Dolomitization of the Middle Devonian Winnipegosis carbonates in south‐central Saskatchewan, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Middle Devonian Winnipegosis carbonate unit in south‐central Saskatchewan is partially to completely dolomitized. Two major types of replacive dolomite are distinguished. Microcrystalline to finely crystalline dolomite (type 1) displays nonplanar‐a to planar‐s textures, mimetically replaces the precursor limestone, accounts for about four‐fifths of dolomite phases volumetrically, and mainly occurs in the Winnipegosis mounds and the Lower Winnipegosis Member directly underlying the mounds. Medium crystalline dolomite (type 2) shows planar‐s to planar‐e textures, commonly occurs in the Lower Winnipegosis and Brightholme members, and decreases upward in abundance. The 87 Sr/ 86 Sr ratios of type 1 dolomite (0·70795 to 0·70807) fall within the estimated Sr‐isotopic range for Middle Devonian marine carbonates. Stratigraphic, petrographic and geochemical data constrain the formation of type 1 dolomite to hypersaline sea water in a near‐surface environment, after marine cementation and sub‐aerial diagenesis and prior to precipitation of the Middle Devonian Leofnard salts. Movement of dolomitizing fluids could be driven by density differences and elevation head. The shift to lower δ 18 O values of type 1 dolomite [−7·4 to −5·1‰ Vienna Pee Dee Belemnite (VPDB)] is interpreted as the result of recrystallization at elevated temperatures during burial. Type 2 dolomite has higher 87 Sr/ 86 Sr ratios (0·70809–0·70928), suggesting that the dolomite probably formed from basinal fluids with an increased richness in the radiogenic Sr isotope. In type 2 dolomite, Sr 2+ concentrations are lower, and Fe 2+ and Mn 2+ concentrations are higher, compared with the associated limestone and type 1 dolomite. Type 2 dolomite is interpreted as having been formed from upward‐migrating basinal fluids during latest Devonian and Carboniferous period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".