Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology
    Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology
    Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology
    Ebook1,207 pages12 hours

    Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology

    By Elsevier Science

    ()

    Read preview

    About this ebook

    Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology provides information on the ‘Tidal-Fluvial Transition', the transition zone between river and tidal environments, and includes contributions that address some of the most fundamental research questions, including how the morphology of the tidal-fluvial transition zone evolves over short (days) and long (decadal) time periods and for different tidal and fluvial regimes, the structure of the river flow as it varies in its magnitude over tidal currents and how this changes at the mixing interface between fresh and saline water and at the turbidity maximum, the role of suspended sediment in controlling bathymetric change and bar growth and the role of fine-grained sediment (muds and flocs), whether it is possible to differentiate between ‘fluvial’ and ‘tidally’ influenced bedforms as preserved in bars and within the adjacent floodplain and what are the diagnostic sedimentary facies of tidal-fluvial deposits and how are these different from ‘pure’ fluvial and tidal deposits, amongst other topics.

    The book presents the latest research on the processes and deposits of the tidal-fluvial transition, documenting recent major field programs that have quantified the flow, sediment transport, and bed morphology in tidal-fluvial zones. It uses description of contemporary environments and ancient outcrop analogues to characterize the facies change through the tidal-fluvial transition.

    • Presents the latest outcomes from recent, large, integrated field programs in estuaries around the world
    • Gives detailed field descriptions (outcrop, borehole, core, contemporary sediments) of tidal-fluvial deposits
    • Accesses new models and validation datasets for estuarine processes and deposits
    • Presents descriptions of contemporary environments and ancient outcrop analogues to characterize the facies change through the tidal-fluvial transition
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherElsevier Science
    Release dateNov 26, 2015
    ISBN9780444635396
    Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology

    Related to Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology

    Titles in the series (29)

    View More
    View More

    Related ebooks

    Mechanical Engineering For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Geology Makes You Time-Literate

      Sep 13, 2018

      As a geologist and professor I speak and write rather cavalierly about eras and eons. One of the courses I routinely teach is “History of Earth and Life,” a survey of the 4.5-billion-year saga of the entire planet—in a 10-week trimester. But as a hum

      11 min read

    • Article

      Predicting Human Survival on Earth Requires Oceans

      Nov 1, 2017

      When scientists consider “planetary boundaries,” which describe the conditions within which humanity can continue to thrive, they tend to disregard oceans. And that’s a big problem, a new paper argues. The oceans are an integral part of life on Earth

      1 min read

    • Article

      System Could Make Seawater Drinkable

      Jan 24, 2024

      Researchers have achieved a major breakthrough in redox flow desalination, an emerging electrochemical technique that can turn seawater into potable drinking water and also store affordable renewable energy. In a paper published in Cell Reports Physi

      2 min read

    • Article

      The Oceans Are Missing Their Rivers

      May 3, 2023

      Gazing out from the eighth floor of a hotel in Georgetown, Guyana, the broad expanse of the Atlantic Ocean was a muddy brown. Only a thin rim of blue on the horizon showed the ocean’s true color; the rest swirled with sediment emerging from the mouth

      6 min read

    • Article

      Deep Breaths The Mission To Track Sea Gases

      Jan 12, 2024

      Darkness is falling and I’m on the bridge of the research vessel Maria S Merian. This is its control centre, with big windows providing an uninterrupted view of the stormy sea in all directions, and long banks of screens and maps displaying data funn

      5 min read

    • Article

      Laser Focused

      Feb 25, 2023

      Laser Focused
      2 min read

    • Article

      Navigation Briefing

      Mar 14, 2024

      We all know the tide ebbs and flows. It’s as predictable as the sun rising or the seasons changing, but it’s also not an exact science. Getting the timing wrong can mean an extended journey battling against a relentless current. Traditionally we’ve r

      4 min read

    • Article

      How Climate Change Alters Paths Of Rivers

      Aug 4, 2023

      New research digs into why the paths of meandering rivers change over time and how climate change could affect them. The researchers first looked at the Mississippi River before adding other rivers on Earth and ancient riverbeds on Mars to the study.

      2 min read

    • Article

      The Shape of Flow

      Jan 31, 2021

      The Shape of Flow
      1 min read

    • Article

      Not Rolling On The River: Drought Tests America’s Main Water Highway

      Dec 9, 2022

      The exposure of the Mississippi River’s dry banks makes it look vulnerable, laid bare as a result of a monthslong drought across the U.S. heartland. In normal conditions, the river’s tributaries would help feed the historically reliable flow of its w

      4 min read

    • Article

      Can Caves Tell The Future?

      Dec 8, 2021

      Can Caves Tell The Future?
      4 min read

    • Article

      Five Things We Still Don’t Know About Water: From steam to ice, water continues to mystify.

      Jun 11, 2015

      What could we not know about water? It’s wet! It’s clear. It comes from rain. It boils. It makes snow and it makes ice! Does our government actually spend taxpayer money for you to study water?” This excerpt is from one of the last conversations I ha

      4 min read

    Reviews for Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology

    0 ratings

    0 ratings0 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

      Book preview

      Fluvial-Tidal Sedimentology - Elsevier Science

      Preface

      Philip J. Ashworth; James L. Best; Daniel R. Parsons

      All rivers that flow into the ocean contain a zone that possesses flow, morphodynamic, and depositional characteristics that are transitional between river and tidal environments. This fluvial–tidal zone is one of the most complex environments on Earth as it can experience a combination of downstream moving freshwater river flow, saline or brackish flood and ebb tidal currents, surface waves, mixed and stratified flows, and elevated suspended sediment concentrations. In addition, the location and boundaries of this fluvial–tidal zone fluctuate daily, seasonally, and annually, so that it is challenging to relate process to form in such spatially and temporally varying environments.

      Over 40% of the world's population live within 150 km of the ocean and 21 of the world's 30 largest cities are located on estuaries. The fluvial–tidal zone is thus at the center of competing demands for flood protection, shipping, aquaculture, land reclamation, urbanization, and ecological conservation, as well as being one of the most sensitive environments affected by climate change and sea-level rise. As such, there is a pressing societal need to understand fully how these zones will respond to natural and anthropogenic change, in order to yield improved predictive models that will guide future management strategies.

      Furthermore, some of the world's largest hydrocarbon resources, such as the Cretaceous Athabasca Oil Sands, reside in sediments that have been interpreted as fluvial–tidal deposits. Constructing robust models of such sedimentary deposits requires detailed process–product descriptions and facies interpretations that are based on modern analogues coupled to facies analysis from ancient deposits. The scale of the sedimentary characterization required may be smaller than other sedimentary environments, since production strategies for oil sands—such as steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD)—may operate on cells that are only ca. 5 m in height, and thus at the scale of the channel depth or bar unit within a channel. However, developing such fine-scale and comprehensive facies models for this fluvial–tidal environment has presented significant challenges because tidally modulated fluvial systems have spatially and temporally varying flows, sediment transport, and grain size segregation across multiple scales. The combination of these variations and complexities makes deciphering the formative processes that govern the observed sedimentological characteristics extremely difficult. Indeed, robust criteria for the recognition of this zone in ancient sediments are lacking, especially at the scale of the barform and channel, and this has ramifications for predicting how far updip fully fluvial facies may be located in relation to a tidal river mouth, or the extent, and sedimentological signature, of backwater zones generated by tidal forcing.

