Geologic Map and Upper Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the 

Marble Canyon Area, Cottonwood Canyon Quadrangle, 

Death Valley National Park, Inyo County, California

By Paul Stone, Calvin H. Stevens, Paul Belasky, Isabel P. Montañez, Lauren G. Martin, Bruce R. Wardlaw, 

Charles A. Sandberg, Elmira Wan, Holly A. Olson, and Susan S. Priest

Pamphlet to accompany

Scientific Investigations Map 3298

2014 

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Cover

View of Marble Canyon area, California, showing dark rocks of Mississippian Indian Springs Formation and Pennsylvanian Bird Spring Formation 

overlying light rocks of Mississippian Santa Rosa Hills Limestone in middle distance. View is southeast toward Emigrant Wash and Tucki Mountain in 

distance.
U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit 

http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications,

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Suggested citation:

Stone, P., Stevens, C.H., Belasky, P., Montanez, I.P., Martin, L.G., Wardlaw, B.R., Sandberg, C.A., Wan, E., Olson, 

H.A., and Priest, S.S., 2014, Geologic map and upper Paleozoic stratigraphy of the Marble Canyon area, 

Cottonwood Canyon quadrangle, Death Valley National Park, Inyo County, California: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Map 3298, scale 1:24,000, 59 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sim3298.

ISSN 2329–132X (online)

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain

copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be 

secured from the copyright owner.
iv

Contents

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................................1

Geologic Framework ........................................................................................................................................................................2

Upper Paleozoic Stratigraphy and Depositional Environments ........................................................................................................4

Mississippian Rocks.....................................................................................................................................................................4

Pennsylvanian and Permian Rocks..............................................................................................................................................8

Late Paleozoic Depositional and Paleogeographic History............................................................................................................17

References Cited ...........................................................................................................................................................................20

Appendix 1—Measured Sections ...................................................................................................................................................24

Appendix 2—Mississippian Conodonts, by C.A. Sandberg............................................................................................................39

Appendix 3—Pennsylvanian and Permian Conodonts, by B.R. Wardlaw......................................................................................42

Appendix 4—Fusulinids and Other Foraminifers, by C.H. Stevens................................................................................................48

Appendix 5—Corals, by C.H. Stevens ...........................................................................................................................................49

Appendix 6—Thin-Section Notes, by C.H. Stevens and P. Stone..................................................................................................51

Appendix 7—Tephrochronologic Analysis of Cenozoic Tuffs, by E. Wan and H.A. Olson.............................................................56

Appendix 8—Ammonoids from the Osborne Canyon Formation 5 km East of the Study Area, by P. Stone and C.H. Stevens ....59

Figures

1. Index map showing location of geologic map area in Cottonwood Mountains, Death Valley National Park, Inyo County, 

east-central California ......................................................................................................................................................2

2. Chart showing Paleozoic stratigraphy of the Marble Canyon area..........................................................................................3

3. Field photographs of Upper Mississippian Indian Springs Formation in the Marble Canyon area. .........................................8

4. Field photographs of Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks in the Marble Canyon area ...........................................................10

5. Maps illustrating Mississippian to Permian paleogeographic evolution of the Inyo Mountains-Cottonwood Mountains area18

6. Chart showing correlation of members 1–4 of the Bird Spring Formation at Marble Canyon with regional stratigraphic 

sequences and relative sea-level curve for the Bird Spring Platform.............................................................................19

7. Thin-section photographs of fusulinids from Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks in the Marble Canyon area .......................50

8. Thin-section photographs of colonial corals from Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks in the Marble Canyon area................52

9. Photographs of Tertiary tuff outcrops in the map area ..........................................................................................................58

10. Photographs of ammonoids from the Osborne Canyon Formation 5 km east of the Marble Canyon study area, 

reproduced from Lee (1975) ..........................................................................................................................................59
Geologic Map and Upper Paleozoic Stratigraphy of the 

Marble Canyon Area, Cottonwood Canyon Quadrangle, 

Death Valley National Park, Inyo County, California

By Paul Stone1, Calvin H. Stevens2, Paul Belasky3, Isabel P. Montañez4, Lauren G. Martin5, Bruce R. Wardlaw1, 

Charles A. Sandberg1, Elmira Wan1, Holly A. Olson1, and Susan S. Priest1

Introduction

This geologic map and interpretive pamphlet focus primarily on the stratigraphy, depositional 

history, and paleogeographic significance of upper Paleozoic rocks exposed in the Marble Canyon area

in Death Valley National Park, California. The study area, which covers the northwestern part of the 

Cottonwood Canyon 7.5’ quadrangle, is on the east side of the Cottonwood Mountains (northern part of 

the Panamint Range) about 15 km west of Stovepipe Wells (fig. 1). This area contains excellent

exposures of Mississippian to Permian sedimentary rocks that provide important stratigraphic and 

paleontologic information for reconstructing the late Paleozoic continental margin of the southwestern 

United States. Vehicular access is provided by a jeep road that starts at Stovepipe Wells and branches 

into both Marble and Cottonwood Canyons.

Geologic examination of the Marble Canyon area began with mapping studies by Stadler (1968) 

and Johnson (1971), which established the basic stratigraphic and structural framework. Stone (1984) 

remapped the area in greater detail with a focus on the Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks. As part of that 

study, John Repetski of the U.S. Geological Survey identified conodonts that provided the first refined 

age control for Upper Mississippian to Pennsylvanian rocks exposed in the area. The Mississippian 

rocks were later studied by Belasky (1988), who included conodont identifications and age 

determinations by one of the present authors (Sandberg). Most recently, the Pennsylvanian rocks were 

studied by two of the authors (Martin and Montañez) as part of a regional investigation of sea-level 

fluctuations on the Bird Spring carbonate platform (Greene, 2010; Martin and others, 2012).

This report synthesizes information from these previous reports together with additional

information that has not been presented before. The geologic map is more detailed than that of Stone 

(1984) and incorporates additional work done from 2009 to 2012. S.S. Priest created the digital database 

for the geologic map. The measured sections (appendix 1) are from Belasky (1988) and P. Stone 

(unpublished data, 1980, 1990). We also include updated conodont identifications by C.A. Sandberg and 

B.R. Wardlaw (appendixes 2 and 3), fusulinid and coral identifications by C.H. Stevens (appendixes 4 

and 5), petrographic studies by C.H. Stevens and P. Stone (appendix 6), and a tephrochronologic 

analysis of Cenozoic tuffs by E. Wan and H.A. Olson (appendix 7). Finally, we include a brief 

 

1 U.S. Geological Survey.

2

San Jose State University.

3 Ohlone College.

4 University of California, Davis.

5 Apache Corporation.
2

discussion of early Permian ammonoids described by Lee (1975) near the mouth of Cottonwood 

Canyon, 5 km east of the map area (appendix 8).

Mississippian to Permian chronostratigraphic terminology used in this report (fig. 2) is from 

Davydov and others (2004) and Wardlaw and others (2004). A combination of global and North 

American stage terms is used as appropriate throughout the report.

Figure 1. Index map showing location of geologic map area in Cottonwood Mountains, Death Valley National 

Park, Inyo County, east-central California. Geology generalized from Jennings (1977). Trace of late Cenozoic 

Hunter Mountain Fault from Burchfiel and others (1987).

Geologic Framework

Bedrock exposed in the Marble Canyon area is composed of Mississippian to lower Permian 

(Cisuralian) marine sedimentary rocks (fig. 2) and the Jurassic Hunter Mountain Quartz Monzonite. The 

Mississippian to lower Permian rocks represent lithostratigraphic units that are widespread in eastcentral California and adjacent regions, although the rocks herein assigned to the Bird Spring Formation 

are entirely of Pennsylvanian age in contrast to the overall unit age of latest Mississippian to early

Permian. Most of the Mississippian to lower Permian rocks are well preserved, but limestone and silty 
3

limestone of the Bird Spring Formation are metamorphosed to marble and calc-silicate rocks near the 

intrusive contact with quartz monzonite.

Figure 2. Chart showing Paleozoic stratigraphy of the Marble Canyon area. Stage names and correlations are 

from Davydov and others (2004) and Wardlaw and others (2004).

The bedrock units are overlain by deeply dissected Tertiary and Quaternary(?) nonmarine 

sedimentary deposits and minor tuff (unit QTs). The oldest recognized deposits of unit QTs consist of

arkosic sandstone and minor conglomerate that we tentatively interpret to represent the middle Miocene 

Panuga Formation of Snow and Lux (1999). Just east of the map area, however, Snow and Lux (1999) 

reported older deposits of the lower Miocene Ubehebe Formation, and it is possible that correlative 

deposits are present in the map area as well. Younger deposits of unit QTs consist primarily of 

conglomerate that we interpret to represent the middle Miocene to Pliocene Navadu Formation and the 

Pliocene to Quaternary(?) Nova Formation of Snow and Lux (1999). These younger deposits include a 

previously unrecognized tuff to which we tentatively assign an age of late middle Miocene (~12 Ma)
4

based on tephrochronologic analysis, in addition to a tuff dated as ~3.28 Ma and assigned to the 

Pliocene tuff of Mesquite Spring by Snow and Lux (1999). Both tuffs are further discussed in appendix 

7. Younger Quaternary deposits in the map area include moderately dissected alluvium of inferred 

Pleistocene age (unit Qoa), the alluvium of modern washes (unit Qya), and talus (unit Qt). Unit Qoa

contains a slide block of Permian limestone (unit Qsb).

Structurally, the Mississippian to Permian strata are in the lower plate of the Marble Canyon 

Thrust Fault (Stadler, 1968; Snow, 1992), which is exposed a few kilometers northwest of the map area 

(fig. 1). This regionally significant thrust fault, which is intruded by the Hunter Mountain batholith

beyond the margins of the map area, is interpreted to be of late Permian age (Stevens and Stone, 2005b).

Overturned bedding in the lower Permian Osborne Canyon and Darwin Canyon Formations near the 

west edge of the map area was caused by folding in the lower plate of the thrust fault. Folding, possibly

related to intrusion of the Hunter Mountain batholith, deformed Mississippian and Pennsylvanian rocks 

adjacent to the batholith into a large, northwest-trending anticline that parallels the intrusive contact.

Upper Paleozoic rocks between Marble and Cottonwood Canyons form a series of tilted, 

northeast-dipping fault blocks bounded by southwest-dipping normal faults (see cross section A-A’).

These faults formed as the result of late Cenozoic extensional deformation of regional extent (Snow and 

Wernicke, 2000). This faulting and tilting postdated deposition of arkosic sandstone in the lower part of 

unit QTs, which dips as much as 60° northeast in the hanging wall of a major normal fault and 

depositionally overlies the Pennsylvanian Bird Spring Formation with little or no angular discordance.

Younger deposits of unit QTs dip less steeply and are inferred to have accumulated as the extensional 

deformation took place. In several places, subhorizontal gravel deposits of unit QTs are bounded by 

fault scarps, but it is generally unclear whether fault activity predated or postdated deposition of these 

gravels.

The northwest-striking faults and fault blocks are cut by a major northeast-striking, northwestdipping normal fault in Marble Canyon. Northeastward along strike, this fault splits into at least two 

branches that interact with the northwest-striking fault set, resulting in a complex of small fault blocks.

Several other northeast-striking, northwest-dipping normal faults are present between Marble and 

Cottonwood Canyons. In contrast to the major fault in Marble Canyon, however, most of these relatively 

minor faults appear to be cut by northwest-striking faults.

Upper Paleozoic Stratigraphy and Depositional Environments

The stratigraphic relations and ages of the upper Paleozoic units recognized in the Marble 

Canyon area are shown in figure 2. The lines of measured sections CC, MC-1, MC-1A, and MC-2, in 

which the different units are best exposed, are shown on the geologic map. Each measured section is 

described in detail in appendix 1 and is graphically displayed on the geologic map sheet.

Mississippian Rocks

Rocks of Mississippian age in the Marble Canyon area have an exposed thickness of about 

650 m and are composed predominantly of limestone with a thin capping unit of siliciclastic rocks. The 

thick limestone sequence is divided into three conformable formations that are, in ascending order, the 

Tin Mountain Limestone, Stone Canyon Limestone (of Stevens and others, 1996), and Santa Rosa Hills 

Limestone (fig. 2). This sequence of units, widespread in east-central California, is correlative with the

lithologically similar Monte Cristo Limestone, or Group, of southern Nevada and southeastern 

California (Stevens and others, 1996). The Stone Canyon Limestone and Santa Rosa Hills Limestone 

encompass rocks formerly assigned to the Perdido Formation and Lee Flat Limestone, respectively 

(Dunne and others, 1981; Stevens and others, 1996). The thin siliciclastic unit that disconformably caps 

the Mississippian sequence is assigned to the Indian Springs Formation, which is recognized throughout 
5

a large region in eastern California and adjacent parts of Nevada (for example, Stevens and others, 

1996).

Tin Mountain Limestone

The Tin Mountain Limestone is recognized only in the vicinity of measured section CC where an 

incomplete section is exposed and the base is faulted. The depositional contact between the Tin 

Mountain Limestone and the underlying Devonian Lost Burro Formation is widely exposed in the 

Cottonwood Mountains outside the map area (Stadler, 1968; Johnson, 1971; Snow, 1990).

The maximum exposed thickness of the Tin Mountain Limestone near section CC is about 

100 m, but only the upper 40 m is traversed by the measured section (appendix 1). The rocks consist 

predominantly of medium-bedded, resistant, dark-gray lime wackestone with thin interbeds of light-redweathering lime mudstone. The average bed thickness is 20 to 50 cm. Fossils are common and include 

solitary rugose corals, brachiopods, bryozoans, and siliceous sponge spicules. Pelmatozoan debris

occurs throughout and is most abundant near the top of the formation. Chert nodules constitute no more 

than 10 percent of the rock volume, in contrast to the abundant lenticular chert in the overlying lower 

member of the Stone Canyon Limestone.

The dark-gray color and fine-grained texture of the Tin Mountain Limestone, together with the 

abundance of siliceous sponge spicules, suggest deposition on a relatively deep, quiescent carbonate 

platform (Sandberg and Gutschick, 1984). The presence of stenohaline fossils such as pelmatozoans, 

bryozoans, and solitary rugose corals implies an offshore environment with good circulation.

Megafossils and conodonts from various localities in east-central California indicate that the Tin 

Mountain Limestone is of Early Mississippian (Kinderhookian to early Osagean) age (McAllister, 1952, 

1956, 1974; Merriam, 1963; Stevens and others, 1996). No fossils were collected or examined from the 

Tin Mountain Limestone in the study area.

Stone Canyon Limestone

The Stone Canyon Limestone is 417 m thick in measured section CC (appendix 1) where it is 

informally divided into a lower member (301 m) and an upper member (116 m). The Stone Canyon 

Limestone conformably overlies the Tin Mountain Limestone and is conformably overlain by the Santa 

Rosa Hills Limestone.

The lower member of the Stone Canyon Limestone is composed of dark-gray, thin- to mediumbedded lime mudstone, spiculiferous wackestone containing scattered crinoids and rare solitary rugose 

corals, and about 50 percent black, lenticular chert and brown-weathering, silicified, spiculiferous 

limestone. The average bed thickness is about 15 cm. The amount of chert and silicified limestone 

gradually decreases toward the top of the member, while the average bed thickness increases.

The contact with the upper member is marked by the appearance of graded beds of pelmatozoanrich limestone in addition to the predominant lime mudstone and wackestone like that in the lower 

member. Graded beds, which commonly exhibit erosive bases, are most abundant in the middle part of 

the member. Rocks of the upper member are mostly medium gray and contain less chert (30 percent) 

than rocks of the lower member. Thick, massive beds of medium- to light-gray, coarse-grained 

pelmatozoan calcarenite are present, although not abundant, in the upper 75 m of the member. Some 

beds contain colonial tabulate syringoporoid corals and rare, broken colonial rugose corals. Interbeds of 

lime wackestone locally contain abundant fenestrate bryozoans oriented parallel to bedding.

The contact with the overlying Santa Rosa Hills Limestone is defined by a change in color from 

medium to light gray, by the disappearance of chert and graded bedding, and by an increase in average 

bed thickness (from approximately 50 cm to more than 1 m).
6

The lower member of the Stone Canyon Limestone is interpreted to represent a deep to 

moderately deep, quiescent, possibly dysaerobic environment of deposition. This interpretation is based

on the dark-gray color and generally fine grained texture of the rocks, together with the paucity of 

megafossils and the abundance of chert (Sando, 1980; Sandberg and Gutschick, 1984; Klingman, 1987).

In support of this interpretation, the conodont assemblage in sample PD17 just above the base of the 

Stone Canyon Limestone represents a gnathodid-pseudopolygnathid biofacies (Lane and others, 1980; 

Sandberg and Gutschick, 1984), which suggests a foreslope or outer ramp setting.

The upper member of the Stone Canyon Limestone is interpreted to represent a more shallow 

water depositional environment than the lower member. This interpretation is based on the presence of 

thick, massive beds of coarse-grained pelmatozoan calcarenite, the local occurrence of colonial rugose 

corals, and the abundance of graded beds that Belasky (1988) interpreted as storm deposits. Together, 

these features point to a shallow to moderately shallow water setting with open circulation and varying 

degrees of water agitation, possibly on a carbonate platform above storm wave base and offshore from 

high-energy pelmatozoan shoals.

Regionally the Stone Canyon Limestone is late Early to Middle Mississippian (Osagean) in age 

based primarily on conodonts (Stevens and others, 1996). In the study area (measured section CC), 

conodonts from sample PD17 just above the base of the formation indicate an early middle Osagean age, 

whereas conodonts from samples CC-1 and CC-4 approximately 260 and 367 m above the base indicate 

a middle Osagean age (Stevens and others, 1996; appendix 2). A poorly preserved colonial coral

(“Diphyphyllum” sp.) from sample PD1, 23 m below the top of the Stone Canyon Limestone, is 

consistent with a late Osagean age (Belasky, 1988).

Santa Rosa Hills Limestone

The Santa Rosa Hills Limestone is exposed both in Marble Canyon and in Cottonwood Canyon,

where it is 109 m thick in measured section CC (appendix 1). The lower part of the formation (37 m

thick) is characterized by thick-bedded, light-gray, pelmatozoan packstone and grainstone that contain 

less than 5 percent nodular chert. The upper part (72 m thick) is of generally similar lithology but also 

contains several units, up to 10 m thick, composed of medium-gray, predominantly medium-bedded 

pelmatozoan lime wackestone and as much as 20 percent nodular chert. Locally, rocks in the uppermost 

5 m of the formation are medium to dark gray in color. A sharp contact separates the Santa Rosa Hills 

Limestone from the overlying clastic rocks of the Indian Springs Formation.

The lower part of the Santa Rosa Hills Limestone is interpreted to represent winnowed 

pelmatozoan shoals deposited in a well-agitated, shallow-water environment. The upper part, which 

contains substantial amounts of fine-grained limestone and nodular chert, probably represents relatively 

quiet-water deposition in a partially protected, outer-platform environment.

About 5 km northeast of the map area, near the mouth of Marble Canyon, the upper surface of 

the Santa Rosa Hills Limestone is marked by circular depressions filled with shale and siltstone that

reportedly contain fossils of lycopsid root fragments (Stigmaria), Lepidodendron cones, and other plant 

debris (Decourten and Bovee, 1986; locality confirmed by F.L. Decourten, written commun., 2012). The 

presence of these fossils led Decourten and Bovee (1986) to interpret the depressions as “an exhumed 

rooting ground representing a buried forested shoal.” Bishop and others (2009) reported similar potholes 

and Stigmaria at the top of the Mississippian limestone sequence at Arrow Canyon, Nevada, 250 km 

east of Marble Canyon.

