In their recent discussion of the recognition of late burial dissolution of carbonates, Ehrenberg et al. (2012) use our article (Beavington-Penney et al., 2008) as an example of a study that mistakes late burial (mesogenetic) porosity for pores that formed much earlier in the diagenetic sequence. Commenting on our study of reservoir quality variation in Eocene nummulitic limestones, Ehrenberg et al. (2012, p. 229) note that “…the pores in the photomicrographs shown [our figure 8]… appear to be combinations of primary intrachamber (nummulite [sic]) and intergranular macropores, in some cases augmented by molds of possible eogenetic origin.”...

First Page Preview

First page PDF preview
You do not currently have access to this article.