?’ bAY i; The Logic of Geological Maps, With Reference to Their” .' Interpretation and Use ' ii for Engineering Purposes ' GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 837 UvS'S'DNiAR 19 1975 The Logic of Geological Maps, With Reference to Their Interpretation and Use for Engineering Purposes By DAVID J. VARNES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 837 A discussion of the definition and classification of map units, with emphasis on the problems presented by maps intended for use in civil engineering UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1974 ‘3? 9’7fm UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 73-600355 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Oflice Washington, DC. 20402 — Price $3.50 (paper covers) Stock Number 2401—02493 CONTENTS Abstract Introduction.... . General characteristics of classification and maps ............ Units or individuals ......................................................... Methods of classification... ............................................... Matrices... .. Temporal variations ................................................. Grouping .................................................................... Division .. Mapping of fundamental attributes .............................. Purposefulness in classification... Map information .................................................. Operations on maps .......... Generalization ................................................................... Selection ..................................... . Addition and superposition ............. Transformation ...................... Summary of operations .................................................... Analysis and problems ............................................................ Identification of essential attributes during opera- tions on maps ........................................................ Addition or regrouping without redefinition ....... Transformation ......................................................... Unemphasized.. Units redefined...) .............................................. Differing maps of similar intent ................... Page H :oooqqcnwsmmi-t Analysis and problems — Continued Identification of essential attributes during opera- tions on maps — Continued Addition and superposition.... Covariance not required.. Covariance imposed... Typological degeneralization... Map units based on relations... Nested categories ............... Vertical relations ...................................................... Uncovered .......................................................... Striped ................................................................ Unitized .............................................................. Value relations .......................................................... Comments on cartography...’ ........................................... Visual emphasis“: .................................................... Rank of contact ......................................................... Suggested ways to improve engineering geological map- ping .................... Concern .............................................................................. lllarity ................................................................................ Critical evaluation ............................................................ Creativity ........................................................................... Conclusions ...................................................................... References cited ........................................................................ ILLUSTRATIONS [Plates are in pocket] PLATE 1. The logic of geological mapping. ens wows 2. The logic of geological mapping. A. B. C. ritorio Nacional of Mexico. D E. F G . Map showing suitability of soils for septic fields, Waco area, Texas. Map showing suitability of formations for septic sewage disposal, Waco area, Texas. Part of a slope-stability map of San Clemente area, California. . Parts of the lithologic column description and explanation of map showing foundation and excavation conditions in the Burtonville quadrangle, Kentucky. Part of map showing surficial deposits, and its explanation, McHenry County, 111. Part of map showing geologic conditions relating to waste disposal, and its explanation, McHenry County, III. Part of map of ground-water conditions, and its explanation, McHenry County, Ill. . System of map representation of Quaternary soil units of different character and thickness. Map representation of the character and depth of the pre-Quaternary rock surfaces. . Example of portrayal of different soil and rock units in an engineering geology map and cross section. . Profile legend for geologic map of Zeeuwsch-Vlaanderen, The Netherlands. 3. Explanation and map showing unitized method of indicating sequence. III Page 24 24 26 31 32 32 32 34 35 35 36 37 37 38 38 40 41 42 43 45 45 Part of the map of engineering geological zonation, and its explanation, Zvolen Basin, Czechoslovakia. Explanation and part of map of geological-engineering conditions. Part of the explanation for a potential-use-of—soils map published by the Comisién de Estudios del Ter- IV FIGURE TABLE CONTENTS Page 1. Sketch showing map unit defined by overlapping attributes .............. 3 2. Diagram showing field of purposes of maps ........................................................... 4 3. Matrices relating objects and attributes ................................ 6 4. Geographic matrix ..................................................................................... ....... 7 5. Diagram showing relation between property X and age .................. 7 6. Matrices showing attributes of places, places grouped by similar attributes, and attributes grouped by simi- lar places ............................................................................................................... 8 7. Attribute-attribute correlation matrix ............................................... 9 8. Attribute-place matrix and superposed maps... ........................................................... 10 9. Schematic diagram of communications system ............................................................. 12 10. Detailed and generalized land-use-suitability maps ..................................................... 13 11. Diagram showing superposition of maps and regionalization ...................................................................................... 14 12. Soil-suitability map showing superposition of recommendations for uses of areas ............................................... 15 13. Part of explanation for geologic map of Orocovis quadrangle, Puerto Rico ............................................................ 18 14. Map illustrating transformation of meaning between explanation and caption .................................................... 20 15. Three-dimensional matrix of map units defined by capability in terms of design requirements. 21 16. Diagram showing distribution of geologic units among suitability-for-waste-disposal units .............................. 22 17. Data matrix for classifying geologic units into waste-disposal units ..................... .. 23 18. Tree of logical division for classifying geologic units into waste—disposal units .................................................... 24 19. Map showing units resulting from superposition of attributes that are not covariant ........................................ 25 20. Contact-criteria matrix for slope-stability map, San Clemente area, California .................... 26 21. Table of logical division for map units of ground-water conditions, McHenry County, 111...... 27 22. Contact-criteria matrix for engineering geological zonation map, Zvolen Basin, Czechoslovakia. 28 23. Venn diagram showing classification of map units III through V, Zvolen map ...................................................... 28 24. Three-dimensional matrix of map units III through V, Zvolen map ......................................................................... 29 25. Three—dimensional matrix of map units I through IV, map of geological-engineering conditions ..................... 30 26. Geomorphological and geomorphological evaluation maps, Krakow region, Poland ................................................. 33 27. Venn and Euler diagrams showing classification of geomorphological evaluation map units... ., 34 28. Part of the geologic map of Warsaw, Poland, showing geologic units at a depth of 2 m ...................................... 34 29. Matrix showing definition of units on engineering geologic map of Creve Coeur quadrangle, Missouri ............ 35 30. Diagram showing types of sedimentary units in the profile-legend type of map ...................................................... 37 31. Soil map of an area with peat and sand at various depths... 39 32. Peat map of the area shown in figure 31 ............................................ . 40 33. Diagram showing rank of contacts between map units defined by two criteria ............................. . ..... 41 34. Matrix indicating appropriate methods to perceive, acquire data on, or measure attributes ............ 44 35. Matrix indicating what attributes affect performance, use, or behavior, and to what degree ............................. 44 TABLES Page 1. Kinds of measurement ........................................................ 5 . Operations performed on maps ........................................................................................................................................... 1’7 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS, WITH REFERENCE TO THEIR INTERPRETATION AND USE FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES By DAVID J. VARNES ABSTRACT A map is a spatial classification that transmits information about features at or near the earth’s surface for a defined purpose. Transmission is effective only if map maker, map, and map user are so coordinated that the maker’s concept is transferred to the user’s mind without significant alteration. Map purpose lies between the two extremes of showing the area or distribution of one or more attributes or showing the attributes of a selected area or point. Attributes are of four basic kinds, which refer to time, space, the inherent proper- ties of real matter, and the relations between objects. In com- mon with all classifications, maps involve the definition of classes or units by grouping or division, logical synthesis or analysis, induction or deduction. The resulting map units consist of two parts that cannot be considered separately: graphic portrayal of the position or areal distribution, and the definition in words of what the graphic portrayal means. One of the most fundamental problems in the construction and use of maps is the isolation and identification of those attributes that are essential to the definition of map units. Maps are both prepared and modified through four princi- pal types of operations: generalization, selection, addition or superposition, and transformation. The derivation from a conventional geologic map of information or other maps ap- plicable to the needs of civil engineering is dominantly an operation of transformation in which some or all of the lines of the geologic map are reused but in which the delineated units are assigned new essential attributes of engineering performance, behavior, or use. The success of this transfor- mation depends on what accuracy and reliability are required, on how closely the properties of interest covary with the orig- inally mapped boundaries, and on how heterogeneous the geologic units are with respect to these properties. More gen- erally, each type of special-purpose engineering geological map requires for its preparation specific operations of addi- tion, selection, generalization, and transformation of spatial information that concerns not only lithology and structure of soils and rock but also hydrology, geomorphology, and geo- logic processes. Real examples of engineering geological and related maps are analyzed regarding identification of essential attributes of map units. The principal operations on map units are re- grouping, transformation, and addition and superposition with and without generalization. Some map units are based on geometric or age relations. Some maps converge in intent but differ in content. Examination of the logic, or lack of it, in maps is aided by various kinds of plots and graphical analyses. Among the more useful and easily constructed are the data matrix, tree of logic, table of logical division, and three-dimensional map unit matrix. Thoughts on needed improvement in the preparation of en- gineering geological maps are contained in a discussion of concern, clarity, critical evaluation, and creativity. A look at the future suggests an increasing need for precise informa- tion and growing sophistication in acquiring and processing of data. Thus, maps that show only one or a few attributes, whose boundaries may overlap and are not necessarily coinci- dent with boundaries of geologic units, may become the domi- nant and most useful mode for transmitting spatial engineering geological information. INTRODUCTION Maps and Maidens— They must be well-proportioned and not too plain; Colour must be applied carefully and discreetly; They are more attractive if well dressed but not over dressed; They are very expensive things to dress up properly; Even when they look good they can mislead the innocent; And unless they are very well bred they can be awful liars! (Willatts, 1970) Much of this paper pertains to the last two lines of verse, that is, to the integrity and good breeding of maps, for which I consider proper construction an essential. Its purpose is to examine the process of spatial classification as it operates to define map units, to discuss how maps function as instruments of communication, to indicate some problems of map communication through analysis of actual examples, and to suggest some improvements in the way we think about making engineering geologic maps and their derivatives. Some of the discussion is abstract, philosophical, and admittedly difficult, because the language needed to discuss the thought processes used to make maps is strikingly diiferent from that needed to discuss their scientific content. In any event, this report is expected to be of more interest and use to those with some experience in applied geologic mapping than it will be to the beginner seeking guidance. The paper is more specifically directed toward geologists who are interested in the process of defining map units, and particularly toward those engaged in the deriva- tion,, fromgeneral geologic or engineering geologic 1 2 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS maps, of interpretations regarding the performance, behavior, or use of geologic materials. Although the discussion is mostly about engineer— ing geological maps, it includes a look at character- istics of maps in general. We are often too close to our work to always be aware that some of our goals and many of our difficulties are not peculiar to geol- ogy but are common to any science that deals with the spatial distribution of things and their proper- ties. Advances in allied fields, such as geography or biology—either in the manner of acquiring and presenting information or in the development of principles to guide selection of information to be presented—may be applicable to our own activity in geology. We must see how our work relates to the work of others, not so much in our ends as in our means; and the means employed are primarily those of thought. Awkward necessity requires that maps are here discussed more with words than by means of the maps themselves. Direct references are made to some examples, and simple drawings are presented as aids, but words must serve as the principal vehicle for ideas. Hence, the meanings of some common terms, as they are here used, are defined or discussed at appropriate places. This paper is an outgrowth of several related ac- tivities and interests: a continued concern with the subject of engineering geological mapping through more than 20 years’ work in the engineering geology investigations by the US. Geological Survey; pres- ent participation in the project on Research in Geologic Mapping directed by H. W. Smedes; mem- bership in the Association of Engineering Geologists Ad Hoc Committee on Mapping, whose chairman is E. E. Lutzen; and a desire to further the aims of the Working Group on Engineering Geological Map- ping of the International Association of Engineer- ing Geologists, whose chairman, Milan Matula, and secretary, Dorothy Radbruch-Hall, have shown in- terest that encouraged me to prepare this paper. The advice and criticism given by Professor Matula, John S. Scott of the Geological Survey of Canada, and my colleagues Mrs. Radbruch-Hall, D. L. Schleicher, J. E. Harrison, and C. M. Wentworth have been very helpful. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSIFICATION AND MAPS A particular field of knowledge is a body of struc- tured, patterned, ordered, or interrelated informa- tion. Inquiry into such a body must consider first what makes up the units or individual building blocks of information, and second, what arrange- ments of these units are possible, feasible, or useful. Much of this paper concerns the processes of classi- fication, so the terms “classification” and “identifica- tion” must be distinguished. Sokal (1966, p. 108) put it this way: When a set of unordered objects has been grouped on the basis of like properties, biologists call this “classification.” Once a classification has been established the allocation of additional unidentified objects to the correct class is generally known as “identification.” The process of classification can be reduced to ex- amining the validity of a series of elementary cate- gorical propositions in which something is asserted or denied about a subject or individual. In formal logic, that which is asserted or denied is called a “predicate.” Thus, a complete proposition might be of the form: Most (qualifier) of the Pierre Shale (subject) is (copula or verb) unsuited for dimen- sion stone (predicate). Predicates, according to Car- nap (1962, p. 58), may be of degree one, in which they designate properties or characteristics of indi- viduals, or of degree two or higher, in which they designate relatiOns between individuals. Carnap grouped properties and relations together under the term “attributes.” I adopt this meaning and use the term repeatedly because it has such a broad meaning. The way this term is used among authorities seems to be uniform, whereas other similar words, such as “property” or “characteristic,” are sometimes used in varied and more restrictive senses. UNITS 0R INDIVIDUALS Ideally, an individual or unit is defined by a unique attribute or a unique set of attributes. Clearly, the construction of classes from individuals is meaningful only if the individuals are generically similar—the sum of a horse and a radish is not horseradish. A basic and pervasive problem in making maps is the isolation and identification of the attributes that are necessary and sufficient to define the units to be mapped. An attribute may be absolute, that is, either present or absent, or it may exist in degrees that are measurable in qualitative or quantitative terms, or it may be immeasurable. Attributes may be constant or variable in space or time, and one attribute may covary in space or time with another, with or with- out a dependent or cause-effect relationship. Complex material objects, such as a unit of rock or a landslide, are commonly defined by a suite of attributes, and among these is generally at least one that is both essential to the classification and identi- fication of the object and unique to the body. Other attributes may be essential but not unique, some may GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSIFICATION AND MAPS 3 be unique but nonessential, and some may be neither essential nor unique but simply present or accessory. If no unique properties can be found in a broad group of individuals, a class can be constructed of individuals that have only gross similarity. Such a class is defined by the clustering of its members in some sort of data plot or by a statistical or non- statistical measure of similarity that demonstrates the existence of a group distinct from the population from which it was selected. No attribute is necessar- ily common to all components that form such a unit or is necessarily unique to the group thus formed. Many geologic map units are so constructed, which helps to explain why they commonly are heteroge- neous rather than homogeneous. Four fundamental categories of attributes apply to maps; these pertain to time, space, the inherent qualities or properties of real matter, and the rela- tions between objects. Correspondingly, four kinds of units can be referred to as temporal, spatial, typo- logical, and relational. Geologic units commonly are defined by combinations of these four kinds of attri- butes. Because many possible combinations of these categories are not covariant, we geologists can read- ily get into logical difficulties unless care is taken in our definitions of map units. The four categories of attributes generally require different treatment. Temporal units on a map are defined solely by time lines that are established, for example, by the fossil record, geochronology, or the high-water marks of a major flood. Likewise, a purely spatial map unit is defined by physical bound— aries only. In contrast, typological and relational units are defined, respectively, by a great variety of properties or by various geometric or time relations. Specific attributes pertaining to time, space, inher- ent qualities, and relations can be superposed, but whether any “individual” actually possesses all these attributes may then become a serious question. We may have created a complex pigeonhole that closely fits no real pigeon. If not only typological but also relational, tem- poral, or spatial attributes are combined to define a .1 new class, the areas of the new class are not neces- sarily contiguous. For example, we may wish to de- fine an engineering geologic map unit as having the following attributes: (1) Lithology A, (2) slope within a range designated S, and (3) ground-water condition I. These attributes may be distributed as shown in figure 1. The map unit is shown as two ruled non- contiguous areas of coincidence of all three attri- butes. If A], A2, and A3 represent strata of different FIGURE 1.—Map unit (ruled) defined by overlapping attributes of lithology A, slope S, and ground-water condition I . ages but of essentially the same lithology, rocks in the two shaded areas are also noncontiguous in time. Lack of spatial contiguity should not be trouble- some if the attributes involved are clearly not ge- netically related. Strong forces, however, work in the mind to create regions if there is spatial coinci- dence of typological attributes. If A, S, and I in fig- ure 1 were somewhat similar physical properties or slightly different landforms, then many mappers would tend to join the shaded areas (depending on scale) to make them contiguous, which infers that all the area in and between the shaded areas em- braces a significantly large group of genetically re- lated covariant attributes. These are the “natural” regions thought of by geographers, and the philos- ophy of their discrimination has been much discussed (Armand, 1965; Grigg, 1965, 1967;McDonald, 1966; Rodoman, 1965). Geologic formations are often so regarded; although the Code of Stratigraphic No- menclature (Am. Comm. Stratigraphic Nomencla- ture, 1970) allows only lithology to be considered in defining a rock-stratigraphic unit, attributes of genesis and time or geometric relations with other units almost inevitably and properly enter in. Simi- lar trends occur in the search by many mapping or- ganizations for “integrated” terrain, landform, or soil units of significance for engineering and for land use and development. The importance of careful definition of map units cannot be overemphasized. First, the purpose of the 4 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS unit must be identified, and the unit must be assigned to one or more of the fundamental categories — tem- poral, spatial, typological, or relational. Second, a formal statement of the essential attributes in each of the applicable categories must be composed. The statement must specify what characters and prop- erties are necessary and sufficient to identify the unit or an individual in the class; and if many essen- tial attributes are specified, care must be taken that they are not mutually exclusive under some condi- tions. The third step is to determine the degree of internal heterogeneity that can be permitted and yet fulfill the purpose of the map. ‘ Homogeneity, or the lack of it, is so important to concepts in natural science and to engineering geol- ogy in particular that homogeneity will be considered as absolute in this report; that is, an attribute either is absolutely homogeneous or possesses degrees of heterogeneity. One of the measures of heterogeneity which is relevant to mapping is that given by the ratio VR/ V1, where V1 is the total volume of the body and VR is the smallest representative size of sample taken from anywhere in the body such that the mea- sure, within VR, of the attribute being considered does not range beyond preselected acceptable limits. This is the inverse of the measure of homogeneity pro- posed by Bjerrum (1954). The concept presumes that the smallest sample of significance to the engi- neering geological attributes of a given homogeneous body will have attributes identical to those of the body as a whole. Homogeneity must be considered for each attri- bute separately, because any physical object or body of rock or soil may be homogeneous with respect to one or more attributes and heterogeneous with re- spect to others. In geology, as in other spatially ori- ented sciences, boundaries usually can be drawn around real parcels of ground such that, with respect to a certain named set of attributes, the defined par- cel is not unacceptably heterogeneous, and the mea- sure of one or more of its essential characters changes abruptly or with steep gradient at the se- lected borders. The essence of mapping is to delineate areas that are homogeneous or acceptably heterogeneous for the intended purpose of the map. The resulting map consists of two parts that should never be considered separately: (1) the two-dimensional plan showing the outline of identified areas and (2) the explana- tion that tells in words and symbols what the essen- tial attributes are that the enclosed areas exhibit. In a purposefully constructed map, a selected character- istic or set of attributes appears as an areal entity or group of areas that has the minimum heteroge- neity obtainable—that is, the inclusion of additional area would increase the net heterogeneity, and the delineation of a smaller area or areas would fail to include parts similar to those within the remaining unit. Because a map is constructed by classifying data and outlining class boundaries, the methods of classi- fication are prime factors in mapmaking, and a look at various procedures and their logic is pertinent to both the construction of a new map and the evalua- tion of an existing one. METHODS OF CLASSIFICATION According to Beckett (1968, p. 53) , a map is made “in order to be able to make more precise statements about the mapped subdivisions of the region than we can about the region as a whole.” This is true, but it is only half the story. Mapping also includes the operation of grouping small areas into larger units so we can make statements about the group that are more general than those we can make about its components. In these two intents, and their com- binations, lie all the reasons for mapping. Every map occupies some part of a field of contest that has at one end the goal of attainment of perfectly de- tailed information about the attributes that are pos- sessed by specified areas and at the other end the goal of complete knowledge of location of all areas that have one or more attributes of interest. (See fig. 2.) A close look at the countercurrents shown in fig— ure 2 shows that operations tending to go to the right (grouping, synthesis) presuppose the existence of defined individuals that can be welded into new, more inclusive individuals. Operations tending to the left (analysis, logical division) consist largely of a Division, analysis, identification +—~_ Few Many . _ ‘ individuals 'nleldeitls or units Por um 5 Purpose: urpose. A]: Precise Field of maps k General :[B knowledge novaledge of attributes 0 areas ' ‘ that have of specified . . areas specufied ——> attributes Grouping, synthesis, fusion into classes FIGURE 2. — Field of purposes of maps. The two goals — A, attainment of precise knowledge of attributes of specified areas, and B, general knowledge of the areas having spec- ified attributes—are generally approached by opposing methods of classification: division and grouping. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSIFICATION AND MAPS 5 search for, and precise definition of, manageable, useful individuals; and this search presupposes the existence of concepts by which individuals can be defined or recognized. The two opposed operations of subdivision and grouping are subject to well-known rules of logic (Grigg, 1965, p. 481—482; Searles, 1956, p. 61—67; Armand, 1965, p. 22—26, 33). In a very illuminating way, Armand pointed out specific instances in Rus- sian geologic and geographic studies where inatten- tion to logic led to faulty classifications. Logical grouping and subdivision can proceed on the basis either of concepts or of the attributes of real subjects. Use of concepts for classification is perhaps more consistent with the historical develop- ment of mathematical logic and was advocated by Knox (1965, p. 79) and by Schelling (1970) for the classification of soils, even though some classes may be empty. Similar philosophy was followed in geog- raphy by Milovidova (1970), who explained that certain classes, although logically and factually pos- sible, are unrealized in the area under consideration. In contrast, Cline (1949, p. 81) held that a class is a group of individuals which is exemplified by the actual median individual. A geologic formation is a product of Cline-type classification, for it requires a real example—a lithostratigraphic unit, or strato- type (Hedberg, 1970). Much of the modern technique of arranging field data and establishing classes, especially in the United States, is based more on manipulating the quantitative measures of the properties of physical units or samples and forming empirical groups than on fitting them into abstract class concepts. In Europe, especially eastern Europe, the Milovidova procedure prevails. Three types of relations must be considered in the arrangement of information: 1. Object to attribute. (The terms “object” and “sub- ject” are here regarded as synonyms.) 2. Attribute to attribute, over a span of objects. 3. Object to object, over a span of attributes. The relation of object to attribute, or sample to property, can be expressed most simply by specify- ing whether the property is present or absent. More commonly, the property has a range or degree, and some system of measurement permits more precise descriptions of all three kinds of relations. Measurement is the assignment of numerals to events or objects according to rules. The rules are of four kinds, as listed in table 1 in increasing com- plexity (Abler and others, 1971, p. 93—110; Stevens, 1946, 1958; Searles, 1956, p. 278—282). 531-431 0 - 74 - 2 TABLE 1. — Kinds of measurement Scale Basic operation Typical example Nominal .................. Assignment of a number Numbered rock specimens. (or name) to each object. Assignment of a number Rock specimens named by (or name) to each class. lithology. Ordinal .................... Determination of greater Hardness of minerals. or less. Street numbers. Strata ranked by age. Interval .................... Determination of the Temperature on Fahrenheit equality of intervals or or Celsius scale differences. (arbitrary zero). Calendar time. Ratio ......................... Determination of the Length, mass, altitude, velocity, or size. Temperature on Kelvin scale (zero point identified). equality of ratios. The formal name of an object is in this paper re- garded as an attribute, perhaps the most fundamen- tal attribute, because a name represents, generally, a specific identification or classification. Identifying a formation in the explanation of a map involves not only a nominal measurement by specifying it as the “Jones Pass Sandstone” but also an ordinal measurement by assigning it to the “Lower Creta- ceous” and by placing its analog box in the explana— tion in proper relation to the other units. MATRICES If more than a very small number of objects and their attributes is being considered, use of a matrix to display the data is very helpful in constructing or analyzing classifications. Figure 3A shows a matrix in which the symbols a, b, and so forth ex- press, according to one of the modes of measure- ment, the relation between the corresponding object and attribute. Any of the symbols can be replaced by 1 or 0, a nominal measurement denoting presence or absence of the relation, as shOWn in figure 33; this may be convenient in mathematical or computer treatment (Lafiitte, 1968; Dixon, 1970). Gradational attributes can be partitioned into classes or ranges so that the presence or absence of any range, now within specified limits, can also be indicated by 1 or 0. If more information is available, the objects can be assigned ordinal numbers in each column, as in figure 3C, or given numerical values on an interval or ratio scale, as in figure 3D. The objects referred to in figure 3 may be samples that are tied to some spatial or temporal frame of reference, or they may be the spatial or temporal individuals themselves, regarded as homogeneous and having no variation of attributes. , The geographic matrix presented by Berry (1964, fig. 2), slightly modified here as figure 4, shows vari- ous ways in which information on spatial, temporal, and typological attributes may be arranged. The matrix can be used in two fundamentally different ways. If we wish to know the attributes of an area, ATTRIBUTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 A a1 a2 a3 a4 as as B b1 b, b, b. 11,, b, V) [— U a C 01 c2 c3 c4 (:5 c6 a: O D d1 d2 (is d, «is d, E e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 I A 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 1 2 1 1 2 1 B 2 3 3 2 4 5 C 3 1 5 3 1 3 D 4 5 2 5 5 2 E 5 4 4 4 3 4 C THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 B 1 1 1 1 1 0 C 1 1 0 1 1 1 D 1 1 1 1 0 1 E 1 1 1 1 1 1 B 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 500 16 40 0.73 1500 +6.2 3 400 13 25 0.62 300 ".3. C 300 17 0.0 0.57 2670 -1.1 D 200 10 30 0.39 ' 0 + 3.6 E 100 12 5 0.43 1200 -2.3 D FIGURE 3. — Matrices relating objects and attributes according to scales of measurement: A and B, nominal; C, ordinal; and D, interval or ratio. we scan the particular row of interest, noting the measures in each column; if we wish to know the areas that exhibit an attribute, we scan the column of interest, noting the measures in the rows (places or areas). Maps are a method of representing such matrices graphically, in a spatial format, so that the places are not simply ordered serially but are displayed in correct relations having topologic similarity to the real world. Hence, the two modes of use of the ma- trix are the two basic ways in which maps are used, and the design of maps reduces to devising means to display one or the other of these two matrix modes. A map’s logic, or lack of logic, and the ways in which maps can or cannot be used can often be ex- amined more easily with reference to the underlying matrix than to the maps themselves. Berry (1964, p. 5—9) discussed 10 ways of treating the data ma- trix; the first two are the basic approaches men- tioned above: 1. 2. Examine the arrangement of cells within a row or part of a row. Examine the arrangement of cells within a col- umn or part of a column. Compare pairs or series of rows; that is, com— pare places or areal differentiation on the basis of characteristics. . Compare pairs or series of columns; that is, ex- amine spatial covariations or associations of attributes. Study a submatrix. (See fig. 4.) . Compare a row or part of a row through time; that is, study changing character of some par- ticular area through a series of stages. . Compare a column or part of a column through time; that is, study changing spatial distribu- tion of attributes. . Study changing differentiation of areas through . time. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSIFICATION AND MAPS 7 PAST Time 1 T‘ "he 2] Do PRESENT ‘1». Time 3 Characteristics DI \‘p, (typological attributeg olumri / l 1* x / R ' Cell " > ow: I] E co L“ \ PLACES 8 \‘P{ I \ O. c, Submatrirr FIGURE 4,—Geographic matrix. Modified from Berry (1964, fig. 2). 9. Study changing spatial association of attributes through time. 10. Compare a submatrix through time by rows or columns. TEMPORAL VARIATIONS The importance of the temporal aspects of areal variation was emphasized by Duncan, Cuzzort, and Duncan (1961, p. 160ff). They pointed out that some scientists * * * believe that genuine causal knowledge can be established only on the basis of longitudinal or diachronic [through time] observations, or at least by using information on the temporal relationships among Variables. The need to understand the course of change and to forecast the direction of future change often is felt to be so great that the research worker is constrained to make some inference about change even though he lacks time series data. Thus the tacit assumption frequently is made that temporal relationships can be sur- mised from relationships holding in cross-sectional data. For example, suppose, as shown in figure 5, that units or individuals A, B, C, and D of various ages show at an instant of time, to, a property X that is greater the older the individual, as indicated by points A0 through Do. It is very easy to infer from these “cross-sectional” data that a relationship be- tween X and age is defined by the heavy line and that any one individual, as time passes, will move up along the line from the position of A to that of B, and so on. This may be false if the actual paths pursued by the individuals from time to to time t2 are given by the dashed lines. Obviously, some factor other than the simple passage of time is operating on the individuals. \ 82 AGE FIGURE 5. — Relation between property X and age might be inferred from data pertaining to individuals at a particu- lar instant, as given by the points A0 through Do, imply- ing that as each individual ages it moves up along the solid line. However, with passage of time, each individual may follow a path such as A0 to A2 because of the influ- ence of a factor not recognized.’ GROUPING A matrix is highly useful to study covariance, for the columns or rows can be manipulated to help es- tablish groupings that can be used to define classes. For example, regrouping of the rows (places) of figure 6A into those of figure 6B identifies two new classes (map units) having similar but not identical attributes. If grouping of these places into slightly inhomogeneous map units does not violate the pur- pose of the map, then the areas to be shown have been reduced from 9 to 5. This kind of study is areal (grouping of places having similar attributes). A topical study can be made, as shown in figure 60, by regrouping columns. This operation identifies two pairs of attributes that covary—3 and 7 per- fectly, 1 and 9 almost perfectly. The reason for the covariances can then become the subject of investi— gation. A historical study would examine the relations of the various matrices through a span of time. The comparison and grouping of objects over a span of attributes (grouping of rows in fig. GB) is termed correlation in the Q mode, and the grouping of attri- butes or variables (grouping of columns in fig. 60) 8 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS is called correlation in the R mode (Krumbein and Graybill, 1965; McCammon, 1968). By natural ex- tension of this nomenclature, grouping according to time might be termed correlation in the T mode. As grouping proceeds, statements that can be made about the increasingly agglomerated groups become fewer and more generalized but presumably more significant to the purpose and use of the classi- ATTRIBUTES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A xxx xx x axxx xxx xx cx x x xx go xx xxx x gexxx xxx x F x x x x exxx x x xx H xx x . xxx xxxx A ATTRIBUT 4 5 X X PLACES I-noomm—U) PLACES IoflmUCWP FIGURE 6,—Matrices showing: A, attributes of places; B, places grouped by similar attributes (Q mode); C, attrio butes grouped by similar places (R mode). fication system. At some point we arrive at groups that have a maximum acceptable heterogeneity with respect to the statements we wish to make about them for the purpose of the map, and the process is terminated. The techniques by which either objects (places) or attributes, or both, are grouped to make the most meaningful units for the purpose at hand commonly involve specialized statistical methods that are beyond the scope of this paper. The inter— ested reader is referred to work by Abler, Adams, and Gould (1971), Berry (1961, 1964), Berry and Marble (1968), Cole and King (1968), Hautamaki (1971), Johnston (1968), King (1969), Klovan and Billings (1967), Krumbein and Graybill (1965), McCammon (1968), Pocock and Wishart (1969), Rhodes (1969), and Spence and Taylor (1970). Overlapping of map areas formed by grouping generally is not allowed (Grigg, 1965, p. 486; Rodo- man, 1965, p. 6), but contiguity or adjacency is another matter. Some geographers require that “re- gions” comprise only contiguous places (Johnston, 1968, p. 575, 578', Grigg, 1965, p. 476, 480) ; others recognize two types of regions in which one type re- quires contiguity and the other does not (Berry, 1968, p. 424; King, 1969, p. 199; Armand, 1965). Armand called the first “individual regions” and the second “typological regions.” He recognized also that whereas typological regions can be precisely defined, individual regions often cannot. He noted that indi- vidual regions derive their uniqueness and integrity from predominance of a certain terrain or regular pattern of land types, but they may include alien enclaves. Grigg (1965, p. 477) likewise distinguished ge- neric and specific regions by, in effect, placing em- phasis either on a suite of typological attributes or on specific spatial attributes (in the form of bound- aries or location). The different types of geometric relations that may hold between regions defined by various kinds and combinations of factors were well illustrated by McDonald (1966). DIVISION The search for classes, individuals, mappable units, or natural regions can proceed, as shown in figure 2, by division rather than by grouping. Both processes are subject to similar rules of logic, they are often used in concert, and each usually results in a hier- archy of classes. But there is no assurance that their end products would be the same if the two processes were applied to the same information independently. In division, the classes most significant to the pur- pose of the classification are produced at the begin- GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSIFICATION AND MAPS 9 ning, and the most trivial, at the last. Therefore, the choice of criteria and attributes for the first few divisions is extremely important, for these determine the principal characters of the resulting hierarchy. Successive divisions are made in the order of in- creasing focus on details. In mapping, logical division consists only of the addition of boundaries, without erasure or alteration of those already drawn. The process continues to re- duce within-unit variance and produce smaller units until further division cannot usefully reduce heter- ogeneity with respect to the chosen essential con- cepts or attributes or until practical cartographic or economic problems become overriding. At this point we have a practical typological individual. Criteria applied at the successive stages of logical division must be defined as early in the course of study as possible to achieve economy of effort. Ideally, a hier— archy of criteria can be established on the basis of incomplete but representative spatial surveys ; in geo- logic mapping, such surveys involve reconnaissance, widely spaced traverses, preliminary photogeologic work, or interpretation of other imagery. This natu- rally leads to the classification of type areas that ex- emplify those attributes or groups of attributes deemed important to the study. From here on, with the classification scheme begun, the proper categor- ization of new places, as unmapped areas are filled in, can proceed by successively applying discrimi- nating criteria, starting with the highest rank of at- tributes and proceeding by the logical process of dichotomy. In the actual practice of geologic map- ping, discovery of new properties and recognition of new map units are common, so a continuing revision of criteria and remapping of some areas are expect- able as the study proceeds. MAPPING OF FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTES Attributes are themselves structured into hier- archies. The attribute “suitable for liquid waste dis- posal” comprises others that are more fundamental, such as porosity, permeability, susceptibility to spe- cific chemical or physical alteration, properties of the waste liquid, degree of saturation, thickness, and direction of ground—water movement. Some of these, in turn, can be broken dOWn into still simpler com- ponents; permeability, for example, depends upon the size distribution, shape, and connectedness of voids. Eventually we should be able to define a set of n largely independent attributes of a basic nature ~ (excluding position), which in various combinations would form the essential components for a larger number, N, of other attributes or statements. Because fundamental attributes are the basic building blocks, we hope that they can be identified, and described or measured, in mapping, much as the elements are used in chemistry. In mapping, as in chemistry, the fundamental attributes can be struc- tured in many ways. Unfortunately for the mapper, particularly in a natural science such as geology, the almost infinite combinations of physical, chemical, and structural properties of earth materials make determination of fundamental attributes elusive. Even where fundamental attributes can be identified in a single sample, the tendency for all earth mate- rials to be heterogeneous requires that projection of these attributes beyond the sample be done with care and skill. The geologic mapper can and should identify and map attributes pertinent to the purpose of his map. Obviously, if truly fundamental attributes can be identified and mapped, more uses can be made of the map, because many properties and qualities depend on the basic attributes. In actual practice, some of the properties known to be pertinent to the map pur- pose are selected for mapping. These, plus others collected along the way, can be tested for pertinence via such devices as an attribute-attribute matrix (fig. 7), which helps identify the most common attri- butes that may be important or even fundamental. A; X //%7X X X EAa X X X y X X .— < ”7 As X X ///A X A, X X X 7// FIGURE 7.—Attribute-attribute correlation matrix. Crosses indicate attributes that correlate. Degree of correlation and directed sense of dependence or causal relation could be shown by other symbols. Arrow indicates attribute A4 cor- relates with more attributes than any other. 10 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS ATTHIBUTE a, a, a, a. a5 a6 a, a, PI X P, X X P3 X 8 , < P4 X X _I D. Ps X X P5 X X X P7 X FIGURE 8.—-—A, Attribute-place matrix. B, Superposed maps formed by plotting the information of the matrix and using the known position of the places; overlap is permitted. The map distributions of various properties, quali- ties, and units commonly overlap, as shown in figure 1. In fact, it is the areas of overlap of various char- acteristics pertinent to the purpose of the map that define areas for particular performance, use, or be- havior. Boundaries on true multiattribute maps are determined only by the areal distribution of the at- tributes shown. Such boundaries may or may not coincide with those of geologic map units. Where they do coincide, the geologic units can be used for cautious projection of information from the mea- sured areas into other areas of concern, particularly where the geologic unit is only slightly heteroge- neous with respect to the projected attribute. How— ever, some pertinent attributes, such as slope or depth to water table, may at best be only crudely covariant with geologic formations. A compound map, formed by the superposition of several simple maps, in which overlap is allowed and integration and generalization are not imposed, can be regarded as a plot of an attribute-place matrix of the kind shown in figure 8. PURPOSEFULNESS IN CLASSIFICATION However constructed, a map requires the applica- tion of logical division and logical grouping, neither of which can proceed effectively without well-defined purpose. Yet we have long accepted the idea that engineering geological information, for special pur- poses, can be extracted from conventional or general- purpose geologic maps (Eckel, 1951; US. Geol. Survey, 1949). This concept is useful only to the degree that one can take a conventional geologic map, which is itself a synthesis — a special-purpose map for certain kinds of geologists — and make from it another synthesis corresponding to the needs of civil engineers, without drawing new lines or analytically decomposing the geologic map units into more basic components and reassembling them in another form. The basic assumptions are (1) geologic map units are “natural” units, (2) components of these units have a common genesis and have been subject to similar environmental factors and processes, and (3) therefore, all parts of such units have so many attributes in common that the units can be regarded as homogeneous for diverse or general purposes. As Searles (1956, p. 66—67) said, Classification is guided both by the nature of the materials to be classified and by the purpose of the classifier. This two- fold aspect may serve to introduce us to the distinction which is usually made between natural and artificial classification. Natural classification ideally is dictated by the discoverable natural structures, properties and attributes of the materials under investigation. Artificial classification, on the other hand, is dictated by some practical human purpose, such as convenience in handling and saving of time and energy * * *. Harvey (1969, 'p. 331) pointed out that a general classification can be designed to serve many pur- poses, but it is unlikely to serve all those purposes with more than a low level of efficiency. Grigg (1967, p. 486) discussed eight rules for classification, of which the first is “Classifications should be designed for a specific purpose; they rarely serve two purposes equally well.” Board (1967, p. 707), quoting Gombrick, said, “The form of representation cannot be divorced from its purpose and the requirements of the society in which the given visual image gains currency.” Cline (1949, p. 81) said, The purpose of any classification is so to organize our knowl- edge that the properties of objects may be remembered and MAP INFORMATION 11 their relationships may be understood most easily for a spe- cific objective. The process involves formation of classes by grouping the objects on the basis of their common properties. In any system of classification, groups about which the great- est number, most precise, and most important statements can be made for the objective serve the purpose best. As the things important for one objective are seldom important for another, a single system will rarely serve two objectives equally well. Orvedal and Edwards (1941) made a distinction between technical and natural grouping of agronomic soils, and what they wrote years ago has direct rele- vance to engineering soils and engineering geologic mapping today: By the term technical grouping we mean, in general, the plac- ing of soils into groups for immediate practical objectives — objectives that pertain to the use and management of soils * * * * * * If soils are properly classified into a system of natural classification, they can be grouped in many ways for specific objectives. Almost any conceivable technical grouping for agricultural purposes can be derived from a sufficiently de— tailed fundamental natural classification; and this fact, inci- dentally, is one of the strong arguments for first classifying the soils according to a natural classification, even for imme- diate practical objectives. * * * The first requisite for any technical grouping, as well as any other grouping, is a clear understanding of the objective for which the grouping is made * * *. Everything hangs, of course, on whether the clas- sification is sufficiently detailed and fundamental enough to serve several purposes. The preparation of a derived or interpretive map from a geologic map depends on the thesis that two or more objectives can be served by a single system of classification. From a geologic map showing units based upon criteria of genesis, age, and lithology, we infer the boundaries of units having a satisfactory degree of homogeneity with regard, say, to lithology. Only the boundaries shown on the geologic map, or parts of them, together with supplementary infor- mation in the text can be used; no new field data are necessary. From the lithologic units, we infer units having particular properties, and from the units having particular properties, we infer units having the characteristics of performance, use, or behavior in which we are interested. The success of such serial inferences depends pri- marily upon whether the original map depicts the required information in the necessary detail. The final probability that the derived map is acceptably accurate depends upon the product of the probabili- ties involved at each stage of inference. Suppose a geologic map unit “quartzite” is transformed into a use unit “suitable for building stone,” without alter- ation of boundaries. Suppose also that the geologic unit actually is 0.8 quartzite and 0.2 shale and, fur- ther, that even if the rock is quartzite, the chances are only 8 in 10 that it is “suitable for building stone.” The final average probability that any ran— domly selected part of the suitability unit actually fulfills the description is 0.8x0.8=0.64. Thus, al- though rather high probabilities are involved at each stage of inference, repeated inference may ulti- mately result in an unsatisfactory degree of accu- racy for the stated purpose of the map. Unless new supplementary data are obtained, the final descrip- tion of the unit must be made loose enough that it is true or accurate, although it then may become so broad, imprecise, and loaded with qualifying phrases as to be useless. The whole matter is one of high current interest among geologists, geomorphologists, soil scientists, ecologists, environmentalists, and others concerned with land use in many parts of the world. Because of this interest, and need, and because we should be concerned about the possibility of misinforming our audience, some of the functions of and operations with maps, as specific means of communication, are briefly examined in the next two sections. MAP INFORMATION Maps are primarily instruments for arranging, storing, transmitting, and analyzing information about the spatial distribution of attributes. The term “information” itself needs explanation, for it has three principal aspects, of which any one or all may be exhibited by a geologic map. The first aspect of information is syntactic: infor- mation is a quantity that can be measured by mes- sages used in various means of communication, such as telephony, codes, or common language. This as- pect involves the statistical rarity of signals quite apart from their truth, precision, meaning, value, or importance. Rare signals, having a lower probability, are regarded as being more informative, when they occur, than common ones. This is the “surprise” aspect of information (Cherry, 1966, p. 14, 50—51), which is closely connected with the concept of order- disorder and entropy in thermodynamics. In the context of maps, we might regard 'a gravity, geo— chemical,.or geothermal anomaly, which appears in an unexpected place and whose meaning, signifi- cance, or cause is yet unknown, as an item of syn- tactic information. Likewise, a topographic map that shows a lone conical hill on an otherwise nearly fea- tureless plain clearly contains information’that the neighboring sheet does not, even though the hill’s 12 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS Encoder transmitter Concepts of ‘ Noise\ Noise Misfit Concepts of receptor 3% Decoder Receptor Medium of transmission Filter Filter Noise \ Noise/ Filter FIGURE 9. — Schematic diagram of some features of a communications system. composition, origin, or significance to land use is completely unknown. The second aspect is semantic: information con- cerns something other than statistical relations among signs or within language; it is about some- thing. This aspect of information involves the valid- ity of propositions, the construction of classification systems by grouping and division, and the progres— sive removal of uncertainty concerning the attributes of individuals and units apart from consideration of who the user may be and of the value, purpose, or use of the information. This kind of information forms a large part of the body of geological knowl- edge. The third aspect is pragmatic: information refers to a completed communication process. Pragmatic information is measured by the change in state of an identified receptor produced by the receipt of a mes- sage. The change may be zero or catastrophic for any given message, depending upon the ability of the receiver to understand the message, upon his interest, and upon the resulting change in his pre- vious assessment of probabilities concerning the sub- ject of the message. Pragmatic information, like beauty, exists only in the eye and mind of the be- holder. Cherry (1966, p. 245) stated that * * * what people value in a source of information (i.e., what they are prepared to pay for) depends upon its exclusiveness and prediction power * * *. “Exclusiveness” here implies the selecting of that one particular recipient out of the popula- tion, while the “prediction” value of information rests upon the power it gives to the recipient to select his future action, out of a whole range of prior uncertainty as to what action to take. For example, a map showing a gravity anomaly might mean nothing to me except just that—an anomalyexists at such and such a place, and I am completely disinterested. To me this is syntactic in- formation, of no value. But the same data arriving at the mind of a petroleum geologist already familiar with adjoining areas might have an enormous im- pact— completely altering his previous assessment, if any, of the attributes of the map area — and re- sult in some decision or overt action. The fields of applied science, of which engineering geology is one, seek constantly to convert semantic information to pragmatic information, to put knowl- edge in the abstract to use, to make it relevant. This requires a complete and operating communication system, such as shown in figure 9, with atransmitter, medium of transmission, and receptor, all having known pertinent characteristics and, to the degree practicable, all designed for the most efficient opera- tion of the system. The process of transmitting carto- graphic information was examined in detail by K0- lacny (1969). fig/33,“, fl; Vii/J: /‘ , OPERATIONS ON MAPS One may go beyond the reading and use of a map simply for the information on it and manipulate this information by performing an operation on the map for a new purpose. The four most common opera- tions that can be performed on maps are generali- zation, selection, addition or superposition, and transformation. ,1 “‘1' GENERALIZATION To generalize a map requires the preexistence of something more detailed. One does not a priori pro- duce a generalized map unless he has at hand a map that is more detailed, or has at least a mappable mental concept of how things are really arranged in a more complicated manner than he is making them out to be. As implied in the word itself, generalization is a simplification; and, because maps involve both areal and typological attributes, the simplification can occur in either or both types of attributes. The two types of attributes were recognized by Orvedal and Edwards (1941), who distinguished cartographical and categorical generalization. Although I do not agree completely with some of their examples, their OPERATIONS ON MAPS 13 concept is useful, and the paper as a whole is an ex- cellent contribution to the philosophy of mapping. In spatial or cartographic generalization, the boundaries between units are made smoother, tortu- osities are simplified, and small inliers of one unit in another, if not important to the purpose of the generalized map at the scale intended for use, are absorbed by the surrounding unit. The number of typological classes remains unchanged, but class FIGURE 10.——-Detailed and generalized versions of a rural residential land-use-suitability map. A, detailed, showing units as small as 5 acres and indicating ratings of opti- mum (O), satisfactory (S), marginal (M), and unsatisfac- tory (U), and limiting factors of slope (t), soil class (s), drainage (d), and depth to bedrock (r). B, Generalized, showing units larger than 10—20 acres, without indication of limiting factors. Map B is generalized both cartograph- ically and typologically from map A. From Kiefer (1967, figs. 4, 5). 531-431 0 - 74 - 3 I heterogeneity, particularly near the borders, may be greatly increased. In categorical or typological generalization, classes are fused. If map units that are to be fused are con- tiguous, a boundary is removed; otherwise, bound- aries are not altered. Noncontiguous units that are fused take on a single new color, symbol, pattern, or other label that designates the new unit. The classes are redefined on the basis of a new set of essential attributes. The new set may include some of the old attributes, but inevitably others are less specific than before. , Thus, although categorical generalization can result in decreased heterogeneity, some informa- tion is lost. Both kinds of generalization may be re- quired if information is recompiled at a much smaller scale. Kiefer (1967) showed a generalized land-use map that involves both cartographic and typological gen- eralization of a more detailed map. (See fig. 10.) Generalization is not usually reversible. Degener- alization is not commonly a logical procedure, for once the details of boundaries are smoothed, or the details of attributes are lost in fusion of units, the original boundaries can be recovered only by refer- ence to original data. This procedure is, in effect, a new start, not a reverse of generalization. Neverthe- less, degeneralization is employed in making deriva- tive maps, but its success depends upon the use of inference and experience concerning covariance of attributes. SELECTION Selection is the process by which a discriminating choice of information is achieved. It is an operation that must permeate mapmaking from initial concept to printing and be directed toward presenting a final product that shows the desired information effec- tively. The need to fulfill a newly recognized special purpose may, however, arise after the map is fin- ished. Further selection of map units is then based upon one or more of the attributes stated to be pres- ent (or absent) in the description of the units. If the attribute upon which selection is to be made, say A, is not mentioned in unit description, then one must infer the presence or absence of A from ex- perience and judgment about its covariance with expressly stated attributes. Obviously, then, selection commonly precedes the other operations of addition and transformation. Selection may be semimechanical. For example, it may involve modifying the information-carrier base so that only certain information is transmitted. Sup- pose that a map showed typological attributes by means of colors produced by halftone dots and that 14 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS each dot reflected light of a certain narrow band of wavelengths. If some attribute, A, was designated by color “a,” then theoretically,‘those areas exhibit- ing attribute A could be selectively displayed either by illuminating the map with light of color “a” or by illuminating the map with white light and selec- tively filtering out all but color “a” from the re- flected light. The power to select may exist also, of course, in a receptor, such as the human mind, which can re- ceive all sorts of stimuli from a map through the eyes but react only to some preselected one, rejecting or ignoring to a large degree all others. The process of selection is, however, somewhat more complicated than may appear, according to Treisman (1966, p. 610). She suggests that selective attention is achieved by reducing unwanted sense data to a mere trickle; but at the same time, in order to reduce the risk of missing something really important through inattention, the criterion for recognizing essential sights and sounds is set very low. Thereby, unwanted stimuli are not wholly blocked, and selection appears to be a complex and probably taxing mental process. No doubt the transmission of information is made more simple, accurate, rapid, and reliable, even from a map that is not very complicated, if the material is preselected or prefiltered before presentation to the user. ADDITION AND SUPERPOSITION A simple map is a map that shows the spatial dis- tribution of one attribute or its class intervals. Many maps are compound; they consist of several or many """"""""l"’s II A l B ............... I l E """""""" l l I 3 \ T If All | 2 » Al 1 '._._ ./ """" “ """ /"'""""" ,/ A x _. / '_. / ,/ ,/ / ------ I-----~-/ -----I-----/ 811 r— - — - f 4 l 31 l 3 ! J l I I I // c D G // 11 r I I : A I A ...... II _____ / B / / ........ I ___....|/ 3 B | | F FIGURE 11.—Superposition of maps and regionalization. A and B, two simple maps; C, superposed; D, regionalized, with identifying names retained, equal weight to letter and numeral nominations; E, Roman numeral regions subordinate to lettered regions; F, lettered regions subordinate to Roman numeral regions; G, complete renaming of the four units, using Arabic numerals. From Rodoman (1965, fig. 1). OPERATIONS ON MAPS 15 simple maps superposed and printed together. Each mapped attribute may, of course, have a rather sim- ple definition or a relatively complicated one. The addition of information to a map may involve any or all the processes by which maps are con- structed; but basically, addition can be reduced to one or a combination of three processes: 1. Relating existing attributes to an added place or heretofore-unmapped part of area considered. 2. Relating additional attributes to an existing place. 3. Adding information concerning spatial or typo— logical attributes at new times. The second of these processes, adding attributes, can be accomplished over extended areas by addition of one whole map to another. This is perhaps more clearly indicated by the word “superposition” than by “addition.” Superposition can be illustrated by a diagram (fig. 11) from Rodoman (1965). The distinction is fundamental between superposi- tion of simple maps and typological generalization of a compound map by fusion; recognition of this distinction is essential to understanding the present state of engineering geologic mapping. Typological generalization by fusion, as in figure 11G, results in a new spatial-typological individual, some of whose attributes are usually less precisely defined than were those of its components. If overlap can be tol- erated, the maximum information load is carried by simple superposition, as in figure 11D, where all the original areal and typological data are still shown. Superposition has been used very effectively in environmental planning. McHarg (1969), for exam— ple, showed what areas exhibit combined attributes to the maximum degree, by using film transparencies that record each attribute in degree by steps of de- creasing optical density, the clearest areas having the attribute to the highest desirable degree. When the separate negatives are superposed, laying “truth on truth on truth” as he puts it, the clearest areas in the composite are those that show the combination of the desired attributes to the greatest degree. Gra- . bau (1968, p. 218) used a similar technique of super- posing “factor” maps to derive a “factor complex” map. The Kansas Geological Survey Study Commit- tee (Kansas Geol. Survey, 1968) superposed factor maps to derive a combined single-purpose suitability map. An analogous system using punched cards that code the features or attributes exhibited by items (which can be areas) was described by Brink, Mab- but, Webster, and Beckett (1966, app. G). Haans and Westerveld (1970) superposed recommendations for soil use to derive a soil-suitability map in which the Soll suitable tor: \racraal lonal all" E 'Woflfy m marvel. recreational Inn and loroalry recreational all" and urban development toraalry and urban development Z] we... a... [:1 aolla vary sullable (or agriculture FIGURE 12.—Soil-suitability map showing superposition of recommendations for uses of areas. From Haans and Wes- terveld (1970, fig. 128). spatial distribution of each recommended use re- mains identifiable. (See fig. 12.) TRANSFORMATION Very often communication is not achieved in a system such as shown in figure 9, because of a misfit at the junction between the transmission medium and the receptor. To so change the receptor that transmission is possible may require considerable effort and may result in so altering the receptor that other desirable qualities are adversely affected. It is easier to change the transmission side of the junc- tion; that is, it is generally easier, quicker, and bet- ter for all concerned (if we are dealing with human beings rather than machines) to change the charac- ter of a map to fit the needs of the user than to modify the user so that he can extract information from a map which he does not initially understand. Transformation is the process of changing the character and generally the meaning of lines, areas, and symbols of a map to make it more understand- able and meaningful to the reader and more easily applicable to his purpose. The addition or acquisition of new data is not involved; the changes are in the symbolization, identification, arrangement, and, es- pecially, description or grouping of existing infor- mation. Six kinds of transformation, generally in order of increasing complexity, are given below. The 16 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS first three transformations are elementary mechani- cal ways to transform or modify a map to better fit user needs. The last three transformations relate to the whole process of gathering, classifying, and plot- ting data and are more fundamental, for they alter the meaning of previously drawn lines. 1. Change in the medium for storage or display. This involves interchange between paper, film, magnetic tape, negative and positive scribe sheets, and so forth. 2. Change in symbolization. This involves changes in character of lines, pat- terns, or colors; translation from one language to another; or change in symbols used for quantita- tive data. 3. Change of metric. A. Of spatial attributes; that is, change in the scale or type of projection. B. Of typological attributes; that is, alteration of class interval limits or change of vari- able, such as from X to log X. 4. Spatial extrapolation. This involves the assertion that place P2 has the same set of attributes, A, known at place P1 even though not all of A were measured or ob- served at P2. This may come about because (1) P2 is simply near to P1; (2) a subset “a” of attri- bute set A was observed at P2, and “a” having been recognized as a constant inclusion in A at P1 and elsewhere, the presence of the full set A is inferred at P2; or (3) both P1 and P2 fall within a boundary which is drawn around an area more or less homogeneous in a set of attributes, B, which commonly includes set A or has a satisfac— tory degree of correlation with it. All this sounds like rather sloppy logic, and it is, but these are some of the ways maps are drawn and some of the ways they can become misleading. Spatial extrapolation is the very common and very important process by which information at points of observation is changed to statements about areas or by which a user extends informa— tion from a mapped area into nearby unmapped areas of greater interest to him. Extrapolation in- cludes also the process of interpolation, that is, the inference that the value of an attribute at an unsurveyed point can be estimated through knowl- edge of its value at neighboring points. 5. Typological extrapolation. This involves the assertion that because point P1 is known to exhibit essential attributes A, B, C, and D, the probability that P1 also exhibits un- observed and unessential attributes E and F is sufficiently high to allow E and F to be regarded as essential in lieu of A, B, C, and D in classify- ing other points. The validity of this operation depends entirely on the existence of a relation between set A—B—C—D and set E—F such that A—B—C—D implies or requires E—F. This process can be used for areas rather than points, with the added complication that spatial extrapolation is also involved. Typological extra- polation is commonly used in two circumstances: A. One or more of the essential attributes, say A and B, of a geologic unit may be much less easily observed than E and F; so E and F are used in mapping, but the map purports the presence of A and B. B. Attributes A, B, C, and D are not of interest to a user, but E and F are; that is, they are essential to definitions of new classes in which he has interest. Therefore, al- though mapping may proceed on the basis of attributes A through D, the map omits reference to them and shoWs only that the map unit has attributes E and F. 6. Temporal extrapolation. This involves using a map prepared at one time for making decisions or interpretations at an- other time. The error involved may be so small as to be negligible if the attributes shown are es- sentially static. But if the attributes are chang- ing, such as those connected with processes and their rates, then errors may be large. Temporal extrapolation is always required in using a‘map unless the communication system operates virtu- ally instantaneously, from data acquisition, through portrayal, to decision for use. SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS Some operations are not wholly independent, and they have been somewhat artificially separated to clarify discussion. For example, cartographic or spa- tial generalization involving the erasure of a small inlier can be regarded also as a radical typological transformation in which the attributes of the inlier are transformed from those it originally had to those of the host. Table 2 summarizes factors in the more important operations that are performed on maps. ANALYSIS AND PROBLEMS Engineering geologic maps or maps intended to show some properties important to civil engineers and land-use planners have been constructed in many ways. The following pages are devoted to ana- lyzing how some such maps are made and presenting IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES 17 TABLE 2. — Operations performed on maps Operation Cause, reason, or purpose Generalization 2 “pnfinl To achieve emphasis or clarity; may be required cartographically after reduction in scale. Typological (same as grouping) ............... To clarify concepts, add emphasis, or remove detail unimportant to purpose. Selection: Qpnfinl Typological ....................................................... To emphasize or to fit particular needs. Division: “tum“ To divide area for examination, sampling, or scanning. Typnlnwioal Need for detail of new kind ....... Addition: spatial To extend areal coverage or increase detail. Typological Same map ............................. To add related informnfinn To limit area of interest to user .......... Units outside of boundaries deleted... ...Lines added... Effects on graphic portrayal Efiects on language statements Boundaries made straighter: inliers Changes generally not necessary; erased :‘several symbols in a given can be made less specific to fit area replaced by one. increase in heterogeneity. Lines erased; fewer symbols used ........ Must be recast to make broader. Some may require modification. Some units deleted .................................... Some statements deleted. Lines added ....... ....No effect on typological units; areal units defined. ....New units defined. Map enlarged or information made None. denser. None New attributes added. To add information of a different kind. Superposed maps... Transformation : Cartogrnphir' Qpnfinl (‘hamre of medium Temporal ........................................................... Use in future ......................................... '. .. Typological ....................................................... Change in actual or potential use for map. Change of scale or projection .............. Size or shape of units altered; may ..Depends whether attributes are All map elements superposed ................ Statements still refer to identifiable areas for each attribute. None. None. Nnno require generalization. Depends whether attributes are constant or changing. Minor to complete change in definition of map units. constant or changing. Lines erased but not added without new field study. a few of the logical difficulties that may be encoun- tered in their construction and use. IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES DURING OPERATIONS ON MAPS The identification of essential attributes of a geo- logic r'nap unit can be difficult even during mapping. A lithostratigraphic geologic formation is defined by lithology and mappability. Thus, it may be a distinct, perhaps only slightly heterogeneous, rock unit large enough to be mapped at the scale being used, or it may be a highly heterogeneous unit of many litholo- gies that is mappable only because it is sandwiched between two more readily identifiable units. The only essential attribute of such a unit may be that each part, by definition, lies between drawn bound- aries. When the meaning of such a map unit becomes changed by an operation such as typological trans- formation —— when attributes of use or behavior are ascribed to areas defined by lithostratigraphic cri- teria that may not require homogeneity — then the attributes essential to the new definition of the trans- formed unit may be even more difficult to isolate. This problem can be highlighted by looking at a number of examples that display operations involv- ing a more or less regular increase in logical com- plexity. A map consists of the elements of linework, pat- tern and color, symbol, unit name or identification, and word description. These elements of map lan- guage range from purely graphic to purely verbal, and the various operations on maps generally follow a course of metamorphism that affects first the words and then the graphics. ADDITION OR REGROUPING WITHOUT REDEFINITION The addition of numbers and words that give, say, the results of tests and that present inductive infer- ences concerning the engineering behavior of the mapped units does not affect the essential attributes of the map units. These attributes remain as they were, as do the names, symbols, and linework. There are many such maps, of which a map of the Oakland East quadrangle, California, by Radbruch (1969) is a good example. The second operation that can be made, also with- out removal or change of lines on the basic geologic map or of the description of its units, involves a supplementary identification of the engineering be- havior of specific lithologies and the geologic map units in which they occur. An excellent example of this type of treatment is a map of the Orocov-is quad- rangle, Puerto Rico, by Briggs (1971). The geologic-genetic formation units of Briggs’ map are grouped into tiers A through N on the basis of common engineering geologic characteristics. Each tier includes lithologically similar rocks from the various formations. As shown in a key, each geo- logic map unit, because it is heterogeneous, can be placed in several different tiers (some are in as many as four), and the principal tier to which a geologic unit belongs is shown by boldface type. (See fig. 13.) The engineering geologic tiers are not specifically shown on the geologic map, nor are they formally defined. 18 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS KEY FOR RAPID REFERENCE FROM MAP TO ENGINEERING GEOLOGY TABLE Geologic map symbols in alphabetical order Capital letters refer to tiers of table. Letters in boldface refer to predominant rock types and characteristics Map symbol Tier Map symbol Tier Map symbol Tier Map symbol Tier ha ............ J Kmt ........... H pr ........... F Kva ........... A Ka ............ D,G Kmu ........... ILE Kr. . . . . . . . . . G,B,C,H Kvm ........... A Kc ............ D, A, B, E Ko ............ A,C,G Krf ............ A 0- ------------ K Kct. .......,CA Kpb...........D,F Krla ........... A 0'- --L Kma ........... B,A,C,,G Kpo...........n Kt............G,A,B,C $.25 ---------- }‘ Kma! .......... Kpr ............ H Ktb...........C,G TKp ”I Kmd ........... E Kprb ........... H,D Kto. . . . . . . . . . . B,A,C,G n__ '1" Kmh ........... ll va ........... D,A Kv. . . . . . . . . . . .G,B,A,C HOW TO USE THE ENGINEERING GEOLOGY TABLE Columns are divided horizontally into tiers lettered A to N Table to map —If the reader is looking for rock suitable for riprap, for example, he will search column 3 and find that tier B lists “Riprap— Good.” Columns 1 and 2 of tier B show the rock types involved, the geologic map symbols, and the general area of the map in which these rocks are found. With these data the reader can then locate on the geologic map the sites where the desired material probably will be found. Map to table —If the reader wishes to know, for example, the exca- vation and stability conditions along a proposed highway route, he can plot the route on the geologic map, find the geologic map symbols of the units crossed, and check with the key accompanying the table. Thus, if the area in question is labelled Kto , opposite this letter symbol the key lists B,A,C, and G, with the B in boldface. These letters refer to tiers and the desired information appears in column 3 of these tiers. The boldface B indicates that most of the Kto rocks will have the character- istics listed in tier B, while some of the Kto rocks will have the charac- teristics listed in tiers A, C, or G. A FIGURE 13. —— Part of explanation for geologic map of the Orocovis quadrangle, Puerto Rico. From Briggs (1971). A, Key relating geologic map units to engineering geologic tiers, and directions for use of engineering geology table. B, First three columns and first five tiers in the engineering geology table. Note that the lithologic descriptions for tiers B and E are nearly identical. If the engineering geo- logic classification depends on lithology, the essential attributes that distinguish these two tiers are unex- pressed, at least in the first column of the tabular description. Inasmuch as tier B includes 80—90 per- cent of formations Kma and Kto but no Kmd and tier E includes 100 percent Kmd but no Kma or Kto, the unexpressed essential differences must somehow be linked to the definition or areal distribution of these formations. The engineering characteristics are somewhat different, but patterns of similarity in engineering characteristics do not seem to have wholly controlled the grouping or division into tiers. (Note similarity in the engineering characteristics of tiers C and D.) Incidentally, Briggs’ paragraphs on “How to Use the Engineering Geology Table” are exactly parallel to the two basic uses of engineering geological maps previously emphasized. His directions for going (1) from table to map are essentially those to find the areas of an attribute, and (2) from map to table are those to find the attributes of an area. TRANSFORMATION UNEMPHASIZEI) The next more complex operation involves actual typological transformation. This operation, which was discussed in an earlier section in somewhat ab- stract terms, is at the heart of many problems with real maps. The operation consists essentially of do- ing one thing and saying that it is, or amounts to doing, something else. The shift can be abrupt and very apparent, but it also can be so subtle and unob- IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES ENGINEERING GEOLOGY Characteristics of fresh rock unless specifically stated otherwise (see column 1, tier M) Tier 1. ROCK TYPES AND GEOLOGIC MAP SYMBOIS (Percentage indicates proportion of the rock type within each map unit) 2. DISTRIBUTION 3. GENERAL ENGINEERING CHARACTERISTICS (see text below this table) Very thick lava and lava breccia: 100% of Kmef. Krls. Kvm. Kve. dikes shown by red with x's, blue, and blue with x ’s 70-80% of Ko. 10-20% of Kto. (10% of Kc, Kct. Kms, va, Kt. Kv. Chiefly in the east-central and central parts but locally present in most parts of the quadrangle. Excavation—Difficult. Stability—Good. Strength—Good (A). Aggregate—Excellent. Riprap—Fair (B). Fill—Fair. Permeability—Low. Tunnel requirements—Minimum. Very thick and thick-bedded pyroclaatic breccia and tuff, chiefly of marine origin: 80-90% of Kma, Kto. 30—40% of Kv. 10-20% of Kt. (10% of Kc. Ko. va, Kr. Widespread in east-central, central, and west-central parts of the quadrangle, locally near the southern border. Excavation—Difficult. Stability—Good. Strength—Good (A). Aggregate—Good (A). Riprap—Good. Fill—Fair. Permeability—Low. Tunnel requirements—Minimum. Very thick bedded hyaloclastic breccia and tuft: >90% of Kct, Ktb. 10-20% of Kt, Kv. <10% of Kma. Ko. Kr. Kto. Chiefly in the area south of the Cordillera Central, locally elsewhere south of the Damian Arriba fault, which is near the northern edge of the map area. Excavation—Intennediate. Stability-Fair. Strength—Good (B). Aggregate—Poor (A). Riprap—Poor. Fill—Good. Permeability—Moderate. Tunnel requirements—Minimum to moderate. Very thick and thick-bedded pyroclaatic breccia and tuff, chiefly aubaerial in origin. and very thick and thick volcanic conglomerate: >90% of Ka, va. 70-90% of Kc, Kpb. 10—20% of Kprb. Widespread along the northern edge of the quadrangle north of the Damiin Arriba fault; otherwise chiefly in the southern part of the quadrangle. Excavation-Intennediate. Stability-Fair. Strength—Good (B). Aggregate—Poor (A). Riprap—Poor. Fill—Good (especially Ka). Permeability—Moderate. Tunnel requirements—Moderate. Very thick and thick-bedded pyroclaetic tuff and breccia, marine: 100% of Kmd. 20-40% of Kmu. 10-20% of Kc. Almost entirely in the southern one-third of the quadrangle. Excavation—Moderately difficult. Stability—Good. locally fair. Strength-Good (A). Aggregate—Fair (A). Riprap—Fair (A). Fill—Fair. Permeability—Low to moderate. Tunnel requirements—Minimum. trusive that it appears to have occurred in the mind of the writer almost without his being aware of it. For example, Rockaway and Lutzen (1970) , in their excellent report on the Creve Coeur quadrangle, Mis- souri, state (p. 5) that B 19 cause engineering parameters are the basic criteria used to denote the_ units, different geologic formations may be mapped as one unit. * * * In this system the bedrock formations and extensive surficial deposits of Missouri have been classified according to engineering properties into different units identi- fied by Roman numerals. * * * Major units identified in the Creve Coeur area are: Boundaries of map units were drawn based on engineering geologic characteristics of the bedrock rather than on geologic position or age, as on a conventional geologic map. * * * Be- Unit I — Alluvium Unit II — Carbonate bedrock Unit X —— Cyclic deposits 20 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS Parts of stratigraphically separated formations were indeed included in single engineering geologic map units, but the statement that the mapping cri- teria were engineering parameters or properties seems unwarranted. Longer description of map units and subunits in the text indicates that the classifica- tion criteria actually used in mapping were genetic process (as in alluvium), lithology (as in carbonate bedrock), age (“Unit X denotes areas underlain by Pennsylvanian age bedrock,” p. 11) , and topographic position or form. Although the units adopted are less heterogeneous with respect to engineering prop- erties and behavior than time— or rock—stratigraphic units would be, the criteria actually used for draw— ing the boundaries were not engineering but geo- logic. A similar transformation appears in a figure pre- sented in a very useful report on the pilot study for land-use planning and environmental geology of an area near Lawrence, Kansas (Kansas State Geol. 1 mile EXPLANA TION m Thin soils developed on steep limestone slopes Soils developed on limestone Soils developed on shale :1 Soils developed on alluvium Map showing a simplified classification of soils in the study area based on engineering properties. FIGURE 14,— Transformation of meaning between explana- tion and caption. From Kansas State Geological Survey (1968, fig. 10). Survey, 1968, fig. 10), here reproduced as figure 14. The shift from statements concerning lithology, slope, thickness of soil, and genesis to the statement “based on engineering properties” occurs rapidly and unobtrusively between the explanation for the map and the caption that immediately follows. These examples may appear trivial to some geol- ogist readers, who might be expected to infer, through long experience with our methods of induc- tion, the whole meaning intended by the words. But what of the engineer or planner? If we say that our map boundaries are drawn on the basis of engineer- ing properties, the nongeological reader has some reason to expect that we actually tested engineering properties and drew boundaries based on their val- ues —-that our map units are delineated in the field by homogeneity with respect to the engineering properties ascribed to them in our explanations—not that we are estimating engineering properties within a unit whose boundaries were drawn on the basis of other criteria. UNITS REDEFINED Typological regrouping assembles previously mapped geologic units into fewer use or behavior groups, identifies the regrouped units by new sym- bols or colors, and presents new descriptions. A good and typical example is the foundation- and excava- tion-conditions map of the Burtonville quadrangle, Kentucky, by Dobrovolny and Morris (1965). They used for this map all but one of the lines shown on the basic geologic map made earlier by Morris and added one line (requiring new fieldwork) that sub- divided a geologic map unit according to lithology; these changes are indicated in a part'of the strati- graphic column reproduced here on plate 10. The description of one of the four lettered map units for the Burtonville foundation and excavation map is also given on plate 1D. The new essential attributes of the units, as I would interpret them, are in the first line beneath the explanation box. That is, the essential attributes of unit A are now “Poor foundation material, easily excavated,” and that is all; the remaining descriptive material is accessory — informative and useful, but not essential. The grouping (and division) at Burtonville took place in an ordered vertical sequence involving a considerable thickness of stratified material, both bedrock and alluvium, and it was determined solely by the inherent lithological attributes of that mate- rial. Grouping of units and transformation of descrip- tions for particular purposes is commonly performed on soils maps. In an article that often has been cited IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES 21 as the origin of the “stoplight” map system, Quay (1966) summarized the problems relating to a resi- dential development by means of a map that shows units according to degrees of capability. The bound- aries of the capability units are the previously mapped soil boundaries; his description of the capa- bility units is shown below. Map unit Description of capability No temporary or continuing problems. Temporary problems, no continuing problems. Significant temporary problems, no continuing prob- lems. Significant temporary problems, with continuing prob- lems. Significant temporary problems, significant continuing problems. Significant temporary problems, complex continuing problems. Temporary and continuing complex problems, impos- ing extra design requirement. Temporary and continuing complex problems, impos- ing unusual design requirements. I Temporary and continuing complex problems, impos— ing such design requirements that conventional urban uses are impractical. D ow> m C) ’11 P1 The classification of capability map units accord- ing to the kinds-of problems involved lends itself to diagraming in a three-dimensional array, as shown in figure—15. This figure was constructed in the hope that geometric representations of classifications might be as helpful to the reader as they have been 9 «rs s“ Q; / ' ’ Q. mprncrtca/ I o\ _ / o / Q3’ Unusual // —/ (690 Ex m / | | I | i Conventionai/ I I _ If _________ .1. ______ __....{ Complex I i Significant C D E F /;J _ / TEMPORARY PROBLEMS \ | i / I | > 'V 0' 3 3 3 3 3 A ——-.————T———-+ Absent Present Significant Complex CONTINUING PROBLEMS FIGURE 15.—Three—dimensional matrix of map units A through 1. Units are defined by capability in terms of de- sign requirements resulting from temporary and continu- ing problems of various degrees of severity. Based on Quay (1966, pl. 11). 531—431 0 - 74 - 4 to me. I made two assumptions in constructing fig- ure 15: (1) design requirements were classified as “conventional” unless otherwise specified and (2) the word “complex” was interpreted as a fourth class extending the continuous series that progresses from “absent” through “significant” to indicate serious- ness of problems. The arrangement shows a progres- sion directed from one corner of the array to its diagonally opposite corner, although not along the shortest path. Mapped categories lie wholly in the conventional or complex faces; that is, design re- quirements are not regarded as extra, unusual, or impractical unless both temporary and continuing problems are complex. Grouping, for a particular purpose, of a number of surficial units that occur within a limited vertical range but that are largely defined by inherent litho- logic properties is illustrated by two maps in Hack- ett and McComas (1969) : plate 1A (Surficial deposits) and plate 20 (Geologic conditions relating to waste disposal). Equivalent parts of these maps and their explanations are reproduced here as plates 1E and F. The map sheet has ample space for ex- planation of the units, so perhaps one can assume that the explanations contain all the essential attri- butes of the units in both the surficial-deposits and the waste-disposal maps. Figure 16 shows the distribution of surficial geo- logic units among the suitability-for-waste-disposal units for the full area of the original published maps by Hackett and McComas (1969). The proportion of ' many geologic units assigned to a given suitability unit is very small. I estimated (by eye) that 15 of the 26 geologic units have 95 percent or more of their area assigned to 1 suitability unit. Other geo- logic units are more equitably divided among as many as 5 suitability units. Probably more than 95 percent of the lines on the suitability map coincide with or closely follow boundaries on the surficial geologic map. Because many geologic units occur in several suitability units, various individual patches of a particular geologic unit must have been assigned, undivided, to a variety of suitability units (which, of course, is apparent by inspection). Thus, suitabil- ity units have essential attributes Whose changes in value closely follow geologic contacts but whose ab- solute value is not specifically determined by the material in the geologic unit. Hence, in this trans— formation we must be dealing with attributes that are accessory to the geologic unit and yet essential to the interpretive behavior unit. Such attributes can easily pertain to topography, geomorphology, hy- drology, or even vegetation. In what follows, the 22 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS SUITABI'LITY— FOR-WASTE-DISPOSAL UNIT G2 GS Y1 Y2 Y3 R1 R2 R3 X \\ \\ GEOLOGIC UNIT 14 15 16 19 21 30 X X > 95 percent of geologic unit is in indicated suitability unit \\ Geologic unit present 0 Suitability unit present in amount < 5 percent of geologic unit FIGURE 16. — Distribution of geologic units among suitability- for-waste-disposal units. Estimates by eye from maps in Hackett and McComas (1969, pls. 1A, 20). description of the suitability units is examined in more detail. The statements made about the units ml the waste- disposal map can be analyzed in two ways: by a data matrix (fig. 17) and by a tree of logical division (fig. 18). Each method serves a different purpose. The matrix indicates not only what is said about each established unit in relation to what is said about other units but also, by blanks or other means more clear than running text, what is not said, not known, or irrelevant to the classification process. The matrix is unwieldy, however, to use for placing a new area into the existing scheme or for reclassify- ing any small selected area that may not appear to fit the classification shown for it and its surround- ings. The instrument needed for this operation is an identification key, which may conveniently take the form of a logical tree. Both methods of analysis use answers to questions to determine the presence of attributes. If the same question is asked of all individuals or groups, the answers will not always be yes or no; the answer “yes or no” (equals “maybe”) must be allowed. The answer to one or more questions may logically imply the answer to another; for example, a yes answer to “used as a ground-water source?” implies a no an- swer to “impermeable?” Such relations are, how- ever, generally not' symmetric; that is, a no answer to “impermeable ?’ does not imply a yes answer to “used as a ground-water source?” In the data matrix (fig. 17), those attributes that I think may be necessary for division into classes are indicated by an underline. One attribute that seems to be both essential and unique is given a double underline. In constructing a free of logical division, oneshould consider the relative importance of the criteria to the purpose at hand and apply the criteria in order of decreasing priority or effectiveness in discrimina- tion. The nine criteria shown in figure 17 can be arranged in factorial nine ways. After trying various . schemes, I chose to arrange the criteria, in both the matrix and the logical tree, in order of decreasing number of map units to which the answer to the question appeared possibly necessary for classifica- tion. Thus, the presence of peat in a closed basin appeared, from study of the maps, to be a decisive characteristic — all areas of peat are G3 and almost all areas of G3 are peat—hence, the answer to question 1 creates a clear separation of G3 from the rest of the geologic units. Permeability of the sur- ficial material appeared essential to the definition of seven of the eight classes, and therefore a question regarding that property was placed next, and so on. The tree, better than the matrix, illustrates two points. First, often one can place a geologic unit in its proper class without having toanswer more than a small fraction of the questions in the classification system. For example, G3 is isolated after one ques- tion, G2 after two, and R3 after three. All additional information given in the explanation about these units is redundant for identification, although it is certainly informative and useful. But how is one to determine which among many statements made about a map unit are really essential to its definition? A IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES 23 G 2 G 3 Y1 Y 2 Y 3 R1 R 2 R 3 1. Is the material peat No g No No No No No No In a basm? —— —- — 2. Is the surficial mat- erial impermeable? Yes No (Maybe) No (Maybe) No M (Maybe) 3. Is ground water shallow (No) Yes ( No ( ) m E ( ) or discharging? 4. Are there ground-water sources at depth < 500,? No (Maybe) (Maybe) Yes (Maybe) Yes Yes Yi 5. Is material saturated at ( ) Yes ( N ( ) (Ma be) Ye ( ) depth of disposal? 0 __y_ —S 6. ls the surficial material thick? Yes ( ) Maybe Yes ( l l l Yes . No 7 Is the surficial material ' M highly variable? (N0) (N0) (1%) (N0) E l l l l ( l 8. Is the material subject to flooding? ( ’ yes ( (N0) ( l l ) Yes ( l 9. Is the bedrock permeable? No l ) l l ’ l l l l l ) YES FIGURE 17. — Data matrix for classifying geologic units into units of suitability for waste disposal. Constructed from state- ments in map explanation for plate 20 of Hackett and McComas (1969). Underline indicates that statement seems es- sential to classification (if questions are asked in the order shown). Double underline indicates that statement seems both essential and unique. Parentheses indicate that statement is not specifically made, and the answer is an inference. logical tree is helpful for this purpose, but its con- struction may be difficult, particularly in the choice of sequence of questions that lead to the most effi- cient division. The other point is that many empty sets hang on the logical tree. Although some of these may represent logical impossibilities, many do not. Should we infer that none of those possibilities are actually present in the area? What are the chances that some possible units, because they are rare or small, were incorporated in other units? DIFFERING MAPS OF SIMILAR INTENT This section began with examples of how easily new words and new meanings can be applied to existing map units, with scarcely a ripple in the smooth current of thought. Indeed, most problems in typological transformation stem from the statistical accuracy of applying new words to previously de- lineated areas. But this is not the only possible source of difficulty. One can transform two different maps of the same area and arrive at interpretive maps in which descriptions of the transformed units are remarkably similar yet the spatial picture (and therefore the meaning) is very different. This con- vergence and confusion is illustrated on plates 1A and B, where part A is a map showing suitability of soils for septic fields and part B is a map of the same area showing suitability of: formations for septic sewage disposal. Map A is a transformation made by grouping units on a soil series map; map B was constructed by grouping units on a geologic map (both bedrock and surficial) , except that one division was made that does not appear on the geologic map. The two transformed maps could hardly be more different. The distinction between “soil” and “for- mation” as the source of original data is crucial; yet this easily might escape the attention of a developer or planner, who may see only one of these maps and who is probably more concernedgwith suitability of the ground for a standard operation than he is with whether the material involved is a “soil” or a sur- ficial or bedrock “formation.” Such instances are apparently rare — so far. But many different groups —geologists, geomorphologists, soil scientists, phys- ical geographers, and general environmentalists—— are increasingly engaged in deriving special purpose maps from their own basic data and maps. We may perhaps see more maps, of different origin, that con- 24 THE LOGIC 0F GEOLOGICAL MAPS 1. Is the material peat in a basin? 2. Is the surficial material impermeable? N POPULATION 0F GEOLOGIC UNITS N | Y (M) Y N 3. Is ground water shallow or discharging? N Y 4. Are there ground-water sources at depth of less than 500'? ' N Y 5. Is material saturated at depth of disposal? N 6. Is the surficial material thick? N 7. Is the surficial material highly variable? (N 8. Is the material subject to flooding? (N) (Y) ( 9. Is the bedrock permeable? ( ) ( ) ( Map units of suitability )()( ( ) (N) N (M) Y N Y (M) N (M) Y ( ) (N) Y N O—-< ) N 1(4) E2: N No Y Yes for waste disposal M Maybe LmJ rm lwll‘vé‘i ian (M) Inferred answer lej o (1) Logically improbable or of no consequence owing to answer to question 1 ( ) No statement 0 Empty set FIGURE 18.—Tree of logical division for classifying geologic units into units of suitability for waste disposal. Constructed from statements in map explanation for plate 20 in Hackett and McComas (1969). verge in intent to show the same or similar attri— butes of the same area but which turn out to be confusingly different. ADDITION AND SUPERPOSITION Many derived or interpretive maps cannot in prac- tice be obtained from the geologic map alone, as were the foundation- and excavation-conditions map by Dobrovolny and Morris (1965) and the waste-disposal map by Hackett and McComas (1969). Some types of derived maps require the addition of much other information or the use of other maps to create useful new classes of data. COVARIANCE NOT REQUIRED Classes of additional information may or may not be genetically related to the classes of geologic units with which they are to be combined. If classes are not genetically related, then generally they are not spatially covariant. A map showing units formed by the various possible combinations of two sets of genetically unrelated criteria will have a distinctive appearance. This appearance, in detail, can be simi- lar to the costume of a harlequin, with four colors or patterns meeting at a point, as shown in figure 19, in which areas having attributes 1, 2, and 3 of one kind and A and B of another cross and overlap. If the criteria are not wholly independent, a change in one set will be accompanied by covariant 'changes in the other set, as shown at locality I, where the con- tact between lithologies 2 and 3 follows the boundary between slope categories A and B. An attribute map that illustrates noncovariant contacts very well is the slope-stability map of the San Clemente area, California, by Blanc and Cleve- land (1968), of which a part is reproduced on plate 10. This map was constructed by superposition of two other maps: one showing four strength cate- gories (essentially lithologic) formed by grouping geologic formations without adding new lines (Blanc and Cleveland, fig. 2) ; the other showing two slope categories, below and at or above the critical angle for stability (Blanc and Cleveland, fig. 4). This leads IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES 25 to eight map units, which are arranged in order of increasing stability as below: Map unit Deacriptian 8 Strength unit I, above critical angle. 7 Strength unit 1, below critical angle. 6 Strength unit II, above critical angle. 5 Strength unit II, below critical angle. And so on. The n (:8) units taken 79 (:2) at a time could lead to M distinct kinds of contacts between units, where n! :WIZB. Of these possibilities, 24 are actually realized in the whole area mapped; examples appear on plate 10. Figure 20 is a contact-criteria matrix for the San Clemente map that shows What attributes must change at the contact between units identified in the rows and columns. More than one attribute can change across a contact, but that type of contact on this kind of map either is rare or has a simple and probably significant geologic explanation, such as common coincidence between break in slope and bed- rock-alluvium contact. The San Clemente map, be- sides being very useful for its subject matter, is thus a fine example of superposition of two simple maps of attributes to form a combined or compound map. It shows, without generalization during super- position, not only the areas that have specific attri- butes and the two classes of attributes that apply at any point but also a new set of characteristics re- garding stability that are inferred from the combi— nation of the attributes of slope and strength. The superposition of maps of attributes that are generally not spatially covariant is most common in maps designed to show areas suitable for multiple use or areas of conflicting possible use. McHarg (1969, p. 114) presented such a compound map for Staten Island which shows areas suitable for con- servation, recreation, or urbanization in four de- grees each, together with areas in which these three potential uses overlap and compete equally, in all the various combinations and in four degrees. If the added information required in transforma- tion is not markedly spatially covariant with the units of the geologic map, if it is dominant over the criteria used for geologic mapping, and if it is given much greater weight than the geologic criteria in defining new units resulting from the transforma- tion, then the boundaries on the new map will, of course, generally look much different from those on the geologic map. A good example is taken again from Hackett and McComas (1969) ; parts of their Lithologic units ESE- W3? Slope ff///; 3 FIGURE 19. — Map units resulting from superposition of maps of two sets of attributes, such as lithology and slope, that are genetically independent and not covariant except at' locality I. plate 2A (Ground-water conditions) are reproduced on plate 10. Note that the map unit boundaries bear only local resemblance to those on the map of sur- ficial deposits (pl. 1E of the present report), because thickness, depth, and water yield of buried bedrock units as well as exposed near-surface surficial units were all considered. The statements in the explanation are unusually informative, so a table of logical division could be made that uses not only yes and no answers but also the quantitative ranges of attributes. The table is shown in figure 21. As divisions are achieved going 26 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS STRENGTH GROUP— II III SLOPE ANGLE- At or above Below At or above Below At or above Below At or above Below critical critical critical critical critical critical critical critical (pink) (tan) (yellow) (pale yellow) (green) (pale green) (blue) (pale blue) At or above C s SC S (SC) 8 SC critical 2 2 I . Below SC SC S SC S critical 1 u r At or above 5 (SC) S SC critical 2 [1 Below SC S SC 8 critical r 3 At or above C 5 SC critical 2 [11 Below (SC) S critical At or above C critical IV Below critical FIGURE 20.—Contact-criteria matrix for slope-stability map, San Clemente area, California (Blanc and Cleveland, 1968, pl. 1, part of which is illustrated as pl. 10 of this report). Contacts between map units in rows and columns require changes in attributes of strength, S, and (or) criticality of slope angle, C. Some types of contacts are rare, r, uncom- mon, 11, or absent, ( ). 1, occurs at head or foot of landslide; 2, occurs at foot of landslide or at break in slope at foot of valley side; 3, shown in contact on map, but apparently in error. down the table, vertical lines are inserted, and the end result is the scheme of classification into six sets of conditions which are transformed into grades of suitability. Note in the explanation for unit G3 the dual state- ment combining the two attributes “more than 50 feet thick below a depth of 50 feet,” which is linked by the connective “or” to another dual statement. This complex appears to have helped distinguish G2 and G3 from Y1, Y2, and Y3, but the lack of defini- tive statements in G2 concerning buried sand and gravel aquifers leaves the distinction between G2 and G3 to be drawn on differing thicknesses of un- derlying dolomite. Perhaps this was the authors’ inteht. Inferences must be made, or specific information is lacking, at quite a few places in figure 21. No doubt a complete logical tree would indicate empty sets whose existence is unspecified. A matrix in which each box contains yes, no, or maybe (or irrele- vant) , or an explanatory text constructed upon such a matrix, might add measurable clarity to these very useful derivative maps and texts. COVARIANCE IMPOSED The McHenry County ground-water map more than hints at further complexities in analyzing and presenting multivariable data usable for a specific purpose. Some purposes involve requirements that a map unit be defined by several attributes, which may not, actually and strictly, have the same boundaries. Such a unit is “regionalized” in the geographer’s sense. Some units on the McHenry County ground- water map are at least in part defined by geometric relation—for example, units such as G2 or‘G3 consist of one stratigraphic unit over another. Also, there are distinctions between units according to specific ranges of continuous variables. IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES 27 1. Are there permeable sandstone aquifers at depths of BOO-2,000 feet? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 2.. Are there shallow aquifers I Yes (depth < 300 ft)? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes I limited 1 3. Are the shallow sources suitable I for all uses? Yes Yes Yes No No I No | | 4. Are the shallow sources suitable I for small requirements? (Yes) (Yes) (Yes) Yes Yes No 5. Do the shallow sources include surficial aquifers > 50 ft thick? Yes No (No) No No No 15—20 ft thick? ' (No) Yes Yes (No) ( l ( ) 6. Are the buried sand and gravel aquifers > 50 ft thick below 50 ft depth? or ( ) ( ) Yes (No) No (No) > 25 ft thick above 50 ft depth? 25-50 ft thick below 50 ft depth? ( ) ( i No Yes No l ) < 25 ft thick? ( ) ( ) No No Yes (. ) 7. What is thickness of underlying dolomite? ( ) > 100 ft 50-100 ft > 50 ft < 50 ft ( ) with shale 6—1 6-2 6-3 Y—1 Y-2 Y—3 FIGURE 21. -- Table of logical division for map units of ground-water conditions, McHenry County, Ill. (Hack- ett and McComas, 1969, pl. 2A). Empty parentheses indicate no information in statements in the expla- nation; answer in parentheses is inferred. The problems that may arise from these kinds of from information presented on a more conventional complexities are illustrated by the engineering geo- geologic map— a map 0f engineering geologic con— logical zonation map of the Zvolen Basin, Czechoslo- ditions (Matula, 1969’ app. 2)' The-geologic map vakia (Matula 1969 app 3) This excellent map is was prepared With the knowledge and intent that the _ , _ _ zonation map could and would be derived from it. among the very few Of Its kmd in English, Of a real This sort of planning greatly increases the probabil— area, in full color. and generally available outside of ity that a derivative map will be satisfactory for a central and eastern Europe. It is largely derived specific purpose. 28 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS Parts of the Zvolen zonation map and its explana- tion are shown on plate 2A. Each map unit is defined by essential attributes concerning geomorphic form, slope, thickness of cover, and lithology or degree of consolidation of the underlying material. Figure 22 is a contact-criteria matrix developed from the state- ments made in the explanation of the Zvolen map. The matrix indicates what defining attributes must change at a contact represented by the intersection of map units listed in the rows and columns. When units are defined by more than one essential attribute, a contact represents a change in one or more of the attributes. Only if they have close spatial covariance can all the essential attributes change at a contact. One type of contact shown on the full Zvolen map requires in three different areas covari- ation among three variables: slope, thickness of de- luvia, and type of underlying material. This may be perfectly possible, but both the mapmaker and the mapreader need to be aware of the expressed or im- plied need for multiple covariation. If the mapmaker does not require strict covariation and he uses some averaging, sketching, or stretching of the nominal I-A [—3 II III-A [II-B III-C III-D IV-A IV-B V-A V—B 1-». G G G G G G 1-3 G G G G G G u G G G G G III-A T III-B L I * g III-C T '(I? TGL g "I‘D (E) (I37 (E) (37 IV—A L “"B E (E) V-A L v-B FIGURE 22. —— Contact—criteria matrix for engineering geolog- ical zonation map, Zvolen Basin, Czechoslovakia (Matula, 1969) . Contacts between map units in rows and columns re- quire changes in attributes of geomorphology, G, thickness of deluvia, T, and (or) lithology of material under deluvia, L. Parentheses indicate change across contact is permitted but not always required; blank squares indicate units are not in contact on map. *, in contact at essentially a single point. ranges to draw a “line of best fit,” then he has em- ployed typological generalization. No doubt this is very commonly necessary, but the mapreader needs to be advised by the mapmaker concerning the ex- tent, possible significance, and effect of generaliza- tion upon the heterogeneity of the unit. The three essential attributes used to define map units III, IV, and V on the Zvolen map can be rep- resented in a Venn diagram (fig. 23). This diagram adequately illustrates the logical relations of the classes, but it portrays spatial relations less well. That is, units such as VA and 1110 that can actually be in physical contact are shown in this diagram as separated by other regions. However, representing both the logical and the spatial or topologic inter- relations of three variables by using only two dimen- sions may be too much to expect. A portrayal of the classification that shows some topologic similarity to the map is the three-dimen- sional matrix in figure 24. This is similar to but more complex than the matrix presented previously (fig. 15) in analysis of the classification used in a map by Quay (1966). The category boxes represent map units. Possible and actual contacts between most of the units may here be visualized as surfaces, Flat / Moderate Steep Firm Weak IIIA // )3 SLOPE FIRMNESS 1n IVB IVA HID 1118 a VB VA THICKNESS Thin Moderate Thick / VIA Empty classes FIGURE 23.—Venn diagram showing classification of map units 111 through V, engineering geological zonation map of the Zvolen Basin, Czechoslovakia (Matula, 1969). Units are defined by three criteria: steepness of slope, thickness of deluvium, and firmness of underlying material. IDENTIFICATION OF ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES 29 planes, or points of contact if the boxes of the matrix were to be shoved together. The geomorphological classification by slope or form is based actually on two different concepts: steepness of slope and narrowness of ridge. There are three categories of slope—steep (more than 15°), moderate (up to 15°), and flat — and two categories of width of ridge—narrow and Wide. This minor cross-classification has led in some places to unit IVB being in contact with unit VA, without intervention of a band of Unit III, because the contact may have ,been drawn on the basis of width of ridge rather than steepness of slope or because the areas involved would be too small to show on the map. This “logical tunneling” is indicated in figure 24. A three-dimensional matrix is useful also in check- ing to see whether all possibilities of the classifica- tion system are either discussed or specifically stated to be absent. For example, areas of moderate slope underlain by compressible bedrock and covered by deluvium either less than 2.5 m (meters) thick (in- dicated by 01) or more than 5 m thick (indicated by ,8) do not seem to have been mapped separately as units; yet the map of engineering geologic conditions (not shown here) indicates that these criteria are fulfilled_in some places. Such areas appear to have been incorporated into unit IIIB, and accordingly, connections or “bridges” are shown in figure 24 ex- tending horizontally from IIIB to the a and ,8 boxes. The single area of IIIA shown on the map is under- MA‘I’ERIAL UNDER DELUVIUM FIGURE 24.—Three-dimensional matrix of map units III through V, engineering geological zonation map of the Zvolen Basin, Czechoslovakia (Matula, 1969). Units are de- fined by three criteria: steepness of slope, thickness of de- luvium, and firmness of underlying material. lain predominantly by firm rock, but the definition of IIIA intends no commitment as to underlying ma- terial because of the practical difficulty of specifying lithology beneath more than 5 m of cover (Milan Matula, oral commun., 1972). On the other hand, some areas shown as IIID appear to be underlain by clayey material, so a connection is shown in figure 24 extending vertically from unit IIID to box a. The areas represented by the a box therefore may be shown either as IIIB or IIID on the map. These remarks about a fine map are presented not in a spirit of criticism but rather to illustrate the inevitable difficulties that arise if map units are de- fined by ranges in attributes and if these attributes do not covary precisely in space. In logical division, after the first division into, say, parts I, II, and III, the criterion for partitioning IA from IB may be, and usually is, inappropriate for partitioning IIA from IIB, and so on. Therefore, a map showing units derived by division cannot gener- ally be analyzed by a criterion matrix of the type shown in figure 24. If, however, the map units are formed by grouping, as I believe the Zvolen Basin map units were, then theoretically the resulting groups can be arranged into an N-dimensional ma- trix where N is the number of categories of essential defining attributes. Actual complete graphic repre- sentation is possible, of course, only if N is 3 or less. Problems that arise from the particular structure of a classification system are illustrated by a map of geological-engineering conditions and regionaliza- tion by Lozinska-Stepien and Stochlak (1970, fig. 2) . The explanation and part of the map are here repro- duced as plate 23. In the text discussion of regionalization for foun- dation of structures, item 6 in the explanation, the authors stated (p. 112) : A detailed analysis» was next carried out of all the factors that contribute to the full description of the geological—engi- neering environment. The following are regarded as'Bf para- mount importance in this evaluation: a — ground relief (gradients), b—permissible soil pressure of building soils encoun- tered 1 m below the surface of the area under in- vestigation, c—depth of occurrence of the first underground water level, d —presence of geodynamic processes. Therefore, potential sites for the direct foundations of structures have been differentiated on the 1 : 5000 urban area map of the geological-engineering conditions (Fig. 2). All these conditions (a, b, c, d, Fig. 2) must be fulfilled to qualify a given area for admittance into one of the differ- entiated categories. If so, the area will be indicated by a Roman figure only. Should even one of the required conditions not come up to the level of the given category that particular \ \ l 30 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS area will be referred to a correspondingly lower category. For example: when three of the above requirements are complied with entitling an area to be included into the category for good geological-engineering conditions it will, nevertheless, be placed in the category of very bad conditions should the 4th requirement fit into that level. Say, if the gradients ex- ceed 12 percent the given area will accordingly be classed lowest and will be indicated by the symbol Ia. An area that lacks only one attribute for being classed at 111 will be downgraded into a subgroup of class II if IIa or IIb or IIc or IId is true. The desig- nation of a particular area as IIb does not mean that Vs >3m 2-3 m 1-2m DEPTH TO GROUND-WATER TABLE (C) the area has the attributes generally of II but rather that only one of its attributes is of rank II, namely b. This attribute thus becomes dominant in classifi- cation because the essential definition of II depends not on the whole suite of attributes listed under it but rather on the overall suitability rating “unfavor- able.” The other attributes of such an area, after it is classed as IIb, are then left in doubt, for down- grading could have occurred from either III or IV. The structure of the classification system is brought out by figure 25, in which three of the cri- ab I sissy Ill/ll Empty set FIGURE 25.-—Three-dimensional matrix of map units I through IV, map of geological-engineering conditions by Lozinska— Stepien and Stochlak (1970, fig. 2). Units are actually defined by four criteria, but only three were used to construct this example of a matrix. Units not actually present on themap reproduced herein are indicated by one ruled face. TYPOLOGICAL DEGENERALIZATION 31 teria for evaluation were used to form a three-di- mensional matrix in which the prisms represent actual map units. A fourth major criterion, the pres- ence of geodynamic processes, was omitted, together with some details. The matrix shows how the pres- ence of a single unfavorable criterion results in downgrading into a large panel or block of low rank. Thus, specific information has been lost, while focus on judgment regarding suitability has been sharp- ened. If one tries, for example, to reconstruct depth- to-ground-water contours from the information given on the map, the results are equivocal, and alternative interpretations are possible. Because the boundaries of engineering geological regions coincide with either the color boundaries (depth to compact soil) or the pattern boundaries (material at depth of 1 m), then the depth-to-ground-water boundaries also must co- incide with either depth-to-compact-soil boundaries or material-at-l-m-depth boundaries. These coinci- dences can be questioned. TYPOLOGICAL DEGENERALIZATION In the operation of typological generalization a map unit becomes defined by the “general” concur— rence of a number of attributes, not all of which need to be present at any random point. A geologic formation typically is a generalized unit defined by the general concurrence or spatial covariance of a number of attributes such as lithology, environment of deposition, or genesis and relations with other units. In the operation of typological degeneralization we ascribe to the whole of the generalized unit one of the specific attributes that was used during the original delineation of the unit. If that attribute was invariably essential to the generalized unit, then de- generalization is possible. If it was not, then degen- eralization is successful only when the heterogeneity of the generalized unit with respect to that attribute is acceptable. Suppose that a geologic map unit I has been de- fined on the basis of a characteristic suite of attri- butes A, B, and C. The attributes are fairly closely linked spatially, but not every area of I exhibits all attributes. Some areas showing each attribute have been mapped in the field as members, but their boundaries are gradational, interpenetrating, and poorly exposed. The boundaries between unit I and adjacent units that exhibit very different suites of attributes are sharp. So in the office, information re- garding A, B, and C is not transferred to the master sheet; unit I is generalized typologically and defined as having attribute D that comprises A, B, and C. Now comes a user who is intensely interested in at- tribute B; he learns that D includes A, B, and C and that unit I exhibits D. In the absence of further in- formation, he selects unit I as having attribute B and must assume that all parts of I are alike. An accompanying text may alert him to inhomogeneity within I, but it can never supply the specific spatial information that was lost when the lines demarking A, B, and C were erased. For example, the Pierre Shale does not every- where, laterally and in section, consist of shale. If, for interpretation regarding general engineering use, we ascribe the attribute “consists of shale” to all materials lying between established boundaries of Pierre Shale, we have then degeneralized that attri- bute. Such degeneralization may be acceptable for definition of a stratigraphic unit. It is easy to see, though, that degeneralization for certain purposes may not be acceptable, even regarding a lithologic attribute that forms part of a rock-unit name. Consider now map units defined by “Natural land- scapes with a characteristic pattern of rock, land form, soil, and vegetation, which is mappable from aerial photographs at the map scale used” (Haant— jens, 1970, p. 7). Such “integrated” units are the object of applied geographical and geological map- ping going on in many parts of the world. The par- ticular example reported on by'Haantjens concerns an area in New Guinea in which 39 land systems were recognized and described in terms of their re- lief, form, lithology, soils, vegetation, and agricul- tural capability, and a map of these land systems was prepared at 1 :250,000. The point of interest is that from the land-system classification four small- scale maps were derived, which show lithology, rug- gedness and maximum relief, associations of major soil groups, and agricultural land-use capability. The lithologic map, published at 1 :500,000, has 10 units formed by grouping land systems. Some boundaries were removed, of course, but no new ones were added, and the ones that remain appear to have been reduced photographically. The resulting lithologic units appear now to be more heterogeneous, with respect to variety of rock types, than the original land systems. Perhaps the lithologic map serves some particular purpose, but this is not clear. In any event, the procedure is interesting in that a lithologic map is derived from a more general map, rather than the other way around. Cartographical degeneralization ——the restoration of cartographic detail that has been removed—is, of course, an impossible procedure without reference to original data. 32 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS MAP UNITS BASED ON RELATIONS The units in many maps are defined not only by their inherent characteristics but also by their rela- tions with other map units or components of map units. The relations expressed may, for example, be genetic, spatial, logical, ordinal with respect to some measure, geometric, temporal, sequential, or combi- nations of such relations. Most geologic map units are defined by essential attributes that are spatial, usually also sequential, and commonly genetic. Ex- amples in the following sections show map units that are in part determined by the structure of the classi- fication system, which, in turn, is designed primarily to display relations between map units or their com- ponents. NESTED CATEGORIES A nested classification structure is illustrated in maps by Pokorny and Tyczynska (1963). Figure 1 of the Pokorny—Tyczynska paper (geomorphological map) and figure 2 (geomorphological evaluation map) are here reproduced as figure 26. Note that the geomorphological evaluation map was constructed using a classification system having a nested struc- ture; that is, map category IV is necessarily a sub- set of III, and III, a subset of II. The logical structure can be shown by a Venn diagram (fig. 27A) or, perhaps more clearly, by an Euler diagram (fig. 273). Such a system would appear valid if only one criterion, say slope, were involved, and the suc- cessively smaller circles represented areas of steeper and steeper slope; but tables in the text that describe the units in more detail show that slope is not the only criterion. A nested map-logic diagram requires actual spatial coincidence between the areas of attri- butes causing unsuitability: areas of IV must every— where have the unfavorable attributes of III plus others, and areas of III, the unfavorable attributes of II plus others. Perhaps this coincidence does in fact occur, but these implications are not discussed in the paper. Similar remarks are applicable to a map prepared by E. Jofica (Klimaszewski, 1960, map V). Plate 20, from the explanation of a map published in 1971 by the Comisién de Estudios del Terri- torio Nacional (CETENAL) of Mexico, illustrates nested categories of potential use of soils. The col- ored matrix clearly indicates that lands in class I are suitable for all categories of use from wildlife to very intense agriculture. Similarly, lands in the other Roman numeral classes can be used for all pur- poses to and including the farthest right colored col- umn in each row. Perhaps this nested classification works logically in many or most areas; but it would require that, in an as-yet—undeveloped area, class I land would be potentially suitable for wildlife and forestry and grazing and intense agriculture. Might not some lands be suitable for intense agriculture but not suitable for forestry or for wildlife? Are lands in classes I through VII always good for for- estry or wildlife no matter what the character of the soil? In other words, are the attributes that deter- mine the suitability for diverse uses spatially co- variant? VERTICAL RELATIONS One of the most difficult problems of engineering geologic cartography is to show, on a plan map, the spatial relationships among a succession of near-sur- face stratigraphic or lithologic units. Commonly these units thin and thicken within short distances, interfinger, or are cut out by erosion surfaces. Such relations can easily be shown by sections, block dia- grams, or fence diagrams. But to show in an areal plan the presence of several geologic units in proper sequence and also to indicate their lithology and some of their engineering characteristics requires not only detailed investigation but also thoughtful map construction. A simple method for showing that one unit rests on another is to print a pattern or halftone color representing the upper unit over the pattern or color for the lower unit. When done carefully, this way of adding maps works well for showing one unit over a variety of underlying materials, but only if the user can tell which pattern goes with the top unit. More complicated sequences can be represented by uncovered, striped, or unitized maps. Uncovered maps are constructed to show the traces of contacts as they would appear on surfaces other than ground surface of the earth. These maps are of three types, depending on whether the surface of portrayal is (1) at a constant altitude relative to a base station (“leve1” map), (2) at a constant depth below the ground surface (specific-depth map), or (3) at a geologic horizon. Striped maps indicate underlying material by thin stripes of color or pattern that in- terrupt the color or pattern of the overlying mate- rial. Unitized maps use a specific color or pattern to indicate a particular succession of layers; thus, the pattern or color shown on the map is not determined solely by the outcropping formation. Vertical rela- tions are also shown or can be inferred from contour maps that show, in plan, points at a constant depth below ground surface (or constant altitude above or below a datum) which lie on one or more surfaces of geologic interest, such as the tops of oil-bearing zones. Each method has advantages for certain pur- poses, and each also has its problems; some of these 33 MAP UNITS BASED ON RELATIONS .2305“? v33: 5 4:3 Ewumzm coswofiwwflo a mm: 92: :23396 «53.86 BE AN .H .mwc £me «Amczuomfi ES >98on 88% .ucflom 5033 33ng .92: cocking Eomwflosmpofioow .m E3 :55 Romwouosmuofiomw .Vldm 552m £5093 :052530 was :ofioaaucoo 658 $5339 330: US .32: 353 I B 332:3 mono—u uo savages 52.552: 05 ac 5593:. on. 5 552.328 use on: 9:33.— 35°: 9:an war—cu I. a 3:53 9:315 0250: wan—«E 2.58 I an “:22323 vac cog—dogs was $5330 025: new 033:; bane-ham "Er—cu I H 32: =ofia=~a>o fluofiflonnuofiovm can. Q 73””. as . . . _—. . due: m1: do cox 1.52.: :89 we: was 3907. «o :oumczofi 95 adamant $2: «:03 norm .mnwm 3335‘ I ma ”$02.5“ .53.“ ”—332 was | NH ”nuance“ 026652 E ”93:97 oxnlnmnoua I S ”:EOENB: I rbuzurflz I a ”3:38 I p ”wwwn .83.— I a ”mow—um 3:283 I n ”madam dam mono“: go I n w “mnaom Ufla mono“: MESA I « 5:553 oiTwEouIn ”new -3.— kunaou 650.5 I a 2.53253 «0 mourn—m I H 03 ”mag 33on nonaofiomvw Bi. V .II ,5. no 34 problems are mentioned in the following discussion of uncovered, striped, and unitized maps. m Empty sets FIGURE 27. —A, Venn diagram, and B, Euler diagram show- ing classification of geomorphological evaluation map units I through IV in Pokorny and Tyczynska (1963, fig. 2). H, R, and C represent house building, road construction, and cultivation, respectively; s and u denote suitable and unsuitable, respectively, for the three purposes. Nested structure requires that all areas unsuitable for cultivation be also unsuitable for road and house construction. THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS UNCOVERED Constant-altitude maps probably are most com- monly prepared at large scales as a part of investi- gations of sites for major engineering works. Specific-depth maps are exemplified by parts of the geologic map of Warsaw, Poland (Stamatello, 1965) ; one part is reproduced here as figure 28. Such maps show very well the particular lithology or other at- tributes at a place and at a certain depth, or the areal distribution of several lithologies or attributes at this certain depth. If the depth is one commonly of interest for foundations, say 2 m, such a map can be useful in land-use planning. Specific-depth maps are not easily used, however, for determining the sequence of materials at a point, unless each in a series of maps for various depths is on a transparent base and can be superposed in proper order; nor can specific-depth maps be easily used to gain a mental picture of the three-dimensional geometry of a unit whose borders cut at a low angle across the surfaces portrayed by the maps. ugooa¢ocuoo coo-0000.0: .00....- oonaoo.-..o 0.0.0....- -.-.u-o-.¢ 0-0.- c\\ l D \ £- . ..\\ \ f\‘ c = ‘ t .' n..E:s. - 32 E. a - o'Ir—h , , m - - 7/ ‘11:: II... \ \\ ‘\ II: x O. .0. c \\ :: ‘\ .. /_ H I: I: / \Q .. .. 0. E .. ..l .- cL I\./ .0 II FIGURE 28. — Part of the geologic map of Warsaw, Poland, showing geologic units at a depth of 2 m. A, varved clay; B, morainic loam; C, fill; D, gravel; E, sand; F, clay, Pliocene. From Stamatello (1965, fig. 1). MAP UNITS BASED ON RELATIONS 35 Of the maps depicting contacts at a geologic hori- zon, perhaps the most common is the type of geo— logic map that shows bedrock contacts as they would appear if the surficial deposits and weathering prod- ucts were removed. STRIPED The stripe method appears to have been first used in Czechoslovakia by Zebera in 1947 (Pasek, 1968), and it has come into increasingly wide use in Europe (Bachmann and others, 1967; Reuter, 1968; Bur. Rech. Geol. Min., 1969; Matula, 1969, map of Zvolen; Sanejouand, 1972). Patterns, stripes, and shades of color can be used to show lithology, thickness, and sequence of several bedrock and surficial geologic units (pls. 2D, E, and F). The method is well suited for showing the attributes at a point and the varia- tion of attributes with depth; it can also show with some success the extent of both subsurface and sur- face units and thus exhibit the area of an attribute. It is well suited to showing intricate relationships or multiple attributes of small areas. UNITIZED Unitized maps use a particular color or pattern to represent a succession of two or more units rather than just the surface unit. This method has been rather commonly employed, particularly for the map- ping of agronomic soil series in which the units are defined by a particular succession of materials, a soil profile. The terrain units in the Australian eval- uation system for engineering (Grant, 1968a, b) generally involve, in addition to slope, vegetation, and other factors, a particular succession of sur— ficial materials over bedrock. Some map units in the engineering geological zonation map of the Zvolen Basin (Matula, 1969) contain as essential parts of their definitions the stipulation that particular ma- terials lie on others. On the engineering geologic map of the Creve Coeur quadrangle, Missouri (Rock- away and Lutzen, 1970), several map units are defined as a particular sequence of loess over a par- ticular kind of bedrock (pl. 3). A matrix that shows in somewhat simplified man- ner the definition of the units on the Creve Coeur map is shown in figure 29. Most of the units are re- lational, for they are defined as being alluvium or loess over cyclic deposits or over limestone. The type of display in figure 29 makes it possible to ex- amine the classification structure and to raise some questions that are discussed below by numbers keyed to entries in the matrix. UNITS DEFINED BY RELATIONS ALLUVIUM LOESS COVER\ 5““.0‘33” Thick . . None h‘Sh, Missouri Thln Thick organic . . Missouri River Thm Terrace Locus- BEDROC K River flood mne Swell- | flood plain plain ”(3) “‘3 CYCLIC lc Id [2 X!) Xc Xe Sleep 11d Ild u: 5 . l (4) E Karstic h; "c 11:? E .1 Other It I d u b (2) 11: UNITS NOT DEFINED BY RELATIONS UNEXPRESSED In I!) FIGURE 29. — Matrix showing definition of units on the engi- neering geologic map of the Creve Coeur quadrangle, Mis- souri (Rockaway and Lutzen, 1970). The parenthetically numbered positions are discussed in the present text. 1. Areas of thin loess are divided into several units, depending on the underlying material, but areas of thin alluvium (and terrace alluvium) are not divided according to underlying material. Also, unit Ic is in contact locally with He; that is, areas of thin loess covering karstic bedrock are adjacent to areas covered by thin alluvium where there is no indication of possible solution activity in the bedrock. Does alluviation ob- scure karst topography or does it fill in karst and remove some of the possible hazard? 2. Swelling clay is shown as occurring only in loess that lies on cyclic deposits, not in loess of the same age on carbonate rocks. Is this coinci- dence, or is there a geologic-genetic reason? 3. Unit Ie (lake deposit) is overlain by loess, ac- cording to table 1 of their report. Here the matrix does not work. 4. Unit 11a is in some places in contact with unit IIc. Are there no karstic areas under thick loess, are they unobservable, or do they present no engineering geologic problem? Because some of the Creve Coeur map units are two story (or three story), the tabular text descrip- tion of their engineering behavior and limitations encounters some difficulty; that part of a complex unit to which a statement refers must be identified, or the statement must be qualified in some way. This 36 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS raises the question of how one can describe both the engineering properties and the spatial distribution of a buried material thathas been generalized into a more inclusive map unit. Showing vertical relations in plan view has, in geological mapping, attained its most complex devel- opment in the profile-legend map. This type of map was developed by the Netherlands Geological Survey (Hageman, 1963; Thiadens, 1970) to serve the par- ticular need in Holland for showing the great variety of relationships among the Holocene and Pleistocene deposits. Because each color, supplemented where necessary with patterns, represents a particular suc- cession of as many as five deposits, as well as the interfingering and erosional relations between them, such a map carries a tremendous load of informa- tion. The examples I have seen (Hageman, 1962; Rummelen, 1965) show impressively detailed cartog- raphy of buried surficial units. Profile-legend maps raise questions, however, in spatial logic that are shortly to be discussed herein. Deposits related to the Holocene marine trans- gression in Holland have three main components, which are, from top down: Dunkirk deposits (marine), Holland deposits (peat), and Calais deposits (marine). Holland deposits can interfinger with Dunkirk or Calais deposits, or both, but Dunkirk and Calais are separated by an unconformity and cannot interfin- ger. Thus, allowing omission of a deposit and assum— ing no interfingering, there are seven basic ways the deposits can occur in sequence; interfingering pro- duces additional combinations (fig. 30). The possible combinations in a real map area are shown 'below the plan map by a schematic profile (pl. 2G), which shows the succession signified by each map unit. De- tails of the profile-legend method, including exam- ples in color with the full suite of patterns and symbols, are given in a leaflet (in Dutch) that ac- companies this map and text by Rummelen (1965). The profile-legend method is apparently still being experimented with and improved, so any critical remarks at this stage may be inappropriate. Never- theless, the method is clearly an important innova- tion that deserves study and analysis; hence, the following comments are offered, more or less within the subject of spatial logic. First, the map by Rummelen (1965) illustrates very concretely a common difliculty in the handling of complex spatial information, namely, that the des- ignation used for a sum or combination of attributes often cannot be formed by the sum or combination of the individual designations for those attributes. For example, if attributes A, B, C, and D are indi- cated on a map by colors, patterns, or symbols of respective types a, b, c, and (1, then it would seem “logical” to indicate A+B by a+b and so forth (Golledge and Amadeo, 1966). Obviously, such sum- mation can lead to intolerable clutter where more than a few combinations are possible. Moreover, if certain colors or patterns are added, the resulting visual impression may not be at all to the effect that a+b represents A+B. The Dutch maps are a delib- erate effort to increase the information capacity of a map system by setting a single designation (color plus symbol) to indicate the combined presence of three or more units in a particular geometric rela- tionship. Second, in the profile-legend system the attributes concerning identity become subordinate to those con- cerning geometric relationships. Thus, where Dun- kirk II deposits are at the surface, the map color may be dark tan (unit 33, DPO.2), light green (unit 4, D02), or olive brown (unit 11, Fo.2), depending on the subjacent materials. Also, minor variations in units at depth may result in a change in classifica- tion that produces strong visual contrast on the map. For example, a minor variation in the thickness of Calais, from slightly less than 1 m to slightly more than 1 m, as it occurs between peat lenses at consid- erable depth, results in major reclassification and striking changes in colors, patterns, and symbols, as for example from unit 16 to unit 23 or from unit 17 to unit 22. Whether these properties of the Dutch maps are detrimental depends on the use to which the maps are put. In general, the maps appear to show well the attributes at any selected point or small area, but they may show poorly the area of an attribute or the areal extent of units exposed at the surface. VALUE RELATIONS A type of map that has come into increasing use comprises units whose only essential attributeis the ordinal position each occupies in a scale that mea- sures value, limitations, or difliculty. Typical among such maps are “stoplight” maps, which use red, yel- low, and green to show various degrees of suitability of the land for a particular purpose. Some of the McHenry County maps (Hackett and McComas, 1969) illustrated previously are examples of the type. The essential attribute of the unit— in effect its name— is the value judgment expressed by the colors and by the symbols R, Y, G; but this nomina- tion is supplemented by much other information about accessory physical attributes pertinent to the use involved. COMMENTS ON CARTOGRAPHY 37 LAGUNAL~ ESTUARINE II I! B type PEAT PROFILES ALONG THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE HOLOCENE BASlN II II F type l'Gutype Fo FI Go GI FIGURE 30.—Types of sedimentary units in the profile-legend type of map developed by the Netherlands Geological Survey. From Hageman (1963, fig. 7). The fundamental type, A0, consists of Calais de-_ posits overlain by Holland deposits overlain by Dunkirk deposits. Other types show various combina- tions of the deposits, and subtypes depict interfingering. COMMENTS ON CARTOGRAPHY The act of mapping is always basically the same, drawing lines around homogeneous areal units; but the role of a map in transmitting information from maker to user has many aspects, of which only a few are mentioned here. As Bowman (1968) has so clearly shown, graphic language has vocabulary, grammar, phrasing, structure, emphasis, meaning, and many of the other qualities of written language. And, in common with written or spoken language, the effectiveness of a map to transmit a concept from mind to mind depends not only on what it says but, equally, on how it says it. VISUAL EMPHASIS Visual emphasis logically should be placed on those elements of a map that are most important to the concept being presented. This may not be feasible for some purpose if colors, patterns, symbols, or other identifications of geologic units are based on a standard code derived from other real needs and logical justifications. But maps derived from basic 38 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS geologic data and directed toward one or a few spe- cific engineering geological needs more often have freedom to emphasize any selected feature. As the intent of the map to satisfy more needs broadens, however, so may the visual emphasis become either diffuse or even misdirected. From this point of view, the visual emphasis of the Creve Coeur map (pl. 3), which is an engineering geological map of intended broad usefulness, seems placed on the underlying bedrock rather than on the ubiquitous and thick blanket of loess. This emphasis seems intentional, yet the engineering characteristics, properties, and problems associated with loess units such as IIb and Xb where bedrock is not encountered are (and are stated to be) very similar; the visual emphasis pro- duced by contrasting colors of the map might, how- ever, lead one to expect considerable difference. Similar difficulties appear on the soil map of Jef- ferson County, Wis. (Milfred and Hole, 1970), if one wishes to use it for a synoptic view of land capa- bility or engineering characteristics of the units. Two units comprising soils with very different use limitations are of nearly the same color; some soils with similar properties, at least in the upper 3 or 4 feet, are shown in contrasting colors. The latter cir- cumstance arises because units were differentiated, as at Creve Coeur, on the basis of the material lying beneath a blanket of loess. RANK OF CONTACT Classifications of geologic or soil units for practi- cal purposes commonly make use of specified ranges of continuous variables such as depth, thickness, or slope. Where abrupt changes occur, the values of such continuous variables may differ across a con- tact by more than one step in the classification sys- tem; that is, one or more steps in the range may be skipped. Figures 31 and 32, from Haans and Wester- veld (1970), illustrate such contacts. It seems reasonable to suppose that a contact across which continuous variables change by more than one step may be more significant for a given purpose, or significant to more purposes, than a con- tact which simply marks a change of only one step in the range of a particular variable. Where continu- ous variables do not vary continuously something geologically important may be indicated; contacts marking abrupt breaks in variation of a character- istic carry more information, perhaps evidence of unconformity or faulting. This suggests possible usefulness of a concept of rank among contacts, de- pending upon how many classification-range steps or categories a contact represents, as shown in figure 33. Thus, the area ICV in the center of figure 31 is bounded by a contact of rank 3, as it represents a change in thickness of peat from <40 cm to >40 cm (1 step) and in depth of sand from 40—80 cm to >120 cm (2 steps, skipping the class 80—120 cm). SUGGESTED WAYS TO IMPROVE ENGINEERING GEOLOGICAL MAPPING Geologists must carry their facts and inferences far enough along the road toward satisfaction of human needs that ( 1) problems of the user and his necessity for decision are recognized and (2) ele— ments of geologic knowledge required for decision among alternative courses of action are presented in forms ready for use. Generally, however, when geo- logic information is essential to decision, the decision itself must rest with others, with individuals or groups, who must weigh other criteria as well in seeking a solution to human problems. Engineering geology is one of the principal fields of geologic science that directly affects large num- bers of people and what they do. Therefore, it should inevitably and properly become rather deeply in- volved in the legislative, judicial, and executive pro- cesses by which people govern and are governed. What we need to remember is that these processes may have little similarity with the processes by which - we, as geologists supposedly using the “scientific method,” obtain, evaluate, interpret, and present in- formation. In particular, as Cowan (1963) put it, “The scientist generalizes; the lawyer individuates.” The engineering-geologist scientist is concerned with what general statements are tolerably valid relating to the engineering significance of geologic features. According to lawyer Cowan (1963), Litigation aims to individuate, and the judicial process is most at home when it disposes of a unique conflict situation uniquely. * * * The law is primarily interested in feelings —for example, feelings of justice: the right disposition of the dispute; the best ordering of human relations so as to attain a minimum amount of pain, suffering, loss; and the optimal procedures for attaining these results. And I believe that the law will warp and twist the facts, sometimes in an apparently shame- less manner, if necessary, to obtain what it thinks of as the just result. One can see immediately the potential for a com- munications gap between our science and the law and between us as individuals and the people who make, interpret, and enforce that law. There are several means by which engineering geological map- ping can be improved to help close that gap—for example, change the possible products and their con- tents, use new techniques for investigation, or create organizational frameworks within which people can SUGGESTED WAYS TO IMPROVE ENGINEERING GEOLOGICAL MAPPING 39 O 0.1 0.5 km Mapping units Thickness o! peat Depth 01 sand Mapping units Thickness 0' peal Depth 0' sand above 120 cm below surlace below surface above 120 cm below surface below surface Bog soils cm cm M13 >40 <30 WM 28. 23v >40 80-120 mm 38, 38v >40 _ >120 Halt Bog soils (sand soils with pealy topsoil) V V 40 < 80 Clay soils cm cm E: 1c. 1Cv <40 40-30 E 2c <40 80-120 E SC (40 >120 E 40. 4c», >40 30-120 7 SC. SCv > 40 >120 FIGURE 31.—Soil map of an area with peat and sand at various depths. From Haans and Westerveld (1970, fig. 10A). Some of the contacts on the map in the original paper represent concurrent changes in both defining criteria (thickness of peat above 120-cm depth, and depth of sand); these contacts are indicated here by heavy dots. Contacts at which a single criterion has changed by more than one step are here indicated by a heavy solid line. do the job better. But I prefer to focus on mental processes and to consider just a few of the means under four modes of thought. These are: be con- cerned in a manner that guides effective action; be clear in transmitting both facts and inferences so that the user receives the true impression of reality that he requires; be critical in evaluating in an ana- lytic rather than a fault-finding sense so that we, and our audience, can judge what is being done and what it means; be creative in a constructive manner 40 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS Thickness of peat layer, in centimeters m < 20 W 40-60 E 2°"° [[flflflflflflfl 60-30 Jul" \ \ — '\ \\\/ \\ W 80-120 - 120-160 §\\ 1 “Mullah - 160-200 FIGURE 32.— Peat map of the area shown in figure 31, showing thickness of peat layers in 7 classes. Boundaries were partly derived from the soil map; in addi- tion, results of deeper augerings were used. From Haans and Westerveld (1970, fig. 108) , Arrows indicate line contacts or points at which one class (single arrow) or two classes (double arrow) of thickness have been skipped; such places may indicate buried channel walls. Four areas within the 40- to 60-cm class appear to conflict logically with the definitions given for the classes in figure 31; these are marked by a dot overprint. and look for new ways to acquire and portray infor- mation of value. CONCERN . Continued development of our society will inevita- bly require more environmental geological surveys, on more areas, over a wider range of materials, with greater variety of subjects, and to a higher degree of reliability, accuracy, and detail. The location of such surveys, their scale, and their content must change as swiftly as do the spatial patterns of peo- ple, their needs from the environment, and their effects upon it. Hence, programs for making inter- mediate and small-scale engineering geological sur- veys, within the larger system of environmental studies, must incorporate the following: 1. Ability to identify, sense, measure, and map attri- butes that relate to real human needs. 1 2. Promptness of response. 3. Ability to change direction and focus. 4. Ability, in both knowledge and techniques, to de- termine the directions and rates of significant changes in: SUGGESTED WAYS TO IMPROVE ENGINEERING GEOLOGICAL MAPPING 41 CLASSIFICATION CRITERION A a b Step c d \.\ \ FIGURE 33. — Rank of contacts between map units defined by two criteria, each of which has a continuous range that has been divided into steps. Contact between unit 1a and 1b has a rank of 1, between 1a and 2b a rank of 2, and so on. Step to / / \ CLASSIFICATION CRITERION I A. human population and its requirements, B. effect of geologic conditions and processes on people, and C. effect of people on geologic environment and processes. The need for varied engineering geological studies is greater now than can be met by available com- petent people. Furthermore, the patterns of need shift faster, and the requirements increase more rapidly, than our capability—private and public, individual and corporate—can handle. Every new highway, bridge, or tunnel that significantly alters the traveltime contours around an urban center leads to progressive need for engineering geologic infor- mation that arises and becomes acute faster than the needs can be recognized and satisfied. Accordingly, we should be deeply concerned with devising ways and means to order priorities, to do the most important tasks promptly, if not wholly to our satis- faction, and to improve all elements of our communi- cation system, from the training of people that use and operate it to the identification of our user and his problems. To a considerable degree our concern must be on the future, so we must direct our course to become equal to the “present” needs of a distant day. This will require increased awareness of the changes likely to occur in our stack of data matrices (fig. 4) as we proceed along the longitudinal or time, axis. Our studies must show not only how things now are but increasingly what they will become and how fast. This is possible only as we understand the states of dynamic equilibria and hair-trigger relations that obtain not only among natural physical processes but also among social and economic processes affect- ing those who can make use of our work. CLARITY If one speaks or writes clearly he is unlikely to be misinterpreted; vagueness, ambiguity, illogic, bias, ignorance, and many other impediments to under- standing cannot bear the light that shines through clear language. We engineering geologists are admonished nowa- days to speak the engineer’s language, to put maps in a form that planners or even the layman can un- derstand, and to quantify our statements. This is very good, very necessary. But let us also realize that users of our maps may understand us too well; they may see that we extrapolate without giving the odds, that we sometimes map one thing and say it is an- other without presenting evidence for covariance; and they may be more aware than we that statistical analyses of test results cannot alone serve as reliable measures of in—place heterogeneity. In preparing maps, particularly those derived from other maps, we need to spend much more effort on our words if we expect them to match the accuracy of our lines. The presentation of quantitative information often is helpful in our effort to gain and hold the attention of engineers, planners, legislative bodies, and other users. But even more important is the need to think and write straightforwardly, logically, and honestly — in a word, clearly. This is more than helpful: it is absolutely essential. Although most of our serious problems are with words, we also have problems with graphics. We have, for example, not progressed as far as we might in developing cartographic means for expressing un- certainty, in both kind and degree. The problems of accuracy, reproducibility, and reliability of geologic maps have been discussed from time to time (Kup- fer, 1966; Harrison, 1963; Hageman, 1968), but these problems have not been given nearly the atten- tion they deserve. Because dashing a line can be a very time consuming and expensive operation in mapmaking, we have reasoned that the purpose of such graphic aids can be attained less expensively by remarks, in words only, concerning the accuracy, precision, and meaning of solid lines. Perhaps conveyance of uncertainty by words alone is adequate for some purposes in general geol- ogy. But for four reasons I believe continued consid- eration should be given, in engineering geologic mapping, to expressing by graphics as well as words more, rather than fewer, types and degrees of un- certainty. These reasons are: 42 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS 1. Well-designed graphics yield more efficient trans- mittal of spatial information than do words. 2. Users of engineering geologic maps are generally more interested than other users of geologic data in the accuracy of both attribute-at-a- point and area-of-an-attribute information and in the homogeneity of map units. 3. Being usually outside the science of the map- maker, the user of engineering geological maps has no way to assess the qualifications and doubts that attend the lines around the map units unless he is shown and told. Matters of probability that we geologists believe we com- prehend almost instinctively need explication in both written and graphic language. Other- wise, the user may receive a false impression either of unwarranted security or of unwar- ranted doubt. 4. Adherence to a philosophy of “conservatism,” such as that advocated by Wentworth, Ziony, and Buchanan (1970) , in practice requires hav- ing a variety of means for showing uncertainty. They very properly suggested that For engineering purposes, it is desirable to be alerted to possible geologic problems so that their presence or absence can be investigated and satisfactorily estab— lished, and so that appropriate modifications of plans can be made in advance of detailed design and construc- tion. [This] map has been prepared with the conservative philosophy that portrayal of questionable geologic fea- tures which could adversely affect an engineering struc- ture will lead to their investigation, whereas omission of such features might lead to the inference that no problems exist. To this end, information has been in- cluded on the map even if it seemed questionable or could not be verified, as long as it had some basis and was reasonable. Individual faults, and connections be- tween faults, have been shown where reasonable, even though conclusive evidence for their existence may be lacking. * * * The inclusion of questionable geologic information, in part resulting from a standard of conservatism differ- ent from that normally used in preparation of geologic maps, requires that the map user consult the reliability diagram and that he be aware of the fault symbology used, in order to distinguish the more certain from the less certain information on the map. Clarity in maps requires unimpeded transmission of unequivocal meaning through use of all the tools of language, symbols, and graphic portrayal. To a considerable degree clarity can be improved through standardization — by having the meaning of a word, a map symbol, or a common pattern fixed, at least as used within the context of engineering geological or related maps. Thus, one of the first acts of newly formed organizations in all disciplines, including engineering geology, is to appoint a committee or group to work on nomenclature and unification of aims and products. This need for standardization is fundamental and, I believe, now urgent. As com- puter technology becomes increasingly employed in geologic science and operated by specialized person- nel, we may find that if the practicing field profes- sional fails to define both his words and the concepts they represent, then they may, through necessity, be defined by people whose principal business is the processing of data. The words that need definition are not limited, of course, to those peculiar to our technical field; we must use common words, such as firm, weak, well, poorly, good, and closely, for spe- cial purposes and attach to them meanings that are generally more restricted but rarely standard in our employ. One notes with delight the way Briggs (1971) defined just such common words for the pur- pose of his map and engineering geological classifi- cation. Standardization is welcome when it helps to make communication easy within a system whose basic elements, arrangements, and operations are well along toward being established. Standardization is, however, not desirable when it prevents, hinders, or delays the creation and critical evaluation of new systems that may have distinct advantage over those in use. A kind of standardization that is desirable, and that seems certain to increase, is the use of symbols as tools of communication. As Betz (1963, p. 196) pointed out, symbols have the obvious advantages of precise and unequivocal meaning, ease of handling, independence from words, economy of space, and potential to express not only the description and classification of objects but also the relationships between them. Hubaux (1972), though urging stan- dardization, very rightly indicated that standardiza- tion must be preceded by disentanglement of complex geologic concepts, particularly genesis, from the de- scriptions of the essential characteristics of geologic objects. CRITICAL EVALUATION A map has great power to persuade, a power that was discussed by Boggs (1947) under the apt term “cartohypnosis.” Certainly many users have a strong tendency to accept a map simply because they cannot question it very deeply without direct knowledge of the area and because they naturally tend to believe that some information is better than none. The only way a user can appraise the reliability of some maps is to test internal consistency. So we mapmakers . SUGGESTED WAYS TO IMPROVE ENGINEERING GEOLOGICAL MAPPING 43 need to be self-critical and to devise means to evalu- ate not only the land but also our portrayals of the land. Nobody else can do this. We should not evaluate a map without carefully considering its purpose. We tend to make value judg- ments without a clear understanding that evaluations cannot be made by examination of the properties of the object alone, be the object a parcel of land or an engineering geological map. As emphasized by Lopa- tina and others (1971), evaluation consists of an operation performed on a relationship. This relation- ship exists between a specific object and a specific subject and is examined according to criteria deter- mined by an expressed purpose. In evaluating land, the object might be a spatial unit with relatively homogeneous properties, and the subject, a particular person, group of people, or sec- tor of society. For example, the evaluation of a geo- logic unit for septic sewage disposal—using such terms as good, favorable, questionable, or unfavor- able—has to be made with a subject, or user, in mind, whether this user is actually named or not. The evaluation performed on a medium- to small- scale map will have considerably different accuracy, significance, and reliability if the subject is an indi- vidual lot owner, who either can or cannot use his small parcel of ground for this purpose (which in- volves attributes of a small area), than if the subject is a county planner or a developer of a large tract, who may be able to tolerate considerable inhomoge- neity of the land in deciding on general courses of action (which involves areas of an attribute). This facet of evaluation is recognized in the warning statements, common in texts accompanying small- scale value-judgment maps, that these maps should be used only for general planning purposes, not for evaluation of the properties of a small site. Never- theless, such disclaimers may be found close to state- ments that the map should be useful to individual homeowners and that it should help to “pinpoint” types of problems. The area represented by a geologic map may con- tain many potential objects. One of the principal purposes of preparing a series of interpretive maps from basic geologic data is to reduce the number of potential objects by having each map depict selected data pertinent to a specific purpose in order that evaluation within an object—subject pair can occur without extraneous interferences. But unless the map is prepared by a consultant for a specific client, identification of the eventual subject, or user, re- mains in doubt, and the words used to express evalua- tion will always have different meanings to different potential users. Consequently, mapmakers, such as governmental agencies, who prepare maps for the general public have a particular obligation to use care in the wording on their maps. Criteria for evaluating a map must closely relate to the power of the map to transmit information, to alter the subject’s prior assessment of probabilities concerning possible states of the object. If, before studying a map, the user regards all possible states at all locations as being equally probable, then he is highly uncertain about decisions that require choice. His mental entropy is very high. The truly useful map is one that provides him with the information necessary to guide his choices. A map user seldom applies a single criterion when he evaluates a map in terms of his problems. For in- stance, the suitability of a gravel terrace for exploi- tation as a source of construction materials depends ultimately not only on a number of basic geologic attributes but also on spatial and economic factors. Moreover, the basic geologic attributes may need to be used for other kinds of evaluations of the same area. Thus, grain size and grain-size distribution will be factors in many potential performance-use—behavior evaluations. But the weight that should be assigned to such properties almost always depends on the use to be made of the map. Slope, for example, is less critical in the choice of road alinements than in the siting of canals. Here again, the maker of derivative maps for public use may not have applied all the criteria for evaluation that would have been applied by a specific user. Consequently, clear statements on exactly how the map was derived are essential to aid the potential user and to avoid misleading him. CREATIVITY The stress placed on logical analysis in this dis- cussion has perhaps obscured a parallel need for creative, constructive, innovative thought. Such thought does not in itself conflict with logic, but it can be impaired by standardization of methods no matter how logical the standardization appears to be. Innovative thought seeks to break from prior ex- perience and gain insight, as often by forming new associations among familiar materials in nonstan- dard ways as by acquiring new data. We must prize the ability to recognize and use new relations among elements of knowledge, to form classifications that in the words of Wadell (1938) are not only broad and close but also so flexible and elastic that they can serve effectively to organize the novel or strange. This human attribute is essen- tial to cope with a future whose only certain charac- ter is accelerating change. 44 THE LOGIC 0F GEOLOGICAL MAPS The scope of constructive creativity, that is, the number of possible associations among elements of knowledge, grows very rapidly both with increase in the number of such elements and with their capacity to enter into a variety of associations, that is, with their fundamentality. Hence, if generalized data are perceptively dissected into their fundamental com- ponents or attributes and if the spatial distribution of these attributes can be shown, then the possible number of useful synthetic regroupings into deriva- tive maps is greatly enlarged. The qualifier “percep- tively” must be emphasized because as the number of possible groupings increases, so also does the mental effort needed to examine, compare, and eval- uate them; therefore, perceptive focus on potential value is needed. Maps that present judgments as to whether a unit is good or poor for a particular use certainly are subject to possible rapid obsolescence as patterns of land use change and as technology advances. Such maps are useful; but because they may be short lived, we need to find ways to remake or alter them with relatively little effort. This requires having data on fundamental attributes in a form that can be processed rapidly and cheaply by such operations as generalization, selection, addition, superposition, and transformation to create new kinds of map units as needed. The appropriate means for perceiving, acquiring data on, or measuring attributes can be shown in an d array such as figure 34. Photographic and other re- mote-sensing devices give present means and future promise for acquiring some types of useful engineer- ing geologic information. Computers increasingly can be used for processing, storage, retrieval, filter- ATTRIBUTE al a2 a3 a, a5 a6 a., a, m, X X "‘2 X X m; X x "‘4 X X "‘5 X X m6 X METHOD FOR PERCEPTION, AQUISITION, OR MEASUREMENT FIGURE 34.— Matrix indicating appropriate methods to per— ceive, acquire data on, or measure attributes. ing, regrouping, and cartographic display of many kinds of data (Tanguay, 1969; Smedes and others, 1970). It seems inevitable that much spatial-typo- logical information ultimately will be stored in its most flexible form—in mechanical, electronic, or optical memory— and that grouping and printing out maps of desired options can be performed at will. The making of an optional map may involve super- position to show every recorded attribute of a small area, or it may involve selection to show those areas that exhibit a combination of attributes newly re- quired but never before imagined. If individual fundamental attributes rather than generalized regions of grouped attributes are mapped, an inexperienced user may require a weighted attribute-use matrix to evaluate such maps for his needs. This matrix could most simply consist of an array (fig. 35) that shows what attributes are involved for each use and how important they are. For example, weights, or “coefficients of signifi- cance,” were assigned by Nazarevskiy (1971) to various components of the environment for evalua- tion of areas for particular aspects of human living. Only if the spatial distribution of each fundamen- tal attribute is shown separately can the user assign weights to each attribute, outline the areal distribu- tion of the most favorable combinations, or form regions or new units as determined by the maximum sum of weighted values for the particular use. We need to construct use-attribute matrices for a variety of purposes, seeking always to identify those attributes that are widely applicable. The attributes ATTRIBUTES al a2 a3 a, a5 a6 a7 as 0: P; W11 W12 W13 9 > < uIJ P1 W21 W22 W23 - - m I 0‘ P3 LU U) D 3 P4 2 < 2 CC P5 0 L E 0. P6 FIGURE 35. — Matrix indicating what attributes afi'ect per- formance, use, or behavior, and to what degree. The weights (W11, W12, and so on) can be expressed by the various forms of measurement shown in figure 3. REFERENCES CITED 45 most important for a desired use may not, however, be individually directly measurable, so the measure- ments must be inferred from the measure of other attributes. If inference must be made, the attribute- attribute correlation matrix (fig. 7) can start the logical chain that extends from measurement of observable attribute, to inference regarding areal distribution of desired attribute, to judgment of suitability of areas for proposed use. Analytic fragmentation of geologic information, including map information, into more basic compo- nents is necessary before integrations, syntheses, or regionalizations can be tailored to each need. This will become apparent not only in engineering geo- logic work itself but increasingly as engineering geologic investigations are incorporated into or co- ordinated with interdisciplinary studies of the whole environment. With Mabbutt (1968, p. 27 ), I agree that in the long run the parametric, or factor, approach will dominate over the now popular inte- grated approach in environmental surveys, although both will always be needed. In particular, several species of integrated maps will remain of basic importance. These are bedrock and surficial geologic maps and genetic soil maps. They will remain important because we will always require information on properties that have not been or cannot be measured, and the cheapest if not the surest method to extrapolate point information into three dimensions is to use knowledge of geologic- and pedologic-genetic structure, composition, and process. Standard geologic-genetic maps, even though they are special-purpose maps of prime interest to a rather small segment of our population, will always form an indispensable bank of spatial-typological in- formation. CONCLUSIONS A geologic map is a synthesis; it is not informa- tion in its most fundamental and versatile form. It is a generalization that lies somewhere within the bounds in figure 2, a geologist’s interpretation of the geology for a particular purpose. Its lines, units, and descriptions may not be sufficiently defined for an- other synthesis intended for another purpose. To an increasing degree, the concept of a “general-pur- pose” geologic map, which needs only to be “inter- preted” to be of wide, varied, and accurate use, is being questioned. If a geologic map does not contain the proper information to the required accuracy, it logically cannot, and therefore should not, be inter— preted for special purposes; if it does, it can. Facts cannot be generated by inference. A performance-use-behavior map, which is de- rivable only with difficulty or not at all from a geo- logic-genetic map, is more surely derivable from an attribute-place map that shows those attributes di- rectly relevant to the use in mind and that shows the areal distribution of each attribute, which may overlap others. The problem here, of course, is that the lines, contours, or other means of showing fun- damental properties are, in general, more difficult to draw than the boundaries of conventional geologic formations. For any area to be mapped, the factors of appropriate scale, time, money, competence of in- vestigator, and the numbers and knowledge level of potential users must all be evaluated and the map- ping products decided upon before rather than after the field investigations are performed. Such ideal planning is not always or, perhaps, even frequently possible. We are often called upon to aid in decisions that cannot await collection of all data known to have a bearing on the problem. Then, as geologists, our responsibility is to see that our maps convey clearly the differences between the well- documented and the inferred data, between observa- tion or measurement and interpretation, and that they show nothing where we are truly ignorant. And we must do this with such honesty and clarity that those we wish to inform cannot possibly misunder- stand either our spirit or our intent. This perhaps returns us close enough to the start- ing point to call a halt. Willatts (1970) favors outward attractiveness in maps but suggests that it can be deceiving. Certainly, maps should not be esthetically repulsive, for then they lose their power to inform and persuade; but pleasing appearance should rank much below honest usefulness. True value, of maps as of maidens, is more than skin deep: it involves outer form far less than inner content, and it resides more in the ob- server’s response than in nature of the object ob- served. REFERENCES CITED Abler, Ronald, Adams, J. S., and Gould, Peter, 1971, Spatial organization—A geographer’s view of the world: New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 587 p. American Commission on Stratigraphic Nomenclature, 1970, Code of stratigraphic nomenclature: Am. Assoc. Petro- leum Geologists, 21 p. Armand, D. L., 1965, The logic of geographic classifications and regionalization schemes: Soviet Geography—Rev. and Translation, v. 6, no. 9, p. 20—38. Bachmann, G., Griiwe, H., Helmerich, K., Reuter, F., and Thomas, A., 1967, Instruktion fiir die Anfertigung ein- heitlicher ingenieurgeologischer Grundkarten: Zentr. Geol. Inst. Abh., Berlin, v. 9, 35 p., 9 supplements. These are the COMECON standards, including directions for preparation and made-up examples of maps at scales 1:5,000 to 1:500,000. 46 THE LOGIC 0F GEOLOGICAL MAPS Beckett, P. H. T., 1968, Method and scale of land resource surveys in relation to precision and cost, in Stewart, G. A., ed., Land evaluation—CSIRO symposium: Aus- tralia, Macmillan, p. 53—63. Berry, B. J. L., 1961, A method for deriving multi-factor uni- form regions: Przeglad Geograficzny, v. 33, no. 2, p. 263—282. 1964, Approaches to regional analysis — a synthesis: Assoc. American Geographers Annals, v. 54, p. 2—11. 1968, A synthesis of formal and functional regions using a general field theory of spatial behavior, in Berry, B. J. L., and Marble, D. F., eds., Spatial analysis—A reader in statistical geography: New Jersey, Prentice- Hall, Inc., p. 419—428. Berry, B. J. L., and Marble, D. F., eds., 1968, Spatial analysis — A reader in statistical geography: New Jersey, Pren- tice-Hall, Inc., 512 p. Betz, Frederick, Jr., 1963, Geologic communication, in Albrit— ton, C. 0., Jr., ed., The fabric of geology: Geol. Soc. America, Addison-Wesley Pub. 00., p. 193—217. Bjerrum, L., 1954, The conception of homogeneity: Schweizer Archiv fiir Angewandte Wissenschaft und Technik, v. 20, no. 7, p. 221-223. Blanc, R. P., and Cleveland, G. B., 1968, Natural slope stabil- ity as related to geology, San Clemente area, Orange and San Diego Counties, California: California Div. Mines and Geology Spec. Rept. 98, 19 p. Board, C., 1967, Maps as models, in Chorley, R. J., and Hag- gett, Peter, eds., Models in geography: London, Methuen and 00., p. 671—725. Boggs, S. W., 1947, Cartohypnosis: p. 469-476. Bowman, W. J., 1968, Graphic communication: New York, John Wiley & Sons, 210 p. Briggs, R. P., 1971, Geologic map of the Orocovis quadrangle, Puerto Rico: U.S. Geol. Survey Misc. Geol. Inv. Map I—615. Brink, A. B., Mabbutt, J. A., Webster, R., and Beckett, P. H. T., 1966, Report of the working group on land classification and data storage: Mil. Eng. Experimental Establishment Rept. 940, England, 97 p. Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Miniéres, 1969, Carte géotechnique de la région de Creil (Oise); 1:20,000, in two parts: (1) geologic and documentation map with inset on hydrology and (2) map of foundation types and construction materials with inset on depth of ground water. Carnap, Rudolf, 1962, Logical foundations of probability: Chicago Univ. Press, 613 p. CETENAL (Comision de Estudios del Territorio Nacional), Mexico, 1971, Presade Santa Gertrudis F—14—A—33, 1 : 50,000: Carta uso potencial. Cherry, Colin, 1966, On human communication, a review, a survey, and a criticism [2d ed.]: Cambridge, Massachu- setts Inst. Technology Press, 337 p. Cline, M. G., 1949, Basic principles of soil classification: Soil Sci., v. 67, p. 81—91. Cole, J. P., and King, C. A. M., 1968, Quantitative geography —Techniques and theories in geography: London, John Wiley & Sons, 692 p. Cowan, T. A., 1963, Decision theory in law, science, and tech- nology: Science, v. 140, p. 1065—1075. Sci. Monthly, v. 64, Dixon, C. J., 1970, Semantic symbols: Math. Geology, v. 2, no. 1, p. 81—87. Dobrovolny, Ernest, and Morris, R. H., 1965, Map showing foundation and excavation conditions in the Burtonville quadrangle, Kentucky: U.S. Geol. Survey Misc. Geol. Inv. Map I—460. Duncan, 0. D., Cuzzort, R. P., and Duncan, B., 1961, Statis- tical geography— Problems in analyzing areal data: Illi- nois, Free Press, 187 p. Eckel, E. B., 1951, Interpreting geologic maps for engineers: Am. Soc. Testing and Materials Spec. Tech. Pub. 122, p. 5—15. Elder, W. R., 1965, Soils and urban development of Waco, in Urban geology of greater Waco, Pt. 2, Soils: Baylor Univ., Baylor Geol. Studies Bull. 9, 66 p. Font, R. G., and Williamson, E. F., 1970, Geologic factors affecting construction in Waco, in Urban geology of greater Waco, Pt. 4, Engineering: Baylor Univ., Baylor Geol. Studies Bull. 12, 34 p. Golledge, R. G., and Amadeo, D. M., 1966, Some introductory notes on regional division and set theory: Prof. Geogra- pher, V. 18, no. 1, p. 14—19. Grabau, W. E., 1968, An integrated system for exploiting quantitative terrain data for engineering purposes, in Stewart, G. A., ed., Land evaluation—CSIRO sympo— sium: Australia, Macmillan, p. 211—220. Grant, K., 1968a, A terrain evaluation system for engineer- ing: Commonwealth Sci. and Indus. Research Organiza- tion, Australia, Div. Soil Mech. Tech. Paper 2, 27 p. 1968b, Terrain classification for engineering pur- poses of the Rolling Downs Province: Commonwealth Sci. and Indus. Research Organization, Australia, Div. Soil Mech. Tech Paper 3, 385 p. Grigg, David, 1965, The logic of regional systems: Assoc. American Geographers Annals, v. 55, no. 3, p. 465-491. 1967, Regions, models and classes, in Chorley, R. J., and Haggett, Peter, eds., Models in geography: London, Methuen and 00., p. 461—509. Haans, J. C. F. M., and Westerveld, G. J. W., 1970, The appli- cation of soil survey in the Netherlands: Geoderma, v. 4, p. 279—309. Haantjens, H. A., compiler, 1970, Lands of the Goroka—Mount Hagen area, Territory of Papua and New Guinea: Com- monwealth Sci. and Indus. Research Organization, Aus— tralia, Land Research Ser. no. 27, 159 p. Hackett, J. E., and McComas, M. R., 1969, Geology for plan- ning in McHenry County: Illinois Geol. Survey Circ. 438, 31 p. Hageman, B. P., 1962, The Holocene of Voorne-Putten: Me- dedelingen van de Geologische Stichting, n. 3., no. 15, p. 85—92 [The Netherlands]. 1963, A new method of representation in mapping alluvial areas: Verh. Kon. Ned. Geol. Minjb. Gen., Geol. ser. 21—2, Jub. Conv. pt. 2, p. 211—219. 1968, The reliability of geological maps: Internat. Jahrbuch ffir Kartographie, v. 8, p. 144-154. Harrison, J. M., 1963, Nature and significance of geologic maps, in Albritton, C. 0., Jr., ed., The fabric of geology: Geol. Soc. America, Addison-Wesley Pub. 00., p. 225—232. Harvey, David, 1969, Explanation in geography: London, Ed- ward Arnold, 521 p. Hautamaki, Lauri, 1971, Some classification methods in re— gional geography: Fennia, v. 103, p. 1—37. REFERENCES CITED 47 Hedberg, H. D., ed., 1970, Preliminary report on lithostrati- graphic units: Subcommission on Stratigraphic Classifi- cation Rept. 3, Internatl. Geol. Congress, 24th, Montreal, Canada, 1972, 30 p. . Hubaux, A., 1972, Dissecting geological concepts: Math. Geol- ogy, v. 4, no. 1, p. 77—80. Johnston, R. J., 1968, Choice in classification —the subjectiv- ity of objective methods: Assoc. Am. Geographers Annals, v. 58, no. 3, p. 575—589. Kansas Geological Survey, 1968, A pilot study of land-use planning and environmental geology: Kansas Univ., Kan- sas Geol. Survey Study Comm., Econ. Devel. Plan. Pro- gram, 701 Project, Kansas P—43, rept. 15D, 63 p. Kiefer, R. W., 1967, Terrain analysis for metropolitan fringe area planning: Am. Soc. Civil Engineers Proc., Jour. Urban Plan. and Devel. Div., v. 93, no. UP4, p. 119—139. King, L. J., 1969, Statistical analysis in geography: New Jer- sey, Prentice—Hall, Inc., 288 p. Klimaszewski, Mieczyslaw, 1960, Problematyka szczegolowej mapy geomorfologicznej oraz jej znaczenie naukowe i praktyczne [Problems concerning the detailed geomor- phologic map, its scientific and practical importance]: Przeglad Geograficzny, v. 32, no. 4, p. 459-485 [in Polish with French summary]. Klovan, J. E., and Billings, G. K., 1967, Classification of geo- logical samples by discriminant-function analysis: Cana- dian Petroleum Geology Bull., v. 15, no. 3, p. 313-330. Knox, E. G., 1965, Soil individuals and soil classification: Soil Sci. Soc. America Proc., v. 29, no. 1, p. 79—84. Kolacny, A., 1969, Cartographic information — a fundamental concept and term in modern cartography: Cartographic Jour., v. 6, no. 1, p. 47—49. Krumbein, W. C., and Graybill, F. A., 1965, An introduction to statistical models in geology: New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 475 p. Kupfer, D. H., 1966, Accuracy in geologic maps: Geotimes, v. 10, no. 7, p. 11—14. Lafiitte, Pierre, 1968, Limites actuelles de l’informatique géologique: Bur. Recherches Géologiques et Miniéres, 2 ser., sec. 4, no. 3, p. 1—9. Lopatina, Ye. B., and others, 1971, Present state and future tasks in the theory and method of an evaluation of the natural environment and resources: Soviet Geography— Rev. and Translation, v. 12, no. 3, p. 142—151. Lozinska-Stepien, Halina, and Stochlak, Janusz, 1970, Meto- dyka sporzadzania map ingyniersko-geologicznych w skali 1:5,000 i wiekszych [Mapping methods for geologi- cal engineering 1:5,000 and larger scale maps]: Geologi- cal and engineering investigation in Poland, v. 5, Instytut Geologiczny, Bull. 231, p. 75—112 [in Polish with sum- maries in Russian and English]. McCammon, R. B., 1968, Multiple component analysis and its application in classification of environments: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 52, no. 11, pt. 1, p. 2178-2196. McDonald, J. R., 1966, The region, its conception, design, and limitations: Assoc.,Am. Geographers Annals, v. 56, no. 3, p. 516-528. McHarg, I. L., 1969, Design with nature: New York, Nat. History Press, 197 p. Mabbutt, J. A., 1968, Review of concepts of land classification, in Stewart, G. A., ed., Land evaluation—CSIRO sym- posium: Australia, Macmillan, p. 11—28. Matula, Milan, 1969, Regional engineering geology of Czech- oslovak Carpathians: Bratislava, Publishing House Slo- vak Acad. Sci., 225 p. 1971, Engineering geologic mapping and evaluation in urban planning, in Nichols, D. R., and Campbell, C. C., eds., Environmental planning and geology: U.S. Dept. Housing and Urban Development and U.S. Dept. Interior, p. 144—153. Milfred, C. L., and Hole, F. D., 1970, Soils of Jefferson County, Wisconsin: Wisconsin Univ., Wisconsin Geol. and Nat. History Survey Bull. 86, Soil Ser. no. 61, 172 p. Milovidova, N. V., 1970, The use of the tree of logical possi- bilities in the construction and control of physical geo— graphic classifications: Soviet Geography—Rev. and Translation, v. 11, no. 4, p. 256—262. Nazarevskiy, O. R., 1971, The selection of elements of the physical-geographic environment and of aspects of hu- man occupance for an evaluation of physical living con- ditions: Soviet Geography— Rev. and Translation, v. 12, no. 3, p. 157—172. Orvedal, A. C., and Edwards, M. J., 1941, General principles of technical grouping of soils: Soil Sci. Soc. America Proc., v. 6, p. 386-391. Pasek, J., 1968, The development of engineering-geological maps in Czechoslovakia: Zentr. Geol. Inst. Abh., Berlin, v. 14, p. 75—85. Pocock, D. C. D., and Wishart, D., 1969, Methods of deriving multifactor uniform regions: Inst. British Geographers Trans. 47, p. 73—98. Pokorny, J., and Tyczynska, M., 1963, Method of evaluation of relief for land planning purposes (on example of the region of Krakéw), in Problems of geomorphological mapping: Inst. Geography Polish Acad. Sci., Geog. Studies no. 46, p. 95—99. Quay, J. R., 1966, Use of soil surveys in subdivision design, in Bartelli, L. J., and others, eds., Soil surveys and land use planning: Soil Sci. Soc. America and Am. Soc. Agron- omy, p. 76—86. Radbruch, D. H., 1969, Areal and engineering geology of the Oakland East quadrangle, California: U.S. Geol. Survev Geol. Quad. Map GQ—769. Reuter, F., 1968, Engineering-geological mapping in Ger- many: Zentr. Geol. Inst. Abh., Berlin, v. 14, p. 10-36. Rhodes, J. M., 1969, The application of cluster and discrimi- natory analysis in mapping granite intrusions: Lithos, v. 2, no. 3, p. 223—237. Rockaway, J. B., Jr., and Lutzen, E. E., 1970, Engineering geology of the Creve Coeur quadrangle, St. Louis County, Missouri: Missouri Div. Geol. Survey and Water Re- sources Eng. Geology Ser. no. 2, 19 p. Rodoman, B. B., 1965, Logical and cartographic forms of re- gionalization and their study objectives: Soviet Geog- raphy— Rev. and Translation, v. 6, no. 9, p. 3-20. Rummelen, F. F. F. E. van, 1965, Bladen Zeeuwsch—Vlaan- deren West en Oost, Toelichtingen bij de Geologische Kaart van Nederland 1 : 50,000: Geologische dienst, Haar- lem, 79 p. Sanejouand, R., 1972, La cartographie géotechnique en France: Ministere l’Equipement et du Logement, Direc- tion de l'aménagement foncier et de l’urbanisme and Laboratoire central des Ponts et Chaussées, Paris, 96 p. Schelling, J., 1970, Soil genesis, soil classification, and soil survey: Geoderma, v. 4, no. 3, p. 165—193. 48 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPS Searles, H. L., 1956, Logic and scientific methods [2d ed.]: New York, Ronald Press, 378 p. Smedes, H. W., Pierce, K. L., Tanguay, M. G., and Hoffer, R. M., 1970, Digital computer mapping from multispec- tral data, and evaluation of proposed earth resources technology satellite (ERTS) data channels, Yellowstone National Park; preliminary report: U.S. Geol. Survey open—file report, 39 p. Sokal, R. R., 1966, Numerical taxonomy: Sci. v. 215, no. 6, p. 106—116. Spence, N. A., and Taylor, P. J ., 1970, Quantitative methods in regional taxonomy, in Board, C., and others, eds., Progress in geography—International reviews of cur- rent research: New York, St. Martin’s Press, v. 2, p. 1—64. Stamatello, H., 1965, Une carte géologique de la ville de Var- sovie, a l’usage des urbanistes: Rev. Géographie Phys. et Géologie Dynam., v. 7, no. 1, p. 3-10. American, Stevens, S. S., 1946, On the theory of scales of measurement: - Science, v. 103, p. 677—680. 1958, Measurement and man: p. 383-389. Science, v. 127, Tanguay, M. G., 1969, Aerial photography and multispectral remote sensing for engineering soils mapping: Joint Highway Research Project, Purdue Univ., Progress Rept. 13, 308 p. Thiadens, A. A., 1970, The Geological Survey of the Nether- lands, in 100-year celebrations of the Hungarian Geo- logical Institute: Annales Inst. Geol. Pub. Hungarici, v. 54, p. 1, p. 209—222. Treisman, A. M., 1966, Our 11m1ted attention. Adv. Sci., v.22, no. 104, p. 600-611. U.S. Geological Survey, 1949, Interpreting ground conditions from geologic maps: U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 46, 10 p. Wadell, Hakon, 1938, Proper names, nomenclature, and classi- fication: Jour. Geology, v. 46, no. 3, pt. 2, p. 546—568. Wentworth, C. M., Ziony, J. I., and Buchanan, J. M., 1970, Preliminary geologic environmental map of the greater Los Angeles area, California: U.S. Geol. Survey TID— 25363, 41 p., issued by U.S. Atomic Energy Comm., Oak Ridge, Tenn. Willatts, E. C., 1970, Maps and maidens: Cartographic Jour., v. 7, no. 1, p. 50. U. 5. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1974 O - 531—431 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PROFESSIONAL PAPIEETE3T GEOLOGICAL SURVEY f} RELATIVE AREAL STABILITY Decreasing stability LIMITATIONS 1 E3 Slight DModeraIc Limitations arc shoun in terms of Slig/rt, Modem/s IIIILI Saw-P lfl inches tliiclr lune a smerc limitation); Slope (Soils V\ith 3 Numerous ICCIOI‘S “MT control the stability of hosed on normal density of residences. The soil properties used slope over l2 percent have :I severe limitation); Flood Hazard natural $I°p?s. have. b_¢¢n Integrated to show The in evaluating suitability Iirc: Permeability (A wry slowly pcrmc— lSoils with any degree of overflow have :1 SL’VCI‘L limitation). relative stabflify wfll’un the mapped "ea, zihle 5011 IS ll scvri'e limitation), Depth to Rock (30115 less than C PART OF A SLOPE_STABILITY MAP OF SAN CLEIVIENTE AREA, CALIFORNIA A. MAP SHOWING SUITABILITY OF SOILS FOR SEPTIC FIELDS, WACO AREA, TEXAS Reprinted from 313110 and Cleveland (1968,P1- 1) This map shows pattern that results if map units are defined by two sets of cri- teria that are generally not spatially covariant. Four classes Of decreasing strength '(1—2), (3—4), (5—6),and (7—8) are subdivided into units indicating areas below crit- Ical slope angle (1, 3, 5, 7) or above critical slope angle (2, 4, 6, 8). Reprinted from Elder (1965, fig. 7) g BISheI’Q) leeSIIR Shale, greenish-gray, clayey, thin- and evenly bedded, blocky to con- : chOidal fracture, very plastic when moist. Locally upper part con- ; tains thin (1/2 to 2 inches thick) Interbeds of silty limestone with rare (I) fossil (crinoid) fragments; in places banded and mottled With light- ) Cl.) reddish'brown streaks. Has low porosity and permeability but Banana " ” ‘6 absorbs some water. This is an expansive shale that falls within the E Upper Dart critical category Of FHA classification (Lambe, 1960) and develops a E of Crab swell index of 4100 psf. Orchard 80—150 Limestone and shale: Limestone, greenish~gray, weathers bright reddish Z :2 Formation brown and yellowish brown, coarsely to finely crystalline, dolomitic < (u in part, locally OOIItIc with hematite In upper part. Even beds up to E S 10 inches thick; thicker beds break into large slabs up to 4 feet long. Z) : Crossbedded bioclastic limestone and large 1~ to 2-foot ripple i U) _ marked beds in upper part. Chemical weathering moderate pro- (I) 5-) Lme de,€ted\ ducing a reddish-brown soil. Lower part of unit predominantly lime- 8 stone, upper part limestone Interbedded with green clay shale. Bed- WACO E Lower part ding planes frequently marked with X-Iike impressions 4 to 6 inches LAKE .0 of Crab long. CrinOIds and brachiopods common particularly in oblitic beds. g Orchard Angular “cog wheel" crinoid beads up to 1 Inch In diameter and . brachipods are typical of upper part. CaVIties of fossus sometimes CT) Formatlon 50-55 filled With petroleum or petroleum residues Basal beds form con 3 and spicuous bench along lower valley slopes. Shale, greenish—gray, —‘ Brassfield clayey, thin-bedded, blocky to conchOIdal fracture; glauconite pellets Formation locally abundant; low porOSIty and permeability but absorbs water becoming very plastic when wet. Shale, greenish-gray, thin~ and evenly bedded, calcareous, hackly g 30- fracture, moderately Indurated, sparsely fossiliferous. Forms lower Z '5 35 valley slopes In northwestern and southwestern parts of quadrangle. it '3 . This and underlying unit included in Richmond Group by Perry (1925). 9 8 Sedimentary + 5 5 2 O i. rocks Limestone, light to medium—gray, thin and irregularly bedded. argilla- g g ceous, fossiliferous; weathers to—slabs 1 to 3 inches thick and up to 0- 35+ 18 Inches In length. Brachiopods and bryozoans common. Unit 3 forms ledges and riffles along stream beds. Geologic map Units of map showing excavation units and foundation conditions R05 5°" Poor foundation material, easily excavated SEPTIC SEWAGE DISPOSAL (Shale) , :3 Mod ' I M t .mdequare Bedford Shale,upper part Of Crab Orchard Formation,and upper part l:::l Adequule "a e I “1"" e of the lower part Of the Crab Orchard Formation and the Brassfield _ _ . _ . . Formation Inadequate septic sewage disposal is typical in impermeable tion. Adequate SCPIIC sewage disposal 13 characteristic ”1 highly Expansive clay shale' landslides and slumps are common where valley earth materials, where septic systems are continuously inoper- Moderately adequate septic sewage disposal is encountered in permeable earth materials, where septic systems are usually slopes are steep 07‘ dxcavated cuts are oversteepened' structuralfailu‘res ativc or become inoperative during each wet period. those areas Where septic systems are usually operative, except operative even ln'PCI'IOdS of high saturation. . . ofFox Springs Road east of Wallingford are Causedibyflowage ofwatg/yu Inadequate s€ptic sewage disposal exists in alluvial clays and In periods of prolonged saturation. Moderate disposal is typical Adequate septic sewage disposal crusts mamly in Bosquc saturated shale. There the shale, which is several feet thick, overlies in moderately permeable earth materials. and Brazos terrace deposits. Where terrace deposits are thin, and rest on impermeable materials, septic sewage disposal may reststant limestone of the Brassfreld Formattim; permeability low to silts in the Lower Taylor Marl and hcntonitic and shaly por- tions of the Wolfe City Sand; in the South Bosque Shale; in Moderately adequate septic sewage disposal exists inlsome . very low the Lake Waco Formation; in the Pepper Shale; in the Del areas of the Wolfe City Sand; In the Austin Chalk; and In the be Inadequate. Rio may; and m Shale mm... M the WWW“ Form Georgetown lemonc' D. PARTS OF THE LITHOLOGIC COLUMN DESCRIPTION AND EXPLANATION OF MAP SHOWING FOUNDATION B. MAP SHOWING SUITABILITY OF FORMATIONS FOR SEPTIC SEWAGE DISPOSAL, WACO AREA, TEXAS AND EXCAVATION CONDITIONS IN THE BURTONVILLE QUADRANGLE, KENTUCKY Reprinted from Font and Williamson (1970, fig. 5) Reprinted from Dobrovolny and Morris (1965) R 8 l“: R _ - . - 2A. GROUND-WATER CONDITIONS IA. EXPLANATION 2C. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS RELATING TO WASTE DISPOSAL 0 _ _ . Continuous surficial aquifers of well sorted sand and gravel more 5 m 0 5’ Area Zl ”'1'le CIOY'II“ overlying dense behdrofkl- 0":7 very sfrnull lhan 50 feel lhick. Permeable sandstone aquifers belween deplhs 0;) _u:i g, 3 g groun.»waler supplies available ol-depl s 0 e55 I an 500 eel. of 500 and 2000 feet. a 3 ‘7, ‘3 5 Polenliol for pollution of water supplies Is low. 1 P ' A f d ' d‘ h . II b _ ' . _ ' Conllnuous surficiol aquifers of well sorted sand and gravel 15 lo - ea reel 0 9'0”" 'W° er ‘5‘: urge I" 5m“ “5'"5 C0“ “'"'"9 pea. 50 feet thick. Dolomite aquifers more lhon 100 feel thick wilhin 5 Pollutants generally are confined In the area and unable to reach a deplh Of 300 feel. Permeable sandstone aquifers between 3 usable ground—woler sources. Locally, use of lhese areas may be deplhs of 500 and 2000 feel. “‘ 2 Sills and alluvium limited by periodic flooding. Pollution polenlial is low. T 46 _ De oslts 0‘ ebbl I "d 1’ of var in thickness and I m, p Surficiol sand and gravel aquifers, variable In texture, thickness, 4 Kumic sand and gravel d P 'l ‘ P d 7 ChRYh" . E" I' Y 9' l' - I d ° I and conIInUIly, generally more than I5 feel lhick; buried sand and elm" 5 ° 50"} i W 'C m'Ig I. over ‘9 P0 en “‘3 9’0”“ -woler gravel aquifers more than 50 feet thick below a depth of 50 feel, . sources. Polenlial for pollution is low lo moderate. or more than 25 feet thick above a deplh of 50 feel; dolomite 5A Oulwash, coarse-grained gravel and sand aquifers 50 lo 100 feel lhick. Preceding aquifers all within a depth Thick deposils of dry permeable materials more than 30 feel 28030213830 ff’ermeable sandslone quIfers between deplhs 0f 53 Oulwash, fine-grained gravel and sand above ground-waler zone. Possibly a good area for sanitary land- on eel. fills and a poor area for lagoons. Pollulion poleni‘iul IS moderately low for landfills and moderate to high for lagoons. V Permeable sandstone aquifers between deplhs of 500 and 2000 5C Oulwush, sand and pea gravel \ feel. Within ardeplh of 300 feel are buried sand and gravel Areas of mixed drift wilh extreme range in character of malerials. \\\ aquifers 25-h 59 feel ”Mk below a depth Of 50 feel, and dolomile o , . , , . , aqUIfers, wrlh thin shale zones, more lhan 50 feellhick. or 5D S d . bl Materials range from clay lo gravel. IndIVIdual Site evaluation is 'g an I vuria e essenliol, as pollution potential ranges from low lo high. .6 Permeable sandstone aquifers belween depths of 500 and 2000 3 6 TllereIIOW,5°"dY19’0V9llYi> 5feellhick Areas where depth lo ground-water saturation is shallow and feel. Within a depth Of 300 feet ore sand and gravel aqUIIe” ; where permeable materials are present; widespread movement less than 25 feel thick and dolomite aquifers less than 50 feel . ‘ of pollution of land surface inlo shallow waler sources and sur- 'hICk' 6/7 Um'6. < 5feellhick, over sand and gravel face water bodies creales a moderately high polenlial for pol- lution. Permeable sandstone aquifers belween deplhs of 500 and 2000 6/9 Unit 6 < 5 feel lhick over Marseilleslill (9) feel. Sand and gravel or dolomite aquifers Iimiled in occurrence Area of thick sand and gravel aquifers, of or very close to lhe Wl'hm a depth Of 300 feel. surface. Ground-water levels are high so Ihal wusle would be 6/16 Unii 6, < 5feetll1ick, over Marengo lill [16) disposed in the suluraled zone. Locally, this area is subject to periodic flooding. Potenlial for pollulion on site is high, but pol» lulanls mighl be rapidly diluted. E g E E 7 Sand and coarse-grained gravel . . . Z 3 5. '2 . ‘ . ”r R Indicates Stop. Resource absent or Impractical E 13 § :6 . arcekaozf'clrhin drilff pve'r lliifghly fgpc'turedfbfddrocklz or aria of :efi- 45 to develop (none present on this map)_ 5 i é» g 8 Lacusirine cloylLake Waucondai °ps' °e" '° °' p° U '°" ° 9 '°° “qu' “5 '5 '9 ' N Y Indicates Caution. Some resource limitations. 0 =3 G Indicates Go. Resource of high quality, acces- g 9 Till, gray, clayey, pebbly Sible. u 2 9-10 Unit 9 intermixed wilh Huntley lill R Indicates Stop. Major problems, impractical to E 109 Till, olive gray, clayey, silly, pebbly, overco me. E intermixed with Marseilles lill (9) Y Indicates Caution. Major problems, controllable. G Indicates Go. Minor problems. 1 I Kamic sand and gravel 2 g 12 Oulwash, sand and gravel 8 13-16 Till, yellowish pink, silly, sandy, inlermixed wilh Marengo lill (I6) I4 Kamic sand and gravel 8, 15 Oulwash, sand and gravel E o i 16 Till, pink, silly, sandy 0' I I6—G Unil l6, intermixed wilh Gilberls drifl _ \ air-4. I .1 . o " N h) a fix, fl.\.,, , . E 5 I9 Komic sand and gravel {45: {f-fi‘ ’/// / ’ m 2 c If], n I d / / _ g .. < i 21 Till, yellowish pink, sandy " é%‘ _ / 'l 51w \“- J' ' I H“\\‘ Jag/{#5 ' . 30 Bedrock ’ - ' ’I'sf'I-J’H'y i I do... . s _. Hy .u ,2 x ' It" .. . ,. .. .. . ., . .. .\ I ~ .. , .2 - E. PART OF MAP SHOWING SURFICIAL DEPOSITS, AND ITS EXPLANATION F. PART OF MAP SHOWING GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS RELATING TO WASTE DISPOSAL G. PART OF MAP OF GROUND-WATER CONDITIONS, AND ITS EXPLANATION, , . 3 MC HENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS AND ITS EXPLANATION, MC HENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS MC HENRY COUNTY, ILLINOIS Reprinted from map by D. L. Gross (Hackett and McComas, I969, pl. 1A) Reprinted from map by M. R. McComas (Huokett and McComas, I969, pl. 2C) Reprinted from map by]. E. Hackett and J. I. Larsen (Hackett and McComas, 1969, p1. 2A) lnteri0r~Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.#1974~G73265 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPPING UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 837 'ur-u .‘ its xx __ PLATE 2 m m Terrace fluvial deposits in several Gravel and sand terraces are E “NIMDES DE C ACID” DE WEI-03 g f: levels of various stages. Theyare considerably saturated, Unitexposed ‘8 '2 COmposed Ol Silt)’ and clayey stiff especially in the season atsurtace ‘8.“ to film, to hard Ioams (1,5 of precipitation when the E . ,7 . Greenummurs g E to 4 m thick),of sands (1 to 2 m) level of the ground water i INCREMENTO EN LA INTENSIDAD i" “ ' ‘ beneath yellow 8 r; ‘3 and of sandy gravels, considera- is 2 to 5 m (in some places I E DEL USO DEL SUELO fl ' ' . surficial unit 5 S g bly loamed and weathered even more). In the de- 5 “3‘ afififiw , eeiwww 777*— ‘ , , T s. .7; 3 5 . ' ' ‘ . h ' l a E I fl I “a :Iopttfs mfg) alpe trsvwcidnniy 3f pvraetisriorriisses :peto $21:in Kt g “3, E E PRATICULTURA AGRICULTURA D. SYSTEM OF MAP REPRESENTATION OF ""6""" . _ =' luvia y ere y e' face a 3 g ;fi——eifids_s QUATERNARY SOIL UNITS OF DIFFER- , Mdfi—WW E g. E E E l l E E ( ENT CHARACTER AND THICKNESS Thick deluvia (>5 m) on t e ery weakly saturated to g 8 _. E E j l ‘2 . ‘o , E2 . foot of the slopes, mostly of practically dry. 3 l a l E l E E g E 5, E . g E a E Repnntedir mMatu 1(1971,f1g.5) SURPESIAL DEPOSITS ETchKNESSE 25m 2- m <2," . .. 2 < 3 r; 3 l5 i; g E 5 , ——°—————<3Q——_*~5’——— « $1 solifluctuous origin. d E g g E E g . E g g E E 2 E V’ a l l — J - ‘GRAVELS)$Wh 5 B , Deluvia 2,5 to 5 m thick. In Weakly to very weakly sa- 3 g g the bedrock they are turated deluvia, ground O <1“ "5'" 5-10m >10m r3 '3 ‘- ‘compressible, very little water flows over imper- g i v V V \f 2,. V If E: 3 permeable clayey rocks vious bedrocks, saturated v ‘v’ V \r’ \s \x x E E E g- E (sandy clays, weathered With precipitation and E _ E a i T: .= tuffites, elluvia of clay- wells offissure and hillside '5‘ E. MAP REPRESENTATION OF THE CHARACTER i ’3 ’3 ‘3. stone schist, etc.)- waters; in convenient Pla' = 7. AND DEPTH OF THE PRE-QUATERNARY E : 2 ces It soakes the delu- g d ROCK SURFACES ; a, : vium. '3 eeeeee g, ’2 Reprinted from Matu1a(1971, fig. 5) I 3 Deluvia of a thickness of Ver kl d d _ % 2,5 to 5 m. In bedrock were; {33:33: 50“: F. EXAMPLE OF PORTRAYAL OF DIFFERENT SOIL AND ROCK UNITS 0) . r a hbalrd anfisliide Cforggsrilsg- m" Prac‘ical'y dry 0" IN AN ENGINEERING GEOLOGY MAP AND CROSS SECTION ~ L l e roc imes , - . ,, ,7]. g Eom,,es "Esta“,mum 3g, E17:E‘°”esvd°'°m'tesv8ra‘ C. PART OF THE EXPLANATION FOR A POTENTIAL-USE—OF-SOILS MAP Reprinted from Matu1a(1971,fig.5) ’ '1 ’ ' . z _ /’/,/; X glomerate, tuffs, pliocene PUBLISHED BY THE COMISION DE ESTUDIOS DEL TERRITORIO - / E grave-“v etc-l NACIONAL OF MEXICO In the depth of <25 m there is a hard solid rock or Reprintecl from CETENAL (1971) The c1assification system appears to be nested in that lands classed Pliocene gravels. by a Roman numeral in a row appear suitable for all uses up to and in— cluding the last colored column. \‘ . l . r is I" the depth 0f < 2»5 m the— In the Pliocene complex , .7.“ 3 re are thicker unconsolida- little abundant hillside _ . _ .. g m a ted rocks or plastic soils springs may occur in the Ectematischprofie-I terverdUIdeIiiking van de Iegenda % 6‘79 (e.g. Pliocene grave“. Pllo- slope. c emotic section to aid Interpretation of Legend ('3 a L' cene clays, etc) kleuren op de kaort __ 00 colours on the map 3 ._ E 38 39 32 a s E “ .. _ £1.86 In the depth of < 2.5 m a solid FissureEsprings in the vici- luwu'a'i‘ wl'i'i‘} 3 m g bedrock occurs. nity of the slope foot and i7, 3. t hillside springs. In the lime- To" 2 stones and dolomites very {I x ”R as. \k IV. abundant springs occur on the foot of the slopes. A. PART OF THE MAP OF ENGINEERING—GEOLOGICAL ZONATION, AND ITS EXPLANATION, ZVOLEN BASIN, CZECHOSLOVAKIA V. Wide and flat dividing ridges In the depth of <2.5m thicker unconsolidated rocks or plastic loams occur (e. g. Pliocene gravels and clays). oasaaooaboaaaq H OFQQO C In the depth of < 2,5 m a solid bedrock occurs which (be- sides limestones and do- lomites) usually is weat- hered up to a considerable depth, forming thick el- luvia. Ground water level in the depth of > 5 m. Boundaries ofa) zones, Districts depreciated by strong Betekenis van de signaturen in het schematisch profiel Symbols used in schematic section . ‘ t \ b subzones scourin erosion \\\\=\\\ .: SCALE 1-25’000 ' / / /b ) g m Afzemngen van Duinkerke Ill b Oudste holocene veenatzettingen en Hollandveen j" Formatie van Merksern ‘ .\\\§\§§\§§ Dunkirk m deposits Oldest holocene peotdeposits and Holland pear ‘: Merksem Formation. Reprlnted from Matula (1969) Isa. , Lana... . . _ ref -L\ . . . . ® Lower protection districts of Spas Eb u-Ci DIStl‘lCtS d€P'”e‘3'3“3€l b)’ Slides Afzefiingen van Duinkerke iii” Afzettingen Von Calais a“ \\:-’__ /) DuflkE-rk in deposits Calais deposits We Districts de reciated b ut i ‘ Agx .\ p Y p l' fled Afzemngen van Duinkerke II Formatie van Tweme, ontwikkeld als dekzand SChOOI 1:50 000 B. EXPLANATION AND PART OF MAP OF GEOLOGICAL-ENGINEERING CONDITIONS SCALE 1 :5,000 Reprinted from Lozinska—Stepien and Stochlak (1970, fig. 2) c — fine-grained sand (Pdl d - silty sand (Pt) 9 — sandy silt (Tip) I — SIII (TI) 9 — loamy sands (Pg), sandy Ioams (Gp), loam (G), silty loams (Gr), sandy clays (1p), clays (I), silty clays (In) in places where the top of cohesive soils occurs at a depth of more than 1 m h — organic muds (Mo), peats (T) i — antropogenic forms (N) .v. r 4 O to! 3. Geological profile 5,4—4,5P.i a —- Interbeddings encountered within cohesive soils (e.g. medium-grained sand, 3.4-4.5 m) t. 0—2.5 Pr 2.5-3 1 . 1, b — geological profile of soils overlying the top of cohesive soil (e.g. coarse-grained sand 1.0—2.5 m, silts 2.5—3.1 m) 4. Characteristics of cohesive soils in vertical profile \(tf‘ it”? muddy deposits Fig. 2. Map of geological-engineering conditions Dunkirk ll deposits Twente formation, laid down as coversands LEGENDA p ~ sand pit, t—peat pit) Symbols of principal documentation points as for the documentation map (fable 1) 6. Geological-engineering conditions for direct foundation of structures I. Very unfavourable geological-engineering conditions owing to: a. gradients >12 per cent b. presence in the geologic profile of organic soils, antropogenic forms, soils with plasticity from 0.5 to 1 and >1, with permissible soil pressure per unit at depth of 1 m from surface of ground <0.8 kG/cm2 c. occurrence of underground water table down to a depth oft m below the ground surface d. occurrence of active geodynamic processes 9 Great difficulties in the execution and maintenance at the structures ll. Unfavourable geological-engineering conditions owing to: m gradients 5—12 per cent b. occurrence in the geologic profile of soils with permissible soil pressure per unit at depth of 1 m below the ground surface>0.8—i.0 kG/cm2 c. occurrence of water level at a depth of 1—2 m from ground surface (I. occurrence of active geodynamic processes Probable difficulties in the execution and maintenance of the structures Ill. Mediocre geological-engineering conditions owing to: a. gradients <5 per cent b. presence in the geological profile of soils with permissible soil pressure per unit at a depth of 1 m below the ground surface > 1.0—1.5 kC5/<:m2 c. occurrence of water level at a depth of 2-3 m from ground surface d. probable occurrence of active geodynamic processes W Average conditions for the execution and maintenance of the structures a — degree of plasticity (Sp) . . 1'0 IV. Favourable geological-engineering conditions owing to: b — mean soil condition at corresponding depth 3- gradients <5 per cent 30 b. presence in the geological profile of soils with permissible soil pressure I . , _ , , , per unit at a depth of 1 m from ground surface >1.5 kG/cm2 4.0 c — variability diVision c. occurrence of underground water table at a depth >3 m from ground surface d. absence of active geodynamic processes Favourable conditions for the execution and maintenance of the structures (Dlllb op Dllla op DII). Dunkirk lllb tidal channel deposits overlying older deposits (Dlllb on Dllla on DII) Kreekafzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dlllb op DII) Dunkirk Illb tidal channel deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dll). Kreekafzettingen van Duinkerke Illa Op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dllla op DII) Dunkirk Illa tidal channel deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dllla on Oil). Atzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk Illb deposits overlying Holland peat and Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illa op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk llla deposits overlying Holland peat and Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen van Duinkerke lllb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dlllb op Dllla) op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk lllb deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dllla) on Holland peat and Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen van Duinkerke || op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk II deposits overlying Holland peat and Pleistocene deposits. Atzettingen van Dumkerke Illb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dlllb op Dllla op DII) op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. (Dlllb op Dll) op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. In het Ho Iandveen komt een vertanding voor met de Afzettingen von Calais. Dunkirk lllb deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dll) on Holland peat on Pleistocene deposits. Holland peat interfingers with the Calais deposits. , Afzettingen van Duinkerke llla op oudere Afzettin en van Dunnkerke (Dllla op DII) op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. In het Ho Iandveen komt een vertonding voor met devAfzettingen van Calais. Dunkirk llla deposits overlyin older Dunkirk deposits (Dllla on Dll) on Holland peat and Pleistocene deposits. Hol and peat interfingers with the Calais deposits. Afzetlingen van Duinkerke Illb op Hollandveen op Atzettingen van Calais op Bosisveen op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk lllb deposits overlying Holland peat on Calais deposits on lower peat and Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen van Duinkerke llla op Hollandveen op Afzettingen van Calais op Basisveen op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk llla deposits overlying Holland peat on Calais deposits on lower peat and Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen van Duinkerke lllb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dlllb op Dllla) op Hollandveen op Afzettingen van Calais op Basisveen op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk lllb deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dllla) on Holland peat on Calais deposits on lower peat and Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op Hollandveen op Afzettingen van Calais op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk lllb deposits overlying Holland peat on Colois deposits and Pleistocene deposns. Afzettingen von Duinkerke Illa op Hollandveen op Afzettingen van Calais op Pleistoceen. Dunkirk llla deposits overlying Holland peat on Calais deposits and Pleistocene deposits, 2 3 4km Afzettingen von Duinkerke Illb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dlllb Op Dllla) Op Hollandveen 0p Atzettingen van Calais op Pleistoceen. LEGEND Dunkirk Illb deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dllla on Dll) on 26 Dunkirk lllb depositES overlyingd older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dllla) On Holland Decit on ' ' H ‘ ‘r . - ' 'stocene - 1- TOD 0f coheSive SOIIS (loamy sands, loams. Clays) below 5. Accepted symbols °”°”df’e°’°” P'e'smewde‘m’s _ . C°’°‘5dep°5”5°"Pe‘ 6’3“” III CI urface _ Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op oudere AfZettingen van Dumkerke e groun S . h I . l differentiafi f soils at depth of 1 Grens V0“ de Duinkerke “ 1'0059'955'e (Dlllb op DII) op Hollandveen Op Pleistoceen. Afzeningen van Duinkerke llla op Afzettingen van Calais op Pleistoceen. / a - boundary 0f Ill 0 Og'ca on o m Limit of Dunkirk ll transgression. Dunkirk Illb deposits overlying older Dunkirk dePOSl’S (Dlllb on D“) on Holland peat Dunkirk Illa deposits overlying Calais deposits on Pleistocene dePOSllS‘ a - at depth of I m f hes“ 'IS and Pleistocene deposits. . E . / b—boundaries 0‘ top surface 0 co ve SCI Atzettingen von Duinkerke Illa op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke _ b — at depth Of more than 1 m ’,_\ . . _ . _ O t (Dllla op DII) op Hollandveen Op Pleistoceen. Afzettingen van Dumkerke Illb op nief geerodeerd Pleistoceen. (’ I) c — boundaries of inferbeddlngs tn COheswe SOIIS pen WU er. Dunkirk Illa depiésits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dllla on D”) on Holland peat Dunkirk Illb deposits — immediately Overlying non eroded Pleistocene deposits. C _ at depth of more than 2 m -- and Pleistocene eposirs, . / d — boundaries of areas with gradients >5 per cent Atzemngen van Duinkerke Illb op Hollandveen op Pleistoceen. In het _ . d __ at depfh of more than 3 m Kreekofzettingen van Duinkerke Illb Hollandveen kont een vertanding voor met de Afzettingen van Calais. Afzettingen van Dumkerke llla op niet geerodeerd Pleistoceen. / e _ morphological edges and scarps Dunkirk lllb tidal channel deposits. Biggfi‘lifiggg imi‘lll’éscodfizrlzdegpgsodf:nd pear and Pleistocene dEPosits. Holland peat Dunkirk llla deposits — immediately overlying non eroded Pleistocene deposits. e — plateau f b d , f I'd Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke _. O \ ' . - .. . («I on ones 0 s i es Kreekatzettingen van Duinkerke llla lgigfisiinolggasg- Hollandveel; ogfpleiiihoc:i1eCOhnCl1oie|;SOHOndveen komt Afzettingen van Dumkerke Illb op zwak geerodeerd Pleistoceen. ' T overHOOd terrace at depth below 4 m V -- landslide f Dunkirk ”'0 tidalchonneldeposns, Dunkirk Illb depositsInongrTZhsgnflLefDufkirk dgeposits (Dlllb on Dllla) on Holland Dunkirk “lb overlying weakly eded Pleistocene deposits, VV 9 ongues peat on Pleistocene deposits. Holland peat interfin ers with the Calais deposits. 9 — flood terrace - h —- recent avalanches Kreekafzettingen VG” Duinkerke ”lb op oudere AfzeningenvanDuinkerke :lelemgge: lznmtDUInkerke :I'Io ogorrfl:(devifegetZEgzlifljgichrlaisEn he? Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illao k " d d PI ' 1 ' n. 0 an ve n een ver cin ingv . pzwa geero ear eis oceen. o . (Dlllbop Dllla). . . . . . . . . ' t t.H H d t ~ - Dunkirk Illb tidal channel de 05m overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dllla). DunEkfirk Illa de'poztsgvlerlyiéig Holland pea and Pleistocene deposr s 0 an pea Dunkirk llla deposits overlying weakly eroded Pleistocene deposits. 2 Kinds of soil encountered at depth of I m X. E acme ,aEus aeep p we Ingers w' e 0 ms eposns. k k ' ‘- Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op oudere Afzettingen van Duin er e Afzettin D . k k . . . gen van um er e Illb op oudere Afzettingen van Dumkerke (Dlllb op D o . 4’ _ . Kreekofzettingen van Duinkerke ll. kEIrI'Itbeoe‘i: EdiignodEnDlvoZF :3Iggi¥iggigpefl€:l:2ejgisln he! Hollandveen Dllla) op zwak geerodeerd Pleistoceen. O G a _. gravels (Z), sand-gravel MIX (2P) ’I7/ l - aIIUVIaI fans Dunkirk llfidolchanneldeposits. Dunkirk lllb overlyinggolder Dunkirk deposits (gillb on Dllla on‘DIl on Holland peat Dunkirk Illb deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dllla) on weekly eroded on Pleistocene depositstHolland pecg interfingctlers withftlie Calais eposits. _ k k Pleistocene deposrts, b — coarse-grained sand (Pr), medium-grained sand (Ps) $69 k _ opencasts (general symbol) (c .. brickyard, i gravel p“, Kreekofzettingen van Duinkerke lllb 0p oudere Afzettingen yon Duinkerke Afzettingen van Dumkerke ||| op ou ere A zettin en van Dum er e Afzettingen van Duinkerke || op zwak geerodeerd Pleistoceen. Dunkirk II deposits overlying weakly eroded Pleistocene deposits, Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dlllb op Dllla op DII) op zwak geerodeerd Pleistoceen. DUHkirk lllb deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Dllla on DII) on weakly eroded Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illa op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Illa op Dll) op zwak geerodeerd Pleistoceen. Dunkirk lllo deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dllla on Dli) an weakly eroded Pleistocene deposits. Afzettingen von Duinkerke lllb op oudere Afzettingen van Duinkerke (Dlllb op Dll) op zwak geerodeerd Pleistoceen. Dunkirk lllb deposits overlying older Dunkirk deposits (Dlllb on Oil) on weakly eroded Pleistocene deposits. Formatie van Twente, ontwikk_eld ols dekzand dikker don 2 m. Twente Formation, laid down as coversonds. Formatie van Merksem. Merksem Formation. Afzettingen van Duinkerke Illb op Formatie van Merksem. Dunkirk lllb deposits overlying Merksem Formation. G. PROFILE LEGEND FOR GEOLOGIC MAP OF ZEEUWSCH-VLAANDEREN (OOSTBLAD), THE NETHERLANDS SCALE 1 250,000 Reprinted from Rummelen (1965) Interior—Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.»1974 ~G73265 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPPING UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PROFESSIONAL PAPER 837 PLATE 3 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY EXPLANATION OF MAP UNITS Swamp — Silts and clays with a high percen- tage of organic material; compressible; high water content; water table generally near sur- face; subject to flooding. . Crew: Coeur 1. Airport Thick Alluvium e Stratified sands, silts and clays with gravel and/or clay lenses; high water table; subject to flooding. Thin Alluvium ~ Stratified sands, silts and clays deposited in tributary stream valley; varying thickness; generally silt or clay over sand and/or gravels; subject to flooding. 50' to 70' lb or Id Alluvial Terraces » Stratified sands, SIIts and clays; above level of present floodplain. Lake Deposits (lacustrine) a Stratified silts and clays; compressible; high water content; some organic material. Loess — Loess deposited over carbonate bed- rock; two layers: upper layer (si|t~rich) will stand on 900 slopes and lower layer (clay»rich); natural moisture near liquid limit at interface of loess layers. IO' Io 25' Loess ~ Loess deposited over carbonate bed- rock; two layers: shallow silt~rich layer over thick clay-rich loess; high water content at nterface of loess layers. BEDROCK WEATHERED) (EXTENSIVELY Ktirst lSInk area) — Loess deposited over carbon- txttr bedrock, solution enlargement of joints or cavern collapse expressed as depressions on surface, Internal drainage directly to ground- water system. CARBONATE I It? l‘*//1.K"f/’,r”i/r ". SCALE |224000 TOPOGRAPHIC BASE MAP BY 0 US. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY |954 IOOO 0 IOOO ! 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET EH ,_, E . J (PHOTOREVISED I968) l ‘5 O l KILOMETER H I_. ._. ._. H E Bedrock — Steep slopes (greater than 600 above horizontal); bedrock at or near surface; thin soil zone has tendency to creep down slope. CONTOUR INTERVAL IO FEET DATUM is MEAN SEA LEVEL TR UE NORTH MA G NETIc NORTH APPROXIMATE MEAN DECLINATION, l954 MISSISSIPPIAN‘l Loess — Loess deposited over bedrock (pre— dominantly shale); two layers: upper layer (silt-rich) and lower layer (clay-rich); problems similar to subunit Ila, potential slide plane at interface of loess and shale. DEPOSITS SHALE) (PREDOMINANTLY III lllllllllllllllllllllllllllli:‘ Loess — Loess deposited over bedrock (pre- dominantly shale); two layers: shallow silt-rich layer over thick clay-rich layer; problems simi- V lar to subunit IIb, potential slide plane at inter- facw'mar‘dsm'e' INDEX MAP OF ST. LOUIS COUNTY, SHOWING INDEX MAP OF MISSOURI, SHOWING CREVE COEUR QUADRANGLE ST. LOUIS COUNTY CYCLIC EXPLANATION AND MAP SHOWING UNITIZED METHOD OF INDICATING SEQUENCE LOWER Xb SOILS Loess _ Loess deposited over bedrock (W Reprinted from part of the map and explanation 23:19:33? (1:235); swe'“”9 C'avs encountered (pl. 1) in Engineering geology of the Creve Coeur quadrangle, Missouri, by Rockaway and Lutzen (1970). InterioriGeological Survey, Washington, D.C.—1974 —G73265 THE LOGIC OF GEOLOGICAL MAPPING , 22$ X? 7 PAY @375 ”W Geologic and Seismologic Aspects of the Managua, Nicaragua, Earthquakes of December 23, 1972 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 838 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 Air view of central Managua looking south. Fault D passes obliquely across photograph and through the Central Bank which is heavily damaged. The adjacent Bank of the Americas is essentially un- damaged. Many of the smaller structures that remain standing are badly damaged and will be razed. Extensive open areas in foreground are where structures have collapsed due to the earthquake and i (or) fire. Much of the debris was already cleared away in the right foreground. Geologic and Seismologic Aspects of the Managua, Nicaragua, Earthquakes of December 23, 1972 By R. D. Brown, J12, P. L. Ward, and George Plafker GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 838 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1973 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 73-600128 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office \Vashington, DC. 20402 Stock Number 2401-00340 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract ________________________________________ 1 Seismologic aspects—Continued Introduction _____________________________________ 1 Distribution of aftershocks ___________________ 20 Purpose and scope ___________________________ 2 Nodal plane solutions ________________________ 21 Acknowledgments ____________________________ 3 Comparison to similar earthquakes ____________ 26 Geologic aspects of the earthquakes ________________ 4 Setting of the earthquakes ________________________ 26 Earthquake faults ____________________________ 4 Regional tectonic relations ____________________ 26 Surface expression ___________________________ 4 Physiography ________________________________ 27 Fractures with dextral displacement __________ 13 Near-surface rock units ______________________ 28 Lack of evidence for fault creep _______________ 13 Ground—water relations _______________________ 29 Relationship of faults to structural damage ____ 14 Volcanic risk at Managua ________________________ 29 Similarities of 1972 faults to the 1931 earthquake Seismic risk at Managua _________________________ 30 fault ___________________________________ 16 Historic seismicity ___________________________ 30 Geologic evidence for previous faulting _________ 17 A comparison _______________________________ 30 Landslides and surficial effects ________________ 17 Conclusions _____________________________________ 32 Seismologic aspects of the earthquakes _____________ 18 Recommendations ________________________________ 33 Methods ___________________________________ 19 References cited __________________________________ 33 ILLUSTRATIONS Page FRONTISPIECE. Air view of central Managua. PLATE 1. Map showing faults and fractures related to the Managua earthquakes of December 23, 1972 _______ In pocket FIGURE 1. Geologic map of Managua area showing earthquake faults _______________________________________ 5 2—15. Photographs: 2. Fractures and broken waterline _______________________________________________________ 10 3 Fault-displaced sidewalk ______________________________________________________________ 10 4. Fault offset in railroad line ____________________________________________________________ 10 5. Offset pavement tiles __________________________________________________________________ 11 6 Fault—displaced curb __________________________________________________________________ 11 7 Open fracture in fault zone ___________________________________________________________ 12 8 En echelon fractures in fault zone ______________________________________________________ 13 9 Compressional effects in curb ___________________________________________________________ 13 10. D‘extral displacement of curb __________________________________________________________ 13 11. Collapsed Customs House office building _______________________________________________ 14 12. Damaged home in fault zone __________________________________________________________ 15 13. Partly damaged home in fault zone _____________________________________________________ 15 14. Collapsed tarquezal structures in fault zone _____________________________________________ 16 15. View of fault scarp at Lake Tiscapa ___________________________________________________ 18 16. Schematic diagrams illustrating effect of faulting at the Tiscapa pit crater _______________________ 19 17—19. Photographs: 17. Head of rotational landslide at Tiscapa crater rim ________________________________________ 20 18. Large landslide near km 11 on Leon-Managua Highway _________________________________ 21 19. Minor debris slide along creek bank _____________________________________________________ 22 20. Map showing aftershock epicenters ____________________________________________________________ 23 21. Sections showing aftershock hypocenters _______________________________________________________ 24 22. Composite nodal plane solutions _______________________________________________________________ 25 23. Acceleration versus distance to fault relationships ______________________________________________ 31 V VI TABLE CONTENTS TABLES Page Characteristics of fractures along the Managua faults __________________________________________ 6 Crustal structure models used in the study _____________________________________________________ 20 Fault dimensions and slip for five earthquakes with magnitudes of 5.5 to 6.5 _______________________ 26 Comparison of fault density at Managua and vicinity with other urban areas in seismically active zones ____________________________________________________________________________________ 32 GEOLOGIC AND SEISMOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 By R. D. BROWN, JR., P. L. WARD, and GEORGE PLAFKER ABSTRACT The Managua, Nicaragua, earthquake of December 23, 1972 (Richter magnitude of 5.6, surface—wave magnitude of 6.2), and its aftershocks strongly affected an area of about 27 square kilometers centered on Managua. Within this area, over 11,000 people were killed and 20,000 were injured. About 75 percent of the city’s housing units were destroyed or rendered uninhabitable leaving between 200,000 and 250,000 people homeless, and property damage exceeded half a billion dollars. As a consequence, the economy and gov- ernment of the city, and to a large extent the entire country, were severely disrupted. Surface geology shows that there are at least four sub- parallel strike-slip faults spaced 270 to 1,150 meters apart in the Managua area that slipped in a predominantly sini- stral (left-lateral) sense during the earthquake. Aftershock studies show that at least one of these northeast-trending faults extends from the surface to a depth of 8 to 10 km (kilometers) over a maximum length of about 15 km. The faults are mappable on land for 1.6 km, 5.1 km, 5.9 km, and 2.7 km; aftershock data indicate that faulting extends at least 6 km northeast of the city beneath Lake Managua. Horizontal displacements vary, with the maximum aggre- gate sinistral slip ranging from 2.0 to 38.0 centimeters. There is also a local small down-to-the-southeast vertical compo- nent of slip on three of the four faults. The nature and dis- tribution of the surface faulting are consistent with a tectonic origin for the earthquake. The extensive destruction and loss of life in the Managua area were caused by a combination of the folloWing factors: (1) occurrence of the earthquake on faults directly beneath the city, (2) poor behavior of structures, chiefly tarquezal (wood frame and adobe) and masonry, during strong seismic shaking, and (3) direct displacement of structures, streets, and utilities by faulting. The historic record of seismicity and geologic evidence of active Holocene faulting and vol- canism together show that Managua is an unusually high risk area in terms of geologic hazards and that these hazards should be a primary consideration in evaluating reconstruc- tion of Managua. INTRODUCTION Managua, Nicaragua’s political capital, its busi- ness and industrial center, and by far its largest city, was struck by three moderate-sized earth- quakes within less than an hour in the early morn- ing of December 23, 1972. The earthquakes and related surface faulting severely damaged the central part of the city, interrupted essential serv- ices, and, by their effect on Managua, severely dis- rupted the entire Nicaraguan economy. The first and largest earthquake was felt at 12 :30 a.m., local time. It was assigned a Richter magnitude, Mb, of 5.6 (surface-wave magnitude, M,, of 6.2) by seismolo- gists of the US. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1973). The two largest aftershocks were felt at about 1:18 am. and 1:20 am. Both were smaller (Mb, 5.0 and 5.2) than the main shock, but were large enough to cause substantial addi- tional damage. According to eyewitness accounts, many buildings that were structurally weakened but still standing after the main earthquake suffered additional damage or collapsed during these after- shocks. The earthquake sequence killed over 11,000 people and injured another 20,000, caused more than half a billion dollars property damage, and destroyed or rendered uninhabitable 75 percent of the city’s hous- ing units leaving between 200,000 and 250,000 people homeless out of a total Managua population of around 500,000. Interviews with residents of Mana- gua indicate that many left their homes and moved into the streets as the shaking from the first earth- quake subsided. Many of these people were still in open areas when the aftershocks were felt and there- by escaped possible injury or death in the further collapse of buildings. Aftershock activity continued for weeks after the initial earthquake, with the fre- quency and magnitude of aftershocks progressively diminishing with time. All of the significant damage resulted either from the first three shocks or from fires that followed shortly thereafter. The earth- quakes were of moderate size but caused extensive damage because (1) they occurred at shallow depth under the city, (2) at least four surface faults broke in and near Managua, and (3) most buildings had little resistance to seismic shaking. 2 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 An accurate evaluation of the geologic hazards and the possibility of future earthquakes like those of December 23 is vitical to future development plans. Such evaluations have obvious applications in formal planning and in plan implementation by gov- ernmental bodies. Less obvious perhaps is the degree to which such evaluations are used by financial insti- tutions, insurance companies, and by business and industry. In recent years, in various parts of the world, geologic knowledge concerning recognized ac- tive faults and other clearly identifiable geologic hazards has been increasingly applied by private industry to decisions on site selection, mortgage loan evaluation, and the setting of insurance rates. These nongovernmental decisions can profoundly affect the pattern of growth and development simply by direct- ing or influencing the flow of investment capital away from high-risk sites and towards those where the level of risk is deemed more acceptable. Much current planning, both at governmental and private levels, reflects the viewpoint that earthquake safety in modern cities involves designing for the interaction of two complex systems: the manmade system that is the city itself, and the natural system consisting of the geologic processes that cause or accompany a major earthquake. Successful planning for earthquake safety involves far more than the prevention of structural failure in buildings. It should include, as well, ensuring the integrity of communication lines, water service, sanitation facili- ties, and emergency services such as police, fire, and hospital facilities. Such planning should also recog- nize that massive economic loss will recur in accord- ance with the recurrence rates of catastrophic geo- logic processes. Such losses are largely independent of structural design and construction practices, which are directed primarily to the safety of human lives, at least insofar as earthquake-resistant char- acteristics are concerned. Comprehensive urban planning for earthquake safety depends first of all on a clear understanding of the processes that ac- company earthquakes and how these processes may affect the works of man. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report on the earthquakes of December 23, 1972, is intended to (1) record and interpret pre- liminary geologic and seismologic data and (2) evaluate these data as an aid for those who must make difficult decisions regarding future develop- ment and reconstruction in the Managua area. In order to assist the reader in finding the type of information he is interested in, We have separated the sections with data relevant to the 1972 earth- quakes and their setting from those sections con- cerned primarily with the overall geologic hazards at Managua. Data pertaining to the earthquakes and their setting are in the following lthree sections: “Geologic Aspects of the Earthquakes,” “Seismo- logic Aspects of the Earthquakes,” and “Setting of the Earthquakes.” Readers who are; concerned pri- marily with risk at Managua as related to geologic hazards may wish to skip the data sections and turn directly to the sections entitled “Volcanic Risk” and “Seismic Risk.” Many of the painful lessons leariied in Managua may save hundreds of lives and millions of dollars if they are used to guide policy and planning at Mana- gua and in other earthquake-prone regions. Among the topics that are critical to decisions on land use and redevelopment plans for Managua are several that are essentially geologic in nature. Those that are addressed here include: Identification of the various geologic processes that accompanied the earthquakes of December 23. An assessment of the relative importance of these processes. An estimate of the future hazard from similar or greater earthquakes within the Managua area. Geologic conditions that may suggest constraints or limitations on certain types of functions, land use, or structural or design types within the Managua area. The scope of this report is restricted to earth- quake-related effects in the Managua area (that is, within a few miles of the city center), to geologic conditions within that area, and to the relations be- tween observed damage patterns and geologic con- ditions. This range of topics is dictated by the brief nature of our field investigation and by its focus on these explicit problems. Nongeologic factors that also contributed to the extensive damage in the central part of Managua include design and construction practices, vulnera- bility of parts of the water system to fault rupture, age and stage of repair of structures, and effects of the emergency on disaster relief response. These nongeologic factOrs are being studied by other inves- tigators and will not be discussed here. Many planning decisions may require answers to other geologic questions that are not addressed in this report. For example, a logical and reasonable question is: Are there sites within a few kilometers of Managua that are significantly safer from geo- logic hazards than is the site of the present city? INTRODUCTION 3 Although the answer to this question may be yes, this is not very helpful unless such sites are identi— fied and delineated. To do so, however, requires an evaluation of both earthquake and volcanic hazards and a careful appraisal of engineering geologic con- ditions. The present level of knowledge of the geology near Managua is inadequate to answer many important questions like this one, but a relatively modest geologic investigation could provide much of the essential data. The level of effort required prob- ably amounts to 1 or 2 man—years and would cost less than a hundred thousand dollars. In view of the massive commitment of millions of dollars for re- construction and redevelopment, this investment in evaluating alternative courses of action from a geo- logic perspective seems an obvious and essential step in the planning process. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors of this report spent less than a month on the ground in the Managua area after the earth- quake. To accomplish much of value in so brief an investigation requires the support, cooperation, and assistance of many people. It is not possible to ac- knowledge all here, but everywhere we received the most courteous cooperation from both Nicaraguan ofi‘icials and private citizens during a time of great hardship for them. We are especially indebted to Capt. and Ing. Orlando Rodriguez M., Director, Ser- vicio Geologico Nacional, and to Ing. Humberto Porta 0., Director General, Instituto Geografico Na- cional. These two men, and the organizations which they head, provided information, data, logistics sup- port, liaison, and coordination with other activities in connection with the disaster. Ing. Rodriguez de- serves special thanks for providing our transporta- tion and lodging and for arranging official permis- sion for our investigations within restricted areas. We are also indebted to Mr. Lloyd Cluff, who pre— ceded us to Managua by about 10 days. Mr. Cluff reported his observations of active fault breaks in Managua to us on January 2, and those observations helped guide our investigations and make them more effective. Investigations by Cluff and Mr. Gary Car- ver defined and accurately located the two central and largest fault breaks and established the amount and direction of movement on these. Our studies confirm their findings, add substantiating new data on these two faults, and provide similar data on two parallel but smaller faults. Evidently, others also identified these faults prior to our Visit. An undated report by Juan Kuan S. and Carlos Valle G. “Informe Tecnico sobre el Origin del Terremoto de Managua,” contains a map showing the approximate location of the four fault breaks and some of the points at which evidence of fault movement was observed. The Kuan-Valle report, although brief and relatively undocumented by ob- servations, presents an accurate picture of the fault pattern. Unfortunately, Brown and Plafker did not learn of this report until after their fieldwork was completed. Aerial photography is critically important to post- earthquake studies, especially where there is exten- sive surface faulting or other surface geologic effects that require precise location and careful measure- ments. Superb vertical stereophotographic coverage in both color and color infrared, at optimum altitude and sun angles, of the entire affected area was pro- vided by the NASA Manned-Spacecraft Center in Houston, Texas, and was used in this study. Many NASA people at Houston worked long and irregular hours to provide timely post-earthquake aerial pho- tography. We especially acknowledge and appreciate the efforts of the Mission Manager, Mr. Charles Harlan; the Earth Resources Program Office, Mr. Olav Smistad; and Mr. A. J. Roy, aircraft com- mander of NASA C—130 no. 929. Tent facilities during our field study were pro- vided on the grounds of the residence of the US. Ambassador, Mr. Turner Shelton. We acknowledge, with thanks, the efforts by Ambassador Shelton and others on the US. Embassy staff to accommodate our field investigations at a time of extreme difficulty for the Embassy. The aftershock study was carried out with the skilled and dedicated assistance of Ing. Arturo Aburto Q. of the Servicio Geologico Nacional, who worked 12 to 14 hours a day, 7 days a week, main- taining equipment and making arrangements with the various landowners and watchmen at the instru— ment locations. Dave Harlow, Dan Marquez, Jim Gibbs and Al Vaugh of the US. Geological Survey also participated in parts of the fieldwork, and Rob- ert Page, Rob Wesson, Bill Ellsworth, Jim Ellis, John Lahr, and Bill Gawthrop worked hard to pre- pare the instruments for the field during the Christ- mas holidays. Mr. Leroy Anstead, Inter American Geodetic Survey Representative in Nicaragua, was most helpful in providing office space for data analy- sis and a place for the various earth scientists work- ing in Managua to congregate and exchange ideas. He also assisted with many of the logistical arrange- ments. 4 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 . GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES By far the most important geologic effect of the earthquakes of December 23, 1972, was the tectonic movement that occurred on at least four subparallel surface faults in the Managua area (fig. 1). Warp- ing along the fault zones and displacements on frac- tures along the fault caused direct damage to many buildings, streets, and utilities. Relatively minor secondary geologic effects of the earthquake include displacement on surface fractures not obviously re- lated to the faulting and a variety of downslope mass movements. There was no evidence that compaction or liquefaction of the unconsolidated deposits played a significant role in the damage distribution. A re- connaissance study of the shoreline along the south shore of Lake Managua indicates that there was no significant earthquake-related regional tilting or relative land-level changes in that area. EARTHQUAKE FAULTS / Four faults were identified in the Managua area along which displacement occurred during the earth- quake of December 23d or its aftershocks (pl. 1, fig. 1). The faults are manifested in the unconsolidated alluvial and pyroclastic surficial materials as con— tinuous lines of open fractures or zones of en echelon fractures that consistently show a sinistral (left- lateral) sense of motion and locally show subordi- nate extensional and vertical components of dis- placement. In a few localities, particularly where there is appreciable topographic relief, it was not always possible to differentiate surface fractures re- lated to faulting from fractures that may have been formed through surficial processes such as down- slope slumping or lurching. To the extent possible, however, fractures mapped in the field and shown on plate 1 are those believed to be primarily of tec- tonic origin. Numbers on plate 1 show data points where sur- face faulting was observed. Details of the observa- tion at each data point are given in table 1. Within the limitations of the map scale, we have tried to plot and describe as accurately as possible the distri— bution of surface fractures observed in the field. High—resolution 1:6,000- and 1:10,000-scale vertical color photographsof the Managua area taken by NASA on December 27th and 28th enabled precise location of data points in the field. These photo- graphs were also used to update the 1210,000-scale topographic base map of the Managua area (used for pl. 1) in the immediate Vicinity of the mapped faults so that the data points could be plotted accu- rately relative to streets, highways, major buildings, and other features. It is entirely possible that faults other than the four described herein moved during the earthquake sequence but were not identified during our brief geologic reconnaissance of the earthquake-affected area. The combined surface geologic and seismologic data described in the following sections clearly indi- cate, however, that the faults we have mapped in- clude the most important ones along which displace- ment occurred during the earthquakes. SURFACE EXPRESSION The four surface faults along which displacement occurred during the December 23d'earthquake or during its aftershocks are subparallel and [trend northeastward across the Managua area. On plate 1 these faults are labeled A through D from east to west. Faults A and B are about 850 m (meters) apart, faults B and C are 270 to 500 meters apart, and faults C and D are roughly 850 to 1,150 meters apart. The faults can be traced on land for the fol- lowing distances: A—1.6 km (kilometers), B—-5.1 km, 0—5.9 km, and D—2.7 km. All the faults die out on land to the Southwest. Towards the north- east, fault A dies out on land but the other three faults extend to the shore of Lake Managua. The distribution of aftershocks, described in the follow- ing section, is in good agreement with the mapped southwestern limits of faulting and further suggests that one or both of faults B and C probably extend at least 6 km northeastward beneath Lake Managua approximately as indicated in figure 1. Zones of surface fractures along the faults vary considerably in width and number of constituent fractures, depending upon both the amount of dis- placement and the nature of the ground surface. In open fields displacement tends to be concentrated in a single fracture or in a well-defined band of en echelon fractures a few meters to 20 m wide. The fractures along fault C are effectively masked in cultivated and planted fields between the Circum- ferential Highway and the Nejapa Country Club. In built-up areas where rigid structures such as streets, curbs, sidewalks and buildings locally tend to bridge the shear zone, displacement may be distributed over broad areas 60 m or more wide in which there are as many as 20 fractures. Buildings commonly hide fractures that pass beneath them, unless displace- ment is large enough to visibly affect the structure. The fractures in urban areas commonly ruptured underground utility lines, so that in many places the fault trace was marked by flowing water or utility GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES , 5 86°20' A 86°L10’ 12 h . / \ EXPLANATION ' N Z b fikéi ALLUVIUM, LAKE DEPOSITS, AND SOIL Pleistocene and Holocene MAFIC AND INTERMEDIATE PYROCLASTIC ROCKS E INTERBEDDED FLOWS AND PYROCLASTIC ROCKS ° 2 / 55?: 8 if??? MAFIC PYROCLASTIC ROCKS c a 2 ///// "_'.‘ m n. ‘3 E Contact 1111-11- Volcanic collapse —- —— Fault or linearnent ___. 1931 earthquake fault é 1972 earthquake fault —- Dotted where inferred from aftershock distribution V Huete Pt ,/ LA K E Lake MA NA G UA Apoyeque (elev 39m) Chiltepe '- Volcano Lake Jiloa 12°10’ MANAGUA ' . 71 I ke Tlscagn I ,1 , . . I Lake soso ca 80° 20” Q 2 1/ 'w / RAGUA : PACIFIC /10a ”Z }0CEAN ,\'\/ :fi/ 0 /§§ INDEX MAP 1 6 8KILOMETER$ I T 4M|LE$ FIGURE 1.—Gen0ralized geologic map of the Managua area showing faults related to the 1972 and 1931 earthquakes. Geology modified from 1:250,000-sca1e Managua Sheet (ND 16~15) of the Instituto Geografico Nacional, Nicaragua. [Measured aggregate displacement: value. Sense of displacement: MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 TABLE 1.———Characteristics of fractures along the Managua faults Brown, Jr., and George Plafker, January 6—11, 1973] Tr”. trace. N.m., cracks observed but displacement not measured; S, sxmstral; D, dextral; V, vertical (down-co-southeast); E, wall separation (7), measured displacement may not be true (extension). Observations by R. pavement. o :é 3 a n h I: a” g A “a a 33 E 5 5 5 o 6! Q E a a .38 E 0 1.. :3 W E q) a V :- = E 29 a 0 -~ u 3 ‘3 .5 .3 ° 0 “M .i.‘ :5. 2 . 2 :5 4:) E : g :2 (fig 3‘ g 3' 3 Ground surface Remarks '3. ‘H E S i“ ‘H a 44 ° LU '65 " 'H a: a “a E = V a ea 3 l: o g h x :- h ‘1’ o 0 a a3 .2 w . a .‘3 a w: =1 E = a) s .5 = A v 5 a o a o 5 23 o S w v.2 a E S a a g a g H a, E 5 E g 3 o m H < «.4 <1 :21 B E 9.5 m 0'; av Fault A 1 ___- _______ ‘76 ..... Tr. __________________ Open field ________ Open fractures with no horizontal displacement. 2 ———- ——————— 30 ————— Tr. ________ ___,do ____________ 0. 3 ---- ----------------- NJ“ 5 Dirt road and En echelon, poorly exposed lawn. fractures. 4 ____ N. 25 E 9 4 >%'§ ls] } __________ Asphalt pavement _ 5 ——-- ----------------- >i'g ‘5] } .......... Interlocking tile Broken underground pipes. N ~ S pavement. Offset concrete block fence. 6 ____ _______ 76 >6 J“ ___________ Asphalt pavement Southeast-facin 510 e break. 10'2 E } and open field. g p 7 -..-_ ................. N.m S .............................. Severely damaged new con- crete home astride fracture zone. 8 ____ ____________ 2 ________________ (1.2 S __________ Asphalt pavement _ Damage to concrete homes astride fracture zone. 9 -_- ____________ 1 ________________ >1 S 2.0 Tile floor ......... 10 -_-_ N. 30 E 15 1 N. 15 E >1 2 S __________ ___do _____________ 11 ___- ____________ 1 ________________ Tr __________________ Concrete curbs and Fracture exposed in ditch; dirt road. dip approx 85° SE. 12 ———- ............ l ________________ Tr. .................. _-_do ............. Fracture zone appears to die out near here. Fault B 13 -___ _______ 5 3 _________________ 2.5 S .......... Concrete fence Fracture zone concealed to foundation. north beneath garbage dump. 14 -.-- N. 10 E ___________________________ (1.2 S __________ Dirt road and Broken waterline and con- open field. crete fence foundation. 15 ___- ............ 1 _________________ .m. .................. Dirt road _________ Broken waterline. 16 --.- ....... 5—9 ______________________ 3 8—10.2 S __________ Railroad embank- ment, asphalt pavement, con- crete sidewalks and curb. 17 ____ _________________ N. 10-40 E. N.m __________________ Dirt road and bare Entire area intensely frac- ground on low hill tured. Includes lurch (Chico Pelén). cracking. 18 ____ ____________ 3 N. >5.1 D __________ Asphalt pavement Measurement on curb. and concrete curbs. 19 ---- 2 N. >1.0 D .......... ---do _____________ 20 ____ 1 N. 6. D .......... --_do _____________ Curved fracture in asphalt pavement west of sta. 36 convex towards northeast. 21 ____ _________________ N. 15 W.-—N. 4 E. 2.5 S __________ Cutbank 12 m high and concrete re- taining wall. 22 ___- _______ 5 2 _________________ { 22.9 S } 25.9 Asphalt pavement Near collapsed part of 10.2 E and concrete Customs House. curbs. 23 ____ ____________ 1 N. N.m. __________________ ___do _____________ East side (uphill) overrides west side of fracture. 24 _-__ _______ 12 3 N { 10-2 S ) __________ Asphalt and tile 7-6 E pavement. ' 25 ____ _______ 23 >3 N.-S 19.0 S __________ Asphalt pavement Compression with spallmg and concrete at joints of curbs that curbs. trend north-south. 26 .-__ _______ 52 10 N. 10 E. 10.27152 S ___do ............. 27 ___- N. 42 E. 12—15 1 N. S Open field ________ 28 -___ ____________ 6 N. S Asphalt pavement and concrete curbs. 29 .--- _______ 23 2 S } __________ Asphalt pavement, Broken waterline. Horizontal E concrete curbs, displacement measured on and sidewalks. curved road. 30 ___- ____________ 1 N 45 E 10.2 S __________ Asphalt pavement Broken waterline. and concrete curbs. 31 _--_ _____ 1 ________________ N.m. ________ Asphalt pavement - 32 ____ 2 2 N 15 E N.m. S Dirt road _________ 33 ____ 2 2 ________________ N.m. S Open field ________ ~ 34 -__ 46 Many N. 5—10 W. >3.8 S Asphalt pavement _ Possible lurch cracking. 35 ____ 12 _____ N. 5 W—N. 32 E N.m. S Open field ________ 36 -___ ____________ 1 _________________ >2.5 S Interlocking tile GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES TABLE 1.——Cha7‘acteristics of fractures along the Managua. faults—Continued I 2 :3 a *3 4-» o a S 5 E 5': s A “5 m at} E :1 E w ‘1’ H E q) E g a w ,E «:33 5-7 0 a 5 a) L. 0 ~ u A g V cu g 0 am 3 g a g .—: :3 g g E a E :55 3‘ 5E 3 Ground surface Remarks 3. e 'E g 3.8 ‘H “K. o 'c as 3 V a t a “a "8 5” w as = ° 5* 5* " 5 °’ ° 3 ET" .9. "5 :43 L4 3 "a 5 w E “1 50:... *7 E a. u a o g 3 U N m 9.21. a E .‘S 33 a a a a B we 5 7a a g o w 8 <1 J: < :21 [-4 E 9.5 to 0'7; av Fault B—Continued 37 ____ _________________ N. 25 E N.m. .................. Interlocking tile Probable en echelon offset pavement and to west between stas. 36 open field. and 37. 38 ____ _______ 76 Many N. 25 E N.m. __________________ Asphalt pavement At Baptist Hospital, and tile sidewalk. 39 ---- _______ 18 576 ................. 2; 1% } __________ Asphalt pavement _ Broken waterline. 4O -_-_ _______ 50 >5 N. 17 E 5.1 S __________ ___do _____________ Do. 41 ____ N. 42E 46 >5 N.—N. 30 E { big-$73 S ) 16.8—19.6 Asphalt pavement, pressure ridges trend east. 2' 7 ’8 V concrete curbs, west in field. Two broken and open fiEId- watel'lines in street. 42 ____ _______ 50 8 N. 10 E 15.2*(?)48-3 S __________ Asphalt pavement, Horizontal displacement concrete curbs, measured on curved road and tile sidewalk. and sidewalk. 43 ____ _______ 43 >5 N. 10 E { (“22-3 S } __________ Asphalt pavement Broken waterline. 5'1 V and concrete curbs. 44 ---- N. 25 E 46 >4 _________________ N.m. S __________ Dirt road, concrete- lined ditch. open field. 45 ___- _______ ~90 >5 _________________ >2.5 S Asphalt pavement - Possible lurch cracking, 46 ____ N 12 E 6 _____ N. 10 E N.m. S Dirt road ......... En echelon offset between stas. 46 and 47. 47 ___- N. 32 E _____ l N. 5 W.-N. 10 E. N.m. S __________ Interlocking tile pavement and open field. 48 _-__ N. 24 E 6 1—3 _________________ (?)35.6 S (7)411 Open fiEId ........ Offset fence. Posts may not have been perfectly aligned prior to faulting. 49 ____ N. 22 E. 12 1—3 >152 S .......... ___do ............. o. 50 ____ N. 8 E. 23 1 N.m. D .......... ___do ............. Several centimeters dextral offset of fence. Fracture dies out within 100 m to south. 51 -_-_ ....... 9—12 1 _________________ N.m. S ___________ ___do _____________ 52 -_-_ N. 34E 12 1 N. 15 W N.m. S _ ___do __ 53 _-__ ____________ 1 N. 22 E N.m. S - __-do _- In baseball field. 54 ____ N. 32 E 9—12 >1 N. N.m. S . ___do Do. 55 ____ _______ ____ 1 _________________ N.m. S _ Asphalt pavement _ 56 ____ N. 45 E 2 N. 45 E 12.7—16.5 D ___________ Asphalt pavement Prominent zone dextral frac- and concrete tures across Pan American curbs. Highway. Cannot be traced to northeast. Fault C 57 ____ _____________________________________________________________________ Lake shore ....... Broken sewer outfall along fault trace. 58 __-- _______ 8 1—3 _________________ N.m S __________ Open field and Slump in cliff at old lake ci . shoreline. 59 ___- 15 1 N.m. S __________ Open field ________ 60 _-__ _____ >4 N.m S __________ Interlocking tile Powerplant parking lot. pavement. 61 ____ ________ 37 ______________________ 33.0 S 38.1 Asphalt and inter- Measured on north curb of locking tile pave- highway. ment, and con- crete curbs. 62 ____ _______ 12 ______________________ 28-6 S 33.0 Concrete slab { Y”) E } sidewalk. 63 __,_ __________________________________ 30.5 S 35.2 Asphalt pavement, Broken waterline. Measure- concrete curbs, ment on curb south of railroad embank- railroad line. ment. 64 __-_ _______ 61 9 N. N.m. S .......... Asphalt pavement Broken waterline. and concrete curbs. 65 ____ ____________ >2 N. Tr. D .......... ___(lo _____________ Few poorly exposed cracks with slight horizontal displacement. 66 ___- ____________ >2 N. Tr. S .......... --_do ............. o. 67 ___- _______ 5 2 N. 17.8 S .......... ___do _____________ Broken waterline. . 15.2—17.8 E 68 -_-_ _______ 55 5 . N. { 27.9 S } 31 3 __.do _____________ 4.3 V 69 -___ ____________ 1 ________________ N.m. S __________ ___do _____________ Poorly exposed cracks in street and market floor. 70 ____ _______ )4 12 ________________ N.m S __________ ___do _____________ Down-to-southeast slope break on east side of fracture zone. 71 ____ _______ 24 7 ________________ N.m. S .......... __-do _____________ 8 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 TABLE 1,—Characteristics of fractures along the Managua faults—Continued v at? a .. g £3 9. .. a); 5 E 5': ‘ A '3‘" 'J a) o 8 ca 9 E E a 2 "" E v H an N ‘1’ E q: a 0v k =1 q: ’-‘ 9 "‘ o A a J: g E g a“ ,1? 53 a g F: g :5 g E "‘ 2 a 5'; 3‘ SE a Ground surface Remarks '3. 31.5 S :5 on ad a o :5 we V M ‘1 m a. 'U :V .H a: 3 o x o >< a: o w a, 0 u-E__ ‘1 a " o h g E w '3 ‘-‘ a) .2 'g 5-1 3 L4 5 "g a q) 5 0 :: ~=A a a, D. o p. o q, s u N m 34.”. °3 5 2 ~ 9 .. r... . we 5 .. = z u w E4 <5. < c E 2 9.5 m 0‘; RV Fault C—Continued 72 ____ N. 28 E. 88 >20 ________________ >5.1 S __________ Asphalt pavement and concrete curbs. 73 -___ ____________ 3 ________________ N.m. S __________ ___do _____________ 74 ____ _______ 14 3 N. 27.9—30.5 S 31.9—34.9 ___do _____________ Down-to-southeast slope break on east side of fracture zone. 75 .-__ 1 >10.2 S ___do _____________ 76 -_-_ >4 >6.3 S --_d0 _ .. Broken waterline. 77 ____ 1 >15.2 S ___d0 _ 78 ._-- >3 N.m. S ___do _ _- Broken waterline. 79 __-_ >7 N.m. S ___d() _ ,_ 80 ___ >4 27.9 S ___do ______ _ 81 ____ 5 >5.1 S Open field ________ 82 -__- >6 N.m. ........ Asphalt pavement and dirt road. 83 ____ _______ 8 1 N. 10—15 E. { 1%315 ‘S/ } .......... Open field ________ Fracture zone obscured by ‘ brush in field to south. 84 -_-- ____________ 1 N. 20 E. N.m. S .......... Dirt road and earthen floor of house. 85 ____ _______ 15 2 ________________ >5.1 S __________ ___do _____________ Broken waterline. 86 -_-_ ____________ 1 ................ N.m. S __________ Earthen floor of Fracture intersects wood- house. frame shack. 87 ____ 15—18 2-3 N N.m. S __________ Dirt road _________ 88 ____ 3 N N.m. S _ d 89 ____ _____ 1—2 ________________ N.m. S 90 ____ _____ 1 ________________ { g: .5 Pressure ridges that trend ' V east-west between fractures. 91 _-__ 6 1 N. 10 BEN. 20 W. 7 5710.2 S En echelon cracks along base of southeast-facing slope. 92 ____ _______ 35 >6 _________________ (“33.0 S __________ Interlocking tile Approx 15.2 cm down-to-east pavement in displacement, probably part- highway. 1y due to fill compaction. 93 ____ N. 45 E. s 4 N. 5710 E. { N-gnl- g } __________ Open field ________ 94 ____ _________________ N. 10-40 W. N.m. S _ At base of southeast-facing <7) 15 2 s mm 95 ____________ 1 N. 20 W. { 5.17102 V } __________ ___do _____________ 96 ____ N.’N. 5 E. _____ 1 N. 15 W. N.m. S __________ ___do ............. Fracture zone concealed. 97 __N ____________ 1—2 N. 15 W. N.m. S __________ Golf course fair- way 98 ____ ____________ 1 ________________ N.m. S __________ ___do ............. Fracture zone dies out to south. 99 ____ N. 6 1 N. N.m. S __________ _-_do _____________ 100 ____ N. 10 W. ..... 1 ________________ Tr. S __________ -__do _____________ Fracture zone dies out to south. 101 ____ N. 28 E. _____ 172 N. 8—20 E. N.m. S __________ Open field .......... En echelon fractures in arm- . ate zone concave to east. 102 ____ N. 45 E. 1 N. 30 E. N.m. S __________ ___do _____________ 103 ____ _______ 1 ________________ 2.5 S -. __ Asphalt pavement _ 104 ____ ____________________________ N.m. .................. Golf course fair— way. 105 ____ ___________________________________________________________________ Golf course fairway and asphalt pave- ment. Fault D 106 ____ ____________ 1 N. 30 E. Tr. __________________ Dirt road ________ Open fracture with no measurable horizontal displacement. 107 ____ ____________ 1-3 N. 6 W. Tr. .................. Open field ________ Do. 108 _-__ _______ 6 1 N. 40 E. N.m. __________________ Asphalt pavement and concrete curbs. 109 ____ ____________ 1 N. 25 E. 1.9 S 2.2 _-_do _____________ Measurement at painted yellow line on road. no ____ _________________ Broken waterline. 111 ____ ____________ 1 Measurement on south curb. No offset of north curb. [12 ____ _________________________________ >1.3 S ._' ________ Asphalt pavement. Measurement on Banco de concrete curbs, Americas sidewalk. and sidewalk. \ 113 _-.- ____________ l ________________ 1.3 S .......... Asphalt pavement, concrete curbs, and interlocking tile pavement. 114 ____ N. 20 E. _____ 3 N. N.m. .................. Vacant lot and Broken waterline. asphalt pave- ment. GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 9 TABLE 1.—Characteristics of fractures along the Managua faults—Continued ., .é . .. '1: °’ +3 5 3 5 E 5': s a. 3d» E = o a) " ° 3 d 9 E E h 'H E q, ;.. a 0 _ o +2 h a $4 5 g 3., o :— u A 5 v a, g .5 in g i a g "‘ ° 5 0 '° N‘ a M :A 9‘ E '3 0 Ground surface Remarks #- : .. a E .. ~ 5: o s .2 .. a w ‘E a g« r .. o v w 3 V w m 'H '5 5" 9.1 3— : ° >< 2 x E.’ ° 2 w o 0 a «7, o "a 2 3 2 3 v = E g e '5 ::A s 5 a: a a s a: . 2 2 a a: £1 < 2:. < 4: s s as a o 'a 23 Fault D—Continued 115 ____ ____________ 1—2 N. N.m .................. Asphalt pavement- Broken waterline. 116 ____ ____________ 1—3 N. 10 E. N.m S .......... Asphalt pavement and concrete cur s 117 _--_ ............ 3 N. 10 E. N.m. S __________ _-_do ____________ 118 ____ N. 16 E _____ 1 N. 10—12 E. N.m. S .......... Asphalt pavement Severe damage to Texaco and open field. station astride fracture zone. 119 _--_ _______ 44 8—10 N 8 E. >1.3 S __________ Asphalt pavement Severe damage to concrete and concrete homes astride fracture curbs. zone. 120 __-- ....... 6 3 ................. N.m S .......... ..__do ____________ 121 ___- _______ 44 3 _________________ N.m S _____________ do ____________ 122 .___ ............ 3 N. 35 E N.m S .......... __-do ____________ Severe damage to concrete homes astride fracture zone. 123 __-_ N. 36 E _____ >3 N. 10—18 E. >1.0 S __________ Open field and Fracture zone appears to excavations in the streets (fig. 2). Localities at which waterline breaks were observed are indicated by an “X” on plate 1. Throughout much of the cen- tral part of Managua, where earthquake damage was greatest, the fracture zones were concealed by rubble. This is especially true along fault D between stations 109 and 116. The traces of faults A, C, and D are straight to slightly sinuous, with uniform average strikes for most of their lengths of N. 38° to 40° E. Towards the southwestern end of fault C in the vicinity of the Nejapa Country Club, where the trace is marked by several short, linear fracture zones over a broad area, there is a gradual change in strike to north- south or even N. 10° W. In contrast, fault B is a more complex feature, consisting of three major seg- ments showing en echelon offsets and considerable variability in strike. The overall trend of the zone is approximately N. 40° E., but individual segments have average strikes of N. 23° E. in the area north of the Pan American Highway (Highway 1), N. 43° E. from the highway to the vicinity of Lake Tiscapa, and N. 32° E. in the area south of the lake. The three en echelon segments of fault B are con- nected by broad complex zones of fractures near the Pan American Highway and the Managua-Masaya Highway (Highway 4). At the Pan American High- way there is an offset of approximately 200 m be- tween segments of the fault, with a large number of intervening fractures, some of which have small components of dextral slip in the vicinity of stations earthen floor of die out to south. warehouse. 18, 19, and 20. The exact location of the fault trace in the Pan American Highway area is further com- plicated by pervasive lurch- and slump-fracturing related to settling and spreading in loose pyroclastic deposits that underlie a small hill (Chico Pelén, sta. 17, pl. 1) situated approximately in the en echelon offset between the linear fault segments. The en echelon offset in the Vicinity of the Managua-Masaya Highway is marked by a diffuse zone of cracks over 100 m wide. At this locality some of the fracturing may be due to downslope lurching of highway fill and the loose pyroclastic material that makes up the slopes of the Tiscapa crater. Displacement on fractures within fault zones asso- ciated with the December 23d earthquakes is pre- dominantly horizontal and in a sinistral sense: that is, to an observer looking across the surface cracks, the opposite side has moved toward the left. The sense of lateral displacement can be ascertained from the fact that en echelon fractures have more northerly trends than the fault zones, as determined by offsets of streets, curbs, railroad tracks, walls, and fences, or by matching irregularities in the walls of open fractures (figs. 3 to 8). The amount of displacement across individual fractures and the aggregate displacement across the zones were meas- ured where suitable linear reference features were available. Inasmuch as the streets, curbs, or fences on which horizontal slip was measured are oblique to the trend of the fracture zones, the measurements give a vector component of the slip, rather than the 10 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 4*“ 5 - ' “MW-u van-Ir WW II FIGURE 2.—One of many flowing waterline breaks along earthquake fractures. (Located on fault B, sta. 40, pl. 1.) total slip. The calculated true sinistral slip is shown in table 1 and on plate 1 at those localities where we FIGURE 3,—Displaced sidewalk blocks at fault C along north side of Pan American Highway (sta. 2, pl. 1). Aggregate displacement across zone 12 m wide here is 28.6 cm sinis» tral and 17.0 cm extensional. W_ .35me FIGURE 4.—Sinistral offset in railroad lines where it is crossed by fault C (near sta. 63, pl. 1). Rails had already been straightened somewhat before this photograph was taken. GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 11 FIGURE 5.—Fault displacement in gas station pavement along fault B. Sinistral offset of line is 12.7 cm; absence of scraping along edges of offset interlocking concrete tiles indicates that strike-slip motion occurred after tiles pulled apart about 6.4 cm. obtained the largest reliable measurements of hori- zontal slip across each of the fracture zones. Al- though the aggregate displacements vary from fault to fault and along the trace of individual faults, this variation is generally systematic. Maximum aggre- gate displacements of 22.9 cm (centimeters) (sta. 22) and 33.0 cm (sta. 61) measured on faults B and C, respectively, in the vicinity of the Pan American Highway give calculated total sinistral displace- ments at these localities of 25.9 cm and 38.1 cm. For both of these faults the displacement is reason- ably constant southwestward to the vicinity of Lake Tiscapa and appears to diminish progressively to the southwest of the lake. Aggregate sinistral dis- placement on faults A and D is small: It is 2.0 cm or less on fault A and at least 2.2 cm, but possibly as much as 5.9 cm, on fault D. Minor vertical displacements in which the south- east block is relatively downthrown (fig. 8) are evident across the fracture zones or on individual fractures within the zones at a number of localities along faults A, B, and C. Most of the observed ver- tical displacements are along fault A and the south- western two-thirds of fault C where there is clear evidence for prior vertical movements in the form FIGURE 6.——Sinistral offset of street and curb on fault C near U.S. Embassy (view towards south, sta. 80, pl. 1). Meas- ured aggregate displacement is 27.9 cm across a zone more than 49 m wide. Note asphalt-patched fractures in street and severe “shear” cracking in five-story office building. of southeast-facing topographic slope breaks. In many places, vertical offset on the faults related to the December 23d earthquakes is difficult to ascertain because of preexisting topographic slopes that paral- lel the faults. Maximum aggregate displacement across the zones as determined from measurements of the vertical component across constituent frac- tures is 1.6 cm for fault A, 5.1 cm for fault B, and possibly as much as 10.2 cm for fault C. More accu- rate values for the vertical component of displace- ment related to faulting should become available when the Instituto Geografico Nacional finishes re- surveying level lines in and near Managua. Several features of the two main faults, B and C, suggest the possibility that they merge into a single master fault at some unknown depth beneath the thick fill of unconsolidated deposits that under- lies Managua. The two faults are within a few hun- dred meters of one another at the surface and, judging from their trends, they could intersect in the vicinity of the Nejapa Country Club (pl. 1). Both underwent roughly equal amounts of strike- slip displacement of 30 to 40 cm. On a gross scale, they may be considered as a single rupture with 12 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 FIGURE 7.—-Open fracture along fault C in vacant lot north of U.S. Embassy (sta. 81, pl. 1). Both the fault trend and open- ing direction on the fracture parallel the ruler. Scale is 15 cm long. sinistral displacement of about 64 cm, the sum of the maximum observed offsets. Fault C has a continuous linear surface trace along which there is clear geologic evidence for repeated recent movements involving large vertical displacements, as will be discussed in a following section. In contrast, fault B has a discontinuous, irregular surface trace, and there is no geologic evi- dence along it for preexisting movements. Thus, the irregular, en echelon segments of fault B may be interpreted as splays resulting from upward spread- ing of the rupture zone along fault C within the near-surface unconsolidated deposits. Arguing against this interpretation is the fact that none of the en echelon segments that make up fault B merge into fault C or come closer to it than 270 m. Unfortunately, the resolution of aftershock locations is inadequate to permit a unique solution to this question. In addition to the sinistral displacement across the fracture zones, there typically is a subordinate gaping or extensional east-west component, a local compressional component in a general north-south direction, and a minor vertical component in which the southeast block is relatively downthrown. The maximum measured extensional components across the fracture zones, 10.2 cm on fault B (stas. 22 and 29) and 17.8 cm on fault C (sta. 68), are between one—third and two-thirds of the measured sinistral displacement (figs. 3, 5, and 7). A large extensional component (10.2 cm) was also measured at one 10- cality on fault A (sta. 6), but at this locality, the gaping is probably due in part to slump on a promi- nent southeast-facing slope. The north-south com- pressional component in the fracture zones is mani- fested by east-west-trending buckles and overthrusts that connect en echelon fractures (fig. 8) or by local compressive buckles and overthrusts of north- south streets and pavements (fig. 9). The amount of north—south compressive shortening in the fault zones cannot be ascertained from the available data GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 13 FIGURE 8.—En echelon fractures along fault B (between stas. 42 and 43, pl. 1). There is a down-to-southeast component of vertical displacement on fracture in foreground and a prominent compressional bulge at east-west trending frac- ture connecting en echelon fractures near the belt and hammer in middle ground. but appears to be smaller than either the sinistral or extensional components. FIGURE 9,—Compressional rupture and lateral buckle of north-south trending curb along fault zone B (near sta. 25, pl. 1). FRACTURES WITH DEXTRAL DISPLACEMENT Fractures with predominantly dextral (right- lateral) displacements were observed at several 10- calities near the four earthquake faults. They are located along the Pan American Highway in the gap between faults B and C (stas. 18, 19, 20, 56) and in an open pasture less than 100 m west of fault B (sta. 50). The largest amount of dextral slip, 16.5 cm, was measured at station 56 across a zone 9 m wide that causes a pronounced offset in the pavement and curbs of the Pan American Highway (fig. 10). Dex- tral slip on fractures at stations 18, 19, and 20 amounted to >51 cm, 1.0 cm, and about 5.1 cm, respectively; the slip at station 50 may be as much as several centimeters but could not be accurately measured. Unlike the fractures on the zones along the trend of the earthquake faults, the dextral frac— tures appear to be local effects that do not extend along strike for more than a few hundred meters; for instance, those at the highway were not seen on parallel streets either to the north or south. They appear to be local movements related to the sinistral movement on the faults. FIGURE 10.-——-Dextral offset of between 12.7 and 16.5 cm in curb of Pan American Highway between faults B and C (sta. 56, pl. 1). LACK OF EVIDENCE FOR FAULT CREEP We could not find evidence for creep deformation along any of the surface faults. Absence of pre- quake creep is suggested by the fact that all ob- served surface fractures in paved streets and in curbs appeared to be new and there was no patch- work to suggest movement along them prior to the 14 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 earthquake. By the time we made our study of the faulting (January 6—11), many of the larger frac- tures in paved streets had been patched with asphalt (fig. 6). Nowhere did we see evidence of additional cracking through the asphalt patches. Although this is not conclusive evidence against postquake creep because the patches may not be deforming together with the pavement, it is strongly suggestive that the major part of the displacement occurred at the time of the earthquake or prior to the date when these earthquake fractures were patched. RELATIONSHIP OF FAULTS TO STRUCTURAL DAMAGE Displacement along surface faults was directly responsible for severe localized damage to the streets and underground utilities of Managua and to many buildings along the fault traces. Virtually all under- ground utilities along the faults were disrupted, most critical of which were the waterlines. Fires raged out of control in downtown Managua for weeks after the earthquake. Early control of the fires was prevented by the loss of most fire-fighting equipment due to station house collapse during the earthquake. However, even had the equipment sur- vived intact, the loss of water pressure throughout the city as a result of waterline breaks along faults (fig. 2) would have hindered effective control of major fires. In addition to the waterlines, there was extensive, but less critical, damage along the faults to sanitary and storm sewers, as well as to street pavements and curbs. Many structures located on or close to the faults appear to exhibit more damage than structures of comparable design and construction away from the faults. This may be because, in addition to being subjected to the seismic shaking, which affected the entire Managua area, the foundations and structural frames of such buildings were also distorted or physically ruptured by the faulting. The most obvious localization of damage by fault- ing is along faults B and C, which had the largest displacement. Heavily damaged reinforced concrete buildings on or close to these faults include the Cus- toms House office building, Baptist Hospital, U.S. Embassy, and Nejapa Country Club (pl. 1). The Customs House office building, a three-story con- crete structure astride a segment of fault B that had 25.9 cm sinistral displacement, was the most dra- matic failure of the larger structures (fig. 11). Even many of the better constructed residential dwellings along these faults were severely damaged, whereas nearby buildings of identical construction that were subjected only to shaking sustained little or no loss an... M” .. “ 2* an. ,- _ ~~ any: FIGURE 11.—Collapsed three-story reinforced concrete Customs House office building. This structure is astride fault B at a locality where aggregate sinistral slip is 25.9 cm (near sta. 22, pl. 1). GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 15 FIGURE 12.—Severely damaged small home on trace of fault B (near sta. 43, pl. 1). Note fractures in street, curb, and drive- way. Homes of similar construction in this subdivision that were not on earthquake faults generally had negligible dam- age. (figs. 12 and 13). In some areas where structures were mainly unreinforced concrete block or older tarquezal (wood frame and adobe) construction, the fault trace appeared to be marked by a distinct swath of near-total destruction (fig. 14). Localization of damage was even noted along faults A and D, which underwent only a few centi- meters slip. Modern two- and four-story concrete buildings of the Pureza de Maria School (Colegio Pureza de Maria) located close to fault A and a four-story building of the American School (Colegio Americano) that is astride the fault exhibit severe structural damage. Similarly, along the southern part of the trace of fault D in the Barrio de Bolonia, a number of reasonably well-constructed newer homes sustained severe damage due to foundation displacement. Fault D passes through the commer- cial center of Managua and intersects the 13-st0ry Central Bank/ building (Banco Central), which had extensive nonstructural damage possibly caused in FIGURE 13.-—Masonry and wood home damaged by foundation displacement along fault C (sta. 78, pl. 1). Fractures inter— sect the near half of the house which is in a state of incipient collapse; the part of the house which is off the fault zone is relatively undamaged. Some fractures in the street have a vertical slip component. 16 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 ( s FIGURE 14.—Swath of destroyed buildings along fault C (sta. 64, pl. 1). Fault trace is through center of photograph. Open fractures that trend north-south in street pavement are en echelon to the fault. Structure on the right is typi— cal of tarquezal (wood and adobe) construction that was extensively damaged in the Managua area. part by foundation displacement. (See frontispiece.) In contrast, the adjacent 16-st0ry Bank of the Americas (Banco de Americas) building, which is off the fault zone, sustained less severe earthquake damage. SIMILARITIES OF 1972 FAULTS TO THE 1931 EARTHQUAKE FAULT All the earthquake faults related to the 1972 event are roughly parallel to a fault that was mapped in the northwestern part of the city of Managua after a destructive earthquake on March 31, 1931 (pl. 1, fault E). In a study made on the day after the 1931 earthquake, US. Army Corps of Engineers personnel identified a fault zone trending N. 36° E. that extended 2 km through the present General Somoza Stadium to the shore of Lake Ma- nagua (Durham, 1931; Sultan, 1931). They found numerous cracks, none of which was more than 5 cm wide or had more than 10 cm vertical displace- ment, generally with the southeast side relatively downdropped. No horizontal displacement was ob- served on fractures formed at the surface along the mapped fault, but the observation that individual fractures had more northerly trends than the strike of the zone is strongly suggestive of en echelon rup- tures with the proper sense of rotation for sinistral faulting. The zone of cracks was less than 150 m Wide, and there was extreme damage along the fault trace, especially to the penitentiary and market building, which were directly over the faultline. The water main leading from the reservoir to the city was pulled apart where it crossed the fault. As a conse- quence, the Engineer troops were badly handicapped by lack of water in fighting the fires that broke out after the earthquake—a situation exactly compara- ble to that which occurred in 1972. The December 1972 earthquakes do not appear to have caused renewed movement on this fault in the segment we examined to the northeast of the Gen- GEOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 17 eral Somoza Stadium; we did not work along that part of the trace to the southwest of the stadium. GEOLOGIC EVIDENCE FOR PREVIOUS FAULTING Of the five faults shown on plate 1 that are related to the 1972 and 1931 earthquakes, only faults A and C have clear indications of previous Holocene dis- placement. Both faults were mapped on the 1 : 50,000 Managua sheet (Kuang and Williams, 1971) of the geologic map of Nicaragua as normal faults with the southeast side relatively downthrown, presum- ably on the basis of the prominent topographic scarps that are locally developed along them. Faults A, B, and C all show local earthquake-related ver- tical displacements in which the southeast block was relatively downthrown in the same sense as the topo- graphic slopes along faults A and C. All of fault A (named the “Escuela fault”) was delineated on the geologic map, and it is shown intersecting a north- south trending lineament to the south of Managua (fig. 1). The part of fault C (named the “Tiscapa fault”) extending from a few hundred meters north- east of Lake Tiscapa through the lake and south- westward past the Nejapa Country Club was also delineated on the geologic map. A number of other faults that cut Quaternary deposits are shown on the geologic map, most notable of which is a zone of north-south-trending faults associated with the Ne- japa line of volcanic centers to the west of Managua (fig. 1). The existence of northeast-trending faults with large vertical components of displacement is also suggested by the prominent linear reentrant in the northeast shore of Lake Managua from Punta Huete northeastward, a feature with roughly the same strike as the 1931 and 1972 earthquake faults at Managua (fig. 1). The topography at the Tiscapa pit crater provides some information on the history of previous dis- placement along fault C. The trace of the fault on the northeast side of the crater is marked by a de— graded southeast-facing scarp more than 15 m high at the crater rim and by lakeshore offsets of about 50 m in a sinistral sense on the northeast and 30 m in a dextral sense on the southwest (fig. 15). Both the rim scarps and opposing lakeshore offsets appear to result from relative downdropping of the south- east part of the crater, which is essentially an in- verted cone whose walls slope inward 500 to 60°. Asymmetry in the amount of horizontal offset of the lakeshores could result from a relatively small sin- istral fault displacement either concurrent with, or after, the vertical movements. The postulated faulted origin for the displacement crater rim and lake— shore is illustrated diagrammatically in figure 16. The amount of inferred vertical and lateral displace- ment on the fault is subject to large uncertainties regarding the original crater shape and the extent to which that shape was modified by landslides along the crater walls. The most direct geometric recon- struction indicates that on the order of 30 m ver- tical and 10 m sinistral displacement provides the best fit for the lakeshore. Although the calculated amount of vertical slip is nearly double that which is indicated by scarp heights at the crater rim or further south along the fault trace, it is clear that any reasonable model requires a vertical component that is larger than the horizontal component. This is at variance with the predominantly strike-slip sense of displacement observed after the 1972 earthquakes, and may indicate a late Holocene change in style of tectonic deformation. The Tiscapa data, and other evidence for young faulting cited previously, indi- cate an extremely complex and active Holocene tec- tonic history in the Managua area involving recur— rent horizontal and vertical movements over a broad zone of faulting. It is noteworthy that about 30 fault movements, equivalent in displacement to that which occurred during the 1972 event would be required to produce just the 10 m of sinistral displacement that has offset the shores of Lake Tiscapa—an indi- cation that there must have been many repeated dis- placements on the fault since the Tiscapa crater was formed. LANDSLIDES AND SURFICIAL EFFECTS Secondary geologic effects related to seismic shak- ing during the earthquake were relatively minor. Small slope failures affected steeper slopes in the Managua area, most notably along parts of the inner walls and rim of the Tiscapa crater, where the upper part of a slide showed rotational tilting (fig. 17), and on Highway 2 southwest of Managua at about km 11, where one major slide and several incipient slides in cuts and embankments temporarily blocked part of the highway (fig. 18). A number of rockfalls and debris slides were triggered along the steep slopes of the Asososca pit crater west of Managua (fig. 1), and small areas of artificial fill failed in the road along the south rim of Asososca crater. Minor slumping, debris falls, and ravelling were wide- spread along steep natural and artificial slopes in loose pyroclastic deposits and alluvium throughout the area (fig. 19). Although most of Managua is underlain by thick deposits of unconsolidated materials, there was no obvious damage related to differential compaction, 18 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 FIGURE 15,—Northeast margin of the Tiscapa pit crater and lake showing approximate trace of fault C along which there is a degraded scarp at the crater rim and 50 m apparent sinistral offset of the lake shore (arrows). The opposite lake shore along the fault trace, which cannot be seen in the photograph, is ofisest about 40 m in a dextral sense. (Photo taken from a point near sta. 45, pl. 1, looking northward.) liquefaction, and lateral spreading of foundations. Lack of such effects is probably due to the high per- meability of the predominantly pyroclastic deposits that underlie the city, a low water table, an unusu- ally dry rainy season preceding the earthquake (Santos, 1972), and the short duration of seismic shaking. The only clear indications of surficial slumping and lateral spreading were found along the banks of a sewer outfall along the shore of Lake Managua, where the water table was within 45 cm of the surface. SEISMOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES The hypocenter of the main Managua earthquake was located by the National Oceanic and Atmospher- ic Administration (National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration, 1973) at 12.4°N., 86.1° W., at an assumed depth of 5 km. This location could be in error by at least 50 km because of the lack of local seismic stations and the difficulties of accurately locating earthquakes from data recorded around the world. Furthermore, the hypocenter, or point in the earth where a fault begins to rupture as located with the first seismic waves to arrive at the various re- cording stations, is not particularly relevant to the discussion of damage in Managua since the earth- quake did not occur at a point but was caused by the sudden release of energy along a fault plane with an area of more than 100 km? (square kilometers). Following a large earthquake, there are many smaller earthquakes or aftershocks in the same re— gion. In a number of well-documented cases, the zone of aftershocks has been observed to outline the fault that moved during the main event. Therefore, nine SEISMOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES N l A B l ml 19 FIGURE 16.—Schematic diagrams illustrating possible fault-controlled topographic modifications at the Tiscapa pit crater (oblique views above) and Lake Tiscapa (plan views below). For clarity, the vertical and horizontal displacements are shown sequentially, although it is likely that they were at least in part simultaneous. A, Inferred initial shape; B, For— mation of rim scarp and symmetrically offset lake shore clue to vertical fault slip; C, asymmetrical offset of lake shore due to sinistral slip. Diagrams are not to scale. portable seismographs were operated in the Mana- gua area from January 4 to February 7, 1973, to locate as many aftershocks as possible and thereby to determine the source characteristics of the main earthquake. The locations and nodal plane solutions of 94 aftershocks with magnitudes of about 0 to 4 that occurred between January 4 and January 17 are discuSsed in the following sections. METHODS The nine portable seismographs were each self- contained stations with a sensor, amplifier, smoked- paper recorder and clock. They were operated at amplifications of about 250,000 to 1,000,000 times (at a frequency of 20 cycles per second), depending on the level of the ground noise at the various sites caused by human activities and wind. A master clock with a drift rate of less than 0.05 seconds per day was carried daily to each instrument to synchronize all clocks. The overall relative precision of timing between stations was better than 0.1 second. The records were analyzed using a binocular mi- croscope with adjustable magnification of up to about 30 times. The timing accuracy was thus better than 0.1 second. The earthquakes were located using the standard method of minimizing the root-mean- square (RMS) of the travel-time residuals. After a few mistakes in reading and card punching were corrected, all earthquake locations had RMS values of less than 0.1 second. Because data on crustal velocity are lacking, the nature of the geologic structure of the region under Managua to a depth of 10 km must be assumed in order to calculate the earthquake locations. In order to cover the range of reasonable possibilities, three different crustal velocity models (table 2) were assumed for the calculations. Model A is our best estimate, though it is based on scanty data of the probable structure under Managua. Model B is a crustal structure determined for the summit area of Kilauea Volcano in Hawaii (Ward and Gregersen, 1973) that most likely has higher velocities in the 20 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 FIGURE 17.—Head of rotational slump along rim of Tiscapa pit crater. Note back-tilted benches and paved headwall cracks in rim road. (Location near sta. 45, pl. 1.) TABLE 2.-——Crustal structure models used in this study Depth to the Velocity (km/sec) Thickness top of the layer (km) m) A. Model used for the final data analysis 2.5 _____________ 1.0 0.0 3.5 _____________ 2.0 1.0 5.0 _____________ 3.0 3.0 6.0 _____________ 9.0 6.0 6.8 _____________ 10.0 15.0 8.0 ____________________ 25.0 B. High-velocity Hawaiian-type crust 1.8 _____________ 0.2 0.0 3.1 _____________ 1.5 0.2 5.1 _____________ 3.7 1.7 6.7 _____________ 3.8 5.4 7.4 _____________ 4.0 9.2 8.3 ____________________ 13.2 1.8 _____________ 0.2 0.0 3.0 _____________ 1.5 0.2 4.0 _____________ 1.3 1.7 5.0 _____________ 7.0 3.0 6.0 _____________ 5.0 10.0 6.8 _____________ 10.0 15.0 8.0 ____________________ 25.0 upper crust than the Managua area. Model C is a crustal structure made up of much lower velocity material to depths of 10 km. This model assumes the volcanic ash and pyroclastics under Managua extend to a depth of 10 to 15 km and is considered to have about the lowest average velocities possible in this area. All earthquakes were located with each of the three models. The latitudes and longitudes rarely differed by more than 0.5 km, and the depths for the events located using Model B were generally 1 to 1.5 km shallower than those using the other models. Thus, the choice of an appropriate crustal velocity structure does not critically affect the results given ‘ here. Times of arrival of earthquake waves at a mini- mum of four stations are sufficient to locate an earthquake, but additional readings provide a re- dundancy that permits more accurate locations. It was found in analyzing the data that earthquake locations determined with less than six arrival times scattered more than those determined with six or more. Although locations were determined for over 165 events during this period, the epicenters of only 94 events located near the network and With six or more stations are discussed here. DISTRIBUTION OF AFTERSHOCKS The locations of the aftershocks are shown in fig- ure 20. The polygons represent the error in location, assuming a possible error in reading the arrival times at each station of 0.1 second. This standard error, which is statistically the 68-percent confidence limit, is calculated as an ellipsoid. Each polygon plotted is the shadow of an ellipsoid on the plane of the map projection where, to save computer time, the shadow is plotted as an 18-sided polygon rather than as a smooth ellipse. Thus We are 68 percent certain that the epicenter for each earthquake lies within the polygon plotted on the map. The largest symbols represent the least accurate locations. These error limits do not include the possible errors in lo- cation caused by incomplete understanding of the crustal structure. As discussed above, those errors are small and would cause a systematic shift in the locations. Seventy—nine aftershocks (84 percent of the events) lie in a narrow zone striking about N. 30° to 350 E. The apparent widening of this zone to the northeast can clearly be attributed to the increased errors in locating earthquakes that occurred farther and farther outside the network of stations. The zone is so narrow that 72 of these 79 events could be assumed to occur on one vertical plane. The data do not preclude the possibility that there is more than one fault within the aftershock zone, which is ap- proximately half a kilometer wide. The other seven events that occur near but not on this zone either represent normal statistical scatter in the locations SEISMOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 21 FIGURE 18.—Part of large landslide 55 m wide in highway embankment and out near km 11 on Highway 2 (Leon-Managua Highway). This was the largest landslide seen in the earthquake-affected area. or show that a small amount of deformation was occurring away from the central fault during the period of this study. The fault zone outlined by aftershocks extends southwest to northeast for 15 km or at most 19 km, depending on where one as- sumes the main seismically active zone ends. The depths of these events clearly range from about 2 km to about 8 or 10 km, or at most 16 km. All earthquakes are shown in figure 21A where they are projected onto a vertical plane striking N. 58° W. through the area and perpendicular to the main epicentral trend. The locations of the earthquakes in this northeast-trending zone are shown in figure 218 where they are projected onto a vertical plane passing along the zone. Note that most locations define a narrow vertical zone of seismic activity. Thus, aftershock locations considered with the ob- served surface faulting clearly imply that the fault that broke during the main earthquake on Decem- ber 23, 1972, is 10 to 15 km long, extends to a depth of 8 or 10 km, and strikes approximately N. 30° to 35° E. Twelve earthquakes were located in a group about 6 km northwest of the main fault just south of the Chiltepe volcano, and three were located about 8 km to the southeast of the main fault. Both groups lie near minor faults observed or inferred from the geology (Kuang and Williams, 1971). This type of minor aftershock activity off the main fault has been observed in other areas (for instance, Hamilton, 1972). Chinnery (1963) calculated the stress changes around a strike-slip fault or dislocation surface. He showed that while the greatest increase in stress after an offset is at the ends of the disloca- tion, there is a significant increase in shear stress to the side of the dislocation and centered at a dis- tance of about one dislocation length from its center. Thus these 15 aftershocks may be related to stress changes resulting from the main earthquake. NODAL PLANE SOLUTIONS The first seismic wave to arrive at a station moves the ground either up or down. By noting the direc- tion of this first motion and projecting it back along 22 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 FIGURE 19.—-Minor slide of unconsolidated deposits in steep bank of dry creek (near sta. 46, pl. 1). Failures such as these were common in steep creek banks and artificial cuts throughout the Managua area. the ray to its point of origin on an imaginary sphere around the focus of the earthquake, we can infer two possible directions of fault motion during the earth- quake. A reasonable choice between these two alter- natives can usually be made from geologic evidence. First-motion plots for the well-recorded earthquakes are shown in figure 22, where earthquakes with similar first—motion patterns are grouped in each plot. SEISMOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 23 I I l l l I l l | 1 1 _ 86°2o'w _ 55:... 86°|5'W é _ Managua — Laguna def 1 .///aa — l2°|OI N I: @ ., . — * . _ . ; * " Managua _ 5} PAN AMER/CAN HIGHWAY Laguna de - 45050560 1 a k 7.. Laguna de 1g La 8 /scapa 4 " Nejapa gr (5 $ t _ é ‘ SV- 5 4 E — I2°05' N < _ 2 _ 35 * ’90 H ‘70) o 5 047 7m — AKILOMETERS ‘7; a ‘7 .— l I l l l l l l l | FIGURE 20,—Locations of 94 aftershocks for the period from January 4 to January 17, 1973. The polygons represent the error in location assuming a possible error in reading the arrival times at each station of 0.1 second. Station locations are designated by stars. Polygons for earthquakes with nodal plane solutions other than type A (fig. 22) are crosshatched as follows: type B, east—west trending lines; type C, southwest—trending lines; D, southeast-trending lines. There are four different first-motion patterns. The 1 northeast-striking nodal plane is assumed in each locations of events with these patterns are shown l, case to be the fault plane since the ground fractures with different symbols in figures 20 and 21. The 3 all trend north to northeast. 24 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 o DISTANCE, IN KILOMETERS A N. 58 w. 3. 58° E. o 4 0 I I I DEPTH, IN KILOMETERS 12— 16L— DISTANCE, IN KILOMETERS DEPTH, IN KILOMETERS 16— FIGURE 21.—Hypocenters of the aftershocks projected onto vertical planes. The strike of plane A is N. 58° W, and for plane B, the strike is N. 32° E. The polygons and crosshatching are the same symbols used in figure 20. SEISMOLOGIC ASPECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKES 25 20°/ 90° 30°/ 80° E I22°/34°N N N lO°/80°N 55°/80°S E l00°/80°N |45°/90° S S FIGURE 22.—Composite nodal plane solution for 59 type A events, 5 type B events, 19 type C events, and 9 type D events. The plots are an equal area stereographic projection of the lower half of an imaginary sphere around the focus of the earthquake. Waves traveling up directly through the upper half of the sphere are projected through the center of the sphere onto the lower half. Compressions or upward motions of the ground are represented by solid circles; dilatations or downward motions of the ground are represented by open circles. Arrows designate the direction of motion on the most likely nodal plane chosen because of the trend of the zone of aftershocks and the trend of the surface faulting. A. Fifty-nine earthquakes show sinistral slip along B. Five earthquakes near the northeast end of the a vertical plane roughly parallel to the main seismic zone have sinistral slip bUt With a zone of seismic activity. These events are 10- Eijgguiifgsinent Of normal faulting down to cated predominantly on the northeast half 0f C. Nineteen events in the cluster of activity near the main seismic zone and in the cluster 0f the southwest end of the fault show sinistral events to the northwest. Some are located to slip along a nearly vertical fault striking N. the southwest. 55° E. 26 D. Nine events, five along the southwest part of the main fault and four in the northwest cluster of earthquakes, have apparent dextral slip on the northeast-trending plane. The few inconsistent points in each plot were re- examined and are correctly read. They show that while there is great consistency between earth- quakes, the nodal planes for individual aftershocks may change by :5° to 100 in strike. The nodal plane solutions show sinistral slip With a slight rotation of stresses at the northeast (solution B) and south- west (solution C) ends of the fault. In addition, minor local reversal of the fault motion is suggested by solution D. COMPARISON TO SIMILAR EARTHQUAKES The fault slip during the Managua earthquakes was greater than that associated with earthquakes of comparable size and mechanism in California. The seismic moment (M.,) has been shown by Aki (1966) to be proportional to the product of the fault area A and the average displacement 17 : M0=HAfiy where ,1 is the shear modulus in the source region. The moment can be calculated directly from the spectral density of the seismic waves. It has been related empirically (Wyss and Brune, 1968), how- ever, to the body wave magnitude in the magnitude range of interest here by the equation 10g M0E1.7ZWL+ 15.1. Thus the larger the earthquake, the larger the prod- MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 not of the fault area times average displacement. Fault dimensions and slips for the main Managua earthquake and four well-studied strike-slip earth- quakes in California are summarized in table 3. The slip along the fault is twice as large for the Managua earthquake as it is for the Parkfield, Truckee, or Borrego Mountain earthquakes, which were of simi- lar magnitude. The slip was about similar for the Coyote Mountain earthquake, but this event appar— ently was confined to a fault at a depth of 10 to 13 km which did not break the surface. Thus the Mana- gua earthquake was accompanied by twice as much slip on the fault and therefore by more severe ground fracturing than similar earthquakes in California. SETTING OF THE EARTHQUAKES REGIONAL TECTONIC RELATIONS Managua lies within the trend of volcanic and earthquake activity that girdles the Pacific Ocean basin and that popularly is referred to as the “Pa- cific Ring of Fire.” According to modern geologic theory, the earthquakes and volcanic activity around the Pacific result from relative movement between large plates of the earth’s crust. Certain boundaries between such mobile plates are defined by long, linear trenches in the seafloor, well-defined zones of earthquake activity that are shallow near the trench and deepen toward adjoining continental areas, and linear chains of volcanoes that parallel both the trench and the trend of the zone of earthquakes. All of these characteristic features occur in Central America and have been active there for several mil- TABLE 3.—Fault dimensions and slip for five earthquakes with magnitudes of 5.5 to 6.5 .34 U A u 2 “a: a a: g m ,n a a w ’5‘: E V a :E a 3 q 0" 5 " a “—‘fi “ “55 '1‘; '5 E p. x H «v s..." A v o Reference g m o o E w E '5 E H c‘ *5 E .c. an .5” 0; E 9... .5 0 g V V .- E ,s: a) . ..>_ ‘4 .: :3 ‘H a) w ‘1 *3 . . E2 EE E: ‘53: i e5 if :3 a s s 2% .15. .4 s a s s a a a; Managua ____________ 12—23—72 5.6 6.2 13 >6 10715 From 2 to 8 >67 70 13 National Oceanic Atmos- or 10. pheric Administration (1973), and this report. Pai‘kfield ____________ 6—27—66 5.5—5.8 6.2 1 37 40 From 0 to 10 18 10 0.7 Aki (1966), Eaton and others or 14. (1970), Brown and others (1967). Truckee _____________ 9'12v66 6.0«6.5 __ 0.8 16 10 From 0 to 9 None >30 20 Kachadoorian and others (minor) or 12. (1967), Greensfelder (1968), Rye] and others (1968), Tsai and Aki . (1970). Borrego Mountain ___ 44 9468 6.4 __ 6 31 45—56 From 0 to 10 38 30 9 Allen and Nordquist (1972), or 12. Hamilton (1972), Clark (137;), Wyss and Hanks . (1 7 ). Coyote Mountain -.__ 4—28—69 5.8 __ 0.5 None ~10 From 10 to 13 None 60 80 Thatcher and Hamilton (1973) 1 Determined from the surface-wave magnitude. SETTING OF THE EARTHQUAKES 27 lion years (Dengo, 1968; McBirney and Williams, 1965). Clearly, the historic volcanism and earth- quakes are natural and continuing processes that man must understand and plan for if he wishes to live and prosper here. Major geologic features in Central America are the Middle America Trench, a pronounced linear fea- ture 4 to 5 km deep along the Pacific Coast from central Mexico to Costa Rica (shown on index map, fig. 1), and the chain of young andesitic stratovol- canoes extending from western Guatemala to Pana- ma. Most earthquake activity in Central America is in a belt about 200 km wide that parallels the trench. Where the focal depths of these earthquakes can be well determined, they exhibit a systematic distribu- tion—shallow near the trench and deeper with in- creasing distance towards the northeast (Molnar and Sykes, 1969). The zone of earthquake activity thus dips about 45° NE. and extends from very near the surface at the Middle America Trench to more than 170 km deep at points farthest from the trench. In Nicaragua, earthquake activity related to this dipping zone extends as far inland as Lake Managua and Lake Nicaragua. The line of volcanoes that ex- tends through most of Nicaragua approximately fol- lows the northeasternmost limit of earthquake activ- ity. Earthquakes along this zone since 1963, when the data are most complete, have ranged up to mag- nitude 6 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- ministration, 1973), but Gutenberg and Richter (1954) report some events as large as magnitude 7.7 in the period since 1913. Because Managua lies 100 to 200 km above this zone, even large earth- quakes are unlikely to cause severe damage, although shallow earthquakes in this zone could cause damage in the Pacific coastal areas of Nicaragua. The northeast-dipping zone of earthquake activity marks the boundary between two crustal plates. The Caribbean plate on the northeast includes most of Central America and extends northeast into the Caribbean. The Cocos plate on the southwest extends into the Pacific Ocean from the Middle America Trench. Geologic and geophysical evidence suggests that the Pacific, or Cocos plate, is moving relatively towards the northeast and is slowly being driven beneath the Caribbean plate along the plate bound- ary. The Managua earthquakes of December 23, 1972, were at much shallower depths than the inferred crustal boundary between the Cocos and Caribbean plates, and the observed surface faulting, described in this report, exhibits a much different geometry than that of the plate boundary. For these and other reasons, it is unlikely that the December 23 earth- quakes are a simple and direct result of relative plate movement between these two major crustal blocks. More likely they are caused by relatively shallow adjustment to accumulating crustal strain within the southwesternmost part of the Caribbean plate. This interpretation is favored both by the his- toric record of shallow-focus earthquakes in the Managua area and by the surface trend of the vol- canic chain which passes through the Pacific coastal part of Nicaragua. The line of recent volcanoes in Nicaragua exhibits a marked bend or offset to the south in the segment between the volcano Momo- tombo on the northwest shore of Lake Managua and Masaya Caldera to the southeast of Managua. De- tailed crustal structure and geology are not known well enough in the Managua area to specify the rela- tions between the plate boundary, the line of vol- canic activity offset to the south in a dextral sense, and shallow-focus earthquakes like those of Decem— ber 23 with sinistral offset of the ground. A close relationship between all three, although still un- proven, is an attractive hypothesis for testing and studying. PHYSIOGRAPHY The nature of the land surface in and around Managua provides important clues both to the geo- logic history of the area and also to the kinds of damage that may be expected in future earthquakes. Many of the surface effects of the December 23 earthquakes are likewise related directly to easily observed topographic features. Much of the city of Managua and most of the sur— rounding areas affected by the earthquakes are on a surface that dips a few degrees towards the north. A few north-flowing washes drain this surface and feed into Lake Managua, but all are small and none are incised more than a few tens of meters into the surface. More deeply incised ravines are common further south, however, in the upland area lying west of Masaya Caldera. Except near the Chiltepe Peninsula, similar low relief is also found along the shoreline of Lake Managua, and at most places near Managua the lake appears to be very shallow for considerable distances offshore. This gently north-dipping surface is interrupted in several places by low hills, most of which are clearly of relatively recent volcanic origin. Examples include Tiscapa near the south edge of the city, the hill enclosing Lake Asososca on the west, and the ridgeline on which the Nejapa pits southwest of Managua are located. Few of the hilly areas rise more than about 100 meters above the general sur- 28 . MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 face, and few exhibit steep slopes. Steep slopes are found, however, in the crater walls at Tiscapa, Aso- sosca, and in most of the other interior depressions of volcanic origin. Several lines of evidence suggest that the gentle, relatively undissected surface at Managua and ex- tending generally to the southeast is very young. This surface appears to be graded to Masaya Cal- dera, and locally perhaps to other nearby volcanic centers. Its essentially planar form has not yet been modified greatly by erosion, sedimentation, or other geologic processes, and the rock materials that un- derlie it exhibit generally the same inclination as does the surface. Most of these near-surface rocks are lapilli or ash derived from nearby volcanic sources such as Masaya. If, as appears likely, the surface in and near Ma- nagua is a relatively young constructional feature, the task of evaluating earthquake risk becomes more difi‘icult. Geologists commonly recognize and evalu- ate active faults, those which are capable of generat- ing destructive earthquakes, by their surface topo- graphic expression. Recurrent movement on faults produces well-defined scarps, trenches, alined stream courses, and other linear topographic features that not only mark the fault trend, but provide clear evi- dence of repeated activity along the same lines. These identifying characteristics, however, can be destroyed by other geologic processes, and if such other processes are operative, the record of faulting is apt to be blurred or completely obliterated. How- ever, a very young surface provides a useful means of dating fault-formed features that clearly cut or offset it. Hence, if the young surface near Managua does locally show evidence of fault displacement, such displacement must be very young indeed. The general low relief and absence of steep slopes in and near Managua also had an important bearing on the kinds of damage that resultedfrom the earth- quake. Landslides and other kinds of slope failure are often among the most important causes of prop- erty damage in large and moderate earthquakes. Al- though many slope failures of different kinds could be observed after the earthquake, most of these were small; there were far fewer than are usually seen in areas with even moderate slopes. Other factors prob- ably also contributed to the low incidence of slope failures, but the low relief and the relatively small area covered by steep slopes were major ones. NEAR-SURFACE ROCK UNITS The severity and distribution of damage resulting from destructive earthquakes depend to a large ex- tent upon the nature of the near-surface geology. Different kinds of rock units respond to shaking in quite different ways, and in many well-observed earthquake areas, a very close correlation has been noted between the geology and the intensity of dam- age. Although the relation between damage from shaking and geology is far from simple, damage is commonly greatest over thick accumulations of poorly compacted water-saturated deposits and is least over relatively dense well-consolidated rocks. Our knowledge of the geologic units that underlie Managua comes from published geologic maps of the area, from published scientific papers, from our own observations of scattered exposures of bedrock units, and from a few unpublished records from water wells. The data are inadequate for a detailed analy- sis of the geology, and they allow us to “see” only about 200 m beneath the surface. Nevertheless, the different lines of evidence are consistent, and they indicate that the city is underlain by a relatively homogeneous sequence of rocks, predominantly vol- canic but with many interbeds of water-worked vol- canic debris. Exposures in and near Managua show that most of the volcanic debris is composed of lapilli-sized (4 to 32 mm) angular basaltic scoria. The scoria, or cinder deposits, contains almost no fine-grained ash except as thin beds a few centimeters thick. Both the scoria and the thin beds of ash are pyro- clastic debris and appear to be derived either from Masaya or from the line of volcanic vents immedi- ately to the west of Managua. Locally, these beds contain interbeds of more compact fine-grained rocks that are the products of volcanic mudflows. Unlike the scoria, the mudflow deposits are firm and rela- tively well lithified. They are thick and firm enough to be quarried for building stone west and southwest of Managua, and Williams (1952) has described quarried localities at which the imprints of human feet can be seen on exposed bedding surfaces. The sequence of interbedded scoria, ash, and mud- flow deposits appears to underlie nearly all of Ma- nagua, or at least those parts of the city that ex- hibited the greatest damage (fig. 1). The relative proportions of each rock type vary somewhat in different exposures and in the logs of wells, and the sequence is characterized by lensing and by chan- neling where water-worked deposits are evident. Despite these variations, lapilli-sized scoria appears to be the dominant lithology at least to the depths known from drilling, about 200 In. Some confidence in extrapolating units for consid— erable distances from outcrops, wells, or artificial VOLCANIC RISK AT MANAGUA 29 exposures is gained from the structural attitude of the rocks. In spite of the several faults described in this report, the rocks are little deformed and gen- erally dip about 4° N. They are more steeply in- clined, however, within a few hundred feet of the faults. The lack of interstitial fine-grained matrix in the scoria, the rough exterior and vesicularity of indi- vidual granules, and the angularity of the granules together contribute to form a rock unit that is ex- tremely porous and permeable and that has a low bulk density. Largely because of the angular, rough surface of the lapilli-sized fragments, this rock is fairly stable under static loads, and where it is un- disturbed it will stand in near—vertical slopes. It is clearly much less stable under dynamic load condi— tions, such as the shaking that accompanies earth- quakes. This was well shown by the numerous small debris-falls (fig. 19) that accompanied the earth- quakes of December 23. Somewhat different geologic relations are evident west of Managua along the line of volcanic centers that extends south from Lake Jiloa through Lake Asososca. There, relatively dense lava flows and vent debris are associated with pyroclastic deposits (fig. 1). Damage in this area was much less intense than in the central city, and although a major part of the difference in intensity is due to distance from the epicenter of the main shocks, some of the difference may be related to the differences in geologic condi- tions between the two areas. Despite the general uniformity of ground response in the damaged area, it is likely that shaking was more intense than it would have been in an area underlain by well-consolidated, relatively dense bed- rock. This conclusion, however, is based more on knowledge of other earthquakes and research results than on direct observation of ground effects at Managua. GROUND-WATER RELATIONS A major factor controlling damage in many earth- quakes is ground water. Ground water in permeable zones can result in liquefaction and loss of strength in foundation materials. A near-surface water table, even if unconfined, can lead to slope failures, lateral spreading on low slopes, and to other kinds of failure. Ground-water levels in the Managua area appear to be well below the surface except in the northern- most part of the city, where they are at or near the level of Lake Managua. An unpublished map of the ground-water surface prepared by Hazen and Saw- yer, Engineers, New York-Managua (1964), shows that the surface of the ground water is from 10 to 30 m beneath the ground surface in most of the area that was damaged, and that the piezometric surface slopes northward somewhat more gently than the land surface. The high porosity and permeability of the rock units that contain the ground water, and the lenticular nature of most of the impermeable interbeds, are considered by us as evidence that the ground-water system is relatively open and that con- fined aquifers are relatively unimportant in the part of the geologic section penetrated by wells. VOLCANIC RISK AT MANAGUA In addition to geologic hazards related to earth- quakes, the Managua area has had a long and active history of volcanism, and the future risk from de- structive volcanic eruptions should be considered in reconstruction planning. A thorough discussion of the volcanic risk is far beyond the scope of this field- work and report but nevertheless, we feel that the seriousness of this risk warrants a brief outline and evaluation of the available data. There are three types of recent volcanoes in Nica- ragua. According to McBirney (1955), the first, and by far the most common group is the Strom- bolian type, characterized by a steep sided structure of ash, cinders, and vesicular lava. This group includes the Volcanoes El Viejo, Telica, Cerro Negro, Asososca de Leon, Santa Clara, Momotombo, Chiltepe, Concepcion, Madera, and a host of minor cinder cones. The activity of these volcanoes, which is often intermittent over many years, is normally solfataric, the volume of solid ejecta being subordinate to that of steam and other gaseous elements. The second group is of the Krakatoan type usually char- acterized by a low, shield-like structure composed of succes- sive layers of massive lava flows and a large, steep—walled collapse crater. These volcanoes have been notable for sud- den, paroxysmal eruptions, usually culminating long periods of dormancy, during which enormous quantities of gas and pumice are ejected in the short period of a few days. At the final stage of such eruptions a cylindrical portion of the dome has usually collapsed into the vacated magma chamber forming a large, vertical-walled caldera. In this class we find Cosequina, Apoyeque, * * and ApOyo. The third type is the Masaya type, of which Ma- saya is the only example in Nicaragua. Masaya is quite similar to those Hawaiian volcanoes that con— sist of a caldera formed by repeated collapses of vents within the summits of a fiattish basaltic shield volcano as magma migrates upward from great depth. It has been the most consistently active vol- cano in Central America in historic times (McBir- ney, 1956). There is “no trace of the characteristic pumice beds, which are so voluminous about the other [more explosive] calderas * * *” (McBirney, 3O MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 1956), and McBirney concludes that while gas emis- sion may damage crops, as happened in the period around 1927 and 1954, “* * * little is to be feared from lava eruptions because of the large volume that must be filled before any of the existing craters overflow. Even an eruption of lava from the flanks of the Nindiri-Masaya group or frbm any other vents on the caldera floor would not be likely to endanger any center of population.” N0 lava flow has covered the Managua area in historic time. One flow, however, believed to have erupted in 1670 (Me- Birney, 1956), did run 9 km northward, within 3% km of the present site of the international airport. Masaya could pose a threat to substantial develop- ment in the region between Managua and the City of Masaya. Two of the three most explosive and potentially devastating volcanoes in Nicaragua, Apoyeque and Apoyo, are within 35 km of the center of Managua. The vent occupied by Lake Jiloa on the flank of Apoyeque also “appears to be the source of thick pumice beds typical of an explosive eruption” (Mc- Birney, 1955). Furthermore, Lakes Tiscapa, Aso- sosca, and Nejapa are collapse craters from recent volcanic activity (McBirney, 1955). These calderas and craters appear to be dormant. McBirney (1955) , however, reports that the temperatures in Lake Nejapa are abnormally high and that the chemical content of the water implies that the lake is fed by hot springs. On June 8, 1852, the first indication of a new eruption of Masaya was “when Lake Masaya, together with Lakes Tiscapa, Asososca, Apoyo, and others began to ‘boil.’ Most likely this ‘boiling’ was actually an emission of gases from the lake bottom” (McBirney, 1956). This observation shows, however, that these features are merely dormant and not dead. Thus there is significant volcanic risk in the Ma- nagua area not only from lava flows but from the possibility of a truly devastating eruption. What makes evaluation of volcanic risk particularly diffi- cult is the question of time scale. There has been no historic Krakatoan-type eruption in the Managua area, but there may have been one large eruption since human habitation of the area (Williams, 1952). Another eruption may be thousands of years away. Devastating eruptions typically occur, how- ever, only hours to weeks after the first visible signs of a reawakening of activity at previously dormant vents. The volcanic risk needs to be carefully evalu- ated and taken into account in the reconstruction of Managua. SEISMIC RISK AT MANAGUA HISTORIC SEISMICITY Damaging earthquakes have occurred frequently in Nicaragua. Montessus De Ballore (1888) lists earthquakes in 1528, 1663, 1844, 1849, 1858, 1862, 1881 and 1885, but from his descriptions, it is diffi- cult to tell where these events occurred. The earth- quakes of 1844, 1858, and 1881, however, caused damage in the region of Managua. Earthquakes in 1898, 1913, 1918, 1928, and 1931 also caused damage in Managua (list compiled by Ken Jorgensen, Pana- ma Canal Company, written commun., 1966). All accounts of the earthquake of March 31, 1931, indicate that it was remarkably similar to the 197 2 earthquake in most respects. The event was of mag- nitude 5.3 to 5.9 (Gutenberg and Richter, 1954) and caused ground fracturing along a northeast-trending fault in the western part of Managua. The down- town area was heavily burned. About 1,000 people (Sultan, 1931) were killed out of a population of about 40,000 (Durham, 1931). Most homes were destroyed, and utilities were seriously damaged. A small earthquake (magnitude 4.6) occurred in Managua on January 4, 1968. It caused the heaviest damage in the Colonia Centroamerica, but no loss of life occurred (Brown, 1968). These few data on historic seismicity show how common earthquakes are in the Managua area. From these data and the regional tectonic relations dis- cussed above, it seems certain that damaging earth- quakes will occur again in the Managua area. The data are inadequate for determining a sta- tistical recurrence rate of earthquakes, but it seems reasonable to expect an earthquake in Managua similar to that of December 23, 1972, within the next 50 years. A COMPARISON No method has been developed to quantify the earthquake risk in one area as compared to another. Too many factors, many of them as yet poorly un- derstood, must be taken into account. Considerable research is being done and needs to be done in the future to find methods for defining comparative risk. Some qualitative comparisons, however, can be made on the basis of existing data. All three of the earthquakes that shook Managua between 12:30 and 1 :30 am. on December 23 were of moderate magnitude. The greatest of these, at magnitude 5.6, was smaller than the San Fernando, Calif., earthquake (6.6) of February 9, 1971, and much smaller than such great earthquakes as the Alaskan earthquake of March 27, 1964 (8.4), the SEISMIC RISK AT MANAGUA 31 San Francisco earthquake of April 18, 1906 (8.3), the Niigata, Japan, earthquake of June 16, 1964 (7.5), or the Peruvian earthquake of May 31, 1970 (7.7). Because the magnitude scale is exponential, each integer step—for example, from 6.0 to 7.0—— represents an increase in released energy of about 30 times. Accordingly, a magnitude 8 earthquake releases nearly 1,000 times the energy of a magni- tude 6 earthquake. The area of the fault that slipped in the Managua earthquake is on the order of 100 kmz, whereas faults that slip during events of mag- nitude 6.5 and 7.5 typically have areas on the order of 500 km2 (Hamilton, 1972) and 2,000 km2 (Aki, 1966), respectively. In view of the complex regional tectonics in the Managua area, we would guess that it is unlikely that there are faults with areas much larger than 500 kmz. On this basis, there appears little likelihood that earthquakes much greater than magnitude 6.5 will occur in the immediate vicinity of Managua. Of course, an earthquake with magnitude larger than 8.0 might easily occur on the large faults associated with the Middle America Trench and the zone of underthrusting of the Cocos plate, but the energy source from such earthquakes would be 100 to 200 km distant from Managua. Maximum expected magnitude is, however, not the only consideration. Damage caused directly by an earthquake is primarily related to the amount that the ground accelerates during the event, the duration of the shaking, the number of fractures going through buildings and other structures, and the amount of displacement on these fractures. Ac- celeration is attenuated logarithmically with dis- tance. The data in figure 23 show that the peak acceleration of 0.319 (F. Matthiesen, oral com- mun., 1973) recorded at the ESSO refinery during the main Managua earthquake is about the same as might be expected somewhere between 30 and 50 km from an earthquake of magnitude 7.7. The duration of shaking also is attenuated with distance in a roughly similar way (Page and others, 1972). Thus the intensity and duration of ground shaking in Ma- nagua were large compared with that observed in many cities shaken by larger earthquakes because the Managua earthquake occurred almost directly below the central part of the city. The acceleration would probably have been 10 times less if the earthquake had occurred only 20 to 40 km distant. For instance, there was no noteworthy damage at Masaya, Tipi— tapa, or other nearby cities. Statistically, seismologists find that in a region where there is one earthquake of magnitude 8 in a given period of time, there are approximately 10 o I T I I l I |.O- - 0.52g , 3 o.|- - Z O .: - o I < o D: LIJ ii i O o I o I < E o I— O — 00' EARTHQUAKE - MAGNITUDE 5 5.0-5.9 ' ° 6.0-6.9 ‘- l 7.0-7.9 mo 0 o I 0.001 . 1 . . . ._ I0 I00 — DISTANCE (KM) FIGURE 23.—Peak horizontal acceleration versus distance to the slipped fault as a function of magnitude (after Page and others, 1972). The X is the peak acceleration of 0.319 observed at the ESSO refinery for the Managua earth- quake. earthquakes greater than magnitude 7, 100 greater than magnitude 6, 1,000 greater than magnitude 5, and so forth. Although it is dangerous to extrapolate this relation from region to region, a city that is so close to a fault and is built in such a way that it can be destroyed by a magnitude 6.0 earthquake might be destroyed much more often than a city that could sustain an earthquake of magnitude 7.5 with little damage. Proximity to faults and ground displacement be- neath structures can significantly increase damage. No place in the central two-thirds of Managua is more than one-half kilometer from one of the four faults that moved during this earthquake sequence or the fault that moved during the 1931 earthquake. Within the approximately 15-km2 city limits of Ma- nagua there are 11 km of faults active within the last 42 years—a fault density of roughly 0.73 km/km‘-’. We are not aware of a similar density of faults in any other city. Even in the entire 50 km2 area in- cluded on the 1210,000-scale topographic map of Ma- 32 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 TABLE 4.——Comparison of fault density at Managua and vicinity with other urban areas in seismically active zones [Faults included are only those with known Holocene or historic displacement] Approximate Fault Area Length per Community population 1:13:31] (km2) km2 (km) Data source Managua, Nicaragua ____________ 400,000 11.0 15.0 0.73 This report. Berkeley, Calif _________________ 116,716 11.1 25.8 .43 Radbruch (1967). Oakland, Calif __________________ 362,100 55.9 138.0 .41 Radbruch (1967). Managua and vicinity, Nicaragua _ 500,000 18.0 50.0 .36 This report. Fukui, Japan __________________ 744,230 1.5 6.2 .24 Collins and Foster (1949). Hayward, Calif _________________ 100,000 23.4 96.7 .24 Radbruch (1967). San Bruno, Calif _______________ 36,254 3.2 14.4 .22 Brown (1970). San Leandro, Calif __ __ 70,300 7.9 38.7 .21 Radbruch (1967). Woodside, Calif ______ ___ 4,875 6.4 36.1 .18 Schlocker and others (1965). Fremont, Calif _________________ 123,273 34.9 246.4 .14 Radbruch (1967). Greater Los Angeles area, Calif __ 6,755,000 46.2 590.8 .08 Wentworth and others (1970). nagua and vicinity (part of Which is shown as plate 1), there are at least 18 km of active faults with a density of 0.36 km/km2. In table 4, fault density at Managua is compared with the density of faults along which there has been late Quaternary move- ment in other seismically active urbanized areas elsewhere. Clearly, the hazard from active faults is as great, if not greater, at Managua than at any other large city for which data are available. The pattern of active faults in Managua differs from those in most other urban areas crossed by faults, and it differs in such a way as to increase the hazard. In most urban areas crossed by active faults, the fault breaks are simple—either a single continuous break or a narrow band of subparallel or en echelon breaks a few tens of meters to several hundred meters wide—so that the hazard from sur- face displacements can be well defined. The four faults recognized and described in this report, and a fifth which moved in 1931, together constitute a wide band of active faults which trends northeast- ward across the central part of the city. Together these five active fault traces pose a major threat to much of the urbanized area and to yet undeveloped land lying on their trend and immediately south of the city. New displacements may occur on any or all of these faults during future earthquakes, for at least two of them show clear evidence of repeated movement in the past. This pattern of faulting, which defines a band 3 km wide, suggests also that future surface displacements may not be confined only to those faults which are now known. New branch faults and subsidiary faults may occur Within the zone or outside of it. CONCLUSIONS The extensive destruction and loss of life in the Managua earthquakes of December 23, 1972, were caused almost entirely by the following: 1. Occurrence of the earthquakes directly beneath the city. 2. Poor construction of the buildings, chiefly of tar- quezal and masonry, which had very little shear resistance to lateral forces imposed by the strong seismic shaking. (These effects are being studied and reported in detail by other investigators.) 3. Direct displacement on four subparallel surface faults through the Managua area. From the standpoint of risk from earthquakes, and possibly also volcanism, Managua is situated in an exceptionally hazardous location. On the basis of available geologic and seismologic data the following conclusions appear warranted: 1. Earthquakes comparable in magnitude to those of 1931 and 1972 can reasonably be expected within the next 50 years. 2. Some of these earthquakes will be accompanied by surface faulting like that in 1931 and 1972. 3. Maximum hazard from surface faulting is along the trace of known active faults, five of which have been recognized. 4. New surface faulting is possible, and even likely, within a broad zone that includes all of the present area of Managua. 5. Other conditions of foundation materials, design, and construction being equal, maximum dam- age from shaking will be controlled largely by the proximity of structures to the surface rup- tures and, in the case of a dipping fault, to the fault plane at depth. 6. In terms of the damage they cause, secondary geologic effects such as slope failure, liquefac- tion, and compaction will be far less significant than shaking and fault displacement. 7. The nature and distribution of the surface fault- ing are consistent with a tectonic origin for REFERENCES CITED 33 the 1931 and 1972 earthquakes. 8. Catastrophic eruptions from nearby volcanic centers pose a hazard that may be as great as that from earthquakes, but one that is as yet largely unevaluated. RECOMMENDATIONS A reconstruction and redevelopment plan for Ma- nagua that is sound and economically feasible should be based on informed evaluations by experts from a number of disciplines. Key roles in the long-range decisions that will govern future development should be played by earth scientists, engineers, city plan- ners, economists, and political scientists. The re- quired action can take several routes simultaneously, among the most critical of which are: 1. Evaluation of the present and potential sites for development so that the seismologic-volcano- logic hazards can be minimized. 2. Development of adequate emergency facilities and response systems to reduce the impact of . natural or other disasters. 3. Adoption and strict enforcement of building codes and zoning ordinances that would ensure the integrity of vital utilities and emergency services such as communications, water, police, fire, and hospital facilities. Comprehensive planning for the future of Mana— gua depends first of all on an understanding of the geologic hazards and how these hazards may affect . the works of man. The problems of emergency re— sponse systems as well as construction and zoning practices are beyond the scope of this report and require the expertise of others. However, some of the specific recommendations that can be made re- garding the geologic and seismologic problems are: 1. A full evaluation of the hazard from earthquakes is required as a basis for local zoning and structural design criteria. This would involve detailed geologic and seismologic studies pri— marily directed towards delineating active faults and predicting the level of shaking and acceleration that can be expected in future earthquakes. Other potential geologic hazards such as the possibility of landslide damage to existing and planned critical facilities, such as the Lake Asososca water intake and pumping facility, should also be considered. 2. The hazard from catastrophic volcanic eruptions should be evaluated. This would entail detailed geologic studies to deduce the eruptive his- tories of volcanoes in the Managua area and geophysical monitoring to determine their present state of activity. 3. To the extent possible, essential underground service facilities, such as sewer and waterlines, electric power and telephone lines, should be routed so that they cross known active fault zones in the fewest possible places. Where crossings are unavoidable, design provisions should be made for fault displacements of at least the amounts reported here. 4. Emergency and critical facilities, such as hospi- tals, fire stations, police stations, powerplants, schools, and important government buildings, should be sited well away from known active faults and, to the extent possible, outside of the zone in which surface faulting is prevalent. 5. Disaster relief planning for future destructive earthquakes should be undertaken and peri- odically reviewed; the 1931 and i972 earth.‘ quakes provide patterns that should be incor- porated into such plans. Especially important are the fault trends. amount and nature of displacement, the rupture of waterlines at fault crossings, and the effects of suck". ruptures on postearthquake fire hazard. 6. Regional earth science studies should be under- taken on a long-range basis to evaluate safe sites in Nicaragua for future growth and de- velopment. Such studies should include both geological field investigations and monitoring of seismic and volcanic processes. REFERENCES CITED Aki, K., 1966, Generation and propagation of G waves from from the Niigata earthquake of June 16, 1964. Part 2. Estimation of earthquake moment, released energy, and stress-strain drop from the G wave spectrum: Earth- quake Research Inst. Bull., v. 44, p. 73-88. Allen, C. R., and Nordquist, A. R., 1972, Foreshock, main shock, and larger aftershocks of the Borrego Mountain Earthquake: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 787, p. 55—86. : Brown, R. D., Jr., Vedder, J. G., Wallace, R. E., Roth, E. F., Yerkes, R. F., Castle, R. 0., Waananen, A. 0., Page, R. W., and Eaton, J. P., 1967, The Parkfield—Cholame earthquakes of June to August 1966: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 579, 66 p. Brown, R. D., 1968, Managua, Nicaragua earthquake of January 4, 1968: Proj. Rept., Nicaragua Inv. (IR) NI—l, 16 p. Brown, Robert D., Jr., 1970, Faults that are historically ac- tive or that show evidence of geologically young surface displacement, San Francisco Bay Region—A progress report: Oct. 1970: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file map. Chinnery, M. A., 1963, The stress changes that accompany strike-slip faulting: Seismol. Soc. America Bull., v. 53, p. 921—932. 34 MANAGUA, NICARAGUA, EARTHQUAKES OF DECEMBER 23, 1972 Clark, M. M., 1972, Surface rupture along the Coyote Creek fault: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 787, p. 55—86. Collins, J. J., and Foster, H. L., 1949, The Fukui earthquake, Hokuriku region, Japan: Office of the Engineer, Gen- eral Headquarters, Far East Command, 81 p. Dengo, G., 1968, Estructura geologia, historia tectonica, y morfologia de America central: Instituto Centroameri- cano de Investigacion y Technologia Industrial (ICAITI), Guatemala, 50 p. Durham, H. W., 1931, Managua—Its construction and utili- ties: Eng. News Record, April 23, p. 696—700. Eaton, J. P., O’Neill, M. E., and Murdock, J. N., 1970, After- shocks of the 1966 Parkfield-Cholame, California, Earth- quake: A detailed study: Seismol. Soc. America Bull., v. 60, p. 1151—1197. Greensfelder, R., 1968, Aftershocks of the Truckee, California earthquake of September 12, 1966: Seismol. Soc. America Bull., v. 58, p. 1607—1620. Gutenberg, Reno, and Richter, C. F., 1954, Seismicity of the earth and associated phenomena: Princeton, N.J., Prince- ton Univ. Press, 310 p. Hamilton, R. M., 1972, Aftershocks of the Borrego Mountain Earthquake from April 12 to June 12, 1968: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 787, p. 31—54. Kachadoorian, Reuben, Yerkes, R. F., and Waananen, A. 0., 1967, Efl’ects of the Truckee, California, earthquake of September 12, 1966: U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 537, 14 p. Kuang, J., and Williams, R. L., 1971, Mapa Geologico de Managua, Nicaragua, sheet 2952 III, 1150,000, CATAS- TRO. McBirney, A. R., 1955, The origin of the Nejapa Pits near Managua, Nicaragua: Bull. Volcanol., Serie II, Tome XVII, p. 145—154. 1956, The Nicaraguan volcano Masaya and its cal- dera: Am. Geophys. Union Trans., v. 37, no. 1, p. 83—96. McBirney, A. R., and Williams, H., 1965, Volcanic history of Nicaragua: Calif, Univ. Pubs. Geol. Sci., v. 55, 73 p. Molnar, P., and Sykes, L. R., 1969, Tectonics of the Carib- bean and Middle America Regions from focal mecha- nisms and seismicity: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 80, p. 1639—1684. Montessus De Ballore,F., 1888, Tremblements de terre et eruptions volcaniques au Centre Amérique: Dijon, 281 p. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1973, Preliminary determination of epicenters, No. 76—72. Page, R. A., Boore, D. M., Joyner, W. B., and Coulter, H. W., 1972, Ground motion values for use in the seismic de- sign of the trans-Alaska pipeline system: U.S. Geol. Survey Circular 672, 23 p. Radbruch, D. H., 1967, Map showing recently active breaks along the Hayward fault zone and the southern part of the Calaveras fault zone, California: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file map. Ryall, A., Van Wormer, J. D., and Jones, A. E., 1968, Trig- gering of microearthquakes by earth tides and other features of the Truckee, California, earthquake sequence of September, 1966: Seismol. Soc. America Bull., v. 58, p. 215—248. Santos, C., 1972, La hipotética probabilidad die occurrencia de temblores en la ciudad de Managua durante e1 verano de 1973: Unpub. rept., Santos and Heilemann, Con- sultores de Ingeneria, Managua, Nicaragua, 26 p. Schlo‘cker, Julius, Pampeyan, E. H., and Bionilla, M. G., 1965, Approximate trace of the main surface fault zone be- tween Pacifica and the vicinity of Saratoga, California, formed during the earthquake of April 18, 1906: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file map. Sultan, D. I., 1931, The Managua Earthquake: Military En- gineer, v. 23, p. 354—361. Thatcher, Wayne, and Hamilton, R. M., 1973, Aftershocks and source characteristics of the 1969 Coyote Mountain earthquake, San Jacinto fault zone, California: Seismol. Soc. America Bull. (In press.) Tsai, Y. B., and Aki, K., 1970, Source mechanism of the Truckee, California, earthquake of September 12, 1966: Seismol. Soc. America Bull., v. 60, p. 1199—1208. Ward, P. L., and Gregersen, Soren, 1973, Comparison of earthquake locations determined with data from a net- work of stations and small tripartite arrays 0n Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii: Seismol. Soc. America Bull., v. 63, p. 719—751. Wentworth, C. M., Ziony, J. 1., and Buchanan, J. M., 1970, Preliminary geologic environmental map, of the greater Los Angeles area, California—TID—25363: U.S. Geol. Survey; available from Clearinghouse Federal Sci. and Tech. Inf., Springfield, Va., 41 p. Williams, Howell, 1952, Geologic observations on the ancient human footprints near Managua, Nicaragua: Carnegie Inst. Washington Pub. 596, pt. 1, 31 p., 11 figs. Wyss, Max, and Brune, J. N., 1968, Seismic moment, stress, and source dimensions for earthquakes in the California- Nevada region: Jour. Geophys. Research, v. 73, p. 4681— 4694. Wyss, Max, and Hanks, T. C., 1972, Source parameters of the Borrego Mountain Earthquake: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 787, p. 24—30. * U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973—515—657/53 Io'oo” 8 5 3 8 ..... m t y R . b 54 m 111111 W W , 2 A 1 190v 40.. Did 7 111111 // D. P r 0,0 5 0 y 9 a E ,,,,,,,,,, w km Hm mm m LT ..... xm wn 0m 0 1 n A A l. :1.H.H ./ 0 [WW SF NW N L ewveufl f WB. H O P rflmm mwf ND 3 F .I. \\\\\\ 00 5 Ce ,0, C . 3 o 8 Ska ac fl 0R 6 fr 0 r0) 5 r w 8 0 VA Jlf/ {Id E ;;;;;;; N deos, _ _ rr3 / n1 n3 m J/IDT /U9 0 0 .007 I F .70 8 US/ 4m ./m n 9 R O O A s.c.n/k 0 7 s f orl p l "cw/en. / fhn mm ab e a T m T w.mm.mm / mmm Wm WM mmm W ‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘ TNSWWD TUWW mm nmh mme _H_ w A I mence |.mn5 / r O / O R ufloucn wy/A/ / fe han feW E N m rn .0 fo r I Iv ame 90 v $2: er .nr / ram I Oh Tdv 2ru o u 7 adnpi / / pa/a. l x/ d/ 9eo s O L 9f 0/0 B 0 1 ee [06 lGJ u o lwmaw in; 7.? WWW . '5 P "comm/5 {\ WNW 24am Ffl ,0 E II: ..... 50m c/r 70 0d J o o X w /#a WWW 90 mm W n V 6 f; S./.$.C |./ 0 1 8 E qun/ .m 5% d 6.0 0n0./d e m 5/ me/sm she mm B ,,,,, m/ I esr 5 ./ E 908; hae W L mmmmnx mdw m w m D 0 a. r 0 . 0 111E 5#.W_mM A U 5me M sfhac O F [[[[[ 0 m. 0 .. 0 A E WWW mm A mm. UH‘ Cu W .. ,, T WmWVx, O A O. N W U 1%: WWW % A R E N S W WWW E W n, 30 MW m” nan 45$! W0 L n m m0: 5A 0 v. m0 E fofofo mm] L 10 JJJJJ n E“ A00 M 6| 0 .. W VM 0| yyyyy w E0. DHE L 6 . 1 EM 8 .A T E WW... L NS WWW - UM . WW mo T W N _L/_ W\ o C K ,,,,,,, -O. ... D m \ m W W. W. W. . HE \ Wumm .W /\.X\.Vm - . ”x w m m A. - / T A W .. W W x W A n \ m. . L2- . _ u FT W , E ....... -O _ u . 0. 5 W S ..... W E iffy, W 1m . 1153:1134: AM m. w l A W m ”WWW“ ....... . F .o D [O I) \ \ w .............. . . . N o . 6 \x\ 8 m )I A S R ..... T O L/ I m U T 3. : .sthnnh. . m 2 A 6 w E 01519 F H do] T ............ .m|.nn Y ..... dem FE mmmW G O W ....................... mem T U ................ W wmfm N N m D‘.|.WD. E8 W amMm I M L «m mmmgma T A ......... Wamm R WW .. m GYGh s A G B BbCD u. n P O ........................ mow Wm 0 EL WWWWW m3!” mo 6. mOIJ 8% m ._ mm H E W Cu T W , m We.“ A W wow Md T ..... .W m m. 8 w P W 3 D W E 3 T I N M U Palynological Studies of the Coals of the Princess Reserve District in Northeastern Kentucky GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 839 Work done in cooperation with the Kentucky Geological Survey DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT OCT 9 1974 UBRRRY UNIVERSITY a; mumnnm ”1%?“ /S\ CAL/ET % 4A \ OCT 1], 1974 E? r at: #31 T1? Palynological Studies of the Coals of the Princess Reserve District in Northeastern Kentucky By ROBERT M. KOSANKE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 839 Work done in cooperation with the Kentucky Geological Survey A discussion of the spore and pollen assemblages, range zones, and coal correlations UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON21973 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-ch No. 73—600287 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, US. Government Printing Office Washington, DC. 20402 — Price $1.00 (paper cover) Stock Number 2401—02460 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract ____________________________________ l Palynologic assemblages of the Princess coals — Continued Introduction _________________________________ 1 Princess No. 8 (7) coal _______________________ 10 Previous work _____________________________ 1 Princess No. 9(?) coal _________________________ 10 Acknowledgments ___________________________ 1 Brush Creek(?) coal __________________________ 10 Sample localities and preparation ____________________ 1 Zosterosporites, n. gen. __________________________ 10 Palynologic assemblages of the Princess coals ____________ 3 Correlation of the Princess coals ____________________ 12 Princess No. 5 coal __________________________ 3 Interregional coal correlations ______________________ 17 Princess No. 5A coal _________________________ 5 Summary ___________________________________ 19 Princess No. 5B coal _________________________ 6 References cited _______________________________ 19 Princess No. 6 coal __________________________ 7 Index ______________________________________ 21 Princess No. 7 coal __________________________ 10 ILLUSTRATIONS Page PLATE 1. Zosterosporites triangularis, n. gen., n. sp., and selected taxa. FIGURE 1. Location map of the Princess reserve district __________________________ 2 2. Coal logs of the Webbville 1 core hole and two outcrop samples _______________ 4 3. Chart showing stratigraphic distribution of genera and species _______________ 4 4. Diagram showing abundance of selected genera and species observed in the Princess No. 5 through No. 7 coals __________________________________ 7 5. Diagrammatic reconstruction of Zosterosporites triangularis, n. gen., n. sp ________ 12 6. Diagram showing range zones of selected taxa _________________________ 18 TABLES TABLES 1 — 9. Percentage ofgenera of small spores in: page 1. Princess No. 5 coal ___________________________________ 3 2. Princess No. 5A coal _________________________________ 6 3. Princess No. 5B coal __________________________________ 8 4. Princess No. 6 coal (from drill core) _______________________ 8 5. Princess No. 6 coal (from roadcut) ________________________ 9 6. Princess No. 7 coal (from drill core) ________________________ 11 7. Princess No. 7 coal (from roadcut) ________________________ 11 8. Lower bench Richardson coal at the type locality, Milo quadrangle, Kentucky _______________________________________ 13 9. Skyline coal from the type locality _________________________ 14 I” . .,,..»,m$e¥xa:iuialaitisfif. w , ‘ t. I \ r m w. \ ,M f h J . , .. a , . ‘ ‘ .. r . ; y ‘ A, . w J . . . . . . . . . , . : v . 5 .. PALYNOLOGICAL STUDIES OF THE COALS OF THE PRINCESS RESERVE DISTRICT IN NORTHEASTERN KENTUCKY By ROBERT M. KOSANKE ABSTRACT Palynological studies of Pennsylvanian coals and associated strata from eastern Kentucky have resulted in establishing of range zones of numerous taxa. Some of these taxa have restricted range zones that are useful in cor- relation studies of coals in the Princess reserve district. The coal nomenclature is, in part, peculiar to this district, corresponding neither to that used to the north and east in Ohio and West Virginia nor to that of other coal reserve districts in eastern Kentucky. Correlations of some of these coals with those in other areas have been proposed by several authors. These correlations are, for the most part, based on stratigraphic intervals measured from marker horizons or are based on geologic mapping. The coals under consideration are the Princess No. 5 through the Brush Creek(?) coal. This interval extends from the upper Breathitt Formation to the lower Conemaugh Formation. Samples of the Princess Nos. 5—7 coals were obtained from a diamond-drill core. Outcrop samples of the Princess No. 6 through the Brush Creek(?) coals were also used. Within the interval of the Princess No. 5 through the Brush Creek(?) coals, several major palynological events occur. These include the diminution and extinction of Densosporites, the peak occurrence of Torispora, and the entire range zones of Laevigalosporites pseudothiersenii and Schopfites dimorphus. Zosterosporites is a new fossil spore genus and is described from seat-rock samples of the Princess No. SB coal. The Princess No. 5 coal from the Webbville 1 core hole is less than 10 inches thick, but, palynologically, it is similar in part to the Richardson and Skyline coals. The Princess Nos. 6 and 7 coals of northeastern Kentucky are correlated with the Lower and Middle Kittanning coals of Ohio and . Pennsylvania. The Lower Kittanning—Princess No. 6 coal is similar palynologically to the Colchester (No. 2) coal of Illinois. The Middle Kit- tanning—Princess No. 7 coal may be as old as the Springfield (No. 5) coal or may be somewhat younger and related to the Briar Hill (No. 5A) coal of Illinois, if differences in abundance ratios are not regarded as important. INTRODUCTION The Princess reserve district, as reported by Ferm (1963), is located in the northern part of the eastern Kentucky coal field within the highly dissected Kanawha section of the Ap- palachian Plateau province. This district is bordered by Ohio to the north and by West Virginia to the east, and Grayson, Ky., is near the middle of the district. Boyd, Carter, Greenup, and Lawrence Counties and the eastern part of Lewis County are within the district, an area of about 1,350 square miles (fig. 1). The district name comes from the small mining community of Princess, in northwestern Boyd County. Samples for this investigation were obtained from the Webbville 1 diamond-drill hole, which is near the center of Webbville quadrangle, southeast of Grayson in Lawrence County, about 3 miles east of Webbville, Ky. The stratigraphic position of these samples with respect to each other is thus assured, and they are utilized as a reference set of samples. The samples investigated are from the Princess Nos. 5, 5A, 5B, 6, and 7 coals, together with those from the associated roof and seat rock. A second set of samples was collected from the south side of the roadcut of Interstate 64 in Rush quadrangle about 2,000 feet south of Coalton, or just 21/2 miles north-northeast of Rush, Ky. The roadcut samples include the Princess Nos. 6 and 7 coals, together with three badly weathered younger coals. PREVIOUS WORK Palynological investigations of the coals of the stratigraphic interval under consideration have been inten- sively studied in the United States by several individuals. A few of these people are Schopf(l938), Kosanke (1947, 1950, 1964), Schemel (1951), Guennel (1952, 1958), Winslow (1959), Habib (1966), Gray (1967), Gray and Taylor (1967), and Peppers (1970). Because of these investigations very few new taxa remain to be described, although the usual emen- dations and new combinations are to be expected. One new taxon, Zosterosporites triangularis is described in this report. Z. triangularis is known from the roof rock of the Princess No. 5 coal and from the seat rock of the Princess No. 5B coal in the Princess reserve district of Kentucky. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Don E. Wolcott assisted in the collection of the Princess samples, W. F. Outerbridge and E. C. Jenkins collected the Richardson coal samples, Charles L. Rice collected the Skyline coal samples, Norma L. Noble prepared the samples, and Wendell A. Martz took some of the photomicrographs used in this paper. This help is gratefully acknowledged. SAMPLE LOCALITIES AND PREPARATION Sixty-two samples of coal, roof rock, partings, and seat rock were collected and prepared for palynological in- vestigation. All samples were collected in as similar a manner as possible. Core samples were cut with a carborun- dum saw so that a continuous ribbon of coal was obtained for maceration. Similarly, all outcrop samples were 1 PALYNOLOGICAL STUDIES OF COALS, PRINCESS RESERVE DISTRICT, KENTUCKY 84° 83° 82° l l l O H I O t I P I l ortsmouth \ // I AL \ OHIO, ‘ \ ’ Rig/e / \ (J I \1 “\J \ LAWRENCE [ / _ l —‘ 4 LEWIS I GREENUP \ x \ x . / \\ Ashland Roadcut samples \ . 04600—04604 \ \ / Princess. m\ \/"‘ O l to Huntington "\ 9 . _‘ l 5:; RUSH i _, GraysonO x BOYD. ) ‘ to CARTER I .z "E. f ' x, ‘ WE BBVlLLE ‘\ WEST VIRGINIA k. \ o , , WEBBV/LLE 1 ELLIOTT J . DRILL HOLE , LAWRENCE .. {a4 D4599A-E 6’ — \WI‘ 38°“ \\ \ _ l \ \\ \r\ / MORGAN \d) ’ /( \ JOHNSON C k —l / / 8 ‘-\ ?e «QT/EX / \ MARTIN Q 90 \ \ ‘ //\\ \ / K 0 MAGOFFIN \’\ Ow» § l 90 F‘s “K I \ e I \ . ,_j\ «’0 I -\ A\ K \> 9" ,K '— FLOYD l 4“ 9 TT < \ M,» ‘P BREATHITT ,~\_ x L / \ " ] PIKE \ T‘ / a. I L / ‘ ~ / /7\ , \ // KNOTT 5" / MAPLOCATION é/r\f I \ J / VIRGINIA I I I H ( / I ? 1'0 210 310 4'0 MILES I ' ‘I I I I o 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS FIGURE 1. — The Princess reserve district (patterned) of northeastern Kentucky in the eastern Kentucky coal field. Locations of roadcut and diamond-drill samples in the Rush and Webbville quadrangles are shown in insert. Positions of the Milo (M) quadrangle from which samples of the Richardson coal were Obtained and the Tiptop (TT) quadrangle from which samples of the Skyline coal were obtained are shown in outline. collected as chiseled cubes to obtain as uniform and representative samples as possible. Thirty samples were collected from the Webbville 1 diamond-drill hole. This diamond-drill hole is located as shown by Carlson (1971), on Little Cat Branch west of Baker School, 24,200 feet FNL X 16,500 feet FEL of Webbville quadrangle, Lawrence County, Ky. Five coals and associated strata were assigned US. Geological Survey Paleobotanical locality numbers D4599—A—E and laboratory maceration numbers 238—A—CC, as follows: Princess No. 5 coal, D4599—A (interval, 312 ft 3 in.—313 ft 113/3 in.), macerations 238—Y—~CC; PALYNOLOGIC ASSEMBLAGES OF THE PRINCESS COALS 3 Princess No. 5A coal, D4599—B (interval, 292 ft 43/16 in.—294 ft 9”/,,S in.), macerations 238—P—X; Princess No. 5B coal, D4599-C (interval, 281 ft 6% in.—284 ft 67/8 in.), macerations 238—J—O; Princess No. 6 coal, D4599—D (interval, 226 ft 7/3 in.—229 ft 9 in.), macerations 238—E—I; and Princess No. 7 coal, D4599-E (interval, 190 ft—192 ft 57/3 in.), macerations 238—A—D. Thirty-two samples were collected from roadcut ex- posures on the south side in Interstate 64 in Rush quadrangle, Boyd County, Ky. These samples consist of the Princess Nos. 6, 7, 8(?), and 9(?) and the Brush Creek(?) coals. The following US. Geological Survey Paleobotanical locality and maceration numbers were assigned to these coals: Princess No. 6 coal, D4600 (3,600 ft FEL X 3,200 ft FNL), macerations 161—A———J; Princess No. 7 coal, D4601 (1,800 ft FEL X 2,900 ft FNL), macerations 160—A—G; Princess No. 8(7) coal, D4602 (1,200 ft FEL X 2,700 ft FNL), macerations 162—A—C; Princess No. 9(?) coal, D4603 (1,200 ft FEL X 2,700 ft FNL), macerations 163-A—H; and Brush Creek(?) coal, D4604 (1,100 ft FEL X 2,700 ft FNL), macerations 164—A—D. The coal samples were prepared according to the procedures described by Kosanke (1950), but with minor modifications, to achieve the most satisfactory preparations. The roof, seat-rock, and parting samples were prepared in the standard way for noncoal samples — that is, treatment with HCl, HF, HN03+KClO3 and KOH and ul- timately specific. gravity separation with zinc bromide. Mounting of all maceration residues was made with Canada balsam. Precise preparation methods used for each macera- tion are recorded in maceration books 4 and 6. Abundance counts were made by uniform procedure. Two hundred fifty specimens were counted from each sam- ple, and all taxa not observed in the count were then recorded. Five to 10 slides were examined for each macera- tion. PALYNOLOGIC ASSEMBLAGES OF THE PRINCESS COALS PRINCESS N0. 5 COAL The coal between 312 feet 6 inches and 313 feet 83/8 inches in the Webbville 1 core hole is considered to be the N0. 5 coal. Figure 2A graphically illustrates the interval from 312 feet 3 inches through 313 feet 113/8 inches. The total coal thickness is 93/8 inches (238—Z, 238—BB); in this coal the following genera are numerically significant: Princess N0. 5 coal Percent of Germs total count Laevigatosporites ___________ 27.3 L ycospora _______________ 23 .7 Torispora ________________ 15 . 3 Triquitrites _______________ 8.6 Endosporites _____________ 6. 3 Granulatisporites ___________ 4.3 Total ______________ 85.5 TABLE 1. — Percentage of genera of small spares in the Princess N 0. 5 coal [At a depth of 312 ft 3 in. to 313 ft 113/3 in, Webbville 1 core, on Little Cat Branch about 1.4 miles west of Baker School, 24,200 ft FNL X 16,500 ft FEL, Webbville quadrangle, Lawrence County, Ky. Paleobotanical loc, No. D4599—A, 750 specimens counted. +, present but not observed in statistical count, or statistical count not attempted] Percent Genus Maceralion No. ___ zas—Y 238vZ 238—AA 238—BB 238—CC Ahrensisporites--- ____ + ____ ____ ___- Calamospora ___- + 2.8 0.8 0.8 + Cirralriradites ___. + 2.4 .8 .4 + Crassispora _____ + _ _ _ _ .8 _ _ _ _ + Cristatt'sporites __._ ____ ___- ___- ____ + Densosporites____ ____ ___- + .8 + Endosporites ___- _ _ _ _ 3.6 + 10.4 + Florim'tes ______ + 3.2 1.6 .8 + Granulatisporites _ + 6.8 4.8 .8 7 + Laevigatosporites _ + 28.0 29.6 26.4 + Lycospora ______ + 6.0 30.8 50.4 + Murospora _____ + 1.6 ____ ____ ____ Punctatisporites _- + 3.2 1.6 2.8 _ _ _ _ Raistrt'ckia _____ + 4 4 _ _ _ _ + Reinschospora ___ ____ ___- ____ ___._ + Savitrisporites ___ ____ ___- .4 ____ + Simozonotriletes ._ ___- ___- ____ ____ + Torispora ______ + 23.2 23.6 3.6 + Triquitrites _____ + 13.6 3.2 1.2 + Vestispora ______ _ _ _ _ + + _ _ _ _ + Wilsonites ______ ____ 1.2 .8 ___- ____ Zosterosporites___ + ____ ____ ____ ____ Monosaccates____ ____ 4.0 .8 1.6 ____ Allothertaxa ___- + + ____ __.__ ___- Total _____ ___- 100.0 100.0 100.0 ____ DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL 1N MACERATIONS 238—Y—CC, 203/3 inches siltstone, shale, coal, and seat rock. 2387Y, 3 inches light-gray siltstone and medium-gray shale. 238*Z, 55/3 inches coal. 238eAA, 5% inches dark5 r 11”---- 5 Herrin (No. 6) coal ______________________ 9, I7, 18 C L ' A’ 'r ire: 5, 7 P (‘ 1‘ , u 9 lnterregional correlations, coal ___________________ l7 Paleobotanical locality numbers __________________ 2, 3 SP 5 ‘ 1 1' Tn‘quitriter ————————————————————————— 5 pal/Mus, c, I .195 _ ___ 5 Calamaspora ___________________ 3, 6, 8, 9, ll, 13, 14 Investigations, previous work ____________________ l Palynologic assemblages, princess c0211S ______________ 3 breviradiala _ 5 cc - ,1 m 5' hartungiana _____________________________ 5 Knoxisporiles -f -------------------------- 121 15 Paraioriltlrjffilfiiia:_i_i ________________ 11, 17 spp 5 komnkez. C. r u ' 5 1. ,___ ___ 5‘ l7 Cirrarriradite: ------------------ 31 6’ 8, 9, “1 13- 14 Murorpora ____________________________ 5 Percentage of genera of small spores, Princess No. 5 coal__ 3 I '” 5 Princess No. 5A coal _______________________ 6 5P 5 L Princess No, 58 coal _______________________ 8 Coal correlations. interregional _ _ l7 . Princess No. 6 com (drill core) ________________ 3 Princess coals _________________ 12 Laboratory maceration numbers —————————————————— 2 Princess No. 6 coal (roadcul) ___________ _ 9 Colchester (No, 2) coal __ 7, 9,17,18, 19 59? “’50 Sfleflfif ml "am“ pmcess No_ 7 co2,1 __________________ _ 11 Convolutispora _________________ 6, 8, 9, ll, 12, 13, 14 Laevigatosporiles —-— 31 61 3. 91 10. H, ‘31 141 151 16- 17’ 1: Richardson coal __________________________ 13 s 5 - Commons. mansion“, ml ___________________ ,7 globosus ________ 5, 7, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19; pl. 1 Sm“ ““1 “““““““““““““““““ M Princess coals _ ______ 12 I'm“ 5 P ' ‘r 13:5 3 Crassispora ______ _3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14 "'5le 5 S1: 5. 7 kasankei ___ ______ 5 "WWW ——————————— 5, 7. 10. l3. l4. 15. l7, 19; pl. 1 Preparation, mounting of maceration residues __________ 3 crim'm, Raistrickia' _______________________ 5 ”“1”“ ¥ 5 r' I, 2 G' '1’ [.es _ _____ 3_ g, 9' 12 pseudothiessenii —————— 5, 7, 9, 10, IS. 17. l8, 19; Pl. 1 Princess coals, correlation _______________________ [2 sp ______ 5 PWK‘W’W ——————————————— 5, 6. 10. 131 l4, 15; pl 1 Princess No. 5 coal ______________________ 1, 2, 3, 5 "meg, Ramrickm ___________________________ 5 VII/gar“ ———————————————————————————————— 5 correlation ___________________________ 12, 15 Lawrence coal ______________________________ 15 generic comparison with Richardson coal __________ 13 D (ENS. C. ' , 5m 5 generic comparison with Skyline coal ____________ 14 Localities, paleobotanical, numbers __________ _ 2 generic comparison with SA coal ______________ 6, 9 119115111145, W" ' 5 sample ————————————————————— __ I numerically important genera _________________ 3 Delong coal 17 Location, Princess reserve diStl'iCt ______ —- 1 Zosterosporites triangulari: ___________________ ll Dem05p0,1,es__ 3' 5, 6, s, 9, 1o, 11, 13, 14, 15' 16. 17, 1s, 19 made“! Where samples were taken 1, 10 Princess No. 5A coal _________________________ l, 5 oblamr 16 Webbville l diamond-drill hole _______________ l, 2 correlation ___________________________ 15' 19 ,,‘ a ' ,3 5Y 9, 15 Lowe“ 503' 9 generic comparison __________________ 7, 8, 9, 16 J - , , Lu: r: r ”es _ 5 Lower Freeport coal ______________ --_ 15 numerically important genera _________________ 6 Dicfygfn‘lefg; ______ 12, 13‘ 14 Lower Kittanning coal ____________________ 7, 9, 15 Princess No. SB coal _____________________ l, 3, 6, 7 dimorphus, Schopfites _ __ 5‘ 15 correlation —————————————————————— 15, l7, 18, l9 correlation _________________________ 15, 16, 18 [31511-101 name, origin __________________________ 1 numerically important genera ———————————————— 15 numerically important genera _________________ 6 Lymrpnru ———————— 3. 6. 8, 9. 10. 11. l3, 14, 15. 16, 17. 19 percentage of genera of small spores _____________ 8 E, F 5' ' ————— 5 Zostemsporite: ln'angularis ___________________ ll micrapapillala — 5 Princess No. 6 coal ________________________ 1, 3. 7 ellipticus, Spackmaniles ____________________ 5, 9, 15 r J I 5 correlation ———————————————————— [5v 16. ‘71 18, '9 Endosporiteg ___________________ 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14 Punflala ~—_ 5 numerically important genera _____________ 8 amam 5 SP — 5 percentage of genera of small spores _________ __ 8 sp 5 Princess No, 7 coal ____________________ 1, 3, 7, 9, 10 exiguur, Tn'qunme; ___________________________ 5 M correlation ______________________ 15, 17, 18, 19 numerically important genera ____________ fenestrala, V ', u __ 5 muccabei, Parasporites _______________________ 5. 17 percentage of genera of small spores- Fire Clay coal ______________________________ l7 Maceralion numbers _______ __ 2, 3 Princess No, 8(7) coal _____________ .. 3, [0, 15, 19 Floriniter _____________________ 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14 Maeeration residues, mounting ___________________ 3 Princess No. 90) coal _____________ 3, 7, [0, 15, 19 '1 _ ____ 5 medias, Lu: 'a , {we 5 1., , Triquitrites ____________ _ 5 sp 5 micrapapillala, LycosponL- _______ r ‘ ' L ycoxpora ____,-....__-_ ___________ 5 21 22 INDEX Page Page pseudothiexsenii, Laevigatmpori‘les 5, 7, 9, 10, 15, 17, 18, 19; pl. 1 Savim‘sparite: _________________________ 3, 13, 14 Thymospora ___________________ 5, 15, 16; pl. 1 nux __________________________________ 5 pulvinarux, Triquitrites _________________________ 5 sp ___________________________________ 5 Punctalisparile: ____________ 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, ll, 13, 14, 15 Srhopfites ___________________ 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18, 19 ‘ ____ pl, 1 dimorphux ____________________________ 5, 15 “Z, a ____ 5,16 sp ___________________________________ 5 sulcatus _______________________________ 5 securix, Tarispom ________________ 5, 6, 7, 10, 16; pl, 1 spp __________________________________ 5 Simuzonalriletex ___________________________ 3, 13 punclala, Lycospora __________________________ 5 sp _ 5 puncmlus, Laevigatosparile: ______ 5, 6, 10, 13, 14, 15; pl, 1 Skyline coal ___________________________ 12, 13, I4 numerically important genera _________________ 14 R Zoslerarporiles triangularir ___________________ ll Spark ' _ __ 8,9, 11 R J” _____ 12, l3, l4 ellipticus ___________________________ 5, 9, 15 Raism'tkia ____________________ 3, 6, 8, 9, ll, 13, 14 r‘ , C. ' ' flex _ __ 5 trinila ________________________________ 5 Triquitrite: _____________________________ 5 crocea ________________________________ 5 Spirobix __________________________________ 17 spp __________________________________ 5 Springfield (No, 5) coal _____________________ 18, 19 Reimthospom _________________________ 3, 12, 14 Strasburg coal ___________________________ 18, 19 sp ___________________________________ 5 rulcatus, Punctatisparite: _______________________ 5 Reliculatixporiles _________________ 6, 8, 9, 12, l3, [4 sp ___________________________________ 5 T Richardson coal _____________________ II, 12, I4, 15 numerically important genera ______________ 12, I3 Tamillus __________________________________ 8 Zaslerosporiles triangularis ___________________ ll Iriquetrus _____________________________ 5, 7 Thymospora pseudolhiessenii ____________ 5, 15, 16; pl, 1 S Torispora _____________________ 3, 6, 8, 9, ll, l3, 14 matrix ___________________ 5, 6, 7, [0, 16; pl. 1 Samples, localities ____________________________ l Ilia/mus, A/atixporile: ________________________ 5, 7 preparation I, 2 u‘ D ' (a, L‘ , {m ______________________ 5 Webbville l diamond-drill hole ________________ 2 Zosleroxporiles _______________ 1, 5, 7, 11, 19; pl. 1 Iriquelms, Tanlillu: __________________________ 5, 7 Page Triquitrites _________________ 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, ll, 13, 14 addilux ________________________________ 5 arculalus _______________________________ 5 exiguus ________________________________ 5 inusimlux ______________________________ 5 pretensur ______________________________ 5 pulvinam: ______________________________ 5 .rpinosux _______________________________ 5 spp __________________________________ 5 Triricites ohioensi: ____________________________ 18 U, V Upper Freeport coal _______________________ 15, I7 verrucosus, Gr ' He: 5 Vesimspom _ 9 " " _ 5, 15 Vertirpora _____________________ 3, 6, 8, 9, ll, 13, 14 fenexlmm ______________ 5 sp ____________________ 5 vulgaris, Laevigataspariles ______________________ 5 W, Z ‘ Webbville 1 diamond-drill hole _____________ 1, 2, 6, 10 wilmnii, Vesicaspom ________________ 5, 15 Wilsom‘te: _____________ 3, 6, 8, 9, ll, 13, 14 delicatus _______________________________ 5 spp _____ -_ 5 Zoslerosporites ___________________ 3, 8, ]0_ 13, 14' 19 Iriangularis _________________ l, 5, 7, ll. 19; pl, 1 us. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1974 0—527—762 PLATE 1 {Contact photograph of the plate in this report is available, at cost. from the Us. Geological Survey Photographic Library, Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225] PLATE 1 FIGURES 1—6. Zosterosnorites triangularis, n. gen., n. sp. USGS paleobotanical 10c. D4599—C. 10, 12. 11. 1. Holotype, maceration 238—0, single grain mount 1,108.9 X 14.5, proximal focus, maximum diameter 29.7 microns and negative number 1969. 2. Holotype, distal focus and negative number 1792. 3. Paratype, maceration 238—0, slide 2, 103.1 X 11.0, proximal focus, maximum diameter 29.7 microns and negative number 1752. 4. Paratype, maceration 238—0, slide 5, 109.7 X 7.7, proximal focus, maximum diameter 31 microns and negative number 1973. 5. Paratype, maceration 238—0, slide 3, 111.9 X 12.0 distal focus, maximum diameter 27.0 microns and negative number 1771. 6. Paratype, maceration 238—0, slide 5, 109.4 X 8.3, distal focus, maximum diameter 324 microns and negative number 1793. Laevigatosporites globosus Schemel, D4600, maceration 161 —F, 121.3 X 9.8, proximal focus from distal side, max- imum diameter 27 microns and negative number 1803. Laevigatosporites pseudothiersenii Kosanke = Thymospora pseudolhiessenii (Kosanke) emend. Wilson and Venkatachala, D4601, maceration 160—E, slide 11, 112.3 X 6.0, oblique proximal View, maximum diameter 40.5 and negative number 1808. Laevigatosporites minutus (Ibrahim) S. W. & B. = Punctalosporites minutus Ibrahim, D3302, maceration 5—B, slide 18, 107.0 X 0.0, oblique proximal view, maximum diameter 25.0 microns and negative numberr 1807. Torispora securis Balme. 10. D4599—C, maceration 238—0, slide 6, 102.6 X 17.5, oblique proximal view, maximum diameter 40.5, microns and negative number 1759. 12. D4599—A, maceration 238—Z, slide 4, 112.4 X 7.2, oblique proximal view, maximum diameter 41.8 microns and negative number 1773. Laevigatosparites punctatus Kosanke, D4599—C, maceration 238—0, single grain mount 6, 1199 X 9.7, proximal view, maximum diameter 40.5 microns and negative number 1759. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ‘ ' PROFESSIONAL PAPER 839 PLATE 1 IO ‘20 I I MICRONS ZOSTER OSPORITES, LAE VIGA TOSPORITES, AND TORISPORA Descriptions and Analyses of Eight New USGS Rock Standards Compiled and edited by F. J. FLANAGAN GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 840 Twenty-eight papers present analytical data on new and previously described whole-rock standards UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1976 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR THOMAS S. KLEPPE, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Descriptions and analyses of eight new USGS rock standards. (Geological Survey professional paper; 840) Supt. of Docs. no.: 119.16z840 1. Rocks—~Analysis--Standards. 2. Geochemistry, Analytic-Standards. I. Flanagan, Francis James, 1915- II. Series: United States. Geological Survey. Professional paper; 840. QE438.D37 552’.06 , 76-608172 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, US. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Stock Number 024-001-02866-2 CONTENTS Abbreviations ____________________________________________________________ Introduction, by F. J. Flanagan ____________________________________________ Nepheline syenite, STM—l, from Table Mountain, Oregon, by P. D. Snavely, Jr., N. S. MacLeod, F. J. Flanagan, Sol Berman, H. G. Neiman, and Harry Bastron _____________________________________________________________ Rhyolite, RGM—l, from Glass Mountain, California, by D. B. Tatlock, F. J. Flan— agan, Harry Bastron, Sol Berman, and A. L. Sutton, Jr ___________________ Quartz latite (dellenite), QLO-l, from southeastern Oregon, by G. W. Walker, F. J. Flanagan, A. L. Sutton, Jr., Harry Bastron, Sol Berman, J. I. Dinnin, and L. B. Jenkins ____________________________________________________ Cody Shale, SCo—l, from Natrona County, Wyoming, by L. G. Schultz H. A. Tourtelot, and F. J. Flanagan _________________________________________ Marine mud, MAG—1, from the Gulf of Maine, by F. T. Manheim, J. C. Hathaway, F. J. Flanagan, and J. D. Fletcher ____________________________________ Mica schist, SDC—l, from Rock Creek Park, Washington, DC, by F. J. Flanagan and G. V. Carroll ____________________________________________________ Basalt, BHVO—l, from Kilauea Crater, Hawaii, by F. J. Flanagan, T. L. Wright, S. R. Taylor, C. S. Annell, R. C. Christian, and J. I. Dinnin ______________ Mass spectrometric isotope dilution determinations of barium, by J. R. de Laeter, R. Date, and I. D. Abercrombie _________________________________________ The bismuth content of six new USGS standard rocks, by L. P. Greenland, E. Y. Campbell, and F. J. Flanagan __________________________________________ Molybdenum in USGS standard rocks, by E. G. Lillie and L. P. Greenland _____ Intercalibration of 17 standard silicates for 14 elements by instrumental neutron activation analysis, by, Amitai Katz and Lawrence Grossman _____________ Bismuth contents of USGS rock samples RGM—l and BHVO—l, by P. M. Santoli- quido and W. D. Ehmann ______________________________________________ Determination of uranium and thorium in USGS standard rocks by the delayed neutron technique, by H. T. Millard, Jr _________________________________ The determination of antimony, hafnium, and tantalum in the new USGS standard rocks, by L. J. Schwarz and J. J. Rowe ________________________________ Gold content of USGS standard rocks, by L. J. Schwarz and J. L. Barker _____ The beryllium, fluorine, lithium, copper,zinc, and strontium contents of USGS standard rock samples STM—l, RGM—l, QLO—l, SlCo—l, MAG—1, SDC—l, and SGR—l, by V. Machaéek, I. Rubeska, V. Sixta, and Z. Sulcek ______________ Instrumental analyses of major and minor oxides in USGS standard rocks BHVO— 1, QLO—l, SDC—l, and RGM—l, by P. W. Weigand, K. Thoresen, W. L. Griffin, and K. S. Heier _______________________________________________ The determination of selected elements in the USGS standard rocks STM—l and RGM—l, by A. C. S. Smith and J. N. Walsh ____________________________ Homogeneity of niobium content of eight USGS standard rocks, by E. Y. Camp- bell and L. P. Greenland _____________________________________________ X-ray fluorescence analysis of 21 selected major, minor, and trace elements in eight new USGS standard rocks, by B. P. Fabbi and L. F. Espos __________ Titanium and trace element data in USGS standard rocks SCo—l and SGR—l, by Isaac B. Brenner and A. Harel ________________________________________ Computerized spectrographic data for USGS standards, by F. G. Walthall, A. F. Dorrzapf, Jr., and F. J. Flanagan ______________________________________ Determinations of rare alkalis and alkaline earths in USGS standard rocks, by Sydney Abbey _______________________________________________________ Copper, lithium, manganese, strontium, zinc, sodium, potassium, and magnesium contents of eight new USGS standard rock samples, by J. A. Thomas, Wayne Mountjoy, and Claude Huffman, Jr ____________________________________ 11 15 21 25 29 33 41 45 47 49 59 61 67 71 73 79 83 87 89 95 99 117 119 III IV FIGURES TABLE 1—4. 9‘ 5°9°fl99FS°NP HHHHHHr—l 99‘PWP’FP 17—22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 28. 95°90 CONTENTS Page The carbon contents of USGS volcanic rock standards, by F. J. Flanagan, J. C. Chandler, I. A. Breger, C. B. Moore, and C. F. Lewis ____________________ 123 Final compilation of K-Ar and Rb-Sr measurements on P—207, the USGS inter- laboratory standard muscovite, by M. A. Lanphere and G. B. Dalrymple ___ 127 1972 compilation of data on USGS standards, by F. J. Flanagan ______________ 131 Determination of gold, silver, and tantalum in the new USGS standards by neu- tron activation analysis, by G. N. Anoshin and G. A. Perezhogin _________ 185 G—l et W—l: Requiescant in Pacel, by F. J. Flanagan _______________________ 189 ILLUSTRATIONS Maps showing: 1. Source of STM—l on Table Mountain, Oreg _______________________________________ 2. Lava flow at Glass Mountain, Ca1if., with location of RGM—l ________________________ 3. Source of QLO—l south of Juniper Mountain, Oreg __________________________________ 4. Southwest corner of Edgerton quadrangle, Wyo., showing source of 800—1 ______________ Plane table sketch map and diagrammatic cross section showing the rocks in the immediate area of the source of 800—1 _______________________________________________________________ Sketch map showing location of the source of MAG—1 in the Wilkinson Basin, Gulf of Maine ___ Geologic sketch map of the Washington West quadrangle, District of Columbia-Maryland-Vir- ginia, showing the source of SDC—l ____________________________________________________ Part of the geologic map of Kilauea Crater, Hawaii, with the source of BHVO—l ______________ Scatter diagram of Si02 determinations in G—2 and GSP—l __________________________________ Scatter diagram of SiOz determinations in AGV~1 and BCR—l TABLES Sieve analyses of STM—l _________________________________________________________________ Chemical analyses and norms of STM—l ____________________________________________________ Spectrochemical determinations of elements in STM—l _______________________________________ Averages and standard deviations for spectrographic data for STM—l _________________________ Published determinations by neutron activation analysis of STM—l ___________________________ Sieve analyses of RGM-l __________________________________________________________________ Chemical analyses of RGM—l ______________________________________________________________ Norms (CIPW) for RGM—l ______________________________________________________________ Spectrochemical determinations of elements in RGM—l _______________________________________ Averages and standard deviations for spectrographic data for RGM—l _________________________ Sieve analyses of quartz latite, QLO—l ______________________________________________________ Chemical analyses of QLO—l _______________________________________________________________ Norms (CIPW) of QLO—l ________________________________________________________________ Spectrochemical determinations of elements in QLO—l ________________________________________ Averages and standard deviations for spectrographic data for QLO—l _________________________ Sieve analyses of quartz latite, QLO—q ______________________________________________________ Determinations and analyses of variance of: 17. Uranium in QLO—l _______________________________________________________________ 18. Thorium in QLO—l ________________________________________________________________ 19. K0 in QLO—l ________________________..___-____________~ __________________________ 20. Uranium in QLO—y _____________________________________; _________________________ 21. Thorium in QLO—v _______________________________________________________________ 22. K20 in QLO—v ___________________________________________________________________ Estimates of the U, Th, and K20 contents, and of the Th: U ratio, of QLO—l and QLO—Iy _________ Sieve analyses of 800—1 __________________________________________________________________ Chemical analysis of 800—1 ________1 _______________________________________________________ Semiquantitative spectrographic estimates of some trace elements in SCo—l ____________________ Grain-size estimates of the marine mud MAG—1 ______________________________________________ Bulk mineralogy of MAG—1 determined by X-ray diffractometer ______________________________ Page 11 15 21 TABLE 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. CONTENTS Mineralogy of the clay fraction of MAG—1 determined by X—ray difi’ractometer _______________ Mineralogy of the sand fraction of MAG-1 __________________________________________________ Sieve analyses of MAG—1 __________________________________________________________________ Chemical analyses of MAG—1 ______________________________________________________________ Quantitative spectrographic determinations of trace elements in marine mud, MAG—1 ___________ Conclusions from the analysis of variance and estimates of the spectrographic data from MAG—1 _ Sieve analyses of SDC—l ---—--——--------------—--.- ________________________________________ Analyses of SDC—l by rapid rock methods and by X-ray fluorescence __________________________ Norms (CIPW) for SDC—l, bottle 21/5 ____________________________________________________ Semiquantitative spectrographic estimates of the trace element contents of SDG—l _______________ Chemical analysis of a grab sample of BHVO—l ____________________________________________ Sieve analyses of batches of BHVO—l ______________________________________________________ Quantitative spectrographic determinations of trace elements in Hawaiian basalt, BHVO—l ____ Determinations of the potassium content of BHVO—l ________________________________________ Determinations of the niobium content of BHVO—l ____________________________________________ Determinations of the uranium content of BHVO—l ____________________________________________ Instrumental neutron activation analyses of the chromium, scandium, and thorium contents of BHVO—l ____________________________________________________________________________ X-ray fluorescence determinations of several oxides in BHVO—l _______________________________ Spark source mass spectrometric determination of elements in BHVO—l _______________________ Means and standard deviations of data for BHVO—l ___________________________________________ Isotopic composition of barium nitrate tracer and natural barium ____________________________ Determinations of barium in USGS standard rock samples __________________________________ Estimates of the barium contents of standard rocks ____________________________________________ Bismuth content of USGS standard rocks ___________________________________________________ Summary of estimates for the bismuth content of six USGS standard rocks ____________________ Molybdenum content of USGS standard rocks _______________________________________________ Nuclides, gamma—ray peaks, and half-lives of elements determined _____________________________ Best values selected from literature for the “primary” standards ______________________________ New data for the “primary” standards _____________________________________________________ Data for the new (1971 series) USGS silicate standards ____________________________________ Deviations between the new and the selected data of the “primary” standards __________________ Neutron activation determinations and estimates of bismuth in USGS standard rocks RGM—l and BHVO—l ____________________________________________________________________________ Calibration of uranium and thorium monitors against a set of laboratory standard rocks by the de- layed neutron technique _______________________________________________________________ Neutron fluxes in the Geological Survey TRIGA reactor for pneumatic tube irradiations in the “G” ring _________________________________________________________________________________ Analytical parameters for the determination of uranium and thorium using one cycle of two irra- diations and countings with the delayed neutron system _________________________________ Concentrations of uranium and thorium in USGS standard rocks _____________________________ Estimates for uranium and thorium in USGS standard rocks ________________________________ Determinations of antimony, hafnium, and tantalum in USGS standard rocks _________________ Gold in standard rocks ____________________________________________________________________ Analytical data for seven USGS standard rock samples ______________________________________ Conclusions from the analysis of variance, averages, and standard deviations for USGS standard rock samples _________________________________________________________________________ Operating conditions for X-ray analyses _____________________________________________________ Determinations of oxides and summary of estimates for USGS standard rock samples BHVO—l, QLO—l, SDC—l, and RGM—l ___________________________________________________________ Replicate data for minor oxides in RGM—l and STM—l ________________________________________ Replicate data for trace elements in RGM—l and STM—l _____________________________________ Results of analysis of variance of minor-oxide data for RGM—l and STM—l __________________ Results of analysis of variance of trace-element data for RGM—l and STM—l ___________________ Niobium content of USGS standard rocks ___________________________________________________ X-ray Quantometer operating conditions ____________________________________________________ X-ray spectrograph operating conditions _____________________________________________________ X-ray fluorescence determinations and estimates for standard samples __________________________ Quantitative spectmgraphic determinations of trace and minor elements in Cody Shale, SCo—l ___ Quantitative spectrographic determinations of trace and minor elements in shale of the Green River Formation, SGR—l ___________________________________________________________________ V Page 26 26 26 26 27 28 30 31 31 31 34 34 35 35 35 35 35 36 37 38 42 42 43 45 46 48 50 51 52 53 56 59 62 62 63 64 65 68 72 75 76 79 80 83 84 84 85 87 89 90 90 96 97 VI CONTENTS Page TABLE 82—96. Computerized spectrographic data for: 82. Diabase, W—1 ____________________________________________________________________ 101 83. Granite, G—2 _____________________________________________________________________ 102 84. Granodiorite, GSP—l ______________________________________________________________ 103 85. Andresite, AGV—l _________________________________________________________________ 104 86. Peridotite, PCC—l _________________________________________________________________ 105 87. Dunite, DTS—l ___________________________________________________________________ 106 88. Basalt, BCR—l ____________________________________________________________________ 107 89. Nephaeline syenite, STM—l _________________________________________________________ 108 90. Rhyolite, RGM—l _________________________________________________________________ 109 91. Quartz latite, QLO—l _____________________________________________________________ 110 92. Mica schist, SDC—l _______________________________________________________________ 111 93. Cody Shale, SCo—l ________________________________________________________________ 112 94. Green River Shale, SGR—l _________________________________________________________ 113 95. Marine mud, MAG—1 ______________________________________________________________ 114 96. Hawaiian basalt, BHVO—l _________________________________________________________ 115 97. Estimates of the less common alkali and alkaline—earth contents of USGS samples _______________ 117 98. Determinations and estimates of several elements and oxides in eight USGS samples ___________ 120 99. Determinations of carbon and summary of estimates for USGS samples by Arizona State Univer- sity _________________________________________________________________________________ 124 1001. Determinations of carbon and summary of estimates for USGS samples by USGS laboratory _____ 125 101. Potassium and argon analyses of P—207 ______________________________________________________ 128 102. Rubidium and strontium measurements of P—207 _____________________________________________ 129 103. New rock analyses ________________________________________________________________________ 132 104. Determinations of major and minor constituents in eight USGS standard rock samples ___________ 135 105. Determinations of trace elements in eight USGS standard samples ____________________________ 145 106. Estimates of components normally determined in a crock analysis ______________________________ 171 107. Estimates for trace elements in USGS samples _______________________________________________ 171 108. Determinations of gold, silver, and tantalum in USGS standard rocks __________________________ 186 109. Particle-size distribution of six USGS samples _______________________________________________ 192 ABBREVIATIONS A ______________ Angstrom m ______________ meter cm ______________ centimeter M ______________ mole cm3 _____________ cubic centimeter mA _____________ milliampene cps _____________ counts per second MeV ____________ megaelectronvolts cps/#g __________ counts per second per micmgram mg _____________ milligram ”F ______________ degrees Farenheit mi ________~ ______ mile ft ______________ foot mi2 _____________ square mile ft2 ______________ square foot min _____________ minute f1:3 ______________ cubic foot ml/min __________ milliliters per minute g _______________ gram mm _____________ millimeter g/ kg ____________ grams per kilogram MW ____________ megawatt gal _____________ gallon my. ____________ million years gal/ ton _________ gallons per ton ug ______________ microgram h _______________ hour I‘m _____________ micrometer in ______________ inch as ______________ microsecond keV _____________ kiloelectronvolts neutrons cm‘2 s‘1 __neutrons per square centimeter per second kg ______________ kilogram ng ______________ nanogram km _____________ kilometer nm _____________ nanometer kp ______________ kilopond force oz ______________ ounce kp/cm2 __________ kilopond force per centimeter squared ppb _____________ parts per billion kV _____________ kilovolt ppm ____________ parts per million kW _____________ kilowatt psi _____________ pounds per square inch l _______________ liter yd2 _____________ square yard I/min ___________ liter per minute yr ______________ year 1b ______________ pound DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS INTRODUCTION By F. J. FLANAGAN Eight new whole-rock sample powders have been added to the US. Geological Survey’s standard sam- ple program. These samples supplement the first two samples, G—1 and W—l (Fairbairn and others, 1951; Stevens and others, 1960; Fleischer and Stevens, 1962; Fleischer, 1965, 1969), and the more recent set of six samples, G—2, GSP—l,‘ AGV—l, PCC—l, DTS—l, and BCR—l (Flanagan 1967, 1969). The supply of G—l became exhausted in 1965, but requests for the remaining samples Will be con- sidered as long as supplies last. The new samples consist of six rocks—a nephe- line syenite from Table Mountain, Oreg.; a rhyo- lite obsidian from Glass Mountain, Calif.; a quartz latite from Lake County, Oreg.; a mica schist from Rock Creek Park, Washington, D.C.; the Cody Shale from Natrona County, Wyo.; and a basalt from Kilauea Crater, Hawaii—and a marine sedi- ment from Wilkerson Basin, Gulf of Maine. The marine sediment is probably the first standard sam- ple of its kind and should be of substantial value to analysts dealing with such samples. A second por- tion of the quartz latite is intended for gamma ray spectrometry. Seven of the samples, collected by geologists familiar with the geologic settings, are described in separate sections in this report, and analyses of the contents for many of the elements are given for all eight standard rocks. The samples were prepared primarily as refer- ence materials for geochemical investigations. Al- though intended for use principally in our labora- tories, they are available for distribution to investi- gators in geological surveys, other government or- ganizations, universities, and research institutes whose problems and interests are similar to ours. Normally, 1-oz bottles are supplied, but requests for larger amounts may be considered. Our laboratories have made preliminary chemical and spectrographic analyses of these new samples, and the data are included in the descriptive papers. Periodic compilations of data for all available USGS samples are planned. Because of the difficul- ties inherent in simultaneously compiling data for a dozen or more samples, analysts are requested to send us the references to papers in which they have published data on our samples. The processing of these new samples, with only a few exceptions, follows without change the pro- cedure previously described (Flanagan, 1967). An important part of the procedure consists of the selection, using random normal deviates, of (1) four bottles for sieve tests from each third of the entire batch of bottles; (2) three bottles from each third for spectrographic determinations in which one bot- tle from each third is given to each of our three spectrographic laboratories; and (3) two bottles from each third for the initial chemical analysis by our laboratories. As these selections are made upon completion of bottling, sieve analyses are available for all samples. Chemical analysis by the methods of Peck (1964) and quantitative spectrographic analysis by the method of Bastron, Barnett, and Murata (1960) are avail-able for the first three samples, STM—l, RGM—l, and QLO—l. The compositions of the re- maining samples were determined by rapid rock analysis methods (Shapiro and Brannock, 1962; Shapiro, 1967) and by semiquantitative spectro- graphic analysis (Myers and others, 1961). Data on trace elements that had concentrations below the limits of detection for either spectrographic method have not been entered in the tables. The quantitative spectrographic data for the minor and trace elements are entered as parts per 1 2 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS million for ease in comparison of data and in com- putation in the analysis of variance. These data are significant to two figures (but only one near the limit of detection), and the zeros to the right of the significant digits are intended only to locate the decimal point. The two digits for some semiquan- titative data serve only to indicate the midpoint of an interval because the data are reported as a num- ber in the series 1.0, 0.7, 0.5, 0.3, 0.2, 0.15, 0.1, and so on, which represent midpoints of intervals on a geometric scale. The standard deviation of these semiquantitative data is one interval. The analysis of variance was used with the quan- titative spectrochemical determinations for the first three samples to determine if the samples are homo- geneous for those elements for which the labora- tories reported duplicate determinations on their three bottles. The data for each element are cast into the form of a two-way experimental design with duplicate determinations in which the labora- tories and the bottles from the three thirds of the lot of samples are the variables of classification. As an example, the data for beryllium in STM—l are shown below. Beryllium determinations for STM—I, in parts per million Laboratory Totals Thirds Menlo Wash- for Park Denver ington thirds 1 ____________________ 5 10 7 6 11 14 Subtotal _______ 11 21 21 53 2 ____________________ 6 17 11 6 12 10 Subtotal _______ 12 29 21 62 3 ____________________ 5 7 14 7 6 8 Subtotal _______ 12 13 22 47 Laboratory totals and grand total _____ 35 63 64 162 Because of the relatively small number of deter- minations (18), it was not determined if the as- sumptions underlying the analysis of variance (Eisenhart, 1947) were tenable. 0n the assumption that they are valid, the calculations of the sums of squares for the sources of variation were made as shown in numerous texts, (for example, Dixon and Massey, 1951, p. 135—136), and the sums of squares and the degrees of freedom were entered in the analysis of variance table below. Analysis of variance [NS, not significant] De- grees of Mean Source of Sum of free- sum of _ variation squares dom squares F ratio Thirds _________ 19.00 2 Laboratories ___.. 90.33 2 Interaction _____ 45.67 4 11.42 11.42/6.55=1.74 NS Subtotal __ 1545.004 8 F0,.,5(4,9) =3-63 Within _________ 59.00 9 6.55 Total __.._ 214.00 17 The sum of squares for the interaction was ob- tained by the difference between the subtotal and the sums of squares for the thirds and laboratories, and that for the within, by the difference between the total variation and the subtotal. The mean sums of squares (MSS) for the sources of variation are obtained by dividing the sums of squares by their degrees of freedom, and the sig- nificance of the interaction is tested by the ratio, MSSmtemtion/ MSSwitm", shown in the table. For most elements in the first three samples the computed ratio does not exceed the allowable value, Fm95 (4, 9) 23.63, and the interaction is judged to be not sig- nificant. The interaction and the within sums of squares and their degrees of freed-om are then pooled to form an error sum of squares and degrees of freedom which are entered in the final analysis of variance table below. Ratios of the variation at- tributable to thirds and to laboratories are then formed with the error mean square, and if a ratio does not exceed the value of F0,95(2, 13) :3.81, as shown in F tables, it is not declared to be signfi- cantly larger than the error. When the variation due to the bottles randomly selected from the three thirds is not significant, the sample is declared to be homogeneous for that element by the spectrographic data of the three laboratories. Analysis of variance [S, significant; NS, not significant] De- grees of Mean Source of Sum of free- sum of variation squares dom squares F ratio Thirds _________ 19.00 2 9.50 9.50/8.05=1.18 NS Laboratories _ _ __ 90.33 2 45.16 454.16/8.05=5.61 S Error __________ 104.67 13 8.05 F035 (2,13) :3.81 Total ____ 214.00 17 The standard deviations listed in the summary tables are the estimates for analytical error and for laboratory error. Other designs have been used in some papers that result in estimates of the bottle INTRODUCTION 3 error and the analytical error. Bennett and Frank- lin (1954, table 7.14, p. 362) show that the average value for the mean square for subclasses (in this case, laboratories) is the sum of the mean square for error and n times the laboratory variance, where 'n is the number of determinations by each labora- tory. If we subtract the error mean square from the mean square of the variation attributable to labora— tories and divide this answer by 6, the number of determinations by each laboratory, we obtain the laboratory variance. The square root of the latter value and the square root of the error mean square are entered in the summary tables as their respec- tive standard deviations. For several F ratios of the mean sum of squares for the variation attributable to laboratories over the error mean square, we have obtained values less than, but not significantly less than, one. The re- sulting negative values for the estimates of the laboratory variance may be attributed to sample fluctuations about an average value of zero. We should anticipate this effect in half the tests in which our hypothesis, that the variation due to labora- tories is not significantly greater than the error mean square, is true. These negative values have been indicated in the summary tables by the ab- breviation “Neg.” With few exceptions, the first three samples are homogeneous for the several elements that were de- termined, whereas the laboratory variation was fre- quently significantly greater than the error mean square and the laboratories therefore estimate these elements differently. For several elements, the in- teraction mean square was significantly greater than the within mean square. There appears to be no physical reason for the significance of the in- teraction, and this significance may be due to chance, which may occur 5 percent of the time at the level of significance used. These significant interactions were used in the denominator of the F ratio to test the mean squares for thirds and for laboratories. The data below for the significance of the varia- tion due to laboratories for STM—l, RGM-l, and QLO-l can furnish material for speculation. If the nepheline syenite, STM—l, is classified as crystal- line, and the rhyolite obsidian, RGM—l, and the quartz latite, QLO—l, as noncrystalline (the very fine grain size and the minor glass content give the quartz latite a noncrystalline appearance), then the ratio of nonsignificant conclusions for the crys- talline rock is 0.38 and for the noncrystalline, 0.56. The difference between these ratios lends slight sup- port to the idea that the spectrographic determina- Significance of the variation due to laboratories for STM—I, RGM—I, and QLO—I [5, significant; NS. not significant] Element STM—l RGM—l QLO-l NS NS S S ____________ ____________ NS NS NS NS S ............ S ............ NS ............ NS ____________ ______ S NS ______ NS S NS NS NS ______ S S S NS S S NS NS S S S S S NS S NS S 5/ 13 7/11 6/12 tion of trace elements in noncrystalline materials is more precise than those in crystalline rocks, possibly because of the more uniform distribution of the ele- ments in the noncrystalline rocks. The data also show that, as with G—l, W—1, and other standards, spec- trographic laboratories can agree with only moder- ate differences on elements such as copper but that improvements in the technique are still necessary for elements such as barium, strontium and zir- conium. The last two-thirds of this volume contain compila- tions of data on muscovite P—207 and on the USGS rocks that have been made available since 1951, as well as individual studies of the newer USGS stand- ards by US. Geological Survey laboratories and by laboratories throughout the world. These studies of the newer samples report data obtained by using an experimental design with a single variable of classification. The use of this simple design was based on the argument below. The user of a standard sample generally has a single unit of issue—for our rocks, a single bottle. If an analyst makes determinations on a number of portions of sample from the bottle, he can calculate a mean and a standard deviation of the data. These estimates adequately summarize the data obtained, but they apply only to the powder in the bottle that was analyzed and cannot be extrapolated to another bottle. Further, the standard deviation is of dubious value for estimating sample variability as it con- tains some estimate of the variability of the ma- terial in the bottle and of the variability due to the analyst and to the method. As each analyst has his own bottle, there is an obvious need for some meas- ure of the bottle—to-bottle variation, and the simple 4 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS experimental design with a single variable of classi- fication is one of the least costly ways of achieving the desired goal. The variable of classification for the design is the three or more bottles of a standard, randomly se- lected from the stock. Analysts were requested to make two or more determinations on each bottle (but the same number of determinations per bottle to preserve the simplicity of the arithmetic) and to make the determinations in random order. The analysis of variance allows us to calculate a mean sum of squares for the variation within bottles, which we equate to the analytical variance, and also allows us to separate the components of the mean sum of squares between bottles, so that we can esti- mate a bottle variance. Of at least equal importance, the F test involving the ratio of the two mean sums of squares, where the analytical error is used as the yardstick for measuring, affords us an objective test of the homogeneity of an element in the bottles of sample. Because of the random selection of the bot- - tles, the conclusions may be extrapolated to the en- tire lot of bottles. Many estimates of the bottle variance obtained in these studies are negative, and these negative esti- mates are clearly embarrassing because variance components are, by definition, positive. The prob- lem of negative estimates of variances has been dis- cussed by McHugh and Mielke (1968), Nelder (1954), Thompson (1961, 1962), and Searle (1971). Searle lists several possible steps, few of which are considered by him to be satisfactory, that may be taken when such estimates occur. Bennett and Franklin (1954, p. 329) state that one can expect such negative estimates in about half of the tests on the type of data for which our hy- pothesis, that 0'23 (the bottle variance) is zero, is true and that these negative estimates may be at- tributed to sample fluctuations about an average value of zero. We might, therefore, as a temporary expedient rewrite a negative estimate of the bottle variance, —aZB, as 023 (——1) , or as 0231?, and table the negative estimate as a bottle standard deviation, uni, where i is the conventional symbol for \./_——1. If such a convention were adopted, the 1', especially if itali- cized, should be a sufficient warning that the tabled standard deviation was obtained from a negative bottle variance. We would then have a numerical but partly imaginary estimate that might be useful until a simpler, but rigorous, statistical solution to the problem is available. Among the samples for which data are reported in the analytical papers is one of oil shale from the Mahogany zone of the Green River Formation. No descriptive paper is available for this sample. The rock was sent to the laboratory by G. U. Dinneen, Laramie Petroleum Research Center, U.S. Bureau of Mines, as a possible standard for the determina- tion of shale oil yields and for use by the Organic Geochemistry Division of the Geochemical Society. Thirty determinations by several analysts yielded an average of 53.4 gal of oil per ton of shale, with a range of 52.2—55.7 gal/ton. This range does not necessarily indicate heterogeneity of the sample as the Fischer assay method for oil determinations, or modifications thereof, is an empirical method some- what dependent on the analyst and on his specific technique. The number of samples available or being pre- pared as standards (Flanagan, 1970) now threatens to tax the analysts of laboratories that can cooperate in the analysis of such samples. Invariably, the or- ganization that prepares a proposed standard cannot afford the time and effort to make all determinations necessary for standardization, and it must depend on the generosity of cooperating laboratories. Despite the large size of our organization, we must also depend on such assistance. Our gratitude is extended to collaborators who contributed analyses of our samples. While this paper was in page proof, Kosiewicz and others (1974) published rare-earth data for STM—l and SCo—l from neutron activation. REFERENCES CITED Bastron, Harry, Barnett, P. R., and Murata, K. J., 1960, Method for the quantitative spectrochemical analysis of rocks, minerals, ores, and other materials by a powder d-c arc technique: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1084—G, p. 165—182. Bennett, C. A., and Franklin, N. L., 1954, Statistical analy- sis in chemistry and the chemical industry: New York, John Wiley and Sons, 724 p. Dixon, W. J., and Massey, F. J., Jr., 1951, Introduction to statistical analysis: New York, McGraw-Hill Book Com- pany, 370 p. Eisenhart, Churchill, 1947, The assumptions underlying the analysis of variance: Biometrics, v. 3, p. 1—21. Fairbairn, H. W., and others, 1951, A cooperative investiga- tion of precision and accuracy in chemical, spectro- ‘chemical, and modal analysis of silicate rocks: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 980, 71 p. Flanagan, F. J., 1967, U.S. Geological Survey silicate rock standards: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 31, p. 289— 308. 1969, U.S. Geological Survey standards—II. First compilation of data for the new U.S.G.S. rocks: Geo- chim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 81—120. 1970, Sources of geochemical standards—II: Geo- chim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, p. 121—125. INTRODUCTION 5 Fleischer, Michael, 1965, Summary of new data on rock samples G—1 and W—l, 1962—1965; Geochim. et Cosmo- chim. Acta, v. 29, p. 1263—1283. 1969, U.S. Geological Survey standards—I. Addi- tional data on rocks G—1 and W—l, 1965—1967 : Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 65—79. Fleischer, Michael, and Stevens, R. E., 1962, Summary of new data on rock samples G—1 and W—1: Geoehim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 26, p. 525—543. Kosiewicz, S. T., Schomberg, P. J., and Haskin, R. A., 1974, Rare earth analysis of USGS SCo—l and STM—l— Evaluation of standards for homogeneity and of the pre- cision and accuracy of a procedure for neutron activation analysis: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 20, p. 619—626. McHugh, R. B., and Mielke, P. W., Jr., 1968, Negative vari— ance estimates and statistical dependence in nested sampling: Am. Statistical Assoc. J our., v. 63, 1000—1003. Myers, A. T., Havens, R. G., and Dunton, P. J., 1961, A spec- trochemical method for the semiquantitative analysis of rocks, minerals, and ores: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1084—I, p. 207—229. Nelder, J. A., 1954, The interpretation of negative compo- nents of variance: Biometrika, v. 41, p. 544—548. Peck, L. C., 1964, Systematic analysis of silicates: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1170, 89 p. Searle, S. R., 1971, Topics in variance component estimation: Biometrics, v. 27, p. 1—76. Shapiro, Leonard, 1967, Rapid analysis of rocks and min- erals by a single-solution method: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 575—B, p. B187—B191. Shapiro, Leonard, and Brannock, W. W., 1962, Rapid analy- sis of silicate, carbonate, and phosphate rocks: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1144—A, 56 p. Stevens, R. E., and others, 1960, Second report on a coopera- tive investigation of the composition of two silicate rocks: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1113, 126 p. Thompson, W. A., Jr., 1961, Negative estimates of variance components: an introduction: Inst. Internat. Statistique (Rome) Bull., v. 34, p. 181—184. 1962, The problem of negative estimates of variance components: Annals Math. Statistics, v. 33, p. 273—289. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS NEPHELINE SYENITE, STM—l, FROM TABLE MOUNTAIN, OREGON By P. D. SNAVELY, JR., N. S. MAcLEon, F. J. FLANAGAN, SOL BERMAN, H. G. NEIMAN, and HARRY BASTRON A sample of peralkaline nepheline syenite for the reference sample program of the U.S. Geological Survey was collected from a sill that underlies Table Mountain (Georgia-Pacific quarry, SE14 sec. 36, T. 12 S., R. 10 W., Tidewater 15-min quadrangle, lat. 44°28.6’ N.; long 123°50.2’ W. See fig. 1) in the are 123'50’ ‘ ‘ %b Erika’x a 44:30, :‘jg’afiflw ‘ ‘g _ },l*£&s is . I” and HG. Wagner, 1959 1 ‘/2 (I) iMILE . l l ' l 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 50 FEET FIGURE 1.—Source of STM—l on Table Mountain, Oreg. Shaded areas indicate outcrops of nepheline syenite. Base from U.S. Geological Survey, Tidewater 15-min quadrangle, 1942—56. Oregon Coast Range. The nepheline syenite sill is 250—400 ft thick, underlies an area of about 11/2 mi”, and intrudes graded sandstone and siltstone beds of the Tyee Formation (middle Eocene). The Table Mountain sill is a remnant of a much larger sill that may have underlain an area of more than 50 miz. Numerous small dikes of nepheline syenite, shonki- nite, and camptonite that crop out in the Tidewater and adjoining qu-ad-rangles appear to be consanguine- ous with the nepheline syenite at Table Mountain. Nepheline syenite from a dike in Indian Creek, Mapleton quadrangle (approximately 18 miles south of Table Mountain), has a potassium-argon age of 33.6 m.y. (determined by R. W. Kistler, U.S. Geol. Survey) and this probably is also the age of the nepheline syenite at Table Mountain. The petro- graphy, petrochemistry, and field relations of nephe- line syenite in the central part of the Oregon Coast Range are briefly described by Snavely and Wagner (1961). The fresh nepheline syenite is light to medium gray and has a glassy luster; weathered surfaces are pitted because of leaching of nepheline and analcime. The nepheline syenite is holocrystalline and very fine to fine grained and has a very pro- nounced trachytic texture. According to grain size and texture, it might more properly be termed phonolite, but, because it is intrusive and somewhat coarser grained in places, it is referred to as nephe- line syenite. The rock is composed of alkali feldspar, nepheline, analcime, aegirine, riebeckite-arfved- sonite, biotite, olivine, opaque minerals, and apatite. Alkali feldspar, about Abgo-Orm, constitutes 75- 80 percent of the nepheline syenite and occurs as flow-alined laths. A more potassic feldspar, revealed by sodium cobaltinitrite staining, is interstitial to the albitic feldspar. Nepheline constitutes 5—10 per- cent of the nepheline syenite and occurs as euhedral to subhedral crystals and as smaller anhedral grains interstitial to feldspar. Analcime constitutes about 5 percent and is generally associated with nepheline. ‘7 8 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USrGS ROC’K STANDARDS The mafic minerals occur surrounding larger nepheline and analcime crystals and as anhedral grains ophiticaly intergrown with alkali feldspar. Aegirine makes up about 10 percent of the rock, and riebeckite-arfvedsonite about 3 percent. Olivine is less than 1 percent of the rock and has reaction rims of biotite surrounded by alkali amphibole. Biotite (less than 0.5 percent) also occurs ophitically inter- grown with feldspar and rimming nepheline or anal- cime crystals. Opaque minerals and apatite make up less than 0.5 percent. Sieve analyses of portions of the processed sample are given in table 1. Chemical analyses of two bot- tles of the sample and CIPW norms computed from these analyses are given in table 2. For calculation of the norms, total water was removed from the analyses, and the remaining oxides were recalcu- lated to 100 percent. TABLE 1.—Sieve analyses of STM—I (percent) Thirds _________________ 1 2 3 Avg Sieve size: +100 ___ 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 —100+120 ___ .1 .1 .1 .1 —120+170 ___ .9 1.3 1.0 1.1 ——170+200 ___ 1.9 2.3 2.2 2.1 —200 ________ 96.9 96.2 96.5 96.5 Total ______ 99.9 100.0 99.9 99.9 TABLE 2.—Chemical analyses and norms of STM—I [In weight percent. Chemical analyses by methods of Peck (1964). Ana- lysts: bottle 9/17, E. L. Munson; bottle 29/31, V. C. Smith] Bottle No ____________________ 9/17 29/31 Chemical analyses ____________ 59.62 59.46 , ____________ 18.61 18.60 F8203 _________________ 2.86 2.87 FeO __________________ 2.10 2.08 MgO —————, _____________ .10 .10 CaO __________________ 1.16 1.15 NaaO _________________ 9.01 8.92 K20 __________________ 4.27 4.21 H20+ ________________ 1.41 1.38 H20_ ________________ .18 .19 T102 __________________ .13 14 P205 __________________ .16 16 MnO _________________ .23 22 C02 __________________ .01 02 Cl ____________________ .05 05 F ____________________ .10 .10 S ____________________ .00 .00 BaO __________________ .05 .05 Subtotal ________ 99.95 99.70 Less 0 _______________ .05 .05 Total ___________ 99.90 99.65 TABLE 2.—Chemical analyses and norms of STM—I— Continued Bottle No __________________ 9/17 29/31 CIPW norm Orthoclase ____________ 25.65 25.35 Albite ________________ 50.75 52.43 Nepheline _____________ 12.13 11.48 Halite ________________ .08 .08 Acmite _______________ 3.51 2.58 Wollastonite __________ 1.74 1.70 Enstatite _____________ .16 .18 Ferrosilite ____________ 1.77 1.70 Forsterite _____________ .06 .05 Fayalite ______________ 75 .54 Magnetite ____________ 2.46 2.95 Ilmenite ______________ .25 .27 Apatite _______________ .39 .39 Fluorite ______________ .18 .18 CaCOa ________________ .02 .05 Total ___________ 99.90 99.93 Quantitative spectrographic determinations are presented in table 3. The data for the 13 elements for which our three spectrographic laboratories re— ported duplicate determinations on their three bot- tles were treated by the analysis of variance. These tests showed that Without exception the variation attributable to samples selected from the three thirds was not significant. We may therefore conclude that the samples are homogeneous for the 13 elements. Because of the random selection of the bottles, the conclusions may be extended to the entire sample. The variation due to laboratories was not signifi- cant for Ba, Cu, Mo, Nb, and Sr, and the labora- tories may use the grand average to estimate these elements. The variation due to laboratory means for the remaining eight elements was significantly greater than the error mean square, and the labora- tories estimate these elements differently. Inspec- tion of the data in table 3 shows that the tests of significance for some elements served only to con- firm visual judgments that significant differences might be attributed to laboratory means Laboratory averages are given in table 4 for all elements for which quantitative determinations were reported, and grand averages, standard devia- tions and conclusions from the analysis of variance are given for the 13 elements for which tests were made. Although the variation due to laboratories was significant for eight elements, some differences among the laboratory means are not unduly large, and the grand average may be used as the estimate. The laboratories should use their own estimates for Zr and Ti. Means of the La data for two laboratories agree well between themselves and both differ markedly NEPHELINE SYENITE, STM-l, FROM TABLE MOUNTAIN, OREGON 9 TABLE 3.——Spectrochemical determinations of elements in S TM—l [In parts per million. Method of Bastron and others (1960)] Laboratory ____________ Washington ’ Denver Menlo Park Bottle N0 _______________ 10/13 29/22 50/11 10/12 30/10 49/28 9/20 29/32 50/14 Ba _______________ 500 470 470 480 420 440 460 480 460 370 390 420 760 620 620 480 440 440 Be _______________ 7 11 14 10 17 7 5 6 5 14 10 8 11 12 6 6 6 7 Ce _______________ 800 400 600 ____ ____ ____ -__- ____ _..__ 500 600 300 __.._ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Cr _______________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 2 3 2 1 1 1 _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3 3 3 1 1 1 Cu _______________ 4 3 2 5 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 Ga _______________ 35 36 37 42 46 46 40 32 32 35 29 31 41 45 45 26 26 26 La _______________ 260 260 300 110 150 160 190 160 150 280 240 210 160 160 160 140 140 160 Mo _______________ 6 4 3 15 <5 7 5 6 6 5 5 '4 12 5 7 5 7 6 Nb _______________ 280 290 350 310 330 330 280 260 300 290 240 250 310 340 300 300 320 280 Ni _______________ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 3 2 2 ____ __-_ ____ ____ ____ ____ 1 1 1 Pb _______________ ____ ____ ____ 30 20 20 14 11 8 ____ ____ ____ 20 20 20 10 8 9 Sn _______________ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 13 12 12 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 9 11 12 Sr _______________ 740 420 380 840 1,100 640 900 840 740 400 500 590 1,400 1,000 900 800 880 740 Y ________________ 70 70 70 58 62 54 40 50 50 80 60 50 52 60 67 60 40 40 Yb _______________ 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 6 4 4 5 5 4 4 3 4 Zr _______________ 1,000 990 1,000 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,300 1,100 1,300 960 1,000 900 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,100 1,200 1,300 Mn _______________ 1,600 1,600 1,700 1,700 1,700 1,800 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,700 1,800 1,400 1,800 2,000 1,500 1,400 1,600 1,500 Ti ________________ 840 820 1,100 1,200 1,100 1,200 840 720 790 940 860 690 1,200 1,100 1,200 800 840 830 from the third. These two laboratories may wish to recalculate a single estimate for their common use. Although the variation in the Sr data attributable to both thirds of the lot and to the laboratories were declared not significant, the pooled mean square for error is larger than those attributable to thirds and laboratories. After partitioning the variation due to laboratories into its two components of laboratory and error variance, the laboratory standard devia- tion was entered in the table as negative, but be- cause of the poor precision for Sr, the laboratories might Wish to estimate their own means and stand- ard deviations. Before the processing of this sample had been completed, a request was received for a portion, and two 1-oz bottles were dipped into the ground and partly mixed, but unbottled, bulk sample. Data for several trace elements obtained by neutron activa- tion on these two unnumbered bottles are given in table 5 and lend further credence to the above claims of sample homogeneity. 10 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 4,—Averages and standard deviations for spectographic data for S TM—I [In parts per million. S, significant. NS, not significant, when tested against Fo.95.d.f., degrees of freedom] Conclusion from analysis Standard deviation of variance Laboratory averages Grand Laboratories Error Element ‘ Washington Denver Menlo Park average Thirds Laboratories (d.f. =2) (d.f. = 13) Ba ———————————— 437 557 460 484 NS NS 53 86 Be ————————————— 10.7 10.5 6.2 9.1 NS S 2.2 2.6 Ce _____________ 530 ____ ____ __-_ ____ ____ ____ ___- Cr ____________ ___- 2.6 1 ____ __-_ ____ _-__ ___- Cu ____________ 3.0 3.0 2.3 2.8 NS NS .24 .74 Ga ____________ 34 44 30 36 NS S 7.0 4.1 La ____________ 258 150 156 188 NS S 60 25.6 M0 ____________ 4.5 8.5 5.8 6.3 1 NS 1 NS 1.3 3.9 Nb ____________ 283 320 290 298 NS NS 15.6 28.8 Ni _____________ ___- ___- 1.6 ____ _-_- ___- ___- ___- Pb _____________ ___- 22 10 ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- Sn _____________ ___- -___ 12 ____ ___- ____ ___- ___- Sr _____________ 505 980 817 767 NS NS Neg. 940 Y _____________ 67 59 47 57.4 NS S 9.5 8.5 Yb ____________ 4.8 4.5 3.8 4.4 NS S .46 .51 Zr _____________ 975 1,500 1,217 1,230 NS S 265 63-6 Mn ____________ 1,600 1,800 1,500 1,600 NS S 110 120 T1 _____________ 875 1,166 803 948 NS S 189 88.5 1The significant interaction was used to test the variation due to thirds and to laboratories. TABLE 5.—Published determinations by neutron activation analysis of STM—1 [In parts per million, except where indicated] Determina- tions Average References 298, 286, 308 297 Brunfelt and Steinnes (1967a). 430, 432 431 Johansen and Steinnes (1967). <1 ___- Brunfelt and Steinnes (1966). ____________ 1.4 Brunfelt and Steinnes (19671)). 2.0, 1.9, 2.1 2.0 Brunfelt, Johansen, and Steinnes (1967). Eu _____________ 4.0, 3.9. 4.2 4.1 Brunfelt and Steinnes (1967a) . Ga _____________ 36, 39, 38 38 Brunfelt, Johansen, and Steinnes (1967). In ______________ 0.0852, 0.0879 .087 Johansen and Steinnes (1966). La _____________ 133, 155, 141 143 Brunfelt and Steinnes (1966). Mn _____________ 1,420, 1,540, 1,470 Do. 1.440 Na (percent) ___ 6.12, 6.56, 6.08 Do. 5.99, 5.76, 5.68, 6.39 P205 (percent) __ 1 (0.178, .182 Brunfeli: and Steinnes (1968). 0.0180). 1(0.194, 0.176) Sc ______________ 0.6, 0.6 .6 Brunfelt and Steinnes (1966). Se ______________ 0.012, 0.008 .010 Brunfelt and Steinnes (1967c). Sm _____________ 17.3, 18.3 17.4 Brunfelt and Steinnes (1966). 16.6 Zn _____________ 204, 206, 218 209 Brunfelt, Johansen, and Steinnes (1967). 1Two irradiations REFERENCES CITED - Bastron, Harry, Barnett, P. R., and Murata, K. J., 1960, Method for the quantitative spectrochemical analysis of rocks, minerals, ores and other materials by a powder d-c arc technique: U.S. Geo]. Survey Bull. 1084—G, p. 165-182. Brunfelt, A. 0., Johansen, 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, 1967, Determination of copper, gallium, and zinc in “standard rocks” by neutron activation: Anal. Chim. )Acta, v. 37, p. 172—178. Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, 1966 Instrumental neu- tron activation analysis of “standard rocks”: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v .30, p. 921—928. 1967a, Cerium and europium content of some standard rocks: Chem. Geology, v. 2, no. 3, p. 199—207. 1967b, Determination of chromium in rocks by neu- tron activation and anion exchange: Anal. Chemistry, v. 39, no. 7, p. 833—834. 1967c, Determination of selenium in standard rocks by neutron activation analysis: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 31, no. 2, p. 283—285. 1968, The determination of phosphorus in rocks by neutron activation: Ana. Chim. Acta, v. 41, p. 155—158. Johansen, 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, 1966, Determination of indium in standard rocks by neutron activation analysis: Talanta, v. 13, p. 1177—1181. 1967, Determination of chlorine in U.S.G.S. standard rocks by neutron activation analysis: Geochim. et Cos- mochim. Acta, v. 31, p. 1107—1109. Peck, L. C., 1964, Systematic analysis of silicates: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1170, 89 p. Snavely, P. D., Jr., and Wagner, H. C., 1961, Differentiated gabbroic sills and associated alkalic rocks in the central part of the Oregon Coast Range, Oregon: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 424—D, p. D156—D161. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS RHYOLITE, RGM—l, FROM GLASS MOUNTAIN, CALIFORNIA By D. B. TATLOCK, F. J. FLANAGAN, HARRY BASTRON, SOL BERMAN, and A. L. SUTTON, JR. The rhyolite from Glass Mountain, Siskiyou County, Calif. (lat 41°37.2’ N., long 121°29.0’ W.), was selected for the U.S. Geological Survey stand- ard sample program chiefly because it is a glass and is therefore less subject to the phase hetero- geneities likely to be encountered in a crystalline rock. A sample weighing about 135 kg (300 lb) was broken from a single block of massive obsidian near the terminal front of a Holocene obsidian flow, about 2.7 km northeast of, and about 500 m lower than, its probable source vent on Glass Mountain proper. This youngest of the Glass Mountain flows and the sample location are shown in figure 2. The flow may be as young as 500 yr (Friedman, 1968). Glass Mountain, altitude 2,323 m, is in the Medi- cine Lake Highland (Anderson, 1941; 1931; Powers, 1932) on the eastern margin of the Cascade Range. It is about 63 km east-northeast of Mount Shasta and about 10 km south of Lava Beds National Monument. The Medicine Lake Highland has a diameter of about 30 km and rises from an undulating plateau whose average altitude is about 1,500 m. The plateau is underlain chiefly by basalt and andesite of Mio- cene and Pliocene age. Silicic volcanic rocks of prob- able late Pliocene age are found at several places around the margin of the present highland. The growth of the highland began with the erup- tion of olivine andesites which formed a broad shield volcano. According to Anderson (1941) , the central part of the shield collapsed, forming a caldera some 10 km long and 6 km wide. At the same time, andesitic lava was squeezed upward along boundary fractures, forming rim volcanos that in time were high enough to discharge lava dOWn the slopes of the original shield volcano. The inner walls of the original caldera were obliterated, leaving an en- closed central basin which is now occupied by Medi- cine Lake and is surrounded by a rampart of cones. Peacock, _ Discharge of more silicic differentiates, ranging from dacites to rhyolites, began in the caldera area at this time. In the vicinity of what is now Glass Mountain, flows of spherulitic obsidian and dacite terminated some 5 km east of the rim of the Medicine Lake basin. These flows and the surrounding area were MEDICINE LAKE TIMBER MTN quadrangle 121°30' qUadrangle 2 MILES 1 .5 0 l 2K|LOMETERS CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL FIGURE 2.—Lava flow at Glass Mountain, Calif., with the source of RGM-l. Base from U.S. Geological Survey, Medicine Lake and Timber Mountain 15-min quad- rangles, 1952. 11 12 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS then mantled by white rhyolitic pumiceous ejecta from vents along a fissure striking N. 300 W.; a large pumice cone formed at one of the vents on or near the site of Glass Mountain. Following this explosive activity, dacite (rhyo- dacite) and rhyolite obsidian were discharged si- multaneously and apparently from the same vent. Anderson (1933) termed this a composite flow, but with obsidian forming the major portion. It extends more than 5 km east of Glass Mountain, riding out over the older dacite and spherulitic obsidian flows. Locally, lenses and bands of obsidian are found cut- ting through the dacite, but there is no suggestion of diffusion of one rock type into the other. It is probable that two separate magma chambers existed but that explosive eruptions made it possible for the dacite to erupt from the rhyolite vent. The last of the Glass Mountain flows, and the one from which the sample was taken, consists entirely of rhyolitic obsidian; it flowed predominantly to the east and northeast. It is smaller than, and stands out sharply from, the underlying composite flow. Chemically, however, it is indistinguishable from the older pumice ejecta and obsidian of the composite flow. The geology of Glass Mountain, including eight analyses of the various rhyolitic rocks, has been thoroughly discussed by Anderson (1933). Pieces making up the sample displayed no pheno- crysts or spherulites and no pumiceous or perlitic phases. The luster of the glass on freshly broken surfaces ranged from semiglossy to brilliant. The obsidian appears to be black from a distance, but on close inspection it shows gray to very dark gray or black mottling and banding; the‘bands range in thickness from about a millimeter to several centimeters. The darker bands seem to result from a concentration of microlites, too small to polarize light appreciably, that are roughly parallel to the banding. Rare opaque crystallite, probably magne- tite, may be seen in thin section. The index of refraction of the glass ranges from about 1.491 to almost 1.494, with an average of 1492:0002. The bulk specific gravity of 14 pieces, varying in size from small chips to large band spe- cimens, ranges from 2.380 to 2.385, with a mean of 2383:0003. The specific gravity of the small chips was determined by the sink-float method in solutions of zinc iodide, and that of the hand speci- mens was determined by the specific—gravity bal- ance. The powder density of the ground sample is 2.45. No consistent appreciable differences in either the index of refraction or the specific gravity could be detected between the lighter and darker colored parts of the glass. Sieve analyses of portions of the ground samples are given in table 6. Chemical analyses of portions TABLE 6.—Sie've analyses of RGM—1 , in percent [Tr., trace] Thirds _____________ 1 2 3 Avg. Sieve size: 100 _ Tr. 0.1 Tr. Tr. —100+120 _ Tr. Tr. Tr. Tr. —120+170 .. 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.8 —170+20‘0 _ 1.5 1.7 1.9 1.7 —200 ______ 97.4 97.5 97.3 97.4 Sum _____ 99.9 99.9 100.0 99.9 from two randomly selected bottles of RGM -1 are given in table 7, and the CIPW norms calculated TABLE 7.—Chemical analyses of RGM—1, in weight percent [Method of Peck, 1964, Analysts: bottle 31/14, E. L. Munson: bottle 62/32, V. C. Smith] Bottle No. ________ 31/14 52/32 Si02 ________________________ 73.43 73.44 A1203 ________________________ 13.76 13.72 Fe203 ________________________ .50 .49 1.24 1.23 .29 .29 1.16 1.19 4.19 4.17 4.34 4.34 .32 .35 .12 .11 .26 .27 .05 .05 .04 .04 .01 .00 05 .06 .04 04 .00 .00 .07 .09 Subtotal _______________ 99.87 99.88 Less 0 ______________________ .03 .03 Total __________________ 99.84 99.85 Total Fe as FeO ______ 1.69 1.67 from the analyses are given in table 8. The low water content (reflecting the absence of any perlitic phase), the low ratio of ferric to fer- rous iron, and the low excess alumina (normative corundum) suggest that the glass has undergone no appreciable alteration. The sample is classified as a rhyolite on the basis of its high silica and total alkali contents, and it is assigned to the calc-alkali series because of its high ratio of CaO to total iron and the relatively high (for a rhyolite) anorthite content of its normative plagioclase (An13414). Ex- cept for its lower ratio of potassium to sodium, the RHYOLITE, RGM—l, FROM GLASS MOUNTAIN, CALIFORNIA TABLE 8.—Norms (CIPW) for RGM—I, in weight percent Bottle No _____________________________ 31/14 52/32 Quartz _____________________ 28.99 29.06 Orthoclase __________________ 25.65 25.65 Albite ______________________ 35.46 35.29 Anorthite ___________________ 5.43 5.58 Corundum __________________ .18 .12 Enstatite ___________________ .72 .72 Ferrosilite __________________ 1.51 1.48 Magnetite __________________ .73 .71 Ilm-enite ____________________ .49 .51 Apatite _____________________ .12 .12 Total _________________ 99.28 99.24 Niggli values: k ______________________ .41 .41 mg _____________________ .23 .23 Ratios averaged from two analyses: Q20r: (Ab+An) ______________________ 30.4:26.8:42.8 0r:Ab:An ____________________________ 38.5:53.2:8.3 Alk:F:M (mol. percent) _______________ 78.4:16.6:5.0 rhyolite obsidian from Glass Mountain closely matches the average calc-alkali rhyolite of Nockolds (1954). 13 Quantitative determinations by our three spec- trographic laboratories are shown in table 9. The data for those 11 elements for which the laboratories reported their six determinations were treated by the two-way analysis of variance with duplicate de— terminations. Significant mean squares for interac- tion. for the copper and strontium data were used to test the significance of the variation due to thirds and laboratories, but the tests for the remaining nine elements were made in the normal fashion. Estimates of the means and standard deviations and the conclusions from the analyses of variance are given in table 10. The standard deviation-s were calculated as described in the “Introduction,” ex- cept those for the Cu and Sr data. Because of the significant interaction for these elements, the sums of squares and degrees of freedom for the interac- tion and the within source-s of variation were pooled, and the standard deviation for error was obtained from this pooled estimate. The F tests for the sig- TABLE 9.—Spectroehemical determinations of elements in RGM—l [In parts per million. Method of Bastron and others (1960)] Laboratory ______________ Washington Denver Menlo Park Bottle N0 _______________ 10/28 31/5 56/26 10/3 31/15 52/29 10/27 31/25 52/11 B ________________ 30 30 40 ____ ____ ____ 30 30 40 30 30 30 ____ ____ ____ 40 30 30 Ba _______________ 750 660 740 760 720 740 740 740 740 590 690 700 660 720 640 680 680 740 Be _______________ __.._ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___.. 3 3 3 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 3 3 2 Co _______________ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 3 2 3 _-__ ____ ____ _-__ ____ -___ 2 2 2 Cr _______________ __.._ ____ ____ 3 2 3 4 2 3 ____ __-_ ____ 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cu _______________ 12 13 8 8 _ 9 10 13 8 9 12 14 7 8 8 8 11 10 15 Ga _______________ 10 12 11 17 12 14 __-_ ____ ____ 8 12 12 15 16 15 _-__ ____ ____ Mo _______________ ____ __.-_ ____ ____ ____ ____ 4 4 3 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 3 3 3 Nb _______________ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ 18 18 18 ____ ____ ____ _..__ ____ ____ 15 15 1‘7 Pb _______________ 3O 30 20 20 20 20 13 16 26 30 30 30 20 20 20 12 12 13 Sc _______________ 5 6 6 5 5 6 6 6 5 5 7 5 5 6 6 5 5 5 Sr _______________ 100 100 150 120 110 120 100 100 100 96 120 170 120 110 110 80 100 100 V ________________ 10 13 15 10 10 10 19 19 18 8 4 8 10 10 10 17 16 20 Y ________________ 30 30 30 20 20 30 30 30 30 30 40 20 20 30 30 20 20 20 Yb _______________ 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 Zr _______________ 210 190 200 180 190 210 240 210 200 210 220 180 170 210 200 220 240 210 Mn _______________ 280 330 330 320 330 310 280 240 240 330 300 310 330 310 290 220 200 220 Ti ________________ 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,200 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,600 1,400 1,800 2,100 1,500 1,400 1,800 1,500 1,900 1,900 1,400 14 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 10.-—Ave1-ages and standard deviations for spectrographz’c data for RGM—I [In parts per million. S, significant, NS. not significant, when tested against Fo.es.d.f., degrees of freedom] Laboratory averages Conclusions from analysis Standard deviation Washing. Menlo Grand of variance Labora- Element ton Denver Park average Labora- tories Error Thirds tories (d.f.=2) (d.f.=l3) B ——————————— 31.7 ____ 33.3 ___- ___ ___ ___. ___. Ba __________ 688 707 720 705 NS NS Neg. 49 Be .......... ___- ____ 2.8 ____ ___ ___ ___ ___ Co __________ ____ ____ 2.3 ____ _-_ _-_ ___ _-_ Cr __________ ____ 2.8 2.6 __-_ ___ -_.. ___ ___ Cu __________ 11 8.5 11 10.2 1 NS 1 NS 1.1 2 4 Ga __________ 10.8 14.8 ___- ___- _-_ ___ ___ _-_ Mo __________ ___- ____ 3.3 ____ ___ ___ ___ ___ Nb __________ ___- ___- 16.8 _-__ ___ ..__. ___ ___. Pb __________ 28 20 15.3 21.2 NS S 6.4 4.2 Sc __________ 5.7 5.5 5.3 5.5 NS NS Neg. .61 Sr __________ 123 115 97 111 1 NS 1 NS 6.9 28 V ___________ 9.7 10 18.2 12.6 NS S 4.7 2.5 Y ___________ 30 25 25 26.7 NS NS 1.5 6.0 Yb __________ 2.5 2.3 2.0 2.3 NS NS .19 .43 Zr __________ 202 193 220 205 NS S 11.8 16.4 Mn _________ 313 315 233 287 NS S 45.8 22.6 Ti __________ 1750 1480 1680 1630 NS NS 110 190 1The significant interaction was used to test the variation due to thirds nificance of the variation of the Ba and Sc data at- tributable to laboratories resulted in ratios of less than one (but not significantly so). The laboratory standard deviations for Ba and Sc are therefore negative and are so entered in table 10. The variation attributable to the bottles randomly selected from the three thirds of the sample was not significant for the 11 elements for which there was complete data by the three laboratories, and the sample may be claimed to be homogeneous for these elements. The variation due to laboratories was not significant for Ba, Cu, Sc, Sr, Y, Yb, and Ti, and a single estimate can be used for the three labora- tories. Conclusions of significant differences due to the laboratory means were obtained for Pb, V, Zr, and Mn. Of these, the laboratory means for Zr each fall within one standard deviation of the grand aver- age, and it is appropriate to use the grand average as the single estimate for the laboratories. There are some fairly large differences among the labora- tory means for Pb, V, and Mn, and the laboratories should estimate these elements by their own aver- ages. A study of the gold content of some volcanic rocks (Gottfried, and others, 1972) indicates that gold is also homogeneously distributed in both bottles and in chips from hand specimens of RGM-l. In contrast to the average of 16.8 ppm Nb by the Menlo Park spectrographic laboratory, Esma Campbell of the and to laboratories. Washington laboratory obtained 9.51 ppm Nb for a single determination by the modified thiocyanate spectrophotometric method of Grimaldi (1960). REFERENCES CITED Anderson, C. A., 1933, Volcanic history of Glass Mountain, northern California: Am. Jour. Sci., 5th ser., v. 26, p. 485—506. 1941, Volcanoes of the Medicine Lake highland, Cali- fornia: Calif. Univ. Dept. Geo]. Sci. Bul]., v. 25, no. 7, p. 347—422. B‘astron, Harry, Barnett, P. R., and Murata, K. J., 1960, Method for the quantitative spectrochemica] analysis of rocks, minerals, ores, and other materials by a powder d-c arc technique: U.S. Geo]. Survey Bull. 1084-G, p. 165—182. Friedman, Irving, 1968, Hydration rind dates rhyolite flows: Science, v. 159, no. 3817, p. 878—880. Gottfried, David, Rowe, J. J., and Tilling, R. I., 1972, Dis- tribution of gold in igneous rocks: U.S. Geo]. Survey Prof. Paper 727, 42 p. Grimaldi, F. S., 1960, Determination of niobium in the parts per million range in rocks: Anal. Chemistry, v. 32, no. 1, p. 119—121. Nockolds, S. R., 1954, Average chemical compositions of some igneous rocks: Geol. Soc. America Bu11., v. 65, no. 10, p. 1007—1032. Peacock, M. A., 1931, The Modoc lava field, northern Cali- fornia: Geog. Rev., v. 21, no. 2, p. 259—275. Peck, L. C., 1964, Systematic analysis of silicates: U.S. Geo]. Survey Bull. 1170, 89 p. Powers, H. A., 1932, The lavas of the Modoc Lava Bed quad- rangle, California: Am. Mineralogist, v. 17, no. 7, p. 253—294. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS QUARTZ LATITE (DELLENITE), QLO—l, FROM SOUTHEASTERN OREGON By G. W. WALKER, F. J. FLANAGAN, A. L. SUTTON, JR., HARRY BASTRON, SOL BERMAN, J. I. DINNIN, and L. B. JENKINS As part of the U.S. Geological Survey rock stand- ards program, a sample of dense black volcanic rock was collected in Lake County, Ore., about 21 km (13 miles) south of Juniper Mountain in sec. 35?, T. 32 120°00' 43 °00' . 5 0 SMILES 5 0 5 KILOMETERS CONTOUR INTERVAL 200 FEET WITH SUPPLEMENTARY CONTOURS AT loo-FOOT INTERVALS FIGURE 3.—Source of QLO-l south of Juniper Mountain, Oreg. Base by U.S. Geological Survey, 1:250,000, Walker and Repenning (1965). S., R. 23 E. (lat 42°44.8’ N.; long 119° 58’ W.) (fig. 3). The sample was collected from outcrops about 10 m east of a poor road that heads south- southeast down a shallow unnamed desert wash. Although outcrops are poor in this area, the sam- ple appears to represent part of a lava flow on the flanks of a low exogeneous dome that is composed dominantely of the same dense black volcanic rock. The dome is located on the northern extension of the large tilted fault block dominated on the west by Abert Rim. Correlation with adjacent volcanic units indicates that the exogeneous dome and re- lated flow are either of late Miocene or possibly early Pliocene age. Most of the region adjacent to the dome is underlain by upper Miocene and' lower Pliocene basalt, Pliocene ash flow tufi' of rhyolitic composition, and Pleistocene lake sediments (Walker and Repenning, 1965). Several more or less synonomous petrographic names can be applied to this rock, depending on which classification is used. According to the clas- sification of Rittman (1952), this rock is a quartz latite, and in the classification of Nockolds (1954) and Wahl-strom (1955) it is a dellenite. Very simi- lar volcanic rocks from south-central Nevada, but with slightly different Na202K20 ratios, have been broadly classed as dellenite and more precisely as rhyodaci-te by O’Connor (1965). Characteristically the rock is greasy black and is aphanitic with a conchoidal fracture. In hand speci- men, a few small feldspar phenocrysts, mostly 1 or 2 mm in maximum dimension, can be recognized. A specific gravity of 2553:0003 was obtained by averaging measurements from 10 different hand spe- cimens. The powder density of the processed sample is 2.60. In thin section, the rock is finely porphyritic with an extremely fine grained trachytic to felted groundmass texture or, in places, a vitrophyric tex- 16 16 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS ture. Phenocry-sts, representing less than 1 percent of the rock, consist of rounded and embayed, zoned and twinned plagioclase (about An60_70), hyper- sthene, magnetite, and clinopyroxene?; the plagio- clase phen-ocrysts contain abundant inclusions of pinkish-brown glass. The groundmass consists of abundant minute subparallel microlites of plagio- clase (approximately An25_30) in either a crypto- crystalline mesostasis or rarely in pinkish-brown glass. Sieve analyses of portions of the processed sam- ple are given in table 11, chemical analyses in table 12, and norms in table 13. In the calculation of the TABLE 11.—Sieve analyses of quartz latite, QLO—l, in percent [Tr., trace)] Thirds ________________ 1 2 3 Avg Sieve size: +100 _ 0 1 Tr. 0.1 0.1 —100+120 _ 1 Tr. .1 .1 —120+170 _ 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.1 —170+200 _ 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.1 —200 ______ 96.4 97.1 96.5 96.6 Total ___- 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 TABLE 12.—Chemical analyses of QLO—l [In Weight percent. Method of Peck (1964). Analysts: bottle 9/23, V. C. Smith; bottle 51/6, E. L. Munson] Bottle No _____________________ 9/23 51/6 65.91 65.96 16.34 16.35 .97 1.01 3.0 2.96 1.00 1.05 3.19 3.22 4.22 4.28 3.60 3.61 .28 .25 .16 .21 .61 .60 .25 .26 .10 .09 .01 .01 .02 .03 .03 .03 99.69 99.92 Less 0 _______________ .02 .02 Total ___________ 99.67 99.90 TABLE 13.—Norms (CIPW) of QLO—I in weight percent Bottle No _______________________ 9/23 51/6 Quartz _________________ 18.4 17.9 Corun‘dum ___ ___- .3 .2 Orthoclase _ ___- 21.4 21.5 Albite _____ __-_ 36.0 36.4 Anorthite ___- _______ 14.2 14.3 Enstatite _______________ 2.5 2.6 Ferrosilite ____________ 3.9 3.8 Magnetite ______________ 1.4 1.5 Ilmenite ________________ 1.2 1.1 Apatite _________________ .6 .6 Total _____________ 99.9 99.9 norms, total water, Cl, and F were omitted, and the remaining 12 oxides were recalculated to 100 per- cent. Spectrographic determinations of several ele- ments, including Mn and Ti normally classified as minor elements and reported as oxides in a rock analysis, are given in table 14. The analysis of variance was used to determine the significance of the sources of variation in the data for the 12 ele- ments for which the three laboratories reported duplicates on their bottles. Laboratory averages for all data reported, plus grand averages, standard deviations, and conclusions of significance from the analysis of variance, are given in table 15. The data in table 15 indicate that, except for Sr, the variation attributable to the thirds of the lot from which the sample bottles were selected is not significantly larger than the error term against which they were tested. The variation of the Sr data attributable to thirds is significant at the up- per 5 percent of the F distribution, but that due to laboratories is not. The variation attributable to laboratories is not significant for Co, Cu, Pb, Sr, Yb, and Mn, but it is significantly larger than the pooled error mean square for the remaining elements in table 15 for which estimates are given. The significance of the laboratory variation at F039 for barium confirms the often-noted observation that the determination of this element by optical emission spectroscopy is not too precise. Estimates of the laboratory standard deviations, obtained after partitioning the mean square for laboratories into its variance components, have been entered in table 15. During testing of the signifi- cance of the variation attributable to laboratories, F ratios of less than 1 were obtained for the Co, Cu, and Pb data. The variance for the analytical error is obviously greater than the mean squares due to laboratories, resulting in negative values for the laboratory variance when the variance compo- nents are partitioned. The laboratory standard de- viations for Co, Cu, and Pb have been entered as negative in table 15. Preliminary determinations of uranium and thorium for another study yielded estimates of about 3.4 ppm Th and 1.6 ppm U, with a resultant Th:U ratio of about 2.2 These data are slightly higher than those for some selected reference igneous suites given by Tilling and Gottfried (1969) but they are fairly typical of similar volcanic rocks of the circumpacific region. Data on the thorium, uranium, and potassium con- QUARTZ LATITE (DELLENITE), QLO—l, FROM SOUTHEASTERN OREGON TABLE 14.—Spectrochemic.al determinations of elements in QLO—I [In parts per million. Method of Bastron and others (1960)] 17 Laboratory ______________ Washington Denver Menlo Park Bottle No _______________ 10/23 31/22 51/30 9/23 31/31 51/6 9/30 31/32 52/1 B ________________ 40 30 30 ___- ___- ___- 40 40 40 30 30 40 ____ ___- ___- 50 40 40 Ba _______________ 1,400 1,400 1,100 1,400 1,300 1,300 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,100 1,200 1,100 1,500 1,200 1.200 1,500 1,300 1,500 Be _______________ ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- 2 2 2 ____ ___- ____ ____ __-_ ____ 2 2 2 Co _______________ 7 8 5 6 7 7 7 6 8 7 11 7 7 6 6 6 6 8 Cr _______________ ___- ___- ___- 2 2 2 1 1 1 __-_ ___- _-__ 2 2 2 1 1 4 Cu _______________ 28 33 29 32 32 32 28 28 28 36 33 28 30 30 31 32 32 32 Ga _______________ 12 12 11 20 21 20 ___- ___- ___- 14 17 12 19 18 18 ___- ___- ___- Mo _______________ ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- 4 3 4 ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- ____ 4 4 4 Nb _______________ ___- _-__ ___- 10 10 10 26 24 22 ____ ___- ____ 10 10 10 22 20 18 Ni _______________ ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- 3 2 3 ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- ___- 1 2 2 Pb _______________ 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 13 16 10 40 10 20 20 30 20 14 18 Se _______________ 11 11 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 14 10 9 10 10 9 8 10 Sr _______________ 420 360 320 420 370 360 380 320 380 380 280 320 430 360 330 380 320 320 V ________________ 60 42 40 84 79 73 64 46 56 41 46 32 81 73 81 62 72 66 Y ________________ 40 40 30 20 20 20 40 40 40 30 50 30 20 30 30 30 30 40 Yb _______________ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Zr ________________ 130 150 110 160 160 160 180 170 200 130 200 120 150 160 160 190 210 180 , Mn _______________ 730 500 680 610 690 640 500 640 600 720 790 740 640 650 650 600 500 700 Ti _______________ 4,400 4,000 3,400 2,800 3,100 3,100 3,700 3,500 3,800 3,800 5,400 3,500 2,900 3,100 3,000 4,000 3,500 3,400 TABLE 15.—Averages and standard deviations for spectographic data for QLO—I [In parts per million. S, significant, NS. not significant, when tested against F035. d.f., degrees of freedom] Laboratory averages Conclusions from analysis Standard deviation Washing- Grand 0f variance __ Labora- Element ton Denver Menlo average Labora- tories Error Park Thirds tories (if. :2) (if. = 13) B _____________ 33 ___- 42 ___- ___ ___ ___ ___ Ea ____________ 1,210 1,320 1,460 1,330 NS s 170 110 e ____________ ___- ____ ___- ___ ___ _-.. ___. Co ____________ 7.5 6.5 6.8 6.9 NS NS Neg. 1.4 Cr ____________ ____ 2 1.5 ___- ___ ___ ___ ___ Cu ____________ 31 31 30 30.8 NS NS Neg. 2.4 Ga ____________ 13 19 _____ ___- ___ ___ __- ___ Mo ____________ ___~ ___- 3.8 ____ ___ ___ ___ _-_ Nb ____________ ____ 10 22 ___- ___ ___ ___ ___ Ni ____________ -___ ___- 2 ___- ___ ___ ___ ___ Pb ____________ 20.0 21.7 16.8 19.5 NS NS Neg. 7.3 Sc ____________ 10.8 9.3 9.0 9.7 NS S .86 1.1 Sr ____________ 347 378 350 358 S NS 14 26 V _____________ 43.5 78.5 61.0 61.0 NS S 17 7.7 Y _____________ 36.7 23.3 36.7 32.2 NS S 7.2 6.3 Yb ____________ 2.2 2.5 2.0 2.2 NS NS .19 .41 Zr ____________ 140 158 188 162 NS S 23 19.4 Mn ___________ 693 647 590 643 NS NS 41 78.3 Ti ____________ 4,080 3,000 3.650 3,570 NS S 160 440 18 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS tents of rocks are essential for the calculation of nadiogenic heat production and heat flow, and as such data are frequently obtained by gamma-ray spectrometry for which samples of about 0.5 kg may be required, another portion of the quartz latite was obtained and processed for gamma count- ing. After being processed the bulk sample was di- vided in half, and the portions were poured into two large plastic bags for storage. Sieve analyses representing the two halves of the finished product, QLO—‘y, are given in table 16. TABLE 16.—Sieve analyses of QLO—ql, in percent H [0 Halves of bulk sample ____________ Avg Sieve sizes: + 100 —100 + 120 0 —120+ 170 _________ 2. —170 + 200 _________ 3. 3 9 5° P O Ottawa-up ——-200 ONO: 9. 10. Because it is almost inevitable that comparisons will be made of the thorium, uranium, and potassium contents of the two samples, QLO—l and QLO—y, nine bottles of QLO-l were randomly selected from the bottled stock, and nine portions of QLO—y Were taken at random intervals during the final mixing of the bulk stock. ' Duplicate determinations of uranium were made by the fluorimetric method of Grimaldi, May, and Fletcher (1952), and of K20 by atomic-absorption spectrometry. The experimental design was that for a one-way analysis of variance with duplicate de- terminations per bottle or portion. The data and the analysis of variance are given in tables 17, 19, 20, TABLE 17.—-Determinations and analysis of variance of uranium in QLO—I [In parts per million. Fluorimetric method of Grimaldi and others (1952)] Determination Bottle __________________ First Second Total 1 ________________ 1.6 1.6 3.2 2 ________________ 1.6 1.6 3.2 3 ________________ 1.4 1.5 2.9 4 ________________ 1.4 1.4 2.8 5 ________________ 1.8 1.5 3.3 6 ________________ 1.6 1.6 3.2 7 ________________ 1.8 1.5 3.3 8 ________________ 1.6 1.8 3.4 9 ________________ 1.6 1.5 3.1 Grand total _____________________________ 28.4 Average ________________________________ 1.58 Analysis of variance Degrees Mean sum Source of Sum of of of 1" ratio variation squares freedom squares Bottles _______ 0.15 8 0.0188 0.0188/0.0133=1.41 Within _______ .12 9 .0133 NS at F035 Total __ 0.27 17 and 22. The estimates derived therefrom are sum- marized in table 23. TABLE 18.—Determinations and analysis of variance of thor- ium in QLO~1 [In parts per million. Arenazo III method of May and Jenkins (1965)] Determination Bottle First Second Third Total 1 ________ T ________ 4.3 4.4 3.3 12.0 2 _________________ 3.6 3.5 3.0 10.1 3 _________________ 3.4 3.2 3.3 9.9 4 _________________ 2.1 2.4 3.3 7.8 5 _________________ 3.1 2.9 2.7 8.7 6 _________________ 4.2 4.6 2.7 11.5 7 _________________ 3.7 3.4 3.3 10.4 8 _________________ 3.6 4.2 2.4 10.2 9 _________________ 4.0 3.6 2.4 10.0 Grand total ______________________________ 90.6 Average _________________________________ 3.36 Analysis of variance Source of Sum of Degrees of Mean sum variation squares freedom of squares F ratio Bottles ____ 4.32 8 0.540 0.540/0.388=1.39 Within ~___ 6.99 18 .388 NS at Fans Total _ 11.31 26 TABLE 19.—Determinations and analysis of variance of K20 in QLO—I [In weight percent. Determined by atomic absorption] Determination Bottle First Second Total 1 __________________ 3.60 3.58 7.18 2 __________________ 3.59 3.60 7.19 3 __________________ 3.61 3.58 7.19 4 __________________ 3.58 3.58 7.16 5 __________________ 3.58 3.56 7.14 6 __________________ 3.58 3.56 7 .14 7 __________________ 3.58 3.58 7.16 8 __________________ 3.57 3.59 7.16 9 __________________ 3.58 3.58 7.16 Grand total _______________________________ 64.48 Average _________________________________ 3.582 Analysis of variance Source of Sum of Degrees Mean sum variation squares of freedom of squares F ratio Bottles ____ 0.0012 8 0.00015 0.00015/ 0.000144=1.04 Within ____ .0013 9 .000144 NS at Faas Total _ .0025 17 TABLE 20.—Determinations and analysis of variance of uranium in QLO—q [In parts per million. Method of Grimaldi and others (1952)] Determination Portions First Second Total 1 __________________ 1.8 1.6 3.4 2 __________________ 1.3 1.4 2.7 3 __________________ 1.6 1.6 3.2 4 __________________ 1.5 1.8 3.3 5 __________________ 1.6 1.6 3.2 6 __________________ 1.8 1.7 3.5 7 __________________ 1.3 1.6 2.9 8 __________________ 1.5 1.8 3.3 9 __________________ 1.3 1.6 2.9 Grand total ______________________________ 28.4 Average _________________________________ 1.58 QUARTZ LATITE (DELLENITE), QLO—l, FROM SOUTHEASTERN OREGON 19 TABLE 20,—Determinations and analysis of variance of uranium in QLO—ry—Continued Analysis of variance Source of Sum of Degrees Mean sum variation squares of freedom of squares F ratio Portions ___- 0.2812 8 0.03515 0.03515/ 0.02333:1.51 Within _____ .2100 9 .02333 NS at F035 Total _ .4912 17 TABLE 21.—Determinations and analysis of variance of thor- ium in QLO—v [In parts per million. Arsenazo III method of May and Jenkins (1952)] Determination Thirds First Second Third Total 1st ________________ 3.0 2.3 4.2 9.5 2d ________________ 4.1 3.6 3.5 11.2 3d ________________ 3.2 3.9 3.9 11.0 Grand total _______________________________ 31.7 Average _________________________________ 3.52 Analysis of variance Source of Sum of Degrees Mean sum variation squares of freedom of squares F ratio Thirds _____ 0.576 2 0.288 0.288/0.397: Within _____ 2.380 6 .397 < 1 NS Total _ 2.956 8 TABLE 22.—Determz’nations and analysis of variance of K20 in QLO—Iy [In weight percent. Determination by atomic absorption] Determination Bottle First Second Total 1 __________________ 3.583 3.580 7.163 2 __________________ 3.572 3.580 7.152 3 __________________ 3.580 3.580 7.160 4 __________________ 3.580 3.580 7.160 5 __________________ 3.600 3.590 7.190 6 __________________ 3.580 3.580 7.160 7 __________________ 3.573 3.565 7.138 8 __________________ 3.580 3.580 7.160 9 __________________ 3.580 3.598 7.178 Grand total ______________________________ 64.461 Average _________________________________ 3.581 Analysis of variance Source of Sum of Degrees Mean sum variation squares of freedom of squares F' ratio Portions ___ 0.00087 8 0.000109 0.000109/ 0.0000311=3.50 Within ___- .00028 9 .0000311 S at For?" NS at F...» Total- 0.00115 17 TABLE 23.—Esti’mates of the U, Th, and K20 contents, and of the Th: U ratio, of QLO—‘y and QLO—I [See tables 17-22. Nonsignificant digits shown as subscripts] QLO—A/ and QLO—ry QLO—l QLO—l Average and Degrees Degrees Degrees standard Esti- of Esti- of Esti- of deviation mate freedom mate freedom mate freedom K20 (percent) Average ________ 3.581 ___- 3.582 ____ 3.582 ___- Standard deviation: Bottles or portions __ .0062 8 .002 8 _-__ ___- Analytical error ____ .0053 9 .012 9 .0094 18 TABLE 23.—Esti’mates of the U, Th, and K20 contents, and of the Th: U ratio, of QLO-v and QLO—l—Continued U(ppm) Average ________ 1.5a ___- 1.5a ___- 1.5; ___- Standard deviation: Bottles or portions _.. .024 8 .059 8 ___- ___... Analytical error ___- .15 9 .12 9 .14 18 Th (ppm) Average ________ 3.52 ___- 3.3. ___- 3.40 ___- Standard deviation: Bottles ______________ .23 8 -___ -_-_ Analytic-a1 error ___- .63 6 .62 18 .62 24 Th:U ratio Average ________ 2.23 ____ 2.13 ___- 2.15 ___- Standard deviation (analytical error) _______ .42 15 .51 27 .48 42 Because of an oversight during the sampling for the determinations of thorium, three portions for analysis were taken from the bottles of QLO—l but the nine portions of QLO—y were sampled only once. The thorium determinations by the arsenazo III method of May and Jenkins (1965), the analysis of variance table, and the estimate of the thorium con- tent of QLO—l are given in table 18. During the random selection of bottles of QLO—l or of por- tions of QLO—y, the additional restraint was im- posed that the bottles or portion-s herein numbered 1 to 3, 4 to 6, and 7 to 9 should also be selected from among the 1st, 2d, and 3d thirds, respectively, of the entire lot sampled. Because of this precaution, the nine single determinations of thorium in QLO— V were treated as a one-way experimental design with the three thirds of the bulk sample as the variable of classification and with the single de- terminations on the nine portions considered as replicate analyses within their proper thirds. The data and the analysis of variance table are given in table 21. The estimates for the thorium, uranium, and K20 contents of the two samples are summarized in table 23 where nonsignificant digits are shown as subscripts. The source of variation termed “within” in the analysis of variance tables has been cal-led analytical error in table 23 as it represents any variation not attributable to the main variable of classification of either bottles or portions. Most of the error so included probably represents the error of the analytical method, that associated with sam- pling heterogeneous material, and random error. F ratios between the two samples for the com- parable mean squares of the K20 and of the uranium data, and of only the analytical error for the thorium data, yield one significant ratio, that of the analyti- 20 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS cal error for K20, 0.0‘00144/0.000031124.63, which is greater than F0.95(d.f.=9, 9) =3.18 but less than F0_99(d.f.:9,9):5.35. The same analyst made all K20 determinations, and the slightly higher variance for the one set of data may reflect instrumental dif- ferences that cannot be separated by the simple de- sign used. We have considered the tested mean squares homogeneous and have pooled the com- parable pairs of sums of squares and degrees of freedom for analytical error to obtain the combined estimates in table 23. The standard deviations among bottles or portions are tabled separately as the sam- pling unit is different for QLO—l and QLO—y, and the necessary change in the experimental design for QLO—y reduces further any comparability between the two sets of these Th data. The uranium contents of the two samples are iden- tical, the K20 contents nearly so, and the thorium contents differ slightly but not significantly. The average ratios for Th:U are tabled with the analyti- cal standard deviation and degrees of freedom. Analysts may wish to use our estimates for the samples to judge the appropriateness of their own data. REFERENCES CITED Bastron, Harry, Barnett, P. R., and Murata, K. J., 1960, Method for the quantitative spectrochemical analysis of rocks, minerals, ores, and other materials by a powder d—c arc technique: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1084-G, p. 165—182. Grimaldi, F. S., May, Irving, and Fletcher. M. H., 1952, U.S. Geological Survey fluorimetric methods of uranium analysis: U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 199, 20 p. May, Irving, and Jenkins, L. B., 1965, Use of arsenazo III in determination of thorium in rocks and minerals, in Geological Survey Research 1965: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 525—D, p. D192—195. Nockolds, S. R., 1954, Average chemical compositions of some igenous rocks. Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 65, no. 10. p. 1007—1032. O’Connor, J. T., 1965, A classification for quartz-rich igneous rocks based on feldspar ratios in Geological Survey Re- search 1965: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 525—B, p. B79—BS4. Peck, L. C., 1964, Systematic analysis of silicates. U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1170, 89 p. Rittman, Alfred, 1952, Nomenclature of volcanic rocks: Bull. Volcanol., ser. 2, v. 12, p. 75—102. Tilling, R. L, and Gottfried, David, 1969. Distribution of thorium, uranium, and potassium in igneous rocks of the Boulder batholith region, Montana, and its bearing on radiogenic heat production and heat flow: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 614-E, 29 p. Wahlstrom, E. E.. 1955, Petrographic mineralogy: New York, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.. 408 p. ‘ Walker, G. W., and Repenning, C. A., 1965, Reconnaissance geologic map of the Adel quadrangle, Lake, Harney, and Malheur Counties, Oregon: U.S. Geol. Survey Misc. Geol. Inv. Map I—446, scale 1:250,000. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS CODY SHALE, SCo—l, FROM NATRONA COUNTY, WYOMING By L. G. SCHULTZ, H. A. TOURTELOT, and F. J. FLANAGAN Sample SCo—l was collected in 1963 by J. R. Gill and R. E. Burkholder from a bulldozer cut in an abandoned road on the west side of Teapot Dome in the SE1/;,SE% sec. 4, T. 38 N., R. 78, W., Natrona County, Wyo. (fig. 4). It is from the upper part of the Cody Shale just above the base of the Baculites perplexus range zone in rocks stratigraphically equivalent to the Claggett Shale to the north and the 106°10" 1 2 MILES 1 .5 '0 l 2K|LOMETERS CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL FIGURE 4.——Southwest corner of Edgerton quadrangle, Wyoming, showing source of 800—1. Base from U.S. Geological Survey 15-min quadrangle, 1959. Mitten Black Shale Member of the Pierre Shale to the east (Gill and Cobban, 1966, pl. 3, 10c. 10). The exact location and stratigraphic relations of the sample are shown in figure 5. Sample SCo—l is typical of the Upper Cretaceous silty marine shales intermediate between the fine- grained offshore marine shales common farther to 'the east and the coarser nearsh-o-re marine siltstones and sandstone such as those in the Parkman Sand- stone overlying it (fig. 5). The rock is a medium- dark-gray (Munsell N—4) silty shale having thin lighter colored silty laminations. Mineralogical com- position, estimated from the X-ray difi‘ractometer method of Schultz (1964), is (in percent) 29 quartz, 6 dolomite, 6 plagioclase, about 1 potassium feldspar, 5 kaolinite, 2 chlorite, 10 illite, and 40 of a mixed- layer clay mineral composed of about three-fourths nonexpanding illite-like layers and two fifths ex- panding montmorillonite-like layers. Judged from the chemical analysis (table 25), the sample also may contain pyrite, apatite, and gypsum in amounts too small to be detected in the diffractometer analysis. Thinqsection examination shows the shale to be made up of interlaminated clay and clayey silt in proportions of about 2 to 1. The clay laminae con- tain about 8 percent quartz and 1 percent each of muscovite and dolomite. Biotite is present in smaller amounts. Typical quartz grains measure about 0.02 by 0.01 mm, and the sharply angular elongated shape is characteristic. Several grains as large as 0.05 mm were noted. The dolomite grains are about 0.02 by 0.02 mm and are rudely euhedral with in- distinct boundaries such as might be expected of grains of diagenetic origin. The sparse bi'otite grains are pale and frayed; a typical grain measures 0.05 by 0.01 mm. The muscovite is much more flaky; several grains measure about 0.025 by 0.002 mm. The silty laminae contain 30—35 percent quartz, 10 percent dolomite, and minor amounts of mus- 21 22 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS SANDSTONE Upper part of CODY SHALE 3 ML ma“ 5 \N W“? . x - «1‘9“5“ 9w.» 700 ft su|ty shale a 53“ “(55‘ ‘0 50 “SW-59* 43° 7 I l ¢ 17"1—— ' /;;$7 _. 30" /4, 1 ¢/.' UhSN‘302 ./ t . . SaE‘w'é‘n .\0 l ,__——;’/'= '3} /B\ sw/ ””””” _:' ' ' ‘gp I =~ ~- a4" SNB ++\ . . . X/ Base of Sussex . . . + SCo 1 Base of sandy» / . Sandstone Member + unIt . A . l . a“ ? 1 “. ++ \\ +' \ : \9\0. 9ft bentonite ' .‘\ \ 3 / O. \\ 9 10 ~' \\ . / \\ '/’ \\ ' J 500 o 500. 1000 FEET L 1 I I 1 l l | I I I I l I I 500 0 500 1000 METERS R. 78 W. 106°12’30" FIGURE 5.—Plane table sketch map and diagrammatic cross section showing the rocks in the immediate area of the source of 800—1. Mapped by J. R. covite and biotite. The quartz grains are angular and elongate and average about 0.09 by 0.02 mm. Poorly formed dolomite rhombs measure about 0.04 by 0.04 mm. A very minor part of the dolomite seems to fill voids. Biotite measures about 0.075 by 0.01 mm, and the more flaky muscovite measure-s 0.15 by 0.01. A few greenish grains of indistinct character seem to represent alteration products of Gill and L. G. Schultz. femic minerals. Several pellets of glauoonite were noted. Iron oxides in thin stringers seem to be oxidation products of pyrite, and pyrite may be present but obscured by the iron oxides. Particulate organic matter with high reflectance, and hence probably coaly in nature, forms films along bedding planes. The clay is highly oriented parallel to bedding. CODY SHALE, SCo—l, FROM NATRONA COUNTY, WYOMING 23 Reoognizable compaction features consist of clay flakes wrapped around quartz grains in both the clay laminae and silt laminae. The clay matrix has a mass apparent birefringence of lower first order red, and individual clay minerals could not be recog- nized. Feldspar grains could not be recognized in thin section. The amount of quartz inferred from the X-ray analysis is nearly double that determined from the microscopic examination. Analyses by particle size of numerous samples similar to SCo—l indicate that much of the quartz is in particles less than 2 ,um equivalent settling diameter and therefore is unlike- ly to be identified microscopically. Measured bulk and powder densities of 2.20 and 2.55, respectively, have been obtained by Paul Elmore. The sample was processed in the normal fashion (Flanagan, 1967), and sieve analyses representing the three thirds of the finished product are shown in table 24. During ball milling a comparatively TABLE 24.—Sieve analyses of SCo—I, in percent Thirds ______________________ 1 2 3 Avg Sieve size: + 100 ______ 1.0 2.0 1.4 1.5 —100+ 120 ______ 0 .2 .3 .2 —120+ 170 ______ .6 .5 4 .5 —170+200 ______ 1.0 .8 1.4 1.1 —200 ___________ 97.4 96.4 96.5 96.7 Total _____________ 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 large amount of sample adhered to the balls and the liner of the mill, and probably the moisture content of the sample may be partly responsible. The ma- terial that was retained on the 100-mes'h screen dur- ing sieve tests is readily friable and can easily be re- duced to powder between the fingers. The material in the sealed bottles shows a tendency to “ball,” and therefore the sample should be dried at 105°C before analysis. The chemical analysis and semiquan- titative estimates of some trace elements are given in tables 25 and 26. TABLE 25.—Chemical analysis of SCo—I [Analyst: Sarah M. Berthold] Constituent Weight percent SiOz ______________________________ 61.84 A1203 _____________________________ 13.40 F9203 _____________________________ 3.83 FeO ______________________________ 1.15 MgO ______________________________ 2.69 TABLE 25.—Chemical analysis of SCo—I—Continued Constituent Weight percent CaO ______________________________ 2.68 N 320 _____________________________ .97 20 ______________________________ 2.8 H20 + 1 ____________________________ 3.85 20— ____________________________ 2.45 TiOa ______________________________ .83 P205 ______________________________ .44 MnO _____________________________ .05 C02”Y ______________________________ 2.55 S03“1 ______________________________ .44 Cl ________________________________ .16 F _________________________________ .15 S _________________________________ .12 Organic material ___________________ .18 Subtotal ____________________ 100.58 Less 0: Cl ________________________ .04 Less 0 = F ________________________ .06 Less 0: S _________________________ .06 Total _______________________ 100.42 1Corrected for Organic H—>H20+, assuming organic material contains 5 percent hydrogen. 2Acid evolution. 3Sulfate soluble in HCl. TABLE 26.—Semiquantitative spectrographic estimates of some trace elements in SCo—I [Ag was detected but could not be estimated. Other elements were not detected. Analyst: Joseph J. Harris] Element Parts per million B ______________________________ 70 300 REFERENCES CITED Flanagan, F. J., 1967, U.S. Geological Survey silicate rock standards: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 31, no. 3, p. 289—308. Gill, J. R., and Cobban, W. A., 1966, The Red Bird section of the Upper Cretaceous Pierre Shale in Wyoming: U.S. Geo]. Survey Prof. Paper 393—A, 69 p. Schultz, L. G.. 1964, Quantitative interpretation of min- eralogical composition from X-ray and chemical data for the Pierre Shale: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 391—0, 31 p. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS MARINE MUD, MAG—l, FROM THE GULF OF MAINE By F. T. MANHEIM, J. C. HATHAWAY, F. J. FLANAGAN, and J. D. FLETCHER Another sample for the standards program is MAG—1, a fine-grained gray-brown clayey mud from the Wilkinson Basin of the Gulf of Maine. The sam- ple, collected by the Woods Hole Oceanographic In- stitution R/V Gosnold, J obst Hulseman, scientist- in-charge, was obtained with a 125-l Campbell grab sampler (clamshell type) from a depth of 282 m at lat 42°34.6’ N., long 69°32.6’ W. (Loran A), about 125 km east of Boston, Mass. (fig. 6). The sample is from station 2197 of the joint US. Geological ‘ 1.13:: , .; ' 3 '. if! Mame 44° :iPortland w.” z , 0‘ s a is 6g 6 e0, €35 MAG-17 . Boston N A A- v; r I ' - ““1! A TLANTIC OCEAN 25 O 25 50 75 IOOMILES [1. l I l i l l‘ J . | | 25 O 25 50 75 100 KILOMETERS CONTOURS IN METERS 40° j 72° 70° 68° FIGURE 6.—— Location of source of MAG—1 in the Wilkinson » Basin, Gulf of Maine. Survey-Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution con- tinental margin program (Hathaway, 1971). The bottom sediment is a graydbrown very fine- grained clayey mud with a low carbonate content. Benthonic fauna collected with the sample included mainly sparse worm tubes, scaphopods, and forami- nifers; planktonic forms include sparse diatoms, spores and pollen, and foraminifers. The age of the sediment is Holocene, but it probably includes re- worked Pleistocene sediments from surrounding areas. The sediment, as shipped, probably included more than 60 percent of its bulk weight as sea- water having an estimated salinity of about 33—34 g/kg. The salts are assumed to be in essentially the same proportions as in seawater. Soluble consti- tuents reported in analyses may partly reflect modi- fications of the original salts resulting from the ac- tion of the water on the sediment during the drying process. The sample was shipped to the laboratory in 30- gal polyethylene containers, and the sediment was allowed to settle for several weeks. Because of the size of the sample, no attempt was made to leach the soluble salts. The water (about 4—5 1) then re- maining above the sediment in each container was decanted, and portions of the mud were transferred to pyrex dishes and dried at 170° F. Lumps of sam- ple formed during the drying process were broken every several hours to ensure complete drying. The dried sample was passed through a rolls crusher to ensure the absence of lumps and was then trans- ferred to a ball mill to complete the normal process- ing previously described (Flanagan, 1967). The grain-size characteristics of the sediment are given in table 27. The mineralogy of the bulk sam- ple and of the clay fraction as determined by X-ray diffractometer analyses are given in tables 28 and 29, and the mineralogy of the sand fraction is given in table 30. 25 26 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 27.—Grain-size characteristics of the marine mud MAG—1 [Wentworth scale unless otherwise indicated. Determinations made under supervision of J. S. Schlee] Component Weight percent Gravel ______________________ 0.0 Sand ________________________ .1 Silt (62—4 ,um) _______________ 19.5 Clay (4—2 ,um) _______________ 18.0 Clay (<2 mm) _______________ 63.4 Parameters of particle size distribution Mode _______________________ 8.6 phi (about 4 am) Median ______________________ 9.88 phi Mean ________________________ 9.92 phi Standard deviation ___________ 2.2 phi Skewness ____________________ 0.02 Kurtosis ____________________ —0.32 TABLE 28. — Bulk mineralogy ofMAG-I determined by X-ray‘ diffractometer Constituent Weight percent Quartz Potassuim feldspar ________________________ Plagioclase feldspar ______________________ Calcite Layer silicates ___________________________ 8 ornblende TABLE 29.—Mineralogy of the clay fraction (<2 am) of MAG— 1 determined by X-rray difractiometer Concentration in units Constituent of parts per 10 Montrnorilloni-te _______________________ Trace to 1 Chlorite ______________________________ 2 Illite __________....________' _____________ 5 Kaolinite _____________________________ 1 Feldspar _____________________________ 1 Quartz _______________________________ Trace Homblende ___________________________ Trace TABLE 30.—Mineralogy of the sand fraction of MAG—1 [Determinations by J. V. A. Trumbull] Constituent Weight percent Rock fragments __________________________ 3 Quartz and feldspar ______________________ 63 Dark minerals ____________________________ 1 Glauconite _______________________________ 3 Mica ____________________________________ .1 Foraminifers _____________________________ 30 TABLE 31.—Sieve analyses of MA G—1, in percent Thirds ______________________ 1 2 3 Avg Sieve size: + 100 ______ 4.0 5.5 7.5 5.7 —100+120 ______ .6 .5 .5 .5 —12‘0+ 170 ______ 1.1 2.2 2.2 1.8 —170+200 ______ .8 .8 1.0 .9 —200 ___________ 93.4 91.0 88.8 91.1 Total __________ 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 The size analyses of the processed sample (table 31) show that the proportion of +100—mesh material increases from the first to the last third of the lot of bottled samples. Much of the material consists of friable platy clay aggregates not present in the original sample (table 27). These aggregates were probably formed during the drying of the wet sam- ple and did not disaggregate in the ball mill. Pos- sibly the increase in coarse material occurs be- cause the platy aggregates concentrated near the top of the bulk material being tumbled in the blender. Analysts may wish to make sure of sample homogeneity by hand-grinding the contents of bot- tles to reduce the platy aggregates to powder. The chemical analysis of the sample is given in table 32, and quantitative spectrog-raphic determina- tions of some trace elements are given in table 33. Because the sediment was processed without prior leaching of soluble salts, the powdered material may contain about 4 percent evaporated seawater salts. These salts, predominately NaCl, have an apprecia- ble effect on the Na and S contents and contribute virtually all the Cl. If we can assume that the salin- ity was 33.5 g/kg, typical for bottom water from the Gulf of Maine, with a corresponding chlorinity of 18.7 g/kg, and that all Cl in the sample is derived from seawater, one can calculate that the seawater amounted to about 62 percent of the sediment. Other TABLE 32.—Chemical analysis of MAG—1 [Analyst S. M. Berthold. Organic constituents by J. H. Chandler] Weight Constituent percent Organic C ______________ Organic N _____________________________ Organic H _____________________________ .12 Organic remainder (=0?) ______________ .74 Subtotal Less O=Cl ____________________________ .64 Lesg O=F ____________________________ .05 ____________________________ .26 (98.95) 1 Corrected for Organic H—)H20+. 2 Acid evolution. 3Sulfates soluble in HCl. MARINE MUD, MAG—4, FROM THE GULF OF MAINE 27 TABLE 33.—Quantitative spectrographic determinations (in parts per million) of trace elements in marine mud, MAG—1 Thirds and bottle number (below) Spectral line 2 3 Element 4/21 18/23 35/31 38/20 59/22 60/10 B _______________________ I 2497.73 120 140 120 120 130 140 130 130 120 140 140 130 Ba ______________________ II 4554.0 540 540 520 480 560 480 440 420 400 420 520 600 C0 ______________________ I 3453.50 16 19 19 18 15 17 16 20 19 20 15 17 Cr ______________________ I 3021.56 130 120 120 100 120 120 130 120 140 120 120 110 Cu ______________________ I 3273.96 46 50 44 46 50 48 48 50 52 50 52 50 Ga ______________________ I 2943.64 22 19 18 22 20 24 20 22 20 20 20 24 Ni ______________________ I 3413.94 42 52 50 44 50 52 5O 52 56 56 50 54 Sc ______________________ II 4246.83 19 19 19 17 19 19 17 19 19 17 19 17 Sr ______________________ I 4607.33 180 150 170 170 170 140 120 160 190 170 140 140 V _______________________ I 3183.41 120 130 130 120 140 130 120 150 150 110 130 150 Y _______________________ II 3327.88 58 58 62 60 60 56 58 58 56 50 58 52 Yb ______________________ 3289.37 3.8 3 0 3 0 2.4 3 2 3 2 3.2 30 32 3.0 36 40 Zr ______________________ II 3279.26 140 130 130 120 140 120 130 120 130 120 130 120 constituents less influenced by the evaporated salts are Mg, Ca, K, and 002. The sediment-associated amounts of B and Sr may be slightly enhanced as a result of dried interstitial salt, but most other trace elements should not be appreciably affected. J. Hiilseman and coworkers (written commun., 1969) found 1.9 percent organic carbon, 1.8 per- cent calcium carbonate, and 0.27 percent Kjeldahl nitrogen in a portion of the sample taken before shipment to the laboratory, and these data yield a C :N ratio of 7.0. Differences between the above data for the organic carbon, the Kjeldahl nitrogen, and the CO2 equivalent of the carbonate value, and their equivalents(?) in table 32 may be partly due to processing. Defining processing as anything that happened to the sample between the time of collection and the end of drying, one can assume that two possible causes of such differences are the decantation of the supernaten-t seawater in the laboratory and the dry- ing of the mud at 170° F (76° C). One should not ignore possible losses due to evaporation or steam distillation during the isolation of the organic ma- terial that was separated in the laboratory by re peated HF—HCI treatment, followed by washing With distilled water and drying at 110° C. One might also question the correction of H20+ for the contribution due to the assumed total conversion of the organic hydrogen to water. Because of these possible uncer- tainties, both the subtotal and the total of the analysis in table 32 are enclosed in parentheses. The total of the analysis for MAG—1 is below the range generally considered acceptable by rock analysts, and analyses of portions of the sample from which soluble salts have been leached will undoubtedly re- sult in better data and in acceptable totals. Salt residues such as MgCl2 and some complex chlorides and sulfates are hygroscopic, and the powdered sample is probably even more hygroscopic now than it might ordinarily have been because of the high clay content alone. The processed sample showed a slight tendency to “ball” during and after the splitting and bottling operations, and it is rec- ommended that determinations be made on dried (105° 0) portions or that analyses on an “as re- ceived” sample also show hygroscopic moisture, separately determined. It is not anticipated that the “balling” of the powdered material will result in heterogeneity as the sample was well mixed during the ball milling and blending operations. The mention of “balling” may raise doubts, and to determine if the homogeneity of the sample has been affected, a suite of 13 trace elements was de- termined spectrographically in six bottles of MAG— 1. The first six bottles that fulfilled the requirement that two bottles should represent each third of the lot of samples were selected from the stock of bot- tles stored in random order. Two subsamples were 28 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 34.—Conclusions from the analysis of variance and estimates of the spectrographic data from MAG—1 [In parts per million. Conclusions: S, significant; NS, not significant. Unless otherwise indicated, the calculated ratios were compared to F035. d.f., degrees of freedom] Standard deviation Conclusions Mean Bottles Error Element Thirds Bottles (ppm) (d.f. : 3) (d.f. : 6) NS NS 130 (1) 8.2 NS 28 493 Neg. 70 S (0.99) S(0.99) 17.6 1.6 .64 NS NS 121 7.1 8.6 NS NS 48.8 Neg. 2.8 NS NS 20.9 1.6 1.3 NS NS 50.7 Neg. 4.5 NS NS (0.99) 18.3 .91 .57 NS NS 158 Neg. 20.4 NS(0.99) NS 132 10.8 10.8 NS NS 57 .55 3.6 NS NS 3.2 .10 .36 NS NS (0.99) 128 7.6 5.0 1 Indeterminate. The mean sums of squares for the variation attributable to error and to bottles within thirds were equal, resulting in the indeter- minate division, 0/2. 2The variation attributable to bottles within thirds was significantly less than that for error at Fawn. taken from each bottle and individually diluted 1:1 with a mixture of 10 percent N32003 in quartz. An amount of carbon equal to oneafourth of the weight of this mixture was added to the previous dilution, and this new dilution was then mixed. The samples and standards prepared similarly were loaded into electrodes, and the exposures were made in random order on the plate, yielding the data in table 33. An analysis of variance of the data for each element was made, and 'a summary of the conclusions and estimates is given in table 34. Several mean sums of squares in table 34 are sig- nificantly larger than the error mean square and one, the mean square for bottles within thirds for Ba, is significantly less than the error mean square. Inspection of the cobalt data in table 33 shows that the sums of the determinations for individual bot- tles cluster at two points, the lower at about 32 ppm and the higher at slightly over 38 ppm. There are techniques for comparing means in the analysis of variance but the differences among bottles sums, and the even smaller differences among bottle means, are not analytically significant. Similarly, the dif- ferences among the sums of thirds, and among the means, are statistically but not analytically signifi- cant, and the average of all determinations, 17.6 ppm may be used to estimate the cobalt content of the sample. The mean square for thirds for vana- dium and the mean squares for bottles for scandium and zirconium are also not analytically significant. These spectrographic data therefore indicate that the bottles are generally homogeneous and that the “balling” has had little, if any, effect. Conclusions about the thirds of the entire lot of bottles yield only gross estimates of the homo- geneity of the entire lot whereas similar conclusions for the bottles randomly selected for the test are more valuable as the unit of standard samples with which all analysts deal is a bottle. In a manner simi- lar to What was done for samples STM—l, RGM—l, and QLO—l, the mean sum of squares for the varia- tion attributable to bottles may be shown to be com- posed of the analytical variance plus n times the bot- tle variance, where n is the number of determina- tions made on the individual bottle. The bottle and error standard deviations are given in table 34. Four standard deviations in the table are negative (the error mean square was greater than that for the variation due to bottles), and one is indeterminate (the two mean squares are equal). REFERENCES CITED Flanagan, F. J., 1967, US. Geological Survey silicate rock standards: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta. v. 31, no. 3, p. 289—308. Hathaway, J. 0., ed., 1971, Data file, continental margin program, Atlantic Coast of the United States V. 2, Sample collection and analytical data: Woods Hole Oceanog. Inst. Ref. 71—15, 496 p. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS MICA SCHIST, SDC—l, FROM ROCK CREEK PARK, WASHINGTON, DC. By F. J. F LANAGAN and G. V. CARROLL A ZOO-lb sample of mica schist excavated from a sewer tunnel in the northern part of Rock Creek Park, Washington, DC, was collected during the summer of 1963 to be processed as part of a rock sample program of the US. Geological Survey. At the time of collection the working face of the tun- nel was approximately 400 ft north of Rock Creek, as shown in figure 7, at an estimated depth below 77°07'30“ 77>oo' 39 oo EXPLANATION ‘ B u p 8:28 85° SEDIMENTARY ROCK. L; E AND ALLUVIUM , E u r W GRANITIC GNEISS i o r ‘5 HORNBLENI)EGNEISS ‘5’ Q) To N s '2; E I < H 9: SERPENTINITE AND TALC SCHIST METAMORPHOSED I SEDlMENTARY ROCK A SDC»! , . b I 50‘x x ’7. 4 6‘4: ( \ 38°52'30” PMVLES 1 2 KlLOMETERS FIGURE 7.-——-Geologic sketch map of the Washington West quadrangle, District of Columbia-Maryland-Virginia, show- ing the source of SDC—l. Modified from Coulter and Carroll (1964). 29 30 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS the surface of 80 ft. The sample was selected from the freshest material on top of the dump and was assumed to have been the most recent increment di- rectly from the existing working face. The entrance shaft was later covered during regrading, and the remaining material from the dump was used as rip- rap along Rock Creek. The geology of the region was originally described by Darton and Keith (1901) and subsequently by Fellows (1950) and Cloos and Cooke (1953). Re- cent workers, Coulter and Carroll (1964) and Hop- son (1964), assign these rocks to the Sykesville Formation which Southwick and Fisher (1967) re- fer to as the boulder gneiss lithofacies of the Wis- sahickon Formation of the Glenarm Series. These rocks are probably of late Precambrian age and are probably no younger than Early Cambrian; the regional relations upon which these age assign- ments depend are well summarized by Hopson (1964) and Southwick and Fisher (1967). The rock in hand specimen is a dark-grey per- vasively foliated muscovite-quartz schist with a homogeneous thinly streaked texture, rather than one that is compositionally layered. Muscovite is conspicuous on foliation surfaces. Small ellipsoidal granules of quartz and feldspar, as much as 1—2 mm in diameter, make up 10-15 percent of the rock; individual pebbles of quartz 0.5—1 cm or larger are randomly scattered in the matrix at inter- vals of . several centimeters. Inconspicuous grains of garnet as much as 2 mm in diameter are present in small amounts. In thin section, quartz makes up about 45 per- cent of the matrix of the rock, plagioclase about 15, muscovite 20, biotite as much as 10, chlorite 2—3 and garnet 2—3. Very minor amounts of apatite, epidote, allanite, flaky ilmenite, pyrite, and magnetite(?) are present. Proportions are approximate and vary from one thin section to another. The percentage of quartz varies markedly among specimens, depend- ing on the number and size of the quartz pebbles included. The quartz pebbles are rounded and consist in- ternally of several grains. Grains with straight boundaries display only weak undulose extinction whereas grains with sutured boundaries are char- acterized by strong undulose extinctions. Outer parts of the pebbles may be crushed to grain sizes like, and merging with, the matrix. Plagioclase (Anzws) is characteristically un- twinned and has very weak zonal extinction. A mi- nority of grains show close-set polysynthetic twin- ning much of which appears to be pericline twin- ning. The larger plagioclase grains are poikiloblastic and have strong amoeboid outlines. Some of the larger plagiocl'ase grains, as much as 0.5 cm in diameter, have well-rounded cores densely crowded with finely divided muscovite. These cores are sur- rounded by inclusion-free jackets with amoeboid out- lines against the matrix. Such pebbles are inter- preted as original detrital grains surrounded by metamorphic overgrowths. Mica and chlorite flakes are sharply outlined. The majority of flakes define the foliation, but many flakes cross foliation at higher angles. The larger flakes show minor kinking of cleavage, but no shredding. Garnet is subhedral to anhedral. In gen- eral, min-era] grains have crystall‘oblastic textural relations to one another. This crystalloblastic tex- ture postdates development of foliation. The few cataclastic features appear to be minor and incipient. Evidence presented elsewhere (Coulter and Carroll, 1964) indicates that foliation in these rocks, which originated as massive submarine slump deposits, is not mimetic to bedding. A detailed p-etrologic study of correlative rocks in Howard and Montgomery Counties is presented by Hopson (1964). The general procedure for the processing of sam- ples for the standard sample program has been de- scribed by Flanagan ( 1967). The mica schist pre- sented a challenge for grinding because of its mica content. The sieve analysis of sets of four bottles each, taken randomly around the midpoints of the three thirds of the entire lot of bottled samples, is shown in table 35. An average of 87 percent of the TABLE 35.——Sieve analyses of SDC—I, in percent Thirds _____________________ 1 2 3 AV: Sieve size: + 100 ______ 1.9 .6 2.4 1.6 ——100+ 120 ______ 1.0 2.4 2.0 1.8 —120+ 170 ______ 4.8 5.8 5.8 5.5 —170+200 ______ 3.8 3.5 4.9 4.1 —200 ___________ 88.5 87.7 84.9 87.0 Total __________ 100 100 100 100 sample passes a ZOO-mesh screen, and this percent- age exceeds the goal of at least 80 percent. At least 75 percent of the material retained on the larger screens consists of mica. This situation should cause no problems for techniques like the classical methods of rock analysis in which 0.5-g portions are used, but large subsamples taken from bottles should be reground before use in techniques like spectro- chemical analysis in which sample portions are of the order of 25 mg or less. MICA SCHIST, SD'C—l, FROM ROCK CREEK PARK, WASHINGTON, DC. 31 Chemical analyses of the rock and X-ray fluores- cence determinations of several constituents are given in table 36, and the norms are given in table 37. The rapid methods of Shapiro and Brannock (1962) were used for the chemical analysis, and a modification of the method of Rose, Adler, and Flanagan (1963) was used for the X-ray deter- minations. The modification consisted of the sub- stitution of cerium oxide for lanthanum oxide as the heavy absorber to avoid interference with the magnesium determination by a higher order line of lanthanum (Leonard Shapiro, written commun., 1969). Semiquantitative spectrographic estimates of TABLE 36.—Analyses of SDC—I, in weight percent, by rapid rock methods and by X—ray fluorescence [Analysts: Rapid rock: P. Elmore, S. Botts, G. Chloe, and L. Artis. X-ray fluorescence: L. Shapiro and H. Smtih] Bottle «No _______________ 21/5 100/13 Rapid rock Si02 ____________________ 65.9 65.8 A1203 ___________________ 16.3 16.3 F6201 ___________________ 2.9 2.7 FeO ____________________ 3.7 3.9 MgO ____________________ 1.6 1.7 03.0 ____________________ 1.4 1.3 N320 ___________________ 2.1 2.1 K20 ____________________ 3.2 3.2 H20+ __________________ 1.4 1.51 20— ___________________ .17 .16 T102 ____________________ .98 .98 P205 ____________________ .18 .19 MnO ___________________ .12 .12 002 _____________________ .05 .05 Total ______________ 100 100 X-ray fluorescence FezOg1 ___________________ 7.1, 6.8 6.9, 7.0 MgO ____________________ 2.1, 1.6 1.9,1.7 CaO ____________________ 1.4, 1.4 1.3, 1.5 Na202 ___________________ 2.1, 2.1 1.9, 2.1 K20 ____________________ 3.3, 3.1 3.4, 3.2 TiO: ____________________ 1.0, 1.0 1.0, 1.0 P2052 ____________________ .2 , .24 .24, .24 MnO ____________________ .13, .11 .13, .12 1 Total Fe as Fean. 2 By chemical methods using the powder prepared for X-ray fluorescence. TABLE 37.—Norms (CIPW) for SDC—I, bottle 21/5 Constituent Weight percent Quartz ____________________________________ 35.33 Orthoclase _________________________________ 18.9 1 Albite _____________________________________ 1 7.77 Anorthite _________________________________ 5.45 Corundum _________________________________ 7.38 Enstatite __________________________________ 3.99 Ferrosilite 3.00 Magnetite 4.20 Ilmenite ______________ 1.86 Apatite ______ .43 CaC 03 ____________________________________ .1 1 Total ________________________________ 98.43 several detectable trace elements are shown in table 38. The semiquantitative method of Myers, Haven, and Dunton (1961) was used, and the data are re- ported in percent to the nearest number in the series 1, 0.7, 0.5, 0.3, 0.2, 10.15, and 0.1, which represent approximate midpoints of intervals on a geometric scale. TABLE 38.—Semiquantitative spectrograyphic estimates of the trace element contents of 800—1 Element Percent Ag ____________________________________________ 0.000013 B _____________________________________________ .003 Ba ____________________________________________ .1 Be ____________________________________________ .0003 Ce ____________________________________________ .02 Co ____________________________________________ .002 Cr _____________________________________________ .007 Cu ____________________________________________ .003 Ga ____________________________________________ .003 La ____________________________________________ .015 Nb ____________________________________________ .0015 Nd ____________________________________________ .01 Ni _____________________________________________ .005 Pd ____________________________________________ .003 Sc _____________________________________________ .002 Sn ____________________________________________ .0003 Sr _____________________________________________ .02 V _____________________________________________ .007 Y _____________________________________________ .007 Yb ____________________________________________ .0007 Zr _____________________________________________ .05 The sample was originally intended for chemical analysis. It is inevitable, however, that the sample will be used with other techniques that require a much smaller sample size. The mica content will probably be the source of problems for elements such as Ba, K, Rb, Sr and Zr, and claims of hetero- geneity of the sample, published with the data and test used, are anticipated. REFERENCES CITED C‘loos, Ernest, and Cooke, C. W., 1953. Geologic map of Mont- gomery County and District of Columbia: Baltimore, Md., Maryland Dept. Geology, Mines and Water Re- sources, scale 1:62,500. Coulter, H. W., and Carol], G. V., 1964, Selected geologic localities in the Washington area: Washington Acad. Sci. Jour., v. 54, no. 5, p. 153—159. Danton, N. H., and Keith, Arthur, 1901, Description of the Washington, D.C.—Md.-Va. quadrangles: U.S. Geol. Sur- vey Geol. Atlas, Folio 70. Fellows, R. E., 1950, Notes on the geology of Rock Creek Park, District of Columbia: Am. Geophys. Union Trans., v. 31, no. 2, p. 267—277. Flanagan, F. J., 1967, U.S. Geological Survey silicate rock standards: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 31, no. 3‘, p. 289—308. 32 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS Hopson, C. A., 1964, The crystalline rocks of Howard and Montgomery Counties, in the geology of Howard and Montgomery Counties: Baltimore, Md.. Maryland Geol. Survey, p. 27—215. Myers, A. T., Havens, R. G., and Dunton, P. J., 1961, A spectrochemioal method for the semiquantitative analy- sis of rocks, minerals, and ores: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1084—1, p. 207—229. Rose, H. J., Jr., Adler, Isidore, and Flanagan, F. J., 1963, X—ray fluorescence analysis of the light elements in rocks and minerals: App]. Spectroscopy, v. 17, no. 4, p. 81—85. Shapiro. Leonard, and Brannock, W. W., 1962, Rapid analy- sis of silicate, carbonate, and phosphate rocks: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1144—A, 56 p. Southwick, D. L., and Fisher, G. W., 1967, Revision of the stratigraphic nomenclature of the Glenarm Series in Maryland: Maryland Geol. Survey Rept. luv. 6, 19 p. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS BASALT, BHVO—l, FROM KILAUEA CRATER, HAWAII By F. J. FLANAGAN, T. L. WRIGHT, S. R. TAYLOR,1 C. S. ANNELL, R. C. CHRISTIAN, and J. I. DINNIN A basaltic lava from Kilauea caldera, Kilauea volcano, Hawaii, was collected by Howard A. Powers and coworkers from the surface layer of the pahoe— hoe lava that overflowed from Halemaumau in the fall of 1919. The sample, BHVO—l, has been proc- essed as one of the series of standard rock powders, and more than 100 1b of the powdered material has been shipped .to the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center, where it is being used as simulated lunar material for such purposes as plan-t growth media, soil mechanics experiments, drilling experiments, and oxygen recovery technique development. The sample locality (fig. 8) is 1,000 ft due east of the tic at lat 19°25’00” N., long 155°17’30” W., on the Kilauea Crater quadrangle, Hawaii Island and County of Hawaii, 71/2-min topographic series, 1963. The flow is mapped on the geologic map of Kilauea Crater quadrangle (Peterson, 1967). A strong overflow occurred from the north side of Halemaumau from April 20 through June ‘1919. After a period of quiescence, the strong overflow from the north resumed on August 16 and continued through September, covering the lavas emplaced in the spring. Thus, the sample collected is probably from the overflow that occurred in mid—September. This surface was later bombarded by falling blocks and small particles, from pebble to silt size, broken from the wall lavas of Halemaumau during phreatic explosions in May 1924. It was not buried under a cover of such debris, however, and has thus been exposed as surface rock since September 1919. The surface cooling unit of the 1919 pahoehoe is usually from 6 in to 1 1ft thick and is separated from the lower part of the flow by a zone of large vesicles or even by open flattened gas cavities perhaps sev- eral feet in diameter. Shrinkage cracks break these slabs into blocks with top surface areas of 1—2 ftz. 1Department of Geophysics and Geochemistry, Australian National University, Canberra. Several of these blocks, from different parts of the flow but all within an area of about 100 ydz, con- 155° 19°25' N 1 Sé o Lllllllllll 'llllllllll 1 .5 0 1M|LE l iKILOMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET DATUM Is MEAN SEA LEVEL FIGURE 8.—Part of the geologic map (Peterson, 1967) of Kilauea Crater, Hawaii, with the source of BHVO—l identified. Products of different eruptions are identified by year. Also shown are sl, splatter and lava cones; Ilk, lower lavas of Klauea; bu, basalt of Uwekahuna lacco— lith; and ua, Uwekahuna ash. 33 34 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS stituted the original bulk sample weighing nearly 7001b. The rock has a mildly oxidized zone, a few cen- timeters thick, separating the glassy rind from the denser crystalline interior, both of which are es- sentially unoxidized. There is no evidence of surface alteration due to weathering. The variation of chemical composition within this sample is prob- ably not great and is caused mostly by the somewhat erratic distribution of olivine phenocrysts and by minor variations in the ratio of ferric to ferrous iron. A grab portion of the powdered and mixed sample was analyzed by the methods of Shapiro (1967 ) , and this chemical analysis is shown in table 39. TABLE 39.—Chemica-l analysis of a grab sample of BHVO—I Constituent Weight percent Si02 _______________________________________ 49.8 A1203 ______________________________________ 14.0 F6203 ______________________________________ 2.5 FeO _______________________________________ 8.5 MgO ______________________________________ 7.2 CaO _______________________________________ 11.3 Na20 ______________________________________ 2.2 K20 _______________________________________ .62 H20 + _____________________________________ .25 20— _____________________________________ .06 Ti02 _______________________________________ 2.6 P205 _______________________________________ .32 MnO ______________________________________ .18 0‘02 ________________________________________ < .05 Total ________________________________ 100 The sample was received as eight large pieces ranging in weight from 60 to 120 Lb. These pieces were first cleaned with a brush and Water to remove any possible surface dirt and were then air dried over a weekend at about 90° F. The pieces were then broken on a steel bucking board with a ham- mer and chisel. The few pieces that dropped to the floor were inspected for traces of asphalt tile and were chipped clean, if necessary, before the crush- ing operations. The chips from the surfaces were discarded. As the material was reduced by a rolls crusher, it was continually passed down a stainless steel chute onto a large piece of 16- by 18-mesh aluminum screen to separate oversized particles be- fore final powdering in a ball mill, and this oversize material was returned through the rolls crusher. The material was inspected as it passed to this screen, and several small pieces of wood from the shipping box that had escaped previous notice and a few small pieces of paper from the cardboard box in which broken pieces were stored before crushing were removed. Because traces of asphalt tile, wood, or paper may have escaped detection, it is not rec- ommended that the sample be analyzed for organic constituents. Nominal batch weights (125 1b) of the screened material were then processed in the ball mill until a sieve analysis of the pulverized product showed that at least 90 percent of the powder passed a 200- mesh screen. The second and succeeding batches were formed ‘by replacing the amount of ground ma- terial taken from the ball mill by an equal weight of coarse material. Half—pint samples of the powder were taken at intervals while the batches were be- ing processed, and these portions were sieved to de- termine if the minimum requirements for particle- size distribution had been reached. These sieved portions were then discarded. Sieve analyses of the powder immediately before the four batches were removed from the ball mill are given in table 40, and the average of these may be used to estimate the size distribution of the completed sample. TABLE 40,—Sieve analyses of batches of BHVO-1,in percent [Tr., trace] Batch ________________________ 1 2 3 4 Avg Sieve sizes: + 100 ________ 0.0 0 2 0.8 0.2 0.3 ~100 + 120 ________ Tr. .1 Tr. Tr. .1 ~120+ 170 ________ 2.1 1.9 1.3 .6 1.5 —170+200 ________ 4.1 5.6 3.3 .6 3.4 —200 _____________ 93.8 92.2 94.6 98.6 94.8 Total ___________ 100.0 100 0 100.0 100.0 100.1 The ground sample was stored in eight 1-ft3 card- board :boxes until the ball milling was completed. The contents of these boxes were then mixed in a V- blender (two boxes per batch) in a prearranged scheme to nominally ensure that onebeighth of the contents of any completely blended box could be at- tributed to each of the original eight boxes. After filling every second set of bottles, the nor- mal processing was halted to withdraw a half gal- lon (about 5 1b) of powder from the blender. These 5-lb portions were transferred to a large plastic bag, and the withdrawals continued until the bag contained about 50 lb. When such withdrawals dur- ing the bottling of the first, second, and last thirds of the estimated lot of bottled samples had been completed, the bags were shipped to NASA’s Lunar Receiving Laboratory, Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, Tex. Similar but smaller withdrawals were made simultaneously to reserve part of the powdered material for gamma ray spectrometric determinations of uranium, thorium, and potassium. In anticipation that portions of this sample might be requested as frequently as had been portions of BASALT, BHVO—l, FROM KILAUEA CRATER, HAWAII 35 USGS BCR—l for use as a comparison standard for lunar analyses, several sets of six bottles were randomly selected from the stock of bottles. These sets, designed to test the homogeneity of the sample and to obtain error estimates, were distributed among several analysts who were to make their de- terminations in random order. The data by chemi- cal, optical emission, atomic absorption, instru- mental neutron activation, X-ray fluorescence and spark source mass specroscopic methods are given in tables 41—47. TABLE 41.—Quantitative spectrographic determinations, in parts per million, of trace elements in Hawaiian basalt, BHVO—I [Optical emission method of Annell and Helz (1970). Analyst, C. S. Annell] Bottle Spectral Element line 11/11 10/14 31/23 32/15 52/2 51/17 Ba _______ II 4554.0 170, 190 190, 170 170, 150 190, 170 190, 150 170, 150 Co _______ 3412.3 46, 44 50, 51 44, 44 42, 45 51, 38 44, 47 3412.6 43, 41 48, 52 7, 44 43, 42 48, 39 44, 47 Cr _______ 3005.05 340, 280 340, 3-50 310, 260 285, 270 480, 270 295, 305 2985.9 335, 290 340, 350 320, 275 2910, 290 450, 280 315, 325 Cs ________ 8521.1 <1, 2 0 1.1, 1.1 <1, 1.1 ' 3.5, 1.8 <1, 1.1 <1, <1 Cu _______ 3247.5 150, 94 150, 150 74, 150 155, 150 150, 96 94, 150 3273.96 170, I30 170, 130 150, 110 170, 160 150, 120 100, 61 Ga _______ 2943.6 21, 18 21, 20 18, 18 2‘0, 19 21, 16 18, 20 Li ________ 6707.8 4.4, 4.6 4.3, 4.1 3.9, 4.0 4 2, 4.0 3 7, 3.8 4 1, 3 9 Mn _______ 3256.1 1320, 1140 .1300, 13120 1220, 1120 1370, 1290 1390, 1030 1180, 1320 Nb _______ 11 3163.4 17, 17 17, 12 15, 17 19, 15 14, 15 14, 14 Ni _______ 3050.82 120, 104 117, 122 112, 107 113, 112 157, 106 97, 106 Pb _______ 2833.0 5.9, 6.9 6.5, 3 0 6.2, 6.2 5.5, 3.2 11.2, 7.2 5.5, 7.5 Rb _______ 7800.2 7.4, 9 1 7.3, 7 3 8.3, 7.9 8.6, 8.8 7.2, 8.4 7.0, 8 2 Se ________ II 3353.7 31, 31 32, 32 31, 31 32, 31 32, 31 31, 30 Sr ________ 4607.3 390, 290 390, 300 390, 230 345, 250 360, 250 420, 300 V ________ 3198.0 325, 280 310, 335 320, 235 260, 260 330, 280 315, 305 Y ________ II 3327.8 30, 30 29, 31 31, 28 29, 31 31, 27 29, 30 Yb _______ II 3289.37 3.3, 2 3 2.9, 3 3 2.8, 3.3 2.1, 3.1 2.3, 2 5 2.8, 3 0 Zn _______ 3345.02 97, 107 98, 108 105, 107 95, 108 104, 94 105, 103 3345.6 100‘, 106 97, 106 106, 99 97, 1019 103, 96 104, 100 Zr ________ II 3279.26 153, 151 151, 138 147, 152 154, 158 148, 132 136, 120 TABLE 42.—Determinations of the potassium content of BHVO—I, in percent [Atomic absorption method; Analyst, J. I. Dinnin] TABLE 44,—Determinations of the uranium content of BHVO—I [In parts per million Fluorimetric method of Grimaldi and others (1952); uranium content is close to limit of estimation of the method. Analyst, Bottle Roosevelt Moore] 9/9 11/12 30/6 30/25 51/16 51/25 Bottle 0.440 0.440 0.438 0.443 0.437 0.440 9/9 “/12 30/6 W25 51/25 52/16 .432 .433 .438 .438 .443 .436 .432 .438 .438 .432 .440 .434 0'3 0'3 0'3 0'3 0'; 0'2 .438 .440 .432 .434 .434 .432 ' ' ' ' ' ' TABLE 43.—Determinations of the niobium content of BHVO—I [In parts per million. Isotope dilution-spectrophotometric method of Greenland and Campbell (1970). Analyst, E. Y. Campbell] Bottle 10/14 11/11 31/23 32/15 51/17 52/2 22.6 19.1 21.0 20.0 21.5 20.2 24.0 22.3 23.1 24.6 21.3 24.1 TABLE 45.—Instrumental neutron activation analyses of the chromium, scandium, and thorium contents of BHVO—I [In parts per million. Analyst, L. P. Greenland] Bottle ______________ 9/9 11/12 30/6 30/25 51/16 51/25 Chromium _____ 312 316 305 302 343 331 295 317 33.8 313 300 313 Scandium ______ 26 28 27 26 28 32 27 30 26 28 27 25 Thorium _______ .84 .78 .81 .57 .77 .71 .90 .94 .73 .65 .96 .74 36 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW US'GS ROC‘K STANDARDS TABLE 46.—X-ray fluorescence determinations of several oxides in BHVO—I [In Weight percent. Method of Rose and others (1970); Analyst, R. P. Christian] Bottle ______________ 10/16 10/26 31/20 31/32 50/30 51/22 Si02 __________ 50.2 49.9 49.9 49.8 49.8 49.8 49.8 50.2 49.7 50.0 49.8 49.9 A1203 __________ 14.0 13.8 13.9 14.0 14.0 13.8 13.8 13.8 14.1 13.8 13.9 13.8 Total Fe as Fe203 _____ 11.99 11.89 11.95 11.94 11.94 11.97 11.94 11.94 11.98 11.91 11.96 11.92 MgO __________ 7.45 7.35 7.30 7.40 7.35 7.20 7.40 7.45 7.40 7.35 7.30 7.20 CaO __________ 11.48 11.49 11.39 11.34 11.35 11.39 11.44 11.45 11.44 11.34 11.38 11.43 K20 ___________ .54 .54 .54 .57 .55 .55 . .53 .55 .55 .55 .56 .56 T102 __________ 2.68 2.61 2.63 2.64 2.67 2.68 2.65 2.67 2.64 2.62 2.72 2.68 P205 __________ .26 .30 .27 .28 .26 .27 .26 .30 .29 .28 .26 .29 MnO __________ .17 .16 .16 .17 .16 .16 .16 .16 .17 .17 .17 .16 Calculations for a one-way experimental design with the six bottles of sample as the variable of classification were then made for the data reported. Four determinations for some bottles were made by the spark source method, and two observations Were deleted from each set of four using random num- bers. This procedure simplifies calculations by hav- ing the same number of observations per bottle. For the missing cesium observation by spark source, the average of the other 11 determinations was sub- stituted to facilitate the analysis of variance, but the inserted value may have slightly changed con- clusions and estimates that might have otherwise been obtained. For the instrumental neutron activation deter- minations of chromium, scandium, and thorium, 100- mg samples were irradiated for 14 h in a thermal neutron flux of 5><1012 n/cmZ/sec at the Naval Re- search Laboratory reactor. After about 2 weeks de- cay, the samples were counted at least twice with a 40 cm3 Ge(Li) detector coupled to a 1,024—channel analyzer. The gamma energies, in keV, for the analyses were: Sc”, 889; Cr“, 320; and Th233-> Pa”, 312. USGS sample G—l was used as a stand- ard for the thorium and scandium determinations with assumed values of 45 ppm Th and 2.73 ppm Sc. USIGS DTS—l, with an assumed value of 4,190 ppm Cr, was used as a standard for the chromium deter- minations. Conclusions resulting from the analysis of vari- ance and our estimates of means and standard de- viations are given in table 48. An extra significant digit has been retained in all estimates so that the user can round the data. For simplicity and for freedom of choice for future users, all conclusions are listed as NS (not significant) at some specified or unspecified level. Those conclusions for which no level is specified were obtained after comparing the calculated ratio of the bottle mean sum of squares (MSS bottles) to the error mean sum of squares (MSS error) with the table value'for Fo‘95(d.f.= 5,6) =4.39. For those conclusions for which a frac- tile of the F distribution is specified, for example NS(0.99), the calculated ratio is significant at both F...95 and F0375, but is not significant at F”... Twenty-seven of the 68 standard deviations for bot- tles are listed as negative, and the conclusions listed were reached by testing the inverse ratio of mean squares (MSS error1MSS bottles) to determine if the variation attributable to bottles was significant- ly less than the error mean square. No F test could be made, and therefore a conclusion was not reached for the chemical uranium data because the error mean square was identically zero. The standard deviations for error in table 48 are the square roots of the mean sums of squares for error. Standard deviations for bottles were calcu- lated by 'MSSbottles —‘MSSm~ror n where n is the number of determinations per bottle (four for K by atomic absorption, two for all other determinations). Negative values for the bottle standard deviation may be expected in about half of such calculations as the variances are distributed as sample values of the variances around a mean of zero. Inspection of the column of conclusions in table 48 shows that the bottle mean square was not sig- nificantly different from the error mean square for 53 of the 67 tests made against F035. For these we can conclude that the element or oxide by the method used is homogeneously distributed among the bot- tles. The decision is left to the user Whether to ac- cept a declaration of homogeneity for the five con- clusions that were not significant when tested against FHA-5, or for the eight tested against Fo.99. Comparisons of variances and means by the appro- priate F and t tests could be made for elements and oxides between methods in table 48, but the gen- eral agreement of the data indicate that such tests would probably be arithmetic exercises to test analy- tical judgment. Ilmenite has been added to a small portion of the bulk material shipped to the Manned Spacecraft Center. The addition of the ilmenite at the center raised the TiO2 content of this portion to approxi- BASALT, BHVO—l, FROM KILAUEA CRATER, HAWAII 37 TABLE 47.——Spark source mass spectrometric determination of elements in BHVO—I [In parts per million. Method of Taylor (1965). Analysts, S. R. Tayl'or and A. L. Graham, Australian Nat. Univ.] Bottle Element- isotope 9/8 10/17 30/24 31/3 52/6 52/26 Y—89 _______________ 21.3 29.4 24.8 29.2 28.9 26-7 26.7 31.6 23.8 21.0 22.3 24.3 Nb—93 ______________ 15.7 19.4 19.9 21.2 20.4 21.2 15.6 20.7 16.9 17.8 18.6 19.3 Cs—133 ______________ .0776 .127 .100 ___ .0505 .0784 .0554 .0912 .0872 .126 .0406 .0827 Ba—135 _____________ 121 121 144 144 134 130 120 123 137 139 120 136 Ba—136 _____________ 130 128 149 139 151 132 114 134 149 145 111 139 Ba—137 _____________ 1211 115 126 124 133 126 126 133 132 130 118 132 La—139 ______________ 15.0 16.9 18.4 19.1 15.2 16.8 19.0 17.3 19.5 18.4 17.2 17.21 Ce—140 ______________ 30.0 30.5 31.8 35.2 33.5 31.3 30.0 38.6 35.7 36.4 33.1 33.9 Pr—141 ______________ 5.77 6.06 6.01 6.49 4.77 5.42 5.62 5.60 6.40 5.33 5.35 5.17 Nd—143 _____________ 23.8 24.8 26.9 22.1 18.3 21.2 27.7 17.8 24.5 24.6 22.3 22.6 Nd—146 _____________ 22.1 21.4 26.2 23.2 19.3 20.6 25.6 16.5 25.3 22.3 21.6 21.8 Sm—147 _____________ 6.12 5.47 5.09 5.18 3.96 5.45 5.24 6.35 4.63 5.50 4.72 5.74 Sm—149 _____________ 5.13 6.53 5.14 4.87 4.31 5.31 5.51 4.18 5.20 5.64 4.91 5.53 Eu—151 _____________ 1.70 1.82 1.64 1.67 1.33 1.52 1.98 1.83 1.67 1.77 1.57 1.60 Eu—153 _____________ 1.90 1.81 1.72 1.63 1.21 1.47 1.62 1.49 1.67 1.76 1.63 1.58 Gd—155 ______________ 6.84 6.00 5.45 5.82 4.10‘ 4.95 7.72 6.66 5.94 6.42 5.23 5.21 Gd—158 ______________ 5.68 5.53 5.24 5.53 3.67 4.82 4.83 4.38 5.69 5 11 5.35 5.40 Tb—159 ______________ .685 .752 .595 683 .562 .648 1 00 .756 .841 .765 743 .720 Dy—161 _____________ 4 65 4.94 4.06 4.18 3 34 4.64 5 32 4.46 4.35 5.04 4 21 5.12 Dy—163 _____________ 5.14 5.33 3.90 4.23 3.87 4.80 5.69 4.53 5.00 4.75 4.46 4.93 Ho—165 _____________ 1.07 1.17 .892 .788 .649 .870 862 875 .971 .883 732 927 Er—166 ______________ 2 65 1 86 1.70 1.62 1 26 1 76 1 83 1.74 1.84 1.89 1 64 1 80 Er—167 ______________ 2 21 1.87 1.61 1.65 1 28 1 63 2 21 1.73 1.77 1.83 1 68 1 75 Tm—169 _____________ 300 .302 251 .317 206 272 350 .222 250‘ 335 280 302 Yb—172 _____________ 1.72 1.77 1.40 1.36 1.15 1.62 1.95 1.39 1.39 1.34 1.63 1.68 Yb—174 _____________ 1.64 1.41 1.25 1.21 1.16 1.57 2.28 1.86 1.30 1.33 1.57 1.611 Hf—177 _____________ 4.27 4.28 3.71 3.34 3.39 3.60 5.16 3.27 3.68 4.18 4.21 3.52 Hf—178 _____________ 3.78 3.31 3.25 3.01 3.16 3.20 3.65 4.44 3.40 3.99 4.13 3.27 Th—23-2 _____________ .672 .701 .726 -726 .611 .912 1.15 .825 .814 1.07 .725 .857 U—238 ______________ 393 394 .182 328 315 .332 :316 I414 .186 1452 2327 .351 38 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 48.—Meams and standard deviations of data for BH VO-1 [In parts per million unless percent is indicated. Method: XRF, X-ray fluorescent; OS, optical emission; SSMS, spark source mass spectrometric: INA, instrumental neutron activation; AA, atomic absorption; Chem, chemical. Conclusions are firom the analysis of variance. The calculated F ratio of MSS : MSSbouie. :MSSerror was generally tested at F045 except where the higher fractile of the F distribution is indicated in parenthues. Where the standard deviation for bottles is indicated as “Neg.," the inverse ratio, MsSen-ur : MSSbottles, was tested to determine the significance. NS, not significant; (11.. degree of freedom. See tables 41—47] 9.....- Spectral Conclu- Standard deviation £335,511 line or sion (d.f. = 5) (d.f. = 6) for error Element or oxide Method Isotope (bottles) Mean Bottles Error (percent) A120. _______ percent-.. XRF ______ N‘S 13.89 0.032 0.104 0.7 Ba _________________ OS 11 4554.0 NS 171.7 Neg. 17.3 10.1 SSMS 135 NS (0.99) 132.8 8.33 5.09 3.8 SISMS 136 NS 135.6 2.62 12.8 9.4 SSMS 137 NS (0.975) 127.5 Neg. 7.54 5.9 03.0 ________ percent.-- XRF ______ NS (0.99) 11.41 .048 .026 .2 Ce __________________ SSMS 140 NS 33.4 .402 2.73 8.2 CO __________________ OS 3412.3 NS 45.5 2.76 4.00 8.8 OS 3412.6 NS 44.8 1.89 3.16 7.0 Cr __________________ INAA ______ NS 315 Neg. 17.5 5.6 OS 2985.9 NS 321.7 Neg. 52.5 16.3 OS 3005.05 NS 315.4 NEg'. 65.0 20.6 C-s __________________ SSMS 133 NS(0.975) .088 .022 .016 18.8 Cu _________________ OS 3273.96 NS 135.1 23.8 24.7 18.3 OS 3247.5 NS 130.2 Neg. 35.3 27.1 Dy _________________ SSMS 161 NS 4.60 .323 .456 9.9 SSMS 163 NS 4.83 .283 .482 10.0 Er _________________ SSMS 166 NS 1.86 .159 .278 14.9 . SSMS 167 NS (0.975) 1.80 .219 .145 8.0 Eu _________________ SSMS 151 NS 1.67 .130 .113 6.8 SSMS 153 NS 1.64 Neg. .180 11.0 Total Fe as Fe20. __percent__ XRF ______ NS 11.94 .004 .028 .2 Ga _________________ OS 2943.6 NS 19.2 Neg. 1.82 9.5 Gd __________________ SSMS 155 NS (0.99) 6.04 .862 .513 8.5 SSMS 158 NS 5.18 Neg. .682 13.2 Hf _________________ SSMS 177 NS 3.97 .200 .516 13.0 SSMS 178 NS 3.99 Neg. .518 13.0 Ho _________________ SSMS 165 NS .90 .084 .114 12.7 K __________ percent.-- AA ______ NS .437 Neg. {004 .9 K20 ________ percent__ XRF ______ NS .55 .007 .009 1.6 *La __________________ SSMS 139 NS 17.5 .534 1.35 7.7 Li 6707.8 NS (0.99) 4.08 .239 .122 3.0 MgO ______ NS (0.975) 7.35 .072 .048 .6 Mn 3256.1 NS 1250 Neg. 129 10.3 MnO __- ______ NS .16 .001 .005 3.1 Nb ______ NS 22.0 Neg. 2.10 9.5 II 3163.4 NS 15.5 Neg. 1.96 12.6 93 NS 19.0 1.31 1.56 8.2 Nd 143 NS 22.7 1.16 2.80 12.3 146 NS 22.1 2.05 1.93 8.7 Ni . 3050.82 NS 114.4 Neg. 15.8 13.8 P205 ________ peI‘Cent__ XRF ______ NS (0.99) .28 .014 .008 .8 Pb _________________ OS 2833.0 6.23 1.15 1.79 28.7 Pr __________________ SSMS 141 NS 5.54 .296 .341 6.2 Rb _________________ OIS 7800.2 NS 7.96 Neg. .705 8.8 Sc __________________ INAA ______ NS 27.5 Neg. 2.24 8.1 OS 11 3353 7 NS 31.2 .387 .500 1.6 S‘iO. ________ percent" XRF ______ NS 49.90 Neg. .168 .3 Sm _________________ SSMS 147 NS 5.28 .533 .459 8.7 SSMS 149 NS 5.31 Neg. .746 14.0 Sr __________________ O a: $8 «««8 «3. « «««8 «««o «««c. «««.? «««. “£33. £5“: < . . . . . 3.3:: o 52m :60 «1.8 «««o «««. «««e ««.«o «««o. «««. «E. --- 93%; 59532 awhNfl—Um O E m e— «m.« ««.« v: ««..o ««.o ««.c ««..« «««. --------.«.---.._ :Mwfi «2 «3 ««.« w: ««.« ««.« ««. ««. ««. ««. ««. ««. ««.« ««.« ««.« E..« ........... « ««u ««u 2i «« ««..« ««...« ««.. 3.. e... ««H ««.. ««.« «.3 «3 ««.« «.3 ........... « «« « S. « ««. « «w « «u v «« « «n « ««. « ««. o «a o ««.e ««.o ««.« ««.« ««.« ««.« ---- ....... « oEom hues—3:4 « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « « ---.--- 02 38:55 «sfiom «Izew «logo «Io>«.«m «loam «Lofig «loom «Imam ....... «35am «8m 72:sz :MQZ ucmF—«Ffiavv ac: rutz 633:3: 0—592“ use .5 ««.ok ad «535.5? .m «85% «a «Egcmcmmm no: .mZH «SS3: SA «tea 3 6333382 833wa QGWD «««.fiww 2mm» 2%: 23 «ex sueQzIdm «393. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 54 85 8»... szv I.“ 5»: H.3- 65 a; GE :2. 85 no.“ 65 :3 67: 85 HHHH .... as: k .32 um» va a: mop; gm oNH. .MwZ «83356 H5225: wan—om vaN HE. oNv mnm NmN.H va aNH.H , :w ----- coma—~33 vuawcflm Emuhafl< mveém $9.3m nmwé: pvamw pNv.wwm.H www.mmH mnofipu; ammdg -- 9330: 55?» uwuauni «0 55m 535 wadN vvavHJ oHN.HoH. ooo.omN.H waJmmé NHb.Hbm wNH.NHn.N v3.3 -- $53 ”~waan why-Hanan we 55m flaws $13 33.3 Smdm mwréw 25.: 53.3 Ewan . cow.wH - -------------- :35 SmNH comma 81mm.- oowsvm oonén 8de 254m codaw 25.3. aoHdv 2.5.3. 25.3 933%" 3me 2: mH 3qu -- ----- - m 3de 3» «H oom.mm 89mm ocNdm coNdm 23.3 ocHJw 25.3. oodwv ccflmv 25.3 8er 25.3 25.3 25.: - --------- - N 93.3 cow.NH oomNm oofimm .5qu ocwém ooadw oomdw oofig 25.3 81: 25.3 93.3 oohHm egg: 8de ----------- H 330m :2— Amzv SH. szv NoN Amzv mNa. Amzv 3m. Amzv me 573 Nd Amz; and Amzv m5... ------------ 2»: k .sz mam. .MeZ .sz «KN. HmN. mHm. .mwz --------- :omautrmc Sign? Eton EN. m5. Nam. wow. vow. NmH. mam. umN. ......... :33va . mica—Eon Haomuflan< .55. «.NN. H28. on? EN. mus. mcmo. Ewe. -- 3:08— £5?» mugs—Um «0 Sam flaw: NNHo. va. Nwmo. bHN. now. 3:. wwN. H35. --- $53: .5233 5.35va mo 55m H232 :3 «tom 3.... EM” 2.x m; mm... HmH .............. 532 mad HH.w H.wN wéu an; m: 5H. 3N wH.w mod. mmN wwN mad 2:~ NH; eH.H ----------- m 56 Him 5.x 9% SJ $4. 3.” 23 S.m 56 3”.” mm.» mm}. «H... H: 5. - .......... u and 2..» «an 1mm :3. mud m3. 3.” 36 m3 8.” a.” 8..“- Sé 3H N»: - .......... H 2.53 Elm—Cam 35 no». 65 end 65 $9 85 a: Amv Q: 673 mg 65 «3. Am»: 38. ............ 3%: k .32 wmmo. .32 2:. SH. ammo. .§2 .32 -- ...... .553wa Eénsm 23$ 32. $3. MHmo. memo. ammo. 53. mec. 35. --------- :2:ng Misc—5am Eumffidfi< 33¢. «.25. mwmoo. $8. $89. 33. $3. mmoo. -.-- $58. 54:3 auasvm we Sam :32 mvoco. NcHo. - Nmuco. amNo. pHNo. .38. 38. N25. -- 833A :33an 3.353 .H0 55m 532 mNbd no.”V «EH MEN .3: va «NH and -------------- 53: :3. 2:. H3. 2:. SH 3H HNN SN 33 SH SH SH mug «NH 3m. 3s: :1 ....... m car. 2:. 3.... Ed 54 SH and 3N . EH SH $4 34 «NH 34 o3. 3v. .1. ....... N SS. :55 H3. 23 SH SH «in fig 3H 8N 3H $.H wag BA :56 ond ........... H wagon SEEP—um— Amzv «3. szv moa. Amzw aHm. szv va Amzv 3N Amzv «Ham szv 54.. 873 Sn. ------------ 033 k .muz .u-Z .uez m3. m3. m3. mum. .uwz -1 ...... Essa; whafinaaw £30m EH. 3o. wNH. 5w. mum. NNH. mmH. 5m. 3- ...... 53.22% vuavnflm 1833a:< «no. moo. 39. man. mNb. m8. wmo. 3N. --- @238— 55:9 wmhazdm «0 Sum :aws HHo. moo. ace. wNm. minH Nmo. HmN. m5. -- 3—32— 563$... mwndsam we Eflm :50: wwé wand Nmé HNV wéH w.wH wad MA: -------------- flaws 93 ,3; SH. Sm. mad 3d 93 «A v.3 95 3: 3: $4. 3: «.3 5d ........... m EN 2: can. 2.». $6 23 way-v Q: 93 9E WM: 9.3 was 3: 93 23 ........... N 3N 3H ond owmd meg. Nwé va Q: «.mH «.mH m.wH v.3 36 and 2: a: ----------- H 2.30m :35 Amzv 3% Amy Q: Amzv SN 57: SH Amzv omH . Amzv moH Amy: bNN Amzv mco. ------- --- omega k mm..." mvd 3H 3% SH mvm. w; .Mmz ......... 53.32% Sufism Exam 3.“ and mm: mm.» EN EN pmé aH.m --------- 5.3ng “Eda—Sam EQSEGE< vuaameaeDIEEEeuH—D N H N H N H N H N H N H N H N H ------ oz manozndfl HIEUM HIEm HIOAO HIO>~Hm HIOQm HIV-v; Hloom Hlfiom -- «lb—flaw xoofl Avwncmaaoovlgfifiuss .S& 3.33 S .mvgwggw 33%»; mwmb «mom-Sm H3: 3»: 2: .Sx Eagldm "55.8 5 5 INTERCALIBRATION 0F 17 STANDARD SILICATES sack u< N 635R ¢< 2 . a ”N2. . 622 N5. 622 8.2 622 2.2 622 «mm... 622 EN 522 EN. HH-HH---- £22 E 522 M252. 22 52.5 38. £8. SN. .2202 EN. .uw2 - Ewanflomawfimvm w2m. 2223.. 38. SN. 22». EN. Em. NMN. --------- :ozursv 2:555,” 232K233 mwN. $2.2. $2.25. .33. $8. 88. 32. 22.3. -Whazaflfiwnfinmfig 2 22m 2232.. N3. N32 N2. 228. 52. SN? pmN. 53. -2“ 8&3 :3an .33 mo E: :32 322 22.222 35 22.2 N22 32 2.2.2 3.2. ............. - :82 N22 2.222 2.25 22.2..» 22.22 2.2. 2.2.2 ”2.2 2.2.2 2.2.2 m.N2 N22 ma :2 £2. 2.2.2. --------.-- m 2.22 2.22 mg N62. 22.22 ”2.2. 23.». 2.2.” 22.22 2.2 a.N2 ”.22 22.22 232 was 3.2. .1. ...... - N N52 322 2.22». 3.2.. 3.2. «Na 2N.m 8N 2.1 232 322 w.N2 2.2 2.2.2 22.2. 222.» ------ ..... 2 £282 222-2220.; 29 N2: 622 E. 522 SN? 62. 8a. 622 and 6., 2.3: $22 32. -l ........ - 322 .2 2222. .32 .262 .32 82. £8. 32 -- ....... 52362. 2.2.2.532 23022 SN... 38. EN. 2N2. $8. 3%. 3.2. --------- 28:352. 22.23.2253 Emuh2¢=< 2288. «.38. vao. .38. 22.228. 389. $2.22 1.. 32392 5.2223 meGSUm HO En—m £602 32. N38. N28. $8. 38. SN? 8N8. --- $2322 .2353 mas—222m Ho E2222 flaws 2N N3. 2222 3.2 mg 22.... 2.2.2. :1 ..... 1... 53:2 .222 2.2 SN 2.2 3. 3. 8.2 3.2 25.2 $2 v2.2 82 S. 3. .22.. ON. ......... -- N .222 .222 EN EN 2m. 3. $2 2N2 3.2 22.2 No: 2.2.. mm. em. 8. «2.. -- ......... N .292 2.2 SN NN.N. 2.23 2.2.... 3.2 $2 «N2 22.2 2.2. 23 £6 222.2. 3.: an... ---- ....... 2 3532 E53209 52V 22.” 522 mg. 822 2.8. 622 EN. 6.2. $2., 522 3N Amy I: 82. N22 ........ 1.. £292 .2 ”one. .52 .52 .uwz .2202 23.8. .33. NNS. --------- 25225222. 2:82:23,“ 23° 2526. Nov. 2325. $2. 2N2. 88. EN... 33. -1 ...... 52:232. 22 . . . . 22:22:53 2.3223525. 3N8. «2N ENE $8 32° 82.8. 238. 38:. .1. $523 522:3 . . . 5.252225 «0 55m flaws 5.2.8 52 N88 N28? 38. 32°. N238. £28. -1 822292 :33»:— mcuuflnfi o 55m : $5 9222 2.5 $5 8.: :3 $6 NN.o --------.2.---- :uwwm cm. «22. 32 22.2.2 2.. 5. on. 2.22. am. N2... 22.. 3. 2.2.. mm. 2. 2N. - ...... ---- m qu can a”: £22 £2” 22.” . S2 8. 3” 8.2 cm. 2.. 2e. S. «N. 2N. ........... N ma o 3 o 2 222 m 2.2 22. o E. o 2.2 o N: S o 8.2. $5 3.5 3.2. $5 «N5 22.: ----- ...... 2 ogom EESIGE 522 com. 822 22.2 Amy 2.2.22 62. mp2 67: E; 822 $22. 622 23.2 5 v NN2. ............ o. .2 .mmz $8. NNN. “mm. 2.5. 252. SN. 2 $2 ......... :osmwich ha 2.— 0 N22. N2No. ES. 222.. N2». 32. 232.. $2. {ilwldnuwwaiwfim . . . . .2: 22322 2 .2 a: 322. $25 N88 NON NwN. 38. 52. N28. :2... “32332252234‘ . . . . madman a 8:6 :nw N22: 258 32 N32 N2». N2. SN. 33:. --- $232” 59532.2 . £22. . . 255 8.22 9N» 232 2.2.2 2222 w: -mwwmmmmmw.mmn ”WNW“ 28.2. 2:..2. S. 3.. omnm Saw 2.2m N22 232 2.22 262 2.62 922 22.22 5.2. $2. .......... - N 32.2. 222.2. N2. 5. 8.2 Sum RN... 222 2Hw2 ”.2: 2.52 :2 2.22 2.22 2.3. 8.2. --- ....... - N 222 2. E 2. 5 o 3 o Ma 22 22 a a Na N N» 2. 2 2.222 3: 2.22 2.22 :2 :22. 223 ------!--- 2 carom EEE—eum Amzv omH. Amzv pad Amzw mad Amzv 8.2. .wzy N2..~.. Amy «.mN2 Amzv SN. A . vunuinnluu- . . . . mzv «a» o.— a2 32 cm 2. m 3 22.8 8.2. v.52 .32 .52 ...... - nomaawgw k 2.22 2.2...” 2.: N228. 222.» 2.2. 22.22 22.22 {iiwwluuwwwawmvwfi 22.2 2.22 mam 382.. EN 2.NN NmN No.3 --w..2a2hw2flw.21.o.22fi223 . . . . mwhfifivu 0 Sin :8 N NN a 2m 32 :58 a 3 26 N22. 222$ --- 823%— 595352 $2 . 35 . 3.» $26 22.3 2.2% 2.3 2.8 -mwmm=mwmw.mmn “mm: m: 8N m.3 are wuam Naov 2. 2.22. «do «.22. Ede 26w v.5 92. wéw oéb -uuu---:-n a S “MM MM“ MW...“ 222.... Ba 33 2.. 2.2.. in 2.8 82 3.2 2.3 :2. 2.22. 2.3 ...... N m m w an 2 av 22 o 22 o n 2. N3 2;» :5m 32» 92° «.3 2.2:. ---------.- 2 3.2822 5:23.252 N 2 N 2 N 2 N N 2 N N -- I n I . 2 N -:-- 32 282.222 2 2,2022 2 2,2,5 2 920 2.0322 2625 2:052 2.8m Tmum ------- ofifiam 2822 302222222208'22852: .222 3.322 22.2 622.22.822.32» 33.22.: MGQD «3.2.23. 22.2» S»: 2: 3x Ssfil .wm 22.22249. 56 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 59.-—Deviations, in percent, between the new and the selected data of the‘pfimarfi'standards [The entries were calculated using the formula: 100~ [selected data (table 56) minus new data (table 57) ]/selected data] Sample A Element W—l G—l BCR—l G—2 AGV—l SP—l PCC—l DTS—l GSP-l r Fe ___________ —-—1 49 + 12.2 + 1.48 + 0.27 -——3.20 —5.21 ———3.42 —2.74 —4-61 Ba ___________ ___ —15.8 +25.5 --1.05 + 14.2 + 5.76 ___ ___ +1.26 Ce ___________ ___. —20.3 ——.10 —21.9 -——11.0 + 15.0 __'_ ___ —7.63 Co ___________ +11 0 —4.17 +3.85 +6.14 +7.14 +7.45 +8.11 +7.20 —2.93 Cr ___________ +6.82 ___ +35.4 ___ —-72.5 +.87 +4.18 -—1.23 ___ Cs ___________ +30.8 —24.0 —1.67 + 14.1 —-1.60 —4.93 ___ ___ +292 Eu ___________ —9.26 ——24.6 —12.8 —17.2 ——17.1 +2.07 ___ ___ +9.84 Hf ___________ +10 4 —30.6 +8.58 —7.52 +8.19 +2.09 ___ ___ —10.14 Rb ___________ _ __ —65.7 ___ —27.5 + 24.9 —6.86 ___ ___ +3.86 Sb ___________ ————5.24 —11.2 +45.8 ___ +2.15 +14.6 +14.9 ___. ——7.87 . -——22.2 + 1.49 —1.52 + .81 +3.64 + 1.27 +1.12 +5.96 + 1.67 +38.2 -—-14.7 + 18.1 ——1.94 ___ ___ +39.6 —47.5 +6.19 ——27.9 —19.5 ___ ___ ___ —18.1 —8.08 —3.99 ——19.7 —11.9 —19.3 ___ ___ —8.05 REDUCTION OF DATA FOR THE NEW STANDARDS The concentration of each element in the new standards was defined as: where Xi,- is the concentration (in parts per mil- lion), and A“- is the time-corrected activity of the ith element in the jth new standard. Si, denotes the mean specific activity of the ith element as calculated from the primary standards, and W,- is the weight (in grams) of the jth new standard. The data for the new standards, plus statistical esti- mates when available, are given in table 58. DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY The new data for the primary and new silicate standards are presented in tables 57 and 58, re- spectively. Since all the data were obtained by re- calibration of the primary standards, it is of in- terest to compare the data obtained by our recalib- ration method to the literature data which we have selected for these standards. Table 59 lists the dif- ferences between the selected and the new values. Iron, cobalt, and scandium show the smallest dif— ferences between the two data sets. Co and Sc have very good counting statistics because of their high neutron capture cross sections, and for most sam- ples the data selected were obtained by techniques similar to those of the present study. Iron, although less favorable for INAA, is a major element in all of the standards, and its determination by either chemical or physical means should yield similar re- sults. Relatively large differences were found for the two oldest standards, G—1 and W—l, and these include the highest deviation for Co in W—l, for Sc in G—1 and for Fe in G—l. We do not think that these differences are the result of heterogeneities in the samples. These two samples have been used for a long time in our laboratory, and during this time the samples may have been contaminated by fre— quent reopening and sampling. The standard pot- tery sample (SP—1), for which only one set of data entirely based on INAA was available from the originator of the artificially made standard (Perl- man and Asaro, 1969), appears to show the least difference except for Ce, Sb and Th. The statistical analysis of the new USGS stand- ards (table 58) demonstrates that all samples may be considered homogeneous for most elements. The mean sum of squares for portions taken from dif- ferent bottles of the same sample is not signifi- cantly larger than that for portions sampled from the same bottle at the 95-percent confidence level. There are a few exceptions to this rule: Tb is hete- rogeneously distributed at the 1-percent level in bot- tles of both SCo—l and STM—l; a similar hetero- geneity was found for Ta in SCo—l at the 5-percent level; Rb is heterogeneous in MAG—1, Sc in QLO—l, Eu in SDC-l, and Cr in STM-l, all at the 5-percent level. In all but one analysis (Se in QLO—l), these heterogeneities occurred for elements having rela- tively poor counting statistics, whereas statistically “better” elements in the same standards did not show the same deviations, and it is hard to decide whether these heterogeneities are real. In any case, even if they are real, they may have resulted from minor contamination of selected elements during the processing of the standards rather than by large- scale sampling errors. Had the latter occurred, its effects might have been more evident by a larger proportion of conclusions of heterogeneity. Our variance analysis, which is based solely on the new USGS standards, is independent of the values adopted for the primary standards and thus is valid for the new standards in any case. INTERCALIBRATION OF 17 STANDARD SILICATES 57 The new values given for both the primary and the new standards are self-consistent, and we be- lieve they can be reproduced in other laboratories, provided the counting geometry is identical for both standards and unknowns. The wide chemical and mineralogical composition spectrum covered by the standards used in our study enables one to choose suitable reference samples for future work that match more closely both the matrix of the un- known samples and the concentrations of the ele- ments to be determined. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The many helpful suggestions of Karl T. Ture- kian of Yale University, in whose laboratory this work was performed, are greatly appreciated. The authors wish to thank L. Chan, J. Corliss, and D. P. Kharkar for their valuable advice. The technical assistance of T. Eisensmith, J. Hasbrouck, and M. Applequist is gratefully acknowledged. This work was supported by the US. Atomic Energy Commis- sion grant, No. AT(11—1)3573. REFERENCES Flanagan, F. J ., 1969, US. Geological Survey standards—II. First compilation of data for the new U.S.G.S. rocks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 81—120. Flanagan, F. J‘., 1970, Sources of geochemical standards——II: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, p. 121—125. Fleischer, M., 1969, US. Geological Survey standards—I. Additional data on rocks G—1 and W—l, 1965-1967: Geo- chim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 65—80. Gordon, G. E., Randlxe, Keith, Goles, G. G., Corliss, J. B., Be‘eson, M. H., and Oxley, S. S., 1968; Instrumental acti- vation analysis of standard rocks with high-resolution 'y-ray detectors: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 32, p. 369—396. Perlman, I. and Asaro, F., 1969, Pottery analysis by neutron activation: Archaeomeitry, v. 11, p. 21—52. Schmitt, R. A., Linn, T. A. and Wakita, H., 1970, The deter- mination of fourteen common elements in rocks via se- quential instrumental activation analysis: Radiochim. Acta, v. 13, p. 200—212. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS BISMUTH CONTENTS OF USGS ROCK SAMPLES RGM—l AND BHVO—l By P. M. SANTOLIQUIDO 1 and W. D. EHMANN 1 ABSTRACT The bismuth contents of three bottles of two new USGS standard rocks have been determined by thermal neutron acti- vation analysis and radiochemical separation and counting of the Po210 daughter activity of Bi“. Mean values of 217 ppb Bi and 11.2 ppb Bi were obtained for RGM—l and BHVO—l, re- spectively. Analyses of the variance show that the bottles of each sample are homogeneous for their bismuth contents. No estimates can be made for the standard deviations among bottles of either sample because the bottle variances are nega- tive, but the coefficient of variation for the analyses of both samples averages approximately 12 percent. As part of a program to acquire analytical data for the eventual standardization of a new series of USGS standard rock samples described in this volume, we have determined the bismuth contents of samples RGM—l and BHVO—l. Three bottles of each sample were received, and two portions from each bottle were analyzed for bismuth by thermal neutron activation analysis. The six portions from the two samples were analyzed in random order. Bismuth was determined by alpha-particle counting of the Po210 daughter activity of the Bi210 produced by ther- mal neutron irradiation of the samples for 100 to 200 hours at fluxes ranging from 1 to 5><1013 neu- trons cm—2 sec *1. The University of Missouri Re- search Reactor, Columbia, Mo., was used for these irradiations. Rock powder portions of 500-800 mg were weighed into clean quartz vials that were then heat sealed for irradiation. High-purity bismuth metal was dissolved in concentrated HNOS, and a standard flux-monitor solution was prepared on a weight basis by successive dilution with 4 M HN03. Aliquots of this standard solution were evaporated onto 200 mg of Specpure SiO2 in quartz Vials for irradiation and chemical processing identical to that used for the rock samples. At least 20 days were allowed to elapse between the end of irradiation and the beginning of the polonium separation to permit essentially com- plete decay of Bi210 to P0“. The irradiated sample was then transferred to a Teflon dish, and an aliquot of a standard solution of P0208 was added to permit the determination of the chemical yield of the sep- aration procedures. The sample was then dissolved with H2SO4-HF followed by aqua regia. The aqueous solution obtained was treated with hydroxylamine, sodium citrate, and sulfur dioxide gas and was ad- justed to pH 4 with dilute NH40H. Polonium was plated out of the solution onto a silver metal disk, without the use of applied poten- tial, for a period of 4 hours at a temperature of 65°C. After it was cleaned, the silver disk was counted with a surface-barrier silicon detector coupled to a multichannel pulse-height analyzer. A more detailed description of the chemical procedures may be found in Santoliquido (1971). These pro- cedures have also been used to analyze six older USGS standard rocks (AGV—l, BCR—l, DTS—l, G—2, GSP—l, PCC—l) and a large collection of chondritic meteorites (Santoliquido and Ehmann, 1972). The data for the rocks analyzed in this study are given in table 60. TABLE‘60.—N'eutron activation determinations and estimates of bismuth in USGS standard rocks RGM—l and BHVO—I [d.f., degrees of freedom; Neg., negative bottle variance. Conclusions from the analysis of variance. The calculated F ratio was tested against Fo.9s(d.f. 2,3)=9.55. NS, not significant] Rook Sample _____________ RGM—l BHVO—l Bottle No _________________ 57/26 51/1 57/21 19/10 22/5 62/2 Bismuth ___________ ppb-.-- 201 208 m6 11.0 13.2 11.4 211 262 196 11.4 10.2 9.9 Mean ___________________ 217.3 11.18 Standard deviation: Bottles (d.f.=2) ______ Neg Neg. Error (d.f.=3) ....... 25.5 1.33 Coefficient of variation for error ________ percent____ 11.8 12.3 Conclusions _______________ NS NS The data obtained were treated by the analysis of variance with the bottles of either sample as the 1Department of Chemistry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky. 40506. 59 60 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS single variable of classification, and a summary of the estimates is given in table 60. For both samples, the mean sum of squares for bottles was less than the “within” mean sum of squares that we equate with the analytical error. Hence, we could not calcu- late a standard deviation for the bottles of either sample, since the subtraction involved in the separa- tion of average mean squares (as shown, for ex- ample, by Koch and Link, 1970, table 5.8) results in a negative variance for bottles. Since the variation attributable to bottles was not greater than the ana- lytical variation, these analyses suggest that bismuth in the bottles of either sample is distributed homo- geneously among the bottles. The coefficients of vari- ation (analytical error) for RGM—l and BHVO—l are 11.8 percent and 12.3 percent, respectively. In comparison with our analyses (Santoliquido and Ehmann, 1972) of the old set of USGS standard rocks, it may be noted that the bismuth content of basalt BHVO—l is only approximately one-third of that for basalt BCR—l. The rhyolite RGM—l con- tains approximately four times as much bismuth as the standard granite G—2 that previously repre- sented the highest bismuth content among the USGS standard rocks. The factor of 20 range in bismuth content of these two new standard rocks and the ap- parent homogeneity of the samples should make them valuable reference standards for analysts de- termining bismuth in geologic materials. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported in part by US. Atomic Energy Commission Contract AT—(40—1)—2670. The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of F. J. Flanagan for the statistical treatment of the data. REFERENCES Koch, G. 8., Jr., and Link. R. F., 1970, Statistical analysis of geological data: New York, John Wiley and Sons, 375 p. Santoliquido, P. M., 1971, The determination of bismuth in meteorites and rocks by neutron activation analysis: Lex- ington, Kentucky Univ. Dept. of Chemistry, Ph. D. dis- sert. Santoliquido, P. M., and Ehmann W. D., 1972, Bismuth in stony meteorites and standard rocks: Geochim. et Cos- mochim. Acta, v. 36, no. 8, p. 897—902. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS DETERMINATION OF URANIUM AND THORIUM IN USGS STANDARD ROCKS BY THE DELAYED NEUTRON TECHNIQUE By H. T. MILLARD, JR. ABSTRACT Uranium and thorium were determined in 12 USGS stand- ard rocks by the delayed neutron technique. Duplicates from three bottles of each standard rock were analyzed in random order. The averages are: Parts per million Thorium 5.37 5.26 Uranium The thorium and uranium contents of the bottles of samples, except SCo—l, may beaccepted as homogeneous at F035. The uranium content of 800—1 may be declared heterogeneous at F0415 or accepted as homogeneous at F0375. INTRODUCTION The concentrations of uranium and thorium were determined in the new USGS standard rocks (BHVO—l, MAG—1, QLO-l, RGM-l, SC-o—l, SDC— 1, SGR-l, and STM—l) as well as in four of the older USGS standard rocks (AGV—l, BCR—l, G—2, and GSP—l). The analytical technique used was that of neutron activation-delayed neutron counting (Amiel, 1962; Dyer and others, 1962; Gale, 1967), Which relies upon the property of the fission daugh- ters of uranium and thorium of continuing to emit “delayed” neutrons for a short time after their for- mation. The fact that these neutrons can be detected and counted with good discrimination and efficiency makes the technique both specific and sensitive. It allows rapid, precise, and nondestructive determina- tions of uranium to about 0.1 ppm and thorium to about 1 ppm in a 10-g sample of rock. Lower detec— tion limits for uranium can be realized by recycling the same sample several times and thus improving the counting statistics. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS STANDARD SOLUTIONS A uranium standard solution was prepared from National Bureau of Standards Standard Reference Material 950a Uranium Oxide (99.94 percent U308). The isotopic ratio of this oxide, as determined by mass spectrometry, is U238/U235=137.8 (J. N. Rosholt, oral commun., 1972) and the solution con- tained 0.987 mg U/g solution if a stoichiometric composition is assumed for the oxide. The uranium concentration of the solution was also measured on two separate occasions by isotope dilution-mass spectrometry and found to be 0.982 and 0.998 mg U/g solution (Prijana and J. N. Rosholt, written commun., 1972). The value 0.982 was used. A thorium standard solution was prepared using reagent grade Th(N03)4-4H20. Assuming a stoichi- ometric composition for the nitrate, the solution con— tained 1.003 mg Th/g solution. This value was checked by isotope dilution-mass spectrometry, which gave 1.013 mg Th/g solution (Prijana, oral commun., 1972). PREPARATION AND CALIBRATION OF MONITORS The uranium monitor (500 ,ug U) was prepared from dunite powder (DTS—l) , which contains 3 ppb U and 10 ppb Th, by alternately adding powder and weighed aliquot portions of the uranium standard solution. This procedure resulted in a uniform dis- tribution of the uranium throughout the powder. A low-level thorium monitor (500 ,g Th) was pre- pared by the same procedure as the uranium moni- tor. A high-level thorium monitor (10,000 g Th) 61 62 was prepared by mixing dunite powder with a weighed portion of thorium oxide powder (99.9 per- cent pure, —100+325 mesh, Code 116, American Potash and Chemical Corp., Lindsay Chemical Divi- sion). Rather than relying entirely on the concentra- tion values for the standard solutions, we then cali- brated these monitors against a set of laboratory standard rocks using the delayed neutron technique. For most of these rocks, the uranium and thorium concentrations had been determined by isotope dilution-mass spectrometry, and their homogeneity had been established by delayed neutron analysis of carefully prepared splits. The results of this calibration are given in table 61. It was found necessary to increase the value of uranium in the uranium monitor by 3.8 percent from the value based on the concentration of the uranium standard solution in order to obtain better agree- ment between the delayed neutron values and the literature values for the standard rocks, that is, to make the average of the ratios of the delayed neu- tron values and the literature values closer to 1. The delayed neutron values shown in tables 61 and 64 were computed using this calibrated value for the uranium monitor. No adjustment was made in the value of the thorium monitor. This method of cali- bration results in the values used for the uranium and thorium monitors being dependent on determi- nations obtained by isotope dilution-mass spectrom- etry. PREPARATION OF SAMPLES Tared 2-dram polyethylene snap-cap vials were filled with the sample powders (6 to 10 g of sample), DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS were weighed, and were heat sealed. Two portions from each of three bottles were analyzed for each USGS standard rock. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TRIGA FACTOR The neutron fluxes available in the pneumatic tube facility of the Geological Survey TRIGA reactor (GSTR) are given in table 62. The vertical flux TABLE 62. —Neutron fluxes in the Geological Survey TRIGA reactor for pneumatic tube irradiations in the “G” ring, in neutrons per square centimeter per second [Valum are nominal fluxes 0.5 cm above the bottom of the rabbit. Data from W. M. Quam and T. M. Devore, E. G. and G., Inc. written com- mun, 1969] F1 Reactor power level “x 100 kW 1 MW Thermal ______________ 5.9)(10u 5.9X10“ Fast (>0.6 MeV) ______ 2.'7><1011 2.7X10" gradients at this position in the reactor are: ther- mal, 1.9 percent/cm, and fast, <0.7 percent/cm. Transit times for the polyethylene rabbits range from 6 seconds for an empty rabbit to 7 seconds for a rabbit containing a 10-g sample. The temperature coefficient for the uranium determination in this reactor was determined to be —0.43 percent/degree at 25°C and —0.30 percent/degree at 42°C, where the temperature is that of the water at the top of the reactor tank. This relatively large temperature coefficient requires that the temperature of the re- actor be held as constant as possible throughout a run. BF3 NEUTRON COUNTER The assembly used to count the delayed neutrons is similar to those described by Amiel (1962) and TABLE 61.—Calibration of uranium and thorium monitors against a set of laboratory standard rocks by the delayed neutron technique [In parts per million. Delayed neutron value: and litrature values] Mean (ppm)+coefiicient of variation (percent). 3. 8 percent from that calculated from the concentration of U in the U standard solution to achieve better agreement between the del y The value for the U monitor has be clidanged by neutron U Th Laborator standard rock ' Delayed . L' re Delayed y 13:31:: “at?" 25:21:: “at: __._._ Literature Literature Hinsdale basalt (Ds 29—B) _________ 0.84:6.0 1 0.88 0.954 3.4:8.7 1 3.5 0.971 BCR—l ___________________________ 1.75:2.9 2 1.73 1.012 5519.4 2 5.99 .918 GSP—l ___________________________ 2.50:1.0 3 2.4 1.042 107.411.]. 3 106 1.013 FF-4 _____________________________ 3.11:1.2 ‘ 3.07 1.013 10.4i3.2 ‘ 10.4 1.000 JNR—6379 ________________________ 7.73:3.0 5 7.59 1.018 3.2:65 5 3.01 1.063 RM—l ____________________________ 15.7:1.0 15.3 1.026 37535.5 5 37.7 .995 3633 _____________________________ 23.5:03 7 23.4 1.004 84.1 $4.1 7 82.0 1.026 G __.._ 31521.7 5 30.6 1.029 21+15 “ 22 .954 AEC—NBL—SO 39.9:1.0 9 40 .997 996+1. 3 9 1,000 .966 AEC-NBL—76 100.4:05 9 101 .994 ________________ ____ AEC—NBL—l ________________ ' ______ 229:0.7 ’5 225 1.017 ________________ ____ Average ___________________________________________________ 1.010 .990 1 ID— MS (isotope dilution- -mass spectrometric), Doe and others (1969). 2ID—MS, M. Tataumoto (oral communn 1968) 3 ID—MS, Peterman and others (1967). 4 ID—MS, Rosholt and others (1966). 5 ID—MS. J. N. Rosholt (oral commun., 1969) 6 ID—MS, Rosholt and Noble (1969). '7 ID—MS, Rosholt and others, (1970). 9 Gamma-counting, C. Bunker (oral commun., 1970). 9 Synthetic standard, prepared value. DETERMINATION Gale (1967). When returned from the reactor, the rabbit containing the sample is allowed to drop into the center of an array of six 1°BF3 detectors (each 2 in. in diameter by 28 in. long, sensitive length=26 in. fill pressure=70 cm Hg). The array, which has a radius of 12.7 cm, is completely embedded in paraffin except for the volume around the rabbit, which con- tains a 6.4-cm-thick lead shield to reduce the biologi- cal hazard from gamma radiation. A 0.08-cm-thick cadmium sheet and 7.6 cm of borated paraffin (25 percent H3B03 by weight) are used to shield the detectors from external neutrons. The efficiency of the counter for neutrons is estimated to be 15 per- cent, and the'background, which is probably due to cosmic ray interactions within the array, averages 4.0 cps. The effect of the gamma flux from 2.3-min Al28 in the sample was found to be negligible; the Al in a 12—g sample containing 15 percent A1203 is equivalent to less than 0.017 ppm U (3-sigma limit). IRRADIATION AND COUNTING PROCEDURE The samples and monitors are first irradiated for 1 minute at a power level of 100 kW using a bare pneumatic tube terminus in the GSTR. The activity is allowed to decay for 20 seconds, and the sample is counted for 1 minute in the BF3 counter. After all samples have been run, a cadmium-lined pneumatic tube terminus is installed in the GSTR, and the samples and monitors are reirradiated' at a power level of 1 MW and are counted as in the first irradi- ation. The cadmium reduces the flux of slow neu- trons and thus increases the count rate due to thor- ium relative to the rate due to uranium. A boron- lined counter is used to detect the passage of the rabbit into and out of the reactor (Helfer, 1971). This timing signal and the counting signals are transmitted to a minicomputer that stores the data on magnetic tape and paces the operation of the system so a sample can be run every 90 seconds. The analytical parameters for a single cycle of two irradiations and countings are listed in table 63. CORRECTIONS TO THE DATA The dead time of the counting system at high count rates is dominated by the recovery time of the BF3 detectors. The correction was found (Steven- son, 1966, p. 112) to follow the relation: CPS: _ CpSo cpso _ 1—- (tchso) where t is 7.8 as, cps is counts per second, and the subscripts t and 0 indicate the true and observed counting rates, respectively. 0F URANIUM AND THORIUM 63 TABLE 63 r-Aualytical parameters for the determinatwu of uranium and thorium using one cycle of two irradwtious and countings with the delayed neutron system Reactor power level 1 MW (Cd-lined terminus) U Th U Th Parameters 100 kW ________ cps/#8-- 1.24 0.0173 1. 00 0.142 4.0:025 4. 0+0. 25 4. 0+0. 25 Sensitivity Counter background __cps_- 4. 0+0. 25 Weight of element equivalent to counter background _________ #3-- 3.2:020 ________________ 28i1.8 3-sigma detection limits equivalent to counter background: Weight of element_p.g__ 0.60 ________________ 5.4 Concentration in 1—2 sample _______ ppm._ 0.60 ________________ 5.4 Concentration in 10—g _______ ppm__ 0.54 sample ________________ The reaction 170 (n,p)“N causes an interference during the second irradiation due to emission of delayed neutrons by 17N. This interference results in erroneously high values for the thorium concentra- tion. The magnitude of this interference is equal to 0.30 cps/g oxygen, which, in turn, is equivalent to 0.89 ppm Th for a 10-g sample containing 44 percent oxygen. CALCULATIONS The calculations are performed off-line by the minicomputer using the data for the two irradia- tions stored on magnetic tape. After the counter background has been subtracted and the dead time and oxygen corrections applied, the following simul- taneous equations are solved for the weights of uranium (wt U) and thorium (wt Th) : (611$)1=(wt U) (cps/Mg U)1+ (wt Th) (cps/Mg Th)» (‘cnS)2=(wt U) (cps/Mg U)2+ (wt Th) (CPS/fig Th)2- The subscripts 1 and 2 denote the irradiation, and cps/pg U and cps/Mg Th are computed from the counting data for the U and Th monitors, respec— tively. In addition, the standard deviations for wt U and wt Th are computed from the counting statis- tics, and the results are then reduced to (ppm U) i C.V.cs and (ppm Th) iC.V.c,, where C.V.C, is the co- efficient of variation based on the counting statistics. and RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The concentration-s of uranium and thorium de- termined in the USGS standard rocks are listed in table 64. The values for both portions from each of the three bottles for each standard are shown. The coefficient of variation for a single determination, based on counting statistics, is indicated along with the mean of the six determinations for each stan- dard rock. The coefficients of variation based on the scatter about the means are not shown in the table, 64 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 64.—Concentrations of uranium and thorium in USGS standard rocks [C.V.cs is the coefficient of variation based on counting statistics for a single determination] U Th Standard Bottle C.v.cs C.V.cs 1"00k (split/position) Ppm (percent) Mean Ppm (percent) Mean ppm ppm G—2 _____________________ 50/19 2.13, 2.21 5 2.15 23.4, 25.6 5 24.0 85/29 2.25, 2.07 24.3, 23.9 23/19 2.12, 2.10 23.6, 23.2 GSP-l ___________________ 66/26 2.67, 2.55 5 2.56 105.6, 103.9 2 106.9 36/31 2.48, 2.68 105.7, 108.4 71/03 2.45, 2.54 108.9, 109.1 AGV—l ___________________ 99/03 2.07, 1.94 4 2.05 4.03, 5.98 20 5.37 86/20 2.10, 2.18 5.49, 4.74 38/07 2.05, 1.96 5.47, 6.51 BCR—l ___________________ 68/05 1.83, 1.80 5 1.81 5.15, 5.36 17 5.26 39/28 1.78, 1.76 5.76, 6.40 68/16 1.93, 1.81 3.87, 5.05 STM—l ___________________ 42/09 9.18, 9.08 3 9.10 25.8, 2.67 4 26.6 38/19 9.02, 9.15 27.5, 26.5 35/29 9.27, 8.87 25.0, 28.4 RGM—l __________________ 27/11 5.70, 5.81 3 5.85 11.1, 15.3 13 13.1 01/20 5.90, 5.99 12.3, 12.4 10/06 5.86, 5.82 13.4, 14.2 QLO—l ___________________ 02/24 2.14, 2.04 5 2.01 2.56, 3.60 37 3.24 61/20 1.96, 1.84 4.08, 4.08 28/20 2.02, 2.08 2.72, 2.38 SCo—l ___________________ 29/02 3.08, 3.12 4 3.15 10.15, 9.68 10 9.52 63/12 3.29, 3.24 9.11, 9.12 45/15 3.12, 3.05 8.82, 10.24 MAG—1 __________________ 29/06 2.85, 2.74 4 2.82 12.4, 13.0 10 12.2 20/12 2.86, 2.71 11.7, 12.6 2/22 2.98, 2.78 10.9, 12.7 SDC—l ___________________ 49/19 3.21, 2.97 4 3.12 10.7, 12.9 10 11.4 116/32 3.14, 3.15 11.0, 11.3 44/20 3.16, 3.12 11.6, 10.8 BHVO—l _________________ 8/04 0.45, 0.43 11 .48 0.92, 1.82 60 .90 7/32 .62, .42 .17, 1.55 .90 24/09 .49, .44 .45, .52 SGR—l ___________________ 18/04 5.58, 5.84 3 5.60 6.37, 6.91 22 7.66 24/23 5.34, 5.55 9.18, 9.83 40/24 5.90, 5.41 4.91, 8.76 but in all cases they agree quite well with those based on counting statistics. The values for BCR—l and GSP—l, which appear in both tables 61 and 64, are for different bottles but do agree Within count- ing statistics. Table 65 summarizes the results of one-way anal- yses of variance applied to the uranium and thorium data in table 64. According to the model used, the “Within bottle” mean square is an estimate of the analytical variance and the “between bottle” mean square is an estimate of the analytical variance plus n times the bottle variance, where n (=2) is the number of determinations per bottle. The F ratios calculated for both elements in all rocks, except uranium in SCo—l, do not exceed 17‘0.95 in the tables. Therefore, the bottles for these samples are homoge- nous for uranium and thorium at F035. Similarly, the uranium in bottles of 800—1 is heterogeneous at FM, or homogeneous at FM”. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Colleagues who helped in this work include the reactor staff of the GSTR; A. J. Bartel, who pre- pared the samples for irradiation; P. J. Aruscavage, who helped run the samples; and F. J. Flanagan, who calculated the analysis of variance. I am in— debted to V. J. Janzer and J. G. Hafi'ty for their many suggestions for improving the manuscript. DETERMINATION TABLE 65.