近年来,在《古地理学报》(中文版和英文版)的已刊文章和来稿中,一些作者把岩石或岩石类型称作"微相"或"岩相",把岩石薄片中的微观特征称作"微相",把岩石的宏观特征称作"宏观相"。笔者曾写过2...近年来,在《古地理学报》(中文版和英文版)的已刊文章和来稿中,一些作者把岩石或岩石类型称作"微相"或"岩相",把岩石薄片中的微观特征称作"微相",把岩石的宏观特征称作"宏观相"。笔者曾写过2篇中文的短文《主编的话--岩石不是微相》和《主编的话--岩石不是岩相》,刊于《古地理学报》(中文版)中。但是此二文尚未引起国内外广大读者的关注。还有,在20世纪80年代,一些中国沉积学家根据野外露头和钻井岩心的岩石宏观特征,提出了"亚相"和"微相"。这个"微相"的定义与外国沉积学家在20世纪40年代根据岩石的显微镜下微观特征提出的"微相"的定义完全不同。这些问题屡屡出现从而迫使笔者,作为《古地理学报》(中文版和英文版)的主编,应该遵循"百花齐放和百家争鸣"的方针,再写出1篇中文及英文兼有的新文章,即《沉积相的一些术语定义的评论》(A review on the definitions of terms of sedimentary facies),把沉积相的一些术语,如"相"、"沉积相"、"岩相"、两种"微相"、"宏观相"、"亚相"等术语的定义讲清楚,并把此文同时在《古地理学报》(中文版和英文版)中刊出。希此文能引起国内外广大读者的关注,并撰写文章和参与这些问题讨论及争鸣,争取逐步得到一些共识,从而促进沉积学和古地理学的进步与发展。展开更多
In recent years,in some papers and manuscripts published in and submitted to the Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition and English Edition),the authors named the rocks or rock types as"microfacies"or&qu...In recent years,in some papers and manuscripts published in and submitted to the Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition and English Edition),the authors named the rocks or rock types as"microfacies"or"lithofacies",named the microfeatures in thin-sections under microscope as"microfacies",and named the macrofeatures of rocks as"macrofacies".I wrote two short papers"Words of the Editor-in-Chief—Rocks are not microfacies"(Feng,Journal of Palaeogeography 19(5):II 2017)and"Words of the Editor-in-Chief—Rocks are not lithofacies"(Feng,Journal of Palaeogeography 20(3):452–452,2018)which were in Chinese and published in the Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition).However,they did not attract much attention of readers in China and outside China.In addition,in1980 s,some Chinese sedimentologists proposed"subfacies"and"microfacies"based on the macrofeatures of rocks from outcrops and drilling cores.However,the definition of this"microfacies"is totally different from the"microfacies"proposed by foreign sedimentologists in 1940 s based on the microfeatures in thin-sections under microscope.These problems appeared repeatedly and forced me,as the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition and English Edition),to observe the policy of"A hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend",to write new papers"A review on the definitions of terms of sedimentary facies"both in Chinese and in English,to clarify the definitions of the terms of sedimentary facies,i.e.,"facies","lithofacies",two"microfacies","macrofacies","subfacies",etc.I hope that the new papers will attract attention of readers worldwide and they can write papers and participate in the discussion and contending of these problems,strive for getting some common understandings,and therefore promote the progress and development of sedimentology and palaeogeography.展开更多
I basically agree with the viewpoints of Shanmugam(Journal of Palaeogeography 7(3):197-238,2018)and Zavala(Journal of Palaeogeog raphy 8(3):306-313,2019)who cited,refined and interpreted the definitions of hypopycnal ...I basically agree with the viewpoints of Shanmugam(Journal of Palaeogeography 7(3):197-238,2018)and Zavala(Journal of Palaeogeog raphy 8(3):306-313,2019)who cited,refined and interpreted the definitions of hypopycnal flow,homopycnal flow and hyperpycnal flow.I appreciate two typical case studies of hyperpycnal flows induced by the Yellow River and Yangtze River,and the Gaoping River.The former is a normal type while the latter is catastrophic.They make up a complete knowledge about hyperpycnal flows and hyperpycnites.According to the interpretation of the word "hyperpycnal" from Greek to English,the "hypopycnal flow" should be "less density flow" or "lower density flow"("低密度流"),the "homopycnal flow" should be "equal density