北达科他州西南部梅迪辛波尔山晚始新世砂岩中的重矿物

Q3 Earth and Planetary Sciences
J. Webster, A. J. Kihm, Aaron A. Klingbeil
{"title":"北达科他州西南部梅迪辛波尔山晚始新世砂岩中的重矿物","authors":"J. Webster, A. J. Kihm, Aaron A. Klingbeil","doi":"10.2113/GSROCKY.50.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Late Eocene sandstone capping hills and small buttes in the Medicine Pole Hills in southwestern North Dakota has been correlated with the Chalky Buttes Member of the Chadron Formation. Heavy-mineral analysis was used to assess this correlation. Optical microscopy and chemical analysis using a scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive spectrometer (SEM/EDS) system were used to determine abundances and compositions of heavy minerals separated from 0.25–0.30 mm fractions of nine samples from seven depositional units (353–602 grains per sample). The 0.063–0.125 mm fraction was also studied for one of these samples. Samples ranged from coarse- to medium- to fine-grained poorly consolidated sandstone. Total heavy mineral recovery (0.4–14.1%) generally corresponded with the grain-size distribution of samples, with higher recoveries in coarser samples. Opaque grains (ferruginous aggregates, Fe-Ti oxides, and leucoxene) comprised 0.8–15.6 percent of heavy mineral grains. Non-opaque grains were dominated by amphibole (24.4–52.2%) and epidote-clinozoisite (10.6–38.1%), with variable diopside (0–51.1%). Generally less abundant minerals included garnet, apatite (bone fragments), biotite, and muscovite. One sample was biotite-rich (36.5%). Chemical compositions of heavy minerals showed no significant stratigraphic variations, suggesting the nature of the sources did not vary. Diopside, biotite, and approximately 1/3 of the amphibole grains were interpreted as derived from Tertiary volcanic sources. The majority of the amphibole grains (tremolite and blue-green hornblende), epidote, and garnet were derived from Precambrian metamorphic sources. The relative contribution of volcanic sources was variable (19–64%), being highest in those samples with more diopside and (with the exception of the biotite-rich sample) highest in those samples with higher overall heavy-mineral abundances. Individual heavy-mineral abundances also correlated fairly well with grain size. Overall, variations in heavy minerals were explained by variable volcanic source contributions and variations in grain-size distributions of the samples. Despite the variability found, cluster analysis showed that the samples from Medicine Pole Hills were consistently different than the generally much more stable heavy-mineral assemblages found in the Chalky Buttes Member. They were also consistently different when volcanic heavy minerals were ignored. The differences could not be explained by variable volcanic contributions, grain-size effects, and/or differences in heavy mineral stabilities alone. They require differences in provenance, suggesting that the sandstone of Medicine Pole Hills should not be correlated with the Chalky Buttes Member, or, at the very least, it should be considered a distinct facies of the Chalky Buttes Member.","PeriodicalId":34958,"journal":{"name":"Rocky Mountain Geology","volume":"50 1","pages":"1-29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2113/GSROCKY.50.1.1","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Heavy minerals in the late Eocene sandstone of Medicine Pole Hills, southwestern North Dakota\",\"authors\":\"J. Webster, A. J. Kihm, Aaron A. Klingbeil\",\"doi\":\"10.2113/GSROCKY.50.1.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Late Eocene sandstone capping hills and small buttes in the Medicine Pole Hills in southwestern North Dakota has been correlated with the Chalky Buttes Member of the Chadron Formation. Heavy-mineral analysis was used to assess this correlation. Optical microscopy and chemical analysis using a scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive spectrometer (SEM/EDS) system were used to determine abundances and compositions of heavy minerals separated from 0.25–0.30 mm fractions of nine samples from seven depositional units (353–602 grains per sample). The 0.063–0.125 mm fraction was also studied for one of these samples. Samples ranged from coarse- to medium- to fine-grained poorly consolidated sandstone. Total heavy mineral recovery (0.4–14.1%) generally corresponded with the grain-size distribution of samples, with higher recoveries in coarser samples. Opaque grains (ferruginous aggregates, Fe-Ti oxides, and leucoxene) comprised 0.8–15.6 percent of heavy mineral grains. Non-opaque grains were dominated by amphibole (24.4–52.2%) and epidote-clinozoisite (10.6–38.1%), with variable diopside (0–51.1%). Generally less abundant minerals included garnet, apatite (bone fragments), biotite, and muscovite. One sample was biotite-rich (36.5%). Chemical compositions of heavy minerals showed no significant stratigraphic variations, suggesting the nature of the sources did not vary. Diopside, biotite, and approximately 1/3 of the amphibole grains were interpreted as derived from Tertiary volcanic sources. The majority of the amphibole grains (tremolite and blue-green hornblende), epidote, and garnet were derived from Precambrian metamorphic sources. The relative contribution of volcanic sources was variable (19–64%), being highest in those samples with more diopside and (with the exception of the biotite-rich sample) highest in those samples with higher overall heavy-mineral abundances. Individual heavy-mineral abundances also correlated fairly well with grain size. Overall, variations in heavy minerals were explained by variable volcanic source contributions and variations in grain-size distributions of the samples. Despite the variability found, cluster analysis showed that the samples from Medicine Pole Hills were consistently different than the generally much more stable heavy-mineral assemblages found in the Chalky Buttes Member. They were also consistently different when volcanic heavy minerals were ignored. The differences could not be explained by variable volcanic contributions, grain-size effects, and/or differences in heavy mineral stabilities alone. They require differences in provenance, suggesting that the sandstone of Medicine Pole Hills should not be correlated with the Chalky Buttes Member, or, at the very least, it should be considered a distinct facies of the Chalky Buttes Member.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rocky Mountain Geology\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"1-29\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2113/GSROCKY.50.1.1\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rocky Mountain Geology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2113/GSROCKY.50.1.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Earth and Planetary Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rocky Mountain Geology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2113/GSROCKY.50.1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在美国北达科他州西南部麦迪姆极山的晚始新世砂岩盖山和小孤丘与查德龙组的白垩孤丘进行了对比研究。重矿物分析用于评估这种相关性。利用光学显微镜和扫描电镜/能谱仪(SEM/EDS)系统对7个沉积单元(353 ~ 602粒/个样品)中9个样品0.25 ~ 0.30 mm组分中分离的重矿物进行了丰度和组成分析。对其中一个样品的0.063-0.125 mm组分也进行了研究。样品范围从粗粒到中粒到细粒的疏松砂岩。重矿物总回收率(0.4 ~ 14.1%)与样品粒度分布基本一致,粗粒样品的回收率较高。不透明颗粒(含铁颗粒、铁钛氧化物和亮色烯)占重矿物颗粒的0.8 - 15.6%。非不透明颗粒主要为角闪石(24.4-52.2%)和绿帘石-斜黝帘石(10.6-38.1%),变化透辉石(0-51.1%)。通常不太丰富的矿物包括石榴石、磷灰石(骨碎片)、黑云母和白云母。其中一份样品富含黑云母(36.5%)。重矿物化学成分没有明显的地层变化,说明来源性质没有变化。透辉石、黑云母和大约1/3的角闪孔颗粒被解释为第三纪火山源。闪孔颗粒(透闪石和蓝绿角闪石)、绿帘石和石榴石的主要来源为前寒武纪变质岩。火山源的相对贡献是可变的(19-64%),在透辉石含量较高的样品中贡献最大,在总体重矿物丰度较高的样品中贡献最大(除了富含黑云母的样品)。单个重矿物丰度也与颗粒大小有相当好的相关性。总的来说,重矿物的变化可以用不同的火山源贡献和样品粒度分布的变化来解释。尽管发现了可变性,聚类分析表明,来自麦德辛极山的样品始终不同于在白垩Buttes成员中发现的通常更稳定的重矿物组合。当忽略火山重矿物时,它们也始终不同。这种差异不能仅仅用不同的火山作用、粒度影响和/或重矿物稳定性的差异来解释。它们要求物源的差异,这表明麦德辛极山的砂岩不应该与白垩丘段相关联,或者至少应该被认为是白垩丘段的一个不同相。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Heavy minerals in the late Eocene sandstone of Medicine Pole Hills, southwestern North Dakota
Late Eocene sandstone capping hills and small buttes in the Medicine Pole Hills in southwestern North Dakota has been correlated with the Chalky Buttes Member of the Chadron Formation. Heavy-mineral analysis was used to assess this correlation. Optical microscopy and chemical analysis using a scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive spectrometer (SEM/EDS) system were used to determine abundances and compositions of heavy minerals separated from 0.25–0.30 mm fractions of nine samples from seven depositional units (353–602 grains per sample). The 0.063–0.125 mm fraction was also studied for one of these samples. Samples ranged from coarse- to medium- to fine-grained poorly consolidated sandstone. Total heavy mineral recovery (0.4–14.1%) generally corresponded with the grain-size distribution of samples, with higher recoveries in coarser samples. Opaque grains (ferruginous aggregates, Fe-Ti oxides, and leucoxene) comprised 0.8–15.6 percent of heavy mineral grains. Non-opaque grains were dominated by amphibole (24.4–52.2%) and epidote-clinozoisite (10.6–38.1%), with variable diopside (0–51.1%). Generally less abundant minerals included garnet, apatite (bone fragments), biotite, and muscovite. One sample was biotite-rich (36.5%). Chemical compositions of heavy minerals showed no significant stratigraphic variations, suggesting the nature of the sources did not vary. Diopside, biotite, and approximately 1/3 of the amphibole grains were interpreted as derived from Tertiary volcanic sources. The majority of the amphibole grains (tremolite and blue-green hornblende), epidote, and garnet were derived from Precambrian metamorphic sources. The relative contribution of volcanic sources was variable (19–64%), being highest in those samples with more diopside and (with the exception of the biotite-rich sample) highest in those samples with higher overall heavy-mineral abundances. Individual heavy-mineral abundances also correlated fairly well with grain size. Overall, variations in heavy minerals were explained by variable volcanic source contributions and variations in grain-size distributions of the samples. Despite the variability found, cluster analysis showed that the samples from Medicine Pole Hills were consistently different than the generally much more stable heavy-mineral assemblages found in the Chalky Buttes Member. They were also consistently different when volcanic heavy minerals were ignored. The differences could not be explained by variable volcanic contributions, grain-size effects, and/or differences in heavy mineral stabilities alone. They require differences in provenance, suggesting that the sandstone of Medicine Pole Hills should not be correlated with the Chalky Buttes Member, or, at the very least, it should be considered a distinct facies of the Chalky Buttes Member.
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
Rocky Mountain Geology
Rocky Mountain Geology Earth and Planetary Sciences-Geology
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: Rocky Mountain Geology (formerly Contributions to Geology) is published twice yearly by the Department of Geology and Geophysics at the University of Wyoming. The focus of the journal is regional geology and paleontology of the Rocky Mountains and adjacent areas of western North America. This high-impact, scholarly journal, is an important resource for professional earth scientists. The high-quality, refereed articles report original research by top specialists in all aspects of geology and paleontology in the greater Rocky Mountain region.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信