Maryland Geological Survey Research Articles

Preface to Owen P. Bricker III Special Issue of Aquatic Geochemistry

This special volume of aquatic geochemistry is dedicated to the memory of Owen Peterson Bricker III (1936–2011) and serves as a tribute to his life and career. Owen had a distinguished and productive research career in both academics at Johns Hopkins University (Fig. 1) and as a public servant with the Maryland Geological Survey, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the US Geological Survey. He was a pioneer and leader in aqueous geochemistry, who applied a study approach that quantified mineral weathering reactions and equilibrium thermodynamic relations to better understand the chemical evolution of stream water in small watersheds. He will be especially remembered for his efforts to establish rigorous field studies in small catchments around the United States as a means of quantifying the sources of acid-neutralizing capacity that affect the chemical status and biological health of natural waters. Open image in new window Fig. 1 Owen in a Johns Hopkins University laboratory in the early years (~1965, note the tie!)

Evaluating mobilization and transport of arsenic in sediments and groundwaters of Aquia aquifer, Maryland, USA

Groundwater and sediment samples were collected along a flow path in the Aquia aquifer (Paleocene), Maryland in order to examine and study the factors influencing “evolution” of arsenic (As) in these groundwaters. The Aquia crops out near Washington, DC, where it is unconfined, and extends approximately 90 km down dip to the south and east towards and beneath the Chesapeake Bay. The studied flow path was chosen owing to (i) the number of accessible wells, (ii) differences in total dissolved As concentrations in groundwaters from some of the sampled wells, which reach values ≥667 nmol kg-1 or ≥50 ppb, and (iii) the distinct difference in total dissolved As concentrations in Aquia groundwaters between the northern and southern portions of the study area. In groundwater samples, in situ separation of inorganic As species [As(III) and As(V)] were performed by using anion exchange chromatography. Subsequently, As concentrations were determined by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. In situ measurements of Fe concentrations and speciation, dissolved S(-II) concentrations, pH, alkalinity, and oxidation-reduction potential (Eh) were determined to establish the oxidation-reduction conditions and solution chemistry along the flow path. Concentrations of As in 12 analyzed groundwater samples range from ∼0.75 to 1 072 nmol kg-1, and As(III) concentrations ranging from 0.24 to 980 nmol kg-1 appears to be the dominant form of As in solution. 50% of the studied wells yielded groundwaters with concentrations that exceed the US EPA's Maximum Contaminant Level for As in drinking water of 133 nmol kg-1 or 10 ppb. In order to examine the solid phase speciation of As within the aquifer sediments, we collected a number of Aquia sediment samples from a drill core that was archived at the Maryland Geological Survey. These sediment samples were evaluated using a previously established sequential extractions procedure. Solid phase As concentrations range between 973 and 2,012 nmol kg-1. Additionally, petrographic, X-Ray diffraction and diffuse reflectance spectroscopy analyses of the Aquia sediments reveal presence of glauconite, and smectite along with goethite and hematite within the samples. Here, we present the possible mechanisms responsible for the elevated As concentrations in the studied groundwaters of the Aquia aquifer.

Ten Years of Studies on Maryland's Inner Continental Margin and Coastal Bays

During the past ten years of the Association of American State Geologists-Mineral Management Service Continental Margins Program, the Maryland Geological Sur vey investigated the sedimentological, paleontological, stratigraphical and geophysi cal character of Maryland's inner continental shelf. Based on seismic records and sedimentological analyses completed during the first four years, a late Quaternary stratigraphic model was developed. Five distinct stratigraphic units were identified and described on the Maryland inner shelf. These units represent late Pleistocene interglacial deposits, the oldest of which corresponds to pre-Illinoian (oxygen-isotope stages 7 and or 9) transgressive shelf sands. Overlying the Q1 unit, the Q2 unit is a 6-meter thick mud sequence of oxygen-isotope stage 5 (128-75 ka) age. Units Q3 and Q4 representing fluvial and leading edge estuarine deposits (oxygen-isotope stages 4, 3 and 2) filled numerous paleochannels that were incised into units Q2 and Q1. Modern trailing-edge transgressive shelf shoals (Unit Q5) discontinuously cap the sequence. The 5th and 6th years studies reported on the economic minerals of surficial and cored sediments. Vibracores collected off the Maryland's shelf during previous studies were analyzed for mineral types and abundances, weight percent of general size fractions, and heavy mineral (HM) content. Mineralogic maturity indices were compiled to correlate the THM and economic heavy minerals (EHM) abundances with position offshore, sediment type, and the indices themselves. For the 7th year, the Maryland Geological Survey re-examined geophysical records and lithological data originally collected by the Army Corps of Engineers to locate and assess beach fill borrow areas for the Ocean City Beach Replenishment Project. Data from 163 vibracores and over 300 kilometers of high-resolution seismic profile records collected off Ocean City, Maryland, supported the strati graphic model developed by MGS during the first four years of the AASG-MMS program. The Maryland coastal bays became the focus of study during the 8th and 9th years during which seismic records, cores and surficial sediment were collected in Isle of Wight and Assawoman Bays. Shallow pretransgression surface was mapped, relating the existing streams to offshore paleochannels. The tenth year study focused on developing a repository for vibracores collected on Maryland's inner continental shelf.

Coal Geology of Lower Youghiogheny Basin, Garrett County, Maryland: ABSTRACT

The Lower Youghiogheny basin (130 sq mi or 338 sq km) ranks fourth in total area of the five synclinal coal basins of western Maryland. Approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) of coal-bearing strata of Early to Late Pennsylvanian is exposed (Pottsville, Allegheny, and Conemaugh Formations). The Pottsville Formation rests unconformably on the Mauch Chunk Formation of Late Mississippian. The contact separating the Pottsville and Allegheny Formations is the top of the Homewood Sandstone, and that separating the Allegheny and Conemaugh Formations is the top of the Upper Freeport coal bed. A coal bed correlated with the Little Clarksburg, which occurs in the upper third of the Conemaugh formation in West Virginia, is End_Page 1013------------------------------ stratigraphically the highest coal bed in the section; the uppermost part of the Conemaugh is not present. Structurally, the basin in Maryland is the southern termination of the Youghiogheny syncline, which is asymmetrical and plunges to the northeast. The coal beds of the basin were traced using new data from surface mines, water well logs, a mine-drainage pollution study, recent aerial photographs (May 1979), and unpublished data from the Maryland Geological Survey. Field checking, where possible, substantiated the available data. Two marine intervals, the Ames and the Brush Creek shale, aided in the correlation of the coal beds. A structure contour map of the top of the Upper Freeport coal bed was used to project the outcrop patterns of coal beds onto a topographic map. Fourteen coal beds were identified in the Lower Youghiogheny basin. Of these, five are minable or potentially minable, the Upper Freeport and the Lower Kittanning being the more important. On the basis of this study, the Barton and Clarion coal beds are newly recognized in the basin. The Clarion coal bed has been mined in conjunction with the Lower Kittanning coal bed and knowledge of its existence adds a significant tonnage to calculated coal resources of the basin. A revised stratigraphic column for the basin shows the stratigraphic position of the Barton and Clarion coal beds. A map showing the coal beds indicates minable and potentially minable areas in the basin. End_of_Article - Last_Page 1014------------

The Geology of Howard and Montgomery Counties. Ernst Cloos, G. W. Fisher, C. A. Hopson, and Emery T. Cleaves. Maryland Geological Survey, Baltimore, 1964. xvi + 373 pp. Illus. Plates. Paper, $3; cloth, $4

The Geology of Howard and Montgomery Counties. Ernst Cloos, G. W. Fisher, C. A. Hopson, and Emery T. Cleaves. Maryland Geological Survey, Baltimore, 1964. xvi + 373 pp. Illus. Plates. Paper, $3; cloth, $4

The Maryland Geological Survey Reports. Edward B. Matthews

<i>The Maryland Geological Survey Reports</i>. Edward B. Matthews

Baltimore County, Maryland Geological Survey.

Previous articleNext article No AccessReviewsBaltimore County, Maryland Geological Survey.J. T. McC.J. T. McC. Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Geology Volume 39, Number 4May - Jun., 1931 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/623857 PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Maryland Geological Survey: Cambrian and Ordovician

THE Maryland Geological Survey has always been noted for the educational aspect of its publications, which are by no means a dry record of observations for the use of scientific specialists They help the ordinary citizen to understand his State, and in so doing to appreciate the aims and methods of research. The results of much careful work in petrology and palaeontology are brought together in the well-known green-covered volumes, so as to be accessible in private libraries and in schools. The present volume, by R. S. Bassler, covers a part of the Atlantic slope from the crest of the Alleghanies to the sea, thus including the three great belts of contrasted scenery that stretch from New England to Mississippi. The British controversy as to the nomenclature of the older Palaeozoic systems is interestingly re-stated, and the author, on grounds of fairness to the original workers, would like to use Taconic and Cambrian for the systems now styled Cambrian and Ordovician respectively. He effects a proper compromise, however, and fairly discusses Ulrich's Ozarkian and Canadian systems. Maryland Geological Survey: Cambrian and Ordovician. Pp. 424 + lviii plates. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1919.)

William Bullock Clark

While Professor William Bullock Clark was chiefly known for his notable contributions to the advancement of geological science, he is also to be credited with having taken a prominent part in the advancement of terrestrial magnetism and other geophysical subjects. It was owing to his kindly interest and stimulating appreciation that the writer of this biographical sketch was given the means and the opportunity, under the auspices of the Maryland Geological Survey, to carry out a detailed magnetic survey of Maryland (1896–1899).The example set by Professor Clark was soon followed by the State Geologist of North Carolina, and in 1899, the time appearing ripe to the Superintendent of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey (then Dr. H. S. Pritchett) for the reorganization of a magnetic survey of the United States along the general lines of the Maryland magnetic survey, the writer was invited to draw up a plan and take charge of such a survey. The experience gained in the latter work led the writer some years later to propose a plan to the Trustees of the Carnegie Institution of Washington for a general magnetic survey of the Earth, which plan, as is well known, has been in actual execution since 1904. Thus the magnetic survey of Maryland may be considered as having been virtually the forerunner of the reorganized magnetic survey of the United States and of the general magnetic survey of the Earth.

A Miocene Flora from the Virginia Coastal Plain

Previous articleNext article FreeA Miocene Flora from the Virginia Coastal PlainEdward W. BerryEdward W. Berry Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Geology Volume 17, Number 1Jan. - Feb., 1909 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/621583 Views: 112Total views on this site Citations: 3Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Eduardo Barrón, Anna Averyanova, Zlatko Kvaček, Arata Momohara, Kathleen B. Pigg, Svetlana Popova, José María Postigo-Mijarra, Bruce H. Tiffney, Torsten Utescher, Zhe Kun Zhou The Fossil History of Quercus, (Dec 2017): 39–105.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69099-5_3Qingqing Q. Xu, Jue Qiu, Zhekun K. Zhou, Jianhua H. Jin Eocene Podocarpium (Leguminosae) from South China and its biogeographic implications, Frontiers in Plant Science 6 (Nov 2015).https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00938Ben A. LePage, Hong Yang, Midori Matsumoto The Evolution and Biogeographic History of Metasequoia, (): 3–114.https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2764-8_1

Maryland Geological Survey.

Previous articleNext article FreeReviewsMaryland Geological Survey.H. H.H. H. Search for more articles by this author PDF Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Geology Volume 16, Number 5Jul. - Aug., 1908 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/621544 Views: 50 Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

The Characteristics of Various Types of Conglomerates

In the prosecution of a recent study of the Roxbury Conglomerate (Boston, Mass.), the writer found himself in need of criteria by which to determine the mode of origin of that formation. A critical examination was therefore made of the published descriptions of conglomerates in many parts of the world and belonging to many geological ages, in the hope of discovering characteristics sufficiently marked to distinguish one type from another. The data collected and the conclusions derived therefrom have recently been published in detail.2 The present paper is a brief summary of the results of the investigation. Five general types of conglomerate were considered, namely: marine, fluviatile, estuarine, lacustrine, and glacial. In addition to these, another type was studied, commonly known as crush-conglomerate, but really pseudo-conglomeratic in its nature. The fact was recognized that many conglomerates are the product of the combined action of several conglomerate-forming processes, but the results of each process were classified separately. Among the formations taken under consideration were: the Cretaceous formation of Texas, as described by Hill;3 the Pottsville Conglomerate; non-marine formations in India, Persia, Great Britain, and the United States; the Devonian of Pennsylvania and Maryland, as described by Willis;4 the Newark formation as described by Russell;5 glacial deposits of the Quaternary period in the United States and Europe; ancient glacial deposits in India, Australia, South Africa, and Norway; and crush-conglomerates in the Isle of Man and Argyllshire. ' Read before the Geological Society of America, December 28, 1906, New York. 2 Museum of Comparative Zoology, Bulletin No. XLIX, Geological Series, 8, 1906. 3 R. T. Hill, U S. Geological Survey, Twenty-first Annual Report, 1901, pt. 7. 4 Maryland Geological Survey, 1902, Vol. IV, pp. 21-935 U. S. Geological Survey, Bulletin No. 85, 1892.

VI.—Maryland Geological Survey - 1.—The Pliocene and Pleistocene Deposits of Maryland. By George Burbank Shattuck. pp. 291, 75 plates, and 10 text-figures. (Baltimore: The John Hopkins’ Press, 1906.) - 2.—Report on the Physical Features of Maryland. By Wm. Bullock Clark and Edward B. Mathews. pp. xv, 284, 30 plates, 19 text-figures, and geological map of Maryland. (Baltimore, 1906.)

VI.—Maryland Geological Survey - 1.—The Pliocene and Pleistocene Deposits of Maryland. By George Burbank Shattuck. pp. 291, 75 plates, and 10 text-figures. (Baltimore: The John Hopkins’ Press, 1906.) - 2.—Report on the Physical Features of Maryland. By Wm. Bullock Clark and Edward B. Mathews. pp. xv, 284, 30 plates, 19 text-figures, and geological map of Maryland. (Baltimore, 1906.)

The Terraces of the Maryland Coastal Plain: Maryland Geological Survey. Pleiocene and Pleistocene . Baltimore, 1906. Pp. 291, plates and maps.

The Terraces of the Maryland Coastal Plain: <i>Maryland Geological Survey. Pleiocene and Pleistocene</i> . Baltimore, 1906. Pp. 291, plates and maps.

The Miocene Formation of Maryland

WE have received from the Maryland Geological Survey a memoir on the Miocene formation of the State, in two volumes, text and plates. This is the second of a series of reports dealing with the systematic geology and palaeontology of Maryland, that on the Eocene having been previously published, while reports on other formations are in progress. We may heartily congratulate the State geologist, Dr. Wm. Bullock Clark, on the appearance of these volumes, which in type and illustrations leave nothing to be desired, while the subject-matter, the result of labours extending over fifteen years, represents the combined work of field geologists and of experts in various branches of palaeontology.

Correlation of Maryland and Pennsylvania Piedmont formations

Introduction The generalizations and conclusions presented in the present paper are based on the detailed work of the writer and his assistants on the Maryland Geological Survey, covering the territory from the Susquehanna river to longitude 76 degrees 50 minutes, with the exception of a small area in the immediate vicinity of Baltimore, and on the lines determined by the late Professor Williams, confirmed by a rather detailed reconnaissance by the author, on the territory west of this line to the area of the Frederick and West Washington sheets, where the work of Mr Keith, supplemented by reconnaissance work by the author, is used. The writer has also had access to the field notes, manuscript material, and microscopic sections of Professor Williams, which were prepared by him during his work on the United States Geological Survey. The conclusions reached from the information received from these various sources are, however, the . . .

Magnetic Work in Maryland, U.S.A.

IN a second report on magnetic work in Maryland (Maryland Geological Survey, special publication, vol. v. part i. pp. 23-98, the Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1902), Dr. Bauer gives the results of the survey which he commenced in 1896. In the earlier years the work was done mainly under the direct auspices of the Maryland Geological Survey, but subsequent to May, 1899, when Dr. Bauer took charge of the magnetic department of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, the Geodetic Survey contributed materially to it. The result, in Dr. Bauer's, words, is that “Maryland now possesses the most detailed magnetic survey of any country, with the exception of Holland,” there having been on the average one station to each 100 square miles.

Maryland Geological Survey.

Previous articleNext article FreeReviews of Recent LiteratureMaryland Geological Survey.T. A. Jaggar, Jr.T. A. Jaggar, Jr. Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The American Naturalist Volume 33, Number 387Mar., 1899 Published for The American Society of Naturalists Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/277207 Views: 104Total views on this site PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.