PTME后华北板块南缘生物复苏后期古环境特征:来自豫西登封中三叠统二马营组的证据

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2023.3.5

地学前缘 ›› 2023, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (5): 491-509.DOI: 10.13745/j.esf.sf.2023.3.5

PTME后华北板块南缘生物复苏后期古环境特征:来自豫西登封中三叠统二马营组的证据

邢智峰¹^,²^,³(), 张湘赟¹, 李婉颖¹, 齐永安¹^,²^,³, 郑伟¹^,²^,³^,^*(), 吴盼盼¹, 张立军¹^,²^,³

1.河南理工大学资源环境学院, 河南焦作 454003
2.河南省生物遗迹与成矿过程重点实验室, 河南焦作 454003
3.中原经济区煤层气与页岩气协同创新中心, 河南焦作 454003

收稿日期:2022-09-08 修回日期:2023-01-31 出版日期:2023-09-25 发布日期:2023-10-20
通信作者: *郑伟(1979—),男,博士,教授,主要从事沉积学、古生物学、遗迹学等研究工作。E-mail: zhengw99@hpu.edu.cn
作者简介:邢智峰(1973—),女,博士,副教授,主要从事沉积学、古生物学、遗迹学等研究工作。E-mail: xingzhifeng925@hpu.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(41772110);国家自然科学基金项目(41872111);国家自然科学基金项目(41902113);河南理工大学创新型科研团队支持计划项目(T2022-05);河南理工大学博士基金项目(B2020-54)

Paleoenvironmental characteristics in the late stage of biosphere recovery in the southern margin of the North China Plate after PTME—evidence from the Middle Triassic Ermaying Formation

XING Zhifeng¹^,²^,³(), ZHANG Xiangyun¹, LI Wanying¹, QI Yong’an¹^,²^,³, ZHENG Wei¹^,²^,³^,^*(), WU Panpan¹, ZHANG Lijun¹^,²^,³

1. Institute of Resources and Environment, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo 454003, China
2. Key Laboratory of Biogenic Traces and Sedimentary Minerals of Henan Province, Jiaozuo 454003, China
3. Central Plains Economic Zone Coalbed Methane and Shale Gas Collaborative Innovation Center, Jiaozuo 454003, China

Received:2022-09-08 Revised:2023-01-31 Online:2023-09-25 Published:2023-10-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

三叠纪是二叠—三叠纪生物大灭绝(PTME)之后生态系统恢复的重要时期,也是构造格局的重要转型期。中三叠世生态系统已逐渐恢复,处于生物复苏的后期,该时期的古环境特征、古生物面貌都对生态系统的恢复具有重要意义。本研究通过对豫西地区登封白坪中三叠统二马营组剖面的详细实测和样品的测试分析,运用沉积学和地球化学等方法,进行古环境特征分析。结果表明:(1)二马营组下段以黄绿色细粒长石砂岩与紫红色泥岩不等厚互层为主,发育曲流河的4个沉积旋回;中段底部以厚层黄绿色长石石英砂岩为主,上部出现频繁的砂泥互层,为滨浅湖沉积;二马营组中下段经历了由粗组分为主向细组分为主的多次转变,后期由河流相逐渐转变为滨浅湖相沉积。(2)地化样品中Mg/Ca以及Sr/Cu值(1.8~5.2,均值为3.5)均较低,显示二马营组整体处于温暖湿润的气候条件;Sr/Ba(0.15~0.42,均值为0.29)、∑LREE/∑HREE、Ce异常指数以及氧化还原敏感元素U、V、Cr、Ni、Co等的比值均显示二马营组沉积期为氧化条件为主的陆相淡水沉积环境。综上所述,豫西登封二马营组为一套典型的河湖相沉积,与下伏和尚沟组相比,在古气候方面出现明显的转变,由干旱炎热逐渐转变为温暖湿润的气候,为生态系统的恢复起到了重要的作用。

关键词: 中三叠统, 二马营组, 古环境, 登封地区, 生态系统恢复

Abstract:

