DOCSLIB.ORG

Continental Drilling and the Study of Impact Craters and Processes – an ICDP Perspective

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Continental Drilling and the Study of Impact Craters and Processes – an ICDP Perspective Continental Drilling and the Study of Impact Craters and Processes – an ICDP Perspective 1 2 Christian Koeberl and Bernd Milkereit * 1Department of Geological Sciences, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, A-1090 Vienna, Austria e-mail: [email protected] (corresponding author) 2Department of Physics University of Toronto, 60 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A7, Canada *prepared with the help of the ICDP impact crater working group (see acknowledgments) Abstract Currently about 170 impact craters are known on Earth; about one third of those structures are not exposed on the surface and can only be studied by geophysics or drilling. The impact origin of geological structures can only be confirmed by petrographic and geochemical studies; thus, it is of crucial importance to obtain samples of subsurface structures. In addition, struc- tures that have surface exposures commonly require drilling and drill cores to obtain information of the subsurface structure, to provide ground-truth for geophysical studies, and to obtain samples of rock types not exposed at the surface. For many years, drilling of impact craters was rarely done in dedicated projects, mainly due to the high cost involved. Structures were most often drilled for reasons unrelated to their impact origin. In the for- mer Soviet Union a number of impact structures were drilled for scientific reasons, but in most of these cases the curation and proper care of the cores was not guaranteed. More recently the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP) has supported projects to study impact craters. The first ICDP- supported study of an impact structure was the drilling into the 200-km- diameter, K-T boundary age, subsurface Chicxulub impact crater, Mexico, which occurred between December 2001 and February 2002. The core re- trieved from the borehole Yaxcopoil-1, 60 km SSW from the center of the structure, reached a depth of 1511 m and intersected 100 m of impact melt 96 Christian Koeberl and Bernd Milkereit breccia and suevite, which has been studied by an international team. From June to October 2004, the 10.5 km Bosumtwi crater, Ghana, was drilled within the framework of an ICDP project, to obtain a complete 1 million year paleoenvironmental record in an area for which only limited data ex- ist, and to study the subsurface structure and crater fill of one of the best preserved large, young impact structures. From September to December 2005, the main part of another ICDP-funded drilling project was con- ducted, at the 85-km-diameter Chesapeake Bay impact structure, eastern USA, which involved drilling to a depth of 1.8 km. In 2008, it is likely that the El’gygytgyn structure (Arctic Russia) will be drilled as well. So far only few craters have been drilled – not enough to gain a broad under- standing of impact crater formation processes and consequences. In this chapter we summarize the current status of scientific drilling at impact craters, and provide some guidance and suggestions about future drilling projects that are relevant for impact research. Points we cover in- clude: what is the importance of studying impact craters and processes, why is it important to drill impact craters or impact crater lakes, which im- portant questions can be answered by drilling, which craters would be good targets and why; is there anything about the impact process, or of impact relevance, that can be learned by drilling outside any craters; what goals should be set for the future; how important is collaboration between different scientific fields? In the following report, we first briefly discuss the importance of impact cratering, then summarize experience from past drilling projects (ICDP and others), and finally we try to look into the fu- ture of scientific drilling of impact structures. 1 Introduction: Impact Processes Impact processes are among the fundamental mechanisms that have formed and shaped the Earth and our planetary system. Impacts and related developments have changed the Earth through geological time and have been key factors in the development of life on our planet. The recognition of interplanetary collisions and the formation of impact craters on planetary surfaces as a fundamental geological process has led to a new paradigm in terrestrial geology: The geological and biological evolution of Earth is not only influenced by internal or superficial geologi- cal processes, but also by external, highly energetic processes. Hyperve- locity impacts have produced, on a time scale of minutes, deep scars in the Earth’s crust and mantle, which can be up to several thousand kilometers wide. On Earth, we currently know 174 impact structures – see Fig. 1. For Impact Craters and Processes – An ICDP Perspective 97 a list of currently proven craters, including information and literature, and updates on crater discoveries, see the Canadian “Earth Impact Database” at: http://www.unb.ca/passc/ImpactDatabase/. Most of the very large and old craters, which are still present on the Moon, have been erased on Earth due to internal geological processes on Earth, such as volcanism, tectonics, and weathering – i.e., the result of the active geosphere, hydrosphere, and atmosphere of the Earth. There are certainly more craters on Earth than those known today, but the total number preserved on Earth will fall far short of the hundreds of thousands that would be expected from the lunar impact cratering rate. Unlike Earth, the unaltered ancient surface of the Moon has acted as a reliable recorder of impact processes in the inner solar system over the past 3 to 4 billion years. It is beyond