Tracking the Origin and Evolution of Diagenetic Fluids of Upper Jurassic Carbonate Rocks in the Zagros Thrust Fold Belt, NE-Iraq
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Utilizing sophisticated tools in carbonate rocks is crucial to interpretating the origin and evolution of diagenetic fluids from the Upper Jurassic carbonate rocks along the Zagros thrust-fold Belt. The origin and evolution of the paleofluids utilizing in-situ strontium isotope ratios by high resolution laser ablation ICP-MS, integrated with stable isotopes, petrography and fieldwork are constrained. Due to the lack of information on the origin of the chemistry of the fluids, the cements that filled the Jurassic carbonate rocks were analysed from the fractures and pores. This allowed us to trace the origin of fluids along a diagenetic sequence, which is defined at the beginning from the sediment deposition (pristine facies). Based on petrography and geochemistry (oxygen-, carbon- and strontium-isotope compositions) two major diagenetic stages involving the fluids were identified. The initial stage, characterized by negative δ13CVPDB values (reaching −10.67‰), involved evaporated seawater deposited with the sediments, mixed with the input of freshwater. The second stage involved a mixture of meteoric water and hot fluids that precipitated as late diagenetic cements. The late diagenetic cements have higher depleted O–C isotope compositions compared to seawater. The diagenetic cements display a positive covariance and were associated with extra- δ13CVPDB and δ18OVPDB values (−12.87‰ to −0.82‰ for δ18OVPDB and −11.66‰ to −1.40‰ for δ13CVPDB respectively). The distinction between seawater and the secondary fluids is also evident in the 87Sr/86Sr of the host limestone versus cements. The limestones have 87Sr/86Sr up to 0.72859, indicative of riverine input, while the cements have 87Sr/86Sr of (0.70772), indicative of hot fluid circulation interacting with meteoric water during late diagenesis.
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".