Lithofacies, architectural elements and tectonic provenance of the siliciclastic rocks of the Lower Permian Dorud Formation in the Alborz Mountain Range, Northern Iran

Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of African Earth Sciences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jafrearsci

Lithofacies, architectural elements and tectonic provenance of the siliciclastic rocks of the Lower Permian Dorud Formation in the Alborz Mountain Range, Northern Iran Mojtaba Javidan a, Hosseinali Mokhtarpour b, Mohammad Sahraeyan c,⇑, Hojatollah Kheyrandish d a

Department of Geology, College of Basic Sciences, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran Shariati Campus, Farhangian University, Sari, Iran Department of Geology, Khorasgan (Isfahan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran d Department of Geology, Tehran Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran b c

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 3 April 2014 Received in revised form 1 June 2015 Accepted 2 June 2015 Available online 9 June 2015 Keywords: Lithofacies Petrofacies Architectural element Dorud Formation Iran

a b s t r a c t The siliciclastic deposits of the Lower Permian Dorud Formation widely crop out in the eastern part of the Alborz Mountain Range (northern Iran). In order to interpret the sedimentary environments and tectonic provenance of these deposits, two sections in the Kiyasar and Talmadareh with 112 and 122 m thickness, respectively; have been studied. The analysis of lithofacies and architectural elements, leads to recognition of seven lithofacies (Gmm, Sr, Sl, Sh, Sp, Fl, and Fm), and four architectural elements (FF, LA, CH, and CR). Based on these results, the sedimentary environment of these deposits has been identified as a sandy meandering river. The petrographical analysis indicates that these sediments were deposited under humid weather in the craton interior and recycled orogeny tectonic provenance. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction The siliciclastic deposits are controlled by the sedimentary processes which act in the depositional environment of special regions (Miall, 1996). Also, the composition of sandstone show comprehensive reflection of geological conditions and supply rocks (Tucker, 2011). Recognition of facies assemblages and petrofacies contribute widely in understanding the provenance and sedimentary environment of the siliciclastic rocks (Dickinson, 1985; Catuneanu, 2006). The main objectives of the present study are to interpret the sedimentary environment and tectonic provenance of these siliciclastic deposits. These may contribute to solve some of the controversies about the palaeogeography, sedimentary environments and tectonics of the Alborz Mountain Range during the Early Permian. 2. Geological setting and stratigraphy The Alborz Mountain Range comprises the marginal folds of Central Iran and includes the highlands of the northern Iranian ⇑ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: (M. Sahraeyan).

[email protected],

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2015.06.003 1464-343X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

[email protected]

Plate, which has a west-east trend (Motiei, 1994; Allen et al., 2003; Fig. 1). During the Permian, Alborz Mountain Range was part of the northern edge of the Gondwana, which was moving toward the north due to convergence with Laurasia in the north (Berberian and King, 1981). The Alborz Mountain Range was formed as a result of the collision of the Iranian Plate in the south and Laurasia in the north, which caused the closing of the Palaeo-Tethys during the Late Triassic (Stöecklin, 1968, 1974, 1977; Berberian and King, 1981; Allen et al., 2003). The Lower Permian deposits of the Alborz Mountain Range, which are mostly siliciclastic crop out over the vast areas from the east of the Alborz Mountain Range (Aras River), to the west of the Alborz Mountain Range (Khorasan), (Stöecklin, 1968; Colman-Sadd, 1982; Allen et al., 2003; Falahatgar et al., 2012). These deposits were first studied by Assereto (1963) in the Djajroud Valley (Central Alborz Zone), where he defined the Dorud Formation. Then, Jenny and Stampheli (1978) and Gaetani et al. (2009) had studied their microfossils. For this study, two sections near the Kiyasar and Telmadareh cities were studied, 75 and 97 km southeast of Sari city, respectively (Fig. 2). These areas are located in the eastern part of the Alborz Mountain Range. The Dorud Formation is composed of two siliciclastic units. The lower and upper levels of the each unit are separated by a thick oncoidal, fusulinid limestone deposits.

212

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Fig. 1. General map of main structural sedimentary zones of Iran (modified after Motiei, 1994).

Fig. 2. Geographical map showing access road to the studied sections in Mazandaran Province in the southeast of Sari, northern Iran.

The siliciclastic deposits have 112 m thickness in the Kiyasar and include conglomerate, sandstone and siltstone. The middle unit of oncoidal-fusulinid limestone has 30 m thickness. In the Telmadareh, the siliciclastic unit has 122 m thickness with a 41 m thick intercalated carbonate unit. In the Kiyasar, these siliciclastic deposits disconformably overlay the Lower Carboniferous Mobarak Formation but their upper boundary is erosive and covered. In the Telmadareh area, Lower Permian rocks conformably overlay the Lower Carboniferous Mobarak Formation and disconformably overlain by the Middle Permian Ruteh Formation (Fig. 3).

