Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T12:26:32.734Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Carbon isotope perturbations and faunal changeovers during the Guadalupian mass extinction in the middle Yangtze Platform, South China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2017

HENGYE WEI*
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Nuclear Resources and Environment, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, 330013, China School of Earth Science, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, 330013, China
QUZONG BAIMA
Affiliation:
School of Earth Science, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, 330013, China
ZHEN QIU*
Affiliation:
PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Beijing 100083, China
CHAOCHENG DAI
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Nuclear Resources and Environment, East China University of Technology, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, 330013, China
*
‡Authors for correspondence: weihengye@163.com; qiuzhen316@163.com
‡Authors for correspondence: weihengye@163.com; qiuzhen316@163.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Guadalupian mass extinction took place during the major global environmental changes during Phanerozoic time. Large-scale sea-level fluctuations and a negative shift of δ13C were associated with this crisis. However, the diagenetic or primary origin of the decreased δ13C across the Guadalupian–Lopingian (G–L) boundary and the potential causes for this biotic crisis are still being intensely debated. Integrated analyses, including detailed petrographic examination, identification of foraminifer and fusulinid genera, and analysis of carbonate δ13Ccarb and bulk δ13Corg across the G–L boundary were therefore carried out at Tianfengping, Hubei Province, South China. Our results show that: (1) some foraminifer and most fusulinid genera disappear in the upper Maokou Formation (upper Guadalupian); (2) the negative shift of δ13Ccarb in the uppermost Maokou Formation is of diagenetic origin, but the values of δ13Ccarb in the remainder of the Maokou Formation and in the Wuchiaping Formation represent a primary signal of coeval seawater; and (3) the bulk δ13Corg perturbation across the G–L boundary at Tianfengping is mainly controlled by organic matter (OM) source, that is, terrestrial OM contribution. We suggest that the δ13Ccarb negative shift in the lower Wuchiaping Formation (Wuchiapingian) compared to that in the lower–middle Maokou Formation (Capitanian) were probably caused by the re-oxidization of 12C-rich OM during regression. Global regression resulted in the negative shift of δ13Ccarb at the G–L boundary in South China and led to the loss of shallow-marine benthic habitat. Large-scale global regression is probably one of the main causes for this bio-crisis.