flow"("等密度流"),and the"hyperpycnal flow" should be "higher density flow" or "over density flow"("高密度流" or "超密度流").Some geologists called the "hypopycnal flow" as "异轻流"("abnormally light flow")and called the "hyperpycnal flow" as"异重流"("abnormally heavy flow").There are at least more than 10 names or terms about the "density flows" and the "deposits of density flows".It is a problem indeed.In addition,the density could be changed by salinity,temperature and pressure of water.Therefore,the term "density flow" may be problematic either.Another problem is that reliable and irrefutable identification markers of ancient heperpycnites are lacking.We should observe the policy of "A hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend" to discuss these problems and to promote progress and development of hyperpycnal flows and hyperpycnites.展开更多
Van Loon et al.＇s paper ＂The response of stromatolites to seismic shocks： Tomboliths from the Palaeoproterozoic Chaibasa Formation, E India＂ with a new term ＂tomboliths＂ and original viewpoints should be publish...Van Loon et al.＇s paper ＂The response of stromatolites to seismic shocks： Tomboliths from the Palaeoproterozoic Chaibasa Formation, E India＂ with a new term ＂tomboliths＂ and original viewpoints should be published, but some contents need to be discussed. Shanmugam＇s paper ＂The response of stromatolites to seismic shocks： Tomboliths from the Palaeoproterozoic Chaibasa Formation, E India： Discussion and liquefaction basics＂ pointed out some queries and problems about Van Loon et al.＇s paper. It is an academic discussion paper and should be published as well. However, some main problems, such as the new term＂tomboliths＂ and its origin of seismic shocks, ＂whether stromatolites or tomboliths are soft-sediment deformation structures or not＂, etc., also need to be discussed. Academic discussion is an effective measure to promote scientific development. The more thorough academic discussions are carried out regarding academic problems, the more scientific facts and truths will become clear. All participants in this discussion are contributors. It is active to carry out the policy of ＂A hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend＂ by our Journal of Palaeogeography.展开更多
文摘近年来,在《古地理学报》(中文版和英文版)的已刊文章和来稿中,一些作者把岩石或岩石类型称作"微相"或"岩相",把岩石薄片中的微观特征称作"微相",把岩石的宏观特征称作"宏观相"。笔者曾写过2篇中文的短文《主编的话--岩石不是微相》和《主编的话--岩石不是岩相》,刊于《古地理学报》(中文版)中。但是此二文尚未引起国内外广大读者的关注。还有,在20世纪80年代,一些中国沉积学家根据野外露头和钻井岩心的岩石宏观特征,提出了"亚相"和"微相"。这个"微相"的定义与外国沉积学家在20世纪40年代根据岩石的显微镜下微观特征提出的"微相"的定义完全不同。这些问题屡屡出现从而迫使笔者,作为《古地理学报》(中文版和英文版)的主编,应该遵循"百花齐放和百家争鸣"的方针,再写出1篇中文及英文兼有的新文章,即《沉积相的一些术语定义的评论》(A review on the definitions of terms of sedimentary facies),把沉积相的一些术语,如"相"、"沉积相"、"岩相"、两种"微相"、"宏观相"、"亚相"等术语的定义讲清楚,并把此文同时在《古地理学报》(中文版和英文版)中刊出。希此文能引起国内外广大读者的关注,并撰写文章和参与这些问题讨论及争鸣,争取逐步得到一些共识,从而促进沉积学和古地理学的进步与发展。
文摘In recent years,in some papers and manuscripts published in and submitted to the Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition and English Edition),the authors named the rocks or rock types as"microfacies"or"lithofacies",named the microfeatures in thin-sections under microscope as"microfacies",and named the macrofeatures of rocks as"macrofacies".I wrote two short papers"Words of the Editor-in-Chief—Rocks are not microfacies"(Feng,Journal of Palaeogeography 19(5):II 2017)and"Words of the Editor-in-Chief—Rocks are not lithofacies"(Feng,Journal of Palaeogeography 20(3):452–452,2018)which were in Chinese and published in the Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition).However,they did not attract much attention of readers in China and outside China.In addition,in1980 s,some Chinese sedimentologists proposed"subfacies"and"microfacies"based on the macrofeatures of rocks from outcrops and drilling cores.However,the definition of this"microfacies"is totally different from the"microfacies"proposed by foreign sedimentologists in 1940 s based on the microfeatures in thin-sections under microscope.These problems appeared repeatedly and forced me,as the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Palaeogeography(Chinese Edition and English Edition),to observe the policy of"A hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend",to write new papers"A review on the definitions of terms of sedimentary facies"both in Chinese and in English,to clarify the definitions of the terms of sedimentary facies,i.e.,"facies","lithofacies",two"microfacies","macrofacies","subfacies",etc.I hope that the new papers will attract attention of readers worldwide and they can write papers and participate in the discussion and contending of these problems,strive for getting some common understandings,and therefore promote the progress and development of sedimentology and palaeogeography.
文摘I basically agree with the viewpoints of Shanmugam(Journal of Palaeogeography 7(3):197-238,2018)and Zavala(Journal of Palaeogeog raphy 8(3):306-313,2019)who cited,refined and interpreted the definitions of hypopycnal flow,homopycnal flow and hyperpycnal flow.I appreciate two typical case studies of hyperpycnal flows induced by the Yellow River and Yangtze River,and the Gaoping River.The former is a normal type while the latter is catastrophic.They make up a complete knowledge about hyperpycnal flows and hyperpycnites.According to the interpretation of the word "hyperpycnal" from Greek to English,the "hypopycnal flow" should be "less density flow" or "lower density flow"("低密度流"),the "homopycnal flow" should be "equal density flow"("等密度流"),and the"hyperpycnal flow" should be "higher density flow" or "over density flow"("高密度流" or "超密度流").Some geologists called the "hypopycnal flow" as "异轻流"("abnormally light flow")and called the "hyperpycnal flow" as"异重流"("abnormally heavy flow").There are at least more than 10 names or terms about the "density flows" and the "deposits of density flows".It is a problem indeed.In addition,the density could be changed by salinity,temperature and pressure of water.Therefore,the term "density flow" may be problematic either.Another problem is that reliable and irrefutable identification markers of ancient heperpycnites are lacking.We should observe the policy of "A hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend" to discuss these problems and to promote progress and development of hyperpycnal flows and hyperpycnites.
文摘Van Loon et al.＇s paper ＂The response of stromatolites to seismic shocks： Tomboliths from the Palaeoproterozoic Chaibasa Formation, E India＂ with a new term ＂tomboliths＂ and original viewpoints should be published, but some contents need to be discussed. Shanmugam＇s paper ＂The response of stromatolites to seismic shocks： Tomboliths from the Palaeoproterozoic Chaibasa Formation, E India： Discussion and liquefaction basics＂ pointed out some queries and problems about Van Loon et al.＇s paper. It is an academic discussion paper and should be published as well. However, some main problems, such as the new term＂tomboliths＂ and its origin of seismic shocks, ＂whether stromatolites or tomboliths are soft-sediment deformation structures or not＂, etc., also need to be discussed. Academic discussion is an effective measure to promote scientific development. The more thorough academic discussions are carried out regarding academic problems, the more scientific facts and truths will become clear. All participants in this discussion are contributors. It is active to carry out the policy of ＂A hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend＂ by our Journal of Palaeogeography.