3. Materials and methods In order to study the petrography of these deposits, 71 sandstone samples were collected. In each sample, the frequency and diameter of grains were identified. All samples were analyzed using the Gazzi-Dickinson method as described by Ingersoll et al. (1984). 300–350 points of grains larger than silt (minerals > 0.625 mm) have been counted in each thin section. Coarse-grained rocks (conglomerate) were named based on the classification proposed by Pettijohn (1975) and medium-grained rocks (sandstone) were named based on the classification proposed

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

213

and architectural changes of the gravels are the result of traction, variable to the flow and deposit transportation rate because gravels may be deposited and/or transported several times (Miall, 1985; Lowey, 2007; Ghazi and Mountney, 2009; Sahraeyan et al., 2013). The medium-grained deposits (sandstones) may be deposited alternatively during the traction mechanism (Miall, 2000; Boggs, 2006, 2009; Khalifa and Catuneanu, 2008). During traction mechanism, medium-grained deposits may create various sedimentary structures, such as planar cross bedding, cross lamination, parallel lamination, and different types of current ripples (Miall, 2000). Such primary structures are abundantly found in the sandstone facies of the Dorud Formation. The fine-grained sediments such as mud, may be deposited during the suspension process and tend to overlays coarser deposits (Ghazi and Mountney, 2009, 2010; Sahraeyan and Bahrami, 2012; Sahraeyan et al., 2013). 4.1. Lithofacies Gmm (matrix supported and massive gravel)

Fig. 3. Field photographs showing the members of Dorud Formation in the Kiyasar section (A) and Telmadareh section (B).

by Folk (1974). Also, the lithofacies have been named and classified according to the description proposed by Miall (1996). Considering all of the data, tectonic provenance of these deposits was constructed and interpreted based on composition of sandstones and using triangular Qt–F–L and Qm–F–Lt diagrams of Dickinson (1985). By plotting the point count data on the diagram of Suttner et al. (1981), the effect of weather on the source area were determined. 4. Lithofacies The classification of lithofacies is a standard tool for the facies analysis of the siliciclastic deposits (Miall, 1996). Lithofacies can be classified on the basis of bedding features, grain size, composition, and sedimentary structures (Miall, 2000). Accordingly, the studied lithofacies of the Dorud Formation are classified into the coarse-, medium- and fine-grained deposits (Table 1). The textural Table 1 Facies identified in siliciclastic deposits of Dorud Formation based on classification of Miall (1996). Facies

Facies code

Lithofacies

Sedimentary structure

Interpretation

Gravel

Gmm

Matrixsupported

Massive & lenticular

Debris flow deposits

Sand

Sp

Medium to coarse sand Fine to medium sand Medium sand Fine to medium sand

Planar cross-bed or lamination

Transverse & linguoid bedforms (ripple or 2-D dunes) Plane bed lower & upper flow regimes

Fine Sand, silt and mud Mud and silt

Fine lamination, small ripple, & mud cracks Massive, concretions, & mud cracks

Sh

Sl Sr

Mud

Fl

Fm

Horizontal lamination or beds Low angle cross beds Ripple & crosslamination

Humpback or washedout dunes Ripples(lower & upper flow regimes) Over bank, abandoned channel or waning flood deposits Over bank or abandoned channel

This lithofacies occurs as lens and massive beds (Fig. 4A–C). The thickness of this facies varies from 5 to 135 cm. In comparison with the other lithofacies in the studied siliciclastic deposits, particularly in the Kiyasar, this lithofacies has a much lower volume. In some parts, these conglomerate layers thin laterally, passing to the sandstones. The grains of this lithofacies are poorly to well sorted. They are rounded to angular and bladed in form. The size of the some grains reach up to one meter. The deposits of this lithofacies have some silt material which is found as floating in the silt–sand matrix. No imbrication fabrics, fossils and coarsening- or fining-upward are found in this lithofacies. The lower contact of this lithofacies is erosive. These coarse-grained deposits have been probably formed due to the destruction of the walls and floor of river channel and have remained in the deepest part of the channel (channel floor) (Reincks and Singh, 1986; Sahraeyan et al., 2013). The primary laminations have been preserved in some grains (rip-up clast). These deposits have been formed by a debris-flow with a large sedimentary load (Miall, 1996; Boggs, 2009; Kosun et al., 2009). 4.2. Lithofacies Sp (sandstone with planar cross bedding) The grains of this lithofacies are medium to coarse in size. The lower and upper boundaries of this lithofacies are erosive, pass laterally to the Sh and Fl lithofacies, and often overlay the lag deposits. The large scale planar cross bedding (more than one meter in thickness) is one of the main characteristics of this lithofacies (Fig. 4D), and is created due to the movement of dunes and two dimensional submarine megaripples (Collinson and Thompson, 1989; Ghosh et al., 2006) on the surfaces of the deposits under a low flow rate of water (Ghazi and Mountney, 2009; Tucker, 2011). 4.3. Lithofacies Sh (sandstone with parallel lamination) This lithofacies constituted most of the studied deposits. Its thickness is about 20 cm to 3.5 m. The most observed sedimentary structures of this lithofacies are parallel laminations (Fig. 4E). The grains of this lithofacies are well-sorted and fine to medium in size. Also, the gravels are rarely found in this lithofacies. This lithofacies is created under the conditions of the medium and low flow regimes (Miall, 1996; Ghazi and Mountney, 2010). This lithofacies is laterally converted into Sp and Sl facies. 4.4. Lithofacies Sl (sandstone with low-angle cross beds) This lithofacies is often seen associated with Sp, Sh and Sr. The grains of this lithofacies are medium in size and

214

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Fig. 4. Types of gravel (Gmm) and sandstone lithofacies. A, B and C: Gravel lithofacies (Oligomictic Paraconglomerate) of Dorud Formation deposits; A: Gravel lithofacies with sub-rounded silt grains and rip-up clast (primary lamination) in sand matrix, B and C: Gravel lithofacies (bladed grains are in silt and sand matrix), Their length sometimes also reaches 100 cm (arrow), D: Lithofacies Sp with large scale planar cross bedding, E: Lithofacies Sh with parallel lamination structure, and F: Lithofacies Sl with low angle cross bedding structure. The hammer and pencil (encircled in part e) used as scale are 29 cm and 15 cm in length, respectively.

