Biochronology and biochron boundaries: A real dilemma or a false problem? An example based on the Pleistocene large mammalian faunas from Italy

Reconstructing the Neogene-Quaternary biostratigraphy in continental environments and recognising ‘boundaries’ between successive mammalian faunal complexes is a problematic task. The definition and application of biochronology has been often tainted by references to and inferences from biostratigraphy. Actually, the discontinuities in the continental sedimentary record, environmental conditions, taphonomic and sampling biases are responsible for the fact that the stratigraphical order of the lowest and highest occurrences of fossil remains (stratigraphic datum) does not necessarily reflect the temporal order of actual first/last appearances of taxa (palaeobiological events) in time. Nonetheless, the first/last appearance bioevents (recorded by lowest/highest occurrences of fossil remains in fossiliferous levels of different continental stratigraphical successions) have been the principal foundation for establishing the biochronological setting of continental mammal faunas. Therefore, from a theoretical point of view, ‘boundaries’ should be defined by the oldest and/or youngest ‘historical occurrence’ of one or more taxa. What about an operational approach?Some examples of the Italian faunas are presented, focusing on the transition from the Villafranchian to the Galerian and from the Galerian to the Aurelian Land-Mammal Ages. The results obtained indicate the difficulty of defining a stable scheme that can be applied for correlation by the international scientific community.