Downloaded from geology.gsapubs.

org on March 3, 2010

Geology

Grain size of Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary sediments from Chicxulub to

the open ocean: Implications for interpretation of the mass extinction event
Timothy Bralower, Laurie Eccles, Justin Kutz, Thomas Yancey, Jon Schueth, Michael Arthur and
David Bice

Geology 2010;38;199-202
doi: 10.1130/G30513.1

Email alerting services click www.gsapubs.org/cgi/alerts to receive free e-mail alerts when new
articles cite this article
Subscribe click www.gsapubs.org/subscriptions/ to subscribe to Geology
Permission request click http://www.geosociety.org/pubs/copyrt.htm#gsa to contact GSA
Copyright not claimed on content prepared wholly by U.S. government employees within scope of
their employment. Individual scientists are hereby granted permission, without fees or further
requests to GSA, to use a single figure, a single table, and/or a brief paragraph of text in subsequent
works and to make unlimited copies of items in GSA's journals for noncommercial use in classrooms
to further education and science. This file may not be posted to any Web site, but authors may post
the abstracts only of their articles on their own or their organization's Web site providing the posting
includes a reference to the article's full citation. GSA provides this and other forums for the
presentation of diverse opinions and positions by scientists worldwide, regardless of their race,
citizenship, gender, religion, or political viewpoint. Opinions presented in this publication do not reflect
official positions of the Society.

Notes

© 2010 Geological Society of America

 Downloaded from geology.gsapubs.org on March 3, 2010

Grain size of Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary sediments from

Chicxulub to the open ocean: Implications for interpretation of the
mass extinction event
Timothy Bralower1*, Laurie Eccles1, Justin Kutz1, Thomas Yancey2, Jon Schueth1, Michael Arthur1, and David Bice1
1
Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA
2
Department of Geology and Geophysics, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77845, USA

ABSTRACT was responsible for the mass extinction event

The relationship between the Chicxulub impact event and the Cretaceous-Paleogene (K-Pg) (e.g., Keller et al., 2009). Eruption of the Dec-
boundary mass extinction has been repeatedly questioned. Specifically, Cretaceous planktonic can and Rajahmundy Traps of India overlaps the
foraminifera occurring in high-energy sediments in the Gulf of Mexico related to the impact K-Pg boundary, and the role of this volcanism
have been used to argue that the impact preceded the mass extinction. Here we address this in the extinctions has long been postulated as an
dispute by comparing grain size data from two Gulf of Mexico sections and a distal, pelagic alternative to the Chicxulub impact (e.g., Officer
sequence. Significantly larger grain sizes, combined with evidence for size sorting in the proxi- and Drake, 1983). The eruptions were brief (e.g.,
mal sections, suggest that fossils in boundary deposits are redeposited and cannot be used to Chenet et al., 2007), but the clearest correlation
assign ages. Thus the grain size data support other evidence that indicates that high-energy with the K-Pg boundary is provided by osmium
deposits from around the Gulf of Mexico correlate stratigraphically with the Chicxulub isotope data that indicate that the major pulse of
impact and the K-Pg mass extinction. volcanism began 200–300 k.y. before the K-Pg
boundary (e.g., Robinson et al., 2009), and,
INTRODUCTION plicate biostratigraphic interpretations and have given such a lag, it is unlikely whether Deccan
The mass extinction at the Cretaceous-Paleo- ignited the debate as to whether the impact- volcanism played any role in the mass extinc-
gene boundary (K-Pg; 65 Ma) involved upheaval related deposits correlate to the mass extinction tions. The repeated publications of the Keller
of habitats and elimination of ~75% of marine at the K-Pg boundary (e.g., Keller et al., 1997, group, however, have made the extinctions, and
and ~50% of terrestrial species (Thierstein, 2004, 2007, 2009). the ultimate fate of the dinosaurs, one of the most
1982; Sheehan and Fastovsky, 1992). The com- The crux of the multifaceted argument by lively debates of the modern Earth sciences.
bination of a significant anomaly of platinum Keller and coauthors is the occurrence of latest Here we present grain size analyses from
group elements (including Ir), shocked minerals Cretaceous planktonic foraminifera above the three K-Pg boundary sections, a proximal
(e.g., quartz, feldspar, and zircon), high-pres- impact ejecta layer in expanded sections around sequence from the Chicxulub crater, a cored
sure polymorphs (e.g., coesite and stishovite), the Gulf of Mexico. These authors interpreted section from the western shelf of the Gulf of
Ni-rich spinels, and spherules in K-Pg boundary as much as 300 k.y. between the Chicxulub Mexico, and a pelagic sequence from the Pacific
sections around the globe provides strong evi- impact and K-Pg boundary, and have proposed Ocean (Fig. 1). The grain size data provide a
dence for the cause of the mass extinction, i.e., that Deccan (India) volcanism, not the impact, basis for interpreting the biostratigraphy and
impact of an asteroid with the Earth (e.g., Alva-
rez et al., 1980; Koeberl, 2007). The Chicxu-
lub crater in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico A Site 1212 C YAX-1 Core Chicxulub
Paleocene Cretaceous