moderately-sorted. Pebble quartz grains are rarely found in this lithofacies. The primary sedimentary structure associated with this lithofacies is low angle cross bedding (less than 10°; see Fig. 4F). This lithofacies is more likely to have been formed in the upper rates of water flow and low sedimentary load (Miall, 1996, 2000; Ghazi and Mountney, 2009, 2010; Sahraeyan et al., 2013). 4.5. Lithofacies Sr (sandstone with ripple marks) This lithofacies is contains of medium- to thick bedded sandstone. The main characteristic of this lithofacies is asymmetrical ripple marks (Fig. 5). These ripple marks, show different wavelength and height (Fig. 5). The height of ripples reaches to 1.5 cm and their wavelength reaches to 8 cm. The grains of this lithofacies are fine to medium in size and well sorted. This lithofacies is laterally converted to the mud and covered with lithofacies Sp. The type and size of ripple marks depend on the size of the sedimentary

grains, flow rate and sedimentation rate (Blatt et al., 1980; Boggs, 2009). Consequently, the occurrence of different forms of ripple marks indicates change of the environmental energy and flow rate during the deposition of this lithofacies. 4.6. Lithofacies Fl (sandstone, siltstone and laminate clay) Lithofacies Fl comprises a large volume of the studied deposits, particularly in the Kiyasar section. Its thickness varies from some centimeters to 2 m. The components of this lithofacies are silt, clay, and sometimes very fine sand. The most observed sedimentary structures of this lithofacies are asymmetrical ripple marks, trace fossils (crawling), planar- and cross laminations (in coarse-grained deposits), and mud cracks (in fine-grained deposits) (Fig. 6A–D). These characteristic primary structures indicate that this lithofacies would have been deposited in a low energy environment (Sahraeyan and Bahrami, 2012; Sahraeyan, 2013; Sahraeyan et al., 2013).

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

215

Fig. 5. Lithofacies Sr with all kinds of current ripple marks. A and B: Linguoid ripples, C and D: Complex and asymmetrical ripple marks, E, F and G: Asymmetrical ripple marks (Straight crested with bifurcation asymmetrical ripples), and H: Ripple and current traces.

4.7. Lithofacies Fm (siltstone and massive clay) The main component of this lithofacies is clay with a little proportion of silt. The most abundant sedimentary structures of this

lithofacies are mud cracks and concretions (Fig. 6E–F). The grain sizes and sedimentary structures of this lithofacies indicate the over bank environment (Ghazi and Mountney, 2009, 2010; Sahraeyan et al., 2013).

216

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Fig. 6. Types of fine-grained facies (mud and silt) of Dorud Formation. A, B, C, and D: Lithofacies FI; A: Sequences of silt and clay deposits along with thin bedded sandstone (Sh), B: Asymmetrical ripple marks in silt deposits, C: Crawling trace in silt deposits, D: Mud cracks, E: Mud massive deposits along with concretion, and F: Mud cracks in the Fm lithofacies. The pencil and key used as scale are 15 cm and 7 cm in length, respectively.

5. Architectural elements The architectural elements are classified based on the nature of border surfaces, internal and external geometry, lithology, scale and paleocurrent pattern of deposits (Miall, 1985). These elements contain erosive forms like filled channels and sedimentation shapes of the over bank (Lowey, 2007). Based on the lithofacies introduced for siliciclastic rocks of the Dorud Formation, four architectural elements have been distinguished (Table 2). 5.1. Channel fill (CH) These elements usually comprise channel deposits in which their lower boundary is erosive. The sharp lower boundary of the channel is formed due to erosive bed deposits enriched with clay and silt of the floodplain (Juhasz et al., 2004; Ghazi and Mountney, 2009). These elements include all kinds of the sandstone lithofacies, including Sr, Sh, Sl, and Sp as well as Gmm

Table 2 Characteristics of architectural elements identified in siliciclastic deposits of Dorud Formation based on Miall (1996). Architectural elements

Code

Facies assemblage

Interpretation

Channel

CH

Wedge, Lens

Lateral-accretion macro form Over bank fines Crevasse splay

LA

Gmm Sr, Sh, Sl, Sp Sh, Sp, Sl

FF CR

Fl, Fm, Sl Fl, Sh, Sp

Wedge, Sheet, Lens Blanket or Sheet Ribbon and Blanket

lithofacies (Fig. 7A). The geometrical form of this element is lensoidal in shape. Its thickness varies from one to several meters and expands to tens of meters. These elements are mostly isolated and placed alternatively with architectural element of the floodplain (FF) (Sahraeyan et al., 2013).

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

217

Fig. 7. Architectural elements of Dorud Formation. A: Channel architectural element (CH), Gmm gravel lithofacies below and above Lithofacies Sp with planar cross bedding which is directly placed on erosive surface of gravel lithofacies, B: Architectural element of deposits with lateral Accretion (LA), fining upward which is repeated in different thickness of some meters in several cycles in sequences of Dorud Formation, C: Floodplain architectural element (FF), silt and clay sequences, and D: Crevasse splay (CS) architectural element, Sh lithofacies as cross-laminae in finer-grained silt and clay deposits. The sign and pencil used as scale are 95 cm and 15 cm in length, respectively.

