圣胡安盆地白垩纪-第三纪界面附近岩层的地层命名

J. Fassett
{"title":"圣胡安盆地白垩纪-第三纪界面附近岩层的地层命名","authors":"J. Fassett","doi":"10.56577/ffc-61.113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the last two decades, several changes in the stratigraphic nomenclature of rocks adjacent to the CretaceousPaleogene (K-T) boundary in the San Juan Basin have been recommended. All of these changes have been suggested by vertebrate paleontologists working in limited areas (those containing vertebrate fossils) in the southern part of the San Juan Basin. Because of their provincial view of the formations under discussion and a clear lack of understanding of the North American Stratigraphic Code, these geologists’ suggested stratigraphic changes do not stand close scrutiny and are thus rejected. Suggested deletion of the lithic component of two formations: the Ojo Alamo Sandstone of Paleocene age, and the Upper Cretaceous Farmington Sandstone Member of the Kirtland Formation is rejected. Recommendations were to eliminate the word “Sandstone” from the names of these two rock units and substitute the word “Formation” in their stead. Because these rock units are characterized by their sandstone components, the use of the word Sandstone in both instances is in accordance with the Stratigraphic Code and thus no change in nomenclature is warranted. It has been suggested that the Ojo Alamo Sandstone be divided into two members in the southwest part of the San Juan Basin; the Naashoibito and Kimbeto Members, and only consist of one member in the southeast part of the basin. No lithologic criteria have been established for a two-member Ojo Alamo in the southwest part of the basin, thus this subdivision is rejected. Moreover, the suggestion that the Ojo Alamo consists of a single member in the southeast part of the basin is contrary to the Stratigraphic Code. A formation cannot consist of a single member. It has been recommended that the long established names for subdivisions of the Kirtland Formation: lower shale member, Farmington Sandstone Member, and upper shale member, be changed to the Hunter Wash Member, Farmington Sandstone Member, and the De-na-zin Member, respectively. Because these new names apply to exactly the same lithologic intervals as the old names, there is no valid reason to change the old names that had been in print in various media for 76 years, prior to these suggested name changes. The Stratigraphic Code rejects frivolous changes to long-established nomenclature, therefore, these name changes are rejected. Furthermore, the Hunter Wash name has been previously applied to other rocks in this stratigraphic section in this same area, thus the use of the name “Hunter Wash” for the lower member of the Kirtland Formation has been preempted and is thus improper. It has been suggested that a sandstone bed named the Bisti Bed marks the base of the Kirtland Formation throughout the San Juan Basin. This implies that the Bisti Bed can be traced continuously throughout the San Juan Basin. It is abundantly clear that no such bed exists in the lower Kirtland Formation throughout the basin. Random fluvial channel-sandstone beds occur sporadically in the uppermost Fruitland Formation and lowermost Kirtland Formation, but field mapping has shown conclusively that none of these sandstone beds are continuous even locally, let alone basin-wide. Fruitland and Kirtland Formation rocks are more than two million years older in the southwest part of the San Juan Basin than they are in the northeast part of the basin, therefore, it is physically impossible that a sandstone bed named the Bisti Bed in the southwest part of the basin could be the same bed in the northeast part of the basin. It has been suggested that the Fruitland Formation be subdivided into two members: the Ne-nah-ne-zad (lower member) and the Fossil Forest (upper member). There are no lithologic criteria to validate such a subdivision of the Fruitland, thus these new member names are rejected.","PeriodicalId":283482,"journal":{"name":"Geology of the Four Corners Country","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stratigraphic nomenclature of rock strata adjacent to the Cretaceous-Tertiary interface in the San Juan Basin\",\"authors\":\"J. Fassett\",\"doi\":\"10.56577/ffc-61.113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During the last two decades, several changes in the stratigraphic nomenclature of rocks adjacent to the CretaceousPaleogene (K-T) boundary in the San Juan Basin have been recommended. All of these changes have been suggested by vertebrate paleontologists