—Estimates for uranium and thorium in USGS standard rocks [d.f., degrees of freedom. Neg., negative bottle variance. F ratio tested against 170.95 or 170.975. NS, not significant] Standard deviation M Between Within . Sample (11:13? (goalies) (soft-ties?) 1" ratio Uranium G-—2 __________ 2.15 Neg. 0.081 0.32 (NS) GSP—l _______ 2.56 eg. .102 .68 (NS) AGV—l _______ 2.05 0.059 .072 2.32 (NS) BCR—l _______ 1.81 .035 .051 1.92 (NS) STM—l _______ 9.10 Neg. .176 .06 (NS) RGM—l ______ 5.85 .085 .060 4.99 (NS) QLO—l _______ 2.01 .088 .068 4.30 (NS) SCo—l ________ 3.15 .096 .039 13.3 MAG—1 ______ 2.82 Neg. .112 .44 (NS) SDC—l _______ 3.12 Neg. .099 .19 (NS) BHVO—l _____ .48 Neg. .085 .47 (NS) SGR—l _______ 5.60 Neg. .242 .67 (NS) Thorium G—2 __________ 24.0 Neg. 0.927 0.72 (NS) GSP—l _______ 106.9 1.92 1.30 5.3 (NS) AGV—l _______ 5.37 Neg. .953 .64 (NS) BCR—l _______ 5.26 .709 .554 4.26 (NS) STM—l _______ 26.6 Neg. 1.49 .13 (NS) RGM—l _______ 13.1 Neg. 1.75 .35 (NS) QLO—l _______ 3.24 .710 .447 6.05 (NS) SCo—l ________ 9.52 Neg. .611 .85 (NS) MAG—1 _______ 12.2 Neg. .86 .56 (NS) SDC—l _______ 11.4 Neg. .973 .27 (NS) BHVO-l _____ .90 Neg. .673 .87 (NS) SGR—l _______ 7.66 1.126 1.609 1.98 (NS) REFERENCES Amie], S., 1962, Analytical applications of delayed neutron emission in fissionable elements: Anal. Chemistry, v. 34, p. 1683—1692. OF URANIUM AND THORIUM 65 Doe, B. R., Lipman, P. W., Hedge, C. E., and Kurasawa, Hajime, 1969, Primitive and contaminated basalts from the southern Rocky Mountains, U.S.A.: Contr. Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 21, p. 142—156. Dyer, F. F., Emery, J. F.,' and Leddicote, G. W., 1962, A comprehensive study of the neutron activation analysis of uranium by delayed-neutron counting: U.S. Atomic Energy Comm. Rept. ORNL—3342, 71 p. Gale, N. H., 1967, Development of delayed neutron technique as rapid and precise method for determination of ura- nium and thorium at trace levels in rocks and minerals, with applications to isotope geoohronology, in Radio- active dating and methods of low-level counting—IAEA- ICSU Symposium, Monaco, 1967, Proceedings: Vienna, Austria, Internat. Atomic Energy Agency, p. 431—452. Helfer, P. G., 1971, A precise timing system for pneumatical- ly transferred samples, in American Nuclear Society Re- actor Operations Division Conference on reactor operat- ing experience, Denver, 0010., Aug. 8—11, 1971: Am. Nuclear Soc. Trans, v. 14, supp. no. 2, p. 22—23. Peterman, Z. E., Doe, B. R., and Bartel, A. J., 1967, Data on the rock GSP—l (granodiorite) and the isotope—dilution method of analysis for Rb and Sr, in Geological Survey research 1967: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 575—B, p. B181—B186. Rosholt, J. N., Doe, B. R., and Tatsumoto M., 1966, Evolu- tion of the isotopic composition of uranium and thorium in soil profiles: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 77, p. 987— 1004. Rosholt, J. N., and Noble, D. C., 1969, Loss of uranium from crystallized silicic volcanic rocks: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 6, p. 268—270. ' Rosholt, J. N., Peterman, Z. E., and Bartel, A. J., 1970, U- Th-Pb and Rb-Sr ages in granite reference sample from southwestern Saskatchewan: Canadian Jour. Earth Sci., v. 7, p. 184——187. Stevenson, P. G., 1966, Processing of counting data: Natl. Acad. Sci.—Natl. Research Council Nuclear Sci. Ser. Rept. NAS—NS 3109, 167 p. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NE’W USGS ROCK STANDARDS THE DETERMINATION OF ANTIMONY, HAFNIUM, AND TANTALUM IN THE NEW USGS STANDARD. ROCKS By L. J. SCHWARZ and J. J. ROWE ABSTRACT The new USGS standard rocks, SGR—l, SDC—l, MAG—1, BHVO—l, QLO—l, RGM—l, STM—l, 800-1, and the older standard rocks, G—2, GSP—l, AGV—l and BCR—l, were anal- yzed for antimony, hafnium, and tantalum by instrumental neutron activation analysis. The analysis of variance shows that the three elements in the standard rock samples may be considered homogeneous at Fm except for sample MAG—1 for which antimony and hafnium may be declared homo- genous at Fem. The new USGS standard rocks, SGR—l, SDC—l, MAG—1, BHVO—l, QLO—l, RGM—l, STM—l. and SCo—l, and the older standard rocks, G—2, GSP-l, AGV—l, and BCR—l, were analyzed for antimony, hafnium, and tantalum by instrumental neutron ac- tivation analysis. These analyses were made as part of the program to establish values for the composi- tion of the standard rocks and to estimate the ho- mogeneity of the bottles, the variation between bottles, and the analytical error. The development of high-resolution Ge(Li) de- tectors has made the instrumental neutron activa- tion analysis a practical method for the determina- tion of many elements Without chemical separations. Although our procedure is not unique, the data here— in are valuable for the evaluation of comparability between laboratories. Variations between labora- tories using instrumental neutron activation analy- sis may be due to differences in instrumentation, preparation of standards, irradiation conditions, and data-handling techniques. Standard solutions were prepared from tantalum metal, hafnium dioxide, and potassium antimonyl tartrate hemihydrate. Monitors to be used as stan- dards for the irradiations were prepared by pipet- ting each standard solution onto about 0.1 g of Spec- pure SiO2 in a 2A;-dram polyethylene vial. Each monitor contained 10 pg of antimony and tantalum and 5 pg of hafnium. After being dried at 50°C, the polyvials were heat sealed. Two 0.3-g samples from each of three randomly selected bottles of each standard were weighed into 2[Lg-dram polyethylene vials and were then heat sealed. A random sequence was used for the weigh- ing of samples and the packing of irradiation rab- bits. Each rabbit contained six samples plus three monitors and was irradiated for 8 hours at the Na- tional Bureau of Standards reactor which has a flux of 5X10” neutrons cm—zs—l. Samples and monitors were allowed to cool for 4 weeks to permit short-lived isotopes to decay. Each sample was counted for 2.2 hours at a distance of 12.5 cm above a 10-percent efficient Ge(Li) de— tector (resolution=2.4 keV for the 1.33 MeV peak of Co“). Spectra were collected on a 4,096-channel multichannel analyzer and were transferred auto- matically to magnetic tape. Samples were changed automatically using a device designed and con- structed by us. The magnetic tape was read back into the analyzer, and selected portions of each spectrum were printed out on a line printer. The areas of pertinent peaks were calculated using Covell’s (1959) method. The area under the 1,690 keV peak for Sb‘“ was used for the calculation of antimony content. The 604 keV peak is subject to interference from Cs“ and Ir”, whereas the 1,690 keV peak is virtually interference free. The 482 keV peak for Hf181 was used for the determination of hafnium. The only interference encountered that might affect the re- sults is the 484 keV peak of Ir“. However, concen- trations of iridium are very low, and this interfer- ence may be disregarded. Although Gordon and others (1968) reported that the 67.7 keV peak for Ta182 is more sensitive than 67 68 the 1,221.3 keV peak, Hertogen and Gijbels (1971) found that the hafnium and gold X-rays interfered. The use of a low-energy photon detector for the measurement of the 67.7 keV peak was also subject to geometric and absorption problems for the sam- ple size (0.3 g) used for this study. The interfer- ences to the 1,221.3 keV peak of Ta182 from 17.4- hour Irm and 26.5-hour As76 are eliminated by the cooling time used. The entire suite of samples and standards were counted three times. Each result shown in table 66 is the average of the three counts. The results carry one additional significant figure for calculation pur- poses. They could be rounded at the discretion of the reader. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USG-S ROCK STANDARDS The analysis of variance for a single variable of classification was made on the data to yield the esti- mates and conclusions that are also given in table 66 for antimony, hafnium, and tantalum. The square root of the mean sum of squares for Within bottles has been equated to analytical error. Dixon and Massey (1951, p 154) show the population values estimated by each mean sum of squares, and we have calculated, wherever possible, the bottle vari- ances from which are derived the standard devia- tions. If the mean sum of squares for within bottles is larger than the mean sum of squares for between bottles, a negative bottle variance will result, which is meaningless. This occurrence is noted by “Neg.” in the table. TABLE 66.——Determinations of antimony, hafnium, and tantalum in USGS standard rocks [In parts per million. d.f., degrees of freedom. ”Neg.," a negative bottle variance. Conclusions from analysis of variance (Fans); NS, not significant] Standard deviation Coemcient Standard Bottles Mean - - Co cl - rock 1 2 3 (ppm) (133313;) ((53:02) °f§§§g§§3n n “mom Antimony AGV-l _____ 2.3% if? 4.;2 4.17 Neg. 0.159 3.8 NS . . 4. 3 BCR—l ______ .353 .69 .40 .49 Neg. .130 26.5 NS . .43 .47 G—2 ________ .087 090 .093 .08 Neg‘. .027 35.1 NS .073 .086 .029 GSP—l ______ 3.218 2.22 2.94 3.22 Neg. .349 10.9 NS . 3 3. 7 3.27 BHVO—l _-__ .14 .14 .11 .16 Neg. .048 30.2 NS .20 .15 .21 MAG—1 _____ .91 .98 .79 .88 0.107 .048 5.5 NS (.975) .80 1.01 .76 QLO—l _____ %.69 1.92 1.67 } 2.03 Neg. .515 27.1 NS .79 1.84 2.28 RGM—l _____ 1.21 1.28 1.32 1.30 0.033 .094 7.2 NS . 3 1.33 1.13 SCo—l ______ 2.75 2.51 2.67 2.51 .062 .132 5.3 NS 2.51 2.60 2.50 SDC—l ______ .63 .51 .58 .53 .022 .100 19.1 NS 42 .39 .62 SGR—l _____ 380 33.3% 3.60 3.70 ___.. ____ __.. ________ STM—l _____ 1.68 1270 ‘iéé } 1.67 Neg. .064 3.8 Ns 1.68 1.56 1.73 annium AGV—l _____ 3.36 2.27 5.02 5.17 Neg. 0.239 4.6 NS . 0 .06 5.1 BCR—l _____ $.33; 4.67 4.89 4.80 Neg. .195 4.1 NS . 4. 7 4.77 G—2 ________ 8.33 8.10 8.14 8.15 .104 .129 1.6 NS 8.23 8.23 7.87 GSP—l ______ 127; 14.63 14.98 15.41 Neg. .613 4.0 NS 1 .3 15.6 16.00 BHVO—l ____ 4.23 4%5 4.55 4.43 Neg. .214 4.8 NS 4. 4. 8 4.36 MAG—1 _____ 3.42 3.58 3.53 } 3.52 .107 .052 1.5 NS(.975) 3.40 3.69 3.47 QLO—l _____ 4%; 4.31; 4.64 4.68 Neg. .103 2.2 NS 4. 4. 4.83 RGM—l _____ 5.89 5.98 5.96 5.93 .124 .131 2.2 NS 5.65 6.18 5.89 DETERMINATION OF ANTIMONY, HAFNIUM, AND TANTALUM 69 TABLE 66.—Determinations of antimony, hafnium, and tantalum in USGS standard rocks—Continued Standard deviation Coefficient Bottles M . . . StarLISEx-d _ 1 _ 2_—_3 (p32?) (detiezs) ( (33:22 ) of 5:123:13“ Conclusmns SCo—l ______ 4.55 4.73 4.78 } 4.73 Neg. .167 3.5 NS 4.88 4.85 4.57 SDC—1 _____ 8.72 7.92 8.63 8.30 Neg. .042 5.1 NS 7.96 8.43 8.10 SGR—l _____ ___- 11.43 1 34 1.41 ___- ___- ___ ........ 1 43 .44 ____ STM-l _____ 28.73 28.77 26.97 28.87 Neg. 1.620 5.6 NS 30.92 27.70 30.10 Tantalum AGV—l _____ 0.84 0.74 0.81 0.79 0.070 0.055 7.0 NS .78 .66 .91 BCR—l _____ .34 .70 .62 .69 Neg. .055 8.0 NS . 3 .73 .69 G—2 ________ .75 .74 .81 .74 .003 .039 5.21 NS .74 .69 .73 esp—1 _____ .77 1.27 .78 .89 .066 .179 20.2 NS .84 .84 .84 BHVO—l 1.09 1.07 1.04 1.10 Neg. .048 4.4 NS 1.18 1.10 1.11 MAG—1 _____ .92 1.01 1.08 1.00 Neg. .075 7.5 NS 1.00 1.05 .92 QLO—l _____ .33 .33 .33 } .81 Neg. .063 7.7 NS RGM—l _____ .33 '33 .33 .90 Neg. .035 3.9 Ns SCo—l ______ 1200 I82 :86 .82 .030 .109 13.4 NS .81 .66 .76 SDc—1 ______ 1.14 1.13 1.12 1.15 Neg. .057 5.0 NS 1.07 1.24 1.17 SGR—l _____ ___- .93 .42 .57 ____ ___ ________ .47 .45 ___- STM—l _____ 17.56 17.83 16.59 17.26 Neg. .474 2.8 NS 17.38 16.92 17.29 The F ratio of the mean sum of squares for bot- tles to the mean sum of squares for within bottles is, in almost all cases, not significant when tested against F395. For the combination-s of elements and bottles for which such nonsignificant ratios were obtained, we may conclude that the bottles of a specified standard rock sample are homogeneous for the element determined. Because of the random se- lection of bottles, this conclusion may be extra- polated to the entire lot of bottles of the specific standard rock. The F ratios for antimony and hafnium in MAG— 1 were found to be significant at F395 with the ratio for hafnium just barely significant, but it may be concluded that bottles of MAG—1 are homogeneous for antimony and hafnium at F0375. Two portions of SGR—l were spoiled during processing, hence only the raw data and the average for this sample are shown in the tables. REFERENCES CITED Covell, D. F., 1959, Determination of gamma-ray abundance directly from total absorption peak: Anal. Chemistry v. 31, p. 1785-1790. Gordon, G. E., Randle, Keith, Goles, G. G., Corliss, J. B., Beeson, M. H., and Oxley, S. S., 1968, Instrumental ac- tivation analysis of standard rocks with high-resolution gamma-ray detectors: Geochim. et Cosmoohim. Acta, v. 32, p. 369—396. Dixon, W. J ., and Massey, F. J ., J r., 1951, Introduction to sta- tistical analysis: New York, McGraw Hill, 370 p. Hertogen, J ., and Gijbels, R., 1971, Instrumental neutron ac- tivation analysis of rocks with a low energy photon de- tector: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 56, p. 61—82. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS GOLD CONTENT OF USGS STANDARD ROCKS By L. J. SCHWARZ and J. L. BARKER ABSTRACT Gold was determined in eight new USGS standard rocks, SGR—l, MAG—1, SCo—l, SDC—l, BHVO—l, QLO—l, STM—l, and RGM—l, and in the four older rocks, GSP—l, G—2, AGV— 1, and BCR—l, by neutron activation, using fire assay for the radiochemical separation. The gold content of these stand- ard rocks ranges from 0.4 to 10 ppb. Analyses of variance indicate that, except for BCR—l and SDC—l, gold is distri- buted homogeneously among the bottles of any one of the rocks. As part of a program to evaluate powdered rocks as analytical standards for the determination of elements, the gold contents of 12 USGS standard rocks were measured. The major objectives of the study were: ( 1) to determine the gold contents of the new standard rocks; (2) to test for the homoge- neity of the gold among randomly selected bottles; and (3) to estimate analytical precision. Gold was determined by the neutron activation method of Rowe and Simon (1968), using fire assay for the radiochemical separation. This method is adequately sensitive to determine less than 1 ng of gold in a l-g rock sample and is currently used in this laboratory for the routine determination of gold in igneous rocks (Gottfried and others, 1972). Three bottles from the stock of any specific rock standard were randomly selected for the determina- tions, and these three bottles were used as the single variable of classification in the one-way analysis of variance (Dixon and Massey, 1951). Determina- tions were made in random order on replicate por- tions taken from each of the three bottles of any standard. Duplicate portions were taken from bot- tles of those standards for which previous estimates were available, whereas triplicate or quadruplicate portions were taken of those standards for which preliminary data had been inconclusive or for which the gold contents could only be inferred from data on similar samples previously analyzed. The determinations of gold, the estimates derived therefrom, and the conclusions from the analysis of variance are given in table 67. The partitioning of the mean sum of squares for between bottles for several samples resulted in a negative bottle vari- ance, thus precluding the calculation of a bottle standard deviation, and such occurrences are indi- cated by “Neg.” The F ratios calculated in the analysis of variance for 9 of the 12 samples are not equal to or greater than the tabled value of the 0.95 fractile of the F distribution with the appropriate degrees of free- dom, and the bottles of these standards may be con- sidered to have a homogeneous gold content. For the determinations of gold in G2, the computed F ratio is greater than the value for [41,95 but does not equal or exceed that for F0375; the user may decide wheth- er the gold content of the bottles is heterogeneous at F035 or homogenous at F0375. For the gold determi- nations in SDC—l and BCR—l, the computed F ratios exceed the allowable values at F039, and the gold contents of the bottles of these samples should be considered heterogeneous. The coefficients of variation for analytical error calculated from the standard deviations for within bottles agree generally with the estimates by Gott- fried and others (1972) . The coefficients for the two basalts, 6.5 percent for BCR—l and 4.6 percent for BHVO—l, are much lower than one would predict on the basis of their average gold contents, but we presently have no explanation for this excellent analytical precision. The data in table 67 show that the igneous rocks, except for the Hawaiian basalt BHVO—l, have average gold contents between 0.4 and 1.2 ppb, and the single metamorphic rock SDC—1 has an average of 1.9 ppb. The average gold contents are higher for the two shales and the marine mud; the Green River Shale SGR—l has the highest average, 8.9 ppb. 71 72 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 67.—Gold in standard rocks [Gold and standard deviations in parts per billion. F' ratios Were tested against Fonz. or the fractile of the F distribution indicated. The degrees of freedom for within bottles are 3, 6, negative bottle variance] or 9 for the 2, 3, or 4 determinations per bottle, respectively. S, significant; NS, not significant; Neg, Standard deviation Standard Gold in bottle— . ~ T0¢k 1 2 3 Mean 11:13:; 11:52.02: 1" ratio SGR-l _________________ 8.4 9.2 8.9 8.9 0.2 0.3 NS 8.9 9.3 8.7 MAG—1 ________________ 1.54 2.76 1.95 2.58 .47 .33 NS 1.86 2.97 2.62 2.34 3.04 2.64 3.01 3.04 3.14 SCO—l __________________ 1.83 1.73 2.06 2.11 .22 Neg. NS 2.32 2.01 2.23 2.38 2.15 2.30 SDC—l _________________ 2.24 0.93 0.99 1.89 .52 .94 S. (Fem) 2.51 1.00 1.33 3.55 1.31 1.58 3.75 1.61 1.91 BHVO—l _______________ 1.54 1.62 1.43 1.57 .07 .10 NS 1.70 1.69 1.47 GSP—l __________________ .82 1.09 1.15 1.18 .20 Neg. NS 1.36 1.11 1.17 1.40 1.11 1.40 G—2 ..... ., ______________ .76 1.21 .81 1.02 .16 .21 NS (F0375) .81 1.13 .87 .96 1.50 1.15 QLO—l _________________ .61 .96 1.07 .95 .13 .16 NS .90 1.00 1.19 BCR—l _________________ .61 .363 .425 .490 .032 .130 S. (Foss) .66 .414 .457 AGV—l _________________ .402 .345 .397 .442 .103 Neg. NS .630 .453 .424 STM—l _________________ .362 .353 .340 .430 .141 Neg. NS .431 .422 .67 RGM—l _________________ .354 .288 .380 .386 .074 .04 NS .391 .365 .54 Jones (1969) listed determination-s of gold in rocks made since the beginning of this century and has estimated the average gold content of rocks to be: igneous, 3.0 ppb; metamorphic, 4.3 ppb; and sedimentary, 5.0 ppb. The averages of the data in this study for igneous rocks (0.8 ppb) and for the single metamorphic rock (1.9 ppb) are lower than the estimates of Jones, but the average for the two shales agrees with his estimate of 5.0 ppb for sedi- mentary rocks. In his discussion of the accuracy of the data he listed, Jones pointed out that the deter- minations of gold before 1955 were generally made by less sensitive methods, that there may have been high reagent blanks that influenced some determina- tions, and that the data obtained before 1955 seem higher than those determined by more recent methods. The averages of the gold contents of the four older USGS standard rocks (G—2, GSP—l, AGV—l, and BCR—l) do not diifer markedly from averages previously reported; the average gold contents of the 12 samples may serve as a baseline for future determinations of gold in rocks. REFEREN CES Dixon, W. J., and Massey, F. J., Jr., 1951, Introduction to statistical analysis: New York, McGraw Hill, 370 p. Gottfried, David, Rowe, J. J., and Tilling, R. I., 1972, Dis- tribution of gold in igneous rocks: U.S. Geo]. Survey Prof. Paper 727, 42 p. Jones, Robert S., 1969, Gold in igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic rocks; U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 610, 28 p. Rowe, J. J ., and Simon, F. 0., 1968, The determination of gold in geologic materials by neutron-activation analysis us- ing fire assay for the radiochemical separations: U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 599, 4 p. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS THE BERYLLIUM, FLUORINE, LITHIUM, COPPER, ZINC, AND STRONTIUM CONTENTS OF USGS STANDARD ROCK SAMPLES STM—I, RGM—l, QLO—l, SCo—l, MAG—l, SDC—l, AND SGR—l V By V. MACHAEEK,1 I. RUBE‘éKA,1 V. SIXTA,1 and Z. SULCEK 1 ABSTRACT Six trace elements are reported for seven new USGS stand- ard rock samples. Beryllium was determined fluorimetrically, fluorine by 'py'rohydrolysis and indirect spectrophotometry, lithium by atomic absorption spectrometry, and copper, zinc, and strontium by both X-ray fluorescence and atomic absorp- tion spectrometry. The analysis of variance for a single vari- able of classification was used to determine Whether the sam- ples were homogeneous for the several elements. Estimates of the average trace element contents, of standard deviations for bottles of sample, wherepossible, and of the standard deviations for analytical error are tabulated. Standard rock samples are important for testing and calibrating newly developed chemical or instru- mental methods as well as those in current use. The variety of available standard materials is rather limited, and the 1971 series of USGS standard rock samples is a valuable contribution. The Chemical Laboratory of the Czechoslovakia Geological Survey is assisting in the standardiza- tion of these samples by providing analyses for several trace elements. To ensure reliable data, we have selected methods that have been proven to be correct in previous analyses of international rock samples issued by the US. Geological Survey, the Zentrales Geologisches Institut, and other institu- tions. These methods include fluorimetry for berylli- um, spectrophotometry for fluorine, atomic absorp- tion spectrometry for lithium, copper, zinc, and strontium, and X-ray fluorescence for copper, zinc, and strontium. The methods are briefly described here. The main purposes of the program of analyses were to determine if the samples could be considered homogeneous from bottle to bottle for the several elements and techniques and to obtain estimates of the average trace-element contents and of bottle error and analytical error where possible. Three bottles of each of the seven samples, STM-l, RGM— 1, QLO—l, SCo—l, MAG—1, SDC—l, and SGR—l, were received, and determinations of the several elements were made on two portions from each bottle to fit a one-way experimental design with the three bot- tles of each sample as the variable of classification. Before the determinations, the two portions from each bottle of all samples were arranged in a ran- dom order that was used for the determinations of all elements. For convenience in handling, the 42 portions, 6 from each of the 7 samples, were divided into 3 groups of 14, and each group was analyzed for an element on a different day within a period of 2 weeks. Beryllium was determined fluorimetrically with morin after chromatographic separation on a silica- gel column as described by Sulcek, Doleial, and Michal (1961). A 1-g sample is decomposed by fu- sion with Na2CO3 in a platinum crucible. The melt is dissolved in dilute HCl, and silica is removed by fil- tration. The filtrate is evaporated to about 50 ml. Before sorption, this solution is adjusted to concen- trations of 0.1 M EDTA (sodium salt of ethylenedi- aminetetraacetic acid), 0.03 M tartaric acifi, and 0.2 M sodium acetate at a pH of 5.5 in a final volume of about 200 ml. The solution is then passed at a flow rate of 2—3 ml/min through a column of silica gel (10 ml of silica, +50—100 mesh) previously washed with sodium acetate buffer at pH 5.5. After the column is washed with 150 ml of distilled water, the sorbed beryllium is eluted with 5 ml 1 M HCl and 80 ml of distilled water into a 100-ml volumetric flask. The eluate is neutralized with sodium hy- droxide using pentamethoxyl red indicator. Then 4 1 Geological Survey, Kostelni 26, Prague, Czechoslovakia. 73 74 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS ml of 10-percent NaOH, 2 ml of 2.5-percent sodium stannite, and 2 ml of 0.02-percent morin in acetone are added, and the flask is made up to the mark and is thoroughly mixed. The fluorescence of the solution is measured on a Hilger and Watts H 960 Fluorime— ter, and the beryllium content is estimated from a calibration line. Fluorine was determined by indirect spectropho— tometry of the attenuation of the absorption of the Zr-xylenol orange complex at 540 nm (Valach, 1961). The samples were decomposed by pyrohy- drolysis (Herman and Weiss, 1971). A sample of 0.1—1 g is mixed in a 1:2 ratio with U308. The mix- ture is transferred to a platinum boat that is placed in the platinum tube of a combustion furnace. The horizontal inlet side of this tube has an electric heat— ing tape to prevent steam condensation. The outlet of the tube is led to a water-cooled condensor whose lower end dips under the surface of the absorbing solution. The sample is ignited at 1,150°C for 17 min in a stream of oxygen at a flow rate of 3 l/min. The oxy- gen is saturated with water vapor by bubbling it through a 15-cm water layer. The reaction is com- pleted by passing a mixture of oxygen and steam through the tube for 3 more min. During the reac- tion period, the solution in the absorption vessel is kept alkaline to phenolphthalein by titrating, when necessary, with 0.1 M NaOH. The volume of the NaOH consumed gives a rough estimate of the fluorine content. An aliquot of the absorbing solution containing 5—20 ug of fluorine is pipetted into a solution of 10 ml of 1 X10—3-percent ZrOC12'8H20 in 7 M HClO4 in a 50-ml volumetric flask. After 30 min, 2 ml of 0.1- percent xylenol orange are added, and the flask is filled to the mark. The absorbance at 540 nm is measured within 30—90 min after mixing, and the fluorine content is estimated from a calibration line. The procedure is not applicable to samples high in organic matter, such as MAG—1 and SGR—l. Lithium, copper, zinc, and strontium were deter- mined by atomic absorption from one stock solution after the samples were decomposed. A 1-g sample in a platinum dish is treated with nitric acid and then with hydrofluoric and perchloric acids. The residue is dissolved in 5 ml of concentrated HCl and trans- ferred to a 100-ml volumetric flask. Aliquots for the individual determinations are taken from this stock solution. For lithium, an aliquot of the stock solution is pipetted into a 25-ml volumetric flask containing 2.5 m1 of a buffer (0.2 M Al(N03)3 in 1 M HCl), and the flask is filled to the mark with distilled water. Reference samples contain the same amount of buff- er (Sulcek and Rubeska, 1969). The response at 670.7 nm is read, and the Li content is estimated from calibration lines. Copper and zinc are measured at 324.7 nm and 213.8 nm, respectively, on aliquots directly from the stock solution or after appropriate dilution (Mik- sovsky and Mouldan, 1971). The concentration of HCl is maintained at 0.6 M for all solutions includ- ing reference samples. For the determination of strontium, an aliquot of up to 10 ml of the sample stock solution is pipetted into a 25-ml flask, 2.5 m1 of a buffer solution con- taining 1 percent La and 10 percent oxine in 6 M HCl are added, and the flask is filled to the mark. The reference samples contain the same amount of buffer (Moldan and Miksovsky, 1971). All measurements were made on a Perkin-Elmer 303 atomic absorption spectrometer using an air- acetylene flame. Instrumental conditions recom- mended by the manufacturer were used. A recorder and scale expansion are used when samples read less than about 3-percent absorption. The X-ray fluorescence procedure for copper, zinc, and strontium routinely used in this laboratory for the determination of 14 trace elements in silicate samples (Machaéek, 1971) is a variation of pro- cedures described by Wedepohl (1958). A 1-g sam- ple is thoroughly mixed with 0.5 g of polyvinyl alco- hol containing 0.1 percent molybdenum or 0.71 per- cent cobalt. The latter are used as internal reference elements. The mixture is pressed at 1,500 kp/cm2 (21,000 psi) into tablets of 31 mm diameter. The measurement is carried out on a Phillips PW 1540 X-ray spectrometer with a topaz crystal and a scintillation counter with a discriminator. G—l, W-l, and T—1 were used as standards, and the con— centration range was extended using synthetic stan- dards prepared from a mixture of sodium silicate and oxides of the major elements. Instrumental con- ditions are as follows: Instrumental conditions for X-ray fluorescence Voltage Current Lines measured Anode (kV) ( m A ) Medium Cu-Kai, 2/ Co-Kfii ........ Au 50 20 Vacuum. Zn-Ka1,2/Co-Kfli ....... Au 50 20 Do. Sr-Kai.2/Mo-Ka1.2 ______ W 50 20 Air. The data obtained by these methods are given in table 68. Hygroscopic water (H20—) was also de- termined on one portion of the sample from each bottle of all rocks and, our estimates—the average of three determinations—are: BERYLLIUM, FLUORINE, LITHIUM, COPPER, ZINC, AND STRONTIUM 75 TABLE 68.—Analytical data for seven USGS standard rock samples [In parts per million. AAS. atomic absorption spectrometry; XRF, X-ray fluorescence. N.d., not determined] . c c z z s 5 55:12.1. Rm“ N°' 3° F L‘ (AXS) (x1313) (AXS) (x161?) (AKS) (xplr) STM-l ______ 2/22 9.0 888 34 3.7 <10 248 242 735 673 9.0 918 31 5.2 <10 245 243 710 675 1.3/17 9.2 880 33 4.5 <10 243 242 720 678 8.9 888 30 5.2 <10 240 243 710 674 28/20 9.0 922 33 4.0 <10 247 241 710 668 9.0 908 33 5.5 <10 246 243 715 670 RGM—l ______ 5/20 2.2 323 58 12.5 11 39 37 108 95 2.1 342 55 12.0 12 39 39 108 98 13/02 2.1 367 55 11.2 11 39 39 110 94 2.2 337 59 10.5 11 37 40 120 99 16/01 2.2 339 53 10.7 10 40.5 40 110 95 2.2 346 58 12.5 11 39 38 115 97 QLO—1 ______ 20/23 1.6 239 23 26.0 27 66.5 68 350 320 1.7 260 24 27.0 28 63.5 66 330 323 42/07 1.7 233 23 28.0 29 64.5 69 330 332 1.6 282 23 26.2 30 64 67 385 328 47/13 1.6 265 22 26.0 30 64 68 360 327 1.7 256 23 26.2 30 65 67 370 325 SCo—1 _______ 5/24 1.6 754 41.5 28.7 35 108 120 172 158 1.6 790 41.5 27.7 33 118 118 180 155 55/05 1.6 780 41.5 27.7 33 102 125 177 158 1.6 790 43 28.2 32 106 122 180 159 55/24 1.6 786 39 27.5 34 102 123 190 155 1.5 774 43 28.2 35 103 121 177 152 MAG—1 ______ 3/07 2.6 N.d. 77 29.5 32 133 151 145 129 2.7 N.d. 69 27.5 33 124 152 138 132 10/16 2.8 N.d 71 27.7 32 116 153 157 126 2.8 N.d 69 27.5 33 120 154 155 128 29/02 2.6 N.d 74 27.5 30 122 153 155 125 2.8 N.d 72 27.7 32 117 155 148 128 SDC—1 ______ 21/18 2.5 612 32 28.2 27 106 107 192 172 2.4 612 32 28.2 29 106 109 172 169 50/22 2.7 622 33 28.5 30 100 107 185 169 2.6 626 30 31.0 29 108 110 184 166 115/24 2.6 626 33 29.5 26 104 105 184 174 2.6 628 34 28.5 27 104 106 182 173 SGR—l _______ 36/26 0.90 N.d 123 65.0 58 81 84 430 415 .90 N.d 123 65.5 59 80 86 420 419 38/30 .88 N.d 123 63.0 60 83 86 450 416 .88 N.d 123 63.0 61 82 87 425 415 39/26 .94 N.d 125 65.2 58 80 84 420 419 .95 N.d 120 63.5 59 83.5 85 450 417 Pmm (1949, p. 78). Conclusions from the analysis of vari- fight/[4:11 ------------------------------- 0&3 ance, averages, and standard deviations are given in QLO—1 :::::::::::::::::II: :27 table 69. An estimate of the “bottle variance” is $10511 -------------------------------- 32? relevant only if the F ratio is greater than 1; that is, Egg—i _______________________________ 'él if the bottle standard deviation is positive. Samples — _______________________________ . 7 Each set of six observations (table 68) for all combinations of elements and methods was treated by the analysis of variance for a single variable of classification as described in introductory texts on statistics. A standard deviation for bottles was cal- culated after separating the components of the mean sum of squares for bottles as shown by Davies SGR—l for Be and SDC-l for F are heterogeneous for those elements by the methods used. One conclu- sion, QLO—l for Cu, is listed as N83“... This may be declared heterogeneous when tested against F695, or accepted as homogeneous when tested against F0375, depending on the risk that the reader will accept. For all other combinations that are listed as “NS” (against F395), or with negative bottle standard deviation, the samples are declared homogeneous. 76 DESCRIPTION-S AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 69.—Conclus'£ons from the analysis of variance, averages, and standard devia- tions for USGS standard rock samples [Methodz Fluor, fluorimetric; Pyr-sptr, pyrohydrolysis-indirect spectrophotometry; AAS, atomic absorp- tion spectrometry; XRF, X-ray fluorescence. Conclusions from the analysis of variance: NS. not significant at the fractile of the F distribution shown or at Fox); where none is indicated; d.f., de- grees of freedom; Neg., negative bottle variance] Standard deviation Average Element Method Con- fl content clusion d.f.=2 d.f.=3 (me) STM-l Be ______ Fluor ________ NS Neg. 0.12 9.02 F _______ Pyr-sptr ______ NS 12.2 13.9 900 Li ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 1.7 32.3 Cu ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. .91 4.78 Cu ______ XRF _________ _-__ ____ ____ <10 Zn ______ AAS _________ NS 2.6 1.8 245 Zn ______ XRF _________ NS Neg. 1.0 242 Sr ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 11.2 717 Sr ______ XRF _________ NS 3.3 2.0 673 RGM—l Be ______ Fluor ________ NS Neg. 0.06 2.16 F _______ Pyrnsptr ______ NS Neg. 14.8 342 Li ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 2.9 56.3 Cu ______ AAS _________ NS 0.4 .8 11.6 Cu ______ XRF _________ NS .3 .6 11.0 Zn ______ AAS _________ NS .5 1.0 38.9 Zn ______ XRF _________ NS Neg. 1.2 38.8 Sr ______ AAS _________ NS 1.5 4.6 112 Sr ______ XRF _________ NS Neg. 2.5 96.8 QLO—l Be ______ Fluor ________ NS Neg. 0.07 1.65 F _______ Pyr-sptr ______ NS Neg. 22.1 256 Li ______ AAS _________ NS 0.3 .6 23.0 Cu ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. .8 26.6 Cu ______ XRF _________ NS, 0.075 1.3 .6 29.0 Zn ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 1.3 64.6 Zn ______ XRF _________ NS Neg. 1.2 67.5 Sr ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 24.2 354 Sr ______ XRF _________ NS 4.0 2.2 326 SCo—l Be ______ Fluor ________ NS Zero 0.04 1.58 F _______ Pyr-sptr ______ NS Neg. 16.0 779 Li ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 1.7 41.6 Cu ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. .5 28.0 Cu ______ XRF _________ NS 0.8 1.0 33.7 Zn ______ AAS _________ NS 4.7 4.4 107 Zn ______ XRF _________ NS 2.0 1.7 122 Sr . _____ AAS _________ NS Neg. 6.4 179 Sr ______ XRF _________ NS 2.2 1.8 156 MAG-l ge ______ Fluor ________ NS 0.04 0.09 2.72 Li ‘22:: XAS _________ ‘N‘é' 1:13;}? "3:5" 72".?)— Cu ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. .8 27.9 Cu ______ XRF _________ NS .5 1.0 32.0 Zn ______ AAS _________ NS 4.7 4.5 122 Zn ______ XRF _________ NS 1.1 1.0 153 Sr ______ AAS _________ NS 6.8 4.1 150 Sr ______ XRF _________ NS 1.7 1.9 128 BERYLLIUM, FLUORINE, LITHIUM, COPPER, ZINC, AND STRONTIUM 77 TABLE Gil—Conclusions from the analysis of variance, averages, and standard devia- tions for USGS standard rock samples—Continued Standard deviation 2 Average Element Method c3135.. gpft'téezs, Eirgré (22:11:12]: SDC—l Be ______ Fluor ________ NS 0.10 0.06 2.57 F _______ Pyr-sptr ______ S, 0.99 7.8 1.8 621 Li ______ S _________ NS .5 1.3 32.3 Cu ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 1.1 29.0 Cu ______ XRF _________ NS 1.3 1.0 28.0 Zn ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 3.3 105 Zn ______ XRF _________ NS 1.2 1.5 107 Sr ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 8.2 183 Sr ______ XRF _________ NS 2.7 1.8 171 SGR—l 3e ______ Fluor ________ S, 0.99 0.03 0 004 0.91 Li EIII Li‘s _________ NS ____ 1513; 3.6— 1‘53"— Cu ______ AAS _________ NS 1.0 .7 64.2 Cu ______ XRF _________ NS 1.0 .7 59.2 Zn ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 1.5 81.6 Zn ______ XRF _________ NS .8 1.0 85.3 Sr ______ AAS _________ NS Neg. 16.4 433 Sr ______ XRF _________ NS Neg. 1.9 417 REFERENCES CITED Davies, 0. L., 1949, Statistical methods in research and pro- duction: London, Oliver and Boyd, 292 p. Herman, M., and Weiss, D., 1971, Pyrohydrolytische Zerset- zung der Mineralrohstofi'e und Fluorbestimmung mittels der Fluoridelektrode, in Proceedings of the symposium on the methods for determination of low concentrations of elements in raw materials, Smolenice, 1969: Bratislava, Comenium Univ., p. 55—66. Machaéek, V., 1971, Rontgenspektrometrische Bestimmung von Spurenelementen in Silikatgesteinen, in Proceedings of the symposium on the methods for determination of low concentrations of elements in raw materials, Smole- nice, 1969: Bratislava, Comenium Univ., p. 253—272. Miksovsky, M., and Moldan, B., 1971, Determination of copper, zinc, manganese, and iron in silicate samples by atomic absorption spectroscopy: Chem. Zvesti v. 24, p. 128—133. Moldan, B., and Miksovsky, M., 1971, On the determination of strontium in silicates, carbonates, and sulphates by atomic absorption spectroscopy: Colln. Czechoslov. Chem. Commun., v. 36, p. 1673—1677. Sulcek, Z., Doleial, J., and Michal, J., 1961, Analytische Schnellmethoden zur Untersuchung von Metallen und anorganischen Rohlstofl’en, XII. Bestimmung der Spuren- mengen von Beryllium in Mineralwassern und mineral- ischen Rohstofl’en: Colln. Czechoslov. Chem. Commun., v. 26, p. 246—254. Sulcek Z., and Rube§ka 1., 1969. Bestimmung des Lithium- spurengehaltes in Gesteinen: Colln. Czechoslov. Chem. Commun. v. 34, p. 2048—2056. Valach R., 1961, Die Bestimmung von Fluor in Mineral- wassern mittels Zr—Xylenolorange: Talanta v. 8, p. 443— 444. Wedepohl K. H., 1958, Rfintg‘en-spektral-analyse von geo- chemischen Proben, in Anwendung der Rontgenbeugung's- methoden und der Riintgenspektroskopie. Vortriige der III: Informationstagung der C.H.F. Miiller GMBH Ham— burg in Darmstadt, p. 68—75. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS INSTRUMENTAL ANALYSES OF MAJOR AND MINOR OXIDES IN USGS STANDARD ROCKS BHVO—l, QLO—l, SDC—l, AND RGM—l P. W. WEIGAND,‘ K. THORESEN,2 W. L. GRIFFIN,2 and K. S. HEIER 2 ABSTRACT The contents of nine major and minor oxides in four new USGS standard rocks were estimated by X-ray fluorescence, atomic absorption, and flame photometry. Analysis of vari- ance with three bottles of any standard as the variable of classification indicates that the bottles are homogeneous at F035 for all nine oxides, except for Na20, by either flame photometry or atomic absorption, in the mica schist, SDC—l. Estimates of the averages, and the standard deviations for error and for bottles, are tabled. We have analyzed new USGS standard rocks basalt BHVO—l, quartz latite QLO—l, mica schist SDC-l, and rhyolite RGM—l for nine major and minor oxides by instrumental methods, following analytical procedures that are routinely used at the Geologisk Museum. For each method two portions were prepared from three bottles of each rock, yielding six determinations per rock. Three analytical methods were used in this work —X—ray fluorescence (XRF), atomic absorption (AA), and flame photometry (FP). Silica, Ti02, A1203, Fe203 (T) (total Fe as F6203), CaO, and K20 were analyzed on a Philips model 1410 manual vacuum X-ray spectrometer and the operating con- ditions are given in table 70. A pulse height ana- lyzer was used for all oxides except Fe203. Samples and standards were fused with sodium tetraborate (Na2B407) in a 1:9 ratio. Calibration curves were prepared from USGS, CRPG, ZGI, and 880 stan- dard rocks (see Flanagan, 1970). The technique of counting a reference sample after each sample and using an intensity ratio of standard or unknown to the reference sample was used to correct instru— mental drift. Magnesia and NaZO were analyzed on a Perkin- Elmer model 303 atomic absorption spectrometer. The spectral lines used were 2,850 A and 5,890 A, respectively, the lamps used were hollow cathode and Osram spectral, and an acetylene-air flame was used for both oxides. Samples and standards were dissolved in HF+HN03, evaporated to dryness, re- dissolved in HCl+HN03, and diluted to yield rock solutions of 0.001 percent by weight. Calibration curves were prepared from USGS and CRPG stan- dard rocks. A reference solution was determined periodically, and intensity ratios, assuming linear drift, were used to correct instrumental drift. All samples were run twice. Alkalis were analyzed with a Beckman model B flame photometer with an atomizer-burner. Samples were dissolved in HF+HZSO., evaporated to dry- ness, and redissolved in diluted H2804. Calibration curves were prepared from mixtures of Na20, K20, and List, solutions. Again, a reference standard determined after every second sample was used to correct instrumental drift. In spite of pleas to the contrary, we failed to pre- m Geological and Geophysical Sciences, Princeton University. Princeton, NJ. 08540. 2 Mineralogisk-Geologisk Museum, Sarsgate 1, Oslo 5, Norway. TABLE 70.—Opemting conditions for X-ray analyses Si02 TiOz A1203 F2203 MnO 080 K20 Target __________ Cr Cr Cr W W Cr Cr Crystal __________ KAP LiF PE 1 LiF LiF KAP Detector _________ Flow Flow Flow Scintillation Flow Flow Flow Medium _________ Vacuum Vacuum Vacuum Air Air Vacuum Vacuum Collimator _______ Coarse Fine Coarse Fine Fine Fine Fine Peak 20 _________ 31.23 85.32 144.85 57.48 62.95 113.01 16.16 Background 20 ___ ___- 84.00 147.50 ___- 62.20 ___- 17.00 79 80 pare random number tables as a guide for the se- quence of analyzing the samples. For the XRF (X- ray fluorence) and AA (atomic absorption) analy- ses, a person other than the analyst prepared and coded the samples in a nonsystematic sequence. The XRF pellets were run in the coding sequence, While the AA solutions were run nonsystematically With respect to the coding sequence. The FP (flame pho— tometry) solutions were not coded, but were run in a completely nonsystematic order. In all methods, standard-s were run as a group at the beginning of the run or periodically through the run; they were not run in a random sequence intermixed with the unknowns. It was sometimes necessary to group samples according to elemental concentrations for analytical reasons, that is, all six portions of the same standard rock were run together. In such cases, the six portions were run in a nonsystematic sequence. Despite these limitations, we feel that the chance of systematic errors in the data arising from operator bias or from departures from randomness in the analytical sequence is small. The six determinations for each standard rock are given in table 71. Also included are single determi- nations of total H20 for a random bottle of each rock. For SiO2 and A1203 in all samples and for MgO DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USG‘S ROCK STANDARDS and CaO in BHVO—l, the second decimal place is not significant. Summaries of the estimates and conclusions from the analysis of variance of the data for the four rocks are also given in table 71. The calculated F ratios of the mean sum of squares for the bottles to that for error were generally tested at Fo_95 (d.f.= 2,3) =9.55. If the conclusion is nonsignificant (NS), the three bottles of sample are declared homogene- ous for the oxide. Because of the random selection of the bottles, this conclusion of homogeneity may then be extrapolated to the entire lot of bottles of a sample. We conclude from this study that the bottles of the four standards that we analyzed are homogene- ous at F...95 for most of the nine oxides. The bottles of the mica schist SDC—l are heterogeneous at F045 for the determination of NaZO by either flame pho- tometry or by atomic absorption. This heterogeneity for NaZO may be due to bottle 39/20 because the extreme values seem to have been determined on this bottle. On the other hand, these seemingly extreme values agree well with preliminary data reported by Shapiro and others (this volume, table 36), and we are unable to assign a cause for the heterogeneity. For those who might wish to accept TABLE 71.—Determination of oxides, in percent, and summary of estimates for USGS standard rock samples BHVO—I, QLO— 1, SDC—I, and RGM—I [Methodz XRF, X—ray fluorescence; AA, atomic absorption; FP, flame photometry. Conclusions from the analysis of variance: NS. not signicant at the fractile of the F distribution shown or at F035 where none is indicated; d.f., degrees of freedom; Neg., negative bottle variance] BHVO—l Bottle Standard deviation - . Bottles Error Oxnde Method 19/26 5/26 19/4 Concluswn Mean (44:2) (d.f.=3) XRF 50.57 51.12 50.81 50.64 50.73 51.41 NS 50.88 Neg. 0.364 XRF 2.83 2.72 2.79 2.77 2.79 2.76 NS 2.78 Neg. .047 XRF 13.72 13.71 13.75 13.80 13.59 13.71 NS 13.71 0.050 .053 F9203(T) .............. XRF 12.48 12.33 12.41 12.48 12.50 12.49 NS 12.42 N68. .068 MnO _______ _...... XRF .17 .17 .17 .17 .16 .17 NS .17 N83. .004 AA 7.00 7.14 6.93 7.03 6.83 7.05 NS 7.00 Neg. .114 XRF 11.50 11.46 11.80 11.75 11.90 11.62 NS 11.67 0.144 .117 AA 2.18 2.10 2.16 2.36 2.22 2.25 NS 2.21 0.008 .089 FP 2.10 2.03 2.22 2.09 2.08 2.16 NS 2.11 Neg. .069 XRF .48 .47 .46 .49 .46 .49 NS .475 0 .018 FP .44 .45 .49 .42 .43 .50 NS .455 Neg. .041 ____ .17 ____ ___.. ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ QLO—l Bottle Standard Deviation Oxide Method 45/4 46 /18 51 /28 Conclusion Mean (1310262; ) (£2; ) XRF 65.79 64.91 65.39 65.09 64.98 65.16 NS 65.22 Neg. 0.387 XRF .63 .67 .64 .68 .63 .67 NS .653 Neg. .028 XRF 16.48 16.67 16.66 16.28 16.19 16.36 NS 16.44 0.076 .187 Fe203(T) XRF 4.34 4.66 4.56 4.63 4.31 4.40 NS 4.48 0.071 .139 MnO ____ XRF .10 .10 .10 .10 .10 .10 (‘) .100 ____ ____ MgO AA 1.05 1.08 1.10 1.11 1.07 1.06 NS 1.08 0.021 .014 XRF 3.26 3.22 3.26 3.21 3.25 3.23 NS 3.24 Neg. .027 AA 4.12 3.98 4.18 4.19 4.16 4.13 NS 4.13 0.056 .059 FP 4.28 4.32 4.28 3.97 4.25 4.34 NS 4.24 0.033 .133 XRF 3.58 3.66 3.60 3.70 3.60 3.60 NS 3.62 Neg. .052 FP 3.67 3.58 3.67 3.50 3.83 3.59 NS 3.64 Neg. .126 .60 See footnote at end of table. INSTRUMENTAL ANALYSES OF MAJOR AND MINOR OXIDES 81 TABLE 71.——Dete'rmination of oxides, in percent, and summary of estimates for USGS standard rock samples BHVO—I, QLO— 1, SDC—I, and RGM—I—Continued SDC—l Bottle Standard deviation Oxide Method 14,“? 67/13 39/20 Conclusion Mean (Emil?) (1511:1213) XRF 66.25 66.39 66.00 65.56 66.19 66.29 NS 66.11 0.258 0.193 XRF 1.03 1.09 1.01 1.07 1.05 1.06 NS 1.05 Neg. .035 XRF 16.15 16.12 16.06 15.85 15.86 16.00 NS 16.01 0.084 .104 XRF 7.33 7.42 7.52 7.30 7.33 7.19 NS 7.35 Neg. .113 XRF .13 .12 .12 .12 .12 .12 NS .122 ~0 .004 AA 1.72 1.75 1.62 1.69 1.70 1.70 NS 1.70 0.034 .031 XRF 1.46 1.44 1.46 1.42 1.45 1.46 NS 1.45 Neg. .019 AA 1.94 1.94 2.01 1.98 1.90 1.86 NS 0.975 1.94 0.056 .020 FP 2.08 2.02 2.03 1.97 2.16 2.16 NS 0.975 2.07 0.078 .035 XRF‘ 3.28 3.26 3.25 3.31 3.26 3.30 NS 3.28 Neg .031 F]? 3.33 3.23 3.24 3.15 3.33 3.37 NS 3.28 0.066 .057 -___ 1.68 ____ ___- _-__ ____ ____ __.._ -__ ___- ___- RGM—l Bottle Standard deviation Oxide Method 20/3 2/21 18/4 Conclusion Mean (33%;?) (332;) XRF 71.48 72.49 72.22 71.82 71.51 72.56 NS 72.01 Neg. 0.617 XRF .29 .29 .29 .34 .28 .33 NS .303 Neg. .029 A1203 __-_ XRF 13.82 14.27 13.87 13.83 13.54 14.19 NS 13.92 Neg. .319 F9205(T) ............... XRF 1.81 1.83 1.80 1.97 1.92 1.94 NS 1.88 0.024 .070 MnO ...... XRF .04 .04 .04 .04 .04 .04 (1) .040 ._.- .-... Mgo ............... AA .29 .27 .26 .28 .27 .29 NS .276 Neg. .014 CEO _-- XRF 1.19 1.20 1.23 1.18 1.20 1.18 NS 1.20 Neg. .022 AA 3.99 3.97 4.03 4.08 3.99 4.18 NS 4.04 Neg. .081 FP 3.91 3.90 3.99 4.07 4.11 4.00 NS 4.00 0.070 .056 K20 ................ XRF 4.25 4.38 4.34 4.33 4.42» 4.36 NS 4.35 Neg. .059 K20 _______ FP 4.22 4.09 4.33 4.30 4.32 4.55 NS 4.40 0.118 .109 HzO(T) -___ 0.71 -__- -___ _--- ---_ _--- ---- ____ -_-- -.-- 1 The six values are identical, and thus there is no variation. the slightly greater risk, NaZO by both methods may be declared homogeneous when tested against F0375. The mean sums of squares for bottles for both SiO2 in RGM—l and TiO2 in BHVO-l were signifi- cantly smaller than the appropriate mean sum of squares for error when tested at F099, but the bottles of these samples are declared homogeneous for the elements specified. The mean sum of squares for bottles is significantly smaller than that for error for CaO in QLO—l, but as above, we still declare the bottles of QLO—l homogeneous for CaO as the mean sum of squares for bottles is not significantly larger than that for error. The variances of the Na20 data by flame photome- try and atomic absorption, and of the K20 data by X-ray fluorescence and atomic absorption, were tested at F035 by the ratio of the larger variance over the smaller; it was concluded that the eight respective pairs of variances did not differ signifi- cantly. The differences between the respective pairs of means were not tested in view of the generally good agreement, and because of this good agree- ment, we feel that these data are accurate. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank F. J. Langmyhr for the use of the atomic absorption unit at the Kjemisk Institutt at Blin-dern. B. El-Bouseilly and Y. Thomasson as- sisted with the determinations by flame photometry, and B. Bruum kindly made single determinations of total H20 for us. REFERENCE Flanagan, F. J., 1970 Sources of geochemical standards—II: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, p. 121—125. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS THE DETERMINATION OF SELECTED ELEMENTS IN THE USGS STANDARD ROCKS STM—l AND RGM—l By A. C. S. SMITH 1 and J. N. WALSH 2 ABSTRACT Selected minor oxides and trace elements have been deter- mined in USGS standard rocks STM—l and RGM—l by atomic absorption and flame emission spectroscopy. One-way analysis of variance has shown the rocks to be homogeneous by both analysts for all elements, with the possible exception of sodium in STM—l and calcium in RGM—l. Two-way analysis of vari- ance has shown the variation between analysts to be significant for sodium and calcium as minor oxides and for copper, zinc, lithium, and manganese as trace elements. This study was designed not only to estimate con- centrations of some minor oxides and trace elements in the nepheline syenite STM—l and the rhyolite RGM—l but also to assess the degree of homogeneity within each set of sample bottles and to obtain stan- dard deviations both for bottles and analytical meth- ods. These same data were then used to compare the error for the two analysts whose determinations were made on identical samples with similar meth- ods and equipment in different laboratories. All minor oxides and trace elements were de- termined by atomic absorption spectrophotometry, except sodium and potassium oxides which were de- termined by flame emission spectroscopy. Both ana- lysts used similar Pye—Unicam spectrophotometers. Two portions from each of three sample bottles per rock were analyzed in both laboratories in random order; that is, six determinations per element per rock for each analyst. Samples were decomposed by double evaporation with hydrofluoric and perchloric acids, sample-solution ratios being 1:1,000 and 1:50 for minor oxides and trace elements, respectively. Replicate data are given in tables 72 and 73 for minor oxides and trace elements, respectively, in RGM—l and STM—l. Minor oxides are expressed as percent of the oxide and “total” iron as percent Fe203. Trace elements are expressed in parts per million. Manganese in RGM—l was determined as a trace element as well as a minor oxide because of its relatively low concentration. Calculations for the one-way analysis of variance with the bottles as the variable of classification were made on each set of data. The homogeneity of either sample for any element or oxide was determined by comparing the ratio of the mean sum of squares for bottles to the mean sum of squares for analytical error with the upper 5 percent of the F distribution for the appropriate degrees of freedom. If the cal- culated F ratio was not significantly greater than the value in the table, the bottles of sample were declared to be homogeneous for the element or oxide. TABLE 72.—Replicate data for minor oxides in RGM—l and STM—l, in percent RGM-l King’s College University College Bottle 13/32 15/21 21/16 13/32 15/21 21/16 080 ____________ 1.04 1.02 1.05 1.09 0.95 0.98 .99 1.03 1.05 .99 1.09 1.09 MgO ____________ .24 .27 .25 .27 .25 .23 .26 .27 .26 .26 .27 .27 Fe203 ____________ 1.84 1.86 1.84 1.81 1.72 1.82 1.86 1.83 1.83 1.90 1.72 1.79 MnO ____________ .037 .036 .033 .031 .041 .036 .034 .035 .036 .031 .031 .036 N320 ___________ 4.07 4.08 4.06 4.04 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.07 4.08 4.04 4.16 4.04 K20 _____________ 4.37 4.39 4.36 4.42 4.33 4.40 4.34 4.34 4.38 4.40 4.33 4.33 STM—l King's College University College Bottle 15/7 20/12 29/6 15/7 20/12 29/6 CaO ____________ 0.99 0.96 1.01 1.02 1.04 1.02 1.00 .98 .98 1.04 1.05 1.02 MgO ____________ .06 .07 .09 .08 .08 .07 .06 .08 .08 .08 .08 .07 F820J ___________ 5.08 5.17 5.09 5.08 5.14 5.20 5.26 5.02 5.13 5.14 5.14 5.14 MnO ____________ .22 .23 .22 .23 .23 .22 .22 .22 .23 .23 .22 .20 N320 ____________ 8.92 8.95 9.01 8.90 8.46 8.64 8.95 8.85 9.03 8.78 8.40 8.50 K20 _____________ 4.28 4.33 4.29 4.41 4.26 4.33 4.29 4.31 4.29 4.35 4.33 4.35 1 University College, London, England. 2 King’s College, London, England. 83 84 TABLE 73.—Replicate data for trace elements in RGM—I and STM—I, in parts per milliow RGM-l King’s College University College Bottle ———————— 13/32 15/21 21/16 13/32 15/21 21/16 Li _________________ 46 46 47 40 43 40 47 45 44 40 43 40 Zn _________________ 32 30 33 38 38 38 33 31 32 38 38 37 Cu _________________ 13 9 10 16 17 15 11 11 11 17 17 17 C0 ________________ 5 5 5 8 7 7 5 5 5 9 4 8 Ni ________________ 5 5 5 15 5 4 5 5 5 6 5 2 Mn ________________ 283 282 278 248 260 260 323 273 272 260 245 265 STM—l King’s College University College Bottle ________ 15/7 20/12 29/6 15/7 20/12 29/6 Li _________________ 28 27 26 20 20 20 27 27 28 19 20 21 Zn _________________ 214 211 214 290 277 260 209 212 214 271 281 285 Cu ________________ 3 3 3 6 5 6 4 3 4 6 6 6 C0 ________________ 9 4 9 14 10 9 6 6 11 11 15 8 Ni _________________ 5 ‘7 5 2 2 2 5 5 5 5 3 2 Our estimates and conclusions for the data from each laboratory are given in tables 74 and 75. Standard deviations for analytical error given in tables 74 and 75 are the square roots of the mean sum of squares for error. Partitioning of the mean sum of squares of the variation attributable to the variable of classification in the one-way analysis of variance has been discussed by Davies (1949), who showed that this mean sum of squares, in our case for bottles, is composed of analytical (within) vari- ance plus n times the “bottle” variance, where n is DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS the number of determinations per bottle. The “bot- tle” standard deviations in the tables are the square roots of the variances obtained after rearranging the above relation and solving for the “bottle” variance. Calculations for a two-way analysis of variance were made on the combined data from both laborar tories, using the bottles as one variable of classifica- tion and the two laboratories as the other, after Bennett and Franklin (1954). These calculations showed that the between-laboratory variances for the trace elements in both samples and for CaO and Na20 in STM—l were significant when tested against FM... The remaining between-laboratory variances were not significant. STM—l was found to be homogeneous for calcium oxide at FMS, but the data for RGM—l for Univer- sity College indicates it to be heterogeneous at F035, but homogeneous at FM... The mean of the estimates of the calcium oxide content of the rocks are in good agreement between laboratories, but analysis of var- iance shows that variation attributable to the labora- tories is significant for STM—l and therefore the laboratories should estimate calcium oxide inde- pendently. The good agreement between the two laboratories for the determination of magnesium oxide in the two rocks may well be a reflection of the ex- treme sensitivity and reliability of the determi- nation of magnesium by atomic absorption spectro- photometry. It was impossible to determine the F ratio for the magnesium oxide data of STM—l deter- TABLE 74,—Results of analysis of variance of minor-oxide data for RGM—I and STM—I [Conclusions from analysis of variance; NS, not significant at F035 or fractile shown; d.f., degrees of freedom; Neg., negative variance] King’s College University College Standard deviation Standard deviation Oxide Conoiu- Mean Bottles Error Conelu- Mean Bottles Error sion (percent) (d.f.=2) (d.f.——J') sion (percent) (d.f.=2) (d.f.=3) RGM—l CaO _____________ NS 1.03 0.010 0.021 NS 0.975 1.03 Neg. 0.083 MgO ____________ NS .26 .008 .009 NS .26 Neg. .019 Feaoa ____________ NS 1.84 Neg. .015 NS 1.78 0.063 .039 MnO ____________ NS .04 Neg. .002 NS .04 .004 .004 N320 ____________ NS 4.08 Neg. .015 NS 4.08 .039 .035 K20 _____________ NS 4.36 Neg. .025 NS 4.37 .034 .030 STM-l . CaO _____________ NS 0.99 0.010 0.015 NS 1.03 0.011 0.009 NS .07 .012 .006 (1) .08 .006 .000 NS 5.13 Neg. .097 NS 5.14 .017 .035 NS .22 Neg. .006 NS .22 .008 .009 NS 8.95 .054 .043 NS 0.975 8.61 .201 .079 NS 4.30 .018 .009 NS 4.34 .033 .039 1 No tat; replicate pairs of data identical. THE DETERMINATION OF SELECTED ELEMENTS 85 TABLE 75.—Results of analysis of variance of trace-element data for RGM—I and STM—I [Conclusions from analysis of variance: NS, not significant at Fox; or fractile shown: d.f., degrees of freedom; Neg., negative bottle variance] King’s College , Standard deviation Element Conclu- Mean Bottle University College Standard deviation Error Conclu- Mean Bottles Error sion (ppm) (d.f.=2) (d.f.=3) sion (ppm) (d.f.=2) (d.f.=3) RGM—l L1 _______________ NS 45.8 Neg. 1.35 (‘) 4 ___________ Zn ______________ NS 31.8 1.04 .71 NS 37 8 0.0001 0 41 Cu ______________ ' NS 10.8 .58 1 23 NS 16 5 Neg. 91 Co ______________ (’) _____ ____ _____ NS 0.995 7 2 1.19 1.35 Ni ______________ (’) _____ ____ _____ NS 6 0 3.04 3.87 Mn ______________ NS 285.2 9.85 16 92 NS 256 3 Neg. 8 10 STM-l L1 _______________ NS 27 2 Neg. 0.91 NS 20.0 0.29 0.58 Zn ______________ NS 212 3 Neg 2.08 NS 277 3 Neg 12.92 Cu ______________ NS 3 3 Neg. 58 NS 5 8 .00 .41 Co ______________ NS 7.5 2.20 1 68 NS 11.2 1 56 2 42 Ni ______________ (') _____ __-_ _____ (’) ________________ 1 No test; replicate pairs of data. identical. 2 No test; Some replicate data at the limit of estimation of the method. mined at University College because each duplicate pair of determinations was exactly the same, result— ing in a mean sum of squares for error of zero. The remaining F ratios indicate that the rocks are ho- mogeneous for magnesium oxide at the upper 5 per- cent of the F distribution. The estimates for the iron contents of both rocks for the two analysts agree well. Analytical standard deviations are small, as are the standard deviations for bottles, and the F ratios for both rocks indicate that they are homogeneous at F035. Agreement between laboratories is good for esti- mates of the concentrations of manganese when determined as a minor oxide, but variation attribut- able to laboratories is significant, even at 170.99, When determined as a trace element. However, standard deviations within the sample bottles are small, except when manganese is determined as a trace element in one laboratory (King’s College) where it was found to be 21 ppm at the 285 ppm level. The samples can be considered homogeneous for manganese both as a trace element and as a minor oxide. Replicate data for sodium, determined by flame emission spectroscopy, showed some variability be tween laboratories for STM—l, with two replicate values ranging from 8.40 percent to 9.03 percent Na20 between laboratories. Even though the mean values between laboratories are not grossly differ- ent, analysis of variance shows the between-labora- tory variation to be significant for Na20 in STM—l even at F039. STM—l was found to be heterogeneous for NaZO at the upper 5 percent of the F distribu- tion for the data from University College, but in contrast RGM—l was found by both laboratories to be homogeneous at F0.95 for this oxide. Potassium data, determined by the flame emission method, are in good agreement between laboratories for both rocks and the samples are found to be homogeneous for potassium at F035. Trace element data for copper, nickel, and cobalt were close to their limits of estimation by the meth— od used. Data for cobalt and nickel for RGM—l by one laboratory (King’s College) are reported as a single value, 5 ppm, whereas the nickel data for STM-l by both laboratories show scatter that might be expected when the concentration is at the limit of estimation. No estimates for these elements are given in table 75. The laboratories should estimate lithium inde— pendently because the between-laboratory variation is significant at F039. One-way analysis of variance shows both rocks to be homogeneous at F”... for lithium by King’s College and for lithium in STM—l only by University College. The data obtained for RGM—l by University College could not be used because replicate pairs of data were identical and give a zero mean sum of squares for error and thus preclude a test of significance. The between-laboratory variation is significant for zinc, although there is fair agreement in mean values. Analytical standard deviations are 13 ppm at the 213-ppm level. The rocks by both analysts are homogeneous for zinc at F035. The data obtained for copper give significant be- tween-laboratory variation even at F039, but because the determinations are so near the limit of detection 86 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS of the method it is considered inadvisable to draw REFERENCES CITED any conclusions from this limited amount of data. . Considerable discrepancies between the laboratories Ben’lett’ 0- 1f", and Franklm’ N31“, 1.954: StatIStlcal analym exist for the averages of cobalt and nickel 1n chemistry and the chemlcal 1ndustry: London, John ° _ , Wile and Sons, 724 p. Overall, 9 of the 20 elements show s1gn1ficant , y . _ _ _ variation between laboratories at F09 and it may Dav1es,. 0. L., 1949, Statlstlcal methods In production and . ' 5’ _ research: London, Oliver and Bo d, 292 p. be concluded that laboratories should estimate these y elements independently. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS HOMOGENEITY OF NIOBIUM CONTENT OF EIGHT USGS STANDARD ROCKS By E. Y. CAMPBELL and L. P. GREENLAND ABSTRACT Niobium was determined in two portions of three bottles of eight USGS standard rocks by a spectrophotometric technique. A one-way analysis of variance of the data showed that the niobium contents of RGM—l, AGV—l, QLO—l, GSP—l, SDC—l, BCR—l BHVO—l, and G—2 are homogeneous within the limits set by the analytical precision. The continuing niobium-tantalum resources pro- gram of the U.S. Geological Survey entails a very large number of niobium determinations in igneous rocks. The quality of the analyses is controlled by inclusion of several standard rocks in each batch of samples. It is necessary, therefore, to be certain that different bottles of the standard rocks all have the same niobium content. This section presents data from an analysis of variance experiment to deter- mine'if the niobium contents of eight standard rocks that are in routineruse in this laboratory are ho- mogeneous among bottles. Three bottles of each of eight standard rocks were selected at random. Two portions were taken from each bottle, numbered, and randomized. The por- tions, about 250 mg (milligrams), were then ana- lyzed for their niobium content. The analytical method has been described by Greenland and Campbell (1974). In brief, samples were decomposed with HF-HNOS, evaporated to dryness, and fused with ‘K2SZOT. The fusion cake was dissolved in HCl, the iron was reduced With thioglycollic acid, and the CNS complex of niobium was extracted into amyl alcohol. Niobium was strip- ped from the organic phase with dilute HF, the residual iron was extracted as the CNS complex, and the niobium color with PAR was developed in the presence of EDTA and tartrate masking agents. The absorbance of the sample solutions was compared with that of pure niobium standard solutions taken through the entire procedure. The analytical data and statistical estimates are given in table 76. A one-way analysis of variance of TABLE 76.—Niobium content, in parts per million, of USGS standard rocks [Neg., negative bottle variance; NS, not significant at 170.05 (2, 3) 29.55] Standard Deviation Sample Bottle Nb Mean Bottles Error F (d.f.=2) (d.f.=3) QL0—1 ________ A 11.2, 11.8 11.7 0.526 0.476 9.4 NS B 11.2, 11.2 c 11.9, 12.9 GSP—l _________ A 27.8, 29.0 28.7 Neg. .853 <1 N’s B 27.9, 29.6 c 29.1, 28.9 SDC—l ......... A 20.9, 21.6 21.1 Neg. 1.268 <1 Ns B 21.4, 21.0 c 22.4, 19.4 BCR—l ________ A 16.0, 14.7 15.6 .231 .727 1.2 NS B 15.7. 16.9 C 15.2, 15.4 BHVO—l ______ A 22.5, 21.0 21.0 Neg. 1.067 <1 NS B 21.5, 19.8 c 21.2, 19.9 6—2 ___________ A 12.8, 13.7 13.4 .338 .389 2.5 Ns B 13.9, 14.0 C 13.0, 13.7 RGM—l ________ A 9.5, 9.5 9.4 .076 .289 1.1 Ns B 8.8, 9.5 c 9.6, 9.5 AGV—l ________ A 15.3, 15.5 15.7 Neg. 1.004 <1 Ns B 16.0, 15.5 C 14.8, 17.2 these data was made to determine if the variance in the niobium content among bottles was significantly greater than the variance within bottles for any given standard rock. In no case was the mean sum of squares for bottles significantly greater (95-per- cent confidence level) than the variation within bottles. It may be concluded, then, that the niobium con- tents of these standard rocks are homogeneous with- in the limits set by the analytical precision. The original randomization of the experimental design ensures that this conclusion may be extrapolated to the entire lot of bottles of a given standard rock. REFERENCES CITED Greenland, L. P., and Campbell, E. Y., 1974, Spectrophotometric determination of niobium in rocks; U.S. Geol. Survey Jour. Research, v. 2, no. 3, p. 353—355. 87 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS X-RAY FLUORESCENCE ANALYSIS OF 21 SELECTED MAJOR, MINOR, AND TRACE ELEMENTS IN EIGHT NEW USGS STANDARD ROCKS By B. P. FABBI and L. F. Esros ABSTRACT X-ray fluorescence techniques were used to determine the Si02, A1203, total iron as Fezos, MgO, CaO, Na20, K20, Ti02, P205, MnO, total sulfur as S, Cl, As, Ba, Ni, Rb, Sc, Sr, V, Zn, and Zr contents of the USGS standard rocks STM—l, RGM—l, QLO—l, MAG—1, SDC—l, BHVO—l, 800—1, and SGR—l. Dupli- cate splits from each of three bottles of each rock were analyzed in random order. Analysis of variance suggests that the bottles are homogeneous at F”; for all oxides and elements except for K20 and Rb in STM—l, Na20 in MAG—1, and Zn in BHVO—l. As part of a continuing program to provide refer- ence standards for geochemical investigations, eight new USGS standard rocks—nephveline syenite STM— 1, rhyolitic obsidian RGM-l, quartz latite QLO—l, marine mud MAG—1, mica schist SDC-l, Hawaiian basalt BHVO-l, Cody Shale 800—1, and shale of the Green River Formation, SGR—l—have been ana- lyzed for 21 selected major and minor oxides and for trace elements by X-ray fluorescence methods of Fabbi and Moore (1970), Fabbi (1971, 1972), and Fabbi and Espos (1972a, b). Two portions from three randomly selected bottles of each rock were analyzed for each element. Calculations for a one- way experimental design with the three bottles of samples as the variable of classification were made for the data reported. Silica, A1203, total iron as Fe203, MgO, CaO, K20, Ti02, and P205 were determined simultaneously on a multichannel Quantometer (Applied Research Laboratories VXQ—25000). Sodium oxide, MnO, total sulfur as S, Cl, As, Ba, Ni, Rb, Sc, Sr, V, Zn, and Zr were determined on a single-channel vacuum spectrograph (General Electric XRD—6) with a dual target (Cr and W) tube and a pulse-height anar lyzer. Operating conditions for the Quantometer and spectrograph are given in tables 77 and 78, respectively. Matrix effects were avoided in the major and minor oxide determinations by fusing the standards and samples with LiBO2 in a sample- flux ratio of 1:14. After the button resulting from the fusion has been powdered, three parts of binder for each part of sample were added to assist in forming the pellet. Other minor and trace ele- ments were determined on pellets prepared by direct dilution using one part of sample to one part of binder. Sodium oxide was determined using the direct dilution technique because matrix effects were found to be nearly negligible and the detection limit and counting rates were more favorable. Calibration curves were prepared using 17 USGS, SSC, MRT, CRPG, and Len—X standard rocks (Flanagan, 1970). The determinations in table 79 for the major, minor, and trace constituents of the six portions of each rock standard were made in random order for any specific oxide or element. Antimony is one of seven trace elements that we can determine rou- tinely but the antimony content of all these samples was found to be less than 70 ppm. Arsenic was found to be greater than 5 ppm only in the two shales, 800—1 and SGR—l. Estimates of means, conclusions resulting from the analysis of variance, and standard deviations are also given in table 79. The calculated F ratios of MSS (bottles)/MSS (error) were tested at Fem, (d.f.=2, 3) =9.55. For those conclusions for which a fractile of the F distribution is specified, for ex- ample, NS (0.99), the calculated ratio is not signifi- cant (NS) at F0”, but is significant at both F035 and me. A comparison of the calculated F ratios with appropriate F values in table 79 indicates that TABLE 77.—X-ray Quantometer operating conditions [X-ray tube operated at 30 kV and 50 ma] Counter Element Crystal and voltage Path EDDT _____ Ne Minitron, fixed ...... Vacuum. EDDT _________ do __________________ o. LiF _______ Ar Multitron, fixed ______ Air. ADP ______ Ne Minitron, fixed ______ Vacuum LiF _______ Ne Multitron, fixed ______ Do. LiF ___________ do __________________ Do. LiF ___________ do __________________ Do. EDDT _____ Ne Minitron, fixed ...... Do. 90 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 78.—X-ray spectrograph operating conditions [Pulse height analyzer was used for all elements] Back- ' Peak, ground, Element Target Crystal 20 20 Line Detector Path Na _____ Cr ____ RAP ________ 54.23 ____ K. Flow _____ Vacuum. Mn _____ W ____ LiF—4.08A ___ 62.97 ____ K. __--do ____ Air. S _______ Cr -___ PE __________ 75.76 ____ K. ____do __-_ Vacuum". Cl ______ Cr ____ PE __________ 65.42 ____ K. ____do _-__ Do. As ______ W __-_ LiF—2.85A __-_ 48.83 47.8 K. Fliow _____ Air. 49.8 Xenon Ba ______ W ____ LiF—4.08A ____ 87.13 88.4 L. Flow _____ Do. Ni ______ W ___.. LiF—2.85A __-.. 71.26 70.2 K. Flfw _____ Do. Xenon Rb ______ W _-__ LiF—2.85A ____ 37.99 37.0 K. Fl'ow _____ Do. 39.0 Xenon Sb ______ Cr -___ LiF—4.08A ____ 106.46 108.0 Lg Flow ..... Do. Sc ______ W _-__ LiF—4.08A -___ 97.71 97.0 K. ___-do ___- Vacuum. Sr ______ W ____ LiF—2.85A _-__ 35.85 34.8 K. FEW _____ A‘ir. 37.0 Xenon V _______ W ____ LiF—2.85A ____ 123.16 120.6 K. Flow _____ Do. Zn ______ Cr ____ LiF—2.85A ____ 60.58 59.3 K. FI’ow _____ Do. 61.5 Xenon Zr ______ W ____ LiF—2.85A ____ 312.10 3%.(2) K. Xenon Do. 3 . TABLE 79.—X-ray fluorescence determinations and estimates for standard samples [T, total. Conclusions from the analysis of variance: S or NS, significant or not significant at Four. or at the fractile of the F distribution shown; d.f., degrees of freedom; Neg., negative bottle variance] STM—l, NEPHELINE SYENITE 0 ‘11 Bottle C 1 Standard deviation X1 8 01' one u- __— element 16/16 27/27 40/60 sions M93“ (3:33:35) (Egg) In percent 60.37 60.24 60.14 60.00 60.26 59.93 NS 60.151 0.061 0.150 18.94 18.82 18.16 18.89 18.79 18.81 NS 18.735 Neg. .302 5.40 5.40 5.33 5.36 5.38 5.36 NS 5.372 0.025 .015 .48 .25 .31 .29 .37 .37 NS .345 Neg. .094 1.17 1.14 1.16 1.16 1.15 1.16 NS 1.151 Neg. .130 8.69 8.73 8.83 9.19 9.02 9.07 NS 8.92: .150 .149 4.28 4.26 4.22 4.20 4.31 4.31 S 0.99 4.263 .050 .012 .16 .17 .17 .15 .16 .17 NS .163 N92. .010 .17 .16 .15 .15 .18 .15 NS .160 Neg. .013 .255 .252 .253 .253 .254 .255 NS .254 Neg. .0013 _<.005 (.005 (.005 (.005 (.005 (.005 ____________________________ .0415 .0415 .0425 .0415 .0425 .0425 NS .04200 .0004: .00041 In parts per million <5 <5 <5 <5 (5 <5 ______________ _----- ________ 610 620 620 610 610 600 NS 611.7 2.9 7.1 <4 (4 6 ~4 8 6 ____________________________ 113 114 110 109 115 116 S 0.99 112.8 3.01 .71 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ____________________________ 714 706 714 699 718 717 NS 711.3 2.7 7 0 <10 <10 (10 (10 <10 <10 ____________________________ 262 264 267 250 264 253 NS 260.0 Neg. 8.3 1,246 1,238 1,240 1,219 1,220 1,224 NS 1,231 7.7 9.3 RGM—l, RHYOLITE Standard deviation Oxide or Bottle Conclu- _—_______ element 1 /27 62 /13 16/15 sions M9“ (3‘21?) (312;) In percent 73.03 73.24 73.15 73.63 72.90 72.99 NS 73.150 0.162 0.211 14.11 13.90 13.81 13.88 13.83 13.80 NS 13.885 .079 .091 1.94 1.98 1.93 1.94 1.96 1.95 NS 1.950 .005 .017 .44 .41 .36 .48 .27 .42 NS .391 Neg. .070 1.22 1.27 1.22 1.26 1.22 1.25 NS 1.240 Neg. .020 3.92 3.94 3.82 4.01 3.90 3.95 NS 3.923 Neg. .081 4.12 4.25 4.13 4.36 4.12 4.31 NS 4.215 Neg. .133 .29 .30 .30 .29 .29 .29 NS .293 Neg. .006 .06 .04 .05 .05 .05 .04 NS .048 Neg. .009 .038 .035 .038 .038 .038 .037 NS .037 Neg. .0013 (.005 (.005 (.005 (.005 < 005 (.005 ____________________________ .0445 .0410 .0460 .0415 20470 .0440 NS .0440 Neg. .00263 X-RAY FLUORESCENCE ANALYSIS OF 21 SELECTED MAJOR, MINOR, AND TRACE ELEMENTS TABLE 79.—X—my fluorescence determinations and estimates for standard samples—Continued 91 RGM—l, RHYOLITE—Continued Standard d v'at' Oxide or Bottle Conclu- Mean Bottles e Errloi‘n element 1/27 62/13 16/15 sons (d.f =2) (¢f_=3) In parts per million <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ____________________________ 800 820 820 840 840 840 NS 826.7 12.9 11.5 14 ~4 12 15 27 12 NS 14.0 Neg 7.5 157 137 156 158 158 159 NS 154.2 2.8 8.2 6 6 8 6 7 ~5 NS 6.3 Neg. 1.2 115 103 117 120 122 121 NS 116.5 5.6 5.0 ~10 21 14 16 13 14 NS 14.7 Neg. 4.6 24 10 29 23 22 23 NS 21.8 1.1 6.2 221 196 215 203 217 218 NS 211.7 Neg. 11.3 QLO—l, QUARTZ LATITE Standard deviation Oxide or Bottle Conclu- ——— element 63/6 3/7 17 /3 sions Me“ (39:32“) ( 3:11) In percent 64.96 65.41 65.15 64.50 65.39 65.52 NS 65.155 0.21 0.327 15.82 16.41 16.22 15.99 16.02 16.29 NS 16.125 Neg. .281 4.39 4.43 4.42 4.41 4.32 4.60 NS 4.423 N88. .110 .94 .83 .97 .92 .97 1.03 NS .943 .042 .055 3.16 3.18 3.18 3.17 3.18 3.19 NS 3.177 .003 .010 4.13 4.12 4.10 3.93 4.00 4.18 NS 4.077 Neg. .101 3.52 3.49 3.55 3.44 3.56 3.43 NS 3.498 Neg. .071 .64 .64 .64 .63 .63 .63 NS .635 .004 .004 .21 .27 .23 .20 .22 .25 NS .230 Neg. .030 .098 .098 .095 .098 .097 .100 NS .0977 Neg. .0017 <.005 <.005 <.005 <.005 <.005 <.005 ____________________________ .0182 .0187 .0191 .0196 .0195 .0202 NS 01922 0.00065 00041 In part: per million <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ____________________________ 1,400 1,400 1,350 1.400 1,400 1,400 NS 1,391.7 0 20.4 11 10 13 ~4 6 11 NS 9.2 Neg 4.2 67 67 61 72 74 66 NS 67.8 Neg 5.6 9 12 9 11 13 14 NS 11..'- 1.6 1.5 332 339 296 339 334 336 NS 329.3 Neg. 17.8 55 50 57 49 55 49 NS 52.5 Neg. 4.6 52 52 22 48 50 43 NS 44.5 3.8 11.0 182 169 163 180 178 180 NS 175.3 Neg. 8.8 MAG—l, MARINE MUD Standard deviation Oxide or Bottle Conclu- —— element 60/26 13/17 66/14 sions M93“ (Egg?) (fit-12;) In percent 50.89 52.09 50.18 50.87 50.71 50.49 NS 50.872 0.353 0.572 16.54 16.67 16.72 16.63 17.33 16.75 NS 16.773 .155 .245 7.06 7.13 7.09 7.12 7.07 7.09 NS 7.09: Neg. .032 2.93 2.75 2.76 2.72 3.01 2.85 NS 2.831 .064 .010 1.40 1.39 1.42 1.43 1.39 1.47 NS 1.417 Neg. .033 3.50 8.46 3.33 3.22 3.55 3.53 NS 0 99 3.432 .135 .048 3.56 3.59 3.55 3.53 3.62 3.58 NS 8.572 .0211 .022 .75 .75 .76 .76 .75 .75 ______ .753 ______ 0 .17 .18 .16 .17 .15 .21 NS .173 eg. .025 .113 .112 .114 .114 113 .113 NS .1132 .0007: 00041 .47 .45 .46 .46 .47 .46 NS .462 eg. .009 3.19 3.12 3.07 2.98 3.24 3.16 NS 3.127 .081 057 In parts per million <5 8 <5 <5 9 ~5 ____________________________ 500 520 530 530 500 500 NS 513.3 14.1 .2 55 54 54 53 53 54 NS 53.8 .29 .71 191 181 187 187 186 186 NS 186.3 Neg. 4.1 19 19 19 22 22 20 NS 20.2 0 1.47 174 169 164 169 165 164 NS 167.5 2.96 2.92 147 145 141 138 141 138 NS 141.7 3.50 1.91 156 149 148 144 146 144 NS 147.8 3.29 8.89 131 128 132 125 132 135 NS 130.5 1.19 3.34 92 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 79.—X-ray fluorescence determinations and estimates for standard samples—Continued SDC—l, MICA SCHIST Standard deviation Oxide or Bottle Conclu- element 106/8 76/9 05/5 sions M9“ (322;) ($1.133) In percent 64.72 64.97 65.11 65.48 65.75 66.35 NS 65.396 0.569 0.305 16.37 16.79 16.61 16.41 16.77 17.14 NS 16.682 .167 .243 7.20 7.09 7.20 7.12 7.20 7.42 NS 7.205 .052 .100 1.67 1.54 1.57 1.52 1.59 1.59 NS 1.580 Neg. .057 1.45 1.40 1.52 1.46 1.50 1.53 NS 1.477 .040 .034 1.98 1.98 1.94 2.00 1.97 2.02 NS 1.982 Neg. .032 3.18 3.35 3.16 3.26 3.21 3.45 NS 3.265 Neg. .127 1.04 1.02 1.04 1.03 1.05 1.08 NS 1.04; .010 .015 .15 .17 .16 .14 .15 .13 NS .150 0 .014 .121 .119 .120 .118 .120 .120 NS .1197 Neg. .0012 .05 .05 .05 .05 .05 .04 NS .048 0 .004 .0053 .0041 .0038 .0035 .0030 .0034 NS .00385 .00067 .00050 In parts per million <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 ____________________________ 690 680 700 670 670 640 NS 675.0 11.9 17.8 41 41 41 40 40 41 NS 40.7 Neg. .58 128 128 127 133 126 132 NS 129.0 Neg. 3.46 20 20 21 17 18 18 NS 19.0 Neg. 1.6 199 201 207 201 192 202 NS 200.3 .82 4.83 108 102 105 99 108 113 NS 105.8 3.2 4.0 106 108 110 106 93 104 NS 104.5 3.9 4.8 301 301 288 300 294 310 NS 299.0 Neg. 8.2 BHVO—l , BASALT Standard deviation Oxide 01' Bottle Conclu- ———-—-—-— . Mean Bottle Error element 28/19 19/12 11/31 810115 (“'22) (d.f.=3) In percent 51.63 50.67 51.50 50.30 50.37 50.55 NS 50.837 Neg. 0.632 13.93 14.09 13.30 14.11 13.93 14.40 NS 13.960 Neg. .388 11.89 11.97 11.92 11.86 11.91 11.95 NS 11.917 Neg. .044 6.84 6.98 6.84 6.87 7.04 7.12 NS 6.94:; .107 .067 11.44 11.54 11.55 11.46 11.45 11.43 NS 11.475 Neg. .056 2.37 2.47 2.32 2.39 2.39 2.16 NS 2.850 Neg. .106 .51 .49 .50 .52 .58 .54 NS .523 .020 .020 2.74 2.73 2.69 2.73 2.74 2.72 NS 2.725 0 .019 .23 .23 .19 .27 .22 .27 NS .235 Neg. .038 .162 ' .162 .160 .161 .161 .164 NS .1610 .0005 .0013 <.005 <.005 <.005 <.005 (.005 <.005 ____________________________ .0091 .0102 .0089 .0085 .0106 .0084 NS .0092: Neg. .00102 In parts per million <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 _____________________________ 131 105 133 111 144 135 NS 126.5 5.2 14.4 128 122 118 120 118 123 NS 121.5 2.1 3.3 10 7 7 10 8 10 NS 8.7 Neg. 1.9 28 29 27 27 29 28 NS 28.0 .76 .58 376 371 370 381 381 369 NS 374.7 Neg. 6.95 330 310 320 315 315 305 NS 315.8 Neg. 9.35 83 84 89 86 89 90 NS 0.975 86.8 2.90 1.35 158 155 152 158 152 161 NS 156.0 Neg. 4.58 SCo—l , CODY SHALE Oxide or Bottle Conclu- Standard dev1at10n element 10/16 19/18 21/15 sions M93“ (312;) (£123) In percent 63.30 63.14 62.88 62.63 61.48 53.42 NS 62.805 Neg. 0.801 13.84 14.00 13.86 13.81 13.53 13.80 Ns 13.807 0.92. .130 5.22 5.24 5.19 5.27 5.29 5.21 NS 5.23. Neg. .047 2.38 2.48 2.31 2.22 2.29 2.27 NS 2.325 .082 .056 2.58 2.59 2.55 2.54 2.59 2.55 NS 2.561 .015 .017 .83 .73 .82 .76 .79 .76 NS .782 Neg. .04. 2.62 2.69 2.65 2.65 2.62 2.70 NS 2.65:. Neg. .04. .61 .61 .60 .61 .62 .59 Ns .607 Neg. .013 .16 .21 .18 .21 .21 .22 NS .195 Neg. .02. .060 .060 .060 .061 .060 .061 NS .060 Neg. .00058 .06 .06 .06 .06 .06 .06 Ns .06 o 0 .0077 .0072 .0068 0063 .0053 .0073 NS .0067; Neg. .00087 In parts per million 9 12 10 14 8 12 NS 10.8 Neg. 2.61 620 630 600 620 610 650 NS 621.7 Neg. 18.7 28 30 28 26 29 30 NS 28.5 1.0 1.22 124 122 121 120 122 124 NS 122.2 1.15 1.22 23 19 19 16 19 _ 20 NS 19.3 .96 2.08 194 194 190 193 196 193 NS 193.3 1.04 1.73 138 140 136 138 135 140 NS 137.8 Neg. 2.34 112 115 115 117 119 115 NS 115.5 .91 2.20 5.05 176 178 172 179 175 185 NS 177.5 Neg. X-RAY FLUORESCENCE ANALYSIS OF 21 SELECTED MAJOR, MINOR, AND TRACE ELEMENTS 93 TABLE 79.—X-ray fluorescence determinations and estimates for standard samples—Continued SpR—l, SHALE OF THE GREEN RIVER FORMATION Standard deviation Oxide or B°ttle Conclu- Err 1- element 54/17 57/28 34/15 Slons Me“ (3:15) (digs) In percent 28.15 28.48 28.89 27.90 28.82 27.50 NS 28.290 Neg. 0.68 7.11 7.69 7.17 7.47 7.03 7 01 NS 7.241 0.068 .26 3.18 3.23 3.11 3.25 3.19 3 25 NS 3.202 N83. .065 4.28 4.81 4.59 4.38 4.83 4 16 NS 4.508 Neg. .359 8.88 8.91 8.99 8.75 8.88 8 83 NS 8.873 Neg. .101 2.67 2.69 2.69 2.55 2.67 2 72 NS 2.66:I Neg. .061 1.69 1.78 1.71 1.71 1.64 1.73 NS 1.710 Neg. .052 .36 .36 .36 .35 .35 .36‘ NS .357 Neg. .009 .33 .30 .29 .28 .28 .31 NS .293 .009 .013 .042 .043 .043 .042 .043 .043 NS .0427 Neg. .0006 1.90 1.89 1.90 1.90 1.87 1.91 NS 1.89; Neg. .017 .0039 0041 0045 .0050 .0043 005 NS .00447 .0003: .00035 In parts per million 75 74 75 75 73 75 NS 74.5 Neg. 0.91 320 330 325 340 330 325 NS 328.3 Neg. 7.64 43 40 36 39 39 38 NS 39.2 1.7 1.8 92 90 94 93 92 92 NS 92.2 1.08 .91 10 ~5 11 <5 11 9 ____________________________ 442 44] 440 454 450 443 NS 445.0 Neg. 6.4 134 139 134 133 134 130 NS 134.0 1.3 2.6 99 100 105 94 77 98 NS 95.5 1.04 9.7 60 62 65 54 56 58 NS 59.2 Neg. 4.6 there are only a few departures from the null hy- pothesis at F0.95 in any of ‘the samples. When the F ratio is not significant, one can conclude that the con- tent of the bottles is homogeneous for each of the standard rocks. The K20 and Rb contents of STM—l are heterogeneous at F”... Users of the samples may decide if they Wish to accept the NaZO content of MAG—1 as homogeneous at F..,, and the Zn content of BHVO-l as homogeneous at F0975. The conclu- sions reached from these analyses of variance may also be extended to the entire lot of bottles of any sample because of the original random selection of the bottles. Analyses of variance were not calculated for those determinations where an observation wvvhawnuuw «\HN 9N}: oH\Nv --------uu- -- 02 233m THE—ma: you 3.5% E mawfic =3 .uflvoawn 5 GE Ago-Hag mm mafia—5H: wlmmG ~8§8®e§§§ .Sx 35° ogaesufiuogw @wusoigoldw "Ea-B DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 104 .3» mg wz EN NNN m2 5N SN NNN N.NH .92 m2 H: «NH 3a N: N: NS «N. .32 m2 3 N NNN I. N mp N NNN NYN we.“ .93 m2 EN :N N E N.NN 2N m.NN .............................. ENA SN BNA w: ENA .............................. QHNV SNV SNV m HNV mANV Nd. .wwz wz Sm 3a 3» $3 3N NNN .............................. 93V SNV SNV S NV SNV .............................. 34V 34V 23 m3 8.» 3N 5. m2 SH 9: 92 o NN NE e.NN 5. Na. wz 3w 2: 5.» Saw «N w «as 3. .32 mz 9% mg 55 3:. Ni. 3.» mm.“ :2 m2 «.2 N.oN N 2 N4: 3“ N.¢N 3 No.N wz 98 34 o 3 93 o 3. 3:. SN .uwz m2 is v 3 mm m “.2 NN a 3: mm. .92 m2 «Wm :3 NH.» 3.” MN.» wNN. N5. EN mz 9N» 3:. 9:. 98 m 3. NS .............................. 84V SAV 84V 84V 84V ............................. ENV SNV N.» N w E. N N Maz wz QNN EN «.2 N.NN EN SN 2. 8. m2 mm H m: 3: m: N} m: ...... ---- ------- -------- 3.NV B NV ENV ENV BNV ------------------------------ SNV 35V ENV SNV 35V ------------------------------ «.wwv .1qu «iv NSV «:va a: .uaz mz a: a: S N mg a: Nam 2. 3 N m2 5: E; a 2 Ni 3: Ni o m a.» mz w: NS NS 2: N: a: ------------------------------ 84V 84V 84V 8 V 84V 2. .92 wz .NmN 3N NN N EN NmN EN «.3 .umz mz ---------- ONO; EN EN 8» 5a -------------------- NS. Ezv 9 EV QBV QSV QSV 3o. .32 m2 Nma NH. 2 2. 2. NH. :5. N8. m2 «2. 3H. EH. NS. NS. NH. 29. .uwz mz 8N. SN. me. mom. SN. «3. «S. .uuz mz our. N3. N3. 3». 8w. 3;. ..... - ---- ------ ------ 84A 84A 84A 84A 84A ..... - ----- ----.- ------.- SNA EMA SQA 29A SNA N. .32 m2 de m3 3.” $4 34 N3 8. .92 mz :2 1.4 S N v: a: a: NN. 25 m2 and Sam :5 NNN. 33 23 mm. .32 m2 N.NH Ni *2 m.NH a 3 Na: we; .92 m2 2:" SN N.NN dNN o.NN a...” 3 ”fig AN” «.3 mac—u unwfiwfim 85H 358' .3230 :52 , N H N N N H -- ------ ----- - nomuanmfiuson matrix. Eavufim $25. 83 E: - ouuom 7551: .59 3.3% 5 @550 :u .afluohwn E :5” £95.59 mm manufiflm: nlxpwv‘ .Swmgss .3\ SS. eEREuokemaw ueutflsafi‘oD-lfiw ”Ea-B 105 COMPUTERIZED SPECTROGRAPHIC DATA FOR USGS STANDARDS .......... egv de 35V 25V 35V 2.mV a N 8d m2 2.» 3:. v 3 NE 93 a...» «.5. imam- 1mm“- - ..m.z a: a.“ a: 3." N: 3.4 $4 . . .............. S.mV 25V 3.mV wwmv wgv 2.mV 2%.». Wok ....... m z 1:. 2m 3» a: 2:. e 3 gm ------ -1--- -- --- ............ REV mANV :NV adv RSV 2v ............. 35V 3.: x. 5.. «m s. W-“ HHH- - ................. Sfiv 35V 2. o m 3 3 : - ................. 3 «V 33V «EV 13V 34V 3. «V --wm.~. 1mm..- m2 3 p :3 $6 «.3 N3. 2; 2: - . ................. $4. mgv Edv mgv Edv udmv 2.. 32 wz 3.x .3.» 3.» m: «as H; :a HM-” HHH -- ................ 83A 83A 33A 83A 83A 83A ............................ EEV VEV SHV REV :HV SLV ii” ---- .................... Bfiv E.NV E.NV Edv Edv mgv -- H --- . -- ................ E.~V mduv mgv Efiv ENV 2 «V ...................... REV SAV EEV biv p EV REV ------ H--H-- .................. 84V 84V 84V 22V 22V 84V ............................ S «V 2.mV S.»V 35V .2 mV de ........................ mduv m§V mgv aduv de mgv ........................ 23V 84V 84V 22V 84V 22V ........................ uduv 2.~V mEV mfimv mfiwv 3 «V .................. wQV S.mV 25V 35V 35V 25V m2 2.» S v a: :5 :3 2% 2w m2 $3 2.3 8: 33 find 23 c8.“ .................. 2: a2 2: an“ BNA m: .................. osmv odNV odNV «.3 odmv eduv .......... 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V .......... 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V .......... 84V 84V SAV 84V 84V 84V .......... QSV eSV 9ch QSV c.3V QSV .......... fl 2V 3V 2V 2 V 2V m2 5. $4. and m3. 5“. ”2. «NH. ........ ---------- 33V xiv «.qu 33V 33V EEV mz 38. 2:8. 28°. 32¢. «.58. "$8. $28. ........ 58V 38V 58V 88V gov Son ........ Kiev «ELEV «SSV EXEV 33°.V «SSV no. 8. wz an. fin. Sm. wan. Nam. Em. 3m. 3. .32 m2 gm 3a EN EN «.mu .2" QNN on. .92 m2 :3 $5 «3 m3 2:. m5. and S. .uwz mz «v. can. 8‘. 3v. own. 3.... 3.... SA 5.“ m2 how 3: I: :N Nam 9% :N GHQ“; 3”.de no.3.“ mwfiaom .MWflMD flaws N H N .n N a £5ch Essa—m “NE“. Sh: ”<2. --- Egon Fem—=5 nun 3.33 3 $850 a: 3:3qu 5 a: Jun—25 mm 3:052an 700% .Rzowtwa 3x 3% ugaasuoécuam vantfisagoléw mamfiw DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 106 .............................. 25V S.mV 2.nV S.mV «EV wQV N: .umz wz 33 3» man $5 9% m3 WE mo. 2 $3.va $4 w: a: v: a: S.” a: .............................. 35V 35V fiav 35V de 85V m m .uwz mz EB 3: w: 2.” 5: «.3 .2: .............................. WEV WEV m.§V mANV RSV ENV .............................. 3V $.V 3. 3V 3. 8. .............................. S.mV 35V 3. od 3.mV Nd. .............................. 33V 34V «3V 33V 13V «3V 3.- Nv. m2 :3 2.3 a: 86 E.” and m: -- - -- ..................... E.~V Edv ENV mgv :3 de ............................. N5 84V m3“ m3. v.2 a; -H-HH HHH H-H-l- ........... oeo “V 83A 83A 83A 83A 83A ..................... ZAV EEV 32V REV REV REV - -H - M .................... £.~V mgv mgv ENV Edv EdV H-H- - -H-- ................... Edv mgv Edv uduv DEV Edv ........................ EEV EJV EIV EAV :HV SAV -H-- “H--- --- .............. 84V 22V 84V 22V 84V 84V - --H- --HH Hi“ ............. 3 34V 25V 25V 25V 25V -- - -- H- .............. de may fidv ENV Bfiv £.mV d---“ inH H H .............. 84V 84V 84V 22V 84V 84V ................... EdV mgv mfiuv Eav mgv mgv --- H-HH --H -------------- 25V 25V 35V 35V 35V SdV ----------------------- «3 8d #qu wavv 3.x mm.“ mum “Mo-m - .m-z 53. Sun 35. S}. 23.» :8; 2:3 ------------------------- SNA mEA BNA ENA mSA BNA ----------------------------- 9.3V oduv oduv ogv edNV oduv ------ 84V 84V SAV 84V 84V 84V - ----- 84V 22V 84V 84V SAV 84V ------ 84V 84V 22V SAV 84V 84V --- QSV oiv QSV QSV QSV QSV ------ 3V 2V 2V 3V 3V 3V 8o. .uoz mz N2. mm“. vi. 3:. fifi :3. H3. ------------------------------ EEV 33V 33V 33V SEV $3.V 88. .32 mz 38°. 225. £89 38°. 28°. 228. $8... ----------- - ----- ------ SSV 38V 38V 58V 38V gov -- -------..---- ---- ---- - ----------------- SEQV SEQV «38V «Seqv 339V «38V -- - 4 :2 c8. m8. mz «.2. 2:. m2. ”2. mi. 2”. m2. --HHHnH---H- -- 5 S.» .32 m2 3a 3m 93 93 EN 93 m3 ------- ME S. .32 m2 $6 55 m2 8.“. a: $6 and -..------- oh me. .92 m2 a. 3“. gm. as. 2;. 8m. 3N. - ------ 2 22¢ :6 wz «.3 93 w.wH 9E 95 95 #3 -uuuuul-ua-Isn u- mm sufi: 3H5: £83 - anomwfi Sim $58M. .3550 as: N H N H N a ---- --------- 5235539 Essa-u ESESm 2?» was" ”<2 -- £38 202:5 H2— 339 E 9850 an $55.59 a: :5” Jun—9:: mm macaw—fig 7%an .ofigsv sex 33. c§§sue$onau suguggsobléw mafia. 1.07 COMPUTERIZED SPECTROGRAPHIC DATA FOR USGS STANDARDS wv .32 m2 2: 3: «Nu 2.x a: mun :& ............................... “N «.3 .uoz mz wow 2; m5 3: a: N: m: .............................. :N S. 2.. wz Sam 2% «3 as 36 Ed and .............................. .5 ma .uaz mz wdm 3m “.3. 3:- 35 mg 93 ............................... N .............................. ENA EmA BNA ENA ENA ENA ---------------- > .............................. m.§V mANV DANV mANV m.§V Euv ----------------- an. Yfi SN mz muw a? me. 3:. «.2. man 2:. ............................... um .............................. EdV 3 35V 25V 2.».V 35V .............................. xiv «3V 13V xiv 32V «3V .............................. was 33A 56A HgA 33A QwA .............................. SHV REV REV REV EAV REV ad .92 m2 5.5 92 98 E: 3: «.5 9: «A .sz mz v.2 3H mfi «.fl ”.2 WA: 3: 33 .uwz m2 «.3 9.2 93 o5. odm mam 98 ME .uoz mz «.3 23 3A «.8 «3 Ed 92 .............................. EdV BdV mEV EdV mgv E.~V ms .uoz m2 «.2 is «.3 99. mg mg 3:. .............................. 84V 34V 84V 84V 84V 22V 8A m2 m2 23 8d a: 5.: and EH as as .32 m2 2a 5: EN in max Eu 3m 2. 2. m2 3.x a: «3 a: mud. 8.x 2.x .............................. BNV mduV Edv EdV E.~V E.~V --- ---- ---H ........... «3V cgv adv 25V 35V Sav ............................ «3V €va «.SV €va v.89 1va a: 8; m2 «S 3: v5 93 «a; 8.» 5: flu .Mez ...... w- Z 93 gm 3% mi 93. 93 gm ...................... m: - am: . wfi EH .............................. 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 3. .uwz BA 23 m: a: a: 84 :3 m: can 93 -- Haw-A Pa «3 Sn ”8 as as MS --- --- --H .... - ....... - 0.3V QSV QSV QSV QSV oSV ...................... 2V «N. «N. 2. S. «N. woo. n8... wz 8“. a3. new. fix. 8“. m3. 2:. «Na. .92 EA Ea. 3N. SN. SN. EN. «3. 8m. as. .32 ...... m- ? as." «N4 34 o: 3; mm.“ :3 --- inn-H ----------------- 84A SEA 84A 84A 84A 84A - ------------------ SQA 34A SQA «5A «3A SmA a. .32 wz «we 54. 85 Be a: 3d 56 S. .uoz mz m3 3“.” 23. $4 2..” mm.” «3 .3. .32 m2 5: 3: .3: ”.3 «.2 5: «.3 E .92 EA 3. «.3- 8a and m: 56 2..» mi. .32 m2 «.3 was «.3 9% 3m 3w 3-“ An N div AN H adv ado—n anon—2H “ohm wagon -3950 :32 N d N H N H ------..----- nomuanmgflun 55336 uaéufim {aw muxmu $3“ --------------------------- £30m Tue—23:35 needing xmmu3m¢ £051: .59 3.39 5 $850 :6 5:3an 5 :5” £98.23 mm munwfiflmz nlfiom £335 .8x 339 ugassuoxfiwaa fiaguggnvldw "SEE. S ..... - ...... ---- --- ...... H3!- HmwA waA HSA HmwA HSA M Ham .umz 94 SH EH EH EH 5: mmH m: A mm. an. mz 55 m3 26 H9“. and m3. m; D H.3- oa. mz v.3 93 9% 9a.. «:3 9m:- 92 N .............................. SHV :HV SHV SHV 3H SHV A .1... -- -- ----- .......... 95V 9HNV 93V WHNV 95V 9va T 93 98 wz HE E wHa 2; 25 mar SE S 3. 3.... m2 NHH 9: 3H m.HH «.2 93 I: K 3.. 5. m2 3H EH 3H 92 «.mH 92 95 C - ........... - .............. -. o9HV SH SH 22V 3H 8H 0 Hm. «NH 39va 3: Ham «.3 1: H3 9me 3: R “9 3H mz EH 3: EH NEH SH 92 92 S Hm. wH. mz 8H mHH SH 3H 3H «5 H: G m.» a.» mz 9mm 98 93 98 93 9:. 93. S EN .52 m2 2: 2:. 2: «Hu «2 3H EH U «a .umz m2 9” mad and 86 HS. $5 9: H3. 9: 83m SH 2a SN 8“ SH 3H 2H W .---- ...... -- ............... o9HV 3d 3d SHV v9“ 5.x E ............................. - fidv 25V 35V 24V Sav 24V N 93. 3..» m2 93 H3 .93 92. 9mm 9% 3m NNH. 39 m2 um.” 33 HH.H. mm.» 3...“ mm.” 5..» M --- ........................ mH-NV mgv mQV mH.NV mgv Efiv G --- ---- ------------------ 25V 2. V 25V deV wH.mV Sav I ----------- - ------ -- ........ H9m «Ha Ha.“ >3 :3 o9HV E «a. up. 2:9sz «3 SH 99H :5 m9m 28 3d F ------------ - ------- - -------- - o9HV e9HV SHV 8.HV o9HV o9HV O 92 9: m2 Em Sm :3 man 2:.” Sn mum S --- --.-- -- ------------- .-- o9HV c9HV 8.HV o9HV o9HV SHV E 8. NH. wz 3.: 3H 9: 9: 3H H..HH NHH S 2: .%z wz H: NE- E; in as om:- .E. Y ----- .1... - --------------- - 92V 93V 93V 9ch 93V 9ch L 39 £9 wz man. 3. 3.. 2. 3. mm. mm. ANA 39 29 EA 3N. is. $9 Ha. «3. SN. EN. HH9 $9 wz ”8 «E9 H89 58. 88. 2:9 59 A .39 m8. m2 39 N89 £8. 3%. H59 «89 939 D on. .32 m2 a; man a: 3.» Ed 2d H; N ---.- ---- - ------ -..---- SWA 29A 39A 39A 29A EA A 2-H. .mwz 94 m: EH 3} «9H SH SH SH S $9 .92 EA 2H. 58. NS 2:. $59 2H. NHH. N mm. 8.: m2 m: 5..” Hz; $4.“ Sam can and «9 .32 m2 $5 :3 H3 93 $5 $4.. 3.» m Han .mwz mz 95 «.3 Ham 9% 93 «an 3.x T P Hmnfis H .93 Sea «:8on M 8:3 8:33. .238 :55 N H n H N H ------------ :osanmsuflan C 53.23% Eavcsm 28H «33 HS; ---------------- atom S E T551: 5% manna 5 9850 as .3339 am a: ago-H5 mm macaw—Ha D TERM. 693$? uggaug 3x 339 cEAEuEHuuaa gum-HSSRHSSOIdw Hand-B 108 109 COMPUTERIZED SPECTROGRAPHIC DATA FOR USGS STANDARDS 2m .52 m2 3m 3m 3N 5m SN SN Sm ........................... --- .fi 3H 3. m2 93 in mg 3.” H.HN H3 93 - ............................ nu 8. .Moz wz mm.“ 5.“ 8." Sum Hm.” N3 m: .............................. H; 3 $2 wz MEN «.3 m3 m3 3N «Ha «.mu ............................... m 3H m2 .3; SH 9: 92 SH 3H 3H ............................... > ...... ----- ---.---. @va mHmV 3N mHuV mHmV mHNV ------------------ 5. 3. 9w wz am: a»: wNH a: 3H ”NH ”NH ............................... Hm 8. cu. wz 2am EH. :8 m3. Hm...” «Nm 3...». .............................. :w --- - ................ 1.3V «3V xiv xiv «EV 13V - ............................. Em .uwz m2 9: and «3 S.“ 3.” SH- Nwé ............................... am 5. wz SH. 3..." on.” 3.” SH. SH. w: -- ........................... 3 a.“ m2 3.” H3 «Hm 9mm HEN 3: I: -- .......................... .3 3. an. wz 3H HH.N 2: Sam 3d 2H m: --------------- Hz «H. .uaz m2 M3: 9% 3H 5H 3H mg: 3: ............. - ................ vz «H. «H 33w «qu 93 NH.» Saw «3 «3 :4 - ............................. Hz 3.. «a. mz pm.“ mm.” on.” H: a: «5 8.» .............................. 02 mu.» 5: m2 9.5 «.5 «.3 5m 2m 3m «:3 - ....... - ........... -- ...... - a-H ............ ----- ------ 5H SHV 8.HV SHV SHV SHV --- ------------------ 35V 25V 8.” wig-V «H1. gmv Ham m2 3: EH 3: 5H «.NH 3: WNH - -- ---- -. ----- --- 8.HV SHV 22V ooHV SHV 22V --- --.--- - -------- mH.NV deV mH.NV BdV mH.NV BNV S. .m~z wz 32. m3 5.» m2 «3 :3. a: - -- --- - ------ - -------- 1va 1va «iv 1va «Hz-V €qu 3. we. mz m: 3N Ha.“ EH. 3.” SH EH B. .52 m2 EH :2 8H 8H EH SH «5 ms .32 wz «.8 3x. 95 «.8 9% HS 9% --- --- ---- ----- 22V SHV SHV SHV 8.HV 3H E. .32 m2 8.“ ”3 H3 «3 3d 2d 2d wHH .uwz wz NE- pmm HS. 5m «S H? as 2 3. m2 gm Ham» Ham“ E; «.5 H13 «.8 --- --- - ------------ -- oH.V 2V 3V 2V 2.0V 25V m8. «8. 35. was. 38. Have. £3. $2. 83. ---- --- - -------- - $3.V 33V «gov SEV 33V wwvov mg. .92 3H. 3H. mNH. SH. «2. 2:. m2. an. .92 a: 2.» H3- 36 H3. EH. 3... --- ---- --.-- --- ----- 29A EQA EA SWA SQA EA «a. .mwz m2 m2 SH 3H SH SH NHH 5H So. .uaz m2 :3. 3H. 5:. m2. «5. HHN. EH. «H. .92 m2 3H «3 3H SH :3 3H SH 23 35 m2 :2 H: m3 5;. a3- 86 n3. --- --- ----- ------- -- «imA «an EMA @va @va «.3 An N .wdv AN H fig mflon uflwfiwfin “ohm Exam 5.2.00 :8: a H . N H N H ----- ---------- 5525539 :oSuEwH. Eavafim mu): HES £5 ----. ------- ------ Esom ”flow—=5 awn man-an E Page =: #:8th :m :5 awn—95¢ mm maflwfiflfia 73.6% “SHE‘S-H 3.x 3% fldagaofiggm fiuutgsgsebldm mend-B DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 110 wHwH . ma wz as $3 «mm m3 3“ «3 ANN H-H----H----HH-- ........ ----- AN pv wwz wz «.3 «do «.5 Wan Yum N56 ”.3. - - ................... :N 2.” .32 m2 and. 8.» EN 3.” pm.” 5.” 3.x H ....... n- ...... ---H-H-H- 05 mm .32 wz «.3 Eu 3N 9m“ «.3 mg mg ............... - ...... -- -- V ---m.p. WmZ ..... wz 9:. man 3:. «.5 3w ”.3 mg ----H---H--------H- ......... - > ................. m.§V m.§V m.§V m.§V REV m.EV -.- --- ------ -HHH-H- a. 3m .32 m2 3.. am a: 8m o3 2:. 5w ........................ um ..... - -H-.-- -------- ---.-.---- SMV N3. :3 .33. m3 :3. -.-----------.-------- :m -l--- - --- .................. 34V 33V 34V 34V 13V 23V ------ ---H------------ Em mp. .wwz m2 Y: fl: 3: mg: 9: 9N“ v.3 ----- --- ----- ------------ am 2.. mm. wZ wed 3...“ mm: flaw cad mm: 36 ----..-- --------- ---- an A: .32 m2 ”ZN mam QNN 3; 9mm a: v.3 --- ------------ - ------------ am NN. wN. wZ $4 ma.“ «9N mm." 84 me va -..- ------- - ----- - -------- -- «Z md .sz wZ ”.3 9mm o.vm on c.wm odm 9.3. ------ ------------------- 62 NH." ¢NA m2 26 end awd $3. 3.4.. ewd $6 ------------------------------ AZ am. av. m2 Sim 3N on.” SN bmd 35 32v - ------------------ -----. o: NHN Na.“ m2 adm wdm m.mm w.wm odm «Hm “Sm -.. -------------- - ----- ---- duh --- ----- - n-“ ----- ----- 84V 84V 84V 34V 84V 84V ----- - ----- -- ---- ----.--.-- de S.mV S.mV a: 3.mV wQV DA .sz mz QM: 9mg ch Tm: odN QNH v.5: mg. .52 m2 n: «o; H: 2: m2 a: we; ------ ------ -------- .......... Edv ENV DEV SNV DEV BNV - ..... - ..... -----:- --- ...... - 35V 24V $.mv S.mv wEV SdV ........... . -------- ---------- €va €va YSV 3; «2qu 1va ------ ...... - ................. $4 54 84V 22V S; n2 rm. .sz wz HMS wwd .36 Nwd mus has «$4. va .Moz wz m4: wdw méb Néw mdw mdr wdv - ----- ------ -------- - ...... -- 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V NH. .3. wz :N SN oHN wHN mvN mod NoN adv N.Nm wz ms; as.“ coHJ com; com; chJ owa E. .muz wz 9:. 3w «.3 «.5 ”.3. 9S. 3.» --- ------ -- ---------------- S.V 3. 3V 3. S. 5. woo. m8. m2 we". ed. :1. a3. 9:. 2:. SH. Eo. moo. wz 3;. «E. «5. an“. «2. m2. $4. mmc. .wwz mz mum. «hm. awn. man. .23.. mum. mov. mo. m1 :5.va owé $.m E.” 5.» $4" wad mm.» --- ------ ------.- .......... SWA EMA amuA fimA EMA SWA ov. .uwz wz cod mad mmN NwN wN.m wrN win «so. .wez wz bum. «Rm. mam. «mm. «64 «am. no...“ S. .92 m2 3.... $4. 5.» :4. an mm.” and ON.“ mud m2 NA: show W: 31w NAH de mud ------ ........................ 93 mix 23. @va SN 3» 3 H dd. N H «.3 anufiwfi SEQ amazon flywnmwo :52 N H N H N H -..-------- nomuanmfiuwowfi =053>ov€uvnflm NN\5 mNBH cm)» ---------- ------- - 053m Tam—:5 .Sn .3an E mum—.50 =a 3.59:3 am :5 Jung—5 mm fluwfivfia TOGO .8qu 8.33% 3x 539 S§aasuehooam ®u§m§§§eblém 55.9 11] COMPUTERIZED SPECTROGRAPHIC DATA FOR USGS STANDARDS « em wz Em man :2 Eu SN men 3. m2 ofi H: NS :: n.3, m: 5. m2 :3. 84. $4 35 mg «3 .92 m2 9:. WE. 9mm 95 mg. 3:. ”.5 83m EH «2 Ha p: a: m: --- ........ mANV ENV m.&V mqmv mANV ENV a.» 3. m2 3; Sm an” SN 5.“ amu .............................. S.mv wgv S.mV 25V de S.mv «m. 3. m2 m3 2:. NE. 86 m5. «3 and «9m .32 mz 2: SN v.3 3: ”.2 m3. m3 m5 8.“ m2 2..» :2- :k. and «S m; 9: SA 8. m2 3N man WNW m...“ 3m ”EN 9mm 2:. mad wz ”.3 New .95 «.8 5:. 98 95 3. .32 wz 3m cam 35 9% 3&- 9.3 9mm 5; .wwz mz «.2 wfi i: 1: 3: 3A 3: 8. .$2 wz 8; :2 Ed m2 8d :4 34 mm.» .mmz wz 5m 9% 3m «.3 SE ”.5 «.3 ..... - ---. HHHH ----.- 84V 84V 84V 84V 92V 84V ---------------------- 25V 22 3.” w: S.mv 85 m.“ S. m2 m3 5: «:8 2: 3: mi EN 2. S. ---m-w~ $4 ow.” :2 SA EA «3 $4 --- ----- - -------- - mgv de mgv B.~V mgv mdaV --- --- --------- - $.mV S.mv S.mV 34V 25V 35V ------ --- ------ 1va «.3V .1va €va €va 13V 54. 36 «.5 ”.8 Sb v.3 93 m5 «.8 m5 .2.“ ”.3 3: 9mm 3; «:5 «AN 3“ 3 a.» «NH «2 mm" m: m: a: «2 --- --- -- ----- - --------- 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 2. 5. m2 m3 mm.” 8.» an.» m: 2..“ m3. 3.” 5m, ------ m- 1 an 5. :3 can a: «3 m3 --- --- ---------- 3: 2: 3: wfi QSV M2: :5. a8. m2 5:. E. E. S. S. 3. 2. 3:. m2 and 2H. 31 ma. m2. 3;. mad .uwz wz 2:. 2:. «3:. was. ofi. SH. efi. ewe. Saw-m 3:. m3. 3;. 2m. :2. EB. 23. --- -- H: ------ 84A 81A 22A 84A 84A 84A ----- - 1-: - ---- SQA SWA 2m.A 29A 2m.A SQA 3. 3. 3%.va :3 SA 23 34 mm.” 34 $4 8. 25 mi :4 a: :4 E; a: w: a: Na. .uwz m2 5.» :3 «3 $5 86 53 Ed 33 .umz m2 3: .2: a; 85 a: Z: --- - -- - ------- .3» 3w 5.3 35A 35 .5.va 3H5: any? as; --------m.-.m_-:-w-_H Sim £33 -3250 :52 a H a H u H 55:55.33 €535”. wuavnflw 53¢. a}: 3:3. - ------ --- -------------- ogom macaw: awn 3.39 am 9550 an £532” 5 is Jason—3 «M 3:06:05: 709m. .353. 3.3: 3x 539 Sdas-Seéuwam wantsifibblda HAM—<9 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 112 ES .82 m2 5: «ma mm: mm: SN :2 a: ------H ...... --H----- uu E.» «.3. m2 3; 3m Nam z: N: 33 «.8 - ....... - ..... - ........... as on. .umz mz a.“ a: on.“ 3.“ w: an S.“ ------- ..... ------- an a: Ed in :N Nam 95 EN 92 fl: ------------- ...... -- % SJ. mg p: a: m2 m2 ofi 2: m: --- ....... ------- ...... > ........... - ------ m.§V ENV mANV ENV mguv WSV ---------------- a. $5 9: EN m3 m5 van 8“ mom 2: ---------------- .6 mm. 3. m2 «.3 $5 :3. 36. inn mo... m3. .............................. 1.3V xiv «EV 23V xiv «EV NM: EA m2 2; a; I: Q: mfi 22. a: mm. £2 wz 9%. S... 86. m3. mg mg mg m: w: mz 3a :N w: 3m 93 «.5 m3 2.» EA wz SN 3.“ m3 awn 92 N3 93 ------ ..... - ....... --- «z N.“ 3 wz man 3“ gm 3“ WE 3a 5.3 -------- ..... - ........ uz a: m: wz 3;. m: 23 m3. 3: 23 E.” ........ --.- .......... --- :2 «N. av. mz afia and OWN wad and HQN wwfi I‘ll-IIIIIIIII IIIIII Sin-Inn: OE. Nvé and wz Ném mév «an» vdv mém wdm m.mu IIIII n IIIIIIIII .u uuuuu lulu-I:- an— ............................ - 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V --------------- o: ------ ---- ----- ----- Sav 35V «EV cud wSV SfiV ---------------- to «A w." m2 2: and 36 «.2 3A ”.3 3: - -------- --- ------- ---- aw ----- - --- ---- ------ 84V 84V 34 84 84V 84V -,--------------- 5H ----------- - ---- ------ B.~V de B.NV ENV DEV Bfiv ---------------- um - ----------- . ------------------- mgv adv fidv 35V de $.mv . -- ------------------------- an ------------------------------ 1va «.SV «.SV «.3V 1va 1va -----.--------- so .3 5. m2 9% 5; m3 «.8 3L. “.3 3:. ---------------- .6 3. 3. m2 o: 3; 85 o: E: a: $3 ---- ----- --------- 8 $5 34. EA 9: a? 3: 9% 98 mg mg -------l--..------- 5 -------------------- ----- 84V 8.4V 84V 84V 84V 84V ---------------- E 3. 3. m2 22 $2 a: 2a a: SA BA :21...----------.---------- 3 3% «.5. wz Ev a: .mmv w: E E 3m ---- ----- ------1 ------- am 3 3. m2 «.3 3w» :5 «.3 2; «2 Ea - ----------- - ------ ------- m --- --- -------- -- ----- - 3V 2V 3V 2. EV 3V ---- ------- ---- ----- --- Ex 38. $8. wz $8. $3. 32” 3.3. was. 2:5. mono. --------------- -------- :2 mac. .52 m2 wfi. 2:. 88 H1. mud m2. wfi. -------------- --- ---------- - m 5o. a8. m2 m2. 2:. 5.3. mi. 25. 3;. m2. ---- ------------ -- ------ -- a,- ----- - --- ---- ----- 84A 84A 84A 84A 84A 84A ----------------- M ------ --- ---- ----- EMA EMA EMA EMA 3A 29A --------------- :2 B. an. $5.va a: $4 8.“ 5.” SN 34 no.“ - ---------- --------- no 3. mm. Sim mu.“ :3 .23 gm m3 9% 5.“ ------ ----------- ---H- 22 3.. .32 m2 34 mg «.2 13. :3 and an.” -- ------ -------- .... oh 85 3.5 m2 o3 a: :s «E and 1:. a5. -------- ---------- ---H a --- --- ---- ---------- Em @va 9% man minA 9mm -------------- -- «w Aqufiv GHQ": 28$ ------uwmw_-mw_m— .5th moat—om .30ch fig N H N H N a :omuanmfiaoamfi NEE miwm on}; ------ ----- - ---------- 23cm :ozugww vauwnuum ”com—ma hon 3an E @550 mu dawning E :2” #9555 «M 35353: Nlobm. $233 380 sex .33. oEae-Eotuuam w»~§3:&§ebll.mm mafia. 113 COMPUTERIZED SPECTROGRAPHIC DATA FOR USGS STANDARDS 3H .sz wz 2: m: m: S: «S «.mw w: «3 .wmz m2 «.3 «i «.3 1% I; 36 «.E o«. .32 m2 2.“ «.«4 £2 84 m3 «m4 :2 «b. ma. m2 «.2 «.3 92 m.«H 9: H.«H «.«H «.3 .52 wz ««H «2 «2 «S 2: «S mfi .............................. m.H«V m.H«V m.H«V m._«V 93V 98V «m 3 SS; wz mum 53 25 man man m3. «3. .............................. 35V «EV «EV «EV «EV 25V .............................. «EV vw-«V «3V 34V 33V 23V an. .52 m2 $4" :2. «3 an.” :3. 84 3.” B. «2 $8.va 36 «3 «E «3. «S m; 3.x :3 o«.« mz o.«« 95 «.3 «2% 3” 9mm 3» «A 8.” 83 m2 «.«m Sn 2.” «an «.3 m.«« «.5 «A «4 m2 3.” 3:” 98 9% can 95 3:. 8. «a. m2 :3 «.2 «3. «5. «3. «we w«.m a.” .uoz mz 3m «.3 33 93 9% «.w« «.3 «w... «3 wz :m 5:. «.3 m.«« 1% «.3 «.5 .............................. 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V .............................. 2a «3 a: «3 «EV 85 «m. 8. EA «3 «$1 «3 m: £3 a: 8.”. .............................. oo4\ 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V .................... - ----- E.«V E.«V S.«V E.«V £.«V fl.«V ...... --- ----- -------- 25V 25V «EV 25V «EV 25V ------------------------------ .1va YSV €va 1va 1va 1va «.«5 .92 m2 «.3 H.«« :« «.1 @.«« m.«« o.«« .2. E. m2 8..” «.3 £5 85.. «.2 and Ed «3 m«.« mz 3m 3:. «.3 «.3 95 «.3 9mm ------------------------------ 84V 84V 84V 84V SAV 84V ------------------------------ 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V «.3 «EA m2 «8 8m «5 «a «3 «3 mg .2. .mwz m2 «.3 «.3 «.3 9.5 «.3 «.5 93 ------------------- - ------ 2. 2V 3V 3V 2V S.V 58. «one. «mg. 3.2. «mg. 32. “32. «2 m8. m5. «2. 5:. :2. as. «2. m2. 8... «3. 2.3. $8. $8. «$9 35. ES. ---------------- 84A 84A 84A 84A 84A 84A ---------------- «SA «SA SQA «SA «SA «SA w«. 2. EA 36 $1..“ :a Ed 3.» Ed «3. 2. .Moz wz E.” :3. E.” «3. «3” 8;." 2....” en. .uoz mz m«.« «w.« E.« v«.« S.« «3 E.« o«. m2. m2 5.” 2% Ed :3” m3 3.». £20. 8... .uwz mz «.2 «.2 «.3 «.1 «.1 3: «.2 3H5: «HHS using mw—aaom .MWWWO flaw: N .n N a N H :omaam>wv chainsaw cN\Nw as mN\wN IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 0300” 7551.: ken 3.53 E Page :a 34.89.53 5 n2” «3:95» mm 3.595%: 739% 6:33. $9.3m «$95 geek .339 oERfi-Sokuuaw wuuimwsgseblém mam—<5 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 114 5: «.3 m2 «3 2; 3: m2 Ea «B a: m.» m: wz «3 .2: 3m «.3 2: o: 2: on. .92 m2 w: wm.m mg 2..“ 3." mg :5. 3. 3 m2 3.». as” «.3 EN EN «3 «an 3. .82 m2 m2 m2 m: a: w: a: a: ---- - ..... - ................. mANV m.§V 95V REV RSV ENV Q.” 3. m2 3: mm: 5: mm: a: a: 2: S. E. wz m; b: a; :8 $6 mg m»;- - ........... --- ............... 34V «3. xiv xiv NE 5.... m6 .uez m2 9: 2H m2: mi ”.2 3A «.5 E. .%z mz NS. 54. 3w w: :3 Now 5.5 «A 5 mz «tom 3: 3: 1: 93 «.NN EN - ........... -.----- .......... mANV ENV mdv ENV ENV fuv 9o 3. mz «.8 m3 9% «.8 NE 2; ME; a.” 3 m2 we“ 5.“ 3m 98 EN man 9:" X3 23 wz 8.» m3 :3 WE a; Saw I: 3. cm. mz ow.” mm.“ 8.“ m3 3." 8.x a: 3- % wz 5.2. 3m 3m #5 3:. 95 93 --..- -.--- ------ --- ...... - 84V 84V 22V 84V 84V 84V - ..... --..- .----- -- ----- - N... in 2.mv S.mv 9m 3 3 a." mz MEN MEN «.3 $3 SN 0:3 ”3 S. .32 wz SA 34 mm; 24 an; m5 3; ---- - ----- ------- -- ----- . mgv mgv mgv E.~V Eav mfiuv ---- ------H ---.--.- mgv 35V 25V 35V de 35V ------ ---- ------- 33V $va 1va «:va 1va «3V .uoz m2 1: NS .m2 1.3 2: 3m m2 .umz wz MEN «.8 m 2 3: «.3. new “.3 3 m2 2: 95 2H 33 35 >2 wfi ---- --.-- ------ ------- 84V 84V 84V 84V 23V 84V an. .32 mz 5.x mm.“ «H.» 2.“ m3 8.” m3. 3: QB mz 8w m: $5 3;. 3.. wow :m 3: Wu“ m2 m2 E .3: 12 :9 mm: a: a... «.8. m2 «2. 3. S S. 2. S. S. «8. m8. m2 «3. «so. 2:. 28. was. .v H. 9:. --- ----- ------ - ------- - 33. 33V 53. m2. 2:. NS. :5. .32 m2 wwm. amu. «mm. 2a. 2“. EN. mm”. ---- -.---- ----- - --------- 84A 84A 84A 22A 84A 84A ----- ---- ----- -------- SQA SQA EMA 29A EMA EMA an. .uoz mz a: mm; m: SA mm." 84 $4 2. 2. wz 8.x Ea 3.x 5N 3.x «3 S.» cm. «a. mz «a.» and H3 33 :3 :3 an 5. mm. mz S.» :3 3w :2. 5m 22w 3d .33 3... m2 3% was was .2: ”an min 9.3 Sufi; Aunfia Boa --- -- mmwMo-fi hchhmn mm—auom linoloo fldeH N d N H N .n III II II flowedflmfihfluwg E3333 Eavzflm .3: 33¢ NN\am 2.30m 735:: 5m 3.3m E 9550 :6 #:3an E as £95.25 mm 3—8505: 7an: £32: efi-sss sex 359 oEassuoéuuRw fiauggesblfia mania. 115 COMPUTERIZED SPECTROGRAPHIC DATA FOR USGS STANDARDS cam .uoz m2 «3 E man 3“ SN SH 3“ .uoz mz w: «2 1: NM: am: 3: E. 2. m2 «.3 «3. 34°. :3. p: on.” 3.” .95 m2 EN «.3 man 9mm 3a 9.3 .............................. BNA SNA ENA ENA ENA .............................. ENV ENV ENV REV mAaV 3m .mwz m2 m5. m2. «2. 5:. 8m Ev .............................. 35V 35V 25V odmv 35V .............................. xiv 23V $.vV $.vV 33V .............................. 23A 53 SEA 36A 38A .............................. fizv EEV REV EEV 54V 2. 5. m2 any." 8.“ 2...“ «in 3.» a: mi .32 m2 2; EH «3 a: H2 a: .............................. :AV REV 5.2V EIV :AV g.“ .92 m2 «.2 9.2 1.2 E: 3: «.3 m3 .uuz wz and m5. 2. w £3 36 o: 9m .32 m2 gm 3..» EN 93 3..." can ........... - ------- ---------- SAV 84V 84V 23V 84V 3 .82 m2 3 a; 8““. 2.5 35 93. £3 .uoz m2 .3“ 3.x v «a can man «an 2. .52 wz SA a: 3.4 $4 2.4 w: - ............................. mgv mgv mgv E.~V E.~V ........................ admv 25V S.mv 35V 2.mV uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu u o a ._ u «.3 wz Nun mg was an» awn «3 .32 m2 «.5 9% 1% «.3 WE Si. ...... ----- -------- n . .. «.2 «.5 ------------------------ 84V 84V 84V 84V 84V ------------------------ no; we; 84V 84 84V .92” m2 p: «3 m3 2.: m: a: ------------------------ QSV QEV o.SV oSV c.2V .92 m2 «3. 5. an. on. an. 3. .$2 wz :3. 3H. 2;. EH. «2. NS. ------------------------ 33V 5:. m2. 2:. 33V .92 m2 SA on.“ “uh :3 mm”; emu; $3. mz new. mom. . NS. . m. ........................ EMA SmA 39A 29A EQA S. .92 wz m3. «3. $5 a: m; 85 3.. .92 m2 was a: :2» ”3. o: a: on. 52 m2 and m; a: mvd 9.2 $5 3. .92 m2 a: e: 5;. a: :2. m: 3.x .92 m2 «.mu mdu man as“ EN «.3 SHQS anfi; nah—H awauom hWflMU :35” u a N H N nasamgv Eénflw min” «<2 «NEH --------------------------- "gunmnourwufi 895%.: 33—33. $855 awn 3:3 5 E950 :d .unoohoa E :2 £9.25 am flaw—Ewan ~I0>mm £333 :Ewssém sex 3% Sfiassuoéouaa wuutxifioolém HAM—<3 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS DETERMINATIONS OF RARE ALKALIS AND ALKALINE EARTHS IN USGS STANDARD ROCKS By SYDNEY ABBEY 1 The determinations in the table 97 were made in the chemical laboratories of the Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa. Portions of the samples were randomly inserted into batches of samples for routine I analysis over a period of several months. Barium and strontium were determined by atomic absorption spectrophotometry, and cesium, lithium,- and rubidium, by flame emission spectrophotometry. The methods have beed described by Abbey (1972). An extra digit has usually been retained in the estimates of the means and the standard deviations, and the 1 Geological Survey of Canada. user may round at his discretion. Data were obtained under the same conditions and assumptions, and with the same experimental design with a single variable of classification, used elsewhere in this volume. The analyses of variance and conclusions were calculated by F. J. Flanagan. REFERENCE Abbey, Sydney, 1972, Analysis of rocks and minerals by atomic absorption and flame emission spectrometry. Part IV. A composite scheme for the less common alkalies and alkaline earths. Geol. Survey Canada Paper 71—50, 18 p. TABLE 97.—-Estimates of the less common alkali and alkaline-earth contents of USGS samples [In parts per million. Conclusions from the analysis of variance: NS, not significant at Fem or the fractile of the F distribution indicated. d.f., de- grew of freedom: d.f. for all elements in W—l are 1 for bottles and 2 for error. Neg., negative bottle variance] Bottles Standard Deviation Conclu- Sample Element 1 2 3 Mean si on s ( (321:1?) ( (largo; ) G—2 ___________________ Ba 1780 1920 1880 1830 NS Neg. 58.6 1800 1810 1790 Cs 1.8 .9 1.4 1.32 NS .27 .19 1.4 1.1 1.3 Li 32 30 32 31.5 NS Neg. .9 32 32 31 Rb 200 165 165 174.2 NS 11.3 10.6 175 170 170 Sr 500 510 510 495 NS 0 17.8 490 480 480 GSP—l _________________ Ba 1310 1350 1340 1345 NS Neg. 38 1400 1350 1320 Cs 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.08 NS Neg. .18 .8 1.2 1.0 Li 29 27 30 28.7 NS .96 .58 29 28 29 Rb 275 235 270 264.2 NS (.975) 18.3 6.8 280 250 275 Sr 260 260 250 245 NS 0 17.8 230 230 240 AGV—l ________________ Ba 1360 1260 1220 1267 NS (.975) 90 33 1370 1250 1140 Cs 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.16 NS .08 .27 1.3 1.0 .7 Li 10 10 9 10 NS 0 .8 10 10 11 Rb 66 65 63 67.5 NS Neg. 4.5 72 74 65 Sr 660 670 630 652 NS 5.8 12.2 650 650 650 117 118 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 97.—Estimates of the less common alkali and alkaline-earth contents of USGS samples—Continued Bottles Conclu- Standard Deviation Sample Element 1 2 3 Mean sions (dB-£1239) (fir—2:3) BCR—l ___. ____________ BB. 790 710 730 732 NS 2.9 29 720 720 720 Cs 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.1 NS Neg. .25 .‘7 1.0 1.3 Li 13 17 12 13.7 NS 1.3 1.3 13 14 13 Rb 48 46 49 47.8 NS Neg. 3.2 48 52 44 Sr 320 330 330 318.3 NS Neg. 12.2 310 310 310 W—1 ___________________ Ba 150 250 ..... 208 NS (.975) 59 15 180 250 _____ Cs 1.2 1.5 _____ 1.2 NS .29 .21 .8 1.4 _____ Li 13 13 _____ 12.5 NS .9 1.6 10 14 _____ Rb 22 22 _____ 21.2 NS 0 1.5 19 22 _____ Sr 175 200 _____ 183.8 NS 11.2 7.5 175 185 _____ DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS COPPER, LITHIUM, MANGANESE, STRONTIUM, ZINC, SODIUM, POTASSIUM, AND MAGNESIUM CONTENTS OF EIGHT NEW USGS STANDARD ROCK SAMPLES By J. A. THOMAS, WAYNE MOUNT JOY, and CLAUDE HUFFMAN, JR. Atomic absorption spectrometry and flame emission spec- trometry techniques were used to determine the Cu, Li, Mn, Sr, Zn, Na20, K20, and MgO contents of USGS standard rock samples STM—l, RGM—l, QLO—l, SDC—l, BHVO-l, MAG—1, 800—1, and SGR—l. Eight portions, two from each of four bottles of each reference sample, were analyzed in random order for the elements. The analyses of variance show the samples to be homogeneous for these elements by the methods used. Eight new reference samples have recently been added to the USGS standard rock sample program. The new reference samples include: a nepheline syenite from Table Mountain, Ore. (STM—l); a rhyolite obsidian from Glass Mountain, Calif. (RGM—l); a quartz Iatite from Lake County, Ore. (QLO—l); a mica schist from Rock Creek Park, Washington, DC. (SDC—l); a basalt from Hawaii (BHVO—l); a marine mud from the Wilkerson Basin, Gulf of Maine (MAG—1); a sample of the Cody Shale from Natrona County, Wyo. (800-1); and a shale from the Green River Formation (8GB— 1). This paper presents data on five trace elements— copper, lithium, manganese, strontium, and zinc— and for the minor oxides of sodium, potassium, and magnesium in the new reference samples. Eight portions, two from each of four bottles of each ref- erence sample, were analyzed in random order to obtain the analytical data. Cu, Li, Mn, Sr, Zn, and Mg were determined by atomic absorption spec- trometry; Na and K were determined by flame emis- sion spectrometry. ANALYTICAL METHODS The atomic absorption procedure for determining Cu, Li, Mn, Sr, Zn, and Mg consists of decomposing 1 g of rock sample with nitric, hydrofluoric, and perchloric acids, fuming it to dryness, and finally taking the salts into solution in 100 ml of 5 percent v/v hydrochloric acid. This single sample solution was used to make both the atomic absorption and the flame photometer determinations for all ele- ments looked for. Portions of the sample solution were aspirated into the air-acetylene flame of an atomic absorption spectrophotometer to determine Cu, Li, Mn, Sr, Zn, and Mg using the appropriate hollow cathode lamp. The aliquots taken for the determination of Sr and Mg were diluted with a lanthanum chloride solution so that the final volume of solution contained 1 percent w/v lanthanum, which acts as a releasing agent for these elements. Standard solutions containing known concentrations of the element to be determined were used for cali- bration. The Cu, Li, Mn, Sr, Zn, and Mg data were ob- tained with a Perkin-Elmer model 303 atomic ab- sorption spectrophotometer using the instrumental parameters recommended by the manufacturer: Instrument parameters Parameter Cu Li Mn Sr Zn Mg Grating _______ UV Vis UV Vis UV UV Wavelength- A- 3247 6708 2794 4607 2138 2852 Slit _______ nm- 4 5 4 4 4 5 Lamp current -mA- 15 15 15 10 15 6 Flame (air- acetylene) condition ____ Oxidizing Oxidizing Oxidizing Reducing Oxidizing Reducing Filter _________ Out In Out Out Out Out 119 120 The sodium and potassium data were obtained with an Instrumentation Laboratories model 143 flame photometer using an air-propane flame and the instrumental parameters recommended by the manufacturer. Lithium solution was added as an internal standard to an aliquot of the sample solu- tion prior to aspiration into the flame of the instru- ment. Standard solutions containing known amounts of sodium, potassium, and lithium were used for calibration. The values obtained for each element, their arith- DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS metic mean, and the conclusions from the analysis of variance are given in table 98. The analysis of variance for the several sets of data show the mean sum of squares for the variation attributable to bot- tles is not significantly greater (F035) than that for within bottles, and therefore we may consider the bottles of samples to be homogeneous for Cu, Li, Mn, Sr, Zn, Na, K, and Mg by the analytical methods used. The averages in table 98 are shown with an ex- tra significant digit, and the user may round or not at his discretion. TABLE 98.-Determinatians and estimates of several elements and oxides in eight USGS samples [Conclusions from the analysis of variance: NS, not significant at Fons; d.f., degrees of freedom; Neg., negative bottle variance] Standard Deviation Bottles 0 1 - sample 1 2 3 4 mean (£33?) (£521) gig: Copper, in parts per million MAG—1 ___________________ 35 34 34 34 34.4 0.41 0.35 NS ' 35 35 34 34 BHVO—l _________________ 143 143 143 143 143 ___- _____ ___ 143 143 143 143 QLO—l ___________________ 34 35 33 33 33.5 Neg. .87 NS 33 33 33 34 STM-l ___________________ 6 6 6 6 6 ___- _____ ___ 6 6 6 6 SDC—l ___________________ 35 32 32 32 32.6 .76 .79 NS 33 33 32 32 RGM—l ___________________ 12 14 14 13 13.4 .46 .61 NS 13 13 14 14 SGR—l ___________________ 67 69 68 68 68.4 Neg. 1.5 NS 71 68 67 69 SCo-l ____________________ 30 31 30 30 30.1 .0 .35 NS ' 30 30 30 30 Lithium. in parts per million MAG—1 ___________________ 78 78 77 77 77.6 0.41 0.35 NS 78 78 77 78 BHVO—l _________________ 5 5 5 5 5 ____ _____ ___ 5 5 5 5 QLO—l ___________________ 24 24 24 25 24.6 Neg. .61 NS 25 25 25 25 STM—l ___________________ 36 36 36 36 36.1 .0 .35 NS 36 37 36 36 SDG-l .................... 36 36 36 36 36 ___- _____ ___ 36 36 36 36 RGM—l ___________________ 61 61 61 61 61 ..___ _____ ___ 61 61 61 61 SGR—l ___________________ 131 131 131 131 131 .20 .50 NS 131 130 132 131 SCo-l ____________________ 44 45 44 44 44.2 Neg. .50 NS 45 44 44 44 COPPER, LITHIUM, MANGANESE, STRONTIUM, ZINC, SODIUM, POTASSIUM, AND MAGNESIUM 121 TABLE 98.—Determimztions and estimates of several elements and oxides in eight USGS samples—«Continued Standard Deviation Bottles 0 l - s‘mple 1 2 3 ‘ mm (33?) (£251) £35.: Manganese, in plrts per million MAG—1 ___________________ 723 720 714 714 713.0 Neg. 6.9 NS 710 713 705 705 BHVO—I _________________ 1,290 1,290 1,280 1,290 1,286 Neg. 6.1 NS 1,280 1,280 1,290 1,290 QLO—l ___________________ 670 670 670 670 672.5 Neg. 4.3 NS 675 675 680 670 STM—l ___________________ 1,570 1,570 1,555 1,574 1,568.9 2.4 5.4 NS 1,570 1,570 1,570 1,572 SDC—l ___________________ 825 825 825 825 825.5 .46 1.8 NS 825 825 824 830 RGM—l ___________________ 264 260 260 260 264.5 1.2 11.8 NS 264 260 293 255 SGR—l ___________________ 250 250 250 250 250.5 Neg. .7 NS 251 251 251 251 SCO—l ____________________ 406 400 400 398 397.8 Neg. 4.6 NS 399 393 393 393 Strontium, in parts per million MAG—1 ___________________ 175 173 173 173 173.4 1.1 0.35 NS 175 173 173 172 BHVO—l _________________ 444 437 440 433 438.5 Neg. 4.5 NS 437 440 435 442 QLO—l ___________________ 383 380 380 382 381.8 1.1 1.1 NS 383 380 383 383 STM—l ___________________ 595 595 600 625 609.4 Neg. 16 NS 610 610 635 605 SDC—l ___________________ 182 187 190 182 187.5 Neg. 6.0 NS 198 187 187 187 RGM—l ___________________ 102 100 99 100 100.1 .29 .79 NS 100 100 100 100 SGR—l ___________________ 325 333 330 350 332.2 6.0 9.8 NS 325 315 345 335 800—1 ____________________ 161 154 159 151 152.9 Neg. 5.1 NS 151 148 151 148 Zinc. in puts per million MAG—1 ___________________ 124 124 123 124 123.9 0.0 0.35 NS 124 124 124 124 BHVO-l _________________ 100 100 100 100 100 _..__ _____ __- 100 100 100 100 QLO—l ___________________ 57 57 57 57 57 ..-..- ..... -_- 57 57 57 57 STM—l ___________________ 245 245 245 245 243.8 Neg. 2.5 NS 245 240 245 240 SDC—l ____________________ 100 100 100 100 99.9 .0 .35 NS 100 99 100 100 RGM—l ___________________ 33 33 33 33 33 _-__ _____ ___ 33 33 33 33 ,SGR—l ___________________ 73 72 72 72 72.1 .0 .35 NS ' 72 72 72 72 800—1 ____________________ 96 96 96 95 95.4 Neg. .79 NS 94 95 96 95 122 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 98.—Determ£mtions and estimates of several elements and oxides in eight USGS samples—Confined Bottles :tandnrd Degation Conclu- smple 1 2 3 4 me“ mfg?) («1.523) “”3 Sodium oxide. in percent MAG—1 ___________________ 3.79 3.84 3.79 3.78 3.792 Neg. 0.026 NS 3.78 3.77 3.80 3.79 BHVO—l ________________ 2.29 2.28 2.29 2.28 2.291 Neg. .011 NS 2.29 2.29 2.31 2.30 QLO—l ___________________ 4.17 4.17 4.20 4.17 4.185 .012 .016 NS 4.21 4.19 4.21 4.16 STM—l ___________________ 8.76 8.74 8.73 8.74 8.730 Neg. .018 NS 8.73 8.71 8.71 8.72 SDC-l ___________________ 2.08 2.06 2.07 2.08 2.069 .006 .006 NS 2.07 2.06 2.06 2.07 RGM—l ___________________ 4.01 4.03 4.01 4.02 4.002 Neg. .023 NS 4.00 4.00 3.96 3.99 SGR—l ___________________ 3.03 3.04 3.01 3.04 3.025 Neg. .012 NS 3.02 3.01 3.02 3.03 SCo—l ____________________ 0.90 .92 .92 .94 0.918 .012 .008 NS .90 .92 .93 .92 Potassium oxide, in percent MAG—1 ___________________ 3.52 3.55 3.53 3.53 3.528 Neg. 0.011 NS 3.52 3.52 3.53 3.52 BHVO—l _________________ .516 .512 .514 .514 .5168 Neg. .0049 NS .517 .520 .525 .517 QLO—l ___________________ 3.57 3.57 3.58 3.57 3.565 Neg. .011 NS 3.56 3.55 3.56 3.56 STM—l ___________________ 4.24 4.23 4.23 4.23 4.229 Neg. .0093 NS 4.22 4.22 4.22 4.24 SDC—l ___________________ 3.21 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.206 Neg. .0061 NS 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.21 RGM—l ___________________ 4.27 4.28 4.28 4.28 4.263 Neg. .025 NS 4.27 4.26 4.22 4.25 SGR—l ___________________ 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.598 0.0 .0071 NS 1.60 1.58 1.60 1.60 8004 ____________________ 2.68 2.68 2.65 2.67 2.675 Neg. .017 NS 2.70 2.67 2.69 2.66 Magnesium oxide, in percent MAG—1 ___________________ 3.05 3.00 3.00 2.95 3.00 0.010 0.025 NS 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 BHVO—l ................. 7.00 7 .00 6.94 7.00 6.98 Neg. .038 NS 6.92 6.96 7 .00 7.00 QLO-l ___________________ .98 .96 .97 .97 .964 .0 .011 NS .96 .95 .97 .95 STM-l ___________________ .099 .097 .096 .099 .0986 Neg. .0019 NS .099 .102 .098 .099 SDC—l ................... 1.67 1.64 1.65 1.64 1.649 .004 .011 NS 1.65 1.64 1.64 1.66 RGM-l ___________________ .268 .264 .265 .267 .2662 Neg. .0015 NS .267 .267 .267 .265 SGR-l ___________________ 4.31 4.30 4.34 4.31 4.319 .019 .025 NS 4.35 4.26 4.33 4.35 SCO-l ____________________ 2.54 2.59 2.60 2.64 2.601 .028 .020 NS 2.58 2.63 2.60 2.63 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS THE CARBON CONTENTS OF USGS VOLCANIC ROCK STANDARDS F. J. FLANAGAN, J. C. CHANDLER, I. A. BREGER, C. B. MOORE, 1 and C. F. LEWIS 1 The carbon contents of USGS volcanic rock standards have been determined in two laboratories by slightly difl’erent com- bustion methods. The carbon contents of the bottles of USGS sample BCR—l used by Arizona State University are hetero- geneous. If one accepts the risk of testing F ratios against Fm, the carbon contents of bottles of BHVO—l and QLO—l at Arizona State may be considered homogeneous. The carbon contents of bottles of USGS sample RGM—l used by both laboratories may be accepted as homogeneous, and data ob- tained by the USGS laboratory indicate that the carbon con- tents of bottles of the two basalts, BCR—l and BHVO—l, may also be considered homogeneous. The means of the car- bon contents of RGM—l determined in the two laboratories differ statistically but not analytically, whereas the labora- tories should use their own averages for the basalts, BCR—l and BHVO-l. INTRODUCTION Information on the concentration of carbon in the parts-per-million range in lunar and terrestrial rocks has been required for various geochemical studies. During the course of lunar studies, two of us (see Moore and others, 1970) reported five deter- minations of carbon in USGS sample BCR—l, a basalt, for an estimated average of 330 ppm C. When subsequent analyses of other basalts indi- cated that this value might be too great, additional determinations were made on USGS sample BCR—l and on the following USGS samples: BHVO—l, a basalt from the 1919 Kilauea (Hawaii) flow; QLO— 1, a quartz latite from Oregon; and RGM—l, a rhyo- lite from Glass Mountain, Calif. The last three sam- ples are described elsewhere in this Professional Paper. Data obtained for those four samples at the Arizona State University are shown in table 99. USGS samples BCR—l, BHVO—l, and RGM-l were also analyzed in the laboratories of the US. 851?glenter for Meteorite Studies, Arizona State University, Tempe, Ariz. Geological Survey by a different technique; these values are listed in table 100. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY Refractory crucibles (LECO 528—35 heavy duty) were heated for two hours at 1,100°C in a vented furnace. After the crucibles had cooled, 0.5 g of low- carbon iron chips and 1.25 g of copper metal were added to each crucible as accelerators. These cruci- bles were then reheated to 450°-—500°C- for 1 hour and allowed to cool. A sufficient amount of an open- hearth iron standard, NBS 55e, was weighed into a series of these crucibles to contain 11, 22, and 45 pg of carbon. This series was prepared in duplicate along with a series of blanks containing no iron standard. The blanks were used first, and combustion was carried out in a LECO 521—000 1.5-kW induction furnace for 60 sec at 1,500°C, with a flow rate of 1 1 of oxygen per minute. Combustion products were passed through a dust trap, a trap filled with MnO2 to remove S02, and a rare-earth———copper oxide mix- ture heated in a furnace to oxidize CO to 002. Carbon dioxide was then determined in a LECO ELC—12 low-carbon analyzer in which CO2 and oxy- gen are swept into a gas-chromatographic unit and through a thermal-conductivity detector by a stream of helium. The area of the absorption peak corres- ponding to CO2 was integrated electronically. It was generally necessary to run four blanks to be certain of instrumental stability. Sample weights of unknowns, 250—350 mg, were chosen so as to contain carbon contents falling in the center of the linear calibration curve that was estab- 123 124 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 99.—Determi'mztions of carbon and summary of estimates for USGS samples by Arizona, State University [In parts per million. Conclusions from the analysis of variance: S, significant, or NS, not significant, at the fractile of the F distribution shown or at 170.95 where none is indicated. d.f., degrees of freedom] Standard deviation Conclu- Determinations Mean sions (Egg-es) MEI-Elm Basalt BCR—l Bottle Bottle Bottle 63/9 56/ 5 3/ 10 66 78 92 65 74 85 62 74 92 72 80 90 75 81 88 Average _________ 68.0 77.4 89.4 78.3 S, 0.99 10.6 4.0 69 _ 76 88 72 82 86 68 75 87 70 81 86 74 66 100 Average _________ 70.6 76.0 89.4 78.7 S, 0.99 9.4 5.2 Basalt BHVO-l Bottle Bottle Bottle 57/9 47/ 1 17 / 11 105 110 101 11 1 105 101 105 108 100 114 102 98 108 94 98 Average _________ 108.6 103.8 99.6 104.0 NS, 0.99 4.1 4.4 Quartz Latite QLO—l Bottle Bottle Bottle 20/12 2/22 21/10 73 72 62 73 80 64 67 71 66 64 67 65 79 69 56 Average _________ 71.2 71.8 62.6 68.5 NS, 0.99 4.6 5.0 Rhyolite RGM-l Bottle Bottle Bottle 4/ 15 10/ 25 37/ 3 43 41 60 44 49 58 86 51 61 47 50 60 64 41 58 Average _________ 56.8 46.4 59.4 54.2 NS 4.8 11.0 45 41 58 43 45 60 46 50 61 84 56 54 51 46 57 Average _________ 53.8 47.6 58.0 53.1 NS 2.3 10.5 lished from multiple analyses of standards and blanks by the method of least squares. An analytical sequence consisted of 26 combus- tions of standards, blanks, and unknowns in a pre- determined order so that blank values could be re- corded against time to correct for instrumental drift, if necessary. Unknown samples were analyzed in random order. U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY A Model 185 F and M Carbon-Hydrogen-Nitrogen Analyzer was used in which the sample was mixed with a mixture of manganese and tungsten oxides and then subjected to combustion in a closed cham- ber at 1,050°C. Combustion products were passed through a purifying train, and the effluent carbon dioxide, entrained in a stream of helium, was passed THE CARBON CONTENTS OF USGS VOLCANIC ROCK STANDARDS 125 TABLE 100.———Determinations of carbon and summary of estimates for USGS samples by USGS laboratory [In parts per million. Conclusions from the analysis of variance: NS, not significant at 170.95. d.f., degrees of freedom] Standard deviation Conclu- Determinations Mean sions (Egg?) ($37219) Basalt BCR—l Bottle Bottle Bottle 32/27 74/28 80/30 35 52 68 51 56 57 Average _________ 43 54 62 53.2 NS 7.9 8.1 Basalt BHVO—l Bottle Bottle Bottle 52/11 53/14 60/11 84 69 64 79 82 70 Average _________ 82 76 67 74.7 NS 5.8 6.2 Rhyolite RGM-l Bottle Bottle Bottle 4/ 21 29 / 3 1 57/ 8 25 40 49 42 48 54 Average _________ 34 44 52 43.0 NS 7.1 7.9 through a chromatographic column and detector to isolate and measure the quantity of carbon dioxide produced. Standards were prepared for calibration by mix- ing a sample of analyzed coal with fired quartz’ sand and then making dilutions with additional quartz sand to yield samples containing from 38.3 percent to 50.0 ppm of carbon. Values of carbon in these standards down to and including 275 ppm were con- firmed by analysis in a non-USGS laboratory, using other instrumentation. Equipment in the non-USGS laboratory was, however, unable to accommodate samples large enough to obtain acceptable accuracy where the samples submitted contained less than 275 ppm carbon. The F and M Analyzer was designed to accept samples of about 1 mg. When minor modifications were made in the sampling procedure, samples of about 80 mg of each coal standard or USGS rock were, however, used to achieve maximum accuracy for carbon contents in the parts-per-million range. On the basis of analyses of the coal standards, it is known that less than 2.5 ng of carbon can readily be detected by this analytical procedure. To ensure complete combustion of carbon in samples contain- ing carbon in the parts—per-million range, the com- bustion period was increased from the normal 10 seconds to 60 seconds. A series of analyses using the coal standards did not show any “tailing” of carbon dioxide when combustion periods were increased to more than 60 seconds, thus showing complete com- bustion of all the carbon in a sample within the 60- second interval. Calibration of the technique was based on analyses of these coal standards. DISCUSSION The data obtained independently by both labora- tories were assembled, and the calculations of the analysis of variance for a single variable of classifi- cation were made. Estimates and conclusions result- ing from these calculations are given in the tables with the raw data. The duplicate sets of data for both BCR—l and RGM—l by Arizona State agree with each other. By inspection, the two estimates of both the bottle and the analytical (error) standard deviations for BCR— 1 would not be significantly different if an F test were made, and a t test would confirm a conclusion reached by inspection, that the means of the two sets of data would not differ significantly. For both sets of data for BCR—l, however, we must conclude that the ratios of the mean sum of squares between bottles over the mean sum of squares within bottles are significantly larger than F039 (degrees of free- dom (d.f.) 2, 12) =6.93; we must also conclude that the bottles of BCR—l are heterogeneous for their carbon content. Arizona State should use the aver- age of each bottle calculated from the 10 determinations. Similarly, by inspection, the estimates obtained for RGM—l from the duplicate sets of data by Ari- zona State will not differ significantly. The F test, against F0.95 (d.f. 2, 12) =3.89, in the analysis of 126 variance for both sets of data results in a conclusion of nonsignificance, and we may accept the carbon contents for either set of data to be homogeneous among bottles. As the difference between the two means is less than half of the smaller of the esti- mated bottle standard deviations, the duplicate sets of data may be considered as sets from the same population of values to yield the following estimates: ppm Mean ________________________________ 53.7 Bottle standard deviation _______________ 5.1 Error standard deviation _______________ 10.2 The sets of data from Arizona State for both BHVO—l and QLO—l must be declared heterogeneous if the F test were to be made against F0375 (d.f. 2, 12) =5.10. If we are willing to accept the additional risk of testing against F0.99 (d.f. 2, 12) =6.93, the carbon contents of the bottles of these two samples may be accepted as homogeneous. The data by the USGS laboratory for the three rocks yield F ratios that are not significantly larger than the tabled value at F035. We may accept the carbon contents for bottles of each sample as homogeneous. This study, like others, raises another problem- difi'erences in the data between laboratories. When DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS pooled variances are used for the duplicate sets of data for BCR—l and RGM—l by Arizona State, both the error and the bottle variances for BCR—l, BHVO—l, and RGM—l are not significantly different from similar estimates obtained by the USGS. The means of the duplicate sets of data for BCR—l and RGM-l by Arizona State were pooled, and together with the single mean for BHVO—l, were used to test for differences between means with estimates for the same samples by the USGS. The differences between means by the two laboratories were significant, and the laboratories should use their own estimates for the three samples. Although the average carbon contents of RGM—l determined by the two laboratories differ statistical- ly, we do not believe that the differences are analytp ically significant. Future studies may determine which of the two laboratories obtains the more cor- rect estimates for the two basalts, BCR—l and BHVO—l. REFERENCE CITED Moore, C. B., Gibson, E. K., Larimer, J. W., Lewis, G. F. and Nichiporuk, W., 1970, Total carbon and nitrogen abund- ances in Apollo 11 lunar samples and selected achondrites and basalts, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Proc., v. 2: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Suppl. No. 1, p. 1375-1382. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS FINAL COMPILATION OF K-Ar AND Rb-Sr MEASUREMENTS ON P—207, THE USGS INTERLABORATORY STANDARD MUSCOVITE By M. A. LANPHERE and G. B. DALRYMPLE K-Ar analyses of P—207 in 33 laboratories and Rb-Sr analyses in 17 laboratories indicate that for this muscovite the average interlaboratory standard deviation is 1.2 percent for K-Ar ages and 2.8 percent for Rb-Sr ages and that the average intralaboratory standard deviation is 1.9 percent for K-Ar ages and 3.0 percent for Rb-Sr ages. The mean K-Ar age of P-207 is 80.6:02 m.y. (s5) and the mean Rb-Sr age is 87.5:0.7 m.y. (8;). The difference between these ages may be due to common Sr of anomalous composition. In 1964 approximately 1,100 g of muscovite were separated from an 81-m.-y.-old granite and distrib— uted to 21 K-Ar and Rb-Sr dating laboratories in six countries. The purpose of this standard mineral, known as P—207, was to provide a source of badly needed data on intralaboratory and interlaboratory precision. Although prepared primarily as a K-Ar standard, some laboratories also have found it use- ful as a Rb-Sr standard. The initial description and analyses of P—207 were published in 1965 (Lanphere and Dalrymple, 1965) and were followed 2 yr later by a compilation of results from 25 laboratories (Lanphere and Dalrymple, 1967) . P—207 has now been distributed to 55 laboratories in 15 countries, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, England, France, Holland, Italy, Japan, Rumania, the Union of South Africa, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Switzerland, the United States, West Germany, and Yugoslavia, making P—207 the most extensive and successful K—Ar and Rb-Sr standard-mineral program to date. Unfortunately, however, the supply of this valuable standard is now depleted, and this will be the final compilation. As of November 1971, 37 laboratories had reported data, which are presented in tables 101 and 102 along with the appropriate measures of central ten- dency and dispersion. For uniformity, all statistics presented in these tables were calculated by us using standard techniques (Crow and others, 1960) from the raw data reported by the individual laboratories. The symbols used in the statistical summaries are 'n = total. number of measurements, T = arithmetic mean of laboratory means, 17 =median of laboratory means, 3 =standard deviation of the mean of labora- tory means, =standard error of the mean of laboratory means, and so =pooled estimate of intralaboratory preci- s1dn. Three laboratories had used P—207 for calibration of their Ar38 tracers and these data, indicated by parentheses in table 101, were not used in calculat- ing the interlaboratory statistics. We calculated K-Ar and Rb-Sr ages for each laboratory from the individual laboratory means using the constants shown in the tables. For the K-Ar results, K measurements were made by five different techniques, and Ar measurements by two. In addition, two K-Ar ages were measured by us using the new Arm/Ar39 technique, and the mean of these are within 0.6 percent of the interna- tional mean. For K, Ar, and the calculated age, the results do not appear to vary significantly with ana- lytical technique, and the interlaboratory and intra- laboratory precision appears to be good. F tests indi- cate that the difference between the interlaboratory and intralaboratory precision is significant at the 5—percent level for calculated ages but not for the K and Ar measurements. Interlaboratory precision for calculated ages is significantly better than the intra- laboratory precision. This precision is better proba- bly because the interlaboratory statistics are calcu- lated from laboratory means rather than on the basis of a single random date from each laboratory, 127 tn | z 128 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 101.—Potassium and argon analyses of P—207 [Method. FP, flame photometry: ID, isotope dilution; XR, X—ray fluorescence; GR, gravimetric; AA, atomic absorption: AC. activation analysis; FT, Arm/Ar” technique. Tracer type: B, bulb system; M, manifold or “batch” system. Calibration: A. Ar from atmosphere; C, purified commercial air Ar; I, interlaboratory standard mineral; S, intralaboratory standard mineral. Data in parentheses were not included in interlaboratory statistics be- cause P—207 was used for tracer calibration. C.V., coefiicient of variation] Potassium analyses Argon analyses Mean K20 Tracer 2498:“, Calcu- Number K20 (weight type Number (109212” ) lated Laboratory Method of (weight percent) Method and of an 3 age 1 analyses percent) and calibra- analyses standard (m.y. ) standard tion deviation deviation Australian National University. FF 3 __________ 10.41 : 0.07 ID MAS 14 1.244 : 0.013 79.2 Bundesanstalt fiir Boden- fotschung (West Germany). FF 6 __________ 10.38 : 0.04 ID BIS (24) (1.259 : 0.013) (80.3) California Institute of Technology. _ _ _ - _ ____________________ ID BC 2 1.259 : 0.003 ....... Carleton University (Canada). FF 6 __________ 10.33: 006 ID MS 2 1263:0000 81.0 Cambridge University (England). FF 6 __________ 10.31 : 0.07 Eidgenossiche Technische Hochschule (Switzer- land). ID 7 .......... 10.42 :007 ID BC 13 1268:0013 80.6 Geochron Labs (United G Staten]. S f C d $11; 4 __________ ? 1004:017 ID BACIS 3 1251:0005 82.5 eo ogica urvey o ana a- 1 10.43 ID 5 1035:0-15‘ 1036:014 ID MC 1 1.283 82.0 Geological Survey of Japan_- GR 3 10.48 : 0.10] - FF 2 1022:009} 1037:014 ID MC 3 1258:0005 80.4 ‘ AA 2 10.36 :0.04J Georgia Institute of Tech- nology (United States) . AA 1 __________ 10.32 ID BA 4 1.253 : 0.024 80.4 Institute for Atomic Physics (Rumania) . --_ __ ____________________ AC _____ 1 1.297 Isotopes, Inc. (United Sta ). ID 4 __________ 1023:017 ID MA 2 1244:0006 80.6 Lamont-Doherty Geological 0bserv)atory (United ID 5 1 0 38 08] tates . . + 0. AA 3 1048:0091 1042:009 ID MA 7 1275:0032 81.0 MEX Plane]; Institute (W. FF 0 40 4) ermany . 6 1 . : 0.0 ID 2 ”35:01)” 1039:005 ID MA 3 1258:0008 80.2 Mineralogische Institut . Universitfit (Switzerland). FF 2 __________ 10.36 : 0.04 ID BA 2 1.246 : 0.009 79.7 Mobile Research and Devlop- ment Corp. (United States). GR 4 __________ 10.42 : 0.02 [D MC 3 1.245 : 0.006 79.2 New Zealand Institute of Nucl’ear Science. FP 12 __________ 10.39 :004 ID MA 3 1.241 :0013 79.1 Oxford (England) __________ FP 12 __________ 10.44 : 0.21 ID BA 4 1.264 : 0.009 80.2 Pennsylvania State University (United States). GR 1 __________ 10.22 _ _ _____ __ __________________ Shell Development Co. T (“UlniteiiI States). ( 17:1; __ __________ ) __________ ID BC 3 1245:0016 ——————— o o u niversity Japan)__ 8 1018:009 1 U s G 1 s g? 4 1028:009; .0.22:010 ID MA 11 1.271 :0048 82.3 . . eo ogical urvey _____ 12 10.20:0.09 ID 1 1039 5 1021:010 11%); B015 {1; 1252:0010 33%} 81.1 Uniélersigy )of Alberta 1 ans a . FF 2 10.34+0.02 GR 5 10-34i-011l 1034:009 ID BACIS 3 1263:0003 80.9 University of Amsterdam (Holland). FF 6 __________ 1024:016 ID BAG 8 1273:0023 82.3 University of Arizona (United States). FF 7 __________ 1040:010 ID MA 3 1270:0007 80.9 University of British Columbia (Canada). FP 25 __________ 1033 : 006 ID BA 11 1.245 : 0.015 79.9 University of California, Berkeley (United States). FP __________ 10.29 : 0.02 ID MIS 1 1.265 81.4 University of California, La Jolla (United States). AA 1 __________ 10.16 ID BA 4 1.245 : 0009 81.2 University of Cape Town (South Africa). XR 1 __________ 10.41 __ _____ __ .................. University of Hawaii (United States). FF 7 __________ 9.92:0.16 ID MI (13) (1260:0018) (84.0) University of Rome (Italy) __ ___ __ ____________________ ID BI 3 1281:0011 ------- University of $50 Paulo (Brazil). ___ __ ____________________ ID MIS (14) (1.256 :0027) ....... University of Tokyo (Japan)- GR 3 __________ 1040:004 ID BC 5 1241:0029 79.1 Universitv of Toronto (Canada). ___ -_ ____________________ ID M015 5 1.273 :0007 _______ Yasle University (United tates . FF 2 10.30:0.38l AA 4 1020:005‘ 1023:018 ID BACI 5 1234:0011 79.9 Statistical Summary: 1 93 __________ _ - _____ 1 46 __________________ -_ 10.31 _. _____ __ 1.259 80.6 __ 10.34 _____ __ 1.258 80.6 __ 0.12 (C.V #1 2 _____ __ 0.016 (C.V.=1.2 percent) 1.0 (C.V.: percent) 1. .2 percent) -_ __________ 0 02 (C.V —0 2 _____ __ 0.003 (C.V.:0.2 percent) 0.2 (C.V.— percent) 1.6 percent of value 0.3 percent) 1.9 percent of value 1 le=0585 X 104° yr‘1;)\p : 4.72 >(10‘1° yr-1;K‘°/K= 1.19 )(10'4 mol/mol. 129 FINAL COMPILATION OF K-Ar AND Rb-Sr MEASUREMENTS 0N P—207 .mScod HES Amim>w~mv v:u 52.6 H Ea... A8\E.~wv 23:6 ”E3 Amwam>mhmv .wuzoumwhu:¢ hahIN ha a:0::wh=muu§~e .Buwfioaonn $545 .3 “Ewfiouanawfiu .wo:womw:o:c hahIN ha w\mo_o:~ 1: X 6306 «o u:w..:u..:mao:~ v.3 moon:H v .ou:oumw.~o:c hunIM ha u\mw~o:_ Tom X N55 mo a:o:~o.~:wa®:: 0:0 $6505 a .THI» files X mNAHEafi A a "assuwfwacmnim "mamdnifiafi 3:: 82.3 52: as: 83325: 33 MB: 9m IIII III ..... 2;: we ”E35: «.2 2:5» we £598: wfi II 253 no “.595: «A II ............................................ .5 3:3 .3: ms H . .Ov I 3:3th ad 5. ii I. ..... 3:023 «.mHSdV £85 3523 ms“ 5.0V 53. I- ”5.3 33. -- .......................................... 2 3:8 Inc: wN . H .>.Ov . 3:355 Nam m.N IIII III uuuuu 3:00.53 H.MHH.>.OV £399 353th H.m”.>.0v 3H6 II ”.>.Ov Nwmé II uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 0 «firm IIII III lllll 2:6 vwé II cvd II |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| E msw IIII III uuuuu mvoHd Nmmd II :36 II uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu Q I I I I I I I I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII av IIIIIIIIII ,vv IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII S “bafifism Gamay—«Sm mém ONA NA: ovvw. II DVNH. NH.m H I mvmd H IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Anon—5w magi-Dy hummhmzflp 28% III IIII NwN IIIII omoodHovHH. IIIIIII. IIIII N 5.66” wmdn M IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Aflundhv 9339 «o hfimhmiflp N.mw wmazn NNN :54 “Need H Nmao. «#6 H afim N ”Nd IT «55 N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Amuaumv 025% 9mm Mo hammhmgigw mfiw meA mbN «mod ofiodH @mo. NudH Had N I ovd # IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Ahfiwamv ammnH «0 35933:; 9% Emma 3N :34 waoo6+u$9 mmodITomfim m 8H.¢+:m.a m IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1::ng SomM we hummao>m:D II I I I II II I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II II de H a IIIIIIIIII Adumhmda inflowv :BOH. ammo we hammhwkrmflb. «tww NONA HwN vvoé maood Wfibmc. wmcd m ade N 53.: H mend N IIIIIIIIIIIII Augsw 60$:th 6:0Nmu< «0 hummawZED. m.wm aNNA PNN chbmd awood Hvbcu. wed H mo.m N Mud H mod N IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Ania—mom: EGGHR—mgdq MO Kan—musing: Qua womé NcN vebad mHmoéITwmmH. Nrod +mwv.m M HmfidITvmmd m IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII hoiflm mammgowmu .m.D. III IIII III IIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII IIIII II awed Hm IIII Agdam Emnbv hummhmiflp 003m diagram—Zak 9mm NMNA HwN omoA chodITacou. 986+ HNNd N owoéHHmmd N . 333m gig: .930 unofinofigun— min :33va uses 9% «w: on” 83 I new... I 3.» H I 55 fl - - 8:23“:ka 35:53.5 “.352: Eonficisfis «.5 2a.: :N 3...: 886 + £2. 33. + 8“.” N on: + 2:; m .AIm.m.m.E 32325qu I ma: hue—80 :uinfiaooum no 335%: 93 won: an“ :3: :86 H 83. mm; m as.» m I3: H .. 33283.5 5.. 3»: BS: 5232 you 3355: «flaw mvNA NHN mmwaé bVchH OHNH. «ed H mm.” m mmod H Nofid N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII guano «0 h0>h=w ngmuomcvmv 3a SN: MEN «8.: :63. H 32. 53 H 3N4” c at; H mm; p -- 258:3 :53 3.502853: b: :Snamovnam 95 was." NE 56.“ wvced+wmmoév 236 + Bfim v mwud+aomd 5 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII giggip 1:832 Sum—23:3 :omungwc .55.:va 35:: :05»?me 3:3: . . 33553 E; 3253:“ v5. .25de 2553,. min .25qu $05 Jfizx m in :2: fl im 9% H A MSea. 1.: A335 .1: v «o :52: 1.: no 33235 N 52m 5: a am 5:55". :33 535w :3: 5:552 am :33 gun—:52” mufiwfiflhflmdwfi Eflmafiosm 3:2:2335 EEEAEH n:o$a_.~d> we 0:23:23 ..>.O 63355 3:95;: 32:: .5553. 25.53 h: «Ha Egfiwhnuaws— NQNIAN KO ww§w§0$§w8§ §§wu§ckum 38 §Sw3o8mlfiqn Edam—p 130 and slight mineral inhomogeneities that would in- crease the intralaboratory dispersion would tend to average out in the laboratory means. Taken at face value, the statistics indicate that a difference in the K-Ar age of two samples similar to P—207 can be detected at the 95-percent level of confidence on the basis of single measurements from the average labo- ratory if the calculated ages differ by 5.8 percent, or 4.2 m.y. If duplicate measurements are made, then this critical value is only 3.7 percent, or 3.0 m.y. The critical values for measurements done in different laboratories should be similar. Nearly all the Rb and Sr measurements were made using isotope dilution. The few measurements made by X-ray fluorescence and flame photometry agree with the isotope dilution data. F tests indicate that the difference between interlaboratory and intra- laboratory precision is significant at the 5—percent level for Rb measurements but not for radiogenic Sr“, common Sr, or calculated age. The interlabora- tory precision for calculated ages is better than the intralaboratory precision as was observed for the K-Ar ages. The statistics indicate that a difference in the Rb-Sr age of two samples similar to P—207 can be detected at the 95-percent level of confidence on the basis of single measurements from the aver- age laboratory if the calculated ages differ by 8.4 percent, or 7.4 m.y. If duplicate measurements are made then this critical value is only 5.9 percent, or 5.2 m.y. A t test indicates that the mean K-Ar age is sig— nificantly different from the mean Rb-Sr age at the 5-percent level if the “geologically determined” half- life of 50><109 years (Aldrich and others, 1956) is used for Rb“. The mean K—Ar and Rb-Sr ages (80.6 and 82.7 m.y., respectively) are in good agreement if the 47 X 109-year half-life (Flynn and Glendenin, 1959) of Rb87 determined by liquid scintillation counting is used, but comparative geological studies suggest that a value of the half-life close to 50X 109 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS years is more likely. The calculated Rb-Sr ages are affected significantly by the isotopic composition of the common Sr in P—207 even though the Sr is quite radiogenic. A Sr‘57/Sr86 value of 0.706 for the com- mon Sr was used to calculate the ages in table 87. The composition of the common Sr has not been measured directly in another mineral in the rock. If the common Sr in P—207 has a Sr87/Sr86 value of 0.732, the mean calculated Rb-Sr age would be 80.6 m.y. This Sr87/Sr86 value is much higher than in nor- mal common. Sr. However, anomalous Sr having much higher Sr‘37/Sr86 was redistributed during Cre- taceous metamorphism in an area approximately 10—15 mi south of the small pluton from which P— 207 was collected (Lanphere and others, 1964). It seems possible, therefore, that the muscovite may contain common Sr of anomalous isotopic composi- tion and this could produce the observed difference between the K-Ar and Rb-Sr ages. REFERENCES CITED Aldrich, L. T., Wetherill, G. W., Tilton, G. R., and Davis, G. L., 1956, Half life of Rb“: Phys. Rev., v. 103, p. 1045—1047. Crow, E. L., Davis, F. A., and Maxfield, M. W., 1960, Sta- tistics manual: New York, Dover Pubs., 288 p. Flynn, K. F., and Glendenin, L. E., 1959, Half life and beta spectrum of Rb": Phys. Rev., v. 116, p. 744—748. Lanphere, M. A., and Dalrymple, G. B., 1965, P—207—An interlaboratory standard muscovite for argon and potas- sium analyses: Jour. Geophys. Research, v. 70, p. 3497— 3503. 1967, K-Ar and Rb-Sr measurements on P—2‘07, the U.S.G.S. interlaboratory standard muscovite: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 31, p. 1091—1094. Lanphere, M. A., Wasserburg, G. J ., Albee, A. L, and Tilton, G. R., 1964, Redistribution of strontium and rubidium isotopes during metamorphism, World Beater Complex, Panamint Range, California, Chap. 20, in Craig, Harmon, Miller, S. L., and Wasserburg, G. J., eds., Isotopic and cosmic chemistry: Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing 00., p. 269—320. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS By F. J. FLANAGAN This is the sixth of a series of papers by US. Geo- logical Survey personnel (Fairbairn and others, 1951; Stevens and others, 1960; Fleischer and Stev- ens, 1962; Fleischer, 1965, 1969) dealing with data on G—1 and W—l‘ and the third (Flanagan, 1967, 1969) on the series of samples, G—2 through BCR—l, first issued in 1964. There has been no G—l available for distribution since 1965 and the supply of W—1 for distribution is now exhausted. The supplies of several of the 1964 series of samples are being de- pleted at an alarming rate. The present format is similar to that of previous compilations in which the data are listed by rock analyses (table 103), major and minor oxides (table 104) , and trace elements (table 105) . For tables 104 and 105, the data for an element or oxide are first listed by methods, these data are then classified by the year of publication or of the receipt of a written communication, and finally the authors are listed alphabetically within the years. Violations of this nested structure for the data re- ported have occurred despite attempts to maintain the chronological and alphabetical order when enter- ing data received after the final manuscript tables had been typed. Some data obtained by methods less frequently used have been entered in convenient, rather than logical, places in the tables. Some data not entered in earlier compilations are listed here, as are references to data previously included from private communications. A scan of the tables for major and minor oxides and for trace elements reveals that the samples on which the most data have been reported are W—l and BCR—l and that this seeming popularity is due to the frequency with which they were used in conjunction with the analysis of samples of Moon rocks. A large amount of the available data appeared in the issue of Science devoted to the Moon (v. 167, no. 3918, Jan. 30, 1970) as well as in the supplements to Geo- chimica et Cosmochimica Acta reporting the pro- ceedings of Apollo Lunar Science Conferences. Other sources of data were US National Bureau Standards special Publication 312 (DeVoe and La Fleur, 1969) on modern trends in activation analysis, the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique publication 923 reporting the colloquium, “Dosage des éléments a l’état de traces dans les roches et les autres substances minérales naturelles,” held at Nancy, France, in December 1968 (Roubault and others, 1970), and the proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmochemistry (Brunfelt and Steinnes, 1971a). The general procedure for arriving at values was to compare the averages and the ranges of the data reported here with previous data and recommenda- tions. Notable exceptions to this process may be seen in the data for Rb and Sr, tabulated below, in which the averages by different methods are in such good agreement that the final choices, influenced greatly by data obtained by some form of the isotope-dilu- tion technique, were easily made. There is nothing authoritative in the summary values listed in tables 106 and 107. They are what I ’ consider the most reasonable values at this time but many analysts may wish to use preferred values of their choice. An example of such preferred values was published by Abbey (1970). The agreement or disagreement of the data could be discussed ad in- finitum, but no real purpose would be served by be- laboring the obvious. An extra digit has been in- cluded in many estimates, and the user may round at his discretion. For the environmentalists among us, however, the mercury, lead, thallium, and perhaps the zinc con— tents of the rocks seem sufficiently well characterized 131 132 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS so that they could be used as base levels for con- This compilation of data may be comprehensive, tamination by these elements. More data are neces- but there is an extremely high probability that it is sary for good estimates of the arsenic and cadmium not complete. I am grateful to all who have sent me contents. Further data on the mercury content of published or unpublished data, and I am especially miscellaneous natural inorganic materials, including indebted to Michael Fleischer who continually calls rocks, are given in “Mercury in the Environment” to my attention data published in the less readily (US. Geological Survey, 1970) . available foreign journals. Averages of rubidium and strontium tabulated by method Wal G—l G—2 GSP-l AGV—l PCC—l DTS—l BCR—l Rubidium in parts per million Method: Optical spectrographic..- 22 214 188 305 69 ____ ____ 47 Atomic absorption _____ 23 213 179 279 73 ____ __.__ 45.2 X-ray fluorescence _____ 22 215 166 246 69 _-__ ____ 45.2 Neutron activation _____ 22 224 167 239 71 _..__ ____ 46.5 Isotope dilution ________ 21 ___ 168 254 67 0.063 0.053 46.6 Preferred value ___________ 21 220 168 254 67 .063 .053 46.6 Strontium in parts per million Method: Optical spectrographic__ 164 284 506 255 698 ____ ____ 329 Atomic absorption _____ 208 270 466 249 653 ____ ____ 355 X-ray fluorescence _____ 190 254 484 239 680 _-__ ____ 336 Neutron activation _____ 180 251 427 226 631 ____ ____ 327 Isotope dilution ________ 188 __.. 479 233 657 0.41 0.35 330 Preferred value ___________ 190 250 479 233 657 .41 .35 330 TABLE 103.—New rock analyses, in percent Analysts and methods. Cheng-hong Chen; W—l, Annie An-nie Liu 2.7 Iwan Roelandts and Guy Bologne (written com- (Youh, 1970). mun. ., 1970): method of Roelandts and 31. S. E. Hill and R. B. Reid; rapid methods; Duchesne (1968); average of 2 analyses for average of 2 analvses (J. C. van Moort, Univ. DTS—I and BCR—l and of 3 for other samples. Tasmania, written commun.. 1968). 28. R. Pouget, M. Carrier, M. Lautelin, and A. 32. R. Cioni, F. Innocenti and R. Mazzuoli (1971); Vasseur; various methods (H. Agrinier, writ— various methods. ten commun" 1969). 33. D. C. Guido Friese; average of three analyses 29. Huber-Schausberger and others (1970); vari- (K. Schmidt, Zentrales Geologisches Institut, ous methods Berlin, written commun” 196 9). 30. Youh (1968); methods modified from Hillehrand 34. E. L. Conwell and Co.. Philadelphia (Lapham * and others (1953). and Saylor, 1970). 30. G—2, Tien-fung Tsui; GSP~1, Show-yuan Chow; AGV—l Bruce Huai-tzu Chai; BCR—l 1, G—2, granite \ 27 28 29 , 30 30* 32 $102 ___________________ 68.82 69.22 69.04 68.93 68.84 69.22 A1203 __________________ 15.70 15.50 15.21 15.89 15.56 15.27 Fe203 __________________ 1.09 1.03 1.01 1.17 1.10 1.23 FeO ___________________ 1.44 1.42 1.52 1.55 1.56 1.39 MgO __________________ .88 .73 .86 .74 .88 .77 C510 ___________________ 1.96 1.93 1.99 1.90 2.15 1.98 N320 __________________ 4.23 4.15 4.03 3.87 4.48 4.13 K20 ___________________ 4.53 4.42 4.51 4.40 3.73 4.37 H20+ __________________ 35 -___ .57 .46 .44 _____ H20_ ___ ________________ .25 .30 .15 .12 .17 .10 T102 ___________________ 50 48 .55 48 41 54 P205 ___________________ 15 .15 .13 14 16 16 MnO __________________ 03 .04 .06 04 06 04 CO; ___________________ ____ ____ - .10 07 07 _____ Loss on ignition ________ -___ .52 ____ __________ .74 Total __________________ __-_ 99.89 ____ 1 100.04 2 99.81 99.94 Fe as Fezoa ____________ 2.69 2.61 2.70 2.89 2.82 2.77 See footnotes at end of table. 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS TABLE 103,—New rock analyses, in percent—Continued GSP—l, granodiorite 27 2s 29 30* 31 32 SiOz ___________________ 66.85 67.21 66.96 66.44 66.6 67.30 A1203 __________________ 15.01 15.27 15.25 15.37 15.6 14.98 F8203 __________________ 1.84 1.70 1.65 1.78 1.2 1.84 FeO ___________________ 2.23 2.35 2.35 2.48 2.8 2.24 MgO __________________ 1.09 .97 .99 1.05 .9 .93 CaO ___________________ 2.00 2.01 2.07 2.04 2.0 2.03 Nazo __________________ 3.12 2.75 2.79 3.92 2.8 2.71 K20 ___________________ 5.53 5.45 5.50 5.30 5.4 5.65 H20+ __________________ .39 ____ .61 .35 .40 _____ HaO' __________________ .28 .53 .12 .10 .10 .08 Ti02 ___________________ .64 .65 .58 .74 .66 .72 P205 ___________________ .29 .27 .28 .26 .30 .32 MnO __________________ .03 .05 .06 .06 tr .04 C02 ___________________ ___~ ____ .14 .03 __________ Loss on ignition ________ ____ .68 __-_ __________ .74 Total __________________ ____ 99.89 _-__ 99.92 98.7 99.58 Fe as Fean ____________ 4.32 4.31 4.26 4.41 4.3 4.33 AGV-l, andesite 27 28 29 30* 31 32 SiOa ___________________ 58.82 58.97 58.76 58.80 59.0 59.11 A1203 __________________ 16.94 17.17 17.86 17.36 17.2 16.81 F8203 __________________ 4.67 4.36 4.79 4.49 4.3 4.51 FeO ___________________ 1.90 2.02 2.30 2.28 2.0 1.97 MgO __________________ 1.65 1.51 1 16 1.50 1.6 1.51 CaO ___________________ 4.75 4 90 4.95 5.52 4.6 4.98 NaaO __________________ 4.51 4 23 4.24 4.24 4.2 4.35 K20 ___________________ 2.94 2 90 2.85 2.43 2.8 2.91 H20" __________________ .96 _-__ .85 1.10 .98 _____ H20' __________________ .83 1.55 1.08 .80 .90 .85 TiOz ___________________ 1.02 1.04 1.07 1.09 1.1 1.08 P205 ___________________ .53 .51 .53 .60 .52 .51 MnO __________________ .10 .10 .12 .08 .10 .10 C09 ___________________ _-__ ____ 07 .03 __________ Loss on ignition ________ ____ .67 ____ __________ 1.33 Total __________________ -___ 99.9 ____ 3 100.18 99.4 100.02 Fe as F0203 ____________ 6.78 6.60 7.35 7.00 6.5 6.70 PCC—l, peridotite 27 28 29 30* 31 32 33 SiO. ____________ 41.43 40.97 41.66 41.50 42.1 41.80 42.11 A1203 ___________ .29 .80 .68 1.62 .70 .98 .63 F9303 ___________ 2.74 2.68 3.09 2.21 2.6 2.91 2.49 FeO ____________ 5.37 4.93 4.85 5.27 5.2 4.81 5.11 MgO ____________ 43.69 43.34 43.40 43.44 42.6 43.10 43.50 CaO ____________ .55 .44 .46 nil .6 .53 .54 N820 ___________ .08 .03 <.1 .12 .3 .05 <.01 K.o _____________ .03 .01 <.1 nil .4 ‘ .02 <.01 HnO+ ____________ 4.57 ____ 4.80 5.04 4.69 ____ 4.68 H20_ ____________ .35 .81 .49 .45 .46 .27 (“) 'fiOs _____________ .02 .01 .01 nil 00 <.02 <.01 P205 ____________ .01 (“) <.1 _____ 02 .02 <.01 MnO ____________ .10 .12 .10 .14 12 .12 .11 C0. ______________ ____ ____ .13 .11 ____ ____ .20 Loss on ignition“ ____ 4.78 ____ _____ ____ 5.10 ___- Total ___________ (") 98.9 ____ 3 100.00 99.7 99.71 99.37 Fe as F6203 ______ 8.11 8.16 8.48 8.01 8.5 8.25 8.17 See footnotes at end of table. 133 134 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 103.—New rock analyses, in percent—Continued DTS-l , dunite 27 28 29 30* 31 32 33 SiO, ____________ 39.96 40.08 40.46 40.07 41.9 40.40 40.64 A1203 ___________ .07 .29 .43 1.38 .45 .68 .17 Fe20. ___________ 2.23 .31 .83 .37 .36 1.16 .88 FeO ____________ 5.60 7.62 6.97 7.32 7.43 6.83 6.94 MgO ____________ 49.89 49.69 50.06 49.91 49.2 49.99 49.65 Ca0 ____________ .22 .11 <.1 nil 00 .17 .14 Na.0 ........... .12 .05 <.1 .07 2 .02 <.01 K20 _____________ .04 .01 <.1 nil 3 9 01 <.01 H20+ ____________ .25 ___- .46 .25 85 ___- .38 20‘ ____________ .18 .58 .08 .08 04 01 (5) T102 ____________ .03 .01 .02 nil .00 <.02 <.01 205 ____________ .02 (1°) <.1 _____ .03 .02 <.01 MnO ____________ .09 .11 .13 .17 .13 .12 .12 002 _____________ ___- ___- .07 .07 ___- ___- .07 Loss on ignition" ___- .19 ____ _____ ____ 65 ___- Total ___________ (n) 99.0 ____ 1299.87 100.9 100.06 98.99 Fe as F6203 ______ 8.45 8.77 8.57 8.42 8.61 8.75 8.59 BCR-l, Insult 27 28 29 30 30* 31 32 34 8102 _____________ 53.80 54.07 54.24 54.00 54.60 53.1 54.46 54.62 A1203 _____________ 13.47 13.65 13.50 14.14 13.54 14.4 13.57 13.99 Fe203 _____________ 4.03 3.18 3.56 3.20 3.49 1.06 3.51 3.57 FeO‘ ______________ 8.38 9.02 9.12 9.02 9.17 10.44 8.59 8.78 MgO _____________ 3.52 3.50 3.33 3.48 3.58 3.2 3.49 3.48 08.0 ______________ 6.66 6.89 7.10 6.94 6.94 7.0 6.94 6.95 Na20 _____________ 3.42 3.30 3.32 3.44 3.10 4.6 3.32 2.78 K20 ______________ 1.69 1.70 1.75 1.42 1.70 1.8 1.69 1.45 H20" _____________ .55 ____ .80 .90 .86 .13 _____ .54 H20' _____________ .73 1.37 .78 .80 ,63 97 .62 1.22 T102 _____________ 2.00 2.25 2.20 2.27 2.04 2.2 2.20 2.25 .36 .34 .35 .43 .43 .40 .39 .35 17 19 .20 .18 .21 .20 .19 .20 ___- ___- .01 .07 .06 __________ .01 Loss on ignition ___ ___- 43 ____ ____ __________ 1.17 _____ Total _____________ ____ 99.8 ____ 100.29 100.39 99.44 100.14 100.19 Fe as F8203 _______ 13.39 13.20 13.69 13.12 13.59 12.66 13.05 13.32 W—l, diabase 30 30* 30 30* 8102 ____________ 52.52 52.07 HzO“ ____________ 0.39 0.34 A1203 ___________ 15.10 14.86 H20“ ____________ .16 .10 Fe20. ____________ 1.37 1.75 T102 ____________ 1.08 1.17 FeO _____________ 8.80 8.94 P205 ____________ .14 .21 MgO ____________ 6.60 6.63 Mn0 ____________ .15 .15 Ca0 _____________ 10.97 11.18 C02 _____________ .05 .03 NaZO ____________ 2.24 2.10 Loss on ignition __ ___- ___- K20 _____________ .55 .49 Total ____________ 100.12 100.02 Fe as F8202 ______ 11.15 11.59 1. Includes F. 0.15; S, 0.01; BaO, 0.18. 7. Insoluble residue, 0.49, also reported. 2. Includes BaO, 0.27. 8. Includes Cr203, 0.10. 3. Inculdes BaO, 0.13. 9. K20 as a trace, 0.0063. 4. K20 as a trace, 0.0157. 10. P205, 124 ppm. 5. Sample dried at 110°C, 11. Insoluble residue, 0.58, also reported. 6. P205, 128 ppm. 12. Includes Cr203, 0.18. 135 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS . .33 .SEoEwS ................ 8---- 53.3 -------------------- .83.: 53.... 3:3. 833. 53.3 .33 .393 ES 22520 ---------------- 0..-:- EN3 3. 3. 2.3.3 33.3 8:3. -------------------- .353 .3350 ES 56.530 u--- ommeSoanofiownm 93 em. up. «.5 «.5 «.3 Q: 9: .33 .ESE ---------------- o -- 3393 ---------- $33. ------------------------------ 53.3 233.3 .33 .22.? ES 535 ---------------- 2.---- -------------------------------------------------- Emua. -------------------- .33 5505.5 ES 33.5..on ----------- 2.35.830 - - -- ------------------------------ 3.3 8.3 .33 .8th ---------- 3.5.3.8 .8. ---------- 3.3. 3:... 38.... ------------------------------ 38.3 .33 .533 ------------ o.£oE...o> - -- ------------------------------ 33.: 33.3 .33 52.... ES 3323 -------------- Scuba. ---------- 3.3. 3:... 38.: ------------------------------ 38.3 .33 .223. ES :03an E Sona< was =on¢5 ---------------- ow- in N33 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .33 .5353 ---------------- 3.---- ..3 3. E. .3. 3. -------------------- .33 .353. -------------- 12.5.6 -------------------------------------------------- 53.3 3.... .33 .3333 ES .8352 ----------------- mEmm m3. ---------- .33 .333 ES x2350 ------------------- mo ---------- - --------- 3.3 - -- .33 .oxooEaQ ------------------- mo -------------------------------------------------- .3 3.3 ”Om—1 .33 .338 ES .32 ---------------- 3.---- .833 3.3 3.3 53.3 3.3 3.3 53.3 ---------- .33 .338 ES $1.223 ----------- 39.3.8.2 ------------------------------ 8.3.3 ---------- 8.3.3 ---------- 3.5.3 .33 .223 ES :3:8..§M ---------------- <53 33.3 ---------------------------------------- 33.3 -------------------- .33 .2850 ---------------- ¢U< Tammy «to To TB maunwomwhosw huh-N .hflN ”3.53.550me 333 0935.. v2.3a .mzwm nomanunwofiuwam 30530 .mO ”mmmflaflu £055.53. 5.5.5: .€U< Tammy «16 70 TB gunfigolfisgsuav «.0353 0‘00.“ wsggw mwms 39$ E 380330300 53E: 3...: $.33: x0 gofisfigsuuwgldg mafia. 137 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .22 .222. 2:5 25 <52 .......... 2.» was $5 3.... 2d .................... .22 5:52 E: .3: ................ <32 .................................................. 2.x .......... 5.2 .82 .ouu>uamfi< ................ <52 .................................................. 3:: .................... .52 .2223 ES r82 ................ owl-- 532 5; 2.» $85 24 Ed ASE." .......... .22 .228 E; 2.25222 ............ £2223: .............................. 8:36 .......... 85m: .......... 852.2 .22 .235“an ............ 8:322: 5.2 5% Ed 22. 23 Ed .................... .22 52528 ES .932 .................. 52% 2.2 2d 2d 86 2;. 2.“ .................... £22 .56:— .................. mmx 2.2 2 a w: 2.“. :3. 2.x 2." 2.: .:.2 62:2 .................. max - .32.“. .................... - ............ - ...... .:.2 .522me ES 233‘ .................. 2mm 2.2 .................... 2.: and. 3d .................... .22 £53.32 ------------HH aux No.2 .................... a: med 2.“ .......... 3.: .82 522.1% ............... max ASN.2 .................... 526 $2. $3: 52.2 .22 6232 --:------HH 5? ........................................ 33.... 32.“ .......... .22 .222 c5 22282 ............... Ban .......... 25 2.x Ed «3. 2.“ .......... .22 £83 E; 25222 .-----------HH ham 2.2 .................... Saw 2.“. w: .......... .22 .mfiofiw ............... LEN 8.2 .......... 2.x 8;. 2.“. Ban .......... .22 .5332 .................. max 2.2 Ed 2d :3 24 8d .......... .22 .238 v.3 £8; a ---------HH-hmM 2.2 2 m 3d «.3 2.“. Ed 3.2 8.2 2.3 .2250 2:. uwiuonfim ................ «3 mafia .............................. .:.2 .962 ES Estitw -------H- .... <4 3.2 ........................................ - ................... 3.2 .:.2 528852 ................. << 5.2 mm m and 36 as .. 2.x .................... .:.2 58220 ES .3232 ................ << $2 .................... m3 2... 2d .......... 8.2 .222 .uwSEH ES :Efitm -------HHH .... «4 5.3.2 ............................................................ 8:52 .22 .525 .m .o .< .................. << 3:2 .......... .33. A33. 33 3:.“ $22 ASN.2 .22 .2“:an E; 5.: ................. <4 2.2 3.x 2.2. a: 54 2..“ 8.2 2.2 .22 .8828 E: 5882 ................... << 5.2 2.» 2.x 8% 2;. a: .................... 6%: .522: "E: nuom uuuuuuuuuuuuu ¢< uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu mad ”.3 .22 .3222 E; :82 §> --------HHHHH 4; 53.2 52..» 52.» 526 $2.2. A88.“ .......... 52.: .22 £3555 ................ <¢ 8.2 2; 8.x Ed 23. 2d .......... 2.2 .22 .252 E; 3.2.23 ................... <4. $2.2 SEEN .......... gag A822. .............................. .32 38.8» E: 6:5 ................... << 33.2 $3.: .......... 3:6 324 32.x 8:32 52.: .22 fizzfim ES seam ............. << ...................................................................... 52.2 .22 .55 --------HHHH << 2.2 3.» 2; 26 2;. E.” .................... .22 5:2 E: Esfiucaq .................. << .................................................. SS; .......... A832 .22 6:5 ................... 3.. 2.2 .......... 5.» .............................. 8d 8.2 .22 «$5an ................ «4 $2.2 $2.3 .......... 3:3 32... 32d .................... .32 $3.2 ................ <1 22 3.x and $6 «2“. 3.x .................... .52 £355 ........... 2wa322 ”.2 cm.» and 2.9 2.“. 3d .................... .22 .2832 ................ 3.---- E22 A22: 22:: SE: 853. AB“: .................... .82 .233 2:: «Sign ................ 8---- «.2 2w 2d 23 03. 3." 2.2 .......... .52 .5232 --- 3532828583 ------------ . ------------------------------------------------ A 33.2 58.2 .22 65.265 9; 32.5382 ------------ 923532, ------------------------------------------------------------ 2: 2.2 .52 £288.; ---------------- 3.---- 22 2% 8.» a3. 24. 2.“ -------------------- .22 .2228 E; 3225 -------------- 552:5 ---------- 35.x $1.5. $26 ------------------------------ 32.: .22 .5582 -------- umbefifinfiom 332. 132.2 58.x 322 524 an: -------------------- .22 Eaton. ---------- 35:35 .82 ---------- 33.x 35.» 3o; ------------------------------ 32.2 .22 .5332 ---------------- 3.---- 82 :3 2.» :6 5.2. :.N -------------------- .22 .352 ------------- .8155 ------------------------------------------------------------ 52.2 52.2 .32 .3443: ES 52.52 ----------------- mzww v.2 --------- u ----------------------------- .22 .9550 E; 25:5 ------------- mo who .22 .ESEm-E:§E$> E; :22 ------------------- mo 8:92 -------------------- 8:: 8:3. 8:5 -------------------- .22 .2353 ------------------- mo ------------------------------ i «.2 53.. 3 oh .58. .22 5.6.32 ---------------- 2.---- 55 2.2 :3. 24 2.2 2. -------------------- .:.2 £288..“ ---------------- 8---- 2.” 5.2 2.» 34 2.2 2.2 -------------------- .mwmfi .Oflmvn—OH—Q 6:6 mania—mom IIIIIIIIIIIII oufloumm—mn Qatw draw .uuonaa 1:“ 525%“: Gm hanfldw Vin m—wBXfi: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII OCIIII Db.” II .22 £83 ------------- 13:55 2.» am. an as 8:. mm. ----- -- -------- .22 .2802 ---------------- 3.---- 52. A233 A252 A824. A822 A825 ---------- - -------- .82 .9325— -- oEmESoanoboumm A82... A852 ”ouch wonououwfl vogue: «Ln—Um Hrmfinn TOUR nl>0< 7me NIU TU .75? wonngool Augwckuav nfiafiaa £2: E335» mbmb E3» S $§§§8 .832: 33 3.3:: «a gagmgfilldon "Gan. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 138 .22 .mEoSm -- ................ .25" «ad .......... 2.2 2.2 3. 2. - ................... .22 .233 ES Ew8> on .................. 5:... S.» 3.2 2.3. 22 .......... 2. .......... 2.2 .22 Sign. .......... 3:388 :2 .......... 32.2 32.2 52.2 .............................. 3:3 .22 .5222 ........... 22532.2 ............................................................ 5:. 52.2 .22 £532 ---- 9225828582 ............................................................ 3:2. 222 .22 .223 ES 5282.0 ....... oESEoSEEoo 2..» 2.2 2.2 3.2 2. 2. 2.. 22 .22 59.5 ............... 8.3 E 52.” 82.2 8&2 52.2 52. 2. .................... .22 .165 ................... << 5:2 .................... A822 52. .............................. .22 .9350 ES SEE—Em ................... << ...................................................................... 2.2 .22 £2.52 ................... << 22 2.2. «.2. 2.2 2. 2.. ................. 62.2 £823.59 ................... << 2.“ 2.2 2.2. 2.2 S. 2. .................... .52 .ESZ ES awfiuwufim ................... << 8..» ............................................................ :2 22 £32.56 ES .2225 ................... << 2.". .................... 2.2 S. 2.. .......... S2 .52 .owSEH ES :EEEm ................... << 53.” .............................. 52.2 .22 5555 ................... << .............................. 8:: .............................. .22 .5me .m .o < ................... << 52..” .......... 25.2. 222 22. 52. 522 2.2 fine—Sm ................... << 2.” .................... 2.2 2. 2.. .......... :2 .222 222.550 ................... << 22m.» .................... 282.2 53.2 52.. .................... .22 .3822 ES 8.882 ................... << 2.; :22. 2.2 2. 2. .................... .22 SEE: ES Sam ................... << .................................................. 2. 2.2 .22 .nEnmSm ES noon 55 ................... << 522 522 33.2. 52. 53.. .......... 52¢ .22 .Eofinufi ................... << 22 .................... 8.2 2. .................... .22 5832 ES Scam ................... << 52.” ................... A82. A82. 33. 32.2 . .22 .515 ................... << 2.» .22 2.2. 2.2 2. E. .................... .22 .22 .362 ES SEES-2 ................... << A32.” 3.2.2. 222 A32... $22.. .......... A822 .22 6:5 ................... << 25 ........................................ 2.. 2.2 .22 .stm ................... << 52.“ .......... 52.2 52. 8:2. .................... .22 $3.: ................... << 2.x 8.2. :2 2. 2.. .................... .22 .233 ES 322% ............. 53.52. .......... 32.2. 32.2. 32.2 .............................. 32.2 .22 .23; ................ <25 :52.» 8:22 8:92 3:2 3:2... 232.. .................... .22 $5.32 ............. :ESSE. .............................. -- ............................ 22.. 93:2 .22 65325 ES 32.5:me ................ <22 ............................................................ 2 2.2 .22 .2532 ............... 3-..- ............................................................ 2.. 52.2 .22 .9650 find #33262 Em hw£n< 6:“ affix“: llllllllllllll "Not—3&0 wvfi IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .3322 ES nomEoS ................ mEmm Md ...................................................................... 22 .238 ES SEE—o ................... mo .............................. a: - --- --- .......... .22 .ESSm-ESSEB.» ES «Spam ................... mo 85m.” .................... 852.2 8522 85:8 .................... .22 .2855 ................... mo ............................................................ 25 2.2 On: .a .222 52$ 55 ...... 533:3 :88.” 2.2 .......... 2w .................................................. .222 Java S> ................ 2.---- 22 a: 22 2.2 l-- .................................... .a:.2 $sz S> ................ 2.-.-- ~.2 A325 A822 5.2 ........................................ .:.2 22.5232 ...... 5:553 :322 2.2 2.2 22 2.2 2.2. 2.x .......... S2 .22 Sufi—Sam ES 523:5 .......... 22 283.5 232.2 .................... 2322 982.2. 22.4. .......... 2:2,: .32 20.55” .36 :2, ME: figs-SEEN .me ---------------- .. ¢U< ThwU «Io T6 73 wondflnool €23.25 ”22:5. .203 35332.3.» .mme 23.8 S. 2223228 .8222. 323 2.33:. as mgomugmgouwfiléoa 2.25.9 139 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .32 Jami? ...... 332.83: haw A33 p 52. E3. A836 53d 58." .................... .32 .3556 .................. aux 2...... .......... 5.. 3.2. 3.2 $2 .................... .32 .5332 .................. #5" 3.» a mm. 3.2. 3d 2.2 ......... - .......... .32 .223 ES 58> .5 ..-...-.........n. max 2.5 .......... 3.. NS ".3. No.“ .......... 3.3 .22 5.852 .................. << :3 2. 3. 23. ma." :2 .................... .22 .223 ES Sifinfim ................... << ...................................................................... 8.2 5:2 £523.88 ................... 5.. 8.5 2. 3. 36 8.” 8.2 .................... .52 .554 ES 8.32:3 ................... << 2.“. ............................................................ 3.2 .:2 58250 ES .5225 ................... << .2.» .................... E.» 2; 3.2 .......... 3.: .:.2 62.12 ES .3555 ................... << 812. ............................................................ 3.5.2 .52 £2.55 ................... << .............................. 8:3 - -- .......... .22 .fimfim .w .o .< .................. << 53.3 .................... $13. 33.2 3:: as: 33.2 2.2 .uoauouam ES may—conch ................... «3. $6 2. um. .32. 32 «m4 .................... 2.2 .825: ES Sam ................... << ............................................................ mm... 9: .32 .mBESm ES :93 ES ................... <4 53.: .82. 53 3:3. 2322 3K: .......... 83.2 .32 £35.35 ................... << 2.... .................... 23. mm." 3.“ .......... 3.2 .32 .aoxox ES $5.5 ................... <4 .......... 333. A33. .......... A852 582 Sam.“ 33.2 .32 .mnam ES SmEmS-m ................... << 355. 3.3: .......... 3:54 3:52 .............................. S32 PSSVEEU ................... << 2:. .................... A82.» 52.x A834 .................... .32 .55 ................... << 3.3 2. 3. 3d 2.“ 3." .................... .32 SEE ES EgEuna-H ................... << .................................................. .332 .......... A332 .32 .230 ................... << 3.3 .......... 2. .............................. 3.2 3.2 .32 cwzam ................... << .......... 333. A83. .......... A83.“ A852 .................... .32 $254.. ................... << 3.3 2. 3. 3.2. S.u 3.x .................... .32 awn—SA ................ 8---- 5.3 2. G. 32. 3d :3 -------------------- . .32 23% --------------- 3:: E 53.... 8:2. 853. 3:3. :3va 8:": -------------------- .32 .228 ES 55:35 ------- 023832.500 3.3 2. 3. 33 3d $2 52 3.2 .32 .523 ........... 2.33.823 ------------------------------------------------------------ 5:2 A832 .32 52:52 ES MEN ---------- EfiuEEo—oo :3 3. ---------- 3.2. S; :2 an; 2.: .32 .5239 ---------- mans—~38 :3 ---------- 3:2. Aims. 33.2. ------------------------------ 23%.: .32 .2230 ES 3225 .............. 5555:. ---------- 332. 33m. 323. ------------------------------ 35.2 .32 £3325 ES Eunsgm ---------------- «urn—H ---------- - ------------------- ----- ---------------------- mug 3.2 .32 aha—SM -------------- 5555:. - ----------------------------- A822 A822 draw .9350 6:: :95an 5 >254» was =wa«2 ---------------- cal-- 86 ---------------------------------------- I uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .32 .5332 ---------------- owl-- 33 e 1.. 3;. Ed -------------------- .32 .mqum ------------- 18:55 -------------------------------------------------- 55.2 3.2 62: .dfifldmflm Mus—a flewmhhoz IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII wsmw w-w uuuuuuuuuu I-I llllllllllllllllllll .32 .338 ES “BEES ------------------- mo ------------------------------ N3. -- ---------- .32 648—55 ------------------- mo -------------------- - -- 3.2 ”.2 .32 inn—28M ------------------- mo ------------------------------ SA ---------- Duo .22 .22.? ES 3333.9 -------------------- a 52.» ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 452 its .S> ------- 55:30.88: -------------------- Q3 3.2 ---------------------------------------- .22 .9650 ES :Swnwiufi ---------------- <52 322m" ---------------------------------------- 38.2 -------------------- .32 .5553»? ---------------- <52 32..." ---------- 32.3. ---------------------------------------- A326 .32 den: -32 H 23.5 32 aging ES EOmmhhoE ”92: .thnflo mus—a «newt-92 $.64" IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII $me .muflfiuo figs :ovaOU IIIIIIIIII b-om M.N«~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .223 ES 3mm 5me £232 ES. 3mm ---------- an: E2. ---------- I -- .22 £23.25 ES 9:32 3.” 2.2 2.2. u: 3. E. -------------------- .22 .233 ES T82 53..” 3.3 3.2. 53.2 v: 8. SE. ---------- .22 .238 ES Sumac—3m ------------------------------ 8:24 ---------- 353. ---------- 853.3 S22 .33; 2..” 3.3 2.2. $4 3. S. g. 3.3 .32 .SEESSSQ ES 221$ 3.x -------------------- 3.2 3.2 2. -------------------- .22 .325 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- v.” .32 .goESEom 3..» -------------------- 3.2 3. 2.. 3. E3 .32 inc—3 ES SE52 ------------------ Eda 3.” 3.2 2.2 32 3. 2. -1- ---------------- .32 £355 ------ E50233: haw $33 $3.3 $2.2 534 A85. 5:. -------------------- wonuznoolOu: 35.332 2.3: Tmom Twas Toom T>c< Tmmo «Io To TB cwsnflnoOI-Gguoseav 33:38 ace... 35332.32» mwmb 33.» § 2:352:30 SS3. 3:3 $.22: .3 afiefigwgaufiléon mam—<8 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 140 .32 43:5“ mu.» 3.: S: 2.: .................... .32 .932 :5. Haitian mm.» ........................................ 2.x .:.2 £82.20 :5. 322::— Sd 2.: 8d 2.: .......... 3.: .32 .owSEH :5. =35Em 3:5.» ........................................ 52d .32 £2595 :3: 53.: ........................................ draw .muws—ao mad 501.5% IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .32 6:2»; 3a.: 2.: 3: 3.: .......... 2.x .32 68:23 :5: 8_oomom an.» 5.: a: 2.: .................... 6wa .EflhMflH Via hdom IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII bu.» bfid .22 .nEmEam :5: :25 55 A33.» 53.: 58.x 52.: .......... $.33 .22 .Eufio :5. Boihm .......... 32.: .............................. 32.: .32 £3555 :9», 2.: 8.“ am.» .......... 2.: .22 .55.“: :5. 3.3.33 A32.» 33:: A83: .............................. $2 .53 ...... mmwn- 3.: S: 2.: .................... .82 .23.: :5 3.36:3 .................... A58: .......... 3:; .32 333 $3 £0on :5: 33.5 mm.” on: whu :9: an.» 3.x .32 2:3 $2 .355 mm.»- fi: 3: :9: .................... .Auz 8:5 32 sou—om ::a 33:»: ......... 2.: a: 8.: a.“ 8.: .32 8:3 32 .355 :on no: 3.: S...” .................... .22 582:: En 3.: cm.“ 3: .................... .33 .2230 :5: 05:00:: .......... Amy 2.8. 8:25. ........................................ vawmd .32 55:3 3N”: mm. H- ilfimfi- 2.: 2:3: 33. .................... .32 .515 .w .o 6. 35mm 53.: 33.“ 3.2.: 53.: 5mm.“ .32 .2332 A83.” 852:” 338. 82:8: :35: £35.: .................... .32 .5»sz mu a me 8. 3.: 3d 3.: .................... .32 .§_8_€m -HH-H -mmvwmg..- A338. .................................................. .32 6:355 :5 3:538: - I --H----- HHHHH ..................... 2...” 2.: .52 .533 ........................................ 53: .......... .32 .2828”: .................... 35: A82: .32 .5289 58.: .Euuood .............................. €32: .wwan .mhwflua Ufid BOT-5w llllllllll 0MEG§QNO :OH I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII vaamfi .32 .238 End m—WEfiE Em >0A£¢ via =on¢2 uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu GUI-I: .wm.” IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .82 .355 $2526 .................... -- .......... 5mm...“ 52:. .awaH .dfifin—mdm maid EOEHHOS IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII wsmm N.N IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .32 6:28:59 .................... mo - ......... - -- - .......... 2.” 2: 032 .32 .9350 :5 Eggnmum .................... a Q: ...................................................................... 4:32 .Ewa E5 ..... 53:33: :895 H: .......... 3. .................................................. .332 .EuN 53 ................ o:-- 5.: 2. ---------- «a: ---------------------------------------- .232 .53 E; ----- 53:33: :895 5.: Q. 8. 3.: ---------------------------------------- .32 ion: Lo: 6me ins—Baum can £02232. ------------------ «:42 ed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .32 .225: :5: nomEoE ------------------ <U< 7mm": «1w To HI? counscoOIlAusuokuav 33:33 £92. 8.63395.» mwms “33.9: 3.: 28:33::88 $3.92: :33. 3.3:: x: m::::§3:§3:§l.:3 "HE‘S. 141 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .32. .522 and “25235 ................... << 2.2 .......... u! ....... . .22 non—mind E: .6225 ................... << 32 .................... «Wm med - ......... x... .22 .3552 ES 2552 ................... << 52.2 .......... - ....... - .................... - ........ 8:6. . Arm." .hwscwhm uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu << uuuuuuuuuu .- lllllllll ua uuuuuuuu szmfi In: uuuuuuuuuu . .S..2 22.50 EB 32.5w ................... << .......... A323. A353... - ......... - - -- 32 3823 E: 8.8.82 ................... << $2 8. 8. mm.“ 86 and - ................... 2.2 .5292 ES 282 ................... << .................................................. - ......... mm.» mm. .32 £3.13 ES :82 55 A822 .................... 85w.” . . .......... . .33 2050 “is 3225 uuuuuuuuuu m8.V 39V szwfi unummwmw-m- --mmwmm-N .......... “WWW“. . .22 23.13% 8.2 .................... «ad on.» «3. .......... 2. .32 23m mi: 235225 << A3 «DA .................... A3 and A3 and .............................. .32 .515 ................... << :2 28. ouoo. 3.x Ed 3... .................... .22 .332 ES .iEmcaq ................... << .................................................. A322. .......... 2. .9353 $2 #832 E3 .6322 ................... << 3.2 .................... 22. E6 «.3. 2..» 335. 42363 32 £232 ................... <4 2.2 mm. mm. bmfi ac.» “:2. a ................... .2 £55 32 33—82 E5 .6552 ................... << 2.2 .................... £2 «.3 2.2. 5.» $5 .0535 $2 98352 ................... << cm a pm. 5. ma.“ 2..» mad .................... . .22 $3: ................... << 2.2 85 85 m: 22 Ed .................... .22 .55.. E: 3592 ................ 8---- A25 2 528V 25: 2E2 253. ---------- A82... .22 .233 E5 2.55 ---------------- 3-... 3:52 ---------- 53.x ---------- - ------------------ - --------- .:.2 59:5 ---------------- 8---- 322 38. 32. a: A33.» 3:: -------------------- .52 632... ES :2 ---------------- ou-l- .82. 2 8V S.V 58.x A886 A824 -------------------- .22 :25 .m .o .< ................ 8---- 52.2 ---------- 3V 52.x 553 A324 52.» $3. .22 .2302 ---------------- 3.---- SES 89V 89V A824. 23qu $1.3. -------------------- .33 .2059 ES 9.282. ---------------- ov-I- ---------------------------------------------------- u uuuuuuu 3d ---------- .52 awaken -------------------- - ------------------- --- ----- - -------- A522 ---------- .82 .2522 -------------------- - ---------------------------- - --------- SE: :33. . £2: .hwv—ooi—om IIIIIIIIII Amv Hi5. Auv H25. IIIIIIIIII II In: I um: .33 $225939 25 26:28.“ -------------------------------------------------- cod cm. .82 .5282. ---------- 328. 328. 3%." - ------------------- $8. .32 .2250 ES 322% ------------------------------------------------------------ 8E. .22 .238 can E3833 :m 253‘ was :okxaz ---------------- owl- 2.4 I. -------- I uuuuuuuuu u ------------------------------------------------- .22 .5322 ---------------- 3.---- 22 o e 5.“ 36 22v -------------------- .32 .3562 -------------- 18:55 ------------------------------------------------------------ 323 83$. 5me .flfiflnmdem mun—fl :Ommhhos IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII MEwm mé IIIIIII III III llllllllll .22 5:55 .................... m0 332 ----------------- 3: 33. 3:3. 3:2 35$. .22 458.55 --.. --------------- mo -------------------- -- -- 26 S... ONM .22 .228 ES 235522 ------------------ <w< Tmmu To To TB wwscscool Qgsukuav 232:.» £3... @5323» mwmb 3a....» S figufifiwgoc .3me age 3.3:: xo agofigwguugldcn "33.9 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 142 .22 .monnowm E: .33: .E>< Gd .......... I- ....... 2.2 3. S. . S2 223.. ES «GEES .................. 1- .......... I: ........................................ .momfi mfls—amlmflflflumflmvxr v‘wl Tina—uh Aafivfifi IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Acmvboé Acfivawd AOHvaé IIIIIIIIII 32. £383 .......... v ................... 2.2 «OF .33 .=au:3~ ........................ pa. m¢.V 8. «NA me.V we. .................... .HPGH El>flz WE.“ hfl—Nuofifluw IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ww. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII bu. draw Jud-52 uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu u uuuuuu S... uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu draw .3350 and :03wa 5 53."; ES €3qu ........................ g. .................. nu .................................................. .33 .aoouunum E5 nm_oomoh ........................ mm. so. an. 3. an. ac. .................... . . . .33 230% IIHIIH-Inul- ............ A33... A33. A336 3:34 3:6. Syd. .................... $2 32 3am E3 2.3555 ................... A336 A335 .......... $33. 3:65 36 .......... Ed :03— Arm" .mO—OUmoh uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 66:: an.“ mm. cod «a. «5. 5w. uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .33. £230....“ IIIIII 32.25% Vogue: 3:3. A33. :32; 3:5. EVE.- vaw. .................... .22 zaEsm ................ 0E--- 2.2 and 23 S. 25 «m... .................... .82 .Eufio E: €532 5 32¢ E3 :95qu ................ owl- 3. .............................. 1 ....................................... .m@®H .OUuurfl mead 0—OEhWoadO IIIIIIIIIIIIII mdumfiwfio H05 IIIIIIIIII b.* IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIIIIIII .Qw¢fi .hfl—UGHJO flfid hwwwhm IIIIIIIIIIIIII ghflhHr—H IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII cw.0 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII wvd +Oufl .mp2 .238 E5 Esp—8.502 .................... a 83: ...................................................................... .Hbafi :fi>flz U—nd hw—Naoflflom IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII QH w¢zn IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .52 .233 E; «EEO .................... n: .................... 528. .................................................. 6va £252.55 "Ea mega—Em .................. n: ASNPA -nuH-u--- {1---}- III-Inn: HHHHH HHHHHI -HHHHH - me. - .32 .233 ES “20 .................... a $2.2 ...................................... $me 5.3“ .................... A: opé Nao- uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu cwwm. :HHI-HI- ”:1“ ............... A323 .855me v.5 2wmngm ................. <O< Thww NIU filmy TB uoflwhvE 3253.80! G§e§5 339:3 an: wsgggm mwmb 23.8 § figufifiwéeo Log-.95 ~33. $.23: n? n§£§§§3§~lé3 mam—<8 143 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .umgu ”Each mm. 8. mo. av. an. NH. .8. 3. :25}: Bank on. uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 3.. w“. 1. me. I. . .mmmu quwE—ow cm. .................... on. em. 2. 8. 3. .22 2:23. 2.5.3.282 3.. so. no. 3. 3.... 2. .................... .32 ham—=5 an. woo. A326. 2.. mu. 3. .................... .22 cwzfizm .............................. 2.. - .......... . .32 233m A83. 89V 89V A823 A356 A826 ......... .. .......... .22 Such E: 225820 2. «adv «adv ................... - ---- ................ 2. .52 .528 ........................................ ------ ----- 3:8. .......... 623 .wnuv—hafi -.- omuuofisfiinofiownm uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu A3 mo. Amvou. .NbQH Amhwflao 6:6 hwmswwESQW IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII O—UI-II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I NH. 1:.me .d>dz flfld hw—Nawfldom IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Ofillln hm. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ma. .wwaH .mnmonosfl can guns—wow! uuuuuuuuuuu uEuoEEOBU uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu mod Nnd .22 .228 can :25qu E .325. can $3532 .............. :3me:0 Sm. .............................. -- --- - .82 .3322 E; newts: ................ msmw wand .............................. --- .......... 5mm 42: .9550 can flow—Sum ................. <0=dmfio Hm.u IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII $64 mN. NHA .32 .Ewmaom ---------------- ow}-- ---------------------------------------- ANKN. A352 .32 .3832 1-- oEwESonnoSawnm .......................................... awmm. immwmem .Nrmu .9550 E: uwmnuoiguw ---------------- .31:- mmfi ----------- Na. ------------- .- - - - £2: 6.52359 25 macaw—com ----------- 01353200 ---------------------------------------------- mm: mm. .aomu .52ch --------- - 23.338 new ---------- Aims. 3:8. $2.2 A32: 5 52: .wnonuo cu mm a ------------------------------- flfi m—QBKQE Hm 0A£< H's—d EBNQE IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII -I-I - IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII . IIIIIIIIII c .ww2 .5333 ---------------- 31-.- ca...“ 8. S. no; em 5. .wme .masaom ---------------- ow}: -------------------------------------------------- -- --------- MN. $2: .39 -------------- E2526 mufi 36 No. 9a.: 2%: «1- -- Hm 6on .3332 ES 52202 ---------------- wam an." ---------------------------- .Fmfi .uwnswnm -------------------- m0 2.33." ---------- $38.: 31:..— vamw. 95o». vogzsoolacfl. 8:2on @3qu armom Twang gloom T>U< Tammu «Lu To T3 wag—2350' 32.8.3.5 «32:3 *8; Eggs” $35 33» S. $§§£§8 3:3: 23» $.32: \e agofisfifisgufildou flamed. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 144 .82 .3235" ES @3202 ................ wEmm 3 .......... - ................... NEH whammy HHHHHHHH < ------------------- << 8:3. .82. 5a. :38. 52. A82. ---------- A83. .32 .338 «in 322% ------------------- << ---------- ENE. 33“. 3:2. ------------------------------ 33H. .33 .EoE—Em ------------------- << «2. «.2. 3H. 2:. mg. mg. ---------- m5. .32 £2: .33 ES 5.88:3 ------------------- <4 SE2. 33:. ---------- 332. A525. 852. ---------- 3:3. .32 6:5 ------------------- << fl. ---------- NH. ------------------------------ No. S. 52: .52on ---------- 35.386 :3 ---------- awfi. 33“. 3:3. ------------------------------ 3mm“. .53 59:5 ----------------- 3.1-- mg. NH. 3. ac. 3. mo. -------------------- $2 .333 ---------------- 8---- 3:3. ABE. 882. 3:5. 3:3. 3:3. -------------------- .32 £350 ES gouamao ---------------- owl- mg. Na. 3. 3. 93. one. mac. 5. .53 .awuuom ---------------- ov-l- ------------------------------------------------------------ Auvmo. ---------- .33 .Eufum -- oEwEBonnoSowgm ----- ----- ----- ----H --------------------- 3:5. 3:3. .NPQH .thn—ao mafia hw—Nawflfium IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII any-II- wH. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .wwmfi .wflmflofin— wand mama—5200M” IIIIIIIIIII omhquth—OU IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Nod de h .83 .2qu cc 5:. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ed fluids Em Winds wand :05de IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIII uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu w .32 £85 -------------- 18526 3. -------------------- 3. «3. «mo. .32 53:8 ES x0225 -------------------- mo ------------------------------ 2:. ----- ----- ----- ---------- $3 .Efiim.i§wfi$> v.5 infirm -------------------- m0 859:... -------------------- :5de 85186 8:93... ------------------- 6:5 .mp2 . 6.325 2:. 93M ------------------ ham 5. 89V 39V 3. mm. ma” HHHHH ----------- _ 5&2: .35:wa ----------------- «32 ASE“. sumac. 538. 35:. gown.” ES; ---------- 532. .52: .mwnfiwow ----------------- <w< Himmw N10 70 73 Efipnoolfigouswav 332:; ”mu: wsggm mwmfi 39$ § figmfifimgg .8ng 3: 3.3:: kc wgofisgwggwgldcfi mania. 145 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .33 £35m “Ea 55w A5“ nu--- .............. - Am:— .......... --:-:-l.- .......... :32 .33 .233 E: .ouuflmaafimépsm 3: SV SV 3:: «V 3:.“ SE.“ 33.: .33 .Eofio ES .32 3V 3V onV 3V 3V ouV .. .................. m .33 .338 E: 1:3 ----------.. ...... <G< TmmU «LU TU TB awe—Bomwaonc huh-N .hflN ”omuawanavenm mmuE 3.50m :52: .mSwm KEEN—553353 .Ow “03.5903 :3 0330—3 .HHw 5033:. wASOmmomcau .QHG “owe—Qahwofluwnm 30599 .mO ”39333 «SS—$303 68.550: .<¢z ”0395.50.50on 33: .m2 “39333 «55:33; 4.3.550: 3:55:53“ <8mi< ................. <52 .................................................. $32.2 .................... .22 .3332 2:3 53582 ................. w2mm o2 ...................................................................... .52 5.303 2:. 38m .................. .222 2.2 .................... 22.2 «.22 22.2 .................... 52 .932 2:: 3:2 .................. r222 ............................................................ 332.2 .......... .52 .5235. 9:. 2.22.2 .................. .222 m5 .................... 22.2 2.2.2 «2.2 .................... .052 .5232 .................. 222 2:. 2V 2V 2.2.2 222 .......... 29.2 22 .22 .2an 2:. £23 .................. .222 m2 .................... 2.2.2 22 2 23 2o; 22 .22 .nwEwcaom .................. .222 :2 .................... 2m; 2m; 23 22.2 o2 .22 28:2 .................. .222 332 2V 2V 32m; 52: 52”." .................... .22 .530 .................. 222 525 .................... 322 52m; 523 .......... 52m .22 .322 .................. .222 .................................................. . .......... 22.2 22 .22 53.525 .................. .222 2» 22 c2 23 :2 2 o2; .................... .52 .8325 ................... 3... $32 .................... 52m; 5212 2522 252.2 522 .052 .uEEmfiwe ................... 5.. as «V «V c2; 22 can; .................... .52 $222 ................... << 2... .......... 23 22.2 2.3 .................... .52 62:2 .................... mo :2 .......... o2; .................... 322.2 522 .52 5:55 .................... m0 333 .............................. . £32.“ .......... $32 .52 .228 ES 53232 .................... m0 222 3:. 852.2 322 H 3:222 2.2.2.2 332 .22 5.222 2:: 2932 2:3» .................... mo 25 w m o2; 22.2 25.2 .................... .52 65.32.32... 2. .................... mo .................... --- .................................... 3.2.2 22 .22 .2222 2: 53522. .................... mo REA 8:” 8:2 23A 83A 23A 23A 8522 .22 22:6 2:. him .................... mo - ....................................... . .................... 9:2 .22 295° 2:. :32 ..................... mo 25 2a; 2a 2 m5; .................... .22 .5330 2; .522 .................... mo - ................................................. 8:22 .222 5.2.3550 .................... mo m2 52“; E22 2823 .................... .22 £35.. 2:3 2332 E .9520 .................... mo 2:. .................................................. .22 .2223 2:. 222:5 .................... mo .......... c2; ........................................ .22 .325 .................... m0 332 258.2 322.2 522.2 .................... .22 62:2 .................... mo .................................................. . .......... 3.32.2 an: .22 .523 ES ESE .................... mo 22 .................... 552.2 35:. 2 52¢." .................... .22 2:222:33»; 2:: 2.23.2 .................... mo 8:22 .................... 8232.2 A232; 8323 .................... .22 .250 ................ am-mo o2 .................... 212 22.x o2..." .................... .22 .2552 .................... mo ............................................................ 25.2 .......... an .22 .3332 ES :ommto2 ................. m2ww «a ...................................................................... .22 62255.23 ................ 8---- ----------------------------- - .............................. 3.5.2 82.x .22 .8123 2: 822-2230 ----------- 3.5.3.2822 --- .............................. 5.2 ed .22 .2230 ES 52:82.2. -------------------- mo 2:. mV 8:2 2; 2V V mV 832 ”022520: 8:232 3222 2-202 . Tmub Toom T>o< Tmmu «Lu To TB wannfisoOI-wflagcm 3.2.223» mwmb 32.2 2..» 22.»:220 23.: x0 h§2§w§mfifilfioa H.228 147 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .33 .2050 was £32.33 A3 mv uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu mm .......... 33 .................... 5me .afifln—mg 6G6 5035—0: mv II I III: I IIIIIIIII .33 .9550 "En Sofia—Esau ............................................................ 333 A3 I.“ .33 .EozuaEafl was .EEEO .5358 .5323 A8 «do 28. #2.. A5 udw A522. 833 Gvuan Amvméu .33 .9650 and 35.23? I... u: an an» a3 .................... .32 .238 25 $30 an .................... as .33 .535 .0 .m E. .................... 93 uuuuuuuuuuuuuu . ......................... .33 .533: ........................................ I uuuuuuuuu b3 .......... 1.5 .33 .9550 "E: 2:; av .................... mm 3v :3 .......... 3 .33 Juoow 3. .................... am can H: uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .32 .238 ES :35 l- -- em .......... 32 .................... .32 63M 3 .................... «a .33 22:33 was imam 5 v uuuuuuuuu 3 E» 33 .................... .33 Sam 3:13 .......... 33.3 3363, 3363 uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .32 .9848 E: 5:5 .................................................. com on no .awam .uflflfidem 1:.“ EOmmhhos IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII wsmm M. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .32 .2332.» .25 323:2 .................. <0< Tammw NIU MIG TB vwnfiazoolwflfisg 383:3» mwmb 23.8 E 3:233» 88% \e gugmgwfiuldofi and? DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 148 .22 .232 8:2 ............. - ...... 8:88 8:2 8: 8:. 8:2. .22 503:3: 8:2 852 8:: 88.2 8:3 8:3 .......... 8:1. .22 fiance; ES an: 3 n2 «2 2 a.» 5. 2.8 2 .22 5:982 8.2. -. .................. 5.8 «.m «.2 .......... ES. .82 625 5. 82 S 2 2 2 .......... 2. .82 Sign ES SESm - ........................ - ........................ - ................... 8:3 .22 .3: ES EESZ 3 n2 «2 2 2 3. 2.8 2 .82 .338 ES mac—Sm 83.2 8:: 8;: 8:8 83.2 85.8 .................... .32 .SEEu< ..... SEE". SSA-cm 2. 2: 82 2 w m .................... .22 623w ........... 9285323 3. 8.22 3.2 8.2 ms .3 .................... .22 .fiucom ........... 3.55228 8:5.» .......... -- ....... 88.2 881. 8:83. .................... .22 62:2 ........ - ........... mo 2 ---- ...... 8: EV 2V 2V 8v 3. .22 .Eosuom .................... mo mm 2: m2 2 ed 8V wV S .22 .9350 ES Suponmaafiménzm .................... mo 88.2 8:22 8:22 8:..2 8:3 8.3. 88.8 8:2 .22 65.855 ES 3235325 .................... mo 3 .............................. Em .................... 8.3 .22 .233 ES 522an .................... mo 8:2" 8:2 8:82 8:; 8:: 8:; 85.8 8:: .22 5:52 u ................... mo 8:3 832 8:2 8:88 8; 8:2 .......... 8:2. .22 .8505 ES .2222 .2558 .................... mo 2 2.2 82 ea 2 2. .................... .22 6.55.632 2. ................... mo ...................................................................... 2 .22 .223 ES 5352:. .................... mo 8:2. 8:22 8:2 8:2 8:8 8:8 8:8 8:2 .22 .2250 ES :32 5. E2 «2 2 2 mV .................... .22 .5230 ES :SSS ..................................................................... 8:2 522 .=.S.SE__>ow 8:3 - ................... 8:88 2V 8va .................... .22 55.5 8:12 832 882 8:2 8:. 8:2. .................... .82 .238 ES 2332 on :2 3 a m m .................... .82 .336me .................... mo ............................................................ 2V 2 .82 .228 ES ESE .................... mo 8:2. 8:88 822 8:2 85 8:. .................... .32 £30 ................. 3:99 2 82 82 2 m w ................... 6 .on ................... 2m ........................................ 8:3 8:2 .................... .22 ESE ES 3532 ..... ambaESofiobownm ........................................ 8:...» 8:8 .................... .22 63265.50 .................. <U< almmu «LU filo TB gunmanoolnu3§g £3233 mwmb 39$ :8. 3.3.23» 33.8 .8 ugmwgwfisfiwfildofi "3:9 149 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .52 .3825 ................... << 2 .................... 2 2... 2V 521 22.2 .52 .5235.» ES 95:82 ................... << 2 :2.» 22.2 2 2 2 .......... «2 .252 £52322. ................... << 3:2 32.26 338." 33.2 3:: 3:2 .................... .52 .EEZ ES 5.3222 ................... << 2V 1. - .............................. 22 .52 .238 E:w cases: << A2524 A252." .................... --- .52 582.20 E3 333m ................... << 2 .................... 2 E 2 .......... :2 .22 .282 ES .EEm ................... << 52 .................... a; .......... x ................... 33.22 .22 .£_Ew .m .o .< ................... << ...................................................................... 2:: .22 .332 ................... << .............................. .32 32 $2 .................... .22 .SSEBm ................. I << 2 .................... 2 2 2 ......... 22 .22 .312 ................... << 2 .................... m 2 .......... .52 22:3 or: . in 3.32.3 3322 .............................. .52 .238 E; 52:52 ................ 8---- .......... A2326 8502.2 .............................. .22 .238 E3 896m ................ 3.--: .......... c2; 22." .............................. .52 an; ........... 92852280 .......... 2.3.» .............................. .22 .238 was 5353.2. .................... mo 8:2 8:23 2322 2:. 8:3 .25 .2: 3:22 .52 53523 ES 2:29:52me .................... m0 m2 .-- m2 .......... 32 .52 55.95 .................... mo .......... 3525... A232.» .............................. :25: .52 .2250 E: 5:222 .................... m0 352 3:35.“ 35212 3:32 352 3.2 32 2.32 .22 92.55 ES 652 ._:>< .................... mo 2 82.2. as.” 2 2 2 .................... .52 6.55.532 2. .................... mo ............................................................ 2 32 .22 .238 E; :32 .................... mo 2 2w..." 23.2 2 2 a ................... .22 .5325 E3 :33: .................... mo ...................................................................... 8:22 .22 .2050 ES 523336-522 .................... mo 3:2 232;. 3522.2 33.2 5:2 2 2 5:32 5.22 ..=.2..%E>ow .................... mo 5% .................... 2V 2V 2V .................... .22 .225 .................... mo 3E2 232.” 52”.“ 32. 2:2 222 .................... .22 .233 E; 2232 .................... mo 2 .................... 2 2 2 .................... .22 .322me .................... mo ............................................................ 2. o2 .22 .238 Effie—h .................... mo 3.: 332.” 332.” 3; E2 3; .................... .22 €20 ................ 3qu 2 8o.” 2: 2 2 2 .................... .6 .22 .228 ES 33 .................. <c< Tame «In. To TB wwsfiunoolmfiagoam 23232 wwwb 23.8 S. 2.3.23» 33.3 x9 a§§§§ufildoa HAM—<8 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 150 52.3 .smduacnmgw .33 £550 and €5.35 E .5550 .33 .22...“— .mo3 6.5.50 v.3 9.890% .33 .axmgmfifi .33 .3050 was "53....“ .ww3 £220 .22 .238 can .25 .22 .2...“ 5.22 .8=:.£m .33 2.02.505 .33 239.0% and 23% 22.3 .9550 v.5 ufiucgm .33 .9550 and 3025‘ .33 23:53 .33 £2230 and 3.3.1.03 .230 2:3 .23 .2050 was 5qu .33 .2050 6.... =w=< .33 .2230 ES nhdoN 6:: 6.5.50 v.5 Anuunuuau .aw3 6.5.50 v.5 9.02.202” .33 .333M .2... 08.20... .33 .9350 can Ecuamvnafl 3:: 6.5.30 6.5 .35.; 623 .5me .0 .m .023 £5.50 "Ea EEK .033 £05203 v.3 23.2.95 .33 .wMa>aumE< .33 £25.35. "Ea :02202 .33 .5050 v.5 30.02am .ww3 .9550 v.3 32.5% .53 Sean< .22 .8::_3m 4. £22 .23 =a> 5. .222 .33 ES .033 mic—um 0:0 .unuxvaz .33 502.205 #53 .mo::_3w can £025.;— 653 £200 v.3 33.30 .22 its... 93 £222 .22 .22.... .2: 5.2. .33 .9350 on: €02.20: .22 .3332 .23 53:0... .22 .22.... 2: E95252 .22 .22 .233 0.5 man. .22 £55.. 0.3 33...? .22 .23... .3: 8.00 .22 .22.... .23 .32. .22 .22.... ES 0.5 .33 .9550 v.5 209.30% .33 .2233 v.5 3:; .33 .9550 vac 33% 22.3 £20.30 9.... uuc>omm 433 .2252.” a...“ 20......“03 :33 $25302 and 5.503 .323 £222.00 .33 .kovmoflnom .83 Haw—ham .33 5283 0052333 38.2 no: ................ .2... r. ................ ac..." E uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu <0< mg. 358.3 filmmw «IO gsnmunoolwfiafig 2.33.3» mwmb 23..» S. 382...»? 000.3 x0 gugmguwfilfiofi 5.29 5H :3 HIU .73 151 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .22 .285nt E: 9.2.3 9." ad damn .anflfluflvm win £02220: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ¢< .................... mo 2 n 2 we 2, 2 - ............ - ...... .22 63.6532 ac .................... mo ............................................................ m :2 .22 .Ezflim ES £52822. ”22 .223 E§ 535°: .................... mo 3:2 8:» 8:2 8:2 8:2 8:2 852 A222 .22 .238 ES :82 .................... mo «N m a S 2 2 .......... -5 ....... .22 .2550 E; 2.82 .................... mo ........................................ --- ......... - ....... - ......... A252 .22 .9550 E; “02333022352 .................... mo 83.2 853.2 853. A25 2:: End :32 2.3922 62—5280an «29622 v25»: 720m Humhn ”loom T>U< TmmU file TU 73 vowfiucoolmcafien 2525». .mme 23.8 x.“ 2:»23» 25$ 2 «gamugmgfiufildofi H.228 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 152 .32 .232 :3 tawnfiw .ébafi .nhwfluO ‘Cd and” .22 .532.an E: 3322.: fig." .9350 0:0 Ewe—o—Ekfl .53 .9550 0:0 0:03..“ .52 .mm:.~.~00:0N 0:: man 4:: .2050 0:0 SUM—52m .02: .9550 0:.0 hwfl 6:: .9550 0:: 528:.— 65.» .2050 0:0 .3820 .052 .2050 0:0 5013* not: .2250 0:0 0:050:0Q .05: .9850 0:0 :0:< .33 .aeamonEB 0:0 wig—gum .32 £02.50 0:: :0mhwuwm .33 502.502 503 .S—sanam 0:0 :02202. ”33 .9350 0:0 .8320: .33 6.5.30 0:: 50:30:!”— dwma .Eoswafiam 0:0 .5550 6.5508 .Eouufim .33 .uwaum 0:0 2:5 .053 .nEEm .0 .m .02: £0202 .mwfi .aaoow .33 .3050 0:0 55:0 45.— .2050 0:0 030$ .35: .ansfluwvm 0:: 4.202202 .33 .m=0:om.z_ 0:0 50:26 d2: .:0m:&00 0:0 .8200 .22 .3: .92: .3050 0:: :wnoo 35A A3 34 A5 at”; A3 3A 5..“ A33." Auvcfi A5 wmfi and ANV ma.“ NaA 42: .532 0:0 :wfivwfififi .obmu duo—$0 0:0 $00 .32 .ub—Naw::0m 0:0 mun—033m Jr: .9550 0:: umwufiim .36“ .9550 0:: >3." .05: .2050 0.5 50—92.— .02: .9850 0:0 .552 653 £20.30 0:0 .3520 .02: .2050 0:0 050:3:0Q .05: .2050 0:0 33.82% ”33 .Eusmafinmm 0:: .5550 .5809 .anumm .32. inns—3M 0:: 503.202” .32 .m:0£0_z 0:.a Ens—0:0 .mwmn 50250... 0:0 h0>h00 .33 Sam .33 .9350 0:0 :0:00 .83 .aaaiufi 0:0 283.202 .32 6:000?“ 0:0 Eng—EU deg .:0m:__0n 0:: .5300 6:: .3250 0:0 “—000 .33 .932 0:0 5.30:0; 65H 3:230:58 0:0 ESQ—Em .33 63:30:0N 0:: man— .HR: .3250 0:: o—wuflSum .32 .Eofio .23 .6: .22 £812 .82 .9650 05. 53.00” “3.3 .9850 0:0 0:050:09 .32 £20.. 9:. .330 .32 .55.. E... :23 3390 $20 000:5:0olhn 025.53% 00:qu HIMOM TmEQ filUOm T2,: almmc ~10 HIU 00:03:00133008 0:00:30 mwvs 30...» 3.9 32.20.30 .035 Kg gwgmgtgofildoa ".359 153 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .009." .fiflfia—muM wand EOEHHOE wswm w IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .2222 ES 8320 ................. mEmm .................. ..- .............................. - ......... od .22 £853. ES .5in ................. mEmm .................................................. 9: 2d . .22 .32 ................. 222 8:2 .......... 8:3 592 8:3 .................... .22 238 ES 580 .................... mo .................................................. 2 v E... .22 .683 S ................. 2,22 «.2 2. 2. m2 «.2 92 32 a2 .22 .2228 ES ES .................. <<2 $3.2 ...................................................................... .22 .238 ES 23—835 .................. «4.2 :u 5.. 2. :N 3s «.2 .......... a2 .22 .238 ES 222E .................. <<2 3N“ ...................................................................... . .22 .22—$2.3m ES .8255 .................. «<2 92 ........................................ c2 .......... «.2 .22 2228 ES .Siuwfimmmmwoqu .................. <<2 9:..2 5:. 52 592 ASN.3. 33% A82 5N2 via mhdUM norm: £22.50 62.» ha—afifldfldc IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ¢U< gimme «Ia TU TB. 3::350'2323 @2523» MBWD 23.8 2% 3.323» 83.3 we gugwgefilda "~an DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 154 .52 .22“: E... “53:32 .32 £02.32 .:.2 .533...» as. £23.52 .0 .053 saw—Egan: .52 .2300 0.... 28:50" .32” .0550 ES #3483 .230 .155 .05: 6.550 ES :25; .33 .9550 0:0 Schema—EA .32 .9550 van 0000 .meH .hwgoum can floaufldao .NSH 52E ES :83 Ag“ .Mufimamwg .53” .maanm 0:0 95.50 .32 .3050 via $352 .33 .9550 "En 00155.33 .52 .035. 62: €00.50...” .33 .30 and £30m .32 £302.. 0:0 Signs—0m Ag.— .aaonao was «vacuum .33 .5050 and 50—00mm W3.3 £0050 0:0 =w=< .33 .nnufiafl was .390an ”$3 Sands—3m 45H £02202 5%.; .anznmavm 0:0 £030.33 5on .9550 and 5.3.055 .awmu .9550 was 50.5mede .33 .9350 was :Ommfi .32 .8395 42.: .3050 min $30 .32 .5me .0 .m .032 .fiafiuam E... 28.5.5 .33 63.50005. .32 .ufiEnuM 0:: 0020.53 .52 .2050 ES naxuowwam .052 .noxowvwam 0:: comma? 62: 50233 was awxowumam .32 £833 0:: E6508 .09 .33 65502 ME: 003000.20 .33 ins—30M can :03:ch dram .Afifim 0:0 him .32 .9550 "Ed :32 62: .2050 can awuawnmaunuwéwnam .52 {>62 was aflfiwE—om 65H .uwfiomcnow “Ea Egon—Em 45H .mtinwvnoN 0:0 mag .05" .5050 ES 20% 62: 50202” .33 .5050 van 5355* .32 .9850 0:: .5:un draw .2050 van 5033* 5va .9350 and amass—SQ .82 .9550 E... 5=< .82 033553 0.... 9.513 .22 .0823: u$2 .3330— E: ESTER—z $2: .9550 and :03302 .82 flying: and .2550 6.5509 .5059: .32 .9550 E... 59.0 00:95qu uuuuuuu M5»: 500:? <U< ulnwww gas 3; mdm 8;» 35.x wV 523 3... «L0 vondfinoolueagsw 0.003230 mwmfi 30.3 g... 3:02.30 00:...» x0 fiswggwgwflllfiofi admin. .70 332 3:5 ASSN AcCowm own owu A3 m: SN 52: HI? 155 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .53 .5333 «:5 iwow .52 Sam .awam .hwu—hdm 6me Jan—50M 0.5 031.52 .0.me .5055” 0:0 555.5 5an .5550 "Ed 5m5nu=a£0mfiennm .32 .050Q .33 £550 0.5 0.85 .53 £550 ":5 5:00 .33 £55 .53 .2320 .53 .Eauam 0:0 0.553 .53 .5550 ES 35150.5 .53 £550 0:0 £02.20 .53 .nmnnuwucoN 35 £32.55. .009 .53 .9550 0:0 flounuum .53 .9550 E5 uwxowvmam .52 .0550 0:0 9595‘ 653 .505va0@ an: :0503 6va £550 up; 55:25” .33 .9550 0:0 50—020 6me ins—50M was £005.85 .52 .9650 «as $8033 .35 .55 .52 .9550 0:0 0:35.5— 45: .5250 can new—0355mm .52 £550 an» mhwvfl< .53 95:03.35 0:0 E0303 .53 .9550 ":5 max .53 £550 an: 9»va “Emu £550 0:: 55030.50 .52 .0550 can Emu—mama 555 .0550 0:0 :o=< .wwmu .nommug v.5 now—nub 653 .555 .0 .m .33 £550 0:: .5550: .wmx: flaw—50 can ~2me E "050:0 $037.50 .2 .> “:5 >052; .> .> $me .9550 and 5.5% A5 New. now. .28. 3; N90. A3 mac. 2: mg. Angus“. 35:. A3 mac 5“. $596 .33 .30:qu 95 503.203 .55“ .5313 .53 53:50—25 3:. mag .55 £550 6:0 fiwwsim .53 50055 .ormu .0550 v.5 hem .55 .0550 1:0 5:20 .53 £550 6:0 magnum 5:: £550 0:0 vanasflwfl 62: .0550 and .5:< .33 £35553 0:0 Mam—mnow .53 503.502 “$va .avnimafi 0:0 555.5: 5me £550 600 303.505 .02: .Eusmafiam v.5 £55.88 .305!” ”aw: .525 .6505 6:: .5550 £5589 .2255.“ .53 .9550 “:5 5—00 .32 .ansnmavm was 6.03.502“ .32 5:0522 and 50:20 .wwam 503505. E; .5in .53 (3Q .35 £550 05 50:00 3:05.50“ @0505 Hlflom HIwEQ HIOUQ TU TB 5:.550'33050 33863» .535 330 5 £52.20 000$ 50 50$§§§0§QI$3 "35.3 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 156 £2: £8533. and .5260 on. 3. .32 .Bm EV - ................ 3V adv adv .................... .932 .2259 can non—co ............................................................ 2.: m6 5 .Hbmm .8252 min hw—Nawflfiow QNfi IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .826535 “22 .3153 E: SE-onausa ............................................................ 33:4. $3.2 $me .flflflflmdm mafia EOmEHOS mH IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .32 :13? NH .................... S on an «N 2 .a £32 55:33.59 32 35.x 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:: .................... .32 .Emm E: 5530.0 2 .................... 2 an 2 «a 2 .32 238 EB :56 2:2 mV av .82 2:2 58 .................... .32 £32.20 E: $225 2 .................... 2 2 on .......... mu. .22 .uismauq 2 .................... 2 on .............................. 5:32 .=.§_aufi>ow .................... << ........................................ - ................... 2 3 .22 .233 E: =2»qu E 33.3 .................... << 2 ...................................................................... . .22 .8: --------H-----H << 2 N 9V a an a. .......... 2 .22 3.326 .E: 28$ ................. << 52 .................... 52 3mm 3.me .................... .32 52:35 .................... << 2 n m 2.2 92 m2 .......... 92 .32 £32m E5 9.32 .................... << mm 3 2 on E. 3. .................... .22 55.5 .................... << $3.3 .......... 3: 83.2 83.2 83.2 .................... $2 .35. E: 25:5 .................... << ASN.2 8:2 2V 8E3 $3.5 ASN.2 .................... .32 £2.38. ................. 8---- ---------- 33.2 -------------------------------- - --------------------------- .wwmu .mavflao End 30—95m llllllllll Qua-“0N” flOH IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Aevudfi .32 £35.. E; 8.582 ---------------- «23 E ---------- 8:34 -------------------------------------------------- 8;.2 . .32 $3.? 2 -------------------- 2 mu 5 -------------------- .32 55332 ES :83 ------------------------------------------------------------ on 92 .82 .228 E3 $95 2 2 2 2 mm mm -------------------- .32 5:55 3:2 --. ---------------- 32 33 8:2. 3:2 8:: .32 .22.? E: 5:3an 3:2 3:8. A88. A5: 6:.» 3:2. 32 32 .32 .325 3:: ”V «V 3; 3:3 2:2. 3:2 3:2 .Hrmn .OSthfldn—3~< 0m. IIIIIIII-i IIIIIIIIx: IIIIIIIIII unnu|1||uu nunnulw uuuuuuuuuuuuu ®H IIIIIIIIII .22 .238 E: 53:85. 8:2 8:“ 8:2 8:2 8:3. 8:2. 8:2 8:2 .22 .Bafio E: E32 53 2V V 52 A32 A82 -------------------- E 2.2 .2050 E? “mac ----------------- mega 5.3a ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .32 .238 E: 2355.22 ................. <8m§< ----------------- <52 -- - -------------------- 3:5 ---------- .32 5.32 ------------------ max on - --------- -- ------ - ------------------------------ 2 flwfiflmaEOOlfl‘fl 8:283" 35o: 720m Tman Toom T>w< Thwo NI: To TB vopfiunoolgagsg 233.3% .mme .33...» § 23233» was: .3 gemugwguafildofi H.355 157 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .32 .3652 1. --- - ......... ---------- a.» EHHHH .32 €85 u .......... #2-}--- u a 2 --§------ .. .252 £81.32” :34 .......... u- ...................................... .:.2 .238 E: 23.53 2} - ................................................. 3:2 £3595 Ea 235:2 o3; .......... -- ...................................... .22 .238 . ES 5332 “2.2 .238 E5 :22 x ................. <<2 A82.» 2 .......... -5- ............... - .................... - ......... $me .dflflflmflvfi mafia Ecumkhoz IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII << .................... mo Sm." 2o.“ :3 5:. :3 3m .32 .238 E3 .82 .................... mo 2.: .3 2o; 3:. 3m 3m .32 .238 ES 833333.832 .................... mo .................................. - ..... 53» 9:3 .32 £36 ................ cmlmo 3a; 3» 2:. 83 3a 3» a: .32 .932 ES 8185.3 ................. £28 23. - - . ---- .............................. .22 £25333 E: 38.5.5 1...“ ........... 328 533. ............................. - ............... - .............. H3. .82 .238 E; 85 ................ 222 533. r ........................................ .22 338 ES E332 .................. <<2 3.. - ............................ -- 3. .:.2 £3833 E5 2.5 .................. <<2 ........ .- ........................................ 3. .................... .:.2 .238 ES 203:5 .................. <<2 SE3. ---- ........................................ .22 .538 E; .32 .................. <<2 ‘33. $3. .............................. .82. .......... .22 .880 E5 2:30 .................. <<2 3. .......... -- ---- .................... .22 .238 E3 3332 .................. <<2 .............................. -- -- $2. «3. .22 .238 E: 535 .................. <<2 .................................................. - ......... «a. 3. .32 .238 ES 3332 "2.2 .238 ES 33°33 .................. <<2 A833. .................................................. .22 .238 ES :~:< .................. <<2 p3. ............................................. .32 #33305? E: 3:33 .................. <<2 .................................................. 32. .32 .238 ES .8233 .................. <<2 3. .............................. 2. .......... :22 £8282 “32 .3332 ES 5:282 "32 .238 ES comics .................. <<2 ASE. ................... 3. -- ........ 2. n ......... -u- ....... .32 338 E3 52833 .................. <<2 .......... ---- 52. A53. .32 333522 E5 .2550 .2238. .3232 -H-----------H--H- <<2 53m. .23. $3. 833. .53. H2. 35:. .33». .332 83:83 ES 385:2 ..... .............. <<2 ABE. 35V 35V SE. 3:2. 3:3. .......... GE». .22 .238 ES 8.5 ............ <<2H m3. .......... - ................... o3. .opmH .EOMTE IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 8. I IIIIIIIII .22 .238 E5 3:2 e2 .................... 3. 3. 1- ....... .32 £83 3. --- 3... ---------- .mwam 6.350 9.5 .3qu nu. ma. 5. nnnnnnnnnn $me .0Ma>uum§ I 0 III IIIIIIIIII Aann. II Illlltl .a¢¢H .dfiflflwuVm wand fienmhho: m. .32 .3332 E; E330 .............................. 3. ”352—001.: 35.532 3382 T202 Human Toom T>w< Tmmw «no TU 73 vaufiucoolaufiufiea @333» MUWD 23.8 S. 333.3» 398 a: gugmgumldon mafia. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 158 .33 .9550 05. 32h 1-1--- ....... u--- mo :3 an 3v «.3; $3qu 3:: A83 A8» uuuuuuuu In .......... .33 .0120 uuuuuuuuuu u ..... Omiwo mu 03.N 03.x mu ma 3 .................... «Z .32 .932 "Ed amigo—50m 45 I ........................................................... 3.: .2250 ES 030 and“ - .......................................................... .33 .Bfiuwzfiw can Baez—Eh av flan . ................................................. A313 .33 .238 E: can—mam ea .......... ¢ ................................................. «a .33 .nmsauocnoN can nan .................................................. m: .................... .33 .9550 ES 5m 3;» wuodV. .............................. 580m .................... .33 .9550 0:: 3059mm ............................................................ 5mm 0.: .33 6.530 0:0 $3qu ............................................................ 93 SV .33 .9550 "En :33” 33 .9850 “Ea ~538an .................. <0< Himmw «Lo .70 T3 Umnfiaaoolmu~a§sw 303.3» @903 330 3 383330 83“ x0 a:3§§§§§l.m3 Sam. 159 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .32 .mxgomfiz .................... mo - 5. 2V .33 .9350 E:- uzorm .................... mo 3V :3 3" :3 mm :3 vu .................... .32 .EmEBoM - ................... mo - ..................................... in" - ......... .02: £25»: I uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu m0 :3. uuuuuuu av uuuuuuuuuu .232 1.5.0 - ....... - ....... 030 on 3 2w .................... .E .32 .35m 2:. 22:2 - ................... ”.2 --- ...... - ...................................... ASH .mmausmm vcw winged 3.“ llllllllll 3. ............................................... . .32 .238 E: 33.20 ......... - .83. 8:3. .................... .32 935a was H.353? .030 i=5 83V 3V me «av 3V eSV 3V 3V .wwau 9350 was “.8395 < .23 Esiuowm - .................. << 2 3a.“ 2‘.“ 2 u N ---------- «m .32 .amoa ES .EEm ------------------- 4.4 a: -------------------- 52 - - 33.3 .32 .wwom -------------------- << A35 -------------------- 9v 3 3:. an 3.: A35. .32 .uismsaq -------------------- << 2 -------------------- 2 e a.» ---------- mm .32 .Eamasaw ES aw: -------------------- <4 «.2 3% 9mm.“ #2 Q: 3 e2 8 .32 .SASuE -------------------- << 3N -------------------- «.2 2.2 g ---------- «.3 .22 £35.35 -------------------- << 2 -------------------- 2 n m ---------- an .32 5.55m E; axiom -------------------- << - ------------------------------------------------- - ------------------- 58 .22 iv: E; 23:2 -------------------- <4 wd 2.3 $33 3.2 S. u H on .32 .2532 25 an: -------------------- <4 ---------- 83 8.3 --------------------------------------- 3 .32 .EE. E: 35.5 -------------------- << ASN.3 8:33 $333 33.3 Assn 3:2 -------------------- .32 5.5.3. ----- aw-fiEoEo 63m m 8o.“ 35." 2 w w -------------------- .32 59:3 ----------------- 8---- ---------- 8.3 83 ------------------------------------------------- .32 .223 ----------- umhaoESoam 3. Sam Sad 9.2 3. m2 -------------------- .32 .tuvom ----------- clawiusoo 3:2 -------------------- A833 3:: ---------------- :- 32 £3553 v5. migofiiusu -------------------- mo «.2 -------------------- m5 ------------------- edc .32 5:95 -------------------- m0 852 A833 58$ 52 A2; ---------- A33 .32 .238 ES 55.335 -------------------- mo 35: Gcoumd 3:23 3:?” 3:: 3; 33 .32 6.65.532 3. -------------------- mo --------- -------- ----- -------.. ------------------- 3 .32 :3an v.5 22am ..E>< -------------------- mo 2 23.x 33d 2 as -------------------- .32 .Befio can 535...? -------------------- mo 832 8583 A233.” 8:» 8:9. 2:: 8:3 .32 .228 ES :32 2 Sn." 3.3 N. uV -------------------- .32 .5230 23 £932 ------------------------------ -. --- 8,53 .32 .223 v.3 smtpmsafimfiwnam 8:; 833$ 852:3 85.2 E; 33.x SE.“ :53 A32 .fifiawEEu Ema -------------------- Ema 2V 3:: -------------------- 6me .225 -------------------- mo SKA: Auvowmfi Auvowwfi 3.3m 8:. 3:3." ---------- - --------- .32 .5252 E... $3.33 .223: -------------------- mo 2 -------------------- S 2 a -------------------- .32 .mxmng—E -------------------- mo -------------------- 2 3 voaamudoolmz gubuouwfl €532 Himom TwBQ 700m T>w< Himmc «Ia TU .73 35:3:00'3353 333$? wwwb 33w 3 333:3» was» x: §9§m§uwgldoa H.348 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 160 .33 .558 E: 0333 a.“ 5 3a... 3 adv - 36V --H-H-- ---.-..u.~m.-m- .33 .333 was Baas .......... - ......... m3 --- .............................. .33 .535 E: 33th ......... - .33.» m3 - -- .33.: .33 .383 .......... .2 .33 - ........ - ..................................... 335 «m .33 .2230 ES 53 .83. -- - 33.3. .................... 6an 6.550 mafia .59th IIIIIIIIII l..- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII vn llllllll NAN 9N .33 £38353 E: magnum .................... - ................... :3 .3 .33 53 ii hmxtmnanuxo 53 .8: .33. .893 83.3 .......... - ......... .33 .933 3 - ............................. a .33 .238 .Eu .5an .................... - ....................................... 3 m .mw¢H .lfin—flnaM 6:6 Gent-02 m IIIIIIIIII I: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .33 .3353 .2: E336 .......... - 3. .wwan .EOnEJOH mad hoido uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu I lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll mH «is .5 .33 .556 9:. atom 9V m.V .85. 36V 3V adv .......... .333 .33 .135 E: FEES .................... .83 -- .......... . .................................... .33 .338 can 33M 533 .3953 can 35:95:30 - ................ <c< Hummo To To TB awn—EpsoOI-auafiew 3.53:8» mwmfi 23.3 g... 33.33» 83.3 xo gugwguuufilda and? 161 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .22 .233 ES 2230 iii-i- 529. .815... i- - .......... .22 .932 adv mood uuuuuuuuuu 2.3a .23 6.550 E: 23:83 62.0 Asa-H Aux: -- i..- uuuuuu I uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu A22 .8532 3:2 NV «5V 8:2 2:2 8:22 .......... 22.2 .22 .222 3:. i=2 83.2. - ......... ---------- 52 2:2 3:2 - ....... -- .:_m.n .uhwflao nus—d a—wwfigm s llllllllll I'll IIIII IIIIIIIIII .22 .236 was 22:5. .32. ........................................................... .22 £350 ES .32 .......... 3.3. - -- 22 .233 can 33M 52....— .muoauo van hfldndsaw A3 3. ...................................................................... .22 .Eofio was 5:22 622 .238 ES 5.3 83.1. ......... - ............................................................ .22 63:32 H22 .3322 ES «moan-Ho: umwafi 6.22.50 62.: :Ommkhosn Anv Vv II ||||||| I IIIIIIIIII WP IIIIIIIIII 60H IIIIIIIIII Ill IIIIIII .22 .238 ES £8235 - - 832 A32 .22 .228 ES .3523 - 2 2" :2 ii. ii-i-i .32 .233 can Bah i- 3. Sn i ------ i .922 .8532 23 22:92 52. .................... 52 8:2 32.2 . .22 £2526 2.2. 2... 2:. 2.2 92“ 3.2 £22 82.2 25 Saab 3 3V 3V 5 mg «N .22 .23sz ES 533$ 33.3 3;." 3:4 $3.3 A823 .22 £383 E; 2% 2 -------------------- 2 2" -i-- - .22 62:2 .............................. 2 m2 «a .22 .5580 S «V «V 2 2w 2 .22 5582 2 n u. 2. 2N 2 .22 .2152 E; 2.5222 «.2 -------------------- 2.2 2" iii...- .22 £35 .0 .m 2 .................... 2 on .22 .5330 ........................................ an .22 .238 ES 2.5.6 2 - ------------------- 2 2N «.2 ----.i- adu .32 .nunSm ES .335 S uV mV 1. no“ a: can an .22 .5252 2. -------------------- 2 2n .2 3a 2 .22 #815 mV 2:2 52." A822 -- ........ .22 .352 ”V 2 22m 332 ii. ..... A52 .22 .932 ES 2:2 222 2.2 .22 58222. E; .532 - --------- 52 2.“ .2 iii-i- .22 .SSEm ES 2832 i-iii- 2 2a 22 won on .22 .9650 ES 2356 £25. - ------ - -------------------------------- .22 £9.25 and =wm i-- .22 55555 SV 2V 2: e2 iii-i- dw¢H .dnflfimflv~ mafia Sena-«ho: I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .3320: H e. 22 n2 ---------- .on ---------- 52 .................... .22 .238 E: 5.232528 .......... 52 52m 222 .822 5.2225ng ---------- 2 2" 222 .22 .228 ES 25:0 -------------------- A82“ :32 .22 .2230 c5. :85 av A32. ASSN A832 .22 .ESENG 2 2 2 2. 2m 22 .22 62.2 83 .......... - ......... 2 2m 22 .22 6332 «Eu 5:5 2 2V 2V 2 3a :2 .22 .25. E: mac—am .82 2V 2V A82 832 $22 .33 .2023 "Ed 3225 ---------- umnaaoxo =0— - -------------------------------------- - 3;.NN .22 $222 ............... ".23 E S. ----------------- -- 2 2“ o: ---------- iii-H” .22 .238 ES $25.2 --------------- “.23 E 2 a H :2 2a, .2 - -------- - ii--- .22 5:55 -------------------- mo .53 .................... 33 :32 232 A32“ 252 .22 .222 can 5:3an -------------------- mo 52 9V 3;. 332 E2“ .32" 2:2 32 .22 .233 -------------------- mo Swan ~V 2V A82. 833 $va :33 A3: 2:3: 62:25.52 3v IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII mo IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Inlll IIIII mNN III IIIIIII 2.2 .2050 ES 233822. -------------------- mo 85mm 2V 3V $32: 85 cam 85 m3 839% 85mm .32 .2230 can germ -------------------- mo 8:.» 2V 2V :3 an 333 8K3 i- ------ - .-.---H- .22 22:32 -------------------- mo .......... i ........ 3v ii. - £— 4822 5:52.32 -------- 955—8 .532 26 286 28.: 2.9 26 2.: iii-i- iii---- 3? 3: a». 3:933 was»; 7x02 Human 7002 T>U< gimme «IO 70 TB wasnmanooinuESSa 239:3» MGM-D 33.2» 3.2 222:3» RES use gfiafigonI-dcfi ”Ea-B DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 162 .52 .8an 2: Each .32 £023” 2: £53m ”$2 .3256 .NR: 535.33 .33 .9850 can hEgofimmeU .53 .wau.-=u=£< 2.. .02.: .5me was Sam .33 .3050 was 302 65." .5050 can nwufinuaagw..5n=m .25" 6.550 was “—0.53: 5 .9550 min Ends—O .33 .9550 .33 .3050 an: who; .weafi .0250 .33 .23:de and £31.55 £2: .mwafisw .33 .5050 mid «Human—hm .on .82 .938 E: .3583 .35 .33 .82 figs E: 0:25 5:: .933 E: 55. .33 .9350 and now—Eek .53 532.8: “Sam .unaamam can Hoops: 53a .9550 v.5 «502.3: .83 .9550 "Ea Egan—cam $me .2050 35 3:0 2:3 .9830 ES Ewan—0A .22 £28 23 3E .32 .55 .0 .m .82 £38 1:. 525:3 .32 :21: S; SE a £32 £2.55 E; “Scam dram Hoes—0mm .82 .525 .0 .m ASH ._3.~am 0:: v.35: Jr“: .9545 End Eon—$0 AR: £15.20 .92: .3315” and 6:52.53 hflN umuqu30anohownw Gomua__._um:vl<nz and MafiawEAom .32 .nindN can SEED 65." 5:03. 65a .uwfiaosnom v.5 nut—035m .33 5.550 was «mac .8: .3050 and SE00 .95." 6350553< can non—wage“. .32 6313?. "En ouEngoQ 50.3. $3.3. $3.3 A81: ANV $66 35.2. A9 wdmw Aiwdwa ASSN €5.va , 353 5:: 53.3 Amvobu 3:50:81:— 3.85“; "0050.5 almom HthQ HIOOW HI>U¢ HIAwU «IO HIU 35:5:00'33363 EES» mwmb 330 gm 3:058» 039$ x0 azowugwgfiufilficfi mam—<8 163 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .22 .232 E3 3352.2 .................. <52 52.2 .................... 22 -- ................. .32 .222 E5 Eiuqm .................. <hflo llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll II IIIIIII m6 cod Em .22 .9550 E: 33 .................. <3mE< ---------------- <52 ---------------------------------------- 3.2.» ---------- --- ----- 25:5»:on 3:953 25505 . 7202 TmHQ T002 T>U< Tame «In. TU TB gunmanoolwflfitg 33:382. mwmfi 23.2 S. 2252» 38.8 xo w§fi§§§§m~lda mama“ DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 164 .33: .Aflfim .0 .m .32 .5230 ................. - .......................................... man .32 .223 one 3.8.6 .23 .................... a; man Ev .......... 2: do: 523% can Erna—om 3m mV av 36 man 13. gm mm.” .92: .awEwasow 3m uuuuuuuuuu 2:. can 23 SE o3 .32 5.23 3:3. .85. 33$ 58m .................... .32 6952 «an ANvaw ASSN SE3. .......... 3:3 .33 .3525 E5 33qu non wmw can NS. mun em“ .33 .Eoofl E: minimum can m: own 3: .................... .33 duo—5o E; 59:25 ............................................................ .83 .333 ES :5 ------------ ...... Ea" .................................................. 3H .32 .332 ................. Ban .............................. Ema. .................... .32 sins—=5 ----H-- .......... aux can 3:. SN ea. .................... 4:: .383 H-H--H- --------..- << 35;. Emma is” 3.3:. $3" 32: 5 £ng «Simian. IIIIIIIIIIII << 3:3 335 33mm 3:8 uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .ng .9550 and :55 23va mV mV 2.; m3 Amvmvu 8:3. uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .22 £33.20 2:. $225 2m .................... 5e 3.“ 2... .......... 2N .E: 533:; v5 55—305 we» .................... as 8“ 8m .......... «on .32 Swen—4w in IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 2:. can omv .................... .32 6523 ES 3c=a~8¢ Sn .................... 3.» SN 2; .................... .32: .smfiuungoo ................... << mum .......... m: was 5%; Sn EN .32 .9650 2: 8:30 ................... << ................... 1--- ..... 53a .............................. .33 £35.35 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII << bow .......... our «mm 25 .......... w: .32 63.5 ................... << «3. “V woe N3 56 .......... a..." .32 .EE. ES 25:5 ................... «3. Ass.» mV 853 .8me $33 .................... $3 gun—SM E... :anoE ................. mzwm Eu i- ....... -- .......................................................... . 45H #6::qu— .................... mO A335 ........................................ Awwomm .......... .3me .33 Pawn—ac and Fae—aim ................... mo 53$” 3va 3;. SK? 333 SE: Avau 3&3: .33 £355 2: in: its .................... mo «an mV av 36 SN 2» .................... .23 65.5332 ac .................... mo ............................................................ 3N o: 55H .30st “En :39an6 HH ................ we 855E 85a. QCN 8:23 83mg 3395 85va 83me .23: mums—«o “:3 =32 IIIIIIIIIIIIIII m0 on» mV mV 2:. emu 3m .................... .22 .5330 3:. «SEE .................... mo ............................................................ 85.5 deg» imuaavngow .................... mo A33.” .................... ASSN. ANVmHN 33$. .................... 65“ .2050 and 53533 E fixes—ac was 5:35 3N ...................................................................... .33 .238 can Moreno .............................. o5 ........................................ . .82 .955 A8 :2. 2V 2V 332. ASSN 5m? .................... . . .33 @650 was 32% 83mm uV mV 355. 853 8:2... .................... $2 Eanfiménunwmnmwuw and winch SC nmm .................... 852$ 832$ 832$ .................... .mwam u—EEU 86 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII comm 8v com llllllllllllllllllll um . . .33 figs—now .................. <U¢ Tummy «IO HIU ganmunoolwgagg 233$? mwmb 23.8 § 32.333» 83$ x9 gugwguofildofi mafia. 165 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS 62: £020: up. up. .82 .238 ES 3:2 3 .................... e." e. 8..- .22 .38m 9. .................... 3 m. ........ .awau .mhwfiuo 1nd flghc IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ”V. |||||||||| .022 .uwafiflm E3 £255 52. u- ........ 3:: 52.. 55. .22 Sam ---- hmevwnufixo :2 5a. .................... 3:2 3:3 .................... $me .flfififlmam vfld flOmmthS IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII msww H IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 6:222 E2 5220 ......... n ....... mew .................................................. 2. .w¢®H .fiOm—nn—oh via Hw>hd0 I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII mzwm IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII v. b. .22 .238 ES 5:8 .................... mo ........................................ «V «V .2. .82 £23332 E; 53923.82 .5525. .................. «£2 2%. $32.... 328. 3:3. 3:2. 32». .................... 2053255006 «022 .22 :23an E5 32:35 .................. <w< 2..an «no TU TB voscfinoolafiafig 333:3.» mwmb 23.2 E 22:22 25$ 2 w§2§w§29|63 mafia. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 166 .82 $3933 “a... 5:3 .35 ....... - ......... <<2 53m. 558°. 558°. 52.». 582 $32. 583 £52. 52 9.2.8 E: .5qu 652 .238 E: 3:355 .................. <<2 58.". --H ............. r .,.------- ------- H---->- --.----- ------u w .32 52E ES 933322 ........... 3‘ ‘ dw- ‘ 2. . 3. an. 5.2 No.2 .................... d¢mn .dfifia—mflVm Mafia «menu-:02 IIIII IIIIIIIIIIII mamw . m. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .Eufio E: $23325.ng ............ - ...... mo 2V Hv 2V V 3:.“ 3:: 32.4 V E. .52 .Bofio . was Bah "22 £232 an... 3:2 8:“: .................... 83 83 83 .......... 8.3 .22 5:32 58.. 2 5mm 52. 8:56 583. some.” .................... .22 €952 333.2 .................... A333 33qu 3:2." .......... $356 .22 .282 E: 25:32 SE2 .................... 3.56 can.” 33 .................... .32 £38 8: 2 2 on 83 83. 83 .................... 5. .52 5:58am 9:. :382 .................. <<2 A826 .................... 52.6 522 $2.5 $2.2. A823 .52 .uosnosm E; 5582 .................. <<2 536 588. 8:88. .886 $2.2 $3.3 $1.3 Eng .52 £982 .................. <<2 ........................................ N52 .......... 2.5. m: .22 .830 E; “330 .................. <<2 E. ...................................................................... .52 £82.82 H32 .3332 9:. pours: 22 .223 ES Eat-SE .................. <<2 53. .................... E. .......... 2 .................... .22 .Eofio E: 5952.52 .................. <<2 ............................................................ 6:3 3:3 .22 .utfiom .................. <<2 a H 2 5 N2 2 .................... .32 .2232 ES 823325 .................. <<2 mm.» 2o. 2o. 23 .......... «.5 .................... .52 .Eofio E: .3523 ................. <<2~ .............................. 3 ”2 9mm .................... .52 .228 ES 3.8 ................. <<2H N3. ............................................................ a: .22 .uoEmm ................. <<2H 8;.» .................... 5g 52: A85 5:.» 5o.“ .52 .32.: E; .322 ................. <52 .3 .................... a... :2 mg .......... o.» .922 .$:£3m ES 235:2 .............. <<2~nm A89...» .................... 3:25 3:2 35.2 .......... 8:3. .52 53222. was Eon ................. 3.---- 3 .................... 3 a2 5.3 .................... .52 .238 was 2.155 ................. 8.1- we .................... a... 32 3a .................... .22 .955... ES 3:25 ................. 3---- 3 .................... 2. 3.2 92 5.2 .3 .22 €23.30 ................. 3---- 3nd -------------------- 33. 332 33a -------------------- .22 £3.32 on ------------------------------------------------------------ 8:: 3:.” .33 .aaafidfi was «52.202 m ------------------------------------------------------------ .52 .982 E -------------------- E -------------------- o.” .52 558.2 wV mV mV n ---------- 2 av .22 .2230 2:. 2.6.6 m -------------------- 5 £2 2 ---------- .92: .2052. ~25 5:30 ------------------------------------------------------------ H .2. .52 .9550 v5 .3283 .030 .33 ---- ------------- <<2 Hv 2V 2V ”V 2V Hv Hv 2V .22 £35.52. 2: v32 ------------------ <<2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- m; .32 .3332 ES sour—.82 ----------------- msmm 3.8 --------------------------------------------------------------------- on. .52 53% ES can—mam ma. ------------------------------------------------------------ mm. 1:5" .mmfin—hwvfloN 65¢ mun IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII b. llllllllllllllllllll .52 .233 .25 £3.55 8. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .22 .9350 ES .32 55. ”89V ---------------------------------------- on. ---------- .82 .2230 was 5:32 522 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .22 .238 can “32¢ ------------------------------------------------------------ mm. 5. .52 .Ewflo E: 2523.5: 322.2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .52 .233 ES :2?- 22 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .22 £385.53 was mama—Em ------------------------------------------------------------ S. 8. .anM .mHWH—va vfld downy—wk mm. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ov- IIIIIIIIII km. .52 58232 :32 .3322 ES 4.33.232 52: .3050 and :Ommauos AN: -------------------- w. nnnnnnnnnn m. uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .32 .Eofio can 88:33 ------------------------------------------------------------ A821 5%. dew.— 5—3525us 23 .afisno .2:th .3332 2.2 238. :8. A85. .85; 58. 3:22. £53. £22 .uwufifiw was 235.5 52.2 35V 35V can; 5:2 .856 ---------- A35. .52 .fiufio ES 3:5 ---------------------------------------- - ----------------------------- :3 3:155: .35qu 85.2332 Tmom Twpn Toom T>u< Tame «:0 Tc TB 3::550'33253 339:3» mwmb 3a...» 5 383:3» 88.3 x0 aggefiggumlfig "35.9 167 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .22 .238 E: 52282 .................... mo 2:2. 3:5 3:3 3:22 3:8 3:2 32 5va .22 £2.55 E; .355 .E>< .................... mo 23 u 3. m2 2. an .................... .22 6.63.532 2. .................... mo .......... . ........................................ --- ..... 2 an .22 .233 E3 53:35. .................... mo 852:. 2V 8:2 252 8.52. 852 852 3:3" .22 .238 E5 finfifiifimégm .................... mo 8:2 2V 8:23 8:2 52. En» 85.2 2.32.“ 2.2 £25m E3 Sam .......... 52: .98» .22 .5255 E3 .532 .................... 852.“ 2.22 5222.25". .......... 3:: A82. A82 - ....... .22 .223 E3 :82 2" 22 2. 2 - ......... 2.2 .233 VHS =UBNHS Em .muwAaO GEN Angus—U IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .82 .525 52." $22 :33 A33 .................... .32 .223 ES 2282 mu :2 5 2. .................... 2.2 «£5022 ........................................ 2 SN .32 .223 ES E32 52 8;: 8:3. 8:: .................... .22 .236 on a: 8 2. .................... .22 .25 ............................................................ .52 £962 .................... :3 .......... an.» mm. 62.2 .955wa £322 .................................................. 4:: .mhun—uo via quH—uam llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll .HbmH anhwfiuo USS dBlno IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 2:2 658322 m8. :2 ........................................ .33 GEE-gen and www.m— .............................. a uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu «54 .22 £82.82 ”22 .3332 E2 flowmhhos “aw“: .mnwfiuo wad Sommhhos llllllllll 9.! IIIIIIIIII wé llllllllllllllllllll .22 .9650 ES E95254 .............................. - ......... ark A82. .22 .255 E3 3553 .......... 282.2 353 A882 ...... - 53. 632 .mwnfiflm E: 225.2 .......... 523 A38." 3:3.“ 52.. .:.2 .588: E5 .632 .......... a; E 2.“ .......... .22 .228 E3 23.6 .......... c.« a.“ mi. .......... .22 .233 ES 25:6 .......... v.2 flu a.“ a.» 2.. .22 .2525 .......... 3.3.x A33 and .................... .22 28?: 2. ........................................ 53. 3.8. .Nrafi .0Mfi>d0m5h¢< IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .2050 ES 22:2 ............. - ................ S“ .................... 4.2.2 £552.22 ................ 2.---- E 3:. e8. flu M: a." .................... 2.2 .3;me ................ 3..---- 33: 5223 35.85 322 ---------- a.“ -------------------- .oraH .mhufiao win» 2-5th IIIIIIIIII 306.5 flommmmrfl IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1H.» «v. .meH .afin—AmdM man—d Eammhhos IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII wzww HA IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .228 E: 5:00 -------------------- mo -------------------------------------------------- - --------- ed a.“ D tuba.“ .mmfifihowfioN vfifi mag llllllllllllllll <42 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII n. IIIIIIIIII .32 a3$€£3 E3 magnum ------------------ <U< Thaw «Ia T0 T3 vosuscoOI-wuagsm ESESm mwmb 23.8 5 3222.3» 83.2 xe wgfigmguuofildon mam—<3 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES 0F EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 168 .22 .touuwsnam ....... 55553 mug-N New .................... can «.2 .......... 3 .22 .9608 ES .32 H83. 30. .................... H8; - ................... .33 £30305? HE: mEEaHow .................................................. . H.mH TN .33 inns—max HEa 002.303 3 ............................................................ .22 .222 mm .................... 0N .22 .0333 2:. 33m .............................. 2 N H2 ------- .......... .aNSH .EnanH 3. av wV N .3" av N .53 £55.80 N NV NV NH 3 w .......... .33 95.58% .3. mV 0V NN H... 3 NN .NSH Sam GEN» .................... 33.3 33.3 A81: .......... .33 035:0 .............................. -- -- HH .22 5x53 52 mV av 52 H53 H32 - ................... .33 £35.33 2. vV «V .N N NH NH N .33 .0:Sw:0:£< 0H. ...................................................................... mN .33..Eo£0 Hid 003539 83:. 3va 8.30 8H3” 8S .2." oNV ONV 850m .33 .5me 0:: .50m SEN .................... H83 -- -- 3ch .82 .2200 E; .32 3. 3 3 cm. 3 2V .................... .33 .2050 can H—oBNuS 5 .9550 HE: REE—O vm -------------------- n- ------------------------------------------------ .33 .9509 A515. cHV 3V HEmN 8va 3va -------------------- 32 £36 mu .................... mu 2 2 -------------------- .33 .2230 His 00:00 ------------------------------------------------------------ NH HH V .83 6.5.33 -------------------- m0 -------------------------------------------------- w.V ---------- £33 .355an E5 23:0.5 ------------------ <0:0$0Hu.H HE:w hwy—305E960 0.0mm ----------------------- - ------ mém -------------------- oéwN .HSH 9555.5 3503. ---------- A35 833 H33 HNHV Hw ---------- AavomN r cunnmuflool> . H.050: venouwuwm . Hlflom Hlmfin HIOUm HI>G< HIMMU NIO H16 HI? I 3:5»:00‘3353 30%:30 mwmfi 33.0 E. 320530 03$ .8 gwugwgmuufilfioH Hamfih 169 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS .:.2 fig E... “9.5 ASH .5585h .92: £5550 dean .hogwsnom deg .uwv—nam 62: £5.52 .mwS 6952 .mme .550m do: .5EEN< .A .5va £55559 . .mp3 .553 .F: 5.55». can =2:QO .52 £550 ME: EEO 42: 532220 1:0 .5553— .ogu .035 95 55am 6.5m 53% .92: .afinayaq 45E: Ewan—0:300 .92: £5.55?“ .33.— .n550 can E39252 E 3553‘ .33 $205.35 4....me 5th .33 .5255 ES 535m .52 Java—ohm and $590K .33 .9550 an: 53:55. .05“ £550 "Ed 185 6:: .550 was 5w5n—mzanumu5aam 22...: .m550 mid mid—mum .33 .mmnahownoN and man .52 £550 v.5 immugm 63“ .9550 and .5m .95: 5200 E? 95:0 .33 .9550 and 3003mm 62: .550 «:3 .5530 .05: £550 an: Emu—mam 55a.— .n550 ~23 «5.250an .923 .9550 and .5:< .35“ {35.553 v.5 mn==£um 62: £550 can :omuswm Ag— .noflkuos ”away £5220” and nominee: 5?: £550 v.5 £02505 .33 £550 van Eouumuuafl .533 6255.5 was :wwnam .mme .Euzudfium and .2550 £25508 .Eunum: 22.3 .232 1:5 hofiuuflnom 62: $550 "=5 560 .ogH .555:£uw and mugging .22 52.8 E... 830 .22 .552 .22 .552 E: .3: .82 .38w .32 £2? E... :85 .032 55:50am 0:0 23.5.5 .22 $5 .33 .3235: ES :ofihofi .32 figs—£2 v.5 Ens—EU .32“ 502.33.. ~33 5:50 .NR: £52505 .22 .525 E... Sam 65" £550 E; 50: 63” .550 ":5 nwuuoaunaaomfiwazmm .33 .955 e252 ................... hmx ..... Gméafiouao 5.5m ........... {iv-l: << Auvwwn 2: «ma N: Aswan .3 an“ an“ A8 «an 3V mad 5%.“ 11“ 58.” 5 mm.“ 0050.590.“ filmom A5 .3." $334 HImHQ “loom ~I>U< 8:62 8:: .. Auvné GHQN :uwmmpu. Arvnfi Eva thmmv TB 5::550'5325.» 3380...» .335 £38 S. 355.3» 80% x0 gmwgwESufilch mam—<8 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 170 .22 .952 an: 533.2% ..................... n: «.2 .............................. .52 2.83352 ....... 55:36: 32.x m2 :2 ........ - ....... 2.2 ‘2 2a .......... o2 .22 .955: an: 335.222 8:2 .............................. -- .......... .33 £02.20: 8N ........................................ .22 sang—32 2a 522 .aamH .fiflflflmuVm 62d flail—OE IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .238 E: 55:32 EN .......... .22 .955: an: 58:33 .......... 3:2 .22 £38 2.: 5:23 2a .......... .22 .932 2 I ................... an“ - S .52 53.52 can 5:395 352 .................... 232 2:2 52.» .......... .:.2 5:83 E: 1.8m n2 .................... 8a a...» 22 .......... :2 .932 2:. “BE ...................................... - ............... 1-- 52a .32 .32 53985. E; .532 N2 .................... mun «2 p2 .................... .22 .5535 «2 «V NV :2 22 2a .......... H2 .32 .353...“ 22 mV mV own 22 v ................... 2 2.2 .5230 .1 ..................................... - ---. v2 .22 .aoanfim SE2 .................... 232 283.2 8:5.» 52m 52 .22 £3.32 222 mV mV 232 3:2 2:2 .................... .22 35:52.6 ............. max SV 2V 2: sun 2N I ................... .22 .5282. 1.. $5336 :2 33. 3.3.2 522 --- 3:2 .22 .238 and 3225 ..... 28532—2588 3N.» 3:3 :32 .................... 3:2 .mwau .dflflflmum mun—d EmethE IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII mzmm IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .32 62:2 .................... mo .................... 2a 8» 2 .......... .:.2 22:65 .................... mo 252$ .................... 832 2.52 A2232 .......... $52 .32 .325: ES 5:332 A222 2V 2V 3:22 $522 2:: :22 322 2.2 .238 up: agnfionm. 823% mV 2V A232 8523. 8232 2:2 8:22 .:2 62:03.33. 2. ........................................ i--- ............... m2 2 2.2 :EEw ME: aim 3:2 .................... 853 - - - A82 .22 .955: 3:. 82332923252 8:2 8V SV 83% E2» :22” 828 2:2 .22 .225 E22 2V 2V 32m 832 32a .......... 22 £35.36 ............................................................ 332 .22 525° and F32 :32 3:5 :32 332 .82.. 52a .......... .22 £35 22 .................... 2m 8m 2m .......... :N .:.2 5222. ES 5582 3:22 $2.2 3.2.2 532 $222 33.2 .......... 8:...2 .22 .223 E: 35 2:2 ...................................................................... 22.2 52:: E... «55:32 .................... a2 .................... I- ................. 2.2 22 .Eofio 2:. 22.5.5 .32 ............................. u ....................................... .:.2 .23.... E3 9825. A822 ...................................................................... 2.2 .233 on: 93:83 .030 .33 2.: 2 E. 2 22 2. 3. 2 .22 .8222 ES 5233. 8:22 .................... 3:2 8:..3 $3.2 .......... 35.2 2.2 .225: an: 3:355 522 ...................................................................... 2.2 .9550 an: .3: 2 2 on 2 .......... «w .......... 2 .22 .2228 E; 5:82.22 22 2 2. 2 2.2 2 .......... 2 2.2 .Eefio was :232 2.2 .223: ES :23 $32 ...................................................................... .22 .225: E: :Efiom m2 -----l---- 2 .......... :55}-.. 2 .......... 2 .52 £83.82 “22 .3222 an: 52.82 “22 .952: was :Sraos 2:2 .......... mm .......... 2 ............ - ....... .22 .223: E; £23253 ........................................ A32 .82 .22 £232 9:. Bah .......... 2w .......... 2 .......... 2 .22 .223: us: 230 .......... . ...... v ....................... 2 .anfi .fln—SfluuM ‘5“ £03.56: 9:“ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .22 .932 m2 .......... 2. 2 .......... t- .................. 2 £22 .2.an 2: Bank .822 5.2 $3. 52 6E2 A82 A85 52 .52 .2352 ES 5.585 352 52 53:. 52.2 2:22 22.2 .................... uo:£a:ool_—N @0502 8:233" Tmom Human Tova T>w< Tame «Iv Tc TB gammanoolwflaxsoa 2.2.3333» mwmb 32.8 2.9 «222.3» 88.3 as afiefigwfiiufigldcfi an. 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS 171 TABLE 106.—Estimates of components normally determined in a rock analysis, in percent [Data are listed as recommended, averages, or magnitudes] W—l G—1 G—2 GSP—l AGV—l PCC—l D’l‘S-l BCR—l 52.64 72.64 69.11 67.38 59.00 41.90 40.50 54.50 15.00 14.04 15.40 15.25 17.25 .74 .24 13.61 1.40 .87 1.08 1.77 4.51 2.85 1.21 3.69 8.72 .96 1.45 2.31 2.05 5.24 7.23 8.80 6.62 .38 .76 .96 1.53 43.18 49.80 3.46 10.96 1.39 1.94 2.02 4.90 .51 .15 6.92 2.15 3.32 4.07 2.80 4.26 .006 .007 3.27 .64 5.48 4.51 5.53 2.89 .004 .0012 1.70 .53 .34 .55 .57 .81 4.70 .46 .77 .16 .06 .11 .12 1 .03 .5 0 .06 .80 1.07 .26 .50 .66 1.04 .015 .013 2.20 .14 .09 .14 .28 .49 .002 .002 .36 .17 .03 .034 .042 .097 .12 .11 .18 .06 .07 .08 .15 .05 .12 .08 .08 100.26 99.93 99.73 99.84 99.91 99.89 99.86 100.28 11.09 1.94 2.65 4.33 6.76 8.35 8.64 13.40 44.77 ___ 48.34 47.78 47.24 ____ -___ 45.48 TABLE 101—Estimates for trace elements in USGS samples [Data are listed as recommended, averages, or magnitudes; in all parts per million, except for Au. Hg, Ir, Os. Pd, Pt. Re, Rh, and Ru, in parts per billion and for Ra in [mg/g] Element W—l G—1 G—2 GS P—l AGV—l PCG—l DTS—l BCR—l 0.081 0.05 0.049 0.10 0.11 0.005 0.008 0.036 1.9 .5 .25 .09 .8 .05 .08 .70 3.7 4.0 1.0 1.6 .6 1.6 .8 .95 1 5 1 .7 2.0 <3 5 6 < 5 5 160 1 ,200 1,870 1,300 1,208 1.2 2.4 675 .8 8 2.6 1 .5 8 _________________ 1 .7 .046 .065 .043 .037 .057 .013 ‘.010 .050 .4 .4 .8 ________ .5 .6 .2 .15 _______________________________________________________ 65 .15 .03 .039 .06 .09 .1 .12 .12 28 170 150 394 63 .09 .06 53.9 200 70 50 800 1,10 60 11 50 47 2.4 5.5 6.4 14.1 112 133 88 114 .20 7 12.5 12.2 2,730 4,000 17.6 .9 1.5 1 .1; 1.0 1 .4 .006 .006 .95 110 13 11.7 33.3 59.7 11.3 7.0 18.4 4 2.4 2.6 5.4 3.5 ________ .003 6.3 2.4 1.15 1.8 8.0 1.2 ________ <.003 3.59 1.11 1.3 1.5 2.4 1.7 .002 .0009 1.94 250 690 1,290 8,200 435 15 15 470 16 19.6 22.9 22 20.5 .4 .2 20 4 5 5 15 5.5 ________ (.01 6.6 1.4 1.1 1.15 1.8 1.8 .93 .90 1.54 2.67 5.2 7.35 15.9 5.2 .06 .01 4.7 225 97 39 15.5 15 7.2 8.7 10.7 .69 .35 .4 < .5 .6 ________ .008 1 .2 < .03 < .03 _________________________________________ <1 .065 .02 .034 .05 .04 .008 .0025 .095 .28 .008 .002 .012 .011 5.2 1 .0 .004 9.8 101 96 191 85 .15 .04 26 14.5 22 34.8 32.1 1.2 2 2 12.8 .35 .19 .11 .23 .28 .006 .002 .55 1,278 195 260 331 763 959 969 1,406 .57 6.5 .86 .90 2.8 .2 .2 11.1 52 59 56 48 43 43 27 30 9.5 23.5 13.5 29 15 <2 <3 13.5 15 56 60 188 39 ________ < .02 29 172 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 107 .—Estimates for trace elements in USGS samples—fiontinued W—l G—l G—2 GSP—l AGV—l PCG—l DTS—l BCR—l 76 1 5.1 12.5 18.5 2,339 2,269 15.8 .25 .07 ________ <32 <34 1 1 1 . 7.8 48 31.2 51.3 35.1 13.3 14.2 17.6 Pd _____________ 25 2 <.5 <.5 <.5 1.9 1 12 Pr ____________ 3 .4 1 9 1 9 50 7 ________ .006' 7 Pt ______________ 12 1 9 <.5 <.5 1 8 3 2 Ra ___________________________ .71 .66 .69 .0018 .0013 .56 Rb ............ 21 220 168 254 67 .063 .053 46.6 Re ____________ <2 <2 <7 <2 <5 .07 <.4 .8 Rh ____________ <1 ________________________________ 1.0 .9 .2 Ru __________________________________________________ 9.5 2.5 1 S ______________ 123 58 24 162 <10 <10 <10 892 Sb ____________ 1.0 .31 .1 3.1 4.5 1.4 .46 .69 Sc ____________ 35.1 2.9 3.7 7.1 13.4 6.9 3.6 33 Se _____________ .13 .007 <.7 <.04 <.14 <.18 <.3 .10 Sm ____________ 3.6 8.3 7.3 27.1 5.9 .008 .004 6.6 Sn ____________ 3.2 3.5 1 .5 6.3 4.2 1 1 2.6 Sr ____________ 190 250 479 233 657 .41 .35 330 Ta ____________ .50 1.5 .91 1.0 .9 <.1 <.1 .91 Tb ____________ .65 .54 .54 1.3 .70 .001 .0003 1.0 Te ____________ <1 < 1 1 < 1 1 < 1 < 1 <1 Th ____________ 2.42 50 24.2 104 6.41 .01 .01 6.0 Ti _____________________________ 2,780 3,990 6,190 70 -71 12,750 Tl _____________ .11 1 .24 1 .0 1 .3 1 .0008 .0005 .30 Tm ____________ .30 .15 .3 ________ .4 ________ .001 .6 U _____________ .58 3.4 2.0 1.96 1.88 .005 .004 1.74 V _____________ 264 17 35.4 52.9 125 30 10.3 399 W _____________ .5 .4 .1 .1 .55 .06 .04 .40 Y _____________ 25 13 12 30.4 21.3 <5 .05 37.1 Yb ____________ 2.1 1.06 .88 1.8 1 .7 .02 .01 3.36 Zn ____________ 86 45 85 98 84 36 45 120 Zr _____________ 105 210 300 500 225 7 3 190 REFERENCES Anoshin, G .N., Perezhogiin, G. A., and Melnikova, R. D., 1970, Abbey, Sydney, 1968, Analysis of rocks and minerals by atomic absorption spectroscopy. Pt 2. Determination of total iron, magnesium, calcium, sodium, and potassium: Canada Geol. Survey Paper 68—20, 21 p. 1970, US. Geological Survey Standards—a critical study of published analytical data: Canadian Spectros- copy, v. 15, p. 10—16. 1971, Written communication, Geol. Survey of Canada, Ottawa. Agrinn'er, H., 1968, Written communication, Commisariat a L’Energie Atomique, Chatillon-sous—Bag-neux, France. Allen, R. 0., Haskin, L. A., Anderson, M. R., and Miiller, 0., 1970, Neutron activation analysis for 39 elements in small or precious geologic samples: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 6, p. 115—137. Anders, Edward, Ganapathy, R., Keays, R. R., Laul, J. C., and Morgan, J. W., 1971, Volatile and \siderophile elements in lunar rocks; comparison with terrestrial and meteoritic basalts, in Lunar Sci. Conf., 2d, Houston, Tex., 1971, Proc., V. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 2), p. 1021—1036. Ando, Atsushi, 1971, Written communication, Geol. Survey of Japan, Kawasaki. Anoshin, G. N., and Pemhogin, G. A., 1969, 1971, Written communication, Inst. Geol. and Geophysics, Siberian Branch, U.S.S.R. Acad. Sci., Novosibirsk. Written communication, Inst. Geol. and Geophysics, Si- berian Branch, U.S.S.R. Acad. Sci., Novosibirsk. Aruscavage, P. J., 1969, 1972, Written communication, U.S. Geol. Survey, Denver, Colo. Aston, S. R., and Riley, J. P., 1972, The' determination of mercury in rocks and sediments: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 59, p. 349—355. Aubert, Ch., and Desjardins, M., 1971, Written communica- tion, Société Nationale des Pétroles d’Aquitaiine, Paris, France. Avni, R., Hare] A., and Brenner, I. B., 1972, A new approach to the spectrochemical analysis of silicate rocks and mine- rals: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 26, p. 641-645. Baedecker, P. A., Schaudy, Rudolph, Elzie, J. L., Kimberlin, J ., and Esson, J. T., 1971, Trace element studies of rocks and soils from Oceanus Procellarum and Mare Tran- quillitatis, in Lunar Sci. Conf., 2d, Houston, Tex., 1971, Proc., V. 2: Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press (Geochim et Cosmochim. Acta, Supp. 2), p. 1037—1061. Baedeckevr, P. A., and Wasson, J. T., 1970, Gallium, ger- manium, indium, and riridium in lunar samples: Science, v. 167, no. 3918, p. 503—505. Balous, M., and Thiel, R., 1968, Dosage de sept éléments- traces par spectrophotométri-e d’absorption atomique dans six standards U.S.G.S.: Centre Researches Pau Bull. v. 2, p. 179—182. 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS Bartel, Ard-ith, J., 1969, Written communication, U.S. Geologi- cal Survey, Denver, Colo. Beccaluva, L., and Venturellli, G., 1971, Nickel, chromium, and strontium determination in some silicate rock standards by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Atomic Absorp- tion Newsletter, v. 10, no. 2, p. 50—52. 1972, Written communication, Istituto di Mineralogia, Univ. di Parma, Italy. Bell, Keith, and Doyle, R. J., 1971, K-Rb relationshipsqin’ some continental alkalic rocks associated with the East African Rift Valley system: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 35, p. 903—915. Bell, Keith, and Powell, J. L., 1969, Strontium isotopic studies of alkalic rocks; the potassium-rich lavas of the Birunga and Toto-Ankole regions, East and Central Equatorial Africa: Jour. Petrology, v. 10, p. 536—572. Bender, M. L., and Schultz, Cynthia, 1969, The distribution of trace metals in cores from a traverse across the Indian Ocean: Geochim et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 292—297. B'ernas, Bedrich, 1968, A new method for decomposition and comprehensive analysis of silicates by atomic absorption spectrometry: Anal. Chemistry, v. 40, p. 1682—1686. Bertine, K. K., Chan, L. H., and Turekian, K. K., 1970, Uranium determinations in deep-sea sediments and natural waters using fission tracks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, p. 641—648. Bowers, J. M., and Flack, F. C., 1969, Determination of fluorine by prompt y-radiation from proton bombardment. II. Results: Analyst, v. 94, p. 7—14. , Biagi, Laura, 1970, I limiti dei metodi rapidi in fotometria di assorbimento per il dosaggo di Si02 e A1203: Mineralog. et Petrog. Acta, v. 16, p. 33—44. Bibby, D. M., 1972, written communication, Univ. of Wit- watersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. BIircz, R., 1971, Spectrochemical determination of lithium, rubidium, and cesium in geological standards: Israel Atomic Energy Comm. Rept. IA—1244, 13 p. Blackburn, W. H., Griswold, T. B., and Dennen, W. H., 1971, Spectrochemical determinations of trace elements in the USGS silicate rock standards: Chem. Geology, v. 7, p. 143—147. Blount, C. W., Leyden, D. E., Thomas, T. L., and Guill, S. M., 1972, Written communication, Dept. Geol., Univ. of Georgia, Athens. Boar, P. L., and Ingram, L. K., 1970, The comprehensive analysis of coal ash and silicate rocks by atomic absorp- tion spectrophotometry by a fusion technique: Analyst, v. 95, p. 124—130. Bodart, D. E., 1970, Rapid colorimetric determinations of cobalt, nickel, and copper in silicate rocks: Chem. Geol- ogy, v. 6, p. 133—142. Bergen, B. L., 1967, Analytical procedures used in the geo- chemical laboratory of the Survey: Gr¢nlands Geol. Un- derspgelse Rap. 10, 44 p. Bostrom, Kurt, and Valdes, Sylvia, 1969, Arsenic in ocean floors: Lithos, v. 2, p. 351—360. Bratzel, M. P., Jr., Chakrabarti, C. L., Sturgeon, R. E., McIntyre, M. W., and Agemain, Haig, 1972, Determina- tion of gold and silver in parts-per-billion or lower levels in geological and metallurgical samples by atomic absorp- tion spectrometry with a. carbon rod atomizer: Anal. Chemistry, v. 44, p. 372-374. 173 Breger, I. A., and Chandler, J. C., 1969, Determination of fixed water in rocks by infrared absorption: Anal. Chem- istry, v. 41, p. 506~510. Brenner, I. B., 1971, Written communication, Geol. Survey of Israel, Jerusalem. Brimhall, Willis H., and Embree, Glenn F., 1971, Rapid analysis of basalts by atomic absorption spectrophoto- metry: Brigham Young Univ. Geology Studies, v. 18, pt. 3 (Dec.) , p. 123—130. Briscoe, G. B., and Humphries, S., 1970, Substoichiometric determination of traces of palladium by neutron activa- tion analysis: Talanta, v. 17, p. 371—380. 1971, Substoichiometric determination of traces of palladium by radioactive isotope-dilution analysis: Ta- lanta, v. 18, p. 39—49. Brooks, C. K., 1968, A radiochemical separation for the de termination of zirconium or hafnium in rocks and mine- rals by neutron activation analysis: Radiochim. Acta, v. 9, p. 157—160. Brown, D. F. G., MacKay, A. M., and Turek, A., 1969, Prepa. ration of stable silica standard solutions in rock analysis using lithium tetraborate: Anal. Chemistry, v. 41, p. 2091. Brunfelt, A. 0., Heier, K. S., and Steinnes, Eiliv, 1971, De termination of 40 demerits in Apollo 12 materials by neutron activation analysis, in Lunar Sci. Conf., 2d, Houston, Tex., 1971, Proc., V. 2: Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, Supp. 2), p. 1281— 1290. Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, 1969a Antimony content of some standard rocks: Earth and Planetary Sci. Let- iters, v. 5, p. 282—284. 1969b, Determination of lutetium, ytterbium, and ter- bium in rocks by neutron activation and mixed solvent anion-exchange chromatography: Analyst, v. 94, p. 979— 984. 1969c, Instrumental activation analysis of silicate rocks with epithermal neutrons: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 48, p. 13— 24. 1969d, A simple neutron activation method for silver in rocks: Radiochem. and Radioanal. Letters, v. 1, p. 219—224. eds., 1971a, Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmochemistry; Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute, Kjeller, Norway, 7—21 September 1970: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, 468 p. 1971b, A neutron activation scheme developed for the determination of 42 elements in lunar material: Talanta, v. 18, p. 1197—1208. Buckley, D. E., and Cranston, R. E., 1971, Atomic absorption analysis of 18 elements from a single decomposition of aluminosilicate: Chem. Geology, v. 7, p. 273—284. Butler, L. R. P., 1968, Written communication, Natl. Phys. Research Lab., Pretoria, South Africa. Butler, L. R. F., and Kokot, M. L., 1969, The application of atomic absorption to the analysis of upper mantle and other rocks: Geol. Soc. South Africa Spec. Pub. 2, p. 449—462. Campbell, E. Y., 1969, Written communication, U.S. Geologi- cal Survey, Washington, D.C. Capaldj, G., Ch'vetta, L., and Gasparini, P., 1971, Fractiona- tion of the 238U decay series in the zeolitization of volcanic ashes: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 35, p. 1067— 1072. 174 Carpenter, Roy, 1969, Factors controlling the marine geo- chemistry of fluorine; Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 1153—1167. Carver, R. D., and Johnson, P. G., 1968, Use of a spark source mass spectrograph for the general analysis of geological samples: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 212, p. 431— 433. Casanova, L., Emiliani, F., Fanti, E., and Venturelli, G., 1968, Contributo alla conoscenza di nuovi standards silicatici naturali. Dosagg'i di Si02, A1203, Fe tot. (come Fe203), CaO, MgO, T102, MnO e relativi controllri di accuratezza: Atemeo Parmense, Segione 2, Acta Naturalia, v. 4, fasc. 3, p. 3—23. Case, D. R., Laul, J. C., Lipschutz, M. E., and Schmidt- Bleek, F., 1969, Trace activation analysis of element groups with computer reduction of Ge(Li) spectra: Radiochem. and Radioanal. Letters, v. 1, p. 143—147. Catteirmole, P. J., and Fuge, R., 1969, The abundances and distribution of fluonine and chlorine in a layered intru- sion at Rhiw, North Wales; Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, no. 10, p. 1295—1298. Chalmers, R. A., and Basit, M. A., 1968, Micro-analysis of silicate rocks; Part V, Spectrophotometric determination of alumina: Analyst, v. 93, p. 629—632. Chappell, B. W., 1972, Written communication, Dept. Geol., Australian National Univ., Canberra. Chappell, B. W., Compston, W., A-rriens, P. A., and Vernon, M. J., 1969, Rubidium and strontium determinations by X-ray fluorescence spectrometry and isotope dilution be- low the part per million level: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, no. 8, p. 1002—1006. Cherry, R. D., Hobbs, J. B. M., Erlank, A. J., and Willis, J. P., 1970, Thorium, uranium, potassium, lead, strontium, and rubidium in silicate rocks by gamma-spectroscopy and/or X-ray fluorescence: Canadian Spectroscopy, v. 15, p. 3—9. Cioni, R., Innocenti, F., and Mazzuoli, R., 1971, Chemical analysis and some trace element data on standard silicate rocks. Chem. Geology, v. 7, p. 19—23. Clark, Marie C., 1968, Investigation Report 237R, Common- wealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Division of Mineral Chemistry, North Ryde, New South Wales, Australia. Clements, R. J., Sergeant, G. A., and Webb, P. J., 1971, The determination of fluorine in rocks and minerals by a pyro- hydrolitic method: Analyst, v. 96, p. 51—54. Cohen, N. E., Reeves, R. D., and Brooks, R. R., 1968, Use of a large quartz spectrograph for the determination of thorium, yttrium, and the rare earths in silicates: Talanta, v. 15, p. 1449—1456. Cranston, R. E., and Buckley, D. E., 1972, Mercury pathways in a river and estuary: Environmental Sci. and Tech- nology, v. 6, p. 272—278. Crocket, J. H., Keays, R. R., and Hsieh, S., 1968, Determina- tion of some precious metals by neutron activation anal- ysis: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 1, p. 487-507. Dale, I. M., Henderson, R, and Walton, A., 1970, Non-destruc- tive neutron activation analysis for some transition ele~ ments in rocks: Radiochem. and Radionannal. Letters, v. 5, p. 91—101. Das, H. A., 1969, Written communication, Reactor Centrum Nederland, Patten, North Holland, Netherlands. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 1970, Routine determinations of Al, K, Cr, and Sn in geochemistry by neutron activation analysis: J our. Radio- anal. Chemistry, v. 4, p. 21—33. Das, H. A., de Koning J. and Oosterom M. G., 1971, De- termination of sodium in ultrabasic rocks: Radiochem. and Radioanal. Letters, v. 6, p. 203—209. Das, H. A., Janssen, R., and Zonderhuis, J ., 1971, Determina- tion of iridium in rocks; Radiochem. and Radioanal. Let- ters, v. 8, p. 257—265. Das, H. A., van Raaphorst, J. G., and Umans, H. J. L. M., 1969, Routine determinations of Al, K, Cr, and Sn in geochemistry by neutron activation analysis: U.S. Natl. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, v. 1, p. 291—301. Das, H. A., and Zonderhuis, J., 1971, Routine determinations on rocks and sediments by activation analysis, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmochemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitets- forlaget, p. 65—71. Das, H. A., Zonderhuis, J., and van der Marel, H. W., 1971, Scandium in rocks, minerals, and sediments, and its rela- tion to iron and aluminum: Contr. Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 38, p. 231—244. de Albuquerque, C. A. R., 1971, Petrochemistry of a series of granitic rocks from northern Portugal: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 82, p. 2783—2798. de Laeter, J. R., 1972, The isotopic composition and elemental abundance of gallium in meteorites and in terrestrial samples: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 36, p. 735-743. de Laetetr, J. R., and Abercrombie, I. D., 1970, Mass spectro- metric isotope dilution analyses of rubidium and strontium in standard rocks: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 9, p. 327—330. de Laeter, J. R., Abercrombi‘e, I. D., and Date, R., 1969, Mass spectrometric isotope dilution analyses of barium in standard rocks, Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 7, no. 1, p. 64—66. Denechaud, E. B., Helmke, P. A., and Haskin, L. A., 1970, Analysis for the rare-earth elements by neutron activa- tion and Ge(Li) spectrometry: Jour.~ Radioanal. Chem- istry, v. 6, p. 97—113. de Ruyter, A. W., 1968, Low level gamma counting by means of a. 3x3 inch NaI(Tl) well-type crystal: Thesis, Univ. of Amsterdam, 63 p. De Vecchi, Giampaolo, Piccirillo, Enzo, and Quareni, Sergio, 1968, «Contributo all’analisi rapida di rocce mediante fluorescenza ai raggi X: Soc. Italiana Mineralogia e Petrologia Rend., v. 24, p. 3—14. DeVoe, James R., and LaFleur, Philip D., eds, 1969, Modern trends in activation analysis: U.S. Natl. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, 2 v, 1334 p. Donaldson, E. M., 1969, Study of Groves’ method for the de- termination of ferrous oxide in refractory silicates: Anal. Chemistry, v. 41, p. 501—505. Donaldson, E. M., 1970, Determination of vanadium in .re- fractory metals, steel, cast iron, alloys, and silicates by extraction of an NBPHA complex from a sulfuric-hydro- fluoric acid medium: Talanta, v. 17, p. 583-591. Dorrzapf, A. F., Jr., and Brown, F. W., 1970, Direct spectro- graphic analysis for platinum, palladium, and rhodium in gold beads from fire assay: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 24, No. 4, p. 415—418. Diimecke, G., 1968, Anwendung der Losungsspektralanalyse fiir die Untersuchung von Silikaten: Acta Geol. Geogr. Univ. Comenianae, Geol. no. 15, p. 211—218. 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS Dutra, C. V., 1969, Trace element determinations on six new U.S.G.S. rock standards: Rio de Janeiro Univ. Federal Inst. Geosciéncies, Geologia Bol., No. 3, p. 9—13. Eby, G. N., 1972, Determination of rare-earth, yttrium, and scandium abundances in rocks and minerals by an ion- exchange—X-ray fluorescence procedure: Anal. Chemistry, v. 44, p. 2137—2143. Ehmann, W. D., Baedecker, P. A., and McKown, D. M., 1970, Gold and iridium in meteorites and some selected rocks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, no. 4, p. 493—507. Ehmann, W. D., and Morgan, J. W., 1970, Oxygen, silicOn, and aluminum in Apollo 11 rocks and fines by 14 MeV neutron activation, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Houston, Tex., 1970, Proc., V. 2: New York, Pergamon Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 1), p. 1071—1079. Eisentraut, K. J., Griest, D. J., and Sievers, R. E., 1971, Ultratrace analysis for beryllium in terrestrial, meteoritic, and Apollo 11 and 12 lunar samples using electron cap- ture gas chromatography: Anal. Chemistry, v. 43, p. 203—207. Esson, J., Hahn-Weinheimer, P., and Johanning, H., 1968, Determination of hafnium by neutron activation and variation in the Zr/ Hf ratio of some granite masses: Talanta, v. 15, p. 1111—1118. Evans, W. H., 1968, The determination of magnesium in sili- cate and carbonate rocks by the titan yellow spectro- photometric method: Analyst, v. 93, p. 306—310. Fabbi, B. P., 1969, Written communication, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, Calif. 1971a, Rapid X-ray fluorescence determination of phosphorus in geologic samples: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 25, p. 41—43. 1971b, Written communication, U.S. Geol. Survey, Menlo Park, Calif. 1971c, X-ray fluorescence determination of barium and strontium in geologic samples: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 25, p. 316—318. 1972a, A refined fusion X-ray fluorescence technique, and determination of major and minor elements in sili- cate standards: Am. Mineralogist, v. 57, p. 237—245. 1972b, Written communication, U.S. Geol. Survey, Menlo Park, Calif. Fabbi, B. P., and Espos, L. F., 1972a, X-ray fluorescence determination of arsenic, antimony, nickel, rubidium, scandium, vanadium, and zinc in rock standards and other rock samples: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 800—B, p. B147—B150. 1972b, X-ray fluorescence determination of chlorine in standard silicate rocks: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 26, p. 293—295. Fabbi, B. P., and Volborth, A., 1968, Ultra-soft X-ray fluorescence analysis for oxygen in fifteen igneous rocks: Norelco Reporter, v. 15, nos. 3—4 (July-Dec. 1968), p. 93—95. Fabbri, Bruno, and Vespignani-Balzani, G. C., 1969, Spectro- chemical data on some rock standards: Minerolog. et Petrogr. Acta, v. 14 (1968), p. 105-110. Fairbaim, H. W., and others, 1951, A cooperative investiga- tion of precision and accuracy in chemical, spectrochemi- cal, and modal analysis of silicate rocks: U.S. Geol. Sur- vey Bull. 980, 71 p. 175 Fairbairn, H. W., and Hurley, P. M., 1971, Evaluation of X- ray fluorescence and mass spectrometric analyses of Rb and Sr in some silicate standards: Geochim. et Cosmo- chim. Acta, v. 35, p. 149—156. Feather, C. E., 1971, Written communication, Anglo American Research Laboratories, Johannesburg, South Africa. Ficklin, W. H., 1970, A rapid method for the determination of fluoride in rocks and soils, using an ion-selective elec- trode: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 700—C, p. 0186— 0188. Filby, R. H., and Haller, W. A., 1969, Activation. analysis of geochemical materials using Ge(Li) detectors: U.S. Natl. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, v. 1, p. 339—346. Filby, R. H., Haller, W. A., and Shah, K. R., 1970, Deter- mination of 32 elements in rocks by neutron activation analysis and high resolution gamma-ray spectroscopy; Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 5, no. 2, p. 277—290. Fisher, D. E., 1970, Homogenized fission track determination of uranium in whole rock geologic samples: Anal. Chem- istry, v. 42, p. 414—416. Flanagan, F. J., 1967, U.S. Geological Survey silicate: rock standards: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 31, p. 289— 308. 1969, U.S. Geological Survey standards—II. First compilation of data for the new USGS rocks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 81—120. Fletcher, K., 1970, Some applications of background correc- tion to trace metal analysis of geochemical samples by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Econ. Geology, v. 65, no. 5, p. 588—589. Fleischer, Michael, 1965, Summary of new data on rock samples G-1 and W—1, 1962—1965: Geochim. et Cosmo- chim. Acta, v. 29, p. 1263—1283. 1969, U.S. Geological Survey standards—I. Additional data on rocks G—1 and W—1, 1965—1967: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 65—79. Fleischer, Michael, and Stevens, R. E., 1962, Summary of new data on rock samples G—1 and W—l: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 26, p. 525-543. Floyd, P., Humphreys, A., and Aiken, M., 1968, Written com- munication, Univ. of Keele, Staffordshire. Foscolos, A. E., 1971, Written communication, Dept. of Energy, Mines, and Resources, Calgary 44, Alberta, Canada. Foscolos, A. E., and Barefoot, R. R., 1970, A buffering and standard addition technique as an aid in the compre— hensive analysis of silicates by atomic absorption spec- trometry: Canada Geol. Survey Paper 70-16, 15 p. Franzim', M., and Leoni, L., 1969, X-ray fluorescence analysis of small samples; Soc. Toscana Sci. Nat. Atti, v. 76, p. 263—279. Frew, N. M., Leary, J. J., and Isenhour, T. L., 1972, Isotopic analysis of chromium in lunar materials by mass spectro— metry of the trifluoroacetylacetonate: Anal. Chemistry, v. 44, p. 665—671. Fritze, K., and Robertson, R., 1969, Precision in the neutron activation analysis for gold in standard rocks G—1 and W—l: US. Nat]. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, v. 2, p. 1279—1283. Fuge, R., 1967, The determination of chromium in rocks and minerals: Chem. Geology, v. 2, p. 289—296. 1970, An automated method for the determination of molybdenum in geological and biological samples: Analyst, v. 95, p. 171—176. 176 Fuge, R., and Power, G. M., 1969, Chlorine and fluorine in granitic rocks from S. W. England; Geochem. et Cosmo- chim. Acta, v. 33, p. 888—893. Gale, N. H., 1972, Written communication, Oxford Univ., Oxford, England. Galle, O. K., 1968, Routine determination of major constituents in geologic samples by atomic absorption: Appl. Spectro- scopy, v. 22, p. 404—408. Gamot, E., Philibert, J. and Vialette Y., 1970, Dosage par absorption ’atomique du potassium, du rubidium et du strontium en vue de mesuresl géochronologiques: France, Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Colloques Nationaux, no. 923, p. 287—299. Ganapathy, R., Keays, R. R., Laul, J. C., and Anders, Edward, 1970 Trace elements in Apollo 11 lunar rocks—implica- tions for meteorite influx and origin of moon, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Houston, Tex., 1970, Pnoc., V. 2: New York, Pergamon Press (Geochim..et Cosmochim. Acta, Supp. 1) p. 1117—1142. Gangadharam, E. V., and Pairekh, P. P., 1968, Neutron acti- vation analysis of microgram and submicrogram quan- tities of thorium in ultramafic rocks: Radiochim. Acta, v. 10‘, p. 65—68. Gasparini, Paolo, 1969, Written communication, Univ. di Napoli, Italy. Gast, P. W., Hubbard, N. J., and Wiesmann, H., 1970, Chemi- cal composition and petrogenesis of basalts from Tran- quility Base, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Houston, Tex., 1970, Proc., V. 2: New York, Pergamon Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, Supp. 1), p. 1143—1163. Gerasimovskiy, V. I., and Laktionova, N. V., 1971, Vanadium, chromium, cobalt, nickel, and copper in the volcanic rocks of the rift ZOnes of East Africa: Geochemistry Internat, v. 8, p. 680—696. Gerasimovskiy, V. 1., Laktionova, N. V., and Ageyeva, L. V., 1971, Scandium in the effusives of the East African rift zones: Geochemistry Internat., v. 8, p. 248—258. Gerasimovskiy, V. I., and Savinova, Ye. N;, 1969, Fluorine contents of volcanic rocks in the rift zone of East Africa; Geochemistry Internat, v. 6, p. 1124—1128. Gibson, E. K., Jr., and Moore, C. B., 1970, Inert carrier-gas fusion determination of total nitrogen in rocks and mete- orites: Anal. Chemistry, v. 42 ,p. 461—464. Gijbels, R., 1971, Determination of noble metals by neutron activation analysis: Talanta, v. 18, p. 587—601. Gijbels, R., 1972, Written communication, Inst. voor' Nucleaire Wetenschappen, Ruksuniversiteit—Gent, Belgium. Gijbels, R., Millard, H. T., Jr., Desborough, G. A., and Bartel, J., 1971, Neutron activation analysis for osmium, ru- thenium, and iridium in some silicate rocks and rock- forming minerals, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds, Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmo- chemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 359—370. Gillum, David E., and Ehmann, William D., 1971, Noble metal determination in meteorites: Radiochim. Acta, v. 16, p. 123—128. Girardin, J. L. and Thiel, R., 1970, Micro-analyse spectro- photometrique du fer ferreux dans les roches: Centre Recherches Pau Bull., v. 4, p. 513—516. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS Golds, G. G., Duncan, A. R., Lindstrom, D. J ., Martin, M. R., Beyer, R. L., Osawa, M., Randle, K., Meek, L. T., Stein- born, T. L., and McKay, S..M., 1971, Analyses of Apollo 12 specimens; compositional variations, diffierentiation processes, and lunar soil mixing models, in Lunar Sci. Conf., 2d, Proc. v. 2: Cambridge Mass, MIT Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 2), p. 1063—1081. Goodman, R .J., 1971, Analytical data on the U.S.G.S. stand- ard rocks by X-ray fluorescence spectrometry: Canadian Spectroscopy, v. 16, p. 97—99. Gordon, G. E., Dran, J. C., Baedecker, P. A., and Anderson, C. F. L., 1969, Extensions of the use of Ge(Li) detectors in instrumental neutron activation analysis of geological samples: U.S. Natl. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, v. 1, p. 399—403. Govindaraju, K., 1970a, Emploi de complexants pour la mise en solution des silicates et separations par résines échangeuses d’ions: France, Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Colloques Nationaux, no. 923, p. 269-285. 1970b, Emploi de fondants et de resines échangeuses d’ions pour l’élimination de l’efi‘ect de matrice et dosage quantométrique des éléments en traces dans les silicates: France, Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Colloques Nationaux, no. 923, p. 133-142. Govindaraju, K., Mevelle, G., and Chouard, C., 1971, Direct atomic absorption determination of rubidium on pul- verized silicate rock samples: Chem. Geology, v. 8, no. 2, p. 131—137. Graber, F. M., Lukems, H. R., and MacKenzie, J. K., 1970, Neutron activation analysis determination of all 14 stable rare-earth elements with group separation and Ge(Li) spectrometry: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 4, p. 229— 239. Graham, A. L., and Nicholls, G. D., 1969, Mass spectrographic determinations of lanthanide element contents in basalts: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, no. 5, p. 555—568. Green, T. E., Law, S. L., and Campbell, W. J, 1970, Use of selective ion exchange paper in X-ray spectrography and neutron activation: application to the determination of gold: Anal. Chemistry, v. 42, p. 1749—1753. Green, T. H., Brrunfelt, A. 0., and Heier, K. S., 1969, Rare earth element distribution in anorthosites and associated high grade metamorphic rocks, Lofoten-Vesteraalen, Norway: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 7, no. 2, p. 93—98. Greenland, L. P., 1968a, Application of coincidence. counting to neutron activation analysis: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 600—B, p. B76—B78. 1968b, Simultaneous determination of tantalum and hafnium in silicates by neutron activation analysis: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 42, p. 365—370. Greenland, L. P. and Campbell, E. Y., 1970, Determination of niobium in rocks by an isotope dilution-spectrophotometric method: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 49, p. 109—114. 1971. Substoichiometric determination of tantalum by neutron activation: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 750—B, p. B191—B193. 1972, Determination of nanogram amounts of bismuth in rocks by substoichiometric isotope dilution analysis: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 60, p. 159—165. Greenland, L. P., and Fones, R., 1971, Geochemical behavior of silver in a differentiated tholeiitic dolorite sheet; Neue-s Jahrb. Mineralogie Monatsh., hefte 9, p. 393—398. 