Recent foraminiferal faunules from the Louisiana Gulf Coast

224 Pages·011.916 MB·English

by  Andersen, Harold Veral

RECENT FORAillHD’ESAL FAR RULES FROM THE LOUISIANA GULF COAST
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Louisiana State University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
Department of Geology
ty
Harold Veral Andersen
B* A., University of Nebraska, I9I4O
August, 1950
UMI Number: DP69365
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
U M I
Dissertation Publishing
UMI DP69365
Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProOuest
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
MANUSCRIPT THESES
Unpublished theses submitted' Ter- the master’s and doctor’s
degrees and deposited in the Louisiah&iState University Library
are available for inspection. ‘Use,any thesis- is limited by the
rights of the author. Bibliographical references may be noted, but
passages may not be copied unless the author has given permission*
Credit must be given in subsequent written or published work.
A library which borrows this thesis for use by its clientele
is expected to make sure that the borrower is aware of the above
restrictions.
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
441
S864
ACPOWMlOTiJTO
The preparation of this dissertation was facilitated by the
following people whose assistance and contributions are gratefully
acknowledged! Staff of the Corps of Engineers, 0, S. Axwy, for waking
this investigation possible| Sr. H* N, fisk, Research Director, Humble
Oil Company, for his assistance in initiating this project! Or* H. Y*
Howe* Director* School of Geology, and major professor in the preparation
of this dissertation, for his guidance in the study and for the use of
Ms personal library, photographic equipment and topotype slides j
Dr* Lloyd G* Heabest, 3* S. Geological Survey, for the courtesies ex­
tended while studying the type collection at the 0. S. National Museumj
Hiss Ruth Todd, U. S* Geological Survey, for her time and patience in
making available the type specimens at the Cushman Laboratory of
Foraminiferal Research) Hr* James P. Morgan, Instructor, School of
Geology, for the use of maps he prepared of the South Pass mudlump area,
and Ms suggestions in the mudlurap problem! and Mr* Louis Wilbert,
Assistant Professor, School of Geology, for his suggestions and helpful
criticisms during the preparation of this dissertation.
I- 3 O
ii
/ H S o
TABIE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOffI£DGEA£NTS ................ **
ABSTRACT .................................*................ ^-li
INTRODUCTION ............................................*... X
Objectives ....... X
Area investigated ...... -...... 1
History of investigation ............................ 1
Previous investigations .................... 2
Methods need in sampling environments...... &
Localities collected ...... $
DESCRIPTION OF ENVBtOMENIS SAMPLED ...... 8
Tidal channels ........... 8
Beaches .... 9
Distributaries ....... 9
Bays ..... 10
Meritie zone ...... 10
ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL FC&AMIN1FERAL FAUNULES ............ 13
Conclusions ............................................... Ijj,
ANALYSIS OF MUDLOMP F0RMI2OTFRAL PAUNU1ES...... 17
Mudlump SP-1 ..... 17
Mudlump SP-3 ..... 16
Mudlump 3P-»S ............. l<?
Contributions to the mudlump problem ..... 21
Conclusions ........ 22
iii
Page
s m m m op tm pc&&einifiral fautoes ........*...............25
Family Saccasisinidae .... *.... 25
Faadly Reoph&cidae *• * *,.,.♦****«■.. 26
Family Lituolidae ***• * 26
Family Textularildae *. 32
Family VerrkeniXinidae • * *..♦.*.*». liO
Family VklvuXinidae .... Ul
Family Miliolidae ...... bk
Family OpthalaAdAidae ........... 63
Family Tr o chamminidae ** - 65
Fasily Lagenidae 6?
Family Polymorphinidae ».....* *. 109
Family Ncnionidas ....,..... .................... Ill
Family Peneroplid&e »»•«.,.. 121
Family Buliminidae ......................... 122
Family Ellipsoidinidae • ., *.»»»»..«...... li;0
Family Rotaliidae .....................a » ll^O
Family Amphisteginidae •»».•••••..» .. 150
Family Cyabaloporidae 151
Family Globigerinidae .... 151
Family Globorotaliidae ............. xgfj
Family Cassidulinidae .. ......... 157
Family G hilostomellidae...... »....................,,.. 160
Family Anomalinidae ......... 161
Family Planorbullnidae ...... ............... x6fo
Iv
Page
EXPLANATION OF PUTS X ............. 1#
EXPLANATION OF PUTS n ........ 167
EXPLANATION OF PLATE III .............................. 16?
EXPLANATION OF PLATE XV .................. 171
exjueavicn or puts t ..... 173
KXPUNATION OF PLATE VI ........................ 175
EXPLANATION OF PUTE VII ................................... 177
EXPLANATION OF PUTS VIII ........... 179
EXPLANATION OF PUTS X X .................. 161
EXPLANATION OF PUTE X ........ 183
EXPLANATION OF PLATE X I ................... 185
EXPLANATION OF PLATE XII ............................. 189
EXPLANATION OF PUTE XIII ...................... 193
EXPLANATION OF PUTE XIV .................... 195
EXPUNATION OS PUTE X V .... 197
BiBLioffitAPiir....... 199
AUTOBIOGRAPHX ................................ 20$
APPENDIX I ....................... 206
T
LIST OF FIGURES AND PLATES
Page
FIGURE 1 Area covered bgr present and previous investigations
of the Lower Mississippi River delta. ♦ * * 3
FIGURE 2 Sampling device used in collecting sediment from
the Continental Shell. 6
FIGURE 3 Environmental localities sampled..* .... 12
FIGURE b Mudlump group off South Pass. .... ......... 20
FIGURE 5 An aerial view of four mudlumpa off South Pass..... 2b
PLATS I Saecams&nidae, Reophacidae, lituolidae, Textularidae. 166
PLATE II Textularidae, Verneulinidae, Valvulinidae,
Miliolidae................. 168
PLATE in Miliolidae............... 170
PUTE 17 Miliolidae.......... ....... 172
PLATE 7 Miliolidae, Opthalmididae, Trochamiainidae ......... 17b
PUTE VI Lagenidae.................................... 176
PUTE VII Lagenidae......................... 1?8
PUTE VIII Lagenidae.................. 180
PUTE H Lagenidae, Polymorphinidae .... 182
PUTE X Nonionidae......................... 18b
PUTE XI Peneroplidae, Buliminidae .... 186
PUTE XII Buliminidae, Ellipsoidinidae, Rotalldae............ 190
PUTE XIII Rotalidae, Amphisteginidae, Cymbaloporidae ..... 19b
PUTE XIV Globigerinidae, Globorotalldae.................... 196
PUTE XV Cassidulinidae, Chilostomellidae, Anomalinidae,
Planorbulinidae .... 198
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Page
TABLE I Distribution of foraminifera in environments
and s t u d l u m p s * 213.
vil
ABSTRACT
The Lover Mississippi River delta is an area of active sedimei*-
tatlon receiving an estimated two million tons of material daily via the
Mississippi Elver* This sediment is being deposited In bodies of water
which differ in each physical properties as salinity, temperature, and
depth* Variations in these environmental factors influence or possibly
control the distribution of life which in turn determine the nature of
the organic remains incorporated with the sediment deposited*
This study of the Recent foraminiferal faurmles from the environ­
ments of the Lover delta stemmed from an investigation of the mudlumps
at the mouths of the passes of the Mississippi River conducted for the
Sew Orleans District, Corps of Engineers, TJ* S. Army* Following the
discovery of an unique and prolific foraminiferal assemblage in the
sediments of mudlump SF-J? off South Fass, an extensive investigation of
the foraminiferal genera and species of the present environments in the
Lover Mississippi River delta was initiated* The foraminiferal faumule
in the clay of mudUsap SP-5 was an index to the environment Inhabited
by the foraminifera when they were living and thus was a clue to the
magnitude of vertical displacement of the clay since the time it was
originally deposited as mud in the Gulf of Mexico.
Published reports on two previous investigations of the foramini-
feral populations In the Lower delta did not satisfy the momenclatural
need in conjunction with the study of SP-5. One report restricted to a
study of beach material from the Rio Grande to the Mississippi River
described eighteen species and varieties of foraminifera. The other
report presented the distribution of the foraminifera in Recent
viii