Information

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Capitanian palaeogeography of South China (modified from Zhu, 1989; Wang & Jin, 2000; Chen et al. 2003; Du et al. 2015) and the locations of studied sections. TP – Tianfengping section; QZ Basin – Qianzhong intrashelf basin; JN Basin – Jiangnan basin; TP – Tianfengping section; TQ – Tieqiao section.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Graphic sedimentary log across the Guadalupian–Lopingian boundary at the Tianfengping section, South China. S – shale; M – lime mudstone; W – wackestone; P – packstone; G – grainstone; Sa – sandstone. The conodont data is from Xia et al. (2006). C. p.p. – Clarkina postbitteri postbitteri; C.d. – Clarkina dukouensis; C.a. – Clarkina asymmetrica.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Field photos and thin-section micrographs of the Maokou and Kuhfeng formations at Tianfengping, South China. (a) The Maokou–Kuhfeng boundary; and (b) Udoteacean packstone. Sample TP18. Plane polarized light (PPL). Bar scale 500 μm. (c) Dolomites with cloudy centres and clear rims. Sample TP42. PPL. Bar scale 500 μm. (d) Bitumens (arrows) at the top of the Maokou Formation. Size of bitumen is about 1 cm. (e) Small karst caves (dash lines) at the top of the Maokou Formation. (f) The internal surface of karst cave (dash line) the top of the Maokou Formation. Pencil for scale. (g) Dolomite nodule in the black chert. Hammer for scale. (h) Phylloids in the black chert in the lowermost Kuhfeng Formation. Sample TP45. PPL. (i) Siliceous sponge spicule (arrow) in the black chert. Sample TP50. PPL. (j) Radiolarian chert. Sample TP55. PPL. (h–j) Bar scale 500 μm. (k) Ammonoid in the lower Kuhfeng Formation. Sample TP46. PPL. Bar scale 50 μm. (l) Small and thin-shell brachiopod fragments (solid arrows) and intact one (hollow arrow). Sample TP50. PPL. Bar scale 200 μm.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Field photos and thin-section micrographs of the Wangpo Shale Member in the Wuchiaping Formation at Tianfengping. (a) Black coal (arrow). Marker for scale. (b) Feldspar (F), tuff fragment (TF) and pyrite (P) in sandstone. Sample TP59. PPL. Bar scale 500 μm. (c) Cross-polarized light (CPL) of (b). (d) Palgioclase in the sandstones. Bar sample TP 59. CPL. (e) Tuff fragments (TF) showing oxidized rim. Sample TP59. PPL. (f) Tuff fragment (TF) showing glassy fragment (arrow). Sample TP59. PPL. (g) Basaltic fragment (BF) showing angular shape. Sample TP60. CPL. (h) Spherulitic rhyolite fragment (RF). Sample TP59. PPL. (i) Chert fragment (CF) and feldspar (F) grains. Sample TP60. CPL. (j) Muscovite (arrow) grain. Sample TP60. CPL. (k) Authigenic gypsum. Sample TP59. CPL. (l) Authigenic albite in the sandstone. Sample TP62. CPL. (d–l) Bar scale 100 μm. (m) Claystones containing abundant black pyrite. Sample TP67. PPL. (n) Phylloid fragments (light bands) and calcisphere (light spots). Sample TP69. PPL. (o) Peloid wackestone. Sample TP74. PPL. (m–o) Bar scale 500 μm.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Field photos and thin-section micrographs of the Xiayao Limestone Member in the Wuchiaping Formation at Tianfengping. (a) Outcrop of the Wuchiaping Formation; (b) Lime mudstone, Sample TP 84. PPL. (c) Laminations in the argillaceous lime mudstone. Sample TP83. PPL. (d) Large brachiopods (Br) in the argillaceous lime mudstone. Sample TP86. PPL. (b–d) Bar scale 500 μm. (e) CPL image of (d). Authigenic albites occur in the rim of brachiopod fragments. (f) Brachiopod fossil in Sample TP93 in Bed 17. (g) Gymnocodiacean algae (Gy) grainstone containing small foraminifera (Fo), brachiopod spicule (Br) and gastropod (Ga). Sample TP95. PPL. Bar scale 500 μm. (h) Disseminated glauconites (yellow-green color). Sample TP95. PPL. Bar scale 100 μm. (i) Packstone containing abundant sponge spicules (Sp and hollow arrows), trilobite (Tr) and Gymnocodiacean green algae (Gy). Sample TP97. PPL. Bar scale 500 μm.

Figure 5

Figure 6. Foraminifera occurrences across the G–L boundary at Tianfengping, South China. For lithologic keys and conodont zones see Figure 2.

Figure 6

Table 1. Stable carbonate-carbon, bulk organic-carbon, oxygen isotopes and the isotopic difference between carbonate-carbon and organic-carbon isotope data at Tianfengping, South China.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Carbonate-carbon isotope (δ13Ccarb) and oxygen isotope (δ18Ocarb), and organic-carbon isotope (δ13Corg) profiles across the G–L boundary at Tianfengping, South China. For lithologic keys see Figure 2.

Figure 8

Figure 8. (a) Cross-plot between carbonate-carbon isotope and oxygen isotope at Tianfengping; (b) Cross-plot between carbonate-carbon isotope and organic-carbon isotope.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Carbon-isotope correlation between the Tianfengping section in Hubei Province of South China and the Tieqiao section in Laibin in Guangxi Province of South China. Organic- and inorganic-carbon isotope data at Tieqiao from Yan, Zhang & Qiu (2013). Sea-level change at Tieqiao is from Qiu et al. (2014) and Haq & Schutter (2008).