MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119714850 · doi:10.1306/08281312141

Dolomites of the Boat Harbour Formation in the Northern Peninsula, western Newfoundland, Canada: Implications for dolomitization history and porosity control

2014· article· en· W2119714850 on OpenAlexaffabout
Babatunde-John Olanipekun, Karem Azmy, Uwe Brand

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDolomitizationGeologyPeninsulaHarbourOceanographyGeochemistryArchaeologyPaleontologyGeographyFacies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Boat Harbour Formation constitutes the upper part of the Lower Ordovician St. George Group on the Northern Peninsula, western Newfoundland. It ranges in thickness from 140 m (459 ft) at Main Brook to 96 m (315 ft) at Daniel's Harbour. Dolomitization of the carbonate sequence is more pervasive in the lower 30 to 40 m (98 to 131 ft) at Main Brook, whereas at Daniel's Harbour, the section is entirely dolomitized. Petrography suggests that the Boat Harbour Formation has been affected by three phases of dolomitization. The earliest (near surface or synsedimentary) phase is D1 dolomicrite (4–55 μm), which exhibits dull to no luminescence. It commonly occurs as laminae-capping cycles and as breccias in the younger dolomite phases. It has low Sr (228 ± 30 ppm) and an average δ18O value of −6.0‰ ± 0.8‰ (Vienna Peedee belemnite [VPDB]) in the Main Brook section but more depleted signatures for δ18O of −8.8‰ ± 1‰ (VPDB) and lower Sr contents (45 ± 8 ppm) in the Daniel's Harbour section. The geochemical composition suggests that D1 was developed from fluids of a mixture of meteoric and marine waters. The midburial phase D2 dolomite consists of coarse planar subeuhedral crystals (30–400 μm) that show concentric cathodoluminescence zoning and are also crosscut by microstylolites. Its δ18O values range between −6.6‰ ± 1.3‰ (VPDB) at Main Brook and −9.0‰ ± 0.5‰ (VPDB) at Daniel's Harbour. This dolomite likely precipitated from fluids that circulated through crustal rocks with progressive burial (Th value of 114°C ± 11°C and salinity value of 23 ± 1.8 eq. wt. % NaCl). The late-stage D3 dolomite has large and coarse nonplanar crystals (125 μm–7 mm) that exhibit sweeping extinction under crossed polars, which is characteristic of saddle dolomite and also sometimes shows thin brightly luminescent rims. It was likely precipitated during deeper burial in pulses and from hot fluids (Th values of 148°C ± 19°C and 115°C ± 19.6°C and mean salinities of 23 ± 2 and 22 ± 2 eq. wt. % NaCl at Main Brook and Daniel's Harbour, respectively). This is also supported by their relatively more depleted δ18O (−11.1‰ ± 1.2‰ and −12.3‰ ± 1.4‰ VPDB, respectively) and low Sr contents (88 ± 36 and 38 ± 5.9 ppm, respectively). Porosity in the Boat Harbour Formation is mainly associated with the midburial D2 dolomite. Intercrystalline porosity is the dominant type, and it ranges in the formation from less than 1% to 8% at Main Brook and from 7% to 12% at Daniel's Harbour. Vugs are less common but are associated with D3 dolomite. The porous zone in the formation at Main Brook starts approximately 10 to 15 m (33 to 49 ft) below the lower Boat Harbour disconformity and extends down to the lower formational boundary, whereas porous zones in the formation at Daniel's Harbour are indiscriminately distributed throughout the section.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAPG BulletinSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207