DOCSLIB.ORG

Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2019-07-01 Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin Joshua Kerst Meibos Brigham Young University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Meibos, Joshua Kerst, "Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin" (2019). Theses and Dissertations. 7583. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/7583 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]. Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin Joshua Kerst Meibos A thesis submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Scott M. Ritter, Chair Brooks B. Britt Sam Hudson Department of Geological Sciences Brigham Young University Copyright © 2019 Joshua Kerst Meibos All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Sequence Biostratigraphy of Carboniferous-Permian Boundary Strata in Western Utah: Deciphering Eustatic and Tectonic Controls on Sedimentation in the Antler-Sonoma Distal Foreland Basin Joshua Kerst Meibos Department of Geological Sciences, BYU Master of Science The stratal architecture of the upper Ely Limestone and Mormon Gap Formation (Pennsylvanian-early Permian) in western Utah reflects the interaction of icehouse sea-level change and tectonic activity in the distal Antler-Sonoma foreland basin. Eighteen physically and biostratigraphically corelated stratigraphic sections provide a database for tracing Permo- Carboniferous boundary strata over a north-south distance of 60 km. These formations comprise 14 unconformity-bounded depositional sequence: three in the upper Ely (UE1-UE3) and 11 in the Mormon Gap Formation (MG1-MG11). Conodont and fusulinid faunas provide precise biostratigraphic information for a number of parasequences in the upper Ely and Mormon Gap formations. This paleontological information clarifies the tectonostratigraphic evolution of the distal foreland basin (study area) and permits correlation with events in the proximal foreland (Nevada) and with depositional sequences in the North American midcontinent. The stratigraphic succession is divided into three depositional intervals (I-III) with distinctive differences in constituent facies and facies stacking patterns, the regional continuity of cycles, the relative abundance of dolomite and limestone, calculated sediment accumulation rates, and the frequency and inferred duration of sequence-bounding hiatuses. These reflect the interaction of high- frequency sea-level change on an intermittently subsiding distal foreland basin. Subsidence is generally continuous during the Bashkirian through middle Moscovian (Interval I) and again during the Artinskian (Interval II). During the late Moscovian through Sakmarian stages (Interval III), subsidence rates dropped and sedimentation occurred mainly in consequence of second- order sea-level rise associated with the highstand of the Lower Absaroka II seas. Strata in the distal foreland are bounded by low-relief disconformities of variable duration in stark contrast to the angular unconformities and intensely deformed tectonostratigraphic domains that characterize the proximal foreland basin in north-central Nevada. Keywords: Mormon Gap, conodont, fusulinid, Pennsylvanian, Permian, Western Utah, Ely TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE .............................................................................................................................. i ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................... iii LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................... vi LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1 METHODOLOGY......................................................................................................................2 LITHOSTRATIGRAPHY ...........................................................................................................3 SEQUENCE FRAMEWORK .....................................................................................................4 LITHOFACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS .....................................................5 Heterozoan Association ...........................................................................................................7 Skeletal wackestone to packstone.........................................................................................7 Mudstone to sparse wackestone............................................................................................7 Photozoan Association ............................................................................................................8 Skeletal wackestone to packstone ........................................................................................8 Biohermal packstone to grainstone.......................................................................................8 Coated-grain grainstone...................................................................................................... 