USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

M.E. Koesterer

Publications and source records attributed to M.E. Koesterer.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Development of the Archean crust in the medina mountain area, Wind River Range, Wyoming (U.S.A.)

Evidence for an extensive Archean crustal history in the Wind River Range is preserved in the Medina Mountain area in the west-central part of the range. The oldest rocks in the area are metasedimentary, mafic, and ultramafic blocks in a migmatite host. The supracrustal rocks of the Medina Mountain area (MMS) are folded into the migmatites, and include semi-pelitic and pelitic gneisses, and mafic rocks of probable volcanic origin. Mafic dikes intrude the older migmatites but not the MMS, suggesting that the MMS are distinctly younger than the supracrustal rocks in the migmatites. The migmatites and the MMS were engulfed by the late Archean granite of the Bridger, Louis Lake, and Bears Ears batholiths, which constitutes the dominant rock of the Wind River Range. Isotopic data available for the area include Nd crustal residence ages from the MMS which indicate that continental crust existed in the area at or before 3.4 Ga, but the age of the older supracrustal sequence is not yet known. The upper age of the MMS is limited by a 2.7 Ga Rb-Sr age of the Bridger batholith, which was emplaced during the waning stages of the last regional metamorphism. The post-tectonic Louis Lake and Bears Ears batholiths have ages of 2.6 and 2.5 Ga, respectively (Stuckless et al., 1985). At least three metamorphic events are recorded in the area: (1) an early regional granulite event (M 1 ) that affected only the older inclusions within the migmatites, (2) a second regional amphibolite event (M 2 ) that locally reached granulite facies conditions, and (3) a restricted, contact granulite facies event (M 3 ) caused by the intrusion of charnockitic melts associated with the late Archean plutons. Results from cation exchange geobarometers and geothermometers yield unreasonably low pressures and temperatures, suggesting resetting during the long late Archean thermal event.

Wyoming

Comparison of the Wilfley concentration table and hand panning for concentration of heavy minerals prior to geochemical analysis

Chemical analysis of heavy—mineral concentrates of stream sediments is a common geochemical exploration technique used by the U.S. Geological Survey. Generally these concentrates are prepared by hand panning at streamside or in a washtub and then further concentrated using heavy—liquid (bromoform) techniques in a laboratory. Concentration using heavy liquids is slow, tedious, and expensive for large surveys such as mineral evaluation of wilderness areas. In addition the cost of bromoform is expected to increase greatly because most if not all chemical companies in the United States have ceased production of the compound due to problems in meeting the safety standards of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.). Preliminary studies by the E.P.A. suggest a severe health hazard may be incurred by inhaling vapors of or contacting the skin with chemicals like bromoform. Heavy—liquid concentration of thousands of heavy— mineral samples carries an unavoidable risk of exposure to bromoform. The risk, expense, and time required by routine heavy—liquid concentration of heavy minerals should be eliminated by finding other methods to satisfactorily concentrate minerals whenever it is possible. Heavy—mineral concentrates can be used in several ways in geochemical exploration and each way has certain standards for the nature and quality of the mineral concentration required. The nature of the concentration refers to whether the heavy minerals are analyzed in bulk or whether they are split into magnetic fractions using a hand magnet and possibly a Frantz Isodynamic Magnetic Separator.

Open-File Report