1-20 OF 55 RESULTS FOR

Jessamine Dome

Results shown limited to content with bounding coordinates.
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account

Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Close Modal
Sort by
Journal Article
Journal: GSA Bulletin
Published: 01 June 1938
GSA Bulletin (1938) 49 (6): 989–996.
... much of the region. The Cynthiana section at Lexington, Frankfort, Gratz and vicinity is the upper half, and less of the more complete section developed marginally to the Jessamine Dome. The relationships of the named divisions of this formation are defined and revised. The bearing...
Series: Society of Economic Geologists Guidebook Series
Published: 01 January 1995
EISBN: 9781934969755
.... 1 and 2). Some deposits occur at the northeast edge of the Nashville Dome, the southern extension of the Cincinnati Arch (Fig. 3). Other deposits extend north and northeastward into the Cumberland Saddle, which separates the Nashville Dome from the Jessamine Dome of north-central Kentucky...
Book Chapter

Author(s)
Robert Lockett
Series: AAPG Memoir
Published: 01 January 1968
DOI: 10.1306/M9363C118
EISBN: 9781629812311
... Abstract The Cincinnati arch is a continual anticlinal trend approximately parallel with the Appalachian Mountains. There are two independent domes along the crest—Nashville dome in Tennessee and Jessamine dome in central Kentucky. Sedimentary rocks, in an essentially normal sequence, range...
Journal Article
Journal: PALAIOS
Published: 01 February 2009
PALAIOS (2009) 24 (2): 118–130.
... for the Nashville Dome of Tennessee, the Jessamine Dome of central Kentucky, and the Valley and Ridge area of western Virginia. In each region, shallow and deep subtidal environments were sampled in four stratigraphic sequences representing preextinction and postextinction intervals (M3 and M4 sequences and M5...
FIGURES
First thumbnail for: ECOLOGICAL RESTRUCTURING AFTER EXTINCTION: THE LAT...
Second thumbnail for: ECOLOGICAL RESTRUCTURING AFTER EXTINCTION: THE LAT...
Third thumbnail for: ECOLOGICAL RESTRUCTURING AFTER EXTINCTION: THE LAT...
Journal Article
Journal: GSA Bulletin
Published: 01 April 1997
GSA Bulletin (1997) 109 (4): 489–503.
... by faulting in the foreland and accretionary prism. However, horizons of resedimented lithoclastic breccias in the Jeptha knob cryptoexplosive structure appear to correlate with several ball-and-pillow beds on Jessamine dome, along the Cincinnati arch, suggesting that some of the seismites may be genetically...
Book Chapter

Series: AAPG Special Publication
Published: 01 January 1941
DOI: 10.1306/SV11342C10
EISBN: 9781629812502
... of the formations lying unconformably below the Chattanooga shale. Silurian, and in some places even Ordovician, beds occupying this unconformable position have produced in various places around the Jessamine dome of the Cincinnati arch. The wells are long-lived and respond readily to repressuring with air and gas...
Image
Regional correlation of the Lower Simcoe Group with equivalent allostratigraphic units of New York, the Jessamine Dome (Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana), and the Nashville Dome (Tennessee).
Published: 14 March 2019
Fig. 9. Regional correlation of the Lower Simcoe Group with equivalent allostratigraphic units of New York, the Jessamine Dome (Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana), and the Nashville Dome (Tennessee).
Image
—Generalized structure on top of Knox dolomite. The highest well (No. 48) on the Jessamine dome in Jessamine County has an elevation on top of the Knox of 372 feet above sea-level. There is a zero closure shown in central Kentucky by the well control on the map. The regional dip southeast is approximately 40 feet per mile as compared with 33 feet per mile on the top of the Ordovician.
Published: 01 August 1948
FIG. 2. —Generalized structure on top of Knox dolomite. The highest well (No. 48) on the Jessamine dome in Jessamine County has an elevation on top of the Knox of 372 feet above sea-level. There is a zero closure shown in central Kentucky by the well control on the map. The regional dip southeast
Image
Location of the study area (shaded) in the United States and southern Canada. Ordovician physiographic features (black) include the Transcontinental Arch, the Taconic Highlands, and the Ozark, Nashville, and Jessamine domes (south to north in the interior). Dashed lines indicate the Sebree Trough.
Published: 01 February 2006
Figure 1 Location of the study area (shaded) in the United States and southern Canada. Ordovician physiographic features (black) include the Transcontinental Arch, the Taconic Highlands, and the Ozark, Nashville, and Jessamine domes (south to north in the interior). Dashed lines indicate
Image
 Figure 3. Thickness of the Trenton Limestone  (contour interval 10 m) and its equivalents  in the Midcontinent United States. This represents new mapping in Illinois, southwestern Indiana, western Kentucky, and western Tennessee. Other maps used in this compilation include Iowa (Witzke and Kolata, 1988), Missouri (Thompson, 1991), Indiana (Keith, 1985a; Keith and Wickstrom,  1993), Michigan (Catacosinos et al., 1991), and Ohio (Wickstrom et al., 1992). Wells shown on the inset map are listed in Appendix 1. Middle Ordovician rocks are present at the bedrock surface or are eroded  in shaded areas. M.B.—Michigan Basin, I.B.—Illinois Basin, J.D.—Jessamine Dome, N.D.—Nashville Dome, P.A.—Pascola Arch, O.D.—Ozark Dome
Published: 01 August 2001
in shaded areas. M.B.—Michigan Basin, I.B.—Illinois Basin, J.D.—Jessamine Dome, N.D.—Nashville Dome, P.A.—Pascola Arch, O.D.—Ozark Dome
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 December 1939
AAPG Bulletin (1939) 23 (12): 1847–1852.
...Arthur C. McFarlan The axis of the Cincinnati arch passes north by east through Tennessee and Kentucky, then splits in northern Kentucky and one limb passes on either side of the Michigan basin. Two domal structures are developed along the axis: (1) the Jessamine dome of central Kentucky, which...
FIGURES
First thumbnail for: Cincinnati Arch and Features of Its Development: G...
Second thumbnail for: Cincinnati Arch and Features of Its Development: G...
Third thumbnail for: Cincinnati Arch and Features of Its Development: G...
Image
—Southwest to northeast lithologic cross section of large road-cut exposures of the Lexington Limestone near Frankfort, Kentucky. Sections are located in Tanglewood bank (Figure 6) on the Jessamine dome (Figure 1). Parasequence sets, labeled I—VI, and their component systems tracts are on right side of figure. Stratigraphic control is provided by the Macedonia bed (Cressman, 1973), as well as seismite, stromatoporoid, and coral horizons. DH = Devils Hollow Road; FW = Frankfort West, Kentucky, State Hwy. 127; H4 = State Hwy. 421; FN = Frankfort North, Kentucky, State Hwy. 127; O = Owenton, State Hwy. 127.
