Marquez - Hypervelocity Impact Crater

Alternate Names
Local Language
Coordinates 31° 16' 42" N; 96° 17' 28" W
Notes
  1. Leon County, East Texas.
Country United States of America
Region Texas
Date Confirmed 1989
Notes
  1. Confirmed by shatter cones, planar fractures in quartz, and aerodynamically-shaped clasts and glasses (Gibson and Sharpton, 1989).
Buried? Yes
Notes
  1. Partially buried by Eocene deposits.
Drilled? Yes
Notes
  1. Wealth of petroleum industry holes/oil exploration wells-originally considered a salt dome (NRCAN binder).
Target Type Sedimentary
Notes
  1. The age range suggests an impact into an offshore (continental shelf) environment. Target was part unconsolidated Palaeocene at the time. Cretaceous marls and shales. Offshore.
Sub-Type Marl, Shale, Shelfdeposits
Apparent Crater Diameter (km) 12.7 km
Age (Ma) 58.3 ± 3.1
Notes :
  1. 58.3 ± 3.1 Ma apatite fission track age (McHone and Sorkhabi, 1994). Additional age constraints: Placed at Palaeocene-Eocene boundary (Sharpton and Gibson, 1990).

Method :
  1. Fission track
Impactor Type Possible meteoric contamination
Notes
  1. The Ni-rich metal and oxide particles associated with the shatter cone surfaces might represent relict meteoritic contamination" (Schmeider and Buchner, 2016).

Advanced Data Fields

Notes

Erosion
6
  1. Erosion has exposed the central uplift.
Final Rim Diameter
Unknown
Apparent Rim Diameter
12.7 km
  1. Gravity anomaly map allows for a new diameter estimate of 12.7 ± 1.5 km (Wong et al., 2001). (Wong et al., 1994); Uplift greater or equal to 1.120 km. (Sharpton and Gibson, 1990) consider diameter may be >20 km based on seismic data.
Rim Reliability Index
2
  1. Central structural uplift of ~1.12 km (Wong et al., 2001).
Crater Morphology
Complex
Central Uplift Diameter
3km
Central Uplift Height
Unknown
Uplift Reliability Index
2
Structural Uplift
1.12 km
Thickness of Seds
Target Age
Mesozoic Cenozoic
Marine
No
Impactor Type
Possible meteoric contamination
  1. The Ni-rich metal and oxide particles associated with the shatter cone surfaces might represent relict meteoritic contamination" (Schmeider and Buchner, 2016).
Other Shock Metamorphism
No
Shatter Cones
Yes
  1. Shatter cones occur in limestone boulders and in chert nodules (from the Cretaceous) (Gibson and Sharpton, 1989). Well-developed shatter cones occur in cobble to large boulder-sized limestone blocks of the Pecan Gap Formation within poorly-consolidated clays and sands located in the central part of the structure (Sharpton and Gibson, 1990).
Planar Fractures
Yes
  1. PF/cleavages found in >50% of the grains.
Planar Deformation Features
Yes
  1. PDF in ~1 % quartz grains from breccias (Sharpton and Gibson, 1990).
Diaplectic Glass
No
Coesite
No
Stisovite
No
Crater Fill
LB, M
  1. P, M, G, MB: All searched for but not found nor expected (Buchanan et al., 1998). LB : Two breccias are described as "white mixed breccia with a homogenous, fine-grained glassy matrix containing shocked and melted clasts [up to 2 cm]" (clast-bearing melt rock) and a "brown mixed breccia with a sandy clay matrix containing [up to 20cm] shocked clasts (lithic breccia)". Dikes of the white breccia were found as well (Sharpton and Gibson, 1990). However, "No impact breccias were recovered in drilling at two locations, 1.1 and 2 km from the center of the structure, and the central uplift may be the only prominent remnant of this impact" (Wong et al., 2001). G: Glass is found petrographically with the white breccia containing up to 40 vol. % glass (Sharpton and Gibson, 1990).
Proximal Ejecta
Distal Ejecta
Dykes
M
Volume of Melt
Depth of Melting

References

Spot a missing reference? Submit Reference

V L Sharpton, John W Jr. Gibson (1990) The Marquez Dome impact structure, Leon County, Texas, Lunar and Planetary Sciences XXI, p. 11386-1137

W U Reimold, Burkhard O Dressler (1990) The economic significance of impact processes, Lunar and Plametary Institute, p. 36-37, url

A M Wong, A M Reid, S A Hall (1993) Characterization of the Marquez Dome buried impact crater using gravity and magnetic data, Lunar & Planetary Science XXIV, p. 1533-1534

J F McHone, R B Sorkhabi (1994) Apatite fission-track age of the Marquez Dome impact structure, Texas, Lunar and Planetary Science Conference XXV, p. 881-882

A M Wong, A M Reid, S A Hall, V L Sharpton (1994) The subsurface character of the Marquez impact crater in Leon County, Texas, as determined from gravity and well log data, Meteoritical Society, Annual Meeting, p. 552-553

R R Herrick, V L Sharpton (1997) Shallow seismic test at Marquez impact structure, Lunary and Planetary Science XXVIII, p. 1378

Richard R Donofrio (1997) Survey of hydrocarbon-producing impact structures in North America : Exploration results to date and potential for discovery in Precambrian basement rock, Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular 100, p. 17-29, url

Paul C Buchanan, C Koeberl, A M Reid (1998) Impact into unconsolidated, water-rich sediments at the Marquez Dome, Texas, Meteoritics and Planetary Science 33(5), p. 1053-1064

A M Wong, A M Reid, S A Hall, V L Sharpton (2001) Reconstruction of the subsurface structure of the Marquez impact crater in Leon County, Texas, USA, based on well-log and gravity data, Meteoritics & Planetary Science 36, p. 1443-1455, url

Enrico Flamini, A Coletta, M L Battagliere, M Virelli (2019) Marquez, USA, Encyclopedic Atlas of Terrestrial Impact Craters, p. 553-555, Springer International Publishing, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-05451-9_154

M F Schaller, B D Turrin, M K Fung, M E Katz, C C Swisher (2019) Initial 40Ar-39Ar zges of the Paleocene-Eocene boundary impact spherules, Geophysical Research Letters 46(15), p. 9091-9102, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, doi:10.1029/2019GL082473