DOCSLIB.ORG

Triassic- Jurassic Stratigraphy Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Triassic- Jurassic Stratigraphy of the <JF C7 JL / Culpfeper and B arbour sville Basins, VirginiaC7 and Maryland/ ll.S. PAPER Triassic-Jurassic Stratigraphy of the Culpeper and Barboursville Basins, Virginia and Maryland By K.Y. LEE and AJ. FROELICH U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1472 A clarification of the Triassic--Jurassic stratigraphic sequences, sedimentation, and depositional environments UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1989 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, Jr., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Lee, K.Y. Triassic-Jurassic stratigraphy of the Culpeper and Barboursville basins, Virginia and Maryland. (U.S. Geological Survey professional paper ; 1472) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs. no. : I 19.16:1472 1. Geology, Stratigraphic Triassic. 2. Geology, Stratigraphic Jurassic. 3. Geology Culpeper Basin (Va. and Md.) 4. Geology Virginia Barboursville Basin. I. Froelich, A.J. (Albert Joseph), 1929- II. Title. III. Series. QE676.L44 1989 551.7'62'09755 87-600318 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section, U.S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract.......................................................................................................... 1 Stratigraphy Continued Introduction... ........................................................................................... 2 Newark Supergroup Continued Regional setting.. ................................................................................ 2 Culpeper Group Continued Previous investigations.......................................................................... 3 Mount Zion Church Basalt .................................................. 23 Scope, purpose, and method of study ................................................ 9 Midland Formation .................................................................... 24 Acknowledgments .................................................................................. 9 Hickory Grove Basalt ................................................................ 25 Stratigraphy................................................................................................ 10 Turkey Run Formation.............................................................. 26 Newark Supergroup ............................................................................ 10 Sander Basalt .......................................................................... 27 Culpeper Group ................................................................................ 10 Waterfall Formation .................................................................. 28 Manassas Sandstone.................................................................... 12 Millbrook Quarry Member .................................................. 29 Reston Member ...................................................................... 12 General discussion of the depositional model ........................ 30 Rapidan Member.................................................................... 13 Diabase............................................................. ................. ........ .. 31 Tuscarora Creek Member .................................................... 14 Distribution and mode of occurrence .............................................. 31 Poolesville Member................................................................ 15 Description of rock................................................................................ 31 Balls Bluff Siltstone.................................................................... 16 Geochemistry.......................................................................................... 32 Leesburg Member.................................................................. 19 Thermally metamorphosed rocks .......................................................... 32 Tibbstown Formation ................................................................ 20 Summary ............................. ....... ......... ..... .......... .. 34 Mountain Run Member ........................................................ 20 References cited .......................................................................................... 35 Haudricks Mountain Member ............................................ 21 Appendixes: Catharpin Creek Formation .................................................... 22 A: Measured sections ............................................................................ 38 Goose Creek Member ............................................................ 22 B: Drill and core hole descriptions and columns .......................... 44 ILLUSTRATIONS PLATE 1. Triassic-Jurassic stratigraphy of the Culpeper and Barboursville basins, Virginia and Maryland. ......................... .....In pocket A. Evolution of stratigraphic nomenclature in the Culpeper and Barboursville basins, 1928 to present B. Generalized correlation diagram of the Newark Supergroup in the Culpeper, Newark, and Hartford basins C. Bedrock map of the Culpeper and Barboursville basins D. Simplified stratigraphic correlation diagram summarizing age and lithology of the Culpeper Group in the Culpeper and Barboursville basins Page FIGURE 1. Map showing principal Triassic-Jurassic basins containing the Newark Supergroup strata exposed in Eastern North America...................................--.--..-.................--.........---.........--......-.........-.--......--........-.-.-.-------.--.-..----...--..-. 3 2. Sketch map of the age of strata, Culpeper Group, Culpeper basin, Virginia and Maryland, showing the location of diagnostic palynologic samples and palynofloral zones and paleontologic localities........................................... .............. 5 3. Sketch map of the Culpeper basin, Virginia and Maryland, showing the location of measured sections and selected drill holes -----.---------..................---------.--.........----........---......---.---..--......---.......--....---....--....---..----.-.----. 6 4-7. Photographs showing: 4. Outcrop of the Reston Member of the Manassas Sandstone in the northwestern part of the Independent Hill 7.5-min Quadrangle, town of Manassas........................ ................................... ...................... ... ... 13 5. Outcrop of the Poolesville Member of the Manassas Sandstone in the western part of the Independent Hill 7.5-min Quadrangle .................................................................................................... ..... ....... .. .. 15 6. Upper surface of the Poolesville Member of the Manassas Sandstone showing carbonate nodules and cement ---..-....................-.---.--..-...............---..........---.......--..........-...-....--.........--......--.....--..----.....---.-..--..-- 15 7. Outcrop of the Poolesville Member of the Manassas Sandstone exposed on the west bank of the Potomac River near the end of Virginia State Route 656, Loudoun County, Va............. ...... ..... .. ........ 16 ill IV CONTENTS Page FIGURES 8-14. Photographs showing: 8. Bedding plane exposure of ripple marks and mud cracks in the Balls Bluff Siltstone on a quarried slab at the Culpeper Crushed Stone quarry, Stevensburg, Culpeper County, Va. .......................................................... 17 9. Balls Bluff Siltstone exposed in north quarry face at the Culpeper Crushed Stone quarry near Stevensburg, Culpeper East 7.5-min Quadrangle ............................................................................................ 17 10. Bedding plane exposure of dinosaur tracks in mud-cracked Balls Bluff Siltstone at the Culpeper Crushed Stone quarry, Stevensburg, Culpeper County, Va................................................................................................... 18 11. Exposure of a limestone conglomerate in the Leesburg Member of the Balls Bluff Siltstone in a road cut of U.S. Route 15, north of Leesburg, Va......................................................................................................................... 19 12. Outcrop of indurated greenstone conglomerate of the Mountain Run Member of the Tibbstown Formation exposed at the west end of Chandler Street, Culpeper, Va......................................................................... 21 13. Outcrop of interbedded sandstone and siltstone of the Catharpin Creek Formation in the east-central part of the Thoroughfare Gap 7.5-min Quadrangle................................................................................................ 22 14. Mount Zion Church Basalt exposed on the north cuts of the Southern Railroad about 50 m northwest of the intersection with U.S. Route 15, in the east-central part of the Thoroughfare Gap 7.5-min Quadrangle........................................................................................................................................................................... 23 15. Photomicrograph of the Mount Zion Church Basalt from an exposure in Virginia State Route 600 east of Bull Run ........................................................................................................................................................^ 24 16,17. Photographs showing: 16. Exposure of the Hickory Grove Basalt on the south bank of Broad Run
Recommended publications
  • Montgomery Township N.R.I. Appendix – Nitrate Dilution

    Montgomery Township N.R.I. Appendix – Nitrate Dilution

    Nitrate Dilution Modeling of Montgomery Township, Somerset County, NJ Prepared for: Montgomery Township Environmental Commission Somerset County, NJ 2261 Route 206 Belle Mead, NJ 08502 Prepared by: The GIS Center Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association 31 Titus Mill Road Pennington, NJ 08534 April 8, 2004 Introduction Nitrate from natural sources generally only occurs in ground water at low levels but anthropogenic sources can lead to elevated concentrations. Sources include fertilizers, animal waste, and sewage effluent. Nitrate is considered a contaminant in ground water because of various impacts to human health and aquatic ecology. For instance, high levels of nitrate intake in infants can lead to methemoglobinemia, or blue baby syndrome (Hem, 1985; U.S. EPA, 1991). Because of its low natural occurrence and solubility and stability in groundwater, nitrate can also serve as an indicator for possible bacterial, viral, or chemical contaminants of anthropogenic origin. Nitrogen is present in septic system effluent and is converted to nitrate through biological processes active in the soil below the drain field. Once this nitrification process is complete, nitrate is a stable and mobile compound in ground water under normal conditions (Hoffman and Canace, 2001). Nitrate concentrations resulting from septic effluent are mitigated by dilution if the septic effluent is combined over time with water entering the ground through infiltration during and after storm events. The extent of this dilution effect is clearly dependent on long-term rates of both infiltration and nitrate loading from septic system sources. The density of septic systems relative to infiltration rates in a particular area is therefore a critical factor controlling the ultimate nitrate level in ground water.
  • Post-Carboniferous Stratigraphy, Northeastern Alaska by R

