Correlation and Cyclicity of Stratigraphic Sequence Boundaries and Chronostratigraphic Stage Boundaries of the Last 253 My

First published: 2025

Brief summary

Finds ~26-36 My cycles common to stratigraphic sequence boundaries, tectonism, sea-level, climate and biotic change, potentially linked to modulation of Earth's 2.4-My and 9-My orbital eccentricity cycles.

Article

Correlation and Cyclicity of Stratigraphic Sequence Boundaries and Chronostratigraphic Stage Boundaries of the Last 253 My is a peer-reviewed journal article published by Earth-Science Reviews (ScienceDirect) in 2025. It finds ~26-36 My cycles common to stratigraphic sequence boundaries, tectonism, sea-level, climate and biotic change, potentially linked to modulation of Earth's 2.4-My and 9-My orbital eccentricity cycles.

The analysis focuses on ~26-36 My. It also considers also references orbital eccentricity modulation cycles of 2.4 My and 9 My. The data source is global stratotype (GSSP) chronostratigraphic record spanning 253 My. This gives the cycle claim a specific numerical and evidential setting rather than presenting periodicity only as a visual impression.

The article reports the following result: Similar ~26 to 36 My cycles have been reported in various forms of tectonism, intra-plate volcanism, climatic change, ocean anoxia, biodiversity and mass-extinction events, implying causal linkages among these phenomena. The interpretation is strongest when it survives dating uncertainty, preservation bias, alternative event selections and correction for multiple statistical tests.

For cycles researchers, the article brings together stratigraphic cyclicity, sequence boundaries, 26–36-million-year cycles, orbital eccentricity. It is relevant to debates over whether recurring patterns in the geological record reflect astronomical forcing, internal Earth processes, preservation bias or dating uncertainty.

Because it is a peer-reviewed journal article, the article is a strong starting point for discussion in the Geology & Paleontology forum, although its conclusions should still be compared with later replications and updated datasets.

Source details and credits

• Source / publisher: Earth-Science Reviews (ScienceDirect)
• Source type: Peer-reviewed journal article
• URL type: WWW
• Credits: Earth-Science Reviews (ScienceDirect)
• URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0012825225000613