Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · pp1253

Stratigraphy and paleontology of Mid-Cretaceous rocks in Minnesota and contiguous areas

Abstract

PART A: Molluscan fossils are locally abundant at outcrops of Upper Cretaceous rocks in eastern North and South Dakota, northeastern Nebraska, northwestern Iowa, and western and northern Minnesota. Other Cretaceous mollusks have been found in the glacial deposits in Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois. The oldest well dated marine mollusks are of earliest late Cenomanian age and occur in northwestern Iowa. Mollusks of marginal marine and nonmarine environments in northwestern Iowa and south-central Minnesota are probably of slightly younger late Cenomanian age. The youngest mollusks treated in this report are bivalves of Santonian age found in the Niobrara Formation in eastern North and South Dakota. The collections indicate the presence or former presence of the following ammonite zones in the northeastern part of the Western Interior seaway: Santonian: Scaphites depressus-Clioscaphites choteauensis Coniacian: Scaphites uentrocosus; Scaphites preuentricosus Turonian: Scaphites coruensis; Scaphites whitfieldi; Prionocyclus hyatti; Subprionocyclus percarinatus; Collignoniceras woollgari; Watinoceras coloradoense Cenomanian: Dunueganoceras albertense; Dunueganoceras pondi PART B: Sedimentary rocks of early Late Cretaceous age occur in the eastern parts of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska, and in Minnesota and western Iowa. They are generally included in, from oldest to youngest, the Dakota Formation, Graneros Shale, Greenhorn Formation, Carlile Shale, and Niobrara Formation. However, in eastern North Dakota, they are also assigned to, in ascending order, the Belle Fourche Shale, Greenhorn Formation, Carlile Shale, and Niobrara Formation. The Graneros Shale and laterally equivalent strata in the Belle Fourche Shale grade eastward into the Coleraine Formation of northeastern Minnesota and probably into the Windrow Formation of southeastern Minnesota. Cretaceous beds locally overlie rocks of Precambrian, Paleozoic, and Jurassic ages, and they are generally overlain by glacial drift and alluvium of Quaternary age. In Minnesota and adjoining areas, formations of mid-Cretaceous age commonly overlap the dissected surface of Precambrian rocks. The thickness of the lower Upper Cretaceous sequence ranges from about 223 m in eastern North Dakota and about 200 m in northeastern Nebraska to a featheredge in Minnesota and Iowa. These lower Upper Cretaceous formations are composed mainly of shale, siltstone, sandstone, and limestone units of marine and nonmarine origin and were deposited near the eastern shore of a transgressing and regressing epicontinental sea in Cenomanian Turonian Coniacian. and Santonian time. During the late Cenoanian, the strandline was in Minnesota and was oriented generally northnortheast. Interpretations of the depositional environments of the strata and of fossils from outcrops and from clasts in glacial drift indicate that the Cretaceous seaway extended from this region northeastward across Canada to Greenland in the Turonian Coniacian, and Santonian. The Cretaceous formations are deformed into broad, shallow synclines in eastern North and South Dakota and in northeastern Nebraska. A west-trending anticline, the Sioux uplift, separates the synclines in southeastern South Dakota. Sparse evidence of minor faulting in the formations exists in northeastern South Dakota, along the strike of a major southwest-trending zone of tectonism in the Precambrian basement rocks. The structural relief in the region, on the top of the Greenhorn Formation, is at least 250 m between eastern North Dakota and northeastern Minnesota, and at least 200 m between northeastern Nebraska and northwestern Iowa. A comparison of the Cretaceous stratigraphy of the Minnesota region and of areas in Wyoming indicates that some marine transgressions and regressions were synchronous in the two regions. The transgression during Greenhorn time, the regression during early Carlile time, and the transgression dur

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 41.902277040963696° to 49.32512199104001° latitude; -99.140625° to -89.56054687499999° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

William Aubrey Cobban, E.A. Merewether. 1983. Stratigraphy and paleontology of Mid-Cretaceous rocks in Minnesota and contiguous areas. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1253

