Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
ii
Figure
1,
2.
3.
&.
LIST
..
INZ'RODUCT!:ON
MiddlePermian(LateLeonaxdian
(figure 3 ) e
1% consists of dolomite,Zimestone,
headed sandstone ( f i g w e
origtxl,
t o E a r l y Guadalupian) i n age
and i r k e r -
s t u d i e d i n west
i - k %a a rmervoir far
Chuber m d Puseye
of
200 %D 300 f e e t 3f t h e
San Andres i n t h e E a s t e r n
San
T h i s stuay is
Andres i n t h e n o r t h e r n
p a r t o f t h e study a r e a Lr d a m i n a t l y
Andres becomes c h i e f l y c a r b o n a t e ( f i g u r e
5 ) i n the soutlzeirn
betweenou'tcrops
i n t e r p r e t %he
i n t h e s-tudy
area.
The study 5s based
Uli3.Os-t
Sam? Andres
the e k i n g Ranch. s e c t i o n
o t ~ t c r o p sweremeasured,
outcrop e a s t ofthe
s-t;uriy a r e a .
A few s c a t t e r e d l o w e r
San
(Harbauf, lg?Q)l
b u t arc? not inc1uded in
t h i s study.
sectj.ons i s g i v e n i n Appendix 1.
FIELD IBTHODS
The a u t h o r spent t h i r t e e n weeks i n the f i e l d between
End AUmSti
2.973.
Ha37
E i g h t d e % a i l e d s t r a t i g r a p h i c s e c t i o n s weremeasured
ss a hand l e v e l .
e x a m i n a t i o n .S t r a t i f i c a t i o n
scalz8
in
was describedusing
.t;l?e f o l l o w i n g
<3 Inches
3 Inches 3 F e e t
>3 F e e t
Small Scale
Medium S c a l e
Large Scale
from f o u r sarrrplos on t h e s c a n n i n g e l e c t r o n
~GI-
,
the presence o f conodonts.
0
8
T h e i r a s s i s t a n c e is appreciated.
who
study.
SYORAGE OF STUDY MTERIALS
Specimens important
U .W
#I589
-.-
. .
. .
12
8.36
OP
i n easternLincoln
LI.
County.,
Figure
ibis
5 to
20 f e e t of the
i l l u s t r a t e s the stra-ti-
imi,ts s t u d i e d ,
YES0 FORMATION
c e n t r a l New Mexico.
a p p a r e n t l yg r a d a t i o n a l
The contactbetween
i n t h e s t u d ya r e a .
in
tkiese formations is
No evidence of
.-
BW
RINCONADA
15
in the p u b l i s h e d l i t e r a t u r e ,
gypsum, and s i l t s t o n e
i n t h e SacramentoMountainsofsoa-kth-cen-ttal
Only t h e very t o p ( 3 t o
i n t h i s st;V.dy.
XeL:Lo\:r, ginkr
EQ
;uid
f e e t ) of t h e Yeso is included
grsy quax'czose s i l t s t o n e is
a t Sunset.
t
r
Z
i f e e t i n cea?-bral Mew Mexico t o as mv.ch as 1,700 f e e t i n
s o u t h e a s t e r n Piew Nexiee,Eelleg
theSanhndres
Forina;bian inLo
(1971) fa~s
r e c e n t l ys u b d i v i d e d
Paur members8
Giarie-ta Sand-
base of t h e San
at WalkerRanch,Three
and
sandstone tonguesextendsouthward
5);
of
Lincoln C O W ~ J and t h i c k e n a p p r e c i a b l y t o w a r d s t h e e a s t e r n
edge of -the stu.dY a r e a ( e , g . S m s e t and Bluewater, figures
T t is
sand. depasition,.
Power carbonatesocks
t h i s s'euciy.
Consequently,noatLempt
In t h i s s t u d y , thee:abonatetongue
bei;ween t h e
i s r e f e r r e d t o as
tongue betweenthe
and
..
in
in a
A Limestone
t o use msjor t y p e s o f t r a c e
&termination.
and body f o s s i l s f o r e n v i r o m @ n t a l
were recognized.
No a l g a l body f o s s i l s or p S m t remains
1NTEP;rlbhL
"
"
I
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
i
I
c:
d
5:
''
>"
21
C a r b on&t-,Fen$s
"
carbonatedepositiol1a.lfacies.
The s a p r a t i d a l and i n t e r t i d a l
f a c i e s a r e in p l a c e s s l i g h t l y t o moderatelymottled.Burrowing
i n t h e normal. m a r i n e f a c i e s
which is
to
~ rmx
~
5-n pS-aces.
tcuw
type
ana d i s t i n c t -
i v e u r ~ o r i e ~ ~ tbtrrrolz's
ed
aye almost cnmp1.e'cel.y c o n f i n e d t o t h e
r e s t r i c t e d mari.ine r'a.cles.
the
'I
12
b u t range from 1% t o
two dimensions
inches,
i s abou-t e i g h t inches,
A few burrows a r e d i s -
t i n c t l y i n t e r n a l l y l a m i n a t e d w i t h c o n c e n t r i c 'J-sha'Xjed Laminae
(figure 1lA)
Locally,individualburrowsgive
the impression
t h i s e f f e c t msy bedue
more d i s t i n c t superimposedburrowingevents
t o bvo
(figure I l B ) ,
fossiliferous and u n f o s s l i i f e r o u s s e d i m e n t s
by burrowingorgan-
isms.
The crustaceans Alpheus and
networks i n Recentcarbonatesediments,
the approximate diamekx
Q
22
23
.""GLorleta
SanZls'cone M
-e
Trace f o s s i l s a r e r a r e in t h e G l a r i e t a S a n d s t o n e
Member.
an inorganic
These bur-
-&hatnost of
in a. marine environment,
BODY FOSSILS
Garbcnate Member
"
"
"
1
_
Introduction
Parts o f t h e c a r b o n a t e member a r e a p p a r e n t l y b a r r e n
b i o t a , whereas o t h e r p a r t s a r eh i g h l yf o s s i l i f e r o u s ,
of
The i n t e r -
e s t i n b i o t i c s i n t h e c a r b o n a t e member i s c o n f i n e d t o t h e e n v i r -
onmental inferences
6 i l l u s t r a t e s an e s t i m a t e o f t h e r e l a t i v e free,.
The
rock uni.i;s.
norma2. marine c o n d i t i o n s .
?he
cmsists, i n o r d e r of decraasing
normal marineassemblage
r e l a t i v e abundance, of Productidbra@h.iopods,crinoids,
bryozoansp
n o n - P r o d u c t i da r t f c u P a t eI x a c h i o p o d s ,e c h i n o i d s ,t r i l o b i t e s ,
. and cephalopods,
Productidbrachiopods:
are eom1onI.y p a r t i a l l y s i l i c i f i e d .
v a l v e s bwe re1a:tirsely r a r e .
Crinoids:
t i e secondmost
g e n e r a l l y c o a r s e sand t o g r a n u l e s i z e . d l s a t - t i c u l a t e d c o l ~ t l m t a l g ~
No crown Tragnlents were recogxized.
Rrxozoansa
included in % h i s assemblageeventhough
some modern
t y p e s m e % o l e r a n t oT s a l i n i t i e s s l i g h t l y h i g h e r than that of
~ ~ o r m marine
al
waters hecause in the sWdy w e a t
I) they a r e
biota, and 2 ) t h e y
WE
Marine
a
25
axe flne
Nan-fenestratebryozoms
m e bryoz;oar,-os%?ncod
The
m0s.t eor~mont y p ep r e s e a t .
bioherms
Mon-productsd a r t i c u l a t e b r a c h i o p o d s
i^
r e l a t i v e l y r a r e and
Eahinoidss re3.atively r a r e ,
were noted,
T r i l o b i t e s zg e n e r a l l y
frsrnents areabundant.
'
T r i l o b i t e s m e e x c l u s i v e l y associated
w i t h bicita of Imown or i n f e r r e d n o r m a l m a r i n e a f f i t l i t i e s
in
tho stadjr a r e a ,
of b i o t i c c o n s t i t u e n t s ,
(CanningRmch,
WWE
o n l y observed
whereas o t i ~ e r s
in. float,
Restricted
of
of
adverseenvironmentalconditions,especiallylargevariations
in salinity.
only s l i g h t l y f o s s i l i f e r o u s rock u n i t s i n t h e f i e l d .
ished slab and t h i n s e c t i o n ,
noted t o haveabundantmicrofauna.
lage consi'sts,
I n pol-
i n orderofrelative
gastropods,Foraminifera,pelecypods,spirorbid
worm t u b e s , and
Ostracods
..
26
mos-b a b u n d a n t r e s t r i c t e dm m i n eb f o c c
Ostreeodsrthe
form,
tire p r e s e n t i n bryozoan-ostracodbiohefms
a t Carining Ranch, u n i t
9.
Gastropods8
in diameter -to
C O ~ ~ Esand
S ~
Forminifera% genera.lly
units,
she,
L ^ ~ T Cb~u t a r e
Apparently o n l yc a l c a r e o u s
PeXecypodsa
inches
n o t commonly noted,
cornmon i n a Pew r o c k
types a r e present.
hnndres F o r m t i o n .
p o s s i b l y b e l o n g % n g t o t h e ~ l i o l ~ n a - T e n t a c u l . j . t e sgroups by
Wilson (1967).
These b i o t i cc o n s t i t u e n t sa r eo n l yv e r y
observed i n thelowerSanAndres
Formation.
raxely
The t r u e b i o l o g i c
a f f i n i t y o f Wilsons f o s s i l s a r e unknown:
Clorieta Sandstone Mamber
Member
Organic films s u g g e s t i v e of d i s -
noted,
28
CARBONAT3 i"l3ER
INTRODUCTION
of thelower,middle
i nt h es t u d ya r e ac o n s i s t s
catrbonate toon.ggaes.
lowerSanAnares
The threetongues
tongue
8.t
as t h e
o f the c w b o n a t e member in t h e
dalomj.te,There
Limcstone a t theexpense
area('figure
t h i n t o t h en o r t h
About 75% of t h e r o c k s
study a r e a a r e
and Upper
5).
is a g e n e r a l i a s r e a s e
in
of dol.omile w e s t w a d . a c r o s s t h e s t u d y
ct;CanningRanah,
i n %he uppercazbonate
a t Fox C w e .
member.
mud-support r o c k f a b r i c s s ' b r o n g l y s u g g e s t s
dolomi.te c r y s t a l s i n the carbonete
calciumcarbonate
make upabout
Tho pred.on-inmce of
t h a t most of t h e
member r e p r e s e n t o r i g i n a l
mud precursors,Packstonesandgrainstones
5% of t h e carbonaterockspresent.
in t h e o t h e r
Bluewater,whereastheyareveryraretoabsent
sections,Boundstonesconstitute
They m e
less t h a n 1%
of thecarbonate
algal stromatolites,
Most of thecarbonate
planes a r e
member is v e r yt h i c k l y
A t the S u n s e t , Hondo,
'
23
interrially indistinctly
conlmoaLy t h i n l y
distinc%%ylaminated
'GO
t n thesurvival
iriciicating environmentalcond.iti0n.sinimFcsl
o r developmentofburrowingorganisms.Extreme
s a l i n i t y and/
supratidalexposure
since no evidence o f
was noted i n t h e s e r o c k
units, Towards
Lo dis$i.nct medium
k s t carbonate roclrs
fE Tnat they have
m e at l e a s t moder8.-h?ljr p e t r o l i f e r o u s
a f e t i d odoruponbeing
S u p r a t i d a lf a c i e sa r e
u s u a l l y mwh
formed jn
whether
the
hydrocarbons
present
were
p o r t e di n t o
the a r e a .
If %heyformed
o r "cam-
2~ ap
ther.%beabsence
o f organic materiaL on
otherenvironments.
on
If thehydrocarbons
all
rfiigTated i n t o t h e
carbonate rock u n i t s , t h e n r e l a t i v e p o r o s i t i e s
might be respon-
s i b l e f a r t h e i rl o c a l i z e da b s e n c e .S u b a e r i a lc e m e n t a t i o n
processes might have rendered
the supratidal f a c i e s r e l a t i v e l y
..
39
CARBONATE SEDTivENTkYf STRUCTURES
Introduction
Organo-sedimentary s t r u c t u r e s andemergentdesiccation
features are the
most common c a r b o n a t e s e d i m e n t a r y s t r u c t u r e s
p r e s e n t in t h set u d y
a r e aD. i s t i n cct r o s s - s t r a t i f i c a t i o n
is almost completely absent
i n t h i s r e p o r t .F i g u r e
6 is an est?-mtl-l;e o ft h e
relative
i n the car-
frequency of o c c u r r e n c e o f s e d i m e n t a r y s t r u c t u r e s
bonateenvironments,whichareinferred
fl,wthsir
-!x be r e p r e s e n t e d i n
the studyarea.
# & a."n o - s e d l m ~ t a v
structures
i n t h e stutudy area.Thesestructuyes
h a w formedthrough
greenalgae.
lam-
They a m r e l s t i s e l y
are i n f e r r e d t o
was noted.
Cryptalgallanlinates(Aftken,1967)aresockunits
undulatory laminae
t o t h ea c t i v i t y
with
a t l e a s % some o f which a r e i n f e r r e d t o
Qf blue-greenalgae,
bedue
The c r y p t a l g a l 3.a.minates
1) theydevelopinto
recogniza.bXc a l g a ls t r o m a t o l i t e s
i n a few rock uni'ts, and 2 ) they only very rarely contain evapori t e molds,Cryptalgallaminatesforminprotectedmud-flats
i n R e c e n ct a r b o n a t es e t t i n g s( A i t k e n ,
1967; Logan
-a,
1964)
with
~~~~
e
32
formatioil i n p r o t e c t e d m u d - f l a t s ,
water circulatlon
(Shim &
o r preservatim
&, 1965) of e v a p o r i t e m i n e r a l s . -
DONIa
~ l~g a l s t r o m a t o l i t e s ( h i t k e n , 1 9 6 7 ) a r e t h e
most
Formation,
a c t e r i z e d as foll07m8
1) *hey c o ~ s i s - lof
; si.mpfe,unciulatosy
fea.tares,
n o t a s s o c i a t e d w i t h eviclence of evaporites,p
Domal strome%Gl-
action of
waves and o t h e r i n t e r a c t i n g f a c t o r s p r e v e n t t h e
i n R e c e n tc a r b o n a t es e t t i n g s .
The degree of
I
I
& 3.9641,
GebeleSn,1969)
et
i n 'the s t u d y
i n l o v ~ supratidal/high i n t e r t i d a l or low i n t e r t i d a l / s u b t i d a l
environments.
a t l e a s t minimal amounts o f v f a i e r c i r c u l a t i o n i n t h e i n t e r t i d a l /
subtidal environments
and n o t i n f r e q u e n t i n u n d a t i o n
of the
0
hemispheroids(Lcgan
are about
-5
a a,1 9 6 h ) .
'32
The d Z g f t a t es t r o m a t o l i t e s
D i g i t a t e s t r o m a t o l i t e s a-re g e n e r a l l y t h o u g h t t o h a v e
t'oxhed
1967).
c~~-vi~.o~?me.r~"c.
Kwveverp 'the presence of well
developad f e n e s t r a l f a b r i c
matrixbetween
silbserial
exposure
qlhese o n c o l i t e n
ST^
gen-
e r a l l yc o n c e n t r i c( n o d e
E;5fioi3s
of o n c o l i t e s ,is near t h e
m d bryozoan fra,gents
A few
w i t h borings about
2mm i n dia.meter.
w p o s e d t o waves
modern c a r b o n a t es e t t i n g s
f e a t u r e s i n t h eu n i t .
T~Eonco~.tas
i n a nearly continuously
o f t h e concki1tri.c
and t h e back o f m y i n t e r t i d a l
suggestsnormalmarineconditionsduringdeposition,
l e a c h e do n c o l i t e
in
A single
u n i t 10 ( f i g u r e 10B).
It
was probably t r a n s p o r t e d i n t o t h e a r e a d u r i n g d e p o s i t i o n .
Emergent D e s l c c a t i o n F e a t x r e s
Introduction
Evidence o f s u b a e r i a l s x p o s u r e i s r e l a t i v e l y v e r y rare i n
61'
penecontemporaneous gaps i n r o c k
3965).
Fenestrae
f i l l i n g (Tebbutt
ei: a,
dolomite hosts.
I s o l a t e db u b b l e - l i k ec a v i t i e si n d i c a t i v eo f
o f planar i s o l a t e d c a v i t i e s a r e i n f e r r e d
consistifig
of s u b a e r i a l l y exposed
No internal.
Fones'crsL fabbric in t h e
wit'n anhydritenodule
It is r a r e l y , i f
o r gypsum molds,
Pen-
i n s u b t i d a l ones ( S h i m ,
1968b,). Rock u n i t s w i t h f e n z e s t r a lf a b r i c
are interpreted
t o haveformed
present in i n t e r -
i n t h es t u d ya r e a
in s u p r a t i d a l o r i n t e r t i d a l
e
34
Alua Cracks
i972r Burst,1965)
under s p e c i a cl o l l d i t i o n s( I l e c k e l p
Con-
sequently * 0 t h ~
evidence
~
of s u b a e r i a l e x p o s u r e is desirsb2-s
for envixanrcentxliPitmpretation.
mi%
LO
abmt 2 t o 4 inches
present.
111
ICE-&
Eondo, unit 6 , diatirsc-6 polygms
below them,
The i n t e f - p o l y g o a a la r e a s
with jn%raclnsts,
a r e p a r t i a l l y f'!,iled
f i l l e d mud c r a c k s a r e p r e s e n t .
relatiwe:Ly r a r e l y r e p o r t e d
i n the l i t e r a t m e ,
Matter (1967)e
above arid
Pischer(196b)
t oe x p l a i n t h i s t y p e o f f i l l i n g :
HoweverB similar
by Fischer (1964)
and
ling,
and s t r o m a t o l i t e s
i n t h e rock u n i t i s osmpatib3.e w i t h t h e f o r e g o i n g e x p l a n a t i o n .
F e n e s t r a l fabric in the o v e r l y i n g u n i t and algal s t r o m a t o l i t e s
and c r y p t a l g a l l a m i n a t e s w i t h i n
a e r i a l c a u s e of mud cracking,
. -
35
Brecciation
B r e c c i a t i o n ( f i g u r e 9k) canform i n a ~zumberof waysp
entpirorments, and Limes rela"tve t o deposition8
d e s i c c a t i o n ciue t o subaerialexposure,
t h ec a l i c h i f i c a t i o np r o c e s s( J a m e s ,
1) i n t e n s e
2) iu1 i n i t i a l . s t e p i n
s o l u t i o n b r e c c i a t i o n due t u t h e l e a c h i n g o f e v a p o r i t e s ,
4)
hard-
rock u i ~ i t s , o r 6) i g n e o u s i n t r u s i o n f r e -
q u e n t l yb r e c c i a t e sa d j a c e n t
e. is
ciation
rock u n i t s .
Consequently,brec-
u s e l e s s as an environmentalindica-tor.
but
of carbonaterocks
c i a t i o n is g e n e r a l l y : b m d i n t h e s u p r a t i d a l d e p o s i t i o n a l f s c i e s
( e .g. f i g u r e 9 A 1 , where it may most; l i k e l y be r e l a t e d t o ir,tenoe
desiccationduringsubaerie1exposure
c i a t i o ? ? may havebeenconceivablycaused
However, l o c a l l yb r e c by t h e
SOhtiCR
of
e v a p o r i t e minerals o r by t h e s t a r t o f P e r m i a n c a l i c h i f i c a t i o n ,
although no evidence
Brecciation relatei to
%heemplacement OS i g n e o u s i n t r u s i v e s
Conclusion
"
The p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n s on c a r b o n a t e s e d i m e n t a r y s t r u c t u r e s
i l l u s t r a t e that individual sedimentary structures only rmely
form
iR
ShIgIE
d i s t i n c t environment of deposition.Consequently,
'
..
0
36
used t o i n t e r p r e t s u p r a t i d a l , i . n t e r t i d a l ,
and s u b t i d a l envirom-
men%s i n t h i s s t u d y ,
in t h e
t h a t theenvironments
o f & p o s i 6 i s n of t h e
rare.
The generaL
in the
s u p r a t i d a l and i n t e r t i d a l f a c i e s o f t h i s s t u d y s u g g e s t s that
sabkha environments o f deposition were ram? duying lower
At?dres time,
a t e d on t h e P e d e r n a l p o s i t i v e
San
is loc-
IMPLICATIONS OF STUDY).
PALECGEOGRAPHZC
o f t h s Pedernal
positive
element,cvax,probably
deposited
tidally,
sub-
..
37
~r.'l~l,,f'ilip,,p~fl
2.1 ,:..Iu
*.
I3
-_".Iri~;rociv.chion
The petrography of: r o c k u n i t s d u r i n g
6 i i l u s t r a t e s the relativs
a t i o n of t h e rock u n i t s .F i g u r e
in
frequency of occurrence o f s k e l e t a l a n d n o n - s k e l e t a l g r a i n s
ctlrbonate d e p o s i t i o n a lf a c i e s .
present in themeasured
The petr0graphj.cparameters
s e c - t i o ~ sare grapi1icall.ypoytrayed
in
!'latee8 I t o 'VIII*
'
"-.S~te:.atal G s a - i a
The s k e l e t a l g a i n s i d e n t i f i e d
E'crmation i n t h e s t u d y
3@DY FOSSILS)
i n t h e lovrerSanAndres
a l l m7id-
Th.ese s k e l e t a l .g r a i n sg e n e r e l l yl a c k
m c e of t r a n s p o r t and abrasion,Brachiopodsare
d i s a r t i c u l a t e d andalmost
commanly nct
a l l skeletalfragmentsare
an&wlsr,
t o havebeen
al.mou%
e n t i r e l y i n Iow-energyenvironments.
PelobdF,
The termpeloid(Bathurst,1971)
is u s e d t o d e n o t e c r y p t o -
c r y s t a l l i n e a g g r e g a t e s o f unknown o r i g i n t h a t a r e s m a l l e r t h a n
of
0.231m i n diameter,Peloids,.especiallythosesugpestj.v.e
f e c a l .p e l l e to r i g i n ,a r ev e r yr a r ei nt h e
are abundant
i n both modernand
s-kudy a r e a .
Yet they
many a n c i e n t s h e l f s e t t i n g s ,
b l u r r e d beyond recognition(BeaXes,
compaction o f very poorly cemented
become mergedand
1965) probablyowing
o r non-cemented peloids
to the
and/
38
!?he term f e c a l
o r t h ee f f e c t s
o f p e r v a s i v ed o l o m i t i z a t i o n .
pellet cluster
peloids, which
ciusters of
ei; a . l P 1972).
I n t r a c l a s t s may be i d e n t i c a l t o peloidsand
an i n t r a c l a s t i c o r i g i n i s p r e s e n t .
Such g r a i n s l a r g e r
I n t r a c l a s t s i n the s t u d y a r e aa r e
present in places
"O
.- o l i t e s
most commmly
(P o w w s L 1953)
Ooiitesaredefined.
as s u b s p h e r i c a l , s a n d s i z e c a r b o n a t e
a nucleus o f a n o t h e r p a r t i c l e ( a f t e r
Blatt gi;
.a,1972).
The
50% o f t h e p a r t i c l e .
i s u s e d i n 'chis s t u d y t o danote an
o o l i t e whose. n u c l e u s c o n s t i t u t e s
more t h a n 50% o f t h e p a r t i c l e .
recrystallized
The
.or
However, enough g n i i n s w i t h c h m a c t e r i s t i cc o n c e n t r i c
rings a r e a v a i l a b l e f o r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f o o l i t i c r o c k u n i t s .
39
True o o l i t en u c l e i wereind.eterminable,Intrac3.asts9quavtz
g r a i n s , a.nd F o r a m i n i f e r a t e s t s ; , i n d e c r e a s i n g o r d e r o f abundance,arethe
m o s t common n u c l e i in s u p e r f i c i a l o o l . i t e s .
Terrigenous GraiLs.
t o t h eo n e sp r e s e n t
in theqJartz
arenk-tes o f
. They were n o t e d i n r o c k f a b r i c s
mttdstone t o v e r y mud-leanwackestone,Carbonaterockunits
t h a t a r e r i c h i n t e r r i g e n o u s grains loca,lLy contain rip-ups
. and s u p e r f i c i a l o o l i t e s w i t h qm.rtz g r a i n n u c l e i .
PorosiQ
member was d e s c r i b e d a f t e r t h e
andPray(1970).Calciumcarbonate
limestones)generallyhaveporasities
most,EaPlycementation
of a few p e r c e n t
is thought t o reducethese
5 to
at
d r y high
t oe l i m i n a t et h er e m a i n i n gp o r o s i t y .D o l o m i t i z a t i o n( r e s u l t i n g
in intercrystalline porosity)
(I
& e l e c t i v e s o l u t i o n o f carbonate
and/or random s o l u t i o n of
vugs and/orchannels)
may i n c r e a s e
fre-
h-0
and quartzcements
w e r e o b s e r v e dl o c a l l y ,
The
Andres 5s
Fossil- rnoldic p o r o s i t y i s
thesecondmostabundantporositytype,Evaporite
and o o l i t e .
I n t e r - a a d i n t r s p a r t i c l ep o r c s i - t y
is r a r e , c a l c i t a
f i l l e d u and c h i e f l y p r e s e n t i n theundaform-edge
Interconnectedporosity
intercsystaPlineporosity
is p r a c t i c a l l y c o n f i r i e d t o d o l o m i t e
m-d t h e in-cer-and
o s i t y of t h e undaform-edge f a c i e s ,
allnostwithoutexception
area.
i n t r a p a r t i c l e por-
Theseporositytypes
area,interms
are
f i l l e d w i t h c a l c i t e cement i n t h o study
However, open p o r o s i t y is l o c z l l yp r e s e n t ,
potential of the
sand f a c i e s .
lower SanAndres
The petroleum
i n t h e v i c i n i t y of t h e s t u d y
sf i n t e r c o n n e c t e d p o r o s i t i e s s u f f i c i e n t f o r
r e s e r v o i r development,appears
edge rack units inferred to
t o be confined Lo I ) undaform-
be p r e s e n t i n t h e s u b s u r f a c e
in
OF STUDY)
and 2) dolomitic r o c k u n i t s ,
41
CAREOMATE BIAGEWSIS
.-I n t r o d u c t i o n
Most c a r b o n a t e r o c k s , i n c l u d i n g t h o s e '
been profoundly modified
o f t h i s study, have
by p o s t - d e p o s i t i o n a l
or d i a g e n e t i c
changes,Cementation,dolomitization,.ironsulfides
o x i d e s td e d o l o m i t i z a t i o n ,s i l i c i f i c a t i o n ,
and i r o n
a n ds % y l o l i t i z a t i o n
3,re Lfle c a r b o n a t e d i a g e n e t i c f e a t u r e s c o n s i d e r e d i n
t h i s s-f;udy.
Ccmentatioq;
_
I
Hcawever9 Recentcarbonate
and
i
l
z the study area contains
andhence
The
mudstone
l i t t l e emphasis was
has g e n e r a l l y betm
focusedupon=parrycalcitecements.Suchcementswerenoted
in. t h e s t u d y a r e a
in molds of evaporites
and c a r b o n a t e g r a i n s ,
Only s p a r r y c a l c i t e c o n s i s t i n g
ChoquetteandPray,.
of e q u a n tc r y s t a l s
noted i n t h e 2.00 Y i i n s e c t i o n s o f t h e c a r b o n a t e
during. t h i s study e
in
was
member examined
The e q u a n t c r y s t a l s i m p l y p r e c i p i t a t i o n
1974).
S p a r y dolomiteandquartzcementswereobservedlocally.
The dolomite cements were 0d.y noted filling fenestrae
in supra-
Dolomitizati.on
vsry i m p o r t a n t ( f i g u r e 5 ) .
but l i m e s t o n e s
P r a c t i c a l l y a l l dnlo-
origina.1 calciumcarbonate
mead.
Dolomite
aqd a r e v e r y v a r i -
w i t h b o t h mud and g r a i n s ,
which r e s u l t s f r o m t h e c a n n i b a l i z a t i o n o f l o c a i c a , l c i t c
dolomite cry5W.i~a n d l e a v e i n t e r c r y s t a l l i n e p o r o s i t y i .
of a l l phsscs of
t h i s sequencearepresentinthe
7)
AndresFormation(figure
seqv.ence i n t h e s t u d y
Go form
Extiriplea
lower San
area is t h e e o m p l e i e s e l e c t i v e
dolom3:tiz.-
The f i n a l s t a g e s o f
i n t h e fowes San A n d r e s u s u a l l y r e s u l t e d
the selective
of
N I O ~ C ? ~ ~
whereasotherbiotics
were leached,
f l a t environmentsproducecon-
The heavy h y p e r s a l i n e
and d o l o m i t i z a s
43
(CIWMNG
UrJ1-r
RI.MJCH)
4)
LIMESTWE
DOLQMiTE
'
'
FIGURE7
'
.
'
ULCrrE
FILLED)
SEQUENCE OF SELECTIVE D a L a M l T I ~ A T l O N
OBSERVED IN L6WEK 5AN ANOK5 FOPS$ATIopJ WITH EXAMPLES OF EACH PHASE.
. LET'r~ix5 REFER T O RELATIVE hBUr4DkNCE
OF: D~FFEREW ? H P \ S E ~ < A = A B U ~ ~ D A N T
C* COIVIMW) R-C= RARE TO COMMON R=URE)
theunderlyingsediments(Lucia,
1972).
Vhether o r nottheevapor-
a t i o n r e s u l t s i n t h e f o r m a t i o n of p r e s e r v a b l e e v a p o r i t e & is depen.de n t on c l i m a t e .
TheBahamas
The TrucialCoast
is i n a n
& a9
a r i d c l i m a t i c zone and t h e
formatior. of evaporitesaccompaniesdolomitiza%ion(Bebout
and
Maiklem, 1 9 7 3 ) .
The p a t t e r n s o f d o l o m i t i z a t i o n i n t h e
lower S a n Andres a r e
Fox Cave,which
supra-
44
tidal orintertidalfacies,
2 ) c o n v e r s e l y , f o r example, s u n s e t
has evidence o f f o u rs e p a r a t ep e r i o d so fs u b a e r i a l
tidal flat
some dolomite-
cementedsandstones,
to a l e s s e r e x t e n t CanningRanch9normalmarine
t o be dolomites, 4)
be l i m e s t o n e s , w h e r e a s o t h e r f a c i e s t e n d
,
a t Hondo
Pox Cave,andCanningRanch,
units tend t o
p a r t s of
the upper
t o be doLomiticand grade up i n t o
thak
was r e s p o n s i b l ef o r
of laker
dolurnitizacioil, and 5)
o f theformespiiesenceof
e v a p o r i t e s i s found i n d o l o m i t i c h o s t s , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t a n
i n c r e a s e i n t h e Mg/Ca r a t i o was due t o t h e p r e c i p i t a t i o n of
gypsum and a n h y d r i t e .
No ,canvincingevidence f o r a r e g i o n a l
with
..
t h a t it was a n
i n thelower
San dndresFormation,
t h e y a r e usually found
I n the e v a p o r i t i cf a c i e s ,
p o r t i o n of anhydritenodulemolds,
as w i d e l y d i s s e m i n a t e d i n d i v i d u a l c r y s t a l s
grown c r y s t a l s i n t h e c m b o n a t e
and c l u s t e r s of i n t e r -
deposi,tionzJ. f a c i e s of -this
45
t h e s u p r a t i d a l , some of t h e i n t e r t i d a l ,
btudy,except
and t h e
undaform-edge s m d f a c i e s ,T h e i rp r e s e n c es u g g e s t sr e d u c i n g
c o n d i t i o n s e x i s t e d a t or j u s t below the sediment-water interface pene~ontemporzneously with d e p o s i t i o n .
DedoiomiLizatioB
__I
in one rock u n i t i n t h e
XI. i s t h i n ,i r r e g u l a r l yl a m i n a t e d ,
and has a f a b r i c o f c a l c i t e c r y s t a l s ,
which a r e v e r y similar
(Polk, 1965).
A possibled.edolomiteorigin
'numberoftextural
mud
is suggested by a
and s t r a b i g r a p h i c c r i t e r i a .
The t h i n Lime-
s t o n e i s i n a s e c t i o n that is p r a c t i c a l l y a l l d o l o m i t e ( f i g u r e
5).
The u n i t is n o t u n l i k e
r o c ku n i t ,
the underlyinglaminateddolomite
i f d i a g e n e t i ce f f e c t s
Vjrpical of t h e c l o t t e d
a r e not considered.
Fea%u.res
o r "gr~mel-euse'~dedolomitetexture of
l) s e v e r a l sharp, p a r t i a l rhornbo-
Evamy (1967) a r ep r e s e n t x
1965?), b u t l a c k i n g p a r t i a l mud
o f originaldolomite
rhombohedra. w i t h
a t i o no f
mud.
red presence
T h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h ei n f e r -
o f a n o r i g i n a l mud-supported fabric.
The dedolomiteunit
is i n an i n t e r t i d a l
which i s s t r a t i g r a p h i c a l l y e q u i v a l e n t t o
a w e l ld e v e l o p e ds u p r a t i d a lf a c i e s
a t Hondo.
This stratigraphic
46
selectivity silggests
be discounted on t h e a v a i l a b l e
evidence.
Silicification
S i l j . c f f i c a t i n n i n 'the lower S m h d r e $ Formation i n -the
s t u d y ares i s r e l a t i v e l y r~.ncommon. it
fossil r e p l a c i n g s i l i c a ,
nodules are most
i n dizmeter.Biota,especiallybrachiopods,
normalmarinefacies.Chalcedony
CanningRanch,uniL
also v e r y common
&.*re
c h e r tn o d u l e s p
and p o r e - f i l l i n gc h a l c e d o n y ,C h e r t
i n p a r t s o f theupper
'
O C C L I ~as
10.
i n well developed
i s only common l o c t i l l y i n
A13. chalcedonyfound(present
in six
rock
s i l i c i f i c a t i o n must havebeen
Henceo
an e a r l y d i a g e n e t i c p r o c e s s ,
'because o f t h e e v i d e n c e a l r e a d y c i t e d ( s e e D o l o m i t i z a t i o n )
%hat
Many,
e
The s t y l o l i t e s v a y in. r e l i e f -from
stylolitizfd cmtaCtse
97
inch,
along s t y o l i - t e s ,
However, much t h i c k e r r e d
seams about
inch
IIowewerP noindependent
evidence sf
Dome
at BogZe
a
48
EVIDENCE OF EVAPORITES
Tntrod.uct.ion
'
S.l;ratiTied evaporites
are o f t e n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s h e l f
carbonates (Lucia,
San AndresFoxmation
i n t h e s t u d y area,There
i n t h e lower
is a l s o b u t
by solui;inn,Meteoric
t h a t m a y be p r e s e n t i n
rock u n i t s , t h e r e b y f r e q u e n t l y r e s u l t i n g i n o u t c r o p s
lapsebrecciationof
water
a typicallydolomitichost,
with col-
if stratified
1972).
of nodules(Lucia,
is.
of e v a p o r i t e s .
B r e c c i a t i o n i n -t h e s t u d y a r e a
Hovmver, t h e r e i s l o c a l evid.ence of s a l i n i t i e s
presenceofevaporites
i n t h es t u d ya r e ac o n s i s t s
of theformer
oft
1) com-
e v a p o r i t e c r y s t a l molds,and
length-slowchalcedony.
3) r a r e o c c u r r e n c e s of o p t i c a l l y
The v e r yl i m i t e de v i d e n c eo fe v a p o r i t e s
climate inferred
with the a r i d
f o r Permian t h e s u g g e s t s s u f f i c i e n t w a t e r
cir-
of s t r a t i f i e d e v a p o r i t e s .
Anhvdrite Nodule K o l d s
-to completely
49
s u b a e r i a l exposures
b a r r e n of b i o t a b b u t lack a l l inndica'cionof
a r e a few occurrences o f a n h y d r i t e n o d u l e n o l d s i n s u b t i d a l
f a c i e s o v e r l a i n by s u p r a t i d a l f a c i e s , b u t
i t s e l f i s f r e e of evidence o f e v a p o r i t e s .
ions.
o f s u p r a t i d a l cond.it-
s f l i f e r o u s l i m e s t o n e h o s t werefound
( f i g u r e 34A) a n d 24.
Some wsrenoted
a normalmarinebiota.ere
i n Fox Cave, u n i t s 10
in a f e w r o c k u n i t s
with
the anhydritenodulemoldsincreased
in r e l a t i v e abundance upward i n t h e u n l t s I s u g g e s t i n g f o r m a t l o n
from hypersaline brines,
whichwere
of d e p o s i t i o n ,
i n t h e subsur-
i n tine s t u d y a r e a .
Anhydrite nodulemolds
AndresFormationrange
moldsnoted
i nt h el o w e r
Sari
6 t o 8 i n c h e sl o n g( f i g u r e
lIJ.R),
Evidence o f
~~
gQ
was sought
i n e i g h t t h i n s e c t i o n s and a b o u t t v e n t y p o l i s h e d
taining anhydrite nodule moldse but
slabs con-
%he c h a r a c t e r i s % i c c a l c i t e
acte:cizedbyLobate
intern&septa,
roclds.
char-
of the
L a c i a (1972) r e p o r t s t h a t rarely,evaporitenoduleshave
a r e c t a n g u l a r o u t l i n e with s t r a i g h t s i d e s .
u l e moldswerenoted
ofwestTexas
San
AndresFormation
marcasite).
nod-
Anhydritenodules
Suchanhydrite
t h i s study t o i n c l u d e
anhydrite nodule
similar p y r i t ep r e c t , m x m p whichwere
l a t e ro x i d i z e d .H e m a t i t e
u n i t 15,rvhere a n h y d r i t e
nodule molds a r e c o m p l e t e l y t o a l m o s t c o m p l e t e l y f i l l e d
with
hematite
A r e l a t i v e l y few rock units
rims.
have c a l c i t e - f i l l e d p o r e s
are a s s o c i a t e d
lobate o u t l i n e s ,
w i t h t h e same t y p e s of sediment
rimmed nodulemoldsp
r i t e nodulemolds,
or
and henceprobablyareanhyd-
e
51
molds were never observed together in the
same r o c k u n i t i n t h e
studyarea.Geochemicalconsiderations
o f p y r i t ef o r m a t i o n
t h a t iron
c o n c e n t r a t i o n o r r e a c t i v i t y was p r o b a b l y t h e l i m i t i n g f a c t o r
in pyrite formation
a . t i t e rims.
molds l a c k i n g hem-
of hematite rims i n t h e s e
Crsstal Molds
c r y s t a l s .E v a p o r i t ec r y s t a l
San AndresFormation
-to o r i g i n a l l y havebeen
mol&
arerecognized
gypsum
by s t r a i g h t
s i d e s and r e c t a n g u l a rr e - e n t r a n t s( L u c i a ,1 9 7 2 ) .C a l c i t e - f i l l e d
molds a r e p r e s e n t i n
Empty molds aprree s e n t
unit 8.
a calci-be host i n F o r t S t a n t o n , u n i t
i n a c a l c ihtoe o t
11.
a t Hondo,
t o i a y e r s a.bout i inch
t h i c k , which a r e i n t e r s t r a t i f i e d w i t h l a y e r s a b o u t 1%-inches
thick consisthg of possible cryptalgal. laminates (figure
h fewmolds
are confined to
l3A)
i n er o c ku n i t( F o r tS t a n t o n ,u n i t
1 3 ) . No Lath-shaped mclds
t y p i c a l of a n h y d r i t e c r y s t a l s werefound
o c c u r r e n c e s .I t h e e v a p o r i t ec r y s t a l
moldsmost
o r i g i n a l gypsum c r y s t a l s .C a l c i t e - f i l l e d
t h e , f a b r i c formed by the displacive growth
(Shearman and F u l l e r , 1.969) were only noted
brachiopod from Fort Stanton, unit
23,
..
1 , i k e l yr e p r e s e n t
molds suggestixre of
of a n h y d r i t e c r y s t a l s
i n a Productid
52
Length-SLow Cha.lcedony_
The presence of optically length-slow chalcedony
i s sug-
A l l chalcedonynoted
and
i n th.e studyarea(found.
i n s i x o u t o f onehundred t h i n sectiomexamined) i s o p t i c a l l y
length-sl.ovr, s u g g e s t i n g f o r n a t i o n f r o m h y p e r s a l i n e b r i n e s .
Most
non-evaporitic -Former
of the chalcedony filIs,,pores, but on9 occurrence was noted
coating evaporite crystal
molds i n a burrow h F c r t S t a n t o n ,
u n i t 13.
The presence o f length-slow chalcedony.in a rock u n i t is
an ambiguous c r i t e r i o n to i n f e r an e v a p o r i t i c d e p o s i t i o n a l
h i s t o r y i f usedalone,
Optical-1-g length-slowchalcedony
may
And t h e h y p e r s a l i n e b r i n e s r e c o r d e d
by thepresenceof
Thk i a i r
explanation f o r the
i n t h e studyareacarmot
because s t r a t i f i e d e v a p o r i t e s a r e p r e s e n t
San k n d r e s i n t h e
near t h e r o c k
be discounted
in theoverlyingupper
stu.dy a r e a and i n t h e s t r a t i g r a p h i c a l l y
equiv-
53
CARBONATE DEPOSITIOIIAL FACIES
1ntrod.uction
Wilson (1970) outlined an idealized
scheme ofcarbonate
opendeep
in the geologic
ma'rine t o e v a p o r i t i c s h o r e f a c e
The carbonateenvkonmentsinferred.
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d.e$osiCionof
t o havebeen
t h e carbonate member o f t h i s
s k d y a r e a.pproximatelyequivalenttothefolZowingfiveof
Wilson*s generalshelfdepositionalenvironments
shelffacies,
I) 'tidal
pla,tformfacies9
platform, e n d
14)
5 ) p l a t f o r me v a p o r k t ef a c i e s( f i g u r e
on marine
25)
Figure 6 i l l u s t r a t e s t h e e s t i m a t e o f r e l z t i v e f r e q u e n c y
in t h i s section,
X and f i g u r e 8 i l l u s t r a t e t h e l a t e r a l
of carbonated.epositiona1facies
TZdal F l a t and Lagoonal
Pla.tes IX and
and v e r t i c a l d i s t r i b u t i n n
in t h e studyarea,.
EnvApnLtem
About
% h i s s t u d y is i n t e r p r e t e d t o have
shallow
in a t i d a l f l a t a n d h l a g o o n a ls e t t i n g .
The t i d a l
(1970)
35% and
Specimen
U.W.
1589/1
.-:.
Supratidal
Figureq A,
r(
B.
Specimen
1589/2~+,
U.W.
DepositionalFacies
Sunset, unit 472 brecciation probably dueto solution of evaporites o r intense desiccation.
BogleDome,unit
26: dark makses are digitatestromatolites (D).
0
55
o f t h e c a r b o n a t e member o f t h e lowerSan
area.
And.rus i n t h e s t u d y
of t h e two
1969).
(Kinsman,
The presenceafbeddedevaporitesintheupper
Yeso
Formation i n t h e s t u d y a r e a p i n t h e lowerSanAndresFormation
west of
Therefore
physical s e t % i n g
--
in San
tidal
i n modern c a r b o n a t e s e t t i n g s .
t i d a l fluctuations& the
s u p r a t i d a l , i n t e r t i d a l , and s u b t i d j l sub-environments,
mwineenvironment
t h e t i d a l Ylat.
The
on
Sediment is c a r r i e d o n t o .%he t i d a l f 1 a . t by
t i d a l andstormcurrents,
If t h e r a t e of sedimentaccumulation
is g r a a t s r t h a n r e l a t i v e s e a - l e v e l r i s e ,
%hen t h e tidal. f l a t
w i l l progradecut.Consequently,subtidaideposits
would be
l a i n by s u p r a t i d a l d e p o s i t s .
Two t y p e s o f f l o w o f t e n r e s u l t
on- a i d o f f l a p
may
t i d a i f l a t s i n non-
a r e r a r e i n a r i d s e t t i n g s (Roehl, 1967).
..
56
Non-l?hraDori.tic T i da.3 F l a t ao
-Agl
Facis-2
small amountsof
this
wifh only
Supratidal Facies
The supraLidaL f a c i e s of this study ( f i g w e s 9 and 1OA)
c o n s i s t s o f t - l d a l f l a b caxbonates d.epasitedabove
t i d e and consequentlysuime?ia.lly
timebetw&n
exposed. f o r l o n g p e r i o d s of
inundated them.
276 o f t h e
c m b o n a t e member,
The s u p r a t i d a l f a c i e s
bjr t h e p r e s e n c e
f a b r i c , 2! eLtd .c:ea.cksp 3 1 a b u n d a n t i n t r a c l a s t s , a n d
The f o l l o w i n gr o c k
of
OS vciriouscombinations
thefollowingernergent'desiccationfeatuxeso
ciatLon.
olean high-
4) brec-
types, i n o r d e r of d e c r e a s i n g
r e l a t i v e abundance, a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e s u p r a t i d a l f a c i e s 8
1) i n t r a c l a s l i c
mudstones,andmud-rlchwackestones,
and 3 ) i n t r a c l a s t i c g r a i n s t o n e s .
2) u n f o s s i l . i f e r o u s mudstones,
Intertidal Facies
The i n t e r t i d a l f a c i e s of t h i s s t i ~ d y( f i g u r e s 1013 and 21.G)
consists of carbonates
high- andlow-tide,
and hence,weredailysubjected
ionandemergence.
T h i s f a c i e s makes upabout
mean
t o inundat-
2% of t h e
car-
bonate member,
The s u p r a t i d a l f a c i e s i s environmentally much more d i s tinctive than the intertidal facies
andnormally
direc-t%yover-
S u p r a t i d a l and I n t e r t i d a l D e p o s i t i o n a l F a c i e s
Figure
i.
.)
10
A.
B.
a
59
l i e s it.
Howevers i-t is
p o s s i b l e t o h.ave no i n - t e r t i d a l d e p o s i t s below a s u p r a t i d a l
facies,, and no s u p r a t i d a l f a c i e s o v e r an inter%LdaL d e p o s i t ,
The t i c a l range might havebeenvery
essentLaul3-y a b s e n t or an abrupt r e l a t i v e f a l l i n s e a l e v e l
might have r e s u l t e d i n suFratidal d e p o s i t s be%ng underlai.n by
s u b t i d a ld e p o s i t s ,
And s u p r a t i d a l d e p s i t s n e e 6 n o t
always
p r e g r a d eb v e ri n t e r t i d a ld e p o s i t s s .
c i s e d in idcntiJ3riiig i n t e r t i d a l d e p o s i t s s o l e l y by t h e u s e
of
s u p r a t i d a l rock u n i t s ,
I t i s f r e q u e n t l y d i f f i c u l t t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e low i n t e r t i d a l
fromres-krictedmarinedeposits.Shallowsubtidalsediments
a r e t r a n s p o r t e d to -$he i n t e s t i d a l e m i r o n m e n t by storms and
t i d e s r e s u l t i n g in s i m i l a r s e d i m e n t a r y f a b r i c s
Laporte (Y$67)
i n sa.ch environ-
handled t h i s d i f f i c u l t y
t h a t is
f o r an
his i n t e r t i d a lf a c i e sa p p e a r s
l a m i n a t e s and algal s t r o m a , t o l i t e s o r by p o s i t i o n u n d e r n e a t h
s u p r a t i d a l d e p o s i t s i f shrir&&e cracks or many gastropods were
present.
The f o l l o v & gr o c kt y p e sa r ec h a r a c t e r i s t i c
i n t e r t i d a l f a c i e s i%l
.the s t u d ya r e a :
o r algal s t r o m a t o l i t e bounds-tone
of t h e
I) c r y p t e l g a l laminate
60
R e s t r i c t e dS u b t i d a l( L a g o o n a l )F a c i e s
The s u b t i d a l f a c i e s ( ' t h e i n f r a t i d a l
i n t h i s studjr.
and storm t i d e s .
subaerially
Two s u b - f a c i e s
The r e s t r i c t e d m a r i n e
fac:ies,
The r e s t r i c t e d m a r i n e f a c i e s
o f t h i s study ( f i g u r e s ll and
a
q
n
d p a r t of
Wilson(1970).
1% consists of c a r b o n a t e sd e p o s i t e di n
.tidal environment,which
s. sub-
The r e s t r i c t e d m a r i n e f a c i e s
makes upabout
35% of t h e
carbonate member.
Two s u b - f a c i e s o f the r e s t r i c t e d m a r i n e f a c i e s
are recog4
n l z e d , namely u n f o s s i l i f e r o u s and f o s s i l i f e r o u s s u b - f a c i e s .
The m f o s s i l i f e r o u s s u b - f a c i e s
i s e s s e n t i a l l y b a r r e n of a l l
b i o t a and may r e p r e s e n t p h y s i c a l - c h e m i c a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n
carbonateminerals
of
i n a penesalineenvironment,Unfossilifer-
are t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c r o c k t y p e s .
The f o s s i l i f e r o u ss u b - f a c i e s
_.
62
_.
Specimen
U . W e 1589/7
A,
E.
R e s t r i c t e dm a r i n ef a c i e s( S u n s e t ,u n i t
43):
abundant f o s s i l debris(wackestone)
Normal marine facies(Cannin
Ranch, u n i t
9 ) : abundantProductids (PD and i n t r a particle porosity (P)
63
c o n t a i n s only b i o t i c t y p e s which are i n f e r r e d t o be t o l e r a n t
of such adverse enviromental conditions
as abnormal s a l i n i t y ,
g r e a tt u r b i d i t y ,e x t r e m et e m p e r z t u r ev a r i a ' t i o n s ,
Hencep y e s t r i c t e d )marine doesnotimply
i t i e s were &on
o r s-icagnation.
that abnormal s a l i n -
responsible,althotlghthey
commonly play a
The arid c l i m a t e i n f e r r e d f a r
lower SanAndrestime
ant f a u n a g e n e r a l l y r e p r e s e n t
normal. marineassemblagzs,
very g r e a t l y ( L a p o r t e
Toler-
1967)
I) l a n f o s s i l i f e r o u s
at i f
F o r m i n i l e r a ,g a s t r o p o d s ,
0%
this studyt
f o s s i l i f e r o u s , then o n l y ~ s t r x ~ d s ,
and/orpelecypods
are present, 2 )
is absent ( o r rare, i f
oTrerlying u n i t ) a
Gaographica.lly,
modern c a r b o n a t e s e t t i n g s
1970).
t h e i r former presence in
the studyareaprecludes
t o the
64. .
a s t a n d i n g body of
sedimentation of beddedevaporitesoutof
water.
The L i m i t e de v a p o r i t i cf e a t u r e s
Pound. i n t h er o c k s
of
by p r e c i p i t a t i o n from
a dia-
and hencereLpresent
a sedimentaryenvironment.Thesefeaturessug-
g e s tt h ep r e s e n c e
with
hypersaline bodies
f l a t s (Lucia,1972).
IfloBern Sabkha Environments
The best studied environment
i n which e v a p o r i t e s a r e
precipitatedwithincarbonatesediments
i s thecoa.sta1
sabkha
o r s a l t f l a t of t h e s o u t h e r n P e r s i a n G u l f , e s p e c i a l l y t h e
TrucialCoast
(Kinsman, 1969).
salt-encrustedsurfaces
Sabkhas a r ee x p o s e d ,l e v e l ,
that areonlyoccasionallyinundated.
Sedimentaryevid.encesofemergenceanddesiccationareabundant
(Kinsman, 1969; I l l i n g
1968b)e
'
Thetwo
& 1965; C u r t i s
componentsof
& 1963s S h i m ,
sabkha d k g e n e s i s w e t
1) i n t e r -
as d o l o m i t i z a t i o n .
of t h e sabkha
mechanism o f b r i n e c o n c e n t r a t i o n
is e v a p o r i t i v e pumping of i n t e r s t i t i a l f l u i d s upward t o t h e
sab a s u r f a c e . D o l o m i t i z a t i o n
,through thesediment.Sabklla
a n h y d r i t e i s t y p i c a l l yn o d u l a r .
Gypsum c r y s t a l si nt h eu p p e r
4 t o 5cm o f t h e
sablrha are r e p l a c e d
i n g i n pseudomorphs.
& SLt. by a n h y d r i t e r e s u l t -
The pseudomorphs l o s e t h e i r
shape i nt i m e
ending up as variouslyshapedanlrydri-tenobles.
h
h
i z e d saibka will n o t n e c e s s a r i l y c o n t a i n
A fossil-
a l l m i n e r a l s o r even
tra,ces t h a t d e v e l o p e dd u r i n ge a r l yd i a g e n e s i s .P r e c i p i t a t i o n
of d i a g e n e t i c a r a g o n i t e ,
gypsum1 and a n h y d r i t ei n c r e a s e st h e
Mg/Ca r a t i o r e s u l t i n g i n
the penecontemporaneouspre-
of inter-kidal algal
:xt i n t e r t i d a l zonedia.genesis,
tened in the plane approximately
The gypsum c r y s t a l s a r e
flat-
sha.pes .in
c r o s s - s e c t i o n (Shearman, 1.966).
O
E rvoiagfpi n
o riint e s
A sabkha-likeorigin
San AndresFormation
..
'some of t h ee v a p o r i t i cr o c ku n i t sp r e s e n t ,S u p r a t i d a ls h r i n k a g e
cracks are i n t i m a t e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h anhydritenodulemolds
only i n the upper p a r t of CanningRanch,
u n i t 10.
And t h r e e
u n i t s , b u t no evidence
of evaporites is
p r e s e n tw i t h i nt h es u p r a t i d a lr o c ku n i t st h e m s e l v e s .
Some
66
c r y p t a l g a ll a V , i n a t e ss u g g e s t i n gi n t e r L i d a l
zone d i a g e n e s i s
in t h e s t u d y w e a a r e i n c o n -
s i s t e n t w i t h a sabkha-like0rigi.n.
L i t t l e t o noevidence
o f s u b a e r i a le x p o s u r ee i t h e r :
t h e r o c k u n i t s e 2) abovetherock
1) w i t h i n
u p i t s p r i o r t o thedeposit-
l e v e l s i n nearbymeasuredsections,
o f mhyd;litenodulemolds
sligk-kly higher
i n c a l c i t e showing no evidenceof
k k e s p l a c e c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h t h e p r e c i p i t a t i o n of e v a p o r i t e s
i n modern sabkhas (Bebout and Maiklem, 3.973).
The Sack o f emergent desiccation features
itic rock units
ways:
i n most evzpor-
1) subaqueousorigin
o f emergent features
o f d i a g e n e t i ce v a p o r i t e s ,
2) removal
by e r o s i o n , and 3 ) source of b r i n e s o u t s i d e
Shexrman and
This bias is t h e r e s u l t o f t h e r e b e i n g
mller, 1969).
no recognized modern
of submarinebeddedandnodular
67
anhydrite formation in a basinal s e t t i n g ( D a v i e s and Ludlam,
evaporites,whilecalcitehosts,
two occurrences o f a n h y d r i t e n o d u l e m o l d s i n c a l c i t e i n t h e
studyarealare
morecommonly
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h evaporitesof
19691 Bebout and Maiklern,
inferredsubaqueousorigin(Kendail.,
l9Y3) *
Erosion of subaerially desiccated supratidal
and h i g h i n t e r -
'tidal p o r t i o n s o f an e v a p o r i t i c t i d a l f l a t , and p r e s e r v a t i o n
low i n t e r t i d a l and s u b t i d a l
f a c i e s is a p o s s i b l e
way t o e x p l a i n t h e d i s s o c i a t i o no fe v i d -
o f sucherosi.on might be l e s s
110
For exaimple, t h e r e
b u i l d i n g o f a s o i l p r o f i l e , and 'tile e r o s i o n a l
f a c e mi.ghl be less p r o n o u n c e d .R e l a t i v er i s e si n
SUI-
sea l e v e l and
(Shaw,
submarineerosion,Such
p o s s i b i l i t y i s suggested i n t h es t u d ya r e ab y :
I) e v a p o r i t i c
uncommonly d i r e c t l y o v e r l a i n by normal
by o o l i t i c rock u n i t s ,
which i n d i c a t e h i g h - e n e r g y c o n d i t i o n s
a t deposition, and
some e v a p o r l t i c r o c k u n i t s a r e o v e r l a i n
s t o n er o c ku n i t s
3)
w i t h u n d u l a t o r yc o n t a c t s ,
Hence, t h e r e is a
68
d i s t i n c t p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t a t l e a s t some of the e v a p o r i t i c
rock u n i t s i n t h e s t u d y a r e a
may havebeenformed
by b r i n e s
of which
i n thelowerSanAndres
ation west of
Porm-
in t h e
might have
molds a m s t r a t i -
hypothesis.OccurrencesofabuEdantevaporite
graphically controZLed
and do n o t i n c r e a s e
And
ward o r upward i n t h e s t u d y area. ,,,abundant
this
i
r
-khicltl?ess
~
west-
e v a p o r i t e molds a r e
They arealmostalwaysdolomitic
and e s s e n t i a l l y u n f o s s i l i f e r o u s ,
i n t e r t i d a l , o r s u p r a t i d a l facies character-
i z e d by thepresenceofevaporitemolds.
Two s u b - f a c i e sa r e
r e c o g n i z e d . . An e v a p o r i t i c emergent tiicial f l a t f a c i e s ( f i g u r e s
1%and 14E) composed o f e v a p o r i t i c r o c k u n i t s ,
evidenceofsubaerialexposure
t i d a lr o c ku n i t s ,
which show
And a subaqueous? e v a p o r i t i c f a c i e s ( f i g u r e s
within o r above t h e u n i t s .
Specimen
U .We 1589/8
69
.
E
E
L
II
I
t
3
B.
L'
A.
B.
,
0
The evaporitic emergent
15% o f thecarbon-
5%
t i d . a . l f l a t f a c i e s makes up about
Relativclyminor
71
amoun'ts ofevaporitemoldsare
1 6 ~ ) . These
appear to be
la'tw p e r i o d s o f h y p e r s a l i n i t y ,
Nornlal Narine S u b t i d a l
_XI
Facies
o f t h i s s t u d y ( f i g u r e s %2R, 15,
The normalmarinefacies
of Wilson
in a subtidal
The f a c i e s i s recognized by t h ep r e s e n c eo fb i o t a
for
i n f e r r e d t o r-equira an open,normalmarineenvironnent
development and s w v i v a l , m a i n l y a r t i c u l a t e b r a c h i o p o d s
and
echino'dorrns,
frox
The r o c kt y p e s
n o t e d i n t h i s f a c i e sr a n g e
f o s s i l i f e r o u s mudstone t o mud-richpackstone.
The normal.
t h a t is skeletalboundstones,
area.
i n the lower
They wererecognizedonly
San Andres
in
ostracodbioherms(figure
thick,butonlyabout
apparent.
15).
Thesebiohermsareabout
5 feet
1 t o 2 f e e t of d e p o s i t i o n a l r e l i e f i s
t h e o u t c r o p and a r e l a t e r a l l y e q u i v a l e n t t o
ingabundantProductidbrachiopods(figure
200 f e e ta l o n g
Subtidal
c
c
Rocks of bryozoan-ostracodbioherms
i n normal
marinefacies(Canning
Ranch, u n i t 9)s
A. Sharp contactbetweenbryozoan
(B) bioherm
(BM) and f i l l m a t e r i a l (F) coveringbioherm
B. B r ozoans ( B ) and i n t e r p a r t i c l ep o r o s i t y
(Pg i n biohermal r o c k
73
0
Normal Marine and Undaform-Edge D e p o s i t i o n a l F a c i e s
Figure I6
A.
B.
Normal m a r i n ef a c i e s( F o r tS t a n t o n ,u n i t
13)I
abundantnon-Productidbrachiopods
( B ) and a
barrow (BW) with p r o b a b l e gypsum c r y s t a l
molds ( 0 ) f i l l e d w i t h l e n g t h - s l o w c h a l c e d o n y
and c a l c i t e cement
Undaform-edge f a c i e s (Canning Ranch, u n i t 1 6 )
o o l i t i c g r a i n s t o n e (0) w i t h l i g h t e r c o l o r e d ,
muddier stringers of o o l i t e s (M) (packstone
t o mud-lean wackestone)
'1
. "
74
ske1eta.l ba,nk.s nay 'be p r e s e n t at Fort Stanton about 1 0 f e e t
l a t e r a . l l y fromwhere
u n i t 13 was measured,
HoWevel*p thepoor
It
t o havebeendepositedalonganundaform
In ' t h e s t u d y
mzlrgin..
w e a p it c o n s i s t s m a i n l y c f o o l i t i c
and some i n t r a c l a s t i c s a n d s ,
q u a r t z grains a r e o o l i t i c a l l y
cvated
in places.Obscure,
sma.T.1-
f a c i e s is generally massive.
places
o o l i t i c , and Lesscormonly,
stonerocks.
i.ii
i n t r a c l a s t i c p a c k s t o n e and G a i n -
..
t o . 2 0 t o 30 f e e t .
ami theenvironment
is ,well
it is n o t h o s p i t a b l e t o b e n t h o n i c m a r i n e l i f e
1970).
The undaform-
However, it
7s
Bluevrater s e c t i o n s i n t h e n o r t h e a s t e r n p o r t i o n
of t h e s t u d y
area.
." by_Cwbonate
Depvsitiona.1 FacDetailed carbonate sedimentology, as r e f l e c t e d i n t h e
"
-
C o r p l a.tion
carbonatedepositionalfacies
o f t h i s s t u d y , provides a v a l u a b l e
across t h e s t u d y a r e a ( a b o u t
adjacentareas.Correlation
250
County p r i o r t o t h i s r e p o r t dependedupon t h e u s e o f s a m h t o n e
f o r correlationpurposes,
or' 'the c a r b o n a t e d e p o s i t i o n a l f a c i e s , e s p e c i a l l y t h e
marine and r e s t r i c t e d m a r i n e f a c i e s , a c r o s s
normal
the studyarea s u p
gests t h a t t h e s e f a c i e s conti.nue i n t o a r e a s a d j a c e n t t o
s t u d y area.Seethe
the
"TRANSGRESSIVE-REG~SSI~'"
CYCm section
o f t h i s r e p o r t f o r more i n f d r m s t i o n on t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s of
d e t a i l e d c o r r e l a t i o n within t h e lower San Andres Formation.
77
be%ween c a l c u l a t e ds t a t i s t i c a 3 .
i o n basisp t h e s t a t i s t i c a l
lowing c o n c l u s i o n s t
moments,
78
However, on aninspect-
moments g e n e r a t e d s u g g e s t t h e f o l -
1) t h e r e is no s i g n i f i c a n td i f f e r e n c e
between average mean and median s i z e d i a w t e r s of crosss t r a t i f i e d and comparatively well. sorted massive units, 2)
average mean axd median diameters of
vravy bedded u n i t s a r e
than t h e s e v a l u e s
f o r crossunitss 3 ) t h e
t h i s percentage i n c r o s s -
s t r a t i f i e d and c o m p a r a t i m l y w e l l s o r t e d
t h e r e seems t o beno
massive u n i t s , & )
s i g n i f i c a n t d k f f e r e n c e i n average coars-
and 3 ) t h ea v e r a g es o r t i n g
(i.e
standa.rd
is a d e f j a i t e s o r t i n g d i f f e r e n c e
t h a t there
and c r o s s - s t r a t i f i e d a n dc o m p a r a t i v e l yw e l ls o r t e du n i t s .
sorting difference is usedin
This
t h i s r e p o r t -to h e l p i n t e r p r e t
d e p o s i t i o n a l flow regimes,
t o sub-rounded
Nost l a r g e r g r a i n s a r e v e r y w e l l r o u n d e d t o
rounded, h d i c a t i n g a t e x t u r a l l yv e r y maturesource.
However,
I wge
a r e l a t i v e l y few g r a i n s are sub-rounded suggesting a second,
l e s s mature source.
79
of u n i t s (wavy
A l l s a n d s t o n et h i ns e c t i o n s
were Examined
were s t a i n e d f o r
and
pink.
However, b o t hf e l d s p a r s
were stained
A s a r e s u l t o p l a g i o c l a s e wax i d e n t i f i e d by its c h a r a c t -
e r i s t i c t w i n a i n g and orthoclase
and lackoftwinning,
by its f e l d s p a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of
i t y i n eachsample.Pointintervalsexceededthediameters
A 95% c o n f i d e n c ei n t e r v a lf o r
t h el a r g e s tg r a i n sp r e s e n t .
is almost entirely
a quartz arenite,
b u t a few u n i t s a t Walker H m c h a r e f e l d s p a t h i c a r e n i t e s ( i . e
72075
feldspar).
The f e l d s p a r s( o r t h o c l a s e ,m i c r o c l i n e ,
sodicplagioclase)
and
are r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e f i n e r g r a i n s i z e s .
The formerincrea.se
by increased maturity of
i n m a t u r i t y may be explained
a3d d e p o s i t i o n .
".
".
..
82
Cements
is l o c a l l y
typeintheGlorietaSandstone.Dolomitecement
very importaant ( e . g . Sunset,uni-t
Dome, u n i t 31)
G U o
~f
1 7 ) . Only onesample(Bogle
t h i r t y - s e v e ns a n d s t o n e
thin sections
Clayfrecpent3-lg
c o a t sq u a r t z
may a c t as a cement,
Diagenetic Features
Q u a r t z overgrovrkhs are common, e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e b e t t e r
s o r t e d wni'ts 'I . Ort!loclase overgrowths and t e r r i g e n o u s grains
w i t h s u t u r e dp r e s s u r es o l u t r o nc ; ? n t a c t sa r ev e r yr a r e .c a l c i t e -
cemented spherules
OF
2 inches i n diameterareabundant
l/16 t o
a r e more r e s i s t a n t than t h e h o s t r o c k
and weather o u t i n r e l i e f
t o produce a d i s t i n c % i v e knobbyappetirance
a n theou.tcrop
sur-
face.
SEDIIV2ENTARY
STRUCTUFBS
Layvge dd ing
which a r e s e p a r a t e d by u n d u l a t o r y , d i s t i n c t
are comparativelythemost
i n theGlorietaSandstone,havingthelargest
percentageofgrainsfiner
t h a n 4$ ( t a b l e I),
8 i.k
i n o u t c r o p o r handspecimen.
a p p a r e n t l y homogeneous s a n d s t o n e s i n o u t c r o p
whose radiographs show well-defined Lamination
and handspecimen,
and c r o s s -
lack o f v i s i b l es e d i m e n t a r y
lamination.Consequently,the
s t r u c t u r e s i n a sandstonedoesnotprecludetheirpresence.
The g e n e r a l lack o f m o t t l i n g and t h e p r e s e n c e of v e r y t h i n
bedding suggests no d i s t u r b a n c e by burrowingorganisms,
Several independent lines
of evidence suggest
t h a t wavy
A p o l i s h e d s l a b from t h e
7mnl.
Wavy bedding,very
bedding in t h e G l o r i e t a S a n d s t o n e ,
theJordanSandstone
dolomitebed
is p r e s e n t in a n a u t c r o p or'
in Madison, Wisconsin,
Thereanoverlying
permits discernment of t h e o r i g i n a l r i p p l e d u p p e r
s u r f a c eo ft h es a n d s t o n e ,
The compxrativelypoorersorting
c r o s s - s t r a t i f i e du n i t s .
i n the formation
than -the r e l a t i v e l y b e t t e r s o r t e d .
Such very l o w f l o w c o n d i t i o n s r e s u l t
of most r i p p l e
marks described i n t h e g e o l o g i c l i t e r a t u r e .
Cross-Stratification
"
D i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f c r o s s - s t r a t i f i c a t i o n ( f i g u r e s 2713 and
85
e
Figure
Cross-Stratification
I8
86
(IkKesand
are
Most c r o s s - s e - t sa r e L t o 2 f e e tt h i c k( r a n g i n g
mostabundant.
15 f e e t ) , and medium
However, rnany c r o s s - s e t s a r e
angle ( > 2 5 d e g r e e s ) .
ang&e (10 t o 25 d e g r e e s ) .
high
OR
Host c r o s s - s e t s w e pX4saar ( o r x n g u l a r ) ,
two
Pl?.nas cross-setsforminenvironmznts
where
Curved c r o s s -
a,1972)
height o f 'the l e e s l o p e r e l a t i v e
t o t h e t o t a l Plow depth
was
responsible f o r curvedcross-sets.
Trough c r o s s - s e t s were only found
These s e t s a r e a p p a r e n t l y 1 t o 2 f e e t t h i c k andabout
by h f e e t i n plan v i e w , C r e s s - s t r a t i f i c a t i o n
2 feet
i s apparently
somewhat symnmtrical, b u t it i s d i f f i c u l t t o be c e r t a i n .
cross-sets consist entirely
( D o t t , 1973).
The longaxes
e s s e n t i a l l ye a s t - w e s t .
The
o f canoe-shaped depressions
o f t h e s et r o u g h sx r eo r i e n t e d
However, t h eu n d e r l y i n g
planar
s e t s d i p toward the s o u t h - ~ o u t h w e s t , as do t h e p l a n a r
CTQSS-
e
87
19). Consequently,the
F o r t StanLon,and
Sunset (figure
to
short axesofthesetroughsappear
be i n t h e p a l e o c u r r e n t d i r e c t i o n u n l i k e
studied heretofore.
&e&Plana.r
S t r a t i . ? $ ~ ~ ~
is c o m p a r a t i v e l y F a r e i n t h e
i t s occurrence i n -the
1 0 7 4 % ~ part
of
o f upper flow
of most of t h e Glor-
S t r a t a r a n g ei nt h i c k n e s sf r o ml a m i n a t i o n
(I& t ~5.f e e t ) ,
Massive
Massiveusrits
ax c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e a p p a r e n t l a c k o f
sedimentarystructures,Halnblin's
(1462) work s u g g e s t s t h a t
sedimentaryst-ructv.resprobablyarepresent,althoughinvisible.
Two t y p e s of massiveunitsarerecognized8
1) s i l t y
The b e t t e r s o r t e d u n i t s l a c k
anyevidence
l o c a i l y mottl.edsalthough
Soft
"
Sediment
no d i s t i n c t burrowswerefound.
Deformation
Evidence o f s o f t s e d i m e n t d e f o r m a t i o n ( P o t t e r
and
P e t t i j o h n , 1963) is very u n u s u a l i n t h e G l o r i e t a S a n d s t o n e
e
88
,-
a t sun-
p e c t i v e l y )a r ea p p a r e n t l yu n a f f e c t e d
instantaneous compaction
The
o r Plowage o f
isms of deformation,
by t1li.s deformation.
are themostprobable
mechan-
was a p p a r e n t l y o f a v e r y l o c a l c h a r a c t e r
and m a y p o s s i b l y have
baen r e l a t e d t o r a p i d s e d i m e n t i n f l u x i n c r e a s i n g o v e r b u r d e n
h
p r e s s u r e past a. t h r w o l d . v d . u e r e q u i r e d for d e f o r n a t i o n .
1'
PA.LEOCURRENT ANALYSIS
C r o s s - s f r a t i f i c a % i o n o r i e n t a t i o n s weremeasured
s e c t i o m e x c e p t Pox Cave and Eondo ( f i g u r e 191.
i n all
No o t h e rs e d i -
However, t h eg e n e r a li n c r e a s ei n
compositiona3. m a k r i t y southvrard i n t h e s t u d y a r e a
i b l e with thepaleocurrentdirectionsinferred
i s compat-
f r o m cross-bed
orientations.
A g e n e r a ls o u t h w a r dt r a n s p o r td i r e c t i o n
i s r e c o r d e df o r
t h e c u r r e n t s t h a t d e p o s i t e d t h e Gpper G l o r i e t a t o o g i e ( f i g u r e
19 and 2 3 )
The f i v e c r o s s - s % r a t i f i e d u n i t s
a t Wafirer Ranch
and c o r r e c t -
WALKER
RANCH
UNIT 3
WALKERRANCH
UNIT
WALKER RANCH
UNIT 15
(18)
(45)
WALKER RANCH
UNIT 20
FORT STAHTON
LOWERGLORIETA TONGUE
BOGLEPOME
UPPERGLOUIETATONGUE
(37)
CANNINGRANCH
FORT
STANTON
BLUEWATER
UWER GLORIETATONWF UPPERGLORIETATONGUE
($7)
FIGURE
19
BOGLE DOME-L
WALKERRANCH
UNIT 16
UNITS IN GLOKIETA
SANDSTONE
GLOK~ETA
TONGUE
SUNSET.
MIDDLEGLWETA TONWE
( W
90
The s t a t i s t i c s weredeter-
mined.by
2) and c r a t o n i c
BoththeAncestral-RockiesofColorado(figxire
areasfayther
.to t h e n o r t h
The extremetextuturzl
and n o r t h e a s t a m p o s s i b l e s o u r c e s .
of the Glorieta
a -1, 1 9 7 2 ) .
;vere s t r i p p e d 'to c r y s t a l l i . n e P r e c m b r i a n
(McKee
were n o t
a l l t h e sand p r e s e n t i n 'the
forrns
a southernfeather-edge.Theseconsiderationsstronglysilggest
ntore
Howevero t h e lzrger
'
in
c r a t o n i ca r e a s
Permian terrigenous
cLOWer
The primarysources
Paleozoicsandstones
t o t h en o r t ho ft h es t u d ya r e a .
clay d e p o s i t s i n t h e s o u t h w e s t
The l a c k of
of the United
as t h e Lower
(Doe, 1 9 7 3 ) .
o f q u a r t z i t e and g n e i s s from t h e h i g h e r
parts o f theancestralPedernalMountains,whichwereprobably
abovesealevel,occurlocally
5.3
J'
93.
of the s t u d ya r e a( B e l l e y ,1 9 7 2 ) .
the vicinity of the Precambrian
Corona ( f i g u r e I )
a n tm i c r o c l i n e
However, nonewerefound
knob about
5 mj.les n o r t h o f
The knob i s a g r a n i t i cg n e i s s
wi%h abund-
in
Such
c o n t r i b u t e df e l d s p a r st ot h eG l o r i e t a ,
seems t o havebeen
s u p p l i e d by the Coronaknob.
DEPOSITIONAL PROCESS FACIES
The use of bedformsandbed-form
internal structures
it emphscizesthe
by
f a c t t h a t assemblages
a single h y d r a u l i c v a r i a b l e ,
e t a l , 1972)
t h e r e c o g n i t i o n that a t l e a s t two d i s t i n c te n v i r o n m e n t s
been responsible
may have
f o r d e p o s i t i o n , namely theoffshoremarine
a.nd shorelineenvironments.
P l a t e s I X and X i l l u s t r a t e t h e v e r t i c a l
and l a t e r a l d i s -
tribution of depositional
process f a c i e s o n t h e b a s i s
I ) bed-formsand
bed-form i n t e r n a l
and 2 ) comparative
structurespresentorinferredpresent,
s o r t i n gi na p p a r e n t l ym a s s i v eu n i t s( f i g u r e
good c o r r e l a t i o n betweenthedegree
o f flow
20).
There is a
t h e associatedsedimentarystrucLuresp
v i s i b l e .C o m p a r a t i v e l yp o o r e rs o r t i n g
is a s s o c i a t e d w i t h wavy
93
bedding,whereasbettersorting
i s associated with
s t r a t i f i c a t i o n and even,planai-
stratification.
CTOSS-
ENVZRONMENTAL INTERPRETATGON
o f dkposition of t h e
I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the environments
1962)andthenon-barred
high energynearshoresubaqueous
environment ( C l i f t o n &
x!,,
1971)Higher-anglecross-sets
a r e n o t infrequently 'truncated
by low-angle c r o s s - s t r a t i f i c a t i o n
o r e v e n ,p l a n a rs t r a t i f i c a t i o ni nt h es t u d ya r e a .I nu n i t
a t WalkerRanch,nigh-a.ngle,
la:rge
c r o s s - s t r a t i f i c a t i o n , which is c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f a t l e a s t some
coastaldunes
completelackofinformation
Howevers thealmost
on t h e i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e s
of
in Walker
18) s u g g e s t s p o s s i b l e beachforeshoredeposition
( C l i f t o n ,1 9 6 9 ) .
94,
I n f e r r e d r i p p l e marked u n i t s , t h a t is wavy bedded u n i t s p
do n o t a p p a r e n t l y r e p r e s e n t t i d a l l y - i n f l u e n c e d
sand d e p o s i t s
because f i n e m a t e r i a l is n o t s e g r e g a t e d i n t o r e c o g n i z a b l e
flaser bedding patterns (Reheck
Variousmethods
andWunderlicn,1968),
have beenproposed
s i z ed i s t z i b u t i o n r
t o i n f e r physical
from parameters based
log-normal grain s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n s ,
and
)+
The r e s u l t s o f
i n g and. ambiguous.
tb.egra.in
3) Friedman (1961,
of s t a t i s t i c a l par-.
l i s t s theenvironmental
i n f e r e n c e s made f o r t h e e l e v e n s a m p l e s
methods.
within i n d i v i d u a l
o f t a b l e 1 u s i n g th.ese
s i z ea n a l y s e s are c o n f l i c t -
There is v e r y l i t t l e i f any c o r r e l a t i o n
and t h e
by t h e abovemethods.Grain
a t b e s t , only a v e r y l i m i t e d
u t i l i t y in theenvironmentalinterpretationofsue2pure
quartzsatndstones
as
V a r i o u sc o m b i n a t i o n so fd e t a i l e ds u r f a c et e x t u r e s ,
r e v e a l e d by scanning electron microscope
(SEM), a r e b e l i e v e d
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f s a n d grains d e p o s i t e d i n d i f f e r e n t
environments(Krinsley
g r a i n sp e r
Holocene
on t h e SEK.
and one
Ten t o f i f t e e n
A l l original
SAMPLE
NUMBER
..
g r a i n surfaces werecovered
growths.
diageneticeffectsinancientFandstonessuggests
that t h i s
of a n c i e n t s a n d s t o n e s l i k e t h e G l o r i e t a .
A.t l e a s t some o f t h e F l o f i e t a S a n d s t o n e
i s probablyof
that
an. e n t i r e a r e a .
Yet di.sLinc3t
""
(Pettijohn
at
along deposf%ional
and S u n s estuJ g g e s t i n g
t h a t t h i s is a r e a s o n a b l ee n v i r o n m e n t a li n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
s t r a t i f i e ds a n d s t o n e sa r ea l s op r e s e n t
Crcss-
a t about t h e same
..
t h e lower
Walker Ranch u n i t s
a s a l r e a d yd i s c u s s e d ,
97
sandstones.
1% s e e m l i k e l y
lowerenergyshallowlagoonalenvironments,whereas
some of t h e c r o s s - s l r a t i f i e d
at l e a s t
98
PALEOGEQGRRPHLC IPATLICBTIONS FOR .EARLY S A NA N D W S
TINE
"TRANSCrR~SSIVE-REGRESSI~"
CYCLES
Introduction
"
of the mig-
i n response t o ev.sta.tic
sealevel-fluctuations.Hencesverticalchangesofcmbonate
depositional. facies in ancient rocks
might be t h e r e s u l t o f
changes i n s e al e v e ld u r i n gd e p o s i % i o n .
Howeverp many v e r t i c a l
changes i n c a r b o n a t e f a c i e s do & r e q u i r e s e a l e v e l
Thus, i - t i s f r e q u e n t l yd i f f i c u l t ,
a t i o n sf o re x p l a n a t i o n ,
a detailedsc&le,todeterminethecause
a r yf a c i e sc h a n g e s .Y e tt h e
o f suchchanges
on
o f vertical.sediment-
terms usedtodescribesequences
o f t e n havegeneticconnotations
~
g r e s s i v e and regressive),Consequently,the
study &re defined
fluctu-
(e.g, trans-
necessarilycausedbyp
relativesealevelrise,
g r e s s i or en' f e r s
'to an a p p a r e anbt s o l ust el eavreils e
r e s u l t e d i n normalmarineconditionsovermost
s t u d ya r e a .
A a o r - marine o r e u s t a t i c t r a n s -
that
o r a11 of t h e
R minor t r a n s m e s s i o q r e f e r s t o a n a p p a r e n t
that r e s u l t e d i n l e s s r e s t r i c t i v e
i n the study areap except for normal
when not
99
absc.nt.
o s "shoa,linp v . p v ; a w r e f e r s t o an up-
"I?B:essive"
I
d.rop,
1'h5arine" o r " e u s t a t i cr e g r e s s i o n t t
i n d i c a t e s t h a t an a b s o l u t e s e a l e v e l
ponsibfafor
-?ne deposi'tio-ri o f
8,
"shoalingupwwds"sequence,
but
t?;ith,
con-
The
t h e progradation of
t i d a l f l a t environments.
I
Both*!transg.ressive"
a d ''regressive"rocksequences
m8.y
h e a l" t r a n s @ s s i v e "
wit'? a
may e x p l a i n some
rock sequences,whereas
changes."Sedimentaryregression"
may
Hovrever, e u s t a t i c
s e a l e v e l s h i f t s a r e f r e q u e n t l y invoked t o e x p l a i n l a r g e
scale v e r t i c a l f a c i e s changes i n Permian deposits
i n the
G l a c i a t i o n , g l o b a l t e c t o n i c s and s t o r a g e of water
i nl a k e sa r e
some o ft h ep o s s i b l e
g l a c i a l and i n t e r g l a c i a l p e r i o d s i n
mechanisms,
Alternating
Gondwanahnd a r e o f t e n
f o r E a r l y and
for
a
Middle Permiantime.
100
Howevers a change i n t h e s i z e
of ocearl
basins due t o s h i f t i n g c r u s t a l p l a t e s c o u l d a c c o u n t f o r
shifts.
11, less l i k e l y p o s s i b i l i t y
is thetemporarystorage
sorile
of
1972).
'the "trtznsgressive-regressive" c y c l e s d i s c u s s e d
c a n be c o n f i d e n t l y attribu.ted t o a b s o l u t e
of
r e g r e s s i v e "c y c l e s ,
In g e n e r a l ,t h e9 " g r e s s i t - e "p o r t i o n s
be p r o l o n g e d , r e s u l t i n g i n t h i c k d e p o s i t s
and i n d i c a t i n g a gTadua1"marine"
sion," whereasthe"transgressive"portionstend
%e be " r a p i d s "
a b r u p t changes o r "kicks"havebeen
017.
P l a t e s IX and S .
t o establish approximate
For example,thelower
o f themeasuredsections
on P l a t e s IX and X.
i n most
A relatively
t h i c k l i n e was u s e d f o r t h i s boundary t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h i s
cyclebegins
w i t h a major marinetransgression.
'boundary of cycle
The lower
8 was p o s i t i o n e d on t h e basis of t h e t h r e e
relatively
101
is marked by a r e l a t i v e l y t h i n
w i t h noevidence
of
a t theapproximatehorizon.
7, 13,
Threemajortrarmgressive"kicks"(begi.nningcycles
o r eustatictransg-ressions.Thirteenminor
t r a n s g r e s s i v e t*kicks's (beginningcycles2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,
12,14,16, and 1'7) are tracea,ble over
some t o a l l of t h e s t u d y
area.
between
by a r i s e i n a b s o l u t e
by a r a t e of subsid-
e n c eg r e a t e rt h a nt h er a t e
o f sedimentaccumulation.
The
i s commonly
w i t h l o w s e a l e v e l stands
5$ 9 ,
sea l e v e lf l u c t u a t i o n s .C y c l e s
of WalkerRanch,
ations,
t h u s may r e f l e c t absolu-ke s e a l e v e l . f l u c t u -
The d e p o s i t s o f c y c l e 1 werenotedonly
Ranch, where t h e t r a n s g r e s s i v e p o r t i o n
exposed.Hence,very
of cycle
a t Walker
of t h e c y c l e
was n o t
l i t t l e may be i n f e r r e da b o u tt h eo r i g i n
1.
o f strata,eachinvolvinglower
regimedeposits.Theseconaistofupper-lowerflowregime
d e p o s i t s p which are i n t e r p r e t e d t o r e p r e s e n t t r a n s g r e s s i v e
flow
102
SI0.l
phases, t h a t caplower-lowerhregimedeposits,whichaxeinterp r e t e dt or e p r e s e n tr e g r e s s i v ep h a s e s .
These i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s
two d i f f e r e n t
carbonate member ( P l a t e X ) .
No g e n e r a l method was fou.nd i n %his s t u d y
between r e g r e s s i v e r o c k s e y u e n c s s d e p o s i t e d
'60
distinguish
by marine o r
sion.
carbonatetongue
upwards" sequence i n t h e
8,
pass up
v e r t i c a l d i s t a n c e o f ahout one
Assuming t h a t sedimentaryregression
was r e s p o n s i b l e
However, it i s u n l i k e l y that t h ev a r i e d
normalmarine
middle
and abundant
l 2 B ) couldhavesurvivedandprospered
f o r t h ef o l l o w i n gr e a s o n s .
i n suchshallowdepths
A one footdepthsuggests
Lo
t h a t only
And t r o p i c a ls t o r m s ,
on a geological time
Hondo s e c t i o n ,
upwards"
t h e most a c t i v e
Con-
of Le
E a r l y Permianp
was t o e l i m i n a t e much o f
of theLatePennsylvanian/~a.rl.yPermianbasins:the
Orogmmde,Delawaxe$
platform ( f i g m e 2)
is not
p l a c e s andfault-boundedblocksinothers(Kelley,1971).
o f d i f f e r i n ge l e v a t i o n s ,
with secondorderknobs
Precambrianknob
The
One such
R.13E.) and
a n o t h e rj u s ts o u t h( P a j a r i t o
and
The outcrop
knobs appear to
havebeen
h i g h i n h!iddlePermian
islands a t l e a s t s e v e r a l hundred f e e t
Permiantime,Regionally(Kelley,1971,
1972) arkosicsandstone
..
la6
i n t h e basal p a r k o f t h e Yeso
K e l l e y (1971) foundevidence
1) o f r e p e a t e d a c t i v i t y o f t h e Ped-
Prom Permian w e l l i n t o T e r t i a r y t i x e .
intheCapitan-Ruidosoarea
o f t h e PedernaLposi-i;ive
it a p p e a r s t o
107
have a c t e d as a b u r i e d , y e t r e l a t i v e l y p o s i t i v e f e a t u r e .
Kock
San AndresFormation,includingtheGLorietaSandstone
Memberp
o f t h e s?~!.dy a r e a o f
Pedernal element
~
He suggestf:ed t h a t t h e
A b u r i e d ,y e tr a l a t i v e l yp o s i t i v e
i s a l s o used i n t h i s s t u d y t o e x p l a i n W e
Pedernal element
to
west of the s t u d y a r e a , c a r b o n a t e s
area,andcarbonateseast
ais-
5).
o f %he s t u d y a r e a ( f i g u r e
DETdIL3D PALEOGEOGRAPHY
In-kroducti.
a paleogeographicshelfprovi.nce(Irleissner,1972).Analysis
ofthecarbonates
and sandstones i n t h e s t u d y a r e a
and t h e p r i n c i p l e s
on t h e basis
of carbonate
sedimentologyandpf..ysica.lsedimentationsuggest
t h a t the
i s belowandabove
base
Rich (1953.) coinedthetermsundaform,clinoform,and
wave
108
fondoforin,whichareanalogous
s l o p e p and b a s i n , e x c e p t
The r o o t
unda
tothegeneralterms
r e f e r s 'to t h e r e l a t i v e l y h o r i z o n t a l
part of the
t o t h e more s t e e p l y s l o p i n g p a r t o f t h e s e a f l o o r
down t o t h e more l e v e l d e e p e r p a r t
These t e r m s a r e v e r y u s e f u l
provincafree
of shelf,
that; extends
of any b a s i n a l c h a r a c t e r .
a? evidence lead
Lo t h e hypoth-
in the study
ChavesCounty
(figure 23).
1) -the n a t u r e and. d i s t r i b u t i o no fc e r b o n a t e
2 ) the trend of
and t h i c k n e s s
t r e n d si nt h el o w e r ,m i d d l e ,a n du p p e rG l o r i e t at o n g u e s ,
31 paleocurrentana.lysis
entire study area
sea l e v e l s t a n d s
o f theupperGlorietatongue,
vias presumablybelow
high
Measured
andwesternsides
The
andhence,Inthefondoenvironment.
sectionsinthenorthernpsouthern,
permit any b u t t h e
and
of t h e
enough t o
T h i s exLrapola'tion i s i n c l u d e di nt h e
af t h i s s t u d y , r e q u i r e s w a t e r s u p e r s a t u r a t e d
a t e andanenvironment
w i t h calciumcarbon-
a
110
thegrainsinnearlyconstantagitation(Heckel,1972).
Oolitic sedimentsarefound
i n t h e more shorewardextentof
i n t h e s o u t h e r n P e r s i a n GuI+f* i n t h e G r e a t
o$ t h e Bahamas Platform.
l965), and o o l i t i c r o c k u n i t s
ca.rbona.te
i n similar environments.
on 'the l o w (fondo)
on t h e high (u.nd.a)
the kineticenergy
09
wavesand
currents are
d i n t h ea g i t a t e dz m e( H e c k e l ,1 9 7 2 ) .
dampenh
Oolhjc
sand
whose p o s i t i o n is
t n e undaform-edge, t h a t i s . t h e
break i n s l o p e ( B a l l , 1967).
iilud-supportedcarbonate
..
fabrics i n d i c a t i v e of low-energy
Formation i n t h e s t u d y a r e a .
O f the'remaining
5%$o o l i t i c ,
20s
i n thestudyarea,
of theBluewaterandCanning
Ranch s e c t i o n s ,
Yeso Formation a t S u n s e t ,
althoughsuchwerenotfound
They a r e r e p o r t e d
a t S u m e t by Kelley (1971),
by t h ea u t h o r .E m e r g e n tt i d a l
111
f l a t c a r b o n a t e f w i e s presenk i n a l l s e c t i o n s e x c e p t
Fox Cwe
would have t o be
the low ( f o n d o ) s i d e of t h e
interbedded w i t h t h e o o l i t i c u n i t s
and t h e a s s o c i a t i o n .o. f
at
mus-k mxmarori s c c t i m s ( P l a t e s S
X and X ) w i t h theappearance
of o o l i t i c r o c k u n i t s
reasonab3.ybe
i n t e r p r e t e d as follovrs t
while
an v.nda.form-
i n s e a l e v e l . t h a t weTe n o t l a r g e
below wave base i n %he
enough %o p l a c e t h e e n t i r e s t u d y a r e a
f ondo erwironment
Extrapolation northwestvrard of t h e l i n e a r t r e n d o f s e c t i o n s
with o o l i t e s ( B l u e w a t e r
o f t h e undaform-ed.ge.
However, t h ec o r r e l -
a t i o n of c a r b o n a t e d e p o s i t i o n a l f a c i e s ( P l a t e
Bogle Dome andWalker
Hence, we
may
northward.,then
IX) s u g g e s t s t h a t
deduce t h a t i f an undaform-edge t r e n d c o n t i n u e s
it would have Lo swing t o t h e n o r t h e a s t
embayment.
from
Figure 23 i l l u s t r a t e s t h e
112
of t h e c a r -
u1ld&orm-edge t r e n d i n f e r r e d f r o m t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n
bonatedepositionalfaciesof
t h i s s'tudy.
of t h e P e d e r n s l p o s i t i v e
22; a f t e r Hills
pendentevidences
f o r -the e x i s t e n c eo f
may be iade-
i n t h i s section because
How-
an undaform-edge.
and
Hills
posikion of
would n o t be independent,
of
o f theeasternside
with
o f Lincoln Countyand'themeasured
t h i s study.
T h i s t r e n d is s u b p x a l l e l t o t h e
of
t r e n d o f t h e undaform eclge p r e d i c t e d f r o m t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n
23)
c a r b o n a t ed e p o s i t i o n a fl a c i e s( f i g u r e
The p a r a l l e l i s m
of t r e n d s m a y be explained by t h e P e d e r n a l having a c t e d as a
b u r i e d ,y e tr e l a t i v e l yp o s i . t i v ef e a - t u r e .
than t o t h e e a s t
standss thesediment-water
of t h e
and thewest,
This
as t h e one
1x3
Thickness Trends in t h e Three G l o r i e t a Tongues
%o e a s t a c r o s s t h e s t u d y
a c r o s s %he studya.rea(figure
9) e
However, only a r e l a t i v e l y
a model t h a t a c c o u n t s f o r t h e
cage environment e a s t o f t h e
study a r e a .
an undaform-
lL4
P a l e u c u r r e n t Analysis of theUpper
Analysisindicates
G l o r f e t a Tongue
t h a t t h e paleocufrentdirectionsinfer-
sub-parallel t o t h e
from t h e s t u d y
o f carbonatedepos-
i t i o n a lf a c i e s (figure 2 3 ) .
INTRODUCTION
of t h e
and i t s environ-
m e n t a li n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
pro-posed i n
The depositionalmodels
upon t h e s e
a.lso compatible w i t h t h e g r o s s
and e a s t e r n Socori-oCounties
western ChavesCounty
( a f t e r Harbour, 1 9 7 8 ) and i n
H ~ w e v e rit
~ i s recog-
(Keiss1?er, 1972) I
and subsurface s t u d y
i n v a l i d a t e a . s p e c t s o f these models.
CARBONATE D5POSXTIQNAL MODEL
"Intrcductiion
-
(1970) and t h e
Terrigenoussanddeposition
t h t is south o f Walker
was predominant i n t h e
Z'he i n t e r p r e t e dc a r b o n a t e
model a p p l i e s t o d e p o s i t i o n i n
kt0
LincolnCountyand,,adjacentareas.
model s o u t h o f t h e s t u d y a r e a
The a p p l i c a b i l i t y of t h i s
is urlknovm.
..
.-
117
Ca,rbona-te sedimentsand-terrigenous
deposited i,n r e s p o n s e t o r e l a t i v e s e a l e v e l f l u c t u a t i o n s .
d e p o s i t t o n of the lower San AndresFormation
Hencep
i s discussed below
s'kands.
Low s e a lev-&?-s t a n d s i n e a s l y
the result
o r the accumulation
or eustaticregression)
o f carbonate sediments
(sedi.mentmyregression)
as
t o be p r e s e n t t o t h e e a s t i n h i b i t e d w a t e r c i r c u l a t i o n
study a r e a , r e s u l t i n g i n r e s t r i c t e d ,
i n the
low-energyenvironments.
There was s u f f i c i e n t c i r c u l a t i o n t o p r e v e n t t h e p r e c i p i t a t i o n
i n t h e s - b d y area.p s u g g e s t i n g t h a t th.e
somewha:t
f r p m t h en o r t h ,
study area.
discontinuous
+vest+ and/or
Nowever, w a t e rl e v e l s
t o formsome/,txdal
e v a p o r i t en o d u l e s
f l a t 2nd p o s s i b l y evensubaqueousdiagenetic
and c r y s t a l s .
KTcs-t o f t h e Yregz-essive" p o r t -
i o n s o f t h es e v e n t e e n" t r a n s g r e s s i v e - r e g r e s s i v e "c y c l e s
of t h i s
sou-t'h ofWalker
form thelower,middle,andupperGlorietatongues
Ranch t o
is t r e a t e d
at length in the
n.ext section,
t o low s e a l e v e l
s t a n d s i nt h e
s t u d y a r e a .T h i sr e l a t i o n s h i p
no-ted i n otherPermianformations
west of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
(Ball
in the south-
118
Undaform-edge c a r b o n a t e u n i t s t e n s
of f e e t t h i c k a r e
p o s t u l a t e d t o havebeendeposited
i n p r e s e n t day e a s t e r n
during low s e a l e v e l s t a n d s .
on
fauaa in t h e s t u d y m e a
p a t i b l e with t h e i n f e r r e d p r e s e n c e
i n t h e f o n d oe n v i r m m e n te a s t
of normalmarineconditions
o f t h e u.ndaform-edge.
And t h e
ST 1-SR "A",
figure
i n w e s t e r n Lincoln, e a s t e r n
S o c o r r o , and northernOteroCounties
is c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the
presence o f s t r a t i f i e d e v a p o r i t e s t e n s
Rirlconada Canyon sectionofHarbour,
report).
1970; f i g u r e 5 of t h i s
by t h o sedimentation of e v a p o r i t e m i n e r a l s i.n r e s t r i c t e d s u b t i d a l
environments o r d i a g e n e t i c a l l y u n d - e r n e a t h e v a p o r i t i c t i d a l
( e . g .c o a s t a l
evaporitesoccurdirectlywest
andhence
flats
TheselowerSanAndres
of t h e F e d e r n a l p o s i t i v e e l e m e n t
a r e i n t e r p r e t e d t o haveformed
i n a fondoenvironment
t h e r eb e c a u s eo ft h ee v i d e n c ep r e s e n t e de a r l i e rt h a tt h eF e d e r n a l
a c t e d as a b u r i e d ,y e tr e l a t i v e l yp o s i t i v ef e a t u r e .
This con-
119
e l u s i o n i s c o n s i s t e n t with t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a fondoenvironment e a s t o f t h e P e d e r n a l a n d w i t h the following observation.
Deposition a t Fox Cave, t h e m o s t westward s e c t i o n i n t h e study
area, appears t o havebeendeeperand
t h e o t h e r seet3.0nspbecause
les's emergentthan
in
Fox Cave is t h e o n l y s e c t i o n , e x c e p t
least an initial
a c r o s sL i n c o l n County.
orites can not
T h i s o b s e r v a t i o ns u g g e s t s
at
Consequuen-kly, bo'th p o s s i b l eo r i g i n sw ei n d i c a t e di n
ence.
flguxre 2Sb.
-?-Sea
Level Sta&
A f t e rm a j o rm a r i n et r a n s g r e s s i o n sc e n t r a lL i n c o l n
County
predamfn.ate i n t h e s t u d ya r e a .
The t h i nt r a n s g r e s s i v ep o r t i o n s
o:f "transgreesjve-regressive" c y c l e s 7 , 13
d u r i n gt h e s e
h i g h sea l e v e ls t a n d s .B a t h y m e t r i c a l l yh i g h e r
Or
sedimentaryregression.
The undaform-edge b z m i e r s
and western ChavesCount-
+ondoCom
'
SOCOrrO
drowned by t h e s e
The carbonates
interbedded
western'%incoJ.n and e a s t e r n
x e s u i t o f t h e d i l u t i o n o f hypersaline brines
t h i s time as a
by t h e t r a n s g r e s s i o n .
120
VIEIS
it appears t h a t
onments,butnot
The o o l i t i c
of the
minor r e l -
a t i v e r i s e s i n sea. l e v e l .
In weste:rnLincolnandeas-ternSocorroCounties,the
hyper-
carbona-ke or e v a p o r i t e d e p o s i t s
amount o f r e l a t i v e
Howevers noevidmce
sea l e v e l r i s e and l o c a l
is available t os u p p o r t
hypothesis or t o r u l e o u t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y
this
t h a t r e l a t i v e sea
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h ee v a p o r i t e
andcarbonatedepositspresent
e
121
sAmsTem
DmesmoIuL
r m m
R e ~ i o n 1 l , 4 s ~ e c t so f Glorieta_SandstoneDenositicrn
A d e p o s i t i o n a l model t o e x p l a i n t h e g e n e s i s
of
the GLorieta
must be compatible w i t h t h e a e r i a l
Sandstone i n t h e s t u d y a r e a
f i i s t r i b u t i o n ,c r o s s - b e do r i e n t a t i o n s ,p o s s i b l es h o r e l i n e s ,
paleovlind d i r e c t i o n s , and o t h e r a v a i l a b l e
data o n t h e G l o f i e t a
Sandstoneoutside
26 i l l u s t r a t e s much
-the studyarea,Figure
o f what is IcnovJn o f t h e G l o r i e t a
southern limit o f t h e G l o r i e t a S a n d s t o n e i n c e n t r a l
Bo&
a t which t h e G l o r i e t a
as thelowerSanBndresFormatian
begins t o tonguesouthward
becomesdominantyiy
Dome s e c t i o n si nt h es t u d ya r e a ) .
The GlorietaSandstone,
nlajornortheast-southwest
New Kexico
componentand
The
northeast-southwest compone:?t i n c l u d e s t h e G l o r i e t a S a n d s t o n e
inthenorthern
1/3 o f I h c o l n County.
and upperGlorietatongues
influx
Tanner ( 1 9 6 3 ) p o s t u l a t e d a northeast-southwest-trending
Permianshorelineinnorthern
gypsum, supposed h a l i t e p r i n t s ,
c r a c k s , t r a i l s , p e b b l es i z e s ,
mud
a,nd rockthicknesses.Tanner
,e
NEW
"
"
EAST
MEXICO
WEST COMPOMWT
OF
GLOXlETA SAWSTONE
?PROXIMATE POSITION
ERMIhN EQUATOR (AFTER
UNC3RN AND OPDYUE, ,960)
MILES
EipiEBI
2040bD
1.23
does not consider
time i n r e s p o n s e %o r e l a t i v e s e a l e v e l f l u c t u a t i o n s ,
such m i g r a t i o n s were probably not infrequent
timescale.
on a g e o l o g i c a l
He i n t e r p r e t e dt h eG l o r i e t aS a n d s t o n es o u t h e a s t
of t h i s s h o r e l i n e ( b u t n o r t h o f t h e a r e a
a.n
However,
o f f s h o r e sa.nd.
of t h i s s t i l d y ) t o be
from t h en o r t h e a s t( f i g u r e
to
261,
This d i y e c t i o n i s i n f e r r e d on
i s su5-paya.llel t o t h e n o r t h e a s t -
t o t h e Perm-
as
the a r e a o f this
25)
These r e l a t i o n -
means of t r a n s -
in
Fewer c r i t e r i a a r e a v a i l a b l e
124
f o rd e t a i l e d
environmen'tal. i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ,I n d e e d ,t h e
dir-
o f 'the
is
G l o r i e t ag e n e s i s
represents the
The f o l l o w i n gd i s c u s s i o no f
t h e y e f o r e ,n e c e s s a - i l yh y p o t h e t i c a l . .
It
as we31 as
o f t h e Glorieta Sandstone
Terrigenous sand i n f l u x i s p o p u l a r l y r e l a t e d t o
l e v e l stands (Ball e 2
have postulated
,ag
19711,
low s e a
processes
f o r t h e reasons enumerated in t h e p r e c e e d i n g s e c t i o n ,
been i m p o r t a n t i n t r a n s p o r f i n g
t h e terrigenous sand
GlorietaSandstoneintonortb.ern
xmst kdve
o f the
e v e r , a t l e a s t much o f t h e G L o r i e t a i n
t o havebeendepositedand/orreworked
severalreasons.Theseinclude
t h e presenceof:
marine burrows i n t h e u p p e r G l o r i e t a t o n g u e
i n t h e lower Glorietatongue
m w i n e( s u b t i d a l )c a r b o n a t e s ,
wavy beddedandmassive
atPortStanton,
2) sh&llow
a t Bluewater and
2 ) interbedded
3 ) ccmparativelypoorlysorted
w i t h the e x c e l l e n t s o r t i n g e x p e c t e d
of a e o l i a n p r o c e s s e s ,
4) interpretedmarinechanneldepositsinthemiddleGLorieta
ton-gpe a t Sunset,
!
How-
and
..
125
Ctirbor.ate r o c ku n i t su n d e r l y i n g
t h e lowermi.ddle,and
uppej: G l o r i e t a t o n g u e s i n t h e s t u d y a r e a
SUggSest t h z t a-i; l e a s t
vias
I
_
reworked by rn-arine p r o c e s s e s ,
F i r s t , sub%idal.carbonate depos-
itionalfaciesunderliethethreeGlorie'te
p r e s e n ti nt h e s es u b t i d a lf a c i e s ,
at
Canning Ranch d i r e c t l y o v e r l i e s a n e v a p o r i t i c t i d a l . f l a t
f a c i e s , whichshows
widerice o f s u b a e r i a l e x p o s w e ( s h r i n k a g e
c r a c k s and. dolomitepore-fillingzement)
poor s o r x i n g of this 'thin sandszone
aeolian processes, which should have
t e r r i g e n o u sg r a i n s ,
The compara'bi-vcly
io Incompatible. with
winnowed o u t t h e f i n e
Hence, evidencegathered.
i n -this stucur
in the study
of t h eG l o r i e t a
San Rndrestime,
i s presented i n
thefollowingsection.
-Depositional
Dome
A detailed depositional
n o r t h o f t h e Bogle Dome s e c t i o n is n o t p o s s i b l e
one ou-tcrop(WalkerRanch)
becmse only
226
'the lolrrer
and c a r b o n a t e d e p o s i t i o n a l f a c i e s i n t h e
from tracefossils
s%ud;ra r e a s u g g e s t s
most d e p o s i t i o n . w a ss u b t i d a l .
The combination o f i n f e r r e d
ition oflower-lower
in
t h e G l o r i e t a a t Walker Ranch a r e r e l a t e d t o r e p e a t e i l s e a l e v e l
SluctuaLions,
T h i s a p p a r e n tc o n t r o lo ft e r r i g e n o u s
sa.nd
d e p o s i t i o n by r e p e a t e d s e a l e v e l f l u c t u a t i o n s s u g g e s t s t h a t
at
t h e o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t almost half
o f t h e volume o f sandstone a t
tmits ( P l a t e I ) . Thesecomparatively
o r i g i n f o r t h ef o l l o w i n gr e a s o n .
andmarine
an a e o l i a n
evidence of burrowingandthepresence
that
s t r u c t u r e s suggest,,post-depositional
aeoliansands
wavy
o f abundantsedimentary
mixing o f w e l l s o r t e d
s i l t s o r s i l t y s a n d s by burrowing
127
organisms c o u l d n o t havebeen
Tanner' s (1-963)
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h eC l o r i e t aS a n d s t o n e
is eompat-
i b l e wiSh t h e i n t e r p r e - b a t i o n that t h e G l o r i e t a i n t h e s t u d y
was probably
In su.rfiinaJ?yy t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
Gf
%errigenous sand i n t o t h e
elzuirofiment.
Deposition of t h e G l o r i e t a a t
Walker
e n t i r e l y s u b - l i t t o r a l 'to L i t t o r a l .
128
Depositional Model f o r t h e G l o r i e t a SandstoneSouthof
Walker
Ranch
Introduction
The GI-orieta Sandstone south
chief3.y OP thelower,middle,
of Walker Ranch c o n s i s t s
andupper
this study.Thesetonguesappearto
G l o r i e t a tonguesof
be sov.thernextensions
ThB
i n f l u x of terrigenoussand
s o u t h o f l'lalkw Ranch i s c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d v i t h
low s e a l e v e l
A r e a s o n a b l ee x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s
stmnr?s i n t h e s t u d y a r e a .
fol-lcJiYing e u s t a t i c s e a l e v e l d r o p s , r e s u l t i n g
study area.
I t is i n f e r r e d t h . a t d i s p e r s a l o f t h i s sandwithin
where2.s a e o l i a n
t o tkie nox-tIi*
and upperGlnrietatonguesapechaFact-
e r i e e d by a s i g n i f i c a . n t t h i c k e r d n g e a s t w a r d ( f i g u r e
t!?e i n f e r r e d undaform-edge.
A model termedthe
8 ) towards
~ l o o l j . t sb a r r i e r "
I n t h i s model, t h e i n f l u x of
terr%genous sand f r o m t h e n o r t h - n o r t h e a s t r e s u l t e d
southwaxd along the inside
O O l i ~ i Cb a r r i e r s ,
i n transport
to be r e s p o n s i b l e
westvra.rd.
Eastwardthesand
u a l l yp i n c h
ozlt
a g s i n s t 'the o o l i t i c b a r r i e r s ,
thickening of sandstone
The c o n s i s t e n t
exposed.
a t SunsetandBluewaterappear
t o have a c t e d
highs f o l l o w i n g t h e i r d e p o s i t i o n r e l a t i v e
t h e west,
as topographic
t o thesectionsto
T h i s is suggested by t h e subsequentctirbmatedepos-
i t s , v1hich.m-e g e n e r a l l y s h o a l e r a t S u n s e t
'*kicksv'whichsuggest
loweran8upperGlorietatongues
observation.
on P l a t e s IX and X.
model is alsocompatible
"oolitebzrrier"
l i n e s based on t r a n s g r e s s i v e
by t h e s e r i e s o f approximatetime
the
The
w i t h t h ef c l l o w i n g
with
f e e t t h i c k ) d i r e c t l y above t h e lowerGlorietatongue
water.
'tongues
(2
a t %.ut?-
T h i s t r a n s i t i o n f r o m q u a r t z sand t o c a r b o n a t eo o l i t e s
of the o o l i t i c b a r r i e r s
low sea
of t e r r i g e n o u s sand
model i s v e r y s i n i l a r t o
130
i n the
GuadalupeNnuiztai.ns.
A mod.el, whiizich may be termed the quartz
sand barrier
I n thi,s Eodel,theinflux
of q u a r t z san6 from t h e
n o r t h - n o r t h e a s t is p o s t u l a t e d t o haveoverwhelmed
duction at the
in the
o o l i t e pro-
h a v er e p l a c e dt h eo o l i t i co n e s .
of t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s e d i -
1967), Hence,once
it a c t s ( B a l l ,
it would be exposed
p r i o r t o seild i n f l u x ,
i n t h i s report because it d o e s n o t t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e
e f f e c t s of t h e 2 r e - c x i s t i n g o o l i t i c
which a r e i n f w r t i d t o
umdaform-edge b a r r i e r s ,
and t e r r i g e n -
of siltysandstones,
except f o r l o c z l a r e a s
low-ener,gy
tongue.
i s g e n e r a l l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d by
which are s t r u c t v . r e l e s s
of wavy bedding.These
features suggest
l a g o o n a l d e p o s i t i o n f o r most o f t h e lower G l o r i e t a
The subaqueous o r i g i n of thelower
G1.oriet.a tongue is
131
also i n d i c a t e d by the presence
o f shallowmarineburrows
P o r t S t a n t o n and l o c a l i z e d s o f t s e d i m e n t d e f o r m a t i o n
ab
ai, Sunset.
upper
sca.ecross-stratification
>uti s very w e l l
A t Sun.set,
is t y p i c a l l y s i l t y
s o r t e d a.nd medium
i s o v e r l a i n by even,plalnar
slracif-
ication.
Fretation,
is compatible w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g i n t e r -
se:?tslow-energy
lagoonal deposi-tlon
behind i n h e r i t e d o o l i t i c
by cornppzratively higher
b a r r i e r s i n f e r r e d to h a v e b e e n p r e s e n t t o t h e e a s t a w h e r e a s
c o n p r a t i v c l g lower flow regime energies were probably dominant
fartheramy
from t h e b a r r i e r s .
A e u s t a t i c sea l . e v e l r i s e ,
inf1v.x i n t o L i n c o l n
t o migratewestward.
them
rei-
i t e s a t Bluewater, as d i s c u s s e d i n t h e p r e c e e d i n g s e c t i o n ,
13 2
The lowerGlorietatonguedoesnotextendwestward
Cave.
t o Pox
beyond
%ongx?ei s g e n e r a l l y t h i n ( 3 t o 1.2 f e e t )
I n regions
mentally most d i a g n o s t i c u n i t i s p r e s e n t a t S u n s e t ,
where t i d a l or wave a-etion is v e r y i n t e n s e ,
f l a t s may beformed,
t i d a l sand bars o r
w i t h individual. bars s e p a r a t e d by a n e t -
Glorieta tongue
The middle
fieposited in such
g r a p h i cr e l i e fb e c a u s e :
1) a scouredlowercontact
w i t h about
on a topographic high,
i o n a l f a c i e s do n o t s u g g e s t d e p o s i t i o n
on normal
at c
1
;
io t h e r s e c t i o n s ,
r e s % s on more r e s t r i c t e d cayboilate f a c i e s , s u g g e s t i n g
r e s t r i c t e dc a r b o n a t ef a c i e s
interpretedchannel
were n o t n o t e d i n
acroSS t h e Outcrop.Hencesvery
possibledimensions
has been c u t o u t .
19).
OP
The s i d e s of t h e
of t h i s channel.There
is a bipolar
a s t r o n g s o u t h e r n component is p r e s e n t ( f i g u r e
B i p o l a rp a l e o c u r r e n to r i e n t a t i o n s
eristic
that the
a 250 f e e t t l r a v e r s e
d i s t r i b u t i o n of cross-bedorientations
is dominant,but
it
are a common c h a r a c t -
by t i d a l c u r r e n t s
0.
133
(Elatt &
&>
1.972)
T h i s o b s e r v a t i o ns u g g e s t st h ei n f l u e n c e
of t i d a . 1 c u r r e n t s d u r i n g t h e d e p o s i t i o n
o f t h e middle Glor-
i e t a tongue a t Sunset.
Upper G l o r i e t a Tongue
The upper Glorieta tongue
study
apes
t h es t u d y
as a Lninblanket
zrea ( f i g u r e 8 )
s e t andBluevmter
ac~xs8
a t Hondo, F o r t S t a l t o n ,
s e c t i o n s ,s u g g e s t i n gt h ei n f l u e n c e
relief.
I t thickenseastward
sand,
Subseqtz-
a t t h e s e two
of i n h e r i t e d d e p o s i t i o n a l
T h i s r e l i e f is alsosuggested
by %he shapesofthe
a t S u n s e t p Hondop P o r t S t a n t o n ,
The upperGZorietatongue
h . t BluewatesandCanningRanch,an
upward i n c r e a s e
a t Slue-
d e p o s i t i o nb e h i n dp r e - e x i s t i n go o l i t i cb a r r i e r s .
G l o r i e t a tongue a t t h e o t h e r s e c t i o n s
f l o w regime deposits
and abovethelower-lower
a % Bluewa%er andCanning
e n t i r e l y of upper-lowerandlower-upper
Hence, r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e e v i d e n c e
The upper
Ranch c o n s i s t s
of lower energylagoonal
d e p o s i t i o n is p r e s e n t i n t h e u p p e r G l o r i e t a t o n g u e ,
i t i o n of the Bluewater and Gaming
The pos-
Ranch s e c t i o n s a l o n g t h e
e
nort~lmest-southeast segment of the inferred
134
undaform-edge
t h e southwestsuggeststhef011O~inginterpret-
yco-lectedfromwind-induced
waves and c u r r e n t s by t h e o o l i t i c
o f wind-inducedwaves
a t Blu.ewater arid
no
"3 5
CONCLI.YSIONS
Of
on cietailed study
New Mexico.
1) S u b t i d a l c a r b o n a t ed e p o s i t i o n a lf a c i e s
make up a b o u t 95%
hndres
E v a p o r i t e m i n e r a l s were n o t n o t e d i n t h e l a v e r S a n
e v a p o r i t e s .L i t t l ee v i d e n c e
f i a t o r sabkha origin for
o f d:iage;..,e-i;ic
3 ) Th;? car.kcnai;edepositional.facies
o f this r e p v r t p;-ni.L
d e t a i l e dc o r r e l a t i o nt h r o u g h o u tt h es t u d y
mea.
Th? n o m &
cu-ts5.d.e
t h es t u d ya r e 2 ,
4.)
Seventeen "transgressir~e-regressi~re"
zycles 'were no'ted In
thelower
only t h r e e
cycier; a r e
of
thesecyclesarerelatively
The
much
The c y c l e sp e r m i t
facies.
o f incfividualcarbonatedepositional
blost of t h e s ec y c l e s
SanAndresoutside
s h o u l d he p r e s e n t i n t h e 1.ower
%he s k ~ d ym e a .
The GlorietaSandstone
- h e ca.rbonate member
136
o f -these c y c l e s .
5 ) S e d i m e n t a t i o ni n the lowerSanhndresFormation
study area appears
' t o havebeen
Nos't: o f thelower
c o n t r o l l e d by t h e P e d e r n a l
as a. b u r i e d , y e t p o s i t i v e f e a t u r e ,
6)
inthe
SanAndres
i nt h es t u d y
area ~ 3 . sappzc-
t h a t were p r e s e n t e a s t of t h e s t u d y a r e a i n easteernLincoln
andwestem"ChavesCounkics
7)
The m a j o r i t y of thelvwer
San Andrescarbonate
memberwas
-the o o l i t i c b a r r i e r s o f theundaforn-edge.
The G l o r i e t a Sandstonedoes
o r de:L:i;aic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h i n t h e
must be i n f e r r e d l a r g e l y
i o n a lf a c i e s .
s'i;ucly area..
Its g e n e s i s
from theassociatedcarbonatedeposit-
The t e r r i g e n o u ss a n d s
of thelower,middle,
of t h e undaforrn-edgeenvironment
during low s e a l e v e l s t a n d s .
The t e r r i g e n o u s s a n d s i n n o r t h e r n L i n c o l n
been transpor-ked along the inside
riers.
of pre-existing oo].itic
However, no independentevidence
t h i s hypothesis,
County may a l s o h a v e
bar-
is a v a i l a b l e t o support
e
1Ki.
APPENDIX 11
INPRODUCTlOM
I to
F i g w e 28 i l l , u s t r a t e s t h e h e a d i n g u s e d i n P l a t e s
The s e d i m e n t a r yp a r a r w t e r sl i s t e d
VIII.
discussed i n t h e t e x t
of
4 W s
report.
i n theheading
Mas% sedimentaxypar-
cz~lci g
are
of figure 28)
ways^
1)
and 2) r e l a t i v e
The i n d i c a t i o n o f
nextsection.
Ilela."cive abundance i c d e s c r i b e d q u a l i t a - t i w l y as r a r e ,
ra-e t o
CoIirnOil,
how theseterms
Figure 29 i l l u s t r a t e s
are r e p r e s e n t e d on P l a t e s I t o VIII
fauila.p
I44
1
m
DOLOMITE
CALO\LfnU$
SILTSTO~E.
L.
I --- I
L"---J
CHERT
NODULCS
R C W H CRC55jTRhTlFICATlON
3-47
Curray, J.R, 1956, The analysis of Lwo-dimensional or3.entation datat J o u r , Geology, v. 64, p. ll7-l.31.
Cnrlis, K.
1963,
hssociation
o f dolomite and anhydrite
in t h e Recent Sediment&ofthePersian
GuJX: Pl'ature,
V~
p. 679-660.
Folk, X.L. and W.C. Ward, 195?( RzPazos River bar8 a stu6.y in
the significance of grain size pmwmeteers8 Jour, Sed.
Petrology, v. 27* p. 3-26.
Goddard, E.N., 9C .
a
&
C 2 l a - t Committee,
Council a
1970, Rock-colorchart:
Rock C o l o r
Geol, SOC. America-National Research
3.53
Passcga, R I P 1957, Texture as c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f clastic depoxitlono Am. k s s o c . PetroleumGeologists, Bull,, vli 41,
p. 1.952-1984,
Plumley, V*J.
.& 1962, Energyindex f o r l i m e s t o n ei n t e r p r e t a t i o n and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ,
H a l , W.E, (eJ,), Classifi c a t i o n o f Carbonate Rocksr Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists,
Nem, l e p. f35-lO7,
41
11
CR PTALGAL L A M I N A T E
A L L 5TKoMATOLITE3'
ONCOLllE3
P H Y L L O I D ALGAE
ORGANOSWlmEIClM
SlUUClVZEs AND
v,
..
A\-
m
PI
U I
C R F T A L G ALLA M I M A T E S
ALGAL S T R o M A T O L I T E S
ONMLITES
PHYLLOIDALGAE
ORGANOSWlmEUTM
STRU\NuRRE"E AND