Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

The basins, orogens and evolution of the southern Gulf of Mexico and Northern Caribbean

Ian Davison1*, James Pindell2,3 and Jonathan Hull4 1Earthmoves Ltd, 38–42 Upper Park Road, Camberley, Surrey, GU15 2EF, UK 2Tectonic Analysis Ltd, Chestnut House, Duncton, West Sussex GU28 0LH, UK 3Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Rice University, Houston, TX 77001, USA 4Ophir Energy plc, 123 Victoria Street, London, SW1E 6DE, UK ID, 0000-0003-3703-707X Present Address: ERCE, Stephenson House, 2 Cherry Orchard Road, Croydon, CR0 6BA, UK. *Correspondence: [email protected]

Our introduction to this volume highlights the most dating; Hernández-Vergara et al. 2020) and salt important aspects of the geology and evolution of depositional ages (using Sr isotope analysis, Pindell the southern Gulf of Mexico (GoM) and the North- et al. 2019, 2020b, 2020c; Pulham et al. 2019; Sned- ern Caribbean. The onshore orogens of the Mexican den and Galloway 2019). Higher resolution satellite and Chiapas fold-and-thrust belts and the Northern altimeter-derived gravity (Sandwell et al. 2014) and Caribbean feature prominently in the book, along aeromagnetic data (Pindell et al. 2016, 2020c) have with a discussion of the tectonics of the Florida– been collected in the last decade, which have led to Bahamas peninsula (Fig. 1 and separate Enclosure a greater understanding of ocean–continent transition maps at the back of this volume, Steel and Davison zones, extinct and active mid-ocean ridges, transform (2020a, b), show the area covered). faults (Pindell et al. 2020c) and active tectonics and This is a particularly opportune time to focus on geomorphology (e.g. Sun et al. 2020). these regions, which have seen a recent surge in geo- The first section of papers in the volume is logical research and hydrocarbon exploration. Large focussed on the southern GoM. This is followed in amounts of high-quality seismic reflection data have the second section by a series of papers with studies been acquired offshore, especially in Mexico, but on the onshore orogenies of eastern and southern also in Honduras, Cuba, Jamaica and the Dominican Mexico surrounding the GoM. We discuss the nam- Republic. Deregulation of the Mexican energy sector ing of several important tectonic features and basins and the introduction of a series of competitive in Mexico and give our reasoning for the preferred licence rounds has resulted in a new phase of hydro- names, in an effort to standardize nomenclature. carbon exploration drilling which has only just We also briefly summarize the petroleum elements begun. Several major hydrocarbon discoveries have of the southern GoM. The papers in the last section recently been made, foretelling the region’s huge of the book summarize the complex geology and future potential. There have not been any offshore evolution of the Northern Caribbean, focussing on wells drilled in the Northern Caribbean in the last the characterization of the Caribbean Plate basement four years, to our knowledge. and basins formed during the development of the Improvements in satellite and airborne data North America–Caribbean plate boundary since the acquisition and laboratory analytical techniques have Late Cretaceous. also provided an impetus for the collection of high- quality data which have contributed to a better under- Tectonic framework standing of the region. More rapid and accurate procedures are now available for isotope dating of The geology of the southern GoM and Northern magmatic events and sediment provenance (espe- Caribbean is the manifestation of complex plate cially using single zircon analysis; Erlich and Pin- interactions resulting from the breakup of western dell 2020; Pindell et al. 2020a; Snedden et al. Equatorial Pangea around 250–170 Ma, and, more 2020), denudational events (using fission track and specifically, the rifting and breakup of the continen- (U/Th)/He dating of apatite and zircon; Gray et al. tal crust of the North and South American plates, 2020), deformation events (using illite Ar40–Ar39 including the Yucatán Block. The region is further

From: Davison, I., Hull, J. N. F. and Pindell, J. (eds) 2020. The Basins, Orogens and Evolution of the Southern Gulf of Mexico and Northern Caribbean. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP504-2020-218 © 2020 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Published by The Geological Society of London. Publishing disclaimer: www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ .Davison I. tal. et byguestonSeptember23,2021

Fig. 1. Location map showing the area of interest covered in this volume. Locations of two large fold-out maps provided by Earthmoves Ltd and included at the back of the volume and as a digital pdf version are shown as rectangles. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean complicated by subduction and mantle-related follows the arcuate crystalline basement outcrop processes that resulted in either destruction of pre- and subsurface trend through eastern Mexico existing tectonic elements or uplift and non- (Fig. 2). This basement trend and adjacent curvilinear deposition. These plate-scale events exerted a domi- shear zones have also controlled many later Cenozoic nant control on the tectonostratigraphic development to Recent events. of the associated basins and orogens in the wider Rifting was initiated in the Triassic (c. 240 Ma) in region. Figure 2 and Enclosures 1 and 2 compiled the eastern USA and the GoM (Olsen 1997; Olsen by Steel and Davison (2020a, b) summarize the et al. 2005; Withjack et al. 2012). ‘Red bed’ conti- geological elements of the area of interest covered nental rift basins have been drilled along the US mar- in this volume. gin, where the Eagle Mills Formation in that location The key tectonic elements of this area are the at least is dated as Carnian (Figs 2 and 3; Wood and following: Benson 2000). However, the exact age of the ‘red ’ fi (1) GoM – extensional rift basin with widespread bed sediment in ll onshore Mexico (Plomosas For- salt deposition on the rifted margins, and mation in the North, Huizachal Group in the East, floored by oceanic crust in the deep Gulf. Todos Santos Group in the South) is not well dated fi (2) Mexican Fold-and-Thrust Belt – the southern owing to a lack of age-speci c fauna (Mixon et al. continuation of the North American Cordille- 1959; Lawton and Pindell 2017), and our under- ran Orogen. standing relies heavily on maximum depositional (3) Oaxaca, Chortis and Yucatán blocks – located ages from detrital zircon work (e.g. Godínez-Urban fi on the southern margin of the North American et al. 2011). The onshore Triassic rift ll reaches c. – plate which underwent large translations dur- 1 3 km in thickness. However, offshore seismic ing the Mesozoic and Cenozoic evolution of data along the NW Yucatán margin indicate a thick the GoM. pre-salt, syn-rift and sag basin sequence which can (4) Greater Antillean Arc and Caribbean Plate – a reach up to 8 km, where lacustrine or even marine largely intra-oceanic magmatic arc, fringing deposits may be expected (Steier 2018; Hudec and the oceanic Caribbean Plate which collided Norton 2019; Davison 2020; Kenning and Mann b diachronously from west to east with the rifted 2020 ; Miranda-Madrigal and Chavez-Cabello et al. c continental margins of North America (Cuba, 2020; Pindell 2020 ). Rifting continued into Nicaragua Rise–Jamaica, Hispaniola, Puerto the Middle to Late Jurassic for some 70 myr, which Rico–Virgin Islands) and South America (Lee- is an exceptionally long period for active rifting. ward Antilles, Margarita, Tobago). The Jurassic salt basin Regional geology of the southern GoM and The GoM is dominated by two major salt basins the surrounding orogens which were originally deposited as one contiguous basin in the Middle Jurassic (Humphries 1978). Sub- The main geological events of the southern GoM and sequent rifting and opening of the GoM and surrounding orogens are summarized in Figure 3 and emplacement of the oceanic crust separated the salt discussed in chronological order below. basin into its present two-part configuration (Fig. 2). The northern salt basin comprises much of the US The opening of the GoM sector of the GoM, the Mexican Salina Del Bravo and the Perdido Fold Belt which straddles the border The Precambrian and Paleozoic crystalline basement between the two countries (Fig. 1). The southeastern surrounding the GoM is highly complex. The Florida Mexican salt basin is referred to herein as the Sureste peninsula and western Bahamas are composed of an Basin, the name adopted by the Mexican Comisión amalgam of over 20 different basement blocks with Nacional de Hidrocarburos (CNH) and Pemex. The main structural contacts trending ENE to NE (see basin or parts of it have previously been named the map in Erlich and Pindell 2020). This strong base- Cuenca de Campeche (Campeche Basin, after the ment trend has conditioned the orientation of the Bay of Campeche), Cuenca de Salina del Istmo (Isth- adjacent rifting in the onshore Triassic basins in mian Salt Basin) and simply Cuenca Salina. The South Georgia, and the offshore rifts bordering west- northernmost part of the Sureste Basin has also ern Florida (see Fig. 12 of Erlich and Pindell 2020, been separately named both the Isthmian Salt and Fig. 2). Precambrian to Paleozoic crystalline Basin and the Yucatán Salt Basin (Hudec et al. basement rocks surround the southern GoM area, 2013), even though there is no geological separation the Yucatán Peninsula and Campeche Knoll (located between the main Sureste Basin and this northern on Fig. 2, DSDP, Leg 77, Hole 538A). The curved area. We prefer to refer to this northern subarea as Jurassic shear zone system allowed the Yucatán the Yucatán Salt Basin, as no isthmus is present block to rotate away from North America, and here (Fig. 1). The shallow-water (,200 m) segment Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean of the Sureste Basin has also been divided into the the majority of new developments on the sedimentol- Pilar, Catemaco, Comalcalco and Macuspana sub- ogy, stratigraphy and palaeogeography of the whole basins, the latter two separated by the Reforma– of the GoM. Padilla y Sánchez (2007) and Byron Akal high, and the onshore Chiapas Basin Foldbelt Rodriguez (2011) have also produced regional stud- subareas, among others (Fig. 1). ies of the Mexican sector of the GoM. A few specific The original thickness of halite in the Sureste comments are, however, justified here and a sum- Basin probably approached 4 km in the centre prior mary of the main depositional and tectonic events to breakup owing to seafloor spreading (Davison is presented in Figure 3. 2020), and may have been somewhat greater in the The oldest known sediments deposited on top of Salina del Bravo where large allochthonous sheets, the salt are anhydrites, aeolian sandstones and but not the original salt, reach up to c. 6 km in thick- ephemeral fluvial deposits (Bacab Formation), ness near to the feeder stems (Hudec et al. 2020). The which have not been dated, and these could be any few Sureste Basin wells that have penetrated the salt age between 169 and 160 Ma. These are overlain by have encountered mainly halite, as is the case in the the Tson anhydrites, limestones and shallow marine US Louann salt basin area (Fredrich et al. 2007). The sandstones, mudstones and oolitic limestones of the main salt basin was probably deposited in a short Ek-Balam Formation (Ortuño Álvarez 2014; Sned- period of time (,3 myr), as suggested by the appar- den et al. 2020), which have been dated by ammon- ent paucity of other intervening sedimentary rocks. ites as Late Oxfordian (c. 160 Ma, Cantú-Chapa 1992, 2009). The overlying Norphlet aeolian sand- Oceanic spreading and formation of oceanic stones found in the deepwater central and eastern US sector, and the Bacab Formation in the Sureste crust in the GoM Basin, are similar facies (Godo 2019; Snedden et al. 2020). The occurrence of aeolian desert dunes Ocean spreading is believed to have started soon and wadi deposits overlying the salt suggests the after deposition of the Bajocian salt, but there is no salt basin was not connected to the global ocean sys- absolute dating control on initiation, and continued tem until the late Oxfordian. The degree of downslope until the end of the Berriasian c. 140 Ma (Fig. 3; Pin- rafting of the Norphlet sandstones on salt is signifi- dell 1985; Marton and Buffler 1994; Stern and Dick- cant (Pilcher et al. 2014), which suggests that these inson 2010). Approximately 700–800 km of ocean were deposited on a topographic slope with the centre crust was formed which has been measured parallel of the basin below global sea-level, so that a Batho- to the transform faults at the westernmost end nian–early Oxfordian transgressive marine section (Fig. 2). Extinct mid-ocean ridge segments, trans- may overlie the oldest parts of the oceanic crust form fault offsets and curved fracture zones are with the transgression only reaching the proximal now reasonably well imaged using vertical gravity basin edges in the late Oxfordian (Pindell et al. gradient data and seismic data (Sandwell et al. 2020b, 2020c). 2014; Lin et al. 2019; Fig. 4). Pindell et al. (2020c) During the late Jurassic to mid Cretaceous period provide more details of ocean spreading history. the GoM slowly subsided owing to thermal cooling and sediment loading. The surrounding onshore Jurassic to Upper Cretaceous post-salt areas were presumably low relief and the basin was sediment deposition (167–65 Ma) starved of coarse clastic sediment. Carbonates were deposited on the surrounding shelves and fine- Individual papers on post-rift sedimentation are too grained sediment in the deepwater (Snedden and Gal- numerous to mention here, but Snedden and Gallo- loway 2019). During the 100 myr period from 165 to way (2019) have compiled a milestone synthesis of 65 Ma only 1–3 km of sediment was deposited in the

Fig. 2. Geological elements map of the Gulf of Mexico (GoM) and the Northern Caribbean showing many of the key basins and tectonic features described. This map has been compiled from the following range of data sources. Antillean Arc Progression is mapped from Pindell and Cossey. Fault systems are mapped from Hernández-Vergara et al. (2020), Leroy et al. (2015), Pindell and Kennan (2009), Rogers and Mann (2007). Note, some of the faults and folds have been simplified to show overall trends. Key for structural features: BB, Belize Basin; CB, Corozal Basin; CC, Chuacús Complex; CFB, Catemaco Fold Belt; CHB, Chicontopec Basin; FPFB, Frey Pedro Fold Belt; FZ, Fault Zone; IOT, Isthmus of Tehuantepec; LP-SJ FZ, Los Pozos–San Juan Fault Zone; LTV, Los Tuxtlas Volcanics; MB, Magiscatzin Basin; PAB, Parras Basin; PB, Petén Basin; PLB, Placetas Belt; PMFS, Polochic–Motagua Fault System; PRVI MICROPLATE, Puerto Rico–Virgin Islands Microplate; SCFB, Sierra de Colón foldbelt; SDLO, Sierra de los Organos; SFB, Sepur Foredeep Basin; TMFS, Tuxtla–Malpaso Fault System; TP, Tuxpan Platform; VF, Veracruz Fault; YC, Yucatán Channel. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al.

deep GoM (Salvador 1991; Galloway 2008; Snedden and Galloway 2019). This is a relatively recent reali- zation, as prior to the dating of the ‘mid Cretaceous unconformity’ or ‘Challenger reflector’ as top Creta- ceous by Dohmen (2002), this reflector was thought to be around 97 Ma (Buffler et al. 1981; Shaub et al. 1984). Hence, prior to 2002, it was thought that much more sediment had entered the GoM during the Late Cretaceous, and less in the Paleogene. We now know that the GoM remained essentially starved of sediment input until the Chicxulub impact, which in fact caused the Challenger reflector, and after which deposition was permanently altered.

Mexican Fold-and-Thrust belt (c. 93–45 Ma). The starved slowly subsiding GoM was dramatically changed by several important pulses of Late Creta- ceous to Pliocene activity, which caused basin defor- mation, basin margin uplift and rapid sediment influx. These tectonic events were mainly concen- trated in the Mexican sector of the GoM and resulted in the development of the Mexican Fold-and-Thrust Belt (MFTB), Mexican Foreland Basin and the Chi- apas Fold-and-Thrust Belt which exerted important influences on the evolution of the Mexican GoM. The first contractional pulse, now known as the Mexican Orogeny, produced the Mexican Fold- and-Thrust Belt, consisting of the mountain chains of the Sierra Madre Oriental (SMO), and Sierras Juá- rez and Zongolica in the south (Carrillo-Bravo 1971; Tarango 1973; Fitz-Díaz et al. 2018; Juárez-Arriaga et al. 2019a, b; Fig. 5). Apatite fission track dating of the latest cooling event affecting rocks exposed in the Chiapas Fold Belt, and dating of thrust faults and flexural slip zones in folds, suggests a limited amount of Late Cretaceous to Paleogene deforma- tion may have extended this far south (Abdullin et al. 2018; Hernández-Vergara et al. 2020), although the main phase of compression in Chiapas occurred later in the Miocene. Compressive deformation was initiated around 90 Ma in the interior basins of Mexico and the SMO, and the associated thrusts and folds propa- gated progressively eastward into the frontal part of the SMO and coastal areas of the western Tam- pico–Misantla Basin by middle Eocene times (44 Ma) (Gray and Lawton 2011; Fitz-Díaz et al. 2014, 2018; Juárez-Arriaga et al. 2019a, b; Gray et al. 2020; Fig. 5). This orogenic event has also been called the Mexican Laramide or Hidalgoan Orogeny (Lawton et al. 2009; Gray and Lawton 2011). Hidalgoan was coined by Guzmán and de Cserna (1963) because the structural style of the MFTB differs from that of the Canadian and US cor- dilleras. Guzmán and de Cserna (1963) named the orogeny after the Mexican state of Hidalgo that lies to the north of Mexico City, but this is only a small Fig. 3. Geological events chart for the Mexican GoM. part of the whole orogeny and as such we prefer Downloaded from nrdcint h otenMxcnGMadteNrhr Caribbean Northern the and GoM Mexican southern the to Introduction http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ byguestonSeptember23,2021

Fig. 4. Vertical gravity gradient map of the GoM and the Northern Caribbean derived from satellite measurements of ocean topography (dataset of Sandwell et al. 2014). Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al.

