Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgel20

Depositional mechanism of Fort Member

Sandstone (Early-Late Bathonian), Jaisalmer
Formation, Western Rajasthan: insights from
granulometric analysis

Faiz Ahmad , M. A. Quasim , A. H. M. Ahmad , S. M. Rehman & S. Asjad

To cite this article: Faiz Ahmad , M. A. Quasim , A. H. M. Ahmad , S. M. Rehman & S. Asjad
(2020): Depositional mechanism of Fort Member Sandstone (Early-Late Bathonian), Jaisalmer
Formation, Western Rajasthan: insights from granulometric analysis, Geology, Ecology, and
Landscapes, DOI: 10.1080/24749508.2020.1833642

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2020.1833642

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group on behalf of the International Water,
Air & Soil Conservation Society(INWASCON).

Published online: 19 Oct 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 88

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tgel20
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES
https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2020.1833642 INWASCON

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Depositional mechanism of Fort Member Sandstone (Early-Late Bathonian),

Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan: insights from granulometric analysis
a a
Faiz Ahmad , M. A. Quasim , A. H. M. Ahmada, S. M. Rehmanb and S. Asjada
a
Department of Geology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India; bDepartment of Computer Engineering, Aligarh Muslim University,
Aligarh, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Granulometric analysis is an imperative tool used to reveal the hydrodynamic conditions, mode Received 2 March 2020
of transportation and deposition of siliciclastic sediments. Forty-two samples of Fort Member Accepted 4 October 2020
Sandstone of the Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan were selected and studied with the KEYWORDS
help of detailed granulometric analysis which include both graphical as well as mathematical Granulometric analysis;
moment methods. Micro textures were recognized as chatter marks, curved and straight steps, hydrodynamic condition;
grooves, upturned plates in association with V impact pits and triangular solution pits suggest­ depositional environment;
ing the predominance of mechanical activities over the chemical dissolution. The analysis Fort Member; Jaisalmer
shows the sandstone is coarse-grained, very well sorted, very fine to fine skewed and very Formation
platykurtic to platykurtic in nature. The dominance coarse grains give an indication of high
energy level and almost stable as there is not much variation in the grain-size. Bivariate plots
show that the sediments were deposited in beach sub-environment which was also confirmed
by the linear and multigroup discriminant analysis. C-M plot shows that the sediments were
transported by rolling and log-log plot also confirms the transportation by the traction
processes. These features describe the sediments deposited by the fluvial process dominated
by tractive current pattern in a shallow marine depositional environments.

Introduction and geometry, grain-size analysis becomes an essential

tool for a better understanding of the depositional
Grain-size parameters are fundamental tool for identi­
environment as they are mostly dependent on the syn­
fying the sedimentary environments such as beach,
depositional processes (Reading, 1996).
dune and river and some other divisions of continental
The pericratonic Jaisalmer basin situated to the west of
shelf through graphic as well as mathematical moment
Aravalli axis on the western part of the Indian peninsula,
methods used along with other textural properties.
formed the eastern most part of the Indo-Arabian
Grain-size is the utmost important property of the
Geological Province (Pandey & Choudhary, 2007). The
sediments, affecting their entrainment, transport and
basin has attracted the attention of geologists and
deposition. Therefore, grain-size analysis offers signifi­
palaeontologists due to its rich record of well-preserved
cant evidences to the sediments provenance, transport
Jurassic to Tertiary fossils. Recently, the basin has also
history and depositional conditions (Ghaznavi et al.,
been proved its potential for oil and gas reserves and
2019; Quasim et al., 2020; Sahu, 1964; Visher, 1969).
categorized category-I (producing) basin by Directorate
Despite the usefulness of grain-size analysis in stu­
General of Hydrocarbons (DGH). Therefore, the
dies of siliciclastic sedimentary rocks, there are various
research on the sedimentary features of the Jaisalmer
limitations for grain-size parameters also. These limita­
Formation may understand the petroleum geology char­
tions include changes or subsequent modifications that
acteristics and tectonic evolution history in this area.
a framework particle undergoes when it is subjected to
The Jurassic Jaisalmer basin is predominantly
diagenesis (Ghaznavi et al., 2019; Ghosh & Chatterjee,
a carbonate facies and inter-bedded with calcareous sand­
1994). Irrespective of these restrictions, parameters of
stone and shale deposited under marginal marine to
grain-size analysis have been used successfully in pre­
occasional shelf lagoon conditions of deposition which
vious studies and proved to be useful in interpreting
has huge hydrocarbon generation potential and reservoir
provenance, mechanism of transportation and environ­
potential (Ahmad et al., 2020b; Pandey & Maurya, 2020).
ment of deposition (Ahmad et al., 2017a; Cheetham
Previous studies mainly focussed on the sedimentological
et al., 2008; Ghaznavi et al., 2019; Kanhaiya et al.,
attributes like tectono-provenance (Ahmad et al., 2019),
2017; Quasim et al., 2020; Kanhaiya & Singh, 2014;
diagenetic evolution (Ahmad et al., 2017b; Mahender &
Weltje & Prins, 2007). In aggregation with different
Banerji, 1990) and depositional environment (Ahmad
sedimentological factors like structures of sedimentary
et al., 2020a, 2017a; Bhat & Ahmad, 2013; Pandey et al.,
origin and their associations, palaeoflow, fossil content

CONTACT Faiz Ahmad faizgeology@gmail.com Department of Geology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India
© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of the International Water, Air & Soil Conservation Society(INWASCON).
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2 F. AHMAD ET AL.
2006, 2006b) but the research on the sedimentary hydro­
dynamic conditions of Fort Member Sandstone has not
started yet. Sandstone grain-size characteristics are of
great significance in the analysis of sedimentary hydro­
dynamic conditions (Ghaznavi et al., 2019; Ghosh &
Chatterjee, 1994; Quasim et al., 2020). Based on the
analysis of sandstone grain-size characteristics (both gra­
phical as well as mathematical moment methods) of the
Fort Member of the Jaisalmer Formation, Western
Rajasthan, the evolution history of sedimentary hydro­
dynamic conditions of the Fort Member Sandstone in
this region can be reconstructed.
Geological background
The Rajasthan shelf has been divided into four units
namely: the Jaisalmer basin, the Bikaner-Nagaur
basin, the Barmer-Sanchor basin and the Pokharan-
Nachana high but owing to continuous alteration of
tectonic setting and palaeogeographic conditions the
extent of these basins on Rajasthan shelf kept on
Figure 1. (a) Outline map of India depicting the location of the Jaisalmer basin; (b) tectonic map of the Jaisalmer basin (after
Biswas, 1982; Misra et al., 1993); (c) geological map of Jaisalmer basin showing outcrop of the Jaisalmer Formation, Western
Rajasthan (after Jodhawat & Kachhara, 2000).
changing through time. The Precambrian igneous
(Malani volcanics)/metamorphic rocks form the base­
ment for the later deposited sedimentary sequences of
Western Rajasthan Basin, but they are exposed in only
few locations around Pokhran, Jodhpur and Barmer.
The Jaisalmer basin covers entire district of
Jaisalmer in West Rajasthan and neighbouring
Kachchh basin in the south with depth of the base­
ment 10,000 m near the Indo-Pak border (Figure 1
(a)). It is a pericratonic basin positioned at the west of
the Aravalli axis on the western part of the Indian
craton with dip direction in the north-west. It repre­
sents the Tethyan margin during the Jurassic, when it
was located at about 23ᵒ south of the equator. On the
basis of geophysical investigations conducted by
ONGC, four geostructural units are found (Figure 1
(b)) which are Mari-Jaisalmer arch, the synclinal
Shahgarh sub-basin, the Kishangarh sub-basin and
the Miajlar sub-basin (Raghavendra Rao, 1972; Singh
et al., 2005; Sinha et al., 1993). Sedimentation in the
Jurassic Jaisalmer basin starts with widely spread

