Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:51:24.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Pipe-organ structures” in the Lee Formation (Pennsylvanian) of the central Appalachian Basin: animal or plant?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Donald R. Chesnut Jr. ,
James C. Cobb  and
Stephen F. Greb
Donald R. Chesnut Jr.
Affiliation:
Kentucky Geological Survey, 228 Mining and Mineral Resources Building, University of Kentucky, Lexington 40506-0107
James C. Cobb
Affiliation:
Kentucky Geological Survey, 228 Mining and Mineral Resources Building, University of Kentucky, Lexington 40506-0107
Stephen F. Greb
Affiliation:
Kentucky Geological Survey, 228 Mining and Mineral Resources Building, University of Kentucky, Lexington 40506-0107
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A sequence of unusual vertical tubes, arranged in multiple groups, and each tube several meters high occurs in the Middlesboro Member of the Lee Formation (Lower Pennsylvanian). These structures are controversial with various interpretations suggesting either plant or animal origin. Observations supporting a plant origin include: 1) numerous C- and D-shaped, and multichambered tube cross sections are similar to fern and seed fern structures, 2) numerous membrane relicts loosely enclosing the tubes are similar to fern and seed fern tissues, 3) microscopic bundles are observed in cross-sectional thin sections, 4) presence of carbonaceous material and reported fecal pellets over a vertical distance in excess of 5 m are consistent with deteriorating plant material, not escape structures, 5) tubes are composed of casts and molds, but lack spreite or other features typical of escape structures, 6) tubes occur in clusters about one meter in diameter and are associated with coaly material at their base, which suggests that the clusters represent trees, 7) other trace fossils are absent in the enclosing sandstone, 8) tubes branch upward, which is a common structure in plants but unlikely in escape structures, 9) a coalified root structure was found at the base of the sandstone, and 10) all the tubes extend from the bottom of the sandstone to the top. The probability of burrowing animals escaping through as much as 8 m of sand with 100 percent survivorship is low.

The structures may represent a stand of pteridosperms with each “tree” approximately 1–1.5 m in diameter. The individual pipe-organ structures represent aerial stems, shoots, and adventitious roots; each cluster of pipe-organ structures represents a single tree.

Based upon sedimentologic features such as presence of 1) channel form, 2) scoured base, and 3) fining-upward sequence, we interpret the sandstone containing the pipe-organ structures to have been deposited in a sandy fluvial or tidal channel. The unidirectional cross-bed dips, poor sorting, occurrence only of very restrictive fauna and terrestrial flora, position of the sandstone above a possible floodplain facies, and lack of characteristic tidal structures suggest that the sandstone is more probably a sandy fluvial channel that may have minor tidal influence.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 66 , Issue 1 , January 1992 , pp. 148 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bement, W. O. 1976. Sedimentological aspects of Middle Carboniferous sandstones on the Cumberland overthrust sheet. Unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, 182 p.Google Scholar
Chesnut, D. R. Jr. 1988. Stratigraphic analysis of the Carboniferous rocks of the Central Appalachian Basin. Unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kentucky, Lexington, 296 p.Google Scholar
Chesnut, D. R. Jr.In press. Stratigraphic and structural framework of the Carboniferous rocks of the Central Appalachian Basin. Kentucky Geological Survey, Series 11, Bulletin.Google Scholar
Chesnut, D. R. Jr., Cobb, J. C., and Gastaldo, R. A.In press. Origin of the Middlesboro Member of the Lower Pennsylvanian-age Lee Formation (Bashkirian) in the Central Appalachian Basin, eastern U.S.A., and its unique fossil occurrence. Eleventh International Congress of Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, Compte Rendu.Google Scholar
Cobb, J. C., Chesnut, D. R. Jr., and Gastaldo, R. A. 1987. Origin of the Middlesboro Member of the Lower Pennsylvanian-age Lee Formation (Bashkirian) in the Central Appalachian Basin, eastern U.S.A., and its unique fossil occurrence. Eleventh International Congress of Carboniferous Stratigraphy and Geology, Abstracts of Papers, 1:165.Google Scholar
Cobb, J. C., Gastaldo, R. A., and Chesnut, D. R. 1986. Origin of the Middlesboro Member of the Lee Formation (Lower Pennsylvanian) in the Central Appalachian Basin and its unique fossil occurrence. Abstracts of the International Symposium of Coal and Coal-Bearing Strata, Royal Holloway and Bedford New College (University of London), p. 12.Google Scholar
De Boer, P. L., Ost, A. P., and Visser, M. J. 1989. The diurnal inequality of the tide as a parameter for recognizing tidal influences. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 59:912–921.Google Scholar
de Raaf, J. F. M., and Boersma, J. R. 1971. Tidal deposits and their sedimentary structures. Geologie en Mijnbouw, 50:479–504.Google Scholar
Ekdale, A. A., Bromley, R. G., and Pemberton, S. G. 1984. Ichnology: the use of trace fossils in sedimentology and stratigraphy. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Short Course No. 14 Notes, 317 p.Google Scholar
Englund, K. J. 1968. Geology and coal resources of the Elk Valley area, Tennessee and Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 572, 59 p.Google Scholar
Ettensohn, F. R. 1980. An alternative to the barrier–shoreline model for deposition of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian rocks in northeastern Kentucky. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 91:130–135, 934–1056.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferm, J.C., and Cavaroc, V. V. 1969. A Field Guide to Allegheny Deltaic Deposits in the Upper Ohio Valley. Pittsburgh Geological Society, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 21 p.Google Scholar
Ferm, J.C., Horne, J. C., Swinchatt, J. P., and Whaley, P. W. 1971. Carboniferous depositional environments in northeastern Kentucky. Roadlog for Geological Society of Kentucky 1971 Field Excursion, Kentucky Geological Survey, Series 10, 30 p.Google Scholar
Folk, R. L. 1968. Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Hemphill's Book Store, Austin, Texas, 170 p.Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1886. Note on some obscure organisms in the roofing slate of Washington County, New York. Trustees New York State Museum of Natural History, 39th Annual Report:160.Google Scholar
Heer, O. 1876–1877. Flora Fossilis Helvetiae. In Die vorweltliche Flora der Schveiz. J. Wurster and Co., Zurich, 182 p.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, Edward. 1858. Ichnology of New England. A report on the sandstone of the Connecticut Valley, especially its footprints. W. White, Boston, 220 p.Google Scholar
Jackson, S. R. 1984. Depositional environment of the Lower Pennsylvanian Rockcastle Conglomerate, Northern Cumberland Plateau, Tennessee. Unpubl. , Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, 148 p.Google Scholar
Jackson, S. R., and Miller, M. F. 1984. Depositional environments of the Lower Pennsylvanian Rockcastle Conglomerate, northern Cumberland Plateau, Tennessee. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, 16:148.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. Y. 1986. Water-escape structures in coarse-grained, volcaniclastic, fluvial deposits of the Ellensburg Formation, south-central Washington. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 56:905–910.Google Scholar
Johnsson, M. J. 1990. Tectonic versus chemical-weathering controls on the composition of fluvial sands in tropical environments. Sedimentology, 37:713–726.Google Scholar
Klein, G. deV. 1977. Clastic Tidal Facies. Continuing Education Publication Co., Champaign, Illinois, 149 p.Google Scholar
Kvale, E. P., Archer, A. W., and Johnson, H. R. 1989. Daily, monthly, and yearly tidal cycles within laminated siltstones of the Mansfield Formation (Pennsylvanian) of Indiana. Geology, 17:365–368.Google Scholar
Lesquereux, Leo. 1876. Species of fossil marine plants from the Carboniferous measures. Indiana Geological Survey, Annual Report, 7(1875):134–145.Google Scholar
Martino, R. L. 1989. Trace fossils from marginal marine facies of the Kanawha Formation (Middle Pennsylvanian), West Virginia. Journal of Paleontology, 63:389–403.Google Scholar
Massalongo, A. 1855. Zoophycos, novum genus plantorum fossilium. Antonelli, Verona, 52 p.Google Scholar
Miller, M. F., and Jackson, S. R. 1984. Biogenic structures as salinity indicators: Lower Pennsylvanian coal-bearing sequences, northern Cumberland Plateau, Tennessee. Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Program, 16:180.Google Scholar
Miller, M. S. 1974. Stratigraphy and coal beds of Upper Mississippian and Lower Pennsylvanian rocks in southwestern Virginia. Virginia Division of Mineral Resources Bulletin 84, 211 p.Google Scholar
Reineck, H. E., and Singh, I. B. 1986. Depositional Sedimentary Environments with Reference to Terrigenous Clastics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 543 p.Google Scholar
Rice, C. L. 1984. Sandstone units of the Lee Formation and related strata in eastern Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1151-G, 53 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seilacher, Adolf. 1955. Spuren und Fazies im Unterkambrium, p. 11–143. In Schindewolf, O. H. and Seilacher, A. (eds.), Beitrage zur Kenntnis des Kambriums in der Salt Range (Pakistan). Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur zu Mainz, mathematisch-natur-wissen-schaftliche Klasse, Abhandlungen, Weisbaden, No. 10.Google Scholar
Stewart, W. N. 1983. Paleobotany and the Evolution of Plants. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 405 p.Google Scholar
Terwindt, J. H. J. 1988. Palaeotidal reconstructions of inshore tidal depositional environments, p. 233–263In De Boer, P. L., Van Gelder, A., and Nio, S. D. (eds.), Tide-influenced Sedimentary Environments and Facies. D. Reidel Publishing Co., Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Berg, J. H. 1982. Migration of large-scale bedforms and preservation of crossbedded sets in highly accretional parts of tidal channels in the Oosterschelde, SW Netherlands. Geologie Mijnbouw, 61:253–263.Google Scholar
von Otto, Ernst. 1854. Additamente zur Flora des Quadergebirges in Sachsen. G. Mayer, Leipzig, Part 2, 53 p.Google Scholar
Vyalov, O. S. 1964. Zvezdchatye ieroglify iz Triasa severovostoka Sibiri. Akademii Nauk SSSR, Sibirskoye Otdeleniye Geologii i Geophyziki, 5:112–115.Google Scholar
Williams, G. E. 1989a. Late Precambrian tidal rhythmites in South Australia and the history of the Earth's rotation. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 146:97–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. E. 1989b. Tidal rhythmites: geochronometers for the ancient Earth-Moon system. Episodes, 12:162–171.Google Scholar
Wizevich, M. C. 1991. Sedimentology and regional implications of fluvial quartzose sandstones of the Lee Formation, Central Appalachian Basin. Unpubl. Ph.D. dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 237 p.Google Scholar
Wnuk, Christopher, and Maberry, J. O. 1990. Enigmatic eightmeter trace fossils in the Lower Pennsylvanian Lee Sandstone, central Apalachian Basin, Tennessee. Journal of Paleontology, 64:440–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar