¥" T 6 h v. 11 78 Elements in Fruits and Vegetables from Areas of Commercial Production in the Conterminous United States GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1173 2451 Y OF CAL] OPB] 'o i00on | j Mo 1405! | ! 6 1J¢ LiBrany u Miversity of CALIFORNIA (LS. DEPQSITORY JUL 2 198g Elements in Fruits and Vegetables from Areas of Commercial Production in the Conterminous United States By HANSFORD T. SHACKLETTE G FO LEO GIC AL SURVEY «PROFESSIONAL PAPER 11 7 8 A biogeochemical study of selected food plants based on field sampling of plant material and soil UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1980 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR CECIL D. ANDRUS, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY H. William Menard, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Shacklette, Hansford T. Elements in fruits and vegetables from areas of commercial production in the conterminous United States. (Geological Survey Professional Paper 1178) Bibliography: p. 28 Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.16:1178 1. Vegetables-United States-Composition. 2. Fruit-United States-Composition. 3. Vegetables United States-Soils-Composition. 4. Fruit-United States-Soils-Composition. 5. Biogeochemistry- United States. 6. Fruit-culture-United States. 7. Truck farming-United States. 8. Soils-United States-Composition. I. Title. II. Series: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 1178. $B320.6.$52 641.3'5'0973 80-607141 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 CONTENTS Abstract Introduction Sampling localities Berrien COUNty, MiChig@N Wayne County, New York -------------------------..-- Cumberland County, New Jersey ----------------- Palm Beach County, Florida ------ Hidalgo County, Texas Imperial COUNty, CaIlifOPMi@® -------------------....-............ccc.ccccnno Yuma County, Arizona Twin Falls COUNty, IG@RO Yakima County, Washington ------------------------------- San Joaquin County, CalifOrMi@ ---------------------..-.................. Mesa County, Colorado Methods of sampling plants and SOils -------------------------------........ Sampling design Sampling techniques Species Of SAMpIed --------------------......................... Fruits Vegetables Collection and preparation of samples ------------------------- Fruits Vegetables Soils Analytical methods used Plants Soils Statistical procedures used in evaluating data ------------------------- Results Concentrations of elements in fruits and vegetables --------- Bases for reporting concentrations of elements ---------- Page w w co t 00 <1 1-1 O or Or Or Ovaa £4 g- 17 Results-Continued Concentrations of elements in fruits and vegetables-Continued Mean concentrations in samples ------------------------------.-.- Compositional variation among areas, among fields within areas, and within fields ---------------------------- AN@lySiS Of Significant differences in mean element concentra- tions among areas of commercial production ------ Concentrations of elements and pH of soils that sup- ported the fruits and vegetables ------------------------------- Compositional variation among areas and among field$ WithiN Ar@@S AN@lySi$ Of Significant differences in mean element concen- tration and pH among areas of commercial production Discussion of results Trends in element concentrations in fruits and vege- tables Among kinds Of PFOUUC@ Fruits Vegetables Among areas of commercial production ---------------------- Trends in element concentrations in soils supporting frUits ANG Among kinds Of PrOGUC@ Among areas of commercial production ---------------------- Relationships of the element concentrations in fruits and vegetables and the concentrations in soils ---------------------- Summary Conclusions References cited ILLUSTRATION Page FiGURE 1. Map showing locations of counties where fruits and vegetables were sampled 6 TABLES Page TABLE 1. Summary of methods used for analysis of plants and plant ashes and ap- proximate lower limits Of d@t@erMin@tiON ----------------------........................ 14 2. Summary of methods used for analysis of soils and approximate lower limits of determination 15 3. Components of variance in composition between samples from within a sampling site and between analyses of the same sample ------------------- -~ 17 III Page 19 19 19 20 21 21 21 21 21 22 23 24 24 24 25 27 28 28 CONTENTS TABLES 4-20. Elements in ash or dried material, percent ash yield of dried material, P°8° and percent dried material yield of fresh fruits and vegetables from areas of commercial production: 4. American grapes 33 5. Apples 34 6. European grapes 35 7. Grapefruit 36 8. Oranges 38 9. Peaches 40 10. Pears 42 11. Plums 44 12. Cabbage - 46 13. Carrots 48 14. Cucumbers 49 15. Dry beans 50 16. Lettuce 52 17. Potatoes 54 18. Snap beans 56 19. Sweet corn 58 20. Tomatoes 60 21-37. Summary statistics of element concentrations expressed on fresh-, dry-, and ash-weight bases, ash yield of dry material, and dry-material yield of fresh material for each kind of fruit and vegetable col- lected in more than one area: 21. American grapes 62 22. Apples 63 23. European grapes 64 24. Grapefruit 65 25. Oranges 66 26. Peaches 67 27. Pears 68 28. Plums 69 29. Cabbage 70 30. Carrots 71 31. Cucumbers 72 32. Dry beans 73 33. Lettuce 74 34. Potatoes 75 35. Snap beans 76 36. Sweet corn 77 37. Tomatoes 78 38-45. Summary statistics of element concentrations expressed on fresh-, dry-, and ash-weight bases, ash yield of dry material, and dry-material yield of fresh material for each kind of fruit and vegetable col- lected in only one area: 38. Asparagus 79 39. Cantaloupes 80 40. Chinese cabbage 81 41. Eggplant 82 42. Endive 83 43. Onions 84 44. Parsley 85 45. Peppers 86 46-62. Estimates of logarithmic variance for fruits and vegetables from areas of commercial production in the conterminous United States: 46. American grapes 87 47. Apples 87 48. European grapes 87 49. Grapefruit 87 50. Oranges 88 51. Peaches 88 52. Pears 88 CONTENTS TABLES _- 46-62. Estimates of logarithmic variance for fruits and vegetables-Continued _ Page 53. Plums 88 54. Cabbage - 89 55. Carrots 89 56. Cucumbers 89 57. Dry beans 89 58. Lettuce 90 59. Potatoes 90 60. Snap beans 90 61. Sweet corn 90 62. Tomatoes 91 63. Areas having significantly different concentrations of elements in fruits and vegetables 92 64-80. Element concentrations and pH of soils that supported fruit trees and vines and vegetable plants in areas of commercial production: 64. American-grape-vine soils 95 65. Apple-tree soils 96 66. European-grape-vine soils 97 67. Grapefruit-tree soils 98 68. Orange-tree soils 100 69. Peach-tree soils 102 70. Pear-tree soils 104 71. Plum-tree soils 106 72. Cabbage-plant soils 108 73. Carrot-plant soils 109 74. Cucumber-plant soils 110 75. Dry bean-plant soils 111 76. Lettuce-plant soils 112 77. Potato-plant soils 114 78. Snap-bean-plant soils 116 79. Sweet-corn-plant