Published: 11 November 1997
Figure 10 —Southwest to northeast lithologic cross section of large road-cut exposures of the Lexington Limestone near Frankfort, Kentucky. Sections are located in Tanglewood bank ( Figure 6 ) on the Jessamine dome ( Figure 1 ). Parasequence sets, labeled I—VI, and their component systems tracts
Image
 Figure 4. Thickness of the Black River Limestone (contour interval 10 m) and its equivalents in the Midcontinent United States. The base of the Black River Limestone  corresponds to the base of the Pecatonica  Formation throughout most of the Midcontinent. In parts of Michigan and Ohio, the Black River may include as much as 10 m of shaly sub-Pecatonica carbonates (Lilienthal, 1978; Stith, 1979, 1986). This map represents an update of Illinois, southwestern  Indiana, western Kentucky, and western Tennessee. Other maps used in this compilation include Iowa (Witzke and Kolata,  1988), Missouri (Thompson, 1991), Indiana  (Droste et al., 1982), Michigan (Catacosinos  et al., 1991), and Ohio (Wickstrom et al., 1992). Wells shown on the inset map are listed in Appendix 1. Middle Ordovician  rocks are present at the bedrock surface  or are eroded in shaded areas. M.B.—Michigan Basin, I.B.—Illinois Basin, J.D.—Jessamine Dome, N.D.—Nashville Dome, P.A.—Pascola Arch, O.D.—Ozark Dome
Published: 01 August 2001
, I.B.—Illinois Basin, J.D.—Jessamine Dome, N.D.—Nashville Dome, P.A.—Pascola Arch, O.D.—Ozark Dome
Image
—Isopachs of depositional sequences. (A) Sequence 1 (Lexington Limestone-Trenton-Lower Martinsburg). Basinward extent of outcrop belt around the Jessamine dome on the Cincinnati arch is shown by long dashed line. Isopachs show thinning of sequence over the Cincinnati arch. Shaded area shows the approximate outline of sequence 1 highstand tidal-flat facies. Short dashed line shows the extent of the Tanglewood bank (Hrabar et al., 1971; Ettensohn, 1992). Lowstand clastics in Virginia (dots) are Bays-Moccasin units. (B) Combined sequences 2–4 (Cincinnatian—upper Martinsburg). Extent of supersequence highstand dolomites is based on outcrop and cores; east of outcrop area, their distribution is poorly known.
Published: 11 November 1997
Figure 8 —Isopachs of depositional sequences. (A) Sequence 1 (Lexington Limestone-Trenton-Lower Martinsburg). Basinward extent of outcrop belt around the Jessamine dome on the Cincinnati arch is shown by long dashed line. Isopachs show thinning of sequence over the Cincinnati arch. Shaded area
Image
Distribution of A) δ13Ccarb (this study), B) δ13Corg (this study) and C) ϵNd (Holmden et al. 1998) across the Mohawkian Sea time slice with regional lithofacies and sample lithology. Lithofacies are modified from Leslie (1995), Leslie and Bergstrom (1997), and Kolata et al. (2001). Nash. D. = Nashville Dome, Jess. Dome = Jessamine Dome. Sites where both Midcontinent Faunal Region (MFR) and Atlantic Faunal Region (AFR) conodonts are present are marked with an asterisk (*), indicating a cooler, deeper water column, whereas other sites have MFR conodonts only, which occupied warm, shallow platform waters (Bergström 1990; Sweet and Bergström 1974). In Part A, crosses (×) indicate core sites described in Ludvigson et al. (2004). In Parts B and C heavy dashed lines indicate aquafacies boundaries. Boundaries are after Holmden et al. (1998), with the exception of the boundary between the Midcontinent Aquafacies and the Arch Margin Aquafacies. This boundary is drawn to encompass higher δ13C values along the Transcontinental Arch.
Published: 01 February 2006
) , and Kolata et al. (2001) . Nash. D. = Nashville Dome, Jess. Dome = Jessamine Dome. Sites where both Midcontinent Faunal Region (MFR) and Atlantic Faunal Region (AFR) conodonts are present are marked with an asterisk (*), indicating a cooler, deeper water column, whereas other sites have MFR conodonts only
Image
Distribution of A) δ13Ccarb (this study), B) δ13Corg (this study) and C) ϵNd (Holmden et al. 1998) across the Mohawkian Sea time slice with regional lithofacies and sample lithology. Lithofacies are modified from Leslie (1995), Leslie and Bergstrom (1997), and Kolata et al. (2001). Nash. D. = Nashville Dome, Jess. Dome = Jessamine Dome. Sites where both Midcontinent Faunal Region (MFR) and Atlantic Faunal Region (AFR) conodonts are present are marked with an asterisk (*), indicating a cooler, deeper water column, whereas other sites have MFR conodonts only, which occupied warm, shallow platform waters (Bergström 1990; Sweet and Bergström 1974). In Part A, crosses (×) indicate core sites described in Ludvigson et al. (2004). In Parts B and C heavy dashed lines indicate aquafacies boundaries. Boundaries are after Holmden et al. (1998), with the exception of the boundary between the Midcontinent Aquafacies and the Arch Margin Aquafacies. This boundary is drawn to encompass higher δ13C values along the Transcontinental Arch.