The Triassic is an important period of ecological recovery after the Permian-Triassic Mass Extinction (PTME) and also an important tectonic transition period. As ecosystem recovery was near completion in the Middle Triassic while biosphere recovery was in the late stage, the environmental and paleontological condition of this period was greatly important to a full ecological recovery. Based on detailed geologic profile study and sample testing conducted in the Middle Triassic Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng, western Henan, the Middle Triassic sedimentary environment and paleoenvironmental changes were analyzed by sedimentology and geochemical methods. The results show that (1) The lower member of the Ermaying Formation (layers 2-18) developed four sedimentary cycles under meandering river environment, where mainly composed of yellow-green fine-grained feldspar sandstone and purplered mudstone with unequal thickness interbeds. The middle member (layers 19-25) is dominated by thick yellow-green feldspathic quartz sandstone in the bottom and frequently interbedded mudstone and sandstone in the upper, which is the shore-shallow lake deposition. From the lower to the middle member, Ermaying Formation experienced alternating depositions of coarse-grained and fine-grained sediment, and gradually changed from fluvial facies to shore-shallow lake facies. (2) The low Mg/Ca and Sr/Cu ratios (1.8-5.2, averaging 3.5) of samples indicate the Ermaying Formation was deposited under warm and humid climate conditions. The Sr/Ba (0.15-0.42, averaging 0.29) and ∑LREE/∑HREE ratios, Ce anomaly index and elemental ratios of redox sensitive elements (U, V, Cr, Ni, Co) in the Ermaying Formation indicate its sedimentary environment type is continental freshwater under oxidation conditions. In summary, the Ermaying Formation has typical fluvial-lacustrine sedimentary facies, and, compared with the underlying Heshanggou Formation, its paleoclimate obviously changed from arid and hot to warm and humid, which plays an important role in the ecosystem recovery.

Key words: Middle Triassic, Ermaying Formation, paleoenvironment, Dengfeng area, ecosystem recovery

中图分类号:

邢智峰, 张湘赟, 李婉颖, 齐永安, 郑伟, 吴盼盼, 张立军. PTME后华北板块南缘生物复苏后期古环境特征:来自豫西登封中三叠统二马营组的证据[J]. 地学前缘, 2023, 30(5): 491-509.

XING Zhifeng, ZHANG Xiangyun, LI Wanying, QI Yong’an, ZHENG Wei, WU Panpan, ZHANG Lijun. Paleoenvironmental characteristics in the late stage of biosphere recovery in the southern margin of the North China Plate after PTME—evidence from the Middle Triassic Ermaying Formation[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2023, 30(5): 491-509.

图/表 19

图1 研究区域地质图

Fig.1 Location and geological setting of the study area

图2 豫西登封白坪二马营组综合柱状图

Fig.2 Composite column diagram of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng, western Henan

图3 登封白坪二马营组下段沉积构造与微观结构 A—第2层黄绿色细粒长石石英砂岩; B—第3层紫红色粉砂岩与紫红色泥岩互层; C—第4层灰黄色细粒长石砂岩; D—A中样品镜下照片, 50×; E—B中样品紫红色粉砂岩镜下照片, 50×; F—C中样品镜下照片, 50×; G—第9层紫红色粉砂质泥岩; H—下段灰黄色粉砂质泥岩; I—第6层砾岩; J—G中样品镜下照片, 50×; K—H中样品镜下照片, 50×; L—第13层发育的钙质结核。

Fig.3 Structural and microstructural characteristics of sedimentary rocks of the lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

图4 登封白坪二马营组中段沉积构造与微观结构 A—黄绿色长石石英砂岩; B—灰黄色细砂岩; C—紫红色泥岩(发育遗迹化石); D—A中样品岩石薄片(P为长石, Q为石英), 50×; E—B中紫红色粉砂岩岩石薄片, 50×; F—灰黄色细砂岩(楔状交错层理和平行层理)。

Fig.4 Structural and microstructural characteristics of sedimentary rocks of the middle section of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

表1 图解法计算沉积物粒度参数公式(据文献[24]修改)

Table 1 Formulas for calculating sediment particle size parameters by graphical method. Modified after [24].