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Allostratigraphy and formalizing the Cold Harbor Alloformation, Virginia Coastal Plain, Eastern Virginia

Introduction Distinct morphologic features in the Virginia part of the Coastal Plain Province (herein referred to as the Virginia Coastal Plain) were noted in one of the earliest geologic surveys in 1839 (Rogers, 1884). South of the James River, Rogers (1884, p. 252) described a western bench that ranged from “a low rocky coast…of the primeval sea” to an eastern facing scarp east of the City of Suffolk, Virginia. His eastern bench extended from the scarp at Suffolk, which he suggested was a former shoreline, to the present Atlantic Ocean. Notably, the eastern plain was described as less dissected than the western plain. In Virginia, creation and publication of topographic maps by the U. S. Geological Survey began in the mid-1880s. By 1905, many areas in eastern Virginia were mapped as 30-minute and 15-minute series with 10-foot (ft) contour interval accuracy (Virginia Division of Mineral Resources [VDMR] , 2008). After the continued release of these early maps that displayed Virginia Coastal Plain morphology in increasingly greater detail, several geological reports were published where scarps and plains were traced, named, and origins proposed (Shaler, 1890; Shattuck, 1901; Clark and Miller, 1906, 1912; Wentworth, 1930). Shattuck (1901) recognized three continuous scarps in Maryland and most importantly suggested that there was a correlation between surficial deposits (geologic formations) and morphologic terraces; this defined the terrace-formation concept that became the basis of geologic mapping of the Upper Pliocene and Pleistocene sediments in the Virginia Coastal Plain. Clark and Miller (1912) described three Pleistocene formations and supported the terrace-formation concept because the sediments within each formation were lithologically similar to one another, and differentiating them by comparing key vertical sections was not helpful. In Virginia, Wentworth (1930) defined and mapped five Pleistocene terraces on the basis of correlating morphologic terraces with their underlying formation sediments. Similarly, Cooke (1931) identified and traced seven marine shorelines and proposed corresponding terrace names from Maryland to Florida. Cooke (1931) also pointed out that the various elevations of scarps were related to interglacial sea-level highstands whereas prior workers called on vertical land movement of emergence and submergence to create shoreline scarps. Cooke’s (1936) geologic map of eastern South Carolina showing the Pleistocene sediments is also based on the terrace-formation concept. Detailed geologic mapping of the Virginia Coastal Plain by Virginia Division of Mineral Resources (VDMR) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) followed lithostratigraphic convention for Early Pliocene and older marine sediments. However, geologic mapping of Upper Pliocene and Pleistocene sediments used the concept of morphologic setting and elevations of scarp toe and flat-plain, or the terrace-formation concept. The 1983 version of the North American Stratigraphic Code (hereafter the Code) (North American Commission on Stratigraphic Nomenclature [NACSN] , 1983) introduced allostratigraphy that gave credence to the terrace-formation concept. According to the current Code (NACSN, 2021; Article 58), “an allostratigraphic unit is a mappable body of rock that is defined and identified on the basis of its bounding discontinuities,” and, “formal allostratigraphic units may be defined or distinguish between different (1) superposed discontinuity-bounded deposits of similar lithology, (2) contiguous discontinuity-bounded deposits of similar lithology, or (3) geographically separated discontinuity-bounded units of similar lithology…The lithology of an allostratigraphic unit plays no part in its definition.” However, definition and placement of bounding discontinuities relies on lateral and vertical knowledge of lithology and is so recognized in Article 58e, “A type locality and type area must be designated; a composite stratotype or a type section and several reference sections are desirable.” We understand that each of the terrace formations of Late Pliocene and Pleistocene age were deposited during a marine transgressive event tied to an interglacial sea-level highstand (scarp above the Poquoson Member of the Tabb Formation may be the result of a still-stand as sea level was falling after deposition of the Lynnhaven Member, refer to fig. 1). The base of each map unit is an unconformity (or is at least in part for the base of the Poquoson) and nomenclature for each unit might be changed from “formation” to “alloformation,” as suggested by Doar and Berquist (2009). Figure 1 shows the relative placement of these mapped and named alloformations as used in the Virginia Coastal Plain and Fall Zone (a zone of transition between the Piedmont and Coastal Plain Provinces) (Berquist, 2021). Except perhaps for the Poquoson, many of these proposed alloformations are unlikely to interfinger or grade laterally seaward into extensive deep marine sediments. After their deposition, erosion during sea-level fall and then rise for the next depositional event would seemingly obliterate any marine connection without a basal unconformity. All these alloformations contain sediments deposited in fluvial, estuarine, and shallow-marine environments and are bound everywhere by unconformities. This paper documents the Cold Harbor Alloformation as a formal stratigraphic unit and the rationale for mapping the sediments using an allostratigraphic classification. The Cold Harbor Alloformation is composed of sediments from a variety of environments such as gravel beds, shoreline beach sands, marsh and estuarine sand and mud, and shallow marine sands. These sediments are found at elevations up to 240 ft and lie unconformably above older sediments and rocks. Our work relied on observations of outcrops and many auger borings to identify basal unconformities.

Professional Paper↗

Formalization of the Elsing Green Alloformation, Virginia Coastal Plain, Eastern Virginia

The Elsing Green Alloformation is herein formalized as a new Pleistocene alloformation in the Virginia Coastal Plain. This allostratigraphic unit is characterized by an unconformity-bounded terrace deposit occupying a morphologic flat with a mapped elevation range of about 26 to 38 feet (7.9 to 11.6 meters); its landward extent is commonly marked at the base of an erosional scarp where the toe is typically at 38 feet (11.6 meters) and is distinguished by its topographic expression and stratigraphic position. Sediments of this unit were previously mapped as part of the Shirley Formation or Sedgefield Member of the Tabb Formation but differ significantly in their bounding scarps and terrace morphology. The type area is within the Tunstall 7.5-minute quadrangle near Elsing Green Plantation, King William County, Virginia. The reference section is provided by boring 2012270-2. Correlation is proposed with other mid-Pleistocene terrace deposits in the mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain, including the younger Lynch Heights Formation of Delaware and the Butlers Bluff Member of the Nassawadox Formation of the Eastern Shore of Virginia. The age of the Elsing Green Alloformation is interpreted to be Marine Isotope Stage 9e (about 330,000 years).

Professional Paper↗

Resurvey of the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dam sites in Grand Canyon National Park—Changes in sediment storage and evidence supporting the occurrence of bedrock incision through the mid-20th century

The Bureau of Reclamation developed an extensive plan for a network of dams, water tunnels, and hydropower plants in and around Grand Canyon, Arizona, in the 1940s through 1960s. The two largest of these planned dams were the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. Though these dams were ultimately never built, Reclamation conducted extensive topographic, bathymetric, and subsurface exploration work at the sites proposed for these dams in the 1940s and 1950s. Resurveys of these dam sites were conducted between 1998 and 2021 to determine the changes in sediment storage at these dam sites caused by the upstream construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam and by the recession of Lake Mead, the reservoir impounded by Hoover Dam. The resurveys of the Marble Canyon dam sites indicate that the post-1950s changes in sediment storage at these dam sites are broadly consistent with flux-based estimates of voluminous sand erosion from Marble Canyon since the 1963 closure of Glen Canyon Dam. These resurveys also suggest that the pre-dam longitudinal variation in sediment thickness over bedrock played a key role in determining the locations of the sand erosion induced by Glen Canyon Dam; more sand eroded from locations where more sand was present in the 1950s. The resurvey of the Bridge Canyon dam sites indicates that the Colorado River’s incision of the Lake Mead delta is regulated both by bed-sediment grain size and downstream hydraulic controls. Finally, analyses of bed-sediment thickness and sedimentological data at the dam sites, and observations of bed scour and gravel transport, suggest that sufficient bedrock was exposed to allow bedrock incision during commonly recurring pre-dam snowmelt floods that entrained small boulders into transport.

Arizona↗