Trace Fossils of the Brassfield Formation, Lower Silurian, in South-Central Ohio and North Central Kentucky
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 12-1975 Trace Fossils of the Brassfield ormation,F Lower Silurian, in South- Central Ohio and North Central Kentucky Eugene J. Murray Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the Geology Commons Recommended Citation Murray, Eugene J., "Trace Fossils of the Brassfield ormation,F Lower Silurian, in South-Central Ohio and North Central Kentucky" (1975). Master's Theses. 2449. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/2449 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TRACE FOSSILS OF THE BRASSFIELD FORMATION, LOWER SILURIAN, IN SOUTH-CENTRAL OHIO AND NORTH- CENTRAL KENTUCKY by Eugene J. Murray A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Science Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan December 1975 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. William B. Harrison III for first introducing him to the topic and for valuable assistance both in the field and in research. My appreciation also goes to Dr. Stewart Monroe and Dr. W. Thomas Straw for their critical evaluation of the manuscript. Modern traces cited were observed during the summer of 197^ at Scituate, Massachusetts with the help of Dr. David Nellis, Boston State College. Lastly, I would like to thank Raymond Perez for assistance in typing the original manuscript. Eugene J. Murray ii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor. Michigan 48106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. MASTERS THESIS M-7945 MURRAY, Eugene J. TRACE FOSSILS OF THE BRASSFIELD FORMATION, LOWER SILURIAN, IN SOUTH- CENTRAL OHIO AND NORTH-CENTRAL KENTUCKY. Western Michigan University, M.S., 1975 Geology Xerox University Microfilms,Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................. ii INTRODUCTION .......................................... 1 Historical Development ........................ 1 Classification of Trace Fossils .................... 4 Ethological classification ............ 6 Preservational classification ................... 6 Trace Fossils as a Paleoecological Tool ........... 10 Value of neoichnology ...................... 10 Paleoecological value of trace fossils .......... 16 Relationship of the Brassfield Formation with the Regional Silurian Stratigraphy ....... 18 Brassfield Lithology and Characteristics ..... 23 PALE0EC0L0GIC INTERPRETATION ......................... 28 Environmental Conditions ........................... 28 Brassfield Paleocommunity Re-examined in Light of the Trace Fossils ............................... 30 Alterations of the Sedimentary Record .............. 33 SUMMARY ............................................... 3^ SYSTEMATIC PALEONTOLOGY .............................. 37 Domichnia ........................................... 37 Ichnogenus Skolithos Haldemann, 1840 ......... 37 Ichnospecies Skolithos delicatalus James, 1881 . 39 Ichnospecies Skolithos verticalis Hall, 1843 ... 41 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. iv Page Ichnogenus Diplocraterion Torell, 18?0 .......... 43 Ichnospecies Diplocraterion biclavatum Miller. 1875 ................................... 45 Fodinichnia ......................................... 48 Ichnogenus Chondrites Sternberg, I883 ........... 48 Chondrites Type A .............................. 53 Chondrites Type B ............................... 54 Chondrites Type C .............................. 54 New Ichnogenus Conclavichnus ..................... 55 New Ichnospecies Conclavichnus nerensis ....... 55 New Ichnogenus Radichnus ...................... 57 New Ichnospecies Radichnus unionensis ....., .., . 57 Ichnogenus Rusophycus Hall, I852 ............ 58 Ichnospecies Rusophycus? cryptolithi Osgood, 1970 ............ 61 Ichnospecies Rusophycus? clavatum Hall, 1852 ... 62 Repichnia ........................................... 64 Ichnogenus? Cruziana d'Orbigny, 1842 ............ 64 Ichnogenus Planolites Nicholson, 1873 ........... 65 Flanolites Type A ................. T........... 67 Planolites Type B .............................. 68 Ichnogenus Palaeophycus Hall, 1847 ............... 68 Ichnospecies Palaeophycus striatum Hall, I852 .. 71 Palaeophycus Type A ............................ 72 Palaeophycus Type B ............................ 73 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. V Page New Ichnogenus Sipuncuichnus ..................... 76 New Ichnospecies Sipuncuichnus verticalis ..... 76 Ichnogenus Imbrichnus Hallam, 1970 ............... 77 New Ichnospecies Imbrichnus repichensis ....... 78 Borings ..... ......................... 80 Ichnogenus Vermiforichnus Cameron, 19&9 ......... 80 Inorganic Traces ................................... 84- Dystactophycus Miller and Dyer, 1878 ............ 84 Load Casts............ ................ 86 Drag Marks ....................................... 86 References Cited ................................ 88 Plates ....................................... 93 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. The preservational classification as suggested by Seilacher .......... 8 Figure 2. Cleavage relief. The imprint of an arthropod's appendage is preserved in the lower laminae of a section of sediment while not being preserved in the upper layers ................................. 9 Figure 3 . Effects of sediment on the production of traces as displayed by a sea gull's footprints ................................ 12 Figure 4-. The fine detail of the gastropod trail produced by Littorina littorea as preserved in a cohesive sediment ......... 12 Figure 5 . The fine detail on the gastropod trail of Littorina littorae as destroyed by the flowage of muddy sediment ......... 14- Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. vi Page Figure 6. Current direction, as shown by the agglutinated tube of Polydora ciliata, is from the top to the bottom of the photograph................................ 14 Figure ?. The feeding trace of a sea gull .......... 15 Figure 8. Correlation chart relating the Brassfield Formation with other rock units in the mid-continent region ........... 20 Figure 9. Map showing the major faunal units of the Lower Silurian........................... 22 Figure 10. Map showing the regional distribution of Silurian rock around the Cincinnati arch. Also included are the sample localities for the study .............. 26 Figure 11. Belfast member of the Brassfield Formation........ 2? Figure 12. Interbedded shales, limestones, and dolomites which are characteristic of the Brassfield Formation .... ............ 27 Figure 13. Burrowing activity of the recent genus Sipunculus ............ 35 Figure 14. Pseudo-cross-bedding produced by Imbrichnus repichensis................................ 36 Figure 15* Relationship between the two ichnogenera Diplocraterion and