Sequence Stratigraphy of Foreland Basin Deposits<subtitle>Outcrop and Subsurface Examples from the Cretaceous of North America</subtitle>

Using the tectophase conceptual model to assess late Triassic–Early Jurassic far-field tectonism across the South-central Barents Sea shelf

“…Understanding stratigraphic sequences as predictable patterns and cyclic responses to eustacy (sequencestratigraphic techniques; e.g., Vail and Mitchum, 1977;Vail, 1987;Posamentier and Morris, 2000;Catuneanu et al, 2011) has become a classic method in basin analysis. This method was initially developed in extensional settings (e.g., Brown and Fisher, 1977), but their same basic concepts (e.g., retrogradation and progradation) have been used in compressional settings with some degree of success (e.g., Van Wagoner and Bertram, 1995). However, in foreland basins, flexural models (e.g., Jordan, 1981;Karner and Watts, 1983;Quinlan and Beaumont, 1984;Ettensohn, 1985;Beaumont et al, 1987;1988;Klein and Hsui, 1987;Ziegler, 1987;Klein, 1994) are more appropriate in addressing the resulting relationships among deformational loading, depositional regime, and reactivation of basement structures by far-field forces (Ettensohn, 1987;Ettensohn, 2004;Ettensohn, 2008;Ettensohn et al, 2019).…”

Unconformity generation and the shift from storm‐dominated to tide‐dominated processes in a Jurassic retroarc foreland basin: Insights from ichnology

“…In a normal, progradational shoreface succession, the storm-dominated lower shoreface is overlain by fairweather wave-generated deposits of the middle shoreface, followed by trough cross-stratified sands of the upper shoreface, and then low-angle, wedge-shaped to tabular sand of the foreshore, unless interrupted or truncated by erosion (Pemberton et al, 2012;Peters & Loss, 2012;Plint, 1988;Van Wagoner, 1995). The ichnological profile for such deposits reflects the increasing depositional energy and the offshore Cruziana Ichnofacies gives way to the Skolithos Ichnofacies of the shoreface and foreshore (Figure 15C).…”

Is there a role for sequence stratigraphy in chronostratigraphy?

“…Unconformities associated with propagating faults, growing folds, basin inversion and diapirs in a broad range of tectonic settings in some cases extend only a few kilometers to as little as a few hundred meters transverse to structures (e.g., Riba 1976;Anadón et al 1986;Medwedeff 1989;Christie-Blick et al 1990;Rosales et al 1994;Driscoll et al 1995;Ford et al 1997;Suppe et al 1997;Poblet et al 1998;Sharp et al 2000;Giles and Lawton 2002;Castelltort et al 2003;Mortimer et al 2005). Other unconformities in foreland basin, intra-orogenic, rift and passive margin settings pass laterally into flooding surfaces, with definitive sequence boundary character expressed primarily by localized erosion or offlap (e.g., Underhill 1991;Driscoll et al 1995;Van Wagoner 1995;Miller et al 1996;Kidwell 1997;Naish and Kamp 1997;Jiang et al 2002;Pekar et al 2003). Such flooding surfaces are typically "concordant" with underlying and overlying strata.…”

“…2) Sequence stratigraphy provides a genetic depositional framework for integrating other stratigraphic data, independent of existing classification schemes, as well as for siting boreholes and developing a sampling strategy. Sequence boundaries and other stratigraphic discontinuities are proxies for time horizons, passing through laterally changing facies, and commonly from one lithostratigraphic unit to another (e.g., Kennard et al 1992;Sonnenfeld and Cross 1993;Van Wagoner 1995;Tinker 1998;Eberli et al 2002;Pekar et al, 2003). They are also the breaks in bio-, magneto-and chemo-stratigraphic records that chronostratigraphy seeks to fill at both updip locations and some downdip or basinal locations, where only a fraction of geological time may be represented by sediments or sedimentary rocks owing to nondeposition/condensation or erosion (e.g., Aubry 1995;Aubry et al 1999;Pekar et al 2003).…”

“…These surfaces have been mapped in outcrop and well logs over an area of ~80,000km 2 . 4) The principles are applicable in every depositional and tectonic setting, in deposits of any age (from the Holocene to Archean); in seismic reflection, Compressed High Intensity Radar Pulse (CHIRP) sonar, ground-penetrating radar, downhole logs and cores, as well as outcrop; and at scales of meters to hundreds of kilometers (e.g., Grotzinger et al 1989;Mitchum and Van Wagoner 1991;Underhill 1991;García-Mondéjar and Fernández-Mendiola 1993;Van Wagoner 1995;Tinker 1998;Sharp et al 2000;Tesson et al 2000;Christie-Blick et al 2002;Jiang et al 2002;Møller and Anthony 2003;Pekar et al 2003;Posamentier 2004;Rabineau et al 2005;Nordfjord et al 2006).…”