soils 118 80. Tomato-plant soils 120 81-97. Summary statistics of element concentrations and pH of soils that sup- ported fruit trees and vines and vegetable plants in two or more areas: 81. American-grape-vine soils 122 82. Apple-tree-soils 122 83. European-grape-vine soils 123 84. Grapefruit-tree soils 123 85. Orange-tree soils 124 86. Peach-tree soils 124 87. Pear-tree soils 125 88. Plum-tree soils 125 89. Cabbage-plant soils 126 90. Carrot-plant soils 126 91. Cucumber-plant soils 127 92. Dry-bean-plant soils 127 93. Lettuce-plant soils 128 94. Potato-plant soils 128 95. Snap-bean-plant soils 129 96. Sweet-corn-plant soils 129 97. Tomato-plant soils 130 98-99. Summary statistics of element concentrations and pH of soils that sup- ported vegetable plants from only one area of commercial pro- duction: 98. Asparagus-plant soils 130 99. Onion-plant soils 131 100-116. Estimates of logarithmic variance for soils that supported fruits and vegetables from areas of commercial production in the conterminous United States: 100. American-grape-vine soils 131 101. Apple-tree soils 132 VI CONTENTS TABLES 100-116. Estimates of logarithmic variance for soils-Continued 102. European-grape-vine soils 103. Grapefruit-tree soils 104. Orange-tree soils 105. Peach-tree soils 106. Pear-tree soils 107. Plum-tree soils 108. Cabbage-plant soils 109. Carrot-plant soils 110. Cucumber-plant soils 111. Dry-bean-plant soils 112. Lettuce-plant soils 113. Potato-plant soils 114. Snap-bean-plant soils 115. Sweet-corn-plant soils 116. Tomato-plant soils 117. Areas having significantly different concentrations in soils --------------------- 118. Mean concentrations and high-to-low ratios of elements and water in fruits 119. Mean concentrations and high-to-low ratios of elements and water in vegetables 120. Mean concentrations and high-to-low ratios of elements and pH of soils that supported fruits 121. Mean concentrations and high-to-low ratios of elements and pH of soils that supported vegetables Page 132 133 133 134 134 135 135 136 136 137 137 188 138 139 139 140 146 147 148 149 ELEMENTS IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES FROM AREAS OF COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION IN THE CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES By HANSFORD T. SHACKLETTE ABSTRACT The mean concentrations of 27 chemical elements in eight kinds of fruits and nine kinds of vegetables were estimated from field col- lections within 11 areas of commercial production. Water-content and ash-yield measurements permitted the element concentrations to be expressed on fresh-, dry-, and ash-weight bases. A three-level sampling design was used; and estimates were made of the chemical variation in the produce from among the areas, among fields within each area, and between sites within fields. Most significant varia- tion was found to be among areas: concentrations of some elements in some kinds of produce were found to vary tenfold. Soils in which the produce grew were sampled also, and analysis revealed strong differences among areas that are attributed, from place to place, to cultivation practices, contamination by pesticides, or pollution, as well as to climate and underlying geology. In general, little relation- ship was found between total element concentration in the soil and in the produce that could be assigned to natural causes, but where the soils are highly contaminated the levels of the contaminating element were found to be high in the produce. The concentrations of elements in fruits and vegetables generally differ least in the macronutrients potassium, phosphorus, magnesium, and sulfur that are essential for plant growth. Trends in concentrations of the micronutrients boron, copper, iron, and zinc are similar but not as pronounced as those of the macronutrients. The concentrations of the nonnutritive nontoxic elements barium, cobalt, lithium, titanium, and zirconium tend to have greater ranges than do those of the nutritive elements. Concentrations of elements generally considered toxic to organisms exhibit erratic distribu- tions among areas and kinds of produce, and a wide range of values is indicated. INTRODUCTION The chemical elements in food plants are of interest primarily because these plants constitute the major source of essential elements (excluding oxygen and hydrogen) in human nutrition (Underwood, 1971); lesser amounts of these elements are derived from water, soil and rocks, and air. The elements contained in the plants may be consumed directly in vegetables and fruits, or indirectly in meat and milk from animals that have eaten the plants. Numerous studies have been made of the elements in man's total diet, and analyses of many food plants are given in the reports of the studies. A lack of uniformity among these studies exists, however, in sampling techniques, methods of analyses, kinds of plants sampled, and bases used for reporting element concentrations. In- adequate, or no, descriptions of the origins of the samples further reduce the usefulness of many reports. A National Research Council report (Morrison and others, 1974, p. 92) stated, "no systematic study has been made of sampling of fruits and vegetables for trace elements. More attention has been paid to food processing and its effect on changes in trace element composition of fruits and vegetables." The effects of processing on the element content of food plants cannot be determined unless reliable bases are available for estimating the typical concentrations of the elements that are in the edible portion of the plants as they grow in the field. Regulations governing allowable increases or decreases of element content caused by processing food should take into account not only the concentrations of elements of interest char- acteristic of the different food plants, but also the variation in chemical composition of the plants among the areas of commercial production throughout the country. Some fruits and vegetables are consumed that have had little or no processing; therefore, the introduction of extraneous elements is minimal, and only the elements acquired by the plants while growing in the field are generally present. Yet the sources and concen- trations of elements in these, as well as in other, food plants may be greatly different among areas where the plants are grown, as influenced by factors of soil chemistry, agricultural practices, climate, and the ex- tent to which environmental pollution affects the pro- duce. Plant species react differently to these influences on element content because of their genetic control of growth processes and characteristics. If the edible parts of the plant are leaves and stems, atmospheric pollution may considerably influence the kinds and concentrations of elements in these parts. If roots or tubers are used for food, the elements in the soil may exert the greatest effect, whereas if fruits are