5.2. Lateral-accretion (LA) In the meandering river, the process of destruction is performed in concave parts and the sedimentation process on its convex side (Collinson, 1986). The continuation of this trend also causes lateral accretion of channel and forms point bar deposits (Boggs, 2006; Ghazi and Mountney, 2009; Sahraeyan et al., 2013). In this environment, finer deposits are placed on the coarser deposits. The fining upward sequences are the main characteristic structure that seen in the meandering river environments (Tucker, 2001; Yuste et al., 2004). The thickness of this element varies from 2 to 10 m (Fig. 7B). In the middle and upper sections of the Dorud Formation, these elements (LA) are almost created in a sand bed load and include sandstone lithofacies (Sp and Sh). The Sl lithofacies is sometimes found in these elements. 5.3. Floodplain fine (FF) These elements include fine-grained deposits of the floodplain and includes thickness of 1–8 m in each cycle. These elements are found on each fining upward cycle and their upper boundary is erosive (Sahraeyan et al., 2013). The most important lithofacies of these architectural elements is Fl (Fig. 7C). The Sl lithofacies is sometimes found in this element. The sequence of this element is mostly consists of the silt and clay. 5.4. Crevasse splay (CR and CS( The coarser sand deposits that found in the floodplain deposits are crevasse splays (Tucker, 2001). These architectural elements are found interbedded in fine-grained sequences of the Dorud

Formation (Fig. 7D). The lithofacies of these elements are often Sh and sometimes Sp.

6. Sedimentary environment Following the classification of Miall (1996), there are a number of observed features which are herein considered indicators that the formation of the studied deposits would have taken place in a river system setting. These features are: (1) the fining upward sequences along the lag deposits on the floor of the river channel with lower erosional contact, (2) the presence of one-directional sedimentary structures such as cross bedding and ripple marks, (3) desiccated flat structures and over bank such as mud crack, and (4) the absence of the fossils. The color of these deposits confirms that these sediments were deposited in a continental setting. These deposits are orange to red in color due to the presence of hematite. In an oxidizing environment Fe2+ is changed and the mineral containing this element is decomposed to Iron oxide which includes cement around the clastic particles or filling the empty spaces between particles and fractures (Pettijohn et al., 1987). In the sequence of the river deposits from the lower to the upper part, the size of grains decreases due to decrease in depth and energy of the water. Thick sequences of fine-grained deposits (sometimes with thickness of more than 8 m) are found with eroded surface in the upper sections of fining upward cycles (Fig. 8). In several repeated sequences, these isolated deposits include channel filling deposits. The relatively wide occurrence of the overbank and floodplain deposits indicates a broad floodplain around the meandering channels in comparison with channel filling deposits (Kostic et al., 2005; Lee and Chough, 2006; Kim et al., 2009). Therefore, the siliciclastic deposits of the

218

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Fig. 8. Lithostratigraphic logs and fining upward sequences in Kiyasar section (A) and Telmadareh section (B).

Early Permian Dorud Formation have been formed in a meandering river (Fig. 9). These siliciclastic deposits have been deposited in a sedimentary environment, such as the Early Permian deposits reported in the Potwar Basin of Pakistan, Miocene–Pliocene deposits in Iran and Lower Cretaceous deposits in Korea in the Tethys sedimentary basin (Ghazi and Mountney, 2009; Kim et al., 2009; Sahraeyan et al., 2013). Regarding the channel filling deposits (CH architectural element), the river environment which forms these deposits is of a sand bed meandering river because fewer gravel deposits are present compared with sand facies and the

presence of fine-grained deposits of floodplain (FF architectural element) compared with channel deposits. In the Telmadareh section, based on the presence of gravels with lower roundness in the architectural elements of channel deposits and the lower rate of fine-grained deposits, it is inferred that deposits of this section have formed closer to the source area than those deposits of the Kiyasar section. Moreover, this inference is in accord with the direction of paleocurrents in the Permian sedimentary basin. As a corollary we conclude that currents direction would have been South-North.

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

219

Fig. 9. Schematic model of meandering river depositional environment for deposits of Dorud Formation.

7. Petrofacies Two petrofacies are identified in the siliciclastic deposits of the Dorud Formation, as follows: 7.1. Conglomerate petrofacies Lack of variety of the grains making up the conglomerate indicates a supply of coarse sedimentary grains from an inter-basin source. These pieces originated from movement of eroded pieces of the preexisting mud deposits (Tucker, 2001). Based on the classification of Pettijohn (1975) these kind of conglomerates conform to the oligomictic group. These deposits are considered based on the sedimentary fabric from all kinds of paraconglomerates (Tucker, 2001). 7.2. Sandstone petrofacies The particles constituting siliciclastic deposits have different components which originate from the erosion of material out of the sedimentary environment (Tucker, 2001). The components of the sandstones of this formation include different kinds of quartz (92.6%), feldspar (1.9%), lithic fragments (5.1%), and accessory minerals (0.4%; see Fig. 10 and Table 3). These sandstones show high textural maturity. In these sandstones, the frequency of quartz particles varies from about 70% to 95%. In these deposits, quartz grains are classified into two groups of monocrystalline quartz grains (Qm) and polycrystalline quartz grains (Qpq). Monocrystalline quartz grains (Qm) are the most common type of quartz grains in the studied sections. They show undulose and non-undulose extinction. Some monocrystalline quartzes have mineral inclusions represented by apatite and tourmaline. Polycrystalline quartz grains (Qpq) can be divided into grains which are composed of two or three crystals and those which are composed of several crystals. The most abundant lithic fragments are sedimentary fragments, namely siltstone. There were also present sedimentary–metamorphic rocks and chert indicating transportation from another source area. The volcanic fragments are absent in the samples. The frequency of the chert in the classification of Folk (1974) has been considered in the fragments pole and has been considered in the source analysis of siliciclastic deposits following Dickinson (1985) in the quartz pole. In these deposits, all kinds of feldspars