Published: 01 February 2006
) , and Kolata et al. (2001) . Nash. D. = Nashville Dome, Jess. Dome = Jessamine Dome. Sites where both Midcontinent Faunal Region (MFR) and Atlantic Faunal Region (AFR) conodonts are present are marked with an asterisk (*), indicating a cooler, deeper water column, whereas other sites have MFR conodonts only
Image
Distribution of A) δ13Ccarb (this study), B) δ13Corg (this study) and C) ϵNd (Holmden et al. 1998) across the Mohawkian Sea time slice with regional lithofacies and sample lithology. Lithofacies are modified from Leslie (1995), Leslie and Bergstrom (1997), and Kolata et al. (2001). Nash. D. = Nashville Dome, Jess. Dome = Jessamine Dome. Sites where both Midcontinent Faunal Region (MFR) and Atlantic Faunal Region (AFR) conodonts are present are marked with an asterisk (*), indicating a cooler, deeper water column, whereas other sites have MFR conodonts only, which occupied warm, shallow platform waters (Bergström 1990; Sweet and Bergström 1974). In Part A, crosses (×) indicate core sites described in Ludvigson et al. (2004). In Parts B and C heavy dashed lines indicate aquafacies boundaries. Boundaries are after Holmden et al. (1998), with the exception of the boundary between the Midcontinent Aquafacies and the Arch Margin Aquafacies. This boundary is drawn to encompass higher δ13C values along the Transcontinental Arch.
Published: 01 February 2006
) , and Kolata et al. (2001) . Nash. D. = Nashville Dome, Jess. Dome = Jessamine Dome. Sites where both Midcontinent Faunal Region (MFR) and Atlantic Faunal Region (AFR) conodonts are present are marked with an asterisk (*), indicating a cooler, deeper water column, whereas other sites have MFR conodonts only
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 01 August 1948
AAPG Bulletin (1948) 32 (8): 1647–1657.
...FIG. 2. —Generalized structure on top of Knox dolomite. The highest well (No. 48) on the Jessamine dome in Jessamine County has an elevation on top of the Knox of 372 feet above sea-level. There is a zero closure shown in central Kentucky by the well control on the map. The regional dip southeast...
FIGURES
First thumbnail for: Kentucky Subsurface
Second thumbnail for: Kentucky Subsurface
Third thumbnail for: Kentucky Subsurface
Journal Article
Journal: AAPG Bulletin
Published: 11 November 1997
AAPG Bulletin (1997) 81 (11): 1866–1893.
...Figure 10 —Southwest to northeast lithologic cross section of large road-cut exposures of the Lexington Limestone near Frankfort, Kentucky. Sections are located in Tanglewood bank ( Figure 6 ) on the Jessamine dome ( Figure 1 ). Parasequence sets, labeled I—VI, and their component systems tracts...
FIGURES
First thumbnail for: High-Resolution Surface and Subsurface Sequence St...
Second thumbnail for: High-Resolution Surface and Subsurface Sequence St...
Third thumbnail for: High-Resolution Surface and Subsurface Sequence St...
Journal Article
Published: 01 September 1984
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences (1984) 21 (9): 973–996.
... interactions between the Appalachian Basin and the contemporaneous intracratonic Michigan and Illinois basins produced the interbasinal Kankakee, Findlay–Algonquin, and Cincinnati arches as well as the Jessamine and Nashville domes. These arches and domes existed in fluctuating submergent and emergent...