Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Earth-Science Reviews

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate /earsc i rev

Paleogeography as geological heritage: Developing geosite classification

Delia Evelina Bruno a,b, Brooke E. Crowley c,d, Jaroslav M. Gutak e, Adriana Moroni f, Olesya V. Nazarenko g,Kathryn B. Oheim h, Dmitry A. Ruban b,i,j,⁎, Günter Tiess b,k, Svetlana O. Zorina l,m

a CNR-IRSA, National Research Council, Water Research Institute, Via F. Blasio 5, 70125 Bari, Italyb International Agency for Minerals Policy (“MinPol”), Austriac Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USAd Department of Anthropology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USAe Division of Geology and Geodesy, Institute of Mining and Geosystems, Siberian State Industrial University, Kirov Street 42, Novokuznetsk, Kemerovo Region 654007, Russiaf Research Unit of Prehistory and Anthropology, Department of Physical, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Siena, via Laterina, 8, 53100 Siena, Italyg Department of Physical Geography, Ecology, and Nature Protection, Institute of Earth Sciences, Southern Federal University, Zorge Street 40, Rostov-na-Donu 344090, Russiah Suffolk County Department of Planning, 4th Floor, 100 Veterans Memorial Highway, Hauppauge, NY 11788, USAi P.O. Box 7333, Rostov-na-Donu 344056, Russia 1

j Department of Tourism, Higher School of Business, Southern Federal University, 23-ja linija Street 43, Rostov-na-Donu, 344019, Russiak Chair of Mining Engineering and Mineral Economics, Department of Mineral Resources and Petroleum Engineering, University of Leoben, Franz-Josef-Strasse 18, A-8700 Leoben, Austrial Central Research Institute of Geology of Industrial Minerals, Zinin Street 4, Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan 420097, Russiam Deparment of Palaeontology and Stratigraphy, Institute of Geology and Oil-Gas Technologies, Kazan Federal University, Kremljovskaja Street 4/5, Kazan, Republic of Tatarstan 420008, Russia

⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Tourism, H4634344.

E-mail addresses: delia.bruno@ba.irsa.cnr.it (D.E. Brunolesyanv@yandex.ru (O.V. Nazarenko), graphicgranite@gmsvzorina@yandex.ru (S.O. Zorina).

1 For postal communication.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2014.06.0050012-8252/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 4 October 2013Accepted 21 June 2014Available online 27 June 2014

Keywords:Geological heritagePaleogeographical geositePaleoecosystemPaleoenvironmentGeodiversityGeotourism

Geological heritage sites (geosites) are sites that contain information about the state and the dynamics of theEarth. Paleogeographical (paleoenvironmental) geosites preserve paleoenvironments, paleoecosystems, andother relevant phenomena. However, the value of these sites can only be fully understood through professionalinterpretation of the observed features. Description of paleogeographical geosites in terms of the paleospace andthe geologic time they encompass is challenging, partially because ofmany uncertainties in the interpretations ofa given geosite and in the paleogeographical, paleobiogeographical, and stratigraphical nomenclature. Thesegeosites can be classified on the basis of facies, paleoecosystems, ichnological value, taphonomic patterns,major events and catastrophes, and geoarcheological potential that they exhibit. Some geosites comprise severalsubtypes, and some are especially important for construction of paleogeographical maps. Moreover, the paleo-geographical geosite type always associates with other types of geosites (20 in total). These combinations formcomplex geosites that contribute to geodiversity. If information about the Earth's past is especially valuable fora given complex geosite, then the paleogeographical type is dominant.

© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3012. Paleogeographical geosites: conceptual remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3013. Towards classification of paleogeographical geosites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3034. Paleogeography in complex geosites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3075. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309

igher School of Business, Southern Federal University, 23-ja linija Street 43, Rostov-na-Donu, 344019, Russia. Tel.: +7 903

o), brooke.crowley@uc.edu (B.E. Crowley), GutakJaroslav@yandex.ru (J.M. Gutak), adriana.moroni@unisi.it (A. Moroni),ail.com (K.B. Oheim), ruban-d@mail.ru, ruban-d@rambler.ru (D.A. Ruban), guenter.tiess@unileoben.ac.at (G. Tiess),

301D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

1. Introduction

Adequate recognition, conservation, promotion, and multi-purposeuse of global, national, regional, and local geological heritage haveremained an agenda for geologists, nature conservationists, andpolicy-makers for more than two decades (Black, 1985; Lapo et al.,1993, 1997; Wimbledon et al., 1995, 1998; Wimbledon, 1996, 1999;Kislov, 1999, 2001; Gray, 2004, 2008; Prosser et al., 2011; Ruban,2010; Ruban and Kuo, 2010; Henriques et al., 2011; Asrat et al., 2012;Brown et al., 2012; Gordon, 2012; Fassoulas et al., 2012; Wimbledonand Smith-Meyer, 2012; Tiess and Ruban, 2013). Additionally, tourismand recreation based on geological objects have evolved to become animportant industry (Hose, 1996, 2000; Hose and Wickens, 2004;Doktor and Golonka, 2006; Pajak et al., 2006; Gray, 2008; Dowling andNewsome, 2010; Ruban and Kuo, 2010; Jin and Ruban, 2011; Brunoand Perrotta, 2012; Farsani et al., 2012; Gordon, 2012; Hose andVasiljević, 2012; Liccardo et al., 2012). Localities with scientifically im-portant, rare, and beautifully preserved fossils and minerals, or otherspectacular geological features and landforms, are of primaryimportance for both of these movements. These geological heritagesites (geosites) frequently incorporate complex phenomena. Availableclassification systems distinguish several types of geosites, includingthe paleogeographical (paleoenvironmental) type (e.g., Lapo et al.,1993, 1997; Wimbledon et al., 1998; Kislov, 1999; Ruban, 2005, 2010;Ruban and Kuo, 2010), which is the focus of this paper.

The heritage value of many globally important geosites (Wimbledonet al., 1998) and geoparks (http://www.unesco.org/en/natural-sciences/environment/earth-sciences/geoparks/some-questions-about-geoparks/where-are-the-global-geoparks/ and europeangeoparks.org)is determined by the paleogeographical (paleoenvironmental) informa-tion that they exhibit. Reynard et al. (2007)went so far as to propose theevaluation of paleogeographical value for all existing geosites (see alsoBruschi and Cendrero, 2009), although not all geosites (e.g., exposuresof igneous rocks) necessarily exhibit paleogeographical features.

The objective of this paper is to present a template for evaluating abroad range of paleogeographical phenomena in terms of geologicalheritage. Our three main goals include:

1) Defining paleogeographical geosites and outlining their specificfeatures;

2) Developing a provisional classification for paleogeographicalgeosites (this classification should be specific to geoconservation);

3) Demonstrating the complexity of paleogeographically-importantgeosites.

This paper is based on published literature as well as our own fieldexperience. We focus only on the “in-situ” geological heritage that is pre-served in geosites, geoparks, geological reserves, etc. (either designatedlegally or not) and do not discuss “ex-situ” geological heritage such asmuseum collections and reconstruction exhibitions. Similarly, althoughthe ideas of so-called “rewilding” (e.g., Martin, 2005; Zimov, 2005;Allison, 2012; Zimov et al., 2012a,b; Levy, 2013), form (at least theoreti-cally) the basis for a fundamentally new kind of paleogeography-relatedgeological heritage, their discussion is beyond the scope of the presentpaper. We intend to demonstrate to geoconservationists how geologicalknowledge can be used to better evaluate geosites, as well as attract theattention of geologists working with various paleogeographical phenom-ena to the heritage value of sites they visit and study.

2. Paleogeographical geosites: conceptual remarks

Geosites are “geological objects or fragments of the geologicalenvironment exposed on the land surface, thus, accessible for visitsand studies” (Ruban, 2010, p. 326). They supply information useful forscience, education, and tourism/recreation, and, thus, they bear heritagevalue (Ruban and Kuo, 2010). Although many exposed geological ob-jects are potential geosites, evaluation of their heritage value is necessary

to designate them as true geosites. This will also help rank their relativeimportance (global, national, regional, or local). The heritage value islinked to geosite uniqueness, which may reflect either rare or, in con-trast, typical geological features. Evaluating heritage value is possiblevia comparison with other similar geosites (Ruban, 2005, 2006a, 2010).Esthetic properties of the potential geosite and its landscape context asperceived by visitors are also important (e.g., Reynard et al., 2007;Gray, 2008; Bruschi and Cendrero, 2009; Nazarenko and Gorbatcheva,2009; Ruban, 2011a; Fassoulas et al., 2012), but, of course, they areonly supplementary to the main evaluation procedure. These propertiesare chiefly important when the tourism and recreation importance of ageosite is discussed (Hudson, 2013; Kirillova et al., 2014; van der Jagtet al., 2014). The simple concept of geosite recognition (Fig. 1) links abroad spectrum of relevant ideas (e.g., Lapo et al., 1993; Wimbledonet al., 1995; García Cortés et al., 2000; Prosser et al., 2006; Reynardet al., 2007; Bruschi and Cendrero, 2009; Fassoulas et al., 2012). Inorder for geosites to retain their value to society (e.g., Asrat et al., 2012;Farsani et al., 2012), they must be protected from negative natural andanthropogenic influences, including damage from visitors. Sometimes,debris removal and even restoration are necessary (for more detailssee Prosser et al., 2006).

As mentioned above, paleogeographical geosites have beendistinguished by many specialists (Lapo et al., 1993; Wimbledonet al., 1998; Kislov, 1999; Ruban, 2005, 2010; Ruban and Kuo,2010). Generally, they can be defined as geological heritage sitesthat represent paleoenvironments in general or highlight particularpaleoenvironmental features, which are of special interest for science,education, or tourism/recreation. Paleogeographical geosites can beoutcrops, roadcuts, quarries, etc. representing preserved elements ofthe ancient environment or permitting evaluation of ancient environ-ments through indirect, but valuable geological evidence. An exampleis the Oshten Mountain in the Western Caucasus (Fig. 2A), which is awell-preserved Late Jurassic reefal massif. Such geosites could also becalled “paleoenvironmental geosites”, but the term “paleogeographicalgeosite” is preferred here to follow the original classification of geositesproposed by Ruban (2010) and Ruban and Kuo (2010). A special dis-tinction of the paleogeographical type of geosites is necessary becausesome other types of geosites (for example, magmatic or structuralgeosites) do not necessarily provide valuable information about thegeological past. And the paleogeographical type may not dominatecomplex geosites.

There are different meanings of the term “paleogeography”. Evensome important reference volumes (e.g., Gornitz, 2009) do not clarifythis term. Whereas some specialists often mention the relevant phe-nomena (e.g., facies) together with sedimentology and stratigraphy,other specialists (including those from Russia) tend to treat paleogeog-raphy as a sub-discipline of the historical geology (cf. Jain, 2014). Andthere is yet another complication. Lists compiled by Wimbledon et al.(1998) indicate only geosites named “paleoenvironmental”. Here wepropose to define paleogeographical geosites as broadly as possible.We argue that they should include sites that preserve physicalpaleoenvironments sensu lato, paleoecosystems sensu lato, and theirdynamics on any time scale. Paleogeographical geosites may also pre-serve paleoclimatological, paleoceanographical, paleobiological, andgeobiological (sensu Bottjer, 2005) phenomena.

Two specific features of paleogeographical geosites make them verydifferent from most other geosites. The first is that paleogeographicalgeosites exhibit information about ancient phenomena that started andended in the more or less remote geological past. The heritage of thesesites includes those features that help visualize something no longer inexistence, aswell as the interpretationof this event, environment, or com-munity. Therefore, we need an additional interpretive “lens” for recogni-tion of paleogeographical geosites (Fig. 1). The other specific feature ofpaleogeographical geosites is their complexity. Paleoenvironments andpaleoecosystems, as well as modern landscapes and biotic communitiesare multi-component systems. Sedimentary, taphonomic, and other

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the concept of geosite recognition (for more details see Ruban, 2005, 2006a, 2010; Ruban and Kuo, 2010; Ruban, 2011a; Fassoulas et al., 2012).

