I read contradicting reports on Great Salt Lake ooids: Were/are these ooids originally aragonitic or calcitic? Could you cite any relevant and trusted bibliographic reference!?...
Dear Bruno,
you are right, although the generalities of the formation of Great Salt Lake ooid have been recognized for some time, the specific processes responsible for their formation remain an enigma. As suggested by Kahle (1974), radial texture in ancient calcitic ooids is probably mainly original, not diagenetic. Halley (1977) evidences that their petrographic relationships are ambiguous relative to their origin, but a magnesium-rich zone around large radial grains suggests these result from an early reorganization of a precursory material. Large radial grains are interpreted as secondary features, albeit syndepositional. These grains are the result of recrystallization only if the postulated earlier precipitate was calcium carbonate. However, we must remember that modern depositional environments of marine ooids and carbonate muds are chemically unrepresentative of comparable ancient environments (Sandberg, 2006).
The following papers can be useful in this open question.
My best regards
Michele
KAHLE, C. F. (1974) Ooids from Great Salt Lake, Utah, as an analogue for the genesis and diagenesis of ooids in marine limestones: JOURNAL OF SEDIMENTARY PETROLOGY, v. 44, p. 30-39
ROBERT B. HALLEY (1977) Ooid fabric and fracture in the Great Salt Lake and the geologic record. JOURNAL OF SEDIMENTARY PETROLOGY, VOL. 47, NO. 3, p. 109
PHILIP A. SANDBERG (2006) New interpretation of Great Salt Lake ooids and of ancient non-skeletal carbonate mineralogy. SEDIMENTOLOGY 22(4): 497 - 537
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3091.1975.tb00244.x
Here is an interesting paper (with color photographs) in Facies 1997:
"Organic matter in Great Salt Lake ooids (Utah, USA) - First approach to a formation via organic matrices" @Gernot Arp and colleagues
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Chemistry
- Sulfites
- Inorganic Chemistry
- Inorganic Chemicals
- Salts