Preserved Stratigraphic Architecture and Evolution of A Net-Transgressive Mixed Wave- and Tide-Influenced Coastal System: The Cliff House Sandstone, Northwestern New Mexico, U.S.A.

Abstract

The Cretaceous Cliff House Sandstone comprises a thick (400 m) nettransgressive succession representing a mixed wave-and tide-influenced shallow-marine system that migrated episodically landwards. This study examines the youngest part (middle Campanian) of the Cliff House Sandstone, exposed in Chaco Cultural Natural Historical Park, northwest New Mexico, U.S.A. Detailed mapping of facies architecture between a three-dimensional network of measured sections has allowed the character, geometry, and distribution of key stratigraphic surfaces and stratal units to be reconstructed. Upward-shallowing facies successions (parasequences) are separated by laterally extensive transgressive erosion (ravinement) surfaces cut by both wave and tide processes. Preservation of facies tracts in each parasequence is controlled by the depth of erosion and migration trajectory of the overlying ravinement surfaces. In most parasequences, there is no preservation of the proximal wave-dominated facies tracts (foreshore, upper-shoreface), resulting in thin (4-7 m) top-truncated packages. Four distinct shallow marine tongues (parasequence sets) have been identified, consisting of ten parasequences with a total stratigraphic thickness of ~ 100 m. Each tongue records an episode of complex shoreline migration history (multiple regressive-transgressive phases) in an overall net-transgressive system.The ravinement surfaces provide a stratigraphic framework in which to understand partitioning of tide-and wave-dominated deposits in a net-transgressive system, and a model is presented to account for the sediment distribution and stratigraphic architecture observed in each parasequence. Despite a complex internal architecture, parasequences exhibit a predictable pattern which can be related to the regressive and transgressive phases of deposition. Preservation of wave-dominated facies tracts is associated with shoreline regression, while tide-dominated facies tracts are interpreted to record sediment accumulation during shoreline transgression that also resulted in significant erosion of the underlying regressive deposits. The interplay between erosion, sediment bypass, and deposition during regression and transgression is shown to ultimately control the preservation and stratigraphic architecture of the larger-scale net-transgressive coastal system. While the Cliff House Sandstone exhibits a facies composition and quantitative stacking patterns (shoreline trajectory) similar to other studied examples, differences in the dip-extent of the wave-dominated sandstone tongue has resulted in a more

Sedimentary Architecture of Storm-Influenced Tidal Flat Deposits of the Upper Mulichinco Formation, Neuquén Basin, Argentina

“…The successive alternation of storm and tidal deposits in the deltaic Rannoch Fm., Northern North Sea (Wei et al, 2016), is an example of how storm waves and tidal currents have altered the architecture of a delta shoreface by successively remobilizing each other's deposits. Other examples of similar process interactions have been recognized from other depositional systems where waves and tides interacted on deposition (Yang et al, 2005;Dashtgard et al, 2009Dashtgard et al, , 2012Vakarelov et al, 2012;Leva López et al, 2016;Vaucher et al, 2017) and paleoenvironments that also recorded some degree of fluvial influence (Jordan et al, 2016;Van Cappelle et al, 2017;Peng et al, 2018).…”

Recognition and significance of Upper Devonian fluvial, estuarine, and mixed siliciclastic-carbonate nearshore marine facies in the San Juan Mountains (southwestern Colorado, USA): Multiple incised valleys backfilled by lowstand and transgressive systems tracts

“…The intensely bioturbated surfaces are interpreted as firmgrounds (Ekdale et al, 1984). These omission surfaces have been recognized as components of ravinement surfaces in other studies (Jordan et al, 2016).…”

Accommodation and sediment‐supply controls on clastic parasequences: A meta‐analysis

“…For attributes of parasequence sand belts, corresponding to littoral or delta‐front deposits, the sand–mud boundaries placed in the original works were considered, but criteria for their placement may vary across datasets. Uncertainty in the recognition of the true orientation of a depositional‐dip profile (cf. Fielding, versus Zhu et al ., ) affects quantification: apparent measures of dip length and progradation distance overestimate true values whereas apparent progradation angles underestimate true values. Depositional‐tract shoreline trajectories and parasequence progradation angles are also affected by problems relating to variability in data types and density, choice of datum in actively deforming basins, parasequence‐top erosion, differential sediment compaction and along‐strike variations in sedimentary architectures (see discussions in: Hampson et al ., ; Helland‐Hansen & Hampson, ; Bhattacharya, ; Jordan et al ., ; Madof et al ., ; Hutsky & Fielding, ; Pattison, ). Although the case studies considered in this meta‐analysis are globally distributed and cover Phanerozoic successions of different ages, there exists bias towards Upper Cretaceous successions of the Western Interior Seaway of North America (48% of the studied parasequences). This reflects how research delivering data suited to this study has been conducted to date by the wider community.…”

“…B). However, when an increase in accommodation outstrips sediment supply leading to transgression, reduction of parasequence thickness can occur in the form of erosional beheading by wave or tidal ravinement (Posamentier & Allen, ; Cattaneo & Steel, ; Jordan et al ., ; Zecchin et al ., ).…”