    Post-Carboniferous Stratigraphy, Northeastern Alaska by R

    Post-Carboniferous Stratigraphy, Northeastern Alaska By R. L. DETTERMAN, H. N. REISER, W. P. BROSGE,and]. T. DUTRO,JR. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 886 Sedirnentary rocks of Permian to Quaternary age are named, described, and correlated with standard stratigraphic sequences UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 1975 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Detterman, Robert L. Post-Carboniferous stratigraphy, northeastern Alaska. (Geological Survey Professional Paper 886) Bibliography: p. 45-46. Supt. of Docs. No.: I 19.16:886 1. Geology-Alaska. I. Detterman, Robert L. II. Series: United States. Geological Survey. Professional Paper 886. QE84.N74P67 551.7'6'09798 74-28084 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Stock Number 024-001-02687-2 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract __ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ 1 Stratigraphy__:_Continued Introduction __________ ----------____ ----------------____ __ 1 Kingak Shale ---------------------------------------- 18 Purpose and scope ----------------------~------------- 1 Ignek Formation (abandoned) -------------------------- 20 Geographic setting ------------------------------------ 1 Okpikruak Formation (geographically restricted) ________ 21 Previous work and acknowledgments ------------------ 1 Kongakut Formation ----------------------------------
  • Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of Northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania

    Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of Northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania

    HYDROGEOLOGY AND GROUND-WATER QUALITY OF NORTHERN BUCKS COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA by Ronald A. Sloto and Curtis L Schreftier ' U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4109 Prepared in cooperation with NEW HOPE BOROUGH AND BRIDGETON, BUCKINGHAM, NOCKAMIXON, PLUMSTEAD, SOLEBURY, SPRINGFIELD, TINICUM, AND WRIGHTSTOWN TOWNSHIPS Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 1994 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information Copies of this report may be write to: purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center District Chief Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Box 25286, MS 517 840 Market Street Denver Federal Center Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-1586 Denver, Colorado 80225 CONTENTS Page Abstract....................................................................................1 Introduction ................................................................................2 Purpose and scope ..................................................................... 2 Location and physiography ............................................................. 2 Climate...............................................................................3 Well-numbering system................................................................. 4 Borehole geophysical logging............................................................4 Previous investigations ................................................................. 6 Acknowledgments....................................................................
  • Lancaster County Geology

    Lancaster County Geology

    LancasterLancaster CountyCounty GeologyGeology gfgh µ OverOver TopographicTopographic ReliefRelief Om Miles Í897 0 10 hg Lebanon County Adamstown ¦¨§76 ! Berks County Oha ! Oo Denver ab322 Ephrata Csc Í501 ! Í72 TRh 272 TRn Oco Lititz Í ! Akron Elizabethtown Manheim ! Dauphin County! ! TRhc Cr TRs c Os Rn ! T Terre Hill TRg Trd 322 772 ab 10 Í 222 625 Í ab Í897 Í Í283 Ohm Í230 Oan Í241 East New Holland Oe 722 Petersburg Í Cbs ! Mount Joy ! ! Czc Cch Í23 Cm gga fl R 743 T Í Csb gg pg ggd Í441 Ck Cl 772 72 Í 23 Í ! Í Ca Marietta Ch Lancaster Mountville ! 340 ! Í Columbia 30 ! ! ba Í462 Í462 ab30 Í999 Millersville Ccc Strasburg ! ! Cv Í741 Í741 Í272 41 Í County Chester 896 222 Í gn Christiana ba mg ! oct Cah Í372 S u sq u e h a n n a R iv e r Y o rk C o u n ty gqm LEGEND COUNTY BOUNDARIES Í324 Source: Lancaster County GIS, Copyright (c) 2019 MAJOR ROADS This map to be used for reference or illustrative purposes only. This map FAULT is not a legally recorded plan, survey, or engineering schematic Quarryville and it is not intended to be used as such. For complete disclaimer see: RIVERS AND STREAMS ! http://www.co.lancaster.pa.us/gisdisclaimer DIKE wc ORDOVICIAN Í472 Oan, ANNVILLE FORMATION LIMESTONE TRIASSIC 372 Oco, COCALICO FORMATION DARK GRAY SHALE TRfl, LIMESTONE FANGLOMERATE Í TRg, GETTYSBURG FORMATION SHALE-SANDSTONE Oe, EPLER FORMATION LIMESTONE TRh, HAMMER CREEK FORMATION SANDSTONE-SHALE Oha, ANNVILLE, HERSHEY, AND MYERSTOWN FORMATION TRhc, HAMMER CREEK QUARTZ-CONGLOMERATE Ohm, HERSHEY AND MYERSTOWN FORMATION LIMESTONE 272 TRn, NEW
  • Hydrogeology of the Chinle Wash Watershed, Navajo Nation Arizona, Utah and New Mexico

