Sediment geochemistry as a provenance indicator: Unravelling the cryptic signatures of polycyclic sources, climate change, tectonism and volcanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Interpretation of bulk‐sediment geochemistry is one of several approaches for determining sediment provenance. This study investigates the value added by bulk‐sediment geochemical analysis in interpreting provenance in a passive margin clastic basin, the Upper Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous deltaic sediments of the Scotian Basin. Provenance studies in this basin are challenging because source tectonic terranes are parallel to the basin margin and polycyclic sediment sources are abundant. More than 400 samples of mudstone and sandstone representing the geographical and stratigraphic range of interest were analysed for 57 elements. Diagenetic processes added calcium to many samples and removed potassium in rocks buried below 3 km, thus impacting principal component analysis and published weathering indices. However, multiple geochemical approaches to assessing the degree of weathering showed climatically controlled changes in weathering in the Tithonian and Barremian, and changes in supply from major tectonic events, such as the top‐Aptian uplift in the Labrador rift. Covariance of elements in heavy minerals demonstrates the varying magnitude of polycyclic supply and stratigraphic changes in sources. Geochemical analyses revealed a previously unsuspected Tithonian alkali volcanic sediment source, characterized by high niobium and tantalum. The lack of highly contrasting sources means that geochemistry alone is inadequate to determine sediment provenance. Published discrimination diagrams are of limited value. Statistical analysis of geochemical data is strongly influenced by diagenetic processes, episodic volcanic inputs and polycyclic concentration of resistant heavy minerals in sandstones. Single indicator elements for particular sources are generally lacking. Nevertheless, careful consideration of geochemical variability on a case by case basis, integrated with detrital mineral studies, provides new insights into palaeoclimate, sediment provenance and, hence, regional tectonics. Although there is no simple template for such analysis, this study demonstrates an approach that can be used for other basins.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".