any doubt that the study of impact craters on Earth is an absolute prerequisite for the understanding of some of the most fundamen- tal problems of Earth and planetary sciences, including: • variation of the morphology and structure of impact craters as a function of their size and of planetary gravity, • origin, constitution, and evolution of the Archean crust of the Earth, • origin and evolution of early primitive life, • discontinuities in the evolution of later complex life (i.e., Phanerozoic mass extinctions). A major topic of impact research is the effect on the global environment and possible relations to mass extinctions. At present, the Chicxulub im- pact structure, with a Cretaceous-Tertiary (KT) boundary age, is the only one for which a relationship to a major mass-extinction event has been es- tablished, at least with respect to the timing. To explore and demonstrate the potentially important role of meteorite impacts on biotic extinctions and subsequent evolution, it is important to find other examples of a mete- orite impact that is related to a mass extinction. In addition to this biological interest, the study of meteorite impact cra- ters also has an important economical aspect. Some of the Earth’s impor- tant mineral deposits (Ni-Cu-Pt mines, Sudbury Structure, Canada) and hydrocarbon reservoirs (the giant Cantarell oil field, Chicxulub structure, Mexico – the 8th largest oil field in the world) are closely associated with large impact events. 98 Christian Koeberl and Bernd Milkereit Fig. 1. Location map of meteorite impact crater (status 2006) with current and proposed ICDP projects (source: http://www.unb.ca/passc/ImpactDatabase/). 2 Impact Craters and Shock Metamorphism This section provides a short introduction to the importance and character- istics of impact structures (mostly following reviews by Koeberl 2001, 2002; Koeberl and Martinez-Ruiz 2003; as well as Koeberl and Reimold 2005). All bodies in the solar system - planets, moons, asteroids, etc. - that have solid surfaces are covered by craters. In contrast to many other plan- ets and moons in the solar system, the recognition of impact craters on the Earth is difficult, because active geological and atmospheric processes on our planet tend to obscure or erase the impact record in geologically short times. Impact craters can only be recognized from the study of their rocks – remote sensing and geophysical investigations can only provide initial hints at the possible presence of an impact crater. Petrographic studies of rocks at impact craters can lead to the confirmation of impact- characteristic shock metamorphic effects, and geochemical studies may yield information on the presence of meteoritic components in these rocks. Craters of any type and morphology are not an obvious and common land- form on Earth, due to erosion and sedimentation and other active geologi- cal processes. Considering that some impact events have demonstrably af- fected the geological and biological evolution on Earth (e.g., papers in Ryder et al. 1996; Koeberl and MacLeod 2002), and that even small im- Impact Craters and Processes – An ICDP Perspective 99 pacts can disrupt the biosphere and lead to local and regional devastation (e.g., Chapman and Morrison 1994), the understanding of impact struc- tures and the processes by which they form should be of interest not only to Earth scientists, but also to society in general. Fig. 2. Simple and complex craters a. the 1 km diameter Wolf Creek crater is an example of a simple crater and b. the 24 km diameter Gosses Bluff structure is an eroded complex crater. Both are in Australia. Cross sections are shown to illustrate the crater fill. In terms of morphology, an unaltered and uneroded feature is called an “impact crater”, whereas a more eroded or filled-in feature is called an “impact structure”. Impact craters occur on Earth in two distinctly different morphological forms. They are known as simple craters (small bowl- shaped craters) with diameters up to about 2 to 4 km, and complex craters, which have larger diameters (Fig. 2). Craters of both types have an outer rim and are filled by a mixture of fallback ejecta and material slumped in from the walls and crater rim during the early phases of crater formation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Show Your Parents
    Show your parents Saxby and William Pridmore Show your parents is a series of short chapters aimed at helping children (under 12 years) master a little general knowledge and science. Some of this material may need input from an adult – some words and ideas may be a bit difficult. But, the need for a bit of adult/parent input is not a bad thing – such interaction between the generations may be helpful to both. See what you think. It is a not-for-profit endeavour. Editorial Board Rachel & Amelia Allan, Eve Porter, Layla Tanner, Dempsey & Isaac O’Neil, and Julia & Claude Glaetzer Dedicated to Helen Stephen [pictured] [William’s pre-school teacher; many thanks to Sarah Stephen for the photograph] Contents 1. Start here… 2. Here, pussy, pussy… 3. Bones 4. Space opportunity 5. Rainbows 6. Where is New Zealand? 7. The narwhal 8. Kangaroos, what they do… 9. Planets and volcanos 10. Optical illusions 11. First and surprising 12. The marsupials 13. Tree rings and things 14. Flowers and honey 15. Evolution and waterfalls 16. Catalogue 17. Magnets and unrelated 18. Cakes first 19. Take a breath 20. Dolphins and 21. Getting around 22. Geography special 23. Speak up 24. Going around 25. Dragon’s blood 26. Larry 27. More atoms 28. Flags 29. Moscow 30. Some carbon 31. More carbon 32. Photosynthesis 33. Pisa 34. Toes and energy 35. Water and energy 36. Craters 37. Animals, mainly 38. Old rocks Show your parents Chapter 1. [‘Show your parents’ is a series of short chapters aimed at helping children (with input from their parents) learn some stuff.