    Hydrogeology of the Chinle Wash Watershed, Navajo Nation Arizona, Utah and New Mexico

    Hydrogeology of the Chinle Wash Watershed, Navajo Nation Arizona, Utah and New Mexico Item Type Thesis-Reproduction (electronic); text Authors Roessel, Raymond J. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 07/10/2021 19:50:22 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/191379 HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE CHINLE WASH WATERSHED, NAVAJO NATION, ARIZONA, UTAH AND NEW MEXICO by Raymond J. Roessel A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN HYDROLOGY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1994 2 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.
  • The Geologic Time Scale Is the Eon

    The Geologic Time Scale Is the Eon

    Exploring Geologic Time Poster Illustrated Teacher's Guide #35-1145 Paper #35-1146 Laminated Background Geologic Time Scale Basics The history of the Earth covers a vast expanse of time, so scientists divide it into smaller sections that are associ- ated with particular events that have occurred in the past.The approximate time range of each time span is shown on the poster.The largest time span of the geologic time scale is the eon. It is an indefinitely long period of time that contains at least two eras. Geologic time is divided into two eons.The more ancient eon is called the Precambrian, and the more recent is the Phanerozoic. Each eon is subdivided into smaller spans called eras.The Precambrian eon is divided from most ancient into the Hadean era, Archean era, and Proterozoic era. See Figure 1. Precambrian Eon Proterozoic Era 2500 - 550 million years ago Archaean Era 3800 - 2500 million years ago Hadean Era 4600 - 3800 million years ago Figure 1. Eras of the Precambrian Eon Single-celled and simple multicelled organisms first developed during the Precambrian eon. There are many fos- sils from this time because the sea-dwelling creatures were trapped in sediments and preserved. The Phanerozoic eon is subdivided into three eras – the Paleozoic era, Mesozoic era, and Cenozoic era. An era is often divided into several smaller time spans called periods. For example, the Paleozoic era is divided into the Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Carboniferous,and Permian periods. Paleozoic Era Permian Period 300 - 250 million years ago Carboniferous Period 350 - 300 million years ago Devonian Period 400 - 350 million years ago Silurian Period 450 - 400 million years ago Ordovician Period 500 - 450 million years ago Cambrian Period 550 - 500 million years ago Figure 2.
  • Perennial Lakes As an Environmental Control on Theropod Movement in the Jurassic of the Hartford Basin

    Perennial Lakes As an Environmental Control on Theropod Movement in the Jurassic of the Hartford Basin

    geosciences Article Perennial Lakes as an Environmental Control on Theropod Movement in the Jurassic of the Hartford Basin Patrick R. Getty 1,*, Christopher Aucoin 2, Nathaniel Fox 3, Aaron Judge 4, Laurel Hardy 5 and Andrew M. Bush 1,6 1 Center for Integrative Geosciences, University of Connecticut, 354 Mansfield Road, U-1045, Storrs, CT 06269, USA 2 Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, 500 Geology Physics Building, P.O. Box 210013, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA; [email protected] 3 Environmental Systems Graduate Group, University of California, 5200 North Lake Road, Merced, CA 95340, USA; [email protected] 4 14 Carleton Street, South Hadley, MA 01075, USA; [email protected] 5 1476 Poquonock Avenue, Windsor, CT 06095, USA; [email protected] 6 Department of Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, 75 North Eagleville Road, U-3403, Storrs, CT 06269, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-413-348-6288 Academic Editors: Neil Donald Lewis Clark and Jesús Martínez Frías Received: 2 February 2017; Accepted: 14 March 2017; Published: 18 March 2017 Abstract: Eubrontes giganteus is a common ichnospecies of large dinosaur track in the Early Jurassic rocks of the Hartford and Deerfield basins in Connecticut and Massachusetts, USA. It has been proposed that the trackmaker was gregarious based on parallel trackways at a site in Massachusetts known as Dinosaur Footprint Reservation (DFR). The gregariousness hypothesis is not without its problems, however, since parallelism can be caused by barriers that direct animal travel. We tested the gregariousness hypothesis by examining the orientations of trackways at five sites representing permanent and ephemeral lacustrine environments.
  • North American Coral Recovery After the End-Triassic Mass Extinction, New York Canyon, Nevada, USA

    North American Coral Recovery After the End-Triassic Mass Extinction, New York Canyon, Nevada, USA

    North American coral recovery after the end-Triassic mass extinction, New York Canyon, Nevada, USA Montana S. Hodges* and George D. Stanley Jr., University of INTRODUCTION Montana Paleontology Center, 32 Campus Drive, Missoula, Mass extinction events punctuate the evolution of marine envi- Montana 59812, USA ronments, and recovery biotas paved the way for major biotic changes. Understanding the responses of marine organisms in the ABSTRACT post-extinction recovery phase is paramount to gaining insight A Triassic-Jurassic (T/J) mass extinction boundary is well repre- into the dynamics of these changes, many of which brought sented stratigraphically in west-central Nevada, USA, near New sweeping biotic reorganizations. One of the five biggest mass York Canyon, where the Gabbs and Sunrise Formations contain a extinctions was that of the end-Triassic, which was quickly continuous depositional section from the Luning Embayment. followed by phases of recovery in the Early Jurassic. The earliest The well-exposed marine sediments at the T/J section have been Jurassic witnessed the loss of conodonts, severe reductions in extensively studied and reveal a sedimentological and paleonto- ammonoids, and reductions in brachiopods, bivalves, gastropods, logical record of intense environmental change and biotic turn- and foraminifers. Reef ecosystems nearly collapsed with a reduc- over, which has been compared globally. Unlike the former Tethys tion in deposition of CaCO3. Extensive volcanism in the Central region, Early Jurassic scleractinian corals surviving the end- Atlantic Magmatic Province and release of gas hydrates and other Triassic mass extinction are not well-represented in the Americas. greenhouse gases escalated CO2 and led to ocean acidification of Here we illustrate corals of Early Sinemurian age from Nevada the end-Triassic (Hautmann et al., 2008).
  • Gettysburg National Military Park & Eisenhower National Historic Site

    Gettysburg National Military Park & Eisenhower National Historic Site

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Gettysburg National Military Park & Eisenhower National Historic Site Geologic Resources Inventory Report Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/GRD/NRR—2009/083 THIS PAGE: North Carolina State Monument (NPS Photo) ON THE COVER: Gettysburg NMP, looking toward Cemetery Ridge Cover photo by Bill Dowling, courtesy of the Gettysburg Foundation Gettysburg National Military Park and Eisenhower National Historic Site Geologic Resources Inventory Report Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/GRD/NRR—2009/083 Geologic Resources Division Natural Resource Program Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, Colorado 80225 March 2009 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Denver, Colorado The Natural Resource Publication series addresses natural resource topics that are of interest and applicability to a broad readership in the National Park Service and to others in the management of natural resources, including the scientific community, the public, and the NPS conservation and environmental constituencies. Manuscripts are peer-reviewed to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and is designed and published in a professional manner. Natural Resource Reports are the designated medium for disseminating high priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. Examples of the diverse array of reports published in this series include vital signs monitoring plans; "how to" resource management papers; proceedings of resource management workshops or conferences; annual reports of resource programs or divisions of the Natural Resource Program Center; resource action plans; fact sheets; and regularly-published newsletters.
  • A Comparison of the Dinosaur Communities from the Middle

    A Comparison of the Dinosaur Communities from the Middle

    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 31 July 2018 doi:10.20944/preprints201807.0610.v1 Peer-reviewed version available at Geosciences 2018, 8, 327; doi:10.3390/geosciences8090327 1 Review 2 A comparison of the dinosaur communities from 3 the Middle Jurassic of the Cleveland (Yorkshire) 4 and Hebrides (Skye) basins, based on their ichnites 5 6 Mike Romano 1*, Neil D. L. Clark 2 and Stephen L. Brusatte 3 7 1 Independent Researcher, 14 Green Lane, Dronfield, Sheffield S18 2LZ, England, United Kingdom; 8 [email protected] 9 2 Curator of Palaeontology, The Hunterian, University of Glasgow, University Avenue, Glasgow 10 G12 8QQ, Scotland, United Kingdom; [email protected] 11 3 Chancellor's Fellow in Vertebrate Palaeontology, School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, 12 Grant Institute, The King's Buildings, James Hutton Road, Edinburgh EH9 3FE, Scotland, United Kingdom; 13 [email protected] 14 * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: 01246 417330 15 16 Abstract: 17 Despite the Hebrides and Cleveland basins being geographically close, research has not 18 previously been carried out to determine faunal similarities and assess the possibility of links 19 between the dinosaur populations. The palaeogeography of both areas during the Middle Jurassic 20 shows that there were no elevated landmasses being eroded to produce conglomeratic material in 21 the basins at that time. The low-lying landscape and connected shorelines may have provided 22 connectivity between the two dinosaur populations. 23 The dinosaur fauna of the Hebrides and Cleveland basins has been assessed based primarily 24 on the abundant ichnites found in both areas as well as their skeletal remains.
  • A Dinosaur Track from New Jersey at the State Museum in Trenton

    A Dinosaur Track from New Jersey at the State Museum in Trenton

    New Jersey Geological and Water Survey Information Circular What's in a Rock? A Dinosaur Track from New Jersey at the State Museum in Trenton Introduction a large dinosaur track (fig. 2) on the bottom. Most of the rock is sedimentary, sandstone from the 15,000-foot-thick Passaic A large, red rock in front of the New Jersey State Museum Formation. The bottom part is igneous, lava from the 525-foot- (NJSM) in Trenton (fig. 1) is more than just a rock. It has a thick Orange Mountain Basalt, which overspread the Passaic fascinating geological history. This three-ton slab, was excavated Formation. (The overspreading lava was originally at the top of from a construction site in Woodland Park, Passaic County. It the rock, but the rock is displayed upside down to showcase the was brought to Trenton in 2010 and placed upside down to show dinosaur footprint). The rock is about 200 million years old, from the Triassic footprints Period of geologic time. It formed in a rift valley, the Newark Passaic Formation Basin, when Africa, positioned adjacent to the mid-Atlantic states, began to pull eastward and North America began to pull westward contact to open the Atlantic Ocean. The pulling and stretching caused faults to move and the rift valley to subside along border faults including the Ramapo Fault of northeastern New Jersey, about 8 miles west of Woodland Park. Sediments from erosion of higher Collection site Orange Mountain Basalt top N Figure 1. Rock at the New Jersey State Museum. Photo by W. Kuehne Adhesion ripples DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS 0 1 2 mi Orange Mountain Basalt L 32 cm Jo (Lower Jurassic) 0 1 2 km W 25.4 cm contour interval 20 feet ^p Passaic Formation (Upper Triassic) Figure 3.
  • Geology and Coal Resources of Atarque Lake Quadrangle, Cibola

    Geology and Coal Resources of Atarque Lake Quadrangle, Cibola

    GEOLOGY AND COAL RESOURCESOF THE ATARQUE LAKEQUADRANGLE, CIBOLA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO NEW MEXICO BUREAU OF MINES AND MINERALRESOURCES OPEN-FILEREPORT 167 bY ORIN J. ANDERSON June, 1982 (revised,1983) Contents: (1) Discussion of Geology and CoalResources (attached) (2) Geologic map with cross sesction (accompanying) Table of Contents GEOLOGY General P. Study Area P. Structure P. Stratigraphy P. COAL RESOURCES p. 22 REFERENCES p. 23 Figures 1 - Measured section of Zuni and Dakota SS. p. 11 2 - Measured section of Atarque and Moreno Hill Fms. p. 18 GEOLOGY General The Atarque Lake quadrangle lies in the southwestern part of the Zuni Basin, a broad,shallow structural element that extends southwestward from the Zuni Mountains of New Mexico into east- central Arizona. As such it liesnear the southeastern margin ofthe Colorado Plateau. The regionaldip in the study area is very gently northeastward toward the Gallup Sag which comprises thenortheastern part of the Basin. There are, however, broad, gentle NW-SE trending folds which result in local southwestward dips, and at least twoabrupt monoclinal flexures, up on the northeastside, (opposed to regional dip) that clearly define the NW-SE structural grain of the area, as well as minor faulting. These structural trends parallel the axis of the Zuni Uplift, but perhaps more importantly they appear to represent the southeastward extension of the structural axes that wrap aroundthe southern end of the Defiance Uplift, as shown by Davis andKiven (1975), and theyalso align very well with the northwest-trendingdike system in the Fence Lake (the Dyke quadrangle),Techado, Adams Diggings,and Pietown areas. Of the three structural features mentioned - broadfolds, monoclines and faulting - monoclinesare the most pronounced and significantnot only locally, but in a much broadercontext.