In the Piedmont and Mountain Provinces of North Carolina average annual precipitation exceeds evapotranspiration. Soil solum thickness is usually 1 to 2 m. Saprolite thickness is variable but related to rock type and geomorphic position. Slow hydraulic conductivity in the zone between the soil and the saprolite appears to restrict vertical percolation of water, thus slowing saprolite weathering on convex slopes. In saprolite zones immediately above granitic gneiss, often about 5 m below the surface, halloysite, gibbsite and X-ray amorphous aluminosilicate clay are the initial secondary minerals formed. Halloysite contents increase upward in the saprolite, apparently from resilication of gibbsite and the amorphous aluminosilicates. In the upper zones of the saprolite the halloysite is recrystallized into kaolinite which is the predominant clay-sized mineral in the soil. Over gabbro and metagabbro rocks, the lower zones of the saprolite contain appreciable quantities of smectite, vermiculite, and where chlorite is present, regularly interstratified chlorite-smectite. Although these smectite minerals become partially interlayered with hydroxy aluminum in the overlying soil, they p persist as a substantial component of the clay-sized fraction. Saprolite thickness is less than over the granitic rocks. Increased run-off and lateral through-flow produced by low hydraulic conductives of smectite-rich argillic horizons and convex hill slopes are believed to be responsible for the thin saprolite above mafic bedrock. Soils and saprolites from biotitic gneiss on upper sideslopes in the Mountain physiographic province have mineralogical trends with depth similar to those found over the granitic gneisses of the Piedmont. Gibbsite often constitutes as much as 30% of the clay, and contents tend to increase in the deeper saprolite zones. Biotite sand, which is common throughout the soil and saprolite, alters to kaolinite sand under the acidic conditions of the saprolite. Sand-sized mica appears resistant to weathering except where there is evidence of physical transport.
Read full abstract