2020
DOI: 10.18654/1000-0569/2020.11.14
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characteristics and pore genesis of dolomite in Ordovician Yingshan Formation in Gucheng area, Tarim Basin

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, previously published datasets on the northern slope of the Tazhong Uplift were analysed together to bring new constraints on the nature of diagenetic fluids. These published data include silicon isotopes of the cherts (Chen et al, 2015;Table S1), REE + Y results of siliceous limestones (Hong et al, 2018;Li, 2016;Table S2) and igneous rocks (Yu, 2009; Table S2), and carbon and oxygen isotope data of the dolomites (Guo et al, 2020;Wang, 2017;Wang et al, 2020; Table S3). The following three points need to be highlighted here: Firstly, these collected carbon and oxygen isotopes are considered comparable as all these data have reportedly been normalised to Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB) with an accuracy of ±0.1‰; Secondly, the same computations for Ce and Eu anomalies are adopted in these references, which are otherwise recalculated before analysis; Thirdly, these published datasets are evaluated here to give new insights into diagenetic fluids, for example, solute transport mechanisms.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, previously published datasets on the northern slope of the Tazhong Uplift were analysed together to bring new constraints on the nature of diagenetic fluids. These published data include silicon isotopes of the cherts (Chen et al, 2015;Table S1), REE + Y results of siliceous limestones (Hong et al, 2018;Li, 2016;Table S2) and igneous rocks (Yu, 2009; Table S2), and carbon and oxygen isotope data of the dolomites (Guo et al, 2020;Wang, 2017;Wang et al, 2020; Table S3). The following three points need to be highlighted here: Firstly, these collected carbon and oxygen isotopes are considered comparable as all these data have reportedly been normalised to Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB) with an accuracy of ±0.1‰; Secondly, the same computations for Ce and Eu anomalies are adopted in these references, which are otherwise recalculated before analysis; Thirdly, these published datasets are evaluated here to give new insights into diagenetic fluids, for example, solute transport mechanisms.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The δ 18 O of fine crystalline dolostone (−7.18‰ to −8.53‰) and meso-coarse crystalline dolostone (−7.26‰ to −8.35‰) in this study were more negative than that of limestone (average value of −6.92‰). However, the δ 18 O of hydrothermal dolostones in other basins is usually below −10‰ [56,57], the relatively heavier δ 18 O in the study might have been influenced by the high salinity. Strontium isotope could be used to identify the occurrence of hydrothermal fluids [8].…”
Section: Dolomitization Of Dolostone Formed By Hydrothermal Fluidsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…In general, dolomite ΣREEs are higher than limestone. The measured results were standardized for the Australian Post-Archean mean shale (PAAS) [34], and the standardized (SN) element anomalies were calculated using the following methods: δCe = 2 × Ce SN /(La SN + Pr SN ), δEu = 2 × Eu SN /(Sm SN +) [25]; if δCe and δEu are greater than 1.2, they are judged as positive anomalies; if δEu and δCe are less than 0.8, they are judged as negative anomalies. As can be seen from the standardized rare earth element partitioning pattern (Figure 7), both dolomites and limestone have the characteristics that the content of light rare earth elements (La~Eu) is smaller than that of heavy rare earth elements (Gd~Lu), showing no "tilt upward" pattern.…”
Section: Rare Earth Elementsmentioning
confidence: 99%