Lyell Collection

Geological Society, London, Special Publications

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Macquaker, J. H. S.
Right arrow Articles by Curtis, C. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 1996; v. 103; p. 97-107;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.SP.1996.103.01.07
© 1996 Geological Society of London

Shallow Marine Sequences

Sedimentological and geochemical controls on ooidal ironstone and ‘bone-bed’ formation and some comments on their sequence-stratigraphical significance

J. H. S. Macquaker1, K. G. Taylor1, T. P. Young2 & C. D. Curtis1

1 Department of Earth Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
2 Department of Earth Sciences, University of Wales Cardiff, PO Box 914, Cardiff CF 3YE, UK

Ironstones and ‘bone-beds’ are both formed in shallow marine settings where the prevailing sediment accumulation rates are very low. A review of published work shows that both sediment types cap coarsening upward successions and are commonly developed in mudstonedominated settings. Both can be shown to contain similar sedimentary structures (e.g. rip-up clasts, disarticulated shell debris) and a diverse assemblage of ichnogenera. However, the early diagenetic assemblages within each sediment type are both different from each other and from the mudstones within which they are enclosed. In ooidal ironstones, the cement assemblage comprises glaucony, berthierine and siderite; in ‘bone-beds’ it comprises early apatite, glaucony and later calcite and pyrite; in the mudstones it is predominantly pyrite. It is argued that the physical environment in which the ironstones and ‘bone-beds’ formed was similar, whereas their diagenetic environments were rather different. In particular, the characteristic cement assemblage of ironstones was produced in suboxic pore waters which were subjected to intense Fe reduction, whereas the characteristic cement assemblage of ‘bone-beds’ was produced in suboxic pore waters where there was limited Fe reduction. As a consequence of these chemical and stratigraphical constraints it is believed that ‘bone-beds’ formed on marine flooding surfaces and ironstones formed either at sequence boundaries, major flooding surfaces or maximum flooding surfaces.