302 D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

geological processes inhibit preservation of all these components andtheir relationships in the rock record. This complicates interpretation ofancient environments and ecosystems. Therefore, each preserved featurethat facilitates our understanding of past environments and ecosystemsbecomes precious.

Paleogeographical geosites can be characterized spatio-temporally;they can be attributed to a given paleogeographical domain, givenpaleobiogeographical unit (biochore), and given period, epoch, or age.However, there are two main challenges for spatio-temporally placingpaleogeographical sites:

1) Uncertainties in paleogeographical, paleobiogeographical, andstratigraphical interpretations, as well as the possibility of reinter-pretations at a given geosite;

Fig. 2. Examples of paleogeographical geosites: A – Oshten Mountain (height — 2804 m) in thereef (photo by O.V.N.); B – FishtMountain (height— 2867m) in the Lago-NakiHighlands,WesteJaja-Petropavlovskij section in theKemerovo Region, southern Siberia, Russia– deposits of a Latelimestones in the marine terraces of ViboValentia, Calabria, southern Italy (photo by D.E.B.).

2) Variation in the nomenclature used to define paleogeographical,paleobiogeographical, and stratigraphical units on internationaland regional scales (Gradstein et al., 2004; Ogg et al., 2008; Ruban,2009a; Gradstein et al., 2012, stratigraphy.org).

For example, a Late Jurassic paleoreef exposed presently as the OshtenMountain in the Western Caucasus (Fig. 2A) can be attributed to theCaucasian Sea, theMediterran-Caucasian Paleobiogeographical Subrealm.However, the true extent and integrity of the Caucasian Sea (proposed asa paleogeographical unit by Ruban, 2006b) depend on regionalpaleotectonic reconstructions that still require some refining. Moreover,the location of the paleoreef was likely controlled by a long-lived shearzone (Khain, 1962), which inherited the Gondwana-derived nature ofthe Greater Caucasus (Ruban et al., 2007), although the Late Jurassic

Lago-Naki Highlands, Western Caucasus, southwestern Russia – an exposed Late Jurassicrn Caucasus, southwestern Russia – an exposed Late Jurassic reef (photo byO.V.N.); C – theDevonian catastrophic lake outflow(photo by J.M.G.); D— the sequence of sandstones and

303D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

massif of the region developed on the northernmargin of the Neo-TethysOcean (Ruban, 2006b). Even the nature of the Paleozoic Greater Caucasusterrane (and, consequently, the above-mentioned shear zone) remainsdebatable (Ruban, 2013a; Stampfli, 2013). The Mediterran-CaucasianSubrealm is advocated by Westermann (2000), but this biochore is notwidely recognized by modern paleobiogeographers, who often preferto refer to the Western Tethys or the Tethys as a whole. Finally, becausethe Upper Jurassic chronostratigraphy of the Western Caucasus(Rostovtsev et al., 1992) is yet to be improved, the age of the carbonatesthat constitute the Oshten Mountain requires further investigation. Insummary, the spatio-temporal scale to which this ancient reef can be at-tributed varies widely.

3. Towards classification of paleogeographical geosites

Paleogeographical geositesmay varywidely in terms of the informa-tion they preserve. To objectively discuss what is preserved and thevalue of this information requires development of amore or less univer-sal classification for characterizing different types of paleogeographicalgeosites. Geoconservationists need a framework to describe the essenceof a particular geosite to avoid oversimplifications or, in contrast, compli-cations. The huge quantity of phenomena that have occurred during theEarth's historymakes this a challenging task. For example, shallow-waterpaleoenvironments with abundant carbonate-producing invertebratescan be described using several classifications of carbonate platforms(Ahr, 1973; Read, 1982, 1985; Burchette and Wright, 1992; Read, 1998;Pomar, 2001; Pomar and Hallock, 2008; Jung and Aigner, 2012; Kimet al., 2012; Pomar et al., 2012).

Here, we propose a provisional classification of paleogeographicalgeosites. It is our hope that this template will be further developed byother researchers who may add subtypes to those discussed below. Itshould be stressed that this classification is developed for the purposesof geoconservation. For instance, it can be employed for brief, butprecise description of a given geosite, measurement of geodiversity(see below), adequate promotion of a particular geosite, etc.Geoconservationists need such a classification, because their practicalwork requires abridged, but more or less comprehensive synopses ofnumerous paleogeographical (paleoenvironmental) issues that arediscussed in the professional geological literature. This classification issimilarly important for other geologists because it will give them aframework for interpreting the heritage values for research sites.

At least six criteria can be employed to distinguish subtypes of paleo-geographical geosites: facies, paleoecosystems, ichnology, taphonomy,events/catastrophes, and geoarcheological features (Table 1). Weconsider each of these in detail below. Several categories can be distin-guishedwithin each of these subtypes on the basis of current geologicalknowledge and the available classifications of paleogeography-relatedphenomena. One should note that a paleogeographical geosite mighthave characteristics that could place it in several of these proposedsubtypes. We argue that the most important or unique features shouldbe used for establishing the dominant subtype(s).

Table 1Principal subtypes of paleogeographical geosites discussed in this work (several categories can

Subtypes Examples (see Fig. 3

Facies Punta Chivato, PuntaPaleoecosystem Oshten (Fig. 2A) andIchnological Altamura Locality (NiTaphonomic Solnhofen FossillagerEvent/catastrophic Jaja-Petropavlovskij sGeoarchaeological Easter Island (Mann eComplex (comprised of several subtypes) Gondolin paleocave sValuable for paleogeographical mappinga Dampier Archipelago

a Special subdivision.

The facies subtype of paleogeographical geosites can be distinguishedbased on the general characteristics of the rock units that are present in agiven outcrop (Table 2). For example, Paleogene siliciclastic turbidites(deeper-marine siliciclastic facies) exposed on the Kalipur–Shibpurcoast of the North Andaman Island (Indian Ocean) represent the activityof gravity flows on an ancient island slope (Bandopadhyay, 2012). Ofcourse, there are many kinds of facies that are not reflected in commonclassifications (Table 2). For instance, deposits (and relevant fossilcommunities) interpreted as indicators of ancient rocky shores(Johnson, 1988; Johnson and Baarli, 1999; Johnson, 2006; Johnson andLedesma-Vázquez, 2009; Johnson and Baarli, 2012) or paleoislands(e.g., Johnson, 2002; Ruban, 2007) are exceptionally rare in the geologi-cal record. Their exposures (like Punta Chivato, Punta San Antonio, etc. ofthe Baja California Peninsula, northwestern Mexico — see Johnson andLedesma-Vázquez, 2009) are unique geological objects that deserve tobe geosites. The Merzhanovo section on the northern shore of the AzovSea (southwestern Russia) provides an example of a geosite representinganother unusual facies (Ruban, 2011b). Here, upper Miocene coquina-like deposits accumulated on the cliffed coast of the ancient TanaissPaleobay.

The paleoecosystem subtype demonstrates particular ecosystemsthat are known from the geological past, including those with nomodern analogs. No universal classification of paleoecosystems canbe proposed. One can distinguish them by facies (i.e., the samepaleoenvironments discussed above, see also Table 2). It is also possibleto classify paleoecosystems based on the biomes or biochores that theyrepresent. Rapid paleobiogeographical changes (e.g., Westermann,2000) have led to re-organizations of paleoecosystems defined bybiochores through geologic time. However, the full diversity ofpaleoecosystems cannot be deduced by such approaches. Below, wegive three examples of paleogeographical geosites belonging to differ-ent paleoecosystem subtypes: fossil reef communities, petrified forests,and an early Archean ecosystem.

Ancient reef communitieswere species-rich and highly complex (e.g.,Kiessling et al., 2010). The Oshten Mountain in the Western Caucasus(Fig. 2A), as well as the neighboring FishtMountain (Fig. 2B) are exposedLate Jurassic reefal massives, which represent a rich paleocommunity ofcorals, brachiopods and molluscs that populated the warm CaucasianSea on the northern periphery of the Neo-Tethys Ocean (Khain, 1962;Boiko et al., 1977; Boiko, 1982; Lozovoy, 1984; Rostovtsev et al., 1992;Kuznetsov, 1993; Ruban, 2006b). The Lago-Naki Highlands, which theOshten Mountain belongs to, have already been proposed as a geositeof national rank based on its geodiversity and uniqueness (Ruban,2010). The second example of a paleoecosystem subtype is petrifiedforests, which are reported from a number of regions around the world(although they remain uncommon objects). Petrified forests revealdiverse ancient terrestrial ecosystems, their physical environments, andwood preservation processes. Many petrified forests are not only recog-nized as geosites, but are also already protected as natural heritage orexploited as geoparks (Dernbach, 1996; Dernbach and Dernbach, 1996;Velitzelos and Zouros, 1998; Röβler, 2001; Dernbach and Tidwell, 2002;Jones et al., 2002; Zouros, 2009, 2010; El-Saadawi et al., 2011; Garcia

be distinguished within each subtype — see text for more information).

for location)

San Antonio (Johnson and Ledesma-Vázquez, 2009)Fisht (Fig. 2B) mountainscosia et al., 2000)stätte (Barthel et al., 1990)ection (Fig. 3C)t al., 2007; Mieth and Bork, 2010; Rull et al., 2010; Lipo et al., 2013; Mulrooney, 2013)ystem (Adams et al., 2007)(Ward et al., 2013)

Table 2Common categories of facies/paleoenvironments and relevant paleogeographical geosite characteristics (based partly on Nichols, 2009; Leeder, 2011; Tucker, 2011).

Facies Example of paleogeographical geosite characteristics

TerrestrialFluvial Exposure of riverine cross-bedding sandstones with rare fresh-water fossils and woody debris.Aeolian Exposure of desert sandstones with fossil-dune structuresa, also aeolianites and miliolitesb.Lacustrine Exposure of non-marine carbonates with tufa bedsc.Pedogenic Exposure of paleosols.Glacial Exposure of tillites.

Deltaic Exposure of ancient deltaic sandstones with fresh-water fossils.MarineShallow-marine siliciclastic Exposure of well-sorted conglomerates that mark paleoshoreline.Deeper-marine siliciclastic Exposure of flysch with graphoglyptid trace fossils.Shallow-marine carbonate Exposure of well-preserved ancient carbonate platformd.Evaporitic (marine) Exposure of salts or gypsum layers.Pelagic (including deeper-water carbonate) Explosure of oceanic red clayse.

Karsticf

“Indoor” Carbonate concretions that reflect peculiar environments where they formed; mixed cave sediments.“Outdoor” Exposure of bauxites in soil profiles.

Volcanic/volcaniclastic Exposure of well-preserved ancient center of volcanic activity.

a For example, see characteristics of fossil dunes in Blakey et al. (1988), Glennie (1992, 1998, 1999), Patel and Bhatt (1995), Kocurek (1991, 1996), and Simpson et al. (2002).b These rock types are described by Patel and Bhatt (1995) and Glennie (1999).c Such unusual lacustrine deposits (tufa mark the ancient waterfalls at spillover points) have been recently described in theMayran Basin system (northeast Mexico) by Amezcua et al.

(2012).d Types and general evolution of carbonate platforms are discussed by Ahr (1973), Read (1982, 1985, 1998), Burchette and Wright (1992), Pomar (2001), Pomar and Hallock (2008),

Kim et al. (2012), Jung and Aigner (2012), and Pomar et al. (2012).e The nature of oceanic red clays is discussed by Wagreich and Krenmayr (2005), Wang et al. (2011), and Hu et al. (2012).f See Fornòs et al. (2009) for more information on karstic facies.

304 D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

Massini et al., 2012; Reichgelt et al., 2013). The petrified forests of Arizona(USA), Chemnitz (Germany), and Lesvos Island (Greece) are amongthe most famous (see references above). The third example of apaleoecosystem subtype is the exposure of the Apex Basalt in the Pilbararegion (Australia). This site preserves evidence of one of the earliestknown “ecosystems” that existed on Earth: A pumice raft in the Paleo-Archean ocean appears to have facilitated the development of some ofthe first organisms (Brasier et al., 2013).

Paleoecosystems can be studied in detail in the so-called“Fossillagerstätten” (e.g., Wyse Jackson, 2010; Ruban, 2011c). AlthoughFossillagerstätten are essentially of paleontological heritage (Ruban,2011c), they also reflect the diversity and the complexity of fossilcommunities and permit evaluation of paleoenvironmental and preser-vation conditions (e.g., Cherns et al., 2008; Retallack, 2011). Therefore,it seems reasonable to assign them to the paleoecosystem subtypeof paleogeographical geosites (however, they may also be assignedto the taphonomical subtypes mentioned below). Examples ofFossillagerstätten include the Eocene Messel Pit Fossil Site in Germany(Rose, 2012; Schaal, 2012), the Late Pleistocene Rancho La Brea tarpits in the USA (McHorse et al., 2012; Prothero et al., 2012), and themid-Holocene bone bed at Mare aux Songes swamp on the island ofMauritius (Rijsdijk et al., 2009).

The ichnological subtype of paleogeographical geosites includes geo-logic localities containing trace fossils. Our knowledge of the latter hasnot only grown spectacularly during the past decade, but it has alsobeen updated (Bertling et al., 2006; Hasiotis, 2006; Seilacher, 2007;Buatois and Mangano, 2011; Callow and McIlroy, 2011; Knaust andBromley, 2012; Plotnick, 2012). Generally, ichnology provides impor-tant evidence of organism–sedimentary environment relationships.Every exposure containing trace fossils should be considered a valuablepaleogeographical geosite. An example is the Yutsa locality in theSouthern Ciscaucasus (southwestern Russia), where trace fossils occurin Paleocene diagenetically-altered diatomite, which indicates a deep-marine paleoenvironment dominated by accumulation of siliceousmaterial (this leads to a serious update of the earlier regional interpre-tations). This site has already been proposed as a geosite (Martchenkoet al., 2008; Kopenok et al., 2009). A second example is the locality ofAltamura in the Apulia Region of southern Italy, known for the highnumber (~30,000) of dinosaur footprints preserved in an area of

15,000 m2. This is one of the most important and spectacular geositesin the world (Nicosia et al., 2000). The 50-m thick “AltamuraLimestone”, in which the footprints occur, was formed in a subtidaland intertidal flat environment. Algal carpets on this marshy tidal flatmay have facilitated preservation of the footprints (Nicosia et al.,2000). The other internationally known example of a paleogeographicalgeosite with ichnological value is Laetoli in East Africa. This site is fa-mous for its hominid and other animal footprints preserved in Pliocenevolcanic ash (Leakey and Hay, 1979; Leakey, 1987; Musiba et al., 2008;Buatois andMangano, 2011;Meldrum et al., 2011; Reader, 2011). Final-ly, the Komati river locality in the Barberton Greenstone Belt (SouthAfrica) is undoubtedly a geosite of outstanding importance. Fliegelet al. (2010) reported the oldest known trace fossil (3.34 Ga) from thissite.

The taphonomic subtype of paleogeographical geosites embraceslocalities that record fossil formation under the influence of variousbiotic and abiotic processes. Diverse taphonomic processes have beenresponsible for the preservation of paleontological material throughtime (e.g., Fernández-Jalvo et al., 2011). Categories of this subtype canbe distinguished based on the mode of preservation (Fernández-López,1991, 1995, 2000). Some of the previously mentioned geosites (e.g., pet-rified forests and Fossillagerstätten) bear distinctive taphonomicfeatures. In a recent study, Chang et al. (2012) discussed the amazing dis-coveries of Early Cenozoic magnetotactic bacteria preserved as giantmagnetofossils from the New Jersey coastal plain (USA) and offshoreAntarctica. Aside from providing micropaleontological information,magnetofossils can be used to reconstruct ancient magnetic fields,hyperthermal global climatic events, andother parameters of the ancientenvironment (Chang et al., 2012; Reinholdsson et al., 2013; Yamazakiand Shimono, 2013). This stresses the paleogeographical heritage valueof siteswith giantmagnetofossils, although the relevant geoconservationactivities are yet to be considered.

The Solnhofen limestones of Bavaria (Germany) provide anotherexcellent example of a taphonomic paleogeographical geosite (as wellas ichnological subtype and Fossillagerstätte) (Barthel et al., 1990).These limestones were deposited in a quiet, hypersaline lagoon duringthe Tithonian Age (Jurassic). The lagoon was home to a diversity ofvertebrate and invertebrate marine fauna. Some terrestrial plants andanimals, includingArchaeopteryx, are also preserved in these limestones

305D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

(Barthel et al., 1990; Bottjer, 2002). Fully articulated skeletons, softtissue impressions, phosphatized soft tissues and even the stomachcontents remain for some of the preserved individuals (Barthel et al.,1990; Wilby and Briggs, 1997; Bottjer, 2002). Such exceptional preser-vation allows detailed study of the anatomy and, in some cases, diet ofthe organisms that inhabited this ancient ecosystem. Intriguingly, thehypersaline environment appears to have had some desiccating effectson the preserved organisms. For example, remains from teleost fishand terrestrial vertebrates have severely bent vertebral columns, crusta-ceans are arched, and crinoid arms are curled (Barthel et al., 1990;Bottjer, 2002).

The event/catastrophic subtype of paleogeographical geosites exhibitfeatures important for understanding peculiar long-term and short-term events in global, regional, or local geologic history, as well astime-specific facies (sensu Brett et al., 2012). These geosites are crucialfor understanding large, possibly catastrophic phenomena includingmass extinctions,major biotic radiations, glaciations, greenhouse condi-tions, fluctuations in atmospheric oxygen, and ancient tsunamis (e.g.,Bostrom and Ćirković, 2008; Prothero, 2011; Gutak and Ruban, 2013).The transitional Cretaceous–Paleogene deposits that outcrop along theBrazos River in Texas, USA are a typical example of potential event/catastrophic geosite. These deposits shed some light on events thattook place approximately 66Ma (see stratigraphy.org for the new abso-lute age of the Cretaceous/Paleogene boundary). They provide evidenceof extraterrestrial impact, but prior to the Cretaceous/Paleogene bound-ary and the mass extinction event (Keller et al., 2007, 2009).

Another remarkable geosite that exhibits deposits of a regional-scaleevent is the Jaja-Petropavlovskij section in Southern Siberia (Russia)(Fig. 2C). Approximately 250 m of coarse red-colored cross-beddingsiliciclastics of Late Devonian age exposed in this section was formedas a result of overfilling and catastrophic outflow of water from theMinusa Paleolakes to the Kuznetsk Paleosea (Gutak and Antonova,2006a,b; Gutak et al., 2009). Late Devonian strata in the neighboringoutcrops contain fossil plants, fish, and arthropods (Gutak and

Fig. 3. Geographical location of examples of paleo

Antonova, 2006a,b; Gutak et al., 2009). The Jaja-Petropavlovskij sectionhas already been proposed as a complex geosite for the KemerovoRegion (Gutak et al., 2009). Lightning can act as a significant geomor-phic agent in exceptionally small-scale and short-term events (Knightand Grab, 2014). Lightning-related geological objects may preserveinformation about past local climate conditions, and, therefore, theyhave important paleogeographical heritage value (general consider-ations of the lightning phenomenon by Cancio (2013) and Middletonand Sternberg (2013) stimulate diverse thoughts on how this hazardcan be interpreted with regard to the ancient environment).

Importantly, events do not have to have been catastrophic to be in-cluded in the event/catastrophic subtype of paleogeographical geosites.“Ordinary” (but important) events can be represented at geosites ofthis subtype. For instance, geosites that provide evidence of Cretaceousglobal sea-level changes (Haq, 2014), the Paleocene planetary-scaletransgressions and regressions (Ruban et al., 2010, 2012), orNeogene cli-matic shifts (Zachos et al., 2001), have paleogeographical heritage value.Also the interaction between Quaternary sea-level fluctuations and re-gional trend of tectonic uplift (Fig. 2D) has characterized Mediterraneancoasts with a sequence of marine and fluvial terraces (Carobene, 1980;Miyauchi et al., 1994; Filocamo et al., 2009) leaving paleogeographicalevidence for today.

Closely related to the event/catastrophic subtype are those geositesthat provide information that facilitates strong scientific debates. Forinstance, precise dating of some discovered impact craters has not con-firmed a link between these craters and mass extinctions (see generalcritical remarks given by Erwin, 2006; Prothero, 2009, 2011; Racki,2012). Of course, it cannot be excluded that some impacts triggered bi-otic catastrophes (Alvarez, 2008; Schulte et al., 2010; Renne et al.,2013). Similarly, an examination of Valanginian (Lower Cretaceous)sections in the Vocontian Basin (southeast France) led Kujau et al.(2012) to conclude that widespread anoxia during the Valanginian didnot appear in this basin, and that this anoxic event was less extensivethan earlier believed.

geographical geosites mentioned in Table 1.

306 D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

Finally, the geoarcheological subtype refers to paleogeographicalgeosites that provide information about human–environment interac-tions in the geological, prehistorical, or historical past. Such geositesmay differ in their essence, scale, or age from other paleogeographicalgeosites. The paleolake at Ljubljansko barje (Slovenia) is an exampleof a geoarcheological paleogeographical geosite. LateQuaternary chang-es in vegetation documented on the basis of palynological analysis ofthe lacustrine sediments are thought to have resulted from humanimpact on the local environment (Andrič et al., 2009). Easter Island(Isla de Pascua or Rapa Nui), which is situated in themidst of the PacificOcean, provides another example of ecosystem collapse thatmost likelyresulted from human impact, although this scenario remains debatable(Mann et al., 2007; Mieth and Bork, 2010; Rull et al., 2010; Lipo et al.,2013; Mulrooney, 2013).

Caves are of special geoconservation importance, because of theirarcheological and paleogeographical records. For example, the MiddlePaleolithic coastal site of Cala dei Santi Cave (Monte Argentario, Tuscany,Italy) yielded several Neandertal “living floors”, and this cave contains aQuaternary deposit, which is crucial for studying regional coastal evolu-tion, climatic events and paleoenvironments during the last 120 ka(Moroni et al., 2010). The Uluzzian archeological sites of Italy(e.g., Grotta del Cavallo and Grotta di Fumane) are important from thepaleogeographical point of view because they shed light on thepaleoenvironmental and paleoecological contexts of interactionsbetween anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals, as well ashuman dispersal routes in prehistorical times (Palma di Cesnola,1989; Benazzi et al., 2011; Boscato and Crezzini, 2012; Moroni et al.,2013; Tagliacozzo et al., 2013). The “Hermit caves” of Amendolara(Southern Italy) provide an example of a geosite (Bruno and Perrotta,2012) of geoarcheological subtype of paleogeographical type that isalso characterized by structural and geomorphological features. Thesecaves were probably excavated by humans during the transition fromthe Paleolithic to theNeolithic, and they are also thought to have played

Fig. 4. Example of a simple paleogeographical reconstruction: the Early Toarcian paleoenvironmGeological objects established as geosites represent the principal paleoenvironments (outlinedRostovtsev et al., 1992) was obtained from many sections and outcrops, not shown on this figu

an important role during Byzantine times as places of hermitage. Thenatural Romito cave in Southern Italy contains one of the oldest exam-ples of prehistoric art in Italy: the visualization of Bos primigenius(Martini and Lo Vetro, 2011). This depiction of the prehistoric environ-ment by eyewitnesses increases the significance of this locality as a pa-leogeographical geosite. The Paglicci Cave (Apulia, Italy) is of the sameimportance, because of the only instance of Paleolithic rock paintings(two horses and a few hands) in Italy (Palma di Cesnola, 2001).