are found in small amounts. The potassium feldspars (orthoclase and microcline) are more abundant than plagioclases. Heavy minerals like zircon, apatite and tourmaline have been observed (<3%). These grains show good roundness, indicating high maturity. The cement materials in the sandstones are almost completely composed of hematite, siliceous cement and small amounts of calcite cement. In some parts, small amounts of matrix have been seen that considering the evidence of alteration, probably indicate that some of these clays have diagenetic origin (Tucker, 2001). Classification of sandstones was based on microscopic studies and it was necessary to estimate the percents of different types of the available grains (Tucker, 2001). This work was performed by point counting, then obtained data was plotted on a Folk (1974) diagram. In this way lithologic composition of these sandstones was recognized to include quartz arenite, litharenite and sublitharenite (Fig. 11). Most component parts of quartz arenite are composed of monocrystalline quartz (Qm). The polycrystalline quartz (Qpq) is also found in small amount. The fragments of these sandstones include chert and siltstone. In some samples, heavy minerals such as zircon and apatite occur dispersed. Cements are hematite, silica and small amounts of calcite. The main cements of this petrofacies are hematite and syntaxial siliceous cement. Also, small amount of matrix is observed. The quartz grains are well rounded and sorted, and are in a mature stage as indicated by the lack of clay matrix. Litharenite and sublitharenite petrofacies are composed of monocrystalline quartz (Qm) and polycrystalline quartz (Qpq), lithic fragments (chert, sandstone and siltstone), feldspar and some heavy minerals. The grains are sub-rounded to rounded and show moderate to well sorting. The combination of small amounts of matrix, roundness of quartz grains, occurrence of chert and the presence of heavy minerals in rounded particles indicate that the sandstones were caused by the erosion of older sedimentary rocks.

8. Provenance and source area weathering The goals of the provenance studies are to reconstruct and interpret the history of the deposits from primary erosion of the source rock to final burial of the clastics, and to reconstruct the sedimentary cycle of the studied deposits (Weltje, 2002; Weltje and von Eynatten, 2004). Clastic modes of the sandstones are used to help identify tectonic settings of paleobasins due to the close

220

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Fig. 10. Photomicrographs of sandstone samples from Dorud Formation (XPL). A: Monocrystalline quartz with syntaxial cement, B: Monocrystalline quartz (Qm) rounded with mineral inclusions (apatite inclusion), C: Polycrystalline quartz (Qpq), D: Chert rounded grain, E: Microcline rounded grain, F: Altered plagioclases grain, G: Zircon grain, H: Quartz arenite with monocrystalline, subrounded to rounded quartz, I: Sublitharenite with monocrystalline and subrounded polycrystalline quartzes along with fragments, and J: litharenite with monocrystalline quartzes and rounded fragments by preserving primary lamination.

221

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Table 3 Detrital modes of sandstone samples from the Dorud Formation. Qm non: Non undulose monocrystalline quartz, Qm un: Undulose monocrystalline quartz, Qpq > 3: Qp > 3 crystal unites per grain, Qpq 2–3: Qp 2–3 crystal unites per grain, Qpq 2–3: Qp 2–3 crystal unites per grain, Qpq: Polycrystalline quartz, Cht: Chert, Qm: Qm non + Qm un, Qp: Qpq + Cht, Qt: Total quartzose grains (Qm + Qp), Q: Qm + Qpq, F: Total feldspatic grains (P + K), K: Potassium feldspar, P: Plagioclase feldspar, L: Unstable (siliciclastic) lithic fragments (Lv + Ls + Lsm), Lsm: Metasedimentary rock fragments, Lv: Volcanic rock fragments, Ls: Sedimentary rock fragments, Lc: Carbonate rock, Lt: Total siliciclastic lithic fragments (L + Qp), RF: Total unstable rock fragments and chert used for Folk (1974) classification, Acc: Accessory minerals, Cem: cement (Cc + Dc + Ac), Cc, Calcite (micrite and sparite), Dc: Dolomite (dolomicrite and dolosparite), A: Anhydrite cements, and matx: matrix. S. N

Qm non

Qm un

Qpq > 3

Qpq 2–3

Cht

Cem + Matx

fe oxide cem

Acc

Lt

L

RF

F

Qpq

Qm

Qp

Qt

Q

A1 A2 A4 A6 A7 A8 A10 A11 A12 A16 A17 A18 A19 A21 A22 A25 A27 A28 A29 A31 A33 A34 A35 A36 A37 A38 A39 A40 A42 A43 A45 A46 A49 A50 B2 B3 B7 B10 B13 B14 B16 B18 B22 B23 B24 B25 B26 B27 B30 B31 B32 B25 B26 B27 B30 B33 B34 B35 B36 B38 B39 B41 B43 B44 B45 B46 B49 B50 B52 B53

58 72 72 69 59 83 71 68 62 62 59 64 68 63 72 83 59 58 69 77 72 62 74 76 70 81 71 77 69 68 72 80 67 81 70 67 68 77 72 81 72 70 69 87 81 73 75 69 67 70 71 73 75 69 67 81 66 68 71 67 65 72 67 77 71 78 67 68 81 71

