新墨西哥州西南部mogolon - datil火山区“Box峡谷凝灰岩”及其与Schoolhouse山破火山口的关系

J. Amato, V. Swenton, W. Mcintosh, T. Jonell
{"title":"新墨西哥州西南部mogolon - datil火山区“Box峡谷凝灰岩”及其与Schoolhouse山破火山口的关系","authors":"J. Amato, V. Swenton, W. Mcintosh, T. Jonell","doi":"10.56577/sm-2017.539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rhyolite tuffs in the Mogollon-Datil volcanic field (MDVF; McIntosh et al., 1991;1992, hereafter M91, M92) and Boot Heel volcanic field (BHVF: McIntosh and Bryan, 2000) were previously correlated based on 40 Ar/ 39 Ar sanidine geochronology and paleomagnetism. For this project we revisited correlations between tuffs and inferred caldera sources for the time period 33.8–33.7 Ma, focusing on the “Box Canyon tuff” (M92). The southwestern MDVF contains exposures of several ~33.7 Ma tuffs, including Luna, Fall Canyon, Cherokee Canyon, “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” (not actually Kneeling Nun), “Sugarlump,” Bell Top 6, and Box Canyon. These were grouped as the “Box Canyon tuff” at 33.73 ± 0.13 Ma (M92; formerly 33.51 Ma; all ages recalculated). Most samples were from outflow sheets, but the Cherokee Canyon tuff within the SMC was interpreted as caldera-fill and thus the SMC was inferred as the source of the “Box Canyon” tuffs. McIntosh and Bryan (2000) subsequently noted that the Oak Creek tuff, sourced from the Juniper caldera in the BHVF, also has an age of 33.72 Ma. Thus, there are two potential sources for the 33.7 “Box Canyon” tuff: the SMC and the Juniper caldera. We tested these correlations using electron microprobe analysis of sanidine. The two stratigraphically highest tuffs in the SMC, McCauley Ranch (33.99 Ma, this and Cherokee Canyon (33.84 Ma, this yielded average compositions of Or 43 and Or 55 , whereas the Oak Creek (33.72 ± 0.07 Ma, McIntosh and Bryan, 2000), “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” (33.8 Ma, M91), and Bell Top 6 (33.8 Ma M91) tuffs have sanidine compositions in a cluster around Or 65 . The Oak Creek tuff from the Juniper caldera has sanidine more geochemically similar to other “Box Canyon” tuffs than to the Cherokee Canyon tuff of the SMC, and therefore the SMC is not the exclusive source for the “Box Canyon tuff”. Future work will characterize the other “Box Canyon” tuffs to determine if they represent outflow sheets from the SMC. One potential area is Knight’s Peak, 20 km south of the SMC. There, the JPB Mountain tuff is 36.3 ± 0.6 Ma (U-Pb zircon). The overlying C-Bar Canyon rhyolite tuff did not yield sanidine. The overlying “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” is 33.77 Ma (M91) and thus cannot be Kneeling Nun (~35 Ma). This is overlain by the intermediate lava flows of Malpais Hills that yielded a U-Pb age of 32.6 ± 0.4 Ma. The unrecalculated age of 33.51 Ma (M92) has been long used as the “age” of the SMC (e.g., Chapin et al., 2004). Continuing work on the SMC will determine the age of the caldera collapse and caldera fill deposits.","PeriodicalId":192881,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings Volume: \"Uranium in New Mexico: the Resource and the Legacy\", New Mexico Geological Society, 2017 Annual Spring Meeting","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The “Box Canyon tuff” and its Relationship to the Schoolhouse Mountain Caldera, Mogollon-Datil Volcanic Field, Southwest New Mexico\",\"authors\":\"J. Amato, V. Swenton, W. Mcintosh, T. Jonell\",\"doi\":\"10.56577/sm-2017.539\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rhyolite tuffs in the Mogollon-Datil volcanic field (MDVF; McIntosh et al., 1991;1992, hereafter M91, M92) and Boot Heel volcanic field (BHVF: McIntosh and Bryan, 2000) were previously correlated based on 40 Ar/ 39 Ar sanidine geochronology and paleomagnetism. For this project we revisited correlations between tuffs and inferred caldera sources for the time period 33.8–33.7 Ma, focusing on the “Box Canyon tuff” (M92). The southwestern MDVF contains exposures of several ~33.7 Ma tuffs, including Luna, Fall Canyon, Cherokee Canyon, “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” (not actually Kneeling Nun), “Sugarlump,” Bell Top 6, and Box Canyon. These were grouped as the “Box Canyon tuff” at 33.73 ± 0.13 Ma (M92; formerly 33.51 Ma; all ages recalculated). Most samples were from outflow sheets, but the Cherokee Canyon tuff within the SMC was interpreted as caldera-fill and thus the SMC was inferred as the source of the “Box Canyon” tuffs. McIntosh and Bryan (2000) subsequently noted that the Oak Creek tuff, sourced from the Juniper caldera in the BHVF, also has an age of 33.72 Ma. Thus, there are two potential sources for the 33.7 “Box Canyon” tuff: the SMC and the Juniper caldera. We tested these correlations using electron microprobe analysis of sanidine. The two stratigraphically highest tuffs in the SMC, McCauley Ranch (33.99 Ma, this and Cherokee Canyon (33.84 Ma, this yielded average compositions of Or 43 and Or 55 , whereas the Oak Creek (33.72 ± 0.07 Ma, McIntosh and Bryan, 2000), “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” (33.8 Ma, M91), and Bell Top 6 (33.8 Ma M91) tuffs have sanidine compositions in a cluster around Or 65 . The Oak Creek tuff from the Juniper caldera has sanidine more geochemically similar to other “Box Canyon” tuffs than to the Cherokee Canyon tuff of the SMC, and therefore the SMC is not the exclusive source for the “Box Canyon tuff”. Future work will characterize the other “Box Canyon” tuffs to determine if they represent outflow sheets from the SMC. One potential area is Knight’s Peak, 20 km south of the SMC. There, the JPB Mountain tuff is 36.3 ± 0.6 Ma (U-Pb zircon). The overlying C-Bar Canyon rhyolite tuff did not yield sanidine. The overlying “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” is 33.77 Ma (M91) and thus cannot be Kneeling Nun (~35 Ma). This is overlain by the intermediate lava flows of Malpais Hills that yielded a U-Pb age of 32.6 ± 0.4 Ma. The unrecalculated age of 33.51 Ma (M92) has been long used as the “age” of the SMC (e.g., Chapin et al., 2004). Continuing work on the SMC will determine the age of the caldera collapse and caldera fill deposits.\",\"PeriodicalId\":192881,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings Volume: \\\"Uranium in New Mexico: the Resource and the Legacy\\\", New Mexico Geological Society, 2017 Annual Spring Meeting\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings Volume: \\\"Uranium in New Mexico: the Resource and the Legacy\\\", New Mexico Geological Society, 2017 Annual Spring Meeting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56577/sm-2017.539\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings Volume: \"Uranium in New Mexico: the Resource and the Legacy\", New Mexico Geological Society, 2017 Annual Spring Meeting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56577/sm-2017.539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

mogolon - datil火山区流纹岩凝灰岩McIntosh et al., 1991;1992,以下简称M91, M92)和Boot Heel火山场(BHVF: McIntosh and Bryan, 2000)之前基于40 Ar/ 39 Ar的岩浆年代学和古地磁进行了对比。在这个项目中,我们重新研究了33.8-33.7 Ma期间凝灰岩与推断出的火山口来源之间的相关性,重点关注“Box Canyon凝灰岩”(M92)。西南MDVF包含几个~33.7 Ma凝灰岩的暴露,包括Luna, Fall Canyon, Cherokee Canyon,“Hedlund的跪尼姑,1978”(不是真正的跪尼姑),“Sugarlump”,Bell Top 6和Box Canyon。在33.73±0.13 Ma (M92;原为33.51 Ma;所有年龄重新计算)。大多数样品来自流出层,但SMC内的切诺基峡谷凝灰岩被解释为火山口填充物,因此SMC被推断为“盒子峡谷”凝灰岩的来源。McIntosh和Bryan(2000)随后指出,来自BHVF的Juniper破火山口的Oak Creek凝灰岩的年龄也为33.72 Ma。因此,33.7“盒子峡谷”凝灰岩有两个潜在的来源:SMC和Juniper破火山口。我们用电子探针分析了这些相关性。SMC中两个地层最高的凝灰岩,McCauley Ranch (33.99 Ma)和Cherokee Canyon (33.84 Ma)的平均组成为Or 43和Or 55,而Oak Creek(33.72±0.07 Ma, McIntosh和Bryan, 2000),“hehedlund跪尼玛,1978”(33.8 Ma, M91)和Bell Top 6 (33.8 Ma M91)凝灰岩的平均组成在Or 65附近。来自Juniper破火山口的Oak Creek凝灰岩的地球化学特征与其他“Box Canyon”凝灰岩相似,而与SMC的Cherokee Canyon凝灰岩相似,因此SMC不是“Box Canyon”凝灰岩的唯一来源。未来的工作将描述其他“盒状峡谷”凝灰岩,以确定它们是否代表SMC的流出层。一个潜在的区域是位于SMC以南20公里的骑士峰。其中,JPB山凝灰岩为36.3±0.6 Ma (U-Pb锆石)。上覆的C-Bar峡谷流纹岩凝灰岩不产毒碱。上面的“赫隆德下跪的尼姑,1978”是33.77 Ma (M91),因此不可能是下跪的尼姑(~35 Ma)。它被马尔佩斯山的中间熔岩流覆盖,产生了32.6±0.4 Ma的U-Pb年龄。未重新计算的33.51 Ma (M92)的年龄一直被用作SMC的“年龄”(如Chapin et al., 2004)。对SMC的持续研究将确定破火山口崩塌和破火山口填充物沉积的年龄。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The “Box Canyon tuff” and its Relationship to the Schoolhouse Mountain Caldera, Mogollon-Datil Volcanic Field, Southwest New Mexico
Rhyolite tuffs in the Mogollon-Datil volcanic field (MDVF; McIntosh et al., 1991;1992, hereafter M91, M92) and Boot Heel volcanic field (BHVF: McIntosh and Bryan, 2000) were previously correlated based on 40 Ar/ 39 Ar sanidine geochronology and paleomagnetism. For this project we revisited correlations between tuffs and inferred caldera sources for the time period 33.8–33.7 Ma, focusing on the “Box Canyon tuff” (M92). The southwestern MDVF contains exposures of several ~33.7 Ma tuffs, including Luna, Fall Canyon, Cherokee Canyon, “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” (not actually Kneeling Nun), “Sugarlump,” Bell Top 6, and Box Canyon. These were grouped as the “Box Canyon tuff” at 33.73 ± 0.13 Ma (M92; formerly 33.51 Ma; all ages recalculated). Most samples were from outflow sheets, but the Cherokee Canyon tuff within the SMC was interpreted as caldera-fill and thus the SMC was inferred as the source of the “Box Canyon” tuffs. McIntosh and Bryan (2000) subsequently noted that the Oak Creek tuff, sourced from the Juniper caldera in the BHVF, also has an age of 33.72 Ma. Thus, there are two potential sources for the 33.7 “Box Canyon” tuff: the SMC and the Juniper caldera. We tested these correlations using electron microprobe analysis of sanidine. The two stratigraphically highest tuffs in the SMC, McCauley Ranch (33.99 Ma, this and Cherokee Canyon (33.84 Ma, this yielded average compositions of Or 43 and Or 55 , whereas the Oak Creek (33.72 ± 0.07 Ma, McIntosh and Bryan, 2000), “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” (33.8 Ma, M91), and Bell Top 6 (33.8 Ma M91) tuffs have sanidine compositions in a cluster around Or 65 . The Oak Creek tuff from the Juniper caldera has sanidine more geochemically similar to other “Box Canyon” tuffs than to the Cherokee Canyon tuff of the SMC, and therefore the SMC is not the exclusive source for the “Box Canyon tuff”. Future work will characterize the other “Box Canyon” tuffs to determine if they represent outflow sheets from the SMC. One potential area is Knight’s Peak, 20 km south of the SMC. There, the JPB Mountain tuff is 36.3 ± 0.6 Ma (U-Pb zircon). The overlying C-Bar Canyon rhyolite tuff did not yield sanidine. The overlying “Kneeling Nun of Hedlund, 1978” is 33.77 Ma (M91) and thus cannot be Kneeling Nun (~35 Ma). This is overlain by the intermediate lava flows of Malpais Hills that yielded a U-Pb age of 32.6 ± 0.4 Ma. The unrecalculated age of 33.51 Ma (M92) has been long used as the “age” of the SMC (e.g., Chapin et al., 2004). Continuing work on the SMC will determine the age of the caldera collapse and caldera fill deposits.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Detrital Sanidine 40Ar/39Ar Dating: Transforming Sedimentary Rock Geochronology Implications of Past Extents of Rio Salado and Rio Puerco Deposits in the Southwestern Corner of the Albuquerque Basin, New Mexico The Cretaceous Section at Placitas, Sandoval County, New Mexico Origin and Mineral Resource Potential of the Rosedale District, Socorro County, New Mexico A New Chasmosaurine Ceratopsid From the Hall Lake Member of the Mcrae Formation (maastrichtian), South-Central New Mexico
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1