Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 84 ( 1991): 369-423 369

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam

Sedimentary facies and depositional

environments of early Mesozoic Newark
Supergroup basins, eastern North America

J o s e p h P. S m o o t
u.s. Geological Survey, Reston, VA 22092, USA
(Received September 12, 1988; revised and accepted June 19, 1990)

ABSTRACT

Smoot, J.P., 1991. Sedimentary facies and depositional environments of early Mesozoic Newark Supergroup basins, eastern
North America. Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., 84: 369-423.

The early Mesozoic Newark Supergroup consists of continental sedimentary rocks and basalt flows that occupy a NE-
trending belt of elongate basins exposed in eastern North America. The basins were filled over a period of 30-40 m.y. spanning
the Late Triassic to Early Jurassic, prior to the opening of the north Atlantic Ocean. The sedimentary rocks are here divided
into four principal lithofacies. The alluvial-fan facies includes deposits dominated by: (I) debris flows; (2) shallow braided
streams; (3) deeper braided streams (with trough crossbeds); or (4) intense bioturbation or hyperconcentrated flows (tabular,
unstratified muddy sandstone). The fluvial facies include deposits of: (1) shallow, ephemeral braided streams; (2) deeper, flash-
flooding, braided streams (with poor sorting and crossbeds); (3) perennial braided rivers; (4) meandering riversi (5) meandering
streams (with high suspended loads); (6) overbank areas or local flood-plain lakes; or (7) local streams and/or colluvium. The
lacustrine facies includes deposits of: (1) deep perennial lakes; (2) shallow perennial lakes; (3) shallow ephemeral lakes; (4)
playa dry mudflats; (5) salt-encrusted saline mudflats; or (6) vegetated mudflats. The lake margin clastic facies includes deposits
of: (I) birdfoot deltas; (2) stacked Gilbert-type deltas; (3) sheet deltas; (4) wave-reworked alluvial fans; or (5) wave-sorted sand
sheets.
Coal deposits are present in the lake margin clastic and the lacustrine facies of Carnian age (Late Triassic) only in basins
of south-central Virginia and North and South Carolina. Eolian deposits are known only from the basins in Nova Scotia and
Connecticut. Evaporites (and their pseudomorphs) occur mainly in the northern basins as deposits of saline soils and less
commonly of saline lakes, and some evaporite and alkaline minerals present in the Mesozoic rocks may be a result of later
diagenesis. These relationships suggest climatic variations across paleolatitudes, more humid to the south where coal beds are
preserved, and more arid in the north where evaporites and eolian deposits are common. Fluctuations in paleoclimate that
caused lake levels to rise and fall in hydrologically closed basins ale preserved as lacustrine cycles of various scales, including
major shifts in the Late Triassic from a wet Carnian to an arid Norian. In contrast, fluvial deposits were mainly formed in
response to the tectonic evolution of the basins, but to some extent also reflect climatic changes.
The Newark Supergroup illustrates the complexity of rift-basin sedimentation and the problems that may arise from using
a single modern analog for sedimentary deposition spanning millions of years. It also shows that a tremendous wealth of
depositional, climatic, and tectonic information is preserved in ancient rift-basin deposits which can be recovered if the
depositional processes of modern rift-basin deposits are understood.

Introduction
The Newark Supergroup of eastern North
A m e r i c a c o n s i s t s o f n o n - m a r i n e s e d i m e n t a r y rocks
a n d tholeiitic b a s a l t flows filling m o r e t h a n t w e n t y
exposed half-graben basins (Froelich and Olsen,
1983) ( F i g . l ) . T h e b a s i n s r a n g e f r o m a few k m 2
to o v e r 7500 k m 2 in a r e a a n d are e l o n g a t e d p a r a l l e l
tO the A p p a l a c h i a n o r o g e n . T h e b a s i n s f o r m e d
d u r i n g the c o n t i n e n t a l r i f t i n g e v e n t t h a t e v e n t u a l l y
led to the o p e n i n g o f the A t l a n t i c O c e a n . T h e
n o r m a l faults t h a t f o r m o n e m a r g i n o f each b a s i n
are a p p a r e n t l y r e a c t i v a t e d P a l e o z o i c faults ( R a t -
cliffe a n d B u r t o n , 1985; Ratcliffe et al., 1986;
S w a n s o n , 1986; M a n s p e i z e r , 1988) t h a t c o n t r o l l e d
the l o c a t i o n , shape, a n d d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the basins.

0031-0182/91/$03.50 © 1991 - - Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

370 J.P. SMOOT

80 ° 75 ° 70 ° 65 ° 60 °

!
( ii NB
j.
/ 45 °

. . . . sT
NEWARK SUPERGROUP S

EXPOSED BASINS
I

i ! ,3
/

1, Wadesboro (NC~SC)
k 2, Sanford (NC)

PA
.1 3, Durham (NC)
4, Davie County(NC)
40 °
5, Dan River-Danville (NC-VA)
6, Scotmburg (VA)
+ 7. Basins north of Scottsburg (VA)
8. Fsrmville (VA)
,,t'-" 9. Richmond (VA)
;'V 10. Taylorlville (VA)

/v' 11.
12.
13.
Scottsville (VA)
Bsrboursville (VA)
Culpeper (VA-MD)
14. Gettysburg (MD-PA)
VA 15. Newark (PA-NJ-NY)
16. Pomperaug (CT}
17. Hartford (CT)
18, Deerfield (MA)
19. Fundy or Minas (NB-NS)
20. Chedsbucto (NS)
NC
35*
-t- ACP--Inner margin of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, dashed offshore

Fig.l. Distribution of Newark Supergroup basins in eastern North America. Wadesboro, Sanford, and Durham sub-basins (1-3)
comprise the Deep River basin. Dot pattern designates major buried portions of exposed basins. Smallest basins are not shown.
(Modifiedfrom Olsenet al., in press). SC = South Carolina;NC = North Carolina;VA= Virginia;MD = Maryland;PA---Pennsylvania;
NJ=New Jersey; NY=New York; CT=Connecticut; MA=Massaehusetts; NS--Nova Scotia; NB=New Brunswick; A CP=
Atlantic Coastal Plain.

Sedimentary rocks filling the basins are mostly
fluvial and lacustrine deposits. Table 1 summarizes
the names of the major stratigraphic units of the
Newark Supergroup by basin, state and province,
and geologic age. It may be used with Fig.1 as a
geographic reference to the location of basins
described in the text. Based primarily on palyno-
logical data (Cornet, 1977; Cornet and Olsen,
1985; Ediger, 1986; Traverse, 1987), most of the
Newark Supergroup rocks are Carnian (Late Tri-
assic) to Hettangian (Early Jurassic) in age
(Table 1). However, Anisian rocks (Middle Trias-
sic) are reported from the Fundy basin, Ladinian
(Middle Triassic) rocks from the Deep River,
Richmond, and Taylorsville basins, and Pliens-
bachian (Early Jurassic) or younger strata have
been reported from the Culpeper, Newark, Hart-
ford, and Deerfield basins (Cornet, 1977). Tholei-
itic basalt flows in the Culpeper, Gettysburg,
Newark, Hartford, Pomperaug, Deerfield, and
Fundy basins are Early Jurassic as determined by
radiometric dating (Seidemann et al., 1984; Sutter,
1985) and indirectly by paleontological evidence
from intercalated sedimentary rocks (Cornet, 1977;
Cornet and Olsen, 1985). Tholeiitic diabase dikes
and sills have intruded the upper Triassic and
lower Jurassic sedimentary rocks and in places
some are feeders to the extrusive basalts. Using
TABLE 1

Major stratigraphic units in the Newark Supergroup based on the compilation o f Luttrell (1989). Correlation of Sander Basalt and Waterfall Formation are modified based
on data presented in Olsen et a]., 1989. See Figure I for explanation of state and province names >-
.<

Deep River Dan River- Richmond Taylorsville Culpeper Gettysburg Newark Newark Hartford Deerfield Fundy
Series Stage basin Danville basin basin basin basin basin basin basin basin basin basin
SC&NC VA VA VA VA&MD MD&PA PA NJ&NY CT&MA MA NS&HB ;>
Z
Plionebachian

Portland
Sinemudan Boon'ton Formation MountToby
Formation Formation
Watarllll
Formation Z
Hook Mountain Hampden / / /
Basalt Basalt
Sellcllr
LJ Towaco East Berlin TurnersFalls ©
Basalt :7
Formation Formation Sandstone
Turkey Run
Hettangion Formation
Hickory Grove Prcaknesa Holyoke Deertield
Basalt Basalt Basalt Basalt

Midland Feltvilta Shuttle Meadow McCoy Brook

Formation upper part Formation Formation & Scots k y
Brunswick Grou~ .<
Formations
Mount Zion Basalt I Jacksonwatd :)rangeMountlh Taioott North Mountain
Church Basalt at Aapers | Basalt Basalt Basalt Basalt ©
Cstharpirl Crtmk I N
_o
Formation Sugarioaf
Formation Z
I~ loWerpart
Gettysburg Blomldon
"" 3runawiokGroup Passaic ~o
Balls Bluff Foe,nation New Haven Formation
Norlan . Formation
Slltstone ArkoN

/
jl ~o
©
-|
•~'o'.;;sr,'" '1 ¢d
UTr • Formation 1
BaJ~ord EE Lockatong Lockatong
Cow Branch ; Z
Form~ion {E Formation Formation
Formation o Onordale Manasaas New Oxford WolfvltM
Cumnock ~ Sandstorm Sandstone Formation Slockton Stockton Formation
Formation Pkta Itch DoaWell Formation Formation
Carnlan Formation I: Formation

Vinlta bade
Pekin Pro¢lt~uve COil
Formation Msalume
LoWerbarren
La~nlan . . . . . ~.d,
MTr Ankden
beds
372
4°Ar/39Ar spectra, these intrusive rocks yield a
mean Early Jurassic age of about 201 m.y. (Sutter,
1988). The emplacement of igneous rocks appa-
rently occurred over a short period of time (Ray-
mond et al., 1982; Sutter, 1985, 1988; Olsen et al.,
1989).
Figure 2 is a schematic plan of a typical Newark
Supergroup basin showing many of the common
traits. Strata in these elongate basins generally dip
toward a faulted margin, away from an uncon-
formable margin. The oldest strata commonly
consist of poorly sorted cobble conglomerates with
clasts representative of the immediately adjacent
basement rocks which they unconformably overlie.
These thin conglomerates are overlain by a thick
succession of fluvial sandstones that form a belt
along the unconformable flank of the basin. A
central suite of lacustrine mudstone and siltstone
overlies the sandstone and commonly intertongues
with fluvial strata near the ends of the basin. The
youngest rocks are found along the faulted margin
typified by lobate bodies of poorly sorted boulder
conglomerates and sandstones, and includes inter-
calated basalt flows and fluvial and lacustrine
strata in the northern basins that contain Jurassic
rocks. Arcuate outcrop patterns of basalt flows
and diabase sheets near the faulted margin reflect
broad synclines and narrow anticlines. Diabase
sheets also commonly form ring structures that
uplift the enclosed stratigraphic sections. Compos-
ite stratigraphic thicknesses measured across basins
are typically a few kilometers thick and may be as
a b
)BDsmm
Fig.2. Schematicplan of a typical Newark Supergroup basin showingcommonrelationshipsof principal lithologiesto structure.
Heavylinedepicts the normalborder faultand the other basin marginis unconformable.(a) Poorlysorted conglomerate,(b) Pebbly
sandstone, (c) Sandstone,(d) Mudstoneand siltstone,(e) Basalt flow,(f) Diabase intrusiverock.
J.P. SMOOT
much as 8 km in a deep basin, but the maximum
thickness of lower Mesozoic strata preserved in a
deep basin is probably less than 6 km. Outcrops
in the basins are generally small and widely scat-
tered due to deep weathering and partial cover by
Cretaceous to Tertiary marine and fluvial deposits
of the Atlantic Coastal Plain and Holocene depos-
its. Major portions of the Fundy, Chedabucto,
and Taylorsville basins are known to extend be-
neath Coastal Plain deposits. Early Mesozoic ba-
sins completely buried by Atlantic Coastal Plain
and continental shelf sediments are also present
east of the Newark Supergroup basins (Hutchinson
and Klitgord, 1988).
The Newark Supergroup rocks have been
studied for more than a hundred years resulting
in an extensive literature (Margolis et al., 1986;
Lorenz, 1988). Many of the papers on the sedi-
mentary rocks have discussed the effects of the
tectonic setting and/or the paleoclimate. Early
papers discussed the possibility that the half-gra-
bens are erosional remnants of larger basins (Broad
Terrane theory of Russell, 1892; Wheeler, 1937;
Sanders, 1963; Faill, 1973), but most recent investi-
gations postulate that the faults forming the basin
boundaries were active during sedimentation and
that the present basin boundaries are roughly those
during deposition of the basin fill (for instance,
Hubert et al., 1978; Olsen, 1984; Lorenz, 1988).
Evidence for synsedimentary activity of the border
faults include: (1) thick sequences of coarse con-
glomerates restricted to the vicinity of the border
c d e 1
SEDIMEN'I-ARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
fault and reflecting local sources across the fault,
interpreted as alluvial fan deposits (for example,
Arguden and Rodolfo, 1986); (2) thickening of
stratigraphic units toward the border fault (for
instance, McDonald and Letourneau, 1988; Olsen
et al., 1989) and (3) syndepositional deformation
features consistent with fault activity (Schlische
and Olsen, 1988; Olsen et al., 1989). The East
African rift valleys and the Basin and Range of
the western United States are often cited as Holo-
cene climatic, tectonic, and depositional analogs
to Newark Supergroup basins. Reconstructions of
Newark Supergroup basins commonly show steep
alluvial fans along the faulted margin, a central
lake or playa facies, and low-angle alluvial fan or
braided stream deposits along the unconformity
side (for instance, Turner-Peterson, 1980; Hubert
and Mertz, 1984; McDonald and LeTourneau,
1988). The paleohydrology of the basins, specifi-
cally whether or not they had persistent open or
closed drainages or alternating open and closed
drainages (Van Houten, 1962, 1964; Smoot, 1985;
Gore, 1989), has been cited as a cause for mineral-
ogic variations and for the style and distribution
of lacustrine and fluvial facies.
Paleoclimatic reconstructions of the Newark Su-
pergroup basins commonly invoke arid to semi-
arid conditions. These models are based on: (1)
occurrences of carbonate nodules interpreted as
caliche (for instance, Hubert, 1978); (2) molds or
pseudomorphs of crystals interpreted as former
evaporites, such as gypsum, glauberite, and halite
(for instance, Van Houten, 1965; Parnell, 1983,
Gore, 1988); (3) authigenic minerals such as dolo-
mite, analcime, and chert reflecting alkaline condi-
tions (Van Houten, 1962, 1964; Hubert et al., 1978;
Wheeler and Textoris, 1978); and (4) sedimentary
features indicative of desiccation, ephemeral
stream transport, or eolian conditions (see Lorenz,
1988). Coal beds in the Deep River, Richmond,
Taylorsville, Briery Creek, Farmville, and Dan
River-Danville basins (Robbins et al., 1988) have
been interpreted as indicators of more humid
conditions. Coal deposits are mostly restricted to
the Carnian (or possibly also the Ladinian) and
are also restricted to the southernmost basins of
the Newark Supergroup. These relationships sug-
gest the possibility of climatic changes through
373
time (wet Carnian and arid Norian) and/or changes
along paleolatitudes (more humid to the south)
(Hubert and Mertz, 1980, 1984). Cyclic fluctua-
tions in climate have been cited as cause for vertical
variations in lacustrine deposits on the scale of
meters to hundreds of meters (Van Houten, 1962,
1964; Olsen, 1986).
The purpose of this paper is to present a sum-
mary of the sedimentary facies in the Newark
Supergroup and to discuss the degree of variability
and similarity of the sedimentary deposits in the
basins. The recognition of similar sedimentary
features or lithologic associations in basins pro-
vides a means to extrapolate depositional data
from areas of good exposure to areas with poor
outcrop and places constraints on depositional
models in different basins. The regional compari-
son of sedimentary facies also provides a means
to extract the tectonic and climatic factors affecting
the basins from the local depositional controls.
Newark Supergroup sedimentary facies
Table 2 is a summary of the major sedimentary
facies in the Newark Supergroup. Facies, as used
here, denotes regionally extensive lithologic units
reflecting depositional environments. The subdivi-
sions of these facies denote significant depositional
variations that also have regional extent. This
definition differs from another common usage
wherein facies represent local variability within an
environment (i.e. Miall, 1978). The Newark Super-
group facies are: (1) Alluvial fan; (2) Fluvial; (3)
Lacustrine; and (4) Lake margin clastic. These
facies are not mappable in every basin due to poor
outcrop and fine-scale intercalations, but they re-
present most of the major depositional environ-
ments (as in Reading, 1978). The geographic and
stratigraphic distribution of these units and their
subdivisions within each basin provide the building
blocks for comparison of depositionai environ-
ments between basins. Some of these facies are
roughly coincident with formal stratigraphic units
(Table 1), but most are not (Table 3).
Alluvial fan deposits
Alluvial fan deposits include poorly-sorted con-
glomerates and sandstones that: (1) are restricted
374 J.P. SMOOT

TABLE 2

Summary of characteristics of types of deposits in each sedimentary facies and their inferred depositional environment

Facies Description Interpretation of

depositional environment

.411uvialfan
AF1 • Matrix-supported, pebble-boulder conglomerates, commonly Alluvial fan dominated by debris flow
convex-upward, lenses 5-40 cm thick and less than 4 m long, deposits and deposits of shallow flash-
and poorly sorted, grain-supported, imbricate conglomerate flooding streams.
or pebbly sandstone as irregular lenses, less than 20 cm thick.
Largest clasts scattered at tops of matrix-supported lenses or
concentrated at edges (Fig.3). Isolated pods of tightly packed
boulders or cobbles occur within pebble conglomerates and
sandstones, particularly where matrix-supported conglomerate
lenses are thinner and sandstone lenses are thicker and more
abundant. Sandstones commonly have horizontal lamination.
AF2 • Clast-supported, imbricate cobble and pebble conglomerates Alluvial fan dominated by deposits of
forming lenses 0.1-2.0 m thick, typically less than 10 m long, flash-flooding shallow braided streams.
surrounded by more continuous layers of pebbly sandstone,
typically less than 2 m thick (Fig.4). Conglomerate lenses may
be convex-upward with downflow fining or may be local
filling of scours capped by sandstone. Sandstones have
horizontal lamination and locally irregular low-angle inclined
sets. Interbeds of sandy mudstone as much as 1.5 m thick
where sandstones are more abundant than conglomerate.
Thicker mudstone beds have abundant root structures.
AF3 • Imbricate cobble and pebble conglomerates overlain by cross- Alluvial fan dominated by deposits of
bedded pebbly sandstone forming crude fining-upward braided streams that were 2-3 m deep
sequences 1.5-3.0 m thick. Trough cross-beds (20-30 cm and that had prolonged periods of flow.
thick) are randomly interbedded with tabular foresets (as
much as 1.0 m thick).
AF4 • Pebbly, muddy sandstones forming tabular beds 20-50 cm Alluvial fan dominated by deposits of
thick. Pebbles and cobbles randomly scattered in poorly hyperconcentrated sheetfloods or by
sorted sandstone matrix. Horizontal lamination is locally sandy braided stream deposits that have
present in coarser beds and bioturbation (root and burrow been bioturbated by plant growth.
structures) is abundant. Isolated channel-form lenses (0.2-
3.0 m thick and variable width), composed of imbricate
cobble conglomerate and cross-bedded pebbly sandstone, are
common.

Fluvial
F1 • Imbricate boulder and cobble conglomerates and poorly Deposits of shallow, ephemeral braided
sorted sandstones and pebbly sandstones. Crude upward- streams.
fining sequences (0.3-2.0 m thick) of conglomerate lenses that
overlie channel-form scours and are overlain by tabular
sandstone units. Sandstones dominated by planar horizontal
or low-angle inclined lamination, may have ripple cross-
lamination immediately below mudstone partings. Tabular
foresets in sandstone and conglomerate (up to I m thick) fine
in the down flow direction. Cm-scale mudstone partings are
mudcracked and mudstone intraclasts are common in
sandstones. Root casts are common throughout and locally
abundant in mudstone partings.
F2 • Poorly sorted, cross-bedded pebbly sandstones overlying Deposits of flash-flooding braided
imbricate boulder and cobble conglomerates (Fig.5),. Upward- streams 2-6 m deep. Bedforms produced
fining sequences 2-6 m thick overlie scour surfaces and are by prolonged periods of flow. Some
commonly abruptly overlain by 2-6 m of heavily bioturbated braided channels were anastomosing on
mudstone and siltstone (see F6). Trough crossbeds 20-40 cm vegetated muddy plains.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS 375

TABLE 2 (continued)

Facies Description Interpretation of

depositional environment

thick are randomly interbedded with tabular foresets as much

as 1 m thick in pebbly sandstone. Tabular sets may have
different crossbed orientation than the adjacent trough
crossbeds.
F3 • Moderately sorted cobble conglomerates to medium-grained Deposits of perennial braided streams.
sandstones with abundant decimeter-scale trough Some braided channels were
crossbedding that decreases in size and width within crude anastomosing on vegetated muddy
upward-fining sequences (typically 3-7 m thick) (Fig.6). plains.
Thickness and width of trough cross-beds depends upon
grain size and thickness of upward fining sequence (largest
troughs are 6 m wide and 1.5 m thick in cobble conglomerate
of 10 m thick sequence). Tabular sets (up to 1.5 m thick) near
tops of sequences. Thick beds (3-10 m) of heavily
bioturbated mudstone and siltstone (see F6) commonly
abruptly overlie sequences.
F4 • Sandstone, siltstone, and mudstone forming rhythmically Deposits of deep meandering perennial
stacked, upward-fining sequences 2-7 m thick (Fig.7). streams. Vertical sequences reflect point-
Thickest sandstones have decimeter-scale trough crossbeds at bar aggradation and lateral accretion.
the base grading upward to ripple cross-laminated fine In~lined lenses are interpreted as epsilon
sandstone and siltstone capped by heavily bioturbated bedding.
siltstone and mudstone (see F6). Progressively thinner
sequences overlie the thicker sequences (as many as 5), each
finer grained and more bioturbated than the underlying
sequence. In large outcrops each upward-fining sequence
occurs as a depositionally inclined lens that is thicker and
coarser at downdip end and that is imbricated with other
lenses.
F5 • Sandstone, siltstone, and mudstone as graded beds (0.1-2.0 m Deposits of highly sinuous meandering
thick) that form depositionally inclined sets 2-5 m thick perennial streams with high suspended
(Fig.8). Each inclined bed is coarser on the downdip end and sediment loads. Inclined beds are
more bioturbated on the updip end. Coarsest sandstones interpreted as epsilon bedding formed by
composed of mudstone and carbonate intraclasts overlie point-bar aggradation and lateral
scours into interbedded bioturbated siltstone and mudstone accretion.
(see F6) and have decimeter-scale trough cross-bedding
(10-30 cm thick) commonly with internal mudstone lenses;
finer sandstones have ripple cross-lamination and disruption
by root structures and burrows. Inclined sets define broad
lenses (about 10 times wider than high) that are graded from
coarse sandstone to silty mudstone.
F6 • Mudstone, siltstone, and fine-grained sandstone with Deposits of heavily vegetated fluvial
abundant root structures and burrows (particularly Scoyenia). flood plains or shallow lakes. Soil
Generally massive although remnant patches of layering are processes produce carbonate nodules and
common. Carbonate nodules (sand-sized spheres to irregular bowl-shaped slickensides.
spherical to tube-shaped s~ruetures over 1 cm in diameter)
and bowl-shaped slickenside structures are locally abundant.
Soft-sediment deformation structures such as load casts,
oversteepened layers, and psuedonodules are locally
abundant.
F7 • Poorly sorted conglomerates and pebbly sandstones that may Colluvium formed on exposed bedrock
be grain- or matrix-supported. Matrix-supported or deposits of small streams within a
conglomerates, composed of angular clasts of underlying bedrock topography.
bedrock, lack layering or imbrication. Grain-supported
conglomerates may have imbrication or cross-bedding and
mixtures of rounded grains reflecting different provenance.
376
TABLE 2 (continued)
Facies Description
Lacustrine
L1 • Laminated, organic-rich shale and limestone (Fig.10).
Lamination ranges from sub-millimeter continuous fiat layers
to centimeter-scale pinch-and-swell siltstone beds alternating
with mudstone; bedding plane burrows are locally abundant,
well-preserved fossils of fish, aquatic reptiles, and
conchostracans are abundant in some fine laminae; fish
fragments and ostracodes are common in thicker laminae.
L2 • Thin-bedded to massive mudstone (commonly organic-rich)
with abundant burrow structures. Pinch-and-swell layers or
graded layers of sandstone, soft-sediment deformation
structures, and irregular patches of layered sediment are
common. Fossil ostracodes, conchostrachans, and wood
fragments are common. Polygonal cracks (30-120 cm in
diameter) from two or three bedding planes are 30-60 cm
deep. Root structures are locally abundant.
L3 • Thin-bedded mudstone and siltstone with abundant
polygonal cracks (10-30 cm in diameter and 10-30 cm deep)
extending from most bedding planes (Fig.11). Irregular
siltstone and sandstone beds have abundant scours and
mudstone intraclasts, and less common pinch-and-swell
bedding.
L4 • Massive mudstone with abundant narrow, jagged to sinuous
polygonal cracks (1-20 cm in diameter and 1-10 cm deep)
(Fig. 12). Breccia-like fabric, angular clumps of laminated to
massive mudstone separated by silt-rich polygonal crack
fillings, gradationally overlies L2 and L3 deposits. Mudstones
with sand- and silt-sized angular clumps have abundant
spherical to flattened ovate, cement-filled vugs (less than
1 mm long). Siltstone layers with cement-filled vugs and
broken by polygonal mudstone-filled cracks are common.
L5 • Poorly sorted, sandy mudstone with irregular pods
(0.5-10 cm long) of siltstone and sandstone (Fig.13). Pods
typically have angular margins, jagged internal mud-filled
cracks, internal zones of different grain sizes, and cuspate
contacts with the surrounding mudstone. Subhedral to
anhedral vugs (less than 1 cm in diameter) after evaporite
minerals are common. Sandstone layers with irregular hump-
shaped ripples that have deformed boundaries may be
abundant. Layering may be distorted into polygonal patterns
with upturned edges.
L6 • Massive mudstone and siltstone with abundant cement-filled
and sediment-filled root structures (bifurcating and tapering
tubes, 0.1-10.0 mm in diameter) (Fig. 14). Granule-sized
carbonate nodules are common near the tops of beds.
Remnant patches of rippled sandstone, narrow polygonal
cracks (less than a millimeter wide, 30-40 cm in diameter,
20-50 cm deep), bowl-shaped slickenside surfaces (30-150 cm
in diameter), and burrows (Scoyenia) are locally abundant.
Lake margin clastic
LMI • Channel-form sandstone or conglomerate lenses (10 m to at
least several lO's of meters wide and 2-10 m thick) overlying
or intercalated with L1 or L2 deposits. Sandstone lenses have
decimeter-scale trough crossbedding grading upward to ripple
cross-lamination. Conglomerate lenses may be massive or
J.P. SMOOT
Interpretation of
depositional environment
Deposits of relatively deep perennial
lakes. Finer laminae probably formed in
stratified lake, whereas thicker laminae
indicate shallower lake with bottom
currents.
Deposits of relatively shallow perennial
lakes or the margins of deeper lakes.
Mudcracks indicate intermittent
subaerial exposure.
Deposits of shallow ephemeral lakes or
the fluctuating margins of larger lakes.
Deposits of playa dry mudflats. Breccia
fabric represents lake bottom deposits
disrupted by repeated wetting and drying
during floods. Vug-rich fabric
characterizes aggrading dry mudflat
deposits. Siltstone layers represent larger
sheetflood deposits.
Deposits of salt-encrusted saline
mudflats. Sand and silt pods are formed
by sediment trapped in irregularities of
etflorescent halite crusts. Irregular ripples
were deformed by salt crust growth on
their crestlines. Efflorescent crusts
forming polygonal patterns may also
deform several layers.
Deposits of vegetated mudflats or soils
developed on older deposits.
Deposits of birdfoot deltas, braided
deltas, or fan deltas. Thicker sequences
represent progadation of delta topset by
aggradation. Thinner deposits represent
delta progradation as lake level drops.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS 377

TABLE 2 (continued)

Facies Description Interpretation of

depositional environment

have graded thin beds and have abundant fluidization

structures. Soft-sediment deformation structures are also
common in sandstones. Thinner portions of sandstone lenses
may overlie upward-coarsening sequence (typically 3-10 m
thick) in lacustrine mudstone by increase in thickness and
frequency of ripple cross-laminated sandstone beds.
Bioturbation (root structures and burrows) may disrupt the
tops of sequences or all layering.
LM2 • Depositionally inclined sandstone sets (2-4 m thick) that are Deposits of Gilbert-type deltas that are
stacked to form upward coarsening sequences (at least 10 m stacked due to rise and fall of closed-
thick and probably as much as 40 m thick) (Fig.15). Low- basin lakes. Proximal deltas are steep
angle, inclined sets (2-10 ° dips) in the lower portion of a and coarser grained than distal deltas.
stack are dominated by climbing ripple cross-lamination Plants grow on inactive topset and
forming deceleration-of-flow sequences that fine in the foreset deposits during lake lowstands.
downflow direction (down depositional dip) to flat-laminated Topset channel deposits are only locally
siltstone. Steep inclined sets (10-20 ° dips) in the upper preserved since lake level rises during
portion of a stack are dominated by planar lamination. stream flooding resulting in foreset
Boundaries between sandstone sets are broad, trough-shaped deposition on previously exposed topset.
scours commonly with root structures and burrows. Soft
sediment deformation structures, fossil wood and plant
fragments, and stromatolitic tufa coatings are common.
LM3 • Wedge-shaped sandstone sheets (as much as 3 m thick, Sheetlike deltaic plain deposits produced
hundreds of meters to a few km long and wide) comprised of by the intersection of a very shallow
sandstone thin beds (10-30 cm thick) with climbing ripple expanding ephemeral lake with
cross-lamination in deceleration-of-flow sequences (Fig. 16). flashflooding shallow streams or sheet
Ripple cross-laminae are oriented in similar directions over floods. The surface is subaerially exposed
the length and width of each sheet. Each sandstone thin bed following deposition.
is separated by a mudstone parting with polygonal cracks.
Soft-sediment deformation structures are common in
sandstone beds. Reptile tracks may be abundant in mudstone
partings. Each wedge coarsens upward and fines in the
downflow direction.
LM4 • Conglomerates and conglomeratic sandstones forming 3-10 m Deposits of wave-sorted shorelines by
thick upward-coarsening sequences from L1 or L2 deposits. reworking of alluvial fan deposits.
Lower portions of sequences dominated by thin sandstone Upward-coarsening sequences produced
beds with oscillatory ripple cross-lamination, grading up to as lake level fell and/or fan prograded.
pebbly sandstone with decimeter-scale tabular foresets or flat Poorly sorted deposits with well-sorted
bedding with alternations of grain size and grain shape. matrix reflect waves inability to rework
Upper portion of sequences are poorly sorted boulder and coarser grain sizes.
cobble conglomerate with patchily distributed well sorted
sandstone or granule matrix (Fig.17), locally oscillatory ripple
cross-laminated.
LM5 • Sheet-like wedges of sandstone, dominated by oscillatory Deposits of wave-sorted shoreline
ripple cross-lamination, forming upward coarsening sequences reworking alluvial fan or stream deposits
(1-3 m thick) overlying L1 and L2 deposits. Lower portions into sheets or bar complexes. May be
are thin sandstone beds whereas upper portions are sandstone distal portions of LM4 deposits.
dominated by decimeter-scale tabular foresets or wavy
concavo-convex bedding. The foresets grade laterally into
oscillatory ripple cross-lamination in troughs. Reptile tracks
and mudcracks may be abundant in mudstone partings of
thin-bedded portions of sequences.
TABLE 3
oo
Stratigraphic distribution of dominant lacustrine facies in the major Newark Supergroup basins. Where lake deposits are absent, the dominant fluvial deposits are shown.
The typical lake deposit type for trangressive stages is given in parentheses. Where fluvial and shoreline deposits are an important component of most regressive stages, they
are also shown in parentheses. Common occurrences of coal (c); saline minerals (s); and eolian deposits (e) are also shown. See Figure 1 for explanation of state and province
names.

Deep River Dan River- Richmond Taylorsvllle Culpeper Gettysburg Newark Newark Hartford Deerfleld Fundy
Serlu Stage basin )anvllle baslr basin basin basin basin basin basin basin basin basin
SC&NC VA VA VA VA&MD MD&PA PA NJ&NY CT&MA MA NS&NB
Pllen-kxhlan F1

L6 - LS? L6
Slnen~dan L6 (L1 - L2) L6 - L4
(L1 - L2) (LM - F) • (L1 - L2) (L1 - L2)
(LM - F) •
(LM - F) (LM - F) •

ba, ,... / / /
basalt L6 L6 - L4 L6
LJ (L1 - L2) (L1 - L2) (L1 - L2)
L6 (L1 - L2) (LM • F) (LM - F) • (LM • F) s ?
HeUanglan (LM - F)

basalt basalt basalt basalt

L6 L6 L6 L6 L6
(L1 • L2) ? L6 (L1 - L2) (L1 - L2) (L1 - L2) (L1 - L2) (L1 - L2)
(LM - F) (LM - F) (LM - F) (LM - F) (LM - F) (LM - F) •

ba•al! basalt I basalt basalt basalt basalt

L6 - L4 L6 - L4 L6 - L4 L6 - L4
(L2) • (L2) • (L2) • (L2) • F4 •

L5 e,s
Norlarl
L4 - L6 L4 - L6 L4 - L6 L4 • L6
(L3 - L2) • (L3 - L2) • (L3 - L2) • (L3 - L2) • F1 - F2 F2

F5 • FS • L4 L4

L4 - 1:37 (L3 • L2) • ( L 3 - L2) •

UTr (L3 - 1.2) F3 F1 •
L2 L2
F5 F5 F4 F4 (L1) (L1)
L2
(L1) c
1:2 - F3 F4 F4
1.2 F3
I..2 F3 F3
(L1) c F37
Carnlan (L1) c F7 F7 F2 F2
F2

/:3 F3
L2
(L1)
1:7 c F7
m....===m=.=..
IJdinian
MTr Aa~,. F1 •
S
SEDIMENI"ARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
to an area within a few kilometers of the border
fault, (2) have provenance reflecting the lithology
of the adjacent faulted rocks, and (3) show a sense
of fining away from the fault. These criteria exclude
some conglomerates that previously have been
interpreted as alluvial fan deposits (for instance,
McLaughlin, 1957; Turner-Peterson, 1980; Tex-
toris et al., 1986) which are assigned to fluvial
deposits. The criteria are intended to delineate
deposits that formed directly in response to fault
uplift. Other conglomerates and sandstones may
ultimately fill the criteria for alluvial fans as defined
in Nilsen (1982), but their distribution and sedi-
mentary features suggest that they are river or
stream deposits that are controlled by discharge,
basin slope, and/or intersection with lakes.
Alluvial fan deposits are present in almost all
formations in each basin. They are rarely separated
as formal stratigraphic units (see Lee and Froelich,
1989). The composite thickness of alluvial fan
deposits commonly reaches thousands of meters,
although they are usually intercalated with finer
grained lacustrine or fluvial sedimentary rocks on
a scale of tens or hundreds of meters, particularly
where the fan deposits thin and become finer
grained before pinching out.
AF1 type
Matrix-supported conglomerates with concen-
trations of large clasts along the tops and outer
margins (Fig.3) are interpreted as debris-flow lobe
deposits (Sharp, 1942; Beatty, 1963; Johnson, 1970;
Nilsen, 1982). The matrix-rich character of the
debris-flow deposits is best preserved in conglomer-
ates composed of limestone and dolomite clasts
(as i n the Leesburg Member of the Balls Bluff
~Siftstone, Culpeper basin, Lee and Froelich, 1989).
In conglomerates composed of siliciclastic clasts
(as in the Milford section of the Passaic Formation,
Newark basin, in Arguden and Rodolfo, 1986) the
geometry and sorting of the flow lobes are still
visible, but the clasts appear to be primarily grain
supported. Early cementation of limestone con-
glomerates may result in less compaction of muddy
matrix. Large cobbles or boulders or imbricated
groups of these clasts within finer-grained, flat-
bedded or imbricated conglomerates or in pebbly
sandstones are interpreted as the coarse-grained
379
lags of debris-flow deposits whose finer matrix was
removed by streams (Smoot, 1982). Thin debris-
flow deposits and common debris-flow lag deposits
are generally representative of relatively low fan
slopes (Wasson, 1982; Smoot, 1982). Debris-flow
deposits are surrounded by beds and lenses of
imbricated pebbles or by granule sandstones, inter-
preted as deposits of very shallow, flash-flooding
streams. Poorly sorted imbricate pebble conglom-
erates and planar laminated sandstones indicate
deposition by shallow ( 2 - ~ 5 0 c m deep), short-
lived floods.
AF2 type
Irregular scours filled with conglomerate grading
vertically and laterally to sandstone indicates depo-
sition in small braided channels (Fig.4). Convex
lenses of imbricated pebbles that fine downflow
are similar to gravel braid bars (see Bluck, 1982)
as are low-angle tabular foresets. Their association
with planar laminated gravel conglomerate and
sandstone and the absence of regular dune-scale
crossbedding is consistent with shallow braid chan-
nel deposits on alluvial fans (Hardie et al., 1978;
Nilsen, 1982). Thick sandstone and mudstone in-
terbeds with abundant root structures suggest "ov-
erbank" conditions on surfaces with low slopes (as
in a fan toe or a very low angle fan such as those
from the Flinders Range into Lake Frome in
Australia).
AF3 type
Irregular scour contacts and variability of fining-
upward sequences in conglomerates and pebbly
sandstones suggest deposition in braid channels.
The presence of regular trough crossbedding indi-
cates lower flow regime bedforms (dunes). Tabular
crossbed sets are consistent with transverse and
side-channel bars (see Cant, 1982). The lower flow
regime bedforms suggest more sustained flow,
deeper water, and possibly lower slopes than for
stream deposits in AF1 or AF2. The relatively
poor sorting in trough crossbeds and tabular sets
suggests relatively short-lived depositonal events.
AF4 type
Tabular beds of muddy sandstone with scattered
pebbles have two possible origins: (l) The presence
380 J,P. SMOOT

Fig.3. Comparison of (A) alluvial fan conglomerate (AF1) in the Passaic Formation, Newark basin, near Gladstone, New Jersey,
and (B) modern conglomerate of an alluvial fan in Saline Valley, California. Tightly packed and imbricated boulders and cobbles
(arrows) represent the outer margins of debris flow lobes. Surrounding pebble-cobble conglomerates have muddy matrix except for
thin layers of imbricated pebbles immediately overlying and adjacent to the outer margins of debris flows. Scale bars are I0 cm
long.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS 381

~m'. ., . .. • . . . , . - . . . . . ~ , . - O ? : o o,.e~-d~'~.,,~,-.°~z.~.,°...
i ............ , . " . .. , o ~ ' , , o o • Oo°O?o, ~ U . , , % " ~ ' o ' ~ . ~ , ,

rv.o .,~ , , ° o ~ " ~." o , 7 , . ~ - 6 " , ~ k"

. , . - ' " ' ~ ' ~ o - ~ ' ° ~ , , 2 . , a % ~ . . t ,k" z,

I'-
/" •. ,-; ° ".
" ,,-.
', c,..,, .,.o. .~ ;~ ,'' , ,, _ .. . ~~ . :. ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ . -- . " ~ .~" . " • : .
~.

.,~,:.., ,k. . ,.....'~,;..~

. . .'. .
• • , o • ~ " "
. • • , . . . ~ ~ '• "o. °' o.o e ' ~ -i~
~" , . ° ,

• * " • " ~ ~ $ ' 0 4 ~bO U • . ". , . . •

• • • /'~', .o,.o0 ~ " • _ ,.,~,." ,.-,';."_~:~

_ ...,:2:1 l ' . " ~ ~ ' , " - ~ -
"a,...,. o.:.,I )[.qZ-q-"~f~%.'k'.'.~:'- ~ :
~.-',~"-% o , , ' ~ ~ " . .'. ' . . "
..o,/.~"'..,n-- ....... ". ,, ,- .... .= ~ ° . °~- u.~.-: -. ./ -.. • ..

Fig.4. Photograph (A) and sketch (B) of alluvial fan conglomerate (AF2) in the Passaic Formation, Newark basin, near Milford,
New Jersey. Conglomerate layer to the right of man (1) fills a channel scour, whereas upper conglomerate layer (2) is a convex
lens that fines to the left, overlain by another conglomerate filling a channel scour (3). Muddy sandstone (stippled) between the
conglomeratic beds has horizontal lamination and abundant root structures. Vertical features indicate tubes (roots) filled with
nodular carbonate (caliche). Man to left for scale.

of abundant root structures and burrows in some distinction cannot be made and some mix of the
beds suggest that layering was destroyed by biotur- two processes is possible.
bation. (2) Discontinuous lenses of pebbles and Alluvial fan types AF1 and AF2 are the most
granules in a muddy matrix is consistent with common varieties, occurring in the conglomerates
deposition by hyperconcentrated flow (as in Bever- and sandstones near the border faults of every
age and Culbertson, 1964). In many outcrops this basin. The two types are typically interbedded, but
382
in some localities (for instance the Portland Forma-
tion, Hartford basin, LeTourneau, 1985) the AF2
appears to be a distal equivalent of AF1. AF2
appears to be more abundant than AF1 in the
Deep River, Danville-Dan River, Richmond, and
Taylorsville basins. LeTourneau (1985) noted that
the AF3 type of deposits occurred as discrete
stratigraphic units within thick sequences of AF1
and AF2 types in the Portland Formation. A
similar association may also be present in border
conglomerates of the Passaic Formation of the
Newark basin. AF4 type deposits are abundant in
the Deep River basin (Facies Association III,
TrCS2 of Hoffman and Gallagher, 1989), but are
relatively uncommon in the northern basins, except
as local thin beds.
Most of the alluvial fans were probably low-
angle deposits that extended well outside the pre-
sent basin margin as pediments. The preserved
deposits are mostly distal fan deposits that accu-
mulated along a series of stepped faults. Support
for this model includes: (1) AF1 debris flow depos-
its are typically of the type consistent with low-
angle fans or fan toe deposits (Smoot, 1982; Was-
son, 1982); (2) AF3 deposits require fans with very
low slopes; (3) the coarsest alluvial fan deposits
commonly rest unconformably on basement and
have very local provenance, but are surrounded
by finer-grained deposits with more mixed prove-
nance, conditions similar to locally exposed horst
blocks in pediment plains; (4) small patches of
alluvial fan deposits commonly occur outside the
basins often unconformably overlying basement;
and (5) thick fine-grained sedimentary beds, includ-
ing laminated shales, are intercalated with alluvial
fan deposits on a relatively small scale, suggesting
low initial slopes.
Alluvial fan deposits do not occur continuously
along the border faults of each basin. The alluvial
fan deposits may be absent due to folds exposing
fine-grained sediment layers that extended up to
the present fault boundary. This condition is easily
met if the present alluvial fan deposits represent
distal deposits of low-angle fans. In a few basins,
the folding of strata displays relationships suggest-
ing that fans were not present during deposition
of the initial sedimentary fill. This possibility will
be discussed later in this paper.
J.P.SMOOT
Fluvial deposit~: .
The variety of fluvial styles exhibited in the
Newark Supergroup include a wide range of depos-
its by braided, meandering, and possibly anasto-
mosing streams and rivers. Fluvial deposits are
distinguished from alluvial fan deposits by their
primary structures, areal extent, the thickness of
their channel-fill sequences, and/or the intimate as-
sociation of channel deposits with thick mudstone
deposits. Some of these deposits may actually re-
present very large, low-angle fans (terminal fans of
Friend, 1978), but they are of a considerably larger
scale than those associated with the border faults.
Some formal stratigraphic units are defined by
their fluvial (as opposed to lacustrine) origin, such
as the Pekin Formation in the Deep River basin
and the Stockton Formation in the Newark basin.
The maximum thicknesses of the Pekin Formation
is greater than 1200 m (Gore, 1986) and the
Stockton exceeds 1800 m (Olsen, 1980a). Fluvial
strata also occur within some primarily lacustrine
deposits, such as the northeasternmost portion of
the Passaic Formation in the Newark basin (Parker
et al., 1988), or the upper 1000 m of the Portland
Formation in the Hartford basin (Olsen et al.,
1989). Fluvial deposits are also intimately interbed-
ded with lacustrine deposits at the scale of tens of
meters.
F1 type
The typical poor-sorting in pebbly sandstone
associated with abundant horizontal lamination,
low-angle inclined lamination, and thin
mudcracked mudstone partings are indicative of
shallow, flash-flooding, and probably ephemeral
streams (Picard and High, 1973). Imbricated cob-
ble-pebble conglomerates and tabular sandstone
foresets that fine in the down-flow direction are
similar to braid channel bars (see Rust, 1972).
Sandstone and siltstone layers with ripple cross-
lamination and thin mudcracked mudstone part-
ings and abundant root casts are probably over-
bank deposits of channel complexes.
F2 type
The presence of regular decimeter-scale, trough
crossbedding (Fig.5) indicates the development of
lower flow-regime bedforms (dunes). Poorly de-
S E D I M E N T A R Y F A C I E S A N D D E P O S I T I O N A L E N V I R O N M E N T S O F EARLY M E S O Z O I C N E W A R K S U P E R G R O U P B A S I N S 383

,o
6

Fig.5. Photograph (A) and sketch (B) of poorly sorted fluvial pebbly sandstone (F2) in the Otterdale Sandstone, Richmond basin,
near Winterpock, Virginia. Trough cross-beds at level of hammer head are overlain by large-scale tabular foresets (left of hammer).
Smaller trough cross-beds overlie and occur to the right of the tabular sets. Area below the large trough cross-beds consists of
larger, poorly defined, trough crossbeds (poor sorting makes layers difficult to see). These overlie an imbricated cobble-boulder
conglomerate (not visible in the photo). Paleoflow was to the right and toward observer. Hammer is 30 cm long.

fined f i n i n g - u p w a r d sequences o f c o n g l o m e r a t e rivers. P o o r sorting (including the i m b r i c a t e d boul-

a n d s a n d s t o n e with r a n d o m l y i n t e r m i x e d t a b u l a r ders a n d cobbles) a n d thin f i n i n g - u p w a r d se-
c r o s s b e d sets o f different thicknesses a n d o r i e n t a - quences are consistent with flash-flooding streams
tions are consistent with d e p o s i t i o n b y b r a i d e d with relatively shallow d e p t h s ( 2 - 3 m).
384 J.P. SMOOT

F3 type that made F2-type deposits. The irregular, thick,

These sandstones and conglomerates are consid-
ered to be braided stream deposits like those of
F2, but differ by their greater thickness, better
sorting, and better development o f vertical se-
quences that consist o f decreasing grain size and
of decreasing thickness and width of trough
crossbedding (Fig.6) (for instance, the Wolfville
Formation, Fundy basin, Hubert and Florenza,
1988). These traits suggest that F3 deposits were
formed by braided streams that were deeper and
that had more sustained periods of flow than those
tabular foresets are similar to those of transverse
bars and sandsheets in sandy braided rivers (see
Cant and Walker, 1978).
F4 type
Well-defined fining-upward sequences of sand-
stone to silty mudstone, that systematically thin
upward (Fig.7), are interpreted as lateral accretion
sequences of point bars in meandering rivers. The
vertical succession of large trough crossbeds to
ripple cross-lamination and the upward increase

I SANDSTONE m MUDSTONE

[] PEBBLE
CONGLOMERATE
PLANTCOVER
[] COBBLE
CONGLOMERATE

Fig.6. Sketch from photograph of outcrop of crossbedded fluvial conglomerate (F3) in the Wolfville Formation, Fundy basin, near
Tennycape, Nova Scotia. Basal trough crossbeds consist of well-rounded and well-sorted cobbles and pebbles. Trough crossbeds
are smaller and finer grained upwards and are capped by sandstone and mudstone with abundant root structures and burrows.
Paleoflow was toward observer.

Fig.7. Photograph (A) and sketch (B) of fluvial sandstone and siltstone (F4) in the Stockton Formation, Newark basin, near
Stockton, New Jersey. Photo (A) shows upward fining from basal sandstone (light and blocky) to mudstone (dark), and basal
contact of next sequence (light). Note fining of sequence to the right. Paleoflow is to the right and toward viewer. Dashed lines
show relationships concealed beneath talus.
SEDIMENTARY" FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK S U P E R G R O U P BASINS 385

A Root structures

Ripple cross-lamination

Small-scale (10-20 cm thick) trough crossbed

Large-scale (>30 cm thick) trough crossbed

0 0 • • • °

Pebbles Coarse Fine Mudstone -

Sand Sand Siltstone
386
in bioturbation are consistent with this model. In
some cases, bioturbation by root structures extends
throughout the entire thickness of these sequences.
This may be due to water levels dropping low
enough to allow plants to colonize the entire
channel bottom. The sorting of sand and gravel
in F4 type deposits is consistent with sustained
flow with high suspended sediment loads. The
intercalation of rippled fine sandstone and lami-
nated siltstone and mudstone with the coarser
trough crossbeds is attributed to settling of
suspended sediment during slack flow periods.
The absence of desiccation cracks in thick mud-
stone partings suggests that these streams were
perennial.
F5 type
Inclined beds of sandstone grading up into
mudstone (Fig.8) are interpreted as lateral accre-
tion sets, similar to those illustrated by Stewart
(1983) or Stear (1983). Examples of these fluvial
deposits are provided by Smoot (1985) in the Deep
River basin and Smoot and Robinson (1988) in
the Culpeper basin. Mudstone partings are attrib-
uted to slack period settling of suspended sediment
in a perennial stream similar to the highly sinuous
Barwon River, New South Wales in Australia
(Taylor and Woodyer, 1978; Woodyer et al., 1979).
Draping of trough crossbeds with ripple cross-
laminated fine sand and silt and with mud are also
consistent with high suspended loads. The abun-
dance of carbonate granules apparently derived
from nodules in the surrounding mudstone and
mudstone intraclasts suggests that the flood-stage
streams were capable of moving coarser material
where available.
F6 type
Thick intervals of mudstone and sandstone with
abundant root casts and burrows are swampy
floodplain or shallow lake deposits with soils devel-
oped on them. Besides clay-lined root casts, soil
features include carbonate concretions, interpreted
as caliche nodules, and bowl-shaped, slickensided
surfaces with clay coatings, interpreted as compres-
sion structures from expanding and contracting
soils (see Gray and Nickelsen, 1989). Variations in
the size, shape, and density of carbonate nodules
J.P. SMOOT
in some cases reflect accumulation profiles (see
Gile et al., 1966). In many cases, however, there
are no obvious vertical successions (see Mermut
and Dasog, 1986). Coarsening-upward sequences
of mudstone to sandstone with climbing ripple
cross-lamination and tabular foresets are interpre-
ted as crevasse splays (as in Coleman, 1969 or
Smith, 1983). Thin layers of clay or calcareous
clay that contain lacustrine fossils may be deposits
of local floodplain lakes (see Gore, 1986), or parts
of larger lakes that have been dissected by rivers
during low stands (see Olsen et al., 1989).
F7 type
These poorly sorted conglomerates are difficult
to distinguish from AF1 deposits. They are distin-
guished by: (1) restriction to thin blankets of
conglomerate unconformably over pre-Mesozoic
bedrock; (2) conglomerate clasts that reflect only
the immediately underlying and adjacent bedrock;
and (3) matrix-supported conglomerates that lack
the grain distributions described for AF1 deposits.
These characteristics are consistent with deposits
of small local streams, or locally derived deposits
(like residual lag or colluvium) that move by creep.
Carbonate-clast conglomerates (like the Tuscorora
Member of the Manassas Sandstone, Culpeper
basin, Lee and Froelich, 1989) have irregular,
embayed contacts that are consistent with local
weathering and with short transport.
It is commonly difficult to distinguish between
FI and AF2 type deposits, and the F1 deposits
may represent parts of large, low-angle alluvial
fans. The best examples of this type of deposit are
in the New Haven Arkose (Hubert et al., 1978,
Stop 2) and in the upper Portland Formation
(Olsen et al., 1989, Stop 7.5) of the Hartford basin.
F2 deposits in several basins have been interpreted
as parts of alluvial fans (for instance, in the
Hammer Creek Formation, Newark and Gettys-
burg basins, McLaughlin, 1939, 1957; and in the
Stockton Formation, Newark basin, Turner-Pe-
terson, 1980), but their great lateral extent suggest
deposition by through-flowing braided streams (as
in the Stockton Formation) or by axial streams
terminating in lake deposits (as in the Hammer
Creek Formation). In the Durham subbasin of the
Deep River basin, F2 deposits grade downflow
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS 387

BASALT

U . . . . _ .

~ • ! " - " "- " m " "" : " "- : - "o" "--'" " "-
o o Qo o •
o ° • q P ~

Fig.8. Photograph (A) and sketch (B) of fluvial sandstone and siltstone (F5) in the Feltville Formation, Newark basin, near
Bernardsville, New Jersey. Inclined beds are lateral accretion sets that define three upward-fining sequences (numbered). Coarse-
grained beds are lighter colored than fine-grained beds. Beds in sequence 3 dip toward the observer. Trough crossbedding and
ripple cross-lamination in coarse beds indicate flow toward viewer for sequences 1 and 2, and to the right for sequence 3. Fine-
grained beds are always updip from coarse-grained deposits along each inclined set. Scale bar is 1 m long.

into F3 deposits (Lithofacies Association I o f
H o f f m a n and Gallagher, 1989). In the H a m m e r
Creek F o r m a t i o n and the Passaic F o r m a t i o n
(Units JTrp 1-4 o f Parker et al., 1988) in the
N e w a r k basin, F2 deposits a p p e a r to grade later-
ally into F5 deposits.
F3, F4, and F5 deposits appear to represent
lateral (on the scale o f tens o f kilometers) or
vertical (at the scale o f hundreds to thousands o f
meters) gradations in the Stockton F o r m a t i o n
(Newark basin), the New Oxford F o r m a t i o n (Get-
tysburg basin), and the Manassas Sandstone and
388
Balls Bluff Siltstone (Culpeper basin), In the Dur-
ham subbasin of the Deep River basin, conglomer-
atic F4 deposits grade to finer F4 deposits then to
F5 deposits from north to south (Lithofacies Asso-
ciation II of Hoffman and Gallagher, 1989). In
these cases, the trends suggest a change in stream
gradient with distance from a highland source area
and/or with aggrading of the basin floor.
Thick units (greater than 10 m) of F6 type
deposits are associated with all of the fluvial depos-
its except F1 and F7. This association is expected
in the meandering stream deposits (F4 and F5),
but is not typical of braided streams (F2 and F3)
(see Cant, 1982). The contacts between braided
stream conglomerates and sandstones are typically
abrupt, not only at the basal scour, but also at
the upper contact. Typically, there is no transition
unit of ripple cross-laminated fine-grained sand-
stone or siltstone between cross-bedded sandstone
or conglomerate and bioturbated muddy siltstone.
Two hypotheses, which are not mutually exclusive,
are proposed for this relationship. The first is that
the braided streams avulsed and were abandoned
on a muddy floodplain in a manner similar to
anastomosing streams (see Smith, 1983). This is
suggested in the lower fluvial units of the Deep
River basin (Pekin Formation, see Olsen et al.,
1989, stop 1.1; and Lithofacies Association ! of
Hoffman and GaUagher, 1989) where individual
F3 channel-fill sandstone sequences alternate irreg-
ularly with F6 mudstone and sandstone. Another
possibility is that the braided fluvial systems were
intermittently inundated by shallow lakes that
covered the braid plains with mud which was cut
by stream channels when the lake level fell. This
relationship is suggested by the alternations of 3-5
m thick, sheetlike F2 conglomerates alternating
with similar thickness of F6 mudstone and sand-
stone in the Stockton Formation (Solebury Mem-
ber of McLaughlin, 1945) and in the Hammer
Creek Formation of the Newark basin. Al-
ternations at the scale of hundreds of meters
between coarser grained F2 and F4 deposits and
finer grained, bioturbated F5 and F6 deposits in
the Stockton Formation (informal members of
McLaughlin, 1945) also suggest an external influ-
ence, such as lake level changes, on the fluvial
deposits.
J.P. SMOOT
F7 deposits occur as the basal unit of the
Gettysburg basin, the Culpeper basin, and the
Deep River basin. These conglomeratic deposits
are characteristically discontinuous in distribution
and highly variable in thickness. Limestone con-
glomerate sequences at the base of the Culpeper
and Gettysburg basins are abruptly (possibly un-
conformably) overlain by F3 pebbly sandstones
dominated by rounded quartz pebbles, suggesting
a radical change in the source area and in the scale
of drainage.
Lacustrine deposits
Lacustrine deposits, as used in this paper, are
restricted to predominately siltstone and mudstone
beds that are not intimately associated with fluvial
sandstone and conglomerate. Possible lacustrine
mudstone and siltstones associated with fluvial
sandstones are included in F6 deposits, and coal
deposits are discussed separatelylSiltstones and
mudstones with sedimentary features indicating
prolonged subaerial exposure and, in some cases,
the effects of soil-like processes, are included in
this facies because they are commonly interbedded
at the meter scale with demonstrably subaqueous
lake deposits and because their depositional setting
was either superimposed on subaqueous deposits
or reflects intermittent lake conditions.
Lacustrine deposits are the dominant sedi-
mentary rocks in several basins, such as major
portions of the Lockatong and Passaic Formations
in the Newark basin which are over 4 km thick
with an areal extent of more than 70,000 km 2
(Olsen, 1980b). A characteristic of the lacustrine
deposits in many basins is a pervasive cyclieity
(Fig.9) reflecting change from subaqueous to sub-
aerial conditions (Van Houten, 1962, 1964; Olsen,
1986; Smoot and Olsen, 1988), attributed to the
rise and fall of lake levels in response to changes
in climate. These cycles are called Van Houten
cycles by Olsen (1985). Van Houten (1962, 1964)
and Olsen (1986) documented several levels of
cyclicity that they correlated to periodicities in the
Earth's orbital mechanics (Milankovitch cycles).
Lake margin elastic and fluvial deposits may also
form parts of these cycles.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONALENVIRONMENTSOF EARLY MESOZOICNEWARKSUPERGROUPBASINS
Fig.9. Van Houten cycle in lacustrine mudstone and siltstone in the Balls Bluff Siltstone, Culpeper basin, near Stevensburg, Virginia.
Base of cycle at hammer head. Sedimentary Sequence with facies types is shown schematically in sketch. H a m m e r is 30 cm long.
L1 type
Flat, continuous lamination (Fig. 10) characteris-
tic of this type of deposit reflects deposition of silt,
clay, or carbonate by settling within standing
water. Coarse graded layers were deposited as
turbidites (see Hentz, 1985), and pinch-and-swell
laminae were formed by gentle wave reworking
(rolling grain ripples, Harms et al., 1982, pp. 2-27).
Carbonate units represent precipitation at the
water-air interface or biogenic material. High or-
ganic contents indicate high biogenic productivity
preserved under reducing conditions, and the pres-
ervation of articulated fish and reptile skeletons in
microlaminated units suggests deep, stratified lake
conditions (Olsen et al., 1989). Thicker laminated
deposits commonly show evidence of bioturbation
(Olsen, 1984) which may have destroyed previous
finer layering. Some organic-rich units have been
traced laterally over the length of basins (Olsen,
389
A
L6
A
V V
V
V V 1_2
V
V V
I_1
t_6
1988; Olsen et al., 1989), and the distribution of
other units suggest they have similar great lateral
extents, indicating lakes of considerable area. L1
deposits accumulated under continuous subaque-
ous conditions, but probably represent a variety
of water depths. Olsen (1980b) argued from the
distribution of microlaminites (layering less than
0.1 mm thick) in the Newark basin that they
represent depths exceeding 100 m, although he
neglected the possible effect of sediment binding
by organic mats (Olsen, 1985). The presence of
pelletal material within carbonate concretions in
some organic-rich laminated units suggests that
the fine lamination is in part compactional and
may represent shallower water conditions (Porter
and Robbins, 1981; Gore, 1986). L1 deposits may
be very fossiliferous or may be devoid of fossils.
Elevated lake salinities have been postulated for
the absence of fossils in some cases, supported by
390
Fig.10. Laminated,organic-rich,calcareousmudstone(L1) in the Towaco Formation, Newark basin, from a core taken near Wayne,
New Jersey. Note small-scalescours and load structures at the base of the two thickestsilt layers(light); these are probably deposits
of turbidity currents. Scale bar is 0.5 cm long.
an abundance of sulfide minerals (interpreted as
indicating elevated dissolved sulfate, Olsen, 1984)
and the presence of crystal pseudomorphs interpre-
ted as former evaporites (for instance, Hubert et
al., 1978; Parnell, 1983; Gore, 1989).
L2 type
The characteristic bioturbation of these deposits
may consist only of burrows or of a mixture of
burrows and root structures. Pinch-and-swell and
lenticular bedding reflect oscillatory wave trans-
port separated by heavily bioturbated clay-rich
beds. Remnant patches of layering in some massive
units suggests that the unit was originally lami-
nated to thin-bedded and was subsequently biotur-
bated. The common soft-sediment deformation
features, lacustrine fossils, and preserved organic
matter indicate a subaqueous deposit. Although
these deposits probably represent a variety of water
depths, a generally shallower water condition than
for L1 deposits is suggested by: (1) the thickness
J.P.SMOOT
and frequency of sandy beds with wave-formed
sedimentary features, (2) the common association
with polygonal cracks indicating intermittent sub-
aerial exposure, (3) the common association with
root structures, also indicating subaerial exposure,
and (4) in vertical sequences, these deposits are
commonly situated between L1 deposits and de-
posits indicating constant subaerial exposure (L4,
L5, L6).
L3 type
The layering in these deposits (Fig.11) indicates
tractive currents operating on firm or dry surfaces.
Some wave reworking of sandy beds is indicated
by pinch-and-swell layering, but the scours and
mud intraclasts are more consistent with sheet
floods. The frequency and complexity of polygonal
cracks in these deposits are also consistent with
subaerial conditions alternating with subaqueous
conditions. Other than occasional reptile tracks,
fossils are generally absent.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS 391

Fig.1 I. Comparison of (A) lacustrine mudstone with irregular thin beds and polygonal cracks (L3) in the Gettysburg Formation,
Gettysburg basin, near Heidlersburg, Pennsylvania, and (B) trench through a modern ephemeral lake deposit in Mud Lake, Nevada.
Vertical disruptions in both pictures are mud- and silt-filled polygonal cracks. Note convex-upward humps in thick layers (arrows)
resulting from erosion of mudcrack polygons by lake water partially filling cracks. Scale bars are 5 cm long.

