Sequence Stratigraphy

Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

Nicholas Christie-Blick and Neal W. Driscoll Departmentof Geological Sciences and Lamont-DohertyEarth Observatory of ColumbiaUniversity, Palisades, NewYork 10964-8000

KEYWORDS: sedimentation, unconformity, tectonics, seismic stratigraphy, sea level

INTRODUCTION Sequencestratigraphy is the study of sediments and sedimentaryrocks in terms of repetitively arranged facies and associated stratal geometry(Vail 1987; Van Wagoneret al 1988, 1990; Christie-Blick 1991). It is a technique that can be traced back to the workof Sloss et al (1949), Sloss (1950, 1963), and Wheeler (1958) on interregional unconformitiesof the NorthAmerican craton, but it be- camesystematized only after the advent of seismic stratigraphy, the stratigraphic interpretation of seismic reflection profiles (Vail et al 1977, 1984, 1991; Berg & Woolverton1985; Cross & Lessenger 1988; Sloss 1988; Christie-Blick et al 1990; Van Wagoneret al 1990; Vail 1992). Sequencestratigraphy makesuse of the fact that sedimentarysuccessions are pervadedby physical discontinuities. Theseare present at a great range of scales and they arise in a numberof quite different ways:for example,by fluvial incision and subaerial erosion (abovesea by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. level); submergenceof nonmarineor shallow-marinesediments during transgression (flooding surfaces and drowningunconformities), in somecases with shoreface erosion (ravinement); shoreface erosion during regression; erosion in the marineenvironment as a result of storms, currents, or mass-wasting;and through condensation under conditions of diminished sediment supply (inter- Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org vals of sedimentstarvation). The mainattribute shared by virtually all of these discontinuities, independentof origin and scale, is that to a first approximation they separate older deposits from younger ones. 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 sedimentary geology, and the emergenceof sequence stratigraphy does not imply that existing tech- niques or data ought to 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 frameworkin whichobservations of intrinsic properties such as lithol- ogy, fossil content, chemistry, magneticremanence, and age can be compared, correlated, and perhaps reevaluated. With the possible exception of sedimen- tar), units characterized by tabular layering over large areas and by the absence of significant facies variation (for example,some deep-oceanic sediments), is hard to imagineattempting to interpret the stratigraphic record in any other context. Wemake this point because criticisms leveled at sequencestratigraphy have tended to lose sight of the essence of the technique. In this regard, it is unfortunate that the developmentof sequencestratigraphy 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 muchof earth history but, as a practical technique and in spite of terminologycurrently in use, sequencestratigraphy does not actually require any assumptionsabout 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 phenomenongoverned by a great manyinterrelated factors. In mostcases, specific attributes of sedimentarysuccessions (for example,the lateral extent and thickness of a sedimentaryunit, the distribution of included facies, or the existenceof a particular stratigraphic discontinuity) cannot be as- cribed 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, Schlanger 1986, Burton et 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). by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Each of 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 componentof subsidence (Reynoldset al

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org 1991, Steckler et al 1993, Driscoll & Karner 1994). The space available for sedimentto accumulateis therefore not simplya function of somepoorly defined combinationof subsidence and eustasy (the now-popularconcept 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 phenomenonis particularly significant for efforts to sort out the role of eustasy Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCESTRATIGRAPHY 453

(e.g. Christie-Bliek 1990, Christie-Blick et a11990, Watkins& Mountain1990, Loutit 1992). If the phaserelation betweenthe eustatic signal and the resulting 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.comparisonof sites needs to take into accountthe other important variables. Recognitionof these inherent difficulties has led to a gradualshift in research objectives awayfrom such goals as deriving a "sea-level curve," and toward studies designedto investigate the effects of specific factors ki~ownto have been important in governing sedimentation in a particular sedimentary basin or at a particular time in earth history. Amongthe most important factors are the rates and amplitudesof eustatic change, subsidencepatterns in tectonically active and inactive basins, sedimentflux or availability, the physiographyof the depositional surface (for example,ramps vs settings with a well-developed shelf-slope break), and scale. The subdiscipline of high-resolution sequence stratigraphy has emergedin the course of this research partly in response to the need for detailed reservoir stratigraphy in maturepetroleum provinces and partly becausemany of the interesting issues need to be addressedat an outcrop or borehole scale (meters to tens of meters) rather than at the scale of a conventional seismic reflection profile (Plint 1988, 1991; VanWagoner et al 1990, 1991; Jacquin et al 1991; Leckie et al 1991; Mitchum& Van Wagoner1991; 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 & Lehmann1986; Lind- say 1987; Christie-Blick et al 1988, 1995; Grotzinger et al 1989; Sarg 1989;

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. 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

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org 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 manyof the issues outlined above. Standard concepts and the basic methodologyof sequence stratigraphy are describedin numerousarticles, 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 chosen to emphasizeareas of disagreementor controversy, Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

454 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL

especially with respect to the origin of stratigraphic discontinuities, whichwe think is one of the mostinteresting general issues in sedimentarygeology.

CHOICE OF A FRAMEWORKFOR SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY The objective of sequencestratigraphy is to determinelayer by layer howsedi- mentarysuccessions are put together, from the smallest elementsto the largest. Weare thus interested in all of the physical surfaces that at different scales 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 prod- uct of real differences that have emergedin the study of contrasting examples. However,it is clear that stratigraphy represents morethan a series of random events. In manycases there exists a definite hierarchy in layering patterns. In choosing a frameworkfor sequence stratigraphy, it is therefore important to 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 et al 1988, 1990), in preference to "genetic stratigraphy" (Galloway1989) and "allostratigraphy" (NACSN1983, Salvador 1987, Walker 1990, Blum1993, Mutti et al 1994). Sequencestratigraphy and genetic stratigraphy differ primarily in the waythat fundamentaldepositional units are defined (Figure 1). In the case of sequence stratigraphy, the depositional sequenceis defined as a relatively conformable succession of genetically related strata boundedby unconformities and their correlative conformities (Mitchum1977, Van Wagoneret al 1990, Christie- by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Blick 1991). In the most general sense, an unconformityis a buried surface of 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 et al 1988). Accordingto this def- Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org inition, intervals boundedby marine erosion surfaces that do not pass laterally into subaerial discontinuities are not sequences. The fundamentalunit of genetic stratigraphy, the genetic stratigraphic sequence,is boundedby intervals of sediment starvation (Galloway1989). These correspond approximately with times of maximumflooding 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 argumentfor adopting the genetic stratigraphic approachis utilitarian: Intervals of sedimentstarvation are laterally persistent andpaleonto- logically useful. However,the boundariesof genetic stratigraphic sequencesare Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 455

A Genetic Stratigraphlc Sequence Set

EXPLANATION Fluvial and Coastal Plain Shoreface and Deltaic Bas(nwardLimit of Shelf and Slope AIIoetratlgraphic Unit CompositeInterval of Submarine "Fan" Sediment Starvation

Depositional SequenceBoundary

Genetic Stratigraphic ¯ Sequence Bounclery B X Depositional SequenceBoundary

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 NACSN1983, 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 by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. 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 Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org may contain numerous marine disconformities or hardgrounds (lithified crusts, commordy composed 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. Undue focus on intervals of starvation also makes it 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 Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

456 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL

also be problematic: The boundaries of depositional sequences tend to be of variable character, subject to modificationduring transgression, and difficult to recognize once they pass laterally into fully marine successions. Yet sequence stratigraphy is preferable to genetic stratigraphy becausein manysettings sequence boundaries related 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 (NACSN1983, Salvador 1987, Walker 1990, Blum1993, Mutti et al 1994). As formalized in the North AmericanStratigraphic Code, allostratigraphic units are defined and identified on the basis of boundingdiscontinuities; 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 sequencestratigraphy is not univer- sally applicable--for example, in unifacial or nonmarinesuccessions or where uncertainty exists about the origin of a particular surface. Allostratigraphic nomenclatureis, however,rejected here for several reasons, including historical priority. The designations of "alloformations," "allomembers,"etc are unnec- essary and overly formalistic; and these terms are not strictly applicable wherea boundingunconformity passes 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 makingjudgments about the relative importance of discontinuities (and hence the degree of conformabilityor genetic relatedness), but it does not require an

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. attempt to distinguish surfaces of different origin. Nordoes this nongeneticter- minologyhelp muchwhere sequence stratigraphic interpretation is admittedly difficult (for example,in deposits lacking laterally traceable discontinuities).

DEPARTURES FROM THE STANDARD MODEL Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org In the standard model for sequence stratigraphy (Figure 2), unconformity- boundedsequences are composedof"parasequences" and "parasequence sets," whichare stratigraphic units characterized by overall upward-shoalingof depositional facies and boundedby marine flooding surfaces and their correlative surfaces (Vail 1987; Van Wagoneret al 1988, 1990). These depositional elements 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 Wagoneret al 1988). Boundingunconformities are classified as type 1 or type 2 accordingto such criteria as the presence or absenceof incised valleys, the Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 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 dif- ferentially 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 developedin nearshoreand shallow-marinesettings in both siliciclastic

sb2 Intervalof SedimentStarvation a (MaximumFlooding)

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Maximum iv SubaerialHiatus ~~STbff , . _~,; ...... :~ ’" : ......

¯ -DISTANCE Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org Figure2 Conceptualcross sections in relation to depth (A) and geological time (B) showingstratal geometry,the distribution of silieielastie facies, and standard nomenclaturefor unconformity- boundeddepositional 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 maximumflooding surface of Vail 1987); ts, transgressive surface (top lowstandsurface and top shelf-margin surface of Vail et al 1991); iv, incised valley; lsw, lowstandprogading wedge; sf, slope fma; bff, basin floor fan. Notethat in the seismic stratigraphie literature, the term submarine"fan" includes a range of turbidite systemsand sediment-gravity-flewdeposits that are not necessarily fan-shaped. Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

458 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL

and carbonaterocks (James1984; Van Wagoner et al 1988, 1990;Swift et al 1991;Pratt et al 1992),and their recognitionis undoubtedlyuseful in sequence stratigraphic analysis. However,the tendencyfor pigeonholingin sequence stratigraphytends to obscurerather than to illuminatethe rangeof facies ar- rangementsand processes involved. Sedimentarycycles vary from markedly asymmetricalto essentially symmetrical,with the degree of asymmetryde- creasingin an offshoredirection and dependingalso on whetherparasequences are arrangedin a foresteppingmotif (whichfavors asymmetry)or a backstepping one. (Theterm forestepping means that each parasequencein a succession representsshallower-water conditions overall than the parasequencebeneath it. Backsteppingrefers to the opposite motif: overall deepeningupward.) Al- thoughnot strictly includedin the definition of the termparasequence, similar sedimentarycycles with the samespectrum of asymmetryare observedin many lacustrine successions(Eugster & Hardie1975; Steel et al 1977;Olsen 1986, 1990). Moreover,shoaling upwards is not the only expressionof depositional cyclicity(for example,in alluvial andtidal depositsand deep-marine turbidites). Objectiverecognition of a parasequence,as opposedto someother depositional elementwith sharp boundaries,is therefore tenuousin nonmarineand offshore marinesettings unless boundingsurfaces can be shownto correlate withmarine floodingsurfaces. Theconcept of parasequencesand parasequence sets as the buildingblocks of depositionalsequences is also largelya matterof conventionrather than a state- mentabout how sediments accumulate at different scales. Thereis clear overlap in the lengthscales and timescales representedby parasequencesand high-order sequences (Van Wagoneret al 1990, 1991; Kerans & Nance1991; Mitchum & VanWagoner 1991; Vail et al 1991; Posamentier & Chamberlain1993; Posamentier& James1993; Sonnenfeld& Cross 1993; Christie-Blick et al

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. 1995). The distinction betweensequences and parasequencesis therefore primarilya function of whether,at a particular scale of cyclicity, sequence boundariescan or cannotbe objectivelyidentified and mapped.An unfortunate by-productof the quest for sequencesand sequenceboundaries is to impose sequence nomenclaturewhen parasequence terminology wouldbe moreap-

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org propriate. Floodingsurfaces are sometimesinterpreted as sequenceboundaries whenno objective evidencefor such a boundaryexists (e.g. Lindsay1987, Prave1991, Lindsayet al 1993, Montafiez& Osleger1993) or, if a sequence boundaryis present,it is locatedat a lowerstratigraphic level.

Systems Tracts Thethreefold subdivision of sequencesinto systemstracts is basedon the phase lag betweentransgressive-regressive cycles and the developmentof correspond- ing sequenceboundaries (Figure 2B). In the standardmodel for siliciclastic sedimentationwith a shelf-slopebreak, regressionof the shorelinecontinues Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCESTRATIGRAPHY 459

after the developmentof the sequenceboundary, so that the regressive part of any cycle of sedimentationis divisible into two systems tracts: the highstand belowthe boundary(HST in Figure 2) and the lowstand(or shelf margin) tems tract above it (LSTand SMSTin Figure 2). The designation of systems tracts has becomestandard procedurein sequencestratigraphy as if this werean end in itself but, as with parasequences,subjective interpretation and pigeon- holing tend to obscurethe natural variability in sedimentarysystems. There is no requirementfor individual systems tracts to have any particular thickness or geometry,or even to be representedon a particular profile or in a particular part of a basin (Posamentier & James1993). It is commonin deep water for lowstandunits to be stacked, with intervening transgressive and highstand units representedby relatively thin intervals of sedimentstarvation. In shelf areas, the stratigraphy tends to be composedprimarily of alternating transgressive and highstandunits, but these vary greatly in thickness and they are not necessarily easy to distinguish. Still farther landward,highstands maybe stacked with no other systemstracts intervening, a situation that is likely to challenge those intent on assigning systems tract nomenclaturein nonmarinesuccessions. The most troublesom, e systems tract is the lowstand, which according to the original definition of the term represents sedimentationabove a 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-marineexamples continues to be the subject of vigorous debate (Weimer1989, Normarket al 1993). The lowstandis also the one element of a depositional sequencethat separates it from a transgressive- regressive cycle (e.g. Johnsonet a11985,Embry 1988), It is perhapsnatural that sequencestratigraphers have attemptedto identify lowstandunits, even where the presence of such deposits is doubtful (for example, manyshelf and ramp settings), becausethis helpsto deflect the criticism that sequencestratigraphy of- by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. fers nothing morethan newterminology for 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 et al 1991, Southgate et al 1993). However,sedimentological and Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org paleontological evidencefor estuarine sedimentationwithin (fluvially incised) valleys (e.g. Hettinger et al 1993)in manycases precludesthe lowstandinter- pretation, because such estuaries develop as a consequenceof transgression. JC Van Wagoner(personal communication,1991) has defended the use of the term lowstandfor estuarine valley fills on the groundsthat the differentiation of sandstones within incised valleys from those of the underlying highstand systemstract is of practical importancefor the delineation of reservoirs for oil and gas. However,such commercialobjectives can surely be achieved without fundamentallyaltering the systemstract concept. Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

460 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL Variations in SequenceArchitecture

Case studies in a great variety of settings have led to attempts to develop modified versions of the standard sequencestratigraphic model. Examplesin- clude settings wheresedimentation is accompaniedby growthfaulting, terraced shelves and siliciclastic ramps, carbonate platforms and ramps, nonmarineenvi- ronments(fluvial, eolian, and lacustrine), and environmentsproximal to 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 ex- periments(Wood et al 1993, Koss et al 1994) and small-scale natural analogues (Posamentier et al 1992b), and computersimulations (Jervey 1988, Helland- Hansen et 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 documentvariations in the arrangementof facies and associated stratal geometry,but amongthe moreinteresting results has been the emergenceof somenew ideas about the origin of sequence boundaries and other stratigraphic discontinuities.

ORIGIN OF SEQUENCE BOUNDARIES The conventional interpretation of sequenceboundaries is that they are due to a relative fall of sea level (Posamentieret al 1988, Posamentier& Vail 1988,

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Sarg 1988, Vail et al 1991). For example,a boundarymight be said to develop whenthe rate of relative sea-level fall is a maximumor whenrelative sea level begins to fall at somespecified break in slope, thereby initiating the incision of valleys by headwarderosion. The concept of relative sea-level change ac- counts qualitatively for the roles of both subsidenceand eustasy in controlling Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org the space available for sediments to accumulate.However, existing modelsare fundamentallyeustatic because it is invariably the eustatic componentthat is inferred to fluctuate; the rate of subsidenceis assumedto vary only slowly, if at all. Here wedraw attention to several waysin whichthe conventionalexplana- tion of sequenceboundaries needs 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(Posamentier et al 1988, Vail et al 1991). Themain evidencefor this Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCESTRATIGRAPHY 461

the markedasymmetry of depositional sequences, which in seismic reflection 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;Haq et 1987). (The term 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 modUlatingpatterns of sedimentationsince Oligocenetime (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 manycases, the highstand systemstract is divisible into two parts: a lower/landwardpart 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 upwardtermination of 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,the inferred erosion is unlikely to have taken place in the subaerial environmentbecause subaerial erosion tends to be focused within incised valleys, and the amount of erosion required in manycases exceeds what can reasonably be attributed to shoreface ravinementduring transgression. A more reasonable interpretation is that offlap is due fundamentallyto bypassingdur-

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. ing progradation (toplap of Mitchum1977), 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 exposed in the upper part of the San Andres Formation, a car- Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org bonate platform of Permian age in the GuadalupeMountains of southeastern NewMexico (Figure 3A; Sonnenfeld & Cross 1993). Individual high-order sequencesconsist of two half-cycles. Thelower half-cycle (primarily transgressive) is predominantlysiliciclastic and onlaps the underlying sequenceboundary. The upper half-cycle (regressive) is composedmainly of carbonate rocks and is characterized by onlap and downlap(downward termination of strata) the base and in someinstances by offlap at the top. These high-order sequences are themselves oblique to a prominentlow-order sequenceboundary at the top of the San Andres Formation (top of sequences uSA4and uSA5). On the basis of karstification, this surface is interpreted by Sonnenfeld& Cross (1993) Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

462 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL

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 Brink et al 1993). However,the siliciclastic half-cycles of the high-ordersequences indicate that the platform was bypassed episodically during overall progradation. The sequence boundary at the top of the San Andreswas therefore not producedby an instantaneous downwardshift in onlap but is instead a compositesurface. Anotherpertinent exampleof high-resolution sequencestratigraphy is drawn from the work of Van Wagonerand colleagues in a late Cretaceous foreland- basin ramp setting in the BookCliffs of eastern Utah and western Colorado (Van Wagoneret al 1990, 1991). Numeroussequence boundaries have been documentedin the strongly progradational succession betweenthe Star Point Formation and Castlegate Sandstone (Figure 4A). Twoof the most prominent boundaries are present at the level of the Desert Memberof the Blackhawk Formationand Castlegate Sandstone (Figure 5). These boundaries are characterized by valleys as muchas several tens of meters deep incised into underlying

~ SA4/5 by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only.

300m EXPLANATION Approx. Location uSA3 ~ Sequence Boundary of Detail B ~ High-Order SequenceBoundary _,, ,~,~ Grayburg

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org ...... Other Stratal Surfaces ~ Stratal Termination ne;o~n o e Sa des ==,,, SedimentDeposited Above ~------Cutoff~~ ~ Storm WaveBase ~ Brushy Sediment Deposited Below1100 m ..... ~Canyon [~ Storm Wave Base 5 km Figure3 (A) Simplifiedstratigraphic cross section of the upperpart of SanAndres Formation (Permian)in the GuadalupeMountains, New Mexico. (B) Schematic representation of the broader stratigraphiccontext of theSan Andres Formation at the scaleof conventionalseismic reflection data. Individualhigh-order sequences within sequences uSA4 (numbered 1-12) and uSA5 (num- bered13-14) are characterizedby stratal onlapand offlap and are themselvesoblique to a still lower-ordersequence boundary at the top of the SanAndres Formation. The datum for cross sectionA is the baseof the Hayessandstone oftbe Grayburg Formation. Also shown in Bare the namesof otherassociated lithostratigraphic units. (Modifiedfrom Sonnenfeld &Cross 1993.) Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 463

A Thistle Price Sunnyside GreenRiver UtahI Colo. Palisade ~1 I I I L 1 ~/~.North~ Horn (Part) ~///~T~$dl~r, FarroW’, ~l~sien ...... ~~’~ ~ ...... Castlegate- ~xX~~--~ ,, _ ~_. . Sandstone &~~~esed Mbr o~ ~ ~ ..~o oe Blac~awk Fm.

~~ ~ ~ Op~ Marine Shelf ~ ~asp ~ Forelapd- ~ Ll~oral ...... and~~ Deltal 50 km Fort Collins ~ LowerCoastal Plain BTurkey Creek andIncised Valley Fill S Mowry Shale ~ UpperCoastal Plain ~ Piedmont (~ Skull Creek...... Mostly Nonmarine ~ ~ ...... Plalnview, ~ Sequence Boundary ...... Max. Flooding Surface :’ ...... ’ " -- Other Stratal Surface

Figure4 Simplifiedstratigraphic cross section and lithostratigraphic nomenclaturefor mid-to upperCretaceous strata in the BookCliffs, eastern Utahand westernColorado (A; fromNummedal &Remy 1989), with a detail of the Albiansequence stratigraphy (DakotaGroup) of noah-central Colorado(B; fromWeimer 1984 and RJ Weimer,personal communication,1988). A detail of the DesertMember of the BlackhawkFormation and Castlegate Sandstone(box in A) is illustrated in Figure5. The base of the foreland-basinsuccession is markedapproximately by a regional sequenceboundary ai or near the base of the DakotaSandstone (in A) and at or near the base the Muddy(or J) Sandstoneof the DakotaGroup (in B). FCrefers to the Fort Collins Member,

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. portionof the MuddySandstone that locally underliesthe sequenceboundary.

littoral sandstones,by the offlap of successiveparasequences, and by a marked basinwardshift of facies. In the conventionalinterpretation, the incision of valleys by headward erosion from a break in slope near the shoreline ought to Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org deliver a significant volume of sediment tothe adjacent shelf, and prominent lowstand sandstones would be expected (Van Wagoner et al 1988, 1990). In- stead, 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 of the Castlegatelowstand shoreline on the basis of well-loginterpretation. The depositis perhapsanalogous to the relatively thin lowstandunits fromthe Albertabasin described by Plint (1988,1991) and Posamentieret al (1992a). Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

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

West Sagers Tusher Thompson ’ Thompson Canyon Bull Strychnine Canyon Pass Canyon East Canyon Wash W

Flooding Surface at baseof Buck Tongue

Castlegate SF/E Sequence

SequenceBoundary PassesLaterally into FloodingSurface

LSF OT EXPLANATION

20 m ~ Marine Shale ...... Max.~:loodlng Surface

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. ~ Littoral Sandstone OtherStratal Surface OT W Shale Para,llel Lamination 10 Coal Current Ripples \ m ~--Cross-stratification ~ DesertSequence f ~ SandstoneEstuarine Boundary conglomerate ~-~ o ~ ~ cross.stratification

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org Figure 5 Stratigraphic cross section of the Desert Memberof the BlackhawkFormation and Castlegate Sandstoneshowing depositional facies and sequencegeometry (simplified fromVan Wagoneret al 199l, Nummedal&Cole 1994). See Figure 4 for location. The two sequence boundariesillustrated are characterizedup-di p (west)by well-developedincised valleys. TheDesert sequenceboundary passes down-dip (eastward) in the vicinity of SagersCanyon into a marineflood- ing surface that wasprobably modified by ravinementduring transgression. A similar transition is observedin the CastlegateSandstone as it is traced farther eastward.Note the presenceof offlap- pingparasequences beneath each sequence boundary. Abbreviations for generalizedpaleoenviron- merits:BF, braided fluvial; SF/E,sinuous fluvial/estuarine; FS, foreshore;USF, upper shoreface; LSF,lower shoreface; OT, offshore transition. Systemstracts (modifiedfrom the interpretationsof VanWagoner et al 1991and Nummedal&Cole 1994): HST,highstand; TST,transgressive. Some uncertaintyexists aboutthe locationof the interval of maximumflooding in the Desertsequence owing to the difficultyof interpretingparasequence stacking trends in thin sections:It is at or slightly abovethe dashedline labeled RavinementSurface (D Nummedal,personal communication,1994). Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCESTRATIGRAPHY 465

boundaries can be produced by eustatic fluctuations at rates comparableto typical rates of tectonic subsidence and that they do so by gradual basinward expansionand subsequentburial of zones of bypassingand/or erosion (Christie- Blick 1991, Steckler et al 1993). Consequently,if the rate of eustatic change required to generate a sequenceboundary is small, there is no reason to assume that sequenceboundaries are 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 developmentof sequenceboundaries in such basins maybe entirely tectonic in origin (Underhill 1991). Another view 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 manycases is probably not warranted for times in earth history whenrates of eustatic change were comparableto rates of tectonic subsidence (e.g. Cretaceous). Sequenceboundaries are not merely enhanced obscuredby tectonic activity (cf Vail et al 1984, 1991). Boththeir timing and their very existence are due to the combinedeffects of eustasy and variations in patterns of subsidence/uplift and sedimentsupply. The roles of these factors and the mannerin whichthey interact are admittedlyvery difficult to sort out, but recent studies provide someuseful first-order clues. Animportant attribute of tectonically active basins is that it is possible for the rate of tectonic subsidenceto increase and decrease simultaneouslyin different parts of the samebasin (Figure 6). Sequenceboundaries that are fundamentally of tectonic rather than eustatic origin cannottherefore be attributed satisfactorily by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. to the conceptof a relative sea-levelfall or evenan increasein the rate of relative sea-level fall, becauserelative sea-level mayhave been both rising and falling at an increasingrate in different places. In this regard, patterns of subsidenceand uplift in foreland and extensional

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org 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 orogen leads to regional subsidence and to uplift in the vicinity of the peripheral bulge, with a wavelengthand amplitude that are governedby the flexural rigidity of the lithosphere (Figure 6A; Beaumont1981, Karner & Watts 1983). Uplift mayalso occur locally at the proximal margin of the basin as a result of the propagationof thrust faults at depth. Similarly, in extensional basins, subsidenceand tilting of the hanging-wallblock (abovethe fault in Figure 6) are accompaniedby uplift of the footwall (below the fault; Wernicke & Axen 1988, Weissel & Karner 1989). During times of tectonic quiescence, these patterns are reversed, although the amplitudes are small in Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

466 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL

A ACTIVE DEFORMATION B QUIESCENCE Foreland basin Foreland basin j ~ ~ PeripheralBulge

Thrusting

Thermal Extensional basin Extensionalbasin Subsidence

NormalFaulting EXPLANATION ~ Footwall 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 accumulation of terrigenous sedimentderived fromthe orogen results in additional subsidenceat the distal side of the basin and to lateral migration of the peripheral bulge awayfrom the orogen (Jordan & Flemings1991). A similar pattern of uplift and subsidence mayarise during times of tectonic quiescence in extensional basins, through a

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. combinationof erosional unloading of the footwall block and thermally driven subsidence,especially whenthe latter is offset fromthe original depocenter(as illustrated in Figure,6B). Morecomplicated scenarios can also be envisaged. For example, foreland basins are commonlysegmented by block-faulting, and lithospheric extension

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org maybe accommodatedby a series of tilted fault blocks or distributed inho- mogeneouslyas a function of depth and lateral position within the lithosphere. Subsidenceand uplift mayalso be complicatedin three dimensionsby the presence of salients in the orogen or of accommodationzones in extensional basins. Patterns of subsidenceand uplift in strike-slip basins tend to be even morecomplicated and subject to markedchanges on short time scales (Christie-Blick Biddle 1985). The developmentand characteristics of sequenceboundaries in tectonically active basins are directly related to patterns of subsidence and uplift of the sort outlined here and to the fact that the patterns vary betweentimes of active deformation and quiescence. At a regional scale, the progradation of Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCESTRATIGRAPHY 467

sedimentary systems, the filling of available accommodationwith 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 backstepping of sedimentary systems, an increase in topographic relief along the faulted basin margins, and a narrowingof the depocenter (e.g. Underhill 1991). In both foreland and extensional basins, the most prominentsequence boundaries therefore are expected to correspondwith the onset of deformation. Theseboundaries consist 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 basinwardshift in facies, and wherepresent, such facies shifts maybe restricted to areas that weresubaerially exposed.The 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 example from the Devonian the Canningbasin, Australia]. Several of these points can be illustrated with reference to the late Cre- taceous 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(or J) Sandstone of the DakotaGroup (Figure 4B). The succession above this surface is characterized by a markedincrease in the rate of sediment accumulationand by an

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. abrupt transition from nonmarineto relatively deep marine sedimentary rocks (Mancos/MowryShale; Heller et al 1986, Vail et al 1991). These features are fundamentallyattributable to the onset in late Albiantime of a phase of crustal deformation and accelerated subsidence; the contribution of eustatic change is indeterminate but is presumedto have been small. Wedo not preclude the Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org possibility of slightly earlier (late Aptianto Albian, pre-Dakota)foreland-basin developmentto the west (Yingling & Heller 1992), but the strata are entirely nonmarineand the evidence is equivocal. Within the foreland-basin succession, the origin of other sequenceboundaries is less firmly established, but the BlackhawkFormation and Castlegate Sandstoneexhibit features that are consistent with our model. The Blackhawkand lower/distal part of the Castle- gate (below the Castlegate sequence boundary; Figure 5) are characterized strong progradation and the developmentof offlap, consistent with erosional unloading of the orogen during a time of tectonic quiescence (cf Posamentier & Allen 1993). The upper/proximalpart of the Castlegate (above the sequence Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

468 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL

boundary)is transgressive and, as datumedfrom a flooding surface at the base of the BuckTongue of the MancosShale, it thickens towardsthe orogen(Figure 5). At a regional scale, it appears to pass laterally into syn-orogenicconglomerate (Price River Formation) and to overstep the BlackhawkFormation, which was uplifted and bevelled to the west (Figure 4). Thesefeatures makeit hard to argue that the Castlegate sequence boundarydeveloped solely or even primarily as a result of eustatic change. A seismic exampleof sequence developmentrelated to episodic block faulting in an extensional setting is providedby a seismic reflection profile (line NF-79-108)from the Jeanne d’Arc basin of offshore eastern Canada(Figure 7). The basin records a series of extensional events betweenlate 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 Grand Banks of Newfoundlandand the Iberian peninsula. Reflections below the late Barremian unconformity are approximately parallel and concordantwith the unconformity. Abovethis surface, the onlap of reflections and their divergencetowards the border fault documentthe onset of crustal extension. Similar reflection geometryis evident at the early 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). Evidencefrom available 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 exposuresurfaces. The observedgeometry requires rifting betweenlate Barremianand late Aptiantime. Our preferred interpretation is that each of the mappedsequence boundaries records times of accelerated block tilting. Analternative interpretation, that

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. the early and late Aptian boundariesare due primarily to eustatic fluctuations duringa time of moreor less continuousblock tilting, is not consistelat with the absence of anticipated lowstanddeposits in closed paleobathymetriclows (for example,at the MercuryK-76 well, Figure 7).

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org Role of In-Plane Force Variations in the Origin of High-Order Sequence Boundaries

Oneof the main argumentsfor interpreting high-order depositional sequences in terms of eustatic changeis the absence of another suitable mechanism.We have seen in the Jeanne d’Arc basin examplethat episodic tilting mayprovide such a mechanismin extensional basins. However,difficulties arise in foreland basins because,in such settings, subsidenceis driven primarily by the integrated 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

SEQUENCESTRATIGRAPHY 469

An imaginative and somewhatcontroversial solution to this dilemmahas emergedfrom the recognition and modeling of in-plane force variations in the lithosphere (Lambeck1983, Cloetingh et al 1985, Karner 1986, Braun & Beaumont1989, Karner et al 1993). The best evidence for the existence of such forces is the incidence of intraplate earthquakes (e.g. Lambecket al 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). Although uncertainty 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,which is 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 of extensional basin inversion. The flexural response to in-plane compressiondepends on 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 compressionconsists of enhancedsubsidence in the depocenter,uplift of the peripheral bulge, and a reduction in 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 response for extensional basins is quite different. In-plane compressionresults

by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. in uplift of the depocenterand increased subsidence of the basin margins. In- plane tension leads to uplift of the basin marginsand to enhancedsubsidence of the depocenter (Braun & Beaumont1989, Karner et al 1993). The amplitude and wavelengthof the flexural deformationare a strong function of the extensional basin geometryand, in the case of basins undergoingpost-rift thermal

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org 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 compressionin the foreland basin exampleand decreased in-plane compression(increased tension) in the extensional basin example. Owingto the relatively short length scales relevant to extensional basins (tens of kilometers), it is anticipated that the stratigraphy of such basins oughtto be influencedstrongly even at short time scales by episodicblock tilting (the brittle Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

470 CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL

E m u-0

W ? Y by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only.

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org h b IL z aJ .-C -I Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 471 by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org

: Ill/I II Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

472 CHRISTIE-BLICK& DRISCOLL

componentof the deformation). In contrast, because the integrated vertical load of an orogen changesonly slowly (millions to tens of millions of years; Sinclair et al 1991), the stratigraphy of foreland basins ought to be muchmore sensitive on short time scales to the flexural effects of changesin in-plane compression, providing that the forces involved are sufficiently large. A possible test of this idea is to comparethe stratal geometryof sequencesof different scale in the samebasin. If high-order sequencesare due to eustatic change, as manyhave inferred (e.g. Posamentier & Allen 1993), their geometryought reflect overall patterns of subsidence.If they are instead a result of changesin in-plane compression,high-order transgressive systems tracts ought to thicken preferentially toward the orogenrelative to associated highstand units (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 DunveganFormation of the Alberta basin; Plint 1994).

CONCLUSIONS Sequencestratigraphy is concernedwith the analysis of sediments and sedimentary rocks with reference to the mannerin whichthey accumulatelayer by layer. Asa practical technique and in spite of existing terminology,it requires no assumptionsabout eustasy. Oneof the principal frontiers of the discipline is an effort to developan understandingof the manyinterrelated 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 developmore or by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. less instantaneously. In this paper we argue that in manycases 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.

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org 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 in- debted to numerouscolleagues for stimulating discussions of the issues, and we thank M Steckler and L Sohl for reviewing the manuscript. Weacknowledge support from the National Science Foundation (Earth Sciences and OceanSci- ences); Office of Naval Research; the Donorsof the PetroleumResearch Fund, administered by the American Chemical Society; and the Arthur D Storke MemorialFund of the Departmentof Geological Sciences, ColumbiaUniver- sity. This paper is Lamont-DohertyEarth Observatory Contribution No. 5257. Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 473

AnyAnnual.Review chapter, as well as anyarticle cited in an AnnualReview chapter, maybe purchasedfrom the AnnualReviews Preprints and Reprints service. 1-800-347.8007;415-259-5017; emaih [email protected]

Literature Cited Allen GP, Posamentier HW.1993. Sequence southern offshore, South Africa. See Weimer stratigraphy and facies modelof an incised &Posamentier 1993, pp. 393-410 valley fill: the GirondeEstuary, France. J. BrownLF Jr, Fisher WL.1977. Seismic strati- Sediment. Petrol. 63:378-91 graphic interpretation of depositional sys- Bartek LR, Vail PR, Anderson JB, EmmetPA, tems: examplesfrom the Brazilian rift and Wu S. 1991. Effect of Cenozoic ice sheet pull-apart basins. See Payton1977, pp. 213- fluctuations in Antarcticaon the stratigraphic 48 signature of the Neogene.J. Geophys. Res. Burton R, Kendall CGStC,Lerche I. 1987. Out 96:6753-78 of our depth: on the impossibility of fath- BaumGR, Vail PR. 1988. Sequence strati- omingeustasy from the stratigraphic record. graphic concepts applied to Paleogene out- Earth-Sci. Rev. 24:237-77 crops, Gulf and Atlantic basins. See Wilgus Cathles LM, Hallam A. 1991. Stress-induced et al 1988, pp. 309-27 changes in plate density, Vail sequences, BeaumontC. 1981. Foreland basins. Geophys. epeirogeny, and short-lived global sea level J. R. Astron. Soc. 65:291-329 fluctuations. Tectonics 10:659-71 Bergman EA, Solomon SC. 1985. Earthquake Chiocci FL. 1994. Very high-resolution seismics source mechanismsfrom body-waveformin- as a tool for sequence stratigraphy applied version and intraplate tectonics in the north- to outcrop scale---examples from eastern ern Indian Ocean. Phys. Earth Plant. Inter. Tyrrhenian margin Holocene/Pleistocene de- 4:1-23 posits. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 78:378- Berg OR, Woolverton DG, eds. 1985. Seismic 95 Stratigraphy H: An Integrated Approachto Christie-Blick N. 1990. Sequencestratigraphy HydrocarbonExploration. Am. Assoc. Petrol and sea-level changes in Cretaceous time. In Geol. Mem.39. 276 pp. Cretaceous Resources, Events and Rhythms, Blum MD.1993. Genesis and architecture of ed. RNGinsburg, B Beaudoin, pp. 1-21. Dor- incised valley fill sequences: a late Quater- drecht: Kluwer, NATOASI Series C, 304. nary example from the Colorado River, Gulf 352 pp. coastal plain of Texas. See Weimer& Posa- Christie-Blick N. 1991. Onlap, offlap, and the mentier 1993, pp. 259-84 origin of unconformity-boundeddepositional Bosence DWJ, Pomar L, Waltham DA, sequences. Mar. Geol. 97:35-56 Lankester HG. 1994. Computer modeling Christie-Blick N, Biddle KT, eds. 1985. Strike- a Micocene carbonate platform, Mallorca, Slip Deformation, Basin Formation, and Sed- Spain. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 78:247- imentation. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. 66 Spec. Publ. No. 37. 386 pp. by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Boulton GS. 1990. Sedimentary and sea level Christie-Blick N, Driscoll, NW.1994. Relative changes during glacial cycles and their con- sea-level change and the origin of sequence trol on glacimarine facies architecture. In boundariesin tectonically active settings. Am. Glacimarine Environments: Processes and Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Annu.Conv., Denver,Ab- Sediments, ed. JA Dowdeswell,JD Scourse, str. 121 pp. 15-52. Geol. Soc. LondonSpec. Publ. 53. Ctu’istie-Blick N, DysonIA, von der Borch CC. 423 pp. 1995. Sequencestratigraphy and the inter- Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org BowringSA, Grotzinger JP. 1992. Implications pretation of NeoproterozoicEarth history. In of newchronostratigraphy for tectonic evolu- Terminal Proterozoic Stratigraphy and Earth tion of Wopmayorogen, northwest Canadian History, ed. AHKnoll, MRWalter. Precam- shield. Am. J. Sci. 292:1-20 brian Res. (Special issue). In press BoydR, Suter J, Penland S. 1989. Relation of Christie-Blick N, Grotzinger JP, yon der Botch sequence stratigraphy to modernsedimentary CC. 1988. Sequencestratigraphy in Protero- environments. Geology 17:926-29 zoic successions. Geology16:100-4 Braun J, BeaumontC. 1989. A physical expla- Christie-Blick N, Mountain GS, Miller KG. nation of the relation betweenflank uplifts 1990. Seismic stratigraphic record of sea- and the breakupunconformity at rifted conti- level change. In Sea-Level Change, pp. 116- nental margins. Geology 17:760-64 140. Natl. Acad. Sci. Stud. Geophys.234 pp. Brink GJ, KeenanHG, BrownLF Jr. 1993. De- CloetinghS. 1988. Intraplate stresses: a newel- position of fourth-order, post-rift sequences ement in basin analysis. In NewPerspectives and sequence sets, lower Cretaceous (lower in Basin Analysis (Pettijohn Volume),ed. Valanginianto lower Aptian), Pletmos Basin, Kleinspehn, C Paola, pp. 205-23. NewYork: Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

474 CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL

Springer-Verlag.453 pp. bridgeUniv. Press. 274pp. CloetinghS, McQueenH, LambeckK. 1985. On GallowayWE. 1989. Genetic stratigraphic se- a tectonic mechanismfor regionalsea-level quencesin basin analysisI: architectureand variations,Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 75:157-66 genesis of flooding-surfacebounded deposi- CloetinghS, WonelR. 1985. Regionalstress tional units. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. field of the IndianPlate. Geophys.Res. Letts. 73:125-42 12:77-80 Garcfa-Mond6jarJ, Femfmdez-MendiolaPA. CrossTA, Lessenger MA. 1988. Seismic stratig- 1993. Sequencestratigraphy and systems raphy.Annu. Rev. EarthPlanet. Sci. 16:319- tracts of a mixedcarbonate and siliciclastic 54 platform-basinsetting: the albian of Lunada DamG, SurlykF. 1992. Forcedregresssions in and Soba,northern Spain. Am. Assoc. Petrol. a large wave-and storm-dominatedanoxic Geol. Bull. 77:245-75 lake, Rhaetian-SinemurianKap Stewart For- GoetzeG, EvansB. 1979. Stress and tempera- mation,F.ast Greenland.Geology 20:749-52 ture in the bendinglithosphere as constrained DemarestJM II, Kraft JC. 1987.Stratigraphic by experimentalrock mechanics.Geophys. J. recordof Quaternarysea levels: implications R. Astron. Soc. 59:463-78 for moreancient strata. In Sea-LevelFluctua- GreenleeSM, Devlin W J, Miller KG,Mountain tion andCoastal Evolution, ed. 13 Nummedal, GS, FlemingsPB. 1992. Integrated sequence OHPilkey, JD Howard,pp. 223-39. Soc. stratigraphy of Neogenedeposits, NewJer- Econ.Paleontol. Mineral Spec. PubLNo. 41. sey continentalshelf and slope: comparison 267pp. with the Exxonmodel. Geol. Soc. Am.Bull. Devlin WJ, Rudolph KW,Shaw CA, Ehman 104:1403-1l KD.1993. The effect of tectonicand eustatic Grotzinger JP, AdamsRD, McCormick DS, My- cycles on accommodationand sequence- rowP. 1989.Sequence stratigraphy, correla- stratigraphic frameworkin the UpperCre- tions betweenWopmay orogen and Kilohigok taceous foreland basin of southwestern basin, and further investigationsof the Bear Wyoming.See Posamentieret al 1993, pp. Creek Group(Goulburn Supergroup), Dis- 501-20 trict of Mackenzie,N.W.T. Geol. Surv. Can. DottRH Jr, ed. 1992.Eustasy: The Historical Pap. 89-1C:107-19 Upsand Downsof a MajorGeological Con- Handford CR, Loucks RG, 1993. Carbonate cept. Geol. Soc. Am.Mem. 180. 111pp. depositionalsequences and systemstracts-- Driscoll NW.1992. Tectonic anddepositional responsesof carbonateplatforms to relative processesinferred from stratal relationships. sea-level changes.See Loucks& Sarg 1993, PhDdissertation. ColumbiaUniv., NewYork. pp. 3-41 464pp. HaqBU. 1,99 I. Sequencestratigraphy, sea-level Driscoll NW,Hogg JR, Christie-BlickN, Karner change,and significance for the deepsea. In GD.1995. Extensional tectonics in the Jeanne Sedimentation,Tectonics and Eustasy. Sea- d’ArcBasin: implications for the timingof Level Changesat Active Margins,ed. DIM break-upbetween Grand Banks and Iberia. In Macdonald,pp. 3-39. Int. Assoc.Sedimentol. Openingof the NorthAtlantic, ed, RAScrut- Spec.Publ. 12. 518pp. ton. Geol.Soc. LondonSpec. Publ. In press HaqBU, Hardenbol J, Vail PR. 1987.Chronol- by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. DdscollNW, Karner GD. 1994. Flexural defor- ogyof fluctuatingsea levelssince the Triassic. mationdue to AmazonFan loading: a feed- Science235: 1156-67 back mechanismaffecting sedimentdelivery HaqBU, Hardenbol J, Yall PR. 1988. Mesozoic to margins.Geology 22:1015-18 and Cenozoicchronostratigraphy and cycles EbdonCC, Fraser A J, Higgins AC, Mitch- of sea-level change.See Wilguset al 1988, ener BC,Strank ARE.1990. The Dinantian pp. 71-108 stratigraphy of the East Midlands:a seis- Helland-HansenW, KendallCGStC, Lerche I,

Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org mostratigraphicapproach. J. Geol. Soc. Lon, NakayamaK. 1988. A simulation of con- don 147:519-36 tinental basin marginsedimentation in re- EmbryAE 1988. Triassic sea-level changes: sponse to crustal movements,eustatic sea evidence from the Canadian Arctic Ar- level change, and sediment accumulation chipelago.See Wilguset al 1988,pp. 249-59 rates. Math.Geol. 20:777-802 EugsterHP, HardieLA. 1975. Sedimentation in Heller PL, AngevineCL, WinslowNS, Paola an ancient playa-lakecomplex: the Wilkins C. 1988. Two-phasestratigraphic modelof Peak Memberof the Green River Formation foreland-basinsequences. Geology 16:501-4 of Wyoming.Geol. Soc. Am.Bull 86:319-34 Heller PL, BowdlerSS, ChambersHP, Coogan Flint SS, BryantID, eds. 1993.The Geological JC, HagenES, et al. 1986.Time of initial Modellingof HydrocarbonReservoirs and thrustingin the Sevier orogenicbelt, Idaho- OutcropAnalogues. Int, Assoc. Sedimentol, Wyomingand Utah. Geology14:388-91 Spec.Publ. 15. 269pp. Hettinger PD, McCabePJ, Shanley KW.1993. FrakesLA, Francis JE, SyktusJI. 1992.Climate Detailedfacies anatomyof transgressiveand Modesof the Phanerozoic.Cambridge: Cam- highstandsystems tracts fromthe UpperCre- Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 475

taceous of southernUtah, U.S.A.See Weimer Weimer& Posamentier 1993, pp. 393-410 &Posamentier 1993, pp. 43-70 Koss JE, Ethddge FG, SchummSA. 1994. An HolmesAE, Chdstie-Blick N. 1993. Origin experimentalstudy of the effects of base-level of sedimentarycycles in mixedearbonate- changeon fluvial, coastalplain andshelf sys- siliciclastic systems: an examplefrom tems.J. Sedimentol,Res. B64:90-98 the Canningbasin, WesternAustralia. See LambeckK. 1983. The role of compressive Loucks& Sarg 1993, pp. 181-212 forces in intracratonic basin formationand Jacquin T, Arnaud-VanneauA, AmandH, mid,plate orogenics. Geophys.Res. Lett. RavenneC, Vail PR.1991. Systems tracts and 10:845-48 depositionalsequences in a carbonatesetting: LambeckK, McQueenHWS, Stephenson RA, a studyof continuousoutcrops from platform DenhamD. 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 JamesNP. 1984. Shallowing-upwardsequences LawrenceDT, Doyle M, Aigner T. 1990.Strati- in carbonates. In Facies Models, ed. RG graphic simulationof sedimentarybasins: Walker,pp. 213-28. Toronto:Geosci. Can. conceptsand calibration, Am.Assoc, Petrol. ReprintSer. 1. 317pp. 2nded. Geol. Bull 74:273-95 JansaLF, WadeJA. 1975.Geology of the conti- LeckieDA, Posamentier HW, Lovell RWW,eds. nental marginoffNova Scotia and Newfound- 1991. NUNAConf. on High-ResolutionSe- land. Geol. Surv. Can.Pap. 74-30:51-105 quenceStratigraphy. Toronto: Geol. Assoc. JerveyMT. 1988. Quantitative geological mod- Can.186 pp. eling of siliciclastic rocksequences and their LevyM, Chdstie-Blick N. 1991.Late Protero- seismicexpression. See Wilgus et a11988,pp. zoic paleogeographyof the eastern Great 47-69 Basin. In PaleozoicPaleogeography of the JohnsonJG, Klapper G, SandbergCA. 1985. WesternUnitedStates--ll, ed. JD Cooper,CH Devonianeustatic fluctuationsin Euramerica. Stevens,pp. 371-86.Pacific Section, SEPM, Geol. Soc. Am.Bull. 96:567-87 Book67, Vol. 1. 461pp. JohnsonSD. 1994. High Resolution Sequence LindsayJF. 1987.Sequence stratigraphy and de- Stratigraphy:Innovations and Applications. positionalcontrols in Late Proterozoic-Early Liverpool:Univ. Liverpool. 410 pp. Cambriansediments of the Amadeusbasin, Jordan TE, FlemingsPB. 1991. Large-scale central Australia, Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. stratigraphicarchitecture, eustatic variation, Bull. 71:1387--403 and unsteadytectonism: a theoretical evalu- LindsayJF, KennardJM, SouthgatePN. 1993. ation. J. Geophys.Res. 96:6681-99 Applicationof sequencestratigraphy in an in- KamerGD. 1986. Effects of lithospherie in- .tracratonie setting, Amadeusbasin, central planestress on sedimentarybasin stratigra- Australia. See Posamentieret al 1993,pp. phy. Tectonics5:573-88 605-31 KarnerGD, Driscoll NW,Weissel JK. 1993.Re- LoucksRG, Sarg JF, eds. 1993. CarbonateSe- sponseof the lithosphere to in-planeforce quenceStratigraphy. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. variations. EarthPlanet. Sci. Lett. 114:397- Mere.57. 545pp. 416 Loutit TS, ed. 1992.Sea-Level Working Group. by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Karner GD,Watts AB.1983. Gravity anoma- JOIDESJ. 18(3):28-36 lies andflexure of the lithosphereat mountainLoutit TS, HardenbolJ, Vail PR, BaumGR. ranges. J. Geophys.Res. 88:10,449-77 1988. Condensedsections: the key to age KendallCGStC, Lerehe I. 1988.The rise and fall determinationsand correlation of continen- of eustasy.See Wilguset al 1988,pp. 3-17 tal marginsequences. See Wilguset al 1988, KendallCGStC,Moore P, Whittle G, CannonR. pp. 183-213 1992.Achallenge: Is it possibleto determine McAlpineKD. 1990. Mesozoicstratigraphy, Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org eustasyand does it matter?See Dott1992, pp. sedimentaryevolution, and petroleumpoten- 93-107 tial of the Jeanned’Arc basin, Grand Banks of Kerans C, NanceHS. 1991. High frequency Newfoundland.Geol. Surv. Can. Pap. 89-17 cyclicityand regional depositional patterns of Miller KG,Wright JD, FairbanksRG. 1991. Un- the GrayburgFormation, GuadalupeMoun- locking the ice house: Oligocene-Miocene tains, NewMexico. In SequenceStratigra- oxygenisotopes, eustasy,and marginerosion. phy, Facies,and Reservoir Geometries of the J. Geophys.Res. 96:6829-48 San Andres, Grayburg, and QueenForma. MitchumRM Jr. 1977.Seismic stratigraphy and tions, GuadalupeMountains, NewMexico globalchanges of sea level, part 11: glossary and Texas, ed. S Meader-Roberts,MG Can- of termsused in seismicstratigraphy. See Pay- delada, GEMoore, pp. 53-69. PermianBasin ton 1977,pp. 205-12 section, SEPM(Soc. Sediment.Geol.) Publ. MitchumRM Jr, Van Wagoner JC. 1991. 91-32.141 pp. High-frequencysequences and their stack- KocurekG, HavholmKG. 1993. Eolian event ing patterns: sequence-stratigraphicevidence stratigraphy--a conceptualframework. See of high-frequencyeustatic cycles. Sediment. Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

476 CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL

Geol. 70:131-60 gan Formation, Alberta foreland basin. See Montafiez IP, Osleger DA.1993. Parasequence Posamentier & Mutti 1994, pp. 153-58 stacking patterns, third-order accommoda- Posamentier HW,Allen GP. 1993. Siliciclas- tion events, and sequence stratigraphy of tic sequencestratigraphic patterns in foreland Middle to Upper Cambrian platform car- ramp-type basins. Geology21:455-58 bonates, BonanzaKing Formation, southern Posamentier HW,Allen GP, James DP. 1992b. Great Basin. See Loucks & Sarg 1993, pp. High resolution sequence stratigraphy--the 305-26 East Coulee Delta, Alberta. J. Sediment. Mutti E, Davoli G, MoraS, Sgavetti M, eds. Petrol. 62:310-17 1994. The Eastern Sector of the South- Posamentier HW,Allen GP, James DP, Tes- Central Folded Pyrenean Foreland: Cri- son M. 1992a. Forced regressions in a se- teria for Stratigraphic Analysis and Ex- quence stratigraphic framework: concepts, cursion Notes. Second High-Resolution Se- examples, and exploration significance. Am. quence Stratigraphy Confi 83 pp. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull 76:1687-709 North American Commissionon Stratigrapbic Posamentier HW,Chamberlain CJ. 1993. Se- Nomenclature. 1983. North AmericanStrati- quencestratigraphic analysis of VikingFor- graphic Code. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. mation lowstand beach deposits at Joarcam 67:841-75 Field, Alberta, Canada. See Posamentieret al Normark WR,Posamentier HW,Mutti E. 1993. 1993, pp. 469-85 Turbidite systems: state of the art and future Posamentier HW,James DP. 1993. An overview directions. Rev. Geophys.31:91 - 116 of sequence-stratigraphic concepts: uses and Nummedal D, Cole RD. 1994. The Book abuses. See Posamentieret al 1993, pp. 3-18 Cliffs--again: relative sea level fail and de- Posamentier HW,Jervey MT, Vail PR. 1988. positional systems response. See Posamentier Eustatic controls on clastic deposition I-- & Mutti 1994, pp. 147-51 conceptual framework.See Wilguset al 1988, NummedalD, RemyR, eds. 1989. Cretaceous pp. 109-24 Shelf Sandstones and Shelf Depositional Se- Posamentier HW,Mutti E, convenors. 1994. quences, Western Interior Basin, Utah, Col- Second High-Resolution Sequence Stratigra- orado and NewMexico. 28th Int. Geol. Congr. phy Conference. Int. Union Geol. Sci. and Field Trip GuidebookTl19. Washington,DC: Global Sed. Geol. Prog. 221 pp. Am. Geophys. Union. 87 pp. Posamentier I-IW, SummerhayesCE Haq BU, Officer CB, Drake CL. 1985. Epeirogeny on a Allen GP, eds. 1993. Sequence Stratigraphy short geological time scale. Tectonics 4:603- and Facies Associations. Int. Assoc. Sedimen- 12 tol. Spec. Publ’ 18. 644 pp. Olsen PE. 1986. A 40-million-year lake record Posamentier HW,Vail PR. 1988. Eustatic con- of early Mesozoicorbital climatic forcing. trols on clastic deposition II--sequence and Science 234:842-48 systems tract models. See Wilguset al 1988, Olsen PE. 1990. Tectonic, climatic, and bi- pp. 125-54 otic modulations of Lacustrine ecosystems-- Pratt BR, James NP, CowanCA. 1992. Peritidal examples from NewarkSupergroup of east- carbonates. In Facies Models,ed. RGWalker, ern North America. In Lacustrine Basin NPJames, pp. 303-22. Toronto: Geol. Assoc. by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Exploration--Case Studies and Modern Can. 409 pp. Analogs, ed. BJ Katz, pp. 209-24. Am. As- Prave AR. 1991. Depositional and sequence soc. Petrol. Geol. Mem.50. 340 pp. stratigraphie frameworkof the Lower Cam- Payton CE, ed. 1977. Seismic Stratigraphy-- brian Zabriskie Quartzite: implications for Applications to HydrocarbonExploration. regional correlations and the Early Cambrian Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mem.26. 516 pp. paieogeographyof the Death Valley region of Plint AG. 1988. Sharp-based shoreface se- California and Nevada.Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org quences and "offshore bars" in the Cardium 104:505-15 Formationof Alberta: their relationship to Reynolds DJ, Steckler MS, Coakley BJ. 1991. relative changesin sea level. See Wilguset al The role of the sediment load in sequence 1988, pp. 357-70 stratigraphy: the influence of flexurai isostasy Plint AG. 1991. High-frequency relative sea- and compaction. J. Geophys. Res. 96:6931- level oscillations in UpperCretaceous shelf 49 elastics of the Alberta foreland basin: possi- Ross WC.1990. Modelingbase-level dynamics ble evidence for glacio-eustatic control? In as a control on basin-fill geometriesand fa- Sedimentation, Tectonics and Eustasy, Sea cies distribution: a conceptual framework.In Level Changes at Active Margins, ed. DIM Quantitative DynamicStratigraphy, ed. TA Macdonald,pp. 409-28. Int. Assoc. Sedimen- Cross, pp. 387-99. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: tol. Spec. Publ. 12. 518 pp. Prentice-Hall. 625 pp. Plint AG.1994. Sheep from goats: separating Ross WC, Halliwell BA, May JA, Watts DE, eustatic from tectonic controls on 4th order Syvitski JPM. 1994. Slope readjustment: a sequence development: CenomanianDunve- newmodel for the developmentof submarine Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 477

fans and aprons. Geology22:511-14 imentation, subsurface Devonianreef com- Salvador A. 1987. Unconformity-boundedstra- plex, Canningbasin, WesternAustralia. See tigraphie units. Geol. Soc. Am.Bull, 98:232- Loucks & Sarg 1993, pp. 157-79 37 Steckler MS, Reynolds DJ, Coakley B J, Swift Sarg JF. 1988. Carbonatesequence stratigraphy. BA,Jarrard R. 1993. Modellingpassive mar- See Wilguset al 1988, pp. 155-81 gin sequencestratigraphy. See Posamentieret Sarg JF. 1989. Middle-late Permiandepositional al 1993, pp. 19-41 sequences, Permian basin, west Texas and Steel R J, Maehle S, Nilsen H, Roe SL, Spin- NewMexico. In Atlas of Seismic Stratigra- nangr A. 1977. Coarsening-upward cycles phy, ed. AWBally, pp. 140-54. Am. Assoc. in the alluvium of Homelenbasin (Devo- Petrol. Geol. Stud. Geol. No. 27, Vol. 3.244 nian), Norway:sedimentary response to tec- PP. tonic events. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 88:1124-- Sarg JF, Lehmann PJ. 1986. Lower-Middle 34 Guadalupianfacies and stratigraphy, San An- Suter JR, Berryhill HL, Penland S. 1987. Late dres/Grayburg formations, Permian basin, Quaternary sea-level fluctuations and depo- Guadalupe Mountains, New Mexico and sitional sequences, southwest Louisiana con- Texas. In Field Trip Guidebook, San tinental shelf. In Sea-Level Fluctuation and Andres/Grayburg Formations, Guadalupe Coastal Evolution, ed. D Nummedal, O Mountains, NewMexico and Texas, ed. GE Pilkey, J Howard,pp. 199-219. Soc. Econ. Moore, GLWilde, pp. 1-35. Permian basin Paleontol. Mineral. Spec. Publ. No. 41. 267 section. Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Publ. PP. 86-25. 144 pp. Swift DJP, Phillips S, ThorneJA. 1991. Sedi- Schlager W, Reijmer JJG, Droxler A. 1994. mentation on continental margins, V: parase- Highstand shedding of carbonate platforms. quenees. In Shelf Sand and SandstoneBodies. J. Sedimentol, Res. 64:270-81 Geometry,Facies and SequenceStratigraphy, Schlanger SO. 1986. High-frequency sea-level ed. DJP Swift, GF Oertel, RWTillman, JA fluctuations in Cretaceoustime: an emerging Thome,pp. 153-87. Int. Assoc. Sedimentol. geophysical problem. In History of Mesozoic Spec. Publ. 14. 532 pp. and Cenozo&Oceans, ed. KJ Hsii, pp. 61-74. Sykes LR, Sbar ML. 1973. Intraplate earth- Am. Geophys. Union Geodyn. Ser. 15 quakes, lithospheric stresses and the driv- Shanley KW,McCabe PJ. 1994. Perspectives ing mechanismof plate tectonics. Nature on the sequence stratigraphy of continental 245:298-302 strata. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull, 78:544- Tankard AJ, Welsink HJ, Jenkins WAM.1989. 68 Structural styles and stratigraphy of the Sinclair HD, CoakleyB J, Allen PA, Watts AB. Jeanne d’Arc basin, Grand Banks of New- 1991. Simulationof foreland basin stratigra- foundland. In Extensional Tectonics and phy using a diffusion modelof mountainbelt Stratigraphy of the North Atlantic Margins, uplift and erosion: an examplefrom the cen- ed. AJ Tankard, HRBalkwill, pp. 265-82. tral Alps, Switzerland. Tectonics 10:599-620 Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mem.46. 64l pp. Sloss LL. 1950. Paleozoic stratigraphy in the Tesson M, Allen GP, Ravenne C. 1993. Late Montanaarea. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. Pleistocene shelf-perched lowstand wedges by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. 34:423-51 on the Rh6necontinental shelf. See Posamen- Sloss LL. 1963. Sequencesin the eratonic inte- tier et al 1993, pp. 183-96 rior of North America. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull Tesson M, Gensous B, Allen GP, Ravenne 74:93-114 C. 1990. Late Quaternary deltaic lowstand Sloss LL. 1988. Forty years of sequencestratig- wedges on the Rh6ne continental shelf, raphy. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull, 100:1661-65 France. Mar. Geol. 91:325-32 Sloss LL. 1991. Thetectonic factor in sea level Underhill JR. 1991. Controls on late Jurassic Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org change: a countervailing view. J. Geophys. seismic sequences, Inner MorayFirth, UK Res. 96:6609-617 North Sea: a critical test of a key segment Sloss LL, KrumbeinWC, Dapples EC. 1949. In- of Exxon’soriginal global cycle chart. Basin tegrated facies analysis. In SedimentaryFa- Res. 3:79-98 cies in Geologic History, ed. CR Longwell, Vail PR. 1987. Seismicstratigraphy interpreta- pp. 91-124. Geol. Soc. Am. Mere. 39. 171 pp. tion using sequencestratigraphy. Part I: Seis- Sonnenfeld MD, Cross TA. 1993. Volumetric mic stratigraphy interpretation procedure. In partitioning and facies differentiation within Atlas of Seismic Stratigraphy, ed. AWBally, the Permian Upper San Andres Formation of pp. 1-10. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Stud. Last Chance Canyon, Guadalupe Mountains, Geol. No. 27, Vol. 1. 125 pp. NewMexico. See Loucks & Sarg 1993, pp. Vail PR. 1992. The evolution of seismic stratig- 435-74 raphy and the global sea-level curve. See Dott Southgate PN, Kennard JM, Jackson MJ, 1992, pp. 83-91 O’Brien PE, Sexton MJ. 1993. Reciprocal Vail PR, Audemard E Bowman SA, Eis- lowstandclastic and highstandcarbonate sed- ner PN, Perez-Cruz C. 1991. The strati- Annual Reviews www.annualreviews.org/aronline

478 CHRISTIE-BLICK & DRISCOLL

graphicsignatures of tectonics, eustasyand of WesternInterior, USA.In lnterregional sedimentology--anoverview. In Cycles and Unconforraities and HydrocarbonAccumu- Events 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. 36. 184pp. Springer-Verlag.955 pp. WeimerP. 1989. Sequencestratigraphy of the Vail PR,Hardenbol J, ToddRG. 1984. Jurassic MississippiFan (Plio-Pleistocene), Gulf unconformities,chronostratigraphy, and sea- Mexico.Geol. Mar.Lett. 9:185-272 level changesfrom seismic stratigraphy and WeiraerP, PosamantierHW, eds. 1993.Silici- biostratigraphy. In InterregionalUnconfor- clastic SequenceStraligraphy: Recent Devel- mities and HydrocarbonAccumulation, ed. opmentsand Applications. Am. Assoc. Petrol. JS Schlee, pp. 129-44. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mere.58. 492pp. Geol.Mere. 36. 184pp. WeisselJK, KarnerGD. 1989. Flexural uplift Vail PR, MitchumRM Jr, Todd RG, Widmier of rift flanks dueto mechanicalunloading of JM, ThompsonS III, et al. 1977. Seismic the lithosphereduring extension. J. Geophys. stratigraphyand globalchanges of sea level. Res. 94:13,919-50 See Payton1977, pp. 49-212 WemickeB, AxenGJ. 1988. On the role of Van WagonerJC, MitchumRM, Campion KM, isoStasyin the evolutionof normalfault sys- RahmanianVD. 1990. Siliciclastic Sequence tems. Geology16:848-51 Stratigraphyin WellLogs, Cores,and Out- WheelerHE. 1958. Time-stratigraphy. Am. As- crop.v: Conceptsfor High-ResolutionCorre- soc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 42:1047-63 lation of gimeand Facies. Am. Assoc. Petrol. WilgusCK, Hastings BS, KendallCGStC, Posa- Geol. Methodsin ExplorationSeries, No. Z mentier HW,Ross CA, Van Wagoner JC, eds. 55 pp. 1988.Sea-Level Changes: An IntegratedAp- Van Wagoner JC, NummedalD, Jones CR, proach.Soc. Econ.Paleontol. Mineral. Spec. Taylor DR,Jennette DC, Riley GW.1991. Publ.No. 42. 407pp. Sequencestratigraphy applications to shelf Winter H de la R, Brink MC.1991. Chrono- sandstonereservoirs.Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. stratigraphic subdivisionof the Witwater- FieMConf. srand basin based on a WesternTransvaal Van WagonerJC, Posamentier HW,Mitchum compositecolumn. S. Afr. J. Geol. 94:191- RMJr, Vail PR, Sarg JF, et al. 1988. An 203 overviewof the fundamentalsof sequence WoodLJ, Ethridge FG, SchummSA. 1993. stratigraphyand key definitions. See Wilgus Theeffects of rate of base-levelfluctuation et al 1988,pp. 39-45 on coastal plain, shelf and slope deposi- Walker RG. 1990. Facies modelingand se- tional systems:an experimentalapproach. quence~tratigraphy. J. Sediment.Petrol. See Posamentieret al 1993,pp. 43-53 60:777-86 YangC-S, NioS-D. 1993.Application of high- WalkerRG, Plint AG.1992. Wave-and storm- resolutionsequence stratigraphy to the upper dominatedshallow marine systems. In Facies Rotliegandin the Netherlandsoffshore. See Models,ed. RGWalker, NP James, pp. 219- Weimer& Posamentier 1993, pp. 285-316 238. Toronto:Geol. Assoc.Can. 409 pp. Yingling VL, Heller PL. 1992. Timingand Watkins JS, MountainGS, convenors. 1990. record of foreland sedimentationduring the by Columbia University on 09/17/05. For personal use only. Role of ODPdrilling in the investigation initiation of the Sevierorogenic belt in cen- of global changesin sea level. Reportof tral Utah. BasinRes. 4:279-90 JOI]USSACWorkshop ZobackML, Zoback MD,Adams J, Assumpcao WeimerRJ. 1984.Relation of unconformities, M,Bergrnan S, et al. 1989.Global patterns of tectonics, and sea-level changes,Cretaceous tectonic stress. Nature341:291-98 Annu. Rev. Earth. Planet. Sci. 1995.23:451-478. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org 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.