参数	福克和沃德公式
平均粒径Mz	$M z = ϕ 16 + ϕ 50 + ϕ 84 3$
标准偏差σ	$σ = ϕ 84 - ϕ 16 4 + ϕ 95 - ϕ 5 6.6$
偏度SK	$S K = ϕ 16 + ϕ 84 - 2 ϕ 50 2 (ϕ 84 - ϕ 16) + ϕ 5 + ϕ 95 - 2 ϕ 50 2 (ϕ 95 - ϕ 5)$
峰度K_G	$K G = ϕ 95 - ϕ 5 2.44 (ϕ 75 - ϕ 25)$

表1 图解法计算沉积物粒度参数公式(据文献[24]修改)

Table 1 Formulas for calculating sediment particle size parameters by graphical method. Modified after [24].

参数	福克和沃德公式
平均粒径Mz	$M z = ϕ 16 + ϕ 50 + ϕ 84 3$
标准偏差σ	$σ = ϕ 84 - ϕ 16 4 + ϕ 95 - ϕ 5 6.6$
偏度SK	$S K = ϕ 16 + ϕ 84 - 2 ϕ 50 2 (ϕ 84 - ϕ 16) + ϕ 5 + ϕ 95 - 2 ϕ 50 2 (ϕ 95 - ϕ 5)$
峰度K_G	$K G = ϕ 95 - ϕ 5 2.44 (ϕ 75 - ϕ 25)$

表2 登封白坪二马营组中、下段砂岩粒度参数

Table 2 Grain size parameters for sandstone from the middle and lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

层位	ϕ₅/Φ	ϕ₁₆/Φ	ϕ₂₅/Φ	ϕ₅₀/Φ	ϕ₇₅/Φ	ϕ₈₄/Φ	ϕ₉₅/Φ	Mz/Φ	σ	SK	K_G
2	3.150	3.474	3.644	3.837	4.059	4.322	4.644	3.877	0.461	0.113	1.475
3	2.450	2.837	3.059	3.322	3.644	3.837	4.150	3.332	0.508	0.002	1.047
4	2.943	3.059	3.322	3.644	3.950	4.059	4.322	3.587	0.459	0.007	0.900
6	2.350	2.837	2.943	3.350	3.837	4.059	4.450	3.415	0.624	0.138	0.964
14	2.396	2.750	2.943	3.322	3.644	3.837	4.322	3.303	0.563	-0.004	1.127
19	2.474	2.850	2.943	3.184	3.550	3.837	4.250	2.290	0.516	0.261	1.200
21	2.837	3.059	3.184	3.644	3.837	4.150	4.550	3.618	0.532	-0.007	1.077
23	2.322	2.737	2.943	3.322	3.644	3.837	4.150	3.298	0.552	-0.079	1.070
24	2.850	3.050	3.322	3.644	3.850	3.950	4.322	3.548	0.448	-0.199	1.142

图5 登封白坪二马营组中、下段岩石颗粒粒度参数变化

Fig.5 Variation of sandstone grain size in the middle and lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

图6 登封白坪二马营组中、下段概率值累积曲线

Fig.6 Cumulative curves and histograms for clastic rock samples from the middle and lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

图7 登封白坪二马营组中、下段遗迹化石

Fig.7 Trace fossils from the middle and lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng A—Arenicolites isp.; B—Palaeophycus tubularis; C—Skolithos annulatus; D—Palaeophycus tubularis; E—Palaeophycus heberti; F—Planolites beverleyensis; G—Skolithos verticalis; H—Skolithos isp.; I—Palaeophycus heberti; J—Palaeophycus tubularis; K—Planolites beverleyensis; L—Planolites montanus。

表3 登封白坪地区二马营组中、下段泥岩主量元素含量

Table 3 Major element percent compositions of mudstone samples from the middle and lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

样品	w_B/%
样品	Al₂O₃	K₂O	MgO	MnO	Na₂O	P₂O₅	TFe₂O₃	TiO₂	SiO₂	CaO	烧失量
DF-H-64	12.11	2.21	2.67	0.12	1.00	0.14	6.04	0.75	51.55	10.95	12.24
DF-H-66	17.88	3.28	3.30	0.10	0.87	0.23	7.86	0.80	59.06	0.98	5.57
DF-E-3	13.50	3.42	2.70	0.14	1.11	0.19	5.53	0.61	51.42	9.99	11.35
DF-E-12	15.79	3.93	3.07	0.07	1.26	0.23	6.34	0.71	55.52	5.21	7.84
DF-E-19	14.14	3.52	2.95	0.07	1.17	0.21	5.92	0.65	54.10	7.44	9.09
DF-E-14CW	13.72	3.34	2.39	0.10	1.27	0.22	5.10	0.64	53.51	9.06	14.48
DF-E-31	16.60	4.21	3.37	0.08	0.52	0.20	7.46	0.71	51.66	5.72	8.67
DF-E-17CW	15.24	4.09	2.94	0.09	0.15	0.11	6.21	0.59	45.55	11.40	13.07
DF-E-46	12.96	3.24	2.78	0.15	0.23	0.13	5.59	0.54	40.59	16.45	16.74
DF-E-51	14.03	3.17	3.08	0.08	1.04	0.20	6.46	0.66	49.93	9.80	10.94
DF-E-N5W	14.22	3.38	3.22	0.10	0.57	0.20	6.36	0.65	50.08	9.52	11.30
DF-E-62	13.94	3.11	2.98	0.08	1.43	0.18	6.08	0.62	51.85	9.22	10.03

表4 登封白坪地区二马营组中、下段泥岩元素含量

Table 4 Element content of mudstone in the middle and lower members of Ermaying Formation in Baiping area, Dengfeng

图8 登封白坪二马营组中、下段常见微量元素对古气候影响折线图

Fig.8 Broken-line graphs showing the impact of common trace elements on paleoclimate in the middle and lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

图9 登封白坪二马营组中、下段多指标指示的古环境变化

Fig.9 Paleoenvironmental changes in the middle and lower members of the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng by multi-proxy approach

表5 登封白坪地区二马营组稀土元素素分析结果

Table 5 Rare earth element analysis of Ermaying Format tion in Baiping area,Dengfeng

图10 登封白坪地区泥岩稀土元素分布模式

Fig.10 Chondrite-normalized REE patterns for mudstone samples from Baiping, Dengfeng

图11 登封白坪二马营组泥岩样品中δCe与δEu、(Dy/Sm)N和∑REE含量的相关关系

Fig.11 Rear earth element geochemistry of mudstone from the Ermaying Formation in Baiping, Dengfeng

图12 早—中三叠世陕西石川河、豫西济源与登封、山西宁武古地理图(据文献[48]修改)

Fig.12 Paleogeographic map of the Shichuanhe, Shaanxi-Jiyuan/Dengfeng, western Henan-Ningwu, Shanxi areas in the Early-Middle Triassic. Modified after [48].

图13 三叠纪陕西石川河、豫西济源与登封、山西宁武岩性柱状图对比(据文献[7,48-49])

Fig.13 Stratigraphic correlation between the study area and its surrounding areas in the Triassic. Adapted from [7,48-49].

表6 陕西石川河、豫西济源、山西宁武以及研究区三叠纪二马营组地层对比

Table 6 Paleo-facies/paleo-climate/paleoontology correlation between the Triassic Ermaying Formation in different areas

古地理特征	陕西石川河二马营组	豫西济源二马营组	山西宁武二马营组	豫西登封二马营组(研究区)
岩性	块状砂岩和薄-中层粉砂岩	暗紫、灰紫色黏土岩、钙质黏土岩、粉砂岩与灰紫色长石石英砂岩不等厚互层	浅黄绿色厚层-块状中粗砂岩与紫红色巨厚层细粉砂岩互层为主	黄绿色、紫红色长石砂岩、紫红色泥岩
沉积相	河流相	河湖相	曲流河相	曲流河相
气候	温湿	干旱氧化与温湿还原交替	温湿	湿润与干旱交替的环境
遗迹化石	Gordia indianaensis、Palaeophycus tubularis、Palaeophycus isp.、Planolites beverleyensis、Planolites isp.、Scoyenia gracilis、Skolithos linearis、Skolithos isp.、Teanidium isp.、根迹等7属10种	Skolithos linearis、Palaeophycus tubularis、Palaeophycus alternatus、Scoyenia gracilis、Planolites beverleyensis、Planolites montanus、Taenidium barretti、Didymaulichnus roualti、根迹等7属9种		Skolithos、Palaeophycus、Arenicolites、Planolites、Scoyenia、Beaconites等6属
轮藻化石	Stellatocharahollvicensis、 S.hanchengensis、 Stenocharaovata等种	Stellatochara、Stenochara、Cuneatochara、Porochara、Porosphaera等属

参考文献 53

[1]	童金南, 楚道亮, 缪雪, 等. 中国三叠纪岩石地层划分和对比[J]. 地层学杂志, 2021, 45(3): 340-363.
[2]	CHEN Z Q, BENTON M J. The timing and pattern of biotic recovery following the end-Permian mass extinction[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2012, 5(6): 375-383. DOI
[3]	HU S X, ZHANG Q Y, CHEN Z Q, et al. The Luoping biota: exceptional preservation, and new evidence on the Triassic recovery from end-Permian mass extinction[J]. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2011, 278(1716): 2274-2282. DOI URL
[4]	ZHANG Q Y, WEN W, HU S X, et al. Nothosaur foraging tracks from the Middle Triassic of southwestern China[J]. Nature Communications, 2014, 5: 3973. DOI PMID
[5]	SUES H D, FRASER N C. Triassic life on land[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010.
[6]	郑伟, 许欣, 齐永安, 等. 豫西地区陆相三叠纪遗迹化石演化及生态学意义[J]. 地球科学, 2021, 39: 1-23.
[7]	朱志才. 山西二叠-三叠系过渡段沉积环境演化[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学(北京), 2017.
[8]	刘俊, 李录, 李兴文. 山西三叠系二马营组和铜川组SHRIMP锆石铀-铅年龄及其地质意义(英文)[J]. 古脊椎动物学报, 2013, 51(2): 162-168.
[9]	张运强, 陈海燕, 魏文通, 等. 冀北三叠系二马营组凝灰岩夹层的发现及其地质意义[J]. 地质通报, 2016, 35(1): 20-26.
[10]	辛补社. 华北克拉通北缘承德下板城盆地三叠系二马营组凝灰岩夹层SHRIMP锆石U-Pb定年及源区分析[J]. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 55(6): 796-802.
[11]	彭兆蒙, 吴智平. 华北地区三叠纪地层发育特征及原始沉积格局分析[J]. 高校地质学报, 2006, 12(3): 343-352.
[12]	河南省地质矿产局. 河南省区域地质志[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1989.
[13]	刘绍龙. 华北地区大型三叠纪原始沉积盆地的存在[J]. 地质学报, 1986, 60(2): 128-138.
[14]	邢智峰, 李婉颖, 齐永安, 等. 二叠纪末生物大灭绝后Skolithos遗迹化石的古环境意义: 以豫西和尚沟组为例[J]. 古地理学报, 2022, 24(3): 461-478.
[15]	席文祥, 裴放. 河南省岩石地层[M]. 武汉: 中国地质大学出版社, 1997: 299.
[16]	《中国地层典》编委会. 中国地层典: 三叠系[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2000: 138.
[17]	胡斌, 芦旭辉, 宋慧波. 豫西登封地区下三叠统中的遗迹化石及其沉积环境[J]. 地层学杂志, 2015, 39(4): 454-465.
[18]	胡斌, 王长征, 宋慧波. 渤海湾盆地古近纪湖泊沉积中的遗迹组合与组构研究[C]// 第十五届全国古地理学及沉积学学术会议摘要集. 成都, 2018: 209-211.
[19]	齐永安, 胡斌, 张国成, 等. 豫西济源地区中三叠世油房庄组遗迹组构及其环境解释[J]. 沉积学报, 2007, 25(3): 372-379.
[20]	常龙, 王长征, 胡斌, 等. 东濮凹陷沙三段正常三角洲沉积中遗迹化石及意义[J]. 沉积与特提斯地质, 2017, 37(3): 66-73.
[21]	王长征, 王海邻, 胡斌, 等. 河南西峡盆地上白垩统寺沟组遗迹化石及其沉积环境[J]. 古生物学报, 2016, 55(3): 367-384.
[22]	胡斌, 胡磊, 宋慧波, 等. 晋东南上石炭统—下二叠统太原组灰岩中遗迹组合及其沉积环境[J]. 古地理学报, 2013, 15(6): 809-818.
[23]	朱筱敏. 沉积岩石学[M]. 4版. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2008.
[24]	FOLK R L, WARD W C. Brazos River bar: a study in the significance of grain size parameters[J]. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 1957, 27(1): 3-26. DOI URL
[25]	VISHER G S. Grain size distributions and depositional processes[J]. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 1969, 39(3): 1074-1106.
[26]	陈晶, 黄文辉, 何明倩. 鄂尔多斯盆地东南部本溪组-下石盒子组泥岩元素地球化学特征[J]. 现代地质, 2018, 32(2): 240-250.
[27]	ROSER B, GRAPES R. Geochemistry of a metabasite-chert-coloured-argillite-turbidite association at Red Rocks, Wellington, New Zealand[J]. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, 1990, 33(2): 181-191. DOI URL
[28]	刘刚, 周东升. 微量元素分析在判别沉积环境中的应用: 以江汉盆地潜江组为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2007, 29(3): 307-310, 314.