Regionally the Santa Rosa Hills Limestone is Middle Mississippian (late Osagean to early 

Meramecian) in age based primarily on conodonts (Stevens and others, 1996). In the study area, 

conodonts from sample CC-6, 16 m above the base of the formation in measured section CC, indicate a 
7

late Osagean age, and conodonts from the upper meter of the formation in measured section MC-1 

(samples MC-1-1, 90-MC-1) indicate an early Meramecian age (Stevens and others, 1996; appendix 2).

Indian Springs Formation

Rocks assigned to the Indian Springs Formation consist of sandstone, shale, and minor limestone 

that form a generally red-weathering recessive interval between the more resistant limestone units above 

and below. This formation, which commonly is partially or completely covered by talus or colluvium, is 

between 15 and 20 m thick throughout the study area.

Some of the best exposures of the Indian Springs Formation are in the vicinity of measured 

section MC-1A (appendix 1) where it is about 18 m thick. There, the lower 11 m of the formation are 

mostly composed of greenish-gray, ochre, and reddish-brown shale interspersed with beds of clastic 

limestone. A conspicuous bed of clastic limestone, a brachiopod-fragment coquina 0.7 m thick, is 

present 2 m above the base of the formation (fig. 3A). This laterally continuous bed was recognized at 

several other localities in the map area, including measured section MC-1 (appendix 1). Petrographic 

examination shows that this bed contains a variety of clasts in addition to brachiopod fragments, 

including crinoid ossicles, bryozoans, echinoid spines, and phosphatic fragments, some of which are 

phosphatized fossil fragments (appendix 6, sample MC-1-2).

The overlying 6 m of strata in measured section MC-1A are composed primarily of resistant, 

ledge-forming calcareous sandstone that mostly weathers rusty brown. The sandstone is fine to medium 

grained and displays well-developed planar and cross lamination (fig. 3B). Petrographic thin sections of 

several sandstone samples reveal that the rocks are quartzose, mostly well sorted, and cemented with 

calcite; some samples contain reworked foraminifers and shell fragments (appendix 6). At the top of this 

sequence is a 0.3-m-thick bed of sandy to conglomeratic limestone that contains dark-brown phosphatic 

clasts as much as 2 cm in diameter (fig. 3C). On the upper surface of this bed about 0.2 km west of 

measured section MC-1A, we observed a fossil (fig. 3D) that has been tentatively identified as a 

ctenacanth shark spine (Eileen Grogan, Bill DiMichele, and Hermann Pfefferkorn, written and oral

commun., 2010).

The uppermost rocks that we assign to the Indian Springs Formation, covered or poorly exposed

at most localities, are unusually well exposed in a stream cut near measured section MC-1A. There, the 

sandy to conglomeratic limestone bed is overlain by 1.4 m of pink to gray, fissile, calcareous siltstone 

and fine-grained sandstone, parts of which contain phosphatic grains, abraded brachiopods, burrows, and 

possible plant fossils. These relatively recessive rocks are sharply overlain by more resistant silty 

limestone that we map as the basal part of the Bird Spring Formation.

The abundance of pervasively laminated and cross-laminated, well-sorted sandstone in the Indian 

Springs Formation, particularly in the upper part, suggests a shallow-water, near-shore, high-energy 

depositional environment conducive to the reworking of bioclastic material. The lower, shale-rich part 

of the formation probably represents deposition in somewhat quieter and perhaps deeper water. The 

coquina near the base of the formation could represent a storm deposit.

Regionally the Indian Springs Formation is considered to be of Late Mississippian (late 

Chesterian) age based on megafossils and conodonts (Stevens and others, 1996). In the map area, sample 

MC-1-2 from the coquina 1.5 m above the base of the Indian Springs Formation contains conodonts 

indicating an early Chesterian age (appendix 2). It is uncertain if this age represents the time of 

deposition or if the conodonts were reworked from older rocks. In either case, these conodonts 

demonstrate that the contact with the underlying Santa Rosa Hills Limestone represents a hiatus at least 

spanning most of Meramecian time. Fragmentary conodonts from sample MC-1A-5 near the top of the 

Indian Springs Formation suggest a late Chesterian age, but the fauna is not well enough preserved to 

support a definitive age assignment.
8

Figure 3. Field photographs of Upper Mississippian Indian Springs Formation in the Marble Canyon area. A, 

Coquina with small white shell fragments about 2 m above base of formation (measured section MC-1A, unit 3). 

B, Cross-laminated sandy calcarenite near top of formation, near measured section MC-1A. C, Dark phosphatic 

nodules on upper surface of sandy to conglomeratic limestone bed near top of formation, near measured 

section MC-1A. D, Fossil tentatively identified as a ctenacanth shark spine on same bedding surface shown in 

C.

Pennsylvanian and Permian Rocks

Rocks of Pennsylvanian and Permian age, which have a maximum thickness of about 1,150 m, 

crop out extensively in the Marble Canyon area. In ascending order, these rocks are assigned to the Bird 

Spring, Osborne Canyon, and Darwin Canyon Formations, the latter two of which comprise the Owens 

Valley Group (fig. 2). These unit assignments are based on lithostratigraphic correlations with the type 

section of the Bird Spring Formation in southern Nevada (Hewett, 1931) and the type sections of the 

Osborne Canyon and Darwin Canyon Formations in the vicinity of Darwin, California (Stone and 

others, 1987), some 40 km southwest of the Marble Canyon area (fig. 1).

Rocks herein assigned to the Bird Spring Formation were originally mapped as the Keeler 

Canyon Formation (Stadler, 1968; Johnson, 1971), the type area of which is in the Inyo Mountains about 

40 km west of Marble Canyon (fig. 1). Subsequent studies (Stone, 1984; Stone and Stevens, 1984) 

showed that the Keeler Canyon Formation consists largely of deep-water turbidites that do not closely 

resemble most of the rocks previously assigned to that formation at Marble Canyon, and that these rocks 

are more appropriately assigned to the Bird Spring Formation, which consists primarily of shelf deposits 

(Stevens and Stone, 2007). Prior to definition of the Osborne Canyon and Darwin Canyon Formations as 
9

part of the Owens Valley Group, rocks herein assigned to these units at Marble Canyon were mapped as 

the Owens Valley Formation (Stadler, 1968; Johnson, 1971).

Bird Spring Formation

The Bird Spring Formation is about 600 m thick in the eastern part of the study area but thins to 

about 425 m in the southwestern part. The formation is composed primarily of thin-bedded, variably 

cherty and silty limestone, but it also includes a distinctive basal sequence of relatively thick bedded 

silty limestone and a sequence of thick-bedded to massive, fossiliferous limestone near the top. In 

addition, the sequence contains several intervals of slumped and contorted limestone and marly 

limestone that grade laterally into monomictic breccia and are intercalated with polymictic breccia 

(Greene, 2010; Martin and others, 2012). In the eastern part of the map area, where the rocks are 

essentially unmetamorphosed, the Bird Spring Formation typically forms steep, ledgy slopes of 

alternating gray- and grayish-yellow-weathering beds. By contrast, in the western part of the area near 

the Hunter Mountain Quartz Monzonite, the rocks are metamorphosed to dark-brown-weathering calchornfels and gray marble.

Lithology

In the area of measured section MC-1, where it is thickest and best exposed, the Bird Spring 

Formation is divided into four informal members. Member 1, which constitutes the lower 38 m of the 

Bird Spring Formation in measured section MC-1 and the lower 43 m in measured section MC-1A, 

consists of buff-weathering, fine-grained, silty limestone that forms resistant, planar beds 0.5 to 3 m 

thick (fig. 4A). Most limestone beds are calcisiltite composed of well-sorted, silt-size micritic peloids, 

subangular detrital quartz, and subordinate abraded bioclasts and sponge spicules (appendix 6, sample 

MC-1-4). Some beds are normally graded and are weakly cross laminated, contain mudstone rip-up

clasts and granule- to pebble-size lithoclasts at the base, and grade upward into massive or planelaminated, fine-grained limestone. The resistant beds of silty limestone are separated by recessive layers 

of buff to pinkish-gray silty limestone or calcareous siltstone 3 to 15 cm thick. Lenses and layers of 

dark-brown chert 3 to 10 cm thick are common, particularly near the tops of the resistant silty limestone 

beds. These features combine to produce an overall appearance of very even, tabular stratification.

Member 1 is capped by a 0.5-m-thick unit of contorted limestone beds (basal unit of member 2; fig. 4B)

that show soft-sediment deformation and grade laterally into monomicitic breccia of clast composition 

similar to the adjacent undeformed limestone (Greene, 2010; Martin and others, 2012).

Member 2, which is 379 m thick in measured section MC-1 and forms the bulk of the Bird 

Spring Formation, is primarily composed of very fine grained limestone containing abundant nodular 

and lenticular chert (fig. 4C). Most of the limestone is light to medium gray or buff in color, but darkgray and pinkish- to purplish-gray limestone also is common. Petrographic examination of several 

samples (appendix 6) shows that the limestone is generally micrite or calcisiltite containing as much as 

40 percent detrital quartz. Sponge spicules, radiolarians, and ostracodes are also present in some 

samples. Typically the limestone forms planar, unlaminated to finely laminated or graded beds of 

alternating color 5 to 50 cm thick (fig. 4D); slumped and contorted limestone beds and associated 

monomictic breccia are rare. Within and between many limestone beds are lenses and aligned nodules of 

dark-brown to black chert that further enhance the stratification. Exposed bedding surfaces commonly 

display abundant chert nodules. Spherical (“golf ball”) chert nodules that average about 2 cm in 

diameter are particularly abundant, but elongate to irregular nodules of diverse size and shape are 

common as well.

Macrofossils, primarily crinoidal debris and bryozoans, are rare in the lower 310 m of member 2

but are more common above that level, where gastropods and articulated crinoid stems also are present 
10
11

Figure 4. (Previous page) Field photographs of Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks in the Marble Canyon area. A, 

Bird Spring Formation, member 1, silty limestone forming resistant, planar beds interpreted as turbidites 

(measured section MC-1, unit 5). B, Bird Spring Formation, contorted limestone beds at base of member 2 

(measured section MC-1, unit 7). C, D, Bird Spring Formation, member 2, micritic limestone forming alternating 

light-gray and medium-gray beds containing lenses and nodules of chert (measured section MC-1, unit 58). E, 

Osborne Canyon Formation, member 3, pink silty mudstone containing dark-gray spherical limestone 

concretions (measured section MC-2, unit 19). F, Osborne Canyon Formation, member 3, conglomerate 

consisting of tightly packed, spherical limestone clasts that probably are redeposited concretions (measured 

section 2, unit 20). G, Darwin Canyon Formation, cross-laminated calcareous siltstone to very fine grained 

sandstone (measured section 2, unit 63). H, Darwin Canyon Formation, massive bed of red-weathering, very 

fine grained silty limestone containing unsorted, matrix-supported limestone clasts and bioclasts that include 

fusulinids and coral fragments, interpreted as a debris-flow deposit; sharply overlain by siltstone to very fine 

grained sandstone (fossil locality 80-MC-1; see geologic map).

locally. Skeletal wackestone, packstone, and grainstone typify the upper 60 m of member 2. For 

example, thin-section sample MC-1-33, about 317 m above the base of member 2, is a grainstone 

containing small fusulinids and brachiopod shell fragments (appendix 6). Chert is relatively uncommon 

in beds containing abundant fossil debris.

Member 3, 76 m thick in measured section MC-1, is characterized by the presence of thickbedded to massive, medium- to dark-gray, skeletal limestone that forms most of the lower 33 m of the 

member and isolated beds 4 to 6 m thick in the upper 43 m. The skeletal limestone is mostly coarsegrained packstone, grainstone, and minor wackestone. Heterozoan skeletal limestone beds contain 

crinoid columnals, echinoid spines, encrusting and fenestrate bryozoans, brachiopods, sponges, 

trilobites, and palaeotextulariid foraminifers. Fusulinids are present in skeletal limestone beds along with 

algal-coated skeletal fragments (for example, appendix 6, sample MC-1-41). A colonial coral (Petalaxis 

yosti Stevens, 1995; appendix 5) was found on the upper surface of a skeletal packstone bed at the top of 

member 3.

Micritic limestone in various shades of gray, buff, and pinkish gray forms most of the upper 

43 m of member 3. This limestone contains abundant lenses and aligned nodules of brown to black chert 

that typically form planar zones 5 to 10 cm thick. These rocks resemble those of member 2 but are less 

distinctly bedded. Decimeter-scale lenses of grainstone and packstone that fill scours within the micritic 

limestone consist of abundant broken or abraded skeletal grains, commonly with micritic coatings. A 

polymictic breccia containing abraded pebble- to boulder-size clasts of calcisiltite and bioclastic 

limestone is locally present near the top of member 3.

Member 4, which constitutes the upper 108 m of the Bird Spring Formation in measured section 

MC-1, consists primarily of interlayered buff and light- to medium-gray micritic limestone (including 

calcisiltite, wackestone, and packstone) that produce a distinctive color-banded appearance. Beds range 

from 15 cm to 1 m thick. The buff limestone beds typically contain abundant nodules, lenses, and thin (5 

to 15 cm) beds of brown chert that enhance the stratification. The gray limestone beds generally lack 

chert but commonly are bounded above and below by cherty layers. In contrast to the dominant small, 

spherical nodules of member 2, chert nodules in member 4 are generally larger and more irregular in 

shape. Thin, planar to lenticular concentrations of fossil debris, mostly crinoidal, are present in the 

micritic limestone beds, particularly in the lower 20 m of the member. Also present in member 4 are a 

few isolated, ledge-forming beds of medium- to dark-gray skeletal (crinoid-dominated) limestone 

(packstone and wackestone) 5 to 7.5 m thick. The lowest such bed, which contains small solitary rugose 

corals, pinches out laterally within 50 m in both directions from the line of measured section MC-1.
12

Depositional Environments

The predominance of silty, fine-grained limestone and the presence of interbedded contorted and 

slumped carbonate beds and breccias indicate an outer-platform to upper-slope environment for most of 

the Bird Spring Formation at Marble Canyon. The tabular, graded, silty limestone beds of member 1, 

which we interpret as turbidites, indicate a deep-water environment below storm wave base at the onset 

of Bird Spring deposition. Slumped limestone beds exhibiting soft-sediment deformation just above the 

top of member 1 are interpreted to have formed in a slope environment.

Micritic limestone and calcisiltite of member 2 are interpreted to have accumulated in an outerplatform to upper-slope environment. Storm-induced currents transported silt-sized sediment, bioclasts 

and detrital quartz to these environments from the inner and middle platform. Fossiliferous packstone 

and grainstone toward the top of member 2 are interpreted to have formed in skeletal banks between 

storm and fair-weather wave base. Diverse fauna and common bioturbation suggest normal-marine 

conditions. These fossiliferous beds suggest the seaward progradation of mid-platform carbonates to the 

outer platform.

Member 3 is characterized by the abundance of fossiliferous wackestone, packstone, and 

grainstone. The presence of abundant broken or abraded skeletal grains and the intercalation of mud-rich 

skeletal limestone with decimeter-scale lenses of grainstone and packstone filling scours indicate that

these bioclastic limestones were transported from skeletal banks inboard of Marble Canyon. The overall 

predominance of grainy skeletal limestone in the lower half of member 3 strongly suggests seaward 

progradation of the platform during extended periods of member 3 deposition.

The predominantly fine-grained limestone of member 4 is interpreted to record a return to a

deeper-water, outer-platform depositional environment similar to that of member 2. Isolated bioclastic 

limestone beds presumably derived from inboard skeletal banks are present in the lower part of member 

4 but decrease in abundance upward through the section, reflecting progressive deepening of the 

platform and increasing distance from the shallow-water banks.

Fossils and Age

Age-diagnostic fossils recovered from the Bird Spring Formation in the Marble Canyon area

include both conodonts and fusulinids. All of the fossils are from measured section MC-1 except one

conodont sample from measured section MC-2. Conodonts were recovered from numerous horizons in 

the formation, whereas identifiable fusulinids are largely restricted to member 3.

Conodonts from the Bird Spring Formation in measured section MC-1 indicate an age range of 

Bashkirian to Kasimovian (Morrowan to Missourian). The age determinations presented here (appendix 

2) generally support the original age determinations by John Repetski (in Stone, 1984).

Conodonts indicating a Bashkirian age extend from the lowest sample 1.5 m above the base of 

member 1 (MC-1-4) to sample MC-1-18, about 132 m above the base of the formation and 94 m above 

the base of member 2. Faunas of earliest Bashkirian (early Morrowan) age are not represented. Above 

MC-1-18 is a barren interval that extends to sample MC-1-25, about 258 m above the base of the 

formation and 220 m above the base of member 2. Conodonts indicating a Moscovian age first appear in 

sample MC-1-25 and extend through sample MC-1-51, 538 m above the base of the Bird Spring 

Formation and 45 m above the base of member 4. Thus, the upper part of member 2, member 3, and the 

lower part of member 4 are all Moscovian based on the conodont assemblages. The stratigraphically 

highest conodonts in member 4, from two samples (MC-1-52, 53) in the upper 63 m of measured section 

MC-1 and from sample MC-2-1 about 13 m below the top of the Bird Spring Formation in measured 

section 2, indicate a Kasimovian (Missourian) age. Lithostratigraphic correlation between measured 

sections MC-1 and MC-2 indicates that sample MC-2-1 is probably only a meter or two higher than 

sample MC-1-51, the highest sample interpreted as Moscovian.
13

Identifiable fusulinids were recovered from two localities in member 3 of the Bird Spring 

Formation in measured section MC-1 (appendix 4, samples S-1507, -1508, -2100). These fusulinids 

indicate a Desmoinesian age, compatible with the associated Moscovian conodonts.

Erosional Contact with Osborne Canyon Formation

The upper part of measured section MC-1 (on the east side of the Marble Canyon wash) does not 

extend to the contact between member 4 of the Bird Spring Formation and the overlying Osborne 

Canyon Formation (see geologic map). This contact, however, is exposed in a steep gulch on the west 

side of the Marble Canyon wash. There, massive conglomeratic mudstone at the base of the Osborne 

Canyon Formation overlies well-bedded silty limestone of member 4 similar to that in the upper part of 

measured section MC-1. Followed westward up this gulch, the base of the Osborne Canyon Formation 

cuts downward through member 4 at a low angle, indicating that the contact is erosional.

The contact between the Bird Spring and Osborne Canyon Formations also is exposed in 

measured section 2. Detailed lithostratigraphic correlation indicates that the 65 m of Bird Spring strata in 

measured section 2 correspond to the lower 57 m of member 4 in measured section 1 (see stratigraphic 

column on map sheet). Thus, the upper 51 m of member 4 in measured section 1 are not represented in 

measured section 2, providing further indication that the lower contact of the Osborne Canyon 

Formation is erosional.

Direct evidence of erosion along the Bird Spring-Osborne Canyon contact is found in the vicinity 

of measured section 2, where we have observed that the basal Osborne Canyon Formation cuts 

downward through the Bird Spring Formation at a low angle from southeast to northwest along strike.

Traced 1 km northwest from measured section MC-2, all 65 m of Bird Spring strata measured in section 

MC-2 are progressively cut out beneath the contact, with a corresponding increase in the thickness of the 

basal part of the Osborne Canyon Formation. This relation suggests that the contact represents part of a 

channel that was eroded into the Bird Spring Formation prior to deposition of the Osborne Canyon 

Formation.

Osborne Canyon Formation

The Osborne Canyon Formation, which averages about 150 m thick in the map area, 

disconformably overlies the Bird Spring Formation and is conformably overlain by the Darwin Canyon 

Formation. The Osborne Canyon Formation is composed of silty calcareous mudstone, very fine grained 

calcareous sandstone, siliceous mudstone or chert, conglomeratic limestone, and minor calcarenitic 

limestone. The fine-grained rocks, which dominate the lower half of the formation, form recessive, 

generally pink or purple slopes, whereas the more resistant conglomeratic and calcarenitic limestone

beds form dark-gray ledges that characterize the upper half of the formation. Viewed from a distance, 

the Osborne Canyon Formation typically forms a distinctive, purplish-gray to dark-gray band between 

the lighter gray Bird Spring Formation below and the brown Darwin Canyon Formation above. The 

Osborne Canyon Formation is thickest in areas where the disconformable lower contact cuts deepest into 

the underlying Bird Spring Formation.

In measured section MC-2, where the Osborne Canyon Formation is 150 m thick, it is divided 

into four informal members. Member 1, comprising the lower 36 m of the formation, is primarily 

composed of silty calcareous mudstone that varies in color from purplish- or pinkish-gray to greenishgray and buff. This mudstone is interbedded with medium-gray, fine-grained, plane-laminated to crosslaminated calcareous sandstone that forms discrete beds 2 to 20 cm thick with sharp bases and tops.

Petrographic examination shows that both the mudstone and sandstone contain bioclastic material 

including crinoid fragments, possible algal fragments, and small foraminifers (appendix 6, samples MC2-3A–D). Lenses of dark-gray micritic limestone are present but rare.
14

Member 2, 43 m thick, consists of thinly interbedded, pink to purple, silty mudstone and black 

chert. The mudstone contains abundant limestone concretions that are 2 to 15 cm in diameter and range 

in shape from spherical to flattened in the plane of bedding (fig. 4E). Some beds consist almost entirely 

of limestone concretions. The interbedded chert contains abundant radiolarians as seen in thin section 

(appendix 6, sample MC-2-5).

Member 3, 47 m thick, is characterized by limestone conglomerate that forms discrete beds about 

0.2 to 3 m thick. This lithologically distinct conglomerate is composed of tightly packed, poorly sorted, 

mostly spherical clasts of limestone (probably redeposited concretions) ranging from 1 to 15 cm in 

diameter (fig. 4F). Conglomerate beds are interlayered with limestone-concretion-bearing, silty 

mudstone and black chert similar to the rocks of member 2. Petrographic examination of a limestone 

concretion extracted from mudstone reveals scattered ostracodes, peloids, chert(?) fragments, and 

possible radiolarians (appendix 6, sample MC-2-10).

Member 4, which constitutes the upper 24 m of the Osborne Canyon Formation, is distinguished 

by the presence of dark-gray, coarse-grained, calcarenitic and bioclastic limestone that forms discrete 

beds 0.3 to 0.7 m thick. Member 4 also is distinguished by the presence of two closely spaced beds of 

massive, purplish-red, silty mudstone that contains spherical limestone concretions and ammonoids.

Some ammonoids are free and some are enclosed in limestone concretions. Apart from these distinctive 

rock types, member 4 is similar to member 3, mainly consisting of light-gray, pinkish-gray, and buff, 

silty calcareous mudstone with sparse spherical limestone concretions, scattered beds of limestone 

conglomerate 0.2 to 0.3 m thick, and minor thin-bedded chert.

Rocks of the Osborne Canyon Formation in the map area differ from those in the type section of 

the formation near Darwin, where the formation lacks limestone conglomerate with spherical limestone 

clasts and contains abundant graded beds of fusulinid-bearing bioclastic limestone (Stone and others, 

1987). Only 4 km east of the type section, however, the Osborne Canyon Formation closely resembles 

the section in the Marble Canyon area, with a lower half composed of calcareous mudstone containing 

spherical limestone concretions and an upper half composed of limestone conglomerate with spherical 

limestone clasts (Stone, 1984, p. 89-90). This similarity supports our assignment of the rocks at Marble 

Canyon to the Osborne Canyon Formation.

The predominance of laminated mudstone and radiolarian chert in the Osborne Canyon 

Formation, together with the absence of sedimentary features or fossils suggesting deposition in shallow 

water, points to a relatively deep water depositional environment. We suggest that deposition took place 

in a slope setting where limestone concretions formed in place during or shortly after deposition of the 

enclosing laminated mudstone. The associated conglomerates, which contain little or no bioclastic 

material, probably represent sediment-gravity-flow deposits formed primarily of reworked limestone 

concretions derived from higher on the slope. By contrast, the bioclastic calcarenites of member 4 

probably were derived from a shallow-water shelf. Graded bioclastic limestone beds in the type section 

of the Osborne Canyon Formation near Darwin clearly were deposited as deep-water turbidites derived 

from a carbonate shelf (Stone, 1984; Stone and others, 1987).

Age control on the Osborne Canyon Formation in the Marble Canyon study area is limited to 

conodont samples MC-2-10, -11, and -14 from members 3 and 4 in measured section MC-2 (appendix 

3). Conodonts from these samples indicate an early Permian (probably basal Artinskian) age. Of several 

samples collected for conodonts from underlying rocks in the Osborne Canyon Formation, only 

reworked fragments of middle Pennsylvanian conodonts were found in the lone productive sample (MC2-4 from a limestone lens in member 1). Ammonoids from the lower 15 m of the Osborne Canyon 

Formation about 5 km east of the study area indicate an early Permian (Sakmarian) age (Lee, 1975; see 

appendix 8).
15

Darwin Canyon Formation

The Darwin Canyon Formation in the Marble Canyon area is about 400 m thick with the 

depositional top not exposed because of faulting and erosion. The formation is composed primarily of 

brown-weathering, calcareous siltstone to very fine grained sandstone that contrasts sharply with the 

predominant pink to purple mudstone of the underlying Osborne Canyon Formation. Minor calcarenitic 

limestone, conglomerate, and rare chert also are present.

The siltstone to very fine grained sandstone that dominates the Darwin Canyon Formation 

typically is pervasively plane- to cross-laminated (fig. 4G) and stands out in thick ledges that alternate 

with more recessive intervals. From a distance the formation appears thick and evenly bedded, but 

individual beds can be difficult to distinguish when viewed from closer range. Fresh rock surfaces vary 

in color from pale red to light reddish gray and pale gray. Petrographic examination of several samples

from measured section MC-2 (appendix 6) shows 30 to 70 percent well sorted quartz silt to very fine 

sand (average grain diameter about 0.075 mm) and most of the remainder calcite, some of which is 

undoubtedly of detrital origin. Minor detrital feldspar and muscovite are also present. Crinoid fragments, 

foraminifers, and other bioclasts are present in some thin sections. Locally, the siltstone to very fine 

grained sandstone alternates with recessive intervals of thin-bedded mudstone, siltstone, and radiolarian 

chert (for example, measured section MC-2, unit 75).

Scattered in the Darwin Canyon Formation are isolated beds of dark-gray, medium- to coarsegrained calcarenitic limestone and limestone conglomerate that range from less than a meter to about 

2 m thick. Field and petrographic examination shows that these beds contain a variety of bioclasts 

including fragments of crinoids, brachiopods, bryozoans, algae, fusulinids, and other foraminifers

(appendix 6). Limestone intraclasts are also present. The bioclasts and intraclasts typically are embedded 

in a matrix of calcareous sandstone. The coarsest limestone beds are massive, but some coarse- to 

medium-grained beds are plane- to cross-laminated. One graded bed was observed (measured section 

MC-2, unit 68).

Near the top of the Darwin Canyon Formation is a massive bed of orange- to red-weathering,

very fine grained silty limestone containing unsorted, matrix-supported limestone clasts and bioclasts 

that include fusulinids and coral fragments. This bed is best exposed about 1 km south of measured 

section MC-2 (fossil localities 80-MC-1 and SJS-1087; see geologic map), where it is about 20 m thick

and is sharply overlain and underlain by bedded siltstone to very fine grained sandstone (fig. 4H). The 

basal part of this bed contains large clasts of medium- to dark-gray limestone in which ammonoids are 

locally abundant. The same or a very similar bed is exposed near the top of the Darwin Canyon 

Formation 0.5 km north of measured section MC-2 (fossil localities 80-MC-3 and S-1487), although this 

bed was not encountered in the measured section itself.

The siltstone to very fine grained sandstone that composes the bulk of the Darwin Canyon 

Formation in the Marble Canyon area is lithologically very similar to that which typifies the type section

of the Millers Spring Member of the Darwin Canyon Formation near Darwin (Stone and others, 1987).

In addition, the massive, silty limestone bed near the top of the section in the Marble Canyon area bears 

a striking resemblance to a bed of similar lithology, color, and thickness in the Millers Spring Member 

near Darwin. Finally, the isolated limestone beds in the Darwin Canyon Formation at Marble Canyon 

are lithologically similar to limestone beds in the type section of the Millers Spring Member, although 

they do not form thick, mappable units like those that typify the latter (Stone and others, 1987).

Assignment of the rocks at Marble Canyon to the Darwin Canyon Formation is based on the general 

lithologic similarities with the type section near Darwin despite the absence of a detailed 

lithostratigraphic correlation. Thin-bedded siltstone to very fine grained sandstone typical of the 

Panamint Springs Member of the Darwin Canyon Formation, which overlies the Millers Spring Member 

near Darwin, is not present in the Marble Canyon area.
16

Detailed studies of the type section of the Millers Spring Member (Lico, 1983; Stone, 1984; 

Stevens and others, 1989) have led to the conclusion that most of the rocks in this unit originated as 

sediment-gravity-flow deposits in a deep-water basin. In its type area, the Millers Spring Member 

contains numerous thick, graded, bioclastic to conglomeratic limestone beds that clearly originated as 

turbidites, as well as two thick, massive beds of very fine grained silty limestone with matrix-supported 

clasts interpreted as submarine debris-flow deposits. The associated siliciclastic siltstone to very fine 

grained sandstone in the type Millers Spring Member forms even, laterally extensive beds, commonly 

separated by mudstone, that are characterized by pervasive planar and cross lamination and locally 

contain various types of sole marks. Stone (1984) noted that these sedimentary features resemble those 

in sandstone beds of the Permian Basin of west Texas that have been interpreted as nonturbid density 

flows laid down by currents charged by hypersaline water (Harms, 1974; Williamson, 1979).

Alternatively, Stevens and others (1989) interpreted these beds to have been deposited by moderatedensity turbidity currents based on comparison with sediment-gravity-flow models discussed by Lowe 

(1982). Both interpretations imply a relatively deep-water depositional environment.

The generally similar rocks assigned to the Darwin Canyon Formation at Marble Canyon 

probably represent similar modes of sediment-gravity-flow deposition, although the evidence for this is 

not as clear in this area as it is near Darwin. At Marble Canyon, graded limestone beds are uncommon 

and bedding in the siltstone to very fine grained sandstone is largely obscured by the lack of interlayered 

mudstone. The thick, massive bed of clast-bearing silty limestone near the top of the Darwin Canyon 

Formation at Marble Canyon, however, clearly is a debris-flow deposit like those present near Darwin, 

and the thinner clastic limestone beds in the section are presumably turbidites even though most are not 

graded. The rare presence of radiolarian chert also points to a deep-water environment.

Conodonts from three limestone samples between 125 and 247 m above the base of the Darwin 

Canyon Formation in measured section MC-2 indicate an Artinskian (early Permian) age (appendix 3).

Conodonts in the highest sample (MC-2A-3) suggest a late Artinskian age. By contrast, fusulinids and 

corals from the debris-flow deposit near the top of the Darwin Canyon Formation (appendixes 4, 5)

indicate an older age of middle to late Wolfcampian (late Sakmarian to early Artinskian).

Possible Implication of the Permian Conodont Age Interpretations

The ages of rocks assigned to the Osborne Canyon and Darwin Canyon formations based on 

different fossil groups differ considerably. At Marble Canyon, conodonts from the upper part of the 

Osborne Canyon Formation and from the Darwin Canyon Formation indicate an Artinskian age, with 

latest Artinskian conodonts appearing about 250 m above the base of the Darwin Canyon Formation. By 

contrast, near Darwin, fusulinids reported by Magginetti and others (1988) indicate a middle 

Wolfcampian (Sakmarian) age for the Osborne Canyon Formation and a middle to late Wolfcampian 

(late Sakmarian to middle Artinskian) age for the Millers Spring Member of the Darwin Canyon 

Formation, which corresponds lithologically to the Darwin Canyon Formation at Marble Canyon.

Moreover, both fusulinids and corals from the debris-flow deposit near the top of the Darwin Canyon 

Formation at Marble Canyon are similar to those from the Millers Spring Member near Darwin, 

indicating a late Sakmarian to early Artinksian age. These contrasts in age raise the possibility that the 

fusulinids and corals in the Darwin area and in the debris-flow deposit at Marble Canyon are reworked 

from older beds.

To investigate this possibility, we searched for conodonts in several limestone samples from the 

Osborne Canyon and Darwin Canyon Formations near Darwin as part of this study. Of the samples 

processed, only two (both from the Osborne Canyon Formation) yielded identifiable conodonts.

Examination of these conodonts by Wardlaw indicates a fauna dominated by the genus Rabeignathus, 

which does not have a well-constrained stratigraphic range but is likely at least as young as the Permian 
17

faunas at Marble Canyon. We therefore suggest that the corals and fusulinids are, in fact, reworked.

Thus, the ages assigned here are based primarily on the interpreted ages of the conodont faunas.

Late Paleozoic Depositional and Paleogeographic History

Mississippian and Pennsylvanian rocks in the Marble Canyon area represent deposition on the 

western continental shelf of North America, whereas the Permian rocks represent basinal deposition 

triggered by tectonic activity that caused the shelf to subside (Stevens and others, 1995; Stone and 

Stevens, 1988; Stevens and Stone, 2007; Martin and others, 2012). Here we review the depositional and 

paleogeographic history of these upper Paleozoic strata.

Mississippian limestone units at Marble Canyon accumulated on the outer part of a broad 

carbonate platform that extended southwest across Nevada into east-central California (Belasky, 1988; 

Stevens and others, 1995). Evolution of the Mississippian platform was controlled by a combination of 

tectonic subsidence due to thrust emplacement of the Roberts Mountains allochthon to the west, 

carbonate production rates, and eustatic sea-level changes (Poole and Sandberg, 1977, 1991; Sandberg, 

2002). Deposition of the Tin Mountain Limestone began in middle Kinderhookian time in response to a 

major eustatic rise (Sandberg, 2002). Following final emplacement of the Roberts Mountains allochthon, 

the platform deepened early in middle Osagean time, resulting in deposition of the chert-rich lower 

member of the Stone Canyon Limestone. This second major Mississippian eustatic rise (Sandberg, 

2002) is marked regionally by the Stone Canyon Limestone and the coeval, chert-rich Anchor Member 

of the Monte Cristo Limestone in Nevada and Thunder Springs Member of the Redwall Limestone in 

Arizona. These three units represent deep-water outer-platform and upper-slope or upper-ramp settings.

In response to a late Osagean eustatic fall, carbonate production increased and a shallow-water 

carbonate platform began to prograde westward, resulting in deposition of the upper member of the 

Stone Canyon Limestone and the Santa Rosa Hills Limestone, which continued into Meramecian time.

Coeval basin sediments were deposited west of the Meramecian (early Late Mississippian) platform 

margin (fig. 5A).

The disconformable contact between the Santa Rosa Hills Limestone and the overlying Indian 

Springs Formation represents two separate events. First, pronounced shoaling caused the cessation of 

carbonate sedimentation and local development of a lycopsid forest on the upper surface of the Santa 

Rosa Hills Limestone (Decourten and Bovee, 1986). This event probably coincided with a major eustatic 

sea-level fall that has been interpreted to record the onset of late Paleozoic glaciation in southern 

Gondwana (Bishop and others, 2009). Subsequent widespread deepening led to deposition of the mixed 

siliciclastic and calcareous sediments of the Chesterian Indian Springs Formation (Poole and Sandberg, 

1991) and its deep-water equivalent to the west, the Rest Spring Shale (Titus, 2000). The change from 

shale in the lower part of the Indian Springs Formation to cross-bedded sandstone in the upper part 

suggests an overall shallowing trend within the formation at Marble Canyon.

Marine transgression that coincided with a rise in eustatic sea level at about the MississippianPennsylvanian boundary (Ross and Ross, 1987) led to establishment of the Bird Spring carbonate 

platform (Stevens and Stone, 2007), which covered most of the area previously occupied by the 

Mississippian platform. Analysis of regional sedimentary facies patterns indicates that the Bird Spring 

Platform did not extend as far southwest as the older Mississippian platform (Stone, 1984). Instead, the 

margin of the Bird Spring Platform, flanked on the west by the deep-water Keeler Basin (Stevens and 

others, 2001), changed from a southwesterly to a southeasterly orientation in the vicinity of Panamint 

Valley (fig. 5B). This change in the trend of the platform margin reflects subsidence of the southwestern 

part of the former Mississippian carbonate platform, which is interpreted to have resulted from tectonic 

deformation related to Pennsylvanian truncation of the continental margin along a southeast-trending
18

transform fault zone (Stone and Stevens, 1988). Marble Canyon represents a position on the outer part of 

the Bird Spring Platform almost directly east of the bend in the platform margin (fig. 5B).

Figure 5. Maps illustrating Mississippian to Permian paleogeographic evolution of the Inyo Mountains-Cottonwood 

Mountains area. Rectangle in northeastern part of each map denotes area of geologic map; range outlines are 

the same as on figure 1. Dotted line is trace of Hunter Mountain Fault, on which 10 km of right-lateral 

displacement has been restored based on the interpretations of Burchfiel and others (1987). Note that this 

restoration caused slight counter-clockwise rotation of the geologic map area. See text for discussion of 

paleogeographic evolution. CM, Conglomerate Mesa; D, Darwin; MC, Marble Canyon.

The Bird Spring Formation at Marble Canyon makes up the outer platform component of ten 

third-order (1 to 5 m.y. duration) stratigraphic sequences recently defined for the regional platform 

succession (Greene, 2010; Martin and others, 2012; fig. 6). Sequence 1, which developed during the 

early stages of the marine transgression, probably is represented by the early Morrowan hiatus or 

condensed section that underlies the Bird Spring Formation. The overlying fine-grained calcareous 

turbidites of member 1 of the Bird Spring Formation are interpreted as a transgressive systems tract 

deposited during a major rise in relative sea level marking the base of sequence 2. These turbidites were 

presumably derived from coeval, shallow-water, inner-platform banks to the east. The hiatus or 

condensed section below member 1 may represent an area of sediment bypass during earlier turbidite

deposition farther offshore. Morrowan to Desmoinesian micritic limestone and calcisiltite of member 2

comprise the outer-platform to upper-slope component of regional sequences 2–6. Discrete intervals of 

contorted limestone exhibiting soft-sediment deformation and lateral monomictic breccia are interpreted 

as the outermost platform expression of sequence boundaries (Martin and others, 2012) given that the 

platform-margin carbonates would have been most unstable during periods of lowered sea level (Yose 

and Heller, 1989; Catuneanu and others, 2009). Shoaling toward the end of member 2 deposition, 

followed by the appearance of thick-bedded to massive, skeletal limestone in member 3, marks a shortlived fall in relative sea level at the top of sequence 6 and westward progradation of inner-platform 

facies into the Marble Canyon area (Martin and others, 2012). The return to predominantly micritic 

limestone deposition in member 4 is interpreted to record a gradual long-term rise in relative sea level 

that generally corresponds to a similar sea-level rise recognized in Upper Pennsylvanian cyclothemic 

successions in paleotropical basins of central and eastern Pangaea (Eros and others, 2012a, b). Member 

4 is interpreted to represent sequences 7 and 8 of the regional platform succession. Sequences 9 and 10 
19

are probably missing at Marble Canyon across the disconformable contact between the Bird Spring and 

Osborne Canyon Formations (fig. 6).

Figure 6. Chart showing correlation of members 1–4 of the Bird Spring Formation at Marble Canyon with regional 

stratigraphic sequences and relative sea-level curve for the Bird Spring Platform (modified from Martin and 

others, 2012).

The regional paleogeography was fundamentally changed by major tectonic activity along the 

continental margin beginning in middle early Permian time. Southeast-vergent thrust faulting and 

folding near the eastern margin of the Keeler Basin, interpreted to be related to emplacement of the Last 

Chance thrust plate (Stewart and others, 1966; Stevens and Stone, 2005a), formed a northeast-trending 

structural ridge called the Conglomerate Mesa Uplift (fig. 5C). Simultaneous downwarping to the east 

caused widespread subsidence of the Bird Spring Platform and eastward migration of the shelf edge

(Stevens and Stone, 2007). Early Permian sedimentation that postdated initiation of this deformation 

took place in the deep-water Lone Pine and Darwin Basins that flanked the Conglomerate Mesa Uplift 

on its northwest and southeast sides, respectively (fig. 5C; Stone and Stevens, 1988; Stevens and Stone, 

2007). The Marble Canyon area was part of the Darwin Basin in which the regionally extensive, deepwater strata of the Osborne Canyon and Darwin Canyon formations were deposited. Based on the 

characteristics of these formations in their type area near Darwin, Stone and others (1987) interpreted 

the Osborne Canyon Formation as a channeled slope sequence and the Darwin Canyon Formation as an 
20

unchanneled basin-floor sequence. The erosional base of the Osborne Canyon Formation at Marble 

Canyon supports the interpretation that this unit was deposited on a channeled slope. Bioclastic 

turbidites in both formations are interpreted to have been derived from the Bird Spring Platform to the 

east, whereas the fine-grained siliciclastic silt and very fine sand that is especially abundant in the 

Darwin Canyon Formation was likely derived from cratonal sources and possibly transported into the 

basin through channels cut into the carbonate platform (Stevens and others, 1989).

Deformation and sedimentation along the western margin of the Darwin Basin continued into 

late Permian time as observed in the Inyo Mountains near Conglomerate Mesa (Stone and others, 2009).

The culminating phase of this deformation was part of the regionally extensive Sierra Nevada-Death 

Valley Thrust System of late Permian age (Stevens and Stone, 2005b), which is interpreted to have

included the Marble Canyon Thrust Fault just west of the present map area.

References Cited

Belasky, P., 1988, Stratigraphy and paleogeographic setting of the Mississippian Monte Cristo Group in 

the Spring Mountains, Nevada: San Jose, Calif., San Jose State University, M.S. thesis, 156 p.

Bishop, J.W., Montañez, I.P., Gulbranson, E.L., and Brenckle, P.L., 2009, The onset of midCarboniferous glacio-eustacy—Sedimentologic and diagenetic constraints, Arrow Canyon, Nevada:

Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeocology, v. 276, p. 217–243.

Burchfiel, B.C., Hodges, K.V., and Royden, L.H., 1987, Geology of Panamint Valley-Saline Valley 

pull-apart system, California—Palinspastic evidence for low-angle geometry of a Neogene rangebounding fault: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 92, no. B10, p. 10,422–10,426.

Catuneanu, O., Abreu, V., Bhattcharya, J.P., and 25 others, 2009, Towards the standardization of 

sequence stratigraphy: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 92, no. 1–2, p. 1–33.

Clark, D.L., Sweet, W.C., Bergström, S.M., Klapper, G., Austin, R.L., Rhodes, F.H.T., Müller, K.J., 

Ziegler, W., Lindström, M., Miller, J.G., and Harris, A.G., 1981, Conodonta, in Robison, R.A., ed., 

Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, pt. W supplement 2: Geological Society of America and 

Kansas University, p. W1–W202.

Davydov, V., Wardlaw, B.R., and Gradstein, F.M., 2004, The Carboniferous Period, chap. 15 of

Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., and Smith, A.G., eds., A geologic time scale 2004: Cambridge, UK, 

Cambridge University Press, p. 222–248.

Decourten, F.L., and Bovee, B., 1986, Stigmaria from the upper Carboniferous Rest Spring Shale and a 

possible Lepidodendrale rooting ground, Death Valley region, SE California [abs.]: Geological 

Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 18, no. 2, p. 100.

Dunne, G.C., Gulliver, R.M., and Stevens, C.H., 1981, Correlation of Mississippian shelf-to-basin strata, 

eastern California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, Part II, v. 92, p. 1–38.

Eros, J.M., Montañez, I.P., Osleger, D.A., Davydov, V.I., Nemyrovska, T., Poletaev, V., and Zhykalyak, 

M.V., 2012a, Sequence stratigraphy and onlap history of the Donets Basin, Ukraine—Insight into 

Carboniferous icehouse dynamics: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 313–314, 

p. 1–25.

Eros, J.M., Montañez, I.P., Osleger, D.A., Davydov, V.I., Nemyrovska, T., Poletaev, V., and Zhykalyak, 

M.V., 2012b, Reply to the comment on “Sequence stratigraphy and onlap history of the Donets Basin, 

Ukraine—Insight into Carboniferous icehouse dynamics”: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, 

Palaeoecology, v. 363–364, p. 187–191.

Greene, L.E., 2010, A paleotropical carbonate-dominated archive of late Paleozoic icehouse dynamics, 

Bird Spring Fm., southern Great Basin, USA: Davis, University of California, M.S. thesis, 126 p.
21

Harms, J.C., 1974, Brushy Canyon Formation, Texas—A deep-water density current model: Geological 

Society of America Bulletin, v. 85, p. 1763–1784.

Hewett, D. F., 1931, Geology and ore deposits of the Goodsprings quadrangle, Nevada: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 162, 172 p.

Jennings, C.W., 1977, Geologic map of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, scale 

1:750,000.

Johnson, E.A., 1971, Geology of a part of the southeastern side of the Cottonwood Mountains, Death 

Valley, California: Houston, Texas, Rice University, Ph.D dissertation, 81 p.

Klingman, D.S., 1987, Depositional environments and paleogeographic setting of the middle 

Mississippian section in eastern California: San Jose, Calif., San Jose State University, M.S. thesis,

231 p.

Knott, J.R., Machette, M.N., Klinger, R.E., Sarna-Wojcicki, A.M., Liddicoat, J.C., Tinsley, J.C., III, 

David, B.T., and Ebbs, V.M., 2008, Reconstructing late Pliocene to middle Pleistocene Death Valley 

lakes and river systems as a test of pupfish (Cyprinodontidae) dispersal hypotheses, in Reheis, M.C., 

Hershler, R., and Miller, D.M., eds., Late Cenozoic drainage history of the southwestern Great Basin 

and lower Colorado River region—Geologic and biotic perspectives: Geological Society of America 

Special Paper 439, p. 1–26.

Knott, J.R., Sarna-Wojcicki, A.M., Meyer, C.E., Tinsley, J.C., III, Wells, S.G., and Wan, E., 1999, Late 

Cenozoic stratigraphy and tephrochronology of the western Black Mountain piedmont, Death Valley, 

California—Implications for the tectonic development of Death Valley, in Wright, L.A., and Troxel, 

B.W., eds., Cenozoic basins of the Death Valley region: Geological Society of America Special Paper 

333, p. 345–366.

Lane, H.R., Brenckle, P.L., Baesemann, J.F., and Richards, B., 1999, The IUGS boundary in the middle 

of the Carboniferous—Arrow Canyon, Nevada, USA: Episodes, v. 22, p. 272–283.

Lane, H.R., Sandberg, C.A., and Ziegler, W., 1980, Taxonomy and phylogeny of some Lower 

Carboniferous conodonts and preliminary standard post-Siphonodella zonation: Geologica et 

Paleontologica, v. 14, p. 117–164.

Lee, C., 1975, Lower Permian ammonoid faunal provinciality: Iowa City, University of Iowa, Ph.D 

dissertation, 252 p.

Lico, M.S., 1983, Lower Permian submarine sediment gravity flows in the Owens Valley Formation, 

southeastern California: San Jose, Calif., San Jose State University, M.S. thesis, 80 p.

Lowe, D.R., 1982, Sediment gravity flows II—Depositional models with special reference to the 

deposits of high-density turbidity currents: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 52, p. 279–297.

Magginetti, R.T., Stevens, C.H., and Stone, P., 1988, Early Permian fusulinids from the Owens Valley 

Group, east-central California: Geological Society of America Special Paper 217, 61 p.

Martin, L.G., Montañez, I.P., and Bishop, J.W., 2012, A paleotropical carbonate-dominated archive of 

Carboniferous icehouse dynamics, Bird Spring Formation, southern Great Basin, USA: 

Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 329–330, p. 64–82.

McAllister, J.F., 1952, Rocks and structure of the Quartz Spring area, northern Panamint Range, 

California: California Division of Mines Special Report 25, 38 p.

McAllister, J.F., 1956, Geology of the Ubehebe Peak quadrangle, California: U.S. Geological Survey 

Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-95, scale 1:62,500.

McAllister, J.F., 1974, Silurian, Devonian, and Mississippian formations in the Ryan quadrangle, Death 

Valley region, California: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1386, 35 p.
22

Merriam, C.W., 1963, Geology of the Cerro Gordo mining district, Inyo County, California: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 408, 83 p.

Poole, F.G., and Sandberg, C.A., 1977, Mississippian paleogeography and tectonics of the western 

United States, in Stewart, J.H., Stevens, C.H., and Fritsche, A.E., eds., Paleozoic paleogeography of 

the western United States: Los Angeles, Calif., Society of Economic Paleontologists and 

Mineralogists, Pacific Section, p. 67–85. 

Poole, F.G., and Sandberg, C.A., 1991, Mississippian paleogeography and conodont biostratigraphy of 

the western United States, in Cooper, J.D., and Stevens, C.H., eds., Paleozoic paleogeography of the 

western United States—II: Los Angeles, Calif., Society of Economic Paleontologists and 

Mineralogists, Pacific Section, v. 1, p. 107–136.

Ross, C.A., and Ross, J.R.P., 1987, Late Paleozoic sea levels and depositional sequences: Washington, 

D.C., Smithsonian Institution Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal Research, Special Publication 

24, p. 137–149.

Sandberg, C.A., 2002, Mississippian: McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science & Technology, 9th ed., v. 

11, p. 254–257.

Sandberg, C.A., and Gutschick, R.C., 1984, Distribution, microfauna, and source-rock potential of

Mississippian Delle Phosphatic Member of Woodman Formation and equivalents, Utah and adjacent 

states, in Woodward, J., Meissner, F.F., and Clayton, J.L., eds., Hydrocarbon source rocks in the 

greater Rocky Mountain region: Denver, Colo., Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, p. 135–

178.

Sando, W.J., 1980, The paleoecology of Mississippian corals in the western conterminous United States: 

Acta Palaeontologica Polonica, v. 25, p. 619–631.

Sarna-Wojcicki, A.M., Reheis, M.C., Pringle, M.S., Fleck, R.J., Burbank, D., Meyer, C.E., Slate, J.L., 

Wan, E., Budahn, J.R., Troxel, B., and Walker, J.P., 2005, Tephra layers of Blind Spring Valley and 

related upper Pliocene and Pleistocene tephra layers, California, Nevada, and Utah—Isotopic ages, 

correlation, and magnetostratigraphy: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1701, 63 p.

Snow, J.K., 1990, Cordilleran orogenesis, extensional tectonics, and geology of the Cottonwood 

Mountains area, Death Valley region, California and Nevada: Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University,

Ph.D dissertation, 508 p.

Snow, J.K., 1992, Large-magnitude Permian shortening and continental-margin tectonics in the southern 

Cordillera: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 104, no. 1, p. 80–105.

Snow, J.K., and Lux, D.R., 1999, Tectono-sequence stratigraphy of Tertiary rocks in the Cottonwood 

Mountains and northern Death Valley area, California and Nevada, in Wright, L.A., and Troxel, B.W., 

eds., Cenozoic basins of the Death Valley region: Geological Society of America Special Paper 333, 

p. 17–64.

Snow, J.K., and Wernicke, B.P., 2000, Cenozoic tectonism in the central Basin and Range—Magnitude, 

rate, and distribution of upper crustal strain: American Journal of Science, v. 300, p. 659–719.

Stadler, C.A., 1968, The geology of the Goldbelt Spring area, northern Panamint Range, Inyo County, 

California: Eugene, University of Oregon, M.S. thesis, 78 p.

Stevens, C.H., 1995, A new Middle Pennsylvanian species of Petalaxis (Rugosa) from eastern 

California: Journal of Paleontology, v. 69, no. 4, p. 787–789.

Stevens, C.H., Klingman, D., and Belasky, P., 1995, Development of the Mississippian carbonate 

platform in southern Nevada and eastern California on the eastern margin of the Antler foreland basin, 

in Dorobek, S.L., and Ross, G.M., eds., Stratigraphic evolution of foreland basins: Society for 

Sedimentary Geology Special Publication 52, p. 175–186.
23

Stevens, C.H., Klingman, D.S., Sandberg, C.A., Stone, P., Belasky, P., Poole, F.G., and Snow, J.K., 

1996, Mississippian stratigraphic framework of east-central California and southern Nevada with 

revision of Upper Devonian and Mississippian stratigraphic units in Inyo County, California: U.S. 

Geological Survey Bulletin 1988–J, p. J1–J39.

Stevens, C.H., Lico, M.S., and Stone, P., 1989, Lower Permian sediment-gravity-flow sequence, eastern 

California: Sedimentary Geology, v. 64, p. 1–12.

Stevens, C.H., and Stone, P., 2005a, Interpretation of the Last Chance thrust, Death Valley region, 

California, as an Early Permian décollement in a previously undeformed shale basin: Earth-Science 

Reviews, v. 73, p. 79–101.

Stevens, C.H., and Stone, P., 2005b, Structure and regional significance of the Late Permian(?) Sierra 

Nevada-Death Valley thrust system, east-central California: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 73, p. 103–

113.

Stevens, C.H., and Stone, P., 2007, The Pennsylvanian–Early Permian Bird Spring carbonate shelf, 

southeastern California—Fusulinid biostratigraphy, paleogeographic evolution, and tectonic 

implications: Geological Society of America Special Paper 429, 82 p.

Stevens, C.H., Stone, P., and Ritter, S.M., 2001, Conodont and fusulinid biostratigraphy and history of 

the Pennsylvanian to Lower Permian Keeler Basin, east-central California: Brigham Young University 

Geology Studies, v. 46, p. 99–142.

Stewart, J.H., Ross, D.C., Nelson, C.A., and Burchfiel, B.C., 1966, Last Chance thrust—A major fault in 

the eastern part of Inyo County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 550-D, p. 

D23–D34.

Stewart, J.H., Sarna-Wojcicki, A., Meyer, C.E., and Wan, E., 1999, Stratigraphy, tephrochronology, and 

structural setting of Miocene sedimentary rocks in the Cobble Cuesta area, west-central Nevada: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–352, 21 p.

Stone, P., 1984, Stratigraphy, depositional history, and paleogeographic significance of Pennsylvanian 

and Permian rocks in the Owens Valley-Death Valley region, California: Stanford, Calif., Stanford 

University, Ph.D dissertation, 399 p.

Stone, P., and Stevens, C.H., 1984, Stratigraphy and depositional history of Pennsylvanian and Permian 

rocks in the Owens Valley-Death Valley region, eastern California, in Lintz, Joseph, Jr., ed., Western 

geological excursions, Volume 4—Geological Society of America annual meeting guidebook: Reno, 

Nevada, Mackay School of Mines, p. 94–119.

Stone, P., and Stevens, C.H., 1988, Pennsylvanian and Early Permian paleogeography of east-central 

California—Implications for the shape of the continental margin and the timing of continental 

truncation: Geology, v. 16, p. 330–333.

Stone, P., Stevens, C.H., and Magginetti, R.T., 1987, Pennsylvanian and Permian stratigraphy of the 

northern Argus Range and Darwin Canyon area, California: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1691, 30 

p.

Sweet, W.C., 1988, The Conodonta—Morphology, taxonomy, paleoecology, and evolutionary history of 

a long-extinct animal phylum: New York, Oxford, Clarendon Press, Oxford Monographs on Geology 

and Geophysics, no. 10, 212 p.

Titus, A.L., 2000, Late Mississippian (Arnsbergian Stage-E2 chronozone) ammonoid paleontology and 

biostratigraphy of the Antler foreland basin, California, Nevada, Utah: Utah Geological Survey 

Bulletin 131, 109 p.
24

Wardlaw, B.R., Davydov, V., and Gradstein, F.M., 2004, The Permian Period, chap. 16 of Gradstein, 

F.M., Ogg, J.G., and Smith, A.G., eds., A geologic time scale 2004: Cambridge, UK, Cambridge 

University Press, p. 249–270.

Williamson, C.R., 1979, Deep-sea sedimentation and stratigraphic traps, Bell Canyon Formation 

(Permian), Delaware Basin, in Sullivan, N.M., ed., Guadalupian Delaware Mountain Group of west 

Texas and southeast New Mexico: Permian Basin Section, Society of Economic Paleontologists and 

Mineralogists, Publication 79–18, p. 39–74.

Yose, L.A., and Heller, P.L., 1989, Sea-level control of mixed-carbonate-siliciclastic, gravity-flow 

deposition—Lower part of the Keeler Canyon Formation (Pennsylvanian), southeastern California: 

Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 101, no. 3, p. 427–439.

Appendix 1—Measured Sections

All sections are in the Marble Canyon area, Cottonwood Mountains, Death Valley National Park, 

California (Cottonwood Canyon 71⁄2-minute quadrangle). See geologic map for locations. Coordinates 

referenced to 1927 North American Datum.

Measured Section CC

Santa Rosa Hills Limestone, Stone Canyon Limestone, and Tin Mountain Limestone. Base of 

section is in side canyon 1.1 km northwest of junction with Cottonwood Canyon at lat 36°34'45" N., 

long 117°19'41" W., elevation 2,480 ft. Top of section is on ridge at lat 36°35'07" N., long 117°19'34"

W., elevation 3,260 ft. Modified from Cottonwood Canyon section of Belasky (1988).

Cumulative

thickness

Thickness of unit

in meters in meters

Indian Springs Formation (Mississippian) (not measured):

11. Sandstone, shale, and sandy limestone .......................................................---

Santa Rosa Hills Limestone (Mississippian):

10. Limestone (crinoidal packstone), light- to medium-gray, fine- to 

medium-grained, medium- to thick-bedded; locally contains 

calcareous foraminifers. Dark-gray, reddish-brown-weathering 

chert nodules and lenses form about 10 percent of unit and are 

most abundant near base............................................................................ 68 109

9. Limestone (crinoidal wackestone and packstone), medium-gray, 

massive. Dark-gray, reddish-brown- to black-weathering chert 

nodules and lenses that occur in thin, regularly spaced, laterally 

persistent layers form about 20 percent of unit ........................................... 4 41

8. Limestone (crinoidal wackestone, packstone, and grainstone), 

light-gray, fine- to coarse-grained, thick-bedded. Crinoidal 

debris ranges in size from fine sand to gravel. Dark-gray, blackto reddish-brown-weathering chert nodules form less than 2 

percent of unit. Conodont sample CC-6 from about 16 m above 

base of unit ............................................................................................... 37 37

Total thickness of Santa Rosa Hills Limestone .............................................. 109

Stone Canyon Limestone (Mississippian):
25

Upper member (units 7–6, total thickness 116 m):

7. Limestone (crinoidal packstone) (50 percent): medium-gray, 

predominantly coarse-grained, medium- to thick-bedded; graded 

beds common; becomes more abundant and thicker bedded in 

upper part of unit. Limestone (lime mudstone and wackestone) 

(30 percent): medium- to dark-gray, predominantly fine-grained, 

thin- to medium-bedded, finely laminated, commonly silicified; 

contains crinoids, fenestrate bryozoans (commonly oriented 

parallel to bedding), and rare syringoporoid corals; most 

abundant in lower part of unit. Chert lenses and nodules (20 

percent): gray, weathers reddish brown; most abundant in lower 

part of unit. Fasciculate rugose corals (sample PD1) present 23 

m below top of unit; conodont sample CC-4 from about 50 m 

below top of unit........................................................................................ 75 417

6. Limestone (lime mudstone and wackestone) (50 percent): darkgray, predominantly fine-grained, thin- to medium-bedded, 

some finely laminated. Limestone (crinoidal packstone and 

grainstone) (25 percent): gray, medium- to coarse-grained, thinto medium-bedded; commonly exhibits crude graded bedding; 

gradually increases in abundance toward top of unit. Chert 

nodules, lenses, and beds (25 percent): dark-gray to black, 

weathers reddish brown; commonly occurs in regularly spaced, 

laterally persistent layers........................................................................... 41 342

Lower member (units 5–3, total thickness 301 m):

5. Limestone (lime mudstone and wackestone) (50 percent): darkgray, predominantly fine-grained, medium- to thick-bedded, 

commonly silicified. Chert nodules, lenses, and beds (50 

percent): dark-gray to black, weathers black to dark reddish

gray, variable in thickness; commonly occurs in regularly 

spaced, laterally persistent layers; some layers are lenticular, 

wavy, and irregular; often blocky on weathered surfaces.

Macrofossils rare. Conodont sample CC-1 from 41 m below top 

of unit ........................................................................................................ 76 301

4. Limestone (lime mudstone and wackestone) (50 percent): darkgray, fine-grained, predominantly thin-bedded, commonly 

silicified; some contains scattered crinoids, solitary rugose 

corals, and sponge spicules. Chert nodules, lenses, and beds (50 

percent): dark-gray to black, weathers dark reddish brown;

predominantly thin-bedded, commonly lenticular; blocky on 

weathered surfaces; resistant; most abundant towards base of 

unit........................................................................................................... 185 225

3. Limestone (lime mudstone and wackestone) (50 percent): darkgray, some medium-gray near base of unit, predominantly finegrained, thin- to medium-bedded, sparsely fossiliferous, 

commonly silicified. Chert nodules, lenses, and beds (50 

percent): dark-gray to black, weathers dark reddish brown; thinto thick-bedded, commonly lenticular, wavy, irregular; blocky 
26

on weathered surfaces; resistant. Conodont sample PD17 from 1 

m above base of unit.................................................................................. 40 40

Total thickness of Stone Canyon Limestone .................................................. 417

Tin Mountain Limestone (Mississippian) (incomplete):

2. Limestone (crinoidal wackestone and packstone), dark-gray, fineto medium-grained, predominantly medium-bedded; forms 

resistant cliffs. Contains crinoid debris, bryozoans, brachiopods, 

and solitary rugose corals. Crinoidal debris most abundant near 

top of unit. Interbedded dark-gray, light-red-weathering lime 

mudstone locally forms very thin, continuous partings. Black 

chert nodules form as much as 10 percent of unit..................................... 37 40

1. Limestone (lime mudstone and wackestone), medium- to darkgray, predominantly fine-grained, medium-bedded; contains 

scattered crinoid debris, bryozoans, brachiopods, solitary rugose 

corals, and sponge spicules. Interbedded dark-gray, light-red- to 

reddish-brown-weathering lime mudstone forms very thin lenses 

and partings. Black chert nodules form as much as 5 percent of 

unit............................................................................................................... 3 3

Incomplete thickness of Tin Mountain Limestone ........................................... 40

Base of section covered.

Measured Section MC-1

Bird Spring Formation and Indian Springs Formation. Section is in Marble Canyon. Base of 

section is at lat 36°36'19" N., long 117°20'08" W., elevation 2,160 ft; top of section is at lat. 36°37'11"

N., long 117°19'43" W., elevation 1,960 ft. Measured by Paul Stone in 1980.

Cumulative

thickness

Thickness of unit

in meters in meters

Top of section covered, but probably only a few meters below base 

of the Osborne Canyon Formation (Permian).

Bird Spring Formation (Pennsylvanian):

Member 4 (units 96–85, total thickness 107.9 m):

96. Limestone, forming a massive ledge. Lower 3 m is light-gray 

silty limestone, in part laminated, interbedded with thin partings 

of buff, laminated siltstone. Limestone in beds 10–30 cm thick.

Upper 3 m is massive crinoidal limestone (wackestone and 

packstone) containing scattered lenses and nodules of brown 

chert 0.5 m long. Thin-section sample MC-1-55 (crinoidal 

limestone) from upper part of unit ........................................................... 6.0 601.3

95. Interval largely covered. Rare outcrops of evenly laminated silty 

limestone and calcareous siltstone that weather buff to 1ight 

gray........................................................................................................... 3.0 595.3

94. Limestone, forming a massive ledge. Lower 2 m is light- to 

medium-gray crinoidal limestone (packstone). Upper 3 m is 

dark-gray micritic limestone containing irregular brown chert 
27

nodules and lenses. Conodont sample MC-1-53 from base of 

unit............................................................................................................ 5.0 592.3

93. Interbedded buff silty limestone (75 percent) and light- to 

medium-gray limestone (25 percent), both micritic. Buff 

limestone contains abundant aligned nodules of brown chert................ 15.0 587.3

92. Interbedded buff silty limestone (50 percent) and light- to 

medium-gray limestone (50 percent), both micritic. Buff 

limestone contains abundant nodules, lenses, and thin (5–15 cm) 

beds of brown chert. Gray limestone beds lack chert, but 

commonly are bounded above and below by chert beds.

Conodont sample MC-1-52 from base of unit.......................................... 7.5 572.3

91. Interbedded buff silty limestone (65 percent) and light- to 

medium-gray limestone (35 percent), both micritic. Beds 20–50 

cm thick. Buff limestone contains abundant nodules and lenses 

of brown chert ........................................................................................ 14.0 564.8

90. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to purplish-gray, massive; locally 

contains aligned chert nodules. Chert abundant in lower meter............. 11.0 550.8

89. Limestone, micritic, light- to medium-gray; beds 30–60 cm thick.

Beds separated by thin partings of buff silty limestone. Contains

rare, irregular chert nodules. Locally contains laminae of fossil 

debris to coarse sand size. Conodont sample MC-1-51 from 1 m 

above base of unit..................................................................................... 3.2 539.8

88. Interbedded buff silty limestone (75 percent) and light- to 

medium-gray limestone (25 percent), both micritic. Buff 

limestone beds 50 cm to 1 m thick; gray limestone beds 15–30 

cm thick. Buff limestone contains aligned chert nodules. Gray 

limestone beds generally lack chert but commonly are bounded

above and below by cherty layers .......................................................... 14.0 536.6

87. Limestone, forming a massive ledge. Lower 1.5 m is dark-gray 

micritic limestone. Overlying 3 m is crinoidal limestone

(wackestone and packstone) that contains 30 percent irregularly 

bedded chert in layers 1–8 cm thick. Upper 3 m is crinoidal 

limestone (packstone) that contains small solitary rugose corals 

near top. Unit pinches out within 50 m along strike in both 

directions from line of section. Conodont sample MC-1-49 from 

base of unit ............................................................................................... 7.5 522.6

86. Limestone, micritic, silty, purplish-gray in lower half and lightgray in upper half. Aligned, irregular chert nodules locally

abundant. Locally contains fossil debris to coarse sand size, 

particularly near base................................................................................ 7.2 515.1

85. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to pinkish-gray. Contains 

abundant, large, irregular nodules of brown chert that are 

aligned in planar concentrations. Locally contains planar 

concentrations of fossil debris, most1y crinoidal. Thin-section 

sample MC-1-48 from 1 m below top of unit ........................................ 14.5 507.9

Member 3 (units 84–73, total thickness 75.7 m):

84. Limestone, medium- to dark-gray, massive. Micritic limestone 

and wackestone in lower part grade upward to crinoidal
28

packstone. Central part contains two prominent bands of 

lenticular brown chert. Colonial coral observed on upper 

bedding surface of unit (coral sample SJS 1073)..................................... 5.8 493.4

83. Limestone (crinoidal packstone), light-gray.............................................. 1.6 487.6

82. Limestone (crinoidal packstone), dark-gray, containing irregular 

lenses and aligned nodules of chert. Unit pinches out within 30 

m along strike from 1ine of section.......................................................... 0.7 486.0

81. Limestone, micritic, silty; light-gray, buff, and pinkish-gray; 

massive. Contains abundant lenticular and nodular chert ........................ 2.6 485.3

80. Limestone (crinoidal wackestone and packstone), light- to darkgray, massive. Fusulinids present in upper part of unit.

Conodont sample MC-1-46 and fusulinid sample S-1508 from

0.4 m below top of unit; also fusulinid sample S-2100 from 

approximately the same locality............................................................... 4.6 482.7

79. Limestone, micritic, silty, light-gray in lower part and buff in 

upper part, faintly bedded. Contains abundant nodules and

lenses of brown chert that form planar zones 5–10 cm thick.

Conodont sample MC-1-45 from 1 m above base of unit........................ 9.3 478.1

78. Limestone, micritic, gray, containing lenticular and bedded chert.

Lowermost 50 cm is purplish-gray silty limestone .................................. 3.5 468.8

77. Limestone, forming a massive ledge. Lower 2.4 m is light-gray to 

pinkish-gray, silty micritic limestone that contains abundant 

aligned nodules and lenses of black chert. Overlying 2.0 m is 

dark-gray micritic limestone, also with abundant black chert.

Upper 7.0 m is massive wackestone and packstone containing 

minor chert ............................................................................................. 11.4 465.3

76. Limestone, micritic, containing rare crinoidal debris. Contains 

scattered large chert nodules 15–20 cm thick and 75 cm long................. 1.9 453.9

75. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray to light-gray, massive.

Uppermost 10 cm is black chert............................................................... 1.0 452.0

74. Limestone, gray, forming a massive ledge. Lower 4 m is micritic 

limestone containing rare fossil debris and abundant large 

nodules and lenses of brown chert. Upper 6 m is massive 

crinoidal limestone (wackestone and packstone) containing 

minor chert. Base of unit marked by a few centimeters of palepink, silty limestone ............................................................................... 10.0 451.0

73. Limestone, dark-gray, massive; dominantly coarse-grained 

crinoidal packstone; fusulinids present locally. Chert abundant 

in upper part, particularly the uppermost 1–2 m. Conodont 

sample MC-1-40 from 1.5 m above base of unit; conodont and 

thin-section sample MC-1-41 from 9 m above base of unit; 

conodont sample MC-1-42 and fusulinid sample S-1507 from 20 

m above base of unit............................................................................... 23.3 441.0

Member 2: (measured units 72–7, total thickness 379.3 m):

72. Limestone, micritic, containing scattered coarse crinoidal debris.

Nodular and lenticular chert common ...................................................... 2.7 417.7

71. Limestone, micritic, silty, dominantly light-gray; buff to pinkishgray in uppermost 2 m. Fossil debris (mostly crinoid debris and 
29

bryozoa) common on exposed bedding planes and throughout 

uppermost 2 m. Lenticular chert and elongate chert nodules 

abundant; spherical chert nodules present. Unit massive except 

for chert banding .................................................................................... 11.6 415.0

70. Limestone, micritic, containing very large, irregular chert 

nodules...................................................................................................... 0.7 403.4

69. Limestone, micritic, silty, light-gray to light purplish-gray.

Coarse crinoid debris, including articulated stems, scattered 

throughout. Lenticular chert rare, increasing in abundance 

upward ...................................................................................................... 5.3 402.7

68. Limestone, micritic, silty. Crinoid debris and bryozoa locally 

abundant. Nodular chert rare. Conodont sample MC-1-37 from 

0.5 m below top of unit ............................................................................ 3.8 397.4

67. Limestone, micritic, silty, containing planar concentrations of 

crinoid debris and bryozoa. Chert absent except for nodules in 

lowermost meter....................................................................................... 4.7 393.6

66. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to pinkish-gray. Lenses of black 

chert ranging from less than 1 cm to 3 cm thick spaced 2–10 cm 

apart. Thin-section sample MC-1-35 from near middle of unit ............. 14.0 388.9

65. Limestone, micritic, light-gray, massive, containing rare 

spherical chert nodules............................................................................. 4.5 374.9

64. Limestone, micritic, light-gray, massive, containing irregular 

chert nodules. Conodont samp1e MC-l-34............................................... 1.5 368.9

63. Limestone, micritic, dark-gray. Chert lenses and beds 1–5 cm 

thick spaced 5–30 cm apart. Chert light-gray on fresh surfaces,

weathers dark brown ................................................................................ 3.4 368.9

62. Limestone, micritic, medium-gray, locally containing abundant 

crinoid debris, bryozoa, gastropods, and fusulinids. Fossil debris 

commonly forms planar concentrations. Lenses and beds of 

chert as thick as 10 cm spaced 10–15 cm apart. Spherical and 

small, irregular chert nodules present in limestone intervals 

between chert layers. Thin interbeds of purplish-gray silty limestone common in lower 5 m. Conodont and thin-section sample 

MC-1-33 from a crinoid-rich bed 5 m above base of unit...................... 16.0 365.5

61. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray to buff. Beds and lenses 

of chert 1–2 cm thick spaced 10–40 cm apart. Interbedded with 

subordinate light- to medium-gray micritic limestone that forms 

beds 10–20 cm thick. Gray beds commonly bounded above and 

below by chert layers. Small, spherical chert nodules common 

throughout unit. Thin-section sample MC-1-31 from middle of 

unit.......................................................................................................... 41.0 349.5

60. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray to buff; similar to 61 but 

lacks chert. Subordinate light- to medium-gray micritic 

limestone forms beds 10–15 cm thick.................................................... 23.0 308.5

59. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to pinkish-gray, containing 

laminar concentrations of fossil debris to coarse sand size.

Contains rare spherical chert nodules to 2 cm in diameter....................... 2.2 385.5
30

58. Limestone, micritic, forming alternating light-gray and mediumgray beds 20–50 cm thick. Lenses, elongate nodules, and

spherical nodules of chert common in both types of 1imestone .............. 5.9 283.3

57. Limestone, micritic, silty, purplish-gray to buff, laminated.

Contains minor thin-bedded chert ............................................................ 4.2 277.4

56. Limestone, micritic, dark-gray, massive, containing scattered 

fossil debris. Upper bedding surface contains abundant coarse 

crinoid debris. Unit pinches out within 100 m along strike ..................... 4.0 273.2

55. Limestone, micritic, silty, purplish-gray, laminated. Thin-section 

sample MC-1-27....................................................................................... 3.2 269.2

54. Basal 20 cm is purplish-gray, silty micritic limestone; remainder 

is color-banded cherty limestone as in 53. Conodont sample

MC-1-26 from upper 1 m of unit.............................................................. 2.8 266.0

53. Limestone, micritic, forming alternating light-gray and mediumgray beds 20–50 cm thick as in 58. Nodular and lenticular chert 

common, especially in light-gray beds. Medium-gray beds 

commonly bounded above and below by cherty layers 1–2 cm 

thick. Conodont and thin-section sample MC-1-25 from 1 m 

above base of unit..................................................................................... 6.4 263.2

52. Limestone, micritic, silty, purplish- to pinkish-gray, laminated................ 5.4 256.8

51. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff, containing abundant beds, lenses, 

and elongate nodules of dark-brown chert 1–2 cm thick. Chert 

becomes increasingly abundant and well bedded upward within 

unit.......................................................................................................... 11.5 251.4

50. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish- to purplish-gray, containing 

scattered large, elongate chert nodules to 20 cm long.............................. 1.2 239.9

49. Limestone, micritic, silty; purplish-gray, light-gray, and buff; 

well laminated to nearly massive. Contains planar concentrations of spherical chert nodules averaging 1 cm in diameter, 

particularly in upper 5–6 m .................................................................... 17.3 238.7

48. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray to buff, plane-laminated

to massive. Contains abundant beds and lenses of black chert 

1–5 m thick. Thin-section sample MC-1-24 ............................................ 6.0 221.4

47. Limestone, micritic, light- to medium-gray. Fossil debris 

scattered on some exposed bedding planes. Irregular chert 

nodules common, spherical chert nodules rare ........................................ 3.6 215.4

46. Cherty micritic limestone as in 44, forming alternating light-gray 

and medium-gray beds. Chert forms lenses and elongate nodules........... 3.8 211.8

45. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray, laminated; minor 

medium-gray micritic limestone in beds 5–10 cm thick .......................... 1.5 208.0

44. Limestone, micritic, forming alternating light-gray and mediumgray beds 20–50 cm thick. Lenses, irregular nodules, and

spherical nodules of chert abundant, particularly in the lightgray beds................................................................................................. 32.0 206.5

43. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray. Chert rare, increasing in 

abundance upward.................................................................................... 3.5 174.5

42. Limestone, crinoidal, massive.................................................................... 0.4 171.0
31

41. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to pinkish-gray, laminated, as in 

39. Chert absent........................................................................................ 5.5 170.6

40. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to pinkish-gray, laminated, as in 

39 but with more chert. Lenses, elongate nodules, and spherical 

nodules of chert abundant. Subordinate light- to medium-gray 

micritic limestone present in upper part of unit ..................................... 15.5 165.1

39. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to pinkish-gray, laminated. Chert 

generally rare but locally abundant in the form of lenses, 

elongate nodules, and spherical nodules to 2 cm in diameter.

One large (2 m long) clast of silty limestone is enclosed within 

the unit; bedding in the clast is at an angle to bedding in the unit ......... 11.0 149.6

38. Limestone, micritic, containing lenticular and nodular chert. Unit 

pinches out within a few meters along strike ........................................... 1.1 138.6

37. Limestone, micritic, silty, purple ............................................................... 0.4 137.5

36. Limestone, micritic, containing abundant beds, irregular nodules, 

and spherical nodules of chert. Forms massive ledge .............................. 2.0 137.1

35. Limestone, micritic, silty, poorly exposed................................................. 1.7 135.1

34. Limestone, micritic, silty, light-gray to buff, containing scattered 

irregular and spherical nodules of black chert. Uppermost 10 cm 

composed dominantly of elongate chert nodules. One exposed 

bedding plane contains abundant crinoidal and bryozoan debris.

Conodont sample MC-1-18...................................................................... 2.5 133.4

33. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to purple; elongate black chert 

nodules common....................................................................................... 1.0 130.9

32. Limestone, micritic, gray, containing rare spherical nodules of 

black chert ................................................................................................ 1.0 129.9

31. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to purple. Elongate black chert 

nodules 5–20 cm long and 3-5 cm thick form planar 

concentrations........................................................................................... 3.4 128.9

30. Limestone, micritic, light-gray, faintly laminated; spherical chert 

nodules rare .............................................................................................. 0.4 125.5

29. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to purple, containing elongate 

black chert nodules................................................................................... 0.5 125.1

28. Limestone, micritic, light-gray, faintly laminated; contains rare 

spherical chert nodules to 2 cm in diameter............................................. 0.4 124.6

27. Limestone, micritic, silty; purplish-gray, buff, and light-gray; 

laminated. Thin-section sample MC-1-17................................................ 4.1 124.2

26. Limestone, micritic, forming alternating light-gray and mediumto dark-gray beds averaging about 50 cm thick. Spherical

nodules to 5 cm in diameter, elongate nodules, and lenses of 

chert abundant. Chert commonly forms planar concentrations.

