8 BRITISH AVONIAN CONODONT FAUNAS 
This conodont succession has been applied to rocks of Upper Devonian and 
Carboniferous age in other parts of Western Europe, notably by Dvorak & Freyer 
(1961), Helms (1959, 1961), and Miiller (1959) in East Germany ; Flugel & Ziegler 
(1957) in Austria ; Lys & Serre (1958), Higgins (1962), Higgins, Wagner-Gentis & 
Wagner (1964) in Spain ; Lys & Serre (1957), Lys, Serre & Deroo (1957), Lys, Serre, 
Mauvier & Grekoff (1961) in France and the Sahara ; Boogaard (1963) in Portugal ; 
and by Serre & Lys (1960) and Conil, Lys & Mauvier (1964) in Belgium. 
Germany 
The zonation of the Lower Carboniferous in Germany is based chiefly on the work 
of Bischoff (1957) and Voges (1959). 
Bischoff (1957) studied the conodont faunas of the Wocklumeria, Gattendorfia, 
Pericyclus and Goniatites Stages of the Rhenoherzynicum. He subdivided the 
Pericyclus Stage into two conodont subzones—the Siphonodella Subzone (Cull «—8) 
and the anchoralis Subzone (Cull y). He also described the conodont faunas of the 
three goniatite zones of the Gonzatites Stage. 
Voges (1959) described conodonts from the Lower Carboniferous Gattendorfia and 
Pericyclus Stages. He recognized three zones within the Gattendorfia Stage: the 
Gnathodus  kockeli—Pseudopolygnathus  dentilineatus Zone ; the Siphonodella— 
Pseudopolygnathus triangulus inaequalis Zone and the Siphonodella—Pseudopoly- 
gnathus triangulus triangulus Zone. Three zones were recognized by Voges within 
the Pericyclus Stage ; the Siphonodella crenulata Zone (Cull «), which was sub- 
divided into a lower and an upper subzone, the Scaliognathus anchoralis Zone (Cu 
II By), and a Scaliognathus anchoralis—Gnathodus bilineatus “ interregnum” (Cu 
II 3). Voges thus gave a more detailed and refined zonation than Bischoff (1957) 
for the Gattendorfia and Pericyclus Stages, and also differed from Bischoff by extend- 
ing the Scaliognathus anchoralis Zone into Cu II £ (Bischoff confined the anchoralis 
Zone to Cu II y). 
The German workers were thus the first to attempt a conodont zonation of the 
Lower Carboniferous. Whilst not detracting in the least from the excellent work of 
Bischoff and of Voges it is true to say that there are a number of deficiencies and gaps 
in our knowledge of German conodont faunas. The reasons for these gapsare twofold. 
Firstly the nature of the outcrops is such that it is impossible to collect from con- 
tinuous exposures. The different samples collected by both Voges and Bischoff are 
from widely separated areas. Secondly, the sediments are such that in any one 
locality not all horizons yield conodonts (e.g. Hangenberg Schiefer, and the cherts 
immediately beneath the ‘“‘ Erdbach Kalk’’). There has also been a marked 
tendency for German conodont workers to give total stratigraphic ranges of species, 
rather than the exact distribution and abundance of individual species, although 
more recently, for example Kronberg, Pilger, Scherp & Ziegler (1960) and Ziegler 
(1963), these have been given. It is becoming increasingly apparent from conodont 
studies in other parts of the world that numbers of stratigraphic breaks exist in the 
German succession, even where these have not hitherto been suspected. 
