Sedimentary Provenance of the Wedington Member, Fayetteville Shale, from Age Relations of Detrital Zircons William Tyson Cains University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2013 Sedimentary Provenance of the Wedington Member, Fayetteville Shale, From Age Relations of Detrital Zircons William Tyson Cains University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Geology Commons, Other Earth Sciences Commons, Sedimentology Commons, and the Stratigraphy Commons Recommended Citation Cains, William Tyson, "Sedimentary Provenance of the Wedington Member, Fayetteville Shale, From Age Relations of Detrital Zircons" (2013). Theses and Dissertations. 992. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/992 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Sedimentary Provenance of the Wedington Member, Fayetteville Shale, From Age Relations of Detrital Zircons Sedimentary Provenance of the Wedington Member, Fayetteville Shale, From Age Relations of Detrital Zircons A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology by William Cains University of Arkansas Bachelor of Science in Geology, 2012 December 2013 University of Arkansas This Thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. Dr. Walter L. Manger Thesis Director Dr. Xiangyang Xie Committee Member Dr. Doy Zachry Committee Member ABSTRACT U-Pb geochronology of detrital zircons collected from the Chesterian Wedington Sandstone allows interpretation of sediment provenance and dispersal patterns in the southern midcontinent during the Late Mississippian. Detrital zircons analyzed from six samples of Wedington Sandstone yielded a final result of 565 concordant analyses used for interpretation. Results are plotted as Probability-Density Plots to interpret the spectrum of ages. Significant peaks occurred at 350-500 Ma, 950-1250 Ma, 1300-1500 Ma, 1600-1800 Ma, 1800-2300 Ma, and >2500 Ma. These peaks are interpreted as sourced by crystalline rocks within the Laurentian craton from Taconic-Acadian, Grenville, Midcontinent Granite-Rhyolite, Yavapai-Mazatzal, Paleoproterozoic, and Superior Provinces. The high percentage of grains derived from Acadian, Taconic, and Grenville Provinces indicate the Appalachian Mountains were the primary source of sediment during the Chesterian. The Midcontinent Granite-Rhyolite and Yavapai-Mazatzal Provinces were the second most prevalent source terranes, indicating the Nemaha Ridge was uplifted and supplying a significant amount of sediment by the Late Mississippian. Sediments were likely transported from both eastern and western sources into a drainage basin moving sediments south into northwest Arkansas, where they were deposited on the Arkoma shelf as a small constructive delta complex. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my parents, Bill and Mary Jane Cains, for putting me through school, and especially my dad, for inciting my interest in geology. I’d like to thank my sisters, Caroline, Amanda and especially Julie, for her artistic contributions. Special thanks for Dr. Walter Manger, whose invaluable advice led to my decision to enter the Graduate Program at the University of Arkansas, and also for taking over as Committee Chair halfway through the thesis. Special thanks for Dr. Cheyenne Xie for offering me the project as part of his ongoing research, and serving as Chair for much of the thesis process. I would also like to thank Dr. Doy Zachry for his critiques and for always being available to discuss ideas. Thanks to Department of Geosciences and Ralph Davis, for offering the opportunity to achieve and education in something I hold so dear (Rocks!). Special thanks to all those whose work came before mine and served as stepping stones to getting the project completed: C. McNully, T. Cochran, Chuck Price, Daniel Allen, Walter Manger, Doy Zachry, George Gehrels, William Dickinson, and many more that contributed to North American Geology over the past century. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 A. Purpose and Scope ...................................................................................................... 4 B. Study Area .................................................................................................................... 4 C. Methods ........................................................................................................................ 4 Sampling Method ......................................................................................................... 4 Procedure ..................................................................................................................... 6 U-Pb Detrital Zircon Geochronology ......................................................................... .7 Stratigraphy ............................................................................................................... .11 D. Geologic Setting. ........................................................................................................ 15 E. Previous Investigations. .............................................................................................. 17 II. Southern Midcontinent Depositional Dynamics. ....................................................... 20 III. Detrital Zircon Analysis ............................................................................................. 26 A. WD-1 .......................................................................................................................... 26 B. WD-2 .......................................................................................................................... 28 C. WD-3 .......................................................................................................................... 29 D. WD-5. ......................................................................................................................... 29 E. WD-6 .......................................................................................................................... 31 F. WD-8 .......................................................................................................................... 31 IV. Potential Provenance Terranes .................................................................................. 34 A. Archean ...................................................................................................................... 34 B. Paleoproterozoic. ........................................................................................................ 35 C. Yavapai – Mazatzal Provinces ................................................................................... 35 D. Midcontinent Granite-Rhyolite Province. .................................................................. 36 E. Grenville Province ...................................................................................................... 37 F. Iapetan Synrift ........................................................................................................... 37 G. Acadian – Taconic Orogenic Terranes. ...................................................................... 38 V. Provenance Discussion .............................................................................................. 40 A. Archean Paleoproterozoic Provenance ...................................................................... 44 B. Midcontinent and Yavapai – Mazatzal Provenance. .................................................. 47 C. Appalachian Provenance .............................................................................................. 49 Future Study ...................................................................................................................... 52 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 54 References. ........................................................................................................................ 55 Appendix ........................................................................................................................... 59 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Generalized Stratigraphic Column for Chesterian of northern Arkansas ......... 3 Figure 2 – Lithofacies map with sample locations ............................................................ 5 Figure 3 – Cathodoluminescence image of mounted zircons ........................................... 8 Figure 4 – Probability density plot for Sample WD-8. ...................................................... 9 Figure 5 – Concordia diagram for Sample WD-8 ............................................................ 10 Figure 6 – Type log for the Wedington Sandstone .......................................................... 12 Figure 7 – Isopach map of the Wedington Sandstone ..................................................... 13 Figure 8 – Depositional Model for the Wedington Delta ..................................................... .14 Figure 9 – Geologic Provinces of Arkansas.................................................................... .15 Figure 10 – Contact of Wedington Sandstone and Lower Fayetteville. ......................... 19 Figure 11 – Early to Middle Mississippian Sed-Tectonic