Guilielmites Formed from Phosphatized Concretions in the Ashfield Shale of the Sydney Area
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GUILIELMITES FORMED FROM PHOSPHATIZED CONCRETIONS IN THE ASHFIELD SHALE OF THE SYDNEY AREA By J.G. BYRNES, T.D. RICE*, and D. KARAOLIS* (Manuscript dated January 1976) (Revised July 1977) ABSTRACT Guilielmites, 5-30 mm in diameter, have formed by deformation and partial solution of carbonate apatite nodules in the Triassic Ashfield Shale of the Sydney Basin. The phosphate is believed to be an early diagenetic replacement of carbonate concretions, probably penecontemporaneous with Ashfield Shale deposition. The U and F content of the phosphate does not support a marine origin for the formation. Where protected from compression within hard sideritic bands, the phosphatic nodules remain spheroidal. Elsewhere, forms transitional to guilielmites are encountered. In all stages of the transition, Mn, Fe, Mg, Ca, P, F, and S are more abundant than in average Ashfield Shale. Ca, P, F, Na, U, and C0 2 decrease from nodule to guilielmites, whilst Pb, Ti, Si, Al, K, Ba, and S increase; the ratio P/F decreases, indicating the relative immobility of F. The geometry of formation of guilielmites is envisaged simply as a sphere reducing by solution, under vertical pressure, to a biconvex lens of equivalent diameter. A fourfold to tenfold volume reduction is involved, compatible with the degree of residual concentration of Ba, s, and perhaps Pb. INTRODUCTION Guilielmites is the convenient pseudofossil name for lustrous, dark, slickensided compaction structures found world wide in fine-grained sedimentary rocks. They are conical or lenticular, often biconvex, bodies of circular or elliptical plan. They are 2- 50 mm in diameter (usually 5 - 20 mml. The maximum thickness is 0. 2 - 0. 5 times the diameter and is usually perpendicular to enclosing stratification. Parting surfaces, several of which may occur within a single guilielmites body, carry fine striations in radial, bilateral, or slightly spir~l arrangement. Guilielmites occur frequently in Carboniferous coal measures in France, Belgium, the Saar, Westphalia, Bohemia, Russia, Scotland, * Chemical Laboratory, Department of Mines, Lidcombe, New South Wales Rec. geol. Surv. N.S.W. 18(2), 169-200, 3 figs, 5 pls I1\\111\1\11 \\Ill \\Ill \1\1\1\1\1 \\Ill \1\\\ Ill\\ IIIII \\111\\1 0004984330 170 J .G. BYRNES, T.D. RICE, AND D. KARAOLIS .. England, Wales, and North America. They a.lso Q;QC'IItt' in South America, Africa, Asia, and Australia, their total recorded range being Carboniferous to Miocene. In Australia, guilielmites are known from Cretaceous and Triassic sequences. 'l'lll.e .structures known as "Chinese hat nobbies" at the Lightning Ridge opal field are possibly guilielmites (Byrnes 1975). In the Triassic Ashfield Shale (figure 1), which is the basal formation of the argillaceous Wianamatta Group of the Sydney Basin (Herbert 1976b) (table 1), both guilielmites and concretionary nodules have been known for many years. A connection between the two has not been proposed previously. The nodules, which are phosphatic, have been referred to as essentially siderite (Lovering 1954, Lovering and McElroy 1969). That the nodules are phosphatic was first demonstrated by one of us in 1966 (Pyle and Rice 1967, table 7 herein). That guilielmites may also consist largely of calcium phosphate is now noted, possibly for the first time. It is anticipated that guilielmites elsewhere will prove to be phosphatic. Origin of Guilielmites Guilielmites have been interpreted, inter alia, as burrows, coprolites, body fossils, concretions, compression cones, and as plant bulbs, seeds, or floats. Regarded initially as fruits, they were described under Calvasia and Carpolithes by Sternberg (1820, 1825), transferred to Cardiocarpum by Bronn (1837), and raised to a new genus by Geinitz (1858). After some time they were rejected from palaeobotany (Schenk 1864). Thereafter they have been regarded mainly as inorganic. Carruthers (1871) inter preted them as fluid casts. Gothan (1909) and Schmidt (1934) suggested they may be gas rise structures. For some time they have been generally regarded as inorganic structures indicating differential compaction (Elliot 1965). Differential compaction may occur about a relatively incompressible object such as a concretion, shell, vertical plant root, or animal burrow. Guilielmites have been noted enclosing pelecypods within their burrows and have also been found joined vertically along such a 4 burrow (Pruvost 1930). Their formation about roots has been considered by Pruvost (1930) and Renier et al. (1938). Possibly a feature common to guilielmites of varied origin is reduction in the volume offering resistance. This may take place by solution of concretions, crushing of incompletely filled shells, or removal of decomposed root material. The earliest mention of volume decrease is possibly that of Wood (1935), who explained guilielmites formation as the result of slipping in the rock on the collapse of some central body, generally a shell. Altevogt (1968), however, concluded that such hard bodies acted only as nuclei for rolling clay accretions, and that it was these accretions which were transformed into guilielmites. GUILIELMITES IN THE ASHFIELD SHALE 171 ~ Brlnge/ly Shale 0 Mlnchlnbury Sandstone ~ Ashfield Shale ~ Hawkesbury - Narrabeen ~ Sandstone Group 151"E I Avoca -34°$ 20 0 20 40 10047 Figure 1. Locality map, guilielmites in the Ashfield Shale 0 1 2 3 4 5 em 172 J.G. BYRNES, T.D. RICE,AND D. KARAOLIS TABLE 1 GENERALIZED STRATIGRAPHY OF THE TRIASSIC OF THE SYDNEY BASIN Bringelly Shale Wianamatta Group Minchinbury Sandstone u H Ashfield Shale Ul Ul ..0: H ~ Mittagong Sandstone E-< Hawkesbury Sandstone Includes Bulgo Sandstone, Narrabeen Group ---z- Terrigal Formation ..0: H ~ Coal measures: fluvial and rLI p., marine sediments The principle feature suggesting a genetic relationship between guilielmites and nodules in the Ashfield Shale is their close spatial association, with morphological and mineralogical intergradation. Some major points of evidence are: 1. Guilielmites are concentrated in intervals notable for nodule abundance. 2. The larger guilielmites (>17 mm diameter) occur in mudstone at the surfaces of hard sideritic bands, positions which are other wise often occupied by nodules. 3. Mixtures (roughly 2:1) of guilielmites and flattened nodules were obtained from several mudstone and. shale blocks of small size (e.g., 0.3 m across). 4. Guilielmites have been observed with cores of kaolin, chert, barite, and pyrite, greatly resembling those present in nodules. 5. The range of concentration of insoluble elements in guilielmites relative to nodules (x4 - xlO) corresponds to the volume reduction estimated from geo metrical considerations. GUILIELMITES IN THE ASHFIELD SHALE 173 6. The depletion of Ca and C0 2 in guilielmites phosphate with respect to nodule phosphate, is in accordance with the preferential removal of these components from carbonate apatite* undergoing solution. Geometry of Guilielmites Formation The guilielmites of the Ashfield Shale are usually biconvex lenses with a distinct, sharp equator (plate 1; plate 2, figure 1). The equatorial area may rarely be flattened to a flange. The guilielmites range from 5 to 30 rom in diameter. For 162 specimens measured, the first, second, and third quartiles of this variation were at 10, 12, and 14 rom. Maximum thickness varies from 1 to 8 rom and is mostly between 0.2 and 0.3 times the diameter. Guilielmites surfaces, darker than both their matrix and interiors, are smooth and ornamented with abundant fine radial striations (>30/mm). Frequently these bodies disaggregate readily along two or more similar surfaces below the outermost one. A small core of barite, kaolin, chert, and pyrite is common, and a central depression on the upper surface is sometimes present. The geometry of guilielmites formation may be envisaged simply as a sphere reducing to a biconvex lens without change in horizontal diameter. An early stage of plastic deformation, involving little change in volume but an increase in horizontal dimensions, may have occurred but for simplicity this is overlooked. We may approximate each half of the resultant biconvex lens by revolving sections of the curve y = x 2 about y. 2 If the form can be approximated by y = x , then plotting maximum thickness against diameter should give a curve y =ax, where a is equal to the maximum x value attained on the curve y = x 2 (i.e., y=x 2 =ax). Figure 2 indicates that the maximum x value is x = 1/3. 2 The volume of the solid formed by revolving y = x , between x = o and x = 1/3, about the y-axis .s iven by 1/3 v = 2IT x.x 2 ...-dx r0 3 ITTf/ 3 2] x .d:y.: 0 1 IT _1_ :!-2. • 8 1 * A mineral group, not a mixture of carbonate and apatite. 174 J.G. BYRNES, T.D. RICE,AND D. KARAOLIS This solid is half of a guilielmites body; therefore the volume of a guilielmites, v g = 11/81. The volume of a sphere of radius l/3 is V 4/3 IT. 27 s 411/81 i.e., V /V g s For x<l/3, the volume reduction from sphere to guilielmites will be greater than ~- The gradients of the upper and lower lines 2 of figure 2, when used as the limits for revolution of y = x , give volume reductions of x4 and x9 respectively. The concentrations of S, Ba, and Pb during guilielmites formation suggest volume reductions between x3 and xlO. Even greater volume reduction in shale matrix, by compaction, is responsible for the slickeusiding of the guilielmites. ASHFIELD SHALE GUILIELMITES AND NODULES Distribution The Ashfield Shale varies in thickness from 45 to 61.5 m and has been intersected by at least 113 drill holes. Herbert (l973b, 1974) has proposed the succession of four lithological units shown in the left hand column of figure 3. These may be applied over a large area, from Sydney west-southwest to the Razorback Range (61 km) and west-northwest to Plumpton (39 km), although erosion has removed much of Unit 4.