.1

•.' .' ''''i'' - .t" .•.•.~.. -, : ' '. ~ ::.-

/~TRUCTURES AND FABRICS IN SOME I2MIDDLE AND UPPER DOLOSTONES

~ORTHWESTERN OHIO

I~Char1e8 F. Kahle Jack C. Floyd

Guidebook for The Ohio Academy of Science

Forty~third Annual Geology Field Trip

April 20~ 1968

Bowling Green University Bowling Green, Ohio 1 N'J.'RO.D(J C'['l ON

"Ther'e s 1:; 111 remains much that can be learned from looking at rocks" (Irwin, 1965, po 459 )

The primary purpose of this field trip is to give participants an opportunity to examine some or the megascopic fabrics and structu~es which occur in dolomite . rocks of the "Guelph", Greenfield, and Tymochtee Forma tjo L~."l . in northwestern Ohio (FigS. . 1~Qjsee Fig. -V ror route ma r- .I . Although these rock units appear in outcrop to be . rather monotonous and uninteresting, they display a fascinat1.n ~ variety of structures and fabrics when examined closely. The basic geology of the S1lurian rocks in north­ western Ohio and in adjacent areas has been shaped by a number of outstanding geologists, such as: J. E. Carman, E~ R. Cuming, A. F~ Foerste, A. W. Grabou, E. M. Kindle , A. C. Lane, Co S. Prosser, W. H. Sherzer, R. R. Shrock, and Wo S. Stout. Other geologists, too numbersous to mention, have continued to add to our knowledge of these rocks down to t,he present day. Some of the present day interest in the Silurian rocks in northwestern Ohio, has been sparked by the drilling activity at the south edge of the Michigan Basin since the discovery of significant quantities of 011 in southern Michig~n in 1956.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writers wish to acknowledge Richard Hoare, Chai rman ? Department of Geology, Bowling Green University for his encouragement. One of us (C.F.K.), would like to thank Louis Briggs of The University of Michigan for helpful discussions and for stimulating his thinking about certairl aspects of Silurian rocks in northwestern Ohio. We are grateful to Mary Ann Goodman tor typing this Guidebook~ Our special thanks go to the following people who granted permission for field trip partiCipants to visit their quarries: Mr. R. W. Bodendorfer, Maumee Stone Company, Maumee, Ohio; Mr. Dick Harshman, Prance ·Stone Company, I ~d ~ Waterville, Ohio; Mr. Dale Russell, Ohio Stone Company, Woodville, Ohio. Much of the data upon which this field trip is based has been derived from a regional study of 1 depositional environments in the Guelph and Greenfield by Floyd ( in preparation), and a regional study of deposlti ona J ~ and diagenetic fabrics and textures in the Gr6enfield and Tymochtee by Kahle (1968a; 1968b in preparation). . ~

I ~ SYSTEM SERIES ~TAGE GROUP FORMATION ' ! SUBSURFACE (OUTCROP TERMINOLOGY) TERMINOLOGY Onondaga Delaware Is. Columbus Is.

-. I-. .... __ .__ L-~~ __ ~~,-'-~'-~~ r--- ~ - Anderaon Detroit River -:=:---:-:-Lucas __--.,;._1 1--- - -1- -- Amherstl)urp; und1tfer--1 I-~ • - S,.lvan1a- -!- - ent1ated....0 ... ~..II . . 0 ~ Bas8 Island ain River f. i ~ 0 Put-In-Bay to 0as" .... i '0 ...III Cayugan 1!.Il~_S!!1~a_._ . ..;. TJIDOCht.~_dOlo=- - .! ~~ .'l ~~ I f~ Silurian t- --1-• . ~? - - -Ol"flenr1eld dolo. A lJnit - II :: c: I g iii Lockport Guelph ? rIl co _:E - Niagaran Ir or 1~ Undiffer­ ("Guelph" ) ~ockport~Guelph Cedarville ~ entiated . or Springt1e ld Niagara Euphemia Cl1nton Cl1nton ...... ~...... --...... Medinan or Med1na Brassfield Is. Alexander1an -r or 1----_._----_00 ~ or Albion Albion Cataract Fm.

C:: I( rv Fig. 1 . Generalized columnar section of some Silurian and Devonian rocks in western Ohio. Subsurface terminology after Ulteig (1964, p. 12 1.

'" ,,----,.. '-,----.~ ~ .. ~.-<----'---.. ~U"--~-~.~- --.---- I "" ..- ~ ''I;' ?d.-".'J\ '\ " - '----- o :rii r, ~~__:;-;,~~/d {/' ; ;: · · -~;;-)--:.:-;:· -... ·l lilt (../ ' f.+ J G f.l N~' F... ~ \. ' \ ~"'~.:- -1- ...... r:rp,.ox .. ;.-..It~. -!e $ ;/V!-'/A t. _ j:l>,."O~""; " ! ...... ' '!\ \ ' j cOI1-1ttd- I 1 " ..., ~ - ..../ . ' S I' V\~ ."i' :>! \ , \ :;HS~ i !!~ e f! 11" 1 !~ .. "'l!-._- 7>elo fl. 1 I ~ ,.., . -...... '; LA KE I MINf I !~ W~ye!.!.'1 Sf jli!IIa.. 1! u.· lle . _:0iO~

'i ~ I L -; A !I ' . -- - - _ S~ \ t' I D ,)L " 0 ! I {,j:!,,,! M " ;, .;;/ $ n L ~.O _ .J II ( " 'l/-~\~.l '.... I I ERIE ' r;,·n.,l IlC~.JIJ .... t<-.sf:l:)e Jtl ",,, .. e I '/)tH'. / ~ C .1 I 1\ - " , I I I ft,tJ ; \ I '~. ~9 1" \ ., I rY .J':=-~_': ';"h~e~"od R:vel' e . !tiVt2J"~ _ ,_._' ___ ._.

; I ~/ 1- I~ / i I t' J s. , ~ , L -:: ' II KM." ~IVef' :=. Puf -..r~ - a~. :¥ I I / ,~ I -~..!- , ~ ~ s:. .. I I I I Co/> t l"{ I . I I I S~ i. TYhtf>thh~ .. ' , / ";:J ~ f 1---- II - - O~'I' ii , I I I \1. ~ I 1-, _--~. ~ r :,. (l'!eel1{" el! ______~_ j I I / , t' - - - I ,...... ()ff~H"(J. ' . . S~v li t "G4J~1 ,1." I 1'4/ '} f s. ~ u - ~ -'.; I '7' ~ '[;J ~ I , ~~/ ;J I 5 .. '\. b l. .Jo (j ~ C. I i I /' I 9" .1. _ ~pr ...! _ _ '- ,. vvt. ''fO(/ 1ll I ,-I . ~ . '" , _ . " - '<> • I i , I l .r ...... , I S $ II ! '" I I I I / ,/ . , ~." '-'" -. • I~l . I "\.:"0 ~ r 1 . , ' .... / I I I .J. / ... ----, '. " r--'---"---! l 5fi '" '1 , / I I I I I ,,- , ! \ ' , I .' I I I' t .",,~ \ ! . '';: I I, I I .. f j I I .J. I _ I . C y;e, I' _.L--.. - i t '.- "! ,1 <:It i I 1 / I / I '" .,p' ,. ' , .S~",(tU I $k,,\.. "' W i-!'TI . 1," 1 ,./ . I 'Jo:! l !~ J' / t',. l'. \ - .... I Wo od ~ t:&i ~ - J 5!iv / / / ' / I I ... '-" ~ 1...... :#;J ? t". . J ' ;S:.:; • .; . ~ ~ ; ...... ,I 1------1..... S e heco....~ / r,/ /"O !,., I I if ~J \ ~ r"" .'1 - 1 1){>i:I / , ;''\ ;~I ' tlR." \V J -( / I Cl i · I . v . ,_~ l(. )( '110 ! I t o r- It. ~ , l i I ...... , ~} Go) .s (I, • ... 1 S'I./ "" ;-", . ( I U S9 i / /' ''- '1' I -1-- l' \",' " • I'?y ' : /'11 JilfJ tI '- " I e <' '- ~ '" J H/) 1' 0 '" I ',. \ I ,/1' ,-----' ._._,---l r---·--...J,_·_,_t .:.. \ ':~\ I i I,i ..... ~ ! ,,~~ " I ... $.~ l ,'~ \r " : , D + . t I ~il// • -', \ . ~ I! ~ 6l 0 I p" f Po. I . ' { .\ Dc .,., ' I . , . I I '• I " ' I I I i - " ; Ct"Gt",fo j',j i!;t:l.ltlhd I fisl,/a.hj; w·\y,,'(J. ·"l· ,·r." L~:~""~ ,,-c k. I " I IJ:~~~.!:' h do:i .; . ..., ______, -.._..... _ .. __. ___.. , "~,..L-f_~ .. _...... _~_

Fig.Q. Generalized outcrop pattern of rocks in part o f the no~thern udl0 a.r·~a. Compiled f'rCnl1 Car'man : 19 46 j ; Carman and Ot.l-lcrfl (J 962"1; adO Brownocker ~192U. I~.'

GENERAL ST RUCTURAL SET'I'lNG The major structures within the field trip area are that part of the Cincinnati ar'ch known as .t he Findlay arch and the Bowllnp.; Green fault zone (Fig. 3). All of the f i eld trip area and the larger portion of northwestern Ohio occupy part of the Indiana-Ohio platform (Fig. 3; Green, 1957 ). The Cincinnati arch comprises a fold ot' low structural relief extendin~ from Nashvill~ Tennessee through Kentucky and western OhIo to southern Ontario and eastern Michigan. '!'he northern extentlon of this arch in northwestern Ohio 1.8 termed the Findlay arch (Fig. 3). The maximum structural relief in the FIndlay arch is only 500 feet and regional dip values to the east and west are typically Ie or less (Green. 1957). The exact extent to which these dips are structural or represent the initial dip of the sea floor is open to question. The CIncinnati arch has generally be considered among geologists to date from the . However, Scotford (1964). has presented convIncIng evIdence which indicates that the Cincinnati arch d1d not become a definite paleogeograph1c element unt1l the S11urian. In this connection, 1t Is also InterestIng to note that Patton (1961, p. 244), round no deposItional or erosional effect caused by the Cincinnati arch in the Paleozoic rock record of Indiana. A major zone of structural weakness or hinge line, whIch was active durIng Trenton tIme and apparently intermIttently at other tImes as well since the , extends southwestward through northwestern Ohio (Fig. 3 ). . This hInge line extends from the St. Lawrence River valley , southwestward through Ohio and Indiana and then to the eastern edge or the Ozark Dome (Rooney, 1966, p. 535 ) . That part or the hInge lIne whioh extends through Ohio is termed the northwestern Ohio HInge Zone by the present w~iters. (Pig."). During Niagaran and Cayugan time the positIon of this hinge zone appears to have been oriented essentially north and south In northwestern Ohio (Fig. "); its position at this tIme coincided with the boundary between the OhIo Basin on the east and the more stable shelf area on the west (Ulteig, 1963; Floyd, 1968, in preparation). The position ot this hinge zone also appears to oorrespond very closely to the position of a major reef barrIer (Fig. H) which existed durin~ Niagaran time in northwestern Ohio and which can be traced from Clay Center, southward through Woodville, Gib8onbur~, and Maple Grove (Floyd, 1968, in preparation). r- . . . / - --, . .., ,-I . ' · . /

Figure :3 ,-. Gftnaralized tectonic 1"'!ap o f nnrthwes tern nhL.:' and surround ing arAaS n Hinge line data a ft.e r Rooney (!_r~(", ( 6

STRATIGRAPHY The most distlnotive and MOst universally agreed upon feature ot Niagaran and Cayugan rocks in northweBtern Oh10 is that the, are all dolomites. The geological road beyond thia point ia strewn with question markB. One ot the IIOst recent published accountB which dealB with some ot the Silurian strata In northwestern Ohio is that by Summeraon and others (1963). For detailed discussiona ot Sllurian rocks in areas bordering northwestern

Phl0, the reader ls reterred to the tollowing publications: > 1) tor southernM1ehlgan see Alling and Briggs (1961) and Ehlers and Kesling (1962); 2) tor areas to the west In Indiana aee Pinaak and Shaver (196_); 3) tor west central Ohio see Horvath and others (1961) and Summerson and others (1963); 4) tor the north central Ohl0 area Bee Ulteig (196_) whlch provides an aocount ot Upper Niagaran and Cayugan aubaurtaoe atratlgraphy In the Ohio BaBIn area (PIg. '3). ' Allot the above olted publloatlons have been freely drawn upon In compl11ng the tollowing descrlptive material.

Hiasaran Serle. The "NIagaran Serlea" la a term introduced by J. Hall In 1842 and whioh inoluded strata ot,Clinton and Lockport age. '!'he term Lockport waa "opo.ad by J. Hall In 1839 tor llmeatones expoaed Intbe Eri8 Canal at Lockport, New Yvrko The term Lookport baa been uaed at botb the Group and Pormation levels. In aouthern and central Obl0 the classltlcation ot the Silurian sectloD waa begun' by Newberry (1869) and by Orton (1871); the pre.ent atratlgraphy (Ohl0 aeologlcal Survey Oenera11zed Col~ ot Rocka in Oh1o, obtalned in 1965, but no date, no autbor). is essentlally tbe same as that proposed by Poerate (se. Summerson and others, 1963). Nlagaran rooks trom the Euphemia through the Cedarville (IPig. 1 ) J identltiable in the .est oentral Ohio area, have never been suooess~llJ traoed into north~estern Ohio. Partly tor thls reaaoD. rooks which assumedly oocupy the same and hlgher stratlgraph1c intervals In northwestern Ohio, bave been reterred to as Nlagaran, Lockport, or slmply Ouelphor "Guelph". ' The term "Guelpb" ... Introduced by Hall (1852) tor a group otrocks exposed 1n Ontarl0, between the top of the Lookport and the base ot the Onondaga Salt Group. Dana (1963) Introduc'ed the term "Sallna period" 1n whlch was 7 included the Guelph Limestone and the Onondaga Salt Group. still later, the Guelph was placed in the Niagaran Group. Paleontologically and stratigraphically, the "Guelph" has continued down to the present day as a veritable storm center of controversy. The term Guelph has been widely used in Ohio and elsewhere in the Great Lakes area for almost any rocks within the Silurian interval that displayed evidence of reefs. In general "Guelph" as used in Ohio, refers to gray to buff, coarsely crystalline, rreQuently vuggy, dolomites which commonly display Masslve bedding or no obvlous beddlng whatsoever. Locally, the dolomites may be crossbedded. The term ""Guelph" ls best regarded as an informal term comparable to the now antiquated time stratigraphic uaage of the term Huntlngton in Indiana (Pinaak and ShaTer, 1961&). Most "Guelph" type dolomites conslat of reef or reet flank materlal or have a reefoid character. In some areas regularly bedded portions of the "Guelph" have been referred to as "Lockport" (SWIIII8raon and othera, 1963, p. 51). Tbe tauna ot .the "Guelph" is uaually Quite limited; characteristic tosslls Include: Trimeralla andls, 1h1~1dium occidentale, Zaphrent1sraclnensls, cnost Ius SUe 86eoa1_, MirulollUa canadenais Pentamerus . ower part , and onohldlum upper piit ot unIt). · . The total thickness ot the "Guelph" in northern Ohio is unknown; according to Summerson and others (1963, po 51), the un1t ls at leaat 150 feet thlok and probably more. The contact between the Guelph and the overlying Greenfleld dolomite is a d1acontormlty with low rellef accordlng to Summerson (1n: Summerson and others, 1963, p. 51). The existenoe or an unconform1ty between rocks equivalent to the Guelph and Greenf1eld in northern Indiana and south central Mlchigan is, however, questionable (Pinsak and Shaver, 1961&). In addition, no evidence has been noted of an unconfOrmity 1n the subsurtace in the Ohio basin (Ulteig, 196J&, p. 35). Cayugan Series

The terms Greenfield dolomites and Tymochtee dolomite (Pig- j >, although oommonly applied to certain rocks 1n northwestern Oh10, are by no means terms which are un1versally accepted, nor 1s the1r a complete understanding ot correlations involving rooks which have been designated as Oreenfield and Tymochtee by some geologists in north-­ western Oh10~ ~1th rocks which have been given the same names 1n other areas. 8

The term Greenf1eld dolomite was proposed by Orton (1871) for dolomite exposed at the Rucker Quarry near Greenf1eld, Ohio. He initally considered it- to be of Helderberg age but later related it to the Waterlime group. The Greenfield dolomite has traditionally been plaoed in the Monroe Group by the Ohio Geologieal Survey dating from the work of Lane (in Wadswort , 1893), who used the term for beds trom the top of the Niagaran to the baae of the Dundee l1mestone (Devonian) (aee Fig.J ). Subsequently, Prosser (1903) placed the Monroe between the Niagaran dolomites and the and divided it 1nto three units named the Tymochtee (Lower Monroe), Sylvanian (Middle Monroe), and Detroit River (Upper Monroe). Lane and others (1909) then recognized the Ba8s Island dolomite a term which included the old Tymochtee and Sylvania and included two new units in between, which they named the Put-In-Bay and Rasin River in aacending order. Carman (1921) demonstrated the Devonian age of the and the Silurian age of the Bass Island Group. Ehlers, Stumm, and Kesling (1951) have subs.quentl1 placed the Greenfield and Tymochtee together in the Salina Group. Stout (1941) describes the Greenfield Formation throughout western Obio as a dolomite, bluish-gray to dark brown in color, dense to granular, and commonly in beds ranging trom 2 to 18 inches 1n thickness. In northwestern Ohio the Oreenfield characteristically consists ot very fine gra1ned dolomite, which is frequently banded brown, tan, and gray. Alternating dark and light laminations which range trom 10 microns to a tew millimeters in thickness are connon. Laminations result trom laminar concentrations of dark carbonaceous material, asphaltiC res1dium (algal?), clay, and carbonate detritus. Laminations which have b,en formed by the bindin~ and trappin~ activ1ty ot blue-green algae are also very common. Light colored laminae, regardless ot their origin, are invariably finer grained than dark colored laminae (l'lo),d, 1968, 1n preparation; Kahle, 1968, in preparation). The insoluable residue content ot the Greenfield is typically higher than that of the underlying "Guelph". The thickness of the Greentield has been estimated at about 100 teet in the type locality near Greentield, Ohio. However, neither the top nor the base ot the unit have ever been knowingly observed together in one exposure anywhere in OhiO, so that the true thickne.s rema1n. unknown. '!'he contact with the overl,1ng Tymochtee i. gradational and it 1s frequently impo.s1ble to distinguish one unit trom the other, 1.e., the Greenfield and T,mochtee can not always be mapped as independent un1ts. The typical Greenfield fauna 1ncludes Leperd1tla and the brachiopods Hindella and Schurhertellae 9

tymochtee dolomite The main basis tor separating the Tymochtee dolom1te from the Greenfield dolomite has been that the tormer has a darker color. h1gher clay content, and thinner beds. and an overall more "shaly" appearance. The Tymochtee was named by Winchell (1873) tor 23 feet ot thin-bedded shaly dolomite along Tymo~htee Creek 1n northern Wyandot County. The unit in western Ohio consist primar1ly ot med1~ to dark-gray, thin-bedded dolom1te. with some black carbonaceous shale beds. Locally the un1t may consist ot limestone or calcareous dolom1te. Evaporite m1nerals occur locally. 80mett.es 1n beds. Dess1cation cracks and stromatolltes ~ common 1n many parts ot the un1t.The tauna ls typlcallyver-y 1'8stricted; Le~erditia Is the most common fossll In tbe!7mochtee. The hlckriess ot the Tymochtee 1s unknown; esttmates range up to 150 feet, or more. In southern Ohl0 the Tymochtee 18 overlain dlsconf'ormably by tbe Ohl0 shale. Prom central Ohio north, the Tymochtee 18 overlaln by the Rasin Rlver dolomite or. locally 1n the northl by the Put-In-Bay dolOmite, w1th the nature ot the contact unknown.

SOME PROBLEMS

The tee11ng on me grows and grows That hardly anybodJ knows It those are these or these are those Wlnn1e-The-Pooh

The "Ouelph", Oreen'fleld, and Tymochtee Formations in northwestern Ohl0 present a tremendous number of' problems 1n terms ot b1ostratlgraph7, lithostrat1graphy, and t1me stratlgraph7 as has been Indicated In the toregolng discusslon. The aearch tor solutions to these problems 1s complicated by a near lack of subsurface data, 11m1ted surtace data due to the widespread cover ot glaclal t1ll, extensive dolomitlzat10n ot the rocks, and by a res.tr1cted fauna which occurs 1n limited numbers In the rocks 1n questlon.

sa. ot the lION pneral problema are: 1. What part ot the Silurian dolomites In northwestern Ohio correlate wlth S1lurian dolomites 1n northern Ind1ana and southern M1chigan? 10

2. How widespread (or local1zed?).as the apparent interruption 10 eediaentation at the end o~ Niagaran time (Summer80n and othera. 1963). 3. ExactlJ how va11d. are the names Guelph, Greenf1eld, and TYmochtee as app11ed to certa1n dolomites 1n north- western Ohio' - 4. What ... the nature ot the dep08itional environments that were involved 1n the tormation ot the Guelph, Greenfield, and !7mochtee dolo~tes' An excellent d1.cus81on ot eome ot the problems perta1ninl to Nlagaran and Ca,ugaft dolomites ln northwestern Ohio and a4Jacent aNaale pre.ented bJ Ehlers and Kesling (1962, p. ~15). '!'beae author' polnt out that pos8ibly the be.t bope tor solvins aome ot tbe problema noted above, and othera, lle ban eX&ll1natlon ot cuttings and rock core. tro. deep .ell.. AltboUCb lntormation trom wells would oert&1nl1 be· ot value lt .bOuld be noted that sub.urfaoe etnt1arapbl 1. neceaaarll, lithologic (Br~ggs, 1959, p. '1). It 18 .zaot11 in the use andapp11cation of litbologio analll1. that tbe gNate.t number o~ problema have been o1"e.ted 01" oontounded ntb regards to Silurian strat1crapbJ 1n norttnreltem Ohio and adj acent areas (ihleN and leal.1lls. 1962, p. 1). It would appear tbat tbe onlf true solution to much ot tbe preaent .tratlcraPbio oontallon tbat exist concernin~ tbe S11urlan or DOl'tbwe.'el'll Oblo and adj acent area., is the .stabl1a~tot toaall son•• d1atlnottrom toraations. BerJ7 and Bouoot. (1Il preparation). aIlOng others, arework1n~ on tbl. eztre.e17 1IIportaat prob1_. VI/1 Luc.a.s Co. ( L R K E: E. R \ E \/1,-r To !edo :;"1 I I

r '- O- /" i" 0+1 ()'w Gl c~.

r.\ (If~ r o'[4 (\ -,---,f'" 1E. } ff~ v I' . w~t~l'~il~. " , I ~ ~IS. ------~t~ L -'1\ , ;0:> 15" ... I) ~ "'-(j - , ~~~ J {ooJ"df~ ~ Sfor"S ): ~/~ "I-~ fi'i/- \ to Sow fi ... , -.....:...~ ------:r;a~e .. '--- -=::.:J ..I \.~--- ,- 0' ,--.. E~ '\ - '\ _---- r't,. --'I -.../ - --. '. \ I II PDI-Y '~' e. i I

I Co. \ J ; Nj, 'I (i I I.' ",,, ' ~:" d uS k;l - - ---._-_.. --- \ 1-' I-' WODd Co. \ r -+- !";e 1,/ fr;" rour-e ~ ______~ ______~I Fig.q. Route map for fie ld t rip . 12

ITINEARY FOR SILURIAN FIELD TRIP Saturday, April 20, 1968 Bowling Green, Ohio to Woodville, Ohio

Meeting Place: Kroger Supe~arket parking lot on the. east side of Route 25 at the north edge or Bowling Green.

Mileage 000 Kroger Supermarket parking lot. Leaving the parking lot, turn lert and drive south on Route 25. Use the utmost caution in leaving the parking lot as drivers must pull completely across Route 25 which is an extremely busy highway. 0 .. 2 Traffic light. Turn right (west) onto West Poe Road.

1~2 Stop sign. Turn right' (NW) onto Route 64. 2 .. 0 Note general flatness of landscape. Most of the field trip area lies within part of the Pleistocene Lake Plains section. Surface deposits consist of lacustrine and beach deposits and Wisconsin till. 3.6 Old oil storage tanks on right, a relict from the 1900 oil boom in the Lima-Indiana tield. -03 Old oil pump on right. 6.11 Haskins. 1.0 Cross B and a Railroad tracks in Haskins. 8.9 Waterville Quarry visible on lett across Maumee River Valley_ 904 Junction Route 65. Bear right and follow Routes 64-650 969 Turn lett toward bridge and continue to follow Route 64. 10.1 Bridge over Maumee River. Enter Waterville on south aide ot bridge. 10 .. 3 Trattic light. Turn lett and tallow River Road. Proceeding over flood plain of Maumee River. 11.3 Road cut in Tymochtee dolomite located on the upthrown side or the Bowling Green fault zone.. Stop 1 coming up. 13 M1lease _ - Please note the map shown below 1t w1l1 be necessarJ to~ the carayan to execute a-tr1cky manuver. Drlvera - rollo. the arrows shown-on tbe map and park lOur oara on of the l'Oad and racing east (downatreaa). . 11.6 STOP 1. Bowl1ns Green Pault Zone. (See paRe ,q tOI- deaol'1ptlonl STOP 2. Waterville Quarr;r. (See page a. tor deacI-lp1;lon)

Sketch .ap Show1nc parkins area tOI- Stops 1 and 2.

;,. • J • '

,I • STOP

~ .

H II,., .'''.~..1 'f. ,.,.l,i., "". .. I

No/- dl"4"''' IJ/',. EI,c ",.,... I~.·'/,. --J4. suIt. t."~lItleJ"j ) - - . " ". ,. ~. ..- 14 Mileage 1i.G Leaving Stop 1 and 2, proceed on R1ver Road eastward back to Waterv1lle.

12.8 Trattic light in Wat.rvi11~. Proceed alowly. 12.9 Trattic light 1n Waterville. Turn lett onto Mechanic street. 13.1 Stop sign. Bus, intersectioh. Turn right onto Route 2". 15.4 Johns Man.ville Plant (aDd "dump"> on right.

11.5 CrOS8 o~r BfPass 23 (I.S. 15.>. 11.1 Maumee Cit, L1mits.

18.3 eross Monclova Road. Oont1D~e .traight.ahead on. Route' Z:..-, but besiD to alow ctOtlll and pull into the tal'tbe.t l.tt band lane. 18.9 Tratt10 11pt. lPord Street. '.rum lett. Caution! Another bu., 1Dters.ot1oD. 19.- Stop .1SO. Junotion u.s. 20. Andersons' elevator and Warebou •• larket on rllbt. Continue straight ahead aoro.. Route 20 Obto Bal1aburJ. Road. 19.6 !Urn rllbt onto pa•• d road whieh lead towards llaw.e stone COllP8ft7, Nauaee Quarr,. Rote: At tbe tt. tble pldebook was written, parld.ng arra.naeMllt. were .t111. unoertain. Park TOur ••11101 •• aooo~D8 to 41"otl~na g1van bl the piel•• po.teet alOll8 ~ ao•••• road 1eadine baok to tbe Q1l8l'l7. and await 1Detl'Uotlone about tlna1 parkinB· 19.8 8'1'0' 3...... 8toae Coq>aDJ. IIawaee QuarrJ.' (se. pqe A5 tOl' d.aor1ptloD~·. 19.8 Upon 1eariDI tbe ...... Quarz7 prooeed ba.ck to the _trance to tbe quarrv ptOUD4a and turn lett (south) "onto 8al1abvJ Boa4. 20.0 Itop Slp. Junotloll Route 20. PI'ooeed .traight &bead aON•• Route 20 ODtO ~rcl street 20.2 !rattle 111bt. fUrn right onto Route 24.

20.8 Interseotion witb Monolova Road~ Continue straight .~a4 on Route 2' and move into tbe right-hand lane. ot trattlc. 15 Mileage 21.5 Overpass across Route 23 Bypass (I.S. 75). Turn right onto cloverleaf and enter Bypass 23 goinp; southeast (see sketch map be~ow) • • '0 ," v f! Ia : .' •.' •• 1'- .,. •

g)'Ifl G$ ,;l.3 (r. S . 'IS)

Sketch map showing fleld trip route (arrows) at the Route 24 - Bypas8 23 (I.S. 75) cloverleaf. 22.2 Maumee River Bypass 23 (I.S. 75) Bridge. Enter Wood Co. 24.4 OWen-Illinois Levis Development Park on right. 25.3 Go under Route 25. 16 Mileage 25.9 Follow NORTH I.S. 15 sign (bear left). 26.1 Go under overpass. Merging traffic - SLOW! 26.7 Go under Route 23 overpass. Get in right hand lane of traffic. 27.5 Leave I.S. 75 Expressway via exit ramp. 27.8 Stop sign. Junction Route 20. Turn right onto Route 20. 29.8 Lime City. Slow down; next stop coming up (see sketch map shown below). 30.1 Turn right onto graveL road leading to WMGS radio station transmitter. If ground 1s dry enough~ pull vehicles completely orr the gravel road and park facing south (see sketch map shown below).

IZt, ;10

Sol. F' 114 Pos.s.1/c.,. 1I11't>,." ..-Ic

~ 't7J77/I WMGS 11.o---\~ ~ til »10 W..... I'•• ;"f til,.". €.,.~ a ,.. u.. J J ,,.e I l/~e C,.I, (,"1 l,·",;1~ R.Il. 17 Mileage 30. 2 .STOP 4. Maumee Stone Co. ~ Lime City Quarry.. (See page a9 for description). 30.2 Upon leaving Stop 4, go north on the gravel road to 1ntersectionwith Route 20 and turn right or east. 33.6 Stony Ridge. Town is situated on a bed rock high. Greenfield dolomite (?) at surrace. 34.0 You are driving over some of the most level land in the world. Or hadn't you noticed? 35 .. 7 Lemoyne. 36.0 Cross overpass over N.Y.C. Railroad. 3605 Intersection. Stay right and continue straight ahead on Route 20. 36.1 Junction with Route 120. Continue straight ahead on Route 20. Road narrows and goes to one lane. Caution! 37.9 Bedrock high'on lett. 39.6 Junction with Route 199. Proceed straight . ahead on Route 20. Ahead on the lett can be seen $ome of the quarries in the Woodville, Ohio area. This area~; .in· particular ~ bas been a tradit10nal center for quarrying operations in N.W. Ohio. Stone production is primarily from the "Guelph" dolomite. The Clay Center Quarry is located about 8 miles north ot Woodville. This quarry is famous for' its celestite mineralization and for the massive exposure It provides ot reetoid "Guelph". It was impossible to get permission to visit this quarry. 4200 Woodville.\ 43.0 Portage River. 43.2 Railroad tracks.in Woodville. I1IIID8diately after croasing the tracks turn right (south) onto Anderson Road (sandusky Co. Road 32) and proceed toward the Ohio Liiae Co. Quarry visible to the left.

43.8 S'l'OP 5 •. -Ohio Lime Co., Woodville Quarry. (See page il tor description,) (Park cars in areas shown on sketch map on next page, unless instructed otherwise by guides.) 18 STOP S

• This concludes our field trip. We enjoyed having you with U8 and hope that 10U enjoyed some of the geology. Por those ot you SOing east or west on the Ohio Turnpike. the shortest way to an Interchange is to go back to the N.W. on route 20 to Route 120. Turn rlght (north) on Route 120 whlch wlll take you to Interchange 5.

'07 those wisbing ~o return to Bowling Oreen. we suggest that you return to Woodville. At the western edge ot Woodvllle you may pick up Route 105 which leads o.nto Route 6 and then into Bowllng Green. 19

DESCRIPTIONS OF FIELD TRIP STOPS

STOP 1 BOWLING GREEN FAULT ZONE Sect. 39, T 1, (no range), 3/4 of a mile southwest of Waterville, Ohio. General Nature -of Fault -Zone The Bowling Green fault zone (Fig. 5 ) apparently represents a number of high angle reverse faults. The faulting occurred during some unknown time followin~ the Silurian. The fault zone strikes almost due north and dips 100 and 800 to the east. Throw is estimated at 200 feet or more on the basis of subsurface evidence. Subsurrace evidence also indicates that the fault zone can be traced from about 8 miles north of Waterville, southward to an area in south central Hancock county, southeast of Findlay. Ohio. Insofar as the writers are aw~re, the depth of taulting has never been ascertained; the faulting is known to involve most of the Paleozoic section 1n the area.

Surface Expression Surface evidence of the Bowling Green fault zone can be observed in an area on the north bank of the Maumee River and the south side of State Route 24 opposite the France Stone Company Waterville Quarry. The most dlagnositic evidence ot faulting in this area may be observed within and around an abandoned lock of the old Erie canal. At this site, beds ot the Tymochtee dolomite appear to occupy a shear zone. Individual beds dip to the west at angles up to 700 in this locality; In the France Quarry on the 'opposlte side of Route 24 and on the east or up thrown slde of the fault zone, dip values of major beddlng planes do not exceed 4° (Kahle and Floyd, 1968, in preparation). From the site of' the old canal lock, it is posslble. durin~ intervals of low water In the Maumee River. to look to the south across a serles of rapids. The area in which the raplds be~ln (Fi~.5) assumedly marks the trace ot the Bowling Green fault zone where it crosses the Maumee River. Addltional surface evidence of the tault zone was vlslble in years past within the small quarry located ,90uthwest ot the rock crusher In the France stone Company Waterville Quarry. As of 1968, this auarrY has ;been partlally filled up wlth gravel and other debrl and the fault zone has been completely obscured. 20

N

\ \ • , ...,nee $1•• (0, \ ~A , ....,;1'1. t Q "AI''''~

FIgure 5 ., GeneralIzed block diagram showing the Bowling Green fault zone and the bedrock geology south and west of WatervI11e p Ohloo \

srrtop 2 FRANCE STONE COJIIIPANY, WATERVILLE QUARRY. Sects. 38 and 39, T 1, (no range, 3/4 miles southwest of Waterville, Ohio. All of the rocks in the quarry are considered to represent the Tymochtee dolomite. The quarry lies astride the Bowling Green fault zone on the western flank of the Findlay arch, and at the extreme southern ed~e of the ~ichip-:an Basin (Pig. 3).

Mineralo~ically, all of the rocks exposed in the quarry consist of dolomite. Associated minerals are ~ypsum which is found in the form of veins and as small crystals within vugs; and celestite within small vugs. Celestite also occurs associated with gypsum. Minor amounts of sulphur are present, usually in association with gypsum. The do10stones are typically very fine p.;rained and unfossiliferous. Lithographic to sub-litho~raph1c textures are common, many surfaces display conchoidal or - sub-conchoidal fractures. Colors on weathered surfaces are typically gray; tresh surfaces vary from gray to dark brown. Individual beds are typically less than five inches thick and contain thin "shaly" partings typical of the Tymochtee dolomite. The true shale content of the Tymochtee in this Quarry 1s not, however, as great as it is in this unit in areas to the south, particulari1y in the type locality in Ross County, Ohio. Many of the beds in this quarry have a gnarled appearance and also display what appears to be cut-and­ fill structures. Undulating bedding planes are common. Structures resembling load casts are visible in parts of the Quarry walls, especially in the north wall. A feature of considerable interest in this quarry is the presence of nodular to irregular masses of gypsum. Typically, the gypsum occurs within beds rather than alonp.; bedding planes. This gypsum appears to be similar to gypsum trom Laguna Madre (Gulf Coast), and from the shelf areas of Texas and New Mexico which has been described by Kerr and ~hompson (1963). Sherman (1966, p. 211) has called attention to the idea that this type ot gypsum may well be indicative of deposition in intertidal or in"sabhka (supratidal) environments. 22

Of even more interest in this quarry 1s the spectrum of structures found in the dolostones. Friedman and Sanders (1967) have noted that the following structures are usually associated with dolostones formed in supra­ tidal to intertidal environments: laminations, dessication cracks, "birdseye" structures, boudina~e-like structures, cut-and-fill structures, channels, ripple marks, cr05S­ stratification, and al~al structures. Dolomites containing all or many of these structures typically have a very restricted fauna. Such dolomites may be ~ormed by a mechanism of "capillary concentration" (Friedman, 1967), which would be induced by an arld or semi. -arid environments. Many of the structures noted above by Friedman are to be found in the dolostones In the Waterville Quarry. The mineralogy of the rocks, the associated structures, and the restricted fauna (mainly ostracoda> all stronp:ly suggest that the original sediments were formed i.n an intertidal or possibly a supratidal environment (Kahle and Floyd, in preparation).

DESCRIPTION OF SECTION Between 40 to 60 teet of rock are presently exposed in the walls of this quarry. The generalized description given below Is1dopted from a section measured by Kahle and Floyd durin~ March, 1968 (Fig. E. ). The section begins in a small pit within the main quarry floor in the southern part of the quarry, and continues about 50 yards south­ eastward from the pit, in the main wall of the quarryo It should be noted that the description is based solely upon megascopic criteria. A detailed petro~aphic analysis of textures and fabrics in this section and others within the quarry, is underway by the writers; the results will be submitted for posslble publication in the near future.

Waterville Quarry, Measured Section Silurian Systerr Cayugan Series Tymochtee Formation Thickness Unit 6. Dclostone. Very fine grained; lithogr'aphic. Fresh, gray to dark brown; weathers light· brown to tan .. Unfossiliferous. Sub··conchoidal to conchoidal fracture common. Most beds ab)ut five inches thick in lower pil.rt, grading upwards to beds less th~n one Inch thj,ck. Upper­ most rock surfaces display glacial grooves and striationE; .. tI'hicknes s Unit 5. Dolostone. Fine grained. Beds two inches to eight inches thick. 22' Abundant cut-and-fill structu'~"es. Scattered dessication cracks. Some beds appear to be stromatolite (7). Top three to four feet 1s brecciated; fragments of breccia are an~ular to sub-rounded and measure up to two inches in length. Breccia zone pinches and swells laterally. Unit 4. Dolostone. Fine grained. Irregularly bedded. Brecciated in 2' to part. Contains nodules and pods of gypsum up to twelve inches in 3'6" diameter, some enclosing dolomite. In places unit displays finely veinated calcite and gypsum. Much of unit may represent results of solution collapse. Contact with unit 5 has "load cast" structures and contains scattered leached bugs producing an undulating to irregular contact. Unit 3. Dolostone. Very fine grained. Unfossiliferous. Fresh gray; 6' weathers gr ay • Beds range in thickness from less than one in~h to ten inches. Bedding surfaces are even to slightly undulating. Contains scattered small nodules of gypsum in upper two feet. Some cut-and-fill structures up to several feet across~ Few shaly partings. Contact with Unit 4 even to undulating. Unit 2. Dolostone. In general, thinner bedded than Unit I and contains more 5' well defined laminations. Rest same as Unit 1. Unit 1. Very fine grained dolomite with occassl.onal laminations visible on 11t freshly fractured surfaces. Fresh, light gray to brown; weathers light gray. Unfossiliferous. Bed thickness ranges from paper thin up to six inches. Some gnarly beds and small scale cut­ and~fill structures. Scattered celestite-filled vugs up to six inches in diameter. Some asphaltic residium visible on bedding planes and along small jotnts. Total thickness -- I .

~~2?::'- .!'> (..' "1 ,," f L 2 '" e I (' ~ - # t-e

I

!i ! I f ! !

,/ / I I f ,I I I 1 I ~---It:c I I I I I ! I I I

<'t pr-' Qt. i r.f 1!.t'll'"1 f - ~ r -----.-.---.~---...... --~- .....! . "'-', : J.i ol •• r/, 1.,68 ';7 ,T. ¢: G.X...... - ...... --- -...... --- ......

-; e c· t '. ('1} 'UE.r>l' : 0[' [)~ s '4 D. t ->.. • - ~ . Oh 10 25

STOP 3 MAUMEE STONE COMPANY, MAUMEE QUARRY. Sect. 35, T 2 (no range), Maumee, Ohio, 7.5 Min. Quadrange. PLEASE NOTE: The management of this quarry has requested that individuals stay well back from the quarry walls and off of the tops and siaes-of1brasted rock piles. Collecting, if any, will have to be done from the sides of blasted rock piles at quarry level. This quarry is cut entirely into the Greenfield dolomite. The rocks have been described by Summerson (in, Summerson ~nd others, 1963), and by Textoris and Carozzi (1966). The main part of the quarry comprises a quaquaversal stromatolite mound approximately 800-1,000 feet in diameter. Assumedly, the mound was constructed by blue-green (Cyanophyta) algae. A smaller stromatolite mound is present in the west end of the quarry. These mounds are larger and more complex than algal bioherms which have been reported from the Niagaran of Wisconsin and Indiana. The main mound in this quarry was termed a reef by Alling and Briggs, (196l, p. 539), who also reported that this is the first known occurrence of a growing marginal structure contemporaneous with Cayugan evaporite sedimentation in the nearby Michigan basin. A variety of sedimentar.y structures may be observed in the rocks in this quarry_ The most interesting structures perhaps, are the organo-sedimentary structures formed by algal stromatolites. 6 Figure~shows the petrographic units observable in the north. wall of the quarry, figure 7 illustrates a reconstruction of the environments in which the various units were t"ormed (at"ter Textoris and Carozzi, 1966). 'l WeST E!;\. $,.1.- I1bQ.~ J gt"i~ 1 =,. - i ""''''"';\,;01 ' l't., ·\joJ... te~"_ c.hGlh'"ep, I · __ ~~ .~._.--'".~- --- ::.--::=....--....,:;;. \ "" ___. --".0>... .,../ ...... , -" ~ :::: -:;"-;--..., \. t ~,, ~... ' " '7-~:::::':-:~-=--- -:- -::-::-~.-:- ~. '. , ."7; ;',.': ~, -:-; .:: .. :, :. : 2:~': ~ ,. .. ~~ Y.-..- I, "'/~ " ",I .._,--- -- _-::_ ,/ ..." ~'\ '.' ' Y: ._ ~ " =-- ";,;:::.ii :::-:: .... -<:• ..., . • - .:;~~":;'~ 1,.-';- /'" __ ' .,. .! - , iP / - _ ...:;;:. ... I" ~ .. . "Ie; .. s= - ---!"'. J • ~ ...... ~~...!"'JIII1d ': ...g~ '"' ."" t ~ r \ J . _' ~ rr--./" '- ... ~ ... . , ". ' ,"" '•• .: "'. ' , ~ .•• • • .~~ I ( ( - - ,- ....., I ~ ~ l' ".....- - . ' ••' 'u (\ ." ;'" __;; :;;:=:.;;;~~-~.- . r / ,-'" " ...,. ....') . _ ~~ --.-..=-- .. . (, ( .; c ...... _ I ~. -'".. , :..=:-,,-.-~-~..,::- ~ _~~'_'_r .~ , or . ), .-J ( ..-/ ...... IoW', ...... - " - * ' (_ ). ,...... '- ./ (- - . (, :.-~ :~~ r ) ( ( ) ,./ --> c.. I 'tI' f /" , I:... • ,"~ . ') .,!( ( { , ~ C ./ ( L (...J L,v _. __ ;. i ' ., . ,/ I /.'!... ,,".. ;: ~/ ) ( . . )J ( '- ) (') y ,},,-...J ~~~-~~::::-?~-: ' - --~~'L) F, "/ l,.. '- .../ I... -~~~.v.... .'"'\ -, ~:-.t:. ... /.~.~_.:.-...... ~\ 11I 1- ~$

I, I~C~:;-:;>I 1~-71 , t- " ~ " "\J... -, ~ Hemispherical stronatullte= Pellatoidal ..~ , .', I tlo '-;-;>"

Fi~. 7. North wa ll o f Maumee Quarry show1 n ~ the units makin~ up a stromato lite mound and associated facies in the G ~ eenf ield dol omite (after Te xtoris and Cal'"'f)r:;~d'!I 1966, F~_g. 2:> po 1376i. Unit name s are derlved. from the name of t;:.l.e domiJ;18,nt li1io :C0fa.cies 8.8 ae';:;"'H'ulined pe (;l'ogJ:"'8.pldCl:tlly. Wetjl;w!.:tx·d lHcf'ease i:o. ". ) dip values may be caused by draping over a stromatolite mound 0~ dr~D1ng 0" er N:L;;l garan topography ~ accumpan:i.ed by pos t-deposi tional movemen'C. ,...-.r_ __. ___~ __.. '-----, f\T.H, S.E.

"",- '- 'I'o Michigan Basin To axis . of Findlay arch ~

I i I ) i i ---', I nor ma l hi~h tide ...... -..

'- ' hemispherica l blue­ ~ __~mal low tide __ ~ -= .... .\. .... ' .::.-- '- flat blue­ green s.l /2:a e and f green algae aragonite mud, w1th I ~ aragonite mud­ and araF!:onite penecontemporaneous --~- pellet mud brecci ation araRonit e mud with penecon­ formation temporaneous evaporite 0I'ystal growth

,r'i' '".' !)-!I' SUB'rIDAL E~TVIROHf~ENT LOW :rNTE?'J'r~p.L RIGH ~~N't,"E, P.TID !U. A~::' LEN·V ' !Rm~rlfE~.!I' 3UPRATIDAJ.J ('? ) ~ .t!.~r" ,T,,"' .,;.;~. J.i"",. ~; !l~"r·" ·UJ,jl~.'""p·i"''' ''''" , ,, ___.~_ .• _" _ _ • ______.__ , . • _ .______--L ___ _

Fi g , 8. Cross secti on. depicting ideal lateral environmental relati onshi p, respons i b l e for t he f ormation of t he stromatolite mound and associated facies, Maumee Stone Co . Qua~ry , Ma ume e , Ohio . Basis f or cross s ection is re ~l ona l seLtin~ , pe t rography , rece nt analogs, and use of Wa l t her 's Rule . , Al l a fter: l~Atori s and Ca r ozzi , 1966, Fi~ . 4, p . 1387 . . Gene ral shift of environments :rl"Cl~ left t o r i ght ( transp;ress1.on) , will dup licate s tratip'raphic s e ction 0alther's Rule, shown in F i ~ u r e 7 this guidebook . 28

STOP 4 LIME CITY SECTION This quarry is located in Lime City, Ohio on the north side or u.s. Route 20. The entire section here is thought to be in the Greenfield Formation, the lowermost rormation of the Salina group in southern Michigan and in Ohio. Structurally, the quarry is located on the northwest edge of the Findlay arch. Alling and Briggs (1961) considered the Greenrield to "represent a marginal carbonate phase closely related to the subjacent reef carbonates of the Guelph-Lockport." The rocks exposed here exhibit many of the features which have been previously attributed to Greenfield rocks. (See page e this guidebook). The contact with the underlying Lockport is not visible here. All of the rocks exposed here are composed of dolomite. Beds near the bottom of the section are fairly even bedded, but in general, assume a more massive character toward the top or the section where the beddin~ becomes wavy or undulating. The dolostones near the top of the section contain some very well-developed algal stromatolites. Some of the geometric arrangements which these structures exhibit are: mats, hem1spheroids, and oncolites. Some of the hemispheroids are quite large. It is generally assumed by many workers that algal stromatolites grow most prolifically in the "zone" near, or at, mean sea level. ThiS, plus the occurrence of dessica.~lon features near the top of the section, strongly suggests intertidal to supratidal environmental conditions during deposition. Some "imprints" in the rocks near the top of the section probably represent gypsum and/or anhydrite molds. Locally, ostracodes of the~perditid-type are fairly common. They may occur both whole and fragmented. Some vugs contain authigenic calcite (as spar) and celestite. Some very small fractures appear to contain gypsum (1). In several places, the upper portion of the exposure contains conspicuous brecciated areas which consist of fragments of algal (?) stromatolites. A few stromatolitic structures occur locally 1n the lower portion of the section. Features which resemble "contorted" bedding and mud-slump structures also occur locally. DESCRIPTION OF SECTION A well-defined, but undulating contact (unconformity?) near the top of the exposure naturally separates the section into two units. This exposure was examined on an east wall in May, 1966. UNIT 1 - 8' to 12'

Dolomlte. r-1assi ve. Fine to medJ.um gralned. C(ln'~alns brecciated portions. Fresh-buff. Abundant stromatolites and a few ostracodes. Some vugs and cracks filled witll celestite and/or calcite. Abundant laminations - some may not be of algal origin. Top of unit has some of the algal structures weathered in relief. Some "bll"dseyes II • UNIT 2 - 35' to 40' Dolomite. Thin-to-thick bedded, some massive. Fine to medium grained. Fresh-buff. Some mineralized vugs. Possible stromatolitic structures. A few ostracodes. Slump (?) structures. Some bedding planes are undulat1n~ and poorly defined - others are fairly straight and persistent. Possible cut-and-fill structures. Some laminated portions of this unit contain "birdseyes" and "pelletal" structures. (See Fig. q for the generalized stratigraphic section of this exposure.) T .., ~/u"'p(?) g'/t. 1;1..' , (e /~S i,' -h

I <) VvtS -0-&- Birds e,e m /)o)o*,'- Ie

~--TAI".s ec" J j,l(ufe J ro(..k

Fig. 9. Generalized strati~raphic section of rocks exposed in the Maumee stone Company Quarry, Lime City, Ohio., 31

STOP 5 S.E. WOODVILLE SECTION This quarry Is owned by Ohl0 Llme Company. It is located on Anderson Road about 1/2 mile southeast of Woodville, Ohio in the N.E. 1/4, 8ec. 21, T 6 N, R 13 E, Woodville Twp., Sandu8ky Co. This artifIcial exposure provides an excellent opprtunity to observe one of the more massive portIons of the Guelph (faunal connotatlon). The Guelph fauna is much in evIdence here.

The most conspicuous faunal element consists of lar~e (2" to 10") boss-ahaped stromatoporoids. Thin sections of the fragments of several stromatoporoidl~ from the more massive portions or the exposure exhibit internal structures suggestlve of the genu~ !tromatopora. Whole stromatoporoids are very dl~~!cult to remove trom iSe rock In the fleld. Many have been partlally leached and others are tightly encased in thelr ·dolomitlzed matrix. Usually, only a fragment or two can be obtained from one large specimen. Several large (8" x 8" to 12" X 12") polished slabs of the rocks which contain abundant stromatoporoids Indicate that many of these are probably In-growth posltions. Some workers feel that the mere pre.ence ot abundant stromatoporoids in-growth positlons ls strongly su~~stlve ot r·eef-building. A second distinctlve faunal element which occurs here are the very large (4" to 8" or 10") and originally very thick-shelled pelecypods ot the species Mefalo~us canadensis. Most specImens have had all or a large por lon4O¥ their shells leached away leaving only an internal m!)ld which is composed of the matrix (now dolom1t'.zed) that f'i11ed it subsequent to its death. Occasionally, an entire, pelecypod can be found which still retains nea~ly Its whole shell. Close examination of cross-sectlons of some of these speCimens reveals some very rag~d breaks ap:ainst which do10mltized matrix Is lying. This appears to be strong evidence for a high-level ot mechanical energy in the (lrlginal depositional environment because very large and thick-snelled or~anisrns like Megalomus must have been very difflcu.l..t to rramnent.

Other taunal elements include, large b~achiopods; tabulate coralsj small, stral~t-shelled na~tilold cephalopods; very large coiled gastropods; and rarely SO~9 relatively large whole crinoids and trilobltes. Echino(erm debris is generally ubiquitous in the matrix. Most of ~he faunal elements above are characteristic of unit M ill the description. ' Most of the faunal elements appear to OCClr in zones (no time-connotation intended) in which one or nore of them will be very abundant for a few to many feet la';erally and j2

DESCRIPTION OF SECTION (Note: The section described herein 18 only applicable to the south wall of the main pit and the east wall of the smaller pit in the northwestern part of the quarry. At the time the exposure was investigated (June, 1967) only these areas of the quarry were accessible. The various units described may not be traceable around the entire exposure. The section is idealized because only a small portion of the exposure above 40' could be examined directly at close range and sampled.) Silurian Niagaran, Guelph (1). Greenfield (1) in upper part? UNrf N - B' to 12' Dolomite, medium to coarse grained. Fresh buff to gray, weathers grayish. Nearly unf08siliferous in terms of whole organisms except for a few ostracodes (1) in the upper part. Near the contact with the underlying M unit, it contains associated with'Unit M, but which are smaller in size. Tbe bulk ot the rock appears to be composed of crinoida1 debris. Beds are 2' to 5' thick. Contains some, sma1l-aoale, apparently planar, cross-beds; laminations; and abundant birdseye8 (1). It is quite 'possible that the upper portion or H is represented by the Greenfield formation and the lower portion by the "Guelph". On top of the south wall the beds of this unit can be 8een dipping 4° to 6° to the south and east and appear to be "draped" over a bulge in the underlying M unit. S11urian Niagaran ("Guelph") UNIT M-30' to 40' Dolomite, tine to medium grained; some coarse grained and vuggy. Has a few perSistent bedding planes, but for the most part it is quite massive. This is the most impos1n~ lithology to be found at this exposure. Very conspicuous are the large stromatoporoIds, large pelecypods, large brachiopods, and large coiled gastropods; less conspicuous, but abundant are corals and cephalopods. The least conspicuous fosslls are whole echinoderms, trilobites, and possible algal encruatrations. Preah gray to buff, weathers gray. Skeletal ele.nta may be found whole or fragmented. An interesting feature ot unit M is its "sap:" in to the underly1ng unit L. It is quite p08sible that the underlying unit formed the supporting base of the reef(oid) mass ot unit)1 before it was completely lithitied causing it to say as unit M was 'bein~ depos1ted. Other aspects of unit M have been discussed in the introductory portion or this description. 33 vertically only to become much less conspicuous in the surrou~ding areas. This apparent f'aunal "zonation" 1s highly suggestive of a reef-building environment. The examination of polished sections reveals that many of the faunal elements are in-growth positions, however, many others are obviously not in-growth positions. Faunal elements in-growth position also appear to have a marked "zonation". The matrix in which the reeo~izable faunal elements are embedded varies from what was a "hash" of large skeletal fragments to a carbonate sand composed of the rounded grains of skeletal material. In nearly all of the matrix mud was present and, in places, it probably constituted the whole matrix. All of the rocks exposed in the quarry are profoundly dolom1 tized. ,There are some occurrences of authigenic calcite (as spar, in vugs and velnlets) and celestite. Most vugs appear to have resulted from the selective leaching of skeletal material, throup:h "sheltering" by skeletal elements, and by leaching of what appears to have been very porous and brecciated portions of the rock. The authors consider the skeletal deposits exposed at Woodville to have formed in a reef or reef-associated environments. Four lines of evidence stron~ly suggest this: 1. the exposed portion of the deposit appears to have formed in-place - many of the skeletal elements appear to be in-growth positions and the ones that are obviously not in-growth positions appear to have been moved only a short distance - of course this only applies to the whole, or nearly whole skeletons; 2. the large boss-shaped stromatoporoids have been proven to have had the potential to build wave-resistant structures - they have been found elsewhere in well-exposed Silurian and Devonian reefs; 3. polished sections of these rocks exhibit fabrics which indicate that they were deposited in a high-ener~y environment (Floyd, 1968 in preparation) - high energy environments are characteristic of reefs that have ~rown into the "zone" above wave-.base; 4. many of the fabrics appear analogous with those described in reef limestones of Guam and elsewhere (Schlanger, 1964). To subdivide the rocks into the classical "core" and "flank", if they are present, mayrequlre detailed observation of much of the exposure at very close intervals and proximity. A study of this type could result in the establishment of the reef sub-environments - if they exist here" It is qaite possible that only the so-called "eore" rocks are represented by unit M and the associated rocks by units I, J, L, and possibly all or part of N. It is also possible that this deposit has been partly destroyed by extensive reworking several times in shallow-water as the several well-defined bedding planes and some laterally persistent II zones II of displaced and fra~)~menter. skeletal material seem to Bug~est. UNIT L - 8' to 12' Dolom1te. Unfoss1liferous except 1n portion of extreme upper part. Appears to be composed of fine to med1um, loosely packed dolomite ~rains w1th much intercrystall1ne porosity. Mass1ve. White to butf or p1nk1sh when fresh. Styo11tic. nark, elongated "mottled" area are the most ubiquitous feature of this unit; many of these areas appear to emulate X-beds. (In P1t)

UNIT K - 2 1/2' to 8' Dolomite. Massive. Med1um to coarse gra1ned. Contains nearly the same fauna as unit M. but fossils are not as abundant nor as large. UNIT J - 3' to 8'

Dolom1te. Medium to coarse grain~d. Conta1ns small to medium sized leached stromatoporoids. Buff when fresh. Mass1ve. Styo11tic. UNIT I - la' to 12' Dolomite. Fine to mediuln gra!ned. Buff when fresh. Beds l' to 2' thick in upper part. but in lower part beds are thicker and beddin~ planef ar~ not pronounced. Upper part contains some small, leached stromatoporoids, but lower portion 1s largely unfofs11iferous. Porous. Porosity may be due to leached echinod{~rm'J and/or "birdseyes". Lower portion contains lamina';ions anCil some small-scale J apparently planar, cross-beds. Note: Units K, J, and! dip 4° to 6° to the east in the north wall.

(See Fig. If) for the generaliz·:d strat1graphic sect~on of this exposure.) 35

KEY

C,.. r i . b e J J j H :; 1 - La,..; .. _ tiol-a.s ~ S hoJtt. top 01",'; J,s

CI re Ie c y p 0 J.l 6 a G 4S +,.0 po J s StJ/iI:"l"JI 17 Ct)YA 1$ U .-+M o V,,'S -0-- Bi ,.J$ ere • c.o/OJ1a". CorDis

., I'D,.II. tv"" 1/ \ u.. ,·--t.L , 1 -- -? ---,- • I ;;l;ll fo 30' T u.. ;+ J ao'io ~ 1 1 u".~f %

Fig. 10. Generalized stratigraphie section of rocks exposed in the Ohio Lime Company Quarry, Woodville $ Oh10 ---"'--'1 1----·0- u '0 5 H E L f _ . ~IM. w . · ~ 0 It i 0 I 0 H , 0 B r...~ S I ,tV I H H I NG E Z ONE I VI f S r r- 7 . . - 7 ., •. -.------.. ~ i: I , .

