Jökull

Ataaseq assigiiaat ilaat

Jökull - 01.12.1990, Qupperneq 11

Jökull - 01.12.1990, Qupperneq 11
noted by Sæmundsson and Noll (1974) was the pres- ence of extensive hyaloclastites among two of the in- ferred glacial horizons. This suggested to them that most of the glaciations were of short duration, perhaps over an interval of 5,000-10,000 years. Their criteria for identifying the diamictites as glacial deposits was based largely on the unsorted nature of the deposits, and their association with fluvial sediments. Pjetursson (1904) describedthe stratigraphy north- east of Hvalfjörður and the interbedded diamictites. He described all of the diamictites as ”moraines“, on the basis of striations on the underlying basalts, stri- ated boulders within the diamictites, and the unsorted nature of the sediments. Einarsson (1946) argued against Pjetursson’s interpretation. He pointed out numerous features, such as volcanic matrix, rounded clasts and conformable bed-contacts, which he thought presented evidence against a glacial origin. In- stead he favoured a high-temperature mudflow ori- gm. Rutten (1958) disputed both previous explana- fions, but pointed out that the structures of some of the sediments were not explicit as to their origin. They might be tillites, but such deposits could also form as mudstreams or lahars (Rutten, 1958). He proposed a fluvial origin for some of the sedimentary units and mterpreted others as re-cemented scree deposits. Both Einarsson (1946) and Rutten (1958) were unsuccess- ful in finding glacial striations on the contacts between diamictites and basalt-flows, they thus favoured either a fluvial or a mass-flow origin. In the Hvalfjörður area a glacial origin for the di- amictites has been favoured because of their unsorted appearance and association with sheet-like hyalo- dastite deposits (Gunnlaugsson et al., 1972; Jónas- son et al., 1973; Arason et al., 1974; Guðmundsson, 1976). Altogether eleven glacial horizons were de- scribed, and the existence of two more were suggested further south in the Akrafjall-Esja area (Friðleifsson, 1973, 1985; Kristjánsson et al., 1980). The four low- ennost units are described as ill-sortedconglomerates, while all the other units represented tuffaceous hyalo- clastite and or pillow breccias. Kristjánsson et al. (1980) correlated the lowest diamictite horizon with the 3.1 Ma diamictite unit in the Borgarfjörður area. THE SEDIMENTOLOGY OF DIAMIC- TITES IN THE UPPER BORGARFJÖRÐ- UR AREA AND THE HVALFJÖRÐUR AREA The principles of sedimentology imply that un- der similarprocess conditions, similar deposits should be formed. Similar process conditions must be inter- preted as a function of at least two independent vari- ables. One of these is the physical environment of the area where deposition takes place, and the other is the nature of the sedimentary material supplied. However, various process conditions may also form similar de- posits especially where the nature of the sedimentary material supplied is from a fairly homogeneous lithol- ogy as in Iceland. In such situations it is necessary to apply several criteria in order to detect differences in the deposits and to distinguish between the sedimen- tary processes. METHODS In the study of the diamictites of the upper Borg- arfjörður area and the Hvalfjörður area, a distinction was made between deposits of two environments in particular, the glacial environment and the mass flow environment. The differentiation was based on litho- facies analyses, pebble fabric measurements, textu- ral studies, rock magnetic measurements, both nor- mal remanent magnetism (NRM) and anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS), as well as a compar- ison with analogues