SUBAERIALLY-EXPOSED PALEOZOIC CARBONATES: KARST, OR PALEOKARST?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth James Davies ◽  
Keyword(s):  
1993 ◽  
Vol 98 (B4) ◽  
pp. 6217-6225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike Jackson ◽  
Pierre Rochette ◽  
Gérard Fillion ◽  
Subir Banerjee ◽  
Jim Marvin

1998 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis A Darby

An investigation into the sources of ice-rafted detritus in the central Arctic Ocean using microprobe analyses of detrital Fe oxide minerals discovered unique magnetic spherules in 20 of 144 potential source sample sites from the shelves and coastal areas around this ocean. The spherules occur only in samples from the Queen Elizabeth Islands, Canada. These grains are characterized by a 45-60 µm diameter, pitting throughout, and are occasionally found as multiple joint spherules. They have the optical properties of magnetite and, most remarkably, contain both ZnO and NiO in subequal amounts of up to 25%. The Ni suggests either an anthropogenic or meteoritic source. These spherules were probably ice-rafted into the central Arctic Ocean, where they are found in sediments of Holocene age and back to at least 780 ka, eliminating an anthropogenic source. Because Zn is too volatile to survive entry of a meteor through the earth's atmosphere, these spherules were probably formed during impact of an Fe-Ni meteor in an area of abundant Zn, perhaps the Zn rich Paleozoic carbonates of the Queen Elizabeth Islands. Examination of the ejecta and sediments filling the 22 Ma Haughton Astrobleme impact site on Devon Island, a carbonate terrain, revealed few magnetite spherules. None of these were pitted or contained Ni, but a few percent of ZnO were found in three spherules. Thus, the origin of these magnetite spherules remains unknown. The unique appearance and geochemistry of these spherules are useful in tracing Arctic Ocean ice-rafted detritus to its source.


2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (32) ◽  
pp. e2107632118
Author(s):  
Nikolaus Froitzheim ◽  
Jaroslaw Majka ◽  
Dmitry Zastrozhnov

Anthropogenic global warming may be accelerated by a positive feedback from the mobilization of methane from thawing Arctic permafrost. There are large uncertainties about the size of carbon stocks and the magnitude of possible methane emissions. Methane cannot only be produced from the microbial decay of organic matter within the thawing permafrost soils (microbial methane) but can also come from natural gas (thermogenic methane) trapped under or within the permafrost layer and released when it thaws. In the Taymyr Peninsula and surroundings in North Siberia, the area of the worldwide largest positive surface temperature anomaly for 2020, atmospheric methane concentrations have increased considerably during and after the 2020 heat wave. Two elongated areas of increased atmospheric methane concentration that appeared during summer coincide with two stripes of Paleozoic carbonates exposed at the southern and northern borders of the Yenisey-Khatanga Basin, a hydrocarbon-bearing sedimentary basin between the Siberian Craton to the south and the Taymyr Fold Belt to the north. Over the carbonates, soils are thin to nonexistent and wetlands are scarce. The maxima are thus unlikely to be caused by microbial methane from soils or wetlands. We suggest that gas hydrates in fractures and pockets of the carbonate rocks in the permafrost zone became unstable due to warming from the surface. This process may add unknown quantities of methane to the atmosphere in the near future.


1989 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellis Yochelson

In 1893, Walcott contributed to the debate on the length of geologic time. He approached the problem by calculating average thickness of the Paleozoic rock column in the west and dividing by rates of erosion and by rates of deposition to arrive at a time interval. Although he concentrated on the Cordilleran area, Walcott produced a general paleogeographic scheme for the Paleozoic of North America. He was quite clear in differentiating between chemical and mechanical deposits, and devoted most of his attention to the Paleozoic carbonates. Walcott chose western North America as the source for data, in part because of the long sections and in part because of the large amount of limestone relative to sandstone and shale. Throughout the discussion he included pertinent comments on such subjects as size of source areas and relative speed of deposition; he was familiar with many of the issues that occupy present-day sedimentologists. After considering various aspects of the issue, Walcott estimated 17,500,000 years for the duration of the Paleozoic. Walcott also derived a Paleozoic: Mesozoic: Cenozoic ratio of 12: 5: 2, the same ratio obtained today from radiometric dates. He estimated that the Algonkian was as long as Paleozoic and guessed 10,000,000 years for the duration of the Archean. The greatest flaws in his chain of logic were assumption of an erosion rate of 1 foot in 200 years and assumption that deposition of limestone was more or less continuous. Had he chosen 1 foot per 3,000 years, one of his other two calculations, he would have been close to present-day age figures. Perhaps it was the episodic, rather than the average, nature of sedimentation that was the pitfall. Nevertheless, Walcott's estimates of thicknesses of western Paleozoic rocks and his resulting calculations were the most detailed made on erosion/sedimentation rates to indicate the length of geologic time. His study was published in three journals, plus other outlets, and it may have been the most widely distributed paper of the decade. It was little cited, perhaps because within several years the debate on age shifted to use of ocean salinity as a potentially more precise calender. That approach in turn ultimately succumbed to the new concept of radiometric dating.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document