{"title":"新墨西哥州南部里奥格兰德河早期演化中的上新世古河谷切口","authors":"D. Koning, A. Jochems, M. Heizler","doi":"10.56577/ffc-69.93","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stratigraphic relations in the Truth or Consequences area indicate that the early Rio Grande incised and backfilled twice over 0.6 my, forming two 20-m-deep paleovalleys, shortly after this paleoriver propagated into southern New Mexico. Paleovalley incision is recognized by buttress unconformities between different-aged, lithologically distinctive axial and piedmont deposits. Older (pre-paleovalley) deposits correlate to the Palomas Formation basal transitional unit (map unit Tplt), which includes western-derived piedmont deposits and some of the earliest Rio Grande deposits in the Palomas and Engle Basins. The first (older) paleovalley was backfilled with axial-fluvial sediment consisting of a coarse-grained, basal conglomerate overlain by sandstone and pebbly sandstone; all gravel was locally derived from highlands surrounding the Engle Basin. The second paleovalley fill is distinctive because it contains extrabasinal, coarser (cobble-rich) conglomerate. To the west, the top of the Tplt unit is overlain by coarser-grained and lesser cemented piedmont deposits of the Palomas Formation. These volcaniclastic deposits interfinger eastward with axial-fluvial deposits overlying both aforementioned paleovalleys; these younger axial-fluvial deposits are composed of sand with 5–20% pebbly beds that lack extrabasinal gravel. Radiometric dating of basalt clasts and cryptomelane provide age control for paleovalley formation. A basalt clast dated at 5.06±0.02 Ma (40Ar/39Ar age), collected ~4 m below the top of Tplt, provides a maximum age for both the top of this unit and incision of the older paleovalley. Cryptomelane precipitated at the top of the older paleovalley fill is 4.87±0.05 (previously published 40Ar/39Ar age). Thus, incision and back-filling of the first paleovalley happened between 5.1 and 4.87 Ma , and incision of the second, nested paleovalley occurred after 4.87 Ma. A basalt cobble collected 6 m above the base of the coarse-grained, lesser-cemented piedmont deposits returned an 40Ar/39Ar age of 4.49±0.03 Ma. This stratigraphic horizon projects to 10–12 m above the base of the younger axial-fluvial unit that overlies the second paleovalley; the horizon also underlies (by at least 15 m) the ~3.6–3.3 Ma Repenning fossil site. Thus, aggradation of the second paleovalley continued to ca. 4.5 Ma. The relatively quick succession of two ~20-m-deep incision/backfilling events within 0.6 my, each incising to a similar base level, suggests a paleoclimatic driver that caused notable fluctuations in sediment-water discharge ratios similar to later Pleistocene events. We propose that a similar buried paleovalley may exist between the Palomas and Mesilla Basins, which might explain the general lack of pre-3.6 Ma axial-fluvial deposits in that region. 93","PeriodicalId":253436,"journal":{"name":"Las Cruces Country III","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early Pliocene paleovalley incision during early Rio Grande evolution in southern New Mexico\",\"authors\":\"D. Koning, A. Jochems, M. Heizler\",\"doi\":\"10.56577/ffc-69.93\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Stratigraphic relations in the Truth or Consequences area indicate that the early Rio Grande incised and backfilled twice over 0.6 my, forming two 20-m-deep paleovalleys, shortly after this paleoriver propagated into southern New Mexico. Paleovalley incision is recognized by buttress unconformities between different-aged, lithologically distinctive axial and piedmont deposits. Older (pre-paleovalley) deposits correlate to the Palomas Formation basal transitional unit (map unit Tplt), which includes western-derived piedmont deposits and some of the earliest Rio Grande deposits in the Palomas and Engle Basins. The first (older) paleovalley was backfilled with axial-fluvial sediment consisting of a coarse-grained, basal conglomerate overlain by sandstone and pebbly sandstone; all gravel was locally derived from highlands surrounding the Engle Basin. The second paleovalley fill is distinctive because it contains extrabasinal, coarser (cobble-rich) conglomerate. To the west, the top of the Tplt unit is overlain by coarser-grained and lesser cemented piedmont deposits of the Palomas Formation. These volcaniclastic deposits interfinger eastward with axial-fluvial deposits overlying both aforementioned paleovalleys; these younger axial-fluvial deposits are composed of sand with 5–20% pebbly beds that lack extrabasinal gravel. Radiometric dating of basalt clasts and cryptomelane provide age control for paleovalley formation. A basalt clast dated at 5.06±0.02 Ma (40Ar/39Ar age), collected ~4 m below the top of Tplt, provides a maximum age for both the top of this unit and incision of the older paleovalley. Cryptomelane precipitated at the top of the older paleovalley fill is 4.87±0.05 (previously published 40Ar/39Ar age). Thus, incision and back-filling of the first paleovalley happened between 5.1 and 4.87 Ma , and incision of the second, nested paleovalley occurred after 4.87 Ma. A basalt cobble collected 6 m above the base of the coarse-grained, lesser-cemented piedmont deposits returned an 40Ar/39Ar age of 4.49±0.03 Ma. This stratigraphic horizon projects to 10–12 m above the base of the younger axial-fluvial unit that overlies the second paleovalley; the horizon also underlies (by at least 15 m) the ~3.6–3.3 Ma Repenning fossil site. Thus, aggradation of the second paleovalley continued to ca. 4.5 Ma. The relatively quick succession of two ~20-m-deep incision/backfilling events within 0.6 my, each incising to a similar base level, suggests a paleoclimatic driver that caused notable fluctuations in sediment-water discharge ratios similar to later Pleistocene events. We propose that a similar buried paleovalley may exist between the Palomas and Mesilla Basins, which might explain the general lack of pre-3.6 Ma axial-fluvial deposits in that region. 93\",\"PeriodicalId\":253436,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Las Cruces Country III\",\"volume\":\"83 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Las Cruces Country III\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56577/ffc-69.93\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Las Cruces Country III","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56577/ffc-69.93","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
“真相或后果”地区的地层关系表明,在这条古河流进入新墨西哥州南部后不久,早期里约热内卢Grande在0.6 m内切割和回填了两次,形成了两个20米深的古山谷。古河谷切口是由不同年龄、岩性独特的轴状和山前沉积之间的扶壁不整合来识别的。古谷前沉积与帕洛马斯组基底过渡单元(图单元Tplt)相关,包括帕洛马斯盆地和恩格尔盆地西部衍生的山前沉积和一些最早的里约热内卢Grande沉积。第一个古河谷回填轴流沉积,由砂岩和含砾砂岩覆盖的粗粒基砾岩组成;所有的砾石都来自当地的恩格尔盆地周围的高地。第二个古山谷填充物是独特的,因为它含有基底外较粗(富含鹅卵石)的砾岩。在西部,Tplt单元的顶部覆盖着帕洛马斯组的粗粒度和较少胶结的山前沉积物。这些火山碎屑沉积向东穿插于上述两个古山谷之上的轴向河流沉积;这些较年轻的轴流沉积由砂和5-20%的卵石层组成,缺乏基底外砾石。玄武岩碎屑和隐黑岩的放射性定年为古山谷的形成提供了年龄控制。在Tplt顶部下方约4 m处采集的玄武岩碎屑年龄为5.06±0.02 Ma (40Ar/39Ar年龄),为该单元顶部和更古老的古山谷切口提供了最大年龄。较老古谷填充物顶部沉淀的隐黑烷为4.87±0.05(先前公布的40Ar/39Ar年龄)。第一古谷的切割回填发生在5.1 ~ 4.87 Ma之间,第二古谷的切割嵌套发生在4.87 Ma之后。粗粒、胶结程度较低的山前沉积物底部上方6 m处采集的玄武岩卵石,其40Ar/39Ar年龄为4.49±0.03 Ma。该地层层位位于第二古河谷上较年轻的轴向河流单元基底上方10-12米;该层位也位于~ 3.6-3.3 Ma Repenning化石遗址的下方(至少15米)。因此,第二古谷的沉积持续到约4.5 Ma。在0.6 m的时间内,两次~20 m深的切口/回填事件相对快速地连续发生,每次都上升到相似的基准面,这表明古气候驱动因素导致了沉积物-水排放比的显著波动,类似于更新世晚期的事件。我们认为在Palomas和Mesilla盆地之间可能存在类似的埋藏古谷,这可能解释了该地区普遍缺乏3.6 Ma以前的轴流沉积。93
Early Pliocene paleovalley incision during early Rio Grande evolution in southern New Mexico
Stratigraphic relations in the Truth or Consequences area indicate that the early Rio Grande incised and backfilled twice over 0.6 my, forming two 20-m-deep paleovalleys, shortly after this paleoriver propagated into southern New Mexico. Paleovalley incision is recognized by buttress unconformities between different-aged, lithologically distinctive axial and piedmont deposits. Older (pre-paleovalley) deposits correlate to the Palomas Formation basal transitional unit (map unit Tplt), which includes western-derived piedmont deposits and some of the earliest Rio Grande deposits in the Palomas and Engle Basins. The first (older) paleovalley was backfilled with axial-fluvial sediment consisting of a coarse-grained, basal conglomerate overlain by sandstone and pebbly sandstone; all gravel was locally derived from highlands surrounding the Engle Basin. The second paleovalley fill is distinctive because it contains extrabasinal, coarser (cobble-rich) conglomerate. To the west, the top of the Tplt unit is overlain by coarser-grained and lesser cemented piedmont deposits of the Palomas Formation. These volcaniclastic deposits interfinger eastward with axial-fluvial deposits overlying both aforementioned paleovalleys; these younger axial-fluvial deposits are composed of sand with 5–20% pebbly beds that lack extrabasinal gravel. Radiometric dating of basalt clasts and cryptomelane provide age control for paleovalley formation. A basalt clast dated at 5.06±0.02 Ma (40Ar/39Ar age), collected ~4 m below the top of Tplt, provides a maximum age for both the top of this unit and incision of the older paleovalley. Cryptomelane precipitated at the top of the older paleovalley fill is 4.87±0.05 (previously published 40Ar/39Ar age). Thus, incision and back-filling of the first paleovalley happened between 5.1 and 4.87 Ma , and incision of the second, nested paleovalley occurred after 4.87 Ma. A basalt cobble collected 6 m above the base of the coarse-grained, lesser-cemented piedmont deposits returned an 40Ar/39Ar age of 4.49±0.03 Ma. This stratigraphic horizon projects to 10–12 m above the base of the younger axial-fluvial unit that overlies the second paleovalley; the horizon also underlies (by at least 15 m) the ~3.6–3.3 Ma Repenning fossil site. Thus, aggradation of the second paleovalley continued to ca. 4.5 Ma. The relatively quick succession of two ~20-m-deep incision/backfilling events within 0.6 my, each incising to a similar base level, suggests a paleoclimatic driver that caused notable fluctuations in sediment-water discharge ratios similar to later Pleistocene events. We propose that a similar buried paleovalley may exist between the Palomas and Mesilla Basins, which might explain the general lack of pre-3.6 Ma axial-fluvial deposits in that region. 93