The Amateur Paleontologist Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 Hey everyone I recently heard about a paper on the definition of "Lagerstätte" (see attached); and it did raise an interesting question - "Can a trace fossil site be called a Lagerstätte?" What do you guys think about this? -Christian On_the_definition_of_Lagerstatte.pdf Opalised fossils are the best: a wonderful mix between paleontology and mineralogy! Q. Where do dinosaurs study? A. At Khaan Academy!... My ResearchGate profile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miocene_Mason Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 Not soft tissue soooo no? I have found trace fossils in places without (particularly) spectacular preservation. 1 “...whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.” ~ Charles Darwin Happy hunting, Mason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abstraktum Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Not really sure if this is about the definition of the German word "Lagerstätte". But as a native speaker, for me this is the correct definition: "Lagerstätte" is a term from applied geology and mining for certain areas of the earth's crust, for the mining of raw materials, for the dismantling of buildings or for the future could be worthwhile (usable "Lagerstätte"). Natural accumulations of usable ores, minerals and rocks whose mining is uneconomical are called "Vorkommen". Lagerstätte is used in context with fossils as an area with a lot of fossils. So I would say yes. A lot of trace fossils can also be called Lagerstätte. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Amateur Paleontologist Posted February 11, 2019 Author Share Posted February 11, 2019 11 hours ago, WhodamanHD said: Not soft tissue soooo no? I have found trace fossils in places without (particularly) spectacular preservation. True, but what if the trace fossils themselves are well-preserved, though?... -Christian Opalised fossils are the best: a wonderful mix between paleontology and mineralogy! Q. Where do dinosaurs study? A. At Khaan Academy!... My ResearchGate profile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepTimeIsotopes Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 I would argue that it would be a Lagerstätten. “The quality of preservation, especially of small tracks of types not previously reported from the Cretaceous as well as a large number of excavated specimens still under investigation, mark the Jinju Formation is an example of a Konservat-Lagerstätten defined as a deposit in which body fossil and/or trace fossils show exceptionally good preservation” from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-38633-4.pdf s41598-019-38633-4.pdf 1 Each dot is 50,000,000 years: Hadean............Archean..............................Proterozoic.......................................Phanerozoic........... Paleo......Meso....Ceno.. Ꞓ.OSD.C.P.Tr.J.K..Pg.NgQ< You are here Doesn't time just fly by? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johannes Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 The term "Fossil Lagerstätten" was (as far as I rember) first used by Dolf Seilacher in 1985, he applies the term from the sector of exploration geology to fossil occurences. He differentiate (roughly spoken) between "Konservat-Lagerstätten" and "Konzentrat-Lagerstätten". First ones are the famous ones with their exceptional preservation, like Orsten and Amber. Second ones are defined by mass occurence of fossils, not mandatory by their good preservation. So every middle scaled lumachelle layer can be called "Konzentrat-Lagerstätte". In terms of trace fossils I would avoid the term "Fossil-Lagerstätte", because they are more sediment structures than body fossils. There are some colleagues (esp. ichnologists) with a different opinion, but even in their circles (from my personal experience) this term is not generally used for trace fossil rich strata. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts