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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pedley, M.
Right arrow Articles by Hill, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2003; v. 211; p. 207-223;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.SP.2001.211.01.18
© 2003 Geological Society of London

Part V Ancient Sediments and Tectonics

The recognition of barrage and paludal tufa systems by GPR: case studies in the geometry and correlation of Quaternary freshwater carbonates

Martyn Pedley1,2 & Ian Hill2

1 Department of Geography, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK h.m.pedley{at}hull.ac.uk
2 Department of Geology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK iah{at}Leicester.ac.uk

Tufas provide virtually the only sedimentary and proxy-environmental records within karstic terrains. However, they are difficult to access. Shallow geophysical prospecting techniques, such as resistivity and shallow seismic reflection, fail to define the often complex internal bedform details in tufa deposits and many deposits appear too well lithified to auger-sample. Nevertheless, the application of ground penetrating radar (GPR) permits the recognition of up to five distinct types of radar reflectors that can be directly related to distinct lithologies commonly seen in tufa cores: (1) well-lithified phytoherms produce sharp, sinuous and often complexly truncated bright signals; (2) soft lime muds produce subhorizontal, laterally continuous lower contrast (dull) laminar bedform signals; (3) organic-rich deposits (sapropels and peats) produce poorly focused dull responses, often with internal ‘noise’; (4) the tops of bladed and coarse-grained deposits, such as flint gravel, give a strong bright signal; and (5) the associated presence of clay-grade lime silts and muds within the top of gravel beds produces the same top-bed signal as 4, but internal details of the deposit are masked and a remarkably homogeneous dull signal response is typical throughout the lower parts of the deposit.

From these GPR responses it is possible to make meaningful three-dimensional comparisons of the internal geometries of Holocene tufa deposits. Problematic tufa deposits in the valleys of the Derbyshire Wye and the Hampshire Test, UK, are presented to illustrate the universal value of GPR surveying for fresh-water carbonate recognition and for providing key information on valley-bottom resurgence locations.





This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Geological Society, London, Special PublicationsHome page
C. S. Bristow and H. M. Jol
An introduction to ground penetrating radar (GPR) in sediments
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2003; 211: 1 - 7.
[Abstract] [PDF]