05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 269
Ital.J.Geosci. (Boll.Soc.Geol.It.), Vol. 128, No. 2 (2009), pp. 269-278, 8 figs. (DOI: 10.3301/IJG.2009.128.2.269)
Relationships between the Apennine thrust belt, foredeep
and foreland revealed by marine seismic data, offshore Calabria
ROBERT W.H. BUTLER (*)
ABSTRACT
Resolving tectono-stratigraphic relationships, critical for using
syn-tectonic sedimentation to calibrate time and length scales of
processes in the Apennine-Maghrebian orogenic system, is difficult
using outcrop data alone. Here two commercially-acquired seismic
reflection profiles are used to establish the structure and strati-
graphic relationships between the frontal part of the orogenic belt,
the foredeep and foreland regions in the offshore continuation of the
Apennine system in the northern Ionian sea. Seismic stratigraphic
reasoning is used to define an inter-regional intra-Messinian uncon-
formity surface. In the Apulian foreland this is cut by a widespread
array of normal faults that are sealed by Plio-Quaternary sediments.
The modern foredeep is in part controlled by these faults. On the
Apulian shelf the deposystems are broad. However, the modern fore-
deep and basins developed on the orogenic wedge are only a few km
across. Given the proximity of this study area, the tectono-strati-
graphic relationships imaged on these seismic lines are likely to pro-
vide good analogues for Neogene basins and depositional systems
for much of the Apennines onshore. Syntectonic basins are narrow,
long-range stratigraphic continuity is likely to be the exception
rather than the rule. This challenges some of the assumptions
behind existing tectonic models for the Apennines and similar orogens.
KEY WORDS: Apennines, seismic reflection profiles, intra-
Messinian unconformity, foredeep, thrust front.
RIASSUNTO
I rapporti fra la catena, l’avanfossa e l’avampaese
dell’Appennino ricostruiti sulla base di dati di sismica nel Mar
Ionio al largo della Calabria.
La risoluzione dei rapporti fra tettonica e sedimentazione, che
utilizza lo studio dei depositi sin-tettonici come strumento per defi-
nire l’età e la durata dei processi deformativi nel sistema orogenico
appenninico-maghrebide, è difficile da acquisire basandosi esclusi-
vamente su dati di affioramento. In questo lavoro vengono analizzati
due profili sismici a riflessione, provenienti dalla campagna Fugro
CA99RE00 condotta nel Mare Ionio settentrionale, al fine di rico-
struire la struttura ed i rapporti stratigrafici fra il fronte orogenico,
l’avanfossa e le aree di avampaese nella prosecuzione a mare della
catena appenninica. I profili analizzati possono costituire un valido
elemento comparativo naturale per l’analisi dei rapporti fra tettonica
e sedimentazione in altri contesti deformativi.
Vengono descritti i criteri attraverso i quali è stata riconosciuta
una superficie di discontinuità stratigrafica intra-messiniana di
importanza regionale. Nel profilo più settentrionale attraverso
l’avampaese apulo tale discontinuità risulta troncata da numerose
faglie dirette, che sono sigillate da depositi di età pliocenica e qua-
ternaria. La geometria dell’avanfossa attuale appare in parte control-
lata da queste strutture: le più importanti sono quelle che delimitano
la scarpata apula. In questo profilo settentrionale non compaiono
linee di evidenza a sostegno dell’ipotesi di un’attività pre-messiniana
(*) Geology and Petroleum Geology, School of Geosciences,
Meston Building, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3UE, United
Kingdom.
della scarpata apula ed i carbonati della piattaforma omonima si
seguono senza significativa soluzione di continuità sotto al-
l’avanfossa ed alla catena.
I sistemi deposizionali che ricoprono la piattaforma apula
hanno estensione ed ampiezza di importanza regionale. L’assenza di
superfici di erosione ed il carattere aggradante dei sistemi deposizio-
nali sulla piattaforma apula indicano che il livello del mare non ha
subito oscillazioni significative. Queste linee di evidenza rendono
poco credibili le ricostruzioni ed i modelli di buckling litosferico per
spiegare la geometria arcuata di cospicue porzioni della piattaforma
apula nei settori a mare. L’avanfossa attuale ed i bacini che si sono
formati nella parte superiore del cuneo orogenico sono confinati in
sezioni ristrette, larghe non più di qualche chilometro. Il margine
dell’avanfossa è fortemente controllato dalla presenza di faglie, e
quindi l’appoggio dei depositi sin-orogenici in rapporto di onlap sul
substrato pre-orogenico non riflette semplicemente la migrazione
dell’avanfossa verso l’avampaese. Relazioni tettono-sedimentarie
analoghe sono ben rappresentate nel profilo meridionale, ma qui la
complessità delle strutture deformative (e la corrispondente strut-
tura che si delinea attraverso lo studio della velocità di propagazione
delle onde sismiche) rende ogni interpretazione sulla geometria della
struttura profonda meno vincolata. Sembra comunque assodato che
la piattaforma apula ed i carbonati di scarpata continuino sotto il
fronte della catena – elemento che indica come la scarpata apula
non rappresenti un lineamento geologicamente vecchio.
Dato che l’area oggetto di studio è situata in prossimità della
linea di costa, le relazioni fra tettonica e sedimentazione dedotte
dall’interpretazione dei due profili sismici a mare probabilmente rap-
presentano un buon esempio comparativo per la ricostruzione dei
caratteri geometrici e deposizionali di molti bacini neogenici
nell’entroterra dell’intera catena appenninica. I bacini sin-tettonici
sono stretti ed isolati; la continuità di sedimentazione sembra per-
tanto rappresentare un’eccezione piuttosto che non la regola. Alcuni
dei modelli tettonici proposti per l’Appennino e per catene orogeni-
che simili assumono che i sistemi stratigrafici ed i bacini di avanfossa
siano molto ampi: ciò implica che le variazioni stratigrafiche siano
necessariamente graduali ed avvengano su vasta scala. Gli esempi
provenienti dalla sismica e discussi in questo lavoro sembrano invece
suggerire che i bacini di avanfossa siano ristretti, localizzati e caratte-
rizzati da elevata discontinuità per quanto concerne la loro distribu-
zione areale: pertanto importanti variazioni laterali nel record strati-
grafico, caratteristiche di bacini isolati tra di loro, possono verificarsi
alla scala di alcuni chilometri. I dati presentati in questa nota pos-
sono essere consultati e reinterpretati utilizzando Virtual Seismic
Atlas, VSA: www.seismicatlas.org <http://www.seismicatlas.org>.