10 Peloidal packstone to grainstone......................................................................................... 10 Silty laminated mudstone.................................................................................................... 10 iii Lowstand Microfacies Association ........................................................................................ 11 Autobrecciated skeletal-peloidal packstone......................................................................... 11 Calcareous siltstone to fine-grained sandstone..................................................................... 12 SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 12 Sequence UE-1 ...................................................................................................................... 13 Sequence UE-2 ...................................................................................................................... 13 Sequence UE-3 ...................................................................................................................... 14 Sequence MGl ....................................................................................................................... 15 Sequences MG2, MG3, and MG4 .......................................................................................... 15 Sequences MG5 Through MG 8 ............................................................................................ 16 Sequence MG 9 ..................................................................................................................... 17 Sequence MG10 .................................................................................................................... 17 Sequence MG11 .................................................................................................................... 18 CONODONT AND FUSULINID CHARACTERIZATION OF DEPOSITIONAL SEQUENCES ................................................................................................................................................. 19 Sequence UE-1 ...................................................................................................................... 19 Sequence UE2 ....................................................................................................................... 21 Sequence UE3 ....................................................................................................................... 21 Sequence MG1 ...................................................................................................................... 22 Sequence MG2 Through MG4 ............................................................................................... 23 iv Sequences MG5 Through MG8 ............................................................................................. 24 Sequence MG9 and MG10 .................................................................................................... 24 Sequence MG11 .................................................................................................................... 25 DECIPHERING CONTROLS ON DEPOSITION AND FACIES PATTERNS......................... 25 Interval I: Bashkirian Through Moscovian Strata ....................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geologic Time Scale Cards
    PreCambrian SuperEon (4.6 BYA – 541 MYA) Hadean Eon (4.6 BYA - 4 BYA) Slide # 1 46 feet Earth Forms • Earth is formed from a mass of dust and gas that gravity pulled together. • The process causes a huge amount of radioactive decay and Earth is a boiling ball of lava. • At 4.5 BYA a protoplanet named Theia collides with Earth and a debris ring forms which later becomes our moon. • Earth cools and forms the layers – core, mantel, and outer crust. • Meteors bombard earth bringing frozen droplets of water that later become our oceans. • Volcanic activity continues and Earth’s earliest continental crust forms before 4.03 BYA. The Acasta gneiss is one of the oldest rocks on Earth dating 4.03 billion years.. PreCambrian SuperEon (4.6 BYA – 541 MYA) Archaean Eon (4 BYA – 2.5 BYA) Slide # 2 40 feet Primitive, Simple Life Forms • Earth’s crust cools and plate tectonics forms. • Ancient rock formations form from 4 to 2.5 BYA. • The Primordial soup theory suggests early minerals and compounds from meteors made the perfect recipe for primitive, simple life to form at the thermal vents of the ocean. • Single cell life formed the ocean and over time stromatolites, photosynthesizing colonial bacteria, formed in shallow water and released oxygen. • The oxygen attached to trace iron in the oceans and formed sedimentary layers of banded iron formations (BIFS) that are presently mined for iron ore. Banded iron formations from the late Archaean and early Proterozoic eons Stromatolite fossil image PreCambrian SuperEon (4.6 BYA – 541 MYA) Proterozoic Eon (2.5 BYA – 541 MYA) Slide # 3 25 feet Early life • Photosynthesizing life further establishes and releases oxygen throughout the ocean.
    [Show full text]
  • CONODONT BIOSTRATIGRAPHY and ... -.: Palaeontologia Polonica
    CONODONT BIOSTRATIGRAPHY AND PALEOECOLOGY OF THE PERTH LIMESTONE MEMBER, STAUNTON FORMATION (PENNSYLVANIAN) OF THE ILLINOIS BASIN, U.S.A. CARl B. REXROAD. lEWIS M. BROWN. JOE DEVERA. and REBECCA J. SUMAN Rexroad , c.. Brown . L.. Devera, 1.. and Suman, R. 1998. Conodont biostrati graph y and paleoec ology of the Perth Limestone Member. Staunt on Form ation (Pennsy lvanian) of the Illinois Basin. U.S.A. Ill: H. Szaniawski (ed .), Proceedings of the Sixth European Conodont Symposium (ECOS VI). - Palaeont ologia Polonica, 58 . 247-259. Th e Perth Limestone Member of the Staunton Formation in the southeastern part of the Illinois Basin co nsists ofargill aceous limestone s that are in a facies relati on ship with shales and sandstones that commonly are ca lcareous and fossiliferous. Th e Perth conodo nts are do minated by Idiognathodus incurvus. Hindeodus minutus and Neognathodu s bothrops eac h comprises slightly less than 10% of the fauna. Th e other spec ies are minor consti­ tuents. The Perth is ass igned to the Neog nathodus bothrops- N. bassleri Sub zon e of the N. bothrops Zo ne. but we were unable to co nfirm its assignment to earliest Desmoin esian as oppose d to latest Atokan. Co nodo nt biofacies associations of the Perth refle ct a shallow near- shore marine environment of generally low to moderate energy. but locali zed areas are more variable. particul ar ly in regard to salinity. K e y w o r d s : Co nodo nta. biozonation. paleoecology. Desmoinesian , Penn sylvanian. Illinois Basin. U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • 03-Alekseev and Goreva (Neognathodus).P65
    Lucas, S.G., et al. eds., 2013, The Carboniferous-Permian Transition. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, Bulletin 60. 1 THE CONODONT NEOGNATHODUS BOTHROPS MERRILL, 1972 AS THE MARKER FOR THE LOWER BOUNDARY OF THE MOSCOVIAN STAGE (MIDDLE PENNSYLVANIAN) ALEXANDER S. ALEKSEEV1 AND NATALIA V. GOREVA 2 1 Department of Paleontology, Geological Faculty, Moscow State University, Russia, email: aaleks@geol. msu.ru; 2 Geological institute of Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia, email: [email protected] Abstract—The Moscovian Stage constitutes the Middle Pennsylvanian Series of the Carboniferous System, but a biostratigraphic marker and GSSP for it have not yet been designated. The exact position of the Moscovian boundary cannot be defined properly because in the type area the basal Vereian unconformably overlies the Mississippian limestone or the alluvial and lagoonal Aza Formation of the uppermost Bashkirian. The Task Group to establish a GSSP close to the existing Bashkirian-Moscovian boundary suggested several potential markers among foraminifers and conodonts, but the search for a marker near traditional base of the global Moscovian Stage has stalled. It may be more productive to search for FADs in the lower Moscovian, above the traditional base, to designate the lower boundary of the stage. Relatively rich Vereian and Kashirian conodont assemblages have been recovered from the southwest Moscow Basin, as well as from the Oka-Tsna Swell. The most complete information on the distribution of conodonts in the Vereian- Kashirian boundary interval was obtained from the Yambirno section (Oka-Tsna Swell). The greatest change in conodont assemblages does not occur near the level of the traditional base of the Moscovian, but stratigraphically higher.
    [Show full text]
  • PERMIAN BASIN PROVINCE (044) by Mahlon M
    PERMIAN BASIN PROVINCE (044) By Mahlon M. Ball INTRODUCTION The Permian Basin is one of the largest structural basins in North America. It encompasses a surface area in excess of 86,000 sq mi and includes all or parts of 52 counties located in West Texas and southeast New Mexico. Structurally, the Permian Basin is bounded on the south by the Marathon-Ouachita Fold Belt, on the west by the Diablo Platform and Pedernal Uplift, on the north by the Matador Arch, and on the east by the Eastern Shelf of the Permian (Midland) Basin and west flank of the Bend Arch. The basin is about 260 mi by 300 mi in area and is separated into eastern and western halves by a north-south trending Central Basin Platform. In cross section, the basin is an asymmetrical feature; the western half contains a thicker and more structurally deformed sequence of sedimentary rock. The Permian Basin has been characterized as a large structural depression formed as a result of downwarp in the Precambrian basement surface located at the southern margin of the North American craton. The basin was filled with Paleozoic and, to a much lesser extent, younger sediments. It acquired its present structural form by Early Permian time. The overall basin is divisible into several distinct structural and tectonic elements. They are the Central Basin Platform and the Ozona Arch, which separate the Delaware and Val Verde Basins on the south and west from the Midland Basin on the north and east, the Northwestern Shelf on the southern extremity of the Pedernal Uplift and Matador Arch, and the Eastern Shelf on the western periphery of the Bend Arch.