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS Greenland, L. P., and McLane, J. E., 1969, Determination of germanium in silicates by neutron activation analysis: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof: Paper 650—0, p. 0152—0154. Greenland, L. P., and Rowe, J. J. and Dinnin J. I., 1971, Application of triple coincidence counting and of fire-assay separation to the neutron-activation determination of iridium; U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 750—B, p. B175— 179. Gregory, J. E., and Lavrakes, V., 1971, Written communica- tion, Lowell Technological Inst, Lowell, Mass. Guillemaut, A., 1968, Written communication, Commissariat a L’Energie Atomique, Chatillon-souspBagneux, France. Gundersen, E., and Steinnes, Eiliv, 1972, Written communica- tion, Institutt for Atomenergi, Kjeller, Norway. Gunn, B. M., 1969, The determination of barium in silicate samples by X—ray fluorescence analysis: Canadian Spec- troscopy, v. 14, p. 164—170. Hall, A., and Walsh, J. N., 1969, A rapid method for the determination of fluorine in silicate rocks and minerals: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 45, p. 341—342. Hamaguchi, H., Onuma, N., Hirao, Y., Yokoyama, H., Bando, S., and Furukawa, M., 1969, The abundances of arsenic, tin, and antimony in chondritic meteorites: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, no. 4, p. 507—518. Hart, S. R., 1968, Written communication, Dept. Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Wash- ington, D.C. Haskin, L. A., Allen, R. 0., Helmke, P. A., Paster, T. P., Anderson, M. R., Korotev, R. L., and Zweifel, K. A., 1970, Rare earths and other trace elements in Apollo 11 lunar samples, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., 1970, Proc. v. 2: New York, Pergamon Press, (Geochim. et Cosmo- chim. Acta, Supp. 1) p. 1213—1231. Hatch, W. R., and Ott, W. L., 1968, Determination of sub- microg'ram quantities of mercury by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Anal. Chemistry, v. 40, p. 2085—2087. Hattori, Hitoshi, and Sh‘ibata, Ken, 1969, Quantitative anal- ysis of Rb and Sr in rocks by X-ray fluorescence spectro- metry; Japan Geol. Survey Bull., v. 20, p. 51—76. Haynes, S. J. and Clark, A. H., 1972, A rapid method for the determination of chlorine in silicate rocks using ion- selective electrodes: Econ. Geology, v. 67, p. 378—382. Heady, H. H., 1969, Written communication, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Reno, Nevada. Heier, K. S., and Thoresen, K., 1971, Geochemistry of high grade metamorphic rocks, Lofoten-Veste-ralen, North Norway; Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 89—99. Herzenberg, C. L., 1970, Mossbauer spectrometry as an in- strumental technique for determinative mineralogy, in Symposium on Mossbauer effect methodology, 5th, New York, New York, Feb. 2, 1969: New York, Plenum Press, p. 209—230. Hetman, J. S., 1968, Potentiometric determination of iron in silicate rocks: Centre Reoherches Pau Bull., V. 2, p. 471— 475. Hetman, J. S., and Puyo, M., 1968, Dosage coulométrique du vanadium dans les roches et les minéraux: Centre Re.- veherehes Pau Bull., v. 2, p. 171—177. Higuchi, H., Tomura, K., and Hamaguchi, H., 1970, Deter- mination of rare-earth elements in rock samples by neutron activation analysis; use of Ge(Li) detector in conjunction with light-heavy lanthanides separation by cation exchange: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 5, no. 2, p. 207—222. 177 Higuchi, H., Tomura, K., Onuma, N., and Hamaguchi, H., 1969, Rare earth abundances in several geochemical standard rocks: Geochem. Jo-ur. (Japan), v. 3, p. 171— 180. Higuchi, H., Tomura, K., Takahashi, H., Onuma, N., and Hamaguchi, H., 1969a, Simultaneous determination of strontium and barium by neutron activation analysis with a Ge(Li) detector: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 44, p. 431—436. 1969b, Use of a Ge(Li) detector after simple chemical group separation in the activation analysis of rock sam- ples. IV, Simultaneous determination of strontium and barium, in U.S. Natl. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, v. 1, p. 334—338. Hillebrand, W. F., Lundell, G. E. F., Bright, H. A., and Hoffman, J. I., 1953, Applied inorganic analysis: 2d ed., New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1034 p Hirst, D. M., and Kaye, M. J., 1971, Factors controlling the mineralogy and chemistry of an upper Visean sediment- ary sequence from Rookhope, County Durham: Chem. Geology, v. 8, p. 37—59. Hislop, J. S., Pratchett, A. G., and Williams, D. R., 1971, The determination of fluorine in rock materials by 7- activation and radiochemical separation: Analyst, v. 96, p. 117—122. Hofmeyr, P. K., 1972, Some emission spectrographic trace element data for reference silicate materials: Chem. Geology, v. 9, p. 23—28. Hooper, P. R., and Atkins, Lynne, 1969, The preparation of fused samples in X-ray fluorescence analysis: Mineralog. Mag., v. 37, no. 287, p. 409—413. Huber-Schausberger, I., Janda, I., Dolezel, P., and Schroll, E., 1970, Chemisch-e und spektrochemische Analyze in- ternationaler Referenzgesteinsproben: Tschermaks Mine- ralog. u. petrog. Mitt, v. 14, p. 195—211. Huffman, Claude, Jr., Shaw, V. E., and Thomas, J. A., 1971, Chromium content of U.S. Geological Survey standard rocks PCC-l (peridotite) and DTS—1 (dunite): U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 750—B, p. B185-B187. Iida, C., and Nagura, M., 1968, Determination of nickel in silicates by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Japan Analyst, v. 17, p. 17—22. Iida, C., and Yamasaki K., 1970, Atomic absorption spectro- metric analysis of silicates by the absorption tube tech- nique: Anal. Letters, v. 3, p. 251—257. Ingram, B. L., 1970, Determination of fluoride in silicate rocks without separation of aluminum using a specific ion electrode: Anal. Chemistry, v. 42, p. 1825—1827. Ishida, K., Kawamara, S., and Izawa, M., 1970, Neutron ac- tivation analysis for mercury: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 50, p. 351—353. Ivanova, G. F., 1966, Spectrochemical determination of molyb- denum, tin, lead, and tungsten on the international stand- ard G—l: Geochemistry Internat., v. 3, no. 6, p. 1198— 1199; translated from Geokhimiya, 1966, no. 12, p. 1502- 1505. ' Jenkins, L. B., and Moore, R., 1970, Determination of lead in rocks and minerals after extraction with diethylam- monium diethyldithio-carbamate: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 700—D, p. D222—D224. Johansen, 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, 1969, Determination of tin in geological material by neutron-activation analysis: Analyst, v. 94, p. 976—978. 178 1970, Determination of Co, Cu, Fe, Ga, W, and Zn in rocks by neutron activation and anion-exchange separa- tion: Talanta, v. 17, p. 407—414. Jones, J. B., Nesbitt, R. W., and Slade, P. G., 1969, The de- termination of the orthoclase content of homogenized alkali feldspars using the 201 X-ray method: Mineralog. Mag., v. 37, p. 489—496. Karkare, S. G., 1965, Geochemical studies of the Deccan traps: Varanasi, Banaras Hindu Univ. Press, 128 p. Kawabuchi, K., and Kuroda, R., 1970, Anion-exchange separa- tion and spectrophotometric determination of molybdenum and tungsten in silicate rocks: Talanta, v. 17, p. 67—73. Kaye, Maureen, 1972, Written communication, Dept. Geol., Australian Natl. Univ., Canberra. Kaye, Maureen, and Chappell, B. W., 1972, Written com- munication, Dept. Geol., Australian Natl. Univ., Can- berra. Keays, R. R., Ganapathy, R., Laul, J. C., Anders, E., Herzog, G. F., and Jeffrey, P. M., 1970, Trace elements and radioactivity in Lunar rocks; implications for meteorite infall, solar—wind flux, and formation conditions of moon: Science, v. 167, no. 3918, p. 490—493. Kennedy, E. J., Ruch, R. R., and Shimp, N. F., 1971, Distri- bution of mercury in unconsolidated sediments from south- ern Lake Michigan: Illinois Geol. Survey Environmental Geology Notes, no. 44, p. 1—18. Khasgiwale, K. A., Parthasarathy, R., and Das, M. Sankar, 1972, Determination of lead in geological samples by anodic stripping analysis: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 59, p. 485—489. ' King, H. G. C., and Pruden, G., 1969, The colorimetric deter- mination of calcium in silicate minerals: Analyst, v. 94, p. 39—42. Kowalski, Wlodzimierz, 1967, Geochemistry of K, Na, Ca, Rb, Pb, Ba, and Sr in Sude‘ten granitoids and their pegma- tites: Arch. Mineralog., v. 27, p. 53~244 [Polish with Eng- lish summary]. Kriihenbiihl, U., Rolli, H. P., and von Gunten, H. R., 1972, Aktivierungsanalytische Bestimmung von selten Erden in Gesteinsstandards, und in Mondproben: Helvetica Chim. Acta, v. 55, p. 697—701. Kunzerndorf, H., 1971, An instrumental procedure to deter- mine Fe, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Nb, and M0 in rock powders by S.i(Li) X-ray spectrometry: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 9, p. 311—324. Kuydendall, W. E., Jr., Hoffman, B. W., and Wainerdi, R. E., 1971, Analysis of oceanographic samples from the Glomar Challenger voyage, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv., eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmochemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 321—332. Landstrom, 0., Samsahl, K., and Wenner, C. G., 1969, An investigation of trace elements in marine and lacustrine deposits by means of a neutron activation method: U.S. Natl. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, v. 1, p. 353—366. Langer, K., 1969, On the semimicro determination of silica in natural silicates by photometry of B-molybdroxsilicic acid: Zeitschr. Ana]. Chemie, v. 245, p. 139—148. 1971, Some major and minor constituents of geochemi- cal reference samples as determined by photometric methods: Zeitschr. Anal. Chemie, v. 255, p. 26—29. Langmyhr, F. J., 1970, Written communication, Univ. of Oslo, Blindern. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS Langmyhr, F. J., and Paus, P. E., 1968, The analysis of inorganic siliceous materials by atomic absorption spec— trophotometry and the hydrofluoric acid decomposition technique, part 1, the analysis of silicate rocks: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 43, p. 397—408. 1969, Hydrofluoric acid decomposition-atomic absorp- tion analysis of nine silicate mineral and rock reference samples: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 47, p. 371—373. Lapham, D. M., and Saylor, T. E., 1970, Chemical analyses of three Triassic diabase dikes in Pennsylvania: Penn- sylvania Topographic and Geol. Survey Inf. Circ. 68, 16 p. Laul, J. 0., Case, D. R., Schmidt-Bleek, F., and Lipschultz, M. E., 1970, Bismuth contents of chondrites: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, no. 1, p. 89—103. Laul, J. 0., Case, D. R., Wechter, M., Schmidt-Bleek, F'., and Lipschutz, M. E., 1970, An activation analysis technique for determining groups of trace elements in rocks and chondrites: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 4, no. 2, p. 241—264. Laul, J. G., Keays, R. R., Ganapathy, R, Anders, Edward, and Morgan, J. W., 1972, Chemical fractionations in meteorites; V, Volatile and siderophile elements in achondritos and ocean ridge basalts: Geochim. et Cos- mochim. Acta, v. 36, no. 3, p. 329—345. Laul, J. C., Pelly, I., and Lipschutz, M. E., 1970, Thallium contents of chondrites: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, p. 909—920. Learned, R. E., 1970, Written communication, Dept. Sci. Indus. Research, Petone, New Zealand. LeRiche, H. H., 1968, Ion-exchange concentration of trace elements for spectrochemical analysis of soils and rocks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 32, p. 791—794. Lombard, S. M., Marlow, K. W., and Tanner, J. T., 1971, The determination of antimony in standard rocks by in— strumental neutron activation analysis: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 55, p. 13—17. Loveland, W., Schmitt, R. A., and Fisher, D. E., 1969, Alumi- num abundances in stony meteorites: Geochim. et Cos- mochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 375—385. Loveridge, W. D., and Wanloss, R. K., 1969, Written com- munication, Geol. Survey of Canada, Ottawa. Levering, J. F., and Hughes, T. C., 1971, Rhenium and osmium abundance determinations and meteoritic con- tamination levels in Apollo 11 and Apollo 12‘ lunar sam- ples; in Lunar Sci. Conf., 2d, Houston, Tex., 1971, Proc., V. 2: Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press (Geochim. et Cos- mochim. Acta, Supp. 2), p. 1331—1335. Lueckve, Werner, 1971, Zur Methode der Atomabsorptions- Spektralanalyse der Erdalkalien und refract'a'ren Oxide in geochemischen Referenzproben mit einer NzO—Csz— Flamme: Neues Jahrb. Mineralogie Monatsh., no. 6, p. 263—288. Luhn, J. K., 1968, Written communication, Oxford, Ohio. McCabe, W. J., Ditchburn, R. G., and Adams, C. J. D., 1972, Written communication, Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt, New Zealand. Marinenko, John, and May, Irving, 1968, Fluorimetric de- termination of gold in rocks with rhodamine B: Anal. Chemistry, v. 40, p. 1137—1139. 1970, Gas chromatographic determination of carbonate carbon in rocks and minerals: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 700—D, p. D103—D105. Miami Univ., 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS Marinenko, John, May, Irving, and Dinnin, J. I., 1972, De- termination of mercury in geologic materials by flame- less atomic absorption spectrometry: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 800—B, p. Bl51—B155. Marowsky, Gerd, 1971a, Aktivierungsanalytische Bestimmung von Cadmium, Quecksilber, Thallium, und Wismut in Gesteinen: Zeitschr. Anal. Chemie, v. 253, p. 267—271. 1971b, Aktivierungsanalytische Bestimmung von Thallium in Gesteinen, ein vergleich mehrerer Mess- methoden: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 8, p. 27—32. 1971c, Sensitivity ranges in neutron activation analysis of some rare trace elements (Cd, Hg, Tl, Bi) in silicate samples, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmochemistry . . . :Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 391—396. Marowsky, Gerd, and Wedepohl, K. H., 1971, General trends in the behavior of Cd, Hg, T1, and Bi, in some major rock forming processes: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 35, p. 1225—1267. Martin, A., and Quintin, M., 1970, Utilisation du chlorure de sodium comme tampon spectral en spectrographie d’émis- sion: application au dosage des éléments en traces dans les roches silicatées: France, Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Colloques Nationaux, no. 923, p. 187—195. Martini, Marino, and Tonani, Franco, 1968, Le fluor dans les roches—erreur d’analyse, échantillons-standards, abond- ance; Distribution dans la granodiorite du Mte Capanne (ile d’Elbe, Toscane); in Ahrens, L. H., ed., Origin and distribution of the elements: New York, Pergamon Press, p. 1113—1126. Matthews, A. D., and Riley, J. P., 1969, The determination of thallium in silicate rocks, marine sediments, and sea water: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 48, p. 25—34. Maurel, C., and Maurel, Pierre, 1967, Résultats d’analyses de six roches étalons, G—2, GSP—l, AGV—l, FCC—1, DTS—l, BCR—l: éléments majeurs et éléments en traces: Soc. Francaise Minéralogie et Crystallographie Bull., v. 90, no. 2 p. 260-261. Maxwell, J. A., Peek, L. C., and Wiik, H. B., 1970, Chemical composition of Apollo 11 lunar samples 10017, 10020, 10072, and 10084, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Houston, Tex., 1970, Proc., V. 2: New York, Pergamon Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, Supp. 1), p. 1369—1374. Meehan, W. R., 1969, Beryllium in six U.S.G.S. standard rocks: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 7, no. 1, p. 1—2. Melson, S., 1970, Precision and accuracy of rare earth deter- minations in rock samples using instrumental neutron activation analysis and a Ge( Li) detector: J our. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 4, no. 2, p. 355—363. Meyer, H. G., 1971, Non-destructive determination of uranium and thorium in geological materials by resonance-neutron activation-analysis: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 7, p. 67—79. Meyrowitz, Robert, 1970, A pyrocatechol violet spectrophoto- metric procedure for the direct microdetermination of aluminum in silicate materials: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 700—D, p. D225—D229. Michelsen, 0. B., and Steinnes, E., 1968, Determination of copper in geological material by neutron activation and gamma-gamma coincidence spectrometry: Talanta, v. 15, p. 574—578. 179 Miksovsky, Miroslav, 1968, Quantitative spektrographische Bestimmung von Spurenelementen in Silikaten: Acta Geol. Geogr. Univ. Comenianae, Geol. no. 15, p. 253—269. Millard, H. T., Jr., and Bartel, A J., 1971, A neutron activation analysis procedure for the determination of the noble metals in geological samples, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmochemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 353—358. Moal, J. Y., Beguinot, J., Rue], G., and Vannier, M., 1970, Le quantometre pour le dosage des elements en traces dans les materiaux naturels: France, Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Colloques Nationaux, no. 923, p. 107—132. Moldan, Bedi‘ich, Rubeéka, Ivan, and Miksovsky, Miroslav, 1970, The determination of lead in silicate rocks by atomic absorption spectrophotometry with long-path absorption tubes: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 50, p. 342—345. Moore, C. B., Gibson, E. K., Larimer, J. W., Lewis, C. F., and Nichiporuk, W., 1970, Total carbon and nitrogen abund- ances in Apollo 11 lunar samples and selected achondrites and basalts, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Houston, Tex., 1970, Proc. V.2: New York, Pergamon Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 1) p. 1375—1382. Morgan, J. W., and Ehmann, W. D., 1970, Precise determina- tion of oxygen and silicon in chondritic meteorites by 14- MeV neutron activation with a single transfer system: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 49, p. 287—299. Mori, Yakeshi, Jakes, Petr, and Nagaoka, Masatoshi, 1971, Major element analysis of silicate rocks using electron probe microanalyzer: Kanazawa Univ. Sci. Rept, v. 16, No. 2, p. 113—120. Morrison, G. H., 1971, Multielement neutron activation analysis of geological and lunar material using chemical group separations and high resolution gamma spectrometry, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmochemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 51—54. Morrison, G. H., Gerard, J. T., Travesi, A., Currie, R. L., Peterson, S. F., and Potter, N. M., 1969, Multielement neutron activation analysis of rocks using chemical group separations and high resolution gamma spectrometry: Anal. Chemistry, v. 41, p. 1633—1637. Morrison, G. H., and Kashuba, A. T., 1969, Multielement analysis of basaltic rock using spark source mass spec- trometry: Anal. Chemistry, v. 41, p. 1842—1846. Mountjoy, Wayne, 1970, Determination of cobalt in geologic materials by solvent extraction and atomic absorption spectrometry: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 700—B, p. B174—B176. Miiller, 0., 1970, Sodium, potassium, and cesium concentrations in U.S.G.S. standards, periodite PCC—l, dunite DTS—l, and diabase W—1 by neutron activation analysis: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 8, no. 4, p. 283—284. Murad, E., 1968, 1969, Written communications, Stat. Forsch- ungsinst. fiir angew. Mineral, Regensburg. 1971, Written communication, Mineralog.-Petro- graphisches Institut, Tiibingen. Murali, A. V., Parekh, P. P., and Das, M. S., 1970, On the fission track method for the determination of the uranium content of whole rock samples: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 50, p. 71—77. 180 Muscat, V. I., Vickers, T. J ., and Andren, Anders, 1972, Simple and versatile atomic fluorescence system for determination of nanogram quantities of mercury: Anal. Chemistry, v. 44, p. 218—221. Nadkarni, R. A., and Halder, B. C., 1971a, Simultaneous deter- mination of chromium and zinc by neutron activation analysis: Radiochem. and Radioanal. Letters, v. 8, p. 233— 240. 1971b, Substoichiometric determination of selenium by neutron activation analysis: Radiochem. and Radioanal. Letters, v. 7, p. 305—311. 1972a, Neutron activation analysis of copper by sub- stoichiometric extraction with neocuproine: Anal. Chem- istry, v. 44, p. 1504-1506. 1972b, Substoichiometric determination of mercury by neutron activation analysis: Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 10, p. 181—186. Nagura, M., and Iida, C., 1968, Atomic absorption spectra photometric determination of cobalt, nickel, lead, and copper in silicates with the absorption tube technique: Japan Analyst, v. 17, p. 1513—1518. Nishimura, Susumu, 1970a, The determination of uranium content of standard rocks by fission-track registration in muscovite: Radioisotopes, v. 19, p. 30—32. 1970b, Radium and uranium contents of standard rocks: Chem. Geology, v. 5, no. 2, p. 139—141. Nomura, K., Mikami, A., Kato, T., and Oka, Y., 1970, The determination of scandium and gold in meteorites, tektites, and standard rocks by neutron activation analysis with an internal-reference method: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 51, p. 399—408. Norman, J. C., and Haskin, L. A., 1968, The geochemistry of Sc; A comparison to the rare earths and Fe: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 32, no. 1, p. 93—108. Norton, E. F., and Stoenner, R. W., 1971, A neutron activation method for the determination of thorium in rocks and minerals using the 22-minute 233Th activity: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 55, p. 1—11. O’Gorman, J. V., and Suhr, N. H., 1971, A rapid atomic- absorption technique for the determination of lithium in silicate materials: Analyst, v. 96, no. 1142, p. 335—337. Omang, S. H., and Pans, P. E., 1971, Trace determination of mercury in geological materials by flameless atomic ab- sorption spectroscopy: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 56, p. 393—398. 0ndrick, C. W., Suhr, N. H., and Medlin, J. H., 1969, Investi- gation into increasing the precision of a rotating disk- solution technique for the analysis of silicates: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 23, p. 111—115. Oosterom, M. G., and Das, H. A., 1971, Determination by neutron activation analysis of alkali and other trace eleL ments in ultramafic rocks, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmo- chemistry . . .2 Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 455—459. Osawa, Masium, and Goles, G. G., 1970, Trace element abund- ances in Columbia River basalts: Columbia River Basalt Symposium, 2d, Cheney, Wash, 1969, Proc., p. 55—71. Ozima, M., and Zashu, S., 1971, Written communication, Geophys. Inst, Univ. of Tokyo. Pant, D. R., and Parekh, P. P., 1971, A new method for the radiochemical separation of rubidium and cesium: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 9, p. 259-265. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS Parker, A., 1969, Some trace element determinations on the new U.S.G.S. silicate rock standards: Chem. Geology, v. 4, no. 3—4, p. 445—449. Parker, Andrew, 1970, Chemical and mineralogical analysis of some basic and ultrabasic rocks and their initial weather- ing products: Reading (England) Univ. Geol. Rept. No. 4, 41 p. Peters, A., 1968, Ein neues Verfahren zur Bestimmung von Eisen(II)oxid in Mineralien und Gesteinen: Neues Jahrb. Mineralogie Monatsch., No. 3/4, p. 119-125. Peters, Arnd, 1969, Neue Analysendaten von Standardgést- einen: Neues Jahrb. Mineralogie Monatsch. No. 4, p. 184—188. Peterson, S. F., Travesi, A., and Morrison, G. H., 1969, Rapid group separation method for neutron activation analysis of geological materials: U.S. Natl. Bur. Standards Spec. Pub. 312, v. 1, p. 624—633. Philpotts, J. A., and Schnetzler, C. C., 1970, Apollo 11 lunar samples—K, Rb, Sr, Ba, and rareearth concentrations in some rocks and separated phases, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Houston, Tex., 1970, Proc. V.2: New York, Perga— mon Press (Geochim. et Cosmochim Acta, Supp. 1), p. 1471—1486. Pouget, R., Carrier, M., Lautelin, M., and Vasseut, A., 1968, Written communication, Commissariat a L’Energie Atomique, Chatillon-sous-Bagneux, France. Price, V., 1969, Written communication, Furman Univ., Green- ville, S.C. Quijano-Rico, M., 1970, Méthodes rapides a tres haute sensi- bilité pour la détermination du bore et du lithium dans les météorites pierreuses et dans les roches: France, Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Colloques Nationaux no. 923, p. 367—380. Quijano-Rico, M., and Winke, H., 1969, Determination of boron, lithium, and chlorine in meteorites, in Mellman, P. M., ed. Meteorite research: Proceedings of asymposium on meteorite research held in Vienna, Austria, 7—13 August 1968: Dordrecht, D. Reider Pub. 00., p. 132—145. Quintin, M., 1970, Utilisation de la fluorescence X pour l’analyse quantitative non destructive des éléments en traces de N" atomique supérieur a 27 dans les. roches silicatées, bauxites, et carbonates: France, Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Colloques Nationaux, no. 923, p. 75—87. Ragland, P. C., 1970, Written communication, Dept. Geol., Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Ragland, P. G., Brunfelt, A. 0., and Weigand, P. W., 1971, Rare—earth abundances in Mesozoic dolerite dikes from eastern United States, in Brunfelt, A. O. and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cos- mochemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 227—235. Randall, B. A., O., 1972. Written communication, The Univers- ity, Newcastle—upon-Tyne, England. Rayburn, K. A., 1968, Elemental analysis of cracking catalysts by X-ray fluorescence: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 22, p. 726—729. Rebagay, T. V,, 1969, The determination of zirconium and hafnium in meteorites and terrestrial materials by acti- vation analysis: Dissertation, Univ. of Kentucky, Lex- ing'ton. Rebagay, T. V., and Ehmann, W. D., 1970, Simultaneous de- termination of zirconium and hafnium in standard rocks by neutron activation analysis: Jour. Radioanal. Chem- istry, v. 5, p. 51—60. 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS Reed, G. W., and Jovanovic, S., 1969, Some halogen measure ments on achondrites: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 6, p. 316—320. Rey, P., Wakita, H., and Schmitt, R. A., 1970, Radiochemical neutron activation analysis of indium, cadmium, yttrium, and the 14 rare earths in rocks: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 51, p. 163—178. Richter, P., 1972, Rontgenspektrometrische Bestimmung von Schwefel in silicatischen Proben: Zeitschr. Anal. Chemie, v. 258, p. 287—289. Roberts, J. L., 1971, An improved colorimetric determination of vanadium in geochemical prospecting samples: Talanta, v. 18, p. 1070—1072. Roelandts, Iwan, 1972, The determination of rubidium in rocks and minerals by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Atomic Absorption Newsletter, v. 11, p. 48—49. Roelandts, Iwan, and Bologne, Guy, 1970, Written communi- cation, Inst. Ptetrologie, Univ. of Liege, Belgium. 1 Roelandts, Iwan, and Duchesne, J. C., 1968, Méthod d’analyse des roches silicatés principe et discussion de la précision et de l’exactitude obtenues: Soc. Géol. Belgique Annales, v. 91, p. 159—164. Ropert, M. E., and Broudic, M., 1968, Written communica- tion, Commissariat a L’Energie Atomique, Chatillon-sous- Bagneux, France. Ropert, M. E., Lecable, N., and Monjaux, M., 1968, Written communication, Commissariat a L’Energie Atomique, Chatillon-sous-Bagneux, France. ~ Rose, A. W., 1970, Written communication, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa. 1 R6s1er, H. J., Schr6n, W., and Voland, B., 1968, Germanium und Indium, ein Vergleich zwischen regionales Durch- schnittsgehalten und den Clarke-Werten, in Ahrens, L. H., ed., Origin and distribution of the elements: New York, Pergamon Press, p. 1127—1138. Rosman, K. J. R., and Jeffrey, P. M., 1971, The determina- tion of zinc in standard reference materials by isotope dilu- tion and atomic absorption analysis: Chem. Geology, v. 8, p. 25—32. Roubault, M., and others, 1970, Dosage des éléments a l’état de traces dans les roches et les autres substances miné- rales naturelles: France: Centre Natl. Recherche Sci. Col- loques Nationaux, no. 923, 464 p. Rowe, J. J ., and Simon, F. 0., 1971, Determination of platinum and palladium in geological materials by neutron acti- vation analysis after fire-assay preconcentration: Talanta, v. 18, p. 121—125. Rucklidge, J. C., Gibb, F. G. F., Fawcett, J. J., and Gas- parrini, E. L., 1970, Rapid rock analysis by electron probe: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 34, no. 2, p. 243—247. Sahores, J., 1968, Dosage des éléments majeurs des roches par spectrofluorescence X: Centre Rech. Pau Bull., v. 2, no. 1, p. 137—162. Sceal, J. S. C., and Weaver, S. D., 1971, Trace element data bearing on the origin of salic rocks from the quaternary volcano Paka, Gregory Rift, Kenya: Earth and Planet- ary Sci. Letters, v. 12, p. 327—331. Schilling, Jean-Guy, and Winchester, J. W., 1969, Rare earth contribution to the origin of Hawaiian lavas: Contr. Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 23, no. 1, p 27—37. Schiltz, J. C., 1968, Written communication, Commissariat a L’Energie Atomique, Chatillon-sous-Bagneux, France. 181 Schlocker, L., 1968, Written communication, U.S. Geol. Sur- vey, Menlo Park, Calif. Schmidt, D., 1970, Tin in some standard rocks. Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 10, p. 441—443. Schmidt, D., and Starke, K., 1969, Radiochemische Trennung zur Bestimmung von Zinn in Gesteinen durch Neutro- nenaktivierungsanalyse: Radiochim. Acta, v. 11, .p. 197— 202. Schmidt, K., 1969, Written communication, Zentrales Geo- logisches Institut, 104, Berlin, DDR. Schneider, Gerwulf, 1969, Ergansungen zur Anwendung der Rontgenfluoreszenzanalyse bei geochemischen Reihenun- tersuchungen: Neues J ahrb. Mineralogie Monatsh., no. 11, p. 504—520. Schnetzler, C. C., and Nava, D. F., 1971, Chemical composi- tion of Apollo 14 soils 14163 and 14259: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 11, p. 345—350. Schnetzler, C. C., Philpotts, J. A., Nava, D. F., Schuhmann, Shuford, and Thomas, H. H., 1972, Geochemistry of Apollo 15 basalt 15555 and soil 15531: Science, v. 175, no. 4020', p. 426—428. Schoenfeld, I., 1970, Spectrographic determination of fluorine in standard rocks: Ap‘pl. Spectroscopy, v. 24, p. 359—361. Schroll, E., and Stepan, E., 1969, Zur Rontgenfluoreszenanalyse geologischen Materials: Tschermaks Mineralog. u. petrog. Mitt, v. 13, p. 131—147. Scott, H. D., 1969, Written communication, Bellaire Research Laboratories, Texaco, Inc., Bellaire, Tex. Sen Gupta, J. G., 1968, Determination of fluorine in silicate and phosphate rocks, micas, and stony meteorites: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 42, p. 119—125. 1970, Determination of carbon by non-aqueous titra- tion after combustion in a high-frequency induction furn- nace: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 51, p. 437—447. Shapiro, Leonard, 1971, Rapid scanning technique for low levels of 002 in silicate nooks: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 750—B, p. B161—B162. Shimizu, Tsuneo, 1969, Scandium content of igneous rocks and some oceanic sediments: Chem. Soc. Japan Bull., v. 52, p. 1561—1569. Shimuzu, Tsuneo, and Kuroda, Rokuro, 1969, Abundance of scandium in igneous rocks of Japan: Geochim. et Cos- mochim. Acta, v. 33, no. 2, p. 290—292. Sievers, R. E., Eisentraut, K. J., Griest, D. J., Richardson, M. F., Wolf, W. R., Ross, W. D., Frew, N. M., and Isenhour, T. L., 1971, Variations in beryllium and chro- mium contents in lunar fines compared with crystalline rocks, in Lunar Sci. Cont, 2d, Houston, Tex., 1971, Proc., V. 2: Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press (Geochim et Cosmochim Acta, Supp. 2), p. 1451—1459. Sighinolfi, G. P., 1968, The zirconium content in some stand- ard rock samples: Soc. Toscana Sci. Nat. Atti, Mem., Ser. A, v. 74, no. 2, p. 626—629. 1969, Determination of some major and traee elements in new standard rock samples by atomic absorption spec- troscopic routine analysis: Soc. Toscana Sci. Nat. Atti, Mem., Ser. A, v. 76, p. 312-325. Simon, F. 0., 1970, Written communication, U.S. Geol. Sur- vey, Washington, DC. Simon, F. 0., and Millard, H. T., Jr., 1968, Determinations of gold in rocks by neutron activation analysis using fire- assay preconcentration: Anal. Chemistry, v. 40, p. 1150— 1152. 182 Smith, A. C. S., 1970, Written communication, Univ. College, London. Smith, Bob 0., II, 1970, Written communication, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa. Smith, Bob 0., II, and Rose, A. W., 1970, Written communica- cation, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pa. Smith, J. D., 1971, Spectrophotometric determination of traces of tin in rocks, sediments, and soils: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 57, p. 371—378. Smith, J. D., and Burton, J. D., 1972, The occurrence and distribution of tin with particular reference to marine environments: Geochim. et Cosmoch-im. Acta, v. 36, p. 621—629. Stable, Volker, 1970, Nickel und Kobalt in Gesteinen des Nordlinger Rios: Contr. Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 28, no. 1, p. 72-88. Steinnes, Eiliv, 1969a, Determination of samar-ium in rocks by epithermal neutron-activation analysis: Zeitschr. Anal. Chemie, v. 247, p. 23—27. 1969b, Rapid determination of aluminum in rocks by reactor neutron activation analysis: Kjeller Rept. KR— 131, Inst. for Atomenergi, Kjeller, Norway, 9 p. 1971a, Determination of molybdenum in rocks by epithermal neutron activation analysis: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 57, p. 249—255. 1971b, Determination of phosphorus in silicate rocks by neutron activation and direct fi-counting: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 57, p. 451—456. 1971c, Epithermal neutron activation analysis of geo- logical materials, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmo- chemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 113—128. 1972a, A rapid neutron-activation method for the simultaneous determination of arsenic and antimony in rocks: Analylst, v. 97, no. 1153, p. 241—244. 1972b, Simultaneous determination of rubidium, cesium, chromium, and phosphorus in rocks by neutron activa- tion and a simple group separation: Jour. Radioanal. Chemistry, v. 10, p. 65—73. 1972c, Written communication, Inst. for Atomenergi, Kjeller, Norway. Steinnes, E., and Brune, D., 1969, Determination of uranium in rocks by instrumental activation analysis using epi- thermal neutrons: Talanta, v. 16, p. 1326—1329. Stoch, H., 1969, Written communication, Natl. Metallurgy, Johannesburg, South Africa. Stone, Maurice, and Chesher, S. E., 1969, Determination of lithium oxide in silicate rocks by atomic-absorption spec- trophotometry: Analyst, v. 94, no. 1125, p. 1063—1067. Strelow, F. W. E., Liebenberg, C. J., and Toerien, F. von 8., 1968, Quantitative separation of the alkali metals by cation-exchange chromatography with Bio-Rex 40 resin: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 43, p. 465—473. 1969, Accurate silicate analysis based on separation by ion-exchange chromatography: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 474, no. 2, p. 251—260. Strelow, F. W. E., Toerien, F. von 8., and Weinert, C. H., 1970, Accurate determination of traces of sodium and po- tassium in rocks by ion exchange followed by atomic ab- sorption spectroscopy: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 50, no. 3, p. 399—405. Suhr, N. H., and Smith, B. C., II, 1970, Written communica- tion, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa. Inst. for DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS Sulcek, Zdenék, and Rubeéka, Ivan, 1968, Die Bestimmumg von Lithium-spuren in Gesteinen: Acta Geol. Geogr. Univ. Comenianae, Geol. no. 15 ,p. 177—183. Tanaka, T., and Iida, C., 1969, Atomic absorption spectro- photometric determination of lead by the absorption tube technique: Japan Analyst, v. 18, p. 492-496. Tandon, S. N., and Wasson, J. T., 1968, Gallium, germanium, indium, and irridium variations in a suite of L-group chondrites: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta. v. 32, no. 10, 1087—1109. Terashima, S., 1971a, Atomic absorption analysis of minor elements in silicates: Japan Analyst, v. 20, p. 321—326 [in Japanese]. 1971b, Determination of cobalt, chromium, copper, lithium, nickel, lead, strontium, and zinc in silicates by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Japan Geol. Sur- vey Bull., v. 22, no. 5, p. 19—33. 1971c, Written communication, Geol. Survey of Japan, Kawasaki. Thompson, G., and Bankston, D. C., 1970, Apparent copper inconstancy in artificially prepared standards when de- termined by emission spectrometry: Appl. Spectroscopy, v. 24, p. 375—378. Thompson, G., Bankston, D. C., and Pasley, S. M., 1970, Trace element data for U.S.G.S. reference silicate rocks: Chem. Geology, v. 5, no. 3, p. 215—221. Toerien, F. v. S., 1969, Written communication, Natl. Chemi- cal Research Laboratory, Council for Sci. Indus. Re- search, Pretoria, South Africa. Tomura, K., Higuchi, H., Onuma, N., and Hamaguchi, H., 1968, Rapid determination of dysprosium in rock samples by neutron activation analysis with a Ge(Li) detector after chemical separation: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 42, p. 389—395. Tomura, Kenji; Higuchi, Hideo; Takahashi, Hiroshi; Onuma, N.; and Hamaguchi, H.; 1968, Simultaneous determina- tion of rubidium and cesium in rock samples by neutron activation analysis with a lithium-drifted germanium de- tector after chemical group-separation: Anal. Chim. Acta, v. 43, no. 3, p. 523—526. U.S. Geological Survey, 1970, Mercury in the environment: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 713, 67 p. Van Loon, J. C., and Parissis, C. M., 1969, Scheme of silicate analysis based on the lithium metaborate fusion followed by atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Analyst, v. 94, p. 1057—1062. Van Moort, J. C., 1968, Written communication, Dept. Geology, Univ. of Tasmania, Hobart. Van Zelst, L., 1971a, Instrumental photon and proton activa- tion analysis of some elements in stony meteorites: Thesis, Univ. Amsterdam. 1971b, Non-destructive activation analysis of some elements in stony meteorites by proton- and Bremsstrah- len-irradiation, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmoohem- istry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 99—104. Vidal, F., 1972, Written communication, Inst. Geologic, Univ. de Rennes, France. Walsh, J. N., 1972, Written communication, Dept. Geol., Kings College, London. Walters, L. J ., J r., 1967, Bound halogen in sediments: Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 224 p. Warr, J. J., Jr., and and Dinnin, J. I., 1970, Written com- munication, U.S. Geol. Survey, Washington, D.C. 1972 COMPILATION OF DATA ON USGS STANDARDS Wasson, J. T., and Baedecker, P. A., 1970, Ga, Ge, In, Ir, and Au in lunar, terrestrial, and meteoritic basalts, in Apollo 11 Lunar Sci. Conf., Houston, Tex., 1970, Proc., v. 2: New York, Pergamon Press (Geochim. et Cos- mochim. Acta, Supp. 1), p. 1741—1750. Webber, G. R., and Newbury, M. L., 1971, X-ray fluorescence determination of minor and trace elements in silicate rocks: Canadian Spectroscopy, v. 16, p. 90-93. Weissberg, B. G., 1971, Determination of mercury in soils by flameless atomic absorption spectrometry: Econ. Geology, v. 66, p. 1042—1047. _ Welin, E., 1970, Written communication, Riksmuseet, Stockholm, 50, Sweden. Whitley, J. E., Bowden, P., and Angus, N. S., 1971, The determination of trace elements in igneous rocks by nu- clear techniques, in Brunfelt, A. 0., and Steinnes, Eiliv, eds., Activation analysis in geochemistry and cosmo- chemistry . . .: Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, p. 55-64. Naturhistoriska 183 Willis, J. P., Fesq, H. W., Kable, E. J. D., and Berg, G. W., 1969, The determination of barium in rocks by X-ray fluorescence spectrometry: Canadian Spectroscopy, v. 14, p. 150—157. Wolfe, L. A., and Zeitlin, H., 1970, An X-ray fluorescence spectroscopic method for the determination of total man.- ganese in rocks and marine sediments: Anal. Chim. Acta, V. 51, p. 349—354. Wright, I. H., 1968, Written communication, Univ. Witwaters- rand. [Uncorrected XRF data] Wyttenbach, A., 1969, Rapid instrumental nuclear activation analysis of rocks, cements, and meteorites: Helvetica Chim. Acta, v. 52, no. 8, p. 2458—2465. Youh, Chang-Ching, 1968, A report on the chemical analyses of granite G~2 and diabase W-l: Geol. Soc. China Free, No. 11, p. 143—146. 1970, Chemical analysis of standard rock samples from U.S. Geological Survey: Geol. Soc. Cihina Proc., no. 13, p. 161—163. DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS DETERMINATION OF GOLD, SILVER, AND TANTALUM IN THE NEW USGS STANDARDS BY NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS By G. N. ANOSHIN1 and G. A. PEREZHOGINI Substoichiometric separations after neutron activation were used to determine gold, silver, and tantalum in the new USGS standard rocks. Au, Ag, and Ta were determined in two por- tions from each of three bottles of the standards. The rocks may be considered homogeneous for these elements except for Ag in QLO—l and Au in MAG—1. Modern physical and physico-chemical analytical methods do not always provide reliable data for geochemical samples, and many workers demon- strate the validity of their methods by determining the abundance of elements in USGS standard rocks. Most determinations on these standards are made on different bottles, and it cannot be decided whether the variance among the different sets of data is due to different analytical methods or to heterogeneity of the elements among bottles. Hence, it seemed necessary to determine elements in several bottles to obtain both an analytical variance that would characterize the analytical procedures and the variance of the abundance of the elements among bottles that would characterize the homoge- neity of the distribution-of the elements in the en- tire standard. Such an investigation seemed es- pecially important for the neutron-activation analy- sis of gold in rocks, because relatively small por- tions (0.2—0.4 g) are usually taken for the deter- mination. The problem of the neutron-activation analysis of gold in rocks and minerals has been discussed (Perezhogin and Alimarin, 1965; Anoshin and others, 1971). Some workers (Rozhkov and others, 1970; Rakovsky and others, 1971) consider average abundances of gold in rocks by neutron-activation analysis to be of questionable value because of the heterogeneity of the distribution of gold in rocks. Analyses of the new USGS rocks may help to solve this problem.. llflstitute of Geology and Geonhysics, Siberian Branch, USSR Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk 90, USSR. The present and previous (G. N. Anoshin and G. A. Perezhogin, unpub. data, 1971) studies have been based on substoichiometric separations after neutron activation; our present procedure allows us to determine gold, silver, and tantalum in a single portion. Tantalum was not determined in shales SCo—l and SGR—l and in the schist SDC—l. Samples (0.2—0.4 g) of the finely crushed rocks were put into aluminum foil packets, weighed, and placed in aluminum containers. Standards were pre- pared by applying 0.01 ml solutions of gold (10—4 g/ml), silver (10 mg/ml), and tantalum (10 mg/ ml) to filter-paper strips. After drying, the strips were put between two similar strips of filter paper and wrapped in aluminum foil. These standards were then placed in the same aluminum containers as the rock samples. These containers were then irradiated in a nuclear reactor with a neutron flux of 1013n/cm2/sec for 3 days 'and were allowed to cool for 7 days. Alundum crucibles were prepared by adding to each crucible 0.2 ml of carrier solutions of gold (5 mg/ml), silver (100 mg/ml), and tantalum (8’ mg/ml), which were then adjusted with 5 M NaOH to alkaline pH and dried. Irradiated samples and standards were placed in such crucibles and were mixed with a tenfold excess of sodium peroxide. The crucibles were then placed in a muffle furnace for 8—10 min and the melt was stirred occasionally. The crucibles were then removed from the furnace, allowed to cool to room temperature, and treated with water. The solution with the hydroxide pre- cipitate was transferred to a beaker, heated, and centrifuged. The precipitate was.washed with hot water and again collected by centrifugation. The combined supernatents were transferred to a beaker and acidified with concentrated HGl while being stirred. The solution was heated, 3—4 drops 185 186 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS TABLE 108.—Determinations of gold, silver, and tantalum in USGS standard rocks. [d.f., degrees of freedom. negative bottle variance. Conclusions from the analysis of variance at F035 or the fractile indicated: NS, not sig- nificant: S, significant (at F0.W)] Coefii- ciefnt Standard deviation 0 , s d d Bottles . titrdcl? 1 2 3 Mean (surges) ($521.3) LEE): Conclusions (per- cent) Gold (parts per billion) QLO—l 1.75 1.8 2.0 1.66 Neg. 0.32 19.3 NS 1.7 1.3 1.4 RGM—l 0.23 0.32 0.42 0.28 0.00 0.08 28.6 NS .25 .20 .27 STM—l .27 .26 .44 .36 .10 .07 19.4 NS .26 .40 .53 BHVO—l 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.82 .10 .04 2.2 NS (0.975) 1.7 1.9 1.9 MAG—1 2.6 2.8 1.9 2.43 .5 .11 4.5 S 2.4 3.0 1.9 SCo—l 2.7 2.9 3.2 2.72 .23 .34 12.5 NS 2.3 2.2 3.0 SDC—l 1.1 .9 1.3 1.1 .03 .21 19.1 NS .8 1.3 1.2 SGR—l 9.7 11 12 10.8 Neg. 1.8 16.7 NS 11 13 8.4 Silver (parts per billion) QLO—l 5.5 4.1 3.9 4.5 0.76 0.15 3.4 S 5.2 4.0 4.1 RGM—l 9.5 10 10 10.3 .88 1.7 16.5 NS 9.2 14 9.1 STM—l 8.0 6.4 6.6 8.0 Neg. 1.8 22.5 NS 8.2 9.1 10 BHVO—l 5.2 5.9 5.8 5.7 .44 .17 3.0 NS (0-975) 5.1 5.8 6.2‘ MAG—1 6.5 6.0 7.0 6.4 .46 .40 6.2 NS 5.6 6.4 7.1 800—1 23 18 18 19 2.1 1.3 6.8 NS 20 17 17 SDC—l 6.8 8.5 8.8 9.0 Neg. 1.9 21.1 NS 11 8.2 11 SGR—l 16 20 20 19.2 1.8 1.2 6.2 NS 18 22 19 Tantalum (parts per million) QLO—l 0.85 0.69 0.45 0.63 0.14 0.08 12.7 NS .66 .66 .46 RGM—l .59 .46 .53 .54 .06 .03 5.9 NS (0.975) .65 .50 .52 STM—l 8.5 6.4 1 29 7.9 .96 .55 7.0 NS 8.5 7.0 9.1 BHVO— .95 1.0 .96 .96 .007 .033 3.4 NS 1.0 .96 .91 MAG—1 1.0 1.1 .80 .88 Neg. .19 22.7 NS .65 .80 .92 1This value does not belong to the same population as the other Ta data and the mean of the five other ’1‘: values was substituted for the anal- ysis of variance. Because of the substitution, the conclusion and the estimates should be considered provisional. DETERMINATION OF GOLD, SILVER, AND TANTALUM of antimony (20 mg/ml) and tellurium (15 mg/ml) solutions were added, and the gold and the tellurium reduced by ascorbic acid and hydrazine sulfate. The solution must be clear after the precipitate coagulates. The precipitate was collected on glass filters and washed with 10 percent HCl. The fil- trate was discarded. The precipitate was treated with a hot freshly prepared mixture of HCl :HNO3 (4:1), and the solution was rinsed with water into a 100-ml flask. The volume of the solution was ad- justed with water to about 10 ml, 2 ml of 1.5><10—3 M tetraphenylarsonium chloride-chloroform solu- tion was added, and the mixture was agitated for 2—3 min (the organic layer must become yellow). The contents of the flask were transferred to a cen- trifuge tube, the tube was centrifuged, and 1.6 ml of the organic layer was withdrawn for the gold determination. The precipitate of the hydroxides containing tan- talum and silver was washed with water and treated with 2—3 ml of concentrated nitric acid on a water bath. The mixture was centrifuged, and the pre- cipitate was washed with concentrated ammonia. This precipitate is used for the tantalum determina- tion. To the combined solution resulting from the treat- ments with HNO3 and NH4OH above, 25 percent ammonia was added dropwise until ferric hydroxide precipitated. This precipitate was washed and dis- carded. The solution was acidified with HCl, and the precipitate of silver chloride filtered off. The precipi- tate was washed with 1 percent HCl and with water and then dissolved on the filter with concentrated ammonia. One ml of a 0.1—M KI solution was added to the filtrate, and the silver iodide precipitate was collected on a filter paper disc in a demountable funnel. Adhesive polyethylene film was then used to cover the filter paper to protect the precipitate. The precipitate for the determination of tantalum was treated With 20—30 drops of hydrofluoric acid, 2—3 ml of saturated oxalic acid solution was added, and the mixture was centrifuged. The centrifugate was transferred to a 100—ml flask, diluted with water, and 0.5 ml of a 10‘2 M tetraphenylarsonium chloride solution was added (a white precipitate must appear), followed by 2.5 ml of 1,-2adichloroe- thane. The mixture was agitated until the complete dissolution of the precipitate. The solution was transferred to a tube and centrifuged. The aqueous 187 layer was removed by pipette and discarded, and 2 ml of the organic phase was transferred to a graduated tube for the tantalum determination. The activities of 198Au (Ey=0.41 Mev, T1,, =65 h), 11"mAg (Ey=0.66 Mev, T1/2 =250 days) and 182Ta (Ey=1.0—1.1 Mev, Tl/2 2115 days) were measured on a 100x80 mm NaI crystal, and the data were re- corded in a 256-channel analyzer. The counting rates of the nuclides determined the counting times, which were generally 10—30 min for Au, 30-100 min for Ag, and 5—15 min for Ta. The data obtained and the estimates and conclu- sions resulting from the analysis of variance for a single variable of classification are given in table 108. The three elements may be considered homo- genously distributed among bottles of sample ex- cept for silver in sample QLO—l and gold in sample MAG-1. The problem of the accuracy of the analy- ses of sedimentary rocks for gold has been dis- cussed by Clifton and others (1969) who demon- strated that the accuracy of the analysis for gold depends on the number and size of the gold par- ticles present. The heterogeneity of gold in MAG—1 may be due to a heterogeneous distribution of num- bers and sizes of gold particles in the bottles. REFERENCES Anoshin, G. N., Perezhogin, G. A., and Melnikova, R. D., 1971, [On some methodical problems of the application of radioactivation analysis to studies in the geochemistry of gold], in [Analysis and technology of noble metals], Conf. Chemistry, Analysis Technology Noble Metals, 8th, Novosibirsk, 1969, Trudy, p. 295—297 (in Russian). Clifton, H. E., Hunter, R. E., Swanson, F. J., and Phillips, R. L., 1969, Sample size and meaningful gold analysis. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 625—0, 17 p. Perezhogin, G. A., and Alimarin, I. P., 1965. [The determina- tion of gold in rocks and meteorites by neutron activation analysis]: Zhur. Analit. Khim. v. 20, p. 793—798 (in Russian). Rakovsky, E. E., Behrenstein, L. E., Shilin, N. L., and Sere- bryany, B. L., 1971. [Method of radioactivation deter- mination of gold and its application to studies of some problems in gold geochemistry], in [Analysis and tech- nology of noble metals], Conf. Chemistry, Analysis, Tech- nology Noble Metals, 8th, Novosibirsk, 1969, Trudy, p. 305—408 (in Russian). Roskov, I. S., Rakovsky, E. E., Behrenstein, L. E., Shilin, N. L., and Serebryany, N. L., 1970. [On inhomogeneous dis- tribution of gold in rocks and minerals (as revealed by radioactivation analysis)]: Akad. Nauk. SSSH Dokl., v. 191, p. 927—930 (in Russian). DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS G—l ET W—l: REQUIESCANT IN PACE! By F. J. FLANAGAN A debate is occurring in the literature between Felix Chayes who, using correlation coefl‘icients, attributes the wide spread of paired data for G—1 and W—l to systematic inter- analyst differences, and A. B. Vistelius who, using scatter diagrams, contends that sample heterogeneity is responsible. From analyses of four new rocks, paired silica data for G—2 (the replacement for G—1) and GSP-l (a much coarser grained granodiorite) show less scatter than Vistelius’ dia- gram for G—1 and W-l, whereas paired silica data for AGV—l and BCIR—l, both aphanitic rocks, are scattered at least as widely as those data for G—1 and W—l. The coarsest powder of these new rocks is GSP—l that has 96 percent passing a ZOO-mesh sieve so that a claim of heterogeneity seems un- warranted. An experiment to determine which of the two viewpoints is correct cannot be made because of the complete depletion of G—1 and W—l; hence, Requiescant in Pace! The eulogy delivered by Chayes (1969) in his “Last Look at G—l—W-l” appears to have been premature in view of the full-fledged fray of Chayes (1969, 1970) versus Vistelius (1970, 1971). Be- cause the debate about G—1 and W—l seems to be waxing rather than waning, several details of the program given insufi‘icient attention and the subse- quent change in particle size, some of which may have escaped the attention of a casual reader, should be listed: 1. The program was started to see how well rock analysts could perform. Obviously, as noted many times, analysts were not as good as had been believed. 2. No experimental design is mentioned in US. Geological Survey Bulletin 980 (Fairbairn and others, 1951) . 3. The particle size of the samples (G—l is described as passing an 80-mesh screen and W—l as pass- ing a 100-mesh screen) was known to be too large by many of us before Kleeman (1967) concluded that they were too coarse to be used as reference samples. In retrospect, authors up to the present time have been negligent in their literature searches because Behre and Hassialis (1945) published a method based on the binomial distribution for calculating the amount of sample necessary for a determina- tion to be within specified limits at a predeter- mined probability, or alternately, for calculat- ing the error that might be incurred in a determination, assuming a specified weight of sample. The particle size of the two samples was changed by some unknown person and un- known method during my assignment to other laboratories from 1957 to 1962. Upon my re- turn, the particle size of the samples was finer than that of the samples of G—1 used in a lead study (Flanagan, 1960). The G—l in the six bottles for the lead study had been pur- posely ground finer to obviate errors that might have been incurred because of the coarse particle size; I neglected to mention this fact in the paper. Ball (1965, p. 263) noted that the two rocks were supplied as powders that passed a SOD-mesh sieve. 4. There is no description of what happened to the two samples between the mixing “by shoveling and by shifting on the canvas” (Fairbairn and others, 1951, p. 4) and the bottling of the samples. Either shoveling or shifting, assum- ing that the final form of the material was a cone, could induce segregation by particle size, shape, or density when particles tumbled down the surface of the cone. The method of trans- fer of the material from the cone(?) to the bottles is unknown, and, unless some better method of mixing had been used, the analysts may have started with an unknown but real handicap. 189 190 DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS 70.00 I T I .15 l .163 .2 . 17 26 9 o 24. .19 3. 2 25 5. 3 :4 20 §69.00— 8. *7 3 . — 94 100 18 '1 z . '16b Q- 12a. ’12b 16C (0 18 21 g 022 ' 9" (I) 68.00 — _ 14 0 l l I l 64.50 65.00 66.00 67.00 68.00 SiOz IN GSP-1, IN PERCENT FIGURE 9.—Scatter diagram of SiOz determinations. in G—2 and GSP—l. Data and analysts, identified by number, are from Flanagan (1969). The average of the data for G—2 and GSP—l is indicated by +. 5. The bottles were distinguished from each other same as Collaborator 1 for W—1 cannot be only by the numbers G_1 or W—1. There was tested because I discarded the original data for therefore no way to store the bottles random- the samples a year 01' tW0 before Chayes wrote ly, and the best one can expect is that they his “Last Look.” were stored haphazardly. Consequently, the 8. Neither author mentions that 13 pairs of those selection of any bottles for analysis would have analyses 01-. G—1 and W—1 under consideration been haphazard, at best. were listed as the average of two analyses. Al- though nothing can be done to recover the in- 6. Although all rock analysts are reminded occa— formation lost by averaging one can wonder sionally to mix the contents 0f their bottle how much the correlation coefficient or dia- before sampling, there is no assurance that gram might have been changed. they do. 9. At the beginning of the program that resulted in 7. The reasonable assumption by both Chayes and Geological Survey Bulletin 980 (Fairbairn and Vistelius that Collaborator 1 for G—l is the otherS, 1951). a bottle each of G—1 and W—l G—1 ET W—1: REQUIESCANT IN PACE! 191 l l 7 .125 '12:: 60.00 — _ . 2] l- 2 L2“ 0 .15 3 a 3i 5 o 26 24 g .17 970k 00 '.-‘ 59.00 — 14 19 23 — ‘3 + Z .25 8.18 . 22 a 10 O O 18 . 20 .13 .14 58.00 — — 16c I165 I 4 I 53.0 54.0 55.0 56.0 SiO2 lN BCR-l, IN PERCENT FIGURE 10.-—~Scatter diagram of SiOg determinations in AGV—l and BCR—l. Data and analysts, identified by number, are from Flanagan (1969). The average of the data for AGV—l and BCR—l is indicated by +. were mailed simultaneously to each analyst desiring to participate in the collaborative pro- gram (Michael Fleischer, oral commun., 1972) . As a former rock analyst, I submit that there is an overwhelming temptation to analyze both samples simultaneously. A further temptation, equally strong, is to make duplicate analyses of both standards “just to be sure of the re- sults,” and the duplicate portions of each would likely be analyzed simultaneously sim- ply because four analyses can be handled con- veniently. Even excluding obvious blunders, there is an excellent chance of incurring cor— related ,errors in the classical procedure for rock analysis if the standard samples were handled in this way. Based on such specula- tion, I agree with Chayes’ contention that the 192 published data exhibit large amounts of ana- lytical error. Such speculation, however, does not obviate arguments by Vistelius based on particle shape, size, or density, or upon the possible distribution of monomineralic species within a given bottle. A compilation of data on six USGS samples (Flanagan, 1969) gives some further evidence ap- plicable to the 'theses of Chayes and Vistelius. These samples were processed so that a minimum of 85 percent passed a ZOO-mesh screen; the particle-size distribution of the powdered samples is shown in table 109. Among the six samples are G—2, a substi- tute for G—l but a slightly coarser grained portion of the Westerly Granite, and GSP—l, a granodiorite (or better, an adamellite) whose grain size is much larger than those of G—l or G—2. If one omits the data by analyst 1, who made spectrographic deter- minations, and plots the results of the determina- tions by the other analysts of SiO2 in G—2 versus the paired determinations of SiOz in GSP—l, the plot (fig. 9) seems to lend support to the contentions of both Chayes and Vistelius, because the data, except for analyst 14, are well clustered. Two other samples in the series of six are AGV—l, an andesite from southern Oregon, and BCR-l, a basalt from the Columbia River Group, which differ markedly from G—2 and GSP—l in that they are both very fine grained rocks. If we plot the SiO2 determi- nations for AGV—l versus the paired data for BCR- 1, the resulting plot (fig. 10) is similar to figure 1 of Vistelius (1971). This scatter diagram, like that for G—1 and W—l, can be best interpreted in terms of correlated errors, that is, when SiO2 is low in AGV— 1, it is also low in BCR—l, and conversely. Possible arguments by Vistelius that the scatter might be due to particle size, shape, or density or that the trend may have been generated by one or more mono- mineralic species would be untenable because of the fine particle size to which these four samples were ground and of the care with which the powders were sampled into bottles (Flanagan, 1967) . Because the supply of G—l was depleted about 1965 and that of W—1 in 1972 and because the size DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYSES OF EIGHT NEW USGS ROCK STANDARDS distribution of the two samples was changed (Ball, 1965) since the original preparation, there is little or no likelihood that one can now test the subject of the debate by a well-designed experiment. Hence, G—l et W—l, Requiescant in Pace! of six TABLE 109.——Particle-size distribution, in percent, USGS samples [Reprinted from Flanagan, 1967, table 1] Rock sample G-2 GSP—l AGV-l PCC-l DTS-l BCR—l Number of sieve tests 2 3 3 3 3- 3 Mesh size +100 0-1 0-2 tr tr 0-1 1:1: —100 +120 0'1 01 tr tr 0-1 1:1- -—120 +170 0-4 1'1 0'5 1-6 1'5 0-1 —170 +200 0-9 2-5 0-4 5-6 4-0 0-6 —200 98-5 96-1 99-1 92-8 94-3 99-3 REFERENCES Ball, D. F., 1965‘, Rapid analysis for some major elements in powdered rock by X-ray fluorescence spectrography: Analyst, v. 90, p. 258—265. Behre, H. A., and Hassialis, M. D., 1945‘, Sampling and test- ing, Sec. 19 of Taggart, A. F., Handbook of mineral dressing—ores and industrial minerals: New York, John Wiley and Sons, p. 19—01—19—208. Chayes, Felix, 1969, A last look at G-l—W—l: Carnegie Inst. Washington Year Book 67, 1967-68, p. 239—241. 1970, Another last look at G-1—W—1: Internat. Assoc. Math. Geology Jour., v. 2, p. 207-209. Fairbairn, H. W., and others, 1951. A cooperative investiga- tion of precision and accuracy in chemical, spectroohemi- cal, and modal analysis of silicate rocks: U.S. Geol. Sur- vey Bull. 980, 71 p. Flanagan, F. J., 1960, The lead content of G—l, Part 5 of Stevens, R. E., and others, Second report on a coopera- tive investigation of the composition of two silicate rocks: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1113, p. 113—121. 1967. U.S. Geological Survey silicate rock standards: Geochim. e.t Cosmochim. Acta, v. 31, p. 289—308. 1969. U.S. Geological Survey standards—II. First compilation of data for the new U.S.G.S. rocks: Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta, v. 33, p. 81—120. Kleeman, A. W., 1967, Sampling error in the chemical analy- sis of rocks: Geol. Soc. Australia Joan, v. 14, pt. 1, p. 43—47. Vistelius, A. B., 1970, Statistical model of silicate analysis and results of investigation of 6—1 and W-l samples: Internat. Assoc. Math. Geology Jour., v. 2, p. 1—14. 1971, Some lessons of the G—1—W—1 investigation: Intern-at. Assoc. Math. Geology Jouir., v. 3, p. 323-326. 7 “AV CrystallizatiOn History of Lunar F eldspathic Basalt 14310 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 841 Prepared on behalf of the National Aeronautics and Space A dministration W54 .3, , Crystallization History of Lunar Feldspathic Basalt 14310 By ODETTE B. JAMES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 841 Prepared on behalf of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration An account of the crystallization history of an unusual type of lunar basalt, deduced from detailed petrographic studies and microprobe mineral analyses UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON11973 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 73—600177 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents US. Government Printing Office Washington, DC. 20402 — Price 70 cents domestic postpaid or 50 cents GPO Bookstore Stock Number 2401-00361 CONTENTS Abstract ________________________________________ Introduction _____________________________________ Mineral assemblage and texture __________________ General features _____________________________ Locally developed fine-scale textures ___________ Orthopyroxene with preserved euhedral faces Composite grains with orthopyroxene cores and pigeonite rims ____________________ Coarse polysynthetically twinned pigeonite__ Ni—Fe, schreibersite, and troilite _________ Phase compositions _______________________________ Plagioclase __________________________________ Subhedral laths _________________________ Grains enclosing metal-schreibersite-troilite inclusions _____________________________ Laths adjacent to vugs ___________________ Laths in fine-grained clots ________________ Orthopyroxene ______________________________ Orthopyroxene with preserved euhedral crys- tal faces ______________________________ Orthopyroxene adjacent to vugs ___________ Orthopyroxene containing blebs and {100} lamellae of augite _____________________ Orthopyroxene formed by inversion of pigeonite ______________________________ cocoocacnus women Q 13 13 Phase compositions—Continued Compositions of orthopyroxene and clinopyroxene at'their contacts ___________________________ Pigeonite and ferropigeonite __________________ Augite ______________________________________ Compositions of pigeonite and augite at their contacts ___________________________________ Other pyroxenes _____________________________ Compositions of intergrown and impinging plagio— clase and pyroxene ________________________ Other silicate and oxide phases ________________ Fe—Ni metal and schreib‘ersite _________________ Phosphorus-bearing Ni—Fe and schreibersite Phosphorus-free Ni—Fe ___________________ Crystallization and cooling history ________________ Silicate melt ________________________________ Fe—Ni—P—S melts and particles _______________ Subsolidus effects ____________________________ Crystallization conditions _________________________ Pressure ____________________________________ Temperature ________________________________ Oxygen fugacity _____________________________ Volatiles ____________________________________ Conditions of crystallization of fine-grained clots Genesis of the 14310 magma ______________________ References cited _________________________________ ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURES 1—10. Photomicrographs showing: PWFQP‘PF’JPP General features of rock texture _____________________________________________________ Fine-grained clots ____________________________________________________________________ Composite orthopyroxene-pigeonite-augite grain _________________________________________ Orthopyroxene grains ________________________________________________________________ Composite orthOpyroxene-pigeonite grains ______________________________________________ Composite ortho‘pyroxene-pigeonite grain _______________________________________________ Composite orthopyroxene-pigeonite-augite grain _________________________________________ Coarse polysynthetically twinned grain of pigeonite ____________________________________ Large composite, globules of Ni—Fe, schreibersite, and troilite ___________________________ 10. Globule of Ni—Fe + schreib‘ersite included in plagioclase _______________________________ 11. Diagrams showing variation in Ca, K, and Na along profiles within three large plagioclase laths ___ 12. Plot of WozEnth contents of pyroxenes analyzed in this study ________________________________ 13. Diagrams showing variations in Mg, Ca, and Fe contents across a composite orthopyroxene-pigeonite- augite grain _______________________________________________________________________________ 14. Plot of WozEnst contents of points on profiles shown on figure 13 ____________________________ 15. Diagrams showing variations in Mg, Ca, and Fe contents across orthopyroxene grains ____________ 16. Plot of WozEn2Fs contents of exsolution-free orthopyroxene, orthopyroxene with augite lamellae, and pigeonite at their contacts _____________________________________________________________ III Page 13 14 15 15 15 16 16 16 17 19 19 19 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 24 25 26 12 12 13 14 IV FHGURE 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. CONTENTS Diagrams showing variations in Mg, Ca, and Fe contents across orthopyroxene-pigeonite contacts __ Plot of WoiEnst contents of coexisting augite and pigeonite __________________________________ Plot of Ni and Co contents of grains of phosphorous—bearing and phosphorous-free Ni—Fe ________ Diagrams showing variations in Ni and Co contents across large Fe—Ni—P—S globules ____________ Plots of Ni and Co contents of a Ni—Fe, 7 Ni—Fe, and schreib‘ersite in large Fe—Ni—P—S globules ___ Plot of Ni and Co contents of a Ni—Fe, 'y Ni—Fe, and schreibersite included in plagioclas‘e ________ Page 14 15 17 18 18 19 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 By ODETTE B. JAMES ABSTRACT Lunar feldspathic basalt 14310 crystallized at or near the lunar surface from a melt of virtually the same bulk composition as the rock now has. This melt contained no silicate xenoliths or xenocrysts and probably no phenoerysts, but meteorite-derived Fe—Ni—P—S melt globules (and pos- sibly also solid particles) were present. Plagioclase was the first silicate to form, at about 1310°—1320°C. After crystalli- zation began there was no abrupt volatilization of alkalis from the melt. Orthopyroxene was the second major silicate to precipitate; some grains of this mineral show complex oscillatory and reverse zoning probably related to local variations in volatile content of the melt. As crystallization progressed in the silicate melt: (1) orthopyroxene reacted with liquid and pigeonite precipitated; (2) augite precipi- tated; (3) ilmenite precipitated; (4) augite crystallization ceased; and (5) mesostasis minerals crystallized and mesostasis glasses solidified. During crystallization of the silicate melt the globules of Fe—Ni—P—S melt it contained precipitated first Ni—Fe, then schreibersite, and then troilite. Characteristics of these particles indicate that the 14310 melt was not quenched at any time during its crystalliza- tion, that final solidification of the rock took place at about 950°C, and that subsolidus equilibration continued to below 550°C. Oxygen fugacity throughout crystallization was about comparable to that in Apollo 12 basaltic melts. The 14310 melt could have been generated by: (1) partial or bulk melting of a feldspathic rock in the lunar crust; or (2) impact melting of feldspar-rich lunar surface ma— terials. The latter alternative is favored here. INTRODUCTION Feldspathic basalt 14310 occupies a position of unique importance to lunar petrology, for this rock crystallized from a melt generated in a different geo- logic setting, and at an earlier time, than most lunar basalts brought back to earth. Most basalts brought back by the Apollo missions to date were collected from mare surfaces at the Apollo 11, 12, and 15 sites. Basalt fragments form a large percentage of the samples from these sites, and they were presumably derived from flows and sills that form local bedrock. Crystallization ages are in the range 3.15-3.70 b.y. (billion years). (See references on Rb/ Sr and 40Ar/39Ar ages in Proceedings Volumes of the Apollo 11, Second, and Third Lunar Science Conferences, and the volume of Apollo 15 short papers published by the Lunar Science Institute, Houston, Tex.). In contrast, basalt 14310 was collected at the Apollo 14 site on the Fra Mauro formation, a geologic unit interpreted as an ejecta deposit from the impact event that formed the Imbrian basin (Swann and others, 1971). At this site the rocks on the moon’s surface are apparently nearly all breccias; only two specimens of basalt weighing more than 50 grams were returned, and 14310 is by far the larger of these. These basalts are probably not derived from local basaltic bedrock, but are instead fragments broken and transported far from their sites of crys- tallization by processes associated with impact events. Minimum age of crystallization of 14310 is about 3.91 b.y., and minimum age of crystallization of 14053, the other Apollo 14 basalt hand specimen, is about 3.95 b.y. (results of Rb/Sr and 40Ar/39Ar methods reported by Turner and others, 1971; Papa- nastassiou and Wasserburg, 1971; Murthy and others, 1972; Compston and others, 1972b; and York and others, 1972). Basalt 14310 is further of special interest because it appears to have crystallized from a parent melt much different in composition from the parent melts of the mare basalts, and of basalt 14053 as well. Mare basalts as a group, along with 14053, are typi- fied by: dominance of pyroxene over plagioclase; presence of olivine as a common minor, sometimes major, constituent; virtual absence of orthopyroxene and dominance of calcic pyroxene over pigeonite; high content of FeO (16—23 percent) with attendant high ratio of FeO/MgO; and very low contents of K, P, and Zr. In 14310, however, plagioclase is dominant over pyroxene, olivine is absent, orthopy— roxene is an important constituent, pigeonite is dominant over augite, content of FeO is low and about equal to the content of MgO (Kushiro and others, 1972; Rose and others, 1972; Philpotts and others, 1972; Hubbard and others, 1972; Willis and 1 2 C‘RYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC‘ BASALT 14310 others, 1972; Compston and others, 1972a), and con- tents of K, P, and Zr are 11/2—2 times as high as in the mare basalts that are richest in these elements. This paper presents an account of the crystalliza- tion history of the parent magma of basalt 14310 and its crystallization conditions, deduced from de- tailed petrographic and electron-microprobe studies of thin sections. Also included is a discussion of pos- sible origins of the melt. The thin sections studied in detail were sub‘samples 25 and 9; supplementary microprobe analyses were made on grains in sub- samples 4, 14, 30, 168, and 179, and 12 other thin sections were examined petrographically. Acknowledgments—This work was done under NASA contract T—75412. I thank my colleagues E. C. T. Chao and R. T. Helz for discussion of many points in the paper and review of the manuscript. I am indebted to Judith B. Best for assistance in preparation of the illustrations and final assembly of the manuscript. MINERAL ASSEMBLAGE AND TEXTURE GENERAL FEATURES Major constituents of 14310 are plagioclase and pyroxene (orthopyroxene, pigeonite, augite) ; im- portant minor constituents are ilmenite, metallic Ni—Fe, schreibersite, troilite, and mesostasis (a com- plex intergrowth of late-stage phases). Proportions of these constituents, computed from a bulk-rock analysis (Rose and others, 1972) using the chemical- mode-calculation method described by Wright and Doherty (1970), are as follows (weight percent and volume percent calculated from weight percent, re- spectively): plagioclase, 57.3, 62.0; pyroxene, 37.0, 32.2; oxides (ilmenite + ulvospinel), 1.6, 1.0; and mesostasis (silica-rich glass + apatite + potassium feldspar), 4.1, 4.8. Proportions of major minerals indicated by this calculation correspond fairly closely with proportions derived from optical point counts (Melson and others, 1972). The rock texture ranges from fine-grained sub- ophitic to fine-grained intergranular and is locally intersertal (fig. 1). Plagioclase forms a network of randomly oriented interlocking laths, most of which are subhedral. Feldspar grain-size distribution is roughly seriate rather than bimodal or porphyritic (Drever and others, 1972; Kushiro and others, 1972) ; the laths are as much as 2 mm long and the average is about 0.2—0.3 mm long. Many large and intermediate-sized laths (>01 mm) exhibit optically discernible normal progressive zoning and traces of oscillatory zoning that define euhedral crystal out- lines throughout their interiors. Pigeonite, the most FIGURE 1.—Photomicrograph of 14310,9. Seriate plagioclase forms a network of randomly oriented laths; interstices are filled with subophitic and intergranular pyroxene. The large plagioclase lath at upper left contains small Ni—Fe inclusions (black). A large particle of Ni—Fe (black) and a small clot of fine-grained plagioclase are at upper right. Pigeo‘nite grain at lower left contains an equant core of orthopyroxene (marked by arrow). Width of field of view is 2.2 mm; crossed polarizers. abundant of the pyroxene minerals, forms inter- granular to subophitic grains in the interstices of the plagioclase network. Most orthopyroxene forms cores within the pigeonite grains; where orthopy- roxene is directly intergrown with plagioclase with no intervening pigeonite, the intergrowth tends to be graphic rather than subophitic. Most augite forms epitaxial overgrowths on, or zones within, pigeonite grains, but minute amounts of this mineral also occur as small blebs or stubby exsolved prisms within orthopyroxene grains. Textures of the minor constituents are as follows. Ni—Fe, schreibersite, and troilite form single phase or composite particles that range from large globules (as much as 0.3 mm across) to minute irregular interstitial grains. Most particles of these phases are isolated and occur in interstices, but a few are also included in plagioclase and pyroxene. Ilmenite occurs as small subhedra that are restricted to marginal zones of pyroxene grains and interstices. Mesostasis fills interstices and consists of small crystals of ilmenite, ulvospinel, pyroxene, fayalite, potassium feldspar, baddeleyite, tranquillityite, apatite, and whitlockite and patches of silica-rich and devitrified iron-rich glasses. The rock shows appreciable textural heterogeneity. Locally, patches of the silicate intergrowth have grain size significantly coarser than in the rest of the rock; many of these patches are associated with open vugs. Patches where the silicate intergrowth is MINERAL ASSEMBL‘AGE AND TEXTURE 3 FIGURE 2.—Photomicrographs of fine-grained clots. A, Large clot consisting dominantly of minute plagioclase laths, sub- ordinately of interstitial pyroxene in optical continuity. The basalt immediately surrounding the clot contains a con— centration of interstitial mesostasis material (black). Width of field of view is 0.88 mm; plane-polarized light. B, Clot con- sisting of open framework of minute plagioclase laths with abundant interstitial silica-rich glass. Width of field of View is 0.58 mm; plane-polarized light. C, Minute plagioclase laths that nucleated on a larger plagioclase grain. Width of field of view is 0.41 mm; plane-polarized light. D, Ni—Fe particle within fine-grained clot. The Ni—Fe (white) is enclosed by a reac- tion rim of whitlockite (w) and silica glass (9). The surrounding clot consists of plagioclase (dark—gray laths) and pyroxene (interstitial light-gray phase). Some of the pyroxene near the whitlockite reaction rim contains minute blebs of silica glass and appears partly resorbed. Width of field of view is 0.31 mm; reflected light. extremely fine grained are also present locally (fig. 2). These range in size from clots 2 mm across to tiny clots of only a few grains. The larger clots con- sist dominantly of minute tightly intergrown plagio- clase laths; pyroxene is greatly subordinate and forms interstitial grains that are commonly in opti- cal continuity over large areas Within single clots. Within most of these larger clots, phases other than plagioclase and pyroxene are absent; however, the network of plagioclase surrounding many of them contains a significantly greater proportion of inter- stitial mesostasis material than elsewhere in the tures gradational into textures more typical of the rock as a whole: Some are open frameworks of minute plagioclase laths with abundant interstitial glass (fig. 23) and others appear to have grown on or around larger plagioclase grains fig. 2C). LOCALLY DEVELOPED FINE-SCALE TEXTURES Several phases—most notably orthopyroxene, pi- geonite, and intergrown Ni—Fe and schreibersite— locally show fine-scale textures Whose origin has special bearing on interpretation of the crystalliza- tion history and origin of the rock. The textures are rock (fig. 2A). Some of the smaller clots show tex- l described below, and compositional variations shown 4 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 by phases With these textures are presented in later sections. ORTHOPYROXENE WITH PRESERVED EUHEDRAL FACES Many orthopyroxene grains contain clouds of minute inclusions of a low-refractive-index phase that appears to be glass. In sparse grains, such in- clusions are arranged along planes that mark the traces of euhedral growth surfaces within the crys- tals, and the orientations of these planes provide evidence as to the structure of the pyroxene that initially crystallized from the melt. Figures 3, 4A, and 5A illustrate three grains in which euhedral faces are preserved. The results of Universal-stage studies show that in such grains the best developed euhedral growth surface are parallel to {100}; faces parallel to {210} planes are less well developed, and faces parallel to {010} are rare. FIGURE 3.——Photomicrograph of composite orthopyroxene- pigeonite-augite grain. The orthopyroxene (gray, center) has a core (center top) that is outlined by the traces of {210} faces marked by concentrations of glass inclusions. The outer part of the orthopyroxene grain contains abund- ant exsolution lamellae of augite parallel {100} of the host. The dot-dash line marks the contact of pigeonite and augite. Lines marked A—A and 3—]? indicate traces of microprobe profiles for which compositional data are presented on figures 13 and 14. Width of field of view is 0.31 mm; crossed polarizers. COMPOSITE GRAINS \VITH ORTHOPYROXENE CORES AND PIGEONITE RIMS In nearly all the composite grains of these two pyroxenes, textures suggest that the orthopyroxene cores crystallized from melt as orthopyroxene. In a small proportion of the grains, the textures indicate the nature of the crystallization relationship between the orthopyroxene and surrounding pigeonite; the FIGURE 4,—Photomicrographs of orthopyroxene grains. A, Grain showing traces of euhedral growth surfaces. Orien- tations of the crystallographic planes are indicated on the pho‘tomicrograph. The line marked A—A indicates the trace of a microprobe profile for which compositional data are plotted on figure 15. Width of field of view is 0.28 mm; plane-polarized light. B, Grain bordering a vug. Ortho- pyroxene at the core (c) of the grain is graphically in- tergrown with plagioclase (pl). Along its right edge the orthopyroxene core is rimmed by orthopyroxene of slight- ly different extinction position (r), which is in turn rimmed by pigeonite (p) adjacent to the vug (black). The line labeled B~B indicates the trace of a microprobe pro- file plotted on figure 15. Width of field of view is 0.35 mm; crossed polarizers. variations in these textures demonstrate that there were significant local variations in pyroxene crystal- lization history. In some grains the orthopyroxene core is clearly euhedral and did not react with sur- rounding melt before or during overgrowth by pigeonite (fig. 5A). In contrast, in other grains the orthopyroxene core is irregular and may have been partly resorbed (fig. 5B). In most composite grains, however, the presence or absence of reaction rela- MINERAL ASSEMBLAGE AND TEXTURE FIGURE 5.—Photomicrographs of composite orthopyroxene- pigeonite grains. A, Euhedral orthopyroxene core in pigeonite. Traces of euhedral growth surfaces within the orthopyroxene core are marked by planes rich in glass inclusions; crystallographic orientations of these planes are indicated on the photomicrograph. The line designated A—A indicates the position of a microprobe profile across the orthopyroxene-pigeonite contact for which composi- tional data are presented on figure 17. Width of field of view is 0.35 mm; crossed polarizers. B, Irregular ortho- pyroxene core in pigeonite. The line designated 19—8 is the trace of a microprobe profile for which compositional data are plotted on figure 17. Width of field of View is 0.35 mm; crossed polarizers. tionships is not clearly demonstrated. Most grains are similar to the one illustrated in figure 6. They have equant or prismatic cores of clear orthopyrox- ene free of visible exsolution lamellae; these cores either are overgrown directly by pigeonite, or are overgrown by orthopyroxene with abundant {100} augite exsolution lamellae that is in turn overgrown by pigeonite. Contacts of lamella-free and lamella- rich orthopyroxene with each other and with pigeon- FIGURE 6.—Phot0micrograph of composite orthopyroxene- pigeonite grain. Orthopyroxene forms a core (0), one end of which contains {100} exsolution lamellae of augite, en- cased in pigeonite (p). The orthopyroxene is intergrown near its center with the marginal zones of a plagioclase lath (pl) that contains a euhedral core. Width of field of View is 0.35 mm; crossed polarizers. ite are generally abrupt; commonly subhedral out- lines are suggested by the shapes of the contacts, but just as commonly not. In a very small number of grains, the cores of orthopyroxene have textures that indicate they formed by direct inversion of surround- ing pigeonite with no accompanying exsolution of augite (fig. 7) ; these grains are rare, however. Universal-stage data on crystallographic orienta- tions of the two pyroxenes in single composite grains are consistent with inferences drawn from texture as to which orthopyroxenes are primary and which are inverted. In most composite grains, the corre- sponding crystallographic planes and axes of the orthopyroxene and pigeonite are only very roughly near coincidence. Generally the two pyroxenes have c axes about 10°—20° apart and their {010} planes range from nearly coincident to 45° apart. These de— partures from structural coincidence indicate that the cores cannot represent orthopyroxene that has inverted from enclosing pigeonite. In the grain with the inverted core illustrated in figure 7, however, 0 axes and {010} planes of the orthopyroxene and pigeonite are coincident within the error of measure- ment. COARSE POLYSYNTHETICALLY TWINNED PIGEONITE Locally, the rock contains large, polysynthetically twinned grains of pigeonite that envelop plagioclase grains rather than fill interstices between them (fig. 8); the intergrowth with plagioclase tends to be 6 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASAL‘T 14310 FIGURE 7.—Phot0micrograph of composite orthopyroxene- pigeonite-augite grain. The orthopyroxene core (0) formed by inversion of enclosing p‘igeonite (p); it has a ragged spiked contact and shows elongations parallel to a {100 twin composition plane of the pigeonite (marked on photo— micrograph). Rotation of the grain by Universal stage reveals that the core is actually a patch of thin laminae parallel to {100} of enclosing pigeonite; c axes and {010} planes in the orthopyroxene and pigeonite coincide within the error of measurement. Augite (0) forms an epitaxial overgrowth on the central pigeonite; contacts with the pigeonite are planar and parallel to {110} and {100} (marked on photomicrograph). The augite is in turn overgrown by ferriopigeonite (f). The line A—A’ indicates the trace of a microprobe profile for which com- positional data are plotted on figure 12. Width of field of View is 0.58 mm; crossed polarizers. coarse polysynthetically FIGURE 8.—Photomicrograph of twinned grain of pigeonite. Traces of twin composition planes are dark lines trending east-west. The grain is graphically intergrown with plagioclase (pl), and borders a vug (black, lower right). Around its margin it contains elongate patches of orthopyroxene (o) in optical con- tinuity with one another, suggesting a possible inversion relationship between the two pyroxenes. The orthopyroxene patch at far right contains minute exsolve‘d bl‘ebs of augite (white). Width of field of View is 0.88 mm; crossed polarizers. graphic, like typical orthopyroxene—plagioclase inter- growth, rather than subophitic. Most of these pi- geonites also have cores of, or are intergrown with, orthopyroxene, and in some cases the texture of the intergrowth suggests a possible inversion relation- ship between the two pyroxenes (fig. 8) . These coarse pigeonite grains commonly occur near vugs. Ni-Fe, SCHREIBERSITE, AND TROILITE The schreibersite-bearing particles in 14310 are of special interest because the presence of such particles has been cited as indicating an impact melt- ing origin for the 14310 magma (Dence and others, 1972). Most of the schreibersite in the rock occurs intergrown with Ni—Fe metal and troilite forming composite particles in interstices. The larger of these Fe—Ni—P—S particles (as much as 300 mm across) tend to have roughly spherical outlines. Some of the smaller ones, those less than 100 ,um across, are also globular, but most tend to be less regular in outline and more molded against the edges of grains of adjacent silicate minerals. The particles are not uniformly distributed throughout the rock but tend to occur in scattered concentra- tions. Relative proportions of constituent minerals in schreibersite-bearing particles are highly variable. In particles greater than 100 ,im across, Ni—Fe is dominant and troilite and schreibersite are subordi- nate; maximum proportions of the latter two min- erals observed were 20 and 11 percent by volume, respectively. However, some particles less than 100 ,um across contain much more schreibersite than this, and a few were observed in which schreibersite is more abundant than Ni—Fe. Figure 9 illustrates the textures of large schrei— bersite-bearing globules. Central areas of the glob- ules are Ni—Fe that is generally free of inclusions of other phases fig. (QB). In a few particles, how- ever, the metal contains stubby lamellae of schrei- bersite (fig. 9A); these lamellae typically show common orientations throughout a given particle, indicating that the Ni—Fe host is a single crystal. Most schreibersite, however, is concentrated at the edges of particles, forming thin discontinuous rinds. Troilite is wholly restricted to the margins of the globules, where it forms highly irregular grains. In most of these particles, textures and bulk composi— tions are such that the schreibersite could have been entirely held in solid solution in the coexisting metal, but in a few of the large particles the textures and bulk compositions provide evidence for precipitation of phases from metal-rich melt (see fig. 9A). In smaller similar particles that are very rich in schrei- MINERAL ASSEMBLAGE AND TEXTURE A FIGURE 9.—Photomicrographs of large composite globules of Ni—Fe, schreibersite, and troilite. Schreibersite (intermediate gray) forms lamellae within, and marginal grains surrounding, Ni—F'e (light gray). Troilite (dark gray) forms irregular grains at the edges of the particles. A, Particle showing charcteristics of precipitation from metal-rich melt. Textural evidence for precipitation from melt is the presence of eutectoid bl‘ebs of Ni—F‘e within marginal schreibersite (lower left). Compositional evidence is that the bulk particle contains about 2.3 percent by weight phosphorus (calculated us- ing averaged microprobe analyses of phases and areal phase proportions converted to volume proportions); this much phosphorus could not have been entirely held in solid solution in the associated metal (Doan and Goldstein, 1969). The lamella‘e of schreibersite within the Ni—Fe formed by exsolution, and the marginal schreibersite that precipitated from melt was probably also augmented by exsolution. The line marked A—A indicates the trace of a microprobe profile for which compositional data are plotted on figures 20 and 21. Short lines marked B—B‘, C—C', D—D', and E—E’ indicate the positions of traverses for which compositional data are plotted on figure 21A. Width of field of view is 0.36 mm; reflected light, oil immersion. B, Large composite particle free of schreibersite exsolution lamellae. No textural evidence for pre- cipitation from melt is apparent, and bulk composition is solid solution in the metal. The line marked B—B indicates data are plotted on figure 20. Short lines marked A—A’ and tional data are plotted on figure 213. Width of field of view bersite, textures are also suggestive of precipitation from metal—rich melt: these textures are very like those of the metal-troilite particles that crystallized from Fe—Ni—S melt immiscible in Apollo 11 basaltic magma (Skinner, 1970). Mesostasis immediately surrounding many of the large schreibersite-bearing particles contains more abundant grains of apatite and whitlockite than elsewhere in the rock. Typically the grains of phos- phate minerals are clustered along the edges of the Fe—Ni—P—S particles and border metal with no inter- vening schreibersite. Phosphate minerals also form broad reaction rims bordering the few schreibersite- bearing particles that occur within or near fine— grained clots (fig. 2D). Particles in which Ni—Fe and troilite occur singly or together without schreibersite are more abundant than the schreibersite-bearing particles. They are, however, mostly less than about 20 pm across, al- such that all phosphorus could have initially been held in the trace of a microprobe profile for which compositional C—C' indicate the positions of traverses for which composi- is 0.44 mm; reflected light, oil immersion. though a few are present that are as much as 120 ,im across. Generally either troilite or Ni—Fe is strongly dominant in a given particle, and particles in the size range 20—120 pm almost all have domi— nant Ni—Fe. Most commonly the particles are irregu- lar and interstitial; less commonly they have spheri- cal outlines, and very rarely they are euhedral. Ni—Fe, troilite, and schreibersite all occur as in- clusions in plagioclase and pyroxene; individual in- clusions may consist of any of these phases either singly or in combination. The inclusions in plagio- clase were studied in detail in order to determine the approximate point in the crystallization sequence when a metal-bearing phase first appeared in the silicate melt. Most of these inclusions are rounded droplets about 5 mm across, but a few are globules as large as 30 ,im across (fig. 10). The inclusions tend to be concentrated along twin composition planes in the host feldspar. CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 FIGURE 10.—Photomicrographs of globule of Ni—Fe + schreibersite included in plagioclase. A, Fe—Ni—P globule (black) enclosed by euhedral feldspar. Width of field of View is 0.19 mm; plane-polarized light. B, Inclusion photographed with reflected light. Ni—Fe is white, schreibersite is gray. The line marked A—A' in- dicates the trace of a microprobe profile for which compositional data are plotted on figure 22. Width of field of View is 0.07 mm. PHASE COMPOSITIONS Average compositions of plagioclase and pyrox- ene in 14310 have been estimated from the results of chemical-mode calculations (method described by Wright and Doherty, 1970). The chemical modes were calculated using An95 and An75 as end mem- ber plagioclases, and magnesian orthopyroxene, magnesian augite, and pyroxferroite as end mem- ber pyroxenes (with A120;5 and TiO2 contents in the latter three minerals assigned on the basis of electron microprobe analyses of typical grains). Rock analyses used were those reported by Kushiro and others (1972), Rose and others (1972), and Compston and others (1972a). The calculated aver- age plagioclase composition is a calcic Abytownite, OrLZAbmoAnsm, and the calculated average bulk pyroxene composition is a pigeonite, WomngnsgvoFsm. Electron-microprobe analyses were made in order to determine the nature of compositional variations in important phases throughout the crystallization sequence. Most of the analyses were not complete. Plagioclase was analyzed only for Ca, K, and Na, and potassium feldspar for Ca, K, Na, and Ba; standards were chosen sufficiently close in composi- tion to the unknowns that only background correc- tions were necessary. Pyroxenes were analyzed only for Ca, Mg and Fe, and the raw data were cor- rected using the correction program of Boyd and others (1969), with contents of minor elements and Si assigned on the basis of a few complete analyses performed on typical grains. (For data on A1203, Ti02, and Cr203 contents of pyroxenes, the reader is referred to papers by Kushiro and others, 1972, Ridley and others, 1972, Brown and others, 1972, Bence and Papike, 1972, and Hollister, 1972.) Ni—Fe and schreibersite were analyzed for Ni, Co, and P. The Ni and Co intensity values, corrected for back- ground, were assumed to vary linearly with content of these elements in both unknowns and standards. Phosphorus was determined only semiquantitatively. PLAGIOCLASE Subhedral laths of all sizes were analyzed and the zoning variations in the larger laths were studied in detail in order to determine the pattern of overall compositional variation during the crystallization history. The results of these analyses, presented below, show an orderly progressive change of com- positions that provide a rough scale against which it is possible to calibrate points of appearance of, and compositional changes within, coprecipitating phases. To determine points of first precipitation of orthopyroxene and coarse polysynthetically twinned pigeonite, analyses were made of plagioclase in- cluded within and graphically intergrown with these pyroxenes. Plagioclase enveloping particles of Ni—Fe i schreibersite i troilite was analyzed to determine points of appearance of these phases. Edges of laths , bordering vugs were analyzed to determine at what PHASE COMPOSITIONS 9 approximate point in the crystallization sequence open vugs formed, and laths in fine-grained clots were analyzed to determine their compositional rela- tionships to feldspar elsewhere in the rock. SUBHEDRAL LATHS Compositions within laths analyzed in this study range from An97 to Angz. Cores of grains tend to be at the more calcic end of this range, and rims tend to be at the more sodic end, but the extent of zoning varies considerably from grain to grain. Other in- vestigators have reported similar values, and all data fall within an overall range of AILJ8 to An58 (Dence and others, 1972; Kushiro and others, 1972; Walter and others, 1972; Brown and Peckett, 1971; Longhi and others, 1972; Trzcienski and Kulick, 1972; Rid- ley and others, 1972). Trace element contents were reported by Trzcienski and Kulick (1972). Large (>300 pm) subhedral laths analyzed here have cores that are about A1194.95 and edges adjacent to mesostasis glass that are about Anssm. The over- all compositional change is normal progressive zon- ing with superimposed minor oscillatory zoning. Figure 11 presents microprobe profiles across three large subhedral laths. In these grains the composi- tional oscillations represent about 2 percent An con- tent at a maximum. No major reversals in zoning are observed, but the grains analyzed all show a con- sistent dip in N aZO content at about one-quarter the distance from center to edge. Zoning in intermediate-sized (75—300 mm) sub- hedral laths is much like in larger laths. The grains analyzed in this study have cores as calcic as An,“ and rims adjacent mesostasis as rich in K and Na as Or5_0Ab32.5An62,5. Slight oscillatory zoning is pres- ent, and again there is no significant reverse zoning. Only a few small (<75 um) laths in mesostasis glass were analyzed here, and their compositions cover virtually the entire range of An content ob- served in larger grains——An94 to Anug. Most, how- ever, are in the range An62 to Ann, and one tiny core of plagioclase within a potassium feldspar grain has the composition Or5_0Ab2,—.9An67,,. Brown and Peckett (1971) and Ridley and others (1972) analyzed large and intermediate-sized zoned laths similar to those studied here and found similar ranges of composition, cores of An,.-,,,,,, and rims of Anww Ridley and others further reported analyses of laths that were unzoned or asymmetrically zoned; unfortunately these authors did not describe the phases bordering such grains, so crystallization his- tories cannot be evaluated. Kushiro and others (1972) and Ridley and others (1972), respectively, reported that compositions of small laths associated with mesostasis are Ans“4 and AnQHI. Brown and Peckett (1971) analyzed microlaths of An9,_5_91 in their samples, but whether or not these grains bor- dered glass was not specified. GRAINS ENCLOSING METAL-SCHREIBERSITE- TROILITE INCLUSIONS Ten grains of plagioclase enclosing particles of Ni—Fe metal : schreibersite : troilite were ana- lyzed in this study. Plagioclase directly impinging on the inclusions ranges from Ans“ to A119,7 and averages An”... (Plagioclase enveloping the globule shown in fig. 10 is An93.7.) Microprobe traverses from core to edge of two feldspar laths that contain Ni—Fe inclusions show that the plagioclase at the same “stratigraphic” horizon as the inclusions is about An“. LATHS ADJACENT TO VUGS The plagioclase at the extreme edges of two laths bordering vugs is Ans,1 and Am“. LATHS IN FINE-GRAINED CLOTS Plagioclase grains in clots in Which mesostasis minerals are absent have quite calcic compositions. In the three clots studied, all grains analyzed aver- age about AnQHG; the most sodic plagioclase found is Ange, at the extreme edge of one lath. (Walter and others, 1972, found an identical compositional range for plagioclase in a clot they studied, An9H5, and Kushiro and others, 1972, reported An,2 in a clot they studied.) ORTHOPYROXENE Most orthopyroxene grains analyzed in this study have compositions in the range W0,Eans17 to WosEnGSFsgo and are zoned from more magnesian at their centers to more iron rich at their edges. In a few grains, thin marginal zones less than 10 um wide show stronger iron enrichment, with Fs con- tent as much as 40 percent (see profile B—B’, fig. 12). Other workers (Ridley and others, 1972; Brown and Peckett, 1971; Ringwood and others, 197 2; Hollister and others, 1972; Kushiro, 1972; and Takeda and Ridley, 1972) reported similar ranges or analyses within this range. Compositional variations associ- ated with specific textures are presented in detail below. ORTHOPYROXENE \NITH PRESERVED EUHEDRAL CRYSTAL FACES Grains that retain traces of euhedral growth sur- faces were studied in detail because their textures 10 INTENSITY é L L Co C'RYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 Profile A 0-! -100- -200- -300- -400. -500. —6001 -700- _ 800- Profile B Profile C -900 2001 100' OJ 1000] 9004 700- 600- 5004 400- 300- 200- 1004 i _ J 4L .4 I H—75Fm—H H—'—"80/u.m Center Edge Center Edge DISTANCE Center ——-——H H————————————————'160/4n1-———————————————H Edge PHASE COMPOSITIONS 11 ‘ FIGURE 11.——-Variations in Ca, K, and Na contents along profiles from centers to edges bordering mesostasis of three dif- ferent large plagioclase laths. Points were analyzed at 2-,um intervals. Ordinates represent intensity of X—rays generated by electron bombardment in an electron microprobe; units are counts per constant increment of beam current, and the scale is relative to pure anorthite for Ca and to background for K and Na. For reference, a point with 0 Ca and 0 Na would be pure anorthite, and a point with —800 Ca and + 800 Na would be about Ann. Abscissas represent linear dis- tance. All grains show zones slightly depleted in Na20 at about one-quarter the distance from center to edge, minor oscillations throughout their interiors, and margins abruptly enriched in K and Na. Hd D. I A A * Calculated composition of bulk pyroxene / . Augne bleb and Sul'OUfldlng orthopyronene / / [Holhs'er and ems-75.1972] / . Small grams In mesosmsus / / A Subcalclc augue // / A Angus and Igeonne moergvown With so wk»: OUQI'E / / Grains m (me-grained clots I Intersvlholpnreoded D Bordering {90(“0” nm of phosphate mineral on NI-Fe En Augife blebs In onhopyroxene Orihopyroxene enclosmg ougne blebs Plgeonle evened to onhopysxene wuh no exsobmon Augne forming overgrowvh rims and Intevsmial grams Pigeomve m graphic, subophmc, and Invergmnular grains Fs FIGURE 12.—Wo:En:Fs contents of pyroxenes analyzed in this study. For comparison the composition of bulk pyroxene cal- culated from chemical mode computations is also plotted. Heavy solid lines outline fields of compositions of pyroxenes of specific textural types. Long-dashed lines connect compositions of augite blebs with compositions of orthopyroxene that encloses them. Light solid lines connect points analyzed at 2-.um intervals along profiles across two grains. A—A' is a profile across the composite orthopyroxene-pigeonite-augite grain illustrated in figure 7, beginning just within the core of inverted orthopyroxene, crossing the inner pigeonite zone, the augite epitaxially overgrown on the pigeonite, and the outer rim of ferropigeonite, and ending at the grain margin. B—B' is a profile across a 12—um-wide marginal zone of an orthopyroxene grain that shows strong iron enrichment at its extreme edge (8’). Short—dashed lines connect composi- tions of adjacent points in intergranular grains that consist of complexly intergrown augite, ferropigeonite, and sub- calcic augite. suggest that they might represent the earliest crys- tallized mafic minerals in the rock; furthermore, the observation that these grains contain glassy inclu- sions that were trapped periodically during their crystallization suggests that the pyroxene composi- tions might show the effects of periodic fluctuations in volatile content or temperature in the melt. Four such pyroxene grains were analyzed. They have average compositions about Wo.,,5En,-3_,8Fs,8_22, in the more magnesian part of the orthopyroxene range. The zoning patterns are indeed unusual: All grains show complex oscillatory variations of Fe/Mg ratio, and some show reverse zoning as well, small cores being as iron rich as Fszg. In two of the grains, euhedral cores are outlined by inclusion-rich planes but are themselves relatively inclusion free. Figure 3 illustrates one of these grains, and figures 13 and 14 show the compositional variations it exhibits. The euhedral core contains one band about 15 ,um wide with about 1 percent greater Fs content than the rest of the core (see pro— file A, figs. 13 and 14). In the other similar grain analyzed, adjacent bands in the core differed by as much as 11 percent in Fs content. The other two grains analyzed show traces of euhedral outlines throughout their interiors, and these lines clearly define the nuclei of the grains and their growth directions. Figures 4A and 5A illus- trate these grains, and figure 15 (profile A) shows the compositional variations across the first of them. The nucleus of the grain is about Wo,-,En.,,-Fs2R and shows reverse zoning to W04En76Fs20. The remainder 12 Profile A | owx, Profile 8 OPX.+ ILAMELLAE I PIG. IAUG \ IOPXMAMELLAE I PIG. [we r r DIRECTION OF GROWTH DIRECTION OF GROWTH 14000 4 J 120004 IOOOC INTENSITY 5 o ‘- .- <- L 7000- t’ oo/Lm—H DISTANCE of the grain averages about this latter composition but shows pronounced oscillatory zoning, with alter- nating bands several micrometers thick differing by about 1.5 percent in Fs content. ORTHOPYROXENE ADJACENT TO VUGS A grain of orthopyroxene bordering a vug was analyzed to determine whether or not its composi— tion was affected by local variations in volatile con- CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALIT 14310 {FIGURE 13.—Variations in Mg, Ca, and Fe contents along profiles across the composite orthopyroxene—pigeonite- augite grain pictured in figure 3. Profiles A and B corres— pond to profiles A—A and 3—3 marked on figure 3. Ordi- nates represent intensity of X-rays generated by electron bombardment in an electron microprobe; units are absolute numbers of counts per constant increment of beam cur- rent. Abscissas represent linear distance. Growth direc- tions in the grain and positions of boundaries between phases are indicated above profiles; vertical lines on abscissas mark the positions of inclusion-rich planes. Wo:En:Fs contents of circled points are plotted on fig- ure 14. The orthopyroxene core (profile A) shows oscilla- tory and normal progressive zoning. For the surrounding zone where the orthopyroxene contains abundant exsiolved augite lamellae, compositions of the two phases are best resolved in data obtained in profile A, whereas composition of the primary pyroxene is approximated in data obtained in profile B. 600 F5. 0 \l . En I0 10 m 40 so FIGURE 14.—Wo:En:Fs contents of points on the profiles plotted on figure 13. Open circles are points on profile A; solid circles are points on profile B. Light solid lines con- nect consecutive points on the profiles. For comparison, the heavy dashed line outlines the boundary of the field of compositions of pigeonite in graphic, subo‘phitic, and intergranular grains from figure 12. tent associated with vug formation. The grain is illustrated in figure 4B, and the compositional varia- tions it shows in a profile from its center to its edge are plotted in figure 15 (profile B). The grain shows alternating reverse and normal zoning that combine to produce broad oscillatory variations in Fe/Mg ratio in bands parallel to the vug edge. At its core, the orthopyroxene is WosEnnFsZi; in the direction of the vug the grain shows reverse zoning to W04En77Fs19 and then normal progressive zoning to WotEansm. Orthopyroxene of this composition is rimmed by orthopyroxene of similar composition but different extinction position; the rim orthopyroxene shows reverse zoning to W0,En,—.Fs,8 followed by normal zoning to Wo,En;,Fs2,. Orthopyroxene of this latter composition is in turn overgrown by pigeonite, which forms a 10-,4m-thick rim directly bordering the vug and is normally zoned from WOTEanSM to WOmEnaoFSio~ PHASE COMPOSITIONS 13 Profile A Profile 8 opx. OPX. PIG. _. | CORE I RIM RIM vuo DIRECTION OF GROWTH DIRECTION OF GROWTH Iaooo- I7ooo- I I Mg - loOOO‘ 4 E I In l5000< Z J “J '— . Z i - ——I-—w—H—m—I -—-—mH—!—' 200- CO ”MA/WM» ICC-W 4000‘ -—f-—%—H—%—' F—Béym—H b—92/Am—H DISTANCE FIGURE 15,—Variations in Mg, Ca, and Fe contents along profiles across orthopyroxene grains. Ordinate, abscissa, and designations of textural relations are the same as de- scribed in the caption to figure 13, except that, in addition to inclusion-rich planes, inclusion-rich zones are marked on abscissas by patterned boxes. Profile A crosses a grain that shows traces of euhedral growth surfaces throughout its interior (fig. 4A). This grain shows pronounced re- verse and oscillatory zoning in Fe—Mg contents. Profile B crosses a grain that borders a vug (fig. 4B). The grain shows reverse and normal zoning that combine to produce bands of oscillating Fe/Mg ratio parallel to the vug edge. ORTHOPYROXENE CONTAINING BLEBS AND {100} LAMELLAE OF AUGITE From their textures, these blebs and lamellae all appear to have been exsolved from the enclosing orthopyroxene (see figs. 3, 6, and 8), and the mineral pairs were analyzed to investigate the compositional range in which this exsolution occurred. All such grains of orthopyroxene analyzed in this study are in the more iron-rich part of the compositional range, Fs>25, but Hollister and others (1972) re- ported finding blebs in a more magnesian orthopy- roxene, W04En74Fs22. (Hollister and others inter- preted the blebs they analyzed as inclusions rather than exsolution products. The compositions, how- ever, are reasonable extrapolations of the composi- tional range of the exsolved blebs analyzed here, and it is likely that all such blebs have the same origin.) The field of compositions of the grains analyzed here, and the analysis reported by Hollister and others, are indicated on figure 12. Figures 13 and 14 give the compositional data for the grain containing abundant augite lamellae pic- tured in figure 3. The present composition of the host orthopyroxene is about W05Eans25 to WernelFsgg (best resolved in profile A, fig. 13), and the primary pyroxene prior to exsolution appears to have ranged from about W0,,En,—1Fs23 to about WogEnsts29 (pro- file B, fig. 13). ORTHOPYROXENE FORMED BY INVERSION OF PIGEONITE Two orthopyroxene cores that formed by inversion of surrounding pigeonite with no Visible exsolution of augite (one is illustrated in fig. 7) were analyzed in order to determine whether or not a composi: tional change accompanied the inversion. The field of compositions for these cores, and a trace from within one of them across the contact with sur- rounding pigeonite (profile A—A’) are plotted on figure 12. There is no compositional discontinuity at the contact; the orthopyroxene averages about Wo.,,;,EnT,,_,-,Fs21, and immediately adjacent pigeonite is of similar composition. COMPOSITION OF ORTHOPYROXENE AND CLINOPYROXE‘NE AT THEIR CONTACTS Microprobe traverses were made across contacts of exsolution-free orthopyroxene with pigeonite, and witl: orthopyroxene that contains abundant exsolu- tion, in order to determine Whether or not the tex- turzl variations observed are correlated with specific compositional ranges. The data for the 16 composite grains analyzed are shown on figure 16. There do appear to be several consistent correlations of com- position with texture. Orthopyroxene grains that have euhedral outlines (fig. 5A), contain preserved traces of euhedral outlines (fig. 4A), or have in- vertc-l from pigeonite (fig. 7) are generally more magnesian than F525 at their edges. In these grains the pigeonite at the contact is typically close in com- 14 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC‘ BASAL‘T 14310 do Wo .Enolo SOOFS. FIGURE 16.—Wo:En:Fs contents of exsolution-free ortho- pyroxene, orthopyroxene with augite lamellae, and pigeo- nite at their contacts. Solid circles are orthopyroxene, solid triangles are orthopyroxene containing abundant augite lamellae, and open circles are pigeonite. Solid lines con- nect compositions across the contacts, and the points are separated by no more than 6 Turn. position to the orthopyroxene, and in many grains there is virtually no compositional discontinuity (fig. 17, profile A). Orthopyroxene cores that are over- grown by orthopyroxene with abundant augite 1a- mellae are around Fs25 at the contact of the two orthopyroxenes; the primary pyroxene in the over- growth appears to have been appreciably more calcic than the orthopyroxene in the core (figs. 13, 14, and 16). Orthopyroxene cores for which textures do not indicate whether or not they reacted with melt prior to pigeonite precipitation tend to be more iron-rich than Fs25 at their edges, and the compositional tran- sitions across the contacts range from continuous to strongly discontinuous. The one grain analyzed that shows a possible resorbed margin (fig. 5B) is 19‘s26 at its edge, and the compositional change across the contact is sharply discontinuous with the adjacent pigeonite much depleted in Mg and enriched in Ca and Fe (fig. 17, pro 1e B). None of the orth pyroxene grains analyzed here are directly rimmed by augite; all have interven- ing zones at least a few micrometers thick of pigeonite. However, Follister and others (1972) re- ported an analysis of an unusually calcic hyper- sthene, WouEnfigFSgli directly overgrown by augite, W037En42Fs21. \ PIGEONITE hND FERROPIGEONITE The pigeonites tha form the bulk of the pyroxene grains in the rock h ve an extremely wide range of Fe/Mg ratios but a e fairly restricted in Ca con- tents. The composi’fional field of such pigeonites analyzed in this stu y is outlined on figure 12 (pi- geonites in graphic, subophitic, and intergranular grains); other auth rs report pigeonite composi- tions within the ove all range observed here (Ku- shiro and others, 19 2; Gancarz and others, 1971; Brown and others, 1 72). Single grains are in gen- l I Profile A Profile 8 OPX. PIGEONITE OPX. PIGEONITE ICOREI RIM I CORE I RIM I DIRECTION OF DIRECTION OF GROWTH GROWTH l90001 . 18000- l80004 - 16000- 17000- 14000- Mg 1 12000- 16000- Ioooo- 15000. - 8000- >. t m . . Z ”000- -—-—————-J LU .- Z 500] 500. 400- 400- Co 300‘ 300< 20mm 200- lOO-‘———- Too J 5000- 700% ‘ 60004 Fe . 5000. 40001 ‘W ‘°°°' - 3000- 3000-————— 2000 . k—42/omfil h——+112/Lm——d DISTANCE FIGURE 17.—Variations in Mg, Ca, and Fe contents along profiles across orthopyroxene-pigeonite contacts. Ordinate, abscissa, and designations of textural relations are as de- scribed in caption to figure 13. A is a profile across the contact in the composite grain illustrated in figure 5A. B is a profile from center to edge of the composite grain illustrated in figure 5B. In profile A there is virtually no compositional discontinuity at the contact, but in profile B there is a strong discontinuity. PHASE COMPOSITIONS 15 eral strongly zoned with progressive iron enrichment toward their margins. The extent of zoning and the average Fe/Mg ratio vary considerably from grain to grain. Variation of about 20 percent Fs content was the maximum observed in continuously zoned grains analyzed here, and none of the grains con- tains the complete range of Fe/Mg ratios shown by all pigeonites as a group. As an illustration of typical zoning variation, a microprobe profile across the composite orthopyroxene-pigeonite-augite grain pictured in figure 7 is plotted on figure 12 (A—A’). The coarse twinned pigeonite grains that are graphically intergrown with plagioclase are unusual in composition as well as texture. Points in such grains are W0..En79Fs17 to WoGEansZS, a composi- tional range nearly identical to that of the magne— sian orthopyroxenes in the rock. In single grains of these pigeonites Ca contents are fairly constant, whereas Fe and Mg contents vary irregularly over the range given above; the grains increase abruptly in Ca and Fe at their extreme edges. Ferropigeonites with Fs contents between 40 and 55 percent have highly variable Ca contents in com- parison with pigeonites that have Fs less than 40 percent. This variability apparently indicates that many such grains consist of exsolution intergrowths of ferropigeonite and iron-rich augite, as demon- strated by data presented by Ridley and others (1972) and Takeda and Ridley (1972). Di AUGITE Compositional fields for the major textural types of augite are outlined on figure 12. Analyses re— ported by Ridley and others (1972) indicate that the field of overgrowth and interstitial augites extends to more iron-rich compositions than found in this study, as iron-rich as Wongnszsm. The augites that form exsolution lamellae in orthopyroxene are too fine for accurate analysis, but the data suggest they are similar in composition to the augites that form exsolved blebs and prisms in this mineral. COMPOSITIONS OF PIGEONITE AND AUGITE AT THEIR CONTACTS In order to compare the compositions of coexist- ing pigeonite-augite pairs in 14310 with composi- tions of coexisting pyroxene pairs formed during equilibrium crystallization experiments, microprobe traverses were made across 24 pigeonite-augite con- tacts. Such comparisons yield information on whether or not the natural pyroxenes crystallized metastably or under equilibrium conditions. The Wo:En:Fs contents of the coexisting pyroxenes are plotted on figure 18. OTHER PYROXENES The compositions of small grains of high- refractive-index pyroxene in mesostasis are indi- Hd En Fs FIGURE 18.—WozEnst contents of coexisting augite and pigeonite. Solid circles are compositions of pyroxenes in contact where pigeonite is overgrown by augite; open circles are compositions of pyroxenes in contact where augite is over- grown by ferropigeonite. Solid lines connect compositions across the contacts, and the points are separated by no more than 6 gm. 16 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 cated on figure 12. Most of these grains are very iron-rich ferropigeonites with Fs content ranging from 62 to 80, but a few are more magnesian with Fs content as low as 40. Compositions of pyroxenes in fine-grained clots are plotted on figu re 12. These pyroxenes have Fe/ Mg ratios about like average pigeonites elsewhere in the rock, but in Ca content they are intermediate between augite and pigeonite. Pyroxene that is with- in a fine-grained C] t, but borders a reaction rim of whitlockite surrounding a Ni—Fe particle (fig. 2D), appears to be depleted in Fe and Ca relative to unre- acted pyroxene within clots (see fig. 12). The edges of four grains of pigeonite and one grain of augite immediately bordering vugs were analyzed. The pigeonites are WOW,,En,.>_0r5.»,Fs,HO and the augite is W032En35FS33- Some intergranular grains of augite and ferropi- geonite contain small patches of subcalcic augites whose compositions are fairly uniform and interme- diate between pigeonite and augite. Analyses of points in several such patches of subcalcic augite, and the compositions of the adjacent augites and pigeonites, are plotted on figure 12. COMPOSITIONS OF INTERGROWN AND IMPINGING PLAGIOCLASE AND PYROXENE Intergrown and impinging grains of plagioclase and pyroxene were analyzed in order to obtain a rough calibration of compositional changes in the different pyroxenes relative to the crystallization history of the plagioclase. As would be expected, the more magnesian pyroxenes are intergrown with the more calcic plagioclase, and relatively iron-rich py- roxenes with relatively sodic plagioclase. Moreover, there are several consistent correlations of types of intergrowth textures With certain compositional ranges. Most orthopyroxene grains that occur in intimate intergrowth with plagioclase are in the more magne- sian part of the compositional range, Wo.En79Fs17 to W0.,En72Fs2,. Coarse twinned pigeonites inter- grown with plagioclase are of similar compositions. Cores of plagioclase grains included in, and centers of plagioclase grains graphically intergrown with, magnesian orthopyroxene range from Ang,1 to Ann. and average Anm; centers of grains graphically intergrown with coarse twinned pigeonite range from Any,6 to An,” The few plagioclase grains intergrown with more iron-rich orthopyroxene tend to be more sodic, ranging from An,” to AnHm and averaging Ans” Within a few micrometers of , con- tacts, the plagioclase grains are commonly slightly enriched in sodium and the pyroxene grains in iron. The maximum sodium enrichment in plagioclase near contacts corresponds to an increase of about 10 percent in Ab content, and the maximum iron enrichment in pyroxene corresponds to an increase of about 5 percent in Fs content. Plagioclase border- ing very iron rich orthopyroxene, WomEnijsm,” is more sodic, Or;,,_.»,Ab,;,,,,Anm_9. Plagioclase bordering a contact of augite and pigeonite (W0;,,—En,.,Fsg;., rim- ming WomEnangg.) is Or;.,.gAb1qj.,An;,.,. Plagioclases bordering more iron-rich augites are still more sodic: Or.,,;,Ab,,,,,,An,-,—,,H adjacent to VVogrloEngthsmg, and Orm,,Ab2,-,.~,An,,;_G adjacent to W0;,,,0Eng3.;~,Fs;,g,l-,. OTHER SILICATE AND OXIDE PHASES Fayalite, potassium feldspar, and silica-rich glass are the only mesostasis phases analyzed in this study. The fayalite is F020,21 ; a complete analysis was given by Gancarz and others (1971). The potassium feld- spar grains are all Ba rich and are somewhat varia- ble in Na contents: In grains analyzed here, molecu- lar percent of celsian ranges from 5.9 to 9.0, of albite from 6.4 to 10.4, and of anorthite from 3.2 to 4.2. Silica-rich glass is also rich in K but is poor in Ba; Dence and Plant (1972) , Kushiro and others (1972), Longhi and others (1972) , and Roedder and Weiblen (1972) report that such glass contains 5—8 percent K20 and 7 5—77 percent SiOz. Other phases for which analyses have been reported are: ilmenite (Gancarz and others, 1971, and El Goresy and others, 1971) ; ulvospinel (Haggerty, 1972, and El Goresy and others, 1972); baddeleyite (El Goresy and others, 1971); whitlockite (Brown and others, 1972, Gan- carz and others, 1971, Griffin and others, 1972) ; tranquillityite (Brown and others, 1972, and El Goresy and others, 1972); a new Zr-rich mineral (Brown and others, 1972) ; and devitrified iron-rich glass (Roedder and Weiblen, 1972). Fe—Ni METAL AND SCHREIBERSITE Schreibersite and Ni—Fe were analyzed to deter- mine whether or not these phases show any compo— sitional characteristics that are: (1) diagnostic of either meteoritic or indigenous origin; or (2) diag- nostic of either crystallization from metal—rich melt or precipitation by reduction in silicate melt. De- tailed studies were also made of compositions of coexisting metal and schreibersite in single particles, for under suitable conditions this mineral pair is an excellent recorder of subsolidus temperature history. The analyses of Ni—Fe reveal that there are two distinct compositional populations of metal in the rock: phosphorus-bearing and phosphorus—free. Min- eral associations, and thus textures as well, are cor- PHASE COMPOSITIONS 17 related with this compositional grouping. Phos- phorus-bearing metal grains consist of: all grains associated with schreibersite; a minor number of the small irregular particles that have no associated schreibersite; and about half the metal-bearing par- ticles included in plagioclase. Phosphorus-free metal grains consist of: most of the irregular particles that have no associated schreibersite; about half the metal-bearing particles included in plagioclase; and most globules and small euhedra in troilite or mesos- tasis. Compositions of the phosphorus-bearing metal grains cluster, with Ni ranging from 12 to 17.5 per- cent and Co from 0.6 to 1.2 percent (fig. 19A). The phosphorus-free grains, in contrast, vary widely in Ni and Co, and contents of these elements are roughly linearly correlated (fig. 193); variation is from near 0 to 42.4 percent Ni and 0 to 2.52 percent Co. (Error in the Co analyses may be relatively large, perhaps as great as :0.1 percent absolute, and some of the scatter in Co values may be due to ana- lytical error.) Other workers who analyzed Ni—Fe in 14310 did not report P values; their reported ranges for Ni and Co are Within the ranges reported here (El Goresy and others, 1971; Gancarz and others, 1971; Ridley and others, 1972). The schreibersites analyzed in this study have Ni contents from 11.2 to 29.8 percent and Co contents from 0.25 to 1.14 percent; within single grains these elements show large variations on a very fine scale produced by subsolidus equilibration. (El Goresy and others, 1971, reported an analysis of schreiber- site with Ni and Co contents in the range found here; schreibersites analyzed by Axon and Gold- stein, 1972, have slightly lower Ni but similar Co. No schreibersite with Ni<11 percent was found in this study, but El Goresy and others, 1971, report finding pure FegP in their sample.) PHOSPHORUS-BEARING Ni_Fe AND SCHREIBERSITE Volumetrically, large composite particles like those illustrated in figure 9 contain most of the phosphorus-bearing Ni—Fe and schreibersite in 14310. The y Ni—Fe 1 that is the major constituent of these particles ranges in Ni from about 13 to 16 percent. Co contents are more variable, from 0.6 to 1.1 percent, and this element may be heterogeneously distributed even Within single grains (uncertain be- cause of possible analytical error). The V Ni—Fe 111; is likely that this phase actually consists of a very fine exsolution intergrowth of a and 'y Ni—Fe that developed from 'y Ni—Fe during low temperature subsolidus equilibration; as the original phase was 7 NiiFe and the exsolution is too fine to resolve with methods used here, the designation 7 will be used in this paper for all Ni—Fe of suitable com- position. Wnrmgs win. uhvewbemle y 2. > oo )4. m . + (Wfim . 4 No unooaled «momma 'u > 100/1. m o ,0 wflh "all”. 0 (loo/um with Nolliie A no unocuaved - i 03- mum in B / . a C0 , IN; J§IQN§A9LAQIQCLA§E + +2 oo- on. l§OLAYED_ iRREGUlARfiRN; 55 I >85 a m A 'I 4 (85 A M I Isomw GLOBULE mo E ”Q55 Wu»... mm. >30 u m o (30 u m n Wilhm mexodusm Ian 1 ° > 30 i. m g (30 .1 m I .3 lNCLU§iQN§ w P AGngiag ‘ OD D l '- u—) ' N.:42.4 FIGURE 19.—Ni and Co contents, in weight percent, of grains of phosphorus—bearing (A) and phosphorus-free (B) Ni— Fe. Solid lines connect compositions of points in the same grain. Particle-s designated as “isolated” are those not included in plagioclase or pyroxene. grains commonly have rims a few micrometers thick, formed during subsolidus equilibration, of a Ni—Fe that contains about 7 percent Ni. Ni content in schreibersite in any given composite particle varies widely; a common range observed is from about 2 percent less than, to about 10 percent greater than the Ni content in associated y Ni—Fe. However, Co content in schreibersite is always less than the Co content in associated a or y Ni—Fe. To illustrate these compositional variations, the compositional data for the two globules pictured in figure 9 are presented in detail below. The compositional data for Ni—Fe and schreiber- site in the particle illustrated in figure 9A are plotted on figures 20 (profile A) and 21A. As is evident in figure 20, the large grain of y Ni—Fe that forms the bulk of the particle is zoned: Ni content onhle A Profile B Sl‘hvwhmmé‘ I run. Fm“. I la! m. r. 1 EDGE CENVEW EDGE CENVE“ EDGE INTENSIYY l l \A‘rv“ MW IV“ A AMW N V M\ [/M WMMVAVMMAWVWMVLAWN/MWl, v H U “we MWWA/ Mw~M¢LWMW 95»m—~¢ zoo/4m DiSIANCE FIGURE 20.—Variations in Ni and Co contents along profiles Co ELL: across large Fe—Ni—P—S globules. Ordinate, abscissa, and designations of textural relations are the same as described for figure 13. Profiles A and B correspond to profiles in- dicated on figure 9. On profile B, the counts for Ni in the a. Ni—Fe phase are not plotted because they are below the indicated scale. 104 E, \:.\ 77‘} :SE . a?» . R «ad ".8, o .. ‘ - A § “C Avevoge necv (my a: pound! A B D ~\¥_ -.\ o \ 0 4- Pomu on ”menu Ewenoud bleb a Bovdeung Home ‘ Average bcvdermg ~chve-benwe lomellc Sonya” Palms on . Avevage m 0A. vavevm ma al a phase 02 OX I. Pomls an naveum Cemevi ol vundam povhdes 0 v....-vv vv-u-.vv.v.v 5 IO 15 70 75 FIGURE 21.—Ni and Co contents (in weight percent) of a Ni—Fe, 'y Ni—Fe, and schreibersite in large Fe—Ni—P—S globules. Solid lines connect consecutive (but not always adjacent) points on traverses across phases at edges of globules; arrows indicate traverse direction and point from the extreme edge toward the interior of the particle. A, Points in the particle illustrated in figure 9A. Dashed line connects the average composition of a schreibersite lamella on traverse A—A with the composition of 7 Ni—Fe CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 progressively increases from about 14.1 percent at its center to about 15.2 percent at its edge. The schreibersite lamella analyzed is about 1.75 percent lower in Ni than bordering y Ni-Fe (A—A, fig. 21A). Traverses B—B’ and C—C’ plotted on figure 21A show clearly that schreibersite immediately ad- jacent to a Ni—Fe is enriched in Ni and depleted in Co relative to schreibersite at the center of the mar- ginal grains of this mineral. The compositional data for phases in the globule illustrated in figure 93 are shown on figures 20 (pro- file B) and 213. The 7 Ni—Fe in this globule shows zoning similar to that in the globule described above, with Ni increasing progressively toward the edges of the grain. Ni enrichment of schreibersite imme- diately adjacent to a Ni—Fe is evident in the two traverses plotted on figure 213. Unlike in the glob- ule pictured in figure 9A, the a Ni—Fe analyzed here is appreciably enriched in Co relative to y Ni—Fe as well as to schreibersite. Inhomogeneities in Co dis- tribution are suggested by the data, but their mag- nitude is close to the estimated uncertainty in the analyses. Ni and Co contents in all analyzed metal and schreibersite grains included in plagioclase are plotted on figure 22. The compositional variations in the large schreibersite-bearing inclusion illustrated in figure 10 (traverse A—A’ on fig. 22) are like those shown by the large globules pictured in figure 9 immediately bordering it. Traverses B—B’ and C—C’ show the compositions of, consecutively: schreibersite at the extreme edge of the particle; schreibersite at the center of a marginal grain; schreibersite immediately bordering a. Ni—Fe; a Ni—Fe (resolvable and plotted only in B~B’); and the edge of the 'y Ni—Fe grain bordering a Ni—Fe. Points on the D~D’ traverse show the compositions of, consecutively: schreibersite at the extreme edge of the particle; a small bleb of a Ni—Fe with eutectoid texture in marginal schreibersite; schreibersite (two points) bordering the central 7 Ni—Fe grain; and the edge of the 'y Ni—Fe grain. The E—E’ traverse shows the com- position of a Ni—Fe in contact with troilite and the com- position of 'y Ni—Fe bordering the a. phase. B, Points in the particle illustrated in figure 9B. Traverse A—A’ is similar to the traverses B—B’ and 0—0 described in A above. The 0—0 traverse shows compositions of, consecu— tively: a small bleb of 'y Ni—Fe (two points) enclosed in a patch of schreibersite at the margin of the particle; schreibersite (two points) forming a narrow band that intervenes between the Ni-Fe bleb and the central Ni—Fe grain; a Ni—Fe forming a thin rind between schreibersite and 7 Ni—Fe; and 'y Ni—Fe at the edge of the central metal grain. Also plotted are compositions of the centers of several randomly chosen grains of schreibersite along the margins of the particle, and compositions of a Ni—Fe at points Where this phase forms a rind thick enough to be optically discernible. CRYSTALLIZATION AND COOLING HISTORY 19 §CHR§I§§R§II§-§§AR [39 ION Ni-Fe l \ .Smmbe-me x 0 \ \\ scnnga§a§1§'~fa§§ IMLQfiIQN§ , chem“; NV?! 0 o ‘ p~lvee Ni-re O a , >1 v0 - x 5 I0 Ni lb 10 25 3 FIGURE 22.—Ni and Co contents (in weight percent) of a. Ni—Fe, 'y Ni—Fe, and schreibersi‘te included in plagioclase. Data for both phosphorus—bearing and phosphorus-free particles are plotted. Where two points in single inclusions were analyzed, dashed lines connect compositions of these points. Phase assemblages are: 7 Ni—Fe; schreibersite; 'y Ni—Fe + troilite; schreibersite + troilite; 7 Ni—Fe + schreibersite + troilite; and a Ni—Fe + 'y Ni—Fe + schrei- bersite. The inclusion containing the last of these assembl- ages is the one pictured in figure 10. Traverse A—A’ shows the compositions of points in the inclusion pictured in figure 10; solid lines connect consecutive points on this traverse, and arrows indicate the direction of the center of the inclusion. (traverses B—B’ and C—C’ on fig. 21A, traverse A—A’ on fig. 213). PHOSPHORUS-FREE Ni—Fe Large isolated irregular particles of phosphorus- free Ni—Fe all have fairly similar compositions, Ni ranging from 10 to 13 percent and Co from 0.75 to 0.9 percent (fig. 193); unlike the phosphorus- bearing particles, they are unzoned and are either homogeneous or their compositions vary irregularly. Small isolated irregular particles have compositions that cover the entire range plotted on figure 193. Small particles with spherical or euhedral outlines show some consistent correlations of composition with occurrence. Such particles in mesostasis glass have less than 12 percent Ni and less than 1.1 per- cent Co, and content of these elements seems roughly proportional to size. Globules of metal in troilite show a very wide range of Ni contents (2 to 42.4 percent) but much more restricted Co (nearly all are in the range 0.24 to 0.77 percent). (El Goresy and others, 1971, also pointed out that the grains they analyzed with highest Ni contents tend to be associated with troilite.) CRYSTALLIZATION AND COOLING HISTORY The data presented in this paper indicate that feldspathic basalt 14310 crystallized from a melt of the same, or nearly the same, bulk composition as the rock now has. Globules of Fe—Ni—P—S melt that were immiscible in the silicate melt, and possibly also particles of crystalline Ni—Fe, were present in the magma very early in its crystallization sequence. Evidence for this latter inference is that: (1) pla- gioclase typical of the earliest part of the silicate crystallization sequence, An“, envelops metal parti— cles; and (2) some Fe—Ni—P—S particles are as much as 300 ,um across and their outlines are not greatly interfered with by adjacent plagioclase grains. As the silicate and metal-rich melts crystallized as sepa- rate systems, the sequence of events in each is de- scribed separately below. SILICATE MELT The first crystals of a silicate mineral present in the 14310 magma were of plagioclase, An94_95. These crystals formed in the melt and were not xenocrysts, for their cores preserve traces of euhedral outlines and their zoning patterns and textures show no evi- dence of an episode of reheating. (The irregular zoning cited by Ridley and others, 1972, as evidence for broken crystals probably resulted from growth of impinging grains during the middle part of the crystallization sequence.) Grain-size distribution is roughly seriate, and few, if any, true phenocrysts are present. Cores of the larger grains might repre- sent early formed cumulus crystals, but these make up only 3—4 percent by volume of the total rock (results of point count on 14310,9). The texture (seriate grain sizes, random orientation of laths) indicates that virtually all of the rock must have crystallized in situ. The overall pattern of compositional change in plagioclase is one of orderly normal progressive zoning with superimposed minor reversals and oscil- lations. Cores of the large plagioclase laths analyzed in this study are outlined by sodium-depleted zones that represent an increase in anorthite content of about 2 percent. This zoning reversal may be a re- flection of melt-wide loss of alkalis by volatilization early in the crystallization sequence. The grains show no evidence of consistent melt-wide reverse zoning formed later in the sequence. Minor oscilla- tions and reversals in composition occur, but these vary from grain to grain and probably reflect local changes in growth environment of single crystals. Compositions and zoning are similar in large and intermediate-size laths, and most plagioclase adja- cent to mesostasis glass—whether small laths in interstices or edges of larger laths—is relatively sodic, AHGHR. The simplest explanation for these observations is that abundant nuclei of calcic plagio- clase formed early in the crystallization sequence 20 CRYSTALLIZATION HIS-TORY 0F LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 and cores of intermediate-size laths crystallized simultaneously with cores and intermediate zones of larger laths (also suggested by Ridley and others, 1972, and Longhi and others, 1972). The evidence presented here indicates that, although there may have been minor volatilization of alkalis shortly after crystallization began, profound alkali volatilization (proposed by Brown and Peckett, 1971) did not occur at any point in the crystallization sequence. In crystallization experiments by Ford and others (1972), chrome spinel was the next phase to pre— cipitate from the melt. There is no trace of this min- eral in the natural rock. If chrome spinel formed in the natural crystallization sequence, it was later completely resorbed. Moreover, the crystallization experiments (Ford and others, 1972; Kushiro and others, 1972; Green and others, 1972; Walker and others, 1972) show olivine as the first, or one of the first, of the mafic silicates to form. In the experi- ments the olivine reacted with melt and was resorbed on precipitation of pigeonite. No evidence of olivine crystallization is preserved in the natural rock, but if only a small proportion of this mineral formed it could have been completely resorbed without leaving a trace. Orthopyroxene was the second silicate mineral to precipitate from the melt for which evidence is re- corded in the natural rock. None of the crystals of this mineral are xenocrysts. Hollister and others (1972) cite presence of reverse zoning as evidence that cores of some grains are exotic, but the results of this study indicate that the reverse zoning formed during in situ magmatic crystallization. The evi- dence is as follows: (1) some reverse-zoned grains are graphically intergrown with plagioclase and must have grown in situ; and (2) in many or most grains With reverse zoning, such zoning is not a single simple reversal but is associated with complex oscillatory zoning related to preserved traces of euhedral growth surfaces. The reverse and associ- ated oscillatory zoning in pyroxene are probably the results of fluctuations in conditions such as oxygen and (or) sulfur fugacity during crystallization. Most orthopyroxene probably crystallized from the melt as orthopyroxene. The cores of most composite orthopyroxene-pigeonite grains did not form by in— version from enclosing pigeonite, for c axes and {010} planes of the two minerals do not generally coincide. The preferential developments of {100} relative to {210} and {010} crystal faces, where traces of such planes are preserved, suggests that the crystals grew from the melt as orthopyroxene and not pigeonite. A small proportion of the orthopyrox- ene did form by inversion of- calcium-poor, magne- sium-rich pigeonite, but textures of such grains generally indicate their origin. The magnesian orthopyroxene grains that show complex combinations of reverse, oscillatory, and normal progressive zoning, and in some cases small iron-rich nuclei, may have been among the first crystallized. If so, precise composition of the earliest orthopyroxene is difficult to determine. Composition of plagioclase crystallizing from the melt when such orthopyroxene formed appears to have been about An8H9 (estimated from analyses of plagioclase in- cluded by or intergrown with orthopyroxene). This estimate is supported by the results of 1-atmosphere experimental crystallization studies by Ford and others (1972), in which An88 is the plagioclase pre- cipitating at temperatures slightly above first pre- cipitation of pyroxene. Rock texture suggests that during coprecipitation of orthopyroxene and plagioclase local concentra- tions of volatiles developed in the melt. (Unfortu- nately, compositions of these volatile constituents cannot be specified on the basis of the data now available.) At the sites of these concentrations, graphic intergrowths developed relatively coarse grain size, and later in the crystallization sequence open vugs formed. Variations in volatiles likely pro- duced the reverse and oscillatory zoning observed in pyroxene formed during this period, and the abun- dant minute glass inclusions in some grains may represent trapped droplets of a volatile-rich phase. The precise sequence of events during the period when pigeonites first precipitated appears to have varied from place to place in the rock, probably reflecting local variations in compositions and condi- tions in the crystallizing melt. The observed rela- tionships could be interpreted in several different ways, but one of the more likely of these interpreta- tions follows. Temperature and bulk composition of the melt were such that crystallization of the early pyroxenes occurred very close to the orthopyroxene- pigeonite transition curve. Local variations in vola- tile and minor-element contents, and possibly also in temperature, produced conditions such that ortho- pyroxene and pigeonite were alternately stable at the same point in the melt, or simultaneously stable at different points. Rims of magnesium-rich, cal- cium-poor pigeonite that overgrew orthopyroxene of identical composition formed as a result of such conditions. Furthermore, it is likely that the coarse polysynthetically twinned grains of magnesium-rich, calcium—poor pigeonite formed by inversion of py- roxene that initially crystallized as orthopyroxene. The textures of some of these grains definitely sug- gest a pigeonite-orthopyroxene inversion relation- C‘RYSTALLIZATION AND COOLING HISTORY 21 ship (fig. 8), and the X-ray patterns of the pigeon- ites indicate inversion from orthopyroxene (Malcolm Ross, oral commun., 1972). The compositions of the orthopyroxenes and pigeonites are in many cases identical, however, whereas the compositions of the two pyroxenes should differ by about 4 percent in W0 content if the transition took place under equili- brium conditions (Malcolm Ross, oral commun., 1972). Thus it is likely that the inversion was not an equilibrium process. Cores of some of the magne- sium-rich pigeonites subsequently inverted to ortho- pyroxene with little or no exsolution of augite. Orthopyroxene that contains abundant exsolved lamellae of augite probably also initially crystallized as pigeonite, for the primary pyroxene in such grains appears to have had a calcium content appro- priate for pigeonite (fig. 14). This pigeonite inverted to orthopyroxene and then exsolved augite, as is indi- cated by the crystallographic orientation of the la- mellae (Huebner and Ross, 1972). At some point in the crystallization sequence, however, orthopyroxene became generally unstable and began to be resorbed, and pigeonite became the stable pyroxene phase pre- cipitating throughout most of the melt. Most ortho- pyroxene grains in the rock appear to have contin- ued precipitation until this point in the crystalliza- tion sequence was reached. Their margins have compositions of Fs>25 and they were overgrown by pigeonite appreciably enriched in Ca and (or) Fe (see fig. 16). Comparison with phase relations ex- perimentally determined by Huebner and Ross (1972) suggests that this type of pigeonite crystal- lization was an equilibrium process. Locally, how— ever, crystallization of orthopyroxenes progressively enriched in iron continued well beyond the point at which this pyroxene had ceased to form in the rest of the melt, and crystallization of the most iron-rich orthopyroxenes overlapped with crystallization of ilmenite. The above sequence of events in pyroxene crystal- lization is supported by data on compositions of co- existing plagioclase and pyroxene. Magnesian ortho- pyroxene (Fs<25) is graphically intergrown with plagioclase averaging An,7 and iron-rich orthopyrox- ene (Fs>25) with plagioclase averaging Ansg. Analyses of pyroxenes and plagioclases where they impinge upon each other show that orthopyroxenes and coarse twinned pigeonites of identical composi- tions, about Fszl, border plagioclases also of identi- cal compositions, about Ants. Orthopyroxene ex- tremely enriched in iron, Fsm, impinges on more sodic plagioclase, An.,. Shortly after the initiation of pigeonite crystalli- zation throughout the melt and resorption of ortho- pyroxene, augite also began to precipitate. Both augite and pigeonite continued to crystallize simul- taneously, with local compositional variations in the melt determining which pyroxene was precipitating at any given place (similar to crystallization pat— terns in composite pigeonite-augite phenocrysts in Apollo 12 basalts described by Boyd and Smith, 1971). The pattern of crystallization is that which would be predicted for stable cotectic crystallization of augite and pigeonite (Ridley and others, 1972; experimental phase data reported by Ross and others, 1973). Plagioclase that formed during this period of cotectic crystallization is more sodic than that bordering the earlier formed orthopyroxene or magnesian pigeonite. An78 borders an augite-pigeon- ite contact Where the pyroxenes have Fe/Mg ratios about in the middle of the compositional range shown on figure 18, and still more sodic plagioclase, Anag, is in contact with more iron-rich augite. During coprecipitation of augite, pigeonite, and plagioclase, vugs were forming in areas of volatile concentrations. Ilmenite probably began precipitat- ing during this same period, for most ilmenite is enveloped by ferropigeonite, augite, or mesostasis, and none was observed in orthopyroxene (except in anomalously iron-rich grains) or in magnesian pi- geonite. When the magma had almost entirely crystallized, augite precipitation ceased and ferropigeonite was the only pyroxene to continue crystallizing. Just prior to and just after cessation of augite crystalli- zation, subcalcic augites with compositions interme- diate between augite and pigeonite precipitated locally. These subcalcic augites and calcium-rich ferropigeonites that now consist of exsolution inter- growths of ferropigeonite and augite likely crystal- lized as metastable pyroxenes (compare fig. 12 in this paper with fig. 10 in Ross and others, 1973). Final events in crystallization of the silicate melt were: precipitation in interstices of very iron-rich ferropigeonite, fayalite, barium-rich potassium feld- spar, tranquillityite, and baddeleyite; and quenching of silica—rich and iron-rich immiscible melts to form glasses. Plagioclase bordering these late-stage meso- stasis materials is the most sodic in the rock, as sodic as Angz. Fine-grained clots.~—Origin of the fine-grained clots is a problem of special significance to the ques- tion of origin of the 14310 melt. Previous investiga- tors have interpreted these clots as possible cognate inclusions (LSPET, 1971; Gancarz and others, 1971; Walter and others, 1972) or as possible products of in situ crystallization (Brown and Peckett, 1971; Ridley and others, 1972). Textural evidence strongly 22 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALVT 14310 favors the latter interpretation: Textures of the clots grade into textures typical of the rest of the rock, and the clots are commonly surrounded by zones enriched in mesostasis. Compositions of min- erals in the clots, however, do not follow the same consistent patterns shown by coexisting minerals elsewhere in the rock. The plagioclases are of the very calcic compositions typical of the early part of the crystallization sequence, but the pyroxenes have Fe/Mg ratios characteristic of pyroxenes crystalliz- ing during coprecipitation of augite, pigeonite, and plagioclase. Furthermore, Ca contents of the pyrox- enes are intermediate between those of augite and pigeonite and suggest that they may have crystallized metastably. Fe—Ni—P—S MELTS AND PARTICLES While the silicate melt was crystallizing, the glob- ules of Fe—Ni—P—S melt it contained were precipitat- ing Ni—Fe metal, schreibersite, and troilite. In one of the large Fe—Ni—P—S melt globules described in detail here (illustrated in fig. 9A), the textural and compositional variations are a particularly good illustration of its crystallization history. In this glob- ule the first phase to form was 7 Ni—Fe, which pre- cipitated as a single grain. The grain is progressively enriched in Ni toward its margins, a zoning pattern far more likely to be developed in a grain crystalliz- ing from a metal-rich melt than in a crystal precipi- tated directly by reduction in a silicate melt. When crystallization was nearly complete, schreibersite, and then troilite, began to precipitate along with the metal from melt concentrated at the edges of the globule. Crystallization of schreibersite and troilite did not begin until surrounding silicate melt was al- most entirely solidified, for these two minerals are molded on adjacent grains of silicate minerals. In the end stages of crystallization, phosphorus derived from the metal-rich particle combined with calcium from the surrounding silicate melt to precipitate apatite and whitlockite grains in mesostasis border- ing the globule. In other large particles less rich in total phos- phorus there appears to have been little or no pri- mary precipitation of schreibersite, and all grains of this mineral apparently exsolved from coexisting metal. In these particles, texture alone does not indi- cate whether or not the metal crystallized from metal-rich melt or precipitated by reduction of sili- cate melt. Only one such particle has been studied in detail (fig. 9B) ; here the presence of Ni enrichment toward margins of the metal grain suggests growth in metal-rich melt. In contrast, it is likely that most of the phos- phorus—free Ni—Fe particles precipitated directly by reduction of the silicate melt during the crystalliza- tion sequence. Characteristics consistent with this interpretation are: ( 1) The particles fill irregular interstices, most quite small; and (2) zoning is gen- erally absent and the grains are either homogeneous or their compositions vary irregularly. Particles that contain appreciable proportions of both Ni—Fe and troilite probably crystallized from late-stage Fe— Ni—S melts immiscible in the silicate melt, for their textures are like those of the Apollo 11 metal + troilite particles that formed from such immiscible melts (Skinner, 1970). SUBSOLIDUS EFFECTS Changes in texture and composition of phases con- tinued to take place during cooling below the solidus. Such changes were substantial in coexisting Ni—Fe and schreibersite and their results are obvious in the petrographic and microprobe data. Subsolidus equilibration was also extensive in the pyroxenes, producing exsolution and cation ordering (Gibb and others, 1972; Finger and others, 1972; Schiirmann and Hafner, 1972; Ghose and others, 1972; Takeda and Ridley, 1972), but these effects are for the most part not on a scale easily investigated by the meth- ods used here. The effects of subsolidus equilibration in coexist- ing metal and schreibersite are those that would be predicted from experimental phase relations (Doan and Goldstein, 1969, 1970). In particles relatively rich in phosphorus, such as the one illustrated in figure 9A, y Ni—Fe began to exsolve lamellae and marginal grains of schreibersite immediately after crystallization ceased. In other particles with less phosphorus, such as the one shown in figure 9B, schreibersite may not have begun to exsolve until the temperature had dropped appreciably below the solidus. Schreibersite that formed at or close to the solidus was slightly poorer in Ni than coexisting y Ni—Fe. As temperature dropped and more schreiber- site formed, this mineral was progressively enriched in Ni and depleted in Co relative to adjacent metal. As temperature dropped still further, thin rinds of a Ni—Fe, much depleted in Ni relative to adjacent y Ni—Fe and schreibersite, formed at interfaces. With- in a few micrometers of contacts with metal, schrei- bersite continued to be progressively enriched in Ni CRYSTALLIZATION CONDITIONS 23 and depleted in Co until equilibration ceased. CRYSTALLIZATION CONDITIONS PRESSURE Crystallization of the 14310 melt probably took place entirely at or very near the lunar surface. The large metal particles that were present early in the course of crystallization were not removed by set- tling, and the first-formed pyroxenes are graphically intergrown with plagioclase, indicating crystalliza- tion of the bulk of the rock at a single site. The fine grain size of the rock and the presence of vugs indi- cate that this site was near or at the lunar surface. Cores within large plagioclase grains (<3—4 percent by volume of total rock) are the only fraction that could conceivably have formed prior to surface crys- tallization. TEMPERATURE As basalt 14310 represents a melt crystallized at low pressures, the approximate temperature history of crystallization can be derived from the results of experimental crystallization studies at 1 atmosphere. Liquidus temperature for the silicate minerals is about 1310°—1320°C (Ford and others, 1972; Walker and others, 1972; Green and others, 1972), but liqui- dus temperatures for the immiscible Fe—Ni—P—S melts may have been appreciably higher. The ap— proximate bulk composition of the Fe—Ni~P—S glob- ule pictured in figure 9A is, in weight percent, 81.2 Fe, 14.0 Ni, 1.1 Co, 2.3 P, and 1.4 S (derived from averaged microprobe analyses of phases and point counts of phase proportions converted to volume per- cent and corrected for the effects of sphericity). No experimental data are available for the liquidus tem- perature of such a mix, but estimates based on data for the binary systems Fe—Ni, Fe—S, and Fe—P (Hansen and Anderko, 1958) suggest a liquidus tem- perature around 1375°C. If, however, these metal- rich melts contained appreciable initial P or S, or both, that was lost during crystallization, their liquidus temperatures could have initially been much lower. The presence of concentrations of phosphate minerals bordering the particles indicates that ini- tial P content was indeed greater than at present, but the magnitude of P loss is nearly impossible to estimate. In order to lower the liquidus temperature of the globule pictured in figure 9A to near that of the silicate minerals, the initial content of P + S would have to have been about double that now pres- ent. Most other composite Fe—Ni—P—S particles, such _ as the one pictured in figure BB, have still less S and P and would have required even greater losses of these constituents to lower their liquidus tempera— tures to that of the silicate melt. Rock texture yields no definitive evidence on whether or not such large proportional losses of P and (or) S are reasonable. The natural crystallization sequence at the point of entry of the mafic silicates does not appear to have been reproduced experimentally by any group of investigators. In experiments reported by Ford and others (1972) and Green and others (1972), olivine precipitated at about 1230°C and no ortho- pyroxene formed. In experiments by Walker and others (1972), orthopyroxene was the first major mafic mineral to crystallize, but during their experi- ments it appears that there was significant loss of FeO from the silicate melt. However, all groups found that the second major mafic mineral was pigeonite and that this pyroxene formed by reaction of the first major mafic silicate with melt between 1200°—1180°C. The near-solidus temperature indi- cated by the data of Green and others (1972), Ford and others (1972) , and Walker and others (1972) is about 1100°C, by which temperature nearly all the silicate melt had crystallized. The experimental data on phase relations in the system Fe—Ni—P (Doan and Goldstein, 1970) sug- gest that the Fe—Ni—P—S melt globules probably would not have been entirely solidified until tempera- tures é950°C. Textures of silicate minerals sur- rounding the globules suggest that final solidifica- tion of mesostasis in the silicate melt took place at about the same temperature. Textures of the Fe—Ni—P—S particles indicate that the magma was at no time quenched during its crys- tallization. In the particle shown in figure 9A, the bulk composition indicates that ‘y Ni—Fe would have been the only phase crystallizing at temperatures above about 975°C (Doan and Goldstein, 1969, 1970), encompassing the range of crystallization of nearly all the surrounding silicate melt. The 7 Ni—Fe in this particle shows no evidence of any sudden temperature drop or abrupt loss of volatile P or S during its crystallization. It is smoothly zoned and grew slowly enough that it formed a single crystal. Comparisons with experimental data on sub- solidus phase relations in the Fe—Ni—P system (Doan and Goldstein, 1970) indicate that the Fe—Ni—P—S particles record the effects of equilibration to final temperatures between 800° and <550°C. In the par- ticle shown in figure 9A, an exsolved schreibersite lamella has a Ni content 1.75 percent lower than 24 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSP‘ATHIC‘ BASALT 14310 adjacent ‘y Ni—Fe, suggesting a final equilibration of the bulk lamella with surrounding metal at about 800°C. In other similar particles, compositional dif- ferences between lamellae and host metal record temperatures as low as 650°C. Comparisons of the average Ni contents of metal and of marginal schrei- bersite in individual composite particles yield equili- bration temperatures for different bulk particles ranging from 800° to 650°C. For a particle of the bulk composition of the one in figure 9A, tempera- ture of formation of (x Ni—Fe should have been about 600°C; the observed Ni contents of the a and y phases are consistent with this estimate. The lowest temperatures of equilibration are recorded at con- tacts between a Ni-Fe and schreibersite, where 10- cally the latter mineral was highly enriched in Ni. The most nickel-rich schreibersites analyzed contain 25.0 and 26.3 percent Ni; Ni in adjacent a Ni—Fe is 8.7 and 7.4 percent, respectively. Equilibration tem- peratures indicated by the compositions of these two mineral pairs are less than 550°C, possibly on the order of 500°C. Axon and Goldstein (1972) esti- mated an even lower final equilibration temperature, about 450°C, for one particle analyzed by El Goresy and others (1971) in their sample of 14310. Data on subsolidus equilibration in pyroxenes in- dicate that final equilibration temperatures for these minerals were similar to those for metal and schrei- bersite. Studies of cation distribution in pyroxenes reported by Gibb and others (1972), Finger and others (1972) and Ghose and others (1972) yielded equilibration temperatures of about 625°, 550°, and 700°C, respectively. Several authors have also discussed subsolidus cooling rates in 14310. Based on their studies of cation ordering in pyroxenes, Finger and others (1972) and Ghose and others (1972) found that the cooling rate was comparable to that of the coarse- grained Apollo 12 pigeonite basalt 12021. Ghose and others (1972), Lally and others (1972), and Takeda and Ridley (1972) variously stated that the rock cooled slowly relative to basalt 14053, to Apollo 11 and 12 basalts, and to mare basalts in general. On the basis of their studies of particles of metal + schreibersite, Axon and Goldstein (1972) gave a quantitative estimate of cooling rate: from solidus to 700°C in 1 month. OXYGEN FUGACITY Oxygen fugacity in the 14310 melt throughout its crystallization appears to have been roughly com— parable to that in the melts that crystallized to form the Apollo 12 basalts. Metal particles or metal-rich molten globules were present in both the 14310 and Apollo 12 melts during the earliest parts of their crystallization sequences, and both types of basalt show similar reduction of ulvéspinel to ilmenite + Fe in the latest stages of crystallization. Compari- sons of the observed natural mineral assemblages with experimental data permit some semiquantita- tive estimates of f02 values at different points dur- ing crystallization. Experiments reported by Ford and others (1972) suggest that at the point of pre- cipitation of the first mafic silicates, about 1200°C, log fOZ was between —11.6 and —14 and may have been closer to the latter value. Experimental data on log f02 for the late-stage reduction of ulvospinel (Taylor and others, 1972) indicate that when the silicate melt had cooled about to its solidus (~1000°C) log f02 was probably less than —15.3. VOLATILES The presence of volatiles in the melt and escape of volatiles during crystallization is attested to by the presence of vugs in the rock. Additional evidence for the escape of volatiles is the presence of reverse and oscillatory zoning in pyroxenes; such zoning is most likely the product of periodic degassing, for it is in some cases clearly associated with vugs. Crys- tals that grew near vugs are commonly coarser than elsewhere in the rock; therefore the volatiles that concentrated at these sites favored diffusion to exist— ing crystal nuclei over nucleation of new grains, and possibly also favored relatively rapid grain growth. Composition of the volatile species is problematical. Wellman (1970) proposed that the major volatile species in Apollo 11 melts were H2, H2O, N2, CH4, CO, and C02, and Motoaki Sato and R. T. Helz (oral commun, 1972) have suggested that S2, F2, and C12 might have been important volatiles in these and other lunar melts. In the 14310 melt it is possi- ble that P2 as well was a major volatile species. CONDITIONS OF CRYSTALLIZATION 0F FINE-GRAINED CLOTS Conditions at the sites of crystallization of the fine-grained clots favored both formation of abun- dant nuclei of plagioclase and extensive growth of this mineral. Ridley and others (1972) have pro- posed that the clots may represent sites that differed from the rest of the melt in content of volatile spe- cies (from the data presented here, presumably dif- ferent volatile species from those that formed vugs). There is some evidence that favors such an interpre- tation. Large composite particles of metal + schrei- bersite + troilite in and near clots commonly are enveloped by reaction rims of phosphate minerals GENESIS OF THE 14310 MAGMA 25 (fig. 20), suggesting possible higher f02 at these sites than elsewhere in the melt. Analyses were made of the products and reactants involved in formation of one such reaction rim in an attempt to define the form of the reaction in order to be able to calculate its equilibrium f02. The analyses, the derived reaction, and the calculated equilibrium f02 values are presented below, but the results are not definitive. The calculated f02 values are slightly higher than those estimated for the rock as a whole in the last stages of its crystallization, but the dif- ferences are well within the uncertainties in the calculation. The area studied in detail is pictured in figure 2D. Textures indicate that the reactants were schreiber- site (or phosphorus dissolved in metal) and pyrox- ene and products were whitlockite, silica glass, and probably also native Fe. The whitlockite is fairly uniform in composition and contains Ca, Mg, and Fe in molar proportions 88:3:9; metal and schreibersite contain about 0.86 mole fraction Fe. Reacted pyrox- ene appears to be depleted in Ca relative to unreacted pyroxene, but Ca contents in both pyroxenes are quite variable (fig. 12). It appears that the reac- tion had the general form 3(Ca,Mg)SiOg+2Fe3P +5/202=(Ca,Mg)3(Po.,)2—|—3Si02+6Fe. Oxygen fu- gacity at equilibrium at 1000°C was calculated for the related reaction: 3CaSiO;,-J—2Fe3P+5/202 =Ca3(PO.)2+3Si02—1—6Fe. For this calculation, ther- modynamic data were taken from Latimer (1952), Kelly (1960), Kelley and King (1961), and Kubas- chewski and Evans (1958) ; activities were assumed to be equal to mole fractions. Because the pyroxenes show appreciable variability in Ca contents, two cal- culations were made, one with mole fraction of wol- lastonite set at 0.13, the other at 0.19. The values of log f02 derived from these two calculations are —14.7 and —14.9, respectively. These values represent mini- mum values, because in the actual reaction the pres- ence of Ni in the schreibersite and metal would have raised the equilibrium f02 somewhat. Uncertainty in the thermodynamic data introduces considerable uncertainty into the results, however—on the order of at least :05. Moreover, if the reaction involved P dissolved in metal rather than FesP, the f02 could have differed by more than an order of magni- tude from that calculated here (Olsen and Fuchs, 1967). GENESIS OF THE 14310 MAGMA From data presented here and by others, it ap- pears that the large Fe—Ni—P—S globules in basalt 14310 represent meteoritic contaminant material. The very appearance of these particles suggests an exotic origin: Many are much larger than the rest of the metal-bearing grains, and they tend to occur in local concentrations. Their bulk compositions are appropriate for meteorite-derived particles (Axon and Goldstein, 1972), and the metal they contain has Ni—Co—P contents clearly distinct from the rest of the metal grains in the rock. Data on siderophile trace elements Ir, Re, and Au—elements carried virtually entirely by the metal particles—provide further support for a meteoritic origin. Absolute abundances of these elements are unlike those in other lunar basalts, but are similar to those in lunar soil (Morgan and others, 1972). Moreover, ratios of Re/Au and Ir/Au in 14310 are close to those in lunar soils and in some classes of chondrites and appreciably different from those in mare basalts and other Apollo 14 basalts. Thus it appears that the parent melt of 14310 began its crystallization at or near the lunar surface containing no more than 3—4 percent plagioclase crystals, perhaps none, and scattered globules of Fe—Ni—P—S immiscible melt (and possibly also crys- talline metallic particles). The magma probably contained no silicate xenoliths or xenocrysts, and the metal-rich material was entirely melted or equili- brated with surrounding silicate melt prior to crys- tallization. The presence of meteoritic contaminant suggests that the 14310 melt was generated at the lunar sur— face or in the upper levels of the lunar crust. Simi- larly, the results of experimental crystallization studies have indicated that derivation of the 14310 melt by partial melting deep within the moon is un— likely. These studies show that 14310 could not rep- resent a direct anhydrous partial melt of likely lunar mantle material (Ford and others, 1972; Ku- shiro and others, 1972; Green and others, 1972; Walker and others, 1972). Kushiro (1972) and Ford and others (1972) suggested that if additional alka- lis, or alkalis and water, were present in parent mantle during melting, a partial melt of 14310 com- position could have been generated. However, the presence of alkalis and (or) water during high- pressure melting would have appreciably reduced the liquidus temperature of the melt, and it should have begun to crystallize on the lunar surface at a tem- perature below that of its anhydrous liquidus; this was not the case. Hypotheses that invoke crystal accumulation into a mantle-generated melt to ex- plain the high plagioclase content of the rock are not admissible because the texture indicates that no such accumulation has occurred. Moreover, it is improb- able that 14310 represents a mantle-generated melt 26 C‘RYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSP‘ATHIC BASALT 14310 that incorporated feldspathic and meteoritic debris from the regolith upon extrusion, because it would have been necessary for such a melt to possess an unreasonable degree of superheat in order to retain a temperature >1310°C after melting all incorpo— rated material. From the above lines of evidence it appears that there are two possible ways in which the 14310 melt could have been generated: (1) by partial or bulk melting of a feldspathic rock in the lunar crust (Kushiro, 1972; Walker and others, 1972) ; or (2) by impact melting of feldspar-rich lunar surface materials (Dence and others, 1972; Axon and Gold- stein, 1972; Ehmann and others, 1972; Green and others, 1972; Schnetzler and others, 1972; Hollister and others, 1972). In either case, the parental ma- terial must have been feldspar rich and probably was derived from rocks of a preexisting feldspathic lunar crust. In the first hypothesis, that of partial melting in the lunar crust, the parent material necessarily would have contained meteoritic metal and might most likely have been consolidated or unconsolidated impact debris. This hypothesis, however, requires that very high temperatures be generated by proc- esses other than direct shock melting very near the lunar surface—temperatures of at least 1310°C and possibly considerably higher if the apparent liquidus temperatures of the Fe—Ni—P—S melt globules repre- sent their true liquidus temperatures. Such high temperatures of partial melting so close to the lunar surface would not be expected on the basis of ter- restrial experience, but the evidence that some lunar breccias have been recrystallized at temperatures on the order of 1000°—1100°C (Williams, 1972; Grieve and others, 1972; Anderson and others, 1972) indi- cates that it might have been possible for even higher temperatures to be generated locally in near- surface rocks. In the second hypothesis, that of impact melting, the problem of finding a plausible heat source is re- moved. Generation of melts that have very high temperatures indeed is possible by shock. For this reason I favor the interpretation that impact melt- ing in some form was important in generation of the 14310 melt; however, the possible schemes of genesis involving impact are numerous, and a prob— able parent material is not easily specified. For ex- ample, the 14310 melt could represent: an impact melt of lunar rock, with addition only of Fe—Ni—P—S particles from the impacting body; an impact melt of regolith or microbreccia; a contaminated melt consisting of a mixture of impact melt with impact debris; or a hybrid melt consisting of a mixture of impact melt with magma derived from the lunar interior. If indeed basalt 14310 crystallized from an impact melt, its crystallization history demonstrates that on the surface of the moon in its early history impact melts were formed that were not rapidly quenched. They instead followed crystallization paths like those of mare basalts, or were incorporated into melts that followed such paths. Distinction of such melts from magmas formed in the lunar interior adds yet an- other dimension of complexity to studies of lunar petrology, but such distinction is necessary before questions of the genesis, evolution, and thermal his- tory of the lunar mantle and crust can be considered in the light of petrologic evidence. REFERENCES CITED Anderson, A. T., Jr., Braziunas, T. F., Jacoby, J., and Smith, J. V., 1972, Thermal and mechanical history of breccias 14306, 14063, 14270, and 14321, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press, p. 819—835 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, V. 1). Axon, H. J., and Goldstein, J. I., 1972, Temperature—time relationships from lunar two phase metallic particles (14310, 14163, 14003): Earth and Planetary Sci. Let- ters, v. 16, p. 439—447. Bence, A. E., and Papike, J. J., 1972, Pyroxenes as recorders of lunar basalt petrogenesis; Chemical trends due to crystal liquid interaction, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 431—469 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Boyd, F. R., Finger, L. W.. and Chayes, F., 1969, Computer reduction of electron-probe data: Carnegie Inst. Wash- ington Year Book 67, 1967—68, p. 210—215. Boyd, F. R., and Smith, Douglas, 1971, Compositional zon- ing in pyroxenes from lunar rock 12021, Oceanus Pro- cellarum: Jour. Petrology, v. 12, p. 439—464. Brown, G. M., and Peckett, A., 1971, Selective volatilization on the lunar surface; Evidence from Apollo 14 feldspar- phyric basalts-z Nature, v. 234, p. 262—266. Brown, G. M., Emeleus, C. H., Holland, J. G., Peckett, A., and Phillips, R., 1972, Mineral-chemical variations in Apollo 14 and Apollo 15 basalts and granitic fractions, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 141—157 (Geo- chim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Compston, W., Vernon, M. J., Berry, H., Rudowski, R., Gray, C. M., Ware, N., C‘happell, B. W., and Kaye, M., 1972a, Age and petrogenesis of Apollo 14 basalts [abs.], in Lunar Science, 111: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 151—153. Compston, W., Vernon, M. J., Berry, H., Rudowski, R., Gray, C. M., and Ware, N., 1972b, Apollo 14 mineral ages and the thermal history of the Fra Mauro formation, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 2: Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press, p. 1487—1501 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2). REFERENCES CITED 27 Dence, M. R., and Plant, A. G., 1972, Analysis of Fra Mauro samples and origin of the Imbrian basin, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 379—399 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1) . Dence, M. R., Plant, A. G., and Traill, R. J., 1972, Impact- generated shock and thermal metamorphism in Fra Mauro lunar samples [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 174—176. Doan, A. 8., Jr., and Goldstein, J. I., 1969, The formation of phosphides in iron meteorites, in Millman, P. M., ed., Meteorite Research: New York, Springer-Verlag, p. 763— 779. 1970, The ternary phase diagram, Fe—Ni—P: Metall. Trans, v. 1, p. 1759—1767. Drever, H. I., Johnston, R., Butler, P., Jr., Gibb, F. G. F., and Whitley, J. E., 1972, Some textures in lunar igneous rocks and terrestrial analogs [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 189—191. Ehmann, W. D., Gillum, D. E., and Morgan, J. W., 1972, Oxygen and bulk element composition studies of Apollo 14 and other lunar rocks and soils, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, V. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1149—1160 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2). El Go'resy, Ahmed, Ramdohr, Paul, and Taylor, L. A., 1971, The geochemistry of the opaque minerals in Apollo 14 crystalline rocks: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, V. 13, no. 1, p. 121—129. El Goresy, Ahmed, Taylor, L. A., and Ramdohr, Paul, 1972, Fra Mauro crystalline rocks: Mineralogy, geochemistry, and subsolidus reduction of the opaque minerals, in Pro— ceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 333—349 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Finger, L. W., Hafner, S. S., Schiirmann, K., Virgo, D., and Warburton, D., 1972, Distinct cooling histories and reheating of Apollo 14 rocks [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 259-261. Ford, C. E., Biggar, G. M., Humphries, D. J., Wilson, G., Dixon, D., and O’Hara, M. J., 1972, Role of water in the evolution of the lunar crust; an experimental study of sample 14310; an indication of lunar calc-alkaline vol- canism, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Con- ference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 207— 229 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Gancarz, A. J., Albee, A. L. and Chodos, A. A., 1971, Petro- logic and mineralogic investigation of some crystalline rocks returned by the Apollo 14 mission: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 12, no. 1, p. 1—18. Ghose, Subrata, Ng, George, and Walter, L. S., 1972, Clinopyroxenes from Apollo 12 and 14: Exsolution, domain structure, and cation order, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 507—531 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Gibb, T. C., Greatrex, R., Greenwood, N. N., and Battey, M. H., 1972, Miissbauer studies of Apollo 14 lunar sam- ples, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Con- ference, v. 3: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 2479-— 2493 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 3). Green, D. H., Ringwood, A. E., Ware, N. G., and Hibber- son, W. 0., 1972, Experimental petrology and petro- genesis of Apollo 14 basalts, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 197—206 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Grieve, R., McKay, G., Smith, H., Weill, D., and McCallum, S., 1972, Mineralogy and petrology of polymict breccia 14321 [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 338—340. Griffin, W. L., Amli, R., and Heier, K. S., 1972, Whitlockite and apatite from lunar rock 14310 and from Oedegarden, Norway: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, v. 15, p. 53—58. Haggerty, S. E., 1972, Apollo 14: Subsolidus reduction and compositional variations of spinels, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 305—332 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Hansen, Max, and Anderko, Kurt, 1958, Constitution of binary alloys: 2d ed., New York, McGraw-Hill, 1305 p. Hollister, L. S., 1972, Implications of the relative concen- trations of Al, Ti, and Cr in lunar pyroxenes [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 389— 391. Hollister, L., Trzcienski, W., Jr., Dymek, R., Kulick, C., Weigand, P., and Hargraves, R., 1972, Igneous frag- ment 14310,21 and the origin of the mare basalts [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 386—388. Hubbard, N. J., Gast, P. W., Rhodes, J. M., Bansal, B. M., Wiesmann, H., and Church, S. E., 1972, Nonmare ba- salts: Part II, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Sci- ence Conference, v. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1161—1179 (Geochim. evt Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2). Huebner, J. S., and Ross, Malcolm, 1972, Phase relations of lunar and terrestrial pyroxenes at one atm. [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 410— 412. Kelley, K. K., 1960, Contributions to the data on theoretical metallurgy. 13. High temperature heat-content, heat- capacity, and entropy data for the elements and inor- ganic compounds: U.S. Bur. of Mines Bull. 584, 232 p. Kelley, K. K., and King, E. G., 1961, Contributions to the data on theoretical metallurgy. 14. Entropies of the elements and inorganic compounds: U.S. Bur. Mines Bull. 592, 149 p. Kubaschewski, Oswald, and Evans. E. LL., 1958. Metallurgi- cal Thermochemistry: 2d rev. ed., New York, Pergamon Press. 426 p. Kushiro, Ikuo, 1972, Petrology of lunar high-alumina basalt [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88. p. 466—468. Kushiro, Ikuo, Ikeda, Yukio, and Nakamura, Yasuoa, 1972, Petrology of Apollo 14 high-alumina basalt, in Proceed- ings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cam- bridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 115—129 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Lally. J. S.. Fisher, R. M.. Christie, J. M., Griggs, D. T., Heuer, A. H., Nord. G. L., Jr., and Radcliffe, S. V.. 1972, Electron petrography of Apollo 14 and 15 rocks, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 401—422 (Geo- chim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). 28 CRYSTALLIZATION HISTORY OF LUNAR FELDSPATHIC BASALT 14310 Latimer, W. M., 1952, The oxidation states of the ele- ments and their potentials in aqueous solutions: New York, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 392 p. Longhi, John, Walker, David, and Hays, J. F., 1972, Petrography and crystallization history of basalts 14310 and 14072, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 131— 139 (Geochim. e-t Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). LSPET (Lunar Sample Preliminary Examination Team), 1971, Preliminary examination of lunar samples from Apollo 14: Science, v. 173, p. 681—693. Melson, W. G., Mason, B., Nelen, J., and Jacobson, S., 1972, Apollo 14 basaltic rocks [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 535—536. Morgan, J .W., Laul, J. C., Krahenbfihl, Urs, Ganapathy, R., and Anders, Edward, 1972, Major impacts on the moon: Characterization from trace elements in Apollo 12 and 14 samples, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, V. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1377— 1396 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2) . Murthy, V. R., Evensen, N. M., Jahn, Bor-ming, and Coscio, M. R., Jr., 1972, Apollo 14 and 15 samples: Rb—Sr ages, trace elements, and lunar evolution, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1503—1514 (Geochim. et Cos— mochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2). Olsen, E., and Fuchs, L. H., 1967, The state of oxidation of some iron meteorites: Icarus, V. 6, p. 242—253. Papanastassiou, D. A., and Wasserburg, G. J., 1971, Rb—Sr ages of igneous rocks from the Apollo 14 miSSion and the age of the Era Mauro formation: Earth and Planet- ary Sci. Letters, V. 12, no. 1, p. 36—48. Philpotts, J. A., Schnetzler, C. C., Nava, D. F., Bottino, M. L., Fullagar, P. D., Thomas, H. H., Schuhmann, Shu— ford, and Kouns, C. W., 1972, Apollo 14: Some geo- chemical aspects, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1293—1305 (Geochim. et 00smochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2) . Ridley, W. I., Brett, Robin, Williams, R. J., Takeda, Hiroshi, and Brown, R. W., 1972, Petrology of Fra Mauro Basalt 14310, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Con- ference, V. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 159—170 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2). Ringwood, A. E., Green, D. H., and Ware, N. G., 1972, Ex- perimental petrology and petrogenesis of Apollo 14 basalts [abs.], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 654—656. Roedder, Edwin, and Weiblen, P. W., 1972, Petrographic features and petrologic significance of melt inclusions in Apollo 14 and 15 rocks, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 251—279 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Rose, H. J., Jr., Cuttitta, Frank, Annell, C. S., Carron, M. K., Christian, R. P., Dwornik, E. J., Greenland, L. P., and Ligon, D. T., Jr., 1972, Compositional data for twenty-one Fra Mauro lunar materials, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1215—1229 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, V. 2). Ross, M., Huebner, J. S., and Dowty, E., 1973, Delineation of the one atmosphere augite-pigeonite miscibility gap for pyroxenes from lunar basalt 12021: Am. Mineral- ogist, v. 58. (In press.) Schnetzler, C. C., Philpotts, J. A., Nava, D. F., Thomas, H. H., Bottino, M. L. and Barker, J. L., Jr., 1972, Chemical compasitions of Apollo 14, Apollo 15, and Luna 16 materials [abs], in Lunar Science, III: Lunar Sci. Inst. Cont. 88, p. 682. Schiirmann, K., and Hafner, S. S., 1972, Distinct subsolidus cooling histories of Apollo 14 basalts, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cam- bridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 493—506 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, V. 1). Skinner, B. J., 1970, High crystallization temperatures in— dicated for igneous rocks from Tranquillity Base, in Proceedings of the Apollo 11 Lunar Science Confer- ence, V. 1: New York, Pergamon Press, p. 891—895 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 1, V. 1). Swann, G. A., Trask, N. J., Hait, M. H., and Sutton, R. L., 1971, Geologic setting of the Apollo 14 samples: Science, v. 173, p. 716—719. Takeda, Hiroshi, and Ridley, W. 1., 1972, Crystallography and chemical trends of orthopyroxene-pigeonite from rock 14310 and coarse fine 12033, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 423—430 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Suppl. 3, v. 1). Taylor, L. A., Williams, R. J., and McCallister, R. H., 1972, Stability relations of ilmenite and ulvospinel in the Fe—Ti70 system and application of these data to lunar mineral assemblages: Earth and Planetary Sci. Let- ters, v. 16, p. 282—288. Trzcienski, W. E., Jr., and Kulick, C. G., 1972, Plagioclase and Ba—K phases from Apollo samples 12063 and 14310, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 519—602 (Geo— chim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, V. 1). Turner, G., Huneke, J. C., Podosek, F. A., and Wasserburg, G. J., 1971, ”Ar—”Ar ages and cosmic ray exposure ages of Apollo 14 samples: Earth and Planetary Sci. Let- ters, v. 12, p. 19—35. Walker, David, Longhi, John, and Hays, J. F., 1972, Ex- perimental petrology and origin of Fra Mauro rocks and soil, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, V. 1: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 797~817 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 1). Walter, L. S., French, B. M., Doan, A. S., Jr., and Henrich, K. F. J., 1972, Petrographic analysis of lunar samples 14171 and 14305 (breccias) and 14310 (melt rock) [abs], in Lunar Science, III; Lunar Sci. Inst. Contr. 88, p. 773—775. Wellman, T. R., 1970, Gaseous species in equilibrium with the Apollo 11 holocrystalline rocks during their crystal- lization: Nature, v. 225, p. 716—717. Williams, R. J., 1972, The lithification and metamorphism of lunar breccias: Earth and Planetary Sci. Letters, V. 16, p. 250—256. Willis, J. P., Erlank, A. J., Gurney, J. J., Theil, R. H., and and Ahrens, L. H., 1972, Major, minor, and trace ele- ment data for some Apollo 11, 12, 14, and 15 samples, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, V. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1269—1273 (Geo- chim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, V. 2). Wright, T. L., and Doherty, P. C., 1970, A linear program- REFERENCES CITED ming and least squares computer method for solving petrologic mixing problems: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 81, p. 1995—2008. York, Derek, Kenyon, W. J., and Doyle, R. J., 1972, ”Ar—”Ar 29 ages of Apollo 14 and 15 samples, in Proceedings of the Third Lunar Science Conference, v. 2: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, p. 1613—1622 (Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta Supp. 3, v. 2). * u.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973—515—659/67 1». in.» . . "755/ 7 DAY \ _< ‘60’ $797 Au Type Sections of the Madison Group (Mississippian) and its Subdivisions in Montana GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 842 (fi’o’r’ mm éfi’ a??? Type Sections of the Madison Group (Mississippian) and its Subdivisions in Montana By WILLIAM J. SANDO and J. T. DUTRO, JR. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 842 Descriptions of the type sections of the Madison Group, Mission Canyon Limestone, Lodge pole Limestone, and Paine and Woodhurst Members of the Lodgepole Limestone UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1974 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 74-600112 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, US. Government Printing Office Washington, DC. 20402 — Price $1.70 (paper cover) Stock Number 2401-02528 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract ________________________________________ 1 Descriptions of type sections—Continued Introduction _____________________________________ 1 Monarch—US 89 section _____________________ 8 History of nomenclature _________________________ 2 l Dry Fork section ____________________________ 12 Descriptions of type sections ______________________ 3 Mission CanyOn section _______________________ 16 Field methods ________________________________ 3 Little Chief Canyon section ___________________ 17 Boundary criteria and nomenclature ___________ 4 Age and correlation ______________________________ 21 Logan section _______________________________ 4 References cited _________________________________ 21 ILLUSTRATIONS Page PLATE 1. Correlation of type and reference sections of Madison Group __________________________________ In pocket FIGURE 1. Geologic sketch map of Logan section ____________________________________________________________ 5 2. Photographs showing Madison Group in Logan section ___________________________________________ 6 3. Geologic sketch map of Monarch—US. 89 section ____________________________________________________ 9 4. Photographs showing Madison Group in Monarch—US. 89 section ________________________________ 10 5. Geologic sketch map of Dry Fork section _________________________________________________________ 12 6. Photograph of cliffs at Currie Coulee on Dry Fork of Belt Creek, showing exposures of Lodgepole Limestone and basal beds of Mission Canyon Limestone ________________________________________ 13 7. Photograph of cliff face at Currie Coulee on Dry Fork of Belt Creek, showing uppermost beds of Jef- ferson Formation through basal beds of Woodhurst Member of Lodgepole Limestone _______________ 13 8. Geologic sketch map of Mission Canyon section ____________________________________________________ 16 9. Photograph of cliffs on north side of Mission Canyon, showing contact between Mission Canyon Lime- stone and Lodgepole Limestone _________________________________________________________________ 17 10. View down Mission Canyon, showing thick beds of lower 100 feet of Mission Canyon Limestone __-_ 17 11. Geologic sketch map of Little Chief Canyon section _______________________________________________ 18 III TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP (MISSISSIPPIAN) AND ITS SUBDIVISION S IN MONTANA By WILLIAM J. SANDO and J. T. DUTRO, JR. ABSTRACT This report presents descriptions of precisely located type sections for the Madison Group and its principal subdivi- sions in Montana. The type section of the Madison Group, originally proposed as a formation by A. C. Peale in 1893, is on the Gallatin River at Logan, southwest Montana. Type sections for the Lodgepole Limestone and Mission Canyon Limestone, originally proposed by A. J. Collier and S. H. Cathcart in 1922, are located on the flank of the Little Rocky Mountains in north-central Montana. Inasmuch as the Mission Canyon Limestone is truncated by pre-Jurassic erosion in its type section, a complete reference section just north of Monarch in the Little Belt Mountains is described for the Mission Canyon. A section on the Dry Fork of Belt Creek in the Little Belt Mountains is described as type section for the Paine and Woodhurst Members of the Lodge- pole Limestone, units that were named by W. H. Weed in 1899. Collections of fossils from the type sections are used for dating and correlation of the Madison strata and form an important reference set for future biostratigraphic analyses. IN TRODUCTION The Madison Group is one of the more widespread stratigraphic units in the western United States. This great mass of Mississippian carbonate rocks extends over most of Montana and parts of the Dakotas, Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah. Limestone units of equivalent age in California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado, although given different names, are part of a continuous sheet of Madison-like carbonate sedimentary rocks. The Madison has been studied and mapped since the days of the earliest geological investigations of the Western United States. From the standpoint of stratigraphic nomenclature, the more important studies were made in Montana, where most of the subdivisions of the Madison were established. Al- though many stratigraphic studies have been made since this stratigraphic unit was proposed in 1893, type sections for most of the fundamental Montana subdivisions have never been described in detail. The purpose of the report is to designate and de- scribe type sections for the Madison Group and its principal subdivisions in Montana. Collections of fos- sils from these sections, permanently housed at the US. National Museum in Washington, DC, form an important reference set for any future biostrati- graphic analyses of the type sections. These collec- tions have already been used in several biostrati- graphic studies of the Madison Group (Sando, 1960; Sando and Dutro, 1960; Sando and others, 1969). This report deals with the type sections of the fol- lowing stratigraphic units: Madison Group (Peale, 1893). Mission Canyon Limestone (Collier and Cath- cart, 1922). Lodgepole Limestone (Collier and Cathcart, 1922). Woodhurst Member (Weed, 1899a). Paine Member (Weed, 1899a). A third subdivision of the Lodgepole Limestone, the Cottonwood‘ Canyon Member (Sandberg and Klapper, 1967), is recognized in two of the type sec- tions described herein. Inasmuch as its type section is in Wyoming and has been described in detail by Sandberg and Klapper (1967, p. B16—B19), it is not described in this report. The name Charles Formation has been applied to interbedded carbonate, terrigenous, and evaporitic sedimentary rocks equivalent to the upper part of the Mission Canyon Limestone in the subsurface Williston basin of central and eastern Montana and the western parts of the Dakotas. The Charles was originally proposed by Seager (1942, p. 863, 864) for beds between the Kibbey Formation of the Big Snowy Group and the top of the Madison Group in the Arro Oil and Refining Company and California Company No. 4 well in sec. 21, T. 15 N., R. 30 E., Petroleum County, Mont. Although Seager originally included the formation in the Big Snowy Group, 1 2 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Sloss (1952, p. 66—67) regarded the Charles as the uppermost unit of the Madison Group, and this usage has been followed in most subsequent stratigraphic work. Perry and Sloss (1943, fig. 3) presented a graphic log of the Charles in the well section originally de- scribed by Seager, and Nordquist (1953, p. 79) referred to this section as the “type well” and rede— fined the limits of the formation. Although some geologists have extended the term “Charles Forma- tion” to surface exposures of Madison rocks in parts of central and western Montana, it is defined on criteria that are difficult to use with precision in out- crop areas. Moreover, it includes beds referred by most geologists to the Mission Canyon Limestone. Pending further clarification of its exact relation- ships with the Mission Canyon Limestone of central and southwestern Montana, we recommend that the Charles be restricted to the subsurface in the Willis- ton basin. The Madison Limestone in the mountain ranges of northwest Montana was divided by Deiss (1933, p. 45—48) into five members (in ascending order) : Silvertip Conglomerate, Saypo Limestone, Dean Lake Chert, Rooney Chert, and Monitor Mountain Lime- stone. Later work by Deiss (1943, p. 228) in the Saw- tooth Range led him to conclude that these strata “are not precisely equivalent in age to the Madison or to the Brazer Limestone, but are part correlative with both.” Consequently, he proposed the name Hannan Limestone (Deiss, 1941, p. 1896; 1943, p. 228) to replace Madison Limestone in the Sawtooth Range. Deiss’ nomenclature was not used in recent studies of the Mississippian rocks in the Sawtooth Range by Mudge, Sando, and Dutro (1962) and Mudge (1972, p. A35—A40) . The name Hannan was abandoned, and the Mississippian strata were referred to the Madi- son Group, which was divided into two formations, the Allan Mountain Limestone and the overlying Castle Reef Dolomite. Three unnamed members were recognized in the Allan Mountain Limestone, and the Castle Reef Dolomite was divided into an unnamed lower member and the Sun River Member, originally published by Chamberlain (1955, p. 78, 79) and Andrichuk (1955, p. 88). Descriptions of the type sections of these currently recognized units in north- west Montana are in Mudge, Sando, and Dutro (1962) , which also contains paleontological documen— tation based on fossils in the collections of the US. Geological Survey at the US. National Museum in Washington, DC. HISTORY OF NOMENCLATURE Peale (1893, p. 32—39) proposed the name Madison formation for carbonate rocks of early Carbonifer- ous age underlain by the Three Forks shales (Devonian) and overlain by the Quadrant formation (upper Carboniferous) in the Three Forks area of southwest Montana. Peale recognized three divisions of the Madison, in ascending order: Laminated lime- stones, Massive limestones, and Jaspery limestones. Iddings and Weed (1894, p. 2) used the name Madi- son limestone for rocks of similar age, lithology, and stratigraphic position near Livingston, Mont. Al- though Weed (in Hague and others, 1896, p. 4) stated that Peale’s term was derived from the Madison Range, Sloss and Hamblin (1942, p. 313) suggested that the name referred to the Madison River, which joins with the Gallatin and Jefferson Rivers to form the Missouri at Three Forks. Weed (1899a, p. 2; 1899b, p. 2) divided the Madi- son limestone of the Little Belt Mountains into Paine shale, Woodhurst limestone, and Castle limestone, which evidently corresponded roughly to Peale’s Laminated limestones, Massive limestones, and Jas- pery limestones, respectively. In a later report, Weed (1900, p. 290—294) used the term “Madison group” but does not seem to have intended formational rank for the new subdivisions of the Madison (Sloss and Hamblin, 1942, p. 313—314). The names evidently were derived from Paine Gulch, the mining camp of Woodhurst or Woodhurst Mountain in the Little Belt Mountains, and the town of Castle in the Castle Mountains. Collier and Cathcart (1922, p. 173) were the first to use the name Madison as a group, in the modern sense, in a brief paper on the Little Rocky Mountains. They divided the Madison Group into two formations, using the names Lodgepole limestone for the lower part and Mission Canyon limestone for the upper part. Both names were derived from canyons in the northern part of the Little Rocky Mountains. Sloss and Hamblin (1942, p. 313—315) synthesized previous work on the Madison and proposed the nomenclatural framework presently recognized throughout much of Montana by most geologists. The Madison was recognized as a group divided into Lodgepole Limestone and Mission Canyon Limestone, and Weed’s Paine and Woodhurst units were retained as members of the Lodgepole. The name Castle lime- stone, a synonym for Mission Canyon Limestone, had already been abandoned (Wilmarth, 1938, p. 365) . Sloss and Hamblin’s statements concerning type sections for the various units of the Madison were DESCRIPTIONS OF TYPE SECTIONS ' 3 rather generalized. They indicated that the type section of the Madison is in exposures along the Gal- latin River at Logan, Mont. (pl. 1) and presented a condensed description of this section. They stated that the type locality of the Lodgepole Limestone is in the Little Rocky Mountains and also referred to a type section for the formation, but they did not indi- cate whether their condensed description of the sec- tion on Lodgepole Creek was to serve as a descrip- tion of the type section. They presented a condensed composite section of the Madison measured at three localities in the Little Belt Mountains but did not identify this as a type section for the Paine and Woodhurst Members of the Lodgepole. No mention was made of a type section for the Mission Canyon Limestone. None of their stratigraphic sections were precisely located, and no reference was made to col- lections of fossils from these sections. Holland (1952, p. 1702, 1703) was more explicit in locating the type section of the Madison. He stated that the type section is “along the north bank of the Gallatin River, directly across from Logan, Gallatin County, Montana, 814 [sic] sec. 25, T. 2 N., R. 2 E.” Holland also presented an annotated graphic log of the lower part of this section and listed fossils col- lected from nine precisely located levels in the Lodge- pole Limestone. Limited data on the occurrence of fossils in the lower part of the Logan section were also presented by Gutschick (1964) and Rodriguez and Gutschick (1970). Knechtel, Smedley, and Ross (1954) proposed the name Little Chief Canyon Member for the black shale that occurs at the base of the Lodgepole Lime- stone at many localities in Montana. They stated (p. 2397, 2399) that the type locality for the new mem- ber, as well as for the Lodgepole Limestone, is in “Little Chief Canyon of Lodgepole Creek, Nl/g of sec. 27, T. 26 N., R. 25 E., in Blaine County, Montana, about 31/; miles south-southeast of Lodgepole Sub- agency of the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation” (pl. 1) (Little Chief Canyon actually extends from N1/2 sec. 30 into SE14 sec. 19). They also identified the Little Chief Canyon Member in the section at Logan, 81/2 sec. 25, T. 2 N., R. 2 E., Gallatin County, Mont, which they considered to be the type section of the Madison Group. A recent analysis of Devonian and Mississippian shale units in the northern Cordillera by Sandberg and Mapel (1967, figs. 2 and 10) has shown that the shale in Little Chief Canyon is the upper black shale of the Bakken Formation and that the shale at Logan belongs in the Cottonwood Can- yon Member of the Lodgepole Limestone. Such usage obviates the necessity for the term Little Chief Canyon Member, which is hereby abandoned. Knechtel (1959, p. 733, 734) again stated that the type locality of the Lodgepole Limestone is in Little Chief Canyon in the Little Rocky Mountains. He also stated that the type locality of the Mission Canyon Limestoneis “in Mission Canyon, in sec. 32, T. 26 N., R. 24 E., a mile southeast of St. Paul’s Mission” (pl. 1). Neither of these sections was described in Knech- tel’s paper. In summary, the status of type sections of the Madison Group in central and southwestern Mon- tana is as follows: 1. A specific type section location has been desig- nated for the Madison Group and an annotated section log has been presented for part of it, but no detailed description has been published, and the section has not been adequately docu- mented paleontologically. 2. Specific type localities have been designated for the Mission Canyon Limestone and Lodgepole Limestone, but no descriptions or paleontologi- caldocumentation of their type sections have been published. 3. No type sections for the Paine and Woodhurst Members of the Lodgepole Limestone have been designated, described, or paleontologically documented. DESCRIPTIONS OF TYPE SECTIONS FIELD METHODS The following descriptions of rock units in meas- ured sections were made entirely from observations in the field. Principal carbonate rock designations (limestone, dolomitic limestone, and dolomite) are based on the amount of effervescence of the rock when a fresh surface is treated with 2 N hydro- chloric acid. Rock colors on fresh and weathered sur- faces were determined by comparison with the rock- color chart (Goddard and others, 1948). Fresh rock surfaces, wetted with acid and observed with hand lens, were compared with a Wentworth grain-size chart in order to describe rock textures. Grain-size terms for terrigenous components refer to the Wentworth scale. The following terminology is used to describe grain size in granular carbonate rocks: Fine grained: clasts less than 1/3 mm in diameter (clay, silt, and very fine sand of Wentworth scale). Medium grained: clasts from 1/3 to 1 mm in 4 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA diameter (fine, medium, and coarse sand of Wentworth scale). Coarse grained: clasts from 1 to 64 mm in di— ameter (very coarse sand to pebbles of Went- Worth scale). Grain size in crystalline carbonate rocks is described as follows: Medium crystalline: crystals 1A; to 1 mm in diameter. Coarse crystalline: crystals greater than 1 mm in diameter. Rock-term modifiers, such as crinoidal, refer to pre- dominant biogenic constituents of granular carbon- ate textures. Thicknesses of section units and beds were meas- ured in feet and tenths of feet. Most measurements were made with an 8-foot steel tape held perpendicu- lar to bedding directly against the outcrop. Many large units, particularly those poorly exposed, were measured with 3. Jacob staff where terrain and bedding attitudes were favorable. In rare instances of steep bedding attitudes, intervals were calculated from measurements made perpendicular to the strike with a 100—foot steel tape held horizontally. Positions of fossil collections are recorded for each section unit in the descriptions of the units. The numbers refer to the US. Geological Survey upper Paleozoic locality file at the US. National Museum in Washington, DC. BOUNDARY CRITERIA AND NOMENCLATURE None of the stratigraphic units described in this paper, with the exception of the Cottonwood Can- yon Member of the Lodgepole Limestone (Sandberg and Klapper, 1967), was previously described in enough detail to establish precise boundaries. In the course of studying many stratigraphic sections of the Madison Group in the northern Rocky Moun- tain region, we have used boundary criteria that have proved applicable on a regional basis and that are consistent with the vague limits recognized by the founders of the units and subsequent geologists. Proposed boundary criteria are as follows: 1. Base of Paine Member of Lodgepole Limestone: The basal beds of the Paine Member consist of crinoidal limestone that is readily distinguished from shale, sandstone, or siltstone of the under- lying Cottonwod Canyon Member of the Lodge- pole. 2. Top of Paine Member of Lodgepole Limestone: All but the lowest beds of the Paine consist of fine-grained shaly and silty limestone contain- ing varying amounts of scattered bioclastic debris but no discrete beds of crinoidal 'lime- stone. The top of the Paine Member is placed at the base of the lowest crinoidal limestone bed, which marks the beginning of cyclical alternation of crinoidal limestone (commonly oolitic) and shaly, predominantly fine grained limestone characteristic of the Woodhurst Member. 3. Top of the Woodhurst Member of Lodgepole Limestone: The lower part of the Mission Can- yon Limestone is characterized by clean, thick beds of crinoidal limestone that stand in marked contrast to the shaly, thin-bedded, cyclical limestone sequence of the Woodhurst. The top of the Woodhurst is placed at the top of the highest shaly, thin-bedded, predomi- nantly fine grained limestone beneath the thicker crinoidal beds of the Mission Canyon. The nomenclature proposed by Sloss and Hamblin (1942) for the sequence above the Cottonwood Canyon Member is followed in this report. Weed’s (1899a, b) terms “Paine shale” and “Woodhurst limestone” are changed to Paine Member and Wood- hurst Member; “Paine shale” is a misnomer, and “Woodhurst limestone” is unnecessary inasmuch as both units are subdivisions of the Lodgepole Limestone. LOGAN SECTION The Logan section is the type section of the Madi- son Group. The section traverse begins at the base of the Lodgepole Limestone exposed in the north- west slope of a gully located on the north side of the Gallatin River immediately north of the town of Logan. in SEMLSW1/4, sec. 25, T. 2 N., R. 2 E., Gallatin County, Mont. (figs. 1, 2). The traverse proceeds across exposures of the Lodgepole in the gully slope (fig. 20) to the base of the Mission Canyon Lime- stone exposed near the top of the slope (fig. 2D). The Mission Canyon Limestone is exposed in smooth- surfaced outcrops on a hilltop. The traverse proceeds across the hill to the top of the Mission Canyon at the edge of a swale occupied by the Big Snowy For- mation in NWflSng sec. 25. Thin units in the section were measured directly with an 8-foot tape, whereas thicker ones were cal- culated from measurements made with a 100-foot tape held horizontally. The beds dip 40°—45° NW. The section was measured in 1957. A columnar sec- tion is shown on plate 1. LOGAN SECTION 19 ZN-I 45°53’ 111°25' R. 2 E. R. 3 E. 0 V2 1 MILE o .5 1 KILOMETER EXPLANATION m JURASSIC ROCKS, UNDIVIDED QUADRANT FORMATION AMSDEN FORMATION AND BIG SNOWY GROUP MISSION CANYON LIMESTONE LODGEPOLE LIMESTONE DEVONIAN AND CAMBRIAN ROCKS, UNDIVIDED __ Contact < < << < Measured section traverse FIGURE 1.—Geologic ske-tch map of Logan section. Geology by W. J. Sando and J. T. Dutro, Jr. Base from U.S. Geol. Survey Manhattan quadrangle, Montana, scale 1162,500. Thickness (feet) Big Snowy Formation (Kibbey equivalent) : 41. Quartz sandstone, dolomitic, fine- to medium-grained, grayish-yellow; weathers pale yellowish orange; con- tains dolomite pebbles as much as 0.2 ft in diameter; beds 0.5—1 ft thick; poorly exposed ______________________ 40. Covered; occupied by swale ____________ 12.0 88.5 Madison Group: Mission Canyon Limestone: 39. Dolomitic limestone, like unit 38 but many beds weathered more yellowish; brown Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon. Limestone—Continued 38. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. and gray chert as in unit 38 about 10— 15 percent; beds 0.2—2 ft thick; unit forms ridge and dip slope. Fossils rare or absent __________________________ Dolomitic limestone, fine- to medium- grained, mostly olive gray to light olive gray; weathers yellowish gray, some beds weather medium gray and mot- tled medium gray and yellowish gray; bioclastic debris scattered throughout and in concentrated zones; about 15 per- cent milky—gray aphanitic chert con- centrated mostly in upper half; beds 0.2—2 ft thick; forms massive out- crops. BrachiOpods and solitary and colonial corals. USGS 17387—PC from upper 10 ft ________________________ . Covered; lower half contains platy frag- ments of dolomitic limestone in float; very little chert ____________________ Dolomitic limestone; like unit 35 but more calcareous; rock appears to be made up of fine nonbioclastic sand- and silt-sized carbonate in very fine grained dolomite matrix; chert about same as in unit 35 _________________ Dolomitic limestone; like unit 22 but forms massive beds; much brecciation and flowage of finely laminated struc- ture; about 20 percent brown punky- weathered chert in nearly continuous zones of thin irregular lenses _______ Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained; like unit. 22; poorly exposed; weathers to platy fragments ____________________ Limestone, interbedded fine-grained (60 percent), pelletal or oolitic (30 per- cent), and dolomitic (10 percent); beds 1—3 ft thick; chert less than 5 percent. Brachiopods and bryozoans oc- cur in pelletal beds. USGS 17385—PCA 28.8 ft above base, USGS 17386—PC 49.2 ft above base _________________ Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained; like unit 22; less than 5 percent brown chert lenses and orange-weathered jas- peroid chert; poorly exposed; weathers to platy fragments _________________ Limestone, mostly fine grained (70—80 percent) but contains interbedded pel- letal limestone (5 percent) in beds about 1 ft thick and medium—grained bioclastic limestone (15 percent); also a few dolomitic beds; orange-weather- ing jasperoid chert in large masses and forming reticulate networks about 15— 20 percent. Fauna dominantly brachio— pods and bryozoans and a few large solitary corals. USGS 17382—PC 31.5 ft above base, USGS 17383—PC 44.5 ft 5 Thickness (feet) 176.0 79.0 64.3 11.5 11.5 35.2 80.0 52.8 6 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA FIGURE 2.—Madison Group in the Logan section. A, B, Lower part of Madison Group; Three Forks Formation (Mth), Cot- tonwood Canyon Member of Lodgepole Limestone (Mlc), and Paine Member of Lodgepole Limestone (Mlp). C, Ledges of Woodhurst Member of Lodgepole Limestone (units 10—14 of measured section). D, Contact between Lodgepole Lime— stone (MI) and Mission Canyon Limestone (Mmc). Note light-colored, smooth-weathered thicker beds of basal Mission Canyon Limestone. Smooth-surfaced outcrops of lower part of Mission Canyon continue to top of hill. Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued above base, USGS 17384—PC 59.2 ft above base _________________________ Covered, and a few outcrops or loose blocks of dolomitic limestone like unit 22; very little chert in float; possible solution breccia interval ____________ Limestone, pisolitic and oolitic with fine- grained matrix, light-olive-gray to light-brownish-gray; weathers medium light gray _________________________ Limestone, fine-grained; beds 2—3 ft thick in lower 67 ft, 5—8 ft thick in upper _part; a few lenses of chert in upper 37 ft ______________________________ Limestone, mostly medium grained (some coarser); bioclastic, composed mainly of crinoid, ostracode, and brachiopod remains; brownish gray; weathers medium gray; beds 1—3 ft thick, with some partings spaced 0.1—0.3 ft; about 5—10 percent light-brown— to dark- yellowish-orange - weathered j asperoid chert in masses as much as 2 ft thick. USGS 17379—PC 4.9 ft above base; USGS 17380—PC 30.3 ft above base, USGS 17381—PC 84 ft above base ___ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 25 but more massive; beds 1—5 ft thick; about 20 percent brown punky—weathered chert in irregular masses and mostly thin lenses, although some are as much as 0.5 ft thick. No fossils ___________ Limestone, fine-grained, olive-gray to brownish-gray; weathers medium gray; beds 0.5—1 ft thick, with thinner, lami- nated interbeds (60 percent) ; no chert. No fossils _________________________ Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained; like unit 22 ____________________________ Limestone, crinoidal; like unit 21 but con- tains no chert ______________________ Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained; like unit 19 but contains no lenses of bio- clastic debris; poorly exposed ________ Limestone, coarse to very coarse grained, crinoidal, brownish-gray to olive-gray; weathers medium-gray; beds 2—5 ft thick; reticulate network of chert in upper 10 ft. Corals rare. USGS 17378- PC 16.2 ft above base ______________ Limestone, mostly coarse-grained, cri- noidal, partly oolitic, brownish- to olive- gray; weathers medium gray; beds 2—3 ft thick; no chert __________________ Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained with thin lenses of bioclastic debris, olive- gray; weathers yellowish gray; beds 0.1~0.3 ft thick; weathers to platy frag- ments ______________________________ 30. 29. 28. 27. 26. 25. 24. 23. 22. 21. 20. 19. LOGAN SECTION Thickness (feet) 60.5 47.2 104.0 88.5 33.7 35.7 18.3 16.2 21.0 52.0 10.5 7.1 Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 18. Limestone, medium-grained, crinoidal, brownish-gray to olive-gray; weathers medium gray; beds 2~5 ft thick, but some partings spaced a few inches apart; 5 percent yellowish-white- weathering chert, making fuzzy enve- lopes around limestone “nodules.” Fos- sils rare. USGS 17377—PC 19.7 ft above base ________________________ Total Mission Canyon Limestone__ Lodgepole Limestone: Woodhurst Member: 17. Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- g‘rained; like unit 13; no chert. USGS 17376—PC 6 ft above base ___________ Limestone, fine-grained, brownish-gray; weathers medium light gray; thin layers of coarse bioclastic debris; beds 1—2 ft thick ________________________ Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 13; chert less than 5 percent. USGS 17375—PC 3 ft below top ________________________________ Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 13; chert less than 5 percent; lower 55 ft almost entirely covered, upper 43 ft about 60 percent covered ____________________________ Limestone, very fine to fine grained (micrite and calcisiltite) with scattered thin lenses and beds of coarse bioclastic debris; mostly olive gray; weathers medium gray to medium light gray; beds 0.1—0.4 ft thick, irregular to nodular, separated by silty partings; about 5—10 percent punky-weathered brown chert lenses, concentrated in upper half of unit. USGS 17373—PC 3 ft below top, USGS 17374~PC from float at top ________________________ Limestone; interbedded calcarenite, cal- cisiltite, and coarse: crinoidal limestone; like unit 10. Fauna similar to that of underlying units. USGS 17371—PC 5 ft above base (float), USGS 17372—PC 1 ft below top _____________________ 11. Limestone, medium— to very coarse grained, crinoidal, brownish-gray to olive-gray; weathers medium-dark-gray to light-gray; beds 1—2 ft thick with a few silty partings and small-scale crossbedding. Abundant corals and brachiopods. USGS 17370—PC from upper 2 ft ________________________ 10. Limestone, mostly interbedded fine- grained calcarenite and lime siltstone (many laminated beds) that weather medium dark and medium gray, and 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. Thickness (feet) 44.4 1,050.1 27.0 6.0 12.0 98.0 20.0 17.0 12.0 8 TYPE SECTIONS OF Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued medium to coarse-grained crinoidal sand; minor (10 percent) micrite like that in unit below; chert less than 5 percent. Fauna similar to that of un- derlying units. USGS 17365—PC 26 ft above base (float), USGS 17366—PC 39.5 ft above base, USGS 17367—PC 52.5 above base, USGS 17368—PC 65.5 ft above base, USGS 17369—PC 18 ft below top 9. Limestone, interbe‘dded, fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 8 but with about 15—20 percent brown punky-weathered chert in irregular masses and lenses mostly 0.3 ft or less thick; upper 10 ft contains about 50 percent lime silt- stone. USGS 17362—PC from lower 0.5 ft, USGS 17363—PC 16 ft above base, USGS 17364—PC 22 ft above base ____ 8. Limestone, interbedded fine-grained, like unit 6 (about 70 percent), and coarse- grained, like unit 4, with silty part- ings; beds 0.2—0.4 ft thick, nodular bedded in part; a lens of brown jaspery chert as much as 2 ft thick 15 ft above base. Fossiliferous through- out; fossils in coarse-grained beds and and lenses. USGS 17361—PC from lower 10 ft (float) _______________________ 7. Limestone breccia and conglomerate; tabular fragments of brownish- weathered silty limestone as much as 0.2 ft diameter in coarse to very coarse bioclastic calcarenite matrix composed of crinoidal and brachiopod debris. Bed weathers brownish _____________ Total Woodhurst Member _____ Paine Member: 6. Limestone, very fine to fine grained (micrite and calcisiltite), mostly olive gray to dark gray; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds 0.1—0.3 ft thick, cobbly and nodular; abundant thin lenses of coarse bioclastic debris; beds separated by thin buff-weathered silty partings. Brachiopods, bryozoans, and some spaghettilike ichnofOSSils as in unit 5. USGS 17360—PC from throughout unit ____________________ 5. Limestone, argillaceous, fine-grained, olive- and dark-gray; weathers light gray and very light gray with but cast; faintly laminated; beds 0.2—0.8 ft thick, separated by buff-weathered shaly and silty partings ’as much as 0.2 ft thick; no chert seen. Only fossils seen were abundant spaghettilike ichno- THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Thickness ( f Get) 212.0 31.0 25.0 be 460.8 10.0 Thickness (feet) Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Paine Member—Continued fossils, a few fenestrate bryozoans, and crinoid stems. USGS 17359-PC 80 ft above base _________________________ 4. Limestone, medium to very coarse grained, crinoidal, medium-dark- gray with some brownish hues; weathers medium gray to medium light gray; beds 0.2-0.6 ft thick with silty partings. 3—4 mm thick; brown- ish jaspery chert weathering punky, mostly in irregular masses 0.1 ft or less in diameter, comprising 5 percent or less of unit; a zone of irregular chert lenses at top. Small brachiopods and horn corals rare. USGS 17356-PC from lower 5 ft, USGS 17357—PC 10 ft above base, USGS r17358—PC from upper 1.5 ft _______________________ 241.0 Total Paine Member __________ Cottonwood Canyon Member 3. Quartz sandstone, like unit 1 __________ 2. Clay shale, carbonaceous, grayish-black fresh; poorly exposed, forms reentrant in cliff. USGS 24979—PC ____________ 1.5 Total Cottonwood Canyon Member Total Lodgepole Limestone ____ Total Madison Group _________ Three Forks Formation (Sappington Member) 1. Quartz sandstone, fine-grained, calcare- ous, 1 i g h t-moderate-yellowish—brown; weathers dark yellowish orange; thin, moderately resistant beds. ‘ MONARCH—U.S. 89 SECTION This reference section for the Mission Canyon Limestone was chosen because it is the closest com- plete outcrop section to the type section, which is incomplete by virtue of pre-Jurassic truncation. The section traverse begins at the Lodgepole-Mission Canyon contact exposed in a roadcut on the east side of U.S. Highway 89, 1.8 highway miles north of the road intersection at Monarch and about 100 yards north of a sign marking the boundary of the nation- al forest (figs. 3, 4A, B). This location is in SW14, NEIA sec. 27, T. 16 N., R. 7 E., Cascade County, Mont. The traverse proceeds northward in the hill slopes east of the highway (fig. 40) across SE14, sec. 22 into NE% sec. 22, where the section is termi- nated at the highest beds exposed on a dip slope over- lain by a red soil interval that represents the basal 47°07'30" MONARCH—U.S. 89 SECTION 110 ° 50' 0 1/2 lMlLE o -5 1 KILOMETER EXPLANATION m KIBBEY FORMATION MISSION CANYON LIMESTONE Mam LODGEPOLE LIMESTONE Dashed where approximately located __ _ _ Contact — < < < < < Measured section traverse FIGURE 3.—Geologic sketch map of Monarch—US. 89 sec- tion. Geology by W. J. Sando and J. T. Dutro, Jr. Base from US. Geol. Survey Monarch and Monarch NE quadrangles, Montana, scale 1224,000. beds of the Kibbey Formation. The beds dip 4°-5° N. The section was measured in 1962 with a Jacob staff and 8—foot steel tape. A columnar section is shown on plate 1. A more completely exposed section of the upper 121 feet of the Mission Canyon Limestone was meas- ured in the cliffs above Belt Creek about 150 yards south of the bridge at Riceville in NE1/4NW1/1, sec. 26, T. 17 N., R. 6 E., Cascade County, Mont. At this locality, only the lower 10 feet of the Kibbey Forma- tion are covered by the highway. Comparison of this section With the Monarch—US. 89 section suggests that the latter may lack as much as the upper 10 feet of the Mission Canyon Limestone, but this may be due to variation in position of the post-Madison, pre- Big Snowy erosion surface. Big Snowy Group: Kibbey Formation: Represented by red soil on dip slope; erosional relief on top of Madison appears to be as much as 20 ft. Madison Group: Mission Canyon Limestone: 47. Limestone, fine-grained (micrite), dark- 46. 45. 44. 43. 42. 41. 40. 39. 38. 37. 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. yellowish-brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds 0.5-1.5 ft thick ____________________________ Covered, like unit 44; some chert as in unit 45 in float as well as fine-grained limestone and calcareous siltstone ____ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 35; about 50 percent large brown-weathered chert lenses ________________________ Covered; float consists of red-, yellow-, and orange-weathered platy calcareous siltstone and fine-grained limestone like unit 36; no chert _______________ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 36; no chert ______________________________ Covered; small pieces of pink- and dark- yellowish - orange - weathered siltstone and fine-grained limestone breccia with pink and orange matrix (clasts 0.05 ft or less in diameter) ______________ Limestone, mostly fine grained, like unit 36, about 10—20 percent large nodules of brown- to orange-weathered chert __ Covered by talus from unit 41 ________ Limestone, mostly fine grained; like unit 36; about 10 percent chert __________ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 30 ___ Limestone, mostly fine grained; like unit 36 but with about 20—30 percent brown- to orange-weathered chert nodules, sheets, and lenses. Rare brachiopods and disarticulated colonial corals. USGS 20806—PC 3 ft above base _____ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; micrite and fine-grained calcarenite with about 20 percent scattered medium to coarse crinoidal and other bioclastic debris; dark yellowish brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 1—3 ft thick; about 5 percent small orange-weathered chert nodules- Limestone, fine-grained (micrite), dark- yellowish-brown ; weathers In e d i u m gray to very light gray; beds regular, some laminated, 0.3—0.5 ft thick; one intraformational conglomerate 0.5 ft thick in upper half; about 5 percent orange-weathered chert in thin sheets Covered by talus from unit above _____ Covered; terrace level ________________ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 30; about 20—30 percent fine- to medium- grained bioclastic debris (ostracodes?) Limestone, oolitic; like unit 26; beds 0.5- Thickness (feet) 5.0 13.0 2.0 8.0 1.0 7.0 13.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 13.0 12.0 9.0 25.0 30.0 8.0 10 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Thickness (feet) Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 2 ft thick; about 10—20 percent orange- and brown-weathered chert nodules and lenses. Algal oncolites in lower ft. USGS 20805—PC from lower ft ______ 8.0 30. Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 28 but beds are 0.3—0.5 ft thick and unit con- tains only about 5—10 percent chert--- 9.0 29. Covered; terrace level _________________ 20.0 28. Limestone, fine-grained; predominantly micrite with a few beds of very fine grained calcarenite; dark yellowish brown; weathers medium to very light gray; beds 0.3—1 ft thick; about 40 per- cent orange-weathered reticular, nodu- lar, and lenticular chert ___________ 30.0 27. Covered; medium- to coarse-grained crinoidal limestone in float ________ 8.0 FIGURE 4.-—Madison Group in the Monarch—U.S. 89 sec- tion, Little Belt Mountains. A, Contact between Lodgepole Limestone (MI) and Mission Canyon Limestone (Mmc) exposed in roadcut at base of section. B, Lower part of Mission Canyon Limestone exposed in hills along U.S. 89 north of Monarch (measured section units 1—19 in hill in center of photograph). C, Mission Canyon Limestone: lower clifi‘ is unit 19; units 22 and 23 form rounded cliffs in center of photograph. Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 26. Limestone, predominantly medium grained, oolitic, dark-yellowish-brown; Weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 1—3 ft thick, bed- ding planes poorly defined; about 5—10 percent small spongy orange-weathered chert nodules. Colonial corals. USGS— 20804—PC 3 ft above base ___________ 25. Limestone; like unit 24 but predominant- ly fine grained inorganic calcarenite, with chert about 10 percent in small orange-weathered nodules; beds 1—2 ft thick ______________________________ 24. Limestone, predominantly fine grained; micrite and fine inorganic calcarenite with about 5 percent fine organic debris; a few beds of coarse crinoidal limestone; pale to dark yellowish brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 1—3 ft thick; bedding planes poorly defined; about 30—40 percent orange- to brown- weathered chert in large and small nodules and lenses; some beds slight- ly rotated in lower half _____________ 23. Breccia; clasts consist of fine- to medium-grained dark-yellowish-brown Thickness (feet) 14.0 10.0 45.0 MONARCH—U.S. 89 SECTION Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 22. 21. 20. 19. 18. 17. 16. cherty crinoidal limestone (40 percent crinoidal debris in micrite matrix) that weathers medium light gray to light gray. Clasts are large rotated blocks as much as 10 ft in diameter, some nearly in original position, especially in upper 20 ft. Unit is interpreted as a collapse breccia overlying a solution zone. Clasts contain abundant brachio— pods and solitary and colonial corals. USGS 20800—PC from lower 5 ft; USGS 20801—PC 20—25 ft above base; USGS 20802—PC 40—42 ft above base; USGS 20803—PC 65—70 ft above base__ Breccia; clasts consist of fine-grained dark-yellowish-brown limestone that weathers medium light gray to light gray and of about 5 percent chert that weathers brown and orange. Clasts are angular blocks mostly 0.5 ft in diameter or less in a matrix of fine-grained yel- lowish- to pinkish-weathering calcare- ous rock flour. Unit is interpreted as a solution zone Covered; small chips of fine— to coarse- grained partly crinoidal dolomitic lime- stone that weathers pale yellowish brown _____________________________ Limestone, fine- to medium-crystalline, dark-yellowish-brown to cream-colored; weathers medium light gray mottled grayish orange; beds irregular, 0.5—1 ft thick, seemingly partly brecciated; large colonial coral at base _________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; ‘micrite with 5 percent or less fine bio- clastic debris and pellets and oolites in upper 20 feet; dark yellowish brown; weathers medium light gray to: light gray; beds 5—10 ft thick, bedding planes poorly defined; irregular sparry calcite flecks, some parallel to bedding but mostly at random. Small gastropods in upper 20 ft. Top of unit is top of prominent clifl", which was walked northward around hill to next big draw to north; section continued up nose above cliifs above and on east side of highway and north of draw _________ Limestone, fine grained; like unit 13 but beds about 1—2 ft thick _____________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 16 but beds are 1—4 ft thick and contain about 20 percent punky brown-weathered chert lenses and nodules. Brachiopods and corals. USGS 20799—PC 7-8 ft above base ________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained with about 20—30 percent scattered coarse crinoidal and other bioclastic Thickness (feet) 110.0 25.0 15.0 15.0 62.0 13.0 18.0 Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. debris, dark-yellowish-brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds 1—3 ft thick. Brachiopods and solitary corals rare. USGS 20798—PC from lower 5 ft Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 13 but a little coarser grained _____________ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 13 but with about 20—30 percent spongy brown-weathered chert lenses and sheets; two beds each 4 ft thick _____ Limestone, fine-grained; 20—30 percent sand-size bioclastic debris (ostra- codes?) in micrite matrix; beds regu- lar, 1—5 ft thick, poorly defined; a few small spongy brown chert nodules in lower 5 ft _________________________ Limestone, fine-grained, moderate-brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 0.3—0.5 ft thick, faintly laminated; about 40 percent ir- regular sheets and lenses of orange- weathered brown chert _____________ Covered by talus from unit 12 ________ Mostly covered, with a few ledges of cherty dolomitic limestone and lime- stone like units 3 and 4; about 20—30 percent scattered crinoidal debris in exposed beds. Brachiopods rare _____ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained; like unit 8 but contains about 30 per- cent interbeddred fine-grained limestone and beds are 1—2 ft thick; 5 percent or less small spongy incipient brown- weathered chert nodules. Corals and brachiorpods rare. Unit forms bench on top of clifi‘. USGS 20797—PC from throughout unit ____________________ Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal, dark-yellowish-brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 2—5 ft thick, poorly defined; large lenses of pink- to brown- weathered porous chert at top. Rare solitary corals and brachiopod‘s ______ Covered; lower 20 ft seemingly like units 2—6; upper 33 ft covered completely by talus from unit 8 _______________ Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained; like unit 4 _____________________________ Limestone, fine- to medium-crystalline; like unit 3 _________________________ Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained; like unit 2; about 30 percent irregular re- ticular and sheetlike varicolored chert, some jasperoid _____________________ Limestone, fine- to medium-crystalline, grayish-orange; weathers medium light gray; about 10—20 percent reticular varicolored chert ___________________ 11 Thickness (feet) 20.0 10.0 8.0 31.5 5.5 19.0 20.0 20.0 47.5 53.0 2.5 4.0 3.7 3.5 12 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Thickness (feet) Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 2. Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained with about 30 percent scattered coarse cri- noidal debris, olive-gray; weathers light olive gray and yellowish gray; beds 0.3—0.5 ft thick; about 10 percent reti- cular varicolored chert; both contacts fuzzy ______________________________ 3.0 1. Limestone, predominantly coarse grained, crinoidal with thin interbeds of fine- grained limestone, dark-yellowish- brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 0.5-2 ft thick; less than 5 percent small brown- weathered incipient chert nodules. Corals and brachiopods. USGS 20796— PC 35—40 ft above base _____________ Total Mission Canyon Limestone 861.2 Lodgepole Limestone: Upper 10 ft consists of thin-bedded fine- and coarse-grained limestone like that at the top of the Lodgepole in the Dry Fork section. DRY FORK SECTION The Dry Fork section is the type section of the Paine and Woodhurst Members of the Lodgepole Limestone. The section traverse begins at the base of a cliff above the road along the Dry Fork of Belt Creek at the intersection of Currie Coulee with Dry Fork at the SE. cor. sec. 35, T. 16 N., R. 7 E., Cas- cade County, Mont. (figs. 5—7). The Cottonwood Can- yon Member and lowermost beds of the Paine Mem- ber of the Lodgepole were studied by digging a trench about 5 feet deep at the base of the cliff. The traverse proceeds around and up the cliff in SE14 SE14, sec. 35 to the top of the Paine Member at the top of the cliff, then northeastward across SW1/4, sec. 36 up a long spur to cliffs composed of Mission Can- yon Limestone in NWMLSEIA, sec. 36. The traverse was terminated on top of these clifl’s in SE14NE14 sec. 36, where a long dip slope prevents further measurement. The section was measured in 1962 with a Jacob staff and 8-foot steel tape. The beds dip about 8° N. A columnar section is shown on plate 1. Thickness (feet) Madison Group : Mission Canyon Limestone (incomplete) : 61. Limestone predominantly fine grained; like unit 60 but with about 50 percent networks and nodules of varicolored jasperoid chert _____________________ 30.0 \\ KWO 0; 30 31 47°06'15" n ' u I 110°47'30” R. 7 E R. 8 E 0 V2 lMILE g -5 1 KILOMETER EXPLANATION MISSION CANYON LIMESTONE WOODHURST MEMBER OF LODGEPOLE LIMESTONE 7 /) 5% PAINE MEMBER OF LODGEPOLE LIMESTONE COTTONWOOD CANYON MEMBER OF MIC LODGEPOLE LIMESTONE (COVERED) DEVONIAN ROCKSp UNDIVIDED Contact < < < << Measured section traverse FIGURE 5.—-Geologic sketch map of Dry Fork section. Geology by W. J. Sando and J. T. Dutro, Jr. Base from U.S. Geol. Survey Monarch quadrangle, Montana, scale 1:24,000. Thickness (feet) Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 60. Limestone, predominantly fine grained with a few thin interbeds of coarse crinoidal limestone and about 10 per- cent scattered coarse bioclastic debris, moderate - yellowish - brown; weathers medium light gray to grayish orange; beds regular, 0.1-0.3 ft thick; about 5 percent incipient orange- and brown-weathered chert nodules; unit poorly exposed on knob. Same fauna as unit 59. USGS 20795—PC from lower 5 ft _______________________________ 9.0 DRY FORK SECTION FIGURE 6.—Clifi's at Currie Coulee on Dry Fork pole Limestone (MI) and basal beds of Mission Limestone (Mmc). Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued 59. Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal, pale - yellowish - brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds fairly regular, 0.1—0.5 ft thick; about 5 percent incipient chert nodules as in unit 58; unit poorly ex- posed, on nose above cliff, about 50 percent covered. Abundant solitary and colonial corals. USGS 20793~PC from float 15 ft above base, USGS 20794— PG 20—22 ft above base _____________ 58. Limestone, interbedded fine— and coarse- grained, crinoidal; lower half about 60 percent fine-grained limestone, upper half about 80 percent crinoidal lime- stone; pale yellowish brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 0.5—2 ft thick; 5 percent or less small incipient punky brown- weathered chert nodules; unit meas— ured in cliff. Brachiopods, and solitary and colonial corals common. USGS 20791—PC 3-4 ft above base, USGS 20792—PC from upper 10 ft _________ Mission Canyon Limestone (in- complete) __________________ Lodgepole Limestone: woodhurst Member: 57. Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained (about 50 percent each); like unit 15; beds nodular to lenticular, 0.1— 0.5 ft thick; yellowish- to pink- weathered partings about 20—30 per- cent. Zoophycos ichnofossils _________ of Belt Creek, Little Belt Mountains, showing exposures of Lodge- Canyon Thickness (feet) 25.0 109.0 5.0 13 FIGURE 7.——Clifl’ face at Currie Coulee on Dry Fork of Belt Creek, Little Belt Mountains, showing basal beds of Woodhurst Member of Lodgepole Limestone (le), Paine Member of Lo‘dgepole Limestone (Mlp), Cottonwood Canyon Member of Lodgepole Limestone (MIC), Three Forks Formation (Mth), and uppermost beds ferson Formation (Dj). Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued 56. Limestone, predominantly fine grained with about 10—20 percent scattered medium to coarse crinoidal debris and yellowish-weathered partings, dark-yel- lowish—brown; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 0.3— 0.5 ft thick; about 10 percent small brown- and orange-weathered chert nodules ____________________________ 55. Dolomitic limestone, fine-grained; like unit 53 ____________________________ 54. Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained crinoidal; like unit 52 but no dolomitic limestone interbeds; about 5 percent of J ef- Thickness (feet) 6.0 4.5 14 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued 53. 52. 51. 50. 49. 48. 47. 46. 45. 44. 43. 42. 41. 40. small brown-weathered chert nodules. Brachiopods and solitary corals. USGS 20790—PC from upper 2 ft __________ Dolomitic limestone or dolomite, fine- grained, olive-gray; weathers light brownish gray to yellowish gray; beds blocky, 0.1—0.3 ft thick, regular to lenti- cular; about 5 percent small orange- to brown—weathered subspherical chert nodules ____________________________ Limestone (60 percent) and dolomitic limestone (40 percent); limestone is predominantly medium to coarse grained, crinoidal with some fine- grained layers, dark yellowish brown, weathers medium light gray, in beds 0.3—1 ft thick; dolomitic limestone is fine grained, silty, olive gray, weathers light olive gray to yellowish gray, in platy beds 0.05—0.1 ft thick. Contacts of unit irregular, fuzzy. Brachiopods and solitary corals _________________ Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 15 but no chert; much scattered coarse crinoidal debris in upper half ______________________ Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24. USGS 20789—- PC from upper ft _________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert; thin crinoidal interbeds about 50 percent of unit in upper half. Zoophycos and abundant brachiopods. USGS 20788—PC from float throughout unit _______________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 ______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert. Brachiopods abundant, corals rare. USGS 20787—PC from float throughout unit __________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 _______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15; a few chert nodules in lower half. Zoophycos ichnofossils. USGS 20785—PC from lower ft, USGS 20786—PC from upper 4 ft _________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 ______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert ____________ Limestone, coarse - grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 _______________________ Covered, and a few ledges of predomi- nantly fine grained limestone like unit 15 ____________________________ Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 38 but contains fewer brachiopods Thickness (feet) 3.0 4.5 8.5 5.5 2.5 16.0 2.0 8.5 2.5 7.0 2.0 6.5 1.5 10.0 1.0 Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued 39. 38. 37. 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. 30. 29. 28. 27. 26. 25. 24. 23. 22. 21. 20. 19. Covered, and a few ledges of predomi- nantly fine grained limestone like unit 15 _________________________________ Limestone, coarse—grained, crinoidal; brachiopod coquina. USGS 20784—PC Covered, and a few ledges of predomi- nantly fine grained limestone like unit 15; no chert _______________________ Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 ____________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert ___________ Limestone, predominantly fine to medium grained; interbedded micrite and oolite with about 10—20 percent medium- to coarse—grained crinoidal and other bio- clastic debris (about 40—50 percent in upper 2 ft); pale yellowish brown to dark yellowish brown; weathers me- dium light gray to light gray; beds regular, 0.5—2 ft thick; oolitic beds be- gin with sharp basal discontinuity and grade upward into fine sediment. Brachiopods ________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert. USGS 20783— PC from throughout unit ___________ Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 ____________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert ___________ Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24; beds 0.1—1 ft thick _________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert. USGS 20782— PC from throughout unit ___________ Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 ____________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert ___________ Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 24 ____________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert ___________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 6; beds 0.3—0.5 ft thick, some crossbedded and con- glomeratic _________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert ___________ Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 6; beds 0.3—0.5 ft thick ___________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert ___________ Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 6; conglomeratic. ______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 15 but no chert; thin crinoi- Thickness (feet) 15.0 .5 9.5 1.5 3.5 8.0 4.0 2.5 3.5 4.0 9.5 1.5 6.5 4.0 4.0 3.5 8.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 DRY FORK SECTION 15 Thickness Thickness (feet) (feet) Madison Group—Continued Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued dal beds contain pebbles of fine- chert nodules; top of unit is top of first grained limestone. Zoophycos, brachio- main clifl". Abundant brachio‘pods and pods, and solitary and colonial corals. corals. USGS 20769—PC 5 ft above USGS 20780~PC from lower 10 ft base; USGS 20770—PC 3—5 ft above (float), USGS 20781—PC from upper base ——————————————————————————————— 7.0 5 ft _______________________________ 27_0 11. Limestone, predominantly fine grained; 18. Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, like unit 5- Corals. USGS 20768‘PC crinoidal; like unit 6; beds 0.3—1.5 ft from float in lower half ———————————— 6-0 thick. Abundant solitary and colonial 10- Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, corals. USGS 20779430 from through- crinoidal; like unit 6; beds 0.5—1 ft out unit ___________________________ 5.0 thiCk —————————————————————————————— 5-5 17. Limestone, predominantly fine grained; 9- Limestone, Predominantly fine grained; like unit 15‘; beds 0.05—o.3 ft thick. like unit 5 ———————————————————————— 10-0 USGS 20778—PC 5 ft above base ___ 13.0 8. Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, 16. Covered, and a few ledges of predomi- crinoidal; two lenticular beds sepa- nantly fine grained limestone like unit rated by silty partings ———————————— 2-5 15_ USGS 20776—PC from float in lower 7. Limestone, predominantly fine grained 50 ft, USGS 20777—PC. 57 ft above base with about 20 percent coarse bioclastic (float) ____________________________ 85.0 debris, light-olive-gray; weathers 15. Limestone, predominantly fine grained; medium light gray; beds 0-1*0-3 ft silty micrite with about 10 percent thick, nodular to lenticular; about 30 scattered coarse bioclastic debris and percent yellowish Silty partings 0.1— 5_10 percent pink-stained lenses of 0.3 ft thick. Brachiopods and bryozoans 3.5 conglomeratic crinoidal limestone; 6. Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, dark yellowish brown; weathers me- crinoidal, dark-yellowish-brownto pale- dium light gray; beds lenticular, 0.1— yellowish-brown; weathers medium 0.3 ft thick; 10—20 percent yellowish- light gray to light gray; bEdS 05—3 ft weathered silty partings 0.05—0.2 ft thiCk: CTO‘SSbed‘ded- Brachiopods, bryo- thick; 10_20 percent small punky zoans, solitary and colonial corals. orange-weathered ch'ert lenses and USGS 20765‘PC 35 ft abOVe base; nodules; unit foms small cliff pro- USGS 20766-PC 9 ft above base; truding from long SIOpe. Zoophycos USGS 20767—PC 15—20 ft above base 23.0 ichnofossils, brachiOpods, bryozoans, 5' Limestone, Predominantly fine grained, solitary and colonial corals. USGS micrite With about 20-30 percent 20773_pC 15 ft above base, USGS scattered coarse bioclastic debris in 20774430 20 ft above base, USGS thin lenses and partings and afew thin 20775—PC 21 ft above base ___________ 33.0 lenses of crinoidal limestone; dark yel- 14, Covered; float and a few ledges of lime- lowish brown; weathers medium light stone suggest an interval of limestone gray; beds nodlflar to lenticular 0.05— like unit 15_ USGS 20772—PC from 0.1 ft thick; about 10 percent yellow- float in lower half __________________ 75,0 ish- to pink-weathered silty partings 13. Limestone, predominantly fine grained 0.05—0.1 ft thick. Abundant brachio— with about 30 percent scattered me- POdS- USGS 20764—130 6-9 ft ab‘OVe dium to coarse bioclastic debris and base _______________________________ 10.5 thin lenses of coarse crinoidal lime- 4' Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal, stone; dark yellowish brown; weathers dark-yellowish-brown to pale-yellowish- medium light gray; beds nodular to brown; weathers medium light gray lenticular, 0.3—0.5 ft thick; about 20 to light gray; beds regular, 1—3 ft percent ,yellowish- to pink-weathered thick. Brachiopods and solitary corals. silty partings 0.05—0.1 ft thick; unit USGS 20763—130 from upper half ___ 9.5 forms bench on top of clifl". Abundant 3- Limestone, fine-grained, shaly, cherty, Zoophycos and other ichnofossils, with about 30 percent coarse bioclastic brachiopods, and solitary and colonial debris; like uppermost part of unit 2 corals. USGS 20771430 5—8 ft above but with about 50 percent lenticular in- base _______________________________ 13_0 terbeds (0.3—1.5 ft thick) of medium- 12. Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, to coarse-grained crinoidal limestone. crinoidal; like unit 6; crossbedded, beds Abundant brachiopods and bryozoans- 7.0 0.5—2 ft thick; about 20 percent punky orange- and brown-weathered irregular Total Woodhurst Member ..... 526.0 16 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Thickness (feet) Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Paine Member: 2. Limestone, fine-grained, silty and argil- laceous; micrite with about 5 percent scattered coarse bioclastic debris in lower half increasing to about 10—15 percent throughout most of upper half but becoming 20—30 percent from 170 ft above base to top; dark yellowish brown to olive gray; weathers medium light gray to yellowish gray; lenticular to nodular cherty hard beds 0.3—1.5 ft thick in matrix of hackly, shaly lime- stone; about 40 percent large orange- weathened chert nodules and lenses, many of which have irregular lime- stone cores; hard beds are mostly lime- stone reinforced with incipient chert. Small spaghettilike ichnofossils, bryo- zoans, brachiopods, gastropods, and rare solitary corals. USGS 20752—PC 7—9 ft above base, USGS 20753—PC 28—31 ft above base, USGS 20754—PC 35—38 ft above base, USGS 20755—PC 62—65 ft above base, USGS 20756—PC 98—105 ft above base, USGS 20757—PC 115 ft above base, USGS 20758-PC 125—135 ft above base, USGS 20759—PC 137—142 ft above base, USGS 20760— PC 171 ft above base, USGS 20761— PC 180 ft above base, USGS 20762— PC 190—195 ft above base __________ 1c. Limestone, medium—grained, crinoidal, lightrolive-gray; weathers medium light gray to dark yellowish orange; beds irregular, 0.3—1 ft thick; measured in trench. USGS 20751—PC 1.5 ft above base _______________________________ 6.0 195.0 Total Paine Member __________ Cottonwood Canyon Member: 1b. Clay shale, black, weathered yellowish in in upper 0.3 foot; measured in trench. Conodonts. USGS 24978—PC _________ 1.5 1a. Quartz sandstone, fine-grained, black; measured in trench. Conodonts. USGS 24977—PC __________________________ an Total Cottonwood Canyon Member ____________________ 2.0 Total Lodgepole Limestone ____ 729.0 838.0 Madison Group (incomplete)--- Three Forks Formation (covered). MISSION CANYON SECTION The Mission Canyon section is the type section of the Mission Canyon Limestone. The base of the for- mation is exposed in cliffs that form the north wall of Mission Canyon on Peoples Creek, above the road along the southern boundary of SEIANWIA, sec. 32, T. 26 N., R. 24 E., Blaine County, Mont. (figs. 8 and 9). The beds dip 13°—15° NW. The base of the forma- tion was traced down the canyon to a point where it intersects the road at a culvert that carries the creek under the road. The formation was measured with a Jacob staff in 1962 by traversing along the road through the narrow, steep-walled canyon and observing the rocks in the south wall of the canyon (fig. 10). The section was terminated at the top of the highest limestone bed exposed on a dip slope at the west entrance to the canyon. A columnar section is shown on plate 1. 48°57'30" T 26 N T 25 N 108°40' R 24 E o 1/2 1 MILE o .5 1 KILOMETER EXPLANATION QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM CRETACEOUS ROCKS, UNDIVIDED JURASSIC ROCKS, UNDIVIDED MISSION CANYON LIMESTONE LODGEPOLE LIMESTONE DEVONIAN ROCKS, UNDIVIDED __ ....... Contact ~ Dotted where concealed < < < << Measured section traverse FIGURE 8.—Geologic sketch map of Mission Canyon section. Geology and base from Knechtel (1959, pl. 52). LITTLE CHIEF CANYON SECTION FIGURE 9.—Clifl"s on north side of Mission Canyon, Little Rocky Mountains, showing contact between Mission Canyon Limestone (Mmc) and Lodgepole Limestone (MI). FIGURE 10.—View northwest down Mission Canyon, Little Rocky Mountains, showing thick beds of lower 100 feet of Mission Canyon Limestone exposed in vertical canyon walls. Thickness (feet) Rierdon Formation of Ellis Group (covered). Madison Group: Mission Canyon Limestone: 7. Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 3; a zone of small nodules of gray and brown chert 45 ft above base. Brachiopods and solitary and colonial corals. USGS 20749—PC 45 ft above base, USGS 20750—PC from upper 10 ft __________________ 6. Limestone, mostly medium to coarse grained, crinoidal, interbedded with fine-grained limestone; beds 0.3—0.5 ft thick; yellowish- to reddish-weathered 70.0 17 Thickness (feet) Madison Group—Continued Mission Canyon Limestone—Continued silty partings 0.05—0.1 ft thick; about 20 percent small irregular nodules and lenses of brown jasperoid chert. Brachiopods and solitary and colonial corals. USGS 20748—PC 20—25 ft above base (at natural bridge) __________ 5. Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 3. Brachiopods and solitary corals. USGS 20746—PC 10 ft above base, USGS 20747—PC 40 ft above base _________________________ 4. Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 3 but contains large lentils and nodules of gray to brown chert. Brachiopods. USGS 20745—PC at base _______________________________ 3. Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal, light-olive-gray; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds 1—5 ft thick; contains many solution cavities ____________________________ 2. Limestone, mostly medium to coarse grained, crinoidal, interbedded with nodular to lenticular fine-grained lime- stone (about 30 percent), light-olive- gray; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds 0.2—0.5 ft thick. Brachiopods and solitary corals. USGS 20744—PC 10—15 ft above base _______ Total Mission Canyon Limestone Lodgepole Limestone: Woodhurst Member: 1. Limestone, fine-grained, pale-yellowish- b‘rown; weathers medium light gray; beds nodular to lenticular, 0.1—0.3 ft thick; yellowish-weathered silty part- ings _______________________________ LITTLE CHIEF CANYON SECTION The Little Chief Canyon section is the type section of the Lodgepole Limestone. The section traverse begins at the base of the Lodgepole Limestone ex- posed in the bed of a tributary of Lodgepole Creek in Little Chief Canyon in NElflLNWl/4, sec. 30, T. 26 N., R. 25 E., Blaine County, Mont, and extends across SE14, sec. 19 into SW14NWIA, sec. 20 (fig. 11; Knechtel and others, 1954, fig. 2a). The beds dip 12°- 16° NE. The section was measured in 1962 with a Jacob staff and an 8-foot steel tape, but it was necessary to combine five overlapping traverses as follows: Subsection A: From the base of the Lodgepole Lime- stone up the southeast slope of the canyon; units 1 through 12. Subsection B: About a quarter mile downstream from subsection A, from the base of unit 5 up the 40.0 90.0 20.0 60.0 15.0 295.0 3.0 18 48°00’ R 25 E 108°32’30” o y, 1 MILE 0 -5 1 KILOMETER EXPLANATION QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM CRETACEOUS ROCKS, UNDIVIDED JURASSIC ROCKS, UNDIVIDED MISSION CANYON LIMESTONE LODGEPOIE LIMESTONE CAMBRIAN‘THROUGH DEVONIAN ROCKS, UNDIVIDED ...... Contac' v Dotted where concealed ____ Normal fault — Approximately located. U, upthrown side; D, downthrown side < < < < A Measured section traverse FIGURE 11.—Ge‘olog‘ic sketch map of Little Chief Canyon section. Geology and base from Knechtel (1959, pl. 52) . southeast slope of the canyon in a small draw just southeast of prominent cliffs; units 5 through 16. Subsection C: About 100 yards downstream from subsection B, from the base of unit 11 up the southeast slope of the canyon in a prominent draw on the south side of a prominent red cliff; units 11 through 45. Careful work was required to neutralize the effect of small normal faults that disrupt the sequence. Subsection D: About a quarter mile downstream from subsection C, from the base of unit 43 up the TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA southeast slope of the canyon on the north side of a draw on the south side of a red cliff; units 43 through 60. Subsection E: About an eighth of a mile downstream from subsection D, where the stream bed inter- sects the base of the Mission Canyon Limestone, which was measured in the canyon with a Jacob staff observing the rocks exposed on both walls of the canyon; units 60 and 61. The section was ter- minated at the mouth of the canyon at the high- est limestone beds exposed on a dip slope. A columnar section is given on plate 1. Small dis- crepancies between locations of fossil collections in the Lodgepole Limestone on plate 1 and loca; tions given in the measured section result from difficulties in correlating and compositing of sub- section units of variable thickness. Thickness (feet) Rierdon Formation of Ellis Group (covered). Madison Group: Mission Canyon Limestone: 61. Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal, light-olive-gray; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds 1—5 ft thick, bedding planes indistinct; many caves and solution breccias. Brachiopods and solitary corals. USGS 20742—PC 15 ft above base, USGS 20743—PC 35 ft below top ___________ 60. Limestone, predominantly medium to coarse grained, crinoidal, with a few fine - grained beds, light - olive - gray; weathers medium light gray to light gray; beds 1—5 ft thick except for lower 2 ft in which they are 0.3—-O.5 ft thick, bedding planes indistinct; whitish- to brownish-weathered (some jasperoid) chert nodules and lenses several feet in diameter 50—60 ft above base; many caves and solution cavities throughout, a large solution breccia 50—60 ft above base composed of angular blocks of limestone and chert as much as 2 by 4 ft. Brachiopods, gastropods, and solitary corals. USGS 20739—PC from float at base, USGS 20740—PC 30— 35 ft above base, USGS 20741—PC 50~55 ft above base _______________ 160.0 Total Mission Canyon Limestone Lodgepole Limestone: Woodhurst Member: 59. Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 57"-- 58. Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 51 ________________ 57. Limestone, fine-grained, light-olive-gray; weathers medium light gray; beds nodular to lenticular, 0.1—0.4 ft thick; 4.0 LITTLE CHIEF CANYON SECTION Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued 56. 55. 54. 53. 52. 51. 50. 49. 48. 47. 46. 45. yellowish-weathered silty p a r t i n g s 0.05-0.1 ft thick which do not weather in relief; very little coarse bioclastic debris, no crinoidal beds ____________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 52. Solitary corals Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 51. USGS 20738—PC 8 ft above base ____________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 52. USGS 20737— PC ________________________________ Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 51. Colonial corals. USGS 20736—PC from float throughout unit _______________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, c r i noid al, pale - yellowish - brown; weathers medium light gray _________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 47 but contains about 20 per- cent interbeds of coarse-grained cri- noidal limestone in lenses and beds 0.5 ft thick or less. Zoophycos ichnofossils, brachiopods, gastropods, and solitary corals. USGS 20735—PC from float throughout _________________________ Limestone, interbedded fine— and coarse- grained; like unit 48; upper ft con- sists of crossbedded, very coarse cri- noidal limestone ____________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 47 ________________________ Limestone, fine- to coarse-grained; about 50 percent crinoidal bioclastic layers alternating with micrite layers; pale yellowish brown; weathers medium light gray; beds 0.5—1 ft thick; about 10 percent white-weathered chert nodules. Brachiopods abundant, solitary corals rare _________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained with about 20 percent scattered coarse bioclastic debris in lenses and on bed- ding planes, light—olive-gray; weathers medium light gray; beds regular to lenticular,, 0.1—0.4 ft thick; about 30 percent silty partings weathering yel- lowish gray. Abundant Zo-ophycos and brachiopods ________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse—grained crinoidal; like unit 40 _______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained with about 10—20 percent scattered coarse bioclastic debris, light-olive- gray; weathers medium light gray; beds regular, 0.3-0.5 ft thick; about Thickness ( f eet) 20.0 1.5 27.0 1.5 8.0 1.0 18.0 4.0 3.5 3.6 7.0 Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued 44. 43. 42. 41. 40. 39. 38. 37. 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 20 percent white-weathered chert nodules. USGS 20734—PC 3 ft above base _______________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 40. Brachiopods abundant, solitary and colonial corals rare. USGS 20733—PC ______________ Limestone, fine-grained, silty; like unit 41. USGS 20732—PC throughout unit__ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained crinoidal; like unit 40. USGS 20731— PC from float _____________________ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 39 but contains about 50 percent yellowish- weathered silty and shaly partings; beds nodular to lenticular, mostly 0.2 ft thick or less. Zoophycos ichnofossils and brachiopods abundant in partings. USGS 20730—PC from throughout unit _______________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal, pale - y ellow i s h - brown; weathers medium light gray; beds regular, 0.5—2 ft thick _____________ Limestone, fine-grained; micrite with less than 5 percent bioclastic debris; light olive gray; weathers medium light gray; beds nodular to lenticular, 0.1— 0.3 ft thick; yellowish-weathered shaly partings rare ______________________ Limestone, medium- to coarSe-grained, crinoidal; like unit 36 _______________ Limestone, fine-grained; like unit 35 ___ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 19 but light olive gray weathering medium light gray. USGS 20729—PC ____________________ Limestone, fine-grained; micrite with 10 percent or less coarse bioclastic debris, mostly brachiopods; pale yellowish brown mottled dusky red; beds nodular to lenticular, 0.1—0.4 ft thick; about 20—30 percent silty shaly partings weathering pale red and very pale orange. USGS 20728—PC from lower 3 ft _________________________________ Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 19 but with a few thin beds of fine-grained limestone in- terbedded (about 10—20 percent); beds 0.2—0.5 ft thick; about 30 percent red shaly and silty partings. Brachiopods abundant, corals rare. USGS 20727— PC from upper 2 ft _________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 25 _______________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 19 ______________ 19 Thickness (feet) 4.0 4.0 1.5 3.0 5.0 4.5 2.0 4.0 7.5 14.0 5.0 1.5 20 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued 31. 30. 29. 2’8. 27. 26. 25. 24. 23. 22. 21a. 21. 20. 19. 18. Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 25 _______________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 19 ______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 25 ________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained crinoidal; like unit 19 _______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 25. USGS 20726—PC from upper foot _________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 19 ______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 18; about 55 percent fine- grained limestone, 5 percent crinoidal limestone, and 40 percent shaly silty partings; fossils relatively scarce above lower 5 ft. USGS 20724—PC from lower 6 ft, USGS 20725—PC from float 10 ft abOVe base ______________________ Limestone, medium— to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 19 but with a few thin beds of fine-grained limestone like unit 18; very irregular basal bedding plane Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 18 _______________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained crinoidal; like unit 19 ______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 18 ________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal; like unit 19 ______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 18. USGS 20723~PC R—5 ft above base _________________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal, grayish-red to olive-gray; weathers medium light gray; beds 0.4— 0.8 ft thick; contains pebbles of fine- grained limestone as much as 0.1 ft in diameter ___________________________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; micrite with about 20 percent bio‘clastic debris in thin lenses and on bedding planes and about 10 percent medium- to coarse-grained crinoidal limestone in lenses less than 0.5 ft thick; pale brown; weathers medium light gray; beds nodular to lenticular, 0.05—0.4 ft thick; about 20—30 percent shaly silty partings weathered pale red to moder- ate red. Zoophycos and linear ichno- fossils abundant on bedding planes, brachiopods abundant. Base of unit is base of red-stained clifl“. USGS 20722— PC 4 ft above base _______________ Thickness (feet) 6.0 4.0 1.0 6.0 31.0 8.0 4.0 1.0 8.0 2.5 15.5 1.5 5.5 Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued 17. 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. 8. 7. Limestone, predominantly fine grained with about 20 percent coarse bioclastic debris mostly in silty partings and 10— 20 percent interbeds of crinoidal lime- stone, medium-dark to olive-gray; weathers medium light gray; beds nodular to lenticular, 0.1—0.5 ft thick; about 20 percent silty partings weathered grayish yellow; forms slope between cliffs. Abundant brachiopods and Zoophycos. USGS 20720—PC from float throughout unit _______________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal and bioclastic; like unit 7 ___ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; micrite with about 10—20 percent scattered coarse bioclastic debris; light olive gray; weathers medium light gray; beds 0.5—2 ft thick, ir- regular; silty partings. Bryozoans and solitary and colonial corals. USGS 20719—PC from upper half of unit ___ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal and bioclastic in lower 2 ft grading up into thin bioclastic beds; silty partings. Abundant brachiopods- Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 9; nodular bedded; silty part- ings 0.05—0.1 ft thick ______________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal and bioclastic; like unit 7. USGS 20718—PC from upper 2 ft ___- Limestone, predominantly fine grained; like unit 9 but with thin silty part- ings. USGS 20721—PC from float 14 ft below top, USGS 20715—PC from float throughout ____________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal and bioclastic; like unit 7; upper 3 ft predominantly brachiopod coquina in lenses and beds. Brachiopods abundant, corals rare _______________ Limestone, predominantly fine grained; micrite with about 20 percent scattered coarse bioclastic debris, mostly on bed- ding planes; dark yellowish brown; weathers medium light gray; beds regu- lar to lenticular, 0.1—0.5 ft thick; thin silty partings. Brachiopods common in thin lenses and on bedding planes. USGS 20713—PC 4 ft above base, USGS 20714—PC from float in upper half ___ Limestone, interbedded fine- and coarse- grained; like unit 6. Brachiopods and solitary corals abundant. USGS 20712— PC from upper ft __________________ Limestone, medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal and bioclastic, dark-yellowish- brown; beds regular, 0.3—2 ft thick, Thickness (f 981) 9.0 4.0 7.5 7.5 6.0 6.5 21.0 6.5 14.0 8.0 REFERENCES CITED 21 Thickness Thickness (feet) (feet) Madison Group—Continued Madison Group—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Lodgepole Limestone—Continued Woodhurst Member—Continued Paine Member—Continued separated by silty partings; upper 2 2- Limestone, predominantly medium ft is brachiopod coquina. Abundant grained, cr1n01dal,.511ty, glauconitic, brachiopods and bryozoans; corals rare. medium-dark- to olive-gray; math?“ USGS 20710—PC from lower ft, USGS medlum llght gray to dark yellow1sh 20711—PC from upper 2 ft ___________ 5_0 orange; beds 0.1—0.3 ft thlck. Corals 6. Limes-tone, interbedded fine- and coarse- and cephalopods rare. USGS 20700—PC grained; fine—grained limestone (50 per- 1‘2 ft above base, USGS 20701—130 5 cent) is micrite with about 10-20 per- ft above base ---------------------- 7'0 cent scattered coarse bioclastic debris, Total Paine Member __________ 154_o olive gray, weathers medium light _ gray, in regular to nodular beds 0.1—0.3 Total Lodgepole Limestone "“ 5552 ft thick; coarse-grained limestone (30 Total Madison Group _________ 870.2 percent) is crinoidal and bioclastic like Bakken Formation: unit 5, in beds 0.3—0.5 ft thick; platy 1. Shale, fissile, pyritic, black; exposed at silty limestone partings (20 percent). edge of stream bed at low water. Abundant brachiopods and bryozoans, Conodonts. USGS 11238—PC _________ 1.0 rare corals. USGS 20707-PC from float in lower 5 ft, USGS 20708—PC from float 10—15 ft above base, USGS AGE AND CORRELATION 20709—130 from float in “P991” half: Stratigraphic relationships of the five type sec- }?SGS 20716_PC from float m lower tions described in this report are shown on plate 1, alf, USGS 20717—PC from float prob- . _ _ . _ ably from unit 9 ___________________ 33_5 Wthh shows the pos1t10ns of foss11 collectlons, the 5. Limestone, coarse-grained, crinoidal and boundaries of lithic units and faunal zones recognized bioclastic, Pale- ’00 dark-yellowiSh- in the Madison Group, and the ages of the rock units brown; weathers medium hgh_t gray to in terms of provincial series established in the type light gray; beds sllghtly irregular, . . . . S t T 1 t 1 . 0_3_1 ft thick; about 20 percent punky area of the M1ss1ss1pp1an ys em. wo pa eon o og1- brown-weathered chert 1enses_ Brachio- cal zonation schemes are shown on the diagram: a pods abundant, corals rare. USGS megafaunal scheme, based mainly on corals and 20706-PC from thwughout unit ————— 8-0 brachiopods and originally proposed by Sando and Total Woodhurst Member ____ 391.2 Dutro (1960), and. a mlcrofaunal scheme, based malnly on Foramlnlfera and developed by Mamet Paine Member: and Skipp (1970, 1971). The criteria for recognition 4- Limestone, predominantly fine grained; of the faunal zones and their interrelationships are llke unit 3 bu" Fo‘ltains ab?“ ”“20 described by Sando, Mamet, and Dutro (1969), who percent coarse mnmdal débns. (comm also dealt with the correlation of the Madison Group nals as much as 0.05 ft 1n d1ameter) , , , , , and 20_30 percent punky 10me Wlth the type M1ss1ss1pp1an. weathered chert nodules and lenses“ 35.0 3. Limestone, arg'illaceous and silty, fine— REFERENCES CITED grained (micrite), olive-gray; weathers medium light gray to yel- Andrichuk, J. M., 1955, Carboniferous stratigraphy in moun— lowish gray; consists of regular, tains of northwestern Montana and southwestern Al- hackly, hard beds 0.3—1 ft thick sepa- berta, in Lewis, P. J., ed., Billings Geol. Soc. Guide- rated by platy more silty soft beds book, 6th Ann. Field Conf., Sept. 1955: p. 85—95, 4 figs. 0.3—0.5 ft thick; many hard beds faint- Chamberlain, V. R., 1955, Subsurface carbonates of the 1y laminated; about 10—20 percent Madison group in the Sweetgrass Arch area [Mon- punky brown- to orange-weathered in- tana], in Lewis, P. J., ed., Billings Geol. Soc. Guide- cipient chert lenses in lower 60 ft. book, 6th Ann. Field Conf. Sept. 1955, p. 78—84. Linear ichnofossils abundant; brachio— Collier, A. J., and Cathcart, S. H., 1922, Possibility of find- pods and bryozoans rare in shaly ing oil in laccolithic domes south of the Little Rocky partings, becoming more abundant up- Mountains, Montana: US. Geol. Survey Bull. 736—F, ward in unit. USGS 20702—PC 70—73 p. 171—178. ft above base, USGS 20703—PC 87 ft Deiss, C. F., 1933, Paleozoic formations of northvéestern above base, USGS 20704—PC from float Montana: Montana Bur. Mines and Geology Mem. 6, 85—90 ft above base, USGS 20705—PC 51 p., 3 pls. 101 ft above base ___________________ 122.0 1 1941, Structure of central part Of Sawtooth Range, 22 TYPE SECTIONS OF THE MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA Montana [abs]: Geol. Soc. America Bul]., v. 52, no. 12, pt. 2, p. 1896—1897. 1943, Stratigraphy and structure of southwest Saypo quadrangle, Montana: Geol. Soc. America Bul]., v. 54, no. 2, p. 205—262, 5 pls., 3 figs. Goddard, E. N., chm., and others, 1948, Rock-color chart: Washington, Natl. Research Council (repub. by Geol. Soc. America, 1951), 6 p. Gutschick, R. C., 1964, Transitional Devonian to Mississip- pian environmental changes in western Montana, in Symposium on cylic sedimentation: Kansas Geo]. Sur- vey Bull. 169, v. 1, p. 172—181, 5 figs. Hague, Arnold, Weed, W. H., and Iddings, J. P., 1896, Yellowstone National Park [Wyoming]: U.S. Geo]. Survey Geo]. Atlas, Folio 30, [6] p., 11 figs., 8 maps. Holland, F. D., Jr., 1952, Stratigraphic details of Lower Mississippian rocks of northeastern Utah and south- western Montana: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bul]., v. 36, no. 9, p. 1697—1734, 17 figs. Iddings, J. P., and Weed, W. H., 1894, Livingston, Mon- tana: U.S. Geo]. Survey Geo]. Atlas, Folio 1, [5] p., 4 maps. Knechtel, M. M., 1959, Stratigraphy of the Little Rocky Mountains and encircling foothills, Montana. U.S. Geo]. Survey Bull. 1072—N, p. 723—752, pls. 52, 53., figs. 32, 33. [1960] Knechtel M. M., Smedley, J. E., and Ross, R. J., Jr,. 1954, Little Chief Canyon Member of Lodgepole Limestone of Early Mississippian age in Montana: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 38, no. 11, p. 2395—2400. 2 figs. Mamet, B. L., and Skipp, B. A., 1970, Preliminary fora- miniferal correlations of early Carboniferous strata in the North American Cordillera, in Colloque sur la stratigraphie du carbonifere: Liege Univ. Cong. et Colloques, v. 55, p. 327—348, 3 figs. 1971, Lower Carboniferous calcareous Foramini- fem—preliminary zonation and stratigraphic implica- tions for the Mississippian of North America: In- ternat. Cong. of Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, 6th, Sheffield, England, 1967, Compte rendu, v. 3, p. 1129—1146, 10 figs. Mudge, M. R., 1972, Pre—Quarternary rocks in the Sun River Canyon area, northwestern Montana: U.S. Geo]. Survey Prof. Paper 663—A, 142 p., 3 pls., 40 figs., 9 tables. Mudge, M. R., Sando, W. J., and Dutro, J. T., Jr., 1962, Mississippian rocks of Sun River Canyon area, Saw- tooth Range, Montana: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geolo- gists Bull., v. 46, no. 11, p. 2003-2018, 6 figs. Nordquist, J. W., 1953, Mississippian stratigraphy of northern Montana, in Parker, J. M., ed., Billings Geol. Soc. Guidebook, 4th Ann. Field Cont, Sept. 1953: p. 68—82, 8 figs. Peale, A. C., 1893, The Paleozoic section in the vicinity of Three Forks, Montana: U.S. Geo]. Survey Bull. 110, 56 p. Perry, E. S., and Sloss, L. L., 1943, Big Snowy Group— lithology and correlation in the northern Great Plains: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 27, no. 10, p. 1287—1304, 7 figs. Roberts, A. E., 1966, Stratigraphy of Madison Group near Livingston, Montana, and discussion of karst and solu- tion-breccia features: U.S. Geo]. Survey Prof. Paper 526—B, 23 p., 10 figs.,1 table. Rodriguez, Joaquin, and Gutsclhick, R. C., 1970, Late Devonian—early Mississippian ichnofossils from west- ern Montana and northern Utah, in Crimes, T. P., and Harper, J. C., eds., Trace fossils: Geo]. Jour., Spec. Issue 3, p. 407—438, 10 pls. 6 figs. Sandberg, C. A., and Klapper, Gilbert, 1967, Stratigraphy, age, and paleotectonic significance of the Cottonwood Canyon Member of the Madison Limestone in Wyom- ing and Montana: U.S. Geo]. Survey Bull. 1251—B, 70 p., 5 figs. 3 tables. Sandberg, C. A., and Mapel, W. J., 1967. Devonian of the Northern Rocky Mountains and Plains, in Oswald, D. H., ed., Internat. symposium on the Devonian System, Calgary, 1967 [Proc.]: Calgary, Alberta Soc. Petroleum Geologists, v. 1, p. 843—877, 10 figs. [1968] Sando, W. J., 1960, Distribution of corals in the Madison Group and correlative strata in Montana, western Wyoming, and northeastern Utah. in Geological Sur- vey research 1960. U.S. Geo]. Survey Prof. Paper 400—- B, p. B225—B227, figs. 100.1—100.3. Sando, W. J., and Dutro, J. T., Jr., 1960, ‘Stratigraphy and coral zonation of the Madison Group and Brazer Dolo- mite in northeastern Utah, western Wyoming, and southwestern Montana, in Wyoming Geo]. Assoc. Guide- Book, 15th Ann. Field Conf., Overthrust belt of south- western Wyoming and adjacent areas, 1960: p. 117—126, 1 p]., 3 figs. Sando, W. J., Mamet, B. L., and Dutro, J. T., Jr., 1969, Carboniferous megafaunal and microfaunal zonation in the northern Cordillera of the United States: U.S. Geo]. Survey Prof. Paper 613—E, 29 p., 1 p]., 7 figs. 1 table. Seager, O. A., 1942, Test on Cedar Creek anticline, south- eastern Montana: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 26, no. 5, p. 861—864. Sloss, L. L., 1952, Introduction to the Mississippian of the Williston Basin, in Sonneberg, F. P., ed., Billings Geo]. Soc. Guidebook, 3rd Ann. Field Conf., Sept. 1952: p. 65—69, 2 figs. Sloss, L. L., and Hamblin, R. H., 1942, Stratigraphy and insoluble residues of Madison Group (Mississippian) of Montana. Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 26, no. 3, p. 305—335, 11 figs. Weed, W. H., 1899a, Description of the Fort Benton quad- rangle [Montana]: U.S. Geo]. Survey Geo]. Atlas, Folio 55, [9] p., 4 maps. 1899b, Description of the Little Belt Mountains quad- rangle [Montana]: U.S. Geo]. Survey Geo]. Atlas, Folio 56, [11] p., 4 maps. 1900, Geology of the Little Belt Mountains, Montana: U.S. Geo]. Survey 20th Ann. Rept., pt. 3, p. 257—461, pls. 36—77, figs. 36—79. Wilmarth, M. G., 1938, Lexicon of geologic names of the United States (including Alaska): U.S. Geo]. Survey Bull. 896, 2396 p. ‘6 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 0‘543—556/146 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PROFESSIONAL PAPER 842 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PLATE 1 1 2 3 4 5 MONARCH- DRY MISSION LITTLE CHIEF LOGAN U.S. 89 FORK CANYON CANYON (type section of (type section of (reference section of Paine and Woodhurst Members _ (type section of (type section of Madison Group) Mission Canyon Limestone) of Lodgepole Limestone) Mission Canyon Limestone) LOdgepole Limestone) I I 89 miles 1 1 4 miles 1 l , 116 mnes : g 6 miles . 4| EXPLANATION KOOTENAI [ FEET 40 , FORMATION —1800 (CR ETACEOUS) LIMESTONE — Predominantly fine grained BIG SNOWY GROUP (CHESTERIAN) LIMESTONE — Medium- to coarse-grained, crinoidal I O O I LIMESTONE —- Oolitic — 1 700 39 @— — LIMESTONE — Predominantly fine grained, argillaceous and silty DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE —1600 ‘ 17387| 1—1. 1 ~ 4 CAR ONATE AND CHERT BRECCIA ,— -41 , MORRISON FORMATION B 1.11- t.— 3940 AND ELLIS GROUP 7 38 (JURASSIC) :1 I MERAMECIAN (LOWER PART) i I | a \I 20806d -- I. COLON 0'10 V A @ SOLUTION CAVITIES —1500 I II RT — ‘ E36 33 CHE Nodular to lentIcular LL ll‘ LA ll 0.) 01 I 32'- 31, W Z: 3% CHERT — Irregular to reticular I 34 Fl10l 208050 0 l A L 11. x L I —1400 -? 5i I: O x) s O I”! o N o 3 ('D U I l l I 28 ____ T_ __ CLAY SHALE “173860 . I. III | I (A) u N O :1 ('D .60 o O O M a 17385 O O O Fl10l 20804. O o H 10 03 O O O O O O iI|I I II! . ‘I L I I M A I I I QUARTZ SI LTSTONE ”-1300 III II I I ii i! I ' AWE .I_ 17384. Hg) 17383. 17382. QUARTZ SANDSTONE L 20803', (J - ~\ 0 1 N (.1) Collapse breccia I‘ll! 20802I 0' _ _ _ _ ‘_ 20801|o _________ _ _ -29303 COVERED — Inferred lithology may be indicated MISEIIISIEIs-ESIQIEON Undoing of SvaBI EBBFSXImatca .eiauve bedding thickness —1200 I I w 0 Sol ution' brecciai? —29 o 0 w l:Ormation contaCt — Wavy Where unconformable . III ——__ ——______ —_— ‘~_—._ Member contact .— a N GO —— _____ Lithologic correlation line —1100 o o g . Faunal zone boundary — Queried where position uncertain 30 Described section unit F (8) 17381 c X X F(9) 20799. X H x X 17360 USGS upper Paleozoic fossil Collection X X a. M \1 HQ) 207%| 20743., X Fl9) Collection containing Foraminifera — Mamet zone in parentheses F(8) X X a —-1000 F(8I 173800 MEX I! 17379 e \1 108° N G) X 316° 115° 114° 113° 112° 111° 110° 109° x i] 61 49 X ‘ v1 20742. X X I.I.II L s I I N 01 20797' ll — 900 I I I N b I. - 48° X X 20747 I III!) Little Rocky Mountains 0 _, (D m ,.. v11 ‘3 E I OSAGEAN XI: . . lfig‘ x A J N to ) M .3 H8) 17378. M ntains - 800 cu ——X X O ‘0 X 0 M 0 207411 2079‘” 20740., x Fl8l X A 20739 x - I X XE XI X HSI 17377 c Zone C2 o In (D I o 0 (I o Zone Cl 20790._ \I HI 11 b In 17376 ’ 17375- l II I — 700 II V Bridger Range 20789.; , 52 20788| — F 4849 20738. 20737» — F(7) 20787| - - 47 20736I - 20786. 45, 46 g a 01 l l Ln 0 01 .1 Billings Livingston ' E ll Pryor Mountams 1 I) .I ll Ill ”Il‘l I; 7 . _ a. | 20 85 L 42 44 20735 l I l ' . 20732. 207310 20734 - _43,44 Fl7) 207300 20733 - 41142 20729 - ‘4 20728 ; mg 20727 n 1' II II 111] “I- M N O O \I \l 00 CO 00 A O l 1.4 _|—I —‘ AM (A) — 600 17374 17373 ‘ 7 17372.’ ‘7 17371 0, 17370. .I J 20726 _1 ~~ ‘ 30,31 X)». XI X 1'). ll" ' I I\J O \I R 20725. ::: 173690 : __ 50 100 MILES J a 3! O! 20780 _ 20779 20724. 0 l I I I I I l l o 50 .1100 KILOMETERS —- 500 II All } JI 'I 20723. 1 19-21 LODGEPOLE LIMESTONE 207220 20720 — ~ 17 Distribution of major outcrops of Mississippian rocks in western Montana (modified WOODHURST MEMBER 383:: from Roberts, 1966, fig. 1) showing location of stratigraphic sections described 20721 = in this report. 1, type section of Madison Group; 2, reference section of Mission Canyon Limestone; 3, type section of Paine and Woodhurst Members of 0 Lodgepole Limestone; 4, type section of Mission Canyon Limestone; 5, type 9 section of Lodgepole Limestone. See text figures 1, 3, 5, 8, and 11 for more - 7 detailed location Of sections. X I Id I . III M o \I \I \I . II ( l l 11 l l.“ I. 20776 I I.) II I ‘ I I II 13 l I I" ii: 1- - l 20714‘II' 20715' 20713 0 20712 Fin—30311 0 o F‘7l_%81218 FI7\ 70 20717I 20707: I I 20775 20774'» 20773 — 400 I 173680 17367. 17366- F(7) 17365. I l I I I I 111 11' ‘ -I.I URI“ II 1,II I II. . I 17364. 173630 — 300 17362. 1‘) 20772 III ; F(7) 20771 _ 20769 8 I 17361| : 7 20770 , 20768.- Flpre-7) 17360| I l )l')I ' )1 .‘ lII'lI X 20705.’ X 20704 20703 / 20702 I I III :— Zon 20767. * \K e CI 20766. 207650 Zone 8 * * 20764. I i \ III; I — 200 I . 20761 on 20760. 1 Fl 8—7) 20701 BAKKEN pr 20700 H: 2 PAINE MEMBER FORMATION .,’ . _ 1’ —.’ xfll 20759. 20758I 20757. 20756I _ —100 17359. 20755. KINDERHOOKIAN (UPPER PART) / 0’ ’ THREE FORKS FORMATION MEMBER (ZONE PRE-A) +——v—-—+——+-——...—o —-—-O-———-O-———-o——_.F(pre—7l 207520 I I I I . '20751. ‘ W 2 3 24978q ’ 24977 CORRELATION OF TYPE AND REFERENCE SECTIONS OF MADISON GROUP IN MONTANA * U.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 O!543~586/145