One can also distinguish paleogeographical geosites that are valu-able for paleogeographical mapping. These may include (but are notlimited to) sections representing paleoenvironments and specificpaleoecosystems, such as paleoreefs (Fig. 4). Geological objects, whichindicate the location of ophiolites, hot spots, orogens, etc. are valuablefor paleogeographical mapping. Categories of such geosites depend onthe methods of paleogeographical reconstructions (Golonka et al.,1994; Golonka, 2004, 2007; Golonka and Ford, 2000; Golonka andKrobicki, 2004). A typical example of a geosite with paleogeographicalmapping value is the Dampier Archipelago in northwestern Australia,where late Cenozoic transgressions and regresisons, as well as the gen-eral chronology of landscape change were reconstructed on the basis ofthe exposed geological objects (Ward et al., 2013). However, two cau-tions have to be pointed out. First, asmany geological objects as possibleshould be used for construction of paleogeoghraphical maps (this isespecially the case of high-resolution maps). However, it is impossibleto recognize all included objects as geosites unless they demonstratesignificant heritage value. A typical example is shown in Fig. 4. Recon-struction of Early Toarcian paleoenvironments of the central part ofMountainous Adygeja required information from dozens of outcropsdistributed on this territory. But only four relatively small exposurescould be judged geosites. The other objects are not so valuable withregard to their heritage value. Second, it is evident that structural, igne-ous, and other types of geosites may provide critical information forpaleogeographical mapping.

ents in the central part ofMountainous Adygeja (Western Caucasus, southwestern Russia).tentatively by D.A.R.). Essential information for this reconstruction (partly summarized byre.

307D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

4. Paleogeography in complex geosites

Manypaleogeographical geosites exhibit features that require assign-ment to several subtypes of the paleogeographical type simultaneously.In each of these cases, the dominant subtype is difficult to establishbecause the various subtypes are of relatively equal importance. Anexample is the Petchitschi section (in the vicinity of the city of Kazan inRussia), where one can observe a late Roadian (Permian) sabkha andshallow-marine facies, dynamics of the ancient shoreline, products ofancient explosive volcanic eruptions, and fossils and ichnofossilsrepresenting rich terrestrial and shallow-marine paleoecosystems(Larotchkina, 2007; Silant'ev et al., 2010; Zorina et al., 2011). This geosite,which is planned for inclusion in a future geopark (Vdovets et al., 2010),can be attributed to facies, paleoecosystem, ichnological, and taphonom-ic subtypes of geographical geosites. Another example is the Gondolinpaleocave system in South Africa, which is valuable from the facies,paleoecosystem, and taphonomic points of view; the same geosite alsoprovides evidence of regional hominin presence (Adams et al., 2007).Finally, the spectacular radiolarite outcrop of La Pietra (Tuscany, Italy)located in the La Pietra natural reserve (Gambassini and Marroni, 1998;Moroni et al., in press) could be attributed to both facies andgeoarcheological subtypes. The Tuscan Regional Government is consid-ering including this location in the Regional Geo-sites Archive. Undoubt-edly, such complex paleogeographical objects are of utmost importancefor preserving geological heritage.

As noted above, one needs to study rocks, fossils, minerals, othervisible features, and chemical anomalies in order to reconstruct a partic-ular paleoenvironment or paleoecosystem (Fig. 1). As a result, the mostvaluable paleogeographical geosites are complex and contain severalother types (Table 3; e.g., Ruban, 2010). Therefore, the potential com-plexity of paleogeographical geosites is determined, on the one hand,by combination of subtypes of the paleogeographical type (internalcomplexity; see above for details), and, on the other hand, by the com-bination of the paleogeographical type with the other types of geosites(external complexity).

The importance and quality of information that complex geositescontain should be used to classify these sites. However, because some

Table 3Types of geosites found in combination with paleogeographical geosites.

Geosite typesa Potential combination with paleogeographica

Stratigraphical Fossil reef with age-diagnostic fossilsPaleontological Petrified forestSedimentary Oceanic red clayIgneous Magmatic massif that was exposed as paleoisMetamorphic Precambrian schists with primitive fossilsMineralogical Glaucony-rich bedEconomical Coal depositGeochemical Cretaceous/Paleogene section with Iridium aSeismical Seismite bedStructural Fault-controlled cliffed paleoshorelineCosmogenic Ancient impact craterGeothermal Fossilized hydrothermal vent communityGeocryological Ancient permafrostGeomorphological Presently-exposed reefal massifc; caves and pHydrological and hydrogeological Waterfall on exposed reefal massifEngineering/applied geomorphological Modern landslides in Jurassic continental-sloRadiogeological Fish-bone beds with radioactive anomalyNeotectonical Seismites linked to deglaciationd

Pedological Paleosol horizonGeohistorical “Classical” localities of Ediacaran ecosystems;

a See classification in Ruban (2005, 2010) and Ruban and Kuo (2010). There are different clKislov (1999, 2001), Massoli-Novelli et al. (1999), García Cortés et al. (2000), Gray (2004, 2008

b Based partly on Ruban (2013b).c See examples in Fig. 2.d Example of soft-sediment deformation structures resulted from ancient earthquakes linked

by van Loon and Pisarska-Jamrozy (2014).e Riddiford et al. (2012) have shown recently how salt production via evaporation of salt wa

types may be more valuable than others within the same geosite, adominant type should be established (Lapo et al., 1997; Ruban,2009b). For example, the ancient coral reef exposed at the OshtenMountain in the Western Caucasus (Fig. 2A) is a complex geosite thatis valuable from multiple points of view including geomorphological(it is a well-developed and peculiar landform), engineering/appliedgeomorphological (slope and karstic processes are active), sedimento-logical (limestones and dolostones constitute this mountain), paleonto-logical (corals and other Late Jurassic fossils are reported from there),and, of course, paleogeographical (a coral reef paleoecosystem ispreserved). Because the most unique features of this geosite are linkedto the noted peculiar paleoecosystem, it is sensible to attribute thepaleogeographical type as dominant in this case. Of course, paleogeo-graphical type is not necessarily the dominant type in all geositescontaining a paleogeographic component.

On the basis of the above-presented considerations, an algorithm ofanalysis of the paleogeographical heritage value in geosites is proposed(Fig. 5). Its application is demonstrated by the example of the OshtenMountain (Fig. 2A). As this is a large Late Jurassic reef, which is uniquefor the territory of the Western Caucasus, paleogeographical heritagevalue is present in this geosite. The paleogeographical type dominates(the other types include geomorphological, sedimentary, paleontologi-cal, stratigraphical, and some less important), because the uniquenessof this geosite is determined chiefly by the exposure of paleoreef, andnot by the mountain shape, lithological peculiarities of limestones anddolostones, and other features of this geological object. According tothe classification proposed in this work, the Oshten Mountain geositecan be attributed to the facies subtype (category: shallow-marinecarbonate paleoenvironments) and the paleoecosystem subtype(category: paleocommunity of corals, brachiopods, and molluscs). It islogical to conclude that the latter subtype dominates, because it wasthe activity of reef-building organisms that shaped this carbonate build-up exposed as a modern mountain. Therefore, this geosite shows bothexternal and internal complexity.

One of the central concepts in modern geoconservation isgeodiversity, which reflects the wide spectrum of geological objectsand processes that can be observed in a given territory (Wimbledon

l type Frequency of type combinationwith the paleogeographical typeb

FrequentlyAlwaysAlways

land RarelySometimesSometimesSometimes

nomaly SometimesSometimesSometimesFrequentlyRarelyAlways

aleokarst FrequentlySometimes

pe shales SometimesRarelySometimesSometimes

prehistoric mining and salt production sitese Sometimes

assifications of geosite types— e.g., see Lapo et al. (1993), Wimbledon et al. (1995, 1998),), Prosser et al. (2006), and Bruschi and Cendrero (2009).

to regional deglaciation has been reported recently from the locality of Siekierki (Poland)

ter from naturally occurring brine springs affected the local paleoenvironment.

Fig. 5. Algorithm for classifying geosites that contain paleogeographical information.

308 D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

et al., 1998; Nieto, 2001; Stanley, 2001a; Gray, 2004; Kozlowski, 2004;Zwolinski, 2004; Serrano and Ruiz-Flaño, 2007; Gray, 2008; Serranoand Ruiz-Flaño, 2009; Ruban, 2010; Knight, 2011; Ruban, 2011d;Brown et al., 2012; Burek, 2012; Crawford and Black, 2012; Hart,2012; Pereira et al., 2013; Solarska et al., 2013). At the very elementarylevel, geodiversity can be measured as the number of geologicalphenomena, or geosite types, that constitute the geological heritage ofa given region (cf. Ruban, 2010). This idea has been developed into abroader concept (Stanley, 2001b; Gray, 2004, 2008; Knight, 2011).Taking into account the essential complexity of paleogeographicalgeosites, it is possible to conclude that all of them preserve substantialwithin-site geodiversity, irrespective of which concept of geodiversityis preferred.

5. Conclusions

In this manuscript we have attempted to briefly outline the maincharacteristics and classifications of paleogeographical geosites. Ourmain points are summarized below.

1) Paleogeographical geosites exhibit a broad range of features thatpreserve paleoenvironments, paleoecosystems, and other relevantphenomena.

2) Two specific features of paleogeographical geosites are the impossi-bility to perceive paleogeographical information directly and theirhigh complexity.

3) At least six subtypes of paleogeographical geosites can be distin-guished (facies, paleoecosystem, ichnological, taphonomic, event/catastrophic, and geoarcheological). Geosites that comprise severalsubtypes and those valuable for construction of paleogeographicalmaps should be also noted. Categories can be established withineach of these subtypes.

4) Paleogeographical geosites always associate with other types ofgeosites. Consequently, they are complex and preserve substantialwithin-site geodiversity.

As researchers, our goal should be to share the informationpreserved at paleogeographical geosites with the general public anddecision makers rather than confining this information to those withspecialized academic interests. Increasing awareness of the importanceand heritage value of paleogeographical geosites will help supportproper planning and management decisions as well as promote lawsfor the protection of geological heritage in private areas. Ultimately, in-creased awareness will reduce the destruction of geological heritagethat would result in an enormous loss to future generations.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully thank the journal editor and two anonymousreviewers for their helpful recommendations and constructive criticism.J.W. Adams (Australia), D. Barettino (Spain), N.I. Boiko (Russia), K.W.Glennie (UK), P.G. Eriksson (South Africa), S.R. Fernández-López(Spain), N.M.M. Janssen (Netherlands), M.E. Johnson (USA), E.V. Kislov(Russia), G.A. Kocurek (USA), A.V. Lapo (Russia), G. Racki (Poland), J.F.Read (USA), W. Riegraf (Germany), R. Rössler (Germany), A.J. vanLoon (Netherlands/Poland), W.A.P. Wimbledon (UK), and many othercolleagues are acknowledged for their generous help with literatureand/or useful communications. D.A.R. thanks his present/formercolleagues and students from the Southern Federal University (Russia)for field assistance and fruitful discussions. A part of this work (contri-bution by S.O.Z.) was funded by the subsidy of the Russian Governmentto support the Program of Competitive Growth of the Kazan FederalUniversity among the World's Leading Academic Centres.

309D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

References

Adams, J.W., Herries, A.I.R., Kuykendall, K.L., Conroy, G.C., 2007. Taphonomy of a SouthAfrican cave: geological and hydrological influences on the GD 1 fossil assemblageat Gondolin, a Plio-Pleistocene paleocave system in the Northwest Province, SouthAfrica. Quat. Sci. Rev. 26, 2526–2543.

Ahr, W.M., 1973. The carbonate ramp: an alternative to the shelf model. Transac-tions, Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, 23rd Annual Convention,pp. 221–225.

Allison, S.K., 2012. Ecological Restoration and Environmental Change: RenewingDamaged Ecosystems. Routledge, London (245 pp.).

Alvarez, W., 2008. T. rex and the Crater of Doom. Princeton University Press, Princeton(185 pp.).

Amezcua, N., Gawthorpe, R., MacQuaker, J., 2012. Cascading carbonate lakes of theMayran Basin system, northeast Mexico: the interplay of inherited structural ge-ometry, bedrock lithology, and climate. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 124, 975–988.

Andrič, M., Kroflič, B., Toman, M.J., Ogrinc, N., Dolenec, T., Dobnikar, M., Čermelj, B., 2009.Late quaternary vegetation and hydrological change at Ljubljansko barje (Slovenia).Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 270, 150–165.

Asrat, A., Demissie, M., Mogessie, A., 2012. Geoheritage conservation in Ethiopia: the caseof the Simien mountains. Quaest. Geogr. 31, 7–23.

Bandopadhyay, P.C., 2012. Re-interpretation of the age and environment of deposition ofPaleogene turbidites in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Western Sunda Arc. J.Asian Earth Sci. 45, 126–137.

Barthel, K.W., Swinburne, N.H.M., Conway Morris, S., 1990. Solnhofen: A Study inMesozoic Palaeontology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (236 pp.).

Benazzi, S., Douka, K., Fornai, C., Bauer, C.C., Kullmer, O., Svoboda, J., Pap, I., Mallegni, F.,Bayle, P., Coquerelle, M., Condemi, S., Ronchitelli, A., HArvati, K., Weber, G.W., 2011.Early dispersal of modern humans in Europe and implications for Neanderthalbehaviour. Nature 479, 525–528.

Bertling, M., Braddy, S., Bromley, R.G., Demathieu, G.D., Genise, J., Mikulas, R., Nielsen, J.K.,Nielsen, K.S.S., Rindsberg, A., Schlirf, M., Uchman, A., 2006. Names for trace fossils: auniform approach to concepts and procedures. Lethaia 39, 265–286.

Black, G.P., 1985. Geological conservation and the Nature Conservation Council. Geol.Curator 4, 217–220.

Blakey, R.C., Peterson, F., Kocurek, G., 1988. Synthesis of late Paleozoic and Mesozoiceolian deposits of the Western Interior of the United States. Sediment. Geol. 56,3–125.

Boiko, N.I., 1982. O genezise dolomitov verkhnejurskikh karbonatnykh otlozhenijZapadnogo Predkavkaz'ja. Litol. Pol. Iskop. 2, 47–53 (in Russian).

Boiko, N.I., Sedletskij, V.I., Shvedov, V.N., 1977. Lotologo-fatsial'nye osobennosti i uslovijaobrazovanija karbonatnykh otlozhenij oksforda v Zapadnom Predkavkaz'e. Litol. Pol.Iskop. 1, 137–144 (in Russian).

Boscato, P., Crezzini, J., 2012. Middle–Upper Palaeolithic transition in Southern Italy:Uluzzian macromammals from Grotta del Cavallo (Apulia). Quat. Int. 252, 90–98.

Bostrom, N., Ćirković, M.M., 2008. Global Catastrophic Risks. Oxford University Press,Oxford (554 pp.).

Bottjer, D.J., 2002. Exceptional Fossil Preservation: A Unique View on the Evolution ofMarine Life. Columbia University Press, New York (403 pp.).

Bottjer, D.J., 2005. Geobiology and the fossil record: eukaryotes, microbes, and theirinteractions. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 219, 5–21.

Brasier, M.D., Matthewman, R., McMahon, S., Kilburn, M.R., Wacey, D., 2013. Pumice fromthe ~3460 Ma Apex Basalt, Western Australia: a natural laboratory for the earlybiosphere. Precambrian Res. 224, 1–10.

Brett, C.E., McLaughlin, P.I., Histon, K., Schindler, E., Ferretti, A., 2012. Time-specific aspectsof facies: state of the art, examples, and possible causes. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol.Palaeoecol. 367–368, 6–18.

Brown, E.J., Prosser, C.D., Stevenson, N.M., 2012. Geodiversity, conservation and climatechange: key principles for adaptation. Scott. Geogr. J. 128, 234–239.

Bruno, D.E., Perrotta, P., 2012. A geotouristic proposal for Amendolara territory (northernionic sector of Calabria, Italy). Geoheritage 4, 139–151.

Bruschi, V.M., Cendrero, A., 2009. Direct and parametric methods for the assessment ofgeosites and geomorphosites. In: Reynard, E., Coratza, P., Regolini-Bissig, G. (Eds.),Geomorphosites. F. Pfeil, München, pp. 73–88.

Buatois, L.A., Mangano, M.G., 2011. Ichnology: Organism–Substrate Interactions in Spaceand Time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (358 pp.).

Burchette, T.P., Wright, V.P., 1992. Carbonate ramps depositional systems. Sediment. Geol.79, 3–57.

Burek, C., 2012. The role of LGAPs (Local Geodiversity Action Plans) and Welsh RIGS aslocal drivers for geoconservation within geotourism in Wales. Geoheritage 4, 45–63.

Callow, R.H.T., McIlroy, D., 2011. Ichnofabrics and ichnofabric-forming trace fossils inPhanerozoic turbidites. Bull. Can. Petrol. Geol. 59, 103–111.

Cancio, L.C., 2013. Lightning. In: Bobrowsky, P.T. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Natural Hazards.Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 625–629.

Carobene, L., 1980. Terrazzi marini, eustatismo e Neotettonica — marine terraces,eustatism and neotectonics. Geogr. Fis. Din. Quat. 3, 35–41.

Chang, L., Roberts, A.P., Williams, W., Fitz Gerald, J.D., Larrasoana, J.C., Jovane, L.,Muxworthy, A.R., 2012. Giant magnetofossils and hyperthermal events. Earth Planet.Sci. Lett. 351–352, 258–269.

Cherns, L., Wheeley, J.R., Wright, V.P., 2008. Taphonomic windows and molluscanpreservation. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 270, 220–229.

Crawford, K.R., Black, R., 2012. Visitor understanding of the geodiversity and thegeoconservation value of the Giant's Causeway World Heritage Site, NorthernIreland. Geoheritage 4, 115–126.

Dernbach, U. (Ed.), 1996. Petrified Forests: The World's 31 Most Beautiful PetrifiedForests. D'ORO, Heppenheim (190 pp.).

Dernbach, U., Dernbach, D. (Eds.), 1996. Versteinerte Wälder. Die 30 schönstenWersteinerten Wälder der Erde. D'ORO, Heppenheim (187 pp.).

Dernbach, U., Tidwell, W.D. (Eds.), 2002. Secrets of Petrified Forests: Fascination FromMillions of Tears. D'ORO, Heppenheim (231 pp.).

Doktor, M., Golonka, J., 2006. Geotouristic attractions of Europe — field training forstudents of Geotourism et the Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and EnvironmentalProtection, AGH University of Science and Technology in Krakow. Geotourism 4,39–62.

Dowling, R., Newsome, D., 2010. Geotourism: a global activity. In: Dowling, R.,Newsome, D. (Eds.), Global Geotourism Perspectives. Goodfellow Publishers,Woodeaton, pp. 1–17.

El-Saadawi, W., Kamal-El-Din, M.M., Attia, Y., El-Faramawi, M.W., 2011. The wood flora ofthe Cairo Petrified Forest, with five Paleogene new legume records for Egypt. Rev.Palaeobot. Palynol. 167, 184–195.

Erwin, D.H., 2006. Extinction: How Life on Earth Nearly Ended 250 Million Years Ago.Princeton University Press, Princeton (306 pp.).

Farsani, N.T., Coelho, C., Costa, C., 2012. Geotourism and geoparks as gateways to socio-cultural sustainability in Qeshm rural areas, Iran. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 17, 30–48.

Fassoulas, C., Mouriki, D., Dimitriou-Nikolakis, P., Iliopoulos, G., 2012. Quantitative assess-ment of geotopes as an effective tool for geoheritage management. Geoheritage 4,177–193.

Fernández-Jalvo, Y., Scott, L., Andrews, P., 2011. Taphonomy in palaeoecological interpre-tations. Quat. Sci. Rev. 30, 1296–1302.

Fernández-López, S.R., 1991. Taphonomic concepts for a theoretical biochronology. Rev.Esp. Paleontol. 6, 37–49.

Fernández-López, S.R., 1995. Taphonomie et interprétation des paléoenvironnements.Geobios 18, 137–154.

Fernández-López, S.R., 2000. Temas de Tafonomía. Universidad Complutense de Madrid,Madrid 167 pp.

Filocamo, F., Romano, P., Di Donato, V., Esposito, P., Mattei, M., Porreca, M., Robustelli, G.,Russo Ermolli, E., 2009. Geomorphology and tectonics of uplifted coasts: newchronostratigraphical constraints for the Quaternary evolution of Tyrrhenian NorthCalabria (southern Italy). Geomorphology 105, 334–354.

Fliegel, D., Kosler, J., McLoughlin, N., Simonetti, A., de Wit, M.J., Wirth, R., Furnes, H., 2010.In-situ dating of the Earth's oldest trace fossil at 3.34 Ga. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 299,290–298.

Fornòs, J.J., Ginés, J., Gràcia, F., 2009. Present-day sedimentary facies in the coastal karstcaves of Mallorca island (western Mediterranean). J. Cave Karst Stud. 71, 86–99.

Gambassini, P., Marroni, G., 1998. Scoperta di una cava preistorica di diaspro in val diFarma. Rassegna Archeol. 15, 51–54.

García Cortés, Á., Barettino, D., Gallego, E., 2000. Inventory and cataloguing of Spain'sgeological heritage. A historical review and proposals for the future. In: Barettino,D., Wimbledon, W.A.P., Gallego, E. (Eds.), Geological Heritage: Its Conservation andManagement. ITGE, Madrid, pp. 47–67.

Garcia Massini, J.L., Falaschi, P., Zamuner, A.B., 2012. Fungal–arthropod–plant interactionsfrom the Jurassic petrified forest Monumento Natural Bosques Petrificados,Patagonia, Argentina. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 329–330, 37–46.

Glennie, K.W., 1992. Quaternary dunes of SE Arabia and Permian (Rotliegend)dunes of NW Europe: some comparisons. Zentralbl. Geol. Paläontol. Tiel I 11/12,1199–1215.

Glennie, K.W., 1998. In: Faure, H., Heine, K., Singhvi, A. (Eds.), Some ancient desert ana-logues involving climatic change. Palaeoecology of Africa and the SurroundingIslands, 25, pp. 255–274.

Glennie, K.W., 1999. Dunes as indicators of climatic change. In: Singhvi, A.K., Derbyshire,E. (Eds.), Paleoenvironmental Reconstruction in Arid Lands. Oxford & IBH Publishing,New Delhi, Calcutta, pp. 153–174.

Golonka, J., 2004. Plate tectonic evolution of the southern margin of Eurasia in the Meso-zoic and Cenozoic. Tectonophysics 381, 235–273.

Golonka, J., 2007. Late Triassic and Early Jurassic paleogeography of the world.Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 244, 297–307.

Golonka, J., Ford, D.W., 2000. Pangean (Late Carboniferous–Middle Jurassic)paleoenvironment and lithofacies. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 161,1–34.

Golonka, J., Krobicki, M., 2004. Jurassic paleogeography of the Pieniny and OuterCarpathian basins. Riv. Ital. Paleontol. Stratigr. 110, 5–14.

Golonka, J., Ross, M.I., Scotese, C.R., 1994. Phanerozoic paleogeographic and paleoclimaticmodeling maps. In: Embry, A.F., Beauchamp, B., Glass, D.J. (Eds.), Pangea: GlobalEnvironment and Resources. Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir, 17,pp. 1–47.

Gordon, J.E., 2012. Rediscovering a sense of wonder: geoheritage, geotourism and culturallandscape experiences. Geoheritage 4, 65–77.

Gornitz, V. (Ed.), 2009. Encyclopedia of Paleoclimatology and Ancient Environments.Springer, Dordrecht (1049 pp.).

Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Smith, A.G., Agterberg, F.P., Bleeker, W., Cooper, R.A.,Davydov, V., Gibbard, P., Hinnov, L.A., House, M.R., Lourens, L., Luterbacher, H.P.,McArthur, J., Melchin, M.J., Robb, L.J., Shergold, J., Villeneuve, M., Wardlaw, B.R.,Ali, J., Brinkhuis, H., Hilgen, F.J., Hooker, J., Howarth, R.J., Knoll, A.H., Laskar, J.,Monechi, S., Plumb, K.A., Powell, J., Raffi, I., Rohl, U., Sadler, P., Sanfilippo, A.,Schmitz, B., Shackleton, N.J., Shields, G.A., Strauss, H., Van Dam, J., vanKolfschoten, T., Veizer, J., Wilson, D., 2004. A Geologic Time Scale 2004. Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge (589 pp.).

Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M., Ogg, G. (Eds.), 2012. The Geologic Time Scale 2012.Vols. 1–2. Elsevier, Oxford (1176 pp.).

Gray, M., 2004. Geodiversity: Valuing and Conserving Abiotic Nature. J. Wiley, Chichester(434 pp.).

Gray, M., 2008. Geodiversity: developing the paradigm. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 119, 287–298.

310 D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

Gutak, J.M., Antonova, V.A., 2006a. Krasnotsvetnye otlozhenija v pribrezhno-morskikhfatsijakh (model' formirovanija na primere pozdnedevonskikh otlozhenij Kuzbassa).Izvestija bijskogo otdelenija Russkogo geografitcheskogo obtschestva 26, 95–97 (inRussian).

Gutak, Ya.M., Antonova, V.A., 2006b. Red-coloured adjournment in seashore facies(formation model on an example of the Upper Devonian adjournment of Kuzbass).Proceedings XVIIIth Congress of the Carpathian-Balkan Geological Association,September 3–6, 2006, Belgrade, Serbia. Belgrade, pp. 193–196.

Gutak, J.M., Ruban, D.A., 2013. Catastrophes versus events in the geologic past: how doesthe scale matter? Cadernos Lab. Xeolóxico de Laxe 37, 163–179.

Gutak, J.M., Nadler, Yu.S., Tolokonnikova, Z.A., 2009. Geologitcheskie pamjatniki prirodyKemerovskoj oblasti (stratigrafitcheskij i paleontologitcheskij tipy). KuzGPA,Novokuznetsk (150 pp., in Russian).

Haq, B.U., 2014. Cretaceous eustasy revisited. Glob. Planet. Chang. 113, 44–58.Hart, M.B., 2012. Geodiversity, palaeodiversity or biodiversity: where is the place of

palaeobiology and an understanding of taphonomy? Proc. Geol. Assoc. 123, 551–555.Hasiotis, S.T., 2006. Continental Trace Fossils. Society for Sedimentary Geology, Tulsa (132

pp.).Henriques, M.H., Pena dos Reis, R., Brilha, J., Mota, T., 2011. Geoconservation as an

emerging geoscience. Geoheritage 3, 117–128.Hose, T.A., 1996. Geotourism, or can tourists become casual rock hounds? In: Bennett, M.

R., Doyle, P., Larwood, J., Prosser, C.P. (Eds.), Geology on Your Doorstep: The Roleof Urban Geology in Earth Heritage Conservation. Geological Society, London,pp. 207–228.

Hose, T.A., 2000. European ‘geotourism’ — geological interpretation and conservation pro-motion for tourists. In: Barettino, D., Wimbledon,W.A.P., Gallego, E. (Eds.), GeologicalHeritage: Its Conservation and Management. ITGE, Madrid, pp. 127–146.

Hose, T.A., Wickens, E., 2004. Typologies, tourism locations and images: meeting the realneeds of real tourists. In: Weber, S., Tomljenović, R. (Eds.), Reinventing a TourismDestination: Facing the Challenge. Institute for Tourism, Zagreb, pp. 103–114.

Hose, T.A., Vasiljević, D.A., 2012. Defining the nature and purpose of modern geotourismwith particular reference to the United Kingdom and South-East Europe. Geoheritage4, 25–43.

Hudson, B.J., 2013. Waterfalls, science and aesthetics. J. Cult. Geogr. 30, 356–379.Hu, X., Scott, R.W., Cai, Y., Wang, C., Melinte-Dobrinescu, M.C., 2012. Cretaceous oceanic

red beds (CORBs): different time scales and models of origin. Earth Sci. Rev. 115,217–248.

Jain, S., 2014. Fundamental of Physical Geology. Springer, New Delhi (488 pp.).Jin, Q., Ruban, D.A., 2011. A conceptual framework of tourism crowding management at

geological heritage sites. Natura Nascosta 43, 1–17.Johnson, M.E., 1988. Why are ancient rocky shores so uncommon? J. Geol. 96, 469–480.Johnson, M.E., 2002. Paleoislands in the stream: paleogeography and expected circulation

patterns. Geobios 35 (Supplement 1), 96–106.Johnson, M.E., 2006. Uniformitarianism as a guide to rocky-shore ecosystems in the

geological record. Can. J. Earth Sci. 43, 1119–1147.Johnson, M.E., Baarli, B.G., 1999. Diversification of rocky-shore biotas through geologic

time. Geobios 32, 257–273.Johnson, M.E., Baarli, B.G., 2012. Development of intertidal biotas through Phanerozoic

time. In: Talent, J.A. (Ed.), Earth and Life: Global Biodiversity, Extinction Intervalsand Biogeographic Perturbations Through Time. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 63–128.

Johnson, M.E., Ledesma-Vázquez, J. (Eds.), 2009. Atlas of Coastal Ecosystems in theWestern Gulf of California: Tracking Limestone Deposits on the Margin of a YoungSea. University of Arizona Press, Tucson (189 pp.).

Jones, T.P., Ash, S., Figueiral, I., 2002. Late Triassic charcoal from Petrified Forest NationalPark, Arizona, USA. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 188, 127–139.

Jung, A., Aigner, T., 2012. Carbonate geobodies: hierarchical classification and database —

a new workflow for 3D reservoir modelling. J. Pet. Geol. 35, 49–65.Keller, G., Adatte, T., Berner, Z., Harting, M., Baum, G., Prauss, M., Tantawy, A., Stueben, D.,

2007. Chicxulub impact predates K-T boundary: new evidence from Brazos, Texas.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 255, 339–356.

Keller, G., Abramovich, S., Berner, Z., Adatte, T., 2009. Biotic effects of the Chicxulub im-pact, K-T catastrophe and sea level change in Texas. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol.Palaeoecol. 271, 52–68.

Khain, V.E., 1962. Rify i tektonika. In: Obut, A.M. (Ed.), Znatchenije biosfery vgeologitcheskikh protsessakh. Voprosy vzaimosvjazi paleontologii i tektoniki.Gosgeoltekhizdat, Moskva, pp. 162–170 (in Russian).

Kiessling, W., Simpson, C., Foote, M., 2010. Reefs as cradles of evolution and sources ofbiodiversity in the Phanerozoic. Science 327, 196–198.

Kim, W., Fouke, B.W., Petter, A.L., Quinn, T.M., Kerans, C., Taylor, F., 2012. Sea-level rise,depth-dependent carbonate sedimentation and the paradox of drowned platforms.Sedimentology 59, 1677–1694.

Kirillova, K., Fu, X., Lehto, X., Cai, L., 2014. What makes a destination beautiful?Dimensions of tourist aesthetic judgment. Tour. Manag. 42, 282–293.

Kislov, E.V., 1999. Pamjatniki prirody (na primere Zapadnogo Zabajkal'ja). BNTs SO RAN,Ulan Ude (180 pp. (in Russian)).

Kislov, E.V., 2001. Pamjatniki prirody Severo-Bajkal'skogo regiona. BNTs SO RAN, UlanUde (104 pp., in Russian).

Knaust, D., Bromley, R.G. (Eds.), 2012. Trace Fossils as Indicators of SedimentaryEnvironments. Elsevier, Amsterdam (924 pp.).

Knight, J., 2011. Evaluating geological heritage: correspondence on Ruban, D.A. ‘Quantifi-cation of geodiversity and its loss’ (PGA, 2010, 121(3): 326–333). Proc. Geol. Assoc.122, 508–510.

Knight, J., Grab, S.W., 2014. Lightning as a geomorphic agent on mountain summits:evidence from southern Africa. Geomorphology 204, 61–70.

Kocurek, G., 1991. Interpretation of ancient eolian sand dunes. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet.Sci. 19, 43–75.

Kocurek, G.A., 1996. Desert aeolian systems. In: Reading, H.G. (Ed.), SedimentaryEnvironments: Processes. Facies and Stratigraphy. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp.125–153.

Kopenok, O.B., Marchenko, A.S., Ruban, D.A., Nielsen, J.K., 2009. Trace fossils from theAbazinskaya Formation (Upper Paleocene; Southern Ciscaucasus). Stratigr.Sedimentol. Oil-Gas Basins 1, 69–76.

Kozlowski, S., 2004. Geodiversity. The concept and scope of geodiversity. Pol. Geol. Rev.52, 833–839.

Kujau, A., Heimhofer, U., Ostertag-Henning, C., Greselle, B., Mutterlose, J., 2012. Noevidence for anoxia during the Valanginian carbon isotope event—an organic-geochemical study from the Vocontian Basin, SE France. Glob. Planet. Chang. 92–93,92–104.

Kuznetsov, V.G., 1993. Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous carbonate platform in the northernCaucasus and Precaucasus. In: Simo, J.A.T., Scott, R.W., Masse, J.-P. (Eds.), CretaceousCarbonate Platforms. American Association of Petroleum Geology, Memoirs, 56,pp. 455–463.

Lapo, A.V., Davydov, V.I., Pashkevitch, N.G., Petrov, V.V., Vdovets, M.S., 1993.Metoditcheskie osnovy izutchenija geologitcheskikh pamjatnikov prirody Rossii.Stratigrafija. Geologitcheskaja korreljatsija 6, 75–83 (in Russian).

Lapo, A.V., Davydov, V.I., Pashkevitch, N.G., Petrov, V.V., Vdovets, M.S., 1997.Geologitcheskie ob'ekty vsemirnogo znatchenija Evropejskoj tchasti Rossii.Stratigrafija. Geologitcheskaja korreljatsija 6, 92–101 (in Russian).

Larotchkina, I.A. (Ed.), 2007. Geologitcheskoie pamlatniki prirody Respubliki Tatarstan.Akvarel'-ART, Kazan (296 pp., in Russian).

Leakey, M.D., 1987. Animals prints and trails. In: Leakey, M.D., Harris, J.M. (Eds.), Laetoli: APliocene Site in Northern Tanzania. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 451–489.

Leakey, M.D., Hay, R.L., 1979. Pliocene footprints in the Laetoli Beds at Laetoli, northernTanzania. Nature 278, 317–323.

Leeder, M., 2011. Sedimentology and Sedimentary Basins: From Turbulence to Tectonics.Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester (768 pp.).

Levy, S., 2013. Once & future giants. What Ice Age Extinctions Tell Us About the Fate ofEarth's Largest AnimalsOxford University Press, Oxford (255 pp.).

Liccardo, A., Montesso-Neto, V., Piekarz, G.F., 2012. Urban geotourism — education andculture. Anu. Inst. Geocienc. 35, 133–141.

Lipo, C.P., Hunt, T.L., Rapu Haoa, S., 2013. The ‘walking’megalithic statues (moai) of EasterIsland. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40, 2859–2866.

Lozovoy, S.P., 1984. Lagonakskoe nagor'e. Krasnodarskoe knizhnoe izdatel'stvo, Krasnodar(160 pp., in Russian).

Mann, D., Edwards, J., Chase, J., Beck, W., Reanier, R., Mass, M., Finney, B., Loret, J., 2007.Drought, vegetation change, and human history on Rapa Nui (Isla de Pascua, EasterIsland). Quat. Res. 69, 16–28.

Martchenko, A.S., Kopenok, O.B., Ruban, D.A., 2008. Novyj ob'ekt natsional'nogopaleontologitcheskogo nasledija - “Jutsinskij ikhnokonpleks” (Juzhnoe Predkavkaz'e).Sovremennaja paleontologija: klassitcheskie i novejshie metody. V shkola molodykhutchenykh-paleontologov. Moskva, p. 36 (in Russian).

Martin, P.S., 2005. Twilight of the Mammoths: Ice Age Extinctions and the Rewilding ofAmerica. University of California Press, Berkeley (250 pp.).

Martini, F., Lo Vetro, D., 2011. Grotta del Romito: unmonumento della Preistoria europea.Archeologia Viva 146, 1–12.