working in limited areas (those containing vertebrate fossils) in the southern part of the San Juan Basin. Because of their provincial view of the formations under discussion and a clear lack of understanding of the North American Stratigraphic Code, these geologists’ suggested stratigraphic changes do not stand close scrutiny and are thus rejected. Suggested deletion of the lithic component of two formations: the Ojo Alamo Sandstone of Paleocene age, and the Upper Cretaceous Farmington Sandstone Member of the Kirtland Formation is rejected. Recommendations were to eliminate the word “Sandstone” from the names of these two rock units and substitute the word “Formation” in their stead. Because these rock units are characterized by their sandstone components, the use of the word Sandstone in both instances is in accordance with the Stratigraphic Code and thus no change in nomenclature is warranted. It has been suggested that the Ojo Alamo Sandstone be divided into two members in the southwest part of the San Juan Basin; the Naashoibito and Kimbeto Members, and only consist of one member in the southeast part of the basin. No lithologic criteria have been established for a two-member Ojo Alamo in the southwest part of the basin, thus this subdivision is rejected. Moreover, the suggestion that the Ojo Alamo consists of a single member in the southeast part of the basin is contrary to the Stratigraphic Code. A formation cannot consist of a single member. It has been recommended that the long established names for subdivisions of the Kirtland Formation: lower shale member, Farmington Sandstone Member, and upper shale member, be changed to the Hunter Wash Member, Farmington Sandstone Member, and the De-na-zin Member, respectively. Because these new names apply to exactly the same lithologic intervals as the old names, there is no valid reason to change the old names that had been in print in various media for 76 years, prior to these suggested name changes. The Stratigraphic Code rejects frivolous changes to long-established nomenclature, therefore, these name changes are rejected. Furthermore, the Hunter Wash name has been previously applied to other rocks in this stratigraphic section in this same area, thus the use of the name “Hunter Wash” for the lower member of the Kirtland Formation has been preempted and is thus improper. It has been suggested that a sandstone bed named the Bisti Bed marks the base of the Kirtland Formation throughout the San Juan Basin. This implies that the Bisti Bed can be traced continuously throughout the San Juan Basin. It is abundantly clear that no such bed exists in the lower Kirtland Formation throughout the basin. Random fluvial channel-sandstone beds occur sporadically in the uppermost Fruitland Formation and lowermost Kirtland Formation, but field mapping has shown conclusively that none of these sandstone beds are continuous even locally, let alone basin-wide. Fruitland and Kirtland Formation rocks are more than two million years older in the southwest part of the San Juan Basin than they are in the northeast part of the basin, therefore, it is physically impossible that a sandstone bed named the Bisti Bed in the southwest part of the basin could be the same bed in the northeast part of the basin. It has been suggested that the Fruitland Formation be subdivided into two members: the Ne-nah-ne-zad (lower member) and the Fossil Forest (upper member). There are no lithologic criteria to validate such a subdivision of the Fruitland, thus these new member names are rejected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":283482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geology of the Four Corners Country\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geology of the Four Corners Country\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56577/ffc-61.113\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geology of the Four Corners Country","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56577/ffc-61.113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

