Die Erläuterungen zur Stratigraphischen Tabelle von Deutschland 2002 bestehen aus 29 Beiträgen von Stratigraphen, die die Stratigraphische Tabelle von Deutschland dokumentieren und erweitern. Die Strat. Tabelle v. Deutschland wurde im Jahr 2002 anläßlich des damals ausgerufenen Jahres der Geowissenschaften erarbeitet. Diese umfangreiche Zusammenstellung der litho- und biostratigraphischen Einheiten vom Proterozoikum bis ins Quartär stellt ein regionales Referenzprofil für die Geologie in Mitteleuropa dar. Über die Bereitstellung von umfangreichen Hintergrundmaterial für die STD 2002 hinaus, stellen die Erläuterungen die momentan gültigen zeitlichen Untergliederungen der Schichtglieder in Deutschland vor, dokumentieren den status ihrer Stratigraphie und hängt diese Einheiten in eine aktualisierte numerische Zeitskala ein. Ein Satz von 16 vierfarbigen Falttafeln geben die stratigraphischen Abfolgen schematisch wieder, verschiedene Becken übergreifend. Drei weitere Tafeln geben die historische Entwicklung der Geologischen Zeitskala zwischen 1964 und 2005 wieder.
Die vorliegenden Erläuterungen umfassen weiter:
(1) eine neue cyclostratigraphische Gliederung zwischen später Dyas (Oberperm) und der Germanischen Trias, welche die bio-magnetostratigrapische Korrelation mit den Internationalen Stadien und die Einordnung in eine genaue orbital-klimatische ("Milankovitsch") Skala erlaubt.
(2) die Nutzung eines Datensatzes radiometrischer Daten, um die bestmöglichen Ankerpunkte für gute Zeitauflösung zu erhalten und
(3) ein abschliessender Beitrag mit Nachträgen und Korrekturen an der Stratigraphischen Tabelle von Deutschland (2002).

The Explanatory Notes for the Stratigraphic Table of Germany 2005 (ESTD 2005) are 29 contributions from prominent stratigraphers that document and enhance the Stratigraphic Table of Germany (2002) (STD 2002). STD 2002 was compiled by the Stratigrapic Commission of Germany on the occasion of the Year of the Geosciences celebrated in 2002. This major compilation of Proterozoic through Quaternary litho- and biostratigraphic units is intended to be a regional reference for Central European geology. In addition to providing extensive background material for the STD 2002, the new ESTD 2005 elaborates the current subdivision and correlation with the international divisions of geologic time for the Germanic units, reviews the status of their stratigraphy, and places these units onto an updated numerical time-scale. An enclosed suite of 16 full-color fold-out plates display schematic stratigraphic successions across different basins, and three additional plates depict the historical development of the geologic time scale.

Other aspects of this ESTD 2005 include:
(1) A new cyclostratigraphy scale for the late Dyas (late Permian) through Germanic Trias enables placement of their bio-magnetostratigraphic correlations with the international stages onto a precise orbital-climatic (“Milankovitch”) time scale.
(2) Evaluation of a more extensive database of radiometric ages to provide the most reliable anchor points for better time resolution.
(3) A concluding paper includes addenda and corrections to the Stratigraphic Table of Germany (2002).

In order to prepare a new, refined edition of the International Stratigraphic Guide, the International Commission on Stratigraphy concentrated its effort on the re-definition of national stratigraphic codes. In the framework of the Geological Stratigraphical Sections and Points Programme, this work is associated with searching for international and regional key sections. Until the International Geological Congress in Oslo (2008), all 88 GSSP points should be defined.

In the context of this research programme, the stratigraphic revision of classical Phanerozoic profiles and areas is especially invited. Germany was the area, where the classical studies of Alberti, von Buch, Frech, Geinitz, Geyer, Quenstedt, Schindewolf, Strombeck, and many other founders of stratigraphy as a scientific discipline were done. From this point of view, the recent book edited by Manfred Menning & Andreas Hendrich in Newsletters on Stratigraphy (41: Explanations to Stratigraphic Table of Germany, 2005) deserves special interest.

This book has been compiled due to the common effort of 88 authors from 38 institutions. It consists of 28 chapters dealing with problems of stratigraphic study of individual Phanerozoic time slices in Germany. The explanations are accompanied by numerous sketches and tables on 405 pages of the text, and by 16 coloured tables in the appendix. In spite of the unifying effort of the editors, individual chapters substantionally differ one from another in style, method and in approach to the subject of study. In fact, the text chapters could be grouped into five parts (Teminological Introduction, Early Paleozoic to Pennsylvanian, Permian and Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous, Cenozoic).

Two introductory chapters were written by M. Menning (together with F.F. Steininger). They deal with the trends in German stratigraphy, schools and concepts, development of terminology, and stratigraphical knowledge as a whole in the last three years (since 2002, when the first concept of a new stratigraphical scale was published). Since that time, the Devonian, Triassic and Late Jurassic tables have considerably changed. In the community of German stratigraphers, there is still some oposition to Salvador’s and Hedberg’s concepts. Moreover, the German Cambrian, Ordovician, Devonian, Carboniferous and Permian divisions differ from the Global Time Scale of Harland & Ogg. Although an agreement was reached that the terms "Thuringian", "Saxonian" and "Autunian" are unclear and not recommended for futher use, a judgement that the terms "Buntsandstein", "Muschelkalk" or the "Keuper" should be considered as "obsolete and terminologically incorrect" is still a matter of debate. A new lithostratigraphical (?) term "Folge" has been introduced. Lutz et al. (1999) defined this term as ΄the time section (more-or-less equal to the formation), limited by quasi-isochronous surfaces of different origin‘. However, the meaning of this term is varying in the use of different authors.

Early Paleozoic and Carboniferous stratigraphical problems are discussed by 21 authors in the five following chapters. Their text is written in old routine style, in which the mixing of lithostratigraphical and chronostratigraphical terms and the use of jargon ("deutsche Proterozoikum", "Profil des Neoproterozoikum", "Existenz von Kambrium","sibirische Unterkambrium","deutsche Kambrium","Fazies des deutschen Devon","Graptolithen-Schiefern überlagern das Silur" ...) is frequent. The authors suggest the term "Silesium" for Pennsylvanian, despite of its base lies deeper than the top of the Mississippian. They designate the thickness in meters of Mississippian stages, and of the "Sedimentary Silesian" as well (thus in the meaning of lithostratigraphic units!).

The following eight chapters form part of the most important contribution of the book. They deal with Permian and Triassic stratigraphical problems. In spite of the long history of problems with the diachronism of biostratigraphical indicators, many troubles with the correlation (called here the "Paternoster-Stratigraphie"), the German sequence starting with the Rothliegend up to the Keuper deposits is one of the best studied European Phanerozoic sequences now and it evokes many interesting thoughts. The Permian to Triassic infilling of the Mid European Basin should be the most com104 plete and one of the most continuous Pm/Tr sequences (37 Myr) anywhere. The Pm/Tr boundary should be indicated by microsferuls in the Calvőrde Folge. What a pity that the tables illustrating the division, structure and correlation of the sequences are arranged not very systematically, being placed rather far from the text...

The term "Folge" in use of these authors is close to cyclostratigraphic unit. In Rothliegendes and Zechstein, they represent "Sohlbankzyklen 1. Ordnung" - megacycles with duration of 0.5-2 Myr, (consisting of Milankovich long eccentricity cycles), which are recorded as rock bodies limited by "quasi-isochronous" surfaces ("sie begrenzen Abfolgen von Schichten, die, wenn auch nicht exakt gleichzeitig, so doch innerhalb einer bestimmen Zeitscheibe abgelagert wurden"). In Muschelkalk, the "Folgen" have the character of "quasi-isochronous" formations. These formations were situated centrally in the basin: they were neighbours of typical diachronous formations along the basin marginal parts. The allostratigraphy of the Muschelkalk is based on the marker horizons called here the "Leitbänke" or "Leitflächen" ( =time reference or time-correlation horizons).

The Keuper Group contains more than thirty lithostratigraphic units. The "Folgen" in the Keuper are allostratigraphic units - the definition of their boundaries should be focused not on the facies changes, but on the marker horizons, which, according to sedimentological indicators, are supposed to represent isochronous surfaces. It is noteworthy that the rock record represents less than 50 \% of the time in these sequences. Therefore, both formation and "Folge" represent different but complementary views on the same rock pile, and their boundaries may cross over one another.

In summary, the "Dyas to Rhaetian" sequence should be represented by 33 "quasi-isochronous Folgen" (with a duration of 0.4 to 3.5 Myr) consisting of 230 eccentricity cycles. Rotliegende precession 20 kyr cycles are grouped into eccentricity 100 kyr cycles, 400 kyr "long-eccentricity" cycles and these form 2.8 Myr long "Folgen" (Parchim-, Mirow-, Dethlingen-, Hannover-, Zechstein-Folge). The 58 Buntsandstein cycles (duration of 6 Myr) have a short eccentricity (100 kyr) character. The Lower Muschelkalk (2.8 Myr) comprises twenty eight short eccentricity - parasequences, the Middle Muschelkalk (1.2 Myr) consists of 13 cycles, the Upper one (1.6 Myr) of 14-16 cycles. The Keuper comprises 40 cycles separated by 6 large gaps (the largest one, called the "Altkimmerische Hauptdiskordanz" lasted 12 Myr). The Keuper resembles the Rotliegende Group - they both lasted up to 40 Myr (twice as long as the Muschelkalk, Buntsandstein and Zechstein groups together), with frequent gaps. The Norian and Visean represent the longest stages of the whole Phanerozoic history. However, the Keuper sedimentary record (consisting of 40 cycles with sedimentary rate of 30-40 mm/kyr) contains more than 20 gaps (0.5 to 12 Myr long) and paleosoils.

Three chapters are devoted to the Jurassic stratigraphy. New chronostratigraphic data show that the Late Jurassic lasted 15 Myr (Kimmeridgian 6.5 Myr, Oxfordian 4 Myr, Tithonian 4 Myr). The authors stress chronical problems with the identification of boundaries (Rhaetian Sandstone vs. Hettangian Psilonotus Sandstone, Toarcian-Aalenian ´Posidonienschiefer¡, Tithonian-lower Berriasian Purbeck Facies). Classical terms like Liassic, Dogger and Malm have a provisional status only. They are rather equivalent to lithostratigraphic terms Ith-, Hildesheim- and Herford Group in northern Germany. In southern Germany, names like ´Schwarzer-, Brauner-, Weisser Jura Gruppe¡ are proposed. However, these designations are not concordant with the international terminology and are mixed with other jargon-like expressions in the text (Süddeutscher Jura, globaler Jura). The use of formal lithostratigraphic terminology is also wrong in several examples (Angulatenton Fm, Angulatensandstein Fm, Grypheensandstein Fm, Numismalismergel Fm, Ostreenkalk Fm, Psilonotenton Fm, etc.).

The Cretaceous lithostratigraphic units contain many local names without modern re-definitions. Moreover, they are not hierarchically arranged. Formalized unit names occur in several regions (Lower Saxonia) only. Jargon expressions are frequent (überwiegend in Schriebkreide Fazies entwickelte Oberkreide, Kreide von Norddeutschland, Sächsische Kreide, süddeutsche Kreide, alpinen Kreide). The stratigraphy is based on classical biostratigraphy; the description of sediments mostly lacks any sequence- or cyclostratigraphic interpretation. Three megasequences are recognized (Berriasian to Lower Albian, middle Albian to Lower Coniacian and middle Coniacian to Maastrichtian) and interpreted as a consequence of the Alpine tectonism.

The remaining nine chapters deal with Tertiary (including Quaternary) stratigraphy. They discuss sequences of partial basins (Lower and Upper Rhine Valley, north-western, eastern and southern Germany, Hessian Depression, Mainz Basin, Alpine units). Although many local developments exist, two principal sedimentary megacycles have developed due to the Alpine orogenesis (Paleocene-Lower Eocene and Oligocene-Upper Neogene). It is only a pity that the authors keep a descriptive approach (lithological and stratigraphical description with paleogeographical implications) and sequence stratigraphic, climatic and cyclostratigraphic aspects are only mentioned.

In spite of a few weak points, the book is very important contribution to international discussion on modern trends in the Phanerozoic stratigraphy. The authors expressed a (modest) purpose of the Stratigraphical Table to serve as a stable basis for German Basin stratigraphy for at least five to ten years. I am convinced that this task has been succesfully fulfilled and that their common work documents the admirable progress in German stratigraphical reasearch.

Jozef Michalík, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava

Geologica Carpathica, February 2007, 58, 1, 103-104