TERMINI CHIAVE: Appennino, profili sismici a riflessione,
discontinuità stratigrafica intra-messiniana, avanfossa,
fronte orogenico.
INTRODUCTION
The Apennine thrust belt of Italy has an exquisite
record of Neogene syntectonic deposition that may be
used to establish the timing of thrust activity and basin
development (e.g. PATACCA et alii, 1990; reviewed by
ELTER et alii, 2004). Outcrop data provide detailed strati-
graphic and facies data. However, with a few notable
exceptions, the scale of the various depositional systems
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 270
270 R.W.H. BUTLER
Fig. 1 - Simplified location map (base is from the NASA WorldWind
dataset) of the study area in the continuation of the Apennine oroge-
nic front, offshore southern Italy. Note that precise locations and
orientations of the two regional seismic lines cannot be given. Howe-
ver, fig. 2 comes from towards the NW part of the boxed area while
fig. 7 comes from near the SE margin.
– Schema tettonico semplificato, basato su dati NASA WorldWind,
dell’area di studio sul prolungamento a mare del fronte della catena ap-
penninica meridionale. Vincoli di riservatezza non consentono di illu-
strare la posizione precisa e l’orientazione dei profili sismici regionali.
L’area in fig. 2 rappresenta il settore nord-occidentale del riquadro,
mentre l’area in fig. 7 ne rappresenta il margine sud-orientale.
and clear relationships with structures are more conjec-
tural. Here seismic reflection data that have hitherto been
unavailable are presented from the northern Ionian sea,
offshore Calabria. Previous studies of the area include
PESCATORE & SENATORE (1986), SENATORE et alii (1988)
and CATALANO et alii (2001). For comparison, ARGNANI et
alii (2001) present seismic data for the area from a differ-
ent survey. The aim of this contribution is to use seismic
data from the offshore continuation of the Apennine
thrust belt to illuminate depositional systems and struc-
ture, especially to explore the relationships between the
orogenic belt, the foredeep and adjacent foreland. Of
course, the seismic data alone do not have the resolution
of stratigraphy or sedimentary facies available at outcrop.
The profiles do however resolve the structural controls
and scales of sedimentary basins which, when studied
using the preserved remnants in orogenic belts, can be
highly conjectural. It is not the intention to relate specific
seismic transects to specific cross-sections onshore.
Rather, general themes concerning scale and deduced
geological processes are drawn that the author hopes will
inform further research onshore.
The data for this paper come from a 2D multiclient
survey (CA99RE00) acquired by Fugro in 1998-1999 using
a 6000m streamer with 120 fold data recording. In com-
parison with surveys that use fewer receivers and shorter
streamers, this results in significant enhancement in sig-
nal-to-noise ratios and a correspondingly crisper image.
The data were reprocessed in 2000. Commercial confi-
dentiality prohibits precise identification of the data
shown here. Parts of two lines from the NE part of the
survey are interpreted here. They are also available for
inspection and interpretation via the Virtual Seismic
Atlas (www.seismicatlas.org), as are the links to the origi-
nal data that can be accessed under license in agreements
directly with Fugro. The web-links to clean images in the
figure caption were correct at the time of writing.
REGIONAL SEISMIC LINE 1
A 2D seismic line in two-way-time from a multiclient
survey acquired by Fugro is presented for offshore SE
Calabria (fig. 2). The precise location and orientation can-
not be reported here for commercial reasons. The line
crosses the thrust front of the Calabrian accretionary
prism, the foredeep and a broad arch of adjacent crust
that represents the offshore continuation of the Apulian
foreland of SE Italy. The structure and related stratigra-
phy is described for different parts of the section, working
from NE to the SW.
THE FORELAND
The NE portion of the seismic line images a broad
antiformal arch (the «Apulian swell» of AUROUX et alii,
1985; CATALANO et alii, 2001), more than 50 km across
defined by the seabed and the general orientation of
stratal reflectors (fig. 3). The requirement to retain spatial
anonymity of the line prohibits direct ties to wells in this
area. Consequently there is an inherent uncertainty in
stratigraphic calibration of reflectors. The youngest strata
have good frequency content a define a carapace some
200-400 ms TWT thick. This approximates to 300-600m
thick. It overlies a prominent reflector (M on fig. 3) that
can be traced across the profile beneath which there is
variable degradation of amplitude and frequency. Where
this degradation is low the underlying reflectors show
upward truncation against the prominent reflector (M) –
relationships interpreted here as due to erosion. Conse-
quently the prominent reflector (M) surface is interpreted
as the intra-Messinian unconformity that is recognised
onshore. The patchy degradation of imaging below this
surface may reflect varying degrees of weathering and
palaeokarst formation formed during the intra-Messinian
low stand in Mediterranean sea-level. The strata overlying
this surface are therefore interpreted as being latest
Messinian through Plio-Quaternary in age.
A striking feature of the interpreted intra-Messinian
reflector is the widespread faulting that affects it. Where
data quality permits, these faults can be traced into the
underlying strata. There are no unequivocal faults that
exist in these deeper strata that are cut by the intra-
Messinian reflector. This indicates that faulting, in this
part of the profile, is late-Messinian to «early» Pliocene in
age. The faults show normal offsets with generally low
apparent throws of a few 10s ms. These are however
enough to offset the seismic stratigraphy within the pre-
Messinian strata. The faults also penetrate the overlying
carapace of Pliocene strata. However, all the faults on the
section line of fig. 3 are sealed stratigraphically by the
younger sediments indicating that, here at least, the nor-
mal faults are no longer active. This deduction confirms
that of ARGNANI (2006) based on other seismic data.
