Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T22:34:35.371Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conodont sequence biostratigraphy of the Hermosa Group (Pennsylvanian) at Honaker Trail, Paradox Basin, Utah

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Scott M. Ritter ,
James E. Barrick  and
M. Randall Skinner
Scott M. Ritter
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602
James E. Barrick
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock 79409
M. Randall Skinner
Affiliation:
Montgomery-Watson, Salt Lake City, UT 84106
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In cyclical Pennsylvanian strata, conodonts find their greatest stratigraphic utility as biotic signatures of physically defined stratigraphic entities (cycles, parasequences, high frequency sequences, etc.) rather then the primary means of stratigraphic subdivision (e.g., biostratigraphic interval zones). The practice of identifying depositional entities for purposes of regional correlation on the basis of their constituent conodont faunas is herein called conodont sequence biostratigraphy. In this paper, the concept is utilized to successfully correlate Pennsylvanian cycles of the Paradox basin with their Midcontinent counterparts.

The Honaker Trail section is the most accessible and well-studied succession of carbonate shelf strata in the Paradox basin. Approximately 350 m of cyclically bedded limestone, sandstone, and shale comprising 53 fifth-order cycles are exposed along the cliffs of the deeply entrenched San Juan River. Maximum transgressive facies of 19 cycles yielded Idiognathodus-Neognathodus- and/or Streptognathodus-dominated conodont faunas. Those from the Chimney Rock, Gothic, LHT-5, UHT-3, UHT-5, UHT-8, unnamed limestone, and Shafer correspond to faunas from the Verdigris, Lower Fort Scott, Altamont (Lake Neosho), Lost Branch, Hertha (Mound City), Swope (Hushpuckney), Dennis (Stark), and South Bend cycles of the Midcontinent, respectively. By extrapolation, all minor cycles of the Marmaton, Pleasanton, and Bronson Groups (except for the Critzer) also appear to have counterparts at Honaker Trail.

The position of the Desmoinesian–Missourian boundary in the Honaker Trail section can be approximated using conodonts in conjunction with fusulinids. The highest Desmoinesian conodont fauna, the Idiognathodus nodocarinatus fauna, occurs in cycle UHT-3 in the lower part of the Upper Honaker Trail sequence. The highest occurrence of Beedeina occurs in the same cycle. The lowest conodont fauna with the Missourian species I. eccentricus appears two cycles higher, in cycle UHT-5. Because in the Midcontinent region a small interval of strata separates the first appearance of I. eccentricus from the base of the Missourian, we place the base of the Missourian at the base of cycle UHT-4 (bed 105) at Honaker Trail. The appearance of Streptognathodus firmus and S. pawhuskaensis in the Shafer limestone indicates that the Missourian–Virgilian boundary lies slightly above or below this stratigraphic horizon.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , May 2002 , pp. 495 - 517
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barrick, J. E., and Boardman, D. R. Jr. 1989. Stratigraphic distribution of morphotypes of Idiognathodus and Streptognathodus in Missourian-lower Virgilian strata, north-central Texas, p. 167–188. In Boardman, D. R. Jr., Barrick, J. E., Cocke, J., and Nestell, M. K. (eds.), Middle and Late Pennsylvanian Chronostratigraphic Boundaries in North-central Texas: glacial-eustatic events, biostratigraphy, and paleoecology. Texas Tech University Studies in Geology, 2.Google Scholar
Barrick, J. E., and Boardman, D. R. Jr. 1995. Early Virgilian (Late Pennsylvanian) conodonts from the Haskell-Cass cycle (Douglas Group), Midcontinent North America. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 27:37.Google Scholar
Barrick, J. E. and Lambert, L. L. 1999. Conodont taxa proposed by Jones (1941) are valid, p. 162–169. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) cyclothem succession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas Geological Open-File Report, 99-27.Google Scholar
Barrick, J. E., and Walsh, T. R. 1999. Some older North American types of Idiognathodus and Streptognathodus, p. 147–161. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) cyclothem succession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas Geological Open-File Report, 99-27.Google Scholar
Barrick, J. E., Boardman, D. R. Jr. and Heckel, P. H. 1996. Biostratigraphy across the Desmoinesian-Missourian Stage boundary in North American Midcontinent USA; implications for defining the Middle-Upper Pennsylvanian Series boundary. Newsletters on Stratigraphy, 34:161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrick, J. E., Heckel, P. H., and Boardman, D. R. Jr. 1999. Evolutionary patterns in Late Pennsylvanian Idiognathodus and Streptognathodus: implications for chronostratigraphic boundary characterization and recognition, p. 178–185. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) cyclothem succession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas Geological Open-File Report, 99-27.Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S., and Alekseev, A. S. 1979. Carboniferous conodonts of the Moscow Basin, p. 98–116. In Stratigraphy, Paleontology, and Paleogeography of the Carboniferous of the Moscow Syncline. Moscow. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S., Isakova, T. N., and Schastlivtseva, N. P. 1981. Conodonts of the boundary layers of the Gzhelian and Asselian stages, southern Urals. Izvestiya USSR Academy of Science, Geological Series, 5:78–87. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Barskov, I. S., Alekseev, A. S., Kononova, L. I., and Migdisova, A. V. 1987. Atlas of Upper Devonian and Carboniferous conodonts. Moscow University Press, 144 p. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Boardman, D. R. Jr., and Heckel, P. H. 1989. Glacial-eustatic sea level curve for early Late Pennsylvanian sequence in north-central Texas and biostratigraphic correlation with curve for Midcontinent North America. Geology, 17:802–805.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boardman, D. R. Jr., Barrick, J. E., and Heckel, P. H. 1989. Proposed redefinition of the Missourian-Virgilian stage boundary (Late Pennsylvanian), Midcontinent, North America. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 21:168.Google Scholar
Boardman, D. R., Work, D. M., Mapes, R. H., and Barrick, J. E. 1994. Biostratigraphy of Middle and Late Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian-Virgilian) ammonoids. Kansas Geological Survey Bulletin, 232, 121 p.Google Scholar
Boardman, D. R., Heckel, P. H., Barrick, J. E., Nestell, M. K., and Peppers, R. A. 1991. Middle-Upper Pennsylvanian chronostratigraphic boundary in the Midcontinent region of North America, p. 319–337. In Brenckle, P. L. and Manger, W. L. (eds.), Intercontinental Correlation and Division of the Carboniferous System. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 130.Google Scholar
Chidsey, T. C. Jr., Brinton, L., Eby, D. E., and Hartman, K. 1996. Carbonate-mound reservoirs in the Paradox Formation: an outcrop analogue along the San Juan River, southeastern Utah, p. 139–156. In Huffman, A. C. Jr., Lund, W. R., and Godwin, L. H. (eds.), Geology and Resources of the Paradox Basin, Utah Geological Association Guidebook, 25.Google Scholar
Dunn, D. L. 1970. Middle Carboniferous conodonts from western United States and phylogeny of the platform group. Journal of Paleontology, 44:312–342.Google Scholar
Ellison, S. E. Jr. 1941. Revision of Pennsylvanian conodonts. Journal of Paleontology, 15:107–143.Google Scholar
Gianniny, G. L. 1995. Facies and sequence stratigraphic evolution of the mixed carbonate-siliciclastic strata, lower Desmoinesian, southwestern Paradox basin, Utah. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
Goldhammer, R. K., Oswald, O. J., and Dunn, P. A. 1991. Hierarchy of stratigraphic forcing: example from Middle Pennsylvanian shelf carbonates of the Paradox basin, p. 361–414. In Franseen, E. K., Watney, W. L., Kendall, C. G. ST. C., and Ross, W. (eds.), Sedimentary modeling: computer simulations and methods for improved parameter definition. Kansas Geological Survey Bulletin, 233.Google Scholar
Gunnell, F. H. 1931. Conodonts from the Fort Scott Limestone of Missouri. Journal of Paleontology, 26:244–252.Google Scholar
Gunnell, F. H. 1933. Conodonts and fish remains from the Cherokee, Kansas City, and Wabaunsee Groups in Missouri and Kansas. Journal of Paleontology, 7:261–297.Google Scholar
