Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

www.elsevier.com/locate/sedgeo

Discriminating depositional environments of sands from modern

source terranes using modal analysis
J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga*, W.W. Dickinson
Victoria University of Wellington, School of Earth Sciences, PO Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand
Received 14 April 2000; accepted 15 December 2000

Abstract
Composition of modern beach, dune and ¯uvial sands from the Gulf of Mexico coast, and the Kapiti and Foxton Coasts, New
Zealand, were compared in order to establish petrological criteria that discriminate between depositional environments and
subenvironments. The three areas were chosen because of their different sand compositions. Sand from the Gulf of Mexico is
quartzofeldspathic to feldspatholithic. Sand from the Kapiti Coast sands is feldspatholithic and sand from the Foxton is
lithofeldspathic. Using a con®dence level of 95%, petrographic data were plotted as bar charts for each environment (beach,
dune, river) and for each subenvironment (inshore, foreshore, backshore of the beaches, stoss, crest, lee face of eolian dunes,
upstream and mouths of the river). The best discrimination of beach, dune and river environments was achieved for the Gulf of
Mexico sands using Q±F±L and Qm±K±P plots. Terranes with multiple source rock types such as the Gulf of Mexico enhance
petrological discrimination between sands from beach, dune and river subenvironments and environments. In terranes with few
rock source types such as the Kapiti Coast, only the river sands can be discriminated from those of other environments. The
single rock source of the Foxton Coast allows little petrological discrimination between the beach, dune and river sands.This
study examines compositional differences between beach, dune and river subenvironments and environments, and the degree to
which these differences are dependent on the variation of rock types in the source terrane. The study also shows the usefulness
of Q±F±L, Qm±K±P and Lv±Lm±Ls bar charts. The discrimination among beach, dune and river sands is partly due to grain-
size variation. q 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Sand; Con®dence level; Beach; Dune; River

1. Introduction analysis (Ingersoll, 1990; Molinaroli et al., 1991)

The petrography of modern and ancient sand has
been widely used to address the relationships between
source terrane and sand composition (Ingersoll, 1978;
Dickinson et al., 1983; Basu, 1985; Potter, 1986;
Ibbeken and Schleyer, 1991). Methods of provenance
determination of sand using discriminant function
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: juan.kasper@vuw.ac.nz (J.J. Kasper-Zubil-
laga).
0037-0738/01/$ - see front matter q 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0037-073 8(01)00058-6
and classic ternary plots (Dickinson and Suczek,
1979; Dickinson and Valloni, 1980; Critelli et al.,
1997; Le Pera and Critelli, 1997) have also been
reported. However, compositional differences
between the inshore (breaker zone), foreshore
(swash zone) and backshore (dry zone) of the
beach, the stoss, crest and lee face of eolian dunes
and mouths and upstream of rivers have not
been studied. In this paper, we follow a new
approach to distinguish between beach, dune and
river subenvironments and environments in terms
150 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

of their mineralogical components by using simple

bar charts. We show compositional differences
between these sandy environments by using Q±F±
L (total quartz, feldspars and lithic fragments), Qm±
K±P (monocrystalline quartz, K-feldspars and
plagioclase) and Lv±Lm±Ls (volcanic, metamorphic
and sedimentary lithic fragments) charts with con®-
dence level bars at 95%. This approach considers sand
suites derived from three different source terranes:
quartzofeldspathic to feldspatholithic sands from the
Gulf of Mexico, feldspatholithic sands from the
Kapiti Coast, and lithofeldspathic sands from
the Foxton Coast in New Zealand. In this paper
we: (a) establish sand compositional differences
between beach, dune and river environments
supplied from different source terranes, (b) the
relationships between sand groupings and source
area compositions and (c) the usefulness of Q±
F±L, Qm±K±P and Lv±Lm±Ls charts to discrimi-
nate sandy depositional environments supplied
from different source terranes.

2. Study areas

2.1. Gulf of Mexico

The area is located in the western part of the Gulf of

Mexico at (198 25 0 ±198 48 N lat; 968 20 0 ±968 27 0 W
long) (Fig. 1). The length of coast is about 60 km and
its beaches are classi®ed as transgressive and wave-
dominated (Boyd et al., 1992). Surface water currents
have a northward component in summer with an aver-
age velocity of 4.5 cm/s. In winter, the currents
reverse their direction and ¯ow to the south with an
average velocity of 6 cm/s (FernaÂndez-Eguiarte et al.,
1992a, 1992b).
In areal extent, migrating dunes dominate over
nonmigrating, vegetated dunes, and wind direction
has a permanent impact on the dune morphology.
The ¯uvial network in the area consists of ®ve
seasonal streams and three perennial rivers.
The sedimentary terranes are dominated by
Tertiary and Quaternary alluvial deposits. The
volcanic units comprises Miocene-Pliocene ande-
sites of calcalkaline composition (Cantagrel and
Robin, 1979) that extend to the central area of the
coast, and Pliocene basalts of alkaline composition
Fig. 1. Gulf of Mexico Coast study area.
(Negendank et al., 1985), also distributed in the
central area of the coast (Fig. 1)
2.2. Kapiti and Foxton, New Zealand
The Kapiti and Foxton Coasts are located on
the southwestern side of the North Island (408
32 0 ±408 54 S lat; 1748 58 0 ±1758 12 0 E long)
(40±408 28 0 S lat; 175±1758 30 0 E long) (Figs.
2 and 3). The area has more than 95 km of sand
and mixed gravel-sand beaches with coastal dunes.
The beaches studied were the Whareroa, Peka
Peka and Otaki beaches on the Kapiti coast and
Foxton, Himatangi, Moanaroa, Whangaehu and
Wanganui beaches on the Foxton coast. Whareroa
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167
Fig. 2. Kapiti Coast study area.
beach is accreting whereas Peka Peka and Otaki
beaches are eroding (Gibb, 1978). Observations
suggest that the coast is retreating in Foxton
while south of Foxton the coast is prograding.
The cycle of erosion and accretion along these
beaches is episodic and not periodic and it
is in¯uenced mainly by storm surges (Gibb, 1978).
The inferred net sediment transport along the beaches
according to the observations from April 1974 to June
1975 is southward (Gibb, 1978). The longshore
currents have mean velocities of 0.1±0.3 m.sec 21
and maximum velocities of 0.6±0.9 m.sec 21 (Gibb,
1978). However, there is also evidence of a northward
longshore drift component affecting the Whareroa
Beach (Gibb, 1978). The Kapiti-Foxton coastal
151
Fig. 3. Foxton-Wanganui study area.
dunes have been described as contemporary vegetated
embryo/foredunes systems which run parallel to the
beach (Wright, 1989).
The ¯uvial network sampled on the Kapiti coast
includes the Otaki rivers, and the Whareroa and
Mangaone streams (Fig. 2). Along the Foxton
coast, the Manawatu Whangaehu and Wanganui
rivers and the Kaikokopu stream were sampled
(Fig. 3). The coastal plain from the Whareroa to
the Otaki Beaches is covered by Holocene dunes
and lies at the foot of a post-glacial sea-cliff cut
in Triassic greywacke (Kingma, 1967). The
Foxton coast is in¯uenced by Pleistocene shell-
beds, marine-volcaniclastic sands, limestones,
conglomerates having greywackes, quartzite and
152 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

Table 1
Graphic mean size, sorting and petrography of the beach, dune and river sands from the Gulf of Mexico. Q ˆ total quartz (monocrystalline and
polycrystalline quartz); F ˆ K-feldspar 1 plagioclase; L ˆ rock fragments; Qm ˆ monocrystalline quartz; K ˆ K- feldspars; P ˆ plagioclase;
Lv ˆ volcanic; Ls ˆ sedimentary lithic fragments; Mz ˆ mean grain-size, s ˆ sorting, x ˆ average, sd ˆ standard deviation

Sedimentary environment Mz s Q F L Qm K P Lv Ls

Beach n ˆ 12
Inshore 2.03 0.39 34.8 18.0 47.2 48.8 15.8 35.4 83.0 17.0
Inshore 2.04 0.39 45.4 11.6 43.0 66.9 4.3 28.4 84.0 16.0
Inshore 2.26 0.52 31.7 22.5 45.8 41.1 4.4 54.5 55.0 45.0
Inshore 1.72 0.39 14.0 18.4 67.6 16.1 1.8 82.1 91.0 9.0
Foreshore 2.38 0.25 56.7 19.6 23.7 66.3 7.1 26.6 74.0 26.0
Foreshore 2.12 0.41 48.7 14.2 37.1 62.0 12.7 25.3 72.0 28.0
Foreshore 2.54 0.32 18.2 22.3 59.5 22.2 1.4 76.4 75.0 25.0
Foreshore 1.99 0.59 19.3 24.1 56.6 21.7 5.2 73.1 70.0 30.0
Backshore 2.09 0.40 34.7 36.0 29.3 32.3 22.6 45.1 78.0 22.0
Backshore 2.03 0.50 50.7 20.0 29.3 52.3 5.8 34.9 70.0 30.0
Backshore 1.99 0.59 2.7 17.2 80.1 3.4 6.4 90.2 69.0 31.0
Backshore 2.44 0.43 22.6 35.0 42.4 11.8 3.9 84.3 50.0 50.0

Dune n ˆ 12
Stoss 2.08 0.33 43.2 24.0 32.8 52.4 2.1 45.5 65.0 35.0
Stoss 2.24 0.25 53.2 14.7 32.1 70.0 3.2 26.8 77.0 23.0
Stoss 1.57 0.70 25.6 26.8 47.6 29.8 4.2 66.0 75.0 25.0
Stoss 2.24 0.41 24.0 35.1 40.9 25.3 0.9 73.8 90.0 10.0
Crest 2.30 0.33 40.7 29.2 30.1 43.3 8.6 48.1 71.0 29.0
Crest 2.28 0.27 61.1 20.1 18.8 68.5 6.5 25.0 72.0 28.0
Crest 2.56 0.72 28.9 50.3 20.8 29.8 0.8 69.4 75.0 25.0
Crest 2.45 0.38 40.5 52.1 7.4 41.9 10.0 48.1 70.0 30.0
Lee 2.45 0.37 61.6 20.7 17.7 69.1 5.9 25.0 67.0 33.0
Lee 2.35 0.30 65.6 16.3 18.1 74.8 10.8 14.4 77.0 23.0
Lee 2.57 0.41 41.5 26.2 32.3 48.7 4.3 47.0 75.0 25.0
Lee 1.99 0.72 42.4 19.6 38.0 51.7 6.0 42.3 75.0 25.0

River n ˆ 9
Upstream 21.06 0.88 2.7 23.0 74.3 2.9 6.8 90.3 97.0 3.0
Upstream 0.75 1.72 4.8 44.4 50.8 2.8 9.4 87.8 91.0 9.0
Upstream 21.57 0.84 5.5 36.9 57.6 5.5 ± 94.5 92.0 8.0
Upstream 20.92 1.87 1.3 9.9 88.8 1.3 7.9 90.8 90.0 10.0
Mouth 2.49 0.38 26.3 22.8 50.9 32.1 4.2 63.7 90.0 10.0
Mouth 2.17 0.50 24.5 18.5 57.0 35.1 4.4 60.5 70.0 30.0
Mouth 1.38 1.03 7.9 15.3 76.8 10.4 ± 89.6 97.0 3.0
Mouth 20.77 1.65 8.8 8.8 82.4 11.7 ± 88.3 90.0 10.0
Mouth 20.75 2.44 8.3 18.2 73.5 8.9 4.3 86.8 94.0 6.0
x 1.64 0.65 30.2 24.3 45.5 35.2 5.8 59.0 78.0 22.0
sd 1.20 0.52 19.2 11.5 21.2 23.4 4.76 25.2 11.5 11.5

andesites clasts, volcanic ash layers and Holocene
sand dunes (Lensen, 1959) (Fig. 3).
3. Methods
A total of 101 beach (n ˆ 42), dune (n ˆ 39) and
¯uvial (n ˆ 20) sands were sampled from the Gulf of
Mexico (March±April 1997), and the Kapiti and
Foxton coasts (September±November 1999). Only
the uppermost centimeter of sediment was collected
from the inshore, foreshore and backshore of the
beaches, the stoss, crest and lee face of the dunes
and the mouth and upper reaches of the rivers. This
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167 153

Table 2
Graphic mean size, sorting and petrography of the beach, dune and river sands from the Kapiti Coast. See Table 1 for symbols. Lm ˆ
metamorphic lithic fragments

Site/sample Grid a Sub- Mz s Q F L Qm K P Lv Lm Ls

environments

Whareroa R26 Inshore 2.59 0.44 27.1 15.1 57.8 50.0 10.0 40.0 41.0 15.0 44.0
Beach 2597 Foreshore 2.69 0.33 26.4 24.4 49.2 36.0 ± 64.0 27.0 14.0 59.0
Sample WB1 56 Backshore 2.26 0.49 13.0 27.0 60.0 15.6 ± 84.4 17.0 12.0 71.0
nˆ5 Stoss 2.59 0.26 39.0 15.5 45.5 58.1 1.3 40.6 36.0 10.0 54.0
Crest 2.74 0.18 37.5 30.0 32.5 42.3 1.0 56.7 35.0 9.0 56.0
Whareroa R26 Inshore 1.96 1.08 28.0 9.5 62.5 66.1 ± 33.9 27.0 9.0 64.0
Beach 2607 Foreshore 2.65 0.24 30.0 18.0 52.0 51.3 ± 48.7 35.0 11.0 54.0
Sample WB2 56 Backshore 2.24 0.42 16.1 20.1 63.8 39.4 4.5 56.1 38.0 20.0 42.0
nˆ6 Stoss 2.13 0.60 19.2 16.7 64.1 41.1 10.7 48.2 16.0 17.0 67.0
Crest 2.03 0.36 19.3 19.8 60.9 42.7 2.9 54.4 34.0 20.0 46.0
Lee face 2.13 0.59 14.4 22.4 63.2 39.1 ± 60.9 22.0 18.0 60.0
Whareroa R26 Inshore 2.41 0.35 15.0 16.5 68.5 41.1 ± 58.9 39.0 22.0 39.0
Beach 2617 Foreshore 2.38 0.39 16.5 24.0 59.5 28.3 3.0 68.7 32.0 11.0 57.0
Sample WB3 57 Backshore 2.35 0.48 5.5 30.0 64.5 11.7 1.5 86.8 14.0 8.0 38.0
nˆ5 Stoss 2.54 0.32 8.5 43.5 48.0 9.3 2.1 88.6 34.0 13.0 53.0
Crest 2.65 0.28 5.1 47.2 47.7 6.0 2.0 92.0 30.0 7.0 63.0
Peka Peka R26 Inshore 2.47 0.31 12.1 17.6 70.3 28.6 2.0 69.4 37.0 15.0 48.0
Beach 3968 Foreshore 2.57 0.23 12.1 29.6 58.3 23.4 1.3 75.3 24.0 9.0 67.0
Sample PP 32 Backshore 2.65 0.22 2.1 39.3 58.6 3.8 ± 96.2 22.0 16.0 62.0
nˆ6 Stoss 1.17 0.26 11.0 30.5 58.5 20.8 ± 79.2 14.0 17.0 69.0
Crest 2.69 0.20 6.0 33.5 60.5 9.5 ± 90.5 16.0 11.0 73.0
Lee face 2.60 0.24 7.4 31.6 61.0 17.8 1.4 80.8 25.0 26.0 49.0
Otaki S25 Inshore 1.90 1.42 6.0 3.5 90.5 56.3 ± 43.7 12.0 20.0 68.0
Beach 4698 Foreshore 1.45 0.40 10.5 11.5 78.0 32.4 ± 67.6 18.0 12.0 70.0
Sample OTK 72 Backshore 1.29 0.33 3.0 10.5 86.5 16.0 ± 84.0 27.0 14.0 59.0
nˆ5 Stoss 1.39 0.45 8.5 5.0 86.5 44.4 ± 55.6 19.0 9.0 72.0
Crest 1.63 0.38 5.0 14.5 80.5 17.1 ± 82.9 35.0 8.0 57.0
Whareroa R26 Mouth 2.57 0.26 10.0 38.5 51.5 18.8 2.2 79.0 67.0 4.0 39.0
Stream 2607
Sample WSM 56
nˆ1
Mangaone R25 Mouth 20.18 2.17 13.5 15.5 71.0 32.6 ± 87.4 17.0 6.0 77.0
Stream 4428
Sample MSM 59
nˆ2
Otaki R25 Mouth 1.27 0.55 2.5 7.0 90.5 6.7 ± 93.3 7.0 8.0 85.0
River 4748
Sample OBM 73
nˆ1
Whareroa R26 Upstream 2.99 0.57 3.5 9.5 87.0 17.0 ± 83.0 12.0 5.0 83.0
Stream 2607
Sample 57
WSU
nˆ1

Mangaone S25 Upstream 2.85 0.41 4.0 5.0 91.0 12.0 1.0 87.0 16.0 4.0 80.0
Stream 4418
Sample MSU 62
nˆ1
Otaki River S25 Upstream 1.05 1.16 7.0 2.5 90.5 28.6 ± 71.4 10.0 6.0 84.0
Sample ORU 4619
nˆ1 10
x 2.14 0.49 13.3 20.6 66.1 29.2 1.5 69.3 25.9 12.3 61.8
sd 0.68 0.40 9.9 11.8 15.3 16.8 2.6 17.5 12.2 5.5 13.7
a
Topographic maps 260, S25 1:50,000.
154 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

Table 3
Graphic mean size, sorting and petrography of the beach, dune and river sands from the Foxton Coast. See Table 1 for symbols

Site/sample Grid a Sub- Mz s Q F L Qm K P Lv Lm Ls

environments

Foxton R22 Inshore 2.37 0.52 26.5 13.5 60.0 55.5 ± 45.0 57.0 2.0 41.0
Beach 978 Foreshore 2.63 0.24 31.5 25.5 43.0 41.4 ± 58.6 23.0 14.0 63.0
Sample FB 806 Backshore 2.43 0.36 22.0 35.0 43.0 26.3 ± 73.7 23.0 10.0 67.0
nˆ6 Stoss 2.74 0.28 12.0 30.5 57.5 20.8 ± 79.2 32.0 9.0 59.0
Crest 2.70 0.27 21.0 43.0 36.0 20.8 ± 79.2 10.0 6.0 84.0
Lee face 2.74 0.22 7.0 28.0 65.0 12.5 ± 87.5 14.0 8.0 78.0
Himatangi R22 Inshore 2.89 0.36 13.0 34.5 52.5 12.7 2.5 84.8 38.0 3.0 59.0
Beach 991 Foreshore 2.60 0.23 13.0 47.5 39.5 9.5 1.0 89.5 24.0 6.0 70.0
Sample HB 900 Backshore 2.57 0.27 8.5 51.5 40.0 5.5 ± 94.5 11.0 6.0 83.0
nˆ6 Stoss 2.61 0.29 15.0 36.0 49.0 15.3 ± 84.7 25.0 8.0 67.0
Crest 2.55 0.31 16.5 43.5 40.0 16.4 ± 83.7 21.0 4.0 75.0
Lee face 2.50 0.41 10.5 37.0 52.5 5.1 ± 94.9 13.0 5.0 82.0
Mona Row R22 Inshore 2.11 0.66 13.5 29.0 57.5 20.6 1.3 78.1 66.0 2.0 32.0
Beach 989 Foreshore 2.71 0.25 15.0 47.5 37.5 17.4 0.9 81.7 19.0 10.0 71.0
Sample MRB 009 Backshore 2.46 0.32 14.0 59.0 27.0 9.9 ± 90.1 30.0 10.0 60.0
nˆ6 Stoss 2.50 0.57 7.5 46.0 46.5 2.1 2.1 95.8 52.0 6.0 42.0
Crest 2.26 0.57 5.5 59.0 35.5 15.4 15.4 69.2 35.0 3.0 62.0
Lee face 2.52 0.42 5.0 52.0 43.0 1.9 ± 98.1 46.0 6.0 48.0
Whangachu R22 Inshore 1.16 0.61 4.5 41.0 54.5 2.4 ± 97.6 88.0 1.0 11.0
Beach 893 Foreshore 2.06 0.38 8.0 60.5 31.5 4.7 0.8 94.5 62.0 5.0 33.0
Sample WhB 271 271 Backshore 2.03 0.41 4.5 89.0 6.5 2.2 ± 97.8 53.0 3.0 44.0
nˆ6 Stoss 2.16 0.43 4.5 88.0 7.5 2.2 ± 97.8 49.0 7.0 44.0
Crest 1.83 0.46 3.5 87.5 9.0 2.2 ± 97.8 72.0 2.0 26.0
Lee face 2.08 0.49 2.0 74.0 24.0 2.0 ± 98.0 79.0 1.0 20.0
Wanganui R22 Inshore 1.31 1.24 2.0 24.0 74.0 5.9 9.8 84.3 89.0 1.0 10.0
Beach 792 Foreshore 1.42 0.44 8.5 46.5 45.0 12.3 7.6 80.1 67.0 1.0 32.0
Sample WnB 382 Backshore 1.69 0.51 6.0 64.5 29.5 4.4 1.5 94.1 81.0 3.0 16.0
nˆ6 Stoss 1.09 0.50 3.5 56.5 40.0 3.4 ± 96.6 70.0 3.0 16.0
Crest 2.09 0.44 9.5 54.5 36.0 9.9 1.3 88.4 62.0 4.0 34.0
Lee face 1.50 0.51 4.0 72.0 24.0 2.0 ± 98.0 72.0 2.0 26.0
Manawatu R22 Mouth 2.72 0.56 16.0 26.5 57.5 23.1 ± 76.8 11.0 5.0 84.0
River 905
Sample MwR 792
nˆ1
Kaikokopu R22 Mouth 2.70 0.22 15.0 37.0 48.0 13.9 2.3 83.8 17.0 6.0 77.0
Stream 992
Sample HS 905
Sample Ksu R22 Upstream 0.84 2.24 7.5 40.5 52.0 9.8 2.2 88.0 15.0 ± 85.0
nˆ2 006
904
Whangaehu R22 Mouth 1.51 0.52 2.0 44.5 53.5 1.1 ± 98.8 83.0 2.0 15.0
River 894
Sample WhR 275
nˆ1
Wanganui R22 Upstream 3.12 0.52 12.0 27.5 60.5 12.7 ± 87.3 12.0 7.0 81.0
River 845
Sample 300
WR
nˆ1
x 2.50 0.48 12.1 45.7 42.2 12.1 1.4 86.5 43.5 4.9 51.6
sd 0.57 0.35 10.3 20.1 15.8 11.6 3.2 11.9 26.2 3.2 24.3
a
Topographic maps 260, S23, S24, R22 1:50,000.
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167 155

0 20 40 60 80 100 (%)
Q inshore n= 14
foreshore n= 14 BEACH n= 42
backshore n= 14

stoss n= 14
crest n= 14 DUNE n= 39
lee face n= 11
mouth n= 11
RIVER n= 20
upstream n= 9

F inshore
foreshore
backshore

stoss
crest
lee face

mouth
upstream

inshore
L
foreshore
backshore

stoss
crest
lee face

mouth
upstream

Fig. 4. Q±F±L discrimination group at 95% con®dence level for beach, dune and river subenvironments for the entire sample set (Gulf of
Mexico 1 Kapiti 1 Foxton). Q ˆ monocrystalline 1 polycrystalline quartz, F ˆ K-feldspar 1 plagioclase, L ˆ lithic fragments, volcanic,
metamorphic, sedimentary. Shaded bars show statistically separated subenvironments. Beach n ˆ 42, dune n ˆ 39, river n ˆ 20.

was done to avoid the heterogeneity effect in sand
laminae which also increases the sorting values
(Pettijohn et al., 1972). The samples were dry-sieved
and grain-size parameters (Table 1) were deter-
mined according to Folk (1980). Subsamples were
impregnated and thin-sectioned for point counting. The
standard method of point counting was used (200 grains
per slide) for the Q±F±L and Qm±K±P components
(Franzinelli and Potter, 1983). The grain types include
total quartz (Q) subdivided into monocrystalline (Qm)
and polycrystalline quartz, total feldspar (F) subdivided
into potash feldspars (K) 1 plagioclase (P), and lithic
fragments (L), subdivided into volcanic (Lv), meta-
morphic (Lm) and sedimentary lithic fragments (Ls).
156 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

0 20 40 60 80 100 (%)
Qm inshore n= 14
foreshore n= 14 BEACH n= 42
backshore n= 14

stoss n= 14
crest n= 14 DUNE n= 39
lee face n= 11

mouth n= 11
upstream n= 9 RIVER n= 20

K inshore
foreshore
backshore

stoss
crest
lee face

mouth
upstream

P inshore
foreshore
backshore

stoss
crest
lee face
mouth
upstream

Fig. 5. Qm±K±P discrimination group at 95% con®dence level for beach, dune and river subenvironments for the entire sample set (Gulf of
Mexico 1 Kapiti 1 Foxton). Qm ˆ monocrystalline quartz, K ˆ potash feldspars, P ˆ plagioclase.

The data were normalized to 100% for the Q±F±L and
the Qm±K±P ternary diagrams and bar charts. An addi-
tional point count of 100 grains was used to distinguish
among volcanic, metamorphic and sedimentary lithic
fragments (Tables 1±3). Con®dence levels of 95%
for the point counting data are shown on bar
charts to discriminate between subenvironments
or environments. Ternary plots with standard
deviation polygons may fail to indicate if the
difference between means of two data sets is
signi®cant (Ingersoll, 1990; Molinaroli et al.,
1991). Data from the three coasts were combined
and plotted on Q±F±L (Fig. 4), Qm±K±P (Fig. 5)
and Lv±Lm±Ls bar charts (Fig. 6) to distinguish
among subenvironments.The data sets from each
study area are plotted on similar bar charts to
identify parameters that discriminate among
beach, dune and river environments (Figs. 7±9).
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167 157

0 20 40 60 80 100 (%)
inshore n= 14
Lv foreshore n= 14
backshore n= 14
BEACH n= 42
stoss n= 14
crest n= 14 DUNE n= 39
lee face n=11

mouth n= 11 RIVER n= 20
upstream n= 9

inshore
Lm foreshore
backshore

stoss
crest
lee face

mouth
upstream

inshore
Ls foreshore
backshore

stoss
crest
lee face

mouth
upstream

Fig. 6. Lv±Lm±Ls discrimination group at 95% con®dence level for beach, dune and river subenvironments for the entire sample set (Gulf of
Mexico 1 Kapiti 1 Foxton). Lv ˆ volcanic rock fragments, Lm ˆ metamorphic rock fragments Ls ˆ sedimentary rock fragments.

4. Results coarse sands and the river mouth sediments are

poorly sorted, coarse sands. Gulf of Mexico sands
4.1. Gulf of Mexico are feldspatholithic to quartzofeldspathic
(Q30F24L46; Fig. 10(a),(b)).
The textural parameters (Folk, 1980) indicate that
all the beach and dune subenvironments are 4.2. Kapiti Coast
composed of well sorted, ®ne-grained sands, the
upstream river samples are poorly sorted, very The grain size distribution (Folk, 1980) of the
158 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

0 20 40 60 80 100 (%)
Q beach n= 12
A river n= 9
dune n= 12

Gulf of Mexico
beach
F
dune
river

L beach

dune
river

Qm
B beach n= 12

dune n= 12
river n= 9

K beach

dune
river
P beach

dune river

C Lv beach n= 12
dune n= 12

Ls beach river n= 9
dune
river

Fig. 7. Discrimination at 95% con®dence level for the Gulf of Mexico beach, dune and river sands. (a) Q±F±L, (b) Qm±K±P and (c) Lv±Ls.

samples indicates that inshore sediments are moder-
ately sorted, medium-grained sands, whereas the fore-
shore and backshore samples are well sorted,
®ne-grained sands. In the dune pro®le, the stoss
sediments are well sorted, medium-grained sands,
and the crest and lee face sediments are well to
very well sorted, respectively, ®ne-grained sands.
The river mouth and upstream sediments are
poorly sorted, medium-grained sands and moder-
ately sorted ®ne-grained sands, respectively. Overall,
the Kapiti Coast sands are feldspatholithic (Q13F21L66;
Fig. 10(a),(b)).
4.3. Foxton Coast
The inshore sand is medium-grained and moderately
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167 159

0 20 40 60 80 100 (%)
A Q beach n= 15
dune n= 12
river n= 6 Kapiti Coast
beach
F dune
river
L beach
dune
river

B Qm dune n= 12
beach n= 15

river n= 6

K beach

dune
river
P beach
dune
river

C Lv dune n= 15
beach n= 12
river n= 6

Lm beach
dune
river beach
Ls
dune
river

Fig. 8. Discrimination at 95% con®dence level for the Kapiti beach, dune and river sands. (a) Q±F±Lm, (b) Qm±K±Pand (c) Lv±Lm±Ls.

well sorted; the foreshore and backshore samples are river mouth sand is well sorted and ®ne-grained
®ne-grained and very well sorted and well sorted whereas the upstream sand is poorly sorted and
respectively. In the dune pro®le, the stoss, crest and medium-grained. Overall, the Foxton Coast sands are
lee face sands are well sorted, and ®ne-grained. The lithofeldspathic (Q13F46L41; Fig. 10(a),(b)).
160 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

0 20 40 60 80 100 (%)

A Q beach n= 15

dune n= 15
river n= 5 Foxton Coast
F beach
dune
river

beach
L dune
river

B Qm beach n= 15
dune n= 15
river n= 5

beach
K
dune
river beach
P
dune

river

C Lv dune n= 15
beach n= 15
river n= 5

Lm beach
dune
river
beach
Ls
dune
river

Fig. 9. Discrimination at 95% con®dence level for the Foxton beach, dune and river sands. (a) Q±F±L, (b) Qm±K±P and (c) Lv±Lm±Ls.

5. Discussion showed no effects of grain-size fractionation. This

check was made because size fractionation may
5.1. Grain-size and compositional trends occur as sand grains settle in the epoxy resin before
it cures.
The impregnated samples used for point counts The grain-size and compositional trends for the
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167 161

beach, dune and river sands are shown in Figs. 11 and
12. Only small grain-size variations across the beach-
dune pro®les are observed despite signi®cant compo-
sitional variations (Fig. 11). This suggests that the
compositional modi®cations of beach and dune
sands are not grain-size related.
In contrast, signi®cant grain-size and compositional
modi®cations in river sands are observed in the three
areas (Fig. 12). This suggests that compositional
differences are grain-size related between the river
sands. Hence, the discrimination among beach, dune
and river sands is partly due to grain-size variation.
5.2. Petrographic composition of subenvironments
The Q±F±L bar chart for all samples from the three
study areas shows an abrupt separation between the
river mouth and upstream sand in the Q-®eld, and
between the inshore and foreshore sand in the L-
®eld (Fig. 4). Quartz trends for all of the sand samples
are similar, except for the ¯uvial subenvironments.
The river mouth sand has slightly more quartz-rich
particles because this area is in¯uenced by longshore
currents, deriving beach sand with more stable
components (Pettijohn et al., 1972). Quartz grains
are more resistant to the high energy of the river
mouth environment. Hence, river mouth sediments
are more quartz-rich than upstream sediments. Also,
maturation along the main river channel occurs during
transport. These observations accord with those of
Critelli et al. (1997), and Le Pera and Critelli (1997)
who found that downstream sediments are closer to
the composition of quartzofeldspathic beach sands. In
contrast, upstream sands are richer in feldspars and
lithic fragments than the river mouth.
The clear distinction between inshore and foreshore
sands in the L ®eld (Fig. 4) re¯ects the abundance of
volcanic lithic fragments in the inshore of the beach
environment (Fig. 6). Volcanic lithic fragments are
more resistant to abrasion in the breaker zone than
are other lithics (McBride, 1996) and consequently
tend to concentrate in the inshore environment
(Carranza-Edwards et al., 1994; Carranza-Edwards
and Rosales-Hoz, 1995).
The Qm and P ®elds of the Qm±K±P bar chart
(Fig. 5) show signi®cant differences between the
inshore and backshore. The inshore tends to concen-
trate grains which are resistant to abrasion such as
monocrystalline quartz (Fig. 4) whereas the backshore
is in¯uenced mainly by intermittent wind action
which assists the preservation of more labile minerals
such as plagioclase.
The Lv±Lm±Ls bar chart is less sensitive than either
the Q±F±L or Qm±K±P bar charts in differentiating
sand from different subenvironments. However, inshore
sands have more volcanic lithic particles than do those in
the foreshore and backshore (Fig. 6).
5.3. Regional differences in composition
When grouping the Q±F±L, Qm±K±P and Lv±
Lm±Ls ®elds by region, several trends become appar-
ent. In the Gulf of Mexico (Fig. 7(a)), a distinction
between beach, dune and river sands is observed in the
Q and L ®elds (Fig. 7(a)). The Q ®eld separates river
sands from the beach and dune sands. Depletion of
quartz particles in the ¯uvial sand of the Gulf of
Mexico is partly due to the scarcity of this mineral
in the basaltic and andesitic source rocks (Fig. 1).
When con®dence level bars are plotted on the L
®eld (Fig. 7(a)) the dune sands have lower L, suggest-
ing that wind is unable to concentrate higher density
volcanic lithic grains (Pye, 1994). The river is richer
in lithic fragments because of its proximity to
the source rock compared to the beach and dune.
The composition of the beach is halfway between
the lithic-poor dune environment and the lithic-rich
¯uvial environment. The Q±F±L bar chart is a good
discriminator between beach, dune and river sands
that have a quartzofeldspathic to feldspatholithic

Fig. 10. (a) Q±F±L plots of beach, dune and river sands from the Gulf of Mexico, Kapiti and Foxton Coasts. Filled circles and squares are beach
and dune sands from the Gulf of Mexico respectively. 1 are river sands from the Gulf of Mexico. Open circles and squares are beach and dune
sands from the Kapiti Coast respectively. * are river sands from the Kapiti Coast. Shaded circles and squares are beach and dune sands from the
Foxton Coast respectively. X are river sands from the Foxton Coast, (b) Polygons represent the average and ^1 standard deviation of sand
samples. Filled polygons represent beach, dune and river sands from the Gulf of Mexico. Open polygons represent beach, dune and river sands
from the Kapiti Coast. Shaded polygons represent beach, dune and river sands from the Foxton Coast. Squares are the average of all the samples
for each area.
162 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

A
50

+ +
x x
x *
x
x
* + +*
+ + + * **
F + + L

50
B Dune n= 12

Dune n= 12

Beach n= 12
Gulf of Mexico
Gulf + Kapiti + Foxton
Dune
n= 15 Dune
n= 12
Beach n= 15
Beach n= 15 Kapiti
River n= 5 River n= 9
Foxton River n= 6

F L
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167 163

composition such as the Gulf of Mexico sands (Figs. 7
and 10(a),(b)).
The Qm ®eld on the Qm±K±P bar chart also sepa-
rates the beach, dune and river sands of the Gulf of
%
Mexico (Fig. 7(b)). Dune sands tend to be enriched in
quartz because it is selectively concentrated by the
wind (Kasper-Zubillaga et al., 1999). This was also
observed in dunes from the southern Mexico active

60

Lithic s
30

60
Feldspar

30

60
Quartz

Q
30

Mean grain-size
2.5
2
o

LEE
FORESHORE n=14 BACKSHORE n=14 DUNE FACE n=11
INSHORE n= 14 STOSS n=14 CREST n=14
1.5
Kapiti Coast Foxton-Wanganui Coast Gulf of Mexico

Fig. 11. Graphic mean size and compositional trends for beach±dune pro®les of the three studied areas.
164 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

increases downstream towards the coast (Le Pera

%
and Critelli, 1997).
100 For Gulf of Mexico sands, only volcanic and sedi-
Lithic s mentary lithic fragments are plotted because these
sands are depleted in metamorphic and plutonic rock
fragments (Fig. 7(c)). The river sands are enriched in
volcanic lithic fragments but depleted in sedimentary
lithic fragments with respect to the beach sand,
50 re¯ecting their provenance from basaltic and andesitic
rocks. Also, sedimentary lithic fragments have a very
low potential of preservation during river transport
(Pettijohn, 1975).
The Kapiti Coast sands are supplied from a lithic-
feldespathic source terrane. The Q±F±L bar chart
50 Feldspar (Fig. 8(a)) shows an overlap for all the subenviron-
ments, but the Q±F±L ternary diagram, in this case,
separates the beach±dune±river ®elds (Fig. 10(b)).
Unlike the Gulf of Mexico where quartz is enriched
in dune sands, the Kapiti Coast dunes are poor in
quartz and rich in lithic fragments (Fig. 8(a)).
However on the Qm±K±P and Lv±Lm±Ls bar charts
(Fig. 8(b) and (c)), the river sands separate from those
30 of other environments.
Quartz The lithofeldspathic sands at Foxton (Fig. 9(a))
show an overlaps for all the samples except for the
river sands when plotted on the Q±F±L ®eld. Like in
the Kapiti Coast samples, poor separation between the
different environments at Foxton sands is due to the
Mean grain-size low quartz content.
2
5.4. Comparison of regions
o

1 RIVER
MOUTH n=11
0 plotted on the Q±F±L, Qm±K±P and Lv±Lm±Ls
UPSTREAM n=9
Kapiti Coast
Foxton-Wanganui Coast
Gulf of Mexico
Fig. 12. Graphic mean size and compositional trends for river sands
from the three studied areas. See Fig. 11 for symbols.
margin (DõÂaz-GarcõÂa 1984; Carranza-Edwards et al.,
1988) and Egypt (Frihy et al., 1999). In contrast, river
sands are enriched in plagioclase as shown on the P
®eld (Fig. 7(b)) because they re¯ect the initial compo-
sition of the source rocks. Mineralogical maturity
The beach, dune and river sands of all samples are
charts (Fig. 13). The mean hypothetical composition
of the Gulf of Mexico 1 Kapiti 1 Foxton sand is
Q19F30L51 (Fig. 10(b)) which is feldspatholithic.
The Q±F±L chart discriminates the river sands on
the Q ®eld and beach, dune and river sands on the L
®eld. Comparing Fig. 7(a) to Fig. 13 shows that discri-
mination of the sands in the L ®eld is not enhanced
when data from the three areas are combined.
When data are combined on the Qm±K±P chart, the
con®dence bars of the beach and dune sands overlap
on the Qm ®eld (Fig. 13), and only river sands can be
discriminated. This is an effect of combining samples
with high F and L values which prevents discrimina-
tion between beach and dune sands on the Qm ®eld.
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167 165

0 20 40 60 80 100 (%)
beach n= 42
A Q
dune n= 39
river n= 20

F beach
dune
river

L beach

dune
river

Qm beach n= 42

B river n= 20
dune n= 39

K beach
dune
river P beach

dune
river

C Lv beach n= 42
dune n= 39
river n= 20

Lm beach
dune
river

Ls beach
dune

river

Fig. 13. Discrimination at 95% con®dence level for the Gulf of Mexico 1 Kapiti 1 Foxton beach, dune and river sands.
166 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167

Table 4
Separation of beach, dune and river sands from different sand compositions. Q ˆ total quartz (monocrystalline 1 polycrystalline), F ˆ feldspars
(K-feldspars 1 plagioclase), L ˆ rock fragments (volcanic 1 metamorphic 1 sedimentary), Qm ˆ monocrystalline quartz, K ˆ potash feld-
spars, P ˆ plagioclase, Lv ˆ volcanic rock fragments, Lm ˆ metamorphic rock fragments, Ls ˆ sedimentary rock fragments. Words in bold
typeface are the best environments separated within the ®elds

Mineralogical components

Locality/sand type Q F L Qm K P Lv Lm Ls

Gulf of Mexico river ± beach/dune/river beach/dune/river ± river river ± river

(feldspatholithic to
quartzfeldspathic)
Kapiti Coast (feldspatholithic) ± ± ± river ± river ± river ±
Foxton Coast (lithofeldspathic) ± ± river ± ± ± ± ± ±
Gulf 1 Kapiti 1 Foxton river ± beach/dune/river river ± ± ± ± ±
(feldspatholithic)

The combined Lv±Lm±Ls chart shows no discrimina- Acknowledgements

tion of beach, dune and river sands (Fig. 13). Indivi-
dual regions give a better discrimination of beach,
dune and river sands by lithic components (Figs. 7(c)
and 8(c)).
Table 4 highlights the environments discriminated
in each study area and the components that contribute
to each discrimination. Sands from the Gulf of
Mexico are differentiated on the Q±F±L and Qm±
K±P charts due to the quartz enrichment effect in
beach and dune sands. Only the Kapiti Coast river
sands are discriminated on the Qm±K±P and Lv±
Lm±Ls charts because they re¯ect local provenance.
The Foxton sands show a lack of discrimination,
except for the river sand plotted on the L ®eld.
6. Conclusions
1. The Q±F±L and Qm±K±P bar charts are most
useful for discriminating beach and river sands
from diverse source terranes.
2. When petrographic data are combined from the
three different coastal areas, discrimination of
beach, dune and river sands remains the same on
the Q±F±L bar chart. This suggests that discrimi-
nation is better achieved when sands come from a
quartz-nriched source overlapped by volcanic±
andesitic sources as in the Gulf of Mexico.
3. The discrimination between beach, dune and river
sands is partly due to grain-size variations.
This research was carried out during a postdoctoral
fellowship at the School of Earth Sciences, Victoria
University of Wellington, New Zealand with funding
from CONACyT (Mexico's Council of Science and
Technology, Project no. 990227). We thank Stewart
Bush for thin sectioning and Neil Hartstein for ®eld
assistance. Comments and critical review by A.C.
Morton and S. Critelli were most appreciated.
References
Basu, A., 1985. In¯uence of climate and relief on composition of
sands released at source areas. In: Zuffa, G.G. (Ed.), Provenance
of Arenites 1-18. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 1±18.
Boyd, R., Dalrymple, R., Zaitlin, B.A., 1992. Classi®cation of clas-
tic coastal depositional environments. In: Donoghhue, J.F.,
Davis, R.A., Fletcher, C.H., Suter, J.R. (Eds.), Quaternary
Coastal Evolution. Elsevier, pp. 139±150.
Cantagrel, J.M., Robin, C., 1979. K-Ar dating on eastern volcanic
rocksÐrelations between andesitic and the alkaline provinces.
J. Volc. Geoth. Res. 5, 99±114.
Carranza-Edwards, A., Rosales-Hoz, L., 1995. Grain size trends and
provenance of southwestern Gulf of Mexico beach sands. Can.
J. Earth Sci. 32, 2009±2014.
Carranza-Edwards, A., Rosales-Hoz, L., Santiago-PeÂrez, S., 1994.
Provenance memories and maturity of Holocene sands in NW
Mexico. Can. J. Earth Sci. 31, 1550±1556.
Carranza-Edwards, A., Rosales-Hoz, L., Lozano-Santacruz, R.,
1988. Estudio SedimentoloÂgico de playas del Estado de Oaxaca,
MeÂxico. Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y LimnologõÂa. Anales of
the Universidad Nacional AutoÂnoma de MeÂxico, 15, 23±28.
Critelli, S., Le Pera, E., Ingersoll, R.V., 1997. The effects of source
 J.J. Kasper-Zubillaga, W.W. Dickinson / Sedimentary Geology 143 (2001) 149±167
lithology, transport, deposition and sampling scale on the compo-
sition of southern California sands. Sedimentology 44, 653±671.
DõÂaz-GarcõÂa, V., 1984, Estudio sedimentoloÂgico del litoral de
Chipehua, Oaxaca, MeÂxico. MA Thesis, Universidad Nacional
AutoÂnoma de MeÂxico, MeÂxico, 95 pp.
Dickinson, W.R., Suczek, C.A., 1979. Plate tectonics and sandstone
composition. Am. Ass. Pet. Geol. Bull. 63, 2164±2182.
Dickinson, W.R., Valloni, R., 1980. Plate settings and provenance
of sands in modern ocean basins. Geology 8, 82±86.
Dickinson, W.R., Beard, L.S., Brakenridge, G.R., Erjavec, J.L.,
Ferguson, R.C., Inman, K.F., Knepp, R.A., Lindberg, F.A.,
Ryberg, P.T., 1983. Provenance of Phanerozoic sandstones in
relation to tectonic setting. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 94, 222±235.
Folk, L., 1980. Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Hemphill, Austin,
Texas, p. 182.
FernaÂndez-Eguiarte, A., Gallegos-GarcõÂa, A., Zavala-Hidalgo, J.,
1992. OceanografõÂa FõÂsica 1 (Masas de Agua y Mareas de los
Mares Mexicanos). Atlas Nacional de MeÂxico. (Sheet IV.9.1
Summer). Instituto de GeografõÂa, Universidad Nacional AutoÂ-
noma de MeÂxico, MeÂxico.
FernaÂndez-Eguiarte, A., Gallegos-GarcõÂa, A., Zavala-Hidalgo, J.,
1992. OceanografõÂa FõÂsica 1 (Masas de Agua y Mareas de los
Mares Mexicanos). Atlas Nacional de MeÂxico. (Sheet IV.9.2
Winter). Instituto de GeografõÂa, Universidad Nacional AutoÂ-
noma de MeÂxico, MeÂxico.
Franzinelli, E., Potter, P.E., 1983. Petrology, chemistry and texture
of modern river sands Amazon River System. J. Geol. 91, 23±29.
Frihy, O.E., El-Askary, M.A., Deghidy, E.M., Moufaddal, W.M.,
1999. Differentiating ¯uvio-marine depositional environments
in the Nile Delta using textural and compositional components.
J. Afr. Earth Sci. 28, 599±618.
Gibb, J.G., 1978. The problem of coastal erosion along the Golden
Coast western Wellington New Zealand. Water and Soil Tech-
nical Publication, 19 p.
Ingersoll, R.V., 1978. Petrofacies and petrology evolution of the
Late Cretaceous fore-arc basin northern and central California.
J. Geol. 86, 335±352.
167
Ingersoll, R.V., 1990. Actualistic sandstone petrofacies: dis-
criminating modern and ancient source rocks. Geology 18,
733±736.
Ibbeken, H., Schleyer, R., 1991. Source and Sediment. Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, p. 286.
Kasper-Zubillaga, J.J., Carranza-Edwards, A., Rosales-Hoz, L.,
1999. Petrography and geochemistry of Holocene sands in the
western Gulf of Mexico: implications for provenance and
tectonic setting. J. Sediment. Res. 69, 1003±1010.
Kingma, J.T., 1967. New Zealand Geological Survey Map
1:250,000, Sheet 12, Wellington.
Lensen, G.J., 1959. New Zealand Geological Survey Map
1:250,000, Sheet 10, Wanganui.
Le Pera, E., Critelli, S., 1997. Sourceland controls on the composi-
tion of beach and ¯uvial sand of the northern Tyrrenian coast of
Calabria, Italy: implications for actualistic petrofacies. Sedi-
ment. Geol. 110, 81±97.
McBride, E.F., Abel-Wahab, A., McGilvery, T.A., 1996. Loss of
sand-size feldspar and rock fragments along the South Texas
Barrier Island, USA. Sediment. Geol. 107, 37±44.
Molinaroli, E., Blom, M., Basu, A., 1991. Methods of provenance
determination tested with discriminant function analysis. J.
Sediment. Res. 61, 900±908.
Negendank, J.F., Emmerman, R., Krawczyk, R., Mooser, F.,
Tobschall, H., Werle, D., 1985. Geological and geochemical
investigation on the eastern Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt.
Geo®sica Internacional. 24, 477±575.
Pettijohn, F.J., 1975. Sedimentary Rocks. Harper and Row, New
York, p. 627.
Pettijohn, F.J., Potter, P.E., Siever, R., 1972. Sand and Sandstones.
Springer-Verlag, New York, p. 618.
Potter, P.E., 1986. South America and a few grains of sand: part 1-
beach sands. J. Geol. 94, 301±319.
Pye, K., 1994. Sediment Transport and Depositional Processes.
Blackwell, Cambridge, Massachusetts, p. 24.
Wright, L.W., 1989. Sediments of the Paekakariki±Otaki River sand±
dune sequence, New Zealand. NZ. J. Geol. Geop. 32, 299±302.