FACIES MODELS REVISITED

Edited by:
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, 1201 Lake Robbins Drive, The Woodlands, Texas 77380, U.S.A.
AND
ROGER G. WALKER
Roger Walker Consulting Inc., 83 Scimitar View NW, Calgary, Alberta T3L 2B4, Canada

Copyright 2006 by
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology)

Laura J. Crossey and Donald S. McNeill, Editors of Special Publications

SEPM Special Publication 84

Tulsa, Oklahoma, U.S.A. September, 2006

 SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology) is an international not-for-profit Society based in Tulsa,
Oklahoma, U.S.A.. Through its network of international members, the Society is dedicated to the
dissemination of scientific information on sedimentology, stratigraphy, paleontology, environmental
sciences, marine geology, hydrogeology, and many additional related specialties.

The Society supports members in their professional objectives by publication of two major scientific journals, the
Journal of Sedimentary Research (JSR) and PALAIOS, in addition to producing technical conferences, short courses,
and Special Publications. Through SEPM's Continuing Education, Publications, Meetings, and other programs,
members can both gain and exchange information pertinent to their geologic specialties.

For more information about SEPM, please visit www.sepm.org.

ISBN 1-56576-121-9
© 2006 by
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology)
6128 E. 38th Street, Suite 308
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74135-5814, U.S.A.
Printed in the United States of America
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED

Henry W. Posamentier and Roger G. Walker, Editors

CONTENTS

Facies models revisited: Introduction

ROGER G. WALKER .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Eolian facies models

NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY .............................................................................................................................................................................. 19

Fluvial facies models: Recent developments

JOHN S. BRIDGE ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 85

Estuarine and incised-valley facies models

RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE, AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN. ................................................................................................ 171

Deltas
JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA ................................................................................................................................................................ 237

A reexamination of facies models for clastic shorelines

H. EDWARD CLIFTON ............................................................................................................................................................................ 293

Facies models revisited: Clastic shelves

JOHN R. SUTER ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 339

Deep-water turbidites and submarine fans

HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER ..................................................................................................................... 399

Index ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 521

 FACIES MODELS REVISITED 1

FACIES MODELS REVISITED

ROGER G. WALKER
Roger Walker Consulting Inc., 83 Scimitar View NW, Calgary, Alberta T3L 2B4, Canada
e-mail: walkerrg@telus.net

ABSTRACT: The papers contained on this CD mostly originate from a session at the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Canadian Society of
Petroleum Geologists, repeated at the 2004 Dallas AAPG Meeting. The theme of both sessions was “Facies Models Revisited”, to see what
sort of progress had been made since the third (1992) edition of Facies Models, published by the Geological Society of Canada.
During the ten years between 1992 and 2002, there has been considerable progress in the understanding of modern and ancient
depositional environments. This additional complexity makes modeling much more difficult, and raises the problem of whether
modeling still serves a purpose. The original reasons for creating facies models still exist—a model is a point of comparison, it is a guide
for further observations, it serves as a basis for hydrodynamic interpretation, and most importantly, it acts as a predictor in new
situations.
Using submarine fans as an example, it is clear that progress during the last ten years (particularly in 3-D seismic) has highlighted
the inadequacy of all pre-existing models—indeed, no comprehensive models have been proposed since the mid eighties. Yet with
continued and increasing exploration in submarine fan systems, predictive models are even more necessary. The traditional approach,
of distilling the features that modern and ancient systems have in common, is extremely difficult (and probably naive) in such diverse
and complex systems. Instead, it is necessary to identify all of the constituent building blocks of submarine fans (channels, point bars,
levees, splays, frontal lobes and so on), and try to identify the salient features of each. New models for particular situations can be
constructed by examining the relationships of the constituent building blocks. For example, sinuous channels, levees and splays may
be closely related in space, whereas frontal lobes are unlikely to be related to sinuous leveed channels (except for the channel that
ultimately feeds the lobe). A three-dimensional reconstruction can therefore be made by examining the building blocks that are closely
and commonly related, and also using information from the building blocks that are seldom or never found in juxtaposition.
These principles, discussed above for submarine fans, can be applied to all depositional environments, at all scales. The ideas are
elaborated in this introductory paper, and can be seen in the other contributions to this CD.

INTRODUCTION controlling physical processes of the elements represented in

“Facies Models”, a publication of the Geological Association
of Canada, first appeared in 1979 (Walker, 1979), with second and
third editions in 1984 and 1992 respectively (Walker, 1984; Walker
and James, 1992). In 2002, the Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists organized a session at their annual meeting entitled
“Facies Models Revisited”. The idea was to review progress in
facies modeling during the ten years since publication of the third
edition of “Facies Models” (Walker and James, 1992). The all-day
session was well received, and SEPM requested that a similar
session be organized at the annual AAPG meeting in Dallas (2004).
This CD includes most of the papers presented in Dallas. We
have taken advantage of the CD format by including abundant
full color illustrations of the examples discussed. The papers on
this CD cover clastic sediments only, and they are more compre-
hensive than the reviews in “Facies Models”. This partly reflects
the advances made during the last ten years, with increasing
recognition of the complexity and variability of depositional
environments.
This paper is organized in terms of increasing scale and
complexity. The concept of facies will be introduced first, fol-
lowed by facies associations and facies successions. Then the
stage is set for a discussion of facies models, with a final discus-
sion of future approaches to modeling.
FACIES AND FACIES MODELING
Facies modeling, as understood today, involves a synthesis of
information from ancient and recent depositional environments,
in an effort to understand the nature, scale, heterogeneity, and
each environment. The object is to identify the salient features of
recent sediments and ancient rocks, such that these features can
be identified, combined, and distilled into models that character-
ize that particular environment. Once a model is available, how-
ever simple and basic, it can be used to further our understanding
of natural systems. Perhaps the primary use is in the prediction
and interpretation of sandbodies in oil and gas reservoirs, but
increasing applications can be found in the movement of ground-
water through clastic sediments, and in environmental studies.
Facies models also play an important role in the understanding,
prediction and amelioration of coastal erosion, and Hurricane
Katrina in 2005 emphasizes the importance of incorporating
isolated extreme events into the formulation of facies models—
this is a topic that has been underemphasized and is in need of
further development.
Facies
The concept of facies is a very old one, and was introduced
into geology by Nicholas Steno in 1669. It implied the entire
aspect of a part of the earth’s surface during a certain interval of
geological time (see Teichert, 1958). The modern usage was
introduced by Gressly (1838), implying the sum total of the
lithological and paleontological aspects of a stratigraphic unit.
Translations of Gressly’s extended definition are given by
Teichert (1958) and Middleton (1973). The linkage of modern
and ancient environments probably dates back to Johannes
Walther in 1893. He suggested that “the most satisfying genetic
explanations of ancient phenomena were by analogy with mod-
ern geological processes” (quoted by Middleton, 1973, p. 981).

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 1–17.
2 ROGER G. WALKER
Facies—A Working Definition
The most useful modern working definition of the term
“facies” was given by Middleton (1978), who noted that:
“the more common (modern) usage is exemplified by de
Raaf et al. (1965) who subdivided a group of three forma-
tions into a cyclical repetition of a number of facies distin-
guished by “lithological, structural and organic aspects
detectable in the field”. The facies may be given informal
designations (“Facies A” etc.) or brief descriptive designa-
tions (“laminated siltstone facies”) and it is understood
that they are units that will ultimately be given an environ-
mental interpretation; but the facies definition is itself
quite objective and based on the total field aspect of the
rocks themselves… . The key to the interpretation of facies
is to combine observations made on their spatial relations
and internal characteristics (lithology and sedimentary
structures) with comparative information from other well-
studied stratigraphic units, and particularly from studies
of modern sedimentary environments”.
The term facies can be used in both a descriptive and an
interpretive sense. The definition above defines only the descrip-
tive facies. However, it may be useful, as a quick means of
communication, to tell a friend that you worked on a “fluvial
facies”. It is understood that you have made an interpretation of
the rocks you worked on, and that the term “fluvial facies”
encompasses a constellation of features including (in the fluvial
example) sharp-based fining-upward successions with lags at
their bases, thin siltstones with root traces, abundant trough and
planar tabular cross bedding, and the absence of marine indica-
tors. It is normally obvious from the context whether the term
facies is being used in a descriptive or an interpretive sense.
Facies Modeling
Although the term facies is old, the concept of facies modeling
is much younger. The term “facies model” was first used at a
“discussion” organized by Paul Potter at the Illinois State Geo-
logical Survey in 1958 (Potter, 1959). The purpose of the discus-
sion was to pool “the knowledge and experience of the group
concerning three topics”. These topics have a remarkably modern
ring to them, and could equally well have been chosen for a
research conference in 2005. They involved “the existence and
number of sedimentary associations; the possibility of establish-
ing a model for each association that would emphasize the areal
distribution of lithological units within it; and the exploration of
the spatial and sequential relations between the associations”.
Potter reports that a facies model “was defined as the distribution
pattern or arrangement of lithological units within any given
association” (a “sedimentary association” being “a collection of
commonly associated sedimentary attributes”). He continued
with another very up-to-date concept, that “in the early stages of
geological exploration, the function of the model is to improve
prediction of the distribution of lithological types”. One of Potter’s
conclusions remains true today—“the group discussion clearly
pointed out those areas of knowledge that permit generalization,
those areas in which problems are clearly recognized and stated
but for which definitive answers are not available, and the areas
in which the problems are not as yet clearly formulated”.
In recent correspondence, Potter (personal communication,
2005) referred back to his 1959 discussion. A “facies model” was
defined as “a commonly recurring sedimentary facies (that is
scale independent to a large degree)”—readers should note that
this is rather different from the modern usage, where a facies
model is on the scale of individual depositional environments
and may contain many different facies. However, Potter (per-
sonal communication, 2005) noted that his facies models were
created “to improve prediction and understanding of how the
different lithologies that form a recurring facies are put together”.
It is apparent that his “facies” are defined on a larger scale than
those discussed in this present paper. Finally, Potter noted that
“improved prediction largely depends on relating the facies to
basin geometry and understanding the internal transport system
of the facies; together both help us understand the ‘fabric’ of the
facies”.
Despite the very forward-looking ideas expressed at Potter’s
conference, the term “facies model” did not catch on, perhaps
because there was insufficient information regarding deposi-
tional environments and architectures to make much progress.
The term was reintroduced in 1975 in my paper “Generalized
facies models for resedimented conglomerates of turbidite asso-
ciation” (Walker, 1975). At the time, I was unaware of Potter’s
earlier usage of the term. Shortly afterward I used the term again
in the first edition of Facies Models (Walker, 1979), not realizing
that the term would become so widely used in sedimentary
geology. In the second edition of Facies Models (Walker, 1984), it
is clear that “facies” are the smaller-scale building blocks of the
sedimentary record. Facies can be organized into “facies se-
quences” (today we would use the term facies successions), and
various sequences and successions in particular depositional
environments can be synthesized into models for that environ-
ment. Important points established in Walker (1984) include (1)
“the term [facies] model has a generality that goes beyond a single
study of one formation”, and (2) the facies model is “a general
summary of a specific sedimentary environment, written in
terms that make the summary usable in at least four different
ways”. These ways are discussed in this present paper.
The models discussed in the first two editions of “Facies
Models” (Walker, 1979, 1984) were static, inasmuch as they used
information from modern environments as seen today. The third
edition (Walker and James, 1992) examined models in the light of
responses to sea level change. In the last ten years, there has been
a large amount of new work on modern depositional environ-
ments. Also, in many cases (particularly turbidite systems) an
entirely new dimension has been added through 3-D seismic
studies. Consequently, the first questions to be asked at the Calgary
meeting in 2002 concerned the construction of facies models given
the size and diversity of the data base, and the appropriateness of
using such models in an increasingly complex world.
One of the themes of the Dallas symposium (2004) was to
examine these questions, and perhaps to shift the emphasis onto
the individual depositional elements within environments, and
the study of how these elements fit together laterally and verti-
cally. For example, submarine fans may be too complex for
simple models of entire fans—nevertheless, most fans contain
similar elements (e.g., channel fills, splays, levees, frontal lobes
etc.) which can be stacked in various ways depending on relative
sea level fluctuations, local tectonics, variations in sediment
supply and other internal and external factors. Thus the various
descriptive entities have been reduced to the depositional-ele-
ment level, rather than the scale of the entire environment (sub-
marine fan, delta, shoreface etc.).
The best models embody large amounts of information from
as many examples as possible, modern and ancient. In generaliz-
ing this information, the resulting models can serve as reference
points for interpretations of new situations and examples, and as
a basis for making predictions from limited amounts of data in
new situations. The predictive aspects of facies models are impor-
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED 3

tant in subsurface exploration for oil, gas, and minerals, and,

increasingly, for studying and predicting the movement of ground
water through relatively unconsolidated surficial materials. In all
cases, the geometry and connectedness of the reservoirs or aqui-
fers is directly related to the original depositional environments.
Facies modeling can now be regarded as a mature science. The
basic facies, facies organizations and depositional controls of the
major environments are fairly well understood (perhaps with the
exception of submarine fans). However, depositional environ-
ments can always be subdivided (deltas, for example) and smaller-
scale models proposed for the various parts of larger-scale envi-
ronments (distributary mouth bars, interdistributary bays, pro-
grading beach ridge systems, etc.).

SCALES AND METHODS FOR DEFINING FACIES

Facies can be defined on many different scales. Whenever a
vertical stratigraphic section or core is measured, decisions have to
be made about what to include in each measurement unit. A simple
section might consist of 2 m of sandstone overlain by 2 m of shale.
The sandstone and shale units are different facies (they have a
different “aspect”), and the defining characteristic is their lithol-
ogy. In more detail, it might be decided to measure 1 m of cross-
bedded sandstone, 1 m of ripple cross-laminated sandstone, and 2
m of shale. In this case, the different sandstone facies are defined by
their sedimentary structures. It follows that the scale of subdivision
of a stratigraphic section into facies depends on:

1. the purpose of the study

2. the time available to make the measurements, and
3. the abundance of descriptive features in the rocks.
Purpose of the Study
If the objective of a study is a routine description and interpre-
tation on a large scale, the scale of facies subdivision may be fairly
broad. In contrast, if the goal is a detailed analysis and interpre-
tation of a thin stratigraphic unit, perhaps with a view to refining
cm scale
FIG. 1.—Ripple cross lamination. Note symmetry of ripples (red
arrows), but unidirectional cross lamination (to the right,
yellow arrows). Symmetry suggests wave action, and cross
lamination suggests a superimposed unidirectional flow. These
are combined-flow ripples with relatively long periods of
mud deposition between sand emplacement. Discontinuity
of ripple layers suggests very limited sand supply. Pennsyl-
vanian, Devon, England.
FIG. 2.—Ripple cross lamination. Red arrows show cross lamina-
tion dipping left, and blue arrows show lamination dipping
right. Note mudstone drapes (yellow arrows) between ripple
cross-laminated layers. Reversing flow directions with drapes
between layers suggests a tidal influence. Cretaceous, south-
ern Alberta. Core is 10 cm in diameter.
an existing model, the scale of facies subdivision must be much
more detailed. As an example, compare Figures 1, 2 and 3. They
all could be described as “ripple cross lamination”. However,
Figure 1 shows symmetrical ripple profiles with unidirectional
cross lamination, and can be interpreted as combined-flow ripples
(wave plus current). Figure 2 shows ripple cross lamination
alternating with thin mudstone drapes. The cross lamination is
directed both to the right and the left, and the assemblage of
features suggests alternating tidal currents with mud deposited
during slack tides. Figure 3 shows ripple cross lamination with-
out mudstone layers. Lamination is preserved on the ripple
crests, and sets of ripples climb on the backs of each other. This
lamination formed during active deposition from suspension,
perhaps during a waning flood stage.
These observations go beyond “ripple cross lamination”, and
involve sand/mud ratios, continuity of lamination within the
ripples and preservation (or not) of the entire ripple form. If the
purpose of the study is a detailed interpretation of sedimentary
environments, distinguishing Figures 1, 2 and 3 as different facies
is important. In a broader study, lumping all three Figures
together into one “ripple cross-laminated facies” might be suffi-
cient.
Time Available for the Study
With an entire day available for the description of one 18 m
core, it will be possible to subdivide the core into many different
4 ROGER G. WALKER

facies using varied and subtle criteria to distinguish the various

facies. In contrast, if a thick unit has to be studied over a wide area
in only two weeks of field work, the facies subdivisions will
necessarily be broader. This again is illustrated in Figures 1, 2, and
3, where more time would be necessary to distinguish and
describe the details of the ripple cross lamination, as opposed to
lumping all three figures together as “ripple cross laminated”.
The importance of time available and purpose of study are
also illustrated in Figure 4. With little time and a routine descrip-
tion on a large scale, the sandier-upward succession (red arrow)
could be described as one facies—hummocky cross-stratified
sandstones interbedded with bioturbated mudstones. If more
time were available and more detail required, the succession
could be divided into three different facies (yellow arrows), a
lower muddier facies, a central facies in which the sandstone/
shale ratio is about 1, and an upper facies consisting almost
entirely of sandstone.

Descriptive Features

FIG. 3.—Ripple cross lamination. Red arrows indicate preserva-
tion of lamination over the ripple crests, and yellow arrows
indicate forward movement and aggradation of the ripples.
This climbing-ripple cross lamination suggests rapid deposi-
tion from suspension during ripple formation, with no pauses
for mud deposition. Pleistocene, southern Ontario. Coin is 2.2
cm in diameter.
The degree of subdivision always depends on the abundance
of features in the rocks. A thick succession of interbedded sand-
stone and shales (thin-bedded turbidites) will be difficult to
subdivide because of the monotonous nature of the succession. In
contrast, a complexly interbedded succession of mudstones and
sandstones with a wide variety of sedimentary structures and
trace fossils, and various scales of interbedding of the lithologies

FIG. 4.—Sandier-upward succession from the Cardium Formation (Cretaceous), Blackstone River, Alberta. Person circled for scale.
Red arrow shows overall sandier-upward succession, and yellow arrows suggest how the succession could be subdivided into
a lower muddier portion, a main central portion characterized by interbedded sandstones and mudstones, and an upper
dominantly sandy portion.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED
(as might occur in an estuary fill), will allow detailed facies
subdivision on a small scale. Figures 1, 2 and 3 clearly present a
wealth of descriptive features on a small scale, whereas Figure 5
presents few descriptors within the thick package of thin-bedded
sandstones and shales.
Subdivision of a stratigraphic section into facies should not
be undertaken before gaining familiarity with the complete
section. It will then be apparent how much variability there is,
and how many facies should be defined to describe the unit
adequately. Most facies studies to date have relied on qualita-
tively assessed combinations of characteristic sedimentary struc-
tures and trace fossils (e.g., de Raaf et al., 1965; Williams and
Rust, 1969; Wilson, 1975; Cant and Walker, 1976; Scholle et al.,
1983; Walker, 1983). Statistical methods have also been used,
particularly where there is agreement among workers as to the
important quantifiable descriptive parameters—for example,
the proportions of different types of clasts in carbonate rocks
(Imbrie and Purdy, 1962; Klovan, 1964; Harbaugh and
Demirmen, 1964; Harbaugh and Merriam, 1968). Statistical
methods are less suited to clastic rocks, where the most impor-
tant descriptors (sedimentary structures and trace fossils) can-
not easily be quantified.
The facies concept can be extended beyond observable rock
types. Different seismic characteristics have given rise to various
seismic facies (Weimer, 1989), and different well log characteris-
tics have also given rise to log facies (Fig. 6). The gamma ray
FIG. 5.—Thin-bedded classical turbidites, Devonian, South Australia. Stratigraphic top to left. The succession is characterized by its
homogeneity, with almost no change in facies from bottom to top.
5
profile in Fig. 6A shows a progressive upward shift to the left,
indicating “cleaner” rocks with fewer clays—the profile is com-
monly described as cleaning-upward, or more interpretively,
“sandier-upward”. The profiles in Figs. 6B and C are very similar,
and both show abrupt shifts to the left in the gamma ray profiles,
rather than the progressive shift seen in Fig. 6A. The profile is
commonly described as “blocky”. The log facies of Figs. 6A and
6B are the same, and differ from the log facies of Fig. 6A.
However, similar log facies may have very different interpreta-
tions—the blocky profiles can indicate sharp-based channel-
filling sandstones, or sharp-based forced-regressive shorefaces.
Without other information, preferably core control, the two pos-
sibilities cannot be distinguished.
The pitfalls involved in the interpretation of such log facies are
highlighted by the fact that channel sandbodies and shoreface
sandbodies commonly trend at right angles to each other.
FACIES ASSOCIATIONS
In many studies, facies may have been defined in a detailed
way on a small scale, with minor subtle differences between the
facies (e.g., Walker, 1983). This subdivision may result in a facies
scheme where the descriptive differences outstrip our ability to
interpret the differences. It is therefore useful in such studies to
combine closely related facies into facies associations, or “groups of
facies genetically related to one another and which have some
6 ROGER G. WALKER

05-03-50-8W5 07-20-51-11W5 05-28-09-09W4

B C

FIG. 6.—Gamma-ray logs from three locations in Alberta. A shows a “cleaner-upward” succession, whereas B and C show
examples of a blocky gamma-ray signature. Scale in meters. Interpretations: 6A is a prograding shoreface from the Cretaceous
Second White Specks, 6B is a forced regressive shoreface from the Cretaceous Cardium Formation, and 6C is a channel fill from
the Cretaceous Viking Formation.

environmental significance” (Collinson, 1969). These larger-scale
facies associations have also been termed architectural elements
(Allen, 1983), denoting the building blocks of the various deposi-
tional systems. It will be suggested later that the definition of
architectural elements is fundamental to the construction of
improved facies models in situations where the complexity of the
system (e.g., deltas) appears to discourage the development of
simple models.
It is now clear that some facies and architectural elements
occur universally, in recent and ancient sediments, and in many
different basins around the world. The first universal facies
scheme was proposed for turbidites (Mutti and Ricci Lucchi,
1972), and Miall (1977, 1985) has suggested a universal scheme for
fluvial deposits. For example, Miall’s (1985) channel architectural
element (CH) consists of any combination of a series of defined
lithofacies which communally have a distinctive elongate chan-
nel geometry; it is part of the architecture of almost all modern
rivers and can be recognized in most ancient fluvial deposits.
Other examples of universal facies include:
1. sharp-based hummocky cross-stratified sandstones inter-
bedded with bioturbated mudstones (Fig. 7) (storm-domi-
nated shelf deposits),
2. giant (20 m +) sets of planar tabular cross bedding (Fig. 8)
(eolian environments),
3. thin-bedded turbidites with climbing ripples, convolute
lamination, and ripped-up mud clasts (Fig. 9) (the “CCC
turbidites” of Walker, 1985, interpreted as levee deposits),
and
4. cross bedding with bundles of mudstone drapes indicative
of deposition in a tidally dominated environment (Fig. 10)
(Visser, 1980).
Generally, the subtle differences that enable individual facies
to be defined may be the result of many small-scale local factors
affecting deposition. Architectural elements are the larger-scale
components of a depositional system—they will tend to be more
general in nature, less influenced by local factors, and hence more
universal in their application.
FACIES SUCCESSIONS
This term implies that certain facies properties change pro-
gressively and systematically either vertically or horizontally.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED
FIG. 7.—Interbedded sandstones and mudstones, Kenilworth Formation, Book Cliffs, Utah. Red arrows show convex-upward
stratification typical of hummocky cross stratification (HCS), and black arrows show low-angle curved intersections of
stratification, also characteristic of HCS.
Examples include changing proportions of sand, giving rise to a
sandier-upward (or muddier-upward) succession (Fig. 4), chang-
ing grain size giving rise to a fining-upward (or coarsening-
upward) succession, or changing bed thickness giving rise to a
thickening-upward (or thinning-upward) succession. The im-
portance of recognizing such successions is that they place indi-
vidual facies into a context. Some individual facies, for example
medium-scale cross bedding (Fig. 11), may be descriptively and
hydrodynamically identical, but may actually represent different
depositional environments—medium-scale cross bedding can
form in many settings, including meandering or braided rivers,
tidal inlets, a shoreface dominated by alongshore currents, or in
an open marine tidal setting. The key to distinguishing the
environments lies in the context of the facies in vertical and
horizontal succession—for example, the shoreface cross bedding
might overlie offshore mudstones and be overlain in turn by
beach and nonmarine deposits. Thus the succession contributes
important information that the individual facies cannot.
The relationship between depositional environments in space
and the resulting stratigraphic successions developed through
time was first emphasized by Johannes Walther (1894, translated
in Middleton 1973) in his Law of the Correlation of Facies. Walther
stated that:
“it is a basic statement of far reaching significance that only
those facies and facies areas can be superimposed primarily
which can be observed beside each other at the present time”.
Application of this law suggests that in a vertical facies
succession a gradational transition (Fig. 12) from one facies to
another implies that the two facies represent environments that
were once adjacent laterally. If the contacts between facies or
facies associations are sharp and/or erosional (Fig. 12), there is no
way of knowing whether the two vertically adjacent facies repre-
sent environments that were once laterally adjacent. For example,
7
a fall of relative sea level may force a shoreface to prograde
rapidly onto an erosion surface, placing the shoreface sharply
and erosionally on shelf bioturbated mudstones. The erosion
surface represents the non-preservation of inner-shelf and shelf–
shoreface transitional environments. Thus sharp breaks between
facies, marked for example by channel scours, thin bioturbated
horizons (Glossifungites surfaces) or thin pebble lags, may signify
fundamental changes in depositional environments, and per-
haps the beginning of new cycles of sedimentation (de Raaf et al.,
1965). Many of these sharp breaks (bounding discontinuities) are
now used to separate stratigraphic sequences and allostratigraphic
units (discussed below).
The relationships between facies within facies successions can
be shown qualitatively in facies relationship diagrams (Fig. 13; de
Raaf et al., 1965) or tabulated to show the numbers of observed
transitions. These numbers can be converted to probabilities, in a
technique known as Markov chain analysis. This technique is not
used as commonly as it once was, but interested readers are
referred to the second edition of Facies Models (Walker, 1984;
Harper, 1984).
FACIES MODELS
A facies model can be defined as a general summary of a
specific depositional environment, incorporating information
from recent sediments and ancient rocks. Two problems are
immediately apparent: scale and interpretation. The problem of
scale refers to the environment to be modeled—do we need a
model for barrier-island and lagoon systems (large scale), or
should we be separately modeling the lagoons and the shoreface
dunes of the barrier itself (small scale)? A simple answer
suggests that both scales need modeling. The smaller scale is
easier to define, describe, and distill, and a group of related
small-scale models can probably be combined into a larger-
scale model.
8 ROGER G. WALKER
FIG. 8.—Giant (20 m) planar-tabular cross bedding from the Permian White Rim Sandstone, Canyonlands, Utah. Scale suggests an
eolian origin for the cross bedding.
The problem of interpretation concerns the integration of data
on ancient rocks into the facies model. For example, it is easy to
choose several examples of modern wave-dominated shorefaces
and compare their characteristics—the data set is homogeneous.
However, incorporating data from ancient sediments into this
facies model involves making interpretations—we may be cor-
rect in many of the examples we choose, but some tide-dominated
shorefaces may end up in our data set, which would then be less
homogeneous.
In all modeling, a philosophical assumption must be made,
that there is system and order in Nature, and that geologists can
identify and agree upon a limited number of depositional envi-
ronments and systems. In a well argued alternative view,
Anderton (1985, p. 33) suggests that “if, like me, you have a more
nihilistic view of life, the universe and everything, then you
have to admit an infinite number of environments, facies and
models”.
For those of us who seek order in Nature, and who see value
in building facies models, the principles, methods, and motives
are shown in Figure 14. In this figure, a turbidite / submarine fan
example has been used—readers should understand that in order
to present the basic ideas the details of submarine fan systems
have been very oversimplified.
The first assumption is that many modern submarine fan
systems have been studied, and many ancient turbidite systems
studied and interpreted. As a result of this work, we then
assume that we can make some general statements about how
20 m
such systems operate, rather than making statements only about
each individual example (see turbidite contribution by
Posamentier and Walker on this CD). These general statements
are obviously more powerful than countless statements involv-
ing only individual examples. The process of extracting this
general information is shown in Figure 14, using some modern
fans (Rhone, Amazon and Mississippi) and some ancient tur-
bidite examples (Wheeler Gorge, Frigg fan). Obviously, a better
generalization (model) would result if more examples were
used.
The entire wealth of information is first distilled, boiling away
the local details and concentrating the important features that all
examples share. The features that all examples share (in this case,
perhaps the monotonous alternations of parallel-bedded sand-
stones and shales) may be relatively easy to agree upon, but in
many cases separating local detail from general principles may be
more contentious. In this case, the conglomerates of Wheeler
Gorge are quite unlike the fine-grained sheetlike turbidites of the
outer parts of Mississippi Fan.
Answering these questions involves a thorough knowledge
of the literature along with extensive individual experience,
judgement, and discussion with other workers with different
experiences. Models are constantly being refined as more ex-
amples become available, as more distinct architectural elements
are recognized, and as depositional processes become better
understood. This is shown in Figure 14 by the feedback loop from
distillation to model, from model to comparison with more local
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED 9

A B C
FIG. 9.—CCC turbidites from the Cretaceous Lange Formation, offshore mid-Norway. In A, note convoluted parallel and ripple cross
lamination. In B, the ripple cross lamination becomes progressively more convoluted upward. In C, the ripples are climbing
(arrow) and convoluted. Core is 10 cm in diameter.

examples, and incorporation of those new examples into the data
base. This in turn demands renewed distillation, and so on.
CHOICE OF ENVIRONMENTS TO MODEL
Facies models have traditionally been formulated for deposi-
tional systems that form obvious geographical entities—for ex-
ample, meandering rivers or deltas. In many environments, and
deltas are a good example, it is clear that many different deposi-
tional processes combine to give many different depositional
results. Thus deltas may be wave dominated, river dominated, or
tide dominated, all of which have very different geometries and
sandbody distributions (Bhattacharya, this CD). Yet they all
conform to one of the classic definitions of a delta, as a “river-fed
depositional system that results in an irregular progradation of
the shoreline” (Scott and Fisher, 1969).
The results of nearly fifty years of research (since publication
of “Recent Sediments, Northwest Gulf of Mexico”; Shepard et al.,
1960) have suggested that deltas may be too big and too complex
for the formulation of good facies models. Variability within
river-influenced deltas such as the Mississippi is enormous,
embracing many smaller environments that may deserve their
own models (distributary mouth bars, bays, distributary chan-
nels and levees, crevasses splays, beaches and barriers, lagoons,
and offshore shoals, among others). It should also be emphasized
that the basis of many facies models consists of the work done
during long periods of “normal” conditions. Hurricane Katrina
in 2005 may have altered the Mississippi Delta in ways that will
be preserved and may be recognized in the geological record—
these effects will need to be built into future deltaic models.
Similar comments concerning facies complexity and the impor-
tance of rare catastrophic events can be made about submarine
fans and fluvial systems.
Depositional Elements Rather Than Environments
Instead of modeling obvious geographical entities, it may be
preferable to model discrete depositional elements. These ele-
ments may be found in several geographical settings. An obvious
example is the shoreface depositional element. It is controlled by
alongshore sediment supply under the influence of shoaling waves.
Variability of process, for example the relative importance of fair-
weather and storm processes, combined with the rate and caliber
of sediment supply, combine to give rise to a closely related set of
depositional products. If the immediate snapshot of the shoreface
at one time is combined with evolution of the depositional system
through time, emphasizing relative sea-level fluctuations, the depo-
sitional products may be gradationally based and sandier upward
(a normal prograding shoreface), or sharp based and sandy through-
out (the result of progradation during relative sea level fall—a
forced regressive sequence). Nevertheless, the shoreface is a rela-
tively easily defined and easily understood depositional element
(compared with the complexity of a delta). The shoreface element
occurs in several geographic environments, and contributes to
10 ROGER G. WALKER
FIG. 10.—Set of cross bedding 20 cm thick from Cretaceous sandstones of Leighton Buzzard, England. Note mudstone drapes on the
foresets (yellow arrows), and at least one paired set of drapes (red arrow) indicative of deposition in a tidal setting. The mudstone
drapes form during slack tides.
several geographically based traditional facies models—for ex-
ample, wave-dominated deltas, prograding strandplains, barrier
islands and transgressive shoreline systems. Other examples are
discussed in the individual contributions on this CD.
Another excellent example of depositional elements within a
specific depositional environment has been presented by Miall
(1977, 1985). In this fluvial example, a set of architectural elements
has been defined, using capital letters to designate grain sizes (G
for gravel, S for sand, etc.). Lower-case letters were used to
indicate sedimentary features (f for flat bedded, for example),
resulting architectural element designations such as Gf. Miall’s
catalog of elements for fluvial systems is very useful, particularly
for workers new to fluvial systems seeking guidance in what to
look for and what to describe. More experienced workers will be
sensitive to the possibility that there may be elements that do not
fall easily into Miall’s catalog.
Elements Remain Constant—
Geographic Environments Change Through Time
The shoreface depositional element discussed above remains
relatively constant through time. It progrades given sufficient
sediment supply, with details of the progradation being controlled
by wave and tidal processes, and changing relative sea level.
On a larger scale, geographically defined environments may
change dramatically through time, such that very few parts of
today’s snapshot may be preserved in the geological record.
Barrier islands form an excellent example (Fig. 15; see contribu-
tion by Boyd et al. on this CD), where one of the most obvious
parts of the system involves the foreshore and barrier superstruc-
ture (Fig. 15). However, Rampino and Sanders (1980) have shown
by detailed coring studies (Fig. 16) that during transgression the
sand from the foreshore and barrier superstructure is moved (1)
seaward by storm waves to form new nearshore sand ridges (Fig.
16, red arrow), and (2) landward into the lagoon as washover
facies (Fig. 16, blue arrow). In a transgressive setting, the barrier
itself is not preserved—the resulting sedimentary record is shown
in the black rectangle of Fig. 16, and consists of thin lagoonal and
washover deposits, sharply overlain by thin nearshore sand
ridges. Any attempt to model a geographically defined barrier
island and lagoonal system is bound to encounter severe prob-
lems of facies preservation. It will be more fruitful to identify the
various depositional elements of the system, to study the pro-
cesses that control them today, and the ways in which they will
(or will not) be preserved in the geological record. Our model, for
purposes of comparison and prediction (see below), may end up
as a “transgressive lagoon-washover” model (Fig. 16), rather than
a “barrier-island” model exemplified by Figure 15.
THE USES OF FACIES MODELS
There has been little or no discussion in the literature of the
original four uses of facies models proposed by Walker (1979,
1984; Walker and James, 1992). The generality embodied in a
model, as opposed to a summary of one particular example,
enables the model to assume four main functions (Fig. 14):
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED
FIG. 11.—Trough cross bedding, seen more or less parallel to flow direction (to the left), from the Cretaceous rocks in, Berry Gulch,
Colorado. 15 cm scale circled.
1. a norm, for purposes of comparison
2. a framework and guide for future observations
3. a predictor in new situations, and
4. a basis for interpretation
The Model As a Norm
Figure 17 shows a simple 2-D model of a fluvial fining-
upward succession. It was derived from data published by
Allen (1970) on more than one hundred examples of Devo-
nian fluvial successions in Britain, and redrawn to scale in
Figure 17. It is characterized by roughly equal proportions of
point-bar and vertical-accretion facies, both about 3 m thick,
and the entire fining-upward sequence can be considered as
a norm.
Let us then assume that during field work a new succession is
found with a 6-m thick point-bar succession and 3 m of vertical
accretion facies. By itself, this succession may be difficult to
interpret, but by comparison with the norm (Fig. 17) it is imme-
diately clear that the new point-bar succession is twice as thick as
the norm. This comparison opens new lines of thought and
interpretation—was the river unusually deep; was the rate of
subsidence unusually high; does the sandbody actually consist of
11
a stack of two 3-m-thick sandbodies? These are questions and
ideas that are possible only if the new example is compared with
a norm. A fourth question also arises: is the comparison valid, or
is an apple being compared with a norm for oranges? In the case
of Allen’s fluvial successions, the norm has probably been con-
structed from very homogeneous data. Comparisons with other
Devonian examples may be good, but comparisons with (say)
Cretaceous rivers from very high-accommodation settings may
be less useful.
The Model As a Framework for Observations
A good model summarizes all of the important descriptive
features of a particular system. For example, in Figure 17 the
fluvial fining-upward sequence contains a basal lag overlain
by various cross-bedded and parallel-laminated facies. These
in turn are overlain by ripple cross-laminated facies. The
vertical-accretion facies may contain root traces, desiccation
cracks, and caliche nodules. These are the basic descriptors of
this particular model, and they act as a guide for making
observations in new examples—is the succession the same; are
the proportions of facies the same; are any distinctive features
absent; or are there new features that are not included in the
current model? Miall’s (1977, 1985) fluvial depositional ele-
ments (Gf, etc.) are also excellent examples of a framework for
future observations.
12 ROGER G. WALKER

Sharp and/or erosive facies boundaries

Gradational facies boundaries

within successions

FIG. 12.—Cretaceous Mountain Park Formation, Alberta. Yellow arrows show three sandier-upward successions. Within these
successions, all of the facies boundaries are gradational. At the tops of the successions, contacts are sharp (yellow dotted lines).
At the horizon of the uppermost sandstone, the dotted lines show a sharp base and a sharp and erosional top (seen at right).

The Model As a Predictor
This is without question the most important function of any
facies model. The basic idea is very simple: given one new piece
of information, it may be possible (1) to assign that information to
a particular model, and therefore (2) use the model to predict the
rest of the system.
As an example, some thin-bedded turbidites are shown in
Figure 9. The sandstones are characterized by climbing ripples
and convolute lamination, features that are more abundant in
thin-bedded levee turbidites than in thin-bedded basin-plain
turbidites (Walker, 1985). We may therefore make a preliminary
interpretation, assigning the beds in Figure 9 to the levee of a
deep-sea channel. To make further predictions, we select a model
for deep-sea channels (see Posamentier and Walker on this CD).
The one new piece of information (thin-bedded levee facies), plus
the appropriate model, suggests a system involving back-of-
levee facies, channel-margin facies, channel-fill facies (perhaps
coarser sandstones interbedded with mudstones), and possible
channel “point-bar” facies with morphological scars as the point
bar has shifted in position as the channel migrated (Kolla et al.,
2001; Posamentier and Walker on this CD).
There are two equally important steps in using models as
predictors. The first involves the correct interpretation of the new
piece(s) of information. If thin-bedded levee turbidites were
incorrectly interpreted as distal basin-plain facies, the wrong
model might be chosen for prediction. It follows that the second
important step involves selection of an appropriate model. As
another example, let us assume that our new piece of information
consists of the lag and cross-bedded sandstones at the base of the
succession in Figure 17. The appropriate model would be a
meandering-river model—an inappropriate model would be a
braided-river model or a tidal-inlet model.
In many cases, it will be possible to test the predictions made
from the one new piece of information, perhaps by examining all
of the nearby outcrops. But if thin-bedded turbidites similar to
those in Figure 9 are also characteristic of one core from a Miocene
submarine fan in offshore West Africa, testing the prediction of a
nearby channel sandbody may involve millions of dollars of
drilling costs. Clearly, the new data must be interpreted as
carefully and accurately as possible, and the most appropriate
model used for prediction.
The Model As a Basis for Hydrodynamic Interpretation
This use of facies models was originally prompted by the idea
that one individual turbidite may be difficult to interpret, whereas
many turbidites combined into a model (the Bouma sequence,
1962) would give a more consistent and general basis for inter-
preting depositional processes (Harms and Fahnestock, 1965;
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED 13

cross-stratified sandstones interbedded with bioturbated

mudstones (Fig. 7), b) thin-bedded turbidites with climbing
ripples, convolute lamination, and ripped-up mud clasts
(Fig. 9), c) sets of cross stratification thicker than 10 m (Fig.
8), that may be either planar-tabular or trough shaped (the
latter commonly with very long toesets), and d) cross-
bedded sandstones with paired mudstone drapes on the
foresets (Fig. 10). There are more and more examples of
universal facies being recognized, and these will form the
basic building blocks of the sedimentary record.

2. Modern processes, varying rates of sediment supply, and

fluctuations in relative sea level combine to form distinctive
depositional elements in recent sediments. Some of these
elements are also universal, and occur in many different
places around the world today. Examples include a)
shorefaces, b) eolian desert dune complexes, c) tidal inlet–
tidal delta systems, and d) lagoonal and barrier washover
systems. Many other examples could easily be added to this
list, but perhaps with the exception of desert dunes the
depositional elements tend to be smaller rather than larger
in scale, and homogeneous in character.

Granted these two “truths”, the future of modeling may lie in

FIG. 13.—Facies-relationship diagram from the Carboniferous
refining and agreeing upon the commonly occurring universal
Westward Ho! Formation, north Devon, England. Facies have
architectural elements in the geological record (a process akin to
been given descriptive names, and arrows show sharp and
distillation in Fig. 14). At the same time, there may be more
gradational facies contacts, and numbers indicate the occur-
refining and agreeing upon the combinations of processes that
rence of each transition. From de Raaf et al. (1965).

Walker, 1965). This interpretive usage of models is probably more

effective for small-scale models (the Bouma sequence for turbid-
ites), and less effective for large-scale systems (e.g., deltas). Also,
individual turbidity-current depositional processes are difficult Distill local examples
▼

to observe in modern oceans, whereas work over the last 20 years

in nonmarine and shallow-marine depositional environments
has added enormously to our understanding of depositional Make a model
processes. Models have not been used extensively as a basis for
hydrodynamic interpretation, and this is probably their least
useful aspect.
Comparison
FUTURE APPROACHES TO MODELING ▼

It was pointed out above that our knowledge of modern

environments has expanded tremendously in the last twenty-five
years (since the publication of the first edition of Facies Models).
Because of this, many modern environments may be perceived as
so complex that simple models and distillations may be impos- ▼
sible, inappropriate, or both. In the absence of models, however,
there will be no norms, and no bases for making predictions. In
the hope that modeling of any sort is preferable to anarchy, I
emphasize two basic “truths” from which we might proceed. Prediction
1. Individual, small-scale facies can be identified in ancient
rocks, as shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Associations of facies
that commonly occur laterally and vertically adjacent to each
other can be combined into facies associations, and these
associations (or architectural elements) form the basis for a
descriptive subdivision of the stratigraphic record. The na- FIG. 14.—Facies modeling, from Walker and James (1992). Note
ture of the bounding surfaces between associations/ele- the relationship between individual examples and their
ments is also important—they may be gradational, or sharp distillation into a general model. Note how new examples
and/or erosional (Fig. 12). It is becoming apparent that some can be compared with the model (the “norm”), and then
facies, facies associations, and architectural elements are incorporated into the general data base (feedback). The
universal (i.e., they occur in many different places, in all parts model also serves as a guide for making observations and as
of the geological record). Examples include a) hummocky a predictor in new situations.
14 ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 15.—Block diagram of a barrier-island and lagoonal depositional environment, from Reinson (1992). Note that this is a “snapshot
in time” and that the various environments shown in the diagram may not be preserved if the barrier progrades or is transgressed.
For the transgressive setting, see Figure 16.

Washover

Superstructure
Foreshore
Nearshore
ridges

FIG. 16.—Cross section of Cedar Beach, Long Island, New York. Barrier–lagoon system rests disconformably on Pleistocene diamictite
(blue, conglomerate–breccia symbols). The barrier cuts down into the Pleistocene at a tidal inlet. Note the age dates of lagoonal
deposits, 7815 and 7130 years BP south of the barrier, 5055 years BP at Cedar beach, and 1015 and 300 years BP at the northern
edge of the lagoon. The sand of the barrier superstructure is not preserved during transgression—it is washed into the lagoon
(dark red) during storms (blue arrow) and is also moved offshore to form small ridges (red arrow—southern end of cross section).
The record of barrier transgression is shown in the black rectangle, and consists of a thin sheet of lagoonal and washover facies
(blue, dark red, seaward of barrier) overlain disconformably by modern storm sands. The two black arrows at the right show two
erosion surfaces, one separating Pleistocene from Holocene sediments and one separating 7000+ year-old lagoonal and washover
facies from offshore sands forming today. From Rampino and Sanders (1970).
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED 15

7 nearshore ridges, lagoon, and washover. Each association will

have distinctive lithologies, sedimentary structures, and trace-
fossil assemblages. However, if the situation shown in Figure 15
CALICHE were to be preserved in the geological record, three of the associa-

MUDSTONES 2.86 m
NODULES tions would be closely related (the lagoon, washover, and near-

VERTICAL ACCRETION
6 shore ridges shown in the black rectangle in Fig. 16), and two
DESSICATION would be missing (barrier superstructure and foreshore). Signifi-
cantly, the lagoon and washover facies would lie on a major

FLOODPLAIN
CRACKS
transgressive surface of erosion, and the nearshore ridges would
be separated from the lagoon and washover facies by another
ROOT transgressive surface of erosion (Fig. 16). Thus the geological
5 TRACES interpretation would be based on (1) defining the facies associa-
tions present, (2) making a preliminary interpretation of the
associations, and (3) defining the relationships of the facies asso-
ciations and their bounding surfaces. Item 3 in this list is the crux
of the overall interpretation, because it involves building the
4 facies associations into a three-dimensional structure, indepen-
ALTERNATING dently of any preconceived facies model.
SSTS. AND MSTS.
1.00 m BUILDING MODELS
3 The ideas presented above suggest that we are moving away
RIPPLE from interpretation by reference to existing models. We are better
LATERAL ACCRETION
CROSS-LAM. able to recognize facies and architectural elements. We have more
0.95 m data expressing the complexity of modern environments. It there-
fore becomes less and less appropriate to use simple models to
2
POINT BAR

interpret complex geological situations.

TROUGH, P.T.
CROSS BED
1 1.71 m
LAG. 0.32 m
0 2. Carefully fit the elements into their 3-D framework. Which
METERS
FIG. 17.—Fining-upward meandering-fluvial succession, com-
plied by Walker (1979) from data published by Allen (1970).
The average thicknesses shown for each facies are also com-
piled from Allen’s data.
form distinctive depositional systems in recent sediments. It
follows that the combination of architectural elements in ancient
sediments, and depositional systems in recent sediments, will
form the true basis for defining the building blocks of the sedi-
mentary record. As an example, I again refer to the shoreface,
where the architectural element is well defined in the geological
record and where there is a large body of data from recent
sediments. Questions remain, particularly concerning the con-
cept and definition of fair-weather wave base, and the preserv-
ability of many of the features seen in modern shorefaces. Never-
theless, the shoreface is an important example of a basic architec-
tural and depositional element, particularly in its role in defining
transgressions and regressions.
In many ancient examples from the geological record, there
may be no easy and direct comparison with existing facies mod-
els. It therefore becomes even more important to recognize indi-
vidual facies and facies associations (architectural elements), and
to determine which elements commonly occur together and
which never occur together. In Figure 15, at least five associations
could be recognized: barrier superstructure, barrier shoreface,
The solution is not to abandon models, which would result in
anarchy. The solution is to build your own interpretations, using
the following stages.
1. Recognize and define facies, facies associations, and archi-
tectural elements in the example you are studying. Some of
the elements may be universal, and some may be local to
your particular example.
ones occur together, and which are never found together?
Define the surfaces that separate the elements.
3. Attempt a preliminary interpretation of those elements that
allow it. Some will probably present features that have been
well studied and have agreed-upon interpretations (e.g.,
hummocky cross stratification), but other may be enigmatic
(e.g., thick structureless sandstones).
4. From whatever interpretation is possible, refer to the clos-
est existing model (the model as a norm). How does the
distribution of depositional elements in the model conform
to the distribution defined in your example? Lagoonal and
washover elements might suggest reference to a barrier-
island model, but the association of lagoonal, washover,
and nearshore-ridge elements defines one part of a dy-
namic barrier system rather than a barrier–lagoon system
shown as a block diagram (e.g., Reinson, 1992, his fig. 3).
This approach might be even more important in submarine
fan systems, where there has been considerable work on
depositional elements but no simple fan models since the
1970s and early 1980s.
Models and Interpretations
The three-dimensional relationships of architectural ele-
ments that emerge from a new study of the hypothetical Beau-
fort Sea Formation add up to an interpretation of that formation,
16 ROGER G. WALKER
and NOT to a model for the Beaufort Sea Formation. There are
many papers in the literature that have titles along the lines of
“The Beaufort Sea Formation—a model for deposition in shal-
low marine environments”. Presumably the idea is that if a
model is presented, a routine description of the Beaufort Sea
Formation may sound more interesting, and hence attract atten-
tion.
One formation may provide a superb case history, but one
formation does not make a model. The theme of facies modeling
is one of distilling many examples in the search for generality.
Small is beautiful because small is usually more homogeneous. I
therefore suggest that one important approach in the future will
be to define the pieces (modern and ancient) and to define the
relationships between the pieces. This is part of the distillation
process, but it begins with the pieces rather than with an initial
assumption of a geographically defined environment (delta,
whatever). Progress will truly be made when the geologically
defined pieces (ideally, the universally accepted architectural
elements) closely agree with the depositional elements defined
by modern processes.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank Brian A. Zaitlin and Henry Posamentier for their
comments on the manuscript. I also thank the Natural Sciences
and Engineering Research Council of Canada for their support of
my research.
REFERENCES
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1970, Studies in fluviatile sedimentation: a comparison of
fining-upward cyclothems, with special reference to coarse member
composition and interpretation: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v.
40, p. 298–323.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1983, Studies in fluviatile sedimentation: bar complexes and
sandstone sheets (low sinuosity braided streams) in the Brownstones
(L. Devonian), Welsh Borders: Sedimentology, v. 33, p. 237–293.
ANDERTON, R., 1985, Clastic facies models and facies analysis, in Brenchley,
P.J., and Williams, B.J.P., eds., Sedimentology: Recent Developments
and Applied Aspects: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell Scientific Publications,
p. 31–47.
BOUMA, A.H., 1962, Sedimentology of Some Flysch Deposits: Amsterdam,
Elsevier, 169 p.
CANT, D.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1976, Development of a braided fluvial
facies model for the Devonian Battery point Formation, Quebec:
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 13, p. 102–119.
COLLINSON, J.D., 1969, The sedimentology of the Grindslow Shales and the
Kinderscout Grit: a deltaic complex in the Namurian of northern
England: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 39, p. 194-221.
DE RAAF, J.F.M., READING, H.G., AND WALKER, R.G., 1965, Cyclic sedimenta-
tion in the lower Westphalian of North Devon, England: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 4, p. 1–52.
GRESSLY, A., 1838, Observations géologiques sur le Jura Soleurois: Neue
Denksch. allg. schweiz., Ges. ges. Naturw., v. 2, p. 1–112.
HARBAUGH, J.W., AND DEMIRMEN, F., 1964, Application of factor analysis to
petrologic variations of Americus Limestone (Lower Permian), Kan-
sas and Oklahoma: Kansas Geological Survey, Special Distribution
Publication 15, 50 p.
HARBAUGH, J.W., AND MERRIAM, D.F., 1968, Computer Applications in
Stratigraphic Analysis: New York, Wiley, 262 p.
HARMS, J.C., AND FAHNESTOCK, R.K., 1965, Stratification, bed forms and flow
phenomena (with example from the Rio Grande), in Middleton, G.V.,
ed., Primary Sedimentary Structures and Their Hydrodynamic In-
terpretation: Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists,
Special Publication 12, p. 84–115.
HARPER, C.W., JR., 1984, Improved methods of facies sequence analysis, in
Walker, R.G., ed., Facies Models, Second Edition: Geological Associa-
tion of Canada, Reprint Series 1, p. 11–13.
IMBRIE, J., AND PURDY, E.G., 1962, Classification of modern Bahamian
carbonate sediments, in Ham, W.E., ed., Classification of Carbonate
Rocks: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 1, p.
253–279.
KLOVAN, J.E., 1964, Facies analysis of the Redwater reef complex, Alberta,
Canada: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 12, p. 1–100.
KOLLA, V., BOURGES, P., URRUTY, J.M., AND SAFA, P., 2001, Evolution of deep-
water Tertiary sinuous channels off shore Angola (west Africa) and
implications for reservoir architecture. American Association of Pe-
troleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 85, p. 1373–1405.
MIALL, A.D., 1977, A review of the braided river depositional environ-
ment: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 13, p. 1–62.
MIALL, A.D., 1985, Architectural element analysis: a new method of facies
analysis applied to fluvial deposits: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 22, p.
261–308.
MIDDLETON, G.V., 1973, Johannes Walther’s law of the correlation of facies:
Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 84, p. 979–988.
MIDDLETON, G.V., 1978, Facies, in Fairbridge, R.W., and Bourgeois, J., eds.,
Encyclopedia of Sedimentology: Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, Dowden,
Hutchinson & Ross, p. 323–325.
MUTTI, E., AND RICCI LUCCHI, F., 1972, Le torbiditi dell’Appennino
settentrionale: introduzione all’analisi de facies: Societá Geologica
Italiana, Memorie, v. 11, p. 161–199. English translation by T.H.
Nilsen, 1978, International Geology Review, v. 20, p. 125–166.
POTTER, P.E., 1959, Facies models conference: Science, v. 129, p. 1272–1273.
RAMPINO, M.R., AND SANDERS, J.E., 1980, Holocene transgression in south-
central Long Island, New York: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v.
50, p. 1053–1079.
REINSON, G.E., 1992, Transgressive barrier island and estuarine systems, in
Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Geological Asso-
ciation of Canada, p. 179–194.
SCHOLLE, P.A., BEBOUT, D.G., AND MOORE, C.H., 1983, Carbonate Deposi-
tional Environments: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Memoir 33, 708 p.
SCOTT, A.J., AND FISHER, W.L., 1969, Delta systems and deltaic deposition,
in Fisher, W.L., Brown, L.F., Scott, A.J., and McGowen, J.H., collo-
quium leaders, Delta Systems in the Exploration for Oil and Gas:
Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, Research Colloquium, various
pagination.
SHEPARD, F.P., PHLEGER, F.B., AND VAN ANDEL, T.H., 1960, Recent Sediments,
Northwest Gulf of Mexico: American Association of Petroleum Ge-
ologists, 394 p.
TEICHERT, C., 1958, Concepts of facies: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 42, p. 2718–2744.
VISSER, M.J., 1980, Neap–spring cycles reflected in Holocene sub-tidal
large-scale bedform deposits: a preliminary note: Geology, v. 8, p.
543–546,
WALKER, R.G., 1965, The origin and significance of the internal sedimen-
tary structures of turbidites. Yorkshire Geological Society, Proceed-
ings, v. 35, p. 1–32.
WALKER, R.G., 1975, Generalized facies models for resedimented con-
glomerates of turbidite association: Geological Society of America,
Bulletin, v. 86, p. 737–748.
WALKER, R.G., ed., 1979, Facies Models: Geological Association of Canada,
211 p.
WALKER, R.G., 1983, Cardium Formation 3. Sedimentology and stratigra-
phy in the Garrington–Caroline area: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum
Geology, v. 31, p. 213–230.
WALKER, R.G., ed., 1984, Facies Models, Second Edition: Geological Asso-
ciation of Canada, 317 p.
WALKER, R.G., 1985, Mudstones and thin-bedded turbidites associated
with the Upper Cretaceous Wheeler Gorge conglomerates, Califor-
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED 17

nia: a possible channel–levee complex: Journal of Sedimentary

Petrology, v. 55, p. 279–290.
WALKER, R.G., AND JAMES, N.P., eds., 1992, Facies Models: Response to Sea
Level Change: Geological Association of Canada, 409 p.
WEIMER, P., 1989, Sequence stratigraphy of the Mississippi Fan (Plio-
Pleistocene), Gulf of Mexico: Geo-Marine Letters, v. 9, p. 185–272.
WILLIAMS, P.F., AND RUST, B.R., 1969, The sedimentology of a braided river:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 39, p. 646–679.
WILSON, J.E., 1975, Carbonate Facies in Geologic History: New York,
Springer-Verlag, 471 p.
18 ROGER G. WALKER
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 19

EOLIAN FACIES MODELS

NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY
Earth Sciences and Geography, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK
e-mail: n.p.mountney@keele.ac.uk

ABSTRACT: Although eolian facies models have been developed since the 1970s, only recently have they become sufficiently sophisticated
to enable the effects of external climatic and tectonic controls to be expressed in terms of resultant facies architecture. By using a joint
conceptual and process-based approach, the response of eolian systems to changes in controlling parameters such as sediment supply,
sediment availability, water table, and wind regime is now well understood. Dynamic facies models are able to account for spatial and
temporal variations in these controlling parameters and predict likely stratigraphic responses. Large-scale, quantitative stratigraphic data
sets from outcrop are being applied to unequivocally demonstrate relationships between preserved eolian architecture and original
bedform morphology and migratory behavior.
In dry eolian systems, the key to developing predictive facies models has been an appreciation of the paleoenvironmental significance
of the 3D geometry and hierarchical nature of bounding surfaces, which has enabled the products of external (allocyclic) controls such
as climate change be discerned from the complex mechanics of intrinsic (autocyclic) bedform migratory behavior. In wet eolian systems,
subtle variations in interdune architecture provide the basis for a spectrum of predictive facies models that explain preserved eolian
architecture in terms of interactions between water-table level, sediment availability, dune size, and dune migration rate, parameters
which in turn are a function of sediment distribution pathways, climate, and basin setting.
The development of eolian facies models is important for understanding the likely response of desert systems to climatic and
environmental change. Additionally, predictive models remain important for hydrocarbon exploration, particularly in mature
provinces, where good well control allows the employment of sophisticated models in the search for small plays based on subtle
stratigraphic traps.

INTRODUCTION HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT

Although eolian processes operate in a variety of deposi-
tional settings (e.g., beaches, fluvial and glacial outwash plains,
and volcanic regions) and under the influence of various
climates, their occurrence is most closely associated with hot-
and cold-climate arid systems, and this chapter therefore fo-
cuses predominantly on the development of facies models for
desert eolian systems. Recognition of ancient eolian deposits
can sometimes be straightforward. For example, very large-
scale sets of cross bedding exposed across much of the south-
western United States have long been ascribed an eolian dune
origin (Huntington, 1907, referenced in McKee, 1979). How-
ever, in many cases recognition is problematic, principally
because it can often be difficult to differentiate strata of eolian
origin from the deposits of other environments, notably those
of sandy fluvial and shallow marine origin. Furthermore,
building a detailed representation (model) of the architecture
of an eolian succession and devising a paleoenvironmental
reconstruction is also problematic because (1) although eolian
dune systems are typically dominated by only three or four
facies types, variations in the geometric arrangement of these
facies can lead to radically different models, (2) although other
facies make up only a small proportion of most successions,
their interpretation is critical to determining the mechanisms
that controlled accumulation, (3) erosion is an inherent part of
eolian bedform migration, and preserved successions are al-
ways highly fragmentary, and (4) most eolian successions are
characterized by marked lateral variations in bed thickness
and a low degree of lateral continuity, such that traditional 1D
sedimentary logs are not particularly useful for interpretation.
For these reasons coherent eolian facies models were not
developed until the late 1970s, somewhat later than for most
other environments.
OF EOLIAN FACIES MODELS
The development of eolian facies models has been ongoing
since the 1960s, and today’s sophisticated models incorporate
ideas that have evolved since that time (Table 1).
The Early Years
The first in-depth study of eolian sediments was undertaken
by Bagnold (1941), who investigated the mechanics of sediment
entrainment, transport, and deposition. McKee (1966) and Th-
ompson (1969) conducted detailed early studies of modern and
ancient eolian strata, respectively, whilst Stokes (1968) pro-
posed that many eolian systems underwent periodic deflation
down to the level of the water table and that extensive bounding
surfaces were likely to represent regional deflation surfaces,
later to become known as “Stokes surfaces”. Although these
works illustrated the 3D complexity of eolian strata and pro-
vided the first rudimentary models that related modern dunes
to preserved sets of cross bedding, it was to be a further decade
before unifying models were developed. Throughout the 1970s
there was a growing need for predictive eolian facies models
because a number of significant hydrocarbon provinces utilized
reserves with eolian reservoirs. In particular, the Permian
Rotliegend Group of the Southern North Sea was a major source
of gas (Glennie, 1972), and a better understanding of reservoir
architecture was crucial to the successful exploitation of these
reserves.
At White Sands, New Mexico, McKee and Moiola (1975)
demonstrated that large eolian bedforms climbed downwind as
they migrated, such that the basal parts of eolian dunes became
preserved because they were overridden by succeeding dunes.
Brookfield (1977) introduced a model that explained the origin of

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 19–83.
20 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

TABLE 1.—Summary of notable studies of modern and ancient eolian systems and important conceptual and modeling studies.
The modern and ancient eolian systems summarized are representative examples, and the list is not comprehensive.
Classic studies that are recommended as an initial source of further reading are highlighted in bold.

Studies of modern and recent eolian systems

Eolian processes
General studies Bagnold (1941)
Cooke et al. (1993)
Glennie (1970)
Kocurek (1996)
Lancaster (1995)
Erg dynamics and behavior Wilson (1971, 1973)
Eolian bedforms
General studies Glennie (1970)
McKee (1979)
Ripples Anderson (1987)
Ellwood et al. (1975)
Fryberger and Schenk (1981)
Fryberger et al. (1992)
Sharp (1963)
Dunes and draa Lancaster (1988, 1998)
McKee (1979)
Sweet (1992)
Sweet and Kocurek (1990)
Werner and Kocurek (1999)
Wilson (1971)
Structures and stratification
Wind ripple, grainflow and grainfall Anderson (1988)
strata Hunter (1977, 1981)
Fryberger and Schenk (1981, 1988)
Kocurek and Dott (1981)
Rubin (1987a)
Adhesion strata Kocurek and Fielder (1982)
Olsen et al. (1989)
Soft sediment deformation Doe and Dott (1980)
Horowitz (1982)
McKee et al. (1971)
Cross bedding and bounding Bristow et al. (1996, 2000, 2004)
surfaces McKee (1966)
Remote sensing Breed and Grow (1979)
Breed et al. (1979, 1987)
Inland eolian dune–interdune systems
Ackchar Erg Mauritania Kocurek et al. (1991a)
Al Liwa Sand Sea Abu Dhabi Bristow et al. (1996)
Duero Basin Dune Field Central Spain García-Hidalgo (2002)
Gran Desierto Sand Sea Mexico Lancaster et al. (1987)
Great Sand Dunes Colorado Andrews (1981)
Fryberger (1990a)
Kelso Dune Field Mojave Desert Kocurek and Lancaster (1999)
Nebraska Sand Hills Nebraska Ahlbrandt and Fryberger (1980)
Loope et al. (1995)
Namib Sand Sea Western Namibia Lancaster (1985)
Lancaster and Teller (1988)
Skeleton Coast Dune Field Northern Namibia Stanistreet and Stollhofen (2002)
White Sands New Mexico Fryberger et al. (1988)
McKee (1966)
McKee and Moiola (1975)
Simpson and Loope (1985)
Coastal eolian dune–interdune systems
Guerrero Negro Baja California, Mexico Fryberger et al. (1990)
Jafurah Saudi Arabia Fryberger (1990c)
Fryberger et al. (1984, 1988)
Oregon Coastal Dunes Oregon Hunter and Richmond (1988)
Hunter et al. (1983)
Padre Island Texas Hummel and Kocurek (1984)
Kocurek et al. (1992)
Schenk (1990)

geometrically complex sets of strata in terms of a hierarchy of
bounding surfaces that originated in response to interdune mi-
gration in front of large bedforms, the migration of smaller
superimposed bedforms over larger bedforms, and the periodic
reactivation of dune lee slopes in response to changes in wind
direction. Hunter (1977) proposed criteria for the identification of
small-scale eolian sedimentary structures, thus enabling many
hitherto ambiguous successions to be ascribed unequivocally to
an eolian origin. Other important developments in the 1970s
included the comprehensive studies of the sedimentary features
of modern sand seas by Glennie (1970), and studies by Wilson
(1971, 1972, 1973) on sand-sea dynamics and their response to
external controls. The decade culminated in the publication of A
Study of Global Sand Seas (McKee, 1979), which remains an invalu-
able reference. Technological advances in the late 1970s provided
a new view of eolian systems through the acquisition of remotely
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 21

TABLE 1 (continued).—

Studies of modern and recent eolian systems (continued)

Sand sheets
General Kocurek and Nielson (1986)
Koster (1988)
Algodones California Nielson and Kocurek (1986)
Askja Central and NE Iceland Mountney and Russell (2004)
Dhahran Saudi Arabia Fryberger et al. (1983)
Salima Eastern Sahara, NE Africa Breed et al. (1987)
Maxwell and Haynes (1989)
Kuwait Desert Arabian Gulf Khalaf (1989)
Khalaf et al. (1984)
Namib Sand Sea Western Namibia Lancaster (1985)
Ténéré Desert Niger Warren (1971)
Sabkhas
Bahrain Coast Bahrain Doorncamp et al. (1980)
Dhahran Saudi Arabia Fryberger et al. (1983)
Trucial Coast Arabian Gulf Evans et al. (1964)
Pursar and Evans (1973)

Studies of ancient eolian systems

Dry eolian systems
Botucatu Sandstone Formation Cretaceous, Brazil Scherer (2001)
Etjo Sandstone Formation Cretaceous, NW Namibia Mountney and Howell (2000)
Mountney et al. (1999a,b)
Jerram et al. (1999)
Navajo Sandstone Jurassic, SW Utah Herries (1993)
Middleton and Blakey (1993)
Page Sandstone Jurassic, Utah and N Arizona Blakey et al. (1996)
Havholm and Kocurek (1994)
Havholm et al. (1993)
Kocurek et al. (1991b)
Wingate Sandstone Jurassic, SE Utah Clemmensen and Blakey (1989)
Clemmensen et al. (1989, 1994)
Wet eolian systems
Dala Sandstone Proterozoic, Sweden Pulvertaft (1985)
Entrada Sandstone Jurassic, Utah, Arizona and New Benan and Kocurek (1999)
Mexico Kocurek (1981)
Carr-Crabaugh and Kocurek (1998)
Crabaugh and Kocurek (1993)
Helsby Sandstone Formation and Triassic, NW England Herries and Cowan (1997)
Ormskirk Sandstone Formation Mountney and Thompson (2002)
Thompson (1969)
Weber Sandstone Pennsylvanian–Permian, N Utah and Driese (1985)
Colorado (Fryberger (1990d)
Stabilized eolian systems
Shikaoda Formation Proterozoic, India Chakraborty and Chakraborty (2001)
Tsondab Sandstone Tertiary, W Namibia Kocurek et al. (1999)
Tumblagooda Sandstone Silurian, Western Australia Trewin (1993)
Whitworth Formation Early Proterozoic, Queensland Simpson and Eriksson (1993)
Australia
Mixed eolian systems
Cedar Mesa Sandstone Permian, SE Utah Loope (1984, 1985)
Langford and Chan (1988, 1989)
Mountney and Jagger (2004)
Lower Cutler Beds Pennsylvanian–Permian, SE Utah Loope (1985)
Rankey (1997)
Rotliegend Group Permian, southern North Sea George and Berry (1993, 1997)
Glennie (1990)
Glennie and Buller (1983)
Howell and Mountney (1997)

Conceptual and modeling studies

Bed sets and bounding surfaces Brookfield (1977)
Fryberger (1993)
Porter (1986)
Rubin and Hunter (1982, 1983)
Rubin (1987a)
Supersurfaces, sequence Blakey (1988b)
stratigraphy and controls on eolian Kocurek (1988, 1999)
systems Kocurek and Havholm (1993)
Kocurek and Lancaster (1999)
Loope (1985)
Mainguet and Chemin (1983)
Wilson (1971, 1973)
22 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY
sensed satellite data (Breed and Grow, 1979; Breed et al., 1979).
The state of knowledge at the end of the 1970s enabled simple 3D
eolian facies models to be proposed, which, although based on
observations from a limited number of modern and outcrop
studies, provided a basis for interpretation and a norm for com-
parison.
The 1980s: Order Out of Chaos
Research in the early 1980s focused on the application, testing,
and refinement of existing models through the collection of
stratigraphic datasets from outcrop (e.g., Kocurek, 1981). Addi-
tionally, studies of modern eolian systems highlighted that the
relatively small proportion of facies within interdune regions
were often key to environmental interpretation (Ahlbrandt and
Fryberger, 1981; Hummel and Kocurek, 1984). Rubin and Hunter
(1982) outlined a model to explain the mechanics of eolian accu-
mulation through the process of bedform climbing. Considerable
research focused on an assessment of the environmental signifi-
cance of eolian bounding surfaces and in particular whether
major surfaces of great lateral extent were the product of regional
deflation to the water table as originally suggested by Stokes
(1968). Kocurek (1984) and Rubin and Hunter (1984) argued that
surfaces arising from both climbing bedform migration and
regional deflation could occur, and Talbot (1985) demonstrated
regionally extensive deflationary “supersurfaces” to be a product
of climatic change. Kocurek (1988) proposed that “supersurfaces”
of regional extent originated through a variety of mechanisms
that usually resulted in the termination of erg accumulation;
hence, such surfaces effectively bounded separate erg sequences
in the ancient record. The development of 3D geometric strati-
graphic modeling techniques (Rubin, 1987a), which enabled the
simulation of the generation of complex bed-set geometries,
provided a means to explore how relatively common styles of
bedform migration could generate the complex bed-set architec-
tures observed in outcrop. For example, these new techniques
helped in the recognition that accumulations of linear (longitudi-
nal) dunes were apparently underrepresented in the rock record
because such bedforms usually have an additional small compo-
nent of transverse motion, and it is this signature that is preferen-
tially preserved as sets of strata (Rubin and Hunter, 1985). By the
end of the 1980s 3D eolian facies models had been developed for
specific types of eolian dune systems, including those character-
ized by transverse, oblique, and longitudinal bedforms.
The 1990s and Beyond:
Eolian Sequences and External Controls
In the 1990s, a conceptual framework was developed that
enabled the construction of dynamic facies models that ac-
counted for spatial and/or temporal variability in controlling
parameters. Kocurek and Havholm (1993) discussed how sedi-
ment flux within an eolian system controls whether the sedi-
ment body undergoes accumulation, bypass, or deflation. Ad-
ditionally, this work proposed that erg systems could be classi-
fied as dry, wet, or stabilized depending on the nature of the
agent that controlled accumulation. Fryberger (1993) provided
a valuable review of eolian bounding surface types and summa-
rized the terminology used in their description and interpreta-
tion. Kocurek and Lancaster (1999) argued that the construction
of ergs is dependent on the generation of a sediment supply, the
availability of that supply for eolian transport, and the ability of
the wind to transport that sediment and build an erg. George
and Berry (1997) and Howell and Mountney (1997) demon-
strated that rate of creation of accommodation plays a major role
in determining the extent to which eolian accumulations may be
preserved. Clemmensen et al. (1994) demonstrated the occur-
rence of separate erg sequences in the ancient record, accumu-
lation and preservation of which they infer to have been con-
trolled by cyclic changes in climate within gradually subsiding
basins. Kocurek (1999) presented the culmination of this re-
search as a set of rules that set out the steps required for (1) erg
construction, (2) the accumulation of a body of strata, and (3)
preservation of the body of strata.
Throughout the 1990s, researchers documented the response
of eolian systems to Quaternary climate change. Alsharhan et al.
(1998) and papers therein explore how eolian systems respond to
external forces such as changes in precipitation, the level of the
groundwater table, wind velocity, and, in the case of coastal ergs,
changes in sea level. One important general conclusion from this
work has been the recognition that most modern eolian dune
systems are currently still responding to late Quaternary climate
changes and are therefore out of equilibrium with the current
climatic regime (Lancaster, 1998). The application of geophysical
techniques such as ground-penetrating radar (GPR) has enabled
the detailed internal architecture of modern bedforms to be
established in more detail than ever before and is helping to
establish the exact mechanisms by which modern dunes generate
sets of strata (Bristow et al., 1996; Bristow et al., 2000). Meanwhile,
new dating techniques, such as optically stimulated lumines-
cence (OSL) are helping to determine the migration histories of
large dunes, under both present-day wind regimes and during
previous windier glacial episodes (Bristow et al., in 2005).
MODERN AND RECENT DESERT EOLIAN SYSTEMS
Eolian Systems
Approximately 30% of the present-day land surface of the
Earth is characterized by arid or semiarid climatic conditions
(Fig. 1), and eolian sand deposits cover 20% of these regions.
Eolian processes occur preferentially in arid regions because
low amounts of precipitation result in a dry substrate with
relatively sparse vegetation cover, which promotes the ability of
the wind to entrain and transport loose surface material. Addi-
tionally, extensive eolian processes also occur in humid settings
where there is a surfeit of sediment supply available for trans-
port and the wind velocity is sufficiently great, the main ex-
ample being sandy coastlines (Pye, 1983). Most of the world’s
larger deserts can be divided into a series of distinct geomorphic
elements (Fig. 2). Those elements characterized by eolian sand
accumulation are called sand seas or ergs and range in size from
a few km2 to 560,000 km2 in the case of Rub al Khali erg, Arabia
(Wilson, 1973). Ergs represent the depositional part of eolian
systems, systems that are additionally composed of areas where
eolian sediment supply is generated and where eolian transport
and erosion occurs.
Eolian Sediment Entrainment
Eolian sediment entrainment occurs wherever and whenever
wind velocity is sufficient to overcome the effects of surface
stabilization. At a grain scale, aerodynamic lift and drag promote
entrainment, whereas particle weight, friction, and cohesive in-
terparticle forces retard entrainment (Fig. 3). Drag and lift are
generated by fluid flow over and around the particle, whereas
weight, friction, and cohesion are determined by particle size,
density, shape, packing, moisture content, mineralogy, and de-
gree of interparticle cementation (Lancaster, 1995). Where a fluid
flows over a solid surface, a boundary layer develops because of
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS
Great
Basin
Sonoran
Mojave
Libyan
Sahara
Peruvian
(Loma)
Atacama Namib
Monte
Patagonia
FIG. 1.—Distribution of the world’s major climatic deserts.
friction close to the interface, such that the velocity profile in-
creases from zero at the surface itself to approach the mean wind
velocity some distance above the surface. For turbulent flows (as
is typical for wind), flow mixing in the boundary layer, owing to
efficient momentum transfer, results in a steep velocity gradient
immediately above the surface and, hence, greater shear stress
(Fig. 3; Bagnold, 1941). Thus, turbulence provides a mechanism
by which initial grain entrainment into the airflow can occur at
relatively low wind velocities.
Eolian Sediment Transport
Particles of larger grain size (coarse sand, granules, and rarely
pebbles) may be transported by the wind but are usually re-
stricted to surface creep (Fig. 4), whereby grains roll or slide along
the bed during periods of high wind velocity. Creep may addi-
tionally be promoted by grains already in motion falling out of the
airflow and nudging surface grains downwind. Grain size, shape,
density, sorting, and packing all determine the ease with which
grains undergo creep. Particles of very fine to medium sand,
which constitute the bulk of sediment transported in most eolian
systems, are susceptible to saltation, whereby grains are lifted into
the airflow and carried downwind before returning under the
influence of gravity to the surface (Fig. 4). Incoming grains often
possess sufficient energy to bounce (saltate) back into the airflow.
Importantly, saltating grains additionally impact and dislodge
other grains on the bed (ejecta), causing them to commence
transport and thus inducing a chain reaction that generates a
23
Turkmenistan
Taklamakan
Syrian Gobi
Turpan
Thar
Nubian
Arabian
Danakil
Ethiopian
Great
Sandy
Gibson
Australian
Kalahari Simpson
Great
Victoria
saltation cloud within a few seconds (Fig. 5). Mid-air collisions
between saltating grains allow individual grains to be held aloft
within a saltation cloud for several seconds, during which time
grains may be transported tens of meters. Once saltation has been
initiated, the energy associated with incoming grain collisions
means that further entrainment and transport will continue if the
wind velocity drops below the fluid transport threshold until a
lower impact threshold shear velocity is reached (Fig. 3; Bagnold,
1941). Reptation is a mode of eolian transport intermediate be-
tween saltation and creep whereby larger grains hop short dis-
tances downwind as they are impacted by incoming saltating
grains (Fig. 4). Creep, saltation, and reptation are all types of
bedload transport. Finer-grained particles (clay and silt) are usu-
ally transported as suspended load (Fig. 5), in which fine dust may
be held aloft indefinitely by atmospheric turbulence and silt-
grade material (loess) may be carried 30–300 km downwind
during single wind-storm events (Pye and Tsoar, 1987).
Eolian Sediment Textures
Eolian sediments often exhibit distinctive grain size, shape,
and sorting characteristics that can be useful in the recognition of
eolian strata (Pye, 1982; Lancaster, 1986). The wind is highly
selective in terms of the grain sizes that it can carry for a given
velocity, and eolian dunes are often characterized almost exclu-
sively by very fine- to medium-grained sand that is well or very
well sorted (Fig. 6). Interparticle collisions result in high rates of
grain abrasion, and less resistant minerals such as mica and lithic
24 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

N
50 km

Turkmenistan
Taklamakan

Gobi
Turpan
Sahara Thar

Arabian

FIG. 2.—Satellite image of the Turpan Depression, Bogda, northern China. This arid system contains a number of erosional and
depositional elements including eroding mountain catchment areas, alluvial fans, wadi channels, an interior-draining salt lake,
salt flats (inland sabkha), sand sheets, and a major erg accumulation. Image courtesy of NASA Earth Observatory collection.
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 25

A L
L = lift
D = aerodynamic drag
Wind D W = weight
C = inter-particle cohesion.

C C

B 40 40
Turbulent
30 30 flow
Height (mm)

Height (mm)
20 20

10 Laminar 10
flow
0 0
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
Wind velocity (m/s) Wind velocity (m/s)

C 80
Higher wind speeds Fluid
needed for small threshold
Wind velocity (m/s)

60 grains due to
cohesive forces

40
Impact
threshold
20

0
0 0.04 0.08 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
Grain diameter (mm)

FIG. 3.—Factors governing particle entrainment by the wind. A) Forces exerted by the wind on a particle at rest. B) Typical vertical
velocity profiles showing the smaller near-surface shear stresses in laminar flow when compared with turbulent flow. C)
Relationship between particle size and threshold shear velocity. Saltating grains lower the wind speed needed to induce further
grain motion. After Bagnold (1941).

fragments often break down to dust, whilst more resistant grains
(e.g., quartz) become highly rounded as angular edges are abraded,
often develop a high sphericity, have surfaces that are dull
(frosted) as a result of repeated grain collisions, and may exhibit
conchoidal fractures. Eolian grains with these properties often
have a “millet seed”’ texture (Fig. 6). Although many eolian sands
are monomineralic (usually dominated by quartz grains), com-
position and texture is ultimately dependent on the nature of the
source material, the availability of that material for eolian trans-
port, transport distance, and wind gustiness. Carbonate eolian
dunes are documented from Oman and the United Arab Emirates
(Besler, 1982), and eolian dunes composed of basalt and pumice
clasts have been recorded from active volcanic provinces
(Mountney and Russell, 2004). The movement of coarse sand and
26 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A 0.5–2.0 mm

Lift Impact Wind Impact

Drag

C Saltating grain
Reptating grain

D W1 Final
Initial U2
W2
U1 Saltation
b height
a

Saltation path length

FIG. 4.—Methods of eolian grain transport. A) Surface creep. B) In-air collisions of saltating grains maintains momentum, keeping
grains aloft. Ground impacts induce new grains to saltate. C) Impact of saltating grains with grains on bed drives reptation. D)
The ballistic trajectory of a saltating sand grain. W and U represent vertical and horizontal velocities, respectively. a is the approach
angle, b is the take-off angle.

granules via creep typically occurs only sporadically during
episodes of high winds, and sand-sheet deposits where creep is
a dominant process are often characterized by poorly to moder-
ately sorted sediments.
Eolian deflation involves the winnowing of sand-grade sedi-
ment to leave a surface dominated by a coarse-grained lag (reg or
serir). The concentration of larger clasts on deflationary surfaces
acts as an armored lag that protects underlying sand from further
winnowing (Fig. 6D). Sand sheets often contain wind-faceted
cobbles and boulders (ventifacts) with distinctive upwind-facing
scalloped and abraded surfaces that are useful paleocurrent
indicators.
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS
A heights up to 5 m and 0.35 m, respectively (Fig. 8D). A continuum
B once initiated, the ripples themselves grow and steepen into
FIG. 5.—Examples of eolian grain transport. A) Saltation of sand-
size particles across a low-relief sand sheet. Most transport
occurs within 2 m of the surface. Skeleton Coast, northern
Namibia. B) Suspension of silt-size particles within the air-
flow to a height in excess of 300 m above the surface. Huab
Basin, northern Namibia.
Although textures can aid the recognition of ancient eolian
deposits, they can be reliably used only when associated with
diagnostic sedimentary structures. The intimate association of
many eolian systems with fluvial, lacustrine, and coastal environ-
ments means that sediments with eolian textures are frequently
reworked by non-eolian processes. For example, the Kuiseb River
of Namibia captures eolian sand moving north from the Namib
Sand Sea and transports it downstream before releasing it to the
shallow offshore realm.
Eolian Bedforms
Eolian bedforms can be classified according to their scale,
morphology, orientation relative to net sand transport direction,
style of migratory behavior, and style of superimpositioning.
Three distinct scales of eolian bedform are recognized: ripples,
dunes, and draa (Fig. 7).
Ripples.—
Eolian sand ripples typically have straight crestlines oriented
perpendicular to wind direction, and have wavelengths of 50–200
mm and heights of 5–10 mm (Fig. 8; Bagnold, 1941). Coarser
granule megaripples typically have sinuous crestlines (Greeley
27
and Iverson, 1985; Fryberger et al., 1992) and wavelengths and
of ripple sizes exists between these limits (Ellwood et al., 1975).
Eolian ripples can be differentiated from subaqueous ripples
because the former typically have high ripple indices (ratio of
wavelength to height) of 25–40+, and are often characterized by
inverse grading that results from the migration of coarser-grained
ripple crests over finer-grained ripple troughs (Fig. 9). The major-
ity of eolian ripples develop as a consequence of saltation and
reptation. For a given wind velocity, grains in motion are re-
stricted to a narrow size range, and the distance that grains jump
downwind (saltation path length) is similar for most of the sedi-
ment in transport (Bagnold, 1941). Eolian saltation ripples begin
to form with spacings that are determined by the saltation path
length (Figs. 4D, 9). Minor surface perturbations act as the catalyst
required to initiate ripple development (Anderson, 1987), and,
bedforms because upwind-facing stoss slopes act as an impact
zone that catches incoming saltating grains, whereas downwind-
facing lee slopes act as a shadow zone where grain impacts are
minimal (Sharp, 1963). Grains landing in the impact zone often
creep up the stoss slope to the ripple crest before once again being
launched into the airflow and saltating downwind to the next
ripple. Coarser grains often concentrate at ripple crests, whereas
finer grains are preferentially trapped in ripple-trough shadow
zones.
Dunes.—
Eolian dunes have wavelengths of 5–250 m (Fig. 7) and are
often arranged into trains of regularly spaced bedforms (Lancaster,
1988; Werner and Kocurek, 1999). Most dunes have a windward
stoss slope inclined at 8–16° and a lee slope inclined at 20–34°. Dunes
form topographic obstacles that disrupt the primary airflow such
that as the flow moves up the dune stoss slope it accelerates,
thereby causing an increase in transport rate and promoting
transport up the stoss slope to the dune crest. As the flow moves
over the crest and into the lee-side depression, it decelerates, and
causes a decrease in transport rate, thus promoting deposition on
the lee slope (Sweet and Kocurek, 1990; Frank and Kocurek,
1996). This provides the basis for a mechanism by which dunes
advance downwind over time. Flow separation of the airflow from
the bedform surface occurs beyond the crest, whilst flow reattach-
ment typically occurs a distance of about seven dune heights
downwind. Thus, a separation cell exists in the dune lee (Sweet,
1992) within which turbulent secondary airflow occurs that allows
ripples and erosional scour hollows on the dune flanks (plinth) to
undergo complex migratory behavior. Downwind of the reat-
tachment point, renewed flow acceleration means that interdune
sediments may potentially be eroded, thereby providing a local
sediment supply for the next dune downwind in the train. The
angle of repose for most types of dry eolian sand is 32–34°, and lee
slopes inclined at or beyond these angles are inherently unstable
and develop an active slipface where grainflow avalanche pro-
cesses dominate (Hunter, 1977), whereas lee slopes inclined at
less than 32° are generally stable and characterized by ripples.
Dunes exhibit a wide variety of morphological forms (Figs. 10,
11) that reflect the combined effects of a number of controlling
factors, including wind strength and directional variability on
diurnal to seasonal (and longer) timescales, the timing of genera-
tion of a sediment supply, and the availability of that sediment for
transport. Dunes can be classified as mobile (actively migrating),
active but anchored, or stabilized (Fig. 12; Cooke et al., 1993).
Mobile dunes can be classified according to their morphology on
the basis of the number of lee faces that they possess (McKee,
28 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

C D

FIG. 6.—Eolian sediment textures. A) Well rounded and well sorted “millet seed” grains. B) Eolian sand composed of frosted quartz
grains and lithic fragments. C) Bimodally sorted sand on an eolian ripple (coarse grains on crest). D) Pebble deflation lag.

1979), and according to the orientation of their crestlines relative
to the predominant wind direction (Hunter et al. 1983). Common
dune types classified according to these criteria include transverse
dunes, which have a single lee face and a crestline normal to the
prevailing wind, linear or seif dunes, which have one or two lee
faces and a crestline parallel to the wind, and star (pyramid) dunes,
which have three or more lee faces (Fig. 10). The classification of
dunes as transverse or longitudinal is potentially misleading
because net sand transport direction across many dunes is oblique
to the orientation of the bedform (Hunter et al. 1983; Rubin and
Hunter, 1985). At a more detailed level, dunes that possess straight
crestlines are two-dimensional, whilst those with sinuous, cuspate,
or lobate crestlines are three-dimensional (Rubin 1987a). Isolated
barchan dunes and barchanoid dune ridges are examples of 3D,
transverse bedforms. The style of migratory behavior of mobile
dunes can also be used for classification; dunes that migrate in a
constant direction, at constant speed, and without undergoing
charges in form over time are invariable, whereas dunes that
undergo temporal changes in migration direction, speed, asym-
metry, and/or steepness are variable (Rubin, 1987a, 1987b).
Fryberger (1978, 1979) and Fryberger et al. (1979) defined
three terms that attempt to classify the energy and directional
properties of the wind and relate it to the construction of
particular dune types (Fig. 13). Drift potential (DP) is a measure
of the total-sand moving capability of the wind without regard
to wind direction. Resultant drift potential (RDP) is a measure of
the resultant or net sand-moving capability of the wind in the
resultant drift direction (RDD). RDP/DP, the unidirectionality
index of Wilson (1971), is a measure of wind variability where
values approaching unity (RDP/DP > 0.8) signify low variabil-
ity and low values (RDP/DP < 0.3) signify high variability. One
of the original methods for the classification of dune types was
based on the number and orientation of slipfaces (McKee, 1979),
which in turn reflects the complexity and variability of the wind
responsible for generating and maintaining the bedform. Trans-
verse dune forms tend to develop under conditions of unidirec-
tional winds characterized by high RDP/DP values and are
sand-transporting bedforms, whilst star-dune forms tend to
develop in response to variable winds (low RDP/DP values)
(Wasson and Hyde, 1983) and are sand-accumulating bedforms
that do not migrate great distances (Fig. 13).
Draa.—
Draa are larger-scale bedforms than dunes (Wilson, 1971,
1972) that have wavelengths of 500–5000 m and exceed 50 m in
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 29

20 RIPPLES
Grainsize (mm)
10
DUNES
8
6 DRAA
4

1 4 16 64 256 10 40 160 640 2560

centimeters meters

Bedform wavelength

FIG. 7.—Grain size (coarsest twentieth percentile) versus wavelength for eolian bedforms. Note the three distinct groups representing
ripples, dunes, and draa. Modified after Wilson (1972).

A B

C D

FIG. 8.—Examples of eolian ripple forms. A) Sinuous crested with coarser grains on crests. Skeleton Coast, Namibia. B) Two scales
of superimposed ripples. Idaho (courtesy of John Collinson). C) Two scales of ripples developed on the stoss slope of an eolian
dune. Huab Basin, Namibia. D) Sinuous-crested eolian granule megaripples. Askja sandsheet, central Iceland.
30 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B C
Variation in impact intensity over pertubation in bed.
Note higher intensity in AB compared to BC

Ripple spacing is controlled by saltation path length, which

is itself primarily a function of grain size and wind velocity.

Impact
angle

Impact Shadow Impact

zone zone zone
Alternation of impact and shadow zones on developing
wind ripple (after Anderson, 1987).

B Wind direction
Crestal accumulation
of coarser grains
Veneer of
finer grains

Core of finer grains Foreset bed

Laminae and grain size distribution within eolian ripples (after Sharp, 1963).

FIG. 9.—Generation of eolian ripples. A) Model for the generation of saltation ripples. After Anderson (1987). B) Grain texture in
eolian ripples. After Sharp (1963).

height (Fig. 7). These “mega-bedforms” occur only in the largest
ergs, where eolian sediment supply and transport rates are high.
Draa are described using the same terminology as for dunes but
additionally can be characterized by the presence of superim-
posed dune-scale bedforms on their flanks (Fig. 14). Simple draa
lack superimposed bedforms, whilst compound draa possess su-
perimposed dunes of the same morphological type and complex
draa possess superimposed dunes of a different type (McKee,
1979). The migration of superimposed dunes over larger, more
slowly moving draa is one possible explanation for the origin of
geometrically complex bed sets in the ancient record.
Eolian Sedimentary Structures and Stratification
Small-scale eolian stratification arises in response to a distinct
suite of processes that enables eolian strata to be recognized
(Hunter, 1977; Hunter, 1981; Kocurek and Dott, 1981; Fryberger
and Schenk, 1981). Four basic eolian stratification types (ripple
strata, avalanche strata, grainfall strata, and adhesion strata) are
recognized to occur in various configurations and often combine
to form larger-scale cross-bedded sets.
Wind-Ripple Strata.—
Tractional processes that generate wind ripples give rise to
various types of wind-ripple stratification (Fig. 15). Although ripple
foreset laminae (rippleform laminae) may be preserved in wind-
ripple strata, internal laminae often cannot be distinguished
because of the uniformity of the grain size, and translatent rippleform
stratification results (Fig. 16; Hunter, 1977). Wind-ripple strata
sometimes exhibit a weak inverse grading, in part because the
finest material tends to accumulate in sheltered ripple troughs,
whilst the upper parts of ripples are composed of coarser material
(Fig. 17), and in part because finer grains tend to settle between
coarser grains, resulting in a pour-in texture (Sharp, 1963; Fryberger
et al., 1992). This means that the base of the ripple stratum is often
distinct, the surface being defined by a thin lag of finer material.
Where ripples preserve ripple traces only one or two grains thick,
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 31

A barchan B barchanoid

C transverse D oblique

E longitudinal F parabolic
(linear, seif)

G star H dome
(pyramid)

FIG. 10.—Three-dimensional forms of some common dune types. The arrows mark the dominant directions of the effective winds and,
in case E, the dotted arrow indicates the resultant effective direction.

a characteristic pinstripe lamination is preserved (Fig. 15A; Fryberger
and Schenk, 1988). Eolian ripple strata form widespread deposits
in sand sheets, on dry interdunes, and on low-moderately in-
clined dune and draa slopes.
Grainflow Strata.—
When the lee slope of an eolian dune exceeds the angle of
repose (32–34°), an active slipface develops that is subject to
gravity-driven collapse, resulting in the generation of various
types of avalanche strata (fig. 18). Lee-slope avalanches are ex-
amples of grainflows (sandflows) in which intergranular cohesion
is lost during the flow, resulting in an erosionally based, chaotic
deposit that usually lacks internal structure. Slump degradation
grainflows occur where internal structure is destroyed as the flow
travels downslope, and resultant deposits are characterized by a
chaotic wedge of loosely packed sediment up to a few meters
wide that thickens downslope up to 5–6 cm before pinching out.
Scarp recession grainflows occur where an initial point of failure
generates a scarp that then retreats back upslope toward the
brinkline. The resultant deposits form tongue-like bodies that
rarely exceed 0.5 m in width but may extend almost the full length
of the lee slope. Grainflows may exhibit inverse vertical grading
due to shear sorting and downslope grading where the coarser
sediment grains run farthest down slope. Where developed in
very well sorted sand, the boundaries between successive ava-
lanches might not be evident, in which case only amalgamated
grainflow units will be recognized (Howell and Mountney, 2001).
Grainfall Strata.—
Gravity-driven grainfall occurs as the wind carries clouds of
saltating grains over a dune brink. A reduction in wind transport
capacity in the lee-side depression allows grains to settle onto the
upper part of the lee slope (Fig. 19; Nickling et al., 2002). Grainfall
strata are usually difficult to distinguish but are often moderately
packed and exhibit a wedge-shaped geometry that is thickest just
leeward of the brinkline and thins downslope (Hunter, 1985;
32 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

C D

FIG. 11.—Examples of eolian dune forms. A) Slipface and plinth of crescentic barchan dune. Skeleton Coast, Namibia. B) Transverse
dunes. Western Namib Sand Sea. C) Linear dune ridge partly stabilized by vegetation. Lake Eyre Basin, Australia (courtesy of
John Collinson. D) Large star dune, central Namib Sand Sea.

Anderson, 1988). Additionally, grainfall strata often blanket the
upper parts of dune lee slopes for distances of tens of meters
along-slope (Hunter, 1977), enabling them to be differentiated
from individual avalanche stratum. On small dunes, wedges of
grainfall strata may extend down to the base of the lee slope,
whereas on dunes of increasing size, wedges of grainfall strata
tend to be cut out by grainflow strata. Repeated grainfall deposi-
tion on the upper lee slope is the main mechanism by which the
slope attains and exceeds the angle of repose, thus inducing
reworking of grainfall strata by avalanche processes.
Adhesion Strata.—
Cross Bedding.—
Cross bedding is ubiquitous within eolian dune sands and
sandstones. It develops as a consequence of repeated and ongo-
ing lee-slope sedimentation whereby ripple, avalanche, and
grainfall strata generate cross stratification (Fig. 21). The interiors
of most eolian bedforms are composed of cross-bedded sands,
and the stratification planes provide a record of the former
positions and shape of the bedform lee slope and of the processes
that operated on that slope (Figs. 22, 23). Where bedforms migrate
over one another, cross strata are truncated and sets delineated by
erosional bounding surfaces are generated.

The adhesion of grains in motion to a damp surface results in
the generation of a range of structures (Fig. 20) including adhe-
sion plane beds, adhesion ripples (Kocurek and Fielder, 1982),
and adhesion warts (Olsen et al., 1989), which are characterized
by low-relief ridges and mounds that grow by adhesion to their
upwind edge and thereby undergo upwind migration. Adhesion
structures are preserved both on bedding surfaces and in section
where strata form crinkly and wavy laminae. The generation of
adhesion strata requires the accumulation surface to be damp,
and such strata often occur in low-lying damp interdune and
dune-flank settings (Hummel and Kocurek, 1984).
Structures Due to Postdepositional
Soft-Sediment Deformation.—
Small-scale deformation structures (< 1 m) in eolian strata
occur as either intradune folding, indicative of near-surface liq-
uefaction, or slumping of moderately cohesive, moist sands on
the dune lee slope in response to surface precipitation (Doe and
Dott, 1980). Liquefaction results from an elevation of pore-water
pressure as the wetting front infiltrates into highly porous dune
sands (Fig. 24). Loosely packed grainflow laminae are particu-
larly susceptible to liquefaction by collapse of grain packing due
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS
A Mobile
Type Description
TRANSVERSE Asymmetrical, crestline normal
to transport direction, single
slipface, unidirectional wind
Barchan Isolated crescentic dune
Barchanoid Sinuous-crested ridge
Transverse Straight-crested ridge
LINEAR (SEIF) Symmetrical, crestline parallel
to transport direction, often with
2 slipfaces, bidirectional wind
Straight Straight-crested ridge
Sinuous Sinuous-crested ridge,
scour pits migrate along flanks
STAR Peaked form with 3+ slipfaces
separated by ridges or spurs.
Multidirectional wind regime.
Pyramid Central peak, no elongate arms
Radiating Central peak, with elongate arms
SAND SHEET Low-relief sand accumulation
that actively accumulates but
lacks slipfaced bedforms.
Zibar Low-relief dunes that lack
slipfaces, varied morphology
SUPERIMPOSED Transverse, linear and star
parent forms that support smaller
dunes on their flanks. Often
large scale (draa).
Compound Superimposed dunes of same
morphological type as parent
Complex Superimposed dunes of different
morphological type to parent
FIG. 12.—Classification scheme for common dune types. A) Mobile (freely migrating) dunes, B) anchored dunes that are active but
fixed because of aerodynamic conditions, C) stabilized dunes that develop because of the action of physical, chemical, or biogenic
factors favorable for sand accumulation. The scheme is not rigid, and overlap exists between the three groups. For example,
nebkha and parabolic dunes could be classed as being anchored by vegetation. Many dunes are neither transverse nor linear but
are oriented oblique to resultant sand transport direction.
to mechanical loading associated with the wetting event. Defor-
mation due to surface collapse occurs where the upper dune lee
slope fails because of a decrease in the angle of internal friction in
response to wetting and to oversteepening by wet grainfall
(Hunter et al., 1983; Loope et al., 2001), resulting in a range of
brittle-failure structures, including slab slides (Fig. 25). Larger-
scale deformation structures usually indicate liquefaction below
the water table (McKee et al., 1971), which is usually best ex-
plained by loading of the saturated sand by an advancing dune
(Fig. 26; Collinson, 1994; Horowitz, 1982).
Non-Eolian Sedimentary Structures.—
Non-eolian processes and structures are common in many
eolian systems, especially in interdunes (Ahlbrandt and
33
B Anchored
Type Description
RISING Large sand banks that
form on windward side of
topographic obstacles.
FALLING Large sand banks that
form on leeward side of
topographic obstacles.
ECHO Dunes on steep windward slope
of topographic ridge but separated
from ridge by sand-free area due
to occurrence of a fixed eddy.
SHADOW Small sand dunes that form
in localized topographic
depressions or in lee of obstacles
FLANK Dunes anchored to the flanks
of larger parent forms. Result
from secondary airflow.
C Stabilized
Type Description
NEBKHA Sand accumulation developed
around vegetation clumps. Also
known as coppice dunes.
PARABOLIC U-shape dunes with active “nose”
and trailing arms stabilized by
vegetation. Various scales up to
1–2km long and 10–70m high.
CEMENTED Dunes that undergo early cement-
ation due to the precipitation of early
diagenetic cement (e.g. gypsum),
often associated with moisture.
BEACH DUNE Coastal backshore dunes stabilized
RIDGE by vegetation. Often developed in
humid climatic settings
Fryberger, 1981; Kocurek, 1981). Sedimentary structures of physi-
cal origin (Fig. 27) include desiccation cracks and polygons,
raindrop imprints, mud flakes and curls, wave and current
ripples, cross strata, and wavy lamination of subaqueous origin
(Ahlbrandt et al., 1978; Langford 1989; Langford and Chan,
1989). Sedimentary structures of chemical origin (Fig. 28) in-
clude evaporitic salt crusts, fenestral porosity, sandstone pseudo-
morphs of salt minerals, especially halite (hoppers) and gypsum
(desert rose), and evaporite precipitation structures such as tee-
pees (Kocurek, 1981). Sedimentary structures of biogenic origin
(Fig. 29) include animal footprints, trackways, burrows and
crawling traces (Ahlbrandt et al., 1978; Hasiotis, 2002), plant
root structures and rhizoliths (Loope, 1988), and algal growth
structures. Paleosols are also widespread in many desert sys-
tems (Kocurek et al., 1991a).
34 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A DP = 518 DP = 255
RDP = 448 RDP = 56
RDD = NE RDD = SSE
RDP/DP = 0.86 RDP/DP = 0.22

Crescentic dunes Complex star draa

Walvis Bay, Namibia Ouargia, Algeria
Narrow unimodal Complex distribution

B 50
sand thickness in meters)
Amount of sand in dunes
(expressed as average

40
Star
Transverse
30

20
Linear
10 (Longitudinal)
Crescentic
(Barchan)
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Wind-directional variability (RDP/DP)

FIG. 13.—Illustration of the concept of drift potential (DP), resultant drift potential (RDP), and resultant drift direction (RDD). A) Sand
transport regimes represented by sandflow roses (after Fryberger, 1979). All numeric values are in vector units. See text for further
explanation. B) Relationship between dune type, wind regime, and equivalent sand thickness. Transverse and barchan dunes
develop under unimodal wind regimes (RDP/DP > 0.5) and are sand-transporting bedforms. Star dunes develop under multi-
directional wind regimes (RDP/DP < 0.2) and are sand-storing bedforms. Modified after Wasson and Hyde (1983).

Eolian Bounding Surfaces and Cross-Bedded Sets Reactivation Surfaces.—

Bounding surfaces are erosional surfaces that are generated
as an intrinsic product of eolian dune migration whereby
bedforms (or parts thereof) scour into preexisting deposits as
they move through space (Fig. 30). Brookfield (1977) produced
the first widely accepted model that explained a hierarchy of
eolian-bounding surface types (first-, second-, third-order) in
terms of the migratory behavior of bedforms (Fig. 31). Subse-
quently, Rubin and Hunter (1983) and Hunter and Rubin (1983)
argued that apparently similar geometrical bounding-surface
configurations could be produced by a variety of styles of
bedform behavior, and Rubin (1987a) employed 3D computer
simulations to demonstrate how arrangements of bedforms
could generate highly complex bounding-surface geometries.
Fryberger (1993) provides a valuable summary of terminology
for eolian bounding surfaces and provides some useful photo
examples. Three broad types of eolian bounding surface are
recognized to occur as a product of autocyclic (intrinsic) bed-
form migratory behavior.
Reactivation surfaces result from periodic lee-slope erosion fol-
lowed by renewed sedimentation associated with a change in
bedform migration direction, migration speed, asymmetry, and/
or steepness (Fig. 30; Rubin, 1987a, 1987b). These changes are
common because airflow on lee slopes is often subject to turbulent
modification and is rarely steady. In some cases, the period of the
flow fluctuation is regular and generates cyclic reactivation sur-
faces, as is the case for diurnal and seasonal wind reversals (Hunter
and Rubin, 1983; Hunter et al., 1983; Hunter and Richmond, 1988;
Loope et al., 2001). Nested reactivation surfaces on two or more
scales occur when cyclic cross bedding is generated by the interac-
tion of two or more forcing parameters operating with different
periodicities (Fig. 32; Crabaugh and Kocurek, 1993).
Reactivation surfaces occur within eolian sets and are char-
acterized by planar- or scalloped-shaped erosion surfaces that
typically dip downwind at inclinations of 10–20°, somewhat
less than the cross strata that they truncate (Fig. 30). In sections
perpendicular to eolian transport, reactivation surfaces trend
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 35

B C

FIG. 14.—Examples of eolian draa forms. A) Pyramid-shaped star draa with radiating linear ridges, some supporting superimposed
transverse ridges. Central Namib Sand Sea. B, C) Complex linear draa with numerous superimposed bedforms, mostly oriented
oblique to the trend of the main crest line. Northern Namib Sand Sea.

parallel to subparallel to the cross strata and can sometimes be
traced for 10–100+ m along strike, whilst in sections parallel to
transport they may extend the full height of a set or may be
restricted to its basal part, in which case they are often charac-
terized by a sweeping (asymptotic) base. Reactivation surfaces
either occur randomly within sets or exhibit regular spacings, as
has been documented from the Navajo Sandstone (Chan and
Archer, 1999, Loope et al., 2000). Overlying cross strata exhibit
either a concordant or a downlapping relationship.
Superimposition Surfaces.—
Superimposition surfaces result from either the migration of
superimposed dunes over a larger parent bedform, or the mi-
gration of scour troughs on the lee slope of a bedform (Fig. 30;
Rubin, 1987a). Although theoretically superimposed dunes and
scour troughs can migrate directly up or down the lee slope of
a parent bedform, oblique migration is more common because
secondary airflow, which occurs because the high-relief bedforms
36 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

C D

FIG. 15.—Examples of eolian ripple internal stratification. A) Pinstripe lamination, Etjo Formation, Cretaceous, Namibia. B) Inversely
graded translatent strata, Askja, Iceland. C) Sharply defined wind ripple laminae interbedded with thin grainfall laminae. Lower
Cutler Beds, Pennsylvanian–Permian, Utah, U.S.A. D) Wind-ripple strata on a dune plinth. Cedar Mesa Sandstone, Permian,
Utah, U.S.A.

Translatent strata Rippleform laminae

Subcritical

Incomplete rippleform laminae

(ripple foreset cross-laminae)
(a < b)
Angle of ripple climb (a)

of ripple stoss slope (b)

relative to inclination

Subcritically climbing Truncated ripple-foreset

translatent strata cross laminae
Critical
(a = b)

Critically climbing Complete ripple-foreset

translatent strata cross laminae
Supercritical
(a > b)

Supercritically climbing Complete rippleform

translatent strata laminae

FIG. 16.—Classification of wind-ripple stratification types according to angle of ripple climb relative to the inclination of the stoss
slope of the bedform and the presence or absence of cross-lamination. Modified after Hunter (1977).
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 37

FIG. 17.—Wind ripples generated by ballis-

tic impact of grains. The ripple spacing
A relates in a general way to the saltation
path length, which is the characteristic
distance that individual grains hop
downwind as a result of grain collision
on the bed. The saltation path length is a
function of grain size, shape and den-
sity, and mean wind velocity and gusti-
ness close to the bed. A) The migration of
wind ripples generates subparallel lami-
nation. B) The impact angle of saltating
sand grains differs between stoss sides
and lee slopes. High-angle impacts on
B the stoss of the bedforms promotes creep
high-angle of coarser grains towards the ripple crest.
impacts Downwind-facing lee slopes form a
few low-angle impacts shadow zone where relatively few low-
in shadow zone angle impacts occur, thus encouraging
the accumulation of finer grains in ripple
troughs. As ripples migrate downwind,
this sorting mechanism generates lami-
nation with inverse grading.

A B C

1m 1m

D E

FIG. 18.—Examples of eolian grainflows and the characteristic strata that they produce. A) Scarp-recession grainflow, Namibia. B)
Slump-degradation grainflows, Namibia. C) Slab slide failure degenerates downslope into a slump-degradation grainflow,
Namibia. D) and E) Grainflow tongues pinching out into wind-ripple strata. Cedar Mesa Sandstone, Permian , Utah, U.S.A.
38 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

FIG. 19.—Examples of eolian grainfall and the characteristic strata that it produces. A) Saltation of sand-size particles over the brink
of a dune to form a suspension cloud. Deceleration of the airflow in the lee-side depression results in a loss of carrying capacity,
and the grains fall onto the upper part of the lee slope as grainfall deposits. Kalahari Desert. B) Grainfall facies interbedded with
wind-ripple strata. Individual grainfall units rarely exceed 5 mm in thickness but tend to be laterally continuous along the strike
of the cross-bedding for several meters to tens of meters. Interbedded units of wind-ripple strata are thicker (1–2 cm). Cedar Mesa
Sandstone, Permian, Utah, U.S.A. Penknife for scale.

disrupt the airflow, tends to be directed along the lee slope of the
parent bedform.
Superimposition surfaces occur within eolian co-sets (Fig. 30)
and are characterized by planar to highly scallop-shaped erosion
surfaces that dip in a wide range of orientations. In sections
parallel to transport, these surfaces appear similar to reactivation
surfaces, and their identification can be problematic. However, in
sections perpendicular to transport, superimposition surfaces
differ from reactivation surfaces because they are usually ori-
ented oblique to the cross strata that they truncate. Where both
reactivation and superimposition surfaces are developed, the
latter always truncate the former.
Interdune Migration Surfaces.—
that immediately overlie an interdune surface are determined by
the processes operating within the interdune. For example, re-
stricted interdune hollows are typically characterized by dry wind-
ripple strata, damp interdune flats by adhesion strata, and wet
interdune ponds by subaqueous (non-eolian) strata.
Interdune migration surfaces are characterized by low-angle-
inclined erosional surfaces (Fig. 30) that typically extend down-
wind for distances of hundreds of meters to several kilometers.
These surfaces, which bound sets or co-sets, appear planar to
slightly scalloped-shaped in sections parallel to eolian transport,
whilst in sections perpendicular to transport they may be moder-
ately to highly scalloped (Kocurek, 1981; Mountney and Howell,
2000). Interdune surfaces truncate both superimposition and
reactivation surfaces.

Interdune migration surfaces result from the migration of bedforms
separated by interdunes (Fig. 30). The surfaces are carved by the
passage of an erosional scour that defines the interdune trough
between successive bedforms. The depth to which the interdune
trough scours as it migrates influences the extent to which deposits
of the preceding bedform are eroded. The nature of the deposits
Relation between Bed Sets,
Bounding Surfaces, and Bedforms.—
Relating the morphology and migratory behavior of modern
bedforms to the architecturally complex bed-set and bounding-
surface geometries that they generate is an important compo-
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 39

A B

C D

FIG. 20.—Examples of eolian adhesion ripples. A) Sólheimasandur, southern Iceland. Accretion occurs on the steeper upwind-facing
slopes, and the “ripples” migrate upwind over time. B) Askja, central Iceland. C) Adhesion warts, Mojave desert. D) Adhesion
structures on a bedding surface, Precambrian, Greenland (courtesy of John Collinson).

nent in the development of eolian facies models, but is far from
straightforward. Whilst the external morphology of modern
eolian bedforms is readily apparent, their internal bed-set archi-
tecture is difficult to determine. From the geometrical computer
simulations of Rubin (1987a) it is clear that bedforms of similar
external morphologies can generate radically different patterns
of cross bedding because they undertake different migratory
behavior through time. Furthermore, the amount of a bedform
that is accumulated as a bed-set (i.e., not eroded) following the
passage of subsequent bedforms in a train is typically only a
small fraction (usually < 10%) from the basal-most part of the
entire bedform. As such, the reconstruction of bedform mor-
phologies from bed-set architecture usually relies on the as-
sumption that the preserved bottom sets adequately reflect the
depositional processes that occurred on the upper (non-pre-
served) parts of the bedform lee slope.
Reconstructing Bedform Migration Vectors from
Cross Bedding and Bounding Surfaces.—
Simple facies models for “transverse” or “linear” eolian
dune systems are misleading, and the reconstruction of
paleodune migration directions from foreset dip-azimuth data
must be performed with caution. Rubin and Hunter (1983) and
Rubin (1987a, 1987b) document numerous examples where
mean foreset azimuths differ markedly from the migration
direction of parent and/or superimposed bedforms. Such dif-
ferences arise most commonly either from the oblique or along-
crest migration of superimposed dunes over parent bedforms,
the oblique or along-crest migration of scour pits (Fig. 33), or the
transverse migration of scour pits that are offset relative to each
other in successive bedforms within a train such that one side of
the troughs filled with cross strata are consistently eroded by
the succeeding scour, thus preserving a “biased” record. Even
relatively simple bedform configurations can generate bed-set
and bounding-surface architectures that are difficult to inter-
pret, and the belief that mean foreset azimuth direction is an
indicator of paleodune migration direction is incorrect for all
but the simplest of 2D (i.e., straight crestline), invariable, trans-
verse bedforms. Furthermore, the limitations of 2D outcrop and
1D core can also lead to misinterpretation because troughs need
to be observed in three dimensions in order to fully appreciate
their structure (Fig. 34; DeCelles et al., 1983).
The correct method for determining the migration direction of
parent and superimposed bedforms from foreset and bounding-
surface azimuths is discussed by Rubin and Hunter (1983) and well
40 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Modern examples Eolian facies distribution on crescentic dunes Ancient examples

1 plan view 4
Stoss
slope
Grainflow
strata

Grainfall
Lee slope
slipface th
3 5 strata
plin
ne
Du
Damp Wind ripple
Slipface on barchan dune with grainflow avalanches. Wind
1 interdune strata Wind ripple strata in section displaying characteristic pinstripe
ripples in dry interdune. Skeleton Coast, Namibia. lamination. Etjo Formation, NE Namibia.
2 Adhesion
2 strata 5
Large Dune
Contorted Rotated
bedding block
Grainfall
Breccia
Grainflow
Wind ripple
6 deposits
Adhesion structures on a damp interdune surface. Plan view.
Monument Valley, northern Arizona.
4 A Wavy laminae in damp interdune unit passing up into overlying
wind ripple dune plinth strata. Helsby Sandstone, UK.

B
3 Only wind-ripple-dominated 6
basal part of underlying dune set
Small Dune preserved
Grainfall
Grainflow Shallower
truncation
A
B
Deeper
Slipface collapse due to cohesive slab slide. Slabs of wet sand Wind ripple truncation Grainflow tongues merging with wind ripple strata that
fail without loss of internal structure. Askja region, NE Iceland. deposits represent dune plinth deposits. Cedar Mesa Sandstone, Utah

FIG. 21.—Examples of characteristic eolian facies and their distribution on a simple crescentic (barchan) dune and on large-scale and
small-scale eolian dunes truncated to different levels (A, B). Level of truncation influences the preservation of facies types in the
geological record, with features characteristic of the upper slipface lost. Modified after Kocurek and Dott (1981).

illustrated by Kocurek (1996). The trend of the crestline of the
parent bedform is given by the strike of the interdune bounding
surface, the migration direction of the parent bedform being nor-
mal to this trend. The trend of the crestlines of superimposed
bedforms is determined most easily using a stereonet. The line of
intersection between the plane that represents the mean orienta-
tion of the cross strata and the plane that represents the mean
orientation of the superimposition bounding surfaces defines the
along-crest trend of the superimposed dunes. Assuming that there
is no component of along-crest sand transport, then the migration
direction of the superimposed dunes is normal to this trend.
Architectural Elements in Eolian Systems
Modern eolian systems are composed of a suite of geomor-
phic elements that occur on a range of scales, with a variety of
geometries and that occupy a variety of positions within the
eolian system. This section illustrates the range of architectural
elements present in modern eolian deserts and discusses the
influences on the development of these elements.
Dune Elements.—
Eolian dune elements are accumulations of strata generated by
the migration of hierarchies of eolian bedforms of differing sizes
and shapes, moving at varying rates and in varying directions
relative to one another. In situations where the net sediment
budget is positive, accumulation occurs such that bedforms climb
over one another at various angles, thereby preserving sets of cross
strata and associated bounding surfaces (Brookfield, 1977; Rubin
and Hunter, 1982; Rubin, 1987a). These sets and co-sets are them-
selves composed of smaller-scale structures such as wind-ripple,
grainflow (avalanche), and grainfall strata, the relative proportions
and distributions of which are determined by the type of bedforms
on which the processes responsible for their generation operated.
Thus, dune elements are larger-scale stratal units composed of a
variety of arrangements of smaller-scale bodies.
Studies of modern dune elements are many and varied.
Downwind changes in dune type across the Great Sand Dunes,
Colorado, occur in a predictable sequence from a zone of small,
spatially isolated, partly cemented dunes at the upwind margin,
through a zone of undulating barchan, parabolic, and transverse
dunes with intervening interdunes, to a zone of large, actively
accumulating transverse and star dunes separated by only minor
interdune depressions at the downwind margin (Andrews, 1981;
Fryberger 1990a). Complex morphological arrangements of star
dunes in the Gran Desertio Sand Sea, Mexico, accumulated under
the influence of multidirectional wind regimes through the merg-
ing of smaller crescentic and reversing dunes (Lancaster et al.,
1987). Internal dune structures in the Al Liwa sand sea, Abu
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 41

Topset and lee side accretion deposits

A grainfall laminae
grainflow strata
cone-shaped
grainflow foresets
climbing-
ripple strata

wind ripple strata

at dune toe set

Planation surface with plan view geometry of lee slope strata

B grainfall lamination
climbing-ripple
stratification

grainflow (sandflow)
gross stratification

front edge of dune

at time of planation
B

A B 0 6
m

Key
climbing-ripple stratification
dip and strike of
cross strata grainfall lamination
set boundary grainflow (sandflow) lamination

FIG. 22.—A) Schematic diagram showing the small-scale structures of different types of foresets: simple cone-shaped grainflows,
grainfall laminae, and climbing-ripple strata. Plane-bed lamination is often developed on exposed dune crests but is not shown
here. B) Map and cross section of dune foreset cross strata exposed on a planed-off sinuous transverse or barchanoid ridge
dune, showing the distribution of small-scale foreset structures. Simplified from an exposure on Padre Island, Texas, U.S.A.
After Hunter (1977).
42 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A plan viewmain
face of dune
N bounding surface
cross stratum
Transverse dune
trench (b)
side trench section SE
n 4
side tio NW
ec m
trench (c) dir 0
nd
wi
main trench section
SW NE
10
base m
of trenc
0 m 10 h
0
base of dune

main
B plan trench (b) N Barchanoid dune
n
tio
ec

bounding surface
dir

cross stratum
nd

side
wi

trench (c)
main trench section
poor
SW exposure NE
6

poor m
exposure
covered
0
base of dune
side trench section 0 m 8

NW SE

concealed

base of trench
base of dune

C plan
main trench
north wall (b)
N
bounding surface Dome dune
n
ectio cross stratum
win d dir
main trench side wall
south wall (c) (not shown)
0 m 15 dune crest E
main trench, north wall windward (stoss) surface
W

base of trench concealed

main trench, south wall
W small swale on dune surface lee surface
4
E m
0
concealed base of trench concealed

FIG. 23.—The structure of the interior of different dune types revealing various patterns of cross bedding. After McKee (1966) and
McKee (1979). A) Transverse dune. B) Barchanoid ridge dune. Of the modern dunes excavated, this particular example shows
a complexity of internal lamination that would not have been expected from the external morphology and suggests a complex
evolution. C) Dome-shaped dune.
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 43

A B

C D

0.5 m

FIG. 24.—Examples of ductile soft-sediment deformation structures in eolian sandstones. A, B) Small-scale liquefaction structures in
wind-ripple- and grainflow-dominated eolian dune sandstones. Cedar Mesa Sandstone, Permian, Utah, U.S.A. C) Larger-scale
liquefaction structure affecting several dune sets. Cedar Mesa Sandstone. D) Helsby Sandstone Formation, Triassic, England.

Dhabi are architecturally complex, with nested sets of troughs
being generated by a combination of lee-slope reactivation, dune
superimposition, and alongslope migration of linear spurs
(Bristow et al., 1996). Remote-sensing techniques (e.g., Breed and
Grow, 1979; Breed et al., 1979; Breed et al., 1987) provide an
opportunity to appreciate the spatial variability of dune and
associated elements within eolian systems (Fig. 35).
Quaternary eolian systems provide a link between modern
active systems and their ancient counterparts preserved in the
rock record. The Nebraska Sand Hills are a large, stabilized late
Quaternary dunefield, covering 57,000 km2 (Ahlbrandt and
Fryberger, 1980). Transverse dune ridges with up to 100 m of
relief and smaller, spatially isolated barchans are separated by
low-lying interdune areas. Eolian erosion in a series of blowouts
and fluvial drainage pathways exposes the interiors of many of
the bedforms, and analysis of foreset azimuths suggests uniform
migration to the southeast (Ahlbrandt and Fryberger, 1980). The
coastal Akchar eolian system of Mauritania represents the amal-
gamation of several separate ergs composed of complex linear
draa, the accumulation and partial preservation of which have
been controlled by eustatic and climatic variations during the late
Pleistocene and Holocene (Kocurek et al., 1991a). Dating by 14C
methods and archeological artifacts indicates that the eolian
accumulations are associated with three separate constructional
erg-building phases, each partially preserved in a complex mo-
saic. Sand for the construction of more recent eolian bedforms
was derived partly from the cannibalization of older deposits.
The current humid (interglacial) climate means that many
modern eolian dune systems are only partly active and currently
are not accumulating. It is therefore difficult to relate them directly
to the widespread eolian accumulations observed in the ancient
record (Lancaster, 1998). Instead, comparisons between modern
dune elements and their preserved counterparts are supplemented
by theoretical models for bedform climbing and accumulation.
Dry Interdune Elements.—
Interdune flats and hollows that occur between eolian dunes
are considered dry where the depositional surface exhibits no
evidence of sedimentation that is influenced or controlled by
moisture. Dry interdunes are dominated by wind-ripple strata,
though eolian plane beds are also observed and dry interdunes
subject to deflation are sometimes characterized by granule and
pebble lags (Hunter, 1977). The absence of near-surface moisture
means that the degree to which dry interdunes are colonized by
vegetation is minimal and that animal trackways are restricted.
44 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

0.5 m

C D

FIG. 25.—Examples of brittle soft-sediment deformation structures in eolian sandstones. A, B) Slab slide—failure of partly cohesive
sand slabs along a plane of weakness, Askja, Iceland. C) Brittle faulting of grainflow strata. Cedar Mesa Sandstone, Permian, Utah,
U.S.A. D) Brecciated sandstone blocks in the toeset region of a dune set. Helsby Sandstone Formation, Triassic, England.

folds contorted due to fold amplitude decreasing,

loading by sand dune wavelength constant

eolian
dune
preserved erosion surface

0 m 2

FIG. 26.—Schematic illustration of the development of contortion in a siltstone unit as the result of the advance of a large eolian dune
across its surface. Lnagra Formation, Upper Devonian, central Australia. Modified after Collinson (1994).
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 45

A B

C D

FIG. 27.—Examples of non-eolian physical structures associated with eolian environments. A) Desiccation cracks on an interdune
playa lake surface. Sossusvlei, central Namib Sand Sea. B) Aqueous climbing-ripple strata with preserved form sets. Southern
Namibia. C) Mud curls and rain drop imprints. Southeast Spain. D) Sand-filled desiccation crack in mudstone. Lower Cutler Beds,
Permian, Utah, U.S.A.

The geometry of dry interdune elements, such as those of the
Namib Sand Sea (Figs. 35, 36; Lancaster and Teller, 1988), is
largely controlled by the spacing and plan-view shape (morphol-
ogy) of adjoining dunes. Dry interdunes range from spatially
isolated hollows, completely surrounded by dunes, to narrow
but elongate corridors that extend for several kilometers between
rows of transverse or linear dunes, to extensive interdune flats
completely surrounding isolated bedforms (Figs. 35, 36, 37). The
width, length, and degree of interconnection of adjacent dry
interdune corridors typically decrease from the erg margin
toward the center as surrounding dunes increase in size. The
degree to which dry interdunes are partitioned is partly influ-
enced by the degree of sinuosity of adjacent dune forms. Straight-
crested bedforms promote the generation of straight, uninter-
rupted interdune corridors, whilst highly sinuous-crested
bedforms tend to partition interdune corridors into separate
isolated hollows (Fig. 35B, C, 37).
Damp Interdune Elements.—
Interdune flats and hollows that occur between eolian dunes
are considered damp where the depositional surface is in contact
with the capillary fringe of the water table such that sedimentation
is influenced by the presence of moisture (Fig. 38). Damp interdunes
are characterized by a range of adhesion structures (Fig. 20) and
minor salt-precipitation structures (Ahlbrandt and Fryberger, 1981;
Kocurek, 1981). Near-surface moisture encourages colonization by
plants and animals, and a variety of root structures, burrows, and
surface traces on a variety of scales are common (Fig. 29; Ahlbrandt
et al., 1978; Loope, 1988; Hasiotis, 2002). The geometry of damp-
interdune elements can differ substantially from that of dry
interdunes because the presence of moisture acts to stabilize the
sediment surface and restricts the availability of sand within damp
interdunes for eolian transport. Documented examples of water-
table-controlled damp-interdune elements in coastal settings in-
clude Padre Island, Texas (Hummel and Kocurek, 1984; Kocurek et
al., 1992), the Oregon Coast (Hunter et al., 1983), and the Dhahran
area of Saudi Arabia (Fryberger et al., 1983). Examples from inland
settings include parts of the Namib Desert (Lancaster and Teller,
1988) and White Sands, New Mexico (Simpson and Loope, 1985;
Fryberger et al., 1988).
Wet (Flooded) Interdune Elements.—
Interdune flats and hollows that occur between eolian dunes
are considered wet where the water table rises to or above the level
46 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

C D

FIG. 28.—Examples of non-eolian chemical structures associated with eolian environments. A) Laminar calcrete profile, Sossusvlei,
central Namib Sand Sea. B) Sandstone pseudomorphs after desert-rose gypsum. C) Silcrete (chert) developed in an episodically
flooded wet interdune. D) Paleosol with nodular calcrete within an interdune unit. B–D) from the Cedar Mesa Sandstone,
Permian, Utah, U.S.A.

of the depositional surface for protracted periods such that the
interdune is continuously or episodically inundated by water
(Fig. 35C). Mud-, silt-, and sand-grade sediment may be supplied
to wet interdunes via eolian processes, or via fluvial processes.
Additionally, carbonate sediments may also accumulate in long-
lived ponds (Driese, 1985). Sedimentary structures associated
with such settings include subaqueous current and wave ripples
(sometimes with mud drapes), wavy laminae (Kocurek, 1981),
contorted bedding (Doe and Dott, 1980), desiccation cracks,
raindrop impressions, hard-pan crusts, mud flakes, and mud
curls (Fig. 27; Fryberger, 1990b). The continuous or episodic
presence of water encourages plant colonization and animal
activity, and a wide variety of biogenic structures are common
(Ahlbrandt et al., 1978). The preservation potential of delicate
features such as burrows and animal trackways is often enhanced
where such features are emplaced on or in a damp muddy
substrate. Interdunes may be flooded for a variety of reasons,
including ephemeral flash flooding from intra-erg rainfall events,
fluvial inundation from beyond the erg margin, localized and
temporary water-table elevation associated with extra-erg rain-
fall events (Langford, 1989; Langford and Chan, 1989), seasonal
variations in regional ground-water table, and longer-term varia-
tions in the water table that reflect changes in the balance between
ongoing sedimentation, subsidence, and regional climate varia-
tion (Kocurek and Havholm, 1993). In some situations flooding
may occur where infiltration capacity is exceeded because of a
low-permeability horizon at or beneath the interdune surface
that promotes the generation of a perched water table. Docu-
mented examples of permanently and episodically flooded wet-
interdune elements in coastal settings include the tidally flooded
back-barrier dune field of Guerrero Negro, Mexico (Fryberger,
1990c; Fryberger et al., 1990), Padre Island, Texas (Hummel and
Kocurek, 1984; Schenk, 1990; Kocurek et al., 1992), and the Jafurah
area of Saudi Arabia (Fryberger et al., 1984; Fryberger et al., 1988;
Fryberger, 1990c). Examples from inland settings include the
Duero Basin dune field, central Spain (García-Hidalgo et al.,
2002), dune-dammed paleovalleys in the Nebraska Sand Hills
(Loope et al., 1995), and parts of the Skeleton Coast dunefield of
northern Namibia (Stanistreet and Stollhofen, 2002).
Sand-Sheet Elements.—
Sand sheets are areas of wind-blown sand that lack high-relief
bedforms (Fig. 39) but are instead characterized by wind ripples
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 47

A B

0.25 m

C D

FIG. 29.—Examples of non-eolian biogenic structures associated with eolian environments. A) Reptile trackway on bedding surface.
Cutler Group, Permian, Utah, U.S.A. B) Vertebrate indenter mark in dune-foreset facies. Sherwood Sandstone Group, Triassic,
England. C) Near-surface burrows in damp interdune strata. D) Fossilized root structures (rhizoliths). Cedar Mesa Sandstone,
Permian, Utah, U.S.A.

and sometimes low-relief ridge- and dome-like bedforms called
zibar (Nielson and Kocurek, 1986). The development of sand sheets
is controlled by a variety of factors, the most important being the
supply and availability for transport of a surfeit of sand and
granules (Breed et al., 1987; Khalaf, 1989; Kocurek and Nielson,
1986). Sand-sheet deposits may additionally be characterized by
plane beds and long-wavelength wind ripples termed megaripples
(Fig. 8D; Fryberger et al., 1992). The presence of vegetation in some
sand sheets can act to restrict sand movement and dune growth
(Kocurek and Nielson, 1986), as can a shallow water table (Fryberger
et al., 1988). Some sand sheets represent the erosional remnants of
what were previously higher-relief bedforms and therefore reflect
the product of a negative sediment budget and widespread defla-
tion. Sand sheets covered with an armoring of granule and pebble
deflation lags are the end product of this deflationary process.
Individual sand sheets vary in extent from localized sand patches
(< 1 km2) to major geomorphic features such as the > 100,000 km2
Salima sand sheet of the eastern Sahara (Breed et al., 1987; Maxwell
and Haynes, 1989). Other large sand sheets in hot desert settings
have been documented from the Ténéré Desert, Niger (Warren,
1971), and parts of the Namib Desert (Lancaster, 1985). Although
documented less extensively, sand sheets also form important
geomorphic elements in cold-climate deserts (Koster, 1988), such
as those in central Iceland (Fig. 39B; Mountney and Russell, 2004).
Sand-sheet accumulations rarely exceed 10–20 m in thickness in
modern deserts and often border and/or underlie active ergs,
thereby acting as stable bases over which large dune forms migrate
(Fryberger et al., 1979; Khalaf et al., 1984), as is the case for the
northeastern margin of the Australian ergs (Brookfield, 1970).
Sabkha and Playa-Lake Elements.—
Sabkhas are low-relief flats where accumulation occurs wholly
or partly as a result of evaporite precipitation (and in some cases
carbonate sedimentation). The term sabkha was originally used
exclusively for the description of salt flats in coastal desert
settings (Evans et al., 1964; Purser and Evans, 1973) but is now
also widely used for the description of inland salt flats, which are
also termed playa basins. Sabkha sedimentation usually involves
interactions between chemical (precipitate) and eolian processes
and results in the generation of a variety of wavy and crinkly
laminae types that are often disturbed by salt-growth structures
such as teepees. Salt precipitation in sabkhas requires periodic
wetting and subsequent desiccation of the surface and is often
48 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Simple set of cross strata Compound set of cross strata Compound sets of cross strata
(no internal bounding surfaces) (internal bounding surfaces) which together form a coset

I I I
S
R

Coset

Set
Set

Set
R S
R
I I I

Superimposition
surfaces

Supersurface-bounded erg sequences Eolian dune

facies
SS Eolian interdune
Compound
facies
draa Cross strata
system
R Reactivation surface
SS
Simple S Superimposition surface
dune
system I Interdune migration surface
SS Supersurface

FIG. 30.—Models illustrating the geometry of reactivation surfaces, superposition surfaces, interdune migration surfaces, and
supersurfaces in eolian systems. The hierarchical nature of the bounding surfaces, as described by Brookfield (1977), is not always
readily identifiable in the rock record. The surfaces do not necessarily break into universally distinct groups by extent or dip angle.
However, higher-order bounding surfaces always truncate lower-order bounding surfaces. Modified after Kocurek (1991).

interdune migration superimposition reactivation

surface surface surface

cross strata

FIG. 31.—Definition diagram for the hierarchical system for
describing eolian bounding surfaces in compound-cross-
bedded sands and sandstones, as proposed originally by
Brookfield (1977). Interdune migration surfaces arise as a
consequence of dune migration. Superimposition surfaces
represent the migration of superimposed bedforms and/or
scour pits over a larger parent bedform. Reactivation sur-
faces represent partial deflation of a bedform lee slope and
arise in response to periodic changes in bedform migration
direction, steepness, speed, and/or asymmetry.
FIG. 32.—Schematic diagram illustrating a co-set of scalloped
cross strata with internal cyclicity. Two distinct scales of
bounding surface are evident within the co-set. Note how
bounding surfaces at the base of the sets pass down dip into
corrugated surfaces. This relationship, which can poten-
tially occur at a variety of scales, is indicative of eolian dune
migration that occurs synchronously with accumulation in
damp, water-table-controlled interdunes. Based on obser-
vations from the Jurassic Entrada Sandstone, NE Utah,
U.S.A. Modified from Crabaugh and Kocurek (1993).
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 49

Cross-bed azimuth data

A Bedform migration vector
Crestline sinuosity migration vector
Scour pit trend

m
d for n Cre
s
Be rati n
o sinu tline
g o
mi ecti mig osity
i r ratio
d n

B
Tre
rm nd
e dfotion trou of
g
B ra n
g o axe h
mi ecti s
d i r

Downlap

Troughs in the
dip section only

Concordant bedding

FIG. 33.—Examples of common complexities encountered in attempting to relate preserved set architectures to the bedforms
responsible for their generation. A) The migration of 3D (sinuous) bedforms with along-crest-migrating sinuosities preserves
cross strata with mean foreset azimuths that are 35 degrees counterclockwise from the bedform migration direction. B) The
migration of 2D (straight-crested) bedforms that are subject to temporal variations in height generates scour troughs with axes
that trend normal to bedform migration. Models generated using the software of Rubin (1987a).
50 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

A
C D

A B C D

FIG. 34.—Schematic illustration of the geometric complexity of trough-cross strata. A) A vertical section oriented transverse to the
trough axis reveals symmetrical cross-stratification planes that are apparently concordant with the trough base. B) A vertical
section oriented oblique to the same trough axis reveals cross-stratification planes that apparently fill the trough asymmetri-
cally and downlap onto its base. This illustrates the problems associated with the measurement of foreset dip azimuths from
core or outcrop for the purposes of establishing paleo–transport direction from trough-shaped cross strata. Modified after
DeCelles et al. (1983).

controlled by subtle water-table changes, which in coastal set-
tings may be driven by sea-level change. Modern coastal sabkhas
are documented from parts of the Bahrain coast (Doornkamp et
al., 1980), Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (Fryberger et al., 1983), and
southern Kuwait (Gunatilaka and Mwango, 1987).
Non-Eolian Elements.—
Eolian sedimentary systems are often intimately associated
with a range of other depositional environments, including
ephemeral and perennial fluvial systems, alluvial fans, perma-
nent lake bodies, and shoreline and shallow marine systems
(Chan and Kocurek, 1988; Kocurek et al., 2001). The boundaries
between these various depositional environments may be either
sharp or gradational, and non-eolian elements may sporadi-
cally occur within otherwise exclusively eolian systems. For
example, the eastern portion of the Namib Sand Sea is punctu-
ated by a dune-free corridor, 2–4 km wide and 40 km long,
utilized by an ephemeral fluvial system (Fig. 35).
Controls on Eolian Systems
The preservation of an eolian system in the rock record
requires a special set of fortuitous circumstances. Preserved
architecture reflects the culmination of a series of events that
together determine how the geomorphology of the original sys-
tem relates to its preserved sedimentary expression. A variety of
external (allogenic) controls determine how eolian systems are
constructed and undergo accumulation, how their accumulation
is terminated, and how sequences of eolian accumulations can be
preserved into the long-term rock record.
Construction of Eolian Systems.—
Erg construction is a function of sediment supply, sediment
availability, and the transport capacity of the wind (Kocurek and
Lancaster, 1999). Sediment supply is the volume of sediment of a
grain size suitable for eolian transport generated per unit time.
This sediment may form either a contemporaneous or a time-
lagged source of material with which to construct an eolian
system (Kocurek, 1999), and can be derived from a variety of
sources. For example, fluvial, deltaic, and lacustrine terrigenous
sands of the Mojave River and fan delta supply the Kelso Dune
Field, California (Sharp, 1966; Kocurek and Lancaster, 1999),
coastal and shallow marine shelf sands supply the Namib Desert
(Corbett, 1993), evaporitic gypsum from Lake Lucero supplies
the White Sands Dune Field, New Mexico (McKee, 1966), and
glacial and volcaniclastic sediments supply the Askja Sand Sheet,
Iceland (Mountney and Russell, 2004). Sediment availability is the
susceptibility of surface grains to entrainment by the wind
(Kocurek and Lancaster, 1999) and may be controlled by stabiliz-
ing factors such as the presence of vegetation, mud drapes,
coarse-grained lags, an elevated water table, or surface binding
and cementing agents. The extent to which sediment is available
for eolian transport determines the actual sediment transport rate
for a given wind. Transport capacity is a measure of the potential
sediment-carrying capacity of the wind and increases with wind
power. Where sediment supply and/or availability is limited, the
airflow is unsaturated with respect to its potential sediment load
and the wind is potentially erosive. Conversely, an airflow which
is fully saturated with sediment and which undergoes decelera-
tion must drop some of its load, thereby encouraging growth of
eolian bedforms (Figs. 40, 41).
Accumulation of Eolian Successions
and Bedform Climbing.—
Accumulation is the generation of a body of strata by the
passage of sediment from above to below the accumulation
surface (Kocurek and Havholm, 1993) such that the level of that
surface rises over time. The alternatives to accumulation are
bypass, whereby the level of the accumulation surface remains
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 51

A
B

C
N
5 km

B C
FIG. 35.—Image of part of the central Namib Desert. A) Separate elements composed of morphologically distinct bedform types are
evident. B) Complex linear draa with superimposed transverse dune ribs. Net sand transport is from SSW to NNE. C) Mosaic of
pyramid star draa with isolated interdune hollows. White color represents salt and calcrete deposits, green color represents
ponded water in wet interdunes. Image courtesy of NASA Earth Observatory collection.
52 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A B

200 m 300 m

C D

1 km 10 km

FIG. 36.—Examples of modern interdunes showing a range of geometric configurations. A) Fully enclosed isolated depression. B)
Fully enclosed large interdune flats. C) Open interdune flat. D) Open interdune flats forming linear corridors with some enclosed
and isolated interdune depressions. A–C) Namib Sand Sea. D) Sahara. Image courtesy of NASA Earth Observatory Collection.

constant, and erosion (deflation), whereby the surface falls. The
accumulation surface is defined by a plane that joins bedform
troughs, and sediment lying above the surface (including
bedforms) is considered to be in transport, whilst sediment
beneath is considered to have accumulated. Whether accumula-
tion, bypass, or erosion occurs is determined by the net sediment
budget of the system (Mainguet and Chemin, 1983). Where
upstream influx exceeds downstream outflux, a positive net
sediment budget exists and accumulation occurs (Fig. 42). By
contrast, neutral budgets and negative budgets result in bypass
and erosion, respectively. For a given sediment influx, accumu-
lation requires a decrease in the downstream transport rate
and/or a decrease in flow concentration over time (Rubin and
Hunter, 1982; Kocurek and Havholm, 1993). A downstream
reduction in sediment transport rate occurs with a downwind
decrease in wind power (deceleration), often as a consequence of
airflow moving into topographic basins or because of a spatial
decrease in the pressure gradient. A temporal decrease in flow
concentration is achieved most easily by a reduction in dune
size, perhaps due to a temporal decrease in wind power (Kocurek,
1999).
Accumulation of migrating bedforms occurs as a consequence
of bedform climb with respect to the accumulation surface. The
angle of climb is determined by the ratio between the rate of
downwind bedform migration and the rate of rise of the accumu-
lation surface (Fig. 42). For most eolian bedforms, the accumula-
tion rate is small compared to the migration rate and the resultant
angle of climb is low such that subcritical climbing occurs (Hunter
1977), whereby as bedforms move through space they truncate
the upper parts of the preceding bedforms in a train and only the
basal part of the bedforms accumulate to form sets of cross-strata
(Fig. 43). Critical climbing occurs where the angle of climb exactly
matches the angle of the stoss slope of the bedforms such that the
entire bedform is accumulated (Hunter, 1977). Supercritical climb-
ing occurs where the angle of climb is greater than the angle of the
stoss slope of the bedforms and both the lee and stoss slope
deposits accumulate in a manner whereby laminae can be traced
uninterrupted between successive sets. Both critical and
supercritical climbing are usually restricted to ripple-scale
bedforms (Fig. 16).
Accumulation in Dry, Wet, and
Stabilized Eolian Systems.—
In dry eolian systems, the water table lies substantially below
the accumulation surface such that moisture plays no role in
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 53

A bedform lee slope bedform crestline

bedform stoss slope dominant

wind direction
interdune in all cases

D E

FIG. 37.—Schematic illustration of common bedform configurations in plan view. A) Sinuous-crested transverse bedforms with
crestlines of adjoining bedforms 180° out of phase. Note how the interdune flats form spatially isolated depressions. B) Sinuous-
crested transverse bedforms with crestlines of adjoining bedforms perfectly in phase. Downwind decrease in amplitude of
crestline sinuosity to zero. C) Downwind spatial transition from isolated barchan dunes, through a zone of laterally intercon-
nected barchanoid dune ridges, to low-sinuosity transverse dunes. This pattern is a common configuration at upwind erg
margins. D) Longitudinal dunes that undergo a downwind decrease in crestline sinuosity. Note the resultant increase in the
degree of interconnectivity of the interdune flats. E) Downwind spatial transition from isolated barchan dunes to connected
barchans that are transitional into sinuous-crested linear dune ridges with transverse spurs.

influencing sedimentation, and deposition occurs as a result of
aerodynamic configuration alone (Kocurek and Havholm, 1993).
Interdune flats in dry eolian systems tend to be areas character-
ized by accelerating airflow and are therefore sites of potential
erosion where available sediment is swept up and deposited on
the lee slopes of nearby bedforms. This results in bedform growth
and expansion at the expense of the interdune flats. Bedforms in
dry systems tend to commence climbing (i.e., accumulating) only
once the interdune flats have been eliminated (Fig. 44). Thus, dry
eolian successions are dominated by cross-bedded dune strata
and tend to lack thick accumulations of dry-interdune strata.
In wet eolian systems, the water table or its capillary fringe is in
contact with the accumulation surface such that moisture influ-
ences sedimentation, and deposition occurs as a result of both
aerodynamic configuration and moisture content (Kocurek and
Havholm, 1993). Because damp sand is less susceptible to eolian
entrainment than dry sand, the availability of sediment for trans-
port in damp interdunes tends to be restricted. A progressive rise
in the relative water table is the fundamental mechanism by
which both dune and interdune deposits accumulate in wet
eolian systems (Hummel and Kocurek, 1984; Pulvertaft, 1985),
the angle of climb being determined by the ratio between the rate
54 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Damp-to-dry interdune transition Contorted damp–wet interdune

A

Gently deformed
wind ripple strata

Climbing damp-interdune element Contorted dune and interdune sets

Wavy but horizontal Direct indicator of Silt and mud drapes

lamination angle of climb & rare wave ripples

Cyclical dune scour into damp interdune Brittle deformation in dune toe sets

Grainflow strata Trace fossils

Wind-ripple strata
Bedform migration
Burrows
Adhesion strata Rootlets 0 Typical scale (m) 1
Contorted lamination

B Interdune deposits Self-healing deformation -

slipface collapse during rainfall
onlap dune slipface Erosional
due to rapid Trace fossils truncation
rise in water table concentrated in dune Adhesion structures of underlying set
toesets and at margins and wavy lamination (subcritical climb)
of interdunes

Water Table
T4
T2/3
T1

Convoluted bedding - Encroaching dune Intertonguing of dune toeset deposits with

deformation toesets indicate damp interdune strata indicates bedform
following rise static water table advance contemporaneous with damp-
in water table interdune sedimentation
T1 - Static water table and encroaching bedform T3 - Static water table and encroaching bedform
T2 - Rapid water table rise and static bedform T4 - Gradual water table rise contemporaneous
with bedform advance (intertonguing)

FIG. 38.—Styles of interaction between eolian dune and interdune elements. A) Examples of common dune–interdune facies
associations. B) Environmental significance of dune–interdune interactions. Modified after Herries (1992).
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 55

Subaqueous Dry eolian

system

Sabkha
Time Wet eolian
system Lag time

B (-) 0 (+)
Available sediment supply

FIG. 41.—Fields for subaqueous environments, sabkhas, wet eo-

lian, and dry eolian systems as a function of the available
sediment supply over time. At any given time the available
sediment supply is the percentage of the substrate covered by
dry, loose sediment. The initial condition is one of a flat
surface at the level of the capillary fringe of the water table.
After Kocurek and Havholm (1993).

tions, where interdune flats parallel the accumulation surface, the

FIG. 39.—Morphology of modern sand sheets. A) Skeleton Coast,
northern Namibia. Note dune field in far distance. B) Askja,
central Iceland.
of relative water-table rise and the rate of downwind migration of
the bedforms (Fig. 44). Accumulations in wet eolian systems tend
to be characterized by downwind-climbing dune strata sepa-
rated by damp-interdune units. For simple geometric configura-
downwind extent of both dune and interdune units is directly
related to the thickness of the sets that accumulate via the angle
of climb (Fig. 44B).
In stabilizing eolian systems, factors such as vegetation and
surface cementation influence sedimentation, and deposition
occurs as a result of both aerodynamic configuration and the
degree and type of surface stabilization (Kocurek and Havholm,
1993). The mechanisms that cause eolian systems to become
partly or wholly stabilized are many and varied, and thus the
causes and styles of accumulation within such systems are also
highly varied. Vegetation acts to disrupt the primary airflow,
leading to a reduction in sand transport capacity. Precipitation of
early diagenetic cements acts to restrict the availability of sedi-
ment for eolian transport and therefore promotes accumulation.

qi Transport qo
Field of
Influx sediment accumulation
ce

saturation level Accumulation

fa

surface a
ur

+Dh
rs

= Sediment
pe

in transport
su

h=0
Actual upwind Field of erosion
ss

Accumulation
transport rate
pa

(Erosional supersurface)
By

s-strata -Dh
Set of cros
Potential upwind
transport rate
Foreset

0
0 1
Downwind deceleration Downwind acceleration
FIG. 42.—Generation and accumulation of sets of cross strata by
Change in transport capacity =
Potential transport rate at downwind boundary
Potential transport rate at upwind boundary
migrating and climbing bedforms, where all transport is
downwind in the section depicted. Accumulation requires a
positive net sediment budget whereby influx (qi) exceeds
FIG. 40.—Fields of accumulation, bypass, and erosion (deflation- outflux (qo) and the height (h) of the accumulation surface rises
ary supersurface generation) defined by the sediment satura- through time. The ratio between the rate of rise of the accumu-
tion level of the influx and the change in transport capacity lation surface and the rate of downwind migration of the
downwind in the system. The slope of the line of bypass is +1. bedforms determines the angle of climb (α) of the accumu-
Modified after Kocurek and Havholm (1993). lated sets of cross strata.
56 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Transport direction
l a
A l

t supersurface
(former
l a depositional
surface)
bypass
B supersurface

C wet interdune
water table at
depositional
surface

a
2l
D
2t

E
subcritical
climb angle
critical climb
angle
supercritical
climb angle

FIG. 43.—Models for bedform climbing. A) Dry eolian system with 100% loose sand cover (positive angle of climb). λ = downwind
bedform wavelength, α = angle of climb. t = preserved set thickness. Note that wavelength can be measured between successive
interdune hollows, along a former depositional surface, or between successive interdune migration surfaces in an alignment
parallel to the former depositional surface. B) Dry eolian system with < 100% loose sand cover—bedforms grow filling
interdunes but angle of climb is zero. C) Wet eolian system with water-table rise—angle of climb controlled by rate of rise of
water table versus rate of bedform migration. D) Angle of climb same as in Part A but bedform wavelength = 2λ, resulting
preserved set thickness = 2t. E) The effects of a progressive temporal reduction in angle of climb on preserved set thickness for
bedforms of a constant wavelength. Note that critical and supercritical angles of climb are usually restricted to ripple-scale
bedforms. Parts A–D Modified in part after Mountney and Howell (2000).
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 57

UNDERSATURATED METASATURATED SATURATED

ZONE ZONE ZONE
No eolian Positive net sediment budget. Positive net sediment budget.
bedforms Dunes grow at expense of 100% sand cover.
interdunes. Zero climb. Climbing dry erg.

Base level
0% 100%
Increasing sand cover
Theoretical section across upwind erg margin showing zones of
A sand saturation, metasaturation, and undersaturation.

B Accumulation
surface
Climbing
wet erg
C Relative
Water
Table

Capillary
Angle of fringe of Absolute
climb water table Water
Table
A high water table restricts the availability of sediment for eolian transport. As a
result, actual sediment transport rate is typically significantly less than potential Subsidence
sediment transport rate and the wind is not fully saturated.
Eolian bedforms cannot grow to the point where interdune flats are eliminated.
Accumulation in wet eolian systems requires a progressive water-table rise that Relative
protects interdune flats from eolian erosion. Water
The ratio between the rate of water-table rise and the rate of downwind dune Table
migration defines the angle of climb of the system.

FIG. 44.—Models for accumulation in eolian systems. A) In dry systems dune expansion to the point where interdunes flats are
eliminated occurs prior to the onset of accumulation. Based on the discussion of Wilson (1971). B) In wet systems, both dunes and
interdune flats accumulate in response to water-table rise. After Mountney and Jagger (2004). C) Relative water table is
determined by changes in absolute water table and subsidence.

Similarly, the deposition of a thin veneer of mud in episodically
flooded interdune areas also acts to retard the effects of eolian
deflation (Langford, 1989).
Supersurfaces and the Generation of Eolian Sequences.—
A cessation of eolian accumulation occurs where the net
sediment budget switches from positive to neutral or negative.
Under such circumstances, bedform climbing ceases and is re-
placed by either bypass (neutral sediment budget) or deflation
(negative sediment budget) whereby the wind is unsaturated
such that its potential transport rate is not realized and the
accumulation surface falls as the existing accumulation is canni-
balized by the wind. Both bypass and deflation result in the
generation of a supersurface that caps the underlying accumula-
tion (Fig. 45; Kocurek, 1988). The accumulation defines a sequence,
and its bounding supersurface defines a sequence boundary (Figs.
46, 47). Deflation occurs until either the net sediment flux once
again becomes neutral or positive, or until further deflation is
prevented because the accumulation has been deflated down to,
for example, the water table. Deflation in wet eolian systems is
controlled by the rate of water-table fall. In either dry or wet
eolian systems, where it is the water table that acts to limit the
extent of eolian deflation, the resultant supersurface is sometimes
called a Stokes surface (Stokes, 1968). Supersurfaces are also gen-
erated as a product of a depositional change from one environ-
ment to another, for example by marine flooding of a coastal erg
system (Glennie and Buller, 1983; Chan and Kocurek, 1988).
Distinguishing supersurfaces in eolian strata from other types
of bounding surfaces is often difficult. Sedimentary features
associated with supersurfaces include desiccation cracks and
polygonal fractures (Kocurek and Hunter, 1986), bioturbation,
rhizoliths (Fig. 45B; Loope, 1988), halokinetic (salt) structures,
and large-scale erosional “superscoops” (Blakey, 1988a), all of
which yield important paleoenvironmental information regard-
ing the nature of the accumulation surface at the time of
supersurface formation, but not necessarily about the nature of
the accumulation surface at the time when the eolian system was
accumulating. Supersurfaces often have great lateral extent and
continuity and may bound entire eolian accumulations (Kocurek
et al., 1991b; Havholm et al., 1993). As such, they are of a higher
order than autocyclically generated bounding surfaces and trun-
cate all such surfaces. Supersurfaces may be flat lying and planar
or may exhibit considerable local relief (Kocurek et al., 1991a),
making their recognition problematic. Because most supersurfaces
result from external change imposed on a system, their form and
any intimately associated deposits may differ from those associ-
ated with other bounding surfaces. Where accumulations of two
separate eolian sequences are juxtaposed and separated by a
supersurface, that surface might be recognized by a change in
the style of sedimentation and/or set architecture on either side
of the surface. Finally, it may be possible in some situations to
58 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY
A lags may take 104–105 years to form (Loope, 1985). Furthermore,
B of the geologic time over which the eolian systems were active.
→ ensure their long-term preservation. Indeed, evidence from the
FIG. 45.—Examples of supersurfaces from modern and ancient
settings. A) Deflationary supersurface, development of which
is currently ongoing. Eolian deflation of sand-grade material
is concentrating larger clasts at the surface, leading to the
development of an armored lag. Huab Basin, northern
Namibia. B) Deflationary supersurface separating two sepa-
rate erg sequences. Deflation occurred down to the level of the
water table, thereby enabling plant colonization and the de-
velopment of a prominent rhizolith horizon. Cedar Mesa
Sandstone, Permian, Utah, U.S.A.
correlate supersurfaces laterally into adjoining non-eolian envi-
ronments and relate them to basinwide events such as marine
transgressions (Chan and Kocurek, 1988).
Rather like sequence boundaries in marine systems,
supersurfaces can sometimes be generated as a result of geologi-
cally instantaneous (i.e., isochronous) events such as basin-wide
water-table fall due to regional climate change, or their genera-
tion may be time-transgressive (i.e., diachronous). For example, a
supersurface may be generated by the progressive migration
(translation) of entire erg systems (Porter, 1986).
Supersurfaces that bound episodes of eolian accumulation
are diastems that represent a hiatus in deposition. The period of
time represented by a supersurface varies according to the pa-
rameters responsible for its generation and conceivably may
range from a few days to millions of years. The paucity of tools
with which to date eolian successions means that determination
of the length of time represented by supersurfaces is usually
rather speculative. However, sedimentary features such as large
and densely concentrated rhizoliths and thick pebble deflation
recent studies of Quaternary eolian systems (e.g., Kocurek et al.,
1991a; Stokes et al., 1997; Swezey et al., 1999; Swezey, 2001;
Bateman et al., 2003, 2004; Bristow et al., 2005) have utilized
techniques such as 14C, thermoluminescence (TL), and optically
stimulated luminescence (OSL) to date separate eolian accumu-
lations. Although timescales vary according to the scale of
supersurface being studied, most workers are now in agreement
that most major supersurfaces represent geologically significant
periods of nondeposition. Indeed, Loope (1985), Clemmensen et
al. (1994), and Rankey (1997) have argued that generation of
supersurfaces in some eolian successions may occur as a result of
Milankovitch-style orbital forcing with periodicities of 18–400
kyr. In many cases, the amount of time represented by eolian
accumulations is likely to be significantly less than the amount of
time represented by the intervening supersurfaces, and, by infer-
ence, preserved eolian successions represent only a small fraction
Preservation of Eolian Sequences.—
The accumulation of eolian sequences does not automatically
Quaternary record (Kocurek et al., 1991a; Kocurek, 1999) argues
that entire ergs were constructed and accumulated to consider-
able thicknesses, only to be eroded away and leave no record.
Long-term preservation requires that the body of strata be placed
below some regional baseline of erosion, beneath which erosion
does not occur. Thus, the rate of generation of accommodation
and the rate at which eolian accumulations fill that space is a
fundamental control on preserved architectural style (Howell
and Mountney, 1997). The principal agents that generate accom-
modation and promote preservation are subsidence, water-table
rise, sea-level rise, surface stabilization, and exceptional circum-
stances (Fig. 48).
Subsidence of an accumulation beneath the baseline of ero-
sion occurs because of tectonism and/or sediment compaction
(Blakey, 1988b; Blakey et al., 1988). In many systems, the water
table defines the baseline of erosion. A rise in the water table may
be relative, whereby an accumulation subsides through a static
water table, or absolute, whereby the water table rises in response
to a shift to more humid climatic conditions (Fig. 44C). In the case
of coastal eolian systems such as Guerrero Negro (Fryberger et al.,
1990), changes in water table may be driven by changes in relative
sea level. Sea-level rise may also promote eolian preservation
where ergs are inundated following marine transgression and
subsequently buried by marine strata, as described for the Leman
erg of the Permian Rotliegend Group, southern North Sea (Glennie
and Buller, 1983). Surface stabilization, for example by the devel-
opment of a vegetative cover associated with a shift to a more
humid climate, may also increase long-term preservation poten-
tial. However, the factor that enables the stabilization may be
transient in nature, and, once that is removed the accumulation
may be subject to erosion.
ANCIENT DESERT EOLIAN SYSTEMS
The Nature of the Preserved Eolian Record
Documented examples of ancient eolian systems exposed in
outcrop range from the description of characteristic facies to
detailed architectural reconstructions of entire eolian sequences
and in-depth discussions regarding their response to various
forcing factors that operate over a range of geological timescales.
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 59

a Erosional Bypass Depositional

(change of
Dry Damp Dry Damp environment)
Falling water
table
Unstabilized

Wet eolian
system
Dry eolian Dry eolian Wet eolian
system system system
(negatively (zero angle (zero angle
climbing of climb) of climb, static
Water table/ water table)
dunes) sabkha flat
Stabilized

Vegetated Vegetated or
relict dunes or cemented
trailing margin dunes

Reg Water table/

sabkha flat

b Level of accumulation surface

Height

Height

Water
Water table level
Time table level
Time

Dune sediment Supersurface

Strata indicating sedimentation on a damp surface

FIG. 46.—Types of supersurfaces. A) Classification of supersurfaces based on net sediment budget (erosional, bypass, depositional),
and the nature of the substrate (dry, damp, stabilized, unstabilized). Downward-pointing arrows indicate erosion of the substrate,
horizontal arrows indicate bypass. Modified after Kocurek and Havholm (1993). B) Example of supersurface generation due to
deflation to the water table (Stokes surface) and an illustration of how the rate of water-table rise can determine the thickness of
a preserved succession. Modified after Havholm and Kocurek (1994).
60 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Deflationary supersurface model Bypass supersurface model

A Dunes migrate
B
Dunes migrate
across former across former
erosion surface. erosion surface.
Zero angle of climb Zero angle of climb

Dunes and interdunes Dunes climb

climb preserving preserving cross-
cross-bedded sets bedded sets
and inclined BS’s and inclined BS’s

Dunes cease climbing Flooding event.

but continue to migrate. Fluvial channel
Net deposition is zero and overbank
(eolian bypass) deposits

Deflation to water table. Continued migration

Surface colonized by of non-climbing
plants and burrowing dunes across
invertebrates flood surface

Renewed eolian Renewed eolian

accumulation accumulation
generates buries bypass
new sequence supersurface

New deflation event New flood event

generates another generates another
deflationary bypass
supersurface supersurface

FIG. 47.—Models for the accumulation and preservation of eolian sequences bounded by deflationary and bypass supersurfaces. A)
Deflationary supersurface model in which eolian accumulation precedes partial deflation to the level of the water table.
Supersurfaces in this example are characterized by rhizoliths, though features such as desiccation polygons, salt structures, and
bioturbation may also be present. Modified after Loope (1985). B) Bypass supersurface model in which eolian accumulation
precedes bypassing due to interdune flooding. Modified after Langford and Chan (1988).

Whilst the Permian to Jurassic eolian outcrops of the Colorado
Plateau, western United States, have been the focus of most
intense study in recent years (Blakey et al., 1988), outcrop studies
from all seven continents now provide a considerable database of
case examples (Table 1). Well studied regions include the Permo-
Triassic of Europe, the Proterozoic of the Indian subcontinent, the
lower Paleozoic of the central USA, and the Mesozoic of eastern
South America and southwestern Africa.
Although studies of ancient systems are blessed with several
advantages over those of modern systems, they also face numer-
ous problems. Advantages include an ability to trace and corre-
late key surfaces of environmental significance over large (erg-
scale) distances, an ability to reconstruct eolian set architecture in
3D and observe complex relationships between bounding sur-
faces, an ability to establish the complex 3D preserved geometry
of and style of interaction between eolian and non-eolian archi-
tectural elements, and an ability to determine how the accumula-
tion of eolian sequences has been controlled by external forcing
mechanisms such as geotectonic basin evolution. Problems faced
by workers investigating ancient eolian systems include an in-
ability to directly relate preserved sedimentary architecture to
the processes responsible for its generation and the resultant
requirement for interpretation, an inability to demonstrate un-
equivocally a link between allogenic forcing mechanisms such as
climate change and the generation of stratal bodies and their
bounding supersurfaces, and a general paucity of material and
techniques suitable for the absolute dating of stratal units.
Dry Eolian Systems
Dry eolian systems, where accumulation is controlled by
aerodynamic configuration alone, are widely documented in the
rock record. The Page Sandstone of Utah and northern Arizona is
a dry eolian system represented by separate supersurface-bounded
sequences composed of climbing dune strata and an absence of
extensive interdune-flat strata (Kocurek et al., 1991b; Havholm et
al., 1993; Havholm and Kocurek, 1994). The eolian succession
interfingers with transgressive marine tongues of the neighbor-
ing Carmel Formation, indicating a coastal erg setting (Blakey et
al., 1996). The supersurfaces, which are often overlain by sabkha
and subaqueous strata, have great lateral extent and are charac-
terized by polygonal fractures (Kocurek and Hunter, 1986) and a
corrugated, erosional relief. Eolian-dominated sequences record
episodic, punctuated accumulation, and, rather than being stacked
vertically, occupy laterally variable paleo-depocenters. Regional
mapping and correlation indicates that dry eolian strata accumu-
lated as a consequence of plentiful sand supply from the nearby
shoreline during periods of marine regression, whilst deflation to
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 61

accumulation above
A preservation space

water table

Dry eolian system, accumulation and

accumulation preservation space
exceeds accumulation by subsidence
preservation space
preservation space by water table

B accumulation and
preservation space
unfilled accumulation
and preservation space
by subsidence by subsidence

Dry eolian system,

water table
accumulation
does not exceed accumulation preservation space
preservation space by water table

C water
table

preservation space
Wet eolian system, by subsidence
accumulation accumulation and
exceeds preservation accumulation preservation space
space by subsidence by water table

unfilled preservation space

D by subsidence

water table
Wet eolian system,
preservation space
accumulation does not by subsidence
exceed preservation accumulation accumulation and preservation
space by subsidence space by water table

FIG. 48.—Components of accumulation and preservation space for dry and wet eolian systems. A) Dry eolian system where the
accumulation has built above the preservation space because a positive net sediment budget exists. Long-term preservation
potential of that part of the accumulation above the preservation space line is low. B) Dry eolian system where the accumulation
has not filled the available preservation space. C) Wet eolian system where water-table rise has enabled the accumulation to
build above that preservation space generated by subsidence. A fall in water table results in deflation. D) Wet eolian system
where the water table is below the preservation space line and the preservation space remains unfilled. Modified after Kocurek
and Havholm (1993).
62 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY
the water table and supersurface generation occurred during
periods of reduced eolian sand supply during marine transgres-
sion (Havholm and Kocurek, 1994).
The Jurassic Navajo Sandstone of southwestern Utah (Fig.
49A; Middleton and Blakey, 1983; Herries, 1993) and the Juras-
sic Wingate Sandstone of southeastern Utah (Fig. 49B;
Clemmensen and Blakey, 1989; Clemmensen et al., 1989) are
both examples of predominantly dry eolian systems that were
subject to episodic fluvial incursions into their erg margins,
possibly as a result of Milankovitch-style climatic fluctuations
(Clemmensen et al., 1994).
The Cretaceous Etjo Formation of northwestern Namibia
represents the deposits of a dry eolian system (Mountney et al.,
1998, 1999a) and indicates rapid basin infilling by eolian strata
that is characterized by superimposition surfaces that record the
migration of crescentic oblique dunes over larger, slipfaceless
transverse draa (Figs. 50, 51). The preserved thickness of indi-
vidual eolian sets varies from 52 m in the basin depocenter to only
8 m at the basin margin (Mountney and Howell, 2000) as a result
of increased angles of bedform climb toward the basin center
made possible by the increased availability of accommodation in
this region. Temporal reductions in preserved set thickness and
A 2000), and from the Permian White Rim Sandstone in southeast-
B traced downwind for several kilometers, where they climb through
FIG. 49.—Examples of dune sets in dry eolian systems. A) Navajo
Sandstone, Jurassic, north of Moab, southeastern Utah, U.S.A.
B) Wingate Sandstone, Jurassic, Upper Indian Creek, south-
ern Utah, U.S.A.
angle of climb in the upper part of the succession reflect progres-
sive loss of accumulation space as the erg filled the basin. Eolian
activity ended abruptly as a result of the emplacement of flood
basalts of the Etendeka igneous province across the erg (Jerram et
al., 1999; Jerram et al., 2000). These fluid lava flows “drowned”
the erg, preserving bedforms with heights and downwind wave-
lengths of up to 100 m and 1.3 km, respectively (Mountney et al.,
1999b). Subsequent erosion has exposed the cores of these
bedforms and has enabled the original bedform morphology to
be related directly and unequivocally to the preserved bounding-
surface architecture (Figs. 50, 51). Similar preservation of eolian
bedforms following burial by basalt lava flows has also been
documented from the Cretaceous Botucatu Formation in the
Paraná Basin of Brazil (Scherer, 2000, 2002), both episodes relat-
ing to the initial onset of breakup of West Gondwana and the
opening of the South Atlantic Ocean.
Other examples of preserved but partly denuded and re-
worked relict dune topography include the Permian Leman
Sandstone of the UK southern North Sea (Glennie and Buller,
1983) and the Permian Yellow Sands of northeast England
(Clemmensen, 1989; Chrintz and Clemmensen, 1993), both of
which are examples of dune flooding by rapid transgression of
the Zechstein Sea. Relict dune topography is also recorded from
parts of the Jurassic Entrada Sandstone in Utah (Eschner and
Kocurek, 1986, 1988) and in New Mexico (Benan and Kocurek,
ern Utah (Huntoon and Chan, 1987; Kamola and Huntoon, 1994).
Wet Eolian Systems
Wet eolian systems, in which accumulation is controlled by
progressive water-table rise that occurs in conjunction with ongo-
ing eolian activity, are less widely recognized in the rock record
than dry systems. The Jurassic Entrada Sandstone of the Colo-
rado Plateau (Fig. 52) represents the accumulation of a coastal to
inland eolian system that is composed of a complex arrangement
of eolian dune, damp–wet interdune, and sabkha elements
(Kocurek, 1981). Flat-bedded sabkha deposits immediately over-
lie the uppermost surface of the marine Carmel Formation
(Kocurek, 1981; Crabaugh and Kocurek, 1993; Carr-Crabaugh
and Kocurek, 1998), and dune elements separated by damp and
wet interdune flat elements rise off this basal surface and can be
the stratigraphy at angles of a few tenths of a degree. In the middle
part of the Entrada succession, climbing dune–interdune ele-
ments are truncated against more flat-bedded sabkha deposits in
a relationship that represents the termination of erg accumula-
tion and the generation of a supersurface that formed as a result
of either a static or falling water table (Crabaugh and Kocurek,
1993). The upper part of the succession is again composed of
downwind-climbing dune and damp or wet interdune elements
that signify accumulation controlled by a progressively rising
water table. Because the sabkha accumulations off which dune
elements climb represent a former depositional surface, the down-
wind distance between the points at which dune and interdune
elements rise off the sabkha surface can be used as a measure of
downwind dune wavelength and interdune-flat width, respec-
tively (Kocurek, 1981). Estimates from the lower part of the
succession suggest that the dune elements were generated by
bedforms with downwind wavelengths of 600–700 m, whilst the
adjacent interdune flats were up to 250 m wide.
Interactions between water-table-controlled eolian dune and
ephemeral fluvial systems have been documented from the
Triassic Wilmslow, Helsby, and Ormskirk Sandstone Forma-
tions, NW England (Øxnevad, 1991; Herries and Cowan, 1997;
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 63

A B

C D

25 m

FIG. 50.—Eolian dune bedforms and strata from the Etjo Formation, Cretaceous, NW Namibia. A) 52-m-thick cross-stratified set with
asymptotic base. This is the thickest single bed-set documented from anywhere in the world. Person for scale. B) 90-m-high
compound draa drowned by basalt. C) Series of three stacked transverse dune forms, each covered by basalt. D) Barchan dune
draped by basalt.

Mountney and Thompson, 2002). Eolian successions are charac-
terized by lenses of damp and wet interdune strata that exhibit
an intertonguing, transitional relationship with the toesets of
overlying eolian dune elements, signifying dune migration that
was contemporaneous with water-table-controlled accumula-
tion in adjacent interdunes (Figs. 53, 54; Pulvertaft, 1985). Down-
wind changes in the geometry and facies of the interdune
elements indicate periodic interdune expansion and contrac-
tion in response to changing groundwater-table level and epi-
sodic flooding (Fig. 55). Sets of cross strata and their bounding
surfaces represent the products of both oblique migration of
superimposed dunes over slipfaceless, sinuous-crested parent
bedforms, and lee-slope reactivation under non-equilibrium
flow conditions (Mountney and Thompson, 2002).
Some spectacular examples of various styles of eolian–fluvial
interaction are exposed in Pennsylvanian–Permian Lower Cutler
Beds of the Paradox Basin, southeast Utah, U.S.A. (Fig. 56). Stratal
relationships between eolian and fluvial strata document fluvial
incursions along open interdune corridors, the ponding of flood
waters by eolian dunes, the incision of large fluvial channels into
eolian accumulations, and the reworking of eolian dune and
interdune deposits by intra-erg fluvial systems.
Stabilized Eolian Systems
Stabilized eolian systems, in which accumulation occurs be-
cause agents such as vegetation or cementation act to restrict the
availability of sediment for transport, are not widely recognized
in the rock record. Part of the Tertiary Tsondab Sandstone, which
underlies much of the modern Namib Desert, is characterized by
sets of cross-stratified dune strata that contain abundant plant
root structures. The prevalence of these structures throughout
much of the succession indicates that the bedforms were veg-
etated to some degree during their construction, and the accumu-
lation most likely represents an ancient stabilizing dune system
(Kocurek et al., 1999). Prior to the development of widespread
land-based vegetation in the Devonian, chemical and physical
factors, rather than biogenic factors, were the main stabilizing
agents. A high water table, surface and near-surface cementation
by chemical precipitates, periodic flooding, and the presence of
coarse-grained lags are all considered to enable accumulation in
warm-climate stabilizing eolian systems (Kocurek and Nielson,
1986), whilst permafrost may play an important role in enabling
accumulation in cold-climate systems (Mountney and Russell,
2004). Sand-sheet deposits in the Upper Silurian Tumblagooda
64 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

FIG. 51.—Depositional models illustrating the temporal evolution of the Etjo Sandstone Formation. A) Restricted sediment supply,
underfilled basin. B) High sediment supply, rapid infilling of accumulation space. C) Exceptional preservation of original
bedform morphologies because of flood basalt emplacement. Modified after Jerram et al. (1999) and Jerram et al. (2000).
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 65

moisture, possibly fog, and minor salt deposition acted as the

binding agents (Trewin, 1993). Early Proterozoic eolianites of the
Whitworth Formation, Queensland, Australia, are characterized
by cross-stratified sets with irregular, overhanging tops and
pseudomorphs of gypsum and anhydrite (Simpson and Eriksson,
1993). These deposits are considered to have accumulated as a
result of early cementation by evaporites and/or adhesion of
damp sand within the capillary fringe. Despite an abundant
sediment supply and a net aggradational setting, sand-sheet
deposits of the Proterozoic Shikaoda Formation, India, were
stabilized to the point where dunes did not develop but rather
sand-sheet accumulation occurred, short-term preservation of
which was enabled by repeated flooding into the low-lying
supratidal flat region, whilst long-term preservation was con-
trolled by subsidence of the accumulation below the water table
(Chakraborty and Chakraborty, 2001).

FIG. 52.—The Entrada Sandstone, Jurassic, exposed in Arches
National Park, southeast Utah, U.S.A.
Sandstone of western Australia accumulated through surface
binding or cementation, as indicated by the presence of corru-
gated tops to dune sets, broken beds, wind-deflation ridges, and
open burrows, all of which suggest that a combination of surface
Mixed Eolian Systems
Some eolian successions exhibit features characteristic of dry,
wet, and stabilized systems. The Permian Cedar Mesa Sandstone
of southeast Utah, U.S.A. (Loope, 1984) exhibits a complex spatial
variation in sedimentary architecture which, in terms of paleo-
geographic setting, reflects a transition from a dry erg center,
through a water-table-controlled eolian-dominated erg margin,

0 2 4 6 8 10

meters

Facies Sedimentary structures

B C Vegetation Cross-bedding Sand volcano

Eolian dune Contorted

Flame structure
foreset bedding
Eolian dune Nearly horizontal Rip-up
toeset wind ripple pebble clast
Eolian dune
Wave ripple Desiccation crack
flank
Footprint indenter
Dry interdune Wavy lamination mark and burrows

1m 1m Damp interdune Planar lamination Massive

FIG. 53.—Eolian dune–interdune architecture in the Wilmslow Sandstone Formation (Sherwood Sandstone Group), Triassic,
England. A) Dune sets with numerous reactivation surfaces are interbedded with damp interdune units characterized by wavy
lamination. B) Detail of dune set and underlying wavy-laminated interdune. C) The top of the formation is delineated by a fluvial
incision surface.
66 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

o
175 > <0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Facies Sedimentary structures Symbols
13 14 15 7 5o
12 1
10 11 Cross-bed
o
8 9 2 Fluvial Cross-bedding Sand volcano 20>224
<355 7 dip azimuth

1 2 3 4 5 6 3
4 meters Contorted Bounding surface
5 Fluvial (vf sand) Flame structure 12>162
bedding dip azimuth
20
6 No vertical exaggeration 180 >18
o
19 <0
Rip-up Translatent
19 7 16 17 1 85o Eolian dune Wind ripple TS
14 15 pebble clast strata
8 13 2
18 25 11 12
9 5o> 8 9 10 3
Dry interdune Wave ripple Desiccation crack GF
Grainflow
10 o
6 7 4 strata
17 11 <000 3 4 5
5
2
12 1
6 Set identifier
16 26 o Damp interdune Wavy lamination Indenter mark H06
7 5> label
15 20 F17 8 o

9 Wet interdune Planar lamination Massive

Modern 175 >
14 19 vegetation 29 30
F06
27 28

meters
13>310 25 26 20
13 18>305 16>336 24
18 F05 06>080 23
F07
21 22
19 20 19
12 17 18>315 18
17>310 F16
16 17
F15
F04
14 15 18
meters

11 16 F09 12 13
F03 10 11
o
8 9 17
10 15 <355 5 6 7
F04
3 4
F10
G0 2 16
9 14 F09 F08 F10 8 1
D06

16>288
15
8 13
TS
16>280
F18 20
04>268 F10
F10 14
7 D03 12 F01
08>220 24>250 F13 19
22
>2 13
6 D05 64 11 F13

meters
D02 D07 16 10
>2
52 >2
38
18
18>230 E01 18 12
5 TS 14>240
16>235 26>350 16
>2
36 10 G0
7
D04 17

meters
>2
24>326 20 54 H12
10>220 >2 11
4 44 22 TS
9 F13
F12
16>305 D01
>3
44 16
F11 10
3 8 H17
F02 15
F12
G0 9
2 24
>2 7 6

20
40 14 H 22
>2 TS 8
15 46 6
1 14 08>080 F12

12 13 1 E02
24>240 13 H16
11 20>224 G0 H20
18>264
10 18 03
E
12>162 24>012 20>230
5
7
0 8 9 2 >2
54
5 F14 H21 H19 H15 GF TS
7 20>222 25>012 12
6 3 21>210 20
5
meters 19>030 >2 G0 H18
4 TS 24 4 6
3 4 4
1 2 11
H07

meters
20 H13
5 >2
24 5
3
16>244
me 6
18 19 G0 G0
10 12>220
ter 7 17 3 9 H06 4
2 16 1 H09
s 14 15 G0
9 14>280 H08
E

8 13 2 20 3 H14 H05
11 12 >2
24 G0 TS 3
1 10 4
S

9 9 3 G0
TS
8
meters
7 8 1 20>290 16>310
<0 10 6 4 H14 H12
2
5
7 101 4 H07 H03
20 1 5o 12 1 2 3 me5 G0
2
7
16>254
14>230 08>310 H03
H02 Plaque

ter 6 1
N

H10 H11 H01

H04
2
19 s 7 6 10>230 H06 H02
14>300
W

3 14>308 0
o <0 8 12>308

160 >
18 4 7 5
5 1 0o 30
19 20 10 28 29
17 6 18 2 4 27
16 17 25 26
7 14 15 3 23 24
16 12 13 3 21 22
8 11 4 20
9 10 19
o 5 18
15 9 25 o <340 6 7 8 2
15 16 17
5>
meters
10 4 5 6 14
3 12 13
14 11 1 2 7 1 10 11
8 9
12 8 7
5 6
13 9 0 4
2 3
10 1
12 11 o
19
175 > <065o
12 o
25 o <355
meters

11 6 7 8
18 13 0> 5 9 10 o
175 >
18>310 3 4 11 12
10 14 1 2 13 14 15 o
17 8
15 16 17 18
245o> <355 6 7
12>300 19 4 5
9 20 3 20
16 21 22 1 2
23
8 20>300 14>250 19
15 19
12>240
7
20 18
14 18
24>348 19
6 17
13 17
5
I09
18 16
I08 J08
12 16
I09

4 17 15
J11
11 15
meters

J09
3 16 14
I10 10 12>280
14
2 I04 16>255 15 13
M05
9 J08
13
I07 18
12>250
I07
1 18>312 >2
56
14 12
08
>2 8 18>350
J07
18>285 22 12
>2
I09 55 14>276 18>270 20>248

meters
30
0 K01 M02
13 11
14 7 20
>2 10>265 >2 11
12>335
meters

95 12
TS 14 14>232 TS
> 26 08>228 12 10
14 I0
>3 3
24 24>196 M04
I05 65 J10
>2
38 10 L01 22>252
0 10
I01
12>282 12>290 J10 GF
K06
TS 20>246 12>230 11

meters
1 12>274 10>250 9
20 14
5 18>288 TS J06
>3
00
>3
30
22
>2 9 GF
2 18>320
J05 28
GF 24>2
GF
10
I02 I06 12>290 10>196 10>226
14
I05
3 14>258 M03 8
3 >3 4 J04 6 K03
8 18>284
14>276
10>200
00 J03 TS 20>300
4 J02
K0
7 L02 9 16>198 N02
08>250 18>284 7
3 J01
5 1 7 20>296 12>234
19 20 20
>2
20
>2
6 18 2 66 76
08>232 8 6
17 K02
me 7 2
14 15 16 3 TS 6 12>238 18>220 10>23
ter 11 12 13
4
14
>2
12
>2
26
>2 7 14>282 5
s 8 1
9 10 80 70
K05 18
30
5 M01
18>228
14>250
GF N01

meters
9 8 5 >2
7 20>6350
TS 56
5 6 12>250
4
10 0 4 6 4
2 3 10
>2 10>256
11 1 7 36 5 3
12 me 8 K04 14 3
>2
24 4
ter 9 2
s 10
2
3 1
11
1
12 2
6 7 8 0
13 0 5 9 10
3 4 11 12
14 1 2 13 1
14 15 8
15
16
meters16 17 18 19 0 4 5 6 7
20 3
meters
21 22 1 2
23

FIG. 54.—Sedimentary architecture of part of the Helsby Sandstone Formation (Sherwood Sandstone Group), Triassic, England.
Modified after Mountney and Thompson (2002).

to an outer erg margin subject to episodic fluvial incursion and table, and regionally extensive deflationary supersurfaces devel-
stabilization (Langford and Chan, 1988, 1989). Accumulation in oped during periods of widespread water-table fall (Fig. 47;
the erg margin was controlled by periodic water-table rise coupled Loope, 1985; Langford and Chan, 1988). A spectrum of deposi-
with ongoing dune migration and associated changes in the tional models that reflect a range of dry to wet and partly
supply and availability of sediment. Variation in the level of the stabilized eolian elements is envisaged to account for the complex
water table relative to the accumulation surface determined the architecture of the succession (Figs. 58, 59).
nature of interdune sedimentary processes, and a range of dry,
damp, and wet (flooded) interdune elements are recognized CONSTRUCTION OF FACIES MODELS
(Figs. 57, 58; Mountney and Jagger, 2004). Variations in the FOR DESERT EOLIAN SYSTEMS
geometry of these units reflect the original morphology and
migratory behavior of dunes and spatially isolated dry interdune Approach to Facies Modeling
hollows in the erg center, locally interconnected damp and/or
wet interdune ponds in the eolian-dominated erg margin, and Studies of modern and ancient eolian systems document a
fully interconnected, fluvially flooded interdune corridors in the wide range of facies variability and architectural complexity and
outer erg margin. Relationships between eolian dune and demonstrate that there is no such thing as a “typical” eolian
interdune units indicate that dry, damp, and wet interdune system. As a consequence, it would be counterproductive to
sedimentation occurred synchronously with eolian bedform mi- attempt to explain eolian systems in terms of a single facies
gration. Temporal variation in the rates of water-table rise and model, nor is it feasible to propose a large number of separate,
bedform migration determined the angle of climb of the erg- highly specialized models that could together account for all
margin succession, such that accumulation rates increased dur- possible variations; this would defeat one of the fundamental
ing periods of rapidly rising water table, whilst sediment bypass- purposes of a facies model, namely to act as a norm with which to
ing (zero angle of climb) occurred in the aftermath of flood events compare individual examples. Rather, eolian sedimentology and
in response to periods of elevated but temporarily static water stratigraphy has now progressed to a state where it is possible to
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 67

I Interdune migration surfaces

03 30
S Superimposition surfaces
0 0
o

12 2
0 10
o
R Reactivation surfaces
o

Superimposed bedforms Slipfaced primary

o
migrate toward 270° bedform
Spatially isolated
Damp–wet Primary bedforms
wet interdune
interdune corridor migrate toward 300°
Minor
Water fluvial
table I channel
S I
Laterally
interconnected I I I
damp interdune I I
strata S S S
R I
I S R R
S I
I I S
n
uccessio
Fluvial s
Isolated damp interdune
strata in trough base
Large-scale disorganized Interdune strata thicken and
4 trough cross-bedding pinch as they climb downwind
Downwind climb in response to water-table changes
m Abandoned fluvial of eolian sets
0 0 m 20 topography with relative to top of
mud drapes fluvial unit

FIG. 55.—Depositional model for the Triassic Helsby Sandstone Formation, Cheshire Basin, UK. Dune elements climb downwind, as
do adjacent interdune elements, which exhibit downwind facies variability that reflects subtle changes in the level of the water
table relative to the accumulation surface during accumulation. Lateral connectivity of the interdune elements is controlled by
dune morphology, and both isolated interdune hollows (ponds) and interconnected, throughgoing corridors are recognized.
Modified after Mountney and Thompson (2002).

construct “tailor-made” facies models that can be designed to
help solve specific problems. This new approach to eolian facies
modeling requires two basic types of information: (1) a database
containing a description of the physical attributes of the elements
that are known to make up eolian systems, and (2) a set of rules (i.e.,
first principles) that dictate the various permissible ways in
which these elements can fit together in order to construct a viable
model, based on our understanding of how physical processes
operate within modern systems. Architectural elements are the
basic physical building blocks of eolian systems and include
facies, bed-sets, and bounding surfaces, whilst the physical at-
tributes of these elements are descriptions of parameters such as
likely size and shape. Successful facies models need to encapsu-
late architectural complexity on a range of different scales from
the grain and lamina scale, through the bed-set and co-set scale,
the architectural-element scale, right up to the sequence and
basin scale.
Static Versus Dynamic Facies Models
In static facies models, the various parameters that control
the construction, accumulation, and preservation of the eolian
system remain constant through both time and space and, as a
consequence, the arrangement of architectural elements within
the resultant models is relatively simplistic. Many early eolian
facies models, such as erg margin, transverse dune, and longi-
tudinal dune models, are static in that they do not fully incorpo-
rate the effects of changes in parameters such as sediment flux
and as a consequence do not explain temporal changes in dune
size, angle of climb, and the generation of supersurfaces (Fig.
60). Static models nevertheless remain useful because they act as
a basis for the fundamental description of new examples, they
can be used for prediction, they can be used to infer processes of
deposition, and they act as a norm against which individual
examples can be compared. However, such models usually
cannot explain the complex architectures and juxtaposition of
elements that arise as a consequence of changes in allogenic
controlling parameters.
Dynamic facies models incorporate the effects of spatial and
temporal variations in one or more of the fundamental control-
ling parameters. Key controlling parameters that are known to
change both spatially and temporally include the rate of sand
supply, the availability of sediment for transport, and the carry-
ing capacity of the wind, which together define the sediment state
of an eolian system and govern its construction (Kocurek and
Lancaster, 1999), the level of the water table and its rate of change,
the level of the equilibrium height (below which a positive net
sediment budget exists), and the distribution of stabilizing fac-
tors, which together determine the mechanism, rate, and style of
eolian accumulation (Kocurek and Havholm, 1993), and the rate
of subsidence, which partly defines the extent to which eolian
accumulations are preserved.
68 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

3m

B C

0.5 m

FIG. 56.—Examples of eolian–fluvial interaction in the Lower Cutler Beds, Pennsylvanian–Permian, Utah, U.S.A. A) Fluvial strata
infilling interdune hollow and onlapping onto flanks of eolian dune form. B) Large fluvial channel cutting into older eolian dune
sequence. C) Erosionally based fluvial channel and paleosol between two eolian dune sequences.

Static Eolian Facies Models
A range of static models can be used to illustrate the styles of
eolian architecture that can develop depending on sediment
availability (a parameter that is often determined largely by the
level of the water table relative to the accumulation surface) and
angle of climb of the system (Fig. 61). A continuum from wet to
dry systems occurs with increasing sediment availability (Kocurek
and Havholm, 1993). A high water table restricts sediment avail-
ability and enables the generation of extensive interdune flats
separated by eolian dunes of restricted size. Damp interdunes
develop where it is the capillary fringe of the water table that
restricts sediment availability, whereas wet (flooded) interdunes
occur where the water table rises above the level of the interdune
floor. A low water table increases sediment availability and
promotes eolian dune growth through cannibalization of adja-
cent interdunes (Wilson, 1971, 1973), the conclusion of this pro-
cess being eolian dune growth to the point where interdune flats
are reduced to isolated dry interdune hollows, as for a dry eolian
system (Fig. 61A). A second control on preserved sedimentary
architecture is the angle of climb of dune–interdune units, which
for wet eolian systems (Fig. 61B) is determined by the ratio
between the rate of water-table rise and the rate of downwind
bedform migration (Mountney and Thompson, 2002). For dunes
and interdunes of a given size, steeper angles of climb (induced
either by slow bedform migration or rapid water-table rise)
preserve thicker dune and interdune units.
Dynamic Eolian Facies Models
Subject to Temporal Variability
Figure 62 depicts an example of a dynamic depositional
model that incorporates an element of temporal variation. Tem-
poral variation in sediment availability, which for wet eolian
systems may be determined by changes in the level of the water
table relative to the accumulation surface, is a fundamental
control on preserved architecture in many eolian systems, includ-
ing the Cedar Mesa Sandstone (Langford and Chan, 1988, 1989;
Mountney and Jagger, 2004), the Navajo Sandstone (Herries,
1993), the Ormskirk Formation (Herries and Cowan, 1997), and
the Helsby Sandstone Formation (Mountney and Thompson,
2002). Periodic dune expansion and contraction is inversely re-
lated to interdune extent and chiefly reflects temporal variations
in sediment availability and relative water-table level. Changes in
these controlling parameters could result from a variety of driv-
ers operating over various timescales ranging from seasonal
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 69

A B

C D

FIG. 57.—Examples of facies architecture in a mixed eolian system, the Cedar Mesa Sandstone, Permian, Utah, U.S.A. A) Single 20-
m-thick erg sequence bounded by deflationary supersurfaces with rhizoliths. B) Small-scale trough-cross-bedded eolian dune
sets. C) Wet interdune unit intertonguing with eolian dune sets and demonstrating coeval existence. D) Fluvial flood surfaces.

flood events to long-term climatic changes induced by regional or
even global climate change. The amplitude of the change in
sediment availability and/or water-table level determines the
maximum and minimum size of the dunes and interdune flats,
whilst the periodicity of the change in these parameters deter-
mines the rate of change of dune–interdune size (Fig. 62).
Additional complexity needs to be incorporated where tem-
poral changes in certain controlling parameters have an influence
on others. For example, evidence from a variety of outcrop
studies (e.g., Mountney and Jagger, 2004) indicates that the angle
of climb of wet eolian systems is influenced by temporal changes
in sediment availability and relative water table (Fig. 63). Whilst
rapid rates of water-table rise promote interdune expansion, they
also act to increase the angle of climb in the system. Conversely,
slow rates of water-table rise act to reduce the angle of climb,
whilst a temporarily static water table would induce bypassing
and promote the generation of a bypass supersurface. Figure 63B
presents a dynamic facies model that incorporates cyclical tem-
poral changes in both water-table level and angle of climb. Damp
and/or wet interdune expansion and steeper angles of climb
occur synchronously in response to relative water-table rise,
whilst damp and/or wet interdune interconnection and non-
climbing bypass occur synchronously with a high but static
relative water table. Note how the resultant architecture varies
from that depicted in Figures 62 and 63A, which ignore the effects
of periodic changes in the angle of climb.
Dynamic Eolian Facies Models Subject to Spatial Variability
Many erg successions are characterized by interdune ele-
ments that progressively increase in size at the expense of eolian
dune elements from the erg center to the erg margin (Porter,
1986). This primarily reflects spatial changes in the sediment
saturation level of the wind, which, in downwind erg margins, is
often unsaturated with respect to its potential sand-carrying
capacity because of limited sediment supply and/or availability
(Kocurek and Lancaster, 1999). Many modern ergs and ancient
erg systems are characterized by a progressive shift from a dry
eolian erg center, through a damp, water-table-controlled erg
margin, to a wet or periodically fluvially flooded outer erg
margin, and thus represent a spatial transition from a dry to a wet
eolian system (Mountney and Jagger, 2004). The model in Figure
64 depicts both temporal changes in controlling parameters as
water-table level, sediment availability, and angle of climb un-
dergo cyclical variation, and spatial changes in controlling pa-
rameters from an erg-center to an erg-margin setting. The 2D
70 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Predominant fluvial flow

Prevailing wind direction - SE Predominant Fluvial Flow
Prevailing wind direction - SE - W to SW
Source-bounded fluvially - W to SW Passive flooding of
A entrenched eolian dune
Overbank and
interdune area
B
Braid channel sheetflood deposition
away from main channel

Su
Flu pers R

via urfa Flu

lly
do ce - d
R

via
mi lly
na eflat Flood carrying do
mi
ted ion na
erg to g
R

extrabasinal sediment ted

ma rou and reworking eolian erg
rgi nd R

ma
n wa sediment rgi
ter n
tab
le R

Eo
lian Eo
-do lian
min R R

-do
ate R R R
mi
de na
SS rg R
R

ted
ma erg
R

rgi ma
n
R

Freshwater limestone rgi

R

n
pond, bioturbated prior
to fluvial deposition
Major fluvial flood, overlying a rooted Fluvially reworked eolian sandstone,
deflationary supersurface. Edge of onlapping on to eolian dune.
entrenched eolian dune, with fluvially Generated as flood breaks into
reworked top active dune field

R
R

Very thin, laterally restricted fluvial

SS SS
facies in the outer erg.

SS
Outcrop exposure showing two
major fluvial incursions over
deflationary supersurfaces at the
fluvially dominated erg margin
Small-scale eolian and fluvial
interaction in the eolian-dominated
Elliptical mud-filled interdune
erg margin, along a flooded
element , with groundwater calcrete
interdune corridor
developed at deflationary super-
surface. Eolian erg margin

FIG. 58.—Facies models of eolian and fluvial interactions in the Permian Cedar Mesa Sandstone, SE Utah, U.S.A., from the fluvial-
dominated erg margin to the eolian-dominated erg margin. A) Major fluvial incursions over a low-relief, deflationary
supersurface following erg deflation to the level of the ground-water table. B) Styles of eolian–fluvial interactions during
period of active erg accumulation. After Jagger (2003).

model, which for simplicity depicts the migration of simple Rather, the encapsulation of 4D complexities is perhaps best
transverse bedforms, portrays spatial variations in an orientation undertaken by building a purpose-designed facies model from a
perpendicular to the trend of eolian bedform crestlines. How- set of simpler constituent parts (Fig. 65).
ever, most eolian systems also exhibit architectural variability
and complexity in orientations parallel to the crestline trend, and APPLICATION OF A DYNAMIC EOLIAN
an appreciation of the nature and causes of this complexity is FACIES MODEL: AN EXAMPLE FROM
essential. In such sections, architectural complexity is largely THE UK SOUTHERN NORTH SEA
dependent on the morphology of the eolian dunes that populate
the system. The planform wavelength and amplitude of along- Facies models have long been used as an aid in hydrocarbon
crest sinuosities and their rate of along-crest migration (Rubin exploration, where they act as a tool for subsurface prediction
1987a) determine the degree to which interdune corridors be- when employed in conjunction with a limited amount of primary
come interlinked as dunes and interdunes migrate and undergo data from core (Fig. 66), wireline log, and/or seismic. When used
expansion and contraction in relation to changes in parameters for subsurface reservoir prediction and characterization, a facies
such as sediment availability and water-table level. model needs to be sufficiently generic to be applicable at an inter-
well or even basin scale but also needs to be specific enough to
Encapsulating 4D Complexity in Eolian Facies Models depict the likely subsurface architectural complexity of a particu-
lar geologic setting. Employment of a valid model can lead to an
From the above discussion it is evident that most eolian improved understanding of the subsurface architecture and can
systems are geometrically and architecturally complex, and for provide insight regarding the range of controls that influenced
facies models to reflect this complexity they must incorporate a the accumulation and preservation of the original sedimentary
large amount of detail on a variety of scales. Models need to system.
account for potential variability in three spatial dimensions plus The Lower Permian Rotliegend Group, which forms the main
the temporal dimension. Given the relatively large number of gas reservoir unit in the UK southern North Sea (SNS), accumu-
controlling parameters and their wide range of permissible val- lated in an intermontane basin and forms a semiarid continental
ues, the notion of a single, all-encompassing model is unrealistic. succession composed of a series of facies belts that pass from
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 71

D Eolian dune
Wet interdune
0.05–2km Flood surfaces

R R

10–15 km

Cedar Mesa Sandstone Cutler Formation

A 4–40 m

Eolian dune Fluvial channel & overbank interdune

Flood surfaces

C Eolian dune B 50–300 m

Overbank

5–9 m
interdune Fluvial channel
Flood surfaces
Overbank interdune
R

Eolian dune
Rooted horizon R R

FIG. 59.—Schematic model of the Cutler–Cedar Mesa fluvial–eolian interaction indicating the geometry and scale of the intertonguing
deposits. A) Overall geometry of the erg-margin system and relationship of bypass (flood) supersurfaces to fluvial and eolian
strata. B) Geometry and facies relationships associated with fluvial-channel emplacement into eolian dune succession. C)
Relationships between overbank–interdune deposits, eolian dune deposits, and bypass (flood) supersurfaces. D) Relationships
between wet interdune deposits and bypass (flood) supersurfaces. Note the vertical exaggeration and different scales. After
Langford and Chan (1989).

marginal alluvial systems, through erg and erg-margin deposits,
to a sabkha and playa-lake system in the basin center (Glennie,
1972, 1990). Whilst large gas discoveries of the 1960s (e.g., Leman)
were located in erg-center accumulations, more recent discover-
ies have largely been restricted to “feather-edge” settings where
erg-margin accumulations interfinger with alluvial and playa-
lake facies. Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, a paucity of age
indicators, together with a crude lithostratigraphic framework,
meant that prediction of and correlation between feather-edge
eolian accumulations with good reservoir potential was prob-
lematic.
Analysis of repeating facies associations observed in a num-
ber of SNS cores led Howell (1992) and George and Berry (1993,
1997) to suggest that accumulation and preservation of much of
the Rotliegend Group may have been externally controlled by
climatic cyclicity, and that the eolian succession might be di-
vided into a number of separate erg sequences, each bounded by
a regionally extensive supersurface. In an analysis of 55 wells
from the SNS region, Howell and Mountney (1997) recognized
12 repeating facies cycles across the basin, each characterized by
distinctive facies successions indicative of progressive drying-
upward then wetting-upward trends that culminated in a
supersurface or its correlative conformity at the cycle bound-
aries, which were interpreted to represent points of minimum
aridity (Fig. 67). This suggests a regional climatic control on
sequence generation and preservation. Paleoclimatic evidence
indicates that the climate change that acted as a forcing param-
eter during Permian times is likely to have been regional in
extent, and, as a consequence, individual cycles and their bound-
aries are considered to have chronostratigraphic significance.
Correlation of cycles between different, coeval depositional
environments (e.g., alluvial fan, erg, playa lake) led to the
recognition of various drying- and wetting-upward motifs, and
has provided a means of correlation from basin-margin alluvial-
fan successions, through erg-center dune successions, to a ba-
sin-center playa-lake succession. Despite maximum accumula-
tion rates typically being an order of magnitude slower in playa-
lake environments than in eolian-dune and some alluvial-fan
systems, individual cycles exhibit similar thicknesses between
these sub-environments because preserved cycle thickness is
considered to be controlled by the rate of creation of accumula-
tion space (Fig. 68). For example, high accumulation rates in the
eolian part of the system resulted in rapid infilling of the
available space prior to the generation of a bypass supersurface.
By contrast, low accumulation rates in the playa-lake part of the
system meant that the available space was filled more slowly
and bypassing did not occur until much later in the climatic
cycle (if at all). Thus, whilst the internal architectures of sedi-
mentary cycles are controlled by the depositional processes and
their positions within the basin, the thickness of the cycles
directly reflects the rate of accommodation creation (Howell,
1992; Howell and Mountney, 1997). The subdivision of the
72 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Eolian facies model — Dry eolian erg center, transverse bedforms

Complex draa with transverse elements Isolated dry interdune hollow Barchan dune migrating over sandsheet
Dune slipface Transverse Barchan Wind-
Dunes superimposed grainflow and dune dune rippled
on slipfaceless draa Dry grainfall sand
interdune
Prevailing wind

Superimposition
surface Adhesion
structures
Sand-
sheet Capillary
fringe of
water table
Interdune
migration
surface

All photo examples

Dry Dune top- Dune core Dune plinth Eolian Damp–wet from Central Namib
interdune set wind- grainflow & grainflow & sandsheet interdune
wind-ripple ripple grainfall wind ripple wind-ripple adhesion Desert
strata strata strata strata strata strata

Eolian facies model — Periodically flooded erg-margin system

Desiccation cracks, lake margin Dead Vlei — a dry desert lake from the air Sossusvlei — a seasonal dune-dammed lake

Lake Lake-margin Sheetflood

sabkha deposits Sandsheet
with small
eolian bedforms
Dune-dammed
lake with
evaporitic fringe

Prevailing wind

All photo examples

from Central Namib
Desert
Playa Lake-margin Inland Ephemeral Ephemeral
lake sabkha sabkha lake margin lake
Damp–wet Lacustrine
interdune mudstones
strata

FIG. 60.—Simple facies models for eolian systems. A) Model for the accumulation of simple and compound transverse bedforms in
a dry-erg-center setting. B) Model for the accumulation of siliciclastic sabkha flats and isolated eolian dunes in an episodically
flooded erg-margin system. Modified after Howell (1992).
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS
A Extent of interdune flats
Dry eolian system
Increasing sediment supply and availability
No interdune flats (only dry interdune hollows)
Interdune area < Bedform area
Interdune area = Bedform area
Wet eolian system
Interdune area > Bedform area
Extent of damp–wet interdune flats increases as
eolian sediment supply and its availability for
transport decreases in response to rising water table
FIG. 61.—Basic controls on interdune geometry in wet eolian systems. Modified in part from Kocurek and Havholm (1993).
upper part of the Rotliegend Group into separate sequences
represented by cycles bounded by points of minimum aridity
controlled by regional changes in climate (Fig. 69) has greatly
enhanced the ability to correlate within the basin and has
significantly reduced uncertainty in reservoir prediction.
POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
Significant advancements in our understanding of the dy-
namic sedimentology and stratigraphy of eolian systems have
been made in recent years. Research throughout the 1990s con-
centrated on relating the morphology and behavior of modern
eolian systems to the stratigraphic architecture of their counter-
parts preserved in the ancient rock record. Many of the hypotheti-
cal models proposed in the late 1970s and early 1980s have now
been updated and refined as new outcrop-based datasets have
been acquired. The current state of knowledge has progressed to
a point where conceptual models for construction, accumulation,
and preservation of eolian systems can be used as a framework
with which to develop dynamic facies models that account for 3D
spatial complexity and temporal evolution. Although the eolian
facies models developed at the onset of the 21st Century are
considerably more sophisticated than their predecessors, there
are nevertheless a number of important research questions that
remain to be addressed.
Future developments in eolian sedimentology are likely to
focus on the continued development of a set of tools that can be
applied to unequivocally differentiate between the products of
73
B Angle of climb
Increasing angle of eolian bedform climb
Critical angle of climb (rarely realized in nature)
Subcritical angle of climb
Subcritical angle of climb
Zero angle of climb
Angle of climb in wet eolian systems controlled
by ratio between rate of water-table rise
and rate of downwind bedform migration
intrinsic (autogenic) process such as bedform migration and
external (allogenic) processes such as climate change and tec-
tonic basin evolution, and to demonstrate the extent to which
these two sets of processes are independent of each other.
Questions not yet fully answered include: What is the preserved
facies response to climatically driven erg-margin expansion and
contraction? Is it possible to recognize the signature of climate
change in data sets of limited extent or resolution (e.g., core or
wireline log), and can these signatures be used as a correlation
tool? What is the nature and preserved expression of the com-
plex interactions that occur between fundamental controlling
parameters such as sediment availability, sand saturation of the
airflow, and angle of climb? How do coastal eolian successions
respond to changes in relative sea level, and can we relate
sequence stratigraphic models developed for marine systems to
those developed for eolian systems?
In attempting to answer these questions, detailed relation-
ships between large-scale architectural elements and regionally
significant bounding surfaces will need to established. This will
require the collection of large 3D datasets from outcrop on a scale
hitherto not attempted. The employment of 3D architectural data
from outcrop analogue studies is especially important for im-
proved subsurface prediction in eolian systems because tradi-
tional 1D logs and core have only a limited interpretative scope.
In attempting to relate the external form and behavior of modern
eolian systems to the potential range of preserved architectures,
the most likely arena for future research will be the Quaternary
record, which affords relatively good age constraints using a
74 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

Transport
Relative water table = intermediate. Mixed dunes and wet interdunes. Wet eolian system.

T1

Relative water table = low. Maximum dune extent. Dry eolian system.

T2

Relative water table = intermediate. Mixed dunes and wet interdunes. Wet eolian system

T3

Relative water table = high. Minimum due extent. Wet sandsheet with small dunes.
T4

Relative water table = intermediate. Mixed dunes and wet interdunes. Wet eolian system.

T5

Relative water table = low. Maximum dune extent. Dry eolian system.

T6

High

Low

Periods of wet-
interdune
sedimentation
Thickness

Absolute water table

Sediment availability
Relative water table
Accumulation surface
Subsidence

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6
Time

FIG. 62.—Dynamic model for dune and interdune architecture resulting from cyclical temporal variation in controlling parameters
in a mixed wet–dry eolian system. Periodic changes in the position of the water table in relation to the accumulation surface drive
cyclical changes in dune–interdune size. For a fixed rate of dune migration, damp/wet interdune expansion and contraction
occurs during periods of accelerating and decelerating rates of relative water-table rise, respectively.
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 75

A Transport
Expansion of
damp–wet
interdunes at
expense of dunes
promotes the
preservation of
thicker damp–wet
interdune units.

Black arrows
indicate the former
positions of the
depositional surface
at the time of
B Transport maximum interdune
extent.

Gray arrows
indicate former
positions of the
depositional surface
at the time of
minimum interdune
extent.

FIG. 63.—Models for dune and interdune architecture resulting from cyclical temporal variation in controlling parameters in a wet
eolian system. A) The effects of periodic changes in relative dune–interdune size. For a fixed rate of dune migration, damp and/
or wet interdune expansion and contraction occur during periods of accelerating and decelerating rates of relative water-table
rise, respectively. B) The combined effects of cyclical changes in relative dune–interdune size and related changes in angle of
climb. Angle of climb steepens as the rate of relative water-table rise increases and falls to zero as relative water table becomes
static. Modified after Mountney and Jagger (2004).

variety of recently developed techniques. The continued devel-
opment of forward numerical stratigraphic models is also likely
to be a valuable research tool. In particular, the incorporation of
tools for investigating the effects of various configurations of
controlling parameters at an erg scale should prove fruitful in
determining the sensitivity of eolian systems to environmental
change.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Alison Jagger is thanked for help in the preparation of some
of the figures used in this paper. John Collinson provided some
of the photographs. I am grateful to John Howell and an anony-
mous reviewer for their encouraging reviews and to Henry
Posamentier and Roger Walker for their enthusiasm for the
“Facies Models Revisited” project.
REFERENCES
AHLBRANDT, T.S., AND FRYBERGER, S.G., 1980, Eolian Deposits in the
Nebraska Sand Hills: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper
1120-A, 24 p.
AHLBRANDT, T.S., AND FRYBERGER, S.G., 1981, Sedimentary features and
significance of interdune deposits, in Ethridge, F.G., and Flore, R.M.,
eds., Recent and Ancient Non-Marine Depositional Environments:
Models for Exploration: Society of Economic Paleontologists and
Mineralogists, Special Publication 31, p. 293–314.
AHLBRANDT, T.S., ANDREWS, S., AND GWYNNE, D.T., 1978, Bioturbation in
eolian deposits: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 48, p. 839–848.
ALSHARHAN, A.S., GLENNIE, K., WHITTLE, G.L., AND KENDALL, C.G.ST.C., 1998,
Quaternary Deserts and Climate Change: Rotterdam, Balkema, Pro-
ceedings of the International Conference on Quaternary Deserts and
Climate Change, 621 p.
ANDERSON, R.S., 1987, A theoretical model for aeolian impact ripples:
Sedimentology, v. 34, p. 943–956.
ANDERSON, R.S., 1988, The pattern of grainfall deposition in the lee of
aeolian dunes: Sedimentology, v. 35, p. 175–188.
ANDREWS, S., 1981, Sedimentology of Great Sand Dunes, Colorado, in
Ethridge, F.P., and Flores, R.M., eds., Recent and Ancient Non
marine Depositional Environments: Models for Exploration: Soci-
ety of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publica-
tion 31, p. 279–291.
BAGNOLD, R.A., 1941, The Physics of Blown Sand and Desert Dunes:
London, Methuen & Company, 265 p.
BATEMAN, M.D., HOLMES, P.J., CARR, A.S., HORTON, B.P., AND JAISWAL, M.K.,
2004, Aeolianite and barrier dune construction spanning the last
two glacial–interglacial cycles from the southern Cape coast, South
Africa: Quaternary Science Reviews, v. 23, p. 1681–1698.
BATEMAN, M.D., THOMAS, S.G., AND SINGHVI, A.K., 2003, Extending the
aridity record of the Southwest Kalahari: current problems and
future perspectives: Quaternary International, v. 111, p. 37–49.
BENAN, C.A.A., AND KOCUREK, G., 2000, Catastrophic flooding of an
aeolian dune field: Jurassic Entrada and Todilto Formations, Ghost
Ranch, New Mexico, USA: Sedimentology, v. 47, p. 1069–1080.
76 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

A Erg Center Transport Erg Margin

Expansion of
damp/–wet
interdunes at
T5 T5
expense of
T4 T4 dunes
T3 T3 promotes the
T2 T2 preservation of
thicker
T1 T1 damp–wet
interdune units.

High High

Low Low
Absolute water table
Periods of wet- Periods of wet-
interdune interdune Sediment availability
sedimentation sedimentation
Relative water table
Thickness

Thickness

Period of 100% Accumulation surface

dune cover
(dry system) Eolian bypass Subsidence
supersurface
generation

B T1 T2 T3
Time
T4 T5
C T1 T2 T3
Time
T4 T5

FIG. 64.—Model for dune and interdune architecture resulting from spatial and temporal variation in controlling parameters. A)
Model incorporating temporal variations of relative dune–interdune size and angle of climb in response to cyclical changes in the
rate of relative water-table change and sediment availability. Additionally, the model incorporates the effects of a spatial decrease
in dune coverage from 100% eolian bedform cover in the erg center to 0% at the outer limit of the erg margin. B, C) Diagrams
illustrating possible configuration of controlling parameters responsible for generating the preserved succession in the erg-center
and erg-margin areas, respectively.

BESLER, H., 1982, The north-eastern Rub’ al Khali within the borders of the
United Arab Emirates: Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, v. 26, p. 495–505.
B LAKEY , R.C., 1988a, Superscoops—their significance as elements of
eolian architecture: Geology, v. 16, p. 483–487.
B LAKEY , R.C., 1988b, Basin tectonics and erg response: Sedimentary
Geology, v. 56, p. 127–151.
B LAKEY , R.C., H AVHOLM , K.G., AND JONES , L.S., 1996, Stratigraphic
analysis of eolian interactions with marine and fluvial deposits,
Middle Jurassic Page Sandstone and Carmel Formation, Colo-
rado Plateau, USA: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 66, p.
324–342.
B LAKEY , R.C., PETERSON , F., AND KOCUREK , G., 1988, Synthesis of late
Paleozoic and Mesozoic eolian deposits of the western interior of
the United States: Sedimentary Geology, v. 56, p. 3–125.
B REED, C.S., AND G ROW, T., 1979, Morphology and distribution of
dunes in sand seas observed by remote sensing, in McKee, E.D.,
ed., A Study of Global Sand Seas: U.S. Geological Survey, Profes-
sional Paper 1052, p. 253–302.
B REED, C.S., F RYBERGER, S.G., A NDREWS , S., MC CAULEY , C., L ENNARTZ, F.,
G EBEL, D., AND H ORSTMAN, K., 1979, Regional studies of sand seas,
using Landsat (ERTS) imagery, in McKee, E.D., ed., A Study of
Global Sand Seas: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper
1052, p. 305–397.
BREED, C.S., MCCAULEY, J.F., AND DAVIS, P.A., 1987, Sand sheets of the
eastern Sahara and ripple blankets on Mars, in Frostick, L.E., and
Reid I., eds., Desert Sediments; Ancient and Modern: Geological
Society of London, Special Publication 35, p. 337–359.
BRISTOW, C., PUGH, J., AND GOODALL, T., 1996, Internal structure of aeolian
dunes in Abu Dhabi determined using ground-penetrating radar:
Sedimentology, v. 43, p. 995–1003.
BRISTOW, C.S., BAILEY, S.D., AND LANCASTER, N., 2000, The sedimentary
structure of linear sand dunes: Nature, v. 406, p. 56–59.
BRISTOW, C.S., LANCASTER, N., AND DULLER, G.A.T., 2005, Combining
ground penetrating radar (GPR) surveys and optical dating to
determine dune migration in Namibia: Geological Society of Lon-
don, Journal, v. 162, p. 315–321.
BROOKFIELD, M.E., 1970, Dune trends and wind regime in central Austra-
lia: Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, Supplementband, v. 10, p. 121–
153.
BROOKFIELD, M.E., 1977, The origin of bounding surfaces in ancient
aeolian sandstones: Sedimentology, v. 24, p. 303–332.
CARR-CRABAUGH, M., AND KOCUREK, G., 1998, Continental sequence stratig-
raphy of a wet eolian system: A key to relative sea-level change, in
Shanley, K., and McCabe, P., eds., Relative Roles of Eustasy, Cli-
mate, and Tectonism in Continental Rocks: SEPM, Special Publica-
tion 59, p. 213–228.
CHAKRABORTY, T., AND CHAKRABORTY, C., 2001, Eolian–aqueous interac-
tions in the development of a Proterozoic sand sheet: Shikaoda
Formation, Hosangabad, India: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v.
71, p. 107–117.
 R I R
>121o
R >118o
I I
I
R
R
I I
I
R R R
Facies Association 1 Facies Association 6
2 4
I
Erg-center m Outer-erg- m

27
o
00

0
o
m 0 m 75 0

0
0 50 0
architecture margin architecture
Dynamic facies

1
o
09

80
o
0
model
Mean eolian
bedform
migration Mean fluvial
> 125o transport
direction
F > 225o

F F
D F
Facies Association 2 F Facies Association 5
FD
F

20
m
0 0 20
Facies Association 3 km Facies Association 4
Individual bedforms and sets not drawn to scale
EOLIAN FACIES MODELS

I
Controlling parameters — Inner-erg-margin Controlling parameters — Outer-erg-margin
R
R I R
I
R R I T6
I I T5 T7/8
R T4 T6
R R
T3 T5
I 2 4
T2 T3/4
I I m m
Inner erg T2 Outer-erg-
0 m 50 0 T1 T1 0 m 75 0
margin architecture High High
margin architecture

Low Low
Periods of wet- Periods of wet- Legend
interdune interdune
sedimentation sedimentation Eolian dune Chert Interdune
Absolute water table I surface
Sediment availability Dry interdune Limestone
R
Reactivation
Relative water table Eolian bypass surface

Thickness
Thickness

Sandsheet Paleosol
Accumulation surface & flood surface
generation Flood
Subsidence Damp interdune Fluvial channel F surface
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 Wet interdune Underlying Deflation
Time Time sequence D surface

FIG. 65.—Integrated dynamic facies model for an erg margin exhibiting dry to wet spatial and temporal variations as a consequence of changes in water table and resultant
changes in sediment availability and angle of climb. Model encapsulates 4D complexity and accounts for facies variability on a range of scales. Based on observations
from the Permian Cedar Mesa Sandstone, southeast Utah, U.S.A.
77
78 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY
5 cm
FIG. 66.—Example of eolian facies in core. Grainflow strata within
a cross-stratified eolian dune set overlain by low-angle wind-
ripple strata within a dry interdune unit. Leman Sandstone
Formation, Rotliegend, Permian, southern North Sea. The
pattern of cross stratification is revealed by the presence of
finer-grained, more tightly packed grainfall deposits between
individual grainflow laminae.
CHAN, M.A., AND ARCHER, A.W., 1999, Spectral analysis of eolian foreset
periodicities—implications for Jurassic decadal-scale paleoclimatic
oscillators: Palaeoclimates, v. 3, p. 239–255.
CHAN, M.A., AND ARCHER, A.W., 2000, Cyclic eolian stratification on the
Jurassic Navajo Sandstone, Zion National Park: periodicities and
implications for paleoclimate, in Sprinkel, D.A., Chidsey, T.C., and
Anderson P.B., eds., Geology of Utah’s Parks and Monuments: Utah
Geological Association, Publication 28, p. 607–617.
CHAN, M.A., AND KOCUREK, G., 1988, Complexities in eolian and marine
interactions—processes and eustatic controls on erg development:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 56, p. 283–300.
CHRINTZ, T., AND CLEMMENSEN, L.B., 1993, Draa reconstruction, the Permian
Yellow Sands, northeast England, in Pye, K., and Lancaster, N., eds.,
Aeolian Sediments, Ancient and Modern: International Association
of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 16, p. 51–161.
CLEMMENSEN, L.B., 1989, Preservation of interdraa and plinth deposits by
the lateral migration of large linear draas (Lower Permian Yellow
Sands, northeast England): Sedimentary Geology, v. 65, p. 139–151.
CLEMMENSEN, L.B., AND BLAKEY, R.C., 1989, Erg deposits in the Lower
Jurassic Wingate Sandstone, northeastern Arizona—oblique dune
sedimentation: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 449–470.
CLEMMENSEN, L.B., OLSEN, H., AND BLAKEY, R.C., 1989, Erg-margin depos-
its in the Lower Jurassic Moenave Formation and Wingate Sand-
stone, southern Utah: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v.
101, p. 759–773.
CLEMMENSEN, L.B., ØXNEVAD, I.E.I., AND DE BOER, P.L., 1994, Climatic
controls on ancient desert sedimentation: some late Palaeozoic
examples from NW Europe and the western interior of the USA, in
de Boer, P.L., and Smith, D.G., eds., Orbital Forcing and Cyclic
Sequences: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special
Publication 19, p. 439–457.
COLLINSON, J.C., 1994, Sedimentary deformational structures, in Maltman,
A., ed., The Geological Deformation of Sediments: London, Chapman
& Hall, p. 95–125.
COOKE, R., WARREN, A., AND GOUDIE, A., 1993, Desert Geomorphology:
London, University College London Press, 526 p.
CORBETT, I., 1993, The modern and ancient pattern of sandflow through the
southwestern Namib deflation basin, in Pye, K., and Lancaster, N.,
eds., Aeolian Sediments, Ancient and Modern: International Associa-
tion of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 16, p. 45–60.
CRABAUGH, M., AND KOCUREK, G., 1993, Entrada Sandstone: An example of
a wet aeolian system, in Pye, K., ed., The Dynamics and Environmen-
tal Context of Aeolian Sedimentary Systems: Geological Society of
London, Special Publication 72, p. 103–126.
DECELLES, P.G., LANGFORD, R.P., AND SCHWARTZ, R.K., 1983, Two new
methods of paleocurrent determination from trough cross-stratifica-
tion: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 53, p. 629–642.
DOE, T.W., AND DOTT, R.H., JR., 1980, Genetic significance of deformed
cross bedding—with examples from the Navajo and Weber Sand-
stones of Utah: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 50, p. 793–811.
DOORNCAMP, J.C., BRUNSDEN, D., AND JONES, D.K.C., 1980, Geology, Geomor-
phology and Pedology of Bahrain: Norwich, U.K., Geobooks, 443 p.
DRIESE, S.G., 1985, Interdune pond carbonates, Weber Sandstone (Penn-
sylvanian–Permian), northern Utah and Colorado: Journal of Sedi-
mentary Petrology, v. 55, p. 187–195.
ELLWOOD, J.M., EVANS, P.D., AND WILSON, I.G., 1975, Small scale aeolian
bedforms: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 45, p. 554–561.
ESCHNER, T.B., AND KOCUREK, G., 1986, Marine destruction of eolian sand
seas—origin of mass flows: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 56,
p. 401–411.
ESCHNER, T.B., AND KOCUREK, G., 1988, Origins of relief along contacts
between eolian sandstones and overlying marine strata: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 72, p. 932–943.
EVANS, G., KENDALL, C.G.ST.C., AND SKIPWITH, P., 1964, Origin of coastal
flats, the sabkha of the Trucial Coast, Persian Gulf: Nature, v. 202, p.
759–761.
FRANK, A., AND KOCUREK, G., 1996, Toward a model for airflow on the lee
side of aeolian dunes: Sedimentology, v. 43, 451–458.
FRYBERGER, S.G., 1978, Techniques for the evaluation of surface wind data
in terms of eolian sand drift: U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report
78-405, 25 p.
FRYBERGER, S.G., 1979, Dune forms and wind regime, in McKee, E.D., ed.,
A Study of Global Sand Seas: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional
Paper 1052, p. 137–169.
FRYBERGER, S.G., 1990a, Great Sand Dunes depositional system—an over-
view, in Fryberger, S.G., Krystinik, L.F., and Schenk, C.J., eds., Mod-

Deposition
Deposition
Deposition
Erg center
Erosion
Erosion
Erosion
Lake–Sabkha and margin
FIG. 67.—Preserved expression of idealized climatic cycle within three separate sub-environments encountered in the Permian Gas
Basin, southern North Sea. Modified after Howell (1992) and Howell and Mountney (1997).
ern and Ancient Aeolian Deposits: Petroleum Exploration and Pro-
duction: SEPM, Denver, p. 1-1–1-9.
FRYBERGER, S.G., 1990b, Role of water in eolian deposition, in Fryberger,
S.G., Krystinik, L.F., and Schenk, C.J., eds., Modern and Ancient
Eolian Deposits: Petroleum Exploration and Production: SEPM, Den-
ver, p. 5-1–5-11.
FRYBERGER, S.G., 1990c, Coastal eolian deposits of Oregon, USA, Guererro
Negro, Mexico and Jafurah Sand Sea, Saudi Arabia, in Fryberger, S.G.
Krystinik, L.F., and Schenk, C.J., eds., Modern and Ancient Eolian
Deposits: Petroleum Exploration and Production: SEPM, Denver, p.
11-1–11-15.
FRYBERGER, S.G., 1993, A review of aeolian bounding surfaces, with ex-
amples from the Permian Minnelusa Formation, USA, in North, C.P.,
and Prosser, J.D., eds., Characterization of Fluvial and Aeolian Reser-
voirs: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 73, p. 167–
197.
FRYBERGER, S.G., AND SCHENK, C., 1981, Wind sedimentation tunnel experi-
ments on the origins of aeolian strata: Sedimentology, v. 28, p. 805–
821.
FRYBERGER, S.G., AND SCHENK, C.J., 1988, Pin stripe lamination—a distinc-
tive feature of modern and ancient eolian sediments: Sedimentary
Geology, v. 55, p. 1–15.
FRYBERGER, S.G., AL-SARI, A.M., CLISHAM, T.J., RIZVI, S.A.R., AND AL-HINAI,
K.G., 1984, Wind sedimentation in the Jafurah sand sea, Saudi Arabia:
Sedimentology, v. 31, p. 413–431.
FRYBERGER, S.G., AHLBRANDT, T.S., AND ANDREWS, S., 1979, Origin, sedimen-
tary features, and significance of low-angle eolian “sand sheet”
deposits, Great Sand Dunes National Monument and vicinity, Colo-
rado: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 49, p. 733–746.
FRYBERGER, S.G., AL-SARI, A.M., AND CLISHAM, T.J., 1983, Eolian dune,
interdune, sand sheet, and siciliclastic sabkha sediments of an off-
shore prograding sand sea, Dharan Area, Saudi Arabia: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 67, p. 280–312.
FRYBERGER, S.G., HESP, P., AND HASTINGS, K., 1992, Aeolian granule ripple
deposits, Namibia: Sedimentology, v. 39, p. 319–331.
FRYBERGER, S.G., KRYSTINIK, L.F., AND SCHENK, C.J, 1990, Tidally flooded
back-barrier dunefield, Guerrero Negro area, Baja California, Mexico:
Sedimentology, v. 37, p. 23–43.
EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 79
Basin-margin
system Absolute climate Cycle Facies
Association
Wet Dry
Eolian dune
Interdune
Wetting upward
Deflation surface
Proximal alluvial fan
Medial alluvial fan
Drying upward
Distal alluvial fan
Lake-margin sabkha
Lacustrine
All logs idealized, no vertical scale implied
FRYBERGER, S.G., SCHENK, C.J., AND KRYSTINIK, L.F., 1988, Stokes surfaces and
the effects of near-surface groundwater-table on aeolian deposition:
Sedimentology, v. 35, p. 21–41.
GARCÍA-HIDALGO, J.F., TEMIÑO, J., AND SEGURA, M., 2002, Holocene eolian
sediments on the southern border of the Duero Basin (Spain): origin
and development of an eolian system in a temperate zone: Journal of
Sedimentary Research, v. 72, p. 30–39.
GEORGE, G.T., AND BERRY, J.K., 1993, A new lithostratigraphy and deposi-
tional model for the Upper Rotliegend of the UK sector of the
Southern North Sea, in North, C.P., and Prosser, D.J., eds., Character-
ization of Fluvial and Aeolian Reservoirs: Geological Society of
London, Special Publication 73, p. 291–319.
GEORGE, G.T., AND BERRY, J.K., 1997, Permian (Upper Rotliegend) synsedi-
mentary tectonics, basin development and palaeogeography of the
southern North Sea, in Ziegler, K., Turner, P., and Daines, S.R., eds.,
Petroleum Geology of the Southern North Sea: Future Potential:
Geological Society of London, Special Publication 123, p. 31–61.
GLENNIE, K.W., 1970, Desert Sedimentary Environments: Amsterdam,
Elsevier, Developments in Sedimentology, 14, 222 p.
GLENNIE, K.W., 1972, Permian Rotliegendes of North West Europe
interpreted in light of modern desert sedimentation studies: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 56, p. 1048–
1071.
GLENNIE, K.W., 1990, Lower Permian—Rotliegend, in Glennie, K.W., ed.,
Introduction to the Petroleum Geology of the North Sea: Oxford,
U.K., Blackwell Science, p. 120–152.
GLENNIE, K.W., AND BULLER, A.T., 1983, The Permian Weissliegend of NW
Europe—the partial deformation of aeolian dune sands caused by the
Zechstein Transgression: Sedimentary Geology, v. 35, p. 43–81.
GREELEY, R., AND IVERSON, J.D., 1985, Wind as a Geological Process on Earth,
Mars, Venus and Titan: Cambridge, U.K., Cambridge University
Press, 345 p.
GUNATILAKA, A., AND MWANGO, S., 1987, Continental sabkha pans and
associated nebkhas in southern Kuwait, Arabian Gulf, in Frostick,
L.E., and Reid, I., eds., Desert Sediments, Ancient and Modern:
Geological Society of London, Special Publication 35, p. 187–203.
HASIOTIS, S.T., 2002, Continental Trace Fossils: SEPM, Short Course Notes,
no. 51, 132 p.
80 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY

HERRIES, R.D., 1992, Sedimentology of Continental Erg Margin Interac-

A Eolian erg and erg margin Lithology Preserved
climatic cycle
tions: Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Aberdeen, 205 p.
HERRIES, R.D., 1993, Contrasting styles of fluvial–aeolian interaction at a
Subsidence
DEPTH/THICKNESS

downwind erg margin: Jurassic Kayenta–Navajo transition, north-

eastern Arizona, USA, in North, C.P., and Prosser, J.D., eds., Charac-
Accumulation
Drying- terization of Fluvial and Aeolian Reservoirs: Geological Society of
upward
Supersurface
cycles
London, Special Publication 73, p. 199–218.
HERRIES, R.D., AND COWAN, G., 1997, Challenging the ‘sheetflood’ myth: the
role of water-table-controlled sabkha deposits in redefining the depo-
sitional model for the Ormskirk Sandstone Formation (Lower Trias-
Sediment availability
sic), East Irish Sea Basin, in Meadows, N.S., Trueblood, S.P., Hardman,
RATE

Subsidence M., and Cowan, G., Petroleum Geology of the Irish Sea and Adjacent
eolian dune slipface deposits Areas: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 124, p. 253–
Wet Dry Wet Dry Wet 276.
wind-rippled sandsheet deposits
TIME
HOROWITZ, D.H., 1982, Geometry and origin of large-scale deformation
Climate structures in some ancient wind-blown sand deposits: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 29, p. 155–180.
Preserved HOWELL, J.A., 1992, Sedimentology of the Rotliegend Supergroup of the
B Basin-margin alluvial fan Lithology
climatic cycle
UK Southern North Sea: Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of
DEPTH/THICKNESS

Wetting- Birmingham, 345 p.

upward
cycle
HOWELL, J., AND MOUNTNEY, N., 2001, Aeolian grain flow architecture: hard
data for reservoir models and implications for red bed sequence
Drying– stratigraphy: Petroleum Geoscience, v. 7, p. 51–56.
wetting
Cycle
HOWELL, J.A., AND MOUNTNEY, N.P., 1997, Climatic cyclicity and accommo-
dation space in arid to semi-arid depositional systems: An example
Proximal alluvial-fan deposits from the Rotliegend Group of the Southern North Sea, in Ziegler, K.,
RATE

Turner, P., and Daines, S.R., eds., Petroleum Geology of the Southern
Intrabasinal fluvial deposits
North Sea: Future Potential: Geological Society of London, Special
Wet Dry Wet Dry Wet
Deflation lag deposits Publication 123, p. 63–86.
TIME HUMMEL, G., AND KOCUREK, G., 1984, Interdune areas of the back-Island
Climate dune field, North Padre Island, Texas: Sedimentary Geology, v. 39, p.
1–26.
HUNTER, R.E., 1977, Basic types of stratification in small eolian dunes:
C Lake and lake-margin sabkha Lithology Preserved
climatic cycle
Sedimentology, v. 24, p. 361–387.
HUNTER, R.E., 1981, Stratification styles in eolian sandstones: Some Penn-
DEPTH/THICKNESS

Drying- sylvanian to Jurassic examples from the western interior USA, in

upward
cycle Ethridge, F.G., and Flores, R.M., eds., Recent and Ancient Non-
Marine Depositional Environments, Models for Exploration: Society
Symmetrical
of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication
drying–
wetting 31, p. 315–329.
cycle HUNTER, R.E., 1985, A kinematic model for the structure of lee-side
deposits: Sedimentology, v. 32, p. 409–422.
RATE

Playa-lake mudstone

Lake-margin sabkha deposits

Wet Dry Wet Dry
TIME
Climate
FIG. 68.—Diagrams illustrating how variations in climate control
the preserved expression in the Permian Rotliegend Group,
Southern North Sea. A) Eolian erg and erg margin. B) Basin-
margin alluvial fan. C) Lake and lake-margin sabkha. Modi-
fied after Howell and Mountney (1997).
HAVHOLM, K.G., AND KOCUREK, G., 1994, Factors controlling aeolian se-
quence stratigraphy: clues from super bounding surface in the Middle
Jurassic Page Sandstone: Sedimentology, v. 41, p. 913–934.
HAVHOLM, K.G., BLAKEY, R.C., CAPPS, M., JONES, L.S., KING, D.D., AND
KOCUREK, G., 1993, Aeolian genetic stratigraphy: an example from
the Middle Jurassic Page Sandstone, Colorado Plateau, in Pye, K.,
and Lancaster, N., eds., Aeolian Sediments, Ancient and Modern:
International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication
16, p. 87–107.
HUNTER, R.E., AND RICHMOND, B.M., 1988, Daily cycles in coastal dunes:
Wind-rippled eolian sandsheet
Sedimentary Geology, v. 55, p. 43–67.
Wet HUNTER, R.E., AND RUBIN, D.M., 1983, Interpreting cyclic cross-bedding,
with an example from the Navajo Sandstone, in Brookfield, M.E., and
Ahlbrandt, T.S., eds., Eolian Sediments and Processes: Amsterdam,
Elsevier, Developments in Sedimentology, no. 38, p. 429–454.
HUNTER, R.E., RICHMOND, B.M., AND ALPHA, T.R., 1983, Storm-controlled
oblique dunes of the Oregon Coast: Geological Society of America,
Bulletin, v. 94, p. 1450–1465.
HUNTINGTON, E., 1907, Some characteristics of the glacial period in non-
glaciated regions: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 18, p.
351–388.
HUNTOON, J.E., AND CHAN, M.A., 1987, Marine origin of paleotopographic
relief on eolian White Rim Sandstone (Permian), Elaterite Basin, Utah:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 71, p.
1035–1045.
JAGGER, A., 2003, Sedimentology and Stratigraphic Evolution of the Per-
mian Cedar Mesa Sandstone, SE Utah: Unpublished Ph.D. thesis,
University of Keele, 391 p.
JERRAM, D.A., MOUNTNEY, N.P., AND STOLLHOFEN, H., 1999, Facies architec-
ture of the Etjo Sandstone Formation and its interaction with the
basal Etendeka flood basalts of NW Namibia: Implications for
offshore analogues, in Cameron, N., Bate, R., and Clure, V., eds., Oil
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 81

Northern Raven- North East

Audrey Indefatigable Leman Hewett Anglia Sole Pit spurn Midland Shelf Amethyst

12

11 Lithostratigraphy
Upper Leman Sand Fm.
10
Silverpit Fm.
9 Leman Sand Fm.
8
7 Relative Climate
WET - DRY

6 Unit Number
8
Unit boundary
5 (Chronostratigraphic
7 surface)
4
Each curve is a summary of the relative
3 climatic cycles from several study wells.
Note the varied expression of single
cycles and that the thickness of each
2 cycle is typically constant within
individual structural blocks. The unit
cycle boundaries are time lines and
1 cross-cut the lithostratigraphic formation
boundaries.

FIG. 69.—Correlation of climatic cycles across the Permian Rotliegend Group, southern North Sea. Modified after Howell (1992) and
Howell and Mountney (1997). Each curve is a summary of the relative climatic cycles from several study wells. Note the varied
expression of single cycles and that the thickness of each cycle is typically constant within individual structural blocks. The unit
cycle boundaries are time lines and crosscut the lithostratigraphic formation boundaries.

and Gas Habitats of the South Atlantic: Geological Society of Lon-
don, Special Publication 153, p. 367–380.
JERRAM , D.A., MOUNTNEY , N., H OWELL, J., AND S TOLLHOFEN, H., 2000, The
fossilized desert: recent developments in our understanding of
the Lower Cretaceous deposits in the Huab Basin, NW Namibia:
Geological Survey of Namibia, Communications, v. 12, p. 269–
278.
KAMOLA, D.L., AND HUNTOON, J.E., 1994, Changes in rate of transgres-
sion across the Permian White Rim Sandstone, southern Utah:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B64, p. 202–210.
KHALAF, F., 1989, Textural characteristics and genesis of the aeolian
sediments in the Kuwaiti Desert: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 253–271.
KHALAF, F.I., GHARIB, I.M., AND AL HASHASH, M.Z., 1984, Types and
characteristics of recent surface deposits of Kuwait, Arabian Gulf:
Journal of Arid Environments, v. 7, p. 9–33.
KOCUREK, G., 1981, Significance of interdune deposits and bounding
surfaces in aeolian dune sands: Sedimentology, v. 28, p. 753–780.
KOCUREK, G., 1984, Origin of first-order bounding surfaces in aeolian
sandstones—Reply: Sedimentology, v. 31, p. 125–127.
KOCUREK, G., 1988, First-order and super bounding surfaces in eolian
sequences—bounding surfaces revisited: Sedimentary Geology, v.
56, p. 193–206.
KOCUREK, G., 1991, Interpretation of ancient eolian sand dunes: Annual
Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, v. 19, p. 43–75.
KOCUREK, G., 1996, Desert aeolian systems, in Reading, H.G., ed., Sedi-
mentary Environments; Processes, Facies and Stratigraphy, Third
Edition: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell Science, p. 125–153.
KOCUREK, G., 1999, The aeolian rock record (Yes, Virginia, it exists but it
really is rather special to create one), in Goudie, A.S., Livingstone, I.,
and Stokes, S., eds., Aeolian Environments, Sediments, and Land-
forms: Chichester, U.K., John Wiley & Sons Ltd., p. 239–259.
KOCUREK, G., AND DOTT, R.H., JR., 1981, Distinctions and uses of strati-
fication types in the interpretation of eolian sand: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 51, p. 579–595.
KOCUREK, G., AND FIELDER, G., 1982, Adhesion structures: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 52, p. 1229–1241.
KOCUREK, G., AND HAVHOLM, K.G., 1993, Eolian sequence stratigraphy—
a conceptual framework, in Weimer, P., and Posamentier, H.W.,
eds., Siciliclastic Sequence Stratigraphy: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 58, p. 393–409.
KOCUREK, G., AND HUNTER, R.E., 1986, Origin of polygonal fractures in
sand, uppermost Navajo and Page Sandstones, Page, Arizona:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 56, p. 895–904.
KOCUREK, G., AND NIELSON, J., 1986, Conditions favourable for the
formation of warm-climate aeolian sand sheets: Sedimentology, v.
33, p. 795–816.
KOCUREK, G., AND LANCASTER, N., 1999, Aeolian system sediment state:
theory and Mojave Desert Kelso dune field example: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 46, p. 505–515.
KOCUREK, G., HAVHOLM, K.G., DEYNOUX, M., AND BLAKEY, R.C., 1991a,
Amalgamated accumulations resulting from climatic and eustatic
changes, Akchar Erg, Mauritania: Sedimentology, v. 38, p. 751–772.
KOCUREK, G., KNIGHT, J., AND HAVHOLM, K., 1991b, Outcrop and semi-regional
three-dimensional architecture and reconstruction of a portion of the
eolian Page Sandstone (Jurassic), in Miall, A.D., and Tyler, N., eds., The
Three-Dimensional Facies Architecture of Terrigenous Clastic Sedi-
ments and Its Implications for Hydrocarbon Discovery and Recovery:
SEPM, Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology, v. 3, p. 25–43.
82 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY
KOCUREK, G., TOWNSLEY, M., YEH, E., HAVHOLM, K., AND SWEET, M.L., 1992,
Dune and dune-field development on Padre Island, Texas, with
implications for interdune deposition and water-table-controlled
accumulation: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 62, p. 622–635.
KOCUREK, G., LANCASTER, N., CARR, M., AND FRANK, A., 1999, Tertiary
Tsondab Sandstone Formation: preliminary bedform reconstruction
and comparison to modern Namib Sand Sea dunes: Journal of African
Earth Sciences, v. 29, p. 629–642.
KOCUREK, G., ROBINSON, N.I., AND SHARP, J.M., JR., 2001, The response of the
water table in coastal aeolian systems to changes in sea level: Sedi-
mentary Geology, v. 139, p. 1–13.
KOSTER, E.A., 1988, Ancient and modern cold-climate aeolian sand depo-
sition: a review: Journal of Quaternary Science, v. 3, p. 69–83.
LANCASTER, N., 1985, Winds and sand movements in the Namib sand sea:
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 10, p. 607–619.
LANCASTER, N., 1986, Grain-size characteristics of linear dunes in the south-
west Kalahari: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 56, p. 395–400.
LANCASTER, N., 1988, Controls on eolian dune size and spacing: Geology,
v. 16, p. 972–975.
LANCASTER, N., 1995, Geomorphology of Desert Dunes: New York,
Routledge, 290 p.
LANCASTER, N., 1998, Dune morphology, chronology and Quaternary
climate change, in Alsharhan, A.S., Glennie, K., Whittle, G.L., and
Kendall, C.G.St.C., eds., Quaternary Deserts and Climate Change:
Proceedings of the International Conference on Quaternary Deserts
and Climate Change: Rotterdam, Balkema, p. 339–349.
LANCASTER, N., AND TELLER, J.T., 1988, Interdune deposits of the Namib
Sand Sea: Sedimentary Geology, v. 55, p. 91–107.
LANCASTER, N., GREELEY, R., AND CHRISTENSEN, P.R., 1987, Dunes of the Gran
Desierto sand sea, Sonora, Mexico: Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms, v. 12, p. 277–288.
LANGFORD, R.P., 1989, Fluvial–aeolian interactions: part 1, modern sys-
tems: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 1023–1035.
LANGFORD, R., AND CHAN, M.A., 1988, Flood surfaces and deflation surfaces
within the Cutler Formation and Cedar Mesa Sandstone (Permian),
southeastern Utah: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 100, p.
1541–1549.
LANGFORD, R.P., AND CHAN, M.A., 1989, Fluvial–aeolian interactions: part
2, ancient systems: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 1037–1051.
LOOPE, D.B., 1984, Eolian origin of Upper Paleozoic sandstones, southeast-
ern Utah: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 54, p. 563–580.
LOOPE, D.B., 1985, Episodic deposition and preservation of eolian sands—
a late Paleozoic example from southeastern Utah: Geology, v. 13, p.
73–76.
LOOPE, D.B., 1988, Rhizoliths and ancient aeolianites: Sedimentary Geol-
ogy, v. 56, p. 301–314.
LOOPE, D.B., ROWE, C.M., AND JOECKEL, R.M., 2001, Annual monsoon rains
recorded by Jurassic dunes: Nature, v. 412, p. 64–66.
LOOPE, D.B., SWINEHART, J.B., AND MASON, J.P., 1995, Dune-dammed
paleovalleys of the Nebraska Sand Hills—intrinsic versus climatic
controls on the accumulation of lake and marsh sediments: Geologi-
cal Society of America, Bulletin, v. 107, p. 396–406.
MAINGUET, M., AND CHEMIN, M.-C., 1983, Sand seas of the Sahara and Sahel:
An explanation of their thickness and sand dune type by the sand
budget principle, in Brookfield, M.E., and Ahlbrandt, T.S., eds.,
Eolian Sediments and Processes: Amsterdam, Elsevier, Develop-
ments in Sedimentology, no. 38, p. 353–363.
MAXWELL, T.A., AND HAYNES, C.V., 1989, Large-scale, low-amplitude
bedforms (chevrons) in the Selima Sand Sheet, Egypt: Science, v. 243,
p. 1179–1182.
MCKEE, E.D., 1966, Structures of dunes at White Sands National Monu-
ment, New Mexico (and a comparison with structures of dunes from
other selected areas): Sedimentology, v. 7, p. 1–69.
MCKEE, E.D., 1979, A Study of Global Sand Seas: U.S. Geological Survey,
Professional Paper 1052, 421 p.
MCKEE, E.D., AND MOIOLA, R.J., 1975, Geometry and growth of the White
Sands dune field, New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey, Journal of
Research, v. 3, p. 59–66.
MCKEE, E.D., DOUGLASS, J.R., AND RITTENHOUSE, S., 1971, Deformation of lee
side laminae in eolian dunes: Geological Society of America, Bulle-
tin, v. 82, p. 359–378.
MIDDLETON, L.T., AND BLAKEY, R.C., 1983, Processes and controls on the
intertonguing of the Kayenta and Navajo formations, northern
Arizona: Eolian–fluvial interactions, in Brookfield, M.E., and
Ahlbrandt, T.S., eds., Eolian Sediments and Processes: Amsterdam,
Elsevier, Developments in Sedimentology, no. 38, p. 613–634.
MOUNTNEY, N., AND HOWELL, J., 2000, Aeolian architecture, bedform
climbing and preservation space in the Cretaceous Etjo Formation,
NW Namibia: Sedimentology, v. 47, p. 825–849.
MOUNTNEY, N.P., AND JAGGER, A., 2004, Stratigraphic evolution of a wet
aeolian system: The Permian Cedar Mesa Sandstone, SE Utah:
Sedimentology, v. 51, p. 713–743.
MOUNTNEY, N.P., AND RUSSELL, A.J., 2004, Sedimentology of aeolian
sandsheet deposits in the Askja region of northeast Iceland: Sedi-
mentary Geology, v. 166, p. 223–244.
MOUNTNEY, N.P., AND THOMPSON, D.B., 2002, Stratigraphic evolution and
preservation of aeolian dune and damp/wet interdune strata: an
example from the Triassic Helsby Sandstone Formation, Cheshire
Basin, UK: Sedimentology, v. 49, p. 805–834.
MOUNTNEY, N.P., HOWELL, J.A., FLINT, S.S., AND JERRAM, D.A., 1998, Aeolian
and alluvial deposition within the Mesozoic Etjo Sandstone Forma-
tion, North West Namibia: Journal of African Earth Sciences, v. 27,
p. 175–192.
MOUNTNEY, N.P., HOWELL, J.A., FLINT, S.S., AND JERRAM, D.A., 1999a,
Climate, sediment supply and tectonics as controls on the deposi-
tion and preservation of the aeolian–fluvial Etjo Sandstone Forma-
tion, Namibia: Geological Society of London, Journal, v. 156, p. 771–
779.
MOUNTNEY, N.P., HOWELL, J.A., FLINT, S.S., AND JERRAM, D.A., 1999b,
Relating eolian bounding-surface geometries to the bed forms that
generated them: Etjo Formation, Cretaceous, Namibia: Geology, v.
27, p. 159–162.
NICKLING, W.G., MCKENNA NEUMAN, C., AND LANCASTER, N., 2002, Grainfall
processes in the lee of transverse dunes, Silver Peak, Nevada:
Sedimentology, v. 49, p. 191–209.
NIELSON, J., AND KOCUREK, G., 1986, Climbing zibars of the Algodones:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 48, p. 1–15.
OLSEN, H., DUE, P.H., AND CLEMMENSEN, L.B., 1989, Morphology and
genesis of asymmetric adhesion warts—a new adhesion surface
structure: Sedimentary Geology, v. 61, p. 277–285.
ØXNEVAD, I.E.I., 1991, Aeolian and mixed aeolian–subaqueous sedimen-
tation in modern and ancient sub-tropical desert basins: examples
from the Sahara and Permo-Triassic of NW Europe: Unpublished
Doctor of Science thesis, University of Bergen, Norway, 161 p.
(volume I), 111 p. (volume II).
PORTER, M.L., 1986, Sedimentary record of erg migration: Geology, v. 14,
p. 497–500.
PULVERTAFT, T.C.R., 1985, Aeolian dune and wet interdune sedimenta-
tion in the Middle Proterozoic Dala Sandstone, Sweden: Sedimen-
tary Geology, v. 44, p. 93–111.
PURSER, B.H., AND EVANS, G., 1973, Regional sedimentation along the
Trucial Coast, Persian Gulf, in Purser, B.H., ed., The Persian Gulf:
Berlin, Springer, p. 211–231.
PYE, K., 1982, Negatively skewed aeolian sands from a humid tropical
coastal dunefield, northern Australia: Sedimentary Geology, v. 31,
p. 249–266.
PYE, K., 1983, Coastal dunes: Progress in Physical Geography, v. 7, p.
531–546.
PYE, K., AND TSOAR, H., 1987, The mechanics and geological implications of
dust transport and deposition in deserts, with particular reference to
 EOLIAN FACIES MODELS 83

loess formation and dune sand diagenesis in the northern Negev, a high-resolution record from the Chott Rharsa basin, Tunisia: The
Israel, in Frostick, L.E., and Reid, I., eds., Desert Sediments; Ancient Holocene, v. 9, p. 141–147.
and Modern: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 35, p. TALBOT, M.R., 1985, Major bounding surfaces in aeolian sandstones—a
139–156. climatic model: Sedimentology, v. 32, p. 257–265.
RANKEY, E.C., 1997, Relations between relative changes in sea level and THOMPSON, D.B., 1969, Dome shaped aeolian dunes in the Frodsham
climate shifts: Pennsylvanian–Permian mixed carbonate–siliciclastic Member of the so-called ‘Keuper’ Sandstone Formation [Scythian–
strata, western United States: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, ?Anisan: Triassic] at Frodsham, Cheshire (England): Sedimentary
v. 109, p. 1089–1100. Geology, v. 3, p. 263–289.
RUBIN, D.M., 1987a, Cross-Bedding, Bedforms and Paleocurrents: SEPM, TREWIN, N.H., 1993, Controls on fluvial deposition in mixed fluvial and
Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology, v. 1, 187 p. aeolian facies within the Tumblagooda Sandstone (Late Silurian) of
RUBIN, D.M., 1987b, Formation of scalloped cross-bedding without un- Western Australia: Sedimentary Geology, v. 85, p. 387–400.
steady flows: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 57, p. 39–45. WARREN, A., 1971, The dunes of the Ténéré Desert: Geographical Journal,
RUBIN, D.M., AND HUNTER, R.E., 1982, Bedform climbing in theory and v. 137, 458–461.
nature: Sedimentology, v. 29, p. 121–138. WASSON, R.J., AND HYDE, R., 1983, Factors determining desert dune type:
RUBIN, D.M., AND HUNTER, R.E., 1983, Reconstructing bedform assem- Nature, v. 304, p. 337–339.
blages from compound crossbedding, in Brookfield, M.E., and WERNER, B.T., AND KOCUREK, G., 1999, Bedform spacing from defect dy-
Ahlbrandt, T.S., eds., Eolian Sediments and Processes: Amsterdam, namics: Geology, v. 27, p. 727–730.
Elsevier, Developments in Sedimentology, no. 38, p. 407–427. WILSON, I.G., 1971, Desert sandflow basins and a model for the develop-
RUBIN, D.M., AND HUNTER, R.E., 1984, Origin of 1st-order bounding surfaces ment of ergs: Geographical Journal, v. 137, p. 180–199.
in aeolian sandstones—Reply: Sedimentology, v. 31, p. 128–132. WILSON, I.G., 1972. Aeolian bedforms—their development and origins:
RUBIN, D.M., AND HUNTER, R.E., 1985, Why deposits of longitudinal dunes Sedimentology, v. 19, p. 173–210.
are rarely recognized in the geologic record: Sedimentology, v. 32, p. WILSON, I.G., 1973, Ergs: Sedimentary Geology, v. 10, p. 77–106.
147–157.
SCHENK, C.J., 1990, Eolian deposits of North Padre Island, Texas, in
Fryberger, S.G., Krystinik, L.F., and Schenk, C.J., eds., Modern and
Ancient Eolian Deposits: Petroleum Exploration and Production:
Denver, SEPM, p. 10-1–10-7.
SCHERER, C.M.S., 2000, Eolian dunes of the Botucatu Formation (Creta-
ceous) in southernmost Brazil: morphology and origin: Sedimentary
Geology, v. 137, p. 63–84.
SCHERER, C.M.S., 2002, Preservation of aeolian genetic units by lava flows
in the Lower Cretaceous of the Paraná Basin, southern Brazil: Sedi-
mentology, v. 49, p. 97–116.
SHARP, R.P., 1963, Wind ripples: Journal of Geology, v. 71, p. 617–636.
SHARP, R.P., 1966, Kelso dunes, Mojave Desert, California: Geological
Society of America, Bulletin, v. 77, p. 1045–1074.
SIMPSON, E.L., AND ERIKSSON, K.A., 1993, Thin eolianites interbedded within
a fluvial and marine succession—Early Proterozoic Whitworth For-
mation, Mount Isa inlier, Australia: Sedimentary Geology, v. 87, p.
39–62.
SIMPSON, E.L., AND LOOPE, D.B., 1985, Amalgamated interdune deposits,
White Sands, New Mexico: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 55, p.
361–365.
STANISTREET, I.G., AND STOLLHOFEN, H., 2002, Hoanib River flood deposits of
Namib Desert interdunes as analogues for thin permeability barrier
mudstone layers in aeolianite reservoirs: Sedimentology, v. 49, p.
719–736.
STOKES, S., THOMAS, S.G., AND WASHINGTON, R., 1997, Multiple episodes of
aridity in southern Africa since the last interglacial period: Nature, v.
388, p. 154–158.
STOKES, W.L., 1968, Multiple parallel-truncation bedding planes—a fea-
ture of wind deposited sandstone formations: Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, v. 38, p. 510–515.
SWEET, M.L., 1992, Lee-face air-flow, surface processes, and stratification
types—their significance for refining the use of eolian cross-strata as
paleocurrent indicators: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v.
104, p. 1528–1538.
SWEET, M.L., AND KOCUREK, G., 1990, An empirical model of aeolian dune
lee-face airflow: Sedimentology, v. 37, p. 1023–1038.
SWEZEY, C., 2001, Eolian sediment responses to late Quaternary climate
changes: temporal and spatial patterns in the Sahara: Palaeogeography
Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology, v. 167, p. 119–155.
SWEZEY, C., LANCASTER, N., KOCUREK, G., DEYNOUX, M., BLUM, M., PRICE, D.,
AND PION, J.-C., 1999, Response of aeolian systems to Holocene cli-
matic and hydrologic changes on the northern margin of the Sahara:
84 NIGEL P. MOUNTNEY
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 85

FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

JOHN S. BRIDGE
Department of Geological Sciences, Binghamton University, Binghamton, New York 13902-6000, U.S.A.
e-mail: jbridge@binghamton.edu

ABSTRACT: Recent development of fluvial facies models has been due to improved description of natural river and floodplain processes
and deposits using: (1) ground-penetrating radar (GPR) combined with cores and trenches to describe modern deposits in 3D; (2) study
of frozen rivers to allow easy access to the entire channel belt and procurement of undisturbed cores; (3) optically stimulated luminescence
(OSL) for improved dating of deposits; (4) high-resolution remote sensing over large areas and at short time intervals in order to determine
temporal changes in channel and floodplain geometry due to erosion and deposition; (5) new measuring equipment such as acoustic
Doppler current profilers (ADCP), high-resolution multibeam sonar, and GPS, for measuring surface topography, flow, and sedimentary
processes. However, there is still a lack of studies of river geometry, flow, and sedimentary processes at the all-important high flow stages,
especially on big rivers and floodplains.
Laboratory studies of bed geometry, flow, and sediment transport, erosion, and deposition have been undertaken for a range of scales,
from small bedforms such as ripples, dunes, and antidunes, to bars and channels, to whole channel belt–floodplain systems. Controls on
river and floodplain mechanics such as sediment supply, base level ,and tectonism have also been evaluated. However, there are scaling
problems with laboratory experiments that become more acute as the scale of the system increases.
The new field and laboratory data have allowed development of new qualitative and quantitative fluvial depositional models. Such
models account for the fact that: (1) there are different superimposed scales of fluvial forms and associated stratasets in rivers and
floodplains; (2) the geometry and mode of migration of any scale of fluvial form (e.g., dune, bar, channel, channel-belt) is closely related
to the geometry and internal character of the associated strataset, which allows development of generalized depositional models for the
different scales; (3) changes in flow stage over various time scales affect the nature of deposits. These new models use consistent descriptive
terminology and dispel many of the extant misconceptions about fluvial deposits.
Quantitative, process-based models of fluvial deposits exist, but are not well developed, especially for the longer-term and larger-scale
processes and deposits. Process-based models of the effects of tectonism, climate, and base-level change on fluvial deposits are in their
infancy. Furthermore, most models are difficult to test. These problems with quantitative models are due to lack of appropriate quantitative
data, and difficulties in mathematical modeling of complex natural systems. As a result of this, stochastic models are commonly used to
represent fluvial stratigraphy, given initial data from wells, cores, and geophysical surveys. Development of quantitative models is
essential if we are to understand and predict the nature and spatial distribution of ancient fluvial deposits, and to characterize aquifers and
hydrocarbon reservoirs for subsurface fluid flow simulations. Such development will require more studies of rivers and floodplains during
floods, and more mathematical sophistication.

INTRODUCTION modern alluvium is generally not known well enough. This is

Rivers and floodplains (including alluvial fans and deltas)
are important features of the Earth’s surface, both now and in
the past. Ancient fluvial deposits are indicators of past Earth
surface environments, and may contain economically impor-
tant resources such as water, oil, gas, coal, and placer minerals.
Understanding of fluvial sedimentary forms, processes, and
deposits has come from: (1) field studies of modern environ-
ments; (2) laboratory flume studies using physical models; and
(3) construction of models based on these studies. Depositional
(facies) models and direct modern analogs allow rational inter-
pretation of ancient deposits, and can aid prediction of the
nature of subsurface deposits where data (e.g., cores, well logs,
seismic) are sparse. Depositional models can be qualitative
(graphic) and/or quantitative (numerical), static and/or dy-
namic (forward), stochastic and/or deterministic. Ideally, a
depositional model must represent landforms and sedimentary
processes accurately, must contain detailed sedimentary infor-
mation (including the various superimposed scales of strata),
should be quantitative, and should have some predictive value.
A depositional model should also provide parameters (e.g.,
permeability, porosity) relevant to modeling fluid flow through
aquifers and hydrocarbon reservoirs. Most fluvial depositional
models (e.g., Miall, 1992, 1996; Bridge, 1993, 2003; Collinson,
1996) do not meet these ideals, because the nature and origin of
due partly to difficulties in describing deposits below the water
table, and in studying depositional processes during the all-
important high-flow stages and over large time and space scales
(see reviews by Bridge, 1985, 1993, 2003). Also, field and labora-
tory studies are expensive, and theoretical modeling of complex
fluvial processes is difficult.
Over the past decade or so, difficulties in describing modern
fluvial deposits have been overcome by: (1) use of ground-
penetrating radar (GPR) in combination with cores and trenches
to describe different scales of deposits in detail (e.g., Jol and
Smith, 1991; Gawthorpe et al., 1993; Huggenberger, 1993; Jol,
1995; Bridge et al., 1995; Bridge et al., 1998; Beres et al., 1995;
Beres et al., 1999; McMechan et al., 1997; Bristow et al., 1999;
Szerbiak et al., 2001; Corbeanu et al., 2001; Skelly et al., 2003;
Woodward et al., 2003; Best et al., 2003; Lunt et al., 2004a, 2004b);
(2) study of channel deposits in frozen rivers, allowing easy
access to the whole channel belt, and the procurement of undis-
turbed cores of unconsolidated gravel (Lunt et al., 2004a, 2004b);
and (3) improved methods of determining the age of fluvial
deposits, particularly optically stimulated luminescence (Duller,
1996; Aitken, 1998). Also, our ability to document changes in the
geometry of channels and floodplains arising from erosion and
deposition has improved by using aerial photos and satellite
images taken at short time intervals (e.g., Lane et al., 1994; Lane
et al., 1995; Lane et al., 1998; Lane et al., 2001; Lane et al., 2003;

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 85–170.
86 JOHN S. BRIDGE
Ashmore and Church, 1998; Stojic et al., 1998; Chandler, 1999;
Westaway et al., 2000; Ashworth et al., 2000; Best et al., 2003;
Lunt and Bridge, 2004). These studies have allowed the con-
struction of a new generation of fluvial depositional models
(e.g., Best et al., 2003; Lunt et al., 2004a, 2004b; Bridge and Lunt,
2006).
There have been many studies of water flow, sediment trans-
port, and channel migration in natural rivers, but not many of
these have been undertaken over periods of years and including
floods (review in Bridge, 2003). Those studies of processes of fluid
flow, sediment transport, erosion, and deposition in fluvial envi-
ronments during flood stages (e.g., Bridge and Jarvis, 1982;
Dietrich and Smith, 1983, 1984; Bridge and Gabel, 1992; Gabel,
1993; Julien and Klaasen, 1995; Richardson et al., 1996; Richardson
and Thorne, 1998; Ten Brinke et al., 1999; McLelland et al., 1999;
Ashworth et al., 2000; Julien et al., 2002; Wilbers and Ten Brinke,
2003) were facilitated by building bridges over small rivers (less
than 30 m wide), and use of new equipment such as acoustic
Doppler current profilers, high-resolution multibeam sonar, and
accurate and rapid positioning using differential GPS. Further
work of this kind will be necessary in order to make progress in
the development of models that link bed topography, fluid flow,
sediment transport, erosion, and deposition in rivers and flood-
plains.
Laboratory flumes have been used recently to study relatively
small-scale bed forms (bed-load sheets, ripples, dunes, and
antidunes) and their associated sedimentary structures (e.g.,
Bridge and Best, 1988, 1997; Bennett and Bridge, 1995a; Paola et
al., 1989; Best and Bridge, 1992; Storms et al., 1999; Alexander et
al., 2001; Leclair and Bridge, 2001; Leclair, 2002); channel and bar
evolution and migration (e.g., Schumm and Khan, 1972; Ashmore,
1982, 1991, 1993; Fujita, 1989; García and Niño, 1993; Whiting and
Dietrich, 1993a, 1993b; Ashworth, 1996; Lanzoni, 2000a, 2000b;
Knappen et al., 2001); geometry, water flow, and sediment trans-
port in channels (e.g., Ashmore, 1988; Hoey and Sutherland, 1991;
Warburton and Davies, 1994; Bennett and Bridge, 1995b; Frederici
and Paola, 2003); water flow over simple floodplains (e.g., Knight
and Shiono, 1996; Naish and Sellin, 1996; Sellin and Willetts, 1996;
Willetts and Rameshwaran, 1996; Wormleaton, 1996; Lai et al.,
2000; Patra and Kar, 2000; Knight and Brown, 2001; Myers et al.,
2001; Valentine et al., 2001); the effects of vegetation, tectonism,
base-level change, aggradation, and degradation on rivers and
floodplains (or fans) and their deposits (e.g., Ouchi, 1985; Schumm
et al., 1987; Germanowski and Schumm, 1993; Leddy et al., 1993;
Koss et al., 1994; Wood et al., 1993; Bryant et al., 1995; Ashworth
et al., 1999, 2004; Heller et al., 2001; Paola et al., 2001; Gran and
Paola, 2001; Moreton et al., 2002; Sheets et al., 2002). Laboratory
experiments are desirable in that they are undertaken in manage-
able environments, and the variables that control the environ-
ment can be varied systematically. These physical laboratory
models may be full scale, reduced scale, or unscaled (analog
models). However, scaling problems are common, and these
increase as the physical model becomes increasingly smaller than
the real-world prototype. Laboratory experimenters have not
been able to generate all of the superimposed scales of bed forms
(e.g., bedload sheets, ripples, dunes, unit bars, compound bars)
and associated strata that occur in natural rivers. Also, unrealis-
tically high rates of channel migration occur in many experi-
ments.
Quantitative models of fluvial environments can both en-
hance understanding and allow prediction. Because such models
are ultimately based on understanding gained from field and
laboratory studies, the models of short-term, small-scale pro-
cesses are best developed. Nevertheless, there have been only
modest advances here, because of the lack of appropriate data
from modern environments. Useful quantitative models are more
difficult to construct and test as the time scale and spatial scale
increase. There is a lack of linkage between models treating
different scales, and there are inadequate data to test long-term,
large-scale models. As a result, quantitative fluvial models are in
their infancy (Bridge, in press).
This review concerns development of fluvial depositional
models over the past two decades. Earlier studies of fluvial
environments are discussed in Miall (1996) and Bridge (2003).
The presentation in this paper is as follows: (1) definition of
superimposed scales of fluvial bed forms and associated
stratasets; and (2) new data and models for each scale of bed
form and strataset, smallest to largest, with discussion of the use
of these models to interpret and predict ancient deposits. The
relevance of the new depositional models to exploration and
management of hydrocarbon reservoirs and aquifers is dis-
cussed throughout.
SUPERIMPOSED SCALES OF
FLUVIAL FORMS AND STRATASETS
Table 1 and Figure 1 show (in simplified form) the different
scales of fluvial forms and associated sediment deposits. It will be
demonstrated below that the geometry of a particular type of
strataset is related to the geometry and migration of the associ-
ated fluvial form. In particular, the length-to-thickness ratio of
stratasets is similar to the wavelength-to-height ratio of associ-
ated forms. Furthermore, the wavelength and height of bed forms
such as dunes and bars are related to channel depth and width.
Therefore, the thickness of a particular scale of strataset (e.g.,
medium-scale cross sets and large-scale sets of inclined strata)
will vary with river dimensions. These relationships between the
dimensions of stratasets, bed forms, and channels mean that
generally applicable, quantitative depositional models can be
developed.
PLANE BEDS, RIPPLES, DUNES, ANTIDUNES,
AND ASSOCIATED STRATASETS
The origin, geometry, and migration of (sub–bar scale) bed
forms such as ripples, dunes, and antidunes, and the nature
and origin of their associated sedimentary structures, are well
summarized by Allen (1982), Middleton and Southard (1984).
However, there have been some significant improvements in
our knowledge of these bed forms and sedimentary structures
over the past two decades (reviews by Best, 1996; Bridge,
2003), including: (1) description of bed forms and their hy-
draulic stability limits over a broader range of grain sizes than
hitherto; (2) description of low-relief bed waves (bed-load
sheets) on nominally plane beds, and the realization that their
migration is responsible for the formation of planar strata; (3)
analysis of changes in the geometry of bed forms as they
migrate under steady and unsteady flows; (4) detailed exami-
nation of the way bed-form geometry and migration and
aggradation rate control the geometry and preservation of
sedimentary structures; and (5) development of quantitative
models of the relationship between bed-form height and length
and the thickness and length of sets of cross strata. In view of
the fact that these relatively small-scale sedimentary struc-
tures can be described from cores and image logs as well as
outcrops, it is worthwhile investing some time in understand-
ing them.
Dunes are generally recognized as the most common sub–
bar-scale bed form in sandy rivers. However, contrary to popular
perception, dunes also occur commonly in gravelly–sandy rivers
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 87

TABLE 1.—Scales of fluvial forms and associated stratasets (simplified).

Fluvial form Strataset
Ripples Small-scale cross stratasets
Dunes Medium-scale cross stratasets
Low-relief bedwaves on plane beds Planar stratasets
Antidunes Low-angle cross stratasets

Seasonal flood deposit Large-scale (inclined) stratum

Unit bars and compound bars Large-scale inclined stratasets

Channels Channel fills

Channel belt composed of channels and bars Group of large-scale inclined stratasets and
channel fills
Floodplain with levees, crevasse splays, Groups of large-scale inclined stratasets and
channels, lakes, floodbasins channel fills

Alluvial valley with channel belts and floodplain Groups of groups: alluvial architecture
(or fan or delta)

Alluvial river system Basin fill (or part of basin fill)

A 2 B
point bar

channel belt

braid bar
chute
1

sandstone body with sets of large-scale inclined strata: channel belt deposit
2

set of large-scale inclined strata: channel bar deposit

C

large-scale inclined stratum:

seasonal deposit on channel bar
simple: no unit bar compound: unit bar deposit
small-scale cross strata: ripples

planar strata: plane bed

medium-scale cross strata

superimposed on simple
large-scale inclined strata:
medium-scale cross strata: dunes dunes on unit bar

FIG. 1.—Superimposed scales of fluvial forms and stratasets. A) Cross sections (1) and (2) through an idealized braided channel belt.
The cross sections show several sets of large-scale inclined strata formed by deposition on channel bars. Each large-scale inclined
stratum can be simple (deposited during a single flood) or compound (deposited as a unit bar over one or more floods). Large-
scale inclined strata contain smaller-scale stratasets associated with passage of ripples, dunes, and bedload sheets over bars.
Modified from Bridge (2003). B) Alluvial valley of the Senguerr River, southern Argentina, containing a floodplain with a channel
belt (about 100 m wide) on one side of it, adjacent to the valley margin in the foreground. C) Channel-belt sandstones (gray) and
floodplain deposits (red) from the Miocene Siwaliks of northern Pakistan. Marked channel-belt sandstone body is 10–15 m thick.
88 JOHN S. BRIDGE

(e.g., Dinehart, 1989, 1992; Carling, 1999; Kleinhans et al., 2002;
Lunt et al., 2004a, 2004b). One reason why gravel dunes had not
been more widely reported is that gravelly–sandy rivers are
rarely studied during peak flood conditions. Also, gravel dunes
commonly have low heights on the upper parts of bars where
they can be observed easily at low flow stage. Cross stratification
formed by dunes is common in pebble-gravelly fluvial deposits
(e.g., Lunt et al., 2004a, 2004b), but is perhaps not as easily seen as
in sands. Hydraulic stability diagrams for sub–bar-scale bed
forms have recently been extended into the gravel sizes (Fig. 2A;
Carling, 1999) and the silt sizes (Fig. 2B; van den Berg and van
Gelder, 1993).

FIG. 2.—A) Hydraulic conditions for stability of bed forms in sand and gravel, according to Carling (1999) modified from Allen (1982),
as a function of dimensionless bed shear stress and median sediment diameter. Includes additional data from Carling and
Shvidchenko (2002). B) Hydraulic conditions for stability of bed forms in sand and silt, according to van den Berg and van Gelder
(1993), as a function of dimensionless bed shear stress and median sediment diameter.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 89

Planar strata are formed by migration of low-relief bed waves
(bed-load sheets) on lower-stage plane beds and upper-stage
plane beds (Bennett and Bridge, 1995a; Paola et al., 1989; Bridge
and Best, 1988, 1997; Best and Bridge, 1992). Thus, plane beds are
not strictly planar. Low-relief bed forms on lower-stage plane
beds are associated with low bed-load transport rates of coarse
sand to gravel. These bed forms are a few grain diameters high,
and their length is proportional to flow depth (Bennett and
Bridge, 1995a). The bed forms are composed of the smaller grain
sizes available in the bed, and the largest grains in the bed are
more or less immobile. The gravel on most of the backs of these
bed forms is imbricated, and may be in the form of pebble or
cobble clusters. The steep fronts of the bed forms may have platy
grains dipping in the flow direction at the angle of repose (pseudo-
imbrication). Thus gravelly planar strata formed by downstream
migration of low-relief bed waves typically fine upward, and
contain both imbricated and pseudo-imbricated gravel clasts
(Fig. 3A, B). As bed shear stress increases, grain size of the bed
load becomes more like the bed material, and low-relief bed
waves are transformed into dunes.
Bed-load sheets on upper-stage plane beds are associated
with high bed-load transport rates of sand mainly, and sus-
pended sediment load is substantial (Bridge and Best, 1988, 1997;
Best and Bridge, 1992). The bed forms are millimeters high, and
their length is about six flow depths. As these bed forms migrate
downstream (at rates of millimeters per second), suspended
sediment is deposited in the trough of the bedform. As the bed
form migrates over this trough, a lamina is produced that has a
fine-grained base formed from the suspended-sediment deposi-
tion (Fig. 3C).
As subcritical bed forms (bed-load sheets, ripples, and dunes)
migrate under steady or unsteady flow conditions, the wave-
length, height, and migration rate of individual bed forms change
in time and space (review by Bridge, 2003, p. 79–97). Modes of
change include: formation of small bed forms on the backs of
larger ones; one bed form catching up with the one in front of it,
thus forming a single bigger bed form; sudden increase in the
height of a bed form by deep scour of its trough; gradual reduc-
tion in height (dying out) of bed forms. As a result of this
behavior, probability density distributions of bed-form height
and length are normally asymmetrical (high-end tail) and
polymodal. This bed-form behavior has an important influence
on the nature and degree of preservation of planar strata and
cross strata (Fig. 4). Changes in the geometry and migration rate

A B

FIG. 3—A) Planar strata in gravel formed by migration of bedload sheets. A planar stratum composed of open-framework gravel
occurs in the middle of the photo. The base of this stratum is relatively coarse grained and contains imbricated pebbles dipping
to the left. The upper part of the stratum is finer grained and contains pseudo-imbricated pebbles dipping to the right. B) bedload
sheets on a bar in the Sagavanirktok River, Alaska. C) Planar strata in sand formed by migration of low-relief bed waves (bedload
sheets) on upper-stage plane beds. Section is 30 mm thick. The dark boundaries of the planar laminae are formed of relatively fine-
grained sediment deposited from suspension in the troughs of bed-load sheets. From experiments of J.S. Bridge and J.L. Best.
90 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 4.—Cross strata formed by dunes. Flow is right to left and width of section is 0.5 m. Dune form at top of section is marked by
dark line. Arrow 1 indicates thickening of a cross set due to dune trough scouring. Arrow 2 is the front of a dune that was preserved
as the dune was overtaken by another dune. Then, the dune decreased in height and its trough (arrow 3) was filled with low-angle
strata. From experiments of Leclair (2002).

of dunes over floods have received some attention recently (e.g.,
Gabel, 1993; Julien and Klaassen, 1995; Harbor, 1998; Ten Brinke
et al., 1999; Carling et al., 2000a; Carling et al., 2000b; Julien et al.,
2002; Wilbers and Ten Brinke, 2003), but theoretical models for
such changes are still lacking.
Recent experiments on antidune migration under aggrada-
tional conditions (Alexander et al., 2001) have revealed that the
dominant internal structure is trough-shaped stratasets con-
taining low-angle cross strata (as seen in along-stream sections;
Fig. 5). The cross strata may dip upstream or downstream, or in
no preferred direction. These stratasets are formed as antidunes
and associated water-surface waves migrate upstream, increase
in height and asymmetry, and then break up, filling the antidune
trough with sediment very rapidly. Preservation of antidune
forms is rare because they are such short-lived bed forms.
It is commonly stated that aggradation and bed-form climb-
ing are required for preservation of sets of cross strata. In reality,
the most important factor controlling cross-set preservation is
the variability of trough scour depth (and height) of the indi-
vidual bed forms. Only those bed forms with the largest scour
depths leave sets of cross strata, and of these less than a half of
the height of the bed form is represented as a cross set (Paola and
Borgman, 1991; Best and Bridge, 1992; Bridge, 1997; Bridge and
Best, 1997; Storms et al., 1999; Leclair and Bridge, 2001; Leclair,
2002). A simple approximate relationship between the mean
thickness of cross sets, the mean height of bed forms, and the
aggradation rate is
sm = lr/c + e/a (1)
where sm is mean cross-set thickness, l is mean wavelength of bed
forms, r is mean deposition rate, c is mean migration rate of bed
forms, e is a parameter that varies with bed-form type from about
0.8 to 1.6, and a is a parameter that depends on mean bed-form
height (commonly about 0.2 mean bed-form height). For dunes
and bars, the first term on the right-hand side of Equation 1 is
normally an order of magnitude less than the second term and
can be ignored, implying that aggradation rate has little influence
on the thickness of stratasets formed by dunes and bars. Aggra-
dation rate can have more of an effect for smaller bed forms such
as ripples and low-relief bed forms. Another significant result of
the recent studies is that the alongstream length of preserved
stratasets is proportional to the length of the formative bed form
(mean strataset length is approximately half mean bedform length
for dunes and antidunes), such that there is a relationship be-
tween bed-form length/height and strataset length/thickness
(Fig. 6). This has important implications for predicting the lateral
extent of stratasets from their thickness, but establishment of such
relationships for all bed-form scales needs more research.
FLOOD-GENERATED STRATASETS
The hydraulic conditions controlling the existence of the
various bed forms discussed above (Fig. 2) are fairly well known
as long as the bed forms are in equilibrium with the flow (reviews

antidune

FIG. 5.—Cross strata formed by antidunes. Flow is right to left, and section is 1 m wide. Antidune (marked) occurs at top of section.
Cross strata formed by aggradation on migrating antidunes are inclined at a low angle and fill troughs. Relatively coarse sediment
is light, and fine sediment is dark. Troughs are lined with fine-grained sediment. From experiments of Alexander et al. (2001).
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
FIG. 6.—Scales of bedforms and associated stratasets from modern rivers. From Bridge and Lunt (2006).
by Allen, 1982; Bridge, 2003). This information is useful because
it allows prediction of changes in bed forms (hence sedimentary
structures) as flow conditions change in time and space over
sediment beds of a given grain size. However, changes in the
geometry of large bed forms such as dunes normally lag behind
changes in flow conditions, because of the amount of sediment
that must be moved to effect a change in geometry. This means
that prediction of the flow conditions for dune existence under
unsteady flows is imprecise. Nevertheless, Figure 7 shows some
typical sedimentary sequences in which mean grain size and
sedimentary structures vary vertically and laterally, associated
with changing flow conditions over a typical flood. Temporal
changes in sediment transport rate and grain size (hence bed
form) at a point are associated with changes in flow strength (e.g.,
flow velocity or bed shear stress) over the flood, and these
produce vertical variations in grain size and sedimentary struc-
tures. Spatial decrease in sediment transport rate is mainly re-
sponsible for the deposition and for downstream changes in
mean grain size and sedimentary structures. The availability of
different sediment sizes and the overall flow strength controls the
overall grain size of the deposited sediment. Sequences such as
those shown in Figure 7 will be incorporated into larger-scale
sequences associated with channel bars and channel fills, levees,
and crevasse splays.
RIVER CHANNELS, BARS, AND CHANNEL BELTS
General Character of Geometry, Water Flow, Sediment
Transport, Erosion, and Deposition
Channel Geometry.—
The fundamental components of all alluvial channel belts are
channels, unit bars, and compound bars (Fig. 8). A bar is defined
as a bed form with length proportional to local channel width and
height proportional to channel depth. Unit bars are lobate
(linguoid) in plan, and their lee side is steeper (up to the angle of
91
repose) than their stoss side (Fig. 8A). Point bars and braid bars
are normally compound bars in that they are composed of unit
bars that accreted onto the compound bars during floods. Accre-
tion of unit bars is indicated by accretion topography in the form
of bar-head lobes and bar-tail scrolls (Fig. 8). Unit bars are not
always obvious in rivers at low flow stage, because they may be
low-relief features, or they may be modified during falling flow
stage. Cross-bar channels (including chute channels) commonly
cut through compound bars, especially between individual unit
bars (Fig. 8).
The geometry, spatial distribution, and migration of bars
within channels control the plan geometry (channel pattern) of
the channel belt: that is, the sinuosity of channels and the
degree of channel splitting (braiding). These are in turn con-
trolled mainly by the supply of water and sediment during
floods (channel-forming discharge). A continuum of channel
patterns occurs as water supply and sediment supply are
increased (Fig. 9): single (meandering) channel of increasing
sinuosity; single to braided channel; braided channel with
increasing degree of braiding. All of these different channel
patterns can be formed at constant discharge, and in muddy,
sandy, and gravelly rivers. However, their detailed geometry
is influenced by discharge variations, sediment size supplied,
and riparian vegetation.
Water Flow.—
Water flow in single curved channels is broadly equivalent to
the flow in curved channels around braid bars. Curved flow
around and over any type of channel bar results in: (1) a cross-
stream component of water-surface slope towards the center of
curvature; (2) a cross-stream (secondary) flow pattern; and (3)
convective acceleration and deceleration of the depth-averaged
downstream flow associated with bar topography (Fig. 10). As a
result, the maximum depth-averaged flow velocity moves from
the convex bank at the bend entrance (the shallow bar-head
region) towards the concave bank (the deep region adjacent to the
92 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 7.—Typical sedimentary sequences produced by erosion and deposition over a single flood period, for three different grain-size
ranges. Deposition, and downstream change in grain size and sedimentary structures, are caused by decreasing bed shear stress
and sediment transport rate (i) in the flow direction (x). Vertical changes in grain size and sedimentary structures are caused by
change in bed shear stress and sediment transport rate with time (t) over the flood period. Thickness of flood-generated
sedimentary sequences is typically centimeters to meters.

A B

a
b c
b

FIG. 8.—A) Geometry of unit bars, compound bars, and channels in a braided channel belt, Rakaia River, New Zealand. Photo from
Jim Best. Flow is right to left, and width of view is about 500 m. Single lobate unit bars occur in the channel at (a). An incipient
compound braid bar occurs at (b). The bar head is composed of a single, partly emergent lobate unit bar that is dissected by a series
of cross-bar channels. These cross-bar channels have small solitary bars (deltas) at their downstream ends. The bar tail is composed
of two emergent scroll bars and at least one incipient submerged scroll bar. A well-developed compound braid bar occurs at (c).
The bar head is composed of at least six lobate unit bars, and the bar tail is composed mainly of a single scroll bar. Cross-bar
channels are also evident. B) Geometry of unit bars, compound bars, and channels in a meandering channel belt. Flow is left to
right. Compound point bar in center of photo contains lobate unit bars at the bar head (a), scroll bars at the bar tail (b), and
abandoned cross-bar channels (c). Madison River near Hebgen Lake, Montana, U.S.A. Channel is about 50 m wide.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 93

bar tail) with progression around the bend. The cross-stream

components of water-surface slope and flow velocity increase
relative to the downstream components as the radius of bend
curvature decreases. In general, the mean cross-stream flow veloc-
ity is an order of magnitude less than the mean downstream flow
velocity. Bed shear stress varies in a way similar to that of depth-
averaged flow velocity. However, this is a simplified view of flow
in curved channels, and more details are given in Bridge (2003).
Water flow in channel confluences is somewhat analogous
to that in adjacent curved channels if the joining channels have
similar geometry (Fig. 10). The maximum high-stage velocity
occurs near the center of the confluence scour, with lower
velocities near the banks (Fig. 10). However, the pattern of flow
in confluences is also dependent upon flow acceleration associ-
ated with reduced cross-sectional area of the conjoined streams,
flow separation downstream from crests of tributary mouth-
bars, inequality in the depths of confluent channels, and the
FIG. 9.—Continuum of channel patterns. Channel sinuosity and enhanced turbulence of the mixing layer between the joining
degree of channel splitting around braid bars vary with streams (Fig. 10).
channel-forming (bankfull) water discharge, valley slope, Water flow in channel diffluences (upstream of braid-bar
and mean grain size of transported sediment. Valley slope is heads) is not known well, because of lack of data (review in
a surrogate measure of sediment transport rate. Bridge, 2003, p. 188; see also Frederici and Paola, 2003). At high
A
A B
A
C
B
D
A
C

E
D

Flow

B B
F G

Flow

Mouth bar
G

FIG. 10.—A) Simplified pattern of near-bankfull water flow for curved channels of similar geometry adjacent to a braid bar (sections
A, B, C), and the downstream confluence (section D) and diffluence (section E) regions. For simplicity, flow patterns associated
with unit bars and smaller bed forms are not included. Arrows on the map represent vectors of depth-averaged, downstream flow
velocity. The cross sections show channel geometry and flow-velocity vectors (near surface and bed) for the cross-stream flow.
Cross-stream flow velocities are typically an order of magnitude less than downstream flow velocities. These flow patterns and
channel geometry change with flow stage. B) Simplified pattern of near-bankfull flow for a confluence in which a relatively small
channel with a tributary mouth bar joins a larger channel. Symbols as for Part A. From Bridge (1993), and based on the work of
Jim Best and Andre Roy.
94 JOHN S. BRIDGE

flow stage, the locus of maximum velocity is in midchannel
upstream of the diffluence, and splits downstream such that
each high-velocity thread is close to the upstream tip of the braid
bar. It is common for the relative discharges of the split channels
to vary with time, and one of the channels may become domi-
nant while the other fills. Diffluence zones may also contain
complicated patterns of convergence and divergence of depth-
averaged flow velocity.
The flow patterns described above for near-bankfull (chan-
nel-forming) flow stage change with water discharge. At rela-
tively low discharge, depth-averaged flow velocity and bed shear
stress are less than for high discharge. Water flows in a more
sinuous path around emerging bars, resulting in relatively strong
cross-stream flow components relative to downstream flow com-
ponents. Dissection of emerging bed forms such as dunes and
unit bars may result in small cross-bar channels. At high dis-
charge, new channels may be cut across existing compound bars,
particularly through the low areas between adjacent unit bars,
and the relative discharges of braided channels may vary. During
overbank floods, the overbank flow may interact with and modify
the bankfull flow pattern in the main channel (review in Bridge,
2003).
Sediment Transport and Bed Forms.—
Bed-load transport rate and mean grain size at channel-
forming flow stage over point bars and braid bars generally
increase with depth-averaged flow velocity and bed shear stress
(Fig. 11), which are largest in the shallow water near the up-
stream end of a bar, in mid-channel in the mid-bar region, and
in the deep water adjacent to the bar tail. Bed material normally
fines downstream on the tops of both braid bars and point bars
in modern sandy and gravelly rivers, and is relatively coarse in
the deepest parts adjacent to the bar tail. Thus, the spatial
distribution of mean grain size of the bed material reflects the
distribution of bed-load grain size and bed shear stress at high
(channel-forming) discharges, as would be expected. In
confluences, the largest bed-load transport rates also generally
occur where the flow velocities and bed shear stresses are
largest, provided that the bed is not armored. The largest mean

A
A
p les
rip
rip
upper-stage plane beds and p les
antidunes (shallow, fast flow)
rip Fine Flow
p les les
(sh ripp
a llow Coarse
, sl Dunes and bed-load sheets
ow
flow over most of bed
)

FIG. 11.—A) Schematic distribution of bedload grain size and sub–bar-scale bed forms in sandy and gravelly rivers at bankfull flow
stage. Ripples occur only in sands with diameter less than about 0.7 mm. The boundary between coarse and fine sediment is
actually gradational. B) Dunes preserved on the upper part of a point bar (Congaree River, South Carolina, U.S.A.) following a
flood. Medium-scale trough cross strata exposed in trench in foreground. The scale in the trench is 0.15 m long, and the trench
is about 0.75 m deep.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 95

grain size occurs in the deepest, downstream part of the
confluence scour, whereas the finest mean grain size occurs
immediately upstream of the scour zone and near the banks
adjacent to the downstream end of the confluence (Fig. 11).
These patterns of bed-load transport rate and mean grain size
would be somewhat different if the braided channels differed
greatly in discharge and geometry.
As discharge changes, the patterns of bed topography, flow
velocity, and bed shear stress also change, as discussed above.
The decreased bed shear stress at low flow stage generally results
in smaller transport rates and grain sizes of bed load. Bed-load
transport may essentially cease at low flow stage in areas with
gravelly bed sediment, and armor layers may develop. Changes
in the spatial distribution of bed shear stress with changing flow
stage may bring a zone of high bed shear stress over a zone of
relatively fine-grained bed material, thus producing high bed-
load transport rate locally. This typically happens adjacent to bar
tails.
In general, suspended-sediment concentrations are relatively
large where bed shear stress and turbulence intensity are large
and where bed-material size is small. Suspended-sediment con-
centrations are very difficult to predict in confluence zones in
view of the zones of mixing, upwelling, and flow separation.
The variation of sediment transport rate and bed sediment
size in alluvial channels is reflected in the bed forms superim-
posed upon bars. Dunes with curved crest lines are the most
common bed forms in sandy rivers at high flow stage (Fig. 11).
Upper-stage plane beds in sands occur locally in shallow areas of
high flow velocity. Ripples can occur only in sands with mean
diameter less than about 0.7 mm, and are normally restricted to
areas of slow-moving water near banks. Dunes are also common
in gravelly–sandy rivers at high flow stage, as are lower-stage
plane beds (with bed-load sheets, pebble clusters, and sand
ribbons). Antidunes in sands and their equivalent in gravels
(transverse ribs) occur only rarely in fast, shallow water. At flow
stages lower than bankfull, dunes are generally shorter and
lower, and the proportion of curved-crested dunes decreases
relative to ripples and lower-stage plane beds. Dune geometry is
commonly not in equilibrium with rapidly changing flow stage,
particularly in shallow water, where dunes can become exposed
by small decreases in water level.
Erosion and Deposition.—
Erosion and deposition at the scale of the channel bars and
bend scales are due to: (1) adjustments of bed topography specifi-

A
B

Flow

Potential rising-stage erosion, falling-stage deposition

Potential cross-bar channel
Potential rising-stage deposition, falling-stage erosion directions at high stage

DOWNSTREAM PART OF CURVED CHANNEL

falling-stage erosion
A
3 2
falling-stage deposit 1
4 rising-stage deposit

flood-stage deposit

CURVED CHANNEL ENTRANCE

falling-stage deposit
B flood-stage deposit
falling-stage deposit

2 3
1 4
rising-stage deposit flood-stage deposit

FIG. 12.—Typical pattern of erosion and deposition at the channel bar and bend scale for the case of a symmetrical braid bar (modified
from Bridge, 1993). Cross sections show channel geometry during the course of a flood: (1) pre-flood low stage; (2) flood stage;
(3) flood stage after bank erosion and bar deposition; (4) post-flood low stage.
96 JOHN S. BRIDGE

cally associated with varying discharge (Fig. 12); (2) bank erosion
and associated bar deposition, occurring mainly at high flow
stage; and (3) cutting of new channels, enlarging existing chan-
nels, and filling of others. During rising flow stage, erosion tends
to occur in the deepest parts of bends and confluence scours and
the upstream ends of bars, whereas these areas receive deposits
during falling stages (Fig. 12). In contrast, the highest parts of bar
tails tend to be areas of deposition at high flow stage, with erosion
as stage falls. Such adjustments in bed topography are normally
associated with bank erosion and deposition on adjacent bar
margins. Bar migration during high flow stages is most com-
monly by lateral and downstream accretion (Fig. 13). Such chan-
nel accretion is episodic, and may be in the form of distinct unit
bars. The upstream ends of channel bars are sites of erosion
during bankfull flow stage but may receive deposits at high
falling stages. Erosional enlargement of one braided channel
while an adjacent channel is filled is commonly associated with
migration of unit bars into a channel entrance, thereby blocking
discharge into the channel. The enlarging channel continues to
migrate laterally and downstream while the blocked channel fills
with sediment, resulting into an asymmetrical bar form in plan.
The growing bar tail of the enlarging channel obstructs the
downstream end of the diminishing channel (Fig. 13; Ashworth
et al., 2000; Bridge, 2003). New channels are commonly cut across
low areas adjacent to unit bars at high and falling flow stage,
leading to chute cutoff of bends and formation of braid bars from
point bars (Fig. 13). Another well-known type of bend cutoff,
neck cutoff, occurs in very sinuous rivers (Fig. 13), and is enter-
tainingly discussed by Mark Twain in Life on the Mississippi.
Misconceptions About River Channels
Several misconceptions about the nature of alluvial river
channels that occur in much of the literature need to be dispelled
(Bridge, 2003). First of all, river channel patterns cannot be
properly classified using the terms straight, meandering, braided,
and anastomosing (e.g., Miall, 1996). Straight alluvial channels
occur only where the flow is not powerful enough to erode the
channel banks. This may be because of high bank resistance
(caused by early lithification), but normally because of human
engineering. Anastomosing rivers do not belong in a classifica-
tion based on channel sinuosity and degree of splitting around
braid bars. Anastomosing channels are divided by areas of flood-
plain and are long enough to contain many bars, enabling assign-
ment of channel pattern based on degree of channel splitting
around bars and sinuosity. This means that the terms anastomos-
ing and braiding are not mutually exclusive, and cannot be used
together in a single classification. In fact, many braided rivers
appear to be both braided and anastomosing (Fig. 14). The term
anastomosing belongs in a classification of patterns of channel-belt
branching and joining, a classification that also includes the terms
tributive and distributive.

Translation
Translation and expansion

Translation, expansion, and

development of meander lobes

Chute cutoff
Neck cutoff

FIG. 13.—A) Typical modes of channel migration for single-channel rivers (from Bridge, 2003). Active channels are stippled.
Simplified accretionary units on point bars (separated by lines) are actually composed of unit bars (bar-head lobes and bar-tail
scrolls). Upper photo (courtesy of Jim Best) shows accretion topography on a Paraná River (Argentina) point bar adjacent to an
abandoning channel. Lower photo shows neck cutoff of a meander loop of the Calamus River, Nebraska, USA. Channel width
is about 15 m.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 97

Another common misconception is that discharge variability
is greater for braided rivers than for single-channel rivers. This
misconception probably originated from the early studies of
proglacial braided rivers in mountainous regions of North
America, where discharge varied tremendously during snow-
melt. In contrast, many single-channel rivers were studied in
temperate lowland regions where discharge variations were
moderated by groundwater supply. In fact, discharge variability
does not have a major influence on the existence of the different
channel patterns, because they can all be formed in laboratory
channels at constant discharge, and many rivers with a given
discharge regime show along-stream variations in channel pat-
tern.
Another misconception is that rivers that transport large
amounts of bed load relative to suspended load have relatively
low sinuosity and high degree of braiding (Schumm, 1977; Miall,
1996). Such bedload streams have been associated with relatively
easily eroded banks of sand and gravel, large channel slope, and
large stream power, such that they are laterally unstable. In con-
trast, rivers with relatively large suspended loads were postu-
lated to be characteristic of undivided rivers of higher sinuosity.
Such suspended-load streams were associated with cohesive muddy
banks, low stream gradient and power, and lateral stability. This
misconception probably arose because early studies of braided
rivers were in mountainous areas of sandy–gravelly outwash and
those of single-channel sinuous streams were from temperate
lowlands (e.g., the U.S. Great Plains). In fact, many braided rivers
carry large amounts of sand and silt in suspension (e.g.,
Brahmaputra in Bangladesh, Yellow in China, Platte in Ne-
braska), and many single-channel, sinuous rivers carry sands and
gravels as bed load (Madison in Montana, South Esk in Scotland,
Yukon in Alaska).
Linked to the perceived lateral instability of braided rivers
relative to meandering rivers, plus relatively large channel width/
depth of braided channels, is the supposition that the width/
thickness of braided channel belts is much greater than meander-
ing channel belts. This is not generally the case. Channel belts of
meandering Mississippi and braided Brahmaputra have similar
width/thickness (Mississippi: 15 km / 40 m = 375; Brahmaputra:
10 km / 40 m = 250).
The influence of vegetation on alluvial rivers is also misun-
derstood. Vegetation helps stabilize channel banks and bar
surfaces given adequate time and conditions for development.
Such bank stabilization allows the existence of relatively steep
cut banks and may hinder lateral migration of channels. It has
been claimed that all rivers prior to the development of vegeta-
tion on land were braided because of abundant supplies of
relatively coarse sediment and their banks were “unstable”
(Schumm, 1968; Cotter, 1978). However, there is no conclusive
evidence that vegetation (or early lithification) has a significant
influence on channel pattern, as long as the flood flow is capable
of eroding banks and transporting sediment. Low-powered

B Translation with symmetrical channels

Translation and expansion with symmetrical channels

Translation and changes in relative discharge of channels

FIG. 13 (continued).—B) Typical modes of channel migration for simple braided-river patterns (from Bridge, 2003). Simplified
accretionary units on braid bars (separated by lines) are actually composed of unit bars (bar-head lobes and bar-tail scrolls). The
braid bar grows asymmetrically in the case where discharge in one channel is increasing at the expense of the other channel. Photo
(Sagavanirktok River, northern Alaska, U.S.A.) shows braid bar with accretion topography, active channel to left and filling
channel to right. Filling channel (about 120 m wide) contains lobate unit bars.
98 JOHN S. BRIDGE

Point bar

Meandering and braided channel

Braid bar

Bar assemblage
(floodplain)

Braided channel

Floodplain (abandoned-
bar assemblages)

FIG. 14.—Sagavanirktok (northern Alaska, U.S.A.) channel belt with compound braid bars and point bars associated with braided
and meandering channels, and anastomosing, braided–meandering channels separated by a bar assemblage. Compound bars
have accretion topography indicating downstream translation and lateral growth, and channel fills are also evident. Channel
belt is 2 km wide.

streams may not be capable of eroding banks and transporting
appreciable amounts of sediment, thus allowing vegetation to
encroach into the channel (e.g., streams in lowland swamps).
Similarities and Differences Among
Different Channel Patterns
The main types of channel pattern are single-channel (mean-
dering) and braided. Both types of channel pattern have curved
channel segments adjacent to compound bars. Braided channels
have zones where the flow divides and rejoins around compound
braid bars; however, cutoff of point bars in meandering rivers is
also a braiding pattern. The patterns of flow and sediment trans-
port around curved channel segments are the same irrespective
of whether the bar is a point bar or a braid bar. All river channels
migrate by erosion of concave banks in curved channel segments
and deposition on compound bars. Deposition is mainly on the
downstream parts of point bars and braid bars, but there is also
commonly a lateral component that causes point bars and braid
bars to increase in width (Fig. 13). In some cases, there is even
upstream accretion of bars. Thus, the key differences between
meandering rivers and braided rivers are the more frequent
occurrence in braided rivers of braid bars bounded by coeval
channels, and of confluence regions bounded by coeval side bars
(Fig. 8).
Deposition on both point bars and braid bars is commonly in
the form of unit-bar accretion during floods. Unit bars and
supposedly related sets of planar cross strata have been specifi-
cally associated with braided rivers (e.g., Collinson, 1970; Smith,
1971, 1972, 1974; Bluck, 1976,1979; Cant, 1978; Cant and Walker,
1976,1978; Blodgett and Stanley, 1980; Crowley, 1983). However,
unit bars occur in meandering rivers also (e.g., McGowen and
Garner, 1970; Bluck, 1971; Jackson, 1976; Levey, 1978; Bridge et al.,
1995). Furthermore, most of the internal structure of unit bars is
not planar cross strata, but is due to the bed forms (dunes, ripples,
bedload sheets) migrating over them (Collinson, 1970; Jackson,
1976; Nanson, 1980; Bridge et al., 1986; Bridge et al., 1995; Bridge
et al., 1998; Ashworth et al., 2000; Best et al., 2003; Lunt et al.,
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 99

2004a, 2004b). Angle-of-repose (planar) cross strata are appar-
ently restricted to the margins of unit bars, particularly where the
bars migrate into relatively deep, slow-moving water.
The bed forms superimposed on bars during floods are most
commonly dunes, irrespective of grain size or channel pattern
(Fig. 11). Ripples occur mainly in very fine to medium sands in
areas of slow flow near banks. Upper-stage plane beds and
antidunes occur in limited areas of fast shallow flow near bar
tops. However, there are more bedload sheets (planar strata) in
gravelly–sandy rivers and more upper-stage plane beds (planar
laminae) and ripples (small-scale cross strata) in sandy rivers.
Quantitative Process-Based Models for River Channels
as negligible over the time spans considered in the models.
Despite being simplified, these models give important insights
into the nature of channel bar deposits that did not come from
earlier static 1-D and 2-D models (review in Bridge, 2003). Ex-
amples of these models shown in Figures 15 and 16 illustrate a
number of fundamentally important aspects of river channel
deposits:
1 As channels migrate by lateral and downstream migration,
the deposits from different parts of channel bars become
vertically superimposed (e.g., bar-head deposits overlying
bar-tail deposits, bar-tail deposits overlying confluence scour
deposits).

Quantitative, dynamic, 3-D depositional models of river chan-
nel deposits have been developed only recently, and such models
are at a rudimentary stage (e.g., Willis, 1989; Bridge, 1993). These
types of models require prediction of the interaction between bed
topography, water flow, sediment transport rate, mean grain size
of bedload, and bed forms within channels of prescribed geom-
etry. The flow conditions are assumed to be steady and bankfull,
with the bed topography, water flow, and sediment transport in
equilibrium. The models apply to either single channel bends
with an associated point bar, or two channel bends separated by
a braid bar. The plan forms of the channels are sine-generated
curves, and features such as unit bars and cross-bar channels are
not considered. The channels must be put in a dynamic context by
allowing them to migrate by bank erosion and bar deposition,
and to change geometry in time. Net vertical deposition is taken
METERS
2 Systematic spatial variations in the thickness of channel de-
posits, and the inclination and orientation of large-scale strata,
are due to bed topography and the mode of channel migra-
tion. For example, it is common for channel-bar deposits to
thicken (by up to a factor of two), and for large-scale strata to
steepen, towards a cut bank (channel-belt margin) or
confluence scour.
3 Lateral and vertical variation in grain size and sedimentary
structures are controlled by the bed topography, flow, sedi-
ment transport and bed forms, and by the mode of channel
migration. Channel-bar deposits normally fine upwards, but
they also commonly show little vertical variation in grain size.
Some channel-bar deposits coarsen at the top if bar-head
deposits are preserved.

METERS
METERS

METERS

FIG. 15.—Example of quantitative model of point-bar deposits (Willis, 1989). Meander plans to right indicate downstream and lateral
growth of a point bar in discrete increments, and position of cross sections in various orientations. Cross sections indicate basal
erosion surface of point-bar deposits, large-scale inclined strata due to incremental deposition, contours of mean grain size (dotted
lines annotated in millimeters), and current orientations relative to the cross section (arrows pointing down indicate flow out of
plane of cross section). Point-bar deposits thicken, and inclination of large-scale inclined strata increases, from left to right in
sections A, B, and C.
100 JOHN S. BRIDGE

c1 c5

10 m

0 m 2 section c1
0
m
1

section c5

fill fill
0.5

0 0.5 mm

FIG. 16.—Example of quantitative model of braid-bar deposits (Bridge, 1993). Upper figure shows plan geometry of initial braided
channels (stippled) and migrated channels (dashed). The braid bar migrated downstream in four discrete increments. Cross
sections show basal erosion surface of bar deposits, large-scale inclined strata due to incremental deposition, and details of
spatial variation in deposit thickness, grain size, sedimentary structure, and paleocurrents. Deposit thickness and inclination
of large-scale inclined strata vary systematically. Bar sequences generally either fine upwards or have little vertical variation
in grain size. The dominant internal structure in this example is medium-scale trough cross strata (formed by dunes), with
subordinate small-scale cross strata (formed by ripples).

These models of Bridge and Willis predict the geometry, grain
size, and sedimentary structure of the deposits of single point
bars or braid bars. However, they do not consider the somewhat
complicated flow structures at channel diffluences and
confluences. It is necessary to develop theoretical models for flow
and sediment transport in these regions. Although there are
numerical models of turbulent flow in confluences that agree
fairly well with observed flows (review in Bridge, 2003), they do
not describe the interaction between flow, sediment transport,
and bed topography. Quantitative models for the flow, sediment
transport, and deposition in abandoned channel fills are also
needed.
Qualitative Depositional Models for River Channels
The qualitative depositional models shown in Figures 17 to 21
comprise: (1) maps showing idealized active and abandoned
channels, compound bars, and lobate unit bars; (2) cross sections
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 101

F
flow D flow
100s to 1000s m

B
G
Old braid bar

C F
flow
E
100s to
1000s m

flow

FIG. 17.—Qualitative models of channel deposits. Maps of meandering and braided rivers showing active and abandoned channels,
compound bars, and some lobate unit bars. Stippled areas are filled with water at low flow stage, and unit bars within these areas
are not shown. Bar heads of compound braid bars and point bars have formed by accretion of the fronts of lobate unit bars, and
their bar tails have formed by accretion of the sides of lobate unit bars (i.e., scroll bars). Thus, growth of compound bars has been
mainly by lateral and downstream accretion. The upstream end of the abandoned braid channel was blocked by a compound
point bar, and the channel is being filled with unit-bar deposits. The upstream and downstream ends of the abandoned
meandering channel were also blocked by bar deposits, but unit bars in the filling channel do not fill the entire abandoned channel.
Cross sections and vertical sedimentary logs are shown in Figures 18 to 21. Cross sections with letters correspond to those in Figure
18.

showing large-scale inclined strata and their internal structures,
associated with migration of compound bars, unit bars, and their
superimposed bed forms; and (3) vertical logs of typical sedimen-
tary sequences through different parts of compound-bar deposits
and channel fills. The cross sections and vertical logs differ
somewhat between gravelly–sandy rivers (Figs. 18, 19) and sandy
rivers (Figs. 20, 21), and the cross sections differ between single
channels and braided channels. The bar-head regions of the
compound bars have formed by accretion of the fronts of lobate
unit bars, and their bar-tail regions have formed by accretion of
the sides of lobate unit bars (i.e., scroll bars) (Fig. 17). Thus,
growth and migration of compound bars have been mainly by
lateral and downstream accretion. The abandoned channel in the
braided-channel model is being filled with unit-bar deposits (Fig.
102 JOHN S. BRIDGE

A Across-stream view of compound side bars adjacent to a confluence scour

lobate unit bar

side bar
side bar
confluence scour

B Across-stream view of compound braid bar that migrated over a confluence

Cross-bar channel
Unit bar

cross-stratified sand in small channel fill

medium-scale cross-stratified sandy gravel medium-scale cross stratified open-framework gravel

C Across-stream view of compound point bar that accreted laterally

D Along-stream view through compound bar that migrated laterally and downstream

Downstream Cross-bar channel Upstream

FIG. 18.—Qualitative models of channel deposits. Cross sections (letters correspond to those in Figure 17) showing large-scale
inclined strata, and their internal structures, associated with migration of compound bars, unit bars, and their superimposed
bedforms for gravelly–sandy rivers. Cross sections are hundreds of meters to kilometers wide and meters thick. Vertical
exaggerations are 5 to 10.

17), and its upstream end was blocked by a compound point bar.
The abandoned channel in the meandering-channel model (Fig.
17) is filled with unit-bar deposits only at the upstream end, and
the downstream end is a lake.
Channel-Bar Deposits.—
Figures 17, 18, and 20 show how the geometry and mode of
migration of river channels and bars control the geometry and
orientation of large-scale inclined strata. Large-scale strataset (story)
thickness in a channel belt can vary laterally by a factor of two or
more. In places, large-scale stratasets thicken laterally as the
large-scale strata increase in inclination. Some sets have large-
scale strata inclined predominantly in one direction, whereas
others show convex-upward or concave-upward stratal inclina-
tions. The deposits of braided and nonbraided rivers can be
distinguished on the basis of these patterns of large-scale inclined
strata in cross section. This distinction between channel patterns
cannot be made from vertical lithofacies profiles, contrary to
published opinions. The definitive depositional evidence for
braiding in ancient deposits is cross sections through braid bars
with adjacent, coeval channels, and confluences. Examples of
these patterns of large-scale inclined strata from modern channel
belts are shown in Figure 22.
Large-scale inclined strata shown in Figures 18 and 20 rarely
have such systematic inclinations, and both discontinuities and
discordances are common. Discontinuities in inclination may be
associated with the occurrence of unit bars (discussed below) and
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 103

E Along-stream view through upstream end of large channel fill: lateral and downstream growth of compound bar

Upstream unit bar deposit Downstream

medium-scale cross stratified open-framework gravel

F Across-stream view of upstream end of large channel fill: lateral accretion and channel filling

G Across-stream view of downstream end of large channel fill: scroll bar accretion and channel filling
scroll bars

FIG. 18 (continued).—

lower-bar platforms (Fig. 22). Discordances in large-scale in-
clined strata form through discharge fluctuations and shifts in
channel position, and are (as discussed below) related to the
formation of cross-bar channels.
The number of large-scale inclined strata comprising most of
the thickness of a set (story) is commonly between 1 and 10,
dependent on the rate of channel migration relative to channel-
bar width. For example, if the channel migrates a distance
equivalent to the apparent bar width during a single deposi-
tional event, the bar sequence comprises a single large-scale
stratum. If ten depositional episodes are required to migrate one
bar width, ten large-scale strata are formed. The amount of
channel migration during a flood is commonly on the order of
10-1 x channel width.
Downstream translation of bars results in preferential preser-
vation of bar-tail deposits and erosion of bar-head deposits. Bar-
tail deposits fine upward (Figs. 19, 21), and the vertical range of
mean grain size in such sequences increases with channel sinuos-
ity. Bar sequences with little vertical variation in mean grain size
occur where bend-apex deposits build over bar tails. Such se-
quences may coarsen at the top if the bar head migrates over bar-
tail deposits. Bar-head deposits can be preserved only if the
upstream part of the bar is not extensively eroded. Thus, different
types of vertical sequence of lithofacies depend mainly on the
position in the bar and on the mode of channel migration rather
than on channel pattern. In some channel deposits, upper-bar
deposits and lower-bar deposits can be distinguished by their
differences in grain size and sedimentary structure, and by the
more common presence of buried vegetation in upper-bar depos-
its (Figs. 21, 22). Upper-bar deposits commonly increase in thick-
ness in the down-bar direction, whereas lower-bar deposits de-
crease in thickness.
Individual large-scale inclined strata can be recognized by
vertical changes in grain size and sedimentary structure: they
104 JOHN S. BRIDGE

Downstream end
of channel bar
Upstream end
of channel bar
Upstream end
of channel bar

sand gravel sand gravel sand gravel

Channel fill LEGEND

small-scale
cross sets
compound planar strata
large-scale simple
metres set large-scale
set medium-scale
cross sets

sand gravel
vfs fs ms cs vcs vfp fp mp cp vcp
4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6
Grain size (phi)

FIG. 19.—Qualitative models of channel deposits. Vertical logs of typical sedimentary sequences through different parts of compound
bar deposits and channel fills for gravelly–sandy rivers.

commonly fine upwards at the top (Figs. 19, 21, 22). The internal
structure of large-scale inclined strata in sandy and gravelly
braid bars and point bars is normally dominated by medium-
scale trough cross strata, by virtue of the ubiquitous presence of
curved-crested dunes on bar surfaces during high flow stage.
Sets of medium-scale cross strata are commonly decimeters
thick—that is, an order of magnitude thinner than channel-bar
thickness. Gravelly–sandy deposits may have relatively more
planar strata with imbricated pebbles or cobbles, which are
formed by migration of bedload sheets on lower-stage plane
beds. Planar strata associated with upper-stage plane beds are
common in the upper parts of sandy braid bars and point bars.
Small-scale cross-stratification from ripple migration is restricted
to relatively fine-grained sands deposited near banks at high
flow stage, or in other positions in low-stage deposits. Small-
scale cross-stratified, bioturbated sand commonly occurs inter-
bedded with vegetation-rich mud as centimeter-thick units in
the upper-bar deposits near channel banks. Antidune cross
stratification and transverse ribs occur rarely in the upper parts
of sandy and gravelly channel bars, that is, where flow is fast
and shallow.
Large-scale inclined strata may be sheet-like or, if associated
with deposition of unit bars, mound-like (Figs. 17, 18, 20). Unit
bars commonly grow in height and migrate downstream by
accretion of the deposits of the smaller-scale bedforms that mi-
grate over them: bedload sheets, dunes, or ripples. During their
growth and migration, such unit bars are asymmetrical in along-
stream profile with a relatively steep downstream side that is less
than the angle of repose. Therefore, cross-set bases and planar
strata tend to be inclined at a relatively low angle (up to about
10°), reflecting the geometry of the unit bar over which they are
migrating. As a unit bar grows, the lee face may reach the angle
of repose, and superimposed bedforms then halt at the crest of the
unit bar, from where their sediment avalanches. Therefore, the
low-angle inclined set boundaries within unit bars pass laterally
into angle-of-repose cross strata, defining a smaller scale of large-
scale inclined strata than associated with the compound bar on
which the unit bar is superimposed (Figs. 18, 20, 23). The angle-
of-repose cross strata associated with unit bars are commonly
referred to as planar cross strata, and are thought to be character-
istic of braided rivers (see above). In reality, unit bars and their
deposits form in all river types, angle-of-repose cross stratifica-
tion is not normally the dominant internal sedimentary structure,
and such cross strata look planar only in sections that are small
relative to the unit bar. Angle-of-repose cross strata formed by
unit bars can easily be confused with that due to dune migration.
Unit-bar deposits associated with bar-head lobes and bar-tail
scrolls tend to occur in the upper parts of compound-bar deposits,
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 105

ALONG-STREAM SECTION ALONG AXIS OF COMPOUND BAR

Upstream Downstream
or erosional cross-bar channel fill
channel margin scroll bars

small-scale cross strata

planar strata unit-bar deposit

medium-scale cross strata

ACROSS-STREAM SECTION OF TAIL OF COMPOUND BRAID BAR THAT MIGRATED DOWNSTREAM OVER
CONFLUENCE SCOUR
channel fill braid-bar tail tributary-mouth bars

ACROSS-STREAM SECTION OF CONFLUENCE SCOUR AND ADJACENT SIDE BARS

THAT MIGRATED DOWNSTREAM OVER A BRAID BAR
confluence scour fill side bar tail

ACROSS-STREAM SECTION OF DOWNSTREAM END OF CHANNEL FILL

FIG. 20.—Qualitative models of channel deposits. Cross sections showing large-scale inclined strata, and their internal structures,
associated with migration of compound bars, unit bars, and their superimposed bedforms for sandy rivers. Cross sections are
hundreds of meters to kilometers across and meters to tens of meters thick. Vertical exaggerations are approximately 5.
106 JOHN S. BRIDGE

DOWNSTREAM PARTS OF CHANNEL BARS

BANKFULL LEVEL

Upper bar
Upper bar

Upper bar
Upper bar

Scroll bar Scroll bar

or chute bar
Scroll bar

Tributary mouth
bar or riffle
Lower bar
Lower bar
Lower bar

mst sst

Gamma ray Mean grain size

UPSTREAM PARTS OF CHANNEL BARS Upper bar

BANKFULL
channel Upper bar
Upper bar

Upper
Upper

bar
LEVEL

bar Unit bar

Cross-bar

Bar-head
unit bar

Unit bar
Unit bar Unit bar

Lower bar
Lower bar

Lower bar
Lower bar
Lower bar

Unit bar
mst sst
Gamma ray Mean grain size

UPSTREAM PART CHANNEL FILL CHANNEL FILL WITH DOWNSTREAM PART

OF CHANNEL FILL BANK SLUMPS OF CHANNEL FILL
BANKFULL LEVEL
Bank slumps
Unit bar

Unit bar
Lower bar

Lower bar

Lower bar
Lower bar
Unit bar

Gamma ray Mean grain size

FIG. 21.—Qualitative models of channel deposits. Vertical logs of typical sedimentary sequences through different parts of compound
bar deposits and channel fills for sandy rivers.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
whereas those associated with tributary-mouth bars occur nearer
the base (Fig. 20).
Relatively small channels cutting into the upper parts of
channel bars, particularly between unit bars, are cross-bar chan-
nels. Cross-bar channels commonly develop their own bars, the
geometry of which is controlled by the conditions of flow and
sediment transport in these channels. Where a cross-bar channel
joins a main channel, solitary delta-like deposits with avalanche
faces commonly form (e.g., chute bars; Fig. 23). The maximum
depth of cross-bar channels is commonly less than a third of the
maximum depth of main channels, but any cross-bar channel
could be enlarged to become a main channel (e.g., chute cutoff).
Channel-Fill Deposits.—
The deposits of channel fills are dependent on the history of
flow through the channel following the beginning of abandon-
ment. Channel abandonment is normally initiated by movement
of a bar into the entrance of the channel. If the angle between the
enlarging channel and the filling channel is relatively small, as in
low-sinuosity rivers, flow is maintained in the filling channel so
that bed load can be deposited (Fig. 17). Such bed load is com-
monly moved as unit bars with superimposed ripples or dunes.
Although bed load may extend a considerable way into such
filling channels, the downstream ends receive mainly fine-grained
suspended sediment and organic matter from slowly moving
water. With larger angles of divergence, both ends of the aban-
doned channel are quickly blocked (Fig. 17), and most of the
channel fill is relatively fine grained and organic rich because of
deposition from suspension in ponded water.
Channel fills generally fine upward, reflecting progressively
weaker flows during filling (Figs. 19, 21). They also generally
fine downchannel as water flow decelerates in that direction.
The relatively coarse bed-load deposits at the upstream end of
the channel fill tend to fine upwards, inasmuch as they repre-
sent progradation of bar-tail deposits into the channel entrance
(Fig. 21). Bed-load deposits in channel fills may show evidence
LEGEND FOR SEDIMENTOLOGICAL LOGS
Mudstone with minor sandstone lenses,
vegetation-rich layers, root casts, burrows,
and desiccation cracks. Degree of
bioturbation increases upwards.
Lenticular to wavy bedding
with asymmetrical ripples
Small-scale cross strata (set thickness
< 0.02 m) with asymmetrical ripples
Planar strata
1 Medium-scale cross strata
(set thickness drawn to scale)
meters
Sandy gravel-stone including
intraformational mud clasts (black)
0
vf f m c vc
mud sand gravel
FIG. 21 (continued).—Legend for models on opposite page.
107
of accretion on progressively smaller bars (e.g., rows of unit
bars) as discharge is reduced (Figs. 21, 24). Small deltas may
prograde into entrances of abandoned channels containing
ponded water, thereby producing coarsening-upward se-
quences. Sediment gravity flows from cut banks may accumu-
late in the channel base as poorly sorted, structureless deposits
(Fig. 21). The suspended-load deposits drape over existing bed
topography. Horizontal suspended-load deposits lap onto in-
clined channel margins (Fig. 20). In humid climates, peat may
accumulate in the ponded water of channel fills. In arid cli-
mates, evaporitic tufas may form.
Channel-fill deposits grade laterally into channel-bar depos-
its, and it may be difficult to distinguish them in subsurface
deposits. Channel-fill sequences can look very similar to channel-
bar-tail deposits. The deposits of the relatively small bars within
channel fills may look similar to the deposits within cross-bar
channels. The fine-grained parts of channel fills may look very
similar to overbank deposits, including lacustrine deposits.
Evidence of Falling Flow Stage.—
Evidence of falling stage in channel deposits includes fining
of grain size and associated changes in sedimentary structures
in the upper parts of large-scale inclined strata (Figs. 19, 21, 22).
Cross strata associated with dunes and unit bars may have
current ripples and wave ripples superimposed, and possibly
mud drapes with abundant plant debris. Rill marks oriented
parallel to depositional slopes represent falling-stage drainage
channels, and cross-stratified sand wedges represent the small
deltas that form as these channels flow into standing water (Fig.
25). Desiccation cracks occur in emergent mud drapes, and
rooted plants can colonize areas exposed at low flow stage. The
level of these features in channel sequences gives an indication
of the low-stage level. Burrowing and surface-browsing ani-
mals are most active following floods, and escape burrows may
occur within the flood deposits.
Paleocurrent Orientations.—
Paleocurrent orientations recorded in channel deposits de-
pend on: (1) the orientation of the bed forms and associated
sedimentary structures that vary with bed-form type, their
position in the channel, and with river stage; and (2) what part
of the channel bar or fill is preserved (Allen, 1966). The mean
orientation of structures like pebble imbrication and various
scales of cross strata generally correspond with local water-flow
directions. However, near banks, these paleocurrent indicators
tend to be oblique to local flow direction, as are the dips of angle-
of-repose cross strata in scroll bars. Local paleo-flow directions
may be associated with deposition over a range of paleo-flow
stages and strengths, and are not necessarily parallel to the
orientation of the high-stage channels. Furthermore, it is ex-
pected that paleo-flow directions from the downstream parts of
ancient channel bars are preferentially preserved. As a result,
the mean paleocurrent azimuth for any particular structure in a
channel deposit may not be parallel to the mean channel orien-
tation, and the range of azimuths probably differs from the
range of local channel orientations. Thus, great care must be
exercised in interpreting local channel orientations (and chan-
nel sinuosity) from paleocurrent data (e.g., Allen, 1966).
Porosity and Permeability of Channel Deposits.—
Porosity and permeability of channel deposits vary spatially
with variation in texture and internal structure, and such varia-
108 JOHN S. BRIDGE

A West
10 m
East
0 0.0
Vertical exaggeration = 2

Channel fill Unit bars

Time (ns)

Depth (m)
100 Side-bar deposit Channel fill Side-bar deposit 6.75

2 meters

B land surface

upper bar

lower bar

C FIG. 22.—A) Large-scale inclined strata in GPR profiles through

braided and meandering river deposits. Profiles are oriented
across-channel. Upper profile (Sagavanirktok River, Alaska,
U.S.A.) shows compound bar deposit with large-scale in-
clined strata dipping to west and passing into a channel fill.
Variable inclination of large-scale strata is associated with
deposition on unit bars. Lower in the profile, a confluence fill
is bounded on both sides by side (point) bars. The large-scale
strata within the side bars increase in inclination, and their
basal erosion surfaces become deeper, towards the confluence
scour. Basal erosion surfaces of bars are marked by white
arrows. B) Lower profile (South Esk River, Scotland) shows
point-bar deposits with large-scale inclined strata dipping to
left. Basal erosion surface of point-bar deposits (marked by
black arrows) is about 3 m below land surface. Discordance
in inclination of large-scale strata is marked by d. Upper-bar
deposits have more laterally continuous radar reflections
than lower-bar deposits. C) Trench showing lower-bar de-
posits (medium-scale trough cross-stratified sand) overlain
by upper-bar deposits (small-scale cross-stratified and bur-
rowed sand interbedded with dark layers of vegetation-rich
silt). The dark layers are low-flow deposits, and define the
upper parts of large-scale inclined strata

tion occurs over different scales of strataset. Information on the 3-

D variation in porosity and permeability over this range of scales
is lacking in general. In some channel-bar deposits, porosity and
permeability decrease upwards with mean grain size. The poros-
ity and permeability of channel-bar deposits is also expected to
decrease downstream because bar-tail deposits are likely to be
finer grained than bar-head and mid-bar deposits. Furthermore,
the finest deposits occur as low-flow drapes within large-scale
inclined strata, and in the uppermost large-scale inclined strata of
bar tails. Low-permeability strata are also expected in relatively
fine-grained channel fills that are concentrated near the margins
of channel belts.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 109

A
Bar-head unit bars

Bar-tail scroll bar

Cross-bar channel

B C

a
Unit bar b

FIG. 23.—A) View looking upstream of a Sagavanirktok bar-tail scroll bar with cross-bar channels that pass to the left into mouth bars
within an inner bank swale (about 2 m wide). Two bar-head unit bars are in the background. B) Unit bar with steep downstream
face on a point bar, Congaree River, South Carolina, U.S.A. Unit bar is about 0.5 m high. C) Trench through front of unit bar in
Part B showing medium-scale cross strata (a) formed by dunes migrating over the unit bar. Cross strata associated with sand
avalanching down the steep front of the unit bar are limited in extent (b).

Models of Superimposed Channel Bars,
Channel Fills, and Channel Belts
The spatial distribution of the deposits of individual channel
bars and fills could not be included easily in the models above
because it is very difficult to predict how individual channel
segments and bars migrate and become preserved in channel belts.
It is necessary to develop models that predict details of the deposits
of several adjacent bars and channel fills within channel belts.
Vertical superposition of channel-bar and channel-fill depos-
its in single channel belts can occur by superposition of a cross-
bar channel on a main-channel bar and by migration of one main-
channel bar over another (Fig. 26). In the latter case, the degree of
preservation of the overridden bar depends on the relative eleva-
tions of the two superposed basal erosion surfaces. The likelihood
of preservation of the lower parts of the eroded bar increases with
the vertical deposition rate relative to the lateral migration rate of
the superposed bar, and the variability of channel scour depth
and bar thickness. The relative importance of the ratio of deposi-
tion rate to lateral migration rate of bars and the variability of
channel scour depths (bar heights) in controlling the amount of
preservation of truncated bars can be assessed using Equation 1.
In general, the variability of channel scour depths is the main
control.
Object-based stochastic models have been used to distribute
channel deposits within channel belts (e.g., Tyler et al., 1994;
Webb, 1994, 1995; Webb and Anderson, 1996; Deutsch and Wang,
1996; Holden et al., 1998; Deutsch and Tran, 2002). The common
approach in these models is: (1) define shapes of channels; (2)
position a series of channels randomly within an aggrading
110 JOHN S. BRIDGE

20 m
0 0.0
top of channel fill C

Depth (m)
Time (ns)

channel margin
100 5.0

basal erosion surface

Vertical exaggeration = 5
cut bank active channel bank

land surface

basal erosion surface

10 meters
land surface
1m mid-channel bar
small bar in channel
(35 ns
TWTT) channel

basal erosion surface

FIG. 24.—Channel-fill deposits in across-channel GPR profiles. Upper profile (Sagavanirktok River, Alaska) shows compound large-
scale inclined strata (boundaries marked by small arrows) formed by individual gravelly unit bars that filled the channel. Within
these compound large-scale strata are smaller-scale large-scale inclined strata formed by episodic migration of unit bars. Channel
fill is approximately 4 m thick, and vertical exaggeration of profile is 5. Lower profile (Calamus River, Nebraska, U.S.A.) has high-
amplitude reflections (medium-scale cross-stratified sand) overlain by low-amplitude reflections (bioturbated small-scale cross-
stratified sand interbedded with vegetation-rich sand). Channel fill contains deposits of small bars. Vertical exaggeration of
profile is 3.

channel belt; and (3) define sedimentary facies, porosity, and
permeability within the channels. None of these approaches (e.g.,
Fig. 27) correctly represents the nature of channel deposits in
channel belts, which are in fact composed predominantly of parts
of channel bars with relatively minor volumes of channel fills (see
below). It is necessary to define shapes of objects properly (Fig.
27). The information shown in Figure 6 will assist in the scaling of
objects. Numerical simulation of channel deposits within channel
belts is in its infancy.
Vertical superposition of channel-bar and channel-fill depos-
its can also result from superposition of distinct channel belts
without intervening floodplain deposits (Fig. 26). In cores and
well logs, it may be very difficult to distinguish superimposed
channel bars and fills in a single channel belt with superimposed
channel belts (Fig. 26). The ability to make this distinction hinges
on the ability to correctly interpret the different superimposed
scales of strataset, as explained below.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 111

dune floodplain
crest vegetation

flow tracks and trails mud

rills cracks

roots
delta
mud draping
vel ripple marks
water le
burrows
channel

FIG. 25.—Falling-stage features at channel margins.

Qualitative Interpretation of Ancient Channel Deposits
In order to make the best use of the new qualitative deposi-
tional models to interpret ancient channel deposits, it is necessary
to have: (1) detailed descriptions of large outcrops; (2) thorough
understanding of the geometry, flow, and sedimentary pro-
cesses, and modes of migration of modern channels and bars; and
(3) knowledge of how channel-bar and channel-fill deposits
appear in variously oriented 2-D sections. Figure 28 shows de-
scriptions of some well-exposed Miocene fluvial deposits from
the Siwaliks of northern Pakistan that have allowed detailed
interpretation of depositional environment (Willis, 1993a, 1993b).
Figure 29 shows other examples of relatively simple qualitative
interpretations of ancient channel deposits.

FIG. 26.—Superimposed channel deposits in channel belts. Thick lines are basal erosion surfaces of compound channel bars, thin lines
are large-scale inclined strata, and arrows are idealized paleocurrent directions relative to outcrop plane (down is out of outcrop).
A) Downstream migration and climbing of one bar over another bar. B) Superposition of channel bars and fills of different depth
and width. C) Superposition of channel bars of similar size but different sinuosity and orientation. D) Superposition of different
channel belts. E) Superposition of channel bars in different channel belts and within channel belts. It may be difficult to distinguish
these two different types of superposition using vertical sedimentary logs or gamma-ray logs (compare two logs on right side of
figure). (A to D from Willis, 1993a; E from Bridge and Tye, 2000).
112 JOHN S. BRIDGE

A B
A B

C
C

FIG. 27.—Object models for channel belts from A) Tyler et al. (1994) and B) Deutsch and Wang (1996) Both representations are
unrealistic because real channel belts are composed of the deposits of channel bars and channel fills. C) More realistic
representation of objects (plans and cross sections of channel bars and adjacent channel fills) that must be distributed within
channel belts.

Quantitative Interpretation of
Ancient Channel Deposits from Outcrops
The most sophisticated quantitative interpretation of channel
geometry, flow, sediment transport, and migration requires the
same kind of information mentioned above for qualitative inter-
pretation, but it must be quantitative. The quantitative models
described above have been used to interpret ancient meandering-
river deposits from the Devonian of southern Ireland and New
York State (Figure 30; e.g., Bridge and Diemer, 1983; Bridge and
Gordon, 1985; Gordon and Bridge, 1987; Willis, 1993c) and an-
cient braided rivers in the Miocene Siwaliks of northern Pakistan
(Willis, 1993a, 1993b; Khan et al., 1997; Zaleha, 1997b, 1997c).
Willis (1993a, 1993b) was able to quantitatively reconstruct the
width, depth, mean velocity, slope, wavelength, and sinuosity of
individual channel segments in these Siwalik deposits, and,
because of the excellent exposures, to estimate channel-belt widths
and degree of braiding. Channel bars were interpreted to have
migrated mainly by downstream translation and bend expan-
sion, but also by channel switching within the channel belts.
Other, less sophisticated methods of quantitative interpreta-
tion of paleochannel hydraulics and geometry are routinely
applied (reviews in Bridge, 1978; Ethridge and Schumm, 1978;
Williams, 1988; North, 1996). Grain-size data have yielded esti-
mates of the threshold bed shear stress for bed-load or sus-
pended-load motion, although this information is of limited
value unless the grains were close to these thresholds at the time
of deposition. Komar (1996) pointed out potential errors in some
of the methods for determining threshold bed shear stress for
movement of gravel. Grain-size data have yet to be used seriously
to quantitatively estimate flow parameters such as bed shear
stress during transport and deposition. Sedimentary structures
and preserved bed forms indicate the geometry of bed forms that
existed at the time of deposition. If these bed forms are assumed
to have been in equilibrium with the flow, estimates can be made
of ranges of bed shear stress or flow velocity and depth. The mean
thickness of various scales of cross strata can give estimates of the
mean heights of the bed forms (e.g., ripples, dunes, bars) respon-
sible, and the heights of dunes and bars can be related to flow
depth. Estimates of flow velocity, depth, and friction coefficients
from grain-size data and reconstructed bed forms have been used
to estimate channel slope using formulae for uniform flow.
Unfortunately, the flow equations used for these procedures are
commonly misapplied or are inappropriate. It is also commonly
difficult to understand what the reconstructed flow velocities
and depths actually mean. Are they local or spatially averaged
values, and what flow stages do they represent?
Average sinuosity of paleochannels can be estimated from the
maximum range of paleocurrent directions observed in a single
channel-belt deposit, provided that paleocurrent indicators are
analyzed carefully. Paleocurrent indicators should represent lo-
cal paleochannel direction (e.g., medium-scale trough cross strata
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 113

FIG. 28.—Example of Miocene Siwalik deposits of northern Pakistan. Position of photo is shown as box in figure to right, which shows
channel sandstone bodies (stippled) with large-scale inclined strata, floodplain mudstones (unshaded), and well-developed
paleosols (vertical line ornament). Lower figure gives more sedimentological details of the extensive sandstone body shown in
the upper right figure (which includes logs 5 to 18). Line diagrams modified from Willis (1993a).

from lower-bar deposits), and the preferential preservation of
bar-tail deposits must be recognized. Calculation of sinuosity
from paleocurrent ranges requires a functional relationship be-
tween these two parameters.
On Holocene to Pleistocene floodplains, it is commonly
possible to observe the geometry and plan form of paleo-
channels. In some well-exposed fluvial deposits, the width and
depth of channels and bars, and (exceptionally) the length and
sinuosity of channel bends, can be observed directly (reviews in
Bridge, 1978; North, 1996). In most cases, only one or two of
these geometric parameters can be observed, and empirical
equations derived from modern rivers have been used to pre-
dict other geometrical parameters. Observed or calculated geo-
metric parameters of rivers are then used, in some cases along
with sedimentary data, to calculate channel-forming discharge
using empirical regression equations (reviews in Dury, 1976,
1985; Bridge, 1978; Ethridge and Schumm, 1978; Williams, 1988;
Bridge and Mackey, 1993b; North, 1996). This procedure is
fraught with problems, including inadequate empirical regres-
sion equations and their misapplication (discussed in Bridge,
2003). Unfortunately, such empirical equations that relate geo-
metrical and sedimentary characteristics of ancient rivers to
their paleodischarge have largely formed the basis for the field
of paleohydrology. The hydrology of major paleofloods has
gained attention recently (e.g., Baker et al., 1988; Martini et al.,
2002). One novel way of assessing paleoflood levels is to deter-
mine the level of backwater deposits in canyons (Kochel and
Baker, 1988). The depth and velocity of floods associated with
catastrophic draining of ice-dammed lakes have been inter-
preted by examining large bedforms on floodplains (e.g., chan-
nelized scablands; Baker and Nummedal, 1978).
Estimation of Paleochannel Depth from Subsurface Deposits
It is desirable to estimate the thickness and width of subsur-
face channel-belt deposits in view of their importance as aqui-
114 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 29.—A) Devonian river channel deposits from SW Ireland with large-scale inclined strata dipping to left (top of cliff) and fine-
grained channel fills. Person in lower left for scale. B) Carboniferous river channel deposits from northwest Germany, showing
large-scale inclined strata dipping to left. Basal erosion surface is immediately above head of person.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 115

Plan view of channel centerlines Plan view of channel centerlines

FIG. 30.—Quantitative interpretation of Devonian channel-bar deposits from New York State, U.S.A. Photo on left shows a channel-
bar deposit viewed parallel to flow direction (basal erosion surface marked by arrow). Reconstructed channel-bar geometry and
migration pattern are show below. Photo and line diagrams to right show a channel bar viewed approximately normal to flow
direction (arrow indicates basal erosion surface). Channel reconstructions from Willis (1993c).

fers and hydrocarbon reservoirs (Bridge and Tye, 2000). The
first step is estimation of maximum paleochannel depth. In
order to do this, channel-belt sands and gravels must be distin-
guished from floodplain sands, and the various scales of strataset
must be distinguished, particularly those due to individual
floods, single channel bars and fills within one channel belt, and
individual channel belts (method shown in Figure 31). This
requires knowledge of spatial variations in grain size, sedimen-
tary structures, paleocurrents, and degree of stratal disruption
(determined from cores and well logs). However, it is difficult
to distinguish meters-thick fining-upward sequences associ-
ated with sandy to muddy fills of main channels from a rela-
tively thin sequence of overbank sandstone (e.g., levee, crevasse
splay, lacustrine delta) overlain by muddy floodbasin deposits.
Also, upper-bar deposits look very similar to near-channel
floodplain deposits. Superimposed channel bars or fills are
difficult to distinguish from single-channel bars or fills. The
thickness of all single, nontruncated channel bars or fills (from
the tops of channel belts) must be measured to get an estimate
of the range of maximum channel depths. An independent
check on the estimates of bank-full flow depth is to use the
relationships between thickness of medium-scale cross sets,
dunes and flow depth (Fig. 31; Bridge, 2003).
Estimation of Widths of Single Channel Belts
from Subsurface Deposits
Four commonly used methods for estimating the geometry of
isolated channel belts are: (1) well-to-well correlation; (2) using
empirical equations relating maximum channel depth, channel
width, and channel-belt width; (3) measurement of outcrop ana-
logs; and (4) amplitude analysis of 3-D seismic horizon slices.
These are discussed in turn.
Well-to-Well Correlation.—
Well-to-well correlation of channel-belt sandstone bodies
using wireline logs has been the most common method for
116 JOHN S. BRIDGE
FIG. 31.—Estimation of flow depth from cores and gamma-ray
logs through channel-bar deposits (from Bridge and Tye,
2000). Maximum bankfull flow depth can be estimated from
the thickness of channel-bar deposits (7.5 m). This estimate
can be checked using the mean thickness of medium-scale
cross sets (formed by dunes) from the lower part of bar
deposits (0.29 m), giving mean dune height of about 0.85 m.
This dune height is appropriate for estimated water depths
during formation of 6 to 7 m.
estimating channel-belt widths and orientations (Fig. 32). The
spatial resolution of this technique can be no better than the
average well spacing. The validity of this technique is very
much dependent on the correlation rules utilized. Once a suit-
able horizontal datum has been chosen for the wells to be
correlated, it is necessary to establish whether sandstone bodies
at similar stratigraphic levels in different wells can be corre-
lated. In order to make this assessment, it is essential to have a
reasonable genetic interpretation of the sandstone body, and a
model for its lateral extent and lateral variation in thickness and
lithofacies. Well-to-well correlation is commonly compromised
by lack of a realistic model for the possible lateral extent and
lateral variation of sandstone bodies, and erroneous assump-
tions such as: (1) sandstone bodies positioned at the same
stratigraphic level must be connected between adjacent wells;
(2) vertical sequences through channel deposits indicate the
paleochannel pattern and hence the geometry of channel-belt
sandstone bodies; and (3) ratios of sandstone-body width to
thickness are closely related to paleochannel pattern. Modern
and ancient channel belts have width/maximum channel depth
of between 700 and 20 (Bridge and Mackey, 1993b). It is com-
monly stated that this ratio is larger for braided rivers than for
meandering rivers. This is a moot point when utilizing core and
wireline log data, because such a distinction between
paleochannel patterns cannot be made. Furthermore, this sup-
position is not generally correct. For example, the channel-belt
width/maximum bankfull depth for the meandering lower
Mississippi River approximates that of the braided Brahmaputra
River, being about 300.
Empirical Equations.—
In order to make the critical assessment of expected width
of channel-belt sandstone bodies, it is first necessary to deter-
mine whether the sandstone body is a single channel belt or a
combination of channel belts. The widths of single channel
belts can be estimated using empirical equations that relate
maximum channel depth, channel width, and channel-belt
width (Bridge and Mackey, 1993b; Bridge and Tye, 2000). This
approach requires estimates of maximum bankfull channel
depth from cores or well logs. Because the empirical equations
available have large standard errors, estimates of channel-belt
width are imprecise.
Outcrop Analogs.—
The use of outcrop analogs to interpret subsurface strata is
very popular but has serious shortcomings. Obviously, the inter-
preted depositional environments of the outcrop analog and the
subsurface strata must match. It is difficult to make detailed
interpretations of depositional environments from typical sub-
surface data, and outcrop data can easily be misinterpreted.
Outcrops are rarely extensive or numerous enough to allow
unambiguous determination of the three-dimensional geometry
and orientation of channels and channel belts. This is why it is
desirable to use analog data from Holocene depositional environ-
ments, where channel-belt dimensions can be determined easily,
and the relationship between the nature of the deposits and the
geometry, flow, and sedimentary processes of the environment
can be established unambiguously.
Amplitude Analysis of 3-D Seismic Horizon Slices
Amplitude analysis of 3-D seismic horizon slices is the only
method capable of yielding directly the width of channel belts,
and imaging the channel pattern (sinuosity, channel splitting)
of subsurface sandstone bodies (Fig. 33). This is also the only
method that can be used to predict the spatial distribution of
channel-belt thickness and lithofacies. These are major ad-
vances. However, this method depends on the resolution of the
seismic data relative to the thickness of the sandstone bodies
imaged, and requires calibration by wireline logs and cores. In
general, sandstone-body thickness must be greater than ap-
proximately 10 m.
Estimation of Width of Superimposed Channel Belts
from Subsurface Deposits
Widths of superimposed channel belts can be estimated with
the help of alluvial stratigraphy models (Bridge and Mackey,
1993b; Mackey and Bridge, 1995), and depend on the proportion
and degree of connectedness of channel-belt deposits in a cross
section (Fig. 34). For channel-deposit proportion less than about
0.4, channel belts are unconnected and sandstone-body width
 Permian
salt

coal

Shale

coal

coal
FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

coal
coal
Sandstone

FIG. 32.—Channel-belt width is commonly estimated using well-to-well correlation of channel-belt deposits if channel belts are wider than well spacing. This requires
an estimate of expected channel-belt width from channel-bar thickness. However, it is difficult to distinguish relatively thick floodplain sands from thin channel-bar
deposits and the sandy parts of channel fills. Fine-grained channel-fill deposits are difficult to distinguish from floodplain shale. In this figure, the deposits are
interpreted as channel-belt deposits (stippled), floodplain sands (stippled), or floodbasin shales (unstippled). The datum used to aid correlation is the coal seam in
the middle of the section. Channel-belt deposits (letters A to P) were recognized on the basis of their (large) thickness and gamma-ray (GR) patterns. Correlation of
channel deposits was based on estimated width derived from channel-bar thickness, hence maximum channel depth. To do this it is not necessary to know whether
the channel was meandering or braided. Also, channel fills and floodplain sands help define channel-belt edges (e.g., L and H). Superimposed channel bars are
distinguished using GR patterns (e.g., J). Floodplain sandstones are recognized and correlated on the basis of their (small) thickness, expected geometry, and
relationship to channel-belt edges.
117
118 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 33.—Amplitude analysis of a 3-D seismic horizon slice showing the width and channel pattern of channel-belt sandstone bodies.
Cross section (right) shows correlated logs and position of horizon slice. Log 3 cuts the variable-width, straight channel belt (red
in left figure). Logs 4 to 6 cut through a point bar and channel fill of a slightly older channel belt (green and blue in left figure).

CDP = channel-belt proportion

Vertical exaggeration ~ 10

FIG. 34.—Channel-belt connectedness increases with channel-deposit proportion (CDP). For CDP < 0.4, most channel belts (shown
as stippled boxes in the cross-floodplain section to the upper right) are unconnected, such that frequency distributions (to upper
left) of channel-deposit width or thickness (relative to floodplain width or thickness) are bimodal with a large mode equivalent
to unconnected channel belts. As CDP increases, more channel belts are connected, channel deposits become larger, and the
frequency distributions of channel-deposit width or thickness becomes polymodal. For CDP > 0.75 (lower figures), all channel
belts are connected and the single-channel deposit is as wide and thick as the floodplain.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
equals channel-belt width. As channel-deposit proportion in-
creases, some channel belts become connected, the mean and
standard deviation of width increase, and the frequency distribu-
tion becomes polymodal. If channel-deposit proportion exceeds
about 0.75, all channel belts are connected, and the single sand-
stone body has a width equal to floodplain width.
FLOODPLAINS
A floodplain is a strip of land that borders a stream channel
and that is normally inundated during seasonal floods. Flood-
plains develop in all alluvial valleys and on alluvial fans and
deltas, irrespective of the channel pattern. The interaction be-
tween water flow, sediment transport, and bed topography of
floodplains is not known as well as for channels (review by
Bridge, 2003). Comprehensive field studies of water flow and
sediment transport over floodplains during overbank floods do
not exist, mainly because of difficulties of observation and lack of
students willing to make the observations (but see Velikanov and
Yarnykh, 1970; Hughes and Lewin, 1982; Nicholas and McLelland,
1999). Water flow and sediment transport on floodplains is
complicated by variable floodplain width and surface topogra-
phy (channels, depressions, mounds of sediment such as levees
and crevasse splays, vegetation, and structures produced by
humans and other animals). Many experimental studies of
overbank flow adjacent to river channels have been undertaken
(recent examples are Knight and Shiono, 1996; Naish and Sellin,
1996; Sellin and Willetts, 1996; Willetts and Rameshwaran, 1996;
Wormleaton, 1996; Lai et al., 2000; Patra and Kar, 2000; Knight
and Brown, 2001; Myers et al., 2001; Valentine et al., 2001), but
mostly with steady flows over simple channel–floodplain geom-
etry, and with immobile boundaries without sediment move-
ment. Numerical models of floodplain flow and sediment trans-
port are inadequate at present, and there are no quantitative, 3-D
depositional models for floodplains. Qualitative models of flood-
plain deposits are also relatively poorly developed, as demon-
strated below.
General Patterns of Geometry, Water Flow,
Sediment Transport, Erosion, and Deposition
Floodplain geometry has been reviewed by Allen (1965, 1970),
Brierley et al. (1997), and Bridge (2003). Floodplains normally
contain active and abandoned alluvial ridges that rise several
decimeters to meters above adjacent lowlands (flood basins). Allu-
vial ridges contain active and abandoned channels and bars (the
channel belt), levees, and crevasse channels and splays (Fig. 35).
Levees are discontinuous, wedge-shaped ridges around active
and abandoned channels (Fig. 35). Levees commonly have chan-
nels cut into their surfaces. The larger ones are called crevasse
channels and split downslope into smaller distributaries sur-
mounting fan- or lobe-shaped mounds of sediment called crevasse
splays (Fig. 35). In some cases, levees comprise a series of adjacent
crevasse splays. Crevasse channels can have their own levees and
terminal mouth bars. The distal margins of crevasse splays can
either thin gradually or end abruptly with a steep (angle-of-
repose) slope. Crevasse splays that terminate in permanent lakes
are similar to lacustrine deltas. Flood basins are commonly seg-
mented into subsidiary basins by crevasse splays, alluvial ridges
of tributary channels, or abandoned alluvial ridges. Permanent
lakes and marshes may be present in wet climates, whereas lakes
are ephemeral in dry climates. Permanent lakes are particularly
common on coastal plains, and where there is local tectonic
subsidence or base-level rise. Floodplain drainage channels are
common, and those that flow into lakes form deltas. Plant cover
119
induces deposition by decelerating sediment-laden flows, and
protects surface sediment from entrainment by wind or water.
Plant cover is sparse in arid and semiarid climates, such that
surface sediment may be moved by the wind. The geometry of
floodplains changes in time and space as a result of: channel
migration within the channel belt; migration, cutting, and filling
of floodplain channels; large-scale movements of channel belts
(avulsions); local tectonism; and progressive deposition or ero-
sion.
The fastest flow in simple channel–floodplain systems is in
the main channels, and flow velocity and bed shear stress on the
floodplain diminish away from channel margins (Fig. 36). The
most abrupt lateral decrease in flow velocity occurs at the chan-
nel–floodplain margin, related to vortices with horizontal axes
spaced periodically along the channel margins that cause local
exchange of water between the channel and the floodplain. As the
depth of flow on the floodplain increases relative to that in the
main channel, the flow velocity on the floodplain also increases,
and the reduction in velocity at the channel margin is not as great
as with shallow floodplain flows (Fig. 36). With wide floodplains
(width/depth > 100), the velocity of the floodplain flow decreases
with distance from the channel only in a zone close to the channel
margin (Wormleaton, 1996). Also, flow velocities on floodplains
are relatively high in zones of flow convergence and relatively
low in expanding flow zones, and are greatly influenced by
variations in bed roughness.
Sediment is transported over the floodplain as bed load and
suspended load during floods. The sediment comes from the
main channel and tributary channels, the valley sides, and the
floodplain itself. A large range of sediment size is commonly
available, from mud to gravel. The coarser-grained sediment may
be in the form of mud pellets (consolidated by desiccation or
bioturbation), soil concretions, and organic debris (bones, shells,
plant axes). Indeed, much of the mud that is transported on
floodplains may be in the form of pellets. Sediment is routed onto
the floodplain from the main and tributary channels via smaller
channels, sheet flows, and the large-scale vortices at channel
margins. Bedload sand is transported mainly as ripples and
upper-stage plane beds. However, dunes occur also, especially in
floodplain channels, and antidunes occur in very rapid, shallow
flows.
Changes in water flow and sediment transport over flood
periods control erosion and deposition on floodplains (review in
Bridge, 2003). In general, water initially gets to the floodplain
during rising flow stage through crevasse channels, through low
parts of levees, and by overland flow from the valley margins. At
this stage, the water level in the main channels may be much
higher than that in the flood basin, leading to accelerating, erosive
flows from the channel to the flood basin. During peak flood, water
completely covers the floodplain and flows more or less down
valley. The water flows in a very broad, shallow channel (the
floodplain) in which there are smaller, deeper channels (the main
channels and crevasse channels). The flow patterns on the flood-
plain during this stage are described above and in Figure 36.
During falling flow stage, water and sediment flow back into the
main channels through floodplain drainage channels, and as
ground water. Floodplain lakes gradually diminish as water level
goes down. Freshly exposed sediment surfaces are modified by
the wind, by plant growth, and by the activities of animals.
Desiccation cracks appear in muddy sediments, and in arid
climates salts may be water precipitated in the soil as a result of
evaporation of surface and ground water.
The greatest floodplain deposition rates of the coarsest sedi-
ments generally occur near the margins of channels (on levees
and crevasse splays, thus explaining the origin of alluvial ridges)
120 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 35.—Geometry of floodplains. A) Alluvial ridge with active channel and levee (background) and abandoned channels. Paraná
River, Argentina. Photo from J. Best. B) Active channel and levee (left) passing to right into wet floodbasin. Cumberland Marshes,
Saskatchewan, Canada. Photo from N. Smith. C) Active crevasse splay from Saskatchewan River, Canada. Floodbasin is bordered
by older channel belt (background). Cumberland Marshes. Photo from N. Smith. D) Crevasse channel and crevasse splay passing
into dry floodbasin (background). Brahmaputra River. E) Desiccated muddy floodbasin with channel belt in background.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 121

flow velocity vector

floodplain channel
1
flow deep
velocity
shallow
0
FIG. 36.—Idealized overbank flow patterns on floodplains (based on information in Knight and Shiono, 1996; Wormleaton, 1996).
Perspective diagram indicates decrease in downvalley flow velocity with distance away from channel, and large-scale vortices
at the channel margin. Across-floodplain variation in flow velocity depends on the depth of overbank flow relative to channel
depth. The interaction between overbank flow and channel flow pattern is not shown.

because of rapid spatial deceleration and decreasing turbulence
intensity (see references in Bridge, 2003, p. 268). Relatively high
rates of floodplain deposition also occur in zones of flow decel-
eration such as abandoned channels and floodplain lakes. The
lowest deposition rates of the finest sediments occur in flood
basins distant from channels and areas that are relatively el-
evated. Although the grain size of sand on modern floodplain
surfaces tends to decrease away from the channel belt, mud
usually accumulates as a more or less continuous blanket (ref-
erences in Bridge, 2003, p. 269). Deposition rate (averaged over
hundreds of years) on modern floodplains decreases exponen-
tially with distance from the active channel belt. This means that
the cross-valley floodplain slope and elevation of alluvial ridges
above flood basins increase with time. The average thickness of
sediment deposited on floodplains during seasonal floods is on
the order of millimeters to centimeters. However, floodplain
deposition rate averaged over millions of years is on the order
of 0.1 mm per year, because long-term floodplain deposition is
interrupted by lateral shifts of alluvial ridges (avulsions) and by
periods of erosion (Bridge and Leeder, 1979; Sadler, 1981; Enos,
1991). Erosion occurs where flow is accelerated in locally nar-
row or topographically high floodplain sections and where
vegetation cover is poor.
The basic sedimentation units on floodplains are millimeter-
to decimeter-thick stratasets deposited during floods (Figs. 7, 37,
38; references in Bridge, 2003, p. 270). Basal erosion surfaces are
present if erosion preceded deposition. Upward-fining stratasets
indicate deposition during temporally decelerating flows, whereas
those that coarsen upwards then fine upwards reflect deposition
during accelerating then decelerating flows. Grain sizes and
internal structures depend on local flow conditions and sediment
availability. Many floodplain deposits are planar-stratified and
small-scale cross-stratified fine to very fine sands interbedded
with silt and clay. In general, overbank deposits closest to the
main channel are similar to upper-bar deposits but decrease in
grain size (and change internal structure) with distance from
channels. Layers of drifted vegetation are common in the overbank
deposits of humid climates, and they are generally bioturbated by
animals and plant roots. The stratasets may be sheet-like, wedge-
shaped, or lenticular, depending on the local environment of
deposition.
Qualitative Depositional Models for Floodplain Deposits
Levees, Crevasse Splays, and Lacustrine Deltas.—
Depositional models for levees, crevasse splays, lacustrine
deltas, and floodbasins are still rudimentary, because of the lack
of detailed study (Fig. 38; review by Bridge, 2003). However,
some recent studies have added greatly to our knowledge, nota-
bly work on crevasse splays and lacustrine deltas in the
Cumberland Marshes in Saskatchewan, Canada (Fig. 39; Smith et
al., 1989; Smith et al., 1998; Smith and Perez-Arlucea, 1994; Perez-
Arlucea and Smith, 1999; Morozova and Smith, 1999, 2000; Farrell,
2001), on the lacustrine deltas of the lower Mississippi Valley (Tye
and Coleman, 1989a, 1989b), and on a crevasse splay in Nebraska
(Fig. 39; Bristow et al., 1999). However, there is still a need for
more detailed descriptions of the 3-D variation of strataset geom-
etry, grain size, sedimentary structures, paleocurrents, and or-
ganic remains.
The 3-D geometry of crevasse-splay deposits is different from
that of levee deposits (Fig. 38). Crevasse-splay deposits tend to be
coarser grained and thicker than levee deposits, although the
edges of crevasse-splay deposits farthest from the main channel
may be difficult to distinguish from levee deposits. Flood-gener-
ated stratasets of crevasse splays are similar to those of levees, but
medium-scale cross strata (formed by dune migration) are more
common in sandy crevasse-splay deposits. Channel-bar and chan-
122 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 37.—Typical flood-generated sedimentation unit on a floodplain near the main channel (Brahmaputra River, Bangladesh). Planar
laminae overlie an erosion surface (not shown), in turn overlain by small-scale cross laminae (climbing-ripple type). Load
structures are common in the small-scale cross sets. Sedimentation unit fines upward and is capped by bioturbated mud.

nel-fill deposits are common in crevasse splays (Fig. 38), and
these may be difficult to distinguish from the main-channel
deposits. The channels on crevasse splays are expected to be
smaller on average than those in main channels, and show
evidence of periodic cessation of discharge (e.g., desiccation-
cracked mud layers, root casts, burrows, tracks and trails through-
out). However, some crevasse channels may be similar in size to
main channels (especially immediately prior to an avulsion), and
some main channels may be ephemeral just like crevasse chan-
nels. The margins of levees, crevasse splays, and lacustrine deltas
can slope at up to the angle of repose. If they reach the angle of
repose, the marginal deposits resemble those of Gilbert-type
deltas (Figs. 39, 41).
Within levees, crevasse splays, and lacustrine deltas, groups of
flood-generated stratasets may occur in distinctive vertical se-
quences that are up to meters thick and perhaps hundreds of
meters in lateral extent (Figs. 38, 39, 41). Coarsening-upward
sequences are produced by progradation of the sediment bodies
into flood basins or lakes, and upward-fining sequences are pro-
duced by abandonment. Such progradation and abandonment
may be associated with migration and abandonment of individual
channels in a crevasse splay or lacustrine delta, migration and
cutoff of channels within the active channel belt, or avulsion of the
whole channel belt. However, these sequences might also be
related to regional changes in sediment supply and deposition rate
associated with, for example, climate change, tectonism, or relative
sea-level changes. Distinguishing among these various possibili-
ties is no trivial task, requiring observation of floodplain deposits
of a given age across the full extent of the floodplain.
Channel Fills.—
Channel fills in floodplain deposits may be associated with
abandoned main channels, crevasse channels (including flood-
plain drainage channels), and tributary channels. After their
ends become plugged with bed-load sediment, these aban-
doned channels become lakes, and receive mainly suspended-
load sediment. Deposits are typically small-scale cross-strati-
fied sands and muds. Lacustrine deltas may form at the en-
trances to these lakes. Channel fills normally contain abundant
plant debris, shells of freshwater molluscs, vertebrate bones
(given the appropriate climate and stage in earth history),
burrows, tracks, and trails (see below).
Flood Basins.—
Flood-basin deposits are the finest sediments available for
transport (e.g., silts and clays), with subordinate millimeter- to
centimeter-thick sheets and lenses of sand containing small-
scale cross strata and both wave-ripple and current-ripple marks
(Fig. 40). Evidence of subaerial exposure in flood-basin deposits
is desiccation cracks and raindrop imprints in mud, and wind-
blown sand. Burrows and root casts, and layers of drifted plant
material, may be abundant depending upon climate. However,
exceptional sheet floods may deposit thick (up to a meter or so)
sheets of sediment over large areas of a floodplain. Internal
structures may be medium-scale cross strata and planar strata,
formed from dune migration and upper-stage plane beds, re-
spectively.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 123

B C

Channel Levee

Levee

D E

FIG. 38.—A) Simple depositional models for levees and crevasse splays (from Bridge, 2003). Levee deposits from B) Devonian of New
York, U.S.A., and C) Miocene of northern Pakistan. Levee deposits thin away from main channels. D, E ) Crevasse-splay deposits
from the Carboniferous of eastern Kentucky, U.S.A. Sections are normal to flow direction, and show channels cutting through
lobate sandstone bodies (a).

Floodplain Lakes.—
Stratasets formed in lakes are sheet-like and millimeters to
centimeters thick. Evidence for waves in lakes includes cross-
stratified sands and silts with relatively small wave-ripple
marks, and planar laminae (Fig. 40). Burrows, tracks, and trails
are common as long as the lakes are oxygenated and not
hypersaline, and root traces occur in shallow-water deposits.
Common shelly fossils are pelecypods, gastropods, and ostra-
cods. If sediment supply is low, chemical or biochemical pre-
cipitation of deposits may be important. For example, carbon-
ate mud may be formed by calcareous cyanobacteria. A com-
mon association of features in such deposits is centimeter-
thick strata of calcite or dolomite mud with pellets, ostracods,
burrows, and evidence of cyanobacterial filaments and mats.
In swampy areas with low sediment supply in temperate and
124 JOHN S. BRIDGE

SOUTH NORTH
standing
dunes in exposed areas ripples water
mud deposition
splay channel

flow direction
dunes in distal slip face
crevasse channel vegetated levee

SOUTH NORTH
crevasse channels prograding splay deposits

backswamp deposits

WEST EAST
mud deposition crevasse channel

2m
backswamp deposits local channel incision
20m

LEGEND
medium-scale trough cross
pre-splay deposits strata (formed by dunes) trees
curved-crested dunes fish in water
mud (silt and clay) current ripples and associated
shrubs and grass
small-scale cross strata
sand cross strata on distal slip faces roots

FIG. 39.—Depositional models for crevasse splays from Bristow et al. (1999) based on the Niobrara River, Nebraska, U.S.A. (this page),
and from Perez-Arlucea and Smith (1999) based on Cumberland Marshes, Canada (opposite page).

humid climates, peat may accumulate. In arid climates, evapor-
ites may form.
Upward-coarsening sequences (decimeters to meters thick,
and up to kilometers across) are expected from progradation of
lacustrine shorelines, whereas fining-upward sequences are ex-
pected from retrogradation (e.g., Fig. 41). Lacustrine deposits
also commonly show evidence for temporal changes in the sedi-
ment supply as well as depth and areal extent of the lake (e.g.,
vertical changes in grain size, composition, internal structure,
and thickness of strata). As with other overbank deposits, such
changes may be local and associated with migration of channels,
levees, and crevasse splays, local tectonism, or regional and
associated with changes in climate, relative sea level, and tec-
tonism.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 125

FIG. 39 (continued).—
126 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 40.—Floodbasin deposits. Sandstone-filled desiccation cracks in mud (now eroded) that was draping small wave-ripple marks
(wavelengths on the order of a centimeter) and current-ripple marks. The wave-ripple marks are symmetrical at top left but
become asymmetrical and smaller in wavelength towards the lower right. Their crest lines also change orientation as they become
more asymmetrical. These changes in wave-ripple marks are associated with shoaling water at the edge of an ephemeral
floodplain pond. Current ripples in lower half of photo indicate a unidirectional flow to the right.

Qualitative Models for Floodplain Soils
Alluvial soil features were recently reviewed by Retallack
(1997, 2001), Kraus (1999), and Bridge (2003). Typical features of
alluvial soils include: (1) horizons (e.g., A, B, C); (2) textural
evidence of leaching of soluble materials and eluviation of clays
from A horizons and precipitation of secondary minerals and
illuviation of clays in B horizons; (3) disruption of original struc-
tures by burrowing organisms, plant roots, changes in moisture
content, and growth of secondary minerals; and (4) characteristic
coloration and mottling associated with chemical alteration of
parent material and formation of new minerals (Fig. 42). The
degree of development of these features in soils depends on time,
deposition rate, climate, vegetation, topography relative to the
water table, and source materials. Well-developed soils with hori-
zons require on the order of 103 years to form, and relatively low
deposition rate (less than the order of millimeters per year; Leeder,
1975). Such soils are typically decimeters to meters thick. Different
types of soils and paleosols defined based on distinctive features
are called pedofacies (e.g., Table 2 and Figure 43), although defini-
tions of modern pedofacies cannot always be applied to ancient
pedofacies, because of diagenesis (Mack et al., 1993).
Soils and paleosoils commonly vary laterally and in time, and
various models have been proposed for such variations. A catena
comprises the lateral variants of a soil. A common type of catena
on floodplains is associated with a decrease in elevation, deposi-
tion rate, and grain size with distance from the channel belt (Fig.
44; e.g., Fastovsky and McSweeney, 1987; Platt and Keller, 1992;
Wright and Platt, 1995; Zaleha, 1997a; Cojan, 1999; Kraus and
Aslan, 1999; Wright, 1999). Soils on sandy, well-drained levees
and crevasse splays have a relatively thick oxidized and leached
zone (zone of aeration) underlain by a gleyed horizon (saturated
zone). The lower, muddy, poorly drained flood-basin deposits
are more gleyed. If soils undergo extremes of wetting and drying,
calcium carbonate is leached from the zone of aeration and
accumulates as glaebules in the capillary fringe above the water
table. Poorly drained flood-basin soils may have glaebules of
both calcium carbonate and iron oxide. Local or widespread
aggradation on floodplains may result in “drying-out” vertical
sequences of soils (Fig. 45). Decreasing deposition rate from
channel belt to floodbasin may also result in increasing degree of
soil development farther away from channel belts, and change in
degree of soil development in vertical sequences of paleosols has
been related to varying proximity of channel belts (Fig. 44; Bown
and Kraus, 1987; Kraus, 1987; Kraus and Aslan, 1999). Further-
more, the relationship between increasing soil maturity and
decreasing deposition rate has been related to long-term, large-
scale changes in deposition rate, as seen in a later section on
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 127

FIG. 41.—Lacustrine deposits. A) Coarsening-upward

sequence (about 4 m thick) from laminated shale
(a) to cross-laminated and ripple-marked sand-
stone and siltstone (b) to channel-fill sandstone
(c). From Carboniferous of Eastern Kentucky,
U.S.A. Interpreted as progradation of crevasse
splay into lake, analogous to Cumberland
Marshes (Fig. 39). B) Coarsening-upward se-
quence (about 4 m thick) from laminated shale (a)
to sandstone with angle-of-repose cross strata
(b). From the Carboniferous of northwestern
Germany. Interpreted as progradation of distal
slipface of a crevasse splay into a lake, analogous
to Niobrara example in Fig. 39.

B
128 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 42.—Paleosol features. A) nodular calcareous B horizon (a) overlain by noncalcareous mottled A horizon (b), overlain by stratified
non-pedogenic deposits (c). Soil profile is 2 to 3 meters thick. B) interconnected calcareous glaebules in a B horizon. Scale is 0.1
m long. Photos from Siwaliks of Pakistan, courtesy of Mike Zaleha.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 129

TABLE 2.—Classification of soils.

Entisol — Very weakly developed soils.

Inceptisol — Weakly developed soils.
Andisol — like Inceptisol but formed on volcanic ash.
Vertisol — Abundant swelling clay (mainly smectite) subjected to
seasonal extremes of wetting and drying (expansion and
shrinkage), commonly have blocky to columnar ped struc-
tures, cutans, slickensides, pseudo-anticlines, as well as cal-
careous and iron oxide glaebules.
Aridisol — Light color, calcareous layer close to surface (within a
meter) or evidence of precipitation of evaporite minerals such
as gypsum. May contain silcrete horizon. Desert soil.
Mollisol — Organic-rich A horizon with abundant roots and
burrows, and B horizon enriched in clay or calcium carbonate.
Grassland soil.
Histosol — O horizon (peat) with uncompacted thickness of at
least 0.4 m. Swamp soil.
Spodosol — Thick, well-differentiated horizons with B horizon
enriched in sesquioxides and organic matter, and little or no
clay or calcium carbonate. Forest and woodland soil.
Alfisol — Thick, well-differentiated horizons with B horizon
enriched in clay, red sesquioxides, and cations of Ca, Mg, Na,
K. Forest and woodland soil.
Ultisol — similar to alfisol but has sparse cations. May contain
laterite or bauxite horizons. Forest and woodland soil.
Oxisol — Thick well-differentiated clayey soil, highly oxidized
and red lower horizons, and no unweathered material. May
contain laterite or bauxite horizons. Rainforest soil.

alluvial architecture (Allen, 1974; Wright and Marriott, 1993;

Willis and Behrensmeyer, 1994; McCarthy and Plint, 1998;
Retallack, 2001). However, some caution is necessary, because
soil maturity (pedofacies) is controlled not only by deposition red color
rate. In sequences of floodplain deposits where paleosoils vary in
their maturity, it is necessary to determine whether these varia- brown color
tions are local or regional, and whether they are related to
variations in deposition rate or other factors. This is no easy task.
FIG. 43.—Soil types of the US Soil Conservation Service (from
FOSSILS IN FLUVIAL DEPOSITS Retallack, 1997).

Preservation of Hard Parts

The hard parts of animals and plants are common in fluvial
deposits, depending upon the stage in evolution of organisms on
Earth. Vertebrates include fish, amphibians, reptiles, and mam-
mals. Invertebrates include molluscs (bivalves, gastropods),
arthropods (crustaceans and insects), and annelids (earthworms,
nematodes). Plant remains (e.g., plant axes, roots, leaf impres-
sions, pollen and spores) are present in abundance in Devonian
and younger sediments (Fig. 46; Gensel and Edwards, 2001).
These body fossils can occur in situ or as transported remains.
Some fossils are transported only a short distance, so as to remain
within their local habitat. Transported plants and bones are
normally sorted by size, shape, and density, oriented by the
current, and abraded because of contact with other hard objects
during transport. The abundance and diversity of fossils varies
greatly within different fluvial sub-environments (Behrensmeyer
and Hook, 1992). Abundance and diversity are related to that of
the original ecosystem, to the nature of transport and burial, and
to postdepositional modification of the material. Good preserva-
tion is generally favored by rapid deposition and burial in topo-
graphically low sites, and by negligible chemical or biological
degradation in the burial environment.
Trace Fossils
Trace fossils (ichnofossils) are also very common in fluvial
deposits from most sub-environments (reviews in Pemberton et
al., 1992; Retallack, 2001; Hasiotis, 2002; Bridge, 2003). They
record the dwelling, burrowing, and surface movement of a wide
variety of organisms, including worms, arthropods (insects, crus-
taceans), molluscs, and vertebrates. Plant root casts occur in
many fluvial deposits, with the exception of deposits formed
below the low-water level in channels and lakes. Until the 1980s,
the only formal continental ichnofacies was the Scoyenia ichnofa-
cies (e.g., Ekdale et al., 1984; Frey et al., 1984), comprising dwell-
ing, feeding, and crawling traces produced mainly by arthropods
in ephemeral lakes and floodplains. The full diversity and impor-
tance of continental trace fossils is now being realized and docu-
mented. A new Mermia ichnofacies has been proposed for lacus-
trine environments (Buatois and Mángano, 1995). A Coprinisphaera
ichnofacies (Genise et al., 2000), named after dung beetle nests, is
an ichnofacies of insect traces (bees, wasps, ants, beetles, termites)
in paleosols. Genise et al. (2000) suggest that this ichnofacies
should subsume the previously defined Termitichnus ichnofacies
(Smith et al., 1993; Hasiotis and Dubiel, 1995), an assemblage
130 JOHN S. BRIDGE

Channel Levee or Crevasse Splay Floodbasin Lake

low water table

Deposition rate, grain size, and drainage decreases

Soil maturity increases

Oxidized, leached horizon gleyed horizon thickening relative

over gleyed horizon to oxidized, leached horizon

CaCO3 glaebules above Fe glaebules increasing

low-stage water table relative to CaCO3 glaebules

Compound soils cumulative soils

FIG. 44.—Idealized catena associated with floodplain environments.

dominated by termite nests. In contrast to definition of these new
ichnofacies, Hasiotis (2004) has constructed ichnocoenoses for
alluvial, lacustrine, and transitional marine environments (e.g.,
Fig. 47). Ichnocoenoses are assemblages of trace fossils that reflect
biological communities (above and below ground). These bio-
logical communities (hence ichnocoenoses) vary with
subenvironment and climate.
Continental trace fossils tend to be vertically zoned (tiered),
reflecting the soil moisture and level of the water table. For
example, most insects and earthworms live above the water table,
crabs and crayfish occupy a zone near the water table, and some
organisms (oligochaete worms, molluscs, water-loving insects,
shrimp) live below the water table. As the elevation of the water
table varies seasonally, the traces made by these different organ-
isms may become superimposed. The content of soil moisture
and the elevation of the water table are controlled by climate and
by position on the floodplain relative to water bodies such as
rivers and lakes. In arid climates, the amount of soil moisture is
low, as is the average height of the water table. In moving from the
edge of a lake or river onto a dry floodplain, the amount of soil
moisture decreases, as does the mean elevation of the water table.
This results in an increase in biodiversity, biotic exchange, bur-
rowing depth, and degree of tiering from the water body to the
floodplain (Fig. 47). For example, insect nests (termites, soil bees,
ants) tend to be deeper and larger if there are seasonal extremes
of rainfall. Insect nests are smaller and shallower where the

well drained soils with

eluvial–illuvial horizons
he oxidized
m
at
ite
hematite –
illuvial horizons

FIG. 45.—Drying-out sequences in paleosols (from Wright, 1999).

 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 131

A C

FIG. 46.—Paleozoic fluvial fossils. A) sandstone cast of tree-trunk (0.1 m scale). B) Oriented plant axes (centimeter scale). C, D) Bivalve
escape burrows. E) Common type of meniscate burrow, possibly formed by arthropods. (A) to (E) are from Devonian of
northeastern USA or Canada. Photos from Steve Hasiotis.
132 JOHN S. BRIDGE

F G

H I

FIG. 46 (continued).—Mesozoic to Tertiary fluvial fossils. F) Mammal burrows. G) Termite nest, about 1 m across. H) Crayfish burrow.
I) Dung beetle nest with ball. Photos from Steve Hasiotis.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 133

Traces absent where water table is deep Wet-season water-table level Dry-season water-table level

FIG. 47.—Alluvial trace-fossil model, based on the Jurassic Morrison Formation (Hasiotis, 2004). Legend to symbols follows. AMB,
adhesive meniscate burrows; An, Anchorichnus; At, ant nests; Bv, Bivalve traces; Ca, Camborygma (crayfish burrows); Ce, Celliforma
(bee cells and nests); Cl, Cylindrichum; Cp, Coprinispheara (dung beetle traces); F, Fuersichnus (insect larvae burrows); G, Gastropod
trail; Hb, Horizontal burrow; Jb, J-shaped burrow; O, Ornithopod and theropod tracks; P, Planolites; Rh, Rhizoliths; Sa, Sauropod
tracks; So, Scoyenia; St, Steinichnus (beetle traces); Tm, Termite nests; T/Rh, termite nests in rhizoliths; Vb, quasi-vertical burrows;
Vtb, Vertebrate burrows; Wp, wasp nests/cocoons; Yt, Y-shaped burrows.

substrate is either dry or wet. Freshwater trace fossils reflect
seasonal changes in water depth and salinity, and are thus
controlled by climate also. Trace-fossil abundance and soil matu-
rity increase as deposition rate decreases, because of the time
available for bioturbation and pedogenesis.
Fossils in Different Fluvial Environments
River Channels.—
Much of the information included here on fossils in different
fluvial environments comes from the reviews of Behrensmeyer
and Hook (1992) and Hasiotis (2002). Plant material is commonly
preserved in river channel deposits (e.g., logs, twigs, fruits, seeds,
leaves, pollen and spores). Invertebrate fossils are mainly unionid
bivalves and freshwater oysters. Vertebrates include tetrapods
and other aquatic animals in various stages of disarticulation.
Most of the plant and bone material is transported, if not very far.
Trace fossils in river channel deposits include the dwelling,
locomotion, and escape burrows of bivalves, arthropod feeding
burrows, arthropod walking traces, and plant root casts. Trace
fossils tend to be concentrated in upper-bar deposits. Plant root
casts in channel deposits can give (along with desiccation cracks
and falling-stage drainage features) an indication of the low
water level, and hence the range of flow stage in the paleoriver.
For example, root casts and desiccation cracks in the deepest part
of a paleochannel are a clear indication that it was seasonally
ephemeral.
Abandoned Channels.—
Abandoned channels support a prolific ecosystem and expe-
rience relatively high deposition rate, leading to abundantly
preserved fossils. Plant assemblages tend to be derived mainly
from the channel margins, and peat can be preserved in this
waterlogged environment. Common invertebrates are molluscs
(bivalves, gastropods) and arthropods. Tetrapod and other aquatic
vertebrate bones may be common. As the channel is filled, the
fossils may indicate a trend from aquatic to terrestrial fauna. The
fauna is usually not transported, and may be associated with
mass death due to aridity or predation. Trace fossils include the
dwelling burrows of bivalves, arthropod feeding and resting
burrows, and walking traces. Root traces increase in abundance
upwards in channel fills.
134 JOHN S. BRIDGE
Levees and Crevasse Splays.—
Levee and crevasse-splay deposits contain abundant plant
roots and transported plant material (wood fragments, leaves,
pollen and spores). Chemical and biological degradation of plants
follows burial in these well drained, oxidizing environments, but
casts of these plants commonly survive. Disarticulated, trans-
ported tetrapod and aquatic vertebrates also occur, as do mol-
luscs. Bivalve escape burrows and arthropod dwelling burrows
(e.g., crayfish, beetles, termites, wasps) are common in levees and
crevasse splays, and vertebrate burrows also occur.
Flood Basins.—
Well-drained floodplains (including abandoned channel
belts) are sites of intense bioturbation and pedogenesis. Organic
debris is readily oxidized, and acidic soils lead to dissolution of
shell and bone. Some organic remains (e.g., logs, in situ tree
stumps, and roots) can be preserved as casts in pedogenic
calcium carbonate or as casts of sandstone or mudstone. Micro-
floras are rare because of chemical degradation. Articulated and
disarticulated bones of tetrapods and fish are uncommon, and
such assemblages show evidence of surface weathering, carni-
vore damage, or trampling, and are enriched in the most resis-
tant animal parts. Invertebrates such as molluscs (gastropods
and bivalves) and crustaceans are uncommon, probably be-
cause of dissolution of their hard parts. Floodplain soils com-
monly contain root traces (especially rhizoliths), burrows, pel-
lets and coprolites, and trackways. Very common (post-Paleo-
zoic) trace fossils are vertical, branching, and chambered bur-
rows of insects (bees, wasps, dung beetles, ants, termites; Figure
47). Insects and spiders produce vertical dwelling burrows,
horizontal feeding burrows, and surface trails. Insects do not eat
sediment or line burrows. Worms also produce burrow tubes in
various orientations, but worms eat sediment, producing pel-
lets, and line burrows with mucus. Trackways and burrows of
vertebrates (e.g., various kinds of rodents; Figure 47) occur, and
some burrows contain bones and coprolites.
Wet, poorly drained floodplains (marshes, swamps, forests)
typically have chemically reducing conditions at and below the
surface, and are favorable sites for preservation of plant material
(logs, in situ tree stumps, leaves, peat, seeds, microflora), roots,
and insect parts. In coal-bearing sequences, tree-stump casts,
plant compressions, and roots are especially common. Articu-
lated and disarticulated vertebrate skeletons may be present (e.g.,
fish, reptiles, amphibians). Vertebrate trackways are common
near the shorelines of rivers and lakes. Molluscs and arthropods
occur, and their burrows and trackways are common.
The fossils of floodplain lakes are similar to those of aban-
doned channels. In oxygenated lakes, macroplant debris and
stromatolites occur but are not very common. Pollen and spores,
benthic phytoplankton, and charophytes are more common.
Oligochaete worms, molluscs (bivalves, gastropods), amphi-
pod crustaceans, ostracods, and insect larvae are very common.
Disarticulated fish and tetrapods are also common. Roots, bur-
rows, and trackways are very common in oxygenated lakes.
Worm burrows are lined, vertical tubes that may branch. Bur-
rows of insect larvae are U-shaped. Bivalve dwelling burrows
are relatively large vertical chambers. Depth zonation of benthic
organisms occurs in a way similar to the sea (Hasiotis, 2002).
Suspension feeders tend to be more common in shallow water,
whereas deposit feeders are more common in deeper water.
Low-oxygen lakes may have anoxic bottom conditions, leading
to common preservation of logs, leaves, seeds, pollen, and
spores. Benthic invertebrates and insects (hence ichnofossils)
are rare, but aquatic and tetrapod vertebrates and flying ani-
mals are common.
Changes in Fluvial Fossils Over Time
Change in the preservation of fluvial fossils over time has
been influenced not only by evolution of life on land but also by
change in climate and tectonic activity that has changed the land
area and relief. Change in climate and tectonic activity control
change in depositional environments, and hence in the types of
organisms present and their modes of preservation. It is com-
monly difficult to discern whether an evolutionary sequence of
organisms is related to changing organisms or changing deposi-
tional environments. There are many more fluvial fossils avail-
able in Quaternary and Tertiary sediments than in Mesozoic and
Paleozoic sediments. This is partly due to the evolution of life on
land, and partly due to the greater exposed volume of the young-
est deposits. Some important stages in the evolution of life on
land relating to fossil preservation are given in Behrensmeyer
and Hook (1992), Buatois et al. (1998), Driese et al. (2000), Driese
and Mora (2001), and Shear and Selden (2001).
RIVER DIVERSIONS (AVULSIONS)
ACROSS FLOODPLAINS
Observations of the Nature of Avulsion
Avulsion is the relatively abrupt shift of a channel belt from
one location to another on the floodplain (references in Bridge
and Leeder, 1979; Mackey and Bridge, 1995; Jones and Schumm,
1999; Smith and Rogers, 1999; Berendsen and Stouthamer, 2001;
Stouthamer, 2001; Stouthamer and Berendsen, 2000, 2001; Bridge,
2003; Slingerland and Smith, 2004). Evidence for avulsions comes
from studies of modern rivers and from abandoned channel belts
on Holocene floodplains. Avulsions normally occur during floods,
although the high water levels required for avulsions may be
created by downstream blockage of the channel associated, for
example, with ice, vegetation, or sediment. An avulsion may be
initiated by enlargement of a channel on a crevasse splay or by
intersection of the main channel with a preexisting channel. The
new channel belt follows the maximum floodplain slope on its
way towards the locally lowest part of the flood basin. Aban-
doned channel belts may block the path of avulsing channels;
however, an abandoned or active channel belt may be taken over
by the avulsing channel. The transfer of water discharge from the
old channel belt to the new channel, and the associated change in
channel pattern, may occur over years to centuries. Inter-avul-
sion periods for a given channel belt (defined as the period of
activity of the channel belt minus the avulsion duration) range
from decades to thousands of years. Successive avulsions may be
initiated from a specific section of a valley (i.e., nodal avulsion;
Fig. 48), particularly in the case of alluvial fans and deltas (see
below). In other cases, successive points of avulsion may shift
progressively upstream with decreasing avulsion period, until
there is an abrupt down-valley shift in the location of the avulsion
points. In yet other cases, avulsing channel belts appear to move
progressively in one direction across floodplains or fans (e.g., the
Kosi River; Fig. 48).
Avulsion and Anastomosis.—
If the different channels in avulsive river systems coexist for
a finite length of time, the river system can be classified as
distributive (divergent channel belts) or anastomosing (if chan-
nel belts split and rejoin). Such river patterns are typical of
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 135

Effects of Base-Level Change on Avulsion.—

High deposition rate Low deposition rate
4 Inter-avulsion periods decrease (avulsion frequency increases)
6
2 as relative base level rises, because of the down-valley decrease in
5
1 river slope and sediment transport rate, which causes aggrada-
3 tion and growth of alluvial ridges (e.g., Törnqvist, 1994; Ethridge
3
et al., 1999). Stouthamer and Berendsen (2001) found an increase
in avulsion frequency with increased rate of base-level rise for the
8
Rhine–Meuse delta, but not an associated decrease in inter-
2
5 avulsion period. This means that the number of coeval channels
4 must increase during increasing rate of base-level rise. Another
1 9 effect of rising base level is that points of avulsion shift up-valley
7 as the sea transgresses over the land. Avulsion is apparently more
Low deposition rate High deposition rate
likely to be associated with crevasse channels and splays when
aggradation rate is high, and with reoccupation of preexisting
channels if aggradation rate is relatively low (Aslan and Blum,
High deposition rate High deposition rate 1999; Morozova and Smith, 1999; Stouthamer, 2001).
2 1
4 1
The response of rivers to base-level fall depends on factors like
3 2 the slope and sediment type of the exposed land areas, and the
6 rate of fall (Schumm, 1993; Wescott, 1993). If the slope of the
exposed surface is greater than the equilibrium channel slope,
there may be channel incision and/or the channel may become
more sinuous. Avulsion frequency may be expected to decrease
in this region, but not necessarily farther up valley. An upstream
5
avulsion may limit the amount of incision farther down valley
(Leeder and Stewart, 1996). If the slope of the exposed surface is
less than the equilibrium channel slope, there may be deposition
and/or the channel may become straight. Under these condi-
tions, avulsion frequency may be increased.

Effect of Climate Change on Avulsion.—

Low deposition rate
FIG. 48.—Typical patterns of channel-belt avulsion, dependent
upon spatial variation in deposition rate and preexisting
floodplain topography. Channel belts are represented by
lines. Numbers are locations of avulsion in chronological
order. Full explanation in Bridge (2003).
alluvial fans, crevasse splays, and deltas. These are environ-
ments with high deposition rates and active growth of alluvial
ridges, producing the gradient advantages conducive to avul-
sion (Smith and Smith, 1980; Smith, 1983; Smith et al., 1989;
Smith et al., 1998; Törnqvist, 1993, 1994: Makaske, 2001). The
water and sediment discharge (hence channel geometry) of
individual channel-belt segments may change in time. The
channel segments in anastomosing river systems can have any
type of channel pattern (e.g., meandering, braided; Fig. 14).
Therefore, it makes no sense to have depositional models for
anastomosing river systems that are distinguished from models
for braided or meandering rivers (as occurs in much of the
literature on fluvial deposits).
Effects of Sedimentation Rate on Avulsion.—
Avulsion frequency increases (inter-avulsion period decreases)
with increasing channel-belt deposition rate (Mackey and Bridge,
1995; Heller and Paola, 1996; Ashworth et al., 2004). This is
because high channel-belt deposition rate causes rapid growth of
the alluvial ridge above the floodplain, and attendant rapid
increase in cross-valley slope of the alluvial ridge relative to its
down-valley slope. Channel-belt aggradation rate can be influ-
enced by base-level change, climate change in the hinterland, or
tectonic activity, as explained below.
Changes in climate in the drainage basin can affect avulsion
by changing the discharge regimes and sediment supply to the
rivers. For example, during and immediately following glacial
periods, the magnitude and variability of water and sediment
supply may be increased, resulting in higher avulsion frequen-
cies. This trend may be reversed during warmer periods. In
addition, changes in the base levels of lakes and the sea during
glaciations should affect avulsion frequencies (Morozova and
Smith, 1999), and ice dams could cause river diversions.
Effects of Tectonism on Avulsion.—
Tectonically induced changes in river and floodplain gradi-
ents may result in avulsions (reviews by Mackey and Bridge,
1995; Peakall et al., 2000; Schumm et al., 2000; Bridge, 2003).
Avulsion may occur as a direct response to an individual tectonic
event or (more likely) in response to a gradual, tectonically
induced change in floodplain topography. Avulsing channels
concentrate in areas of tectonic subsidence and avoid areas of
tectonic uplift. However, if channels occupying subsided areas
have a high aggradation rate, subsequent river diversions may be
away from the zone of maximum subsidence. Tectonically in-
duced changes in river and floodplain gradients may also result
in aggradation and an increased probability of avulsion, or inci-
sion and a reduced probability of avulsion.
Theoretical Models of Avulsion
Mackey and Bridge (1995) suggested that the probability of
avulsion at a given location along a channel belt increases with
a discharge ratio (maximum flood discharge for a given year/
threshold flood discharge necessary for an avulsion) and a slope
ratio (cross-valley slope at the edge of the channel belt/local
136 JOHN S. BRIDGE
down-valley slope of the channel belt). They assumed that
avulsions are initiated during extreme discharge events when
erosive power of the stream is greatest, and that a sufficient
stream-power advantage exists for a new course to be estab-
lished on the floodplain. The stream power and sediment trans-
port rate per unit channel length are proportional to the dis-
charge–slope product. Therefore, if the discharge–slope prod-
uct and sediment transport rate of an overbank flow can exceed
that of the channel flow, sediment transport rate increases from
the channel to the floodplain, and erosion and enlargement of a
crevasse channel is possible. The discharge in a growing cre-
vasse channel initially is less than that in the main channel.
Therefore, the overbank slope must be much greater than the
channel slope in order for the sediment transport rate to increase
from the main channel to the floodplain. In the limiting case
where the discharges of the main channel and the developing
crevasse channel are equal, the slope in the crevasse channel
must exceed that of the main channel for the avulsion to pro-
ceed. The water level in a flood basin must be lower than that in
the main channel to allow water to flow away from the main
channel through a crevasse channel. When the water-surface
elevations of the main channel and the flood basin are the same,
there can be no such crevasse-channel flow. Therefore, crevasse-
channel enlargement can operate only during certain overbank
flood stages. Accordingly, it may take a number of overbank
flood periods for a crevasse channel to enlarge to the point of
avulsion.
Mackey and Bridge (1995) used their avulsion probability
model to simulate avulsions where floodplain slopes vary in
space and time because of variations in deposition rate, and
tectonic tilting and faulting within the floodplain. Down-valley
increase in channel-belt deposition rate produces a down-valley
decrease in channel-belt slope but an increase in cross-valley
slope as the alluvial ridge grows, as is likely to happen during
base-level rise. Under these circumstances, avulsion probability
increases through time, and is greatest in the down-valley part of
the floodplain, where channel-belt slopes are smallest but cross-
valley slopes are largest. The model predicts that avulsion is
initiated in the down-valley part of the floodplain and successive
avulsion locations shift up valley with a progressive decrease in
inter-avulsion period. This is due to gradual increase in avulsion
probability up valley of avulsion locations where growth of
alluvial ridges continues uninterrupted. New channel-belt seg-
ments down valley from avulsion locations have not had time to
aggrade significantly and develop alluvial ridges, and therefore
have low avulsion probabilities. After a finite number of avul-
sions stepping up-valley, the progressive decrease in channel-
belt slopes in the down-valley part of the floodplain causes
abrupt shift in the locus of avulsion to this location. Although
model results agree broadly with what is observed in nature
(Mackey and Bridge, 1995), the model does not take into account
the effects of the increased slope of the new channel as it leaves the
old channel. This steep slope would result in channel incision and
upstream retreat of a knickpoint in the vicinity of the point of
avulsion. Therefore, the probability of avulsion would be greatly
reduced immediately upstream of a recent avulsion location.
Down-valley decrease in channel-belt aggradation rate produces
a down-valley decrease in down-valley slope, but an increase
over time in down-valley slope at any point on the floodplain,
as is typical of alluvial fans and where base level is falling.
Avulsion probability decreases with time because overall down-
valley channel-belt slope increases. However, avulsion prob-
ability is high in the up-valley parts of the floodplain, where
cross-valley slopes are increased by high aggradation rate. The
concentration of avulsions up valley, where deposition rate is
high, produces nodal avulsions, which are characteristic of
alluvial fans.
The Mackey–Bridge model predicts that avulsion periods
vary greatly depending on the stage of growth of alluvial ridges.
Sections of alluvial ridges that are well developed are associated
with short avulsion periods (say, decades or centuries), whereas
newly formed channel belts may not experience an avulsion for
on the order of a thousand years. Also, the obstruction to flow
caused by preexisting alluvial ridges may cause subsequent
channel belts to be clustered preferentially on one side of the
floodplain with a distinctive en echelon pattern (Fig. 48). This
means that other parts of the floodplain distant from the active
channels experience relatively low overbank deposition rates for
extended periods of time, allowing soils to develop.
Tectonic tilting and faulting within the floodplain increase
avulsion probability locally, according to Mackey and Bridge
(1995) (Fig. 49). Channel belts shift away from zones of uplift and
towards zones of maximum subsidence. However, if channel-
belt aggradation keeps pace with fault displacement or tilting,
alluvial-ridge topography causes channels to shift away from
areas of maximum subsidence. Although these predictions agree
broadly with data from modern rivers (e.g., Mike, 1975; Schumm,
1986; Alexander and Leeder, 1987; Leeder, 1993; Peakall, 1998,
Peakall et al., 2000; Schumm et al., 2000), data on the relationship
between tectonism and avulsion are insufficient to test model
predictions in detail.
Slingerland and Smith (1998) made the only analytical ap-
proach to the cause of avulsion. Their model is based on simpli-
fied equations of motion for fluid and sediment applied to simple
channel geometry. The crux of the model is that the suspended-
sediment concentration at the entrance to a crevasse channel
leading from a deeper main channel is different from the equilib-
rium concentration that should exist in the crevasse channel.
Then, depending on local hydraulic conditions, the crevasse
channel would deepen or fill with sediment until the equilibrium
sediment concentration is reached. A condition where the chan-
3
4
5
1
3 1
4
2
2
FIG. 49.—Typical effect of faults and tilting on channel-belt avul-
sion. Channel belts are indicated by lines. Numbers are loca-
tions of avulsion in chronological order. Downthrown sides
of faults are indicated by triangles. Full explanation in Bridge
(2003).
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
nel progressively deepens is taken as a criterion for avulsion.
Avulsions are predicted to occur wherever the slope ratio exceeds
about 5. Notwithstanding the importance of this first analytical
approach, the geometry and physical processes are treated at a
very simple level. Bedload sediment transport is not treated, so that
the model cannot explain avulsions in the many rivers that trans-
port mainly bedload during floods. Slingerland and Smith (2004)
mention that theories for the stability of channel bifurcations
(including treatment of bedload) in braided rivers (e.g., Bolla
Pittaluga et al., 2003) might be applied to prediction of avulsion.
Effects of Avulsions on Erosion and Deposition
Diversion of a channel belt to a new area of flood basin may be
preceded by extensive development of crevasse splays (Smith et
al., 1989). It has even been suggested that most floodplain depos-
its may be formed during the period of crevasse-splay deposition
preceding an avulsion (Smith et al., 1989; Kraus, 1996; Kraus and
Gwinn, 1997; Kraus and Wells, 1999). This is difficult to establish,
however, and crevasse splays can be deposited without having
an avulsion associated with them.
Avulsions may also be recognized in ancient floodplain
deposits without actually observing the diverted channel de-
posits (e.g., Elliott, 1974; Bridge, 1984; Behrensmeyer, 1987;
Farrell, 1987, 2001). For example, initiation of an avulsion may
be recorded in floodplain deposits by an erosion surface over-
lain by relatively coarse-grained deposits (associated with a
major overbank flood) and overlying deposits may be different
from those that were deposited prior to the initiation of the
avulsion. If the channel belt moved to a more distant location on
the floodplain than hitherto, the new flood-generated stratasets
on the floodplain may be thinner and finer grained and be
associated with a different flow direction. If deposition rate is
decreased, soils may become more mature (Leeder, 1975; Bown
and Kraus, 1987; Kraus, 1987). If the channel belt moved closer
to a given floodplain area, the new overbank flood deposits
could be thicker and coarser grained, and coarsening-upward
sequences may occur because of development and prograda-
tion of levees and crevasse splays (e.g., Elliott, 1974; Farrell,
1987, 2001; Perez-Arlucea and Smith, 1989). However, meter-
scale overbank sequences that fine upwards or coarsen up-
wards can also be produced by progradation or abandonment
of different levees and crevasse splays from a fixed channel belt,
or by regional changes in sediment supply and deposition rate
(see previous section).
Avulsion by channel reoccupation is very difficult to recog-
nize in the stratigraphic record. It has been claimed (Mohrig et al.,
2000; Stouthamer, 2001) that channel reoccupation results in
relatively thick, multistory channel belts and multiple levees, but
these stratigraphic features can easily be produced by episodic
deposition in a single channel belt. The only conclusive evidence
for channel reoccupation is preservation of deposits indicating
long time periods (such as mature soils) between the deposits of
superimposed channel belts.
Non-Avulsive Shift of Channel Belts Across Floodplains
It has been suggested that channel belts are capable of gradual
migration across their floodplains by preferential bank erosion
along one side of the channel belt and net deposition on the other
side (Allen, 1965, 1974; Coleman, 1969; Thorne et al., 1993; Peakall
et al., 2000). Such migration is possibly a response to across-valley
tilting of the floodplain, and gives rise to so-called asymmetrical
meander belts (Alexander and Leeder, 1987, 1990; Leeder and
Alexander, 1987; Alexander et al., 1994). However, evidence for
137
such movement is rare or equivocal in modern rivers. Peakall et
al. (2000) suggested that gradual shift of channel belts occurs
instead of avulsion if tilt rates are relatively low. However, the
only physical model for the effect of floodplain tilting on channel
migration (Sun et al., 2001) predicts that a river could migrate
towards or away from the down-tilted area, depending upon
flow characteristics. Avulsions are the most important means of
moving channel belts around most natural floodplains.
ALONG-VALLEY VARIATION IN
RIVERS AND FLOODPLAINS
River and floodplain geometry, water flow, sediment trans-
port, erosion, and deposition vary along valley as tributaries join,
as water is lost by evaporation and/or infiltration, as geological
features such as faults and lava flows change valley slope, as
valley width changes, and as rivers enter bodies of water such as
lakes and seas.
Along-Valley Variation of River Slope and Geometry
Long profiles of river channels and valleys (along-stream
variation in bed elevation) are commonly considered to be con-
cave upwards and fitted by an exponential curve (recent reviews
by Sinha and Parker, 1996; Morris and Williams, 1997, 1999a,
1999b; Rice and Church, 2001). However, long profiles are not
always concave upwards, especially in tectonically active areas
(Leeder, 1999). The commonly observed down-valley decrease in
mean grain size of channel sediment is due mainly to down-
valley decrease in bed slope and bed shear stress within the river
system, such that the coarsest grains are progressively lost in the
down-valley direction (review in Bridge, 2003, p. 70). Down-
valley reduction in bed sediment size due to progressive abrasion
is of minor importance.
Downstream increase in channel-forming discharge of wa-
ter and sediment, due to joining tributaries, causes a down-
stream increase in bankfull channel width and depth. For a
given sediment supply, width increases more than depth as
discharge increases, such that width/depth ratio might be ex-
pected to increase down valley with discharge. Related to this,
channel pattern might be expected to change downstream from
single channel to braided. Actually, it is quite common to see the
opposite, because, although discharge increases downstream,
channel slope and mean grain size may decrease (Bridge, 2003,
p. 297).
Effects of Tectonism on Along-Valley Variation
of Rivers and Floodplains
Tectonic activity affects the slopes of rivers and floodplains,
and their supply of water and sediment, over a range of spatial
and temporal scales. For example, periodic activity of a fault
crossing a river valley may result in a local change in valley slope,
river diversion, and subsequent change in channel pattern over a
period of several hundreds or thousands of years. On a much
larger scale, the whole river system may be affected by tectonic
activity for millions of years if it is located in a tectonically active
mountain belt with adjacent sedimentary basin (e.g., Basin and
Range Province, Himalayas and Indo-Gangetic alluvial basins).
Relatively short-term, local tectonic influences are discussed
here, and longer-term, regional tectonic influences are discussed
below.
Local tectonic activity includes the effects of movement on
relatively small folds and faults that directly influence land
topography. Tectonic activity can also act indirectly by control-
138 JOHN S. BRIDGE

ling base level and the slope of rivers entering standing water.
Tectonic and volcanic activity can cause blockages of river
valleys (creating lakes and local changes in slope) with lava,
volcanic ash, and debris flows. Changing slopes within alluvial
valleys can result in diversions of rivers and changing channel
patterns. Changing topography of the floodplain relative to the
groundwater table can influence floodplain flow and sediment
transport, and the development of soils. These topics were
reviewed recently by Schumm et al. (2000) and Burbank and
Anderson (2001).
Activity of a fault or fold may result in a depression or ridge
with its axis approximately normal to the valley (Fig. 50). Along-
valley slope decreases upstream of an uplifting ridge axis and
increases downstream of the axis. The opposite occurs in the case
of a subsiding depression. The short-term response to a slope
decrease might be a decrease in river sinuosity and increase in
degree of braiding, but an increase in river sinuosity and decrease
in degree of braiding where slope is increased (e.g., Ouchi, 1985).
In regions of slope decrease, the floodplain may become perma-
nently swampy, or the frequency and height of overbank flood-
ing may increase. In other cases, a former floodplain lake may be
reduced in level. Deposition is expected where slope is decreased,
and erosion (and possibly terrace formation) is expected where
slope is increased. If there is an abrupt transition from the zone of
erosion and river incision to a zone of deposition downstream,
the deposit may be in form of an alluvial fan (see below).
The response of the river to such active tectonic deformation
of the land surface depends on the rate of deformation relative to
the rate of river erosion and deposition, in turn related to stream
power and bank erodibility. If the rate of erosion and deposition
is sufficiently large, along-stream changes in slope arising from
tectonic activity are reduced, and the river may tend to its former
state. However, if rate of erosion and deposition is not sufficient
to remove tectonic topography, river diversion may occur. River
diversion is most likely in areas of reduced down-valley slope.
Relatively large cross-valley slopes therefore encourage diver-
sion of the river during flood periods in the direction of maximum
valley slope (Fig. 49; Mackey and Bridge, 1995). In this case, the
river may become anastomosing if it cannot be diverted around
the topographic obstruction. When a river crosses an active strike
slip fault, it may be offset by the fault. Alluvial fans on the
downthrown sides of such faults may be separated laterally from
the stream that provided the fan sediment (Burbank and Ander-
son, 2001).
Along-valley tectonic structures such as faults result in tilting
of the floodplain in the across-valley direction. A common re-
sponse of rivers to cross-valley tilting is periodic diversion to-
wards the down-tilted area, producing asymmetrical channel
belts where the active channel occupies the lowest part of the
floodplain, and abandoned channel belts occur on the up-tilt side
(Figs. 49 and 51; Coleman, 1969; Mike, 1975; Alexander and
Leeder, 1987; Leeder 1993; Mackey and Bridge, 1995; Peakall,
1998; Holbrook and Schumm, 1999; Peakall et al., 2000; Schumm
et al., 2000). The low area of the floodplain is also flooded
preferentially and suffers increased deposition rate associated
with both channel belts and increased overbank floods. If depo-
sition rate temporarily exceeds tectonic subsidence rate, rivers do
not always occupy the zone of maximum subsidence. Increased
deposition rate in down-tilted sides of floodplains tends to re-
duce the development stage of soils, whereas the up-tilted sides
experience lower deposition rate and increased soil maturity.
Alluvial Fans
Definition, Occurrence, and Geometry.—
Alluvial fans and deltas (reviewed recently by Miall, 1996;
Leeder, 1999) have distinctive plan shapes and distributive to

uplift subsidence

deposition erosion deposition erosion deposition erosion

T
T

braided river

T
T
meandering river

FIG. 50.—Effect of tectonism on along-stream change in channel patterns (based partly on Ouchi, 1985). Erosion occurs where slope
is increased, and where sediment supply is reduced because of upstream deposition, producing terraces (T), decrease in degree
of braiding, or increase in sinuosity of meandering rivers. Deposition occurs where slope is decreased, and downstream of erosion
zones, producing increase in braiding and local avulsion.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
FIG. 51.—Asymmetrical channel belt, Senguerr River, Argentina. Channel belt occupies one side of floodplain, as a result of tectonic
tilting. Floodplain is bordered by dissected uplands (background) or a terrace margin (foreground).
anatomosing channels bordered by floodplains. Deltas build into
standing bodies of water. If alluvial fans build into standing
bodies of water, they are referred to as fan deltas. Deltas range in
size from small lobes where cross-bar channels enter slow-mov-
ing water in bar-tail areas, to lacustrine deltas on floodplains, to
the coastal deltas of major rivers. Alluvial fans can be small
crevasse splays on floodplains adjacent to channels, or the well-
known fans that occur at the margins of small, fault-bounded
valleys, or megafans (e.g., the Kosi fan), which occur where major
rivers flow from mountain ranges onto broad alluvial plains. The
term terminal fan has been used for fans in arid areas where
flowing water percolates into the ground before reaching beyond
the fan margins. Alluvial fans are commonly classified according
to their surface slopes and the relative importance of sediment
gravity flows, sheet floods, and stream flows in forming them.
Alluvial fans occur in every climate where a river course
passes sufficiently rapidly from an area of high slope to one of low
slope. The abrupt change of slope results in an abrupt down-
stream decrease in bed shear stress and sediment transport rate,
which leads to localized deposition. Alluvial fans commonly
occur adjacent to fault scarps, and the preservation of fan deposits
is enhanced by the subsidence of the hanging wall. Alluvial fans
are well known in poorly vegetated, arid areas where infrequent
violent rainstorms cause high sediment loads. However, alluvial
fans also occur in humid and periglacial conditions. Alluvial fans
may pass downstream into alluvial plains, tidal flats, beaches,
perennial lakes, eolian dune fields, or playa lakes. The locally rapid
deposition and fixed supply of water and sediment give rise to the
fan shape (segment of a cone cut downward from its apex; Fig.
52). Fan radius varies from hundreds of meters to more than a
139
hundred kilometers, increasing with the supply rate of water and
sediment from the catchment. Fan area increases with catchment
area approximately linearly, although the exact relationship de-
pends on climate, catchment geology, and deposition rate rela-
tive to the basin subsidence rate (Leeder, 1999). Fans tend to be
more or less evenly spaced and laterally coalesced along faulted
mountain fronts, and their areas may increase along the fault as
the amount of throw increases (Gawthorpe and Leeder, 2000).
Although the channel system on fans appears distributive to
anastomosing, not all channels are active at once. Diversion of
flood flows among different channels (avulsion) is common. The
trunk stream at the apex of the fan is commonly entrenched, as
discussed below. In humid climates, it is normal for at least one
of the channels to be perennial and to continue beyond the fan,
but this is not the case in arid climates where the channels are
ephemeral and the fans are “terminal”. In humid fans (e.g., the
Kosi fan), some of the smaller channels may originate on the fan
surface from groundwater springs instead of originating in the
hinterland.
The long profile of fans is normally concave upwards, i.e.,
slope decreases down fan. Average slope generally decreases as
supply of water and sediment increase, and as grain size of
sediment supplied decreases. As slopes increase to on the order
of 10-2 to 10-1, sediment gravity flows (debris flows and mud-
flows) become more common. Channelized debris flows are
associated with distinct levees and terminate in lobate deposits.
Transverse profiles of fans are convex upward. Fan geometry is
complicated by incision of fan channels and formation of a new
fan downstream of the incised fan and by trimming of the fan toe
by an axial river.
140 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 52.—Geometry and sedimentary processes of A) debris-flow-dominated and B) streamflow-dominated alluvial fans (from
Leeder, 1999).

Flow and Sedimentary Processes.—
River channels on fans are braided if there is a large supply of
water and sediment from the hinterland. Groundwater-fed fan
channels are generally smaller and may have a different channel
pattern (e.g., meandering). In arid fans, channels decrease in size
down-fan because water infiltrates or may become a sheet flood.
As the slope or depth of water decreases down-fan, grain size of
surface sediment decreases. Overbank areas have channelized
flow and sheet floods. Debris flows, grain flows, and mudflows
are particularly common in channelized apex areas, where slopes
are steepest.
Channel diversions (avulsions) are common on alluvial fans
during floods, and occur following a period of aggradation near
the fan apex (e.g., Schumm et al., 1987; Sun et al., 2002). This local
aggradation causes the transverse slope of the fan apex to in-
crease relative to the downstream slope, thereby facilitating
avulsion. Once avulsion is initiated, the new channel is incised
into the fan surface, with the maximum incision occurring near
the fan apex where the new course is steepest (fan-head entrench-
ment). A depositional lobe forms downstream of the entrenched
channel. As fan aggradation proceeds, the entrenched course of
the new channel may start to aggrade by backfilling, starting from
the lower fan region (Fig. 53). Eventually, the fan-head trench
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 141

A Basin outlet B because it is not possible to observe directly the processes of

development of alluvial architecture, it is necessary to use models
Trench
to interpret and predict alluvial architecture. Most quantitative
models of alluvial architecture (reviewed by Bryant and Flint,
1993; Koltermann and Gorelick, 1996; North, 1996; Anderson,
1997; Bridge, 2003, in press) are either process-based (process-
Deposition imitating) or stochastic (structure-imitating), as seen below.

Controls on Alluvial Architecture

C D Alluvial architecture is controlled primarily by: (1) the geom-

E F
FIG. 53.—Evolution of experimental alluvial fans (from Schumm
et al., 1987). A) Fan-head channel entrenchment leads to
deposition of a lobe downstream. B) Deposition zone moves
upstream and channel is backfilled. C) Channel filled and
deposition at fan head increases slope here. D) Channel
moves to new area of fan and is entrenched. E, F) as for Parts
B and C.
etry and sediment type of channel belts and floodplains; (2) the
rate of deposition or erosion in channel belts and on floodplains;
(3) local tectonic deformation within the alluvial valley; and (4)
the nature of channel-belt movements (avulsions) over flood-
plains. These intrinsic (intrabasinal) controlling factors are in turn
controlled by extrinsic (extrabasinal) factors such as tectonism,
climate, and eustatic sea-level changes. For example, the geom-
etry and sediment type of channel belts and floodplains are
controlled by water and sediment supply (rate and type), which
are in turn controlled by the source rocks, topographic relief,
climate, and vegetation of the drainage basin. Long-term deposi-
tion in alluvial valleys is due to long-term decrease in sediment
transport rate in the down-flow direction, which can be accom-
plished by increasing sediment supply up-valley (by tectonic
uplift, climate change, or river diversions) and/or by decreasing
sediment transport rate down valley (by flow expansion associ-
ated with tectonic subsidence or base-level rise). Subsequent
erosion depends upon increasing sediment transport in the down-
flow direction, such as caused by basin uplift or base-level fall.
Local tectonic deformation in alluvial valleys can cause local
changes in channel and floodplain geometry and location, depo-
sition, and erosion. Channel-belt movements across floodplains
are influenced by the severity of floods and the development of
cross-floodplain slopes associated with alluvial-ridge deposition
and local tectonic deformation. The intrinsic controls on alluvial
architecture will be examined first, followed by the extrinsic
controls.

becomes aggraded, and the conditions become favorable for Process-Based (Process-Imitating)
another channel avulsion. It is possible that fan-head aggrada- Models of Alluvial Architecture
tion, avulsion, and entrenchment are associated with pulses of
sediment supply from the hinterland, perhaps associated with The earliest hypothetical models of alluvial architecture were
episodic tectonism or climate change. qualitative and essentially two-dimensional (Allen, 1965, 1974).
Allen (1965) hypothesized that low-sinuosity, single-channel and
ALLUVIAL ARCHITECTURE AND ITS CONTROLS braided channels migrated rapidly (swept) across their flood-
plains, leading to alluvium dominated by sheet-like to lenticular
Alluvial Architecture channel deposits (Fig. 55). In contrast, single-channel, high-sinu-
osity streams were taken to migrate within well-defined meander
Extensive accumulations of fluvial deposits in sedimentary belts that experienced periodic avulsion, leading to ribbon-like
basins formed over millions of years normally show distinctive channel belts were set in a relatively high proportion of fine-
spatial variations in the mean grain size, geometry, and propor- grained alluvium (Fig. 55). These hypotheses are actually incor-
tion and spatial distribution of channel-belt and floodplain de- rect, but Allen’s (1965) models were useful for stimulating more
posits (referred to as alluvial architecture by Allen, 1978). These sophisticated quantitative approaches. Allen (1974) elaborated
spatial variations occur over a range of scales (e.g., vertical on his earlier models by considering the effects on alluvial archi-
sequences of strata may be tens to hundreds of meters thick; Fig. tecture of climate and base-level change, degradation, and differ-
54), and regional unconformities (erosion surfaces that extend ent modes of channel migration. More recent qualitative, 2-D
laterally for hundreds of kilometers) may underlie these se- models predict how alluvial architecture is dependent on changes
quences of strata. Definition of alluvial architecture requires in aggradation rate and valley width during change in relative sea
extensive exposures, and/or high-resolution (preferably three- level (Fig. 66; e.g., Shanley and McCabe, 1993, 1994; Wright and
dimensional) seismic data, and/or many closely spaced cores or Marriott, 1993).
borehole logs, and accurate age dating. Because such data are Leeder (1978) developed the first quantitative, process-imi-
commonly lacking or incomplete, it is necessary to “fill in” three- tating model of alluvial architecture. Channel-belt and flood-
dimensional space in order to produce a complete (and hypo- plain deposits were modeled within a single cross-valley sec-
thetical) representation of alluvial architecture. Furthermore, tion. Channel-belt width, maximum channel depth, and flood-
142 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 54.—Large-scale sequence of fluvial deposits from the Miocene Siwaliks of northern Pakistan. Sandstone-body (channel-deposit)
proportion decreases, increases, and decreases upwards over 2 kilometers of strata, but also varies over 100–200 meters and tens
of meters. The photos show zones of high and low sandstone-body proportion.

plain width were specified. The channel belt was allowed to
move by avulsion across the floodplain as aggradation (balanc-
ing subsidence) continued. The period of time separating avul-
sions and the location of avulsing channels in the floodplain
section were chosen randomly within defined limits. Leeder
defined 2-D measures of the proportion of channel-belt deposits
and their degree of connectedness, which depend upon aggra-
dation rate, avulsion frequency, channel-belt cross sectional
area, and floodplain width. Allen’s (1978, 1979) later approach
followed Leeder’s closely, but Allen added a function to allow
diverted channel belts to avoid high floodplain areas underlain
by preexisting channel belts. The 2-D approach was extended
(Bridge and Leeder, 1979; Bridge and Mackey, 1993a, 1993b) by
considering also the effects on alluvial architecture of compac-
tion, tectonic tilting of the floodplain, and variation of aggrada-
tion rate with distance from channel belts (Fig. 56), and predict-
ing the width and thickness of channel sandstone–conglomer-
ate bodies comprising single or connected channel belts (Fig.
34). Channel-deposit proportion and sandstone-body width
and thickness increase as bankfull channel depth and channel-
belt width increase, and as floodplain width, aggradation rate,
and inter-avulsion period decrease. Channel-deposit propor-
tion and connectedness also increase in locally subsided areas of
floodplain. These models show that the proportion of channel
deposits (net-to-gross) has nothing to do with whether the river
channel is meandering or braided, as suggested in Allen’s early
models. These quantitative 2-D models have been tested against
limited field data (e.g., Leeder et al., 1996; Mack and Leeder,
1998; Peakall, 1998; Törnqvist and Bridge, 2002) and have been
used (and misused) widely to interpret and model alluvial
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 143

plain deposition and erosion associated with tectonism; (2) tribu-

FIG. 55.—Qualitative alluvial architecture models of Allen (1965).
The braided-river model does not show an adjacent flood-
plain, and depiction of braided-river deposits is unrealistic.
The low-sinuosity-river model indicates erroneously that chan-
nels sweep gradually across their entire floodplains.
taries and downstream increases in channel-belt size; (3) wide-
spread erosion (degradation) of channel–floodplain systems; and
(4) diversion of a channel belt into a preexisting channel. How-
ever, model development is under way, and has been greatly
aided by new data from Holocene fluvial and deltaic settings
(reviewed by Bridge 2003). The component models for aggrada-
tion, avulsion, and the development of channel belts following
avulsion have been greatly improved (details in Karssenberg et
al., 2003). New channel belts are formed by channel bifurcation,
and multiple channel belts may develop and coexist. In some
cases, a preexisting channel belt is abandoned in favor of another
one, and an avulsion occurs. Degradation of the channel and
floodplain are treated using a diffusion–advection approach,
such that upstream migration of knickpoints and formation of
incised channels and terraces can be simulated. The effect of
cyclic variation in degradation and aggradation on avulsion and
alluvial architecture can be simulated (allowing a link to se-
quence-stratigraphic models).
Models of sediment deposition that are based on solution of
the fundamental equations of motion of water and sediment are
referred to as sediment routing models. Engineers apply these
models to relatively simple flow and sedimentation problems in
modern rivers and floodplains. Sedimentologists have also used
them to explain phenomena such as downstream fining of bed
A

architecture (references in Bridge, 2003, p. 334). However, 2-D

models are unable to realistically simulate down-valley varia-
tions in the location and orientation of individual channel belts.
This is possible only with 3-D models.
Mackey and Bridge (1995) developed the first 3-D process-
imitating model of alluvial architecture. The floodplain contains
a single active channel belt (Fig. 57). Changes in floodplain
topography are produced by spatial and temporal variation of B
channel-belt and floodplain deposition rates, by compaction, and
by tectonism. The location and timing of avulsions are deter-
mined by local changes in floodplain slope relative to channel-
belt slope and by flood magnitude and frequency (discussed
above). The diverted channel follows the locus of maximum
floodplain slope. Major differences between this model and the 2-
D models are the treatment of avulsion location and period as
dependent variables, and constraints on the location of avulsing
channels by the points of avulsion and topographic highs on the
floodplain. The behavior of the avulsion model was discussed
above. Avulsions occur preferentially where there is a decrease in
channel-belt slope and/or an increase in cross-valley slope that C
may be related to spatial variations in deposition rate and/or
tectonism and/or base-level change. Evolution of alluvial ridges
over time in different parts of the floodplain greatly influences the
timing and location of avulsions. This may result in sedimentary
sequences that increase upwards in channel-deposit proportion
and connectedness, capped with overbank deposits with well-
developed soils. Such sequences may take on the order of 103 to 105
years to form, comparable to cycles attributed to tectonism or
climate change. Predictions of the Mackey–Bridge model agree
with the somewhat limited data from modern rivers, and the
model has been applied to interpreting and predicting the alluvial FIG. 56.—Examples of quantitative 2D alluvial architecture model
architecture of ancient deposits (references in Bridge, 2003, p. 336). of Bridge and Leeder (1979), showing effect on alluvial archi-
The Mackey–Bridge model has many shortcomings, and does tecture of A, B) varying channel-belt width and C) tectonic
not consider: (1) changes in channel pattern and channel-belt tilting. Channel belts are yellow blocks, and lines are flood-
width, formation of floodplain lakes, and channel-belt and flood- plain surfaces at time of avulsion.
144 JOHN S. BRIDGE
FIG. 57.—Quantitative, 3D alluvial-architecture models from Mackey and Bridge (1995) and Karssenberg et al. (2001). Colored objects
are channel belts.
material in rivers and large-scale sorting of placer minerals such
as gold (e.g., Van Niekerk et al., 1992; Vogel et al., 1992; Bennett
and Bridge, 1995b; Robinson and Slingerland, 1998a, 1998b;
Robinson et al., 2001). Koltermann and Gorelick (1992) used a
simple sediment routing model to investigate how the large-scale
patterns of deposition in alluvial fans are related to climatically
controlled changes in water and sediment supply, tectonism, and
base-level change. However, sediment-routing models have not
yet been used to simulate alluvial architecture, but they probably
hold out most hope for rational simulation of fluvial deposition
and erosion.
Prediction of Alluvial Architecture of
Subsurface Deposits: Stochastic Models
The most common approach to predicting the architecture of
subsurface fluvial reservoirs and aquifers (discussed in Bridge
and Tye, 2000; Bridge, 2001) is to: (1) determine the geometry,
proportion, and location of different types of sediment bodies
(e.g., sandstones, shales) from well logs, cores, seismic, or GPR;
(2) interpret the origin of the sediment bodies; (3) use outcrop
analogs to predict more sediment-body characteristics; and (4)
use stochastic (structure-imitating) models to simulate the allu-
vial architecture between wells, and the rock properties with
sediment bodies such as channel-belt sandstones. Stochastic (struc-
ture-imitating) models are either object-based (also known as
discrete or Boolean) or continuous, or both (reviewed by Haldorsen
and Damsleth, 1990; Bryant and Flint, 1993; Srivastava, 1994;
North, 1996; Koltermann and Gorelick, 1996; Dubrule, 1998; and
Deutsch, 2002). A common combined approach is to use object-
based models to simulate the distribution of channel-belt sand-
stone bodies and floodplain shales, and then use continuous
models for simulating “continuous” variables such as porosity
and permeability within the objects.
With object-based models, the geometry and orientation of
specified objects (e.g., channel-belt sandstone bodies or discrete
shales) are determined by Monte Carlo sampling from empirical
distribution functions derived mainly from outcrop analogs.
“Conditioned simulations” begin by placing objects such that
their thickness and position correspond with the available well
data. Then, objects are placed in the space between wells until the
required volumetric proportion is reached. Objects are placed
more or less randomly, although arbitrary overlap and repulsion
rules may be employed to produce “realistic” spatial distribu-
tions of objects (Fig. 58).
Continuous stochastic models have been used mainly to
simulate the spatial distribution of continuous data such as
permeability, porosity, or grain size. With these models, a param-
eter value predicted to occur at any point in space depends on its
value at a neighboring site. The conditional probabilities of
occurrence are commonly based on an empirical semivariogram.
These approaches have been modified to predict the distribution
of discrete facies by using indicator semivariograms and simu-
lated annealing (Fig. 59; e.g., Johnson and Dreiss, 1989; Bierkens
and Weerts, 1994; Deutsch and Cockerham, 1994; Seifert and
Jensen, 1999, 2000). A variant of the indicator semivariogram
approach is transition probability (Markov) models in which the
spatial change from one sediment type (e.g., channel sandstone)
to another (e.g., floodplain mudstone) is based on the probability
of the transition. The probability of spatial transition to a particu-
lar sediment type depends on the existing sediment type, and this
dependence is called a Markov property. The matrix of probabili-
ties of transition from one sediment type to another can be used
to simulate sedimentary sequences in one, two, or three dimen-
sions (Fig. 59; e.g., Tyler et al., 1994; Doveton, 1994; Carle et al.,
1998; Elfeki and Dekking, 2001).
It is commonly difficult to define the input parameters for
stochastic models, especially the semivariograms and transition
probability matrices in lateral directions. The shapes, dimen-
sions, and locations of objects in object-based models are difficult
to define realistically (see the models of Tyler et al., 1994; Deutsch
and Wang, 1996; Holden et al., 1998; Seifert and Jensen, 1999,
2000) (Fig. 59). If definition of the dimensions of objects relies
upon use of outcrop analogs and determination of paleochannel
patterns from subsurface data, there may be serious problems
(Bridge and Tye, 2000). Process-based models and sequence-
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
FIG. 58.—Example of 2-D object-based stochastic modeling of
alluvial architecture (modified from Srivastava, 1994).
stratigraphic models demonstrate that the spatial distribution of
channel-belt sandstones is not random. Unrealistic shapes, di-
mensions, and spatial distributions of sediment types means that
it is difficult to get the model to fit observed data and predict
reservoir or aquifer behavior. Furthermore, because stochastic
models do not simulate processes of deposition, they cannot give
any insight into the origin of the alluvial architecture, and they
have no predictive value outside the data region.
Some reasons why stochastic models are so widely used,
despite all of the associated problems, are: (1) commercial
software is available; (2) simulations can easily be conditioned
using well data, cores, seismic, GPR, and other types of geologi-
145
cal information; (3) detailed understanding of the origin of the
subsurface strata is not necessary in order to use stochastic
models, even though it is desirable; and (4) numerical forward
(process-imitating) models are considered difficult to fit to
subsurface data, and the models and software are not well
developed. Therefore, process-imitating models have had lim-
ited application in quantitative simulation of the architecture of
hydrocarbon reservoirs or aquifers. However, process-imitat-
ing models provide genetic interpretations of deposits and can
predict more realistic sedimentary architecture than structure-
imitating stochastic models. Karssenberg et al. (2001) have
demonstrated that fitting of process-based models to well data
using an essentially trial-and-error approach is possible in
principle. Such an approach involves multiple runs of a process-
based model under different input conditions, and optimiza-
tion of the fitting of output data to observed data. Process-based
models are being developed by Karssenberg et al. (2003), in-
cluding development of software so that models can be fitted to
subsurface data (inversion approach). Another approach is to
use output from process-imitating forward models to provide
input for stochastic models that can be more easily conditioned
with subsurface data.
Process-Based Models of Long-Term,
Large-Scale Erosion in Rivers and Floodplains
Deposition in alluvial valleys is commonly punctuated by
long periods of widespread erosion, resulting in the formation of
incised valleys and river terraces. Long-term, large-scale erosion
in alluvial valleys results from increasing sediment transport rate
in the down-flow direction, such as caused by basin uplift or base-
level fall, or by climatically influenced decrease in upstream
sediment supply. Sediment routing models have not been widely
applied to long-term, large-scale erosion. However, erosion of
fault scarps, valley slopes, and river channels has been modeled
using the diffusion approach (reviewed by Bridge, 2003, p. 339;
Bridge, in press). The diffusion approach can be used to model the
time variation of channel and floodplain erosion arising from an
imposed increase in downstream channel slope. This might occur
as a result of base-level lowering, or local tectonic movements, or
as an avulsing channel flows over the steep edge of an alluvial
ridge. The point in the river profile where the increased slope and
erosion start is called the knickpoint (Fig. 60). As river erosion
proceeds, the knickpoint moves progressively up valley. Incising
channels can still migrate laterally and form floodplains, but
these surfaces would lie beneath and within older, abandoned
floodplains. River terraces are parts of floodplains that have
become elevated above the bankfull level of the active channel as
a result of widespread channel incision. Terrace risers would also
experience erosional retreat associated with mass wasting (creep,
debris flows), overland flow, and gullying. As a wave of channel
incision moves upstream, the downstream parts of the valley
experience channel erosion and degradation of terrace risers for
the greatest period of time. Therefore, the floodplain of the
incising channel should decrease in width in the up-valley direc-
tion (Fig. 60).
Different episodes of degradation and aggradation can result
in a series of terraces of different height and valley fills with a
complicated internal structure (Fig. 61), and the sequence of
degradation and aggradation may be very difficult to discern
from the pattern of river terraces. In order to reconstruct the
timing and location of degradation and aggradation in valley
fills, it is necessary to establish the relative ages of the terrace
surfaces and the deposits beneath them. The relative ages of
terrace surfaces have been estimated using the degree of weath-
146 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 59.—3-D stochastic model simulations. A) Alluvial-fan deposits simulated using a Markov model (Carle et al., 1998). Note the
unrealistic depiction of channel deposits. B) Fluvial deposits simulated using an object model for channel belts and a sequential
indicator simulator for the “background” sheetflood and lacustrine deposits (Seifert and Jensen, 2000). Note the unrealistic
distribution of channel-belt orientations.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 147

A be associated with major earthquakes. Prolonged movement on

alluvial ridge faults or growth of folds over periods of 104 to 105 years could
therefore result in vertical or horizontal motions on the order of
tens to hundreds of meters. Tectonic uplift and subsidence also
knickpoint
vary spatially. For example, the fault zone at the margin of a
floodplain basin comprises many different fault segments that may be
active at different times, and each fault segment has spatially
variable throw along its length. Thus uplift of a mountain belt or
terrace subsidence of a basin comprises the sum of motions along all of
the different active structures. Episodic ground motions of the
order of a meter along a single fault that may be tens of kilome-
incised ters long may locally influence the channel pattern and course
channel belt of a river, but it is unlikely to have a big impact on an entire
deposition
sedimentary basin. However, a succession of movements on
B knickpoint many related faults over, say, 105 years may produce tens to
original bankfull level
hundreds of meters of ground motion affecting basin lengths of
erosion
hundreds of kilometers. Such movements could be responsible
for diversion of major rivers and growth or dissipation of
base-level fall
channel belt alluvial fans (Gawthorpe and Leeder, 2000). If such tectonic
subsequent bankfull level motions were cyclic, they could explain cyclicity in sedimentary
facies over vertical thicknesses of tens to hundreds of meters
and lateral extents of up to hundreds of kilometers.
original floodplain profile

mass wasting channel Evidence of Tectonic Activity in Sedimentary Basins.—

C water erosion erosion

Evidence for tectonic activity in sedimentary basins includes

incised channel belt subsequent floodplain profile variation in: (1) sediment thickness and type in relation to
synsedimentary folds and faults; (2) paleocurrent direction; and
FIG. 60.—Conceptual model for channel-belt incision, knickpoint
and riverbank retreat, and terrace formation resulting from
fall in base level (from Bridge, 2003).

ering of the surface deposits, and using the degree of degradation

of terrace scarps (using diffusion models of scarp retreat). Match-
ing of heights of paired terraces on either side of valleys has also
been used to establish age equivalence. However, terraces may
not be paired on either side of valleys because of the variable age
and elevation of a given abandoned floodplain, or because a once-
present floodplain was later eroded or obscured by colluvium
from valley walls, or because of tectonic deformation of the
terrace. Therefore, it should not be expected that a particular
terrace should have an age and elevation that is constant and
easily distinguishable from others.

Effects of Tectonics on Alluvial Architecture

Tectonic activity controls the rate, amount, and location of
uplift and subsidence, gradient of the land surface, and the
position of rivers and coastlines. Thus, tectonic activity is also
intimately related to climate, vegetation, and eustasy. These
factors in turn control locations, rates, and types of sediment
production, erosion, sediment transport, and deposition. The
effects of tectonic activity on valley slope, channel pattern, and
channel avulsion were discussed above (and reviewed by Schumm
et al., 2000). Thick accumulations of fluvial sediments (sedimen-
tary basins) occur in a variety of different tectonic settings (e.g.,
compressional, extensional, and strike-slip basins), and alluvial
architecture varies with tectonic setting (Miall, 1996).
Tectonic uplift and subsidence can be gradual or episodic
(Schumm et al., 2000). Rates of uplift and subsidence averaged FIG. 61.—Evolution of river terraces and valley fills during falling
over many thousands of years are commonly on the order of and rising base level, based on Gulf of Mexico coastal plain
10-1 mm/year (ranging from 10-2 to 101 mm/year; Leeder, 1999). (from Blum and Price, 1998). Multiple episodes of erosion and
Instantaneous translation on single faults of the order of meters deposition are caused by climate-related variation in supply
typically occurs at intervals of the order of 103 years, and would of water and sediment and in channel avulsion.
148 JOHN S. BRIDGE
(3) sediment provenance. The sediment fills of extensional and
compressional basins are closely related to uplift of adjacent
uplands due to translation along basin-marginal faults, as dis-
cussed below. However, variations in sediment thickness and
type in sedimentary basins can also be related to changes in base
level or climate in the drainage basin, although such changes
may occur over different spatial and temporal scales. For ex-
ample, the increase in sediment supply to rivers resulting from
tectonically induced headward erosion may occur at a much
slower rate than the increase in sediment supply due to increase
in precipitation in the drainage basin. This is because upstream
migration of a wave of river erosion (a knickpoint) is a local
process that does not affect all of the drainage basin simulta-
neously. In contrast, an increase in precipitation may cause an
increase in erosion of the whole drainage basin simultaneously.
Change in mean paleocurrent direction in river deposits may
indicate tectonically induced change in slope direction or river
diversion. However, change in paleocurrent direction can also
be caused by deposition-induced change in slope direction, and
tectonic activity does not always cause river directions to change
dramatically. Change in sediment provenance may be related to
unroofing of new rock types as a result of uplift, or a river
diversion in the hinterland. But erosional exposure of new rock
types does not require tectonic uplift, and river diversions in the
hinterland do not need to result in changed provenance of
sediment supplied to the river. Tectonic activity is also com-
monly associated with volcanic eruptions, and all of the associ-
ated features such as catastrophic floods and mudflows, and the
damming of rivers with debris flows, ash, and lava.
General Models for Tectonic Subsidence,
Fluvial Sediment Supply, and Deposition.—
Paola et al. (1992) developed a theoretical model of large-
scale variations in mean grain size in alluvial basins, as viewed
in a section parallel to direction of sediment transport. Sedi-
ment transport was modeled using a linear diffusion ap-
proach, with the diffusivity of sediment being controlled mainly
by water discharge and channel pattern (braided or single
channel). Grain-size partitioning in the model was based on the
assumption that gravel dominates a deposit until all gravel in
transport is exhausted, at which point deposition of sand be-
gins. They examined the response of an alluvial basin to sinusoi-
dal variation of four extrinsic controlling variables: rate of
sediment supply, diffusivity of sediment, tectonic subsidence
rate, and proportion of gravel in the sediment supply (Fig. 62).
The basin response depends strongly on the time scale over
which variation in the controlling variables occurs. “Slow” and
“rapid” variations are defined as those that vary with periods
that are respectively longer or shorter than a so-called basin
equilibrium time, defined as the square of basin length divided
by sediment diffusivity. Changes in the rates of uplift of up-
lands, erosion, sediment supply, and subsidence are not linked
in this model, as they must be in nature. Despite the simplifica-
tions in this model, Heller and Paola (1992) applied it to three
alluvial basins to help determine whether conglomerate progra-
dation was coincident with tectonic uplift and increase in ero-
sion and sediment supply (i.e., syntectonic) or not (antitectonic).
Paola et al. (1999) and Marr et al. (2000) further developed this
approach.
Slingerland et al. (1994) coupled a simple sediment routing
model with models for tectonic subsidence and uplift, varying
sea level, and variable sediment supply related to climate change,
in order to explore their effects on long profiles of rivers (hence
long-term, large-scale erosion and deposition). These simple
sediment routing models are potentially more realistic than
diffusion-based fluvial models, but they require development
before they are capable of simulating alluvial architecture.
Alluvial Architecture in Compressional Basins.—
Examples of compressional basins containing fluvial depos-
its are the Paleozoic basins of the Catskill clastic wedge, devel-
oped along the western side of the Appalachians in eastern USA
and Canada, the Mesozoic to Tertiary basins on the eastern side
of the Rockies in North America and the Andes in South America,
the Tertiary Siwaliks of the Indo-Gangetic basins on the south
edge of the Himalayas, and the Molasse of the European Alps.
There are various kinds of compressional basins (e.g., foreland,
foredeep, retroarc; Allen and Allen, 1990; Miall, 1996). They are
formed by crustal thickening arising from compression, thrust-
ing, and folding. The area adjacent to the thickened crust (the
basin) subsides because of gravitational loading. An important
aspect of the crustal flexure is a flexural bulge at the periphery
of the basin. If the crust has high flexural rigidity and viscosity,
the basin is relatively shallow and wide; otherwise it is deep and
narrow. Thus, temporal changes in the rheological properties of
the crust result in changes in the shape of the basin.
An episode of thrusting, crustal thickening, and loading
results in uplift and increases in valley slopes, erosion rate, and
sediment supply in the vicinity of the uplift. It also results in
subsidence and deposition in the basin, and growth and migra-
tion of the peripheral bulge towards the basin. Erosion of
uplifted crust and deposition in the foreland basin causes fur-
ther isostatic uplift of the highlands and subsidence in the basin.
The erosional and depositional response to uplift and subsid-
ence depend upon the relative timing, positions, and rates of
these events, and these are very difficult to ascertain. For ex-
ample, the nature of crustal subsidence in response to loading
depends on crustal rheology, specifically whether the crust is
elastic or viscoelastic, and how rheological properties change in
time with temperature and pressure. The response of weather-
ing, erosion, and sediment supply to changes in source-rock
type, elevation, slope, and vegetation are difficult to predict.
The early quantitative models for compressional basins con-
sidered flexural isostatic response to loads created by tectonic
thrusting and sediment deposition, as represented in 2-D sections
parallel to the direction of thrusting (e.g., Beaumont, 1981; Jor-
dan, 1981; Quinlan and Beaumont, 1984; Beaumont et al., 1988).
Erosion and deposition were not modeled explicitly. Erosion and
deposition were modeled explicitly by Flemings and Jordan
(1989) (see also Flemings and Jordan, 1990; Jordan and Flemings,
1990, 1991) using a linear diffusion approach. Paola (2000) com-
pared the stratigraphy predicted by a range of such simple 2-D,
diffusion-based models.
A major step forward in the modeling of deposition at the
river system and basin scale was the treatment of surface pro-
cesses and drainage-basin evolution in 3-D, and linking them to
climate, tectonic activity, and base-level change (Fig. 63; e.g.,
Beaumont et al., 1992; Kooi and Beaumont, 1994, 1996; Johnson
and Beaumont, 1995; Coulthard et al., 2002; Allen and Densmore,
2000; Garcia-Castellanos, 2002; Tucker et al., 2002; Clevis et al.,
2003). These 3-D basin models indicate that the availability of
sediment, related to weathering rate and bedrock erodibility,
exerts a strong control on sediment transport rate and basin
deposition. Changes in sediment transport rate to basins lag
behind episodes of tectonic uplift, because of limits to sediment
availability (weathering and bedrock erodibility) and the time it
takes for sediment to move downslope through the drainage
network. Sediment may be stored temporarily in an orogen
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 149

SLOW VARIATION FAST VARIATION

Sediment flux

sand
gravel

basement

Subsidence

Gravel fraction

Diffusivity

FIG. 62.—Hypothetical variation in distribution of sand and gravel in a sedimentary basin subjected to periodic variation in sediment
flux, subsidence, gravel fraction, and sediment diffusivity (from Paola et al., 1992). Figures on left are for slow variation, and lines
are isochrons drawn at 1-million-year intervals. Figures on right are for fast variation and isochrons are drawn every 10,000 years.

because of the development of intermontane basins related to
local thrusting and folding (e.g., Tucker and Slingerland, 1996).
The lag time may be on the order of 104 to 106 years.
Episodic uplift and subsidence leads to episodic progradation
and retrogradation of fluvial gravels and coastlines, but the
relative timing of these events is equivocal (review in Bridge,
2003). In models that assume an elastic crust, tectonic subsidence
in the basin is an immediate response to thrusting, crustal thick-
ening, and loading. Thus, subsidence rate may exceed sediment
supply and basin deposition rate during crustal loading. Rela-
tively coarse sediment produced as a result of uplift is deposited
close to the source, and marine transgression may occur. Such
basins have been called “underfilled”. Subsequent to uplift (time
lag on the order of 104 to 106 years), the rate of sediment supply
may begin to exceed subsidence rate, and as deposition proceeds
there is progradation of relatively coarse sediment across the
basin, and possibly marine regression. Such basins have been
called “overfilled”. Prograding coarse material is called
“antitectonic” in this case because it is not coincident with the
tectonic uplift. In models that assume viscoelastic crust, sediment
supply and deposition rate may exceed subsidence rate during
thrusting and uplift, such that relatively coarse sediment fills the
basin and progrades basinwards (i.e., “syntectonic”), possibly
resulting in marine regression. Subsequently, subsidence rate
exceeds deposition rate, the coarsest sediment is limited to areas
near the uplift, and marine transgression may occur. The predic-
tions of these models can be changed dramatically by different
assumptions about the response to uplift of erosion and transport
of sediment.
Uplift is likely to be associated with climate change in the
mountain belt and surrounding basins (review in Bridge, 2003, p.
352). Climate changes are strongly linked to basin stratigraphy,
mainly because of the strong link between rainfall, water dis-
charge, bedrock erosion rate, and sediment transport rate in
rivers. Climate also indirectly affects basin stratigraphy through
its effect on vegetation and weathering rate, which influence both
effective precipitation and sediment production. Changes in
sediment transport rate to basins may lag behind changes in
rainfall by on the order of hundreds to thousands of years.
Burbank (1992) suggested that periods of accelerated isostatic
uplift associated with climatically induced increase in erosion
rate should result in deposits that do not vary greatly in thickness
150 JOHN S. BRIDGE

across the basin, because uplift is not associated with downwarp-
ing of the basin. Eustatic sea-level fluctuations add more com-
plexity to basin stratigraphy, especially in near-coastal fluvial
deposits (see below).
The spatial and temporal scales considered in these basin
models preclude consideration of individual channels and flood-
plains, and important controls on alluvial architecture such as
channel-belt avulsion and local tectonics. Therefore, these mod-
els do not predict alluvial architecture. However, it is possible to
link changes in alluvial architecture qualitatively with changes in
subsidence rate, deposition rate, and grain size. High deposition
rate of relatively coarse sediment in basins that are back-tilting
should result in relatively high avulsion frequency close to the
uplands, producing fans with nodal avulsion, as observed in the

FIG. 63.—A) 3-D compressional basin model with surface processes (Johnson and Beaumont, 1995).
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 151

A Q

600 kyr 1200 kyr

Q A

800 kyr 1400 kyr

progradation of the coastline,
connection of the gravels

A Q

1000 kyr 1600 kyr

retreat of the coastline and gravel front,
change to lobate gravel distribution

FIG. 63.—B) 3-D compressional-basin model with surface processes and grain-size sorting (Clevis et al., 2003). Perspective views of
successive stages of landscape subjected to tectonic pulsations. Phases of tectonic activity (A) reflected by retreat of coastline and
gravel front. Quiescent periods (Q) associated with progradation of coastline and gravel front.

Himalayan foreland (e.g., the Kosi fan). Overlapping channel
belts on such fans result in sandstone–conglomerate bodies with
large width/thickness ratios, with channel-deposit proportion
and connectedness increasing towards the mountain belt (Mackey
and Bridge, 1995). Paleoslopes and river courses are approxi-
mately normal to the edge of the mountain belt (Fig. 64). Periods
of relatively low deposition rate of relatively finer sediment
should be associated with relatively low avulsion frequency, and
the possibility of a relative rise in base level may lead to the
highest avulsion frequencies distant from the edge of the moun-
tain belt. In this case, rivers may be flowing parallel or oblique to
the axis of the foreland basin (Fig. 64). Garcia-Castellanos (2002)
discusses the tectonic influences on the orientation of rivers
flowing across foreland basins.
Tectonic uplift occurs at different rates at different times in
different parts of a mountain belt, which may result in diversions
of rivers within mountain belts (e.g., Tucker and Slingerland,
1996; Gupta, 1997). Thus, the supply of sediment and water to
rivers entering the basin, and the positions of the entry points of
rivers, may vary in space as well as time. Variations in water and
sediment supply in different rivers may be congruent or incon-
gruent. Furthermore, changes in climate in different parts of the
mountain belt (especially during glaciations) could also result in
both congruent and incongruent changes in the discharges and
sizes of different rivers flowing from the mountain belt. Figure 64
illustrates diversion of a river by a thrust-related anticline near
the edge of a compressional basin, resulting in reduction in the
supply of water and sediment to a basin-margin fan. The size and
slope of this fan may then become more influenced by tectonic
subsidence than by sediment progradation. The river that re-
ceives the diverted flow experiences an increased discharge of
water and sediment. Its basin-marginal fan would experience an
increase in deposition rate, and the size and slope of the fan would
become dominated by this sediment progradation. According to
the sediment routing model used by Robinson and Slingerland
(1998a, 1998b), downstream fining of river bed material would
not be as effective on the growing fan as it would be on the
shrinking fan. Increase in the discharges and sizes of rivers, and
in deposition rate and avulsion frequency, on the growing fan
would probably result in increasing channel-deposit proportion
and connectedness. Such increases in deposition rate in a cross
section oriented normal to the thrust belt and basin axis may not
be related to a change in uplift rate or subsidence rate in the same
cross section. Thus, although tectonism (with or without climate
change) may occur over a broad region over a long period of time,
the depositional responses may not be the same in different parts
of the basin. This illustrates the desirability of modeling tectonics
and sedimentation in three dimensions rather than two.
152 JOHN S. BRIDGE

section c

section d

section c

section d

a
b

300
300

250
250

200
200
thickness (m)

thickness (m)

150
150

100
100

50
50

c d
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
distance (km) distance (km)
1800

300 1600

1400
250
thickness (m)

1200
time (kyr)

200
1000

800
150

600
100
400

50 200
e f
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
distance (km) distance (km)
Figure 2.11

FIG. 63 (continued).—C) 3-D compressional-basin model with surface processes and grain-size sorting (Clevis et al., 2003). Cross
sections (c, d) showing distribution of gravel during tectonic pulsation (200,000 yr period). Gravel progrades during tectonic
quiescence. Sinusoidal sea-level fluctuation (period 100,000 years, amplitude 20 m) superimposed on tectonic pulsation shown
in Part E.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
FIG. 64.—Hypothetical changes in alluvial-fan size in a foreland (compressional) basin due to hinterland tectonics and river capture
(from Bridge, 2003). Increase in supply of water and sediment to growing fan should result in increased channel size and frequent
avulsion, hence increased channel-deposit proportion.
Compressional basins normally show an increase in deposi-
tion rate and mean grain size with time. If it is assumed that
deposition rate is approximately equal to subsidence rate, this
trend can be interpreted as an increase in subsidence rate as the
thrust front encroaches and/or as the rate of uplift increases.
Inflections in such curves may be related to individual thrusting
events. The only way to test the various basin-filling models that
relate uplift, subsidence, and deposition is to have independent
estimates of the timing and magnitude of uplift and deposition,
which are not normally available. If the thrust front moves
relative to the compressional basin at the same speed as litho-
spheric plates (order of 10 mm/year), and subsidence rate is on
the order of 1 mm/year, then 100 km of crustal convergence
would produce 10 km of sediment thickness in 10 million years.
Shorter-term episodes of tectonic uplift and subsidence in com-
pressional basins possibly range from on the order of a million
years for major regional thrusting episodes to on the order of a
thousand years for meter-scale throws on single faults.
Alluvial Architecture in Extensional Basins.—
Examples of extensional basins are the Triassic–Jurassic rift
basins developed during the opening of the Atlantic Ocean, and
now occupying parts of NW Europe, NE North America, Africa,
and South America. Other well-known extensional basins occur
in the basin-and-range province of the western United States.
Passive continental margins that formed on the Atlantic margins
following the rifting stage have extensive thickness of Cretaceous
and Tertiary deposits, much of which are alluvial and deltaic.
Failed rift basins include the Viking Graben of the North Sea, the
East Shetland Basin, and the Benue Trough.
Extensional basins are caused by lithospheric stretching and
thermal subsidence (reviews in Allen and Allen, 1990; Leeder,
1999). Lithospheric stretching causes brittle fracture and normal
faulting in relatively shallow parts of the lithosphere but thinning
by plastic deformation in deeper parts. Upwelling of hot astheno-
sphere beneath the thinned lithosphere increases the thermal
153
gradient and causes decreasing density and thermal expansion of
the lithosphere. This results in both isostatic and expansional
uplift at the margins of the thinned lithosphere. Sediment is
eroded from these peripheral uplifts (and other local uplifts) and
deposited in the extensional basin. As the lithosphere cools,
density increases and subsidence occurs as a result of isostasy and
thermal contraction. The rate of thermal subsidence decreases as
the square root of time. Loading of sediment deposited in the
basin causes downward flexure of the lithosphere and onlap of
sediment at the basin margins. Because flexural rigidity increases
as the lithosphere cools, the zone of onlap increases in width with
time, and the basin becomes wider and shallower. Thus, lapping
of marine sediments onto fluvial sediments is not necessarily due
to eustatic sea-level rise.
A feature of extensional basins that distinguishes them from
compressional basins is that the overall subsidence rate decreases
with time. If one side of an extensional basin becomes a “passive”
rifted continental margin (e.g., the Atlantic), moves away from
the spreading center for on the order of 100 million years (1000 km
at 10 mm/year), and average subsidence rate is on the order of 0.1
mm per year, kilometers of sediment could accumulate in the
basin. During this time, sea level may be rising eustatically
because of growth of mid-ocean ridges.
Gawthorpe and Leeder (2000) modeled erosion and deposi-
tion in extensional basins in relation to the initiation, growth,
propagation, and death of arrays of normal faults (Fig. 65).
During the fault-initiation stage, rift basins are isolated. Anteced-
ent river courses start to become influenced by the emerging
fault-related topography, and some rivers may be diverted in and
along developing rift basins. Incision of new drainage systems in
the uplifted footwalls leads to the development of small, regu-
larly spaced alluvial fans. The size of the drainage basins and fans
decreases towards the fault tips. The centers of these developing
rift basins may be occupied by eolian sands, ephemeral or peren-
nial lakes, or axial rivers with floodplains (Fig. 65A).
Lateral propagation and joining of fault segments leads to
enlargement and coalescence of rift basins and further develop-
154 JOHN S. BRIDGE

Early footwall catchments develop

Shallow lake in easily eroded lithology
Migration and deposition of
aeolian sands controlled by
in hangingwall
depocenter
A
interplay of regional winds and
local structural topography

B A
Early syn-rift depocenter in
growth syncline, bounded
A by fault tip monocline

B B

Lateral propagation and

interaction between fault segments
leads to along-strike onlap Fault scarp with
A incipient drainage
catchments

Aggradational alluvial fans

sourced from incipient
footwall catchments

Fluvial channel belts

preferentially stacked in
centre of early growth syncline
Fluvial plain/playa
A Antecedent drainage incising
Alluvial fans/fan deltas into uplifting footwalls

B Drainage diverted around

Aeolian
propagating fault tips
Lake Pre-rift regional palaeoslope

River channel incision and

terrace formation (high
runoff/low sediment supply) B

Large catchment
at segment boundary B

B
Axial delta sourced Fans incised during
from segment boundary pluvial lake highstand
and axial catchments (high runoff/low
sediment supply)
Shallow highstand
pluvial lake Fault zone with
Aggradational high run off/low
Deep highstand footwall-sourced sediment supply
pluvial lake with fan deltas
basinal turbidites

Fault zone with

Fluvial plain/playa
high run off/high
sediment supply A Antecedent drainage incising
Alluvial fans/fan deltas into uplifting footwalls

Lake Lake deposits B Diversion of antecedent river

through segment boundary
Rift initiation stratigraphy Lake shoreline terraces Abandonded river course

FIG. 65.—Model of alluvial architecture in evolving extensional basins (from Gawthorpe and Leeder, 2000). A) Initiation stage. B)
Interaction and linkage stage.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 155

Large fan 'force' axial river

away from footwall
Increased displacement rate
and low sediment supply lead
to lake development C

A A
B
Alluvial fan toe cut
by axial channel

B
A

B
Tilting and subsidence
Axial progradation of
promotes vertical stacking
fluvio-deltaic system
of axial channel belts adjacent
promoted by development
to footwall fans
of major axial drainage

Tilting and subsidence

of lake bed promotes
vertical stacking of axial
turbidite lobes at base of
Fluvial plain/playa footwall scarp

Alluvial fans/fan deltas A Reversed drainage due to

uplifting footwalls
Lake Lake deposits B Large catchments and fans mark
Rift initiation and interaction breached segment boundaries
stratigraphy Abandoned meander belt

Older footwall-derived fans become

incised as they are uplifted in
footwall of new fault

Main border fault dies and

new fault propagates into
Axial river forced across hangingwall
to hangingwall side of basin
by new footwall fans

Fluvial plain/playa

Alluvial fans/fan deltas

Lake Lake deposits

Rift initiation, interaction and
through-going fault zone
stratigraphy

FIG. 65 (continued).—Model of alluvial architecture in evolving extensional basins (from Gawthorpe and Leeder, 2000).
C) Throughgoing fault stage. D) “Fault death” stage.
156 JOHN S. BRIDGE
ment of drainage systems (Fig. 65B). The largest fans are associ-
ated with the larger antecedent rivers and with areas distant from
fault tips. Lakes are present in the areas of maximum subsidence,
distant from fault tips. Figure 65B illustrates the effects of climate
change superimposed on tectonic activity. Increases in precipita-
tion and runoff combined with low sediment supply lead to
incision of drainage basins, floodplains, and fans, and deposition
downstream, possibly in expanded lakes. Such incision does not
occur if increase in precipitation is accompanied by increase in
sediment supply. Major changes in climate affecting catchments
tend to be reflected relatively rapidly (order of thousands of
years) in downstream alluvial deposition. Episodic uplift of
footwalls causes a wave of incision to move up the catchment,
providing increased sediment supply to alluvial fans. However,
it may take tens of thousands of years for this to be reflected in
increased fan growth, if at all (Allen and Densmore, 2000). Inci-
sion of fan channels and local growth of fans can also be associ-
ated with more or less random increases in sediment supply and
river avulsions. Episodes of fan progradation into the basin result
in upward-coarsening sequences on the order of tens of meters
thick, whereas fan recession results in fining-upward sequences.
Continued linkage of adjacent fault segments results in defi-
nition of elongate half-graben basins (Fig. 65C), allowing devel-
opment of major axial rivers and floodplains bounded by basin-
edge fans. Axial channel belts tend to move towards the
downthrown side of the basin, resulting in relatively thick chan-
nel deposits with high channel-deposit proportion and connect-
edness interbedded with alluvial-fan deposits. Up-tilted sides are
likely to have low channel-deposit proportion and connected-
ness, and well-developed soils. Active tectonism ensures fre-
quent avulsions and episodes of high erosion and deposition rate.
Deposition in the basin may also be affected by periodic dam-
ming of rivers by earthquake-induced landslides or volcanic
eruptions (Alexander et al., 1994).
The “fault death” stage (Fig. 65D) is associated with relatively
low deposition rates and increasing basin areas, and possibly
marine transgression. Figure 65D shows progradation of axial
rivers into a lake or the sea, and relatively low deposition rate of
axial rivers and floodplains that are being shifted away from the
footwall by deposits of reworked fans. Low channel-deposit
proportion and connectedness are expected from low avulsion
frequency and larger floodplain widths, but high values are
expected if deposition rate is very low, allowing extensive re-
working of the deposits. High avulsion frequency is expected in
local areas affected by sea-level rise.
Effect of Climate Change on Alluvial Architecture
Evidence for Paleoclimatic Conditions in Fluvial Deposits.—
Reviews of paleoclimatic indicators in fluvial deposits are
given by Miall (1996) and Blum and Törnqvist (2000). Today,
rivers of varying size and channel pattern occur in all climatic
zones. The suggestion that vegetation (hence climate, or stage in
geological history) has an important influence on channel pat-
terns (i.e., dense vegetation causes low discharge variability,
enhances bank cohesion, and promotes the occurrence of single-
channel sinuous rivers) was dismissed previously. Nevertheless,
regional changes through time in channel dimensions and pat-
tern (arising from changes in water and sediment supply during
floods) may be related to climatic changes. There are many
examples of a change from large, braided rivers to progressively
smaller meandering rivers associated with the change from gla-
cial to interglacial conditions in the Quaternary (reviewed in
Blum and Törnqvist, 2000).
Seasonal variability of discharge may have an influence on
some aspects of channel deposition. In high-latitude and/or
high-altitude rivers, there is commonly a pronounced low-flow
(or frozen) period, and a relatively short spring-to-summer flood
period comprising a number of flood peaks. Furthermore, there
may be marked diurnal variations in flow resulting from daytime
thawing of ice but night-time freezing. Rivers in seasonal temper-
ate and tropical climates may also have relatively long low-flow
periods and single-peak or multi-peak flood periods in the spring
and summer. Seasonal variation in discharge is likely to be
reflected in variation in grain size and sedimentary structures.
However, it is unlikely that there would be discernible differ-
ences in the deposits of rivers in these different climates, insofar
as they all have low-flow periods and multi-peak flood periods
when bankfull level would be approached. However, diurnal
variations in flow in cold climates might be discernible in the
character of the stratification (Smith, 1974). The level of base flow
in perennial rivers can be recognized using features of subaerial
exposure, such as desiccation cracks, footprints, and plant roots.
In fact, ephemeral rivers (defined as having a completely dry
course for some of the time) in dry climates can be recognized by
observing features of subaerial exposure at the bottom of the
channel. Many published sedimentological criteria (e.g., North
and Taylor, 1996) for the recognition of ephemeral channels (e.g.,
predominance of planar-laminated and low-angle cross-strati-
fied sandstone, a lack of well-defined channels or channels with
high width/depth ratios, downstream decrease in channel size)
are invalid because they are not distinctive. When assessing the
paleoclimatic significance of ephemeral river channels, it is im-
portant to make sure that such channels are not overbank chan-
nels, which are expected to be ephemeral in any climate. Further-
more, although a reduction in channel size in a downstream
direction could be due to loss of discharge as the river flowed
across an arid land, it could also be due to a distributive channel
system.
Deposits of sediment gravity flows are commonly taken as
being characteristic of ephemeral rivers in arid climates. Actu-
ally, the only prerequisite for a sediment gravity flow is an
appropriate sediment supply, water, and a relatively large
slope. Sediment gravity flows occur on the steep slopes of
alluvial fans in both arid and wet climates. Furthermore, sedi-
ment gravity flows commonly occur down the cut banks of
channels, and can be preserved if the channel is being aban-
doned and filled.
Some types of floodplain soil are indicative of paleoclimate in
the depositional area (see above), but soil features are controlled
by parent materials, stage of formation, deposition rate, and
ground-water level, as well as by climate and vegetation. The
stage in development of paleosols has been related indirectly to
climate, by associating well-developed paleosols with climati-
cally controlled periods of low deposition rate or erosion. The
composition of clay minerals is commonly related to degree of
chemical weathering, hence climate and vegetation. For example,
kaolinite and gibbsite are related to the deep weathering in
humid low latitudes. However, the composition of clays depends
on parent materials and weathering during their journey from
their site of origin to their site of burial. Therefore, there are likely
to be many uncertainties in the paleoclimatic meaning of clay
minerals.
Coal in floodplain environments is not a climate indicator but
is an indicator of non-saline wetlands where precipitation ex-
ceeds evaporation (McCabe, 1984; McCabe and Parrish, 1992).
Lacustrine deposits interbedded with overbank deposits may
yield information about climate and changes in climate. For
example, evaporite minerals indicate saline lakes in arid climates,
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
and climatically induced changes in lake level may be reflected in
changes in the relative abundance of evaporites and of terrig-
enous mud and sand. Eolian deposits on floodplains indicate
wind action upon unvegetated sediment surfaces. Although such
deposits may merely reflect wind acting on freshly deposited
flood sediments, an association with evaporites may indicate
more prolonged aridity. Fossil plants and animals may suggest
paleoclimate, especially by comparison with the habitats of com-
parable extant species.
Glacial deposits such as till and ice-contact stratified drift that
are interbedded with fluvial deposits are a clear indication of
paleoclimate. However, continental glaciations also bring changes
to rivers and floodplains where there is no evidence of deposition
directly from or next to the ice. These changes associated with
glacial and interglacial periods are discussed below.
Regional paleogeographic reconstructions can lead to delin-
eation of the areal extent and relative locations of mountain
ranges, lowlands, and oceans. The elevations of mountains can be
estimated from some types of tectonic model (e.g., Beaumont et
al., 1988). Paleoslopes and paleodischarges of rivers can be esti-
mated from sedimentary data. Latitudes can be reconstructed
from paleomagnetic data, and paleoclimate can be estimated
using sedimentological and paleontological data. Wind circula-
tion patterns may be deduced from eolian deposits. As a result of
this, rain-shadow effects can be estimated, as can the likelihood of
monsoonal climates. Global climate models have been applied to
paleogeographies of the past in order to predict paleoclimate and
to assess the paleoclimatic evidence that comes from the rocks
themselves. For example, global climate models have been used
to analyze the onset of the Asian Monsoon in response to the
collision of the Indian subcontinent with Asia, and the uplift of
the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau. Such models also attempt
to explain the onset of global cooling in the Tertiary, and the
advent of continental glaciation.
Climate Change.—
Long-term climate change has been related to changes in
solar output, planetary orbital geometries, geographic distri-
bution of continents, oceanic circulation patterns, atmospheric
composition, or any combination of these. The last 600 Ma of
Earth’s history has featured 108 year swings from “icehouse”
climates (latest Precambrian, Late Ordovician–Early Silurian,
Permo-Carboniferous, and Late Neogene–Holocene) to “green-
house” climates. Icehouse-to-greenhouse swings are coinci-
dent with long-term sea-level changes, changes in the miner-
alogy of oceanic carbonates (“aragonite seas” vs. “calcite seas”;
Sandberg, 1983), changes in evaporate mineralogy (Hardie,
1996), and changes in the chemistry of sea water (Lowenstein
et al., 2001).
Modeling and proxy data for pCO2 have suggested that most
(but not all) icehouse-to-greenhouse fluctuations were mirrored
by variations in the carbon dioxide content of the Earth’s atmo-
sphere (Crowley and Berner, 2001; but see Boucot and Gray, 2001,
and Veizer et al., 2000, for dissenting views). A long-term carbon
cycle controls the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere.
Berner (1991, 1994) and Berner and Kothavala (2001) modeled
this carbon cycle as controlled by factors such as the degassing of
carbon dioxide from the mantle, recycling of subducted organic
and inorganic carbon at magmatic arcs, burial of carbon as
organic carbon and as carbonates, and consumption of atmo-
spheric carbon dioxide by carbonate and silicate weathering.
Silicate and carbonate weathering are apparently controlled partly
by land vegetation. Coincident with the notable climatic swing at
the end of the Paleozoic was the development and spread of land
157
plants and their root systems (Driese and Mora, 2001; Algeo et al.,
2001). Larger and deeper roots led to thicker and better-devel-
oped paleosols after the Devonian, and the appearance of specific
types of paleosols such as Histosols, Alfisols, Ultisols, and
Spodosols. Increase in the rate of weathering due to the spread of
land plants, and enhanced preservation of buried organic matter
because of its resistance to microbes, are thought to have led to a
major drop in atmospheric CO2 from the Devonian to the early
Carboniferous, resulting in global cooling (Berner, 2001; Algeo et
al., 2001; Driese and Mora, 2001). Similarly, Berner’s model
suggests that spread of angiosperms after the Cretaceous may
have at least partly influenced the global cooling of the Later
Tertiary.
Cyclicity in climate is related to variations in the Earth’s orbit
around the Sun and in the Earth’s own rotation, resulting in cyclic
changes in solar radiation. Such Milankovitch cycles have dis-
crete periods (on the order of 104 to 105 years) and amplitudes that
interact in a complex way. These cycles had a major influence on
the volume of continental ice (hence sea level) during the Pleis-
tocene. There has been a high-amplitude 100,000-year period to
glacial–interglacial cycles during the middle to late Pleistocene,
but lower-amplitude, 40,000-year cycles dominated prior to that.
Evidence for these climatic cycles is found in studies of deposi-
tional sequences, oxygen isotopes of marine microfossils, and
comparative studies of pollen, spores, and marine microfossils.
More recent work on ice cores and marine microfossils indicates
the existence of cycles of abrupt warming followed by longer-
term cooling over thousands to tens of thousands of years. These
global climatic cycles are apparently related to interactions be-
tween the atmosphere, ice masses, and thermohaline circulation
of the oceans (Blum and Törnqvist, 2000). Regional climate changes
are more complex than global changes, because of the way that
changes in the global atmospheric circulation are manifested in
different regions with differing proportions and elevations of
land. Some short-period (decades and less) fluctuations in re-
gional climate are related to sunspot cycles or ocean–atmosphere
interactions such as El Niño.
The effects of Quaternary climate change on rivers and their
deposits have been studied widely (compilations in Gregory,
1983; Gregory et al., 1995; Knox, 1983, 1996; Bull, 1991; Benito et
al., 1999; Blum and Törnqvist, 2000). Some of the changes in
rivers and their deposits that are expected over glacial–intergla-
cial cycles are summarized below and in Table 3. This summary
is based on much data, but especially data from the Mississippi
valley and delta plain, the Gulf of Mexico coastal plain, and the
Rhine–Meuse delta. Glacial and early deglacial periods are
associated with ice-related crustal loading and drainage diver-
sions in upland areas, increases in flood discharge, mean grain
size, and rate of sediment supply, and low sea level. This results
in progradation from uplands of relatively coarse sediment and
steepening of valley slopes, increases in channel-belt size, and
changes in channel pattern. High avulsion frequency and high
ratios of channel-belt width to floodplain width in up-valley
regions should result in increased channel-deposit proportion
and connectedness. Falling sea level causes incision or deposi-
tion in coastal areas (and changing channel patterns) depending
on factors such as the slope of the exposed surface, rate of sea-
level fall, and up-valley avulsions. Channel-deposit proportion
and connectedness in coastal areas are increased by larger
channel-belt size and decreased deposition rate but are de-
creased by low avulsion frequency and high floodplain width.
Interglacial periods are associated with isostatic uplift and
revegetation of uplands, reduction in flood discharge, grain
size, and rate of sediment supply, and rising sea level. This
results in erosion and terrace formation in up-valley regions.
158 JOHN S. BRIDGE

TABLE 3.—Responses of Mississippi Valley and delta plain to glacial–interglacial cycles

(following Autin et al., 1991; Saucier, 1994).

Parameter Uplands Alluvial valley Coastal plain

Deglaciation-interglacial (Holocene)

Tectonism Isostatic uplift Subsidence increasing towards coast

Sea level Rising:
Transgression
Water supply Decreasing Decreasing
Sediment supply Decreasing Decreasing
Mean sediment size Intermediate Fine
Channel-belt width and depth High Low
Channel pattern Meandering Low sinuosity
Floodplain width Low Very high
Floodplain slope Intermediate Low
Deposition/erosion rate Erosion Terrace formation upvalley
Deposition rate increasing to
coast
Avulsion frequency Intermediate High
Channel-deposit proportion High Low

Glacial maximum-deglaciation (Pleistocene)

Tectonism Crustal loading Subsidence decreasing towards coast
Sea level Low to rising
Water supply High High
Sediment supply High High
Mean sediment size High Intermediate
Channel-belt width and depth High High
Channel pattern Braided Braided-meandering
Floodplain width High Low
Floodplain slope High Intermediate
Deposition/erosion rate Erosion Max. deposition to minor Valley incision to
erosion deposition
Avulsion frequency High, decreasing Low, increasing
Channel-deposit proportion High High, decreasing

Reduced deposition rates, avulsion rates, and channel sizes in
mid-valley regions lead to decreased channel-deposit propor-
tion and connectedness. Rising sea level leads to increased
deposition rate and avulsion frequency in coastal areas, as well
as increasing channel-deposit proportion and connectedness.
However, up-valley shift in avulsion points and abandonment
of delta lobes leads to high overbank deposition rates and small
channel belts in coastal areas, decreasing channel-deposit pro-
portion and connectedness.
These predictions are complicated by local changes in sedi-
ment supply, deposition rate, channel pattern, and avulsion
frequency associated with local tectonism or climate change, not
necessarily congruent with regional changes. Indeed, Blum and
Törnqvist (2000) describe examples of allostratigraphic units
within valley fills that record widespread episodes of river inci-
sion and aggradation that are interpreted as due to a combination
of interglacial–glacial cycles and shorter-term climate changes.
Each allostratigraphic unit has an erosional base, is on the order
of meters to tens of meters thick, extends across valley for kilome-
ters to tens of kilometers, and is capped by a well-developed
paleosol (e.g., Fig. 62). Finally, predictions for present-day tem-
perate regions cannot necessarily be expected to apply to regions
with different climate and vegetation, because changes in water
and sediment supply may be different.
Many fluvial depositional sequences from meters to tens of
meters thick (representing 104 to 105 years) in rocks older than
the Pleistocene have been interpreted in terms of Milankovitch
glacio-eustasy (e.g., Olsen, 1990, 1994; Van Tassell, 1994; Read,
1994). Also, 100-m-thick, 1 to 10 million-year cycles have been
interpreted as due to the growth and decay of continental ice.
There are many potential problems with such interpretations. It
is not possible to establish the period of these older depositional
sequences accurately if they are less than 105 years (because of
dating limitations); therefore, it is not possible to establish the
age equivalence of depositional sequences with periods less
than 105 years in different parts of the world. The links between
solar radiation, climate, sediment production, river and sedi-
ment discharges, and sea level are tenuous and poorly known in
the absence of major continental ice sheets. Milankovitch-cycle
periods are similar to those associated with other mechanisms
(e.g., tectonism) that can produce sedimentary cycles (Steel et
al., 1977; Algeo and Wilkinson, 1988; Fraser and DeCelles, 1992).
However, some workers have appealed to the 5-to-1 ratio of the
periods of the different Milankovitch cycles (e.g., 20,000 year
and 100,000 year cycles) to justify orbital forcing of sedimentary
cycles.
Koltermann and Gorelick (1992) explained changes in allu-
vial-fan deposits due to climate change using a simple sediment
routing model. Floods were generated using a stochastic simu-
lator, and variations in water discharge and sediment transport
during large floods were linked to Quaternary paleoclimate
change. The effects of a basin-bounding fault, compaction, and
base-level change were also considered in this model. Periods of
high deposition rate of relatively coarse sediment (fan progra-
dation) were associated with the periods of wet, cool climate
when flood discharge of water and sediment were high. Fine
sediment was deposited during warmer, drier climate.
Transcurrent movement on the basin-margin fault caused the
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
fan to move horizontally relative to the feeder stream, such that
successive progradations of the fan were offset relative to each
other, producing a 100-m-thick sequence where the thickness of
successive fan deposits either increased or decreased upwards.
Effect of Relative Base-Level Change on Alluvial Architecture
Eustatic sea-level changes depend greatly upon tectonics and
climate, and are due to: (1) changes in the amount of continental
ice (sea-level changes of more than 100 m over time scales of 104
to 106 years); (2) changes in the volume of ocean basins, occurring
over periods of 10 to 100 million years; and (3) changes in the
amount of water on the surface of the Earth due to outgassing from
the interior of the Earth throughout geological time. Relative sea-
level changes depend also on local tectonism and deposition. In
most cases, the effects of relative and eustatic sea-level changes are
combined; therefore, it is generally difficult to recognize a particu-
lar eustatic sea-level change in deposits worldwide, even if the
deposits could be dated accurately enough. Exceptions are where
major eustatic sea-level changes occur over long periods of time.
The Exxon research group (e.g., Vail et al., 1977) developed a
methodology and terminology for describing and analyzing
relatively large-scale depositional sequences with periods rang-
ing from 105 to 107 years. Because these sequences were initially
described from seismic records this methodology was referred to
as seismic stratigraphy. Subsequently, this approach was also
applied to rock outcrops, cores, and well logs, and became known
as sequence stratigraphy. The jargon associated with sequence
stratigraphy is now pervasive, to such an extent that the word
“sequence” has developed a special connotation. The Exxon
group interpreted sequences and associated bounding surfaces
as due to eustatic sea-level changes. These interpretations have
been criticized by many individuals (notably Miall, 1986, 1991,
1996) on the grounds that: (1) the method for determining relative
sea-level change from seismic records and from cores is flawed;
(2) other interpretations of the sequences are not considered; and
(3) the data used to correlate the sequences and interpreted sea-
level changes worldwide are not generally available.
There are now many different (sequence stratigraphic) mod-
els for the effects of relative sea-level change on deposition rate
and alluvial architecture (reviewed in Bridge, 2003). Most of them
are qualitative and only 2-D, and do not adequately represent all
of the controls on alluvial deposition. Miall (1991, 1996) has
criticized some of the earlier models of the effects of sea-level
change on near-coastal alluvial deposition. His main point is that
a relative fall in sea level is not normally associated with alluvial
aggradation, except for the newly exposed part of the sea bed, and
even then only under special circumstances. Whether or not a
river valley is incised or aggraded during sea-level fall depends,
among other things, on the slope of the exposed shelf relative to
that of the river valley. In general, effects of sea-level change are
expected to decrease up-valley and be negligible beyond ap-
proximately 300 km from the shoreline in a large river like the
Mississippi.
The effect of eustatic sea-level change on fluvial processes
near shorelines depends on co-variation in tectonic subsidence or
uplift, and deposition or erosion. However, certain generaliza-
tions can be made about the nature of near-coastal alluvial
deposition associated with eustatic sea-level changes that domi-
nate over changes in tectonic uplift or subsidence and deposition
or erosion. During eustatic sea-level rise (marine transgression),
slopes of rivers and floodplains are reduced near shore because
of backwater effects, and the width of valleys increases because of
drowning. These changes result in reduced grain size of trans-
ported sediment, deposition, change in channel pattern, and
159
increased frequency of avulsion. Increases in avulsion frequency
increase channel-deposit proportion and connectedness, but in-
creases in deposition rate and width of flood plains decrease
them. During falling sea level (marine regression), the exposed
land surface may experience erosion or deposition depending on
the slope of the exposed surfaces (Schumm, 1993; Wescott, 1993;
Wood et al., 1993). Erosion occurs on relatively steep slopes given
enough time and flow competence. However, erosion of channels
and floodplains is a long-term process, and the short-term re-
sponse may be to increase sinuosity of rivers. Also, upstream
avulsion may cause channel abandonment before incision is
complete (Leeder and Stewart, 1996). Incision of channels and
floodplains is associated with terrace formation, reduction of
valley width, and up-valley migration of knickpoints. Avulsion
frequency is expected to be low in areas of erosion. Channel-
deposit proportion and connectedness may increase during sea-
level fall because of reduced deposition rate or erosion and
reduced floodplain width, but may decrease as a result of re-
duced avulsion frequency.
Most alluvial sequence-stratigraphy models have an ero-
sional base to the sequence (a so-called Type 1 unconformity)
due to valley incision arising from relative fall in base level (Fig.
66; Shanley and McCabe, 1993, 1994; Wright and Marriott, 1993;
Gibling and Bird, 1994; Miall, 1996). The erosional base in these
models is overlain by superimposed channel-belt deposits, which
supposedly accumulated under conditions of low deposition
rate and restricted floodplain width (due to valley incision).
Such deposits comprise the so-called “lowstand systems tract”.
Many workers assume that zones of high channel-deposit pro-
portion in alluvial deposits represent the basal parts of “se-
quences”, and that the basal erosion surface of the lowest
sandstone body represents an incised valley (e.g., Aitken and
Flint, 1995; Flint et al., 1995; Hampson et al., 1997; Hampson et
al., 1999; Davies et al., 1999). In many cases, evidence for an
incised valley is lacking. Criteria for incised valleys include
(Dalrymple et al., 1994): (1) erosional relief that is greater than
the thickness of a single channel fill; (2) multiple, vertically
stacked channel bars within the valley; (3) evidence for ex-
tended periods of nondeposition (mature paleosols) on inter-
fluves; and (4) alluvial channel deposits resting erosionally
upon shallow marine sands and muds. Commonly, a large
amount of erosional relief on the base of a single channel deposit
can be misinterpreted as an incised-valley margin (Salter, 1993;
Best and Ashworth, 1997). Thick and laterally extensive amal-
gamated channel deposits are commonly important oil and gas
reservoirs. Therefore, such deposits should be interpreted accu-
rately when predicting their thickness, lateral extent, and bound-
ing facies. If zones of high channel-deposit proportion are
incorrectly interpreted as incised-valley fills, their extent nor-
mal to the valley direction will be underestimated, and their
extent parallel to the valley will be overestimated.
Fluvial deposition may be occurring up-valley while incision
is occurring near the coast because of falling sea level (Blum and
Price, 1998; Blum and Törnqvist, 2000; Törnqvist et al., 2000; Van
Heijst and Postma, 2001), so that the basal erosion surface of the
sequence will not be coeval or correlatable inland. An ancient
example of a lowstand valley fill of this kind is given by Willis
(1997), who explained it in terms of low rate of sea-level change
relative to fluvial sediment supply. Interestingly, major erosional
surfaces may be associated with climate-related fluvial incision
or estuarine channels during rising sea level.
According to the sequence-stratigraphy models, the depos-
its above the lowstand systems tract were deposited under
conditions of relatively high deposition rate on a broad alluvial
plain, in response to rising relative base level (the so-called
160 JOHN S. BRIDGE

FIG. 66.—2-D, qualitative, fluvial sequence-stratigraphy models according to Shanley and McCabe (1993) (left) and Wright and
Marriott (1993) (right). HST = highstand sequence tract, TST = transgressive sequence tract, LST = lowstand sequence tract.

“transgressive systems tract”). The channel-deposit proportion
and connectedness are relatively low as a result. The association
of relatively high proportion of overbank mud with rising sea
level and marine transgression was recognized early on by
McCave (1968, 1969). Törnqvist (1993, 1994) associated high
avulsion frequency and anastomosing rivers with periods of
rapid base-level rise and deposition. According to Gibling and
Bird (1994) and Heckel et al. (1998), extensive coals occur just
below the “maximum flooding surface”, when sea level is near
its highstand. However, others predict coal development imme-
diately above the incised valley fill, associated with the “initial
flooding surface” (Aitken and Flint, 1995; Flint et al., 1995;
Hampson et al., 1997, 1999; Davies et al., 1999). Paleosols in the
“transgressive systems tract” are likely to reflect high ground-
water table (Wright and Marriott, 1993). Deposits associated
with the maximum flooding surface may contain evidence of
marine influence. The “highstand systems tract” is also associ-
ated with relatively low channel-deposit proportion, according
to Shanley and McCabe (1993). However, Wright and Marriott
(1993) predict an increase in channel-deposit proportion here,
and an increase in soil maturity, both related to reduced depo-
sition rate. Retallack (2001) also predicts increasing soil matu-
rity as sea level rises.
The alluvial sequence-stratigraphic models discussed above
all include a basal incised-valley fill related to sea-level fall, and
predict variations in channel-deposit proportion and connect-
edness as a function of deposition rate and floodplain width.
However, it is known that sea-level fall is not always accompa-
nied by valley incision, and the nature of erosion and deposition
in alluvial systems is controlled also by climate and tectonism.
Furthermore, channel-deposit proportion and connectedness
are controlled also by factors such as avulsion frequency and
channel-belt size. Therefore, it is unlikely that extant 2-D allu-
vial sequence-stratigraphy models are generally applicable. A
quantitative, 3-D fluvial sequence-stratigraphy model is long
overdue.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Comments on the manuscript by Jim Best, Mike Blum, and
Rudy Slingerland are greatly appreciated.
REFERENCES
AITKEN, J.F., AND FLINT, S.S., 1995, The application of high-resolution
sequence stratigraphy to fluvial systems: a case study from the Upper
Carboniferous Breathitt Group, eastern Kentucky, USA: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 42, p. 3–30.
AITKEN, M.J., 1998, An Introduction to Optical Dating: Oxford, U.K.,
Oxford University Press, 267 p.
ALEXANDER, J., BRIDGE, J.S., CHEEL, R.J., AND LECLAIR, S.F., 2001, Bed forms
and associated sedimentary structures formed under supercritical
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
water flows over aggrading sand beds: Sedimentology, v. 48,
p.133–152.
ALEXANDER, J., BRIDGE, J.S., LEEDER, M.R., COLLIER, R.E.LL., AND GAWTHORPE,
R.L., 1994, Holocene meander belt evolution in an active extensional
basin, southwestern Montana: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v.
B64, p. 542–559.
ALEXANDER, J., AND LEEDER, M.R., 1987, Active tectonic control on alluvial
architecture, in Ethridge, F.G., Flores, R.M., and Harvey, M.D., eds.,
Recent Developments in Fluvial Sedimentology: SEPM, Special Pub-
lication 39, p. 243–252.
ALEXANDER, J., AND LEEDER, M.R., 1990, Geomorphology and surface tilting
in an active extensional basin, SW Montana, USA: Geological Society
of London, Journal, v. 147, p. 461–467.
ALGEO, T.J., SCHECKLER, S.E., AND MAYNARD, J.B., 2001, Effects of the Middle
to Late Devonian spread of vascular plants on weathering regimes,
marine biotas, and global climate, in Gensel, P.G., and Edwards, D.,
eds., Plants Invade the Land: New York, Columbia University Press,
p. 213–236.
ALGEO, T.J., AND WILKINSON, B.H., 1988, Periodicity of mesoscale Phanero-
zoic sedimentary cycles and the role of Milankovitch orbital modula-
tion: Journal of Geology, v. 96, p. 313–322.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1965, A review of the origin and characteristics of recent
alluvial sediments: Sedimentology, v. 5, p. 89–191.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1966, On bedforms and palaeocurrents: Sedimentology, v.
6, p. 153–190.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1970, Physical Processes of Sedimentation: London, George
Allen & Unwin, 248 p.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1974, Studies in fluviatile sedimentation: implications of
pedogenic carbonate units, Lower Old Red Sandstone, Anglo-Welsh
outcrop: Geological Journal, v. 9, p. 181–208.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1978, Studies in fluviatile sedimentation: an exploratory
quantitative model for architecture of avulsion-controlled alluvial
suites: Sedimentary Geology, v. 21, p. 129–147.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1979, Studies in fluviatile sedimentation: an elementary
geometrical model for the connectedness of avulsion-related channel
sand bodies: Sedimentary Geology, v. 24, p. 253–267.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1982, Sedimentary Structures; Their Character and Physical
Basis, Volume I: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science Publishers, Develop-
ments in Sedimentology 30, 593 p.
ALLEN, P.A., AND ALLEN, J.R., 1990, Basin Analysis: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell,
451 p.
ALLEN, P.A., AND DENSMORE, A.L., 2000, Sediment flux from an uplifting
fault block: Basin Research, v. 12, p. 367–380.
ANDERSON, M.P., 1997, Characterization of geological heterogeneity, in
Dagan, G., and Neuman, S.P., eds., Subsurface Flow and Transport; A
Stochastic Approach: Cambridge, U.K., Cambridge University Press,
p. 23–43.
ASHMORE, P.E., 1982, Laboratory modeling of gravel braided stream
morphology: Earth Surface Processes, v. 7, p. 201–225.
ASHMORE, P.E., 1988, Bed load transport in braided gravel-bed stream
models: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 13, p. 677–695.
ASHMORE, P.E., 1991, How do gravel-bar rivers braid?: Canadian Journal
of Earth Sciences, v. 28, p. 326–341.
ASHMORE, P., 1993, Anabranch confluence kinetics and sedimentation
processes in gravel-braided streams, in Best, J.L., and Bristow, C.S.,
eds., Braided Rivers: Geological Society of London, Special Publica-
tion 75, p. 129–146.
ASHMORE, P.E., AND CHURCH, M., 1998, Sediment transport and river
morphology: a paradigm for study, in Klingeman, P.C., Beschta, R.L.,
Komar, P.D., and Bradley, J.B., eds., Gravel-Bed Rivers in the Environ-
ment: Highlands Ranch, Colorado, Water Resources Publications, p.
115–148.
ASHWORTH, P.J., 1996, Mid-channel bar growth and its relationship to local
flow strength and direction: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms,
v. 21, p. 103–123.
161
ASHWORTH, P.J., BEST, J.L., AND JONES, M., 2004, Relationship between
sediment supply and avulsion frequency in braided rivers: Geology,
v. 32, p. 21–24.
ASHWORTH, P.J., BEST, J.L., PEAKALL, J., AND LORSONG, J.A., 1999, The influ-
ence of aggradation rate on braided alluvial architecture: field study
and physical-scale modelling of the Ashburton River gravels, Canter-
bury Plains, New Zealand, in Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds., Fluvial
Sedimentology VI: International Association of Sedimentologists,
Special Publication 28, p. 333–346.
ASHWORTH, P.J., BEST, J.L., RODEN, J.E., BRISTOW, C.S., AND KLAASSEN, G.J.,
2000, Morphological evolution and dynamics of a large, sand braid-
bar, Jamuna River, Bangladesh: Sedimentology, v. 47, p. 533–555.
ASLAN, A., AND BLUM, M.D., 1999, Contrasting styles of Holocene avulsion,
Texas Gulf Coastal Plain, USA, in Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds.,
Fluvial Sedimentology VI: International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Special Publication 28, p. 193–209.
AUTIN, W.J., BURNS, S.F., MILLER, R.T., SAUCIER, R.T., AND SNEAD, J.I., 1991,
Quaternary Geology of the lower Mississippi valley, in Morrison,
R.B., ed., Quaternary Nonglacial Geology: Conterminous U.S: Geo-
logical Society of America, The Geology of North America, v. K-2, p.
547–582.
BAKER, V.R., KOCHEL, R.C., AND PATTON, P.C., 1988, Flood Geomorphology:
New York, Wiley, 528 p.
BAKER, V.R., AND NUMMEDAL, D., 1978, The Channeled Scabland: Washing-
ton, D.C., NASA, Planetary Geology Program, 186 p.
BEAUMONT, C., 1981, Foreland basins: Geophysical Journal of the Royal
Astronomical Society, v. 65, p. 291–329.
BEAUMONT, C., FULLSACK, P., AND HAMILTON, J., 1992, Erosional control of
active compressional orogens, in McClay, K.R., ed., Thrust Tectonics:
London, Chapman & Hall, p. 1–18.
BEAUMONT, C., QUINLAN, G., AND HAMILTON, J., 1988, Orogeny and stratig-
raphy: numerical models of the Paleozoic in the eastern interior of
North America: Tectonics, v. 7, p. 389–416.
BEHRENSMEYER, A.K., 1987, Miocene fluvial facies and vertebrate taphonomy
in northern Pakistan, in Ethridge, F.G., Flores, R.M., and Harvey,
M.D., eds., Recent Developments in Fluvial Sedimentology: SEPM,
Special Publication 39, p. 169–176.
BEHRENSMEYER, A.K., AND HOOK, R.W., 1992, Paleoenvironmental contexts
and taphonomic modes, in Behrensmeyer, A.K., Damuth, J.D.,
DiMichele, W.A., Potts, R., Sues, H.-D., and Wing, S.L., eds., Terres-
trial Ecosystems Through Time: Chicago, University of Chicago
Press, p. 15–136.
BENITO, G., BAKER, V.R., AND GREGORY, K.J., eds., 1999, Palaeohydrology and
Environmental Change: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, 368 p.
BENNETT, S.J., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 1995a, The geometry and dynamics of low-
relief bed forms in heterogeneous sediment in a laboratory channel,
and their relationship to water flow and sediment transport: Journal
of Sedimentary Research, v. A65, p. 29–39.
BENNETT, S.J., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 1995b, An experimental study of flow,
bedload transport and bed topography under conditions of erosion
and deposition and comparison with theoretical models: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 42, p. 117–146.
BERENDSEN, H.J.A., AND STOUTHAMER, E., 2001, Paleogeographic develop-
ment of the Rhine–Meuse delta, The Netherlands: Assen, Koninklijke
Van Gorcum, 268 p.
BERES, M., GREEN, A.G., HUGGENBERGER, P., AND HORSTMEYER, H., 1995,
Mapping the architecture of glaciofluvial sediments with three-di-
mensional georadar: Geology, v. 23, p. 1087–1090.
BERES, M., HUGGENBERGER, P., GREEN, A.G., AND HORSTMEYER, H., 1999, Using
two- and three-dimensional georadar methods to characterize
glaciofluvial architecture: Sedimentary Geology, v. 129, p. 1–24.
BERNER, R.A., 1991, A model for atmospheric CO2 over Phanerozoic time:
American Journal of Science, v. 291, p. 339–376.
BERNER, R.A., 1994, GEOCARB II: A revised model of atmospheric CO2
over Phanerozoic time: American Journal of Science, v. 294, p. 56–91.
162 JOHN S. BRIDGE
BERNER, R.A., 2001, The effect of the rise of land plants on atmospheric
CO2 during the Paleozoic, in Gensel, P.G., and Edwards, D., eds.,
Plants Invade the Land: New York, Columbia University Press, p.
173–178.
BERNER, R.A., AND KOTHAVALA, Z., 2001, GEOCARB III: A revised model of
atmospheric CO2 over Phanerozoic time: American Journal of Sci-
ence, v. 301, p. 182–204.
BEST, J.L., 1996, The fluid dynamics of small-scale alluvial bedforms, in
Carling, P.A., and Dawson, M.R., eds., Advances in Fluvial Dynamics
and Stratigraphy: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, p. 67–125.
BEST, J.L., AND ASHWORTH, P.J., 1997, Scour in large braided rivers and the
recognition of sequence stratigraphic boundaries: Nature, v. 387, p.
275–277.
BEST, J.L., ASHWORTH, P., BRISTOW, C., AND RODEN, J., 2003, Three-dimen-
sional sedimentary architecture of a large, mid-channel sand braid
bar, Jamuna River, Bangladesh: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v.
73, p. 516–530.
BEST, J.L., AND BRIDGE, J. S., 1992, The morphology and dynamics of low
amplitude bedwaves upon upper stage plane beds and the preserva-
tion of planar laminae: Sedimentology, v. 39, p. 737–752.
BIERKENS, M.F.P., AND WEERTS, H.J.T., 1994, Application of indicator simu-
lation to modeling the lithological properties of a complex confining
layer: Geoderma, v. 62, p. 265–284.
BLODGETT, R.H., AND STANLEY, K.O., 1980, Stratification, bed forms, and
discharge relations of the Platte River system, Nebraska: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 50, p. 139–148.
BLUCK, B.J., 1971, Sedimentation in the meandering River Endrick: Scot-
tish Journal of Geology, v. 7, p. 93–138.
BLUCK, B.J., 1976, Sedimentation in some Scottish rivers of low sinuosity:
Royal Society of Edinburgh, Transactions, v. 69, p. 425–456.
BLUCK, B.J., 1979, Structure of coarse grained braided stream alluvium:
Royal Society of Edinburgh, Transactions, v. 70, p. 181–221.
BLUM, M.D., AND PRICE, D.M., 1998, Quaternary alluvial plain construction
in response to glacio-eustatic and climatic controls, Texas Gulf Coastal
Plain, in Shanley, K.J., and McCabe, P.J., eds., Relative Role of Eustasy,
Climate and Tectonism on Continental Rocks: SEPM, Special Publica-
tion 59, p. 31–48.
BLUM, M.D., AND TÖRNQVIST, T.E., 2000, Fluvial responses to climate and
sea-level change: a review and look forward: Sedimentology, v. 47
(Suppl.1), p. 2–48.
BOLLA PITTALUGA, M., REPETTO, R., AND TUBINO, M., 2003, Channel bifurca-
tions in braided rivers: equilibrium configurations and stability:
Water Resources Research, v. 39, p. 10–46.
BOUCOT, A.J., AND GRAY, J., 2001, A critique of Phanerozoic climatic models
involving changes in the CO2 content of the atmosphere: Earth-
Science Reviews, v. 56, p. 1–159.
BOWN, T.M., AND KRAUS, M.J., 1987, Integration of channel floodplain suite,
I. Developmental sequence and lateral relations of alluvial paleosols:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 57, p. 587–601.
BRIDGE, J.S., 1978, Paleohydraulic interpretation using mathematical mod-
els of contemporary flow and sedimentation in meandering channels,
in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petro-
leum Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 723–742.
BRIDGE, J.S., 1984, Large-scale facies sequences in alluvial overbank envi-
ronments: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 54, p. 583–588.
BRIDGE, J.S., 1985, Paleochannel patterns inferred from alluvial deposits: A
critical evaluation: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 55, p. 579–
589.
BRIDGE, J.S., 1993, The interaction between channel geometry, water flow,
sediment transport and deposition in braided rivers, in Best, J.L., and
Bristow, C.S., eds., Braided Rivers: Geological Society of London,
Special Publication 75, p. 3–72.
BRIDGE, J.S., 1997, Thickness of sets of cross strata and planar strata as a
function of formative bed-wave geometry and migration, and aggra-
dation rate: Geology, v. 25, p. 971–974.
BRIDGE, J.S., 2001, Characterization of fluvial hydrocarbon reservoirs and
aquifers: problems and solutions: AAS Revista, Revista de la Asociación
de Sedimentología, v. 8, p. 87–114.
BRIDGE, J.S., 2003, Rivers and Floodplains: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell, 491 p.
BRIDGE, J S., in press, Numerical modeling of alluvial deposits: recent
developments, in de Boer, P.L., Postma, G., Kukla, P., van der Zwan,
K., and Burgess, P., eds., Analogue and Numerical Forward Model-
ling of Sedimentary Systems; From Understanding to Prediction:
International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication.
BRIDGE, J.S., ALEXANDER, J., COLLIER, R.E.L., GAWTHORPE, R.L., AND JARVIS, J.,
1995, Ground penetrating radar and coring used to document the
large-scale structure of point-bar deposits in 3-D: Sedimentology, v.
42, p. 839–852.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND BEST, J.L., 1988, Flow, sediment transport and bedform
dynamics over the transition from upper-stage plane beds: Implica-
tions for the formation of planar laminae: Sedimentology, v. 35, p.
753–763.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND BEST, J.L., 1997, Preservation of planar laminae arising
from low-relief bed waves migrating over aggrading plane beds:
comparison of experimental data with theory: Sedimentology, v. 44,
p. 253–262.
BRIDGE, J.S., COLLIER, R.E.L., AND ALEXANDER, J., 1998, Large-scale structure
of Calamus River deposits (Nebraska, USA) revealed using ground
penetrating radar: Sedimentology, v. 45, p. 977–986.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND DIEMER, J.A., 1983, Quantitative interpretation of an
evolving ancient river system: Sedimentology, v. 30, p. 599–623.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND GABEL, S.L., 1992, Flow and sediment dynamics in a low
sinuosity, braided river: Calamus River, Nebraska Sandhills: Sedi-
mentology, v. 39, p. 125–142.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND GORDON, E.A., 1985, Quantitative reconstructions of
ancient river systems in the Oneonta Formation, Catskill Magnafacies,
in Woodrow, D.L., and Sevon, W.D., eds., The Catskill Delta: Geologi-
cal Society of America, Special Paper 201, p. 163–181.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND JARVIS, J., 1982, The dynamics of a river bend: a study in
flow and sedimentary processes: Sedimentology, v. 29, p. 499–541.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND LEEDER, M.R., 1979, A simulation model of alluvial
stratigraphy: Sedimentology, v. 26, p. 617–644.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND LUNT, I.A., 2006, Depositional models of braided rivers, in
Sambrook Smith, G.H., Best, J.L., Bristow, C.S., and Petts, G., eds.,
Braided Rivers; Process, Deposits, Ecology, and Management: Inter-
national Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 36, p.
11–50.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND MACKEY, S.D., 1993a, A revised alluvial stratigraphy
model, in Marzo, M., and Puidefàbregas, C., eds., Alluvial Sedimen-
tation: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publi-
cation 17, p. 319–337.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND MACKEY, S.D., 1993b, A theoretical study of fluvial
sandstone body dimensions, in Flint, S.S., and Bryant, I.D., eds.,
Geological Modeling of Hydrocarbon Reservoirs: International As-
sociation of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 15, p. 213–236.
BRIDGE, J.S., SMITH, N.D., TRENT, F., GABEL, S.L., AND BERNSTEIN, P., 1986,
Sedimentology and morphology of a low-sinuosity river: Calamus
River, Nebraska Sand Hills: Sedimentology, v. 33, p. 851–870.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND TYE, R.S., 2000, Interpreting the dimensions of ancient
fluvial channel bars, channels, and channel belts from wireline-logs
and cores: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v.
84, p. 1205–1228.
BRIERLEY, G.J., FERGUSON, R.J., AND WOOLFE, K.J., 1997, What is a fluvial
levee?: Sedimentary Geology, v. 114, p. 1–9.
BRISTOW, C.S., SKELLY, R.L., AND ETHRIDGE, F.G., 1999, Crevasse splays from
the rapidly aggrading, sand-bed, braided Niobrara River, Nebraska:
effect of base-level rise: Sedimentology, v. 46, p. 1029–1047.
BRYANT, I.D., AND FLINT, S., 1993, Quantitative clastic reservoir geologi-
cal modeling: problems and perspectives, in Flint, S., and Bryant,
I.D., eds., Geological Modeling of Hydrocarbon Reservoirs: Inter-
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
national Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 15,
p. 3–20.
BRYANT, M., FALK, P., AND PAOLA, C., 1995, Experimental study of avulsion
frequency and rate of deposition: Geology, v. 23, p. 365–369.
BUATOIS, L.A., AND MÁNGANO, M.G., 1995, The paleoenvironmental and
paleoecological significance of the lacustrine Mermia ichnofacies: an
archetypal subaqueous nonmarine trace fossil assemblage: Ichnos, v.
4, p. 151–161.
BUATOIS, L.A., MÁNGANO, M.G., GENISE, J.F., AND TAYLOR, T.N., 1998, The
ichnologic record of the continental invertebrate invasion: evolution-
ary trends in environmental expansion, ecospace utilization, and
behavioral complexity: Palaios, v. 13, p. 217–240.
BULL, W.B., 1991, Geomorphic Responses to Climate Change: New York,
Oxford University Press, 326 p.
BURBANK, D.W., 1992, Causes of recent Himalayan uplift deduced from
deposited patterns in the Ganges basin: Nature, v. 357, p. 680–683.
BURBANK, D.W., AND ANDERSON, R.S., 2001, Tectonic Geomorphology:
Oxford, U.K., Blackwell, 274 p.
CANT, D.J., 1978, Bedforms and bar types in the South Saskatchewan
River: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 48, p. 1321–1330.
CANT, D.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1976, Development of a braided fluvial
facies model for the Devonian Battery Point Sandstone, Quebec,
Canada: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 13, p. 102–119.
CANT, D.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1978, Fluvial processes and facies sequences
in the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River, Canada: Sedimen-
tology, v. 25, p. 625–648.
CARLE, S.F., LABOLLE, E.M., WEISSMANN, G.S., VAN BROCKLIN, D., AND FOGG,
G.E., 1998, Conditional simulation of hydrofacies architecture: a
transition probability/Markov approach, in Fraser, G.S., and Davis,
J.M., eds., Hydrogeologic Models of Sedimentary Aquifers: SEPM,
Concepts in Hydrogeology and Environmental Geology 1, p. 147–
170.
CARLING, P.A., 1999, Subaqueous gravel dunes: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 69, p. 534–545.
CARLING, P.A., GOLZ, E., ORR, H.G., AND RADECKI-PAWLIK, A., 2000a, The
morphodynamics of fluvial sand dunes in the River Rhine, near
Mainz, Germany. I. Sedimentology and morphology: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 47, p. 227–252.
CARLING, P.A., WILLIAMS, J.J., GOLZ, E., AND KELSEY, A.D., 2000b, The
morphodynamics of fluvial sand dunes in the River Rhine, near
Mainz, Germany. II. Hydrodynamics and sediment transport: Sedi-
mentology, v. 47, p. 253–278.
CARLING, P.A., AND SHVIDCHENKO, A.B., 2002, A consideration of the
dune:antidune transition in fine gravel: Sedimentology, v. 49, p.
1269–1282.
CHANDLER, J.H., 1999, Effective application of automated digital photo-
grammetry for geomorphological research: Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms, v. 24, p. 51–63.
CLEVIS, Q., DE BOER, P., AND WACHTER, M., 2003, Numerical modeling of
drainage basin evolution and three-dimensional alluvial fan stratig-
raphy: Sedimentary Geology, v. 163, p. 85–110.
COJAN, I., 1999, Carbonate-rich palaeosols in the Late Cretaceous–Early
Palaeogene series of the Provence Basin (France), in Thiry, M., and
Simon-Coicon, R., eds., Palaeoweathering, Palaeosurfaces and Re-
lated Continental Deposits: International Association of Sedimen-
tologists, Special Publication 27, p. 323–335.
COLEMAN, J.M., 1969, Brahmaputra River: Channel processes and sedi-
mentation: Sedimentary Geology, v. 3, p. 129–239.
COLLINSON, J.D., 1970, Bedforms of the Tana River, Norway: Geografiska
Annaler, v. 52A, p. 31–56.
COLLINSON, J. D., 1996, Alluvial sediments, in Reading, H. G., ed., Sedimen-
tary Environments and Facies, Third Edition: New York, Elsevier, p.
37–82.
CORBEANU, R.M., SOEGAARD, K., SZERBIAK, R.B., THURMOND, J.B., MCMECHAN,
G.A., WANG, D., SNELGROVE, S.H., FORSTER, C.B., AND MENITOVE, A., 2001,
163
Detailed internal architecture of fluvial channel sandstone deter-
mined from outcrop and 3-D ground penetrating radar: Example
from mid-Cretaceous Ferron Sandstone, east-central Utah: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 85, p. 1583–1608
COTTER, E., 1978, The evolution of fluvial style, with special reference to the
central Appalachian Paleozoic, in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimen-
tology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 361–
383.
COULTHARD, T.J., MACKLIN, M.G., AND KIRKBY, M.J., 2002, A cellular model
of Holocene upland river basin and alluvial fan evolution: Earth
Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 27, p. 269–288.
CROWLEY, K.D., 1983, Large-scale bed configurations (macroforms), Platte
River Basin, Colorado and Nebraska: Primary structures and formative
processes: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 94, p. 117–133.
CROWLEY, T.J., AND BERNER, R.A., 2001, CO2 and climate change: Science, v.
289, p. 270–277.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., BOYD, R., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., eds., 1994, Incised-Valley
Systems: Origin and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special Publica-
tion 51, 391 p.
DAVIES, S., HAMPSON, G., FLINT, S., AND ELLIOTT, T., 1999, Continent-scale
sequence stratigraphy of the Namurian, Upper Carboniferous and its
applications to reservoir prediction, in Fleet, A.J., and Boldy, S.A.R.,
eds., Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe: Proceedings, 5th Con-
ference: Geological Society of London, p. 757–770.
DEUTSCH, C.V., 2002, Geostatistical Reservoir Modeling: New York, Ox-
ford University Press, 376 p.
DEUTSCH, C., AND COCKERHAM, P., 1994, Practical considerations in the
application of simulated annealing to stochastic simulation: Math-
ematical Geology, v. 26, p. 67–82.
DEUTSCH, C.V., AND TRAN, T.T., 2002, FLUVSIM: a program for object-
based modeling of fluvial depositional systems: Computers & Geo-
sciences, v. 28, p. 525–535.
DEUTSCH, C.V., AND WANG, L., 1996, Hierarchical object-based stochastic
modeling of fluvial reservoirs: Mathematical Geology, v. 28, p. 857–
880.
DIETRICH, W.E., AND SMITH, J.D., 1983, Influence of the point bar on flow in
curved channels: Water Resources Research, v. 19, p. 1173–1192.
DIETRICH, W.E., AND SMITH, J.D., 1984, Bedload transport in a river mean-
der: Water Resources Research, v. 20, p. 1355–1380.
DINEHART, D.L., 1989, Dune migration in a steep, coarse-bedded stream:
Water Resources Research, v. 25, p. 911–923.
DINEHART, D.L., 1992, Evolution of coarse gravel bed forms: field measure-
ments at flood stage: Water Resources Research, v. 28, p. 2667–2689.
DOVETON, J.H., 1994, Theory and applications of vertical variability mea-
sures from Markov Chain analysis, in Yarus, J.M., and Chambers,
R.L., eds., Stochastic Modeling and Geostatistics: American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists, Computer Applications in Geology, v.
3, p. 55–64.
DRIESE, S.G., AND MORA, C.I., 2001, Diversification of Siluro-Devonian
plant traces in paleosols and influence on estimates of
paleoatmospheric CO2 levels, in Gensel, P.G., and Edwards, D., eds.,
Plants Invade the Land: New York, Columbia University Press, p.
237–253.
DRIESE, S.G., MORA, C.I., AND ELICK, J.M., 2000, The paleosol record of
increasing plant diversity and depth of rooting and changes in
atmospheric pCO2 in the Siluro-Devonian, in Gastaldo, R.A., and
DiMichele, W.A., eds., Phanerozoic Terrestrial Ecosystems, A Short
Course: New Haven, Connecticut, The Paleontological Society, Pa-
pers, v. 6, p. 47–61.
DUBRULE, O., 1998, Geostatistics in Petroleum Geology: American Asso-
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Continuing Education Course Note
Series 38, 52 p.
DULLER, G.A.T., 1996, Recent developments in luminescence dating of
Quaternary sediments: Progress in Physical Geography, v. 20, p.
127–145.
164 JOHN S. BRIDGE
DURY, G.H., 1976, Discharge prediction, present and former, from channel
dimensions: Journal of Hydrology, v. 30, p. 219–245.
DURY, G.H., 1985, Attainable standards of accuracy in the retrodiction of
palaeodischarge from channel dimensions: Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms, v. 10, p. 205–213.
EKDALE, A.A., BROMLEY, R.G., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1984, Ichnology: Trace
Fossils in Sedimentology and Stratigraphy: SEPM, Short Course 15,
317 p.
ELFEKI, A., AND DEKKING, M., 2001, A markov chain model for subsurface
characterization: theory and application: Mathematical Geology, v.
33, p. 569–589.
ELLIOTT, T., 1974, Interdistributary bay sequences and their genesis: Sedi-
mentology, v. 21, p. 611–622.
ENOS, P., 1991, Sedimentary parameters for computer modeling, in
Franseen, E.K., Watney, W.L., Kendall, C.G.St.C., and Ross, W., eds.,
Sedimentary Modeling: Computer Simulations and Methods for
Improved Parameter Definition: Kansas Geological Survey, Bulletin
233, p. 63–99.
ETHRIDGE, F.G., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1978, Reconstructing paleochannel
morphologic and flow characteristics: methodology, limitations and
assessment, in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian
Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 703–721.
ETHRIDGE, F.G., SKELLY, R.L., AND BRISTOW, C.S., 1999, Avulsion and crevassing
in the sandy, braided Niobrara River: complex response to base-level
rise and aggradation, in Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds., Fluvial
Sedimentology VI: International Association of Sedimentologists,
Special Publication 28, p. 179–191.
FARRELL, K.M., 1987, Sedimentology and facies architecture of overbank
deposits of the Mississippi River, False River Region, Louisiana, in
Ethridge, F.G., Flores, R.M., and Harvey, M.D., eds., Recent Develop-
ments in Fluvial Sedimentology: SEPM, Special Publication 39, p.
111–120.
FARRELL, K.M., 2001, Geomorphology, facies architecture, and high reso-
lution, non-marine sequence stratigraphy in avulsion deposits,
Cumberland marshes, Saskatchewan: Sedimentary Geology, v. 139,
p. 93–150.
FASTOVSKY, D.E., AND MCSWEENEY, K., 1987, Paleosols spanning the Creta-
ceous–Paleogene transition, eastern Montana and western North
Dakota: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 99, p. 66–77.
FLEMINGS, P.B., AND JORDAN, T.E., 1989, A synthetic stratigraphic model of
foreland basin development: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 94,
p. 3851–3866.
FLEMINGS, P.B., AND JORDAN, T. E., 1990, Stratigraphic modeling of foreland
basins: Interpreting thrust deformation and lithospheric rheology:
Geology, v. 18, p. 430–434.
FLINT, S.S., AITKEN, J., AND HAMPSON, G., 1995, Application of sequence
stratigraphy to coal-bearing coastal plain successions: implications
for the UK Coal measures, in Whateley, M.K.G., and Spears, D.A.,
eds., European Coal Geology: Geological Society of London, Special
Publication 82, p. 1–16.
FRASER, G.S., AND DECELLES, P.G., 1992, Geomorphic controls on sediment
accumulation at margins of foreland basins: Basin Research, v. 4, p.
233–252.
FREDERICI, B., AND PAOLA, C., 2003, Dynamics of channel bifurcations in
noncohesive sediments: Water Resources Research, v. 39, p. 1162.
FREY, R.W., PEMBERTON, S.G., AND FAGERSTROM, J.A., 1984, Morphologi-
cal, ethological and environmental significance of the ichnogenera
Scoyenia and Ancorichnus: Journal of Paleontology, v. 58, p. 511–
528.
FUJITA, I., 1989, Bar and channel formation in braided streams, in Ikeda, S.,
and Parker, G., eds., River Meandering: American Geophysical Union,
Water Resources Monograph 12, p. 417–462.
GABEL, S.L., 1993, Geometry and kinematics of dunes during steady and
unsteady flows in the Calamus River, Nebraska, USA: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 40, p. 237–269.
GARCÍA, M., AND NIÑO, Y., 1993, Dynamics of sediment bars in straight and
meandering channels: experiments on the resonance phenomenon:
Journal of Hydraulic Research, v. 31, p. 739–761.
GARCIA-CASTELLANOS, D., 2002, Interplay between lithospheric flexure
and river transport in foreland basins: Basin Research, v. 14, p. 89–
104.
GAWTHORPE, R.L., COLLIER, R.E.LL., ALEXANDER, J., BRIDGE, J.S., AND LEEDER,
M.R., 1993, Ground penetrating radar: application to sandbody ge-
ometry and heterogeneity studies, in North, C.J., and Prosser, D.J.,
eds., Characterization of Fluvial and Aeolian Reservoirs: Geological
Society of London, Special Publication 73, p. 421–432.
GAWTHORPE, R.L., AND LEEDER, M.R., 2000, Tectono-sedimentary evolution
of active extensional basins: Basin Research, v. 12, p. 195–218.
GENISE, J.G., MÁNGANO, M.G., BUATOIS, L.A., LAZA, J.H., AND VERDE, M., 2000,
Insect trace fossil associations in paleosols: the Coprinisphaera ichno-
facies: Palaios, v. 15, p. 49–64.
GENSEL, P.G., AND EDWARDS, D., 2001, Plants Invade the Land: New York,
Columbia University Press, 304 p.
GERMANOWSKI, D., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1993, Changes in braided river
morphology resulting from aggradation and degradation: Journal of
Geology, v. 101, p. 451–466.
GIBLING, M.R., AND BIRD, D.J., 1994, Late Carboniferous cyclothems and
alluvial paleovalleys in the Sydney Basin, Nova Scotia: Geological
Society of America, Bulletin, v. 106, p. 105–117.
GORDON, E.A., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 1987, Evolution of Catskill (Upper Devo-
nian) river systems: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 57, p. 234–
249.
GRAN, K., AND PAOLA, C., 2001, Riparian vegetation controls on braided
stream dynamics: Water Resources Research, v. 37, p. 3275–3283.
GREGORY, K.J., ed., 1983, Background to Palaeohydrology: Chichester,
U.K., Wiley, 486 p.
GREGORY, K.J., STARKEL, L., AND BAKER, V.R., eds., 1995, Global Continental
Palaeohydrology: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, 346 p.
GUPTA, S., 1997, Himalayan drainage patterns and the origin of fluvial
megafans in the Ganges foreland basin: Geology, v. 25, p. 11–14.
HALDORSEN, H.H., AND DAMSLETH, E., 1990, Stochastic modeling: Journal of
Petroleum Technology, v. 42, p. 404–412.
HAMPSON, G.J., ELLIOTT, T., AND DAVIES, S.J., 1997, The application of
sequence stratigraphy to Upper Carboniferous fluvio-deltaic strata of
the onshore UK and Ireland: implications for the southern North Sea:
Geological Society of London, Journal, v. 154, p. 719–733.
HAMPSON, G.J., DAVIES, S.J. ELLIOTT, T., FLINT, S.S., AND STOLLHOFEN, H., 1999,
Incised valley fill sandstone bodies in Upper Carboniferous fluvio–
deltaic strata: recognition and reservoir characterization of Southern
North Sea analogues, in Fleet, A.J., and Boldy, S.A.R., eds., Petroleum
Geology of Northwest Europe: Proceedings 5th Conference: The
Geological Society of London, p. 771–788.
HARBOR, D.J., 1998, Dynamics of bedforms in the lower Mississippi River:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 68, p. 750–762.
HARDIE, L.A., 1996, Secular variations in seawater chemistry: An explana-
tion for the coupled secular variation in the mineralogies of marine
limestones and potash evaporates over the past 600 m.y.: Geology, v.
24, p. 279–283.
HASIOTIS, S.T., 2002, Continental Trace Fossils: SEPM, Short Course Notes
No. 51, 132 p.
HASIOTIS, S.T., 2004, Reconnaissance of Upper Jurassic Morrison Forma-
tion ichnofossils, Rocky Mountain Region, USA: paleoenvironmen-
tal, stratigraphic, and paleoclimatic significance of terrestrial and
freshwater ichnocoenoses: Sedimentary Geology, v. 167, p. 177–268.
HASIOTIS, S.T., AND DUBIEL, D.L., 1995, Termite (Insecta, Isoptera) nest
ichnofossils from the Upper Triassic Chinle Formation, Petrified
Forest National Monument, Arizona: Ichnos, v. 4, p.111–130.
HECKEL, P.H., GIBLING, M.R., AND KING, N.R., 1998, Stratigraphic model for
glacial-eustatic Pennsylvanian cyclothems in highstand nearshore
detrital regimes: Journal of Geology, v. 106, p. 373–383.
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
HELLER, P.L., AND PAOLA, C., 1992, The large scale dynamics of grain-size
variation in alluvial basins, 2. Application to syntectonic conglomer-
ate: Basin Research, v. 4, p. 91–102.
HELLER, P.L., AND PAOLA, C., 1996, Downstream changes in alluvial archi-
tecture: an exploration of controls on channel-stacking patterns:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B66, p. 297–306
HELLER, P.L., PAOLA, C., HWANG, I-G., JOHN, B., AND STEEL, R., 2001, Geomor-
phology and sequence stratigraphy due to slow and rapid base-level
changes in an experimental subsiding basin (XES 96-1): American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 85, p. 817–838.
HOEY, T., AND SUTHERLAND, A.J., 1991, Channel morphology and bedload
pulses in braided rivers: a laboratory study: Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms, v. 16, p. 447–462.
HOLBROOK, J., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1999, Geomorphic and sedimentary
response of rivers to tectonic deformation: a brief review and critique
of a tool for recognizing subtle epeirogenic deformation in modern
and ancient settings: Tectonophysics, v. 305, p. 287–306.
HOLDEN, L., HAUGE, R., SKARE, Ø., AND SKORSTAD, A., 1998, Modeling of fluvial
reservoirs with object models: Mathematical Geology, v. 30, p. 473–496.
HUGGENBERGER, P., 1993, Radar facies: recognition of characteristic braided
river structures of the Pleistocene Rhine gravel ( NE part of Switzer-
land ), in Best, J.L., and Bristow, C.S., eds., Braided Rivers: Geological
Society of London, Special Publication 75, p. 163–176.
HUGHES, D.A., AND LEWIN, J., 1982, A small-scale flood-plain: Sedimentol-
ogy, 29, p. 891–895.
JACKSON, R.G., 1976, Large-scale ripples of the Lower Wabash River:
Sedimentology, v. 23, p. 593–623.
JOHNSON, D.D., AND BEAUMONT, C., 1995, Preliminary results from a plan-
form kinematic model of orogen evolution, surface processes and the
development of clastic foreland basin stratigraphy, in Dorobek, S.L.,
and Ross, G.M., eds., Stratigraphic Evolution of Foreland Basins:
SEPM, Special Publication 52, p. 3–24.
JOHNSON, N.M., AND DREISS, S.J., 1989, Hydrostratigraphic interpretation
using indicator geostatistics: Water Resources Research, v. 25, p.
2501–2510.
JOL, H.M., 1995, Ground penetrating radar antennae frequencies and
transmitter powers compared for penetration depth, resolution and
reflection continuity: Geophysical Prospecting, v. 43, p. 693–709.
JOL, H.M., AND SMITH, D.G., 1991, Ground penetrating radar of northern
lacustrine deltas: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 28, p. 1939–
1947.
JONES, L.S., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1999, Causes of avulsion: an overview, in
Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds., Fluvial Sedimentology VI: Interna-
tional Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 28, p. 171–
178.
JORDAN, T.E., 1981, Thrust loads and foreland basin evolution, Cretaceous
western United States: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Bulletin, v. 65, p. 2506–2620.
JORDAN, T.E., AND FLEMINGS, P.B., 1990, From geodynamical models to basin
fill—a stratigraphic perspective, in Cross, T.A., ed., Quantitative
Dynamic Stratigraphy: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall,
p. 149–163.
JORDAN, T.E., AND FLEMINGS, P.B., 1991, Large-scale stratigraphic architec-
ture, eustatic variation, and unsteady tectonism: a theoretical evalu-
ation: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 96, p. 6681–6699.
JULIEN, P.Y., AND KLAASEN, G.J., 1995, Sand-dune geometry of large rivers
during floods: American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of Hy-
draulic Engineering, v. 121, p. 657–663.
JULIEN, P.Y., KLAASSEN, G.J., TEN BRINKE, W.B.M., AND WILBERS, A.W.E., 2002,
Case study: bed resistance of Rhine River during 1998 flood: Ameri-
can Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, v.
128, p. 1042–1050.
KARSSENBERG, D., TÖRNQVIST, T.E., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 2001, Conditioning a
process-based model of sedimentary architecture to well data: Jour-
nal of Sedimentary Research, v. 71, p. 868–879.
165
KARSSENBERG, D., BRIDGE, J.S., STOUTHAMER, E., KLEINHANS, M.G., AND
BERENDSEN, H.J.A., 2003, Modelling cycles of fluvial aggradation and
degradation using a process-based alluvial stratigraphy model. Pro-
ceedings of “Analogue and Numerical Modelling of Sedimentary
Systems; From Understanding to Prediction”, 9–11 Oct., 2003, Utre-
cht, the Netherlands.
KARSSENBERG, D., DALMAN, R., WELTJE, G.J., POSTMA, G., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 2004,
Numerical modelling of delta evolution by nesting high and low
resolution process-based models of sedimentary basin filling: Joint
EURODELTA/EUROSTRATAFORM meeting. Venice (Italy), Octo-
ber 20–23, 2004, p. 1–37.
KHAN, I.A., BRIDGE, J.S., KAPPELMAN, J., AND WILSON, R., 1997, Evolution of
Miocene fluvial environments, eastern Potwar plateau, northern
Pakistan: Sedimentology, v. 44, p. 221–251.
KLEINHANS, M.G., WILBERS, A.W.E., DE SWAAF, A., AND VAN DEN BERG, J.H.,
2002, Sediment supply–limited bedforms in sand–gravel rivers: Jour-
nal of Sedimentary Research, v. 72, p. 629–640.
KNAAPEN, M.A.F., HULSCHER, S.J.M.H., DE VRIEND, H.J., AND VAN HARTEN, A.,
2001, Height and wavelength of alternate bars in rivers: modeling and
laboratory experiments: Journal of Hydraulic Research, v. 39, p. 147–
153.
KNIGHT, D.W., AND BROWN, F.A., 2001, Resistance studies of overbank flow
in rivers with sediment using the flood channel facility: Journal of
Hydraulics Research, v. 39, p. 283–302.
KNIGHT, D.W., AND SHIONO, K., 1996, River channel and floodplain hydrau-
lics, in Anderson, M.G., Walling, D.E., and Bates, P.D., eds., Flood-
plain Processes: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, p. 139–182.
KNOX, J.C., 1983, Responses of river systems to Holocene climates, in
Wright, H.E., and Porter, S.C., eds., Late Quaternary Environments of
the United States, vol. 2, The Holocene: Minneapolis, University of
Minnesota Press, p. 26–41.
KNOX, J.C., 1996, Fluvial systems since 20,000 years BP, in Gregory, K.J.,
Starkel, L., and Baker, V.R., eds., Continental Palaeohydrology:
Chichester, U.K., Wiley, p. 87–108,
KOCHEL, R.C., AND BAKER, V.R., 1988, Palaeoflood analysis using slack
water deposits, in Baker, V.R., Kochel, R.C., and Patton, P.C., eds.,
Flood Geomorphology: New York, Wiley, p. 357–376.
KOLTERMANN, C.E., AND GORELICK, S.M., 1992, Paleoclimatic signature in
terretrial flood deposits: Science, v. 256, p. 1775–1782.
KOLTERMANN, C.E., AND GORELICK, S.M., 1996, Heterogeneity in sedimentary
deposits: a review of structure-imitating, process-imitating and de-
scriptive approaches: Water Resources Research, v. 32, p. 2617–2658.
KOMAR, P.D., 1996, Entrainment of sediments from deposits of mixed
grain sizes and densities, in Carling, P.A., and Dawson, M.R., eds.,
Advances in Fluvial Dynamics and Stratigraphy: Chichester, U.K.,
Wiley, p. 127–181.
KOOI, H., AND BEAUMONT, C., 1994, Escarpment evolution on high-elevation
rifted margins: insights derived from a surface processes model that
combines diffusion, advection, and reaction: Journal of Geophysical
Research, v. 99, p. 12,191–12,209.
KOOI, H., AND BEAUMONT, C., 1996, Large-scale geomorphology: classical
concepts reconciled and integrated with contemporary ideas using a
surface processes model: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 101, p.
3361–3386.
KOSS, J.E., ETHRIDGE, F.G., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1994, An experimental study
of the effects of base-level change on fluvial, coastal plain, and shelf
systems: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B64, p. 90–98.
KRAUS, M.J., 1987, Integration of channel and floodplain suites, II. Vertical
relations of alluvial paleosols: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v.
56, p. 602–612.
KRAUS, M.J., 1996, Avulsion deposits in lower Eocene alluvial rocks,
Bighorn Basin, Wyoming: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B66, p.
354–363.
KRAUS, M.J., 1999, Paleosols in clastic sedimentary rocks: their geologic
applications: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 47, p. 41–70.
166 JOHN S. BRIDGE
KRAUS, M.J., AND ASLAN, A., 1999, Palaeosol sequences in floodplain
environments: a hierarchical approach, in Thiry, M., and Simon-
Coicon, R., eds., Palaeoweathering, Palaeosurfaces and related Con-
tinental Deposits: International Association of Sedimentologists, Spe-
cial Publication 27, p. 303–321.
KRAUS, M.J., AND GWINN, B.M., 1997, Controls on the development of early
Eocene avulsion deposits and floodplain paleosols, Willwood Forma-
tion, Bighorn Basin: Sedimentary Geology, v. 114, p. 33–54.
KRAUS, M.J., AND WELLS, T.M., 1999, Recognizing avulsion deposits in the
ancient stratigraphic record, in Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds.,
Fluvial Sedimentology VI: International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Special Publication 28, p. 251–268.
LAI, C.-J., LIU, C.-L., AND LIN, Y.-Z., 2000, Experiments on flood-wave
propagation in compound channel: American Society of Civil Engi-
neers, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, v. 126, p. 492–501.
LANE, S.N., CHANDLER, J.H., AND PORFIRI, K., 2001, Monitoring river channel
and flume surfaces with digital photogrammetry: American Society
of Civil Engineers, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, v. 127, p. 871–
877.
LANE, S.N., CHANDLER, J.H., AND RICHARDS, K.S., 1994, Developments in
monitoring and terrain modeling small-scale river-bed topography:
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 19, p. 349–368.
LANE, S.N., RICHARDS, K.S., AND CHANDLER, J.H., 1995, Morphological
estimation of the time-integrated bedload transport rate: Water Re-
sources Research, v. 31, p. 761–772.
LANE, S.N., RICHARDS, K.S., AND CHANDLER, J.H., EDS., 1998, Landform
Monitoring, Modeling and Analysis: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, 466 p.
LANE, S.N., WESTAWAY, R.M., AND HICKS, D.M., 2003, Estimation of erosion
and deposition volumes in a large gravel-bed, braided river using
synoptic remote sensing: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v.
28, p. 249–271.
LANZONI, S., 2000a, Experiments on bar formation in straight flume. 1.
uniform sediment: Water Resources Research, v. 36, p. 3337–3349.
LANZONI, S., 2000b, Experiments on bar formation in straight flume. 2.
graded sediment: Water Resources Research, v. 36, p. 3351–3363.
LECLAIR, S.F., 2002, preservation of cross-strata due to the migration of
subaqueous dunes: an experimental investigation: Sedimentology, v.
49, p. 1157–1180.
LECLAIR, S.F., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 2001, Quantitative interpretation of sedi-
mentary structures formed by river dunes: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 71, p. 713–716.
LEDDY, J.O., ASHWORTH, P.J., AND BEST, J.L., 1993, Mechanisms of anabranch
avulsion within gravel-bed rivers: observations from a physical scale
model, in Best, J.L., and Bristow, C.S., eds., Braided Rivers: Geological
Society of London, Special Publication 75, p. 119–127.
LEEDER, M.R., 1975, Pedogenic carbonates and flood sediment accretion
rates: A quantitative method for alluvial arid-zone lithofacies: Geo-
logical Magazine, v. 112, p. 257–270.
LEEDER, M.R., 1978, A quantitative stratigraphic model for alluvium with
special reference to channel deposit density and interconnectedness,
in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petro-
leum Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 587–596.
LEEDER, M.R., 1993, Tectonic controls upon drainage basin development,
river channel migration and alluvial architecture: implications for hy-
drocarbon reservoir development and characterization, in North, C.P.,
and Prosser, D.J., eds., Characterization of Fluvial and Aeolian Reser-
voirs: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 73, p. 7–22.
LEEDER, M.R., 1999, Sedimentology and Sedimentary Basins: Oxford,
U.K., Blackwell, 592 p.
LEEDER, M.R., AND ALEXANDER, J.A., 1987, The origin and tectonic signifi-
cance of asymmetrical meander belts: Sedimentology, v. 34, p. 217–
226.
LEEDER, M.R., MACK, G.H., PEAKALL, J., AND SALYARDS, S.L., 1996, First
quantitative test of alluvial stratigraphy models: southern Rio Grande
rift, New Mexico: Geology, v. 24, p. 87–90.
LEEDER, M.R., AND STEWART, M., 1996, Fluvial incision and sequence stratig-
raphy: alluvial responses to relative base level fall and their detection
in the geological record, in Hesselbo, S.P., and Parkinson, D.N., eds.,
Sequence Stratigraphy in British Geology: Geological Society of Lon-
don, Special Publication 103, p. 47–61.
LEVEY, R.A., 1978, Bedform distribution and internal stratification of
coarse-grained point bars, Upper Congaree River, South Carolina, in
Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petro-
leum Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 105–127.
LOWENSTEIN, T.K., TIMOFEEFF, M.N., BRENNAN, S.T., AND DEMICCO, R.V., 2001,
Oscillations in Phanerozoic seawater chemistry: Evidence from fluid
inclusions: Science, v. 294, p. 1086–1088.
LUNT, I.A., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 2004, Evolution and deposits of a gravelly braid
bar and a channel fill, Sagavanirktok river, Alaska: Sedimentology, v.
51, p. 415–432.
LUNT, I.A., BRIDGE, J.S., AND TYE, R.S., 2004a, Development of a 3-D
depositional model of braided river gravels and sands to improve
aquifer characterization, in Bridge, J.S., and Hyndman, D., eds.,
Aquifer Characterization: SEPM, Special Publication 80, p. 139–
169.
LUNT, I.A., BRIDGE, J.S., AND TYE, R.S., 2004b, A quantitative, three-dimen-
sional depositional model of gravelly braided rivers: Sedimentology,
v. 51, p. 377–414.
MACK, G.H., JAMES, W.C., AND MONGER, H.C., 1993, Classification of paleo-
sols: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 105, p. 129–136.
MACK, G.H., AND LEEDER, M.R., 1998, Channel shifting of the Rio grande,
southern Rio Grande rift: implications for alluvial stratigraphy mod-
els: Sedimentary Geology, v. 177, p. 207–219.
MACKEY, S.D., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 1995, Three dimensional model of alluvial
stratigraphy: theory and application: Journal of Sedimentary Re-
search, v. B65, p. 7–31.
MAKASKE, B., 2001, Anastomosing rivers: a review of their classification,
origin and sedimentary products: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 53, p.
149–196.
MARR, J.G., SWENSON, J.B., PAOLA, C., AND VOLLER, V.R., 2000, A two-
diffusion model of fluvial stratigraphy in closed depositional basins:
Basin Research, v. 12, p. 381–398.
MARTINI, I.P., BAKER, V.R., AND GARZON, G., EDS., 2002, Flood and Megaflood
Processes and Deposits: International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Special Publication 32, 312 p.
MCCABE, P.J., 1984, Depositional environments of coal and coal-bearing
strata, in Rahmani, R.A., and Flores, R.M., eds., Sedimentology of
Coal and Coal-Bearing Sequences: International Association of Sedi-
mentologists, Special Publication 7, p. 13–42.
MCCABE, P.J., AND PARRISH, J.T., 1992, Tectonic and climatic controls on the
distribution and quality of Cretaceous coals, in McCabe, P.J., and
Parrish, J.T., eds., Controls on the Distribution and Quality of Creta-
ceous Coals: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 267, p. 1–15.
MCCARTHY, P.J., AND PLINT, A.G., 1998, Recognition of interfluve sequence
boundaries: integrating paleopedology and sequence stratigraphy:
Geology, v. 26, p. 387–390.
MCCAVE, I.N., 1968, Shallow and marginal marine sediments associated
with the Catskill complex in the Middle Devonian of New York, in
Klein, G.deV., ed., Late Paleozoic and Mesozoic Continental Sedi-
mentation, Northeastern North America: Geological Society of
America, Special Paper 106, p. 75–108.
MCCAVE, I.N., 1969, Correlation of marine and nonmarine strata with
example from Devonian of New York State: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 53, p. 155–162.
MCGOWEN, J.H., AND GARNER, L.E., 1970, Physiographic features and
stratification types of coarse grained point bars: Modern and ancient
examples: Sedimentology, v. 14, p. 77–111.
MCLELLAND, S.J., ASHWORTH, P.J., BEST, J.L., RODEN, J., AND KLAASEN, G.J.,
1999, Flow structure and transport of sand-grade suspended sedi-
ment around an evolving braid bar, Jamuna River, Bangladesh, in
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds., Fluvial Sedimentology VI: Interna-
tional Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 28, p. 43–
57.
MCMECHAN, G.A., GAYNOR, G.C., AND SZERBIAK, R.B., 1997, Use of ground-
penetrating radar for 3-D sedimentological characterization of clastic
reservoir analogs: Geophysics, v. 62, p. 786–796.
MIALL, A.D., 1986, Eustatic sea level changes interpreted from seismic
stratigraphy: a critique of the methodology with particular reference
to the North Sea Jurassic record: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 70, p. 131–137.
MIALL, A.D., 1991, Stratigraphic sequences and their chronostratigraphic
correlation: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 497–505.
MIALL, A.D., 1992, Alluvial deposits, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P.,
eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea Level Change: St. Johns, New-
foundland, Geological Association of Canada, p. 119–142.
MIALL, A.D., 1996, The Geology of Fluvial Deposits: New York, Springer-
Verlag, 582 p.
MIDDLETON, G.V., AND SOUTHARD, J.B., 1984, Mechanics of Sediment Move-
ment: SEPM, Short Course Notes No. 3, 401 p.
MIKE, K., 1975, Utilization of the analysis of ancient river beds for the
detection of Holocene crustal movements: Tectonophysics, v. 29, p.
359–368.
MOHRIG, D., HELLER, P.L., PAOLA, C., AND LYONS, W.J., 2000, Interpreting
avulsion process from ancient alluvial sequences: Guadalope–
Matarranya system (northern Spain) and Wasatch Formation (west-
ern Colorado): Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 112, p.
1787–1803.
MORETON, D.J., ASHWORTH, P.J., AND BEST, J.L., 2002, The physical scale
modelling of braided alluvial architecture and estimation of subsur-
face permeability: Basin Research, v. 14, p. 265–285.
MOROZOVA, G.S., AND SMITH, N.D., 1999, Holocene avulsion history of the
lower Saskatchewan fluvial system, Cumberland Marshes,
Saskatchewan–Manitoba, Canada, in Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds.,
Fluvial Sedimentology VI: International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Special Publication 28, p. 231–249.
MOROZOVA, G.S., AND SMITH, N.D., 2000, Holocene avulsion styles and
sedimentation patterns of the Saskatchewan River, Cumberland
Marshes, Canada: Sedimentary Geology, v. 130, p. 81–105.
MORRIS, P.E., AND WILLIAMS, D.J., 1997, Exponential longitudinal profiles of
streams: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 22, p. 143–163.
MORRIS, P.E., AND WILLIAMS, D.J., 1999a, A worldwide correlation for
exponential bed particle size variations in subaerial aqueous flows:
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 24, p. 835–847.
MORRIS, P.E., AND WILLIAMS, D.J., 1999b, Worldwide correlations for sub-
aerial aqueous flows with exponential longitudinal profiles: Earth
Surface Processes and Landforms, v. 24, p. 867–879.
MYERS, W.R.C., LYNESS, J.F., AND CASSELLS, J., 2001, Influence of boundary
roughness on velocity and discharge in compound river channels:
Journal of Hydraulic Research, v. 39, p. 311–320.
NAISH, C., AND SELLIN, R.H.J., 1996, Flow structure in a large-scale model of
a doubly meandering compound channel, in Ashworth, P.J., Bennett,
S.J., Best, J.L., and McLelland, S.J., eds., Coherent Flow Structures in
Open Channels: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, p. 631–654.
NANSON, G.C., 1980, Point bar and floodplain formation of the meander-
ing Beatton River, northeastern British Columbia, Canada: Sedimen-
tology, v. 27, p. 3–29.
NICHOLAS, A.P., AND MCLELLAND, S.J., 1999, Hydrodynamics of a flood-
plain recirculation zone investigated by field monitoring and numeri-
cal simulation, in Marriott, S.B., and Alexander, J., eds., Floodplains:
Interdisciplinary Approaches: Geological Society of London, Special
Publication 163, p. 15–26.
NORTH, C.P., 1996, The prediction and modelling of subsurface fluvial
stratigraphy, in Carling, P.A., and Dawson, M.R., eds., Advances in
Fluvial Dynamics and Stratigraphy: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, p. 395–
508.
167
NORTH, C.P., AND TAYLOR, K.S., 1996, Ephemeral-fluvial deposits: inte-
grated outcrop and simulation studies reveal complexity: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 80, p. 811–830.
OLSEN, H., 1990, Astronomical forcing of meandering river behaviour:
Milankovitch cycles in Devonian of East Greenland: Palaeogeography,
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 79, p. 99–115.
OLSEN, H., 1994, Orbital forcing on continental depositional systems—
lacustrine and fluvial cyclicity in the Devonian of East Greenland, in
de Boer, P.L., and Smith, D.G., eds., Orbital Forcing and Cyclic
Sequences: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special
Publication 19, p. 429–438.
OUCHI, S., 1985, Response of alluvial rivers to slow active tectonic move-
ment: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 96, p. 504–515.
PAOLA, C., 2000, Quantitative models of sedimentary basin filling: Sedi-
mentology, v. 47 (Suppl.1), p. 121–178.
PAOLA, C., AND BORGMAN, L., 1991, Reconstructing random topography
from preserved stratification: Sedimentology, v. 38, p. 553–565.
PAOLA, C., HELLER, P.L., AND ANGEVINE, C.L., 1992, The large-scale dynam-
ics of grain-size variation in alluvial basins. 1—Theory: Basin Re-
search, v. 4, p. 73–90.
PAOLA, C., WIELE, S.M., AND REINHART, M.A., 1989, Upper-regime parallel
lamination as the result of turbulent sediment transport and low-
amplitude bedforms: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 47–60.
PAOLA, C., PARKER, G., MOHRIG, D.C., AND WHIPPLE, K.X., 1999, The influence
of transport fluctuations on spatially averaged topography on a
sandy, braided fluvial plain, in Harbaugh, J.W., Watney, W.L., Rankey,
E.C., Slingerland, R., Goldstein, R.H., and Franseen, E.K., eds., Nu-
merical Experiments in Stratigraphy: Recent Advances in Strati-
graphic and Sedimentologic Computer Simulations: SEPM, Special
Publication 62, p. 211–218.
PAOLA, C., MULLIN, J., ELLIS, C., MOHRIG, D.C., SWENSON, J.B., PARKER, G.,
HICKSON, T., HELLER, P.L., PRATSON, L., SYVITSKI, J., SHEETS, B., AND
STRONG, N., 2001, Experimental stratigraphy: GSA Today, v. 11 , no. 7,
p. 4–9.
PATRA, K.C., AND KAR, S.K., 2000, Flow interaction of meandering river
with floodplains: American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, v. 126, p. 593–604.
PEAKALL, J., 1998, Axial river evolution in response to half-graben faulting:
Carson River, Nevada: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 68, p. 788–
799.
PEAKALL, J., LEEDER, M., BEST, J., AND ASHWORTH, P., 2000, River response to
lateral ground tilting: a synthesis and some implications for the
modelling of alluvial architecture in extensional basins: Basin Re-
search, v. 12, p. 413–424.
PEMBERTON, S.G., MACEACHERN, J.A., AND FREY, R.W., 1992, Trace fossil
facies models: environmental and allostratigraphic significance, in
Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., Facies Models: Geological Association
of Canada, p. 47–72.
PEREZ-ARLUCEA, M., AND SMITH, N.D., 1999, Depositional patterns follow-
ing the 1870s avulsion of the Saskatchewan River (Cumberland
Marshes, Saskatchewan): Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 69, p.
62–73.
PLATT, N.H., AND KELLER, B., 1992, Distal alluvial deposits in a foreland
basin setting—the Lower Freshwater Molasse (Lower Miocene),
Switzerland: sedimentology, architecture and palaeosols: Sedimen-
tology, v. 39, p. 545–565.
QUINLAN, G.M., AND BEAUMONT, C., 1984, Appalachian thrusting, litho-
spheric flexure, and the Paleozoic stratigraphy of the eastern interior
of North America: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 21, p. 973–
996.
READ, W.A., 1994, High-frequency, glacial-eustatic sequences in early
Namurian coal-bearing fluviodeltaic deposits, central Scotland, in de
Boer, P.L., and Smith, D.G., eds., Orbital Forcing and Cyclic Se-
quences: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Pub-
lication 19, p. 413–428.
168 JOHN S. BRIDGE
RETALLACK, G.J., 1997, A Colour Guide to Paleosols: Chichester, U.K.,
Wiley, 175 p.
RETALLACK, G.J., 2001, Soils of the past; An Introduction to Paleopedology,
Second Edition: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell, 404 p.
RICE, S.P., AND CHURCH, M., 2001, Longitudinal profiles in simple alluvial
systems: Water Resources Research, v. 37, p. 417–426.
RICHARDSON, W.R.R., AND THORNE, C.R., 1998, Secondary currents and
channel changes around a braid bar in the Brahmaputra River,
Bangladesh: American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of Hydrau-
lic Engineering, v. 124, p. 325–328.
RICHARDSON, W.R.R., THORNE, C.R., AND MAHMOOD, S., 1996, Secondary
flow and channel changes around a bar in the Brahmaputra River,
Bangladesh, in Ashworth, P.J., Bennett, S.J., Best, J.L., and McLelland,
S.J., eds., Coherent Flow Structures in Open Channels: Chichester,
U.K., Wiley, p. 519–543.
ROBINSON, R.L., AND SLINGERLAND, R.L., 1998a, Origin of fluvial grain-size
trends in a foreland basin: the Pocono Formation of the central
Appalachian basin: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 68, p. 473–
486.
ROBINSON, R.L., AND SLINGERLAND, R.L., 1998b, Grain-size trends and basin
subsidence in the Campanian Castlegate Sandstone and equivalent
conglomerates of central Utah: Basin Research, v. 10, p. 109–127.
ROBINSON, R.A.J., SLINGERLAND, R.L., AND WALSH, J.M., 2001, Predicting
fluvial–deltaic aggradation in Lake Roxburgh, New Zealand: test of
a water and sediment routing model, in Merriam, D.F., and Davis,
J.C., eds., Geologic Modeling and Simulation; Sedimentary Systems:
New York, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, p. 119–132.
SADLER, P.M., 1981, Sediment accumulation rates and the completeness of
stratigraphic sections: Journal of Geology, v. 89, p. 569–584.
SALTER, T., 1993, Fluvial scour and incision: models for their influence on
the development of realistic reservoir geometries, in North, C.P., and
Prosser, D.J., eds., Characterization of Fluvial and Aeolian Reservoirs:
Geological Society of London, Special Publication 73, p. 33–51.
SANDBERG, P.A., 1983, An oscillating trend in Phanerozoic nonskeletal
carbonate mineralogy: Nature, v. 305, p. 19–22.
SAUCIER, R.T., 1994, Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of
the Lower Mississippi Valley: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Missis-
sippi River Commission, Vicksburg, 364 p.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1968, Speculations concerning paleohydrologic controls of
terrestrial sedimentation: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v.
79, p. 1573–1588.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1977, The Fluvial System: New York, Wiley, 338 p.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1986, Alluvial river response to active tectonics, in Active
Tectonics: National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., p. 80–94.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1993, River response to baselevel change: implications for
sequence stratigraphy: Journal of Geology, v. 101, p. 279–294.
SCHUMM, S.A., DUMONT, J.F., AND HOLBROOK, J.M., 2000, Active Tectonics
and Alluvial Rivers: Cambridge, U.K., Cambridge University Press,
276 p.
SCHUMM, S.A., AND KHAN, H.R., 1972, Experimental study of channel
patterns: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 83, p. 1755–1770.
SCHUMM, S.A., MOSLEY, M.P., AND WEAVER, W.E., 1987, Experimental Flu-
vial Geomorphology: New York Wiley, 413 p.
SEIFERT, D., AND JENSEN, J.L., 1999, Using sequential indicator simulation as
a tool in reservoir description: issues and uncertainties: Mathematical
Geology, v. 31, p. 527–550.
SEIFERT, D., AND JENSEN, J.L., 2000, Object and pixel-based reservoir model-
ing of a braided fluvial reservoir: Mathematical Geology, v. 32, p. 581–
603.
SELLIN, R.H.J., AND WILLETTS, B.B., 1996, Three-dimensional structures,
memory and energy dissipation in meandering compound channel
flow, in Anderson, M.G., Walling, D.E., and Bates, P.D., eds., Flood-
plain Processes: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, p. 255–298.
SHANLEY, K.W., AND MCCABE, P.J., 1993, Alluvial architecture in a sequence
stratigraphic framework: a case history from the Upper Cretaceous of
southern Utah, USA, in Flint, S., and Bryant, I.D., eds., The Geological
Modeling of Hydrocarbon Reservoirs and Outcrop Analogues: Inter-
national Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 15, p.
21–56.
SHANLEY, K.W., AND MCCABE, P.J., 1994, Perspectives on the sequence
stratigraphy of continental strata: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 544–568.
SHEAR, W.A., AND SELDEN, P.A., 2001, Rustling in the undergrowth: animals
in early terrestrial ecosystems, in Gensel, P.G., and Edwards, D., eds.,
Plants Invade the Land: New York, Columbia University Press, p. 29–
51.
SHEETS, B.A., HICKSON, T.A., AND PAOLA, C., 2002, Assembling the strati-
graphic record: depositional patterns and time-scales in an experi-
mental alluvial basin: Basin Research, v. 14, p. 287–301.
SINHA, S.K., AND PARKER, G., 1996, Causes of concavity in longitudinal
profiles of rivers: Water Resources Research, v. 32, p. 1417–1428
SKELLY, R.L., BRISTOW, C.S., AND ETHRIDGE, F.G., 2003, Architecture of
channel-belt deposits in an aggrading shallow sandbed braided river:
the lower Niobrara River, northeast Nebraska: Sedimentary Geology,
v. 158, p. 249–270.
SLINGERLAND, R.L., AND SMITH, N.D., 1998, Necessary conditions for a
meandering-river avulsion: Geology, v. 26, p. 435–438.
SLINGERLAND, R.L., AND SMITH, N.D., 2004, River avulsions and their depos-
its: Annual Review of Earth and Planetery Sciences, v. 32, p. 255–283.
SLINGERLAND, R., HARBAUGH, J.W., AND FURLONG, K.P., 1994, Simulating
Clastic Sedimentary Basins: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice
Hall, 220 p.
SMITH, D.G., 1983, Anastomosed fluvial deposits: modern examples from
Western Canada, in Collinson, J.D., and Lewin, J., eds., Modern and
Ancient Fluvial Systems: International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Special Publication 6, p. 155–168.
SMITH, D.G., AND SMITH, N.D., 1980, Sedimentation in anastomosed river
systems: examples from alluvial valleys near Bauff, Alberta: Journal
of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 50, p. 157–164.
SMITH, N.D., 1971, Transverse bars and braiding in the Lower Platte River,
Nebraska: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 82, p. 3407–3420.
SMITH, N.D., 1972, Some sedimentological aspects of planar cross-stratifi-
cation in a sandy braided river: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v.
42, p. 624–634.
SMITH, N.D., 1974, Sedimentology and bar formation in the upper Kicking
Horse River, a braided outwash stream: Journal of Geology, v. 81, p.
205–223.
SMITH, N.D., CROSS, T.A., DUFFICY, J.P., AND CLOUGH, S.R., 1989, Anatomy of
an avulsion: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 1–23.
SMITH, N.D., AND PEREZ-ARLUCEA, M., 1994, Fine-grained splay deposition
in the avulsion belt of the lower Saskatchewan River, Canada: Journal
of Sedimentary Research, v. B64, p. 159–168.
SMITH, N.D., AND ROGERS, J., eds., 1999, Fluvial Sedimentology VI: Interna-
tional Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 28, 478 p.
SMITH, N.D., SLINGERLAND, R.L., PÉREZ-ARLUCEA, M., AND MOROZOVA, G.S.,
1998, The 1870s avulsion of the Saskatchewan River: Canadian Jour-
nal of Earth Sciences, v. 35, p. 453–466.
SMITH, R.M.H., MASON, T.R., AND WARD, J.D., 1993, Flash-flood sediments
and ichnofacies of the Late Pleistocene Homeb Silts, Kuiseb River,
Namibia: Sedimentary Geology, v. 85, p. 579–599.
SRIVASTAVA, R.M., 1994, An overview of stochastic methods for reservoir
characterization, in Yarus, J.M., and Chambers, R.L., eds., Stochastic
Modeling and Geostatistics: American Association of Petroleum Ge-
ologists, Computer Applications in Geology 3, p. 3–16.
STEEL, R.J., MÆHLE, S., NILSEN, H., RØE, S.L., AND SPINNANGER, A., 1977,
Coarsening-upward cycles in the alluvium of the Hornelen basin
(Devonian, Norway): sedimentary response to tectonic events: Geo-
logical Society of America, Bulletin, v. 88, p. 1124–1134.
STOJIC, M., CHANDLER, J.H., ASHMORE, P., AND LUCE, J., 1998, The assess-
ment of sediment transport rates by automated digital photogram-
 FLUVIAL FACIES MODELS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
metry: Photogrammmetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, v. 64,
p. 387–395.
STORMS, J.E.A., VAN DAM, R.L., AND LECLAIR, S.F., 1999, Preservation of
cross-sets due to migration of current ripples over aggrading and
non-aggrading beds: comparison of experimental data with theory:
Sedimentology, v. 46, p. 189–200.
STOUTHAMER, E., 2001, Sedimentary products of avulsions in the Holocene
Rhine–Meuse Delta, The Netherlands: Sedimentary Geology, v. 145,
p. 73–92.
STOUTHAMER, E., AND BERENDSEN, H.J.A., 2000, Factors controlling the Ho-
locene avulsion history of the Rhine–Meuse delta (The Netherlands):
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 70, p. 1051–1064.
STOUTHAMER, E., AND BERENDSEN, H.J.A., 2001, Avulsion frequency, avul-
sion duration, and interavulsion period of Holocene channel belts in
the Rhine–Meuse delta, The Netherlands: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 71, p. 589–598.
SUN, T., MEAKIN, P., AND JOSSANG, T., 2001, Meander migration and the
lateral tilting of floodplains: Water Resources Research, v. 37, p. 1485–
1502.
SUN, T., PAOLA, C., PARKER, G., AND MEAKIN, P., 2002, Fluvial fan deltas:
Linking channel processes with large-scale morphodynamics: Water
Resources Research, v. 38, p. 1151.
SZERBIAK, R.B., MCMECHAN, G.A., CORBEANU, R., FORSTER, C., AND SNELGROVE,
S.H., 2001, 3-D characterization of a clastic reservoir analog: From 3-
D GPR data to a 3-D fluid permeability model: Geophysics, v. 66, p.
1026–1037.
TEN BRINKE, W.B.M., WILBERS, A.W.E., AND WESSELING, C., 1999, Dune
growth, decay and migration rates during a large magnitude flood at
a sand and mixed sand–gravel bed in the Dutch Rhine river system,
in Smith, N.D., and Rogers, J., eds., Fluvial Sedimentology VI: Inter-
national Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 28, p.
15–32.
THORNE, C.R., RUSSELL, A.P.G., AND ALAM, M.K., 1993, Platform pattern and
channel evolution of Brahmaputra River, Bangladesh, in Best, J.L.,
and Bristow, C.S., eds., Braided Rivers: Geological Society of London,
Special Publication 75, p. 257–276.
TÖRNQVIST, T.E., 1993, Holocene alternation of meandering and anasto-
mosing fluvial systems in the Rhine–Meuse Delta (central Nether-
lands) controlled by sea-level rise and subsoil erodibility: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 63, p. 683–693.
TÖRNQVIST, T.E., 1994, Middle and late Holocene avulsion history of the
River Rhine (Rhine–Meuse Delta, Netherlands): Geology, v. 22, p.
711–714.
TÖRNQVIST, T.E., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 2002, Spatial variation of overbank
aggradation rate and its influence on avulsion frequency: Sedimen-
tology, v. 49, p. 891–905.
TÖRNQVIST, T.E., WALLINGA, J., MURRAY, A.S., DE WOLF, H., CLEVERINGA, P.,
AND DE GANS, W., 2000, Response of the Rhine–Meuse system (west-
central Netherlands) to the last Quaternary glacio-eustatic cycles:
Global Planetetary Change, v. 27, p. 89–111.
TUCKER, G.E., AND SLINGERLAND, R.L., 1996, Predicting sediment flux from
fold and thrust belts: Basin Research, v. 8, p. 329–349.
TUCKER, G.E., LANCASTER, S.T., GASPARINI, N.M., AND BRAS, R.L., 2002, The
Channel–Hillslope Integrated Landscape Development Model
(CHILD), in Harmon, R.S., and Doe, W.W., III, eds., Landscape
Erosion and Evolution Modeling: New York, Kluwer Academic
Publishing, p. 349–388.
TYE, R.S., AND COLEMAN, J.M., 1989a, Depositional processes and stratigra-
phy of fluvially dominated lacustrine deltas: Mississippi Delta Plain:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 59, p. 973–996.
TYE, R.S., AND COLEMAN, J.M., 1989b, Evolution of Atchafalaya lacus-
trine deltas, south-central Louisiana: Sedimentary Geology, v. 65,
p. 95–112.
TYLER, K., HENRIQUEZ, A., AND SVANES, T., 1994, Modeling heterogeneities in
fluvial domains: a review of the influence on production profiles, in
169
Yarus J.M., and Chambers, R.L., eds., Stochastic Modeling and Geo-
statistics: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Computer
Applications in Geology 3, p. 77–89.
VAIL, P.R., MITCHUM, R.M., JR., TODD, R.G., WIDMIER, J.M., THOMPSON, S., III,
SANGREE, J.B., BUBB, J.N., AND HATLELID, W.G., 1977, Seismic stratigra-
phy and global changes in sea-level, in Payton, C.E., ed., Seismic
Stratigraphy—Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 26, p. 49–212.
VALENTINE, E.M., BENSON, I.A., NALLURI, C., AND BATHURST, J.C., 2001,
Regime theory and the stability of straight channels with bankfull and
overbank flow: Journal of Hydraulic Research, v. 39, p. 259–268.
VAN DEN BERG, J.H., AND VAN GELDER, A., 1993, A new bedform stability
diagram, with emphasis on the transition of ripples to plane bed in
flows over fine sand and silt, in Marzo, M., and Puidefàbregas C., eds.,
Alluvial Sedimentation: International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Special Publication 17, p. 11–21.
VAN HEIJST, M.W.I.M., AND POSTMA, G., 2001, Fluvial response to sea-level
changes: a quantitative analogue, experimental approach: Basin Re-
search, v. 13, p. 269–292.
VAN NIEKERK, A., VOGEL, A.K., SLINGERLAND, R., AND BRIDGE, J., 1992, Routing
heterogeneous size–density sediments over a moveable bed: model
development, American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal of Hy-
draulic Engineering, v. 118, p. 246–262.
VAN TASSELL, J., 1994, Cyclic deposition of the Devonian Catskill Delta of
the Appalachian, U.S.A, in de Boer, P.L., and Smith, D.G., eds., Orbital
Forcing and Cyclic Sequences: International Association of Sedimen-
tologists, Special Publication 19, p. 395–411.
VEIZER, J., GODDERIS, Y., AND FRANCOIS, L.M., 2000, Evidence for decoupling
of atmospheric CO2 and global climate during the Phanerozoic eon:
Nature, v. 408, p. 698–701.
VELIKANOV, Z.M., AND YARNYKH, N.A., 1970, Field investigations of the
hydraulics of a floodplain during a high flood: Soviet Hydrology:
Selected Papers, v. 5, p. 426–440.
VOGEL, K., VAN NIEKERK, A., SLINGERLAND, R., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 1992, Routing
of heterogeneous size-density sediments over a moveable bed: model
verification and testing: American Society of Civil Engineers, Journal
of Hydraulic Engineering, v. 118, p. 263–279.
WARBURTON, J., AND DAVIES, T., 1994, Variability of bedload transport and
channel morphology in a braided river hydraulic model: Earth Sur-
face Processes and Landforms, v. 19, p. 403–421.
WEBB, E.K., 1994, Simulating the three-dimensional distribution of sedi-
ment units in braided stream deposits: Journal of Sedimentary Re-
search, v. B64, p. 219–231.
WEBB, E.K., 1995, Simulation of braided channel topology and topogra-
phy: Water Resources Research, v. 31, p. 2603–2611.
WEBB, E.K., and Anderson, M.P., 1996, Simulation of preferential flow in
three-dimensional, heterogeneous conductivity fields with realistic
internal architecture: Water Resources Research, v. 32, p. 533–545.
WESCOTT, W.A., 1993, Geomorphic thresholds and complex response of
fluvial systems—some implications for sequence stratigraphy:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 77, p.
1208–1218.
WESTAWAY, R.M., LANE, S.N., AND HICKS, D.M., 2000, The development of
an automated correction procedure for digital photogrammetry for
the study of wide, shallow, gravel-bed rivers: Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms, v. 25, p. 209–226.
WHITING, P.J., AND DIETRICH, W.E., 1993a, Experimental constraints on bar
migration through bends: implications for meander wavelength se-
lection: Water Resources Research, v. 29, p. 1091–1102.
WHITING, P.J., AND DIETRICH, W.E., 1993b, Experimental studies of bed
topography and flow patterns in large-amplitude meanders: 1. Ob-
servations: Water Resources Research, v. 29, p. 3605–3614.
WILBERS, A.W.E., AND TEN BRINKE, W.B.M., 2003, The response of subaque-
ous dunes to floods in sand and gravel bed reaches of the Dutch Rhine:
Sedimentology, v. 50, p. 1013–1034.
170 JOHN S. BRIDGE

WILLETTS, B.B., AND RAMESHWARAN, P., 1996, Meandering overbank flow

structures, in Ashworth, P.J., Bennett, S.J., Best, J.L., and McLelland,
S.J., eds., Coherent Flow Structures in Open Channels: Chichester,
U.K., Wiley, p. 609–629.
WILLIAMS, G.P., 1988, Paleofluvial estimates from dimensions of former
channels and meanders, in Baker, V.R., Kochel, R.C., and Patton, P.C.,
eds., Flood Geomorphology: Chichester, U.K., Wiley, p. 321–334.
WILLIS, B.J., 1989, Paleochannel reconstructions from point bar deposits: a
three-dimensional perspective: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 757–766.
WILLIS, B.J., 1993a, Ancient river systems in the Himalayan foredeep,
Chinji village area, northern Pakistan: Sedimentary Geology, v. 88, p.
1–76.
WILLIS, B.J., 1993b, Evolution of Miocene fluvial systems in the Himalayan
foredeep through a two kilometer-thick succession in northern Paki-
stan: Sedimentary Geology, v. 88, p. 77–121.
WILLIS, B.J., 1993c, Interpretation of bedding geometry within ancient
point-bar deposits, in Marzo, M., and Puidefàbregas, C., eds., Alluvial
Sedimentation: International Association of Sedimentologists, Spe-
cial Publication 17, p. 101–114.
WILLIS, B.J., 1997, Architecture of fluvial-dominated valley-fill deposits in
the Cretaceous Fall River Formation. Sedimentology, v. 44, p. 735–
757.
WILLIS, B.J., AND BEHRENSMEYER, A.K., 1994, Architecture of Miocene
overbank deposits in Northern Pakistan: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. B64, p. 60–67.
WOOD, L.J., ETHRIDGE, F.G., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1993, An experimental study
of the influence of subaqueous shelf angles on coastal plain and shelf
deposits, in Weimer, P., and Posamentier, H.W., eds., Siliciclastic
Sequence Stratigraphy: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Memoir 58, p. 381–391.
WOODWARD, J., ASHWORTH, P.J., BEST, J.L., SAMBROOK SMITH, G.H., AND
SIMPSON, C.J., 2003, The use and application of GPR in sandy fluvial
environments: methodological considerations, in Bristow, C.S., and
Jol, H.M., eds., Ground Penetrating Radar in Sediments: Geological
Society of London, Special Publication 211, p. 127–142.
WORMLEATON, P.R., 1996, Floodplain secondary circulation as a mecha-
nism for flow and shear stress redistribution in straight compound
channels, in Ashworth, P.J., Bennett, S.J., Best, J.L., and McLelland,
S.J., eds., Coherent Flow Structures in Open Channels: Chichester,
U.K., Wiley, p. 581–608
WRIGHT, V.P., 1999, Assessing flood duration gradients and fine-scale
environmental change on ancient floodplains, in Marriott, S.B., and
Alexander, J., eds., Floodplains: Interdisciplinary Approaches: Geo-
logical Society of London, Special Publication 163, p. 279–287.
WRIGHT, V.P., AND MARRIOTT, S.B., 1993, The sequence stratigraphy of
fluvial depositional systems: the role of floodplain sediment storage:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 86, p. 203–210.
WRIGHT, V.P., AND PLATT, N.H., 1995, Seasonal wetland carbonate se-
quences and dynamic catenas: a re-appraisal of palustrine limestones:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 99, p. 65–71.
ZALEHA, M.J., 1997a, Siwalik paleosols (Miocene, northern Pakistan):
genesis and controls on their formation: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 67, p. 821–839.
ZALEHA, M.J., 1997b, Fluvial and lacustrine palaeoenvironments of the
Miocene Siwalik Group, Khaur area, northern Pakistan: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 44, p. 349–368.
ZALEHA, M.J., 1997c, Intra- and extrabasinal controls on fluvial deposition
in the Miocene Indo-Gangetic basin, northern Pakistan: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 44, p. 369–390.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 171

ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS

RON BOYD
Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of Newcastle, New South Wales 2308, Australia
e-mail:
ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE
Department of Geological Sciences and Geological Engineering, Queens University, Kingston Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada
AND
BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
Suncor Energy Inc., Prospect Generation Services, Calgary, Alberta T2P 2V5, Canada

ABSTRACT: Modern estuaries and incised valleys are important depositional settings that have widespread significance for human land use.
The deposits of these environments are economically important for hydrocarbon exploration and production. Estuaries and incised valleys
are a complex and possibly unique environmental grouping, inasmuch as they represent creation of depositional space by one process
(mainly fluvial erosion) and fill of that space by a range of other processes (fluvial, estuarine, and marine deposition).
Early investigations of valleys began slowly in Greek and Roman times, but increased in the nineteenth century, when they were used
to develop ideas on the age of the earth in uniformitarian debates. Gradual progress was made throughout the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries with the introduction of ideas on river grade, fluvial equilibrium profiles, and base level, followed by the development of fluvial
facies models in the 1960s. Studies on estuaries began in earnest much later than those on valleys, and major advances were not made until
the mid-twentieth century, with development of the first comprehensive facies model in the 1990s.
Research on estuaries and incised valleys was energized in the 1980s by the concept of sequence stratigraphy, and work in the field has
mushroomed since then. Indeed, the currently used facies models for estuaries and incised valleys were among the first to explicitly take
into account the external control on the creation of accommodation and to be presented in a sequence-stratigraphic framework. In line with
other sedimentary environments, the facies models for estuary and incised-valley environments have also proliferated, leading to the need
for fundamental advances in how facies models are conceived.
Estuaries, as defined geologically here, are transgressive in nature. They receive sediment from both fluvial and marine sources,
commonly occupy the seaward portion of a drowned valley, contain facies influenced by tide, wave, and fluvial processes, and are
considered to extend from the landward limit of tidal facies at their heads to the seaward limit of coastal facies at their mouths. Estuaries
can be divided, on the basis of the relative power of wave and tidal processes, into two main types, wave-dominated estuaries and tide-
dominated estuaries. Estuarine facies models exhibit generally retrogradational stacking of facies and a tripartite zonation reflecting the
interaction of marine and fluvial processes. All estuaries and incised valleys have a fluvial input by definition, but estuarine facies models
reflect the balance between wave and tidal processes.
Valleys form because the transport capacity of a river exceeds its sediment supply. An incised-valley system is defined as a fluvially
eroded, elongate topographic low that is characteristically larger than a single channel, and is marked by an abrupt seaward shift of
depositional facies across a regionally mappable sequence boundary at its base. The fill typically begins to accumulate during the next base-
level rise, and it may contain deposits of the following highstand and subsequent sea-level cycles if the accommodation is not filled during
the first sea-level cycle. Incised valleys may be formed by either a piedmont or a coastal-plain river and can exhibit a simple or compound
fill. The erosion that creates many incised valleys is thought to be linked to relative sea-level fall, although climatically produced changes
in discharge and/or sediment supply may independently cause incision, even in areas far removed from the coast. In the case of valleys
in coastal areas, fluvial deposition typically begins at the mouth of the incised-valley system when sea level is at its lowest point and expands
progressively farther up the valley as the transgression proceeds, producing depositional onlap in the valley. Based on the longitudinal
distribution of broad depositional environments, the length of an incised valley can be divided into three segments. Ideally, the fill of the
seaward portion of the incised-valley (segment 1) is characterized by backstepping (lowstand to transgressive) fluvial and estuarine
deposits, overlain by transgressive marine deposits. The middle reach of the incised valley (segment 2) consists of the drowned-valley
estuarine complex that existed at the time of maximum transgression, overlying a lowstand to transgressive succession of fluvial and
estuarine deposits similar to those present in segment 1. The innermost reach of the incised valley (segment 3) is developed headward of
the transgressive estuarine–marine limit and extends to the point where relative sea-level changes no longer controlled fluvial style (i.e.,
to the landward limit of sea-level-controlled incision). This segment contains only fluvial deposits; however, the fluvial style changes
systematically due to changes in the rate of change of base level. The effect of base-level change decreases inland until eventually climatic,
tectonic, and sediment-supply factors become the dominant controls on the fluvial system. In valleys far removed from the sea, the fill
consists entirely of terrestrial deposits, but shows changes in fluvial style that are similar to those in segment 3, even though the stacking
patterns are controlled more by local tectonics and climate.
Recent and future development of estuarine and incised-valley facies models has emphasized the use of ichnology to recognize brackish-
water deposits and the ability to subdivide compound valley fills on the basis of sediment composition. Imaging the valley and its fill has
been greatly improved with 3D and 4D seismic techniques. Seabed mapping of modern estuaries has enabled detailed distributions of facies
and morphology to be compiled, enhancing the ability to predict these features in ancient rocks. Our current set of facies models represents
the early classification stage in the development of depositional models. The appropriate way forward appears to be a transformation from
qualitative approaches to empirical and quantitative computer-based models with predictive capability, based on a thorough understand-
ing of the dominant processes operating in each environment.

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 171–235.
172 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

INTRODUCTION linked facies-model approach. The other main components of

Estuaries and incised valleys and their preserved deposits
(E&IVs; Figure 1) are important depositional settings that have
widespread significance as the sites of human habitation, as
harbors, as the host of significant hydrocarbon reserves, and as
the repository of important information on lowstand to early
transgressive sedimentation in ramp and shelf settings. Petro-
leum explorationists, in particular, have focused on E&IV de-
posits because of the economically significant quantities of
hydrocarbons produced from reservoirs hosted by the fill of
incised valleys (Table 1; e.g., Zaitlin and Shultz, 1984, 1990; Van
Wagoner et al., 1990; Brown, 1993; Dolson et al., 1991). For
example, Brown (1993) estimated that ~ 25% of worldwide off-
structure conventional petroleum traps in clastic reservoirs are
hosted within incised-valley systems, with the single largest
petroleum reserves in the world (the Athabasca Tar Sands)
being hosted by incised-valley deposits. Therefore, a clear un-
derstanding of the internal facies architecture, reservoir charac-
teristics, and production behavior of incised-valley systems is of
critical importance to the exploration for and exploitation of
incised-valley reservoirs.
Estuaries and incised valleys are a complex and possibly
unique grouping of sedimentary environments, inasmuch as
their formation and development involve creation of deposi-
tional space mainly by one process (fluvial erosion) and the filling
of that space by a range of other processes (fluvial, tidal, and
wave), in the presence of water of variable salinity. It is the close
association of incised valleys with estuarine fill that has resulted
in these two environments being considered together here in a
incised-valley fills (fluvial and marine sediments) are treated in
separate sections of this publication.
Estuaries are also complex environments in that they contain
the interrelated depositional products of wave, tide, and river
processes within a relatively restricted area. This complexity
caused the development of facies models for estuaries to lag
behind those of most other adjacent environments such as rivers
or beaches. For example, earlier editions of the Facies Models text
(Walker 1979, 1984a, Walker and James 1992) did not have stand-
alone consideration of either estuaries or incised valleys.
Because of the nature and complexity of E&IV facies models,
this paper begins with a section on the development of both of
these fields, to place the concepts in their historical framework.
The next section details the authors’ approach to facies models in
general and the place of E&IV models in that approach. The
remainder of the paper consists of outlining the current facies
models for E&IVs, discussing how to use those models in practi-
cal applications, illustrated by reference to both ancient and
modern examples and case studies. It concludes with a section on
recent and future developments in the field.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF IDEAS ON
ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
Incised Valleys
The following discussion represents a short historical sum-
mary of facies models for E&IVs. For more detail, the reader is
referred to excellent reviews such as Dalrymple et al. (1994b),

TABLE 1.—Super-giant petroleum reservoirs hosted within incised-valley (IV) deposits (i.e., reservoirs with reserves
> 50 MMBOE estimated ultimate recovery). Summarized from Dolson et al. (1991) and Pulham (1994).

Field/Trend Basin EUR (Mmboe) Age Environment

Athabasca Oil Sands Western Canada 665000 Cretaceous Fluvial–Estuarine-IV
Canada, Alberta Sedimentary Basin
Messla-Faregh Sirte 1500 Cretaceous Fluvial–Estuarine-IV
Libya
Burbank Mcalester 500 Pennsylvanian Fluvial-IV
Oklahoma
Cutbank WCSB 199 Cretaceous Fluvial-IV
Montana
Hilight Powder River 108 Cretaceous Fluvial–Estuarine-IV
Wyoming
Churches Buttes Green River 77 Cretaceous Fluvial-IV
Wyoming
South Glenrock Powder River 75 Cretaceous Fluvial–Estuarine-IV
Wyoming
Clinton Anadarko 67 Pennsylvanian Fluvial-IV
Oklahoma
Adena Denver 60 Cretaceous Estuarine-IV
Colorado
Clareton Powder River 60 Cretaceous Fluvial-IV
Wyoming
Stockholm–Arapahoe Las Animas Arch 50 Pennsylvanian Fluvial-IV
Kansas
Cusiana Llanos > 100 Eocene Fluvial–Estuarine-IV
Mirador Fm.
Colombia
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 173

FIG. 1.—Landsat image of the Pamlico–Albermarle Sound area of North Carolina showing a range of incised valleys, estuaries, and
lagoons. The valleys of the Pamlico, Neuse, and Roanoke rivers were incised during sea-level lowstand and have since been
flooded by relative sea-level rise. This has transformed them into wave-dominated estuaries with extensive estuary-mouth-
barrier and tidal-inlet systems. The regions between the valleys are also flooded and flanked seaward by barriers, tidal inlets, and
tidal deltas, but are better described by the term lagoons.
174 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

Miall (1996), and Blum and Törnqvist (2000), from which parts of
the following are derived.
The development of ideas on incised valleys is closely linked
to the investigation of fluvial processes, and these have a long
history of study back to Greek and Roman times. Plato and
Homer both were aware of fluvial sedimentation processes.
Herodotus around 450 B.C. realized the connection between the
Nile River, its valley, and the deposits at its seaward end, to
which he applied the term “delta”. The term “valley” itself
derives from Latin and Old French origins meaning “a long
depression or hollow lying between hills or stretches of high
ground and usually having a river or stream flowing along its
bottom” (Oxford English Dictionary). It was not until the eigh-
teenth century that more specialized study was devoted to river
valleys, and this was mostly a result of the attempt to assign an
age to the Earth. Hutton and his successor Playfair (1802) used
the idea that river valleys were the product of long-term fluvial
erosion to assign a much greater age to the earth than the
opposing Neptunist concepts of recent catastrophism and ori-
gin from floods. These uniformitarian themes using fluvial
processes were further developed in the classic work of Lyell
(1830).
However, it was not until later in the nineteenth century that
the concept of river grade and the fluvial equilibrium profile were
developed, and their relationship to valley erosion and fluvial
deposition was appreciated. Among the first to address these
concepts were Powell (1875), Gilbert (1880), who developed the
idea of base level, and Davis (1908), who illustrated the successive
widening of a valley with age and the influence on the valley
profile of strata of varying resistance. Around the same time,
Penck and Brückner (1909) suggested a climatic control for the
origin of valley terraces in southern Germany, thus initiating a
continuing debate between climatic and fluvial control on valley
development and fluvial deposition (e.g., Fisk 1944, 1947; Blum
1990, 1994; Blum et al. 1994; Blum and Törnqvist, 2000).
The next major development in our understanding of rivers
and valleys came in the mid-twentieth century with the ideas of
Lane (1935, 1955) and Mackin (1948), who took a more hydrody-
namic approach and discussed the effects of equilibrium and the
graded stream in terms of discharge, load, slope, and base-level
parameters. Fisk’s (1944) landmark work on the Mississippi River
developed many of these concepts into a detailed approach to a
single drainage system that considered its response to both
internal sediment parameters and outside forcing by sea-level
changes. Quantitative fluvial geomorphology themes were con-
tinued by Leopold and Wolman (1957), Leopold et al. (1964), and
later Schumm and co-workers (e.g., Schumm 1972, Schumm and
Khan 1972, Ethridge and Schumm 1978). At around the same
time, incised-valley deposits were being recognized as hydrocar-
bon reservoirs for the first time. One of the earliest and best-
described examples of a subsurface depositional system meeting
the criteria of an incised valley was that of Harms (1966) in his
description of stratigraphic traps within the extensive system
associated with the Cretaceous “J” Sandstone in western Ne-
braska (Fig. 2).
Concurrently through the twentieth century, concepts of flu-
vial facies models were slowly being developed, beginning in the
modern sense with the work of Melton (1936), Mackin (1937), and
Happ et al. (1940), and also in Fisk’s Mississippi studies (1944,
1947), culminating in the first major fluvial facies models devel-
oped by Allen (1963, 1964, 1965). Further developments in fluvial
facies models were summarized in the first edition of Facies
Models (Walker, 1979) drawing on many studies of the 1960s and
1970s integrated in papers such as Cant and Walker (1976, 1978),
Miall (1977, 1978), and Rust (1978a, 1978b).
However, the majority of these advances did not deal with the
longer-term evolution of river systems. Instead, they examined
instantaneous fluvial geomorphology, sedimentary structures,
bedforms, paleocurrents, and empirical relationships between
parameters, finally integrating these features into static facies

FIG. 2.—Wireline-log cross section from Harms (1966) showing one of the first and best-described examples of a subsurface
depositional system meeting the criteria of an incised valley—the Cretaceous “J” Sandstone in western Nebraska. The figure
shows the J Sandstone as “valley fill”, incising the regional Skull Creek Shale and Huntsman Shale.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
models for meandering and braided rivers. These studies were
concentrated in terrestrial settings not linked to coastlines. They
were also concerned mainly with the detailed nature of river
deposits and not with a holistic approach to landscape evolution
that encompassed river-valley incision and the large-scale strati-
graphic organization of deposits within those valleys.
Developmental work on fluvial facies models concentrated
more on the products of deposition than erosion and hence
moved away from the early stratigraphic emphasis on uncon-
formities (e.g., Blackwelder, 1909; Schuchert, 1927). A change
back towards these larger-scale themes was precipitated by
the development of seismic stratigraphy and later sequence
stratigraphy in a series of papers by Vail and co-workers
presented first in Payton (1977) and followed up in Posamentier
and Vail (1988) and other related papers in SEPM Special
Publication 42 (Wilgus et al., 1988). In the latter publications,
incised valleys were seen as an integral component of a depo-
sitional sequence, formed during periods of decreasing and
low accommodation (e.g., Van Wagoner et al., 1990). They
were interpreted to form by fluvial incision at the exposed
shelf break and to extend across the continental shelf and into
the adjacent coastal plain. In this sense the application of the
word incised, meaning “cut into” (Oxford English Dictionary)
together with the word valley, was used to mean a valley that
was eroded actively as a result of allocyclic factors (particu-
larly falling relative sea level), to distinguish it from a valley
resulting from other means (e.g., tectonic processes such as
graben formation in a rift valley; Leeder and Gawthorpe,
1987). Thus, the criticism leveled by Blum and Törnqvist (2000)
that all valleys are incised valleys is not valid when the term is
used in a broad sequence-stratigraphic sense.
FIG. 3.—A search of the Georef data base (www.agiweb.org/georef) for the term “incised valley” shows a significant increase in
usage during and after the 1980s, reflecting the widespread acceptance of the sequence-stratigraphy concept (e.g., Posamentier
and Vail, 1988). Significant papers are shown in blue boxes.
175
Further advances in the recognition of incised-valley deposits
and documentation of fill styles were made in Van Wagoner et al.
(1990), another book from the Exxon school of sequence stratigra-
phy. The rapid acceptance of sequence stratigraphy as the pre-
ferred method for stratigraphic analysis and hydrocarbon explora-
tion placed a new significance on the recognition of incised-valley
deposits and energized the decade of the 1990s to produce the first
integrated facies models for these systems. As a result, facies
models for E&IVs were the first to explicitly include a sequence-
stratigraphic approach, and their usage increased rapidly (Fig. 3).
Advances in sequence stratigraphy and its emphasis on the
evolution of depositional systems were instrumental in the
development of these integrated dynamic models as compared
to the more static or autocyclic focus of earlier facies models. A
special session at the 1992 AAPG conference in Calgary was the
source of many of the papers that made up SEPM Special
Publication 51 on incised valleys (Dalrymple et al., 1994a). This
publication presented the first integrated facies model for an
incised-valley system (Zaitlin et al., 1994), together with sum-
maries of the history of incised-valley research (Dalrymple et
al., 1994b) and the origin, evolution, and morphology of fluvial
valleys (Schumm and Ethridge, 1994). A further 19 papers
described a range of incised-valley deposits. More recently, a
2003 SEPM research conference on incised valleys produced an
updated collection of research papers in another SEPM Special
Publication (Dalrymple et al., 2006).
Estuaries
Early work on applied and environmental aspects of estuaries
is plentiful because of the widespread utilization of estuaries as
176 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
harbors and ports (e.g., the Thames, the Hudson, and the Mersey;
e.g., Preddy, 1954; Hughes, 1958) or living space (the Dutch
lowlands; Oomkens and Terwindt, 1960). The presence of tidal
influence is fundamental to the concept of an estuary, and the
Oxford English Dictionary defines an estuary as “the tidal mouth
of a great river, where the tide meets the current of fresh water”
or more fully as a “semi-enclosed coastal body of water which has
a free connection with the open sea and where fresh water,
derived from land drainage, is mixed with sea water. Estuaries
are often subject to tidal action...” (Allaby and Allaby, 1999).
However, this is primarily an oceanographic definition derived
from Pritchard (1967) and is difficult to apply to sediments and
ancient rocks. It can also be ambiguous in a geological context
because the active progradational distributaries of a delta such as
the modern Mississippi can fulfill this definition of an “estuary”
despite having profound stratigraphic differences from those
drowned (i.e., transgressive) river mouths, which are also consid-
ered to be estuaries.
Early geological studies of the modern Severn estuary were
conducted by Sollas (1883), who noted upstream sediment trans-
port and determined a vertical stratigraphic succession. Other
early studies of estuarine sediments were conducted in the Bay of
Fundy (Kindle, 1917) and the Dutch estuaries and tidal flats (e.g.,
Oomkens and Terwindt, 1960; Terwindt, 1963; Van Straaten,
1952, 1954a, 1954b, 1961). Kindle also noticed upstream sediment
transport, while Van Straaten (1952, 1954a) developed a model
for tidal-channel migration (Fig. 4) well before Allen’s (1963)
fluvial version. Much early work seems to have differentiated
between tidal flats and estuaries (e.g., Klein 1967); however,
many of the tidal-flat studies were on sediments that were com-
ponents of larger estuaries (e.g., the Bay of Fundy and the Dutch
and German North Sea coasts). Summaries of estuaries were
produced first in the early to mid-twentieth century (Twenhofel,
1932; Emery and Stevenson, 1957) and commonly dealt with the
FIG. 4.—A) Block diagram and B) enlarged cross section of tidal-flat and tidal-channel sediments in the Dutch Wadden See (from Van
Straaten, 1952, 1954, as modified by Klein, 1967.)
oceanographic and biological aspects, reinforced by detailed
physical oceanographic studies such as Rochford’s (1951) Aus-
tralian work. Studies of ancient estuarine sediments were rare in
the early twentieth century and included Arkell (1933), Pepper et
al. (1954), and Allen and Tarlo (1963). A useful early comparison
summary of modern and ancient estuarine and tidal-flat sedi-
ments was provided by Klein (1967).
However, while estuarine research concentrated on circula-
tion studies and sediment dynamics, and models for fluvial
systems, coasts, and deltas matured slowly, estuarine facies
models did not make comparable advances. Schubel and
Hirschberg as late as 1978 noted that “estuarine deposits rarely
can be delimited unequivocally from other shallow marine de-
posits in the geological record because of their limited areal
extent, their ephemeral character and their lack of distinctive
features”. However, great strides in understanding and recogniz-
ing estuarine sediments were made from the 1960s to the present,
such that integrated models for estuaries were finally available by
the 1990s (e.g., Dalrymple et al., 1992).
Some of the first major steps forward in understanding the
geology of estuaries were the conferences held at Jekyll Island,
Georgia (Lauff, 1967) and Myrtle Beach, South Carolina (Cronin
1975). In the published volumes from these two conferences, an
oceanographic definition of an estuary was formulated (Pritchard,
1967) and later largely accepted. In addition, geomorphological
elements of an estuary were defined (e.g., Russell, 1967; Steers,
1967, Jennings and Bird, 1967), rates of sediment transport and
accumulation were determined (e.g., Postma, 1967; Rusnak, 1967),
and studies that indicated the tripartite sedimentary subdivision
of an estuary were presented (e.g., Kulm and Byrne, 1967; see
Figure 5).
Numerous studies of the morphology and evolution of tidal
inlets characterized work in the 1960s and 1970s (Hoyt and
Henry, 1965; Vallianos, 1975; Oertel, 1975; Hine, 1975; Hubbard,
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 5.—Early example of tripartite estuarine sedimentation zonation, Yaquina Bay, Oregon (original from Kulm and Byrne, 1967).
1975). Many of these studies were influenced by the estuary and
tidal-inlet ideas of M.O. Hayes, who provided the first compre-
hensive sedimentary models for these settings in his classic 1969
and 1975 publications. Hayes (1975) also provided the basis for
division of estuaries into microtidal, mesotidal, and macrotidal
categories, following the tidal classification system of Davies
(1964). These advances in modern systems began to be translated
into detailed studies of ancient successions by authors such as
Land (1972) in the Cretaceous of the Rocky Mountains, Bosence
(1973) in the Eocene London Basin, and Horne and Ferm (1976) in
the Carboniferous of the Appalachians. Beginning in 1985 and
continuing through 2004, research symposia on clastic tidal sedi-
ments (e.g., de Boer et al., 1988; Smith et al., 1991; Bartholdy and
Pedersen, 2004) have provided valuable studies of many modern
and ancient tidal deposits, including documentation of the tidal
sedimentary structures by which tidal deposits can be recog-
nized. More recently, databases and volumes dealing with the
distribution of estuaries across entire continents have been devel-
oped, such as those for Australia (www.ozestuaries.org) and
South America (Perillo et al., 1999).
However, although extensive research continued on estuar-
ies, no comprehensive model identifying and integrating the
range of geomorphological and sedimentary elements was devel-
oped. Clifton’s (1982) summary catalogued many estuarine sedi-
mentary structures and proposed a tidal-channel succession. Roy
(1984) summarized much research on Australian wave-domi-
nated estuaries in a paper that identified a geomorphological
evolution that is the basis of many later models. Nichols and
Biggs (1985) provided an extensive review of estuaries, and,
although summarizing processes and sediment dynamics com-
prehensively, noted that “it is still difficult to hindcast with
certainty under what conditions and in what manner the sedi-
177
ment accumulated”. Most of this earlier research tended to focus
on wave-dominated rather than tide-dominated systems and on
coastal segments that were not necessarily associated with river
mouths.
Reinson’s (1992) and Dalrymple’s (1992) reviews in the third
edition of Facies Models (Walker and James 1992) began to
synthesize much of the earlier work on estuarine facies and facies
successions and began to focus more on the role of tides. In this
1992 volume an early classification was developed (Fig. 6; Reinson,
1992), diagnostic sedimentary structures were identified, and
summary vertical successions were provided. In addition, some
integrated local studies had begun to assemble all of the basic
elements required for later facies models in modern environ-
ments (e.g., Allen 1991; Dalrymple et al., 1990; Nichols et al.,
1991), and in ancient rocks (Zaitlin and Schultz, 1984, 1990;
Demarest and Kraft, 1987; Rahmani, 1988; Wood and Hopkins,
1989). By 1992, Dalrymple et al. had integrated many of these
ideas into a conceptual facies model for estuarine systems that
contained a geological definition of an estuary. This work has
provided the main focus for research since then.
BACKGROUND TO FACIES MODELS AND
THEIR APPLICATION TO ESTUARIES
AND INCISED VALLEYS
Theoretical Basis of Facies Modeling
The facies-model concept as formulated by Walker (1984b,
1992) provides “a general summary of a depositional system
written in terms that make the summary usable in at least (the
following) four different ways”: (1) As a norm for comparison, (2)
As a framework and guide for future observations, (3) As a
178 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
FIG. 6.—Early estuarine classification from Reinson (1992).
predictor in new geologic situations, and (4) As an integrated
basis for interpretation for the system it represents. In practice,
this often translated into an “idealistic” vertical succession of
facies and/or a 3D block diagram of facies relationships that
supposedly portrays the “essence” of the environment. Early
facies models had only one or a limited number of vertical
successions, and 3D block diagrams showed little internal infor-
mation beyond the top and side panel(s) of the diagram.
An important extension of this approach is the display of a
range of vertical successions in different parts of the model (e.g.,
for deltas; Coleman and Prior, 1980; Galloway and Hobday, 1996)
or a spectrum of vertical successions that illustrate the variability
that is possible, as illustrated by the multiple models for braided-
fluvial deposits by Rust (1978a), Rust (1978b), and Miall (1978),
summarized into the 16 “models” provided for fluvial systems by
Miall (1996). However, when this approach is extended to its
logical conclusion, the number of “models” can proliferate, and
hence lose the ability to provide a relatively simple environmen-
tal summary. In this sense the proliferation of models brings into
question the provision of a “norm” (use #1 above, as discussed by
Anderton, 1985). Part of the problem here is the degree to which
each researcher utilizes the technique of “distillation” (Walker,
1984b), in which local variability is removed and replaced with a
simplified model that is based on a summary of the representa-
tive geomorphology and facies (i.e., an idealized view of what
should occur at a specific place on the earth’s surface). Hence we
have problems in appreciating (for example) what the ideal view
of a delta is when we have to confront the contrasts between a
temperate-climate river-dominated mid-latitude delta and a fro-
zen arctic delta or a tide-dominated tropical delta.
In our search for facies and geomorphological simplicity we
may have neglected the fundamental basis for our development
of models, which lies in the characteristic processes that control
sedimentation in any one depositional setting. Hence we should
not expect a single model for the deltas listed above, but we
should expect that all of them follow similar physical laws such
as the dispersion of suspended sediment, the response of bed
material to wave motion and the action of biological agents in the
presence of a salinity gradient. Thus, the key to understanding
depositional environments is to identify the processes that oper-
ate in each one and to determine their sedimentary response or
combination of responses. For example, the combination of waves,
longshore-directed currents, and offshore-directed rip currents
in the surf zone makes for a unique process environment. If we
can identify the corresponding sedimentary responses and de-
posits for this combination of processes we will have generated a
model that summarizes those deposits and their formational
processes. It may not be the only model for nearshore marine
settings, but it should be the only one that experiences that
specific process combination. We then need to examine the
physical, chemical, and biological processes of an environment,
as well as the properties of the sediment supplied to it, to
determine the range of possible outcomes for that environment.
Secondly we need to determine the probability of occurrence of
those process combinations and sediment types. Our ideal facies
model then becomes one that covers the environmental range but
recognizes the most probable combination of processes and
sediments (this is the real distillation process of Walker, 1984b).
Many situations are possible in the real world, but only a small
number are common. Environments with many variables that do
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
not display clustering of common processes and sediment types
will not produce a single representative, useful facies model. On
the other hand, the best facies models will result from environ-
ments with few variables that exhibit frequent repetition of the
same process combinations. Our approach to building an ideal
facies model should then be a quantitative approach that models
the processes and sediments and is capable of creating the full
range of process–sediment interactions in an environment. Ex-
amples of this approach are Syvitski and Daughney (1992) as
applied to deltas, or Cowell et al. (1992, 1995) as applied to
transgressive continental shelves. Our observations derived from
experiments and field work provide the experience that identifies
the processes and geomorphological components, and the prob-
ability of encountering the individual examples throughout the
range of possibilities.
The response to the process combination in each part of the
environment will be a 3D sediment body of a particular shape that
contains a number of characteristic properties. Sediment bodies
of this sort have been termed architectural elements (e.g., Miall,
1985) and equated with facies successions by Walker (1992). The
frequent association of processes results in architectural elements
occurring in common relationships with other adjacent or linked
elements. An example is the frequent association of river flood
plains with levees and channels because of the linked processes
of channel hydraulics and flooding. Because of the direct link
between processes and facies models, the critical laboratory for
constructing models is the modern environment, where the inter-
play between sedimentary process and product can be observed
and recorded in a wide range of settings. Modern environments
are also becoming better suited to the documentation of sedimen-
tary architecture with the advent of high-resolution seismic sur-
veys (particularly 3D surveys), ground-penetrating radar,
multibeam bathymetric surveys, and other remote-sensing tech-
niques such as resistivity surveying. Ancient examples are not as
useful because of the possibility of ambiguity in interpretation of
the contemporaneous processes (the Shannon Sandstone is a
celebrated although extreme example; see for example, Suter and
Clifton, 1999) and the inability to observe those processes di-
rectly. Nevertheless, once processes have been documented and
understood, observation of their depositional products in ancient
rocks can be used to: (1) provide good information on the 3D
geometry of the deposits, (2) extend the range of variability and
scale for examples (such as ice-house versus hothouse climates
and a wide range of tectonic basin settings), (3) document paleo-
geographic development and preservation potential through
time, as well as (4) provide the only information on non-unifor-
mitarian situations such as the pre-Silurian terrestrial processes
prior to the advent of land plants and the widespread presence of
microbial mats prior to the advent of metazoan grazers in the
latest Precambrian (MacNaughton et al., 1997).
The process characterization of an environment takes place at
two scales, the local, autocyclic scale and the regional to global
allocyclic scale. In the first case the controlling variables are
things like fluid shear, salinity, density, and sediment size. The
response is the production of distinctive sedimentary bodies that
reflect the genetic process—these bodies are facies, facies succes-
sions, and architectural elements, and the sedimentological fea-
tures that they contain, such as bedding structures, bioturbation,
and their geometry. In the second (allocyclic) case, the controlling
variables are accommodation (the space made available for sedi-
mentation, sensu Jervey, 1988) and the amount and textural
character of the sediment flux as determined by tectonic, climatic,
and sea-level behavior. The sediment responses here are the
production of distinctive bounding surfaces, and the generation,
preservation, and juxtaposition of stratigraphic units, including
179
their stacking patterns. A facies model for any one environment
should take into account both the autocyclic products to provide
the building blocks and the allocyclic products that describe the
geometric arrangement of those building blocks into the finished
end product.
These principles can be explicitly applied to E&IV facies
models. In this case, the processes involved are primarily a
combination of fluvial, wave, and tidal processes supplemented
locally by other processes such as organic production (e.g., peat
or shell), wind, and density stratification. Wave and tidal pro-
cesses provide a range of possibilities in estuarine systems,
generating a spectrum between macrotidal, tide-dominated set-
tings and microtidal, wave-dominated settings. The combination
of all E&IV processes produces a range of characteristic morpho-
logical elements including river channels and flood plains,
bayhead deltas, estuarine central basins, barriers and tidal inlets,
tidal deltas, and tidal sand flats and ridges. The allocyclic vari-
ables produce fluvial incision during decreases in sediment in-
put, increases in water flux or lowered relative sea level, and
fluvial deposition followed by estuarine deposition during in-
creases in relative sea level and the landward migration of fluvial,
estuarine, and marine lithofacies. Estuarine facies models are
amongst the most complex due to the occurrence of multiple
dominant processes (river, wave, and tide) and specific varied
responses to a range of relative sea-level and sediment-flux
parameters. This complexity contributed to the slow develop-
ment of facies models for E&IV systems.
FORMATION AND FILL OF INCISED VALLEYS
Incised valleys are containers. They are significant strati-
graphic entities because they create a localized space in which
sediment can accumulate, often in areas where space may be
uncommon otherwise (such as the coastal plains of low-accom-
modation basins). Incised valleys should be regarded as a system
in which there are two components, the valley and its fill. These
components may or may not be related in time or formational
process. To understand the incision of a valley by fluvial pro-
cesses (the only mechanism we will address here, neglecting
valleys of structural or tectonic origin) we must consider the
sediment continuity equation , which can be written in its sim-
plest one-dimensional form as
dz/dt + dqs/dx = 0
where z = bed elevation, t = time, qs = width-averaged sediment
transport rate, and x = distance along the channel. Blum and
Törnqvist (2000) show how this equation can be used to identify
channel incision (an increase in z) as the result of the sediment
transport capacity exceeding the sediment supply. Steeper slopes
and coarser grain sizes increase the magnitude and rate of inci-
sion. Incision can result from a change in climate, tectonics, or sea
level, with climate and tectonics becoming more important land-
ward from the shoreline (Shanley and McCabe, 1994).
Much of the modern significance associated with incised
valleys derives from their association with sequence-stratigraphic
concepts (e.g., Posamentier and Vail, 1988; Van Wagoner et al.,
1988; Van Wagoner, 1990; Van Wagoner et al., 1991) and eco-
nomic importance (e.g., Brown, 1993; Dolson et al., 1991). In areas
on the margin of a marine basin, incised valleys are considered to
have formed primarily in response to a fall in relative sea level
and a resulting decrease in accommodation, and are associated
with a regional unconformity. Such a response requires a spe-
cific coastal-plain and continental-shelf geometry to satisfy the
sediment continuity equation. In particular, for the sediment-
180 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
transporting capacity of the stream to increase during sea-level
fall, the river must encounter a significant increase in gradient (a
knickpoint) somewhere seaward of the highstand shoreline (e.g.,
Summerfield, 1985; Schumm, 1993). In other words, the fluvial
equilibrium profile lies below the level of the land surface
(Summerfield, 1985). The incision initiated at this location then
propagates headward to create the valley. In areas with a rela-
tively low-gradient shelf and a distinct, exposed shelf–slope
break, a knickpoint generally coincides with the shelf edge.
However, in cases without a distinct shelf break, or where the
shelf edge lies below the lowstand elevation, incision may not
extend to the shelf edge; instead, recent studies of several such
shelves have shown that incision begins at the break in slope
associated with an earlier lowstand shoreline (e.g., Woolfe et al.,
1998; Posamentier, 2001; Fielding et al., 2003; Wellner and Bartek,
2003) and/or with the immediately preceding highstand coast-
line.
The lateral extent along the stream channel that can be
affected this way is highly debated (see Blum and Törnqvist,
2000), but Quaternary examples suggest that incision across the
entire exposed continental shelf is possible if sea level falls
below the shelf edge (e.g., Suter and Berryhill, 1985), and that
incision upstream of the highstand shoreline (e.g., Ethridge et
al., 1998) is possible for some tens to hundreds of kilometers:
Blum and Törnqvist (2000) suggest a range of from 40 to 400 km
for the upstream limit of coastal onlap. Examples of ancient
incised valleys can reach hundreds of kilometers in length if the
sea-level fall is of sufficient duration and magnitude. The Mis-
sissippian Morrow Formation along the Sorrento–Mt. Pearl–
Siaana and Stateline trends is such an example of a well-docu-
mented valley form that is mappable over hundreds of kilome-
ters (e.g., Krystinik and Blakeney-DeJarnett, 1994; Krystinik,
1989; Bowen and Weimer, 1997). Another documented subsur-
face example of a long incised valley is provided by the Lower
Cretaceous Basal Quartz and its time-equivalent units (e.g.,
Hayes et al., 1994; Zaitlin et al., 2002; Leckie et al., 2005). The
several valleys forming this compound valley fill can be traced
for over 800 km south to north in the Western Canadian Sedi-
mentary Basin. Other examples of throughgoing valley systems
include the Pennsylvanian of the Illinois Basin (Howard and
Whitaker, 1988), the Permian of west-central Texas (Bloomer,
1977), the Lower Cretaceous Glauconitic Formation of Alberta
(Sherwin, 1994), the Lower Cretaceous Viking–Muddy equiva-
lents in western U.S.A. (Harms, 1966; Weimer, 1984; Reinson et
al., 1988; Martinsen et al., 1994; Porter and Sonnenberg, 1994),
and the Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation, Alberta (Plint,
2002; Plint and Wadsworth, 2003). More localized incision is
also possible: in cases where sea level does not fall very far,
incision may occur only in the vicinity of the immediately
preceding highstand shoreline as a result of the relatively steep
slope of the highstand shoreface. Distinguishing such localized
incisions from tidal inlets may be difficult. In areas far removed
from the sea, incision can be induced by increases in slope
caused by tectonic activity or by an increase in the ratio of water
discharge to sediment discharge: determining the cause(s) of
incision in an ancient example can be very difficult.
Incised-valley filling is also highly dependent on the rela-
tionship between accommodation and sediment flux, with fill-
ing beginning when the fluvial equilibrium profile rises above
the level of the valley base. Clearly, because valleys are incised
by fluvial processes, one can expect fluvial sediments to be
deposited at the base of the valley, even if these deposits are only
one meander-belt or channel-bar height thick. In the case of
valleys cut into coastal plains, these fluvial deposits have a
marine influence for some distance landward of the lowstand
shoreline but lack marine influence farther inland. The facies
boundary between tidal–fluvial and purely fluvial deposits
migrates landward as base level rises. Landward of the marine
limit of inundation during relative sea-level highstand, valley-
fill deposits consist entirely of fluvial, lacustrine, and organic
facies (e.g., Shanley and McCabe, 1994). If there is sufficient
terrestrial sediment supplied during valley filling, the valley
may be both cut and filled by fluvial processes. If the valley
remains at least partially unfilled after sea-level lowstand, then
the downdip end experiences estuarine sedimentation during
the subsequent transgression. Seaward of the highstand shore-
line, if the valley is still underfilled after transgression, some of
the valley fill is marine and includes shelf sand and mud facies.
In valleys far removed from coastal areas, all of the valley fill is
fluvial in nature. Terrestrial and marine sediments are covered
in detail elsewhere in this volume and will not be considered
further here. Instead we will concentrate on identifying the
character of estuarine sediments that are a common component
of valley fills in coastal areas and developing an appropriate
facies model for them. Later we will return to see how estuarine
sediments fit into an overall facies model for incised-valley
systems.
COASTAL CLASSIFICATION
Defining precisely what is or is not an estuary, and providing
a useful geological classification scheme for estuaries, as a neces-
sary basis for creating a facies model, has been a long-standing
problem in coastal studies. In order to solve this problem, it is first
necessary to present some basic ideas on coastal classification to
see what estuaries are and how they fit in (see Boyd et al., 1992,
Perillo, 1995, and Bird, 2000, for a more detailed treatment of this
material).
Firstly, we divide coasts into either transgressive or regressive
categories (Figs. 7, 8). Secondly, we divide coasts into those that
are significantly influenced by rivers and those that are not. On
regressive coasts, the interaction between river sediment input
and the ability of marine processes to redistribute that input
determines if the coast will be an elongate or lobate protuberance
(i.e., deltaic) or linear (i.e., strandplain or shoreface or tidal flat;
Boyd et al., 1992). When the rate of relative sea-level rise exceeds
the rate of sediment supply (area above the diagonal line in
Figure 7), transgression with deposition (blue color in Figure 7)
results in the generation of estuaries and lagoons on embayed
coasts and the landward migration of the shoreline and continen-
tal shelf on all linear (tidal-flat and headland) coasts. Coastal cliffs
fall into this latter category and form where the terrestrial gradi-
ent is relatively steep and there is net erosion. It is implicit in this
arrangement that estuaries and lagoons form in areas of low
terrestrial gradient, and only during regional or local trangression.
They should not form or persist through a shoreline regression,
and they should occupy only an ephemeral position at sea-level
highstand until infilled (a critical point to appreciate for manage-
ment of present-day highstand shorelines). However, estuaries
are commonly reestablished in the same location during subse-
quent sea-level cycles, leading to multiple cut-and-fill events in
the sedimentary record. Confirmation of the formation of estuar-
ies during transgressions and their disappearance during regres-
sions is provided by the history of the 3 m sea-level oscillation of
the Caspian Sea over 65 years (Kroonenberg et al., 2000).
Another way of describing the influence of the major coastal
processes is to employ a ternary diagram identifying their rela-
tive power (Fig. 9). Here the three main process agents are
considered to be river currents, waves, and tidal currents. When
the ternary diagram is constructed such that the vertical axis for
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 181

FIG. 7.—Shoreline response (transgression versus regression) to change in sea level and sediment supply (modified from Boyd
et al., 1992).

FIG. 8.—Classification from Boyd et al. (1992), illustrating organization of all of the major clastic coastal depositional environments
based on shoreline translation direction (i.e., progradation or transgression) and relative power of waves, tidal currents, and river
currents. The upper coastline is transgressive, and the lower coastline is regressive. The influence of tides relative to wave power
increases from right to left.
182 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
FIG. 9.—Triangular coastal classification using the three parameters of river, wave, and tidal processes, together with direction of
sediment supply.
fluvial power is combined with a factor that discriminates pro-
grading coasts from embayed transgressive coasts, and a second
factor that discriminates direct sediment supply from a river from
sediment that is supplied to the coast by marine processes (termed
a marine sediment supply in Figures 8 and 9), then a clear
definition of the major coastal sedimentary environments can be
achieved. Estuaries occupy the center of the ternary diagram,
where the coast is embayed and receives sediment from both
marine and fluvial sources.
Estuaries can be distinguished by their mixed sediment source
and association with a river input, whereas lagoons have no
strong river-valley association and have only a marine sediment
source (Figures 10, 11; Boyd et al., 1992;). In this scheme, estuaries
and lagoons are intergradational, with lagoons representing the
end-member situation where the river influence is negligible. By
contrast, prograding deltas (the top triangle of Figure 9) derive
sediment directly and only from a fluvial source, whereas pro-
grading linear coasts (strandplains and tidal flats as shown at the
base of Figure 9) are supplied only by marine processes (waves
and/or tides), although that sediment must ultimately be derived
mostly from a river source. It should be noted that virtually all
coastal embayments have some form of fresh-water drainage into
them, making the recognition of the gradational boundary be-
tween estuaries and lagoons difficult. It is suggested here that the
term lagoon be used when there is no significant bedload sup-
plied to the system by fluvial processes, as shown, for example, by
the absence of a bayhead delta.
ESTUARINE FACIES MODEL
Once we have identified the dominant coastal processes and
the relationship of relative sea level to sediment flux, we can
develop a practical definition of an estuary. Perillo (1995) pro-
vides an extensive discussion of estuarine definitions and classi-
fications, identifying a range of oceanographic, biologic, and
geomorphologic–geologic approaches. For facies-models usage,
a geological definition is most useful because it can be applied to
ancient estuarine successions as well as modern estuaries. An
estuary in geological terms receives sediment from both fluvial
and marine sources, commonly occupies the seaward portion of
a drowned valley, contains facies influenced by tide, wave, and
fluvial processes, and is considered to extend from the landward
limit of tidal facies at its head to the seaward limit of coastal facies
at its mouth (cf. Dalrymple et al., 1992). This definition overcomes
the limitations of the widely used oceanographic definition of
Pritchard (1967) based on salinity, because Pritchard’s definition
applies to both regressive and transgressive settings in addition
to being difficult to use in ancient estuarine deposits. Estuaries as
defined here are present at the mouths of valleys that are being
transgressed, and Dalrymple et al. (1992) restricted the use of
“estuary” to such settings. However, we now recognize that
transgressive embayments that do not contain a river-carved
valley (e.g., the “abandoned” portion of a delta) may also contain
environments that fulfill the criteria for an estuary provided
above. Therefore, we extend the term “estuary” to such transgres-
sive settings.
Most estuaries contain brackish water, but brackish water
can occur in other settings (e.g., progradational deltas and even
some shelves); hence, the identification of a trace-fossil assem-
blage indicating reduced salinity in an ancient succession does
not necessarily mean that the deposits are estuarine (sensu
Dalrymple et al., 1992). Salt-water intrusion up rivers is never as
extensive as tidal action, so an estuary as defined above extends
farther inland than if a salinity-based definition is used (e.g.,
Buatois et al., 1997): the tidal limit on many modern rivers lies
tens of kilometers (in microtidal and steep-gradient settings) to
hundreds of kilometers (in low-gradient, macrotidal settings)
landward of the coast.
Because of the profound influence that waves and tides have
on their basic morphology, estuaries can be divided into two
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 10.—A) Schematic representation of the definition of an estuary according to Pritchard (1967) and Dalrymple et al. (1992).
B) Schematic distribution of the physical processes operating within estuaries, and the resulting tripartite facies zonation.
main types, wave-dominated estuaries and tide-dominated estu-
aries, based on the relative power of waves and tidal processes
(Figs. 8 , 9). This distinction determines the range of the resulting
facies model. Fluvial processes primarily control the upstream
sediment flux during estuary evolution and do not alter the
fundamental morphology of the system. This point will be dis-
cussed further in the section on criticisms, misuses, and refine-
ments of the E&IV model.
We believe that the interaction between river and marine
processes provides the basis for a generalized estuarine facies
model. Fluvial energy, as given by the energy flux per unit cross-
sectional area or other suitable measure, typically decreases
down an estuary (Fig. 10), because the hydraulic gradient de-
creases and the valley and its associated marine water bodies
widen as the river approaches the sea. Marine energy, by contrast,
generally decreases headward, because oceanic wave energy is
dissipated by a wave-built barrier or tidal sand-bar complex and/
or because tidal-current speeds eventually decrease up the estu-
ary as a result of friction. Ideally, therefore, both wave- and tide-
dominated estuaries can be divided into three zones (Fig. 10): (1)
an outer zone dominated by marine processes (waves and/or
tidal currents); (2) a relatively low-energy central zone, where
marine energy (generally tidal currents) and river currents are
approximately equal in strength in the long term (i.e., averaged
over many years); and (3) an inner, river-dominated zone. (Note
that this estuarine zonation must be distinguished from the three-part
segmentation of valley fills to be discussed below, because the two
schemes have no relationship to each other).
183
The tripartite estuarine zonation (Figs. 5, 10, 11) also corre-
sponds with the general patterns of net bedload transport. Long-
term (averaged over several years) transport of bedload is sea-
ward in the river-dominated zone, whereas coarse sediment
moves up estuary in the marine-dominated zone as a result of
waves and/or flood-tidal currents (Guilcher, 1967; Kulm and
Byrne, 1967; Roy et al., 1980; Dalrymple and Zaitlin, 1989). Thus,
the central zone is an area of net bedload convergence and
typically contains the finest-grained bedload sediment in the
estuary, regardless of whether the estuary is wave- or tide-
dominated. Once the process-based tripartite division of wave-
and tide-dominated estuaries has been established, we can then
examine each of these estuary types to see the major depositional
elements developed and the facies successions they produce.
Elements of a Wave-Dominated Estuary
The profile of “total energy” (i.e., the sum of energy from all
sources) for an ideal wave-dominated estuary shows two maxima,
one at the mouth caused by wave energy and one at the head
produced by river currents, separated by a pronounced energy
minimum (Fig. 11). This distribution of total energy produces a
clearly defined, “tripartite” distribution of lithofacies (coarse–
fine–coarse) within most wave-dominated estuaries (e.g., Figs. 5,
11, 12; Kulm and Byrne, 1967; Roy et al., 1980; Zaitlin and Shultz,
1984, 1990; Rahmani, 1988; Nichol, 1991; Nichols et al., 1991). As
the estuary fills, the central energy minimum becomes less pro-
nounced.
184 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 11.—Distribution of A) energy types, B) morphological components in plan view, and C) sedimentary facies in longitudinal
section within an idealized wave-dominated estuary. MSL = mean sea level (from Dalrymple et al., 1992). Note that for simplicity
the complete transgressive succession that would be formed by landward migration of the estuary is not shown.

A marine sand body accumulates in the area of high wave
energy at the mouth (Figs. 11, 12). It consists of a barrier, cut by
one or more tidal inlets that terminate in ebb and flood tidal
deltas. A shoreface, which typically experiences net erosion, lies
seaward of the barrier. The limit of this shoreface or the distal
ebb-tidal delta is the marine limit of the estuary (sensu lato), and
typically occurs in water depths less than 20 m. A subsurface
example of such a barrier deposit located at the mouth of a
wave-dominated estuary is provided by the Lower Cretaceous
Lloydmister Formation Senlac Pool (Zaitlin and Shultz, 1984,
1990), which is described below in the Incised Valley Segment 2
portion of this review. Sand and/or gravel are also deposited at
the head of the estuary by the river, forming a bayhead delta.
This bayhead accumulation has a typical deltaic character with
subaerial delta plain and a subaqueous mouth bar, prodelta,
and delta front. The morphology is typically river-dominated
because of the low-energy nature of the central basin, but wave-
and tide-dominant varieties can occur if the local processes
allow. A subsurface example of such a bayhead-delta deposit is
the Lower Cretaceous Glauconitic Formation Lake Newell Pool
of Broger et al. (1997), described in the Incised Valley Segment
1 portion of this review. The low-energy central part of the
estuary (the “central basin”) acts as the prodelta region of both
the bay-head delta and the flood-tidal delta, and fine-grained,
organic-rich and normally bioturbated muds accumulate there
(Biggs, 1967; Donaldson et al., 1970). The margins of wave-
dominated estuaries typically contain salt marshes, and/or
mangroves cut by tidal channels, and sandy or muddy tidal
flats. A comparison of central-basin deposits between the Glau-
conitic and Viking Formations was presented by Leroux et al.
(2001) and MacEachern (1999). Beaches may occur along the
margins of large central basins with fetch sufficient for the local
generation of waves.
Elements of a Tide-Dominated Estuary
Most tide-dominated estuaries are macrotidal, but tidal domi-
nance can also occur at much smaller tidal ranges if wave action
is limited and/or the tidal prism is large. Tidal-current energy
exceeds wave energy at the mouths of tide-dominated estuaries,
and elongate sand bars are typically developed there (Figures
13, 14; Hayes, 1975; Dalrymple et al., 1990). These bars dissipate
the wave energy that does exist, causing it to decrease with
distance up the estuary. On the other hand, the incoming flood
tide is progressively compressed into a smaller cross-sectional
area because of the funnel-shaped geometry that characterizes
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 185

FIG. 12.—Examples of wave-dominated estuaries: A) Tuggerah Lake, NSW, on the southeast coast of Australia. Wyong Creek (right)
and Ourimbah Creek (center) are building prograding bay-head deltas into the muddy central basin of Tuggerah “Lake”, while
The Entrance tidal inlet (foreground) is building a marine sand body landward into the estuary. B) Port Stephens, NSW, showing
a merged landscape and seascape DEM illustrating the division of wave-dominated estuaries into an outer flood tidal delta and
barriers (right), a deeper central basin (middle), and an inner river valley and bay-head delta (Karuah River upper left). Depth
color bar at right is in meters below sea level.
186 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
these estuaries (Langbein, in Myrick and Leopold, 1963; Wright
et al., 1973). Flood tidal currents increase in speed landward
until frictional dissipation exceeds the effects of amplification
produced by convergence, causing the tidal energy to decrease,
eventually reaching zero at the tidal limit. Fluvial energy de-
creases seaward as in wave-dominated systems. The location
where flood-tidal and fluvial energy are equal lies landward of
the tidal-energy maximum (i.e., the location where the tidal
current speeds are greatest; Fig. 13A). As in wave-dominated
systems, this bedload convergence is the location of a minimum
in the total-energy curve, but this minimum is not as pro-
nounced as it is in most wave-dominated estuaries because the
flow is channelized along the entire length of the estuary.
Subsurface examples of such tide-dominated estuarine systems
have been proposed from the Lower Cretaceous McMurray
Formation (e.g., Flach and Mossop, 1985; Ranger and Pemberton,
1988) and in outcrop from the Proterozoic of Utah (Ehlers and
Chan, 1999) and the Eocene of Spitsbergen (Plink-Björklund,
2005).
In high-tidal-range end-member cases such as the Severn and
Cobequid Bay–Salmon River estuaries, the marine sand body
consists of two strongly contrasting facies. The best known is the
elongate tidal sand-bar zone (Harris, 1988; Dalrymple and Zaitlin,
1989; Dalrymple et al., 1991), which is characterized by cross-
bedded medium to coarse sand (Fig. 14). These bars lie seaward
of the tidal-energy maximum. The second facies, which coincides
with the tidal-energy maximum, consists of upper-flow-regime
(UFR) sand flats which display a braided channel pattern where
the estuary is broad and shallow (Fig. 15A), but these become
confined to a single channel farther headward as the estuarine
funnel narrows (Figs. 13, 15B; Hamilton, 1979; Lambiase, 1980;
Dalrymple et al., 1990). This facies, which may not be present in
FIG. 13.—Distribution of A) energy types and B) morphological elements in plan view within an idealized tide-dominated estuary.
tide-dominated estuaries that are deeper and/or have smaller
tidal ranges, consists of parallel-laminated fine sand.
The tripartite facies distribution is not as obvious in tide-
dominated estuaries because the energy minimum is not as
pronounced within these channelized systems, and sands occur
in the tidal–fluvial channels that run along the length of the
estuary (Woodroffe et al., 1989; Dalrymple et al., 1990). Neverthe-
less, the energy minimum is the site of the finest channel sands.
In the central, low-energy zone of systems in which the main
channel is unconfined by older material, this channel consistently
displays a regular progression of sinuosities (e.g., Ashley and
Renwick, 1983; Dalrymple and Zaitlin, 1989; Woodroffe et al.,
1989) that is termed “straight–meandering–straight” (Figs. 13,
15). The outer straight reach in these estuaries is tidally domi-
nated and the net sediment transport and barform asymmetry are
headward due to strong flood-tidal currents (e.g., Dalrymple et
al., 1990). The channel contains alternate, bank-attached bars (Fig.
15B) and some mid-channel bars. The inner straight reach con-
tains similar bar types, but here the net sediment transport and
barform asymmetry are downstream due to the long-term domi-
nance of river flow over tidal currents.
The region between the two straight reaches contains tight
meanders (Figs. 13, 15B) that commonly exhibit symmetrical
point bars (Dalrymple and Zaitlin, 1989). A subsurface example
of such a symmetrical tidal point-bar deposit, also from the Lower
Cretaceous Glauconitic Formation, is provided by the Lathom
“A” Pool described by Zaitlin et al. (1998). This meandering zone
is the lowest-energy portion of the system and is the position of
net bedload convergence. Grain sizes in the channel become finer
toward this area from both directions (Dalrymple and Zaitlin,
1989). Muddy sediments accumulate primarily in tidal flats,
marshes, and flood plains along the sides of the estuary. Subtle
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 187

FIG. 14.—A) Overview of elongate sand bars developed in the outer (marine dominated) part of the Cobequid Bay–Salmon River
Estuary, Bay of Fundy, Canada. B) Close up of one elongate sand bar from Part A showing the scale of the bar (approximately
500 m across) and the superimposed dunes on the bar at several different length scales (Both photos by R. Dalrymple).
188 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 15.—A) The inner part of the upper-flow-regime sand flats of Zone 2, where marine energy is at a maximum (see Fig. 13). B) the
straight–meandering–straight transition in the mixed energy, upper part (Zone 3) of the Cobequid Bay–Salmon River Estuary,
Canada. This photo is taken from approximately the same position as Figure 15A but is looking in the opposite direction. The
straight channel with bank-attached bars is in the foreground, the meandering channel is in the middle distance above the bridge,
and the upper straight channel is in the upper center near the town of Truro. Both photos courtesy of John Suter.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 189

levees flank the channel, but crevasse-splay deposits become
progressively less abundant in a seaward direction through the
tidal–fluvial reach because the intensity of river floods is damped
by tidal action. A discrete bayhead delta is not present in the
river-dominated portion of tide-dominated estuaries because
there is no open-water body into which the sediment can be
dumped. Instead the tidal–fluvial channel passes directly into the
river above the tidal limit.
Organization of Estuary Elements into a Facies Model
The allocyclic components of estuarine sedimentation are
fixed, in that relative sea-level rise over the long term exceeds
the sediment input from both marine and fluvial sources, result-
ing in transgression, a necessary condition for the formation of
estuaries (as defined geologically; Dalrymple et al., 1992). Estu-
aries are typically initiated with the beginning of the transgres-
sion and continue accumulating sediment throughout the trans-
gression, up to the time of maximum flooding, when the shore-
line reaches its most landward position, before finally filling at
the beginning of the subsequent highstand. If the highstand is of
short duration, sea level may fall before the estuary is com-
pletely filled; however, if the highstand is long and/or the rate
of sediment input is high, then the estuary fills completely in the
transition to highstand progradation. As a result, an assemblage
of estuarine facies, termed here an estuarine lithosome, stretches
along a substantial portion of the valley or the length of the
embayment, from near the lowstand mouth of the river to the
landward extent of marine influence at the time of maximum
transgression (Figs. 16, 17). In this lithosome, facies are stacked
retrogradationally such that the most landward terrestrial fa-
cies is overlain by central estuarine facies and lastly by the most
marine facies.
The contact between the fluvial and overlying estuarine sedi-
ments is termed the initial flooding surface (FS; Figs. 16, 17), or,
alternatively, the transgressive surface. As the estuary continues
to translate landward, the upper portion of the transgressive
succession is generally removed by shoreface and/or tidal-chan-
nel erosion (generating wave and tidal ravinement surfaces,
respectively), depending on whether wave or tidal processes
dominate. The amount of section removed varies between ex-
amples, depending on the relationship between the rates of sea-
level rise and transgression, the rate of sediment input, the depth
of the shoreface and tidal-channel thalweg, and the depth of the
paleovalley (cf. Davis and Clifton, 1987; Demarest and Kraft,
1987). Partial transgressive successions, in which the basal fluvial
and fluvial–estuarine facies have the highest preservation poten-
tial, should occur along the transgressed portion of a paleovalley,
seaward of the highstand shoreline (Figs. 16, 17). Fluvial deposits
should occupy the deepest portions of the valley, except near the
lowstand river mouth, where tidal–fluvial sediments may occur.
Along the flanks of the valley, estuarine deposits lie directly on
older deposits and the sequence boundary, without intervening
fluvial sediments. In settings where estuaries occupy embayments
that are not paleoriver valleys, the estuarine deposits overlie
either earlier deposits such as deltas and are separated by a

FIG. 16.—Schematic section along the axis of a wave-dominated estuary, showing the distribution of lithofacies resulting from
transgression of the estuary, followed by estuary infilling and shoreface progradation at the time of sea-level highstand. The
completeness and thickness of the preserved transgressive succession depends on the relative rates of sea-level rise and the
headward translation of the shoreface. See Figure 17 for legend (from Zaitlin et al., 1994). “Flooding surface (FS)” refers to the
initial flooding surface at the beginning of transgression.
190 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 17.—Schematic section along the axis of a tide-dominated estuary, showing the distribution of lithofacies resulting from
transgression of the estuary, followed by estuary infilling and progradation of sand bars or tidal flats. The completeness and
thickness of the preserved transgressive succession depends on the relative rates of sea-level rise and the headward translation
of the thalweg of tidal channels (from Zaitlin et al., 1994). “Flooding surface (FS)” refers to the initial flooding surface at the
beginning of transgression.

flooding surface, or older unrelated units located below an un-
conformity.
Wave-Dominated Estuarine Model
The marine sand body in these estuaries is a composite feature
that may contain several discrete facies. In transgressive succes-
sions, some or all of the barrier complex is likely to be eroded
during shoreface retreat and overlain by a wave ravinement
surface (Fig. 16, C1). If any part of the barrier remains, it consists
of the deeper and/or more landward facies including erosionally
based tidal-inlet deposits and the landward-directed cross bed-
ding of washovers and flood-tidal deltas that may interfinger
with the underlying central-basin muds (e.g., Roy et al., 1980;
Roy, 1984; Zaitlin and Schulz, 1984, 1990; Boyd and Honig, 1992).
In vertical profile, fine-grained central-basin sediments ideally
exhibit a symmetrical grain-size trend (Fig. 16, C4). The basal
upward-fining portion represents the passage from transgres-
sive, fluvial, and bayhead-delta deposits through progressively
more distal prodelta sediments. More commonly, the base of the
central-basin muddy facies is an abrupt flooding surface that
might display some evidence of erosion (i.e., a “bay ravinement
surface”) that occurred as the low-energy central-basin shoreline
transgressed. The finest sediments represent the center of the
central basin and are frequently the mostly intensely bioturbated
(although often with an impoverished, brackish-water trace-
fossil assemblage). Organic facies, including peat, coal, and oys-
ter buildups, may also be present at this stratigraphic level. The
finest sediments are overlain in turn by an upward-coarsening
succession passing into either flood-tidal delta and washover
sediments (Fig. 16, C1, C2, C3) along most of the length of the
estuarine lithosome, or into bayhead-delta deposits (Fig. 16, C3)
at locations where there is episodic bayhead-delta progradation.
Tidal-channel migration during transgression generates a tidal
ravinement surface landward and ahead of the wave ravinement
surface, providing at least two possible erosion surfaces within
the wave-dominated estuarine succession.
The bayhead delta deposits are distinguished from true flu-
vial sediments by the presence of tidal structures and/or a
brackish-water fauna as well as a deltaic geometry and stratigra-
phy. Bayhead-delta sediments are likely to be common in the
lower part of transgressive valley-fill successions, and will occur
at the up-dip end of the estuarine lithosome where they will
exhibit an upward-coarsening succession resulting from progra-
dation either during stillstands or during estuary filling at high-
stand (Fig. 16, C4; Rahmani, 1988; Reinson et al., 1988; Allen, 1991;
Allen and Posamentier, 1993; Broger et al., 1997).
Meandering tidal channels containing inclined heterolithic
strata (Flach and Mossop, 1985; Thomas et al., 1987; Pemberton
and Wightman, 1992) are likely to be most abundant in the late
stage of estuary filling, when the prograding bayhead delta
merges with the flood-tidal delta (Smith, 1987; Nichol, 1991).
Such channels may erode some or all of the underlying central-
basin succession and might scour down to the basal unconfor-
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
mity. An additional stratigraphic surface, termed the bayhead-
delta diastem, may be generated by erosion at the base of
laterally migrating bayhead-delta distributaries (e.g., Nichol,
1991). Ancient wave-dominated estuarine systems such as the
Lower Cretaceous Lloydminster Member and the Albian Paddy
Member (Leckie and Singh, 1990; Leckie et al., 1990) will be
discussed in the later section dealing with incised valleys,
segment 2.
Tide-Dominated Estuary Model
During transgression, the elongate tidal sand bars that consti-
tute the outer part of the marine sand body in tide-dominated
estuaries are likely to be erosionally truncated or completely
removed (Fig. 17, C1) by the headward migration of the erosional
zone that coincides with the “bedload parting” that lies seaward
of the estuary mouth (Dalrymple, 1992; Dalrymple et al., 1992)
and/or the headward and lateral migration of tidal channels that
separate the sand bars. The amalgamation of these scours pro-
duces a tidal ravinement surface. Erosion by the channels during
transgression also causes the cross-bedded sand bars, or the
parallel-laminated, UFR sand-flat deposits, to overlie or abut
erosionally against mudflat and salt-marsh sediments along the
margins of the estuary and/or on more headward facies in the
axis of the valley (Fig. 17, C2). If the transgressive succession
contains both sandy facies (i.e., cross-bedded medium to coarse
sand and parallel-laminated fine to very fine sand), they produce
an overall upward-coarsening trend. The contact may be either
erosional or gradual.
The central, mixed-energy (tidal–fluvial meanders) and in-
ner, river-dominated portions of the estuary are characterized by
tidal-channel deposits that are flanked by vertically accreted,
salt-water, brackish-water, and fresh-water marsh sediments. If
sufficient accommodation is generated, the point-bar sediments
of the meandering zone are overlain and underlain by the depos-
its of straighter channels (Fig. 17) that display opposite paleocur-
rent directions; if there is low accommodation, the last channel to
cross the area incises into the older tidal-channel deposits. Upper-
flow-regime parallel lamination predominates in the shallower
parts of the outer (tide-dominated) straight reach (Fig. 15A),
while dunes may occur in the deeper channels. Ripples and/or
dunes are likely to be more abundant in the meandering and
inner straight reaches. The channel sediments are finest, and the
mixing of fluvially and tidally supplied sediment is most pro-
nounced, in the zone of tight meandering. The contacts between
facies zones coincide with erosional channel bases. The channel-
bank sediments consist of tidally bedded sands and muds that
occur either as erosionally bounded wedges of flat-lying strata
(Dalrymple et al., 1991) or as inclined heterolithic strata (IHS); see
Flack and Mossop (1985). IHS is most prevalent in the meander-
ing reach. A well-documented example of an ancient tide-domi-
nated estuary is the Cretaceous Lower Greensand in the Leighton
Buzzard area of England (Johnson and Levell, 1995).
INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODEL
To develop an appropriate facies model for an entire incised
valley, compared to an estuary, we need to address the wider
concept of an incised-valley system (IVS). An incised-valley
system (e.g., Fig. 18) must incorporate elements of the erosional
valley itself, the strata that it eroded into, and the entire fill
consisting of fluvial, estuarine, and marine facies (Fig. 19). In this
context, an incised-valley system is defined as “a fluvially eroded,
elongate topographic low that is typically larger than a single
channel form, and is characterized by an abrupt seaward shift of
191
depositional facies across a regionally mappable sequence bound-
ary at its base. The fill typically begins to accumulate during the
next base-level rise, and may contain deposits of the following
highstand and subsequent sea-level cycles” (Zaitlin et al., 1994).
Types of Incised Valleys
There are two major physiographic types of incised valley.
Incised-valley systems that have their headwaters in a (moun-
tainous) hinterland, and that cross a “fall line” where there is a
significant reduction in gradient, are here considered to be pied-
mont incised-valley systems. There are many ancient examples
from the North American Western Interior Seaway that can be
interpreted as piedmont incised-valley systems including the
Lower Cretaceous Cutbank, Taber, and Basal Quartz of northern
Montana–Alberta (e.g., Hayes, 1986; Dolson and Piombino, 1994;
Ardies et al., 2002; Lukie et al., 2002; Zaitlin et al., 2002), Glauco-
nite Formation (Rosenthal, 1988; Sherwin, 1994) and Muddy
Sandstone and its Canadian equivalents the Viking and Bow
Island Formations (Gustason et al., 1986; Dolson et al., 1991;
Pattison, 1991; Pattison and Walker, 1994, 1998; MacEachern and
Pemberton, 1992, 1994). Incised-valley systems that are confined
to low-gradient coastal plains and that do not cross a “fall line”
are termed coastal-plain incised-valley systems. Subsurface ex-
amples of coastal-plain estuaries include parts of the Cretaceous
Viking Formation (e.g., Pattison, 1991; MacEachern and
Pemberton, 1994) at Sundance, Edson, and CynPem, and the
southern portions of the Paddy–Cadotte (e.g., Leckie and Singh,
1991).
Piedmont incised-valley systems are characterized by a longer
fluvial reach than coastal-plain systems and are commonly asso-
ciated spatially with underlying structural features in the hinter-
land, e.g., the Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan System (Plint, 2002,
and the Mississippian Morrow System (Bowen and Wiemer,
1997, 2003). As a result, these river systems may be longer lived
than coastal-plain systems. Also, piedmont systems more com-
monly contain coarse-grained, less-mature, fluvially supplied
sediment, whereas coastal-plain systems are usually filled by
finer-grained and more mature deposits recycled from coastal-
plain sediments. Piedmont systems may have overall higher rates
of sediment supply because they have larger catchment areas. In
both piedmont and coastal-plain systems, marine-derived sedi-
ment is preserved in the estuarine portion of the valley fill (see
below). Coastal-plain and piedmont incised-valley systems oc-
cur adjacent to each other in modern coastal areas (e.g., Hayes and
Sexton, 1989).
Simple and Compound Incised-Valley Fills
The fill of any incised-valley system can be classed as either
simple or compound depending on the absence or presence,
respectively, of multiple, internal, high-frequency sequence
boundaries. If the valley is filled completely during one cycle
such that the depositional surface rises above the level of the
original interfluves, the fill is termed a “simple fill”. An ancient
example of a simple fill has been described by Zaitlin and
Schultz (1984, 1990; see more below). A “compound fill” records
multiple cycles of incision and deposition resulting from fluc-
tuations in base level and is therefore punctuated by one or
more sequence boundaries in addition to the main, lower-order
sequence boundary at the base of the incised valley (e.g., the
Mississippian Morrow Formation; Krystinik and Blakeney-
DeJarnett, 1994; Krystinik, 1989; Bowen and Weimer, 1997,
2002); and the Lower Cretaceous Basal Quartz Formation (Ardies
et al., 2003; Zaitlin et al., 2002; Leckie et al., 2005), the Lower
192 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
FIG. 18.—Example of incised valley with incised tributaries, Red Deer River south of East Coulee, Alberta, Canada. An incised-valley
system consists of the erosional form seen here, plus the sediments that will ultimately fill this container.
Cretaceous Glauconitic Formation (e.g., Wood and Hopkins,
1989, 1992; Broger et al., 1997), and the Viking/J/Muddy For-
mation (Gustason et al., 1986, Gustafson et al., 1988, Reinson et
al., 1988). Due to the presence of structural control on their
location, piedmont river systems may exist through more than
one sequence of sea-level fall and rise; thus, their incised valleys
may contain a compound fill, although higher rates of sediment
supply may counteract this tendency (e.g., Gustason et al., 1988;
Dolson et al., 1991; Ardies et al., 2002; Zaitlin et al., 2002).
Coastal-plain systems are more likely to exist through only one
regression–transgression cycle and therefore have a simple fill,
unless the rate of sediment supply is too low to fill the valley
during a single cycle.
Recognition of Estuarine and Incised-Valley Systems
E&IV deposits are among the hardest to recognize because of
their low width:depth ratio, limited lateral extent and ribbon
geometry, and the complex association of fluvial, tidal, wave, and
marine facies within them (Figs. 19–21). The following is a list of
criteria for recognizing E&IV systems:
(1) The valley is a negative (i.e., erosional) paleotopographic
feature, the base of which truncates underlying strata,
including any regional markers (such as bentonites, coals,
flooding surfaces, or seismic markers) that may be present
(Fig. 22, green arrow). The valley container has a characteris-
tic size, shape, and regional extent. The valley should be
larger than a single channel (e.g., Figs. 18, 23) and commonly
has an erosional relief (from the valley base to the original
floodplain level) of 10 m or more. However, there is a com-
plete gradation from non-incised channels, through shal-
lowly incised systems, to very deeply entrenched valleys
(Fig. 23). Studies of both modern and ancient valleys show
that the depth of incision is not constant along their length
(Schumm and Ethridge, 1994). Deeper-than-average incision
occurs at the location where tributaries join the trunk river
(scour depths at these locations may be up to five times the
depth of adjacent parts of the valley; Best and Ashworth,
1997), at the location of flow constrictions where the river cuts
across a more resistant underlying unit, and at the outsides of
bends. Ardies et al. (2002) show a well-documented ancient
example of all three types of channel-bottom irregularity (Fig.
24). The valley width may also be quite variable; it increases
with time (e.g., Schumm and Ethridge, 1994) and is wider
where the river cuts into less resistant lithologies (e.g., Ardies
et al., 2002). However, typical dimensions are in the range of
several hundreds of meters to several tens of kilometers, with
most valleys in the range of 1–10 km wide.
(2) The base and walls of the incised-valley system represent a
sequence boundary (Fig. 22, red line) that correlates to an
erosional (or hiatal) surface outside the valley (i.e., on the
interfluve areas). This erosional surface may be modified by
later transgression, forming an E/T (erosive–transgressive)
surface; Plint et al., 1992), or a combined flooding surface and
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 193

sequence boundary (an FS/SB surface; Van Wagoner et al.,
1990). The sequence boundary may be mantled by a pebble
lag and/or characterized by burrows belonging to the
Glossifungites ichnofacies (MacEachern et al., 1992;
MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994). On the interfluves the
exposure surface may be characterized by a particularly
well-developed soil or rooted horizon (Leckie and Singh,
1991; McCarthy and Plint, 1998). Such paleosols may show
evidence of lower groundwater tables and more prominently
developed soil horizons than paleosols formed
syndepositionally within the TST and/or the HST.
(3) Because the river erodes below the level of the interfluves
when it creates the valley, water drains downward into the
valley; as a result, the trunk river may be fed by smaller
incised tributary valleys that are themselves incised (e.g.,
Figs. 18, 24; Posamentier, 2001; Ardies et al., 2002). These
tributary valleys aid in distinguishing incised valleys from
unincised channels and augment criterion 2 above. On the
regional scale, the planform geometry of tributary networks
should mimic the river system(s) that became entrenched. As
a result, the various river patterns identified by geomor-
phologists (e.g., Howard, 1967) may be recognized in valley
systems. For example, dendritic patterns predominate in
areas with uniform slopes and substrate erodibility, whereas
rectilinear patterns occur in jointed bedrock or in areas with
a crosscutting network of subtle faults. Recent work suggests
that faults that are active during incision may have a strong
influence on the location and planform pattern of valleys
(e.g., Ardies et al., 2002).
(4) A fundamental aspect of incised valleys is their formation at
times of erosion and falling base level; in cases where the
area lies close to the shoreline, coastal regression accompa-
nies incision. Hence, the base of the incised-valley fill (Figs.
19–21) exhibits an erosional juxtaposition of more proximal

FIG. 19.—Idealized longitudinal section of a simple incised-valley system showing the distribution of A) depositional environments,
B) systems tracts, and C) key stratigraphic surfaces. A wave-dominated estuary has been used in this model. Segments 1 and 3
are typically much longer than segment 2, and are compressed here for presentation purposes. Also shown are the locations of
the schematic profiles illustrated in Figure 20. Modified from Zaitlin et al. (1994).
194 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 20.—Five representative vertical sections of facies and sequence-stratigraphic surfaces in an idealized incised-valley system,
based on an estuarine system that is wave dominated. WRS = wave ravinement surface, MFS = maximum flooding surface, IFS
= initial flooding or transgressive surface, SB = sequence boundary, TRS = tidal ravinement surface, BHD = bay-head delta.
Numbers in circles identify location of sections shown in Figure 19. Modified from Zaitlin et al. (1994).

(landward) facies over more distal (seaward) deposits (i.e.,
a “basinward shift in facies” sensu Van Wagoner et al.,
1990), across a regional hiatus (unconformity)—vertical
white arrow in Figure 22. The subsequent filling of the
valley occurs partially or wholly during rising base level
and is accompanied by transgression in near-coast situa-
tions. The latter typically results in more downdip facies
(marine, estuarine) being deposited on top of more updip
facies (terrestrial). In the case of valley fills consisting solely
of fluvial facies, those facies reflect the change from a low-
accommodation to a higher-accommodation style, for ex-
ample by changing the channel stacking patterns, the rela-
tive preservation of overbank deposits, or the amount of
organic facies (Fig. 21), and/or by a change in any paleosols
from well-drained and more mature to poorly drained and
immature as accommodation increases.
(5) As a result of filling in response to rising base level, deposi-
tional markers within the deposits of the incised-valley fill
onlap the valley base and walls but do not occur outside the
valley (smaller white horizontal arrow in Figure 22), except
where they can be traced in a seaward direction into equiva-
lent marine deposits.
(6) In terms of sequence-stratigraphic surfaces (Figs. 19–21), the
formation of a valley generates a sequence boundary at the
base, and a transgressive surface within the fill of a simple
valley, or of each sequence constituting a compound valley
fill. A maximum flooding surface lies above the valley fill in
segment 1, within the estuarine deposits in segment 2, and
likely low in the fluvial deposits in segment 3. Wave and tidal
ravinement surfaces are commonly present between the se-
quence boundary and the maximum flooding surface in the
areas transgressed by the shoreline. Additional flooding
surfaces, bay ravinement surfaces, and erosional surfaces of
more local extent, including bayhead and fluvial diastems,
are likely to be formed during backstepping of fluvial and
estuarine subenvironments.
(7) Channels contained within the valley should be substantially
smaller than the valley itself (e.g., Figs. 18, 21, 23). However,
it is recognized that channels that experienced only a short
period of incision may be incised only slightly, with insuffi-
cient widening to form a pronounced valley. In addition, as
discussed above, individual scours within a channel may be
much deeper than the average channel depth, for example at
tributary junctions (e.g., Best and Ashworth, 1997; Ardies et al.,
2002). In these cases, the deeper scour could be mistaken for a
valley but is of local extent only (Fig. 24), whereas a valley
exhibits an elongate erosion surface of more regional extent.
Where the valley and channel boundaries can be observed
together, floodplain or terrace surfaces attached to channels
within the valley can occur at lower stratigraphic elevations
than the adjacent valley walls (M. Boyles, personal communi-
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 21.—Nonmarine sequence-stratigraphic model showing the change in channel stacking patterns and organic facies responding
to a cycle of accommodation change such as may be seen in segment 3 of an incised-valley fill. From Boyd and Diessel (1994).
cation, 2002) and/or interfluves outside the valley. This recog-
nition feature augments those listed in 4 and 5 above.
(8) Estuaries as defined above, following Dalrymple et al.
(1992), are transgressive, tidally influenced environments
that constitute an important and distinctive component of
incised valleys in their seaward parts. Because estuaries
tend to enhance tidal action because of flow constriction, tidal
indicators and distinctively tidal deposits may be especially
abundant within the fill of incised valleys. The most distinc-
tive of these (Fig. 25) are flat-lying tidal rhythmites and tidal
bundles in cross beds, both of which record the neap–spring
tidal cyclicity. In more general terms, single and paired (i.e.,
double) mud drapes, which give the deposits a heterolithic
nature, are indicative of tidal sedimentation. In addition,
other classic features such as reactivation surfaces, bidirec-
tional paleocurrent patterns, herringbone cross stratification,
flaser to lenticular bedding, and the large scale of cross-beds
are distinctive (Dalrymple, 1992). In relatively low-accom-
modation settings and in basins with small tidal ranges,
incised-valley fills may be the only place where tidal deposits
are preserved. In such cases, the presence of tidal deposits can
be used to suggest the existence of an incised valley.
(9) The mixing of fresh and salty water is a fundamental
characteristic of estuaries. This stressed environment pro-
duces a characteristic ichnological suite and faunal compo-
sition (Pemberton et al., 1992, and early articles in Lauff,
1967) that are characterized by a low ichnospecies diversity,
with populations consisting of small individuals (smaller
then their open-marine counterparts) that exhibit opportu-
195
nistic behavior (cf. Howard and Frey, 1973, 1975; Howard et
al., 1975; MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994; Buatois et al.,
1997; Buatois et al., 2005; Gingras et al., 1999; Pemberton et
al., 2001). The degree of bioturbation (i.e., the bioturbation
index; Droser and Bottjer, 1986, 1989) is commonly highly
variable, with essentially unbioturbated beds interbedded
with extensively bioturbated deposits that may contain a
monospecific assemblage of traces. The unconformity at the
base of the valley can display a Glossifungites ichnofacies
(MacEachern et al., 1992), and individual forms such as
Gyrolithes are distinctive of the estuarine environment (see
the Brackish Ichnology section below). Brackish-water mi-
crofauna and macrofauna also display distinctive diversity
and occurrence trends that are useful for the recognition of
estuarine deposits, such as marsh foraminifera (Ammonia,
Haplophragmoides, Trachammina sp.) that occur primarily in
the intertidal zone in combination with Spartina sp. flora.
Bivalves such as the modern Rangia cuneata that are over-
whelmingly found in estuarine settings and oysters such as
Crassostrea sp. are also useful environmental indicators.
However, it is important to note that many of these brack-
ish-water features may occur in settings other than estuar-
ies and should not be used on their own to interpret the
presence of an estuary or an incised valley.
(10) Estuaries receive sediment input from both the marine and
terrestrial ends of the system (Figs. 9–12), creating the poten-
tial for the mixing of sediment with two different composi-
tions. The sediment supplied directly by the river reflects the
bedrock composition of the fluvial drainage basin, while the
sediment provided by the marine source reflects shelf litholo-
196 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 22.—The four main criteria for recognizing an incised-valley system illustrated using a Lower Cretaceous (Basal Quartz
equivalent), muddy incised-valley fill cutting into shoaling-upward shelf–shoreface parasequences along the Missouri River
in northern Montana, U.S.A. Photo courtesy of P. Putnam, Petrel Robertson Research.

gies and/or source regions updrift in the longshore transport

system. Because the marine-sourced material has been re-
worked from older deposits, it is often more mature than the
terrestrial sediment (e.g., Roy, 1977). If source regions change
during the fill of a compound valley, it may be possible to
distinguish individual sequences within the compound val-
ley fill by their compositional differences (e.g., Zaitlin et al.,
2002).

(11) E&IVs contain a characteristic mix of sedimentary facies.

FIG. 23.—Incised-valley formation and entrenchment. If the flood-
plain is periodically inundated by large floods, the river is not
incised, regardless of the relief between the low-stage water
level in the river and the floodplain. The situation shown in
Part B is the minimum incision required to qualify the river as
incised in the modern, but such situations may be difficult to
distinguish from non-incised channels in the ancient; the
degree of development of floodplain paleosols, if preserved,
would be the key distinguishing factor.
These include terrestrial, estuarine, and marine facies and
range from fluvial, to tidal–fluvial channel, bayhead delta,
central basin, barrier, and tidal sand ridge. When found in
combination, and especially when such facies are not present
in the surrounding regional deposits, this set of facies iden-
tifies an estuarine setting, provided that they display a
transgressive stacking arrangement (Figs. 16, 17) and may
also point to the presence of an incised valley if a suitable
container is present. Note that the presence of fluvial facies
at the base of the estuarine or valley-fill succession is helpful
but not essential for identification. Transgression subse-
quent to fluvial deposition can result in reworking and
removal of fluvial facies by tidal and wave processes, espe-
cially by means of erosion at the bases of migrating tidal
inlets. In other situations, the fluvial sediments may not be
widespread and may occur only in a geographically re-
stricted zone along the valley axis. Near the seaward end of
segment 1 of the incised-valley system, all channel facies are
likely to be tidal–fluvial in nature and hence display tidal
features.
(12) The central zone of incised-valley estuaries is occupied by
a low-energy region (Figs. 11, 13) representing either the
finer-grained central basin of wave-dominated estuaries or
the fine-grained meandering reach of tide-dominated estuar-
ies.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 24.—A 3-D amplitude anomaly map of a part of the Basal Quartz Formation (Lower Cretaceous) of southern Alberta, showing
a tributary-junction scour (TJS) (cf. Ardies et al., 2001; 3-D image courtesy PanCanadian Energy (now EnCana) Corporation).
(13) In the case of valley incision during regression and relative
sea-level fall due to steepening of the fluvial profile as a result
of seaward extension of the river, the regional marine gradient
is greater than the terrestrial gradient of the river valley.
(14) E&IV deposits occupy fluvial drainage corridors, and their
locations are often determined by underlying paleotopo-
graphic and structural trends, with valleys occurring espe-
cially in areas of subtle downward flexure and/or parallel to
fault traces (cf. Ardies et al., 2002; Plint and Wadsworth, 2003).
By contrast, valleys tend to avoid areas of subtle upwarping.
An early example of an interpreted subsurface incised-valley
system that subsequently met many of the above criteria for an
incised valley was that of Harms (1966) in his description of the
Cretaceous “J” Sandstone in western Nebraska. Harms’ correla-
tion (Fig. 2), based on a detailed electric-log cross section, demon-
strated the truncation of regionally mappable, coarsening-up-
ward marine parasequences by blocky to fining-upward fluvial
valley-fill deposits, thus fulfilling recognition criteria (1), (2), (4),
and (5) above. Other examples include those of the Mississippian
Morrow Formation (e.g., Krystinik, 1989; Krystinik and Blakeney,
1990; Krystinik and Blakeney-DeJarnett, 1994; Bowen and Weimer,
1997, 2003) and parts of the Lower Cretaceous Glauconitic Forma-
tion (Wood and Hopkins 1989, 1992; Broger et al., 1997). An
example of a more recent study that illustrates criterion (3) above
is that of Ardies et al. (2002), who, in their study of the Basal
Quartz unit, recognize tributaries and tributary junction scours,
both in seismic and by detailed wireline well correlation.
It is critical when identifying the extent of the incised-valley
system to document the geometry of the sequence boundary,
both inside and outside of the incised valley. The paleotopogra-
phy of the incised-valley network (e.g., tributary orientation or
valley width/depth) may allow one to determine the
paleodrainage direction as an aid in paleogeographic reconstruc-
tion. In addition, paleovalley networks are proving to be power-
197
ful tools for the identification of subtle structural warping and/
or fault movement (e.g., Ardies et al., 2002), because rivers seek
out the lowest part of the eroding landscape. A variety of tech-
niques have been employed to identify and map paleovalleys,
including: (1) geological structure mapping of the erosional sur-
face from 2D–3D seismic (e.g., Broger et al., 1997) or from wireline
logs (e.g., Krystinik, 1989; Van Wagoner et al., 1990; Krystinik and
Blakeney-DeJarnett, 1994; Bowen and Weimer, 1997); (2) third- or
higher-order residual mapping of the erosional surface in areas
affected by postdepositional structuring (e.g., Zaitlin and Shultz,
1984, 1990); (3) detailed isopach mapping of the interpreted fill, or
of an interval between the unconformity and an overlying hori-
zontal marker that extends over the interfluves, to locate anoma-
lously thick sections confined to the paleotopographic lows (e.g.,
Siever, 1951; Van Wagoner et al., 1990, Ardies et al., 2002). Other
techniques include petrographic and chemostratigraphic typing
of sediment composition, gravity techniques, resistivity map-
ping, and mapping of hydrocarbon production trends.
Model for a Simple Incised-Valley Fill
For simplicity, here we present a model for a simple incised-
valley fill, based primarily on Zaitlin et al. (1994). We will con-
sider the case of a piedmont incised-valley system, which is cut
and filled in a single cycle of base-level change and which is
connected to a marine shoreline; valleys that are located far
inland with no marine link are considered later. We will also
assume that fluvial sediment supply and the rate of transgression
are constant, that waves are more significant than tides in the
coastal zone, and that any estuaries that develop are wave-
dominated (sensu Dalrymple et al., 1992) , because this is the
situation most commonly documented in ancient incised-valley
systems. For the sake of completeness, we have explicitly in-
cluded the succeeding highstand systems tract, assuming that
sediment supply is sufficient, relative to the length of the sea-level
highstand, to allow shoreline progradation following the trans-
198 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

gression. At times of high-frequency, high-amplitude sea-level
changes, such as have occurred during the Pleistocene, this
assumption may not be fulfilled, in which case sea level falls and
the river reincises before the estuary is completely filled.
STRATIGRAPHIC ORGANIZATION OVERVIEW
Models for incised valleys that are connected to a marine
shoreline are based on an ability to subdivide the valley fill
longitudinally (Fig. 19) into three segments (as distinct from the
tripartite estuarine facies zonation discussed above). This three-
fold subdivision reflects the unique depositional and stratigraphic
organization of the fill, which results primarily from lowstand
erosion, followed by transgressive deposition, and finally high-
stand progradation.
As relative sea level falls, the entire length of the incised valley
is characterized by (net) fluvial erosion, which creates the basal
sequence boundary and may also leave intermediate, falling-
stage terraces within the valley. When relative sea level starts to
rise after reaching its lowest level, fluvial deposition begins at the
mouth of the incised-valley system and extends progressively
farther up the valley (i.e., the deposits onlap) as the transgression
proceeds. Ideally, the fill of the seaward portion of the incised
valley (segment 1, Fig. 19) is characterized by backstepping
(lowstand to transgressive) fluvial and estuarine deposits, over-
lain by transgressive marine sands and/or shelf muds. The
middle reach of the incised valley (segment 2, Fig. 19) consists of
the drowned-valley estuarine complex that existed at the time of
maximum transgression, overlying a lowstand to transgressive
succession of fluvial and estuarine deposits like those in segment
1. The innermost reach of the incised valley (segment 3, Fig. 19) is
developed headward of the transgressive estuarine limit and
extends to the point where relative sea-level changes no longer
control fluvial style. This segment is characterized by fluvial
deposits throughout its depositional history; however, the fluvial
style changes due to systematic variations in the rate of change of
base level. The effect of base-level change decreases inland until
eventually climatic, tectonic, and sediment-supply factors be-
come the dominant controls on the fluvial system.
In the following sections we present additional detail on the
characteristics of each incised-valley segment and then provide a
range of representative outcrop and subsurface studies.

A B

FIG. 25.—Examples of diagnostic tidal sedimentary structures; A) tidal rhythmites, B) tidal mud drapes in a cross bed that separates
the cross bed into tidal bundles (from MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994).
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
Segment 1—Outer Incised Valley
The outer incised valley (segment 1) extends from the most
seaward extent of valley incision, near the lowstand mouth of
the incised valley, to the point where the shoreline stabilizes at
the beginning of highstand progradation (Fig. 19). As in the
other segments, this reach of the valley initially undergoes
fluvial incision with the lowering of base level. Sediment is
bypassed to the mouth of the valley, where it is deposited as a
lowstand delta and/or prograding shoreline. This period is
represented by the sequence boundary, which may be overlain
by lowstand fluvial to tidal–fluvial deposits (Fig. 20, profile 1).
As sea level begins to rise and the lower reaches of the system are
transgressed, the lower reaches of the incised valley change
from being a conduit for fluvially eroded sediment to the site of
fluvial and (subsequently) estuarine deposition. Fluvial deposi-
tion, although initiated during the late lowstand, continues
during the early stages of transgression, with the locus of
deposition shifting landward as relative sea level rises and the
shoreline transgresses (Wright and Marriott, 1993; Wescott,
1993). The transition from erosion and fluvial bypass to fluvial
deposition migrates landward as the transgression proceeds.
Thus, the boundary between the lowstand and transgressive
systems tracts (i.e., the transgressive surface) may lie within the
fluvial deposits rather than at their top and is diachronous if it
is picked at a facies boundary. For this reason, the lowstand
systems tract (LST—i.e., those deposits that accumulated before
the shoreline begins to migrate landward) within the valley may
effectively pinch out landward (Figs. 19, 20), although there
should be at least a thin layer (ca. one channel depth thick) of
lowstand-age fluvial deposits along the length of the valley,
unless they have been removed by later channel erosion. Near
the mouth of the valley, most of the fill may be deposited during
lowstand-systems-tract time, but farther up the valley the greater
part of the fill accumulates during transgressive-systems-tract
time.
Within the fluvial succession near the river mouth, the early
deposits accumulate when the rate of creation of accommoda-
tion is low (i.e., near maximum lowstand time), hence channel
amalgamation is common, leading to the formation of a coarse-
grained succession in which muddy overbank deposits are
scarce. As base level begins to rise ever more rapidly during the
TST, the fluvial channels become progressively less amalgam-
ated and fine-grained deposits are preserved more commonly
(Fig. 21; e.g., Boyd and Diessel, 1994). The fluvial style (i.e.,
braided, meandering, anastomosed, or straight) within the in-
cised valley is dependent on a variety of factors, including
sediment supply, grain size, discharge, valley gradient, and rate
of transgression (Schumm, 1977, 1993; Schumm and Ethridge,
1994). These variables likely change during the rise in sea level
associated with the marine transgression (Gibling, 1991; Wright
and Marriott, 1993; Törnqvist, 1993). Thus, in the simplest case
where all other factors remain constant, the character of the
lowstand to transgressive fluvial sediments should change ver-
tically as the depositional gradient and capacity of the fluvial
system decreases as the shoreline approaches. This change
would most likely result in successively younger channels
having finer-grained sands than preceding channels, in part
because of the seaward decrease in grain size within the river
but also because of deposition of the coarser portions of the
sediment load in more inland areas. This overall upward de-
crease in the grain size of subsequent channels accompanied by
and upward decrease in channel amalgamation, with a change
from higher-energy (such as sandy braided) to lower-energy,
(such as mixed-load meandering) fluvial deposits. An excellent
199
example of this is provided by the Quaternary sediments in the
Rhine–Meuse valley (Törnqvist, 1993), and in conceptual form
in Figure 21. Note, however, that the amalgamated channel
deposits at the base of the valley fill cannot be assumed to be
braided, simply because of the absence of overbank deposits;
they could equally well be meandering-river deposits with
negligible preservation of muddy overbank deposits because of
the low accommodation.
The thickness of the fluvial succession, and the extent to which
the predicted changes in fluvial style are developed, may be
variable along the length of segment 1. The ultimate thickness is
controlled by the accommodation developed during the rise in
sea level (Jervey, 1988), with the major factor being the ratio of the
rate of fluvial-sediment input to the rate of sea-level rise. In the
situation where sea-level rise greatly outpaces fluvial input,
transgression is rapid and the thickness of the fluvial deposits is
less than in the case where abundant sediment input occurs
during a slow rise in sea level. In the special case where sediment
input matches sea-level rise, the fluvial deposits aggrade verti-
cally and the shoreline does not transgress. In all cases, the
preserved thickness of the fluvial succession may be affected by
subsequent erosion associated with transgression. While this
fluvial stacking is best preserved in Segment 3 (discussed below),
and documented in Arnott et al. (2000, 2002) and Lukie et al.
(2002) from the Basal Quartz Formation, examples of preserved
fluvial stacking controlled by accommodation in Segment 1 are
found in the Upper Cretaceous of the Kaiparowits Plateau, Utah
(Shanley and McCabe, 1991, 1994) and the Mesaverde Group
(Olsen et al., 1995).
As the transgression proceeds, the estuarine conditions that
are established in the seaward end of the valley migrate land-
ward. In a wave-dominated estuarine setting, the first estuarine
deposits over the fluvial sediments are tidally influenced fluvial
and bayhead-delta (distributary channel, levee, and interdistrib-
utary bay) deposits (Fig. 20, profile 1). As transgression contin-
ues, central-basin deposits then overlie the bayhead delta across
a flooding surface that may correlate updip to a change in fluvial
style. The central-basin deposits in turn are overlain by the
estuarine flood-tidal-delta and other barrier deposits (cf. Boyd et
al., 1992; Dalrymple et al., 1992). This contact may be gradational
if it corresponds to the prodelta deposits of the flood tidal delta,
but it is equally likely to coincide with the erosional base of a tidal
channel (Boyd and Honig, 1992), with the deepest incision occur-
ring at the location of the tidal inlet. The erosion surface at the base
of such channels is referred to as a tidal ravinement surface (Allen
and Posamentier, 1993).
As transgression proceeds, the shoreface passes the former
location of the estuary. Wave erosion associated with shoreface
retreat produces a wave ravinement surface that may truncate the
underlying estuarine deposits (Fig. 20, profile 1; e.g., Ashley and
Sheridan, 1994; Belknap et al., 1994; Kindinger et al., 1994; Tho-
mas and Anderson, 1994). The depth of erosion depends on a
variety of factors, the more important of which are:
1. The depth of the base of the shoreface: a more intense wave
climate leads to deeper erosion.
2. The resistance to erosion of the interfluves: lithified bedrock
is more resistant to erosion than unconsolidated material,
and may cause the shoreface to ride up and over the valley
fill.
3. The depth of the valley: shallow valleys may be completely
removed, whereas more of the fill of deeper valleys escapes
truncation.
200 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
4. The rate of relative sea-level rise: more rapid rates of sea-level
rise promote more rapid transgression, which reduces the
potential for deep truncation.
In many cases, all but the deepest and most landward parts of
the estuary-mouth sand body are removed. Flood-tidal deltas
and the bases of the deepest tidal channels, including the tidal
inlet, have the highest preservation potential (e.g., Belknap et al.,
1994, Thomas and Anderson, 1994). The wave ravinement sur-
face may then be overlain by transgressive shoreface to nearshore
sands, which may vary in thickness from almost nothing to many
meters in shelf sand banks and ridges (Snedden and Dalrymple,
1998) that were created by shelf processes. Finally, the valley is
capped by open-marine mudstones associated with the succeed-
ing highstand. The landward limit of these mudstones is an
indicator of the inner end of segment 1.
Segment 2—Middle Incised Valley
Segment 2 lies between the inner end of segment 1 (i.e., the
initial highstand shoreline) and the estuarine limit (i.e., the
landward limit of recorded tidal influence) at the time of maxi-
mum flooding (Fig. 19). It therefore corresponds to the area
occupied by the drowned-valley estuary at the end of the
transgression. In this segment the sequence boundary is over-
lain by lowstand to early-transgressive fluvial deposits similar
to those in segment 1. These are in turn overlain by transgressive
estuarine facies, but in this segment the nature of the overlying
estuarine succession varies along the length of the segment
(Figs. 16, 17; cf. Dalrymple et al., 1992) because the estuarine
facies are (ideally) preserved with the spatial distribution they
had in the contemporaneous estuary.
Near its seaward end, (i.e., beneath the preserved barrier that
forms the landward margin of any subsequent highstand
strandplain, assuming as we have throughout this discussion
that the coastline is wave dominated) the succession is similar to
that in segment 1, with fluvial and bayhead-delta sediments
overlain by central-basin deposits , which are, in turn, capped by
estuary-mouth-barrier sands. Because open-marine conditions
do not transgress into this segment, the barrier sediments are
overlain by highstand fluvial deposits (Fig. 20, profile 2), unless
sea level falls before the estuary fills completely, in which case the
estuarine deposits are capped by the next sequence boundary. In
the middle portion of segment 2, barrier sands are absent, and
central-basin deposits coarsen upwards above the maximum
flooding surface into progradational, bayhead-delta and fluvial
sediments of the succeeding highstand deposits (Fig. 20, profile
3) that fill the estuary if the highstand is of sufficient duration.
At the headward end of segment 2, central-basin sediments are
absent, and the bayhead delta is overlain directly by highstand
fluvial deposits (Fig. 20, profile 4). The most landward limit of
the detectable marine influence (i.e., tidal features in fluvial
deposits) is taken as the inner end of segment 2. This point
corresponds with the inner end of the estuary as defined by
Dalrymple et al. (1992), and is also approximately equivalent to
the “bayline” of Posamentier et al. (1988) and Allen and
Posamentier (1993).
Barrier islands are rarely preserved in incised valleys be-
cause typically they are removed by shoreface ravinement
during transgression. However, preservation may be possible
at the highstand shoreline as the barrier stabilizes and then
evolves into a strandplain, as is just beginning on Galveston
Island, Texas (e.g., McCubbin, 1982). A potential subsurface
example of such a preserved barrier sand body is provided by
the Lower Cretaceous Lloydminster Member (Mannville Group)
Senlac heavy-oil pool in southwestern Saskatchewan (Zaitlin
and Shultz, 1984, 1990).
Segment 3—Inner Incised Valley
The innermost segment (segment 3) of the incised-valley
system lies landward of the transgressive marine–estuarine limit,
but it is still influenced by changes in base level associated with
relative sea-level change (Fig. 19). This segment may extend for
tens to hundreds of kilometers above the limit of marine/estua-
rine influence (Shanley et al., 1992; Schumm, 1993; Levy and
Christie-Blick, 1994). The fill of this segment is entirely fluvial,
with no evidence of tidal action or brackish water. Channels may
be braided, meandering, anastomosed, and/or straight, depend-
ing on a variety of factors such as sediment supply, gradient,
discharge, and sediment size. However, relative sea-level changes
associated with the lowstand–transgression–highstand cycle pro-
duce predictable variations in the rate of creation of accommoda-
tion through time and may also produce a predictable vertical
succession of fluvial styles (Fig. 20, profile 5; Fig. 21; Gibling, 1991;
Wright and Marriott, 1993).
Lowstand fluvial deposits are expected to be relatively thin,
because the fluvial system in these inland locations would have
been erosional or would have acted mainly as a transport
conduit (a bypass zone) at that time. Late lowstand to early
transgressive deposits at the base of the fill may be character-
ized by relatively coarse-grained, amalgamated channel depos-
its (Fig. 21). As transgression proceeds, an overall upward-
fining succession of channels should be developed as the gradi-
ent and stream capacity decrease as the backwater zone land-
ward of the estuary migrates up the valley. The deposits that
accumulated during times of rising base level should contain
more isolated, channel-sandstone bodies, interbedded with a
higher percentage of overbank deposits (e.g., Törnqvist, 1993,
Shanley and McCabe, 1994). Freshwater organic facies (e.g.,
peat or lacustrine carbonates) might be abundant and the soils
less mature and wetter than those associated with the lowstand
(Cross, 1988; Boyd and Diessel, 1994; Wadsworth et al., 2002).
The overlying highstand deposits may be expected to coarsen
upward overall, due to progradation in response to decreasing
rates of base-level rise and accommodation creation (Schumm,
1993).
In terms of relative length, the three incised-valley segments
identified above may be quite variable. If the transgression has
been extensive, however, segment 1 is likely to be long and may
extend for most of the width of the formerly exposed continental
shelf. The length of segments 2 and 3 is related to the depth of
valley incision and the gradient above the highstand shoreline.
For example, on many old, wide passive margins such as the Gulf
of Mexico, segment 1 is much longer than segments 2 and 3
(Thomas and Anderson, 1994; Blum and Törnqvist, 2000). Over-
all, segment 2 is likely to be the shortest of the three because it
corresponds to the length of the estuary at one point in the sea-
level cycle.
ANCIENT CASE STUDIES OF
INCISED-VALLEY DEPOSITS
The model for an incised-valley fill described in the preceding
paragraphs has been applied to a large number of ancient ex-
amples. Here we review several of these to illustrate typical
examples and to highlight controls on the nature of incised-valley
deposits that are not discussed elsewhere in this chapter, such as
the influence of the overall accommodation regime on the char-
acter and stratigraphic organization of such deposits. The petro-
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
leum-industry applications are highlighted in several of these
examples.
Case Study 1:
The Mississippian Morrow Formation:
Fluvial to Fluvial–Estuarine Deposits of Segment 1
A number of well-documented subsurface examples of seg-
ment 1 incised-valley deposits exist from the Western Interior
Seaway of North America. One such example is the Carbonifer-
ous Morrow Formation of the Anadarko Basin, as described by
Krystinik and Blakeney-DeJarnett (1994), Krystinik (1989), and
Bowen and Weimer (1997) (Figs. 26, 27).
The Morrow Formation has been the target of extensive
exploration over the last forty years and is characterized by
several well-documented productive trends. The Morrow For-
mation is distributed on the north flank of the Anadarko Basin, in
what was a broad, low-relief shelf subject to glacio-eustatic
exposure and inundation. During glacio-eustatic lowstands (Fig.
27B), the shelf was largely exposed and subject to fluvial erosion
by drainage networks that fed deltas along the rim of the Anadarko
Basin. During interglacial highs (Fig. 27A) the shelf was inun-
dated, with the deposition of mudstone and carbonate. The
shoreline position is thought to have moved in excess of 145–200
km (90–125 miles) per cycle.
The Morrow incised valleys are characterized by multiple
exposure surfaces and fluvial incision interpreted to have been
cut by repeated high-frequency glacio-eustatic sea-level drops,
and backfilled with fluvial and fluvial–estuarine deposits during
transgression. The Sorrento–Mt. Pearl–Siaana and Stateline trend
is an example of a well-documented Mississippian Morrow struc-
turally controlled valley that is mappable over hundreds of
FIG. 26.—Map showing the distribution of the Mississippian Morrow Formation incised-valley fills (from Bowen and Wiemer, 2003).
201
kilometers (Fig. 26). Repeated transgressive–regressive events
developed a compound valley and terrace geometry (Leighton,
1997), similar to that observed in the modern Colorado River in
Texas (Blum, 1990, 1994). Individual incised-valley systems are
between 50 and 80 feet (15–25 m) thick and 0.5 and 2 miles (0.8–
3.2 km) wide (Krystinik and Blakeney-DeJarnett, 1994; Krystinik,
1989). The incised-valley systems are cut into marine mudstones
and limestone of the preceding highstand and are blanketed by
similar deposits of the succeeding highstand. Multiple unconfor-
mity and exposure surfaces merge onto the interfluves.
An individual cycle of fill from segment 1 of the Morrow
incised valleys consists, from base to top, of:
(1) basal (braided) fluvial deposits composed of coarse–me-
dium-grained cross-bedded sandstones (core porosity to 25%;
core permeability 0.1–4 darcys), grading upward into
(2) meandering fluvial (core porosity 20–25%; core permeability
0.1–300 md) and floodplain mudstones and green-waxy paleo-
sols that are overlain by
(3) estuarine (bayhead delta) sandstones (core porosity 3–12%;
core permeability 0.1–2 md) and mudstones displaying tidal
influence and restricted bioturbation, topped by
(4) glauconitic sandstone and transgressive marine mudstones
that rest on a shell-rich pebble lag (i.e., the wave ravinement
surface) that indicates the Segment-1 character of this ex-
ample. The “hour glass” shape of the well logs through the fill
(i.e., a basal blocky to fining-upward fluvial to estuarine
succession, overlain by coarsening–upward central-basin to
estuary-mouth deposits) appears to be characteristic in most
202 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 27.—Schematic diagram showing the distribution of depositional systems during deposition of the Morrow Formation. A)
During relative highstands of sea level, shorelines rimmed the basin and black muds were deposited on a broad, shallow-marine
shelf. B) During relative lowstands, an extensive series of river valleys were developed in eastern Colorado and western Kansas
that flowed into the Anadarko Basin (from Bowen and Wiemer, 2003).

of these incised-valley systems. Outside of the incised-valley
networks, the interfluve areas are characterized by extensive
paleosol surfaces.
Case Study 2:
Lower Cretaceous Glauconitic Sandstone:
Fluvial to Fluvial–Estuarine Deposits of Segment 1
The Lower Cretaceous Glauconitic Formation of the Western
Canada Sedimentary Basin is characterized by a network of
northwestward-trending, compound, piedmont incised-valley
systems that are interpreted to feed lowstand to early transgres-
sive east–west-trending shorelines to the north. The Glauconitic
incised-valley system is mappable for at least 535 km south–
north, from Montana into central Alberta (Wood and Hopkins,
1989, Sherwin, 1994, Broger et al., 1997, Peijs-van Hilten et al., 1998).
The fills of the 1–5 km wide valleys exhibit a progressive northward
change in character. In the south, the fill consists of lowstand to
early transgressive, fluvial to fluvial–estuarine deposits character-
ized by multiple erosive events (i.e., they are compound valley
fills) as a result of low accommodation. In the north, the accom-
modation was greater and the individual valleys are separated by
coarsening-upward highstand shoreface parasequences, result-
ing in full preservation of individual, simple valley fills.
The Countess–Alderson trend is a 56 mile (90 km) reach of one
such Glauconitic IVS that extends over 300 miles (480 km) from
northern Montana into central Alberta, Canada. Along this reach
there are 122 hydrocarbon pools (e.g., Countess YY and Lathom
A pools) that have produced over 100 MMBBL of oil and 300 BCF
of gas since the 1950s. Recent optimization of many pools using
a multidisciplinary approach has led to a better understanding of
the nature of this incised-valley system. The majority of pools
produce from backstepping (LST to TST), transgressed fluvial
and estuarine bayhead-delta and central-basin deposits.
The Countess YY pool (Fig. 28), one of several reservoirs
located beneath Lake Newell and adjacent areas in southern
Alberta, Canada, is interpreted by Broger et al. (1997), Peijs-van
Hilten et al. (1998), and Zaitlin et al. (1998) to lie within segment
1 of a wave-dominated incised-valley system. A low-permeabil-
ity Middle Glauconitic channel (Fig. 29) incises into the produc-
ing channel and locally forms an updip seal to trap hydrocarbons
in the Lower Glauconitic channel.
Both the Countess YY and Lathom “A” pools contain a num-
ber of characteristic depositional facies that are stacked in a
manner that is consistent with the vertical succession proposed
for a segment 1 incised-valley system. The base of the valley is
overlain by fluvial facies that consist of litharenitic, coarse- to
medium-grained, large-scale trough and planar-tabular cross-
bedded sandstone that overlies erosional surfaces that are usu-
ally covered by a pebble lag (Figs. 30, 31). This facies has excellent
reservoir quality (Fig. 29), ranges in thickness from 1 m to more
than 10 m, and is encountered at the base of the incised-valley
system. The gamma-ray log signature shows a blocky or fining-
upward profile. The sediments are interpreted to be deposited by
a highly connected braided to coarse-grained meandering fluvial
channel system.
The bay-head delta facies has moderate to poor reservoir
quality and either gradationally overlies the fluvial facies or
immediately overlies the basal sequence boundary in areas off
the axis of the valley. Thickness ranges from 3 m to more than 11
m. The gamma-ray log signature shows an overall coarsening-
upward trend, indicating a progradational environment. Indi-
vidual blocky to fining-upward units 3–7 m thick are interpreted
to represent bayhead-delta distributary channels. Single and
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 28.—An example of a compound incised-valley fill from the type Lower Cretaceous Glauconitic Formation well from the Latham
“A” field in southern Alberta, Canada. (Zaitlin et al., 1998). Bottom of core to the lower left; top to the top right. Glauconitic
Sandstone Member; 30, 40, and 50 represent informal units in the Glauconitic; A = fluvial facies, B = tidal–fluvial, C/D = tidal–
fluvial bayhead-delta to central-basin facies.
stacked channel units show a fining-upward and an obvious
shaling-upward trend in core and on wireline logs, with tidal
mud drapes (Fig. 32) being more abundant in the upper parts of
the units, indicating either an increase in tidal influence or a
decrease in energy during deposition. These bayhead-delta dis-
tributary-channel deposits are composed of medium- to coarse-
grained, planar-tabular cross-bedded, flaser-bedded, and tidally
bedded sandstones (Fig. 32). Massive to repetitive fining-upward
successions are characterized by basal scour surfaces marked by
shale rip-up clasts and channel lags. From seismic-amplitude
maps, a northwest (downvalley) bifurcation of the channel facies
is observed, indicating a distributary-channel pattern (Fig. 33).
Evidence of tidal activity is indicated by the presence of mud
drapes and couplets, as well as by a typical estuarine ichnofossil
assemblage in the associated central-basin facies (Fig. 34).
In some cases, these channel deposits display a more
heterolithic character and are interpreted to consist of an inclined
heterolithic tidal point-bar facies that is characterized by a sharp to
erosional basal contact with a fining-upward trend. These units
consist of fine, massive to tidally bedded, flaser-bedded sand-
stones, alternating with 2-cm-thick continuous mudstones. All of
the strata display a consistent dip of 5–19° and can be considered
to be inclined heterolithic stratification (IHS; cf. Thomas et al.,
1987) of point-bar origin. Locally, a restricted trace-fossil assem-
blage may be present. This facies has moderate to good reservoir
quality and overlies the bayhead-delta distributary-channel fa-
cies. Thickness ranges from 5 to 7 m. The gamma-ray log signa-
ture shows an irregular but clearly fining-upward profile. The
abundance of inclined shale intervals increases toward the top of
the succession. Sandstone intervals containing tidal mud drapes
also are more abundant in the top part of this facies.
The delta-front turbidite facies lies adjacent to the distributary-
channel deposits and consists of a regular interbedding of planar
to wavy parallel-laminated sandstones and weakly burrowed,
dark-gray mudstones (Broger et al., 1997; Peijs-van Hilten et al.,
203
1998). Locally an abundance of wave-generated physical sedi-
mentary structures are present, such as current-ripple lamina-
tion. Fine mud laminae are present in some intervals. The mud-
stone beds are locally highly carbonaceous, and typically much
thinner than the intervening sandstone beds (1–5 cm thick). They
commonly contain convolute lamination, syneresis cracks, and
small-scale gravity faults. Bioturbation is rare in the sandier
portions of the facies but increases in the mudstone interbeds. The
trace-fossil assemblage is restricted in diversity (Planolites,
Teichichnus, Cylindrichnus, Skolithos, and Tigillites sp.), indicating
the presence of a stress, most likely because of salinity fluctua-
tions or water turbidity. The heterolithic character indicates
repeated fluctuations in the energy regime, and the sedimentary
structures indicate that the sand beds were emplaced by density
flows that were caused by wave, storm, and/or river-flood pro-
cesses. The deformation features indicate a depositional slope,
and failure of the heterolithic succession. These deposits have
thicknesses ranging from 8 to 24 m. The gamma-ray log clearly
shows an irregular alternation of clean sandstone and shale
intervals. Reservoir properties and thicknesses of the sandstone
intervals increase upward, suggesting a sanding-upward and
coarsening-upward trend that indicates progradation. This facies
is interpreted to be deposited in a bayhead delta-front turbidite
environment, and is inferred to have a lobate geometry. In some
wells, the successions show overall lower porosity and perme-
ability values than elsewhere, indicating an areal variation in
grain size or sand proportion.
The central-basin facies consists of fine-grained, rippled, flaser-
bedded and tidally bedded sandstones displaying abundant
shale laminae and double mud drapes with a low-diversity
ichnofossil assemblage (Fig. 34). This facies has poor reservoir
quality and occurs in intervals with a thickness of 1 to 5 m at
various stratigraphic positions, most commonly on top of bayhead-
delta sandstone facies and below capping marine shales or the
crosscutting Middle Glauconitic channel sediments. The gamma-
204 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 29.—Porosity (%) versus permeability (millidarcys) cross plot for the various incised-valley facies in the Lower Cretaceous
Glauconitic Formation, southern Alberta, Canada. The data points cluster about four major categories: (1) best reservoir
produceability occurs in fluvial, bayhead-delta channel, and bayhead-delta tidal point-bar (IHS) facies; (2) moderate-reservoir
deposits consisting of sandy, central-basin bay-fill deposits; (3) moderate- to poor-reservoir deposits consisting of muddy,
bayhead-delta fresh-water and central-basin deposits; and (4) Middle Glauconitic lithic-channel facies that locally forms a lateral
seal to the reservoirs because of extensive diagenetic alteration (Broger et al., 1997). BHD = bayhead delta; IHS = inclined
heterolithic stratification; CH = channel; FW = fresh water.

FIG. 30.—A typical basal pebbly fluvial-lag facies from the Lathom “A” 7-19-20-17W4 well, with its associated grain size, porosity (Ø),
and permeability (K) values (from Zaitlin et al., 1998).
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 205

FIG. 31.—Sandy cross-bedded fluvial facies from the Lathom “A” 7-19-20-17W4 well, with its associated grain size, porosity (Ø), and
permeability (K) values (Zaitlin et al., 1998).

FIG. 32.—Typical tidal–fluvial facies with tidal couplets and mud drapes from the Lathom “A” 7-19-20-17W4 cored well, with its
associated grain size, porosity (Ø), and permeability (K) values (from Zaitlin et al., 1998). The mud layers reduce permeability
and make this facies a poorer reservoir than the fluvial facies (Figs. 30, 31) that underlie these deposits (see Fig. 29).
206 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 33.—Map of the Lake Newell area, southern Alberta, Canada, showing the distribution of seismic amplitudes along the trend
of the lower Glauconitic incised valley (margins indicated by heavy white lines). Warm colors are interpreted to be either porous
sand (i.e., potential hydrocarbon reservoirs) or undisturbed Ostracod shale, whereas cooler colors indicate nonporous shales.
Note the northwestward bifurcation of the inferred sandstones in the northern part of Lake Newell. This pattern is interpreted
to represent a bayhead delta. The locations of the drillsites are also shown. (Broger et al., 1997.)

ray log signature is irregular. This facies is interpreted to have
been deposited in the central-basin environment. As is common
in segment 1, no preserved barrier exists in the study area because
it was removed by ravinement. This is particularly true of low-
accommodation settings; in areas with higher accommodation,
portions of the barrier (dominantly the tidal inlet and flood-tidal
channels that cut down into the central-basin deposit) may escape
removal—e.g., Cretaceous Viking Formation in the Crystal Field
(Reinson et al., 1988; Pattison, 1991 or in outcrops of the Paddy–
Cadotte interval (Leckie and Singh, 1991), both in Alberta.
Case Study 3:
Lower Cretaceous Senlac (Lloydminster Formation) Sandstone:
An Example of an Estuary-Mouth Barrier
Sandbody of Segment 2
The Senlac heavy-oil pool, located in Townships 38–39, Range
26–27W3, of Saskatchewan (Fig. 35), was discovered in 1980. It
has been estimated to contain 1.3 x 107 m3 (84.3 x 106 barrels) of 13–
15 degree API oil in a barrier and tidal-inlet complex at the mouth
of a paleovalley system (Fig. 36). The existence of an intact barrier
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 34.—An example of bioturbated central-basin facies from the Lathom “A” 7-19-20-17W4 cored well, with its associated grain size,
porosity (Ø), and permeability (K) values (from Zaitlin et al., 1998).
complex with its associated estuary is the reason for assigning
this deposit to segment 2 of the incised-valley model.
Four main environments can be identified beneath and within
the barrier at the mouth of the paleovalley (Figs. 36, 37):
(1) A basal fluvial sandstone to siltstone ~ 5 m thick, organized
into repetitive fining-upward cycles of massive to cross-
bedded to rippled sandstone with local rootlets and a re-
stricted trace-fossil assemblage consisting of Paleophycus
herberti, Conichnus sp., Lokeia sp., and small Thalassinoides sp.
The sands display excellent reservoir quality but are wet,
whereas the siltstone has an effective permeability of < 0.01
md and porosity of < 5%.
(2) An ~ 4-m-thick coal and carbonaceous shale that accumu-
lated in marsh environments.
(3) A bioturbated central-basin to fringing tidal-flat mudstone.
(4) A complex sandbody that consists of upward-coarsening
shoreface deposits (effective permeability 2.5 darcys and
porosity 27–31%) that are cut by blocky to fining-upward
tidal-inlet channels (permeability ~ 3 darcys and porosity 25–
30%), with back-barrier flood-tidal deltas on its south side
(permeability ~ 2.7 darcys and porosity 29–31%).
The position and preservation of the barrier imply a wave-
dominated shoreline deposit at the transgressive limit of the
shoreline.
There is marked variation in the production history (Fig. 38)
between the subfacies of the barrier because of internal hetero-
207
geneity, variation in lateral continuity, and porosity–perme-
ability differences associated with original textural characteris-
tics. The flood-tidal delta, with increased bioturbation and a
higher proportion of introduced mud, has the poorest produc-
tion characteristics, whereas the tidal inlets have the coarsest
grain size and the highest initial porosity and permeability,
which leads to the most rapid production. Another example of
a preserved segment 2 barrier has been documented in outcrop
sections from the Paddy Member of the Albian Peace River
Formation (Leckie et al., 1990).
Case Study 4:
Lower Cretaceous Basal Quartz Sandstone:
A Low-Accommodation Compound Incised-Valley Deposit
One of the most complex successions of incised-valley de-
posits yet described in detail is provided by the Lower Creta-
ceous Basal Quartz Formation and its equivalents (i.e., the
Coverley, Lakota, Cutbank, and Sunburst units) in southern
Alberta and northwestern Montana (e.g., Way et al., 1998;
Dolson and Piombino, 1994; Lukie et al., 2002; Zaitlin et al., 2002;
Leckie et al., 2005). The Basal Quartz (BQ) is a relatively thin unit
(typically < 100 m) that was deposited in an accommodation-
limited setting and is characterized by multiple, closely spaced
unconformities that define a set of more than ten complexly
nested incised-valley fills. The BQ was deposited as part of an
elongated NNW–SSE trending foreland trough in which there is
pronounced isopach thickening toward the northwest. The
trough contains three major north-south paleodrainage systems
(the Spirit River, Edmonton Channel, and McMurray valleys;
Fig. 39). The older and more southerly occurrences provide
208 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 35.—Two-way travel time in seconds to the sub-Cretaceous unconformity in the Senlac area of southwestern Saskatchewan,
Canada. Darker colors (longer times) indicate areas where the unconformity is deeper. The pattern is interpreted to represent an
incised-valley network. Arrows indicate interpreted paleovalley trends and inferred paleodrainage directions. (From Zaitlin and
Shultz, 1990.)

FIG. 36.—Distribution of inferred depositional environments during Lloydminster Formation time in the Senlac incised valley. SF.
= shoreface deposits; TC. = tidal-channel deposits; FTD = flood-tidal-delta deposits. Heavy black lines separate depositional
environments within the estuary-mouth sand plug. (From Zaitlin and Shultz, 1990.)
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 209

FIG. 37.—Idealized vertical sequence of the Lower Mannville Group in the Senlac area. Ichnofossils identified by Dr. G. Pemberton
(University of Alberta); micropaleontological data provided by Robertson Research and Dr. C. Vervoloet. A, B, and C refer to
zones in Figure 36: SB = sequence boundary; IFS = initial flooding surface; TR = tidal ravinement surface; WR = wave ravinement
surface. (From Zaitlin and Shultz, 1990.)

well-documented examples of segment 3 fluvial deposits that
pass northward into segment 1 fluvial, estuarine, and marine
deposits.
Within the study area of Zaitlin et al. (2002) (Fig. 39), accom-
modation ranges between the following two end members:
(1) An area of extremely low accommodation in the southeast
corner of Alberta, where isopach values range between 0 and
40 m and net sedimentation rates are less than 2.2 m/My. This
area was dominated by long periods of erosion and exposure,
the development of paleosols, and polycyclic incision of
valley systems characterized by thin, sheet-like, braided to
coarse-grained meandering-fluvial deposits.
(2) An area of low–intermediate accommodation in the north-
west where thicknesses range between 40 m and more than
200 m and net sedimentation rates ranged between 1.3 and
11.1 m/My, and valley systems are less amalgamated and
more easily mappable, with sheet-like fluvial to coarse-grained
meandering deposits, paleosols, and thin coals at their bases,
changing upward into finer-grained meandering-fluvial to
fluvial–estuarine systems.
The transition between these two areas corresponds closely to
a geophysically defined ENE-trending structural zone termed
the Vulcan Aeromagnetic Low (Ross et al., 1997).
The BQ has an extensive data base of wireline logs, cores,
cuttings, and producing pools that allow the succession to be
divided into four informal mappable units (A Sandstone, Horse-
fly, BAT, Ellerslie), each of which can be further subdivided
(Zaitlin et al., 2002) (Fig. 40). In particular, the A Sandstone has
been divided into the Regional A (oldest), Carmangay, Mesa IV,
and Valley and Terrace units. This informal stratigraphic break-
down was later substantiated by chemostratigraphic analysis of
the succession (Figs. 42, 43; Ratcliffe et al., 2004). There are two
cycles of increasing-upward mineralogical and textural matu-
rity, the first associated with the A Sandstone and the second
associated with the Horsefly–BAT–Ellerslie succession. The
subdivision of the BQ into discrete valley systems allows recog-
nition of how the paleodrainage changed through time. There is
both a progressive spatial and stratigraphic change in valley
organization, from thin and wide valley forms in the south and
at the base of the maturity cycles, to thicker, narrower, and more
deeply cut systems toward the northwest and top of the cycles
(Figs. 40, 41). There is also a spatial and temporal change in the
development of tributary systems for the Horsefly–BAT–Ellerslie
(upper) cycle. The Horsefly Sandstone has few well-developed
tributaries, whereas the BAT is characterized by narrow and
thin tributaries south of the Vulcan Low, deeply cut complex
tributary patterns within the Vulcan Low, and linear deep
tributaries north of the Vulcan Low (Ardies et al., 2002; Zaitlin
et al., 2002).
The style of depositional fill also changes stratigraphically
and spatially, from braided and coarse-grained meandering-
fluvial sheet deposits in the Regional A Sandstone, Carmangay,
and Horsefly units south of the Vulcan Low and in the low-
210 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 38.—Plot of cumulative oil production vs. time for three typical wells completed in the tidal-channel, shoreface and tidal-delta
lithofacies. Inset: total cumulative oil production vs. time for the Senlac Pool. (From Zaitlin and Shultz, 1990.)

accommodation portions of the Valley and Terrace and BAT units
north of the Vulcan Low, to meandering-fluvial deposits associ-
ated with somewhat higher-accommodation Mesa IV, Valley and
Terrace, Horsefly, and BAT units, and then to fluvial–estuarine
deposits in the portions of the Valley and Terrace, BAT, and
Ellerslie units, which accumulated in the highest-accommoda-
tion settings north of the Vulcan Low (Figs. 40, 41).
The Carmangay unit (Figs. 40, 41) forms a thin sheet-like
sandbody, up to 20 m thick, in the southwest corner of the study
area and is interpreted to have accumulated entirely in segment
3. It consists of multiple cycles of erosionally based, fining-
upward channel deposits, 1–5 m thick, of medium- to coarse-
grained, pebbly, cross-bedded sandstones, fining upward into
fine- to medium-grained cross-bedded to rippled, well sorted
sandstones. Where preserved, the cycles are locally capped by
thin variegated to green waxy paleosols. During Carmangay
time, braided-fluvial to coarse-grained meandering-fluvial sys-
tems migrated across the depositional surface. The lateral migra-
tion of the channels effectively removed most fine-grained
overbank deposits and left multiple basal scour surfaces. Reser-
voir parameters range from < 0.01 md to 4 darcy permeability,
with 20% porosity, that yield excellent reservoir quality.
The Mesa IV unit (Figs. 40, 41) also lies entirely in segment 3
and consists of multiple cycles of erosionally based, fining-
upward medium- to coarse-grained pebbly cross-bedded quartz
and rusty-chert sandstones fining upward into fine- to medium-
grained cross-bedded to rippled, well sorted sandstones. These
sandstones may be capped by thin, variegated to green waxy
paleosols that formed during long periods of exposure. Partial
pedogenic clay plugging is pervasive and typically degrades the
porosity and permeability of the Mesa IV deposits. The Mesa IV
valleys contain narrow, sinuous, ribbon-like channel deposits,
less than 15 m thick and 1.6 km wide. Individual channels are
difficult to map in the absence of core. The Mesa IV deposits are
interpreted to have been formed by coarse-grained meandering-
fluvial systems. Locally, the Mesa IV sandstones constitute fair to
excellent gas reservoirs with 12–25% porosity and < 0.1 md to 0.8
darcy permeability.
The Valley and Terrace deposits (Figs. 40, 41; cf. Hamilton et
al., 2001) consist of braided and coarse-grained meandering-
fluvial deposits, grading upward into fluvial and interbedded
floodplain and paleosols. Toward the north the Valley and Ter-
race deposits contain tidal–fluvial channel and estuarine central-
basin deposits of segments 1 and 2. As the name indicates, the
Valley and Terrace unit consists of a series of nested terraces that
formed during repeated periods of base-level fall and subsequent
backfilling at a time of overall falling base level, resulting in an
architecture that is similar in style to the Quaternary Colorado
River (Blum, 1990, 1994; Blum and Valastro, 1994; Blum et al.,
1994). Southward-directed transgression of the northern Boreal
Seaway during Valley and Terrace time resulted in the backstep-
ping of estuarine deposits over fluvial deposits. Reservoir param-
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 211

FIG. 39.—Isopach map of the Lower Mannville Group in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin. The northwestward increase in
thickness indicates that accommodation increased in that direction during deposition of the Basal Quartz. L = low-accommoda-
tion area; I = intermediate-accommodation area; H = high-accommodation area. Arrows indicate paleodrainages of the
McMurray, Edmonton, and Spirit River valley systems. BC = British Columbia; AB = Alberta; SK = Saskatchewan; MB = Manitoba;
MT = Montana. (From Zaitlin et al., 2002.)

eters range from 5–28% porosity, and 0.06 md to 1.2 darcy
permeability.
The Horsefly unit is confined to two major compound incised-
valley systems termed the Whitlash Valley (Hayes, 1986; Hayes
et al., 1994) and Taber–Cutbank Valley (Lukie, 1999; Lukie et al.,
2002; Arnott et al., 2000, 2002), both of which extend southward
into northern Montana (e.g., Dolson and Piombino, 1994), where
the Horsefly is termed the Cutbank Sandstone. The Horsefly
succession is up to 25 m thick, and the Taber–Cutbank Valley is
approximately 50 km wide (Fig. 41). The valley fill consists of
repeated fining-upward successions of braided-fluvial to coarse-
grained meander sandstones overlain by thick successions of
muddy paleosols. The basal strata consist of poorly sorted, ma-
trix-supported conglomerate with a medium- to coarse-grained
sandstone matrix. Clasts are subrounded and several decimeters
in diameter and are composed of sandstone and silty mudstone.
The basal unit is overlain by cross-stratified upper medium- to
coarse-grained sandstone, gradationally overlain by massive to
small-scale cross-stratified fine-grained sandstone, in turn over-
lain by siltstone and silty mudstone. The overlying paleosol
deposits are composed of variegated red, green, and gray silt-
stones and mudstones that locally reach 30 m in thickness (Lukie,
1999; Lukie et al., 2002; Arnott et al., 2000, 2002; Zaitlin et al., 2002).
The channel deposits in the Horsefly Sandstone exhibit a
classic upward change from amalgamated to isolated (cf. Fig. 21).
The cycle begins with a regionally mappable erosional surface
that is overlain by amalgamated braided-fluvial sandstones. Any
contemporaneous overbank mudstones were completely eroded.
These sandstones are then overlain by mudstone-dominated
overbank deposits that encase “ribbon” channel and sheet-like
crevasse-splay deposits (Arnott et al., 2000, 2002; Lukie et al.,
2002; Zaitlin et al., 2002). Two such successions are present within
the Horsefly. Each of these sequences accumulated under condi-
tions of continuously increasing accommodation. Tectonic move-
ments, perhaps in response to episodic thrust loading, are thought
to have been the major control on accommodation; eustatic
fluctuations were probably not important because the study area
lay far inland at the time of deposition, landward of the landward
limit of estuarine conditions (i.e., in segment 3). Reservoir param-
eters of the Horsefly unit range from 3–24% porosity and < 0.01
md to > 1.2 darcy permeability.
The BAT can be divided spatially, on the basis of deposi-
tional style, into two sub-units (Fig. 41; Zaitlin et al., 2002). The
first is a low-accommodation BAT in areas where the total BAT
unit isopach is less than 30 m. South of Township 20 along the
Taber–Cutbank valley system the width is of the order of 1–5
212 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 40.—Variations in BQ valley form and width:depth ratios. Cycles 1 and 2 relate to tectonic stages of the adjacent Cordillera during
accumulation of the Basal Quartz (as defined in Zaitlin et al., 2002). Note how in each cycle the first valleys are broad and relatively
shallow, whereas younger valleys have greater depth-to-width ratios.

km. The second is a high-accommodation BAT along the
Carseland–Crossfield–Penhold trend, and the Provost trend
(where the term Dina is used), where total isopach values can
reach up to 100 m and the valley width is approximately 6 to 10
km and the valley-filling deposits are characterized by fluvial–
estuarine deposits of segment 1. In low-accommodation areas,
the BAT consists of stacked, erosionally based, fining-upward
sheet-like sandstones (Ardies, 1999; Ardies et al., 2002; Arnott et
al., 2000, 2002; Zaitlin et al., 2002). Each succession grades
upward from coarse to medium sandstone, to lower medium–
upper fine sandstone. All of these sandstones are pervasively
cross stratified and are interpreted to have accumulated in
braided to coarse-grained meandering rivers. Very rarely does
the low-accommodation BAT display any form of marine bio-
turbation. The BAT sandstones display excellent reservoir qual-
ity and are a prime exploration target. In low-accommodation
BAT reservoirs in the southern and eastern portions of the study
area, reservoir parameters range from 3–28% porosity and <
0.01 md to 5 darcy permeability.
CRITICISMS, MISUSES, AND REFINEMENTS
OF THE E&IV MODEL
The E&IV facies model detailed above (Dalrymple et al., 1992;
Zaitlin et al., 1994) has gained widespread usage (Fig. 3) and
acceptance over the past decade and could now be regarded as a
mature and established model. However, like all facies models
that are necessarily based on a “distillation” of natural variability
(Walker, 1984b), it does represent a simplification of natural
complexity and cannot be expected to match every specific ex-
ample, whether modern or ancient. As a result, it is perhaps
natural that there have been suggestions that the model fails to
take into account important variables and thus does not accu-
rately reflect certain aspects of estuarine and incised-valley de-
posits. There have also been attempts to develop refinements
and/or elaborations of the model, in the same way that the
models for a meandering-river point bar have multiplied from
the single vertical succession proposed by Allen (1963) to the 16
successions shown by Miall (1996). In addition, there has been
inadvertent misuse of the model by some workers. Here we
examine some of the issues raised by these developments, be-
cause they illustrate useful information about incised-valley es-
tuarine systems or about the nature of facies models in general.
Estuary Versus Estuary:
The Implications of Applying a Name
One of the most fundamental problems with estuarine facies
models has been the ongoing confusion between the oceano-
graphic, salinity-based definition of estuaries (Pritchard, 1967)
and the modified geologic definition of Dalrymple et al. (1992)
used here. This, in turn, has led to the potential for inaccurate
interpretations of ancient successions and/or to suggestions that
one or other of the definitions is inappropriate. At the outset, it
must be recognized that both definitions are “valid” in their own
right. The problem arises through failure to carefully articulate
which definition is being used and/or to implicitly switch be-
tween definitions without saying so.
The most common expression of this problem is the growing
tendency to deduce that certain ancient deposits accumulated in
an area of brackish water, on the basis of the nature of the trace-
fossil assemblage as described below. From this, the authors state
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS

FIG. 41.—Cycle 1 (lower right): Composite isopach and paleogeographic map of the A Sandstone. Contour interval = 5 m, values range from 0 to 30 m. Cycle 2 (lower left)
Isopach and paleogeographic map for the Horsefly unit. Cycle 2 (upper left): Isopach and paleogeographic map of the BAT unit. Cycle 2 (upper right): Isopach and
paleogeographic map of the Ellerslie unit. In all panels, arrows represent inferred paleodrainage direction. Where no contours are present, no deposits are present,
due either to nondeposition or to subsequent erosion. Original from Zaitlin et al. (2002).
213
214 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 42.—Vertical changes in the geochemistry of silty claystone in the Horsefly, BAT, and Ellerslie units of the Basal Quartz Formation
(Zaitlin et al., 2002; Ratcliffe et al., 2004). The data come from several cores, with samples placed in their correct, relative
stratigraphic position. Al2O3 and SiO2 values demonstrate that there are only minor differences in the silt and clay content of the
various units. However, to minimize the influences of subtle changes in silt content, the values for the other elements have been
normalized against Al2O3.

FIG. 43.—Cross plots of normalized elemental ratios to illustrate differentiation of the Horsefly, BAT, and Ellerslie units (Basal Quartz
Formation) using geochemical data.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
that the deposits are “estuarine”, implicitly utilizing the salinity-
based definition of Pritchard (1967). Then, on the basis of this
estuarine interpretation, the deposits are said to be transgressive
and/or to demonstrate the existence of an incised valley, which
implicitly represents a switch to the Dalrymple et al. (1992)
geological definition. Alternatively, the authors might demon-
strate that the succession is, in fact, regressive and go on to
suggest that progradational estuaries exist, in contravention of
the Dalrymple et al. (1992) definition.
Such switching between the two definitions of estuary is
inappropriate because, as stated above, the salinity-based defini-
tion includes a much broader range of environments than the
geological definition: although the two definitions overlap in
their application, they are not equivalent. It is certainly the case
that estuaries (sensu Dalrymple et al., 1992) may have a phase of
progradational filling at the end of the transgression, when the
coastal zone switches from transgression to regression. However,
this progradational phase must overlie a transgressive succes-
sion. Furthermore, the application of the term “estuary” sensu
Dalrymple et al. (1992), in combination with the (now modified)
idea that such estuaries are restricted to incised valleys, also
implies that there was a relative sea-level lowstand and the
development of a sequence boundary at the base of the valley (cf.
Hein and Langenberg, 2003). This, in turn, has important impli-
cations for our understanding of the geological history of the area
and for the prediction of petroleum-reservoir play types (e.g.,
lowstand deltas). However, brackish-water trace-fossil assem-
blages can occur in progradational deltaic settings and even in
some shelf environments. It may be, therefore, that the inappro-
priate switching between the two definitions of estuary has led to
the misidentification of deltaic distributaries as estuaries and the
incorrect sequence-stratigraphic interpretation of some succes-
sions (cf. Reinson and Meloche, 2002; Zaitlin, 2003; Krystinik and
Leckie, 2005).
It should be noted that the definition of estuary presented in
this paper is a modification of that presented in Dalrymple et al.
(1992). Since the original definition was constructed it has become
apparent that there are numerous settings such as abandoned
deltas and structural embayments that possess the characteristics
of estuaries but are not necessarily associated with paleovalleys.
While the origin and classification of these types of settings are
usually apparent in modern environments, it is much more
difficult to discern them in ancient sediments. Hence, while it
might be preferable to identify an abandoned delta as such in an
ancient deposit, it might not always be possible to do so, in which
case the use of the term estuary would be justified if it met the
criteria identified in this paper.
The types of problems that may result from switching be-
tween the two definitions of estuary represent inappropriate use
of the models rather than deficiencies in the definitions. Both
definitions of estuary have their use, but they should not be
confused. We suggest that, if the Dalrymple et al. (1992) definition
is to be used at any point in a study, the salinity-based definition
be avoided. Instead, we recommend the use of the term “brack-
ish-water” as the more acceptable term (in place of “estuarine”)
for deposits believed to have accumulated in an area of reduced
salinity. Conversely, if the decision is to use the salinity-based
definition, then the Dalrymple et al. (1992) definition should be
avoided and the term “transgressive” should be used for
retrogradationally stacked facies successions.
Classification of Estuaries
Several authors, beginning with Cooper (1988), have sug-
gested that a third type of estuary (fluvially dominated) should be
215
added to the two-fold wave- and tide-dominated subdivision
proposed by Dalrymple et al. (1992). Such a proposal would seem
reasonable by analogy with the three-fold subdivision of delta
facies models (Coleman and Wright, 1975; Galloway, 1975). It is
certainly the case that there is a wide range in the size of rivers
feeding estuaries. However, this proposal for a river-dominated
class of estuary has weaknesses for three reasons:
(1) In the specific instance described by Cooper (1988), the short-
term and long-term behavior of the system was not ad-
equately taken into consideration. Because of the extreme
variability of discharge in that situation, the river-mouth area
alternated between two conditions: at the time of the infre-
quent but very large river floods, sand was exported beyond
the mouth of the river to the marine environment, whereas,
during the much longer, intervening periods, the river-mouth
area was refilled by sand carried to the area by river and
flood-tidal processes. During the times when sediment was
being imported, the system was a wave-dominated estuary
(sensu Dalrymple et al., 1992) with a barrier, flood-tidal delta,
and central basin). In the longer term, however, sediment was
being supplied by the river to a beach and shoreface system.
As a result, in the longer term the system described by Cooper
(1988) is not an estuary but is a river feeding an incipient
strandplain.
(2) In the more general sense, one of the most important, even
defining, characteristics of estuaries (sensu Dalrymple et al.,
1992) is the existence of two sediment sources: fluvial and
marine. In the limiting cases where one or other of these two
sediment sources goes to zero, it is legitimate to argue that the
systems are no longer estuaries in the original sense. Therefore,
systems with only a marine sediment source and no river
influence might legitimately be considered barrier–lagoon
systems that are gradational with estuaries (cf. Boyd et al.,
1992). Such systems, in our opinion, form exclusively in trans-
gressive situations. Systems with negligible marine sediment
input (i.e., they are “river-dominated”) are, by contrast, almost
certainly regressive, at least locally at the river mouth, at the
time of consideration. Therefore, they fail to fulfill one of the
fundamental criteria of “estuary” (sensu Dalrymple et al.,
1992). There is no good, existing term for a semi-enclosed
coastal area with no marine input that might otherwise be
called river-dominated. One possibility would be to call such
systems “embayments”, as is commonly done in the coastal
geomorphological literature (e.g., an open-mouthed bay with
no bay-mouth barrier or other marine-sourced sediment body,
but with river input at its head). Therefore, given the essential
character of estuaries as proposed by Dalrymple et al. (1992) a
prograding river-dominated system cannot be an “estuary”.
(3) A careful review of modern river-mouth areas (cf. Dalrymple
et al., 1992) indicates that the size of the river does not
fundamentally change the geomorphic character of the estua-
rine system. Therefore, valley mouths that have unfilled
accommodation (i.e., they are estuaries sensu Dalrymple et
al., 1992) have similar morphologies regardless of whether
the river is small or large. For example, the Severn River
(England) and Salmon River (Cobequid Bay, Bay of Fundy)
tide-dominated estuaries have essentially identical morpho-
logical and facies zonations despite the fact that the water and
sediment discharges of the Severn River are several orders of
magnitude larger than those of the Salmon River. Similarly,
the fundamental morphology of the large Mobile Bay estuary
(Kindinger et al., 1994) is identical to that of the small
216 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
Narrawallee and Wapengo estuaries of southern New South
Wales (with coast-parallel barrier, low-energy and muddy
central basin and bayhead delta; Nichol, 1991).
Thus, the creation of a river-dominated class of estuaries
would appear, at least at this time, to be unnecessary. People
working in the ancient rock record who have adopted this con-
cept may have fallen victim to the inadvertent mixing of estuary
definitions discussed in the preceding section.
Systems-Tract Assignment of Valley Fills
Some confusion exists regarding the assignment of incised-
valley fills to individual systems tracts. The original work on
incised-valley deposits by the Exxon group (e.g., Van Wagoner et
al., 1988, Posamentier and Vail 1988) considered all of the depos-
its within an incised valley to belong to the LST. In this context,
this was reasonable because they were dealing with relatively
low-resolution seismic data and large-scale stratigraphic se-
quences of second or third order. In this context, the fill of the
valley could not be subdivided in detail and the valley-fill succes-
sion represented a very small volume at the base of the much
larger sequence. By contrast, detailed examination of both modern
and ancient valley-fill successions (e.g., Roy, 1984; Reinson, 1992;
Boyd and Honig, 1992; MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994; Demarest
and Kraft, 1987) show clearly that a significant fraction of the
valley-filling deposits in many systems was deposited during
base-level rise, commonly at a time when the shoreline had mi-
grated substantial distances landward of its lowstand location.
Incised-valley estuaries along modern coastlines illustrate this
point: valley filling continues at a relative highstand of sea level. As
a result, many, but not all, workers have tended to recognize both
LST and TST deposits within incised valleys, with TST deposits
predominating throughout most of the length of the valley.
Although this situation is perhaps the “norm” (sensu Walker,
1992), valleys, or portions of valleys, that are filled entirely during
the lowstand are a possibility. In particular, this may occur for a
distance landward of the lowstand shoreline, with the valley fill
consisting of fluvial deposits that accumulated during the fluvial
aggradation that accompanied sea-level rise during the late LST
and earliest TST. High rates of sediment supply at lowstand
would favor valley filling at this time. However, the inland extent
of this lowstand fluvial aggradation would be limited to the area
where the “backwater” effect exists (a few kilometers to several
tens of kilometers at most; e.g., Blum and Törnqvist, 2000, and
references therein) during the late lowstand. At the same time,
areas farther landward in the valley would be bypass zones with
little or no net deposition. As the lowstand shoreline experienced
initial transgression at the onset of the RSL rise, the transgressive
surface would be formed. This surface, where it is possible to
recognize it, would onlap into the valley. Landward of the point
of onlap of the transgressive surface, the valley fill would consist
of a thin LST (possibly only one channel depth thick in many
cases) consisting of relatively coarse-grained fluvial deposits,
overlain by finer-grained fluvial sediments of the TST.
Both systems-tract assignments of valley-fill deposits are
probably valid, but at very different scales of consideration. The
early Exxonian view that all valley-fill deposits are LST should be
used only at very large spatial and temporal scales, whereas a
more refined subdivision into LST and TST is more likely to be
correct in high-resolution studies. In our opinion, an example of
what can happen by an inappropriate use of the Exxonian view in
a high-resolution study is provided by Bowen and Weimer (1997,
2003). In these papers, the authors use the Exxonian approach
without clearly explaining why. They then proceed to document
the nature of the valley fill in detail and show tens of kilometers
of backstepping of facies, which clearly lie within the TST as
defined by most workers, but which they say forms part of the
LST. Such inconsistent use of terminology is confusing at best and
deviates from the original intent of systems tracts.
Relative Abundance of Facies and
Systems Tracts within Incised Valleys
The original model for incised valleys (Figs. 19, 20; Zaitlin et
al., 1994) shows fluvial deposits as constituting a very small
proportion of the entire valley fill, which was dominated by
estuarine facies. As a result, the TST was volumetrically predomi-
nant, with minimal LST. While these authors explicitly said that
the relative proportion of fluvial (and LST) deposits was subject
to considerable variability, some subsequent workers have criti-
cized the model, suggesting that this is not a universal aspect of
incised-valley successions.
Such criticisms may have some validity, but they fail to
recognize the nature and role of facies models. As already stated,
facies models represent a distillation of existing knowledge and
are not intended to illustrate the only possible stratigraphic
expression. Variability is to be expected, and deviations from the
model can be used to deduce important information about the
situation under study. For example, the complete absence of
fluvial deposits and the presence of tidally influenced deposits
right to the base of the valley may indicate either (1) that the
erosional feature is not a valley but instead represents a tidally
scoured depression that may not correlate to a sequence bound-
ary or (2) that deposition within a valley took place near the
lowstand river mouth in a tidal–fluvial environment. On the
other hand, a valley filled entirely with fluvial deposits indicates
that the rate of fluvial sediment supply was high relative to the
rate of creation of accommodation by sea-level rise, or that the
location in question lay sufficiently far inland that estuarine
conditions never reached there (i.e., the valley lies within seg-
ment 3). In retrospect, the original Zaitlin et al. (1994) representa-
tion with minimal fluvial and LST deposits may have been
unduly influenced by the then predominance of systems in which
there was a relatively small fluvial sediment input and of modern
systems in which the rate of RSL rise was so rapid that minimal
fluvial–LST deposition occurred, especially in the inner part of
segment 1 and in segment 2 (e.g., incised-valley systems along the
US east coast such as described in Ashley and Sheridan, 1994). A
better “distillation” might well have included more fluvial sedi-
ment as the “norm”.
Additional Critiques of Estuarine and Incised-Valley Models
Other discussions of the E&IV models have been published by
Washington and Chisick (1994) and Blum and Törnqvist (2000).
Washington and Chisick (1994) suggested that several factors
were missing from the estuary model of Dalrymple et al. (1992).
They identified the in situ production and accumulation of bio-
genic material (peat and carbonate), the rate of sea-level rise
relative to the rate of marine sediment input, and climate (tem-
perate versus tropical) as factors that should have been included.
In response we note that no generalized model can include all
factors that are present in a depositional sedimentary environ-
ment. The full range of boundary conditions and processes in an
environment determines the spectrum of deposits that may be
produced by that environment; however, only the commonly
occurring combinations will be useful for a widely applicable
model. Hence, while the three factors identified by Washington
and Chisick (1994) may be important in local examples, the lack
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
of explicit inclusion of them in the Dalrymple et al. (1992) model
illustrates the distillation process identified by Walker (1992), by
which variability is removed and generalized facies models are
produced. In the case of the three factors above, they are not
included in the general model because: (1) they do not control the
basic geomorphic organization of estuarine facies; (2) their influ-
ence is less pervasive or less intense than that of the fundamental
interaction of fluvial and marine processes; and/or (3) the nature
or distribution of their influence is controlled by the fluvial–
marine interaction in an estuary (i.e., the latter factor is more
fundamental; cf. Dalrymple et al., 1994a). As estuarine facies
models become progressively more refined, however, future
workers might well wish to create a “new” facies model (i.e., a
variant on the models proposed by Dalrymple et al., 1992) to
explicitly incorporate the distribution of carbonate facies in tropi-
cal estuaries with low fluvial influence.
More recently, Blum and Törnqvist (2000) have criticized how
some workers have used the incised-valley concept because it
implies a “vacuum cleaner” approach to fluvial sediment trans-
port rather than a “conveyor belt” approach. Blum and Törnqvist
(2000) have disputed the influence of relative sea-level fall as the
initiator of incision, accompanied by “an upstream-propagating
wave of stream rejuvenation, which produces sediments that
entirely bypass the coastal plain and newly emergent shelf to
provide a critical volume of sediment for systems tracts further
basinward” (the vacuum-cleaner model that results in an incised
valley). This is contrasted with the conveyor-belt model, “where
sediments are continuously delivered to the basin margin from a
large inland drainage”. Instead, they suggest that it is the climati-
cally produced changes in discharge that drive incision. While
this may be true in many cases and is not explicitly considered in
many discussions of valley formation, it is hard to neglect the role
of relative sea level (RSL) fall as a trigger for valley formation,
because a fall in RSL may cause the river to encounter new areas
of steep gradient on the continental shelf that promote incision.
Although the impact of these new gradients is not felt throughout
the drainage basin, incision is present on many rivers 40–400 km
upstream of the present shoreline (data of Blum and Törnqvist,
2000). Indeed, the very abundance of Holocene incised valleys
containing estuaries on many coastal streams near the highstand
shoreline points to the strong influence of RSL change on their
development. So, although much sediment is transported through
alluvial valleys in response to climatic forcing during times of
sea-level fall and steeper shelf gradients, some sediment is also
removed from the coastal plain, generating a container (the
valley) for later filling. This line of argument highlights one of the
new features to emerge since the development of E&IV models,
namely the recognition that valley incision may take place only at
localized changes in gradient where knickpoints can be created.
Hence, although full cross-shelf incision may occur when the
shoreline drops below the shelf break (e.g., Suter et al., 1987;
Por™bski and Steel, 2003), a more common situation results from
sea-level change that exposes a local gradient increase at an old
shoreface. This may cause incision at several localized sites while
the greater part of the exposed continental shelf and the upstream
alluvial channel remain unincised (e.g., Woolfe et al., 1998;
Posamentier, 2001; Fielding et al., 2003; Wellner and Bartek,
2003).
AN EXAMPLE OF FACIES-MODEL USAGE:
THE TIDE-DOMINATED DELTA VERSUS
ESTUARY CONTROVERSY
At a recent SEPM research conference (Dalrymple, 2003) it
was suggested by some participants that any brackish-water,
217
tidally influenced facies should be considered an estuarine de-
posit, a suggestion that implicitly follows the Pritchard (1967)
definition of an estuary. It was also suggested that many deltaic
deposits had been incorrectly identified as estuaries because of
the recent popularity of E&IV models (e.g., Reinson and Meloche,
2002; Leckie and Krystinik, 2005). This illustrates the need for
practical and accurate facies models, because brackish-water
tidal facies actually occur in several distinct environments, and
because deltas should not be confused with estuaries. By devel-
oping clear facies models based on distinctive combinations of
sedimentary processes it is possible to correctly identify and
differentiate these environments.
While it was noted in an earlier section of this paper that each
facies model necessarily is a simplification of a wide spectrum of
similar environments, there should be fundamental differences
in facies models from different depositional environments. So
facies models from estuaries, tide-dominated deltas, lagoons,
and tidally influenced shelves should not be the same. For ex-
ample, the differentiation of tide-dominated deltas from tide-
dominated estuaries provides a convincing argument for the
clear establishment of facies models for each setting and their
appropriate use, and it represents an important example of the
value of the facies-model concept.
The delta-versus-estuary problem was formally raised by
Walker (1992), who suggested that the triangular classification of
deltas (e.g., Galloway, 1975) was inappropriate and that it should
be modified or abandoned. Walker’s (1992) emphasis on sea-level
change and the presence of a coastal protuberance (i.e., a bulge)
as a distinguishing feature of deltas led him to believe that tide-
dominated deltas, which commonly occur at the heads of
embayments, were not related to other deltas and were better
considered as tidal estuaries. However, the problem results from
a fundamental confusion of the factors that make up the essence
of facies models for deltas and estuaries.
Many of the detailed features of tide-dominated deltas and
tide-dominated estuaries are certainly similar. For example,
both of them contain brackish water and hence restricted
faunal and ichnological assemblages. They contain very simi-
lar physical sedimentary structures (e.g., tidal bundles, in-
clined heterolithic stratification, and all other tidal indicators
listed in recognition criteria 8 and 9 above), as well as similar
depositional sub-environments and facies (e.g., tidal–fluvial
channels and elongate tidal sand bars). However, that is as far
as the similarity goes. There are fundamental differences that
distinguish the two depositional environments and their fa-
cies models.
(1) Estuaries are commonly associated with incised valleys while
deltas are not. However, early highstand progradation of
some deltas may be restricted to incised-valley settings, while
some abandoned deltas that are not incised take on an estua-
rine character during transgression.
(2) Estuaries display a tributary pattern (see above) while deltas
display a distributary pattern.
(3) Deltas have only one sediment source and hence single
composition, while estuaries have two.
(4) Deltaic sands fine unidirectionally seaward while estuaries
show a grain-size peak at either end of the system, reflecting
the two sediment sources.
(5) Deltas are fundamentally regressive systems while estuaries
are transgressive.
218 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
(6) Because deltas are regressive in nature, their stratigraphy
differs fundamentally from transgressive estuaries. In deltas,
marine sand bars are underlain by prodelta and marine
sediments. In estuaries, marine sand bars are underlain by a
tidal ravinement surface and more landward estuarine and
fluvial facies (Figs. 16, 17, 19, 20).
(7) The prodelta environment is missing in estuaries.
(8) The estuary typically lies on a regional unconformity or on
fluvial deposits , which in turn lies on an unconformity. It has
a maximum flooding surface located within or above the
estuarine fill. A highstand delta typically lies above a maxi-
mum flooding surface and has a sequence boundary devel-
oped above it (Fig. 19).
(9) In sequence-stratigraphic terms, estuaries more commonly
occupy the transgressive systems tract while deltas more
commonly occupy the highstand systems tract (although it is
recognized that these depositional systems can occur in a
range of systems tracts, especially when considering lower-
order sequences).
So, while many aspects of tide-dominated estuaries and del-
tas look superficially similar, they should not share the same
facies model. When the correct identification of estuarine and
deltaic deposits in their appropriate stratigraphic context is made,
it is clear from the nine issues listed above that there are funda-
mental differences in the two facies models. Our conclusion is
that the “offending corner of the delta triangle” that was removed
by Walker (1992, his Figure 7) should be firmly reaffixed. In
addition, it should be placed correctly in the triangular coastal
classification of Boyd et al. (1992) and separated as shown in
Figure 9 from tide-dominated estuaries. The reasoning behind
this return to the triangular classification is the contrasting pro-
cesses that distinguish deltas (e.g., Wright, 1985) from estuaries.
Chief among these is the balance between sediment flux and
relative sea-level rise. In deltas, over a longer term, the sediment
flux outstrips any change in relative sea level, while in estuaries
the reverse is true. In deltas, the fluvial processes delivering
sediment to the coastline overwhelm the marine processes be-
cause there is no available onland accommodation, and they
result in a unidirectional seaward flux of sediment. In estuaries,
because there is unfilled accommodation within the drowned
coastal zone, wave and tidal processes produce a landward
sediment flux from the marine end of the system that supple-
ments that from the fluvial end. In addition, the geometry of a
delta tends to favor ebb-tidal dominance while that of an estuary
tends to favor flood-tidal dominance (cf. Friedrichs and Aubrey,
1988).
RECENT AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
OF ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY
FACIES MODELS
In this section we first look at the general concept of scientific
models, to identify the current state of evolution of facies models.
We then examine some specific advances in the field of E&IV
models and look forward to the approach of the future.
Development of Scientific Models
Goodwin (1999) provides an insight into the evolutionary
stages in the development of a scientific field such as sedimentol-
ogy (Fig. 44). He identifies an early observation stage that is then
followed by a need for classification of the observations. Both of
these stages occur early in the development of a discipline. As the
field advances, however, classification gives way to the develop-
ment of empirically based laws and finally to theoretical under-
standing (Hempel, 1965).
The field of facies models is still a relatively young field with
a history of less than forty years. Hence, we are in the early stages
of its development, in which we have made a large number of
observations in the form of surveys and process measurements in
modern environments, outcrop studies, wireline-log, core and
borehole studies, and remote-sensing studies (e.g., seismic, ra-
dar). These observations have been incorporated into deposi-
tional facies models since the middle of the twentieth century in
what is essentially a form of classification. An approach of this
kind describes the delta and coastal classification triangles pre-
sented earlier.
Inherent in this approach is an organization of the processes
that control deposition and hence involves some understanding
of the relationships between the controlling parameters (in these
cases, for example, waves, tides, and rivers). Therefore, our
scientific field is at the point of transition to the next stage , which
involves empirical approaches and finally theoretical approaches
to understanding.
In the E&IV field, empirical laws have been developed and
applied, for example, to paleohydraulics (Miall, 1996), simula-
tion of alluvial stratigraphy (Bridge and Leeder, 1979), the
influence of relative sea level on river incision (Wood et al.,
1993), the continent-wide quantitative classification of coastal
systems based on physical processes (Harris et al., 2002) and the
preservation of estuarine strata after shoreface erosion (Cowell
et al., 1999). All of these examples and many others have begun
to take a quantitative approach to sedimentation problems with
the ultimate aim of achieving a theoretical understanding. We
believe that the quantitative approach to sediment modeling is
the best way to advance our field. Our current stage of develop-
ment is the formulation and application of facies models, with
a resulting proliferation of these models. The way to avoid
becoming bogged down in this classification stage, as also
occurred, for example, in the study of cyclothems (e.g., Wanless
and Weller, 1932) or geosynclines (e.g., Kay, 1951) in the earlier
twentieth century, is to employ a quantitative approach to
determine the predictive relationships governing the sedimen-
tary processes. An approach of this kind represents a way
forward (most likely through the techniques of computer mod-
eling; see section below) that will provide a better ability to
predict facies relationships.
Brackish Ichnology
Because estuaries, like other river-mouth coastal environ-
ments, are characterized by brackish-water conditions, the devel-
opment of techniques to identify brackish-water deposits using
trace fossils has greatly assisted the recognition of estuarine
deposits. In many deposits, distinctive body fossils are either
lacking or poorly preserved, whereas trace fossils are abundant
and preserved in situ. The development of brackish-water ichnol-
ogy is a relatively recent field, with early work in the 1980s (e.g.,
Wightman et al., 1987) and first-generation summaries published
in the 1990s (MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994; MacEachern in
Zaitlin et al., 1995). More recent reviews are provided by Pemberton
et al. (2004) and Buatois et al. (2005).
Recent research (e.g., MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994) has
shown a distinctive assemblage of trace fossils for brackish-water
settings that contrasts strongly with surrounding terrestrial or
fully marine trace-fossil suites (Fig. 45). Additional work by
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 44.—Evolutionary stages in the development of a scientific
field (after Goodwin, 1999).
Buatois et al. (1997) has shown that terrestrial trace-fossil assem-
blages in tidal rhythmites can be used to locate the innermost
tidally influenced freshwater zone of an estuary (see Fig. 10) The
trace-fossil suite of brackish-water environments is characterized
(MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994) by “a variable and sporadic
distribution of burrowing, variability in ichnogenera distribu-
tion, and dominance by simple structures of trophic generalists.
The suite is dominated by opportunistic suites characteristic of
FIG. 45.—Comparison of ichnological traces from brackish sediments (left: monospecific Gyrolithes traces) and marine sediments
(right: high-species-diversity traces with Helminthopsis and Chondrites dominant) in the Viking Formation, Western Canada
Sedimentary Basin. (Figure courtesy of James MacEachern.)
219
stressed environments, particularly those subjected to fluctua-
tions in salinity, episodic deposition, variable aggradation rates,
and variability in substrate consistency.”
Recognition of these ichnological characteristics in combina-
tion with the other criteria for distinguishing E&IV systems
given above provides a strong basis for identifying E&IV sys-
tems, even where they exhibit a mud-on-mud or a sand-on-sand
contact with the deposits of other environments. In addition,
careful documentation of ichnofacies assemblages may enable
an internal subdivision of estuarine depositional settings into
bayhead delta, central basin, and barrier components (Fig. 46)
on the basis of a longitudinal gradient of salinity (from nearly
freshwater at the head to nearly marine salinity near the mouth;
cf. MacEachern et al., 1992). A key to the ichnological identifica-
tion of incised-valley deposits is the presence of a firmground
Glossifungites ichnofacies (Fig. 47) that frequently occurs on the
sequence-bounding unconformity at the base of the valley
(MacEachern et al., 1992; Pemberton et al., 1992). It must be
remembered, however, that all of these ichnological character-
istics may occur in any brackish-water setting and not just
estuaries.
Subdivision of Compound Incised-Valley Fills
A recent advance has been to use detailed compositional data
to subdivide complex, compound valley fills into their constitu-
ent sequences. Early approaches to incised valleys regarded the
fill as an undifferentiated entity, and while later work identified
individual components such as bayhead deltas and muddy cen-
220 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
FIG. 46.—Examples of distinctive ichnofacies from the inner (bay-head delta), middle (central basin), and outer (flood-tidal delta)
regions of an estuary. (After MacEachern and Pemberton, 1994.)
tral basins, the work of Zaitlin et al. (1994) highlighted the
complex nature of many incised-valley deposits as a result of cut
and fill over several sea-level cycles. However, these cycles
remain difficult to subdivide, especially in low-accommodation
settings such as described in Case Study 4 above, despite being of
prime importance in establishing petroleum reservoir and seal
relationships. Work by Zaitlin et al. (2002) has illustrated how the
use of a small number of diagnostic petrological components can
be used to differentiate two cycles and five units of cut and fill in
a single formation (Figs. 40–43, 48). Other similar opportunities
exist to use complementary parameters such as chemostratig-
raphy, heavy minerals, reservoir properties such as pressure and
flow, and remotely sensed electrical properties to identify and
subdivide compound valley fills, as well as to determine their
provenance. Chemostratigraphy, for example, involves the char-
acterization and correlation of strata using major-element and
trace-element geochemistry and has been used effectively in the
North Sea (e.g., Preston et al., 1998) and the Western Canada
Sedimentary Basin (e.g., Ratcliffe et al., 2004).
3-D Seismic
Earlier 2D seismic-reflection technology was not effective at
imaging E&IV systems in the subsurface. This was because the
frequencies generated by conventional seismic sources were in
the range of 20–100 Hz, which is generally not sufficient to
resolve incised valleys with only a few meters to several tens of
meters of relief. In addition, 2D seismic collected in single lines
could not provide a regional map of incised-valley distribution,
which typically exhibits a complex regional pattern (e.g., Figs.
26, 35, 41, 49).
The advent of 3D seismic changed this scenario in several
important ways. Firstly, because 3D-seismic acquisition works
with an array of receivers for each shot location, there are multiple
return paths from each location in the subsurface, providing
continuous coverage and a resulting 3D cube of seismic data
rather than a 2D slice. Secondly, the 3D method of generating
seismic data enables the 3D cube to be sliced horizontally as well
as vertically. It also allows the 3D cube to be imaged along
individual reflection horizons, which in turn allows visualization
of complex paleogeomorphological features. A range of seismic
attributes can be used to highlight aspects of the 3D data (e.g.,
Figs. 24, 33, 49). These include peak-amplitude maps of the
depositional surface, and classification of the waveforms being
reflected from that surface. These techniques have greatly en-
hanced our ability to image E&IV settings (e.g., Zeng et al., 1996;
Posamentier, 2001; Miall, 2002; Reuter and Watts, 2004) because
the fill of incised valleys frequently differs seismically from the
surrounding regional sediments. The acoustic-impedance con-
trast at the base of the valley aids further in imaging the valley
container. Finally, the fragmentary coverage of 2D seismic that
was ineffective at detecting E&IV facies has been replaced by
horizontal maps of seismic attributes that are particularly effec-
tive in connecting together the linked reflections that result from
long, linear coherent features such as channels and valleys (e.g.,
the tributary valleys seen in Figure 49). Increased future use of 3D
seismic processing and enhancement algorithms will be espe-
cially powerful for delineating valley networks and longitudinal
changes in the nature of the valley-filling deposits.
Numerical Modeling
As discussed above regarding scientific models, forward
progress in the field of facies models will require the develop-
ment of quantitative techniques to predict the response of E&IV
systems to the dominant processes, and to assess the balance
between sediment flux and relative sea-level changes. Some
important steps have already been taken in this direction, and
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
FIG. 47.—Demarcation of incised-valley surfaces by the Glossifungites ichnofacies (from McEachern and Pemberton, 1994). Note
that this ichnofacies is not unique to sequence boundaries.
preliminary results are available from a number of approaches.
There is insufficient space to review this field here, but some of the
more interesting approaches are as follows:
(1) The generation of valleys and their fill has been modeled from
the perspective of landform evolution models (e.g., Willgoose
et al., 2003; Whipple and Tucker, 2002), fluid mechanics mod-
els (e.g., Thorne 1994), and alluvial-simulation stratigraphic
models (Bridge and Leeder, 1979; Bridge and Mackey, 1993);
(2) The question of E&IV preservation has been modeled with a
shoreface-erosion approach (Figs. 50–51) by Cowell et al.
(1995), Cowell et al. (1999), and Cowell et al. (2003);
(3) Extensive numerical modelling of estuarine circulation (e.g.,
the NOAA model for Chesapeake Bay; NOAA, 2003; Fig. 52)
and sediment transport has been conducted; and
(4) Quantitative relationships have been developed for the bal-
ance between river, wave, and tidal power (Fig. 53) and used
to test the Boyd et al. (1992) coastal classification through the
analysis of all major Australian estuaries (Harris et al., 2002).
However, these quantitative approaches only address indi-
vidual components of the larger system; a full simulation of E&IV
stratigraphy has not yet been attempted.
Seabed Imagery
Improved technology for imaging the modern seabed offers
important new insight into marine sedimentary environments.
Earlier views of the seabed were derived primarily from individual
soundings, followed more recently by continuous 2D seismic and/
221
or echosounder profiles. These earlier acoustic techniques relied on
wide-angle single-beam methods with limited spatial coverage.
Results were frequently contoured to give a final representation of
the current marine depositional surface. However, the detailed
character of the seafloor remained elusive, and the ability to image
details of the marine depositional surface lagged behind equiva-
lent land-based approaches such as aerial photography and satel-
lite imagery. The development of multibeam sounders, wide-
swath side-scan sonars, and the first seabed returns from 3D
seismic surveys, combined with accurate satellite position fixing,
have fundamentally changed our view of the seabed over the past
twenty years, but particularly over the past five to ten years (e.g.,
Fig. 54). All three of these depth-measuring methods rely on the
propagation of sound waves through the ocean and their reflection
from the seabed, providing a marine acoustic image equivalent of
aerial photographs, Landsat images, and digital-elevation models
for the terrestrial environment. This provides us with our first real
view of what is on the ocean floor at the same degree of resolution
as that available on land. Detailed understanding of the modern
depositional surface in estuaries enables us to interpret better the
vertical stacking of depositional and erosional surfaces that are
imaged below the seabed in 3D seismic data.
These new views of estuaries have shown us tidal bedforms in
great detail, from the centimeter to the tens-of-meters scale (Fig.
54). They have provided details of separation of flood and ebb
tidal currents, maps of the distribution of the marine flora and
fauna, the nature of deep scour holes, and the release of biogenic
and thermogenic gas from pockmarked estuary floors. Deriva-
tion of acoustic backscatter values from side-scan and multibeam
data has enabled correlations to be made with sediment grain size
and hence has provided the promise of remotely mapping the
detailed distribution of sediment texture on the floor of estuarine
and adjacent shallow-marine areas.
222 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 223

FIG. 49.—3D seismic time slice of a Late Pleistocene incised valley from the Java Sea shelf, offshore Indonesia. Note valleys tributary
to the main valley. (From Posamentier, 2001.) Compare with Figure 18.

A LOOK FORWARD—ELEMENTS OF AN E&IV
FACIES MODEL FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
The recent advances in E&IV models documented above,
and progress in the field of facies models in general, enable us
to delineate an ideal facies model of the future. Such a model
would: (1) produce a range of realistic E&IV stratigraphy and
facies from a given set of input parameters (see example list
below), (2) identify the preservation potential of the stratigra-
phy produced in that model, (3) hindcast the input parameters
for a given field example, and (4) predict the rest of the model or
example from elements of the component data set. Following
the approach of developing more realistic and quantitative
facies models outlined above, the following elements represent
important components of an E&IV facies model for the twenty-
first century:
(1) A precise definition of the E&IV system and its morphologi-
cal elements.
(2) A quantitative (digital) database of the geometry and
facies of entire systems and their component elements
from many global examples, both ancient and modern.
This should cover the spectrum of systems and be able to

←
FIG. 48 (opposite page).—Representative thin sections of the major Basal Quartz units with associated point-count data. Two sets of
ternary diagrams are used to illustrate variations in textural and mineralogical maturity. The upper ternary diagram of each pair
has quartz, chert, and clay-rich grains at the apices and is effective in partitioning the petrographic data into distinctive
populations of mineralogical maturity. The lower ternary diagram of each pair has intergranular, intragranular, and microporosity
pore types at the apices and is used to illustrate porosity fabric and reservoir quality. The representative thin sections are
organized into two cycles (see Fig. 40). Star and triangles represent locations of point-counted samples in the ternary diagrams.
Left photomicrograph in each pair taken in plane light, right photomicrograph of each pair in crossed polars. Magnification 100x.
QTZ = quartz; CH = chert; AR = argillans; P = porosity.
224 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 50.—Transgressive shoreface simulation of Duck, North Carolina, U.S.A., showing retention of a thin estuarine valley fill
(horizontal stripes) after shoreface translation during the last 9 ky (sea-level curve in upper right). From Cowell et al. (1999) and
Cowell et al. (2003).

FIG. 51.—Transgressive shoreface simulation of Haarlem, The Netherlands, showing reworking of shelf deposits into the backbarrier
during transgression. In contrast to the situation shown in Figure 50, almost all of the estuarine sediments (gray color) have been
removed from the shelf but have been preserved behind the aggrading barrier at the present-day shoreline (which marks the
position of maximum transgression and the landward limit of the ravinement surface). From Cowell et al. (1999) and Cowell et
al. (2003).
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 225

FIG.52.—Animation of tidal circulation in Chesapeake Bay. (From http://ccmp.chesapeake.org/C3POANIM/). Color bar on right
shows surface tidal current speed in m/s at 0700 on July 10, 2006. Arrows on figure show direction of water transport.

identify “average” or most frequently occurring geom-
etries and the common internal facies characteristics of
each system element. The database should be managed as
an open structure able to be accessed by all researchers via
grid or web-based computing and have a template for
common data entry.
(3) A list of the major processes operating in the E&IV system
and a description of their dynamic characteristics. Ex-
amples of these processes include, but are not limited to,
plane jet flow in bayhead and tidal deltas, channelized
flow in inlets and tidal–fluvial channels, wave motion at
the seaward margin, and relative sea-level changes through-
out the system.
(4) A sediment-input component providing sediment volume,
direction, texture, and composition. These inputs could be
empirical values or derived in turn from models such as
climate simulations, wave, and tide predictions.
(5) Computer-modeling software developed to simulate the
processes identified in #3 above using inputs of geometry
and facies from #2 and sediment input from #4. For complex
systems such as E&IVs, the software models would require
a number of linked modules to incorporate the range of
processes present. Early models could utilize a smaller
subset of the processes to describe wave-dominated estuar-
ies, for example, or a fluvially eroded valley, while more
complex models would be required to describe the response
of fluvial and estuarine systems to sea-level change or
incised-valley evolution over a complete sea-level cycle,
and to predict the range of subsequent preservation out-
comes. Ideally, computer-modeling software would also
have an open architecture and be available on line so that
users could simulate parts of the overall system or link
several modules together following the lead of other geo-
science modeling networks such as www.geoframework.org
for internal earth processes.
(6) Output models would exhibit a spectrum of 3D examples
spanning the range of natural E&IV variability, together with
a set of “average” models that would describe the most
frequently occurring combinations of natural parameters
(e.g., most common values of wave height, tidal range, valley
size, rate of sediment supply, and rate of sea-level variation)
and sediment characteristics. Model output would be evalu-
ated on how well it reproduced type field examples.
The field of facies models in general has had a rapid rise in
knowledge and application over the past forty years, with
estuary and incised-valley models exhibiting a similar rise in
popularity over the past thirteen years. As new strides are
226 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN

FIG. 53.—Coastal classification and empirical model testing from Harris et al. (2002). In this approach, the parameters of log [mean
annual fluvial flow] (vertical axis, right) and fluvial discharge (left) have been plotted on a ternary diagram against log [ratio of
tidal power to wave power]. This provides a quantitative test for the Boyd et al. (1992) coastal-classification scheme using all the
river mouths on the Australian coast. Note segregation of major coastal depositional settings.

made to transform the current spectrum of classification mod-
els into empirical and theoretical models, simulated on com-
puters and tested in the field, further advances to a new level
of understanding sedimentary depositional systems can be
anticipated.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the many individuals
and their home institutions who have assisted them over the
past twenty years in the development of models for estuary
and incised-valley depositional systems. In particular we would
like to thank our colleagues for supplying much critical discus-
sion and many of the illustrations for this review paper,
especially Henry Posamentier, James MacEachern, John Suter,
Dale Leckie, Peter Roy, Peter Cowell, Peter Harris, Norm
Corbett, and George Ardies. Funding for our studies has come
from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
of Canada, the Australian Research Council, ConocoPhillips,
PanCanadian Energy (now EnCana Corporation), and Exxon-
Mobil. Ron Boyd would like to acknowledge the support
provided by the Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping, Uni-
versity of New Hampshire, while writing this paper on study
leave.
REFERENCES
ALLABY, A., AND ALLABY, M., 1999, Dictionary of Earth Sciences, Second
Edition: Oxford, U.K., Oxford University Press.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1963, The classification of cross-stratified units, with notes
on their origin: Sedimentology, v. 2, p. 93–114.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1964, Studies in fluviatile sedimentation: six cyclothems
from the Lower Old Red Sandstone, Anglo-Welsh basin: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 3, p. 163–198.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1965, A review of the origin and characteristics of recent
alluvial sediments: Sedimentology, v. 5, p. 89–191.
ALLEN, J.R.L., AND TARLO, L.B., 1963, The Downtonian and Dittonian
facies of the Welsh Borderland: Geological Magazine, v. 100, p.
129–155.
ALLEN, G.P., 1991, Sedimentary processes and facies in the Gironde
estuary: a Recent model of macrotidal estuarine systems, in Smith,
D.G., Reinson, G.E., Zaitlin B.A., and Rahmani, R.A., eds., Clastic
Tidal Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists,
Memoir 16, p. 29–40.
ALLEN, G.P., AND POSAMENTIER, H.W., 1993, Sequence stratigraphy and
facies model of an incised valley fill: The Gironde Estuary, France:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 63, p. 378–391.
ANDERTON, R., 1985, Clastic facies models and facies analysis, in Brenchley,
P.J., and Williams, B.J.P., eds., Sedimentology: Recent Developments
and Applied Aspects: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell, p. 31–47.
ARDIES, G.W., 1999, Sedimentology, depositional environments and
high resolution sequence stratigraphy of the Horsefly, BAT and
Ellerslie (Basal Quartz) incised valleys, south-central Alberta,
Canada: Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Queens University, Kingston,
Ontario, 344 p.
ARDIES, G.W., DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 2001, Examination of the
controls on the planform geometry of the BAT (Basal Quartz; Lower
Cretaceous, Lower Mannville) incised-valley system, Western Canada
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 227

FIG. 54.—Reson 8101 multibeam data from Portsmouth Harbor, New Hampshire, U.S.A., showing a high-resolution image of
estuarine geomorphology including the channel thalweg (dark blue), an extensive tidal dune field (center) and localized bedrock
outcrops (e.g., right-hand side of channel). Data collected by NOAA as part of the Shallow Survey 2001 Common Data Set (Mayer
and Baldwin, 2001) and processed by the Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping, University of New Hampshire. 3-D visualization
created using the Fledermaus software suite. Color bar, top right, shows depths in meters below sea level.

Sedimentary Basin (abstract): Seventh International Conference on
Fluvial Sedimentology, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Program
with Abstracts, p. 47.
ARDIES, G.W., DALRYMPLE, R.W., and ZAITLIN, B.A., 2002, Controls on the
geometry of incised valleys in the Basal Quartz unit (Lower creta-
ceous), Western Canada Sedimentary Basin: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 72, p. 602–618.
ARKELL, W.J., 1933, Jurassic geology of Great Britain: Oxford, U.K.,
Clarendon Press, 806 p.
ARNOTT, R.W.C., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND POTOCKI, D., 2000, Geological controls
on reservoir distribution in the Lower Cretaceous Basal Quartz, Chin
Coulee–Horsefly Lake area, south-central Alberta: Bulletin of Cana-
dian Society of Petroleum Geologists, v. 48, p. 212–229.
ARNOTT, R.W.C., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND POTOCKI, D., 2002, Stratigraphic re-
sponse to sedimentation in an accommodation-limited setting, Lower
Cretaceous Basal Quartz, south-central Alberta, Canada: Bulletin of
Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 50, p. 92–104.
ASHLEY, G.M., AND RENWICK, W.H., 1983, Channel morphology and pro-
cesses at the riverine–estuarine transition, the Raritan River, New
Jersey, in Collinson, J.D., and Lewin, J., eds., Modern and Ancient
Fluvial Systems: International Association of Sedimentologists, Spe-
cial Publication 6, p. 207–218.
ASHLEY, G.M., AND SHERIDAN, R.E., 1994, Depositional model for valley fills
on a passive continental margin, in Dalrymple, R.W., Boyd, R., and
Zaitlin, B.A., eds., Incised-Valley Systems: Origin and Sedimentary
Sequences: SEPM, Special Publication 51, p. 285 p.
BARTHOLDY, J., and PEDERSEN, J.B.T., 2004, Tidalites 2004, Abstracts from the
6th International Conference on Tidal Sedimentology, 2–5 August
2004, Copenhagen.
B ELKNAP , D.F., K RAFT , J.C., AND D UNN , R.K., 1994, Transgressive
valley-fill lithosomes: Delaware and Maine, in Dalrymple, R.W.,
Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., eds., Incised-Valley Systems: Origin
and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special Publication 51, p.
303.
BEST, J.L., AND ASHWORTH, P.J., 1997, Scour in large braided rivers and the
recognition of sequence stratigraphic boundaries: Nature, v. 387, p.
275–277.
BIGGS, R.B., 1967, The sediments of Chesapeake Bay, in Lauff, G.H., ed.,
Estuaries: American Association for the Advancement of Science,
Publication 83, p. 239–260.
BIRD, E.C.F., 2000, Coastal Geomorphology; An Introduction, New York,
John Wiley & Sons, 322 p.
BLACKWELDER, E., 1909, The valuation of unconformities: Journal of Geol-
ogy, v. 17, p. 289–300.
228 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
BLOOMER, R.R., 1977, Depositional environments of a reservoir sandstone
in west-central Texas: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Bulletin, v. 61, p. 344–359.
BLUM, M.D., 1990, Climatic and eustatic controls on Gulf Coast Plain
fluvial sedimentation: an example from the Late Quaternary of the
Colorado River, Texas, in Armentrout, J.M., and Perkins, B.F., eds.,
Sequence Stratigraphy as an Exploration Tool: Concepts and Prac-
tices in the Gulf Coast: SEPM, Gulf Coast Section, 11th Annual
Research Conference, Proceedings, p. 71–83.
BLUM, M.D., 1994, Genesis and architecture of incised valley fill sequences:
a Late Quaternary example from the Colorado River, Gulf Coastal Plain
in Texas, in Weimer, P., and Posamentier, H.W., eds., Siliciclastic
Sequence Stratigraphy: Recent Developments and Applications: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 58, p. 259–283.
BLUM, M.D., TOOMEY, R.S., III, AND VALASTRO, S., JR., 1994, Fluvial response
to Late Quaternary climatic and environmental change, Edwards
Plateau, Texas: Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology,
v. 108, p. 1–21.
BLUM, M.D., AND TÖRNQVIST, T.E., 2000, Fluvial responses to climate and
sea-level change: a review and a look forward: Sedimentology, v. 47,
p. 2–48.
BLUM, M.D., AND VALASTRO, S., JR., 1994, Late Quaternary sedimentation,
lower Colorado River, Gulf Coastal Plain of Texas: Geological Society
of America, Bulletin, v. 106, p. 1002–1016.
BOSENCE, D.W.J., 1973, Facies relationships in a tidally influenced environ-
ment: a study from the Eocene of the London Basin: Geologie en.
Mijnbouw, v. 52, p. 63–67.
BOWEN, D.W., AND WEIMER, P., 1997, Reservoir geology of incised valley
sandstones of the Pennsylvanian Morrow Formation, Southern
Stateline Trend, Colorado and Kansas, in Shanley, K.W., and Perkins,
B.F., eds., Shallow Marine and Non-Marine Reservoirs—Sequence
Stratigraphy, Reservoir Architecture and Production Characteris-
tics: SEPM, Gulf Coast Section, Eighteenth Annual Research Confer-
ence, p. 55–66.
BOWEN, D.W., AND WEIMER, P., 2003, Regional sequence stratigraphic
setting and reservoir geology of Morrow incised-valley sandstones
(lower Pennsylvanian), eastern Colorado and western Kansas: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 87, p. 781–815.
BOYD, R., AND DIESSEL, C.F., 1994, The application of sequence stratigraphy
to non-marine clastics and coal: Second High Resolution Sequence
Stratigraphy Conference, Tremp, Proceedings, p. 13–20.
BOYD, R., DALRYMPLE, R., and ZAITLIN, B.A., 1992, Classification of clastic
coastal depositional environments: Sedimentary Geology, v. 80, p.
139–150.
BOYD, R., AND HONIG, C., 1992, Estuarine sedimentation on the eastern
shore of Nova Scotia: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 62, p.
569–583.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND LEEDER, M.R., 1979, A simulation model of alluvial
stratigraphy: Sedimentology, v. 26, p. 617–644.
BRIDGE, J.S., AND MACKEY, S.D., 1993a, A revised alluvial stratigraphy
model, in Marzo, M., and Puigdefábregas, C., eds., Alluvial Sedimen-
tation: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publi-
cation 17, p. 319–336.
BROGER, E.J.K., SHYLONYK, G.E., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 1997, Glauconitic Sand-
stone Exploration: A case study from the Lake Newell Project, south-
ern Alberta, in Pemberton, S.G., and James, D.P., eds., Petroleum
Geology of the Cretaceous Mannville Group, Western Canada: Cana-
dian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 18, p. 140–168.
BROWN, L.F., JR., 1993, Seismic and Sequence Stratigraphy: Its Current
Status and Growing Role in Exploration and Development (course
notes): New Orleans Geological Society, Short Course No. 5.
BUATOIS, L.A., GINGRAS, M.K., MACEACHERN, J., MANGANO, M.G., ZONNEVELD,
J.-P., PEMBERTON, G., NETTO, R.G., AND MARTIN, A., 2005, Colonization
of brackish-water systems through time: Evidence from the trace-
fossil record: Palaios, v. 20, 321–347.
BUATOIS, L., MANGANO, M.G., MAPLES, C.G., AND LANIER, W.P., 1997, The
paradox of nonmarine ichnofacies in tidal rhythmites: integrating
sedimentologic and ichnologic data from the late Carboniferous of
eastern Kansas, U.S.A.: Palaios, v. 12, p. 467–481.
CANT, D.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1976, Development of a braided-fluvial
facies model for the Devonian Battery Point Sandstone, Quebec:
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 13, p. 102 –119.
CANT, D.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1978, Fluvial processes and facies sequences
in the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River, Canada: Sedimen-
tology, v. 25, p. 625 –648.
CLIFTON, H.E., 1982, Estuarine deposits, in Scholle, P.A., and Spearing, D.,
eds., Sandstone Depositional Environments: American Association
of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 31, p. 179–189.
COLEMAN, J.M., AND PRIOR, D.B., 1980, Deltaic Sand Bodies: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Educational Course Note Series
15, 171 p.
COLEMAN, J.M., AND WRIGHT, L.D., 1975, Modern river deltas: variability of
processes and sand bodies, in Broussard, M.L., ed., Deltas—Models
for Exploration: Texas, Houston Geological Society, p. 99–149.
COOPER, J.A.G., 1988, Sedimentary environments and facies of the sub-
tropical Mgeni Estuary, southeast Africa: Geological Journal, v. 23, p.
59–73.
COWELL, P.J., ROY, P.S., CLEVERINGA, J., AND DE BOER, P.L., 1999, Simulating
coastal systems tracts using the shoreface translation model: SEPM,
Special Publication 41, p. 165–175.
COWELL, P.J., ROY, P.S., AND JONES, R.A., 1992, Shoreface translation model—
computer-simulation of coastal-sand-body response to sea-level rise:
Mathematical Computer Simulation, v. 33, p. 603–608.
COWELL, P.J., ROY, P.S., AND JONES, R.A., 1995, Simulation of large-scale
coastal change using a morphological behavior model: Marine Geol-
ogy, v. 126, p. 45–61.
COWELL, P.J., STIVE, M.J.F., NIEDORODA, A.W., SWIFT, D.J.P., DE VRIEND, D.J.,
BUIJSMAN, M.C., NICHOLLS, R.J., ROY, P.S., KAMINSKY, G.M., CLEVERINGA,
J., REED, C.W., AND DE BOER, P.L., 2003, The coastal-tract (Part 2):
Applications of aggregated modeling to low-order coastal change,
Journal of Coastal Research, v. 19, p. 828–848.
CRONIN, L.E., 1975, Estuarine Research, Vol. II: Geology and Engineering,
New York, Academic Press, Inc., 587 p.
CROSS, T.A., 1988, Controls on coal distribution in transgressive–regres-
sive cycles, Upper Cretaceous, Western Interior, U.S.A., in Wilgus,
C.K., Hastings, B.S., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., Van Wagoner, J.,
and Kendall, C.G.St.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Ap-
proach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 371–380.
DAVIS, W.M., 1908, Practical Exercises in Physical Geography: Boston,
Ginn and Company, 148 p.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1992, Tidal Depositional Systems, in Walker, R.G.,
and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea Level Change:
St. John’s, Newfoundland: Geological Association of Canada, p.
195–218.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., 2003, Conference report: SEPM, research conference—
Incised valleys: Images and Processes: SEPM website: www.sepm.org.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 1989, Tidal sedimentation in the
macrotidal, Cobequid Bay–Salmon River estuary, Bay of Fundy:
Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Field Guide, Second Inter-
national Symposium on Clastic Tidal Deposits, Calgary, Alberta, 84 p.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., KNIGHT, R.J., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND MIDDLETON, G.V., 1990,
Dynamics and facies model of a macrotidal sand-bar complex,
Cobequid Bay–Salmon River estuary, (Bay of Fundy): Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 37, p. 577–612.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., MAKINO, Y., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 1991, Temporal and
spatial patterns of rhythmite deposition on mudflats in the macrotidal
Cobequid Bay–Salmon River estuary, Bay of Fundy, Canada, in
Smith, D.G., Reinson, G.E., Zaitlin, B.A., and Rahmani, R.A., eds.,
Clastic Tidal Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Memoir 16, p. 137–160.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
DALRYMPLE, R.W., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND BOYD, R., 1992, Estuarine facies mod-
els: Conceptual basis and stratigraphic implications: Journal of Sedi-
mentary Petrology, v. 62, p. 1130–1146.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., BOYD, R., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 1994a, Incised-Valley Sys-
tems: Origin and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special Publication
51, 391 p.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., BOYD, R., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 1994b, History of research,
valley types and internal organization of incised-valley systems:
introduction to the volume, in Dalrymple, R.W., Boyd, R., and Zaitlin,
B.A., eds., Incised-Valley Systems: Origin and Sedimentary Sequences:
SEPM, Special Publication 51, p 3–10.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., LECKIE, D.A., AND TILLMAN, R.W., eds., 2006, Incised-
Valleys in Time and Space: SEPM , Special Publication 85, in press.
DAVIES, J.L., 1964, A morphogenic approach to world shorelines: Zeitschrift
für Geomorphology, v. 8, p. 27–42.
DAVIS, R.A., JR., AND CLIFTON, H.E., 1987, Sea-level change and the preser-
vation potential of wave-dominated and tide-dominated coastal se-
quences, in Nummedal, D., Pilkey, O.H., and Howard, J.D., eds., Sea-
level Fluctuation and Coastal Evolution: SEPM, Special Publication
41, p. 167–178.
DE BOER, P.L., VAN GELDER, A., AND NIO, S.D., 1988, Tide-Influenced Sedi-
mentary Environments and Facies: Boston, D. Reidel Publishing
Company, 530 p.
DEMAREST, J.M., II, AND KRAFT, J.C., 1987, Stratigraphic record of Quater-
nary sea levels: implications for more ancient strata, in Nummedal,
D., Pilkey, O.H., and Howard, J.D., eds., Sea-level Fluctuation and
Coastal Evolution: SEPM, Special Publication 41, p. 223–239.
DOLSON, J., MULLER, D., EVERTS, M.J., AND STEIN, J.A. 1991, Regional paleo-
geographic trends and production, Muddy Sandstone (Lower Creta-
ceous), Central and Northern Rocky Mountains: American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 75, p. 409–435.
DOLSON, J.C., AND PIOMBINO, J., 1994, Giant proximal foreland basin non-
marine wedge trap: Lower Cretaceous Cutbank Sandstone, Mon-
tana, in Dolson, J.C., Hendricks, M.L., and Wescott, W.A., eds.,
Unconformity-Related Hydrocarbons in Sedimentary Sequences:
Guidebook for Petroleum Exploration and Exploitation in Clastic and
Carbonate Sediments: Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists,
Denver, p. 135–148.
DONALDSON, A.C., MARTIN, R.H., AND KANES, W.H., 1970, Holocene Guada-
lupe Delta of Texas Gulf Coast, in Morgan, J.P., ed., Deltaic Sedimen-
tation; Modern and Ancient: SEPM, Special Publication 15, p. 107–
137.
DROSER, M.L., AND BOTTJER, D.J., 1986, Semiquantitative field classification
of ichnofabric: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 56, p. 558–559.
DROSER, M.L., AND BOTTJER, D.J., 1989, Ichnofabric of sandstones deposited
in high-energy nearshore environments: measurement and utiliza-
tion: Palaios, v. 4, p. 598–604.
EHLERS, T.A., AND CHAN, M.A., 1999, Tidal sedimentology and estuarine
deposition of the proterozoic Big Cottonwood Formation, Utah:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 69, p. 1169–1180.
EMERY, K.O., AND STEVENSON, R.E., 1957, Estuaries and lagoons, in Hedgpeth,
J.W., ed., Treatise on Marine Ecology, Vol. 1: Geological Society of
America, Memoir 67, p. 673–750.
ETHRIDGE, F.G., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1978, Reconstructing paleo-channel
morphologic and flow characteristics: methodology, limitations and
assessment, in Miall, A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian
Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 703–721.
ETHRIDGE, F.G., WOOD, L.J., AND SCHUMM, S.A., 1998, Cyclic variables
controlling fluvial sequence development: problems and perspec-
tives, in Shanley, K.W., and McCabe, P.J., eds., Relative Role of
Eustasy, Climate and Tectonics in Continental Rocks: SEPM, Special
Publication 59, p. 17–29.
FIELDING, C.R., TRUEMAN, J.D., DICKENS, G.R., AND PAGE, M., 2003, Anatomy
of the buried Burdekin River channel across the Great Barrier Reef
shelf: how does a major river operate on a tropical mixed siliciclastic/
229
carbonate margin during sea level lowstand? Sedimentary Geology,
v. 157, p. 291–301.
FISK, H.N., 1944, Geological investigation of the alluvial valley of the
lower Mississippi River: Vicksburg, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Mississippi River Commission, 78 p.
Fisk, H.N., 1947, Fine-grained alluvial deposits and their effect on Missis-
sippi River activity: Vicksburg, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mis-
sissippi River Commission, 82 p.
FLACH, P.D., AND MOSSOP, G., 1985, Depositional environments of the
Lower Cretaceous McMurray Formation, Athabasca Oil Sands,
Alberta: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v.
69, p. 1195–1207.
FRIEDRICHS, G.T., AND AUBREY, D.G., 1988, Non-linear tidal distortion in
shallow well mixed estuaries: A Synthesis: Estuarine, Coastal and
Shelf Science, v. 27, p. 521–546.
GALLOWAY, W.E., 1975, Process framework for describing the morphologic
and stratigraphic evolution of deltaic depositional systems, in
Broussard, M.L., ed., Deltas—Models for Exploration: Houston Geo-
logical Society, p. 87–98.
GALLOWAY, W.E., AND HOBDAY, D.K, 1996, Terrigenous Clastic Deposi-
tional Systems, Second Edition: New York, Springer-Verlag, 489 p.
GIBLING, M.R., 1991, Sequence analysis of alluvial-dominated cyclothems
in the Sydney Basin, Nova Scotia, in Leckie, D.A, Posamentier, H.W.,
and Lovell, B., eds., NUNA Conference on High Resolution Sequence
Stratigraphy: Geological Association of Canada, Calgary, p. 15–19.
GILBERT, G.K. 1880, Land, sculpture, geology of the Henry Mountains
(second edition), U.S. Geographical and Geological Survey, Rocky
Mountain Region, 160 p.
GINGRAS, M.K., PEMBERTON, S.G., AND SAUNDERS, T., 1999, The ichnology of
modern and Pleistocene brackish-water deposits at Willapa Bay,
Washington: variability in estuarine setting: Palaios, v. 14, p. 352–374.
GOODWIN, C.N., 1999, Fluvial classification: Neanderthal necessity or
needless normalcy, in Olson, D.S., and Potyondy, J.P., eds., Wild-
land Hydrology: American Water Resources Association, TPS-99-3,
p. 229–236.
GUILCHER, A., 1967, Origin of sediments in estuaries, in Lauff, G.H., ed.,
Estuaries: American Association for the Advancement of Science,
Publication 83, p. 149–157.
GUSTASON, E.R., RYER, R.A., AND ODLAND, S.K. 1986, Unconformities and
facies relationships of the Muddy Sandstone, northern Powder River
Basin, Wyoming and Montana: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 70, p. 1042.
GUSTASON, E.R., WHEELER, D.A., AND RYER, T.A., 1988, Structural control on
paleovalley development, Muddy Sandstone, Powder River Basin,
Wyoming: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin,
v. 72, p. 871.
HAMILTON, D., 1979, The high-energy, sand and mud regime of the Severn
estuary, S.W. Britain, in Severn, R.T., Dineley, D., and Hawker, L.E.,
eds., Tidal Power and Estuary Management: Albuquerque, Transat-
lantic Arts Incorporated, Colston Paper 30, p. 162–172.
HAMILTON, W.D., SCOTT, D., MARSDEN, G., AND BAXTER, B., 2001, Structural
and stratigraphic influences on reservoir compartmentalization in
low accommodation settings: Basal Quartz A Sandstone, Alderson
Lower Mannville “D4D” Pool (abstract): Canadian Society of Petro-
leum Geologists, Annual Convention, Calgary, Program and Ab-
stracts, p. 150–151.
HAPP, S.C., RITTENHOUSE, G., AND DOBSON, G.C., 1940, Some principles of
accelerated stream valley sedimentation: U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, Technical Bulletin 695.
HARMS, J.C., 1966, Stratigraphic traps in valley fill, western Nebraska:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 50, p.
2119–2149
HARRIS, P.T., 1988, Large-scale bedforms as indicators of mutually evasive
sand transport and the sequential infilling of wide-mouthed estuar-
ies: Sedimentary Geology, v. 57, p. 273–298.
230 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
HARRIS, P.T., HEAP, A.D., BRYCE, S.M., PORTER-SMITH, R., RYAN, D.A., AND
HEGGIE, D.T., 2002, Classification of Australian clastic coastal deposi-
tional environments based on a quantitative analysis of wave, tide
and river power: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 72, p. 858–870.
HAYES, B.J.R. 1986, Stratigraphy of the basal Cretaceous Lower Mannville
Formation, southern Alberta and north-central Montana: Bulletin of
Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 34, p. 30–48.
HAYES, B.J.R., CHRISTOPHER, J.E., ROSENTHAL, L., LOS, G., MCKERCHER, B.,
MINKIN, D., TREMBLAY, Y.M., AND FENNEL, J., 1994, Cretaceous Mannville
Group of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin, in Mossop, G.,
and Shetsen, I., eds., Geological Atlas of the Western Canada Sedi-
mentary Basin: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, p. 317–334.
HAYES, M.O., ed., 1969, Coastal Environments—NE Massachusetts and
New Hampshire: University of Massachusetts, Department of Geol-
ogy, Technical Report #1-CRG, 462 p.
HAYES, M.O., 1975, Morphology of sand accumulations in estuaries: an
introduction to the symposium, in Cronin, L.E., ed., Estuarine Re-
search, Vol. II: New York, Academic Press, p. 3–22.
HAYES, M.O, AND SEXTON, W.L., 1989, Modern Clastic Depositional Envi-
ronments, South Carolina: American Geophysical Conference, Wash-
ington, D.C., Field Trip Guidebook T-371, 85 p.
HEIN, F.J., AND LANGENBERG, C.W., 2003, Reply to discussion of C.W.
Langenberg, F.J. Hein, D. Lawton, and J. Cunningham, Seismic mod-
eling of fluvial–estuarine deposits in the Athabasca oil sands using
ray-tracing techniques, Steepbank River area, northeastern Alberta:
Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 51, p. 354–366.
HEMPEL, C.G., 1965, Aspects of Scientific Explanation: New York, The Free
Press, 505 p.
HINE, A.C., 1975, Bedform distribution and migration patterns on tidal
deltas in the Chatham Harbor Estuary, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, in
Cronin, L.E., ed., Estuary Research: New York, Academic Press, p.
235–252.
HORNE, J.C., AND FERM, J.C., 1976, Carboniferous depositional environ-
ments in the Pocahontas Basin, eastern Kentucky and southern West
Virginia, Guidebook: University of South Carolina, Department of
Geology.
HOWARD, A.D., 1967, Drainage analysis in geologic interpretation: a
summary: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v.
51, p. 2246–2259.
Howard, J.D., Elders, C.A., and Heinbokel, J.F., 1975, Estuaries of the
Georgia Coast, U.S.A.: Sedimentology and Biology. II, Regional
animal–sediment characteristics of Georgia estuaries: Sencken-
bergiana Maritima, v. 7, p. 33–103.
HOWARD, J.D., AND FREY, R.W., 1973, Characteristics physical and biogenic
structures in Georgia estuaries: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 57, p. 1169–1184.
HOWARD, J.D., AND FREY, R.W. 1975, Estuaries of the Georgia Coast, U.S.A.:
Sedimentology and Biology, V. Animal–sediment relationships in
estuarine point bar deposits, Ogeechee River–Ossabaw Sound:
Senckenbergiana Maritima, v. 7, p. 181–203.
HOWARD, R.H., AND WHITAKER, S.T., 1988, Hydrocarbon accumulation in a
paleovalley at Mississippian–Pennsylvanian unconformity near
Hardinville, Crawford County, Illinois: a model paleogeomorphic
trap: Illinois State Geological Survey, Illinois Petroleum 129, 26 p.
HOYT, J.H., AND HENRY, V.J., 1965, Significance of inlet sedimentation in
the recognition of ancient barrier islands: Wyoming Geological
Association, 19th Field Conference Guidebook, p. 190–194.
HUBBARD, D.K., 1975, Morphology and hydrodynamics of the Merrimack
River ebb-tidal delta, in Cronin, L.E., ed., Estuary Research: New
York, Academic Press, p. 253–266.
HUGHES, P., 1958, Tidal mixing in the Narrows of the Mersey Estuary.
Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, v. 1, p. 271–
283.
Jennings, J.N., and Bird, E.C.F., 1967, Regional Geomorphological Char-
acteristics of Some Australian Estuaries, in Lauff, G.H., ed., Estuaries:
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication
83, p. 121–128.
JERVEY, M.T., 1988, Quantitative geological modeling of siliciclastic rock
sequences and their seismic expression, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings,
B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van
Wagoner. J.C., eds., Sea Level Research: An Integrated Approach:
SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 47–69.
JOHNSON, H.D., AND LEVELL, B.K., 1995, Sedimentology of a transgressive,
estuarine sand complex: the Lower Cretaceous Woburn Sands (Lower
Greensand), southern England, in Plint, A.G., ed., Sedimentary Facies
Analysis—A Tribute to the Research and Teaching of Harold G.
Reading: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Pub-
lication 22, p. 17–46.
KAY, M., 1951, North American Geosynclines: Geological Society of
America, Memoir 48, 143 p.
KINDINGER, J.L., BALSON, P.S., AND FLOCKS, J.G., 1994, Stratigraphy of
Mississippi–Alabama Shelf and Mobile River Incised-Valley Sys-
tem, in Dalrymple, R.W., Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., eds., Incised-
Valley Systems: Origin and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special
Publication 51, p. 83–96.
KINDLE, E.M., 1917, Recent and fossil ripple-mark: Geological Survey of
Canada Department of Mines, Geological Survey, Museum Bulletin,
no. 25, p. 1–56.
KLEIN, G. DEVRIES, 1967, Comparison of recent and ancient tidal flat and
estuarine sediments, in Lauff, G.H., ed., Estuaries: American Associa-
tion for the Advancement of Science, Publication 83, p. 207–218.
KROONENBERG, S.B., BADYUKOVA, E.M., STORMS, J.E.A., IGNATOV, E.I., AND
KASIMOV, N.S., 2000, A full sea-level cycle in sixty-five years:
barrier dynamics of the Caspian Sea: Sedimentary Geology, v. 134,
p. 257–274.
KRYSTINIK, L.F., 1989, Morrow formation facies geometries and reservoir
quality in compound valley fills, central State Line area, Colorado and
Kansas (abstract): American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Bulletin, v. 73, p. 375.
KRYSTINIK, L.F., AND BLAKENEY, B.A., 1990, Sedimentology of the upper
Morrow Formation in eastern Colorado and western Kansas, in
Sonnenberg, S.A., Shannon, L.T., Rader, K., von Drehle, W.F., and
Gregory, W., eds., Morrow Sandstones of Southeast Colorado and
Adjacent Areas: Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, p. 37–50.
KRYSTINIK, L.F., AND BLAKENEY-DEJARNETT, B.A., 1994, Sedimentology of the
Upper Morrow Formation in eastern Colorado and western Kansas
Morrow sandstone (Pennsylvanian) of southeastern Colorado and
Kansas, in Dolson, J.C., Hendricks, M.L., and Wescott, W.A., Uncon-
formity–Related Hydrocarbons in Sedimentary Sequences, Rocky
Mountain Association of Geologists, Reprint, RMAG Sandstone Res-
ervoirs of the Rocky Mountains, p. 167–180.
KRYSTINIK, L.F., AND LECKIE, D.A., 2005, Is that channel a valley? Distin-
guishing between distributaries, tidal inlets and paleovalleys: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists–SEPM Annual Meeting,
Calgary, Proceedings and Abstracts, p. A76.
KULM, L.D., AND BYRNE, J.V., 1967, Sediments of Yaquina Bay, Oregon, in
Lauff, G.H., ed., Estuaries: American Association for the Advance-
ment of Science, Publication 83, p. 226–238.
LAMBIASE, J.J., 1980, Sediment dynamics in the macrotidal Avon River
estuary, Bay of Fundy: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 17, p.
1628–1641.
LAND, C.B., JR., 1972, Stratigraphy of the Fox Hills Sandstone and associated
formations, Rock Springs Uplift and Wamsutter Arch area, Sweetwater
County, Wyoming: a shoreline-estuary sandstone model for the Late
Cretaceous: Colorado School of Mines, Quarterly Journal, 67, 69 p.
LANE, E.W., 1935, Stable channels in erodible materials: American Society
of Civil Engineers, Transactions, v. 63, p. 123–142.
Lane, E.W., 1955, The importance of fluvial morphology in hydraulic
engineering: American Society of Civil Engineers, Transactions, v. 81,
p. 1–17.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
LAUFF, G.H., 1967, ed., Estuaries: American Association for the Advance-
ment of Science, Publication 83, 757 p.
LECKIE, D.A., AND SINGH, C., 1991, Estuarine deposits of the Albian Paddy
Member (Peace River Formation), and lowermost Shaftsbury Forma-
tion, Alberta: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 825–850.
LECKIE, D.A., STANILAND, M.R., AND HAYES, B.J., 1990, Regional maps of the
Albian Peace River and lower Shaftesbury Formations on the Peace
River Arch, northwestern Alberta and northeastern British Colum-
bia: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 38A, p. 176–189.
LECKIE, D.A., WALLACE-DUDLEY, K.E., VANBESELAERE, N.A., AND JAMES, D.P.,
2005, Sedimentation in a low-accommodation setting: nonmarine
(Cretaceous) Mannville and marine (Jurassic) Ellis Groups,
Manyberries field, southeastern Alberta: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 88, p. 1391–1418.
LEEDER, M.J., AND GAWTHORPE, R.L., 1987, Sedimentary models for exten-
sional tilt-block/half-graben basins, in Coward, M.P., Dewey, J.F.,
and Hancock, P.L., eds., Continental Extension Tectonics: Geological
Society of London, Special Publication 28, p. 139–152.
LEIGHTON, V.L., 1997, River metamorphosis in the upper Morrowan Kinsler
field complex, Southwestern Kansas, in Shanley, K.W., and Perkins,
B.F., eds., Shallow Marine and Non-Marine Reservoirs—Sequence
Stratigraphy, Reservoir Architecture and Production Characteristics:
SEPM, Gulf Coast Section, Eighteenth Annual Research Conference,
p. 155–169.
LEOPOLD, L.B., AND WOLMAN, M.G., 1957, River Channel Patterns; Braided,
Meandering, and Straight: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional
Paper 282-B, 85 p.
LEOPOLD, L.B., WOLMAN, M.G., and MILLER, J.P., 1964, Fluvial Processes in
Geomorphology: San Francisco, Freeman, 522 p.
LEROUX, S.M., MACEACHERN, J.A., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 2001, Ichnological and
sedimentological analysis of incised valley trends in the Glauconite
Member and Viking Formation, Central Alberta, Canada (abstract), in
Mason, J.A., Diffendal, R.F., Jr., and Joeckel, R.M., eds., University of
Nebraska–Lincoln, Seventh International Conference on Fluvial Sedi-
mentology, Program with Abstracts, p. 172
LEVY, J., AND CHRISTIE-BLICK, N., 1994, Neoproterozoic incised valleys of the
eastern Great Basin, Utah and Idaho, fluvial response to changes in
depositional base level, in incised-valley systems, in Dalrymple, R.W.,
Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., eds., Incised-Valley Systems: Origin and
Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special Publication 51, p. 369–384.
LUKIE, T., 1999, A study of the sedimentology, geochemistry, and
stratigraphic organization of the Lower Cretaceous Horsefly (Basal
Quartz) Valley (Taber–Cutbank), Southern Alberta and Northern
Montana: Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Queen’s University, Kingston,
Ontario, 291 p.
LUKIE, T.D., ARDIES, G.W., DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND ZAITLIN, B.A. 2002, Allu-
vial architecture of the Horsefly Unit (Basal Quartz) in southern
Alberta and northern Montana: influence of accommodation change
and contemporaneous faulting: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Ge-
ology, v. 50, p. 73–91.
LYELL, C., 1830, Principles of Geology, 3 vols.: Murray, London (reprinted
by Johnson, New York, 1969).
MACKIN, J.H., 1937, Erosional history of the Big Horn Basin, Wyoming:
Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 48, p. 813–894.
MACKIN, J.H., 1948, Concept of the graded river: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 59, 463–512 p.
MACEACHERN, J.A., 1999, Ichnology and sedimenology in a sequence
stratigraphic framework: integrated facies models for subsurface
analysis: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Short Course
Notes, 130 p.
MACEACHERN, J.A., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1992, Ichnological aspects of
Cretaceous shoreface successions and shoreface variability in the
Western Interior Seaway of North America, in Pemberton, S.G., ed.,
Applications of Ichnology to Petroleum Exploration: SEPM, Core
Workshop 17, p. 57–84.
231
MACEACHERN, J.A., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1994, Ichnological aspects of
incised valley fill systems from the Viking Formation of the West-
ern Canada Sedimentary Basin, Alberta, Canada, in Dalrymple,
R.W., Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., eds., Incised-Valley Systems:
Origin and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special Publication 51,
p. 129–158.
MACEACHERN, J.A., RAYCHAUDHURI, I., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1992, Strati-
graphic applications of the Glossifungites Ichnofacies: delineating
discontinuities in the rock record, I, in Pemberton, S.G., ed., Applica-
tions of Ichnology to Petroleum Exploration: SEPM, Core Workshop
17, p. 169–198.
MACNAUGHTON, R.B, DALRYMPLE, R.W., and NARBONNE, G.M., 1997, Early
Cambrian braid-delta deposits, MacKenzie Mountains, north-west-
ern Canada: Sedimentology, v. 44: p. 587–609.
MARTINSEN, R.S., JIAO, Z.S., IVERSON, W.P., AND SURDAM, R.C., 1994, Paleo-
sols and sub-unconformity traps: Examples from the Muddy Sand-
stone, Powder River basin, Wyoming, in Dolson, J., ed., Unconfor-
mity Related Hydrocarbon Exploration and Exploitation in Carbon-
ate and Clastic Settings: Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists,
p. 119–130.
MAYER, L.A., AND BALDWIN, K., 2001, Shallow water survey 2001: Papers
based on selected presentations from the second international confer-
ence on high-resolution surveys in shallow water: Marine Technol-
ogy Society, Journal, v. 35, p. 3–4.
MCCARTHY, P.J., AND PLINT, A.G., 1998, Recognition of interfluve sequence
boundaries: Integrating paleopedology and sequence stratigraphy:
Geology, v. 26, p. 387–390.
MCCUBBIN, D.G., 1982, Barrier island and strand plain facies, in Scholle, P.A.,
and Spearing, D., eds., Sandstone Depositional Environments: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 31, p. 247–279.
MELTON, F.A., 1936, An empirical classification of flood-plain streams:
Geographical Review, v. 26, p. 593–609.
MIALL, A.D., 1977, A review of the braided river depositional environ-
ment: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 13, p. 1–62
MIALL, A.D., ed., 1978, Fluvial sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petro-
leum Geologists, Memoir 5, 859 p.
MIALL, A.D., 1985, Architectural-element analysis: a new method of facies
analysis applied to fluvial deposits: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 22, p.
261–308.
MIALL, A.D., 1996, The Geology of Fluvial Deposits: Berlin, Springer, 582 p.
MIALL A.D., 2002, Architecture and sequence stratigraphy of Pleistocene
fluvial systems in the Malay Basin, based on seismic time-slice analy-
sis: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 86, p.
1201–1216.
MYRICK, R.M., AND LEOPOLD, L.B., 1963, Hydraulic geometry of a small tidal
estuary: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 422-B, 18 p.
NICHOL, S.L., 1991, Zonation and sedimentology of estuarine facies in an
incised valley, wave-dominated, microtidal setting, in Smith, D.G.,
Reinson, G.E., Zaitlin, B.A., and Rahmani, R.A., eds., Clastic Tidal
Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir
16, p. 41–58.
NICHOLS, M.M., AND BIGGS, R.B., 1985, Estuaries, in Davis, R.A., Jr., ed.,
Coastal Sedimentary Environments: Second Edition: New York,
Springer-Verlag, p. 77–186.
NICHOLS, M.M., JOHNSON, G.H., AND PEEBLES, P.C., 1991, Modern sediments
and facies model for a microtidal coastal plain estuary, the James
estuary, Virginia: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 883–899.
NOAA, 2003, http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/csdl/op/c3po.html
OERTEL, G.F., 1975, Ebb-tidal deltas of Georgia estuaries, in Cronin, L.E.,
ed., Estuarine Research, Vol II: New York, Geology and Engineering,
Academic Press, Inc., p. 267–276.
OLSEN, T., STEEL, R., HOGSETH, K., SLAR, T., AND ROE, S.L., 1995, Sequential
architecture in a fluvial succession: sequence stratigraphy in the
Upper Cretaceous Mesaverde Group, Price Canyon, Utah: Journal of
Sedimentary Research, v. 65, p. 265–280.
232 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
OOMKENS, E., AND TERWINDT, J.H.J., 1960, Inshore estuarine sediments of
the Haringvleit (Netherlands): Geologie en Mijnbouw, v. 39, p.
701–710.
PATTISON, S.A., 1991, Crystal, Sundance and Edson valley fill deposits, in
Leckie, D.A., Posamentier, H.W., and Lovell, R.R., eds., NUNA Con-
ference on High Resolution Sequence Stratigraphy, Banff.
PATTISON, S.A.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1994, Incision and filling of a lowstand
valley: Late Albian Viking Formation at Crystal, Alberta, Canada:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B64, p. 365–379.
PATTISON S.A.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1998, Multiphase transgressive filling
of an incised valley and shoreface complex, Viking Formation,
Sundance–Edson area, Alberta: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum
Geology, v. 46, p. 89–105.
PAYTON, C.E., ed., 1977, Seismic Stratigraphy—Applications to Hydro-
carbon Exploration: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Memoir 26, 516 p.
PEIJS-VAN HILTEN, M., GOOD, T.R., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 1998, Heterogeneity
modeling and geospeudo upscaling applied to waterflood perfor-
mance prediction of an incised valley reservoir: Countess YY pool,
southern Alberta, Canada: American Association of Petroleum Ge-
ologists, Bulletin, v. 82, p. 2220–2245.
PEMBERTON, S.G., SPILA, M., PULHAM, A.J., SAUNDERS, T., MACEACHERN, J.A.,
ROBBINS, D., AND SINCLAIR, I.K., 2001, Ichnology and Sedimentology of
Shallow to Marginal Marine Systems: Geological Association of
Canada, Short Course Notes, no. 15, 343 p.
PEMBERTON, S.G., MACEACHERN, J.A., AND FREY, R.W., 1992, Trace fossil
facies models: environmental and allostratigraphic significance, in
Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea
Level Change: St. John’s, Newfoundland, Geological Association of
Canada, 409 p.
PEMBERTON, S.G., AND WIGHTMAN, D.M., 1992, Ichnological characteristics
of brackish water deposits, in Pemberton, S.G., ed., Applications of
Ichnology to Petroleum Exploration: SEPM, Core Workshop 17, p.
141–167.
PENCK, A., AND BRÜCKNER, E., 1909, Die Alpen in Eiszeitalter. Leipzig,
Tauchnitz.
PEPPER, J.F., DEWITT, W., JR., AND DEMAREST, D.F., 1954, Geology of the
Bedford Shale and Berea Sandstone in the Appalachian Basin: U.S.
Geological Survey, Professional Paper 259, 109 p.
PERILLO, G.M.E., ed., 1995, Geomorphology and Sedimentology of Estu-
aries: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science, Developments in Sedimentol-
ogy, no. 53, 471 p.
PERILLO, G.M.E., PICCOLO, M.C., AND PINO-QUIVIRA, M., 1999, Estuaries of
South America; Their Geomorphology and Dynamics: Berlin,
Springer, 245 p.
PLAYFAIR, J., 1802, Illustrations of the Huttonian theory of the Earth:
London, Cadel and Davies, (Reprinted by Dover, New York, 1964).
PLINK-BJÖRKLUND, P., 2005, Stacked fluvial and tide-dominated estua-
rine deposits in high-frequency (fourth-order) sequences of the
Eocene Central Basin, Spitsbergen: Sedimentology, v. 52, p. 391–
428).
PLINT, A.G., 2002, Paleovalley systems in the Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan
Formation, Alberta and British Columbia: Bulletin of Canadian
Petroleum Geology, v. 50, p. 277–296.
PLINT, A.G., EYLES, N., EYLES, C.H., AND WALKER, R.G., 1992, Control of sea
level change, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models:
Response to Sea Level Change: Geological Association of Canada, St.
John’s, Newfoundland, p. 15–25.
PLINT, A.G., AND WADSWORTH, J.A., 2003, Sedimentology and palaeo-
geomorphology of four large valley systems incising delta plains,
Western Canada foreland basin: implications for Mid-Cretaceous
sea-level changes: Sedimentology, v. 50, p. 1147–1186.
POR§BSKI, S.J., AND STEEL, R.J., 2003, Shelf-margin deltas: their stratigraphic
significance and relation to deepwater sands: Earth-Science Reviews,
v. 62, p. 283–326.
PORTER, K.W., AND SONNENBERG, S.A., 1994, Overview of criteria for
recognition and mapping of valley fills and associated surfaces:
Lower Cretaceous Muddy Sandstone, Rocky Mountain region, in
Dolson, J.C., Hendricks, M.L., and Wescott, W.A., eds., Unconfor-
mity—Related Hydrocarbons in Sedimentary Sequences: Rocky
Mountain Association of Geolgists, p. 157–166.
POSAMENTIER H.W., 2001, Lowstand alluvial bypass systems: Incised vs.
unincised: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin,
v. 85, p. 1771–1793.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., JERVEY, M.T., and VAIL, P.R., 1988, Eustatic controls on
clastic deposition I—conceptual framework, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings,
B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier. H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van
Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Approach:
SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 109–124.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., AND VAIL, P.R., 1988, Eustatic controls on clastic
sedimentation II—Sequence and systems tract models, in Wilgus,
C.K., Hastings, B.S., Ross, C.A., Posamentier, H.W., Van Wagoner, J.,
and Kendall, C.G.St.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Ap-
proach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 125–154.
POSTMA, H., 1967, Sediment transport and sedimentation in the estuarine
environment, in Lauff, G.H., ed., Estuaries: American Association for
the Advancement of Science, Publication 83, p. 158.
POWELL, J.W., 1875, Exploration of the Colorado River of the West. Wash-
ington (see also U.S. 43rd Congress, 1st Session, H miscellaneous
documents 265, 1874).
PREDDY, W.S., 1954, The mixing and movement of water in the estuary
of the Thames: Marine Biology Association, Journal, v. 33, p. 645–
662.
PRESTON, J., HARTLEY, A., HOLE, M., BUCK, S., BOND, J., MANGE, M., AND STILL,
J., 1998, Integrated whole-rock trace element geochemistry and heavy
mineral chemistry studies: aids to correlation of continental red-bed
reservoirs in the Beryl Field, U.K. North Sea: Petroleum Geoscience,
v. 4, p. 7–16.
PRITCHARD, D.W., 1967, What is an estuary? Physical viewpoint, in Lauff,
G.H., ed., Estuaries: American Association for the Advancement of
Science, Publication 83, p. 3–5.
PULHAM, A. J., 1994, The Crusiana field, Llanos basin, eastern Colombia:
high resolution sequence stratigraphy applied to late Paleocene–
early Oligocene, estuarine, coastal plain and alluvial clastic reser-
voirs, in Johnson, S., ed., High Resolution Sequence Stratigraphy:
Innovations and Applications: University of Liverpool, Liverpool,
England, p. 63–68.
RAHMANI, R.A., 1988, Estuarine tidal channel and nearshore sedimenta-
tion of a Late Cretaceous epicontinental sea, Drumheller, Alberta,
Canada, in de Boer, P.L., van Gelder, A., and Nio, S.D., eds., Tide-
Influenced Sedimentary Environments and Facies: Boston, D. Reidel
Publishing Company, p. 433–481.
RANGER, M.J., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1988, Marine influence on the McMurray
Formation in the Primrose area, Alberta, in James, D.P., and Leckie,
D.A., eds., Sequences, Stratigraphy, Sedimentology; Surface and
Subsurface: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 15, p.
439–449.
RATCLIFFE, K.T., WRIGHT, A.M., HALLSWORTH, C., MORTON, A., ZAITLIN, B.A.,
POTOCKI, D., AND WRAY, D.S., 2004, Chemostratigraphic characterization
of fine grained facies in a low accommodation setting: an example from
the (Lower Cretaceous) Basal Quartz, Southern Alberta: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 88, p. 1419–1432.
REINSON, G.E., CLARK, J.E., AND FOSCOLOS, A.E., 1988, Reservoir geology of
Crystal Viking field, Lower Cretaceous estuarine tidal channel-bay
complex, south-central Alberta: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 72, p. 1270–1294.
REINSON, G.E., 1992, Transgressive barrier island and estuarine systems, in
Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea
Level Change: St. John’s, Newfoundland, Geological Association of
Canada, 409 p.
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS
REINSON, G.E., AND MELOCHE, J.D., 2002, Application of the estuary valley-
fill facies model—stratigraphic implications and constraints (ab-
stract): SEPM, Incised Valleys, Images and Processes, Research
Conference, 40 p.
REUTER, J., AND WATTS D.R., 2004, An ancient river channel system incised
on the Precambrian–Cambrian unconformity beneath Jackson
County, Ohio: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bul-
letin, v. 88, p. 1041–1047.
ROCHFORD, D.J., 1951, Studies in Australian estuarine hydrology: Austra-
lian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, v. 2, p. 1–116.
ROSENTHAL, L. 1988, Wave-dominated shoreline and incised valley trends:
Lower Cretaceous Glauconitie Formation, west-central Alberta, in
James, D.J., and Leckie, D.A., eds., Sequences, Stratigraphy Sedi-
mentology; Surface and Subsurface: Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 15, p. 207–220.
ROSS, G.M., EATON, D.W., BOERNER, D.E., AND CLOWES, R.M., 1997, Geolo-
gists probe buried craton in Western Canada: EOS, Transactions,
American Geophysical Union, v. 78, p. 493–494.
ROY, P.S., 1977, Does the Hunter River supply sand to the New South
Wales coast today? Royal Society of New South Wales, Journal and
Proceedings, v. 110, p. 17–24.
ROY, P.S., 1984, New South Wales estuaries: their origin and evolution,
in Thom, B.G., ed., Coastal Geomorphology in Australia: New York,
Academic Press, p. 99–121.
ROY, P.S., THOM, B.G., AND WRIGHT, L.D., 1980, Holocene sequences on an
embayed high energy coast: an evolutionary model: Sedimentary
Geology, v. 26, p. 1–19.
RUSNAK, G.A., 1967, Rates of sediment accumulation in modern estuar-
ies, in Lauff, G.H., ed., Estuaries: American Association for the
Advancement of Science, Publication 83, p. 180–184.
RUSSELL, R.J., 1967, Origins of estuaries, in Lauff, G.H., ed., Estuaries:
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication
83, p. 93–99.
RUST, B.R., 1978a, A classification of alluvial channel systems, in Miall,
A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 187–198.
RUST, B.R., 1978b, Depositional models for braided alluvium, in Miall,
A.D., ed., Fluvial Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 5, p. 605–625.
SCHUBEL, J.R., AND HIRSCHBERG, D.J., 1978, Estuarine graveyard and cli-
matic change, in Wiley, M., ed., Estuarine Processes: New York,
Academic Press, p. 285–303.
SCHUCHERT, C., 1927, Unconformities as seen in disconformities and
diastems: American Journal of Science, v. 13, p. 260–262.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1972, River Morphology: Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania,
Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Benchmark Papers in Geology, 429 p.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1977, The Fluvial System: New York, Wiley, 338 p.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1993, River response to baselevel change: implications for
sequence stratigraphy: Journal of Geology, v. 101, p. 279–294.
SCHUMM, S.A, AND ETHRIDGE, F.G., 1994, Origin, evolution and morphol-
ogy of fluvial valleys, in Dalrymple, R.W., Boyd, R., and Zaitlin,
B.A., eds., Incised-Valley Systems: Origin and Sedimentary Se-
quences: SEPM, Special Publication 51, p. 11–28.
SCHUMM, S.A., AND KHAN, H.R., 1972, Experimental study of channel
patterns: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 83, p. 1755–
1770.
SEIVER, R. 1951, The Mississippian–Pennsylvanian unconformity in south-
ern Illinois: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulle-
tin, v. 35, p. 542–581.
SHANLEY, K.W., AND MCCABE, P.J., 1991, Predicting facies architecture
through sequence stratigraphy: Journal of Geology, v. 101, p. 279–
294.
SHANLEY, K.W., AND MCCABE, P.J., 1994, Perspectives on the sequence
stratigraphy of continental strata: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 544–568.
233
SHANLEY, K.W., MCCABE, P.J., AND HETTINGER, R.D., 1992, Tidal influences
in Cretaceous fluvial strata from Utah, USA: a key to sequence
stratigraphic interpretation: Sedimentology, v. 39, p. 905–930.
SHERWIN, M.D., 1994, Incised channel trends: Glauconitic Member, South-
ern Alberta, in CSEG-CSPG Joint National Convention 1994, Program
and Extended Abstracts, p. 358.
SMITH, D.G., 1987, Meandering river point bar lithofacies models: Modern
and ancient examples compared, in Ethridge, F.G., Flores, R.M., and
Harvey, M.D., eds., Recent Developments in Fluvial Sedimentology:
SEPM, Special Publication 39, p. 83–91.
SMITH, D.G., REINSON, G.E., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND RAHMANI, R.A., 1991, Clastic
Tidal Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists,
Memoir 16, 387 p.
SNEDDEN, J.W., AND DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1998, Modern shelf sand bodies: an
integrated hydrodynamic and evolutionary model, in Bergman, K.,
and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sandbodies: Se-
quence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 13–28.
SOLLAS, W.J., 1883, The estuaries of the Severn and its tributaries: Geologi-
cal Society of London, Quarterly Journal, v. 39, p. 611–626.
STEERS, J.A., 1967, Geomorphology and coastal processes, estuaries: Ameri-
can Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C.,
Publication 83, p. 100.
SUMMERFIELD, M.A., 1985, Plate tectonics and landscape development on
the African continent, in Morisawa, M., and Hack, J., eds., Tectonic
Geomorphology: Boston, Allen and Unwin, p. 27–51.
SUTER, J.R., AND BERRYHILL, H.L., 1985, Late Quaternary shelf margin deltas,
Northwest Gulf of Mexico: American Association of Petroleum Ge-
ologists, Bulletin, v. 69, p. 77–91.
SUTER, J.R., BERRYHILL, H.L., and PENLAND, S., 1987, Late Quaternary sea-
level flucturations and depositional sequences, southwest Louisiana
continental shelf, in Nummedal, D., Pilkey, O.H., and Howard, J.D.,
eds., Sea-Level Fluctuation and Coastal Evolution: SEPM, Special
Publication 41, p. 199–219.
SUTER, J.R., AND CLIFTON, H.E., 1999, The Shannon Sandstone and isolated
linear sand bodies: interpretations and realizations, in Bergman, K.,
and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sandbodies: Se-
quence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 321–356.
SYVITSKI J.P.M., AND DAUGHNEY, S., 1992, DELTA2—Delta-progradation
and basin filling: Computers & Geoscience, v. 18, p. 839–897.
TERWINDT, J.H.J., 1963, Excursion Rhine–Meuse Estuary (Haringvliet): Sixth
International Sedimentological Congress, Amsterdam, Guidebook.
THOMAS, M.A., AND ANDERSON, J.B., 1994, Sea-level controls on the facies
architecture of the Trinity/Sabine incised-valley system, Texas conti-
nental shelf, in Dalrymple, R.W., Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., Incised-
Valley Systems: Origin and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special
Publication 51, p. 63–82.
THOMAS, R.G., SMITH, D.G., WOOD, J.M., VISSER, J., CALVERLEY-RANGE, E.A.,
AND KOSTER, E.H., 1987, Inclined heterolithic stratification—termi-
nology, description, interpretation and significance: Sedimentary
Geology, v. 53, p. 123–179.
THORNE, J., 1994, Constraints on riverine valley incision and the response
to sea-level change based on fluid mechanics, in Dalrymple, R.W.,
Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., Incised-Valley Systems: Origin and
Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special Publication 51, p. 29–44.
TÖRNQVIST, T.E., 1993, Holocene alternation of meandering and anasto-
mosing fluvial systems in the Rhine-Mesue delta (central Nether-
lands) controlled by sea-level rise and subsoil erodibility: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 63, p. 683–693.
TWENHOFEL, W.H., 1932, Treatise on Sedimentation, Second Edition,
1961, New York, Dover Publications, 926 p.
VALLIANOS, L., 1975, A recent history of Masonboro Inlet, North Carolina,
in Cronin, L.E., ed., Estuarine Research, vol. II. Geology and Engi-
neering: New York, Academic Press, Inc.
234 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
VAN STRAATEN, L.M.J.U., 1952, Biogene textures and the formation of
shell beds in the Dutch Wadden Sea: Koninklijke Nederlandse
Akademie van Wetenschappen, Proceedings, Series B., 55, p. 500–
516.
VAN STRAATEN, L.M.J.U., 1954a, Sedimentology of Recent tidal flat de-
posits and the Psammites du Condroz (Devonian): Geologie en
Mijnbouw, v. 16, p. 25–47.
Van Straaten, L.M.J.U., 1954b, Composition and structure of Recent
marine sediments in the Netherlands: Leidse Geologie Medelingen,
v. 19, p. 1–110.
VAN STRAATEN, L.M.J.U., 1961, Sedimentation in tidal flat areas: Alberta
Society of Petroleum Geologists Journal, 9, p. 203–226.
VAN WAGONER, J.C., MITCHUM, R.M., CAMPION, K.M., AND RAHMANIAN,
V.D., 1990, Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigraphy in Well Logs, Cores,
and Outcrops: Concepts for High-Resolution Correlation of Time
and Facies: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Meth-
ods in Exploration Series, no. 7, 55 p.
VAN WAGONER, J.C., NUMMEDAL, D., JONES, C.R., TAYLOR, D.R., JENNETTE,
D.C., and RILEY, G.W. 1991, Sequence Stratigraphy Applications to
Shelf Sandstone Reservoirs: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Field Conference Guidebook, Tulsa.
VAN WAGONER, J.C., POSAMENTIER, H.W., MITCHUM, R.M., VAIL, P.R., SARG,
J.F., LOUTIT, T.S., AND HARDENBOL, J., 1988, An overview of the funda-
mentals of sequence stratigraphy and key definitions, in Wilgus,
C.K., Hastings, B.S., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., Van Wagoner,
J., and Kendall, C.G.St.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated
Approach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 39–45.
WADSWORTH, J., BOYD, R., DIESSEL, C., LECKIE, D., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 2002,
Stratigraphic style of coal and non-marine strata in a tectonically
influenced intermediate accommodation setting: the Mannville
Group of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin, south-central
Alberta: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 50, p. 507–
541.
WALKER, R.G., ed., 1979, Facies Models: Geological Association of Canada,
St. John’s, Newfoundland, Geoscience Canada Reprint Series 1.
WALKER, R.G., ed., 1984a, Facies Models, Second Edition: Geological
Association of Canada, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Geoscience
Canada Reprint Series 1.
WALKER, R.G., ed., 1984b, General introduction: facies, facies sequences and
facies models, in Walker, R.G., ed., Facies Models, Second Edition:
Geological Association of Canada, Toronto, Geoscience Canada Re-
print Series 1, p. 1–9.
WALKER, R.G., 1992, Facies, facies models and modern stratigraphic
concepts, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models:
Response to Sea Level Change: St. John’s, Newfoundland, Geologi-
cal Association of Canada, p. 1–14.
WALKER, R.G., AND JAMES, N.P., 1992 eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea
Level Change: St. John’s, Newfoundland, Geological Association of
Canada, 409 p.
WANLESS, H.R., AND WELLER, J.M., 1932, Correlation and extent of Pennsyl-
vanian cyclothems. Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 43, p.
1003–1016.
WASHINGTON, P.A., AND CHISICK, S.A., 1994, Estuarine facies models: con-
ceptual basis and stratigraphic implications—Discussion: Journal of
Sedimentary Research, v. B64, p. 74–75.
WAY, J.N., O’MALLEY, P.J., SUTTNER, L.J., and FURER, L.C., 1998, Tectonic
controls on alluvial systems in a distal foreland basin: the Lakota and
Cloverly Formations (Early Cretaceous) in Wyoming, Montana and
South Dakota, in Shanley, K., and McCabe, P., eds., Relative Role of
Eustasy, Climate, and Tectonism in Continental Rocks: SEPM, Special
Publication 59, 145 p.
WEIMER, R.J., 1984, Relation of unconformities, tectonics, and sea-level
changes, Cretaceous of the Western Interior, U.S.A., in Schlee, J.S., ed.,
Interregional Unconformities and Hydrocarbon Accumulation:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 36, p. 7–35.
WELLNER, R.W., AND BARTEK, L.R., 2003, The effect of sea level, climate, and
shelf physiography on the development of incised-valley complexes:
A modern example from the East China Sea: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 73, p. 926–940.
WESCOTT, W.A., 1993, Geomorphic thresholds and complex response of
fluvial systems—some implications for sequence stratigraphy: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 77, p. 1208–1218.
WHIPPLE, K.X., AND TUCKER, G.E., 2002, Implications of sediment flux
dependent river incision models for landscape evolution: Journal of
Geophysical Research, v. 107, no. B2, 10.1029/2000JB000044, ETG 3.1–
3.20.
WIGHTMAN, D.M., PEMBERTON, S.G., AND SINGH, C., 1987, Depositional
modeling of the Upper Mannville (Lower Cretaceous), east-central
Alberta, implications for the recognition of brackish water deposits:
in Tillman, R.W., and Weber, K.J., eds., Reservoir Sedimentology:
SEPM, Special Publication 40, p. 189–220.
WILGUS, C.K., HASTINGS, B.S., POSAMENTIER, H.W., ROSS, C.A., VAN WAGONER,
J., AND KENDALL, C.G.ST.C., eds., 1988, Sea Level Changes: An Inte-
grated Approach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, 407 p.
WILLGOOSE, G.R., HANCOCK, G.R., AND KUCZERA, G.A., 2003, A framework
for the quantitative testing of landform evolution models, in Wilcock,
P.R., and Iverson, R.M., eds., Predictions in Geomorphology: Ameri-
can Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C., p. 195–216.
WOOD, J.M., AND HOPKINS, J.C., 1989, Reservoir sandstone bodies in estua-
rine valley fill: Lower Cretaceous Glauconitic Member, Little Bow
Field, Alberta, Canada: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Bulletin, v. 73, p. 1361–1382.
WOOD, J.M., AND HOPKINS, J.C., 1992, Traps associated with paleo-valleys
and interfluves in an unconformity bounded sequence: Lower Creta-
ceous Glauconitic Memer, southern Alberta, Canada: American As-
sociation of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 76, p. 904–926.
Wood, L.J., Ethridge, F.G., and Schumm, S.A., 1993, An experimental
study of the influence of subaqueous shelf angles on coastal plain
and shelf deposits, in Weimer, P., and Posamentier, H.W., eds.,
Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigraphy: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Memoir 58, p. 381–391.
WOODROFFE, C.D., CHAPPELL, J.M.A., THOM, B.G., AND WALLENSKY, E., 1989,
Depositional model of a macrotidal estuary and flood plain, South
Alligator River, Northern Australia: Sedimentology, v. 36, p. 737–756.
WOOLFE, K.J., LARCOMBE, P., NAISH, T., and PURDON, R.G., 1998, Lowstand
rivers need not incise the shelf: an example from the Great Barrier
Reef, Australia, with implications for sequence stratigraphic models:
Geology, v. 26, p. 75–78.
WRIGHT, L.D., 1985, River deltas, in Davis, R.A., Jr., ed., Coastal Sedimen-
tary Environments, Second Edition: New York, Springer-Verlag, p.
1–76.
WRIGHT, L.D., COLEMAN, J.M., AND THOM, B.G., 1973, Processes of chan-
nel development in a high-tide-range environment: Cambridge
Gulf–Ord River delta, Western Australia: Journal of Geology, v. 81,
p. 15–41.
WRIGHT, V.P., AND MARRIOTT, S.B., 1993, The sequence stratigraphy of
fluvial depositional systems: the role of floodplain sediment storage:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 86, p. 203–210.
ZAITLIN, B.A., 2003. Recent advances in hydrocarbon exploration and
exploitation techniques for incised valley systems: examples from the
Lower Cretaceous of the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (ab-
stract): American Association of Petroleum Geologists–SEPM Annual
Convention, Salt Lake City, Utah, Proceedings and Abstracts, p. A187.
ZAITLIN, B.A., DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND BOYD, R., 1994, The stratigraphic
organization of incised-valley systems associated with relative sea-
level change, in Dalrymple, R.W., Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., eds.,
Incised-Valley Systems: Origin and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM,
Special Publication 51, p. 45–60.
ZAITLIN, B.A, DALRYMPLE, R.W., BOYD, R., LECKIE, D., AND MACEACHERN, J.,
1995, The Stratigraphic Organisation of Incised Valley Systems, Im-
 ESTUARINE AND INCISED-VALLEY FACIES MODELS 235

plications to Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production with Ex-

amples from the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin: Canadian
Society of Petroleum Geologists, Calgary, Alberta, 189 p.
ZAITLIN, B.A., GRIFFITH, L., HEUBSCH, H., LEGGITT, S., DUFRESNE, D., POTOCKI,
D., COX, W., SQUIRES, J., AND SMITH, I., 1998, Lathom “A” Pool: an
example of a Lower Cretaceous compound incised valley reservoir
from the western interior (abstract): American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Annual Convention, Program and Abstracts.
ZAITLIN, B.A., AND SHULTZ, B.C., 1984, An estuarine-embayment fill model
from the Lower Cretaceous Mannville Group, west-central
Saskatchewan, in Scott, D.F., and Glass, D.J., eds., Mesozoic of Middle
North America: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir
9, p. 455–469.
ZAITLIN, B.A., AND SHULTZ, B.C., 1990, Wave-influenced estuarine sand
body, Senlac heavy oil pool, Saskatchewan, Canada, in Barwis, J.H.,
McPherson, J.G., and Studlick, J.R.J., eds., Sandstone Petroleum Res-
ervoirs: New York, Springer-Verlag, p. 363–387.
ZAITLIN, B.A., WARREN, M.J., POTOCKI, D., ROSENTHAL, L., AND BOYD, R., 2002,
Depositional styles in a low accommodation foreland basin setting:
an example from the Basal Quartz (Lower Cretaceous), southern
Alberta: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 50, p. 31–72.
ZENG, H.L., BACKUS, M.M., BARROW, K.T., AND TYLER, N., 1996, Facies
mapping from three-dimensional seismic data: potential and guide-
lines from a Tertiary sandstone–shale sequence model, Powderhorn
Field, Calhoun County, Texas: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v, 80, p. 16–46.
236 RON BOYD, ROBERT W. DALRYMPLE AND BRIAN A. ZAITLIN
 DELTAS 237

DELTAS
JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
Robert E. Sheriff Professor of Sequence Stratigraphy, Geosciences Department, SR1 Rm. 312,
University of Houston, 4800 Calhoun Rd., Houston, Texas 77204-5007, U.S.A.
e-mail: jpbhattacharya@uh.edu

ABSTRACT: Deltas are discrete shoreline protuberances formed where a river enters a standing body of water and supplies sediments more
rapidly than they can be redistributed by basinal processes, such as tides and waves. In that sense, all deltas are river-dominated and deltas
are fundamentally regressive in nature. The morphology and facies architecture of a delta is controlled by the proportion of wave, tide, and
river processes; the salinity contrast between inflowing water and the standing body of water, the sediment discharge and sediment caliber,
and the water depth into which the river flows. The geometry of the receiving basin (and proximity to a shelf edge) may also have an
influence. The simple classification into river-, wave-, and tide-dominated end members must be used with caution because the number
of parameters that control deltas is more numerous.
Other depositional environments, such as wave-formed shorefaces or barrier-lagoons can form significant components of larger wave-
influenced deltas, but conversely smaller bayhead or lagoonal deltas can form within larger barrier-island or estuarine systems. As deltas
are abandoned and transgressed they may also be transformed into another depositional systems (e.g., transgressive barrier–lagoon system
or estuary). Delta plains also contain distributary river channels and their associated floodplains and bays, which can equally be classified
as both fluvial and deltaic environments.
Sharp-based blocky sandstones, tens of meters up to about a hundred meters thick, within many ancient mid-continent deltas have
routinely been interpreted in the rock record as distributary channels, although many of these examples are now reinterpreted as incised
fluvial valleys. Distributary channels may show several orders of sizes and shapes as they bifurcate downstream around distributary-
mouth bars. Bifurcation is inhibited in strongly wave-influenced deltas, resulting in relatively few terminal distributary channels and
mouth bars flanked by extensive wave-formed sandy barriers or strandplain deposits. In shallow-water river-dominated deltas, tens to
hundreds of shallow, narrow and ephemeral terminal distributary channels can form intimately associated with mouth bars that form
larger depositional lobes. Tides appear to stabilize distributary channels for hundred to thousands of years, inhibiting avulsion and delta
switching.
As deltas prograde they form upward-coarsening facies successions, as sandy mouth bars and delta-front sediments build over muddy
deeper-water prodelta facies. Deltas display a distinct down-dip clinoform cross-sectional architecture. Many large muddy deltas show
separate clinoforms, the first at the active sandy delta front and the second on the muddy shelf. Along-strike facies relationships may be
less predictable and depositional surfaces may dip in different directions. Overlapping delta lobes typically result in lens-shaped
stratigraphic units that exhibit a mounded appearance.
All modern deltas grade updip from marine into non marine environments, and Walther’s Law predicts that deltas should show a marine
to nonmarine transition as they prograde. However, in many low-accommodation settings, topset alluvial or delta-plain facies can be
removed or reworked by wave or tidal erosion during transgression, resulting in top-eroded deltas. Historically, some of these top-eroded
deltas have been interpreted as distal shelf deposits, not related to shoreline processes. Sequence stratigraphic concepts, however, allow
facies observations to be placed within a larger context of controlling allocyclic mechanisms which allow the correct interpretation of larger
delta systems of which only small remnants may be preserved.

WHAT ARE DELTAS,
AND WHY ARE THEY IMPORTANT?
Much of the sediment transferred from land to sea is carried
by rivers and deposited at the shoreline in the form of deltas.
About 25% of the world’s population live on deltaic coastlines
and wetlands (Syvitski et al., 2005). Prediction of growth and
decay of modern deltas is critical in areas such as Louisiana and
in much of Asia where rampant dam building has caused an
immense decrease in discharge of freshwater to the world’s
oceans, resulting in enormous stresses to these coastal ecosys-
tems as they experience subsidence and land loss (Vörösmarty et
al., 1997). Sixty percent of the world’s rivers are affected by
reservoirs (Syvitski et al., 2005). The USA National Inventory of
Dams shows 38,100 dams over 6 m high blocking the flow in the
Mississippi River drainage basin alone. The muddy deltaic coast-
line immediately south of Bangkok, Thailand, for example, is
retreating at 12 m per year as a consequence of the extreme
demands made by a huge population on the precious freshwater
resource supplied by the Chao Phraya River (Vongvisessomjai,
1990). Similar problems exist along the entire Indo-Gangetic delta
plain. Better prediction of deltas, the critical boundary between
land and sea, is needed.
From the economic perspective, deltas have been estimated to
host close to 30% of all of the world’s oil, coal, and gas deposits
(Tyler and Finley, 1991). Much of these resources are in areas that
have been productive for many years, such as the oil and gas
deposits of the Cretaceous Interior Seaway and the Gulf of
Mexico and the Carboniferous coal deposits of the UK and the
Eastern USA. However, as production declines and global energy
needs continue to grow, new and better facies models will be
required to improve the extraction of oil and gas. Significant
fresh-water resources also occur in delta deposits, and exploita-
tion of these aquifers requires robust facies models for deltas.
This paper reviews deltaic facies models from the sedimento-
logical to the regional stratigraphic perspective. It begins by
presenting a brief historical overview of delta studies and then
proceeds with defining what a delta is, describing the various
components of deltaic depositional systems, in terms of typical
sub-environments and facies successions, and then finishes with
the larger perspective provided by facies-architecture and se-
quence-stratigraphic studies.

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 237–292.
238 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

Historical Background
The concept of a delta dates back to Herodotus (c. 400 BC),
who recognized that the alluvial plain at the mouth of the Nile
had the form of the capital Greek letter ∆ (Fig. 1). The first study
of ancient deltas was that of Gilbert (1885), who described Pleis-
tocene fresh-water gravelly deltas in Lake Bonneville, Utah.
Gilbert recognized a basic threefold subdivision of delta deposits
into topset, foreset, and bottomset units (Fig. 2), a terminology
that remains in use to this day. Barrell (1912) extended these
subdivisions to the much larger scale of the Devonian Catskill
wedge in the Appalachians, and provided the first explicit defi-
nition of the essential features of a delta as

“… a deposit partly subaerial built by a river into or against a

body of permanent water. The outer and lower parts are necessar-
ily constructed below water level, but its upper and inner surface
must be land maintained or reclaimed by the river building from
the sea. A delta, therefore, consists of a combination of terrestrial
and marine, or at least lacustrine strata, and differs from other
modes of sedimentation in this respect” (Barrell, 1912, p. 381).

Barrell considered the recognition of associated nonmarine

facies crucial in distinguishing ancient deltas from estuaries. This
criterion is no longer required because in deltas deposited during
times of falling sea level (e.g., lowstand, forced regressive, or
falling-stage systems tracts), subaerial topset facies may either
not be deposited or may be eroded during subsequent transgres-
sion, yielding “top-truncated” delta deposits (Plint, 1988;
Posamentier et al., 1992; Hart and Long, 1996; Bhattacharya and
Willis, 2001; Martinsen, 2003).
Our understanding of modern deltas developed rapidly dur-
ing the last fifty years, beginning with work on the Mississippi
Delta published in the 1950s and early 1960s (e.g., Shepard et al.,
1960). Scruton (1960) recognized that deltas are essentially cyclic
in nature and consist of a progradational, “constructive phase”
FIG. 1.—Environments and facies in the modern Nile delta. Only
the Rosetta and Damietta Branches are presently active. Stipple
indicates older reworked delta sands (Scheihing and Gaynor,
1991) rather than active “sand plumes” (Coleman et al., 1981).
Since construction of the Aswan Dam, water and sediment
discharge to the delta have decreased, and the entire delta is
undergoing transgression. From Bhattacharya and Walker,
(1992) based on Fisher et al. (1969) and Sestini (1989).
FIG. 2.—Cross-sectional facies architecture and vertical facies
succession of a delta showing threefold subdivision into
topset, foreset, and bottomset strata. From Elliott (1986), after
Gilbert (1885) and Barrell (1912).
usually followed by a thinner retrogradational “destructive phase”
coinciding with delta abandonment. He also illustrated a vertical
“deltaic sequence” (Scruton, 1960) of coarsening- and sandier-
upward facies related to progradation of bottomset, foreset, and
topset strata (Fig. 3).
The Gulf Coast region of the U.S.A. (Florida to Texas) histori-
cally has been an important focus for research on modern and
ancient deltas, primarily because of the economic importance of
deltas as oil and gas reservoirs. Coleman and Wright (1975)
compiled a global data base of 34 modern deltas and developed
a six-fold classification based on sand distribution patterns (Fig.
4) with accompanying “typical” vertical facies profiles. One of the
most widely used classification schemes is that of Galloway
(1975), who subdivided deltas according to the dominant pro-
cesses controlling their morphology: rivers, waves, and tides
(Fig. 5). These two studies emphasized the importance of the
overall shape of a sediment body in defining the type of delta,
although this has recently come under some criticism (Dominguez,
1996; Rodriguez et al., 2000; Fielding et al., 2005a). A spate of
research, focused on coarser-grained, high-latitude delta sys-
tems, led to an appreciation of the importance of grain size, water
depth, and feeder type as controlling variables on delta type
(Colella and Prior, 1990; Postma, 1990; Orton and Reading, 1993).
Improvements in seismic and side-scan sonar imaging led to
the recognition of regional-scale synsedimentary deformation in
the subaqueous parts of modern deltas (Coleman et al., 1983;
Winker and Edwards, 1983). Similar features have now been
recognized in outcrops of several ancient deltas (Nemec et al.,
1988; Martinsen, 1989; Pulham, 1989; Bhattacharya and Davies,
2001, 2004; Wignall and Best, 2004). These are also critical for
 DELTAS 239

FIG. 3.—Early example of a delta clinoform, showing topset, foreset, and bottomset strata (Scruton, 1960). A) Lithostratigraphic
representation shows facies boundaries as undulating but apparently sharp. Arrows indicate direction of progradation. Most
modern delta studies still show facies contacts in this manner. B) Correct representation of facies boundaries versus timelines.
Bed boundaries are more likely to follow the time lines (From Gani and Bhattacharya, 2005).

creation of traps in many shelf and offshore deltas such as the
Gulf of Mexico and Nigeria (e.g., Evamy et al., 1978; Berg and
Avery, 1995).
A large body of research, begun with advent of seismic and
sequence stratigraphy, emphasizes the evolution of modern and
Quaternary deltas in the context of relative sea-level changes
(Dominguez et al., 1987; Boyd et al., 1989; Williams and Roberts,
1989; Carbonel and Moyes, 1987; Hart and Long, 1996; Hori et al.,
2002; Ta et al., 2002; Sydow and Roberts, 1994; various papers in
Sidi et al., 2003; various papers in Anderson and Fillon, 2004), and
the application of these concepts to ancient deltas (Galloway,
1989a, 1989b; Bhattacharya and Walker, 1991; Martinsen, 1993;
Tesson et al., 1993; Bhattacharya, 1994; Gardner, 1995; Garrison
and van den Bergh, 1997; Plint, 2000; Bhattacharya and Willis,
2001; Garrison and van den Bergh, 2004).
Several recent studies have documented examples of tide-
influenced deltas, which until recently have been the least well
documented in the ancient record (e.g., Maguregui and Tyler,
1991; Jennette and Jones, 1995; Mellere and Steel, 1995, 1996;
Dalrymple, 1999; Willis et al., 1999; Willis and Gabel, 2001;
Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001; Ta et al., 2002; Ta et al., 2005; Hori
et al., 2002; Davies et al., 2003; Allison et al., 2003; Dalrymple et al.,
2003; Lambiase et al., 2003; White et al., 2004; Willis, 2005). There
has also been an increasing focus on studies of muddy prodeltaic
shelves linked to Modern highstand deltas, such as the Po,
Ganges–Brahamaputra, Amazon, and Orinoco (Nittrouer et al.,
1986; Kuehl et al., 1997; Correggiari et al., 2001; Liu et al., 2002;
Warne et al., 2002; Cattaneo et al., 2003; Correggiari et al., 2005;
Neill and Allison, 2005).
Definitions
Deltas have been defined as “discrete shoreline protuber-
ances formed where rivers enter oceans, semi-enclosed seas,
lakes or lagoons and supply sediments more rapidly than they
can be redistributed by basinal processes” (Elliott, 1986, p. 113).
240 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 4.—Sandbody geometries of the six delta types of Coleman and Wright (1975) plotted on the river-, wave-, and tide-dominated
tripartite classification of Galloway (1975), from Bhattacharya and Walker (1992). Note that all sand bodies narrow and thicken
towards a point (fluvial) source. Also note similarity of tide-dominated isolith to river-dominated end member.

By this definition, all deltas are to some degree river-influenced.
Deltas are therefore fundamentally regressive in nature
(Dalrymple, 1999).
The term delta has also been applied to many ancient facies
successions or clastic wedges that show a marine to nonmarine
transition, or which contain a marine–fluvial or lacustrine–fluvial
interface (Alexander, 1989), following the early definition of
Barrell (1912). Although a shoreline must be crossed in such a
transition or interface, the identification of the shoreline as spe-
cifically deltaic usually requires good three-dimensional control
of facies patterns. This may consist of maps of lithofacies distribu-
tions showing a thickening and narrowing of the clastic succes-
sion toward the point of fluvial input, and the required seaward
protuberance of the shoreline (Fig. 4).
Distinguishing Deltas from Other Depositional Systems
Much of the sediment in a delta is derived directly from the
river that feeds it, in contrast to estuaries, in which sediment is
derived both from the marine and the fluvial realm (Dalrymple,
1999). Estuaries have also been defined as fundamentally trans-
gressive depositional systems, in contrast to deltas, which are
regressive (Dalrymple et al., 1992).
In barrier-island systems, sediment is supplied alongshore
(Reinson, 1992). The terms ebb-tidal delta and flood-tidal delta
have also been applied to sediment accumulations that form
around tidal inlet channels in barrier–lagoon depositional sys-
tems (Reinson, 1992). Barrier islands may form components of
larger wave-influenced delta systems (Bhattacharya and Giosan,
2003). In particular, a river can act as a groyne, or hydraulic
barrier, that traps sediment carried in the longshore drift system
(Fig. 6; e.g., Dominguez, 1996; Rodriguez et al., 2000; Bhattacharya
and Giosan, 2003). Barrier islands can also form during the trans-
gression of a delta, such as the Chandeleur islands in the Gulf of
Mexico, which are the remnants of a now-abandoned delta lobe
of the Mississippi delta (Fig. 7; Boyd and Penland, 1988). Where
basinal processes redistribute sediment to the point that the
fluvial source and delta morphology can no longer be recognized,
more general environmental terms such as paralic, strandplain,
or coastal plain may be more preferable (Alexander, 1989).
Deltas occur at a wide variety of scales ranging from conti-
nental-scale depositional systems, such as the modern Missis-
sippi delta (Fig. 8), with an area of about 28,500 km2, to compo-
nents of other depositional systems such as bayhead deltas
within estuarine or lagoonal systems. Many continental-scale
deltas, such as the Danube in Romania (Fig. 9) and the Missis-
sippi, may contain smaller-scale crevasse deltas within larger-
scale lobes, resulting in a complex and hierarchical facies archi-
tecture.
RIVER-MOUTH PROCESSES
A delta forms when a river of sediment-laden freshwater
enters a standing body of water, loses its competence to carry
sediment, and deposits it. The theory of jets has been widely
applied to explain the dynamics of how river plumes interact
 DELTAS 241

FIG. 5.—Tripartite classification of deltas, into river-, wave-, and tide- dominated end members (Galloway, 1975). Tide-dominated
end members are noted as being “estuarine”. This prompted Walker (1992) to abandon the concept of a tide-influenced delta. Also
note that the São Francisco and Brazos deltas are considered as type examples of wave-dominated end members.

with the body of water that they flow into (e.g., Bates, 1953;
Wright, 1977; Orton and Reading, 1993; Nemec, 1995). The
internal facies distribution and external morphology of a deltaic
deposit depends upon (1) whether the river outflow is more
dense (hyperpycnal), equally dense (homopycnal), or less dense
(hypopycnal) than the standing body of water, (2) the interac-
tion of the river plume with marine processes, which can in-
clude waves, tides, storms, and ocean currents, and biogenic
reworking (Fig. 10), (3) the physical position of the delta in the
basin, such as the shelf edge, and (4) the degree to which river-
derived sediments are reworked by marine processes.
Historically, most marine deltas have been assumed to be
hypopycnal, but many rivers experience dramatic changes in
discharge as a function of seasonal climate change or as a result
of major floods associated with storms. As a consequence, many
rivers can alternate from hypopycnal to hyperpycnal conditions,
even in fully marine settings (Nemec, 1995; Mulder and Syvitski,
1995; Parsons et al., 2001). Many river plumes may show both
hyperpycnal and hypopycnal plumes at the same time (Nemec,
1995; Kineke et al., 2000). Homopycnal conditions are the least
common, because only small density differences are required for
a flow to become either hypopycnal or hyperpycnal.
Much of the active sand deposition occurs in a distributary-
mouth bar (also referred to as a stream-mouth bar or a middle-
ground bar). Mouth bars are a fundamental architectural element
in modern deltas; they can coalesce to form complex bar assem-
blages, which in turn build regional-scale depositional lobes.
Mouth bars scale broadly to the width of flow, although flow
widths in distributary channels can vary both spatially and
temporally. Individual bars can be on the order of several kilome-
ters long in relatively large rivers like the modern Atchafalaya
delta (Fig. 11; Van Heerden and Roberts, 1988; Tye, 2003). The size
and shape of a mouth bar also depends on the angle of dispersion
of a plume, the flow conditions (hyperpycnal, hypopycnal, or
homopycnal), and the forces that act on the river plume (buoyant,
inertial, and frictional forces and basinal processes).
242 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

Symmetric Asymmetric Deflected

A < 200 A > 200 A > 200

LEGEND
Net sediment drift at mouth River sediment discharge
Lagoonal Facies
Fluvial & Bayhead Delta Facies
Beach & Barrier Sand
Pre-delta

FIG. 6.—Morphology of wave-influenced deltas. Top row represents lower fluvial discharge compared to bottom row. River plume
acts as a groyne that traps sediment updrift (after Bhattacharya and Giosan, 2003). Asymmetry index represents the ratio of fluvial
sediment discharge to alongshore sediment transport rate.

FIG. 7.—Evolution of Mississippi delta lobes

from progradation to abandonment (from
Boyd et al., 1989). Delta goes through an
initial cycle of progradation, during which
it shows a river-dominated character. As
it is abandoned, it forms into a barrier-
lagoon system. The barrier is ultimately
drowned to form a relict shelf shoal.
 DELTAS
FIG. 8.—Infilling of interdistributary bays by historically dated
crevasse “subdeltas” in the modern Mississippi birdfoot delta.
Note the large variation in scale of deltas and distributary
channels. At least three orders of branching can be discerned
(from Bhattacharya and Walker, 1992; simplified from Coleman
and Gagliano, 1964).
Tye (2004) compiled data on the dimensions of modern mouth
bars and other sandy elements in the Atchafalaya delta in the Gulf
of Mexico and the Colville, Kuparuk, and Sagavinortik rivers in
Alaska. His data showed that bar widths ranged from 100 m to 3
km and bar lengths ranged from 140 m up to a maximum of nearly
7 km. Modal mouth-bar widths are between 120 to 410 m, and
modal lengths are between 250 m to 610 m. A compilation by
Reynolds (1999) of ancient mouth-bar sand bodies shows consid-
erably larger dimensions. His study showed that mouth-bar sand
bodies range from 1.1 km to 14 km wide with lengths of between
2.6 km to 9.6 km. Average sand-body widths are about 3 km, and
average lengths are about 6 km. Reynolds suggests that mouth-
bar sandstones are typically twice as long as they are wide.
Clearly, the average values of ancient sand bodies (Reynolds,
1999) versus their modern geomorphic counterparts (Tye, 2003)
illustrate that ancient examples represent the migration and
growth of modern bars, and hence give larger dimensions.
Because bars are bedload features, they induce an enormous
amount of form friction, in excess of that associated with grain
and bedform roughness. This form friction significantly lowers
bed shear stress and causes channel discharge to decrease as well
as causing a change in the direction of flow around the bar (i.e.,
bifurcation of the channel). As bifurcation continues, the system
may become unstable, initiating an autocyclic upstream avulsion
of the feeding distributary.
Mouth bars can accrete downstream, laterally, and upstream
(e.g., Van Heerden and Roberts, 1988; Corbeanu et al., 2004;
Olariu et al., 2005; Olariu and Bhattacharya, 2006). Downstream
accretion is an important process by which deltas grow and
prograde. Upstream accretion of sand, caused by the form fric-
243
tion described earlier, may initiate growth faults (Bhattacharya
and Davies, 2001, 2004) and may be important in causing avul-
sions as distributary channels become choked with sediment and
switch course.
Waves smooth out and elongate mouth bars in a shore-
parallel direction (Fig. 12; Wright, 1977; Fielding et al., 2005b).
The ability of waves to extend a bar downdrift depends on the
ratio of flood frequency to longshore-drift transport capacity. In
deltas with high-wave-energy regimes or very infrequent floods
(e.g., centennial floods), mouth bars may be extended for many
kilometers or more alongshore. Tides commonly dissect the bar,
or elongate it in a shore-normal direction. Tides may also cause
distributary channels, and in turn the associated bars, to be stable
for centuries, resulting in length-to-width ratios of up to 10
(Reynolds, 1999).
Hypopycnal (Buoyancy- and Friction-Dominated) Deltas
Where a river enters salt water, the density of the fresh river
water plus suspended sediment load may be less than that of the
sea water, causing hypopycnal flow (Fig. 10). Suspended muds
are carried out into the receiving basin as a buoyant plume,
resulting in lower depositional slopes.
Hypopycnal mud plumes may be deflected along the shelf by
waves, ocean gyres, or other oceanic circulation currents. In cases
where this mud is trapped within the littoral zone, it may form a
hyperconcentrated fluid mud that accretes to the shoreline. Win-
nowing of this mud may cause shells or sands to form thin beach
deposits that armor the underlying mud and allow the downdrift
muddy coastline to prograde, forming a chenier plain (Rine and
Ginsburg, 1985; Augustinius, 1989; Penland and Suter, 1989;
Draut et al., 2005). These are common on the downdrift margins
of muddy delta systems, such as the chenier plain of the Louisiana
coast, which lies downdrift of the mighty Mississippi outflow
(Penland and Suter, 1989; Draut et al., 2005). The Camau penin-
sula is a largely muddy accumulation that forms the downdrift
wing of the Mekong delta (Ta et al., 2002). Nearly 50% of mud
trapped in the modern Orinico delta in Venezuela is actually
derived from the Amazon (Rine and Ginsburg, 1985; Warne et al.,
2002). The Amazon muds are thus carried along the shelf for a
distance of over 1000 km. Mud from the modern Po delta has also
been tracked for several hundred kilometers to the south along
the Adriatic coast (Fig. 13; Cattaneo et al., 2003).
River bedload typically stops moving at the point of flow
expansion, forming the mouth bar, whereas suspended-load
muds continue to be transported basinward. Hypopycnal deltas
are thus characterized by a distinct separation of the friction-
inducing sandy bedload from the buoyant suspended muddy
load. Depending on plume stability, muddy plumes may pro-
duce subaqueous distributary channels with well developed
levees that may cause the mouth bar and channel to form elongate
bar-finger sands (Fisk, 1961).
At low stage, the more dense sea water can intrude many
kilometers upstream into the river, forming a salt wedge, as is
seen in many modern deltas, such as the Po in Italy (Nelson, 1970).
Salt wedges can bring marine or brackish fauna into the distribu-
tary channels, as observed in delta-plain distributary channels in
the Cretaceous Ferron Sandstone in Utah, U.S.A. (e.g., Corbeanu
et al., 2004). During low discharge, muds in the overlying buoy-
ant plume may flocculate and be deposited through suspension,
settling as extensive bar drapes in the river and mouth-bar areas.
These bar drapes can form fluid-mud layers that may be flushed
out onto the shelf during subsequent floods. Settling of sediment
within a hypopycnal plume may result in unstable fingers of
sediment collapsing through the water column and becoming
244 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

-
Chilia Arm

i
rien
4b

Jeb
4a 4c

Letea

TULCEA
Sulina Arm
Sf .
Gh
eor
ghe
Arm
2

Ca
ra
orm
an
1

ile
ur
t
rã
Sã
Razelm
Lake 3a
3b
3
nd
la
Is
in
c al
Sa

SEA
CK
Sinoe
A
BL
Lake

Bedrock
Delta Plain
Abandoned Channels
Beach and Barrier Sands
0 3 6 9 12
km

FIG. 9.—History of the Danube delta plain. The highest-discharge, northern branch feeds a highly river-dominated delta lobe 4c,
comprising numerous bifurcating distributary channels with only minor wave reworking. The southernmost branch feeds the
distinctly asymmetric wave-influenced lobe 3. The updrift side of lobe 3 comprises amalgamated beach ridges of the Saraturile
Formation whereas the downdrift side comprises river-dominated bay-head deltas (3b) building behind a wave-formed barrier
island. The asymmetry is preserved in the older lobes 1 and 2. The central lobe 2 is largely inactive and is presently being destroyed.
Sands from lobe 2 are carried south by longshore drift to accumulate in the vicinity of lobe 3. Successive ages and outlines of lobes
are: 1, 9000–7300 yr BP; 2, 7300–2500 yr BP; 3 and 4, 2900 yr BP–present (based on radiocarbon dates of Panin et al., 1983). Figure
is based on map prepared by Gastescu (1992).
 DELTAS 245

Hyperpycnal
Buoyancy-Dominated

Salt Wedge

Levee Bar Finger

Transverse Flow
Convergence

Low Tide
Friction Buoyancy

Friction Turbulent
Friction Waves Diffusion
Buoyancy
&

Bifurction Mixed-Influence Flows

around mouth bar High Tide
Inertia-Dominated
Homopycnal Flow

Gilbert Foresets

Hyperpycnal Flow

Loading/Invasion
Mass Flow Freezing
FIG. 10.—Examples of mouth-bar processes in river-dominated deltas (from Reading and Collinson, 1996, after Orton and Reading,
1993) incorporating ideas of Bates )1953), Wright (1977), and others. See text for discussion.
246 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

A B LOCATION
Ba
yo
u
Te
c he

EAST
PASS
Six Mile Lake

Morgan City

t
tl e

iv er
Ou
ISLE DERRIERE

ya R
ke
a
xL

fa la
Marsh Island

Wa
POULE

A tc ha
navigation A tc
D'EAUX ha
fa la
channel ISLANDS
ya
Ba
0 10 20 km y

NA LOUISIANA

1973 1975 TA Gu
L lf o
CH.
fM
e x ic o
Mis
sis
sip
pi
Riv
er

Atchafalaya Bay

CH. LEGEND
IA
TR
NU Exposed area
1973
1976
1km 1982
Mouth bar growth
1976 1979 Upstream
Downstream
Lateral
SOUTHE
AST PAS
S

0 500 1000 m
Scale

FIG. 11.—Development of a shallow-water delta in Atchafalaya Bay, Mississippi Delta, U.S.A. A) River-dominated lobe forms by
the coalescing of distributary-mouth bars (black), suggesting friction dominance. B) As the delta grows, the mouth bars accrete
upstream and downstream (compare 1976 and 1982 shorelines). Note that there are numerous orders of distributary channels,
culminating in small terminal distributary channels. Also note the scale of the mouth bars, which are on the order of several
hundred meters wide and one to several kilometers in length (from Olariu and Bhattacharya, 2006; after Van Heerden and
Roberts, 1988).

concentrated enough to produce a hyperpycnal flow (Nemec,
1995; Parsons et al., 2001).
Hyperpycnal (Inertia-Dominated) Deltas
In freshwater lakes, sediment concentrations less than 1 kg/
m3 produce hyperpycnal conditions whereas sediment concen-
trations greater than the density caused by dissolved salt in
seawater (about 35 to 45 kg/m3) may be required to generate
hyperpycnal flows in marine settings (Mulder and Syvitski,
1995; Parsons et al., 2001). These flow conditions dominate
where sediment-laden streams enter freshwater lakes, as occurs
in many alpine or periglacial environments (Eyles and Eyles,
1992). Many marine settings, however, are also hyperpycnal
(e.g., Wright et al., 1988; Mulder and Syvitski, 1995, Plink-
Björklund and Steel, 2004), and hyperpycnal conditions have
been shown to occur in marine setting, at sediment concentra-
tions of 1–5 kg/m3 (Parsons et al., 2001). Such low-concentration
hyperpycnal flows may occur where marine water is colder
than fresh river outflow, or where the shallow marine setting is
brackish, such as occurs at many delta fronts. Hyperpycnal
flows may cause sediment to bypass the shoreline or mouth bar
and be deposited on the offshore shelf as density underflows.
Because the momentum of the hyperpycnal flow exceeds the
ability of the standing body of water to stop the motion or lift the
plume by buoyant forces, hyperpycnal deltas have been re-
ferred to as “inertia-dominated” (Bates, 1953). Hyperpycnal
flows can be important in feeding deep-water systems, espe-
cially during times of low sea level or in areas with narrow
shelves where the river may be delivering sediment directly
into deep water. The resulting deposit of a hyperpycnal flow is
either a fluid mud, or a silty or sandy graded bed (i.e., a
 DELTAS 247

Symmetrical Deflected

FIG. 12.—A) Symmetrical mouth bars, versus B) deflected mouth bars. As a result of oblique wave approach (compare with
Figure 6). From Reading and Collinson (1996), after Wright (1977).

turbidite; Fig. 14A, B, C). Sands may occur as thinner, wedge-
shaped sheets or fining-upward shallow undulating channel
deposits (Olariu et al., 2005; Gani and Bhattacharya, 2005; Plink-
Björklund and Steel, 2004, 2005). Hyperpycnal turbidites typi-
cally show more complex internal geometry than surge-type
turbidites (Mulder and Alexander, 2001; Plink-Björklund and
Steel, 2004). The sustained flows associated with hyperpycnal
flows may result in thick, massive beds that typically show
inverse grading at the base (associated with increasing flood
discharge) followed by normal grading as the flood wanes.
Alternation of structureless to parallel-laminated sandstones
may also indicate more sustained flows (Plink-Björklund and
Steel, 2004).
For sandy systems there has been significant debate about
how sandy delta front turbidites form. One hypothesis is that
delta-front-turbidites are fed by true hyperpycnal flows directly
from the proximal delta front caused by rapid sedimentation
(e.g., Mulder et al., 1996). The alternate hypothesis is that sandy
sediment is first “stored” in a proximal mouth bar, which builds
up to a threshold slope and then becomes unstable. Floods,
storms, or earthquakes may trigger a delta-front sediment grav-
ity flow. Both processes have been documented for the Modern

FIG. 13.—Mud from the Po delta , deposited during the Holocene highstand (HST) is carried
several hundred kilometers along the Adriatic coast by geostrophic currents (from
Correggiari et al., 2001).
248 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 14.—A) Aggrading wave-rippled sandstones interbedded with normally graded siltstones and claystones, Cretaceous Dunvegan
Formation, Alberta, Canada. B) Interbedded normally graded very fine-grained sandstones and siltstones with lightly burrowed
mudstones. Prodelta mudstones of the Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation, Alberta, Canada. C) Normally graded to flat-stratified
sandstones of the Cretaceous Panther Tongue sandstone, Utah, U.S.A. A–C are interpreted as delta-front sediment-gravity-flow
deposits. D) Pervasively bioturbated, non-deltaic sandy mudstone, Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation, Alberta. Except for
hammer in Part C, scale bar is 3 cm.
 DELTAS
Sepik river mouth in Papua New Guinea (Kineke et al., 2000). In
the second scenario, all that is required is rapid sedimentation of
the sandy load of the river, which could occur in either hypopycnal
or homopycnal settings. In the second scenario, mud may never
be deposited from a hyperpycnal flow, and the deposits thus
comprise mud deposited from hypopycnal flows that shows less
“fluvial” influence (e.g., more normal marine biota), interbedded
with rapidly deposited sands with burrowed tops (MacEachern
et al., 2005). Muds deposited from suspension accumulate at rates
an order of magnitude slower than hyperpycnal muds and con-
sequently show much higher degrees of bioturbation (Fig. 14D;
Allison et al., 2000).
Rivers that frequently experience hyperpycnal conditions are
typically small “dirty” systems that drain high-relief, tectonically
active terrains, such as the Eel River, which feeds the Northern
California coast (Mulder and Syvitski, 1995; Syvitski and
Morehead, 1999). However, these systems are usually not
hyperpycnal throughout the year. Most sediment discharge oc-
curs during rare, large-magnitude floods. Ninety percent of the
yearly Eel River discharge, for example, occurred in just a few
days of flooding. The rest of the year, the Eel is hypopycnal and
carries very little sediment (Syvitski and Morehead, 1999). Dur-
ing low-discharge periods, sediments deposited during major
floods may be significantly reworked by waves and tides.
A “pulsed” depositional history characterizes many deltas,
such as the Brazos, in the Texas Gulf Coast, the Danube, in the
Black Sea, the Senegal in Africa, and the Burdekin delta, in
Australia (Bhattacharya and Giosan, 2003; Fielding et al., 2005a).
Growth of these deltas is confined to very short periods of major
flood activity associated with storms. Depending on flood fre-
quency, which can be seasonal or centennial, flood-borne sedi-
ment can be completely reworked over time. The Brazos and
Burdekin deltas have recently been redefined as “flood-domi-
nated” rather than wave-dominated systems (Rodriguez et al.,
2000; Fielding et al., 2005a, 2005b). Storms at the downstream end
of a delta system may do little to increase sediment discharge,
even though they may cause flooding, whereas storms in the
hinterland may be far more important in terms of increasing
sediment discharge. In continental-scale deltas, such as the Nile,
the Amazon, or the Mississippi, there may be no obvious link
between coastal storms and hinterland storms, which may be
completely out of phase. Rivers associated with continental drain-
ages, in excess of 106 km2, have been suggested to rarely, if ever,
go hyperpycnal (Mulder and Syvitski, 1995), although if marine
waters are already brackish, or where marine water is cold, even
large rivers may go hyperpycnal frequently (Parsons et al., 2001;
Plink-Björklund and Steel, 2004).
Homopycnal (Friction-Dominated) Deltas
In homopycnal settings there may be a greater degree of
mixing between the river and standing body of water. These
situations are common in fresh-water deltas and can also occur in
marine settings where the amount of bed load is high. In shallow
water, friction at the bed causes rapid deceleration and develop-
ment of a mouth bar that causes the associated distributary
channel to bifurcate, and settings of this kind have been referred
to as “friction-dominated” (Wright, 1977). However, friction is
important in both hypopycnal and hyperpycnal deltas. “Friction-
dominated” mouth bars are more fan shaped than buoyancy-
dominated mouth bars, and may be dominated by traction-
current features such as climbing ripples and cross bedding (Fig.
10). Deltas of this kind are characterized by close-to-angle-of-
repose foreset beds, such as seen in the gravelly freshwater deltas
originally described by Gilbert (1885). There are several good
249
examples of marine steep-fronted Gilbert type deltas, such as the
Modern Alta delta in Norway (Corner et al., 1990). Numerous
ancient examples are given in Colella and Prior (1990), and more
recently published examples from Europe include Burns et al.
(1997), Ulicny (2001), and Soria et al. (2003).
DELTA ENVIRONMENTS
Deltas comprise three main geomorphic environments of
deposition (Fig. 15): the subaerial delta plain (where river pro-
cesses dominate), the delta front (the coarser-grained area where
river and basinal processes interact), and the prodelta (primarily
muddy). These three environments roughly coincide with the
topset, foreset, and bottomset strata of early workers, although
the boundaries overlap and specific definitions of the delta front
are not widely agreed on.
Delta Plain
The delta plain is defined by the presence of distributary
channels. It includes a wide variety of nonmarine to brackish,
paralic to wetland sub-environments including swamps, marshes,
tidal flats, lagoons, and interdistributary bays. Although readily
distinguished in most modern delta environments (e.g., Ta et al.,
2005; Fielding et al., 2005a), the distinction of these various
shallow-water, brackish wetland environments is not routinely
attempted in ancient settings (but see McCabe, this volume).
The landward limit of modern delta plains is typically taken
at the point in the alluvial realm where trunk streams become
unconfined and distributive (typically immediately downstream
of the alluvial valley). In many cases, this is the nodal avulsion
point on an alluvial plain. In modern settings, the delta plain can
be subdivided into a lower delta plain, marked by tidal incur-
sion of sea water, and a more landward upper delta plain, in
which major distributary channels still occur but in which there
is no incursion of marine water (Fig. 15; Coleman and Prior,
1982).
The demarcation between these areas is referred to as the bay
line (Posamentier et al., 1988). Rivers may experience tidal modu-
lation of flow far upstream of the actual marine incursion, de-
pending on the ratio of tidal forces to river discharge. The land-
ward limit of incursion depends on slope and discharge. In
ancient settings, the bay line may be indicated by the landward
limit of marine or brackish-tolerant fossils or trace fossils, al-
though tidally influenced cross stratification may occur farther
upstream of any measurable brackish influence. The seaward
limit of the lower subaerial delta plain is defined at either the
high-tide shoreline (Elliott, 1986) or the low-tide shoreline, which
includes the foreshore (e.g., Coleman and Prior, 1982).
The upper delta plain is a fluvial environment, although in
rare cases it may be indirectly tide influenced. Lakes lack tides,
and consequently the distinction between the upper and lower
delta plain cannot be made in lacustrine deltas. Steeply sloping
fan deltas, adjacent to scarps, have very limited delta plains.
Delta Front
The delta front is defined as the shoreline and adjacent
dipping sea bed (Elliott, 1986). It is defined as the area domi-
nated by coarser sediment (sand or gravel) that includes sub-
aqueous topset and foreset beds. However, many studies of
modern delta systems do not include the foreshore and shoreface
environments within the delta front but rather treat this as a
separate intertidal to subtidal “delta platform” environment
(Fig. 16; e.g., Coleman and Prior, 1982; Ta et al., 2002; Roberts
250 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
FIG. 15.—Major areal subdivisions of a delta. The upper delta
plain is essentially nonmarine and characterized by distribu-
tive river systems.
and Sydow, 2003). The width of this subtidal platform can be up
to several kilometers where tidal range is high (e.g., Corner et
al., 1990; Hori et al., 2002; Ta et al., 2002; Allison et al., 2003;
Roberts and Sydow, 2003).
River-dominated delta fronts typically consist of a complex
association of terminal distributary channels and mouth bars that
coalesce to form bar assemblages and depositional lobes (e.g.,
Van Heerden and Roberts, 1988). In hypopycnal river-dominated
settings, especially those with minimal tides or waves, the posi-
FIG. 16.—Morphometric subdivisions of the Mahakam delta, Kalimantan, Indonesia. Note that muddy subaqueous foreset is referred
to as the “delta front” (modified after Roberts and Sydow, 2003).
tions of distributary channels may be fixed for long periods,
forming elongate bar fingers, as in the deeper-water mud-domi-
nated Mississippi “birdfoot” delta (Figs. 8, 17; Fisk, 1961). How-
ever, the elongation of the modern Mississippi “birdfoot” delta is
somewhat artificial, because it has been maintained for many
decades by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. By contrast, in
siltier or sandier systems deposited in shallower water, or not
stabilized by human interference, distributaries switch more
rapidly and coalesce to form more lobate deltas, as in the Lafourche
(Fig. 17) and Atchafalaya (Fig. 11) deltas (Olariu and Bhattacharya,
2006).
The seaward-dipping slope associated with the distal mar-
gin of a distributary-mouth bar is also sometimes referred to as
the distal delta front and can form a relatively continuous
sandy fringe in front of the active zone of mouth bars. Internally,
the distal bar is physically built by rapidly decelerating “frontal
splays”. In high-slope delta fronts, these can be expressed as
normally or inversely graded beds deposited from waning
turbidites or grain flows (Por™bski and Steel, 2003; Plink-
Björklund and Steel, 2005; Olariu et al., 2005) In coarser deltas,
these deposits produce the classical foreset geometries that
define Gilbert deltas (e.g., Soria et al., 2003). Several researchers
(e.g., Coleman and Prior, 1982) reserve the term delta front to
refer only to this distal bar environment. The term delta front has
also been applied to refer to mid-shelf muddy clinoform strata,
seaward of any significant sand deposits (Fig. 16; Roberts and
Sydow, 2003).
Delta Front Versus Shoreface
In wave-influenced deltas, mouth bars may be reworked into
a distinct shoreface, which can be considered as part the delta
front (Barrell, 1912). The shoreface is the seaward-dipping equi-
librium surface that forms in response to the asymmetry of
shoaling fair-weather waves (Barrell, 1912; Bruun, 1962; Swift,
1968). The shape and extent of the shoreface depends on the
interaction of sediment supply and wave energy expended at the
coast (Walker and Plint, 1992). Non-oceanic settings, or coasts
with wide shelves, typically lack swell waves, for example, and
have a correspondingly diminished shoreface in which fair-
weather waves affect only sediments deposited in a few meters or
 DELTAS 251

FIG. 17.—Representative modern examples of river-dominated, wave-dominated, and tide-influenced deltas. Modified from Fisher
et al. (1969). River-dominated deltas are classified into lobate (shoal-water) and elongate (deep-water or birdfoot) deltas. In the
Mahakham example (after Allen et al., 1979), delta-front deposits comprise sandy siltstones and mudstones. Figure from
Bhattacharya and Walker (1992).

less. This may nevertheless impart a smooth-fronted appearance Prodelta

to the delta, but sediments deposited below the effects of fair-
weather waves will record the original depositional processes. In
mesotidal or macrotidal settings, tidal process may mask the
effects of waves. Many smooth-fronted modern deltas, such as
the Brazos, Burdekin, Baram/Trusan, and Mekong, while show-
ing the effects of shallow-wave reworking, show a dominance of
river-flood or tidal facies in the underlying sediments (Rodriguez
et al., 2000; Lambiase et al., 2003; Ta et al., 2002, 2005; Fielding et
al., 2005a, 2005b).
In wave-modified deltas, the shoreface may form part of the
delta front. Shorefaces can also form in the absence of a river. The
shoreface can also be entirely erosional, especially during trans-
gression, where sediment supply may be minimal (e.g., Bruun,
1962; Swift, 1968; Nummedal and Swift, 1987; Kraft et al., 1987).
This erosion forms a ravinement surface that commonly removes
5–10 m of the topset portions of a delta. These ravinement
surfaces form profoundly significant bounding discontinuities
that are the key to identifying and mapping ancient top-truncated
delta deposits (e.g., Weise, 1980; Walker and Plint, 1992; Hart and
Long, 1996; Posamentier and Allen, 1999; Bhattacharya and Willis,
2001; Martinsen, 2003).
The prodelta has historically been interpreted as the area
where fine mud and silt settle slowly out of suspension. Prodelta
deposits may be more or less burrowed, depending on sedimen-
tation rates. Prodelta muds may merge seaward with fine-grained
hemipelagic and commonly calcareous sediment of the basin
floor. The preservation of silty or sandy lamination is commonly
taken to mark the influence of the river, as opposed to total
bioturbation of the basin-floor sediments in areas away from the
active river (Fig. 14D; Allison et al., 2000; Neill and Allison, 2005;
MacEachern et al., 2005). Where the sediments are rhythmically
laminated, a tidal influence may be inferred (Smith et al., 1990).
Because of the abundant suspended sediment, certain types of
vertical filter feeders and other organisms that produce open
vertical burrows of the Skolithos ichnofacies tend to be suppressed
(e.g., Moslow and Pemberton, 1988; Gingras et al., 1998;
MacEachern et al., 2005).
The term prodelta and shelf have been presented historically
as mutually exclusive environments (e.g., Walker, 1984), which
may be a serious error. Many of the world’s muddy shelves, such
as the Adriatic (Fig. 13), Black Sea, Amazon, Bay of Bengal, Papua
252 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

A B

50 km 50 km

C D

10 km

E
10 km

20 km

FIG. 18.—Comparison of distributary-channel branching patterns in a river-dominated versus wave-dominated deltaic coastline. A)
River-dominated Lena River delta (Russian Arctic) shows numerous orders of branching with many tens of terminal distributary
channels. B) Wave-dominated coastline associated with the Paraíba do Sul, Brazilian coast. C) Po delta, Italy. D) Ebro delta, Spain.
Bifurcation is inhibited in wave-dominated deltas because the river is unable to prograde into the basin as rapidly. This effectively
allows the river to maintain its grade, which in turn inhibits avulsion. E) Tide-dominated Ganges–Brahmaputra delta shows
highly elongate channels. Photos courtesy of NASA.
 DELTAS
New Guinea, Gulf of Mexico, and others, are now being inter-
preted as the subaqueous extension of deltas (e.g., Nittrouer et al.,
1986; Kuehl et al., 1997; Michels et al., 1998; Liu et al., 2002;
Cattaneo et al., 2003; Roberts and Sydow, 2003; Kuehl et al., 2005;
Neill and Allison, 2005). Studies of modern muddy shelves show
that much of the muddy sediment deposited by suspension out
of buoyant river plumes ultimately concentrates at the seabed,
forming a fluid-mud layer that may be kept in suspension by
waves (e.g., Kineke et al., 1996) or moved by storms (Allison et al.,
2000; Draut et al., 2005). Mud may also be introduced directly
onto the seafloor by hyperpycnal flows (Mulder and Syvitski,
1995). Because sedimentation rates of fluid muds are so much
higher than by suspension settling, they are probably far more
important in the construction of the shelf than has historically
been realized (Neill and Allison, 2005). Fluid muds may be
characterized by centimeter- to decimeter-thick beds which show
a lack of lamination and bioturbation and which are interbedded
with graded siltstone or sandstone beds (Kuehl et al., 1986;
Allison et al., 2000; MacEachern et al., 2005).
Distributary Channels
Distributary channels may show a wide range of sizes and
shapes in different positions on the delta (Fig. 18; Olariu and
Bhattacharya, 2006). There is therefore no such thing as “a
distributary channel” in many deltas. Typically, a trunk fluvial
system first avulses at the point where the river becomes uncon-
fined, forming a nodal avulsion point (e.g., Nelson, 1970; Mackey
and Bridge, 1995). Delta-plain channels tend to be few in num-
ber and are separated by wide areas of interdistributary bays,
swamps, marshes, or lakes on the delta plain, although these
interdistributary areas can be replaced by channel deposits,
depending on the avulsion frequency and rate of channel migra-
tion (Bristow and Best, 1993; Mackey and Bridge, 1995; Holbrook,
1996). In an ancient setting, upper-delta-plain channels may be
very difficult to distinguish from fluvial channels, especially if
there is no tidal influence.
Distributary channels can show several orders of branching,
readily measured in modern systems but difficult to determine in
ancient examples. The smallest-scale channels are referred to as
“terminal distributary channels” and are intimately associated
with mouth bars that form at the distal delta plain and proximal
delta front (Olariu and Bhattacharya, 2006). Terminal distribu-
tary channels can extend several kilometers offshore, forming
channelized to scoured facies within the delta front (Olariu and
Bhattacharya, 2005).
Distributary-channel bifurcation occurs at a point where the
channel can no longer cut directly through the distributary-
mouth bar, forcing it to split into two smaller channels flanking
the bar crest. Channel-bifurcation frequency and branching pat-
terns are strongly dependent on slope, river discharge, water
depth, and the interaction of the river plume with marine pro-
cesses (Fig. 18). Multiple bifurcations are favored in low-gradi-
ent, high-discharge, river-dominated deltas, where friction is the
dominant process controlling sediment dispersal and deposition
(Welder, 1959; Wright, 1977). Nodal avulsion of trunk streams
and distributary crevassing are common processes in river-domi-
nated deltas because hydraulic gradients decrease as rivers and
distributaries extend their courses. Friction, caused by mouth
bars and plume dispersion, also reduces the discharge.
In wave-modified deltas, much of the sediment delivered to
the shoreline is carried away from the river mouth by longshore
transport (Figs. 6, 18). Thus, relative to river-dominated deltas,
the progradation rate of wave-influenced deltas is slowed. This
allows rivers feeding wave-influenced coasts to maintain a
253
higher slope, which inhibits avulsion. As a consequence, wave-
influenced deltas typically have only a few active distributary
channels (Figs. 18B, C, D) whereas river-dominated deltas can
have tens to hundreds of active terminal distributary channels
(Fig. 18A).
Many tidally influenced deltas show distributary channels
that are stable for hundreds to thousands of years, as in the
Mekong delta (Ta et al., 2002; Ta et al., 2005) and Ganges–
Brahmaputra (Kuehl et al., 2005). This results in the develop-
ment of elongate bars and islands that can be tens of kilometers
in length and a few kilometers wide (Fig. 18E). Increased chan-
nel stability results in far more elongate sand bodies, with
higher length-to-width ratios than are typically found in river-
dominated delta fronts (ratio of 10 versus 2, respectively;
Reynolds, 1999).
In systems with many orders of branching, younger and
shorter-lived distributary channels, lower on the delta plain, tend
to be straighter because of lower slopes and lower discharge,
whereas longer-lived channels on the upper delta plain can show
complex and highly sinuous or braided channel patterns because
of higher slopes. In wave- or tide-dominated deltas, rivers may
retain their trunk character all the way to the shoreline. This is
why the Ganges–Brahmaputra and São Francisco rivers are
braided at the river mouth.
Terminal distributary channels are difficult to recognize in
subsurface because they tend to be shallow. Successive higher-
order distributary channels should become thinner and narrower
downstream, as has been documented in ancient channels within
the Devonian “Catskill” deltaic wedge of the Appalachian basin,
U.S.A. (Bridge, 2000). Thus, one way to determine if an ancient
fluvial system is distributive is to see if the widths and depths of
channels become smaller in more distal reaches of a clastic wedge.
Distributary Channels Versus Incised Valleys, and
Overapplication of the Mississippi Analogue.—
Many ancient examples of so-called river-dominated deltas
exhibit thick channelized deposits overlying marine prodelta
shales and have been interpreted as distributary channels cutting
into their associated delta fronts (Fig. 19; e.g., Busch, 1971, 1974;
Cleaves and Broussard, 1980; Rasmussen et al., 1985) despite the
fact that this is rare in many modern deltas. Some of these sand-
stones are over 30 m thick and cut out delta-front sandstones that
are only 10 m thick. Many of these deeply incised channels are now
recognized as valley fills rather than distributary channels (Willis,
1997; Bowen and Weimer, 2003; Bhattacharya and Tye, 2004).
The earlier interpretations of these features as distributary
channels stemmed largely from comparison with the deep and
stable distributary channels of the modern Mississippi birdfoot
delta. The fact that deep Mississippi distributary channels erode
into underlying prodelta muds has been cited as the main reason
why distributary channels, in general, do not migrate laterally
(Coleman and Prior, 1982). However, the Mississippi is a conti-
nental-scale system, and the modern channel has been kept in
place through the dredging efforts of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. It is an inappropriate analogy with which to interpret
many shallower-water, mid-continent delta systems, such as
developed in the Pennsylvanian and Cretaceous systems of North
America, which drained considerably smaller areas (Bhattacharya
and Tye, 2004).
Regional Controls on Delta Morphology
Many other factors may also influence the delta form, apart
from the nature of the fluvial input and the reworking of the
254 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

BOOCH
DELTA

McAlester Fm.

FIG. 19.—Ancient examples of dendritic “shoestring” sandstones of the Pennsylvanian Booch sandstone (Oklahoma). A) Map view
suggests river-dominated, elongate deltas. This interpretation was heavily biased by modern Mississippi birdfoot delta (after
Busch, 1971). B) Well-log cross section suggests over-thick valleys. Many of these systems should probably be reinterpreted as
incised valleys.

deposits by waves and tides. Coleman and Wright (1975) empha-
size the nature of the receiving basin, the nature of the drainage
basin, the tectonic setting, and climate. In addition, relative sea-
level changes influence the extent of delta growth and destruc-
tion. These factors are not all independent. Sediment type and
rate of supply, for example, are a function of the size, relief,
climate, and underlying geology in the drainage basin. Relief
may be dependent on the tectonics of the drainage basin. Wave or
tide energy may be a function of eustasy, shelf slope, and size and
shape of the receiving basin, and wave energy is also related to
climate (e.g., wind direction and strength).
For example, tidal range is typically enhanced within coastal
embayments. Many of the world’s largest deltas are tide-domi-
nated, because they lie within major straits or continental reen-
trants, such as the tide-influenced Ganges–Brahmaputra delta
(Fig. 18E), which lies at the head of the Bay of Bengal. The tropical
deltas of southeast Asia lie within a part of the world that has very
low wave heights but high tides, which also contributes to the
generally tide-dominated nature of deltas there (Nummedal et al.,
2003). Sediment type and rate of supply were also influenced by the
absence of land plants in pre-Devonian rocks, resulting in higher
sedimentation rates and a greater proportion of fan deltas (Stow,
1986; MacNaughton et al., 1997). Deltas formed against scarps or
faults typically form as fan deltas with little to no delta plain.
The focus of geologists on studying sandstone has resulted in
the erroneous notion that many rivers carry primarily sand. Most
 DELTAS 255

rivers carry between 85% to 95% mud (Schumm, 1972), chiefly in
suspension. Mud-free rivers are rare in nature, and most modern
mud-free rivers owe their lack of suspended material to the fact
that the suspended load is deposited in dams, far upstream of the
river mouth. There are very few studies of Modern systems that
document how mud is partitioned between the delta plain (i.e.,
floodplain) versus the prodelta shelf environment and what are
the key controlling factors on sediment partitioning (e.g.,
Goodbred and Kuehl, 1999). In contrast, sequence stratigraphic
studies of ancient systems have demonstrated that sediment is
partitioned over geological time as a consequence of changes in
accommodation, sediment supply, and sea-level change (e.g.,
Jervey, 1988; Posamentier et al., 1988; Helland-Hansen and
Gjelberg, 1994; Posamentier and Allen, 1999).
CLASSIFICATION OF DELTAS
The commonly used tripartite classification of deltas (Fig. 5;
Galloway, 1975) is based on the idea that the ratio of fluvial,
wave, and tidal processes results in different and identifiable
plan-view morphology of resulting deposits as well as charac-
teristic internal facies successions. Unfortunately, there has
been a natural tendency for workers to force-fit their particular
example into one of the end-member categories (e.g.,
Bhattacharya and Walker, 1992; Dominguez, 1996), despite the
fact that most deltas are likely to be mixed-influence and plot
somewhere within the triangle. Many modern deltas, such as
the Danube, show a mixture of delta types both between and
within discrete lobes (Fig. 9). This can create problems for
interpreters, especially in subsurface studies, where the nature
of a depositional system is typically determined on the basis of
sparse core data, which may not represent the whole system.
Furthermore, the terms “dominated” versus “influenced” have
never been adequately distinguished. These could be quantified
in terms of wave or tide energy expended at the coast versus
sediment discharge or sedimentation rate at the river mouth or
other measurable parameters (e.g., as attempted by Coleman
and Wright, 1975, Hayes, 1979, and Dalrymple, 1992), but these
are virtually impossible to measure or determine in an ancient
system (see, however, Bhattacharya and Tye, 2004). Another
approach would be to measure the physical proportion of facies
that were formed by wave, tide, or fluvial processes. This
approach is more applicable to ancient systems, and it may be
especially applicable to reservoir or aquifer modeling, where
facies architecture may have a first-order control on flow behav-
ior. In a study of the Baram and Trusan deltas of Borneo,
Lambiase et al. (2003) showed that despite a smooth-fronted
external geometry, suggestive of wave domination, the internal
facies show a strong tidal signature. The plan-view shape of the
modern Brazos delta has long been cited as a classic example of
a wave-dominated delta, but recent coring studies show a
dominance of river-flood deposits and have led Rodriguez et al.
(2000) to reclassify the Brazos as a river-flood-dominated, wave-
influenced delta. Similar work on the Burdekin delta in Austra-
lia shows that despite its smooth-fronted external appearance,
which historically led it to be classified as wave-dominated,

FIG. 20.—Tide dominated deltas. A) Tidally reworked mouth bars are highly elongated. Central part of delta is predominantly sandy
bars whereas mud is partitioned along sides of system (from Dalrymple, 1992). B) During transgression of the East China Sea,
mouth bars are reworked into elongate, shore-normal shelf ridges (after Yang and Sun, 1988).
256 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
FIG. 21.—Delta triangle of Galloway (1975) is extended to include sediment caliber as a fundamental control (from Reading and
Collinson, 1996, after Orton and Reading, 1993).
internal facies from cores and outcrops show a predominance of
river-flood deposits (Fielding et al., 2005a, 2005b)
River-dominated deltas display an overall digitate or lobate
morphology (Figs. 4, 5, 8, 11, 17, 18). In contrast, wave-influ-
enced deltas show smooth-fronted lobes with arcuate to cuspate
margins (Figs. 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 17, 18). Tidal processes form sand
bodies oriented parallel to the directions of the tidal currents
(Figs. 4, 5, 17, 18E, 20), typically perpendicular to regional
shorelines (Dalrymple, 1992; Maguregui and Tyler, 1991; Willis
and Gabel, 2001). The area of the marine-influenced lower delta
plain and delta front may be quite extensive where tidal range
is large. In tide-dominated settings, mud is partitioned along
the margins of the system (Fig. 20), in contrast to wave-domi-
nated estuaries, where a wave-formed barrier–beach complex
protects the estuary mouth and mud accumulates in the lagoon
behind the barrier.
Coleman and Wright (1975) recognized that the geometry of
a delta sand body should reflect the relative importance of fluvial
and marine processes. All of their delta geometries (Fig. 4) em-
phasize narrowing and thickening of sands towards a point (i.e.,
fluvial) source, but the seaward margins differ, as explained
above. Orton and Reading (1993) extended the Galloway classi-
fication to include sediment type (Fig. 21). Postma (1990) pre-
sented an independent classification scheme based on the type of
feeder system, water depth, and mouth-bar process (Fig. 22). This
classification scheme does not, however, include waves or tides
as key parameters.
The term “braid delta” or “braidplain delta” has been used to
refer to a sandy or gravelly delta front fed by a braided river and
characterized by a fringe of active mouth bars (e.g., McPherson et
al., 1987). This term must be used with caution. There are many
examples of braided rivers that feed highly wave-influenced
deltas (e.g., the São Francisco and Paraiba do Sul in Brazil) or tide-
influenced deltas (e.g., the Ganges–Brahmaputra) that bear little
resemblance to the so-called “braid deltas” of McPherson et al.
(1987).
Dalrymple et al. (1992) extended the delta triangle of Gallo-
way (1975) into three dimensions to include the sequence strati-
graphic concept that the abundance of different depositional
systems is a function of relative sea-level change (Fig. 23). They
emphasize the relationship between “regressive” delta-type sys-
tems and “transgressive” depositional systems, such as estuaries
and barrier-lagoons. Although this is a valuable extension of
Galloway’s work, missing from this diagram is the fact that many
deltas contain barrier-island–lagoon systems, tidal flats, and
even drowned abandoned distributaries, which may exhibit a
strongly estuarine-type fill (Fig. 9).
Seismic-stratigraphic studies and sequence-stratigraphic stud-
ies of deltas led to a recognition that depositional systems change
their character as a function of their physical and temporal
position. For example, shelf-edge deltas tend to form at sea level
lowstands (Fig. 24; e.g., Edwards, 1981; Posamentier et al., 1992;
Tesson et al., 1993). Deltas deposited at the shelf edge are com-
monly unstable and develop impressive growth faults. Sand
 DELTAS
FIG. 22.—Classification of coarse-grained delta types incorporating type of feeder system, water depth, and type of mouth-bar process
(from Reading and Collinson, 1996; after Postma, 1990).
bodies in these settings are often aligned along strike (Fig. 25), but
this elongation is controlled by subsidence along the growth
faults rather than by wave processes.
VERTICAL FACIES SUCCESSIONS
Coleman and Wright (1975) presented, in addition to sand-
body shapes, a series of composite vertical facies successions
through the prodelta, delta-front, and delta-plain environments
of each of their delta types. These idealized facies successions
represent “norms” and may be very useful points of reference
for outcrop studies where three-dimensional control may be
limited. Although a single vertical profile may not be represen-
tative, especially in deltas that show extreme lateral facies
variability, 1D vertical profiles remain the most common data
type on which any study of depositional systems, be it core, well
log, or outcrop data, is based. Lateral facies relationships, in
contrast, can be interpreted directly from seismic data (e.g.,
papers in Anderson and Fillon, 2004) or in continuous cliff
panoramas (e.g., Willis et al., 1999; Willis and Gabel, 2001; Soria
et al., 2003; Barton, 2004; Garrison and van den Bergh, 2004).
Typical facies successions through the dominantly marine (pro-
delta and delta front) and dominantly nonmarine (delta plain)
parts of deltas, mostly in river- and wave-dominated settings,
are outlined below.
Prodelta and Delta-Front Successions
Progradation of a delta commonly produces a coarsening-
upward facies succession (Fig. 26) showing a transition from
muddier facies of the prodelta into the sandier facies of the delta-
front and mouth-bar environments (Elliott, 1986; Coleman and
257
Wright, 1975). Thick mudstone deposits that do not display a
distinctive upward-coarsening facies succession may occur in
areas away from the river mouth, such as where there is signifi-
cant alongshore diversion of a muddy river plume.
Depending on the shoreline trajectory during progradation,
significant delta-plain facies can accumulate above and behind
the migrating and subsiding delta front (Fig. 27). Thicknesses of
upward-coarsening facies successions may range from a few
meters to a hundred meters, depending on the scale of the delta,
the water depth, the shoreline trajectory, and the subsidence rate.
Delta-front sands may subsequently be partially eroded as the
distributary channel migrates over its own mouth bar (Fig. 26).
Recent studies of deltas that build into very shallow water (e.g.,
Kroonenberg et al., 1997; Overeem et al., 2003; Fielding et al.,
2005a, 2005b) show that upward-coarsening successions are more
difficult to produce, because there is little space to accumulate a
thick underlying prodelta platform over which the delta can
build. Where channel flow depths are on the same scale as water
depth, the channel flows more easily cannibalize underlying
muddy facies and the facies succession is dominated by sharp-
based coarsening-upward mouth bars or fining-upward dis-
tributary-channel fills (e.g., Holbrook, 1996). These sharp-based
mouth bars may produce facies succession that are very similar to
those produced in other low-accommodation settings, such as
during forced regressions (Plint, 1988; Posamentier et al., 1992;
Fielding et al., 2005a, 2005b).
In shelf-edge deltas (Fig. 24), thick upward-coarsening delta-
front successions can be preserved within the hanging wall of
growth faults, although they show increasing dip with depth. In
the shallower landward portions, greater reworking by shallow-
marine processes can result in more complex facies successions
(Winker and Edwards, 1983).
258 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
FIG. 23.—Delta triangle of Galloway (1975) as extended by
Dalrymple et al. (1992) to reflect changes in sediment supply
(from Reading and Collinson, 1996).
The specific nature of the facies and beds in prograding
prodelta and delta-front successions depend on the processes
influencing sediment transport, deposition, and reworking.
Upward-coarsening facies successions can be produced by the
progradation of wave-formed shorefaces. However, unless
there is a significant supply of sediment, which almost invari-
ably must come from rivers, significant progradation does not
occur.
River-Dominated Delta-Front and Prodelta Successions.—
In river-dominated deltas, prodelta sediments are typically
heterolithic laminated to thin-bedded mudstones with or with-
out sandstones (Fig. 14A, B). Siltstones and sandstones are
typically massive to well stratified and may show graded bed-
ding (Fig. 28, river-dominated column). The graded beds may
reflect deposition from hyperpycnal density underflows gener-
ated at the river mouth during high-discharge floods (Wright et
al., 1988; Mulder and Syvitski, 1995). The degree of bioturbation
can be variable, depending on rates of sedimentation and the
grain size of the sediment supplied (MacEachern et al., 2005;
FIG. 24.—Block diagram contrasting lobate shoal-water (or shelf-
phase) deltas and shelf-edge deltas. Note thickening of facies
across growth faults in the shelf-edge delta (From Bhattacharya
and Walker, 1992; after Edwards, 1981).
Neill and Allison, 2005). Wave-formed structures may occur at
the tops of graded sandstone beds, but they are less abundant
than in a more wave-influenced setting. If floods occur during
major coastal storms, sets of highly aggrading wave-rippled
sandstone beds may occur (Fig. 14A) and hummocky cross
stratification may be abundant. Soft-sediment deformation fea-
tures result from high sedimentation rates and are common in
river-dominated deltas (Fig. 29). Deposition of overpressured
prodelta muds may cause remobilization of the overlying delta-
front sand (Figs. 29, 30; Coleman et al., 1983; Bhattacharya and
Davies, 2001; Wignall and Best, 2004). Cores from prodelta and
delta-front deposits of the Mississippi show a complex facies
architecture dominated by upward-coarsening facies succes-
sions (Fig. 31).
Sandy delta-front facies predominantly reflect deposition
from rapidly decelerating unidirectional flows in distributary-
mouth-bar environments. Structures may include unidirectional
current ripples and cross bedding, flat-stratified sandstones, or
massive graded beds (Fig. 14B, C), depending on the impor-
tance of frictional versus inertial processes (Martinsen, 1990).
High rates of deposition result in rapid burial and preservation
of structures formed by unidirectional or oscillatory flows.
Sorting, especially in gravelly systems, may be poor to moder-
ate (Arnott, 1992; Bridge, 2003). Variations in discharge of the
fluvial feeder system may produce an irregular coarsening-
upward succession, with interbedded mudstones throughout
(Figs. 26, 28, 31).
Fresh-water influence may be indicated by an abundance of
syneresis cracks, reflecting flocculation and contraction of clays
as a result of salinity changes (Plummer and Gostin, 1981), and
early diagenetic siderite, which commonly requires fresh-water
influx to reduce sulfate activity (Coleman and Prior, 1982;
Bhattacharya and Walker, 1991b).
Ichnological Effects of Fluvial Processes.—
Periods of low discharge (e.g., hypopycnal) may result in
intense faunal colonization of the substrate alternating with
 DELTAS 259

FIG. 25.—Percent-sandstone and net-sandstone thickness maps of the Eocene Slick Sand (a shelf-edge delta), Texas Gulf Coast,
U.S.A. Percent-sandstone map gives the best indication of the lobate nature of the delta. Growth faults (heavy lines on net-
sandstone-thickness map) have a fundamental control of facies distribution, with thickening on the hanging wall. After Winker
and Edwards (1983).

sparsely burrowed flood deposits, resulting in a highly irregu-
lar, or even cyclic, bioturbation index (MacEachern et al., 2005).
Preserved organic matter is commonly high in river-dominated
delta fronts, reflecting numerous phytodetrital pulses of depo-
sition (MacEachern et al., 2005). Fresh-water or brackish-water
influence may be reflected in the trace faunal assemblages
(Moslow and Pemberton, 1988; Bhattacharya and Walker,
1991b; Gingras et al., 1998; MacEachern et al., 2005). River-
dominated substrates produce the most stressful conditions for
infauna. Salinity stress leads to conditions that can be exploited
only by trophic generalists. Ichnological suites are dominated
by low diversity and locally high abundance of generally dimin-
ished forms. High amounts of suspended sediment inhibit filter
feeders, such as are common in the Skolithos ichnofacies, and
simple deposit feeders are more common. Buoyant plumes of
sediment also create a sunlight stress, further reducing biogenic
reworking.
Wave-Influenced Delta Fronts.—
Wave-influenced deltas commonly consist of a series of pro-
grading beach and shoreface complexes, with sand fed from a
nearby river (e.g., Rhone, Danube, Paraíba do Sul; Figs. 9, 17, 18).
Many wave-influenced deltas show an asymmetry that results
from oblique wave approach, with amalgamated sandy beach-
ridge and shoreface deposits on the updrift side and muddier
260 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 26.—Typical coarsening-upward facies successions formed

as a result of prograding deltaic lobes and mouth bars. Missis-
sippi example shows a composite of a thicker mouth-bar
succession below and the more irregular bay-fill successions
above. (From Bhattacharya and Walker, 1992; after Elliott,
1986, and Coleman and Wright, 1975). Rhone example (left)
shows progradation of a mouth bar forming an asymmetrical
coarsening-upward succession, whereas Rhone example
(right) shows truncation by a distributary channel, and has a
more symmetrical profile. Rhone examples are from
Bhattacharya and Walker (1992); modified by Elliott (1986)
after Oomkens (1970).

facies on the downdrift side (Figs. 6, 9). Updrift areas are usually
characterized by a relatively continuous coarsening-upward fa-
cies succession representing a wave-dominated shoreface (e.g.,
as in Fig. 28, wave-dominated column; Figs. 32, 33). The propor-
tion of wave-produced structures (such as wave ripples and
hummocky cross stratification) are greater updrift, whereas indi-
cators of high sedimentation rates and fresh-water influence (e.g.,
soft-sediment deformation, climbing current ripples, brackish
fauna) are fewer. Sandy sediment may be texturally more mature
and better sorted than on the downdrift side, where fluvial
influence is greater (Dominguez et al., 1987). Prodelta mudstones
may be more bioturbated, thinner, and sandier than in river-
dominated settings (Fig. 14D).
In the geological record, a single vertical facies succession of FIG. 27.—Examples of “forced” and “normal” regression (modi-
this type indicates a prograding wave-dominated shoreface. fied after Helland-Hansen and Gjelberg, 1994). A) Sharp-
Good three-dimensional control may be necessary before such a based shoreline deposits are produced when the trajectory of
shoreface can be positively ascribed to a delta. However, recent a falling shoreline is greater than sea-floor slope. B, C) Grada-
studies of many so-called “classic” shoreface successions are tionally based deposits, are predicted when falling shoreline
showing high ichnological stress in intervening mudstones, which trajectory is equal to or less than sea-floor slope. C)
may be a direct indicator of a brackish, fluvial plume nearby (e.g., Oversteepening can cause sediment gravity flows that are
Hampson and Howell, 2005). deposited on the basin floor. In all cases of forced regression
In asymmetric wave-influenced deltas, the sandy mouth bar (B, C, D) there is no subaerial accommodation and delta topset
may be elongated downdrift to form a barrier island, is seen in the facies are thin to absent. Thin topset facies may easily be
Brazos, Danube, and São Francisco deltas. The barrier may tem- reworked or eroded during subsequent transgression. D)
porarily inhibit delta progradation, because the back-barrier This contrasts with normal regression, where shoreline trajec-
lagoon area acts as an important area for trapping of river- tory is opposite of the basin slope. As a consequence, subaerial
derived sediment. Vertical facies successions may appear more accommodation is positive and significant accumulation of
like the irregular river-dominated examples described above. delta topset facies (i.e., fluvial channels, mudstones) can oc-
River-borne mud is deposited in greater proportions in the cur. Thick paralic and nonmarine facies thus accumulate and
downdrift than in the updrift areas (Fig. 32). are more likely to be preserved.
 DELTAS 261

River Storm-Wave Storm-Wave

Dominated Influenced Dominated

Legend

FIG. 28.—Comparison of delta-front successions in river-domi-

nated, wave-influenced, and wave- dominated deltas in the
Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation, Alberta, Canada.
After Bhattacharya and Walker (1991). The river-dominated
succession is the most irregular. Basal mudstones are in-
creasingly bioturbated with decreasing fluvial influence.

Tide-Influenced Delta Fronts.—

Tidally influenced delta fronts, such as the Fraser in Canada
(Monahan et al., 1997), the Mahakham in Indonesia (Allen et al.,
1979; Roberts and Sydow, 2003), the Niger in Africa (Allen, 1970),
the Fly delta in Papua New Guinea (Baker et al., 1995; Dalrymple
et al., 2003) the Mekong in Vietnam (Ta et al., 2002; 2005), and the
Baram and Trusan deltas in Borneo (Lambiase et al., 2003) also
show an overall coarsening-upward facies succession, but inter-
nally the facies reflect tidal influence. Tidal indicators in delta-
front sands include herringbone cross bedding, tidal bundles,
and reactivation surfaces, although these features are also found
in many nondeltaic tidal settings (Dalrymple, 1992).
Sandstones of the Frewens Allomember of the Frontier For-
mation in Wyoming, U.S.A., provide a recently studied example
of an ancient tide-influenced delta front (Figs. 34, 35; Willis et al.,
1999; Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001). Upward-coarsening facies
successions, 30 m thick, show an extremely low degree of burrow-
ing (Fig. 34) but contain marine dinoflagellates, indicating a
brackish-marine setting. Tidal features abound, including
heterolithic wavy-bedded mudstones and rippled sandstones at
the base, passing into thicker cross-bedded sandstones with
262 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 29.—Deformation structures (load casts) in: A) prodelta mudstones of the Kavik Formation, Prudhoe Bay Field, Alaska, U.S.A.;
B) deformed sandstone bed overlain by parallel-laminated to rippled delta front splays interpreted as distal delta front, sediment-
gravity-flow deposits, Cretaceous Ferron sandstone, Utah, U.S.A.

abundant double mud drapes and reactivation surfaces (Fig. 35).
Mudstones show abundant subaqueous shrinkage cracks, which
may reflect salinity changes. However, these “syneresis” cracks
are also associated with small-scale interstratal deformation,
which may indicate diastasis rather than syneresis (Cowan and
James, 1992).
The upward coarsening and low bioturbation indicate deltaic
progradation, but the tidal features throughout indicate signifi-
cant tidal modulation. The top of the Frewens sandstone is
characterized by meter-thick sets of angle-of-repose cross beds,
commonly floored by mud chips. Vertical cliffs expose seaward-
dipping clinoforms (see Fig. 42) interpreted as seaward-migrat-
ing, tidally influenced mouth bars (Willis et al., 1999). In the case
that only cores were available through this system, these features
would look like erosionally based distributary channels.
Paleocurrents in the Frewens are dominantly unidirectional and
strongly ebb-dominated, also suggesting tidal modulation of
river flows.
Detailed work on the mixed tide- and wave-influenced Creta-
ceous Sego sandstone in the Book Cliffs of Utah, U.S.A., shows
numerous erosional features interpreted to have been produced
by tidal scours (Willis and Gabel, 2001). The tops of tide-influ-
enced deltaic successions are commonly reworked by tidal pro-
cesses, producing deep tidal scours that might be mistaken for
fluvial or distributary-channel erosion surfaces. The Mahakham
delta contains 12 terminal distributary channels but over 20
distinct bars. Bars not fed by active channels are bounded by
landward-narrowing tidal channels that scour up to 30 m deep
(Fig. 17; Allen et al., 1979). Other ancient examples of tide-
influenced deltas have been presented by Mutti et al. (1985),
Maguregui and Tyler (1991); Nummedal and Riley (1999), and
Jennette and Jones (1995).
Delta-Plain Successions
Distributary Channels.—
Distributary channels are erosionally based (Fig. 36). Filling
commonly takes place after channel switching and lobe abandon-
ment. At this time, the distributary channel may develop into an
 DELTAS 263

FIG. 30.—Cross section and interpretation of growth faults formed in prodelta and delta-front strata of the Cretaceous Ferron
Sandstone exposed along Muddy Creek, Utah, U.S.A. A) Detailed photomosaic, B) geological interpretation of structure, C)
detailed measured sections, and D) a reference diagram. The growth interval consists of upstream- and downstream-accreting
cross-bedded sandstones deposited in shallow distributary channels and proximal distributary-mouth bars. Successive sand-
stones in the growth section are labeled SS1 to SS6 (from Bhattacharya and Davies, 2001, 2004).
264 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 31.—Cores and well logs from the modern Mississippi delta show a variety of upward-coarsening facies successions. Sharper-
based, blockier-appearing log patterns (e.g., profiles 5 and 8) lie in the more proximal portions of the delta lobe. Interlobe
succession (profile 1) is irregular. From Coleman and Prior (1982).

FIG. 32.—Block diagram illustrating the hypothesized three-dimensional facies architecture of an asymmetric delta. Significant
prodelta mudstones are associated with downdrift portion of the delta where sandy barrier-bar complexes occur within lagoonal
mudstones and bayhead-delta deposits. The updrift side of the delta comprises a sandy beach-ridge plain (from Bhattacharya and
Giosan, 2003).
 DELTAS 265

FIG. 33.—Facies photos of wave-dominated shoreface of the

Gallup Sandstone, New Mexico, U.S.A. A) Distance shot
of wave-dominated shorefaces shows sand-dominated
cliff section. B) Close-up of basal sandstones showing
pervasive bioturbation. Large mud-rimmed burrow is
Asterosoma. Smaller sand blebs in mud rim are Chondrites.
C) Mud-pellet-lined Ophiomorpha burrows in cross-bed-
ded shoreface sandstones in middle part of cliff. These
suggest a wave-dominated shoreface characterized by the
Skolithos ichnofacies. D) Bidirectional cross bedding in the
upper shoreface.

estuary, and the fill is commonly transgressive with strong tidal
indications. The facies succession tends to fine upward, with
some preserved river-derived facies at the base and a greater
proportion of marine or brackish facies in the upper part of the
channel fill. The extent of brackish to marine facies development
depends on the degree of river dominance and the position of the
channel. Distributary channels within the nonmarine upper delta
plain look entirely fluvial in nature (see Bridge, 2003, and Bridge,
this volume), although they tend to be single-story rather than
multi-story, compared to valley fills.
266 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 34.—Measured vertical facies succession through tide-influenced delta front of the
Cretaceous Frewens Allomember, Wyoming, U.S.A., emphasizes low degree of
burrowing and heterolithic nature of interbedding. Photos of facies in Figure 35.
From Willis et al. (1999).

Although the salt-water wedge migrates no farther landward

than the bay line, tidal effects can be felt farther upstream. As a
consequence, rhythmic alternations of mud and sand may be
seen in wholly freshwater channels that nevertheless indirectly
feel some marine influence (Gastaldo et al., 1995). Examples of
these different types were presented by Bhattacharya (1989) and
Bhattacharya and Walker (1991b) from distributaries in Creta-
ceous deltaic systems of the Dunvegan Formation in Alberta,
Canada (Fig. 36).
The overall proportion of distributary-channel facies is a
function of the type of delta, avulsion frequency, bifurcation
order, and channel migration (e.g., Bristow and Best, 1993; Miall,
1996; Blum and Törnqvist, 2000; Bridge, 2003; Bridge, this vol-
ume; Olariu and Bhattacharya, 2006). Numerical models of allu-
vial versus deltaic stratigraphic systems do not typically allow
multiple active distributaries, but rather model a single channel
 DELTAS 267

FIG. 35.—Tide-dominated delta front of the Cretaceous Frewens sandstone, Wyoming, U.S.A. A) Upward-coarsening facies
succession (see measured section in Figure 34). B) Double mud drapes indicative of tidal modulation. C) Heterolithic, lightly
burrowed subtidal prodelta facies at the base of the succession. Bedding architecture is shown in Figure 42.

that avulses and migrates (e.g., Paola, 2000; Mackey and Bridge,
1995; Overeem and Weltje, 2001; Overeem et al., 2005; Olariu and
Bhattacharya, 2006). Some of the fundamental characteristics of
distributive channel systems, particularly downstream decreases
in discharge, channel width, and channel depth, are thus not
predicted by present numerical models, and the increase in
bedload-related form friction is not generally accounted for
(Giosan and Bhattacharya, 2005; Overeem et al., 2005).
In general, the more wave-dominated the delta, the greater is
the proportion of lobe sediment, with more limited amounts of
interlobe and distributary-channel facies. It is also emphasized
that there is no such thing as “a distributary channel” of a unique
width or depth. Several scales of distributary channel may occur
within any given delta (Fig. 18).
In general, valley fills are much thicker than associated
delta-front successions and consist of multi-story sandstones
(Figs. 19, 37; Reynolds, 1999). Plan-view maps of valleys should
show a tributive rather than a distributive pattern (Fig. 38; e.g.,
Plint and Wadsworth, 2003). While these may be difficult to map
in outcrops or in sparse subsurface data sets using 1D log or 2D
seismic data, horizon mapping through 3D seismic cubes has
revealed complex dendritic drainage patterns within buried
paleovalleys (e.g., Brown, 2005). Also, valley fills do not inter-
finger with adjacent floodplain or delta-plain facies but exhibit
an erosional relationship. This may be more difficult to observe
in well-log data, and large valleys may internally contain flood-
plain or delta-plain facies. Interfluve paleosols may also pro-
vide key evidence of sediment bypass, floodplain starvation,
and avulsion frequency (McCarthy, 1999; Kraus, 2002).
Interdistributary Areas.—
Interdistributary and interlobe areas are less sandy, and com-
monly contain a series of relatively thin, stacked coarsening- and
fining-upward facies successions (Figs. 31, 39). These are usually
less than ten meters thick, and they do not show as thick or as
well-developed coarsening-upwards facies successions as are
found in prograding deltaic lobes (Elliott, 1974; Tye and Coleman,
1989). The proportion of lobe versus interlobe successions de-
pends on the nature and type of delta system, the stability of
distributary channels, and the amount of nonmarine accommoda-
tion. Wave-influenced systems, like the Danube, can contain sig-
nificant lagoonal and bay mudstones in regions downdrift of the
river mouth, and, depending on shoreline trajectory, thick accu-
mulations of mud-prone paralic and nonmarine facies can accu-
mulate behind an aggrading shoreface or delta front (Fig. 27D).
268 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

Interdistributary Areas in River-Dominated Deltas.—

An interdistributary bay is filled by overbank spilling of fine-
grained material from the river during flood stages (Fig. 8). There
is an overall shallowing-upward facies succession, associated
with a trend from more marine to more nonmarine facies, but
commonly without the deposition of thick sands (Fig. 39). This
represents the transition from offshore prodelta mudstones into
delta-top facies without the development of a sandy shoreline
(Walker and Harms, 1971; Bhattacharya and Walker, 1991b). The
muddy nature of interdistributary-bay successions may be punc-
tuated by sandy crevasse-splay or channel deposits that may
produce thin coarsening or fining successions (Coleman and
Prior, 1982; Elliott, 1974). The succession may grade into rooted
coaly mudstones or coals representing a variety of swamp, marsh,
and lacustrine environments. Beach sands, associated with the
development of barrier strandplains, spits, or cheniers, may be
present at the tops of these successions, although they are rela-
tively thin compared to the delta front. Interlobe areas may also
act as the locus for progradation of a subsequent lobe and may be
erosionally truncated by younger distributary channels.

←
FIG. 36.—Comparison of distributary-channel-fill successions in
river- and marine-dominated deltas of the Dunvegan Forma-
tion (Cretaceous, Alberta, Canada). In the marine-dominated
system, the distributary fill reflects transformation of the
distributary into an estuary. After Bhattacharya and Walker
(1991b). Legend in Figure 28.

C
C
B
B
A A

FIG. 37.—Facies architecture of an interpreted valley fill in the Cretaceous Ferron Sandstone member of the Mancos Shale, Utah,
U.S.A. Base of valley erodes into several upward-coarsening parasequences A, B, C) Valley depth (Hv) is about 21 meters. In
contrast, associated channel depths (Hc) are only about 6 m. Valley is filled with 5 channel stories (1–5). Lowest channel-belt
deposit (1) is largely eroded by migration of younger channels. Predominance of laterally accreting bars defines the internal
facies architecture of each channel-belt deposit. The bedding geometry shows that the rivers were single-thread, meandering
streams that gradually filled the larger valley. Calculation of water depth from dune-scale cross strata within the bar deposits
suggest maximum bankfull depth of about 9 m. From Bhattacharya and Tye (2004), modified after Barton et al. (2004).
 DELTAS 269

A
N
200 km

Perm

Moscow

Tributive
TributiveSystem
System
(Volga
(Volga
V Drainage
DrainageBasin,
3Basin,
2
Area
Area1,614.4 x 103 km
1,614.4x10 km2))

Area dominated by
erosion processes
"Trunk" Channel (Volga River),
might be extremely short for some systems
Area with erosion Volgograd
or deposition
Apex
Distributive System
(Volga Delta,
Area dominated by 2
Astrakhan Subaerial area 27,224 km )
deposition processes

Basin
(Caspian Sea)

gan Delta)
ed

FIG. 38.—A) Example of a tributive–distributive system, Volga basin. The tributive pattern is an order of magnitude larger (tens to
hundreds of times) than the distributive pattern, and the main “trunk” valley connects the two patterns. Modified after Payne
et al. (1975). B) Tributive-trunk system in Dunvegan lacks details of distributive pattern because distributary channels are too
small to image. (From Plint and Wadsworth, 2003).
270 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
FIG. 39.—Interdistributary-bay fill in a river-dominated delta lobe
in the Dunvegan Formation (Cretaceous, Alberta, Canada),
showing thin irregular cycles and overall increase in propor-
tion of nonmarine facies upwards. Compare with profile 1 in
Figure 31. Legend in Fig. 28. After Bhattacharya and Walker
(1991).
Interdistributary Areas in Wave-Influenced Deltas.—
Interdistributary bays may often be closed off by barrier–
beach complexes in wave-dominated deltas resulting in exten-
sive back-barrier lagoons — e.g., the Nile (Fig. 1), the São Fran-
cisco, the Danube (Fig. 9), the Brazos, and the Po. These may be
filled from the landward side by progradation of bayhead deltas
or from the barrier side by storm washovers (Bhattacharya and
Giosan, 2003) and have been regarded as local estuaries within a
larger delta system. Deposits are commonly organic-rich, with
marsh vegetation or mangroves. These areas are typically more
pronounced on the downdrift sides of highly asymmetric deltas
(Bhattacharya and Giosan, 2003). However, identification of es-
tuarine-type facies does not necessarily mean deposition within
a valley (e.g., MacEachern et al., 1998).
Interdistributary Areas in Tide-Influenced Deltas.—
Tidal processes may be important in interdistributary bays
(even in river-dominated deltas), resulting in tidally influenced
facies such as tidal flats or tidal channels (Allen et al., 1979; Ramos
and Galloway, 1990). These are especially common in modern
tidally influenced deltas such as the Niger, Fraser, Mahakham,
Fly, Mekong, Ganges–Brahmaputra, Ayerarwady, and Orinoco
deltas. Ancient examples of tidally influenced facies in delta-
plain settings include those published by Ramos and Galloway
(1990), Eriksson (1979), and Rahmani (1988). Ebb versus flood
tidal currents may move down different pathways, such that
current directions are unidirectional at any one place but differ
between ebb-dominated versus flood-dominated channels (Har-
ris, 1988; Dalrymple et al., 2003). In tide-dominated deltas, mud is
partitioned along the sides of the system as well as in the prodelta
area (Fig. 20; Dalrymple, 1992; Willis et al., 1999; Willis, 2005).
FACIES ARCHITECTURE OF DELTAS
Bedding geometry and lateral facies variability can be ad-
dressed by the use of seismic data (e.g., Hart and Long, 1996;
Anderson, J.B. et al., 2004), ground-penetrating radar (Jol and
Smith, 1991, 1992; Smith et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2005), continuous
outcrop data (e.g., Willis et al., 1999; Soria et al., 2003; Gani and
Bhattacharya, 2005; numerous papers in Chidsey et al., 2004),
and interpolation of well data (e.g., Bhattacharya, 1991, 1993,
1994; Ainsworth et al., 1999; Tye et al., 1999; Plint, 2000;
Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001). Facies architectural studies of
deltas lag significantly behind those of fluvial, deep-water, and
eolian systems, but more recent studies of deltaic systems are
becoming available (Willis et al., 1999; Knox and Barton, 1999;
Willis and Gabel, 2001; Olariu et al., 2005).
Although it may be premature to fully characterize the archi-
tectural elements that make up deltaic depositional systems,
some generalizations can be made. Sandy architectural elements
in the delta plain include channels at various scales, which may
migrate or stack to form channel bodies or channel belts. Inter-
nally channel bodies consist of bars (macroforms) and smaller-
scale bedforms, analogous to the architectural elements described
in the fluvial literature (Miall, 1995, 1997; Bridge, 2003; Bridge,
this volume). The number of different scales of channels relates to
the bifurcation order, which can be high in river-dominated
deltas and low in wave-dominated settings. Unfortunately, bifur-
cation order is very difficult to determine in outcrop or subsur-
face examples, although this may be possible in selected settings
or particularly good outcrop exposures (e.g., Bhattacharya and
Tye, 2004). Areas away from distributary channels may include
crevasse splays and levee deposits. The delta plain also consists
of numerous mud-prone wetland environments, although there
have been few studies that compile the typical dimensions of the
associated muddy facies elements.
The distal delta plain and proximal delta front consist of
mouth-bar elements, which in turn build bar assemblages and
form depositional lobes. There may be several scales of bar
assemblage and lobe clustering, especially in continental-scale
river-dominated delta systems like the Mississippi. Mouth bars
are in turn intimately associated with terminal distributary chan-
nels. A variety of sandy bedforms may be associated with the
upstream sides of these bars. In river-dominated, shallow-water,
friction-dominated deltas, these channels are typically only a few
meters in depth and a few tens to a few hundred meters wide. The
distal margins of bars are commonly formed by frontal splay
elements or subaqueous channels and chutes. Channels typically
scour only a few meters and may be intimately associated with
 DELTAS 271

frontal splays. Dimensions of splays are largely unknown, al-
though individual beds should scale to the generative flow. These
frontal splays may coalesce to form a fringe of distal delta-front
sand, which scales to the size of the depositional lobe.
Wave-formed architectural elements include barrier-island
sand bodies and shorefaces. Width of barrier islands typically
scales to the width of the initial mouth bar, although they may
extend for several kilometers downdrift. Shorefaces can reach
several to tens of kilometers in width and several tens of kilome-
ters in length. In many wave-dominated coastlines, the area
occupied by shoreface “wings” can greatly exceed the area occu-
pied by the river-dominated mouth bar (e.g., Paraíba do Sul, Fig.
18B). This has led many to question the value of calling river-fed
shorefaces, deltas at all (Dominguez, 1996). Recent studies of the
shoreface successions in the Book Cliffs, Utah, U.S.A., suggests
that rivers were widely spaced, up to 50 kilometers apart, along
strike (Hampson and Howell, 2005). The shorefaces are charac-
terized by river-plume deposits that effectively “puncture” the
otherwise rather uniform shoreface sand body. These studies
predict that shoreface sandstones typically extend several tens of
kilometers along strike before they are punctured. This invites the
question: are there any shorefaces that truly extend, unbroken,
for hundreds of kilometers along depositional strike? The posi-
tion of river plumes in these outcrops is indicated by the appear-
ance of steep clinoform strata, a marked decrease in diversity and
abundance of ichnofauna in underlying mudstones, and the
appearance of laminated to graded prodelta facies (Hampson
and Howell, 2005).
Tidal reworking may produce a bewildering variety of tidal
bedforms and bars (see Dalrymple, 1992; Boyd et al., this vol-
ume; Willis, 2005). Tidal processes also result in greater win-
nowing of distributary channels, which may be stable for con-
siderably longer periods than terminal distributary channels in
river-dominated environments. This can result in significantly
more elongate bars and bar assemblages than in nontidal set-
tings.
Muddy elements associated with the subaqueous realm in-
clude prodelta muds, bay muds, and bar drapes. Prodelta muds
may cover vast areas of the shelf and may migrate for thousands
of kilometers along strike. Although muddy wave-formed clastic
coastlines are common in the modern, there is a paucity of well
documented ancient examples such as cheniers. Tidal flats are
significantly better recognized but are largely discussed in the
context of tidal depositional systems.

FIG. 40.—Inclined bedding (clinoforms) and facies in a river-dominated delta front of the Cretaceous Ferron sandstone member, Utah,
U.S.A. A) Photomosaic of a cliff face. B) Bedding and facies geometry of the same cliff face (along depositional dip), Ivie Creek
amphitheater, Emery County, Utah. The diagram shows prominent seaward-dipping clinoforms. From Gani and Bhattacharya
(2005), modified after Anderson, P.B. et al. (2004) and Mattson (1997).
272 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
A comprehensive compilation of the sizes and dimensions of
these various architectural elements is simply beyond the scope
of this review, and in this regard architectural-element analysis of
deltaic systems remains significantly behind the deep-water,
fluvial, and eolian systems described in other chapters in this
volume. Many of the elements described in these other systems
are also found in deltas (e.g., channels, bars, shorefaces, barriers,
tidal bars, cheniers), but clearly a great deal of compilation is
required to determine whether the dimensions of these elements
is fundamentally different if they are associated with a delta
system. Tye (2004) compiled data on the dimensions of mouth-
bar sandstones in several arctic deltas, as well as the Atchafalaya
delta in the Gulf of Mexico, and Reynolds (1999) compiled data on
dimensions of a variety of paralic sandstone bodies, including
mouth bars and distributary channels.
Dip Variability
In cross-sectional dip view, deltas can be divided into three
distinct regions: topset, foreset, and bottomset (Figs. 2, 3, 40).
Foresets are typically associated with the distal delta front and
show dips that can range from a few degrees up to the angle of
repose in Gilbert-type deltas (Fig. 41). Bottomsets dip less steeply
than foresets, typically << 1°, and are usually associated with
prodelta sediments. Topset facies are typically flat to undulating
and are built out of the proximal delta-front and delta-plain
facies. Subaqueous topset facies (i.e., proximal delta front) can
show extreme variability, depending on whether they are con-
structed from mouth bars, tidal bars, or shoreface deposits.
Shoreface elements produce the simplest bedding geometries
(e.g., Hampson, 2000) and essentially consist of seaward-dipping
beds, with dip angles typically less than 1°. Mouth bars and tidal
bars produce far more complex deposits (Fig. 42). The seaward
migration of these elements builds the vertical facies successions
detailed above Fig. 34).
FIG. 41.—Details of facies interfingering at the base of a small-scale outcrop example of a gravelly, Pennsylvanian “Gilbert” delta, Taos
Trough, New Mexico, U.S.A. A) Outcrop photomosaic. B) Line drawings of beddings with facies interpretation. Note that
clinoforms are steeply dipping (average 13°). C) Lithologic column of this coarse-grained delta (position of the measured section
is shown in Part B). From Gani and Bhattacharya (2005).
Deltaic deposits are characterized by a prograding clinoform
geometry (Figs. 40–46; (Gilbert, 1885; Barrell, 1912; Rich, 1951;
Scruton, 1960; Berg, 1982). This geometry can be seen in downdip
seismic profiles of modern and ancient deltas (see Figures 43 and
44). Many superb examples are given in a recent volume on
Quaternary deltas of the Gulf of Mexico (Anderson and Fillon,
2004), as well as numerous examples from Southeast Asian deltas
presented in Sidi et al. (2003). This clinoform geometry can also be
reconstructed in core and well-log cross sections (Figs. 45, 46;
Bhattacharya, 1991; Ainsworth et al., 1999; Plint, 2000). It can also
be seen in some outcrops (Figs. 40–42; Chidsey et al. (2004); Gani
and Bhattacharya, 2005). Berg (1982) discussed typical seismic
facies in deltaic depositional systems and suggested that sandy
wave-dominated systems are characterized by a shingled pat-
tern, whereas muddier deltas show an oblique-sigmoidal pat-
tern. Sigmoid-shaped portions are characteristic of the mud-
dominated prodelta facies (Kuehl et al., 1997; Liu et al., 2002;
Roberts and Sydow, 2003; Hiscott, 2003; Anderson, J.B. et al.,
2004; Roberts et al., 2004; Neill and Allison, 2005; Kuehl et al.,
2005), whereas the more flat-lying or oblique reflectors represent
the sandier delta-front and delta-plain facies. Frazier (1974)
showed a similar clinoform geometry on the basis of geological
studies of the Mississippi delta plain.
Offlapping clinoformal geometries have also been recognized
in Late Quaternary deltas around the world (Brown and Fisher,
1977; Suter and Berryhill, 1985; Tesson et al., 1993; Sydow and
Roberts, 1994; Hart and Long, 1996; Hiscott, 2003; Roberts and
Sydow, 2003; Roberts et al., 2004; Bart and Anderson, 2004; and
others in Anderson and Fillon, 2004). In shelf-edge systems,
clinoforms commonly steepen towards the shelf edge. The steep-
ening reflects the progradation into progressively deeper water.
At the shelf edge, the delta front can no longer build seaward, so
it steepens and then fails (e.g., Fig. 24).
Clinoform gradients have a wide range of values in different
settings. Clinoform gradients of shelf-edge deltas in the Gulf of
 DELTAS 273

FIG. 42.—Outcrop example of complex internal architecture in the Cenomanian (Upper Cretaceous) tide-influenced river delta of the
Frewens Allomember, Frontier Formation, central Wyoming, U.S.A. Dip view (AB) of the prograding delta shows the seaward-
dipping clinoforms, whereas in strike view (BC) these clinoforms show bidirectional downlap, forming a classical lens-shaped
geometry. In both cases, muddy bottomset facies interfinger with the sandy foreset facies, forming a shazam-type facies
boundary. Note that clinoform dip varies from 5° to 15°. Detailed facies shots and measured sections are shown in Figures 34 and
35 (modified from Willis et al., 1999).
274 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
FIG. 43.—A) Dip-oriented and B) strike-oriented views showing bedding geometry of a top-truncated lowstand delta, based on
shallow seismic profiles off the Natashquan River, Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada (after Hart and Long, 1996). Note reworked
sediments on top of deltas.
Mexico average between 4° and 8° (Suter and Berryhill, 1985).
Gradients of the Rhone shelf-edge deltas average about 1°. The
high slopes in the Gulf Coast and Rhone shelves result in signifi-
cant instability of the shelf-edge sediments, where large-scale
synsedimentary deformation features are common. Slopes are
typically much lower in ramp-type depositional margins, and
soft-sediment deformation features in the Alberta examples are
mostly limited to loading rather than large-scale slumps, slides,
or growth faults. Foreset dips of subaqueous prodelta clinoforms
are typically less than 0.1° (e.g., Liu et al., 2002; Neill and Allison,
2005) as opposed to sandy foresets, which are usually an order of
magnitude higher (i.e., > 1°).
Strike Variability
Along strike, facies relationships may be less predictable and
depositional surfaces may dip in different directions (Figs. 42,
43B, 44B, 47). This is particularly so in more river-dominated
deltas, where along-strike reworking is not significant and abrupt
facies transitions may occur between distributaries and
interdistributary areas (Bhattacharya, 1991). Overlapping delta
lobes result in lens-shaped stratigraphic units that exhibit a
mounded appearance on seismic lines (Figs. 43B, 44B). Regional
mapping of delta lobes in the Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation,
Alberta, Canada (Bhattacharya, 1991; Plint, 2000), the Frontier
Formation in Wyoming, U.S.A. (Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001),
and Pennsylvanian deltas in Kentucky (Horne et al., 1978) shows
similar lateral overlap of lens-shaped delta lobes (e.g., Fig. 47).
Although the older seismic and sequence stratigraphic litera-
ture is rife with dip-oriented cross-sectional depictions of shelf
depositional systems, newer studies emphasize strike-oriented
variability (e.g., Anderson, J.B. et al., 2004). Strike variability (i.e.,
the timing and spacing of overlapping lenses or lobes) is depen-
dent on the number, spacing, and avulsion frequency of distribu-
tary channels. It also depends on the shape of the sea floor,
especially if there is differential subsidence or uplift related to
tectonics, because deltas commonly fill low areas on the sea floor
(Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001; Martinsen, 2003). Tectonics can be
related to salt or shale mobility, or it can be related to larger-scale
lithospheric deformation (e.g., plate tectonic).
Sequence Stratigraphy of Deltas
Delta systems have been an important focus of research in the
development of new allostratigraphic and sequence stratigraphic
concepts (e.g., Boyd et al., 1989; Van Wagoner et al., 1990;
Posamentier et al., 1992; Bhattacharya, 1993; Miall, 1997;
Posamentier and Allen, 1999; Anderson, J.B. et al., 2004). Se-
quence stratigraphy provides a very different view of both the
large-scale and small-scale architecture of sedimentary systems
(e.g., Van Wagoner et al., 1990; Bhattacharya and Posamentier,
1994; Miall, 1997).
Allostratigraphy and sequence stratigraphy involve the corre-
lation of bounding discontinuities through potentially varying
lithologies that yields a fundamentally different picture of genetic
stratal relationships than older lithostratigraphic techniques, and
allows far more accurate paleogeographic maps to be constructed
(Fig. 48). This is best illustrated by example. Historically the term
delta has been generally applied to many clastic wedges, such as
the Devonian–Carboniferous Catskill delta wedge in the north-
eastern U.S.A. (Woodrow and Sevon, 1985) and the Cretaceous
Dunvegan, Ferron, and Frontier formations in Western North
America. Previous lithostratigraphic maps of these undifferenti-
ated wedges show broadly lobate geometries, especially at the
distal margins of the wedges, but it was practically impossible to
determine which lobe belongs to which channel without more
detailed sequence stratigraphic correlations (Fig. 49).
The Dunvegan Delta
The Dunvegan Formation of Alberta, Canada, represents a
heterolithic wedge of mudstones and sandstones, up to 300 m
 DELTAS 275

FIG. 44.—Seismic geometry of the Lagniappe delta, Gulf of Mexico. A) Dip line showing clinoforms; B) strike line showing lens-shaped
cross sections; C) base map showing outline of lobe; D) detailed seismic facies mapping shows sub-lobes and distributary
channels. Core MP303 c1 shows a predominantly upward-coarsening facies succession. After Roberts et al. (2004).
276 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 45.—A) Dip-oriented well-log and core cross sections within Allomember E of the Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation,
Alberta, Canada, showing offlapping clinoforms. Paleogeographic maps of the various offlapping shingled units are shown in
Figure 51. Modified after Bhattacharya (1991).

FIG. 46.—Subsurface model of well-log correlation in a lacustrine deltaic environment along depositional dip. Lithostratigraphic
correlation (upper diagram) assumes no dip in sand bodies towards basin, whereas chronostratigraphic correlation (lower
diagram) assumes basinward-dipping clinoforms. Chronostratigraphic model better predicts reservoir behavior. Note that
correlation lengths of many beds are below the well spacing (from Gani and Bhattacharya, 2005, modified after Ainsworth et
al., 1999).
 DELTAS 277

FIG. 47.—A) Maps and B) cross section of delta lobes and fingers in the Cretaceous Lower Belle Fourche Member, Frontier
Formation, Wyoming, U.S.A. Strike section (b) shows overlapping lens-shaped delta bodies. Facies details of the Frewens tide-
dominated delta sandstone are shown in Figures 34, 35, and 42. (After Willis et al., 1999, and Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001.)

thick, deposited from the actively rising Western Cordillera into
the adjacent Cretaceous Interior Seaway. The term “Dunvegan
Delta” has been applied to this entire undifferentiated sedimen-
tary package (Figs. 48, 49).
In a study area of about 30,000 km2 in the subsurface of
Alberta, Bhattacharya and Walker (1991) recognized seven
throughgoing transgressive surfaces (Fig. 48B). These were used
to subdivide the Dunvegan wedge into seven allomembers (Fig.
48B). Each of the allomembers could be further subdivided into
several shingled offlapping units separated by less extensive
surfaces of transgression and regression (Figs. 45, 48). The discon-
tinuity-bounded shingles and allomembers provided the strati-
graphic basis for more detailed facies mapping and paleogeo-
graphic reconstruction than had ever before been possible (Figs.
50–52 ). Continued work in a more landward direction by Plint
(2002) has demonstrated older shingles and allomembers (Fig.
53) below those mapped by Bhattacharya and Walker (1991a).
Sandbody geometries within individual shingles (Figs. 50, 51)
revealed a wide range of deltaic to shoreline-related depositional
systems, including some superb examples of ancient river-domi-
nated deltas (Bhattacharya, 1991). The abundance of core data
allowed reconstruction of the lateral facies relationships both
down dip (Fig. 45) and along depositional strike. The cores also
facilitated the development of summary vertical facies succes-
sions for the various components in the different deltaic systems
(Figs. 28, 36, 39).
Individual delta lobes could not be mapped without the
detailed correlation of the offlapping, shingled units (Figs. 45, 50,
51). If sandstones within each allomember are mapped together,
the isolith patterns do not show narrowing and thickening towards
a point fluvial source in a landward position (Fig. 49). Only the
seaward deltaic promontories can be seen (e.g., Fig. 49). Also, the
highstand and lowstand deltas within each allomember could not
be mapped without the detailed correlation of the shingle bound-
aries. This is an especially acute problem in high-accommodation
settings, where lowstands tend to be attached to the highstand
clastic wedge, versus low-accommodation settings, where low-
stands are highly detached (Ainsworth and Pattison, 1994).
278 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

A Lithostratigraphy
Kaskapau Formation

Dunvegan
Formation La Biche

Shaftesbury Formation

Fish Scales Marker bed

B Allostratigraphy
Kaskapau Formation
Dunvegan Fm.

Shingle
Shaftesbury

50m
50 m

SANDSTONE 20km
20 km

FIG. 48.—Regional cross section across the Alberta Foreland Basin, Canada, illustrating the difference between a lithostratigraphic
and an allostratigraphic interpretation of the Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation (from Bhattacharya, 1993). A) The
lithostratigraphic interpretation depicts a homogeneous, wedge-shaped sandstone body that tapers to the right. Some
interfingering of the distal end of the Dunvegan Formation into the La Biche Formation shales is shown. B) The allostratigraphic
interpretation shows that the Dunvegan comprises several stacked allomembers (A to G). Each allomember consists of several
smaller-scale, offlapping, shingled units that map as delta lobes (e.g., Figs. 50 and 51). Each allomember is bounded by a
regional transgressive flooding surface. These regional flooding surfaces and smaller-scale “shingle” boundaries show that the
Dunvegan consists of numerous sandy compartments, bounded by mudstones. Oil and gas reservoirs occur within these
smaller-scale shingled units.

More recent work (Plint and Wadsworth, 2003) in the land-
ward realm has allowed mapping of the nonmarine facies within
the Dunvegan, including superb examples of tributive valley
systems (Fig. 38B).
Ferron Example
A recent correlation of the Ferron sandstone member, in
central Utah, U.S.A., based on nearly continuous outcrop expo-
sures, shows a complicated series of seaward-stepping,
offlapping, to aggrading and finally backstepping shorelines
(Fig. 54; Gardner, 1995; Gardner et al., 2004; Barton et al, 2004;
Garrison and van den Bergh, 2004). The correlation is based on
tracing various bounding discontinuities, including flooding
surfaces, erosional surfaces, coal beds, bentonites, and ammo-
nite horizons across the outcrop belt. The Ferron has been
subdivided into seven major transgressive–regressive “strati-
graphic cycles”, each of which is bounded by a regionally
traceable flooding surface and associated coal (Ryer, 1984;
Gardner, 1995). The lower two stratigraphic cycles consist of
strongly seaward-stepping shoreline and delta deposits. The
middle three cycles aggrade, and the last two cycles backstep.
Regionally, the Ferron delta prograded to the northeast, but
locally, individual delta lobes prograded at high angles to this
general northeast direction.
Internally, the stratigraphic cycles consist of a series of lens-
shaped to lobate offlapping, shingled delta-front and shoreface
sandstone bodies that show upward-coarsening facies succes-
 DELTAS 279

of the fault zones shows that deformation was largely by soft-

sediment mechanisms, such as grain rolling and by lubrication of
liquefied muds, causing shale smears. Mechanical attenuation of
thin beds occurs by displacement across multiple closely spaced
small throw faults. Analogous river-dominated deltaic subsur-
face reservoirs may be compartmentalized by growth faults, even
in shallow-water, intracratonic, or shelf-perched highstand del-
tas. Reservoir compartmentalization would occur where thicker
homogeneous-growth sandstones are placed against the muddy
pre-growth strata and where faults are shale-smeared, and thus
potentially sealing.
Although the Dunvegan and Ferron were deposited into a
very similar tectonic and paleogeographic setting, the Ferron
shows considerably more complexity in cross section (compare
Figures 53 and 54) . This likely reflects the fact that the Ferron is
nearly continuously exposed in outcrop, allowing greater reso-
lution of individual delta lobes than is possible with the largely
well-log-based cross section of the Dunvegan. Outcrop ex-
amples, like the Ferron, indicate the fundamentally complex
nature of reservoir compartmentalization within fluviodeltaic
reservoirs.

Top-Truncated Deltas and the Shelf Sand Problem

FIG. 49.—Sandstone isolith mapping of undifferentiated Dunvegan One of the central debates in facies sedimentology in the past
wedge (after Burk, 1963). few decades has been the interpretation of seemingly isolated
basin-distal, “shelf” sandstones (cf. Snedden and Bergman,
1999). These deposits comprise meters-thick to tens-of-meters-
sions. Wave-influenced and river-dominated successions can be thick, upward-coarsening facies successions that are surrounded
recognized. The shingled units are locally bounded by less exten- by “shelf” mudstone. Coevel paralic facies, such as typify the
sive flooding surfaces, and they thus resemble “parasequences” high-accommodation and unequivocally deltaic Dunvegan and
(e.g., Van Wagoner et al., 1990). The “stratigraphic cycles” effec- Ferrron sandstones described above, are commonly found tens
tively are “parasequence sets”. The shoreline-type sandstone to hundreds of kilometers away. In the 1970s and 1980s these
bodies correlate landward into a thick delta-plain succession, basinally isolated sandstones were widely interpreted as off-
consisting of single-story distributary channels and multi-story shore shelf bars, molded by shelf processes unrelated to the
valley fills (Fig. 37; Garrison and van den Bergh, 2004; Barton, shoreline, or deposited as turbidites, implying deeper-water
2004). Highly asymmetric subsidence, characteristic of the fore- depositional systems (see summary in Bhattacharya and Willis,
land-basin setting, results in high accommodation, high sedi- 2001).
ment supply, a broadly positive shoreline trajectory, and conse- In the late 1980s and the 1990s, sequence stratigraphic con-
quently accumulation and preservation of thick paralic, delta- cepts forced a reconsideration of these units, and it was recog-
plain topset facies (compare Fig. 54 and Fig. 27). nized that the sandstones, in many cases, were underlain by
The integration of detailed facies analysis within a well devel- erosional surfaces, implying no genetic link between the under-
oped stratigraphic framework allows specific statements to be lying shelf mudstones and the newly interpreted overlying
made about how depositional systems evolve as a function of shoreface deposits, interpreted to be deposited by the process of
position within the wedge. The seaward-stepping deltaic para- “forced regression” during major drops of sea level (Plint, 1988;
sequences in the lowest stratigraphic cycle show greater river Posamentier et al. 1992).
influence than the more wave- and tide-influenced parasequen- The next level of debate then centered on the magnitude of
ces in the upper cycles, although there is considerable facies sea-level drops and the origin of the erosional surfaces. Several
variability at all scales. studies went the ultimate step and interpreted the erosion sur-
The lower parasequences in the Ferron contain normal growth faces to be fluvially eroded, incised-valley fills (e.g., Jennette and
faults well exposed along the highly accessible walls of Muddy Jones, 1995). Thus, sediment bodies once interpreted as deeper-
Creek Canyon in Central Utah (Fig. 30; Bhattacharya and Davies, water “shelf” turbidites became fluvially incised valley fills.
2001, 2004). Distinctive pre-growth, growth, and post-growth An unwillingness to interpret these systems as strictly deltaic
strata indicate a highly river-dominated crevasse delta that pro- can be traced directly to the application of Barrell’s 1912 criterion,
graded northwest into a large embayment of the Ferron shore- namely that subaerial facies are required to define a delta. Strict
line. The growth section comprises medium- to large-scale cross- adherence to this rule does not consider the fact that during
stratified sandstones deposited as upstream- and downstream- forced regression, shoreline trajectory is negative, and accommo-
accreting mouth bars in the proximal delta front. Deposition of dation for delta-plain facies is extremely limited (Fig. 27). Also,
mouth-bar sands initiates faults. Because depositional loci shift ravinement is a very efficient process that truncates the tops of
rapidly, there is no systematic landward or seaward migration of these systems.
fault patterns. During later evolution of the delta, foundering of The Cretaceous Frontier Formation, in the Powder River
fault blocks creates an uneven sea-floor topography that is Basin of Wyoming, U.S.A., is a recently described example that
smoothed over by the last stage of deltaic progradation. Faults are contains numerous basin-distal sandstones separated by mud-
inferred to occur within less than 10 m water depths in soft, wet stones (Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001). Previous interpretations
sediment (Bhattacharya and Davies, 2004). Detailed examination of these sandstones, based on only limited data, ranged from
280 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 50.—Paleogeographic maps of successive offlapping shingles within Allomember E of the Dunvegan Formation (see also Figures
45 and 48). Note numerous small deltas associated with the highstand shingles E4 to E3. The youngest shingle, E1, is accompanied
by fluvial entrenchment, incision of an incised valley, and development of a single, massive delta lobe. E1 is thus interpreted as
a lowstand delta. From Bhattacharya (1991).

prodelta shelf plumes (Winn, 1991), to tidally modified shelf
ridges (Tillman and Merewether, 1998), to incised estuarine
valley fills (Tillman and Merewether, 1998). A detailed
allostratigraphic study of the lower portion of the Frontier incor-
porated lithofacies, ichnofacies, palynofacies, paleocurrent data,
bedding relationships, and isolith maps from nearly 100 mea-
sured outcrop sections and about 550 subsurface well logs. Four
allomembers, interpreted as major delta lobes, were identified
and mapped (Fig. 47). Each allomember has a lobate to elongate
geometry, basinward-dipping internal clinoform bedding (Fig.
42), radiating paleocurrents, and low to moderate degree of
shallow marine burrowing. Facies successions show variable
wave- and tide-influenced lithofacies. Delta-plain, paralic, and
nonmarine facies have been eroded from the top of every deltaic
succession, at least in the Powder River Basin. Erosion surfaces
capping progradational deltaic successions are the only stratal
discontinuities that can be mapped regionally (Fig. 55) and were
used to define the four allomembers within the Formation. The
bounding discontinuities record transgressive ravinement that
was enhanced over areas of structural uplift, rather than low-
stand surfaces of erosion recording the bypass of sediments
basinward (Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001; Martinsen, 2003). Chert
pebble and cobble lags associated with these surfaces are the
primary evidence that coarser-grained rivers fed these shorelines
(Fig. 55). The fluvial deposits have been completely reworked
into a transgressive lag.
The low-accommodation setting left little room for sand-
stones to stack vertically, and successive episodes of delta
progradation were offset along strike (Fig. 47). More tide-influ-
enced delta deposits of the Frewens Allomember (Willis et al.,
1999) formed within shoreline embayments defined by the
topography of older wave-influenced delta lobes and subtle
syndepositional deformation of the basin floor (Bhattacharya
and Willis, 2001).
San Miguel Formation
In a final example, Weise (1980) used somewhat more tradi-
tional lithostratigraphic and facies techniques to correlate and
map sandstones within the Cretaceous San Miguel Formation in
 DELTAS
FIG. 51.—Spectrum of sandbody geometries shown by sandstone
isolith maps of shingles within various allomembers in the
Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation (Alberta, Canada).
From Bhattacharya and Walker (1992), based on data pre-
sented by Bhattacharya and Walker (1991b). Mapping of
isoliths within entire allomember does not reveal deltaic
shape as clearly.
east Texas, U.S.A., (Fig. 56). Cores showed highly bioturbated
shelf and shoreface type, upward-coarsening facies successions,
with abundant hummocky cross stratification and a typical wave-
dominated Cruziana ichnofacies grading into an Ohiomorpha-
dominated Skolithos ichnofacies. No fluvial or paralic facies were
noted in the subsurface. Her maps (Fig. 56) showed classic deltaic
morphologies, similar to the models of Coleman and Wright
(1975). The sand-body geometries were readily interpreted to be
wave-influenced deltas, and the paper has become a classic.
281
FIG. 52.—Block diagram showing paleogeography of delta lobe of
shingle E1, Dunvegan Formation. Allostratigraphic correla-
tions allow channels and associated delta lobes to be sepa-
rated and linked. Compare with Figure 48 and Figure 49
(From Bhattacharya, 1991).
Although the paper was published before the sequence strati-
graphic revolution, Weise suggests that the lack of delta-plain
facies resulted from transgressive reworking and removal of
topsets.
The San Miguel is one of the earliest well-documented ex-
amples of a top-truncated delta system. It illustrates the key point
that the lower the accommodation rate, the greater the degree of
erosion resulting in partial preservation of an ancient deposi-
tional system. These examples show that detailed sedimentol-
ogy, ichnology, facies mapping, and paleocurrent data must all
be integrated to make an unequivocal interpretation, as was
recently elucidated by Martinsen (2003). Although fluvial influ-
ence can be identified in some single vertical successions, many
deltas may contain little evidence of fluvial effects (such as the
San Miguel example), which can then be identified only on the
basis of correlation and mapping.
Controls on Sequence Stratigraphic Organization
The distribution of lithologies and overall facies architecture
within a given depositional system is highly sensitive to allocyclic
controls, such as eustasy, tectonics, and sediment supply (Jervey,
1988). Sequence stratigraphy provides a means of interpreting
these controls on sediment partitioning within and between
different depositional systems, as well as providing a means for
understanding the origin of key bounding discontinuities that
are critical to correlate and map depositional systems and sys-
tems tracts (Posamentier et al., 1988; Bhattacharya, 1993; Ander-
son, J.B. et al., 2004). For example, when base level is low or falling
(lowstand and falling-stage (forced regressive) systems tracts),
river-dominated deltas may form, and the fluvial systems may be
sandier and may be predominantly erosional or incised
(Bhattacharya and Walker, 1992; Shanley and McCabe, 1994).
During times of lowered sea level in the Cretaceous Western
Interior, the effects of subtle sea-floor topography may be en-
hanced, causing complex physiography and numerous
embayments of the shoreline (Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001;
Nummedal and Riley, 1999). Tidal effects, in particular, can be
enhanced within these embayments, especially during the initial
turnaround of sea level. Units originally interpreted as shelf
sands, such as the Shannon, Tocito, and Frewens sandstones,
have been reinterpreted as tidally influenced lowstand deltas and
shorefaces (Bergman, 1994; Sullivan et al., 1997; Nummedal and
282 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

kilometers

FIG. 53.—Allostratigraphy of the Dunvegan Alloformation. Plint (2000) extended correlation of marine fooding surfaces (initiated
by Bhattacharya, 1993) into the nonmarine portion of the clastic wedge. This included mapping of tributive valley systems (see
Figure 38). Nonmarine facies show a distinct thickening, interpreted as driven by increased tectonic subsidence to the
northwest.

Riley, 1999; Willis et al., 1999; Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001;
Willis and Gabel, 2001).
In contrast, during rising base level (e.g., transgressive and
highstand systems tracts) mud tends to be trapped within the
estuary or within the alluvial realm, resulting in more heteroge-
neous fluvial reservoirs (see Ferron example, above). Coeval
shorelines may tend to be wave- or tide-dominated (Bhattacharya,
1993; Barton, 1997; Plint, 2000).
Galloway (1975) suggested that many regressive–transgres-
sive clastic wedges in the Texas Gulf Coast show a transition from
elongate river-dominated types in the lower parts of a wedge to
more wave-modified deltas in the upper parts. Other examples
include the Norias delta system (Duncan, 1983). This idea was
recognized earlier by Barrell (1912), who noted that the Catskill
wedge showed a similar transition.
An understanding of the allostratigraphic framework poten-
tially allows the geologist to predict relative shale proportions,
geometries, and distributions in different depositional environ-
ments as a function of stratigraphic position and basin setting
(e.g., Gardner, 1995). This is of great value in constructing de-
tailed geo-cellular models in reservoir characterization.
The concept of systems tracts also provides a way of linking
the different types of depositional systems in various positions in
the basin. Growth of deep-water submarine fans is commonly
related to the development of shelf-edge deltas in lowstand
systems tracts and the development of hyperpycnal flow at the
river mouth (Por™bski and Steel, 2003; Anderson, 2005; Plink-
Björklund and Steel, 2005). Development of fans may also corre-
late with the incision of alluvial systems in a landward direction.
Submarine-fan growth commonly ends with a relative rise of sea
level, and may coincide with development of shoal-water deltas
in a transgressive or highstand systems tract. The generalizations
embodied in the definitions of systems tracts allow the tracts to be
used predictively, and in that sense they can be used as basin-
scale facies models. One part of a given systems tract may be
important in predicting the appearance and nature of a related
part.
The differences in interpretations and nomenclature in se-
quence stratigraphy results from the distinction between systems
tracts defined purely on geometric character and physical posi-
tion within the sequence versus definition in the context of time
and relative changes in sea level. In most papers on sequence
stratigraphy, concept-driven genetic models and field observa-
tions are complexly intertwined. Nomenclature problems of the
same kind exist in other areas of sedimentology, such as the use
of the term facies to describe rock properties (e.g., cross-bedded
sandstone facies) versus paleodepositional environments
(shoreface facies). The way that most scientific systems are named
and analyzed reflects how we think about them, and to some
degree all observations are model driven. The use of systems
tracts in the context of relative sea-level change seems to be more
widespread than the use favored by Van Wagoner (1995), but in
general it is critical to separate observation from interpretations.
CONCLUSIONS
Deltas are complex three-dimensional progradational depo-
sitional systems that form primarily as a consequence of the
interaction of a river plume with basinal processes, chiefly tides
and waves. Longer-term changes in controlling parameters
 DELTAS

FIG. 54.—Sequence stratigraphic cross section of the Cretaceous Ferron sandstone. The cross section is based on nearly 100 measured sections and correlations of coals,
bentonites, and other key flooding surfaces in nearly continuous cliff exposures along the Coal Cliffs and Wasatch Plateau in central Utah, U.S.A. (from Garrison and
van den Bergh, 2004).
283
 284
JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA

FIG. 55.—Photos of erosional discontinuity above Belle Fourche sandstone bodies of the Frontier Formation, Wyoming, U.S.A.. A) Regional photo shows dipping delta-
front sandstones truncated on top and overlain by shale. B) Close-up of erosional contact between shales and underlying delta-front sandstones. C) Locally, a cross-
bedded pebbly sandstone lag containing sharks’ teeth and oyster fragments marks the transgressive erosion (see Bhattacharya and Willis, 2001, for more details).
 DELTAS 285

FIG. 56.—Spectrum of river-dominated (left) to wave-dominated (right) deltas in the Upper Cretaceous San Miguel Formation (Texas,
U.S.A.) after Weise (1980). The isopach maps are contoured in 20 foot (6.1 m) intervals, with maximum thicknesses of about 120–
140 feet (36–43 m). Symmetrical and asymmetrical deltas can be identified. The model for the formation of asymmetrical deltas
suggests that the original interpretations of longshore-drift directions may be reversed from that originally interpreted. Sandier
deposits may occur on the updrift rather than on the downdrift side.

may cause deltas to be transformed into other depositional
systems. A delta may transform into a barrier-island system
during a major transgression, for example (Fig. 7). Conversely,
an increase in sedimentation rate, or a channel avulsion, could
transform a prograding strandplain into a delta. A steady rise of
relative sea level may cause a river channel or distributary to
widen into an estuary with tidally influenced sand bars. The
estuary might in turn be drowned, and the system would evolve
into a series of shallow-marine, tidal sand ridges (Fig 20; Yang
and Sun, 1988).
In other settings, waves are important in modifying deltaic
sediments during transgression. Around the margins of the
Mississippi delta, such modification has produced winnowed
sandbodies that began as beach-ridge complexes, were detached
as barriers, and have now been drowned to produce shelf shoals
(Fig. 7). It is now recognized that waves, rivers, and tides continu-
ously interact, resulting in deposits that may show an interfinger-
ing of facies architectural elements formed by these different
processes (Bhattacharya and Giosan, 2003). Depending on the
larger stratigraphic context, these can be regarded as components
of deltaic systems or as distinct depositional systems.
The definition and understanding of a depositional system
depends largely on the scale of observation and objectives of the
study. The distribution of sediment at the surface in many mod-
ern deltas may not characterize the sandbody geometry in the
immediately underlying deposits. In many modern deltas, trans-
gressive reworking by waves and tides of the uppermost veneer
of sediments (i.e., destructional phase) may not reflect the sedi-
mentary processes in the major proportion of the underlying
regressive deltaic package (i.e., constructional phase).
REFERENCES
AINSWORTH, R.B., SANLUNG, M., THEO, S., AND DUIVENVOORDEN, C., 1999,
Correlation techniques, perforation strategies, and recovery factors:
An integrated 3-D reservoir modeling approach Sirkit Field, Thai-
land: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 83,
p. 535–1551.
AINSWORTH, R.B., AND PATTISON, S.A.J., 1994, Where have all the lowstands
gone? Evidence for attached lowstand systems tracts in the Western
Interior of North America: Geology, v. 22, p. 415–418.
ALEXANDER, J., 1989, Deltas or coastal plain? With an example of the
controversy from the Middle Jurassic of Yorkshire, in Whateley,
M.K.G., and Pickering, K.T., eds., Deltas: Sites and Traps for Fossil
Fuels: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 41, p. 11–
19.
ALLEN, J.R.L., 1970, Sediments of the modern Niger delta, a summary and
review, in Morgan, J.P., ed., Deltaic Sedimentation; Modern and
Ancient: Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists,
Special Publication 15, p. 138–151.
ALLEN, G.P., LAURIER, D., AND THOUVENENIN, J., 1979, Etude sédimentologique
du delta de la Mahakam: Paris, TOTAL, Compagnie Francaise des
Petroles, Notes et Memoires 15, 156 p.
ALLISON, M.A., KINEKE, G.C., GORDON, E.S., AND GOÑI, M.A., 2000, Develop-
ment and reworking of a seasonal flood deposit on the inner continen-
tal shelf off the Atchafalaya River: Continental Shelf Research, v. 20,
p. 2267–2294.
ALLISON M.A., KHAN S.R., GOODBRED, S.L., JR., AND KUEHL, S.A., 2003,
Stratigraphic evolution of the late Holocene Ganges–Brahmaputra
lower delta plain: Sedimentary Geology, v. 155, p. 317–342
ANDERSON, J.B., 2005, Diachronous development of late Quaternary shelf-
margin deltas in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico: Implications for
sequence stratigraphy and deep-water reservoir occurrence, in Giosan,
L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and
Examples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 257–276.
ANDERSON, J.B., AND FILLON, R.H., eds., 2004, Late Quaternary Stratigraphic
Evolution of the Northern Gulf of Mexico Margin: SEPM, Special
Publication 79, 311 p.
ANDERSON, J.B., RODRIGUEZ, A., ABDULAH, K., FILLON, R.H., BANFIELD, L.A.,
MCKEOWN, H.A., AND WELLNER, J.S., 2004, Late Quaternary strati-
graphic evolution of the Northern Gulf of Mexico Margin: A synthe-
sis, in Anderson, J.B., and Fillon, R.H., eds., Late Quaternary Strati-
graphic Evolution of the Northern Gulf of Mexico Margin: SEPM,
Special Publication 79, p. 1–23.
ANDERSON, P.B., CHIDSEY, T.C., RYER, T.C., ADAMS, R.D., AND MCCLURE, K.
2004, Geologic framework, facies, paleogeography, and reservoir ana-
logs of the Ferron sandstone in the Ivie Creek area, East-Central Utah,
in Chidsey, T.C., Jr., Adams, R.D., and Morris, T.H., eds., The Fluvial–
Deltaic Ferron Sandstone: Regional to Wellbore-Scale Outcrop Analog
Studies and Application to Reservoir Modeling: American Association
of Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology, no. 50, p. 331–356.
ARNOTT, R.W.C., 1992, The role of fluvial processes during deposition of
the (Cardium) Carrot Creek/Cyn-Pem conglomerates: Bulletin of
Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 40, p. 356–362.
AUGUSTINIUS, P.G.E.F., 1989, Cheniers and chenier plains: a general intro-
duction: Marine Geology, v. 90, p. 219–230.
286 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
BAKER, E.K., HARRIS, P.T., KEENE, J.B., AND SHORT, S.A., 1995, Patterns of
sedimentation in the macrotidal Fly River Delta, Papua, New Guinea,
in Flemming, B.W., and Bartholomae, A., eds., Tidal Signatures in
Modern and Ancient Sediments: International Association of Sedi-
mentologists, Special Publication 24, p. 193–211.
BARRELL, J., 1912, Criteria for the recognition of ancient delta deposits:
Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 23, p. 377–446.
BART, P.J., AND ANDERSON, J.B., 2004, Late Quaternary stratigraphic evolu-
tion of the Alabama and west Florida outer continental shelf, in
Anderson, J.B., and Fillon, R.H., eds., Late Quaternary Stratigraphic
Evolution of the Northern Gulf of Mexico Margin: SEPM, Special
Publication 79, p. 43–53.
BARTON, M.D., ANGLE, E.S., AND TYLER, N., 2004, Stratigraphic architec-
ture of fluvial–deltaic sandstones from the Ferron Sandstone out-
crop, East-Central Utah, in Chidsey, T.C., Adams, R.D., and Mor-
ris, T.H., eds., Regional to Wellbore Analog for Fluvial–Deltaic
Reservoir Modeling: The Ferron Sandstone of Utah: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology, no. 50, p.
193–210.
BARTON, M., 1997, Application of Cretaceous Interior Seaway outcrop
investigations to fluvial–deltaic reservoir characterization: Part 1,
predicting reservoir heterogeneity in delta front sandstones, Ferron
gas field, Central Utah, in Shanley, K.W., and Perkins, B.E., eds.,
Shallow Marine and Nonmarine Reservoirs, Sequence Stratigraphy,
Reservoir Architecture and Production Characteristics: Gulf Coast
Section. SEPM Foundation, Eighteenth Annual Research Confer-
ence, p. 33–40.
BATES, C.D., 1953, Rational theory of delta formation: American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 37, p. 2119–2162.
BERG, O.R., 1982, Seismic detection and evaluation of delta and turbidite
sequences: their application to exploration for the subtle trap: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 66, p. 1271–1288.
BERG, R.B., AND AVERY, A.H., 1995, Sealing properties of Tertiary growth
faults, Texas Gulf coast: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Bulletin, v. 79, p. 375–393.
BERGMAN, K.M., 1994, Shannon sandstone in Hartzog Draw–Heldt Draw
fields reinterpreted as detached lowstand shoreface deposits: Journal
of Sedimentary Research v. B64, p. 184–201.
BHATTACHARYA, J., 1989, Estuarine channel fills in the Upper Cretaceous
Dunvegan Formation: core example, in Reinson, G.E., ed., Modern
and Ancient Examples of Clastic Tidal Deposits—A Core and Peel
Workshop: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Calgary,
Alberta, p. 37–49.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., 1991, Regional to subregional facies architecture of
river-dominated deltas in the Alberta subsurface, Upper Cretaceous
Dunvegan Formation, in Miall, A.D., and Tyler, N., eds., The Three-
Dimensional Facies Architecture of Terrigenous Clastic Sediments,
and Its Implications for Hydrocarbon Discovery and Recovery:
SEPM, Concepts and Models in Sedimentology and Paleontology,
no. 3, p. 189–206.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., 1993, The expression and interpretation of marine
flooding surfaces and erosional surfaces in core: examples from the
Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation in the Alberta foreland
basin, in Summerhayes, C.P., and Posamentier, H.W., eds., Sequence
Stratigraphy and Facies Associations: International Association of
Sedimentologists, Special Publication 18, p. 125–160.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., 1994, Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation strata of the
Western Canada Sedimentary Basin, in Mossop, G.D., and Shetsen, I.,
compilers, Geological Atlas of the Western Canada Sedimentary
Basin: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists and Alberta Re-
search Council, p. 365–373.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND DAVIES, R.K., 2004, Sedimentology and structure
of growth faults at the base of the Ferron Member along Muddy
Creek, Utah, in Chidsey, T.C., Adams, R.D., and Morris, T.H., eds.,
Regional to Wellbore Analog for Fluvial–Deltaic Reservoir Modeling:
The Ferron Sandstone of Utah: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Studies in Geology, no. 50, p. 279–304.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND DAVIES, R.K., 2001, Growth faults at the prodelta
to delta front transition, Cretaceous Ferron Sandstone, Utah: Marine
and Petroleum Geology, v. 18, p. 525–534.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND GIOSAN, L., 2003, Wave-influenced deltas: geo-
morphological implications for facies reconstruction: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 50, p. 187–210.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND POSAMENTIER, H.W., 1994, Sequence stratigraphic
and allostratigraphic applications in the Alberta Foreland Basin, in
Mossop, G.D., and Shetsen, I., compilers, Geological Atlas of the
Western Canada Sedimentary Basin: Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists and Alberta Research Council, p. 407–412.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND TYE, R.S., 2004, Searching for modern Ferron
analogs and application to subsurface interpretation, in Chidsey,
T.C., Jr., Adams, R.D., and Morris, T.H., eds., The Fluvial-deltaic
Ferron Sandstone: Regional to Wellbore-Scale Outcrop Analog Stud-
ies and Application to Reservoir Modeling: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology, no. 50, p. 39–57.
BHATTACHARYA, J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1991a, Allostratigraphic subdivision
of the Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan, Shaftesbury, and Kaskapau
Formations in the subsurface of northwestern Alberta: Bulletin of
Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 39, p. 145–164.
BHATTACHARYA, J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1991b, Facies and facies successions
in river- and wave-dominated depositional systems of the Upper
Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation, northwestern Alberta: Bulletin of
Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 39, p. 165–191.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND WALKER, R.G., 1992, Deltas, in Walker, R.G., and
James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea Level Change:
Geological Association of Canada, p. 157–177.
BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND WILLIS, B.J., 2001, Lowstand deltas in the Fron-
tier Formation, Powder River Basin, Wyoming: Implications for
sequence stratigraphic models: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 85, p. 261–294.
BLUM, M.D., AND TÖRNQVIST, T.E., 2000, Fluvial responses to climate and
sea-level change: a review and look forward: Sedimentology, v. 47, p.
2–48.
BOWEN, D.W., AND WEIMER, P., 2003, Regional sequence stratigraphic
setting and reservoir geology of Morrow incised-valley sand-
stones (lower Pennsylvanian), eastern Colorado and western Kan-
sas: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 87,
p. 781–815.
BOYD, R., AND PENLAND. S., 1988, A geomorphic model for Mississippi delta
evolution: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, Transac-
tions, v. 38, p. 443–452.
BOYD, R., SUTER, J., AND PENLAND, S., 1989, Sequence stratigraphy of the
Mississippi delta: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies,
Transactions, v. 39, p. 331–340.
BRIDGE, J.S., 2000, The geometry, flow patterns and sedimentary processes
of Devonian rivers and coasts, New York and Pennsylvania, USA, in
Friend, P.F., and Williams, B.P.J., eds., New Perspectives on the Old
Red Sandstone: Geological Society of London, Special Publication
180, p. 85–108
BRIDGE, J.S., 2003, Rivers and Floodplains: London, Blackwell, 491 p.
BRISTOW, C.S., AND BEST, J.L., 1993, Braided rivers: perspectives and prob-
lems, in, Best, J.L., and Bristow C.S., eds., Braided Rivers: Geological
Society of London, Special Publication 75, p. 1–11.
BROWN, A.R., 2005, Interpretation of Three-Dimensional Seismic Data, 6th
Edition: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 42,
541 p.
BROWN, L.F., AND FISHER, W.L., 1977, Seismic-stratigraphic interpretation
of depositional systems: examples from Brazilian rift and pull-apart
basins, in Payton, C.E., ed., Seismic Stratigraphy—Applications to
Hydrocarbon Exploration: American Association of Petroleum Ge-
ologists, Memoir 26, p. 213–248.
 DELTAS
BRUUN, P., 1962, Sea level rise as a cause of erosion: American Society of
Civil Engineers, Proceedings, Journal of the Waterways and Harbors
Division, v. 88, no. WW 1, p. 117–130.
BURK, C.F., JR., 1963, Structure, isopach, and facies maps of Upper Creta-
ceous marine successions, West-Central Alberta and Adjacent British
Columbia: Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 62-31, 10 p.
BURNS, B.A., HELLER, P.L., MARZO, M., AND PAOLA, C., 1997, Fluvial response
in a sequence stratigraphic framework: Example for the Montserrat
Fan Delta, Spain: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 67, p. 311–321.
BUSCH, D.A., 1971, Genetic units in delta prospecting: American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 55, p. 1137–1154.
BUSCH, D.A., 1974, Stratigraphic Traps in Sandstones—Exploration Tech-
niques: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 21,
174 p.
CARBONEL, P., AND MOYES, J., 1987, Late Quaternary paleoenvironments of
the Mahakham delta (Kalimantan, Indonesia): Palaeogeography,
Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 61, p. 265–284.
CATTANEO, A., CORREGGIARI, A., LANGONE, L., AND TRINCARDI, F., 2003, The
late-Holocene Gargano subaqueous delta, Adriatic shelf: Sediment
pathways and supply fluctuations: Marine Geology, v. 193, p. 61–91.
CHIDSEY, T.C., ADAMS, R.D., AND MORRIS T.H., EDS., 2004, Regional to
Wellbore Analog for Fluvial–Deltaic Reservoir Modeling: The Ferron
Sandstone of Utah: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Studies in Geology, no. 50, 568 p.
CLEAVES, A.W., AND BROUSSARD, M.C., 1980, Chester and Pottsville deposi-
tional systems, outcrop and subsurface, in the Black Warrior Basin of
Mississippi and Alabama: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Soci-
eties, Transactions, v. 30, p. 49–60.
COLEMAN, J.M., AND GAGLIANO, S.M., 1964, Cyclic sedimentation in the
Mississippi River deltaic plain: Gulf Coast Association of Geological
Societies, Transactions, v. 14, p. 67–80.
COLEMAN, J.M., ROBERTS, H.H., MURRAY, S.P., AND SALAMA, M., 1981, Mor-
phology and dynamic stratigraphy of the eastern Nile shelf: Marine
Geology, v. 42, p. 301–326.
COLEMAN, J.M., AND PRIOR, D.B., 1982, Deltaic environments, in Scholle,
P.A., and Spearing, D.R., eds., Sandstone Depositional Environ-
ments: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 31, p.
139–178.
COLEMAN, J.M., PRIOR, D.B., AND LINDSAY, J.F., 1983, Deltaic influences on
shelf edge instability processes, in Stanley, D.J., and Moore, G.T., eds.,
The Shelfbreak: Critical Interface on Continental Margins: SEPM,
Special Publication 33, p. 121–137.
COLEMAN, J.M., AND WRIGHT, L.D., 1975, Modern river deltas: variability of
processes and sand bodies, in Broussard, M.L., ed., Deltas, Models for
Exploration: Houston, Houston Geological Society, p. 99–149
COLELLA, A., AND PRIOR, D.B., 1990, Coarse-Grained Deltas: International
Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 10, 357 p.
CORBEANU, R.M., WIZEVICH, M.C., BHATTACHARYA, J.P., ZENG, X., AND
MCMECHAN, G.A., 2004, Three-dimensional architecture of ancient
lower delta-plain point bars using ground-penetrating radar, Cre-
taceous Ferron Sandstone, Utah, in Chidsey, T.C., Adams, R.D.,
and Morris, T.H., eds., Regional to Wellbore Analog for Fluvial–
Deltaic Reservoir Modeling: The Ferron Sandstone of Utah: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology, no.
50, p. 285–309.
CORREGGIARI, A., TRINCARDI, F., LANAGONE, L., AND ROVERI, M., 2001, Styles
of failure in heavily sedimented highstand prodelta wedges on the
Adriatic shelf: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 71, p. 218–236.
CORREGGIARI, A., CATTANEO, A., AND TRINCARDI, F., 2005, Depositional
patterns in the Late-Holocene Po Delta system, in Giosan, L., and
Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Ex-
amples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 365–392
CORNER, G.D., NORDAHL, E., MUNCH-ELLINGSEN, K., AND ROBERTSON, K.R.,
1990, Morphology and sedimentology of an emergent fjord-head
Gilbert-type delta: Alta delta, Norway, in Colella, A., and Prior, D.B.,
287
eds., Coarse-Grained Deltas: International Association of Sedimen-
tologists, Special Publication 10, p. 155–168.
COWAN, C.A., AND JAMES, N.P., 1992, Diastasis cracks: mechanically gener-
ated syneresis-like cracks in Upper Cambrian shallow water oolite
and ribbon carbonates: Sedimentology, v. 39, p. 1101–1118.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1992, Tidal depositional systems, in Walker, R.G., and
James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea Level Change: St.
John’s, Newfoundland, Canada, Geological Association of Canada,
p. 195–218.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1999, Tide-dominated deltas, do they exist or are they all
estuaries? (abstract): American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Annual Convention, San Antonio, Texas, Official Program with Ab-
stracts, p. A29.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND BOYD, R., 1992, Estuarine facies mod-
els: conceptual basis and stratigraphic implications: Journal of Sedi-
mentary Petrology, v. 62, p. 1130–1146.
DALRYMPLE, R.W. BAKER, E.K. HARRIS, P.T., AND HUGHES, M.G., 2003, Sedi-
mentology and stratigraphy of a tide-dominated, foreland-basin
delta (Fly River, Papua New Guinea), in Sidi, F.H., Nummedal, D.,
Imbert, P., Darman, H., and Posamentier, H.W., eds., Tropical Deltas
of Southeast Asia—Sedimentology, Stratigraphy, and Petroleum
Geology: SEPM, Special Publication 76, p. 147–173
DAVIES, C., BEST, J. , AND COLLIER, R., 2003, Sedimentology of the Bengal
shelf, Bangladesh: comparison of late Miocene sediments, Sitakund
anticline, with the modern, tidally dominated shelf: Sedimentary
Geology, v. 155, p. 271–300.
DOMINGUEZ, J.M.L., 1996, The São Francisco strandplain: a paradigm for
wave-dominated deltas? in de Batist, M., and Jacobs, P., eds., Geol-
ogy of Siliciclastic Shelf Seas: Geological Society of London, Special
Publication 117, p. 217–231.
DOMINGUEZ, J.M.L., MARTIN, L., AND BITTENCOURT, A.C.S.P., 1987, Sea-level
history and Quaternary evolution of river mouth-associated beach-
ridge plains along the east-southeast Brazilian Coast: a summary, in
Nummedal, D., Pilkey, O.H., and Howard, J.D., eds., Sea-Level
Fluctuation and Coastal Evolution: SEPM, Special Publication 41, p.
115–127.
DUNCAN, E.A., 1983, Delineation of delta types: Norias delta system, Frio
Formation, South Texas: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societ-
ies, Transactions, v. 33, p. 269–273.
DRAUT, A.E., KINEKE, G.C., VELASCO, D.W., ALLISON, M.A., AND PRIME, R.J.,
2005, Influence of the Atchafalaya River on recent evolution of the
chenier-plain inner continental shelf, northern Gulf of Mexico: Con-
tinental Shelf Research, v. 25, p. 91–112.
EDWARDS, M.B., 1981, Upper Wilcox Rosita delta system of South Texas:
growth-faulted shelf-edge deltas: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 65, p. 54–73.
ELLIOTT, T., 1974, Interdistributary bay sequences and their genesis: Sedi-
mentology, v. 21, p. 611–622.
ELLIOTT, T., 1975, The sedimentary history of a delta lobe from a Yoredale
(Carboniferous) cyclothem: Yorkshire Geological Society, Proceed-
ings, v. 40, p. 505–536.
ELLIOTT, T., 1986, Deltas, in Reading, H.G., ed., Sedimentary Environments
and Facies: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell Scientific Publications, p. 113–154.
ERIKSSON, K.A., 1979, Marginal marine processes from the Archean Moodies
Group, Barberton Mountain Land, South Africa: evidence and signifi-
cance: Precambrian Research, v. 8, p. 153–182.
EVAMY, D.D., HAREMBOURE, J., KAMERLING, P., KNAPP, W.A., MOLLOY, F.A.,
AND ROWLANDS, P.H., 1978, Hydrocarbon habitat of Tertiary Niger
delta: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 62,
p. 1–39.
EYLES, N., AND EYLES, C.H., 1992, Glacial depositional systems, in Walker,
R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea Level
Change: Geological Association of Canada, p. 73–100.
FIELDING, C.R., TRUEMAN, J., AND ALEXANDER, J., 2005a, Sedimentology of the
modern and Holocene Burdekin River delta of North Queensland,
288 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
Australia—Controlled by river output, not by waves and tides, in
Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts,
Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 467–496.
FIELDING, C.R., TRUEMAN, J., AND ALEXANDER, J., 2005b, Sharp-based mouth
bar sands from the Burdekin River Delta of northeastern Australia:
extending the spectrum of mouth bar facies, geometry, and stacking
patterns: Journal of Sedimentary Research. v. 75, p. 55–66.
FISHER, W.L., BROWN, L.F., SCOTT, A.J., AND MCGOWEN, J.H., 1969, Delta
systems in the exploration for oil and gas, a research colloquium:
Austin, Texas, Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, 204 p.
FISK, H.N., 1961, Bar finger sands of the Mississippi delta, in Peterson, J.A.,
and Osmond, J.C., eds., Geometry of Sandstone Bodies—A Sympo-
sium: Tulsa, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, p. 29–52.
FRAZIER, D.E., 1974, Depositional episodes: their relationship to the Qua-
ternary stratigraphic framework in the northwestern portion of the
Gulf basin: Austin, Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, Geological
Circular 74-1, 28 p.
GALLOWAY, W.E., 1975, Process framework for describing the morphologic
and stratigraphic evolution of deltaic depositional systems, in
Broussard, M.L., ed., Deltas, Models for Exploration: Houston, Texas,
Houston Geological Society, p. 87–98.
GALLOWAY, W.E., 1989a, Genetic stratigraphic sequences in basin analysis
I: architecture and genesis of flooding-surface bounded depositional
units: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 73,
p. 125–142.
GALLOWAY, W.E., 1989b, Genetic stratigraphic sequences in basin analysis
II: application to northwest Gulf of Mexico Cenozoic basin: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 73, p. 143–154.
GALLOWAY, W.E., AND HOBDAY, D.K., 1996, Terrigenous Clastic Deposi-
tional Systems: Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag, 489 p.
GANI, M.R., AND BHATTACHARYA, J.P., 2005, Bedding correlation vs. facies
correlation in deltas: Lessons for Quaternary stratigraphy, in Giosan,
L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and
Examples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 31–47.
GARDNER, M.H., 1995, Tectonic and eustatic controls on the stratal archi-
tecture of mid-Cretaceous stratigraphic sequences, central western
interior foreland basin of North America, in Dorobek S.L., and Ross,
G.M., eds., Stratigraphic Evolution of Foreland Basins: SEPM, Special
Publication 52, p. 243–281.
GARDNER, M.H., CROSS, T.A., AND LEVORSEN, M., 2004, Stacking patterns,
sediment volume partitioning and facies differentiation in shallow-
marine and coastal-plain strata of the Cretaceous Ferron Sandstone,
East-Central Utah, in Chidsey, T.C., Adams, R.D., and Morris, T.H.,
eds., Regional to Wellbore Analog for Fluvial–Deltaic Reservoir
Modeling: The Ferron Sandstone of Utah: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology, no. 50, p. 201–230.
GARRISON, J.R., JR., AND VAN DEN BERGH, T.C.V., 1997, Coal zone and high-
resolution depositional sequence stratigraphy of the Upper Ferron
Sandstone, in Link, P.K., and Kowallis, B.J., eds., Mesozoic to Recent
Geology of Utah: Brigham Young University, Geology Studies, 42,
Part II, p. 160–178.
GARRISON, J.R., JR., AND VAN DEN BERGH, T.C.V., 2004, The high-resolution
depositional sequence stratigraphy of the Upper Ferron Sandstone
Last Chance Delta: an application of coal zone stratigraphy, in Chidsey,
T.C., Adams, R.D., and Morris, T.H., eds., Regional to Wellbore
Analog for Fluvial–Deltaic Reservoir Modeling: The Ferron Sand-
stone of Utah: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Stud-
ies in Geology, no. 50, p. 125–192.
GASTALDO, R.A., ALLEN, G.P., AND HUC, A.-Y., 1995, The tidal character of
fluvial sediments of the modern Mahakam river delta, Kalimantan,
Indonesia, in Flemming, B.W., and Bartholomae, A., eds., Tidal Signa-
tures in Modern and Ancient Sediments: International Association of
Sedimentologists, Special Publication 24, p. 171–181.
GASTESCU, P., 1992, The Danube Delta, Map, Marta Turistica, Compania de
Turism Pentru Tenuret, Bucharest, Romania.
GILBERT, G.K., 1885, The topographic features of lake shores: U.S. Geologi-
cal Survey, 5th Annual Report (1883–1884), p. 69–123.
GINGRAS, M.K., MACEACHERN, J.A., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1998, A compara-
tive analysis of the ichnology of wave- and river-dominated
allomembers of the Upper Cretaceous Dunvegan Formation: Bulletin
of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 46, p. 51–73.
GIOSAN, L., AND BHATTACHARYA, J.P., 2005, New directions in delta research,
in Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts,
Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 3–10.
GOODBRED, S.L., AND KUEHL, S.A., 1999, Holocene and modern sediment
budgets for the Ganges–Brahmaputra River: Evidence for highstand
dispersal to flood-plain, shelf, and deep-sea depocenters: Geology, v.
27, p. 559–562.
HALDORSEN, H.H., AND DAMSLETH, E., 1993, Challenges in reservoir charac-
terization: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v.
77, p. 541–551.
HAMPSON, G.J., 2000, Discontinuity surfaces, clinoforms, and facies archi-
tecture in a wave-dominated, shoreface–shelf parasequence: Journal
of Sedimentary Research, v. 70, p. 325–340.
HAMPSON, G.J., AND HOWELL, J.A., 2005, Sedimentologic and geomorphic
characterization of ancient wave-dominated deltaic shorelines: Up-
per Cretaceous Blackhawk Formation, Book Cliffs, Utah, U.S.A., in
Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts,
Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 133–154.
HARRIS, P.T., 1988, Large-scale bedforms as indicators of mutually evasive
sand transport and the sequential infilling of wide-mouthed estuar-
ies: Sedimentary Geology, v. 57, p. 273–298.
HART, B.S., AND LONG, B.F., 1996, Forced regressions and lowstand deltas:
Holocene Canadian examples: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v.
66, p. 820–829.
HAYES, M.O., 1979, Barrier island morphology as a function of tidal and
wave regime, in Leatherman, S.P., ed., Barrier Islands from the Gulf
of St. Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico: New York, Academic Press,
p. 1–27.
HELLAND-HANSEN, W., AND GJELBERG, J.G., 1994, Conceptual basis and
variability in sequence stratigraphy: a different perspective: Sedi-
mentary Geology, v. 92, p. 31–52.
HISCOTT, R.N., 2003, Latest Quaternary Baram prodelta, northwestern
Borneo, in Hasan Sidi, F.H., Nummedal, D., Imbert, P., Darman, H.,
and Posamantier, H.W., eds., Tropical Deltas of Southeast Asia—
Sedimentology, Stratigraphy, and Petroleum Geology: SEPM, Spe-
cial Publication 76, p. 89–107.
HOLBROOK, J.M., 1996, Complex fluvial response to low gradients at
maximum regression: a genetic link between smooth sequence-bound-
ary morphology and architecture of overlying sheet sandstone: Jour-
nal of Sedimentary Research, v. 66, p. 713–722.
HORI, K., SAITO, Y., ZHAO, Q., AND WANG, P., 2002, Architecture and
evolution of the tide-dominated Changjiang (Yangtze) River delta,
China: Sedimentary Geology, v. 146, p. 249–264.
HORNE, J.C., FERM, J.C., CARUCCIO, F.T., AND BAGANZ, B.P., 1978, Deposi-
tional models in coal exploration and mine planning in Appalachian
region: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 62,
p. 2379–2411.
JENNETTE, D.C., AND JONES, C.R., 1995, Sequence stratigraphy of the Upper
Cretaceous Tocito Sandstone: a model for tidally influenced incised
valleys, San Juan basin, Mexico, in Van Wagoner, J.C., and Bertram,
G.T., eds., Sequence Stratigraphy of Foreland Basin Deposits: Out-
crop and Subsurface Examples from the Cretaceous of North America:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 64, p. 311–
347.
JERVEY, M.T., 1988, Quantitative geological modeling of siliciclastic rock
sequences and their seismic expression, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings,
B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van
Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea-Level Change: An Integrated Approach:
SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 47–69.
 DELTAS
JOL, H.M., AND SMITH, D.G., 1991, Ground penetrating radar of northern
lacustrine deltas: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 28, p. 1939–
1947.
JOL, H.M., AND SMITH, D.G., 1992, Geometry and structure of deltas in
large lakes: a ground penetrating radar overview, in Hanninen, P.,
and Autio, S., eds., Fourth International Conference on Ground
Penetrating Radar: Geological Survey of Finland, Special Paper 16,
p. 159–168.
KINEKE, G.C., STERNBERG, R.W., TROWBRIDGE, J.H., AND GEYSER, W.R., 1996,
Fluid-mud processes on the Amazon continental shelf: Continental
Shelf Research, v. 16, p. 667–696.
KINEKE, G.C., WOOLFE, K.J., KUEHL, S.A., MILLIMAN, J.D., DELLAPENNA T.M.,
AND PURDON, R.G., 2000, Sediment export from the Sepik River, Papua
New Guinea: Evidence for a divergent dispersal system: Continental
Shelf Research, v. 20, p. 2239–2266.
KNOX, P.R., AND BARTON, M.D., 1999, Predicting interwell heterogeneity in
fluvial–deltaic reservoirs: effects of progressive architecture varia-
tion through a depositional cycle from outcrop and subsurface obser-
vations, in Schatzinger, R.A., and Jordan, J.F., eds., Reservoir Charac-
terization; Recent Advances: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 71, p. 57–72.
KRAFT, J.C., CHRZASTOWSKI, M.J., AND BELKNAP, D.F., 1987, The transgressive
barrier–lagoon coast of Delaware: morphostratigraphy, sedimentary
sequences and responses to relative rise in sea level, in Nummedal, D.,
Pilkey, O.H., and Howard, J.D., eds., Sea-Level Fluctuation and
Coastal Evolution: SEPM, Special Publication 41, p. 129–143.
KRAUS, M.J., 2002, Basin-scale changes in floodplain paleosols: implica-
tions for interpreting alluvial architecture: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 72, p. 500–509
KROONENBERG, S., BRUSAKOR, G.V., AND SVITOCH, A.A., 1997, The wandering
of the Volga delta: a response to rapid Caspian sea-level changes:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 107, p. 189–209
KUEHL, S.A., DEMASTER, D.J., AND NITTROUER, C.A., 1986, Distribution of
sedimentary structures on the Amazon subaqueous delta: Continen-
tal Shelf Research, v. 6, p. 311–336.
KUEHL, S.A., LEVY, B.M., MOORE, W.S., AND ALLISON, M.A., 1997, Subaque-
ous delta of the Ganges–Brahmaputra river system: Marine Geology,
v. 144, p. 81–96.
KUEHL, S.A., ALLISON, M.A., GOODBRED, S.L., AND KUDRASS, H., 2005, The
Ganges–Brahmaputra Delta, in Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P.,
eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special
Publication 83, p. 413–434.
LAMBIASE, J.J., DAMIT, A.R., SIMMONS, M.D., ABDOERRIAS, R., AND HUSSIN, A.,
2003, A depositional model and the stratigraphic development of
modern and ancient tide-dominated deltas in NW Borneo, in Sidi,
F.H., Nummedal, D., Imbert, P., Darman, H., and Posamantier,
H.W., eds., Tropical Deltas of Southeast Asia—Sedimentology,
Stratigraphy, and Petroleum Geology: SEPM, Special Publication
76, p. 109–123.
LEE, K., ZENG, X., MCMECHAN, G.A., HOWELL, C.D., JR., BHATTACHARYA,
J.P., MARCY, F., AND OLARIU, C., 2005, A GPR survey of a delta-front
reservoir analog in the Wall Creek Member, Frontier Formation,
Wyoming: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulle-
tin, v. 89, p. 1139–1155.
LIU, J.P., MILLIMAN, J.D., AND GAO, S., 2002, The Shandong mud wedge and
post-glacial sediment accumulation in the Yellow Sea: Geo-Marine
Letters, v. 21, p. 212–218.
MACEACHERN, J.A., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1998, High-resolu-
tion sequence stratigraphy of early transgressive deposits, Viking
Formation, Joffre Field, Alberta, Canada: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 82, p. 729-755.
MACEACHERN, J., BHATTACHARYA, J.P., HOWELL, C.D., AND BANN, K., 2005,
Ichnology of deltas, in Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River
Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special Publication
83, p. 49–85.
289
MACKEY, S.D., AND BRIDGE, J.S., 1995, Three dimensional model of alluvial
stratigraphy: theory and application: Journal of Sedimentary Re-
search, v. B65, p. 7–31.
MACNAUGHTON, R.B., DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND NARBONNE, G.M., 1997, Early
Cambrian braid-delta deposits, Mackenzie Mountains, north-west-
ern Canada: Sedimentology, v. 44, p. 587–609.
MAGUREGUI, J., AND TYLER, N., 1991, Evolution of Middle Eocene tide-
dominated deltaic sandstones, Lagunillas Field, Maracaibo Basin,
western Venezuela, in Miall, A.D., and Tyler, N., eds., The Three-
Dimensional Facies Architecture of Terrigenous Clastic Sediments,
and Its Implications for Hydrocarbon Discovery and Recovery: SEPM,
Concepts and Models in Sedimentology and Paleontology, no. 3, p.
233–244.
MARTINSEN, O.J., 1989, Styles of soft-sediment deformation on a Namurian
(Carboniferous) delta slope, Western Irish Namurian basin, Ireland,
in Whateley, M.K.G., and Pickering, K.T., eds., Deltas: Sites and Traps
for Fossil Fuels: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 41,
p. 167–177.
MARTINSEN, O.J., 1990, Fluvial, inertia-dominated deltaic deposition in the
Namurian (Carboniferous) of northern England: Sedimentology, v.
37, p. 1099–1113.
MARTINSEN, O.J., 1993, Namurian (late Carboniferous) depositional sys-
tems of the Craven–Askrigg area, northern England: implications for
sequence stratigraphic models, in Summerhayes, C.P., and Posa-
mentier, H.W., eds., Sequence Stratigraphy and Facies Associations:
International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 18,
p. 247–281.
MARTINSEN, R.S., 2003, Depositional remnants, part 1: Common compo-
nents of the stratigraphic record with important implications for
hydrocarbon exploration and production: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 87, p. 1869–1882.
MATTSON, A., 1997, Characterization, facies relationships, and architec-
tural framework in a fluvial-deltaic sandstone—Cretaceous Ferron
Sandstone, central Utah: University of Utah, M.S. thesis, 174 p.
MCCARTHY, P.J., 1999, Evolution of an ancient coastal plain: Palaeosols,
interfluves and alluvial architecture in a sequence stratigraphic frame-
work, Cenomanian Dunvegan Formation, NE British Columbia,
Canada: Sedimentology, v. 46, p. 861–891
MCPHERSON, J.G., SHANMUGAM, G., AND MOIOLA, R.J., 1987, Fan-deltas and
braid deltas: varieties of coarse-grained deltas: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 99, p. 331–340.
MELLERE, D., AND STEEL, R.J., 1995, Facies architecture and sequentiality of
nearshore and ‘shelf’ sandbodies: Haystack Mountains Formation,
Wyoming, USA: Sedimentology, v. 42, p. 551–574
MELLERE, D., AND STEEL, R.J., 1996, Tidal sedimentation in Inner Hebrides
half grabens, Scotland: the Mid-Jurassic Bearreraig Sandstone For-
mation, in de Batist, M., and Jacobs, P., eds., Geology of Siliciclastic
Seas: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 117, p. 49–
79.
MIALL, A.E., 1985, Architectural-element analysis: A new method of facies
analysis applied to fluvial deposits: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 22, p.
308, 1985.
MIALL, A.D., 1996, The Geology of Fluvial Deposits; Sedimentary Facies,
Basin Analysis and Petroleum Geology: Berlin, Springer, 582 p.
MIALL, A.D., 1997, The Geology of Stratigraphic Sequences: Berlin, Springer,
433 p.
MICHELS, K.H., KUDRASS, H.R., HUBSCHER, C., SUCKOW, A., AND WIEDICKE, M.,
1998, The submarine delta of the Ganges–Brahmaputra: cyclone-
dominated sedimentation patterns: Marine Geology, v. 149, p. 133–
154.
MONAHAN, P.A., LUTERNAUER, J.L., AND BARRIE, J.V., 1997, The topset and
foreset of the modern Fraser River Delta, British Columbia, Canada,
in Wood, J.M., and Martindale, B., compilers, Sedimentary Events—
Hydrocarbon Systems, Core Conference, CSPG–SEPM Joint Conven-
tion, p. 491–517.
290 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
MOSLOW, T.F., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1988, An integrated approach to the
sedimentological analysis of some lower Cretaceous shoreface and
delta front sandstone sequences, in James, D.P., and Leckie, D.A.,
eds., Sequences, Stratigraphy, Sedimentology; Surface and Subsur-
face: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 15, p. 373–
386.
MULDER, T., AND SYVITSKI, J.P.M., 1995, Turbidity currents generated at
river mouths during exceptional discharge to the world’s oceans:
Journal of Geology, v. 103, p. 285–298.
MULDER, T., SAVOYE, B., SYVITSKI, J.P.M., AND COCHONAT, P., 1996, Origine
des courants de turbidité enregistrés à embouchure du Var en 1971:
Académie des Sciences, Paris, Comptes Rendus, v. 322, Série Iia, p.
301–307.
MULDER, T., AND ALEXANDER, J., 2001, The physical characteristics of sub-
aqueous sedimentary density flows and their deposits: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 48, p. 269–299.
MUTTI, E., ROSELL, J., ALLEN, G.P., FONNESU, F., AND SGAVETTI, M., 1985, The
Eocene Baronia tide dominated delta-shelf system in the Ager Basin,
in Mila, M.D., and Rosell, J., eds., Excursion Guide-book: 6th Euro-
pean Regional Meeting, International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Lleida, Spain, p. 579–600.
NEILL, C.F., AND ALLISON, M.A., 2005, Subaqueous deltaic formation on the
Atchafalaya Shelf, Louisiana: Marine Geology, v. 214, p. 411–430.
NELSON, B.W., 1970, Hydrography, sediment dispersal, and recent histori-
cal development of the Po River delta, Italy, in Morgan, J.P., ed.,
Deltaic Sedimentation; Modern and Ancient: Society of Economic
Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication 15, p. 152–184.
NEMEC, W., 1995, The dynamics of deltaic suspension plumes, in Oti,
M.N., and Postma, G., eds., Geology of Deltas: Rotterdam, Balkema,
p. 31–93.
NEMEC, W., STEEL, R.J., GJELBERG, J., COLLINSON, J.D., PRESTHOLM, E., AND
OXNEVAD, I.E., 1988, Anatomy of a collapsed and re-established delta
front in Lower Cretaceous of Eastern Spitsbergen: gravitational slid-
ing and sedimentation processes: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 72, p. 454–476.
NITTROUER C.A., KUEHL, S.A., DEMASTER, D.J., AND KOWSMANN, R.O., 1986,
The deltaic nature of Amazon shelf sedimentation: Geological Society
of America, Bulletin, v. 97, 444–458.
NUMMEDAL, D., AND RILEY, G.W., 1999, The origin of the Tocito Sandstone
and its sequence stratigraphic lessons, in Bergman, K.W., and
Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sand Bodies: Sequence
Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM,
Special Publication 64, p. 227–254.
NUMMEDAL, D., AND SWIFT, D.J.P., 1987, Transgressive stratigraphy at
sequence-bounding unconformities: some principles derived from
Holocene and Cretaceous examples, in Nummedal, D., Pilkey, O.H.,
and Howard, J.D., eds., Sea-Level Fluctuation and Coastal Evolution:
SEPM, Special Publication 41, p. 241–260.
NUMMEDAL, D., SIDI, F.H., AND POSAMENTIER, H.W., 2003, A framework for
deltas in southeast Asia, in Sidi, F.H., Nummedal, D., Imbert, P.,
Darman, H., and Posamantier, H.W., eds., Tropical Deltas of South-
east Asia—Sedimentology, Stratigraphy, and Petroleum Geology:
SEPM, Special Publication 76, p. 5–17.
OLARIU, C., BHATTACHARYA, J.P., XU, X., AIKEN, C.L.V., ZENG, X., AND
MCMECHAN, G.A., 2005, Integrated study of ancient delta-front
deposits, using outcrop, ground-penetrating radar and three-di-
mensional photorealistic data: Cretaceous Panther Tongue Sand-
stone, Utah,, in Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Del-
tas—Concepts, Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special Publication
83, p. 155–177.
OLARIU, C., AND BHATTACHARYA, J.P., 2006, Terminal distributary channels
and delta front architecture of river-dominated delta systems: Jour-
nal of Sedimentary Research, v. 76, p. 212–233.
OOMKENS, E., 1970, Depositional sequences and sand distribution in the
postglacial Rhone delta complex, in Morgan, J.P., ed., Deltaic Sedi-
mentation, Modern and Ancient: Society of Economic Paleontolo-
gists and Mineralogists, Special Publication 15, p. 198–212.
ORTON, G., AND READING, H.G., 1993, Variability of deltaic processes in
terms of sediment supply, with particular emphasis on grain size:
Sedimentology, v. 40, p. 475–512.
OVEREEM, I., KROONENBERG, S.B., VELDKAMP, A., GROENESTEIJN, K., RUSAKOV,
G.V., AND SVITOCH, A.A., 2003, Small-scale stratigraphy in a large ramp
delta: recent and Holocene sedimentation in the Volga delta, Caspian
Sea: Sedimentary Geology, v. 159, p. 133–157.
OVEREEM, I., SYVITSKI, J.P.M., AND HUTTON, E.W.H., 2005, Three-dimen-
sional numerical modeling of deltas, in Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya,
J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Examples: SEPM,
Special Publication 83, p. 13–30.
OVEREEM, I., AND WELTJE, G.J., 2001, Conditioning channel switching for a
3-D fluvio-deltaic process model: International Association of Math-
ematical Geologists, 2001, Cancun, Mexico, 6–12 September 2001,
Expanded abstract.
PAOLA, C., 2000, Quantitative models of sedimentary basin filling: Sedi-
mentology, v. 7, p. 121–178.
PANIN, N., PANIN, S., HERZ, N., AND NOAKES, J.E., 1983. Radiocarbon dating
of Danube Delta deposits: Quaternary Research, v. 19, p. 249–255.
PARSONS, J.D., BUSH, J.W.M., AND SYVITSKI, J.P.M., 2001. Hyperpycnal plume
formation from riverine outflows with small sediment concentra-
tions: Sedimentology, v. 48, p. 465–478.
PAYNE, M.M., GROSVENOR, M.B., GROSVENOR, G.M., PEELE, W.T., COOK, D.W.,
AND BILLARD, J.B., EDS., 1975, National Geographic Atlas of the World,
Fourth Edition: Washington, D.C., National Geographic Society, 330 p.
PENLAND, S., AND SUTER, J., 1989, The geomorphology of the Mississippi
River chenier plan: Marine Geology, v. 90, p. 231–258.
PLINK-BJÖRKLUND, P., AND STEEL, R., 2005, Deltas on falling-stage and
lowstand shelf margins, the Eocene Central Basin of Spitsbergen:
Importance of sediment supply, in Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P.,
eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special
Publication 83, p. 179–206.
PLINK-BJÖRKLUND, P., AND STEEL, R.J., 2004, Initiation of turbidity currents:
outcrop evidence for Eocene hyperpycnal flow turbidites: Sedimen-
tary Geology, v. 165, p. 29–52.
PLINT, A.G., 1988, Sharp-based shoreface sequences and “offshore bars” in
the Cardium Formation of Alberta: Their relationship to relative
changes in sea level, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C.,
Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea-
Level Changes: An Integrated Approach: SEPM, Special Publication
42, p. 357–370.
PLINT, A.G., 2000, Sequence stratigraphy and paleogeography of a
Cenomanian deltaic complex: the Dunvegan and lower Kaskapau
formations in subsurface and outcrop, Alberta and British Columbia,
Canada: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 47, p. 43–79.
PLINT, A.G., AND WADSWORTH, J.A., 2003, Sedimentology and palaeogeo-
morphology of four large valley systems incising delta plains, West-
ern Canada foreland basin: implications for Mid-Cretaceous sea-level
changes: Sedimentology, v. 50, p. 1147–1186.
PLUMMER, P.S. AND GOSTIN, V.A., 1981, Shrinkage cracks: desiccation or
synaeresis?: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 51, p. 1147–1156.
POR§BSKI, S.J., AND STEEL, R.J., 2003, Shelf-margin deltas: their stratigraphic
significance and relationship to deepwater sands: Earth-Science Re-
views, v. 62, p. 283–326.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., JERVEY, M.T., AND VAIL, P.R., 1988, Eustatic controls on
clastic deposition I—conceptual framework, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings,
B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van
Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea-Level Changes: An Integrated Approach:
SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 109–124.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., ALLEN, G.P., JAMES, D.P., AND TESSON, M., 1992, Forced
regressions in a sequence stratigraphic framework: concepts, ex-
amples, and exploration significance: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1687–1709.
 DELTAS
POSAMENTIER, H.W., AND ALLEN, G.P., 1999, Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigra-
phy—Concepts and Applications: SEPM, Concepts in Sedimentology
and Paleontology, no. 7, 216 p.
POSTMA, G., 1990, Depositional architecture and facies of river and fan
deltas: a synthesis, in Colella. A., and Prior, D.B., eds., Coarse Grained
Deltas: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publi-
cation 10, p. 13–27.
PULHAM, A.J., 1989, Controls on internal structure and architecture of
sandstone bodies within Upper Carboniferous fluvial-dominated
deltas, County Clare, western Ireland, in Whateley, M.K.G., and
Pickering, K.T., eds., Deltas: Sites and Traps for Fossil Fuels: Geologi-
cal Society of London, Special Publication 41, p. 179–203.
RAHMANI, R.A., 1988, Estuarine tidal channel and nearshore sedimenta-
tion of a Late Cretaceous epicontinental sea, Drumheller, Alberta,
Canada, in de Boer, P.L., van Gelder, A., and Nio, S.D., eds., Tide-
Influenced Sedimentary Environments and Facies: Dordrecht, The
Netherlands, D. Riedel Publishing Company, p. 433–471.
RAMOS, A., AND GALLOWAY, W.E., 1990, Facies and sand-body geometry of
the Queen City (Eocene) tide-dominated delta-margin embayment,
NW Gulf of Mexico basin: Sedimentology, v. 37, p. 1079–1098.
RASMUSSEN, D.L., JUMP, C.J., AND WALLACE, K.A., 1985, Deltaic systems in the
Early Cretaceous Fall River Formation, southern Powder River Basin,
Wyoming: Wyoming Geological Association, 36th Annual Field Con-
ference, Guidebook, p. 91–111.
READING, H.G., AND COLLINSON, J.D., 1996, Clastic Coasts, in Reading, H.G.,
ed., Sedimentary Environments; Processes, Facies and Stratigraphy,
Third Edition: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell Science, p. 154–231.
REINSON, G.E., 1992, Barriers and estuaries, in Walker, R.G., and James,
N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea Level Change: Geological
Association of Canada, p. 179–194.
REYNOLDS, A.D., 1999, Dimensions of paralic sandstone bodies: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 83, p. 211–229.
RICH, J.L., 1951, Three critical environments of deposition and criteria for
recognition of rocks deposited in each of them: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 62, p. 1–20.
RINE, J.M., AND GINSBURG, R.N., 1985, Depositional facies of a mud
shoreface in Suriname, South America: a mud analogue to sandy,
shallow-marine deposits: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 55, p.
633–652.
ROBERTS, H.H., AND SYDOW, J., 2003, Late Quaternary stratigraphy and
sedimentology of the offshore Mahakham Delta, East Kalimantan
(Indonesia), in Sidi, F.H., Nummedal, D., Imbert, P., Darman, H., and
Posamantier, H.W., eds., Tropical Deltas of Southeast Asia—Sedi-
mentology, Stratigraphy, and Petroleum Geology, SEPM, Special
Publication 76, p. 125–145.
ROBERTS, H.H, FILLON, R.H., KOHL, B., ROBALIN, J.M., AND SYDOW, J.C., 2004,
Depositional architecture of the Lagniappe Delta: sediment charac-
teristics, timing of depositional events, and temporal relationship
with adjacent shelf-edge deltas, in Anderson, J.B., and Fillon, R.H.,
eds., Late Quaternary Stratigraphic Evolution of the Northern Gulf of
Mexico Margin: SEPM, Special Publication 79, p. 143–188
RODRIGUEZ, A.B., HAMILTON, M.D., AND ANDERSON, J.B., 2000, Facies and
evolution of the modern Brazos Delta, Texas: wave versus flood
influence: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 70, p. 283–295.
RYER, T.A., 1984, Transgressive–regressive cycles and the occurrence of
coal in some Upper Cretaceous strata of Utah, U.S.A., in Rahmani,
R.A., and Flores, R.M., eds., Sedimentology of coal and coal-bearing
sequences: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special
Publication 7, p. 217–227.
SCHEIHING, M.H., AND GAYNOR, G.C., 1991, The shelf sand-plume model: a
critique: Sedimentology, v. 38, p. 433–444.
SCHUMM, S.A., 1972, Fluvial paleochannels, in Rigby, J.K., and Hamblin,
W.K., eds., Recognition of Ancient Sedimentary Environments: Soci-
ety of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publica-
tion 16, p. 98–107.
291
SCRUTON, P.C., 1960, Delta building and the deltaic sequence, in Shepard,
F.P., Phleger, F.B., and Van Andel, T.H., eds., Recent Sediments,
Northwest Gulf of Mexico: Tulsa, Oklahoma, American Association
of Petroleum Geologists, p. 82–102.
SESTINI, G., 1989, Nile delta: a review of depositional environments and
geological history, in Whateley, M.K.G., and Pickering, K.T., eds.,
Deltas: Sites and Traps for Fossil Fuels: Geological Society of London,
Special Publication 41, p. 99–127.
SHANLEY, K.W., AND MCCABE, P.J., 1994, Perspectives on the sequence
stratigraphy of continental strata: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 544–568.
SHEPARD, F.P., PHLEGER, F.B., AND VAN ANDEL, T.H., EDS., 1960, Recent
Sediments, Northwest Gulf of Mexico: Tulsa, Oklahoma, American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, 394 p.
SIDI, F.H., NUMMEDAL, D., IMBERT, P., DARMAN, H., AND POSAMANTIER, H.W.,
EDS., 2003, Tropical Deltas of Southeast Asia—Sedimentology, Stratig-
raphy, and Petroleum Geology, SEPM, Special Publication 76, 269 p.
SMITH, N.D., PHILLIPS, A.C., AND POWELL, R.D., 1990, Tidal drawdown: a
mechanism for producing cyclic laminations in glaciomarine deltas:
Geology, v. 18, p. 10–13.
SMITH, D.G., JOL, H.M., SMITH, N.D., KOSTASCHUK, R.A., AND PEARCE, C.M.,
2005, Wave-dominated William river delta, its morphology, radar
stratigraphy, and history, Lake Athabasca, Canada, in Giosan, L., and
Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Ex-
amples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 295–318.
SNEDDEN, J.W., AND BERGMAN, K.M., 1999, Isolated shallow marine sand
bodies: Deposits for all interpretations, in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden,
J.W., eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sand Bodies: Sequence Strati-
graphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special
Publication 64, p. 1–12.
SORIA, J.M., FERNÁNDEZ, J., GARCÍA, F., AND VISERAS, C., 2003, Correlative
lowstand deltaic and shelf systems in the Gaudix basin (late Mi-
ocene, Betic Cordillera, Spain): the stratigraphic record of forced
and normal regressions: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 73, p.
912–925.
STOW, D.A.V., 1986, Deep clastic seas, in Reading, H.G., ed., Sedimentary
Environments and Facies, Second Edition: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell
Scientific Publications, p. 399–444.
SULLIVAN, M.D., VAN WAGONER, J.C., JENNETTE, D.C., FOSTER, M.E., STUART,
R.M., LOVELL, R.W., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1997, High resolution
sequence stratigraphy and architecture of the Shannon Sandstone,
Hartzog Draw Field, Wyoming: implications for reservoir man-
agement, in Shanley, K.W., and Perkins, B.F., eds., Shallow Marine
and Nonmarine Reservoirs, Sequence Stratigraphy, Reservoir Ar-
chitecture and Production Characteristics: Gulf Coast Section,
SEPM Foundation, Eighteenth Annual Research Conference. p.
331–344.
SUTER, J.H., AND BERRYHILL, H.L., JR., 1985, Late Quaternary shelf-margin
deltas, Northwest Gulf of Mexico: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 69, p. 77–91.
SYDOW, J., AND ROBERTS, H.H., 1994, Stratigraphic framework of a late
Pleistocene shelf-edge delta, northeast Gulf of Mexico: American
Association Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 1276–1312.
SYVITSKI, J.P.M., AND MOREHEAD, M.D., 1999, Estimating river-sediment
discharge to the ocean: application to the Eel margin, Northern
California: Marine Geology, v. 154, p. 13–28.
SYVITSKI, J.P.M., HARVEY, N., WOLLANSKI, E., BURNETT, W.C., PERILLO, G.M.E.,
AND GORNITZ, V., 2005, Dynamics of the Coastal Zone, in Crossland,
C.J., Kremer, H.H., Lindebloom, H.J., Marshall-Crossland, J.I., and Le
Tissier, M.D.A., eds., Global Fluxes in the Anthropocene: Berlin,
Springer, p. 39–94.
SWIFT. D.J.P., 1968, Coastal erosion and transgressive stratigraphy: Jour-
nal of Geology, v. 76, p. 444–456.
TA, T.K.O., NGUYEN, V.L., TATEISHI, M., KOBAYASHI, I., SAITO, Y., AND
NAKAMURA, T., 2002, Sediment facies and Late Holocene progradation
292 JANOK P. BHATTACHARYA
of the Mekong River Delta in Bentre Province, southern Vietnam: an
example of evolution from a tide-dominated to a tide- and wave-
dominated delta: Sedimentary Geology, v. 152, p. 313–325.
TA, T.K.O., NGUYEN, V.L., TATEISHI, M., KOBAYASHI, I., AND SAITO, Y., 2005,
Holocene Delta Evolution and Depositional Models of the Mekong
Delta, Southern Vietnam, in Giosan, L., and Bhattacharya, J.P., eds.,
River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Examples: SEPM, Special
Publication 83, p. 453–466.
TESSON, M., ALLEN, G.P., AND RAVÈNNE, C., 1993, Late Pleistocene shelf-
perched lowstand wedges on the Rhone continental shelf, in
Summerhayes, C.P., and Posamentier, H.W., eds., Sequence Stratig-
raphy and Facies Associations: International Association of Sedimen-
tologists, Special Publication 18, p. 183–196.
TILLMAN, R.W., AND MEREWETHER, E.A., 1998, Bayhead-delta and estuary
mouth bars of early Cenomanian age in the mid-Cretaceous Frontier
Formation, Central Wyoming (abstract): American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Annual Meeting, Extended Abstracts Volume
2, A675, p. 1–4.
TYE, R.S., 2004, Geomorphology: An approach to determining subsurface
reservoir dimensions: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Bulletin, v. 88, p. 1123–1147.
TYE, R.S., BHATTACHARYA, J.P., LORSONG, J.A., SINDELAR, S.T., KNOCK, D.G.,
PULS, D.D., AND LEVINSON, R.A., 1999, Geology and stratigraphy of
fluvio-deltaic deposits in the Ivishak Formation: Applications for
development of Prudhoe Bay Field, Alaska: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 83, p. 1588–1623.
TYE, R.S., AND COLEMAN, J.M., 1989, Depositional processes and stratigra-
phy of fluvially dominated lacustrine deltas: Mississippi Delta Plain:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 59, p. 973–996.
TYLER, N., AND FINLEY, R.J., 1991, Architectural controls on the recovery of
hydrocarbons from sandstone reservoirs, in Miall, A.D., and Tyler,
N., eds., The Three-dimensional Facies Architecture of Terrigenous
Clastic Sediments, and Its Implications for Hydrocarbon Discovery
and Recovery: SEPM, Concepts and Models in Sedimentology and
Paleontology, no. 3, p. 1–5.
ULICNY, D., 2001, Depositional systems and sequence stratigraphy of
coarse-grained deltas in a shallow-marine, strike-slip setting: the
Bohemian Cretaceous Basin, Czech Republic: Sedimentology, v. 48, p.
599–628.
VAN HEERDEN, I.L., AND ROBERTS, H.H., 1988, Facies development of
Atchafalaya delta, Louisiana: a modern bayhead delta: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 72, p. 439–453.
VAN WAGONER, J.C., MITCHUM, R.M., CAMPION, K.M., AND RAHMANIAN, V.D.,
1990, Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigraphy in Well Logs, Cores, and
Outcrops: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Methods
in Exploration Series, no. 7, 55 p.
VONGVISESSOMJAI, S., 1990, Coastal erosion in Thailand: Geographical
Journal, v. 15, p. 321–337.
VÖRÖSMARTY, C.J., SHARMA, K.P., BALÁZS, M.F., COPELAND, A.H., HOLDEN, J.,
MARBLE, J., AND LOUGH, J.A., 1997, The storage and aging of continental
runoff in large reservoir systems of the world: Ambio, v. 26, p. 210–
219.
WALKER, R.G., 1984. Facies Models, Second Edition: Geological Associa-
tion of Canada, 317 p.
WALKER, R.G., 1992, Facies, facies models and modern stratigraphic
concepts, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Re-
sponse to Sea Level Change: Geological Association of Canada, p. 1–14.
WALKER, R.G., AND HARMS, J.C., 1971, The “Catskill Delta”: A prograding
muddy shoreline in central Pennsylvania: Journal of Geology, v. 79,
p. 381–399.
WALKER, R.G., AND PLINT, A.G., 1992, Wave- and storm-dominated shal-
low marine systems, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies
Models: Response to Sea Level Change: Geological Association of
Canada, p. 219–238.
WARNE, A.G., MEADE, R.H., WHITE, W.A., GUEVARA, E.H., GIBEAUT, J., SMYTH,
R.C., ASLAN, A., AND TREMBLAY, T., 2002, Regional controls on geomor-
phology, hydrology, and ecosystem integrity in the Orinoco Delta,
Venezuela: Geomorphology, v. 44, p. 273–307.
WEISE, B.R., 1980, Wave-dominated deltaic systems of the Upper Creta-
ceous San Miguel Formation, Maverick Basin, South Texas: Austin,
Texas, Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, Report of Investigations
107, 39 p.
WELDER, F.A., 1959, Processes of Deltaic Sedimentation in the Lower
Mississippi River: Alexandria ,Virginia, Defense Technical Informa-
tion Center, 90 p.
WHITE, C.D., WILLIS, B.J., DUTTON, S.P., BHATTACHARYA, J.P., AND NARAYANAN,
K., 2004, Sedimentology, statistics, and flow behavior for a tide-
influenced deltaic sandstone, Frontier Formation, Wyoming, United
States, in Grammer, G.M., Harris, P.M., and Eberli, G.P., eds., Integra-
tion of Outcrop and Modern Analogs in Reservoir Modeling: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 80, p. 129–152.
WIGNALL, P.B., AND BEST, J.L., 2004, Sedimentology and kinematics of a
large, retrogressive growth-fault system in Upper Carboniferous
deltaic sediments, western Ireland: Sedimentology, v. 52, p. 1343–
1358.
WILLIAMS, H.F.L., AND ROBERTS, M.C., 1989, Holocene sea-level change and
delta growth: Fraser River delta, British Columbia: Canadian Journal
of Earth Sciences, v. 26, p. 1657–1666.
WILLIS, B.J., 1997, Architecture of fluvial-dominated valley-fill deposits in
the Cretaceous Fall River Formation: Sedimentology, v. 44, p. 735–
757.
WILLIS, B.J., 2005, Tide-influenced river delta deposits, in Giosan, L., and
Bhattacharya, J.P., eds., River Deltas—Concepts, Models, and Ex-
amples: SEPM, Special Publication 83, p. 87–129.
WILLIS, B.J., BHATTACHARYA, J.B., GABEL., S.L., AND WHITE, C.D, 1999, Archi-
tecture of a tide-influenced delta in the Frontier Formation of Central
Wyoming, USA: Sedimentology, v. 46, p. 667–688.
WILLIS, B.J., AND GABEL, S., 2001, Sharp-based, tide-dominated deltas of
the Sego Sandstone, Book Cliffs, Utah, USA: Sedimentology, v. 48,
p. 479–506.
WINKER, C.D., AND EDWARDS, M.B., 1983, Unstable progradational clastic
shelf margins, in Stanley, D.J., and Moore, G.T., eds., The Shelfbreak:
Critical Interface on Continental Margins: SEPM, Special Publication
33, p. 139–157.
WINN, R.D., 1991, Storm deposition in marine sand sheets: Wall Creek
Member, Frontier Formation, Powder River Basin, Wyoming: Journal
of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 86–101.
WOODROW, D.L., AND SEVON, W.D., EDS., 1985, The Catskill Delta: Geological
Society of America, Special Paper 201, 246 p.
WRIGHT, L.D., 1977, Sediment transport and deposition at river mouths: a
synthesis: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 88, p. 857–868.
WRIGHT, L.D., WISEMAN, W.J., BORNHOLD, B.D., PRIOR, D.B., SUHAYDA, J.N.,
KELLER, G.H., YANG, Z.S., AND FAN, Y.B., 1988, Marine dispersal and
deposition of Yellow River silts by gravity-driven underflows:
Nature, v. 332, p. 629–632.
YANG, C.S., AND SUN, J.S., 1988, Tidal sand ridges on the East China Sea
shelf, in de Boer, P.L., van Gelder, A., and Nio, S.D., eds., Tide-
Influenced Sedimentary Environments and Facies: Dordrecht, The
Netherlands, D. Riedel Publishing Company, p. 23–38.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 293

A REEXAMINATION OF FACIES MODELS FOR CLASTIC SHORELINES

H. EDWARD CLIFTON
6 Cielo Vista Drive, Monterey, California 93940, U.S.A.
e-mail: eclifton@earthlink.net

ABSTRACT: Currently accepted depositional models of coastal facies derive mostly from studies of modern depositional systems combined
with interpretations of ancient successions. Two factors, however, can limit the efficacy of such facies models. First, Holocene coastal
settings differ significantly from those in which many, if not most, ancient coastal sediments accumulated. Second, input to a model from
the rock record commonly is specific to a particular tectonic and oceanographic setting (which may be poorly constrained) and is not fully
exportable to other settings. This paper explores how these factors impact our interpretive capability.
Many, if not most, ancient shoreface deposits accumulated under conditions of progradation, a process relatively uncommon among
the world’s present shorelines. Instead, many modern postglacial coasts experience rising sea level and reduced sedimentation, which
enhances barrier-island development and influences the shoreface-to-shelf bottom profile and sand–mud distributions. Ignoring these
differences promotes inaccuracy in our facies models.
Often overlooked in the application of coastal facies models are variations imposed by texture, energy level, and tectonism. Sedimentary
structures on fine-grained sandy coasts differ substantially from those on a coast underlain by coarse-grained sediment. Deposits on a high-
energy coast are unlike those in a low-energy setting. Differing degrees of accommodation influence the nature of the preserved succession.
Some of the problems inherent in current facies models can be obviated by considering them as end members within a continuum of models
that incorporate different energy regimes, textural characters, and preservational modes.

INTRODUCTION
The basic model for open-coast clastic facies is not a complex
three-dimensional model, as with deep-sea fan facies or deltaic
facies, but rather a simple shallowing-upward facies succession
that is perpetuated in a sheet sand to its landward and seaward
pinchouts. The model follows the premise of Walther’s Law,
whereby the vertical ordering of facies reflects the lateral arrange-
ment of facies in a conformably prograding system (Middleton,
1973). In such a case, beach and shoreface (used here as the
relatively steep concave-up surface that lies between a beach
foreshore and a shelf or basin platform) deposits prograde over
adjacent shelf sediment. The resulting stratigraphic succession,
where complete, is an upward progression of shelf–shoreface–
foreshore–nonmarine facies (Fig. 1). Minor variations on the
central theme exist in the various published iterations of the
model (Figs. 2, 3, 4). All share a common motif of upward
progression from bioturbated muddy sediment of the inner shelf
to mixed mud and storm sand transitional to the sandy shoreface,
which is dominated by storm structures in the lower part and by
cross-bedded sand in the upper part. At the top lie flat-bedded
beach foreshore deposits that are overlain by backshore or other
nonmarine facies. More complex models have been proposed for
open-coast accumulations in settings where base-level fluctua-
tions impose patterns different from the laterally continuous
systematic facies progression. These include the “forced regres-
sion” models of Plint (1988, 1991) and Posamentier et al. (1992)
(Fig. 5) and the “transgressive incised shoreface” of Walker and
Plint (1992) and Bergman and Walker (1999) (Fig. 6). In these
models, stratigraphic associations differ from the basic model
and the upward facies progression may be incomplete.
Although the basic concept of shallowing-upward facies suc-
cession has been widely applied to ancient open-coast accumula-
tions, the specific models that exist do not cover all situations.
Some include assumptions that are demonstrably erroneous.
Much of the problem relates to limitations in the scope of studies
on which the models are based. This paper reviews the origins
and applications of the models and the impact of these problems.
It concludes by suggesting an alternative approach that would
allow a broader applicability of the models.
A DURABLE MODEL
The shallowing-up coastal classic facies succession in one or
another of its various manifestations (Figs. 1, 2, 3) is familiar to
virtually all students of shallow marine sandstones. The model
has persisted with little modification for nearly 30 years, as
depositional facies models for other systems, such as those for
deep-sea fans, evolved dramatically (and some continue to evolve,
as demonstrated in this collection of papers). The long-term
effectiveness of this model derives in large part from a combina-
tion of simplicity and consistency in process, geometry, and
preservation on wave-dominated coasts.
Although a complex array of processes influence coastal
settings, the effects of shoaling waves are primarily responsible
for shaping the nature of the clastic facies on open coasts, al-
though tides and biogenic processes may be locally significant.
Waves may exist as “seas”, driven by local winds, or as “swell”,
generated by distant storms. Swell tends to have longer period
and to influence the seabed to greater depths than do local sea
waves. “High-energy” coasts are likely to be dominated by swell.
“Low-energy” coasts receive smaller everyday waves but can
experience very large waves during storms.
Waves move sediment by two mechanisms: by inducing
water motion as they pass, and, at the shoreline, by generating
sustained flow in the form of shore-parallel longshore currents
and seaward-directed rip currents. The water motion induced by
passing waves takes a consistent and predictable pattern that
relates to shoaling changes in the wave form itself. Waves passing
into shallow water change from a rounded, nearly sinusoidal
form to one of sharp-crested peaks separated by broad, flat
troughs. As the waves approach the beach they become increas-
ingly asymmetric and ultimately break when they encounter
water depths slightly (1.2–1.4 times) deeper than the wave height.

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 293–337.
294 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

PROGRADATION

NONMARINE

UPPER SHOREFACE upward-shallowing

facies succession
LOWER SHOREFACE

SHELF

FIG. 1.—Characteristic mode of accumulation of shoreline deposits through progradation (shown here with a slight rise of relative
sea level during progradation), whereby shallow-water facies build laterally over deeper-water counterparts, generating an
upward-shallowing succession or, if sandwiched between transgressive episodes, a parasequence (see Harms et al., 1982).

A
FORESHORE high
TIDE
low

UPPER
MIDDLE
FWWB LOWER
SHOREFACE
OFFSHORE

MUDDY SUBSTRATE SANDY SUBSTRATE

F W W B = FAIR–WEATHER WAVE BASE

B
LITHOLOGY ENVIRONMENT

COASTAL PLAIN
COAL
PLANAR LAMINATION BEACH FORESHORE
0m

BREAKER ZONE
CROSSBEDDING
(UPPER SHOREFACE)

SWALY CROSS-
STRATIFICATION SHOREFACE
10
HUMMOCKY CROSS-
LOWER SHOREFACE/
STRATIFICATION
INNER SHELF TRANSITION
BIOTURBATED
SANDY SILTSTONE MID-SHELF

FIG. 2.—A) Beach-to-offshore profile in facies model of Walker and Plint (1992). Fair-weather wave base at base of shoreface. B)
Shallowing-up facies succession in facies model of Walker and Plint (1992).
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 295

A HIGH-ENERGY SHOREFACE ZONATION

FORE-
UPPER SHORE

MIDDLE
LOWER
SHELF TRANSITION SHOREFACE

B
"HIGH ENERGY" "LOW ENERGY"

DUNE OR MARSH DUNE OR MARSH

FORESHORE FORESHORE

UPPER SHOREFACE
>2m
SHOREFACE
LOWER
SHOREFACE
< 25 m MIDDLE
SHOREFACE TRANSITION

LOWER SHELF
SHOREFACE

TRANSITION

SHELF

FIG. 3.—A) Beach-to-offshore profile (high-energy) in facies model of Galloway and Hobday (1996). Features a “transition zone”
between shoreface and shelf. B) Shallowing-up facies succession in facies model of Galloway and Hobday (1996). Features a
“transition zone” between shoreface and shelf in both high- and low-energy sequences.

The waves then pass through a breaker zone and end as swash
and backwash on the beach foreshore.
Water moved by the passing of a wave follows a circular orbit,
forward under the crest of the wave and backward under the
trough, and the diameter of the circle diminishes with depth until
the movement becomes insignificant (“wave base”). As a wave
enters shallow water, the circle is deformed into an ellipse and the
water movement just above the seabed is essentially horizontal
(Fig. 7). As long as the wave form is nearly sinusoidal, the forward
and backward movement of the water is symmetrical in both
duration and velocity. But as the wave crests become peaked, the
velocity profile of the orbital currents changes: the forward
motion under the wave crests becomes stronger and of shorter
duration than the seaward motion (Fig. 8).
The velocity asymmetry of oscillatory (orbital) motion has
several geological ramifications. First, because bedload trans-
port is on the order of the cube of the velocity, the asymmetry
has the capability to drive sediment on the bed in a landward
direction. Second, bedforms created by this flow face in a
landward direction. Third, the stronger landward flow can
overcome thresholds for movement of clasts that cannot be
moved by the weaker seaward flow, and, where the grain-size
range is sufficient, results in a preferential landward movement
of the coarser clasts and textural sorting within the nearshore
zone (Fig. 9).
All of this movement involves little or no mass transport of
water. But as waves enter the breaker zone, water is carried
forward by the waves. The result is a combination of setup and
setdown, whereby the sea surface is elevated adjacent to the
beach and depressed just seaward of the breaker line (Fig. 10).
These changes in elevation create a hydraulic head that serves as
the driving mechanism for longshore and rip currents, unidirec-
tional flows that constitute nearshore circulation cells (Fig. 11).
These simple processes encompass the significant forces that
drive sedimentation in the nearshore, and they have prevailed
since waves first came ashore early in the earth’s history.
Wave-dominated shorelines typically have a simple geom-
etry. In plan view, the shorelines tend to be two-dimensional and
uncomplicated. In profile, shoaling waves create a relatively
steep, concave-up shoreface (Fig. 12) that extends seaward from
the beach foreshore and merges offshore with a much flatter shelf
or basin platform (Johnson, 1919). On prograding shorelines, the
shoreface is an equilibrium surface, probably reflecting a balance
of seaward sediment transport during storms and the landward
transport by shoaling waves between storms (Niedoroda et al.,
1984). The sediment typically coarsens toward the upper part of
the shoreface, the most energetic part of the system, where waves
and longshore and rip currents typically shape the bed into
dunes. The shoreface geometry may be complicated by the pres-
ence of breaker bars, but the overall system is one of general
296 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A
FORESHORE

MLW
FAIR-WEATHER WAVE BASE
SHOREFACE
OFFSHORE- STORM WAVE BASE
TRANSITION
OFFSHORE

MLW = Mean Low Water

B LITHOLOGY AND PROCESSES FACIES

SWASH ZONE FORESHORE

STORM EROSION, UPPER

FAIR-WEATHER SHOREFACE
DEPOSITION

STORM AND
FAIR-WEATHER SHOREFACE
DEPOSITION

STORM-DOMINATED OFFSHORE-
TRANSITION

FEW STORM EFFECTS OFFSHORE

FIG. 4.—A) Beach-to-offshore profile in facies model of Reading and Collinson (1996). Fair-weather wave base defines base of
shoreface. B) Shallowing-up facies succession in facies model of Reading and Collinson (1996).

Alluvial-plain and coastal-plain aggradation

A bayline Shoreline migration

B Alluvial-plain aggradation

bayline Shoreline migration

subaerial erosion
C
highstand shoreline
lowstand shoreline

submarine wave erosion

FIG. 5.—“Normal” and “forced” regressions. A) “Normal” regression under conditions of rising sea level. Shoreline deposits build
seaward and upward. B) “Normal” regression under stable sea level. Shoreline deposits build laterally. C) “Forced” regression
under conditions of falling sea level. Shoreline deposits become detached from their former position and can translate a
substantial distance into the basin. Subaerial erosion occurs landward of the new shoreline deposits, which, because of wave
erosion, display a sharp, erosional base over some portion of the previously deposited shelf facies. Modified from Posamentier
et al. (1992).
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 297

A
A 1. SEA LEVEL (SL) AT HIGHSTAND

A, F 2. RAPID SL
FALL
A, B
H G F
A
E
5. EROSION, D
CONSTANT SL
“CLIFF” C
SL 4. RAPID, STEPPED B
SL RISE
FWWB 3. SLOW SL RISE

WAVE EROSION IN SHOREFACE

B
POST-TRANSGRESSIVE SHELF MUD

TSE2
PRE-TRANSGRESSIVE
SHELF MUD
TSE1
SHOREFACE SAND BODY

FIG. 6.—A) “Stepped transgressions” following a major fall in sea level (2). Rapid rise in sea level (4) can preserve shoreface deposits
(E, D, formed during pauses in the transgression), which are “trapped” against a sea cliff, where they will be encased in offshore
mud as transgression progresses. Erosion surfaces are marked by transgressive lags. Modified from Walker and Plint (1992). B)
Template and log signatures for a shoreface deposit preserved after a stepped transgression (TSE1 = initial transgressive surface
of erosion which cuts a “cliff”, TSE2 = resumed transgressive surface of marine erosion). Shoreface sand body accumulates during
brief stillstand of sea level between the two phases of transgression. After Bergman and Walker (1999).

simplicity (Fig. 13). Finally, because wave processes tend to
straighten progradational shorelines, the process of prograda-
tion tends to produce simple sheet sand deposits, with minimal
geometric complication.
There is also simplicity and consistency in preservation. Shore-
line successions typically develop where the coast progrades
through the addition and accumulation of sediment (Fig. 1). The
result is the basic depositional facies model, reflecting the shal-
lowing-upward succession of facies (typically coarsening-up-
ward as well). Accumulations of coastal deposits are likely to be
preserved only within a subsiding basin. Fluctuations in eustasy,
sediment supply, or rates of subsidence typically generate alter-
nations of marine regression (progradation) and transgression.
During marine transgression, the landward migration of the
shoreface equilibrium profile (Fig. 14) removes much of the
previously deposited material and produces a surface of ravine-
ment (transgressive surface of erosion). As a consequence, stacked
sets of shoreline deposits tend to consist of a stacked set of
progradational parasequences separated by erosional surfaces
formed during intervening transgressions (Fig. 15). Erosional
surfaces formed at the base of tidal inlet deposits during trans-
gression may complicate the pattern (Clifton, 2003).
ORIGIN AND APPLICATION OF THE MODEL(S)
Among the earliest depositional facies models proposed for
shallow marine sandbodies was that of the barrier island. Barriers
are particularly prominent on the U.S. Gulf Coast and East Coast
and on the southeastern coast of the North Sea, all sites of early
coastal sedimentologic studies (e.g., Shepard and Moore, 1955;
Van Straaten, 1959; Shepard et al., 1960; Bernard, et al., 1963;
Reineck, 1963; Hoyt et al., 1964). Simultaneously, geologists began
to recognize that depositional facies could be very useful in the
exploration for petroleum hydrocarbons. As a result, “linear clastic
shorelines” became an early analog for open-coast deposits, and
barriers became almost synonymous with shallow-marine sand
deposits. It was noted that barriers contained an upward-coarsen-
ing lithologic succession (Weimer, 1961; Bernard et al., 1963;
Shelton, 1965, 1967; Berg and Davies, 1968), and for some time it
was virtually assumed that all shallowing-up shallow-marine
sandstones originated in a barrier. Selley (1969), in his survey of
depositional environments, focuses almost exclusively on barri-
ers, referring to nearshore deposits (even sheet sands) as “barrier
beach” facies. In SEPM Special Publication 16, Recognition of
Ancient Sedimentary Environments (Rigby and Hamblin, 1972),
298 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

WAVE TRANSLATION BOTTOM OSCILLATORY CURRENTS

SYMMETRIC ASYMMETRIC

"wave base"

FIG. 8.—Schematic representation of relative velocity (arrow thick-

FIG. 7.—Water particles moved by passing waves in deep water
follow a circular orbit that diminishes to zero at depth. In
shallower water, the particles follow an elliptical orbit that
flattens downward into a simple back-and-forth motion at the
sea floor, forward under the wave crest and backward under
the trough. The landward-most set of motions shown here is
exaggerated for convenience.
a chapter is dedicated to criteria for recognizing ancient barrier
coastline (Dickinsen et al., 1972), and scant attention is given to
strand plains. As late as 1982, McCubbin, in a discussion of sandy
coastal environments, discusses strand plains but devotes most
of his text to barriers. In my experience in the petroleum industry
in the 1990s, I found a surprising number of shallow-marine
sandstones interpreted as linear barriers, even where the geom-
etry did not support a barrier-island interpretation.
Early depositional facies studies of shallow-marine sandbodies
encountered difficulties with the barrier interpretation. Harms et
al. (1965), in a description of the Fox Hills Sandstone in Wyoming,
could not accept an earlier interpretation of the unit as a barrier
deposit (Weimer, 1961). They noted that although the sandstone
ness) and duration (arrow length) of oscillatory flow at the
bottom beneath shoaling waves. Flow is symmetric under
sinusoidal waves and asymmetric under sharp-crested waves.
Flow is landward under wave crests and seaward under wave
troughs. Stronger landward velocities (1) generate landward
bed-load transport, (2) create landward-directed cross-bed-
ding and ripple lamination, and (3) overcome threshold ve-
locities of clasts too large to be moved seaward, thereby
contributing to selective landward transport of coarser clasts
and overall textural sorting on the beach and shoreface.
showed the upward lithologic progression attributed to barrier-
island deposits (upward coarsening, upward transition from
marine to nonmarine environments), the lateral facies relations
were inconsistent with a barrier interpretation. They could not,
however, offer an alternative interpretation.
The description by Curray et al. (1969) of a prograding
strandplain at Nayarit, Mexico, provided an alternative to the
barrier-island model: a sheet sand with an internal shallowing-up
facies succession. The facies models shown in Figures 1–3 are
consistent with either prograding strand plains or barrier islands,
where the primary differences lie in the geometries and facies

200

threshold velocity for moving a pebble with a diameter of 2.5 cm

Onshore
100

Bottom
orbital
velocity 0
(cm/s)

Offshore 100

threshold velocity for moving a pebble with a diameter of 2.5 cm

200
10 20
0
Time (seconds)

FIG. 9.—Selective shoreward transport of a 2.5 cm pebble under shoaling waves in which the landward oscillatory flow under the
wave crest has a greater velocity than the seaward flow under the trough. Dashed lines indicate threshold velocity, areas in red
indicate intervals of transport (adapted from Komar, 1976). Threshold velocity is derived from Komar and Miller (1973).
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS
Breaker
line
Setdown Setup
SWL
FIG. 10.—Setup and setdown of the sea surface (departure from
the still-water line (SWL)) owing to the landward transport of
water within the surf zone. Depression of the sea surface
(setdown) just outside the breaker line and elevation of the sea
surface adjacent to the beach provides the hydraulic head for
nearshore circulation cells.
associations. Ryer (1977) noted the asymmetry of shoreface suc-
cessions, in which the shallowing-up facies progression is typi-
cally capped by an erosional surface. He attributed the erosion
and the accompanying abrupt return to facies deposited in deeper
water to a landward shift in shoreface profile during transgres-
sion (Bruun, 1962).
The prograding strand-plain model, which may have first
been proposed by Harms et al. (1975) and was expanded upon by
Harms et al. (1982), has been applied successfully in many basins
throughout the world. It predicts that prograding shoreline sand-
stones become progressively coarser and/or cleaner in an upsec-
tion direction, an attribute readily identifiable in well logs in areas
where rock data are sparse or absent.
Despite the success of the prograding shoreline models, they
did not explain several categories of deposits, such as sharp-
FORE-
SHORE
SHOREFACE
INNER
SHELF
FIG. 12.—The shoreface is best defined as a morphologic feature that attends nearly all clastic shorelines. It has a relatively steep
concave-up surface that extends seaward from the beach foreshore and merges with the much flatter shelf or basin platform.
Breaker bars, as shown, may cover the upper part of the shoreface here.
299
Wave crests
Rip current Rip current
Breaker line Breaker line
Longshore currents Longshore currents
Beach Beach
FIG. 11.—Nearshore circulation cells where wave incidence is
parallel to coast. Circulation consists of unidirectional rip and
longshore currents generated by the hydraulic head caused
by setup and setdown of the sea surface in and near the
breaker zone.
based shoreface deposits resting abruptly on shelf mudstone, or
isolated sandstone bodies encased in shelf mudstone or shale
(Snedden and Bergman, 1999). Although these latter deposits
commonly share similar characteristics with shoreline succes-
sions (upward coarsening and upward increase in depositional
energy), they lack the sheet geometry and lateral facies relations
normally found in a progradational unit.
The advent of sequence stratigraphy created a new awareness
of the potential importance of sea-level change on facies associa-
tions. The progradational-shoreline model is premised on con-
stant or slightly rising relative sea level (Fig. 1). New models were
proposed involving a fall of relative sea level, or “forced regres-
sion” (Plint, 1988; Posamentier et al., 1992). In these models, a
relatively rapid fall in sea level induces a seaward “jump” of the
shoreline deposits to a new, topographically lower position (Figs.
5, 6, 16, 17). The models differ in their extent of wave erosion and
300 H. EDWARD CLIFTON
FIG. 13.—Two-dimensional wave-dominated open coast, South
Carolina, U.S.A. Two sets of breaker bars are clearly visible: a
continuous inner bar, and an outer bar on which waves break
more sporadically. Ridge-and-runnel systems occupy lower
beach foreshore, particularly in the distance. Although a
barrier presently occupies this coast, progradation would
produce a shallowing-upward sheet sand.
nature of subsequent transgression. Plint (1988) and Snedden and
Bergman (1999) envision wave erosion by fair-weather waves
across the shelf platform in advance of the new shoreline position,
producing an extensive erosional base to the advancing shoreface
deposits (Figs. 16, 17). Posamentier et al. (1992) envision wave
erosion limited to the position of the newly established shoreline,
and a gradational shoreface–shelf transition as progradation
ensues (Fig. 5). Posamentier et al. (1992) and Snedden and Bergman
(1999) invoke a steady transgression that isolates the lowstand
deposits, whereas Bergman and Walker (1988) and Walker and
Plint (1992) call on a stepped transgression, featuring sporadic
stillstands of the sea. During the stillstands, shoreline deposits
can accumulate against a wave-cut sea cliff (Fig. 6), thereby
forming narrow, shore-parallel linear sandbodies encased in
marine shale as transgression proceeds.
TRANSGRESSION
SHOREFACE
LAGOON BARRIER INNER SHELF
SL 2 could be useful in the interpretation of shallow-marine sand-
SL 1 stone (Weimer and Hoyt, 1964; Harms et al., 1965; Howard,
RAVINEMENT SURFACE
LAGOONAL SEDIMENT BARRIER-ISLAND SAND
TIDAL-INLET FILL SHELF SAND AND MUD
FIG. 14.—Process of marine transgression is commonly associated
with the landward migration of a barrier island or barrier spit.
Landward translation of the shoreface profile as sea level rises
(here from SL 1 to SL 2) creates an erosional surface (surface
of ravinement or transgressive surface of erosion) cut into
previously deposited sediment. Because deeper-water sedi-
ments (here inner-shelf sand/mud) accumulate on the ravine-
ment surface, it marks an abrupt upward change to deeper-
water deposits.
TRANSGRESSION
PROGRADATION
TRANSGRESSION
PROGRADATION
TRANSGRESSION
PROGRADATION
TRANSGRESSION
FIG. 15.—Typical pattern of stacked shoreline successions. Shal-
lowing-upward progradational parasequences meters to tens
of meters thick are separated by transgressive surfaces of
erosion (ravinement surfaces). Falls in sea level prior to trans-
gressions can produce erosional sequence boundaries and
incised-valley-fill deposits at the top of the parasequences.
The forced-regression models have been much applied since
their inception (Posamentier and Chamberlain, 1993; Ainsworth
and Crowley, 1994, to cite a few). The Bergman and Walker
(1988) transgressive-incised-shoreface model for the Cardium
has been used to interpret other less well-documented shorefaces
(Pattison and Walker, 1992; Walker and Wiseman, 1995; Le
Roux and Elgueta, 1997; Bergman, 1999; MacEachern et al.
1999), including, somewhat controversially, the Shannon Sand-
stone (Bergman and Walker, 1999). As will be discussed, how-
ever, not all sharp-based shoreface deposits are necessarily
produced by forced regression.
Ichnofacies models, based on associations of trace fossils,
have also been proposed for wave-dominated coastal succes-
sions. Early students of these deposits recognized that traces
1966). The trace Ophiomorpha was thought initially to be indica-
tive of a shallow-marine environment (Weimer and Hoyt, 1964;
Harms et al., 1965), but subsequent studies found it in a variety
of other marine environments, including those at bathyal depths
(Kern and Warme, 1974). The trace Macaronichnus occurs in
many beach foreshore facies (Saunders and Pemberton. 1986;
MacEachern and Pemberton, 1992), but the trace is present in
other paralic environments as well, including upper shoreface
(MacEachern and Pemberton 1992; Male, 1992), lower shoreface
(Clifton, 1981), and tidal flats and channels (Clifton and Thomp-
son, 1978). A problem with trace fossils is that, for most, we have
no knowledge of the physical or chemical factors that limit their
distribution.
Several attempts have been made to associate ichnologic trends
to lithologic trends in nearshore sediment. Howard (1966) identi-
fied patterns in the trace assemblages that corresponded to the
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 301

A
Swaly
cross-stratified sand
Fair-weather wave base

Hummocky
cross-stratified sand

Rippled and bioturbated sand and mud

B
Swaly
cross-stratified sand

Hummocky
cross-stratified sand

Rippled and bioturbated sand and mud

C “Normal”, gradationally based shoreface succession

Coastal plain
Coal/backshore
0 Beach foreshore
Upper shoreface
cross-bedded ss

Sharp-based shoreface succession

Shoreface
swaly cross- deposited during a forced regression
stratified ss

10 m
Shoreface-shelf
transition Relatively thin,
Hummocky cross- erosionally based
stratified ss shoreface sand
body

Mid-shelf Mudstone interclasts

bioturbated ss-mds gutter casts

Outer shelf
bioturbated mds

FIG. 16.—”Forced regression” as visualized by Plint (1988). A) Prograding shoreline in which swaly cross-stratification defines the
lower shoreface, hummocky cross-stratification defines the shoreface–shelf transition, and rippled and bioturbated sand and
mud typify the mid-shelf facies. B) Result of “forced regression”, where falling sea level induces mid-shelf wave erosion and
shoreface sands accumulate on the erosional surface. C) Vertical succession of a “forced regressive” deposit compared to a
“normal” progression.
302 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A
Relatively slow sea-level fall

FWWB
Rippled sandstone and mudstone

(FWWB = fair-weather wave base)

B

Relatively rapid sea-level fall

thin shoreface sand

New erosional shoreface profile

Relatively stable sea level

Lowstand shoreface sandbody

D Relatively rapid sea-level rise

FWWB
TSE Transgressive mud blanket

Isolated sharp-based shelf sand body ("offshore bar")

FIG. 17.—Model of formation of isolated shallow marine sandbodies by relative sea-level change. A) Relatively slow sea-level fall;
shoreline moves seaward relatively slowly. Reduced accommodation results in a relatively thin shoreface sandbody. B) Faster
relative sea-level fall; shoreline moves seaward at an increasing rate. Rate of sea-level fall exceeds subsidence, accommodation
is reduced to nil, and the shelf becomes emergent. C) Relatively stable sea level; shoreline incises in seaward position. Erosion
plus subsidence create space into which a new shoreface sandbody can prograde. D) Relatively rapid sea-level rise; shoreline
shifts rapidly landward. Sandbody is isolated in shelf mud. After Snedden and Bergman (1999), following Plint’s (1988) model
(Fig. 16).

lithologic changes in shallowing-up Cretaceous sandstones in the
Book Cliffs, Utah, U.S.A. (Fig. 18), and Howard et al. (1972) and
Howard and Reineck (1981) describe the distribution of physical
and biological structures in beach-to-offshore transects at Sapelo
Island, Georgia, and Port Hueneme, California, U.S.A. More re-
cently, Pemberton et al. (1992) followed up on Howard’s work in
the Book Cliffs with a more detailed analysis of the traces associ-
ated with the lithologic succession (Fig. 19), and in 1992 MacEachern
and Pemberton (1992) proposed an ichnofacies model for Creta-
ceous shoreface successions in the western interior basin (Fig. 20).
The ichnofacies model is a useful adjunct to models based on
texture and sedimentary structures, and may provide a basis for
subtle environmental interpretations not possible on the basis of
physical structures alone (MacEachern and Pemberton, 1992).
Unlike models based on physical features, ichnofacies models are
subject to biological evolutionary trends and may therefore be
somewhat time-specific. Comparisons with modern analogs are
also inherently difficult owing to the typically limited view of the
sub-sea-floor section on modern coasts. The studies of modern
biological structures by Howard et al. (1972) and Howard and
Reineck (1981), for example, provide little data that bear on the
model developed by MacEachern and Pemberton (1992).
THE HOLOCENE HERITAGE:
ANALOGS FROM A NON-ANALOGOUS WORLD
At present, a glacio-eustatic highstand exists, following a
rapid and large sea-level rise (that began about 17,000 years ago),
a consequence of the melting of continental glaciers that devel-
oped during the Wisconsin glaciation. Sea level continues to rise
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS
Plug-
shaped
burrow
Plural Teichichnus
curving
tubes
Ophiomorpha
FIG. 18.—Distribution of traces in a shallowing-up succession in the Cretaceous Blackhawk Formation, Book Cliffs, Utah, U.S.A.
Constructed from data provided by Howard (1966).
on many coasts (albeit at a greatly reduced rate), and much of the
world’s coastal area remains in a state of slow transgression. In
contrast, the coastal successions to which the classic shoreface
model applies are, by definition, progradational. The attempts to
incorporate observations from a still somewhat transgressive
world into a progradational model have created a number of
problems for our models of open-coast clastic facies.
Barriers
Presently, about 15% of the world’s coastline is fronted by
sandy barrier islands or barrier spits (Glaeser, 1978), much of it on
U.S. coasts, and it is unsurprising that the linear sandbodies
represented therein provided an early, and widely used, explora-
tion model. The origin of barrier islands has been much debated
(see discussion in Davis, 1994), but most seem to form as a result
of landward transport and upward accretion of sand (Davis,
1994). Many, if not most, modern barriers seem to be accumula-
tions of sand that are migrating landward as part of a slow
transgression (Kraft et al., 1973; Boyd, et al., 1992). A key factor in
their development is probably a paucity of sand in the open-coast
system. It is generally accepted that during a rise in relative sea
level much sediment is trapped in rivers and estuaries and that
the amount of sediment, particularly sand, delivered to the open
coast in many settings is greatly reduced. Waves mobilize the
available sand and concentrate it along the coast into a barrier,
303
Foreshore
Upper shoreface
Lower shoreface
Offshore
Asterosoma Snail trails
which exists because the sediment supply is insufficient to fill the
basin landward of the barrier. Under this concept, the barrier
continues to retreat to landward until a new progradational
episode begins. As noted by Suter and Clifton (1999), the biggest
pitfall to using modern analogs is preservation potential. The
most common record of geologically preserved barrier islands
may be as the landward-most part of a progradational sand sheet
(Fig. 21).
Sand–Mud Distribution
The fact that many of the present-day coasts, particularly
those with barriers, are sand-poor has also directed our thinking
about the distribution of sand and mud in ancient coastal sys-
tems. Where sand is more or less confined to a barrier’s shoreface,
a transition from sand to mud is likely to coincide with the base
of the shoreface. Because so many of the early studies of coastal
facies focused on barrier islands, it became generally accepted
that a transition from sand to mud defines the base of the
shoreface. This concept persists today in our models of prograd-
ing coastal deposits. In nearly all of them, the base of the shoreface
coincides with a downward textural transition from sandstone to
shale (Figs. 2, 3, 4).
Under conditions of progradation, sand is likely to be far more
abundant and can extend far out onto the shelf. North of the
mouth of the Columbia River, for example, the transition from
304 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

LITHOFACIES TRACE FOSSIL ASSEMBLAGES

FORESHORE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0

UPPER SHOREFACE

5
PROXIMAL MIDDLE SHOREFACE
DISTAL MIDDLE SHOREFACE

PROXIMAL LOWER SHOREFACE

10

DISTAL LOWER SHOREFACE

PROXIMAL LOWER SHOREFACE

15

DISTAL LOWER SHOREFACE

PROXIMAL OFFSHORE
20 m
TRACE FOSSILS
Helminthopsis A A O O - - -
Anconichnus C C A C - - -
Planolites A A C O - - -
Chondrites - O C C - - -
A = abundant Teichichnus - C C O - - -
C = common Thalassinoides - C C O - - -
O = occasional Terebellina S C C O - - -
S = sparse
Rosselia - O O O - - -
* = opportunistic following Rhizocoralium - S - - - - -
storm sedimentation
Skolithos S* S* O* C* C - -

Escape Burrow - S* O* A* S - S
Ophiomorpha - S* S* C* C O S
Arenicolites S* S* S* - S - -

Diplocraterion - - S* S* S - -

Palaeophycus - O* C* C* C O S

FIG. 19.—Trace-fossil distributions in core from the Spring Canyon Member of the Blackhawk Fm., Price, Utah, U.S.A. From
Pemberton et al. (1992).

sand to mud lies in a water depth of about 40 m near the river
mouth (Fig. 22). The transition extends to the north across the
shelf in progressively deeper water, ultimately reaching about 90
m a few tens of kilometers north of the river mouth. Off north-
central California, the sand–mud transition lies consistently at a
water depth of about 60 m. (Fig. 23). Even off some barrier coasts,
such as that of New Jersey, sand extends offshore well onto the
shelf (Fig. 24). Such sands may not be coeval with those on the
barrier but could be indistinguishable from them in the rock
record. Depositional facies models that equate the sandstone–
shale transition with the base of the shoreface may be valid for
some deposits, but they do not provide an encompassing gener-
alization.
Shoreface Profile
The relief of shoreface profiles in our present post-transgressive
world is variable (Fig. 25), depending on energy level and the
seafloor configuration prior to the transgression. The range in
water depths at the base of modern shorefaces led Galloway and
Hobday (1996) to conclude that that the thickness of shoreface
facies successions spans some 2 to 25 meters (Fig. 3). This variation,
however, occurs on erosional coasts. Prograding coasts, which
provide the analog for nearly all ancient shoreline succession,
show less variability. On the prograding high-energy coast of
southern Washington state, U.S.A., the break in slope that defines
the shoreface–shelf transition occurs at a water depth of about 10
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS
Backshore
Foreshore
Upper suspension
Shoreface feeding
Middle
Shoreface
Lower
Shoreface
Transition
deposit
feeding
Upper
Offshore
Lower
Offshore grazing &
foraging
Shelfal
FIG. 20.—Ichnofacies model for the shoreface, after Pemberton et al. (1992).
m (Fig. 26). The progradational coast of Nayarit, Mexico, a region
of somewhat lower wave energy, has the base of the shoreface at
around 6–7 m (Fig. 27). The base of the shoreface on Galveston
Island, a prograding part of the Gulf of Mexico also with relatively
low wave energy (Morton, 1994), lies at a water depth of about 6 m
(Fig. 28). In contrast, the base of the shoreface off Padre Island, an
eroding part of the Gulf coastline (Morton, 1994), lies in water
depths that approach 20 m (Fig. 25). On the basis of these observa-
tions it seems likely that, barring unusual rates of accommodation,
the thickness of individual shoreface succession in the strati-
graphic record is not likely to exceed 10–12 m.
Many modern shorelines, particularly those on the U.S.
Atlantic coast, are fringed by shoreface-attached ridges, linear
bodies of sand, or sand ridges, that rise above the adjacent sea
floor (Snedden et al., 1984; Hoogendoorn and Dalrymple, 1986;
Antia et al., 1994; van de Meene, et al., 1996; Dalrymple and
Hoogendoorn, 1997). The ridges can be tens of kilometers long,
0.7 to 8 km wide, and 5 to 40 m high, and they are composed of
fine to coarse sand. The ridges typically lie oblique to the
shoreline and tend to be asymmetric, with side slopes ranging
from < 1° to a maximum of 7°. Sediment on the stoss sides of
305
Psilonichnus
Ichnofacies
High Tide
Low Tide
Skolithos
Ichnofacies
Minimum
wave base
Cruziana
Ichnofacies
Maximum
wave base
Zoophycos
Ichnofacies
ridges is generally coarser than that on their lee sides. Most
shoreface-attached ridges consist of an upward-coarsening ac-
cumulation of storm-event beds (Snedden et al., 1994;
Hoogendoorn and Dalrymple, 1986; Rine et al., 1991; Dalrymple
and Hoogendoorn, 1997), although some show evidence of both
storm and tidal influences in their internal structures (Antia et
al., 1994; van de Meene et al., 1996). Coring and/or high-
resolution seismic profiling show that many contemporary
ridges are compound features, composed of an upper part
shaped by modern processes and a core derived in an earlier
setting (Rine et al., 1991; Snedden et al., 1994).
Shoreface-attached ridges appear to be phenomena associ-
ated with a retreating shoreline (McBride and Moslow, 1991). As
the shoreline shifts landward, some of the ridges are left behind
as isolated features on the inner shelf (Fig. 29), where they may be
further modified by shelf processes (Swift et al., 1986). Although
shoreface-attached ridges can be imposing coastal features, their
association with transgressive coasts minimizes any importance
as part of a progadational shoreline model. Any preservation is
most likely as isolated linear shelf sand bodies within a shelf
succession (Swift and Parsons, 1999).
306 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

1. Sedimentation > base-level rise, progradation

2. Sedimentation < base-level rise, formation of barrier and lagoon

3. Sedimentation << base-level rise, transgression

4. Sedimentation > base-level rise, progradation

Shoreface deposits Bay fill

Tidal deposits and bay fill Inner-shelf deposits

FIG. 21. Schematic diagram showing the development, landward migration, and stranding of a barrier in response to changes in the
balance of sedimentation and relative sea-level fluctuation. During progradation in step 4, barrier maintains its identity until the
embayment created by the barrier is filled, at which time the coast converts to a strand plain.

TECTONIC SETTING AND GRAIN SIZE
Most of the early studies of modern open-coast systems were
conducted on tectonically passive margins of the U. S. Atlantic
and Gulf coasts and the German and Dutch coasts of the North
Sea, where rivers with low gradients cross broad coastal plains
and deliver fine sand to the shoreline. As a result, the emerging
models were premised on a nearshore system composed of
uniformly fine-grained sand. These models were corroborated by
studies in the Book Cliffs and elsewhere made on rocks of similar
texture. The generalizations drawn in these studies, however, fail
in varying degrees when applied to coarser-grained open-coast
deposits, particularly those in tectonically active settings.
Sedimentologists have tended to consider grain-size distribu-
tions mostly to be reflective of processes of transport and depo-
sition, hence the numerous, largely unsuccessful, attempts to
reconstruct ancient depositional environments from textural pa-
rameters. While it is true that processes, in part, influence the
texture of the sediment, sources and delivery systems also play a
significant role, particularly in the marine environment. Waves
can work only the sand population provided, and textural varia-
tion is a highly significant but commonly underrated parameter
in determining the nature of coastal facies.
Grain size largely determines the slope of a beach–nearshore
system. Coarse systems are steep, the waves break near the beach,
and wave energy tends to be reflected back into the ocean (Wright
et al., 1979). Fine beach–nearshore systems slope more gently,
with the result that waves break farther from the shoreline and
dissipate their energy across a wide surf zone, in which bars and
troughs are likely to develop. It is commonly assumed that high-
energy beaches are steeper than their lower-energy counterparts,
but studies of modern beaches have demonstrated just the re-
verse: they are more gently inclined (Komar, 1976). The assump-
tion probably derives from erroneously mentally associating
coarse beaches with high energy.
Grain size is a major influence in the size and shape of
bedforms. This has long been known for unidirectional flow, but
the textural relation may be even greater for wave-generated
structures. Figure 30 shows the spacing of symmetric ripples as a
function of maximum bottom orbital velocity and grain size for a
ten-second wave. Only very small ripples form in fine to very fine
sand at the same orbital velocities that generate megaripples in
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 307

200 m 100 m 50 m

MUD
VERY Willapa
FINE Bay
SAND

RELICT
SAND

Columbia R.
0 10 KM

FINE SAND

FIG. 22.—Distribution of sand and mud on the continental shelf off the mouth of the Columbia River, Pacific Northwest Coast of
the United States. After Nittrouer et al. (1986).

medium to coarse sand. It is unlikely that bedforms capable of

POINT ARENA
generating cross-bedding sets more than a few centimeters thick
can develop in fine to very fine sand under purely oscillatory
flow.
A comparison of texturally disparate coasts that have similar
wave climates illustrates the degree to which texture influences
facies character. Study of medium- to coarse-grained sandy
nonbarred nearshores in southern Oregon (Clifton et al., 1971)
100 showed that the sedimentary structures were arrayed in simple
shore-parallel patterns that reflected the transitions in the shoal-
ing waves (Fig. 31A). Asymmetric ripples dominate in the
150 offshore area, converting to decimeters-high lunate megaripples
SAND
in the area of most intense wave buildup just seaward from the
MUD surf zone. Landward migration of these bedforms produces
RELICT SEDIMENT
50 landward-dipping trough cross-bedding. Within the surf zone,
the bed is essentially flat; small, low-amplitude, transitory
500 ripples form between intervals of sheet flow as the waves
contours in meters
passed overhead. Adjacent to the beach foreshore, the bottom
0 50 km again becomes irregular at the interface between surf and swash
POINT REYES zones. Bedforms here faced seaward and produced seaward-
dipping cross-bedding. Within the foreshore, the bed is planar,
and the sediment contains gently inclined or planar parallel
FIG. 23.—Distribution of sand and mud on the shelf off central lamination.
California. The sand–mud transition lies at a water depth of The zones of sedimentary structures shift back and forth with
about 60 m, well seaward of the shoreface. After Drake and changes in wave climate and tides, producing assemblages of
Cacchione (1985). structures. An offshore–nearshore transition zone contains ripple
308 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

REHOBOTH BAY LAGOON, DELAWARE

0m

10

15

BARRIER SAND 0 3 km

SHALLOW MARINE SAND

LAGOONAL MUD, PEAT

PLEISTOCENE (After Kraft et al., 1973)

FIG. 24.—Distribution of sand on the shelf adjacent to the barrier at Rehoboth Bay, Delaware (arrow, above), after Kraft et al. (1973).
Shallow marine sand may be an older palimpsest deposit, but it demonstrates the lack of correspondence of the base of the
shoreface with the sand-mud transition.

A TRANSGRESSIVE SHOREFACE
CAPE ROMAINE, SOUTH CAROLINA

3–4 m
LAGOONAL SEDIMENT

TSE

B TRANSGRESSIVE SHOREFACE
SOUTH PADRE ISLAND, TEXAS
0m

10
BARRIER SAND A

LAGOONAL SAND & MUD 20 B

HOLOCENE DELTAIC DEPOSITS

LATE PLEISTOCENE DEPOSITS

0 5 km

FIG. 25.—Variability in transgressive shoreface profiles, Cape Romaine, South Carolina, U.S.A. (after Hayes and Sexton, 1989) and
South Padre Island, Texas, U.S.A. (after Morton, 1994).
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 309

LONG BEACH, WASHINGTON

A PROGRADING HIGH-ENERGY SHOREFACE

10

20 m SHOREFACE
SHELF

5 km 0

FIG. 26.—Shoreface profile on a high-energy, prograding coast, Long Beach, Washington, U.S.A. Break in slope defines the shoreface–
shelf boundary lies a water depth of about 10 m. After Dingler and Clifton (1994).

A B

PACIFIC
OCEAN
PROGRADING
NAYARIT, MEXICO SHORELINE
NAYARIT, MEXICO

C COSTA DE NAYARIT, MEXICO

10 km

Beach Ridges
Pacific Ocean

10 m

REGRESSIVE SAND
SILTY SAND
0 5 km SHELF MUD
MARSH, LAGOONAL FACIES

FIG. 27.—A) Location, B) plan view, and C) profile of the prograding coast at Nayarit, Mexico. Break in slope that defines shoreface–
shelf boundary lies in about 6-7 m of water. After Curray et al. (1969).
310 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

PROGRADATIONAL SHOREFACE
GALVESTON ISLAND, TEXAS
Galveston Island

0m

10

0 5 km
20

FIG. 28.—Profile across Galveston Island, Texas, U.S.A. Break in slope that defines shoreface–shelf boundary lies in about 6–7 m of
water. After Morton (1994).

B NORTH
EDISTO C
A RIVER

B 2m 4m 10 m
6m
A

C'
N

5 km
A' B'

C CHARLESTON, S. C., PROFLES

C C'

10 m

B B'

EBB-TIDAL
DELTA
10 m

A A'

10 m

FIG. 29.—Shoreface-attached ridges and isolated ridges on inner shelf, off the North Edisto River, Charleston, South Carolina, U.S.A.
A) Index map. B) Plan view. C) Cross section. Note break in slope at about 5 m on profiles A–A' and C–C', which is probably the
wave-cut shoreface on this complex coast.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS
300 VELOCITY LIMIT — 10 SECOND WAVE
200
40
20 cm
100
80
200
60
50
40
30 100
Um 20
(cm/s)
NO MOVEMENT
10
2.00 1.00 0.50
GRAIN SIZE (mm)
FIG. 30.—Variation in ripple size (spacing = l) as a function of grain size and maximum bottom orbital velocity (Um) under a wave
with a period of 10 seconds. After Clifton (1976).
lamination, something similar to swaly cross-stratification, and
landward-facing trough cross-bedding generated under condi-
tions of heavy seas. A surf assemblage includes planar lamination
and landward- and seaward-dipping trough cross-bedding. A
surf–swash transition assemblage contains planar lamination
interrupted by wedges or troughs of seaward-dipping cross-
bedding. Progradation of a high-energy, non-barred, fair-weather,
coarse sandy, wave-dominated shoreline produces a stacking of
these assemblages in an upward-shallowing succession (Fig.
31B). In contrast, a fine sandy high-energy, nonbarred nearshore
lacks the larger bedforms (Fig. 32A), and the vertical succession
shows a dominance of planar or gently undulating stratification
(Fig. 32B).
Where the nearshore is composed of gravel, large straight-
crested, two-dimensional ripples or megaripples predominate
(Fig. 33A). Stratification typically is difficult to delineate in the
gravel beds, and the resulting nearshore succession consists of
well-segregated layers and lenses of apparently structureless
gravel interbedded with sand showing flat or inclined lamination
and cross-bedding (Fig. 33B).
Sediment of different caliber can be transported in different
directions under the same set of waves. The selective shoreward
transport of the larger clasts by asymmetric orbital currents
under shoaling waves has been noted (Fig. 9). Where mega-
ripples or other large bedforms exist, the asymmetric flow may
result in coarser sand moving landward as part of the bed load,
and finer sand moving seaward as part of a suspended load
(Inman and Bowen, 1963). While diving in the southern Oregon
surf zone, we noted that fountains of suspended sand commonly
erupted from the lee sides of megaripples as the landward surge
of a wave diminished. The cloud of sediment would then drift
seaward under the offshore component of the orbital motion.
Observations of both the clouds of sediment and dye streams
released as the sand fountains erupted indicated that the sus-
pended sediment never settled landward of the point of origina-
311
FLAT BED
10 cm
RIPPLES
l = 5 cm
T = 10 SECONDS
0.250 0.125 0.062
tion. The process resulted in the finer sand moving offshore even
as the coarser sand was being driven shoreward (Fig. 34). This
process provides an effective means of textural segregation of
sand on the upper shoreface (Komar, 1976).
Texture can also influence processes in the nearshore. A
striking example occurs on the Surinam coast of South America,
where suspended fine sediment discharged from the Amazon
River accumulates in the nearshore area. A zone of fluid mud
concentrated near the shoreline damps about 95% of the wave
energy and transforms the incoming waves to a solitary wave
form (Wells and Coleman, 1978; Rine and Ginsburg, 1985).
Solitary waves are waves of translation that transport water
(and mud) shoreward where the mud is trapped against the
beach. Texture also controls rates of bioturbation, which tend to
be most rapid in fine to very fine sand and diminish as the grain
size either increases to coarse sand or gravel or decreases to
mud.
EFFECTS OF BARS IN NEARSHORE SYSTEMS
Nearshore systems with breaker bars or other bars are inher-
ently more difficult to study than are nonbarred coasts, particu-
larly on high-energy coasts with intense longshore and rip cur-
rents. As a result several detailed open-coast studies that are
applied to facies models were conducted on nonbarred coasts
(Clifton et al. 1971; Howard and Reineck, 1981).
Bar–trough systems, however, are common on many, if not
most, coastlines, and probably form part of nearly all ancient
open-coast successions. The development of bars and troughs is
commonly linked to nearshore circulation cells of longshore and
rip currents (Fig. 11). Typically, on modern coasts, the location of
offshore bars adjacent to a beach is readily seen from the breaking
pattern of waves in the bar crests. The studies noted below have
focused on the facies of bar–trough systems on modern open
coasts.
312 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A
NEARSHORE
Buildup Breaker Swash
OFFSHORE zone zone zone

Asymmetric Lunate Outer Inner Inner

ripple megaripple planar rough Planar
facies facies facies facies facies

OFFSHORE NEARSHORE

B TEXTURE STRUCTURES FACIES

GRAVEL CS MS FS VFS
0m
Planar
lamination FORESHORE

Landward,
seaward
x-bedding; UPPER
Planar SHOREFACE
5 lamination

Landward,
x-bedding

Ripple, planar LOWER

lamination SHOREFACE
TO
10 Ripple
lamination; INNER
Bioturbation SHELF

FIG. 31.—A) Sedimentary structural facies in the non-barred nearshore (upper shoreface) in coarse sandy sediment on the high-energy
coast of southern Oregon, U.S.A., under fair-weather conditions. B) Vertical succession produced by progradation of such a
system.

Bars and troughs may be parallel to the shoreline and can
occur in multiple sets of two or three, such as those on the Texas
Gulf Coast (Hill and Hunter, 1976). Here, breaking waves shape
bar crests into a plane bed; the sea floor in deeper water is covered
with wave ripples. Longshore currents stronger than about 0.5
m/s generate small dunes that produce medium-scale, shore-
parallel cross-bedding. Hill and Hunter (1976) note that intense
bioturbation destroys physical structures that lie 30 cm or more
beneath the sediment–water interface.
Where waves approach a coast obliquely, the bars and troughs
are likely to develop an en echelon pattern, in which individual
bars are oblique and attached to the shoreline (Fig. 35). Study of
an attached oblique bar on the southern coast of Oregon (Hunter
et al., 1979) showed that the sedimentary facies reflect the circu-
lation cell. Water flows landward across the bar in the form of
very asymmetric oscillatory flow, generating either a flat bed or
lunate megaripples. In the longshore trough and rip channel,
medium to small subaqueous dunes migrate in the direction of
flow, respectively, producing longshore- and offshore-directed
cross-bedding (Fig. 36).
Some coasts are characterized by irregular bar systems.
Davidson-Arnott and Greenwood (1976) describe the facies that
form in mostly medium- to-fine-grained sand along the shore of
Kouchibouguac Bay, New Brunswick. Two sets of bars occur,
broadly shore-parallel, but with much irregularity. Bar crests
here are composed of a combination of flat bedding and cross-
bedding, and the troughs are largely underlain by ripple-lami-
nated sand. Rip channels that cut through the inner bar are
underlain by seaward-facing ripple lamination and cross-bed-
ding.
In all three examples, the bars shift landward and seaward as
wave conditions change. The oblique bars on the Oregon coast
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 313

NEARSHORE
A Buildup Breaker Swash
zone zone zone

Asymmetric Outer Inner

ripple planar Planar
facies facies facies

OFFSHORE NEARSHORE

B TEXTURE STRUCTURES FACIES

GRAVEL CS MS FS VFS
0m
Planar FORESHORE
lamination

Planar
lamination UPPER
SHOREFACE
5
Planar or
undulatory
lamination

LOWER
Ripple SHOREFACE
10 lamination; TO
bioturbation
INNER
SHELF

FIG. 32.—A) Sedimentary structural facies in the non-barred nearshore (upper shoreface) in fine sandy sediment on a high-energy
coast under fair-weather conditions. Flatter beach–nearshore profile expands the surf zone relative to coarser shorelines. No
medium- to large-scale bedforms. Surf and swash zones are underlain by planar parallel lamination. B) Vertical succession
produced by progradation of such a system. Section lacks cross-bedding that typifies the upper shoreface of coarser shorelines.

also migrate laterally at rates of 100–200 m/ month and generate
an envelope of bar–trough sedimentary facies (Fig. 37A). During
progradation of this envelope, the currents in the trough land-
ward from the bar erode previously deposited bar facies (Fig.
37B). Therefore the bar itself, although apparently the dominant
feature in the system, has a low potential for preservation.
Davidson-Arnott and Greenwood (1976) reach a similar conclu-
sion for the bars on the New Brunswick coast. Most interpreta-
tions of sand bodies as “offshore bars” are probably wrong. The
vertical succession produced by a prograding nearshore bar–
trough system contains an erosional surface that separates rip-
channel and longshore-trough facies from subjacent finer sand
deposited on the seaward side of the bar (Fig. 38).
The net effect of bar–trough systems is to enhance the unidi-
rectional flow of rip currents and longshore currents and to create
internal erosional surfaces marking the seaward migration of the
troughs during progradation. The unidirectional currents can
generate bedforms in fine sand that would be shaped into a flat
bed or ripples by oscillatory flow (Fig. 39A). As a result, a
progradational succession produced by a barred nearshore sys-
tem composed of fine sand can show abundant cross-bedding
that otherwise would be absent (Fig. 39B).
FAIR-WEATHER OBSERVATIONS AND
STORM-DOMINATED SYSTEMS
Most of our direct observations of nearshore processes
come from studies conducted under conditions of fair weather,
when data can be collected most easily. Yet it is likely that
processes operating during storms dominate much of the
314 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A NEARSHORE Swash
Swash
OFFSHORE Build-up
Buildup Breaker
Breaker zone
zone
zone
zone zone
zone

Asymmetric Lunate 2-dimensional Inner

ripple megaripple megaripple Planar
facies facies facies facies

OFFSHORE NEARSHORE

B TEXTURE STRUCTURES FACIES

GRAVEL CS MS FS VFS
0m
Planar
lamination FORESHORE

Cross-bedding;
Planar
lamination;
gravel layers, UPPER
lenses SHOREFACE
5

Landward
cross-bedding

Planar or wavy LOWER

lamination SHOREFACE
TO
10
Ripple lamination
Bioturbation INNER
SHELF

FIG. 33.—A) Sedimentary structural facies in the non-barred nearshore (upper shoreface) in coarse gravelly sand on a high-energy
coast under fair-weather conditions. Large two-dimensional, straight-crested ripples occur in the gravel. These ripples tend to
face landward near the beach and be symmetrical in deeper water. B) Stratigraphic succession produced by progradation of such
a system.

nearshore stratigraphic record. Storms influence almost all
coastlines, and, compared to fair-weather waves, are capable
of eroding, transporting, and depositing vast quantities of
sediment. Analysis of wave records along most coasts indi-
cates a pattern where most of the time is occupied by fair-
weather conditions, a small but significant component of time
is occupied by typical large annual storms, and a tiny fraction
of time is occupied by very infrequent major storms (Fig. 40).
Each of these marks the sedimentary record in different ways,
depending on water depth. On the inner shelf, extreme events
are likely to produce the only physical structures in sediment
otherwise dominated by bioturbation. The presence of sand in
this environment, however, by itself probably attests to trans-
port and deposition during storms of a wide range of sizes. On
the shoreface, the effects of storm and fair-weather cross-shore
transport become important (Fig. 41). The enhancement of rip
currents and their extent into deeper water during storms (Fig.
42) provides a mechanism for transporting a wide range of grain
sizes to or beyond the base of the shoreface. Shoaling waves
following the storm drive much of this material back onto the
upper shoreface, but some of the coarser grains (small pebbles,
granules) are likely to be left behind, trapped in burrows or
other depressions. The resulting bimodal sediment forms a
distinctive lower-shoreface facies in coarse sediment (Figs. 43,
44). In the absence of these pebbles, it may be very difficult to
distinguish between lower-shoreface and subjacent sandy-
shelf facies. The upper shoreface is likely to be dominated by
storm processes and consist of rip-current deposits, storm
lags, and other storm-generated features (Fig. 43). Beach fore-
shores are eroded during storms, and aggrade in fair-weather
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 315

A Onshore T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
200
100
Bottom
orbital
0
velocity
(cm/s) 100

200
Offshore 0 10 20
Time (seconds)

T1- Peak onshore flow. Suspended sand is concentrated in “roller” on lee side of megaripples

A B C

T2 -. End of onshore flow. Suspended sand fountains erupt from the lee sides of megaripples

A B C

T3 - Peak offshore flow. Suspended sand clouds from fountain move seaward.

C
B

T4 - End of offshore flow. Suspended sand rains out over megaripples to seaward.

B C

T5 - Next peak onshore flow. Sand deposited from the suspension clouds is caught in roller of
megaripple to seaward.

FIG. 34.—Differential transport of coarse and fine sand under the same set of waves. A) Velocity profile of currents generated at the
sea bed by a passing waves. B) T1–T5 correspond to times shown in Part A. Coarse sand moves shoreward as bed load, whereas
fine sand is thrown into suspension and drifts seaward, where it is trapped in rollers on the lee side of megaripples farther offshore.
Transport of sand to seaward in a field of megaripples under strongly asymmetric orbital flow.
316 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

wave
crest

Rip current Rip current

breakerline
breaker line
Bar Bar

Longshore currents Longshore currents

Beach

FIG. 35.—Nearshore circulation cells where wave incidence is oblique to coast. Longshore currents tend to flow in one direction only.
Such cells promote the development of attached oblique bars (shown in yellow).

-2

-2
-1

-1
RIP
CHANNEL BAR CREST

1 LONGSHORE TROUGH
2
3

BEACH FORESHORE
0 100 m
CONTOURS IN METERS AND HALF-METERS
A

-2

-2
-1

-1

1
2
3

0 100 m
CONTOURS IN METERS AND HALF-METERS
B

FIG. 36.—Bar and trough system on the southern coast of Oregon (Pistol River), U.S.A. A) Morphology and currents associated with
the system. B) Sedimentary structures associated with this system. Dunes occupy the longshore trough and rip channel, whereas
the bar crest is covered by lunate megaripples and/or a flat bed. Sediment in the longshore trough is coarser than that on the bar
or in the rip channel.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 317

A
FORESHORE DEPOSITS
MEAN SEA LEVEL

BAR DEPOSITS

TRANSITION
LONGSHORE- NEARSHORE-OFFSHORE
RIP- TRANSITION DEPOSITS
3m TROUGH DEPOSITS CHANNEL
DEPOSITS
100 m

B
PROGRADATION

MEAN SEA LEVEL

3m

100 m

FIG. 37.—Depositional facies in a prograding bar–trough system. A) Envelope of sedimentary facies generated by laterally migrating
shore-attached oblique bar system, as visualized in a cross section projected normal to the shoreline. B) Effects of progradation
of a laterally migrating shore-attached oblique bar system, as visualized in a cross section normal to the shoreline. Figure shows
the limited potential for preserving bar facies and the development of an internal erosional surface beneath the longshore trough
and rip channel. Coarse sediment from these environments sits abruptly over finer sediment deposited at similar water depths
outside the bar (nearshore–offshore transition). After Hunter et al. (1979).

intervals. Most beach foreshores thus consist primarily of fair-
weather deposits.
The dominance of storm effects on the upper shoreface im-
plies that features observed during fair-weather conditions may
rarely be preserved. Examples include the lunate megaripples
found in the high-energy nearshore of southern Oregon (Clifton
et al., 1971). Decimeters-high dunes that migrate landward under
the asymmetric flow of shoaling waves, these features produce
medium-scale trough cross-bedding in the area just seaward of
the breaker zone. Examination of many nearshore successions in
the stratigraphic record shows that onshore trough cross-bed-
ding is uncommon (Fig. 45). The lunate megaripples are fair-
weather phenomena that are obliterated by the enhanced rip
currents and longshore flow that accompanies storms.
Conversely, several structures that are common in the sedi-
mentary record have never been seen during their formation.
Gravel-filled gutter casts are common in pebbly nearshore sand-
stones. These shore-normal structures commonly have steep, or
even undercut, sides indicating nearly simultaneous cutting and
filling (Chiocci and Clifton, 1991). Their orientation and shape
suggest that the gutter casts form when large waves drag gravel
back and forth on a sandy bed during a storm. They have not been
seen under fair-weather conditions.
Another structure attributed by most workers to storms is
hummocky cross-stratification. This feature, which is common to
nearly all shoreface and shelf fine-grained sandstone deposits,
has been observed forming only once in the natural environment
(Greenwood and Sherman, 1986). Many questions about the
dynamics of its formation and its significance remain unan-
swered.
BIAS TOWARD LOW-ENERGY COASTS
Unsurprisingly, most of our knowledge about modern
shoreface facies comes from the study of coasts with low wave
energy. The few studies of high-energy systems, where the
wave heights are routinely in the range of 1–2 m, have been
focused on nearshore areas close to the shoreline. As a result,
our understanding of modern open coasts is strongly biased
toward low-energy systems. The result has been some errone-
318 H. EDWARD CLIFTON
TEXTURE
GRAVEL CS MS FS VFS
0m
5 Inclined planar
10
FIG. 38.—Vertical sequence produced by progradation of an attached, oblique bar system in a high-energy, coarse sandy setting.
ous generalizations that pervade the models of the wave-domi-
nated coastal facies.
Wave Base
Perhaps the most broadly held misconception in the interpre-
tation of shoreface systems is that of the role of fair-weather wave
base relative to facies distributions. Reineck and Singh, in their
justifiably influential book on depositional sedimentary environ-
ments (1973), state that the seaward limit of the shoreface corre-
sponds to wave base, which in they identify as the “average
maximum wave base”. From their studies in the low-energy Gulf
of Gaeta, they concluded that the boundary between the upper
and lower shoreface corresponded to fair-weather wave base. In
the low-energy setting of Long Island, New York, U.S.A., Shipp
(1984) found that the maximum depth to which fair-weather
waves moved sediment corresponded with the base of the
shoreface. Such studies were incorporated into the models for a
wave-dominated coast. Fair-weather wave base coincides with
the base of the shoreface in the models provided by Walker and
Plint (1992) and Reading (1996). The same relation is implicit in
the text of Galloway and Hobday (1996), who note that the lower
shoreface is influenced by both storm and fair-weather waves,
whereas fair-weather waves (other than long-period swell) have
little effect on the shelf. Consequently, a number of workers
postulate that fair-weather wave base defines the shelf–shoreface
boundary (e.g., MacEachearn and Pemberton, 1992; Maejima,
1993; Hettinger et al., 1994; Hart and Plint, 1995; Hampson and
Storms, 2003).
Although this interpretation may be valid for some succes-
sions, it is invalid as a generalization. First, wave base is so
variously defined that it has lost much of its currency. Most
geologists identify wave base as the greatest water depth in
which passing waves disturb the bed, although some have used
the term to separate the zones of “normal” wave erosion and
wave deposition (Kowalewsky, 1982), which is postulated to
occur at a depth of about 10 m (Schwartz, 1982). Plint (1988) seems
to use this definition in his model of forced regression. Physical
oceanographers have placed wave base at a depth where waves
begin to “feel bottom”, approximately equivalent to one-half of
STRUCTURES FACIES
Planar FORESHORE
Lamination
Longshore or
seaward UPPER
crossbedding; SHOREFACE
lamination
Parallel or wavy
lamination; LOWER
SHOREFACE
Ripple TO
lamination; INNER
Bioturbation SHELF
the wave length (Sverdrup et al., 1942), and many geologists have
followed suit (Walker and Plint, 1992; Reading, 1996). This defi-
nition, however, does not consider the effect of wave height; large
waves disturb the bottom at depth uninfluenced by smaller
waves of the same period or wavelength. The concept that wave
base equates with the water depth in which sediment first begins
to move implies that wave base is partly dependent on sediment
caliber; under the same set of waves, a fine bed might be above
wave base whereas a coarser bed might not be. Moreover, wave
theory predicts that a bed of fine sand is mobilized by fair-
weather long-period swell at water depths much beyond the base
of the shoreface (Fig. 46A). Shorter-period waves, such as those
characteristic of a low-energy coast, move fine sand sediment in
considerably shallow water (Fig. 46B). A coincidence of fair-
weather wave base and the base of the shoreface, however, is
likely to be just that: a coincidence depending on wave height and
period and sediment grain size. It is noteworthy that for both
long-period (10 s) and shorter-period (5 s) waves, a water depth
equivalent to one-half of the deepwater wave length lies well
seaward of the shoreface base on a prograding shoreline (Fig.
46A, B).
Finally, geologists can interpret wave base in the stratigraphic
record only by inference, such as the balance between physical
depositional structures and biogenic structures or the presence of
mud layers in the section. In the first case, fine sand is commonly
completely bioturbated even at water depths where everyday
waves ripple the surface. The ripples would indicate deposition
above fair-weather wave base, but the bioturbation could suggest
deposition possibly below storm wave base. Layers of mud can
accumulate in shallow water from the rapid settling of large
volumes of silt and/or clay resuspended by storm waves or
introduced by floods. Their presence is unrelated to fair-weather
conditions. The extension of generalizations regarding wave
base, drawn from studies of modern low-energy coasts, is largely
unwarranted.
Wave Energy and Facies
Several workers have attempted to compare the facies of high-
energy and low-energy coasts. Clifton (1976) contrasted the fair-
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 319

A NEARSHORE
Swash
OFFSHORE Buildup Breaker Reforming zone
zone zone zone

Asymmetric Plane-bed Bar-trough Inner

ripple bar surface facies planar
facies (shore-parallel facies
cross-bedding)

OFFSHORE NEARSHORE

B TEXTURE STRUCTURES FACIES

GRAVEL CS MS FS VFS
0m
Planar
lamination FORESHORE

Longshore or
seaward
crossbedding; UPPER
Inclined planar SHOREFACE
lamination
5

Parallel or
ripple lamination; LOWER
Bioturbation SHOREFACE
TO

10 Ripple INNER
lamination; SHELF
Bioturbation

FIG. 39.—A) Sedimentary structural facies in a barred high- to moderate-energy fine-grained nearshore under fair-weather
conditions. Longshore flow in the trough of the shore-parallel bar is strong enough to create small dunes that migrate alongshore
in the trough. B) Vertical succession produced by progradation of the system shown in Part A. Fine sand shows much shore-
parallel trough cross-bedding that would not be formed without unidrectional flow within a bar–tough system.

weather nearshore facies in sand of similar texture on the very
high-energy coast of southern Oregon, the moderately low-
energy coast of southeastern Spain, and the very low-wave-
energy beach within Willapa Bay, Washington, U.S.A., (Fig. 47A).
The facies distribution becomes increasingly compressed as fa-
cies requiring relatively high velocities progressively disappear
as wave energy is decreased. The upper-flow-regime plane bed
that characterizes the inner surf zone of southern Oregon is absent
on the Spanish coast, and the lunate megaripples and cross-ripples
observed in Oregon and Spain are absent in Willapa Bay. As the
wave energy of the setting diminishes, the progradational succes-
sions (Fig. 47B) become thinner and increasingly impoverished in
sedimentary structures requiring relatively strong currents.
Howard and Reineck (1981) contrast the facies succession
from a high-energy coast in Southern California with that of a
low-energy coast in Georgia, U.S.A. Their analysis is based on
both box-core and vibracore analyses, which incorporates the
effects of coastal storms. Their comparison shows a similar thin-
ning of the facies progression and loss of higher-energy features
in the low-energy setting (Fig. 48). The thickness of the shoreface
section that would result from progradation of these coasts
differs from about 9 m in California to 2 m in the example from
Georgia. Cross-bedding, common in the shoreface deposits in
California, is absent in the Georgia succession. Some textural
differences may exist in these two examples. The California
nearshore is typified by fine- to medium-grained sand (Howard
and Reineck, 1981), whereas the Georgia nearshore seems to be
composed of uniformly fine-grained sand (Howard et al., 1972).
As noted below, textural differences may outweigh variations in
wave energy in shaping coastal facies.
320 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

100 comparison with a third shoreline, on the southeastern coast of

FAIR WEATHER Spain, helps to resolve the relative influences of texture and
PERCENT ambient energy. The environmental setting of this Spanish coast
OF
TIME
TYPICAL LARGE WINTER STORM is very similar to that of the Texas Gulf coast (fair-weather wave
heights in the range of 0.2–0.5 m, tidal range less than a meter),
EXTREME EVENT but texturally this tectonically active coast resembles that of
50 Oregon. Profiles (Fig. 50) show development of a succession of
structures similar to that seen on the Oregon coast. Even where
bars composed of fine sand lie off the beaches, the intervening
RECURRENCE INTERVAL (YR) troughs are occupied by gravel shaped into large 2-D ripples
2 5 10 20 50 100 like those shown in Figure 50B.
A comparison of outcrops representing each of these three
0 environments (Figs. 51–54) likewise shows greater similarity
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 between the Spanish and Oregon deposits. The primary differ-
WAVE HEIGHT (M), GALVESTON, TEXAS
ence between the two coarse-grained deposits is that the low-
energy succession is significantly thinner that that formed un-
der high-energy conditions, as a consequence of the deeper
FIG. 40.—Energy (wave height) frequency for Galveston Island, extent of wave influence on the high-energy California coast.
Texas, U.S.A. During most of the time small waves prevail Fine-grained, shallowing-up coastal succesions occur in the
(fair-weather conditions). A small, but significant, amount of Eocene Jackson Group of West Texas, where presumably they
time is occupied by large-winter-storm conditions, and very accumulated under conditions similar to those on the present
large storm (hurricane) waves occur very infrequently. This Texas Gulf Coast. Once exposed in now-covered uranium pits
pattern is typical for most coasts, although the wave heights in West Texas, these successions are thinner than might be
involved may differ (for example, on the central California expected on a fine sandy coast with greater wave energy, and
coast, waves 2 m high are fairly common, and typical large they also show more bioturbation than might occur on a high-
winter storm waves range from 4–5 m high). energy coast. The successions differ strikingly from those formed
in coarse sediment under similar oceanographic conditions off
Intuitively, it would seem that variations in energy regime the coast of Spain. Although ambient wave energy is a factor in
would constitute a major influence on the character of shoreline facies development, any interpretation of energy level must
facies. In reality, that influence can be difficult to resolve, largely take into account the textural factor.
because of textural complications. The nearshore profile off Low wave energy may be an important factor in shaping one
Padre Island (Fig. 49), where fine to very fine sand accumulates particular type of shallow marine deposit. The shoreface is gen-
in a low-energy setting (fair-weather waves 0.2–0.5 m high tidal erally presumed to be an equilibrium profile for a given set of
range > 1 m) differs markedly from that of the Oregon coast, wave conditions. Where equilibrium is not achieved, owing to an
(Fig. 31), where medium to coarse, pebbly sand accumulates in inability of the waves to redistribute the introduced coarse sedi-
a high-energy setting (fair-weather waves 1–2 m high; tidal ment, and/or insufficient time to reshape the profile as new
range 2–3 m). Much of the difference, however, may be due to sediment accumulates, and/or a very steep offshore gradient, a
the diverse textural character of these two environments. A Gilbert delta rather than a shoreface is likely to develop (Corner
et al., 1990; Postma, 1990).
Gilbert deltas are characterized by steeply inclined foresets in
STORM LAG tabular sets that can be tens of meters thick (Colella, 1988a, 1988b;
COARSE GRAVEL Nemec, 1990). Sediment transport down the face of the delta
occurs primarily by mass transport (Postma, 1984; Postma et al.,
POST-STORM LAG 1988). Many, if not most, Gilbert deltas are conglomeratic, finer
FINE GRAVEL sediment being more easily shaped into a shoreface. But in areas
of powerful waves, as along much of the U.S. West Coast, even the
coarsest gravel can be reworked into an equilibrium profile and
COARSE SAND
FAIR-WEATHER Gilbert deltas do not develop.
STORM CONDITIONS
CONDITIONS
MEDIUM SAND
SHARP-BASED SHOREFACE DEPOSITS

The models for coastal deposits that formed during a forced

FINE SAND
EQUILIBRIUM SIZE
OFFSHORE 0 ONSHORE
RATE OF SEDIMENT TRANSPORT
FIG. 41.—Idealized diagram showing rate and direction of trans-
port on the shoreface as a function of grain size under storm
and fair-weather conditions. Sediment carried seaward by
storm rip currents is reworked in the aftermath of the storm.
On the lower shoreface, fine sand in equilibrium with the fair-
weather waves coexists with fine gravel deposited during the
storm and left behind as a post-storm lag.
regression derive almost entirely from the stratigraphic record.
Although Pleistocene deposits on the outer part of modern con-
tinental shelves are cited as contemporary examples (Posamentier
et al., 1992), little is known about the lithologic details of these
deposits or the processes that attended their formation. The
concept that forced regression can produce an extensive ero-
sional base to shoreface deposits, as Plint (1988) postulated for the
Cardium Formation, has been widely applied. Posamentier et al.
(1992) note that, although coastal deposits in the Viking Forma-
tion in Joarcam Field, Alberta, Canada, seem produced by forced
regression, shorefaces are sharp-based only in their most proxi-
mal position, rather than over the entire width of their occur-
rence, as in the Cardium. The difference between the two may
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 321

A
WAVE CRESTS

RIP CURRENT
BREAKER LINE

LONGSHORE CURRENTS

BEACH

WAVE CRESTS
B RIP CURRENT
BREAKER LINE

LONGSHORE CURRENTS

BEACH

FIG. 42.—Nearshore circulation cells as a function of wave energy. A) Small waves break in shallower water than do large waves B).
Larger waves also generate a greater degree of setup/setdown and thus have more strongly developed rip and longshore
currents. Rip currents under large waves extend farther offshore, probably to the base of the shoreface or slightly beyond.

reflect the finer grain size of the Viking sand or lower wave
energy (Posamentier et al., 1992), or possibly a somewhat lower
basinal gradient for the Cardium.
Although some sharp-based shoreface deposits unquestion-
ably reflect a forced regression, as for example where the ero-
sional surface is of regional extent (Plint, 1988; Hadley and Elliott,
1993), other explanations exist. Figure 6, for example, shows
sharp-based shorefaces that result from incision during a stepped
transgression (Walker and Plint, 1992; Bergman and Walker,
1988, 1999). As noted in a previous section, a prograding bar–
tough system can create an erosional surface at the base of upper-
shoreface deposits (Fig. 38). Examples of this feature occur re-
peatedly in middle Miocene shoreline deposits in the Caliente
Range of California, U.S.A. (Clifton, 1981). Paleocurrent mea-
surements support the conclusion that the sharp-based upper-
shoreface deposits here result from progradation of a coast marked
by oblique shore-attached bars, rather than from forced regres-
sion (Figs. 55, 56). In these deposits, the sharp contact separates
coarser, cross-bedded sandstone from subjacent finer and more
bioturbated sandstone. The common presence of small pebbles in
the sandstone below the contact and occasional intertonguing of
the facies suggests that the erosional surface does not represent a
major break in facies succession.
Parasequences in the Blackhawk Formation in the Book Cliffs,
Utah, U.S.A., also contain sharp-based nearshore sandstones that
may be unrelated to forced regression. Two types of contacts
occur (Fig. 57). One lies at the base of the upper shoreface
deposits, as noted by Howard (1972), where clean, medium-
grained cross-bedded sandstone sharply overlies finer biotur-
bated sandstone of the lower shoreface. As with the Caliente
Range example, the break in succession is relatively minor and is
probably attributable to a prograding bar–trough system. The
322 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A STORM EFFECTS, HIGH-ENERGY, NONBARRED COARSE SAND

TEXTURE STRUCTURES FACIES
GRAVEL CS MS FS VFS
0m
Planar BEACH
lamination FORESHORE

Seaward
cross-bedding;
pebble and
cobble layers
5 UPPER
SHOREFACE
Seaward
cross-bedding;
Layers and
lenses of fine
pebbles

10
Scattered fine LOWER
pebbles; SHOREFACE
Bioturbation

Bioturbation INNER
HCS SHELF

B STORM EFFECTS, HIGH-ENERGY, NON-BARRED FINE SAND

TEXTURE STRUCTURES FACIES
GRAVEL CS MS FS VFS
0m
Planar BEACH
lamination FORESHORE

Planar
lamination

Planar or UPPER
5
undulatory SHOREFACE
lamination
Swaly cross-
stratification

LOWER
Hummocky SHOREFACE
10
cross-strata TO
Bioturbation
INNER SHELF

FIG. 43.—A) Vertical succession produced by progradation of a high-energy, nonbarred, coarse sandy nearshore, in which storm
effects predominate. Scattered pebbles on lower shoreface interpreted as reworked post-storm lags. Scattered fine pebbles in the
lower shoreface are interpreted as remnants of post-storm lags. B) Vertical sequence produced by progradation of a storm-
dominated, nonbarred, high-energy, fine-sandy nearshore. Cross-bedding may result from increased nearshore circulation flow.

second contact lies at the base of amalgamated storm sands. In the
section below, muddy intervals separate the storm sets. Although
striking, the contact at the base of the amalgamated sandstone is
probably comparable to that at the base of each of the subjacent
storm sands. The absence of shale in the overlying section,
because of either greater storm erosion in the shallower water or
inability of mud to accumulate in the more energetic environ-
ment, defines the break. Such contacts cannot be traced laterally
and are unlikely to represent forced regressions.
CONCLUSIONS
The basic facies model for open-coast clastic deposits is a
simple upward-shallowing succession in a sand body bounded
to seaward by shelf deposits and to landward by nonmarine
facies. The sand body may be linear, as in a barrier, or sheet-like,
as in a strand plain. The model exists with minor variations in the
standard texts and has received broad application. It is flawed to
a degree, in that it is based on a fairly limited set of modern
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 323

A 100
WATER DEPTH HIGH-ENERGY COAST
(m) 90
T = 10 S
80
1/2 L
70
FAIR
60 WEATHER
STORM
50

40

30

20
SHOREFACE
BASE THRESHOLD FOR MOVING FINE SAND
10
um = 0.17 m/s
0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
FIG. 44.—Photograph of transition from upper shoreface to lower WAVE HEIGHT (m)
shoreface (just below10 cm scale) in the Plio-Pleistocene Merced
Formation, San Francisco, California, U.S.A. Upper shoreface B 30
has cross-bedded sand and gravel. Lower shoreface is marked WATER DEPTH LOW-ENERGY COAST
by a couple of meters of fine sand that bears scattered small (m)
T=5S
pebbles in stringers and isolated clusters.

analogs. Many studies of modern coasts have been made in areas 20

1/2 L
undergoing marine transgression, and conclusions drawn from
STORM
these coasts are skewed in their view of sandbody geometry,
shoreface profile, and sand–mud distribution. In addition, stud- FW
ies of modern coasts are biased toward fair-weather conditions
10
0° SHOREFACE
10% BASE
330° 30°
8 THRESHOLD FOR MOVING FINE SAND
um = 0.15 m/s
SHORELINE 6
0
TREND
300° 4 60° 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

WAVE HEIGHT (m)

FIG. 46.—Combination of wave heights and water depths in

Land which fine sand (D = 0.125 mm) will be moved by passing
270° n = 149 90° waves. A) 10-second waves. Combination of wave heights
and water depths in which fine sand (D = 0.125 mm) will be
moved by passing waves. B) 5-second waves. In both cases
movement occurs in water depths well seaward of the base of
the shoreface on a prograding coast. Water depths equal to
one-half the deep water wave length are deeper still.
240° 120°

210° 150°
180°
FIG. 45.— Summary of 149 cross-bedding measurements in near-
shore facies of the Plio-Pleistocene Merced Formation. Red
bars indicate orientation of gravel-filled gutter casts that are
approximately normal to the shoreline. Most of the cross-
bedding indicates south-flowing longshore currents. Very
little cross-bedding is directed landward, indicating that lu-
nate megaripples produced by fair-weather waves are rarely
preserved. After Chiocci and Clifton (1991).
and settings of low wave energy. Most modern studies have been
made on coasts in tectonically passive settings, where fine sand
predominates on the beach and shoreface. The influence of tex-
ture, as an independent variable, has largely been overlooked.
Many of the limitations on the basic model could be obviated
by considering the variations to be end members in a flexible or
even multi-dimensional model based on parameters such as
texture, sand supply, ambient wave energy, storm influence,
coastal morphology, and nature of base-level change (Fig. 58).
Using this approach, the basic model as presented in most texts
becomes specifically a model for a storm-dominated, moderate-
energy to low-energy setting with a moderate gradient in which
fine sand was in somewhat limited supply and base level was
static (Fig. 59). Coastal successions in Pleistocene deposits on the
324 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A LANDWARD
SYMMETRIC ASYMMETRIC
BIOTURBATED 2-D 3-D CROSS LUNATE FLAT
SEAFLOOR RIPPLES RIPPLES RIPPLES MEGARIPPLES BED

Oregon Coast
water depth = 1–30 m, wave height 1–3 m

Southeastern Spain
water depth = 1–5 m, wave height 0.2–0.5 m

Willapa Bay, Washington

water depth = 0.5–1 m, wave height < 0.2–0.5 m

B “LOW ENERGY”
“HIGH ENERGY”

“VERY LOW ENERGY”

FORESHORE FORESHORE

MLW MLW

5m 5 5

10 m 10

MLW = Mean low water

15 m

FIG. 47.— A) Distribution of sea-floor facies observed under fair-weather conditions on a high-energy coast (southern Oregon), U.S.A,
a low-energy coast (southeastern Spain), and a very low-energy coast (Willapa Bay Washington, U.S.A.), and B) comparison of
the hypothetical beach-to-offshore successions produced by progradation of facies shown in Part A.

California coast (Fig. 60) reflect accumulation in a storm-domi-
nated, high-energy, barred setting with an abundant supply of
sand, including coarse sand and gravel, under conditions of static
base level. Pleistocene successions on the southeastern coast of
Spain (Fig. 61) were deposited in a similar setting, but under
conditions of much lower wave energy. Successions like those
formed on the Texas Gulf Coast (Fig. 62) represent deposition in
a similarly low-energy setting, but one dominated by fine sand,
in which fair-weather processes predominate in the preserved
deposit. Gilbert-delta deposits (Fig. 63) can be accommodated
into the model as accumulating in a steep-gradient setting of low
to very low energy. Although the supply of gravel may be
substantial, not enough sand enters the system to develop an
offshore profile in equilibrium with the waves.
Facies models have been proposed for open-coast sediment
in settings other than progradation at constant or slowly rising
relative sea level. In particular, models based on “forced re-
gression” have provided an alternative for explaining isolated
shallow marine sand bodies with sharp bases. The vertical
succession produced thereby fits into the model as forming in
a storm-dominated, moderate-energy to low-energy setting
with a low gradient in which fine sand was in somewhat
limited supply and falling (or fallen) base level (Fig. 64). Not all
sharp-based shoreface successions, however, require sea-level
change. Prograding bar–trough systems and the simple amal-
gamation of storm sands in a setting with limited sand supply
can also produce erosionally based coastal sandstone deposits
(Fig. 65).
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS
“HIGH ENERGY”
FORESHORE
MLW
SHOREFACE
5 5
TRANSITION
10 ZONE
15
OFFSHORE
20 m
FIG. 48.—A comparison of high- and low-energy beach-to-offshore sequences, Ventura to Port Hueneme, California, and Sapelo
Island, Georgia, U.S.A. After Howard and Reineck (1981).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am greatly indebted to Sandra Phillips, David James, and
William Morris for their insightful reviews. They caught far too
many typos and raised many salient points, and the paper has
benefited immensely from their comments. I also thank the
editors of this volume for providing a format for presenting this
material.
REFERENCES
AINSWORTH, R.B., AND CROWLEY, S.F., 1994, Wave-dominated nearshore
sedimentation and ‘forced’ regression: post-abandonment facies, great
Limestone Cyclothem, Stainmore, UK: Geological Society of London,
Journal, v. 151, p. 681–695.
ANTIA, E., FLEMMING, B., AND WEFER, G., 1994, Transgressive facies sequence
of a high energy, wave-tide-storm-influenced shoreface: a case study
of the East Frisian barrier islands (Southern North Sea): Facies, v. 30,
p.15–24.
BERG, R.R., AND DAVIES, D.K., 1968, Origin of Lower Cretaceous Muddy
Sandstone at Bell Creek Field, Montana: American Association Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 52, p. 1888–1898.
325
“LOW ENERGY”
MLW
10
15 m
MLW = Mean low water
BERGMAN, K.M., 1999, Cretaceous Sussex Sandstone in House Creek Field
(Wyoming, USA): Transgressive incised shoreface deposits, in
Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies:
Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 297–319.
BERGMAN, K.M., AND WALKER, R.G., 1988, Formation of Cardium Erosion
surfaces E5, and associated deposition of conglomerate, Carrot Creek
Field, Cretaceous Western Interior Seaway, Alberta, in James, D.P.,
and Leckie, D.A., eds., Sequences, Stratigraphy, Sedimentology; Sur-
face and Subsurface: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists,
Memoir 15, p. 15–24.
BERGMAN, K.M., AND WALKER, R.G., 1999, Campanian Shannon Sandstone:
an example of a falling stage systems tract deposit, in Bergman, K.M.,
and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies: Sequence Strati-
graphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special
Publication 64, p. 85–93.
BERNARD, H.A., LEBLANC, R.J., AND MAJOR, C.F., 1963, Recent and Pleis-
tocene geology of southeast Texas: Geology of Gulf Coast and central
Texas guidebook: Houston Geological Society, p. 175–224.
BOYD, R., DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND ZAITLIN, B.A., 1992, Classification of clastic
coastal depositional environments: Sedimentary Geology, v. 80, p.
139–150.
326 H. EDWARD CLIFTON
OFFSHORE NEARSHORE
Breaker
zone
Symmetric Asymmetric
ripples ripple
(bioturbated) facies
OFFSHORE
FIG. 49.—Sedimentary structural facies in a barred low-energy fine-grained nearshore under fair-weather conditions (example, Padre
Island, Texas, U.S.A., after Hill and Hunter, 1976). Sediment in the longshore trough and seaward from the bar is intensely
bioturbated.
BRUUN, P., 1962, Sea level rise as a cause of shore erosion: American Society
of Civil Engineers, Proceedings, Journal of Waterways and Harbors,
v. 88, no. WW1, p. 117–130.
CHIOCCI, F.C., AND CLIFTON, H.E., 1991, Gravel-filled gutter casts in
nearshore facies—indicators of ancient shoreline trend, in Osborne,
R.H., ed., From Shoreline to Abyss; Contributions in Marine Geol-
ogy in Honor of Francis Parker Shepard: SEPM, Special Publication
46, p. 67–76.
CLIFTON, H.E., 1976, Wave-formed sedimentary structures—a conceptual
model, in Davis, R.A., and Ethington, R.L., eds., Beach and Nearshore
Processes: Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists,
Special Publication 24, p. 126–148.
CLIFTON, H.E., 1981, Progradational sequences in Miocene shoreline de-
posits, southeastern Caliente Range, California: Journal of Sedimen-
tary Petrology, v. 51, p. 165–184.
CLIFTON, H.E, 2003, Coastal sedimentary facies, in Middleton, G.V., ed.,
Encyclopedia of Sediments and Sedimentary Rocks: Boston, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, p. 149–157.
CLIFTON, H.E., HUNTER, R.E., AND PHILLIPS, R.L., 1971, Depositional struc-
tures and processes in the nonbarred high-energy nearshore: Journal
of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 41, p. 651–670.
CLIFTON, H.E., AND THOMPSON, J.K., 1978, Macaronichnus segregatis: a feed-
ing structure of shallow marine polychaetes: Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, v. 48, p. 1293–1302.
COLELLA, A., 1988a, Gilbert-type fan deltas in the Crati Basin (Pliocene–
Holocene, southern Italy), in Colella, A., ed., Excursion Guidebook,
International Workshop on Fan Deltas, Calabria, Italy, p. 19–77.
COLELLA, A., 1988b, Pliocene–Holocene fan deltas and braid deltas in the
Crati Basin, southern Italy: a consequence of varying tectonic condi-
tions, in Nemec, W., and Steel, R.J., eds., Fan Deltas: London, Blackie
& Son Ltd., p. 50–74.
CORNER, G.D., NORDAHL, E., MUNCH-ELLINGSEN, K., AND ROBERTSEN, K.R.,
1990, Morphology and sedimentology of an emergent fjord-head
Swash
Reforming zone
zone
Bar crest Bar trough Inner
(plane bed) facies planar
(bioturbated) facies
NEARSHORE
Gilbert-type delta: Alta delta, Norway, in Colella, A., and Prior, D.B.,
eds., Coarse-Grained Deltas: International Association of Sedimen-
tologists, Special Publication 10, p. 155–168.
CURRAY, J.R, EMMEL, F.J., AND CRAMPTON, P.J.S., 1969, Holocene history of
a strandplain, lagoonal coast, Nayarit, Mexico, in Castañares, A.A.,
and Phleger, F.B., eds., Coastal Lagoons, A Symposium: Mexico,
Universi-dad Nacional Autónoma, p. 63–100.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND HOOGENDOORN, E.L., 1997, Erosion and deposition
on migrating shoreface-attached ridges, Sable Island, Eastern Canada:
Geoscience Canada, v. 24, p. 25–36.
DAVIDSON-ARNOTT, R.G.D., AND GREENWOOD, B., 1976, Facies relations on
a barred coast, Kouchibouguac Bay, New Brunswick, Canada, in
Davis, R.A., and Ethington, R.L., eds., Beach and Nearshore Pro-
cesses: Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Spe-
cial Publication 24, p. 149–168.
DAVIS, R.A., JR., 1994, Barrier island systems—a geologic overview, in
Davis, R.A., Jr., ed., Geology of Holocene Barrier Island Systems:
New York, Springer-Verlag, p. 1–46.
DICKINSON, K.A., BERRYHILL, H.L., JR., AND HOLMES, C.W., 1972, Criteria for
recognizing ancient barrier coastlines, in Rigby, J.K., and Hamblin,
W.K., eds., Recognition of Ancient Sedimentary Environments:
Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special
Publication 16, p. 192–214.
Dingler, J.R., and Clifton, H.E., 1994, Barrier systems of California,
Oregon and Washington, in Davis, R.A., Jr., ed., Geology of Ho-
locene Barrier Island Systems: New York, Springer-Verlag, p. 115–
165.
DRAKE, D.E., AND CACCHIONE, D.A., 1985, Seasonal variation in sediment
transport on the Russian River shelf, California: Continental Shelf
Research, v. 4, p. 495–514.
GALLOWAY, W.E., AND HOBDAY, D.K., 1996, Terrigenous Clastic Deposi-
tional Systems; Applications to Fossil Fuel and Groundwater Re-
sources, Second Edition: New York, Springer, 489 p.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 327

OFFSHORE NEARSHORE
Breaker
A
Swash
Sinusoidal Buildup zone
zone
waves zone

Symmetric Asymmetric Lunate Inner

ripples ripple megaripple planar
(bioturbated) facies facies facies

OFFSHORE NEARSHORE
Swash B
Breaker Reforming zone
zone zone

Symmetric Asymmetric Bar-trough Inner

ripples ripple facies planar
(bioturbated) facies (large gravel facies
ripples)

FIG. 50.—Coastal facies on an non-barred and barred nearshores on the southeastern coast of Spain. A) Upper-shoreface profile on
a non-barred nearshore. Small (0.5 m) waves break directly on the edge of the foreshore. Lunate megaripples occur just seaward
of the beach foreshore. B) Upper-shoreface profile on a barred nearshore, southeastern coast of Spain. Large 2-D megaripples
occur in gravel at base of beach. Bar is composed of fine- to medium-grained sand.

GLAESER, J.D., 1978, Global distribution of barrier islands in terms of
tectonic setting: Journal of Geology, v. 86, p. 283–297.
GREENWOOD, B., AND SHERMAN, D.J., 1986, Hummocky cross-stratification
in the surf zone: flow parameters and bedding genesis: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 33, p. 33–45.
HADLEY, D.F., AND ELLIOTT, T., 1993, The sequence stratigraphic signifi-
cance of erosive-based shorefaces in the Cretaceous Mesaverde Group
of northwestern Colorado, in Posamentier, H.W., Summerhayes,
C.P., Haq. B.L., and Allen, G.P., eds., Sequence Stratigraphy and
Facies Associations: International Association of Sedimentologists,
Special Publication 18, p. 521–535.
HAMPSON, G.W., AND STORMS, J.E.A., 2003, Geomorphological and se-
quence stratigraphic variability in wave-dominated, shoreface–shelf
parasequences: Sedimentology v. 50, p. 667–701.
HARMS, J.C., MACKENZIE, D.B., AND MCCUBBIN, D.G., 1965, Depositional
environment of the Fox Hills sandstones near Rock Springs, Wyoming,
in DeVoto, R.H., and Bitter, R.K., Sedimentation of Late Cretaceous
and Tertiary Outcrops, Rock Springs, Uplift: Wyoming Geological
Association Guidebook, Nineteenth Field Conference, p. 113–130.
HARMS, J.C., SOUTHARD, J.B., SPEARING, D.R., AND WALKER, R.G., 1975, Depo-
sitional Environments as Interpreted from Primary Sedimentary
Structures and Stratification Sequences: Society of Economic Paleon-
tologists and Mineralogists, Short Course no. 2, 161 p.
HARMS, J.C., SOUTHARD, J.B., AND WALKER, R.G., 1982, Structures and Se-
quences in Clastic Rocks: Society of Economic Paleontologists and
Mineralogists, Short Course no. 9, p. 7-1–7-22.
HART, B.S., AND PLINT, A.G., 1995, Gravelly shoreface and beach deposits,
in Plint, A.G., ed., Sedimentary Facies Analysis; A Tribute to the
328 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A
C
older eolian dunes
2 2 fine sand,
root structures
planar parallel
1 laminated medium to B planar parallel 1 planar parallel
coarse sand laminated fine
laminated medium to
coarse sand sand
0m 0m 0m
crossbedded
-1 -1 medium to coarse -1
sand and beds or bioturbated
lenses of gravel fine sand
-2 -2 -2

-3 -3 bioturbated fine -3 bioturbated

crossbedded
sand and fine fine sand
medium to coarse
gravel and sets of
sand and beds or
-4 -4 -4
lenses of gravel hummocky
cross-
-5
stratification
-5

-6 -6
bioturbated
very fine
-7 -7 sand
bioturbated fine sand
and fine gravel
-8

older eolian dunes

FIG. 51.—Comparison of stratal successions illustrating effects of ambient wave energy and grain size. A) Pleistocene terrace
deposits, Monterey Bay, California, U.S.A., composed of medium to coarse, pebbly sand deposited in a high-energy setting
(fair-weather waves 1–2 m high; tidal range 2–3 m). B) Pleistocene terrace deposits, Mediterranean coast, southeastern Spain,
composed of coarse, pebbly sand and deposited in a low-energy setting (fair-weather waves 0.2–0.5 m high; tidal range > 1 m).
C) Eocene Jackson Group, central Texas, U.S.A., composed of fine to very fine sand and deposited in a low-energy setting (fair-
weather waves 0.2–0.5 m high; tidal range > 1 m). The Pleistocene deposit in southeastern Spain closely resembles the texturally
similar Pleistocene deposit of Monterey Bay, despite the pronounced difference in energy regime. The succession in Spain
differs markedly from that in the fine sandy deposits of the Jackson Group, which formed under a very similar energy regime.
This comparison illustrates the need to factor in the effect of grain size when interpreting paleo–wave energy. The primary
difference between the two coarse-grained deposits is that the low-energy succession is significantly thinner that that formed
under high-energy conditions, as a consequence of the deeper wave base of the high-energy California deposit.

Research and Teaching of Harold G. Reading: International Associa-
tion of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 22, p. 75–99.
HAYES, M.O., AND SEXTON, 1989, Modern depositional environments,
South Carolina: 29th International Geological Congress, 20–25 July,
1989, Washington D.C., American Geophysical Union, Fieldtrip
Guidebook T371, 85 p.
HETTINGER, R.D., MCCABE, P.J., AND SHANLEY, K.W., 1994, Detailed facies
anatomy of transgressive and highstand systems tracts from the
Upper Cretaceous of southern Utah, U.S.A., in Weimer, P., and
Posamentier, H.W., eds., Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigraphy—Recent
Developments and Applications: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 58, p. 235–257.
HILL, G.W., AND HUNTER, R.E., 1976, Interaction of biological and geologi-
cal processes in the beach and nearshore environments, northern
Padre Island, Texas, in Davis, R.A., and Ethington, R.L., eds., Beach
and Nearshore Processes: Society of Economic Paleontologists and
Mineralogists, Special Publication 24, p. 169–187.
HOOGENDOORN, E.L., AND DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1986, Morphology, lateral
migration, and internal structures of shoreface-connected ridges,
Sable Island, Nova Scotia, Canada: Geology, v. 14, p. 400–403.
HOWARD, J.D., 1966, Characteristic trace fossils in Upper Cretaceous
sandstones of the Book Cliffs and Wasatch Plateau: Utah Geological
and Mineralogical Survey, Bulletin 8, p. 35–53.
HOWARD, J.D., 1972, Trace fossils as criteria for recognizing shorelines in
the stratigraphic record, in Rigby, J.K., and Hamblin, W.K., eds.,
Recognition of Ancient Sedimentary Environments: Society of Eco-
nomic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication 16, p.
215–225.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 329

A A

B B

FIG. 52.—Pleistocene terrace deposits, Manresa Beach, California,

U.S.A. A) Cross-bedded sand and gravel (upper shoreface FIG. 53.—Pleistocene terrace deposits, southeastern Spain. A)
facies) exposed several meters above the base of a shallowing- Upper part of a section. Hammer head rests on contact be-
up section. B) Base of shallowing-up section. Note scattered tween cross-bedded sand and gravel (inner shoreface) and
pebbles in fine sand (lower-shoreface facies) above machete upward-fining flat-bedded pebbly sandstone (beach fore-
handle. Reddish sand with high-angle foresets at base of shore). B) Lower part of section. Cross-bedded pebbly sand in
photo is older eolian dune sand. upper part of photograph (upper shoreface) overlies bur-
rowed sand with scattered small pebbles and pebble stringers
(lower shoreface).
HOWARD, J.D., FREY, R.W., AND REINECK, H.-E., 1972, Georgia coastal region,
Sapelo Island, U.S.A.: sedimentology and biology, I. Introduction:
Senckenbergiana Maritima, v. 4, p. 3–14. KRAFT, J.C, BIGGS, R.B., AND HALSEY, S.D., 1973, Morphology and vertical
HOWARD, J.D., AND REINECK, H.-E., 1981, Depositional facies of high-energy sedimentary sequence models in Holocene transgressive barrier sys-
beach to offshore sequence: comparison with the low-energy se- tems, in Coates, D.R., ed., Coastal Geomorphology: Binghamton,
quence: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. N.Y., State University of New York, Publications in Geomorphology,
65, p. 807–830. p. 321–354.
HOYT, J.H., WEIMER, R.J., AND VERNON, J.H., 1964, Late Pleistocene and KOMAR, P.D., 1976, Beach Processes and Sedimentation: Englewood Cliffs,
Recent sedimentation, Central Georgia Coast, U.S.A., in Van Straaten, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 429 p.
L.M.J.U., ed., Sixth International Geologic Congress, The Nether- KOMAR, P.D., AND MILLER, M.C., 1973, The threshold of movement under
lands and Belgium, 1963, Proceedings, p. 170–176. oscillatory water waves: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 45, p.
HUNTER, R.E., CLIFTON, H.E., AND PHILLIPS, R.L., 1979, Depositional struc- 697–703.
tures and processes in oblique bar-rip channel systems, southwestern KOWALEWSKY, D.B., 1982, Wave-built terrace, in Schwartz, M.L., ed., Ency-
Oregon: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 49, p. 711–726. clopedia of Beaches and Coastal Environments: Stroudsburg, Penn-
INMAN, D.L., AND BOWEN, A.J., 1963, Flume experiments on sand transport sylvania, Hutchison Ross Publishing Company, 855 p.
by waves and currents: American Society of Civil Engineers, 8th LE ROUX, J.P., AND ELGUETA, S., 1997, Paralic parasequences associated with
Conference on Coastal Engineering, Proceedings, p. 137–150. Eocene sea-level oscillations in an active margin setting: Trihueco
JOHNSON, D.W., 1919, Shore Processes and Shoreline Development: New Formation of the Arauco Basin, Chile: Sedimentology, v. 110, p. 257–
York, John Wiley, 884 p. 276.
KERN, J.P., AND WARME, J.E., 1974, Trace fossils and bathymetry of the MACEACHERN, J.A., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1992, Ichnological aspects of
Upper Cretaceous Point Loma Formation, San Diego, California: Cretaceous shoreface succession and shoreface variability in the
Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 85, p. 893–900. Western Interior Seaway of North America, in Pemberton, S.G., ed.,
330 H. EDWARD CLIFTON
Applications of Ichnology to Petroleum Exploration: SEPM, Core
Workshop 17, p. 57–84.
MACEACHERN, J.A., ZAITLIN, B.A., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1999, A sharp-based
sandstone of the Viking Formation, Joffre Field, Alberta, Canada:
criteria for recognition of transgressively incised shoreface com-
plexes: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 69, p. 876–892.
MAEJIMA, W., 1993, prograding gravelly shoreline deposits in the Early
Cretaceous Yuasa Formation, western Kii Peninsula, southwest Ja-
pan: Geological Society of Japan, Journal, v. 89, p. 645–660.
MALE, W.H., 1992, The sedimentology and ichnology of the Lower Creta-
ceous (Albian) Bluesky Formation in the Karr area of west-central
Alberta, in Pemberton, S.G., ed., Applications of Ichnology to Petro-
leum Exploration: SEPM, Core Workshop 17, p. 33–55.
MCBRIDE, R.A., AND MOSLOW, T.F., 1991, Origin, evolution, and distribution
of shoreface sand ridges, Atlantic inner shelf, USA: Marine Geology,
v. 97, p. 57–85.
MIDDLETON, G.V., 1973, Johannes Walther’s Law of the Correlation of
Facies: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 84, p. 979–988.
MCCUBBIN, D.G., 1982, Barrier island and strand-plain facies, in Sholle,
P.A., and Spearing, D., eds., Sandstone Depositional Environments:
A Cardium Formation, Cretaceous, western interior seaway, Alberta:
B POSAMENTIER, H.W., AND CHAMBERLIN, C.J., 1993, Sequence stratigraphic
FIG. 54.—A) Exposure of the Jackson Group in a uranium pit, west
Texas, U.S.A. A) Upper part of section. Hammer head rests on
contact between flat-bedded sand (upper foreshore) and gen-
tly inclined large-scale foresets with root structures
(backshore). Bioturbated sand in lower half of photo repre-
sents upper shoreface. B) Lower part of section. Hammer is on
hummocky cross-stratified set in lower-shoreface or inner-
shelf facies. Bioturbated interval in upper part of photo is
upper shoreface.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 31, p. 247–
279.
MORTON, R.A., 1994, Texas barriers, in Davis, R.A., Jr., ed., Geology of
Holocene Barrier Island Systems: New York, Springer-Verlag, p. 75–
114.
NEMEC, W., 1990, Aspects of sediment movement on steep delta faces, in
Colella, A., and Prior, D.B., eds., Coarse-Grained Deltas: International
Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 10, p. 29–73.
NIEDORODA, A.W., SWIFT, D.J.P., HOPKINS, T.S., AND MA, C.-M., 1984, Shoreface
morphodynamics on wave-dominated coasts: Marine Geology, v. 60,
p. 331–354.
NITTROUER, C.A., DEMASTER, D.J., KUEHL, S.A., AND MCKEE, B.A., 1986,
Association of sand with mud deposits accumulating on continental
shelves, in Knight, R.J., and McLean, J.R., eds., Shelf Sands and
Sandstones: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 11, p.
17–25.
PEMBERTON, S.G., VAN WAGONER, J.C., AND WACH, G.D., 1992, Ichnofacies of
a wave-dominated shoreline, in Pemberton, S.G., ed., Applications of
Ichnology to Petroleum Exploration: SEPM, Core Workshop 17, p.
339–382.
PATTISON, S.A.J., AND WALKER, R.G., 1992, Deposition and interpretation of
long, narrow sandbodies underlain by a basinwide erosional surface:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 62, p. 292–309.
PLINT, A.G., 1988, Sharp-based shoreface sequences and “offshore bars” in
the Cardium Formation of Alberta: their relationship to relative
changes in sea level, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.G.,
Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level
Changes: An Integrated Approach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, p.
357–370.
PLINT, A.G., 1991, High-frequency relative sea level oscillations in Upper
Cretaceous shelf clastics of the Alberta foreland basin: possible evi-
dence for a glacio-eustatic control?, in MacDonald, D.I.M., ed., Sedi-
mentation, Tectonics and Eustasy: International Association of Sedi-
mentologists, Special Publication 12, p. 409–428.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., ALLEN, G.P., JAMES, D.P., AND TESSON, M., 1992, Forced
regressions in a sequence stratigraphic framework: concept, examples,
and exploration significance: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1687–1709.
analysis of Viking Formation lowstand beach deposits at Joarcam
Field, Alberta, Canada, in Posamentier, H.W., Summerhayes, C.P.,
Haq, B.L., and Allen, G.P., eds., Sequence Stratigraphy and Facies
Associations: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special
Publication 18, p. 469–485.
POSTMA, G., 1990, Depositional architecture and facies of river and fan
deltas: a synthesis, in Colella, A., and Prior, D.B., eds., Coarse-Grained
Deltas: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publi-
cation 10, p. 13–28.
POSTMA, G., 1984, Slumps and their deposits on fan delta fronts: Geology,
v. 12, p. 27–30.
POSTMA, G., BABIC, L., ZUPANIC, J., AND RØE, S.-L.,1988, Delta-front failure
and associated bottom sets in a marine, gravelly Gilbert-type delta, in
Nemec, W., and Steel, R.J., eds., Fan Deltas: London, Blackie & Son
Ltd. p. 91–102.
READING, H.G., 1996, Sedimentary Environments; Processes, Facies and
Stratigraphy, Third Edition: London, Blackwell Scientific Ltd., 688 p.
REINECK, H.-E., 1963, Sedimentgefüge im Bereich der südlichen Nordsee:
Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Abhandlung, v.
505, 138 p.
REINECK, H.-E., AND SINGH, I.B, 1973, Depositional Sedimentary Environ-
ments—with Reference to Terrigenous Clastics: Berlin, Springer-
Verlag, 439 p.
RIGBY, J.K., AND HAMBLIN, W.K., 1972, Recognition of Ancient Sedimentary
Environments: Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralo-
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 331

Lithology Facies Paleocurrents

Unbedded siltstone INNER SHELF
Transgressive lag
Poorly sorted conglomerate,
cross-bedded sandstone FLUVIAL
A
Variegated mudstone
Structureless medium- BACKSHORE
grained sandstone
Planar-bedded FORESHORE B
medium-grained sandstone

C
Cross-bedded
coarse sandstone, UPPER D
pebble lenses and SHOREFACE
layer
E
Sharp contact
Bedded fine sandstone,
scattered small pebbles, LOWER F
burrows SHOREFACE

5m Unbedded fine sandstone

INNER SHELF

Unbedded siltstone

0 Transgressive lag
Variegated mudstone FLUVIAL

FIG. 55.—Generalized stratigraphic succession through middle Miocene shoreline deposits in the Caliente Range, California, U.S.A.
(after Clifton, 1981). Note sharp contact at base of upper-shoreface facies. Paleocurrent roses: A) Fluvial sandstone; B) planar
laminae of the foreshore; C) general summation of all (124) cross-bedding measurements within the upper shoreface facies; D)
large-scale (> 1 m) cross-bedding in the upper-shoreface facies (inferred to represent bars); E) cross-bedding in sandstone beds
immediately above the basal upper-shoreface contact (inferred to represent rip-channel deposits; F) foresets in isolated gravel
ripples in the lower-foreshore facies (inferred to represent wave ripples and the direction of wave passage).

gists, Special Publication 16, 340 p.
RINE, J.M., AND GINSBURG, R.N., 1985, Depositional facies of a mud shoreface
in Surinam, South America—a mud analog to sandy shallow-marine
deposits: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 55, p. 633–652.
RINE, J.M., TILLMAN, R.W., CULVER, S.J., AND SWIFT, D.J.P., 1991, Generation
of late Holocene sand ridges on the middle continental shelf of New
Jersey, USA—evidence for formation in a mid-shelf setting based on
comparisons with a nearshore ridge, in Swift, D.J.P., Oertel, G.F.,
Tillman, R.W., and Thorne, J.A., eds., Shelf Sand and Sandstone
Bodies: Geometry, Facies and Sequence Stratigraphy: International
Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 14, p. 395–423.
RYER, T.A., 1977, Patterns of Cretaceous shallow-marine sedimentation,
Coalville and Rockport areas, Utah: Geological Society of America,
Bulletin, v. 88, p. 177–188.
SAUNDERS, T., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1986, Trace fossils and sedimentology
of the Appaloosa Sandstone: Bearpaw–Horseshoe Canyon Forma-
tion transition, Dorothy, Alberta: Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists, Field Trip Guidebook, 117 p.
SCHWARTZ, M.L., 1982, Beach processs, in Schwartz, M.L., ed., Encyclope-
dia of Beaches and Coastal Environments: Stroudsburg, Pennsylva-
nia, Hutchison Ross Publishing Company, p. 153–157.
SELLEY, R.C., 1969, Ancient Sedimentary Environments; A Brief Survey:
Ithaca, New York, Cornell University Press, 237 p.
SHELTON, J.W., 1965, Trend and genesis of lowermost sandstone unit of
Eagle Sandstone, Billings, Montana: American Association Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 49, p. 1385–1397.
SHELTON, J.W., 1967, Stratigraphic models and general criteria for recogni-
tion of alluvial, barrier bar, and turbidity current sand deposits:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 51, p.
2441–2461.
SHEPARD, F.P., AND MOORE, D.G., 1955, Central Texas Coast sedimentation:
characteristics of sedimentary environment, Recent history, and di-
agenesis: American Association Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 39,
p. 1463–1593.
SHEPARD F.P., PHLEGER, F.B., AND VAN ANDEL, T.H., 1960, Recent Sediments,
Northwest Gulf of Mexico: Tulsa, Oklahoma, American Association
332 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

A
B

D
A
F C

E
N

100 m

B
STACKED PROGRADING BARRED SHORELINE DEPOSITS
MIOCENE, CALIENTE RANGE, CALIFORNIA

TSE

TSE
NONMARINE

UPPER SHOREFACE
TSE = Transgressive
LOWER SHOREFACE
10 m surface of
erosion SHELF
BASE OF TROUGH
0 100 m

FIG. 56.—A) Inferred coastal bar–trough systems responsible for producing the middle Miocene shoreline succession in the Caliente
Range, California, U.S.A. Shoreline trend was developed from independent evidence (after Clifton, 1981). B) Inferred stacking
pattern of the shoreline deposits shown in Part A. Individual parasquences, separated by transgressive surfaces of erosion,
contain internal erosional surfaces and sharp-based upper-shoreface deposits generated by prograding bar–trough systems.

of Petroleum Geologists, 394 p. Special Publication 64, p. 321–356.

SHIPP, R.C., 1984, Bedforms and depositional structures of a barred
nearshore system, eastern Long Island, New York: Marine Geology,
v. 60, p. 235–259.
SNEDDEN, J.W., AND BERGMAN, K.M., 1999, Isolated shallow marine sand
bodies: deposits for all interpretations, in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden,
J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies: Sequence Stratigraphic Analy-
sis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special Publication 64,
p. 1–11.
SNEDDEN, J.W., TILLMAN, R.W., KREISA, R.D., SCHWELLER, W.J., CULVER, S.J.,
AND WINN, R.D., JR., 1994, Stratigraphy and genesis of a modern
shoreface-attached sand ridge, Peahala Ridge, New Jersey: Journal of
Sedimentary Research, v. B64, p. 560–581.
SUTER, J.R., AND CLIFTON, H.E., 1999, The Shannon Sandstone and isolated
linear sand bodies: Interpretations and realizations, in Bergman,
K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies: Sequence
Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM,
SWIFT, D.J.P., AND PARSONS, B.S., 1999, Shannon Sandstone of the Powder
River Basin: Orthodoxy and revisionism in stratigraphic thought, in
Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies:
Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Special Publication 64, p.85–93.
SVERDRUP, H.U., JOHNSON, M.V., AND FLEMING, R.H, 1942, The Oceans:
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1087 p.
SWIFT, D.J.P., THORNE, J.A., AND OERTEL, G.F., 1986, Fluid processes and sea-
floor response on a modern storm-dominated shelf: middle Atlantic
shelf of North America. Part II: Response of the shelf floor, in Knight,
R.J., and McLean, J.R., eds., Shelf Sands and Sandstones: Canadian
Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 11, p. 191–211.
VAN DE MEENE, J.W.H., BOERSMA, J.R., AND TERWINDT, J.H.J., 1996, Sedimen-
tary structures of combined flow deposits from the shoreface-con-
nected ridges along the central Dutch coast: Marine Geology, v. 131,
p. 151–175.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 333

1
BEACH
Fine sand,
planar lamination FORESHORE
0m

-1 UPPER
Fine to medium sand,
longshore or seaward SHOREFACE
crossbedding; -2 (BAR TROUGH
Inclined planar AND/OR
lamination
-3 RIP CHANNEL)

-4 Sharp-based ss 1

Fine to very fine sand, -5

SCS, HCS, LOWER SHOREFACE
Bioturbation TO
-6
INNER SHELF
-7
Sharp-based ss 2
Interbedded fine sand
and shale, HCS in sand, -8
bioturbation
-9

Shale, interbedded
very fine sandstone, -10
bioturbation INNER SHELF

FIG. 57.—Generalized shoreface succession on a prograding fine-grained, non-pebbly, moderate- to low-energy coast (Cretaceous
Blackhawk Fm., Book Cliffs, Utah, U.S.A.). Two sharp-based sandstones are shown: #1, produced by prograding bar–trough
systems, and #2, produced by the amalgamation of storm sandstones.

