Abstract This TMS Special Publication comprises a collection of 23 papers with an international authorship reflecting on landmarks in the history and development of Foraminiferal micropalaeontology. The volume is prefaced by an introductory overview that provides a brief and selected historical setting, as well as the intended aims of the book. Selected developments in Foraminiferal studies from a global perspective are presented from the time of Alcide d’Orbignyand the founding of the Paris MNHN collections in the mid-nineteenth century to the use of foraminifera in industry, other museum collections, palaeoceanography and environmental studies, regional studies from the Southern Hemisphere and the riseand fall of significant research schools. The book concludes with a chapter on the modelling of foraminifera. Landmarks in Foraminiferal Micropalaeontology: History and Development will be of particular interest to micropalaeontologists, other Earth scientists, historians of science, museum curators and the general reader with an interest in science.

Abstract This TMS Special Publication was proposed after several informal discussions about changing trends in Micropalaeontology. It was realized that a possible watershed had been reached regarding the formal training of micropalaeontologists, employment opportunities and the closure of several research schools. It was thought to be opportune at this juncture to provide a selected global overview of the history and development of one particular branch of Micropalaeontology–Foraminiferal studies. To this end a brief historical introduction is provided before outlining each author’s contribution.

Abstract This paper reports the history of the Paris foraminiferal collection and documents the beginnings of foraminiferal studies in France from 1826 until the early years of the twentieth century. The first foraminiferal classification was published in 1826 by the French naturalist Alcide d’Orbigny (1802–1857), considered to be the father of micropalaeontology. His work produced a prestigious and fruitful scientific heritage that extends well beyond the scope of foraminiferal research. His important foraminifera collection is a priceless heritage, which is today held at the Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle (MNHN, Paris, France). Other important French pioneers include d’Archiac, Terquem and Schlumberger, who have made great contributions to foraminiferal research and to the enrichment of the collections held at the MNHN.

Abstract A brief account is given of the life, scientific work and legacy of the foraminiferologist Henry Bowman Brady (1835–1891). Brady’s most enduring legacy is the ‘Report on the Foraminifera dredged by HMS Challenger’, published in 1884. Distribution data contained in the report enable the recognition of a range biogeographic provinces and of bathymetric zones. The biogeographic data and provinces are of considerable use in palaeobiogeographic-and palaeoclimatic-interpretation, for example in the Pleistocene–Holocene of the British Isles. The bathymetric data and zones are similarly of use in palaeobathymetric interpretation, for example in the Palaeogene of the North Sea. Brady himself appears to have been the first to apply bathymetric data in palaeobathymetric interpretation, on Fiji in 1888, and on Barbados in 1892. Some notes on the voyage of HMS Challenger are appended.

Abstract Updates are made to the names of the foraminifera in the ‘Report on the Foraminifera dredged by HMS Challenger’ (Brady 1884) that have been necessitated by work undertaken since the previous revision (Jones 1994).

Abstract Edward Heron-Allen, a lawyer by profession, was a true polymath with interests covering an extremely wide variety of topics. ‘The beauty and mystery of the foraminifera’, in particular, fascinated him and for nearly 50 years he worked on the group, for most of the time at the Natural History Museum, London, in an unpaid, unofficial capacity. During his scientific career, he published over 70 papers and obtained several fellowships, culminating in 1919 in his election to the Royal Society. Most of this work was undertaken with Arthur Earland (a senior Post Office official), until the collaboration sadly ended in acrimony in the early 1930s. He amassed a very fine collection of mostly recent species and probably one of the finest foraminiferal libraries and archives in the world, which he bequeathed to the Museum in 1926 (and subsequently). These are housed today in a room named in his honour and remain a great source of research potential.

Abstract The VNIGRI (All Russia Petroleum Research Exploration Institute) microfauna laboratory, founded in St Petersburg (then Leningrad) in 1930, was the first micropalaeontological institution established in the USSR. Utilizing the newly established microfaunal methodology for subsurface correlation pioneered by Cushman in the USA, the laboratory managers A. V. Fursenko and N. N. Subbotina made outstanding contributions to the development of the laboratory as the leading Russian micropalaeontological centre devoted to petroleum geology. This managerial team, supported by a team of specialists were instrumental in the development of soviet micropalaeontology and its application to exploration. Despite the outbreak of World War II the Petroleum Institute continued to work but inevitably some collections were lost. Following the war Soviet scientists were particularly fruitful during the period 1945 to 1972, as typified by the book series Microfauna of the USSR, initiated by Fursenko, and followed by the series Fossil Foraminifera of the USSR (the ‘Deep Blue Books’) dedicated to the different families of foraminifera. Special mention is given to Subbotina, who throughout the history of the laboratory, as leader created a remarkably prolific research team and facilitated the dissemination of knowledge between the different geological institutes. The zenith of her career was the publication in 1953 of her work on Cenozoic planktonic foraminifera which was subsequently translated into English and was widely utilized outside of the USSR. Monographs and atlases published between the 1960s and 1990s yielded outstanding results in practice and were used in establishing the first biostratigraphic schemes for the oil- and gas-producing areas of the Russian platform. It is estimated that the VNIGRI laboratory micropalaeontologists published over one thousand articles and during the most prolific period the staff numbered more than 50 scientists and technicians.

Abstract This article concerns the creation of the Soviet micropalaeontological school and the study of Palaeozoic Foraminifera in the USSR in the twentieth century.

Abstract The Smithsonian Institution’s foraminiferal collections, collectively identified as the Cushman Collection, consist of nearly 17 000 primary type slides, more than 240 000 secondary type and identified slides and thousands of bulk samples and washed residue samples from important type localities, stratigraphic sections and land-based and deep-sea boreholes. The collection grew slowly from its beginning in the late 1800s, but acquisition of Joseph A. Cushman’s entire research collection in 1950 dramatically increased its size and international prominence. Following Cushman’s gift, the collection grew over three times larger during the late twentieth century as additional foraminiferal slides and samples were added. Biographical profiles are presented here for key research scientists who were particularly influential in the collection’s growth and/or curation at the Smithsonian Institution. These researchers include T. Wayland Vaughan, Joseph A. Cushman, Lloyd G. Henbest, Ruth Todd, Alfred R. Loeblich Jr, Thomas Gibson and Raymond C. Douglass.

Abstract The chalk facies dominates Upper Cretaceous strata in the Anglo-Paris Basin, northern Germany, Poland, southern Sweden, Denmark and the North Sea Basin. The very name of the Cretaceous is derived from ‘creta’, the Latin word for chalk. It is unsurprising, therefore, that some of the earliest uses of micropalaeontology in France and the United Kingdom was to determine the biostratigraphy of the chalk: by Alcide d’Orbigny in France and by staff of the (British) Geological Survey in the UK. This approach was extended, in the 1940s, to the analysis of on-shore, and then offshore, hydrocarbon exploration wells. The continuing interest in the foraminifera of the chalk can be linked to the site investigation for the Channel Tunnel, construction of the Thames Barrier and the development of chalk oilfields in the North Sea Basin. Supporting these interests is a body of research aimed at the understanding of both the overall biostratigraphy of the chalk and some of the key bio-events of the Late Cretaceous: most notably the Cenomanian/Turonian boundary event (OAE ll) and the end-Cretaceous mass extinction.

Abstract The utility of micropalaeontology and biostratigraphy has perhaps been nowhere better demonstrated than in the Gulf Coast of the United States. Gulf Coast micropalaeontology and biostratigraphy evolved through several phases in response to the shift in exploration from onshore to the deep Gulf of Mexico. During this time, micropalaeontology and biostratigraphy morphed into the discipline of chronostratigraphy while playing critical roles in exploration due to the complex geometries produced by the interplay of sea-level change, shifting loci of sedimentation and diapirism. Micropalaeontology, biostratigraphy and their latest incarnation of chronostratigraphy have contributed to the discovery, exploration and development of new fields and trends while saving countless hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in exploration and development costs, as well as significantly adding to reserves by discovering new reservoirs that would otherwise be missed by the drill. Chronostratigraphy will continue to play a critical role in the exploration and development of the latest Gulf of Mexico frontier play: the Lower Tertiary Deepwater Wilcox Trend.