from modern depositional envi- ronments (Geirsdóttir, 1988). The application of lithofacies analyses to sedimen- tary deposits and investigation of facies associations has recently gained considerable attention. Such an approach can provide the basis for the genetic study of both glacial and volcaniclasticrock (Eyles et al., 1983; Anderson, 1983; Eyles and Miall, 1984; Shultz, 1984; Shaw, 1987; Smith, 1987; Eiríksson et al., 1987). Emphasis is most often placed on vertical logging of sedimentary sections where the associations of certain facies types are thought to be the best evidence for the origin of the unsorted sediment. In both the Borgar- fjörður and the Hvalfjörður areas, investigation of the interstratified diamictites permits the recognition and JÖKULL, No. 40, 1990 9
Qupperneq 1
Qupperneq 2
Qupperneq 3
Qupperneq 4
Qupperneq 5
Qupperneq 6
Qupperneq 7
Qupperneq 8
Qupperneq 9
Qupperneq 10
Qupperneq 11
Qupperneq 12
Qupperneq 13
Qupperneq 14
Qupperneq 15
Qupperneq 16
Qupperneq 17
Qupperneq 18
Qupperneq 19
Qupperneq 20
Qupperneq 21
Qupperneq 22
Qupperneq 23
Qupperneq 24
Qupperneq 25
Qupperneq 26
Qupperneq 27
Qupperneq 28
Qupperneq 29
Qupperneq 30
Qupperneq 31
Qupperneq 32
Qupperneq 33
Qupperneq 34
Qupperneq 35
Qupperneq 36
Qupperneq 37
Qupperneq 38
Qupperneq 39
Qupperneq 40
Qupperneq 41
Qupperneq 42
Qupperneq 43
Qupperneq 44
Qupperneq 45
Qupperneq 46
Qupperneq 47
Qupperneq 48
Qupperneq 49
Qupperneq 50
Qupperneq 51
Qupperneq 52
Qupperneq 53
Qupperneq 54
Qupperneq 55
Qupperneq 56
Qupperneq 57
Qupperneq 58
Qupperneq 59
Qupperneq 60
Qupperneq 61
Qupperneq 62
Qupperneq 63
Qupperneq 64
Qupperneq 65
Qupperneq 66
Qupperneq 67
Qupperneq 68
Qupperneq 69
Qupperneq 70
Qupperneq 71
Qupperneq 72
Qupperneq 73
Qupperneq 74
Qupperneq 75
Qupperneq 76
Qupperneq 77
Qupperneq 78
Qupperneq 79
Qupperneq 80
Qupperneq 81
Qupperneq 82
Qupperneq 83
Qupperneq 84
Qupperneq 85
Qupperneq 86
Qupperneq 87
Qupperneq 88
Qupperneq 89
Qupperneq 90
Qupperneq 91
Qupperneq 92
Qupperneq 93
Qupperneq 94
Qupperneq 95
Qupperneq 96
Qupperneq 97
Qupperneq 98
Qupperneq 99
Qupperneq 100
Qupperneq 101
Qupperneq 102
Qupperneq 103
Qupperneq 104
Qupperneq 105
Qupperneq 106
Qupperneq 107
Qupperneq 108
Qupperneq 109
Qupperneq 110
Qupperneq 111
Qupperneq 112
Qupperneq 113
Qupperneq 114
Qupperneq 115
Qupperneq 116
Qupperneq 117
Qupperneq 118
Qupperneq 119
Qupperneq 120
Qupperneq 121
Qupperneq 122
Qupperneq 123
Qupperneq 124
Qupperneq 125
Qupperneq 126
Qupperneq 127
Qupperneq 128
Qupperneq 129
Qupperneq 130
Qupperneq 131
Qupperneq 132
Qupperneq 133
Qupperneq 134
Qupperneq 135
Qupperneq 136
Qupperneq 137
Qupperneq 138
Qupperneq 139
Qupperneq 140
Qupperneq 141
Qupperneq 142
Qupperneq 143
Qupperneq 144
Qupperneq 145
Qupperneq 146
Qupperneq 147
Qupperneq 148
Qupperneq 149
Qupperneq 150
Qupperneq 151
Qupperneq 152
Qupperneq 153
Qupperneq 154
Qupperneq 155
Qupperneq 156
Qupperneq 157
Qupperneq 158
Qupperneq 159
Qupperneq 160
Qupperneq 161
Qupperneq 162
Qupperneq 163
Qupperneq 164
Qupperneq 165
Qupperneq 166
Qupperneq 167
Qupperneq 168
Qupperneq 169
Qupperneq 170
Qupperneq 171
Qupperneq 172
Qupperneq 173
Qupperneq 174
Qupperneq 175
Qupperneq 176
Qupperneq 177
Qupperneq 178
Qupperneq 179
Qupperneq 180
Qupperneq 181
Qupperneq 182
Qupperneq 183
Qupperneq 184
Qupperneq 185
Qupperneq 186
Qupperneq 187
Qupperneq 188
Qupperneq 189
Qupperneq 190
Qupperneq 191
Qupperneq 192
Qupperneq 193
Qupperneq 194
Qupperneq 195
Qupperneq 196
Qupperneq 197
Qupperneq 198
Qupperneq 199
Qupperneq 200
Qupperneq 201
Qupperneq 202
Qupperneq 203
Qupperneq 204
Qupperneq 205
Qupperneq 206

x

Jökull

Direct Links

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Jökull
https://timarit.is/publication/1155

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.