Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T18:42:45.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An evaluation of the V. J. Gupta conodont papers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Gary D. Webster ,
Carl B. Rexroad  and
John A. Talent
Gary D. Webster
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Washington State University, Pullman 99164
Carl B. Rexroad
Affiliation:
Indiana Geological Survey, 611 North Walnut Grove, Bloomington 47405
John A. Talent
Affiliation:
School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, New South Wales 2109, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Distortion of the paleontologic literature in most of the 450 papers bearing V. J. Gupta as author or co-author during the past 30 years has been documented by Agarwal and Singh (1981), Talent (1989a, 1989b, 1989c, 1990a, 1990b, 1990c, in press), Talent et al. (1988, 1989, 1990, 1991), Ahluwalia (1989), Bassi (1989, 1990), Brock et al. (1991), and Radhakrishna (1991). Replies to the charges of fabrication and distortion by Gupta (1989, 1990a, 1990b) were futile attempts to distract the reader, rather than to provide information to refute the charges.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 67 , Issue 3 , May 1993 , pp. 486 - 493
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Annotated Bibliography

Abstracts and conference chronicles are not included in the compilation.Google Scholar
1. Ahluwalia, A. D., Budurov, K. J., Gupta, V. J., and Kanwar, S. S., 1982a, Some remarks on the find of Lower Triassic conodonts from Lahaul and Spiti regions, Himalayas, India. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 274–278. Reports occurrence of several species of Neospathodus from one horizon in Lahaul and another in Spiti. These species were not found occurring together in earlier studies in the Himalaya by other workers. Localities questioned, need verification.Google Scholar
2. Ahluwalia, A. D., Gupta, V. J., Budurov, K. J., and Kanwar, S. S., 1982b, Lower Carboniferous conodonts from the upper Chandra Valley of Lahaul, Himalaya, India. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 279–280. Lists four species and three genera identified from the Lipak Formation and assigned an Early Carboniferous age. Fauna not illustrated. Locality suspect.Google Scholar
3. Ahluwalia, A. D., Gupta, V. J., Budurov, K. J., and Kanwar, S. S., 1982c, Devonian conodonts and fish scales from Spiti, Himalaya, India. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 281–283. Preliminary report of the discovery of conodonts described and illustrated in item 4. Locality and stratigraphic occurrence questioned by Talent et al., 1988. May have used specimens from the North Evans Limestone fauna of Amsdell Creek, New York, U.S.A. Google Scholar
4. Ahluwalia, A. D., Gupta, V. J., Budurov, K. J., and Kanwar, S. S., 1983, Devonian conodonts from Spiti Himalaya, India. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, v. 88, p. 169–180. Fauna reported in item 3 described and illustrated. Locality and stratigraphic occurrence questioned by Talent et al., 1988. May have used specimens from the North Evans Limestone fauna of New York, U.S.A. Google Scholar
5. Bando, Y., Bhatt, D. K., Gupta, V. J., Hayashi, S., Kozur, H., Nakazawa, K., and Wang, Z-h., 1980, Some remarks on the conodont zonation and stratigraphy of the Permian. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 1–53. Paper reviews the taxonomic problem of Gondolella–Neogondolella, introduces two new species, discusses regional stratigraphy of the Permian across Asia to Russia and the Middle East, relates conodont and ammonoid zonations, and illustrates one cephalopod and numerous conodonts. A letter from D. H. Bhatt (25 July 1990) asserts that he collected the specimens illustrated. The paper is marred by reference to three of Gupta's papers, all of which are questionable.Google Scholar
6. Bassi, U. K., Gupta, V. J., Chopra, S., Budurov, K. J., and Ahluwalia, A. D., 1988, Neogondolella regale from the Tidong Valley of Kinnaur, Himachal Himalaya, India. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association 21, #2, p. 155–158. Cites item 20. Bassi, 1989, p. 16, has stated that the paper is untrustworthy and “has to be withdrawn” because the stratigraphic column he supplied was tampered with by Gupta.Google Scholar
7. Brookfield, M. E., and Gupta, V. J., 1989, The Devonian of northern Gondwanaland: a Himalayan viewpoint and terrrane analysis in McMillan, N. F., et al. (eds.), Devonian of the world Part I. Canadian Society Petroleum Geologists, Calgary, p. 579–589 (1988). On p. 584 lists several species of the Phulchauki fauna reported in item 35. See item 35 for comments.Google Scholar
8. Budurov, K. J., and Gupta, V. J., 1988, Triassic conodont stratigraphy of some sections of Kashmir Himalaya, India. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association 21, #2, p. 21–39. Paper documents the field studies, photographs of the stratigraphic sections and sample horizons, of three sections in Kashmir and illustrates some of the specimens. Contains one specimen illustrated in items 60, 109 that is reported from a different locality and given a new name in this 1988 publication as noted in Talent et al., 1989. Budurov and Sudar, in an unpublished letter to Nature (copy sent to each of us), vouch for the validity of this locality, sampling done by Budurov and Kachroo, sample processing by Budurov, and paleontology done by Budurov, or Budurov, Sudar, and Gupta. In a letter to Talent, Budurov states that Gupta submitted the final manuscript.Google Scholar
9. Budurov, K. J., Gupta, V. J., and Kachroo, R. K., 1984, Some Permian conodonts from the Zewan Formation, Kashmir, Himalaya. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 25, #8, p. 533–536, 1 pl. A brief note describing and illustrating two new species. Budurov and Sudar, in an unpublished letter to Nature (copy sent to each of us), vouch for the validity of this locality, sampling done by Budurov, Kachroo, and K. S. Chib, sample processing by Budurov, and paleontology done by Budurov, or Budurov, Sudar, and Gupta.Google Scholar
10. Budurov, K. J., Gupta, V. J., Kachroo, R. K., and Sudar, M. N., 1986, Problems of the Lower Triassic conodont statigraphy and the Permian–Triassic boundary. Societa Geologia Italiana Memoir 34, p. 321–328. A review paper based on “the Author's own conodont material, originating from various regions of the Kashmir Himalayas, and all the published conodont faunas”; only one Gupta co-authored paper cited, item 14. It is assumed that the “Authors own conodont material” referred to is that described in items 8, 9. See item 8 for note concerning one recycled specimen. Budurov and Sudar, in an unpublished letter to Nature (copy sent to each of us), vouch for the validity of the Himalayan localities, sampling done by Budurov and Kachroo, sample processing by Budurov, and paleontology done by Budurov or Budurov, Sudar, and Gupta.Google Scholar
11. Budurov, K. J., Gupta, V. J., Kachroo, R. K., and Sudar, M. N., 1987. Problems of the Lower Triassic conodont stratigraphy and the Permian–Triassic boundary. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 30, p. 80–81. A very condensed version of item 10, no references cited. See item 10 .Google Scholar