The seabed on fig. 3 is irregular, showing abrupt steps
against which underlying reflectors are truncated. These
might be mistaken for fault offsets except that in all cases
the steps are underlain by continuous stratal reflectors.
Therefore they are interpreted as erosional features. The
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 271

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE APENNINE THRUST BELT 271

Fig. 2 - Regional seismic line 1: a) shows the clean seismic data; b) shows a simplified interpretation and the location of the more detailed
images. Both diagrams have two-way-time as the vertical scale and there is significant vertical exaggeration in this display. Sea level has been
cropped as part of the anonymizing of the profile. All seismic images used in this paper are available on the Virtual Seismic Atlas via the hub
link: http://see-atlas.leeds.ac.uk:8080/homePages/generic.jsp?resourceId=090000648000f2db. All seismic images used in this paper are available
as high-resolution colour Jpegs on the Virtual Seimic Atlas: www.seismicatlas.org <http://www.seismicatlas.org>.
– Il profilo sismico regionale n. 1: a) Profilo non interpretato; b) interpretazione del profilo sismico e localizzazione delle immagini di maggiore
dettaglio. In entrambe le rappresentazioni la scala verticale, fortemente esagerata, è espressa in tempi di andata e ritorno. L’indicazione circa la
posizione del livello del mare sul profilo è stata omessa per vincoli di riservatezza.

post Messinian sedimentary carapace contains broad sig-
moidal reflector patterns and asymptotic convergence
indicative of very broad depositional structures. Both the
erosional surface and interpreted bed-forms indicate
mobile sediment on the foreland arch with the possibility
of this region acting as a sediment source to adjacent
basinal areas through the Plio-Quaternary.
In the absence of well-data for this study, the adjacent
onshore outcrops of the Apulian promontory (as used by
CATALANO et alii, 2001) may be used to calibrate the Plio-
Quaternary imaged on fig. 3. The Plio-Quaternary sedi-
mentary cover is thin, overlying a platform sequence from
Eocene back through the Mesozoic to Upper Triassic at
depth with a total thickness of 4-5 km. The deep structure
of this stratigraphy is not relevant to this paper. However,
the structural simplicity of the pre-Messinian strata on
the profile is evident where seismic quality permit.
THE MODERN PLATFORM MARGIN
The broad arch of the seabed across the foreland is
cut abruptly by an escarpment that faces into the adja-
cent foredeep (fig. 4); part of the so-called «Apulian
escarpment». This seabed feature is interpreted here as a
fault scarp with normal offset. The stratal reflectors ter-
minate abruptly against this and none can be traced
directly across its subsurface continuation, consistent
with the fault interpretation. The escarpment, and criti-
cally, its upthrown crest is not significantly degraded
indicating that there has not been significant erosion of
this feature and implying that it has remained submarine
since it formed. There is no evidence that, on the section
line of fig. 2, this fault has any pre-Messinian history.
The footwall to the fault scarp contains an equivalent
seismic stratigraphy to that described for the region to
the NE (fig. 3). A prominent reflector (M of fig. 4) sepa-
rates a superficial sedimentary carapace with good ampli-
tude and frequency content from a more degraded sub-
strate. Reflectors in the substrate are truncated upwards
against the bounding surface. Consequently the promi-
nent reflector is again interpreted as the intra-Messinian
unconformity surface, overlain by Plio-Quaternary sedi-
ments. The unconformity is cut by numerous faults. How-
ever, their interpretation is more equivocal in this part of
the section. The majority have normal offsets and appear
to be sealed stratigraphically by the overlying Plio-Qua-
ternary sequence. There is no evidence for erosion of the
upthrown sides of the faults indicating that they formed
under water. Four faults have been identified on fig. 4
with plausible reverse offsets, including one adjacent to
the main seabed escarpment. Small-offset reverse faults
have been identified in the Adriatic Sea, ahead of the
main Apennine orogenic front (ARGNANI & GAMBERI,
1997), interpreted as having nucleated on older normal
faults (BUTLER et alii, 2004). In fig. 4 the notion that
reverse faulting is related to fault inversion is harder to
demonstrate as clear correlations of pre-Messinian reflec-
tors are ambiguous.
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 272

272 R.W.H. BUTLER

Fig. 3 - Detail of regional seismic line 1 (location on fig. 2) through the offshore continuation of the Apulian platform: a) clean line; b) inter-
pretation. Reflector M is interpreted as an intra-Messinian surface, plausibly the emergent erosional unconformity formed at maximum low-
stand of Mediterranean sea level. High-resolution colour versions of these images are available on the Virtual Seimic Atlas: www.seismicatlas.
org <http://www.seismicatlas.org>.
– Particolare del profilo sismico regionale n. 1 (vedasi la fig. 2 per la localizzazione) attraverso il prolungamento a mare della piattaforma apula:
a) Profilo non interpretato; b) Profilo interpretato. Il riflettore M è qui interpretato come una superficie di discontinuità stratigrafica intra-messi-
niana, e più precisamente come la discordanza angolare erosiva che si è formata durante l’abbassamento del livello del mare nel Mediterraneo
legato alla crisi di salinità.

Notwithstanding the comments above, in contrast to
the more NE portion of the regional line (shown in fig. 3),
reflector quality is better maintained at depth in fig. 4.
Beneath the intra-Messinian marker, on either side of the
seabed escarpment there is an inclined break in reflector
orientation, with deeper strata dipping more steeply than
those above. Therefore the deeper parts of the Apulian
stratigraphy pick out a flexure down towards the modern
orogenic front. The seismic data are insufficient to deter-
mine whether these deep inclined reflectors are clino-
forms, and hence represent an ancestral hinge margin to
the Apulian platform, or represent tectonic structure.
Whatever their origin, the onlapping sequence above seals
the geometry. Their structure is tracked regionally by the
intra-Messinian reflector.
On the downthrown side of the seabed escarpment it
is possible to identify a candidate correlative reflector to
the intra-Messinian unconformity (fig. 4). This is overlain
by a near-transparent interval with a constant thickness of
about 120 ms. Both sides of this interval are offset by
minor faults and it is onlapped by the overlying carapace
of younger sediment. The interval is interpreted here as a
thin veneer of Upper Messinian sediment, potentially
chiefly resedimented evaporites as characterise the «Sec-
ond Cycle» Messinian strata of Sicily. Its uniform seismic
facies and thickness suggests that this thin unit was
deposited at near horizontal on a low-relief local basin
floor. The present inclination of this horizon therefore
represents a post Messinian tilt, down towards the orogen.
In this regard the sea floor escarpment represents an
abrupt morphological hinge, separating the true foreland
with a differentially subsided foredeep moat to the orogen.
The post-Messinian sedimentary carapace of this seg-
ment (fig. 4) of the seismic profile shows more complex
depositional geometry compared with its more NE con-
tinuation. The shallow section, on the upthrown side of
the sea bed escarpment, shows a broadly arched reflector
pattern together with onlap onto tilted portions of the
intra-Messinian reflector. In general the faults that offset
this surface are simply banked over and sealed strati-
graphically by the younger strata. In one instance the
younger sediments show apparent clinoformal geometries
spilling over a fault. This is a direct subsurface analogue
for the architectures displayed by the Pleistocene cal-
carenites of the Matera area of the Apulian foreland (TRO-
PEANO et alii, 2002). Similar geometries are also described
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 273

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE APENNINE THRUST BELT 273

Fig. 4 - Detail of regional seismic line 1 (location on fig. 2) through the SE margin of the Apulian platform: a) clean line; b) interpretation.
High-resolution colour versions of these images are available on the Virtual Seimic Atlas: www.seismicatlas.org <http://www.
seismicatlas.org>.
– Particolare del profilo sismico regionale n. 1 (vedasi la fig. 2 per localizzarne approssimativamente la traccia) attraverso il margine sud-orientale
della piattaforma apula: a) Profilo non interpretato; b) Profilo interpretato.

from the Hyblean foreland of Sicily (BUTLER et alii,
1997). The reflector architectures for the post Messinian
strata imaged on the SW side of the seabed escarpment
are broadly similar, with faults banked over by the
younger sediments. However, at the escarpment itself,
both at its crest and along its base, the younger sediment
carapace is effectively absent. Messinian strata are inter-
preted as forming the modern seabed here. This interpre-
tation implies that the younger sediment have been swept
out by bottom currents here.
THE FOREDEEP
Sediments of the Apulian margin are imaged dipping
towards the orogenic front, defining the NE margin of a
narrow foredeep basin (fig. 5). These include the inferred
intra-Messinian reflector identified on the foreland arch of
Apulia (fig. 3). The seismic data beneath this surface has
reduced amplitude and frequency content. Nevertheless
some low-angle reflector terminations can be identified
implying that the interpreted intra-Messinian reflector is
an erosional unconformity. There is no indication of sig-
nificant thicknesses of evaporites either above or below
this unconformity, indicating that, at the time of the
Messinian, this section lay outside any evaporite depocen-
tre and was therefore, part of the upstanding Apulian plat-
form. A corollary of this deduction is that the present oro-
genward dip is an exclusively post-Messinian feature.
The inclined Apulian strata and intra-Messinian sur-
face are onlapped by a sub-horizontal stratal package that
represents the sedimentary fill to the modern foredeep.
These sediments show no indication of incremental tilt-
ing and they lap against small-offset fault scarps in the
top of the Apulian sequence. Consequently they have been
deposited after the entire tilting and deformation of the
foreland. The period of tilting is marked by non-deposi-
tion without erosion, presumably in a submarine setting.
THE ACCRETIONARY PRISM
The SE margin of the fordeep basin floor is defined
by an escarpment that represents the offshore continua-
tion of the Apennine orogenic front (fig. 5). The seabed in
inclined into the foredeep basin to define the upper sur-
face of the orogenic thrust wedge. The lower surface is
more difficult to define as reflector quality beneath the
wedge is strongly degraded. This is a general problem in
thrust belts, exacerbated here by the varying water depth
over the structure. This, coupled with presumed higher
seismic velocities within the orogenic wedge in compari-
son with the adjacent foredeep sediments, generates
velocity pull up. It is important therefore to establish the
importance of this in creating reflector geometry, espe-
cially the apparent antiformal fold structure seen adja-
cent to the thrust front and the apparent folding in the
foredeep sediments.
Fig. 6 shows a simple depth conversion of the oro-
genic front. In the absence of precise seismic interval
velocity data it is necessarily speculative. However it
serves to illustrate that the imaged structure may be a
pull-up artefact, or at least have a strongly modified
geometry in reality. The standard sea water velocity (1500
m/s) is combined with published estimates for the Plio-
Quaternary sediments in the Ionian Sea (1800 m/s; CATA-
LANO et alii, 2001). The velocity of the accretionary prism
is likely to be heterogeneous but significantly higher than
the adjacent (and overlying) Plio-Quaternary sediments.
As there are reflections emanating from underthrust
Apulian units, presumed to be carbonates, it is likely that
the structure of the accretionary prism does not generate
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 274

274 R.W.H. BUTLER

Fig. 5 - Detail of regional seismic line 1 (location on fig. 2) through the Apennine orogenic front, the leading part of the orogenic wedge,
together with the adjacent foredeep basin: a) clean line; b) interpretation. High-resolution colour versions of these images are available on
the Virtual Seimic Atlas: www.seismicatlas.org <http://www.seismicatlas.org>.
– Particolare del profilo sismico regionale n. 1 (vedasi la fig. 2 per localizzarne approssimativamente la traccia) attraverso il fronte della cate-
na appenninica, il margine esterno del cuneo orogenico ed attraverso l’adiacente bacino di avanfossa: a) Profilo non interpretato; b) Profilo
interpretato.

significant velocity inversions. Consequently an upper

Fig. 6 - Investigation of velocity pull-up effects expected by varying
water depth and seismic velocity in the shallow section: a) shows the
geometry in time, b) is a simple depth conversion of the same data.
See text for discussion.
– Valutazione degli effetti del fenomeno di pull-up delle velocità, così
come stimati per varie colonne d’acqua e velocità di propagazione delle
onde sismiche nella parte più superficiale della sezione: a) Geometria
ricostruita utilizzando la velocità di propagazione delle onde sismiche;
b) Conversione in profondità ottenuta dall’interpretazione degli stessi
dati. Per la discussione si rimanda al testo.
bound of around 4000 m/s (the assumed seismic velocity
of Mesozoic Apulian carbonates, CATALANO et alii, 2001).
The value used here is 3000 m/s. The modelling is simplis-
tic in that the foredeep sediments are assigned a single
velocity when it is likely to increase with depth.
The result of the simple velocity modelling demon-
strates that the apparent antiform in Apulian carbonates at
the orogenic front could be explained as velocity pull-up,
rather than be a real geological feature. The pull-up effect
results from a combination of a reduction in water depth
across the orogenic front, coupled with an increase in seis-
mic velocity from the sediments of the foredeep to the
accretionary complex. Note that elsewhere in the southern
Apennines there are real structures found beneath the
allochthon, proven by drilling (e.g. BUTLER et alii, 2004).
The structure of the orogenic wedge is, in common
with many examples around the world, rather obscure.
There is reflector continuity suggesting that, at least in
this leading portion of the orogen, the internal structure
of the thrust belt is not chaotic. Further, the toe of the
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 275
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE APENNINE THRUST BELT
Fig. 7 - Regional seismic line 2: a) clean line; b) interpretation. M is the inferred Messinian reflector. See text for discussion. High-resolution
colour versions of these images are available on the Virtual Seimic Atlas: www.seismicatlas.org <http://www.seismicatlas.org>.
– Profilo sismico regionale n. 2: a) Profilo non interpretato; b) Profilo interpretato. Il riflettore messiniano è indicato con M. Per la discussione si
rimanda al testo.
prism is rimmed by a high amplitude package that may
inhibit imaging beneath. This package may represent thin
Messinian evaporites and carbonates, as found onland on
the Gela Nappe of Sicily (e.g. BUTLER et alii, 1992). The
lower part of the accretionary complex is overlain by a
draping sequence of, presumably Quaternary sediments
that show little deformation. Higher on the slope this
sequence is deformed in growth folds. However, the
younger sediments on the carapace are undeformed.
The orogenic front is marked by a step on the seabed
and the change from horizontal strata of the foredeep to
inclined sediments that drape the thrust belt. There is little
apparent offset of the younger sediment. However, just
below these strata there are repeated high-amplitude reflec-
tors that may represent imbricated Messinian evaporites
and carbonates. Again – analogous geometries can be found
onland in the Gela Nappe of Sicily (BUTLER et alii, 1992).
REGIONAL SEISMIC LINE 2
For comparative purposes, a second line from Fugro’s
multiclient survey is provided in fig. 7. As before, the pre-
cise location and orientation cannot be disclosed. How-
ever, it lies further offshore modern Italy than fig. 2. It is
discussed briefly starting on the Apulian (NE) side of the
section.
Elements of the seismic stratigraphy for the Apulian
platform, identified on the northern profile (fig. 2), may be
identified on fig. 7. These include a prominent shallow
reflector that is overlain by high frequency data and under-
lain by more degraded reflector character. Again, this fea-
ture is interpreted as the intra-Messinian unconformity,
overlain by a thin carapace of Plio-Quaternary sediments.
This tectonic domain terminates to the SW at a prominent
275
seabed escarpment that represents the submarine expres-
sion of a normal-offset fault. This has the same character
as the Apulian escarpment of CATALANO et alii (2001, their
fig. 5), although in their profile (CROP C9434), the geology
is largely obscured by diffractions. Here (fig. 7). the foot-
wall block (upthrown) side of the fault shows little evi-
dence of significant erosion of the intra-Messinian uncon-
formity or of the older carbonates below, although the
crest of the fault itself does appear to have been slightly
degraded. Chaotic seismic facies at the foot of the escarp-
ment may represent the detritus shed from the upper parts
of the scarp. Notwithstanding these comments, the high
preservation level of this escarpment suggests that it never
experienced long-term subaerial emergence.
The base of the seabed escarpment (fig. 7) forms the
NE retaining margin to a narrow sedimentary basin.
More faults are interpreted at depth, banked over by the
modern basin fill. However, the SW margin of this
basin is defined by deformed substrate that continues
across the rest of the profile. For the purposes of this
paper this tract is divided into 3 «domains» which are
described in turn.
The upper portion of domain 1 yields high amplitude
reflectors interpreted as a succession of Messinian evap-
orites. They are faulted. The interpretation of the inferred
Messinian reflector and faults shown on fig. 7 is highly
non-unique, given the complexity of structure and the
limitations of seismic interpretation in 2D. However, the
geometry shown here displays both normal and reverse
faults. The overlying (inferred Plio-Quaternary) sediments
show deformation that varies, with folds extending to the
modern seabed with other segments effectively unde-
formed. In places the carapace of young sediments
appears to seal significant post-Messinian thrust struc-
tures. The NE limit of domain 1 is sealed stratigraphically
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 276
276 R.W.H. BUTLER
by younger sediment. The internal structure of domain 1
is difficult to resolve. Given the complexity of surface
morphology and faulting, it is plausible that much of
domain 1 consists of Messinian evaporites, perhaps with
other sedimentary fill to the Miocene foredeep. The array
of mini-basins at the surface contribute to a «cobble-
stone» type morphology.
The deep structure of the domain 1 is difficult to
deduce. However, there are semi-continuous, gently-
inclined reflectors at depth that tentatively are interpreted
as being part of the Apulian carbonate sequence. If the
Apulian carbonates do indeed continue beneath domain 1
then the notion that, for this part of the Ionian Sea, the
modern offset of the seabed (Apulian escarpment) is a
reactivated ocean-continent transition of Mesozoic age
(CATALANO et alii, 2001; ARGNANI, 2005) is erroneous.
This boundary, if it exists on this line of section, would lie
at depth and has been overstepped tectonically by the
emplaced allochthon.
Domain 2 has been defined by the nature of the young
sediment carapace and its relationship with its substrate
which, unlike domain 1, is not marked by a high ampli-
tude reflector sequence. A tentative interpretation is that
high velocity Messinian evaporite deposits are absent from
this part of the section and that the chaotic reflectors
beneath the upper carapace represents deformed (pre-
Messinian) accretion complex. The boundary between
these domains, labelled here «tectonic boundary A» (fig. 7)
has a weak series of reflectors dipping SW – interpreted as
being the continuation of Messinian strata in the footwall
to a major thrust. This tectonic boundary is sealed strati-
graphically by sediments that are only weakly-folded indi-
cating that it is not a significant active feature at present.
Deformation within domain 2 is difficult to interpret given
its chaotic reflector character. However, those folds that
are found within the young sedimentary carapace con-
tinue up to the modern seabed.
Domain 2 is bounded to the SW by a tectonic contact
(tectonic contact B on fig. 7) and a major change in
seabed morphology. The contact is interpreted as a
thrust, apparently dipping SW. An inclined series of semi-
continuous reflectors forms the footwall to this thrust
and these continue up to the top of domain 2. Thus is
appears that domain 3 overthrusts domain 2. This tec-
tonic contact may have recent activity at the seabed as
there are no young sediments that clearly seal it. This is
the only major structure imaged on fig. 7 (or indeed on
fig. 2) that can accommodate significant late Quaternary
displacement. Given the (NE-SW) trend of the profile, it
is likely that this domain boundary also accommodates
significant left-lateral out-of-plane motion.
As with other parts of the section (fig. 7), the internal
structure of domain 3 is difficult to deduce. However the
upper part of this domain contains a deformed high ampli-
tude reflector sequence which, as elsewhere, is interpreted
as Messinian evaporites. These reflectors, together with the
overlying (Plio-Quaternary) carapace, are folded and cut by
faults. Collectively these structures have generated a corru-
gated seabed and a modern series of mini-basins.
The majority of faults in domain 3 show normal off-
sets, indicating that this part of the modern orogenic
wedge is undergoing significant extension. These faults
define narrow mini-basins that are ponding sediment in
what is, tectonically, a thrust-top setting. There are appar-
ent reverse faults and contractional folds that deform the
inferred Messinian reflector. However, most of the stratal
relationships relate to the local, chiefly extensional, faults
rather than to thrusts and folds in the thrust wedge.
Deformation continues to the modern seabed.
DISCUSSION: IMPLICATIONS FOR GEOLOGICAL
INVESTIGATIONS IN THE APENNINES
The geological interpretations developed in the earlier
part of this paper are collated onto two «geoseismic» sec-
tions (fig. 8) that portray the main relationships evident
on the two profiles (figs. 2 and 7). These are used to
address a number of issues relevant for understanding the
tectonostratigraphic evolution of the surrounding thrust
systems, in the Apennines and on Sicily.
The orogenic foreland shows substantial amounts of
individual rather low-displacement faulting that has cre-
ated a rough sea bed upon which Plio-Quaternary sedi-
ments have accumulated. The lower parts of the succes-
sion banks across fault scarps. Analogous tectono-
stratigraphic relationships are described on the Hyblean
foreland of Sicily (BUTLER et alii, 1997) and for the Mat-
era area of Apulia (TROPEANO et alii, 2002). Apart from
the inferred Messinian surface, which correlates with the
Mediterranean-wide low-stand in sea-level, there is no
evidence for any other significant erosion or emergence
of the Apulian foreland on the section lines presented
here, even though the foreland area is both faulted and
folded into a broad arch. These deformations must there-
fore have occurred within a regime of regional subsi-
dence. Arching is not accompanied by uplift on these pro-
files so the DOGLIONI et alii (1994) proposal that the
Apulian arch is a manifestation of lithospheric buckling
(i.e. end-load-driven contractional deformation) is not
supported by these profiles.
Although the post-Messinian faults found on the
Apulian foreland are sealed stratigraphically by younger
parts of the Plio-Quaternary successions, larger faults are
present and retain escarpments to control the margins of
the foredeep. Foreland faulting has been invoked to
explain abrupt facies and thickness variations in ancient
foredeep successions in the Sicily (BUTLER et alii, 1992)
and within parts of the Apennines (SCISCIANI et alii,
2002). Faults of this type disrupt the simplicity of the
foreland monocline that otherwise dips into the orogen.
Consequently, the lateral onlap pattern for foredeep sedi-
mentation will be complex. Ideal models for flexural sub-
sidence in foredeep basins predict that the lateral migra-
tion of onlap of foredeep deposits charts the lateral
migration of the advancing orogenic load and therefore
act as a proxy for tectonic rates (CIPOLLARI et alii, 1995).
Onlapping onto a faulted substrate will necessarily be
irregular and might erroneously be interpreted as chart-
ing pulses in orogenic activity. An alternative interpreta-
tive strategy might be to use punctuated records of the
lateral migration in onlap of foredeep sediments to
detect fault scarps in the ancestral foreland now stacked
within Apennine thrust sheets.
The floor of the modern foredeep basin (fig. 8a) is
highly confined with a width of only 5-6 km. The scale of
the various depositional systems here must therefore be
rather small in 2D. Further, the foreland area can act as a
significant sediment source in addition to material derived
from the orogen. Indeed, the foreland area is higher-stand-
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 277
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN THE APENNINE THRUST BELT
Fig. 8 - Interpreted «geoseismic» sections illustrating the key tectono-stratigraphic relationships deduced from the two regional seismic lines
(figs. 2 and 7).
