Advertisement

Geosciences Journal

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 237–247 | Cite as

Role of oysters in biostratigraphy: A case study from the Cretaceous of the Ariyalur area, southern India

  • Krishnan AyyasamiEmail author
Article

Abstract

The Cretaceous sediments of the Ariyalur area, southern India, are the largest and the most important of all the exposures of that system in southern India. Oyster bivalves are common in these Cretaceous sediments. More than twenty species belonging to fifteen genera are known from the Ariyalur area. They are distributed in almost all the rock formations representing ages ranging from Late Albian to Maastrichtian. The abundance, preservation and restricted ranges of these bivalve species in the Cretaceous of Ariyalur area offer scope for biozonation. They seem to play a role as markers of sedimentary units by their apparent accumulation. This study attempts to interpret the palaeoenvironment of deposition based on size, distribution and carbon isotope study of the shells, the petrology of the associated rocks and inferences based on other groups of fossils including invertebrates, vertebrates and plant fossils.

Key words

oysters biostratigraphy Cretaceous Ariyalur India 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ayyasami, K., 1990, Cretaceous heteromorph ammonoid biostratigraphy of southern India. Newsletters on Stratigraphy, Stuttgart, 33, 2/3, 111–118.Google Scholar
  2. Ayyasami, K. and Banerji, R.K., 1984, Cenomanian-Turonian transition in the Cretaceous of southern India. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Denmark, Copenhagen, 33, 21–30.Google Scholar
  3. Ayyasami, K. and Rao, B.R.J., 1980,Goniomya from the Trichinopoly Group, Upper Cretaceous, Tamil Nadu, Journal of the Geological Society of India, Bangalore, 21, 354–357.Google Scholar
  4. Ayyasami, K. and Rao, B.R.J., 1984, Observation on the biostratigraphic zones of the Trichinopoly Group (Upper Cretaceous), Tamil Nadu. Proceedings of the X Indian Colloquium on Micro-palaeontology and Stratigraphy, Pune, pp 223–230.Google Scholar
  5. Ayyasami, K. and Rao, B.R.J., 1996. Dispersal of Cretaceous inocramids in Gondwanaland. Proceedings of the 9th International Gondwana Symposium, Hyderabad, 1, 339–354.Google Scholar
  6. Banerji, R.K., 1972, Stratigraphy and micropalaeontology of the Cauvery Basin, part-I. Exposed area. Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India, 17, 7–30.Google Scholar
  7. Blanford, H.F., 1862. On the Cretaceous and other rocks of South Arcot and Trichinopoly districts. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, 4, 217p.Google Scholar
  8. Chiplonkar, G.W. and Tapaswi, P.M., 1976, Bivalvia from the Upper Cretaceous of Trichinopoly district, South India, Part I, Inoceramidae. Recent Researches in Geology, 3, 87–123.Google Scholar
  9. Chiplonkar, G.W. and Tapaswi, P.M., 1979, Biostratigraphy, age and affinities of the bivalve fauna of the Cretaceous of Tiruchirapalli District, South India, Miscellaneous Publication of the Geological Survey of India, 45, 137–164.Google Scholar
  10. Forbes, E., 1846, Report on the fossil invertebrates from southern India, collected by Mr. Kaye and Mr. Cunliffe. Transactions of the Geological Society of London, 7, 97–174.Google Scholar
  11. Fursich, F.T. and Pandey, D.K., 1999, Genesis and environmental significance of Upper Cretaceous shell concentrations from the Cauvery Basin, southern India. Palacogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 145, 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hart, M.B., Bhaskar, A. and Watkinson, M.P., 2001, Large foraminifera from the Upper Cretaceous of the Cauvery Basin, S.E. India. Memoirs of the Geological Society of India, 46, 159–171.Google Scholar
  13. Kennedy, W.J., 1984, Ammonite faunas and the ‘standard zones’ of the Cenomanian to Maastrichtian Stages in their type areas, with some proposals for the definition of the state boundaries by ammonites. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Denmark, 33, 147–161.Google Scholar
  14. Mohabey, D.M., 2001, Indian dinosaur eggs: a review. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 58, 479–508.Google Scholar
  15. Moore, R.C. (Editor), 1971. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, part N (3 of 3). Mollusca 6, Bivalvia, N1-N1224.Google Scholar
  16. Sastry, M.V.A., Rao, B.R.J. and Mamgain, V.D., 1968, Biostratigraphic zonation of the Upper Cretaceous formations of Trichinopoly district, South India. Memoirs of the Geological Society of India, 2, 10–17.Google Scholar
  17. Stoliczka, F., 1871, Cretaceous fauna of South India. The Pelecypoda, with review of all known genera of this class, fossil and recent. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, Palaeontologia indica, Series 6, 3, 1–537.Google Scholar
  18. Sundaram, R., Henderson, R.A., Ayyasami, K. and Stilwell, J.D., 2001, Lithostratigraphic revision and palacoenvironmental assessment of the Cretaceous System exposed in the onshore Cauvery Basin, southern India. Cretaceous Research, 22, 743–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tapaswi, P.M., 1977, Palacoecology of the Upper Cretaccous of Trichinopoly district, South India with reference to bivalvia. Recent Researches in Geology, 4, 261–266.Google Scholar
  20. Tapaswi, P.M., 1978, Palacobiogeography of the South Indian Cretaceous bivalves. Biovigyanam, 4, 141–149.Google Scholar
  21. Tapaswi, P.M., 1987, Taxonomic studies of the Southern Indian Cretaceous bivalves. Special Publication of the Geological Survey of India, 11, 505–514.Google Scholar
  22. Wani, R. and Ayyasami, K., 2004, A review of the Cretaceous biostratigraphy in the Ariyalur area, southern India. Bulletin of the Mikasa City Museum, 8, 1–15(In Japanese).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Palacontology DivisionGeological Survey of IndiaHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations