Advertisement

Bulletin of Volcanology

, Volume 53, Issue 6, pp 460–476 | Cite as

Magnetic fabrics of the Bloodgood Canyon and Shelley Peak Tuffs, southwestern New Mexico: implications for emplacement and alteration processes

  • Sheila J Seaman
  • William C McIntosh
  • John W Geissman
  • Michael L Williams
  • Wolfgan E Elston
Article

Abstract

Anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS) of the middle Tertiary Bloodgood Canyon and Shelley Peak Tuffs of the Mogollon-Datil volcanic field has been used to (1) evaluate the ability of AMS to constrain flow lineations in low-susceptibility ash-flow tuffs; (2) establish a correlation between magnetic fabric, magnetic mineralogy, tuff facies, and characteristics of the depositional setting; and (3) constrain source locations of the tuffs. The tuffs are associated with the overlapping Bursum caldera and Gila Cliff Dwellings basin. The high-silica Bloodgood Canyon Tuff fills the Gila Cliff Dwellings basin and occurs as thin outcrops outside of the basin. The older Shelley Peak Tuff occurs as thin outcrops both along the boundary between the two structures, and outside of the complex. AMS data were collected from 16 sites of Bloodgood Canyon Tuff basin fill, 19 sites of Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow, and 11 sites of Shelley Peak Tuff. Sites were classified on the basis of within-site clustering of orientations of principal susceptibility axes, based on the categories of Knight et al. (1986). Most microscopically visible oxide minerals in the Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow and basin fill, and in the Shelley Peak Tuff are members of the hematite-ilmenite solid solution series. However, IRM acquisition data indicate that Bloodgood Canyon Tuff basin fill and Shelley Peak Tuff have magnetic mineralogy dominated by single- or pseudo-single-domain magnetite, and that the magnetic mineralogy of the Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow is dominated by hematite. Hematite in Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow is likely to be the result of deuteric and/or low-temperature alteration of magnetite and iron silicate minerals. Bulk magnetic susceptibility is higher in magnetite-dominated ash-flow tuff (Bloodgood Canyon Tuff basin fill and Shelley Peak Tuff) than it is in hematite-dominated ash-flow tuff (Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow). Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow has the highest total anisotropy (H) of the three units, followed by Shelley Peak Tuff and Bloodgood Canyon Tuff basin fill. All three ash-flow tuffs are genearlly characterized by oblate susceptibility ellipsoids, with those of the Bloodgood Canyon Tuff basin fill nearest to spherical. At high values of total anisotropy, Shelley Peak Tuff susceptibility ellipsoids attain a prolate shape; those of Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow attain an increasingly oblate shape. Three factors may influence differences in total anisotropy and susceptibility ellipsoid shape: (1) ash which travelled the greatest distance before deposition may show the best development of magnetic fabric, particularly of magnetic lineation; (2) deposition of ash in a closed basin may inhibit laminar flow throughout the sheet and the resulting development of flow textures; and (3) replacement of magnetite and iron silicates preferentially oriented within the foliation plane by hematite with strong crystalline anisotropy may enhance the magnetic susceptibility within that plane. Scatter in AMS axis orientation within sites may result from: (1) greater orientation inaccuracy in block-sampled than in fielddrilled samples; (2) rheomorphism; and (3) low accuracy of AMS measurement in low-susceptibility ashflow tuffs. Evaluation of flow lineation based on AMS of sites with well-clustered K1 axes indicates that (1) Bloodgood Canyon Tuff basin fill flowed along a generally northwest-southeast azimuth; (2) Shelley Peak Tuff located on the boundary of the Bursum caldera and the Gila Cliff Dwellings basin flowed along a nearly east-west azimuth; and (3) Bloodgood Canyon Tuff outflow sites have K1 susceptibility axes generally radial to the Bursum-Gila Cliff Dwellings complex, but within-site scatter of K1 orientations is generally too large to draw conclusions about flow lineation orientation. Limited petrographic work on pilot thin sections adds flow direction information to AMS-derived flow lineation information.