– Interpretazione delle sezioni «geo-sismiche» che mostra i rapporti-chiave fra tettonica e sedimentazione dedotti dallo studio delle due sezioni
sismiche analizzate in questo lavoro (figg. 2 e 7).
ing with respect to the frontal part of the thrust belt. This
is the same relationship as between the Hyblean foreland
and the Gela Nappe in Sicily (e.g. GRASSO et alii, 1995).
Offshore in the current study, the post-Messinian succes-
sion has been eroded at the modern seabed and internally
shows evidence for submarine (shelfal) resedimentation
processes. Consequently, the modern foredeep may be
receiving sediment from the foreland. Given the continuity
of the inferred intra-Messinian reflector across the region,
in this profile there is no significant erosion of older strata
during Plio-Quaternary times. Indeed the crest of the
seabed fault scarp («Apulian escarpment’) has not been
degraded significantly. Elsewhere and in equivalent tec-
tonic settings in the past, however, the interplay between
sea-level and foreland faulting may have acted to expose
substrate for erosion and resedimentation into the fore-
deep. Sediment sourcing from both the orogen and the
foreland is a feature of some Neogene successions in the
southern Apennines (e.g. the Langhian-Serravalian Cilento
Group, CAVUOTO et alii, 2004; Tortonian Gorgoglione-
Serra Palazzo units, SGROSSO, 1998).
All the basins imaged on the seismic sections (fig. 8)
are generally only a few km across, separated by tectoni-
cally-controlled sills. The 3D sediment pathways are not
directly deducible from the 2D seismic profiles. However,
given the complexity of basin forms, the depositional fill
for these mini-basins is likely to vary on the km scale.
This should be the expectation for thrust-top, and indeed,
segments of the ancestral foredeep basins of the Apen-
nines (c.f. PESCATORE & SENATORE, 1986; SGROSSO,
1998). In general, stratigraphic continuity and long-range
(10s-100s km) litho-stratigraphic or facies correlations
should not be expected, with obvious exceptions such as
aspects of the Numidian sand fairway (e.g. PATACCA et
277
alii, 1992) and parts of the Marnosa Arenacea system of
the Northern Apennines (e.g. AMY & TALLING, 2006).
The modern orogenic wedge shows evidence for signif-
icant post-Messinian extension creating local mini-basins.
This tectonic style might be expected to have occurred on
parts of the Neogene orogenic wedge onshore. In Sicily,
significant extension has not been recognised, with Neo-
gene statal relationships on the Gela Nappe and in the Cal-
tanissetta basin interpreted exclusively in terms of thrust
related growth folding (e.g. BUTLER & LICKORISH, 1997;
LICKORISH et alii, 1999). However, in parts of the southern
Apennines the tectono-stratigraphic relationships are more
equivocal. The effect of extension within the orogenic
wedge is to cause further shortening at the thrust front.
Therefore some of the substantial thrust displacements
inferred for some parts of the Apennine belt, may reflect a
combination of subduction-related contraction and more
superficial gravity spreading in the orogenic wedge.
CONCLUSIONS
The seismic reflection profiles from the northern Ion-
ian Sea reveal the relationships between the Apennine oro-
genic wedge and the adjacent Apulian foreland. Seismic
stratigraphy of the foreland includes a prominent reflec-
tor, interpreted as the intra-Messinian unconformity, that
separates a shallow (Plio-Quaternary) sequence from
underling platform carbonates within which reflector
character is rather degraded. The youngest Plio-Quater-
nary sediments seal an array of generally low-displace-
ment faults with normal throws that offset the underlying
units, especially well-picked out by the intra-Messinian
unconformity. The modern, relatively shallow-water, Apu-
05 261-BUTLER 269-278 27-07-2009 8:33 Pagina 278
278 R.W.H. BUTLER
lian shelf is terminated towards the orogen by a fault
scarp, apparently part of the same series that are found
throughout the foreland. On the orogen side of this
escarpment the Apulian series dips towards the orogen
and this slope, together with the fault scarp, defines the
outer margin of the foredeep. Foredeep sediments simply
onlap the surface and show no evidence for a lateral
migration of the foredeep basin during their deposition.
Young, presumably Quaternary, sediments drape much of
the outer part of the orogenic wedge. The internal struc-
ture of the orogenic wedge is obscure but its upper surface
includes thrusts and significant numbers of extensional
faults. Collectively these control the scale of thrust-top
mini-basins. These mini-basins and the foredeep are only
a few km across. As the foreland is at a shallower bathym-
etry that the frontal part of the orogenic wedge it can have
acted as a significant source of sediment into the foredeep
and, potentially, the outer parts of the thrust-top basin
array. Significant active lateral translations of the orogen
appear to be restricted to the southern part of the study
area. The northern section shows little evidence for active
deformation while in the southern profile a proportion of
the translation of the orogenic wedge appears to be driven
by gravity spreading rather than be wholly due to subduc-
tion processes. The Apulian platform adjacent to the oro-
gen, and beneath its leading edge, shows little evidence for
significant internal thrusting, with warps in the seismic
reflectors better explained by velocity pull-up rather than
be real geological structures.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The clean seismic images used in this paper come from the Vir-
tual Seismic Atlas (www.seismicatlas.org) where they may be freely
accessed and interpreted. Tony Pedley of Fugro is thanked for pro-
viding seismic data for the VSA and permitting its use on these
terms. The interpretations are exclusively that of RWHB who takes
full responsibility for the validity or otherwise of them. Competing
interpretations may be submitted to the VSA, as discussed on the
web-site. Silvio Seno and Ardrea Argnani are thanked for construc-
tive reviews of an early draft of this manuscript.
The author was introduced to the Apennine-Sicilian orogens by
Mario Grasso and Tonino Decandia who shared a passion for their
local geology and a desire to challenge the consensus. The paper is
dedicated to their memory.
REFERENCES
AMY L.A. & TALLING P.J. (2006) - Anatomy of turbidites and linked
debrites based on long-distance (120 × 30 km) bed correlation,
Marnoso Arenacea Formation, Northern Apennines, Italy. Sedi-
mentology 53, 161-212.
ARGNANI A. (2005) - Possible record of a Triassic ocean in the
southern Apennines. Boll. Soc. Geol. It., 124, 109-121.
ARGNANI A. (2006) - Some issues regarding the central Mediterranean neo-
tectonics. Bolletino di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata, 47, 13-37.
ARGNANI A. & GAMBERI F. (1997) - Stili strutturali al fronte delle
catena appenninica nell’Adriatico centro-settentrionale. Studi
Geologici Camerti, v. speciale 1995/1, 19-28.
ARGNANI A., FRUGONI F., COSI R., LIGI M. & FAVALI P. (2001) - Tec-
tonics and seismicity of the Apulian Ridge south of Salento penin-
sula (southern Italy). Annali di Geofisica, 44, 527-540.
AUROUX C., MASCLE J., CAMPREDON R., MASCLE G. & ROSSI S.
(1985) - Cadre géodynamique et évolution récente de la Dorsale
Apulienne et de ses bordures. Giornale Geol., 47, 101-127.
Received 15 January 2008; revised version accepted 23 April 2009.
BUTLER R.W.H., GRASSO M. & LA MANNA F. (1992) - Origin and
deformation of the Neogene-Recent Maghrebian foredeep at the
Gela Nappe, SE Sicily. Journal of the Geological Society, Lon-
don, 149, 547-556.
BUTLER R.W.H., GRASSO M., GARDINER W. & SEDGELEY D. (1997) -
Depositional patterns and their tectonic controls within the Plio-
Quaternary carbonate sands and muds of onshore and offshore
SE Sicily (Italy). Marine Petrol. Geol., 14, 879-892.
BUTLER R.W.H., MAZZOLI S., CORRADO S., DE DONATIS M., DI BUCCI
D., GAMBINI R., NASO G., NICOLI C., SCROCCA D., SHINER P. &
ZUCCONI V. (2004) - Applying thick-skinned tectonic models to
the Apennine thrust belt of Italy: limitations and implications. In:
Thrust tectonics and hydrocarbon systems (ed. K. McClay),
Mem. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., 82, 647-667.
CATALANO R., DOGLIONI C. & MERLINI S. (2001) - On the Mesozoic
Ionian Basin. Geophysical Journal International, 144, 49-64.
CAVUOTO G., MARTELLI L., NARDI G. & VALENTE A. (2004) - Deposi-
tional systems and architecture of Oligo-Miocene turbidite succes-
sions in Cilento (Southern Apennines). GeoActa, 3, 129-147.
CIPOLLARI P., COSENTINO D. & PAROTTO M. (1995) - Modello cinema-
tico-strutturale dell’Italia centrale. Studi Geologici Camerti, spec.
v. 1995/2, 135-143.
DOGLIONI C., MONGELLI F. & PIERI P. (1994) - The Puglia uplift (SE-
Italy): an anomaly in the foreland of the Apennine subduction due
to buckling of a thick continental lithosphere. Tectonics, 13,
1309-1321.
ELTER P., GRASSO M., PAROTTO M. & VEZZANI L. (2004) - Structural
setting of the Apennine-Maghrebian thrust belt. Episodes, 26,
205-211.
GRASSO M., MIUCCIO G., MANISCALCO R., GAROFALO P., LA MANNA
F. & STAMILLA R. (1995) - Plio-Pleistocene structural evolution of
the western margin of the Hyblean Plateau and the Maghrebian
foredeep, SE Sicily. Implications for the deformational history of
the Gela Nappe. Annales Tectonicae, 9, 7-21.
LICKORISH W.H., GRASSO M., BUTLER R.W.H., ARGNANI A. & MANI-
SCALCO R. (1999) - Structural styles and regional tectonic setting
of the ‘Gela Nappe’ and frontal part of the Maghrebian thrust belt
in Sicily. Tectonics, 18, 655-668.
PATACCA E., SATORI R. & SCANDONE P. (1990) - Tyrrhenian basin and
apenninic arcs: kinematic relations since Late Tortonian times.
Mem. Soc. Geol. It., 45, 425-451.
PATACCA E., SCANDONE P., BELLATALLA M., PERILLI N. & SANTINI U.
(1992) - The Numidian-sand event in the Southern Apennines.
Mem. Sci. Geol. Padova, 43, 297-337.
PESCATORE T.S. & SENATORE M. (1986) - A comparison between a
present-day (Taranto Gulf) and a Miocene (Irpinian Basin) fore-
deep of the Southern Apennines (Italy). In: Foreland Basins (Ed.
by P.A. Allen & P. Homewood). Spec. Publ. Int. Assoc. Sedi-
ment., 8, 169-182.
SCISIANI V., TAVARNELLI E. & CALAMITA F. (2002) - The interaction
of extensional and contractional deformations in orogenic belts:
the example of the Central Apennines, Italy. Journal of Structural
Geology, 10, 1647-1658.
SGROSSO I. (1998) - Possibile evoluzione cinematica Miocenica nell’oro-
gene centro-sud-Appenninico. Boll. Soc. Geol. It., 117, 679-724.
SENATORE M.R., NORMARK W.R., PESCATORE T. & ROSSI S. (1988) -
Structural framework of the Gulf of Taranto (Ionian Sea). Mem.
Soc. Geol. It., 41, 533-539.
TAVARNELLI E., BUTLER R.W.H., DECANDIA F.A., CALAMITA F.,
GRASSO M., ALVAREZ W. & RENDA P. (2004) - Implications of
fault reactivation and structural inheritance in the Cenozoic tecto-
nic evolution of Italy. In: The Geology of Italy (eds. U. Crescenti,
S. D’Offizi, S. Merlini & R. Sacchi), Soc. Geol. It., Special
Volume, 209-222.
TROPEANO M., SABATO L. & PIERI P. (2002) - Filling and cannibaliza-
tion of a foredeep: the Bradanic Trough, Southern Italy. In: Sedi-
ment flux to basins: causes, controls and consequences (eds. S.J.
Jones & L.E. Frostick), Geological Society London Special
Publications, 191, 55-79.