Harris, R. W., and Hollingsworth, R. V. 1933. New Pennsylvanian conodonts from Oklahoma. American Journal of Science, 25(147):193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckel, P. H. 1986. Sea-level curve for Pennsylvanian eustatic marine transgressive-regressive depositional cycles along Midcontinent outcrop belt, North America. Geology, 4:330–334.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckel, P. H. 1989. Current view of Midcontinent Pennsylvanian cyclothems, p. 17–34. In Boardman, D. R. Jr., Barrick, J. E., Cocke, J., and Nestell, M. K. (eds.), Middle and Late Pennsylvanian chronostratigraphic boundaries in north-central Texas: Glacial-eustatic events, biostratigraphy, and paleoecology. Texas Tech University Studies in Geology, 2.Google Scholar
Heckel, P. H. 1999. Overview of Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) stratigraphy in Midcontinent region of North America, p. 68–102. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) cyclothem succession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas Geological Open-File Report, 99-27.Google Scholar
Heckel, P. H., Boardman, D. R. Jr., and Barrick, J. E. 1999. Proposed Desmoinesian-Missourian Stage boundary stratotype, p. 186–198. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) cyclothem succession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas Geological Open-File Report, 99-27.Google Scholar
Hedberg, H. D. 1976. International Stratigraphic Guide: A Guide to Stratigraphic Classification, Terminology, and Procedure. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Hite, R. J. 1960. Stratigraphy of the saline facies of the Paradox Member of the Hermosa Formation of southeastern Utah and southwestern Colorado, p. 86–89. In Geology of the Paradox Fold and Fault Belt. Four Corners Geological Society 3rd Field Conference Guidebook.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hite, R. J., and Buckner, D. H. 1981. Stratigraphic correlations, facies concepts and cyclicity in Pennsylvanian rocks of the Paradox basin, p. 147–160. In Weigand, D. L. (ed.), Geology of the Paradox Basin. Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists 1981 Field Conference.Google Scholar
Jones, D. J. 1941. The conodont fauna of the Seminole Formation. University of Chicago, private edition, 55 p.Google Scholar
Koike, T. 1967. A Carboniferous succession of conodont faunas from the Atetsu Limestone in southwest Japan. Tokyo Kyoiku Daigaku Science Reports, Section C, Geology, Mineralogy, and Geography, 9:279–318.Google Scholar
Kosenko, Z. A. 1975. New species of conodonts from the deposits of the Moskovian stage in the southwestern part of the Donets Basin. Geologichnii Zhurnal, 35:120–127. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Kozitskaya, R. I., Kosenko, Z. A., Lipnygov, O. N., and Nemirovska, T. I. 1978. Conodonts from the Carboniferous of the Donets Basin. Isvestya Nauka Dumka, Kiev, 136 p. (In Russian)Google Scholar
Lambert, L. L. 1992. Atokan and basal Desmoinesian conodonts from central Iowa, reference area for the Desmoinesian stage. Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular, 94:111–123.Google Scholar
Lambert, L. L., and Heckel, P. H. 1991. The Atokan-Desmoinesian boundary in North America: preliminary considerations for selecting a boundary horizon, p. 307–318. In Brenckle, P. L. and Manger, W. L. (eds.), Intercontinental division and correlation of the Carboniferous System. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg, 130.Google Scholar
Loutit, T. S., Hardenbol, J., and Wright, R. C. 1991. Sequence biostratigraphy. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 75:624 (abstract).Google Scholar
Merrill, G. K. 1972. Taxonomy, phylogeny, and biostratigraphy of Neognathodus in Appalachian Pennsylvanian rocks. Journal of Paleontology, 46:817–829.Google Scholar
Merrill, G. K. 1975. Pennsylvanian conodonts of northwestern Illinois-Summary and new systematics. Geology, 3:721–722.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, G. K., and Wentland, E. M. 1994. Conodont determination of the age of the Mill Creek Limestone: Carboniferous, northeastern Pennsylvania. Northeastern Geology, 16:9–13.Google Scholar
Merrill, G. K., Grayson, R. C. Jr., and Mosley, J. L. 1987. Restudy of the localities and conodont faunas of Stauffer and Plummer, 1932, p. 23–45. In Early and Late Paleozoic conodont faunas of the Llano uplift region, central Texas: biostratigraphy, systemic boundary relationships, and stratigraphic importance. South-Central Section of the Geological Society of America, guidebook for field trip 1.Google Scholar
Miser, H. D. 1924. Geologic structure of San Juan Canyon and adjacent country, Utah. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, 751-D:115–155.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. 1932. A reclassification of the Pennsylvanian System in the northern Midcontinent region, p. 79–88. In Kansas Geological Society, Guidebook for Sixth Annual Field Conference.Google Scholar
Murray, F. N., and Chronic, J. 1965. Pennsylvanian conodonts and other fossils from insoluble residues of the Minturn Formation (Desmoinesian), Colorado. Journal of Paleontology, 39:594–609.Google Scholar
Nemyrovka, T. I., and Kozitska, R. I. 1999. Species of Idiognathodus and Streptognathodus from late Carboniferous strata of the Donets Basin, Ukraine, p. 170–173. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) cyclothem succession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas Geological Open-File Report, 99-27.Google Scholar
Posamentier, H. W., and Goodman, D. K. 1992. Biostratigraphy in a sequence stratigraphic framework. Palynology, 16:228–229.Google Scholar
Pray, L. C., and Wray, J. L. 1963. Porous algal facies (Pennsylvanian) Honaker Trail, San Juan Canyon, Utah, p. 204–234. In Bass, R. O. (ed.), Shelf Carbonates of the Paradox Basin. Four Corners Geological Society, 4th Field Conference Guidebook.Google Scholar
Rabe, E. H. 1977. Contributions to the stratigraphy of the east-Andean area of Columbia. Geissener Geollgische Schriften, 11, 223 p. (In German)Google Scholar
Ritter, S. M. 1994. New species and subspecies of Streptognathodus (Conodonta) from the Virgilian (Late Carboniferous) of Kansas. Journal of Paleontology, 69:870–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, S. M. 1995. Upper Missourian-Lower Wolfcampian (upper Kasimovian-lower Asselian) conodont biostratigraphy of the Midcontinent, U.S.A. Journal of Paleontology, 69:1139–1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarg, J. F., Markello, J. R., and Weber, L. J. 1999. The second-order cycle, carbonate-platform growth, and reservoir, source, and trap prediction, p. 11–34. In Harris, P. M., Saller, A. H., and Simo, J. A. (eds.), Advances in carbonate sequence stratigraphy: applications to reservoirs, outcrops and models, SEPM Special Publication, 63.Google Scholar
Stauffer, C. R., and Plummer, H. J. 1932. Texas Pennsylvanian conodonts and their stratigraphic relations. University of Texas Bulletin, 3201:13–50.Google Scholar
Swade, J. W. 1985. Conodont distribution, paleoecology, and preliminary biostratigraphy of the upper Cherokee and Marmaton Groups (upper Desmoinesian, Middle Pennsylvanian) from two cores in south-central Iowa. Iowa Geological Survey, Technical Information Series, 14. 71 p.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. L. 1957. Northern Midcontinent Missourian fusulinids. Journal of Paleontology, 31:289–328.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. L., Verville, G. J., and Lokke, D. H. 1956. Fusulinids of the Desmoinesian-Missourian contact. Journal of Paleontology, 30:793–810.Google Scholar
Wahlman, G. P. 1999. Fusulinid biostratigraphy of the Honaker Trail section, San Juan River canyon, southeastern Utah, p. 208–216. In Heckel, P. H. (ed.), Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian (Upper Carboniferous) cyclothem succession in Midcontinent Basin, U.S.A. Kansas Geological Open-File Report, 99-27.Google Scholar
Weber, L. J., Sarg, J. F., and Wright, F. M. 1995. Sequence stratigraphy and reservoir delineation of the Middle Pennsylvanian (Desmoinesian), Paradox basin and Aneth field, southwestern U.S.A., p. 1–81. In Read, J. F., Kerans, C., Weber, L. J., Sarg, J. F., and Wright, F. M. (eds.), Milankovitch sea-level changes, cycles, and reservoirs on carbonate platforms in greenhouse and ice-house worlds. Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM) Short Course, 35.Google Scholar
Wengerd, S. A. 1958. Pennsylvanian stratigraphy, southwest shelf, Paradox Basin, p. 109–134. In Intermountain Association of Petroleum Geologists 9th Annual Field Conference Guidebook, Geology of the Paradox Basin.Google Scholar
Wengerd, S. A. 1963. Stratigraphic section at Honaker Trail, San Juan Canyon, San Juan County, Utah, p. 235–243. In Bass, R. O. (ed.), Shelf Carbonates of the Paradox Basin. Four Corners Geological Society, 4th Field Conference Guidebook.Google Scholar
Woodruff, E. G. 1910. Geology of the San Juan oil field, Utah. United States Geological Survey Bulletin, 471:76–104.Google Scholar