    [Show full text]
  • Subcommission on Permian Stratigraphy International
    Number 30 June 1997 A NEWSLETTER OF THE SUBCOMMISSION ON PERMIAN STRATIGRAPHY SUBCOMMISSION ON PERMIAN STRATIGRAPHY INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON STRATIGRAPHY INTERNATIONAL UNION OF GEOLOGICAL SCIENCES (IUGS) Table of Contents Notes from the SPS Secretary...................................................................................................................-1- Claude Spinosa Note from the SPS Chairman....................................................................................................................-2- Bruce R. Wardlaw Proposed new chronostratigraphic units for the Upper Permian ..............................................................-3- Amos Salvador Comments on Subdivisions of the Permian and a Standard World Scale ................................................-4- Neil W. Archbold and J. Mac Dickins Permian chronostratigraphic subdivisions ................................................................................................-5- Jin Yugan, Bruce R. Wardlaw, Brian F. Glenister and Galina V. Kotlyar The Permian Time-scale ...........................................................................................................................-6- J. B. Waterhouse Sequence Stratigraphy along Aidaralash Creek and the Carboniferous/Permian GSSP ..........................-8- Walter S. Snyder and Dora M. Gallegos Upper Paleozoic Fusulinacean Biostratigraphy of the Southern Urals ...................................................-11- Vladimir I. Davydov, Walter S. Snyder and Claude Spinosa Cordaitalean
    [Show full text]
  • The Stratigraphic Architecture and Evolution of the Burdigalian Carbonate—Siliciclastic Sedimentary Systems of the Mut Basin, Turkey
    The stratigraphic architecture and evolution of the Burdigalian carbonate—siliciclastic sedimentary systems of the Mut Basin, Turkey P. Bassanta,*, F.S.P. Van Buchema, A. Strasserb,N.Gfru¨rc aInstitut Franc¸ais du Pe´trole, Rueil-Malmaison, France bUniversity of Fribourg, Switzerland cIstanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey Received 17 February 2003; received in revised form 18 November 2003; accepted 21 January 2004 Abstract This study describes the coeval development of the depositional environments in three areas across the Mut Basin (Southern Turkey) throughout the Late Burdigalian (early Miocene). Antecedent topography and rapid high-amplitude sea-level change are the main controlling factors on stratigraphic architecture and sediment type. Stratigraphic evidence is observed for two high- amplitude (100–150 m) sea-level cycles in the Late Burdigalian to Langhian. These cycles are interpreted to be eustatic in nature and driven by the long-term 400-Ka orbital eccentricity-cycle-changing ice volumes in the nascent Antarctic icecap. We propose that the Mut Basin is an exemplary case study area for guiding lithostratigraphic predictions in early Miocene shallow- marine carbonate and mixed environments elsewhere in the world. The Late Burdigalian in the Mut Basin was a time of relative tectonic quiescence, during which a complex relict basin topography was flooded by a rapid marine transgression. This area was chosen for study because it presents extraordinary large- scale 3D outcrops and a large diversity of depositional environments throughout the basin. Three study transects were constructed by combining stratal geometries and facies observations into a high-resolution sequence stratigraphic framework. 3346 m of section were logged, 400 thin sections were studied, and 145 biostratigraphic samples were analysed for nannoplankton dates (Bassant, P., 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvanian Boundary Unconformity in Marine Carbonate Successions