      This volume on Fluvial–Tidal Sedimentology arises from a session concerning fluvial–tidal morphodynamics, sedimentology, and reservoir modeling, held at the 10th International Conference on Fluvial Sedimentology (ICFS) at the University of Leeds, UK, July 14–19, 2013. This session was one of a number of hot topic themes that attracted considerable attention during the meeting and brought together a wide and interdisciplinary group of researchers interested in the geomorphology and sedimentology of this vital environmental transition, and using approaches that ranged from numerical modeling to modern field studies to examination of ancient outcrop analogues. What became clear from this session was the abundance of exciting new work in this area and the important applications of this research, especially within the hydrocarbons industry and in reconstruction of sea-level histories in ancient sediments, where recognition of the fluvial–tidal interface is of paramount importance. This volume brings together a set of papers that report on progress toward the broad goal of better understanding the complexities and process–product relationships across the fluvial–tidal zone. The papers are organized in a sequence that extends from studies of modern environments, to those that examine detailed aspects of ancient sediments, through to those that concentrate on aspects central to resource applications.

      This book represents some of the key contributions from this conference session and we are grateful to the presenters who agreed to write up their talks for this volume. In addition, we are fortunate to have attracted contributions from other researchers who accepted the invitation to participate in this volume and broaden its scope and appeal. We are also extremely grateful to Chris Simpson who helped organize the ICFS10 alongside the editors.

      The inspiration for this volume arises from the editors’ research on the Columbia River Estuary, WA, USA, which has been supported by ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company and a UK Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) research grant. Mike Blum, Howard Feldman, Dave Moreton, Bogdan Varban, Greg Sambrook Smith, Andrew Nicholas, and Eric Prokocki are thanked for their input and insights into developing our ideas at various stages of this research. We are also grateful to the Elsevier Editorial Project Managers, Derek Coleman and Hannah Colford, and Acquisitions Editor Kirsten Shankland, for keeping us on schedule and ensuring the book could be written and produced within 12 months.

      Finally, the editors would like to dedicate this volume to John Bridge whose influence on the field of process sedimentology, and our approach as individuals to the subject, has been immense and left a permanent impression. Thanks John for all your insights and inspiration over the years.

      September 2015

      Part 1

      Context

      Chapter 1

      Deciphering the relative importance of fluvial and tidal processes in the fluvial–marine transition

      R.W. Dalrymple*; C.E. Kurcinka*; B.V.J. Jablonski†; A.A. Ichaso‡; D.A. Mackay§    * Department of Geological Sciences and Geological Engineering, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

      † Statoil Canada Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, Canada

      ‡ Shell E&P, Houston, Texas, USA

      § Serinus Energy, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

      Abstract

      Sedimentation in the fluvial–marine transition is governed by the interaction of river and tidal currents. Tidal currents act continuously, albeit with small variations in strength as a result of neap–spring cyclicity and modulation by changes in river discharge. River currents, by contrast, commonly change more dramatically because of the presence of river floods. The superposition of river floods on the tides causes depositional conditions to vary temporally from less fluvially influenced/dominated (and more tidally influenced/dominated) during the times between river floods (the interflood periods) to more fluvially influenced/dominated (and less tidally influenced/dominated) during river floods. These temporal variations in the relative importance of river and tidal currents are recorded within individual beds in the point-bar and mouth-bar deposits of the fluvial–marine transition, creating a spectrum of possible deposit types depending on the longer-term ratio of river flood to tidal energy. In areas of fluvial dominance, tidal action is only present in the interflood deposits, if present at all, whereas in areas of tidal dominance, river-flood sedimentation can become cryptic and is indicated by intervals with coarser sand and a greater abundance of fluid-mud deposits. The ichnological character of the deposits preferentially reflects interflood conditions. A detailed analysis of the deposit characteristics allows deductions to be made about the strength of the tidal currents, the intensity of river floods, and the relative position of a given deposit within the fluvial–marine transition. Discrepancies between the proximality indicated by the nature of the river-flood deposits and the ichnology of the interflood intervals can give an indication of the relative magnitude of river-discharge fluctuations.

      Keywords

      Fluvial–tidal transition

      River-flood–interflood cycle

      Physical sedimentary structures

      Tidal–fluvial channel

      Delta mouth bar

      Fluvial sedimentation

      Tidal sedimentation

      Inclined heterolithic stratification (IHS)

      Tidal rhythmites

      1.1 Introduction

      The interaction of tidal and river currents is a fundamental attribute of all rivers that empty into a marine basin, provided the basin is not tideless (as is essentially the case in the Mediterranean Sea and much of the Arctic Ocean; Candela, 1991; Kowalik and Proshutinski, 1994). The length of the zone of interaction is a complex function of several variables, including the coastal-plain gradient, the tidal range at the coast, and the fluvial discharge, with depth of the river playing a secondary role. A decrease in gradient causes an increase in the distance landward of the coast that tidal action can be expected, all else being equal: for example, a halving of the slope doubles the extent of tidal penetration (Fig. 1.1). An increase in the tidal range also causes tidal action to penetrate farther inland, whereas an increase in fluvial discharge decreases the tidal penetration, again all else being equal (Dyer, 1997; Nichols and Biggs, 1985). Water depth, together with channel width, also influences the upstream penetration of the tidal wave through their influence on frictional attenuation of the tide. In many systems, the landward decrease in the cross-sectional area of the channel initially causes the tidal range (and tidal–current speeds) to increase landward (i.e., a hypersynchronous situation; Salomon and Allen, 1983) to a location referred to as the tidal maximum (Dalrymple and Choi, 2007). Beyond this, friction causes the tidal range to decrease to zero at the tidal limit (Godin, 1999). Because friction is higher in shallow water, shallow systems such as braided rivers are likely to have shorter tidal-penetration distances than rivers that are deep. The end result of these various factors is that large rivers, which generally flow over low-gradient coastal plains, tend to have longer tidal-penetration distances than small rivers with steeper slopes. [Larger rivers also tend to have stronger tidal currents at their mouth because of the larger tidal prism (i.e., the tidal water flux past a point on each half tidal cycle) that is caused by the longer distance of tidal penetration (cf. Dalrymple, 2010).] The longest tidal-penetration distance documented is in the Amazon River, in which a tidal influence is detectable up to 800 km landward of the coast. However, even small to medium rivers have tidal-penetration distances of several tens to more than a hundred kilometers in low-gradient, coastal-plain settings (Dyer, 1997; A.A. Ichaso, unpublished data; Nichols and Biggs, 1985; Van den Berg et al., 2007). It follows, therefore, that a significant fraction of the coastal-zone deposits in ancient sedimentary basins should have accumulated in the tidal–fluvial transition zone.

      Figure 1.1 Tidal penetration as a function of coastal-zone gradient. In both panels, the tidal range at the mouth is the same and the only difference is slope: (A) has approximately twice the slope of (B) and half the distance of tidal penetration. In this figure, the tidal range is shown as increasing inward from the river mouth to the tidal maximum (T.M.; Dalrymple and Choi, 2007), beyond which the tidal range decreases toward the tidal limit because of frictional dissipation. Systems that show such an initial increase of the tidal range are termed hypersynchronous ( Salomon and Allen, 1983). These diagrams do not take into account the influence of differences in fluvial discharge: the effect of an increase in river flow is to displace the tidal limit in a seaward direction.

      If we are to undertake sophisticated interpretations of these deposits, it is necessary to be able to determine where a particular deposit formed in the tidal–fluvial transition. In simplistic terms as noted by Dalrymple et al. (1992, 2012) and Dalrymple and Choi (2007), the transition zone can be thought of as displaying a gradient in the relative importance of river and tidal currents (Fig. 1.2). Unfortunately, a robust method of positioning a deposit with respect to these gradients does not currently exist. To date, our best tool for determining the relative position of deposits in the fluvial–marine transition has been the trace-fossil assemblage, which has been calibrated against salinity with reasonable precision (M. Gingras, 2007, personal communication; cf. Gingras and MacEachern, 2012; Gingras et al., 2012a,b; MacEachern and Gingras, 2007). A comparable tool using physical sedimentary structures has not yet been developed.

      Figure 1.2 Simplified representation of the interaction of tidal and fluvial processes in the fluvial–marine transition zone, based on Dalrymple et al. (1992) and Dalrymple and Choi (2007). This diagram portrays only the time-averaged intensity of the two processes and ignores temporal variations in their relative strengths, a factor that is central to the approach advocated in this chapter.

      The objective here is, therefore, to propose an approach to determining the relative importance of fluvial and tidal currents in the formation of a deposit, which is based on an understanding of the dynamics of river floods and their interaction with tides in the transition zone. The application of the concept is then illustrated with a series of examples that we believe to show nearly the full range of possible ratios of tidal power to fluvial power, and to span the full transition zone from fluvially dominated with a weak tidal signal to tidally dominated with a barely recognizable fluvial signal. In this, we build on the pioneering studies of Jones et al. (1993), Gingras et al. (2002), and van den Berg et al. (2007), who were among the first to document the role of river-discharge variations in the formation of sand–mud alternations in occurrences of inclined heterolithic stratification (IHS; Thomas et al., 1987) and to recognize the interaction of fluvial and tidal processes in its formation. We emphasize that the approach presented here is most applicable to the heterolithic strata that are common in the fluvial–marine transition and not to the sand-dominated deposits of the channel thalweg where the temporal variations in the strength of the tidal and fluvial currents are commonly cryptic (cf. Martinius and Gowland, 2011).

      1.2 Process Framework for the Fluvial–Tidal Transition

      Our proposed model for tidal–fluvial sedimentation is based on the recognition that the temporal variability of fluvial and tidal processes are usually very different. Although rivers generally flow continuously, most fluvial sedimentation occurs during the relatively short periods of river flood because this is when the physical energy is the greatest and the sediment-transport capacity of the river is the highest. (Note: Because the word flood is used in two different ways in this chapter, we never use flood alone and always say river flood or flood tide to avoid potential confusion.) The duration of river floods is highly variable, both within a single river system and between river systems. As a general rule, however, the duration of river floods is a function of the size of the drainage basin, although other factors such as the intensity of precipitation and the infiltration capacity of the catchment also influence the shape and duration of the river-flood hydrograph. Small headwater streams with small catchments tend to have short-lived floods (i.e., commonly only a few days in duration) that represent the response to discrete precipitation events (i.e., a single storm; Fig. 1.3A). By contrast, rivers fed by large catchments are relatively insensitive to individual precipitation events because they integrate the drainage from many smaller tributaries and the river flood wave becomes stretched and attenuated during transit through the tributary network (Carter and Godfrey, 1960; Milliman and Farnsworth, 2013; Smith and Ward, 1998). Instead, large rivers respond to longer-term, generally seasonal, variations in runoff (Fig. 1.3B) as a result of, for example, monsoonal variations in rainfall or changes in snow melt as a function of temperature changes. Most such rivers have a single major flood each year that lasts for several weeks or months. Small rivers tend to be flashy, but can also be termed weather-dominated, whereas larger rivers can be called climate-dominated because their discharge regime reflects the general climate of the drainage basin. The rivers that are primarily responsible for the construction of coastal plains are likely to be of the latter type, because medium to large rivers are the main sources of sediment, especially in low-gradient sedimentary basins, because it is the larger rivers that have their headwaters in the mountainous regions that are the primary source of sediment. (See Syvitski and Milliman (2007) and references therein for a review of sediment delivery as a function of drainage-basin size, topographic relief, and bedrock lithology. See also the recent work on estimating the size of drainage basins in coastal-plain succession (Bhattacharya and Tye, 2004; Davidson and North, 2009)).

      Figure 1.3 Examples of flood hydrographs for a weather-dominated river (A; Huai Bang Sai at B. Nong Aek, Thailand) and a climate-dominated river (B; Mekong River at Phnom Pemh, Cambodia). In (A), the river discharge varies erratically because the river responds directly to each precipitation event, whereas in (B) the river responds primarily to seasonal variations in precipitation as a result of the south-Asian monsoon. Note that in (B), the flood hydrograph is much smoother than that in (A), but there are still smaller peaks and valleys, especially during the rising limb, presumably because of local precipitation events or short-duration variations in the intensity of the monsoon. Such irregularities are not considered in the conceptual development presented in this chapter. Note the vast difference in the discharge scale of the two rivers. X -axis in months. Based on figure 4.10 of Smith and Ward (1998); reproduced with permission from John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Original diagram reproduced from Volker (1983, figures 1 and 2) with permission of IAHS.

      Regardless of the nature of the discharge regime and the duration of an individual river flood, fluvial sediment deposition, whether on point bars or deltaic mouth bars, is episodic to at least some degree. Flow discharge and current speed commonly increase relatively quickly from their preflood levels, reaching a peak value before decreasing more slowly to low levels (commonly something approaching base flow; Rodda, 1969; Smith and Ward, 1998). Because of the power–function relationship between current speed and sediment transport, it is common for most, if not all, fluvial sedimentation to occur during the river flood, with relatively less or perhaps no accumulation during the intervening, low-flow (i.e., interflood) period. Given that river-flood sedimentation is almost certainly the predominant style of sedimentation in most rivers, it is surprising that so little emphasis has been placed on documenting the nature and variability of river-flood deposits. The only systematic review of the deposits of individual river floods known to the authors is that provided in figure 4.54 of Bridge (2003) (Fig. 1.4); most textbooks, by comparison, have almost no discussion of the nature of the deposits of an individual flood (e.g., Miall, 1996). The rapid rise of current speeds at the onset of the river flood (Fig. 1.3) typically leads to erosion of the bed. Deposition begins near peak discharge when flow conditions are approximately steady (Bridge, 2003). The grain size and sedimentary structures of the deposits formed at this time reflect the grain size that is available and the local combination of current speed and water depth. The upper part of the river-flood deposit accumulates during the waning stage of the flood (i.e., the falling limb of the flood hydrograph; Fig. 1.3). (Although Fig. 1.4 has been annotated to show the general, proximal–distal trends that might be expected in a fluvial system, the changes can also occur vertically on a single point bar, because of the tendency for sand grain size to decrease upward.) The interflood deposits, if any accumulate, are commonly not preserved in channel-axis locations, and successive river-flood beds are amalgamated because of erosion by the next river flood; indeed, there is likely to be the preferential removal of thin flood beds formed by smaller river floods, and preferential preservation of the thick deposits formed by the most energetic floods (Sambrook-Smith et al., 2010; see Thorne et al. (1991) for a comparable situation with storm-event beds on shorefaces). In more sheltered locations such as higher on point bars, in counter-point-bar areas (Smith et al., 2009) or the more distal parts of mouth bars, the interflood deposits are likely to be muddy, especially in the coastal plain, where IHS is commonly developed (Johnson and Dashtgard, 2014; Jones et al., 1993; Sisulak and Dashtgard, 2012; Thomas et al., 1987). It is these heterolithic deposits that are the focus of the analysis here.

      Figure 1.4 Variation in the character of river-flood deposits as a function of grain size, which is in turn a function of proximal–distal location, position on a point bar, etc. No absolute thickness or temporal scale is implied. Based on figure 4.54 of Bridge (2003). In the tidal–fluvial transition, the muddy interflood deposits that cap each succession can contain evidence of tidal action as well as marine bioturbation because of the upstream migration of the tidal and salt-water limits. Reproduced with permission from John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

      Compared to the episodic nature of river floods, tides operate continuously, albeit with regular variations in tidal range and peak current speed as a result of the neap–spring and other longer-period cycles (Allen, 1997; Kvale, 2006). There is potentially, therefore, a sedimentation event every half tidal cycle (i.e., approximately every 6 h (semidiurnal tides) or 12 h (diurnal tides)). Because of the asymmetry that develops in the tidal wave as it propagates into shallow water (Allen, 1997; Dalrymple, 2010), the flood tide is usually of shorter duration than the ebb tide, with correspondingly higher current speeds during the flood, leading to the widespread development of a net landward transport of both bed-load and suspended-load sediment (i.e., a flood-tide dominance; Dalrymple, 2010; Dyer, 1997; Yu et al., 2014). As noted in Section 1.1, many estuaries (sensu Dalrymple et al., 1992) and deltas are hypersynchronous (Salomon and Allen, 1983), such that the zone with the largest tidal range and maximum tidal influence are located some distance inland of the coast (Fig. 1.1). Beyond this point, tidal influence decreases and the relative importance of river currents increases when conditions are averaged over a time span of many years.

      Although tides theoretically operate continuously, their intensity is modulated by river discharge: just as the salt wedge is displaced seaward by increased fluvial discharge, so too is the tidal limit (Fig. 1.5; Allen et al., 1980; Kravatsova et al., 2009; Sisulak and Dashtgard, 2012; Uncles et al., 2006). This means that there is generally a reciprocal relationship at any point in the transition zone between the intensity of river currents and the strength of the tidal currents (Figs. 1.6–1.9), such that times of maximum fluvial influence are the times of minimal tidal influence, and vice versa. This relationship can cause sedimentation in many parts of the fluvial–tidal transition to alternate between fluvially dominated during river floods and tidally dominated during the interflood periods (van den Berg et al., 2007). At the very least, the relative intensity of the two processes varies on the period of the changes in fluvial discharge (Johnson and Dashtgard, 2014; Sisulak and Dashtgard, 2012), regardless of how long the river flood lasts.

      Figure 1.5 Schematic illustration of the control that variations in river discharge have on the inland penetration of salt water and tides. Diagram inspired by data from the Irrawaddy River ( Kravatsova et al., 2009). The four small inset panels at the top show the locations of Figs. 1.6–1.9, positioned relative to the water-level profiles in the main diagram. In these panels, the black line is the river-discharge hydrograph and the blue line shows the peak speeds of the tidal currents. This example has a large tidal range at its mouth, thereby allowing illustration of the full spectrum of depositional conditions from fluvially dominated near the limit of tidal penetration to tidally dominated near the coast. Systems with a smaller tidal range at their mouth will not experience depositional conditions like those shown in insets Figs. 1.8 and 1.9 and conditions such as those shown in inset Figs. 1.6 or 1.7 could occur at the mouth of the system, as is seen in case studies 1 and 3.

      Figure 1.6 Schematic representation of the temporal variation in the speed of the river current (heavy black line) and of the tidal currents (blue (gray in the print version) line) over the course of a river flood, at a site that is strongly fluvially dominated. The river flood is shown as lasting approximately 1 month, a value that is not uncommon for medium-sized rivers close to the coast (cf. Fig. 1.3B). Because the tidal wave typically becomes asymmetric in shallow water, flood–tidal currents are shown as being stronger than those of the ebb, and the flood–tidal currents are plotted above the zero line, so that their magnitude can be compared more easily with the river currents in order to evaluate the process dominance. For simplicity of representation, the neap–spring variation in tidal–current speeds is not shown, but would be present in a real example. In this example, the tidal currents are weak, and the river-flood currents dominate sedimentation except during the low-flow period (see top of diagram), when the flood–tidal currents are faster than the river current. Tidal currents go to zero during the river flood because the tidal limit is pushed seaward of this location. Conditions such as this would occur near the position of the tidal limit (cf. Fig. 1.5), regardless of its absolute distance from the shoreline. The depositional conditions shown here are interpreted to be similar to those that formed by case studies 1 and 2 ( Figs. 1.15 and 1.16). Depositional conditions for case study 3 ( Fig. 1.17) are believed to be intermediate between those shown here and illustrated in Fig. 1.7. See text for additional discussion.

      Figure 1.7 Schematic representation of the depositional conditions at a site that has stronger tidal currents (blue (dark gray in the print version) line) and a less pronounced river-flood peak (black line) than those shown in Fig. 1.6. In this case, tidal currents still go to zero during the peak of the river flood, but begin to be expressed during the waning stage of the river flood, and are strongly expressed during the interflood period. Sedimentation is fluvially dominated during the river flood, but tidally dominated during the interflood period (see top of diagram). (See caption of Fig. 1.6 for information about the representation of the tidal currents, and Fig. 1.5 for relative position of this case in the fluvial–marine transition.) The depositional conditions shown here are believed to be similar to those that formed in case study 4 ( Fig. 1.18). See text for additional discussion.

      Figure 1.8 Schematic representation of the depositional conditions at a site that has stronger tidal currents (blue (dark gray in the print version) line) and a less pronounced river-flood peak (black line) than those shown in Fig. 1.7. In this case, the tidal currents are strong enough, relative to the strength of the river-flood currents, that they exist throughout the entire river flood, although they decrease slightly in strength during the river-flood peak: sedimentation is only fluvially dominated for a relatively brief period at the peak of the river flood (see top of diagram). Such a situation would occur a significant distance seaward of the tidal limit because the tidal limit did not move seaward of this location during the river-flood peak. (See caption of Fig. 1.6 for information about the representation of the tidal currents and Fig. 1.5 for relative position of this case in the fluvial–marine transition.) The depositional conditions shown here are believed to be similar to those that formed in case studies 5 and 6 ( Figs. 1.19 and 1.20). See text for additional discussion.

      Figure 1.9 Schematic representation of the depositional conditions at a site that has stronger tidal currents (blue (dark gray in the print version) line) and a less pronounced river-flood peak (black line) than those shown in Fig. 1.8. In this case, the tidal currents exceed the river currents through the entire river flood, such that sedimentation is tidally dominated at all times (see top of diagram). This would occur if the river flood was very subdued or the strength of the tidal currents was high. (See caption of Fig. 1.6 for information about the representation of the tidal currents and Fig. 1.5 for relative position of this case in the fluvial–marine transition.) The depositional conditions shown here are believed to be similar to those that formed case study 7 ( Figs. 1.20 and 1.21). See text for additional discussion.

