Abstract

AbstractThis study highlights three‐dimensional variability of stratigraphic geometries in the ramp crest to basin of mixed carbonate–siliciclastic clinoforms in the Permian San Andres Formation. Standard field techniques and mapping using ground‐based lidar reveal a high degree of architectural complexity in channellized, scoured and mounded outer ramp stratigraphy. Development of these features was a function of location along the ramp profile and fluctuations in relative sea‐level. Deposition of coarse‐grained and fine‐grained turbidites in the distal outer ramp occurred through dilute and high‐density turbidity flows and was the result of highstand carbonate shedding within individual cycles. In this setting, high‐frequency cycles of relative sea‐level are interpreted on the basis of turbidite frequency, lateral extent and composition. Submarine siliciclastic sediment bypass during lowstand cycles resulted in variable degrees of siliciclastic preservation. Abundant siliciclastic material is preserved in the basin and distal outer ramp as point‐sourced lowstand wedges and line‐sourced early transgressive blankets. In mounded topography of the outer ramp, siliciclastic preservation is minimal to absent, and rare incised channels offer the best opportunity for recognition of a sequence boundary. Growth of mounded topography in the outer ramp began with scouring, followed by a combination of bioherm construction, fusulinid mound construction and isopachous draping. Intermound areas were then filled with sediment and continued mound growth was prevented by an accommodation limit. Mound growth was independent of high‐frequency cycles in relative sea‐level but was dependent on available accommodation dictated by low‐frequency cyclicity. Low‐angle ramp clinoforms with mounded topography in the outer ramp developed during the transgressive part of a composite sequence. Mound growth terminated as the ramp transformed into a shelf with oblique clinoform geometries during the highstand of the composite sequence. This example represents a ramp‐to‐shelf transition that is the result of forcing by relative sea‐level fluctuations rather than ecologic or tectonic controls.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.