[29]	谭聪, 袁选俊, 于炳松, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地南缘上二叠统-中下三叠统地球化学特征及其古气候、古环境指示意义[J]. 现代地质, 2019, 33(3): 615-628.
[30]	王益友, 郭文莹, 张国栋. 几种地球化学标志在金湖凹陷阜宁群沉积环境中的应用[J]. 同济大学学报, 1979(2): 51-60.
[31]	熊小辉, 肖加飞. 沉积环境的地球化学示踪[J]. 地球与环境, 2011, 39(3): 405-414.
[32]	ERNST W. Geochemical facies analysis[M]. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1970.
[33]	JONES B, MANNING D A C. Comparison of geochemical indices used for the interpretation of palaeoredox conditions in ancient mudstones[J]. Chemical Geology, 1994, 111(1/2/3/4): 111-129. DOI URL
[34]	WIGNALL P B, TWITCHETT R J. Oceanic anoxia and the end Permian mass extinction[J]. Science, 1996, 272(5265): 1155-1158. PMID
[35]	颜佳新, 徐四平, 李方林. 湖北巴东栖霞组缺氧沉积环境的地球化学特征[J]. 岩相古地理, 1998, 18(6): 27-32.
[36]	HATCH J R, LEVENTHAL J S. Relationship between inferred redox potential of the depositional environment and geochemistry of the Upper Pennsylvanian (Missourian) Stark Shale Member of the Dennis Limestone, Wabaunsee County, Kansas, USA[J]. Chemical Geology, 1992, 99(1/2/3): 65-82. DOI URL
[37]	HARNOIS L. The CIW index: a new chemical index of weathering[J]. Sedimentary Geology, 1988, 55(3/4): 319-322. DOI URL
[38]	MCLENNAN S M, HEMMING S, MCDANIEL D K, et al. Geochemical approaches to sedimentation, provenance, and tectonics[M]// Processes controlling the composition of clastic sediments. New York: Geological Society of America, 1993: 21-40.
[39]	FEDO C M, YOUNG G M. Unraveling the effects of potassium metasomatism in sedimentary rocks and paleosols, with implications for paleoweathering conditions and provenance[J]. Geology, 1995, 23(10): 921-924. DOI URL
[40]	徐小涛, 邵龙义. 利用泥质岩化学蚀变指数分析物源区风化程度时的限制因素[J]. 古地理学报, 2018, 20(3): 515-522.
[41]	BOYNTON W V. Cosmochemistry of the rare earth elements: meteorite studies[M]// Rare earth element geochemistry. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1984: 63-114.
[42]	TAYLOR S R, MCLENNAN S M. The continental crust: its composition and evolution[M]. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1985.
[43]	王中刚, 于学元. 稀土元素地球化学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1989.
[44]	ELDERFIELD H, GREAVES M J. The rare earth elements in seawater[J]. Nature, 1982, 296: 214-219. DOI
[45]	杨森楠, 杨巍然. 中国区域大地构造学[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1985.
[46]	李洪革, 杜旭东, 陆克政, 等. 渤海湾地区中西部中生代构造特征及演化[J]. 石油大学学报(自然科学版), 1999, 23(3): 1-5.
[47]	胡斌. 河南省中生代岩相古地理研究[M]. 北京: 煤炭工业出版社, 2014.
[48]	GUO W W, TONG J N, TIAN L, et al. Secular variations of ichnofossils from the terrestrial Late Permian-Middle Triassic succession at the Shichuanhe section in Shaanxi Province, North China[J]. Global and Planetary Change, 2019, 181: 102978. DOI URL
[49]	邢智峰, 许欣, 齐永安, 等. 豫西济源中三叠统二马营组中、下段遗迹组构与沉积环境[J]. 地球科学, 2022, 40: 1-25.
[50]	吴汉宁, 朱日祥, 刘椿, 等. 华北地块晚古生代至三叠纪古地磁研究新结果及其构造意义[J]. 地球物理学报, 1990, 33(6): 694-701.
[51]	张振来. 河南登封中三迭世轮藻化石[C]// 中国地质科学院宜昌地质矿产研究所文集(地层古生物专号). 宜昌: 宜昌地质矿产研究所, 1980: 94-101, 163-164.
[52]	王振, 黄仁金. 陕西三叠纪轮藻化石[J]. 古生物学报, 1978, 17(3): 267-276, 361-362.
[53]	李满洲, 李广坤, 李玉信. 河南平原第四纪地质演化与环境变迁: 兼论黄河发育演化与再造[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 2013.