    [Show full text]
  • Cross-References ASTEROID IMPACT Definition and Introduction History of Impact Cratering Studies
    18 ASTEROID IMPACT Tedesco, E. F., Noah, P. V., Noah, M., and Price, S. D., 2002. The identification and confirmation of impact structures on supplemental IRAS minor planet survey. The Astronomical Earth were developed: (a) crater morphology, (b) geo- 123 – Journal, , 1056 1085. physical anomalies, (c) evidence for shock metamor- Tholen, D. J., and Barucci, M. A., 1989. Asteroid taxonomy. In Binzel, R. P., Gehrels, T., and Matthews, M. S. (eds.), phism, and (d) the presence of meteorites or geochemical Asteroids II. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, pp. 298–315. evidence for traces of the meteoritic projectile – of which Yeomans, D., and Baalke, R., 2009. Near Earth Object Program. only (c) and (d) can provide confirming evidence. Remote Available from World Wide Web: http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/ sensing, including morphological observations, as well programs. as geophysical studies, cannot provide confirming evi- dence – which requires the study of actual rock samples. Cross-references Impacts influenced the geological and biological evolu- tion of our own planet; the best known example is the link Albedo between the 200-km-diameter Chicxulub impact structure Asteroid Impact Asteroid Impact Mitigation in Mexico and the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary. Under- Asteroid Impact Prediction standing impact structures, their formation processes, Torino Scale and their consequences should be of interest not only to Earth and planetary scientists, but also to society in general. ASTEROID IMPACT History of impact cratering studies In the geological sciences, it has only recently been recog- Christian Koeberl nized how important the process of impact cratering is on Natural History Museum, Vienna, Austria a planetary scale.
    [Show full text]
  • (Uth)He Age for the Shallowmarine Wetumpka Impact Structure
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OceanRep Meteoritics & Planetary Science 47, Nr 8, 1243–1255 (2012) doi: 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2012.01381.x An (U-Th)⁄He age for the shallow-marine Wetumpka impact structure, Alabama, USA Jo-Anne WARTHO1*, Matthijs C. van SOEST1, David T. KING, Jr.2, and Lucille W. PETRUNY2 1School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, PO Box 876004, Tempe, Arizona 85287, USA 2Geology Office, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama 36849, USA *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] (Received 12 January 2012; revision accepted 27 May 2012) Abstract–Single crystal (U-Th) ⁄ He dating was applied to 24 apatite and 23 zircon grains from the Wetumpka impact structure, Alabama, USA. This small approximately 5–7.6 km impact crater was formed in a shallow marine environment, with no known preserved impact melt, thus offering a challenge to common geochronological techniques. A mean (U-Th) ⁄ He apatite and zircon age of 84.4 ± 1.4 Ma (2r) was obtained, which is within error of the previously estimated Late Cretaceous impact age of approximately 83.5 Ma. In addition, helium diffusion modeling of apatite and zircon grains during fireball ⁄ contact, shock metamorphism, and hydrothermal events was undertaken, to show the influence of these individual thermal processes on resetting (U-Th) ⁄ He ages in the Wetumpka samples. This study has shown that the (U-Th) ⁄ He geochronological technique has real potential for dating impact structures, especially smaller and eroded impact structures that lack impact melt lithologies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Continental Scientific Drilling U.S
    THE FUTURE OF CONTINENTAL SCIENTIFIC DRILLING U.S. PERSPECTIVE Proceedings of a workshop | June 4-5, 2009 | Denver, Colorado DOSECC WORKSHOP PUBLICATION 1 Front Cover: Basalts and rhyolites of the Snake River Plain at Twin Falls, Idaho. Project Hotspot will explore the interaction of the Yellowstone hotspot with the continental crust by sampling the volcanic rocks underlying the plain. Two 1.5 km holes will penetrate both the surficial basalt and the underlying rhyolite caldera-fill and outflow depos- its. A separate drill hole will explore the paleoclimate record in Pliocene Lake Idaho in the western Snake River Plain. In addition to the understanding of continent-mantle interaction that develops and the paleoclimate data collected, the project will study water-rock interaction, gases emanating from the deeper curst, and the geomicro- biology of the rocks of the plain. Once scientific objectives and set, budgets are developed, and funding is granted, successful implementation of projects requires careful planning, professional on-site staff, appropriate equip- ment, effective logistics, and accurate accounting. Photo by Tony Walton The authors gratefully acknowledge support of the National Science Foundation (NSF EAR 0923056 to The University of Kansas) and DOSECC, Inc. of Salt Lake City, Utah. Anthony W. Walton, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas Kenneth G. Miller, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. Christian Koeberl, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria John Shervais, Utah State University, Logan, Utah Steve Colman, University of Minnesota, Duluth, Duluth, Minnesota edited by Cathy Evans. Stephen Hickman, US Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California covers and design by mitch favrow. Will Clyde, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire document layout by Pam Lerow and Paula Courtney.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin of the Circular K Anomalies at the Bosumtwi Impact Structure
    Large Meteorite Impacts VI 2019 (LPI Contrib. No. 2136) 5008.pdf THE ORIGIN OF THE CIRCULAR K ANOMALIES AT THE BOSUMTWI IMPACT STRUCTURE. C.A.B. Niang1,2,3, D. Baratoux3, D.P. Diallo1, R. Braucher4, P. Rochette4, C. Koeberl5, M.W. Jessell6, W.U. Reimold7, D. Boamah8, G. Faye9, M.S. Sapah10, O. Vanderhaeghe3, S. Bouley11. 1Département de Géologie, Université Cheikh Anta Diop, Dakar, Senegal, [email protected], 2Institut Fon- damental d’Afrique Noire Cheikh Anta Diop, Dakar, Senegal. 3Géosciences Environnement Toulouse, University of Toulouse, CNRS & IRD, 14, Avenue Edouard Belin, 31400, Toulouse, France. 4Centre Européen de Recherche et d’Enseignement des Géosciences et de l’Environnement, Aix-Marseille Université, CNRS, IRD, CEREGE UM34, Aix en Provence, France, 5Department of Lithospheric Research, University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria, and Natural History Museum 1010 Vienna, Austria. 6Centre for Exploration Targeting, The University of Western Aus- tralia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia. 7Institute of Geosciences, Laboratory of Geodynamics, Geochronology and Environmental Science, University of Brasília, Brasília, Brazil. 8Geological Survey Department, Accra, Ghana. 9Institut des Sciences de la Terre, Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar, Sénégal.10Department of Earth Science, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana. 11GEOPS - Géosciences Paris Sud, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, Rue du Belvédère, Bât. 504-509, 91405 Orsay, France Introduction: Radiometric data are commonly to weathering, erosional and transport processes. Sev- used for geological mapping in mineral exploration, eral samples were also taken at surface and combined particularly in tropical regions where outcrop condi- with samples from shallow boreholes used for cosmo- tions are poor.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Impact Structures Provide the Only Ground Truth Against Which Computational and Experimental Results Can Be Com­ Pared
    Ann. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 1987. 15:245-70 Copyright([;; /987 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved TERRESTRIAL IMI!ACT STRUCTURES ··- Richard A. F. Grieve Geophysics Division, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario KIA OY3, Canada INTRODUCTION Impact structures are the dominant landform on planets that have retained portions of their earliest crust. The present surface of the Earth, however, has comparatively few recognized impact structures. This is due to its relative youthfulness and the dynamic nature of the terrestrial geosphere, both of which serve to obscure and remove the impact record. Although not generally viewed as an important terrestrial (as opposed to planetary) geologic process, the role of impact in Earth evolution is now receiving mounting consideration. For example, large-scale impact events may hav~~ been responsible for such phenomena as the formation of the Earth's moon and certain mass extinctions in the biologic record. The importance of the terrestrial impact record is greater than the relatively small number of known structures would indicate. Impact is a highly transient, high-energy event. It is inherently difficult to study through experimentation because of the problem of scale. In addition, sophisticated finite-element code calculations of impact cratering are gen­ erally limited to relatively early-time phenomena as a result of high com­ putational costs. Terrestrial impact structures provide the only ground truth against which computational and experimental results can be com­ pared. These structures provide information on aspects of the third dimen­ sion, the pre- and postimpact distribution of target lithologies, and the nature of the lithologic and mineralogic changes produced by the passage of a shock wave.
    [Show full text]
  • La Ronge Lynn Lake Bridge Project: Geology of the Southern Reindeer Lake Area
    Saskatchewan Open File Report 2003-1 Industry and Resources Saskatchewan Geological Survey _ La Ronge Lynn Lake Bridge Project: Geology of the Southern Reindeer Lake Area Executive Summary (part of CD1) R.O. Maxeiner, C.T. Harper, D. Corrigan, and D.G. MacDougall 2004 Saskatchewan Open File Report 2003-1 Industry and Resources Saskatchewan Geological Survey La Ronge–Lynn Lake Bridge Project: Geology of the Southern Reindeer Lake Area Executive Summary (part of CD1) R.O. Maxeiner, C.T. Harper, D. Corrigan, and D.G. MacDougall 2004 19 48 Printed under the authority of the Minister of Industry and Resources Although the Department of Industry and Resources has exercised all reasonable care in the compilation, interpretation, and production of this report, it is not possible to ensure total accuracy, and all persons who rely on the information contained herein do so at their own risk. The Department of Industry and Resources and the Government of Saskatchewan do not accept liability for any errors, omissions or inaccuracies that may be included in, or derived from, this report. Cover: Garnet-anthophyllite alteration assemblage from the Numabin Bay area (Reindeer Lake). This report is available for viewing and additional copies are available for purchase at: Publications Office Saskatchewan Industry and Resources 2101 Scarth Street, 3rd floor Regina, SK SA4P 3V7 (306) 787-2528 or FAX (306) 787-2488 E-mail: [email protected] and the Resident Geologists’ offices in La Ronge and Creighton Parts of this publication may be quoted if credit is given. It is recommended that reference to this report be made as follows: Maxeiner, R.O., Harper, C.T., Corrigan, D., and MacDougall, D.G.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology, Petrography, Shock Petrography, and Geochemistry of Impactites and Target Rocks from the Kärdla Crater, Estonia
    Meteoritics & Planetary Science 39, Nr 3, 425–451 (2004) Abstract available online at http://meteoritics.org Geology, petrography, shock petrography, and geochemistry of impactites and target rocks from the Kärdla crater, Estonia V. PUURA,1* H. HUBER, 2† J. KIRS,1 A. KÄRKI,3 K. SUUROJA, 4 K. KIRSIMÄE, 1 J. KIVISILLA, 4 A. KLEESMENT, 5 M. KONSA,5 U. PREEDEN, 1 S. SUUROJA, 5 and C. KOEBERL 2 1Institute of Geology, University of Tartu, Vanemuise strasse 46, 51014 Tartu, Estonia 2Department of Geological Sciences, University of Vienna, Althanstrasse 14, A-1090 Vienna, Austria 3Institute of Geosciences, University of Oulu, Box 3000, FIN-90401 Oulu, Finland 4Geological Survey of Estonia, Kadaka tee 80/82, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia 5Institute of Geology, Tallinn Technical University, Estonia pst. 7, 10143 Tallinn, Estonia †Present address: Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California Los Angeles, 595 Charles Young Drive, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] (Received 20 December 2002; revision accepted 7 January 2004) Abstract–The Kärdla crater is a 4 km-wide impact structure of Late Ordovician age located on Hiiumaa Island, Estonia. The 455 Ma-old buried crater was formed in shallow seawater in Precambrian crystalline target rocks that were covered with sedimentary rocks. Basement and breccia samples from 13 drill cores were studied mineralogically, petrographically, and geochemically. Geochemical analyses of major and trace elements were performed on 90 samples from allochthonous breccias, sub-crater and surrounding basement rocks. The breccia units do not include any melt rocks or suevites. The remarkably poorly mixed sedimentary and crystalline rocks were deposited separately within the allochthonous breccia suites of the crater.
    [Show full text]
  • POSTER SESSION 5:30 P.M
    Monday, July 27, 1998 POSTER SESSION 5:30 p.m. Edmund Burke Theatre Concourse MARTIAN AND SNC METEORITES Head J. W. III Smith D. Zuber M. MOLA Science Team Mars: Assessing Evidence for an Ancient Northern Ocean with MOLA Data Varela M. E. Clocchiatti R. Kurat G. Massare D. Glass-bearing Inclusions in Chassigny Olivine: Heating Experiments Suggest Nonigneous Origin Boctor N. Z. Fei Y. Bertka C. M. Alexander C. M. O’D. Hauri E. Shock Metamorphic Features in Lithologies A, B, and C of Martian Meteorite Elephant Moraine 79001 Flynn G. J. Keller L. P. Jacobsen C. Wirick S. Carbon in Allan Hills 84001 Carbonate and Rims Terho M. Magnetic Properties and Paleointensity Studies of Two SNC Meteorites Britt D. T. Geological Results of the Mars Pathfinder Mission Wright I. P. Grady M. M. Pillinger C. T. Further Carbon-Isotopic Measurements of Carbonates in Allan Hills 84001 Burckle L. H. Delaney J. S. Microfossils in Chondritic Meteorites from Antarctica? Stay Tuned CHONDRULES Srinivasan G. Bischoff A. Magnesium-Aluminum Study of Hibonites Within a Chondrulelike Object from Sharps (H3) Mikouchi T. Fujita K. Miyamoto M. Preferred-oriented Olivines in a Porphyritic Olivine Chondrule from the Semarkona (LL3.0) Chondrite Tachibana S. Tsuchiyama A. Measurements of Evaporation Rates of Sulfur from Iron-Iron Sulfide Melt Maruyama S. Yurimoto H. Sueno S. Spinel-bearing Chondrules in the Allende Meteorite Semenenko V. P. Perron C. Girich A. L. Carbon-rich Fine-grained Clasts in the Krymka (LL3) Chondrite Bukovanská M. Nemec I. Šolc M. Study of Some Achondrites and Chondrites by Fourier Transform Infrared Microspectroscopy and Diffuse Reflectance Spectroscopy Semenenko V.
    [Show full text]
  • A PROTEROZOIC 40Ar/39Ar AGE for the SUVASVESI SOUTH STRUCTURE (FINLAND)
    72nd Annual Meteoritical Society Meeting (2009) 5076.pdf A PROTEROZOIC 40Ar/39Ar AGE FOR THE SUVASVESI SOUTH STRUCTURE (FINLAND). E. Buchner1, M. Schmieder1, W. H. Schwarz2, M. Trieloff2, J. Moilanen3, T. Öhman4 and H. Stehlik5. 1Institut für Planetologie, Universität Stuttgart, D-70174 Stuttgart, Germany. Email: [email protected]. 2Institut für Geowissenschaften, Universität Heidelberg, D-69120 Heidelberg. 3Pinkelikatu 6 B 48, FI-90520 Oulu, Finland. 4Department of Geosciences, FI-90014 University of Oulu, Finland. 5Hagedornweg 2/2/12, A-1220 Vienna, Austria Introduction: The Suvasvesi North (diameter ~3.5 km) and South (diameter ~4.0 km) structures [1-3] in Finland are thought to represent a double impact crater system, similar to the Clearwater lakes in Canada [4]. As no isotopic data have so far been available, only the age of the ~1.88 Ga Paleoproterozoic (and some ~2.7 Ga Archean) crystalline target rocks of the Baltic Shield [1] is cited as the maximum impact age. Paleomagnetic data suggested either a Permo-Triassic (~230-280 Ma) or a Neoproterozoic (770-790 Ma) age for the Suvasvesi North impact structure [4,5]. We here present the first 40Ar/39Ar age for the Suvasvesi South structure. Samples and analytical procedure: Clast-poor particles of impact melt rock (87.1 mg) recovered by one of the authors (J. M.) from the Mannamäki area were chosen for 40Ar/39Ar dat- ing at the University of Heidelberg [6,7]. Results and interpretation: 40Ar/39Ar step-heating analysis yielded no plateau within a perturbed, hump-shaped [8] age spectrum with younger apparent ages (~100-450 Ma) within the low-temperature (T) heating steps (~13% of 39Ar released), older apparent ages (~820 Ma) in the mid-T fractions (~47% of 39Ar), and intermediate apparent ages (~715-710) Ma in the four final high-T steps (~40% of 39Ar).