在过去的二十年中,圣胡安盆地白垩纪-古近纪(K-T)边界附近岩石的地层命名法发生了一些变化。所有这些变化都是在圣胡安盆地南部有限区域(那些含有脊椎动物化石的区域)工作的脊椎动物古生物学家提出的。由于这些地质学家对所讨论的地层的看法很狭隘,而且明显缺乏对《北美地层法典》的了解,他们提出的地层变化观点经不起仔细审查,因此被拒绝了。拒绝了古新世Ojo Alamo砂岩和Kirtland组上白垩统Farmington砂岩两组岩屑成分缺失的建议。建议将“砂岩”一词从这两个岩石单元的名称中删除,并用“地层”一词代替。由于这些岩石单元的特征是它们的砂岩成分,因此在这两种情况下使用“砂岩”一词是符合地层规则的,因此不需要改变命名法。认为圣胡安盆地西南部的Ojo Alamo砂岩可分为两段;Naashoibito段和Kimbeto段,仅在盆地东南部组成一段。在盆地西南部没有建立两段Ojo Alamo的岩性标准,因此该细分被拒绝。此外,认为Ojo Alamo在盆地东南部是单一的一段,这与地层学规则相反。一个编队不能由单个成员组成。建议将Kirtland组长期以来的划分名称:下页岩段、Farmington砂岩段和上页岩段分别改为Hunter Wash段、Farmington砂岩段和De-na-zin段。由于这些新名称适用于与旧名称完全相同的岩性区间,因此没有正当理由更改在这些建议名称更改之前在各种媒体上印刷了76年的旧名称。地层学法典拒绝对长期建立的命名法进行无谓的更改,因此,这些名称更改被拒绝。此外,Hunter Wash这个名称之前曾被应用于同一地区该地层剖面的其他岩石,因此将“Hunter Wash”这个名称用于Kirtland组的下段已经被抢先使用,因此是不恰当的。有人认为,一个名为Bisti层的砂岩层标志着整个圣胡安盆地的Kirtland组的底部。这意味着可以在整个圣胡安盆地连续追踪比斯蒂地层。很明显,在整个盆地的下科特兰组中不存在这样的层。随机河道砂岩层偶尔出现在最上部的Fruitland组和最下部的Kirtland组,但野外测绘已经明确表明,这些砂岩层即使在局部也是连续的,更不用说整个盆地了。圣胡安盆地西南部的Fruitland组和Kirtland组岩石比盆地东北部的岩石早200多万年,因此,盆地西南部的Bisti砂岩层与盆地东北部的同一层在物理上是不可能的。果地组可划分为Ne-nah-ne-zad(下段)和Fossil Forest(上段)两段。由于没有岩性标准来验证Fruitland的这种细分,因此这些新的成员名称被拒绝。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Stratigraphic nomenclature of rock strata adjacent to the Cretaceous-Tertiary interface in the San Juan Basin
During the last two decades, several changes in the stratigraphic nomenclature of rocks adjacent to the CretaceousPaleogene (K-T) boundary in the San Juan Basin have been recommended. All of these changes have been suggested by vertebrate paleontologists working in limited areas (those containing vertebrate fossils) in the southern part of the San Juan Basin. Because of their provincial view of the formations under discussion and a clear lack of understanding of the North American Stratigraphic Code, these geologists’ suggested stratigraphic changes do not stand close scrutiny and are thus rejected. Suggested deletion of the lithic component of two formations: the Ojo Alamo Sandstone of Paleocene age, and the Upper Cretaceous Farmington Sandstone Member of the Kirtland Formation is rejected. Recommendations were to eliminate the word “Sandstone” from the names of these two rock units and substitute the word “Formation” in their stead. Because these rock units are characterized by their sandstone components, the use of the word Sandstone in both instances is in accordance with the Stratigraphic Code and thus no change in nomenclature is warranted. It has been suggested that the Ojo Alamo Sandstone be divided into two members in the southwest part of the San Juan Basin; the Naashoibito and Kimbeto Members, and only consist of one member in the southeast part of the basin. No lithologic criteria have been established for a two-member Ojo Alamo in the southwest part of the basin, thus this subdivision is rejected. Moreover, the suggestion that the Ojo Alamo consists of a single member in the southeast part of the basin is contrary to the Stratigraphic Code. A formation cannot consist of a single member. It has been recommended that the long established names for subdivisions of the Kirtland Formation: lower shale member, Farmington Sandstone Member, and upper shale member, be changed to the Hunter Wash Member, Farmington Sandstone Member, and the De-na-zin Member, respectively. Because these new names apply to exactly the same lithologic intervals as the old names, there is no valid reason to change the old names that had been in print in various media for 76 years, prior to these suggested name changes. The Stratigraphic Code rejects frivolous changes to long-established nomenclature, therefore, these name changes are rejected. Furthermore, the Hunter Wash name has been previously applied to other rocks in this stratigraphic section in this same area, thus the use of the name “Hunter Wash” for the lower member of the Kirtland Formation has been preempted and is thus improper. It has been suggested that a sandstone bed named the Bisti Bed marks the base of the Kirtland Formation throughout the San Juan Basin. This implies that the Bisti Bed can be traced continuously throughout the San Juan Basin. It is abundantly clear that no such bed exists in the lower Kirtland Formation throughout the basin. Random fluvial channel-sandstone beds occur sporadically in the uppermost Fruitland Formation and lowermost Kirtland Formation, but field mapping has shown conclusively that none of these sandstone beds are continuous even locally, let alone basin-wide. Fruitland and Kirtland Formation rocks are more than two million years older in the southwest part of the San Juan Basin than they are in the northeast part of the basin, therefore, it is physically impossible that a sandstone bed named the Bisti Bed in the southwest part of the basin could be the same bed in the northeast part of the basin. It has been suggested that the Fruitland Formation be subdivided into two members: the Ne-nah-ne-zad (lower member) and the Fossil Forest (upper member). There are no lithologic criteria to validate such a subdivision of the Fruitland, thus these new member names are rejected.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信