BGS Rock Classification Scheme
Cannel-mudstone - A type of sedimentary-rock rich in organic matter. Sapropelite and cannel-mudstone are both derived from the unlithified fine organic mud termed sapropel. These sapropels contain more inorganic matter and plant matter than the sapropels that form sapropelic coals. Inorganic sedimentary rocks rich in sapropel are classified according to their type of organic matter. Sapropelite is rich in alginite, whereas cannel-mudstone is rich in miospores. In the Rock Classification Scheme, it is recommended that total organic content (TOC) for cannel-mudstone should be between 8% and 50%. British Geological Survey Research Report RR/99/03, section 6.3, table 18 and fig. 10.
| Code | CNMST |
|---|---|
| Description | Cannel-mudstone - A type of sedimentary-rock rich in organic matter. Sapropelite and cannel-mudstone are both derived from the unlithified fine organic mud termed sapropel. These sapropels contain more inorganic matter and plant matter than the sapropels that form sapropelic coals. Inorganic sedimentary rocks rich in sapropel are classified according to their type of organic matter. Sapropelite is rich in alginite, whereas cannel-mudstone is rich in miospores. In the Rock Classification Scheme, it is recommended that total organic content (TOC) for cannel-mudstone should be between 8% and 50%. British Geological Survey Research Report RR/99/03, section 6.3, table 18 and fig. 10. |
| Qualifiers | No qualifiers currently exist. |
| Definition | Sedimentary rock, particles >50% or predominantly mud-grade, <0.032mm. Organic component sapropelic miospores > aliginite. Total organic carbon between 8 & 50%. |
| Linked data | http://data.bgs.ac.uk/id/EarthMaterialClass/RockName/CNMST |
CAVEAT
"Thumbnail" definitions attached to some of the table entries are an interim attempt to provide simple short descriptions of the "unqualified" rock types presented within the BGS Rock Classification Scheme. Every effort has been made to ensure accuracy and consistency but minor contradictions or omissions might be present. The BGS welcomes any feedback pointing out such minor imperfections and/or providing constructive comment and suggestions for improvement of the definitions. In the first instance such feedback should be directed to Dr Tim McCormick.