Abstract Foraminifera were of little interest in North America until 1923, when Joseph Cushman demonstrated how these microfossils could be used for subsurface geologic correlation. Word spread quickly throughout the oil industry and their sudden demand for foram workers prompted academia to provide the necessary training. For the next 60 years, industrial exploration and development played a major role in maintaining a large presence of foraminiferologists in California. Although the major oil companies employed most of them, a few found careers in the major universities or with the US Geological Survey. In the 1980s, the Californian oil industry became less reliant on biostratigraphy and the numbers of micropaleontologists rapidly declined. The heyday of foraminiferal micropaleontology had passed and by the time offshore exploration was abandoned in the early 1990s, few foraminiferologists remained in the state. Today only a handful of seasoned foraminiferologists can be found working in California.

Abstract As the Middle East is the prime hydrocarbon province in the world, it is not surprising that micropalaeontological biostratigraphy has been employed by the various national and international oil companies to provide chronostratigraphic, lithostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental control for surface and subsurface samples. The discovery of oil in Iran in 1908, followed by Bahrain in 1932, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in 1938, Qatar in 1939, Abu Dhabi in 1959, Oman in 1963 and Yemen in 1984, led to a proliferation of micropalaeontological laboratories in each country, and numerous taxonomic publications on the Mesozoic and Tertiary foraminifera. The early micropalaeontologists in the region were associated with British exploration companies and were therefore British, whereas those associated with micropalaeontological support of Saudi Arabian stratigraphy were from the United States. Pioneering micropalaeontologists in this region include F. R. S. Henson, T. F. Grimsdale, G. F. Elliott, F. E. Eames, A. H. Smout, R. Bramkamp, C. D. Redmond and N. J. Sander. Other significant micropalaeontological contributions of regional significance have been included, but a comprehensive inclusion of such works is beyond the concept of this chapter.

Abstract The field of studies labelled palaeoceanography integrates research on foraminifers and other microfossils within their environment on deep-sea sediments raised by cores taken from ships. The first large-scale project deserving the label was the Swedish Deep-Sea Expedition, which used the sailing vessel Albatross and the then newly developed Kullenberg coring machine to raise hundreds of long cores from around the world during 1947–1948. Thus, just as the Challenger Expedition (1872–1876) serves as a marker point for the beginnings of oceanography, the Albatross represents the beginnings of palaeoceanography. The unique defining element – the link of micropalaeontology to ocean circulation and climate – came to dominate discussions in the 1950s with the reports by Gustaf Arrhenius and Cesare Emiliani. At the same time, important steps in the evolution of the new field depended on the expansion of the inventory of cores by major oceanographic institutions (especially Lamont Geological Observatory in Palisades, New York), and on the introduction of new dating methods. Subsequently, the field benefited from the increased use of various statistical techniques, as well as of numerical modelling, all of which profited greatly from the rapid growth of computing power.

Abstract By the late nineteenth century, reports of foraminiferal distributions by pioneers such as Alcide d’Orbigny, Jacob Bailey and Henry Brady led to the realization that benthic foraminiferal populations have a biogeography, and are strongly influenced by water temperatures. Later studies, especially those by Richard Norton and Manley Natland in the 1930s, confirmed the temperature effect. The salinity effect became well known by late 1950s. In the 1950s and 1960s, environmental influences, including that of dissolved oxygen, became clearer with the extensive work of Fred Phleger and associates in the Gulf of Mexico, and in the western North Atlantic and eastern North Pacific Oceans. During this time, Orville Bandy and his students demonstrated severe changes in foraminiferal assemblages at California sewage outfalls. Furthermore, in Argentina, Esteban Boltovskoy confronted questions of species abundances and morphology, as related to natural and anthropogenic environmental constraints. A decade later, George Seiglie recognized anomalous populations and morphological abnormalities in polluted Puerto Rican bays. Thus, today’s approach to environmental micropalaeontology, using benthic foraminifera as a tool, was well established by the early 1970s. The emphasis, however, has shifted since then from environmental effects on assemblage characteristics (diversity, dominance, morphological aberrations) to the use of assemblages or species as tracers of environmental changes in historical time.

Abstract Foraminiferal palaeontology has deep roots in SE Asia. Accidents of history have, however, greatly reduced the role of the region in modern micropalaeontological studies. To understand this history some analogues can be made to natural evolutionary processes, whereby variations in the stability of an environment produce different selection pressures. The early days were times of multi-talented and flexible pioneers doing their own fieldwork, palaeontology and geology. This blossomed into a period of stability and the development of finely tuned specialists. The modern era, however, is dominated by a selection process that has commoditized analyses and discourages innovation. This negative pressure affected many geological services. For biostratigraphy, however, it came at the same time as the computing revolution in seismics; when micropalaeontology should have evolved alongside better subsurface imaging, it faded into the background. Foraminiferal studies will regain their importance when the environmental pressures change. With fantastically rich faunas and complex geology that is in need of the best analytical methods, it is a wonderful laboratory for facies analysis and stratigraphy as well as pure palaeontology.

Abstract India, known for its remarkable early contribution in mathematics and astronomy, made a late beginning in the modern discipline of palaeontology in the nineteenth century. The report of vertebrate fossils found in the Siwalik hills in 1835 marked the beginning of palaeontology and reports of foraminifera from Kutch followed soon after in 1840. The professionals from the newly set-up Geological Survey of India in 1856 and some of the British army personnel deputed to India made significant contributions on systematics and stratigraphic distribution of larger foraminifera. It remained at the core of foraminiferal studies for nearly 100 years. The years post-1950 witnessed expansion in several dimensions, including biostratigraphic refinement, oceanography and climate. The recognition of Indian Stages and sequence stratigraphic framework of the Indian sedimentary basins are the major achievements of skilful applications of foraminifera during this period. In the past three decades foraminiferal research has been actively pursued for the palaeoceanography of the Indian Ocean and monsoon variability in the Quaternary at higher time resolutions. The geochemical proxy data in foraminiferal carbonates are being increasingly used in climate reconstruction at different scales.

Abstract In this chapter, we describe the history of foraminiferal research in Japan. We divided the history of Japanese foraminiferal research into two periods, before and after World War II when a strong regime shift actually took place. We also include a modern history, paying attention to recent biological investigation.

Abstract Martin Glaessner (1906–1989) began publishing on fossil decapod crustaceans as a teenager, took doctorates in palaeontology and jurisprudence in Vienna, and developed his interest in foraminifera. Alpine tectonics was a central and lifelong theme. A second theme was economic geology. A third was organic evolution, and here it is important to note that, although the main evolutionary influence was Othenio Abel’s palaeobiology, Glaessner avoided the Germanic extremes such as typostrophism arising from transformational evolution, becoming instead a variational evolutionist, that is, a Darwinian. Foraminifera took him to Moscow to organize research pertaining to hydrocarbon exploration and development. An outstanding clutch of publications in the mid-1930s were both evolutionary-taxonomic and biostratigraphical, the latter including the most compelling of all pre-war publications on the planktonic foraminifera. In Port Moresby and Melbourne in the 1940s, amongst applied micropalaeontology, reviewing and synthesis, he produced Principles of Micropalaeontology . In the 1950s and 1960s in Adelaide he supervised research extending from Cenozoic to Cambrian and Neoproterozoic, foraminifera and crabs to trilobites and stromatolites, meanwhile making the transition himself from foraminifera to the Ediacarans. Combining meticulous attention to evidence and detail with wide-ranging enquiry, he was a forerunner of the modern disciplines and mindsets such as palaeoceanography and integreted biogeohistory.