DOCSLIB.ORG

An Annual Summary of the State's Economic Geology.Indd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Annual Summary of the State's Economic Geology.Indd STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Ted Strickland, Governor Sean D. Logan, Director Lawrence H. Wickstrom, Chief DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 2045 MORSE RD., BLDG. C-1 COLUMBUS, OHIO 43229-6693 (614) 265-6576 (614) 447-1918 (FAX) E-Mail: [email protected] World Wide Web: http://www.OhioGeology.com 2009 Report on Ohio Mineral Industries: An Annual Summary of the State's Economic Geology WITH DIRECTORIES OF REPORTING COAL AND INDUSTRIAL MINERAL OPERATORS compiled by Mark E. Wolfe Database design and data retrieval: Joseph G. Wells Interactive mineral industries map/digital cartography: Donovan M. Powers Columbus 2010 FOREWORD The Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological Survey is pleased to pres- ent the 2009 Report on Ohio Mineral Industries. The Division’s staff, led by chief compiler Mark Wolfe, has again introduced signifi cant improvements to further strengthen this year’s report, which we hope all will fi nd useful. This annual report has been singled out by the USGS and other organizations many times as the best of its kind in the nation, and by constantly improv- ing it, we hope to keep it that way. Through the Division’s nearly 175-year history, we have continuously worked to assist the extractive industries in their ability to fi nd, evaluate, and produce the mineral and fuel com- modities demanded by our society. We do this through our various mapping programs—glacial, bedrock, and subsurface—as well as our mapping of specifi c commodities, including oil and gas, coal, sand and gravel, and so on. We keep updated maps of where all mines and oil and gas wells are located, both current and historical. Via this report (and associated databases) and efforts such as our Production of Oil and Gas in Ohio (POGO) database, we maintain the most comprehensive data on the production of these commodities. The Division provides relevant research and it serves as the state’s archive for geologic data and materials. We maintain a vast collection of rock core and samples, geologic analyses of all types, original submitted drilling records and geophysical logs, records of engineering borings, maps, aerial photographs, and surveys, and the list goes on. As technology has advanced, the Division has taken a leader- ship role in converting this information to digital format and providing it in state-of-the-art geographic information system (GIS) fi les, online interactive maps, and databases on portable media. All of this information is made available to all at minimal cost. Our information and research investigations not only benefi t the mineral and fuels industries but also the agencies that regulate these industries. In fact, because of the Division’s long his- tory, our data and maps have been provided to the regulatory agencies when they formed or began regulating different commodities or methods. We continue to work with industry and regulatory agencies as an unbiased research organization and data provider. The Division collects geologic data of its own and from many other sources, in addition to the mineral and fuels industries. All of this information is used in compiling our various geologic maps and databases. This information is widely used for transportation projects and site as- sessments for new developments—from a new housing subdivision and shopping malls to siting wind turbines and major industrial sites. If not for this information availability, it would cost much more to develop many of these items. In effect, the Division assists not only the extrac- tive industries, but also development of the buildings and other industries that rely on these minerals and fuels for their collective existence. We’re proud to do our part. I hope readers fi nd this report useful and welcome any feedback. Lawrence Wickstrom Division Chief and State Geologist ii CONTENTS Foreword ................................................................................................................................ ii Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 Illustration of reported tonnage ..................................................................................... 1 Economic impact of Ohio’s extractive industries ........................................................... 1 2009 Ohio ecomomic geology in brief ................................................................................... 4 Coal ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Industrial minerals ............................................................................................................... 12 Limestone and dolomite .................................................................................................. 15 Sand and gravel ............................................................................................................... 19 Sandstone and conglomerate .......................................................................................... 22 Clay .................................................................................................................................. 24 Shale ................................................................................................................................ 25 Salt ................................................................................................................................... 26 Gypsum ............................................................................................................................ 26 Peat .................................................................................................................................. 26 Oil and gas ............................................................................................................................. 28 References cited .................................................................................................................... 32 Appendix A 2009 Coal companies with sales or production .............................................................. A-1 2009 Ohio alphabetical directory of producing coal mine operators ............................ A-2 2009 Ohio directory of coal preparation plants and associated facilities, by county ... A-6 2009 Ohio directory of producing coal mine operators, by county ................................ A-8 Appendix B 2009 Ohio alphabetical directory of industrial-mineral mine operators ...................... B-1 Appendix C 2009 Limestone/dolomite companies with sales or production ..................................... C-1 2009 Ohio directory of limestone/dolomite mine operators reporting sales or produc- tion, by county ............................................................................................................ C-2 Appendix D 2009 Sand and gravel companies with sales or production .......................................... D-1 2009 Ohio directory of sand and gravel mining operators reporting sales or produc- tion, by county ............................................................................................................ D-3 Appendix E 2009 Sandstone/conglomerate companies with sales or production ............................. E-1 2009 Ohio directory of sandstone/conglomerate mine operators reporting sales or pro- duction, by county ...................................................................................................... E-2 Appendix F 2009 Clay companies with sales or production .............................................................. F-1 2009 Ohio directory of clay mine operators reporting sales or production, by county ... F-2 Appendix G 2009 Shale companies with sales or production ............................................................ G-1 2009 Ohio directory of shale mine operators reporting sales or production, by county .. G-2 Appendix H 2009 Ohio directory of salt mine and salt-brining plant operators reporting sales or production, by county ................................................................................................ H-1 2009 Ohio directory of peat mine operators reporting sales or production, by county H-1 FIGURES 1. Illustration of one million tons on a standard football fi eld ......................................... 1 2. Map showing locations of companies producing equipment or providing services ...... 2 3. Graph showing value of coal, nonfuel minerals, and oil and gas in Ohio .................... 4 4. Map Showing coal production in Ohio in 2009, by county ............................................ 6 5. Graph showing sales and value of coal in Ohio ............................................................. 6 6. Stratigraphic column of coals mined in Ohio during 2009 ........................................... 6 7. Map showing sales of limestone and dolomite in Ohio in 2009, by county .................. 15 8. Graph showing sales and value of limestone and dolomite in Ohio ............................. 15 9. Stratigraphic column of industrial minerals mined in Ohio during 2009 ................... 18 10. Map showing sales of sand and gravel in Ohio in 2009, by county .............................. 19 11. Graph showing sales and value of sand and gravel in Ohio ......................................... 19 iii FIGURES, cont. 12. Map showing sales of sandstone and conglomerate in Ohio in 2009, by county
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 65Th Annual Tri-State Geological Field Conference 2-3 October 2004
    65th Annual Tri-State Geological Field Conference 2-3 October 2004 Weis Earth Science Museum Menasha, Wisconsin The Lake & The Ledge Geological Links between the Niagara Escarpment and Lake Winnebago Joanne Kluessendorf & Donald G. Mikulic Organizers The Lake & The Ledge Geological Links between the Niagara Escarpment and Lake Winnebago 65th Annual Tri-State Geological Field Conference 2-3 October 2004 by Joanne Kluessendorf Weis Earth Science Museum, Menasha and Donald G. Mikulic Illinois State Geological Survey, Champaign With contributions by Bruce Brown, Wisconsin Geological & Natural History Survey, Stop 1 Tom Hooyer, Wisconsin Geological & Natural History Survey, Stops 2 & 5 William Mode, University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Stops 2 & 5 Maureen Muldoon, University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Stop 1 Weis Earth Science Museum University of Wisconsin-Fox Valley Menasha, Wisconsin WELCOME TO THE TH 65 ANNUAL TRI-STATE GEOLOGICAL FIELD CONFERENCE. The Tri-State Geological Field Conference was founded in 1933 as an informal geological field trip for professionals and students in Iowa, Illinois and Wisconsin. The first Tri-State examined the LaSalle Anticline in Illinois. Fifty-two geologists from the University of Chicago, University of Iowa, University of Illinois, Northwestern University, University of Wisconsin, Northern Illinois State Teachers College, Western Illinois Teachers College, and the Illinois State Geological Survey attended that trip (Anderson, 1980). The 1934 field conference was hosted by the University of Wisconsin and the 1935 by the University of Iowa, establishing the rotation between the three states. The 1947 Tri-State visited quarries at Hamilton Mound and High Cliff, two of the stops on this year’s field trip.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Supplementary Materials and Methods 1 S1 Expanded
    1 Supplementary Materials and Methods 2 S1 Expanded Geologic and Paleogeographic Information 3 The carbonate nodules from Montañez et al., (2007) utilized in this study were collected from well-developed and 4 drained paleosols from: 1) the Eastern Shelf of the Midland Basin (N.C. Texas), 2) Paradox Basin (S.E. Utah), 3) Pedregosa 5 Basin (S.C. New Mexico), 4) Anadarko Basin (S.C. Oklahoma), and 5) the Grand Canyon Embayment (N.C. Arizona) (Fig. 6 1a; Richey et al., (2020)). The plant cuticle fossils come from localities in: 1) N.C. Texas (Lower Pease River [LPR], Lake 7 Kemp Dam [LKD], Parkey’s Oil Patch [POP], and Mitchell Creek [MC]; all representing localities that also provided 8 carbonate nodules or plant organic matter [POM] for Montañez et al., (2007), 2) N.C. New Mexico (Kinney Brick Quarry 9 [KB]), 3) S.E. Kansas (Hamilton Quarry [HQ]), 4) S.E. Illinois (Lake Sara Limestone [LSL]), and 5) S.W. Indiana (sub- 10 Minshall [SM]) (Fig. 1a, S2–4; Richey et al., (2020)). These localities span a wide portion of the western equatorial portion 11 of Euramerica during the latest Pennsylvanian through middle Permian (Fig. 1b). 12 13 S2 Biostratigraphic Correlations and Age Model 14 N.C. Texas stratigraphy and the position of pedogenic carbonate samples from Montañez et al., (2007) and cuticle were 15 inferred from N.C. Texas conodont biostratigraphy and its relation to Permian global conodont biostratigraphy (Tabor and 16 Montañez, 2004; Wardlaw, 2005; Henderson, 2018). The specific correlations used are (C. Henderson, personal 17 communication, August 2019): (1) The Stockwether Limestone Member of the Pueblo Formation contains Idiognathodus 18 isolatus, indicating that the Carboniferous-Permian boundary (298.9 Ma) and base of the Asselian resides in the Stockwether 19 Limestone (Wardlaw, 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 21 Cover
    rf Predictive Stratigraphic Analysis- - Concept and Application u.s. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 21 Cover. Calcic paleo-Vertisol underlying the resistant transgressive marine limestone Little Stone Gap Member of the Hinton Formation (Upper Mississippian) in southwestern West Virginia. This paleosol is indicative of a relatively dry climate when evapotranspira- tion exceeded rainfall for more than 6 months out of the year. The light-gray color at the level of the photograph scale (center) is the result of gleying (bleaching) after burial. A calcified root system, located in the proximity of the scale, branches downward and sug­ gests a well-developed root system for a plant whose stem may have been up to 15 centi­ meters in diameter. Numerous mineralized fossil roots at this level indicate that land plants were very well adapted to seasonally dry conditions in nonwaterlogged environ­ ments by Late Mississippian time. Cross-cutting fractures, known as mukkara structures and caused by seasonal expansion (wet) and contraction (dry), are visible throughout the outcrop beneath the resistant limestone layer except where interrupted or destroyed by paleoroot systems. Predictive Stratigraphic Analysis Concept and Application Edited by C. Blaine Cecil and N. Terence Edgar U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2110 A collection of extended abstracts of papers presented at two workshops on the title subject UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1994 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GORDON P. EATON, Director For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Report on Ohio Mineral Industries: an Annual Summary of the State’S Economic Geology with Directories of Reporting Coal and Industrial Mineral Operators
    2012 Report on Ohio Mineral Industries: An Annual Summary of the State’s Economic Geology with Directories of Reporting Coal and Industrial Mineral Operators compiled by Mark E. Wolfe Database design and data retrieval: Joseph G. Wells Interactive mineral industries map/digital cartography: Dean R. Martin STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas J. Serenko, Chief Columbus 2013 DISCLAIMER The information contained herein has not been reviewed for technical accuracy and conformity with current ODNR Division of Geological Survey standards for published or open-fi le materials. The ODNR Division of Geological Survey does not guarantee this information to be free from errors, omissions, or inaccuracies and disclaims any responsibility or liability for interpretations or decisions based thereon. RECOMMENDED BIBLIOGRAPHIC CITATION Wolfe, M.E., compiler, 2013, 2012 Report on Ohio mineral industries—An annual summary of the state’s economic geology: Columbus, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological Survey, 29 p., 9 appendices. Editing: Charles R. Salmons Graphic design and layout: Lisa Van Doren CONTENTS 2012 Ohio ecomomic geology in brief ............................................................................................................................ 1 Coal ................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Production ...............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vertebrate Coprolites
    Bulletin 57 New Mexico Museum of Natural History & Science A Division of the DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS Vertebrate Coprolites edited by Adrian P. Hunt, Jesper Milàn, Spencer G. Lucas and Justin A. Spielmann Albuquerque, 2012 Hunt et al., eds., 2012, Vertebrate Coprolites. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, Bulletin 57. 5 VERTEBRATE COPROLITE STUDIES: STATUS AND PROSPECTUS ADRIAN P. HUNT1, SPENCER G. LUCAS2, JESPER MILÀN3, 4 AND JUSTIN A. SPIELMANN2 1 Flying Heritage Collection, 3407 109th Street SW, Everett, WA 98204, e-mail: [email protected]; 2 New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science, 1801 Mountain Road NW, Albuquerque, NM 87104, e-mails: [email protected], [email protected]; 3 GeomuseumFaxe/Østsjællands Museum, Østervej 2, DK-4640 Faxe, Denmark, e-mail: [email protected]; 4 Department of Geography and Geology, University of Copenhagen, Øster Voldgade 10, DK-1350 Copenhagen K, Denmark Abstract—The history of study of vertebrate coprolites can be divided into four phases: (1) 1800-1890 – initial studies; (2) 1890-1910 – first bloom; (3) 1910-1950 – intermittent work; (4) 1950-1990 – maturing science (in archeology and Pleistocene coprolite studies); and (5) 1990 to present – maturing science (study of pre-Pleistocene coprolites). The oldest putative vertebrate coprolites are Ordovician in age. Few Silurian coprolites have been described, and some large coprolites of this age have been ascribed to eurypterids. Devonian coprolites are common, but poorly described. Mississippian vertebrate coprolites have been minimally studied, but they prob- ably represent the first relatively abundant coprofaunas. Several Pennsylvanian coprofaunas have been described. The Permo-Triassic seems to be an acme zone for coprolites as a result of their abundance in redbeds.
    [Show full text]
  • The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions Roger
    The University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions Roger. L. Kaesler, Editor Order from: The Paleontological Institute The University of Kansas Lindley Hall 1475 Jayhawk Blvd, Room 121 Lawrence, KS 66045 USA 785-864-3338 http://paleo.ku.edu NEW SERIES ISSN 1046-8390 1 Denver, L. E. and R. L. Kaesler. Paleoenvironmental significance of stromatolites in the Americus Limestone Member (Lower Permian, Midcontinent, USA), 11 p., 12 fig. 2 Kontrovitz, M., N. R. Ainsworth, R. D. Burnett, and J. M. Slack. 1992. Induced color in ostracode shells: an experimental study, 10 p., 1 fig. No. 1, 2 in one cover. _____________________________________________________ 5.00 3 Palmer, A. R. and L. N. Repina. 1993. Through a glass darkly: taxonomy, phylogeny, and biostratigraphy of the Olenellina, 35 p., 13 fig. 5.00 4 Hageman, S. J. 1993. Effects of nonnormality on studies of morphological variation of a Rhabdomesine bryozoan, Streblotrypa (Streblascopora) prisca (Gabb and Horn), 13 p., 4 fig. 5.00 5 Doyle, P., D. T. Donovan, and M. Nixon. 1994. Phylogeny and systematics of the Coleoidea, 15 p., 4 fig. 5.00 6 Finks, R. M. 1995. Some New Genera of Paleozoic Calcareous Sponges, 6 p., 11 fig. 5.00 7 Rigby, J. K., and B. Senowbari-Daryan. 1995. Upper Permian Inozoid, Demospongid, and Hexactinellid Sponges from Djebel Tebaga, Tunisia, 130 p., 37 fig., 11 tables, 81 pl. 5.00 8 Krebs, J. W., R. L. Kaesler, E. A. Brosius, D. L. Miller, and Y.-M. Chang. 1996. PaleoBank, A Relational Database for Invertebrate Paleontology: The Data Model, 7 p., 1 fig., 2 tables.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography of New Mexico Invertebrate Paleontology Barry S
    University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Earth and Planetary Sciences Faculty and Staff Scholarly Communication - Departments Publications 8-2-2005 Bibliography of New Mexico Invertebrate Paleontology Barry S. Kues Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/eps_fsp Recommended Citation Kues, Barry S.. "Bibliography of New Mexico Invertebrate Paleontology." (2005). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/eps_fsp/4 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Scholarly Communication - Departments at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Earth and Planetary Sciences Faculty and Staff ubP lications by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BIBLIOGRAPHY OF NEW MEXICO INVERTEBRATE PALEONTOLOGY Barry S. Kues Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, MSC03 2040, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001; [email protected] Introduction New Mexico has a rich record of invertebrate fossils, which have been reported in publications since 1848. Several thousand species have been documented from the state, and they represent each of the geologic periods from Cambrian to Neogene. The literature on the invertebrate paleontology of New Mexico is vast. Reference to much of this literature through 1979 was brought together by Kues and Northrop (1981) in a bibliography that included vertebrate and plant as well as invertebrate fossil groups reported in the state. A separate bibliography on vertebrate paleontology was published by Kues and Lucas in 1993, and this has been recently updated by Lewis et al. Much work on New Mexico invertebrate paleontology has been published since 1979, especially by paleontologists associated with the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science (which opened in the mid-1980s), the University of New Mexico, and the U.
    [Show full text]
  • Myr-Old Fossil Fish
    ARTICLE Received 20 Feb 2014 | Accepted 21 Nov 2014 | Published 23 Dec 2014 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms6920 Mineralized rods and cones suggest colour vision in a 300 Myr-old fossil fish Gengo Tanaka1, Andrew R. Parker2, Yoshikazu Hasegawa3, David J. Siveter4, Ryoichi Yamamoto5, Kiyoshi Miyashita5, Yuichi Takahashi5, Shosuke Ito6, Kazumasa Wakamatsu6, Takao Mukuda7,8, Marie Matsuura7, Ko Tomikawa9, Masumi Furutani10, Kayo Suzuki11 & Haruyoshi Maeda12 Vision, which consists of an optical system, receptors and image-processing capacity, has existed for at least 520 Myr. Except for the optical system, as in the calcified lenses of trilobite and ostracod arthropods, other parts of the visual system are not usually preserved in the fossil record, because the soft tissue of the eye and the brain decay rapidly after death, such as within 64 days and 11 days, respectively. The Upper Carboniferous Hamilton Formation (300 Myr) in Kansas, USA, yields exceptionally well-preserved animal fossils in an estuarine depositional setting. Here we show that the original colour, shape and putative presence of eumelanin have been preserved in the acanthodii fish Acanthodes bridgei. We also report on the tissues of its eye, which provides the first record of mineralized rods and cones in a fossil and indicates that this 300 Myr-old fish likely possessed colour vision. 1 Center for Marine Environment Studies, Kumamoto University, 6061 Matsushima-cho, Kami-amakusa, Kumamoto 861-6102, Japan. 2 Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, UK. 3 Gunma Museum of Natural History, Tomioka City, Gunma 370-2345, Japan. 4 Department of Geology, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Discovering the Ancient History of the American West
    CHAPTER 6 PALEONTOLOGY Discovering the Ancient History of the American West Kirk Johnson and Overview Richard K. Stucky The history of paleontology at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science can be seen as two bursts of research productivity separated by a long period of intermittent exhibit development and research inactivity. The first period lasted from 1915 to 1948. It was led by Jesse Dade Figgins, Philip Reinheimer, Harold Cook, Harvey Markman, and Robert Landberg, and was characterized by extensive exploration in the Western Interior states in search of skeletons of extinct animals that were suitable for mounting in Museum exhibitions. During this time, the Museum’s scientists had close ties with the American Museum of Natural History, collaborating with its scientists, being supported by its funders, and trading specimens and localities with the American and other institutions. This was a time of many publications in the Proceedings of the Colorado Museum of Natural History and the development of new exhibits that highlighted the vertebrate paleontology of the Western Interior. In-house research and publication essentially ceased when Cook left the Museum in 1930. Reinheimer was a master craftsman at the art of mount- ing and displaying fossil skeletons, and he continued this work until his retirement in 1947. Between 1930 and 1988, there was minimal publication and very little planned fieldwork in paleontology. Some important specimens were acquired as gifts, trades, purchases, and salvages, and the six curators of this period—Harvey Markman, John Roberts, John “Jack” Murphy Jr., Charles “Chuck” Crockett, and K. Don Lindsey—focused primarily on the develop- ment of paleontology and geology exhibits.
    [Show full text]
  • Randol Wehrbein Thesis.Pdf
    Comparisons of Paleoenvironments, Taxa, and Taphonomy of the Late Carboniferous Garnett and Hamilton Quarry Localities, Eastern Kansas ______________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Department of Physical Sciences EMPORIA STATE UNIVERSITY ______________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Sciences ______________________________ by Randol Louis Wehrbein May 2017 iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank the Department of Physical Sciences at Emporia State University (ESU) for funding my research through the NASA Space grant and graduate assistant position during my time at ESU. Additionally, I would like to thank the Graduate School at ESU for funding my research thought the Harold Durst Graduate Research Award and Graduate Research grant. I would also like to thank the Kansas Geological Foundation for funding through their student scholarship. I would like to thank the Denver Museum on Nature and Science for access of their collections, use of their facilities and equipment, and use of a copyrighted photograph. I would like to thank Brian Madeira for aid in museum work at ESU, and Derrick Stockton for aid in both field and museum work at ESU. I would like to thank the Interlibrary Loan personnel at ESU, for I made them work a lot. I also wish to extend thanks to the members of my committee. Furthermore, I would like to thank my friend, Jared Krenke, for copy editing my thesis because we both know (to quote the late Dr. Larry Martin) “I can’t spell my way out of a wet paper bag.” Finally, I wish to acknowledge the late Dr. Larry Martin for piquing my interest in both Garnett and Hamilton Quarry as an undergraduate.
    [Show full text]
  • Response of Late Carboniferous and Early Permian Plant Communities to Climate Change
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Department of Earth and Environmental Departmental Papers (EES) Science May 2001 Response Of Late Carboniferous And Early Permian Plant Communities To Climate Change William A. DiMichele Smithsonian Institute Hermann W. Pfefferkorn University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Robert A. Gastaldo Colby College Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/ees_papers Recommended Citation DiMichele, W. A., Pfefferkorn, H. W., & Gastaldo, R. A. (2001). Response Of Late Carboniferous And Early Permian Plant Communities To Climate Change. Retrieved from https://repository.upenn.edu/ ees_papers/2 Copyright 2001 Annual Reviews. Reprinted from Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Volume 29, May 2001, pages 461-487. Publisher URL: http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.earth.29.1.461 The US Government has the right to retain a nonexclusive, royalty-free licence in and to any copyright covering this paper. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/ees_papers/2 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Response Of Late Carboniferous And Early Permian Plant Communities To Climate Change Abstract Late Carboniferous and Early Permian strata record the transition from a cold interval in Earth history, characterized by the repeated periods of glaciation and deglaciation of the southern pole, to a warm- climate interval. Consequently, this time period is the best available analogue to the Recent in which to study patterns of vegetational response, both to glacial-interglacial oscillation and to the appearance of warm climate. Carboniferous wetland ecosystems were dominated by spore-producing plants and early gymnospermous seed plants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kinney Brick Quarry Lagerstätte, Late Pennsylvanian of New Mexico, Usa: Introduction and Overview
    Lucas, S. G., DiMichele, W. A. and Allen, B. D., eds., 2021, Kinney Brick Quarry Lagerstätte. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 84. 1 THE KINNEY BRICK QUARRY LAGERSTÄTTE, LATE PENNSYLVANIAN OF NEW MEXICO, USA: INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW SPENCER G. LUCAS1, WILLIAM A. DIMICHELE2 AND BRUCE D. ALLEN3 1New Mexico Museum of Natural History, 1801 Mountain Road N.W., Albuquerque, New Mexico 87104; email: [email protected]; 2Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560; 3New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, 801 Leroy Place, Socorro, New Mexico 87801 Abstract—The Kinney Brick Quarry, located in the Manzanita Mountains of central New Mexico, is a world-famous fossil locality in deposits of a marine embayment of Late Pennsylvanian age. The quantity and quality of fossil preservation identify Kinney as a Konservat Lagerstätte. This volume presents the results of recent research on the Kinney rocks and fossils, as well as new research based on older collections. Here, we provide a review of previous work and of the context within which to understand the Kinney Quarry Lagerstätte and the articles in this volume. A new look at Kinney, the environment, the animals, plants, and ichnofauna preserved there, was initiated by a controlled excavation carried out in 2014. This excavation revealed additional, more refined information about the sedimentology of the Kinney deposits, and additional information about the distribution of organisms during the period of accumulation. INTRODUCTION Fossils were discovered at the Kinney Brick Quarry in the The Kinney Brick Quarry (Figs. 1-3), located in the early 1960s by two University of New Mexico (UNM) students Manzanita Mountains of central New Mexico, is a clay pit who went on to careers in paleontology, Sidney R.
    [Show full text]