61 78 75 81 63 91 82 72 68 70 67 68 73 68 80 89 71 65 73 78 77 68 75 81 82 89 76 80 75 72 78 85 77 86 71 70 69 85 89 88 78 72 88 86 81 75 82 73 75 78 77 75 82 73 75 85 67 70 83 81 72 78 76 79 73 89 77 76 90 76

2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 1 2 1 1 1 0 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1

1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 3 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

9 4 4 8 5 5 7 9 22 8 19 3 3 13 10 6 8 3 10 11 11 4 5 5 2 3 7 8 2 6 5 5 11 2 2 4 4 7 6 8 4 7 7 5 9 2 7 9 6 8 7 2 7 9 6 3 11 13 10 6 9 9 10 11 13 9 5 5 2 3

148 111 161 121 109 167 112 132 143 171 150 137 152 167 178 99 169 125 118 159 109 165 171 173 140 142 146 154 136 138 133 154 167 156 128 142 181 145 117 143 167 163 154 145 111 123 156 141 95 180 146 149 127 143 149 168 153 134 101 153 142 167 134 136 137 170 159 149 130 128

16 41 31 9 32 19 22 38 10 21 0 21 6 0 0 0 13 29 0 41 0 0 0 20 24 48 0 19 38 11 0 0 0 0 33 27 0 16 38 29 0 0 0 18 40 34 0 32 41 0 0 13 29 0 23 0 33 34 24 26 36 0 37 35 27 0 0 0 37 46

2 1 1 0 1 2 2 2 3 0 2 2 1 2 1 0 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 0 0 3 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 4 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 3

20 10 8 16 10 8 11 16 50 13 49 10 6 17 16 28 18 15 22 25 28 26 18 13 14 10 13 15 12 18 18 12 28 15 6 9 18 21 22 13 22 23 13 18 21 19 20 15 14 14 18 19 20 15 14 18 18 27 15 13 14 16 26 28 22 27 10 19 15 13

8 4 2 7 4 2 3 5 26 4 29 2 2 2 4 18 9 10 11 13 14 19 11 4 8 5 4 5 7 11 10 5 16 11 2 2 12 12 12 3 17 14 4 10 9 16 10 4 6 3 10 16 10 4 6 13 5 12 3 5 3 6 14 14 7 16 3 12 10 8

17 8 6 15 9 7 10 14 48 12 48 5 5 15 14 24 17 13 21 24 25 23 16 9 10 8 11 13 9 17 15 10 27 13 4 6 16 19 18 11 21 21 11 15 18 18 17 13 12 11 17 19 17 13 12 16 16 25 13 11 12 15 24 25 20 25 8 17 12 11

2 6 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 2 1 3 3 3 2 1 4 3 2 2 2 4 2 2 3 1 2 3 1 4 4 4 1 3 4 3 2 0 3 3 5 4 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 2 1 3 3 2 0 1 3 3

3 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 4 1 2 1 1 3 3 2 4 4 2 2 2 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 3 1 2 4 2 1 2 2 3 3 1 3 2 2 3 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 2

119 150 147 150 122 174 153 140 130 132 126 132 141 131 152 172 130 123 142 155 149 130 149 157 152 170 147 157 144 140 150 165 144 167 141 137 137 162 161 169 150 142 157 173 162 148 157 142 142 148 148 148 157 142 142 166 133 138 154 148 137 150 143 156 144 167 144 144 171 147

12 6 6 9 6 6 8 11 24 9 20 8 4 15 12 10 9 5 11 12 14 7 7 9 6 5 9 10 5 7 8 7 12 4 4 7 6 9 10 10 5 9 9 8 12 3 10 11 8 11 8 3 10 11 8 5 13 15 12 8 11 10 12 14 15 11 7 7 5 5

131 156 153 159 128 180 161 151 154 141 146 140 145 146 164 182 139 128 153 167 163 137 156 166 158 175 156 167 149 147 158 172 156 171 145 144 143 171 171 179 155 151 156 181 174 151 167 153 150 159 156 151 167 153 150 171 146 153 156 146 148 160 155 170 159 178 151 151 176 152

122 152 149 151 123 175 154 142 132 133 127 137 142 133 154 176 131 125 143 156 152 133 151 161 156 172 149 159 147 141 153 167 145 169 143 140 138 164 165 171 151 144 159 176 165 149 160 144 144 151 149 149 160 144 144 168 135 140 156 150 139 151 145 159 146 169 146 146 174 149

222

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

Fig. 13. The effect of source rock on the composition of the Dorud Formation sandstones using Suttner et al. (1981) diagram; Q: Quartz, F: Feldspar and RF: Rock fragment. Fig. 11. Q–F–R triangular classification plot (Folk, 1974) of different sandstone samples from the Dorud Formation.

relationship between components of the sands, tectonic provenance and origin areas of sands (e.g., Dickinson and Suczek, 1979; Dickinson et al., 1983; Dickinson, 1985; Critelli, 1993). Based on the classification of Dickinson (1985), the Dorud Formation sandstones are recognized as quartzose facies due to high ratio of monocrystalline quartz to polycrystalline quartz and higher amount of feldspar with Potassium compared with plagioclases. For recognition of the tectonic provenance, modal analyses were plotted in a Qt–F–L diagram (Fig. 12A) and Qm–F–Lt diagram (Fig. 12B), which indicated craton interior and a recycled orogeny. These interpretations show that the some of the deposits were derived from the internal craton and were deposited during sedimentary recycling within a passive continental margin. To determine the effect of weathering conditions on the composition of sandstones, the data obtained by point counting were plotted on the diagram designed by Suttner et al. (1981). The study of the distribution of the scattering of data in this diagram indicates a metamorphic source rock under humid climatic conditions (Fig. 13). These results coincide with the fact that the paleosetting of the Alborz Zone is located in low latitudes (Muttoni et al., 2009; Fig. 14).

