Genesis and diagenesis of travertine, Futamata hot spring, Japan

The fate of a travertine record: Impact of early diagenesis on the Y‐10 core (Mammoth Hot Springs, Yellowstone National Park, USA)

“…Such rates are inferior to those measured in the active Mammoth springs by precipitation experiments, which are on the order of 0.2–1.0 mg/cm 3 h or ≤5 mm/day (Fouke, 2011; Kandianis et al, 2008). They are, however, higher than values found for banded travertine in fissure ridges at Futamata (0.06 mm/year; Shiraishi et al, 2020) and at different locations in Turkey (Altunel & Karabacak, 2005; Mesci et al, 2008) or for tufa deposits in Spain (average 0.7 mm/year; Rodríguez‐Berriguete et al, 2018). In situ measurements at Mammoth were taken over a couple of days in an active stream.…”

“…Temperature, evaporation, degree of CO 2 degassing and water composition vary not only downstream, but also through time (Fouke et al, 2000; Veysey et al, 2008) with changing spring activity, chemistry, day–night and weather conditions. These changes influence calcite‐aragonite stability and the isotopic signal of the carbonates that precipitate (Gutjahr et al, 1996a, 1996b; Morse, 2002; Morse et al, 2007; Shiraishi et al, 2020). The isotopic value of neomorphosed‐cemented travertine would then obviously change, but still vary roughly along the same δ 13 C–δ 18 O trend.…”

“…The rapid lateral and vertical alternations and changes in facies and fabrics, at multiple scales, are causes of their heterogeneity and anisotropy in petrographic and geophysical properties (Claes et al, 2017; De Boever et al, 2016; Gagrcía‐del‐Cura et al, 2012; Soete et al, 2015). Gradually, interest in the presence and variety of diagenetic products in calcareous spring deposits increased (Arp et al, 2013; Claes et al, 2017; Gandin & Capezzuoli, 2014; Rodríguez‐Berriguete, 2020; Shiraishi et al, 2020). The processes and their products go beyond localised precipitation of cements in cavities/fractures, or dissolution by meteoric waters, resulting in enlarged voids.…”

“…Diagenesis in these settings may result in textures and microscopic fabrics (microfabrics) that are considered primary in other settings (Frisia et al, 2018), adding to the confusion of how to interpret them and the physicochemical and depositional context in which these deposits initially formed (Brasier et al, 2011; De Boever et al, 2017a). A number of case studies have suggested that diagenesis starts early and proceeds fast in non‐marine carbonates (Chafetz et al, 1994; Golubić et al, 2008; Janssen et al, 1999; Rainey & Jones, 2007), although the exact rates are hard to define (Andrews & Brasier, 2005; Arp et al, 2001; Pederson et al, 2020; Shiraishi et al, 2020). Finally, the impact of early diagenetic processes on the preservation of elemental and isotopic signals used in palaeo‐environmental reconstructions (Andrews, 2006; Andrews & Brasier, 2005; Brasier et al, 2010; Takashima & Kano, 2008), and in particular the dating of palaeoclimate records, is an important although still controversial topic in non‐marine carbonate research (Falk et al, 2016; Frisia et al, 2018; Kele et al, 2003; Pederson et al, 2019; Scholz et al, 2014; Zhang et al, 2014).…”

3D reconstruction of the Lapis Tiburtinus (Tivoli, Central Italy): The control of climatic and sea‐level changes on travertine deposition

“…Travertine deposits show complex facies distributions due to the numerous extrinsic (e.g. underlying substrate morphology and topographic gradient, fault patterns and tectonic setting, hydrogeology and geometry of the springs and climate) and intrinsic (interaction between biological and physico‐chemical processes) factors affecting their deposition and evolution (Della Porta, 2015; Guo & Riding, 1998; Jones & Renaut, 1995; Pentecost, 2005; Shiraishi et al., 2020). The relationship between travertine deposition and tectonic activity is well demonstrated in the published literature (Brogi et al., 2010, 2018).…”