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dissertations & Theses in Earth and Atmospheric Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Department of Sciences Summer 6-2014 ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE MISSISSIPPIAN – PENNSYLVANIAN BOUNDARY UNCONFORMITY IN MARINE CARBONATE SUCCESSIONS WITH A CASE STUDY OF THE KARST DEVELOPMENT ATOP THE MADISON FORMATION IN THE BIGHORN BASIN, WYOMING. Lucien Nana Yobo University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/geoscidiss Part of the Geochemistry Commons, Geology Commons, Sedimentology Commons, and the Stratigraphy Commons Nana Yobo, Lucien, "ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE MISSISSIPPIAN – PENNSYLVANIAN BOUNDARY UNCONFORMITY IN MARINE CARBONATE SUCCESSIONS WITH A CASE STUDY OF THE KARST DEVELOPMENT ATOP THE MADISON FORMATION IN THE BIGHORN BASIN, WYOMING." (2014). Dissertations & Theses in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences. 59. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/geoscidiss/59 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations & Theses in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. ORIGIN AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE MISSISSIPPIAN – PENNSYLVANIAN BOUNDARY UNCONFORMITY IN MARINE CARBONATE SUCCESSIONS WITH A CASE STUDY OF THE KARST DEVELOPMENT ATOP THE MADISON FORMATION IN THE BIGHORN BASIN, WYOMING. By Luscalors Lucien Nana Yobo A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Major: Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Under the Supervision of Professor Tracy D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parallels Between the End-Permian Mass Extinction And
    Drawing Connections: The Parallels Between the End-Permian Mass Extinction and Current Climate Change An undergraduate of East Tennessee State University explains that humans’ current effects on the biosphere are disturbingly similar to the circumstances that caused the worst mass extinction in biologic history. By: Amber Rookstool 6 December 2016 About the Author: Amber Rookstool is an undergraduate student at East Tennessee State University. She is currently an English major and dreams of becoming an author and high school English Teacher. She hopes to publish her first book by the time she is 26 years old. Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................1 Brief Geologic Timeline ...........................................................................................................2 The Anthropocene ......................................................................................................................3 Biodiversity Crisis ....................................................................................................................3 Habitat Loss .........................................................................................................................3 Invasive Species ..................................................................................................................4 Overexploitation ...................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian Mass Extinction: Comparing Brachiopod Faunas
    Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian mass extinction: Comparing brachiopod faunas PAUL COPPER Copper, P. 1998. Evaluating the Frasnian-Famennian mass extinction: Comparing bra- chiopod faunas.- Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 43,2,137-154. The Frasnian-Famennian (F-F) mass extinctions saw the global loss of all genera belonging to the tropically confined order Atrypida (and Pentamerida): though Famen- nian forms have been reported in the literafure, none can be confirmed. Losses were more severe during the Givetian (including the extinction of the suborder Davidsoniidina, and the reduction of the suborder Lissatrypidina to a single genus),but ońgination rates in the remaining suborder surviving into the Frasnian kept the group alive, though much reduced in biodiversity from the late Earb and Middle Devonian. In the terminal phases of the late Palmatolepis rhenana and P linguifurmis zones at the end of the Frasnian, during which the last few Atrypidae dechned, no new genera originated, and thus the Atrypida were extĘated. There is no evidence for an abrupt termination of all lineages at the F-F boundary, nor that the Atrypida were abundant at this time, since all groups were in decline and impoverished. Atypida were well established in dysaerobic, muddy substrate, reef lagoonal and off-reef deeper water settings in the late Givetian and Frasnian, alongside a range of brachiopod orders which sailed through the F-F boundary: tropical shelf anoxia or hypońa seems implausible as a cause for aĘpid extinction. Glacial-interglacial climate cycles recorded in South Ameńca for the Late Devonian, and their synchronous global cooling effect in low latitudes, as well as loss of the reef habitat and shelf area reduction, remain as the most likely combined scenarios for the mass extinction events.
    [Show full text]
  • VOLUME 33 December 2017
    VOLUME 33 December 2017 Volume 33 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE’S COLUMN…………………………………………………………………..…….. 2 OBITUARY……………………………………………………………………………………..…5 SCCS REPORTS………………………………………………………………………………….7 ANNUAL REPORT TO ICS FOR 2016-2017…………………………………………………..….7 TASK GROUP REPORTS FOR 2016-2017 AND WORK PLANS FOR 2017 FISCAL YEAR………….11 Report of the task group to establish a GSSP close to the existing Viséan-Serpukhovian boundary…………11 Report of the task group to establish a GSSP close to the existing Bashkirian-Moscovian boundary………16 Report of the task group to establish the Moscovian-Kasimovian and Kasimovian-Gzhelian boundaries…....18 SCCS DOCUMENTS (CONTRIBUTIONS BY MEMBERS)…………………………………...……21 SHALLOW-WATER SIPHONODELLIDS AND DEFINITION OF THE DEVONIAN-CARBONIFEROUS BOUNDARY…………………………………………………………………………………….21 REPORT FOR PROGRESS FOR 2017 ACTIVITIES IN THE CANTABRIAN MOUNTAINS, SPAIN AND THE AMAZONAS BASIN, BRAZIL……………………………………………...………………26 TAXONOMIC AND STRATIGRAPHIC PROBLEMS CONCERNING THE CONODONTS LOCHRIEA SENCKENBERGICA NEMIROVSKAYA, PERRET & MEISCHNER, 1994 AND LOCHRIEA ZIEGLERI NEMIROVSKAYA, PERRET & MEISHCNER, 1994-CONSEQUENCES FOR DEFINING THE VISÉAN- SERPUKHOVIAN BOUNDARY………………………………………………………………………………...28 PROGRESS ON THE VISÉAN-SERPUKHOVIAN BOUNDARY IN SOUTH CHINA AND GERMANY……………………………………………………………………………………..35 POTENTIAL FOR A MORE PRECISE CORRELATION OF THE BASHKIRIAN AMMONOID AND FORAMINIFERAL ZONES IN THE SOUTH URALS…………………………………………..……42 CHEMOMETRICS AND CARBONIFEROUS MEDULLOSALEAN FRONDS: IMPLICATIONS FOR CARBONIFEROUS PHYTOSTRATIGRAPHY…………………………………………………...…45
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science 83
    Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science 83 (1993) Volume 102 p. 83-91 CONODONTS FROM COAL BALLS IN THE SPRINGFIELD COAL MEMBER OF THE PETERSBURG FORMATION (DESMOINESIAN, PENNSYLVANIAN) IN SOUTHERN INDIANA Carl B. Rexroad Indiana Geological Survey 611 North Walnut Grove Bloomington, Indiana 47405 ABSTRACT: A well-preserved and moderately diverse conodont faunule was recovered from five coal balls in the Springfield Coal Member of the Petersburg Formation from Peabody Coal Com- pany's Eby Pit, Lynnville Mine, in Warrick County, Indiana. The presence of Neognathodus roundyi and the other species recorded in this study is compatible with the middle Desmoinesian age of the Springfield. Idioprioniodus conjunctus is the most ecologically diagnostic of the conodonts and suggests organic-rich, quiet water with a low pH, which in turn suggests that the conodonts lived in a salt-water marsh bordered on one side by coal swamps and on another by near-normal marine waters. Apparently coal balls had multiple origins, and the origin of the conodont-bearing ones is uncertain. INTRODUCTION Because marine fossils are commonly associated with plant fossils in some coal balls, it is not surprising that conodonts have been reported from them. A half-dozen well-pre- served conodonts from Pennsylvanian coal balls from three different States were figured by Mamay and Yochelson (1962), but no other conodonts were figured; therefore, the overall conodont content in coal balls is unknown. To better understand the distribution of conodonts and their paleoecologic impor- tance in coal balls, samples were processed from coal balls of the middle Desmoinesian Springfield Coal Member of the Petersburg Formation from the Eby Pit of Peabody Coal Company's Lynnville Mine (SW'/4 , SWA, NE'A, Sec.
    [Show full text]