Upper Cenozoic dinoflagellate cysts from the continental slope and rise off New Jersey

This report contains the occurrence data for dinoflagellate cysts recorded from 163 samples taken from Sites 902 through 906, during Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) Leg 150. The dinoflagellate cyst (dinocyst) stratigraphy has been presented in Mountain, Miller, Blum, et al. (1994, doi:10.2973/odp.proc.ir.150.1994), and was based on these data. This report provides the full dinocyst data set supporting the dinocyst stratigraphic interpretations made in Mountain, Miller, Blum, et al. (1994). For Miocene shipboard dinocyst stratigraphy, I delineated 10 informal zones: pre-A, and A through I, in ascending stratigraphic order. These zones are defined in Shipboard Scientific Party (1994a, doi:10.2973/odp.proc.ir.150.103.1994), and are based on my studies of Miocene dinocyst stratigraphy in the Maryland and Virginia coastal plain (de Verteuil and Norris, 1991, 1992; de Verteuil, 1995). This zonation has been slightly revised (de Verteuil and Norris, 1996), and the new formal zone definitions are repeated below. Each new zone has an alpha-numeric abbreviation starting with "DN" (for Dinoflagellate Neogene). The equivalence between the informal zones reported in Mountain, Miller, Blum, et al. (1994), and the new DN zones is illustrated in Figure 1. For clarity, I delineated both zonations in the range charts that accompany this report (Tables 1-6). De Verteuil and Norris (1996a), using these and other data, correlated the DN zonation with the geological time scale of Berggren et al. (1995). Figure 2 summarizes these correlations and can be used to check the chronostratigraphic position of samples in this report, as determined by dinocyst stratigraphy. A thorough discussion of the basis for, and levels of uncertainty associated with, these correlations to the Cenozoic time scale can be found in de Verteuil and Norris (1996a). The Appendix lists all the dinocyst taxa recorded during shipboard analyses of Leg 150 samples. Open nomenclature is used for undescribed taxa. The range charts and Appendix also include reference to several new taxa that de Verteuil and Norris (1996b) described from Miocene coastal plain strata in Maryland and Virginia. Names of these taxa in Tables 1 through 6 and in the Appendix of this report are not intended for effective publication as defined in the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN, Greuter et al., 1994). Therefore, taxonomic nomenclature contained in this report is not to be treated as meeting the conditions of effective and valid publication (ICBN; Article 29).本报告包含了大洋钻探计划（Ocean Drilling Program, ODP）第150航次期间，从902至906站位采集的163个样品中记录的沟鞭藻囊孢（dinoflagellate cysts，后文简称dinocyst）出现数据。此前Mountain、Miller、Blum等（1994，doi:10.2973/odp.proc.ir.150.1994）已发表该沟鞭藻囊孢地层学研究，其研究基础正是上述样品数据。本报告完整提供了支撑Mountain等（1994）文中沟鞭藻囊孢地层学解释的全套数据集。 针对中新世船载沟鞭藻囊孢地层学，笔者划分了10个非正式地层带，按地层年代由老至新的升序依次为前A带（pre-A）及A至I带。该地层划分方案见于船载科学工作组（Shipboard Scientific Party，1994a，doi:10.2973/odp.proc.ir.150.103.1994），其依据为笔者对马里兰州与弗吉尼亚州海岸平原中新世沟鞭藻囊孢地层学的研究（de Verteuil & Norris, 1991, 1992; de Verteuil, 1995）。 该地层划分方案经de Verteuil与Norris（1996）小幅修订，下文将复述修订后的正式地层带定义。每个新地层带均采用以“DN”（沟鞭藻新近系，Dinoflagellate Neogene）开头的字母数字缩写。Mountain等（1994）文中的非正式地层带与新版DN地层带的对应关系如图1所示。为便于理解，笔者在本报告配套的延限图（表1至表6）中同时呈现了两套地层划分方案。 de Verteuil与Norris（1996a）借助本数据集及其他相关数据，将DN地层划分方案与Berggren等（1995）的地质年代标尺进行了对比。图2汇总了上述对比结果，可用于校核本报告中基于沟鞭藻囊孢地层学确定的样品年代地层位置。关于本次新生代地质年代标尺对比的依据及相关不确定性水平的详细讨论，可参见de Verteuil与Norris（1996a）。 附录列出了第150航次样品船载分析过程中记录的全部沟鞭藻囊孢类群，未描述类群采用开放命名法。延限图与附录同时提及了de Verteuil与Norris（1996b）从马里兰州及弗吉尼亚州海岸平原中新世地层中描述的若干新类群。本报告表1至表6及附录中出现的上述类群名称，不符合《国际植物命名法规》（International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, ICBN, Greuter et al., 1994）中定义的有效发表条件。因此，本报告所包含的分类学命名法，不应被视为满足有效及合法发表的要求（ICBN第29条）。