USGS
South Florida Information Access
SOFIA home
Help
Projects
by Title
by Investigator
by Region
by Topic
by Program
Results
Publications
Meetings
South Florida Restoration Science Forum
Synthesis
Information
Personnel
About SOFIA
USGS Science Strategy
DOI Greater Everglades Science Plan
Education
Upcoming Events
Data
Data Exchange
Metadata
publications > wri > 02-4050 > hydrogeology > lithologic comparison

Interactions between Surface Water and Ground Water and Effects on Mercury Transport in the North-central Everglades

By Judson W. Harvey, Steven L. Krupa, Cynthia Gefvert, Robert M. Mooney, Jungyill Choi, Susan A. King, and Jefferson B. Giddings

Home
Introduction
Hydrogeology of NC Everglades
- Geologic Setting
- Subaerial exposure and weathering
- Lithology of surficial aquifer
- Lithologic comparison: WCA-2A and ENR
- Geophysical logging
- Hydraulic conductivity: surficial aquifer
- Hydraulic conductivity comparison: ENR and WCA-2A
- Hydraulic conductivity comparison: other studies
Quantifying Recharge and Discharge
Use of Geochemical Tracers
Effect of GW and SW Interactions
Summary
References
PDF Version

Lithologic Comparison Between WCA-2A and ENR

At S10C, sediments generally are poorly sorted and the d20 in the complete borehole (Fort Thompson and Tamiami Formations) ranges from 0.12 mm (very fine) to 0.46 mm (medium). Various cycles of coarsening upwards and fining upwards appear in the S10C profile, which indicates periods of sea-level transgression and regression (fig. 8). In contrast, sediments from ENR site MOP2 have a d20 that ranges from 0.11 mm (very fine) to 0.25 mm (fine/medium) and primarily are well sorted. The ENR profiles show much smaller changes with elevations (fig. 7). The geometric mean of d10, d17, d20, and d60 values and the uniformity coefficient (Cu) are all larger for WCA-2A compared with the ENR boreholes. Possible sub-areal caps and caliche crusts are present in the limestone core samples at varying depths and are described in Harvey and others (2000, p. 94 and 98).

These sedimentary differences support the theory that the depositional environments at WCA-2A were different than those at the ENR (Enos, 1977). This difference probably resulted because the ENR is located about 20 mi north of and slightly west of WCA-2A. Whereas both sites have similar land-surface elevations, WCA-2A is closer to the current and paleo-shorelines of peninsular Florida and would have been flooded earlier, longer, and possibly more frequently by sea-level transgressions and regressions. Because of the changing sea levels, the chemical composition of the water within the aquifer and the depositional processes varied. Future work could involve correlating the sub-aereal caps and caliche crusts and the effect of these sedimentary structures on ground-water quality.

Uniformity coefficients, hydraulic conductivities from drawdown tests, and generalized lithology from the Surficial aquifer
Figure 7. Uniformity coefficients, hydraulic conductivities from drawdown tests, and generalized lithology from the Surficial aquifer at sites MP2 (ENR) (top, A) and S10C (WCA-2A) (bottom, B), north-central Everglades, south Florida. [larger version]
Graph showing grain size from the Surficial aquifer

Figure 8. Grain size from the Surficial aquifer at site S10C (WCA-2A) and site MOP2 (ENR), north-central Everglades, south Florida. [larger version]

Next: Geophysical logging >



| Disclaimer | Privacy Statement | Accessibility |

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
This page is: http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/wri/02-4050/lithcomparison.html
Comments and suggestions? Contact: Heather Henkel - Webmaster
Last updated: 13 January, 2005 @ 10:17 AM (KP)