Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:12:04.533Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The origin of the montmorillonite of the European Chalk with special reference to the Lower Chalk of England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2018

C. V. Jeans
C. V. Jeans*
Affiliation:
Sedgwick Museum, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The evidence is reviewed for the various hypotheses put forward to explain the origin of the Chalk montmorillonite.

Recent X-ray investigation of the mineralogy of the acid-insoluble clay fractions (buffered 2 N acetic acid at pH 3; <2 µ e.s.d.) of the Lower Chalk of England sheds light on the origin of the montmorillonite. The relations between the qualitative and semi-quantitative mineralogy of the clay fractions and the facies and stratigraphy in this formation have been studied in detail. Montmorillonite, illite, kaolinite, chlorite, vermiculite, pyrophyllite, mixed-layer minerals, quartz, low-temperature cristobalite and apatite have been identified; their semi-quantitative distribution reveals that two main antipathetic assemblages are present, between which all gradations occur. The first is characterized by montmorillonite, illite, quartz and by montmorillonite/illite (M/I) values of 0·7 and above; and the second by illite, kaolinite, chlorite, vermiculite and by M/I values of below 0·2. The distribution of these assemblages or of any particular mineral does not show obvious relations to the facies or stratigraphy.

There is strong evidence that the second of these assemblages is of detrital origin, introduced into the Lower Chalk seas by currents flowing mainly from areas to the east and south-east of England. There is no evidence to suggest that the montmorillonite and the illite of the first assemblage are of detrital or volcanic origin, and their distribution in the Lower Chalk is best explained by their neoformation in the sediment on the sea floor by precipitation from the porewaters. By extrapolation it is thought that most of the Chalk montmorillonite of clay-grade is of neoformational origin. Some from the Campanian and younger Chalks may be detrital. Locally in N.W. Germany and possibly Poland minor amounts may have been derived from the decomposition of volcanic glass in the Chalk seas.

Type
Research Article
Information
Clay Minerals , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , July 1968 , pp. 311 - 329
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1968

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

Brindley, G.W. (1961) The X-ray Identification and Crystal Structure of Clay Minerals. (Brown, G., editor), Chap. XIV, p. 489. Mineralogical Society, London.Google Scholar
Brotzen, F. (1960) The Mesozoics of Scania, S. Sweden, Guide to excusions A21 and C16, Int. geol. Congr., XXI. Norden.Google Scholar
Brown, G. (1961) The X-ray Identification and Crystal Structure of Clay Minerals. (Brown, G., editor), Chap. XIII. p. 469. Mineralogical Society, London.Google Scholar
Burst, J.F. (1958) Am. Miner. 43, 481.Google Scholar
Dorn, P. & Bräutigam, F. (1959) Abh. braunschw, wiss. Ges. 11, 1.Google Scholar
Duplaix, et al. (1960) Bull. Serv. Carte géol. Als. Lorr. 13, 157.Google Scholar
Gribbs, R.J. (1965) Am. Miner. 50, 741.Google Scholar
Heim, D. (1957) Heidelb. Beitr. Miner. Petrogr. 5, 302.Google Scholar
Jeans, C.V. (1967) The Cenomanian Rocks of England., Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Jefferies, R.P.S. (1962) Palaeontology 4, 609.Google Scholar
Lapparerzr, J. DE (1930) Les bauxites de la France méridionale. Mém. Carte Géol. dét. Fr., Paris.Google Scholar
Millot, G. (1949) Thése Sci. Nancy et Géol. Appl. Prospec. Min. 2, 172.Google Scholar
Millot, G. (1964) Geologie des Argiles., pp. 234, 390. Mason et Cie, Paris.Google Scholar
Millot, G., Camez, T. & Bonte, A. (1957) Bull. Carte géol. Als. Lorr. 10, 25.Google Scholar
Nalivkin, D.N. (1960) The Geology of U.S.S.R., p. 120. Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Perrin, R.M.S. (1955) Clay Min. Bull. 2, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrin, R.M.S. (1957) Clay Min. Bull. 3, 193.Google Scholar
Perrin, R.M.S. (1964) Analysis of Calcareous Materia., p. 207. Society for the Chemical Industry, Monograph 18, London.Google Scholar
Sabatier, G. (1964) Bull. Soc. fr. Minér. Cristallogr. 87, 101.Google Scholar
Schöner, H. (1960) Beitr. Miner. Petrogr. 7, 76.Google Scholar
Soukup, J. (1954) Geotechnica (Czechoslovakia Ústred. Ústav Geol.) 18.Google Scholar
Sujkowski, Z. (1931) Spraw. pol. Inst. geol. 6, 485.Google Scholar
Vachtl, J. (1950) Geotechnica (Czechoslovakia, Ústred. Ústav Geol.) 10.Google Scholar
Vadasz, E. & Fülöp, F. (1959) El Sistema Cretacio., 1, 221. Int. geol. Congr. XX Mexico.Google Scholar
Valeton, I. (1959) Neues Jb. Geol. Paläont. Mh. 5, 193.Google Scholar
Valeton, I. (1960) Mitt. geol. Stlnst. Hamb. 29, 26.Google Scholar
Weir, A.H. & Catt, J.A. (1965) Clay Miner. 6, 9.Google Scholar
Whitehouse, U.G., Jeffrey, L.M. & Debrecht, J.D. (1960) Clays Clay Miner. 7, 1.Google Scholar
Young, B.R. (1965) Bull. geol. Surv. Gt Br., 23, 110.Google Scholar