Keywords

Iron Silicate Magnetic Lineation Magnetic Mineralogy Bulk Magnetic Susceptibility Total Anisotropy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anders M, Geissman JW, Piety L, Sullivan JT (1989) Parabolic distribution of circumeastern Snake River Plain seismicity and latest Quaternary faulting: migratory pattern and association with the Yellowstone hotspot. J Geophys Res 94:1589–1621Google Scholar
  2. Balsey JR, Buddington AF (1960) Magnetic susceptibility anisotropy and fabric of some Adirondack granites and orthogneisses. Am J Sci A258:6–20Google Scholar
  3. Carmichael ISE (1967) The iron-titanium oxides of salic volcanic rocks and their associated ferromagnesian silicates. Contrib Mineral Petrol 14:36–64Google Scholar
  4. Chapin CE, Lowell FR (1979) Primary and secondary flow structures in ash-flow tuffs of the Gribbles Run paleovalley, central Colorado. In: Chapin CE, Elston WE (eds) Ash-flow tuffs. Spec Pap Geol Soc Am 180:137–154Google Scholar
  5. Ellwood BB (1982) Estimates of flow direction for calc-alkaline welded tuffs and paleomagnetic data reliability from anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility measurements: central San Juan Mountains, southwest Colorado. Earth Planet Sci Lett 59:303–314Google Scholar
  6. Ellwood BB, Hrouda F, Wagner J-J (1988) Symposia on magnetic fabrics: introductory comments. Phys Earth Planet Int 51:249–252Google Scholar
  7. Elston WE (1976) Tectonic significance of mid-Tertiary volcanism in the Basin and Range province: a critical review with special reference to New Mexico. In: Elston WE, Northrop SA (eds) Cenozoic volcanism. New Mexico Geol Soc Spec Publ 5:93–102Google Scholar
  8. Elston WE (1984) Mid-Tertiary ash-flow tuff cauldrons, southwestern New Mexico. J Geophys Res 89:8733–8750Google Scholar
  9. Elston WE, Smith EI (1970) Determination of flow direction of rhyolitic ash flow-tuff from fluidal textures. Geol Soc Am Bull 81:3393–3406Google Scholar
  10. Fisher RA (1953) Dispersion on a sphere. Proc R Soc London 217:295–305Google Scholar
  11. Flinn D (1962) On folding during three-dimensional progressive deformation. Geol Soc Lond Quart I 118:385–433Google Scholar
  12. Froggatt PC, Wilson CJN, Walker GPL (1981) Orientation of logs in the Taupo Ignimbrite as an indicator of flow direction and vent position. Geology 9:109–111Google Scholar
  13. Haggerty SE (1976) Opaque mineral oxides in terrestrial igneous rocks. In: Rumble D (ed) Oxide minerals. Mineralogical Society of America Reviews in Mineralogy 3: HG-101-HG-276Google Scholar
  14. Knight MD, Walker GPL, Ellwood BB, Diehl JF (1986) Stratigraphy, paleomagnetism, and magnetic fabric of the Toba Tuffs: constraints on the sources and eruptive styles. J Geophys Res 91:10355–10382Google Scholar
  15. McIntosh WC, Sutter JF, Chapin CE (1986a) Stratigraphic framework for the Mogollon-Datil volcanic field based on paleomagnetism and high-precision 40Ar/39Ar dating of ignimbrites. Geol Soc Am Abstr with Programs 8:689Google Scholar
  16. McIntosh WC, Sutter JF, Chapin CE, Osburn GR, Ratte' JC (1986b) A stratigraphic framework for the estern Mogollon-Datil volcanic field based on paleomagnetism and high-precision 40Ar/39Ar dating of ignimbrites-a progress report. In: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 37th Field Conference: 183–195Google Scholar
  17. McIntosh WC (1989) Ages and distribution of ignimbrites in the Mogollon-Datil Volcanic Field, southwestern New Mexico: a stratigraphic framework using 40Ar/39Ar dating and paleomagnetism, Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, New Mexico, 291 pGoogle Scholar
  18. McIntosh WC, Sutter JF, Chapin CE, Kedzie LL (1990) High-precision 40Ar/39Ar sanidine geochronology of ignimbrites in the Mogollon-Datil volcanic field, southwestern New Mexico. Bull Volcanol 52:584–601Google Scholar