Massoli-Novelli, R., Burri, E., Petitta, M., 1999. The typology of geosites in the Abruzzo Re-gion (Italy). In: Barettino, D., Vallejo, M., Gallego, E. (Eds.), Towards the BalancedManagement and Conservation of the Geological Heritage in the New Millennium.SGE, Madrid, pp. 151–154.

McHorse, B.K., Orcutt, J.D., Davis, E.B., 2012. The carnivoran fauna of Rancho LaBrea: average or aberrant? Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 329–330,118–123.

Meldrum, D.J., Lockley, M.G., Lucas, S.G., Musiba, C., 2011. Ichnotaxonomy of the Laetolitrackways: the earliest hominin footprints. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 60, 1–12.

Middleton, N.J., Sternberg, T., 2013. Climate hazards in drylands: a review. Earth Sci. Rev.126, 48–57.

Mieth, A., Bork, H.-H., 2010. Humans, climate or introduced rats—which is to blame for thewoodland destruction on prehistoric Rapa Nui (Easter Island)? J. Archaeol. Sci. 37,417–426.

Miyauchi, T., Day Pra, G., Sylos Labini, S., 1994. Geochronology of Pleistocene marineterraces and regional tectonics inthe Tyrrhenian coast of south Calabria, Italy. IlQuaternario 17–34.

Moroni, A., Freguglia, M., Bernardini, F., Boschian, G., Cavanna, C., Crezzini, J.,Gambogi, P., Longo, L., Milani, L., Parenti, F., Ricci, Sю, 2010. Nuove ricerchealla Grotta dei Santi (Monte Argentario, Grosseto). In: Negroni Catacchio, N.(Ed.), L'alba dell'Etruria. Fenomeni di continuità e trasformazione nei secoliXII–VIII a.C. Ricerche e scavi. Atti del Nono Incontro di Studi “Preistoria eProtostoria in Etruria”, Valentano (Vt) – Pitigliano (Gr), 12–14 Settembre2008, pp. 649–662.

Moroni, A., Boscato, P., Ronchitelli, A., 2013. What roots for the Uluzzian? Modernbehaviour in Central–Southern Italy and hypotheses on AMH dispersal routes. Quat.Int. 316, 27–44.

Moroni, A., Aranguren, B., Casini, A., Costantini, A., Grandinetti, G., Gambassini, P., 2014. Theprehistoric quarry of La Pietra (Roccastrada— Grosseto — Tuscany). Copper age lithicworkshops and the production of bifacial points in Central Italy. Actes du Colloque“Ressources lithiques, productions et transferts entre Alpes et Méditerranée”, Nice28–29 Mars 2013. Bull. Soc. Préhist. Fr. (in press).

Mulrooney, M.A., 2013. An island-wide assessment of the chronology of settlement andland use on Rapa Nui (Easter Island) based on radiocarbon data. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40,4377–4399.

Musiba, C., Mabula, A., Selvaggio, M., Magori, C., 2008. Pliocene animal trackways atLaetoli: research and conservation potential. Ichnos 15, 166–178.

311D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

Nazarenko, O.V., Gorbatcheva, E.D., 2009. Otsenka effektivnosti i opredelenie prioritetovupravlenija sistemami okhranjaemykh prirodnykh territorij. Antropogennjatransformatsija prirodnoj sredy. Perm, pp. 117–120 (in Russian).

Nichols, G., 2009. Sedimentology and Stratigraphy. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester (419 pp.).Nicosia, U., Marino, M., Mariotti, N., Muraro, C., Panigutti, S., Petti, F.M., Sacchi, E., 2000.

The late Cretaceous dinosaur tracksite near Altamura (Bari, Southern Italy). I —geological framework. Geol. Romana 35, 231–236.

Nieto, L.M., 2001. Geodiversidad: propuesta de una definicion integradora. Bol. Geol. Min.112, 3–12.

Ogg, J.G., Ogg, G., Gradstein, F.M., 2008. The Concise Geologic Time Scale. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge (177 pp.).

Pajak, J., Golonka, J., Krobicki, M., 2006. Attractions of unanimated nature of the northernVietnam as a basis for tourist development. Geotourism 4, 5–26.

Palma di Cesnola, A., 1989. L'Uluzzien: faciès italien du Leptolithique archaïque.l'Anthropologie 93, 783–812.

Palma di Cesnola, A., 2001. Le Paléolithique Supérieur en Italie. Préhistoire d’Europe9Jérôme Millon, Grenoble.

Patel, M.P., Bhatt, N., 1995. Evidence of palaeoclimatic fluctuations in miliolite rocks ofSaurashtra, Western India. J. Geol. Soc. India 45, 191–200.

Pereira, D.I., Pereira, P., Brilha, J., Santos, L., 2013. Geodiversity assessment of Parana State(Brazil): an innovative approach. Environ. Manag. 52, 541–552.

Plotnick, R.E., 2012. Behavioral biology of trace fossils. Paleobiology 38, 459–473.Pomar, L., 2001. Types of carbonate platforms: a genetic approach. Basin Res. 13, 313–334.Pomar, L., Hallock, P., 2008. Carbonate factories: a conundrum in sedimentary geology.

Earth Sci. Rev. 87, 134–169.Pomar, L., Bassant, P., Brandano, M., Ruchonnet, C., Janson, X., 2012. Impact of carbonate

producing biota on platform architecture: insights from Miocene examples of theMediterranean region. Earth Sci. Rev. 113, 186–211.

Prosser, C., Murphy, M., Larwood, J., 2006. Geological Conservation: A Guide to GoodPractice. English Nature, Peterborough (145 pp.).

Prosser, C.D., Bridgland, D.R., Brown, E.J., Larwood, J.G., 2011. Geoconservation for scienceand society: challenges and opportunities. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 122, 337–342.

Prothero, D.L., 2009. Greenhouse of the Dinosaurs: Evolution, Extinction, and the Future ofOur Planet. Columbia University Press, New York (274 pp.).

Prothero, D.R., 2011. Catastrophes! Earthquakes, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, and Other Earth-shattering Disasters. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (326 pp.).

Prothero, D.R., Syverson, V.J., Raymond, K.R., Madan, M., Molina, S., Fragomeni, A.,DeSantis, S., Sutyagina, A., Gage, G.L., 2012. Size and shape stasis in late Pleistocenemammals and birds from Rancho La Brea during the Last Glacial–Interglacial cycle.Quat. Sci. Rev. 56, 1–10.

Racki, G., 2012. The Alvarez impact theory of mass extinction; limits to its application andthe “great expectations syndrome”. Acta Palaeontol. Pol. 57, 681–702.

Read, J.F., 1982. Carbonate platforms of passive (extensional) continental margins —types, characteristics and evolution. Tectonophysics 81, 195–212.

Read, J.F., 1985. Carbonate platform facies models. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 69, 1–21.Read, J.F., 1998. Phanerozoic c aronate ramps from greenhouse, transitional and ice-

house worlds: clues from field and modelling studies. In: Wright, V.P., Burchette, T.D. (Eds.), Carbonate Ramps. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 149,pp. 107–135.

Reader, J., 2011. Missing links. Search of Human Origins. Oxford University Press, Oxford(538 pp.).

Reichgelt, T., Parker, W.G., Martz, J.W., Conrad, J.G., van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, J.H.A.,Kürschner,W.M., 2013. The palynology of the Sonsela member (Late Triassic, Norian)at Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona, USA. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 189, 18–28.

Reinholdsson, M., Snowball, I., Zillen, L., Lenz, C., Conley, D.J., 2013. Magnetic enhance-ment of Baltic Sea sapropels by greigite magnetofossils. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 366,137–150.

Renne, P.R., Deino, A.L., Hilgen, F.J., Kuiper, K.F., Mark, D.F., Mitchell III, W.S., Morgan, L.E.,Mundil, R., Smit, J., 2013. Time scales of critical events around the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary. Science 339, 684–687.

Retallack, G.J., 2011. Exceptional fossil preservation during CO2 greenhouse crises?Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 307, 59–74.

Reynard, E., Fontana, G., Kozlik, L., Scapozza, C., 2007. A method for assessing “scientific”and “additional values” of geomorphosites. Geogr. Helv. 62, 148–158.

Riddiford, N.G., Branch, N.P., Green, C.P., Armitage, S.J., Olivier, L., 2012. Holocenepalaeoenvironmental change and the impact of prehistoric salt production in theSeille Valley, eastern France. The Holocene 22, 831–845.

Rijsdijk, K.F., Hume, J.P., Bunnik, F., Vincent Florens, F.B., Baiderg, C., Shapiro, B., van derPlicht, J., Janoo, A., Griffiths, O., van den Hoek Ostende, L.W., Cremer, H.,Vernimmen, T., De Louw, P.G.B., Bholah, A., Saumtally, S., Porch, N., Haile, J.,Buckley, M., Collins, M., Gittenberger, G., 2009. Mid-Holocene vertebrate boneConcentration-Lagerstatte on oceanic island Mauritius provides a window into theecosystem of the dodo (Raphus cucullatus). Quat. Sci. Rev. 28, 14–24.

Rose, K.D., 2012. The importance of Messel for interpreting Eocene Holarctic mammalianfaunas. Palaeobiodivers. Palaeoenviron. 92, 631–647.

Der Versteinerte Wald von Chemnitz. In: Röβler, R. (Ed.), Museum für NaturkundeChemnitz, Cheminitz (252 pp.).

Rostovtsev, K.O., Agajev, V.B., Azarjan, N.R., Babajev, R.G., Beznosov, N.V., Gasanov, N.A.,Zasaschvili, V.I., Lomize, M.G., Paitchadze, T.A., Panov, D.I., Prosorovskaya, E.L.,Sakharov, A.S., Todria, V.A., Toptchischvili, M.V., Abdulkasunzade, M.R., Avanesjan,A.S., Belenkova, V.S., Bendukidze, N.S., V.Ja., Vuks, Doludenko, M.P., Kiritchkova, A.I.,Klikuschin, V.G., Krymholz, G.Ja, Romanov, G.M., Schevtchenko, T.V., 1992. JuraKavkaza. Nauka, Sankt-Peterburg (192 pp., in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2005. Geologitcheskie pamjatniki: kratkij obzor klassifikatsionnykhpriznakov (Geological monuments: brief review of classification criteria). IzvestijaVysshikh Utchebnykh Zavedenij. Geologija i Razvedka 4, 67–69 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2006a. Standartizatsija opisanija geologitcheskikh pamjatnikov prirody kakvazhnykh ob'ektov national'nogo nasledija. Geografija i Prirodnye Resursy 3,166–168 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2006b. The palaeogeographic outlines of the Caucasus in the Jurassic: theCaucasian Sea and the Neotethys Ocean. Geološki Anali Balkanskoga Poluostrva 67,1–11.

Ruban, D.A., 2007. Bazal'nyj lejas bassejna r. Belaja (Severo-Zapadnyj Kavkaz). Nautchnajamysl' Kavkaza. Mezhdistsiplinarnye i Spetsial'nye Issledovanija 2, 95–97 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2009a. Regional stages: their types and chronostratigraphic utility. CadernosLab. Xeolóxico de Laxe 34, 59–73.

Ruban, D.A., 2009b. Problemy identifikatsii geologitcheskikh pamjatnikov. IzvestijaVysshikh Utchebnykh Zavedenij. Geologija i Razvedka 4, 72–73 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2010. Quantification of geodiversity and its loss. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 121,326–333.

Ruban, D.A., 2011a. Estetitcheskaja attraktivnost' unikal'nogo tsentra georaznoobrazija vGornoj Adygee dla turistov. In: Konoplenko, A.A. (Ed.), Aktual'nye problemygostinitchno-turistitcheskogo biznesa i servisa 2. Nauka, Saratov, pp. 64–67 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2011d. In: Lisitsyn, A.P. (Ed.), Novye dannye ob otlozhenijakhmeotitcheskogo obryvistogo poberezh'ja Tanaisskogo paleozaliva VostotchnogoParatetisa. Materialy XIX Mezhdunarodnoj nautchnoj konferentsii (Shkoly) pomorskoj geologii, vol. 1. GEOS, Moskva, pp. 237–241 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2011b. Osobo unikal'nye mestonakhozhdenija iskopaemykh organizmov kakob'ekty geologitcheskogo nasledija. Izvestija Vysshikh Utchebnykh Zavedenij.Geologija i Razvedka 5, 83–86 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., 2011c. How diverse should be geodiversity? Reply to Knight “Evaluatinggeological heritage” (Proc. Geol. Assoc. (2011)). Proc. Geol. Assoc. 122, 511–513.