'4.41Y CIlIfIJINJf#T'i 410NEKl¥h ,t ~ .z SL A'q(J:; )'f/,vo,< IfE£.j ,t/Tl'tlE EI<'''~ENC E OF ",,!. .:: ": -,s.' \ ZohE I \ / I f" ,.;.. Df C/------7 ,I /4 ;t./'i !_1t I. AS j" o ~ o __ V) o o o I , ~~ /} / / ~ ! ,,::...-- --=- ~- -- -4------.1f-"'----- ~-="- . ~ !-, .._ ­ ~~.--- - ~ r-·-.. -__ .~___ ~ 1•. _. __

I._~-- .... --_...• ---....·------.--_---._------~ :::;: r:::::::i:::SL'~ ~ ~ ~ . ._-----.-----_ .______- ____ -G~· ~~ ~------~rv===~.~ __ ~

'----- N j) f< r t-r - (fA/7I. fl i.. ,c I NDLRY c t: ~ f'i Po R 0 4

Flp.:. II , B l o ck d 1 aRr'am mode l. s h v"o11n p' 1dea. uzed s edimen tary f"rdmewo:ck c.l.r:!:r .. ,. Nlap:a r ar. t!me 1n p a rt o f n o r t hwe3 t ern Ohio , rvt ode:i ~. s based -:n rep'~.c:lai set~ir.O' (U:te i g , 196 1.1 ; p. ll in~ a nd B !'1F':P'8. !961', "l. :10 0:1 ~i e ld a.nd . H" I"'"\,. rI ' P 'n r-"~~,~ w ~"" \~ r"'J, ' a,...\,.1 1,.'r.-" .....4~',r .~der., ..cf' ...... r ' 1, _'ot;8.- ~ , ~-...,> ~~,." · ':'~.·18. •' ·"'· ~v ~_ '\" I "". , Ur· .~r, _,l . ~ - , ·lc~ 6 ('o. t .. - .•

r .... .~ J ~l r" ..~~ t __ -.J n HEPERENCES

Allinp:, H. L." and Brigp:;s, L. I., 196.l~ Stratl~raphy of' upper Silurian Cayu~an evaporites: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geolop:;ists Bull., v. 45, p. 515-547. Berry, W. B. N., and Boucot, A. J. in prep.aration, Report on Silurian correlations in North America.

Briggs, L. I., 1959, Physical strati~raphy of Lower fUddle Devonian rocks in the Michigan Basin: In: Mich. Basin Geological SOCiety Annual Guidebook; Geolo~y of Mackinac Island and Lower and Middle Devonian south of the Mackinac Island and Lower and Middle Devonian south of the straits of ~ackinact p. 39-56. ~ Carman, J. E., 1927, The Monroe division of rocks in Ohio: Jour. Geolo~, v. 35, p. 481-506.

, 1946, The ~eolo~ic interpretation of scenic ------f-e-a~t-ur--e-s in Ohio: The Ohio Jour. of Science, v. XLVI, No.5, p. 241-283.

, and others, 1962, Geolo~ of the Toledo area: ----~G~u~i~d~e-Tt-o 31th Annual Field Conf. of the section of Geolo~ of tne Ohio Academy of SCience, 14 p.

Cumin~s, E. R. and Shrock, R. R., 1928, Nia~aran coral reefs of Indiana and adjacent states and their strati~raphic relations: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Ge010~ists Bull., v. 39, p. 519-620.

Dana,J. D., 1863, Manual of ge010~: p. 246-251. Ehlers, G. M., Stumm, E. C., and Kesling, R. W., 1951, Devonian rocks of southeastern Michi~an and northwestern Ohio: Geol. Soc. American Guidebook for the Detroit meet1ng. Ehlers, G. M. and Kesling, R. V., 1962, Silurian rocks of the southern Lake Michir:(an area: Mich. Basin Geolollical Soc, Annual Field Conf.; J. H. Fisher, Chairman, p. 1-20. Floto, Bernard A., 1954, The possible presence of buried Niagaran reefs in/Ohio and their relationship to the Newburg oil and gas zone: Oil & Gas Developments in OhiO, Petroleum and Natural Gas Series #7, Report Inv. 124, 58 p.

Floyd, Jack, 1968, A peleoecolo~ical study of "Guelph" and Greenfield dolomites in part of northwestern Ohio: M.S. theSis, Bowlin~ Green Univ., in preparation. Friedman, Gerald M., and Sanders, John E., 1967~ Ori~1nand occurrence of dolostones: In: Carbonate Rocks! G. v. Chilln~ar, J. J. B1ssell, and R. W. Fa1rbrld~e (Editors), Chap. 6, Developments 1n Sed1mentolo~y 9A, ~lsevier Pub. Co.~ Amsterdam, p. 267-348. Green, D. A., 1957, Trenton structure in Ohio, Indiana, and northern Il11nois: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geolo~ists Bull., v. 41, p. 621-642.

Hall, James, 1839, Third annual report of the fourth ~eolo~ical district o~ the state of New York: New York Geol. Surv., Third Ann. Rept., p. 287-339.

____~~~, 1842, Notes upon the geolo~ of the Western States: Am. Jour. Scl., v. 42, p. 52, 57-62. , 1852, Descriptions ot the organic remains of ----~t~h-e--low-er middle division of the New York system: Paleontology ot New York, v. 2, p. 340-341.

Horvath, A. L. and others 1961, Silurian ~eolo~ of western Ohio: Guide to the 42ndl Annual Pie1d Conf. of the Section ot Oeolo~ of the Ohio Academy of SCience, 25 p. Irwin, M. L., 1965, Oeneral theory of epeiric clear water sedimentation: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologist Bull., v. 49, p. 445-459.

Kahle, Charles F., 1968a, Petrolo~y and structure of a Salina (Silurian) dolomitized algal stromatolite complex, northwestern Ohio: (abat.), Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geolo~i.ts Bull., v. 52, p. 534-535. , 1968b, Depositional and diagenetic fabrics -----a~n-a~t~e~x~t~u~r~e~s in Salina (Silurian) dolomites on the southern ed~e of the Mich1gan Basin and comparisons with poss1ble modern analo~: 1n preparation.

Kerr, S. Dugg Jr., and Thompson, Alan, 1963, Or1~ln of nodular and bedded anhydrIte in Permian shelf sediment, Texas and New Mexico: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geolo~ists Bull., v. 41, p. 1126-1732. Lane, A. C. and others, 1909, Nomenclature and subdivision ot the upper SiluriC strata or Mlchi~an, OhiO, and Western New York: (abst.),Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 19, p. 553-556.

Lowenstam, H. A., 1950, N1a~aran reefs of the Great Lakes areas: Jour. Geolo~, v. 58, p. 430-487.

Orton, Edward, 1871, The p;eolo~ of Hiv,hland County: Ohto Geolo~ical Survey, Report of Progress for 1810, p. 251-310. Patton~ J. Bo, 1961, Depositional and erosional evidence in Ind:tana t'or the age o'C thp Cincinnati arch i abi3t. ! : Geolop,;tcal Soc. Am., Special Paper 68, p. 24ij. Pinsak, A. P. and Shaver, R. H., 196'4, The Silurian Formations of Northern Indiana: Indiana Dept. Conservation, Geological Survey Bull. 32~ 87 p.

Prosser, C. S., 1903, The nomenclature of the Ohio ,,:eoloF!'i(!al formation: Jour. Geol., v. II, p. 5l9-5~6.

Roliff, W. A., 19~9, Salina-Guelph fields of southwestern Ontario: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geolo~lsts Bull., v. 33, p. 153-188. Rooney,L. F., 1966, Evidenoe of unconformity at top of Trenton 11mestone in IndIana and adjacent states. Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geolo~ists Bull., v. 50, p. 533-546. Schlanger, Seymour 0., 1964, Petrology of the Limestone . of Guam: U.S.G.S. Professional Paper 403-0,51 p., 21 pl. Sootford, David M., 1964, Cincinnati arch: mineralogica1- statistical evidence ot post Ordovician ori~in: Am. Assoc. ~etroleum Geologists Bull., v. 48, p. 427-436. Sherman, D. J., 1966, Origin of marine evaporites by diagenesis: Institution of Mining and ~etallur~y Transactions, London, Part B 75, po 208-215. Shinn, E. A., 1968, Practical significance of birdseye structures in carbonate rocks: Jour. Sedimentary Petro1o~, v. 38, p. 215-223. . Stout, W., 1941, Dolomites and Limestones of Western Ohio: Geolo~ical Survey of Ohio, Fourth Series, Bull. 42, 398 p. Summerson, C. H. and others, 1963. Stratigraphy of the Silurian rocks in western Ohio: Michi~an Basin Geol. Soc. Ann. Field Excursion, 71. p.

Textoris D. A. and Carozzi, A. V., 1966, Petro~raphy of a Cayup:an (Silurian) stromatolite mound and assoctated facies, Ohio: Jour. Sedimentary Petrolo~y, v. 50, p. 1315-1388.

Ulteig, John R., 19611, Upper Niagaran and Cayup:an stratip'raDlJ." of northwestern Ohio and adj al~ent areas: Rept. of' Inv., No. 51, Ohio Geological Survey, 48 p.

Wadswort, M. E., 1893, Report of the State ~eolo~ist5 fnr 1891 and 1892: Michigan Geolo~lcal Survey Rept. for 1891-92, p, 66, 40

Winchell, N.. H., 1873, Reports on the ~eolo~y of Sandusky, Seneca, Wyandot, and Marion counties: Ohio Geolop:ical Survey, v. 1, pt. 1, p. 591-645. Wolf, K. H., 1965, Littoral environment indicated by open­ space structures 1n algal l1mestones: Paleography, Pa1eoo1imatolo~, Paleoeoolo~, v. 1, p. 183-223.