Sequence Stratigraphy as a “Concrete” Stratigraphic - SEPM Strata
Sequence Stratigraphy as a “Concrete” Stratigraphic - SEPM Strata
Sequence Stratigraphy as a “Concrete” Stratigraphic - SEPM Strata
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
others will be experiencing b<strong>as</strong>e level rise(normal regression). Thus the “start of forced<br />
regression” occurs at many different times during an interval of b<strong>as</strong>e level fall and the<br />
re<strong>as</strong>on for this is that the shoreline along its extent occupies are<strong>as</strong> with markedly different<br />
rates of subsidence. In fact, forced regression may not even occur during some times of<br />
b<strong>as</strong>e level fall when the subaerial unconformity never extends beyond the co<strong>as</strong>tal plain.<br />
Plint and Nummedal (2000) and Catuneanu (2006) characterize the BSFR <strong>as</strong> the<br />
clinoform representing the start of offlap along a given transect perpendicular to the<br />
shoreline. Because offlap (forced regression) will begin at very different times along a<br />
shoreline, there will be many such clinoforms developed parallel to depositional strike.<br />
Notably such theoretical time surfaces were never recognized or even considered to be<br />
present in the stratigraphic record until the Jervey Model w<strong>as</strong> published and thus have no<br />
empirical roots.<br />
Unfortunately, it is impossible to recognize “the first clinoform <strong>as</strong>sociated with offlap” in<br />
almost every conceivable geological setting. Such a time surface h<strong>as</strong> no observable<br />
characteristics which allow it to be recognized with any semblance of scientific<br />
objectivity. It occurs within a succession of coarsening-upward strata and no<br />
sedimentological variation or change in grain size trend, which might mark the surface<br />
occurs in the succession (Fig. 11). This lack of objective criteria for the recognition of<br />
such a surface over most of the b<strong>as</strong>in h<strong>as</strong> been noted by Posamentier and Allen (1999),<br />
Plint and Nummedal (2000) and Catuneanu (2006) among others. Posamentier and Allen<br />
(1999, p.90) state “it exists only <strong>as</strong> a chronohorizon, .. precise identification .. can be<br />
limited”. Plint and Nummedal (2000, p. 5) note that such a time surface is “difficult or<br />
impossible to recognize in outcrops or well logs”. Catuneanu (2006, p.129) admits “the<br />
b<strong>as</strong>al surface of forced regression .. h<strong>as</strong> no physical expression in a conformable<br />
succession of shallow water deposits”. Thus it is widely accepted that the BSFR is a<br />
theoretical surface (or set of surfaces) which h<strong>as</strong> no physical attributes to allow its<br />
objective recognition in well exposed sections or in core.<br />
42