Vallon et al., 2015a
| Author(s): | Vallon, L. H., Rindsberg, A. K., Martin, A. J. |
|---|---|
| Year: | 2015 |
| Title: | The use of the terms trace, mark and structure |
| Journal: | Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae |
| Volume: | 85 |
| Number: | 3 |
| Pages: | 527-528 |
| Abstract | Mark, trace and structure have been in consistently used in ichnology for many years; we wish to clarify the origins and to prescribe co rect usage of these terms. The origins of the words are ancient and complex; in thetwentieth century they were given clear definitions as ichnologic terms. Seilacher (1953) defined a mark (German Marke) as a physical (abiogenic) sedimentary structure, as in the common terms sole mark, flute mark, but not bite mark or scratch mark. Trace has been defined many times; we recommend the consensus defini ion of Bertling et al. (2006) as “a morphologically recurrent structure resulting from the life activity of an individual organism (or homotypic organisms) modifying the substrate”; this includes dwel ing trace, feeding trace, bite trace. Structure, as implied in another consensus paper (Frey, 1973), is a neutral term for geologic patterns resulting from ei ther biogenic or abiogenic processes. Use of the three terms in a clear consistent manner will aid communication both among ichnologists and be tween ichnologists and their col leagues in other fields. |
| Keywords: | Bioerosion, Paleontology, Terminology, Trace fossils |
| DOI: | https://doi.org/10.14241/asgp.2015.014 |
| SARV-WB: | edit record |