PTME后华北板块南缘生物复苏后期古环境特征:来自豫西登封中三叠统二马营组的证据

Paleoenvironmental characteristics in the late stage of biosphere recovery in the southern margin of the North China Plate after PTME—evidence from the Middle Triassic Ermaying Formation

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 19

参考文献 53

相关文章 9

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李佩, 张春霞, 罗浩, 刘志成, 高战武. 青藏高原东南缘昭通盆地晚中新世到上新世古环境演化过程[J]. 地学前缘, 2024, 31(4): 326-339.
[2]	何雁兵, 雷永昌, 邱欣卫, 肖张波, 郑仰帝, 刘冬青. 珠江口盆地陆丰南地区文昌组沉积古环境恢复及烃源岩有机质富集主控因素研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2024, 31(2): 359-376.
[3]	官玉龙, 陈亮, 姜兆霞, 李三忠, 肖春凤, 陈龙. 东北印度洋源汇过程及古环境与古季风演化[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(5): 102-118.
[4]	王相力, 卫炜. 铬稳定同位素地球化学[J]. 地学前缘, 2020, 27(3): 78-103.
[5]	侯卫国，董海良，蒋宏忱，李高远，杨渐. 沉积物中古DNA在古生态、古环境和古气候研究中的应用[J]. 地学前缘, 2017, 24(2): 286-291.
[6]	于晓辉, 沈军, 林玲玲, 范天骐. 辽宁中元古代初期粗碎屑岩中微生物砂质颗粒的发现及古环境意义[J]. 地学前缘, 2016, 23(4): 284-291.
[7]	邵龙义，李猛，李永红，张云鹏，鲁静，张文龙，田政，文怀军. 柴达木盆地北缘侏罗系页岩气地质特征及控制因素[J]. 地学前缘, 2014, 21(4): 311-322.
[8]	李美铮, 刘楚雄, 江大勇, 郝维城, 孙元林, 孙作玉. 贵州盘县新民地区关岭组中三叠世盘县动物群产出层段碳酸盐岩微相分析和古环境恢复[J]. 地学前缘, 2011, 18(6): 341-346.
[9]	贾慧孙柏年李相传肖良吴靖宇. 浙东新近纪一种栎属植物化石微细特征及其古环境指示[J]. 地学前缘, 2009, 16(5): 79-90.