deltaic, fluvial or lacustrine sediments in the basal
Lathi Formation (Srivastava, 1966) followed by mar­
ginal marine sediments which in turn then followed by
a series of various non-marine, marginal marine and
fully marine sediments. Lithostratigraphically, these
deposits are classified into Jaisalmer, Baisakhi and
Bhadasar formations (Das Gupta, 1975; Pandey,
Fürsich, Sha et al., 2009; Pandey et al., 2006, 2005,
2006b). Geologically, the Jaisalmer basin is repre­
sented by a sequences of shale, siltstone, sandstone
and limestone.
The depositional settings in the Jaisalmer basin fluc­
tuate from fluvial/lagoonal, delta front, shoreface to
offshore environment with shifting water energy and
salinity (Ahmad et al., 2017a; Pandey et al., 2006,
2006b). Although based on lithostratigraphic studies,
it is revealed that there is cyclicity in sedimentation
present in all the formations but it is most prominent
and well displayed in the Jaisalmer Formation
(JaiKrishna, 1987; Pandey & Fürsich, 1994; Pandey
et al., 2009; Pandey et al., 2006, 2006b).
Jaisalmer Formation has been further classified
lithostratigraphically into the Hamira, Joyan, Fort,
Badabag, Kuldhar and Jajiya members in increasing
order (Figure 1(c)) (Das Gupta, 1975). Except for the
Phanerozoic outcrops overlying the Precambrian
basement in the eastern and southern parts, whole of
the basin is covered by sand dunes or sands of Thar
Desert. Pareek (1984) estimated the thickness of
Jaisalmer Formation as 300 m. The sub-surface thick­
ness as observed by drilling is more than 600 m (Das
Gupta, 1975).
The best exposure of studied Fort Member is found
along the Jaisalmer fort escarpments. It is widest in north­
ern part and get narrower progressively towards south. It
contains fine- to medium-grained sandstones, oolitic,
sandy, bioturbated and fossiliferous nature of limestones,
and cross-bedded sandy limestones (Mahender &
Banerji, 1990; Pandey & Dave, 1998; Pandey et al.,
2006). The sandstones are calcareous in nature and pos­
sess current bedding in upper part. The limestones are
yellowish brown in colour, compact and fossiliferous.
These limestones also have thin inter-beds of limestone
that possess brachiopod and mollusca shell fragments. It
contains various taxa of brachiopods, echinoids, gastro­
pods, corals, bryozoans and foraminifers. On the basis of
the stratigraphic position and inter-basinal correlation of
marker-beds (Pandey et al., 2009) the age of Fort Member
is interpreted as Early Bathonian to Middle/Late
Bathonian.
Materials and methodology
Three lithostratigraphic sections representing the
Fort Member of Jaisalmer Formation were measured
(Figure 2). Forty-two fresh samples of sandstone were
collected from the outcrop in Near Fort scarp, Shiv Madi
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 3
Darbar and Jaithawai road. Thin-sections were prepared
for these forty-two sandstone samples for their textural
analysis. On an average about 200–300 grains were
counted in each thin section following the method of
Chayes (1949). Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)
images were used for the identification of ultra-textures
present in the quartz grains of the Fort Member. Quartz
grains were visually examined using JEOL JSM-5800 LV
scanning electron microscope at University Sophisticated
Instrument Facility (USIF), AMU, Aligarh. Phi-scale pro­
posed by Krumbein (1934), was used and the size data
were grouped in half-phi scale intervals. Cumulative fre­
quency curves were plotted on a log probability scale.
Grain diameters in phi-unit that are represented by ϕ5,
ϕ16, ϕ25, ϕ50, ϕ75, ϕ84 and ϕ95 percentiles were ana­
lysed from the size frequency curves. Using these values
various statistical parameters are calculated like mean
size, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis. These
parameters were calculated using both the graphical
method as well as moment measures method.
According to calculations given by Krumbein and
Pettijohn (1938), Folk (1968, 1980), and McBride
(1971), these statistical parameters have been classified.
The mathematical method of moments used in the
present study was introduced by Krumbein and
Pettijohn (1938). Various bivariate plots are plotted
between these values to establish the interrelationships.
Linear Discriminate Analysis (LDA) was done to
interpret the depositional sub-environment using fol­
lowing formula after Sahu (1964):
Y1 = −3.5688 Mean +3.7016 (Standard
deviation)2 − 2.0766 Skewness +3.1135 Kurtosis
This formula is used to distinguish between aeolian
and beach sub-environment.
For beach sub-environment; Y1 > −2.7411
For aeolian sub-environment; Y1 < −2.7411
Y2 = 15.6534 Mean +65.7091 (Standard
Deviation)2 + 18.1071 Skewness +18.5043 Kurtosis
Y2 is used to delineate between beach and shallow-
marine environment.
For beach sub-environment Y2 < 65.36
For shallow-marine sub-environment Y2 � 65.36
Y3 = 0.2852 Mean −8.7604 (Standard
Deviation)2 − 4.8932 Skewness +0.0428 Kurtosis
It is used to distinguish between shallow-marine
and fluvial sub-environment.
For shallow-marine sub-environment Y3 > −7.4190
For fluvial sub-environment Y3 < −7.4190
Y4 = 0.7215 Mean +0.403 (Standard
2
Deviation) + 6.7322 Skewness +5.2927 Kurtosis
It is used to delineate between fluvial and marine
turbidity sub-environment.
For marine turbidity sub-environment Y > 10.00
For fluvial sub-environment Y < 10.00
Multigroup discriminant analysis (Sahu, 1983) was
carried out to differentiate between various deposi­
tional environments using the formula;
4 F. AHMAD ET AL.
Figure 2. Lithological succession showing the lithology of Fort Member of Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan.
V̅ 1 = 0.48048 Mean +0.06231 Standard Deviation
+0.40602 Skewness +0.44413 Kurtosis
V̅ 2 = 0.24523 Mean −0.45905 Standard Deviation
+0.15715 Skewness +0.83931 Kurtosis
Energy variation and fluidity factors are dependent
on different processes and the depositional environ­
ment (Sahu, 1964).
Results
Surface features on quartz sand grains
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) of quartz grains
has paved way for discrimination between various
sedimentary environments depending on their surface
textures (Krinsley & Donahue, 1968; Krinsley &
Doornkamp, 2011; Krinsley & Margolis, 1969). The
ultra-textures provide valuable details about the dif­
ferent processes which were operational during the
transportation and after the deposition of grains
(Krinsley & Funnell, 1965; Mahaney, 1998; Newsome
& Ladd, 1999) and the parameters have been set to
distinguish between the mechanical and chemical fea­
tures (Krinsley & Donahue, 1968; Rahman & Ahmed,
1996; Whalley & Krinsley, 1974). Surface textures of
quartz sand grains have also been used to identify the
provenance and mode of origin of various detrital
sediments. SEM analysis of quartz sand grains from
Fort Member Sandstone has shown various surface
features such as chatter marks, curved and straight
steps, grooves, upturned plates in association with
V impact pits and triangular solution pits.
Chatter marks are series of sub-parallel indenta­
tions which is formed when part of a grain skips across
another grain (Figure 3(a)). Grooves are caused by
drawing of sharp edge of a grain across another
(Krinsley & Margolis, 1969), they are further modified
by the fracture and solution activities (Figure 3(b)).
These quartz grains also show curved and straight
steps in association with silica precipitation (Figure 3
(c)). Small V-shaped indentations (Figure 3(d,f)) are
formed by grain to grain collision in an aqueous med­
ium (Krinsley & Margolis, 1969). Surfaces of the
quartz grains from the Fort Member Sandstone exhibit
silica precipitation features like irregular plates and
cavity filling. Furthermore, excess silica is pressed
over quartz grain surface in non-oriented patterns
(Figure 3(e)). It may be explained by the movement

Figure 3. Surface textures in quartz sand grains from Fort Member Sandstone as observed by SEM. (a) chatter Marks, (b) grooves,
(c) curved and straight steps, (d) upturned plate in association with V-shaped pits, (e) silica plastering association with triangular
pits and irregular plates, and (f) V-shaped pits.
of grains across one another under high pressure
(Krinsley & Doornkamp, 2011). On the basis of results
from SEM studies it is concluded that the studied
samples have been deposited in shallow marine envir­
onment as it is reworked by waves and tides to form
these beach sand deposits. The dominance of mechan­
ical activities over the chemical dissolution generally
reflects medium to high energy nearshore environ­
ments. Also the roughness of surfaces and edges of
some quartz grains in Figure 3(c,d) might reflect dif­
ferential chemical weathering that may be related to
differences in chemical resistance within the grains
(Krinsley & Doornkamp, 2011).
Frequency curves
Phi values are plotted against the frequency distribution
of each grain-size in the frequency curves. These curves
show modality or predominance of a particular size class.
These frequency curves are dominantly unimodal with
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 5
the distribution of curves around 0.4ϕ for FS samples
(Figure 4(a)) and distribution of curves around 0.35ϕ for
JS samples (Figure 4(b)) although few samples show
different frequency curve distribution around 0.5ϕ. This
indicates all of the samples are predominantly unimodal
in nature and have sediments of pure sand type without
any mixing of silt particles. The unimodality is also indi­
cative of more or less consistent depositional process
during the time of sediment settling.
In some of the samples (FS-11, JS 26, 27, 41, 42, 43)
bimodality can also be seen with samples showing
peaks at around 1.4ϕ (Figure 4(b)). The bimodality is
attributed to mixing of different size grains, variation
in velocity of depositional processes and the difference
in mode of transportation. Samples showing unimod­
ality and bimodality are shown in Figure 5(a,d).
Phi scales are plotted against the cumulative frequen­
cies (Figure 6), giving an idea about various modes of
sediment transportation, deposition and their impor­
tance in the genesis of sandstones. Sorting of the
6 F. AHMAD ET AL.

Figure 4. Grain-size distribution curves for the Fort Member Sandstone. (a) for FS samples and (b) for JS samples.

Figure 5. Four different types of textural attributes recognized based on the thin-section distribution of quartz grains (I-bimodal, II-
unequal bimodal, III-unimodal unequal, and IV-unimodal equal). (a) bimodal unequal quartz grains are showing pore spaces filled
by cementing materials (carbonate and iron); (b) bimodal equal quartz grains showing pore spaces filled by cementing materials
(carbonate and iron); (c) unimodal unequal can be attributed to moderate to well sorting, weak alteration of unstable grains and
a moderate degree of cementation and compaction. (d) unimodal equal are mainly found in well-sorted highly mature
quartzarenites.

Figure 6. Cumulative frequency curve showing trends of the Fort Member Sandstone. (a) for FS samples and (b) for JS samples.
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 7

samples can be obtained by the slope of middle portion
of the curve. Poor sorting is indicated by a broad and
gentle gradient of the curve which also indicates low
kinetic energy and velocity. A very steep slope, whereas,
is indicative of good sorting, high kinetic energy and
high velocity. All of the studied samples are coarse
grained, and based on the steepness of the gradient of
the cumulative frequency curves can be regarded as very
well sorted (Figure 6).
Statistical parameters
Graphical method
(1) Inclusive Graphic Median (ϕ50)-Median
corresponds to the 50 percentile, half of
the particles are coarser and the other half
are finer. Studied samples range from 0.12
to 0.34, with an average of 0.19 (Table 1).
Based on the data all of studied samples are
coarse grained.
(2) Graphic Mean Size (Mz)-Mean size is indicative
of the average particle size. In studied samples Mz
ranges from 0.04 to 0.11 with an average of 0.06
(Table 1). It implies that all of studied samples are
coarse-grained sands. There is minute variability
in the grain size of samples which make these
samples very well sorted.
(3) Standard Deviation (σ1)-It depicts the sorting or
uniformity of grains which in turn indicates the
prevailing energy conditions at the time of trans­
portation and deposition. Studied samples are
ranging from 0.09 to 0.24 with an average of 0.16
(Table 1) which indicate that all of the samples are
very well sorted which gives an indication of
smooth and constant current flow and velocity.
(4) Graphic Skewness (SK1)-Measures the degree to
which a cumulative curve approach symmetry in
terms of predominance of fine- or coarse –
grained fractions. The value of skewness in stu­
died samples range from 0.09 to 0.42 with an

Table 1. Statistical parameters of grain-size distribution in Fort Member Sandstone of Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan,
calculated by the graphical method. Φ50, Mz, σ1 in phi units.
Standard Verbal
S. no. Median (ᶲ50) Mean size (Mz) Verbal limit deviation (σ1) limit Skewness (Sk1) Verbal limit Kurtosis (KG) Verbal imit C M
JS-20 0.23 0.27 CS 0.21 VWS 0.29 FS 0.71 PK 995.16 852.63
JS-21 0.17 0.18 CS 0.14 VWS 0.20 FS 0.68 VPK 997.23 888.84
JS-22 0.22 0.25 CS 0.20 VWS 0.29 FS 0.68 VPK 997.23 858.57
JS-23 0.26 0.29 CS 0.22 VWS 0.24 FS 0.91 PK 997.23 835.09
JS-24 0.19 0.22 CS 0.19 VWS 0.33 VFS 0.56 VPK 999.31 876.61
JS-25 0.24 0.27 CS 0.20 VWS 0.24 FS 0.83 PK 996.54 846.75
JS-26 0.16 0.17 CS 0.14 VWS 0.22 FS 0.61 VPK 997.23 895.03
JS-27 0.27 0.31 CS 0.25 VWS 0.32 VFS 0.78 PK 996.54 829.32
JS-28 0.32 0.34 CS 0.23 VWS 0.13 FS 1.74 VLK 993.09 801.07
JS-29 0.21 0.24 CS 0.19 VWS 0.32 VFS 0.61 VPK 995.16 864.54
JS-30 0.32 0.33 CS 0.23 VWS 0.09 NSS 2.52 VLK 995.16 801.07
JS-31 0.2 0.22 CS 0.18 VWS 0.27 FS 0.66 VPK 993.78 870.55
JS-32 0.24 0.27 CS 0.21 VWS 0.29 FS 0.74 PK 997.23 846.75
JS-33 0.22 0.25 CS 0.20 VWS 0.30 FS 0.66 VPK 997.23 858.57
JS-34 0.2 0.24 CS 0.22 VWS 0.42 VFS 0.52 VPK 995.16 870.55
JS-35 0.25 0.29 CS 0.23 VWS 0.32 VFS 0.73 PK 997.23 840.90
JS-36 0.22 0.26 CS 0.20 VWS 0.33 VFS 0.62 VPK 995.16 858.57
JS-37 0.28 0.32 CS 0.24 VWS 0.27 FS 0.88 PK 995.16 823.59
JS-38 0.34 0.36 CS 0.24 VWS 0.13 FS 1.84 VLK 997.23 790.04
JS-39 0.22 0.26 CS 0.22 VWS 0.36 VFS 0.61 VPK 997.23 858.57
JS-40 0.2 0.23 CS 0.18 VWS 0.31 VFS 0.58 VPK 996.54 870.55
JS-41 0.13 0.13 CS 0.09 VWS 0.10 NSS 0.95 MK 999.31 913.83
JS-42 0.13 0.13 CS 0.09 VWS 0.10 NSS 1.00 MK 997.23 913.83
JS-43 0.12 0.13 CS 0.09 VWS 0.17 FS 0.52 VPK 997.23 920.19
JS-44 0.13 0.14 CS 0.09 VWS 0.11 FS 0.86 PK 998.61 913.83
JS-45 0.12 0.12 CS 0.09 VWS 0.09 NSS 0.99 MK 997.23 920.19
FS-1 0.13 0.14 CS 0.09 VWS 0.14 FS 0.69 VPK 993.78 913.83
FS-2 0.14 0.15 CS 0.11 VWS 0.16 FS 0.67 VPK 998.61 907.52
FS-3 0.15 0.17 CS 0.13 VWS 0.24 FS 0.53 VPK 998.61 901.25
FS-4 0.16 0.18 CS 0.13 VWS 0.23 FS 0.57 VPK 995.16 895.03
FS-5 0.14 0.15 CS 0.11 VWS 0.20 FS 0.55 VPK 999.31 907.52
FS-6 0.14 0.15 CS 0.11 VWS 0.17 FS 0.63 VPK 997.23 907.52
FS-7 0.13 0.14 CS 0.10 VWS 0.20 FS 0.50 VPK 999.31 913.83
FS-8 0.18 0.20 CS 0.16 VWS 0.29 FS 0.57 VPK 997.23 882.70
FS-9 0.15 0.17 CS 0.13 VWS 0.23 FS 0.54 VPK 999.31 901.25
FS-10 0.12 0.13 CS 0.09 VWS 0.14 FS 0.64 VPK 995.16 920.19
FS-11 0.15 0.17 CS 0.12 VWS 0.20 FS 0.60 VPK 997.23 901.25
FS-12 0.13 0.14 CS 0.10 VWS 0.16 FS 0.61 VPK 998.61 913.83
FS-13 0.14 0.15 CS 0.11 VWS 0.16 FS 0.67 VPK 997.23 907.52
FS-14 0.14 0.15 CS 0.09 VWS 0.40 VFS 0.24 VPK 999.31 907.52
FS-15 0.14 0.15 CS 0.10 VWS 0.14 FS 0.74 PK 998.61 907.52
FS-16 0.13 0.14 CS 0.10 VWS 0.19 FS 0.53 VPK 996.54 913.83
Avg. 0.19 0.21 CS 0.16 VWS 0.23 FS 0.76 PK 996.97 879.10
CS = Coarse Sand, VWS = Very Well Sorted, NSS = Near Symmetrical Skewed, FS = Fine Skewed, CSK = Coarse Skewed, VFS = Very Fine Skewed,
VPK = Very Platykurtic, PK = Platykurtic, MK = Mesokurtic, LK= Leptokurtic, VLK = Very Leptokurtic
8 F. AHMAD ET AL.

average of 0.23 (Table 1) which gives an indication
that most of the samples are fine skewed followed
by very fine skewed and nearly symmetrical
skewed.
(5) Graphic Kurtosis (KG)-Kurtosis is measure of
peakedness in a curve. Values of Kurtosis in
studied sample ranges from 0.24 to 2.52 with
an average of 0.76 (Table 1). Peakedness is
mainly dominated by very platykurtic beha­
viour which indicates a thinner than normal
tail, followed by platykurtic, very leptokurtic
which indicates a thicker than normal tail and
mesokurtic behaviour which corresponds to
equal thickness throughout the curve.
Mathematical moment method
(1) 1st Moment-Mean (x̅ )-In studied samples the
values of mean ranges from 0.29 to 0.6 with an
average value of 0.42 (Table 2). These values
indicate that all of studied samples are coarse
grained.
(2) 2nd Moment-Standard Deviation (σϕ)-Its value
in studied samples range from 0.14 to 0.32 with
an average of 0.24 (Table 2). It is a clear indica­
tion of grains being very well sorted which is
also an indication of uniform energy condition
prevailing at the time of deposition.
(3) 3rd Moment-Skewness (SKϕ)-The values of
skewness in studied samples range from −0.09
to 2.77 with an average of 1.10 (Table 2). The
samples are dominated equally by very fine
skewed and fine skewed grains followed by
near symmetrical skewed grains and coarse
skewed grains.
(4) 4th Moment-Kurtosis (Kϕ)-The value of kurtosis
ranges from 0.33 to 9.49 with an average of 3.38
(Table 2). Peakedness is dominated by platykur­
tic behaviour with more than half of the samples
showing the same. It is then followed by meso­
kurtic and leptokurtic behaviours in equal mea­
sure and very platykurtic and very leptokurtic
behaviours.

Table 2. Statistical parameters of grain-size distribution in the Fort Member Sandstone of Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan,
calculated by the moment method.
Σ f(m− x̅ φ) Σ f(m Σ f(m 1st Verbal 2nd Verbal 3rd Verbal 4th Verbal
S. no. Σ fm 2 − x̅ φ)3 − x̅ φ)4 moment limit moment imit moment limit moment limit
JS-20 50 7.34 0.83 1.07 0.5 CS 0.27 VWS 0.42 NSS 1.99 PK
JS-21 40.44 5.33 1.02 0.47 0.4 CS 0.23 VWS 0.83 FS 1.68 VPK
JS-22 48.23 7.4 1.17 1.19 0.48 CS 0.27 VWS 0.58 FS 2.18 PK
JS-23 52.85 7.77 0.71 1.27 0.53 CS 0.28 VWS 0.33 NSS 2.1 PK
JS-24 46.38 7.69 1.79 1.57 0.46 CS 0.28 VWS 0.84 FS 2.66 PK
JS-25 49.73 6.97 0.85 1.39 0.5 CS 0.26 VWS 0.46 NSS 2.86 PK
JS-26 39.94 5.86 1.71 1.1 0.4 CS 0.24 VWS 1.2 FS 3.2 MK
JS-27 55.97 10.06 1.84 2.68 0.56 CS 0.32 VWS 0.58 FS 2.64 PK
JS-28 57.15 7.63 0.19 1.28 0.57 CS 0.28 VWS 0.09 CSK 2.2 PK
JS-29 47.87 6.98 0.89 0.93 0.48 CS 0.26 VWS 0.48 NSS 1.91 PK
JS-30 56.3 6.87 0.17 0.9 0.56 CS 0.26 VWS −0.9 CSK 1.91 PK
JS-31 45.5 6.57 1.2 1.24 0.45 CS 0.26 VWS 0.71 FS 2.88 PK
JS-32 50.94 7.77 0.98 1.3 0.51 CS 0.28 VWS 0.45 FS 2.16 PK
JS-33 49.01 7.03 0.74 0.91 0.49 CS 0.26 VWS 0.4 NSS 1.84 PK
JS-34 48.65 9.11 2.45 2.31 0.48 CS 0.3 VWS 0.89 FS 2.78 PK
JS-35 53.49 9.06 1.46 1.95 0.53 CS 0.3 VWS 0.54 FS 2.38 PK
JS-36 49.47 7.67 1.15 0.19 0.49 CS 0.28 VWS 0.54 FS 0.33 VPK
JS-37 56.14 9.22 1.17 1.99 0.56 CS 0.3 VWS 0.42 NSS 2.33 PK
JS-38 59.96 8.51 0.42 1.74 0.6 CS 0.29 VWS 0.17 NSS 2.4 PK
JS-39 50.65 8.67 1.68 1.85 0.5 CS 0.29 VWS 0.67 FS 2.47 PK
JS-40 45.42 6.04 0.55 0.41 0.45 CS 0.24 VWS 0.37 NSS 1.14 VPK
JS-41 32.1 3.04 1.09 0.48 0.32 CS 0.17 VWS 2.04 VFS 5.2 LK
JS-42 32.02 3.01 1.08 0.48 0.32 CS 0.17 VWS 2.07 VFS 5.28 LK
JS-43 31.13 2.69 1.01 0.45 0.31 CS 0.16 VWS 2.29 VFS 6.29 LK
JS-44 31.99 3 1.08 0.48 0.31 CS 0.17 VWS 2.07 VFS 5.32 LK
JS-45 29.74 2.14 0.87 0.39 0.29 CS 0.14 VWS 2.77 VFS 8.66 VLK
FS-1 35.73 7.7 5.7 5.63 0.36 CS 0.27 VWS 2.67 VFS 9.49 VLK
FS-2 35.27 4.08 1.2 0.52 0.35 CS 0.2 VWS 1.46 VFS 3.13 MK
FS-3 40.04 6.65 2.72 2.35 0.4 CS 0.26 VWS 1.58 VFS 5.32 LK
FS-4 39.84 5.62 1.49 0.89 0.39 CS 0.24 VWS 1.12 FS 2.82 PK
FS-5 36.53 4.44 1.19 0.52 0.36 CS 0.21 VWS 1.28 FS 2.63 PK
FS-6 35.7 3.67 1.2 0.52 0.36 CS 0.2 VWS 1.39 VFS 2.95 PK
FS-7 34.43 3.96 1.36 0.69 0.34 CS 0.2 VWS 1.73 VFS 4.41 LK
FS-8 43.83 4.14 1.53 1.15 0.44 CS 0.26 VWS 0.88 FS 2.55 PK
FS-9 38.88 4.06 1.53 0.89 0.39 CS 0.23 VWS 1.22 FS 3.06 MK
FS-10 31.08 3.31 1.26 0.72 0.31 CS 0.17 VWS 2.6 VFS 8.81 VLK
FS-11 37.69 4.73 1.16 0.51 0.37 CS 0.21 VWS 1.13 FS 2.28 PK
FS-12 32.86 2.86 1.13 0.5 0.33 CS 0.18 VWS 1.88 VFS 4.55 LK
FS-13 35.22 5.39 1.2 0.52 0.35 CS 0.2 VWS 1.47 VFS 3.15 MK
FS-14 35.49 6.73 1.2 0.52 0.35 CS 0.2 VWS 1.42 VFS 3.03 MK
FS-15 34.86 3.97 1.19 0.52 0.35 CS 0.2 VWS 1.52 VFS 3.31 MK
FS-16 33.93 4.2 1.18 0.51 0.34 CS 0.19 VWS 1.68 VFS 3.82 MK
Avg. 42.68 5.93 1.29 1.12 0.42 CS 0.24 VWS 1.1 FS 3.38 MK
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 9

Discussion and very well sorted (Figure 7(a)). The clustering of

Interrelationship of textural parameters
To demarcate different depositional environments,
the combination of several textural parameters in
the form of bivariant plots has been used (Friedman,
1979). The basis behind these plots is the assump­
tion that statistical parameters reliably reflect varia­
tions in the fluid flow mechanism of sediment
transportation and deposition (Sutherland & Lee,
1994). Various workers supposed that these plots
can serve as a reliable tool for delineating processes
of different environment of sedimentation (Martins,
2003; Srivastava et al., 2010, 2012; Srivastava &
Mankar, 2009; Sutherland & Lee, 1994).
The bivariate plot between mean size and standard
deviation shows the samples clustered at the centre of
the curve denoting the samples to be coarse grained
the samples in a narrow region is indicative of very less
mixing of sediments. This type of curve shows that
there is minute difference between the grain sizes and
hence the studied samples are very well sorted.
The plot between skewness and standard deviation
(Figure 7(b)) helps to differentiate river sediments
from beach sediments (Flemming, 2007; Friedman,
1967; Friedman, 1961). A symmetrical curve is
obtained in two cases (1) unimodal sample with
good sorting, or (2) equal mixtures of the two modes
which have the poorest possible sorting (Folk & Ward,
1957). Studied samples are very well sorted and posi­
tively skewed showing the unimodal behaviour.
The trend between mean size and skewness is sinusoi­
dal (Figure 7(c)). The pure sand mode occurs by itself
produces a symmetrical size curve, but addition of
increasing quantities of gravel mode imparts negative

Figure 7. Bivariate plots showing the placement of present samples in the model plot as proposed by Folk and Ward (1957). (a)
mean grain size vs standard deviation; (b) skewness vs standard deviation, (c) mean grain size vs skewness; (d) standard deviation
vs kurtosis; (e) mean grain size vs kurtosis; and (f) skewness vs kurtosis.
10 F. AHMAD ET AL.
skewness. Positive skewness is shown when coarser mode
of the sediment are more dominant (Folk & Ward, 1957).
The plot shows that all of the samples are positively
skewed, coarse-grained and the trend of the curve is
close to sinusoidal. River sands are generally positively
skewed while coarse-grained river sand can be either
positively or negatively skewed (Friedman, 1961). Based
on this, studied samples indicate river sand and deposited
in shallow marine environment.
According to Folk and Ward (1957), poor sorting is
found in the bimodal mixtures with equal amounts of
the two modes, and these two will also have lowest
kurtosis, while, the highest kurtosis is associated with
the samples which have one dominant and one very
subordinate mode and moderate sorting. Unimodal
sediments produce normal kurtosis and very well-
sorted samples (Folk & Ward, 1957). Studied samples
fall in the last category, i.e. these are unimodal, have
normal kurtosis and are very well sorted (Figure 7(d)).
The plot of mean against kurtosis (Figure 7(e))
shows mixing of two or more size classes of sediment
which affects the sorting of central and tail part of the
curve (Flemming, 2007; Molinaroli et al., 2009).
According to Folk and Ward (1957), the presence of
only one mode results in nearly normal curve, i.e. KG
= 1.0. Addition of very small amount (3–10%) of
another mode results in poorer sorting in the tail and
Figure 8. Bivariate plots of various parameters. (a) median vs standard deviation (after Moiola & Weiser, 1968; Stewart, 1958); (b)
mean size vs standard deviation (after Friedman, 1961; Moiola & Weiser, 1968) and (c) skewness vs standard deviation (after
Friedman, 1967).
better in the centre making the curve very leptokurtic
with KG >1.0. Very platykurtic behaviour is obtained
when two modes are present in sub-equal amount
(anything from 25–75% to 75–25%). Most of studied
samples are showing very platykurtic to platykurtic
behaviour with three samples showing mesokurtic
and further three showing very leptokurtic with con­
stant coarse grain. It is an indication that most of
studied samples are dominated by coarse sand and in
case of bimodal sediments the second mode is present
in sub-ordinate amount.
Skewness vs kurtosis properties of samples depend on
the proportions of the two modes present, generally pure
sand mode gives normal curve, whereas, by addition of
other modes it is disturbed (Folk & Ward, 1957). Studied
samples mainly fall below the shaded zone indicating the
dominance of very platykurtic to platykurtic grains with
some samples mesokurtic to very leptokurtic behaviour.
All the studied samples are positively skewed giving an
indication that sand is dominant constituent with sub-
ordinate amount of silt (Figure 7(f)).
Bivariate grain-size parameters
Statistical parameters achieved by graphical as well as
moment methods were plotted in various bivariate
diagrams, to know the environmental conditions that
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 11

Figure 9. Linear discriminate function analysis plot for Fort Member Sandstone. (a) Y1 vs Y2 discriminates between beach and
aeolian environment; (b) Y2 and Y3 between beach and shallow marine sub-environment; and (c) Y3 vs Y4 discriminates between
marine turbidity and fluvial environment.

were present at that time. To differentiate between Linear discriminate analysis

river, beach and coastal dune sub-environments,
Linear discriminant function analysis is a vital tool in
Friedman (1961), and Moiola and Weiser (1968),
identifying the environment at the time of sediment
plotted mean size versus standard deviation. The
deposition. Sahu (1964) stated that there is definite
bivariate is most useful in differentiating between
correlation between fluctuations in energy and fluidity
beach and river sands and river and coastal dune
and different operating processes and environment in
sands and the differentiation works well regardless of
which sediments are deposited. In this study both
whether quarter, half or whole phi data are used
linear and multi-group discriminant function analysis
(Moiola & Weiser, 1968).
(Sahu, 1964, 1983) used to further distinguish deposi­
Stewart (1958) distinguished between river and
tional environments.
wave process by plotting median grain size vs stan­
Y1 vs Y2 plot by graphical method indicates that all of
dard deviation. The plots of both graphical as
studied samples fall strictly in beach littoral sub-
well as moment analysis indicate that all of the
environment (Figure 9(a)), and by moment method,
samples were deposited in beach sub-environment
the samples are scattered in the fields of beach shallow
(Figure 8(a)).
agitated and beach littoral sub-environment with dom­
Standard deviation vs mean size diagram using
inance of beach shallow agitated sub-
graphical method, indicates the beach sub-
environment (Table 3). It is a clear indication that
environment and same in the case with plot of
studied samples are exclusively deposited by beach
moment measures method, i.e. it also cluster in the
and shallow marine processes with no indication of
beach sub-environment (Figure 8(b)).
aeolian processes.
Standard deviation vs skewness (Friedman, 1967;
The plot Y2 vs Y3 is used to differentiate between
Friedman, 1961) was plotted to distinguish beach and
fluvial and shallow marine sub-environments, the
river sub-environment. Graphical data show the sam­
values obtained by graphical method are clustered
ples to be exclusively of beach sub-environment while
exclusively in fluvial beach environment, the data
the moment data is showing it to be dominated by river
obtained by moment analysis are quite scattered
sub-environment while some of the samples also fall in
(Figure 9(b)). It is dominated by shallow marine
the beach sub-environment (Figure 8(c)).
agitated environment with some samples falling
12 F. AHMAD ET AL.

Table 3. Linear discriminate function analysis to interpret variation in energy and fluidity factors. Environmental symbols: B-beach,
SM-shallow marine, F-fluvial, T-marine turbidity current.
By graphical method By moment method
S. no. Y1 Env. Y2 Env. Y3 Env. Y4 Env. Y1 Env. Y2 Env. Y3 Env. Y4 Env.
JS-20 1.50 B 22.52 B −1.75 SM 5.81 F 3.54 B 57.05 B −2.47 SM 13.75 T
JS-21 1.56 B 18.24 B −1.09 SM 4.98 F 1.75 B 55.85 B −4.34 SM 14.79 T
JS-22 1.38 B 21.55 B −1.72 SM 5.62 F 3.77 B 63.15 B −3.25 SM 15.82 T
JS-23 2.19 B 25.76 B −1.55 SM 6.52 F 4.04 B 58.28 B −2.06 SM 13.75 T
JS-24 0.97 B 19.69 B −1.88 SM 5.27 F 4.66 B 76.78 SM −4.55 SM 20.10 T
JS-25 1.94 B 23.52 B −1.46 SM 6.07 F 6.13 B 73.52 SM −2.58 SM 18.62 T
JS-26 1.31 B 17.30 B −1.21 SM 4.76 F 5.50 B 90.99 SM −6.13 SM 25.33 T
JS-27 1.67 B 25.86 B −2.07 SM 6.39 F 5.03 B 74.85 SM −3.46 SM 18.32 T
JS-28 4.95 B 39.56 B −0.99 SM 10.17 T 4.86 B 56.41 B −0.87 SM 12.69 T
JS-29 1.12 B 20.60 B −1.84 SM 5.43 F 3.18 B 55.99 B −2.72 SM 13.71 T
JS-30 7.47 B 53.29 B −0.74 SM 14.05 T 6.63 B 32.25 B 4.05 SM 4.48 F
JS-31 1.37 B 20.09 B −1.53 SM 5.34 F 5.69 B 77.63 SM −3.81 SM 20.37 T
JS-32 1.60 B 23.08 B −1.73 SM 5.92 F 3.98 B 61.25 B −2.65 SM 14.86 T
JS-33 1.33 B 21.55 B −1.78 SM 5.62 F 3.15 B 53.40 B −2.33 SM 12.81 T
JS-34 0.69 B 21.30 B −2.41 SM 5.62 F 4.87 B 80.98 SM −4.89 SM 21.09 T
JS-35 1.53 B 24.24 B −1.98 SM 6.11 F 4.39 B 68.03 SM −3.18 SM 16.65 T
JS-36 1.13 B 21.11 B −1.90 SM 5.53 F −1.89 B 28.71 B −3.18 SM 5.77 F
JS-37 2.05 B 26.51 B −1.79 SM 6.59 F 4.45 B 65.40 SM −2.58 SM 15.60 T
JS-38 5.27 B 41.98 B −1.03 SM 10.73 T 5.18 B 62.41 B −1.29 SM 14.31 T
JS-39 1.07 B 22.10 B −2.13 SM 5.72 F 4.40 B 71.19 SM −3.77 SM 17.98 T
JS-40 1.04 B 19.54 B −1.76 SM 5.22 F 1.16 B 38.62 B −2.14 SM 8.87 F
JS-41 2.64 B 20.69 B −0.51 SM 5.74 F 9.63 B 140.07 SM −9.92 F 41.50 T
JS-42 2.78 B 21.44 B −0.49 SM 5.95 F 9.80 B 142.09 SM −10.06 F 42.12 T
JS-43 1.13 B 13.78 B −0.87 SM 3.91 F 12.37 B 164.39 SM −11.07 F 48.94 T
JS-44 2.34 B 19.07 B −0.54 SM 5.30 F 9.96 B 142.68 SM −10.07 F 42.33 T
JS-45 2.78 B 20.97 B −0.43 SM 5.85 F 18.50 B 216.23 SM −13.27 F 64.70 T
FS-1 1.74 B 16.49 B −0.70 SM 4.60 F 21.31 B 234.38 SM −13.19 F 68.49 T
FS-2 1.62 B 16.68 B −0.83 SM 4.64 F 4.69 B 92.46 SM −7.26 SM 26.66 T
FS-3 1.02 B 16.03 B −1.29 SM 4.47 F 11.11 B 137.76 SM −7.98 F 39.11 T
FS-4 1.18 B 16.62 B −1.22 SM 4.60 F 4.57 B 82.35 SM −5.75 SM 22.77 T
FS-5 1.19 B 15.45 B −1.06 SM 4.33 F 3.60 B 80.38 SM −6.43 SM 22.81 T
FS-6 1.47 B 16.21 B −0.90 SM 4.51 F 4.29 B 88.02 SM −6.92 SM 25.25 T
FS-7 1.02 B 14.31 B −1.05 SM 4.06 F 7.98 B 120.88 SM −8.53 F 35.25 T
FS-8 1.07 B 18.41 B −1.59 SM 4.99 F 4.24 B 74.45 SM −4.66 SM 19.77 T
FS-9 1.08 B 16.09 B −1.25 SM 4.48 F 5.03 B 88.29 SM −6.19 SM 24.71 T
FS-10 1.58 B 15.55 B −0.73 SM 4.37 F 19.39 B 216.85 SM −12.51 F 64.37 T
FS-11 1.32 B 16.54 B −1.09 SM 4.58 F 2.88 B 71.34 SM −5.71 SM 19.96 T
FS-12 1.46 B 15.46 B −0.81 SM 4.33 F 8.02 B 125.53 SM −9.19 F 36.99 T
FS-13 1.62 B 16.68 B −0.83 SM 4.64 F 4.73 B 93.01 SM −7.31 SM 26.84 T
FS-14 −0.23 B 12.88 B −2.00 SM 3.97 F 4.49 B 89.89 SM −7.07 SM 25.87 T
FS-15 1.90 B 17.71 B −0.73 SM 4.91 F 5.09 B 96.88 SM −7.55 F 28.02 T
FS-16 1.12 B 14.53 B −0.99 SM 4.11 F 6.27 B 108.80 SM −8.28 F 31.79 T

into fluvial beach and one sample is also found to
fall in shallow marine beach environment (Table 3).
Y3 vs Y4 plot shows that the most of studied sam­
ples fall in the turbidity current/shallow marine envir­
onment and three samples found to be in the field of
fluvial/shallow marine environment by graphical
method. The moment analysis data shows a very scat­
tered plot, mostly dominated by fluvial/shallow mar­
ine and fluvial environments and three samples have
plotted in turbidity current/shallow marine environ­
ment (Figure 9(c)).
Multigroup discriminate analysis
Multigroup discriminant analysis has been used to dif­
ferentiate between various depositional environments
(Sahu, 1983). Eigen vectors V̅ 1 and V̅ 2 were calculated
and plotted on the standard diagram of (Sahu, 1983)
(Figure 10). Textural parameters were used to identify
five depositional environments-dune, river, beach,
shallow marine and turbidity. The plot of studied sam­
ples concluded that all samples fall exclusively in beach
environment which is a reflection of deposition by the
rivers and subsequent sorting by the wave action.
C-M plot
Passega (1957) introduced the use of C-M plot to
analyse the hydrodynamic forces that were opera­
tional during the deposition of sediments. This dia­
gram was plotted by the combination of coarsest
grain in the sample, C (in microns) and M (Median
in microns) on log probability curve. Generally the
grain-size of clastic sediment defines the hydraulic
energy condition of the environment (Kalicki, 2000;
Molinaroli et al., 2009; Le Roux & Rojas, 2007). The
plot of studied samples on the C-M plot examined
that the studied detritus were transported by rolling
which is an indication of high energy conditions
(Figure 11).

Figure 10. Multigroup discriminant diagram after Sahu (1983)
Figure 11. C-M plot to determine depositional mechanisms (after Passega, 1957).
Log normal distribution curve
Log probability curves were used to distinguish between
the different modes of transport of sediments within
a depositional medium (Visher, 1969). It is the repre­
sentation of cumulative grain-size distribution on
a probability plot. The importance of these data is that
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 13
it do not show a single line but more than one straight
lines. Every segment of line depicts a different mode of
transportation like traction bed load (> 1.0 mm), salta­
tion (0.75–1.0 mm) and suspension (<0.1 mm). The
studied plot shows that the transportation of sediment
by the traction processes (Figure 12).
14 F. AHMAD ET AL.

Figure 12. Log probability curves showing the trend of various modes of transportation (after Visher, 1969).

Conclusions related to differences in chemical resistance

within the grains.
This study once again proved the importance of grain-
(2) The cumulative frequency percentage curves and
size analysis of sandstone in depicting the depositional
grain-size statistics of studied samples are classi­
environments and processes that were functional at
fied as coarse-grained and mainly have unimodal
the time of the deposition and were further supported
distribution with some of the samples also show­
by surface textural analysis. The following conclusions
ing bi-modality. The predominance of unimodal
are drawn from this study-
nature of sediments specifies pure sand without
any mixing. The value of mean grain-size indi­
(1) SEM studies indicating the grains to be depos­
cates that the energy conditions of the depositing
ited in shallow marine environments reworked
agent was high; however, the presence of unim­
by waves and tides. The dominance of mechan­
odal nature of the sediments with minor bimod­
ical activities over the chemical dissolution gen­
ality suggests the consistent energy levels of
erally reflects medium to high energy nearshore
depositing medium.
environments. The roughness of surfaces and
(3) The average sorting of all the sandstone 0.16
edges of some quartz grains might reflect dif­
represents very well-sorted grains, which are
ferential chemical weathering that may be
dominantly very fine to fine skewed and show

mainly very platykurtic to platykurtic beha­
viour with some samples also showing meso­
kurtic and leptokurtic behaviour.
(4) Bivariate plots concluded that all these sediments
are deposited in beach sub-environment mainly
by river processes. The linear and multigroup
discriminant analyses also indicates beach envir­
onment for deposition of these sediments.
C-M plot shows the sediments to be transported
by the process of rolling and log-log plot shows the
dominance of traction processes. The sediments
were mainly in traction and saltation before being
deposited in a shallow marine condition.
Acknowledgements
The authors are very thankful to the Chairperson,
Department of Geology (A.M.U., Aligarh) for providing
the necessary facilities. The authors are grateful to Ms.
Sadia Khanam and Ms. Aashna Javed (Research Scholars,
Sedimentology Lab, Department of Geology, A.M.U.) for
helping in carrying out the required calculations.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
ORCID
Faiz Ahmad http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2301-1760
M. A. Quasim http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0081-1906
References
Ahmad, F., Ahmad, A. H. M., & Quasim, M. A. (2017b).
Diagenetic Features of Jurassic Fort Member Sandstone,
Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan. Journal of the
Geological Society of India, 90(3), 273–282. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12594-017-0715-7
Ahmad, F., Quasim, M. A., & Ahmad, A. H. M. (2020a).
Lithofacies characteristics and depositional environment
interpretations of the Middle Jurassic Fort Member rocks,
Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan, India. Journal
of Sedimentary Environments, 5(3), 355–373. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s43217-020-00023-6
Ahmad, F., Quasim, M. A., & Ahmad, A. H. M. (2020b).
Microfacies and diagenetic overprints in the limestones of
Middle Jurassic Fort Member (Jaisalmer Formation),
Western Rajasthan, India: Implications for the deposi­
tional environment, cyclicity, and reservoir quality.
Geological Journal, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/gj.3945
Ahmad, F., Quasim, M. A., Ahmad, A. H. M.,
Ghaznavi, A. A., Khan, Z., & Albaroot, M. (2019).
Factors influencing Detrital Mineralogy and
Tectono-provenance of Fort Member Sandstone,
Jaisalmer Formation, Western Rajasthan, India. Journal
of the Geological Society of India, 93(4), 392–398. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12594-019-1193-x
Ahmad, F., Quasim, M. A., Ghaznavi, A. A., Khan, Z., &
Ahmad, A. H. M. (2017a). Depositional environment of
the Fort Member of the Jurasic Jaisalmer Formation
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 15
(western Rajasthan, India), as revealed from lithofacies
and grain-size analysis. Geologica Acta, 15(3), 153–167.
https://doi.org/10.1344/GeologicaActa2017.15.3.1
Bhat, G. M., & Ahmad, A. H. M. (2013). Temporal facies
and diagenetic evolution of the mixed siliciclastic-
carbonate Jajiya Member (Callovian–Oxfordian),
Jaisalmer Formation, West India. Volumina Jurassica,
11(11), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1306/03B5A976-
16D1-11D7-8645000102C1865D.
Biswas, S. K. (1982). Rift basins in western margin of India
and their hydrocarbon prospects with special reference to
Kutch Basin. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, 66(10), 1497–1513. https://doi.org/10.1306/
03B5A976-16D1-11D7-8645000102C1865D.
Chayes, F. (1949). A simple point counter for thin-section
analysis. The American Mineralogist, Journal of the
Mineralogical Society of America, 34(1–2), 1–11.
Cheetham, M. D., Keene, A. F., Bush, R. T., Sullivan, L. A., &
Erskine, W. D. (2008). A comparison of grain-size analy­
sis methods for sand-dominated fluvial sediments.
Sedimentology, 55(6), 1905–1913. https://doi.org/10.
1111/j.1365-3091.2008.00972.x
Das Gupta, S. K. (1975). A revision of the Mesozoic-Tertiary
stratigraphy of the Jaisalmer Basin, Rajasthan. Indian
Journal of Earth Sciences, 2(1), 77–94.
Flemming, B. W. (2007). The influence of grain-size analysis
methods and sediment mixing on curve shapes and tex­
tural parameters: Implications for sediment trend
analysis. Sedimentary Geology, 202(3), 425–435. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2007.03.018
Folk, R. L., (1968). Bimodal super mature sandstones:
Product of the desert floor. In: Proceedings of the 23rd
International Geological Congress, Prague, 8, 9–32
Folk, R. L. (1980). Petrology of sedimentary rocks. Hemphill
publishing company.
Folk, R. L., & Ward, W. C. (1957). Brazos River bar, a study
in the significance of grain size parameters. Journal of
Sedimentary Research, 27(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.
1306/74D70646-2B21-11D7-8648000102C1865D
Friedman, G. M. (1961). Distinction between dune, beach,
and river sands from their textural characteristics. Journal
of Sedimentary Research, 31(4), 514–529. https://doi.org/
10.1306/74D70BCD-2B21-11D7-8648000102C1865D.
Friedman, G. M. (1967). Dynamic processes and statistical
parameters compared for size frequency distribution of
beach and river sands. Journal of Sedimentary Research,
37(2), 327–354. https://doi.org/10.1306/74D716CC-
2B21-11D7-8648000102C1865D.
Friedman, G. M. (1979). Differences in size distributions of
populations of particles among sands of various origins:
Addendum to IAS Presidential Address. Sedimentology, 26
(6), 859–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1979.
tb00979.x
Ghaznavi, A. A., Quasim, M. A., Ahmad, A. H. M., &
Ghosh, S. K. (2019). Granulometric and facies analysis
of Middle–Upper Jurassic rocks of Ler Dome, Kachchh,
western India: An attempt to reconstruct the depositional
environment. Geologos, 25(1), 13–35. https://doi.org/10.
2478/logos-2019-0005
Ghosh, S. K., & Chatterjee, B. K. (1994). Depositional
mechanisms as revealed from grain-size measures of the
Palaeoproterozoic Kolhan siliciclastics, Keonjhar District,
Orissa, India. Sedimentary Geology, 89(3–4), 181–196.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0037-0738(94)90093-0
Jodhawat, R. L., & Kachhara, R. P. (2000). Modiolus zonation of
the Jaisalmer Formation, Rajasthan. Proceedings 16th Indian
Colloquium on Micropalaeontology and Stratigraphy, Oil and
16 F. AHMAD ET AL.
Natural Gas Corporation Bulletin, 37(1), 207–211. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.2164-0947.1969.tb02929.x
Kalicki, T. (2000). Grain size of the overbank deposits as
carriers of paleogeographical information. Quaternary
International, 72(1), 107–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S1040-6182(00)00026-4
Kanhaiya, S., Singh, B. P., & Srivastava, V. K. (2017). Surface
textures of detrital quartz grains derived from
Bundelkhand granite in the Khurar River, central India.
Geo-spatial technology and Earth resources: Publishing
House for Science and Technology.
Krinsley, D., & Margolis, S. (1969). Section of geological
sciences: A study of quartz sand grain surface textures
with the scanning electron microscope. Transactions of
the New York Academy of Sciences. 31(5), 457–477.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2164-0947.1969.tb02929.x.
Krinsley, D. H., & Donahue, J. (1968). Environmental inter­
pretation of sand grain surface textures by electron
microscopy. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 79(6),
743–748. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1968)79[743:
EIOSGS]2.0.CO;2
Krinsley, D. H., & Doornkamp, J. C. (2011). Atlas of quartz
sand surface textures. In Cambridge University Press.
Krinsley, D. H., & Funnell, B. M. (1965). Environmental
history of quartz sand grains from the Lower and Middle
Pleistocene of Norfolk, England. Quarterly Journal of the
Geological Society, 121(1–4), 435–456. https://doi.org/10.
1144/gsjgs.121.1.0435
Krishna, J. (1987). An overview of the Mesozoic stratigraphy
of Kachchh and Jaisalmer basins. Journal of the
Palaeontological Society of India, 32, 136–149.
Krumbein, W. C. (1934). Size frequency distributions of
sediments. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 4(2), 65–77.
https://doi.org/10.1306/D4268EB9-2B26-11D7-
8648000102C1865D
Krumbein, W. C., & Pettijohn, F. J. (1938). Manual of
sedimentary petrology. Appleton-century-crofts. 549.
Le Roux, J. P., & Rojas, E. M. (2007). Sediment transport
patterns determined from grain size parameters: Overview
and state of the art. Sedimentary Geology, 202(3), 473–488.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2007.03.014
Mahaney, W. C. (1998). Scanning electron microscopy of
Pleistocene sands from Yamal and Taz peninsulas, Ob River
estuary, north western Siberia. Quaternary International, 45,
49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1040-6182(97)00006-2
Mahender, K., & Banerji, R. K. (1990). Petrography, diagen­
esis and depositional environments of Middle Jurassic
Jaisalmer Carbonates, Rajasthan, India. Indian Journal
of Earth Sciences, 17(3–4), 194–207.
Martins, L. R. (2003). Recent sediments and grain-size
analysis. Gravel, 1, 90–105.
McBride, E. F., (1971). Mathemathical treatment of size
distribution data. Procedures in sedimentary petrology.
Misra, P. C., Singh, N. P., Sharma, D. C., Upadhyay, H.,
Karoo, A. K., & Saini, M. L. (1993). Western Rajasthan
basin: Lithostratigraphy of Indian petroliferous basins.
Document–II. KDMIPE, ONGC.
Moiola, R. J., & Weiser, D. (1968). Textural parameters: An
evaluation. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 38(1),
45–53. https://doi.org/10.1306/74D718C5-2B21-11D7-
8648000102C1865D.
Molinaroli, E., Guerzoni, S., De. Falco, G., Sarretta, A.,
Cucco, A., Como, S., Simeone, S., Perilli, A., & Magni, P.
(2009). Relationships between hydrodynamic parameters
and grain size in two contrasting transitional environments:
The Lagoons of Venice and Cabras, Italy. Sedimentary
Geology, 219(1–4), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sed
geo.2009.05.013
Newsome, D., & Ladd, P. (1999). The use of quartz grain
micro textures in the study of the origin of sand terrains
in Western Australia. Catena, 35(1), 1–17. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0341-8162(98)00122-2
Pandey, D. K., & Choudhary, S. (2007). Sequence stratigraphic
framework of Lower to lower Middle Jurassic sediments of
the Jaisalmer Basin, India. Beringeria, 37, 121–131.
Pandey, D. K., & Fürsich, F. T. (1994). Bajocian (mid Jurassic)
age of the lower Jaisalmer formation of Rajasthan, western
India. Newsletters on Stratigraphy, 30(2) 75-81. 10.1127/nos/
30/1994/75
Pandey, D. K., Fürsich, F. T., & Baron-Szabo, R. (2009).
Jurassic corals from the Jaisalmer basin, western
Rajasthan, India. Zitteliana, 13–37.
Pandey, D. K., Fürsich, F. T., & Sha, J. (2009). Interbasinal
marker intervals-A case study from the Jurassic basins of
Kachchh and Jaisalmer, western India. Science in China
Series D: Earth Sciences, 52(12), 1924–1931. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11430-009-0158-0
Pandey, D. K., Jingeng, S., & Shipral, C. (2006). Depositional
history of the early part of the Jurassic succession on the
Rajasthan Shelf, western India. Progress in Natural
Science, 16(1), 176–185.
Pandey, D. K., Kashyap, D., & Choudhary, S. (2005, April).
Microfacies and depositional environment of the Gharoi
River section (upper Jaisalmer Formation), west of Baisakhi
Village, Jaisalmer Basin, Rajasthan. In Proceedings of the
National Seminar on Oil, Gas and Lignite Scenario with
special Reference to Rajasthan (pp. 117–130). Jaipur.
Pandey, D. K., Sha, J., & Choudhary, S. (2006b).
Depositional environment of Bathonian sediments of
the Jaisalmer Basin, Rajasthan, western India. Progress
in Natural Science (Special Issue of IGCP 506 on the
Jurassic Boundary Events), Beijing, 16, 163–175.
Pandey, J., & Dave, A. (1998). Stratigraphy of Indian petro­
liferous basins. National Institute of Oceanography.
Pandey, R., & Maurya, A. S. (2020). Hydrocarbon uncer­
tainty based on facies analysis: Middle Jurassic sequence
(Jaisalmer Formation), Jaisalmer Basin, Rajasthan.
Journal of the Geological Society of India, 95(3),
301–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-020-1429-9
Pareek, H. S. (1984). Pre-Quaternary geology and mineral
resources of north western Rajasthan. Memoir Geological
Survey of India, 115.
Passega, R. (1957). Texture as a characteristic of clastic
deposition. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, 41(9), 1952–1984.
Quasim, M. A., Ghosh, S. K., Ahmad, A. H. M., Srivastava,
V. K., & Albaroot, M. (2020). Integrated approach of
lithofacies and granulometric analysis of the sediments
of the Proterozoic Upper Kaimur Group of Vindhyan
Supergroup, Son Valley, India: Palaeo-environmental
implications. Geological Journal, 55(9), 5991-6012.
https://doi.org/10.1002/gj.3781
Rahman, M. H., & Ahmed, F. (1996). Scanning electron micro­
scopy of quartz grain surface textures of the Gondwana
sediments, Barapukuria, Dinjapur, Bangladesh. Journal of
the Geological Society of India, 47(2), 207–214. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12517-012-0709-0
Rao, V. R. (1972). Subsurface stratigraphy, tectonic setting
and petroleum prospects of the Jaisalmer area, Rajasthan,
India. Proceedings of the IV Symposium of Development in
Petroleum Resources of Asia and the Far East. Camberra,
Australia, Series, 41(1), 366–371.

Reading, H. G. (1996). Sedimentary Environments: Processes,
Facies and Stratigraphy (3rd).
Sahu, B. K. (1964). Depositional mechanisms from the size
analysis of clastic sediments. Journal of Sedimentary
Research, 34(1), 73–83.
Sahu, B. K. (1983). Multi group discrimination of deposi­
tional environments using size distribution statistics.
Indian Journal of Earth Sciences, 10(1), 20–29.
Singh, A. K., Sethi, J. R., Rai, A. K., Kumar, S., Kundu, J., &
Goel, S. M. (2005). An overview of exploration and
exploitation strategy for hydrocarbons in ONGC acreages
of Jaisalmer Basin, Rajasthan. Proceedings of the National
Seminar on Oil, Gas and Lignite Scenario with Special
Reference to Rajasthan, 20, 53–68.
Kanhaiya,S., & Singh, B. P. (2014). Spatial variation of textural
parameters in a small river: An example from Khurar River,
Khajuraho, Chhaterpur District, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Global Journal of Earth Science and Engineering, 1(1),
34–42. https://doi.org/10.15377/2409-5710.2014.01.01.4
Sinha, A. K., Yadav, R. K., & Qureshi, S. M. (1993). Status of
exploration in south Shahgarh Sub-basin of Jaisalmer
Basin, Rajasthan. In S. K. Biswas et al. (eds.), Proceedings
of second seminar on petroliferous basins of India, Indian
Petroleum Publishers, Dehradun (Vol. 2, pp. 285–333).
Srivastava, A. K., Ingle, P. S., & Khare, N. (2010). Textural
characteristics, distribution pattern and provenance of
heavy minerals in glacial sediments of Schirmacher
Oasis, East Antarctica. Journal of the Geological Society
of India, 75(2), 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-
010-0035-7
Srivastava, A. K., Ingle, P. S., Lunge, H. S., & Khare, N.
(2012). Grain-size characteristics of deposits derived
from different glacigenic environments of the
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 17
Schirmacher Oasis, East Antarctica. Geologos, 18(4),
251–266. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10118-012-0014-0
Srivastava, A. K., & Mankar, R. S. (2009). Grain size analysis
and depositional pattern of upper Gondwana sediments
(Early Cretaceous) of Salbardi area, districts Amravati,
Maharashtra and Betul, Madhya Pradesh. Journal of the
Geological Society of India, 73(3), 393–406. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12594-009-0019-7
Srivastava, S. K. (1966). Jurassic microflora from Rajasthan,
India. Micropaleontology, 12(1), 87–103. https://doi.org/
10.2307/1484541
Stewart, H. B., Jr. (1958). Sedimentary reflections of deposi­
tional environment in San Miguel lagoon, Baja California,
Mexico. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 42
(11), 2567–2618. https://doi.org/10.1306/0BDA5BFA-
16BD-11D7-8645000102C1865D.
Sutherland, R. A., & Lee, C. T. (1994). Discrimination
between coastal sub environments using textural
characteristics. Sedimentology, 41(6), 1133–1145. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1994.tb01445.x
Visher, G. S. (1969). Grain size distributions and deposi­
tional processes. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 39(3),
1074–1106. https://doi.org/10.1306/74D71D9D-2B21-
11D7-8648000102C1865D.
Weltje, G. J., & Prins, M. A. (2007). Genetically meaningful
decomposition of grain-size distributions: Sedimentary
Geology. 202(3), 409–424.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sedgeo.2007.03.007.
Whalley, W. B., & Krinsley, D. H. (1974). A scanning
electron microscope study of surface textures of quartz
grains from glacial environments. Sedimentology, 21(1),
87–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1974.
tb01783.x