Ruban, D.A., 2013a. The Greater Caucasus— a Galatian or Hanseatic terrane? Comment on“The formation of Pangea” by G.M. Stampfli, C. Hochard, C. Vérard, C. Wilhem and J.von Raumer [Tectonophysics 593 (2013) 1–19]. Tectonophysics 608, 1442–1444.

Ruban, D.A., 2013b. Geokonservatsionnyj aspekt nedropol'zovanija: ob'ektygeologitcheskogo nasledija i vzaimosvjaz' ikh tipov. Nedropol'zovanie, XXI vek 2,pp. 108–113 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., Kuo, I., 2010. Essentials of geological heritage site (geosite) management: aconceptual assessment of interests and conflicts. Natura Nascosta 41, 16–31.

Ruban, D.A., Zerfass, H., Yang, W., 2007. A new hypothesis on the position of the GreaterCaucasus Terrane in the Late Palaeozoic–Early Mesozoic based on palaeontologic andlithologic data. Trab. Geol. 27, 19–27.

Ruban, D.A., Conrad, C.P., van Loon, A.J., 2010. The challenge of reconstructing thePhanerozoic sea level and the Pacific Basin tectonics. Geologos 16, 235–243.

Ruban, D.A., Zorina, S.O., Conrad, C.P., Afanasieva, N.I., 2012. In quest of Paleocene global-scale transgressions and regressions: contraints from a synthesis of regional trends.Proc. Geol. Assoc. 123, 7–18.

Rull, V., Cañellas-Boltà, N., Sáez, A., Giralt, S., Pla, S., Margalef, O., 2010. Paleoecology ofEaster Island: evidence and uncertainties. Earth Sci. Rev. 99, 50–60.

Schaal, S., 2012. Messel pit fossil site — the legacy of the environment and life of theEocene. In: Talent, J.A. (Ed.), Earth and Life: Global Biodiversity, Extinction Intervalsand Biogeographic Perturbations Through Time. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 225–236.

Schulte, P., Alegret, L., Arenillas, I., Arz, J.A., Barton, P.J., Bown, P.R., Bralower, T.J., Christeson, G.L., Claeys, P., Cockell, C.S., Collins, G.S., Deutsch, A., Goldin, T.J., Goto, K., Grajales-Nishimura, J.M., Grieve, R.A.F., Gulick, S.P.S., Johnson, K.R., Kiessling, W., Koeberl, C.,Kring, D.A., MacLeod, K.G., Matsui, T., Melosh, J., Montanari, A., Morgan, J.V., Neal, C.R.,Nichols, D.J., Norris, R.D., Pierazzo, E., Ravizza, G., Rebolledo-Vieyra, M., Reimold, W.U.,Robin, E., Salge, T., Speijer, R.P., Sweet, A.R., Urrutia-Fucugauchi, J., Vajda, V., Whalen,M.T., Willumsen, P.S., 2010. The Chicxulub asteroid impact and mass extinction at theCretaceous–Paleogene boundary. Science 327, 1214–1218.

Seilacher, A., 2007. Trace Fossil Analysis. Springer, Berlin (226 pp.).Serrano, E., Ruiz-Flaño, P., 2007. Geodiversity. A theoretical and applied concept. Geogr.

Helv. 62, 140–147.Serrano, E., Ruiz-Flaño, P., 2009. Geomorphosites and geodiversity. In: Reynard, E.,

Coratza, P., Regolini-Bissig, G. (Eds.), Geomorphosites. F. Pfeil, München, pp. 49–61.Silant'ev, V.V., Zorina, S.A., Khasanova, M.N., Khajrullina, E.A., 2010. Ikhnofossilii i rizolity v

stratotipitcheskom razreze verkhnekazanskogo prod'jarusa u sela Petchischi. In:Karasjova, T.V. (Ed.), Geologija i neftegazonosnost' severnykh rajonov Uralo-Povolzh'ja. PGU, Perm', pp. 103–106 (in Russian).

Simpson, E.L., Eriksson, K.A., Eriksson, P.G., Bumby, A.J., 2002. Eolian dune degradationand generation of massive sandstone bodies in the Paleoproterozoic MakgabengFormation, Waterberg Group, South Africa. J. Sediment. Res. 72, 40–45.

Solarska, A., Hose, T.A., Vasiljevic, D.A., Mroczek, P., Jary, Z., Markovic, S.B., Widawski, K.,2013. Geodiversity of the loess regions in Poland: inventory, geoconservation issues,and geotourism potential. Quat. Int. 296, 68–81.

Stampfli, G.M., 2013. Response to the comments on “The formation of Pangea” by D.A.Ruban. Tectonophysics 608, 1445–1447.

Stanley, M., 2001a. Geodiversity strategy. ProGeo News 1, 6–9.Stanley, M., 2001b. Editorial. Geodiversity Update 1, p. 1.Tagliacozzo, A., Romandini, M., Fiore, I., Gala, M., Peresani, M., 2013. Animal exploitation

strategies during the Uluzzian at Grotta di Fumane (Verona, Italy). In: Clark, J.L.,Speth, J.D. (Eds.), Zooarchaeology and Modern Human Origins: Human HuntingBehaviour During the Later Pleistocene. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 129–150.

Tiess, G., Ruban, D.A., 2013. Geological heritage and mining legislation: a brief conceptualassessment of the principal legal acts of selected EU countries. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 124,411–416.

Tucker, M.E., 2011. Sedimentary Rocks in the Field: A Practical Guide. Wiley-Blackwell,Chichester (276 pp.).

van der Jagt, A.P.N., Craig, T., Anable, J., Brewer, M.J., Pearson, D.G., 2014. Unearthing thepicturesque: the validity of the preference matrix as a measure of landscapeaesthetics. Landsc. Urban Plan. 124, 1–13.

312 D.E. Bruno et al. / Earth-Science Reviews 138 (2014) 300–312

van Loon, A.J., Pisarska-Jamrozy, M., 2014. Sedimentological evidence of Pleistoceneearthquakes in NW Poland induced by glacio-isostatic rebound. Sediment. Geol.300, 1–10.

Vdovets, M.S., Silantiev, V.V., Mozzherin, V.V., 2010. A national geopark in the Republic ofTatarstan (Russia): a feasibility study. Geoheritage 2, 25–37.

Velitzelos, E., Zouros, N., 1998. New results on the petrified forest of Lesvos. Bull. Geol. Soc.Greece 32, 133–142.

Wagreich, M., Krenmayr, H.-G., 2005. Upper Cretaceous oceanic red beds (CORB) in theNorthern Calcareous Alps (Nierental Formation, Austria): slope topography andclastic input as primary controlling factors. Cretac. Res. 26, 57–64.

Wang, C., Hu, X., Huang, Y., Wagreich, M., Scott, R., Hay, W., 2011. Cretaceous oceanic redbeds as possible consequence of oceanic anoxic events. Sediment. Geol. 235, 27–37.

Ward, I., Larcombe, E., Mulvaney, K., Fandry, C., 2013. The potential for discovery of newsubmerged archaeological sites near the Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia.Quat. Int. 308–309, 216–229.

Westermann, G.E.G., 2000. Marine faunal realms of the Mesozoic: review and revisionunder the new guidelines for biogeographic classification and nomenclature.Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 163, 49–68.

Wilby, P.R., Briggs, D.E.G., 1997. Taxonomic trends in the resolution of detail preserved infossil phosphatized soft tissues. Geobios 30 (Suppl. 1), 493–502.

Wimbledon, W.A.P., 1996. Geosites — a new conservation initiative. Episodes 19, 87–88.Wimbledon, W.A.P., 1999. GEOSITES — an International Union of Geological Sciences

initiative to conserve our geological heritage. Polish Geological Institute SpecialPapers, 2, pp. 5–8.

Wimbledon, W.A.P., Smith-Meyer, S. (Eds.), 2012. Geoheritage in Europe and its conser-vation. ProGEO, Oslo (405 pp.).

Wimbledon, W.A., Benton, M.J., Bevins, R.E., Black, G.P., Bridgland, D.R., Cleal, C.J., Cooper,R.G., May, V.J., 1995. The development of a methodology for the selection of britishgeological sites for conservation: part 1. Mod. Geol. 20, 159–202.

Wimbledon, W., Ishchenko, A., Gerasimenko, N., Alexandrowicz, Z., Vinokurov, V., Liscak,P., Vozar, J., Bezak, V., Kohut, M., Polak, M., Mello, J., Potfaj, M., Gross, P., Elecko, M.,Nagy, A., Barath, I., Lapo, A., Vdovets, M., Klincharov, S., Marjanac, L., Mijovic, D.,Dimitrijevic, M., Gavrolovic, D., Theodossiou-Drandaki, I., Serjani, A., Todorov, T.,Nakov, R., Zagorchev, I., Perez-Gonzalez, A., Benvenuti, M., Boni, M., Bracucci, G.,

Bortolani, G., Burlando, M., Costantini, E., D'Andrea, M., Gisotti, G., Guado, G.,Marchetti, M., Massolli-Novelli, R., Panizza, M., Pavia, G., Poli, G., Zarlenga, F.,Satkunas, J., Mikulenas, V., Suominen, V., Kananajo, T., Lehtinen, M., Gonggriijp, G.,Look, E., Grube, A., Johansson, C., Karis, L., Parkes, M., Paudsep, R., Andersen, S.,Cleal, C., Bevins, R., 1998. A first attempt at a GEOSITES framework for Europe — anIUGS initiative to support recogniztion of world heritage and European geodiversity.Geol. Balc. 28, 5–32.

Wyse Jackson, P.N., 2010. Introducing Palaeontology: A Guide to Ancient Life. DunedinAcademic Press, Edinburgh (152 pp.).

Yamazaki, T., Shimono, T., 2013. Abundant bacterial magnetite occurrence in oxic red clay.Geology 41, 1191–1194.

Zachos, J., Pagani, M., Sloan, L., Thomas, E., Billups, K., 2001. Trends, rhythms, and aberra-tions in global climate 65 Ma to present. Science 292, 686–693.

Zimov, S.A., 2005. Pleistocene park: return of the mammoth's ecosystem. Science 308,796–798.

Zimov, S.A., Zimov, N.S., Tikhonov, A.N., Chapin III, F.S., 2012a. Mammoth steppe: a high-productivity phenomenon. Quat. Sci. Rev. 57, 26–45.

Zimov, S.A., Zimov, N.S., Chapin III, F.S., 2012b. The past and future of the mammothsteppe ecosystem. In: Louys, J. (Ed.), Paleontology in Ecology and Conservation.Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 193–225.

Zouros, N., 2009. Geomorphosites within geoparks. In: Reynard, E., Coratza, P., Regolini-Bissig, G. (Eds.), Geomorphosites. F. Pfeil, München, pp. 105–118.

Zouros, N.C., 2010. Geotourism in Greece: a case study of the Lesvos Petrified ForestGeopark. In: Dowling, R., Newsome, D. (Eds.), Global Geotourism Perspectives.Goodfellow, Woodeaton, pp. 215–229.

Zorina, S.A., Ruselik, E.S., Il'itcheva, O.M., Netkasova, N.A., Silant'ev, V.V., 2011.Vetschestnennyj sostav i uslovija obrazovanija pogranitchnykh otlozhenij nizhnegoi verkhnego pod'jarusov kazanskogo jarusa v stratotipitcheskom razrezePrikazanskogo rajona. Izvestija Vysshikh Utchebnykh Zavedenij. Geologija i Razvedka1, 11–17 (in Russian).

Zwolinski, Z., 2004. Geodiversity. In: Goodie, A.S. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Geomorphology.Routledge, London, pp. 417–418.