Fig. 5. Simplified sketch map showing the latest stage of development of the Mexican Foreland Basin (MFB) in the late Paleogene. The MFB captured most of the eroded material from the Sierra Madre Oriental and the Mexican cordillera arc and basement terranes further west. Two major channel systems fed coarser-grained sediment into the GoM in the Veracruz Basin and in the Burgos Basin to the north. The central part – the Tampico Misantla Basin – was starved of coarse clastic sediment in Paleogene. Fine-grained deposits were accumulated on this steep transform margin and a series of major mass transport complexes were developed in the deep water which reach up to 3.5 km in thickness (Kenning and Mann 2020a). The two schematized cross-sections (no specific location intended) show (a) the late Paleogene foreland basin which accumulated up to 6 km of clastics and (b) the same cross-section as in (a) after Oligo-Miocene uplift. Uplift of the whole mountain and foreland system is interpreted to have been caused by increased upward force from a shallowing of the subducting Pacific slab (Gray et al. 2020). Sediment then spilled over the foreland bulge into the Tampico–Misantla Basin where up to 6 km of Oligoene to Pliocene sediment was deposited. Uplift also caused an inversion in dip of the basal detachment from a westerly dip to an eastward dip. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean the names Mexican Orogeny and the Mexican FTB Chicontepec Formation (Vasquez et al. 2014; Cos- (see Juárez-Arriaga et al. 2019a, b, who adopted sey et al. 2016; González Díaz et al. 2018; Juárez- these names). Arriaga et al. 2019b; Gray et al. 2020). The Mexican Orogen developed in association The MFB is unusual in that it appears to have with the palaeo-Pacific Benioff Zone and could been actively contracting at the same time that it have been created by several different processes; was subsiding, and the basin was maintained well by shallowing of the subducted Pacific slab below below sea-level. Folds and thrusts were developed the North American plate (Coney and Reynolds in the western foreland during rapid marine trans- 1977; English and Johnston 2004), subduction of a gression and accompanying sediment deposition, buoyant oceanic plateau (Burke et al. 1978; Livac- with relatively little forward propagation of the cari et al. 1981) or an increase in the rate of subduc- thrusts into the foreland. As a result, the main fore- tion (Engebretson et al. 1984). The ‘La Posta’-type land basin succession is marine in origin from the plutons along the western margin of Mexico indicate basal Soyatal Formation to the uppermost Eocene that subduction of the Pacific Farallon plate was Chicontepec Formation (Cossey et al. 2016; probably initiated around 100 Ma, slightly before González Díaz et al. 2018 ). This anomalous foreland the first subduction-related granitic intrusions dated basin development is perhaps best explained by an at 98 Ma (Kimbrough et al. 2001). underlying dynamic pull-down force in the mantle The Mexican sierras formed as a result of the coeval with compression (Fig. 5; Gray et al. 2020). Mexican Orogeny and rise to over 3 km in height; Sediments were trapped in the MFB west of the these are mainly composed of Cretaceous carbonates, Tamaulipas, Tuxpan and Cordoba highs which are marls and shales (Carrillo-Bravo 1971, and the front located near to the Jurassic East Mexico Transform cover of this volume). Uplift of the Cretaceous car- zone (González Alvarado 1974; Vázquez-Meneses bonate platforms resulted in important karstification 2005, Fig. 5). These highs have been previously events occurring in the Golden Lane carbonate rim interpreted as foreland bulges by Horbury et al. of the Tuxpan Platform, and in the Sureste Basin (2003) and Alzaga-Ruiz et al. (2009). However, where some of the breccias in the Cantarell Field we interpret these as earlier features which devel- resulted from several episodes of Cretaceous karstifi- oped relative relief in the Late Jurassic, as evidenced cation, shelf edge collapse and reworking (Aguayo- by onlap of the Zuloaga and Olvido carbonates onto Camargo 1978, 1998; Horbury et al. 2005; Ruiz the Tamaulipas Arch (and the others?). Positive ele- et al. 2011; Horbury 2018; Horbury and Ruiz vation persisted into the Cretaceous at the Golden 2019). The Sureste Basin also exhibits a distinct Lane, where the carbonate shelf edge developed phase of allochthonous salt sheet development in around the Tuxpan High in Aptian–Albian times the Eocene, which was probably due to compression (CNH 2015b), well before the MFB was initiated at the end of the Mexican Orogeny (Davison 2020). in the Late Cretaceous. Paleogene sediment was channeled parallel to the Mexican Foreland Basin development and GoM MFB, with palaeocurrents systematically oriented Paleogene deposition. The name Mexican Foreland towards the SE in the San Luis de Potosi area (Cue- Basin (MFB) was first formalized by Juárez-Arriaga vas Barragan et al. 2016) and the Chicontepec Chan- et al. (2019b). The MFB was developed along the nel system of the Tampico–Misantla Basin (Cossey eastern front of the MFTB and extends for c. et al. 2016; González Díaz et al. 2018). Sedimentary 1700 km from the city of Chihuahua in the north, to detritus escaped into the offshore Veracruz Basin the town of Jesus Carranza in Veracruz State in the between the Tuxpan and Cordoba carbonate plat- south. Up to 6 km of siliciclastic sediments were forms, and into the southern Veracruz area (future deposited in the basin (e.g. Ortuño-Arzate et al. Los Tuxlas volcanic centre) where long-range 2003; Alzaga-Ruiz et al. 2009; Lawton et al. 2009; NNW channels ran out along the frontal western Juárez-Arriaga et al. 2019b, Fig. 5). The MFB edge of the Sureste salt basin (Fig. 5). encompasses the Parras, Mayran (name proposed The offshore region east of the Tampico–Misan- by Gray et al. 2020), Magiscatzin, Tampico–Misan- tla Basin, which would become the future site of the tla and Veracruz basins, and follows underlying Mexican Ridges Fold Belt (MRFB), was shielded by Jurassic NW trending rifts, which have been identi- the Tamaulipas Arch from the sediment shed off the fied in both the Magiscatzin and Chicontepec areas MFTB and the basement and volcanic arc terrains fur- (Horbury et al. 2003; Alzaga-Ruiz et al. 2009). ther west. However, fine-grained mudstones derived The earliest sediments in the MFB are unnamed from Cretaceous shales and carbonates were eroded marine turbidites that outcrop in the Mesa Central from the eastern side of the Tamaulipas Arch and (maximum depositional age from detrital zircons of deposited along this steep transform margin (Fig. 5). c. 94–92 Ma; Juárez-Arriaga et al. 2016). The youn- The apatite cooling histories of the frontal eastern gest MFB sediments are early and middle Eocene, parts of the MFTB and the western part of the MFB mostly calcareous turbidite sandstones of the indicate that it was buried by 4–7 km of sediment, Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al. but then rapidly uplifted around 35–40 Ma, with Paleogene mass transport complexes in the most of the MFB sediment removed, except in the deep water (offshore) Tampico–Misantla Basin Chicontepec and Veracruz areas (Gray et al. 2020). This later uplift is possibly due to astheno- Major Paleogene siliciclastic input occurred spheric upwelling above a retreating subducted throughout the Tampico–Misantla offshore basin slab (Gray et al. 2020). The large volume of eroded where fine-grained clastics dominated, and the thick- material spilled over the partially eroded Tamaulipas ness of this interval can reach up to 3.5 km (Marcías Arch into the Salina del Bravo and Tampico–Misan- Zamora 2007). The rapid sediment input along the tla Basin in the late Eocene to Miocene. steep transform margin caused dramatic shelf fail- ures and produced stacked mass transport deposits (MTDs) in the deep water (Kenning and Mann Eocene to Oligocene gravity tectonics along 2020a, Fig. 4). The largest MTD extends to the the East Mexican margin northern part of the Sureste Basin, an east–west dis- tance greater than 400 km (see Kenning and Mann Tectonic elevation of the Laramide (US) and Mexi- 2020a, their Fig. 12A). can orogens during the Paleocene initiated a major increase in sedimentation rate after c. 65 Ma (Gallo- Miocene to Recent: Mexican Ridges Fold Belt way 2008; Snedden et al. 2018). The catchment area of the Rio Bravo and Colorado rivers extended to the The deepwater Tampico–Misantla Basin remained Rocky Mountains in Colorado (Snedden et al. 2018) undisturbed for some 30 myr until the mid Miocene and these rivers transported coarse clastic material (c. 15 Ma), when a remarkable series of large coast- from across the North American continent into the parallel extensional growth faults were initiated in Burgos Basin and the Salina del Bravo where it the shallow-water part of the basin, (e.g. Faja de was deposited as the Wilcox Formation. In the US Oro Fault). Large shale-cored folds developed sector the Wilcox Formation has been dated from downdip of the growth fault system, to produce the 61.5 to 51.1 Ma (Zarra et al. 2019). Wilcox Forma- Mexican Ridges Fold Belt (MRFB, Buffler et al. tion sandstones evenly blanketed the whole of the 1979; Pew 1982; Vázquez-Meneses 2005). Down- Burgos Basin during large-scale progradation of del- slope gravity gliding has continued until the present tas (Echanove Echanove 1986). In the deeper water day, resulting in a seabed which is significantly of the Salina del Bravo and Perdido Fold Belt areas folded. The folding occurred above a major detach- the Wilcox appears as a regionally extensive interval ment surface located at or near the base of the Eocene of sub-parallel reflectors. These sandstones consti- MTDs (Kenning and Mann 2020a). tute the principal target for hydrocarbon exploration Le Roy (2007) and Le Roy et al. (2008) sug- in these basins. In the Salina del Bravo and Perdido gested that the sudden collapse of the shelf 30 myr Fold Belt the Paleogene section can reach more than after the development of the MFTB was due to the 2.5 km in thickness (Colmenares 2014). Neogene reactivation and 1–2 km of relief enhance- The rapid deposition of the Wilcox Formation, ment along the transform fault which borders the which began in the Paleocene, caused sediment load- GoM, trending 170–150° N (Fig. 2). However, the ing and major seaward-directed salt extrusion in the MRFB can reach up 220 km wide, and the thickness Salina del Bravo (Pérez Cruz 1992; CNH 2015a; of the pre-kinematic strata above the detachment can Davison and Cunha 2017; Hudec et al. 2020). be c. 3.5 km. Therefore, it is unlikely that a fold belt However, it was not until the Late Eocene–Early Oli- of this scale was produced from localized uplift gocene (30–35 Ma), some 15–20 myr later, that the along a transform fault (Gradmann et al. 2009). salt-detached Perdido Fold Belt developed (Fiduk Local Neogene reactivation would have been insuf- et al. 1999; Patiño Ruiz et al. 2003). The time lag ficient, in isolation, to generate the folding of between end of Wilcox deposition and the formation 3.5 km of normal strength clastic strata as observed of the salt-detached Perdido Fold Belt is significant. in the MRFB. However, when combined with the It has been suggested that the presence of an outer presence of a weak overpressured detachment and ‘Baha High’ east of the Perdido Fold Belt prevented overpressure in the folded strata across the entire the salt from flowing seaward onto the oceanic crust fold belt, the observed geometries of the MRFB (Hudec et al. 2020). These authors attributed the could be generated. Hence, a much more likely outer high to be an original ‘basement high’ present explanation for the time lag is that the Eocene shales at the time of salt deposition. Compression continued only became sufficiently weak and overpressured in later into the late Oligocene to early Miocene, when the Late Miocene when the underlying Tithonian the Lamprea Fold Belt detached on Paleogene shale source rock began to generate gas. The Tithonian in front of the southern segment of the Salina del source was buried to c. 6 km depth below seabed Bravo salt canopy (Salomón-Mora 2013; Vazquez- by mid Miocene times and is predicted to have Garcia 2018). entered the gas window at this time (authors’ Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean estimate with geothermal gradient of 30°C/km). The Recent sinistral rejuvenation of large strike-slip gas would then have risen to the hydraulic seal at the faults bordering the Oaxaca (or Southern Mexico base of the MTDs and caused overpressure where Block) and Chortis blocks (Fig. 2; Andreani et al. the detachment is located. 2008). In addition, important mafic alkaline volca- nism occurred during the late Miocene to Recent – Miocene: Chiapanecan Orogeny (7.5 0 Ma) along a zone bordering the GoM in the Tampico–Misantla and Veracruz basins known as Subduction-related magmatism commenced in the the Eastern Alkaline Province (Ferrari et al. 2005). Miocene in southeastern Oaxaca and southern Chiapas Los Tuxtlas volcanic field in the Veracruz Basin is as the Chortis Block moved east and exposed the 80 km long by 50 km wide and volcanism is centred Tehuantepec and Chiapas regions to subduction for over two parallel strands of the Veracruz Fault that the first time. The introduction of the Cocos Slab have been mapped through the complex (Fig. 2; beneath Chiapas as the Chortis Block moved east Andreani et al. 2008). The volcanic rocks have greatly increased the total lithospheric thickness and been dated from 7 Ma to the last historical eruption drove rapid and large uplift and imbrication within of San Martin Tuxtla in 1773 AD (Nelson and Gon- the Chiapas Massif, which initiated the Chiapanecan zalez-Caver 1992; Aguilera-Gómez 1988). These Orogeny (Pindell and Miranda 2011; Graham et al. volcanic rocks are interpreted to have formed during 2020). The Chiapanecan orogenic event also produced transtension along these deep-seated fault strands folds and thrusts throughout both the southern half of with magmas derived from the underlying subducted the Sureste Basin and the Chiapas Fold-and-Thrust Cocos plate. Belt (Garcia-Molina 1994; Mora et al. 2007; Mandu- The North Chiapas calc-alkaline volcanic arc jano-Velazquez and Keppie 2009; Davison 2020; became active around 2.9 Ma (Mandujano-Velazquez Graham et al. 2020; Villagomez and Pindell and Keppie 2009). The magmatism was probably 2020). Maximum contraction occurred in the mid associated with significant uplift and denudation, Miocene, which was most concentrated in the south- and coincided with the timing of a large influx of sedi- ern half of the Sureste Basin and the onshore areas ment into the southern part of the Sureste Basin which extending from Veracruz to Chiapas states. caused large-scale evacuation of allochthonous salt Seismic data reveal a culmination of sorts within sheets and formation of deep mini-basins (Comal- the Chiapanecan Orogeny. This culmination is repre- calco Macuspana, and Pescado with up to 4 km of sented by a strong erosional unconformity that can sediment accumulated in the last 2.5 myr (Gomez- be regionally correlated across the southern Sureste Cabrera and Jackson 2009; Ruiz-Osorio 2018; Basin, with high-angle sedimentary onlap patterns Chavez Valois et al. 2009)). onto the fold crests associated with this unconfor- mity (Davison 2020). This indicates there was a Chicxulub impact (66 Ma) short intense compressional event in the present-day offshore area, which is estimated to have occurred A regional review of the GoM would not be com- between 13.8 and 11.6 Ma (Mandujano-Velazquez plete without mentioning the Chicxulub impact, and Keppie 2009; Shann 2020). This compressional which had such an important effect on our planet. event also produced the main episode of folding and Since the discovery of the location of the impact cra- thrusting in the onshore Chiapas Fold-and-Thrust ter in northern Yucatán (see Penfield 2019 for a his- Belt (Graham et al. 2020). torical account of its discovery, and Hildebrand et al. The transcurrent fault systems that facilitated the 1991), there has been great interest in this feature rotation of the Yucatán block in the Jurassic to early with publications too numerous to mention here. Cretaceous were reactivated in the mid Miocene with The asteroid impact that caused the Chixcxulub cra- the Veracruz, Tuxtla–Malpaso and Grijalva faults ter occurred at 66.038 + 0.025/0.049 Ma (Renne and many subsidiary west- to NW-trending faults et al. 2013), which coincided with the last day of exhibiting sinistral movement at this time; some the Mesozoic when more than 60% of all Cretaceous movement has continued to the present day (Fig. 2; species died out (Schulte et al. 2010). The bolide is Meneses-Rocha 1991, 2001; Andreani et al. 2008; estimated to have had a diameter of 10–15 km and Witt et al. 2012; Hernández-Vergara et al. 2020). created an impact crater c. 110 km in diameter. The calculated impact angle of 45–60° arriving from – the NW (Collins et al. 2020) produced a very deep Late Miocene Recent: rejuvenation of the crater (c. 20 km) almost instantaneously (Morgan major strike-slip faults, North Chiapas et al. 2016). Consequently, a large volume of dust Volcanic Arc and molten material was ejected. The impact locality was covered by thick Cretaceous anhydrite deposits The final tectonic events affecting the onshore Mex- which were vaporized into large volumes of sulfate ican sector of the GoM resulted in late Miocene to aerosols, which would have created a very effective Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al. block to sunlight (325 + 130 Gt of sulfur were gas- canopies and creation of salt-cored fold belts in the ified; Artemieva et al. 2017). This, along with the Sureste, Burgos and Perdido basins and shale-cored occurrence of a smoke screen created by numerous structures of the MRFB. Peak deformation during mega-wildfires, is postulated to have caused dark- the Chiapanecan Orogeny occurred in the middle ness and global cooling for a sufficiently long Miocene Serravallian period (Mandujano-Velazquez enough period to cause mass extinction (Gullick and Keppie 2009; Shann 2020), resulting in a phase et al. 2019). Molten spherules of impact melt up to of intense structuration and trap formation in the 1.4 mm in diameter were thrown as far as 1700 km Sureste Basin. These orogenic events also controlled from the crater, with fish choking on them in a lake hydrocarbon maturation and migration at a regional deposit at the aptly named Hell’s Creek in North scale. Dakota (De Palma et al. 2019). Ejected zircons Following the 2013 reform of the Mexican from around the world show a Pan-African age, indi- energy sector, subsequent competitive licence rounds cating that the crust of northern Yucatán is similar to have resulted in the drilling of a number of wells that of Florida, but unlike that of southern Yucatán (Fig. 7). The current focus of exploration drilling (see Krogh et al. 1993; Erlich and Pindell 2020). has targeted Miocene to Recent siliciclastic reser- The impact shocked the GoM and surroundings voirs within salt-related structures formed during with an energy equivalent to a magnitude 10–11 the Chiapanecan Orogeny. However, the ultradeep earthquake and this created the largest known water Chibu-1 and Max-1 wells reportedly targeted ‘event’ deposit (debris flows and later tsunami Jurassic (Oxfordian) objectives, and will provide deposits) in the world. This event can be correlated important calibration on the petroleum potential of across the entire GoM using a bright high-impedance the northern deepwater area of the Sureste Basin. seismic reflector and well data (Sandford et al. The majority of wells in this first phase of drilling 2016). Collapse of the Mesozoic carbonate shelf was located with legacy seismic data that was prob- edge around the GoM produced a widespread car- ably inadequate for detailed subsalt imaging. To sup- bonate breccia that forms an important portion of port the recent exploration effort, 72 000 km2 of the reservoir in most of the giant oil fields reservoired wide azimuth, multiclient 3D seismic data were by carbonates in the Sureste Basin. However, not all acquired and processed across the offshore Sureste breccias are associated with the meteorite impact. At Basin. The combination of modern acquisition and the Cantarell Field, in situ carbonates with karstic processing technology combined with detailed veloc- processes and dolomitization were developed during ity modelling and re-processing of targeted mini- the Late Cretaceous (Horbury and Ruiz 2019). An basins provided enhanced imaging of the subsalt sec- iridium-rich ash-fall layer associated with the impact tion, which will be a focus for future exploration. forms the lowermost part of the Paleocene mudstone top seal to the Cantarell Field (Grajales-Nishimura et al. 2000), which has the largest known vertical Regional geology of the Northern Caribbean hydrocarbon column in the world at 2.2 km islands, and the Honduras–Nicaraguan Rise (Shann 2020). The geology of the Northern Caribbean region is more complex than that of the GoM and its immedi- Hydrocarbon systems of the southern GoM ate margins. The Caribbean Plate is bounded by structurally complex zones involving microplates The widespread presence of the Bajocian salt, Titho- rather than discrete plate boundaries (Burke et al. nian source rock, Cretaceous carbonate buildups 1978; Tillman and Mann 2020; Fig. 8). and Cenozoic clastic depositional systems across The Northern Caribbean region of today has the Mexican GoM has resulted in many of the basins formed as a result of the relative eastward migration sharing common elements of their petroleum of Pacific-derived oceanic lithosphere, led by the systems (Fig. 6). However, the Mexican (Late Creta- Great Caribbean or Greater Antillean Arc, with the ceous–Eocene) and Chiapanecan (Neogene) oroge- partly continental Chortis Block at its trailing end. nies had the greatest impact on the hydrocarbon This multicomponent plate has been engulfed habitat of these basins. These tectonic events uplifted between the originally passive North and South the Mexican hinterlands, caused karstification and American margins during the westward flight of brecciation of the Cretaceous carbonate buildups the Americas from Africa (Pindell et al. 2005; Pin- and delivered Cenozoic clastic sediments into the dell and Kennan 2009; Figs 8 & 9). The Greater basin depocentres. These are the two primary Antillean Arc began to form c. 135 Ma by subduc- present-day reservoir types. The orogenies also tion when there was very little space between indirectly triggered, within the GoM basin, updip the Americas, and comprises igneous and metamor- gravitational extension, translation and downdip phic rocks of Cretaceous to Eocene age (Rojas- compression with shortening of allochthonous salt Agramonte et al. 2011). It is now widely accepted Downloaded from nrdcint h otenMxcnGMadteNrhr Caribbean Northern the and GoM Mexican southern the to Introduction http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ byguestonSeptember23,2021

Fig. 6. Summary of the key petroleum systems elements for the basins of the Mexico and southern GoM. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ .Davison I. tal. et byguestonSeptember23,2021

Fig. 7. Map showing location and publicly reported results of recent exploration/appraisal wells drilled during the period January 2017 to May 2020 in Mexico. Downloaded from nrdcint h otenMxcnGMadteNrhr Caribbean Northern the and GoM Mexican southern the to Introduction http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ byguestonSeptember23,2021

Fig. 8. Tectonic framework of the Northern Caribbean. Caribbean Large Igneous Province (CLIP) which is overthickened oceanic crust has been drawn using a combination of work from Reuber et al. (2019), Serrano et al. (2011), Mauffret and Leroy (1997) and Nerlich et al. (2015). Cenozoic Basins/Rifts are mapped from Brandes and Winsemann (2018), Cruz-Orosa et al. (2012), Mann and Burke (1984), Sanchez et al. (2015) and Torrado et al. (2019). Key for structural features: BB, Belize Basin; CB, Corozal Basin; CFB, Catemaco Fold Belt; FPFB, Frey Pedro Fold Belt; FZ, Fault Zone; IOT, Isthmus of Tehuantepec; LP-SJ FZ, Los Pozos–San Juan Fault Zone; LTV, Los Tuxtlas Volcanics; PB, Petén Basin; PLB, Placetas Belt; PMFS, Polochic–Motagua Fault System; PRVI MICROPLATE, Puerto Rico–Virgin Islands Microplate; SCFB, Sierra de Colón Fold Belt; SDLO, Sierra de los Organos; TMFS, Tuxtla–Malpaso Fault System; VF, Veracruz Fault; YC, Yucatán Channel. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al. that the Caribbean lithosphere and the Antillean Arc arc system, but became part of the North American migrated from west to east into the Proto-Caribbean Plate with the Paleogene advent of the Cayman gap since the Late Cretaceous (Pindell et al. 1988, Trough transcurrent fault system (Figs 2, 8 & 9). 2006; Montgomery and Kerr 2009; Neill et al. Foreland basins were produced along the north- 2011; van Benthem et al. 2013; Stanek et al. 2019; ern margin of the collisional zone in Guatemala, Fig. 9). Subduction produced largely intra-oceanic Yucatán, Cuba and the Bahamas (e.g. Masaferro et al. island arc complexes, but some continental basement 1999). The foreland basins were uplifted, deformed blocks (e.g. the core of the Chortis Block) were and eroded in Guatemala and the Yucatán, but are accreted into the Caribbean Plate during collision still well preserved in northern Cuba and the Baha- with the rifted continental margins of North and mas, where up to 4 km of mainly Paleogene sedi- South America as a consequence of the long-lived ment are preserved, overlying the original passive migration (Figs 2, 8 & 9). Jurassic–Cretaceous continental margin section The zone of original island arc collision with (Hempton and Barros 1993; Iturralde-Vinent et al. the North American continental margin was some 2008; Pszczółkowski 1999; López Corzo 2015). 3000 km in length extending along the southern Several exploration wells have been drilled in the Chortis Block (Nicaragua) and continuing northward Cuban foreland but with no success. This can prob- through eastern Honduras into southeastern Mexico ably be attributed to an absence of siliciclastic reser- (Chiapas) and Guatemala, along Belize and eastern voir rocks, because the Cuban fold-and-thrust belt is Yucatán, and across the Florida Straits to the south- composed mainly of arc volcanic rocks, ophiolites ern flank of the Bahamas (Figs 8 & 9). Central Cuba and limestones. (part of the frontal arc), the Yucatán Basin (intra-arc The Northern Caribbean Plate interior is dis- basin) and the Cayman Ridge (the remnant island sected by a series of presumed left-lateral strike-slip arc) were once part of the mobile Caribbean island faults (e.g. Pedro Escarpment, Hess Escarpment),

Fig. 9. Late Paleocene (56 Ma) depiction of the allochthonous Caribbean Plate entering the Proto-Caribbean gap between the Americas. Reconstruction is drawn in the Indo-Atlantic hotspot reference frame of Müller et al. (1993). Faint grey geographic lines are present-day coastlines. Label abbreviations: GoM OC, GoM oceanic crust; NR, Nicaragua Rise; CB, Colombian Basin; VB, Venezuelan Basin; J, Jamaica; SH, southern Hispaniola; AR, Aves Ridge; C, Central Cuba; WC, Western Cuba; CR, Cayman Ridge; YB, Yucatán Basin; GB, Grenada Basin (not yet opened); CCB, composite Chortis Block. Heavy grey line, outline of present oceanic crust of Caribbean interior. Circles with G, granite (arc); circles with V, volcanic (arc). Modified after Pindell and Kennan (2009). Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean which link northward into an east–west sinistral CLIP magmas appear to be intruded into, and to transcurrent fault zone (Swan Island–Enriquillo– overlie, older oceanic crust (Pindell 2018; Reuber Plantain FZ) passing through Jamaica and Hispan- et al. 2019; Serrano et al. 2011; Nerlich et al. 2015). iola (Fig. 8). This fault system is the southernmost of several fault strands associated with the Cayman (2) Areas of oceanic crust formed by intra-arc exten- Trough transform system (Pindell and Barrett sion. The Yucatán and Grenada intra-arc basins lie 1990; Pindell et al. 2006), which define elongate amidst tectonically extended island arc crust microplates through Hispaniola and the NE Carib- (Fig. 2). Both basins have extensionally faulted bean. Paleogene to Recent sedimentary basins are fl anks that produced thinned arc crust with probable preserved along the transform strands through His- oceanic (intra-arc) crust occupying the deepest por- paniola (Gorosabel-Araus et al. 2020; Mann and tions of the basins (Hall and Yeung 1980; Pindell Pierce 2020; Tillman and Mann 2020). The original and Dewey 1982; Speed and Westbrook 1984; Rose- Greater Antillean Arc has been offset by the Cayman ncrantz 1990; Bird et al. 1993, 1999). The crustal Trough transform, with an estimated 1100–1200 km extension and inferred seafloor spreading in both of total sinistral movement. This corresponds to the basins is thought to be Paleogene in age, and caused east–west width of the deep Cayman Trough, an oce- by the geometrical expansion of the two ends of the anic pull-apart basin which opened with a north– original Antillean Arc after it had passed through south-orientated spreading axis (Fig. 8). However the Yucatán–Colombia constriction of the Proto- the offset between the Cuban and Hispaniolan arc Caribbean gap (Pindell and Barrett 1990). segments is only 350 km because most of the Cayman offset passed south of the Hispaniolan arc axis (Pin- (3) Cayman Trough oceanic crust. The 1100– dell and Barrett 1990). Several pull-apart basins 1200 km-long, but narrow, Cayman Trough is an developed along other strike-slip faults associated oceanic pull-apart basin that records less than half with the Cayman Trough system (Burke et al. of the demonstrable sinistral offset between the 1978), such as the Niobe, Patuca, Tela, San Andres North American and Caribbean plates (Figs 2, 8 & Grabens and the Walton Trough (e.g. Jablonski 9). Dating of sediments from the deep trough (Perfit et al. 2010; Fig. 8). and Heezen 1978), magnetic anomaly interpretation (Leroy et al. 2000) and the interpreted timing of Nature of oceanic crust of the Caribbean Plate motions on the Cayman Trough’s fault splays through Hispaniola (Erikson et al. 1990; Pindell The interior of the Caribbean Plate is floored mainly and Barrett 1990; Dolan et al. 1991; Gorosabel- by Cretaceous oceanic crust. However, some Ceno- Araus et al. 2020; Sun et al. 2020) indicate that the zoic basins have formed within the oceanic crust, basin has probably opened since the Eocene, after and today there are three types of oceanic basement the Greater Antilles Arc had collided with the Baha- in the Northern Caribbean. mas. The rest of the demonstrable North America– Caribbean displacement can be measured from the (1) Oceanic Plateau crust. The Colombian and Ven- length of the undulating southern Chortis–southern ezuelan basins cover a large portion of the Caribbean Yucatán–southern Bahamas suture zone, some Plate. The upper levels consist predominantly of 3000 km in length, that had formed diachronously mafic rocks of the middle to Late Cretaceous Carib- from the Albian to the Eocene (Pindell and Kennan bean Large Igneous Province (CLIP; Fig. 8), but it 2009). This is the period when subduction-related has long been suspected that much of the CLIP is magmatism formed most of the Greater Antilles underlain by Early Cretaceous oceanic crust because Arc, and when most of the circum-Caribbean HP– the better-sampled flanking arc dates back to the LT syn-subduction metamorphic suites found today Early Cretaceous (Pindell and Dewey 1982). The in the Caribbean frontal suture zone were formed CLIP crust can reach 25 km in thickness, but there (see summary of chronology in Pindell et al. 2012). are areas of thinner oceanic crust about which little is known. None of these thinner or CLIP areas fea- ture magnetic stripes or extinct mid-ocean ridges Papers in current volume that can be identified in terms of seafloor spreading isochrons, making plate reconstruction difficult The papers in the current volume span a large range fi (Reuber et al. 2019; Romito and Mann 2020). of scales and disciplines that contribute signi cantly Marine borehole and outcrop samples (e.g. from to the understanding of this region. Papers can be southern Haiti) of the plateau basalts show a range broadly categorized into three themes: of ages from 112 to 68 Ma (Kerr et al. 1997; Sinton (1) geological evolution of the basins of the south- et al. 1998; Lapierre et al. 2000; Révillon et al. 2000; ern Gulf of Mexico; Hoernle et al. 2004; Escuder-Viruete et al. 2007; (2) evolution of the Late Cretaceous to Neogene Hastie et al. 2008; Sandoval et al. 2015). The Mexican orogens; Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al.

(3) geological evolution of the basins and crustal The geological evolution and hydrocarbon pro- elements of the Northern Caribbean, associ- spectivity of the Yucatán Margin is addressed in ated with emplacement of the Caribbean two studies by Kenning and Mann (2020b) and Plate and the Greater Antillean Arc. Miranda-Madrigal and Chavez-Cabello (2020). Kenning and Mann present an exploration frame- In section one, Pindell et al. (2020c) present a com- work for the northern Yucatán margin in the southern prehensive updated synthesis for the reconstruction GoM. Stratigraphy, structure, event timing and ther- of western Equatorial Pangaea and the synrift and mal considerations are integrated to provide a modern drift histories of the Gulf of Mexico and surrounding synopsis of the margin’s petroleum setting. Although regions, accommodating the recently determined it was once believed that this margin had too thin a Bajocian rather than Callovian age for salt. This lat- sedimentary column for hydrocarbon maturation, est model proposes new mechanisms for the the new analysis suggests that Neogene–Recent mat- emplacement of Mexican continental crust into the uration is likely, in keeping with recent mapping of oil ‘Colombian overlap position’ in Pangean recon- seeps along the margin. Miranda-Madrigal and structions, and may be used as a regional exploration Chavez-Cabello (2020) map and describe the framework. Erlich and Pindell (2020) have used a regional geology of a large portion of the southern new dataset of U–Pb radiometric dating of detrital and central GoM from the northern Yucatán Platform zircons to support initial extension in the SE GoM to the eastern Mexican Ridges Foldbelt. Basement beginning in the western Bahamas and offshore type, stratigraphy, structure and palaeogeography western Florida in the Middle Triassic, and progress- through time are documented using a variety of data- ing into the South Florida Basin by the Early Juras- sets including regional seismic sections. The analysis sic. Crustal affinity of the newly described West defines the various play types of the area addressed, Florida Terrane suggests a hybrid origin, possessing providing an exploration framework for this frontier characteristics shared with the Suwannee Terrane exploration area. and northern Yucatán Block. In section two, papers discuss the onshore oro- The Oxfordian palaeographic reconstruction out- genic belts of Mexico and provide further under- lined by Snedden et al. (2020) is supported by standing of the nature and timing of deformation of detailed sedimentological analysis, and illustrates the margins of the southern GoM, and the resultant that aeolian sandstones of the Bacab Formation, uplift, denudation and sediment delivery to the con- found in the offshore Sureste Basin of Mexico, are currently evolving basinal depocentres. coeval to aeolian sandstones of the Norphlet Forma- Gray et al. (2020) have analysed an extensive tion of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Whilst petro- database of new and existing apatite fission track graphic data demonstrate the similarity of these and apatite and zircon (U–Th)/He data across east- aeolian sands on the northern and southern GoM, ern Mexico to describe the thermo-tectonic evolution detrital zircon thermochronology demonstrates dif- of the region with the primary aim of understanding fering source terranes, with the Bacab formation the amount of onshore denudation and the delivery being derived from the Yucatán Block. and deposition of sediment to the GoM. The study Shann (2020) reviews the hydrocarbon explora- reveals the Mayran foreland basin of the MFTB tion history of the prolific Sureste Basin and summa- (Fig. 5) accumulated large volumes of sediment rizes the tectonostratigraphic development of the which was delivered in a northerly direction through basin. Fifteen tectonostratigraphic units of Jurassic the Burgos Basin and into the GoM during the Late to Pliocene age are described which record the Cretaceous and Paleocene. During the Eocene sedi- basin’s evolution. The key petroleum system ele- ment transport changed, when the Mayran Basin ments of reservoir, source and seals are outlined, was inverted, to a southerly direction through the and future exploration opportunities are discussed. Tampico Misantla Basin and sediment was redepos- Davison (2020) summarizes the evolution of salt ited into the southern GoM. bodies and related structures in the Sureste Basin Evolution of the onshore Chiapas region is and their relation to the Mexican and Chiapanecan addressed by Hernández-Vergara et al. (2020), orogenies. Salt-related deformation was diapiric in Pindell et al. (2020a) and Graham et al. (2020). nature until the Eocene, when allochthonous salt The work of Hernández-Vergara et al. (2020) pre- sheets developed in response to the propagation of sents illite Ar40–Ar39 and zircon U–Pb radiometric the Mexican fold-and-thrust belt into the Sureste dating of field samples, using the age of illite clay Basin. The more intense mid Miocene Chiapanecan growth in sheared strata to address the long-standing orogeny produced folding and thrusting over a debate over whether or not Laramide-aged tectonic north–south distance of 600 km. These compressive events occurred in the Chiapas Foldbelt of southern events controlled the source maturation, trap devel- Mexico. Indeed, authigenic clay growth during opment, fluid migration and accumulation within structural deformation appears to be Eocene, despite the Sureste Basin. strata as young as middle Miocene being involved in Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean most folds. Possible explanations for the observa- Mitchell (2020) provides a comprehensive sum- tions are discussed, providing yet further material mary of lithostratigraphic and biostratigraphic data for the ongoing debate. Graham et al. (2020) pre- from outcrop and wells to define the four separate sent a series of restored cross-sections from pub- Cretaceous terranes in Jamaica. These data are inte- lished maps and field studies across the Cuicateco grated into a tectonostratigraphic model for the amal- Belt, southern Sierra Madre Oriental and the Chiapas gamation of these terranes during their collision with Fold Belt. They decipher the main tectonic controls the Greater Antillean Arc in the late Cretaceous to on regional tectonic evolution of the thrust belts, Paleogene. exerted by changes in the geometry of the subducting Farallon and Cocos Plates. Pindell et al. (2020a) pre- Footnote on large fold-out maps sent U–Pb radiometric dating of detrital zircons from field samples of the middle Miocene Nanchital con- Earthmoves Ltd. have produced two large fold out- glomerate in the Chiapas Fold Belt and igneous maps of the Mexican GoM and the Northern Carib- exposures in the SW Tehuantepec region to propose bean which are compiled from many different a sediment source-to-sink model prior to the present sources and provide a useful background for many uplift of the Chiapas Massif. The study demonstrates of the papers. These are available at the back of the that source areas for middle Miocene reservoirs in volume, and digital pdf versions are available from the southern GoM, possibly including those in the the Geological Society website. Zama and other recently discovered fields, extended far beyond the Chiapas Massif to the southern Mex- ican coastal zone and possibly the Chortis Block. Acknowledgements We would like to thank Bethan Phillips for expertly guiding us through the process of edit- The third section of the volume addresses the ing this volume which such good grace and patience. Ian complex evolution of the Caribbean, the Greater Steel is thanked for compiling the map illustrations in Fig- Antillean Arc, and in particular the transpressional ures 1, 2 and 8. Bob Erlich, Ricardo Padilla y Sánchez, Gary suture zone on the southern margin of the north Gray and Edgar Juárez-Arriaga are thanked for their very American plate. Romito and Mann (2020) synthe- useful comments that helped improve this paper. size a broad array of datasets over much of the Carib- bean region to define basement type in relation to Author contributions ID: writing – original draft Caribbean evolution, burial and structurally driven – sediment thickening histories. They also present an (lead); JP: writing review & editing (supporting); JH: writing – review & editing (supporting). assessment of the petroleum habitat upon each base- ment type. A series of papers focus on the geological evolution and hydrocarbon characteristics of the Funding This research received no specific grant from island of Hispaniola. Sun et al. (2020) use gravity any funding agency in the public, commercial, or modelling, geomorphology and historical seismicity not-for-profit sectors. to investigate the nature of crustal types and associ- ated deformation across the oblique 250 km-wide collisional zone between the Bahamas, the island Data availability There are no new data. arc of Hispaniola and the CLIP. Tillman and Mann (2020) review the regional hydrocarbon References potential and, in particular, the source rock matura- tion history of Hispaniola and Puerto Rico, and Abdullin, F., Solari, L., Ortega-Obergon, C. and Sole, J. show that most of the basins are immature for hydro- 2018. New fission track results from the northern Chia- carbon generation. Mann and Pierce (2020) focus pas massif area, SE Mexico: trying to reconstruct its complex thermo-tectonic history. Revista Mexicana on the development of the Azua Basin in the Domin- de Ciencias Geológicas, 35,79–92, https://doi.org/ ican Republic and explain the origin of the isolated 10.22201/cgeo.20072902e.2018.1.523 hydrocarbon occurrences. The oilfields are illus- Aguayo-Camargo, J.E. 1978. Sedimentary environments trated with a series of new cross-sections. Gorosa- and diagenesis of Cretaceous reef complex, eastern bel-Araus et al. (2020) examine and correlate the Mexico, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. central and southern onshore basins of Hispaniola Anales del Centro de Ciencias del Mar y Limnologia, with the offshore San Pedro Basin of the Dominican 5,83–140. Republic, integrating a large dataset consisting of Aguayo-Camargo, J.E. 1998. The middle Cretaceous El updated geological mapping and subsurface infor- Abra limestone at its type locality (facies, diagenesis and oil emplacement) east–central Mexico. Revista mation. The modelling provides new insights and Mexicana de Ciencias Geologicas, 15,1–8. suggests that suspected Upper Cretaceous source Aguilera-Gómez, L. 1988. Petrología de las rocas igneas rocks may be locally mature, with Oligocene and del area de los Tuxtlas, Veracruz. Professional Miocene reservoirs sealed by shales which may Thesis, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, México DF, trap oils generated since the Neogene. México, pp. 1–58. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al.

Alzaga-Ruiz, H., Lopez, M., Roure, F. and Seranne, M. Chavez Valois, V.M., Valdes, M.D.L.C. et al. 2009. 2009. Interactions between the Laramide Foreland A new multidisciplinary focus in the study of the and the passive margin of the GoM: Tectonics and sedi- tertiary plays in the Sureste Basin, Mexico. In: Barto- mentation in the Golden Lane area, Veracruz State, lini, C. and Román Ramos, J.R. (eds) Petroleum Mexico. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 26,951–973, Systems in the Southern GoM. AAPG Memoirs, 90, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2008.03.009 155–190. Andreani, L., Rangin, C., Martínez-Reyes, J., Le Roy, C., CNH 2015a. GoM – deep water – North Sector. Perdido Aranda-García, M., Le Pichon, X. and Peterson- Fold belt Subsalt belt Mexican Ridges Petroleum geo- Rodriguez, R. 2008. The Neogene Veracruz fault: logical synthesis December 2015, https://rondasmex evidences for left-lateral slip along the southern ico.gob.mx/media/1556/geolgical-atlas-cpp.pdf [last Mexico block. Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de accessed May 2020]. France, 179, 195–208, https://doi.org/10.2113/ CNH 2015b. Altas Geológico Cenca Tampico–Misantla, gssgfbull.179.2.195 https://hidrocarburos.gob.mx/media/3091/atlas_geo Artemieva, N., Morgan, J. and Expedition 364 Science logico_cuenca_tampico-misantla_v3.pdf [last accessed Party 2017. Quantifying the release of climate-active 8 June 2020]. gases by large meteorite impacts with a case study Collins, G.S., Patel, N. et al. 2020. A steeply-inclined tra- of Chicxulub. Geophysical Research Letters, 44, jectory for the Chixculub impact. Nature Communica- 10,180–10,188, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL07 tions, 11, article 1480, https://doi.org/10.1038/ 4879 s41467-020-15269-x Bird, D.E., Hall, S.A., Casey, J.E. and Millegan, P.S. 1993. Colmenares, M. 2014. The Perdido and Southwestern Interpretation of magnetic anomalies over the Grenada GoM. AAPG Search and Discovery, article 30331. basin. Tectonics, 12, 1267–1279, https://doi.org/10. Coney, P.J. and Reynolds, S.J. 1977. Cordilleran Benioff 1029/93TC01185 zones. Nature, 270, 403–406, https://doi.org/10. Bird, D.E., Hall, S.A., Casey, J.F. and Millegan, P.S. 1999. 1038/270403a0 Tectonic evolution of the Grenada Basin. In: Mann, P. Cossey, S.P.J., Niewenhuise, D. Van., Davis, J., Rosenfeld, (ed.) Sedimentary Basins of the World, 4, Caribbean J.H. and Pindell, J. 2016. Compelling evidence from Basins, Elsevier, 389–416, https://doi.org/10.1016/ eastern Mexico for a late Paleocene/Early Eocene iso- S1874-5997(99)80049-5 lation, drawdown and refill of the Gulf of Mexico. Inter- Brandes, C. and Winsemann, J. 2018. From incipient island pretation , 4, SC63–SC80, http://library.seg.org/doi/ arc to doubly-vergent orogen: A review of geodynamic 10.1190/INT-2015-0107.1 models and sedimentary basin-fills of southern Central Cruz-Orosa, I., Sàbat, F., Ramos, E., Rivero, L. and Váz- America. Island Arc, 27, e12255, https://doi.org/10. quez-Taset, Y.M. 2012. Structural evolution of the La 1111/iar.12255 Trocha fault zone: Oblique collision and strike-slip Buffler, R.T., Shaub, F.J., Watkins, J.S. and Worzel, J.L. basins in the Cuban Orogen. Tectonics, 31, TC5001, 1979. Anatomy of the Mexican Ridges, south- doi:10.1029/2011TC003045. western GoM. In: Watkins, J.S., Montadert, L. and Cuevas Barragan, C.D., Ocampo-Diaz, Y.Z.E., Lawton, Dickerson, P.W. (eds) Geological and Geophysical T.F., Barboza Gudino, J.F., Ruiz Cigarrillo, J.A., Sau- Investigations of Continental Margins. AAPG Mem- cedo Girón, R. and Alvorado Valdéz, G. 2016. Estrati- oirs, 29, 319–327. gráfia y sedimentolgía de la formación Mexquitic (antes Buffler, R.T., Shaub, F.J., Huerta, R., Ibrahim, A.B.K. and formación Caracol; Cretácico Superior) en la region Watkins, J.S. 1981. A model for the early evolution of central del estado de San Luis Potosí: implicaciones the GoM basin. 26th International Geological Con- en la instaración del sistema antepaís de tipo retro. gress (Paris, 1980), Colloque C3 (Geology of continen- Reunión Anual Unión Geofísica Mexicana, 2016, tal margins). Oceanologica Acta, Special issue, 4, Abstract no. 0532. 129–136. Davison, I. 2020. Salt tectonics in the Sureste Basin, Burke, K., Fox, P.J. and Şengör, A.M.C. 1978. Buoyant SE Mexico: some implications for hydrocarbon ocean floor and the evolution of the Caribbean. Journal exploration. Geological Society, London, Special of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 83, 3949–3954, Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP504- https://doi.org/10.1029/JB083iB08p03949 2019-227 Byron Rodriguez, A. 2011. Regional structure, stratigra- Davison, I. and Cunha, T.A. 2017. Allochthonous salt sheet phy and hydrocarbon potential of the Mexican Sector growth: thermal implications for source rock matura- of the GoM. Unpublished Masters thesis, University tion in the deepwater Burgos Basin and Perdido Fold of Texas. Belt, Mexico. Interpretation, 5,1–11, https://doi. Cantú-Chapa, A. 1992. The Jurassic Huasteca series in the org/10.1190/INT-2016-0035.1 subsurface of Poza Rica, eastern Mexico. Journal of De Palma, R.A., Smit, J. et al. 2019. A seismically Petroleum Geology, 15, 259–282, https://doi.org/10. induced onshore surge deposit at the KPg boundary, 1111/j.1747-5457.1992.tb00872.x N. Dakota. Proceedings of the National Academy Cantú-Chapa, A. 2009. Upper Jurassic Stratigraphy of Physical Sciences of the United States of America, (Oxfordian and Kimmeridgian) in petroleum wells of 17, 8190–8199, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817 Campeche Shelf, GoM. AAPG Memoirs, 90,79–91, 407116 https://doi.org/10.1306/13191079M902804 Dohmen, T.E. 2002. Age dating of expected MCSB seismic Carrillo-Bravo, J. 1971. La Plataforma Valles-San Luis event suggests that it is the K/T Boundary. Gulf Coast Potosí. Boletín Asociación Mexicana Geólogos Petro- Association of Geological Societies Transactions, 52, leros, 23,1–6. 177–180. Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean

Dolan, J.E., Mann, P., Monechi, S., de Zoeten, R., Heu- Galloway, W.E. 2008. Depositional evolution of the beck, C. and Shiroma, J. 1991. Sedimentologic. strati- GoM sedimentary basin. In: Miall, A.D. (ed.) The Sedi- graphic. and tectonic synthesis of Eocene–Miocene mentary Basins of the United States and Canada. Sedi- sedimentary basins, Hispaniola and Puerto Rico. Geo- mentary Basins of the World, 5. Elsevier, Amsterdam, logical Society of America, Special Papers, 262, 505–549. 217–240. Garcia-Molina, G. 1994. Structural evolution of SE Mexico Echanove Echanove, O. 1986. Geología petrolera de (Chiapas–Tabasco–Campeche) offshore and onshore. la Cuenca de Burgos: Boletín de la Asociación Mexi- PhD thesis, Rice University, Houston, TX. cana de Geólogos Petroleros (AMGP), 38,3–74, Godínez-Urban, A., Lawton, T.F., Molina-Garza, R.S., http://www.amgp.org/ws/articulos/1986/1986_Ene_ Iriondo, A., Weber, B. and López-Martínez, M. 2011. Jun_01.pdf The Jurassic volcanic and sedimentary rocks of La Engebretson, D.C., Cox, A. and Gordon, R.G. 1984. Rela- Silla and Todos Santos formations, Chiapas: Record tive motions between oceanic plates of the Pacific of Nazas arc magmatism and rift basin formation Basin. Journal of Geophysical Research, 89, 10291– prior to opening of the GoM. Geopshere, 7, 121–144, 10310, https://doi.org/10.1029/JB089iB12p10291 https://doi.org/10.1130/GES00599.1 English, J.M. and Johnston, S.T. 2004. The Laramide Orog- Godo, T.E. 2019. The Smackover–Norphlet petroleum sys- eny: What were the driving forces? International Geol- tem, deepwater GoM: oil fields, oil shows, and dry ogy Reviews, 46, 822–838, https://doi.org/10.2747/ holes. GCAGS Journal, 8, 104–152. 0020-6814.46.9.833 Gomez-Cabrera, P.T. and Jackson, M.P.A. 2009. Neogene Erikson, J.P., Pindell, J.L. and Larue, D.K. 1990. Mid- stratigraphy and salt tectonics of the Santa Ana area, Eocene–Early Oligocene sinistral transcurrent faulting offshore Salina del Istmo Basin, southeastern Mexico. in Puerto Rico associated with formation of the In: Bartolini, C. and Roman Ramos, J.R. (eds) Petro- northern Caribbean plate boundary zone. The Journal leum Systems in the Southern GoM. AAPG Memoirs, of Geology, 98, 365–384, https://doi.org/10.1086/ 90, 237–255, https://doi.org/10.1306/13191086 M9037 629410 González Alvarado, J. 1974. Resultados obtenidos en la Erlich, R.N. and Pindell, J. 2020. Crustal origin of the West Exploración de la Plataforma de Córdoba y principales Florida Terrane, and detrital zircon provenance and Campos Productores. Boletín Asociación Mexicana development of accommodation during initial rifting Geólogos Petroleros, 37,53–59. of the southeastern Gulf of Mexico and western Baha- González Díaz, M.G., Lawton, T.F., Juarez-Arriaga, E., mas. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Stockli, D., Fitz-Dias, E. and Solari, L. 2018. Análise 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP504-2020-14 estratigráfico y procedencia de la Formación Chiconte- Escuder-Viruete, J., Contreras, F. et al. 2007. Magmatic pec en el Norte de la Cuenca de Tampico–Misantla, relationships and ages between adakites, magnesian México: la Sierra Madre Oreintal como una Fuente de andesites and Nb-enriched basalt-andesites from His- sedimentos. Reuhnion Annual UGM 2018, Abstract, paniola: record of a major change in the Caribbean https://www.raugm.org.mx/resumenes/sessions/abst island arc magma sources. Lithos, 99, 151–177, ract.php?abstractID=741&source=session https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2007.01.008 Gorosabel-Araus, J.M., Granja-Bruña, J.L. et al. Ferrari, L., Tagami, T., Eguchi, M., Orozco-Esquivel, M., 2020. New constraints on the tectonosedimentary evo- Petrone, C., Jacobo-Albarrán, J. and López-Martínez, lution of the offshore San Pedro Basin (southeastern M. 2005. Geology, geochronology and tectonic setting Dominican Republic): implications for its hydro- of late Cenozoic volcanism along the southwestern Gulf carbon potential. Geological Society, London, Special of Mexico: the Eastern Alkaline Province revisited. Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP504- Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 2019-224 146, 284–306, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores. Gradmann, S., Beaumont, C. and Albertz, M. 2009. Factors 2005.02.004. controlling the evolution of the Perdido Fold Belt, Fiduk, J.C., Weimer, P. et al. 1999. The Perdido Fold Belt, northwestern GoM, determined from numerical mod- northwestern deep GoM, Part 2: seismic stratigraphy els. Tectonics, 28, TC2002, https://doi.org/10.1029/ and petroleum systems. AAPG Bulletin, 83, 578–612. 2008TC002326 Fitz-Díaz, E., van der Pluijm, B., Hudleston, P. and Tolson, Graham, R., Pindell, J., Villagómez, D., Molina-Garca, R., G. 2014. Progressive, episodic deformation in the Mex- Granath, J. and Sierra-Rojas, M. 2020. Integrated Cre- ican Fold–Thrust Belt (Central Mexico): evidence from taceous–Cenozoic plate tectonics and structural geol- isotopic dating of folds and faults. International Geol- ogy in Southern Mexico. Geological Society, London, ogy Review, 56, 734–755, https://doi.org/10.1080/ Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ 00206814.2014.896228 SP504-2020-70 Fitz-Díaz, E., Lawton, T.F., Juárez-Arriaga, E. and Chavez- Grajales-Nishimura, J.M., Cedillo-Pardo, E. et al. 2000. Cabello, G. 2018. The Cretaceous–Paloegene Mexican Chicxulub impact: The origin of reservoir and seal orogen: structure, basin development, magmatism and facies in the southeastern Mexico oil fields. Geology, tectonics. Earth Science Reviews, 183,56–84, https:// 28, 307–310, https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613 doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2017.03.002 (2000)28,307:CITOOR.2.0.CO;2 Fredrich, J.T., Fossum, A.F. and Hickman, R.J. 2007. Min- Gray, G. and Lawton, T. 2011. New constraints on timing eralogy of deepwater GoM salt formations and implica- of the Hidalgoan (Laramide) deformation in the Parras tions for constitutive behaviour. Journal of Petroleum and La Popa basins, NE Mexico. Boletin de la Socieded Science and Engineering, 57, 354–374, https://doi. Geologica Mexicana, 63, 333–343, https://doi.org/10. org/10.1016/j.petrol.2006.11.006 18268/BSGM2011v63n2a13 Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al.

Gray, G.G., Villagomez, D. et al. 2020. Late Mesozoic and Horbury, A.D., Hall, S. et al. 2003. Tectonic sequence strat- Cenozoic thermotectonic history of eastern, central and igraphy of the western margin of the GoM in the Late southern Mexico as determined through integrated ther- Mesozoic and Cenozoic: less passive than previously mochronology, with implications for sediment delivery imagined. In: Bartolini, C., Buffler, R.T. and Blick- to the Gulf of Mexico. Geological Society, London, wede, J. (eds) The Circum-GoM and the Caribbean: Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ Hydrocarbon Habitats, Basin Formation, and Plate SP504-2019-243 Tectonics. American Association of Petroleum Geolo- Gullick, S.P.S., Bralower, T.J. et al. and the Expedition 364 gists Memoirs, 79, 184–245. Scientists. 2019. The first day of the Cenozoic. PNAS, Hudec, M.R., Norton, I.O., Jackson, M.P.A. and Peel, F.J. 116, 19342–19351, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 2013. Jurassic evolution of the Gulf of Mexico salt 1909479116 basin. AAPG Bulletin, 97, 1683–1710, https://doi. Guzmán, E.J. and De Cserna, Z. 1963. Tectonic history of org/10.1306/04011312073 Mexico. In: Childs, O.E. and Beebe, B.W. (eds) Back- Hudec, M.R. and Norton, I. 2019. Upper Jurassic structure bone of the Americas – Tectonic History from Pole to and evolution of the Yucatán and Campeche subbasins, Pole. American Association of Petroleum Geologists southern GoM. AAPG Bulletin, 103, 1133–1151, Memoirs, 2, 113–129. https://doi.org/10.1306/11151817405 Hall, S.A. and Yeung, T. 1980. A study of magnetic anom- Hudec, M.R., Dooley, T.P., Peel, F.J. and Soto, J.I. 2020. alies in the Yucatán Basin. Transaction of the Ninth Controls on the evolution of passive-margin salt basins: Caribbean Geological Conference, Santo Domingo, structure and evolution of the Salina del Bravo region, 9, 519–526. northeastern Mexico. GSA Bulletin, 132, 997–1012, Hastie, A.R., Kerr, A.C., Mitchell, S.F. and Millar, I. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1130/B35283.1 Geochemistry and petrogenesis of Cretaceous oceanic Humphries, C.C., Jr. 1978. Salt movement on continental plateau lavas in eastern Jamaica. Lithos, 101,323–343, slope, northern Gulf of Mexico. In: Bouma, A.H., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2007.08.003 Moore, G.T. and Coleman, J.M. (eds) Framework, Hempton, M.R. and Barros, J.A. 1993. Mesozoic stratigra- facies and oiltrapping characteristics of the upper con- phy of Cuba: depositional architecture of a southeast tinental margin: AAPG Studies in Geology #7, p. 69–86. facing continental margin. In: Pindell, J.L. and Perkins, Iturralde-Vinent, M.A., Otero, C.D., García-Casco, A. and R. (eds) Mesozoic and Early Cenozoic Development of van Hinsbergen, D.J. 2008. Paleogene foredeep basin the GoM and Caribbean Region, Gulf Coast Section deposits of north-central Cuba: a record of arc–continent Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists collision between the Caribbean and North American Foundation. 13th Annual Research Conference Pro- Plates. International Geology Review, 50,863–884, ceedings, 193–209. https://doi.org/10.2747/0020-6814.50.10.863 Hernández-Vergara, R., Fitz-Díaz, E., Brocard, G. and Jablonski, D., Westlake, S.and Gumley, G.M. 2010. Offshore Morán-Zenteno, D.J. 2020. Illite 40Ar–39Ar dating of Jamaica – a new frontier? Unmasking the potential of the Eocene deformation in the Chiapas Fold and Thrust Walton Basin. Poster Presentation, AAPG 2010 Annual Belt, southern Mexico. Geological Society, London, Convention & Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, http:// Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ www.searchanddiscovery.com/pdfz/abstracts/pdf/20 SP504-2020-75 10/annual/abstracts/ndx_jablo nski.pdf.html Hildebrand, A.R., Penfield, G.T. et al. 1991. Chicxulub cra- Juárez-Arriaga, E., Lawton, T.F. and Stockli, D.F. 2016. ter: a possible Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary impact Soyatal Formation and related strata: onset of sedi- crater on the Yucatán peninsula, Mexico. Geology, mentation in the Cretaceous Foreland-Basin System, 19, 867–871, https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613 Central Mexico. AAPG Annual Convention and Exhbi- (1991)019,0867:CCAPCT.2.3.CO;2 tion, Calgary, Alberta, http://www.searchanddiscov Hoernle, K., Hauff, F. and van den Bogaard, P. 2004. 70 my ery.com/abstracts/html/2016/90259ace/abstracts/ history (139–69 Ma) for the Caribbean large igneous 2380953.html province. Geology, 32, 697–700, https://doi.org/10. Juárez-Arriaga, E., Lawton, T.F., Stockli, D.F., Solari, L. 1130/G20574.1 and Martens, U. 2019a. Late Cretaceous–Paleocene Horbury, A. 2018. Chapter 4. The amazing carbonate plays. stratigraphic and structural evolution of the central In: Sandrea, I. (ed.) Mexico: History of Oil Exploration, Mexican fold and thrust belt, from detrital zircon (U/ its Amazing Carbonates, and Untapped Oil Potential. Th)/(He–Pb) ages. Journal of South American Earth Privately published in USA. Sciences, 95, 10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames. Horbury, A. and Ruiz, H. 2019. Laramide compression in 2019.102264 Mexico: the missing factor behind significant reservoir Juárez-Arriaga, E., Lawton, T.F., Ocampo-Diaz, Y.Z.E., productivities. Petroleum Geology of Mexico and the Stockli, D.F. and Solari, L. 2019b. Sediment prove- Northern Caribbean. Geological Society of London nance, sediment-dispersal systems, and major arc- Petroleum Group Meeting, London, 14–16 May 2019, magmatic events recorded in the Mexican foreland Abstracts, London, 15. basin, north-central and northeastern Mexico. Interna- Horbury, A., Chambers, R., Zamora, D., Ortuno, E. and tional Geological Review, 61, https://doi.org/10. Bello, R. 2005. Origin of breccia fabrics in the Late Cre- 1080/00206814.2019.1581848 taceous reservoir of the Cantarell Field, Offshore Cam- Kenning, J. and Mann, P. 2020a. Control of structural style peche, Mexico. AAPG International Conference and by large, Paleogene mass transport deposits in the Mex- Exhibition Paris, Abstracts, http://www.searchanddis ican Ridges fold belt and Salina del Bravo, western covery.com/documents/abstracts/2005intl_paris/hor GoM. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 115, https:// bury.htm?q=%2BtitleStrip%3Acantarell doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104254 Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean

Kenning, J.J. and Mann, P. 2020b. Regional thermal matu- adjacent Jurassic oceanic crust in the eastern GoM. rity modelling of hydrocarbons along the deep-water Marine Geophysics Research, https://doi.org/10. Yucatán margin, southern Gulf of Mexico. Geological 1007/s11001-019-09379-5 Society, London, Special Publications, 504, https:// Livaccari, R.F., Burke, K. and Şengör, A.M.C. 1981. Was doi.org/10.1144/SP504-2019-252 the Laramide orogeny related to subduction of an oce- Kerr, A.C., Marriner, G.F., Tarney, J., Nivia, A., Saunders, anic plateau. Nature, 289, 276–278, ISSN 1476-4687, A.D., Thirlwall, M.F. and Sinton, C.W. 1997. Creta- https://doi.org/10.1038/289276a0 ceous basaltic terranes in Western Colombia: elemental, López Corzo, O.L. 2015. Hydrocarbon potential of chronological and Sr–Nd isotopic constraints on petro- Cuban Exclusive Economic Zone in the Gulf of Mexico genesis. Journal of Petrology, 38, 677–702, https:// (CEEZ-GoM) CUPET, Safe Seas – Clean Seas, One doi.org/10.1093/petroj/38.6.677 Gulf and Caribbean Offshore Environment Drilling Kimbrough, D.L., Mahoney, J.B., Moore, T.E., Grove, M., Symposium, 28 October 2015. PowerPoint presenta- Gastil, R.G., Ortega-Rivera, A. and Fanning, C.M. tion, http://nebula.wsimg.com/63ef50d2fa616fc9047 2001. Forearc-basin sedimentary response to rapid 5364a0c6cc328?AccessKeyId=5B9DC426D4E0696A late Cretaceous batholith emplacement in the Peninus- 69E5&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 [last accessed 5 lar Ranges of southern and Baja California. Geology, September 2020]. 29, 491–494, https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613 Mandujano-Velazquez, J.J. and Keppie, J.D. 2009. Middle (2001)029,0491:FBSRTR.2.0.CO;2 Miocene Chiapas fold and thrust belt of Mexico: a result Krogh, T.E., Kamo, S.L., Sharpton, V.L., Marin, L.E. and of collision of the Tehuantepec Transform/Ridge with Hildebrans, A.R. 1993. U–Pb ages of single shocked the Middle America Trench. Geological Society, Lon- zirocons linking distal K/T ejecta to the Chicxulub cra- don, Special Publications, 327,55–69, https://doi. ter. Nature, 366, 731–734, https://doi.org/10.1038/ org/10.1144/SP327.4 366731a0 Mann, P. and Burke, K. 1984. Neotectonics of the Carib- Lapierre, H., Bosch, D. et al. 2000. Multiple plume bean. Reviews of Geophysics, 22, 309–362, https:// events in the genesis of the peri-Caribbean Cretaceous doi.org/10.1029/RG022i004p00309 oceanic plateau province. Journal of Geophysical Mann, P. and Pierce, P. 2020. Stratigraphy and structure of Research, 105,8403–8421, https://doi.org/10.1029/ regionally-isolated hydrocarbon occurrences in the 1998JB900091 Azua Basin, south-central Dominican Republic (North- Lawton, T.F. and Pindell, J. 2017. Upper Triassic–Middle eastern Caribbean). Geological Society, London, Spe- Jurassic Strata of Plomosas Uplift and Sierra Sama- cial Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ layuca, Chihuahua, Mexico: onshore record of syn-rift SP504-2019-241 GoM fault history. AAPG Search and Discovery, article Marcías Zamora, E. 2007. Estilos Estructurales en el 30505. Golfo de México Frentre a la Costa de Tamaulipas. Lawton, T.F., Bradford, I.A., Vega, F.J., Gehrels, G.E. and Resúmenes Simposio AMGP Delegación Tampico, Amato, J.M. 2009. Provenance of Upper Cretaceous– Evaluación de Plays: Hábitat de Hidrocarburos,8–9 Paleogene sandstones in the foreland basin system of November 2007, Tampico, Tamaulipas, 15–23. the Sierra Madre Oriental, northeastern Mexico, and Marton, G. and Buf fler, R.T. 1994. Jurassic reconstruction its bearing on fluvial dispersal systems of the Mexican of the Gulf of Mexico basin. International Geology Laramide Province. GSA Bulletin, 121, 820–836, Review, 36, 545–586, https://doi.org/10.1080/0020 https://doi.org/10.1130/B26450.1 6819409465475 Le Roy, C. 2007. Déformation crustale néogène et Masaferro, J.L., Poblet, J., Bulnes, M., Eberli, G.P., Dixon, processus gravitaires le long de la marge ouest du T.H. and McClay, K. 1999. Palaeogene–Neogene/pre- Golfe du Mexique. PhD thesis, CEREGE, Aix- sent day (?) growth folding in the Bahamian foreland of Marseille Univ. the Cuban fold and thrust belt. Journal of the Geologi- Le Roy, C., Rangin, C., Le Pichon, X., Nguyen Thi cal Society, 156, 617–631, https://doi.org/10.1144/ Ngoc, H., Aandreani, L. and Aranda-Garciá, M. gsjgs.156.3.0617 2008. Neogene crustal shear zone along the western Mauffret, A. and Leroy, S. 1997. Seismic stratigraphy GoM margin and its implications for gravity sliding pro- and structure of the Caribbean igneous province. Tecto- cesses: evidences from 2D and 3D multichannel seismic nophysics, 283,61–104, https://doi.org/10.1016/ data. Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de France, S0040-1951(97)00103-0 179, 175–189, https://doi.org/10.2113/gssgfbull. Meneses-Rocha, J.J. 1991. Tectonic development of the 179.2.175 Ixtapa Graben, Chiapas, Mexico. Unpbl. PhD thesis, Leroy, S., Mauffret, A., Patriat, P. and Mercier de Lépinay, University of Texas at Austin. Downloadable from Pro- B. 2000. An alternative interpretation of the Cayman quest Ann Arbor, order no. 921592. trough evolution from a reidentification of magnetic Meneses-Rocha, J.J. 2001. Tectonic evolution of the anomalies. Geophysical Journal International, 141, Ixtapa Graben, an example of a strike-slip basin of 539–557, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246x.2000. southeastern Mexico: implications for regional petro- 00059.x leum systems. In: Bartolini, C., Buffler, R.T. and Leroy, S., Ellouz-Zimmermann, N. et al. 2015. Segmenta- Cantú-Chapa, A. (eds) The Western GoM Basin: Tec- tion and kinematics of the North America–Caribbean tonics, Sedimentary Basins, and Petroleum Systems. plate boundary offshore Hispaniola. Terra Nova, 27, AAPG Memoirs, 75, 183–216. 467–478, https://doi.org/10.1111/ter.12181 Miranda-Madrigal, E. and Chavez-Cabello, G. 2020. Lin, P., Bird, D. and Mann, P. 2019. Crustal structure of an Regional geological analysis of the southern deep extinct, late Jurassic, oceanic spreading center and its Gulf of México and northern Yucatán Shelf. Geological Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al.

Society, London, Special Publications, 504, https:// Caribbean: Hydrocarbon Habitats, Basin Formation, doi.org/10.1144/SP504-2020-1 and Plate Tectonics. AAPG Memoirs, 79, 476–514 Mitchell, S.F. 2020. Cretaceous geology and tectonic (CD-ROM version). assembly of Jamaica. Geological Society, London, Padilla y Sánchez, R.J. 2007. Evolución geológica del Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ sureste mexicano desde le Mesozoico al presente en el SP504-2019-210 contexto regional del Golfo de México. Boletín de la Mixon, R.B., Murray, G.E. and Teodoro, D.G. 1959. Age Sociedad Geológica Mexicana, 59,19–42, https:// and correlation of Huizachal Group (Mesozoic), State doi.org/10.18268/BSGM2007v59n1a3 of Tamaulipas, Mexico. AAPG Bulletin, 43, 757–771. Patiño Ruiz, J., Rodríguez-Uribe, M.A., Hernández-Flores, Montgomery, H. and Kerr, A.C. 2009. Rethinking the ori- E.R., Lara-Rodríguez, J. and Gómez-González, A.R. gins of the red chert at La Désirade, French West Indies. 2003. El Cinturón Plegado Perdido Mexicano, estruc- In: James, K.H., Lorente, M.A. and Pindell, J.L. (eds) tura y potencial petrolero. Boletín AMGP, 50,3–20. The Origin and Evolution of the Caribbean Plate. Geo- Penfield, G. 2019. Unlikely impact. AAPG Explorer, logical Society, London Special Publication, 328, December. 457–467. Pérez Cruz, G.A. 1992. Geologic evolution of the Burgos Mora, J.C., Jaimes, V.M.C., Gardun, O.M.V.H., Layer, Basin, Northeastern Mexico. PhD thesis, Rice Univer- P.W., Pompa, M.V. and Godinez, M.L. 2007. Geology sity, Houston, TX. and geochemistry characteristics of the Chiapanecan Perfit, M.R. and Heezen, B.C. 1978. The geology and evo- Volcanic Arc (central area), Chiapas Mexico. Journal lution of the Cayman Trench. Geological Society of of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 162, America Bulletin, 89, 1155–1174, https://doi.org/10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2006.12.009 1130/0016-7606(1978)89%3C1155:TGAEOT%3E2. Morgan, J.V., Gulick, S.P.S. et al. 2016. The formation of 0.CO;2 https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1978)89 peak rings in large impact craters. Science, 354 6314, ,1155:TGAEOT.2.0.CO;2 878–882, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aah6561 Pew, E. 1982. Seismic structural analysis of deformation in Müller, R.D., Royer, J.-Y. and Lawver, L.A. 1993. Revised the southern Mexican ridges, Unpublished Masters the- plate motions relative to hot spots from combined sis, University of Texas. Atlantic and Indian Ocean hot spot tracks. Geology, Pilcher, R.S., Murphy, R.T. and McDonough Ciosek, J. 21, 275–278, https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613 2014. Jurassic raft tectonics in the northeastern Gulf (1993)021,0275:RPMRTT.2.3.CO;2 of Mexico. Interpretation, 2, SM39–SM55, https:// Neill, I., Kerr, A.C., Hastie, A.R., Stanek, K.P. and Millar, doi.org/10.1190/INT-2014-0058.1 I.L. 2011. Origin of the Aves Ridge and Dutch–Vene- Pindell, J.L. 1985. Alleghanian reconstruction and the sub- zuelan Antilles: interaction of the Cretaceous ‘Great sequent evolution of the GoM, Bahamas, and Proto- Arc’ and Caribbean–Colombian Oceanic Plateau? Caribbean Sea. Tectonics, 4,1–39, https://doi.org/ Journal of the Geological Society, 168, 333–348, 10.1029/TC004i001p00001 https://doi.org/10.1144/0016-76492010-067 Pindell, J. 2018. Hydrocarbon exploration in the GoM and Nelson, S.A. and Gonzalez-Caver, E. 1992. Geology and Caribbean, a plate tectonic perspective. In: Hedberg: K–Ar dating of the Tuxtla volcanic field, Veracruz, Geology of Middle America – the GoM, Yucatán, Mexico. Bulletin on Volcanology, 55,85–96, https:// Caribbean, Grenada and Tobago Basins and Their doi.org/10.1007/BF00301122 Margins ‘Integration of the Geology of the Area from Nerlich, R., Clark, S.R. and Bunge, H.P. 2015. An outlet for the Southern Onshore of North America to the Northern Pacific mantle: the Caribbean Sea? Geophysical Onshore of South America’,2–5 July 2018, Siguenza, Research Journal, 7,59–65, ISSN 2214-2428, Guadalajara, Spain. AAPG Datapages/Search and Dis- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.grj.2015.06.001 covery Article 90330. Olsen, P.E. 1997. Stratigraphic record of the early Meso- Pindell, J.L. and Barrett, S.F. 1990. Geological evolution of zoic breakup of Pangea in the Laurasia-Gondwana rift the Caribbean region; a plate tectonic perspective. In: system. Annual Reviews of Earth and Planetary Sci- Dengo, G. and Case, J.E. (eds) The Caribbean Region. ence, 25, 337–401, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. Geological Society of America, Decade of North Amer- earth.25.1.337 ican Geology, H, 405–432. Olsen, P.E., Whiteside, J.H., LeTourneau, P.M. and Pindell, J.L. and Dewey, J.F. 1982. Permo-Triassic recon- Huber, P. 2005. Jurassic cyclostratigraphy and paleon- struction of Western Pangea and the evolution of the tology of the Hartford basin. In: Skinner, B.J. and GoM and Caribbean region. Tectonics, 1, 179–212, Philpotts, A.R. (eds) 97th New England Intercolle- https://doi.org/10.1029/TC001i002p00179 giate Geological Conference. Department of Geology Pindell, J.L. and Kennan, L. 2009. Tectonic evolution of the and Geophysics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, GoM, Caribbean and northern South America in the A4-1–A4-51. mantle reference frame: an update. The Geological Ortuño Álvarez, J.C. 2014. Nuevas Áreas de Oportunidad Society of London, Special Publications, 328,1–54. en el Jurásico Superior Oxfordiano para el Campo Pindell, J.L. and Miranda, E. 2011. Linked kinematic histo- Ek-Balam. Thesis, Universidad Nacional Autónoma ries of the Macuspana, Akal-Reforma, Comalcalco, and de México. deepwater Campeche Basin tectonic elements, southern Ortuño-Arzate, S., Ferket, H., Cacas, M.C., Swennen, R. GoM. Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies and Roure, F. 2003. Late Cretaceous carbonate reser- Transactions, 61, 353–361. voirs in the Cordoba Platform and Veracruz Basin, east- Pindell, J.L., Cande, S.C., Pitman, W.C., Rowley, D.B., ern Mexico. In: Bartolini, C., Buffl er, R.T. and Dewey, J.F., La Brecque, J. and Haxby, W. 1988. A Blickwede, J. (eds) The Circum-GoM and the plate-kinematics framework for models of Caribbean Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean

evolution. Tectonophysics, 155, 121–138, https://doi. Renne, P.R., Deino, A.L. et al. 2013. Time scales of critical org/10.1016/0040-1951(88)90262-4 events around the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary. Pindell, J.L., Kennan, L., Maresch, W.V., Stanek, K.P., Science, 339, 684–687, https://doi.org/10.1126/sci Draper, G. and Higgs, R. 2005. Plate-kinematics ence.1230492 and crustal dynamics of circum-Caribbean arc- Reuber, K., Pindell, J., Goswami, A., Campbell, C., Bliss, A. continent interactions, and tectonic controls on basin and Horn, B.W. 2019. Character of the Caribbean crust development in Proto-Caribbean margins. Geological revealed: initial observations of new and reprocessed Society of America, Special Papers, 394,7–52. seismic data. GeoGulf Transactions, 69, 407–414. Pindell, J.L., Kennan, L., Stanek, K.P., Maresch, W.V. and Révillon, S., Hallot, E., Arndt, N.T., Chauvel, C. and Dun- Draper, G. 2006. Foundations of GoM and Caribbean can, R.A. 2000. A complex history for the Caribbean evolution: eight controversies resolved. Geologica Plateau: petrology, geochemistry, and geochronology Acta, 4, 303–341. of the Beata Ridge, South Hispaniola. The Journal of Pindell, J.L., Maresch, W.V., Martens, U. and Stanek, K. Geology, 108, 641–661, https://doi.org/10.1086/ 2012. The Greater Antillean Arc: early Cretaceous 317953 origin and proposed relationship to Central American Rogers, R.D. and Mann, P. 2007. Transtensional deforma- subduction mélanges: implications for models of Carib- tion of the western Caribbean-North America plate bean evolution. International Geology Review, 54, boundary zone. In: Mann, P. (ed.) Geologic and Tec- 131–143, https://doi.org/10.1080/00206814.2010. tonic Development of the Caribbean Plate in Northern 510008 Central America. Geological Society of America Pindell, J., Miranda, C.E., Cerón, A. and Hernandez, L. Special Paper, 428,37–64, https://doi.org/10.1130/ 2016. Aeromagnetic map constrains Jurassic–early 2007.2428(03) Cretaceous synrift, break up, and rotational seafloor Rojas-Agramonte, Y., Kröner, A. et al. 2011. Timing and spreading history in the GoM 2016. In: Lowery, C., Evolution of Cretaceous Island Arc Magmatism in Cen- Snedden, J. et al. (eds) Mesozoic of the GoM. tral Cuba: Implications for the History of Arc Systems GCSSEPM Perkins–Rosen Research Conference, in the Northwestern Caribbean. The Journal of Geol- Transactions, Houston, TX. ogy, 119, https://doi.org/10.1086/662033 Pindell, J., Villagomez, D., Horn, B.W. and Garza, R.M. Romito, S. and Mann, P. 2020. Tectonic terranes underly- 2019. Middle Jurassic tectonic models for the GoM ing the present-day Caribbean plate: their tectonic ori- in light of new Bajocian ages for proximal salt gin, sedimentary thickness, subsidence histories and deposition. Salt Tectonics, Associated Processes, regional controls on hydrocarbon resources. Geological and Exploration Potential: Revisited 1989–2019. Society, London, Special Publications, 504, https:// GCSSEPM Annual Perkins–Rosen Research Confer- doi.org/10.1144/SP504-2019-221 ence,67–88. Rosencrantz, E. 1990. Structure and tectonics of the Yuca- Pindell, J., Molina-Garza, R. et al. 2020a. Provenance of tán Basin, Caribbean Sea, as determined from seismic the Miocene Nanchital conglomerate, western Chiapas reflection studies. Tectonics, 9, 1037–1059, https:// Foldbelt, Mexico: implications for reservoir sands in doi.org/10.1029/TC009i005p01037 the Sureste Basin, Greater Campeche Province. Geo- Ruiz, R.H., Carlos Caraveo, M., Horbury, A. and Ángel logical Society, London, Special Publications, 504, Saldaña, L. 2011. New insights into the eastern mar- https://doi.org4/10.114 /SP504-2020-12 gin of the Tuxpan Platform and its influence on deep- Pindell, J., Weber, B. et al. 2020b. Strontium Isotope Dat- water plays of the Gulf of Mexico. Gulf Coast ing of Evaporites and the Breakup of the GoM and Association of Geological Societies Transactions, Proto-Caribbean Seaway. Geological Society of Amer- 61, 391–401. ica, Special Papers, 546, https://doi.org/10.1130/ Ruiz-Osorio, A.S. 2018. Tectonostratigraphic Evolution 2020.2546(12) and Salt Tectonic Processes of the Isthmus Saline Pindell, J., Villagómez, D., Molina-Garza, R., Graham, R. Basin, South-eastern GoM: Implication for Petroleum and Weber, B. 2020c. A revised synthesis of the rift Systems and Exploration525. Unpublished PhD thesis, and drift history of the Gulf of Mexico and surrounding Royal Holloway University of London. regions in the light of improved age dating of the Salomón-Mora, L.E. 2013. Structure and Tectonics Middle Jurassic salt. Geological Society, London, Spe- of the Salt and Shale Provinces, Western GoM, Unpub- cial Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ lished doctoral thesis. University of Aberdeen, UK. SP504-2020-43 Salvador, A. 1991. Origin and development of the GoM Pszczółkowski, A. 1999. The exposed passive margin of basin. In: Salvador, A. (ed.) The GoM Basin: Boulder, North America in western Cuba. In: Mann, P. (ed.) Colorado. The Geological Society of America, The Sedimentary Basins of the World. Caribbean Basins, Geology of North America, J, 389–444. 4, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 93–121, https://doi.org/10. Sanchez, J., Mann, P. and Emmet, P.A. 2015. Late Creta- 1016/S1874-5997(99)80038-0 ceous-Cenozoic tectonic transition from collision to Pulham, A., Salel, J.-F. et al. 2019. The Age of Louann transtension, Honduran Borderlands and Nicaraguan Salt: insights form historic isotopic analysis in salt Rise, northwestern Caribbean Plate boundary. In: Nem- stocks from the Onshore Interior Salt Basins of the cok, M. and Hermeston, S. (eds) Transform Margins: Northern GoM. 35th Annual GCSSEPM Foundation Development, Controls and Petroleum Systems. Geo- Perkins-Rosen Research Conference,8–9 December logical Society, London, Special Publications, 431, 2016, Houston, TX. Salt Tectonics, Associated Pro- 273–298, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP431.3 cesses, and Exploration Potential: Revisted 1989– Sandford, J.C., Snedden, J.W. and Gulick, S.P.S. 2016. 2019, Abstract only, 64–66. The Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary deposit in the Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

I. Davison et al.

GoM: large-scale oceanic basin response to the Chicxu- Steier, A. 2018. Jurassic-Cretaceous stratigraphic and lub impact. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid structural evolution of the Northern Yucatán margin. Earth, 121, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JB012615 GoM Basin. Unpublished MSc thesis, University of Sandoval, M.I., Baumgartner, P.O., Escuder-Viruete, J., Houston. Gabites, J. and de Lépinay, B.M. 2015. Late Cretaceous Stern, R.J. and Dickinson, W.R. 2010. The GoM is a Juras- radiolarian biochronology of the Pedro Brand section, sic backarc basin. Geosphere, 6, 739–754, https://doi. Tireo Group, eastern Central Cordillera, Dominican org/10.1130/GES00585.1 Republic: a contribution to the stratigraphy of the Sun, L., Mann, P. and Bird, D. 2020. Integration of tectonic Caribbean Large Igneous Province. Revue de micropa- geomorphology and crustal structure across the active léontologie, 58,85–106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rev obliquely collisional zone on the island of Hispaniola, mic.2015.02.002 northeastern Caribbean. Geological Society, London, Sandwell, D.T., Müller, R.D., Smith, W.H.F., Garcia, E. Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ and Francis, R. 2014. New global marine gravity SP504-2019-242 model from CryoSat-2 and Jason-1 reveals buried tec- Steel, I. and Davison, I. 2020a. The basins and orogens of tonic structure. Science, 346,65–67, https://doi.org/ the Southern Gulf of Mexico. Geological Society, Lon- 10.1126/science.1258213 don, Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10. Schulte, P., Alegret, L. et al. 2010. The Chicxulub asteroid 1144/SP504-2020-2 impact and mass extinction at the Cretaceous- Steel, I. and Davison, I. 2020b. Geology of the Northern Paleogene boundary. Science, 327, 1214–1218, Caribbean and the Greater Antillean Arc. Geological https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1177265 Society, London, Special Publications, 504, https:// Serrano, L., Ferrari, L., Martínez, M.L., Petrone, C.M. and doi.org/10.1144/SP504-2020-3 Jaramillo, C. 2011. An integrative geologic, geochrono- Tarango, G. 1973. Estudio Estratigráfico de la Porción logic and geochemical study of Gorgona Island, Noroccidental de la Cuenca Morelos-Guerrero. Colombia: Implications for the formation of the Carib- Boletín Asociación Mexicana Geólogos Petroleros, bean Large Igneous Province. Earth and Planetary Sci- 190–234. ence Letters, 309, 324–336, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Tillman, T. and Mann, P. 2020. Regional hydrocarbon poten- epsl.2011.07.011 tial of the northeastern Caribbean based on integration Shann, M.V. 2020. The Sureste Basin of Mexico: its of sediment thickness and source rock maturity data. framework, future oil exploration opportunities and Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 504, key challenges ahead. Geological Society, London, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP504-2019-244 Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/10.1144/ Torrado, L., Carvajal-Arenas, L.C., Sanchez, J., Mann, P. SP504-2019-214 and Silva-Tamayo, J.C. 2019. Late Cretaceous–Ceno- Shaub, F.J., Buf fler, R.T. and Parsons, J.G. 1984. Seismic zoic sequence stratigraphic and paleogeographic con- stratigraphic framework of Deep Central GoM. AAPG trols on petroleum system elements of the Nicaraguan Bulletin, 68, 1790–1802. platform, western Caribbean Sea. AAPG Bulletin, 103, Sinton, C.W., Duncan, R.A., Storey, M., Lewis, J. and 1925–1962, https://doi.org/10.1306/12191817068 Estrada, J.J. 1998. An oceanic flood basalt province van Benthem, S., Govers, R., Spakman, W. and Wortel, R. within the Caribbean plate. Earth and Planetary Sci- 2013. Tectonic evolution and mantle structure of ence Letters, 155, 221–235, https://doi.org/10.1016/ the Caribbean. Journal of Geophysics Research and S0012-821X(97)00214-8 Solid Earth, 118, 3019–3036, https://doi.org/10. Snedden, J.W. and Galloway, W.E. 2019. The GoM Sedi- 1002/jgrb.50235 mentary Basin: Depositional Evolution and Petroleum Vasquez, R., Cossey, S., van Nieuwhuise, D., Davis, J., Applications. Cambridge University Press, 326. Castagna, J., Morales Leal, M. and Ramos Lopez, I. Snedden, J.W., Tinker, L.D. and Virdell, J. 2018. Southern 2014. New insights into the stratigraphic framework GoM Wilcox, source to sink: investigating and predict- and depositional history of the Paleocene and Eocene ing Paleogene Wilcox reservoirs in eastern Mexico Chicontepec Formation, onshore eastern Mexico. deepwater areas. AAPG Bulletin, 102, 2045–2074, AAPG Search and Discovery, article 30334. https://doi.org/10.1306/03291817263 Vazquez-Garcia, O. 2018. Tectonic synthesis of the deep- Snedden, J.W., Stockli, D.F. and Norton, I.O. 2020. water Lamprea thrust and foldbelt, offshore Burgos Palaeogeographical reconstruction and provenance of Basin, western GoM. Colorado Sch. Mine. Unpub- Oxfordian aeolian sandstone reservoirs in Mexico off- lished Master’s thesis. shore areas: comparison to the Norphlet aeolian system Vázquez-Meneses, M.E. 2005. Gravity Tectonics, Western of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Geological Society, Gulf of Mexico. PhD thesis, Department of Geology, London, Special Publications, 504, https://doi.org/ Royal Holloway University of London. 10.1144/SP504-2019-219 Villagomez, D. and Pindell, J. 2020. Speed, R.C. and Westbrook, G.K. 1984. Lesser Antilles arc Withjack, M.O., Schlische, R.W. and Olsen, P.E. 2012. and adjacent terranes. Marine Science International. Development of the passive margin of the passive Ocean Margin Drilling Program, Regional Atlas, 10, margin of Eastern North America: Mesozoic rifting, 27 sheets. igneous activity, and breakup. In: Roberts, D.G. and Stanek, K.P., Maresch, W.V. et al. 2019. Born in the Pacific Bally, A.W. (eds) Phanerozoic Rift Systems and Sedi- and raised in the Caribbean: construction of the Escam- mentary Basins, 1A, Elsevier, 301–335, https://doi. bray nappe stack, central Cuba. A review. European org/10.1016/B978-0-444-56356-9.00012-2 Journal of Mineralogy, 31,5–34, https://doi.org/10. Witt, C., Rangin, C., Andreani, L., Olaez, N. and Martinez, 1127/ejm/2019/0031-2795 J. 2012. The transpressive left-lateral Sierra Madre de Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2021

Introduction to the southern Mexican GoM and the Northern Caribbean

Chiapas and its buried front in the Tabasco plain (south- paleographic, paleoecologic and biostratigraphical ern Mexico). Journal of the Geological Society of importance in the Triassic. American Association of London, 169, 143–155, https://doi.org/10.1144/ Stratigraphic Palynologists, 24,8–20. 0016-76492011-024 Zarra, L., Hackworth, R. and Kahn, A. 2019. Wilcox chro- Wood, G.D. and Benson, D.G. 2000. The North American nostratigraphic framework update. AAPG Search and occurrence of the algal coenobium plaesiodictyon: Discovery, article 51616.