Ichnology and Sedimentology of a Mud-Dominated Deltaic Coast: Upper Cretaceous Alderson Member (Lea Park Fm), Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Current depositional models largely promote the perception that all open-coastal distal (sea)–proximal (land) gradients are reflected by upward-coarsening grain-size trends, and that shoreline deposits are represented by prominent sand bodies. Although commonly the case, significant departures from this model may occur when the availability of coarser sediment calibers (sand-sized and larger) is limited. This is especially true where alongshore sediment-transport-influenced depositional systems are associated with rivers that supply abundant suspended sediments. Underestimating the role of grain-size segregation may lead to misinterpretations of energy levels and water depths, especially in some shale-dominated sedimentary units. The Upper Cretaceous Alderson Member (Lea Park Fm) is an up to 180-m-thick, gas-charged shale unit that we interpret as an ancient analogue for modern offshore and mud-dominated deltaic coasts. Sedimentological and ichnological data collected from 27 cores indicate that much of the sediment volume of the Alderson Member was deposited in relatively shallow water under the influence of tidal and wave processes in a deltaic coastal setting. Characteristic features reflecting these depositional affinities include: (1) increased proportions of terrestrially derived organic matter; (2) indications of thixotropic to soupy substrates (e.g., fluid mud) coupled with rapid depositional rates; (3) an impoverished ichnological signal (Planolites-dominated suites); (4) micro-laminated shale; (5) shale-on-shale erosional contacts; (6) scour-and-fill structures; and (7) intervals of low-angle cross-stratification. The interpretation of relatively shallow-water settings is also supported by recurring root-bearing horizons, Glossifungites Ichnofacies-demarcated transgressive surfaces of erosion, and conglomeratic surfaces at particular stratigraphic levels. The deposits are interpreted to include offshore, "subaqueous deltas," muddy shoreface and/or tidal flat, and aggradational muddy coastal plain (chenier plain) sub-environments. The results of this study improve our knowledge of ichnological and sedimentological characteristics of shallow-marine shale units, and are potentially useful for recognition of similar nearshore mud-prone deposits elsewhere.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".