      The variation in river discharge also changes the location and intensity of the turbidity maximum, the zone of the highest suspended-sediment concentrations in the fluvial–marine transition zone (Dyer, 1997). At times of increased river discharge, the turbidity maximum is shifted seaward and commonly it increases in overall turbidity because of the net addition of fine-grained sediment by the river (Castaing and Allen, 1981; Doxaran et al., 2009; Lesourd et al., 2003; Uncles et al., 2006). Therefore, areas seaward of the low-flow/interflood position of the turbidity maximum will experience increased turbidity during river floods, whereas areas farther landward might see higher suspended-sediment concentrations during times of low river flow (van den Berg et al., 2007). Of course, changes in river discharge will also cause the salinity gradient to migrate up-river as discharge decreases, and in a seaward direction as discharge increases (Fig. 1.5). Such changes should be reflected in the ichnological character of the deposits, with the most diverse trace-fossil assemblages occurring in the deposits that accumulated between river floods (cf. Gingras et al., 2002), when the salinity was the highest and the current energy and sedimentation stresses were least.

      The temporal variations in depositional conditions over a single river flood at any given point, which are a direct result of the changes in fluvial discharge, provide the basis for recognizing the deposits of the tidal–fluvial transition, and for determining the relative strengths of river and tidal processes. We also suggest that this approach should allow deposits to be positioned, in relative terms, within the tidal–fluvial transition. The anticipated changes in depositional conditions over the duration of a single river flood of moderate duration (i.e., several weeks, which is typical of a medium-sized river; cf. Fig. 1.3B), in situations with different relative intensities of the river-flood and tidal currents, are shown in Figs. 1.6–1.9, and the anticipated relative positions of these figures in the fluvial–marine transition are shown in Fig. 1.5. In these schematic representations, the flood peak is shown as becoming more subdued as it passes downstream (i.e., in the progression from Fig. 1.6 to Fig. 1.9), leading to a seaward decrease in total fluvial energy as shown in Fig. 1.2. At the same time, the tidal energy increases in a seaward direction. In Figs. 1.6–1.9, the tidal energy decreases during the river flood, because of the seaward displacement of the tidal limit (Fig. 1.5), although the suppression of the tidal signal during river floods is thought to be less near the river mouth (Fig. 1.9), because this area is subject to the externally imposed tide in the depositional basin. In the following section, we describe a series of case studies that illustrate these concepts and show the ways in which these variations in the relative intensity of the tidal and fluvial currents are recorded in the deposits.

      1.3 Setting of the Case Studies Used in This Chapter

      No systematic study exists of a single depositional system, modern or ancient, that can be used to test the utility of the concepts outlined above. Instead, a series of seven individual case studies have been selected from five different Mesozoic successions in which the depositional environments are well documented, to demonstrate the application of the approach advocated here. The stratigraphic and environmental setting of each of the successions is presented in this section, followed in the next section by the description and interpretation of the deposits at the scale of individual beds. The case studies are presented in order from the example with the least tidal influence to the one with the greatest tidal influence (i.e., from the most fluvially dominated example to the most tidally dominated case). Note that it is not possible in the context of this overview to document fully the environmental interpretations of each succession; interested readers are encouraged to examine the work cited in each subsection.

      1.3.1 Lajas Formation, Neuquén Basin, Argentina

      The Lajas Formation (Bajocian to Bathonian, Middle Jurassic) in the Neuquén Basin, west-central Argentina (Fig. 1.10A), comprises the coastal, deltaic deposits in a progradational basin-fill succession (Howell et al., 2005; Legarreta and Uliana, 1996; McIlroy et al., 1999, 2005). The succession begins with the deep-water to slope mudstones and turbidities of the Los Molles Formation, which are gradationally overlain by the Lajas Formation deltaic sediments that are in turn gradationally overlain by the fluvial deposits of the Challaco Formation (Fig. 1.10B). The entire Lajas Formation, which is 500–800 m thick, is heterolithic at a wide range of scales. At the largest scale, the succession consists of a vertical alternation of prodeltaic mudstones and mouth bar and associated distributary-channel sandstones, especially in the lower half of the Lajas, which is the portion from which the examples discussed here come (Fig. 1.10C). Coastal-plain mudstones of various types, including well-drained paleosols and poorly drained floodplain and interdistributary-bay deposits, are present at various levels in the middle and upper part of the Lajas. Amalgamated fluvial-channel sandstones are present at various levels, but become more abundant in the more proximal upper part of the Lajas (not shown in Fig. 1.10C).

      Figure 1.10 Location map (A), general stratigraphic setting (B), and detailed stratigraphic succession of the lower Lajas Formation (Jurassic) in the Neuquén Basin, west-central Argentina. The red (black in the print version) stars in (C) give the locations of the examples used in case studies 1 and 3. (A) Modified after Howell et al. (2005), (B) modified from Howell et al. (2005) and McIlroy et al. (2005), and (C) from Kurcinka (2014).

      Previous work on the Lajas interpreted it as having formed in a tide-dominated deltaic environment (McIlroy et al., 1999, 2005). Recent, more detailed sedimentological investigations of the lower and middle Lajas (Gugliotta et al., 2015a,b; Kurcinka, 2014) have determined, however, that the degree of tidal influence is not as great as previously believed. The lowest Lajas, below the lowest sequence boundary (Fig. 1.10C) is interpreted as consisting of river-dominated mouth bars that are separated by fine-grained prodeltaic deposits. Above the sequence boundary, the increased abundance of cyclic fine-grained drapes in the mouth-bar deposits indicates that the amount of tidal influence is greater than in the section below the sequence boundary, but the deltaic deposits are nevertheless interpreted as river dominated.

      1.3.2 McMurray Formation, Northern Alberta

      The McMurray Formation (Neocomian-Aptian, Early Cretaceous) is widely known for its enormous heavy-oil reserves. Sedimentation occurred in a series of north–south-oriented valleys, cut by rivers of continental scale (Blum and Pecha, 2014; Mossop and Flach, 1983) that flowed northward along the eastern side of the Rocky Mountain foreland basin. The outcrop from which the example used here comes occurs along the Steepbank River, which is a tributary that joins the Athabasca River 30 km north of Fort McMurray, Alberta (Fig. 1.11A and B). The sampled succession, which comprises the informally named middle McMurray in that area, consists of a single, upward-fining channel-point-bar succession that is 30–35 m thick (Fig. 1.11C; Jablonski, 2012; Mossop and Flach, 1983; Musial et al., 2011). The lower 5–10 m of the succession is composed of cross-bedded sandstone that accumulated in a channel thalweg to lower point-bar setting. These sandstones are overlain by and interfinger with a 25–30 m thick succession of interbedded sandstones and mudstones that forms a single, uninterrupted set of IHS, with dips of 5°–10°, that accumulated on an actively migrating point bar (cf. Jablonski, 2012; Jablonski and Dalrymple, 2015; Smith et al., 2009). The presence of a low-diversity, brackish-water trace-fossil assemblage in the IHS has led to the interpretation of these deposits as estuarine in character (Gingras et al., 2012a,b; Langenberg et al., 2002; Lettley et al., 2005; Musial et al., 2011; Ranger and Pemberton, 1992; Ranger et al., 2008), but it is not known whether the succession is regressive (i.e., part of a delta) or transgressive (i.e., part of an estuary, sensu Dalrymple et al., 1992).

      Figure 1.11 Location maps (A and B) and schematic stratigraphic succession (C) for the McMurray Formation in the area north of Fort McMurray, Alberta. The entire McMurray Formation in the study area is ca. 70–75 m thick. The example used in this study comes from the inclined heterolithic stratification (IHS) portion of the middle McMurray, which is ca. 25 m thick in total; the red star at the edge of the section (C) gives the approximate level from which the example comes. (C) After Mossop and Flach (1983).

      1.3.3 Neslen Formation, Book Cliffs, Utah

      The Neslen Formation (Late Campanian, Late Cretaceous) crops out in the Western part of the Book Cliffs of Utah (Fig. 1.12A and B). It overlies the better-known Sego Sandstone (Fig. 1.12C), which has been interpreted as a series of tide-dominated estuaries and/or deltas, that may or may not sit within incised valleys (Aschoff and Steel, 2011; Kirschbaum and Hettinger, 2004; Van Wagoner, 1991; Willis and Gabel, 2003). The Neslen Formation, which is approximately 30–50 m thick, is much more mudstone-rich than the Sego, and is dominated by coastal-plain deposits (Willis, 2000) that are interpreted to consist of tidal flats, marshes, and carbonaceous floodplain mudstones that represent waterlogged paleosols. Sandstone intervals are interpreted by Willis (2000) as small tidal creeks that drained across the tidal flats. More recent work suggests that at least some of the floodplain mudstones accumulated in interdistributary-bay environments, whereas at least some of the sandstones accumulated in channels with a significant fluvial influence. Some of the sandstone bodies are also interpreted as delta mouth bars (Olariu et al., 2015).

      Figure 1.12 General (A) and detailed (B) location maps of the study area in the Neslen Formation, central Utah. The study area is located in the Book Cliffs, approximately 30 km east of Green River. (The yellow line traces the general trend of the Book Cliffs). (C) Stratigraphic position of the Neslen Formation, which overlies the well-known Sego Sandstone. The red star indicates the approximate stratigraphic position of case studies 4 and 5. (B) Map data courtesy of Google Earth©.

      1.3.4 Tilje Formation, Offshore Norway

      The Tilje Formation (Pliensbachian, Early Jurassic) occurs in the subsurface of the Halten Terrace, which lies 100–200 km northwest (seaward) of Trondheim, Norway, beneath the Norwegian continental shelf (Fig. 1.13A and B). Deposition occurred in an overall transgressive setting in which accommodation was generated by crustal stretching and thermal relaxation associated with extension during the early stages of the opening of the North Atlantic Ocean (Doré, 1991). The Tilje is underlain by the alluvial-plain deposits of the Åre Formation and is overlain by the shelf mudstones of the Ror Formation (Fig. 1.13C). The Tilje Formation itself is 150–200 m thick, and, like the Lajas Formation (see above), consists of tabular units that are composed of alternating prodeltaic mudstones and deltaic sandstones and tidal–fluvial-channel deposits (Ichaso and Dalrymple, 2014; Ichaso Demianiuk, 2012; Martinius et al., 2001). The previous sedimentological interpretation indicated that the Tilje accumulated in a succession of tide-dominated estuaries and deltas (Martinius et al., 2001), but more recent work (Ichaso and Dalrymple, 2014; Ichaso Demianiuk, 2012) proposes a more mixed-energy coastal setting, intermediate between the river- and tide-dominated end members. Sediment input was generally from the north and northeast, and the succession accumulated in a southward-opening embayment, in which tidal action was accentuated, whereas the intensity of wave action was reduced by the sheltered setting. Fluid-mud deposits are abundant in the fluvial–tidal mouth bars and tidally influenced distributary channels (Ichaso and Dalrymple, 2009).

      Figure 1.13 General (A) and local (B) location maps of the study area in the Tilje Formation, central Norwegian continental shelf. The core from which the illustrated deposit ( Fig. 1.20) comes was taken in the Smørbukk Field (B). (C) Generalized stratigraphic section for the Tilje Formation in the Smørbukk Field, showing the progression of depositional environments. P.Z. refers to the production zones used internally by the field operator (Statoil). The red (black in the print version) star in (C) shows the stratigraphic level from which the studied example comes. (C) From Ichaso Demianiuk (2012).

      1.3.5 Bluesky Formation, Peace River Area, Alberta

      The Bluesky Formation (Aptian-Albian, Early Cretaceous; 0–30 m thick) of west-central Alberta is broadly coeval with the McMurray Formation (see above) and forms the middle part of the initial transgression of the Western Canadian foreland basin in the Early Cretaceous (Cant and Abrahamson, 1996). In areas where the sub-Cretaceous unconformity is topographically low, the Bluesky is underlain by fluvially dominated coastal-plain deposits of the Gething Formation (Fig. 1.14; Cant and Abrahamson, 1996; Leckie and Smith, 1992; Mackay, 2014), but in areas where the sub-Cretaceous unconformity is high, the Bluesky rests directly on Mississippian carbonates. Everywhere, the Bluesky is overlain by the marine mudstones of the Wilrich Member of the Spirit River Formation. The first detailed sedimentological and ichnological study of the Bluesky recognized its brackish-water character and interpreted it as a wave-dominated estuarine succession (Hubbard et al., 1999, 2002). A recent re-evaluation of the Bluesky instead interprets it as having formed in a tide-dominated setting (Mackay, 2014; Mackay and Dalrymple, 2011), based on the pervasive presence of tidal sedimentary structures including cyclic tidal rhythmites, an abundance of thick (> 2 cm) fluid-mud layers, a predominance of cross-bedded sandstone, and an extremely low level of bioturbation (bioturbation index—BI 0–1), and by the absence of wave-generated structures. Furthermore, the clear tripartite facies organization that characterizes wave-dominated estuaries (Dalrymple et al., 1992) is not evident. Mackay (2014) has subdivided the Bluesky into lower and upper parts (Fig. 1.14C). The lower portion, from which the example described below comes, is sandstone dominated, but it is pervasively heterolithic with abundant thick mudstone layers that are interpreted as fluid-mud deposits (Mackay and Dalrymple, 2011); it is interpreted to represent a deltaic deposit because of its seaward transition into upward-coarsening delta mouth-bar successions. By contrast, the upper part of the Bluesky, which is composed almost entirely of sandstone, passes seaward into subtly upward-coarsening successions consisting of pervasively cross-bedded sandstone that are believed to represent tidal sand-ridge deposits. The overall back-stepping nature of the upper Bluesky indicates that it accumulated in a tide-dominated estuarine environment that is transitional into the overlying marine mudstones of the Wilrich Member. Both units contain abundant erosively based channel-bar successions that fine upward.

      Figure 1.14 Location maps (A and B) and stratigraphy (C) of the Bluesky example used herein, which comes from the Peace River area, north-central Alberta, Canada. The succession there is temporally equivalent with the better-known McMurray Formation in the Fort McMurray area. The example used here comes from the lower part of the Bluesky (red (black in the print version) star in (C)), a heterolithic unit that is interpreted as being of regressive, deltaic origin ( Mackay, 2014).

      1.4 Description and Interpretation of the Case Studies

      1.4.1 Case Study 1: Lower Lajas Formation

      The lowermost Lajas Formation in the Los Molles area consists of three progradational episodes that are represented by upward-coarsening sandstone tongues, each ca. 10 m thick, composed of mouth-bar deposits, separated by finer grained, intensely bioturbated prodeltaic deposits (Fig. 1.10C; Kurcinka, 2014). Progradational clinoforms are clearly visible in outcrop (Fig. 1.15A), with dips that reach 16° (average ~ 10°). Small channels (10–100 m wide; 1.5–4 m thick) that cut into the top of the mouth-bar deposits are interpreted to be terminal distributary channels.

      Figure 1.15 Case study 1, lowermost Lajas Formation ( Fig. 1.10). (A) Clinoform package in the lowermost part of the Lajas Formation ( Fig. 1.10C), showing the seaward-dipping stratification that characterizes these river-dominated mouth-bar successions. Flat-lying, finer-grained prodeltaic deposits are locally exposed at the base of the cliff. Person for scale circled. The flood–interflood bedding shown in (B) comes from a laterally adjacent exposure within this sandstone tongue. (B) Typical example of the bedding within the sandstone tongues of the lowermost Lajas. Each sandstone bed has an erosive base. This bed contains faintly visible dune cross-stratification dipping to the left (i.e., in a seaward direction), which implies that deposition occurred by means of river-generated currents, presumably during a river flood. In more distal locations such as is shown here, the sandstone beds are separated by finer grained, intensely bioturbated material (recessive) that is interpreted as the sediment that accumulated during periods between river floods. See text for additional discussion.

      Internally, the clinoform packages are composed of sandstone beds that range in thickness from a few centimeters to 50 cm, with typical values in the range of 10–20 cm, that are separated by thinner intervals of finer-grained sediment (Fig. 1.15B). In proximal, up-dip locations, the bases of the beds is erosive, but the amount of erosion decreases distally, such that the finer interbeds are more prominent in distal locations. Many of the sandstone beds appear to be structureless internally; some of this may be due to the character of outcrop weathering and the uniform nature of the grain size (lower medium to upper fine-grained sand), but most is attributed to rapid deposition by density flows (Kurcinka, 2014). Locally, dune-scale cross-stratification is evident, with paleocurrents uniformly in the seaward (i.e., northwesterly) direction. Current-ripple bedding, if present, cannot be seen due to the lack of textural differentiation and the poor quality of the outcrop exposure. Bioturbation is uncommon to rare within these beds, and the majority of the burrows in the sandstone beds extend down from the overlying, finer-grained deposits. These finer-grained deposits, which consist of fine to very-fine sand and silt, are, by contrast, intensely bioturbated (Fig. 1.15B), with bioturbation indices of 5–6 (cf. MacEachern et al., 2010, figure 3). The diversity of burrow types is not high (Rosselia, Rhizocorellium, Palaeophycus, Planolites, and Skolithos), but the ichnofossil assemblage is among the most diverse in the succession and includes fully marine trace fossils. Any primary sedimentary structures have been obliterated and the physical processes responsible for sedimentation can no longer be deduced.

      Sedimentation in this case study is clearly episodic, with periods of rapid sedimentation under energetic conditions (i.e., the physically structured sandstone beds) alternating with periods of low energy when the bioturbated interbeds accumulated. The seaward-directed paleocurrents in the sandstone beds indicate that they were emplaced by river currents, whereas the moderately diverse ichnofossil assemblages in the intervening finer-grained deposits indicate that sedimentation rates had decreased and salinity levels had increased. Therefore, the sandstone beds are interpreted to represent river floods, whereas the finer-grained interbeds accumulated in the periods between river floods. The extent to which tidal currents may have been active during the interflood periods cannot be determined because of the intensity of the bioturbation, but tidal currents cannot have been very strong because the presence of an actively shifting substrate, which would have existed if the tidal currents had been capable of significant sediment transport, would have inhibited bioturbation. On the other hand, the nature of the bioturbation indicates that the salinity during the times of low river flow was at least moderate. Given that tidal action extends farther landward than salt-water intrusion, tidal currents must have existed, but their intensity was too weak to have left any preserved record. Sedimentation conditions were, therefore, similar to those shown in Fig. 1.6, with a strong overall river dominance, with the likelihood of weak tidal action during interflood periods. In Fig. 1.5, this set of conditions, as shown by the positioning of the Fig. 1.6 inset, lies close to the tidal limit, in an area that is fluvially dominated, possibly with water becoming fresh during river floods. This is at odds, however, with the fact that the Lajas example described here experienced brackish-water conditions during low river flow, as shown by the trace-fossil assemblage in the fine-grained interbeds (Fig. 1.15B). Reconciliation of this discrepancy requires that the low-flow discharge of the river feeding the mouth bars in the lower Lajas was lower than that implicit in Fig. 1.5, thereby allowing salt water to penetrate farther inland and to extend closer to the low-flow tidal limit than is shown in Fig. 1.5.

      1.4.2 Case Study 2: McMurray Formation

      The IHS deposits that comprise a large part of point-bar sediments in the middle McMurray Formation (Fig. 1.11C) consist of interbedded fine- to medium-grained sandstones and finer beds consisting of fine to very fine sandstone and siltstone (Jablonski, 2012; Jablonski and Dalrymple, 2015). The fundamental building block of the IHS consists of an erosively based sandstone bed (10–30 cm thick) that passes upward gradationally into a muddier interval that is 0.5–10 cm thick (Fig. 1.16). The sandstone beds locally contain dune cross-stratification, which is much more abundant in the lower part of the point-bar succession, but more commonly contain cosets of ripple cross-lamination (Fig. 1.16A) that climbs in some places. In the outcrops studied, all paleocurrent indicators are unidirectional in the downstream (northerly) direction. Cyclically organized mud/silt drapes are uncommon in the sandstone beds, but groupings of silt drapes do occur within some of the rippled intervals, suggesting regular retardation of the river flow. (Reversed paleocurrents and rhythmically spaced reactivation surfaces are not present in the cross-bedded sandstones that gradationally underlie the IHS deposits.) Bioturbation is generally absent from the sandstone beds, except for top-down penetration of the sand beds by organisms that colonized the intervening muddy deposits. Relatively uncommon burrows within the sandstone beds suggest that the depositional conditions during sand-bed deposition were infrequently able to sustain a benthic community; such within-sandstone-bed bioturbation is most abundant in the thinnest of the sandstone beds.

      Figure 1.16 Case study 2, McMurray Formation ( Fig. 1.11). (A) General view of bedding in the sandy IHS of the middle McMurray Formation, showing the alternation of unbiotubated, sandy river-flood deposits that contain climbing, current-ripple cross-lamination, with intensely bioturbated intervals that are interpreted as interflood deposits that formed when river flow was weak and the salinity higher. In this example, the mud that commonly characterizes interflood deposition has been eroded by the subsequent flood (erosive bed bases highlighted by red lines), leaving only the lower portions of the burrows that penetrate down into the river-flood sand. It is assumed that the thickness of the river-flood sandstone can be used as a proxy for the magnitude (peak speed and/or duration) of the river flood (Jablonski, 2012; Jablonski and Dalrymple, 2015). (B) Close-up of two muddy interflood deposits that are less thoroughly burrowed than many examples, showing the thinly laminated nature of these deposits. In the best exposed examples, regular thickening and thinning of the laminae suggest that the lamination records weak tidal action. See text for additional discussion.

      The intervening finer-grained beds are more intensely bioturbated than the sandstone beds, but BI values are generally only 2–4 (i.e., moderately bioturbated; MacEachern et al., 2010), with only some examples having BI values of 5–6 (intensely bioturbated). The trace-fossil assemblage has a very low diversity, consisting almost entirely of Cylindrichnus and Planolites, with only minor Gyrolithes. In those examples, where primary structures are still recognizable, the mudstone intervals are laminated at a millimeter scale (Fig. 1.16B). These laminae commonly show cyclic variations in thickness that are interpreted to be tidal rhythmites (cf. Coughenour et al., 2009; Kvale, 2012, and references therein) and clear double mud drapes are present locally (Jablonski, 2012; Jablonski and Dalrymple, 2015).

      The sandstone beds with their unidirectional paleocurrents are interpreted to be the product of river floods (Jablonski, 2012; Jablonski and Dalrymple, 2015), with rapid sedimentation being indicated by the presence of climbing-ripple lamination. It is believed that the thickness of the sandstone beds correlates with the magnitude of the river flood, thinner beds representing smaller river floods, and thicker beds representing larger floods (i.e., either higher current speeds and/or longer duration). The absence of cyclically organized silt drapes within most of the sandstone beds implies that tidal influence was not present during most river floods, but the rare presence of cyclic drapes suggests that tidal currents were present but perhaps only during brief intervals such as when spring tides (with their stronger currents; see also case study 4) coincided with lulls in the river-flood currents (cf. the discharge oscillations during the rising limb of Fig. 1.3B). The absence of reversed ripples suggests that the tides were only able to retard the river flow but not reverse it (cf. Martinius and Gowland, 2011). The water apparently became fully or nearly fresh during these river floods, thereby excluding the activity of marine organisms, although rapid sediment accumulation probably contributed to the low bioturbation indices. The occurrence of a small amount of bioturbation during the deposition of some sandstone beds, and especially the thinner ones that are attributed to smaller river floods (Fig. 1.16A), suggests that the weaker river-flood currents were not able to push the salinity-penetration limit seaward of the site of deposition. During the deposition of the muddy, interflood intervals, the water was at least somewhat brackish, but the salinity was presumably low, as indicated by the very low diversity of the trace-fossil assemblage. Tidal currents appear to have been present, but were not very strong, as indicated by the silty nature of the interflood deposits and the lack of current-generated ripples within them. Relative to the spectrum of depositional conditions shown in Figs. 1.6–1.9, the conditions of sedimentation appear to be most similar to those illustrated in Fig. 1.6, with tidal activity being expressed mainly during the times between river floods. Some of the thinner river-flood beds might have been formed under conditions intermediate between those in Figs. 1.6 and 1.7, with a low level of tidal activity occurring at times when the river-flood currents were weaker.

      Where this example lies within the fluvial–tidal transition relative to the deposits discussed in case study 1 is difficult to determine with certainty: there is more obvious evidence of tidal action in the McMurray (compare Figs. 1.15B and 1.16B), suggesting a more distal setting, but the more diverse trace-fossil assemblage in the lower Lajas suggests a higher salinity during the interflood periods, which in turn suggests that it formed farther seaward than the McMurray example. Such contradictory evidence can be explained by noting that the difference in fluvial discharge between flood peaks and low-flow periods can be very different between systems. Systems with larger river-discharge fluctuations (i.e., extreme flood peaks and/or very low base-flow discharge) will display a larger difference in salinity between river-flood and interflood times than will systems with a smaller difference in fluvial discharge between flood peak and base flow. Perhaps the Lajas, which was undoubtedly formed by smaller rivers than the McMurray, had larger discharge and salinity fluctuations (i.e., it was somewhat more flashy than the McMurray). Furthermore, the strength of the tidal signal is dependent on the tidal range and tidal prism. Thus, case study 1 from the Lajas might have formed in a setting with an overall small tidal range and/or small tidal prism, such that the strength of the tides was inherently lower than it was in the large river in which the McMurray accumulated. Such considerations indicate that the deposits formed within the fluvial–tidal transition are inherently diverse in their character because of the interaction of so many variables.

      1.4.3 Case Study 3: Middle Lajas Formation

      Like the lower Lajas, the middle Lajas consists of upward-coarsening successions that are of the order of 10 m thick (Figs. 1.10C and 1.17A). They begin with fine-grained (silty to muddy) bioturbated deposits (BI 3–6) that are interpreted as prodeltaic in origin and pass upward into sandstone-dominated deposits that are interpreted to represent mouth bars. Small, terminal distributary channels are also present at the top of some successions. IHS caused by mouth-bar progradation is also visible, but is lower angle (i.e., < 7°) than in the lower Lajas. In general, these mouth-bar deposits are more heterolithic in nature than those in the lower Lajas.

      Figure 1.17 Case study 3, middle Lajas Formation ( Fig. 1.10). (A) Typical expression of the tide-influenced, river-dominated mouth bars of the middle Lajas Formation, overlying muddy prodeltaic deposits in a gradational upward-coarsening succession. (B) Close-up view of a river-flood deposit, overlain by the sediment that is interpreted to have accumulated during the interflood period. The lamination in the interflood deposit is interpreted as tidal in origin because of the local presence of bipolar ripple cross-lamination. See text for additional discussion. Both images courtesy of Macello Gugliotta; see also Gugliotta et al. (2015b).

      Sedimentation within the mouth-bar deposits of the middle Lajas is clearly episodic and, like the two previous case studies, consists of sandstone beds that alternate with muddier intervals (Fig. 1.17B). As in the lower Lajas, the sandstone beds are erosively based, typically consist of upper fine- to medium-grained sand, and commonly do not show many sedimentary structures, although some contain dune-scale cross-stratification, with local development of current ripples. Paleocurrents are overwhelmingly to the north–northwest (i.e., in a seaward direction), but rare landward-direction ripples are present in some of the sandstone beds. Mud and/or organic-debris drapes are rare within the sandstone beds but are present locally. As with the previous case studies, bioturbation is rare in the sandstone beds (BI 0–1).

      The muddy interbeds are more intensely bioturbated but have only moderate levels of bioturbation (BI 2–4). The ichnogenera present have a low diversity and are limited to Planolites and Ophiomorpha. Physical lamination is moderately to well developed and consists of interlaminated silt and fine- to very fine-grained sandstone; clay layers are rare but terrestrial organic detritus is moderately abundant. The lamination in the fine-grained layers locally shows regular thickening and thinning trends, suggesting that they are tidal rhythmites. Bidirectional current ripples are also present in some layers.

      As in the case studies discussed above, the sandstone layers are interpreted to be river-flood deposits because the grain size in these layers is coarser-grained than in the intervening deposits and the paleocurrents are predominantly seaward-directed. The low level of bioturbation is consistent with rapid sedimentation in a setting with low salinity. By contrast, the finer-grained interbeds indicate slower sedimentation under lower energy levels, and they are, therefore, interpreted as the interflood deposits. Evidence of tides, including rhythmic layering and bidirectional current ripples, is more pervasive in these interbeds than in either of the previous examples, indicating that the tidal currents were stronger than in the previous cases. Evidence of tidal–current action is also present in the river-flood deposits in the form of rare landward-directed current ripples and muddy drapes. As a result, the deposits in the middle Lajas are believed to represent conditions between those shown in Figs. 1.6 and 1.7, with some minor record of tidal–current action (perhaps forming during spring tides) within the deposits of the river floods. In general terms, the mouth-bar deposits in which these beds occur are interpreted to be tidally influenced but river dominated (Fig. 1.8C; Gugliotta et al., 2015b; Kurcinka,

      Enjoying the preview?
      Page 1 of 1