  19. Owens WH (1974) Mathematical model studies on factors affecting the magnetic anisotropy of deformed rocks. Tectonophysics 24:115–131Google Scholar
  20. Potter DB, Oberthal CM (1987) Vent sites and flow direction of the Otowi ash flows (lower Bandelier Tuff), New Mexico. Geol Soc Am Bull 98:66–76Google Scholar
  21. Ratte' JC, Gaskill DL (1975) Reconnaissance geologic map of the Gila Wilderness study area, southwestern new Mexico. US Geol Surv Misc Inv Series Map I-886Google Scholar
  22. Ratte' JC, Gaskill DL, Eaton GP, Peterson DL, Stotelmeyer RB, Meeves HC (1979) Mineral resources of the Gila Primitive Area and Gila Widerness, New Mexico. US Geol Surv Bull 1451:229 pGoogle Scholar
  23. Ratte' JC, Marvin CW, Naeser CW, Bikerman M (1984) Calderas and ash flow tuffs of the Mogollon Mountains, southwestern New Mexico. J Geophys Res 89:8713–8732Google Scholar
  24. Rhodes RC (1976) Volcanic geology of the Mogollon Range and adjacent areas, Catron and Grant couties, New Mexico. In: Elston WE, Northrop SA (eds) Cenozoic volcanism. New Mexico Geol Soc Spec Publ 5:42–50Google Scholar
  25. Rhodes RC, Smith EI (1972) Distribution and directional fabric of ash-flow tuff sheets in the northwestern Mogollon Plateau, New Mexico. Geol Soc Am Bull 83:1863–1868Google Scholar
  26. Rosenbaum JG (1986) Paleomagnetic directional dispersion produced by plastic deformation in a thick Miocene welded tuff, southern Nevada: implications for welding temperatures. J Geophys Res 91:12817–12834Google Scholar
  27. Schlinger CM, Rosenbaum JG, Veblen DR (1988) Fe-oxide microcrystals in welded tuff from southern Nevada: origin of remanence carriers by precipitation in volcanic glass. Geology 16:556–559Google Scholar
  28. Schmincke H-U, Swanson DA (1967) Laminar viscous flowage structures in ash-flow tuffs from Gran Canaria, Canary Islands. J Geol 75:641–664Google Scholar
  29. Stacey FD, Joplin G, Lindsay J (1960) Magnetic anisotropy and fabric of some foliation rocks from S. E. Australia. Geofis Pura Appl 47:30–40Google Scholar
  30. Stupavsky M (1985) SI-2 magnetic susceptibility and anisotropy instrument operating manual and handbook. Ruthven, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  31. Suzuki K, Ui T (1982) Grain orientation and depositional ramps as flow direction indicators of a large-scale pyroclastic flow deposit, Japan. Geology 10:429–432Google Scholar
  32. Tarling DH (1983) Paleomagnetism: priciples and applications in geology, geophysics, and archaeology. Chapman and Hall, New York, 379 pGoogle Scholar
  33. Uyeda S, Fuller JC, Belshe JC, Girdler RW (1963) Anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility in rocks and minerals. J Geophys Res 68:279–291Google Scholar
  34. Walker GW, Swanson DA (1968) Laminar flowage in a Pliocene soda rhyolite ash-flow tuff, Lake and Harney Counties, Oregon. US Geol Surv Prof Paper 600-B:B37-B47Google Scholar
  35. Wolff JA, Wright JV (1981) Rheomorphism of welded tuffs. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 10:13–34Google Scholar
  36. Wolff JA, Ellwood BB, Sachs SD (1989) Anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility in welded tuffs: application to a welded-tuff dyke in the Tertiary Trans-Pecos Texas volcanic province, USA. Bull Volcanol 51:299–310Google Scholar
  37. Zijderveld JDA (1967) A. F. demagnetization of rocks: analysis of results. In: Collinson DW, Creer RM, Runcorn SK (eds) Developments in Solid Earth Geophysics, vol. 3, Methods in Paleomagnetism:254–286Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheila J Seaman
    • 1
    • 4
  • William C McIntosh
    • 2
  • John W Geissman
    • 3
  • Michael L Williams
    • 4
  • Wolfgan E Elston
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of GeologyColgate UniversityHamiltonUSA
  2. 2.New Mexico Bureau of MinesSocorroUSA
  3. 3.Department of GeologyUniversity of New MexicoAlbuquerqueUSA
  4. 4.Department of Geology and GeographyUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations