Late Paleozoic subsidence and burial history of the Fort Worth basin

Alsalem, Ohood B.; Fan, Majie; Xie, Xiangyang

doi:10.1306/01251716016

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the low abundance, and possible contribution of zircons of the same age from the peri-Gondwana terranes, we suggest that the Amarillo-Wichita uplift did not provide significant amounts of sediment into the Fort Worth Basin during the Middle and Late Pennsylvanian. This interpretation is consistent with the eastward shift of the basin depocenter and dominant control of the Ouachita orogen on basin subsidence during the Middle and Late Pennsylvanian ( Alsalem et al, 2017). The ARM orogeny mainly influenced western Laurentia and reached its maximum during the Middle Pennsylvanian (Kluth and Coney, 1981).…”

Section: Missing Signal Of the Amarillo-wichita Uplift And Arm Orogensupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Contractional tectonics during the late Paleozoic also reactivated rift-related faults of the southern Oklahoma aulacogen and formed the northwest-striking Red River and Muenster uplifts as part of the Amarillo-Wichita uplift (Walper, 1982;Keller et al, 1989;Montgomery et al, 2005;Elebiju et al, 2010;Alsalem et al, 2017). Reactivation of early Paleozoic normal faults also caused the initial rise of the basement-involved Llano uplift in southern Laurentia (Erlich and Coleman, 2005).…”

Section: Geological Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on depositional environments and tectonic histories, Montgomery et al (2005) divided the Paleozoic strata in the Fort Worth Basin roughly into three intervals: (1) late Cambrian to Ordovician platform strata deposited in a passive continental margin; (2) Mississippian shallow marine rocks deposited during the exhumation of the Amarillo-Wichita uplift; and (3) Pennsylvanian-lowermost Permian interbedded shallow marine and deltaic deposition associated with the development of Ouachita orogen. The Paleo zoic strata thin rapidly toward the southwest and crop out in the Llano uplift (Turner, 1957;Moore, 1959;Feray and Brooks, 1966;Erlich and Coleman, 2005;Montgomery et al, 2005;Alsalem et al, 2017). Below we briefly describe the clastic units that we sampled.…”

Section: Stratigraphy and Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lower Strawn Group contains fan deltas and shallow marine deposits, and the upper Strawn Group contains deltaic-fluvial deposits (Brown et al, 1973). These rocks thicken eastward and reach up to 1370 m thick in front of the Ouachita orogen (Alsalem et al, 2017). Maps of fractional volume of sand in the Strawn and Canyon Groups suggest that the sandstones were most likely sourced from east-northeast of the basin (Brown et al, 1973).…”

Section: Stratigraphy and Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5B; Table 2; Sharrah, 2006), suggesting that sediments in the Fort Worth Basin and Ouachita foreland were from the same source, and that the two basins were most likely connected. Although the Amarillo-Wichita uplift induced by the ARM orogeny could have acted as a topographic barrier between the two regions, isopach maps of the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian strata in the Fort Worth Basin show that the Muenster uplift did not cause significant flexural subsidence, and thus was not a major topographic feature during the Pennsylvanian (Alsalem et al, 2017). Eriksson et al, 2004.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Paleozoic sediment dispersal before and during the collision between Laurentia and Gondwana in the Fort Worth Basin, USA

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report detrital zircon U-Pb ages in the Fort Worth Basin (southern USA) aimed at understanding sediment dispersal patterns on the southern margin of Laurentia before and during the Laurentia-Gondwana collision. The ages from two Cambrian fluvial-marginal marine sandstone and six Pennsylvanian deltaic-fluvial sandstone samples span from Archean to early Paleozoic time. In the Cambrian sandstones, 80% of zircons are of Mesoproterozoic age (1.451-1.325 Ga) and 18% are of Grenvillian age. The high abundance of the Mesoprotero zoic population suggests that the grains were dispersed by a local river draining the midcontinent granite-rhyolite province located in the Texas Arch to the northwest of the Fort Worth Basin. In the Pennsylvanian sandstones, 26% of zircons are of Archean-early Mesoproterozoic age, 47% are of Grenvillian age, 15% are of Neoproterozoic-earliest Paleozoic age (800-500 Ma), and 10% are of early Paleozoic age (500-318 Ma), indicating a different dispersal pattern during the Pennsylvanian relative to the Cambrian. Compared to other early Paleozoic detrital zircon records on the southern margin of Laurentia, our Pennsylvanian sandstones have a distinct age peak at ca. 650-550 Ma, which we interpreted to be a result of transport by local rivers draining a peri-Gondwana terrane, most likely the Sabine terrane in the Ouachita orogen. The high abundance of Grenvillian zircons reflects either direct transport from the Appa lachians by an axial river or recycling from Mississippian-Pennsylvanian sedimentary rocks incorporated in the Ouachita orogenic front. The similarity of detrital zircon age distributions in the Fort Worth Basin, the Arkoma Basin, and the southern Appalachian forelands seems to favor sediment dispersal by a major river with headwaters in the southern Appalachians.

show abstract

Section: Missing Signal Of the Amarillo-wichita Uplift And Arm Orogensupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Geological Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stratigraphy and Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stratigraphy and Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Paleozoic sediment dispersal before and during the collision between Laurentia and Gondwana in the Fort Worth Basin, USA

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Late Paleozoic Evolution of the Anadarko Basin: Implications for Laurentian Tectonics and the Assembly of Pangea

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assembly of supercontinent Pangea was completed by middle Permian with the closure of the Rheic Ocean along the Appalachian-Ouachita-Marathon belt on the eastern and southeastern margin (current directions are used throughout this paper) of the Laurentian continent (Figures 1a and 1b;Hatcher et al., 2010;Scotese, 1984). Diachronous collision occurred in the southern Alleghanian orogen during early Carboniferous, in the Ouachita fold and thrust belt during Late Mississippian to Pennsylvanian and terminated in the Marathon fold and thrust belt during Late Pennsylvanian to Cisuralian (formerly Early Permian) time (Hale-Erlich & Coleman, 1993;Thomas et al., 2004;Viele and Thomas, 1989). Late Paleozoic compressional belts are present on all sides of the southern Laurentian continent (e.g., Alleghanian, Antler, Ouachita-Marathon, and Sonoran belts in Figure 1c), as are widespread intraplate basement uplifts (e.g., Ancestral Rocky Mountains, Figure 1c).Numerous models for transfer of compressional stress from Laurentian margins to the plate interior have been proposed. Previous workers have attributed intraplate deformation of southeastern Laurentia to continental collision with Gondwana and peri-Gondwanan terranes (Dickerson, 2003;Graham et al., 1975); the effects of diachronous collision along the irregular southeastern Laurentian margin (Dickinson & Lawton, 2003;Kluth & Coney, 1981); flat-slab subduction along the Sonora margin (Ye et al., 1996); reactivation of pre-existing structures by collision along the Ouachita-Marathon and Antler orogenic belts (Marshak et al., 2003); and combined compressional forces from the Ouachita-Marathon, Sonora, and Antler orogenic belts (Leary et al., 2017;Sweet et al., 2021). Consensus has not emerged about what drove late Paleozoic Laurentian tectonics, in large part because of poor exposure of late Paleozoic faults in southeastern Laurentia.During Carboniferous time, a complex fault system developed along lithospheric weaknesses inherited from Mesoproterozoic weaknesses of the

show abstract

Low pressure buildup with large disposal volumes of oil field water: A flow model of the Ellenburger Group, Fort Worth Basin, northcentral Texas

Gao¹,

Nicot²,

Hennings³

et al. 2021

Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Late Paleozoic subsidence and burial history of the Fort Worth basin

Cited by 10 publications

References 46 publications

Paleozoic sediment dispersal before and during the collision between Laurentia and Gondwana in the Fort Worth Basin, USA

Paleozoic sediment dispersal before and during the collision between Laurentia and Gondwana in the Fort Worth Basin, USA

Late Paleozoic Evolution of the Anadarko Basin: Implications for Laurentian Tectonics and the Assembly of Pangea

Low pressure buildup with large disposal volumes of oil field water: A flow model of the Ellenburger Group, Fort Worth Basin, northcentral Texas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About