Advertisement

A story told by calcareous nannofossils—the timing and course of an Eocene meteorite impact in central Jordan

  • Mohammad Alqudah
  • Hani Khoury
  • Elias Salameh
  • Joerg Mutterlose
Original Paper
  • 53 Downloads

Abstract

A circular structure, 5.5 km in diameter, in central eastern Jordan has been interpreted as a large meteorite impact structure. The age of the Waqf As Suwwan impact is poorly constrained. By examining calcareous nannofossils from the sediments exposed in this structure, an age model of the timing of the event has been obtained. A total of 81 smear slides from two cores (BH-1, BH-2) penetrating the sediments of the central structure were prepared in order to obtain a biostratigraphic age for the post-impact sediments. The calcareous nannofossils assign sediments below the breccias of the core BH-1 an age of late Campanian to late Maastrichtian and a mixture of late Maastrichtian to early Eocene ages in the breccia horizon, while core BH-2 is of early Maastrichtian to late Maastrichtian age. The upper part of the sediments, removed in from adjacent area, consists of breccia components. The presences of calcareous nannofossil marker assemblages suggest that these components were derived from two different sources: a Cretaceous and a Paleocene-Early Eocene one. The deposition of the breccia resulted from gravitational collapse of water-saturated sediments in two stages; the earlier of these was more intensive than the latter. The stratigraphic framework and the presence of reworked Cretaceous and Paleocene calcareous nannofossils within Paleogene nannofossil Zone NP12/NP13 suggests an early Eocene age for the impact. The upper part of the Cretaceous sediments was thermally altered by the impact causing partial or complete dissolution of the calcareous nannofossils. This caused overgrowth for the more resistant species, while others were dissolved.

Keywords

Waqf As Suwwan impact Central Jordan Calcareous nannofossils Biostratigraphy Reworking Preservation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study is in cooperation between the American University of Beirut, the Ruhr University Bochum, and the University of Jordan. The University of Jordan hosts the cores. All the analyses were performed in the Ruhr University Bochum and in the Central Research Science Laboratory at the American University of Beirut. The authors would like to thank Dr. Rolf Neuser from the SEM lab of the Department of Geology, Mineralogy and Geophysics (Bochum) for his support. We would like to thank Dr. Jean Self-Trail and Dr. David Watkins for their useful suggestions. We also would like to thank Ms. Ibtisam Baik for her helpful comments. The second author thanks Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (AvH) for their support during his research visit in Museum für Naturkunde.

References

  1. Adelseck CGJ, Geehan GW, Roth PH (1973) Experimental evidence for the selective dissolution and overgrowth of calcareous nannofossils during diagenesis. Geol Soc Am Bull 84:2755–2762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Hejoj IK, Salameh E, Abu Hamad A (2013) Deformed fossils and related structures in Jordan. Jordan J Earth Environ Sci 5(1):31–44Google Scholar
  3. AlHiyari A, Halasa W (2009) Geological map of Qasr At Tuba, 335-II, scale 1:100,000. Geology Directorate, Natural Resources Authority, AmmanGoogle Scholar
  4. Alqudah M, Ali Hussein M, Van den Boorn S, Giraldo VM, Kolonic S, Podlaha OG, Mutterlose J (2014) Eocene oil shales from Jordan—paleoenvironmental implications from reworked microfossils. Mar Pet Geol 52:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alqudah M, Ali Hussein M, Van den Boorn S, Podlaha OG, Mutterlose J (2015) Biostratigraphy and depositional setting of Maastrichtian—Eocene oil shales from Jordan. Mar Pet Geol 60:87–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bain GW (1940) Geological, chemical and physical problems in the marble industry: American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers Technical Publication, p 1261Google Scholar
  7. Bender F (1968) Geologie von Jordanien. Beitrag zur regionalen Geologie der Erde, v. 7. Bornträger Publication BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Bender F (1975) Geology of the Arabian peninsula-Jordan. United States geological survey professional paper 560-I, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  9. Buchner E, Schnieder M (2009) Multiple fluvial reworking of impact ejecta—a case study from the Ries crater, southern Germany. Meteorit Planet Sci 44(7):1051–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bukry D (1971) Cenozoic calcareous nannofossils from Pacific Ocean: San Diego Society of Natural History Transaction 16:303–237Google Scholar
  11. Burnett J (1998) Upper cretaceous. In: Bown P (ed) Calcareous nannofossils biostratigraphy. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 132–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Edwards LE, Self-Trail JM (2002) Shocking news—impact effects on marine microfossils, Chesapeake Bay Impact Structure, Virginia. Abstract, abstract volume, American Geophysical Union, Spring Meeting 2002, abstract T21A-04Google Scholar
  13. Ferreira J, Cachao M, Gonzalez R (2008) Reworked calcareous nannofossils as ocean dynamic tracers: the Guadiana shelf case study (SW Iberia). Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 79:59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heimbach W (1969) Vulkanogene Erscheinung in der Kalktafel Zentraljordaniens. Beihefte zum Geologischen Jahrbuch 81:149–160Google Scholar
  15. Heinrichs T, Salameh E, Khoury H (2014) The Waqf as Suwwan crater, Eastern Desert of Jordan—aspects of the deep structure of an oblique impact from reflection seismic and gravity data. Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch) 103:233–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kenkmann T, Reimold WU, Kirfan M, Salameh E, Konsul K, Khoury H (2010) The complex impact crater Jebel Waqf as Suwwan in Jordan: effects of target heterogeneity and impact obliquity on central uplift formation. Geol Soc Am Spec Pap 465:471–487Google Scholar
  17. Khoury H, Salameh E, Khirfan M (2012) Chert from Jebel Waqf as Suwwan meteoritic impact structure. Neues Jb Geol Paläontol Abh 265(3):281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Khoury H, Salameh E, Reimold U (2013) Mineralogy and geochemistry of post-impact sedimentary infill of the moat and carbonates of the crater floor, Waqf as Suwwan impact structure. Large Meteorite Impacts and Planetary Evolution V, Sadbury, Canada. Abstract no. 3030. http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/sudbury2013/
  19. Martini E (1970) Standard Paleogene calcareous nannoplankton zonation. Nature 226:560–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Melosh HJ (1989) Impact cratering. Oxford, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Nunes AA, Abbott DH, Glatz CA (2002) Microfossil melting by the Ewing impact. Abstract, abstract volume, Denver annual meeting, session no. 239, paper no. 239-1Google Scholar
  22. Perch-Nielsen K (1985) Cenozoic calcareous nannofossils. In: Bolli HM, Saunders JB, Perch-Nielsen K (eds) Plankton stratigraphy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 427–554Google Scholar
  23. Pirkenseer C, Spezzaferri S, Berger J-P (2011) Reworked microfossils as a paleogeographic tool. Geology 39(9):843–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roth PH (1973) Calcareous nannofossils-leg 17, Deep Sea drilling project. In: Winterer EL, Ewing JI (eds) Initial reports of the deep sea drilling project, vol 17, pp. 695–795Google Scholar
  25. Roth PH (1984) Preservation of calcareous nannofossils and fine-grained carbonate particles in mid-cretaceous sediments from the southern Angola Basin, site 530. In: Hay WW, Sibuet J-C (eds) Initial reports of the deep sea drilling project, vol 75, pp. 651–655Google Scholar
  26. Salameh E, Khoury H, Schneider W (2006) Jebel Waqf as Suwwan, Jordan: a possible impact crater—a first approach. Z Dtsch Ges Geowiss 157(3):1–8Google Scholar
  27. Salameh E, Khoury H, Reimold WU, Schneider W (2008) The first large meteorite impact structure discovered in the Middle East: Waqf As Suwwan, Jordan. Meteorit Planet Sci 43(10):1681–1690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Salameh E, Khoury H, Reimold WU (2014) Drilling the Waqf As Suwaan impact structure. Int J Earth Sci 103(1):233–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schmieder M, Reimold WU, Kirfan M, Salameh E, Khoury H (2011a) Shock-metamorphic microstructures in chert from Jebel Waqf As Suwwan impact structure, Jordan. Meteorit Planet Sci 46:574–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schmieder M, Buchner E, Reimold WU (2011b) Impact-related deformationfeatures in cherts from terrestrial impact structures. Abstract, abstract volume, 42nd lunar and planetary Science Conference. Texas, USA, no. 2274Google Scholar
  31. Self-Trail JM (2003) Shock-wave-induced fracturing of calcareous nannofossils from the Chesapeake Bay impact crater. Geology 31(8):697–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Self-Trail JM, Edwards LE, Litwin RJ (2009) Paleontological interpretations of crater processes and infilling of synimpact sediments from Chesapeake Bay impact structure. In: Gohn GS, Koeberl C, Miler KG, Reimold WU (eds) The ICDP-USGS deep drilling project in the Chesapeake Bay impact structure: results from Eyreville core holes. Geological Society of America, special paper 458, pp. 633–654Google Scholar
  33. Uutela A (2001) Proterozoic and early Palaeozoic microfossils in the Karikkoselkä impact crater, central Finland. Bull Geol Soc Finl 73(1–2):75–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Earth and Environmental SciencesYarmouk UniversityIrbidJordan
  2. 2.Department of GeologyUniversity of JordanAmmanJordan
  3. 3.Institute for Geology, Mineralogy and GeophysicsRuhr University BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations