Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · pp1458

Element concentrations in soils and other surficial materials of Alaska

Abstract

Mean concentrations of 35 elements, ash yields, and pH have been estimated for samples of sils and other unconsolidated surficial materials from 266 collection locations throughout Alaska. These background values can be applied to studies of environmental geochemistry and health, wildlife management, and soil-forming processes in cold climates and to computation of element abundances on a regional or worldwide scale. Limited data for an additoinal eight elements are also presented. Materials were collected using a one-way, three-level, analysis-of-variance samplling design in which collecting procedures were simplified for the convenience of the many volunteer field workers. The sample collectors were asked to avoid locations of known mineral deposits and obvious contamination, to take samples at a depth of about 20 cm where possible, and to take a replicate sample about 100 m distant from the first sample collected. With more than 60 percent of the samples replicated and 14 percent of the samples split for duplicate laboratory analyses, reliable estimates were made of the variability in element concentrations at two geographic scales and of the error associated with sample handling and laboratory procedures. Mean concentrations of most elements in surficial materials from the state of alaska correspond well with those reported in similar materials from the conterminous United STatess. Most element concentrations and ranges in samples of stream and lake sediments from Alaska, however, as reported in the literature, do not correspond well with those found in surficial materials of this study. This lack of correspondence is attributed to (1) a merger of two kinds ofsediments (stream and lake) for calculating means; (2) elimination from the sediment mean calculations of values below the limit of quantitative determination; (3) analytical methods different from those of the surficial materials study; and (4) most importantly, the inherent differences in chemistry of the materials. The distribution of variability in element concentrations o Alaskan surficial-material samples was, for most elements, largely among sampling locations, with only a samll part of the variability occurring between replicate samples at a location. The geochemical uniformity within sampling locations in Alaska is an expression of uniform geochemical cycling processes within small geographic areas. The concentration values for 35 elements in 266 samples were plotted on maps by symbols representing classes of concentration frequency distributions. These plotted symbols form patterns that may or may not be possible to interpret but nevertheless show differences that are observable at several geographical scales. The largest pattern is one generally low concentrations of many elements in materials from arctic and oceanic tundra regions, as contrasted to their often high concentrations in samples from interior and southeastern Alaska. The patttern for sodium isespecially pronounced. Intermediate-sized patterns are shown, for example, by the generally high values for magnesium and low values for silicon in the coastal forest region of southeastern Alaska. Many elements occur at low concentratoins in samples from the Alaskan peninsula and the Aleutian Islands. The degree of confidence in patterns of element abundance is expected to be in direct proportion to the number of samples included in the area. As the patterns become smaller, the probability increases that the patterns are not reproducible.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L. P. Gough, R. C. Severson, H.T. Shacklette. 1988. Element concentrations in soils and other surficial materials of Alaska. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1458

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

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↗

The eruptive behavior of distributed volcanism forming low shield edifices—A case study of Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field, U.S.A.

Distributed volcanic fields are present in various tectonic settings worldwide, and their characteristics reflect differing influences from magmatic and tectonic processes. In the southwestern United States alone, there are 37 Quaternary distributed volcanic fields. After the primary period of extensional tectonics in the southern Basin and Range 15–5 million years ago, the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field developed in southwestern Arizona between 4 and 1 million years ago. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists primarily of low relief shield volcanoes, a type of distributed volcanism with poorly understood temporal evolution. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field is less than 200 kilometers (km) from the Colorado Plateau, Gulf of California, and southern San Andreas Fault system. This work identifies and examines controls on the emplacement of the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field by documenting shallow and surficial structures as well as eruption characteristics and style through time. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists of 21 volcanoes with a total of 33 vents over an area of about 770 square kilometers (km 2 ). The prominence of low relief shield volcanoes may be explained by ascent of basaltic magmas through thin Basin and Range crust, without much crustal contamination, and low viscosities common to mafic compositions. Typical eruption characteristics involve the construction of low relief shield volcanoes followed by Strombolian fissure eruptions at the summits or near-summit medial areas that produce scoria lapilli, which may weld to form agglomerate. The total lifetime erupted volume of about 4.3 cubic kilometers (km 3 ) represents an average eruptive flux of approximately 2x10 -3 km 3 per thousand years (k.y.). This erupted volume is low relative to Neogene basaltic intraplate distributed volcanic fields worldwide, which typically range from 10 -3 to 1 km 3 k.y. -1 . Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field eruptions were likely triggered by intermittent rejuvenation of transient magmatic zones that exist in thinned crust. Instantaneous flux from point sources feeding the lava flows is estimated to be on the order of 10 -1 to 10 cubic meters per second.

Arizona↗

Capitalization of positional (Lower/Middle/Upper) and temporal (Early/Middle/Late) adjectives in the names of formal chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units of the Phanerozoic

Many authors are understandably confused about the capitalization of the words “lower,” “middle,” “upper,” “early,” and “late.” Where these words are used simply as descriptive adjectives, they should be in lowercase; where they form the first word of a formal chronostratigraphic or geochronologic unit name, they should be in uppercase.

Professional Paper↗