08 - Ann - Rev. EPS 23

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.
org/aronline
Annu. Rev. EarthPlanet. Sci. 1995.23:451-78 Copyright 1995by Annual (~ Reviews All rights reserved Inc.
SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only.
Nicholas Christie-Blick
and Neal W. Driscoll
Departmentof Geological Sciences and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of ColumbiaUniversity, Palisades, NewYork 10964-8000
KEY WORDS: sedimentation, unconformity, tectonics, seismic stratigraphy, sea level
INTRODUCTION Sequence stratigraphy is the study of sedimentsand sedimentaryrocks in terms of repetitively arranged facies and associated stratal geometry (Vail 1987;Van Wagoner al 1988, 1990; Christie-Blick 1991). It is a technique that can be et traced back to the workof Sloss et al (1949), Sloss (1950, 1963), and Wheeler (1958) on interregional unconformitiesof the NorthAmerican craton, but it became systematized onlyafter the advent of seismicstratigraphy, the stratigraphic interpretation of seismicreflection profiles (Vail et al 1977, 1984, 1991;Berg &Woolverton1985; Cross &Lessenger 1988; Sloss 1988; Christie-Blick et al 1990; Van Wagoner al 1990; Vail 1992). Sequence et stratigraphy makesuse of the fact that sedimentarysuccessions are pervadedby physical discontinuities. Theseare present at a great range of scales and they arise in a number quite of different ways:for example, fluvial incision and subaerial erosion (abovesea by level); submergence nonmarineor shallow-marinesediments during transof gression (flooding surfaces and drowning unconformities), in somecases with shoreface erosion (ravinement); shoreface erosion during regression; erosion in the marineenvironment a result of storms, currents, or mass-wasting; as and through condensation under conditions of diminished sediment supply (intervals of sedimentstarvation). The mainattribute shared by virtually all of these discontinuities, independent origin and scale, is that to a first approximation of they separate older deposits from youngerones. The recognition of discontinuities is therefore useful because they allow sedimentarysuccessions to be divided into geometrical units that have time-stratigraphic and hence genetic significance. Precise correlation has of course long been a goal in sedimentarygeology, and the emergence sequence stratigraphy does not imply that existing techof niques or data oughtto be discarded. Instead, sequencestratigraphy provides a 451 0084-6597/95/0515-0451$05.00
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 452 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &
unifying framework whichobservationsof intrinsic properties such as litholin ogy, fossil content, chemistry, magneticremanence,and age can be compared, correlated, and perhaps reevaluated. Withthe possible exception of sedimentar), units characterized by tabular layering over large areas and by the absence of significant facies variation (for example,somedeep-oceanicsediments), is hard to imagineattemptingto interpret the stratigraphic record in any other context. Wemakethis point because criticisms leveled at sequencestratigraphy havetended to lose sight of the essence of the technique. In this regard, it is unfortunate that the development sequencestratigof raphy has coincided with the reemergenceof the notion that in marine and marginal marine deposits sedimentary cyclicity is due primarily to eustatic change (Vail et al 1977; Haq et al 1987, 1988; Posamentieret al 1988; Sarg 1988; Dott 1992). Eustasy (global sea-level change) mayin fact have modulated sedimentationduring much earth history but, as a practical technique and in of spite of terminologycurrently in use, sequencestratigraphy does not actually require any assumptions about eustasy (Christie-Blick 1991). Indeed, one of the principal frontiers of this discipline today is the attempt to understandpatterns of sediment transport and accumulation as a dynamic phenomenon governed by a great many interrelated factors. In mostcases, specific attributes of sedimentary successions(for example, the lateral extent and thickness of a sedimentary unit, the distribution of included facies, or the existenceof a particular stratigraphic discontinuity) cannot be ascribed confidentlyto a single cause. In particular, the roles of"tectonic events," eustatic change, and variations in the supply of sediment can be partitioned only with difficulty (Officer &Drake1985, Schlanger1986, Burtonet al 1987, Cloetingh 1988, Kendall & Lerche 1988, Galloway 1989, Cathles & Hallam 1991, Christie-Blick 1991, Reynoldset al 1991, Sloss 1991, Underhill 1991, Kendallet al 1992, Karneret al 1993, Steckler et al 1993, Driscoll et al 1995). Eachof these factors operates at a broad range of time scales (cf Vail et al 1991), and none is truly independent owing to numerousfeedbacks. For example, the accumulation of sediment produces a load, which in manycases significantly modifies the tectonic component subsidence (Reynoldset al of 1991, Steckler et al 1993, Driscoll & Karner 1994). The space available for sedimentto accumulate therefore not simplya function of some is poorly defined combinationof subsidence and eustasy (the now-popular concept of "relative sea-level change") because that space is influenced by the amountof sediment that actually accumulates. As a result of feedbacks, there are also inherent leads and lags in the sedimentary system; these influence the timing of the sedimentary response to any particular driving signal in waysthat are difficult to predict quantitatively (Jordan & Flemings 1991, Reynolds et al 1991, Steckler et al 1993). This phenomenon particularly significant for efforts to sort out the role of eustasy is
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 453 (e.g. Christie-Bliek 1990, Christie-Blick et a11990,Watkins&Mountain 1990, Loutit 1992). If the phaserelation between eustatic signal and the resulting the stratigraphic record varies from one place to another, then the synchronyor lack thereof of observedstratigraphic events mayprove to be less useful than previouslythought as a criterion for distinguishing eustasy fromother controls on sedimentation. At the very least, the.comparison sites needsto take into of accountthe other importantvariables. Recognition these inherent difficulties has led to a gradualshift in research of objectives awayfrom such goals as deriving a "sea-level curve," and toward studies designedto investigate the effects of specific factors ki~own have to been important in governing sedimentation in a particular sedimentary basin or at a particular time in earth history. Among most important factors are the the rates and amplitudesof eustatic change,subsidencepatterns in tectonically active and inactive basins, sedimentflux or availability, the physiography of the depositional surface (for example,rampsvs settings with a well-developed shelf-slope break), and scale. The subdiscipline of high-resolution sequence stratigraphy has emerged the course of this research partly in response to in the need for detailed reservoir stratigraphy in maturepetroleumprovinces and partly becausemany the interesting issues needto be addressedat an outcrop of or boreholescale (meters to tens of meters) rather than at the scale of a conventional seismic reflection profile (Plint 1988, 1991; VanWagoner al 1990, et 1991; Jacquin et al 1991; Leckie et al 1991; Mitchum Van Wagoner & 1991; Posamentier et al 1992a; Flint &Bryant 1993; Garcia-Mond6jar Fern~indez& Mendiola 1993; Johnson 1994; Posamentier & Mutti 1994). Another frontier in sequencestratigraphy is the application of sequencestratigraphic principles to the study of pre-Mesozoic successions (e.g. Sarg &Lehmann 1986; Lindsay 1987; Christie-Blick et al 1988, 1995; Grotzinger et al 1989; Sarg 1989; Ebdonet al 1990; Kerans &Nance 1991; Levy & Christie-Blick 1991; Winter & Brink 1991; Bowring& Grotzinger 1992; Holmes& Christie-Blick 1993; Lindsay et al 1993; Sonnenfeld & Cross 1993; Southgate et al 1993; Yang& Nio 1993). In spite of its roots in Paleozoicgeology(Sloss et a11949),sequence stratigraphy has been undertaken primarily in Mesozoicand Cenozoicdeposits owingto the greater economicsignificance, more complete preservation, and amenabilityto precise dating of sedimentsand sedimentaryrocks of these eras. However, applications to older successions within the past decadehave provided important new perspectives about the developmentof individual sedimentary basins, as well as data relevant to many the issues outlined above. of Standard concepts and the basic methodology sequence stratigraphy are of describedin numerous articles, especially those by Haqet al (1987), Vail (1987), Baum&Vail (1988), Loutit et al (1988), Van Wagoneret al (1988, 1990), Posamentieret al (1988), Sarg (1988), Haq(1991), and Vail et ai (1991). this review, we have chosento emphasize areas of disagreementor controversy,
especially with respect to the origin of stratigraphic discontinuities, whichwe think is one of the mostinteresting general issues in sedimentarygeology.
CHOICE OF A FRAMEWORK FOR SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY

The objective of sequencestratigraphy is to determinelayer by layer how sedimentarysuccessionsare put together, from the smallest elementsto the largest. We thus interested in all of the physical surfaces that at different scales are separate one depositional element from another, and it could be argued that disagreements about how elements are defined and combinedare secondary to the overall task at hand. Indeed, different perceptions are in part a product of real differences that haveemerged the study of contrasting examples. in However, is clear that stratigraphy represents morethan a series of random it events. In many cases there exists a definite hierarchy in layering patterns. In choosing a framework sequence stratigraphy, it is therefore important to for select elements that are as far as possible genetically coherent and not merely utilitarian. Currently, at least three schemesare being used (Figure 1). Here we briefly makethe case for the form of sequence stratigraphy that emerged from Exxonin the 1970s and 1980s (Vail et al 1977, 1984; Vail 1987; Sarg 1988; VanWagoner al 1988, 1990), in preference to "genetic stratigraphy" et (Galloway1989) and "allostratigraphy" (NACSN 1983, Salvador 1987, Walker 1990, Blum 1993, Mutti et al 1994). Sequence stratigraphy and genetic stratigraphy differ primarily in the waythat fundamental depositional units are defined (Figure 1). In the case of sequence stratigraphy, the depositional sequenceis defined as a relatively conformable succession of genetically related strata bounded unconformities and their by correlative conformities (Mitchum 1977, Van Wagoner al 1990, Christieet Blick 1991). In the most general sense, an unconformity a buried surface of is erosion or nondeposition.In the context of sequencestratigraphy, it has been restricted to those surfacesthat are related (or are inferred to be related) at least locally to the loweringof depositional base level and henceto subaerial erosion or bypassing(Vail et al 1984, VanWagoner al 1988). According this defet to inition, intervals bounded marineerosion surfaces that do not pass laterally by into subaerial discontinuities are not sequences. The fundamentalunit of genetic stratigraphy, the genetic stratigraphic sequence,is bounded intervals by of sediment starvation (Galloway1989). Thesecorrespond approximatelywith times of maximum flooding and their significance is therefore quite different fromthat of subaerial erosion surfaces. Both kinds of sequence are recognizable in seismic reflection and borehole data. The principal argument adoptingthe genetic stratigraphic approachis for utilitarian: Intervals of sediment starvation are laterally persistent andpaleontologically useful. However, boundariesof genetic stratigraphic sequencesare the
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline
455
A
Set EXPLANATION
Genetic Stratigraphlc
Sequence
Fluvial and Coastal Plain Shoreface and Deltaic Shelf and Slope Submarine "Fan" Bas(nwardLimit of AIIoetratlgraphic Unit
CompositeInterval of Sediment Starvation
Depositional Sequence Boundary
Genetic Stratigraphic Sequence Bounclery
Depositional Sequence Boundary

Subaerial Hiatus ~
DISTANCE
Figure 1 Conceptual cross sections in relation to depth (A) and geological time (B) showing stratal geometry, the distribution of siliciclastic facies, and competing schemes for stratigraphic subdivision in a basin with a shelf-slope break (from NACSN 1983, Galloway 1999, Vail 1987, Christie-Blick 199l, Vail et al 1991). Boundaries of depositional sequences are associated at least in places with subaerial hiatuses, and they are the primary stratigraphie disec~atinuities in a succession. Boundaries of genetic strafigraphic sequences are located within intervals of sediment starvation, and they tend to onlap depositional sequence boundaries toward the basin margin (point X). Allostratigraphic units are defined and identified on the basis of bounding discontinuities. Allostratigraphic nomenclature is not strictly applicable where a bou~tiing unconformity passes laterally into a conformity or where objective evidence for a stratigraphic discontinuity is lacking (basinward of points labeled Y ).
located somewhat arbitrarily within more-or-less continuous successions. In somecases, no distinctive surfaces are present. In others, intervals of starvation may contain numerous marine disconformities or hardgrounds (lithified crusts, commordycomposed of caxbonate). Objective identification of the maximum flooding surface is usually difficult, and so genetic stratigraphy is especially limited in high-resolution subsurface and outcrop studies. Unduefocus on intervals of starvation also makesit possible to ignore the presence of prominent unconformities and to conclude (perhaps incorrectly) that sedimentary cyclicity is due primarily to variations in sediment supply (Galloway 1989), when the very existence of subaerial unconformities probably requires some additional mechanism (Christie-Blick 1991). The sequence stratigraphic approach can
also be problematic: The boundaries of depositional sequences tend to be of variable character, subject to modification during transgression, and difficult to recognize once they pass laterally into fully marinesuccessions. Yet sequence stratigraphy is preferable to genetic stratigraphy becausein many settings sequence boundariesrelated to subaerial erosion are the primary stratigraphic discontinuities and therefore the key to stratigraphic interpretation (Figure 1B; Posamentier & James 1993). Allostratigraphy differs from sequencestratigraphy and genetic stratigraphy by taking a more descriptive approach to physical stratigraphy (NACSN 1983, Salvador 1987, Walker 1990, Blum1993, Mutti et al 1994). As formalized in the North American Stratigraphic Code, allostratigraphic units are defined and identified on the basis of bounding discontinuities; in this respect they are fundamentallysimilar to those of sequencestratigraphy (Figure 1). Different terminology is justified by Walker(1990) on at least two counts. Sequence stratigraphic concepts are regarded as imprecise, especially with respect to scale and the meaningof such expressions as "relatively conformable" and "genetically related." It is also arguedthat sequence stratigraphy is not universally applicable--for example, in unifacial or nonmarinesuccessions or where uncertainty exists about the origin of a particular surface. Allostratigraphic nomenclature however, is, rejected here for several reasons, including historical priority. The designations of "alloformations," "allomembers," are unnecetc essary and overly formalistic; and these terms are not strictly applicable wherea boundingunconformitypasses laterally into a conformity (Baum Vail 1988) & or whereobjective evidence for a discontinuity is lacking (basinwardof points labeled Yin Figure 1). Aswith sequencestratigraphy, allostratigraphy involves makingjudgmentsabout the relative importanceof discontinuities (and hence the degree of conformabilityor genetic relatedness), but it does not require an attemptto distinguish surfaces of different origin. Nordoes this nongeneticterminologyhelp much wheresequence stratigraphic interpretation is admittedly difficult (for example, deposits lacking laterally traceable discontinuities). in
DEPARTURES FROM THE STANDARD MODEL

In the standard modelfor sequence stratigraphy (Figure 2), unconformityboundedsequences are composedof"parasequences" and "parasequence sets," whichare stratigraphic units characterized by overall upward-shoaling deof positional facies and bounded marineflooding surfaces and their correlative by surfaces (Vail 1987; Van Wagoner al 1988, 1990). These depositional eleet ments are themselves assembled into "systems tracts" (Brown&Fisher 1977) according to position within a sequenceand the mannerin whichparasequences or parasequence sets are arranged or stacked (Posamentier et al 1988, Van Wagoner al 1988). Bounding et unconformities are classified as type 1 or type 2 accordingto such criteria as the presenceor absenceof incised valleys, the
457
prominence of associated facies discontinuities, and whether or not lowstand deposits (LST in Figure 2) are present in the adjacent basin. This particular view of stratigraphy is best suited to the study of siliciclastic sedimentation at a differentially subsiding passive continental margin with a well-defined shelf-slope break, and under conditions of fluctuating sea level. As with any sedimentary model, it represents a distillation of case studies and inductive reasoning, and modifications are therefore needed for individual examples, for other depositional settings, and as concepts evolve (Posamentier & James 1993).
Parasequences Upward-shoalingsuccessions boundedby flooding surfaces (parasequences) are best developed nearshoreand shallow-marine in settings in both siliciclastic
A
EXPLANATION Fluvial andCoastal Plain Shoreface Deltaic and Shelf andSlope Submarine "Fan" sb2
<SMST
I
Ill
iv SubaerialHiatus ~~STbff _~,; ...... :~ " : ........ -DISTANCE
Intervalof Sediment Starvation (Maximum Flooding) Maximum , .
Figure2 Conceptual cross sections in relation to depth (A) and geological time (B) showing stratal geometry,the distribution of silieielastie facies, and standard nomenclaturefor unconformityboundeddepositional sequences in a basin with a shelf-slope break (nmdified from Vail 1987 and Vail et ai 1991, specifically to include offlap). Systemstracts: SMST, shelf margin; HST, Itighstand; TST, transgressive; LST,[owstand. Sequenceboundaries: sb2, type 2; sbl, type 1. Other abbreviations: iss, interval of sedimentstarvation (condenseds~ction and maximum flooding surface of Vail 1987); ts, transgressive surface (top lowstandsurface and top shelf-marginsurface of Vail et al 1991);iv, incised valley; lsw, lowstand progading wedge; slope fma; bff, basinfloor sf, fan. Notethat in the seismic stratigraphie literature, the term submarine "fan" includes a range of turbidite systemsand sediment-gravity-flew deposits that are not necessarily fan-shaped.
458
CHRISTIE-BLICKDRISCOLL &
and carbonaterocks (James1984;VanWagoner al 1988,1990;Swift et al et 1991;Pratt et al 1992),andtheir recognition undoubtedly is usefulin sequence stratigraphic analysis. However, tendencyfor pigeonholing sequence the in stratigraphytends to obscure rather than to illuminatethe rangeof facies arrangements processes involved. Sedimentary and cycles vary from markedly asymmetrical essentially symmetrical,with the degree of asymmetry to decreasingin an offshoredirection anddepending on whether also parasequences are arrangedin a foresteppingmotif (which favors asymmetry) a backstepor ping one. (Thetermforesteppingmeans each parasequence a succession that in representsshallower-water conditions overall than the parasequence beneath it. Backstepping refers to the opposite motif: overall deepening upward.)Although strictly included the definitionof the termparasequence, not in similar sedimentary cycles with the samespectrum asymmetry observedin many of are lacustrine successions (Eugster& Hardie1975;Steel et al 1977;Olsen1986, 1990). Moreover, shoalingupwards not the only expressionof depositional is cyclicity(for example, alluvial andtidal depositsanddeep-marine in turbidites). Objective recognitionof a parasequence, opposed some as to other depositional element with sharpboundaries,is thereforetenuousin nonmarine offshore and marine settings unless bounding surfacescan be shown correlate withmarine to flooding surfaces. Theconcept parasequences parasequence as the buildingblocksof of and sets depositional sequences also largelya matterof convention is rather thana statement abouthow sediments accumulate different scales. Thereis clear overlap at in the lengthscales andtimescales represented parasequences high-order by and sequences (VanWagoner al 1990, 1991; Kerans & Nance1991; Mitchum et & VanWagoner 1991; Vail et al 1991; Posamentier & Chamberlain 1993; Posamentier James1993; Sonnenfeld& Cross 1993; Christie-Blick et al & 1995). The distinction betweensequencesand parasequences therefore is primarilya function of whether,at a particular scale of cyclicity, sequence boundaries or cannotbe objectivelyidentified andmapped. unfortunate can An by-product the quest for sequences sequence of and boundariesis to impose sequence nomenclaturewhenparasequenceterminologywouldbe moreappropriate. Flooding surfacesare sometimes interpreted as sequence boundaries when objective evidencefor such a boundary no exists (e.g. Lindsay1987, Prave1991,Lindsay al 1993,Montafiez Osleger1993)or, if a sequence et & boundary present,it is locatedat a lowerstratigraphic is level. Systems Tracts Thethreefoldsubdivision sequences systems of into tracts is basedon the phase lag between transgressive-regressive cycles andthe development correspondof ing sequence boundaries (Figure2B). In the standardmodel siliciclastic for sedimentation a shelf-slopebreak, regressionof the shorelinecontinues with
SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 459 after the development the sequenceboundary,so that the regressive part of of any cycle of sedimentationis divisible into two systems tracts: the highstand belowthe boundary(HST Figure 2) and the lowstand(or shelf margin) in tems tract above it (LSTand SMST Figure 2). The designation of systems in tracts has become standardprocedurein sequencestratigraphy as if this werean end in itself but, as with parasequences,subjective interpretation and pigeonholing tend to obscurethe natural variability in sedimentary systems. There is no requirementfor individual systems tracts to have any particular thickness or geometry, evento be representedon a particular profile or in a particular or part of a basin (Posamentier & James1993). It is common deep water for in lowstand units to be stacked, with intervening transgressive and highstandunits representedby relatively thin intervals of sediment starvation. In shelf areas, the stratigraphy tends to be composed primarily of alternating transgressive and highstandunits, but these vary greatly in thickness and they are not necessarily easy to distinguish. Still farther landward,highstandsmaybe stacked with no other systemstracts intervening, a situation that is likely to challenge those intent on assigning systems tract nomenclature nonmarine in successions. The most troublesom, e systems tract is the lowstand, which according to the original definition of the term represents sedimentationabovea sequence boundaryprior to the onset of renewedregional transgression (Figure 2). is characterized by remarkablyvaried facies and in manycases by a complex internal stratigraphy that in deep-marine examples continuesto be the subject of vigorous debate (Weimer 1989, Normark al 1993). The lowstandis also the et one element of a depositional sequencethat separates it from a transgressiveregressive cycle (e.g. Johnson a11985,Embry et 1988),It is perhapsnatural that sequencestratigraphers have attemptedto identify lowstandunits, even where the presence of such deposits is doubtful (for example, many shelf and ramp settings), because this helpsto deflect the criticism that sequence stratigraphyoffers nothing morethan newterminologyfor long-established concepts. In shelf and rampsettings, the term lowstandis routinely applied to any coarse-grained and/or nonmarinedeposit directly overlying a sequence boundary, especially wheresuch deposits are restricted to an incised valley (e.g. Baum Vail 1988, & VanWagoner al 1991, Southgate et al 1993). However, et sedimentological and paleontological evidencefor estuarine sedimentation within (fluvially incised) valleys (e.g. Hettinger et al 1993)in many cases precludesthe lowstandinterpretation, because such estuaries develop as a consequence transgression. of JC Van Wagoner (personal communication,1991) has defended the use of the term lowstand estuarine valley fills on the groundsthat the differentiation for of sandstones within incised valleys from those of the underlying highstand systemstract is of practical importance the delineation of reservoirs for oil for and gas. However, such commercial objectives can surely be achieved without fundamentally altering the systemstract concept.
Variations in SequenceArchitecture
Case studies in a great variety of settings have led to attempts to develop modified versions of the standard sequencestratigraphic model. Examples include settings wheresedimentationis accompanied growthfaulting, terraced by shelves and siliciclastic ramps, carbonateplatforms and ramps,nonmarine environments(fluvial, eolian, and lacustrine), and environments proximalto large ice sheets (Vail 1987; Sarg 1988; Van Wagoneret al 1988, 1990; Boulton 1990; Olsen 1990; Vail et al 1991; Greenlee et al 1992; Posamentier et al 1992a; Walker &Plint 1992; Dam Surlyk 1993; Handford & Loucks 1993; & Kocurek & Havholm1993; Schlager et al 1994; Shanley & McCabe1994). Attempts have also been madeto integrate geological studies in outcrop and the subsurface with seismic profiling and shallow sampling of modernshelves and estuaries (Demarest & Kraft 1987; Suter et al 1987; Boyd et al 1989; Tessonet al 1990, 1993; Allen &Posamentier 1993, Chiocci 1994), flume experiments(Wood al 1993, Kosset al 1994) and small-scale natural analogues et (Posamentier et al 1992b), and computersimulations (Jervey 1988, HellandHansenet al 1988, Lawrenceet al 1990, Ross 1990, Reynolds et al 1991, Steckler et al 1993, Bosenceet al 1994, Ross et al 1994). The main emphasis of these studies has been to document variations in the arrangementof facies and associated stratal geometry,but among moreinteresting results has been the the emergenceof somenewideas about the origin of sequence boundaries and other stratigraphic discontinuities.
ORIGIN OF SEQUENCEBOUNDARIES
The conventional interpretation of sequenceboundariesis that they are due to a relative fall of sea level (Posamentieret al 1988, Posamentier&Vail 1988, Sarg 1988, Vail et al 1991). For example,a boundarymight be said to develop when rate of relative sea-level fall is a maximum when the or relative sea level begins to fall at somespecified break in slope, thereby initiating the incision of valleys by headward erosion. The concept of relative sea-level change accounts qualitatively for the roles of both subsidenceand eustasy in controlling the space available for sediments to accumulate.However, existing modelsare fundamentally eustatic because it is invariably the eustatic component that is inferred to fluctuate; the rate of subsidence assumed vary only slowly, if at is to all. Here wedrawattention to several waysin whichthe conventionalexplanation of sequenceboundariesneeds to be modified, particularly in tectonically active basins.
Gradual vs Instantaneous Developmentof Sequence Boundaries

It is widely assumedthat sequence boundaries develop more or less instantaneously(Posamentieret al 1988, Vail et al 1991). Themainevidencefor this
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 461 the markedasymmetry depositional sequences, which in seismic reflection of profiles are characterized by progressive onlap at the base and by a downward (or basinward) shift in onlapat the top (Figure 2; Vail etal 1977, 1984;Haqet 1987). (Theterm onlap refers to the lateral terminationof strata against an underlying surface.) Abruptdownward shifts in onlap are taken to imply rates of relative sea-level changesignificantly higher than typical rates of subsidence, and that the sea-level change must therefore be due to eustasy, presumably glacial-eustasy (Vail et al 1991). Whileit is undoubtedlytrue that glacial-eustasy has played an important role in modUlating patterns of sedimentationsince Oligocene time (Bartek et al 1991, Miller et al 1991), and probably during other glacial intervals in earth history, such explanationsare not plausible for periods such as the Cretaceous for whichthere is very little evidencefor glaciation (Frakes et al 1992). Nor are such explanatioiis required by available stratigraphic data. In many cases, the highstand systemstract is divisible into twoparts: a lower/landward part characterized by onlap and sigmoidclinoforms(clinoforms are inclined stratal surfaces associated with progradation), and an upper/seawardpart characterized by offlap and oblique clinoforms (Figure 2; Christie-Blick 1991). Offlap (the upward terminationof strata against an overlying surface) is not likely be due solely to the erosional truncation of originally sigmoidclinoforms, The progressive onlap implied by this interpretation is not possible during a time of increasingly rapid progradation without a markedincrease in the sediment supply. Moreover, inferred erosion is unlikely to havetaken place in the subthe aerial environment becausesubaerial erosion tends to be focused within incised valleys, and the amountof erosion required in manycases exceeds what can reasonably be attributed to shoreface ravinementduring transgression. A more reasonable interpretation is that offlap is due fundamentally bypassingdurto ing progradation (toplap of Mitchum 1977), implyingthat sequenceboundaries developgradually over a finite interval of geologic time (Christie-Blick 1991). Supportfor this idea is providedby recent high-resolution sequencestratigraphic studies in outcrop. A remarkable series of forestepping high-order sequences is exposedin the upper part of the San Andres Formation, a carbonate platform of Permian age in the GuadalupeMountainsof southeastern NewMexico (Figure 3A; Sonnenfeld & Cross 1993). Individual high-order sequencesconsist of two half-cycles. Thelowerhalf-cycle (primarily transgressive) is predominantly siliciclastic and onlaps the underlying sequenceboundary. The upper half-cycle (regressive) is composed mainly of carbonate rocks and is characterized by onlap and downlap (downward termination of strata) the base and in someinstances by offlap at the top. Thesehigh-order sequences are themselves oblique to a prominentlow-order sequenceboundaryat the top of the San AndresFormation (top of sequences uSA4and uSA5). On the basis of karstification, this surface is interpreted by Sonnenfeld&Cross (1993)
have been exposedsubaerially. At the resolution of conventional seismic data, only the low-order sequence boundaries in the San Andres Formation would be identified (Figure 3B) and the oblique truncation of high-order sequences wouldbe interpreted as offlap (cf figure 11 of Brinket al 1993). However, the siliciclastic half-cycles of the high-ordersequencesindicate that the platform was bypassed episodically during overall progradation. The sequence boundary at the top of the San Andreswas therefore not produced an instantaneous by downward shift in onlap but is instead a compositesurface. Anotherpertinent exampleof high-resolution sequencestratigraphy is drawn from the work of Van Wagoner colleagues in a late Cretaceous forelandand basin ramp setting in the BookCliffs of eastern Utah and western Colorado (Van Wagoneret al 1990, 1991). Numeroussequence boundaries have been documented the strongly progradational succession betweenthe Star Point in Formation and Castlegate Sandstone (Figure 4A). Twoof the most prominent boundaries are present at the level of the Desert Member the Blackhawk of Formationand Castlegate Sandstone (Figure 5). Theseboundaries are characterized by valleys as much several tens of meters deepincised into underlying as
~
EXPLANATION ~
SA4/5
300m B
Sequence Boundary High-OrderSequence Boundary
Approx. Location of Detail ~ _,, ,~,~
uSA3
Grayburg
....... ~
Other Stratal Surfaces Stratal Termination Sediment DepositedAbove ~ Storm WaveBase Sediment Deposited [~ Storm Wave Base
o e Sa 100 m Below 1
des ..... 5 km
==,,, ~---------Cutoff~~
ne;o~n ~ Brushy ~Canyon
Figure (A) Simplified 3 stratigraphic crosssectionof the upper of SanAndres part Formation (Permian) the Guadalupe in Mountains, Mexico. Schematic New (B) representation the broader of stratigraphic context theSanAndres of Formationthe scaleof conventional at seismic reflection data. Individual high-order sequences withinsequences (numbered anduSA5 uSA4 1-12) (numbered 13-14) characterized stratal onlap offlapandare themselves are by and oblique a still to lower-order sequence boundary the top of the SanAndres at Formation. datum cross The for section is the baseof the Hayes A sandstone Grayburg oftbe Formation. shown Bare the Also in names otherassociated of lithostratigraphic units. (Modified Sonnenfeld from &Cross 1993.)

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 463
A
Thistle Price Sunnyside GreenRiver UtahI Colo. Palisade
~1 ~
~/~.North Horn (Part)
I
~~~ ~ ........ ,, _
L
~///~T~$dl~r, FarroW,
1
~l~sien
..........
~xX~~--~ &~~~esed oe ~ ..~o

~_. Mbr Blac~awk
CastlegateSandstone o~ ~ Fm.
~~ ~~ and
~ Op~ Marine ~ ~asp ~ Forelapd- ~ Ll~oral Deltal 50 km Fort Collins Mowry Shale (~ Skull Creek........... ......... Plalnview,~ : ......... "
Shelf ................... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...... -Lower CoastalPlain and Incised Valley Fill Upper CoastalPlain Piedmont Mostly Nonmarine Sequence Boundary Max. Flooding Surface Other Stratal Surface
BTurkeyCreek
S
Figure Simplified 4 stratigraphiccross section andlithostratigraphic nomenclature mid-to for upperCretaceous strata in the Book Cliffs, eastern Utahandwestern Colorado fromNummedal (A; &Remy 1989),witha detail of the Albiansequence stratigraphy(Dakota Group) noah-central of Colorado fromWeimer and RJ Weimer, (B; 1984 personal communication, 1988). A detail of the DesertMember the Blackhawk of Formation Castlegate Sandstone and (box in A) is illustrated in Figure5. Thebaseof the foreland-basin successionis marked approximately a regional by sequence boundary or near the base of the Dakota ai Sandstone A) andat or near the base (in the Muddy J) Sandstone the Dakota (or of Group B). FCrefers to the Fort Collins Member, (in portionof the Muddy Sandstone locally underliesthe sequence that boundary.
littoral sandstones, the offlap of successive by parasequences, by a marked and basinward shift of facies. In the conventional interpretation, the incision of
valleys by headward erosion from a break in slope near the shoreline ought to deliver a significant volume of sediment tothe adjacent shelf, and prominent lowstand sandstones would be expected (Van Wagoner et al 1988, 1990). Instead, each sequence boundary passes laterally into a marine flooding surface and eventually into the MancosShale (Figure 4A) with little or no evidence for lowstand deposits as this term is defined above.1 Our solution to this apparent paradox is that the valleys were not incised as a result of headward erosion. ID Nummedal (personal communication, 1994)has recently identified a possible lowstand depositbasinward the Castlegate of lowstand shorelineonthe basis of well-log interpretation.The depositis perhaps analogous the relativelythin lowstand to units fromthe Alberta basindescribed byPlint (1988,1991) Posamentier al (1992a). and et

464 CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL
A consequence of the idea that sequence boundaries develop gradually during highstand progradation is that incised valleys at the Desert and Castlegate sequence boundaries initially propagated downstream, and that most of the eroded sediment accumulated at the highstand shorelines. If sequence boundaries do not after all develop instantaneously, it is not necessary to call upon rapid eustatic change for which there is no plausible mechanism during nonglacial times. Forward modeling indicates that sequence
Tusher Canyon W
Flooding Surface at baseof Buck Tongue
West Thompson Thompson Pass Canyon
Sagers Canyon East
Bull Canyon
Strychnine Wash
Castlegate Sequence
SF/E
OT
OT Sequence Boundary Passes Laterally into Flooding Surface LSF OT 20 m OT \ ~ ~ W m Marine Shale Littoral Sandstone Shale Coal EXPLANATION ...... Max.~:loodlng Surface OtherStratal Surface Para, llel Lamination Current Ripples
~ ~-~
DesertSequence Boundary
f
10 o
~
~
~-Estuarine Cross-stratification Sandstone

conglomerate ~ cross.stratification
Figure 5 Stratigraphic cross section of the Desert Member the Blackhawk of Formation and Castlegate Sandstone showing depositional facies andsequence geometry (simplified fromVan Wagoner al 199l, NummedalCole 1994). See Figure 4 for location. The two sequence et & boundaries illustrated are characterized p (west)by well-developed up-di incisedvalleys.TheDesert sequence boundary passesdown-dip (eastward) the vicinity of SagersCanyon a marine in into flooding surfacethat was probably modified ravinement by duringtransgression.Asimilartransition is observed the Castlegate in Sandstone it is tracedfarther eastward. the presence offlapas Note of pingparasequences beneatheachsequence boundary. Abbreviations generalized for paleoenvironmerits:BF,braided fluvial; SF/E,sinuous fluvial/estuarine;FS, foreshore;USF, uppershoreface; LSF,lowershoreface; offshore OT, transition. Systems tracts (modified the interpretations from of VanWagoner al 1991and Nummedal et &Cole 1994): HST, highstand; TST,transgressive. Some uncertainty exists aboutthe locationof the interval of maximum flooding the Desert in sequence owing to the difficultyof interpreting parasequence stacking trends thin sections:It is at or slightly in abovethe dashedline labeled Ravinement Surface(D Nummedal, personal communication, 1994).
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 465 boundaries can be produced by eustatic fluctuations at rates comparableto typical rates of tectonic subsidenceand that they do so by gradual basinward expansionand subsequentburial of zones of bypassingand/or erosion (ChristieBlick 1991, Steckler et al 1993). Consequently,if the rate of eustatic change required to generate a sequenceboundary small, there is no reason to assume is that sequenceboundariesare necessarily due to eustatic change.
Tectonically
Active Basins
In the light of these considerations, howdo sequence boundaries develop in tectonically active settings such as extensional,foreland, and strike-slip basins? Oneview, whichis almost certainly incorrect, is that the local development of sequenceboundariesin such basins maybe entirely tectonic in origin (Underhill 1991). Anotherview is that tectonic processes control long-term patterns of subsidenceand that short-term depositional cyclicity is due to eustatic change (e.g. Vail et al 1991, Devlin et al 1993, Lindsayet al 1993). Again, this an assumptionthat in many cases is probably not warrantedfor times in earth history whenrates of eustatic change were comparableto rates of tectonic subsidence (e.g. Cretaceous). Sequence boundaries are not merelyenhanced obscuredby tectonic activity (cf Vail et al 1984, 1991). Boththeir timing and their very existence are due to the combined effects of eustasy and variations in patterns of subsidence/uplift and sediment supply. The roles of these factors and the manner whichthey interact are admittedlyvery difficult to sort out, in but recent studies provide some useful first-order clues. An important attribute of tectonically active basinsis that it is possiblefor the rate of tectonic subsidenceto increase and decrease simultaneously different in parts of the samebasin (Figure 6). Sequence boundariesthat are fundamentally of tectonic rather than eustatic origin cannotthereforebe attributed satisfactorily to the concept a relative sea-levelfall or evenan increasein the rate of relative of sea-level fall, becauserelative sea-level mayhavebeenboth rising and falling at an increasingrate in different places. In this regard, patterns of subsidenceand uplift in foreland and extensional basins are actually very similar during times of active deformationas well as quiescence(Christie-Blick &Driscoll 1994). In the case of a foreland basin, loading by the adjacent orogenleads to regional subsidenceand to uplift in the vicinity of the peripheral bulge, with a wavelength amplitudethat are and governed the flexural rigidity of the lithosphere (Figure 6A; Beaumont by 1981, Karner &Watts 1983). Uplift mayalso occur locally at the proximal margin of the basin as a result of the propagation thrust faults at depth. Similarly,in of extensional basins, subsidenceand tilting of the hanging-wallblock (abovethe fault in Figure 6) are accompanied uplift of the footwall (belowthe fault; by Wernicke &Axen 1988, Weissel & Karner 1989). During times of tectonic quiescence, these patterns are reversed, although the amplitudesare small in
ACTIVE DEFORMATION
j ~ ~ Peripheral Bulge
QUIESCENCE
Foreland basin
Foreland basin
Thrusting Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Thermal Subsidence
Extensional basin
Extensional basin
Normal Faulting ~ Footwall
EXPLANATION Hanging Wall [~ Sediment
NNNNWater
Figure 6 Schematicdiagrams comparingpatterns of uplift and subsidence in foreland and extensional basins during times of active deformation(A) and quiescence(B). See text for discussion.
comparisonwith the deflections engenderedby active deformation(Figure 6B; Heller et al 1988, Jordan & Flemings 1991). Erosional unloading leads to regional rebound of the orogen and adjacent depocenter and to depression of the peripheral bulge. At the same time, the accumulationof terrigenous sedimentderived fromthe orogenresults in additional subsidenceat the distal side of the basin and to lateral migrationof the peripheral bulge away from the orogen (Jordan &Flemings1991). A similar pattern of uplift and subsidence mayarise during times of tectonic quiescencein extensional basins, through a combinationof erosional unloadingof the footwall block and thermally driven subsidence,especially when latter is offset fromthe original depocenter(as the illustrated in Figure,6B). Morecomplicated scenarios can also be envisaged. For example, foreland basins are commonly segmentedby block-faulting, and lithospheric extension maybe accommodated a series of tilted fault blocks or distributed inhoby mogeneously a function of depth and lateral position within the lithosphere. as Subsidenceand uplift mayalso be complicatedin three dimensionsby the presence of salients in the orogenor of accommodation zones in extensional basins. Patterns of subsidenceand uplift in strike-slip basins tend to be evenmorecomplicated and subject to markedchanges on short time scales (Christie-Blick Biddle 1985). The development characteristics of sequenceboundaries in tectonically and active basins are directly related to patterns of subsidenceand uplift of the sort outlined here and to the fact that the patterns vary between times of active deformation and quiescence. At a regional scale, the progradation of
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 467 sedimentary systems, the filling of available accommodation with sediment, the loweringof depositional base level, and the incision of valleys are favored duringtimes of tectonic quiescence(e.g. Heller et al 1988).In contrast, active deformationis associated with regional subsidence and tilting, flooding and backsteppingof sedimentarysystems, an increase in topographicrelief along the faulted basin margins, and a narrowingof the depocenter(e.g. Underhill 1991). In both foreland and extensional basins, the most prominentsequence boundariestherefore are expected to correspondwith the onset of deformation. Theseboundariesconsist of subaerial exposuresurfaces that pass laterally into marine onlap/downlapsurfaces of regional extent (Jordan &Flemings 1991, Underhill 1991, Driscoll 1992, Christie-Blick &Driscoll 1994, Driscoll et al 1995). In contrast to the standard model, the formationof a sequenceboundary is not necessarily associatedwith a basinward shift in facies, and where present, such facies shifts may restricted to areas that weresubaerially exposed.The be developmentof topographic relief mayin somecases lead to the accumulation of thick successions of turbidites in deep water. However, contrary to the conventionalinterpretation, these deposits are not strictly "lowstands"if they accumulateduring a time of regional flooding [see Southgate et al (1993) and Holmes&Christie-Blick (1993) for a possible examplefrom the Devonian the Canningbasin, Australia]. Several of these points can be illustrated with reference to the late Cretaceous foreland basin of Utah and Colorado (Figure 4). The base of the foreland-basin succession in eastern Utah and Coloradocorresponds approximately with a regional sequence boundaryat or near the base of the Dakota Sandstone(Figure 4A) and at or near the base of the Muddy J) Sandstone (or of the DakotaGroup(Figure 4B). The succession abovethis surface is characterized by a markedincrease in the rate of sediment accumulationand by an abrupt transition from nonmarine relatively deep marinesedimentaryrocks to (Mancos/Mowry Shale; Heller et al 1986, Vail et al 1991). These features are fundamentally attributable to the onset in late Albiantime of a phaseof crustal deformationand accelerated subsidence; the contribution of eustatic change is indeterminate but is presumedto have been small. Wedo not preclude the possibility of slightly earlier (late Aptianto Albian, pre-Dakota) foreland-basin development the west (Yingling &Heller 1992), but the strata are entirely to nonmarineand the evidence is equivocal. Within the foreland-basin succession, the origin of other sequenceboundariesis less firmly established, but the Blackhawk Formation and Castlegate Sandstoneexhibit features that are consistent with our model. The Blackhawk lower/distal part of the Castleand gate (belowthe Castlegate sequence boundary; Figure 5) are characterized strong progradation and the development offlap, consistent with erosional of unloading of the orogenduring a time of tectonic quiescence (cf Posamentier & Allen 1993). The upper/proximalpart of the Castlegate (above the sequence
boundary) transgressive and, as datumed is froma floodingsurface at the base of the Buck Tongue the Mancos of Shale, it thickens towardsthe orogen(Figure 5). At a regional scale, it appears to pass laterally into syn-orogenic conglomerate (Price River Formation) and to overstep the Blackhawk Formation, which was uplifted and bevelled to the west (Figure 4). Thesefeatures make hard to arit gue that the Castlegate sequence boundarydevelopedsolely or even primarily as a result of eustatic change. A seismic exampleof sequence development related to episodic block faulting in an extensional setting is providedby a seismic reflection profile (line NF-79-108) from the Jeanne dArc basin of offshore eastern Canada(Figure 7). The basin records a series of extensional events between late Triassic and early Cretaceous time (Jansa &Wade1975, Tankard et al 1989, McAlpine1991); Figure 7 illustrates the last of these prior to the onset in late Aptiantime of seafloor spreading betweenthe GrandBanks of Newfoundland the Iberian and peninsula. Reflections below the late Barremian unconformity are approximately parallel and concordantwith the unconformity.Above this surface, the onlap of reflections and their divergencetowards the border fault document the onset of crustal extension. Similar reflection geometry evident at the early is Aptian and late Aptian unconformities, although reflections are approximately parallel abovethe latter. This is taken to indicate that extensionhad ceased by late Aptian time (Driscoll 1992, Driscoll et al 1995). Evidencefromavailable core indicates that the onlap surfaces are associated with upwarddeepening of depositional facies, but the surfaces are interpreted as sequenceboundaries becausethey are inferred to pass laterally into subaerial exposure surfaces. The observedgeometry requires rifting betweenlate Barremian late Aptiantime. and Our preferred interpretation is that each of the mapped sequence boundaries records times of accelerated block tilting. Analternative interpretation, that the early and late Aptian boundariesare due primarily to eustatic fluctuations duringa time of moreor less continuous blocktilting, is not consistelat with the absence of anticipated lowstanddeposits in closed paleobathymetriclows (for example,at the Mercury K-76 well, Figure 7). Role of In-Plane Force Variations Sequence Boundaries in the Origin of High-Order
Oneof the mainargumentsfor interpreting high-order depositional sequences in terms of eustatic changeis the absence of another suitable mechanism. We have seen in the Jeanne dArc basin examplethat episodic tilting mayprovide such a mechanism extensional basins. However, in difficulties arise in foreland basins because,in such settings, subsidence driven primarily by the integrated is vertical load of the orogen. This can changeonly slowly through a combination of internal deformation,the propagationof thrust faults into the syn-orogenic sediments, and the erosion of topography (Sinclair et al 1991).
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 469 An imaginative and somewhat controversial solution to this dilemmahas emergedfrom the recognition and modelingof in-plane force variations in the lithosphere (Lambeck1983, Cloetingh et al 1985, Karner 1986, Braun &Beaumont 1989, Karner et al 1993). The best evidence for the existence of such forces is the incidence of intraplate earthquakes (e.g. Lambeck al et 1984, Bergman&Solomon1985). Changes in in-plane force are thought to result from changesin the plate-boundaryforces associated with, for example, ridge-push, slab-pull, and collisional tectonics (Sykes &Sbar 1973, Cloetingh &Wortel 1985, Zobacket al 1989). Althoughuncertainty exists about both the magnitudeof the forces and the time scale over which they might vary, it is not unreasonable to think that such forces maybe relevant to the developmentof somesequence boundaries. The response of the lithosphere to in-plane compressionconsists of two components,one elastic (flexural) and the other inelastic (brittle; Goetze &Evans 1979, Karner et al 1993). The brittle component,whichis associated with deformationin the upper part of the lithosphere, is influenced by the preexisting structure of the crust and the orientation of faults with respect to the applied tectonic force. It includes the well-knownphenomenon extensional basin inversion. The flexural response of to in-plane compressiondependson the shape of any preexisting deflection of the lithosphere, the amplitudeof the applied force, and the flexural strength of the lithosphere at the time the force wasapplied. In the case of foreland basins, the predicted flexural response to compression consists of enhancedsubsidence in the depocenter,uplift of the peripheral bulge, and a reductionin the flexural wavelength. The amplitude of subsidence and uplift producedin this wayare approximatelythe same because the wavelengthsof features being selectively modified are approximatelyequal (Karner et al 1993). The predicted flexural responsefor extensional basins is quite different. In-plane compression results in uplift of the depocenterand increased subsidenceof the basin margins. Inplane tension leads to uplift of the basin marginsand to enhanced subsidenceof the depocenter (Braun & Beaumont 1989, Karner et al 1993). The amplitude and wavelength the flexural deformationare a strong function of the extenof sional basin geometryand, in the case of basins undergoingpost-rift thermal subsidence, of the spatial relationship betweenrift basins and any associated passive continental margin. In view of these considerations, our concepts of active deformation and tectonic quiescence need to be modified. With respect to this second-order effect, panels that in Figure 6 are labeled "active deformation"include times of increased in-plane compression the foreland basin exampleand decreased in in-plane compression(increased tension) in the extensional basin example. Owing the relatively short length scales relevant to extensional basins (tens to of kilometers), it is anticipated that the stratigraphy of such basins oughtto be influenced stronglyevenat short timescales by episodicblock tilting (the brittle
Y
W
?
E m
0
u-
470
aJ C .-
I L
h b
CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL
: Ill/I II
component the deformation). In contrast, because the integrated vertical of load of an orogen changesonly slowly (millions to tens of millions of years; Sinclair et al 1991), the stratigraphy of foreland basins oughtto be much more sensitive on short time scales to the flexural effects of changesin in-plane compression, providing that the forces involvedare sufficiently large. A possible test of this idea is to compare stratal geometryof sequencesof different the scale in the samebasin. If high-order sequencesare due to eustatic change, as many have inferred (e.g. Posamentier &Allen 1993), their geometryought reflect overall patterns of subsidence.If they are instead a result of changes in in-plane compression, high-order transgressive systems tracts ought to thicken preferentially towardthe orogenrelative to associated highstandunits (as appears to be the case in the Castlegate example), and backstepping sequences ought to thicken toward the orogen relative to forestepping sequences. The complicationsassociated with lateral changesin facies, compaction,and water depth can be reduced by studying transects parallel to shorelines across foreland basins with axial drainage (for example, the Dunvegan Formation of the Alberta basin; Plint 1994).
CONCLUSIONS
Sequence stratigraphy is concernedwith the analysis of sedimentsand sedimentary rocks with reference to the manner whichthey accumulate in layer by layer. Asa practical techniqueand in spite of existing terminology, requires no asit sumptions about eustasy. Oneof the principal frontiers of the discipline is an effort to developan understandingof the many interrelated factors that govern sedimenttransport and accumulationin a great range of depositional settings and environments. The conventional interpretation of sequence boundaries is that they are due to a relative fall of sea level and that they developmoreor less instantaneously. In this paper we argue that in many cases such boundaries form gradually over a finite interval of geologic time. The widely employed concept of relative sea-level change provides few insights into howsequence boundariesactually develop, especially in tectonically active basins. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper is an outgrowth of more than a decade of research in sequence stratigraphy in a widevariety of depositional and tectonic settings. Weare indebted to numerous colleagues for stimulating discussions of the issues, and we thank MSteckler and L Sohl for reviewing the manuscript. Weacknowledge support from the National Science Foundation (Earth Sciences and OceanSciences); Office of NavalResearch; the Donorsof the PetroleumResearch Fund, administered by the American Chemical Society; and the Arthur D Storke MemorialFund of the Departmentof Geological Sciences, ColumbiaUniversity. This paper is Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Contribution No. 5257.

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY Any Annual.Review chapter,as well as anyarticle cited in an Annual Review chapter, may purchased the Annual be from Reviews PreprintsandReprints service. 1-800-347.8007; 415-259-5017; emaih arpr@class.org 473
Literature Cited Allen GP, Posamentier HW.1993. Sequence stratigraphy and facies modelof an incised valley fill: the GirondeEstuary, France. J. Sediment. Petrol. 63:378-91 Bartek LR, Vail PR, Anderson JB, Emmet PA, Wu S. 1991. Effect of Cenozoic ice sheet fluctuations in Antarcticaon the stratigraphic signature of the Neogene.J. Geophys.Res. 96:6753-78 BaumGR, Vail PR. 1988. Sequence stratigraphic concepts applied to Paleogene outcrops, Gulf and Atlantic basins. See Wilgus et al 1988, pp. 309-27 Beaumont 1981. Foreland basins. Geophys. C. J. R. Astron. Soc. 65:291-329 Bergman EA, Solomon SC. 1985. Earthquake source mechanismsfrom body-waveforminversion and intraplate tectonics in the northern Indian Ocean. Phys. Earth Plant. Inter. 4:1-23 Berg OR, Woolverton DG, eds. 1985. Seismic Stratigraphy H: An Integrated Approachto Hydrocarbon Exploration. Am. Assoc. Petrol Geol. Mem.39. 276 pp. BlumMD.1993. Genesis and architecture of incised valley fill sequences: a late Quaternary example from the Colorado River, Gulf coastal plain of Texas. See Weimer Posa& mentier 1993, pp. 259-84 Bosence DWJ, Pomar L, Waltham DA, Lankester HG. 1994. Computer modeling a Micocene carbonate platform, Mallorca, Spain. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 78:24766 Boulton GS. 1990. Sedimentary and sea level changesduring glacial cycles and their control on glacimarine facies architecture. In Glacimarine Environments: Processes and Sediments, ed. JA Dowdeswell,JD Scourse, pp. 15-52. Geol. Soc. LondonSpec. Publ. 53. 423 pp. Bowring SA, Grotzinger JP. 1992. Implications of newchronostratigraphyfor tectonic evolution of Wopmay orogen, northwest Canadian shield. Am. J. Sci. 292:1-20 BoydR, Suter J, PenlandS. 1989. Relation of sequence stratigraphy to modernsedimentary environments. Geology 17:926-29 Braun J, Beaumont 1989. A physical explaC. nation of the relation betweenflank uplifts and the breakupunconformity rifted contiat nental margins. Geology 17:760-64 Brink GJ, KeenanHG, BrownLF Jr. 1993. Deposition of fourth-order, post-rift sequences and sequence sets, lower Cretaceous (lower Valanginianto lower Aptian), PletmosBasin, southern offshore, South Africa. See Weimer &Posamentier 1993, pp. 393-410 Brown Jr, Fisher WL.1977. Seismic stratiLF graphic interpretation of depositional systems: examplesfrom the Brazilian rift and pull-apart basins. See Payton1977, pp. 21348 Burton R, Kendall CGStC,Lerche I. 1987. Out of our depth: on the impossibility of fathomingeustasy from the stratigraphic record. Earth-Sci. Rev. 24:237-77 Cathles LM, Hallam A. 1991. Stress-induced changes in plate density, Vail sequences, epeirogeny, and short-lived global sea level fluctuations. Tectonics 10:659-71 ChiocciFL. 1994. Veryhigh-resolution seismics as a tool for sequence stratigraphy applied to outcrop scale---examples from eastern Tyrrhenian margin Holocene/Pleistocene deposits. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 78:37895 Christie-Blick N. 1990. Sequencestratigraphy and sea-level changesin Cretaceous time. In Cretaceous Resources, Events and Rhythms, ed. RNGinsburg, B Beaudoin, pp. 1-21. Dordrecht: Kluwer, NATO Series C, 304. ASI 352 pp. Christie-Blick N. 1991. Onlap, offlap, and the origin of unconformity-bounded depositional sequences. Mar. Geol. 97:35-56 Christie-Blick N, Biddle KT, eds. 1985. StrikeSlip Deformation,Basin Formation, and Sedimentation. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Spec. Publ. No. 37. 386 pp. Christie-Blick N, Driscoll, NW. 1994. Relative sea-level change and the origin of sequence boundaries tectonically active settings. Am. in Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Annu.Conv., Denver,Abstr. 121 Ctuistie-Blick N, Dyson von der Borch CC. IA, 1995. Sequencestratigraphy and the interpretation of Neoproterozoic Earth history. In Terminal Proterozoic Stratigraphy and Earth History, ed. AHKnoll, MR Walter. Precambrian Res. (Special issue). In press Christie-Blick N, Grotzinger JP, yon der Botch CC. 1988. Sequencestratigraphy in Proterozoic successions. Geology16:100-4 Christie-Blick N, Mountain GS, Miller KG. 1990. Seismic stratigraphic record of sealevel change. In Sea-Level Change,pp. 116140. Natl. Acad. Sci. Stud. Geophys.234pp. CloetinghS. 1988.Intraplate stresses: a newelement in basin analysis. In NewPerspectives in Basin Analysis (Pettijohn Volume),ed. Kleinspehn, C Paola, pp. 205-23. New York:

Springer-Verlag. pp. 453 bridgeUniv.Press. 274pp. CloetinghS, McQueen Lambeck 1985. On Galloway 1989.Geneticstratigraphic seH, K. WE. a tectonic mechanism regionalsea-level for quences basinanalysisI: architectureand in variations,EarthPlanet.Sci. Lett. 75:157-66 genesis of flooding-surface bounded deposiCloetinghS, Wonel 1985. Regionalstress R. tional units. Am.Assoc.Petrol.Geol.Bull. field of the Indian Plate. Geophys. Letts. Res. 73:125-42 12:77-80 Garcfa-Mond6jar Femfmdez-Mendiola J, PA. CrossTA,Lessenger 1988.Seismic MA. stratig1993. Sequencestratigraphy and systems raphy.Annu.Rev.EarthPlanet.Sci. 16:319- tracts of a mixed carbonate siliciclastic and 54 platform-basin setting: the albian of Lunada Dam SurlykF. 1992. Forced G, regresssionsin andSoba,northernSpain.Am.Assoc.Petrol. a large wave-and storm-dominated anoxic Geol.Bull. 77:245-75 lake, Rhaetian-Sinemurian StewartFor- GoetzeG, Evans 1979. Stress andtemperaKap B. mation,F.ast Greenland. Geology 20:749-52 ture in the bending lithosphere constrained as Demarest II, Kraft JC. 1987.Stratigraphic JM by experimental mechanics. rock Geophys. J. recordof Quaternary levels: implications R. Astron. Soc. 59:463-78 sea for more ancientstrata. In Sea-Level Fluctua- GreenleeSM,DevlinW Miller KG, J, Mountain tion andCoastal Evolution, 13 Nummedal, GS,Flemings 1992. Integrated sequence ed. PB. OH Pilkey, JD Howard,pp. 223-39. Soc. stratigraphy of Neogene deposits, New JerEcon.Paleontol.Mineral Spec. PubL 41. No. sey continentalshelf and slope: comparison 267pp. with the Exxon model.Geol.Soc. Am.Bull. Devlin WJ, Rudolph KW,ShawCA, Ehman 104:1403-1 l KD. 1993.The effect of tectonicandeustatic Grotzinger JP, Adams McCormick MyRD, DS, cycles on accommodation sequenceand rowP. 1989.Sequence stratigraphy,correlastratigraphic framework the UpperCrein tions between Wopmay orogenand Kilohigok taceous foreland basin of southwestern basin, andfurther investigations the Bear of Wyoming. Posamentier al 1993, pp. See et Creek Group(GoulburnSupergroup),Dis501-20 trict of Mackenzie, N.W.T. Geol.Surv. Can. DottRH ed. 1992.Eustasy:The Historical Jr, Pap. 89-1C:107-19 Upsand Downs a MajorGeologicalCon- Handford CR, Loucks RG, 1993. Carbonate of cept. Geol.Soc. Am.Mem. 180. 111pp. depositionalsequences systemstracts-and Driscoll NW. 1992. Tectonicanddepositional responses carbonate of platforms relative to processes inferredfrom stratal relationships. sea-level changes.SeeLoucks Sarg 1993, & pp. 3-41 PhD dissertation. Columbia Univ., New York. 464pp. Haq 1,99I. Sequence BU. stratigraphy,sea-level DriscollNW, JR, Christie-Blick Karner change,andsignificancefor the deepsea. In Hogg N, GD. 1995.Extensional tectonicsin the Jeanne Sedimentation, TectonicsandEustasy. SeadArcBasin:implicationsfor the timingof Level Changes Active Margins,ed. DIM at break-up between Grand Banks Iberia. In and Macdonald, 3-39. Int. Assoc.Sedimentol. pp. Opening the NorthAtlantic, ed, RA of ScrutSpec.Publ.12. 518pp. ton. Geol.Soc. London Spec.Publ.In press HaqBU,Hardenbol Vail PR. 1987.ChronolJ, DdscollNW, KarnerGD.1994. Flexuraldeforogyof fluctuating levelssincetheTriassic. sea mationdue to Amazon loading: a feedFan Science235: 1156-67 backmechanism affecting sedimentdelivery HaqBU,Hardenbol Yall PR. 1988. Mesozoic J, to margins.Geology 22:1015-18 and Cenozoic chronostratigraphy cycles and EbdonCC, Fraser A J, Higgins AC,Mitchof sea-level change.SeeWilgus al 1988, et pp. 71-108 ener BC,Strank ARE. 1990. The Dinantian stratigraphy of the East Midlands: seis- Helland-Hansen KendallCGStC, a W, Lerche I, mostratigraphic approach. Geol.Soc. Lon, J. Nakayama 1988. A simulation of conK. don 147:519-36 tinental basin marginsedimentation rein Embry 1988. Triassic sea-level changes: AE sponse to crustal movements, eustatic sea evidence from the CanadianArctic Arlevel change, and sediment accumulation chipelago. Wilgus al 1988,pp. 249-59 rates. Math.Geol.20:777-802 See et EugsterHP,HardieLA.1975.Sedimentation Heller PL, Angevine Winslow Paola in CL, NS, an ancient playa-lakecomplex: Wilkins C. 1988. Two-phase the stratigraphic modelof Peak Member the GreenRiver Formation foreland-basinsequences.Geology of 16:501-4 SS, HP, of Wyoming. Geol. Soc. Am.Bull 86:319-34 Heller PL, Bowdler Chambers Coogan ES, of Flint SS, BryantID, eds. 1993.TheGeological JC, Hagen et al. 1986.Time initial Modellingof Hydrocarbon Reservoirs and thrustingin the Sevierorogenic belt, IdahoOutcrop Analogues. Int, Assoc. Sedimentol, Wyoming Utah. Geology14:388-91 and Spec.Publ. 15. 269pp. Hettinger PD, McCabe ShanleyKW. PJ, 1993. Frakes FrancisJE, Syktus 1992.Climate Detailedfacies anatomy transgressiveand LA, JI. of Modes the Phanerozoic. of Cambridge: Cam- highstand systems tracts fromthe Upper Cre-

& taceousof southernUtah,U.S.A.SeeWeimer Weimer Posamentier1993, pp. 393-410 &Posamentier 1993, pp. 43-70 KossJE, EthddgeFG, Schumm 1994. An SA. experimental of the effectsof base-level study Holmes Chdstie-Blick N. 1993. Origin AE, change fluvial, coastalplainandshelf syson of sedimentary cycles in mixedearbonatesiliciclastic systems: an examplefrom tems.J. Sedimentol, Res. B64:90-98 the Canning basin, Western Australia. See Lambeck 1983. The role of compressive K. forces in intracratonic basinformation and Loucks&Sarg 1993, pp. 181-212 Jacquin T, Arnaud-VanneauA, Amand H, mid,plate orogenics. Geophys. Res. Lett. Ravenne Vail PR.1991.Systems C, tracts and 10:845-48 depositional sequences a carbonate in setting: Lambeck McQueen K, HWS, Stephenson RA, D. a studyof continuous outcrops fromplatform Denham 1984. Thestate of stress within to basin at the scale of seismiclines. Mar the Australian continent. Ann. Geophys. Petrol Geol.8:122-39 2:723-41 James 1984. Shallowing-upward NP. sequences Lawrence Doyle Aigner 1990.StratiDT, M, T. in carbonates. In Facies Models,ed. RG graphicsimulationof sedimentary basins: concepts calibration, Am.Assoc,Petrol. and Walker,pp. 213-28.Toronto:Geosci.Can. Reprint 1. 317pp. 2nded. Ser. Geol. Bull 74:273-95 JansaLF,Wade 1975.Geology the conti- LeckieDA,Posamentier Lovell RWW, JA. of HW, eds. nental margin offNova Scotia andNewfound- 1991. NUNA Conf. on High-ResolutionSeland. Geol.Surv.Can.Pap.74-30:51-105 quence Stratigraphy.Toronto:Geol.Assoc. JerveyMT. 1988.Quantitativegeologicalmod- Can.186 pp. elingof siliciclastic rocksequences their LevyM,Chdstie-Blick 1991.Late Proteroand N. seismic expression. Wilgus a11988, See et pp. zoic paleogeography the eastern Great of Basin. In PaleozoicPaleogeography the of 47-69 Western UnitedStates--ll,ed. JDCooper, CH JohnsonJG, Klapper G, SandbergCA.1985. Devonian eustatic fluctuations Euramerica. Stevens,pp. 371-86.Pacific Section, SEPM, in Geol.Soc. Am.Bull. 96:567-87 Book Vol.1. 461pp. 67, JohnsonSD. 1994. HighResolution Sequence Lindsay 1987.Sequence JF. stratigraphy deand Stratigraphy: Innovations Applications. and positionalcontrolsin LateProterozoic-Early Liverpool: Univ.Liverpool.410pp. Cambrian sedimentsof the Amadeus basin, Jordan TE, FlemingsPB. 1991. Large-scale central Australia, Am.Assoc.Petrol. Geol. stratigraphic architecture, eustatic variation, Bull. 71:1387--403 andunsteady tectonism:a theoretical evalu- LindsayJF, Kennard Southgate 1993. JM, PN. ation. J. Geophys. 96:6681-99 Res. Application sequence of stratigraphy an inin Kamer 1986. Effects of lithospherie inGD. .tracratonie setting, Amadeus basin, central planestress on sedimentary basin stratigraAustralia. See Posamentier al 1993,pp. et phy. Tectonics5:573-88 605-31 KarnerGD, Driscoll NW, WeisselJK. 1993.Re- Loucks Sarg JF, eds. 1993. Carbonate RG, Sesponseof the lithosphereto in-planeforce quence Stratigraphy. Assoc.Petrol.Geol. Am. variations.EarthPlanet.Sci. Lett. 114:397- Mere. 545pp. 57. 416 Loutit TS,ed. 1992.Sea-Level Working Group. Karner GD,Watts AB.1983. Gravity anoma- JOIDES 18(3):28-36 J. lies andflexureof the lithosphere mountainLoutit TS, HardenbolJ, Vail PR, Baum at GR. ranges. J. Geophys. 88:10,449-77 Res. 1988. Condensed sections: the key to age Kendall CGStC, Lerehe 1988.Therise andfall I. determinations correlationof continenand of eustasy.SeeWilgus al 1988,pp. 3-17 et tal margin sequences. Wilgus al 1988, See et KendallCGStC, Moore WhittleG, Cannon P, R. pp. 183-213 1992.Achallenge: it possible determine McAlpine 1990. Mesozoic Is to KD. stratigraphy, eustasyanddoesit matter? Dott1992,pp. See sedimentary evolution,andpetroleum poten93-107 tial of the Jeanne dArc basin,Grand Banks of Kerans C, NanceHS. 1991. High frequency Newfoundland. Surv. Can. Pap.89-17 Geol. cyclicityandregional depositional patternsof Miller KG, WrightJD, Fairbanks 1991.UnRG. the GrayburgFormation,Guadalupe Moun- locking the ice house: Oligocene-Miocene tains, New Mexico.In Sequence Stratigraoxygen isotopes,eustasy,andmargin erosion. J. Geophys. 96:6829-48 Res. phy, Facies,andReservoir Geometries the of San Andres, Grayburg,and QueenForma. Mitchum Jr. 1977.Seismic RM stratigraphy and tions, Guadalupe Mountains,NewMexico globalchanges sea level, part 11: glossary of and Texas, ed. S Meader-Roberts, CanMG of terms in seismic used stratigraphy. PaySee delada, GE Moore, 53-69. Permian pp. Basin ton 1977,pp. 205-12 section, SEPM (Soc. Sediment.Geol.)Publ. MitchumRMJr, Van WagonerJC. 1991. 91-32.141pp. High-frequency sequences their stackand KocurekG, Havholm 1993. Eolian event KG. ing patterns: sequence-stratigraphic evidence stratigraphy--a conceptualframework. See of high-frequency eustatic cycles. Sediment.
Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 476

CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL gan Formation, Alberta foreland basin. See Posamentier & Mutti 1994, pp. 153-58 Posamentier HW,Allen GP. 1993. Siliciclastic sequence stratigraphic patterns in foreland ramp-type basins. Geology21:455-58 Posamentier HW,Allen GP, James DP. 1992b. High resolution sequence stratigraphy--the East Coulee Delta, Alberta. J. Sediment. Petrol. 62:310-17 Posamentier HW,Allen GP, James DP, Tesson M. 1992a. Forced regressions in a sequence stratigraphic framework: concepts, examples, and exploration significance. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull 76:1687-709 Posamentier HW,Chamberlain CJ. 1993. Sequencestratigraphic analysis of VikingFormation lowstand beach deposits at Joarcam Field, Alberta, Canada.See Posamentieret al 1993, pp. 469-85 Posamentier HW,James DP. 1993. Anoverview of sequence-stratigraphic concepts: uses and abuses. See Posamentieret al 1993, pp. 3-18 Posamentier HW,Jervey MT, Vail PR. 1988. Eustatic controls on clastic deposition I-conceptual framework.See Wilguset al 1988, pp. 109-24 Posamentier HW,Mutti E, convenors. 1994. Second High-Resolution Sequence Stratigraphy Conference. Int. Union Geol. Sci. and Global Sed. Geol. Prog. 221 pp. Posamentier I-IW, SummerhayesCE Haq BU, Allen GP, eds. 1993. Sequence Stratigraphy and Facies Associations. Int. Assoc. Sedimentol. Spec. Publ18. 644 pp. Posamentier HW,Vail PR. 1988. Eustatic controls on clastic deposition II--sequence and systems tract models. See Wilguset al 1988, pp. 125-54 Pratt BR, James NP, Cowan 1992. Peritidal CA. carbonates. In Facies Models,ed. RGWalker, NPJames, pp. 303-22. Toronto: Geol. Assoc. Can. 409 pp. Prave AR. 1991. Depositional and sequence stratigraphie frameworkof the LowerCambrian Zabriskie Quartzite: implications for regional correlations and the Early Cambrian paieogeography the Death Valley region of of California and Nevada.Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 104:505-15 Reynolds DJ, Steckler MS, Coakley BJ. 1991. The role of the sediment load in sequence stratigraphy: the influenceof flexurai isostasy and compaction. J. Geophys. Res. 96:693149 Ross WC.1990. Modelingbase-level dynamics as a control on basin-fill geometriesand facies distribution: a conceptual framework. In Quantitative DynamicStratigraphy, ed. TA Cross, pp. 387-99. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 625 pp. Ross WC,Halliwell BA, May JA, Watts DE, Syvitski JPM. 1994. Slope readjustment: a newmodel for the developmentof submarine
Geol. 70:131-60 Montafiez IP, Osleger DA.1993. Parasequence stacking patterns, third-order accommodation events, and sequence stratigraphy of Middle to Upper Cambrian platform carbonates, BonanzaKing Formation, southern Great Basin. See Loucks & Sarg 1993, pp. 305-26 Mutti E, Davoli G, MoraS, Sgavetti M, eds. 1994. The Eastern Sector of the SouthCentral Folded Pyrenean Foreland: Criteria for Stratigraphic Analysis and Excursion Notes. Second High-Resolution Sequence Stratigraphy Confi 83 pp. North American Commissionon Stratigrapbic Nomenclature. 1983. North AmericanStratigraphic Code.Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 67:841-75 NormarkWR,Posamentier HW,Mutti E. 1993. Turbidite systems: state of the art and future directions. Rev. Geophys. 31:91 - 116 Nummedal D, Cole RD. 1994. The Book Cliffs--again: relative sea level fail and depositional systems response. See Posamentier & Mutti 1994, pp. 147-51 Nummedal RemyR, eds. 1989. Cretaceous D, Shelf Sandstonesand Shelf Depositional Sequences, Western Interior Basin, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico. 28th Int. Geol. Congr. Field Trip Guidebook Tl19. Washington,DC: Am. Geophys. Union. 87 pp. Officer CB, Drake CL. 1985. Epeirogeny on a short geological time scale. Tectonics 4:60312 Olsen PE. 1986. A 40-million-year lake record of early Mesozoicorbital climatic forcing. Science 234:842-48 Olsen PE. 1990. Tectonic, climatic, and biotic modulations of Lacustrine ecosystems-examples from NewarkSupergroup of eastern North America. In Lacustrine Basin Exploration--Case Studies and Modern Analogs, ed. BJ Katz, pp. 209-24. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mem. 340pp. 50. Payton CE, ed. 1977. Seismic Stratigraphy-Applications to HydrocarbonExploration. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mem.26. 516 pp. Plint AG. 1988. Sharp-based shoreface sequences and "offshore bars" in the Cardium Formationof Alberta: their relationship to relative changesin sea level. See Wilgus al et 1988, pp. 357-70 Plint AG. 1991. High-frequency relative sealevel oscillations in UpperCretaceous shelf elastics of the Alberta foreland basin: possible evidence for glacio-eustatic control? In Sedimentation, Tectonics and Eustasy, Sea Level Changesat Active Margins, ed. DIM Macdonald, 409-28. Int. Assoc. Sedimenpp. tol. Spec. Publ. 12. 518pp. Plint AG.1994. Sheep from goats: separating eustatic from tectonic controls on 4th order sequence development: CenomanianDunve-

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY fans and aprons. Geology22:511-14 Salvador A. 1987. Unconformity-bounded stratigraphie units. Geol. Soc. Am.Bull, 98:23237 Sarg JF. 1988. Carbonatesequencestratigraphy. See Wilguset al 1988, pp. 155-81 Sarg JF. 1989. Middle-late Permian depositional sequences, Permian basin, west Texas and New Mexico. In Atlas of Seismic Stratigraphy, ed. AW Bally, pp. 140-54. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Stud. Geol. No. 27, Vol. 3.244 PP. Sarg JF, Lehmann PJ. 1986. Lower-Middle Guadalupian facies and stratigraphy, San Andres/Grayburg formations, Permian basin, Guadalupe Mountains, New Mexico and Texas. In Field Trip Guidebook, San Andres/Grayburg Formations, Guadalupe Mountains, NewMexico and Texas, ed. GE Moore, GLWilde, pp. 1-35. Permian basin section. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Publ. 86-25. 144 pp. Schlager W, Reijmer JJG, Droxler A. 1994. Highstand shedding of carbonate platforms. J. Sedimentol, Res. 64:270-81 Schlanger SO. 1986. High-frequency sea-level fluctuations in Cretaceoustime: an emerging geophysical problem. In History of Mesozoic and Cenozo& Oceans,ed. KJ Hsii, pp. 61-74. Am. Geophys. Union Geodyn. Ser. 15 Shanley KW,McCabePJ. 1994. Perspectives on the sequence stratigraphy of continental strata. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull, 78:54468 Sinclair HD, CoakleyB J, Allen PA, Watts AB. 1991. Simulationof foreland basin stratigraphy using a diffusion modelof mountainbelt uplift and erosion: an examplefrom the central Alps, Switzerland. Tectonics 10:599-620 Sloss LL. 1950. Paleozoic stratigraphy in the Montana area. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 34:423-51 Sloss LL. 1963. Sequences the eratonic intein rior of North America. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull 74:93-114 Sloss LL.1988. Forty years of sequencestratigraphy. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull, 100:1661-65 Sloss LL.1991. Thetectonic factor in sea level change: a countervailing view. J. Geophys. Res. 96:6609-617 Sloss LL, KrumbeinWC, Dapples EC. 1949. Integrated facies analysis. In Sedimentary Facies in Geologic History, ed. CR Longwell, pp. 91-124. Geol. Soc. Am. Mere.39. 171 pp. Sonnenfeld MD,Cross TA. 1993. Volumetric partitioning and facies differentiation within the Permian Upper San Andres Formation of Last Chance Canyon, Guadalupe Mountains, NewMexico. See Loucks & Sarg 1993, pp. 435-74 Southgate PN, Kennard JM, Jackson MJ, OBrien PE, Sexton MJ. 1993. Reciprocal lowstandclastic and highstandcarbonate sed477
imentation, subsurface Devonianreef complex, Canningbasin, WesternAustralia. See Loucks & Sarg 1993, pp. 157-79 Steckler MS, Reynolds DJ, Coakley B J, Swift BA,Jarrard R. 1993. Modellingpassive margin sequencestratigraphy. See Posamentieret al 1993, pp. 19-41 Steel R J, MaehleS, Nilsen H, Roe SL, Spinnangr A. 1977. Coarsening-upward cycles in the alluvium of Homelenbasin (Devonian), Norway: sedimentary response to tectonic events. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 88:1124-34 Suter JR, Berryhill HL, Penland S. 1987. Late Quaternarysea-level fluctuations and depositional sequences, southwest Louisiana continental shelf. In Sea-Level Fluctuation and Coastal Evolution, ed. D Nummedal, O Pilkey, J Howard,pp. 199-219. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Spec. Publ. No. 41. 267 PP. Swift DJP, Phillips S, ThorneJA. 1991. Sedimentationon continental margins, V: parasequenees. In Shelf Sandand SandstoneBodies. Geometry,Facies and SequenceStratigraphy, ed. DJP Swift, GF Oertel, RW Tillman, JA Thome,pp. 153-87. Int. Assoc. Sedimentol. Spec. Publ. 14. 532 pp. Sykes LR, Sbar ML.1973. Intraplate earthquakes, lithospheric stresses and the driving mechanismof plate tectonics. Nature 245:298-302 Tankard AJ, Welsink HJ, Jenkins WAM. 1989. Structural styles and stratigraphy of the Jeanne dArc basin, Grand Banks of Newfoundland. In Extensional Tectonics and Stratigraphy of the North Atlantic Margins, ed. AJ Tankard, HRBalkwill, pp. 265-82. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mem.46. 64l pp. Tesson M, Allen GP, Ravenne C. 1993. Late Pleistocene shelf-perched lowstand wedges on the Rh6necontinental shelf. See Posamentier et al 1993,pp. 183-96 Tesson M, Gensous B, Allen GP, Ravenne C. 1990. Late Quaternary deltaic lowstand wedges on the Rh6ne continental shelf, France. Mar. Geol. 91:325-32 Underhill JR. 1991. Controls on late Jurassic seismic sequences, Inner MorayFirth, UK North Sea: a critical test of a key segment of Exxons original global cycle chart. Basin Res. 3:79-98 Vail PR. 1987. Seismicstratigraphy interpretation using sequence stratigraphy. Part I: Seismic stratigraphy interpretation procedure. In Atlas of Seismic Stratigraphy, ed. AW Bally, pp. 1-10. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Stud. Geol. No. 27, Vol. 1. 125 pp. Vail PR. 1992.The evolution of seismic stratigraphy and the global sea-level curve. See Dott 1992, pp. 83-91 Vail PR, Audemard E Bowman SA, Eisner PN, Perez-Cruz C. 1991. The strati-

graphicsignaturesof tectonics, eustasyand of Western Interior, USA. lnterregional In sedimentology--an overview.In Cyclesand Unconforraities and Hydrocarbon AccumuEvents in Stratigraphy, ed. G Einsele, W lation, ed. JS Schlee,pp. 7-35. Am.Assoc. Ricken,A Seilacher, pp. 617-59. Berlin: Petrol.Geol.Mere. 184pp. 36. Springer-Verlag. pp. 955 Weimer 1989. Sequence P. stratigraphy of the Vail PR,Hardenbol Todd 1984.Jurassic J, RG. MississippiFan(Plio-Pleistocene),Gulf unconformities, chronostratigraphy, seaand Mexico. Geol.Mar.Lett. 9:185-272 level changes fromseismicstratigraphyand Weiraer Posamantier eds. 1993.SiliciP, HW, biostratigraphy.In Interregional Unconfor- clastic Sequence Straligraphy: RecentDevelmities and Hydrocarbon Accumulation, ed. opments Applications. Assoc.Petrol. and Am. JS Schlee, pp. 129-44.Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol.Mere. 492pp. 58. Geol.Mere.36. 184pp. WeisselJK, KarnerGD.1989.Flexural uplift unloading of Vail PR, Mitchum Jr, ToddRG,Widmier of rift flanks dueto mechanical RM JM, Thompson III, et al. 1977. Seismic S the lithosphere duringextension.J. Geophys. stratigraphy globalchanges sea level. and of Res. 94:13,919-50 See Payton1977, pp. 49-212 Wemicke AxenGJ. 1988. On the role of B, VanWagoner Mitchum Campion JC, RM, KM, isoStasy the evolution normal in of fault sysRahmanian 1990.Siliciclastic Sequence tems. Geology VD. 16:848-51 Stratigraphyin WellLogs, Cores,and Out- Wheeler 1958.Time-stratigraphy.Am.AsHE. crop.v: Concepts High-Resolution for Corresoc. Petrol.Geol.Bull. 42:1047-63 lation of gimeandFacies.Am.Assoc.Petrol. Wilgus HastingsBS, KendallCGStC, CK, PosaGeol.Methods Exploration in Series, No. Z mentier HW, RossCA,VanWagoner eds. JC, 55 pp. 1988.Sea-LevelChanges: IntegratedApAn proach.Soc. Econ.Paleontol. Mineral.Spec. Van WagonerJC, Nummedal Jones CR, D, Publ.No.42. 407pp. Taylor DR,Jennette DC,Riley GW. 1991. Sequence stratigraphyapplications to shelf Winter H de la R, Brink MC.1991. Chronosandstone reservoirs.Am. Assoc.Petrol.Geol. stratigraphic subdivisionof the Witwatersrand basin based on a Western Transvaal FieMConf. Van Wagoner Posamentier HW,Mitchum composite JC, column. Afr. J. Geol.94:191S. RM Vail PR, Sarg JF, et al. 1988. An Jr, 203 overviewof the fundamentalsof sequence Wood Ethridge FG, Schumm 1993. LJ, SA. stratigraphyandkeydefinitions. SeeWilgus The effects of rate of base-levelfluctuation et al 1988,pp. 39-45 on coastal plain, shelf and slope deposiWalker RG.1990. Facies modelingand setional systems:an experimental approach. SeePosamentier al 1993,pp. 43-53 et quence~tratigraphy. J. Sediment.Petrol. 60:777-86 Yang C-S, NioS-D.1993.Application highof WalkerRG,Plint AG.1992. Wave- stormand resolutionsequence stratigraphyto the upper dominated shallowmarine systems.In Facies Rotliegand the Netherlands in offshore. See Models,ed. RG Walker,NPJames,pp. 219Weimer Posamentier1993, pp. 285-316 & 238. Toronto:Geol.Assoc.Can.409 pp. Yingling VL, Heller PL. 1992. Timingand recordof forelandsedimentation duringthe WatkinsJS, Mountain convenors. 1990. GS, Role of ODP drilling in the investigation initiation of the Sevier orogenic in cenbelt of global changesin sea level. Reportof tral Utah.BasinRes. 4:279-90 JOI]USSAC Workshop ZobackML,ZobackMD,Adams Assumpcao J, S, Global patternsof Weimer 1984.Relation of unconformities, M,Bergrnan et al. 1989. RJ. tectonics, andsea-levelchanges, Cretaceous tectonic stress. Nature 341:291-98

08 - Ann - Rev. EPS 23

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

08 - Ann - Rev. EPS 23

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.

and Neal W. Driscoll

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 452 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 454 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

CHOICE OF A FRAMEWORK FOR SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

CompositeInterval of Sediment Starvation

Depositional Sequence Boundary

Genetic Stratigraphic Sequence Bounclery

Depositional Sequence Boundary

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 456 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

DEPARTURES FROM THE STANDARD MODEL

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

iv SubaerialHiatus ~~STbff _~,; ...... :~ " : ........ -DISTANCE

Intervalof Sediment Starvation (Maximum Flooding) Maximum , .

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 460 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

Gradual vs Instantaneous Developmentof Sequence Boundaries

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 462 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

Sequence Boundary High-OrderSequence Boundary

Approx. Location of Detail ~ _,, ,~,~

ne;o~n ~ Brushy ~Canyon

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

~/~.North Horn (Part)

~xX~~--~ &~~~esed oe ~ ..~o

~_. Mbr Blac~awk

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

West Thompson Thompson Pass Canyon

Sagers Canyon East

~-Estuarine Cross-stratification Sandstone

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 466 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

Normal Faulting ~ Footwall

EXPLANATION Hanging Wall [~ Sediment

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 468 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 471

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 472 CHRISTIE-BLICK DRISCOLL &

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline 476

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Potrebbero piacerti anche