L4 type 1988). The angular blocks in breccia-like fabrics

Abundant, small, angular, polygonal cracks
characteristic of these mudstones (Fig.12) indicate
desiccation under primarily subaerial conditions,
similar to those found in modern playa dry mud-
flats (Smoot and Katz, 1982; Smoot and Olsen,
consisting of L2 or L3 deposits indicate old lake
bottoms that have been disrupted by repeated
wetting and drying. The curved slickensided planes
also support an interpretation of these types of
conditions. The abundant cement-filled ovate to
392 J.P. SMOOT

Fig.12. Comparison of (A) lacustrine mudstone with small, jagged, polygonal cracks and cement-filled vugs (light o~;oid features)
(L4) in the Lockatong Formation, Newark basin, near Byram, New Jersey, and (B) modern dry mudflat deposit in North Panamint
Valley, California. Black and gray ovoid features in the modern playa sample are open vesicles which are equivalent to the cement
filled vugs. Vertical structures in both pictures are polygonal cracks filled with vesicular silt and mud. Prominent layer in both
samples is comprised of poorly sorted silt, deposited by sheetflood, and disrupted by polygonal cracks. The Lockatong siltstone
layer is cemented by and partially replaced by ferroan dolomite. Note that angular clumps of clay are dark in (A) and light colored
in (B). Scale bar is 0.5 cm long.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
linear vugs are similar to vesicles formed in slowly
aggrading dry mudflats. This type of mudstone
fabric was called crumb fabric in Smoot and Olsen
(1988), but the term is now abandoned due to
confusion with its use in the literature for deposits
of different origin. The preservation of silt layers
disrupted by polygonal cracks and surrounded by
this fabric supports the interpretation of these
deposits as aggradational rather than as a soil
formed on an older lake deposit. No fossils have
been found in L4 deposits.
L5 type
These poorly sorted sandy mudstones (Fig.13)
resemble deposits formed by sediment accumulat-
ing on efflorescent salt crusts (Smoot and Castens-
Seidell, 1982; Smoot and Olsen, 1988). These also
include features indicating deformation by the
growth and dissolution of efllorescent salt crusts.
Ripple lenses with arched crests and distorted
boundaries are similar to modern examples of
ripples deformed by salt crusts, and polygonal
patterns of upturned sandy beds are consistent
with deformation by polygonal crust patterns (at-
tributed to intrasedimentary growth of gypsum by
Mertz and Hubert, 1990). Irregular thickening of
bedding associated with small faults is typical of
syndepositional dissolution of efflorescent salt
crusts. The inferred depositional environment is in
saline mudflats. No fossils have been found in L5
deposits.
L6 type
The abundant tube shapes characteristic of this
type of deposit (Fig.14) are interpreted as traces
of former roots. The plants responsible for these
structures are not known, although two cases of
upright carbonized remains of small trees or shrubs
have been found overlying these deposits. In addi-
tion to root structures, other features consistent
with soil formation include carbonate nodules,
curved slickensided surfaces, remnant patches of
original layering, and oriented clays lining tubes,
cracks, and coating grains. Deep, narrow, polygo-
nal cracks resemble some of the polygonal fractures
also common in soils (i.e. the prismatic peds of
Retallack, 1988). Soil profiles are suggested by
upward increase in the diameter of tubes and in
393
the abundance of carbonate nodules in deposits
gradationally overlying L2, L3, and L4 deposits.
In some cases, vertical aggradation is suggested by
the presence of well preserved sandy interbeds,
penetrated by root structures. The L6 type deposits
may be similar to modern vegetated playas in West
Texas (Allen et al., 1972). Some articulated reptile
skeletons have been found in these deposits (Smoot
and Olsen, 1988). Burrows, particularly the ichno-
genus Scoyenia, are locally abundant.
A variety of vertical successions of the different
types of lacustrine deposits have been illustrated
by Smoot and Olsen (1988). These neither repre-
sent the only variations nor include the variety of
sequences containing lake margin clastic and flu-
vial deposits. The repeated theme of cycles is the
transgression of lakes then a regression leading to
subaerial exposure. L1 deposits grading upward
to L2 and L6 deposits dominate the lacustrine
cycles of the Jurassic formations in the Culpeper
basin, the Newark basin (except for parts of the
Boonton Formation), the Hartford basin (except
for parts of the East Berlin and Portland Forma-
tions), and the Fundy basin. Alternations of these
types of lacustrine deposits are also common in
the late Carnian Cumnock Formation (Deep River
basin), the middle to late Carnian Cow Branch
Formation (Danville-Dan River basin), the early
to middle Carnian Vinita beds (Richmond basin),
and the middle Carnian Falling Creek Member of
the Doswell Formation (Taylorsville basin). LI
and L2 deposits also dominate the lower part of
the Lockatong Formation (late Carnian, Newark
basin). L3 and L4 deposits are common in the late
Carnian to Norian deposits of the upper Locka-
tong Formation and the Passaic Formation (New-
ark basin), the Heidlersburg Member of the
Gettysburg Formation (Gettysburg basin), the
Balls Bluff Siltstone (Culpeper basin), and the
Stoneville Formation (Danville-Dan River basin),
and are present in the Jurassic East Berlin and
Portland Formations (Hartford basin). L5 deposits
dominate the Norian to lower Hettangian Blomi-
don Formation (Fundy basin) and are present in
the Jurassic Boonton Formation (Newark basin).
L6 deposits are more abundant in the late Norian
of the Newark, Gettysburg, and Culpeper basins
than in the early Norian. These deposits suggest
SEDIMENTARY FACIESAND DEPOSITIONALENVIRONMENTSOF EARLY MESOZOICNEWARKSUPERGROUPBASINS 395

Fig.14, Massive silty mudstone with abundant cement-filled tubes (L6) in the Balls Bluff Siltstone, Culpeper basin, near Gainesville,
Virginia. Prominent white vertical feature is a tube that tapers downward and has several small lateral bifurcations (root structure).
Other white dots are also tubes or small carbonate nodules. Dark polygonal cracks are due to surface weathering of the rock. Scale
bar is 2 cm long.

changes in climate from wetter (L1, L2, L6) to
dryer (L3, L4, L5) conditions during sedimentation
in the basins (see also Cornet, 1977, pp. 61-71).
A possible paleolatitude change from wetter condi-
tions to the south and dryer to the north is also
suggested Hubert et al., 1978; Smoot and Olsen,
1988).
Lake margm clastic deposits
Lake margin clastic deposits include sandstones
and conglomerates associated with fine-grained
lacustrine units that are interpreted as having been
deposited in deltas or by wave action (Smoot et
al., 1985). These deposits are transitional to alluvial
fan and fluvial deposits as well as to lacustrine
deposits and in many cases the distinction is diffi-
cult to make. This is particularly true where lake
margin clastic deposits are associated with the
cyclic lake sequences. Lake margin clastic deposits
have sedimentary features indicating deposition by
unidirectional flow into standing water or deposi-
tion by wave action, and they are intercalated with
lacustrine units at a scale of tens of meters to a
few meters. Deltaic sequences commonly consist
of graded beds of ripple cross-laminated sandstone
and siltstone exhibiting an upward increase in the
angle of ripple climb, upward increase in the
preservation of the ripple stoss side, and a change
from trough-shaped scours to elongate planar rip-

Fig. 13. Comparison of (A) cross-section of poorly sorted sandy mudstone (L5) in the Blomidon Formation, Fundy basin, in
Blomidon Provincial Park, Nova Scotia, to (B) and (C) cross-sections of modern etttorescent salt-encrusted saline mudflat deposits
of Saline Valley, California. Irregular patches of coarser sand (light colored in all photos) were formed by sand trapped in surface
irregularities of the salt crust. Small, bright white areas in (B) are aggregates of microcrystalline gypsum and halite; dark circles in
(A) are cavities formed by dissolution of gypsum. Note the cuspate contact of sand against mud in (C) and compare to bottom
contact of sandstone patch in (A) marked by arrows. Scale bars are 1 cm long.
396
pie sets (reflecting the change from three-dimen-
sional crestlines to two-dimensional crestlines; see
Harms et al., 1982, figs. 3-7). This succession is
consistent with ripple formation under conditions
of decelerating flow in standing water, such as on
delta fronts (Jopling and Walker, 1968). The climb-
ing ripples are also commonly associated with soft-
sediment deformation structures. Wave deposits
are recognized by their sorting and their associa-
tion with oscillatory ripple structures.
LM1 type
These deposits are the most similar to fluvial
sandstones and siltstones, and are distinguished
primarily by their direct association with lacustrine
deposits. Important sedimentary features for iden-
tifying these deposits are: (1) abundance of climb-
ing ripple cross-lamination showing deceleration-
of-flow sequences, (2) abundance of soft-sediment
deformation features, and (3) their occurrence as
parts of sequences coarsening-upward from lacus-
trine deposits (L1 and L2). The sedimentary struc-
ture~ and vertical succession are consistent with
delto fronts, distributary mouth bars, crevasse
splays, and distributary channels in river-domi-
nated deltas (Coleman and Prior, 1982).
LM2 type
The stacks of depositionally inclined sandstone
sets characteristic of these deposits (Fig. 15) define
coarsening-upward sequences as much as 40 m
thick. Low-angle inclined sets (2-10 ° primary
dips), dominated by siltstone and fine sandstone,
and steeper foresets (10-20" primary dips), domi-
nated by medium to coarse sandstone and pebble
conglomerate, are similar to Gilbert-type delta
front deposits (Gilbert, 1890; Jopling and Walker,
1968). Coarsening-upward sequences consist of
lacustrine siltstones (L1 and L2) overlain by fine-
grained sandstone exhibiting low-angle foresets, in
turn overlain by medium- to coarse-grained sand-
stone with high-angle foresets; each foreset is sepa-
rated by a scour surface showing concentrations
of root structures. This type of sequence is similar
to Holocene delta deposits in the closed basins of
Walker Lake and Pyramid Lake, Nevada, and
Mono Lake, California (Smoot and Lowenstein,
in press). The stacking of delta front foresets
J.P.SMOOT
occurs when rising lake level, in response to
increased river discharge, covers the former delta
topsets so that the delta front deposits build on
those surfaces. When river discharge decreases,
lake level falls and the river erodes the proximal
delta deposits, and foreset deposition occurs over
more distal deposits. Topset channel deposits are
typically thin and restricted to local channel scours,
since lake level rises and drowns the topset each
time the river floods.
LM3 type
Graded sheets of sandstone dominated by climb-
ing .ripple cross-lamination that characterize these
deposits (Fig. 16) differ from crevasse splay deposits
in rivers (F6) and delta topsets (LM 1) in that the
ripple cross-lamination shows little variation in
orientation over many square kilometers and tens
of meters of vertical section, reflecting the sheet-
like geometry. Polygonal cracks separating succes-
sive sheets indicate periods of subaerial exposure
between deposition of each thin bed. LM3 deposits
are commonly intercalated with or laterally equiva-
lent to L3, L4, and L5 deposits and also comprise
the tops of Van Houten cycles. LM3 deposits are
similar to sheet deltas formed in modern playa
mudflats. Sheetdeltas form at the intersection of
rapidly rising shallow lakes in response to flash
floods in streams or to sheetfloods (Smoot, 1985;
Smoot and Lowenstein, in press).
LM4 type
These deposits typically occur where lacustrine
deposits (L1 and L2) are intercalated with alluvial
fan conglomerates (AF1, AF2, and AF3). The
characteristic coarsening-upward sequences of
well-sorted sandstone and pebble conglomerates
with abundant oscillatory ripple structures, deci-
meter-scale tabular foresets, and conglomerates
with patchy, well-sorted matrix (Fig. 17) are similar
to modern wave-built bars and beach fiats on
alluvial fans in the Walker Lake and Pyramid Lake
basins of Nevada (Smoot and LeTourneau, 1989).
LM5 type
These deposits form coarsening-upward se-
quences similar to LM4, but the coarsest portions
are medium to coarse sandstone. Abundant thin
 ~7
~r

>
7~
\ .<

Z
>

70
O
,.,.,,O. Z

$
I 1 Meter B
.<

©
N

m
D II 70
SANDSTONE RIPPLE CROSS-LAMINATED MUDSTONE
SILTSTONE t~

70
70
O

Fig.15.Sketch from photos (A) of stacked inclined sets of sandstone (LM2) in the Passaic Formation, Newark basin, near Secaucus, New Jersey. Steep, coarse sandstone
forescts to the left are dominated by planar lamination; low-angle, fine sandstone and siltstone foresets are dominated by climbing ripple cross-lamination. Laminated silty
mudstone occurs at the toes of somc siltstonc foresets. Notc coarsening upward sequence formed by stacks of foresets. (B) Photo of area shown in box. Drawing has a 10%
vertical exaggeration.
-...1
398 J.P. SMOOT

Fig.16 (A). Van Houten cycles in which the upper parts consist of sheets of thin-bedded sandstone with mudstone partings (LM3)
in the East Berlin Formation, Hartford basin, near East Berlin, Connecticut. Each sandstone bed contains climbing ripple cross-
lamination and is capped by a mudcracked mudstone parting. Two complete cycles with L1 shales at the base are numbered. People
to right for scale. (B). Trench cross-section of Holocene sheet delta in Coyote Valley, California. Sand with climbing ripple cross-
lamination overlies soft-sediment deformation structures into underlying mudcracked mud. The sand layer is overlain by a
mudcracked mud drape that was disturbed by digging. Coin is about 2.5 cm in diameter.

beds o f s a n d s t o n e with oscillatory ripple cross-
l a m i n a t i o n indicate the p r e d o m i n a n c e of wave
processes. Decimeter-scale t a b u l a r sets a n d convex-
u p w a r d p l a n a r sets resemble wave-formed s i n u o u s
crested b a r f o r m s or possibly h u m m o c k y cross-
strata ( H a r m s et al., 1975, pp. 87-89). L M 5 depos-
its are p r o b a b l y wave-formed sandsheets or b a r
complexes formed in relatively shallow lakes.
S a n d s t o n e beds within the C u m n o c k F o r m a t i o n
in the Deep River basin ( R e i n e m u n d , 1955) a n d
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS 399

Fig.17. Comparison of (A) shoreline conglomerate (LM4) in the Portland Formation, Hartford basin, near Meriden, Connecticut,
and (B) modern shoreline conglomerate from Pyramid Lake, Nevada. In both cases, unsorted coarse-grained clasts (pebble- to
boulder-sized) are too large for wave transport. They are surrounded by sand and granules segregated by waves into well-sorted
patches. Scale bars are 1 cm long.

the Vinita beds in the R i c h m o n d basin (Cornet, represent delta aggradation reflecting the local lake
in Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 4 7 - 5 2 ) suggest L M I depth. Within the cyclic lacustrine deposits o f the
deposits that form coarsening-upward sequences Culpeper, Gettysburg, Newark~ Hartford, and
on the scale o f tens o f meters. These p r o b a b l y Deerfield basins, the L M I coarsening-upward se-
400
quences are generally thin (less than 10 m), appa-
rently reflecting the outbuilding of bird-foot deltas
as lake levels fell (see Midland Formation in the
Culpeper basin, Smoot, in Lee and Froelich, 1989,
pp. 47-52). Many sandstones and conglomerates
interpreted as fluvial channel deposits (F3, F4, F5)
may be deposits of distributary channels if the
surrounding mudstones (F6) are actually shallow
lake deposits. For example, in the Durham sub-
basin of the Deep River basin, Olsen et al. (1989,
pp. 29-31) describe intercalated Carnian mud-
stones and fluvial sandstones that may represent
a swampy floodplain with local small lakes (see
Gore, 1986) or fluvial and deltaic sedimentation
as basin-filling lakes rose and fell. Another example
is in the Triassic Dry Fork Formation of the Dan
River-Danville basin (Stop 2.1 of Olsen et al.,
1989). It contains poorly sorted, trough
crossbedded, conglomeratic sandstones with in-
terbeds of red sandy mudstone with root struc-
tures, but at least one conglomeratic sandstone
lens has meter-scale flame structures from the
underlying red mudstone and abundant sandstone
fluidization dikes into the underlying mudstone,
suggesting subaqueous deposition, perhaps in a
braid delta or fan delta distributary channel (as in
McPherson et al., 1987). This portion of the Dry
Fork Formation appears to be laterally equivalent
to cyclic lacustrine strata of the Carnian Cow
Branch Formation, and one thin black shale bed
was found underlying the red mudstone. Hentz
(1985) has described similar conglomeratic beds
with fluidization structures in the Jurassic Waterfall
Formation of the Culpeper basin.
LM2 type deposits have been identified at several
localities in the Passaic Formation of the Newark
basin, including deposits laterally equivalent to the
Lockatong Formation (Smoot, in press). McDon-
ald and LeTourneau (1988) described an example
of this type of deposit in the Jurassic Portland
Formation of the Hartford basin. Turner-Peterson
and Smoot (1985) described a deposit in the upper
Stockton Formation (Newark basin) that is similar
to the LM2 deposits, but it may be a large crevasse
splay deposit. In the Jurassic Feltville Formation
(Newark basin) at one locality, a variation on the
LM2 deposit is composed only of stacks of low-
angle inclined sandstone beds with climbing ripple
J.P. SMOOT
cross-lamination. It also resembles the LM3 depos-
its, as each layer contains root structures and
desiccation cracks at the top.
LM3 deposits have been recognized in the Pas-
saic Formation of the Newark basin (Smoot, in
press). Several other localities have deposits that
were probably formed in the same manner, includ-
ing sandstone sheets in the Blomidon Formation
(Fundy basin) interpreted as sheet flood deposits
by Hubert and Hyde (1982), and ripple cross-
laminated sandstones in the regressive portions of
the East Berlin Formation (Hartford basin) at
Stops 7.2 and 8.1 of Olsen et al. (1989). Thick
sequences of climbing ripple cross-laminated sand-
stone and siltstone are common in the regressive
portions of lake cycles in many of the basins (for
instance, Smoot and Olsen, 1988, figs. 10-20; or
Fedosh and Smoot, 1988). These deposits may be
LM3 deltaic deposits, low-angle LM2 deposits, or
fluvial overbank deposits (F6).
Wave-formed deposits (LM4 and LM5) have
been recognized only in a few localities. LM4
deposits are recognized in the Portland Formation
of the Hartford basin (LeTourneau and Smoot,
1985), the Passaic Formation (Stop 5.6 of Olsen
et al., 1989) and the Towaco Formation (Stop 6.1
of Olsen et al., 1989) of the Newark basin, and
the Stoneville Formation of the Dan River-Dan-
ville basin (Smoot and LeTourneau, 1989). LM5
deposits occur in the regressive portions of lake
cycles in the Passaic Formation (Newark basin)
and the Portland Formation (Hartford basin)
where they crop out near the border faults. Similar
deposits in the Turners Falls Sandstone of the
Deerfield basin (Stop 8.4 in Olsen et al., 1989) are
interbedded with lacustrine deposits (L1, L2,
and L6) and possible deltaic deposits (LM2 or
LM3). Many sandstone beds that intertongue with
lacustrine cycles in the Lockatong Formation
near the northeastern end of the Newark basin
(fig. 33 of Olsen, 1980b) also appear to be LM5
deposits.
Other significant sedimentary features
A number of sedimentary features that represent
significant variations in the depositional record do
not fit easily into this scheme of mappable sedi-
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
mentary facies. Coal deposits, eolian deposits, and
evaporites are discussed separately in the context
of the facies described above. The role of diagenesis
in the sedimentary record of the Newark Super-
group is also discussed in this section.
Coal deposits
Coal beds have been reported from C.arnian
strata in the Deep River, Dan River-Danville,
Richmond, Taylorsville, Farmville and Briery
Creek basins (Robbins et al., 1988). Coal beds are
typically less than 1 m thick, but coal with bed
thicknesses of several meters in the Richmond and
Deep River basins was mined commercially (Rob-
bins et al., 1988). Individual coal beds appear to
be discontinuous, although the Coal Measures of
the Richmond basin are correlative throughout the
basin (see Cornet, in Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 47-52)
and coal-bearing units in the Deep River basin
have been correlated over an area of about 190
km 2 (Reinemund, 1955). Variations in the thick-
ness of coal beds have been attributed to local
basin development by syndepositional faulting in
the Richmond basin (Goodwin et al., 1985,
pp. 45-49; Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 52-53) and the
Deep River basin (Robbins et al., 1988). Some of
the variations in thickness may also be related to
filling of channels and other topographic features
(see Lorenz, 1988, p. 172).
Summaries of the sedimentary associations of
coal beds are provided by Robbins et al. (1988)
and Lorenz (1988). The coal-bearing units either
overlie or underlie sedimentary units that contain
lacustrine shales (L1 and L2). In the Deep River
basin, the coal beds are intercalated with organic-
rich lacustrine black shales (L2 and some L1) and
commonly contain or are bounded by layers rich
in siderite, ammonium sulphate, and phosphate
called blackband (Reinemund, 1955). Robbins et
al. (1988) interpreted these coal deposits as having
formed in lake margin swamps that prograded
across a shallow anoxic lake during periods of
tectonic stability. Sandstones associated with the
coal beds appear to be deltaic (LMI) suggesting
that some of the coals may be related to delta
topsets. The lacustrine association with coal is not
as pronounced in the other basins, and the coals
401
are typically intercalated with root-disrupted mud-
stone and ripple cross-laminated sandstone (F6).
These may represent swampy floodplains (see
Ressetar and Taylor, 1988) or lake margin deposits.
Eolian deposits
Eolian deposits are mostly restricted to the
Fundy basin (Hubert and Mertz, 1980, 1984),
where well-sorted sandstones have crossbed sets as
much as 4 m thick (Fig.18). These large-scale
crossbeds are interpreted by Hubert and Mertz
(1980, 1984) as eolian dune deposits. These depos-
its contain a number of features indicative of their
eolian origin including: (1) layering styles suggest-
ing grain flows, settle out, and climbing translatent
ripples (Hunter, 1977); (2) well-rounded, well-
sorted grains with an absence of mica, even though
adjacent fluvial beds are commonly very mica-
ceous; (3) reverse-graded ripple lenses with long
wavelengths and low amplitudes (Sharp, 1963;
Fryberger et al., 1979); and (4) rapid alternations
of grain size in lamination (Fryberger and Schenk,
1988). Hubert and Mertz (1980, 1984) interpret
layers of polished and faceted pebbles associated
with these eolian sandstones as wind deflation lags
of fluvial deposits consisting of ventifacts. Most
of the Fundy basin eolian sandstones are interca-
lated with fluvial deposits of the Late Carnian,
uppermost Wolfville Formation (mostly with F1
and F3 deposits), but they also occur with lacus-
trine deposits in the mostly Norian Blomidon
Formation (L5 deposits), and overlie regressive
lacustrine sequences near the base of the Hettan-
gian Scots Bay and McCoy Brook Formations
(Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 152-161). A 3-m thick
sandstone bed near the top of the Upper Triassic
New Haven Arkose in the Hartford basin has the
same sedimentary features described above as indi-
cating an eolian origin. This sandstone is overlain
and underlain by fluvial deposits (F5). It is sheet-
like, consisting of low-angle foresets that change
laterally to steep foresets (3 m thick). This resem-
bles a sandsheet deposit (see Fryberger et al., 1979;
Kocurek and Nielsen, 1986). Associated with this
sandstone deposit and with similar types in the
Fundy basin are layers of mudstone broken into
polygonal curls, similar to flood deposits in inter-
402
ii!iiiii!ii!!i!i!i!iiiiii
i ii!iiiii!i;ii!iiiiiiiiiiii!iiii?i
i +¸¸
Fig.18. Eolian sandstone with large foresets in the WolfvilleFormation, Fundybasin, near Red Head, Nova Scotia. Sbme of the
bounding surfaceshave polishedpebbles interpretedas ventifacts.
dune areas (Glennie, 1970, pp. 52-55). Similar clay
curl beds surrounded by coarse sandstone have
been found in the Jurassic East Berlin and Portland
Formations in the Hartford basin, the Upper
Triassic strata of the .Passaic Formation in the
Newark basin, and possibly in the Upper Triassic
strata of the Gettysburg and Culpeper basins.
These may also reflect limited eolian activity.
Evaporites and other indicators of salinity
Evaporites have been reported from almost all
of the Newark Supergroup basins. The most fre-
quently cited occurrences are casts or molds of
euhedral crystals in mudstone or shale, that are
pseudomorphic after gypsum, glauberite, or hal-
ite (Wherry, 1916; Stose, 1919; Hawkins, 1928;
Schaller, 1932; Van Houten, 1965; Thayer, 1970;
Handy, 1976; Hubert et al., 1976, 1978; Hubert
and Hyde, 1982; Parnell, 1983; Demicco and Gierl-
owski-Kordesch, 1986; Gore, 1988, 1989; Smoot
and Olsen, 1988). Gypsum has also been reported
from cores in several basins (Culpeper basin, Lee
and Froelich, 1989; Deep River basin, Oisen et al.,
J.P.SMOOT
: iii!il ¸¸ i ...................
in press) and in trace amounts in surface deposits
(see Gore, 1989). Anhydrite, thenardite, and halite
have been reported in trace quantities in rocks of
the Fundy basin (Hubert and Hyde, 1982; Mertz
and Hubert, 1990) and euhedral to subhedral
crystals of gypsum (as much as 1 cm long) are
common in surface exposures of the Blomidon
Formation. Demicco and Gierlowski-Kordesch
(1986) mention molds of radiating crystals in the
East Berlin Formation of the Hartford basin that
resemble trona crystals.
The Fundy basin contains the most extensive
occurrences of evaporite deposits. These deposits
are mostly restricted to the Norian-Hettangian
Blomidon Formation. The evaporite deposits in-
clude sedimentary structures indicative of efflo-
rescent salt crusts (L5), numerous gypsum crystals
and crystal molds, and lenticular breccia bodies
that may represent collapse of strata following
dissolution of buried evaporite beds (Olsen et al.,
1989, pp. 143-144). Evaporite crystals and crystal
molds have three major modes of occurrence. In
the first instance, subhedral to anhedral discoidal
crystals are randomly distributed in sandy mud-
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTSOF EARLY MESOZOICNEWARK SUPERGROUPBASINS 403

stone transitional between lake (L3 and L2) or
possible sheet delta (LM3) deposits and overlying
L5 deposits. The crystals are commonly smaller
and more anhedral upwards in these sequences.
This occurrence is similar to gypsum crystal distri-
butions in modern saline mudflats (Smoot and
Lowenstein, in press). In the second case, euhedral
crystals are densely packed in a sandy mudstone
matrix underlying the brecciated mudstone lenses
that are interpreted as solution collapse features.
The euhedral crystal concentrations locally define
cylindrical areas, and the crystals may have precipi-
tated from the brines produced by dissolution of
overlying evaporite beds. This would suggest that
dissolution occurred while the sediments were still
soft. In the third situation, euhedral crystals and
fibrous crystal masses follow fractures or faults.
These evaporites probably represent remobiliza-
tion of the minerals during deformation and may
have been precipitated long after deposition and
burial. These are the only types of evaporites that
also occur in other formations of the Fundy basin.
Euhedral crystal casts and molds in mudstones
and shales are common in the Deerfield, Hartford,
Newark, Gettysburg, and Culpeper basins. These
crystal shapes are commonly filled with cements
that include calcite, dolomite, analcime, and albite,
or combinations of these minerals. Crystal-rich
deposits are characteristically poorly exposed, so
that detailed studies of their distribution have not
been made. The crystal shapes may be bent or
flattened, suggesting compaction before the crys-
tals were replaced.
Irregular zones of euhedral tabular to prolate
crystals, commonly forming radial sprays (Fig.19),
are common in the mainly Norian Balls Bluff
Siltstone, Culpeper basin (Gore, 1988, 1989), Get-
tysburg Formation, Gettysburg basin (Stose,
1919), and Passaic Formation, Newark basin
(Wherry, 1916; Hawkins, 1928; Schaller, 1932; Van
Houten, 1965). The crystals in these zones are
typically about the same size and apparently the
same mineralogy, usually interpreted as gypsum
or glauberite. Evaporite crystal molds in the Juras-
sic Turners Falls Sandstone, Deerfield basin
(Handy, 1976) and East Berlin Formation, Hart-

Fig.19. Silty mudstone with a b u n d a n t root structures (L6) and scattered pseudomorphs after evaporites (white) in the Passaic
Formation, Newark basin, near Flemington, New Jersey. Ovate pale gray areas are tubes (root structures) filled with carbonate
cement and silt. Note radial pattern of some crystals. Scale is 1 cm long.
404 J.P. SMOOT

ford basin (Hubert et al., 1976, 1978), and the
Triassic Stoneville Formation, Dan River-Danville
basin (Thayer, 1970) may also be examples of
similar occurrences. The crystal zones most com-
monly occur in root-disrupted massive mudstone
(L6), but also occur in other lacustrine deposits
(L2, L3, L5), shoreline deposits (LM2, LM3,
LM5), and even fluvial deposits (F6). The crystal
zones are separated by similar sedimentary rocks
with no crystals. Successive zones may consist of
crystals of different size or shape, but no vertical
or lateral changes in character within a zone have
been observed. The crystals show no preferential
associations with layering or porosity, although
they are best developed in silty mudstones. The
apparent lack of facies dependence and the absence
of vertical changes in character suggest that these
crystals were not formed at the depositional surface
by evaporation of a groundwater table as in saline
mudflats (Hardie et al., 1978; Smoot and Lo-
wenstein, in press). They may represent crystal
growth after burial, but before lithification, from
early diagenetic fluids. Another possibility is that
the crystals represent soil evaporites where solutes
are introduced as dust or aerosols then redistrib-
uted downward by infrequent rainfall. Similar
distributions and morphologies are reported from
modern arid soils (Dan, 1973; Stoops, 1978; Callen
et al., 1986; Smoot and Lowenstein, in press) and
some ancient deposits (Goldbery, 1982a, b; Smith,
1990). Other crystal features found in these forma-
tions that are consistent with the arid soil model
are concentrations of crystals along vertical joint-
like planes, concentrations of crystals in tubular
areas (roots? or burrows?), and vertical elongation
of crystals downward from sedimentary contacts.
Smoot and Olsen (1988, fig.10-6) illustrate a
mudstone from the Triassic Perkasie Member of
the Passaic Formation in the Newark basin which
shows the vertical transition from L3 to brecciated
L4 type deposits and a vertical change in evaporite
shapes and distributions (Fig.20). This sequence is
consistent with the evaporation of a shallow saline
lake until it was supersaturated with respect to

4 4

4
^ ~ / " 1 ^ " ^ ^ ^

I
Fig.20. Sketch from photograph of the vertical succession of evaporite crystal pseudomorphs (patterned) in lacustrine mudstone in
the Passaic Formation, Newark basin, near Rutgers, New Jersey. 1 = Thin-bedded mudstone (L3) with crystal sprays extending
from bedding planes; 2 = Mass of vertically oriented crystals forming crust; 3 = Thin-bedded to brecciated mudstone (L3 and L4)
with radial crystal masses restricted to mudcracks; 4 = Massive, vesicular mudstone (L4) with no obvious crystals.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
gypsum, forming crusts on the lake floor, followed
by saline mudflat conditions where gypsum grew
in the desiccated muds. Three successive lake cycles
in the Perkasie Member contain similar crystal
sequences. Each evaporite sequence overlies org-
anic-rich lacustrine shales (L1 and L2) that are
devoid of fossils, and is overlain by dry mudflat
mudstone (L4) then root-disrupted mudstone (L6),
both devoid of evaporite crystals. The same three
lake cycles about 48 km W do not have the vertical
succession of evaporites, but scattered euhedral
crystals occur within the upper L3 deposits. This
distribution is consistent with local ponding of
supersaturated brines as lakes dried. A similar
model of a drying saline lake overlain by a saline
mudflat can be applied to a vertical succession of
evaporite crystals observed in the Jurassic Portland
Formation, Hartford basin (locality 7.6 of Olsen
et al., 1989). At least two cycles at this locality
have euhedral skeletal cubic crystals in the basal
L1 deposit (see below), overlain by L2 deposits
with randomly distributed large (2-5 cm long)
tabular crystals (gypsum?), then L2 deposits with
smaller euhedral crystals (less than l cm long)
restricted to the fillings of polygonal cracks, over-
lain by L6 deposits with no evaporite crystals. The
lateral changes in this succession are not known,
but similar vertical sequences showing decrease in
crystal size associated with increase of desiccation
features in lake cycles occur in a few other Portland
lacustrine shale sequences.
In the Jurassic East Berlin and Portland Forma-
tions of the Hartford basin, cubic crystals that
may be hopper-shaped or skeletal are reported
from organic-rich shales (L1 and L2 deposits). In
many cases, these are the only evaporite minerals
found in the cyclic lake deposits. Skeletal cubic
crystals cross layering in laminated mudstone,
whereas hopper crystals are visible as sediment-
filled casts on shale parting planes. These crystals
have been interpreted as former halite (Hubert et
al., 1978; Parnell, 1983). The skeletal crystals prob-
ably represent intrasediment growth in brine-satu-
rated muds, comparable to those described by
Gornitz and Schreiber (1981) or Southgate (1982).
Some of these cubic crystals are now composed of
pyrite and may have formed as skeletal pyrite
(Carsten, 1986). The bedding plane hopper crystals
405
are similar to features described by Spencer (1982)
from cores in Great Salt Lake that he attributed
to dissolution of crystals that settled to the lake
bottom after precipitation at the air-water in-
terface (cumulate crystals). The crystals dissolve
either because the lake bottom waters were under-
saturated during accumulation or became less sa-
line after deposition. Irregular beds with angular
deflections in some Portland shales also resemble
what results from intrastratal dissolution of evapo-
rites in the Great Salt Lake (Smoot and Lo-
wenstein, in press). The radial crystals illustrated
by Demicco and Gierlowski-Kordesch (1986) also
resemble casts of cumulate crystals in lacustrine
shale.
Gypsum is commonly reported from cores in
the Newark Supergroup, usually from depths ex-
ceeding several tens of meters. Most of this gypsum
appears to be fracture fillings, vein fillings, or
cements that are independent of the sedimentary
facies. Although the gypsum may have been de-
rived from synsedimentary sulfates (Textoris and
Gore, in press), it may also be a result of oxidation
of sulfides during diagenesis. The latter origin may
also apply to minute inclusions of gypsum in
cements (Gore and Talbot, 1989). Weems (in
Goodwin et al., 1985, p. 16) argued that crumbly
Carnian shales in the Taylorsville basin may have
originally had gypsum cements, as groundwaters
below 60 m depth there are typically saline, and
because thin gypsum coatings were found on shale
chips in a less weathered outcrop. No crystal
cavities or molds have been observed in these
deposits.
The presence of dolomite, analcime, albite, or
chert has been argued as an indicator of elevated
salinity or alkalinity in the depositional environ-
ment for several basins (Van Houten, 1962, 1964;
Wheeler and Textoris, 1978; Hubert et al., 1978;
Stevens and Hubert, 1980). Although these miner-
als may be syndepositional, there is evidence in
many cases of their being diagenetic replacements
or cements (for instance, Hubert et al., 1978;
Wheeler and Textoris, 1978; Oshchudlak and Hu-
bert, 1988; Smoot and Horowitz, 1988). The timing
of these diagenetic events is not well constrained,
and there is no evidence that the fluids were
406 J.P. SMOOT

synsedimentary or even that they originated in the

basin.
[] AF

Distribution of depositional environments [] F1 & F2

[] F3

As mentioned earlier, the distribution of sedi- [] F4 & - "

mentary subenvironments is not well known due [] L
to poor exposure and lack of detailed mapping.
The stratigraphic and geographic associations of
[] LM

depositional units can be roughly inferred in some Base

basins, however, from the general lithologic pat- [] DIaL
terns. Figures 21-23 illustrate subenvironment dis-
tributions in the Deerfield, Hartford, Newark, and
Deep River basins. These basins contain most of
the sedimentary associations found in other major
Newark Supergroup basins. Small basins, such as
Northfield or Barboursville, typically contain se-
quences similar to the basal portions of adjacent
large basins, and are thought to be erosional MA
remnants of larger basins. The sedimentary depos-
its in the Richmond basin are the only ones not C'r
similar to the examples (see Goodwin et al., 1985;
Cornet, in Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 47-52). The
Richmond basin deposits are exceptionally poorly
exposed, and environmental interpretations are
mostly based on geophysical surveys, and logs and
rock chips from wells.
The oldest deposits in the Deerfield, Hartford,
Newark, and Deep River basins are fluvial, and
are overlain, in at least parts of the basin, by
lacustrine deposits. Alluvial fan deposits are pre-
sent near the faulted margins of the basins, and
they intertongue with the lacustrine facies. In the
Hartford and Deep River basins, the lacustrine
deposits are overlain by fluvial deposits that also
appear to intertongue with the alluvial fan de- 14
posits.

Deerfield and Hartford basins
The Deerfield and Hartford basins (Fig.21) of
Massachusetts and Connecticut occupy an elon-
gate, northerly aligned, fault-bounded trough, but
are nearly separated from one another by a
transverse basement uplift. Both basins contain a
thick and varied sequence of Upper Triassic to
Lower Jurassic continental sedimentary rocks in-
tercalated with basalt flows that dips regionally
15
ii
Fig.21. Schematic map view of depositional facies in the
Deerfield and Hartford basins in Massachusetts (MA) and
Connecticut (CT). Fault contacts are shown by heavy lines.
Basalt flows are black and diabase intrusions are gray. Modified
from Olsen et al. (1989). AF= Alluvial fan; F=Fluvial; L =
Lacustrine; LM = Lake margin elastic deposits.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
eastward towards a major normal border fault
system. The strata are warped into broad, E-plung-
ing synclinal folds generally separated by tight,
narrow, faulted anticlines. Thick Jurassic diabase
sheets have intruded the Triassic strata of the
Hartford basin, and through-going, but discontin-
uous, diabase dike systems cut across both basins
extending into crystalline rocks on both flanks.
The lower deposits in the Hartford basin are
divided into two fluvial units of Late Triasic age
with the upper unit pinching out northward. The
lower unit is dominated by braided stream con-
glomerates and sandstones (F1 and F2). In the
southern part of the Hartford basin, the lowermost
few hundred meters of the lower unit consists of
F3 conglomeratic sandstone forming fining-up-
ward sequences as much as 3 m thick. These F3
deposits are absent at the base of the northern
part of the Hartford basin and in the Deerfield
basin where the lower fluvial deposits are thinner.
The upper unit is dominated by F4 and F6 depos-
its. It apparently intertongues with F2 deposits to
the north, but the upper contact also may be
unconformable (Cornet, 1977, p. 194). These rela-
tionships suggest that the northern part of the
basins were higher than the southern part of the
Hartford basin, so that erosion and deposition in
the north was more intermittent. The lower fluvial
deposits also occur immediately adjacent to the
faulted eastern margin of the Hartford basin at
several localities (Fig.21). These deposits are no
thicker or coarser than those on the western side
of the basin, suggesting that the eastern border
fault was not controlling sedimentation at the time
of their deposition (contra Hubert et al., 1978).
Lacustrine, lake margin clastic, and alluvial fan
deposits overlie the lower fluvial deposits and are
interbedded with the early Jurassic basalt flows.
The Jurassic lacustrine cycles consist of L1 and
L2 deposits grading up into L6 or L4 deposits, or
into sheetlike deltaic (LM3) or wave-formed (LM5)
lake margin sandstones. Where the lacustrine de-
posits strike towards the faulted eastern margins
of the basins, they are intercalated with coarser
grained lake margin clastic deposits (LM4 and
LM5) and alluvial fan deposits (AF1, AF2, and
AF3) (LeTourneau, 1985; Smoot and LeTourneau,
1989). F3 deposits in the northern Hartford basin
407
that intertongue with the lake margin clastic depos-
its and finer grained lacustrine deposits may actu-
ally be AF3 deposits, and some of the AF2 deposits
in the Deerfield basin may be F2 and F3 deposits.
The upper fluvial deposits in the Hartford basin
consist of a lower unit dominated by F4 and F6
sandstone and siltstone that intertongues with lake
margin clastic deposits (LM2) and some lacustrine
shales (L1 and L2), and an upper unit dominated
by FI and F2 conglomeratic sandstones. All of
these deposits are coarser grained near the border
fault. The F4 deposits grade into F3 deposits near
the eastern border fault in the north, whereas the
other deposits grade into AF2 deposits. The prove-
nance and sparse paleocurrent indicators in the
upper fluvial deposits indicate flow from the east
(Hubert et al., 1978). These associations suggest
that the border fault was active during sedimenta-
tion, but that the basin may have been hydrologi-
cally open.
Newark basin
The Newark basin (Fig.22) in New York, New
Jersey, and Pennsylvania, is a broad half-graben
filled by upper Triassic to lower Jurassic continen-
tal strata and basalts that dip toward the northwest
normal border fault system. The deposits are cut
by a series of normal faults creating three large
blocks in which portions of the stratigraphic se-
quence are repeated (labeled A-C). Large Jurassic
diabase sheets have uplifted and intruded the Trias-
sic strata and caused offsets of sedimentary con-
tacts. Three series of Jurassic basalt flows in a
large plunging syncline (Watchung Syncline) have
been correlated to the three basalt series in the
Hartford basin, based on their sequence and chem-
istry (see Olsen et al., 1989). The lowest basalt
flow unit also occurs in other minor synclines.
Detailed mapping by McLaughlin (1945) and
Olsen (1984, 1988) indicates that individual lake
cycles in both Triassic and Jurassic rocks are
traceable over broad areas of the basin. These
correlations are substantiated by paleontological
and paleomagnetic data (see Olsen et al., 1989).
The lower fluvial sandstone in most of the
Newark basin consists of conglomeratic sandstone
F2 deposits overlain by F4 and F5 sandstones and
 0 15 N J ~

O ,.-" D ,,.~,. mm ,,-°,,

Fig.22. Schematic map view of depositional facies in the Newark basin in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Fault contacts are shown by heavy lines. Basalt flows
are black and diabase intrusions are gray. Zones dominated by different types of lake deposits are numbered I - 1 H and major fault blocks are labeled A - C . Modified from
Olsen (1984) and Smoot (in press). A F = Alluvial fan; F = Fluvial; L = Lacustrine; L M = Lake margin clastic deposits.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
siltstones. In the southeast fault block (A), F2
deposits grade up into pebbly F3 deposits before
grading up into the sandy F4 and F5 type deposits.
These fluvial deposits are intercalated with thick
sequences of F6 deposits. Provenance and paleo-
currents suggest flow was from the southeast
(roughly across the basin towards the border fault).
In the three fault blocks, the lower fluvial deposits
become finer grained and thicker towards the
border fault. This occurs by thinning of the lower
coarse-grained portion and thickening of the upper
sandy part. The lower fluvial deposits also appear
to thin and coarsen toward the ends of the basin.
Sandstones and conglomerates in the northeastern
corner of fault block C have been correlated to
the lower fluvial deposits suggesting an intercala-
tion of the fluvial deposits with alluvial fans near
the border fault (Olsen et al., 1989, fig. 5.1A).
These deposits may also be, at least in part, alluvial
fan and lake margin clastic deposits equivalent to
the lowermost part of the lacustrine deposits. The
thickening of the fluvial deposits towards the bor-
der fault indicates that it was active during deposi-
tion, but the persistence of paleocurrent indicators
toward the fault in the successive blocks suggest
that it did not block flow out of the basin.
The Newark basin cyclic lacustrine deposits
comprise the thickest succession in the Newark
Supergroup (more than 7 km in the thickest area,
Olsen et al., 1989, fig. 5.4). Most of these deposits
are coarser near the border fault and grade into
lake margin clastic deposits (LMI-5) and alluvial
fan deposits (AFI-3). The lacustrine deposits are
here divided into three units that reflect the relative
abundances of the different types. The boundaries
of these units are very approximate, as the contacts
are completely gradational. The lowest unit is
characterized by abundant fossiliferous black lami-
nites (L l) and cycles with thick portions of shallow
lake deposits (L2); desiccation features are largely
restricted to the upper contact of each cycle. The
second unit has fewer L1 deposits and more com-
mon intermittent lake deposits (L3) and dry mud-
flat deposits (L4). Within individual cycles, the L4
deposits are gradationally overlain by root-dis-
rupted mudstones (L6), especially towards the top
of the unit. The third unit contains abundant
shallow lake deposits (L2) and the upper parts of
409
cycles are commonly root disrupted (L6) while L4
deposits are uncommon. The upper portions of
cycles are commonly sandy with deltaic (LM1 and
LM3) and possibly fluvial (F5 and F6) deposits.
A fourth unit, dominated by lake margin clastic
deposits (LMi and LM2), is interbedded with the
basalt flows. It contains common fossiliferous
black laminites (LI) and shallow lake (L2) or root
disrupted mudstone (L6) at the tops of cycles, but
the uppermost parts of most cycles are coarse
grained reflecting their proximity to the border
fault.
Fluvial deposits at the two ends of the Newark
basin are laterally equivalent to the lacustrine
deposits. These fluvial units consist of F3 deposits
grading to F5 and F6 deposits basinward. Their
provenance indicates source areas north of the
basin. These fluvial deposits intertongue with lake
margin clastic deposits (LM2 and LM3) basinward
that in turn intertongue with lacustrine deposits.
These relationships suggest axial drainages into
the basin. The southwestern fluvial and shoreline
wedge intertongues with the first and second lacus-
trine units. The upper part of the second lacustrine
unit and all of the third unit show no evidence of
coarsening towards this end of the basin, except
near the border fault where they are interbedded
with LM3 and LM5 deposits. The northeastern
fluvial and shoreline wedge appears to prograde
basinward starting near the middle or end of the
second lacustrine unit (Parker et al., 1988). Where
the first lacustrine unit nears this end of the basin,
it is intercalated with lake margin clastic deposits
(LM 1 and LM5) reflecting the southeastern prove-
nance. The same may be true for lake margin
clastic deposits equivalent to the lower part of the
second lacustrine unit (dominated by LM2 depos-
its) (see Parker et al., 1988). The lake margin
clastic deposits that are intercalated with the basalt
flows may also be related to an axial fluvial system
from the northeast (Manspeizer and Olsen, 1981;
McGowan, 1981).
Deep River basin
The Deep River basin (Fig.23) in North Carolina
and South Carolina is divided into three sub-
basins that are bounded by a common southeastern
410 J.P. SMOOT

] AFI-2 [] F4
[] ~, [] ~-~

[] ~.~ [] O,sh~se

J 0 2O
NC I I
kilometers

SC /
Fig.23. Schematic map view of depositional facies in the Deep River basin of North Carolina and South Carolina. Fault contacts
are shown by heavy lines. Diabase intrusions are gray. Unpatterned areas with dashed lines show inferred boundaries where the
basin is covered by Atlantic Coastal Plain deposits. Modified from Olsen et al. (in press). AF=Alluvial fan; F=Fluvial; L=
Lacustrine; L M = Lake margin elastic deposits.

normal border fault system. The outcrop patterns
shown have been synthesized from a number of
sources, including Reinemund (1955), Bain and
Harvey (1977), Hoffman and Gallagher (1989),
and Olsen et al. (in press). Upper Triassic strata
dip gently eastward toward the border fault zone.
An anticlinal fold separates the Durham subbasin
from the Sanford subbasin, and younger deposits
of the Atlantic Coastal Plain overlap most of the
basin between the Sanford and Wadesboro subbas-
ins. Exploration drilling for coal in the Sanford
subbasin has demonstrated a complex pattern of
faulting causing repetition of parts of the section.
The lower fluvial deposits in the Deep River
basin are divided into two units. The basal con-
glomeratic unit (F7) contains subangular clasts
derived from the immediately adjacent and un-
derlying bedrock, intermixed with well-rounded
quartz pebbles and quartz sand. These deposits
have been interpreted as alluvial fans (Randazzo
et al., 1970; Textoris et al., 1986) based on their
restriction to the western margin of the basin, their
poor sorting, and the presence of faults along this
margin. These conglomerates are for the most part
less than 50 m thick and appear to extend as a
sheet below the other strata, based on the outcrop
pattern and on drill data (Textoris and Gore, in
press). The conglomerates directly overlie base-
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
ment, but faults cut the basal section out in places
(see Reinemund, 1955). The large percentage of
rounded quartz or quartzite pebbles and decimeter-
scale crossbedding in the basal conglomerate sug-
gests prolonged fluvial transport in sustained flow.
Textoris et al. (1986) attribute these characteristics
to an alluvial fan deposit formed under humid
conditions. The second unit of the lower fluvial
deposits consists of braided stream sandstone
lenses (F3) ranging from 2 to 5 m thick separated
by thicker (tens of meters) siltstone and mudstone
beds (F6). The sandstone lenses are generally finer
grained and more widely scattered towards the top
of this unit. In the northern part of the Durham
subbasin, the F3 deposits appear to be replaced
by F2 deposits and F6 deposits are less common.
Paleocurrent data in the Durham and Sanford
subbasins (Reinemund, 1955; Patterson, 1969;
Dittmar, 1979; Hoffman and Gallagher, 1989)
indicate flow southward, parallel to the basin axis,
and provenance suggests source areas from the
west or northwest. A gypsiferous unit 50-80 m
thick, near the base of the lower fluvial deposits
in a drill hole in the Sanford subbasin (Olsen et
al., in press; Textoris and Gore, in press), consists
of gypsum-cemented sandstone and gypsiferous
shale. Textoris and Gore (in press) interpret this
occurrence as playa deposits in the lowest part of
the basin. The descriptions from the well cuttings
are not detailed enough to determine if this occur-
rence is a later diagenetic feature.
Lacustrine deposits are best developed in the
Sanford subbasin where they consist primarily of
fossiliferous organic-rich shales and siltstones (L1)
interbedded with deltaic sandstones (LM1). Other
than the sedimentary sequences related to delta
progradation, there is no evidence of cyclic changes
of lake level in the lacustrine deposits. In the lower
part of the lacustrine interval, two continuous
coal-bearing units are intercalated with black
shales with siderite nodules and black band (Rein-
emund, 1955), The coal beds are interbedded with
shales or are separated from the shales by black
band layers. Root-disrupted underclay has been
reported in places (Hope, 1975). Robbins et al.
(1988) interpret the coal-bearing units as lake
margin swamps that shifted laterally as a shallow
anoxic lake rose and fell in response to climatically
411
induced inflow fluctuations. Olsen et al. (1989,
pp. 29-31) report an apparent cyclicity in occur-
rences of claystone and calcareous shale in the
Durham subbasin, and Olsen et al. (in press) report
similar sequences in the Wadesboro subbasin. The
Durham deposits, and similar deposits in the San-
ford subbasin in the zone of transition upward
from the lacustrine deposits, are intercalated with
fluvial deposits (F5) and sandstones deposited as
crevasse splays (F6). The claystones and shales
may represent the shallow margins of large lakes
(Olsen et al., 1989) with deltaic and fluvial deposi-
tion during low-lake stands, or they may represent
local shallow lakes or ponds on a fluvial floodplain
(Gore, 1986). Outcrop patterns in the Sanford
subbasin suggest that LI deposits may be time
equivalent to alluvial fan conglomerates along the
eastern border faults.
The upper fluvial deposits in the Durham sub-
basin are mainly meandering stream deposits that
are coarser to the north (F4) and finer grained to
the south (F5). Paleocurrent data in these rocks
are scattered (Dittmar, 1979; Hoffman and Gal-
lagher, 1989), but the feldspathic provenance sug-
gests a source area in granitic rocks to the northeast
or east. The change in grain size suggests a general
axial drainage to the south and, at least in part,
into the lacustrine deposits of the Sanford sub-
basin. The lower part of the upper fluvial deposits
in the Sanford subbasin have a similar provenance
and are generally very fine grained in transition
from the lacustrine deposits. The upper fluvial
deposits are coarser toward alluvial fan deposits
adjacent to the eastern border fault. The lower
and upper fluvial units have not yet been separated
in the Wadesboro subbasin.
The areas adjacent to the eastern border faults
in both the Durham and Sanford subbasins are
dominated by conglomeratic deposits (AFI and
AF2) reflecting provenance from the rocks east of
the border fault. These conglomerates grade ba-
sinward into poorly bedded, muddy, conglomeratic
sandstones with local lenses of cross-bedded con-
glomerates (Lithology TrCS2 of Hoffman and
Gallagher, 1989) that are also believed to represent
alluvial fan deposits (AF3). These deposits have
gradational lower contacts with the upper fluvial
deposits and the lacustrine deposits. In the narrow
412
area between the Durham and Sanford subbasins,
alluvial fan deposits apparently unconformably
overlie the folded lower fluvial sandstone unit.
Small patches of alluvial fan deposits crop out
through the Atlantic Coastal Plain deposits east
of the Wadesboro subbasin. These may represent
erosional remnants of alluvial fan conglomerates
where the basin has been eroded nearly to base-
ment (Randazzo et al., 1970).
Tectonic and climatic controls on depositional
facies
Depositional models for the Newark Supergroup
basins must consider the large amounts of time
involved in the basin filling process, typically on
the scale of 10-20 m.y. or more. It is unreasonable
to assume that depositional facies remained con-
stant over those periods of time, in tectonically
active basins, during a period of continental
breakup, at paleolatitudes transitional between
tropical and arid. The drainage patterns must have
changed as the basins opened and subsidence
continued, and climate probably changed as the
local relief increased and the rift widened. The
stratigraphic and geographic distributions of the
diverse sedimentary facies in the basins suggest
certain components that reflect regional tectonic
and climatic controls. The regional pattern of
sedimentary facies also provides insight into the
relationship of the present-day basin boundaries
to the original depositional basins.
Tectonic controls
As mentioned in the introduction, evidence is
convincing that border faults of the Newark Super-
group basins were active during sedimentation and
that they exerted controls on the facies distribu-
tions. The nature of the fault boundary must have
changed as the basin filled, which should be re-
flected in the sedimentary record. Fluctuations in
the rate of fault movement along the basin borders
is commonly cited as the cause of vertical varia-
tions in alluvial fan or fluvial grain sizes or the
transition from fluvial to lacustrine conditions (see
discussions in Lorenz, 1988, pp. 115-164, and
Olsen et al., 1989). Olsen and Schlische (1988, see
J.P. SMOOT
also Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 5-6) suggested that the
sedimentary successions of the Newark Super-
group basins were controlled by the progressive
widening of the basins over time in response to
extensional faulting. That the fluvial to lacustrine
transition occurred in all basins suggests that it is
not a local drainage phenomenon. Also, since the
transition was not synchronous in the various
basins, it probably does not represent a major
tectonic or climatic shift.
The basal fluvial deposits of the Newark Super-
group basins are not facies equivalent to lacustrine
strata downdip, as indicated by outcrop patterns,
drillhole data, and seismic data, wherever they are
available. These data, and the palynological age-
dating constraints, suggest that fluvial deposits
cropping out along the unconformable margins of
basins predate most, if not all, lacustrine deposits.
The fluvial deposits are an initial stage of basin
filling and the apparent fining of the fluvial deposits
away from the hanging wall unconformity is, at
least in part, a vertical transition. Olsen and
Schlische (1988) proposed that the basal fluvial
deposits progressively onlap the hanging wall un-
conformity, reflecting an increase in basin width
with time. Their evidence for onlap includes the
thinning of the Stockton Formation towards the
unconformable margin and ends of the Newark
basin; outcrop-scale onlap of the WolfviUe Forma-
tion onto basement in the Fundy basin; and a
suggestion of onlap in limited seismic data from
several basins (Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 5-6, 70-72,
139). The basal fluvial deposits in the Deerfield
and Hartford basins appear to onlap northward
onto basement, and the basal fluvial deposits of
both the Gettysburg and Culpeper basins thin
towards the ends. The onlap hypothesis requires
that the ages of deposits overlying the unconfor-
mity differ in different parts of the basins.
Olsen and Schlische (1988) also stated that the
sequence of fluvial sedimentation followed by la-
custrine sedimentation in the Newark Supergroup
basins was a function of the apparent decrease in
the rate of sediment aggradation as the basins
widened during constant subsidence. If the amount
of fluvial sediment entering a basin were constant,
it would be spread over a continuously larger area
as progressively thinner sheets. Therefore, the river
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
could not remain at the level of the outlet, resulting
in basin closure and the formation of lakes. The
lakes would initially be shallow, but since they
would further decrease the rate of sediment aggra-
dation at the outlet, they would become pro-
gressively deeper as the basin subsided. However,
since the basin would continue to widen, the water
entering the basin would be spread over a pro-
gressively broader area resulting in shallower lakes.
The lacustrine succession, then, would be shallow
lakes capped by deep freshwater lakes grading to
shallow saline lakes. Olsen et al. (1989) cite the
Triassic deposits of the Newark basin and the Dan
River-Danville basin as examples of this succes-
sion. They suggest that increased tectonism, associ-
ated with extrusion of the basalts during the
Jurassic in the Hartford and Newark basins,
stopped the basin widening and steepened the
basin floor resulting in a return of deep, freshwater
lakes. Overlying deposits reflect the slow return to
shallow saline lakes in the final stages of sedimenta-
tion. Olsen et al. (1989) attribute the return to
fluvial deposition in the upper parts of the Hart-
ford, Taylorsville, and Deep River basins to a
decrease in subsidence and infilling of the lakes.
A number of relationships in the lower fluvial
units are not addressed by the Olsen and Schlische
(1988) model. (1) Fluvial (F7) deposits in the
Gettysburg, Culpeper, and Deep River basins indi-
cate deposition as reworked residuum and collu-
vium and by small streams on an irregular bedrock
topography. These deposits, obviously derived
from adjacent bedrock, are radically different from
the overlying mature fluvial deposits. It seems
unlikely that the F7 deposits are part of an onlap
sedimentary package. They may represent the ini-
tial phase of basin deposition, or deposition that
predates formation of the basin that was subse-
quently buried by the onlapping deposits. Similar
deposits may be present in the other basins as
suggested by some seismic data, but have not been
recognized or are not exposed at the surface. (2)
Although the characteristic vertical transition of
coarse-grained braided stream deposits (F2 and
F3) grading to finer grained meandering river
deposits (F4 and F5) or braided stream deposits
with thick muddy interbeds (F3 and F6), that
overlies the unconformity or F7 deposits of most
413
basins, clearly reflects downflow fining in some
cases, the occurrence of the lower conglomeratic
fluvial deposits in successive fault blocks across
the Newark basin indicates that an additional
stratigraphic factor may be involved. Similar strati-
graphic successions are suggested by outcrop pat-
terns in the Hartford, Gettysburg, Culpeper, and
Deep River basins. (3) Provenance, paleocurrent
data, and lateral grain size changes in basal fluvial
deposits, although commonly poorly constrained
due lack of outcrop data and lack of stratigraphic
control, indicate that they enter the basin from the
hanging wall side (the Stockton Formation,
Glaeser, 1966; Turner-Peterson, 1980; and the New
Oxford Formation, McLaughlin and Gerhard,
1953), the foot wall side (the Manassas Sandstone,
Lindholm, 1979; and the New Haven Arkose,
Hubert et al., 1978) or along the basin axis (Lithol-
ogy TrCSI, Hoffman and Gallagher, 1989).
Furthermore, paleocurrent data, grain size, and
sedimentary characteristics do not change in some
localities where the basal fluvial deposits are near
the basin boundaries. In the northern Culpeper
basin and southern Gettysburg basin, coarse-
grained fluvial deposits (FD3) near the base of the
Manassas Sandstone and New Oxford Formation
show no change in grain size or fluvial style where
they crop out within a hundred meters of the
border fault and outcrops on the eastern margins
of the basins, they are apparently just thinner.
These relationships suggest that the present basin
boundaries may not have influenced deposition.
The following scenario is proposed for the initial
fluvial development of the Newark Supergroup
basins. The future basin floors were originally
rocky depressions covered with residual gravel and
colluvium, and locally incised by small streams.
Activation of faults in response to regional rifting
formed large elongate depressions and caused
drainages to flow into them. Rivers flowing into
the depressions maintained outlets by cutting bed-
rock as the basins subsided while sediment slowly
accumulated filling and smoothing the basin floor.
The lower relief created by infilling the basin
topography decreased local stream gradients, so
that rivers deposited finer grained sediment. This
further decreased the cutting power of the streams,
so they were less capable of downcutting the outlet
414
resulting in a backup of stream flow and intermit-
tent flooding of the basin floor by shallow lakes.
The shallow lake deposits produced even lower
relief on the basin floor and lower stream gradients,
so that the streams could no longer cut outlets as
the basin subsided. At this point, the streams may
have found new outlets where the confining high-
lands were low enough, such as along the basin
axis, or the drainage system became closed. This
is similar to the model of Olsen and Schlische
(1989) in that it does not require any change in
subsidence and is a direct result of the tectonic
setting.
The basins with cyclic lacustrine deposits are
believed to have been hydrologically closed during
most of lacustrine sedimentation. There are several
pieces of evidence indicating basin closure. (1) The
cyclic lake deposits consist of repeated, rhythmic
alternations of standing water deposits and subaer-
ial deposits including features suggesting deep
lakes (around 100 m deep) overlain in a few meters
by subaerial deposits. Such radical changes in
water depth are inconsistent with lateral facies
shifts (as in Walther's Law, see Middleton, 1973),
but are consistent with observed depositional pat-
terns in Holocene closed basins where lake depth
and area are controlled by the balance of inflow
and evaporation (Langbein, 1961; Richardson,
1969). (2) Major fluvial deposits are absent in the
central parts of the basins even where lake deposits
reflect subaerial exposure. River deposits along the
margins of the basins abruptly thin and intertongue
with lacustrine deposits towards the basin center.
This relationship is consistent with conditions
where fluvial inflow into a basin resulted in pond-
ing of water and lake transgression, as is common
in modern closed basins (Smoot, 1985). (3) Deltaic
deposits associated with the cyclic lake deposits
characteristically consist of stacked Gilbert-type
delta foresets (LM2) and sheet delta fronts (LM3).
Vertical sequences consistent with birdfoot delta
development (LM1) are thinner than expected for
the apparent depth of the lake inferred from
interbedded lake deposits. These features are char-
acteristic of deltas formed on the margins of
modern closed-basin lakes, where lake depth and
area change rapidly and frequently, commonly in
response to the episodes of flooding that are
J.P. SMOOT
depositing the delta (Smoot and Lowenstein, in
press).
It is unlikely that different cycles represent al-
ternations of closed and open drainage systems as
suggested by Gore (1989). The deepest lakes within
the cyclic sequences may have spilled out of the
basins creating open drainages, but the complete
predominance of rhythmic cyclic rise and fall of
lake levels (Olsen, 1986) suggests that lake depths
were rarely controlled by the height of the spillover.
The features used to support closed basin condi-
tions are ubiquitous in the cyclic sequences. Al-
ternations of freshwater conditions and saline
conditions may indicate changes from open to
closed drainage, as suggested by Van Houten
(1962, 1964) and Gore (1989), but they probably
represent deeper lakes and shallower lakes. The
chemical and detrital cycles of Van Houten (1962,
1964), often cited as evidence of salinity fluctua-
tions, may represent the diagenetic overprint of
alkaline groundwater (see Smoot and Horowitz,
1988). The absence of evaporites in the regressive
portion of lake cycles may indicate the lack of
accumulated solutes because of an open drainage
system (Gore, 1989), groundwater leakage out of
the basin (see Snyder, 1962), or short periods of
standing lake conditions in a closed basin (Smoot
and Lowenstein, in press).
Tectonic effects on closed-basin lakes include
shifting of the basin base levels and changing the
inflow drainage systems. Lowering of the basin
floor should not affect lake depth, because it is
controlled by inflow and evaporation rather than
by spillover height. Broadening of the basin would
allow small-scale fluvial systems to migrate over
larger portions of the basin floor because of the
greater area over which the ponded water must
expand (Smoot, 1985). The upward transition to
sandier regressive sequences in the Triassic lake
cycles of the Newark and Culpeper basins (Olsen
et al., 1989) may be due to this phenomenon.
Tectonically induced changes in the drainage sys-
tems may result in a decrease or increase of the
inflow by diverting or capturing drainages. The
apparent shifts of the axial drainage systems in
the Newark basin are apparently the result of
tectonism.
Lacustrine deposits in the Deep River, Rich-
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
mond, and Taylorsville basins do not show the
pronounced cyclicity characteristic of the deposits
in the other large basins. The Cumnock Formation
(Deep River basin), Vinita beds (Richmond basin),
and the middle lacustrine member of the Doswell
Formation (Taylorsville basin) do not show the
cyclic alternations of subaqueous and subaerial
deposits, but fluctuations in depth are suggested
by alternations from L1 to L2 deposits and in the
abundance and distribution of sandstone interbeds.
These fluctuations are not rhythmic or hierarchical
and appear to be related in part to aggradation of
deltas. These deposits may either reflect open
drainage systems or, if the lakes were very deep
and/or in narrow basins, closed-basin conditions
(Smoot, 1985). The alternations of claystones and
sandstones noted by Olsen et al. (1989, pp. 29-31)
in the Durham subbasin may represent the rise
and fall of a deep, narrow, closed-basin lake
reflected only by the shallow lake deposits. Alterna-
tively, the lakes may only behave as closed-basin
lakes during dry periods of sedimentation, so that
insufficient water is present to bring flow over the
spillover. Fluvial deposits appear to extend across
the Deep River, Richmond, and Taylorsville ba-
sins, suggesting that blockage of the outlet pro-
duced the lakes, and lake infilling or downcutting
of the outlet allowed fluvial drainage to resume.
Olsen et al. (1989, p. 108) suggested that fluvial
deposits in the upper part of the Hartford basin
(F1) represent a return to open drainage conditions
as basin subsidence slowed, or that they represent
deposits lateral to cyclic lake deposits now eroded
away in a very broad basin. Similar explanations
may apply to the fluvial deposits in the Deep
River, Richmond, and Taylorsville basins.
Alluvial fan deposits intertongue with most of
the other sedimentary units in each basin indicating
fan deposition over extended periods. The presence
of alluvial fans along the border faults suggests
highlands adjacent to the basins, analogous to
modern rift basins. At the northern end of the
Culpeper basin, however, at least part of the basal
Manassas Sandstone is truncated by the border
fault with no evidence of change of character or
intercalation with fan deposits. This suggests that
some fluvial deposits predate alluvial fan formation
and that the present border fault does not mark
415
highlands at the basin boundary at that time.
Similarly, the consistent paleocurrents towards the
northwestern border fault in the Stockton Forma-
tion of the Newark basin in the three different
fault blocks suggest that these deposits predate
alluvial fan development, as an opposing paleocur-
rent pattern of alluvial fans away from the faulted
highlands would have caused the Stockton drain-
age to shift to axial. The formation boundaries in
the Newark basin as depicted by Olsen et al. (1989,
p. 70) suggest that at least part of the Stockton
Formation intertongues with conglomerates near
the border fault, although the stratigraphic control
there is poor. This may indicate alluvial fan devel-
opment in the latest stages of fluvial sedimentation.
New Haven Arkose in the northern Hartford basin
is boulder-rich where near the border fault, but
away from the border fault has the same grain
size across the width of the basin. There are no
data on the nature of the basal fluvial deposits in
relation to the border faults in the other basins.
The development of large-scale (tens of meters
to about 100 m thick) coarsening- or fining-upward
sequences in alluvial fan conglomerates is com-
monly cited as evidence of tectonic activity and
quiescence (see Heward, 1978). Wessel (1969), LeT-
ourneau (1985), and Arguden and Rodolfo (1986)
describe coarsening-upward sequences in alluvial
fan conglomerates at the scale of 10-30 m that
they attribute to tectonic activity. Alternations of
AF1 and AF2 type alluvial fan deposits, such as
those seen in the Newark basin, may also represent
changes in alluvial fan slope or in drainage area
size in response to tectonic activity. They may also
represent shifts in the loci of deep channels due to
avulsion. Schlische and Olsen (1988) suggest that
fault movement caused syndepositional folding of
strata near the border faults of the Newark basin
in Pennsylvania based on the nature of deforma-
tion of mudcracks and fossils (see also Olsen et
al., 1989), which they interpret as soft-sediment
deformation, and on the relationship of diabase
intrusions, that they interpret as phacoliths, to
folds. There is no direct evidence of thickening of
strata or of local angular unconformities associated
with this postulated folding. More direct evidence
of synsedimentary deformation related to border
fault movement is present in the Fundy basin,
416
Nova Scotia (Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 152-159),
where talus breccias fill local graben in the North
Mountain Basalt. The graben are draped by Juras-
sic fluvial and lacustrine rocks.
Climatic controls
Climatic variability during deposition in the
basins is indicated at several levels. The individual
lake cycles a few meters thick have been interpreted
as indicators of Milankovitch cyclicity at the scale
of 21,000 years (Olsen, 1986). More than a thou-
sand of these cycles are present in the Newark
basin and hundreds of cycles are present in the
Dan River-Danville, Culpeper, Gettysburg, and
Fundy basins. Using Fourier analysis of cyclic
sequences, Olsen (1986) has also determined larger
scale groupings of cycles that he attributes to
periodicities of about 95,000, 125,000 and 400,000
years, also consistent with Milankovitch cyclicity
(see discussion in Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 3-5).
Although the actual timing of these cycles may be
challenged, their regularity and rhythmicity is evi-
dence for climatic rather than tectonic control.
Olsen (in Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 9-12) has corre-
lated individual cycles from the Jurassic sections
in the Culpeper, Newark, Hartford, and Deerfield
basins based on larger cycle patterns and on the
intercalated basalt sequences. Differences in the
fish-fossil assemblages (Olsen et al., 1982; Olsen,
1983) indicate that they were not common to a
single large lake, but developed in individual lakes
in different basins, all reacting synchronously to a
common climatic overprint.
Table 3 is a correlation of sedimentary deposits
in the major Newark Supergroup basins, based
primarily on palynological data. The dominant
types of lacustrine deposits at the top and base of
cycles are noted, or the character of non-cyclic
lake deposits is given. Considerable variability is
present within the zones and the boundaries are
not well constrained. Based on the nature of
massive mudstones in lacustrine sequences, Smoot
and Olsen (1988) postulated that the Carnian stage
of the Late Triassic was primarily a period of wet
conditions, as indicated by the abundance of bio-
turbated lacustrine (L2, L6) deposits. In contrast,
lacustrine intervals dominated by playa fabrics (L4
J.p.SMOOT
and L5) indicate a period of aridity spanning the
latest Carnian into the early Norian. The middle
to late Norian was an interval of gradual return
to wetter conditions, as indicated by increased
bioturbation (L6) reaching a maximum in the
Early Jurassic, Hettangian age. The period of
Hettangian to Pliensbachian marked a gradual
return to arid conditions reflected by an increase
in abundance of playa fabrics (L4, L5). Part of
the zonation may be an artifact of the expanding
basin model of Olsen and Schlische (1988) because
the steeper, narrow basins would have deeper,
more stable lakes; conversely, the broader basins
may have shallower, less stable lakes. This does
not explain why the interval of driest deposits is
not at the top of the Triassic (before the Jurassic
reactivation). The paleolatitude control on climate,
as indicated by the distribution of coal deposits
and eolian deposits, is another important factor
that must be considered in comparing climatic
indicators in the different basins.
Fluvial systems were probably not as sensitive
to climate as the closed basin lakes, but climatic
changes at the scale of the stages, as suggested by
the lacustrine deposits, should be apparent. If
fluvial deposits are divided into dry types (Fl and
F2) and wet types (F3, F4, F5), they also roughly
follow the pattern of the lacustrine deposits
(Table 3). There are a few examples of fluvial
deposits that may reflect climatic fluctuations at
the scale of lake cycles in the Newark Supergroup.
In the Deep River basin, Textoris and Holden
(1986) suggested that the alternation of cross-
bedded, channel-fill sandstones with thick mud-
stone beds containing abundant carbonate nodules
reflects fluctuations from humid to arid conditions.
However, this alternation may be accounted for
by lateral facies variability (channel and overbank
areas) and the association of abundant root struc-
tures and burrows with the carbonate nodules in
the mudstones suggest that conditions were proba-
bly not very dry (see Olsen et al., 1989, pp. 31-32).
LeTourneau (1985) observed that alluvial fan de-
posits in the Portland Formation in the southern
part of the Hartford basin are dominated by AF1
and AF2 deposits of different grain sizes, but just
below lacustrine sequences (Ll and LM4 deposits)
they are dominated by AF3 deposits. He interpre-
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
ted this relationship as indicating a climatic change
influencing alluvial fan depositional style as well
as causing the lake transgression. Blair (1987,
pp. 856.-857) rejected this hypothesis, and attrib-
uted the change in alluvial fan character to rapid
tectonic subsidence in the basin floor allowing
axial lake and fluvial deposits (the AF3) to shift
over the alluvial fan deposits, then the alluvial fan
rebuilding over them during a period of quiescence.
Several important facts support the model of LeT-
ourneau (1985): (1) the lacustrine shales in question
are laterally equivalent to cyclic shales and mud-
stones with the characteristic regular hierarchy
suggestive of climatic fluctuations in a closed basin,
(2) there is no evidence of the axial fluvial system
in the cyclic lacustrine deposits immediately west
of the area dominated by alluvial fan deposits (the
regressive lake sequences are commonly capped by
LM5 sandstones), (3) the AF3 deposits are only
found below the transgressive lacustrine shales and
not on top, (4) the AF3 deposits have the exact
same provenance as the underlying and overlying
AF1 and AF2 deposits, and (5) the paleocurrents
indicated by crossbedding in the AF3 deposits are
the same as those for the overlying and underlying
AF1 and AF2 deposits (LeTourneau, 1985). The
concept of changes in alluvial fan deposition as a
function of climate needs consideration. The size
of the fan drainage areas may dictate the extent
to which the alluvial fans reflect climate change
and the differences may be subtle or may occur
within limited areas. AF3 deposits with provenance
and paleocurrent directions similar to overlying
and underlying AFI and AF3 deposits are present
in the Passaic Formation of Newark, but they
have not been correlated to lake cycles.
Relationship of present basin boundaries to the
depositional boundaries
Although paleontological, mineralogical, and
stratigraphic features indicate that most of the
major Newark Supergroup basins were separate
centers of sedimentation and not structural rem-
nants of much larger basins, evidence suggests that
the present basin boundaries are not the original
depositional basin boundaries. Apparent fault dis-
placement of kilometers of strata, now exposed at
417
similar elevations as in the three fault blocks of
the Newark basin, suggests post-depositional ero-
sion of a tremendous thickness of section. There
is no evidence of the local relief of the scale
necessary to produce the present outcrop pattern
that would result from syndepositional faulting,
and thermal maturity indicators consistently point
to deep burial of the older deposits in the basins
with thick stratigraphic sequences (Pratt et al.,
1985). This erosion must have stripped away any
of the thinner portions of the basin and exposed
the underlying bedrock. Another indicator of deep
erosion is that many of the smaller basins (for
instance, the Northfield, Pomperaug, and Bar-
boursville basins) have stratigraphy and prove-
nance similar to the adjacent larger basins,
suggesting that they are erosional outliers.
Outcrops of the basin-filling rocks also commonly
occur as much as several kilometers outside the
basin boundaries, including the border fault
boundary.
The deep erosion of the Newark Supergroup
basins dictates that too much emphasis should not
be placed on the relationship of depositional facies
to the present basin boundaries. As discussed in
the fluvial deposits, paleocurrent data and prove-
nance of the lower fluvial sandstones and conglom-
erates in several basins show little change due to
their proximity to the unconformable or faulted
basin boundary, and stratigraphic sequences of
decreasing grain size are maintained regardless of
their geographic location. These relationships sug-
gest that the present unconformable boundary of
the basins is an erosional exposure of the basin
floor. Even the alluvial fan deposits on the faulted
basin margin appear to reflect the distal portions
of low-angle pediment fans whose apex and midfan
deposits are eroded away.
Implications to other rift-basin studies
The Newark Supergroup basins contain thou-
sands of meters of continental strata reflecting a
wide variety of depositional environments. Despite
the poor exposure of these deposits, a variety of
stratigraphic and geographic trends suggest both
tectonic and paleoclimatic controls on sedimenta-
tion. The variety of depositional environments
418
within these deposits indicate that simple alluvial
fan, lake, or playa models do not address the
variable conditions during the filling of these com-
plex basins. It is unlikely that any single modern
basin will provide an exact analog to any of the
Newark Supergroup basins. Data on the types of
processes and depositional products from a variety
of different modern basins are needed to re-
construct the depositional history of each Meso-
zoic basin. The narrow block-fault basins of the
arid western United States provide some informa-
tion on the nature of alluvial fans, closed basin
lakes, and playas, but the Newark Supergroup
basins were much broader and flatter than the
modern basins and commonly were fed by larger
fluvial inflow systems. The large Australian and
Chinese modern lake basins with their extensive
fluvial systems are probably more similar to many
of the Newark Supergroup basins, but they are in
different tectonic settings. The East African Rift
basins will provide insight into the interaction of
rivers and lakes in basins in a tropical setting.
Parts of each of these modern depositional systems
may be applicable to different Newark Supergroup
basins at different stratigraphic intervals.
The Newark Supergroup depositional record
provides several important climatic models that
need consideration in the interpretation of other
ancient rift basins. The ubiquitous preservation of
climatic fluctuations at the scale of a few meters
in the Newark Supergroup suggests that at least
some partial record of similar scale should be
preserved in any closed basin. The larger-scale
climatic fluctuations may also be preserved not
only in the lacustrine deposits, but also in the
fluvial, alluvial fan, and lake-margin clastic depos-
its. The possibility of correlation of regional cli-
matic change not only in the early Mesozoic, but
in any age deposit, would provide unparalled
stratigraphic control for other studies. Research
on modern lakes, alluvial fans, and rivers need to
determine the relative effects of climate and tecton-
ism on deposition in order to refine these models.
References
Allen, B.L., Harris, B.L., Davis, K.R. and Miller, G.B.,
1972. The mineralogy and chemistry of high plains playa
lake soils and sediments.U.S. Dep. Interior, Office Water
J.P. SMOOT
Resour. Res. Project Completion Rep. Project No. B-004-
TEX, 75 pp.
Arguden, A.T. and Rodolfo, K.S., 1986. Sedimentary facies
and tectonic implications of lower Mesozoic alluvial-fan
conglomerates of the Newark basin, northeastern United
States. Sediment. Geol., 51:97-118.
Bain, G. L. and Harvey, B. W. (Editors), 1977. Field Guide to
the Geology of the Durham Triassic Basin. Carolina Geol.
Soc., Raleigh, N. C., 83 pp.
Beatty, C. B., 1963. Origin of alluvial fans, White Mountains,
California and Nevada. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr., 53:
516-535.
Beverage, J. P. and Culbertson, J. K,, 1964. Hyperconcentra-
tions of suspended sediment. J. Hydraul. Div. Proc. Am.
Soc. Civil Eng., 90:117-128.
Blair, T. C., 1987. Tectonic and hydrologic controls on cyclic
alluvial fan, fluvial, and lacustrine rift-basin sedimentation,
Jurassic-lowermost Cretaceous Todos Santos Formation,
Chiapas, Mexico. J. Sediment. Petrol., 57: 845-862.
Bluck, B. J., 1982. Textures of gravel bars in braided streams.
In: R.D. Hey, J.C. Bathurst and C. R. Thorne (Editors),
Gravel Bed Rivers: Fluvial Processes, Engineering, and Man-
agement. Wiley, New York, N. Y., pp. 339-355.
Callen, R. A., Dulhunty, J. D., Lange, R.T., Plane, M., Ted-
ford, R. H., Wells, R. T. and Williams, D. L. G., 1986. The
Lake Eyre Basin - - Sediments, Fossil Vertebrates and Plants,
Landforms, Silcretes, and Climatic Implications. Aust. Sedi-
ment. Group Field Guide Ser. No. 4. Geol. Soc. Aust.,
Adelaide, 176 pp.
Cant, D.J., 1982. Fluvial facies models and their application.
In: P.A. Scholle and D. Spearing, (Editors), Sandstone
Depositional Environments. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Mere.,
31: 115-137.
Cant, D.J. and Walker, R.G., 1978. Fluvial processes and
facies sequences in the sandy braided South Saskatchewan
River, Canada. Sedimentology, 25: 625-648.
Carstens, H., 1986. Displacive growth of authigenic pyrite. J.
Sediment. Petrol., 56: 252-257.
Coleman, J. M., 1969. Brahmaputra River: channel processes
and sedimentation. Sediment. Geol., 3: 129-239.
Coleman, J. M. and Prior, D. B., 1982. Deltaic environments
of deposition. In: P.A. Scholle and D. Spearing (Editors),
Sandstone Depositional Environments. Am. Assoc. Pet.
Geol. Mem., 31: 115-137.
Cornet, B., 1977. The palynostratigraphy and age of the
Newark Supergroup. Thesis. Pennsylvania State Univ., Uni-
versity Park, 504 pp.
Cornet, B. and Olsen, P. E., 1985. A summary of the biostratig-
raphy of the Newark Supergroup of eastern North America
with comments on early Mesozoic provinciality. In: 3rd
Congr. Latinoamericano Paleontol., Mexico, Simp. Sobre
Floras del Triasico Tardio, su Fitogeografia y Paleoecologia
Mem., pp. 67-81.
Dan, J., 1973. Arid zone soils. In: B. Yaron, E. Danfors and
Y. Vaadia (Editors), Arid Zone Irrigation. Springer, New
York, NY, pp. 11-28.
Demicco, R.V. and Gierlowski-Kordesch, E. G., 1986. Facies
sequences of a semi-arid closed basin: the Lower Jurassic
East Berlin Formation of the Hartford basin, New England.
Sedimentology, 33: 107-118.
SEDIMENq~.RY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
Dittmar, E. I., 1979. Environmental interpretation of paleocur-
rents in the Triassic Durham basin. Thesis. Univ. North
Carolina, Chapel Hill, 91 pp.
Ediger, V. S., 1986. Paleopalynological biostratigraphy, organic
matter deposition, and basin analysis of the Triassic-(?)Juras-
sic Richmond rift basin, Virginia, U. S. A. Thesis. Pennsylva-
nia State Univ., University Park, 410 pp.
Eugster, H. P., 1969. Inorganic bedded cherts from the Magadi
area, Kenya. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol., 22: 1-31.
Faill, R. T., 1973. Tectonic development of the Triassic Newa-
rk-Gettysburg basin in Pennsylvania. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull.,
84: 725-740.
Fedosh, M. S. and Smoot, J.P., 1988. A cored stratigraphic
section through the northern Newark basin, New Jersey. In:
A.J. Froelich and G. R. Robinson Jr. (Editors), Studies of
the Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United States.
U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 1776: 19-24.
Friend, P. F., 1978. Distinctive features of some ancient river
systems. In: A.D. Miall (Editor), Fluvial Sedimentology.
Can. Soc. Pet. Geol. Mem., 5: 531-542.
Froelich, A.J. and Olsen, P. E., 1983, Newark Supergroup, a
revision of the Newark Group in eastern North America.
U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 1537-A: A55-A58.
Fryberger, S.G., Ahlbrandt, T.S. and Andrews, S., 1979.
Origin, sedimentary features, and significance of low-angle
"sand sheet" deposits, Great Sand Dunes National Monu-
ment and vicinity, Colorado. J. Sediment. Petrol., 49:
733-746.
Fryberger, S. G. and Schenk, C. J., 1988. Pinstripe lamination:
a distinctive feature of aeolian strata. Sediment. Geol., 55:
1-15.
Gilbert, G. K., 1890. Lake Bonneville. U. S. Geol. Surv. Mo-
nogr., 1,438 pp.
Gile, L. H., Peterson, F. F. and Grossman, R. B., 1966. Mor-
phological and genetic sequences in carbonate accumulation
in desert soils. Soil Sci., 101: 347-360.
Glaeser, J.D., 1966. Provenance, dispersal, and depositional
environments of Triassic sediments in the Newark-Gettys-
burg basins. Pennsylvania Geol. Surv. Bull., G43, 168 pp.
Glennie, K.W., 1970. Desert Sedimentary Environments.
Elsevier. Amsterdam, 222 pp.
Goldbery, R., 1982a. Structural analysis of soil microrelief in
paleosols of the Lower Jurassic "Laterite Derivitive Facies"
(Mishor and Arden Formations) Makhtesh Ramon, Israel.
Sediment. Geol., 31:119-140.
Goldbery, R., 1982b. Paleosols of the Lower Jurassic Mishor
and Arden Formations ("Laterite Derivitive Facies") Makht-
esh Ramon, Israel. Sedimentology, 29: 669-690.
Goodwin, B. K., Weems, R. E., Wilkes, G. P., Froelich, A. J.
and Smoot, J.P., 1985. Field Trip4: The Geology of the
Richmond and Taylorsville Basins, East-Central Virginia. In:
Eastern Sect. Meet. Guidebook, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol., 60
pp.
Gore, P. J. W., 1986. Depositional framework of a Triassic rift
basin: the Durham and Sanford sub-basins of the Deep
River basin, North Carolina. In: D.A. Textoris (Editor),
Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Field Guidebooks, Southeast-
ern U. S. 3rd Annu. Midyear Meet., Raleigh, N.C.,
pp. 53-I 15.
Gore, P. J. W., 1988. Late Triassic and Early Jurassic lacustrine
419
sedimentation in the Culpeper basin, Virginia. In: W. Mans-
peizer (Editor), Triassic-Jurassic Rifting: North America
and North Africa. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 369-400.
Gore, P. J. W., 1989. Toward a model for open- and closed-
basin deposition in ancient lacustrine sequences: the Newark
Supergroup (Triassic-Jurassic), eastern North America.
Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol., Palaeoecol., 70: 29-51.
Gore, P. J. W. and Talbot, M. R., 1989. Diagenetic history of
calcite concretions in lacustrine shale: Early Jurassic Midland
Fish-bed, Culpeper basin, Virginia. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr.
with Program, 20: A376-A377.
Gornitz, V. M. and Schreiber, B.C., 1981. Displacive halite
hoppers from the Dead Sea; some implications for ancient
evaporite deposits. J. Sediment. Petrol., 51: 787-794.
Gray, M. B. and Nickelson, R. P., 1989. Pedogenic slickensides,
indicators of strain and deformation processes in redbed
sequences of the Appalachian foreland. Geology, 17: 72-75.
Handy, W.A., 1976. Depositional history and diagenesis of
lacustrine and fluvial sedimentary rocks of the Turners Falls
and Mount Toby transition, north central Massachusetts.
Thesis. Univ. Massachusetts, Amherst, 115 pp.
Hardie, L.A., Smoot, J.P. and Eugster, H.P., 1978. Saline
lakes and their deposits: a sedimentological approach. In: A.
Matter and M. E. Tucker (Editors), Modern and Ancient
Lake Sediments. Int. Assoc. Sedimentol. Spec. PUN., 2: 7-41.
Harms, J.C., Southard, J.B., Spearing, D.R. and Walker,
R.G., 1975. Depositional environments as interpreted from
primary sedimentary structures and stratification sequences.
Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Short Course, 2, 161 pp.
Harms, J. C., Southard, J. B. and Walker, R. G., 1982. Deposi-
tion and stratification. In: Structures and Sequences in Clastic
Rocks. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Short Course, 9, 51
PP.
Hawkins, A.C., 1928. Halite and glauberite cavities and in-
cluded minerals from central New Jersey. Am. Mineral., 13:
238-239.
Hentz, T. F., 1985. Early Jurassic sedimentation in a rift-valley
lake: Culpeper basin, northern Virginia. Geol. Soc. Am.
Bull., 96: 92-107.
Heward, A. P., 1978. Alluvial fan sequence and megasequence
models: with examples from Westphalian D-Stephanian B
coalfields, northern Spain. In: A. D. Miall (Editor), Fluvial
Sedimentology. Can. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Mem., 5: 669-702.
Hoffman, C.W. and Gallagher, P. E., 1989. Geology of the
Southeast Durham and Southwest Durham 7.5 Minute
Quadrangles, North Carolina. North Carolina Geol. Surv.
Bull., 2, 34 pp.
Hope, R.C., 1975. A paleobotanical analysis of the Sanford
Triassic basin, North Carolina. Thesis. Univ. South Carolina,
Columbia, 74 pp.
Hubert, J. F., 1978. Paleosol caliche in the New Haven Arkose,
Newark Group, Connecticut. Palaeogeogr., Palaeoclimatol.,
Palaeoecol., 24: 151-168.
Hubert, J.F. and Florenza, M.F., 1988. Sedimentology of
braided-river deposits in Upper Triassic Wolfville redbeds,
southern shore of Cobequid Bay, Nova Scotia, Canada. In:
W. Manspeizer (Editor), Triassic-Jurassic Rifting: North
America and North Africa. Elsevier, Amsterdam,
pp. 231-247.
Hubert, J. F. and Hyde, M, G., 1982. Sheet-flow deposits of
420
graded beds and mudstones on an alluvial fan sandflat-playa
system: Upper Triassic Blomidon redbeds, St. Mary's Bay,
Nova Scotia. Sedimentology, 29: 457-474.
Hubert, J. F. and Mertz, K. A., 1980. Eolian dune field of Late
Triassic age, Fundy basin, Nova Scotia. Geology, 8:516-519.
Hubert, J. F. and Mertz, K. A., 1984, Eolian sandstones in the
Upper Triassic-Lower Jurassic redbeds of the Fundy basin,
Nova Scotia. J. Sediment. Petrol., 54: 798-810.
Hubert, J. F., Reed, A. A. and Carey, P. J., 1976. Paleogeogra-
phy of the East Berlin Formation, Newark Group, Connecti-
cut Valley. Am. J. Sci., 276: 1183-1207.
Hubert, J. F., Reed, A. A., Dowdall, W. L. and Gilchrist, J. M.,
1978. Guide to the Mesozoic redbeds of central Connecti-
cut.In: Conn. Geol. Nat. Hist. Surv. Guidebook, 4, 129 pp.
Hunter, R. E., 1977. Basic types of stratification in small eolian
dunes. Sedimentology, 24: 361-387.
Hutchinson, D. R. and Klitgord, K. D., 1988. Evolution of rift
basins on the continental margin off southern New England.
In: W. Manspeizer (Editor), Triassic-Jurassic Rifting: North
America and North Africa. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 81-98.
Johnson, A. M., 1970. Physical Processes in Geology. Freeman
and Cooper, San Francisco, 577 pp.
Jopling, A. V. and Walker, R. G., 1968, Morphology and origin
of ripple-drift cross lamination, with examples from the
Pleistocene of Massachusetts. J. Sediment. Petrol., 38:
971-984.
Kocurek, G. and Nielson, J., 1986. Conditions favourable for
the formation of warm-climate aeolian sand sheets. Sedi-
mentology, 33: 795-816.
Langbein, W. B., 1961. Salinity and hydrology of closed lakes.
U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap., 412, 20 pp.
Lee, K. Y. and Froelich, A. J., 1989. Triassic-Jurassic stratigra-
phy of the Culpeper and Barboursville basins, Virginia and
Maryland. U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap., 1472, 52 pp.
LeTourneau, P.M., 1985. Alluvial fan development in the
Lower Jurassic Portland Formation, central Connecticut - -
implications for tectonics and climate. In: G.R. Robinson
Jr. and A. J. Froelich (Editors), Proc. 2nd U. S. Geol. Surv.
Workshop Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United
States. U. S. Geol. Surv. Circ., 946: 17-26.
LeTourneau, P.M. and Smoot, J.P., 1985. Comparison of
ancient and modern lake-margin deposits from the Lower
Jurassic Portland Formation, Connecticut, and Walker Lake,
Nevada. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr.with Program, 17, p. 31.
Lindholm, R.C., 1979. Geologic history and stratigraphy of
the Triassic-Jurassic Culpeper basin, Virginia. Geol. Soc.
Am. Bull., 90: 1702-1736.
Lorenz, J. C., 1988. Triassic-Jurassic Rift Basin Sedimentology.
Van Nostrand Rheinhold, New York, NY, 315 pp.
LuttreU, G. W., 1989. Stratigraphic nomenclature of the New-
ark Supergroup of eastern North America. U. S. Geol. Surv.
Bull., 1572, 136 pp.
Manspeizer, W., 1988. Triassic-Jurassic rifting and opening of
the Atlantic: an overview. In: W. Manspeizer (Editor), Trias-
sic-Jurassic Rifting: North America and North Africa. Elsev-
ier, Amsterdam, pp. 41-79.
Manspeizer, W. and Olsen, P.E., 1981. Rift basins of the
passive margin: tectonics, organic-rich lacustrine sediments,
basin analyses. In: G.W. Hobbs III (Editor), Field Guide
to the Geology of the Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Tertiary
J.P. SMOOT
Rocks of New Jersey and the Central Hudson Valley. Petrol.
Explor. Soc., New York, NY, pp. 25-105.
Margolis, J., Robinson Jr., G. R., and Schafer, C.M., 1986.
Annotated bibliography of studies on the geology, geochem-
istry, mineral resources, and geophysical character of the
early Mesozoic basins of the eastern United States. U.S.
Geol. Surv. Bull., 1688, 492 pp.
McDonald, N. G. and LeTourneau, P. M., 1988. Paleoenviron-
mental reconstruction of a fluvial-deltaic-lacustrine sequence,
Lower Jurassic Portland Formation, Sutfield, Connecticut.
In: A. J. Froelich and G. R. Robinson Jr. (Editors), Studies
of the early Mesozoic basins of the Eastern United States.
U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 1776: 24-30.
McGowen, M., 1981. The Feltville Formation of the Watchung
syncline, Newark basin, New Jersey. Thesis. Rutgers Univ.,
Rutgers, NJ, 135 pp.
McLaughlin, D.B., 1939. A great alluvial fan in the Triassic
of Pennsylvania. Mich. Acad. Sci. Pap., 24: 59-74.
McLaughlin, D.B., 1945. Type sections of the Stockton and
Lockatong Formations. Pa. Acad. Sci. Proc., 19: 102-113.
McLaughlin, D. B., 1957. Triassic alluvial fans in Pennsylvania.
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 68: 1765-1766.
McLaughlin, D. B. and Gerhard, R. C., 1953. Stratigraphy and
origin of Triassic fluvial sediments, Lebanon and Lancaster
Counties. Pa. Acad. Sci. Proc., 27: 136-142.
McPherson, J. G., Shanmugam, G. and Moiola, R.J., 1987.
Fan-deltas and braid deltas: varieties of coarse-grained del-
tas. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 99: 331-340.
Mermut, A. R. and Dasog, G. S., 1986. Nature and morphol-
ogy of carbonate glaebules in some vertisols of India. Soil
Sci. Am. J., 50: 382-391.
Mertz, K.A. and Hubert, J.F., 1990. Cycles of sand-fiat
sandstone and playa-lacustrine mudstone in the Triassic-
Jurassic Blomidon redbeds, Fundy rift basin, Novia Scotia:
implications for tectonic and climatic controls. Can. J. Earth
Sci., 27: 442-451.
Miall, A. D., 1978. Lithofacies types and vertical profile models
in braided river deposits: a summary. In: A. D. Miall (Edi-
tor), Fluvial Sedimentology. Can. Soc. Pet. Geol. Mem., 5:
597-604.
Middleton, G. V., 1973. Johannes Walther's law of the correla-
tion of facies. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 84: 979-988.
Nilsen, T. H., 1982. Alluvial fan deposits. In: P. A. Scholle and
D. Spearing (Editors), Sandstone Depositional Environ-
ments. Am, Assoc. Pet. Geol. Mere., 31: 49-86.
Olsen, P.E., 1980a. The latest Triassic and Early Jurassic
formations of the Newark basin (eastern North America,
Newark Supergroup): stratigraphy, structure, and correla-
tion. N. J. Acad. Sci. Bull., 25: 25-51.
Olsen, P.E., 1980b. Fossil great lakes of the Newark Super-
group in New Jersey. In: W. Manspeizer (Editor), Field
Studies of New Jersey Geology and Guide to Field Stops.
52nd Annu. Meet. New York State Geol. Assoc., Rutgers
Univ., Newark, pp. 352-398.
Olsen, P. E., 1983. On the non-correlation of Newark Super-
group by fossil fishes. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. with Program,
15, p. 121.
Olsen, P. E., 1984. Comparative paleolimnology of the Newark
Supergroup - - A study of ecosystem evolution. Thesis. Yale
Univ., New Haven, CT, 726 pp.
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
Olsen, P. E., 1985. Distribution of organic-rich lacustrine rocks
in the early Mesozoic Newark Supergroup. In: G. R. Robin-
son Jr. and A. J. Froelich (Editors), Proc. 2nd U. S. Geol.
Surv. Workshop Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United
States. U. S. Geol. Surv. Circ., 946: 61-64.
Olsen, P.E., 1986. A 40-million year lake record of early
Mesozoic orbital climatic forcing. Science, 234: 842-848.
Olsen, P.E., 1988. Continuity of strata in the Newark and
Hartford basins. In: A.J. Froelich and G. R. Robinson Jr.
(Editors), Studies of the early Mesozoic basins of the Eastern
United States. U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 1776: 6-18.
Olsen, P. E., Froelich, A.J., Daniels, D. L , Smoot, J. P. and
Gore, P. J. W., in press. Rift basins of early Mesozoic age.
In: J. W. Horton Jr. and V. A. Zullo (Editors), The Geology
of the Carolinas: Carolina Geological Society 50th Anniver-
sary Volume. Univ. Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
Olsen, P. E., McCune, A. R. and Thomson, K. S., 1982. Corre-
lation of the early Mesozoic Newark Supergroup by verte-
brates, principally fishes. Am. J. Sci., 282: 1-44.
Olsen, P. E. and Schlische, R. W., 1988. Quantitative rift basin
evolution: Application of extensional basin filling model to
early Mesozoic rifts, E. North America. Geol. Soc. Am.
Abstr. with Program, 20, p. A123.
Olsen, P.E., Schlische, R.W. and Gore, P . J . W . (Editors),
1989. Tectonic, Depositional, and Paleoecological History of
Early Mesozoic Rift Basins, Eastern North America. In:
Field Trip Guidebook T351, 28th Int. Geol. Congr., Am.
Geophys. Union, Washington, D. C., 174 pp.
Oshchudlak, M. E. and Hubert, J. F., 1988. Petrology of Meso-
zoic sandstones in the Newark basin, central New Jersey and
adjacent New York. In: W. Manspeizer (Editor), Triassic-
Jurassic Rifting: North America and North Africa. Elsevier,
Amsterdam, pp. 333-352.
Parker, R.A., Houghton, H. F. and McDowell, R.C., 1988.
Stratigraphic framework and distribution of early Mesozoic
rocks of the northern Newark basin, New Jersey and New
York. In: A. J. Froelich and G. R. Robinson Jr. (Editors),
Studies of the Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United
States. U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 1776: 31-39.
Parnell, J., 1983. Skeletal halites from the Jurassic of Massachu-
setts, and their significance. Sedimentology, 30: 711-715.
Patterson, O.C., 1969. The depositional environment and
paleoecology of the Pekin Formation of the Sanford Triassic
basin, North Carolina. Thesis. North Carolina State Univ.,
Raleigh, 104 pp.
Picard, M. D. and High Jr., L. R., 1973. Sedimentary Structures
of Ephemeral Streams. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 223 pp.
Porter, K.G. and Robbins, E.I., 1981. Zooplankton fecal
pellets link fossil fuel and phosphate deposits. Science, 212:
931-933.
Pratt, L. M., Vuletich, A. K. and Daws, T. A., 1985. Geochemi-
cal and isotopic characterization of organic matter in rocks
of the Newark Supergroup. In: G. R. Robinson Jr. and A. J.
Froelich (Editors), Proc. 2nd U. S. Geol. Surv. Workshop
Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United States. U. S.
Geol. Surv. Circ., 946: 74-78.
Randazzo, A. F., Swe, W. and Wheeler, W. H., 1970. A study
of tectonic influence on Triassic sedimentation-the Wades-
boro basin, central Piedmont. J. Sediment. Petrol., 40: 998-
1006.
421
Ratcliffe, N. M. and Burton, W.C., 1985. Fault reactivation
models for origin of the Newark basin and studies related
to eastern U. S. seismicity. In: G. R. Robinson Jr. and A. J.
Froelich (Editors), Proc. 2nd U. S. Geol. Surv. Workshop
Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United States. U. S.
Geol. Surv. Circ., 946: 36-45.
Ratcliffe, N. M., Burton, W. C., D'Angelo, R. M. and Costain,
J. K., 1986. Low-angle extensional faulting, reactivated mylo-
nites, and seismic reflection geometry of the Newark basin
margin in eastern Pennsylvania. Geology, 14: 766-770.
Raymond, C. A., Ellwood, B. B., Chaves, L. and Leavy, B. D.,
1982. Paleomagnetic analyses of lower Mesozoic diabase and
basalt from the central and southern Appalachians. Geol.
Soc. Am. Abstr. with Program, 14, 76.
Reading, H. G., 1978. Sedimentary Environments and Facies.
Elsevier, New York, NY, 557 pp.
Reinemund, J. A., 1955. Geology of the Deep River coal field,
North Carolina. U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap., 246, 159 pp.
Ressetar, R. and Taylor, G. K., 1988. Late Triassic depositional
history of the Richmond and Taylorsville basins, eastern
Virginia. In: W. Manspeizer (Editor), Triassic-Jurassic Rift-
ing: North America and North Africa. Elsevier, Amsterdam,
pp. 423-443.
Retallack, G.J., 1988. Field recognition of paieosols. In: J.
Reinhardt and W. R. Sigleo (Editors), Paleosols and Weath-
ering Through Geologic Time: Principles and Applications.
Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap., 216: 1-20.
Richardson, J. L., 1969. Former lake-level fluctuations - - their
recognition and interpretation. Theor. Appl. Limnol., 17:
78-93.
Robbins, E. I., Wilkes, G. P. and Textoris, D.A., 1988. Coal
deposits of the Newark rift system. In: W. Manspeizer
(Editor), Triassic-Jurassic Rifting: North America and
North Africa. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 649-682.
Russell, I.C., 1892. Correlation papers, the Newark system.
U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 85, 344 pp.
Rust, B.R., 1972. Structure and process in a braided river.
Sedimentology, 18: 221-245.
Sanders, J. E., 1963. Late Triassic tectonic history of northeast-
ern United States. Am. J. Sci., 261: 501-524.
Schaller, W.T., 1932. The crystal cavities of the New Jersey
zeolite region. U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 832, 85 pp.
Schlische, R.W. and Olsen, P.E., 1988. Structural evolution
of the Newark basin. In: J.M. Husch and M.J. Hozik
(Editors), Geology of the Central Newark Basin. 5th Annu.
Meet., New Jersey Geol. Assoc., Rider College, Law-
renceville, N J, pp. 43-65.
Seidemann, D.E., Masterson, W.D., Dowling, M.P. and
Turekian, K.K., 1984. K - A t dates and 4°Ar/a9Ar age
spectra for Mesozoic basalt flows of the Hartford basin,
Connecticut, and the Newark basin, New Jersey. Geol. Soc.
Am. Bull., 95: 594-598.
Sharp, R.P., 1942. Mudflow levees. J. Geomorphol., 5:
222-227.
Sharp, R. P., 1963. Wind ripples. J. Geol., 71: 617-636.
Smith, D.G., 1983. Anastomosed fluvial deposits: modern
examples from western Canada. In: J. D. Collinson and J.
Lewin (Editors), Modern and Ancient Fluvial Systems. Int.
Assoc. Sedimentol. Spec. Publ., 6: 155-168.
Smith, R. M.H., 1990. Alluvial paleosols and pedofacies se-
422
quences in the Permian Lower Beaufort of the southwestern
Karoo Basin, South Africa. J. Sediment. Petrol., 60: 248-276.
Smoot, J.P., 1982. Sedimentary fabrics of debris flow-domi-
nated, stream-modified alluvial fan in Saline Valley, Cali-
fornia. Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol., 66, p. 633.
Smoot, J.P., 1985. The closed basin hypothesis and its use in
facies analysis of the Newark Supergroup. In: G. R. Robin-
son Jr. and A. J. Froelich (Editors), Proc. 2nd U. S. Geol.
Surv. Workshop Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United
States. U. S. Geol. Surv. Circ., 946: 4-10.
Smoot, J. P., in press. Triassic-Jurassic sedimentary rocks. In:
C.H. Schultz (Editor), The Geology of Pennsylvania. Pa.
Geol. Surv., Harrisburg.
Smoot, J. P. and Castens-Seidell, B., 1982. Sedimentary fabrics
produced in playa sediments by efflorescent salt crusts: an
explanation for "adhesion ripples". In: Int. Assoc. Sedi-
mentol. I lth Int. Congr. Sedimentol. Abstr., Hamilton, Ont.,
pp. 10.
Smoot, J. P. and Horowitz, M. R., 1988. Vug-filling diagenetic
minerals in early Mesozoic lacustrine rocks of the Newark
Supergroup. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. with Program, 20, A52.
Smoot, J.P. and Katz, S.B., 1982. Comparison of modern
playa mudflat fabrics to cycles in the Triassic Lockatong
Formation of New Jersey. Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. with
Program, 14, p. 83.
Smoot, J. P. and LeTourneau, P. M., 1989. Wave-formed shore-
line deposits on alluvial fans: Examples from modern Pyra-
mid and Walker Lakes, Nevada, and early Mesozoic Newark
Supergroup. In: 28th Int. Geol. Congr., Washington, D. C.,
Abstr., 3: 141-142.
Smoot, J. P., LeTourneau, P. M., Turner-Peterson, C. M. and
Olsen, P.E., 1985. Sandstone and conglomerate shoreline
deposits in Triassic-Jurassic Newark and Hartford basins of
Newark Supergroup. Bull. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol., 69, p. 1448.
Smoot, J.P. and Lowenstein, T.K., in press. Depositional
environments of non-marine evaporites. In: J.L. Melvin
(Editor), Evaporites. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Smoot, J.P. and Olsen, P.E., 1988. Massive mudstones in
basin analysis and paleoclimatic interpretation of the Newark
Supergroup. In: W. Manspeizer (Editor), Triassic-Jurassic
Rifting: North America and North Africa. Elsevier, Amster-
dam, pp. 249-274.
Smoot, J. P. and Robinson Jr., G. R., 1988. Sedimentology of
stratabound base-metal occurrences in the Newark Super-
group. In: A. J. Froelich and G. R. Robinson Jr. (Editors),
Studies of the early Mesozoic basins of the Eastern United
States. U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 1776: 356-376.
Snyder, C.T., 1962. A hydrologic classification of valleys in
the Great Basin, western United States. Int. Assoc. Sci.
Hydrol. Bull., 7: 53-59.
Southgate, P.N., 1982. Cambrian skeletal halite crystals and
experimental analogues. Sedimentology, 29: 391-408.
Spencer, R. J., 1982. The geochemical evolution of Great Salt
Lake, Utah. Thesis. Johns Hopkins Univ., Baltimore, MD,
309 pp.
Stear, W. M., 1983. Morphological characteristics of ephemeral
stream channel and overbank splay sandstones in the Per-
mian Lower Beaufort Group, Karoo Basin, South Africa.
In: J.D. Collinson and J. Lewin (Editors), Modern and
j.P. SMOOT
Ancient Fluvial Systems. Int. Assoc. Sedimentol. Spec. Publ.,
6: 405-420.
Stevens, R. L. and Hubert, J. F., 1980. Alluvial fans, braided
rivers, and lakes in a fault-bounded semiarid valley: Sugarloaf
Arkose (Late Triassic-Early Jurassic), Newark Supergroup,
Deerfield basin, Massachusetts. Northeast. Geol., 2:100-117.
Stewart, D. J', 1983. Possible suspended-load channel deposits
from the Wealdon Group (Lower Cretaceous) of Southern
England. In: J. D. Collinson and J. Lewin (Editors), Modern
and Ancient Fluvial Systems. Int. Assoc. Sedimentol. Spec.
Publ., 6: 369-384.
Stoops, G. J., 1978. Petrography of some pedogenetic gypsum
deposits. In: 10th Int. Congr. Sedimentol. Abstr., 2,
pp. 644-645.
Stose, G.W., 1919. Glauberite crystal cavities in the Triassic
rocks in the vicinity of Gettysburg, Pa. Am. Mineral., 4:
I~,.
Sutter, J.F., 1985. Progress on geochronology of Mesozoic
diabases and basalts. In: G.R. Robinson Jr. and A.J.
Froelich (Editors), Proc. 2nd U.S. Geol. Surv. Workshop
Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United States. U.S.
Geol. Surv. Circ., 946:110-114.
Sutter, J.F., 1988. Innovative approaches to dating igneous
events in the early Mesozoic basins of the Eastern United
States. In: A. J. Froelich and G. R. Robinson Jr. (Editors),
Studies of the Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern United
States. U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull., 1776: 194-200.
Swanson, M.T., 1986. Preexisting fault control for Mesozoic
basin formation in eastern North America. Geology, 14:
419-422.
Taylor, G. and Woodyer, K.D., 1978. Bank deposition and
suspended load streams. In: A.D. Miall (Editor), Fluvial
Sedimentology. Can. Soc. Pet. Geol. Mem., 5: 257-275.
Textoris, D.A. and Gore, P. J. W., in press. Upper Triassic
organic-rich lake, Sanford sub-basin, North Carolina,
U. S. A. In: K. Kelts (Editor), The Geologic Record of Lake
Basins. Cambridge Univ. Press.
Textoris, D. A. and Holden, C. J., 1986. Paleoclimatic change
within a stratigraphic section. In: D.A. Textoris (Editor),
Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Field Guidebooks, Southeast.
U. S. 3rd Annu. Midyear Meet., Raleigh, N. C., pp. 101-102.
Textoris, D.A., Stagg, J.W. and Wheeler, W.H., 1986. The
"Millstone Grit". In: D.A. Textoris (Editor), Soc. Econ.
Paleontol. Mineral. Field Guidebooks, Southeast. U. S. 3rd
Annu. Midyear Meet., Raleigh, N. C., pp. 92-97.
Thayer, P.A., 1970. Stratigraphy and geology of Dan River
Triassic basin. Southeast. Geol., 12: 1-31.
Traverse, A., 1987. Pollen and spores date origin of rift basins
from Texas to Nova Scotia as early Late Triassic. Science,
236: 1469-1472.
Turner-Peterson, C.M., 1980. Sedimentology and uranium
mineralization in the Triassic-Jurassic Newark basin, Penn-
sylvania and New Jersey. In: C. M. Turner-Peterson (Editor),
Uranium in sedimentary rocks: applications of the facies
concept to exploration. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral.,
Rocky Mtn. Sect., Short Course Notes, pp. 149-176.
Turner-Peterson, C. M. and Smoot, J. P., 1985. New thoughts
on facies relationships in the Triassic Stockton and Locka-
SEDIMENTARY FACIES AND DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS OF EARLY MESOZOIC NEWARK SUPERGROUP BASINS
tong Formations, Pennsylvania and New Jersey. In: G. R.
Robinson Jr. and A.J. Froelich (Editors), Proc. 2nd U. S.
Geol. Surv. Workshop Early Mesozoic Basins of the Eastern
United States, U. S. Geol. Surv. Circ., 946: 10-17.
Van Houten, F. B., 1962. Cyclic sedimentation and the origin
of analcime-rich Upper Triassic Lockatong Formation, west-
central New Jersey and adjacent Pennsylvania. Am. J. Sci.,
260: 561-576.
Van Houten, F.B., 1964. Cyclic lacustrine sedimentation,
Upper Triassic Lockatong Formation, central New Jersey
and adjacent Pennsylvania. In: D.F. Merriam (Editor),
Symp. Cyclic Sedimentation. Kans. Geol. Surv. Bull., 169:
497-531.
Van Houten, F.B., 1965. Crystal casts in Upper Triassic
Lockatong and Brunswick Formations. Sedimentology, 4:
301-313.
Wasson, R.J., 1982. The morphologic and sedimentologic
423
continuum from high-angle debris slopes to low-angle fans
in the Hindu Kush. In: 11th Int. Congr. Sedimentol. Abstr.
Pap., pp. 50,
Wessel, J.M., 1969. Sedimentary history of Upper Triassic
alluvial fan complexes in north-central Massachusetts. Univ.
Mass. Dep. Geol. Contrib., 2, 157 pp.
Wheeler, G., 1937. The west wall of the New England Triassic
lowland. Conn. Geol. Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull., 58, 73 pp.
Wheeler, W. H. and Textoris, D.A., 1978. Triassic limestone
and chert of playa origin in North Carolina. J. Sediment.
Petrol., 48: 765-776.
Wherry, E. T., 1916. Glauberite crystal cavities in the Triassic
rocks of eastern Pennsylvania. Am. Miner., 1: 37-43.
Woodyer, K. D., Taylor, G. and Crook, K. A. W., 1979. Sedi-
mentation and benches in a very low gradient suspended
load stream: the Barwon River, New South Wales. Sediment.
Geol,, 22: 97-120.