Proof of Concept Test to Determine the Viability of Building an Extensive Database for Resolution of Far-Field Effects of the Acadian and Alleghanian Orogenies

Kenneth S. Boling^1, , Robert D. Hatcher Jr¹, Peter J. Lemiszki² and Gary G. Bible³

¹Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996

²Tennessee Geological Survey, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, 3711 Middlebrook Pike, Knoxville, TN

³Cougar Dome, LLC, P. O. Box 133, Helenwood, TN 37755

Cite this paper

Kenneth S. Boling, Robert D. Hatcher Jr, Peter J. Lemiszki and Gary G. Bible. Proof of Concept Test to Determine the Viability of Building an Extensive Database for Resolution of Far-Field Effects of the Acadian and Alleghanian Orogenies. Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics. 2020; 8(1):9-14. doi: 10.12691/JGG-8-1-2

Abstract

Several episodes of uplift have occurred along the Cincinnati arch. These periods of uplift are likely a result of several orogenic events although the exact timing of the uplift in relation to these orogenic events is not fully understood. One reason for this has been the lack of accessible structural data over this region. The southern end of the Cincinnati arch and the Nashville and Jessamine domes occur along the arch in Kentucky, Tennessee, and northern Alabama. These states have very different levels of data availability, but potentially enough to identify more subtle, second- and third-order folds and faults along and on the flanks of the arch. These structures may be the key to unraveling the pre-Devonian tectonic history of the two domes, and can be identified in structure contour maps with sufficient data. The goal of this study was to perform a preliminary assessment of the viability of constructing a complete series of structure contour maps of several geologic units across the region, using publicly available data. Thirty-two geologic quadrangle maps selected across the southern end of the Nashville dome in Tennessee were manually digitized utilizing ArcGIS™. The results from this initial study were then compared to the results produced using a less labor intensive method using basic GIS functions to generate data points. The results of this initial investigation seem promising, but methods of cross-verification to remove erroneous data points, the incorporation of subsurface data, and the incorporation of data sets from other states will be required to expand the coverage area. Automation of this process will need to be developed to allow further research to be performed.

Keywords

structural Geology, GIS applications, Nashville dome, Cincinnati arch

Copyright

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References

[1]	King, P.B., Beikman, H.M., and Edmonston, G.J., Geologic map of the United States (exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii): USGS scale 1: 2,500,000, 1974
[2]	Connell, J. F., W. R. Barron, and R. L. Mitchell, Conversion of geologic quadrangle maps to geologic coverages, Report 94-359: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report. 1994
[3]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Taylor, L.C., Geologic Map and Mineral Resources Summary of the Beech Grove Quadrangle: Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 85 NW, scale 1: 24,000, 1973
[4]	Briggs, I.C., Machine contouring using minimum curvature: geophysics, v. 39, p. 39-48, 1974
[5]	Smith, W.H.F., and Wessel, P., Gridding with continuous curvature splines in tension: GEOPHYSICS, v. 55, p. 293-305, 1990
[6]	Miller, R.A., Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Jewell, J.W., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 57 SW, scale 1: 24,000. 1964
[7]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Barnes, R.H., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 58 NW, scale 1: 24,000. 1966
[8]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Miller, R.A., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 58 SW, scale 1:24,000. 1964
[9]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Barnes, R.H., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 59 NW, scale 1: 24,000. 1970
[10]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Kirby, J.P., Miller, R.A., Hershey, R.E., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 57 SE, scale 1: 24,000. 1964
[11]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Kirby, J.P., Miller, R.A., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 58 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1964
[12]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., McCary, C.E.L., Barnes, R.H., and Hershey, R.E., 1966, : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 58 SE, scale 1: 24,000.
[13]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Kirby, J.P., and Hershey, R.E., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 59 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1967
[14]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Miller, R.A., and Hershey, R.E., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 64 SW, scale 1: 24,000. 1963
[15]	Luther, E.T., and Barnes, R.H., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 65 NW, scale 1: 24,000. 1964
[16]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Barnes, R.H., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 65 SW, scale 1: 24,000. 1972
[17]	Barnes, R.H., and Wilson, C.W., Jr., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 66 NW, scale 1: 24,000. 1971
[18]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 64 SE, scale 1: 24,000. 1963
[19]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Luther, E.T., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 65 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1963
[20]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Morrow, W.E., and Miller, R.A., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 65 SE, scale 1: 24,000. 1963
[21]	Barnes, R.H., Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Hershey, R.E., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 66 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1963
[22]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 71 SW, scale 1: 24,000. 1963
[23]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Barnes, R.H., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 72 NW, scale 1:24,000. 1964
[24]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Barnes, R.H., Morrow, W.E., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 72 SW, scale 1: 24,000. 1966
[25]	Barnes, R.H., Wilson, C.W., Jr., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 73 NW, scale 1: 24,000. 1978
[26]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Miller, R.A., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 71 SE, scale 1: 24,000. 1963
[27]	Barnes, R.H., Wilson, C.W., Jr., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 72 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1964
[28]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 72 SE, scale 1: 24,000. 1970
[29]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., Barnes, R.H., and McCary, C.E.L., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 73 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1973
[30]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Miller, R.A., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 78 SW, scale 1: 24,000. 1964
[31]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Barnes, R.H., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 79 NW, scale 1: 24,000. 1964
[32]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 79 SW, scale 1: 24,000. 1969
[33]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., and Taylor, L.C., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 80 NW, scale 1: 24,000. 1971
[34]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 78 SE, scale 1: 24,000. 1965
[35]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 79 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1970
[36]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 79 SE, scale 1:24,000. 1969
[37]	Wilson, C.W., Jr., : Tennessee Division of Geology, Geologic Quadrangle Map 80 NE, scale 1: 24,000. 1985