Results for “Geoscience Canada” — Page 3

USGS2010

Middle Jurassic through Quaternary metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 8 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Tectonic and metallogenic model for northeast Asia, Chapter 9 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Appendix A: Description of the Northeast Asia Project and Associated Products

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2009

Appendix B: Description of Map Units for Northeast Asia Summary Geodynamics Map

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2010

Appendix C: Summary of Major Metallogenic Belts in Northeast Asia (the Russian Far East, Yakutia, Siberia, Transbaikalia, Northern China, Mongolia, South Korea, and Japan)

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗

USGS1996

Joint US Geological Survey, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission workshop on research related to low-level radioactive waste disposal, May 4-6, 1993, National Center, Reston, Virginia; Proceedings

This report contains papers presented at the "Joint U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Technical Workshop on Research Related to Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) Disposal" that was held at the USGS National Center Auditorium, Reston, Virginia, May 4-6, 1993. The objective of the workshop was to provide a forum for exchange of information, ideas, and technology in the geosciences dealing with LLW disposal. This workshop was the first joint activity under the Memorandum of Understanding between the USGS and NRC's Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research signed in April 1992. Participants included invited speakers from the USGS, NRC technical contractors (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Laboratories and universities) and NRC staff for presentation of research study results related to LLW disposal. Also in attendance were scientists from the DOE, DOE National Laboratories, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, State developmental and regulatory agencies involved in LLW disposal facility siting and licensing, Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL), private industry, Agricultural Research Service, universities, USGS and NRC.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗

USGS2006

Petroleum system modeling capabilities for use in oil and gas resource assessments

Summary: Petroleum resource assessments are among the most highly visible and frequently cited scientific products of the U.S. Geological Survey. The assessments integrate diverse and extensive information on the geologic, geochemical, and petroleum production histories of provinces and regions of the United States and the World. Petroleum systems modeling incorporates these geoscience data in ways that strengthen the assessment process and results are presented visually and numerically. The purpose of this report is to outline the requirements, advantages, and limitations of one-dimensional (1-D), two-dimensional (2-D), and three-dimensional (3-D) petroleum systems modeling that can be applied to the assessment of oil and gas resources. Primary focus is on the application of the Integrated Exploration Systems (IES) PetroMod? software because of familiarity with that program as well as the emphasis by the USGS Energy Program on standardizing to one modeling application. The Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (WCSB) is used to demonstrate the use of the PetroMod? software. Petroleum systems modeling quantitatively extends the 'total petroleum systems' (TPS) concept (Magoon and Dow, 1994; Magoon and Schmoker, 2000) that is employed in USGS resource assessments. Modeling allows integration of state-of-the-art analysis techniques, and provides the means to test and refine understanding of oil and gas generation, migration, and accumulation. Results of modeling are presented visually, numerically, and statistically, which enhances interpretation of the processes that affect TPSs through time. Modeling also provides a framework for the input and processing of many kinds of data essential in resource assessment, including (1) petroleum system elements such as reservoir, seal, and source rock intervals; (2) timing of depositional, hiatus, and erosional events and their influences on petroleum systems; (3) incorporation of vertical and lateral distribution and lithologies of strata that compose the petroleum systems; and (4) calculations of pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) histories. As digital data on petroleum systems continue to expand, the models can integrate these data into USGS resource assessments by building and displaying, through time, areas of petroleum generation, migration pathways, accumulations, and relative contributions of source rocks to the hydrocarbon components. IES PetroMod? 1-D, 2-D, and 3-D models are integrated such that each uses the same variables for petroleum systems modeling. 1-D burial history models are point locations, mainly wells. Maps and cross-sections model geologic information in two dimensions and can incorporate direct input of 2-D seismic data and interpretations using various formats. Both 1-D and 2-D models use data essential for assessments and, following data compilation, they can be completed in hours and retested in minutes. Such models should be built early in the geologic assessment process, inasmuch as they incorporate the petroleum system elements of reservoir, source, and seal rock intervals with associated lithologies and depositional and erosional ages. The models can be used to delineate the petroleum systems. A number of 1-D and 2-D models can be constructed across a geologic province and used by the assessment geologists as a 3-D framework of processes that control petroleum generation, migration, and accumulation. The primary limitation of these models is that they only represent generation, migration, and accumulation in two dimensions. 3-D models are generally built at reservoir to basin scales. They provide a much more detailed and realistic representation of petroleum systems than 1-D or 2-D models because they portray more fully the temporal and physical relations among (1) burial history; (2) lithologies and associated changes through burial in porosity, permeability, and compaction; (3) hydrodynamic effects; and (4) other parameters that influence petroleum gen

Open-File Report↗

USGS2007

GIS data for the Seaside, Oregon, Tsunami Pilot Study to modernize FEMA flood hazard maps

A Tsunami Pilot Study was conducted for the area surrounding the coastal town of Seaside, Oregon, as part of the Federal Emergency Management's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map Modernization Program (Tsunami Pilot Study Working Group, 2006). The Cascadia subduction zone extends from Cape Mendocino, California, to Vancouver Island, Canada. The Seaside area was chosen because it is typical of many coastal communities subject to tsunamis generated by far- and near-field (Cascadia) earthquakes. Two goals of the pilot study were to develop probabilistic 100-year and 500-year tsunami inundation maps using Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Analysis (PTHA) and to provide recommendations for improving tsunami hazard assessment guidelines for FEMA and state and local agencies. The study was an interagency effort by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Geological Survey, and FEMA, in collaboration with the University of Southern California, Middle East Technical University, Portland State University, Horning Geoscience, Northwest Hydraulics Consultants, and the Oregon Department of Geological and Mineral Industries. The pilot study model data and results are published separately as a geographic information systems (GIS) data report (Wong and others, 2006). The flood maps and GIS data are briefly described here.

Oregon↗

USGS2021

Deposit classification scheme for the Critical Minerals Mapping Initiative Global Geochemical Database

A challenge for the global economy is to meet the growing demand for commodities used in today’s advanced technologies. Critical minerals are commodities (for example, elements, compounds, minerals) deemed vital to the economic and national security of individual countries that are vulnerable to supply disruption. The national geological agencies of Australia, Canada, and the United States recently joined forces to advance understanding and foster development of critical mineral resources in their respective countries through the Critical Minerals Mapping Initiative (CMMI). An initial goal of the CMMI is to fill the knowledge gap on the abundance of critical minerals in ores. To do this, the CMMI compiled modern multielement geochemical data generated by each agency on ore samples collected from historical and active mines and prospects from around the world. To identify relationships between critical minerals, deposit types, deposit environments, and mineral systems, a unified deposit classification scheme was needed. This report describes the scheme developed by the CMMI to classify the initial release of geochemical data. In 2021, the resulting database—along with basic query, statistical analysis, and display tools—will be served to the public through a web-based portal managed by Geoscience Australia. The database will enable users to trace critical minerals through mineral systems and identify individual deposits or deposit types that are potential sources of critical minerals.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2013

History and evaluation of national-scale geochemical data sets for the United States

Six national-scale, or near national-scale, geochemical data sets for soils or stream sediments exist for the United States. The earliest of these, here termed the ‘Shacklette’ data set, was generated by a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) project conducted from 1961 to 1975. This project used soil collected from a depth of about 20 cm as the sampling medium at 1323 sites throughout the conterminous U.S. The National Uranium Resource Evaluation Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (NURE-HSSR) Program of the U.S. Department of Energy was conducted from 1975 to 1984 and collected either stream sediments, lake sediments, or soils at more than 378,000 sites in both the conterminous U.S. and Alaska. The sampled area represented about 65% of the nation. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), from 1978 to 1982, collected samples from multiple soil horizons at sites within the major crop-growing regions of the conterminous U.S. This data set contains analyses of more than 3000 samples. The National Geochemical Survey, a USGS project conducted from 1997 to 2009, used a subset of the NURE-HSSR archival samples as its starting point and then collected primarily stream sediments, with occasional soils, in the parts of the U.S. not covered by the NURE-HSSR Program. This data set contains chemical analyses for more than 70,000 samples. The USGS, in collaboration with the Mexican Geological Survey and the Geological Survey of Canada, initiated soil sampling for the North American Soil Geochemical Landscapes Project in 2007. Sampling of three horizons or depths at more than 4800 sites in the U.S. was completed in 2010, and chemical analyses are currently ongoing. The NRCS initiated a project in the 1990s to analyze the various soil horizons from selected pedons throughout the U.S. This data set currently contains data from more than 1400 sites. This paper (1) discusses each data set in terms of its purpose, sample collection protocols, and analytical methods; and (2) evaluates each data set in terms of its appropriateness as a national-scale geochemical database and its usefulness for national-scale geochemical mapping.

Conterminous United States↗

USGS2011

Comparison of two methods used to model shape parameters of Pareto distributions

Two methods are compared for estimating the shape parameters of Pareto field-size (or pool-size) distributions for petroleum resource assessment. Both methods assume mature exploration in which most of the larger fields have been discovered. Both methods use the sizes of larger discovered fields to estimate the numbers and sizes of smaller fields: (1) the tail-truncated method uses a plot of field size versus size rank, and (2) the log–geometric method uses data binned in field-size classes and the ratios of adjacent bin counts. Simulation experiments were conducted using discovered oil and gas pool-size distributions from four petroleum systems in Alberta, Canada and using Pareto distributions generated by Monte Carlo simulation. The estimates of the shape parameters of the Pareto distributions, calculated by both the tail-truncated and log–geometric methods, generally stabilize where discovered pool numbers are greater than 100. However, with fewer than 100 discoveries, these estimates can vary greatly with each new discovery. The estimated shape parameters of the tail-truncated method are more stable and larger than those of the log–geometric method where the number of discovered pools is more than 100. Both methods, however, tend to underestimate the shape parameter. Monte Carlo simulation was also used to create sequences of discovered pool sizes by sampling from a Pareto distribution with a discovery process model using a defined exploration efficiency (in order to show how biased the sampling was in favor of larger fields being discovered first). A higher (more biased) exploration efficiency gives better estimates of the Pareto shape parameters.

Mathematical Geosciences↗

USGS2018

Late Holocene paleoceanography in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, Arctic Ocean, based on benthic foraminifera and ostracodes

Calcareous microfossil assemblages in late Holocene sediments from the western Arctic continental shelf provide an important baseline for evaluating the impacts of today’s changing Arctic oceanography. This study compares 14 C-dated late Holocene microfaunal assemblages of sediment cores SWERUS-L2-2-PC1, 2-MC4 and 2-KL1 (57 mwd), which record the last 4200 years in the Herald Canyon (Chukchi Sea shelf), and HLY1302-JPC-32, GGC-30, MC-29 (60 mwd), which record the last 3000 years in the Beaufort Sea shelf off the coast of Canada. Foraminiferal and ostracode assemblages are typical of Arctic continental shelf environments with annual sea-ice cover and show relatively small changes in terms of variability of dominant species. Important microfaunal changes in the Beaufort site include a spike in Spiroplectammina biformis coinciding with a decrease in Cassidulina reniforme in the last few centuries suggesting an increase of Pacific Water influence and decreased sea-ice. There is low-amplitude centennial-scale variability in proportions of benthic foraminiferal species, such as C. reniforme . In addition to these species, Cassidulina teretis s.l., Elphidium excavatum clavatum and Stainforthia feylingi are also common at this site. At the Herald Canyon site in the last few centuries, C. reniforme peaks around 150 years BP and then decreases while Spiroplectammina earlandi spikes and Acanthocythereis dunelmensis decreases also suggesting an increase in Pacific Water influence and decreased sea-ice at this site. This site also includes Buccella spp. and Elphidium excavatum clavatum . Differences in benthic foraminifera and ostracode species dominance between the two sites may be due to a greater influence of Pacific Water in the Chukchi shelf, compared to the more distal Beaufort shelf, which is also affected by the Beaufort Gyre and the Mackenzie River.

Arctic Ocean, Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea↗

USGS2020

Evidence for large Holocene earthquakes along the Denali fault in southwest Yukon, Canada

The Yukon–Alaska Highway corridor in southern Yukon is subject to geohazards ranging from landslides to floods and earthquakes on faults in the St. Elias Mountains and Shakwak Valley. Here we discuss the late Holocene seismic history of the Denali fault, located at the eastern front of the St. Elias Mountains and one of only a few known seismically active terrestrial faults in Canada. Holocene faulting is indicated by scarps and mounds on late Pleistocene drift and by tectonically deformed Pleistocene and Holocene sediments. Previous work on trenches excavated against the fault scarp near the Duke River reveals paleoseismic sediment disturbance dated to ∼300–1,200, 1,200–1,900, and 3,000 years ago. Re-excavation of the trenches indicates a fourth event dated to 6,000 years ago. The trenches are interpreted to show a negative flower structure produced by extension of sediments by dextral strike-slip fault movement. Nearby Crescent Lake is ponded against the fault scarp. Sediment cores reveal four abrupt sediment and diatom changes reflecting seismic shaking at ∼1,200–1,900, 1,900–5,900, 5,900–6,200, and 6,500–6,800 years ago. At the Duke River, the fault offsets sediments, including two White River tephra layers (∼1,900 and 1,200 years old). Late Pleistocene outwash gravel and overlying Holocene aeolian sediments show in cross section a positive flower structure indicative of post-glacial contraction of the sediments by dextral strike-slip movement. Based on the number of events reflecting ∼M6, we estimate the average recurrence of large earthquakes on the Yukon part of the Denali fault to be about 1,300 years in the past 6,500–6,800 years.

Yukon↗

USGS2022

Perspectives on premetamorphic stratabound tourmalinites

Stratabound tourmalinites are metallogenically important rocks that locally show a close spatial association with diverse types of mineralization, especially volcanogenic massive sulfides (VMS) and clastic-dominated (CD) Zn-Pb deposits. These tourmalinite occurrences pan the geologic record from Eoarchean to Jurassic. Host lithologies are dominated by clastic metasedimentary rocks but in some areas include metavolcanic rocks, marble, or metaevaporites. Stratabound and stratiform (conformable) tourmalinites commonly display sedimentary structures such as graded beds, cross-beds, and rip-up clasts. In most cases, field and microtextural relationships are consistent with a synsedimentary to the early diagenetic introduction of boron as a precursor to tourmaline formation. Whole-rock geochemical data for major, trace, and rare earth elements (REE) provide valuable insights into tourmalinite origins. Al-normalized values relative to those for least-altered host metasedimentary rocks suggest that tourmalinites in proximal settings at or near hydrothermal vent sites characterized by high fluid/rock regimes (e.g., Sullivan Pb-Zn-Ag deposit, Canada) have very different signatures than those in low fluid/rock, distal settings (e.g., Broken Hill Pb-Zn-Ag deposit, Australia). The high fluid/rock regimes at Sullivan show large mass changes of +60 % for Mg and +180 % for Mn, as well as large variations in abundances of light and middle REE. In contrast, tourmalinite formation in low fluid/rock regimes yields minimal Al-normalized changes in major elements, trace elements, and REE. Boron isotope values of tourmalinite-hosted tourmaline vary widely from -26.1 to +27.5 ‰, and are attributed mainly to boron sources (e.g., sediments, evaporites) with generally minor influence from processes such as formational temperature, fluid/rock ratio, and secular variation in seawater δ 11 B values. Laterally extensive stratiform tourmalinites formed mainly by syngenetic or early diagenetic processes on or beneath the seafloor. The syngenetic process is attributed to the interaction of vented B-rich brines with aluminous minerals in sediments, whereas the diagenetic process involves the selective replacement of aluminous sediments by B-rich fluids. Modern examples of tourmalinites, as yet undiscovered, may exist in metalliferous sediments of the Red Sea and the eastern Pacific Ocean, in altered volcaniclastic sediments within active seafloor-hydrothermal systems of the South Pacific, and in hydrothermal mounds and vents associated with mafic sill complexes in extensional basins as in the North Sea and South China Sea. Stratabound tourmalinites that contain base-metal sulfides, high Mn concentrations (>1 wt. % MnO), or positive Eu anomalies can be valuable exploration guides for base-metal sulfide deposits in sedimentary and volcanic terranes.

Journal of Geosciences↗

USGS2009

A proposed origin for fossilized Pennsylvanian plant cuticles by pyrite oxidation (Sydney Coalfield, Nova Scotia, Canada)

Fossilized cuticles, though rare in the roof rocks of coal seam in the younger part of the Pennsylvanian Sydney Coalfield, Nova Scotia, represent nearly all of the major plant groups. Selected for investigation, by methods of Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and elemental analysis, are fossilized cuticles (FCs) and cuticles extracted from compressions by Schulze's process (CCs) of Alethopteris ambigua. These investigations are supplemented by FTIR analysis of FCs and CCs of Cordaites principalis, and a cuticle-fossilized medullosalean(?) axis. The purpose of this study is threefold: (1) to try to determine biochemical discriminators between FCs and CCs of the same species using semi-quantitative FTIR techniques; (2) to assess the effects chemical treatments have, particularly Schulze's process, on functional groups; and most importantly (3) to study the primary origin of FCs. Results are equivocal in respect to (1); (2) after Schulze's treatment aliphatic moieties tend to be reduced relative to oxygenated groups, and some aliphatic chains may be shortened; and (3) a primary chemical model is proposed. The model is based on a variety of geological observations, including stratal distribution, clay and pyrite mineralogies associated with FCs and compressions, and regional geological structure. The model presupposes compression-cuticle fossilization under anoxic conditions for late authigenic deposition of sub-micron-sized pyrite on the compressions. Rock joints subsequently provided conduits for oxygen-enriched ground-water circulation to initiate in situ pyritic oxidation that produced sulfuric acid for macerating compressions, with resultant loss of vitrinite, but with preservation of cuticles as FCs. The timing of the process remains undetermined, though it is assumed to be late to post-diagenetic. Although FCs represent a pathway of organic matter transformation (pomd) distinct from other plant-fossilization processes, global applicability of the chemical models remains to be tested. CCs and FCs are inferred endpoints on a spectrum of pomd which complicates assessing origin of in-between transformations (partially macerated cuticles). FCs index highly acidic levels that existed locally in the roof rocks.

Bulletin of Geosciences↗