practical_cons
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
practical_cons [14/03/2023 18:31] – created mike_gss | practical_cons [21/03/2023 11:23] (current) – mike_gss | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
The method of sample processing also has a surprisingly strong influence on the particular fossil group(s) a scientist will study. Each of the three sub-disciplines of micropaleontology (in the loose sense) have their own distinctive preparation techniques and each will favour the recovery of microfossils within that particular sub-discipline. For example, traditional micropaleontological preparation techniques are such that foraminifera (all types), ostracods, diatoms, radiolarian and conodonts are all potentially recoverable from samples using the same processing/ | The method of sample processing also has a surprisingly strong influence on the particular fossil group(s) a scientist will study. Each of the three sub-disciplines of micropaleontology (in the loose sense) have their own distinctive preparation techniques and each will favour the recovery of microfossils within that particular sub-discipline. For example, traditional micropaleontological preparation techniques are such that foraminifera (all types), ostracods, diatoms, radiolarian and conodonts are all potentially recoverable from samples using the same processing/ | ||
- | In an applied situation, biostratigraphers will often need to “turn their hand” to working with any fossils they may find in their various prepared samples. A “micropaleontologist”, | + | In an applied situation, biostratigraphers will often need to turn their hand to working with any fossils they may find in their various prepared samples. A “micropaleontologist”, |
practical_cons.1678818670.txt.gz · Last modified: 14/03/2023 18:31 by mike_gss