Fig. 14. Paleogeographic position of Iran (Alborz and Central Iran) in the Early Permian (Simplified from Muttoni et al., 2009).

Fig. 12. Ternary diagrams for the Dorud Formation sandstones after Dickinson et al. (1983). A: Qt–F–L and B: Qm–F–Lt; Qt: Total quartz grain, Qm: Monocrystalline quartz, F, Feldspar, L: Lithic fragment, and Lt: Total lithic fragment.

M. Javidan et al. / Journal of African Earth Sciences 109 (2015) 211–223

9. Conclusions The analysis of seven lithofacies identified from the siliciclastic deposits of the Dorud Formation allow us to interpret that the studied rocks were formed in a sand-bed meandering river environment. This interpretation is evidenced by: (1) the fining upwards sequences with erosive contacts, (2) the location of coarse-grained deposits as forming lenses in the fine-grained deposits, (3) the large volume of mud deposits, (4) the presence of one-directional sedimentary structures (like all cross bedding and current ripples), (5) the occurrence of mud cracks, (6) the red coloration of the deposits, and (7) the lack of fossils. The increase of volume of the fine-grained deposits in the Kiyasar section compared with the Telmadareh section could indicate a northerly current direction. The petrographical analysis shows that the tectonic provenance of the studied sediments is the craton with a recycling orogeny, and also indicates that the sediments were deposited under humid climatic conditions. Acknowledgments The authors would like to appreciate Dr. Paul Myrow (Colorado College, United States) and Prof. A.I. Al-Juboury (Mosul University, Iraq) for their valuable suggestions and Dr. Horacio Parent (Argentina), Dr. Robert B. Blodgett (Alaska), Sara N. Falcone (England) and Matt Nichols (USA) for correcting the English. Also, we are grateful to the anonymous reviewers who made precise reviews, which helped us in enhancement of final version. References Allen, M.B., Ghassemi, M.R., Shahrabi, M., Qorashi, M., 2003. Accommodation of late Cenozoic oblique shortening in the Alborz range, northern Iran. J. Struct. Geol. 25, 659–672. Assereto, R., 1963. The Paleozoic formations in Central Elburz (Iran). Riv. Ital. Paleontol. Stratigr. 69, 503–543. Berberian, M., King, G.C.P., 1981. Towards a paleogeography and tectonic evolution of Iran. Can. J. Earth Sci. 18, 210–265. Blatt, H., Middleton, G., Murray, R., 1980. Origin of Sedimentary Rocks, second ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Boggs, S.J., 2006. Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy, fourth ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Boggs, S.J., 2009. Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Cambridge University Press, New York. Catuneanu, O., 2006. Principles of Sequence Stratigraphy. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Collinson, J.D., 1986. Alluvial sediments. In: Reading, H.G. (Ed.), Sedimentary Environments and Facies. Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 20–62. Collinson, J.D., Thompson, D.B., 1989. Sedimentary Structures. Unwin Hyman, London. Colman-Sadd, S.P., 1982. Two stage continental collision and plate driving forces. Tectonophysics 90, 263–282. Critelli, S., 1993. Sandstone detrital modes in the Paleogene Liguride Complex, accretionary wedge of the southern Apennines (Italy). J. Sediment. Res. 63, 464– 476. Dickinson, W.R., 1985. Interpreting provenance relations from detrital modes of sandstones. In: Zuffa, G.G. (Ed.), Provenance of Arenites. Nato Advanced Study Institute Series. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, pp. 333–362. Dickinson, W.R., Suczek, C.A., 1979. Plate tectonics and sandstone compositions. AAPG Bull. 63, 2164–2182. Dickinson, W.R., Beard, L.S., Brakenridge, G.R., Erjavec, J.L., Ferguson, R.C., Inman, K.F., Knepp, R.A., Lindberg, F.A., Ryberg, P.T., 1983. Provenance of North American Phanerozoic sandstones in relation to tectonic setting. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 94, 222–235. Falahatgar, M., Mosaddegh, H., Parvanehnejad Shirazi, M., 2012. Foraminiferal Biostratigraphy of the Mobarak Formation (Lower Carboniferous) in Kiyasar Area, SE Sari, Northern Iran. Acta Geol. Sinica – English Edition 86, 1413–1425. Folk, R.L., 1974. Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Hemphill Publishing Company, Austin, Texes. Gaetani, M., Angiolini, L., Ueno, K., Nicora, A., Stephenson, M.H., Sciunnach, D., Rettori, R., Price, G.D., Sabouri, J., 2009. Pennsylvanian-Early Triassic stratigraphy in the Alborz Mountains (Iran). Geol. Soc., Lond., Spec. Publ. 312, 79–128.

223

Ghazi, S., Mountney, N.P., 2009. Facies and architectural element analysis of a meandering fluvial succession: The Permian Warchha Sandstone, Salt Range, Pakistan. Sed. Geol. 221, 99–126. Ghazi, S., Mountney, N., 2010. Subsurface lithofacies analysis of the Fluvial Early Permian Warchha Sandstone, Potwar Basin, Pakistan. J. Geol. Soc. India 76, 505– 517. Ghosh, P., Sarkar, S., Maulik, P., 2006. Sedimentology of a muddy alluvial deposit: Triassic Denwa Formation, India. Sed. Geol. 191, 3–36. Ingersoll, R.V., Fullard, T.F., Ford, R.L., Grimm, J.P., Pickle, J.D., Sares, S.W., 1984. The effect of grain size on detrital modes; a test of the Gazzi-Dickinson pointcounting method. J. Sediment. Res. 54, 103–116. Jenny, J., Stampheli, G., 1978. Lithostratigraphie du Permien de l’Elbourz oriental en Iran. Eclogae Geol. Helv. 71, 551–580. Juhasz, G., Müller, P., Toth-Makk, A., 2004. Alluvial architecture and fluvial cycles in quaternary deposits in a continental interior basin, E Hungary. Geologia Croatica 57, 171–190. Khalifa, M.A., Catuneanu, O., 2008. Sedimentology of the fluvial and fluvio-marine facies of the Bahariya Formation (Early Cenomanian), Bahariya Oasis, Western Desert, Egypt. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 51, 89–103. Kim, S.B., Kim, Y.G., Jo, H.R., Jeong, K.S., Chough, S.K., 2009. Depositional facies, architecture and environments of the Sihwa Formation (Lower Cretaceous), mid-west Korea with special reference to dinosaur eggs. Cretac. Res. 30, 100– 126. Kostic, B., Becht, A., Aigner, T., 2005. 3-D sedimentary architecture of a Quaternary gravel delta (SW-Germany): Implications for hydrostratigraphy. Sed. Geol. 181, 147–171. Kosun, E., Poisson, A., Çiner, A., Wernli, R., Monod, O., 2009. Syn-tectonic sedimentary evolution of the Miocene Çatallar Basin, southwestern Turkey. J. Asian Earth Sci. 34, 466–479. Lee, H.S., Chough, S.K., 2006. Lithostratigraphy and depositional environments of the Pyeongan Supergroup (Carboniferous-Permian) in the Taebaek area, mideast Korea. J. Asian Earth Sci. 26, 339–352. Lowey, G.W., 2007. Lithofacies analysis of the Dezadeash formation (JuraCretaceous), Yukon, Canada: THE depositional architecture of a mud/sandrich turbidite system. Sed. Geol. 198, 273–291. Miall, A.D., 1985. Architectural-element analysis: a new method of facies analysis applied to fluvial deposits. Earth Sci. Rev. 22, 261–308. Miall, A.D., 1996. The Geology of Fluvial Deposits, Sedimentary Facies. SpringerVerlag, New York, Basin Analysis and Petroleum Geology. Miall, A.D., 2000. Principle of Sedimentary Basin Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York. Motiei, H., 1994. Geology of Iran: Stratigraphy of Zagros. Geological Survey of Iran Publication, Tehran. Muttoni, G., Gaetani, M., Kent, D.V., Sciunnach, D., Angiolini, A., Berra, F., Garzanti, E., Mattei, M., Zanchi, A., 2009. Opening of the Neo-Tethys Ocean and the Pangea B to Pangea A transformation during the Permian. GeoArabia 14, 17–48. Pettijohn, F.J., 1975. Sedimentary Rocks. Harper and Row, New York. Pettijohn, F.J., Potter, P.E., Siever, R., 1987. Sand and Sandstone, second ed. SpringerVerlag, New York. Reincks, H.E., Singh, I.B., 1986. Depositional Sedimentary Environments. SpringerVerlag, New York. Sahraeyan, M., 2013. Sedimentology and palaeogeography of conglomerates from the Aghajari Formation in Zagros Basin, SW Iran. Int. J. Adv. Geosci. 1, 13–22. Sahraeyan, M., Bahrami, M., 2012. Fluvial cyclicity from Aghajari Formation (Upper Miocene- Pliocene) in Folded Zagros Zone, Southwestern Iran. Int. J. Adv. Earth Sci. 1, 58–68. Sahraeyan, M., Bahrami, M., Hejazi, S.H., 2013. The Aghajari (Upper Fars) Formation in the Folded Zagros Zone, Iran: Insights to identify facies, architectural elements, fluvial systems, petrography and provenance. Acta Geol. Sinica – English Edition 87, 1019–1031. Stöcklin, J., 1974. Possible ancient continental margins in Iran. In: Burk, C.A., Drake, C.L. (Eds.), The Geology of Continental Margins. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 873–887. Stöcklin, J., 1977. Stratigraphic Lexicon of Iran. Geological Survey of Iran, Tehran. Stöecklin, J., 1968. Structural history and tectonics of Iran; a review. AAPG Bull. 52, 1229–1258. Suttner, L.J., Basu, A., Mack, G.H., 1981. Climate and the origin of quartz arenites. J. Sediment. Res. 51, 1235–1246. Tucker, M.E., 2001. Sedimentary Petrology: An Introduction to the Origion of Sedimentary Rocks. Blackwell Scientific Publication, London. Tucker, M.E., 2011. Sedimentary Rocks in the Field: A Practical Guide, fourth ed. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester. Weltje, G.J., 2002. Quantitative analysis of detrital modes: statistically rigorous confidence regions in ternary diagrams and their use in sedimentary petrology. Earth-Sci. Rev. 57, 211–253. Weltje, G.J., von Eynatten, H., 2004. Quantitative provenance analysis of sediments: review and outlook. Sed. Geol. 171, 1–11. Yuste, A., Luzón, A., Bauluz, B., 2004. Provenance of Oligocene-Miocene alluvial and fluvial fans of the northern Ebro Basin (NE Spain): an XRD, petrographic and SEM study. Sed. Geol. 172, 251–268.