Diagenesis of Cenozoic Limestones on Enewetak Atoll (Dolomite, Neomorphism, Radiaxial)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1984 Diagenesis of Cenozoic Limestones on Enewetak Atoll (Dolomite, Neomorphism, Radiaxial). Arthur Henry Saller Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Saller, Arthur Henry, "Diagenesis of Cenozoic Limestones on Enewetak Atoll (Dolomite, Neomorphism, Radiaxial)." (1984). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3969. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3969 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations 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 through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 8425884 Sailer, Arthur Henry DIAGENESIS OF CENOZOIC LIMESTONES ON ENEWETAK ATOLL The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical Col. Ph.D. 1984 University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V . 1. Glossy photographs or pages x / 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print ______ 3. Photographs with dark background __$zf 4. Illustrations are poor co p y _______ 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy _______ 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page _______ 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages 8. Print exceeds margin requirements ______ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine _______ 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print ______ 11. P a g e(s) _____________ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. P age(s) _____________ seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages n u mbered ____________ . Text fol lows. 14. Curling and wrinkled p a g es _______ 15. Other ____________________________________________________________ ________________ University Microfilms International DIAGENESIS OF CENOZOIC LIMESTONES ON ENEWETAK ATOLL A dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosopy in The Department of Geology by Arthur Henry Sailer B.S. Geology, University of Kansas, 1977 M.S. Geology, Stanford University, 1980 May, 1984 © 1984 ARTHUR HENRY SALLER All Rights Reserved ACKN OW LEDGEMENTS Many people have helped with, and supported this study. Clyde Moore served as my major professor and provided much needed support, discussions and criticism s. I thank Jeffrey Hanor for serving as my minor professor and for many valuable lectures and discussions related to geochemistry. I am also grateful to Dag Nummedal, Paul Aharon, Barun Sen Gupta, and Harry Roberts for serving on my thesis committee. T.R. Waller, Warren Blow, and J.I. Tracey helped in obtaining samples from the U.S. National Museum of Natural History. R.N. Ginsburg kindly lent samples from two Bahamian wells. W.C. Ward lent samples from Pleistocene wells in eastern Yucatan. D.A. Budd, P.W. Choquette, and the Marathon Research Laboratory provided stable carbon and oxygen analyses to verify data from Coastal Science Laboratories (Austin, Texas). Many thanks to Paul Pushkar (Wright State University) for performing strontium ion separations, and to E.A. Hetherington (Mobil Research and Development Corp., Dallas, Texas) for strontium mass spectrometry on Enewetak dolomites. The 87Sr/86Sr data which Dr. Puskar and Dr. Hetherington provided were an extremely valuable addition to this study. During the course of this study, I benefited greatly from discussions with Lynton Land, A.C. Kendall, D.E. Eby, R.B. Koepnick, D.A. Budd, and P. Aharon. Special thanks i i to J.A.D. Dickson fo r ideas and discu ssio n s which gave much insight into carbonate petrology and initiated this p ro je c t. I g re a tly appreciate the many hours which Alan Steuber spent teaching me aspects of analytical and isotope geochemistry. Many members of the L.S.U. Geology Department have helped in this study, and have made our stay in Baton Rouge pleasurable. I am especially grateful for the help and friendship of Ivan Gill, Michael Stamatedes, Ellen Tye, Marshall Vinet, Steve Moshier, Mary Jo Klosterman, Lewis N ichols, Mary Lee Eggart, Ahad Chowdhury, Wanda LeBlanc, Sara Stewart, Scott Wilkinson, Marlene Moore, Danny Peace, Barbara Delaville, Brian Carter, and Terry O'Hearn. Finally, I gratefully acknowledge the help of Julia Sailer, my wife, who (1) typed this dissertation and all preliminary drafts (including this acknowledgement), (2) drafted many of the figures, (3) aided in editing, (4) supplied dinner during late night microprobe vigils, and (5) tried her best to keep smiling throughout this study. Financial support for this project was provided primarily by an L.S.U. Minerals and Mining In stitu te Fellowship and the Applied Carbonate Research Program (also at L.S.U.). Significant support was also supplied by an ARCO Graduate Fellowship, a Mesa Petroleum Scholarship, and the L.S.U. Department of Geology. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................ii LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................x LIST OF FIGURES....................................................................................................xi ABSTRACT X V i INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1 Previous studies on Enewetak .............................................................3 Physical setting of Enewetak .............................................................4 Hydrology ....................................................................................................10 Methods ............................................................................................. 12 Stratigraphy ................................................................................. 19 Depositional facies of Quaternary strata ....................21 Depositional facies of Lower Miocene and Upper Eocene s tra ta ....................................................................29 GENERAL DIAGENETIC PATTERNS.........................................................................36 Holocene .......................................................................................................36 Pleistocene .....................* ........................................................................43 Lower Miocene: F-l w ell ......................................................................43 Upper Eocene: F-l w ell ........................................................................46 E-l w ell........................................................................................................48 Discussion of general diagenetic patterns .............................51 CEMENTS.....................................................................................................................53 Petrography ................................................................................................53 iv