Unit thickness varies from 9 to 14 m in vicinity of section; 

thickness reported here is an average. Conodont sample MC-1-

16 from 1 m below top of unit................................................................ 11.5 120.1

25. Limestone, micritic, silty. Chert rare except for irregular nodules 

in uppermost part. Conodont sample MC-1-15 from 0.5 m below 

top of unit ................................................................................................. 2.3 108.6
32

24. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray. Abundant spherical and 

elongate nodules of black chert form planar concentrations.................... 0.6 106.3

23. Limestone, micritic, medium- to dark-gray. Lenses, elongate 

nodules, and spherical nodules (1–2 cm in diameter) of black 

chert common, increasing in abundance upward ..................................... 5.5 105.7

22. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff to pinkish-gray, laminated. Thinsection sample MC-1-14 ........................................................................ 14.6 100.2

21. Limestone, micritic, silty, very light gray, separated from 

underlying unit by an irregular cherty layer............................................. 0.5 85.6

20. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray in lower part and buff to 

light-gray in upper part, laminated ........................................................... 3.7 85.1

19. Limestone, micritic, light-gray; upper meter contains lenticular 

chert and rare spherical chert nodules...................................................... 5.0 81.4

18. Limestone, micritic, silty, pink to light-gray, containing lenses 

and elongate nodules of chert. Upper part contains abundant 

black spherical chert nodules to 4 cm in diameter ................................... 2.4 76.4

17. Limestone, micritic, silty, pink to light-gray; nodular chert 

present in upper part................................................................................. 1.8 74.0

16. Limestone, micritic, light-gray; lower 20 cm is pinkish gray; 

upper 15 cm is a single bed of black chert ............................................... 2.0 72.2

15. Limestone, micritic, silty, light-gray to pinkish-gray, massive.

Planar concentrations of nodular chert present near top of unit............... 9.0 70.2

14. Limestone, micritic, light-gray, laminated................................................. 0.6 61.2

13. Limestone, micritic, silty, light-gray to light-purple, containing 

scattered spherical chert nodules to 2 cm in diameter. Thinsection sample MC-1-11 .......................................................................... 2.4 60.6

12. Limestone, micritic, silty, light-purple, recessive...................................... 1.0 58.2

11. Limestone, micritic, medium-gray, containing abundant spherical 

(to 5 cm in diameter) and elongate chert nodules in planar 

concentrations. Conodont sample MC-1-10 from middle part of 

unit............................................................................................................ 3.0 57.2

10. Limestone, micritic, silty, pinkish-gray to light-gray, fissile and 

recessive; weathers to platy fragments about 1 cm thick.

Subordinate medium-gray micritic limestone in beds 5–15 cm 

thick.......................................................................................................... 9.5 54.2

9. Limestone, micritic, light- to medium-gray, in beds 5–20 cm thick 

commonly separated by silty layers less than 1 cm thick......................... 2.4 44.7

8. Limestone, micritic, gray; overlies dark-gray limestone ledge 

equivalent to 7 .......................................................................................... 0.5 42.3

[Section repeated by faulting. Measurement resumed across fault at 

top of a dark-gray limestone bed equivalent to 7]

7. Limestone, micritic, dark-gray; forms ledge. Contains buff silty 

lenses and beds 1–5 cm thick and scattered spherical chert 

nodules 1–4 cm in diameter. Locally shows contorted bedding.

Conodont sample MC-1-9 from base of unit............................................ 3.4 41.8

Member 1 (units 6 and 5, total thickness 38.4 m):

6. Covered interval.......................................................................................... 0.5 38.4
33

5. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff, forming resistant, planar beds 50 

cm to 3 m thick. Lenses and beds of dark-brown chert 3–10 cm 

thick common, particularly near the tops of silty limestone beds.

Resistant beds generally separated by recessive layers of buff to 

pinkish-gray silty limestone or calcareous siltstone 3–15 cm

thick. Bases of resistant beds gradational with the underlying 

recessive layers; tops of resistant beds sharp. Conodont and thinsection sample MC-1-4 from 1.5 m above base of unit; conodont 

sample MC-1-5 from 10 m above base of unit....................................... 37.9 37.9

Thickness of Bird Spring Formation............................................................ 601.3

Indian Springs Formation (Mississippian):

4. Covered interval......................................................................................... 14.5 16.8

3. Limestone (calcarenite), gray. Coarse bioclasts (brachiopod shell 

fragments and crinoid debris to 1 cm) scattered throughout bed 

and concentrated in crude planar layers several centimeters 

thick. Conodont and thin-section sample MC-1-2 ................................... 0.8 2.3

2. Shale, greenish gray, fissile, poorly exposed............................................... 1.5 1.5

Total thickness of Indian Springs Formation................................................. 16.8

Santa Rosa Hills Limestone (Mississippian) (not measured):

1. Limestone, medium-gray, crinoidal, massive. Conodont samples

MC-l-l and 90-MC-1 from upper 1 m of unit ...........................................---

Measured Section MC-1A

Bird Spring Formation (lower part) and Indian Springs Formation. Section is about 1 km south of 

Marble Canyon. Base of section is at lat 36°35'51" N., long 117° 20'26" W., elevation 2,920 ft; top of 

section is at lat 36°35'55" N., long 117°20'20" W., elevation 3,000 ft. Measured by Paul Stone in 1980.

Cumulative

thickness

Thickness of unit

in meters in meters

Top of section

Bird Spring Formation (Pennsylvanian) (incomplete):

16. Limestone, dark-gray, with ochre silty bands; equivalent to 7, 

section MC-1; not measured......................................................................---

15. Limestone, micritic, silty, buff, interbedded with purplish- to 

pinkish-gray silty limestone or calcareous siltstone; equivalent 

to 5, section MC-1.................................................................................. 43.0 43.0

Incomplete thickness of Bird Spring Formation............................................ 43.0

Indian Springs Formation (Mississippian):

14. Siltstone, calcareous, and sandstone, very fine grained, gray to 

pink; some siltstone is fissile; some sandstone is weakly 

laminated. Contains burrows, plant fossils, abraded brachiopods, 

and phosphatized grains. Well exposed in one stream cut near 

line of measured section, but poorly exposed in most places .................. 1.4 18.1

13. Limestone, sandy, conglomeratic, containing dark-brown 

phosphatic clasts to 2 cm in diameter. Thin-section sample MC1A-6.......................................................................................................... 0.3 16.7
34

12. Sandstone, calcareous, light-gray; weathers medium gray to rust.

Fine- to medium-grained, plane-laminated and cross-laminated.

Forms ledge. Thin-section sample MC-1A-4; conodont and thinsection sample MC-lA-5 .......................................................................... 2.0 16.4

11. Sandstone, calcareous, as in 10; weathers to platy outcrops...................... 0.6 14.4

10. Sandstone, calcareous, light-red; weathers rusty brown. Finegrained, plane-laminated and cross-laminated. Forms ledge.

Thin-section samples MC-1A-3A, -3B .................................................... 0.3 13.8

9. Covered interval. Float is light-gray calcareous sandstone as in 8 ............. 0.4 13.5

8. Sandstone, calcareous, similar to 7 but forms subdued outcrop 

ledges 15–20 cm thick. Vaguely laminated.............................................. 1.0 13.1

7. Sandstone, calcareous, light-gray; weathers dark brown. Finegrained; plane-laminated and cross-laminated. Forms prominent 

ledge. Thin-section sample MC-1A-2 ...................................................... 0.9 12.1

6. Covered interval.......................................................................................... 2.5 11.2

5. Limestone, sandy, fine- to coarse-grained, plane-laminated and 

cross-laminated, poorly exposed .............................................................. 2.0 8.7

4. Covered interval. Float is greenish-gray and reddish-brown shale............. 4.0 6.7

3. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, coarse-grained. Basal 10 cm is 

coquina composed of brachiopod shell fragments and crinoidal 

debris to 1 cm in diameter. Equivalent to 3, section MC-1...................... 0.7 2.7

2. Covered interval. Nearby outcrops are greenish-gray and ochre 

shale.......................................................................................................... 2.0 2.0

Total thickness of Indian Springs Formation................................................. 18.1

Santa Rosa Hills Limestone (Mississippian) (not measured):

1. Limestone, light-gray, crinoidal, massive. Conodont and thinsection sample MC-1A-1 from upper 1 m of unit.....................................---

Measured Section MC-2

Darwin Canyon Formation (incomplete), Osborne Canyon Formation, and Bird Spring 

Formation (upper part). Base of section is in a side canyon 1.3 km northwest of its junction with Marble 

Canyon at lat 36°37'00" N., long 117°21'41" W., elevation 2,960 ft; section extends eastward across a 

ridge (elevation 3,480 ft) and then down slope to its top at lat 36°37'12" N., long 117°21'01" W., 

elevation 2,800 ft. Measured by Paul Stone in 1980, with additions and modifications by Paul Stone, 

C.H. Stevens, and Paul Belasky in 1990.

Cumulative

thickness

Thickness of unit

in meters in meters

Top of section faulted

Darwin Canyon Formation (Permian) (incomplete):

84. Interval largely covered. Few outcrops of brown-weathering 

siltstone to very fine grained sandstone ................................................. 88.0 399.3

83. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, fine-grained....................................... 1.5 311.3

82. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, as in 54. Abundant cross

lamination. Poorly exposed .................................................................... 35.0 309.8

81. Mudstone, pink, containing scattered dark-gray limestone clasts 

as much as 5 cm in diameter .................................................................... 3.0 274.8
35

80. Limestone, dark-gray, fine-grained............................................................ 1.5 271.8

79. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, as in 54.................................... 23.0 270.3

78. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, coarse-grained, massive.

Clasts are echinoderm debris and intraclasts. Contains irregular 

lenses of fine-grained, laminated siltstone. Conodont and thinsection sample MC-2A-3.......................................................................... 2.5 247.3

77. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, laminated; minor thinbedded chert ............................................................................................. 1.0 244.8

76. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, fine- to medium-grained; 

faintly laminated. Base and top sharp ...................................................... 1.0 243.8

75. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, calcareous, and 

calcarenitic limestone, silty to sandy, in beds 10–40 cm thick.

Alternates with recessive intervals of thin-bedded purple 

mudstone, pinkish-gray to buff siltstone, and dark-gray chert.

Thin-section sample MC-2A-2 (chert) from upper 1 m of unit ............... 8.0 242.8

74. Mudstone, calcareous, purplish-gray, massive. Thin-section 

sample MC-2A-1...................................................................................... 1.3 234.8

73. Mudstone, pink to purple, containing spherical limestone 

concretions. Thin interbeds of dark-gray siliceous limestone.................. 2.0 233.5

72. Covered interval....................................................................................... 12.5 231.5

71. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, calcareous, and 

calcarenitic limestone, silty to sandy, as in 63. Thin-section 

sample MC-2-23 from 5 m above base of unit....................................... 15.0 219.0

70. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, coarse-grained, massive.

Forms a conspicuous marker bed. Conodont and thin-section

sample MC-2-22....................................................................................... 2.0 204.0

69. Covered interval......................................................................................... 2.5 202.0

68. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray. Graded from coarse-grained, 

plane-laminated limestone at base to medium-grained, crosslaminated limestone at top........................................................................ 0.8 199.5

67. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, calcareous, and 

calcarenitic limestone, silty to sandy, as in 63. Convolute 

lamination common. Poorly exposed ..................................................... 26.3 198.7

66. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, calcareous, and 

calcarenitic limestone, silty to sandy, as in 63 ....................................... 13.0 172.4

65. Conglomerate, massive, containing tightly packed, spherical 

limestone clasts as much as 3 cm in diameter.......................................... 0.5 159.4

64. Limestone (calcarenite), medium-gray, fine-grained; forms 

flaggy outcrops. Locally contains limestone intraclasts, as much 

as 3 cm in diameter, that float in the calcarenite matrix........................... 6.4 158.9

63. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, calcareous, and 

calcarenitic limestone, silty to sandy, very fine grained; lightgray to buff; plane-laminated and cross-laminated. Individual 

beds not distinct. Thin-section sample MC-2-20 ................................... 19.2 152.5

62. Conglomerate, massive, containing loosely packed, spherical to 

elongate limestone clasts embedded in a matrix of coarsegrained calcarenite.................................................................................... 0.5 133.3
36

61. Limestone (calcarenite), light-gray, silty to sandy; crosslaminated .................................................................................................. 7.0 132.8

60. Limestone (calcarenite), coarse-grained, locally grading into 

conglomerate. Composed of coarse crinoidal debris and darkgray, subrounded limestone clasts as much as 3 cm in diameter.

Thin interbeds and lenses of buff-weathering silty limestone are 

common. Conodont sample MC-2-19...................................................... 1.5 125.8

59. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, as in 54, and minor 

laminated, silty to sandy calcarenitic limestone..................................... 18.0 124.3

58. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, as in 54. Top of unit is at 

crest of ridge. Thin-section sample MC-2-18, 5 m above base of 

unit.......................................................................................................... 25.0 106.3

57. Siltstone containing abundant spherical to rod- or disc-shaped 

limestone clasts. Clasts float in siltstone matrix....................................... 0.3 81.3

56. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, as in 54.................................... 13.0 81.0

55. Conglomerate, forming a single, crudely graded bed. Clasts in 

lower 0.3 m are of dark-brown-weathering chert, subangular, as 

much as 5 cm in diameter. Clasts in upper 0.7 m are of 

limestone, subrounded, as much as 2 cm in diameter. Uppermost 

5 cm plane 1aminated. Thin-section sample MC-2-17 ............................ 1.0 68.0

54. Siltstone to very fine grained sandstone, slightly calcareous.

Fresh surfaces pale-red, light reddish gray, or pale-gray; 

weathered surfaces dark-brown. Commonly plane laminated and 

cross-laminated. Stands out in thick ledges that alternate with 

relatively recessive intervals. Individual beds not distinct. Unit 

contains minor silty to sandy calcarenitic limestone as in 53 and 

51. Thin-section sample MC-2-16 (calcareous sandstone) from

20 m above base of unit.......................................................................... 38.0 67.0

53. Calcarenitic limestone, silty, as in 51. One 0.3-m-thick bed of 

conglomerate containing spherical limestone clasts near middle 

of unit. Thin-section sample MC-2-15 (calcarenitic limestone) 

from middle part of unit ......................................................................... 20.0 29.0

52. Chert, light-gray, massive, containing dark-gray limestone 

patches. Unit may be silicified limestone................................................. 1.0 9.0

51. Limestone (calcarenite), silty or sandy, light- to medium-gray; 

weathers buff to brown; very fine grained; finely plane 

laminated and cross-laminated ................................................................. 8.0 8.0

Incomplete thickness of Darwin Canyon Formation ................................... 399.3

Osborne Canyon Formation (Permian):

Member 4 (units 50–36, total thickness 23.6 m):

50. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, coarse-grained, planelaminated. Forms ledge. Conodont sample MC-2-14 .............................. 0.6 149.8

49. Mudstone, silty, calcareous, buff-weathering, thinly interbedded 

with gray chert.......................................................................................... 1.9 149.2

48. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray to light-pink, coarse-grained, 

bioclastic................................................................................................... 0.3 147.3

47. Mudstone, silty, purplish-red ..................................................................... 0.1 147.0
37

46. Conglomerate, containing tightly packed, spherical limestone 

clasts 2–4 cm in diameter......................................................................... 0.3 146.9

45. Interval largely covered; some outcrops of purplish-red silty 

mudstone .................................................................................................. 2.0 146.6

44. Mudstone, silty, calcareous, light-gray, irregularly interbedded 

with dark-gray, fine-grained silty limestone ............................................ 1.5 144.6

43. Mudstone, silty, purplish-red, massive, containing spherical 

limestone concretions and ammonoids, as in 41 ...................................... 1.4 143.1

42. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, medium- to coarse-grained; 

forms ledge ............................................................................................... 0.3 141.7

41. Mudstone, silty, purplish-red, massive, containing spherical 

limestone concretions 3–6 cm in diameter and ammonoids, some 

of which are in concretions ...................................................................... 2.2 141.4

40. Mudstone, silty, calcareous, light-gray, containing dark-gray 

limestone concretions aligned with bedding ............................................ 0.4 139.2

39. Mudstone, silty, buff to pinkish-gray; sandstone, fine-grained, 

laminated, in even beds 5–15 cm thick; and chert, gray, 

lenticular to thin-bedded (10 percent of unit). Mudstone contains 

sparse spherical limestone concretions. Thin-section sample 

MC-2-13 (chert and siltstone) from 1 m above base of unit .................... 9.7 138.8

38. Conglomerate, containing tightly packed, well sorted, spherical 

limestone clasts 2–4 cm in diameter......................................................... 0.2 129.1

37. Mudstone, silty, calcareous, buff, laminated, and minor thinbedded chert. Thin-section sample MC-2-12 ........................................... 2.0 128.9

36. Limestone (calcarenite), dark-gray, medium- to coarse-grained, 

plane-laminated; and a few thin (5 cm) intervals of buffweathering calcareous mudstone or siltstone. Conodont samp1e 

MC-2-11 ................................................................................................... 0.7 126.9

Member 3 (units 35–14, total thickness 46.7 m):

35. Conglomerate, containing tightly packed, spherical limestone 

clasts; grades upward into dark-gray, coarse-grained, laminated 

calcarenitic limestone ............................................................................... 1.0 126.2

34. Covered interval......................................................................................... 2.0 125.2

33. Conglomerate, containing tightly packed spherical and angular 

limestone clasts......................................................................................... 2.5 123.2

32. Covered interval......................................................................................... 2.0 120.7

31. Conglomerate, as in 14 .............................................................................. 0.4 118.7

30. Mudstone, silty, purple, laminated............................................................. 0.9 118.3

29. Conglomerate, as in 14 .............................................................................. 1.0 117.4

28. Mudstone, silty, purple, laminated, containing sparse spherical 

limestone concretions or clasts................................................................. 0.4 116.4

27. Conglomerate, as in 14 .............................................................................. 2.7 116.0

26. Mudstone, silty, purple, containing containing sparse spherical 

limestone concretions or clasts................................................................. 1.2 113.3

25. Conglomerate, as in 14 .............................................................................. 0.3 112.1

24. Interval largely covered. Few outcrops of purple silty mudstone 

and thin-bedded chert ............................................................................... 6.0 111.8
38

23. From top to bottom, consists of: conglomerate, as in 14, 0.4 m; 

parting plane; conglomerate, as in 14, 0.6 m; mudstone, silty, 

purple, containing aligned, spherical limestone concretions, 1.9 

m; conglomerate, as in 14, 0.5 m................. ............................................ 3.4 105.8

22. Mudstone, silty, calcareous, massive, containing spherical 

limestone concretions or clasts; locally laminated. Conodont and 

thin-section sample MC-2-10 (limestone concretions) from 2 m

above base ................................................................................................ 4.0 102.4

21. Conglomerate, as in 14 .............................................................................. 2.4 98.4

20. From top to bottom, consists of: mudstone, silty, containing 

sparse, spherical limestone concretions, 2.3 m; conglomerate, as 

in 14, 0.2 m; chert and silty mudstone, 1.0 m; conglomerate, as 

in 14, 0.7 m; chert and silty mudstone, 0.1 m; conglomerate, as 

in 14, 0.6 m............................................................................................... 4.9 96.0

19. Mudstone, silty, pink to purple, containing spherical limestone 

concretions (75 percent); and chert, thin-bedded (25 percent).

Thin-section sample MC-2-9 (mudstone) ................................................ 9.0 91.1

18. Conglomerate, as in 14 .............................................................................. 0.7 82.1

17. Silty mudstone and chert............................................................................ 0.1 81.4

16. Conglomerate, as in 14 .............................................................................. 0.6 81.3

15. Silty mudstone and chert............................................................................ 0.3 80.7

14. Conglomerate, forming a resistant ledge. Consists of poorly 

sorted, spherical limestone clasts 1–15 cm in diameter in a lightgray, silty limestone matrix. Rock is clast-supported (clasts 

make up 70 percent of rock)..................................................................... 0.9 80.4

Member 2 (units 13–10, total thickness 43.5 m):

13. Chert, silty mudstone, and limestone concretions, as in 11....................... 3.0 79.5

12. Mudstone, silty, massive, containing 60–80 percent spherical 

limestone concretions. Thin interbeds of chert and pink 

mudstone .................................................................................................. 4.0 76.5

11. Chert, black, thin-bedded (75 percent); and mudstone, pink, silty, 

containing spherical limestone concretions (25 percent). Some 

intervals, 0.2–0.8 m thick, consist almost entirely of limestone 

concretions................................................................................................ 8.5 72.5

Member 1 (units 9–7, total thickness 36.0 m):

10. Mudstone, silty, purple, and chert, black, intercalated in beds 1–4 

cm thick. Mudstone contains abundant limestone concretions 2–

15 cm in diameter. Concretions range in shape from spherical to 

somewhat flattened in the plane of bedding. Forms slope. Thinsection sample MC-2-5 (chert) from just above base of unit................. 28.0 64.0

9. Silty mudstone and fine-grained sandstone, as in 7 and 8; less 

sandstone than in 8 ................................................................................... 5.0 36.0

8. Silty mudstone and fine-grained sandstone, as in 7; sandstone 

beds rarely thicker than 10 cm; poorly exposed..................................... 15.0 31.0

7. Mudstone, silty, pinkish-gray, purplish-gray, greenish gray, and 

buff, weakly calcareous (70 percent); and sandstone, calcareous, 

medium-gray, fine-grained, plane-laminated and cross-laminated

(30 percent). Sandstone forms discrete beds 2–20 cm thick that 
39

have sharp bases and tops. Rare lenses of dark-gray, micritic 

limestone. Thin-section samples MC-2-3A, -3B, -3C, and -3D, 

all from lower 3 m of unit; conodont sample MC-2-4 (limestone 

lens) ........................................................................................................ 16.0 16.0

Total thickness of Osborne Canyon Formation ........................................... 149.8

Bird Spring Formation (Pennsylvanian) (incomplete):

6. Limestone, micritic, silty; light-gray on fresh surfaces; weathers 

buff to pinkish-gray. Some plane lamination. One bed of darkgray silty limestone, 0.4 m thick, containing abundant coarse 

crinoidal debris, near middle of unit ...................................................... 12.0 65.0

5. Interbedded pinkish-gray to purplish-gray silty limestone (20 

percent) and medium-gray limestone (80 percent), both micritic.

Local concentrations of coarse-grained crinoidal debris.

Conodont sample MC-2-1 from upper 1 m of unit .................................. 6.0 53.0

4. Interbedded pinkish-gray to purplish-gray silty limestone (75 

percent) and medium-gray limestone (25 percent), both micritic.

Medium-gray layers 20-40 cm thick. Chert more abundant than 

in 3 but not as abundant as in 2 .............................................................. 12.0 47.0

3. Interbedded pinkish-gray to purplish-gray silty limestone (75 

percent) and medium-gray limestone (75 percent), both micritic.

Chert rare.................................................................................................. 8.0 35.0

2. Limestone, micritic, silty; weathers buff to pinkish gray; contains 

abundant layered chert, lenticular chert, and aligned elongate 

chert nodules........................................................................................... 27.0 27.0

1. Limestone (packstone), crinoidal, massive; not measured ..........................---

Incomplete thickness of Bird Spring Formation............................................ 65.0

Appendix 2—Mississippian Conodonts, by C.A. Sandberg

Faunal lists indicate number of specimens of each element. See Clark and others (1981) and 

Sweet (1988) for definitions of element types (for example, Pa, Pb, Sc).

Stone Canyon Limestone

Measured Section CC

PD17. Unit 3, 1 m above base of Stone Canyon Limestone

Bispathodus utahensis

1 Pa element

3 M elements

2 Sc elements

2 Gnathodus sp.; Pa elements

1 Hindeodus sp.; Pa element

17 Polygnathus communis; Pa elements

6 Pseudopolygnathus nudus morphotype 1; Pa elements

5 Pseudopolygnathus nudus morphotype indet.; Pa elements

1 Pseudopolygnathus oxypageus morphotype 3; Pa element

1 Vogelgnathus n. sp.; Pa element
40

1 Bactrognathus n. sp.; Pb element

1 Hindeodella segaformis; Sc element

Age: Upper typicus zone (Middle Mississippian, early middle Osagean)

CC-1. Unit 5, 260 m above base of Stone Canyon Limestone

Bispathodus utahensis

29 Pa elements

3 Pb elements

28 Sc elements

2 Doliognathus latus morphotype 3; Pa elements

59 Eotaphrus burlingtonensis; Pa elements

37 Eotaphrus sp.; M elements

3 Polygnathus communis; Pa elements

1 Bactrognathus n. sp. LSZ; Pa element

17 Hindeodella segaformis; Sc elements

15 indeterminate Pb elements

2 indeterminate Sa elements

Age: anchoralis-latus zone (Middle Mississippian, middle Osagean)

CC-4. Unit 7, ~50 m below top of Stone Canyon Limestone

1 Bispathodus utahensis; Pa element

3 Eotaphrus burlingtonensis; Pa elements

1 Ligonodina sp.; Sc element

Age: anchoralis-latus zone (Middle Mississippian, middle Osagean) 

Santa Rosa Hills Limestone

Measured Section CC

CC-6. Unit 8, 16 m above base of Santa Rosa Hills Limestone

1 Bispathodus utahensis; Pa element

14 Hindeodus cristulus; Pa elements

1 Ligonodina sp.; Sc element

1 Polygnathus communis; M element

Age: mehli-Lower texanus zone (Middle Mississippian, late Osagean)

Measured Section MC-1

MC-1-1. Unit 1, upper 1 m of Santa Rosa Hills Limestone

2 Bispathodus stabilis; Pa elements

8 Hindeodus penescitulus; Pa elements

2 Taphrognathus varians; Pa elements

1 Vogelgnathus campbelli; Pa element
41

1 Magnilaterella sp.; Sd element

3 indeterminate M elements

1 indeterminate Sa element

Age: homopunctatus-Upper texanus zone (Middle Mississippian, early Meramecian)

Measured Section MC-1A

MC-1A-1. Unit 1, upper 1 m of Santa Rosa Hills Limestone

1 Taphrognathus varians?; broken

Age: Middle Mississippian, Meramecian

Spot Localities

90-MC-1. Upper 1 m of Santa Rosa Hills Limestone, approximately same locality as MC-1-1 at base of measured 

section MC-1

Bispathodus utahensis

7 Pa elements

4 M elements

1 Sb element

2 Hindeodus cristulus; Pa elements

2 Hindeodus penescitulus; Pa elements

3 Taphrognathus varians; Pa elements

6 Kladognathus sp.; Sc elements

3 indeterminate M elements

Age: homopunctatus-Upper texanus zone (Middle Mississippian, early Meramecian)

79-CC-49. 4 m below top of Santa Rosa Hills Limestone, lat 36°36’15” N., long 117°21’48” W.

1 Cloghergnathus? sp.

1 Apatognathus?; Sa element

Age: Middle Mississippian, Meramecian

Indian Springs Formation

Measured Section MC-1

MC-1-2. Unit 3, ~2 m above base of Indian Springs Formation

23 Gnathodus bilineatus morphotype alpha

Age: bilineatus-Upper Cavusgnathus zone (Late Mississippian, early Chesterian)
42

Measured Section MC-1A

MC-1A-5. Unit 12, upper 1 m of Indian Springs Formation

3 Gnathodus bilineatus; fragments

3 Rhachistognathus muricatus; fragments

1 Adetognathus sp.; fragment

Age: Late Mississippian, late Chesterian

Appendix 3—Pennsylvanian and Permian Conodonts, by B.R. Wardlaw

Bird Spring Formation

Measured Section MC-1

MC-1-4. Unit 5, 1.5 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 16 platforms and fragments

Idiognathoides sinuatus

Idiognathodus sp. (juvenile)

Age: Bashkirian

Note: The lowest collections from the Bird Spring Formation at Marble Canyon contain 

Idiognathoides sinuatus, which does not make its first appearance at Arrow Canyon, Nevada, 

until well up in the Bird Spring Formation (sinuatus-minutus Zone; Lane and others, 1999). The 

Marble Canyon section is therefore missing strata of earliest Bashkirian age. This interpretation 

is consistent with the earlier interpretation of J.R. Repetski (in Stone, 1984), who considered 

samples MC-1-4 through MC-1-15 to represent an age of medial to late(?) Morrowan.

MC-1-5. Unit 5, 10 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 147 platforms and fragments heavily coated with quartz silt

Idiognathoides sinuatus

Age: Bashkirian

MC-1-9. Unit 7, ~38.5 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 77 platforms and fragments, mostly bars

Idiognathoides sp.

Idiognathodus

Hindeodus?

Age: Bashkirian
43

MC-1-10. Unit 11, ~55 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 28 platforms and fragments

Idiognathoides sp.

Idiognathodus sinuosis

Neognathodus

Gnathodus sp.

Idiognathodus sp.

Age: Bashkirian

MC-1-15. Unit 25, ~108 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 24 platforms and fragments

Idiognathodus sp.

Age: Bashkirian

MC-1-16. Unit 26, ~119 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 7 platforms and bars

Idiognathodus sinuosis

Age: Bashkirian

MC-1-18. Unit 34, ~132 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 34 platforms and fragments

Idiognathodus sinuosis

Idiognathoides sp.

Age: Bashkirian

MC-1-25. Unit 53, ~258 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 1 platform

Idiognathodus amplificus

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-26. Unit 54, ~265 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 72 platforms and fragments heavily coated with quartz silt

Idiognathodus amplificus

Idiognathodus obliquus

Neognathodus asymmetricus
44

Idiognathodus sp.

Mesogondolella donbasica

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-33. Unit 62, ~355 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 19 platforms and fragments

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Gondolella sp.

Idiognathodus delicatus

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-34. Unit 64, ~370 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 34 platforms and fragments

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Adetognathus lautus

Idiognathodus sp.

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-37. Unit 68, ~397 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 1 platform

Swadelina subexcelsus

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-40. Unit 73, ~419 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 1 platform

Adetognathus lautus

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-41. Unit 73, ~427 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 58 platforms and fragments; signs of hydrothermal alteration, some deformation

(twisting and stretching of elements) and fracturing and healing

Idiognathodus delicatus

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Hindeodus minutus

Idiognathodus expansus

Age: Moscovian
45

MC-1-42. Unit 73, ~438 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 33 platforms and fragments

Idiognathodus expansus

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Adetognathus lautus

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-45. Unit 79, ~470 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 5 platforms and fragments

Hindeodus sp.

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-46. Unit 80, ~482 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 24 platforms and fragments

Idiognathodus expansus

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Adetognathus lautus

Diplognathodus sp.

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-49. Unit 87, ~515 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 89 platforms and fragments

Idiognathodus expansus

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Adetognathus lautus

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-51. Unit 89, ~538 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 20 platforms and fragments heavily coated with quartz silt

Idiognathodus expansus

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Adetognathus lautus

Age: Moscovian

MC-1-52. Unit 92, ~565 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 29 platforms and fragments heavily coated with quartz silt
46

Idiognathodus corrugatus

Age: Kasimovian

MC-1-53. Unit 94, ~588 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 13 fragments; all abraded grains, possibly reworked

Idiognathodus sp.

Age: Indeterminate

Measured Section MC-2

MC-2-1. Unit 5, ~13 m below top of Bird Spring Formation

Material: 75 platforms and fragments

Idiognathodus cherryvalensis

Adetognathus lautus

Hindeodus minutus

Swadelina subexcelsus

Age: Kasimovian

Osborne Canyon Formation

Measured Section MC-2

MC-2-4. Unit 7, ~8 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Material: 5 fragments, some reworked

Neognathodus asymmetricus

Idiognathodus sp.

Mesogondolella sp.

Age: reworked Moscovian

MC-2-10. Unit 22, ~100 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Material: 2 fragments

Neostreptognathodus clarki

Age: Artinskian

MC-2-11. Unit 36, ~126 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Material: 30 platforms and fragments
47

Mesogondolella bisselli

Sweetognathus merrilli

Sweetognathus whitei

Neostreptognathodus clarki

Streptognathodus (reworked)

Age: Basal Artinskian

MC-2-14. Unit 50, ~149.5 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Material: 111 platforms and fragments; mostly platforms; coated with silt

Sweetognathus whitei

Mesogondolella bisselli

Mesogondolella visibilis

Neostreptognathodus clarki

Streptognathodus pawkuskaensis (reworked)

Mesogondolella new species (also common to the Artinskian at Aktasty Hills, 

Kazakhstan)

Age: Artinskian

Darwin Canyon Formation

Measured Section MC-2

MC-2-19. Unit 60, ~125 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Material: 19 platforms and fragments

Mesogondolella uralensis

Mesogondolella bisselli

Streptognathodus gracilis

Streptognathodus artinskiensis

Sweetognathus whitei

Age: Artinskian

MC-2-22. Unit 70, ~203 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Material: 8 platforms and fragments

Mesogondolella uralensis

Sweetognathus whitei

Streptognathodus artinskiensis

Streptognathodus sp. (abraded, reworked)

Age: Artinskian
48

MC-2A-3. Unit 78, ~247 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Material: 53 platforms and fragments

Sweetognathus guizhouensis

Mesogondolella new species (also common to the Aktasty Hills, Kazakhstan)

Neostreptognathodus clarki

Streptognathodus cf. S. conjunctus (reworked)

Streptognathodus artinskiensis

Neostreptognathodus pequopensis

Sweetognathus whitei

Mesogondolella laevigata

Streptognathodus elongatus (reworked)

Streptognathodus sp. (probably reworked)

Age: Late Artinskian

Appendix 4—Fusulinids and Other Foraminifers, by C.H. Stevens

Bird Spring Formation

Measured Section MC-1

S-1507. Unit 73, ~438 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Beedeina cf. B. cedarensis (Ross and Sabins) (fig. 7E)

Beedeina clarkensis (Cassity and Langenheim) (fig. 7H)

Wedekindellina aff. W. matura Thompson (fig. 7A)

Climacammina sp.

Glyphostomella? sp.

Age: Middle Pennsylvanian, Desmoinesian

S-1508. Unit 80, ~482 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Beedeina cf. B. casperensis (Thompson and Thomas) (fig. 7C)

Beedeina sp. (fig. 7F)

Climacammina sp.

Bradyina? sp.

Age: Middle Pennsylvanian, Desmoinesian

S-2100. Unit 80, ~482 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Wedekindellina coloradoensis (Roth and Skinner) (fig. 7B)

Age: Middle Pennsylvanian, Desmoinesian
49

Darwin Canyon Formation

[Samples are from debris-flow deposit near top of exposed section]

80-MC-1. Lat 36°36'28" N., long 117°21'28" W.

Schwagerina wellsensis (Thompson and Hansen) (fig. 7G)

Age: Early Permian, middle to late Wolfcampian (late Sakmarian to early Artinskian)

80-MC-3. Lat 36°37'26" N., long 117°21'24" W.

Schwagerina modica Thompson and Hazzard

Schwagerina cf. S. youngquisti Thompson and Hansen (fig. 7J)

Schwagerina neolata Thompson (fig. 7D)

Pseudoschwagerina sp. (fig. 7L)

Stewartina convexa (Thompson) (fig. 7M)

Stewartina? sp.

Age: Early Permian, middle to late Wolfcampian (late Sakmarian to early Artinskian)

S-1487. Same locality as 80-MC-1, from a limestone clast in the debris-flow deposit

Schwagerina aff. S. modica Thompson and Hazzard (fig. 7K)

Schwagerina aculeata Thompson and Hazzard (fig. 7I)

Schwagerina aff. S. campensis Thompson

Schwagerina neolata? Thompson

Schubertella sp.

Age: Early Permian, middle to late Wolfcampian (late Sakmarian to early Artinskian)

Appendix 5—Corals, by C.H. Stevens

Bird Spring Formation

Measured Section MC-1

SJS 1073. Unit 84, ~493 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Petalaxis yosti Stevens (fig. 8D)

Age: Middle Pennsylvanian, Desmoinesian (Stevens, 1995)

Darwin Canyon Formation

[Sample is from debris-flow deposit near top of exposed section]

SJS 1087. Same locality as fusulinid sample 80-MC-3

Protowentzelella variabilis Federowski (figs. 8A-C)

Age: Early Permian, middle to late Wolfcampian (late Sakmarian to early Artinskian)
50
51

Figure 7. (Previous page) Thin-section photographs of fusulinids from Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks in the 

Marble Canyon area. All figures are axial sections. Specimens are housed in San Jose State University 

Museum of Paleontology, San Jose, California. A, B, C, E, F, H, fusulinids from the Pennsylvanian Bird Spring 

Formation, all ×15. A, Wedekindellina aff. W. matura Thompson, sample S-1507, slide 368f. B, Wedekindellina

coloradoensis (Roth and Skinner), sample S-2100, slide 265f. C, Beedeina cf. B. casperensis (Thompson and 

Thomas), sample S-1508, slide 377f. E, Beedeina cf. B. cedarensis (Ross and Sabins), sample S-1507, slide 

369f. F, Beedeina sp., sample S-1508, slide 371f. H, Beedeina clarkensis (Cassity and Langenheim), sample 

S-1507, slide 369f. D, G, I, J, K, L, M, fusulinids from the Permian Darwin Canyon Formation, all ×10. D, 

Schwagerina neolata Thompson, sample 80-MC-3, slide 370f. G, Schwagerina wellsensis Thompson and 

Hansen, sample 80-MC-1, slide 372f. I, Schwagerina aculeata Thompson and Hazzard, sample S-1487, slide 

373f. J, Schwagerina cf. S. youngquisti Thompson and Hazzard, sample 80-MC-3, slide 374f. K, Schwagerina

aff. S. modica Thompson and Hazzard, sample S-1487, slide 375f. L, Pseudoschwagerina sp., sample 80-MC3, slide 376f. M, Stewartina convexa (Thompson), sample 80-MC-3, slide 378f.

Appendix 6—Thin-Section Notes, by C.H. Stevens and Paul Stone

Measured Section MC-1

Indian Springs Formation

MC-1-2. Unit 3, ~2 m above base of Indian Springs Formation

Limestone (packstone-grainstone) containing crinoid ossicles, bryozoans, fragments of brachiopod 

shells and spines, echinoid spines, various phosphatic fragments mostly 0.5 to 1.0 mm in diameter and 1 

to 2 mm long, and small bits of phosphatized fossil fragments. Poorly sorted with calcite matrix and 

scattered pyrite cubes.

Bird Spring Formation

MC-1-4. Unit 5, 1.5 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (calcisiltite), containing about 40 percent angular to subrounded quartz grains 0.05 mm in 

diameter; 50 percent well sorted, similar sized micritic calcite grains; minor pyrite and other opaque 

grains; rare muscovite.

MC-1-11. Unit 13, ~60 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (wackestone), vaguely bedded, particles mostly 0.025 mm in diameter. Contains scattered 

quartz (about 25 percent), opaque minerals (probably pyrite, about 15 percent). Micrite matrix.

MC-1-14. Unit 22, ~95 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (mudstone), relatively well bedded, containing about 10 percent siliceous sponge spicules to 

0.025 mm in diameter, several ostracodes about 0.5 mm long filled with quartz, some opaque minerals 

(probably pyrite), and several probable calcified radiolarians up to 0.17 mm in diameter. Micrite matrix.

MC-1-17. Unit 27, ~122 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (wackestone), very thinly bedded, containing about 10 percent siliceous sponge spicules 

mostly 0.025 mm in diameter, many angular quartz grains about 0.07 mm in diameter, and minor 

fragments of calcareous fossils. Micrite matrix.
52

Figure 8. Thin-section photographs of colonial corals from Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks in the Marble 

Canyon area. A, B, C, Protowentzelella variabilis Fedorowski, sample SJS 1087 from the Permian Darwin 

Canyon Formation, all ×3. A, longitudinal section, slide 247c. B, transverse section, slide 248c. C, transverse 

section, slide 249c. D, Petalaxis yosti Stevens, sample SJS 1073 from the Pennsylvanian Bird Spring 

Formation, transverse section, x3.

MC-1-24. Unit 48, ~218 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Spiculitic chert, vaguely bedded, containing 80 percent sponge spicules mostly 0.05 mm in diameter and 

often 0.25 to 1.0 mm long. Many spicules are replaced by calcite. Also contains less than 10 percent 

angular to subrounded quartz grains about 0.03 mm in diameter, a few apparent radiolarians, and some 

dolomite rhombs. Chert matrix.
53

MC-1-25. Unit 53, ~258 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (mudstone), containing scattered pyrite and a few quartz grains to 0.05 mm in diameter.

Micrite matrix.

MC-1-27. Unit 55, ~268 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (mudstone), partially laminated, containing 60 percent unidentified fragments (some possible 

sponge spicules) about 0.025 mm in diameter, and pyrite. Micrite matrix.

MC-1-31. Unit 61, ~329 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (wackestone), with disturbed bedding, containing 40 percent quartz grains 0.025 to 0.05 mm 

in diameter, pyrite cubes in two layers each 1 crystal thick, some dolomite rhombs, and a few sponge 

spicules. Matrix is part calcite and part chert.

MC-1-33. Unit 62,~355 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (grainstone), not bedded, containing fusulinids to 1.5 mm long, crinoid columnals with 

overgrowths, bryozoans to 3 mm in diameter, small quartz grains, and brachiopod shell fragments to 3 

mm long. Partly silicified.

MC-1-35. Unit 66, ~382 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (mudstone) with about 10 percent quartz grains and other particles 0.025 to 0.05 mm in 

diameter in a micrite matrix. Half of thin section is chert with abundant small crystals of calcite or 

dolomite, some pyrite, and quartz grains 0.025 mm in diameter.

MC-1-41. Unit 73, ~427 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (grainstone), containing fusulinids, crinoid columnals with overgrowths, bryozoans, 

Tetrataxis? (foraminifer), palaeotextulariid foraminifers, and echinoid spines. Fossils mostly 0.5 to 1.0 

mm in diameter, rarely to 4 mm.

MC-1-48. Unit 85, ~507 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (mudstone-packstone), vaguely bedded, containing rare sponge spicules and several larger 

crinoid fragments. Most particles about 0.025 mm in diameter. Matrix consists of micrite, chert, and 

opaque minerals.

MC-1-55. Unit 96, ~600 m above base of Bird Spring Formation

Limestone (wackestone), poorly sorted, not bedded, possibly burrowed. Contains large crinoid 

fragments to 2 mm in diameter, bryozoans, pellets, Bradyina (foraminifer), gastropods, and scattered 

quartz grains to 0.075 mm in diameter.

Measured Section MC-1A

Santa Rosa Hills Limestone

MC-1A-1. Unit 1, upper 1 m of formation

Limestone (grainstone), not bedded, composed entirely of crinoid fragments 1 to 2 mm in diameter and 

crystalline calcite.
54

Indian Springs Formation

MC-1A-2. Unit 7, ~12 m above base of Indian Springs Formation

Sandstone, vaguely bedded, composed of well sorted, angular to subrounded quartz grains about 0.075 

mm in diameter. Minor calcite cement and opaque splotches (pyrite?).

MC-1A-3A. Unit 10, ~14 m above base of Indian Springs Formation

Sandstone, similar to MC-1A-2 but with cross lamination.

MC-1A-3B. Unit 10, approximately same locality as MC-1A-3A

Sandstone, complexly bedded, composed of angular to subrounded quartz grains 0.075 to 0.1 mm in 

diameter.

MC-1A-4. Unit 12, ~16 m above base of Indian Springs Formation

Sandstone, primarily composed of angular to subrounded quartz grains mostly about 1.0 mm in diameter 

in calcite cement. Contains various small foraminifers resembling Millerella, Brunsia, Nodosinella and 

Agathammina, and unidentified shell fragments.

MC-1A-5. Unit 12, approximately same locality as MC-1A-4

Sandstone, ripple-cross-bedded, composed of poorly sorted quartz grains 0.05 to 0.2 mm in diameter in 

calcite matrix. Contains productid spines and unidentified fossil fragments.

MC-1A-6. Unit 13, ~16.5 m above base of Indian Springs Formation

Limestone (packstone), possibly burrowed, containing abundant phosphate clasts up to 1.5 mm in 

diameter; rounded phosphate peloids mostly about 0.1 mm in diameter, some with accretionary 

structure; some small, phosphatized fossil fragments; one shell fragment 4 mm long; and a few 

subrounded quartz grains of various sizes up to 0.33 mm in diameter. Calcite matrix.

Measured Section MC-2

Osborne Canyon Formation

MC-2-3A. Unit 7, lower 3 m of Osborne Canyon Formation

Sandstone, crossbedded, composed of angular to subangular quartz grains 0.1 to 0.13 mm in diameter, 

minor pyrite, a few productid and echinoid spines, crinoids and other minor fossil debris. Micrite matrix.

MC-2-3B. Unit 7, lower 3 m of Osborne Canyon Formation

Limestone (packstone?), very thinly bedded, poorly sorted, containing 40 percent quartz grains 0.1 to 

0.15 mm in diameter, a few small foraminifers, algal(?) fragments, and abundant crinoid debris up to 

0.33 mm in diameter.

MC-2-3C. Unit 7, lower 3 m of Osborne Canyon Formation

Sandstone, moderately well sorted, composed of angular to subrounded quartz grains about 0.1 mm in 

diameter, productid spines, algal(?) fragments, and a few foraminifers, crinoid fragments, and other 

fossils in one layer, and scattered opaque minerals (pyrite?). Micrite matrix.
55

MC-2-3D. Unit 7, lower 3 m of Osborne Canyon Formation

Wackestone, unbedded, containing numerous particles including quartz 0.025 mm in diameter and 

minor muscovite. Micrite matrix.

MC-2-5. Unit 10, ~37 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Radiolarian chert, well bedded, containing radiolarians 0.05 to 0.3 mm in diameter and several large, 

thin brachiopod shells in a matrix of chert and opaque minerals.

MC-2-9. Unit 19, ~86 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Limestone (mudstone-wackestone), well bedded, containing abundant particles about 0.025 mm in 

diameter, including quartz and some possible radiolarians replaced by calcite, up to 0.15 mm in 

diameter.

MC-2-10. Unit 22, ~100 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Limestone (wackestone), vaguely bedded, poorly preserved, mostly micrite, containing several 

ostracodes 1 to 2 mm across, some peloids to 0.25 mm in diameter, several chert fragments(?) about 1 

mm in diameter, and possible radiolarians to 0.175 mm in diameter.

MC-2-12. Unit 37, ~128 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Limestone (wackestone), well bedded, containing 30 percent quartz grains 0.05 mm in diameter, a few 

brachiopod spines, one ostracode, Nodosinella? (foraminifer), and scattered pyrite. Micrite matrix.

MC-2-13. Unit 39, ~130 m above base of Osborne Canyon Formation

Limestone (calcisiltite) and chert, well bedded, containing scattered quartz grains and other particles up 

to 0.05 mm in diameter.

Darwin Canyon Formation

MC-2-15. Unit 53, ~20 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Limestone (calcisiltite), thinly bedded, containing 30 percent quartz grains 0.025 to 0.05 mm in 

diameter.

MC-2-16. Unit 54, ~40 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Calcareous sandstone, thinly bedded, composed of quartz grains 0.075 to 0.1 mm in diameter in a calcite 

matrix.

MC-2-17. Unit 55, ~68 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Conglomerate, unbedded, containing fragments of brachiopods, crinoids, bryozoans, and fusulinids, 

several clasts with many calcified radiolarians, and one clast with coated grains. Most clasts 2 to 3 mm 

long. Clasts embedded in calcareous sandstone composed of quartz grains about 0.075 mm in diameter 

in a calcite matrix.

MC-2-18. Unit 58, ~86 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Calcareous sandstone, not bedded, composed of 50 percent angular to subrounded quartz grains 0.075 to 

0.1 mm in diameter, and minor detrital plagioclase and muscovite, in a calcite matrix.
56

MC-2-20. Unit 63, ~142 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Siltstone, well bedded, some bedding contorted. Composed of 50 percent angular to subrounded quartz 

grains mostly 0.05 mm in diameter, minor crinoid debris, and the foraminifers Globivalvulina and 

Pachyphloia. Calcite matrix.

MC-2-22. Unit 70, ~203 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Limestone (grainstone?), vaguely bedded, composed of dasycladacean algae, Tubiphytes, fusulinids 

(including Schubertella), crinoids with overgrowths, brachiopods, bryozoans, Girvanella? (alga), and 

coated grains; all fragments about 1 to 2 mm in diameter. Fragments are embedded in sandstone 

composed of angular to subrounded quartz grains 0.075 mm in diameter, with calcite cement.

MC-2-23. Unit 71, ~209 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Calcareous sandstone, thinly bedded, composed of 60 percent angular to subrounded quartz grains 

mostly 0.075 mm in diameter; also contains Nodosinella? (foraminifer), some larger crinoid fragments 

and fragments of other fossils. Calcite matrix.

MC-2A-1. Unit 74, ~234 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Siltstone, composed of 70 percent quartz grains 0.05 mm in diameter, with scattered opaque minerals 

(pyrite?), in a calcite matrix.

MC-2A-2. Unit 75, ~242 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Radiolarian chert, thinly bedded, containing radiolarians 0.05 to 0.1 mm in diameter, and some sponge 

spicules. Matrix composed of chert and opaque minerals.

MC-2A-3. Unit 78, ~247 m above base of Darwin Canyon Formation

Limestone (grainstone?), containing 15 percent angular to subrounded quartz grains 0.075 to 0.1 mm in 

diameter, Climacammina, Agathammina, and Globivalvulina (foraminifers), Tubiphytes, brachiopods, 

fusulinids (including Schubertella), crinoid fragments with overgrowths, and coated grains. Most 

fragments 0.75 to 1.0 mm in diameter. Calcite matrix.

Appendix 7—Tephrochronologic Analysis of Cenozoic Tuffs, by Elmira Wan and 

H.A. Olson

Introduction

This appendix summarizes the results of tephrochronologic analyses of volcanic glass in samples

09-MC-30 and 12-MC-168 from tuffs that are interbedded with Tertiary and Quaternary(?) sedimentary 

deposits (map unit QTs) in the Marble Canyon map area. Tephrochronology is a technique used to 

estimate the eruptive and depositional ages of a tuff, or tephra, through statistical comparison of glass 

composition with previously analyzed samples such as those in a large database maintained by the 

USGS Tephrochronology Project in Menlo Park, California. For the tuff at locality 09-MC-30, our 

tephrochronologic analysis is the first attempt at a correlation. For the tuff at locality 12-MC-168, our 

analysis was performed to compare with the original correlation and age determination of Snow and Lux 

(1999). Glass shards used for chemical analysis were separated from the +200 to -100 mesh size fraction 

(>75 to <150 micron fraction) of each sample. Glass compositions are presented in table 1.
57

Table 1. Chemical composition of glass from tuff samples 09-MC-30 and 12-MC-168.

[Mean normalized oxide concentrations based on electron microprobe analysis of individual glass shards for 09-MC-30

(n=19) and 12-MC-168 (n=28). Locality coordinates (referenced to NAD27) determined in the field by hand-held Global 

Positioning System]

Sample Lat/Long SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 MgO MnO CaO TiO2 Na2O K2O Total

09-MC-30 N36°35'17.6"

W117°20'05.4" 78.01 13.32 0.54 0.05 0.07 0.36 0.09 2.72 4.84 100.00

12-MC-168 N36°36'43.3"

W117°20'43.9"

76.60 13.17 0.72 0.02 0.08 0.47 0.07 3.05 5.83 100.01

Sample 09-MC-30

The sample locality is in a northern tributary to the main wash in Cottonwood Canyon, where the

white tuff outcrop is well exposed for a distance of about 30 m in the water-washed dry stream bed (fig. 

9A). This tuff, which is about 1 m thick, is in a sequence of conglomeratic strata dipping ~20° NE. The 

dip of these strata is significantly less steep than that of underlying sandstone and minor conglomerate, 

which dip as much as 60° NE (see geologic map). The contact between the two sequences, however, has 

not been mapped.

Microscopic examination shows that the whole-grain, +200 to -100 mesh size fraction of the

sample is composed of ~72 percent glass shards, ~50 percent of which are lightly to heavily coated with 

carbonate and iron oxide minerals, and to a lesser extent, with clay. Shards are angular to subangular, 

predominantly blocky or chunky, and commonly exhibit ribs, bubble-walls, or bubble-wall junctions.

Shards are also vesicular with well-hydrated, equant and irregular bubble-type, cylindrical and spindleshaped vesicles. Webby shards are less common, and frothy or pitted shards are rare. Mineral grains in 

the sample include abundant calcite, common amounts of biotite and tectosilicates (feldspar and quartz), 

rare apatite, and other unidentified minerals.

Statistical analysis indicates that sample 09-MC-30 (table 1) has close geochemical matches with 

two groups of previously analyzed tuffs and tephra. One group includes the 2.22–2.14 Ma tuffs of Blind 

Spring Valley and other closely related early Pleistocene tephra layers (Sarna-Wojcicki and others, 

2005) in east-central California and adjacent Nevada. The other group includes several tuffs of late 

middle Miocene age (≥12.02–11.1 Ma) from coastal California, east-central California, and Nevada (for 

example, sample 2379-14J of Stewart and others, 1999). Because of its relatively steep dip (20°), the tuff 

at locality 09-MC-30 is probably older than the tuff at locality 12-MC-168, which has a dip of only 8° 

and has been dated at ~3.28 Ma (Snow and Lux, 1999). We therefore consider the late middle Miocene 

correlation more probable than the early Pleistocene correlation. Given this tentative age estimate, it is 

possible that the tuff at locality 09-MC-30 is equivalent to the ~12.1 Ma tuff of the Entrance Narrows of 

Snow and Lux (1999), which is exposed about 5 km northeast of the study area in the lower part of the 

Navadu Formation.

Sample 12-MC-168

The sample locality is on the north side of Marble Canyon, near the base of a sequence of 

conglomeratic strata perched about 100 m above wash level. The white to yellowish-white tuff bed, 

which is 2–3 m thick (fig. 9B), is discontinuously exposed for a distance of ~150 m from the sample 

locality eastward, where the conglomeratic sequence terminates against a fault scarp (see geologic map).

The tuff and the enclosing strata dip approximately 8° northeast.

Microscopic examination shows that the +200 to -100 mesh size fraction of sample 12-MC-168

is composed of moderately to heavily coated (iron oxides, clay), predominantly solid and blocky glass 
58

shards. Many of the shards display bubble walls and (or) bubble wall junctions; some show ribs.

Vesicular shards exhibit equant to elongate cylindrical and conical shaped vesicles. A few webby shards 

were noted. Mineral grains include tectosilicates, biotite, and rare hornblende.

Figure 9. Photographs of Tertiary tuff outcrops in the map area. A, unnamed Miocene tuff at locality 09-MC-30. B, 

Pliocene tuff of Mesquite Spring near locality 12-MC-168.

Locality 12-MC-168 is essentially the same as locality 491-1 of Snow and Lux (1999), who first 

noted the existence of this tuff outcrop. They determined a 40Ar/39Ar age of 3.28 ± 0.15 Ma age for

biotite and sanidine from the tuff, which they assigned to the Pliocene tuff of Mesquite Spring. This unit 

was named by Snow and White (1990) for exposures in northern Death Valley and has since been 

widely recognized in the Death Valley region (for example, Knott and others, 1999, 2008). Recognizing 

the presence of at least two separate tuffs of similar age and composition, Knott and others (1999) 

modified the informal unit name to tuffs of Mesquite Spring (Knott and others, 1999). Later, Knott and 

others (2008) referred to two of the related tuffs individually as the 3.35-Ma tuff of Zabriskie Wash and 

the 3.28-Ma tuff of Mesquite Spring.

Statistical analysis indicates that sample 12-MC-168 is a good geochemical match for the tuffs of 

Mesquite Spring, particularly the tuff of Zabriskie Wash (for example, samples JRK-DV-41, -80, -204, 

and -219 of Knott and others, 2008). This result is consistent with the age and correlation of this tuff 

originally reported by Snow and Lux (1999).

Appendix 8—Ammonoids from the Osborne Canyon Formation 5 km East of the 

Study Area, by Paul Stone and C.H. Stevens

In 1972, one of the authors (Stevens) collected ammonoid fossils from rocks then assigned to the 

lower part of the Owens Valley Formation (Johnson, 1971) near the mouth of Cottonwood Canyon, 

about 5 km east of the present study area. The ammonoid collections were from two closely spaced 

localities, 3 and 15 m above the base of the formation. Using current nomenclature, we interpret the 

ammonoid-bearing strata to be in the lower part of the Osborne Canyon Formation, although the precise 

correlation with members 1–4 at Marble Canyon is uncertain.

Ammonoid specialists W.M. Furnish and B.F. Glenister at the University of Iowa conducted a 

preliminary examination of the fossils and determined them to be of early Permian age (written 

commun., 1973). Later, the ammonoids were examined in greater detail by Lee (1975), who identified 

the following taxa: from the locality 3 m above the base of the Osborne Canyon Formation, 

Properrinites boesei; and from the locality 15 m above the base of the Osborne Canyon Formation,
59

Crimites elkoensis, Marathonites (Almites) sellardsi, and Akmilleria electraensis. According to Lee 

(1975), P. boesei is restricted to the Sakmarian, whereas the other species range through much or all of 

the early Permian. The photographs of ammonoid specimens originally presented by Lee (1975) are 

reproduced in figure 10.

Figure 10. Photographs of ammonoids from the Osborne Canyon Formation 5 km east of the Marble Canyon 

study area, reproduced from Lee (1975). Specimens are housed at the University of Iowa, Iowa City. A, B, 

Crimites elkoensis Miller, Furnish, and Clark, specimen SUI 39039, ×2. C, D, E, Marathonites (Almites) sellardsi

(Plummer and Scott), specimen SUI 39042, ×2. F, G, M, Akmilleria electraensis (Plummer and Scott), specimen 

SUI 39040, ×1. H, I, J, K, L, Properrinites boesei (Plummer and Scott); H, I, specimen SUI 39044; J, K, L, 

specimen SUI 39045; all ×2.