12. Budurov, K. J., Gupta, V. J., Sudar, M. N., and Buryi, G. I., 1983a, Triassic conodont biofacies and provinces. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 16, #1, p. 87–92. A discussion paper of topics indicated in title; no Gupta references cited.Google Scholar
13. Budurov, K. J., Gupta, V. J., Sudar, M. N., and Buryi, G. I., 1983b, Triassic conodont biofacies and provinces. Albertiana, v. 1, p. 13–14. A condensed version of item 12, no references cited.Google Scholar
14. Budurov, K. J., Gupta, V. J., Sudar, M. N., and Buryi, G. I., 1985, Conodont zonation, biofacies and provinces in the Triassic. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 26, p. 84–94. An expanded version of item 12, citing item 12. No other Gupta references cited.Google Scholar
15. Budurov, K. J., Sudar, M. N., and Gupta, V. J., 1988a, Spathoicriodus, a new Early Triassic conodont genus. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 20, #2, p. 175–177. A taxonomic paper based on no Gupta references.Google Scholar
16. Budurov, K. J., Sudar, M. N., and Gupta, V. J., 1988b, Kashmirella, a new Early Triassic conodont genus. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 21, #2, p. 107–112. A taxonomic paper using material from Kashmir collected and processed by Budurov as vouched for in an unpublished letter to Nature by Budurov and Sudar (copy sent to each of us). Cites item 10. Google Scholar
17. Budurov, K. J., Sudar, M. N., and Gupta, V. J., 1989, Early Triassic parallel conodont zonation in Gupta, V. J., et al. (eds.), Geology of the Himalayas—Palaeontology, Stratigraphy and Structure. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 4, p. 158–166. A review of conodont zonations, cites items 10, 11, 14 .Google Scholar
18. Buryi, G. I., Budurov, K. J., Sahni, A., Gupta, V. J., Kachroo, R. K., Chhabra, N. L., Ahluwalia, A. D., and Azmi, R. J., 1980, On the validity of the name Neospathodus gondolelliodes (Bender, 1968). Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 13, p. 145–146. Nomenclature review, taxonomic, locality information of Bender, 1968; no Gupta papers cited.Google Scholar
19. Chhabra, N. L., and Gupta, V. J., 1986, Annotated bibliography of papers published on conodonts from India, Pakistan and Nepal. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 3, p. 169–184. Reviews non-Gupta references and known or suspected fraudulent conodont papers (items 35, 36, 88, among others).Google Scholar
20. Chopra, S., Bassi, U. K., Gupta, V. J., Budurov, K. J., and Ahluwalia, A. D., 1982, Triassic (Pelsonian) conodonts and other microfossils from the Tidong Valley, Kinnaur district, Himachal Pradesch, India. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 284–287. Preliminary report of the discovery of Middle Triassic conodonts from the Kinnaur district. Specimens not illustrated. See item 6 .Google Scholar
21. Dhillon, B. S., Gupta, V. J., Kachroo, R. K., and Kumar, R., 1983, Norian conodonts from Spiti, Himalayas, India. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 16, #2, p. 187–188. Preliminary note illustrating Late Triassic conodonts. A letter from R. Kumar (31 July 1990) asserts that B. Dhillon collected the samples from which the conodonts were retrieved. Paper marred by citing two Gupta references.Google Scholar
22. Gupta, V. J., 1968, Conodonts in the Himalayas. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 19, p. 459. Preliminary report of “Gupta's discovery” of Lutherwan conodont fauna; suggests an Early Devonian age. Locality considered spurious, see items 23, 31, 98 .Google Scholar
23. Gupta, V. J., 1969a, Palaeozoic stratigraphy of the area southwest of Srinagar, Kashmir. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 20, p. 1–14. Gives preliminary list of conodonts for the Lutherwan fauna; suggests early or middle Devonian age. No reference is made to the previous identification of this fauna given in item 99. This list has been discussed by Klapper and Ziegler, 1979, and Talent et al., 1988, and shown to be taken from that of the North Evans Limestone, Amsdell Creek, New York, U.S.A. See items 22, 31, 96 .Google Scholar
24. Gupta, V. J., 1969b, Silurian–Devonian boundary in the Kashmir Himalayas. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 6, #1, p. 26–27. Reports rich assemblage of conodont fauna of latest Silurian to Early Devonian age; has not been documented. Cites item 98 .Google Scholar
25. Gupta, V. J., 1970, Lower Devonian conodonts from the Sind Valley, Kashmir, India. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 3, #1, p. 33–34. Considered to be a phantom/nonexistent fauna/locality because, though asserted to be Early Devonian, the identifications proffered suggest a fauna close to the Middle Devonian–Late Devonian, Givetian–Frasnian, boundary (Talent et al., 1988). The faunal list includes forms probably taken from the lists of items 23, 98 .Google Scholar
26. Gupta, V. J., 1971a, Silurian–Devonian boundary in the Indian subcontinent. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 12, #3, p. 274–279. This paper is a regional stratigraphic review. Accepts dubious Gupta conodont reports from Sind Valley (item 25) and upper units of Naubug Beds in the Naubug valley of Kashmir (item 98). The paper was totally discounted in Radhakrishna, 1991.Google Scholar
27. Gupta, V. J., 1971b, Correlation of the Palaeozoic rocks of the Himalayas. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 21, #3, 4, p. 337–352. This is another regional stratigraphic review paper. Mentions well-preserved conodont faunas from siliceous limestone near Lutherwan in the Anantnag district that suggest an Early or Middle Devonian age, p. 344, and then placed in Middle Devonian on table 4, p. 347. See items 22, 23, 31, 98. Locality considered spurious, Talent et al., 1988.Google Scholar
28. Gupta, V. J., 1972a, Conodonts in the Kumaon Himalaya. Current Science, v. 41, p. 306. A very short note reporting the discovery of Early Triassic conodonts, listing four species. Needs independent verification.Google Scholar
29. Gupta, V. J., 1972b, Silurian system of the Indian subcontinent. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 22, p. 339–343. This is a regional review of the Silurian strata reported in the Himalaya. Mentions a rich assemblage of conodonts, listing 18 species, from Pakistan reported by Teichert and Stauffer, 1965 and cites item 23; see comments under item 23 .Google Scholar
30. Gupta, V. J., 1973a, Silurian–Devonian boundary in the west Pakistan and Kashmir Himalayas. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 24, p. 165–166. A brief note suggesting correlation of the Anantnag and Nowshera Silurian–Devonian sequences. Part of the correlation is based on citation of item 98, which has been questioned by Klapper and Ziegler, 1979, and Talent et al., 1988.Google Scholar
31. Gupta, V. J., 1973b, Indian Palaeozoic stratigraphy, Hindustan Publishing Corporation, Delhi, 207 p. Cites previous conodont reports (items 23, 25, 98), and p. 41–44 lists species previously identified. Localities considered spurious and discussion of these faunal lists given in Talent et al., 1988. See items 22, 23, 27, 98 .Google Scholar
32. Gupta, V. J., 1974a, On the stratigraphic position of Tandi Limestone, Lahaul, Himalaya, India. Journal Geological Society of India. v. 15. p. 99–100. Lists identified conodonts reportedly sent to Walter Sweet. See Talent et al., 1988, p. 12–13, for a discussion with comments from Sweet. Locality and stratigraphic details very generalized; locality considered fabricated. Sources of specimens unknown, if there were any. This paper was totally discounted by Radhakrishna, 1991.Google Scholar
33. Gupta, V. J., 1974b, Permian conodonts from Ladakh. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 15, p. 338. A preliminary note of the first “discovery” of Permian conodonts in the Himalaya. Identifications reportedly confirmed by D. L. Clark, but denied by him. This is considered to be a phantom/nonexistent fauna as noted in Talent et al., 1988, p. 26, 27, and Gaetani in Talent et al., 1990, p. 578. See also Srikantia et al., 1980.Google Scholar
34. Gupta, V. J., 1974c, Permo–Triassic boundary in the Himalaya. Die Stratigraphie der Alpine-Mediterranean Trais. Wien. Schriften Erdwissenschaftliche Kommissionen Österreichische Akademie Wissenschaften, v. 2, p. 97–99. A brief note discussing the position of the boundary and listing conodont species reportedly found in several localities in the Himalaya. Locality specifics not given, considered dubious.Google Scholar
35. Gupta, V. J., 1975a, Upper Devonian conodonts from Phulchauki, Nepal. Himalayan Geology, v. 5, p. 153–168. Describes and illustrates a fauna that Klapper and Ziegler, 1979, p. 220, consider to be from the North Evans Limestone, Amsdell Creek, New York, U.S.A. Some photographs from this paper used again in item 36. This was discussed in Talent et al., 1988, p. 17, providing more specifics of the stratigraphy and the results of their conodont sampling of the locality. Talent et al., 1991, report that when Gupta visited Nepal he never reached the locality where he claims the conodonts were from and that the rocks are actually Silurian rather than Devonian age at that locality.Google Scholar
36. Gupta, V. J., 1975b, Devonian conodonts from Himalaya. Chayanica Geologica, v. 1(1), p. 99–121. Describes and illustrates conodonts (reportedly for the first time, p. 108) from three localities in Kashmir, Spiti, and Nepal. Klapper and Ziegler, 1979, p. 220, consider this material to be from the North Evans Limestone, Amsdell Creek, New York, U.S.A., and pointed out the reuse of some of the same photographs as in item 35, reporting the same specimens from a second locality. Talent et al., 1991, report that gneiss occurs at Kiwshtar, not the type of rock wherein conodonts are preserved.Google Scholar
37. Gupta, V. J., 1975c, Indian Mesozoic stratigraphy. Hindustan Publishing Corporation, Delhi, 267 p. Regional review paper. On p. 27 cites a list of taxa from item 87, which is considered a spurious report.Google Scholar
38. Gupta, V. J., 1976a, Conodont biostratigraphy of the Middle and Upper Triassic rocks of Kashmir and Ladakh. Himalayan Geology, v. 6, p. 314–322. A preliminary report listing condonts from three localities in the Himalaya. Agarwal and Singh, 1981, p. 115, pointed out inconsistencies in the lists given in this paper and items 41, 87, 89, 97. Localities considered dubious.Google Scholar
39. Gupta, V. J., 1976b, The stratigraphic position of the Kioto Limestone of Himalaya. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 17, #3, p. 346–352. Mostly a review summarizing the work of others; however, Gupta reports one species of conodont from Ladakh without illustration or locality specifics. Radhakrishna, 1991, pointed out contradictions in the paper. See items 42, 43 .Google Scholar
40. Gupta, V. J., 1976c, Triassic conodonts from Nepal. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 17, p. 562. A note illustrating four species from a sample collected by G. Fuchs. Locality information general, no descriptions. Needs independent verification as suggested by Radhakrishna, 1991.Google Scholar
41. Gupta, V. J., 1976d, Zur Conodonten-Stratigraphie der Mittel- und der Obertrias des Himalaya. Österreichische Akademie Wissenschaften Mathematische Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse Sitzungsberiche, v. 185, p. 31–41. A rewritten version of item 38. See comments under item 38 .Google Scholar
42. Gupta, V. J., 1976e, Zur Stratigraphie des Kiotokalkes (Obere Trias; Unterer Jura) des Himalaya. Österreichische Akademie Wissenschaften Mathematische Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse Sitzungsberiche, Abt. I, v. 185, #5–7, p. 113–123. An expanded version of item 39. See item 39 for comments.Google Scholar
43. Gupta, V. J., 1977a, The stratigraphic position of the Kioto Limestone of Himalaya. Himalaya Sciences de la Terre, Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique #268, Ecologie et Geologie de l'Himalaya p. 193–196. Summary of items 39, 42. See item 39 for comments.Google Scholar
44. Gupta, V. J., 1977b, Palaeozoic biostratigraphy and palaeogeography of the Himalaya. Himalaya Sciences de la Terre, Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique #268, Ecologie et Geologie de l'Himalaya, p. 197–202. A paper reviewing recent reports of fossil discoveries in the Himalaya without citing any references. Mentions “discoveries” such as the spurious Lutherwan Devonian fauna, p. 200. See item 98. Google Scholar
45. Gupta, V. J., 1977c, Conodonts from the Himalayas and their stratigraphic implications. Proceedings VI Indian Colloquium Micropalaeontology and Stratigraphy, Varanasi, p. 99–121. An expanded version of item 44 with references. Cites known spurious papers, i.e., items 25, 32, 33, 35, 36, 92, 98. Agarwal and Singh, 1981, p. 115, pointed out there are major discrepencies in Triassic conodont ranges given in this paper and those of other workers.Google Scholar
46. Gupta, V. J., 1978a, Triassic conodonts from the Himalaya and their stratigraphic and paleobiogeographic implications. Biovigyanam, v. 4, p. 109–123. A review paper citing known spurious papers, i.e., items 32, 41. Agarwal and Singh, 1981, p. 114, point out for one section the similarity of the conodont fauna listed in this paper and that of an unpublished thesis of N. L. Chhabra, 1977, without acknowledgment.Google Scholar
47. Gupta, V. J., 1978b, A note on the Palaeozoic stratigraphy of Luneak Valley with a description of a new species of Retichonetes from Surichun La, Ladakh. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 4, p. 37–45, 1 pl. Cites conodonts as given in item 86, a known fraudulent paper, see Talent et al., 1990.Google Scholar
48. Gupta, V. J., 1978c, Conodonten der Obertrias von Zamalgam Bei Verinag, Distrikt Anantnag Kashmir. Österreichische Akademie Wissenschaften, Mathematische Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse Sitzungsberiche, v. 187(6), p. 171–179. Describes and illustrates conodonts assigned to the Norian. Locality poorly defined, must be independently verified.Google Scholar
49. Gupta, V. J., 1979a, The stratigraphic position of the Syringothyris Limestone of Kashmir and its equivalents in the Himalaya. Himalayan Geology, v. 8, #1, p. 82–92. Reports the “find” of conodonts in the Syringothyris Limestone near Aishmuqam, Kashmir, and correlates the Syringothyris Limestone to equivalents throughout the Himalayas. Poor documentation of the locality; no descriptions or illustrations. Must be independently verified.Google Scholar
50. Gupta, V. J., 1979b, Recent advances on the Paleozoic palaeontology and stratigraphy of the Himalaya in Himalayan geology seminar, Section I, Geology, stratigraphy and palaeontology. India Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publications #41, Pt. 1, p. 419–429. A review paper citing modern paleontologic discoveries in the Himalaya; revision of item 44. Cites 33 Gupta single or co-authored papers, many of which are known to be spurious.Google Scholar
51. Gupta, V. J., 1980, Lower Carboniferous conodonts from the Baralacha Ban Area, Lahaul Valley, Himachal Pradesh. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 13, p. 71–72. A preliminary note on the “discovery” of condonts in the Lipak Formation giving a species list. Very loose locality information, no other documentation. Must be considered dubious without independent verification.Google Scholar
52. Gupta, V. J., 1981a, Triassic conodonts from the Himalaya and their stratigraphic and paleogeographic implications. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, v. 87, p. 23–40. A word for word repeat of item 46. See comments under item 46. Google Scholar
53. Gupta, V. J., 1981b, Tethys biostratigraphy of Spiti, Ladakh and Kashmir in Sinha, A. K. (ed.), Contemporary geoscientific researches in Himalaya, p. 189–200. A rerun of item 50, much of it word for word, with the addition of Mesozoic biostratigraphy largely summarized from item 37. Cites 45 Gupta single or co-authored papers, many of which are known to be fraudulent.Google Scholar
54. Gupta, V. J., 1981c, Palaeozoic biostratigraphy and palaeobiogeography of the Himalaya in Geological and ecological studies of the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau, v. 1, p. 293–296. Science Press, Beijing. A shortened version of item 50, much of it word for word, citing 20 Gupta papers, many of which are known to be fraudulent.Google Scholar
55. Gupta, V. J., 1982, Triassic system of Himalayas. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 33, #3–4, p. 187–201. A review paper collated from several of Gupta's earlier papers. Cites 25 Gupta papers, many of which are known to be spurious. This paper has been incorrectly cited as Geonews, v. 10, p. 1–45 in Pander Society Newsletter #15 and Ellison, 1988.Google Scholar
56. Gupta, V. J., 1983a, Early Lower Carboniferous conodonts from the Lipak Formation of Spiti, Himalaya, India. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 24(9), p. 482–483. A short note illustrating two species of five reportedly from the Lipak Formation. Locality information vague, no descriptions. Report discounted in Radhakrishna, 1991.Google Scholar
57. Gupta, V. J., 1983b, Triassic conodonts from Ladakh and Spiti. Österreichische Akademie Wissenschaften der Erdwissenschaftliche Kommissionen Schriften, v. 5, p. 83–92. A rewrite of item 78, utilizing many of the same photos but rearranged on the plates. Lacks repository and specific locality information; stratigraphic section generalized.Google Scholar
58. Gupta, V. J., 1983c, Upper Permian and Lower Triassic faunas of Kashmir District, Himachal Pradesh. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 24, p. 165–166. Review of a volume of the Geological Survey of India; no Gupta papers published in the volume.Google Scholar
59. Gupta, V. J., 1983d, Carnian conodonts from Tidong Valley, Kinnaur District, Himachal Pradesh. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 24(3), p. 156–158. A note illustrating four species. Considered to be a spurious report because there is no Carnian section on the India side of the border. Gupta would have had to go deep into Tibet to reach the Carnian part of the succession according to Bassi, 1989, p. 16. Paper discounted by Radhakrishna, 1991.Google Scholar
60. Gupta, V. J., 1983e, Conodont biostratigraphy of the Triassic rocks of Kashmir, Ladakh and Spiti, Himalayas, India. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 16, p. 51–62. A review paper including three plates of fossils. See Talent et al., 1989, and Talent et al., 1990; contains one specimen illustrated in items 8, 108, reported from a different locality, and given a new name in item 8. Reillustrates several specimens of items 57, 78. Google Scholar
61. Gupta, V. J., 1983f, Triassic system of Himalayas. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 2, p. 75–82. Review paper, citing 31 Gupta references, most of which are considered fraudulent. Repeats large sections of item 55. Google Scholar
62. Gupta, V. J., 1985a, Lower Carboniferous stratigraphy of Himalaya. 9th International Congress Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, v. 4, p. 283–288. Review paper, 18 Gupta papers cited, many of which are known to be fraudulent.Google Scholar
63. Gupta, V. J., 1985b, Upper Triassic microfossils from Tso Morari region, Ladakh Himalayas, India in Samanta, B. K. (ed.), Proceedings of the XI Indian colloquium on micropaleontology and stratigraphy, Part I, Microfauna. Bulletin of the Geological, Mining and Metallurgical Society of India, v. 52, p. 365–373, 2 pls. Reports and illustrates conodonts and other microfossils from a metamorphic sequence. Locality and stratigraphic information vague; considered very suspect.Google Scholar
64. Gupta, V. J., 1986a, Lower Carboniferous conodonts from Ladakh, Himalaya, India. Publication Centre Advanced Studies in Geology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, v. 2, p. 91–98, 4 pls. Reports and partly illustrates a mixture of Visean and Namurian conodonts he calls Tournaisian–Early Visean. Many of the platforms are illustrated in lateral view and thus not identifiable. Claims these are in addition to forms previously reported in item 86, a known fraudulent report; see Talent et al., 1990.Google Scholar
65. Gupta, V. J., 1986b, Lower Carboniferous conodonts from Spiti. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 28(12), p. 467–472. Illustrates a mixture of Tournaisian to Namurian conodonts with some fish teeth, claiming them to be from one locality. Some of these specimens were sent by Webster in 1973 to Gupta at his request for teaching specimens as discussed in Talent et al., 1990. Several of the illustrations are at a different magnification but of the same specimen claimed to be from Ladakh in item 88. This recycling of specimens was discussed in Talent et al., 1989 and 1990. Radhakrishna, 1991, reported that resampling of the section found no conodonts.Google Scholar
66. Gupta, V. J., 1987a, Devonian system of Himalayas. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 20, #1, p. 1–7. A review paper citing 18 Gupta papers, all of which are known to be fraudulent (i.e., items 35, 36, 98) or considered suspect.Google Scholar
67. Gupta, V. J., 1987b, Spinocyrtia from Kinnaur, Himachal Pradesh. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 30, #4, p. 315–316. Mentions conodonts occurring with the reported brachiopods. Locality information vague, no repository given.Google Scholar
68. Gupta, V. J., 1989a, The peripatetic fossils, part 2. Nature, v. 341, p. 11–12. A futile attempt to reply to the charges of distortion of the fossil record, mentions conodonts in the discussions.Google Scholar
69. Gupta, V. J., 1989b, Permian faunas and correlation of Himalayas with a note on the Permian–Triassic boundary. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 4, p. 73–98. A review paper citing 64 Gupta papers. Reports conodonts on p. 78 (see item 33) and p. 91.Google Scholar
70. Gupta, V. J., 1990a, The peripatetic fossils: part 4—a response to the co-authors. Nature, v. 343, p. 307–308. A second attempt to reply to charges of distortion, fossil recycling, etc. Gupta never addresses the critical points regarding his publishing fraudulent localities and recycling of fossils.Google Scholar
71. Gupta, V. J., 1990b, Comments by V. J. Gupta. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 35, #6, p. 649–655. Another Gupta smokescreen reply dodging the charges of fraudulent practices of some 25 years. Gupta again attempts to direct attention to noncritical matters, not answering the charges.Google Scholar
72. Gupta, V. J., 1990c, Palaeontology, stratigraphy and structure of the Zanskar area of Ladakh, western Himalayas in Guangcen, Li, Weiquin, Zho, and Nicolas, A. (eds.), Geology of the Himalayas, p. 271–276. Geological Publishing House, Beijing. Paper contains undocumented reports of Carboniferous conodonts from Surichun La (see item 86) and Triassic conodonts from near Tso Morari, Ladakh (see item 63). Cites 18 Gupta single or co-authored papers, most considered fraudulent.Google Scholar
73. Gupta, V. J., 1990d, Upper Triassic fossils from Tso-Morari region, Ladakh Himalayas in Guangcen, Li, Weiquin, Zho, and Nicolas, A. (eds.), Geology of the Himalayas, p. 277–281. Geological Publishing House, Beijing. Paper contains undocumented reports of “probable Tournasian to Visean” conodonts from “near Lato” and Triassic conodonts from the “middle part of the Thaglang La Formation exposed just north of Karzok” near Tso Morari, Ladakh (see item 72). Cites five Gupta single or co-authored papers, most considered fraudulent.Google Scholar
74. Gupta, V. J., and Brookfield, M. E., 1986, Preliminary observations on a possible complete Permian–Triassic boundary section at Pahlgam, Kashmir, India. Newsletter on Stratigraphy, v. 17(1), p. 29–35. A generalized report of three sections measured by Brookfield (letter, May, 1990) in Kashmir with an interpretation of sedimentary environments; conodonts listed for some beds. Gupta reportedly collected the section (after Brookfield measured it) and processed the samples. No Gupta references cited.Google Scholar
75. Gupta, V. J., and Brookfield, M. E., 1988, The Devonian of northern Gondwanaland: a Himalayan viewpoint and terrane analysis. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 20, #2, p. 83–101 (1987). A review paper relating Gondwanaland Devonian sequences. Cites 21 Gupta references as supporting documents. Most of these are known fraudulent papers, i.e., items 35, 36, 98 .Google Scholar
76. Gupta, V. J., and Brookfield, M. E., 1991, India in Moullade, M., and Nairn, A. E. M. (eds.), The Phanerozoic geology of the world. The Paleozoic, A., v. 1, p. 71–110. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Reference initially cited with a slightly different title and given a 1987 publication date by Gupta, 1989b, item 69. A pastiche shot through with bogus stratigraphies based on asserted correlations, based in turn on spurious reports from fictitious localities. These include the oft-repeated reports of Devonian (p. 90) and Permian (p. 82) conodonts. Cites 28 Gupta single or co-authored references as supporting documents, all known or considered to be fraudulent, i.e., items 31, 35 .Google Scholar
77. Gupta, V. J., and Budurov, K. J., 1981a, A new species of Neocavitella from Ladakh, India. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 13, #2, p. 143–144. A brief note describing a new species. Budurov and Sudar, in an unpublished letter to Nature (copy sent to each of us), cannot vouch for the validity of the locality as the specimens were supplied by Gupta. Unless independently verified, locality considered dubious.Google Scholar
78. Gupta, V. J., and Budurov, K. J., 1981b, Triassic conodonts from Spiti (Himalaya, India) and their correlations: preliminary data. Geologica Balcanica, v. 11, p. 21–26. A paper making preliminary correlations of Triassic sections within Spiti, four plates of conodonts. Budurov and Sudar, in an unpublished letter to Nature (copy sent to each of us), cannot vouch for the validity of the localities in this paper as the specimens were supplied by Gupta. Unless independently verified, locality considered dubious. Many of the conodont photos are reused in item 60. Google Scholar
79. Gupta, V. J., and Budurov, K. J., 1982, Himalayella—new Upper Triassic conodont genus from Ladakh. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 269–270. Paper names a new genus based on a previously named species and reports additional specimens from Ladakh. Budurov and Sudar, in an unpublished letter to Nature (copy sent to each of us), cannot vouch for the validity of the Ladakh locality as the specimens were supplied by Gupta. Unless independently verified, locality considered dubious.Google Scholar
80. Gupta, V. J., and Budurov, K. J., 1988, Upper Triassic conodonts from Ladakh. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 21, #1, p. 103–106. Illustrates two plates of conodonts, many of which are used in item 57. Budurov and Sudar, in an unpublished letter to Nature (copy sent to each of us), cannot vouch for the validity of the Ladakh locality as the specimens were supplied by Gupta. Unless independently verified, locality considered dubious.Google Scholar
81. Gupta, V. J., and Chhabra, N. L., 1986, Biostratigraphy of Triassic conodonts in Himalaya. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 3, p. 39–51. A review paper citing 17 Gupta references, most of which are known to be fraudulent.Google Scholar
82. Gupta, V. J., and Chhetri, V. S., 1977, Geology of the area around Phulchauki, Kathmandu, Nepal. Chayanica Geologica, v. 3, #2, p. 133–146. Discussion of the geology of the Phulchauki region, citing item 36. Talent et al., 1988, p. 17, discredited Gupta's reported conodont locality in this area. Gupta, 1989a, claimed that his field work in Nepal was done jointly with V. S. Chhetri, but Chhetri in Talent et al., 1991, has testified that they never visited the locality.Google Scholar
83. Gupta, V. J., and Erben, H. K., 1983, A Late Devonian ammonoid faunula from Himachal Pradesh, India. Palaeontologische Zeitschrift, v. 57, #1, 2, p. 93–102. Reports an early Frasnian conodont fauna in association with the ammonoids. This is a nonexistent locality, see Talent et al., 1988, p. 10; Bassi, 1989. Erben, 1989, also referred to this paper detailing his taxonomic contribution.Google Scholar
84. Gupta, V. J., and Janvier, P., 1979a, A review of the Devonian vertebrate localities of the Indian Himalayas (Kashmir, Ladakh and Kumaun), with remarks on their stratigraphical and palaeobiogeographical significance. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 1, p. 78–83. Reports conodonts associated with some of the fish remains indicating a late Middle or early Late Devonian age, citing item 36, a known fraudulent locality as discussed by Talent et al., 1988.Google Scholar
85. Gupta, V. J., and Janvier, P., 1979b, Late Devonian vertebrate remains from western Himalayas, Himachal Pradesh, India. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 12, #2, p. 161–179. Lists conodonts indicating a Late Devonian age from siliceous limestones in the upper part of the Muth Quartzite occurring with the fish remains. Conodonts never illustrated but lists indicate that they are part of the North Evan Limestone fauna discussed by Talent et al., 1988.Google Scholar
86. Gupta, V. J., and Kachroo, R. K., 1976, Carboniferous conodonts from Ladakh. Chayanica Geologica, v. 2, p. 12–36, 4 pls. Reports Early Carboniferous conodonts from three horizons from Ladakh. Each of these zones are compilations of identification lists from other workers. For example his zone 2 contains Spathognathodus rexroadi, which has only been reported from the Battleship Wash Limestone, southern Nevada, U.S.A. (Webster, 1969). Webster believes several of these specimens are ones that he sent to Gupta at his request for teaching materials in 1973. The CAI of these specimens should show considerable variation, reflecting the thermal maturity of the various localities that they came from. Locality considered bogus. See items 65, 87, 88 .Google Scholar
87. Gupta, V. J., and Kachroo, R. K., 1977a, Carboniferous and Triassic conodonts from the Himalaya. Panjab University Centre of Advanced Studies in Geology, Publication 11, p. 118–129. Gives conodont faunal lists for Tournaisian–Namurian and Early Triassic localities reportedly from Ladakh. The Carboniferous lists are duplicates of item 86 now divided into five zones rather than three. Zone 3 of this report is not in sequence. Agarwal and Singh, 1981, p. 115, noted several inconsistencies in the Triassic lists in this paper with other Triassic papers of Gupta (items 38, 41, 45, 97) and other unquestioned Triassic conodont reports in the Himalaya. This paper is considered to be a fabrication, based upon several earlier papers.Google Scholar
88. Gupta, V. J., and Kachroo, R. K., 1977b, Carboniferous conodonts from the Luneak Valley of Zanskar Tehsil, Ladakh District, Jammu and Kashmir. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 3, p. 206–208. Illustrates a mixture of Tournaisian to Namurian conodonts, claiming them to be from one locality. Specimens believed to be ones sent to Gupta by Webster at Gupta's request for teaching specimens in 1973 as detailed in Talent et al., 1990. These same photographs at a different magnification were illustrated in item 65 as discussed in Talent et al., 1989.Google Scholar
89. Gupta, V. J., and Kachroo, R. K., 1980, Recent advances on the Triassic stratigraphy of the Himalaya, pt. 1. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 6, p. 503–539. A review paper, citing 12 Gupta references, most of which are considered dubious. Agarwal and Singh, 1981, p. 115, indicated some of the problems with Gupta's Triassic papers wherein conodonts were identified and used for correlation. See items 38, 87. Cited in Pander Society Newsletter #13 and Ellison, 1988, attributing authorship solely to Gupta.Google Scholar
90. Gupta, V. J., and Kachroo, R. K., 1981, Triassic conodonts from the Kumaun Himalaya. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 29, p. 71–78. Reports and illustrates 14 species of conodonts assigned a Middle Triassic age. Locality suspect until independently verified.Google Scholar
91. Gupta, V. J., and Kachroo, R. K., 1982, Recent advances in the Triassic stratigraphy of Himalaya, Part II. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 510–520. A continuation of item 89 citing nine Gupta references. Most Gupta references considered dubious.Google Scholar
92. Gupta, V. J., and Kataria, J. K., 1972, Occurrence of microfossils in the Palaeozoic rocks of the Himalaya. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 23, p. 117. A preliminary report, mentions only “a few poorly preserved specimens of conodonts” from the Naubug Beds, no identifications. This locality has been discredited by Talent et al., 1988.Google Scholar
93. Gupta, V. J., and Kaul, R., 1975, Lower Carboniferous fossils from Ladakh. Research Bulletin Panjab University, v. 27, #1–4, p. 83–87. Lists three conodont genera occurring with some mega-fossils. Locality information vague; locality co-ordinates and map scale do not coincide. Locality considered spurious.Google Scholar
94. Gupta, V. J., Kovacs, S., and Oravec-Scheffer, A., 1980, Upper Triassic microfossils from northeastern Kumaun Himalaya, India. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 6, p. 582–593. Reports and illustrates a microfossil assemblage including conodonts; locality information vague. Talent et al., 1988, questioned this locality.Google Scholar
95. Gupta, V. J., and Kozur, H., 1983, Remarks on the age of the Otoceras woodwardi Zone and other Otoceras-bearing beds. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 2, p. 292–298. Review/discussion paper citing three Gupta references.Google Scholar
96. Gupta, V. J., and Kumar, S., 1975, Geology of Ladakh, Lahaul and Spiti regions of the western Himalaya with special reference to the stratigraphic position of flysch deposits. Geologische Rundschau, v. 64, #2, p. 540–563. Another review paper listing species of Carboniferous, Permian and Early Triassic conodonts; cites 22 Gupta papers, many of which are known to be spurious. The Permian conodont list is given for the nonexistent “Sarchu Limestone”; see item 33. Google Scholar
97. Gupta, V. J., and Rafek, M., 1976, Middle and Upper Triassic conodonts from the Himalayas. Chayanica Geologica, v. 2(2), p. 196–214. Agarwal and Singh, 1981, p. 114–115, noted inconsistencies in the faunal lists given in this paper and items 38, 41, 45, 87, based on the same material.Google Scholar
98. Gupta, V. J., Rhodes, F. H., and Austin, R. L., 1967, Devonian conodonts from Kashmir. Nature, v. 216, p. 468–469. Reports conodonts, identified by Rhodes and Austin, from the Naubug beds near Lutherwan. Suggests a Middle–Upper Devonian age, fauna never documented. Faunal list considered to be an identification of the North Evans Limestone fauna by Klapper in Talent et al., 1988. See items 22, 23, 27, 31. Google Scholar
99. Gupta, V. J., and Stöcklin, J., 1978, Stratigraphy and structure of the Phulchauki-Chandragiri area, Nepal. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 7, p. 263–275. Interpretations of stratigraphy and structure, citing four Gupta references and giving known spurious lists of conodonts. Talent et al., 1988, p. 17, discredited Gupta's reported conodont locality in this area. See item 82. Google Scholar
100. Gupta, V. J., and Struve, W. A., 1987, A subtransversa faunula from the Middle Devonian of Himalayas. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 20, #1, p. 25–31. Illustrates brachiopods and mentions associated conodonts. A spurious report as Gupta's description of the stratigraphy has been shown to be incorrect by Bassi, 1989, p. 15, and the conodont-brachiopod association to be incongruous by Talent, 1990, p. 42, 43. Struve, 1990, also replied to the problem.Google Scholar
101. Gupta, V. J., and Suneja, I. J., 1973, Devonian conodonts from Baramula District, Kashmir, India. Bulletin of Earth Sciences, v. 2, p. 21–24. Unseen. Attempts to locate a copy of this paper via interlibrary loan and Indian colleagues have been unsuccessful. Locality considered dubious.Google Scholar
102. Gupta, V. J., and Uppal, S., 1984, Upper Devonian conodonts from Ladakh, Himalaya, India. Revisita Italiana di Paleotologia e Stratigrafia, v. 90, p. 303–320. Describes and illustrates conodonts of Late Devonian age supposedly from the basal beds of the Luneak Formation. Although the locality map shows numerous exposures of the reported fossiliferous unit, the fossil locality is shown adjacent to the village of Tanze where there is no shown exposure. Locality and fauna questioned by Talent et al., 1988. Must be considered spurious. Elements of the North Evans Limestone fauna, New York, U.S.A., used in this report. Specimen illustrated as Pl. 1, fig. 8 same photo as item 103, Pl. 6, fig. 7. Cited in Pander Society Newsletter #18 and Ellison, 1988, attributing authorship solely to Gupta.Google Scholar
103. Gupta, V. J., Uppal, S., and Dhillon, B. S., 1986, Upper Devonian conodonts from Ladakh and Spiti. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 3, p. 12–26. Describes and illustrates Late Devonian conodonts from two localities in Ladakh and Spiti, citing one as near the Tanze Village (item 102) and the other between Kunzam La and Losar (item 4) referring reader to items 102 and 4 as indicated for details of locality and geologic mapping. Both are inadequate. The second locality supposedly contains conodonts of mixed Late Devonian zones but is considered to be stratigraphically equivalent to the first. Locality and faunas questioned by Talent et al., 1988. Must be considered spurious. Cited in Pander Society Newsletter #18 and in Ellison, 1988, attributing authorship solely to Gupta. See item 102. Google Scholar
104. Gupta, V. J., and Waterhouse, J. B., 1982, Geology of parts of Tidong Valley, Kinnaur District, with special references to the occurrence of late Middle Permian fossils. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 347–350. A brief note listing Devonian, Permian, and Triassic conodont species as well as brachiopods. These faunas have been questioned by Talent et al., 1988, and the localities are considered spurious.Google Scholar
105. Gupta, V. J., Waterhouse, J. B., and Bhargava, O. N., 1985, Indian subcontinent in Diaz, C. M. (ed.), The Carboniferous of the world, v. II. International Union Geological Sciences, Pub. 20, p. 147–165, 3 pls. A review paper listing conodont species of item 86, which is considered bogus. See item 86 .Google Scholar
106. Gupta, V. J., and Webster, G. D., 1974, A new crinoid from the Lower Carboniferous of the Himalaya. Neues Jahrbuch Geologie, Paläontologie Monh, v. 6, p. 336–341. Lists conodonts associated with a crinoid. Conodonts reported are incorrect identifications, garbled by Gupta. Webster retrieved conodonts from trimmings off of the block containing the crinoid. Locality information vague, questioned by Webster, 1991.Google Scholar
107. Gupta, V. J., and Yin, Hf., 1987, Otoceras and the Permian–Triassic boundary. Journal Geological Society of India, v. 30, p. 132–142. A review paper listing conodont genera or species. Cites three Gupta references, see items 55, 74, 95. Google Scholar
108. Kachroo, R. K., Gupta, V. J., and Budurov, K. J., 1982, Some Spathian conodonts from Pahalagam, Kashmir, India. Recent Researches in Geology, v. 8, p. 271–273. A brief note describing one new species. See Talent et al., 1989; contains one recycled specimen illustrated in items 8, 60, and reported from a different locality in item 8. Google Scholar
109. Kumar, R., and Gupta, V. J., 1981, Stratigraphy of Nepal Himalaya in Sinha, A. K. (ed.), Contemporary geoscientific researches in Himalaya, v. 1. Bishen Singh Mahendra Pal Singh, Dehra Dun, p. 161–176. A review paper citing six Gupta references and listing Phulchauki and Dolpo conodont species. One of these is known to be a spurious locality, the other dubious, as discussed by Talent et al., 1988, 1991. See item 82 .Google Scholar
110. Tewari, B. S., Sharma, V., and Gupta, V. J., 1979, Noric microfossils from Zamalgam, near Verinag, Anantnag district, Kashmir. Himalayan Geology, v. 8, #1, p. 108–118 (1978). Lists conodont genera occurring with described foraminifera and echinoderm ossicles. Locality information vague; requires independent verification.Google Scholar
111. Tewari, B. S., Srivastava, P., and Gupta, V. J., 1978, Lower Carboniferous conodonts from Kotsu, Anantnag District, Kashmir. Himalayan Geology, v. 8, p. 144–148. Illustrates five species of conodonts, mostly broken fragments; locality information vague. Locality questioned by Talent et al., 1988, p. 9. Google Scholar
112. Thakur, V. C., and Gupta, V. J., 1983, Regional stratigraphy, palaeontology and structure of Kashmir and Ladakh Himalayas. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 2, p. 1–32. A review paper giving conodont lists of Devonian, Carboniferous, and Triassic age and citing 31 Gupta references, many known to be spurious.Google Scholar
113. Valdiya, K. S., and Gupta, V. J., 1972, A contribution to the geology of northeastern Kumaun, with special reference to the Hercynian gap in the Tethys Himalaya. Himalayan Geology, v. 2, p. 1–33. Late Devonian conodonts reported from impossible stratigraphy as noted by Talent et al., 1988. Fauna never illustrated. Valdiya (letter, 10 October 1990) stated that Gupta collected some fossiliferous samples within his view but processed them later.Google Scholar
114. Waterhouse, J. B., and Gupta, V. J., 1978, Permian faunal zones and correlations of the Himalayas. Bulletin Indian Geologists Association, v. 10, p. 1–19 (1977). A biostratigraphic correlation based on brachiopods and mentioning other faunal elements including conodont genera and species. Cites 11 Gupta papers, many known to be fraudulent.Google Scholar
115. Waterhouse, J. B., and Gupta, V. J., 1981, Permian brachiopod and bivalve zones in the Himalaya of India and Nepal. Geology and Ecology Studies of Quinghai-Xizang Plateau, v. 1, p. 277–282. A condensed version of item 114 citing seven Gupta references.Google Scholar
116. Waterhouse, J. B., and Gupta, V. J., 1983a, Permian brachiopod and bivalve zones in the Himalaya of India and Nepal. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 2, p. 125–128. Another version of item 111; four Gupta references cited.Google Scholar
117. Waterhouse, J. B., and Gupta, V. J., 1983b, An early Djulfian (Permian) brachiopod faunule from upper Shyok Valley, Karakorum Range, and the implications for dating of allied faunas from Iran and Pakistan. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, v. 2, p. 188–233. Description of a new brachiopod fauna and biostratigraphic discussion of the Permian. Includes mention of conodont species. Only one Gupta reference included. Locality requires independent verification.Google Scholar
118. Webster, G. D., and Gupta, V. J., 1984, A new crinoid and associated conodonts from near Surichun La, Ladakh, Himalaya, India. Bulletin Indian Geological Association, v. 17(2), p. 139–143. Description and illustration of a crinoid and associated conodonts. Webster etched the conodonts from trimmings of the block containing the crinoid. Ahluwalia, 1989, reports finding this specimen in the Lipak Limestone at Bindi-Pahariya on the right flank of the Chandra Valley in Lahul, not the Po Formation at Surichun La as claimed by Gupta.Google Scholar

Invalid References

Budurov, K. J., Sudar, M. N., and Gupta, V. J. 1987. Kashmirella, a new Early Triassic conodont genus. Geologija, Razprave in porocila, Ljublyana, 30:164–173, fig. Though cited with pagination by Gupta, the manuscript was withdrawn from publication by Sudar (written communication to Talent). See item 16 .Google Scholar
Gupta, V. J. 1980b. Recent advances in the Triassic stratigraphy of the Himalaya. Recent Researches in Geology, 6:503–537. Cited in Pander Society Newsletter #13 and Ellison, 1988; published as Gupta and Kachroo, 1980, item 89. Google Scholar
Gupta, V. J. 1984a. Upper Devonian conodonts from Ladakh, Himalaya, India. Revista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 90:303–320. Cited in Pander Society Newsletter #18 and Ellison, 1988; published as Gupta and Uppal, 1984, item 102. Google Scholar
Gupta, V. J. 1984b. Upper Devonian conodonts from Ladakh and Spiti, Himalaya, India. Contributions to Himalayan Geology, 3:38–50. Cited in Pander Society Newsletter #18 and in Ellison, 1988; published as Gupta, Uppal, and Dhillon, 1986, item 103. Google Scholar

References

Agarwal, P. N., and Singh, S. N. 1981. Micropaleontological investigations of the marine Triassic rocks of the Himalaya. Journal Palaeontological Society of India, 25:110–125.Google Scholar
Ahluwalia, A. D. 1989. Upper Palaeozoic of Lahul-Spiti. Nature, 341:13–15.Google Scholar
Bassi, U. K. 1989. The peripatetic fossils: part 3. The Kinnaur region. Nature, 341:15–16.Google Scholar
Bassi, U. K. 1990. Discussion reply. Journal Geological Society of India, 35:661–664.Google Scholar
Bender, H. 1968. Zur gliederung der Mediterranen Trias II. Die Conodontenchronologie der Mediterranen Trias. Annales Geologiaues Des Pays Helleniques, 19:465–540.Google Scholar
Brock, G. A., Mawson, R., Talent, R. S., Engelbretsen, M. J., and Talent, J. A. 1991. Spurious and scrambled data: V. J. Gupta's impact on the Prototethyan/Tethyan database. Saito Ho-on Kai Special Publication, 3:477–480.Google Scholar
Chhabra, N. K. 1977. Geology and micropaleontology of certain Triassic sections of Kashmir and Kumaon Himalaya. Unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, Lucknow University, Lucknow, India, 316 p.Google Scholar
Ellison, S. P. Jr. 1988. Conodont bibliography up to January 1st, 1987. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 103:1–245.Google Scholar
Erben, H. K. 1989. Statement concerning a paper on Devonian allegedly Himalayan ammonoids. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 63:335.Google Scholar
Gupta, V. J. 1989. The peripatetic fossils, part 2. Nature, 341:11–12.Google Scholar
Gupta, V. J. 1990a. The peripatetic fossils: part 4—a response to the coauthors. Nature, 343:307–308.Google Scholar
Gupta, V. J. 1990b. Comments by V. J. Gupta. Journal Geological Society of India, 35:649–655.Google Scholar
Klapper, G., and Ziegler, W. 1979. Devonian conodont biostratigraphy, p. 199–224. In House, M. R. et al. (eds.), The Devonian System. Special Paper Palaeontology, 23.Google Scholar
Radhakrishna, B. P. (ed.). 1991. The Himalayan fossil controversy. Journal Geological Society of India, 36:80–88.Google Scholar
Srikantia, S. V., Ganesan, T. M., Sinha, P. K., and Tirkey, B. 1980. Geology of the Zanskar area, Ladakh Himalaya. Himalayan Geology, 8:1009–1033.Google Scholar
Struve, W. 1990. Paläozoologie III (1986–1990). Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 127:251–252.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A. 1989a. The case of the peripatetic fossils. Nature, 338:613–615.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A. 1989b. The “misplaced” fossils. Science, 246:740–741.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A. 1989c. Rhinos in Rio? An update. The Australian Geologist, 73:39–40.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A. 1990a. Himalayan geology again: curiouser and spuriouser! The Australian Geologist, 74:42–46.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A. 1990b. The peripatetic fossils: part 5. Nature, 343:405–406.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A. 1990c. Peripatetic fossils—V. J. Gupta's response rejected. Bulletin Indian Geological Association, 23:39–61.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A. In press. V. J. Gupta's contributions to the Research Bulletin of Panjab University. Research Bulletin of Panjab University.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A., Brock, G. A., Engelbretsen, M. J., Gaetani, M., Jell, P. A., Mawson, R., Talent, R. C., and Webster, G. D. 1990. Himalayan palaeontologic database polluted: plagiarism and other anomalies. Journal Geological Society of India, 35:569–585.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A., Brock, G. A., Engelbretsen, M. J., Kato, M., Morante, R., and Talent, R. C. 1989. Himalayan palaeontologic database polluted by recycling and other anomalies. Journal Geological Society of India, 34:575–586.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A., Dongol, G. M. S., and Chhetri, V. S. 1991. Biostratigraphic reports—spurious and dubious—from Nepal. Journal of the Nepal Geological Society, 7:9–20.Google Scholar
Talent, J. A., Goel, R. K., Jain, A. K., and Pickett, J. W. 1988. Silurian and Devonian of India, Nepal and Bhutan: biostratigraphic and palaeobiogeographic anomalies. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 106:1–57.Google Scholar
Teichert, C., and Stauffer, K. W. 1965. Paleozoic reef discovery in Pakistan. Geological Survey of Pakistan Records, 14(3):1–2.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1969. Chester through Derry conodonts and stratigraphy of northern Clark and southern Lincoln Counties, Nevada. University of California Publications in Geological Sciences, 79:1–121.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1990. Scientific fraud. Pander Society Newsletter, 22:4–6.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D. 1991. An evaluation of the V. J. Gupta echinoderm papers, 1971–1989. Journal of Paleontology, 65:1006–1008.Google Scholar
Webster, G. D., Rexroad, C. B., and Talent, J. S. 1991. An updated report on the V. J. Gupta conodont papers. Pander Society Newsletter, 23:4–5.Google Scholar
Wyatt, A. 1990. V. J. Gupta and the Aberystwyth fossil collections. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 35:587–592.Google Scholar