has been strongly implicated as the impact site 2

Grain size (µm)
Grain size (µm)

10 2
10
based on radiometric data, the distribution of a
1 1
thick blanket of high-energy sediments around 10 10

the Gulf of Mexico, and chemical similarities

Unit 0

0 0
10 10Paleocene Unit 1
between the ejecta and Chicxulub melt rocks Zone NP1 Zone CC26 Hemipelagic
0
Unit 1

(e.g., Hildebrand et al., 1991; Bourgeois et al., Danian Maastricht. Danian

107.5 108 108.5 109 109.5 794 796 798 800 802 804 806
1988; Sigurdsson et al., 1991). Depth in Core (m) Depth in Core (m)

The fossil remains of planktonic foraminifera B Brazos (KT-1 and Cottonmouth)KT-1

KT-1 Cottonmouth 8
KT-1 Cottonmouth
7
and calcareous nannoplankton provide the basis 2 60°
Grain size (µm)

10 6 Brazos
for dating marine K-Pg boundary sections from 5 YAX-1
1212
1 4 0°
the deep sea to the continental shelf. The small 10
3
size of these fossils renders them highly suscep- 2 -60°
0
10 1
tible to reworking, however, and distinguishing siltstone SO H mass flow undisturbed Cret.

Mudstone 0 180° -120° -60° 0° 60° 120° 180°

Muddy siltstone S H Mass flow
specimens that were derived via sinking from Danian Maastrichtian

overlying surface waters (in situ specimens)
from those that were transported from other
locations, or redeposited from underlying for-
mations, is difficult. This issue is especially
significant at the K-Pg boundary in the Gulf of
Mexico, where sediments were deposited by a
range of high-energy media including gravity
flows, high-energy water disturbance, and tsu-
nami-generated currents. These processes com-
12 13 14 15 16
Depth in Core (m)
Figure 1. Grain size and location of sections investigated. A: Ocean Drilling Program Site
1212. B: KT-1 core (Hansen Brazos Core-1 [Hansen et al., 1993]; S—settling-out unit; H—
hummocky cross-bedded sands) and Cottonmouth Creek. C: YAX-1 (Yaxcopoil-1; 0—unit
0) core. Data are presented as logarithmic density plots of grain size. Sample locations are
shown by small plus signs. Color density scale adjacent to B pertains to all three panels.
Black line represents mean sample size. Routine nannofossil zones are shown in A. White
line in B shows splice between Cottonmouth outcrop and KT-1 core. Units shown are il-
lustrated in Figure DR1 (see footnote 1). Location of Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary is
indicated for Site 1212 and Brazos; boundary is below study section in YAX-1.

© 2010 Geological Society of America. For permission to copy, contact Copyright Permissions, GSA, or editing@geosociety.org.
GEOLOGY,
Geology, March
March 2010
2010; v. 38; no. 3; p. 199–202; doi: 10.1130/G30513.1; 1 figure; Data Repository item 2010056. 199
 Downloaded from geology.gsapubs.org on March 3, 2010
stratigraphic completeness of sections deposited
by impact-generated high-energy processes and
confirm their correlation with the K-Pg bound-
ary and the mass extinction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Ocean Drilling Program Site 1212 is located
at 2681 m water depth on Shatsky Rise in the
Pacific Ocean (Bralower et al., 2002). The
paleontologic and lithologic K-Pg boundary
at 109.22 m composite depth is within nan-
nofossil ooze and chalk (GSA Data Reposi-
tory Fig. DR11) deposited at typical pelagic
sedimentation rates. Rare spherules are found in
boundary samples (Bralower et al., 2002).
The K-Pg boundary at Brazos, Texas, USA,
is exposed in outcrop section and recovered in
cores. Here we present data from the Hansen
Brazos Core-1 (herein the KT-1 core) (Hansen
et al., 1993). The boundary sequence in KT-1
consists of a mass flow deposit (14.00 to at
least 14.62 m) composed of centimeter-sized
mudstone clasts embedded in a shell-rich mud
matrix, overlain by hummocky cross-bedded
sands (fine sand–size grains surrounded by clay
mud matrix; 13.85–14.00 m), and a capping
fining-upward silt-mud unit (13.75–13.85 m)
(Fig. DR1). This sequence has been interpreted
as the deposits of one or more tsunamis related
to the Chicxulub impact (e.g., Bourgeois et
al., 1988) or a succession of impact seismic-
induced mass flows followed by pulses of
sediment deposition generated by major storms
(Yancey, 1996). Overlying the settling-out unit
is a muddy siltstone unit (9.88–13.75 m). The
base of the mass flow unit is not observable in
KT-1, so we sampled undisturbed upper Maas-
trichtian mudstones in the nearby CM-1 section
of the Cottonmouth Creek (Schulte et al., 2006)
to determine grain size trends.
The Yaxcopoil-1 (YAX-1) core drilled in
the Chicxulub crater by the International Con-
tinental Scientific Drilling Project (http://www
.icdp-online.org/contenido/icdp/front_content
.php?idcat=716) contains a thick sequence of
impact rocks and overlying Paleocene hemipe-
lagic carbonate (Dressler et al., 2004; Goto et al.,
2004). The impact rocks are largely composed
of suevite, a breccia that contains polymict clasts
and cogenetic melt particles. The study inter-
val includes units 0 and 1 of Goto et al. (2004)
and Dressler et al. (2004) and several samples
from the overlying Paleocene. Unit 1 (794.60–
808.02 m) comprises 8 fining- and coarsening-
1
GSA Data Repository item 2010056, additional
stratigraphic information and grain size calibration
(lithostratigraphy, biostratigraphy of Brazos and
YAX-1; calibration of the Malvern Mastersizer and
previous grain size measurements), is available online
at www.geosociety.org/pubs/ft2010.htm, or on request
from editing@geosociety.org or Documents Secre-
tary, GSA, P.O. Box 9140, Boulder, CO 80301, USA.
200
upward cycles of coarse sand- to pebble-sized
suevite (clasts to 5 mm); overlying unit 0 is a
49-cm-thick interval of dolomitic calcarenite
(794.11–794.60 m) that contains cross-lamina-
tion and climbing ripples (Fig. DR1). Unit 0 is
overlain by Paleocene hemipelagic limestone.
Small volumes (<0.5 cm2) of each sample
were disaggregated in water. Clasts in the mass
flow unit in KT-1 and in the suevite unit in
YAX-1 could not be physically separated from
the matrix and were disaggregated together.
More indurated samples from YAX-1 were
placed on a shaker table and left overnight. All
but five of these samples disaggregated in this
fashion. These samples were left on the shaker
table for two days, oven-dried, then observed in
a binocular microscope before they were ana-
lyzed. Even though we cannot claim that every
sample from the three sections was completely
disaggregated, the three sections show grain size
trends that are consistent with published sedi-
mentology, and we are confident that the overall
trends are valid.
The size distribution of sediment samples
from the three sites was determined using a
Malvern Mastersizer particle size analyzer in
the Materials Research Laboratory at Pennsyl-
vania State University. This instrument pro-
vides an optical measurement of particle size
between 0.1 and 1000 µm. The precision of
the Malvern is known to be lower than other
grain size analyzers such as the Coulter Coun-
ter or Sedigraph (e.g., McCave et al., 2006),
but the latter instruments measure a restricted
size range and thus require multiple analyses
to reconstruct the complete size distribution
of the samples studied here. We carried out
comparative analyses of the <38 µm grain size
range on the Coulter Counter and Malvern, and
found that the Malvern instrument provides
significantly less resolution, but the overall
modal grain sizes are within 2 µm (Fig. DR2).
Moreover, replicate analyses of individual
samples on the Malvern indicate a precision of
<5% (Fig. DR3). Thus, the data provide a valid
comparison between samples with a broad
range of grain sizes. All data are archived at
the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC;
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov).
RESULTS
The K-Pg boundary at Site 1212 is marked
by an abrupt shift in grain size distribution
(Fig. 1A). Below the boundary, the distribution
is unimodal with a mean grain size of 5–7 µm;
above the boundary, the distribution becomes
bimodal with peaks at 2–4 µm and 40–65 µm.
Samples from the Brazos KT-1 core are char-
acterized by a broader range of grain size than
those from the Cretaceous at Site 1212 and a
more unimodal size distribution than Paleocene
samples at that site. Most samples are composed
of coarse clay, silt, and fine sand (Fig. 1B). The
section shows significant stratigraphic varia-
tion. Samples in the mass flow unit have a mean
grain size of 20–35 µm, although this range is
artificially low as a result of disaggregation of
mudstone clasts contained within the mass flow.
There is an abrupt increase to mean values of
33–49 µm in samples from the hummocky cross-
bedded sands unit. The top of this unit is char-
acterized by a sequential decrease in mean grain
size to 18 µm, a second increase to 50 µm, then
a decrease to 20 µm at the top of the settling-out
unit. The remainder of the core shows generally
homogeneous grain sizes with a mean of 20–40
µm. Apparent high-frequency variability likely
results from the higher density sampling in this
interval. The KT-1 core is much coarser grained
than samples of the undisturbed Maastrichtian
mudstone from CM-1 (mean grain size of 8–17
µm; Fig. 1B).
Samples from the boundary interval in the
YAX-1 core are dominated by sand and char-
acterized by significantly higher mean grain
size than Brazos and Site 1212 (Fig. 1C). The
distribution is extremely broad and generally
unimodal. Unit 1 analyses clearly show 8 or
9 fining- and coarsening-upward cycles with
mean size fluctuating between 30 and 300 µm
(Fig. 1C). This range is artificially low as a result
of disaggregation of clasts contained within the
suevite unit. Unit 0 contains one sample with a
mean grain size of 93 µm and one of 156 µm.
The Paleogene samples are generally coarse
grained (mean 100–170 µm), but show a fining-
upward trend at the top of the study section.
DISCUSSION
Nannoplankton and planktonic foraminifera
are ubiquitous in surface waters of the modern
open ocean and in pelagic sediments derived
from them. Fossils of these plankton occur in
sediments on the shelf but at lower abundances
than in open ocean sediments. Nannoplankton
have wider salinity tolerances than planktonic
foraminifera and are often found in shelf and
inland sea locations where planktonic foramin-
ifera are absent. Similarly, nannoplankton are
more widespread in ancient sediments depos-
ited in marginal marine environments. There-
fore the occurrence of planktonic foraminifera
in ancient sediments without nannoplankton is
highly unusual.
Nannoplankton in the immediate K-Pg
boundary recovery interval are a mixture of
Cretaceous survivors (survivors and species that
went extinct are between 3 and 10 µm), newly
evolved Paleocene species (generally miniscule,
1–2 µm), and the disaster taxa Braarudosphaera
and Thoracosphaera (generally 20–40 µm, but
often break into much smaller pieces). The ear-
liest Paleocene planktonic foraminiferal assem-
blages are dominated by diminutive species
GEOLOGY, March 2010
 Downloaded from geology.gsapubs.org on March 3, 2010
(generally <80 µm; D’Hondt and Keller, 1991)
considerably smaller than Late Cretaceous taxa
(generally 150–350 µm). Planktonic foraminif-
eral and nannofossil assemblages in most low-
ermost Paleocene deep-sea samples are high
dominance and low diversity, thus they should
show relatively simple grain size distributions.
The grain size data from Site 1212 reflect per-
fectly the major plankton extinction at the K-Pg
boundary (Fig. 1A). The overall size increase
and change from a unimodal distribution to a
bimodal distribution reflects the extinction of
Cretaceous nannoplankton and their replace-
ment by small pieces of Thoracosphaera com-
bined with a larger grain size fraction composed
of whole Thoracosphaera and small Danian
planktonic foraminifera. The typical plankton
extinction record and the associated diagnostic
grain size change across the K-Pg boundary at
Site 1212 provides a basis for interpreting the
extinction record and stratigraphy of more prox-
imal and higher energy locations.
Relation of Proximal Deposits to the
Paleontological K-Pg Boundary
Keller et al. (1997, 2004, 2007, 2009) and
others proposed that impact-related units in
shelf sections in northeastern Mexico and Texas
preceded the paleontological K-Pg boundary
by as much as 300 k.y. This conclusion was
based on: (1) the correlation of spherule-bear-
ing cross-bedded sand lenses and layers to the
Plummerita hantkeninoides (CF1) planktonic
foraminiferal zone, which represents the last
300 k.y. of the Maastrichtian; (2) interpretation
of the overlying fining-upward silt-mud unit,
also within zone CF1, as a genetically separate
unit; and (3) in many sections, definition of the
paleontological K-Pg boundary, based on the
appearance of diagnostic Paleocene foraminif-
eral species and the Ir anomaly, at the top of this
silt-mud unit. Keller et al. (2007) proposed that,
at Brazos, the hummocky cross-bedded sand
unit was redeposited from the original Chicxu-
lub ejecta unit represented by a 3-cm-thick clay
layer that is 40 cm lower in the section. Schulte
et al. (2006) placed the K-Pg boundary at the
base of the boundary complex and correlated
the entire complex to the Chicxulub impact. The
biostratigraphic data from Brazos, interpreted
in the light of the grain size data, support the
Schulte et al. (2006) interpretation.
The grain size distribution of undisturbed
Maastrichtian samples from the CM-1 section is
similar to that of the uppermost Maastrichtian
from the pelagic section at Site 1212 (Figs. 1A
and 1B). Moreover, both sets of samples con-
tain abundant and diverse nannoplankton. The
abrupt increase in grain size between the CM-1
and KT-1 samples mirrors the increase at the
K-Pg boundary at Site 1212. However, the grain
size distribution of samples from KT-1 is com-
GEOLOGY, March 2010
pletely different from that of Maastrichtian and
Danian samples from Site 1212 (Figs. 1A and
1B). Samples from KT-1, including those from
the mass flow unit with the clasts disaggregated,
are considerably coarser than the Maastrichtian
from Site 1212, and show significantly less vari-
ance and contain a lower proportion of clay-
sized particles than the entire boundary interval
at the latter site. These properties suggest that
the KT-1 section was deposited in higher energy
environments, and visual examination of smear
slides shows that many samples underwent sig-
nificant size sorting (see the Data Repository).
The paucity of material in the 0–10 µm frac-
tion and the abundance of material in the silt-
and fine sand–sized fractions of KT-1 samples
is borne out by the relative rarity of nannofos-
sils in boundary samples. Samples through-
out the core are characterized by a mixture of
low-diversity Maastrichtian species, taxa from
significantly older intervals of the Cretaceous,
and specimens of the disaster genera Braarudo-
sphaera, and especially, Thoracosphaera (see
the Data Repository). The disaster taxa occur
in the undisturbed Maastrichtian samples from
Brazos, but at considerably lower abundance
than in boundary sequence samples. Maastrich-
tian specimens in most KT-1 samples are well
preserved, but many specimens show evidence
of breakage and size sorting. Given the overall
preservation, assemblages are extremely low
in diversity compared to CM-1 samples. The
above observations strongly suggest that most,
if not all, nannofossils in the boundary complex
are reworked.
The interpretation of the Brazos K-Pg bound-
ary sequence is complicated; we postulate that
the low-diversity, size-sorted nannoplankton
assemblage of mixed age, combined with the
breakage of specimens, resulted from resuspen-
sion of the uppermost Cretaceous and ejecta
deposits during impact-related seismic shaking
and wave-generated currents, or post-impact
slumping. The nannoplankton in samples from
KT-1, including those above the hummocky
cross-bedded sands unit, are clearly reworked
and therefore the planktonic foraminifera in
this unit, including P. hantkeninoides, cannot be
interpreted as in place (e.g., Keller et al., 2007).
Moreover, the absence of diagnostic Paleocene
planktonic foraminiferal species in the coarse-
grained boundary units has no stratigraphic
significance, as the microfossil component of
these sediments was derived from underlying
Maastrichtian units. The nannoplankton and
grain size data combined support other evidence
from Brazos (e.g., Schulte et al., 2006, 2008)
that the entire boundary sequence, including the
mass flow deposits, the hummocky cross-bed-
ded sands unit, and the overlying siltstone unit,
correlates stratigraphically to the event deposits
above the K-Pg boundary.
The age and environment of deposition of the
K-Pg boundary in the YAX-I core have also been
the topics of a great deal of discussion. Goto et
al. (2004) concluded that the lower part of unit
0 was deposited by strong currents that resulted
from seawater flushing in and out of the newly
excavated crater, and that this unit was geneti-
cally related to unit 1, which contains reworked
nannoplankton of late Campanian or early
Maastrichtian age, and resulted from the impact.
However, Keller et al. (2004) identified dolomi-
tized specimens of P. hantkeninoides in unit 0
and interpreted the specimens as in situ based
on the perceived lack of evidence for reworking
as well as the presence of burrows. Further, they
interpreted unit 0 as genetically separate from
unit 1, and therefore proposed that the impact
(represented by unit 1) occurred as much as
300 k.y. before the paleontological K-Pg bound-
ary. In support of their assessment they cited the
lack of an Ir anomaly and the absence of low-
ermost Danian foraminiferal Zone P0, suggest-
ing a substantial unconformity. The Keller et al.
(2004) interpretation was challenged by Arz et
al. (2004) and Smit et al. (2004), who could find
no planktonic foraminifera in unit 0, and, like
Goto et al. (2004), interpreted the cross-bedding
in this unit as resulting from high energy related
to the impact.
The grain size of samples from unit 0
(Fig. 1C) is clearly different from a typi-
cal deep-sea distribution as represented by
Site 1212 (Fig. 1A). No nannoplankton have
been observed in samples from this unit; most
samples have abundant fine-grained dolomite.
Combined with the absence of nannoplankton,
the grain size distribution confirms that the sedi-
ments have been winnowed, and that even if the
dolomitized specimens are true P. hantkeninoi-
des, these specimens are not in situ and can only
be used to provide a maximum age estimate.
Nannofossils in sediments overlying the
boundary in YAX-1 suggest an age between
5 and 40 k.y. after the K-Pg boundary (see
the Data Repository). The occurrence of a
minor unconformity is not surprising given the
expected relief on the floor of the crater after
the impact. Thus the combination of grain size
and micropaleontological data from YAX-1 is
fully consistent with correlation of the impact
at Chicxulub to the K-Pg boundary and the
associated mass extinction. We follow Arz et
al. (2004) in including units 0 and 1 in YAX-
1, which formed at the time of impact, in the
Danian (Fig. 1C).
In summary, combined grain size and bio-
stratigraphic data of K-Pg boundary sections
from the Chicxulub crater and the Texas con-
tinental shelf indicate that the interpretation
of thick, proximal K-Pg sections by Keller
and coworkers (e.g., Keller et al., 2007) using
zonations and principles applicable in deep-sea
201
 Downloaded from geology.gsapubs.org on March 3, 2010
sections is unsound on stratigraphic and sedi-
mentologic grounds and results in gross under-
estimation of rates of sediment accumulation.
While the study section at Site 1212 took hun-
dreds of thousands of years to accumulate, those
in KT-1 and YAX-1 were likely deposited over
hours or days. Our analysis also provides a
framework to interpret the stratigraphy of other
high-energy boundary deposits around the Gulf
of Mexico. The similar lithologic succession of
sections in northeastern Mexico, for example,
combined with extremely rare nannoplankton
in samples above the hummocky cross-bedded
sands–equivalent units (Pospichal, 1996) indi-
cate that the entire high-energy sequence cor-
relates stratigraphically to the impact-related
event deposits above the K-Pg boundary.
CONCLUSIONS
The combination of grain size and paleonto-
logical data in the three investigated sites dem-
onstrates that the sequence of events around
the K-Pg boundary in the proximal Gulf of
Mexico is highly complex and cannot be inter-
preted using the same stratigraphic practices
applied to deep-sea sections. Interpreted in the
light of the grain size data, biostratigraphy of
the proximal sites is consistent with the broad
array of data that supports the correlation of the
impact at Chicxulub with the K-Pg boundary
mass extinction.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank R. Malek and S. Geleskie for analytical
help and H. Stoll for calibrating the Malvern Mas-
tersizer and Coulter Counter. We thank C. Koeberl
and two anonymous reviewers for suggestions, and
Kazuhisa Goto and Peter Schulte for comments on
an earlier manuscript. This research was sponsored
by National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA) Exobiology grant NNX07AK62G.
REFERENCES CITED
Alvarez, L.W., Alvarez, W., Asaro, F., and Mi-
chel, H.V., 1980, Extraterrestrial cause for
the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction: Science,
v. 208, p. 1095–1108, doi: 10.1126/science
.208.4448.1095.
Arz, J.A., Alegret, L., and Arenillas, I., 2004, Forami-
niferal biostratigraphy and paleoenvironmen-
tal reconstruction at the Yaxcopoil drill hole,
Chicxulub crater, Yucatan Peninsula: Meteorit-
ics & Planetary Science, v. 39, p. 1099–1111.
Bourgeois, J., Hansen, T.A., Wiberg, P.L., and
Kauffman, E.G., 1988, A tsunami deposit at
the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary in Texas:
Science, v. 241, p. 567–570, doi: 10.1126/
science.241.4865.567.
Bralower, T.J., Premoli Silva, I., Malone, M., and
the Scientific Participants of Leg 198, 2002,
202
Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program,
Initial reports, Volume 198: http://www.iodp
.tamu.edu/publications/198_IR/198ir.htm.
Chenet, A.-L., Quidelleur, X., Fluteau, F., Courtillot,
V., and Bajpai, S., 2007, 40K-40Ar dating of the
Main Deccan large igneous province; further
evidence of KTB age and short duration: Earth
and Planetary Science Letters, v. 263, p. 1–15,
doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2007.07.011.
D’Hondt, S.D., and Keller, G., 1991, Some patterns
of planktic foraminiferal assemblage turnover
at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary: Marine
Micropaleontology, v. 17, p. 77–118, doi:
10.1016/0377-8398(91)90024-Z.
Dressler, B.O., Sharpton, V.L., Schwandt, C.S., and
Ames, D.E., 2004, Impactites of the Yaxco-
poil-1 drilling site, Chicxulub impact structure;
petrography, geochemistry, and depositional
environment: Meteoritics & Planetary Science,
v. 39, p. 857–878.
Goto, K., Tada, R., Tajika, E., Bralower, T.J.,
Hasegawa, T., and Matsui, T., 2004, Evidence
for ocean water invasion into the Chicxulub cra-
ter at the Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary: Meteor-
itics & Planetary Science, v. 39, p. 1233–1247.
Hansen, T.A., Farrell, B.R., and Upshaw, B., III,
1993, The first 2 million years after the Cre-
taceous-Tertiary boundary in east Texas; rate
and paleoecology of the molluscan recovery:
Paleobiology, v. 19, p. 251–265.
Hildebrand, A., Penfield, G.T., Kring, D.A.M., Pilk-
ington, A., Carmargo, Z., Jacobsen, S.B., and
Boynton, W.V., 1991, Chicxulub crater: A pos-
sible Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary impact
crater on the Yucatan peninsula, Mexico: Geol-
ogy, v. 19, p. 867–871, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613
(1991)019<0867:CCAPCT>2.3.CO;2.