the edible portion, only the elements that can be readily 1 2 ELEMENTS IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES, CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES transported from the roots to the fruit are likely to be greatly influenced by differences in geochemical environments. Quarterman (1973, p. 171) stated, "The amount of a particular trace element in a plant food can depend on the species of plant, the breed or strain, and which part of the plant is eaten. It can also depend on the season of the year and the climate, on the soil type and pH, the proximity of other plants, manuring and various forms of contamination." These factors may differ greatly among regions of foodplant production; there- fore their influence creates an interest in determining the presence and extent of regional variation in the elemental composition of fruits and vegetables. The chemical composition of fruits and vegetables is of interest to the growers of produce because it can be used as an index of the nutritional status of the plants. Some large-scale commercial operations make frequent analyses of the plants during the growing season for as many as eight elements; deficiencies in elements that may affect yield or market quality are determined and are promptly corrected by soil or foliar applications of the deficient elements. Analyses are commonly made of leaf or stem tissue, but may also use fruit tissue. In addition, visible symptoms of specific element defi- ciencies may be used to initiate corrective measures. The data on elemental composition of food plants given in reports of these practices are of limited usefulness in establishing baseline values to be applied to problems of human nutrition, because the emphasis in these reports is on plant nutrition or pathology. These reports include, however, maximum concentra- tions of certain elements in the plants, concentrations that are potentially toxic to humans. Examples of com- prehensive studies of this type include those of Goodall and Gregory (1947), Chapman (1966), and Ken- worthy (1967). The emphasis in fruit and vegetable growing is on an adequate yield of produce that is of acceptable market quality to return a profit to the grower. Quality in this context is measured by the ability of the produce to withstand harvesting, processing, and marketing operations, and to be adequate in such factors as color, flavor, and texture. The nutritional value of the pro- duce generally is given only minor, or no, considera- tion, although Beeson (1957, p. 258) pointed out, ""The term 'crop quality' means both marketable quality and nutritional quality of a crop* * *. Nature has not always combined two aspects of crop quality in one package, and man has seldom improved matters in his efforts to breed plants and manage soil so as to pro- duce crops that are both attractive and high yielding." A task force of the Food and Drug Administration (Miller, 1974) proposed monitoring the content of two elements, magnesium and calcium (along with protein; vitamins A, B6, and C; thiamin; riboflavin; and niacin) in nine food crops. It would seem to be of equal or greater importance to monitor some other elements that, for man, are obtained principally from food plants-copper, for example. In a paper giving quantitative data on the occur- rence in plant tissue of 71 of the 94 naturally occurring elements, 46 elements were reported in measurable concentrations in the edible portion of food plants (Shacklette and others, 1978). The mean concentra- tions, deviations, and observed ranges of 30 elements in many vegetables were reported by Connor and Shacklette (1975), who gave element values for the material actually analyzed, whether it consisted of plant ash or dry plant material. Extensive tables giving element concentrations in many food plants were published by Beeson (1941), Monier-Williams (1949), and Diem (1962); and although the data in these reports generally based the concentrations on dry weight of the plant material, values based on fresh weight occur at places. Only the report by Diem gave the water content of the material that was analyzed. The absence of clearly stated bases for calculating element concentrations in samples of foods and other biological materials is a deficiency in many published reports, and for these one can only assume which bases were used (that is, fresh weight, dry weight, or ash weight) by judging the kind of material analyzed and the magnitude of the concentrations that were reported. The use of various bases for expressing element concentrations in organic materials was discussed by Goodall and Gregory (1947) and is also discussed later in this report. The elemental composition of a variety of foods from tropical plants was given by Duke (1970) in an ethnobotanical report on some Central American In- dians. Many reports of the elements in foods have been published by U.S. Government agencies, including the Department of Agriculture handbooks (for example, see Watt and Merrill, 1950, which gives both water and ash contents of the food plants that were analyzed). Most of these reports include only the major and minor nutritive elements. The concern with environmental contamination has resulted in many publications which include food-plant analyses for toxic elements. In a report on toxicants occurring naturally in foods, Underwood (1973) pro- vided some background ranges in values for the trace elements aluminum, arsenic, iron, copper, molyb- denum, zinc, manganese, selenium, lead, tin, cadmium, mercury, chromium, fluorine, and iodine in a variety of foods of plant origin. Other reports consider fewer elements, often only one, as illustrated by those of INTRODUCTION 3 Williams and Whetstone (1940), for arsenic; Warren (1967) and Egan (1972), for lead; Kropf and Geldmacher-v.Mallinckrodt (1968) and Shacklette (1972), for cadmium; and Garber (1968), for fluorine. An outline of element toxicities to plants, animals, and man (Gough and Shacklette, 1979) reported poisonous levels of 23 elements that are of general environmental concern, although food plants were not specifically emphasized. D. J. Wagstaff, J. F. Brown, and J. R. McDowell stated in a paper presented at the Fourth Biennial Veterinary Toxicology Workshop held at Logan, Utah, June 22, 1978, "Ubiquitous natural elements such as arsenic could never have been fully prevented from oc- curring in foods at low concentrations. The total quan- tity of toxic metal in a food can be viewed as being composed of three portions which originate from dif- ferent sources. First, that which is the natural background, second, that originating from environ- mental pollution, and third, that which is added during food processing or marketing. The most significant en- vironmental and food processing contamination sources have been identified and are being controlled. However, present information is neither sufficiently detailed nor accurate to support definitive apportion- ment of all toxic metals in food into these three source groups." One objective of the present report is to pro- vide background or baseline levels of element concen- trations in the edible parts of certain food plants as they are commercially grown in this country. One approach to evaluating the elemental composi- tion of foods, including those of plant origin, is the "market basket'" method of obtaining samples for analysis. In this method samples of the desired prod- ucts are obtained by purchase from retail food stores at different locations throughout the country without particular consideration of the origin of the produce. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (1972) has carried out such a program in which selected chemical elements as well as other constituents of the samples were determined. Another study (Shacklette and others, 1978) used similar methods of sampling, but limited the analyses to determining the concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, fluorine, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, and zinc in apples, bulb onions, cabbage, carrots, cucumbers, dry beans, head lettuce, oranges, potatoes, snap beans, and sweet corn. The mean concentrations and ranges of concentrations that were reported pro- vide an estimation of the levels of these elements in the produce obtained from retail stores in the states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, North Dakota, Virginia, and Washington. Relatively few comprehensive reports are available in which the concentrations of elements in fruits and vegetables are related to those of associated soils. Beeson (1941) gave an extensive account of the effects of different soils on the mineral content of cultivated plants. Most of these comparisons considered only the major plant nutrient elements in field crops, not in fruits and vegetables, although the concentrations of many elements in food plants were listed. Each of the many agricultural studies of the soil supply of essen- tial and toxic elements generally considered one, or a few, of the elements in relation only to crop yield-not to the chemical composition of the crop. A study of home gardens in Georgia revealed few or no consistent correlations of concentrations of 16 elements in blackeyed peas, cabbage, corn, green beans, and tomatoes with the total (not the "available") concentrations of the same elements in the soils where the vegetables grew (Shacklette and others, 1970). The problems of determining the availaility to plants of the elements in soils are in- herent in the complex relationships of soil chemistry and the physiological processes characteristic of dif- ferent plants. Quarterman (1973, p. 175) stated, "No simple relationship has been found between the amount of a particular element in the soil and the amount which is absorbed by plants." Allaway (1968) reviewed methods by which agricultural technology can modify the routes and extent of trace element movements. He pointed out that plants will grow nor- mally when they contain levels of some elements that are too low for the growth or health of the animals eating the plants. The elements he reported were chromium, cobalt, copper, iodine, manganese, selenium, and zinc. At the other extreme, the plants will grow despite levels of cadmium, lead, molyb- denum, and selenium that are toxic to animals. Con- versely, plants will die with levels of arsenic, beryllium, fluorine, iodine, nickel, and zinc that are tolerated by animals. In general, and certainly for some elements, the best measure of the availability of soil elements to plants is obtained by chemical analysis of the plant as it is grown in the field. The principal objective of the present study was to evaluate the concentrations of elements having par- ticular nutritional or environmental significance that occur in fruits and vegetables entering major commer- cial channels and, therefore, are widely available in retail outlets. The samples were collected from plants as they grew in the fields before they had been com- mercially harvested and processed for sale; they were prepared for analysis in a manner that enabled their element concentrations to be expressed on the fresh- weight, dry-weight, and ash-weight bases. The sam- 4 ELEMENTS IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES, CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES pling design permitted comparisons of element con- tents to be made between kinds of produce, regions of production, fields within regions, and samples within fields, and also allowed the extent of variance at- tributable to combined sample preparation and laboratory analysis to be estimated. The elemental compositions of the soils that supported the food plants were also determined. Cereal grains, soybeans, sugarcane, and sugar beets were not sampled, for although they contribute greatly to the diet, they are so extensively altered by processing prior to consump- tion that the food product derived from them was ex- pected to be greatly different in chemical composition from field collections of the original produce. All fruits and vegetables considered in this report are cultivated varieties (properly termed "cultivars," abbreviated "cv.") of species that have been long in cultivation. The wild progenitors of some cultivars are not know for certain; and the problems of taxonomy, origin, and evolution of many food plants are complex (Pickersgill, 1977). Some of the herbaceous cultivars in commercial use are called "hybrids," generally mean- ing that the cultivar is the F, (first filial) generation resulting from the crossing of two inbred cultivars of the same species. Other hybrids are only selected prod- ucts of crosses between two cultivars that are suffi- ciently homozygous ("pure") to be economically prop- agated from seed. A few hybrids result from crosses between natural (that is, "wild") species. Other cultivars, especially among fruit trees, shrubs, and vines, originate spontaneously as natural somatic ("'sports") or genetic mutations and are heterozygous for the desired characteristics; they, therefore, must be vegetatively propagated by rooting cuttings or by grafting. The complexities of nomenclature resulting from the diverse origins of fruit and vegetable cultivars, and the continual introduction of new cultivars developed by plant-breeding institutions, have made the identifica- tion of some cultivars very difficult, therefore imprac- tical, in field studies of the kind reported herein. The terminology used in this report follows that in general use in this country, which does not always cor- respond to scientific usage. The two major categories of food plants that were sampled, fruits and vege- tables, are distinguished on the basis of long- established custom. For example, the edible product of a tomato plant is ordinarily considered to be a vegetable, but technically it is a fruit-moreover, it is a berry. The sweet and juicy products of trees, shrubs, and vines are designated as fruits, but there are some exceptions to this definition of fruits, as, for example, strawberries and olives. Another pecularity of ver- nacular usage is that some dry beans, such as lima beans, are called vegetables and are considered hor- ticultural products, whereas soybeans are referred to as a field crop and are, therefore, considered to be agronomic products. In some published crop reports, potatoes and dry beans are classified as field crops, and cantaloupes and watermelons are listed as vegetables rather than as fruits. In this report the food plants are classified rather arbitrarily as either fruits or vegetables, and their common and scientific names are given in a later section. The term "produce" refers principally to fresh fruits and vegetables that are of- fered for sale. A. T. Miesch suggested this study, and his assistance in sampling design and statistical treat- ment of data is greatly appreciated. I acknowledge with gratitude the invaluable assistance of Josephine G. Boerngen in processsing the large amount of data generated in the study. Jessie M. Bowles is thanked for help with sample preparation and sorting. Thanks also are expressed to R. J. Ebens, J. R. Keith, and James Scott, who assisted in the field work, and to the following County Agricultural Agents of the Cooper- ative Extension Service, who provided suggestions for selecting areas where the desired produce was grown: Harvey Beltner, Donald A. Chaplin, A. H. Karcher, Jr., Keith S. Mayberry, Raymond C. Nichols, Robert S. Pryor, and Norman J. Smith. The cooperation of the many growers who gave permission to sample produce and soils on their property is also appreciated. This study could not have been accomplished without the U.S. Geological Survey chemists who analyzed the samples; their names follow: James W. Baker, D. A. Bickford, Willis P. Doering, Johnnie Gardner, Patricia Guest, Thelma F. Harms, Claude Huffman, Jr., Lor- raine Lee, Violet Merritt, H. T. Millard, Jr., Harriet G. Neiman, Clara C. S. Papp, James A. Thomas, Michele L. Tuttle, J. S. Wahlberg, and William J. Walz. SAMPLING LOCALITIES Counties were chosen as the largest sampling units because information on agricultural production is based on political units, and because agricultural agents of the Cooperative Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, are assigned to counties. The criteria used for selecting counties in which to sample fruits or vegetables were (1) production of significant quantities of produce that entered commer- cial distribution as fresh, dried, canned, or frozen food,; (2) production of a wide range of food plants, as ap- propriate for the climatic zone in which located; and (3) wide geographic distribution of counties. As a starting point in this selection, the National Atlas (U.S. Geolog- ical Survey, 1970) was consulted to locate counties SAMPLING LOCALITIES 5 having high production of fruits and vegetables. The selection was narrowed to counties for which pro- duction data indicated that sampling several kinds of produce was possible. Letters of inquiry were then sent to the county agricultural agents in each of these coun- ties, briefly outlining the proposed study and asking for information on the present status of horticultural production in the county. Most agents responded to the inquiry, and the final selection of counties in which to sample was influenced by their replies. The counties in which sampling was conducted are listed and characterized below in the chronological order in which they were visited (fig. 1). The soil descriptions given are from U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1970). BERRIEN COUNTY, MICHIGAN Produce was sampled September 11-14, 1972. This county has long been an important center of fruit pro- duction, having a favorable climate because of the moderating effect of Lake Michigan. The principal hor- ticultural crops recorded in 1964 were apples, peaches, grapes, plums, strawberries, tomatoes, snap beans, and sweet corn. The peach crop in 1972 was destroyed by late spring frosts. The sandy soils near Lake Michigan are classified as Order Entisols (no pedogenic horizons), Suborder Psamments (textures of loamy fine sand or coarser), Great Group Udipsam- ments (containing easily weatherable minerals, never moist as long as three consecutive months). The inland soils, on which most fruit trees are grown, are classified as Order Alfisols (medium to high in bases, gray to brown surface horizon, subsurface horizon of clay accumulation); Suborder Udalfs (soils usually moist, but during the warm season some horizons may be intermittently dry for short periods), Great Group Hapludalfs (subsurface horizon of clay accumulation relatively thin; or only a brownish-colored stain marks the horizon). No irrigation was observed in this county. The following kinds of produce were sampled: fruits-apples, cantaloupes, grapes, pears, and plums; vegetables-cabbage, corn, cucumbers, eggplant, pep- pers, snap beans, and tomatoes. WAYNE COUNTY, NEW YORK Produce was sampled September 18-21, 1972. The moderating effect of Lake Ontario on the climate has made this county a favorable fruit-growing center. Ap- ples, cherries, and peaches are the major fruit crops, although pears, grapes, and plums are also grown. Snap beans, dry beans, and potatoes are the principal vegetable crops. The large food-processing plants are closely related to the crops of the region. Low hills of glacial drift, separated by valleys of alluvial material and scattered peat and muck deposits, characterize the landscape. The soils are, in general, classified to Great Soil Group like those of eastern Berrien County, Michigan. The peaty soils are used to grow potatoes and peppermint. No irrigation was observed in the county. The following kinds of produce were sampled: fruits-apples, grapes, peaches, pears, and plums; vegetables-potatoes, dry beans, and snap beans. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NEW JERSEY [Samples of apples and sweet corn were obtained near the Cumberland County line in Gloucester and Salem Counties, respectively] Produce was sampled September 24-28, 1972. This county lies partly in the coastal plain, characterized by low local relief of Quaternary terraces and alluvial em- bayments; but the central and northern parts of this county and of Salem County, and all of Gloucester County, are underlain by upper Tertiary rocks and have somewhat greater relief. The proximity of these counties to Delaware Bay and the Atlantic Ocean results in a mild climate well suited to horticulture. The Rutgers University Research Farm, devoted to horticultural development, and Seabrook Farms, where pioneering work in the frozen food industry was done, are located in Upper Deerfield Township of Cumberland County. Soils of most croplands are classified as Order Ultisol (low in bases, have subsurface horizons of clay accumulation); Suborder Udults (usually moist and relatively low in organic matter in the subsurface horizons); and Great Group Hapludults (have either a subsurface horizon of clay accumulation that is relatively thin, a subsurface horizon having ap- preciable weatherable minerals, or both). Numerous shell fragments were found in some of the fields that were sampled; these fields lie on the upper terraces of the coastal-plain sediments. The principal fruits grown are peaches and apples; strawberries are a minor crop. A wide variety of vegetables is produced, with major production of tomatoes and snap beans and lesser amounts of potatoes, green peas, sweet corn, cabbage, cucumbers, lettuce, potatoes, and sweet corn. The following kinds of produce were sampled: fruits-apples; vegetables- cabbage, cucumbers, lettuce, potatoes, snap beans, and sweet corn. PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Produce was sampled January 29-31, 1973. This county is entirely underlain by Quaternary deposits 6 ELEMENTS IN FRUITS AND VEGETABLES, CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES EXPLANATION Ix > @ Autumn-harvested produce '~ O Winter-harvested produce \. p Hidalgo p *~. County KILOMETERS 400 0 MILES 400
’°‘ 1 7 |a 1 C10 ' aw a ix 92 NIOBRARA COUNTY_| Mon/N 'Te Mcove ® 1s PLATTE COUNTY |GOSHEN county | 4-I/vs ® , ® * 1 «Lb/s | a 1 I NATRONA county ** ,'. Glendo 8 %. E $f CONVERSE __| 1 CARBON COUNTY * .° +- , | - ALBANY COUNTY | I FE ®. ® I | f EZ ® * | [ T4/N 7% 1 w S sH/H | X 4 Lamont L Y 1 ou am I I x 1 1 42°- as | EXPLANATION Tumm? 110 210 BIO 4? MILES t 1 t t 1 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 KILOMETERS ---15 -- _ Isopach line-Showing thickness in meters *2 Borehole-Number designates borehole shown on fig. 1 and table 2 xB Outcrop section or fossil locality - Letter designates outcrop section shown on figs 1, 2 and 9 J_LLLL Boundary of sandstone body where removed by erosion during the Turonian FiGURE 12.-Map showing approximate thickness of a representative unit of sandstone (fossil-zone 17) in the Wall Creek Member of the Frontier Formation and the Turner Sandy Member of the Carlile Shale. 24 PALEONTOLOGY AND STRATIGRAPHY OF MID-CRETACEOUS ROCKS-NORTHEASTERN WYOMING F & c 8 © Osage outcrop section (A) E Secs. 16, 17, 19, 20, and 30, 2 T.46N., Re3wW ., $ Weston County Depositional £ EXPLANATION environment z | % Sandstone 5 € Siltstone -# s = a Shale Offshore marine E (basin and ® Limestone s slope) a 5 a x x x x xx! Bentonite * % L 5 | 5 ~-) Covered interval, e g - o probably shale I | $ £ | 2 Covered interval 5, w Butts Ranch outcrop section (C) E I: a ~a 2 | & f jf 1 41N. .R 81 W. Dominantly 3 s * + + * Conglomeratic 8 | ® Sec. 18, T.4 1N., R.8OW., nearshore» | g | 9 : & | Depositional . Johnson County 19 mance and | a (err iss Sangy w environment deltaic 5 KY 'sst. who Hi -t- (shail) £ Silty I i she 5 Dominantly s= 17 p nearshore- r marine and #. -- -- Calcareous ; : E 5 dellallc ts $ os esse Concretionary € (shelf) Offshore- el . 6 marine p ~- 13 Beds containing Western 4 (bes & Interior Zone fossil % 9s" |; C (fig. 2 & g G P 8 Correlation line at form - i 8 5 2 ation and membe: 0 & G boundaries z C g 5 g Correlation line for el S w Western Interior Zone a 8 E| a tossil W | 5 6 | > a | 9 re c3L E Open-marine s ~~~~~ Correlation line along an 5 (basin?) z: unconformity tt 4 5 £ T 0 P 7 | u 5 § g Dominantly METERS FEET 5 nearshore- 0 0 £ f 5 9 marine and 3 | - deltaic u. o (shelf) 4 % 25 9 1 s 100 F £ © 0 Offshore-marine § (slope?) 6 u ® 8 mal B seers O| Z A ae 2. eze W | | . 2| £ mA mA ~a" t| $ Woes kx "% & | £ £m w "w "k o> & |? 5 & \_ A s | 0 Ge -w Ow -r z 0 | = | 2 aa ¥ E lel &) 3 $ | u 6] © &l & £| & = |S - FIGURE 13.-Outcrop sections and depositional. environments of lower Upper Cretaceous formations in Johnson and Weston Counties. a MID-CRETACEOUS FORMATIONS, WESTON AND JOHNSON COUNTIES, NORTHEASTERN WYOMING 25 the slope deposits of the S‘age Breaks. Another marine regression, during the early late Coniacian, caused the disconformity at the base of the Niobrara in the eastern and southern parts of the Powder River Basin. It was followed by another marine transgression and deposition of the Niobrara. | REFERE$CES CITED Asquith, D. O., 1974, Sedimentary models, cycles, and deltas, Upper Cretaceous, Wyoming: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 58, no. 11, p. 2274-2283. Barlow, J. A., Jr., and Haun, J. D., 1966, Regional stratigraphy of Frontier Formation and relation to Salt Creek field, Wyoming: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 50, no. 10, p. 2185-2196. | Claypool, G. E., and Reed, P. R., 1976, Thermal-analysis technique for source-rock evaluation-quantitative estimate of organic richness and effects of lithologic variation: American Associa- tion of Petroleum Geologigts Bulletin, v. 60, no. 4, p. 608-611. Cobban, W. A., 1951, Colorado shale of central and northwestern Montana and equivalent rocks of Black Hills: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 35, no. 10, p. 2170-2198. | Cobban, W. A., and Hook, S. C., 1979, Collignoniceras wooligari wooligari (Mantell) ammonite fauna from Upper Cretaceous of Western Interior, United States: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources wemoir 37, 51 p. Cobban, W. A., and Reeside, J. B., Jr., 1952, Frontier formation, Wyoming and adjacent areas: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 36, no. 10, p. 1913-1961. Collier, A. J., 1922, The Osage oil field, Weston County, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 736-D, p. 71-110. Darton, N. H., 1909, Geology and water resources of the northern portion of the Black Hills and adjoining regions in South Dakota and Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 65, 105 p. | Evetts, M. J., 1976, Microfossil biostratigraphy of the Sage Breaks Shale (Upper Cretaceous) in northeastern Wyoming: The Mountain Geologist, v. $3, no. 4, p. 115-134. Folk, R. L., 1974, Petrology of sedimentary rocks (2nd ed.): Austin, Texas, Hemphill Publishing Co., 182 p. Gill, J. R., and Cobban, W1 A., 1973, Stratigraphy and geologic history of the Montana Group and equivalent rocks, Montana, Wyoming, and North and South Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 776, 37 p. Goodell, H. G., 1962, The stqatigraphy and petrology of the Frontier formation of Wyoming, in Symposium on Early Cretaceous rocks of Wyoming an?l adjacent areas: Wyoming Geological Association, 17th Annual Field Conference, 1962, Guidebook, p. 173-210. | | Hares, C. J., 1916, Anticlinfs in central Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 641-1, p. 233-279. Hares, C. J., and others, 1‘946, Geologic map of the southeastern part of the Wind River Basin and adjacent areas in central Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Oil and Gas Investigations Preliminary Map 51, scale 1:126,720. Haun, J. D., 1958, Early Upper Cretaceous stratigraphy, Powder River Basin, Wyoming, in Wyoming Geological Association, 13th Annual Field Conference, 1958 Powder River Basin, Guidebook, p.84-89. Knechtel, M. M., and Patterson, S. H., 1962, Bentonite deposits of the northern Black Hills district, Wyoming, Montana, and South Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1082-M, p. 893-1030. Merewether, E. A., and Claypool, G. E., 1980, Organic composition of some Upper Cretaceous shale, Powder River Basin, Wyom- ing: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin (in press). Merewether, E. A., and Cobban, W. A., 1973, Stratigraphic sections of the Upper Cretaceous Frontier Formation near Casper and Douglas, Wyoming: Wyoming Geological Association Earth Science Bulletin (Guidebook Issue), v. 6, no. 4, p. 38-39. Merewether, E. A., Cobban, W. A., and Cavanaugh, E. T., 1979, Frontier Formation and equivalent rocks in eastern Wyoming: The Mountain Geologist, v. 6, no. 3, p.67-102. Merewether, E. A., Cobban, W. A., Matson, R. M., and Magathan, W. J., 1977, Stratigraphic diagrams with electric logs of Upper Cretaceous rocks, Powder River Basin, Johnson, Campbell, and Crook Counties, Wyoming, section A-A': U.S. Geological Survey Oil and Gas Investigations Map OC-73. Merewether, E. A., Cobban, W. A., and Spencer, C. W., 1976, The Upper Cretaceous Frontier Formation in the Kaycee-Tisdale Mountain area, Johnson County, Wyoming, in Geology and energy resources of the Powder River: Wyoming Geological Association, 28th Annual Field Conference, September 1976, Casper, Wyoming, Guidebook, p. 33-44. Obradovich, J. D., and Cobban, W. A., 1975, A time-scale for the Late Cretaceous of the Western Interior of North America, in W. G. E. Caldwell, ed., The Cretaceous System 'n the Western Interior of North America: Geological Association of Canada Special Paper 13, p. 31-54. Richards, P. W., and Rogers, C. P., Jr., 1951, Geology of the Hardin area, Big Horn and Yellowstone Counties, Montana: U.S. Geological Survey Oil and Gas Investigations Map OM-111, scale 1:63,360, 2 sheets. Richardson, E. E., 1957, Geologic and structure contour map of the Tisdale anticline and vicinity, Johnson and Natrona Counties, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Oil and Gas Investigations Map OM-194, scale 1:31,680. Robinson, C. S., Mapel, W. J., and Bergendahl, M. H., 1964, Struc- ture and stratigraphy of the northern and western flanks of the Black Hills uplift, Wyoming, Montana, and South Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 404, 134 p. Rubey, W. W., 1930, Lithologic studies of fine-grained Upper Cretaceous sedimentary rocks of the Black Hills region: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 165-A, p. 1-54. Sawyer, M. B., 1977, Image analysis as a method for determining grain-size distributions in sandstones: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 77-280, 13 p. Towse, Donald, 1952, Frontier Formation, southwest Powder River Basin, Wyoming: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 36, no. 10, p. 1962-2010. Veatch, A. C., 1907, Geography and geology of a portion of southwestern Wyoming, with special reference to coal and oil: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 56, 178 p. Wegemann, C. H., 1911, The Salt Creek oil field, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 452, p. 37-83. # U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1980-677-129/54 '% A Ke EM Kut UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR - PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1180 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PLATE 1 6000 14000 12000 --- 12000 ' pRé¢iPitBTION . s) M/ 0 62 / yé f NG I~ N "157 223. \; (2109.99) 21 / tap (|; 00:04 IO/ (17328; [LOS d & /'? /I | B / /22—O’ M /,/ I Heli \D (J‘G‘QTHQQGQL (280). ~ \\ 4 ~, -[; ----- a ox .. Est C" flee, ~ -gal Peasy §.\\“"~9/°,) ~ ros p é16(158) _.‘(\00/ - “'$ T 8% ts a 15(177) f ¢ o ELRODS _, 100111+) Roek % _/. ILS Pz 9(43)4 ere JH , ) § faile. } 0612(184) [_ of "'o i uef,)_ G2 7 PREQmmT/ON wo 2 F { ,* (130+) _ AGH é / 2/ & e Ap 18266956230 § 'O8(40) _ casina sra FION \\ X) xs 6400 EDcE OF GLACIER \31Y d. L: DYSONAAL, Set f _( ce | EDGE OF GLACIER FROM MAP? / C y J. L; pyson, AUGUST 1932) \‘ § \4 N R - 1| 2% j y As AI X* ~70 § ey." s >- sA («ge " . \ § EXPLANATION 6966202 VECTOR SHOWING DIRECTION AND AMOUNT OF MOVEMENT OF MARKED ROCK Year of initial position and identifying number Year of last recorded position LOCATION AND NUMBER OF ABLATION STAKE-Locations 3, 6, and 8A as of 1961; all others as of 1966 LOCATION AND NUMBER OF TREE MEA- SURED FOR ANNUAL RING COUNT- Showing (parenthetically) number of rings PLANETABLE BENCH MARK SHOWING ELEVATION IN FEET CREVASSE PATTERN ON ICE f Note: All measurements are in feet; to convert to meters, multiply by 0.3048 62270 PRECIPITATION GAGE NO I 00 oe t. tole 4 10000 Base from U.S. Geological Survey, 1950-60 SCALE 1:6 000 Control by U.S. Geological Survey 1000 1500 3000 FEET Topography by Kelsh Plotter methods from > aerial photographs taken Sept. 8, 1960, by National Park Service 500 1000 METERS Emcees md 3 Assumed dang io syslem. : CONTOUR INTERVAL ON ICE AND LAND 20 FEET Dashed contours indicate approximate locations $2323»?ng ”1220" DATUM IS APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL f ACCORDING TO TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE, 1968 NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM of 1929 A A' SOUTHWEST NORTHEAST 6600 '- - 6600 ' TRUE NORTH QUADRANGLE LOCATION ~~-_Atigust 1987 _ f -_ ~~ Sw sonce uus maen t " a= = -~ ___ August 19465 \\ September E79758\\\ "ax, § Au £ Ts 26, 1969 "r tr me mae -_ ~ _ | 1000 UPGLACIER 0 DOWNGLACIER DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT, IN FEET B B' NORTHEAST - 6860" SsoUTHWEST 6860 ' - Au . u w _. Too eae! Jas =x Au ie ~~~ ~ QUSt 1 Septem Egg? x, Augus \t\27,@ | 3 1500 1000 UPGLACIER 0 DOWNGLACIER c DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT, IN FEET C' SOUTHWEST NORTHEAST - 6960 ' | 1000 UPGLACIER 0 DOWNGLACIER DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT, IN FEET SCALE 1:3 000 Stilt] 750 1000 1500 FEET 1 I I A I I I 200 300 400 METERS VERTICAL EXAGGERATION X 2.5 MAP AND PROFILES OF GRINNELL GLACIER AE 15 Ple v. 11Go UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1180 PLATE 2 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TERMINUS FROM MAP BY J. L. DYSON cp X f : ; ROXxImATE) \; P | B r ~ ¢ .7 TERMINUS 19114 C x(; s T8 j? Q y S g" , G (“OX-i X <\ Ci f ~ A [ in' "fk jIZEfiM/Nus % H byrqra - | \To 350+ -year-old tree / ~y-3$ ‘\ Bi approximately 2850 ( \ C SEPTEMBER 20, 1959 feet from bench mafk 7375 _- F’l/ emf C_! ; \\‘L\ f 1938 TERMINUS FRO 6 ~- MAP BY J. L..DYSON, at: wf '.' YEW“ f EPTE ER 75,_,." 1945-__ /* 49" Unmarked rock Movement too _- small to show EXPLANATION % -*%" vECTOR SHOWING DIRECTION AND AMOUNT OF MOVEMENT OF MARKED ROCK Year of initial position and identifying number Year of last recorded position LOCATION AND NUMBER OF ABLATION STAKE-Locations 1-6 as of 1963, 7-12 as of 1965 PLANETABLE BENCH MARK SHOWING ELEVATION IN FEET CREVASSE PATTERN ON ICE Note: All measurements are in feet; to convert Gunsight to meters, multiply by 0.3048 x- Mountain 9021 8000 Base from U.S. Geological Survey, 1950-60 SCALE 1:6 000 Control by U.S. Geological Survey 500 1000 2000 FEET Topography by Kelsh Plotter methods from aerial photographs taken Sept. 8, 1960, by National Park Service Assumed rectangular grid system TRUE NORTH 200 _ 300 400 500 700 METERS n n c CONTOUR INTERVAL ON ICE AND LAND 20 FEET DATUM IS APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL Approximate mean A ACCORDING TO TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE, 1968 peolifiation: ssea A" SOUTHWEST NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM of 1929 NORTHEAST BENCH MARK 7699 A 7700' QUADRANGLE LOCATION 7700' DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT, IN FEET D D' B" NORTHWEST BENCH MARK SOUTHEAST 7699 SOUTHEAST 500 DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT, IN FEET 4 a C' SOUTHEAST |- NORTHWEST 7600 '- NORTHWEST C BENCH MARK | | J.... | 1 1 500 DOWNGLACIER O UPGLACIER DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE POINT, IN FEET SCALE 1:3 000 500 1000 FEET 1 I A I 100 200 300 METERS VERTICAL EXAGGERATION X 2.5 MAP AND PROFILES OF SPERRY GLACIER UNITED STATES DEPARIMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1183 PLATE ! 450 40° igs t C) may Is» Francs "I F- 350 las "t> w a 30° Willamette Lowlands Stockton-Balcones Escarpment 1965 SCALE 1:34,000,000 PHYSICAL SUBDIVISIONS Modified from Edwin H. Hammond Gulf-Atlantic Division Eastern Highland Division Interior Division C] Rocky Mountain Division Intermontane Division Pacific Mountain Division Grand Fork s\“w L 95° | and/ X Milwauke® _, orges CCC ~49* Grand Rapids: isd . MAP SHOWING LANDSLIDE AREAS IN THE CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES By Dorothy H. Radbruch-Hall, Roger B. Colton, William E. Davies, Ivo Lucchitto, Betty A. Skipp, and David J. Varnes U.S. Geological Survey, 1976 Albers Equal Area Projection SCALE 1:7,500,000 a a x o so 100 200 300 400 mies -mm 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 - KiLOMETERS 90° 85° t_" 24 s 54 X 67 LANDSLIDE INCIDENCE High (15% of area involved) Moderate (15%-1.5% of area involved) Low (Less than 1.5% of area involved) LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY High Moderate 30° Susceptibility not indicated where same as or lower than incidence Landslide of special interest. Number refers to publications listed on reverse Italic number shown in upper right-hand corner of a State indicates a general reference for that State Southern limit of Pleistocene continental glacial deposits-Data for area east of the juncture of the Milk River and U.S.-Canada boundary from King and Beikman, 1974. Data for area west of this point from National Research Council, 1945; Crandell, D. R., 1965, modified by data from Waitt, Richard, written communication, 1976; and Colton and others, 1961. (See references at end of text) Isohyets showing 8 or 10 inches of mean annual precipitation (Hachures indicate low side of line). From "Climates of the States'' (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1974) o 29 34 yfimfi ha ; 75° ¢ M Base from U. S. Geological Survey, National Atlas INTERIOR-GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, RETON, VIRGINIA-1981 PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1185 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR PLATE 1 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY EXPLANATION Sample Dated formation Undated - Granitoid numbers or pluton units sequence - Cathedral Peak Granodiorite Quizfydgfize of TUOLUMNE Granodiorite of Kuna Crest Granite of Mono Recesses Round Valley Peak Granodiorite - Granodiorite of Cess) _ Lake Edison 55] Leucogranite of '_'! Big Sandy Bluffs Mount Givens Granodiorite Lamarck l Granodiorite } POWELL MONO PASS KAISER ZV Late Cretaceous Granite of Pellisier Flats Leucogranite of Rawson Creek Granodiorite of Red Devil Lake - } WASHBURN Metavolcanic rock Granite porphyry of Post Peak MERCED PEAK - Granodiorite of Jackass Lakes - Granodiorite of Ostrander Lake Avie _ ce c NX - - Granodiorite of BUENA Y!S x x|x __ # _ _ NX> '" \% Illilouette Creek fCRETACEOUS x x|x x x - - _ | - y f A 7 __ hn ~ ---. \_ _| N a ‘ () - % y Leucogranite of z: (* : i: i: * 24 k; -__ 000 5 . 1! \ - % Graveyard Peak X x x X X \ x . < L Cte M , ‘ HB wi, 1 \ || \ Fay 0 El Capitan 23% ® % \x wa _ ( (\ .. (& . f \ __ 22: 26 Granite X X x. ° X X x Granodiorite of Whiskey Ridge (Granite of |___ staver - Granodiorite of Dimkey Creek \| Granodiorite of £ \22 [> Knowles 3:23 1 4 Oakhurst pluton Early Cretaceous - Plagiogranite of Ward Mountain — Tonalite of Blue C pay. FINE GOLD Granodiorite of The Gateway _ ___ '*; 1g'.<| - Tonalite of 7 S " sug ‘ 37 *- Ross Creek Geology compiled by P.C. Bateman, 1979 S2 - Gest of AGE, 1 1 <] Sawmill Mountain PERIOD IN MILLIONS Guadalupe OF YEARS . - igneous complex - Page Mountain pluton Granodiorite of CEs aes \\\\ \\ \\\\ > \\\ rta .} {t - m _> ~ #:... ay uae. Macey _} + t Granodiorite \ ‘g (K Kf | j Granite of Casa B é) * *~* ®] Diablo Mountain MONO PASS Granodiorite of KAISER TUOLUMNE POWELL o Meant / (4 / I l l SH #." MgggED WASHBURN \ [ BUENA | wo - (4 6 VISTA \ ; FINE GOLD | Cobb Creek JAWBONE JURASSIC pluton Quartz diorite \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ of Granite Creek b Qluartz dioritg of PALISADE E) é Pine Creek mine JAWBONE Me Gfifiiiiviffig $ \ \ \ SOLDIER PASS Quartz monzonite Late Cretaceous CRETACEOUS Early Cretaceous JURASSIC of Beer Creek : A \ \ SOLDIER PASS - Monzonite of Joshua Flat - Don Pedro pluton - Chinese Camp pluton INTERIOR- GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, RESTON VA- 1980 -G8O159 Thngsten Hills ; Scale 1:500,000 : EXPLANATION Quartz Monzonite Re af gMLEs Wheeler Crest O - ages- Radii equal +2 i I Quartz Monzonite percent of the age (estimated 20 30 40 50 KILOMETERS "26 Granodiorite of analytic error on individual nemen esen aa the Benton Range samples) - m UPPER | /| Ultramafic rocks PALEOZOIC (?) SCHEELITE TRIASSIC SCHEELITE TRIASSIC Optimum average age of each named - -| Country rocks (includes meta- granitoid sequence CRETACEOUS ; A TO volcanic rock of sample 35) PRECAMBRIAN SIMPLIFIED GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE CENTRAL SIERRA NEVADA SHOWING THE LOCATION OF COUNTRY ROCK; GRANITOID PLUTONS, FORMATIONS, AND SEQUENCES; AND DATED SAMPLES CO ened Contact Fault This map was printed from negatives prepared by photographic color-separation of hand-colored original.