Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

G. S. Gohn

Publications and source records attributed to G. S. Gohn.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2009

Deep drilling in the Chesapeake Bay impact structure - An overview

The late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure lies buried at moderate depths below Chesapeake Bay and surrounding landmasses in southeastern Virginia, USA. Numerous characteristics made this impact structure an inviting target for scientific drilling, including the location of the impact on the Eocene continental shelf, its threelayer target structure, its large size (??85 km diameter), its status as the source of the North American tektite strewn field, its temporal association with other late Eocene terrestrial impacts, its documented effects on the regional groundwater system, and its previously unstudied effects on the deep microbial biosphere. The Chesapeake Bay Impact Structure Deep Drilling Project was designed to drill a deep, continuously cored test hole into the central part of the structure. A project workshop, funding proposals, and the acceptance of those proposals occurred during 2003-2005. Initial drilling funds were provided by the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Supplementary funds were provided by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Science Mission Directorate, ICDP, and USGS. Field operations were conducted at Eyreville Farm, Northampton County, Virginia, by Drilling, Observation, and Sampling of the Earth's Continental Crust (DOSECC) and the project staff during September-December 2005, resulting in two continuously cored, deep holes. The USGS and Rutgers University cored a shallow hole to 140 m in April-May 2006 to complete the recovered section from land surface to 1766 m depth. The recovered section consists of 1322 m of crater materials and 444 m of overlying postimpact Eocene to Pleistocene sediments. The crater section consists of, from base to top: basement-derived blocks of crystalline rocks (215 m); a section of suevite, impact melt rock, lithic impact breccia, and cataclasites (154 m); a thin interval of quartz sand and lithic blocks (26 m); a granite megablock (275 m); and sediment blocks and boulders, polymict, sediment-clast-dominated sedimentary breccias, and a thin upper section of stratified sediments (652 m). The cored postimpact sediments provide insight into the effects of a large continental-margin impact on subsequent coastal-plain sedimentation. This volume contains the first results of multidisciplinary studies of the Eyreville cores and related topics. The volume is divided into these sections: geologic column; borehole geophysical studies; regional geophysical studies; crystalline rocks, impactites, and impact models; sedimentary breccias; postimpact sediments; hydrologic and geothermal studies; and microbiologic studies. ?? 2009 The Geological Society of America.

Special Paper of the Geological Society of America↗
USGS2008

Deep drilling into the Chesapeake Bay impact structure

Samples from a 1.76-kilometer-deep corehole drilled near the center of the late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure (Virginia, USA) reveal its geologic, hydrologic, and biologic history. We conducted stratigraphic and petrologic analyses of the cores to elucidate the timing and results of impact-melt creation and distribution, transient-cavity collapse, and ocean-water resurge. Comparison of post-impact sedimentary sequences inside and outside the structure indicates that compaction of the crater fill influenced long-term sedimentation patterns in the mid-Atlantic region. Salty connate water of the target remains in the crater fill today, where it poses a potential threat to the regional groundwater resource. Observed depth variations in microbial abundance indicate a complex history of impact-related thermal sterilization and habitat modification, and subsequent post-impact repopulation.

Science↗
USGS2006

Chesapeake Bay impact structure: Morphology, crater fill, and relevance for impact structures on Mars

The late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure (CBIS) on the Atlantic margin of Virginia is one of the largest and best-preserved "wet-target" craters on Earth. It provides an accessible analog for studying impact processes in layered and wet targets on volatile-rich planets. The CBIS formed in a layered target of water, weak clastic sediments, and hard crystalline rock. The buried structure consists of a deep, filled central crater, 38 km in width, surrounded by a shallower brim known as the annular trough. The annular trough formed partly by collapse of weak sediments, which expanded the structure to ???85 km in diameter. Such extensive collapse, in addition to excavation processes, can explain the "inverted sombrero" morphology observed at some craters in layered targets. The distribution of crater-fill materials i n the CBIS is related to the morphology. Suevitic breccia, including pre-resurge fallback deposits, is found in the central crater. Impact-modified sediments, formed by fluidization and collapse of water-saturated sand and silt-clay, occur in the annular trough. Allogenic sediment-clast breccia, interpreted as ocean-resurge deposits, overlies the other impactites and covers the entire crater beneath a blanket of postimpact sediments. The formation of chaotic terrains on Mars is attributed to collapse due to the release of volatiles from thick layered deposits. Some flat-floored rimless depressions with chaotic infill in these terrains are impact craters that expanded by collapse farther than expected for similar-sized complex craters in solid targets. Studies of crater materials in the CBIS provide insights into processes of crater expansion on Mars and their links to volatiles. ?? The Meteoritical Society, 2006.

Meteoritics and Planetary Science↗
USGS2001

High-resolution seismic reflection/refraction images near the outer margin of the Chesapeake Bay impact crater, York-James Peninsula, southeastern Virginia

Powars and Bruce (1999) showed that the Chesapeake Bay region of southeastern Virginia was the site of an asteroid or comet impact during the late Eocene, approximately 35 million years ago (Fig. 1). Initial borehole and marine seismic-reflection data revealed a 90-km-diameter impact structure, referred to as the Chesapeake Bay Impact Crater (CBIC), that lies buried beneath the southern Chesapeake Bay and surrounding Virginia Coastal Plain (Powars and Bruce, Figs. 1b). Stratigraphic correlations among a series of boreholes suggest that the impact disrupted basement rock and the overlying Cretaceous through middle Eocene deltaic and marine sediments. The CBIC truncates important regional sedimentary aquifer systems and possibly caused differential flushing of connate seawater. Therefore, the CBIC affects the present-day ground-water quantity and quality in the rapidly growing Hampton Roads region of southeastern Virginia. Impact-generated faults in the basement rock may be the sources of small-to-moderate earthquakes that have been occurred around the perimeter of the impact structure over the past few hundred years (Johnson et al., 1998). Powars and Bruce (1999) suggest that 150 m to 490 m of relatively undisturbed, post-impact Coastal-Plain sediments overlie the impact-disrupted sediments and basement rocks west of Chesapeake Bay. Their interpretation of marine seismic data, released from Texaco and Exxon, revealed a central 38-km-wide, 1.6-km-deep disrupted zone in the basement rocks (inner basin), which is surrounded by a 21- to 31-km-wide, 1- km-deep annular trough. Steep rim escarpments surround these features, which they mapped regionally as the outer and inner margins (rims) of the CBIC (Fig. 1b). The outer margin is a slumped terrace zone that has a 120- to 305-m-high gullied escarpment and varies in width from 0.8 to 3.2 km. However, the geographic bounds of the CBIC, its effects on the regional aquifer systems, and the distribution of impact generated faults and fractures in basement are not well determined. To better determine some of the unknowns associated with the CBIC, we conducted a 350-m-long, high-resolution seismic reflection and refraction survey, referred to here as the CBIC-1 seismic survey, on the York-James Peninsula in June 1999. In particular, we attempted to: better define the outer margin of the CBIC, understand lateral variations in the stratigraphic sequence, help assess potential hazards associated with regional seismicity, and determine acquisition parameters needed for shallow-depth seismic imaging in the Chesapeake Bay area.

Virginia↗
USGS1999

Physical stratigraphy, paleontology, and magnetostratigraphy of the USGS-Santee Coastal Reserve core (CHN-803), Charleston County, South Carolina

The Santee Coastal Reserve core, a 545-ft-deep corehole in northeastern Charleston County, South Carolina, recovered sediments of Late Cretaceous, Paleocene, Eocene, and Quaternary age. The deepest sediments, the Donoho Creek Formation (545-475.7 ft), consist of 69.3 ft of muddy calcareous sand of marine origin. This formation is placed within the upper Campanian calcareous nannofossil Subzone CC 22c. The overlying Peedee Formation (475.7-367.1 ft) in the core consists of 108.6 ft of silty clay of marine origin. It is placed in upper Maastrichtian calcareous nannofossil Subzones CC 25b, CC 26a, and CC 26b. Combined fossil and paleomagnetic information indicates nearly continuous deposition. Foraminifers indicate an outer neritic paleobathymetric setting. The Rhems Formation sensu stricto (367.1-267.3 ft) consists of 99.8 ft of silty clay, muddy sand, and minor calcite-cemented, shelly sand of marine origin. It is apparently the product of rapid sediment accumulation during a short period of time in the early Paleocene (calcareous nannofossil Zone NP 1). The upper part of the Rhems Formation sensu Bybell and others (1998) (267.3-237.4 ft) consists of 29.9 ft of calcite-cemented muddy sand and burrowed fine sand of marine origin. It is placed in calcareous nannofossil Zone NP 4 and, because it shows normal polarity, likely represents the upper part of the lower Paleocene. This unit may be correlative with the lower part of the Lower Bridge Member of the Williamsburg Formation in its type area. The Lower Bridge Member of the Williamsburg Formation (237.4-125.0 ft) has an unconformable contact at 205.0 ft that divides the member into lower muddy sand beds and upper calcareous clay beds. Both are placed in the upper Paleocene calcareous nannofossil Zone NP 5. The Chicora Member of the Williamsburg Formation (125-51.5 ft) consists of 73.5 ft of muddy, shelly sand of marine origin. It is poorly dated but includes late Paleocene nannofossils (Zones NP 5 and NP 6). A mollusk-bryozoan limestone (51.5-42.0 ft) above the Chicora Member of the Williamsburg yields early Eocene calcareous nannofossils representing both Zone NP 9/10 and Zone NP 12, together with pollen and dinocysts that are younger. Sediments of middle and late Eocene, Oligocene, Miocene, and Pliocene ages were not recovered in the Santee Coastal Reserve core. The upper 42.0 ft of sediments represent Quaternary deposits and are included in the Wando Formation (42.0-28.0 ft) and the informal Silver Bluff beds (28.0-0 ft).

South Carolina↗
USGS1999

Physical stratigraphy, paleontology, and magnetostratigraphy of the USGS-Santee Coastal Reserve core (CHN-803), Charleston County, South Carolina

The Santee Coastal Reserve core, a 545-ft-deep corehole in northeastern Charleston County, South Carolina, recovered sediments of Late Cretaceous, Paleocene, Eocene, and Quaternary age. The deepest sediments, the Donoho Creek Formation (545-475.7 ft), consist of 69.3 ft of muddy calcareous sand of marine origin. This formation is placed within the upper Campanian calcareous nannofossil Subzone CC 22c. The overlying Peedee Formation (475.7-367.1 ft) in the core consists of 108.6 ft of silty clay of marine origin. It is placed in upper Maastrichtian calcareous nannofossil Subzones CC 25b, CC 26a, and CC 26b. Combined fossil and paleomagnetic information indicates nearly continuous deposition. Foraminifers indicate an outer neritic paleobathymetric setting. The Rhems Formation sensu stricto (367.1-267.3 ft) consists of 99.8 ft of silty clay, muddy sand, and minor calcite-cemented, shelly sand of marine origin. It is apparently the product of rapid sediment accumulation during a short period of time in the early Paleocene (calcareous nannofossil Zone NP 1). The upper part of the Rhems Formation sensu Bybell and others (1998) (267.3-237.4 ft) consists of 29.9 ft of calcite-cemented muddy sand and burrowed fine sand of marine origin. It is placed in calcareous nannofossil Zone NP 4 and, because it shows normal polarity, likely represents the upper part of the lower Paleocene. This unit may be correlative with the lower part of the Lower Bridge Member of the Williamsburg Formation in its type area. The Lower Bridge Member of the Williamsburg Formation (237.4-125.0 ft) has an unconformable contact at 205.0 ft that divides the member into lower muddy sand beds and upper calcareous clay beds. Both are placed in the upper Paleocene calcareous nannofossil Zone NP 5. The Chicora Member of the Williamsburg Formation (125-51.5 ft) consists of 73.5 ft of muddy, shelly sand of marine origin. It is poorly dated but includes late Paleocene nannofossils (Zones NP 5 and NP 6). A mollusk-bryozoan limestone (51.5-42.0 ft) above the Chicora Member of the Williamsburg yields early Eocene calcareous nannofossils representing both Zone NP 9/10 and Zone NP 12, together with pollen and dinocysts that are younger. Sediments of middle and late Eocene, Oligocene, Miocene, and Pliocene ages were not recovered in the Santee Coastal Reserve core. The upper 42.0 ft of sediments represent Quaternary deposits and are included in the Wando Formation (42.0-28.0 ft) and the informal Silver Bluff beds (28.0-0 ft).

Open-File Report↗
USGS1990

Earthquake-induced liquefaction features in the coastal setting of South Carolina and in the fluvial setting of the New Madrid seismic zone

Many types of liquefaction-related features (sand blows, fissures, lateral spreads, dikes, and sills) have been induced by earthquakes in coastal South Carolina and in the New Madrid seismic zone in the Central United States. In addition, abundant features of unknown and nonseismic origin are present. Geologic criteria for interpreting an earthquake origin in these areas are illustrated in practical applications; these criteria can be used to determine the origin of liquefaction features in many other geographic and geologic settings. In both coastal South Carolina and the New Madrid seismic zone, the earthquake-induced liquefaction features generally originated in clean sand deposits that contain no or few intercalated silt or clay-rich strata. The local geologic setting is a major influence on both development and surface expression of sand blows. Major factors controlling sand-blow formation include the thickness and physical properties of the deposits above the source sands, and these relationships are illustrated by comparing sand blows found in coastal South Carolina (in marine deposits) with sand blows found in the New Madrid seismic zone (in fluvial deposits). In coastal South Carolina, the surface stratum is typically a thin (about 1 m) soil that is weakly cemented with humate, and the sand blows are expressed as craters surrounded by a thin sheet of sand; in the New Madrid seismic zone the surface stratum generally is a clay-rich deposit ranging in thickness from 2 to 10 m, in which case sand blows characteristically are expressed as sand mounded above the original ground surface. Recognition of the various features described in this paper, and identification of the most probable origin for each, provides a set of important tools for understanding paleoseismicity in areas such as the Central and Eastern United States where faults are not exposed for study and strong seismic activity is infrequent.

Professional Paper↗
USGS1986

HOLOCENE AND LATE PLEISTOCENE(? ) EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED SAND BLOWS IN COASTAL SOUTH CAROLINA.

Multiple generations of prehistoric sand blows, interpreted as earthquake induced, have been discovered throughout coastal South Carolina. These sand blows extend far beyond 1886 earthquake induced sand blows, in sediments having approximately the same liquefaction susceptibility. The seismic source zone for the prehistoric sand blows is unknown. The different distributions of prehistoric and 1886 sand blows have two possible explanations: (1) moderate to strong earthquakes originated in different seismic source locations through time or (2) at least one earthquake much stronger than the 1886 event also originated from the same seismic source as the 1886 earthquake.

Conference Paper↗
USGS1978

Regional implications of Triassic or Jurassic age for basalt and sedimentary red beds in the South Carolina coastal plain

Whole rock potassium-argon ages for samples of subsurface basalt recovered near Charleston, South Carolina, are interpreted to indicate a Triassic or Jurassic age for the basalt and underlying sedimentary red beds. This age is consistent with existing evidence indicating that an early Mesozoic basin is present in the subsurface of a large part of the coastal plain of South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, and Alabama.

South Carolina↗