Dinosaurian Faunas of the Cedar Mountain Formation and LA-ICP- MS Detrital Zircon Ages for Three Stratigraphic Sections
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2009-11-23 Dinosaurian Faunas of the Cedar Mountain Formation and LA-ICP- MS Detrital Zircon Ages for Three Stratigraphic Sections Hirotsugu Mori Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Geology Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Mori, Hirotsugu, "Dinosaurian Faunas of the Cedar Mountain Formation and LA-ICP-MS Detrital Zircon Ages for Three Stratigraphic Sections" (2009). Theses and Dissertations. 2000. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/2000 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Dinosaurian faunas of the Cedar Mountain Formation with detrital zircon ages for three stratigraphic sections and The relationship between the degree of abrasion and U-Pb LA-ICP-MS ages of detrital zircons Hirotsugu Mori A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Brooks B. Britt Thomas H. Morris Ritter M. Scott Department of Geological Sciences Brigham Young University December 2009 Copyright © 2009 Hirotsugu Mori All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Dinosaurian faunas of the Cedar Mountain Formation with detrital zircon ages for three stratigraphic sections and The relationship between the degree of abrasion and U-Pb LA-ICP-MS ages of detrital zircons Hirotsugu Mori Department of Geological Sciences Master of Science The Cedar Mountain Formation contains the most diverse record of Early Cretaceous dinosaurs in the western hemisphere. However, analyses of its faunas have been hindered because 1) most taxa are based on incomplete/fragmentary materials or incomplete descriptions, 2) most sites and some horizons preserve few taxa, and 3) the stratigraphy and geochronology are poorly understood. To help resolve these stratigraphic and correlation problems U-Pb LA-ICP-MS detrital zircon ages were obtained at significant sites and horizons. These dates indicate all sites at or near the base of the formation are no older than 122 to 124 Ma, thus all basal stratigraphic packages are time equivalent. Detrital zircons coarsely bracket the temporal span of the Ruby Ranch Member between about 115 Ma to 111 Ma while the base of the Mussentuchit Member is dated between 108 to 104 Ma and the top of the member is Cenomanian in age. Multivariate analyses utilizing Simpson and Raup-Crick similarity index and pair-group moving algorithms reveal that formation’s faunas fall into two groups. These groups are compared statistically with European, Asian, and Morrison faunas. Results indicate (1) that there is no close relationship between the Yellow Cat fauna and the Morrison Formation fauna and (2) corroborate long-standing hypotheses that the Yellow Cat fauna has European ties and the Mussentuchit fauna has Asian ties. Detrital zircon LA-ICP-MS U-Pb ages were used in this study to approximate the time of deposition of strata because volcanic ashes are rarely preserved in the formation. The ability to select the youngest crystals in a sample prior to applying analytical methods could substantially reduce the number of crystals and cost required to obtain these dates. To this end, the hypothesis that the most pristine, unabraded crystals should be younger than abraded crystals was tested by imaging detrital zircons via SEM, ranking the crystals by the degree of abrasion, and determining their ages. Results of this study partly corroborate the hypothesis in that there is a correlation between the degree of abrasion and ages – obviously abraded crystals are most likely the oldest while pristine to slightly abraded crystals are usually the youngest in a given sample. Keywords: [Cedar Mountain Formation, dinosaur, fauna, detrital zircon, LA-ICP-MS] ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not be completed without helps of following people. I sincerely thank all of them. Dr. Brooks B. Britt gave me precious advice as my academic advisor. Dr. Morris and Dr. Ritter supported my thesis as my committee. Dr. Scheetz advised me in many aspects of the thesis, especially about classification of ornithopods. Dr. Gehrels and Dr.Valencia at the University of Arizona’s Laserchron Center allowed me to analyze the ages of detrital zircons, and gave me advice regarding the interpretation of the data, which is a crucial part of my thesis. The Laserchron Center is supported by NSF grants EAR 0443387 and 0732436. Dr. Cifelli, Dr.Tayler, Dr. Carpenter and John Bird gave me important information regarding fossils of the Cedar Mountain Formation. Dr. Suarez, Dr. Dong, and Dr. Ruiz assisted with the ages of formations in Europe and Asia. Dr. Carrano and other staff of paleobiology database allowed me to access their wonderful database. Without this, statistical comparison of dinosaur taxa would have been impossible. Drs. Farrer and Dorais helped me with preparing and taking SEM images of detrital zircons. Garrett Schwanke, L.J. Krumenacker, and Evan Staples provided valuable assistance measuring sections in the field. Also, the Department of Geological Sciences and the BYU Museum of Paleontology provided me with financial support for my research. Again, I appreciate all these people. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: DINOSAURIAN FAUNAS OF THE CEDAR MOUNTAIN FORMATION WITH DETRITAL ZIRCON AGES FOR THREE STRATIGRAPHIC SECTIONS ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................3 Purpose.....................................................................................................................................................4 STRATIGRAPHY AND GEOCHRONOLOGY ..............................................................................................5 Background ..............................................................................................................................................5 Methods....................................................................................................................................................7 Results ....................................................................................................................................................11 Discussion ..............................................................................................................................................26 FAUNAS OF THE CEDAR MOUNTAIN FORMATION.............................................................................32 Background ............................................................................................................................................32 Methods..................................................................................................................................................34 Result and Discussion ............................................................................................................................37 RELATION TO THE GLOBAL FAUNAL DISTRIBUTION AND THE MORRISON FORMATION....... 40 Background ............................................................................................................................................40 Methods..................................................................................................................................................41 Result and Discussion ............................................................................................................................46 CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................................................................................53 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................55 APPENDIX 1..................................................................................................................................................67 Yellow Cat Member Quarries.................................................................................................................67 Poison Strip Sandstone Quarries............................................................................................................69 Ruby Ranch Member Quarries...............................................................................................................70 Mussentuchit Member Quarries .............................................................................................................71 iv APPENDIX 2..................................................................................................................................................74 List of Tables Table 1 ............................................................................................................................................................35 Table 2 ............................................................................................................................................................42 Table 3 ............................................................................................................................................................43