MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274198338 · doi:10.1086/684289

Age, Correlation, and Lithostratigraphic Revision of the Upper Cretaceous (Campanian) Judith River Formation in Its Type Area (North-Central Montana), with a Comparison of Low- and High-Accommodation Alluvial Records

2016· article· en· W2274198338 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raymond R. Rogers, Susan M. Kidwell, Alan L. Deino, James P. Mitchell, Kenneth Nelson, Jeffrey T. Thole

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Geology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPaleontologyLithologyCretaceousMarine transgressionFaciesSedimentary depositional environmentStratigraphyTransgressiveTectonicsStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite long-standing significance in the annals of North American stratigraphy and paleontology, key aspects of the Upper Cretaceous Judith River Formation remain poorly understood. We re-evaluate Judith River stratigraphy and propose new reference sections that both document the range of lithologies present in the type area in north-central Montana and reveal dramatic changes in facies architecture, fossil content, and rock accumulation rates that can be mapped throughout the type area and into the plains of southern Alberta and Saskatchewan. One section spans the basal contact of the Judith River Formation with marine shales of the underlying Claggett Formation. This contact, which lies along the base of the Parkman Sandstone Member of the Judith River Formation, is erosional and consistent with an episode of forced regression, contrary to previous descriptions. A second reference section spans the entire Judith River Formation. This complete section hosts a lithologic discontinuity, herein referred to as the mid-Judith discontinuity, that reflects a regional reorganization of terrestrial and marine depositional systems associated with a turnaround from regressive to transgressive deposition. The mid-Judith discontinuity correlates with the base of three backstepping marine sequences in the eastern sector of the type area and is thus interpreted as the terrestrial expression of a maximum regressive surface. This mid-Judith discontinuity defines the boundary between the new McClelland Ferry and overlying Coal Ridge Members of the Judith River Formation. The shallow marine sandstones that form the backstepping sequences represent the leading edge of the Bearpaw transgression in this region and are formalized as the new Woodhawk Member of the Judith River Formation in a third reference section. New 40Ar/39Ar ages indicate (1) that the mid-Judith discontinuity formed ∼76.2 Ma, coincident with the onset of the Bearpaw transgression in central Montana; and (2) that the Bearpaw Sea had advanced westward beyond the Judith River type area by ∼75.2 Ma, on the basis of the dating of a bentonite bed at the base of the Bearpaw Formation. These new ages also provide more confident age control for important vertebrate fossil occurrences in the Judith River Formation. Facies analysis across the mid-Judith discontinuity reveals how alluvial systems respond to regional base-level rise, which is implicit with the increase in rock accumulation rates and marine transgression. With the increase in accommodation signaled by the mid-Judith discontinuity, the alluvial system shifted in dominance from fluvial channel to overbank deposits, with greater tidal influence in channel sands, more hydromorphic and carbonaceous overbank deposits, and a higher frequency of bentonites and skeletal concentrations, suggesting higher preservation rates. These features, along with the appearance of extraformational pebbles above the discontinuity, are consistent with an upstream tectonic explanation for the addition of accommodation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations60
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of GeologySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207