Keller, G., Lopez-Oliva, J.G., Stinnesbeck, W., and
Adatte, T., 1997, Age, stratigraphy and deposi-
tion of near K/T siliciclastic deposits in Mexico:
Relation to bolide impact?: Geological Society
of America Bulletin, v. 109, p. 410–428, doi:
10.1130/0016-7606(1997)109<0410:ASADON
>2.3.CO;2.
Keller, G., Adatte, T., Stinnesbeck, W., Rebolledo-
Vieyra, M., Urrutia-Fucugauchi, J., Kramar,
U., and Stuben, D., 2004, Chicxulub impact
predates the K-T boundary mass extinction: Na-
tional Academy of Sciences Proceedings, v. 101,
p. 3753–3758, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0400396101.
Keller, G., Adatte, T., Berner, Z., Harting, M., Baum,
G., Prauss, M., Tantawy, A.-A., and Stuben, D.,
2007, Chicxulub impact predates K–T bound-
ary: New evidence from Brazos, Texas: Earth
and Planetary Science Letters, v. 255, p. 339–
356, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2006.12.026.
Keller, G., Adatte, T., Pardo, A., and Lopez-Oliva,
J., 2009, New evidence concerning the age
and biotic effects of the Chicxulub impact in
NE Mexico: Geological Society of London
Journal, v. 166, p. 393–411, doi: 10.1144/0016
-76492008-116.
Koeberl, C., 2007, The geochemistry and cosmo-
chemistry of impacts, in Davis, A., ed., Trea-
tise of geochemistry, Volume 1: Amsterdam,
Elsevier, p. 1.28.1−1.28.52, doi: 10.1016/B978
-008043751-4/00228-5.
McCave, I.N., Hall, I.R., and Bianchi, G.G., 2006,
Laser versus settling velocity differences in silt
grainsize measurements: Estimation of palaeo-
current vigor: Sedimentology, v. 53, p. 919–
928, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3091.2006.00783.x.
Officer, C.B., and Drake, C.L., 1983, The Cretaceous-
Tertiary transition: Science, v. 219, p. 1383–
1390, doi: 10.1126/science.219.4591.1383.
Pospichal, J.J., 1996, Calcareous nannofossils
and clastic sediments at the Cretaceous-Ter-
tiary boundary, northeastern Mexico: Geol-
ogy, v. 24, p. 255–258, doi: 10.1130/0091
-7613(1996)024<0255:CNACSA>2.3.CO;2.
Robinson, N., Ravizza, G., Coccioni, R., Peucker-
Ehrenbrink, B., and Norris, R., 2009, A high-
resolution marine 187Os/188Os record for the
late Maastrichtian: Distinguishing the chemi-
cal fingerprints of Deccan volcanism and the
KP impact event: Earth and Planetary Science
Letters, v. 281, p. 159–168, doi: 10.1016/j.
epsl.2009.02.019.
Schulte, P., Speijer, R., Mai, H., and Kontny, A.,
2006, The Cretaceous-Paleogene (K-P) bound-
ary at Brazos, Texas: Sequence stratigraphy,
depositional events and the Chicxulub impact:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 184, p. 77–109, doi:
10.1016/j.sedgeo.2005.09.021.
Schulte, P., Speijer, R.P., Brinkhuis, H., Kontny,
A., Claeys, P., Galeotti, S., and Smit, J., 2008,
Chicxulub impact predates K-T boundary:
New evidence from Brazos, Texas: Comment:
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 269,
p. 613–619, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2007.11.066.
Sheehan, P.M., and Fastovsky, D.E., 1992, Major
extinctions of land-dwelling vertebrates at the
Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary, eastern Mon-
tana: Geology, v. 20, p. 556–560.
Sigurdsson, H., D’Hondt, S., Arthur, M.A., Bralower,
T.J., Zachos, J.C., Fossen, M., and Chan-
nell, J.E.T., 1991, Glass from the Cretaceous-
Tertiary boundary in Haiti: Nature, v. 349,
p. 482–487.
Smit, J., Van Der Gaast, S., and Lustenhouwer, W.,
2004, Is the transition impact to post-impact
rock complete? Some remarks based on XRF
scanning, electron microprobe, and thin section
analyses of the Yaxcopoil-1 core in the Chicxu-
lub Crater: Meteoritics & Planetary Science,
v. 39, p. 1113–1126.
Thierstein, H.R., 1982, Terminal Cretaceous plank-
ton extinctions: A critical assessment, in Sil-
ver, L.T., and Schultz, P.H., eds., Geological
implications of impacts of large asteroids and
comets on the Earth: Geological Society of
America Special Paper 190, p. 385–399.
Yancey, T.E., 1996, Stratigraphy and depositional en-
vironments of the Cretaceous-Tertiary bound-
ary complex and basal section, Brazos River,
Texas: Gulf Coast Association of Geological
Societies Transactions, v. 46, p. 433–442.
Manuscript received 8 July 2009
Revised manuscript received 24 September 2009
Manuscript accepted 26 September 2009
Printed in USA
GEOLOGY, March 2010