    [Show full text]
  • Raman Spectroscopy of Shocked Gypsum from a Meteorite Impact Crater
    International Journal of Astrobiology 16 (3): 286–292 (2017) doi:10.1017/S1473550416000367 © Cambridge University Press 2016 This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Raman spectroscopy of shocked gypsum from a meteorite impact crater Connor Brolly, John Parnell and Stephen Bowden Department of Geology & Petroleum Geology, University of Aberdeen, Meston Building, Aberdeen, UK e-mail: c.brolly@ abdn.ac.uk Abstract: Impact craters and associated hydrothermal systems are regarded as sites within which life could originate onEarth,and onMars.The Haughtonimpactcrater,one ofthemost well preservedcratersonEarth,is abundant in Ca-sulphates. Selenite, a transparent form of gypsum, has been colonized by viable cyanobacteria. Basementrocks, which havebeenshocked,aremoreabundantinendolithicorganisms,whencomparedwithun- shocked basement. We infer that selenitic and shocked gypsum are more suitable for microbial colonization and have enhanced habitability. This is analogous to many Martian craters, such as Gale Crater, which has sulphate deposits in a central layered mound, thought to be formed by post-impact hydrothermal springs. In preparation for the 2020 ExoMars mission, experiments were conducted to determine whether Raman spectroscopy can distinguish between gypsum with different degrees of habitability. Ca-sulphates were analysed using Raman spectroscopyand resultsshow nosignificant statistical difference between gypsumthat has experienced shock by meteorite impact and gypsum, which has been dissolved and re-precipitated as an evaporitic crust. Raman spectroscopy is able to distinguish between selenite and unaltered gypsum. This showsthat Raman spectroscopy can identify more habitable forms of gypsum, and demonstrates the current capabilities of Raman spectroscopy for the interpretation of gypsum habitability.
    [Show full text]
  • IODP Deep Biosphere Research Workshop Report – a Synthesis of Recent Investigations, and Discussion of New Research Questions and Drilling Targets
    Workshop White Papers Sci. Dril., 17, 61–66, 2014 www.sci-dril.net/17/61/2014/ doi:10.5194/sd-17-61-2014 Scientific Drilling © Author(s) 2014. CC Attribution 3.0 License. Open Access IODP Deep Biosphere Research Workshop report – a synthesis of recent investigations, and discussion of new research questions and drilling targets B. N. Orcutt1, D. E. LaRowe2, K. G. Lloyd3, H. Mills4, W. Orsi5, B. K. Reese6, J. Sauvage7, J. A. Huber8, and J. Amend2 1Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, East Boothbay, ME 04544, USA 2University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA 3University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA 4University of Houston–Clear Lake, Houston, TX 77058, USA 5Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA 6University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089, USA 7Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, Narragensett, RI 02882, USA 8Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA Correspondence to: B. N. Orcutt ([email protected]) Received: 5 November 2013 – Revised: 30 December 2013 – Accepted: 7 February 2014 – Published: 29 April 2014 Abstract. During the past decade, the IODP (International Ocean Discovery Program) has fostered a sig- nificant increase in deep biosphere investigations in the marine sedimentary and crustal environments, and scientists are well-poised to continue this momentum into the next phase of the IODP. The goals of this work- shop were to evaluate recent findings in a global context, synthesize available biogeochemical data to foster thermodynamic and metabolic activity modeling and measurements, identify regional targets for future tar- geted sampling and dedicated expeditions, foster collaborations, and highlight the accomplishments of deep biosphere research within IODP.
    [Show full text]