VAN STRAATEN, L.M.J.U., 1959, Minor structures of some recent littoral and
neritic sediments: Geologie en Mijnbouw, v. 21, p. 197–216.
WALKER, R.G., AND PLINT, A.G, 1992, Wave- and storm-dominated shallow
marine systems, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models:
Response to Sea Level Change: Geological Association of Canada, p.
219–238.
WALKER, R.G., AND WISEMAN, T.R., 1995, Lowstand shorefaces, transgres-
sive incised shorefaces, and forced regressions: examples form the
Viking Formation, Joarcam Area, Alberta: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. B65, p. 132–141.
WELLS, J.T., AND COLEMAN, J.M., 1978, Longshore transport of mud by
waves, northeastern coast of South America: Geologie en Minjbouw,
v. 57, p. 333–359.
WEIMER, R.J., 1961, Spatial dimensions of Upper Cretaceous sandstone,
Rocky Mountain area, in Peterson, J.A., and Osmond, J.C., eds.
Geometry of Sandstone Bodies: Tulsa, Oklahoma, American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists, p. 82–97.
WEIMER, R.J., AND HOYT, J.H., 1964, Burrows of Callianassa major Say,
geologic indicators of littoral and shallow neritic environments:
Journal of Paleontology, v. 38, p. 761–767.
WRIGHT, L.D., CHAPPELL, J., BRADSHAW, M.P., AND COWELL, P., 1979,
Morphodynamics of reflective and dissipative beach and nearshore
systems, southeastern Australia: Marine Geology, v. 32, p. 105–140.
334 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

TEXTURE
PEBBLY
COARSE SAND
FINE SAND
MUD

AMBIENT ENERGY SAND SUPPLY

HIGH ABUNDANT
MODERATE LIMITED
LOW

DOMINANT MORPHOLOGY
CONDITIONS
MODERATE GRADIENT
STORM VERY STEEP GRADIENT
FAIR-WEATHER
BARRED
FLOOD
BASE LEVEL
RISING
STATIC
FALLING

FIG. 58.—Parameters of open-coast settings that can influence the lithologies and stratigraphic succession of the deposit.

“STANDARD MODEL”
AMBIENT ENERGY
HIGH TEXTURE
MODERATE PEBBLY
LOW COARSE SAND
Coal FINE SAND
Planar- MUD
lamination
0
DOMINANT Cross-bedded
CONDITIONS sand
STORM
FAIR-WEATHER SCS SAND SUPPLY
FLOOD ABUNDANT
HCS LIMITED

BASE LEVEL bioturbation

RISING
STATIC MORPHOLOGY
FALLING MODERATE GRADIENT
VERY STEEP GRADIENT
10 m BARRED

FIG. 59.—”Standard” model for a prograding shoreline (Walker and Plint, 1992). Specific to a storm-dominated, moderate- to low-
energy setting with a moderate gradient in which fine sand was in somewhat limited supply and base level was static.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 335

CALIFORNIA PLEISTOCENE
Planar TEXTURE
lamination
PEBBLY
AMBIENT ENERGY 0m COARSE SAND
HIGH FINE SAND
MODERATE MUD
LOW Cross-bedded
sand and gravel

-5
DOMINANT SAND SUPPLY
CONDITIONS ABUNDANT
Scattered LIMITED
STORM small pebbles
FAIR-WEATHER
FLOOD -10
Fine sand, HCS,
wavy lamination,
bioturbation

BASE LEVEL
RISING -15 MORPHOLOGY
STATIC
FALLING MODERATE GRADIENT
VERY STEEP GRADIENT
BARRED

FIG. 60.—Prograding shoreline typical of that found in Pleistocene deposits found along the central California coast, U.S.A. Specific
to a storm-dominated, high-energy, barred setting with an abundant supply of sand, including coarse sand and gravel, under
conditions of static base level.

PLEISTOCENE SOUTHEASTERN SPAIN

TEXTURE
PEBBLY
AMBIENT ENERGY COARSE SAND
HIGH FINE SAND
MODERATE Planar MUD
LOW lamination
0m
SAND SUPPLY
ABUNDANT
DOMINANT -1 LIMITED
Cross-bedded
CONDITIONS sand and gravel
-2
STORM
FAIR-WEATHER Scattered
FLOOD small pebbles
-3

Bioturbated
-4 fine sand

BASE LEVEL MORPHOLOGY

RISING
MODERATE GRADIENT
STATIC VERY STEEP GRADIENT
FALLING
BARRED

FIG. 61.—Prograding shoreline typical of that found in Pleistocene deposits found along the southeastern coast of Spain. Specific to
a storm-dominated, low-energy, barred setting with a limited supply of sand, including coarse sand and gravel, under conditions
of static base level.
336 H. EDWARD CLIFTON

TEXAS GULF COAST

AMBIENT ENERGY TEXTURE
Root structures
HIGH PEBBLY
MODERATE Planar COARSE SAND
LOW lamination FINE SAND
MUD
0m

Bioturbated
DOMINANT fine sand
CONDITIONS SAND SUPPLY
STORM ABUNDANT
FAIR-WEATHER Alternating sets of LIMITED
FLOOD HCS and intervals of
bioturbated fine
sand
-5

BASE LEVEL Bioturbated very

fine sand
RISING MORPHOLOGY
STATIC
FALLING MODERATE GRADIENT
VERY STEEP GRADIENT
BARRED

Figure 62. Prograding shoreline typical of that found on the Texas Gulf coast. Specific to a low-energy, barred setting with an limited
supply of fine to very fine sand under conditions of static base level. Abundance of bioturbation indicates a dominance of fair-
weather conditions, although storm deposits exist in the lower part of the succession.

GILBERT DELTA
0 TEXTURE
AMBIENT ENERGY
PEBBLY
HIGH COARSE SAND
MODERATE FINE SAND
LOW MUD

Giant foresets
of sand and gravel
DOMINANT
CONDITIONS SAND SUPPLY
STORM ABUNDANT
FAIR-WEATHER LIMITED
FLOOD
10 m

BASE LEVEL MORPHOLOGY

RISING MODERATE GRADIENT
STATIC VERY STEEP GRADIENT
FALLING BARRED

FIG. 63.—Prograding shoreline in a setting where coarse sediment is introduced into a setting of low to very low energy. Although
the supply of gravel may be substantial, not enough sand enters the system to develop a offshore profile in equilibrium with the
waves. Generally associated with steep gradients and, as shown here, under conditions of static base level.
 A REEXAMINATION OF CLASTIC-SHORELINE FACIES MODELS 337

FORCED REGRESSION
AMBIENT ENERGY TEXTURE
HIGH PEBBLY
MODERATE COARSE SAND
LOW Planar lamination FINE SAND
MUD
0

Cross-bedded
fine sand
SCS

DOMINANT SAND SUPPLY

CONDITIONS ABUNDANT
LIMITED
STORM
FAIR-WEATHER Mudstone interclasts
FLOOD
gutter casts

Shelf mudstone
BASE LEVEL
RISING
STATIC MORPHOLOGY
FALLING LOW GRADIENT
10 m VERY STEEP GRADIENT
BARRED

FIG. 64.—Forced-regression model for a prograding shoreline (Plint, 1988). Specific to a storm-dominated, moderate- to low-energy
setting with a low gradient in which fine sand was in somewhat limited supply and base level was falling (or had fallen).

PROGRADING BARRED SHOREFACE

Variegated mudstone TEXTURE
AMBIENT ENERGY
Structureless medium
PEBBLY
HIGH COARSE SAND
MODERATE grained sandstone
FINE SAND
LOW Planar-bedded MUD
medium grained sandstone

Cross-bedded
SAND SUPPLY
DOMINANT coarse sandstone, ABUNDANT
CONDITIONS pebble lenses and LIMITED
layer
STORM
FAIR-WEATHER
FLOOD
Erosional surface
Bedded fine sandstone,
scattered small pebbles,
burrows

BASE LEVEL Unbedded fine sandstone

RISING
STATIC MORPHOLOGY
FALLING 5m
Unbedded siltstone
MODERATE GRADIENT
VERY STEEP GRADIENT
BARRED

FIG. 65.—Prograding shoreline succession like that found in middle Miocene deposits in the Caliente Range, California, U.S.A.
Specific to a storm-dominated, moderate-energy, barred setting with an abundant supply of sand, including coarse sand and
gravel, under conditions of static sea level.
338 H. EDWARD CLIFTON
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 339

FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES

JOHN R. SUTER
ConocoPhillips, Sedimentary Systems, Subsurface Technology, P.O. Box 2197, Houston, Texas 77252–2197, U.S.A.
john.r.suter@conocophillips.com

ABSTRACT: A consistent, commonly accepted facies model for clastic continental shelf deposits has proven elusive. Sand ridges of various
types are ubiquitous on Quaternary shelves, but recognition of ancient examples has been intermittent, as models emerge, evolve, and
undergo relative degrees of acceptance and rejection. Continental shelves lie in the zone between highstand and lowstand shorelines, and
are greatly affected by sea-level changes. Shelf deposits per se are thus limited to and are most volumetrically significant during periods
of high or rising base level, the transgressive and highstand systems tracts. The continental shelf is roughly defined from the base of the
shoreface to the shelf margin or upper continental slope. These defining depths, and consequent shelf widths, are highly variable,
depending largely on tectonic setting. Primary shelf sediments may be derived from erosional scour of preexisting deposits, biological and/
or chemical precipitates, or supplied from adjacent shorelines by direct fluvial, deltaic, or estuarine input, or by tidal flux or storms. Fine-
grained shelf sediments, constituting potential source and seal facies, are less controversial than the origin and distribution of potential
reservoir facies. Coarse-grained shelf deposits are believed to be primarily relict, reworked from shoreline and nearshore deposits laid
down during previous regressive episodes, although notable exceptions exist. These deposits can be quite complex, taking on geometries
reflecting reshaping by wave, tidal, storm, and oceanic currents, with internal stratigraphies reflecting multi-stage depositional and
erosional histories.

INTRODUCTION (Fig. 4) is a good modern example of a broad epeiric platform

Modern continental shelves (Fig. 1) extend from the toe of the
shoreface profile (Fig. 2; also Clifton, this volume) at depths from
about 2 to 25 m, out to the shelf–slope break, or shelf margin. This
latter feature occurs at a variety of depths depending on tectonic
setting and neotectonic effects, but it is usually defined by the 200
m bathymetric contour. Shelf widths are consequently enor-
mously variable, ranging from as little as 2 km to as much as 1500
km (Fig. 1). Most nonglaciated shelves are usually exceptionally
flat, with seaward slopes averaging considerably less than 1°.
Approximately 30,000,000 km2, or about 6% of the earth’s surface,
can be considered continental shelf at the current glacioeustatic
highstand.
Continental shelves are usually classified into two major
geomorphologic categories (Figs. 3, 4). Submerged continental
margins, bounded on their updip sides by the shoreface (Clifton,
this volume), and in deeper waters by the shelf margin, are
termed pericontinental shelves (Fig. 3). Today, pericontinental
shelves are ubiquitous as a result of the Holocene sea-level rise.
Drowned portions of continental interiors are termed epiconti-
nental shelves or epeiric platforms (e.g., the Arafura Sea (Fig. 4),
the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, and the Gulf of Carpentaria). At
times in the geologic past, epicontinental seas were more com-
mon, owing to more favorable paleogeographic configurations
and higher eustasy.
In differing tectonic settings, clastic shelves develop into
somewhat different forms (Fig. 5; Swift and Thorne, 1991). Pas-
sive, or trailing, margins have seaward-thickening sedimentary
wedges, typically forming broad pericontinental shelves, of which
the Gulf of Mexico (Fig. 3) is an excellent example. Convergent
margins form around subduction zones, and are usually hinged
on their seaward side. Shelf areas are typically narrow, wave-cut
platforms, but they may also be aggradational accretionary prisms.
Foreland basins are formed in front of fold-and-thrust belts, with
maximum rates of subsidence and deposition near the orogenic
belt. A peripheral bulge may complicate this simple profile,
which tends to produce a basinward-thinning sedimentary wedge.
The Arafura Sea offshore of Papua New Guinea and Irian Jaya
within a foreland basin.
At present it is not unfair to say that a consistent, commonly
accepted facies model for clastic shelf deposits has proven elu-
sive. Currently, there is a general reluctance to interpret sand
bodies within marine successions as shelfal in origin (Suter and
Clifton, 1999; Galloway, 2002). The recognition of fine-grained
shelf deposits and the understanding of their role as hydrocarbon
source and seal facies are far less equivocal. Sand ridges of
various types are ubiquitous on Quaternary shelves (Table 1), but
recognition of ancient examples in the subsurface or outcrop has
been intermittent, as models emerge, evolve, and undergo rela-
tive degrees of acceptance and rejection (Tables 2, 3). The dynam-
ics of continental shelves can be quite complex, with many
currents of different types and origins interacting (Fig. 6).
Continental shelves lie in the zone between highstand and
lowstand shorelines, and they are greatly affected by sea-level
changes (Figs. 7–11). Fluctuating baselevels intermittently create
shelves by drowning continental platforms during rising phases
and destroy shelves by exposing the same platforms during
periods of base-level fall. The resulting deposits are subjected to
radically different process regimes. Shelf deposits per se are thus
largely limited to and are most volumetrically significant during
periods of high or rising base level. These conditions occur at
several scales. Eustasy has varied throughout Earth’s history
(Figs. 7, 8). High or rising base levels also feature at particular
periods in an accommodation cycle, i.e., during what are known
as the late lowstand, transgressive, and early highstand systems
tracts in sequence stratigraphic terminology (Fig. 9). Shelf depos-
its reflect this complexity. Many deposits on modern shelves are
of composite origin, beginning as shoreline facies that undergo
varying degrees of reworking upon transgression. Morphology,
lithofacies, and vertical successions of these deposits can be quite
similar to those of adjacent shoreface, deltaic, or estuarine depos-
its. In addition, even the most thoroughly studied and best-
known modern shelf sands occur in a transitional environment
that exists only at certain periods in an accommodation cycle (Fig.
9). Preservation in their current form is doubtful. As such, inter-
pretations of ancient shelf sediments based on Quaternary ex-

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 339–397.
340 JOHN R. SUTER

0 5,000 10,000 km

FIG. 1.—Satellite topographic–bathymetric image of the world (image courtesy of K. Soofi, ConocoPhillips, 2004). Continental shelves
are those portions of the ocean basins shown in light blue, comprising depths between 10 and 200 m. This designation represents
about 6% of the total area of the globe. Slopes on the continental shelves range from about 0.001° to ~ 1°, and widths vary from
less than 10 km to greater than 200 km.

Foreshore
Shoreface

Shelf

Foreshore

Shoreface

Shelf

FIG. 2.—Digital bathymetry and profile of a modern shoreface–shelf transition, from offshore of Fraser Island in northeastern
Australia (image courtesy of R. Boyd, 2004). The continental shelf begins at the change in slope at the toe of the lower shoreface.
The depth at which this occurs is highly variable and ranges from about 2 m to as much as 25 m in different parts of the world
(Clifton, this volume).
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 341

Mississippi
Valley

Houston Mississippi Delta

in e
orel
Sh Continental
Continental Shelf
Shelf
Mississippi
Mississippi
Maarg
SShheelflf M in 220000 m
rgin m Canyon
Canyon

Continental
Continental Slope
Slope

Abyssal
Abyssal Plain
Plain

00 200
200 km
km

FIG. 3.—The Gulf of Mexico is an excellent example of a submerged continental margin, or pericontinental clastic shelf. Shelves of this
kind are the most common today. The continental shelf extends from just seaward of the shoreline to the shelf margin, which lies
just landward of the 200 m contour indicated. The rugose topography of the continental slope in this area is the result of extensive
salt tectonics. (Satellite topography–bathymetry image courtesy of K. Soofi, ConocoPhillips).

amples are often suspect, and many frequently cited examples
have been reinterpreted to represent other depositional environ-
ments. Although it is a daunting task, this review utilizes what is
known about Quaternary clastic shelf deposits in an attempt to
provide some consistent working parameters, if not a consistent
facies model, for the interpretation of clastic shelf deposits in the
ancient record.
Given this degree of complexity, the importance of clastic
shelf sands as hydrocarbon reservoirs is similarly uncertain (see
papers in Bergman and Snedden, 1999; Galloway 2002). Shelf
sands have been interpreted as the principal reservoir facies in
numerous oil and gas fields (Table 3), although with the advent
of sequence stratigraphy in the 1980s many previous “offshore
bars,” or what would today be called shelf sand ridges, were
reinterpreted as incised valleys or forced regressive shoreface
deposits (Fig. 11; Walker and Plint, 1992; Sullivan et al, 1997;
Snedden and Bergman, 1999). Recently, Posamentier (2002) inter-
preted Miocene reservoirs from Indonesia as shelf sands, and
Galloway (2002) interpreted Miocene deposits from the North
Sea as comprising clastic shelf deposits. Some major Cretaceous
sandstone reservoirs in the Western Interior of North America are
thought to be shelf sand deposits. The Tocito Sandstone (e.g.,
Nummedal and Riley, 1999) has a cumulative oil production of
over 160 MMBO. Hartzog Draw (e.g., Tillman and Martinsen,
1987), which is dominantly a Shannon Sandstone field, has an
estimated 400 MMBO in place. The Shannon and similar “isolated
marine sands” (Snedden and Bergman, 1999) are the archetypal
“offshore bars.” Sadly, this particular interpretation is extremely
controversial (see the numerous papers in Bergman and Snedden,
1999) with at least four competing alternative interpretations
(Suter and Clifton, 1999).
SEDIMENT SUPPLY TO CLASTIC SHELVES
Probably the most vexing question relating to continental-
shelf sands and gravels concerns the sediments themselves:
How did they get out there? Original models of continental-
shelf sediments used the graded-shelf concept, in which it was
342 JOHN R. SUTER

~ 10 – 200 m Water Depth

Irian Jaya
M
Moou
unnt
taaiin
n BB
eellt
t

Papua -
New Guinea
Co
as
tal
Pla
Arafura i n Fly
Delta
Sea

in
gin
Maarrg
lf M
Cape

Shheelf
York

S
Australia
Coral Sea
Gulf
Gulf of
of Carpentaria
Carpentaria

0 500 km
Australia
FIG. 4.—The Arafura Sea between Australia and Papua New Guinea–Irian Jaya is a good modern example of an epicontinental sea
(satellite topography–bathymetry image courtesy of K. Soofi, ConocoPhillips). A shelf margin does exist eastward of the Fly Delta
and the York Peninsula, but westward a broad, submerged continental platform extends some 1000 km to the Indonesian island
arc.

Passive margin
(A) Passive margin
B C

Convergent
(B) margin
Convergent margin Foreland
(C) basin
Foreland basin
Shelf Width
FIG. 5.—Variations in the tectonic setting of continental shelves (redrawn from Swift and Thorne, 1991). A) Passive margins, or trailing
margins, are pericontinental shelves (Fig. 3), with increasing rates of subsidence seaward, and consequent seaward-thickening
sedimentary deposits. B) Convergent margins form around subduction zones. Subsidence rates are greatest in the area of
subduction. Shelf areas are typically narrow, wave-cut platforms, but they may also be aggradational accretionary prisms. C)
Foreland basins also occur at convergent margins, with maximum rates of subsidence and deposition adjacent to the thrust belt.
Extensive shelf areas commonly develop.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 343

TABLE 1.—Some Quaternary shelf sands: a non-exhaustive list of sands present on present-day continental shelves.
Many of these deposits have been written about multiple times. No effort has been made to list every pertinent
reference, but hopefully those provided will be a starting point for further examination.

Location Water Depth, m Interpretation References

NE Brazil margin 13–20 Ocean current-dominated Testa and Bosence (1999)
Yang and Sun (1988)
Yang (1989)
East China Sea 45–115 Tide-dominated
Liu et al. (1998)
Berné et al. (2002)
Gulf of Lyons > 100 Wave-dominated Berné et al. (1998)
Keller and Richards (1967)
Straits of Malacca 50–80 Tide-dominated
Emmel and Curray (1982)
Eastern Australia 20–70 Wave-dominated Roy et al. (1994)
Flemming, (1980); (1981)
Southeast Africa 35–70 Ocean current-dominated
Ramsay et al. (1994)
Atlantic Margin, North America
East Coast, USA < 20* Storm-dominated McBride and Moslow (1991)
Maryland, USA 16–30 Storm-dominated Swift and Field (1981)
Stubblefield et al. (1984)
New Jersey, USA 4–45 Storm-dominated Rine et al. (1991)
Snedden et al. (1999)
Swift et al. (1986)
New Jersey, USA 20–120 Storms and ocean currents
Goff et al. (1999, 2005)
Twichell (1983)
Georges Bank 25–50 Tide- and storm-dominated
Dalrymple et al. (1992)
Hoogendorn and Dalrymple (1986)
Sable Island Bank Storm-dominated
Dalrymple and Hoogendoorn (1997)
North Sea
Erosional lowstand
Berné et al. (1998)
Celtic Sea ≥ 100 remnants
Tide-dominated moribund Reynaud et al. (1999)
Belgian coast 10–20 Tide-dominated Berné et al. (1994)
Houbolt (1968)
Belderson et al. (1982)
Belderson (1986)
North Sea 15–40 Tide-dominated
Stride et al. (1982)
Huthnance (1982)
Davis and Balson (1992)
Gulf of Mexico, USA
Curray (1960, 1964)
Nelson and Bray (1970)
Frazier (1974)
East Texas/ Southwest Louisiana 12–29 Storm-dominated
Suter (1987)
Thomas and Anderson (1989)
Rodriquez et al. (1999)
Penland et al. (1986, 1988, 1989)
Mississippi Delta 10–50 Storm-dominated
Pope et al (1990)
Northeast 20–35 Transgressive sand sheet McBride et al. (1999)
Southwest Florida <7 Tide-dominated Davis et al. (1993)

believed that sediments should change from coarse to fine as
one progressively moved from the shoreline into deeper water.
This reflected decreasing current and wave energy in an off-
shore direction, and the general belief that no mechanism ex-
isted to transport coarse sediments more than a few kilometers
from the shoreline. As oceanographic studies increased in num-
ber and importance in the latter half of the 20th century, it
became apparent that neither the type nor the distribution of
sediments on continental shelves varies smoothly from the
shoreline to the shelf margin. Coarse sands and gravels were
found at various depths on shelves across the globe. Curray
(1960, 1964; see Figure 10), among others, realized that much of
this sediment distribution was the result of the recent glacio-
eustatic fluctuation and had been left behind on the continental
shelf in the ensuing Holocene transgression. Emery (1968) coined
the term relict for these sediments, meaning that they were
erosional remnants of previous processes and were not in equi-
librium with the process environment of the modern shelf.
Further research continued to demonstrate that many shelves
are highly energetic, with currents capable of considerable
erosion and sediment transport. Swift et al. (1971) termed shelf
sediments palimpsest if they were brought to a particular loca-
tion by some other mechanism but achieved hydraulic equilib-
rium with subsequent shelf processes. The realization grew that
there were a number of different types of sands on continental
shelves, emplaced by a variety of mechanisms. Debate contin-
344 JOHN R. SUTER

TABLE 2.—Some interpreted clastic shelf sands in outcrop. Many of these deposits, in particular the Shannon Sandstone,
have been written about multiple times, and almost all, if not every one of these examples, has one or more
competing interpretations. References in this table mostly advocate the shelf interpretation;
those which represent competing viewpoints are marked by an asterisk*.

Formation Age Location Type Reference

Kazusa Group Pleistocene Boso Peninsula, Japan Current-dominated Ito and Horikawa (2000)
Spearing (1976)
Brenner (1978)
Shannon Cretaceous Wyoming, USA Storm-dominated Tillman and Martinsen (1987)
Gaynor and Swift (1988)
Bergman (1994)*
Bergman and Snedden (1999)
Jennette and Jones (1994)*
Tocito Cretaceous New Mexico, USA Tide-dominated
Nummedal and Riley (1999)
Krause et al. (1987)
Cardium Cretaceous Western Canada Storm-dominated
Plint (1988)*
Frontier Cretaceous Wyoming, USA Storm-dominated Winn (1991)
Cole and Young (1991)
Mancos B Cretaceous Utah and Colorado, USA Shelf Plume Cole et al. (1997)
Hampson et al. (1999)*
Scatter Cretaceous Northwest Canada Storm-dominated Leckie and Potocki (1998)
Niel Klinter Jurassic East Greenland Storm-dominated Dam and Surlyk (1998)
Raukely Cretaceous East Greenland Tide-dominated Surlyk and Noe-Nygaard (1991)
Duffy Mountain Cretaceous Colorado, USA Shelf plume, storm sands Boyles and Scott (1982)
Vlierzele Eocene Belgium Tide-dominated Houthuys and Gullentops (1988)
Rogn Jurassic Northern North Sea Tide-dominated Goetsen and Nelson (1992)
Armorica Quartzite Ordovician Southern Spain Storm-dominated Rey and Hidalgo (2004)
Various Silurian Tennessee, USA Storm-dominated Driese et al. (1991)
Gog Group Cambrian Western Canada Storm-dominated Hein et al. (1987)
Sandfjord Precambrian Finnmark, Norway Tide-dominated Levell (1980)
Precambrian–
Various Mid-continent Tide-dominated Various
Paleozoic

ues concerning how far and by what mechanisms sands can be
transported from the shoreline onto the shelf (Dalrymple and
Cummings, 2004).
Sediments supplied to continental shelves and ultimately
constituting shelf deposits fall into several broad categories.
Allochthonous (Swift and Thorne, 1991) sands, silts, clays, and
organic matter are those particles transported to the shelf by
fluvial/estuarine processes, bypassing river mouths as coastal
jets, hyperpycnal flows, hypopycnal plumes, or tidal flux. Sedi-
ments are also transported from the shoreline by longshore
currents and by downwelling storm flows. If sediment is sup-
plied at a rate greater than the creation of accommodation on the
shelf, a progradational or supply-dominated shelf setting results
(Fig. 12; Swift and Thorne, 1991). Autochthonous sediments are
those developed in situ, by erosion and resuspension by waves or
upwelling, by the formation of authigenic minerals such as
glauconite, or by direct creation from near-surface organic pro-
ductivity. Supply-dominated shelves are somewhat limited
in the present day, but clearly they were more common in the
ancient record. Many supply-dominated shelves are on active
margins, where small mountainous rivers deliver the bulk of
sediment to the world’s oceans. Accommodation-dominated, or
transgressive, shelves—more typical of present-day conditions
on most pericontinental margins—result when sediment supply
is insufficient to fill available space (Fig. 13; Swift and Thorne,
1991).
Allochthonous Sediments
Sediments flowing onto the continental shelf from a river or
an estuary (Fig. 14) are immediately subject to a number of shelf
dispersal processes (Figs. 6, 15, 16). Despite decades of study, and
considerable debate, the mechanisms and magnitude of cross-
shelf dispersal and deposition are still not fully understood
(Nittrouer and Wright, 1994; Leeder, 1999; Dalrymple and
Cummings, 2004). When sediments from a fluvial source enter a
marine receiving basin, they have a number of possibilities,
summarized in Figures 15 and 16. Sediments entering a marine
basin have three basic fates: (1) deposition nearshore; (2) trans-
portation seaward or shore parallel as hypopycnal (buoyant)
plumes; or (3) transportation seaward as hyperpycnal gravity
flows.
If a fluvial system provides enough sediment to form a delta,
bed load carried by traction currents is usually deposited close to
shore in the form of distributary-mouth bars (e.g., the Mississippi
Delta, Fig. 14; also see Bhattacharya, this volume). Wave-domi-
nated estuaries may have ebb tidal deltas that transport sediment
onto the inner shelf, while tide-dominated estuaries commonly
have a series of linear bars in the transition area from estuary to
inner shelf (see Boyd et al., this volume). These mechanisms
emplacement coarse sediments onto the continental shelf, but
these sands belong to their respective depositional environments
and are not considered shelf deposits per se.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 345

TABLE 3.—A non-exhaustive list of interpreted shelf sands in the subsurface. Many of these examples have been
interpreted as some other depositional environment, and several have more than one competing interpretation.
The references provided here support the shelf sand for the respective reservoir, and are meant as representative
starting points, not as a complete bibliography. We can conclude that (1) interpreting shelf sandstones in the
subsurface is not straightforward, and (2) it is problematic to use interpreted examples of shelf sands from
outcrop or the subsurface to construct a facies model for clastic shelf deposits.

Field Example Formation Age Location Reference

Mariner Anahuac-Fleming Miocene Mississippi, USA Handford and Baria (2003)
Seria Miri Miocene Sabah Atkinson et al. (1986)
Various Upper Cibulakan Miocene Indonesia, Java Sea Posamentier (2002)
None – possible CO2 Utsira Miocene North Sea Galloway (2002)
sequestration candidate

Pembina Cardium Cretaceous Alberta, Canada Krause and Nelson (1991)

Kinsale Head, Ballycotton Greensand-Gault Cretaceous UK North Sea Winn (1994)
“A” Sand
Kuparak Kuparak River Cretaceous Alaska Gaynor and Scheihing (1988)
Milk River Milk River Cretaceous Alberta/Saskatchewan, Canada Meijer-Drees and Myhr (1981)
Tom Walsh-Owen Olmos Cretaceous South Texas, USA Snedden and Jumper (1990)
Hartzog Draw Shannon Cretaceous Wyoming, USA Tillman and Martinsen (1987)
House Draw Sussex Cretaceous Wyoming, USA Berg (1975)
Higley et al. (1997)
Bisti Tocito Cretaceous New Mexico, USA Nummedal and Riley (1999)
Various Bakken Shale Devonian– Western Canada Toews et al. (2004)
Mississippian
Heidrun Fangst Group Jurassic Norwegian North Sea Harris (1989)
Whitley (1992)
Alpine Kingak Shale Jurassic Alaska Morris et al. (2000)
Burns et al. (2002)
Draugen Rogn Jurassic Norwegian North Sea Goetsen and Nelson (1992)
Troll Sognefjord, Jurassic Norwegian North Sea Gray (1987)
Fensfjord

Buoyant or hypopycnal plumes (Figs. 14–18) are less dense
than the ambient seawater. Such plumes may reach well out
onto the shelf or across the shelf break, depending on their own
characteristics, the slope of the shelf, and the prevailing shelf
winds, waves, and currents. Suspended load in a hypopycnal
plume is deposited as the plume loses momentum into the
receiving basin. Individual grains settle out as turbulence de-
creases, abetted by the process of flocculation, the agglomera-
tion or clumping of suspended particles into grains which can
settle more quickly. Flocculation occurs as positively charged
ions in seawater interact with negatively charged clay particles.
Typically this happens when salinities exceed 1–5% (Dyer,
1995), which may either take place as a salt-water wedge in
rivers or estuaries or extend offshore for many kilometers
(Bentley, 2003).
The plume of the Amazon River can extend offshore over 100
km (Nittrouer et al., 1986) before turning to the northwest to
form a huge “river” of mud moving along the northeastern coast
of South America (Figs. 17, 18). This transport is so significant
that, despite enormous deposition of muds along the coasts of
French Guiana, Surinam, and Guyana (Fig. 18, Wells and
Coleman, 1981; Rine and Ginsburg, 1985) substantial portions of
the Orinoco delta comprise mud originally sourced from the
Amazon River (Aslan et al., 2003). The plume has tremendous
momentum as it leaves the Amazon River mouth, laden with
suspended mud and silt kept in suspension by the turbulent
effluent, as well as additional turbulence from waves and tidal
forcing. Concentrations reach those required for “fluid muds”
(> 10 g/l; Faas, 1991) in many areas of the plume (Kineke et al.,
1996), although concentrations are generally lower throughout
much of the plume. Fluid muds can be as much as 7 meters thick,
and they appear to form by enhanced settling and convergence
of near-bottom flows (Kineke et al., 1996), similar to the pro-
cesses that occur in an estuarine turbidity maximum (see Boyd
et al., this volume). Sediments carried by the Amazon jet appear
to be cyclically deposited and resuspended near the river mouth
until being carried offshore and along the shelf (Kineke et al.,
1996).
Most hypopycnal plumes are turned by the Coriolis force or
intruding oceanic currents before reaching past midshelf depths
(Nittrouer and Wright, 1994). The rotation of the earth imparts the
apparent Coriolis force to horizontally moving objects, creating a
deflection that is oriented at right angles to the direction of
movement. In the northern hemisphere the deflection is to the
right, and in the southern hemisphere, to the left. This deflection
affects offshore-flowing marine currents, causing them to veer
obliquely offshore. Ultimately, should the pattern persist for
sufficient time to achieve equilibrium, the offshore flow and the
Coriolis deflection balance, creating an essentially shore-parallel
geostrophic, or “balance of forces”, current.
346 JOHN R. SUTER

Oceanic
Oceanic Tides
Tides Meteorological
Meteorological Density
Density

Reversing
Reversing Rotary
Rotary Longshore
Longshore Direct
Direct wind
wind

Cyclic
Cyclic Residual
Residual Wind
Wind Wind
drift
drift setup

Landward
Landward Homopycnal
Homopycnal Internal
Internal Hyperpycnal
Hyperpycnal
bottom
bottom Plumes
Plumes Waves
Waves flows
flows
FIG. 6.—The dynamics of continental shelves can be quite complicated, owing to the interaction of the various components of the
current field shown above. Ordinarily a given shelf is dominated by one process or another. All of the currents illustrated above
combine with the Coriolis force caused by the earth’s rotation to form geostrophic “balance of forces” currents (redrawn from
Leeder, 1999, and Swift, 1972).

Interglacial Periods - Higher Sea Level - increased shelf area

1 - 2.0
9 7
11 5
13

0.0 δ18 O
3 (‰)

4
10 8
12 6
Glacial Periods - Lower Sea Level - decreased shelf area 2 + 2.0

500 400 300 200 100 Present

Time (Thousands of years before present)

FIG. 7.—Oxygen-isotope stages for the past 500,000 yr (redrawn from Imbrie et al., 1984). Even-numbered stages depict glacial
periods, in which ocean water is sequestered into continental ice, resulting in lowered global sea levels and decreased areas
of continental shelves. Odd-numbered stages represent interglacial times, when melting of icecaps returns water to the world
oceans, creating higher sea levels and expanded continental shelf areas. Most previous highstands appear to have been within
a meter or two of present-day sea levels. Estimates for maximum lowstand in the last glacial period (Stage 2), range from -90
to about -120 m.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 347

SEQUENCE SEQUENCE OXYGEN

CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHY BOUNDARIES ISOTOPES
TIME T-R FACIES
MAJOR δ18O, ‰
SEQUENCES T-R
(Ma) CYCLES 0 1 2 3 4
CYCLES
HOLOCENE 0
R R
Q PLEISTOCENE
.80
1.40
Cala 1
Io 1
Cala 2
0.8=lo 1

1.56 0.6=Cala 1
2.09
Ge 2 PGI-2
PLIOCENE

2.55
2.76
Ge 1 2.4=Ge 1 PGI-1
Pia 2
U

3.21
PPI-2
Pia 1 3.0=Pla 1 PPI-1
4.04
Za 2 3.8=Za 2
4.37
Za 1 4.2=Za 1 PZI-3
PZI-2
L

5 PZI-1
T
5.73
Me 2 5.5=Me 2 MMI-2
R
6.98
MMI-1
Tor3/Me 1 6.3=Tor 3/Me 1
UPPER

MTI-4

MTI-3
9.26
Tor 2 8.2=Tor 2 MTI-2
10
TERTIARY

MTI-1
T
MIOCENE

11.70
Ser 4/Tor 1 10.5= Ser 4/Tor1 MSI-4
R
MIDDLE

12.70
Ser 3 MSI-3
12.5= Ser 3
13.60
Ser 2 MSI-2
13.8= Ser 2
14.80 MSI-1
15 Lan 2/Ser 1
15.5= Lan 2/Ser 1

16.40
Bur 5/Lan 1 16.5= Bur 5/Lan 1 MLI-1

17.30
MBI-3
Bur 4 17.5= Bur 4

18.70
Bur 3 MBI-2
LOWER

19.50
Bur 2 MBI-1
20
20.52
Aq 3/Bur 1 21=Aq 3/Bur 1
MAI-3
22=Aq 2
22.20
Aq 2 MAI-2

23.80
T MAI-1
Ch 4/Aq 1
R 25.5=Ch 4/Aq 1
25

FIG. 8.—A portion of the eustatic cycle chart documenting periods of coastal onlap, indicating rise and fall of sea level (redrawn from
Hardenbol et al., 2000). Periods of high and/or rising base level create expanded continental shelf areas and more favorable
conditions for shelf sand deposition.

Many other present-day fluvial systems support large mud-
laden plumes, including the Mississippi–Atchafalaya River com-
plex of North America (Figs. 14, 19, e.g., Bentley, 2003; Neill and
Allison, 2005), the Yellow River of China (e.g., Wright et al., 1988;
Liu et al., 2004), and the Po River of Italy (Cattaneo et al., 2003).
Although such plumes are commonly associated with major deltas
(Fig. 14), they can produce deposits which differ from the prodelta
of classical deltaic facies models (Bentley, 2003; Cattaneo et al,
2003). In some, and perhaps most, cases, sediment supply from
numerous smaller rivers may combine to form a “subaqueous
delta” which cannot be traced directly to a single fluvial source
(Cattaneo et al., 2003). Numerous thick successions of shelf mud in
the ancient record may well be this type of deposit. Because plumes
are so commonly turned alongshore, these deposits may have
progradation directions subparallel to shelf contours, confusing
correlations and paleogeographic reconstructions.
Hyperpycnal flows (Figs. 16, 20) are denser than seawater,
and move offshore (downslope) until drag forces are sufficient
to exceed the downslope momentum created by gravity and
immersed weight. Theoretically, hyperpycnal plumes can form
at the mouths of rivers that are able to generate sufficiently
concentrated flows to overcome the ambient ocean density
(Mulder and Syvitski, 1995). This requires very high sediment
concentrations, and until fairly recently it was generally ac-
cepted that hyperpycnal plumes issuing directly from river
mouths were relatively rare phenomena on modern continental
shelves, because relatively steep gradients (> 0.7°) are required
to generate and maintain them (Bentley, 2003). However, a
number of authors (e.g., Wright et al., 1988; Mulder and Syvitski,
1995; Liu et al., 2004) have documented such flows, particularly
from the Huang He (Yellow River) of China. Our collective
understanding of these processes remains incomplete. Parsons
348 JOHN R. SUTER

Maximum
Highstand Highstand eustatic
Rising RSL Fallling RSL rise

SL
gR
Risin

llin
Fa
Maxim

Ri
RSL

si
ng
um Flo easing she

RS
RSL
- incr

L
"R - inflection Point" -
Maximum rate of eustatic sea-level rise

ing
oding

Fall
Surfa r e a

Ri
si
ng
RS
lf a
ce Fo

n
L io
Maximum at
rm a
RSL

Melt-water Fo a r e
rma

discharge y
r lf
da s h e
ing
tion

n
u g
Fall

Bo s i n
e a
e nc c r e
u e
S eq - D
Maximum
Eustatic Fall

Falling base level “Highstand” Rising baselevel “Lowstand”

Eustatic Fall “Normal” conditions Eustatic Transgression
Forced Regression Maximum Shelf Area Retrogradation Minimum Shelf Area;
Fluvial Extension and Increasing Shelf area Subaerial exposure
Valley Incision Delta Plain aggradation Shelf Margin and
Subaerial exposure Fluvial/Estuarine Valley filling Deepwater deposition
Decreasing Shelf Area Transgressive Erosion
Shelf Sand development

FIG. 9.—Hypothetical response of to a Quaternary glacioeustatic fluctuation in the northern Gulf of Mexico (redrawn from Suter,
2003). No exact timing of different depositional styles, fluvial–estuarine responses, or significant surface formation is intended.
Such cycles are asymmetric and contain several smaller eustatic fluctuations; two are shown here, compare with Figure 7. This
has significant impact on the stratigraphic architecture of shelf and shelf-margin deposits, particularly when autocyclic processes
and climatically driven changes in discharge and sediment load are convolved with base-level forcing. A greater amount of time
is actually spent during overall falling base level and lowstand phases, during which the incised/extended fluvial drainage
network is formed. Continental shelf area expands and contracts as sea level rises and falls. Consequently, continental-shelf
deposits, and in particular shelf sands, are most significant in the late lowstand, transgressive, and early highstand systems tracts.
Note that, in a late Quaternary glacioeustatic cycle, time involved in the formation of the transgressive maximum-flooding surface
is less than that required to form the regressive sequence boundary.

et al. (2001) demonstrated that hyperpycnal flows could be
generated at substantially lower concentrations than previ-
ously thought, through convective processes which coupled
hypopycnal and hyperpycnal plumes. Bentley (2003) suggested
that flocculation, coupled with acceleration of a hypopycnal
plume, could result in dense near-bed suspensions, helping to
achieve conditions for the generation of hyperpycnal flows.
Several authors (e.g., Kineke et al., 1996; Kineke et al., 2000;
Myrow and Southard, 1996; Traykovski et al., 2000; Wright et
al., 2001; Myrow et al., 2002; Bentley, 2003) suggest that turbu-
lence generated by waves and currents can help to ignite sedi-
ment gravity flows at much lower gradients than needed for
autosuspended flows (Fig. 20).
The importance of hyperpycnal flows has likely been under-
estimated to date (Leeder, 1999), and increasing numbers of
authors are invoking this mechanism for deposition on the shelf
as well as in deeper water (e.g., Plink-Björklund et al., 2001;
Johnson et al., 2001; Bentley and Nittrouer, 2003; Plink-Björklund
and Steel, 2004; Edwards et al., 2005; Pattison, 2005). Sediment
gravity flows have appeal as a mechanism for the transport of
sands onto the continental shelf, but there are some intriguing
caveats. Khan et al. (2005) have shown that alongshore currents
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 349

M
Louisiana iss
iss
ipp
iR
ive
r

Trinity
Shoal
LaFourche
Delta Mississippi
Maringouin Delta
Delta
St. Bernard
Ship Shoal "Outer" Delta
Southwest Louisiana Mississippi
Shoal
Shelf Sands Canyon

. 75 - 100% Sand
600 ft

0 50 Mi. 50 - 75% Sand

GULF OF MEXICO Silty Clay
0 100 Km.
CPH-060046.13

FIG. 10.—Distribution of surficial sediments on the Louisiana continental shelf of the northern Gulf of Mexico (redrawn from Frazier,
1974). Ship, Trinity, and the “Outer” Shoal are shelf sand bodies related to the transgression of abandoned Maringouin and
LaFourche complexes of the Holocene Mississippi delta (Penland et al., 1986; Penland et al., 1988). East of the modern Mississippi
Delta is another area of shelf sands, related to the transgression of the abandoned St. Bernard complex of the Mississippi Delta
(Penland et al., 1988; Penland et al., 1989). The Southwest Louisiana shelf sands, and their extension into the waters off of East
Texas, resulted from transgression of Pleistocene shoreline and coastal-plain deposits during the Holocene sea-level rise (Curray,
1960; Frazier, 1974; Suter, 1987).

FIG. 11.—Generation of shallow marine sandbodies by fluctuations in sea level (redrawn from Walker and Plint, 1992). A) Wave-
dominated shorelines form as part of a highstand systems tract (sea level I). Subsequent fall in base level causes “forced
regression,” forming a series of shoreface deposits at successively seaward positions (vertical profiles 2–3), creating “falling stage”
and lowstand (profiles 4–6) systems tracts (Sea levels II–VII). At lowstand, a prograding shoreface is reestablished (sea level VII).
B) Rising base level submerges the exposed coastal plain, expanding the continental shelf. Lowstand and falling-stage deposits
are submerged and reworked by shoreface processes. The “ravinement surface” caused by shoreface erosion truncates
underlying deposits (vertical profiles 7–12). In places, the transgressive erosion surface can be recognized only by an erosional
surface overlain by a thin (centimeter scale) transgressive lag (e.g., thin pebble layer; vertical profile 9). Although not illustrated
in this diagram, marine processes, including waves, tides, and currents, continue to rework the shoreline deposits into shelf sand
bodies, as will be developed further in this chapter. Given sufficient sediment supply, shelf muds bury the earlier sand deposits.
350 JOHN R. SUTER

Sediment Supply > Rate of Accommodation Creation: Progradational

Shelf Floor
Graded, equilibrium surface(s)
Basinward fining Slope-basin Floor
SUPPLY-DOMINATED SHELF River mouth bypassing Gravity transport
Sediment accretion
Ocean currents

FIG. 12.—A) Swift and Thorne (1991) classified shelves on the basis of the ratio of the rate of sediment supply to the rate of creation
of accommodation. Supply-dominated shelves are those in which incoming sediment exceeds the space available to be filled,
resulting in progradation. Rivers supply autochthonous sediment directly to the shelf, and deltas and regressive shoreface deposits
are common (redrawn from Swift and Thorne, 1991). B) An idealized profile and summary of processes and features of a supply-
dominated shelf setting (redrawn from Johnson and Baldwin, 1996).

can significantly alter the shape and direction of hyperpycnal
flows issuing from river mouths, shifting the flow to a shore-
parallel configuration and limiting the amount of cross-shelf
transport. Field observations and numerical models indicate that
hyperpycnal flows are more likely in smaller, mountainous rivers
found on convergent margins than in the larger fluvial systems
that often characterize pericontinental settings (Syvitski et al.,
2003). This leads to a conundrum in that a mechanism to transport
sand onto the shelf is likelier to function in supply-dominated
settings, whereas most of our models and interpretations for shelf
sands come from accommodation-dominated examples.
Sediments are also delivered from the nearshore into shelf
environments by storms. As a storm impacts a coastal/shelf
system (Fig. 21), water levels at the coastline are “set up,” or rise,
owing to several factors, including wind-driven frictional cou-
pling and water setup, wave shoaling and runup, astronomical
tides, and the so-called inverse barometer effect—expansion of
the water at lowered atmospheric pressure. The increased water
level creates a hydraulic head, causing an offshore flow of bottom
water, down the pressure gradient (Figs. 22, 23). This offshore
flow creates a shear stress on nearshore sediments, which com-
bines with the oscillatory shear created by waves to entrain
sediments. Offshore flows are deflected by the Coriolis force to
create geostrophic, essentially shore-parallel currents, which limit
the distance to which sediments can be transported offshore
(Dalrymple and Cummings, 2004).
Aigner and Reineck (1982) and Aigner (1985) provided a
detailed description of the proximal–distal trends produced by
storm sediment transport in the German Bight (Fig. 24). Near-
shore, deposits are amalgamated, thicker, and more numerous,
reflecting the fact that many more storms can impact the near-
shore area. Such deposits interfinger with shoreface sediments
(see Clifton, this volume) in a shoreward direction. Farther off-
shore, individual beds are preserved, with decreasing lamination
and increasing amounts of bioturbation. The distance of offshore
transport is dependent upon a number of factors, including the
slope of the system, the degree of setup of the water level at the
shoreline, and the intensity and duration of the storm.
Sediment resuspension by storm waves is an important pro-
cess (Nittrouer and Wright, 1994). Once the sediment has been
resuspended, it either resettles or is transported in accordance
with any prevailing currents. This process also applies to the
enhancement of tidal-current-related sediment transport by
storms. Bottom friction associated with both tidal and storm
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 351

Sediment Supply < Rate of Accommodation Creation: TRANSGRESSION

n
ce sio
rf a ro
S un e E
ce nt

ri
rf a me

Ma
S uvi n e
Ra

Shelf Floor Slope-basin floor

Disequilibrium, erosional surface(s) Gravity transport
ACCOMMODATION-DOMINATED Irregular grain size patterns
Shoreface bypassing
Sediment starvation
and condensation
SHELF Wave/storm/tidal reworking Ocean currents

FIG. 13.—A) An accommodation-dominated shelf has more available accommodation than sediment input, and is consequently
retrogradational or transgressive. This is the case for most modern shelves, at the close of the Holocene transgression. Embayed
coasts and estuaries (see Boyd et al., this volume) and transgressive shorelines are common. Most sediment on the shelf is
autochthonous, being left behind by the transgression. These are either relict or palimpsest if reworked into a new equilibrium
with shelf waves and currents. Ravinement and marine erosion surfaces can cover much of the shelf area, and abundant sand-
ridge fields occur in the area of preexisting coarse-grained sediments (redrawn from Swift and Thorne, 1991). B) An idealized
profile and summary of processes and features of an accommodation-dominated shelf (redrawn from Johnson and Baldwin,
1996).

processes results in greater sediment resuspension and entrain-
ment, resulting in greater net sediment transport in the net
direction of the combined flow.
Autochthonous Sediments
Authigenic minerals can form in shelf sediments and be a
major aid in identification of depositional environment. Glauco-
nite is often a significant component of sediments that have been
interpreted as shelf deposits. Glauconite occurs as part of the
sand fraction, and is generally thought to form from micaceous
minerals and associated fecal pellets in sediments at the bound-
ary of oxidizing seawater and reducing interstitial waters, typi-
cally at depths greater than 60 m (Odin and Matter, 1981). Due to
various combinations of authigenesis or reworking, glauconite
can exist in almost all shallow-marine environments (Amorosi,
1995). An abundance of glauconite implies a combination of
continual reworking of the sediment and slow rates of clastic
input, but the mineral can be redeposited elsewhere as a detrital
component. Kitamura (1998) found glauconite distribution to be
an unreliable guide to environment and sequence stratigraphic
interpretation. Stonecipher (1999), in a study of authigenic min-
352 JOHN R. SUTER

Mobile
Mobile
Bay
Bay

Mississippi
Mississippi
River
River
Atchafalaya
Atchafalaya
Chenier
Chenier Plain
Plain River
River New
New
Orleans
Orleans
Estuarine
Estuarine
Plume
Plume

Atchafalaya
Atchafalaya Balize
Balize
Complex
Complex Complex
Complex

Deltaic
Deltaic
Plumes
Plumes

FIG. 14.—NASA MODIS satellite image , 1 March 2001, of the Mississippi delta and surrounding areas, northern Gulf of Mexico.
Buoyant or hypopycnal sediment plumes issue from the deltaic distributaries in both the Balize and Atchafalaya complexes, as
well as from several estuaries (e.g., Mobile Bay) along the coast.

Estuary Wind-Driven Along-Shelf Flows

ve s
ach Wa
Fro

s arine ear
Be av
e Estu e s a nd
Sh
s
nt

Rip W Plum Wa
ves
ity
pth rav
De ) Infrag
(m
Ver
t
Diff ical 10 rms
usio Internal Waves y Sto
n
o nb
20 nsi t ion
Physical and
su spe lida
Biologic Mixing Botto
m Bo Re o nso
of Sediment Column Layeundary n dC
30 na
sitiotion
r
p o
Steep Gradients De turba
In Cross-Shelf Sediment Flux 40 Bio

Inner Shelf Mid Shelf

FIG. 15.—Block diagram illustrating the major physical processes influencing sediment transport and deposition on clastic shelves
(redrawn from Nittrouer and Wright, 1994.)
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 353

Inflow from Continental Shelf

river mouth IIa

I IVa
V
IIb III

IVb

Offshore

FIG. 16.—Patterns and processes of sediment dispersal in different parts of the shelf (redrawn from Bentley, 2003; after Nittrouer and
Wright, 1995). Stage I, bedload deposition and channel-mouth-bar formation; Stage IIa, seaward transport as a hypopycnal
plume, with some flocculation and suspension settling; Stage IIb, seaward transport in hyperpycnal gravity flows; Stage III,
temporary deposition on shelf; Stage IVa, resuspension and transport in water column as suspended load; Stage IVb,
resuspension and transport in gravity-driven flow; Stage V, long-term accumulation.

eral distribution in the Shannon Sandstone, noted the possibility
of a “glaucony” facies composed of true glauconite minerals and
a “verdine” facies, which includes other green-pelleted minerals
(chamosite, an iron-rich chlorite, and berthierine, an iron-rich
kaolinite). The verdine facies, in contrast, is found on the inner
shelf and is “particularly abundant in estuarine facies or immedi-
ately offshore from fluvial deltas”. Chafetz and Reid (2000)
describe cross-bedded “glaucarenites” or sandstones in which
glauconitic minerals constitute more than 25% of the composi-
tion, from Cambro-Ordovician strata in Texas and New Mexico
(USA). These strata were interpreted as nearshore and tidal
deposits, with glauconite being rapidly deposited due to differ-
ent sea-water chemistry in the Cambro-Ordovician oceans from
that of the present day. We may conclude that continental shelf
sands are likely to contain glauconite, but the presence of glauco-
nite in a sedimentary deposit does not constitute proof of a shelf
genesis.
Authigenic phosphates can form in areas of slow detrital
sedimentation along outer continental shelves, slopes, and abys-
sal plains. Modern phosphogenesis on the western margin of
southern Africa occurs in areas of upwelling where phosphate
released by microbial degradation of organic matter during early
diagenesis results in formation of phosphate nodules (Compton
et al., 2004). Phosphorite nodules, crusts, and/or grains can
become concentrated as lags in shelf sediments, but, as with
glauconite, the presence of phosphatic sediments can only be an
indicator, not proof, of a shelf origin of a given deposit.
Siderite is also commonly found in marginal marine deposits.
Its formation is variably considered the result of soil develop-
ment (Sullivan et al., 1997) or as an early diagenetic product in
estuarine or marine sediments. Hansley and Whitney (1990)
concluded that siderite is most likely to form in swampy, mar-
ginal marine settings.
Its occurrence in the Shannon Sandstone has been used to
support interpretations ranging from incised-valley deposits
(Sullivan et al., 1997) to forced regressive shorelines (Bergman,
1994; Walker and Bergman, 1993), to open marine sand ridges
(Swift and Parsons, 1999). As with glauconite and phosphates,
shelf deposits may well contain siderite clasts and layers, but
that cannot be used as evidence of formation on a continental
shelf.
Autochthonous organic matter in continental shelves is cre-
ated by phytoplankton from inorganic elements via photosyn-
thesis. The process may continue up to depths of as much as 100
m but is usually limited to shallower depths in turbid waters.
Owing to the increased supply of minerals and other nutrients,
primary productivity is usually enhanced in areas of riverine
plumes or upwelling. Much of the organic carbon produced by
photosynthesis is mineralized by animals into shells or concen-
trated into fecal pellets. These various forms settle through the
water column into the bottom sediments. Once there, organic
carbon may be consumed by infauna, destroyed by bacterial
decay, resuspended by waves or currents, and/or oxidized. If
organic carbon is supplied at a greater rate than the rate of its
destruction, enough may be preserved to become hydrocarbon
source material (Fig. 25).
Preservation of organic material in shelf sediments requires
some protection from oxidative processes. Depending on rela-
tive concentrations of dissolved oxygen, seawater may be oxic,
dysoxic, suboxic, or anoxic (Tyson and Pearson, 1991). Modern
shelves are largely nonstratified, oxidative environments, but
oxygen-depleted water masses are known to exist in many
areas, particularly in association with rivers (e.g., Boesch and
Rabalais, 1991; Rabalais et al. 1991, van der Zwaan and Jorrisen,
1991; Rabalais et al., 2001). Anoxic conditions can develop
because of stratification and isolation of bottom waters, extrac-
tion of oxygen by organisms, or decomposition of particulate
and dissolved allochthonous organic matter (Boesch and
Rabalais, 1991). In marked contrast with the present day, many
black shales in the ancient record are interpreted to have been
deposited under anoxic bottom water conditions, although this
is increasingly debated (see papers and references in Harris,
2005). Many of these are highly important as hydrocarbon
source rocks, and many were deposited in shelf settings in
354 JOHN R. SUTER

Palynofloral Assemblage
Distribution Diagram

Dinoflagellates

Mangrove

Palms

Ferns

B Forest

FIG. 17.—A) Muddy littoral drift system of the combined Amazon–Orinoco Rivers causes deposition and massive progradation
of “fluid” mudflats along the northeastern coast of south America (from Aslan et al., 2003). B) LANDSAT image (bands 2, 4;
7 August 1996) of the suspended-sediment plume of the Orinoco. A hypothetical palynological characterization of the plume
is shown, based on data from Muller (1959). Greens and yellows (pie diagrams) represent terrestrially derived spores and
pollen, whereas reds and pinks represent mangrove and dinoflagellates, respectively (degree of marine influence). In this
example, the fluvial discharge and associated “fresher” water dilute the marine palynofloral signature such that dinoflagel-
lates may be present only beyond the freshwater sediment plume. Mangrove pollen will be present in reduced numbers, and
the palynofloral assemblages will be dominated by terrestrially derived spores and pollen (image from Bureau of Economic
Geology website, palynological characterization by Thomas Demchuk, from Suter , 2001).

epeiric seas (Tyson and Pearson, 1991). Notable examples of
such source rocks include the Jurassic Kimmeridge Clay of the
North Sea (e.g., Miller, 1990) and various Mesozoic deposits in
North America (e.g., Nixon, 1973).
Relative Sea-Level Change
Sea-level change is a major process affecting continental shelves
(Figs. 7–11). Modern continental shelves have experienced re-
peated sea-level fluctuations at various frequencies during Qua-
ternary glaciation, with consequent regression and transgression
(Figs. 10, 11). Forced regression, or the natural basinward move-
ment of the shoreline during falling baselevel, provides an excel-
lent mechanism to emplace gravel and sand across a continental
platform (e.g., Plint, 1988; Posamentier et al., 1992; Plint and
Nummedal, 2000). Ambulatory shorelines resulting from eustatic
fluctuations have been frequently invoked as precursors for
“isolated” marine sands in the subsurface and outcrop (e.g.,
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 355

Foreshore Backshore

Coa
Shoreface sta l Pla
Shelf ank in Che
Mud B niers
uds
ank M
Interb 0
ank
Mud B
m 10
10 k
20

30 m
Direction of ud
prevailing winds, c e ne M
o
Hol ud
waves, and currents
c e ne M
sto
Plei
Semi-fluid or fluid mud
Transgressive Lag:
Consolidated Mud
Shells and Sand
Sequence Boundary Sand
Vegetated Mud flats

FIG. 18.—Depositional model for accumulation of fluid muds in the shoreface and inner continental shelf (redrawn from Rine and
Ginsburg, 1985). Fluid mud is supplied to the nearshore zone by deltaic and estuarine sources in the form of hypopycnal plumes
(Fig. 14). Such plumes may reach well out onto the shelf or across the shelf break, depending on their own characteristics, slope
of the shelf, and the prevailing shelf winds, waves, and currents. Sediments are deposited as the plume loses momentum into the
receiving basin. Individual grains settle out as turbulence decreases, abetted by the process of flocculation. The overall deposit
shows oblique to alongshore progradational architecture. Excellent examples of these deposits occur along the coast of northern
South America (on which this diagram was based), sourced largely from the Amazon and Orinoco Rivers, and the western
coastline of Louisiana, USA, the Chenier Plain (see Fig. 19).

FIG. 19.—The Louisiana, USA, Chenier Plain has been built by sediments derived from the Mississippi River (Fig. 14), chiefly during
periods in which the main course of the river is located in the western portion of its delta plain. The Mississippi, currently in an
eastern position, is presently attempting to avulse into the course of the Atchafalaya River (Fig. 14), providing a renewed sediment
supply to the chenier plain. This map, redrawn from Neill and Allison (2005), depicts the facies of recent sediments accumulating
on the continental shelf offshore of the Atchafalaya River.
356 JOHN R. SUTER

Gravity
Self-generated Turbulence
Minimum angle 0.7°
A. Autosuspending Gravity Flow
Gravity
Wave-current Turbulence
Minimum angle 0.03°
B. Wave/current–enhanced Gravity Flow
FIG. 20.—Types of hyperpycnal flows now
recognized from river-mouth dis-
charges. A) Autosuspended hyper-
Lessening gradient pycnal plumes, with suspension pro-
Frictional Drag duced by turbulence within the flow—
i.e., a “normal” turbidity current. Grav-
ity and turbulence maintain the flow
until frictional drag or a decreasing
gradient result in deposition. These are
believed to be relatively rare on conti-
nental shelves because relatively steep
gradients are required to produce and
maintain the flow. B) Wave–current
enhanced gravity flow, in which the
turbulence associated with waves and/
Lessening gradient or currents, abundant sediment sup-
Lower waves/currents ply, and a gradient above 0.03 degrees
Frictional Drag can produce a gravity flow, creating
downslope transport and broad distri-
bution of sediments across a shelf.
Deposition results when frictional drag,
lowered gradient, and/or decreasing
wave–current turbulence decelerate the
flow (redrawn from Bentley, 2003).

l Hurricane
Hurricane
pica Katrina
Katrina
o
tratr nt
Ex Fro

Hurricane Lili

A B
FIG. 21.—The northwest Gulf of Mexico is microtidal, and fair-weather wave energy is relatively low. However, the area is frequently
impacted by extratropical cyclones and hurricanes. A) Image shows a relatively unusual event of a hurricane and extratropical
storm impacting the area at the same time. Hurricane Lili hit the Louisiana coast early morning of 3 October 2002. Hurricane Lili
was a relatively weak Category 2 storm, unlike B) the much larger and more powerful Hurricane Katrina, which made landfall
in the central Gulf of Mexico shoreline on August of 2005. Storms like these are relatively rare, although they have been
increasingly common in recent years. On average, a hurricane impacts a particular area of the Gulf about every three years, but
occasionally multiple impacts occur, as in 2004 in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and 2005 in the north-central Gulf. These images
illustrate the counterclockwise circulation of tropical storms in the northern hemisphere. Conservation of angular momentum
dictates that the northeastern quadrant of the storm is the most powerful, with the highest winds and highest storm surge. About
25–40 times a year, extratropical storms (known as “northers”) come through, substantially increasing the wave and current
energy on the shelf. These extratropical storms happen often enough to essentially be considered part of the normal process
environment. A. Image courtesy of Accuweather.com. B. NASA GOES-12 imagery over AMSR-E sea-surface temperature.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 357

Storm Wave, Wind Setup

Set-up
Currents
MSL
Reference
horizon Pressure;
Waves Flood
Tide

Oscillatory boundary layer

A

HIGH LOW
PRESSURE GRADIENT
SHORELINE

CORIOLIS PRESSURE

FIG. 22.—Geostrophic flow is driven by the response of the water column to storms, in combination with the Coriolis force,
illustrated here for an idealized northern hemisphere shoreline. A) Surface waters are driven onshore by wind shear, wave
setup and shoaling, and storm surge (the so-called inverse barometer effect). B) The resulting pressure gradient drives bottom
water seaward, but the flow is deflected to the right (northern hemisphere) by the Coriolis force caused by the earth’s rotation.
Given sufficient time a balance between the two forces is achieved, and a geostrophic flow is developed parallel to bathymetric
contours (redrawn from Duke, 1990; Walker and Plint, 1992).

"Enhanced" Sea Level

Coastal Setup
"Normal" Sea Level

(s)
L INE Wind, wave setup;
E
OR pressure effects
SH Do wnw increase local sea level
e llin
g
Low-angle
Laminae
SH
Trough Cross Beds OR
EF
AC Evolves into
E Geostrophic Flow
Hummocky Beds
SHELF
Storm-Graded Sand Beds
Storm-Graded / Bioturbated Muds

FIG. 23.—Shoreface–shelf sediment succession formed in response to storm impact. Rip currents from the storm-enhanced surf zone
along with downwelling storm currents resulting from coastal setup carry sediment offshore onto the shelf. Interaction with the
Coriolis force leads to the evolution of geostrophic currents, sweeping storm-graded graded sediments obliquely offshore and
alongshore (redrawn from Swift et al., 1991).
358 JOHN R. SUTER

Wave
Shelf Shoreface base
Foreshore

Average
storms
Wave base of Shoreface
average storms

storms
Major
Wave base of Shelf
major storms

Grain size
Bed thickness
Amalgamation
Tempestite
frequency
Lamination

Bioturbation
Parauthocthonous Mixed Shell layers
FIG. 24.—Idealized vertical succession and summary of onshore–offshore trends from the Helgoland Bight of the southern North Sea
(redrawn from Aigner and Reineck, 1982).

Terrestrial
Terrestrial Flux:
Flux: Primary
Primary Productivity
Productivity
Organic
Organic matter,
matter, nutrients
nutrients

Organic
Organic Carbon
Carbon Flux
Flux

Water
Water
Column
Column
Mineralization
Mineralization Oxidation
Oxidation

Carbon in Bottom Sediments

Infauna
Infauna Resuspension
Resuspension
Burial
Burial

Total
Total Organic
Organic Carbon
Carbon
FIG. 25.—General scheme for the production of marine source rocks (redrawn from Schwarzkopf, 1993). Terrestrial flux (runoff,
hypopycnal plumes, hyperpycnal flows, storm deposits, atmospheric fallout) contributes particulate organic matter directly to
the shelf, as well as nutrients to stimulate primary productivity. These two contribute to flux of organic carbon, which settles down
through the water column. Under ordinary circumstances, over 90% of the flux of organic carbon on shelves is mineralized in the
water column and sediments (de Haas et al., 2002). Once in the bottom sediments, organic carbon may be consumed by infauna,
destroyed by bacterial decay, resuspended by waves or currents, and/or oxidized. If organic carbon is supplied at a greater rate
than the rate of its destruction, enough may be preserved to become hydrocarbon source material.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 359

Walker and Plint, 1992; Bergman, 1994; Bergman and Walker,
1999). Transgression, both eustatic and autocyclic, and subse-
quent reworking of preexisting shoreline deposits has been a
favorite mechanism for the formation of shelf sands in Quater-
nary settings (e.g., Stubblefield et al., 1984; Penland et al., 1986;
Penland et al., 1988), or at least for the provision of sediments that
ultimately become shelf deposits.
In extending Quaternary analogs to the ancient record, it is
important to remember (1) the relatively unusual nature of the
late Quaternary—i.e., a time of high-frequency, high-magni-
tude base-level fluctuations, and (2) the relatively short-lived
nature of the base-level cycles. Quaternary analogs involving
sea-level changes are best applied to those portions of the
Tertiary, for which the existence of substantial Antarctic ice
can be documented, or the late Paleozoic, for which similar
sea-level cycles are interpreted. Late Paleozoic times present a
different plate-tectonic configuration than the present day,
with fewer trailing margins and greater distribution of epeiric
seaways.
Sometimes overlooked in discussions of relative sea-level
fluctuations are their effects on fine-grained sedimentation.
When base level is positioned close to a shelf margin, silts and
clays may be delivered directly to slope and basin environ-
ments, bypassing the exposed shelf. Changes in base level alter
the size and distribution of microfossil and palynofloral zones
(Fig. 26). Familiar paleobathymetric zonations, such as inner
neritic, outer neritic, and bathyal, are most useful in transgres-
sive and highstand configurations like that of the present day.
With base-level fall, the areas of these zones become greatly
compressed and the terminology becomes less useful and more
difficult to apply.
SHELF PROCESSES AND DEPOSITS
The dynamics of clastic shelves can be exceedingly complex,
owing to the myriad of interacting processes (Fig. 6). Typically,
the most important of these processes are tides, waves, storms,
and semipermanent oceanic currents. One or the other of these

FIG. 26.—Vegetative and palynological response to base-level fluctuations. A) During conditions of a relatively high base level in a
transgressive and highstand setting, the influence of marine waters encroaches a significant distance landward, increasing the
suitable habitat for salt-water-tolerant species, predominantly mangrove. Thus, mangrove pollen as well as marine dinoflagel-
lates should be abundant and characteristic of these systems tracts. Terrestrial spore and pollen habitat is pushed back well into
the hinterland and may constitute a small percentage of the overall palynofloral assemblage. Fluvial drainage can take these
terrestrial palynoflora out onto the extensive continental shelves, mixing with the marine indicators mentioned above as well as
marine microfossils. B) In an idealized lowstand setting, opportunistic species of the savanna and hinterland occupy the exposed
shelf. Accordingly, the terrestrial pollen/spore habitat is abundant and their palynoflora can be transported significant distances
offshore, giving a more terrestrial signal. Mangrove areas are less extensive, and marine dinoflagellates are rarer owing to reduced
habitat. (Redrawn from Demchuk et al., 2004; based therein on Poumot, 1989).
360
Storms
Wind-driven
Thermohaline
4 6
c Cu
i rr e
ean nt
2 Oc s
Fair-weather processes
1
Tides
FIG. 27.—Qualitative process classification of continental shelves, depending on the relative balance of “fair-weather” processes
(oceanic currents, tides, and waves) with storms (redrawn from Johnson and Baldwin, 1996). Numbers refer to shelf regions
discussed in this review. The Bay of Fundy of Nova Scotia, Canada, is included as the type section of tide dominance.
usually dominates a given shelf, leading to a process classifica-
tion (e.g., Johnson and Baldwin, 1996) similar to that for deltas
(e.g., Galloway, 1975) and estuaries (Dalrymple et al., 1992) (Fig.
27). The dominant processes on a given shelf area act upon
previously existing deposits and/or sediments contributed di-
rectly from riverine or alongshore sources to produce a particu-
lar distribution of shelf deposits. It has been suggested that
about 80% of the world’s shelves are dominated by storm
waves, 17% by tidal currents, and 3% by ocean–current interac-
tions (Walker, 1984; Swift et al., 1986), but such classifications
are typically qualitative. Porter-Smith et al. (2004) published a
more quantitative classification of the Australian continental
shelves, using estimates of significant wave heights and periods
and of tidal-current speeds. Based on their calculations, tidal
currents dominate 17.4% of the shelf area, currents derived from
tropical cyclones dominate 53.8% of the shelf area, ocean swell
and storm-generated currents dominate 28.2%, and intruding
ocean currents account for about 0.6% of sediment transport
(their Figure 1). Although the quantitative approach is encour-
aging, application to the stratigraphic record is still somewhat
problematic, inasmuch as dominant processes often vary sea-
sonally, and one process or another may dominate as the system
evolves through tectonic or eustatic accommodation cycles
(Leeder, 1999).
Oceanic Currents
Oceanic currents (Fig. 28) are typically classified according to
their formative mechanism as either wind driven or thermoha-
line (Fig. 6), or by the water depths in which they occur (surface,
intermediate, deep, or bottom). Thermohaline currents are driven
JOHN R. SUTER
1 Bay of Fundy
2 North Sea
3 SE Africa
4 East Coast North America
5 Eastern Australia
6 NW Gulf of Mexico
3
5
Waves
by differences in water temperature and salinity, and are associ-
ated with the sinking of dense, colder water at high latitudes.
Thus, the currents driven by thermohaline forcing are typically
found in deeper waters and are not major influences on sediment
transport on continental shelves. Wind-forced currents result
from the frictional shear stress created by wind blowing over the
water surface, with energy transferred through the water column
by turbulence. The surface circulation of the world ocean is
mostly wind driven. Current directions and resulting sediment
transport typically deviate from the originating wind directions,
owing to the apparent Coriolis force.
Major oceanic basins with bordering continental masses de-
velop large, essentially closed circulation patterns known as
gyres. These usually display east–west aligned currents at the top
and bottom of the system, and north–south boundary currents
along the sides. These currents are effectively permanent, and are
very important in the global heat balance. Many of the western
boundary currents—e.g., the Gulf Stream in the North Atlantic,
the Kuroshio in the North Pacific, and the Agulhas Current in the
Indian Ocean (Fig. 28), can extend for as much as 1000 m through
the water column and have flow velocities well in excess of that
needed for sand movement. Consequently, when these currents
intrude onto the continental shelf they can be very effective
sediment transport mechanisms, or, in the absence of sand, very
erosive.
However, such situations are comparatively uncommon.
Probably the best-known example of a current-dominated
shelf is in the southwestern Indian Ocean, where the Agulhas
Current (Fig. 29) creates persistent southward flow across the
outer shelf offshore of southeastern Africa (Flemming 1980,
1981; Ramsay, 1994). The current usually flows just offshore of
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 361

n
s t nd ia
E a nla eg
ee w

Lab
Gr or
N

r ado
Oyashio
Alaska

r
North Pacific North Atlantic
f Drift Pa c ific
ul North
G eam
tr
S Canary
California
North Equatorial
Kuroshio
Nort
Equatorial Equatoh
North Equatorial Counter rial North Equatorial
Equatorial South Equatorial Equatorial Counter
Counter
South Equatorial South
Equatorial
West
Australia East
Peru Brazil Australia
Benguela
Mozambique

n dian
tlantic th I
South Pacific South A Sou
Antarctic Circumpolar Antarctic Circumpolar
polar Subpolar
tic Sub Antarctic
Antarc

FIG. 28.—The major semipermanent ocean surface currents of the world. Many of these currents affect the continental shelves of the
world. Some, such as the Agulhas Current on the southeast Africa margin, shown in red, regularly impinge onto the continental
shelf. Compiled and redrawn from numerous sources.

the shelf margin, but it periodically intrudes onto the shelf
(Fig. 30), with velocities up to over to 3 m/s (Ramsay, 1994),
eroding fine-grained sands from nearshore deposits which are
swept seaward and transported downcurrent. A variety of
bedforms, including huge dunes up to 17 m high, 4 km long,
and over 1 km wide, are developed along the current pathway
(Flemming, 1981). The southeastern Africa shelf is character-
ized by a number of headward-eroding submarine canyons
that are continually supplied with sand by this process (Ramsay,
1994). Flemming (1980, 1981) indicated that most of the sand
mined from the nearshore by the Agulhas current was trans-
ported off the shelf.
Some other areas of accumulation of outer-shelf sand bodies
deposited by, or at least significantly influenced by, oceanic
currents include the northeastern margin of Brazil (Vianna et al.,
1991; Testa and Bosence, 1999), the Campos margin of Brazil
(Viana et al., 1998), the Grand Banks off of Nova Scotia (Dalrymple
et al., 1992), and the Pennell Coast margin of Antarctica (Rodriguez
and Anderson, 2004). In most cases, the coarse-grained sediments
available to these currents are relict, and their deposits are thus
palimpsest.
Tides
Tidal currents are generated by the differential forces be-
tween the gravitational attraction of the earth–sun and earth–
moon systems, combined with the centripetal acceleration pro-
duced by the revolution of the earth around the sun and the
moon around the earth. These mechanisms, the resultant cur-
rents, and their effects on estuaries and shorelines systems are
covered in greater detail elsewhere in this volume (see Boyd et
al.). Briefly, tidal currents, like tides themselves, may be of the
semidiurnal, diurnal, or mixed type. Where flows are restricted
to certain channels, as in rivers or estuaries, tidal currents are
reversing, i.e., flowing alternately in approximately opposite
directions with a period of little or no current, called slack water,
at each reversal of the cycle. This produces the characteristic
rhythmic signature of coarse–fine, thicker–thinner laminites
used to recognize tidal deposits in the stratigraphic record (Nio
and Yang, 1991).
Tides in open shelf settings are not constricted into specific
channels, and are strongly affected by the Coriolis force (Figure
31). As such, shelf tides rotate, varying continually through tidal
cycles. Although current strength does fluctuate periodically,
rotary tides do not experience slack water periods, which has
significant implications for the recognition of shelf tidal depos-
its. The rhythmic deposition of individual and double slack-
water mud drapes that are cited as the best recognition criteria
for tidal deposits (Nio and Yang, 1991) are unlikely to form
under rotary tidal conditions. Mud deposition is, however,
quite possible, even without slack water. If suspended-sedi-
ment concentrations are sufficiently high (> 100 mg/l), mud is
deposited, particularly if aided by flocculation or biogenic
processes (Galloway and Hobday, 1996). Still, mud drapes are
extremely common features of many different deposits—peri-
odicity and rhythmic variations in lithology and bed thickness
are the keys to the recognition of tidal deposits.
Tidal currents can be quite significant in shelf settings, ca-
pable of extensive bedload transport and formation of significant
sand bodies (Figs. 32–35). Tidal sand sheets and ridges cover
362 JOHN R. SUTER

0 800
A

FIG. 29.—Oceanic currents along the Southeast African shelf. A) The Agulhas current forms from the recombination of the
Mozambique and Madagascar currents, and flows along the South African shelf at velocities up to 3 m/s (Ramsay, 1994) (redrawn
from Johnson and Baldwin, after Flemming, 1981). B) The Sea-viewing Wide Field of view Sensor (SeaWiFS) image 28 March 1999,
shows the Agulhas Current being deflected southward along promontories on the shoreline, resulting in cross-shelf currents and
sediment transport. Higher chlorophyll concentrations are shown in red and orange (NASA Visible Earth SeaWiFS). Note the very
high productivity in the Benguela upwelling zone to the northwest.

thousands of square kilometers in tide-dominated shallow-ma-
rine settings. Transgressive tidal sand sheets are typically only a
few meters thick (Dalrymple, 1992), but examples of much larger
sand ridges or banks abound on modern continental shelves,
including the North Sea (Figs. 31–33; e.g., Houbolt, 1968; Stride et
al., 1982; Belderson et al., 1982; Belderson, 1986), Celtic Sea (Berné
et al. 1998; Reynaud et al. 1999); Georges Bank (Fig. 34; Twichell,
1983; Dalrymple, 1992) and the East China Sea (Fig. 35; Yang and
Sun, 1988; Yang, 1989; Liu et al. 1998; Berné et al., 2002). These
features are typically oriented subparallel to prevailing tidal
currents and reach lengths of up to 180 km, widths of up to 10 km,
and thicknesses of up to 40 m. High-resolution seismic lines
document complex internal stratigraphies and multi-stage histo-
ries (e.g., Fig. 35). Migration of these ridges is evident both from
historical bathymetric changes and from packages of clinoform
reflections seen in seismic data. Dips of these lateral-accretion
surfaces range from 5–10° in active ridges to less than 2° in
“moribund” (inactive) ridges. In the East China Sea ridges shown
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 363

Coastline

Coastline
A B
Land Agulhas current

Wave-dominated
Current-dominated shelf
nearshore sands

Fluctuating boundary zone

FIG. 30.—Conceptual model for sedimentation on the outer shelf off South Africa, controlled by the Agulhas Current (redrawn
from Flemming, 1980). The current migrates laterally, moving A) onto and B) off of the shelf in response to seasonal
fluctuations. During the onshore phase, sand is eroded from the wave-dominated nearshore zone and transported down
current, and in some cases off the edge of the shelf, through submarine canyons and into deeper water (Ramsay, 1994). The
nearshore sand prism also migrates in response to the fluctuations of the current. The original model is not drawn to scale, but
the shelf off of southeast Africa is quite narrow, ranging from 3 to 20 km (Flemming, 1980, 1981; Ramsay, 1994).

in Figure 35, clinoformal reflectors dip obliquely to the long axis
of the ridges and parallel to their steeper sides at angles of about
2 degrees. Individual packages are about 1 km in width and about
10 m thick.
How do the tidal ridges form? The most successful model to
date is that of Huthnance (1982), modified by Hulscher et al.
(1993). As geostrophic or tidal flows accelerate across a bathy-
metric irregularity on the sea floor, they tend to accelerate as
they flow over the up-current side because of flow constriction
and then weaken over the crest and down-current side (Fig. 36).
This process perpetuates ridge growth and existence, as the up-
current side is eroded and sand is deposited on the crest and lee
side, causing upward growth and/or down-current migration.
If sufficient sand is available, the process continues until an
equilibrium profile is reached, at which point upward growth
ceases and widening of the feature begins. Solitary ridges form
where there is only a single, initial perturbation (and limited
sand supply), while fields of ridges develop where there are
many nuclei and an abundance of sand. Calculated models for
flow across shelf sand ridges agree well with the observed
velocity field across Middlekerke Bank off the Belgian coast,
although internally the ridge shows a multistage history (Fig.
37; Berné et al., 1994).
The internal lithofacies and sedimentary structures of Quater-
nary tidal sand ridges are not particularly well known. Some
facies models for tidal sand ridges have been proposed from
modern tide-dominated deltas and/or estuary settings (e.g.,
Allen, 1991; Dalrymple et al., 2003), but these deposits would
undergo substantial reworking upon transgression, and conver-
sion into tidal shelf ridges. Grain-size sampling and analyses,
side-scan sonar images, and seismic profiling have shown some
of the surficial bedforms and internal structures of Quaternary
tidal sand ridges (e.g., Belderson et al., 1982; Stride et al., 1982;
Reynaud et al., 1999; Le Bot and Trentesaux, 2004; among many
others; see Figures 33, 35). Seismic profiles, side-scan sonar, and
multi-beam bathymetry show that active ridges in all settings are
covered by bedforms. Limited core information shows the pres-
ence of cross bedding (Dalrymple, 1992; Davis et al., 1993).
Generally either flood or ebb currents dominate particular areas,
resulting in primarily unidirectional cross-bedding dips. Due to
diminishing current velocities, bed thickness decreases
downcurrent, and the beds ultimately pass into rippled and
burrowed fine sand and mud. Davis and Balson (1992) drilled a
35-m-thick, moribund tidal sand ridge in the East Bank complex
of the North Sea. Although recovery was limited and little infor-
mation was obtained about sedimentary structures, the overall
deposit comprised two coarsening-upward successions of well-
sorted fine sand, with bioturbation limited to the top meter of the
upper unit. The upward-coarsening trend is presumably the
result of more intense current and wave action on the ridge crests
(Dalrymple, 1992). Davis et al. (1993) studied a series of smaller
tidal ridges off southwestern Florida. These ridges contain 3–4 m
364 JOHN R. SUTER

Time Tide Tidal Coriolis 10

NORWAY
(hours) levels 1m
flow influence
11 09
2m
00

0 H L
01 03

02
SCOTLAND
L
3

GERMANY
02
H
3m 03
01

04

00
6 L H
IRELAND
05

1m
06 11
10

09
2m
H 4m 07 08
ENGLAND 07 06
9
L WALES 03
11

00 02
3m 01 The NETHERLANDS

(initial
B T9
12 H L 4m BELGIUM
situation)
5m
FRANCE
A T0, 12 P
T6 C

T3

FIG. 31.—Coriolis effects cause tides on open continental shelves to take on rotary patterns. A) For a semidiurnal (twice-daily) tide,
a standing tidal wave in a basin with initially high water in the west (T0), sets up an eastward flow that is deflected to the right
(south) by the Coriolis effect, resulting in higher water on the south side at Time T3. The ensuing tidal flow to the north is then
deflected eastward, creating higher water on the eastern side of the basin at Time T6, six hours after the initial situation. The process
continues until the high part of the standing wave returns to its original position on the western side of the basin (T12). B) The net
effect is a rotary motion around the basin every 12 hours for a semidiurnal tide or every 24 hours for a diurnal tide. At the central
point “P” in Part B, there is no tidal motion (amphidromic point) and the whole rotary tide is called an amphidromic system. C)
This process is best known and illustrated in the North Sea, where the tidal range varies from 4 m on the English coast to nearly
zero on the coast of Norway. Solid lines are cotidal lines radiating from amphidromic points of zero tidal range, which indicate
the times of high water. Dashed lines show the increase in tidal range away from amphidromic points. Tides move south along
the eastern coast of Scotland and England, and high tide on the northeastern coast of Scotland occurs more than 12 hours before
high tide on the southeastern coast of England (redrawn from Clifton, 1999).

of clean, cross-bedded fine-grained quartz sand overlying muddy,
bioturbated sands. A subtle coarsening-upward trend character-
izes the ridge sands, which contained variable amounts of coarse-
sand-size shell hash.
Berné et al. (1994) interpreted the Middelkerke bank of the
North Sea (Fig. 37) as a composite feature, consisting of erosional
remnants as well as combined tidal and storm deposits. Berné et
al. (1998) made a similar interpretation for sand ridges in the
Celtic Sea. These features, up to 60 m high, 200 km long, and 7 km
wide (Berné et al. 1998), are morphologically similar to other tidal
sand ridges but were interpreted as forming by erosional sculpt-
ing of former lowstand deposits. However, Reynaud et al. (1999)
believe that the same ridges formed entirely in a shelf environ-
ment, albeit under evolving conditions of tide and wave domi-
nance. The latter two studies are based on seismic reflection
profiles and provided minimal lithologic information.
Quaternary tidal sand ridges appear to evolve during con-
tinuing transgression. Most present-day tidal ridge fields exist
because of tidal resonance, or enhancement of the open ocean
tides, due to a particular basin configuration. This resonance
may be a relatively brief feature in the history of a given locality,
and it be lost as water depths increase during transgression (e.g.,
Reynaud et al. 1999). In this case, as resonance is lost and tidal
energy decreases, and current speeds drop, causing sand ridges
to become wave-dominated and eventually moribund as the
energy regime wanes. As the transgression proceeds, there is an
upward change from cross bedding to finer-grained, rippled
and burrowed sediment as current speeds decrease, which
should give rise to a fining-upward succession. Sediment is
eroded from the ridge crests by storm waves and deposited as
a drape on the ridge flanks, producing a laterally accreting
deposit. Presumably a coarsening-upward profile may be pre-
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 365

FIG. 32.—A series of sand ridges align

subparallel to the tidal currents gen-
erated in the North Sea (redrawn
from Snedden and Dalrymple, 1999,
after van den Meene, 1994). The
tidal currents rework relict sands
England from the last glacioeustatic lowstand
The into large sand bodies of various
Netherlands dimensions.

Belgium
ns
bo
Rib
nd
Sa
e

gth
dg

FIG. 33.—General model for a tidal sand trans-

Ri

port pathway in the North Sea. Sediment

n
nd

Stre

is eroded from the seafloor at the up-

Sa

stream end, leaving a shelly gravel lag in

which large wave ripples may be present.
ent

Flow-parallel sand ribbons and isolated

dunes occur in the zone of bypassing,
ur r

Large where neither erosion nor deposition oc-

Dunes curs. The reworked sediment is trans-
gC

ported down current and deposited where

sin

tidal current speeds decrease. In deposi-

tional areas, sand sheets may cover thou-
rea

sands of square kilometers. Dunes of vari-

ous scales are extensively developed on
De c

these sheets. Sand ridges form if current

Small speeds are in excess of 1 m/s and suffi-
Dunes cient sand is available (redrawn from
Belderson et al., 1982).

Rippled
sand sheet
366 JOHN R. SUTER

~ 5 km

FIG. 34.—Digital multibeam bathymetric image of the Canadian portion of Georges Bank. Water depth in this image is about 50–70
m, and ridges are approximately 6–10 m in height; the greatest ridge relief measured in the survey was 18 m. Currents sweep
south-southeast from the Gulf of Maine across the Georges Bank in this area (about 50 to 70 m deep), providing the mechanism
for sediment transport. Sediments on the shelf are largely palimpsest, derived from preexisting glacial deposits. The tidal currents
are rotary with maximum velocities ranging from about 30 to 75 cm/s. Transient currents from wind-driven forcing, storms, and
eddies off the Gulf Stream also influence this area. (Image and data courtesy of Brian Todd, Geological Survey of Canada Atlantic
Geoscience Center, 2003.)

served if the change in tidal regime is rapid and current speeds
diminish so quickly that the ridge is effectively “frozen.” Greater
wave energy at the tops of the ridges may also contribute to an
upward-coarsening profile. Ultimately, the ridge may become
draped with shelf muds.
Wave- and Storm-Generated Processes
Unlike semipermanent oceanic currents and tides, wave and
storm processes result from meteorological forcing. Clifton (this
volume) gives a good introduction to wave and surf-zone pro-
cesses as they influence shoreface and shoreline environments.
Waves shoal as they enter shallow water, moving both sediment
and water onshore. The onshore setup of water creates a hydrau-
lic head that drives rip currents and longshore currents. The
characteristics of wind waves are dependent on three main
factors: the strength and duration of the wind, and the distance
over which the wind blows (the fetch). Consequently, wave-
dominated shelves tend to be those open to oceanic waves, such
as the Pacific Northwest of North America or the eastern coast of
Australia (Figs. 1, 28, 38). Porter-Smith et al. (2004) calculated that
oceanic swell is able to entrain fine sand at depths of up to 142 m
in portions of the Australian continental shelf. Other examples of
wave-dominated shelves include the Bering Sea and the north-
eastern coast of South America (Johnson and Baldwin, 1996;
Galloway and Hobday, 1996).
Given sufficient wave energy and resultant current strength,
very significant longshore sediment transport pathways can be
established, as is the case for eastern Australia (Figs. 38–41;
Boyd et al., 2004a; Boyd et al., 2004b). The Eastern Australia
current (Fig. 28) runs south along the continental margin, sweep-
ing the outer continental shelf of clastic sediments, confining
deposition to the nearshore. Inshore, a longshore-drift system
runs for over 1500 km along the coast. At the end of the sediment
transport pathway past Fraser Island, tidal currents issuing
from Hervey Bay intercept the fine- to medium-grained sands
brought in by longshore currents, creating a cross-shelf-migrat-
ing dune field (Figs. 39–41). The dunes, which are mantled by
smaller, superimposed bedforms, have reliefs up to 6 m and
wavelengths of 200–700 m. Internal structures of the dunes are
not yet available, but we can envision composite sets of large-
scale cross-bedding as dominant sedimentary structures. This
relatively unusual situation provides a mechanism for sand
transport across the shelf, onto the continental slope, and into
deeper water, serving to illustrate the power of combined flow
on continental shelves.
Almost all shelves are affected by storms, including the famil-
iar tropical cyclones (hurricanes and/or typhoons), mid-latitude
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 367

A Recent
Changjian
N
River Delta

Shanghai 0 100

km

East China Sea

Figure 37b
37B

Paleo-estuary
Mouth

B Direction of Ridge Migration

SW NE

20 m

00 km 5 5 km

FIG. 35.—Modern sand ridges in the East China Sea are interpreted to represent the retreat path of the Changjiang River Delta
during the Holocene transgression A) Individual ridges are 10–60 km long, 2–5 km wide, and up to 20 m in height. High-
resolution seismic lines B) document a complex internal stratigraphy and multi-stage history. Packages of clinoforms dip
obliquely to the long axis of the ridges, and parallel to their steeper sides at angles of about 2 degrees. Individual packages are
about 1 km in width and about 10 m thick. No paleocurrent data are available from the ridges, but the ridges are oriented
subparallel to the tidal currents in the East China Sea (redrawn from Posamentier, 2002; Yang and Sun, 1988; Liu et al., 1998;
Berné et al., 2002).

low-pressure systems, as well as high-latitude “disturbances”
(Fig. 21). These systems engender a number of powerful pro-
cesses on clastic shelves, including wind-driven currents, large
waves, coastal setup and downwelling, and, ultimately, geo-
strophic currents (Figs. 21–23). Storms and resulting currents are
responsible for a variety of deposits on shelves, including
tempestites, sand sheets, and sand ridges.
Tempestites
Storm beds, or tempestites, occur widely on modern shelves
(e.g., Fig. 42) and are extensively interpreted in the ancient record.
Tempestites have a fairly characteristic signature, making their
recognition in the rock record in core and outcrop comparatively
straightforward. Identification of storm beds is one good way to
infer that a particular succession represents a shoreface–shelf
environment, although distinguishing between the two usually
requires further context (see Clifton, this volume). The general
succession of tempestites has been widely described (e.g., Aigner
and Reineck, 1982; Dott and Bourgeois, 1982; Aigner, 1985; Walker,
1984; Leckie and Krystinik, 1989) (Figs. 24, 42, 43). Waves,
downwelling storm currents, or some type of combined flow cut
an initial erosional surface. The surface may be flat, undulatory,
or channelized at a small scale (gutter casts) and may contain sole
368 JOHN R. SUTER

Coarsest
GRAIN SIZE
Finest

Highest
SHEAR STRESS
Lowest FIG. 36.—Model for the growth of a shelf sand ridge from
an initial topographic high. Accumulation of sand on
the high is due to a phase lag between topography and
bottom shear stress (Redrawn from Nummedal and
Suter, 2002; modified therein from Swift and Field,
1981, based on Smith, 1970).

0 NW SE 0 NW SE
500 1000m
A 500 1000m
Middelkerke Bank F
10
Middelkerke Bank 10
U7
U6
U7 U3
20 20 U4
U4
U3
30m Tertiary 30m Tertiary
0 NW SE
500 1000m
Middelkerke Bank B 0 NW SE
10
500 1000m
Middelkerke Bank G
U7 10 Oostende Bank
20 U4 U7 U6
U2 20

30m
U2 Tertiary U4
30m Tertiary
0 NW SE
500 1000m
Middelkerke Bank C 0 NW SE
10 500 1000m
H
U7 10 Middelkerke Bank
20
U6 U7
U4 U3 U6
U2 20
30m
Tertiary U1 U4
Tertiary
0 NW SE
500 1000m
Middelkerke Bank D 0 NW SE
10
Oostende Bank 500 1000m
I
U7 U6 10 Middelkerke Bank
20 U4 U6
U7
U2 20 U4
30m U1
Tertiary Tertiary
30m

0 NW 500 1000m
Middelkerke Bank
SE
E A 0 NW SE
Oostende Bank B
500 1000m

Middelkerke Bank
J
C
D 10
U5 E
F U6 U7
U3 G 20 U4
U2 H
I
U1 J Tertiary
30m

FIG. 37.—Interpreted high-resolution seismic profiles across the Middelkerke Bank, part of a field of tidal sand ridges offshore
Belgium in the North Sea. Note the multiple erosional surfaces within the ridge, and the upward change from channelized units
to more tabular packages. Vertical exaggeration is about 50:1; inclined reflections are actually dipping at less than 1 degree
(redrawn from Berné et al., 1994).
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 369

FIG. 38.—Merged satellite topographic-bathymetric image of the Southeast Australia continental margin (Boyd et al, 2004a). Wave
approach from the southeast sets up a strong northward-flowing longshore current and sediment transport system, which is
deflected across the shelf by tidal currents in the area of Fraser Island. Image courtesy of Ron Boyd, 2004.

marks or tool marks in the form of flute casts, groove casts, or sole
casts. Pebble or intraclast lags sometimes occur above the surface,
which is overlain by low-angle-laminated to hummocky cross-
stratified sands (Harms et al., 1975). As storm strength wanes,
wave oscillation ripples and/or combined-flow ripples form.
Post-storm or normal background deposition is generally charac-
terized by suspension fallout.
Tempestites often have a characteristic ichnological signa-
ture, which aids in their recognition (Figs. 44–46; Pemberton et al.,
2001). Following the abatement of storm conditions, opportunis-
tic suspension-feeding faunas colonize the upper parts of the
sand and create dwelling structures of the Skolithos and proximal
Cruziana ichnofacies. Depending upon rates of sedimentation
and storminess, an individual tempestite may be buried and
preserved by fair-weather sedimentation, thoroughly churned
by bioturbation into an unrecognizable mass, eroded away by
subsequent storms, and/or amalgamated with younger
tempestites (Fig. 46). A return to fair-weather conditions results
in deposition of finer-grained sediments with equilibrium
ichnological assemblages dominated by deposit-feeding and graz-
ing structures of the distal Cruziana and Zoophycos ichnofacies
(Figs. 45, 46). Repetition of this process results in a cyclical
deposit, often containing a laminated to scrambled bedding style,
colloquially called “lam-scram” (Howard, 1975) (Figs. 46, 47).
Early tempestite facies models invoked density currents to
move sediments offshore. Hayes (1967) noted the deposition of a
sand bed on the Texas shelf following the passage of Hurricane
Carla in 1961 (Fig. 42). He theorized that following hurricane
landfall the storm surge ebbed back onto the shelf as density or
turbidity currents, flowing through washover channels cut into
the shoreline by the storm surge. Even though subsequent at-
tempts to find the Carla sand bed in the nearshore zone either
were unsuccessful, or discovered only thoroughly bioturbated
sand, the idea of a storm-surge turbidity current had impact.
Numerous ancient sandstones interpreted as storm deposits
have characteristics very similar to Bouma sequences (e.g.,
Hamblin and Walker, 1979), and these were interpreted as the
deposits of shallow-water turbidity currents that took sediment
below wave base.
The concept of shallow-water turbidity currents was ques-
tioned on several grounds. Firstly, no mechanism was available
for ignition of turbidity currents on the very low gradients that
characterize the shelves of the Gulf of Mexico (<< 1 degree).
Morton (1981), citing physical oceanographic measurements and
the distribution of the storm bed, suggested that wind-forced
currents during the landfall of Hurricane Carla, rather than
storm-surge ebb, were responsible for the deposition of the sand
bed. Many authors (e.g., Aigner, 1985; Swift et al., 1986; Snedden
et al., 1988, among others), presented evidence for geostrophic
flows as the dominant mechanism during storms, which would
tend to move sands obliquely offshore and ultimately along shelf
contours. This model is widely held today, although questions
persist. Snedden et al (1988) and Snedden and Nummedal (1991)
mapped the Carla sand bed on the Texas shelf (Fig. 42) but did not
follow the deposit into shallower depths, where the sand had
been thoroughly bioturbated. Leckie and Krystinik (1989) ob-
served that most current indicators in storm deposits pointed
offshore rather than alongshore, and questioned the importance
of geostrophic currents. Duke (1990) and Duke et al. (1991)
offered a solution—storms create combined flows, and instanta-
neous current indicators of the downwelling storm flows are
directed offshore, whilst net sand transport is obliquely along the
shelf, dominated by geostrophic flows.
The controversy regarding shallow-water gravity flows and
tempestite deposition has “reignited” (Myrow and Southard,
1996; Myrow et al., 2002)). New data and theories have been
expounded (e.g., Traykovski et al., 2000; Wright et al., 2001;
Bentley, 2003) which argue that turbulence from storm waves
and/or currents creates enough suspended-sediment concentra-
tion in bottom water layers to reach sufficient densities to activate
370 JOHN R. SUTER

A B rree
s
nntts
rr
CCuu
HERVEY
HERVEY

Tidal
Tidal
BAY
BAY ~~ 60km
60km

FRASER
FRASER
MAINLAND
MAINLAND ISLAND
ISLAND

Hervey FRASER
FRASER
Bay TIDAL
TIDAL ISLAND
ISLAND
DUNES
DUNES

RE NTTS
EN S
C
C UR
U RR
DAAL
L
TTIID

C
FIG. 39.—A) Map of Hervey Bay, Fraser Island, and Breaksea Spit, northeast Australia. The island and attached spit have prograded
to near the shelf margin, which turns to the northwest at this location (Fig. 38). B) The extensive longshore sediment transport
system seaward of Fraser Island and Breaksea Spit is intercepted by tidal currents moving in and out of Hervey Bay, resulting
in C) cross-shelf transport of sand in a series of large tidal dunes prograding to the shelf margin and beyond into deep water (Boyd
et al., 2004b). Map and photographs courtesy of Ron Boyd, 2004.

and sustain gravity flows (Fig. 16). The “wave-modified turbid-
ite” model (Fig. 48) suggests that combined flow is again the
driver of shelf deposition, but in this case the combination is
wave-induced turbulence, geostrophic currents, and sediment
gravity flows. This revival of shelf turbidites mirrors the increas-
ing emphasis being given to hyperpycnal density flows in under-
standing the delivery of sediments from rivers to ocean basins.
Hummocky cross-stratification (HCS) (Fig. 43) has its own
controversies. There is substantial agreement that storm waves
are involved in the formation of HCS, but, beyond that, consensus
is lacking. HCS is widely used as an indicator of the lower-
shoreface environment; however, given that storm waves can
entrain fine sand sediment at depths of well over 100 m (Porter-
Smith et al., 2004), these features can obviously occur in shelf
settings (Clifton, this volume). Original ideas on the formation of
HCS involved combined flows (e.g., Swift et al., 1983; Nøttvedt
and Kreisa, 1987). However, flume studies (e.g., Arnott and
Southard, 1990) indicated that HCS forms under almost purely
oscillatory conditions, with the addition of relatively minor uni-
directional forcing causing a transition to low-angle laminae
dipping in the direction of current flow. HCS per se is limited to
coarse silt and very fine to fine sand, but in larger grain sizes
larger ripples and more steeply dipping strata occur (Leckie,
1988). Definitive examples of hummocks on modern shelves are
still wanting, likely because their presumed formation during
large storms precludes direct observation. Bouma et al. (1982)
reported HCS from box cores taken on the South Texas continen-
tal shelf (their Figure 20). Swift et al. (1983) provide side-scan
sonar records of what they term “hummocky megaripples,”
which are likely candidates, although their formation was con-
cluded to be the result of combined geostrophic flows and storm
waves. Ramsay (1994) reported hummocks and swales in fine-
grained sand with trough–crest amplitudes of 40 cm and wave-
lengths of 1.5–5 m at depths of 30–60 m from the shelf off of
southeast Africa. Dalrymple and Hoogendoorn (1997) interpreted
HCS and storm-graded beds within vibracores from shoreface-
attached ridges off of Sable Island on the Scotian Shelf. Li and
Amos (1999) observed symmetrical “large wave ripples” forming
at 39 m water depth during storms on the Scotian shelf. They
interpreted these features as combined-flow hummocky mega-
ripples. The low-angle laminae found in many vibracores from
shelf deposits (e.g., Fig. 42) probably represent HCS.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES
Breaksea
Spit
Longshore
Longshore
Transport
Transport
N
N
5 km
FIG. 40.—Digital bathymetry from the area immediately offshore of Breaksea Spit, northeast Queensland, Australia (Boyd et al.,
2004b). Eastward-flowing ebb tidal currents from Hervey Bay to the west intercept and divert the massive northward-flowing
longshore transport system, forming a sand sheet of tidal bedforms progressing across the narrow shelf and onto the shelf margin.
Imagery courtesy of Ron Boyd, 2004.
Sand Bodies on Storm-Dominated Shelves
Sand sheets and linear sand bodies are nearly ubiquitous
on storm-dominated Quaternary continental shelves (Table 1)
and have been the subject of considerable research and publi-
cation (see Table 1), with the most recent and comprehensive
review by Snedden and Dalrymple (1999). In subsurface and
outcrop interpretations, as well as on Quaternary shelves,
storm-dominated ridges occur anywhere from just beyond the
shoreface to more than 100 km from the “coeval” highstand
shoreline. Shoreface-attached ridges are generally oblique to
the coeval shoreline, whereas offshore ridges tend to be subpar-
allel to the coast (Fig. 49). Despite decades of research, there is
a great deal we do not know about these deposits. These modern
shoals and ridges are subparallel to the shoreline and can
reliably be considered to be currently subaqueous and on the
continental shelf, but the actual mode of their formation and
ultimate fate are still matters of debate and ongoing research
(Figs. 50, 51). The general consensus today is that there are
various types of continental-shelf sand bodies, the formation
of which is related to transgression and probably involves the
Huthnance mechanism (Berné et al., 1998; Dyer and Huntley,
1999; Snedden and Dalrymple, 1999). Many of these deposits
371
Hervey Bay
Tidal
Tidal Dunes
Dunes
are still in active process environments and are being trans-
formed by present shelf processes, although those in the deep-
est water seem to be moribund (Goff et al., 1999; Goff et al.,
2005).
Many of the best studied—or in any event the most discussed
and debated—Quaternary storm-sand ridges occur on the conti-
nental shelves of North America (Figs. 50–54). Sand ridges of the
Atlantic margin range from about 1 to 10 m in thickness and
average around 3 km in width (Stubblefield et al., 1984; Goff et al.,
1999). Sand bodies of the Gulf coast are of similar dimensions.
Mississippi Delta shoals are 4–6 m thick, 8–10 km wide, and up to
50 km in length (Figs. 53, 54; Penland et al., 1989), and shoals along
the Mississippi–Alabama, western Louisiana, and eastern Texas
shelves (Curray, 1960; Nelson and Bray, 1970; Frazier, 1974; Suter,
1987; Suter et al., 1987; McBride et al., 1999; Rodriguez et al., 1999)
fit within a similar range. Vibracores through many of the Qua-
ternary features (e.g., Penland et al., 1986; Swift et al., 1986; Rine
et al., 1991, Hoogendoorn and Dalrymple, 1986; Snedden et al.,
1994, Dalrymple and Hoogendoorn, 1997; Snedden et al., 1999)
show the ridge lithofacies dominated by sand. Where not wholly
deformed by the coring process, these sands are dominated by
low-angle laminae, high-angle cross-bedding, graded storm beds,
hummocky cross-stratification, or bioturbation. Subordinate
372 JOHN R. SUTER

A. Bathymetric
Profile

B. Bathymetric Bar
Map Crest

Superimposed
Dunes

FIG. 41.—A) Bathymetric profile and B) digital multibeam bathymetry of tidal barforms crossing the continental shelf offshore of
Breaksea Spit (Boyd et al., 2004b). The large bars, with superimposed smaller dunes, are up to 6 m in relief, with wavelengths
of 200–700 m. A model of a Russian Oskar class submarine is shown for scale. Image courtesy of Ron Boyd, 2004.

amounts of mud and silt are present, but as individual beds
within distinct units, not distributed throughout the sand bodies.
These may reflect preexisting deposits upon which the shoals
nucleated (cf. Stubblefield et al., 1984, Penland et al., 1988; Snedden
et al. 1984; 1999; Pope et al. 1989; Rodriguez et al., 1999; Snedden
and Dalrymple, 1999).
The basal contacts of Quaternary ridges are variable. In many
cases, the sand bodies lie on composite erosional surfaces formed
by a combination of wave ravinement and shelf currents. Others
have gradational basal contacts, probably reflecting the different
origins of the basal portions of the sand bodies. Thus, the shelf
sand facies per se has an erosional lower boundary (Fig. 54), while
some portions of the basal contact of the ridge may be grada-
tional. Internally, the contact between the shelf sand and its
precursor is an erosional surface.
Bathymetric map analyses, seismic profiling, and side-scan
sonar imagery have shown that many shoals are active and
migratory. Side-scan sonar and multibeam bathymetric images
show that bedforms migrate obliquely along the Atlantic ridges
(e.g., Swift et al., 1986; Goff et al., 1999). Historic mapping and
seismic profiling have documented migration of shoreface-
attached ridges along shore (McBride and Moslow, 1991,
Dalrymple and Hoogendoorn, 1997; Snedden et al., 1999). In the
Gulf of Mexico, landward migration of Ship Shoal of more than
1.5 km in the last 100 years was documented by bathymetric
map analyses (Penland et al., 1988). Seismic reflection profiles of
other shelf ridges in the Gulf of Mexico show seaward-dipping
reflections, landward-dipping reflections, as well as channeling
and other features within various units (e.g., Rodriguez et al.,
1999).
SHELF SANDS IN OUTCROP AND SUBSURFACE
Although many outcropping and subsurface sandstones have
long been interpreted as shelf deposits (Tables 2, 3), these inter-
pretations remain controversial. “Isolated marine sand bodies”
(cf. Bergman and Snedden, 1999) like the Shannon and Sussex
Sandstones in Wyoming and the Tocito Sandstone in New Mexico
are probably the best known and most studied of these inter-
preted shelf sand ridges (Spearing, 1976; Brenner, 1978; Bouma et
al., 1982; Tillman and Martinsen, 1984, 1987; Gaynor and Swift,
1988; Swift and Parsons, 1999; Nummedal and Riley, 1999).
Despite this wealth of investigation, or perhaps because of it,
alternative interpretations of these units abound: estuary-mouth
shoals or tide-dominated bayhead deltas within incised valleys
(e.g., Jennette and Jones, 1995; Sullivan et al., 1997), forced regres-
sive shorelines (Walker and Bergman, 1993; Bergman, 1994, 1999;
Bergman and Walker, 1999).
Earlier interpretations of these deposits as shelf sandstones
came largely from the occurrence of the sandstones within thick
successions of demonstrably marine mudstones, as well as their
reconstructed paleogeographic position well offshore of pre-
sumed coeval shorelines (e.g., Spearing, 1976; Tillman and
Martinsen, 1984, 1987). The Shannon Sandstone lies about 100 km
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 373

A C

FIG. 42.—The distribution and internal characteristics of the Hurricane Carla storm sand layer on the central Texas shelf. A) Net sand
thickness (cm) of the Carla storm bed as determined by Snedden and Nummedal (1991), extending obliquely across the shelf for
some 200 km (redrawn from Snedden and Nummedal, 1991). B) Graded sand layer found on the inner shelf by Hayes (1967)
immediately following the landfall of Hurricane Carla in 1961. Hayes (1967) interpreted deposition of the sand by storm-surge-
ebb turbidity currents, but Snedden and Nummedal (1991) followed Morton (1981) by arguing in favor of a geostrophic flow
mechanism (redrawn from Johnson and Baldwin, 1996). C) Close-up photograph of tempestites from offshore of Ship Shoal, a
sand body on the continental shelf off of the Mississippi Delta.

offshore of its presumably coeval shoreline, with a roughly shore-
parallel orientation reminiscent of the shelf sand ridges offshore
of the Atlantic coast of the USA. The encasing marine mudstones
create ideal stratigraphic traps for hydrocarbons, and several of
these units comprise large reservoirs (Table 3). For example,
Hartzog Draw (e.g., Tillman and Martinsen, 1987), which is
dominantly a Shannon Sandstone field, has an estimated 400
MMBO in place. This economic driver engendered significant
interest and research into Quaternary shelf sands, along with a
corresponding increase in shelf-sand interpretations in ancient
rocks.
Summarizing characteristics of many units listed in Tables 2
and 3, these deposits comprise sands, in some cases conglomer-
atic, with varying amounts of glauconite and siderite. They are
commonly bioturbated, with ichnofacies ranging from the distal
Cruziana to the proximal Skolithos. Primary sedimentary struc-
tures include hummocky cross-stratification, low-angle lamina-
tion, tabular and trough cross-bedding, sigmoidal cross-stratifi-
cation, wave, current, and combined-flow ripples, mud drapes,
double mud drapes, elongate rip-up clasts, and rhythmites. Thick-
nesses range from 10 to 30 m, widths from 5 to 10 km, and lengths
of up to 160 km. Paleocurrents derived from cross bedding are
generally unidirectional but are typically oblique to the sand-
body orientation.
Vertical trends within the sandstones are inconsistent, rang-
ing from upward cleaning to blocky to upward fining. Depend-
ing on the perspective of the investigators, these have been
variably explained as the result of the original formation of the
sandstones as shoreface and/or incised-valley deposits or as part
of the normal succession of processes expected within a shelf
ridge. Thicknesses of the individual deposits are variable, but
individual Shannon “ridges” approach 30 m in thickness, or
several times that seen for Quaternary storm-dominated shelf
sands.
As previously noted, one of the major problems with the
shelf-sand interpretation was that of supply of coarse-grained
sediment. No convincing mechanisms were available for the
transport of sand and gravel tens of kilometers from coeval
shorelines to be encased in muds far out on the shelf. Shelf
plumes were often invoked, but such plumes comprise mostly
suspended material and are thus limited to finer-grained sedi-
ment (Scheihing and Gaynor, 1991). In addition, plumes are
generally turned shore parallel by geostrophic currents before
reaching the offshore distances needed for some of the units in
question. Some of the “isolated marine sands,” such as the
Prairie Canyon Formation of Utah and Colorado (Cole and
Young, 1991; Cole et al. 1997) do consist mostly of very fine
sand, silt, and clay, trend subparallel to interpreted shorelines,
374 JOHN R. SUTER

Structures
Structures

1.1 Guttercast
Gutter Cast ๷
2.2 Solemarks
Sole Marks ๷
3.3 Partinglineation
Parting Lineation ๷ Perpendicular
๷ Perpendicular
4.4 Wave-ripplecrests
Wave-ripple crests ඳ Parallel
ඳ Parallel
5.5 Combined flowripples
Combined-flow ripples ๷
6.6 Currentripples
Current ripples ๷
FIG. 43.—Leckie and Krystinik (1989) compiled the directional and paleocurrent relationships of tempestites from a number of
Cretaceous sands. The orientations of wave-ripple crests (4) from the lower-shoreface to inner-shelf zones of wave-dominated
coasts are approximately parallel to the local paleoshoreline trend. Numerous current indicators, such as gutter casts (1), sole
marks (2) and parting lineations (3) from tempestites and sole marks from hummocky beds indicate that flows transporting
sediment offshore were at high angles to the paleoshoreline. Wave approach was also at high angles to the shoreline, as indicated
by the shore-normal orientations of sole marks, parting lineation, and asymmetric ripples on hummocky cross-stratification and
their orthogonal relationship with respect to orientation of wave-ripple crests. Compiled paleocurrent data indicate that HCS
forms under dominantly oscillatory flow with a weak, shore-normal, combined-flow component. This apparent conflict between
geostrophic current theory and observations from modern shelves was reconciled by Duke (1990) and Duke et al. (1991), in which
the offshore-directed indicators were attributed to instantaneous combined flow, with overall net transport still believed to be
dominated by geostrophic currents (redrawn from Leckie and Krystinik, 1989).

show an overall upward-cleaning vertical profile, and in gen-
eral are more convincing as shelf plume deposits than coarser-
grained units like the Shannon Sandstone. However, the Prai-
rie Canyon has also been interpreted as incised-valley deposits
(Hampson et al., 1999); and similar units in the area have been
interpreted as deposits of hyperpycnal flows (e.g., Pattison,
2005).
The realization that Quaternary shelves had experienced
repeated glacioeustatic fluctuations solved the problem of sedi-
ment supply problem (Figs. 10, 11). With ambulatory shorelines,
repeatedly prograding and reworked by transgressions, coarse-
grained sediments on an otherwise fine-grained shelf presented
no real mysteries. The difficulty lay in how that sediment was
reworked—was it reformed into shelf sands or did it retain its
original characteristics? In the latter case, was it originally depos-
ited as some type of shoreline, an incised valley, or some interme-
diate deposit? All of these possibilities, and more, have been
proposed (see papers in Bergman and Snedden, 1999). Suter and
Clifton (1999) examined the competing interpretations for the
Shannon Sandstone and found that none of them were able to
explain all of the features found in the deposit. Nummedal and
Suter (2002) reviewed the formation of shelf sand ridges, and
followed Snedden and Dalrymple (1999) by concluding that
most, if not all, were of composite origin.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 375

Sandy Shore

Sandy
Backshore

Semi-consolidated
Substrate

Rocky Sublittoral Zo
Coast ne
Peat or
Xylic

B
at
Substrate

hy
al
Zo
ne
Abys
sal Zone

1 6 7 14 18
11 23
16
8 19 29
3 26
13 20
5
2 9 15
24
22
12 21 28 30
4 10 17
25
Peat or Xylic Semi-consolidated 27
Rocky Coast Substrate Substrate Sandy Backshore Sandy Shore Sublittoral Zone Bathyal Zone Abyssal Zone

Trypanites Teredolites Glossifungites Psilonichnus Skolithos Cruziana Zoophycos Nereites

FIG. 44.—Seilacher’s (1967) model of ichnofacies distribution, based on a number of environmental parameters, was originally
developed for a normal “beach to offshore” trend. The main parameters of the ichnofacies concept include substrate consistency,
hydrodynamic energy, food supply, food type, salinity, temperature, oxygen levels, sedimentation rate, etc., which tend to change
progressively with increasing water depth. However, the relation to water depth is passive, inasmuch as ichnofacies distribution
is rarely directly controlled only by bathymetry (Frey et al., 1990). Consequently, ichnofacies commonly occur outside the zone
specified in the original paradigm. Continental-shelf ichnofacies are no exception to this observation. (Redrawn from Pemberton
et al., 2001.)

Numerous deposits have been interpreted as tidal shelf sand
ridges (e.g., Houthuys and Gullentops, 1988), although the dis-
tinction between estuarine or deltaic tidal sands (see Boyd et al.,
this volume) and tidal shelf sand ridges is sometimes difficult
(Johnson and Baldwin, 1996). Suter and Clifton (1999) found
considerable evidence for the deposition of the Shannon Sand-
stone by tidal currents, including sigmoidal bedding, mud drapes,
double mud drapes, elongate rip-up clasts, current ripples, and
rhythmites. These are all features of inshore or reversing tides,
which should not occur prominently in shelf sands deposited by
rotary tidal currents. Quaternary tidal shelf sand ridges show
surficial bed forms and internal inclined reflections at various
scales; thus their interpreted ancient counterparts are character-
ized by extensive cross bedding. Very large-scale cross bedding
(10–50 m in height), reminiscent of that reported for the Celtic Sea
ridges by Reynaud et al. (1999), has been reported (Surlyk and
Noe-Nygaard, 1991) from the Cretaceous Raukely Formation of
East Greenland. Relatively few outcrop examples of ocean-cur-
rent-deposited sandstones have been reported (Stow et al., 1998).
Ito and Horikawa (2000) interpreted Middle Pleistocene deposits
of the Ichijiku Formation of the Boso Peninsula of Japan as a shelf
sand complex formed by the paleo–Kuroshio current. These
deposits reach thicknesses of up to 400 m and are characterized by
large-scale trough cross bedding, reactivation surfaces, minor
tabular cross beds, and current ripples. Direct tidal indicators,
such as double mud drapes and rhythmites, are lacking.
Recent examples of interpretations of shelf sandbodies in the
subsurface include those of Suter et al. (1996) (Fig. 55); Galloway,
2002 (Fig. 56); Picarelli et al., (2002); Posamentier, 2002 (Figs. 57–
59); and Handford and Baria, (2003). Galloway (2002), using well
logs and 2D and 3D seismic data, interpreted the Miocene Utsira
Formation of the southern North Sea as comprising clastic shelf
sands formed in an elongate structural trough, countering alter-
native interpretations that featured submarine fans (Fig. 56).
Storm, tidal, and marine currents combined with abundant sup-
ply of allochthonous sediment off the adjacent platforms to build
a long-lived aggradational shoal complex. Analogy was made to
several modern shelf settings, but the Utsira succession is 100–300
376 JOHN R. SUTER

Psilonichnus
Ichnofacies High
Macaronichnus Tide
Assemblage Low
Psilonichnus
Tide
Ichnofacies
Skolithos
Ichnofacies

Suspension Feeding
Fair-weather
Wave Base

Proximal
Cruziana

Macaronichnus
Assemblage Archetypal

Cruziana Ichnofacies
Cruziana

Deposit Feeding
Cruziana
Ichnofacies
SHELF
SHELF

Distal
Grazing & Foraging Cruziana

Storm Wave Base

Zoophycus Ichnofacies

Zoophycus
Ichnofacies

FIG. 45.—An idealized vertical succession for marine softground assemblages from wave-dominated shelf–shoreline deposits, based
on observations from Cretaceous strata from the Western Interior Seaway of North America (redrawn from Pemberton et al., 2001;
modified therein from Pemberton and MacEachern, 1995).

m thick, or several times the thickness of even the largest modern
sand ridges, and it spans about 7 million years. The Utsira
succession in this case represents a truly composite system that
spans multiple depositional sequences. Although Galloway (2002)
argued persuasively for the clastic shelf origin of the Utsira, and
provided useful summaries of the large-scale architecture and
likely characteristics of clastic shelf shoal systems, the long-lived,
basin-centered, repeatedly reoccupied depositional system in-
voked has no true modern analog.
Posamentier (2002) provided a detailed stratigraphic evalua-
tion of Miocene deposits from a portion of the northwest Java
shelf. Utilizing well logs, cores, and beautifully imaged 3D seis-
mic data, he interpreted a series of linear features as tidal shelf-
ridge deposits (Figs. 57–59). These features lie on a transgressive
ravinement surface (Fig. 59), contain up to 80% net sand, and
range from 0.3 to 2.0 km wide, more than 20 km long, and up to
17 m high. These characteristics are a very good match with those
of modern ridges, and the comparison gains further support from
the occurrence of the Miocene features in fields with dozens of
individual ridges, also a common characteristic on modern shelves.
Typically, these Miocene ridges are oblique to the reconstructed
paleo-shoreline, contain a sharp edge (possibly the “leading
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 377

A B C

Erosion
D) Erosion and
and Amalagamation
Amalgamation

A)Tempestite
Tempestitedeposition
deposition B)Colonization
Colonizationpost-storm
post-storm C)Fair weather
Fair-weather

“Lam-scram”
FIG. 46.—A) An initial storm event deposits a tempestite, sometimes marked by escape structures of organisms either entrained in
the storm flow or buried by the newly deposited bed. B) Following storm abatement, organisms colonize the sandy substrate,
usually dominated by members of Cruziana or Skolithos ichnofacies. C) With resumed fair-weather deposition, the normal shelf
Zoophycus ichnofacies is reestablished. Subsequent storm events may either substantially erode the fair-weather sediments and
preceding tempestite (D), or preserve enough to produce E) laminated-scrambled or “lam-scram” (Howard, 1975) bedding
(redrawn from Pemberton et al., 2001).

Multiple events; inverse-graded,

bioturbated sand bed

Upward fining storm beds

Low-Concentration
Deposits

High-Concentration
Deposits Poorly sorted clay rich storm
beds;
(River Floods) Flood debris

Multiple events;inverse-graded
bioturbated sand bed
Low-Concentration
Deposits
Upward-fining storm beds

Grain size

FIG. 47.—Schematic drawing illustrating bed architecture on the northern California shelf. Thick, poorly sorted beds deposited by
fluid-mud transport during times of river flooding (high-concentration regimes) alternate with thinner, sandier, bioturbated beds
deposited by wave–current transport in the absence of flood deposits (low-concentration regimes) (redrawn from Fan et al., 2004).
378 JOHN R. SUTER

Laminated siltstone

Climbing, combined-
Combined flow current ripples
Flow FIG. 48.—A general model for a
tempestite deposited by wave-
Asymmetric, modified gravity flows (from
small HCS Myrow et al., 2002).

Massive,
Turbulent graded
Flow

VFS
Silt

MS

CS
Large, well-developed flutes FS

0 1 2 3 30 00’ N 94 00' W
95 00' W
A kilometers 30' Texas
LA

Galveston
Bay

20'

10'
25 m

m
20

38
50'
East Coast, USA
0

Texas
kilometers
m 28 40’ N
0 MAP
10

20' 10' 75 B Map

FIG. 49.—A) Distribution of sand ridges on a portion of the Atlantic continental shelf of the United States and B) the East Texas shelf
in the Gulf of Mexico (redrawn from Snedden and Dalrymple, 1999; after Swift and Field, 1981, Thomas and Anderson, 1994).
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 379

Sea Level
Landward Time 1

Time lines
Nearshore Ridges
Offshore muds
Prograding Barrier Degraded Barrier
Lagoonal muds
Sea Level
Pleistocene substrate Time 2

Barrier and shoreface sands

Aggraded sands Relict Nearshore Ridges

Transgressive Barrier
Degraded
Barriers Sea Level
Time 3

Nearshore Ridges

Relict Nearshore Ridges

FIG. 50.—Schematic diagram for postulated development of New Jersey shelf ridges. Note the existence of regressive and
transgressive shelf ridges as well as degraded barriers (redrawn from Nummedal and Suter, 2002; from Stubblefield et al., 1984).

edge” during their migration), and are asymmetric with the

Flo

thicker parts in the inferred direction of migration (Fig. 58). Core

w

observations reveal that the ridges consist of moderately coarse

Str
ea

sand and contain open-marine fossils and current-formed sedi-

ml

mentary structures, and they are fully encased in muddy sedi-

ine
s

ments immediately above and below (Fig. 59).

A' TOWARDS A CLASTIC-SHELF FACIES MODEL

Considering the complexity of shelf dynamics, the composite

origins of many Holocene and Pleistocene examples, and the
degree of ambiguity associated with outcrop and subsurface
A
interpretations, can we really construct a consistent, commonly
accepted facies model for clastic shelf sands? Johnson and Baldwin
(1996) indicated that it might not be possible to distinguish
between shoreline-associated and offshore sand bodies by facies
analysis alone. Their advice was to concentrate on assemblages of
Ridge data, including texture, sedimentary structures, sandbody geom-
A Crest etry, paleocurrent patterns, and stratigraphic relationships. One
can add that the mineralogy of the sands, the taphonomy of any
Shelf Current
contained shell debris, the biostratigraphy of the encasing and
contained fine-grained sediments, and the ichnology of both the
A A'
shelf sands and muds may be of critical importance in an environ-
mental interpretation. In other words, to make a convincing shelf

←
B FIG. 51.—Conceptual model for a Shannon Sandstone storm-
dominated shelf sand ridge (redrawn from Swift and Parsons,
1999; modified therein from Gaynor and Swift, 1988), based
Glauconitic Trough Cross-bedded
largely on studies of Atlantic shelf sand ridges. A) Plan view
of lithofacies distribution on a ridge and flow streamlines over
Tabular Cross-bedded Thinly-bedded the ridge crest. B) Flow-parallel cross section through sand-
ridge deposits, showing lithofacies distribution. Migration of
Transverse Bedform such features is oblique to the overall flow direction.
Flow Streamline
380 JOHN R. SUTER

Top of Core

PHOTO X-RAY PHOTO X-RAY PHOTO X-RAY

0.0 m

1.5 m

1.0 m

0.5 m

2.0 m

FIG. 52.—Photographs (left of each pair) and x-radiographs (right of each pair) of vibracores from the landward flank of Peahala Ridge,
offshore New Jersey on the Atlantic continental shelf of North America, illustrating the sedimentary structures and features of
the upper, marine portion of a modern shoreface-attached shelf ridge. Sediments are mostly sand and shell fragments, with grain
size ranging from very fine to coarse. Dominant sedimentary structures are low-angle laminae, with some low-angle cross
bedding apparent around 0.5 m. More cross bedding was found in the actual ridge crest (redrawn from Snedden et al., 1994).

sand interpretation requires an integrated approach involving
multiple datasets.
Given that there are a variety of clastic-shelf facies types,
there can be no single facies model for these deposits. Fine-
grained shelf sediments, tempestites, and thin sheet sands over-
lying transgressive surfaces are relatively non-controversial
and are commonly recognized. Recognition of clastic shelf sand
ridges, volumetrically the most significant type on modern shelves,
the most controversial deposit in the subsurface and in outcrop,
and the most likely hydrocarbon reservoirs, is somewhat more
problematic.
Figure 60 shows an evolutionary model for formation of
shelf ridges. Following the Huthnance (1982) model, most sand
ridges start life with a “precursor”, a bathymetric perturbation.
Precursors are very commonly transgressed shoreline features,
meaning that the sediment supply to build a shelf sand ridge
comes from relict deposits, but the ridges themselves are pal-
impsest. With increasing submergence, current reworking, and
shelf-ridge migration, the “precursor” is eroded such that once
a ridge has moved a distance greater than its width it has
evolved to an entirely open-marine depositional system. It is
immaterial whether the formative currents come from tides,
semipermanent oceanic currents, storm-driven geostrophic
flows, or a combination of any or all of them—only that the
current be sufficiently powerful and of sufficient duration to
rework a precursor deposit into a shelf sand body. No scale is
implied in this diagram, but individual ridges on modern shelves
reach thicknesses of up to 40 m.
Shelf ridges can be classified depending upon their progres-
sion along the evolutionary pathway. Figure 61 schematically
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 381

C
FIG. 53.—Mississippi delta shelf sand bodies. A) Three-stage evolutionary model for the transgression of deltaic complexes in the
Mississippi Delta Plain (redrawn from Penland et al., 1988). Transgression and reworking of deltaic sands, mostly mouth-bar and
beach-ridge-plain deposits, results in progressive formation of wave-dominated spits, barrier islands, and, upon total submer-
gence, shelf sand bodies or shoals. B) Bathymetric map of shelf shoals developed in transgressed, abandoned deltaic complexes
of the Mississippi Delta. C) Detailed bathymetric map of Ship Shoal. D) Transgressive submergence model. This process describes
the progressive reworking of deltaic facies during rising relative base level, illustrating the formation of inner-shelf shoals from
preexisting deltaic shoreline deposits. Vibracores from Ship and Trinity shoals contained substantially different lithofacies,
reflective of their different stages of reworking. Trinity Shoal is currently being buried by the renewed progradation of the
Atchafalaya complex, and will probably be preserved as a composite of barrier-island and shelf sand bodies. Ultimate
preservation of a shelf sand body derived from a preexisting shoreline deposit is thus seen to be a function of the rate of subsidence,
the rate of shoreface translation, marine reworking, and burial.

places the evolutionary spectrum of these ridges above a ravine-
ment surface on a continental shelf. Figures 62–64 show concep-
tual vertical successions through the different stages of ridge
development. A “juvenile” or partially evolved ridge (Types I
and II; Figs. 60, 61, 63) would contain characteristics of both its
precursor and whatever degree of marine reworking occurred
before the process clock was turned off. Fully evolved, fully
marine, Type III ridges (Fig. 64) contain only deposits laid down
by shelf processes.
Recognition of such deposits must consider the scale of
observation and data being interpreted. In well logs, ridges
overlie a sharp basal surface and show an aggradational pat-
tern, either blocky, upward cleaning, or shaling upward, de-
pending on the ridge history (Figs. 56, 57). The log patterns
alone would not be sufficient to support such a clastic-shelf
interpretation but would be suggestive or supportive. Finer-
grained deposits, interpreted as deeper-water shelf sediments,
will overlie the unit.
In core or outcrop, an erosional base that may be marked by
a Glossifungites ichnofacies (Figure 54; MacEachern et al., 1992)
will be overlain by clean, cross-bedded to low-angle laminated
sands, depending on the grain size of the ridge. Differing amounts
of shell material, indicative of depth of formation and reworked
into the ridge, are present in Quaternary ridges, but the preserva-
tion of carbonate shells through burial diagenesis is problematic.
Authigenic minerals such as glauconite may be present. In storm-
dominated settings, there may be graded storm beds, and possi-
bly hummocky cross stratification. Bed sets should be gently
382 JOHN R. SUTER

0.0 m
Ophiomorpha

Ravinement
Surface

Rangia sp.
Shoal Sand

B
Glossifungites
Ichnofacies
Deltaic Sediments

A
C
1.0 m

FIG. 54.—Features in the Ship Shoal shelf sand body, offshore of the Mississippi Delta (see Figures 10 and 53 for location). A) Portion
of a vibracore through the base of Ship Shoal. A compositie ravinement surface with a Glossifungites ichnofacies separates a 4 m+
thick shelf sand body from muddy sediments of the abandoned Maringouin complex of the Mississippi Delta (see Penland et al.,
1986). In this core the sands lost cohesion during vibracoring, flowed, and became massive. B) Large Ophiomorpha are commonly
found within the upper portions of the sand body, along with macrofauna such as Rangia sp. (Penland et al., 1986). C) Close-up
of the Glosssifungites ichnofacies found beneath the shoal sand (Penland et al., 1986).
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 383

FIG. 55.—Conceptual diagram de-

picting a model for migration
and trapping of gas within the
shoal deposits reworked from
underlying deltaic and/or in-
cised-valley sands. Shelf sands
within the transgressive systems
tract and highstand parasequen-
ces contain most of the gas accu-
mulations in stratigraphic and
combination traps, because of
better top seal relationships (re-
drawn from Suter et al., 1996).
TST/HST Deltaic Deposits This is a well-known play con-
Distributary channel within TST cept for Tertiary deltaic depos-
its in the Gulf of Mexico, some-
Sandy incised-valley fill, LST/TST times colloquially referred to as
the “destructional bar” play. But
Shoal Sand within HST
a “rose by any other name…”
Gas cap the target is often a shelf sand
Gas migration pathways body (see Figure 50).

West East
GR GR Res GR GR Res GR Res GR GR GR

- 500 - 500 - 500 - 500 - 500 - 500 - 500

Plio- Pleistocene

Utsira Formation
- 1000 1000 - 1000 - 1000 - 1000 - 1000 - 1000 - 1000

Oligocene
Lower Miocene

0 20 km
- 1500 - 1500 - 1500 - 1500 - 1500

FIG. 56.—Well-log cross section from the Shetland Platform towards the Horda Platform in the North Sea, showing the log patterns
and regional stratigraphy of the Miocene Utsira Formation. Galloway (2002) interpreted the Utsira as a long-lived, multi-
sequence, shelf shoal system in an elongate epeiric basin. Note the generally blocky, aggradational log stacking pattern above a
basal erosional surface and sharp top boundary, overlain by fine-grained deposits. The formation shows an overall mounded to
downlapping character on seismic data, and numerous features on 3D seismic were interpreted as having formed by unconfined
shelf flows (redrawn from Galloway, 2002).
384 JOHN R. SUTER

A
Northwest Southeast
E-3 E-12 EC-3 EC-1 EE-1 EE-3 EH-2 EH-1 EH-3 E-6

0 Shelf Ridge
Leading Leading
Distributary Channel
Edge Edge
30 m

B
Northwest Southeast
E-3 E-12 EC-1 EE-3 EH-1
EC-3 EE-1 EH-2 EH-3 E-6
448 408 363 351 384 425 439 474 508 558 607 650 661
210 237 258 290 310 318 357 393 422 429 436 454 469
720 720
740 740
760 760
780 780
800 800
820 820
840 840
860 860
880 880
900 900
920 920
940 940
960 960
980 980
100 100
0 0
102 102
0 0
104 104
0 0
106 106
0 0

Shelf Ridge Distributary Channel

100 ms
Leading
Edge
0 1 2 3 km

0 1 2 miles
FIG. 57.—A) Well-log cross section and B) parallel seismic profile through an interpreted shelf ridge in the middle–upper Miocene
Upper Cibulakan Formation from the Northwest Java shelf (redrawn from Posamentier, 2002). Logs show the sand as sharp
based, with an aggradational, somewhat coarsening-upward succession. Seismic profile shows a low-relief feature defined by
amplitude brightening, dimming abruptly at the western (leading) edge, and gradationally at the eastern (trailing) edge.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 385

Leading
Edge
Leading 5 ms
Edge

10

15

18 ms

0 1.0 km 0 1.0 km
A Seismic Horizon B Isochron Map
Amplitude Extraction
FIG. 58.—Seismic expressions of interpreted shelf ridges from the middle–upper Miocene Upper Cibulakan Formation from the
Northwest Java shelf. A) Seismic amplitude extraction from the reflection corresponding to the shelf ridge. B) Isochron map
between the zero crossings at the top and base of the shelf-ridge seismic reflection. Note that the isochron thick (E) lies along the
sharp western edge of the ridge, presumably its leading edge during migration. (Redrawn from Posamentier, 2002.)

inclined, typically 1–2 degrees, in the direction of ridge migra-
tion. Most Quaternary ridges show superimposed bedforms of
various scales, so cross bed sets ranging from decimeters to
several meters (and larger) can be expected. Accretionary pack-
ages seen in modern shelf ridges (e.g., Fig. 35) will be reflected in
internal scour surfaces and changes in bedding orientation. The
overall package may be relatively blocky, coarsen upward slightly,
or even fine upward, depending on the evolution of the ridge and
its preservation.
Bioturbation may range from rare in continuously high-
energy settings to common or even pervasive in moribund
ridges or in those that were intermittently active. Coupled with
biostratigraphic data, ichnology can be very effective at differ-
entiating fine-grained deposits from shelf, brackish, and fresh-
water settings, but the environments of sand deposition are
again more problematic (MacEachern et al., 1999). The ichnofa-
cies of Quaternary shelf sands have not been systematically
studied, but traces routinely occur in vibracores (e.g., Fig. 54).
Many of these traces comprise dwelling structures more typical
of the Skolithos ichnofacies, or shoreface–foreshore water depths
(Fig. 45). This reflects the sandy lithology, relatively high en-
ergy, and well oxygenated conditions preferred by the types of
organisms that create the burrows comprising the Skolithos
ichnofacies. Increased bioturbation at the top of the ridge may
cause an overall fining-upward signature. Cryptic burrowing
or cryptobioturbation (Pemberton et al., 2001), or modification
of the primary texture and structures of estuarine and marine
sediments by tiny, sometimes microscopic organisms living
within it, may cause the laminae to be “fuzzy.” Macrofauna and
microfauna contained within the ridge sediments may be reflec-
tive of the water depth at which they were deposited, unless
they have been reworked into the ridge sand. Biostratigraphy of
the overlying deeper-water shelf deposits will help with the
overall context but may not be of significant use in determining
the origin of the sand.
Fully developed Quaternary shelf sand ridges reach dimen-
sions that are resolvable on 3D seismic sections, horizon slices,
and attribute extractions (cf. Posamentier, 2002; Galloway, 2002).
On horizontal displays, ridges show as long linear features with
steep leading edges in the direction of ridge migration, while
trailing edges will be less clearly defined (Figs. 57, 58). Ridge
fields may show as groups of such features, separated by ero-
sional troughs of various scales. Depending on resolution, shelf
ridges on seismic-section displays may be mounded, down-
lapping, and composed of internal packages of low-angle clino-
form reflections.
CLASTIC SHELF DEPOSITS IN
SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
Because clastic shelves are dependent upon relatively high
base level for their very existence, it stands to reason that coarse-
386 JOHN R. SUTER

GR
Ravinement
Surface Shelf Sand

Distributary
Channel

ft m
0 0

30 10
FIG. 59.—Core with well log from an interpreted shelf ridge from the middle–upper Miocene Upper Cibulakan Formation from
the northwest Java shelf. In this deposit, from a different ridge than shown in Figures 59 and 60, the log signature is
characterized by a sharp base and fining-upward trend. A Glossifungites ichnofacies marks the contact between upper fine-
grained to medium-grained sandstone above and mudstone below, interpreted as a transgressive ravinement surface
(redrawn from Posamentier, 2002).

grained clastic shelf deposits are more prevalent during rising
and high base-level phases, which are most prevalent within the
late lowstand, transgressive, and early highstand systems tracts
(Fig.. 9). Although not commonly invoked as reservoir facies,
clastic shelf deposits in general are already in common usage in
sequence stratigraphy. The basal portions of most shoreline
parasequences (sensu Van Wagoner et al., 1990) comprise shelf
deposits (cf. Figs. 62–64). Only through recognition of paleo-
bathymetric changes as expressed in facies, lithologies, biostra-
tigraphy, ichnology, and vertical trends can we identify flooding
surfaces or parasequence boundaries and construct a sequence
stratigraphic architecture.
Fine-grained shelf sediments comprise seal and source fa-
cies, which generally receive less attention in sequence strati-
graphic literature than reservoir deposits. Yet in the shallow
marine realm, these are the most common, volumetrically most
significant, and least equivocal manifestation of clastic shelf
deposits (perhaps because they have received less attention
from sequence stratigraphers?). Controversy does exist over the
formation, preservation, and distribution of shelf source rocks
in the rock record, particularly as it relates to ocean anoxia or
times of oxygen depletion. However, there is little or no contro-
versy over the fact that they exist and can be recognized, from
facies analysis, biostratigraphy, and geochemistry. A successful
shelf source facies requires substantial input of organic carbon
material, from either or both terrestrial or in situ sources, and
preservation of the organic carbon from oxidation or
resuspension (Fig. 25). Reduced allochthonous clastic sedimen-
tation allows the accumulation of organic material with less
dilution, resulting in higher concentrations of organic carbon. In
shelf settings, this is ordinarily best accomplished in the “con-
densed section” (e.g., Loutit et al., 1988), a relatively thin inter-
val representing a time of reduced deposition, developed dur-
ing the period of maximum flooding between the transgressive
and highstand systems tracts (Figs. 62–64). In practice, con-
densed sections can occur in association with all flooding sur-
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 387

200 0
Ev
m 0
m Pr
olu
juvenile ridge 5 ec tio
combined flow ur na
so
new marine
sand body r ry FIG. 60.—An evolutionary progres-
P ro sion of shelf sand ridges (redrawn
swale Precursor gr from Snedden and Dalrymple,
es 1999). Following the Huthnance
inlet or incised ravinement surface sio (1982) model, most sand ridges
valley-fill
200 0
n start life with a “precursor”, a
0
Type I m
m bathymetric perturbation that is
combined flow partially evolved 5 most commonly a transgressed
ridge Marine shoreline-associated deposit. Ju-
new marine Sand venile or Type I ridges retain

ac
sand body

cr
much of the characteristics of their

et
swale erosion

io
precursor. With increasing sub-

n
mergence, current reworking,
inlet or incised and shelf ridge migration, the
ravinement surface 400 0
valley-fill 0
fully evolved
m
m “precursor” is eroded and re-
Type II combined flow ridge 5 worked to varying degrees (Type
II, partially evolved). Ultimately,

ac
cr
it may evolve into an entirely open

et
io
erosion marine deposit (Type III or fully-

n
evolved)
ravinement surface

Type III

Increasing terrestrial signature, decreasing seal, source quality

Fig. 62 Fig. 63 Fig. 64

⇓ ⇓ ⇓

Increasing marine signature; increasing source, seal quality

FIG. 61.—A summary diagram for evolution and preservation of clastic shelf sands (redrawn from Penland et al., 1988; Snedden and
Dalrymple, 1999). This highly schematic diagram depicts a set of sand bodies which have developed during a transgression on
an accommodation-dominated shelf, buried by progradation during a subsequent depositional sequence. Arrows and associated
descriptions refer to characteristics of the overlying highstand deposits. Approximate positions of schematic vertical successions
in Figures 62–64 are shown.
388 JOHN R. SUTER

Vertical Depositional
Significant Surfaces Succession Systems Tract
Environment
Flooding Surface Upper Shoreface/
Mouth Bar

Flooding Surface
Highstand

Increasing Terrestrial Palynoflora

Decreasing Marine Microfossils
Flooding Surface Decreasing Source Potential
Decreasing Seal Effectiveness

Flooding Surface

Maximum Flooding Surface Shelf

Sequence Boundary
Shoreface
Highstand

Shelf
SYMBOLS USED IN FIGURES 62-64
Trough cross-beds Sigmoidal beds Bioturbation
Shells
Tabular cross-beds Combined-flow ripples
Low angle laminae Wave ripples Carbonaceous detritus
Plane beds Hummocky cross- Mudclasts
stratification Pebbles
Current ripples

FIG. 62.—A generalized vertical succession through the updip portion of Figure 61. Renewed progradation following the overall
transgression in which the shelf ridges were formed results in the deposition of a stacked highstand systems tract. This could be
part of the same depositional sequence but is herein depicted as separate sequences, with the sequence boundary and maximum-
flooding surface superimposed. Shelf deposits form the basal portions of parasequences, and their recognition is critical to the
identification of flooding surfaces and systems tracts. Recognition of the shelf sediments would presumably be initially made by
abrupt change in lithology and confirmed by biostratigraphic, ichnological, and mineralogical analyses. In this highly schematic
diagram, shelf sediments are progressively less significant volumetrically upward through the succession of the highstand
systems tract. No vertical scale is intended.

faces, but those most likely to encompass significant source
facies are associated with maximum-flooding surfaces.
Clastic-shelf shales can make excellent seal facies. To be a
successful top, side, or bottom seal, a deposit requires sufficient
seal capacity, integrity, and continuity (Fig. 65). Seal capacity is
the hydrocarbon column height a particular seal bed can sup-
port, which is largely a function of its grain size, clay mineral-
ogy, and porosity. Integrity is expressed as ductility and thick-
ness, and largely relates to the ability of shales to flow rather
than suffer brittle fracturing. This is also important in faulting,
in which shales of insufficient thickness could be offset to a more
permeable unit. Continuity is the familiar areal extent, facies
architecture, or distribution of the fine-grained sediment itself.
Typically the greatest areal extent, continuity, highest clay
content, and lowest coarse-grained lithologic content are found
in deposits of the transgressive and early highstand systems
tracts. Almon et al. (2003) found that shales from the transgres-
sive systems tract of the Lewis Shale of South Dakota had
significantly greater seal potential than highstand shales.
Shales and mudrocks are sometimes reservoirs, if the deposit
in question has sufficient organic content and thermal maturity
(e.g., Slatt, 2003). Assuming appropriate traps, these rocks can be
their own source, seal, and reservoir, with flow typically coming
from fractures. Organic-rich shales, such as those which can
occur on clastic shelves, are excellent candidates as fine-grained
hydrocarbon systems.
Once again, clastic-shelf sand reservoirs are more problem-
atic. Following their occurrence on Quaternary shelves and given
our current understanding of their formation, clastic-shelf sand
ridges are most prevalent in the late lowstand, transgressive, and
early highstand systems tracts of accommodation-dominated
basins. Except for those that comprise erosional remnants, all
Quaternary shelf sand ridges overlie a transgressive erosional
surface (e.g., Fig. 54). This basal surface may be a “simple”
ravinement surface or, more likely, a composite surface (cf. Figs.
61–64). This lower surface may be a sequence boundary, a com-
posite flooding surface–sequence boundary, a simple flooding
surface, or a chronostratigraphically insignificant scour surface
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES 389

Vertical Depositional
Significant Surfaces Succession Systems Tract
Environment
Inner Shelf
Flooding Surface Highstand

Flooding Surface Increasing Terrestrial Palynoflora

Decreasing Marine Microfossils
Decreasing Source Potential
Decreasing Seal Effectiveness
Flooding Surface
Highstand
Maximum Flooding Surface

Shelf Sand Body

Flooding Surface
Shoreface

Channel Base Diastem Tidal-Inlet Fill

Transgressive

Incised-Valley Fill

Sequence Boundary
Lowstand
Glossifungites Ichnofacies

Shelf
Highstand

FIG. 63.—A hypothetical vertical succession through a nearshore, “juvenile” or partially reworked “Type I” shelf sand ridge (Fig. 61).
This diagram assumes that the deposit has been buried by fine-grained highstand deposition, preserving its character as a shelf
sand body. Such shelf ridges maintain a considerable portion of their precursor deposit, in this case a remnant barrier island
succession with a tidal-inlet fill cutting into an incised valley. No vertical scale is intended.

Vertical Depositional
Significant Surfaces Succession Systems Tract
Environment
Flooding Surface Inner Shelf/
Lower Shoreface Highstand

Flooding Surface

Increasing Terrestrial Palynoflora

Decreasing Marine Microfossils
Flooding Surface Decreasing Source Potential
Decreasing Seal Effectiveness

Flooding Surface

Maximum Flooding Surface Outer Shelf

Shelf Sand Body

Transgressive
Sequence Boundary Glossifungites Ichnofacies

Lower Shoreface Highstand

Shelf

FIG. 64.—A hypothetical vertical succession through a fully marine, fully reworked, “Type III” shelf sand ridge (Fig. 61). This diagram
assumes that the deposit has been buried by fine-grained highstand deposition, preserving its character as a shelf sand body. The
lower contact of the ridge is on a combined flooding surface–sequence boundary. Ridges on Quaternary shelves are characterized
by varying degrees of storm-graded beds, current-formed low-angle laminae, tabular and trough cross bedding, and bioturba-
tion. No vertical scale is intended, but individual Quaternary ridges can reach vertical dimensions of up to 40 m.
390 JOHN R. SUTER

Seal Capacity
Grain size (mineralogy)
Porosity (burial depth)

Successful
Seal

Seal Integrity Seal Continuity

Ductility Facies architecture
Compressibility Thickness
Areal extent

FIG. 65.—A conceptual diagram illustrating the necessary components of bed seal facies quality. If any of the three components
are lacking, a seal will leak or fail. Continental-shelf muds and silty muds commonly have sufficient capacity, integrity, and
continuity to make exceptional top seals (redrawn from Suter and D’Onfro, 2000; after Kaldi and Atkinson, 1997).

(diastem) formed in response to shelf processes and shoal migra-
tion. The Huthnance–Hulscher model requires a sand supply,
currents capable of moving that sand, and a preexisting bottom
irregularity (Snedden and Dalrymple, 1999). Currents of sufficient
strength to transport sand are demonstrably available on shelves,
and relative sea-level changes provide excellent sources of coarse-
grained sediments and bottom perturbations in the form of trans-
gressed shorelines. Supply-dominated shelves provide abundant
sediments, mostly mud-dominated. This results in relatively smooth
bottom conditions, limiting the bottom irregularities necessary for
ridge initiation (Swift and Thorne, 1991). However, under the
appropriate circumstances, such as transgression and reworking
of an abandoned delta lobe (Penland et al., 1986; Penland et al.,
1988; Penland et al., 1989), large shelf sand ridges can develop even
in supply-dominated settings.
Indeed, given sufficient allochthonous sediment supply and
sufficiently strong currents, clastic shelf sands need not be re-
stricted to the particular systems tracts. In these circumstances, to
form shelf sands we simply need the shelf to exist; thus they will
still be favored in times of relatively high base level. This is well
illustrated by the example of Eastern Australia (Boyd et al., 2004a,
2004b), where, at today’s glacioeustatic highstand, tidal currents
transport sands brought in by longshore drift across the shelf and
onto the continental slope and deeper water (Figs. 38–41). Admit-
tedly this is an unusual occurrence, but are we to suppose that no
other such situations existed in the ancient record?
FINAL THOUGHTS
Quaternary shelf deposits provide excellent models for the
characteristics of clastic shelf facies, for reservoir, source, and seal
deposits. However, there are several major difficulties in the
application of these facies models to the ancient record: (1) The
relatively unusual nature of the late Quaternary—i.e., a time of
high-frequency, high-magnitude base-level fluctuations (not to
mention human influence), (2) the relatively short-lived nature of
the base level cycles, and (3) preservation potential. At various
times in the ancient record, however, clastic shelves have been
much more prevalent than they are today. It strains credulity to
imagine that clastic shelf sands did not develop during extended
periods of shelf existence, even if we are currently unwilling to
interpret them as such.
Preservation is the most difficult question. We can fully
characterize the nature of Quaternary shelf deposits—bathym-
etry, morphology, lithology, internal architecture, ichnology,
biostratigraphy—but no matter how thorough our character-
ization, few Quaternary shelf sediments are in their final pro-
cess environment. Well studied ridges such as those on the East
Coast of the United States and the North Sea are not likely to
survive the next eustatic fall in their present forms. During
falling base level, shelf deposits will be exposed to renewed
shoreface processes as well as potential removal by valley
incision or other subaerial erosion. Only burial can turn off the
process clock. This is a conundrum, inasmuch as shelf sands are
best developed on accommodation-dominated shelves but their
preservation requires burial, i.e., a supply-dominated setting.
For some insight we can turn to those areas where shelf ridges
are currently being buried, such as the Mississippi Delta in the
Gulf of Mexico (Figs. 19, 53). However, these are rapidly evolv-
ing features, even for the Quaternary, and may be uncertain
analogs for the longer-lived systems which are preserved in the
stratigraphic record.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES
It may be somewhat disquieting to be left with the idea that
clastic shelf sands are complex and their identification is not
straightforward. Barwis (1989) posed a series of questions rela-
tive to our ability to predict occurrences of shelf sands in the
subsurface. Many of those questions still cannot be answered
confidently, but we can draw some insights and perhaps com-
fort from the techniques of probabilistic risking and reservoir
modeling employed in the petroleum industry. Instead of ask-
ing: Is this deposit a shelf sand ridge? We can ask: Does the
deposit in question fit what we know of clastic shelf sands? If so,
what are the implications of that interpretation for reservoir
architecture and properties, basin configuration,
paleogeographies? It is best to honor the practice of multiple
working hypotheses.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I gratefully thank ConocoPhillips for permission to publish
this paper, as well as Julia B. Ericsson, Manager of Sedimentary
Systems, for the time and support required for its generation.
Henry W. Posamentier and Roger G. Walker solicited this
contribution, and showed remarkable patience and endurance
throughout its intermittent and well-nigh interminable genera-
tion. Once again, the process of producing a review paper has
proven truly onerous, but hopefully, ultimately worthwhile. I
certainly learned a lot.
Over the years I have benefited greatly from discussions and
interactions with individuals too numerous to acknowledge
properly. I would like to particularly thank Henry L. Berryhill,
Jr., Dag Nummedal, Ron Boyd, and H. Edward Clifton for the
many hours of discussion and keen insights that they have
provided.
The illustrations in this paper have mostly been drawn
from previous work, but several individuals contributed im-
agery or data directly. I would like to particularly thank Khalid
Soofi at ConocoPhillips, who created the beautiful satellite
altimetry–bathymetry images, and Ron Boyd of the University
of Newcastle, Australia, who provided numerous images and
photographs, including the stunning bathymetric imagery
from the Australian shelf. Dag Nummedal, then of the Univer-
sity of Wyoming and now at Colorado School of Mines, John
Snedden of ExxonMobil, Thomas Demchuk of ConocoPhillips,
and Brian Todd of the Geological Survey of Canada Bedford
Institute of Oceanography also provided diagrams and imag-
ery. I greatly appreciate their courtesy and assistance. Debbie
Hall of Manzanita Alliances and Hank Tran of ConocoPhillips
provided graphics support. The manuscript was immensely
improved by the reviews of Octavian Catunaneu, David James,
and Glenn Schmidt. Bob Clarke and John Southard assembled
and edited the final manuscript. I thank them all for their time
and efforts, but I retain responsibility for all remaining errors
and shortcomings.
Finally, I thank Carmen Fraticelli for her love and long-
suffering patience.
REFERENCES
AIGNER, T., 1985, Storm depositional systems: dynamic stratigraphy in
modern and ancient shallow-marine sequences, Berlin, Springer-
Verlag, Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, v. 3, 174 p.
AIGNER, T., AND REINECK, H.E., 1982, Proximality trends in modern storm
sands from the Helgoland Bight (North Sea) and their implications for
basin analysis: Senckenbergiana Maritima, v. 14, p. 183–215.
ALLEN, G.P., 1991, Sedimentary processes and facies in the Gironde
estuary: A Recent model for macrotidal estuarine systems, in Smith,
391
D.G., Reinson, G.E., Zaitlin, B.A., and Rahmani, R.A., eds., Clastic
Tidal Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists,
Memoir 16, p. 29–39.
ALMON, W.R., DAWSON, W.C., SUTTON, S.J., ETHRIDGE, F.G., AND CASTELBLANCO,
B., 2003, Sequence stratigraphy, facies variation and petrophysical
properties in deepwater shales, Upper Cretaceous Lewis Shale, south-
central Wyoming, in Scott, E.D., Bouma, A.H., and Bryant, W.R., eds.,
Siltstones, Mudstones and Shales: Depositional Processes and Char-
acteristics, SEPM/Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies,
Joint Publication, p. 49–64.
AMOROSI, A., 1995, Glaucony and sequence stratigraphy: a conceptual
framework of distribution in siliciclastic sequences: Journal of Sedi-
mentary Research v. B65, p. 419–425.
ARNOTT, R.W., AND SOUTHARD, J.B., 1990, Exploratory flow-duct experi-
ments on combined-flow bed configurations, and some implications
for interpreting storm-event stratification: Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, v. 60, p. 211–219.
ASLAN, A., WHITE, W.A., WARNE, A.G., AND GUEVARA, E., 2003, Holocene
evolution of the Orinoco Delta, Venezuela: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 115, p. 479–498.
ATKINSON, C.D., GOESTON, M.J.B.G., SPEKSNIJDER, A., AND VAN DER VLUGT, W.,
1986, Storm-generated sandstone in the Miocene Miri Formation,
Seria Field, Brunei (N.W. Borneo), in Knight, R.J., and McLean, J.R.,
eds., Shelf Sands and Sandstones: Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 11, p. 213–240.
BARWIS, J.H., 1989, The explorationist and shelf sand models: where do we
go from here? Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation, Seventh Annual
Research Conference, Proceedings, p. 1–14.
BELDERSON, R.H., 1986, Offshore tidal and non-tidal sand ridges and
sheets: differences in morphology and hydrodynamic setting, in
Knight, R.J., and McLean, J.R,. eds., Shelf Sands and Sandstones:
Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 11, p. 293–301.
BELDERSON, R.H., JOHNSON, M.A., AND KENYON, N.H., 1982, Bedforms, in
Stride, A.H., ed., Offshore Tidal Sands; Processes and Deposits:
London, Chapman & Hall, p. 27–55.
BENTLEY, S.J., 2003, Wave–current dispersal of fine-grained fluvial sedi-
ments across continental shelves: the significance of hyperpycnal
plumes, in Scott, E.D., Bouma, A.H., and Bryant, W.R., eds., Siltstones,
Mudstones and Shales: Depositional Processes and Characteristics:
SEPM/Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, Joint Publica-
tion, p. 35–48.
BENTLEY, S.J., AND NITTROUER, C.A., 2003, Emplacement, modification and
preservation of event stratigraphy on a flood-dominated continental
shelf: Eel Shelf, Northern California: Continental Shelf Research, v.
23, p. 1465–1493.
BERG, R.R., 1975, Depositional environment of Upper Cretaceous Sussex
Sandstone, House Creek field, Wyoming: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 59, p. 2099–2110.
BERGMAN, K.M., 1994, Shannon sandstone in Hartzog Draw–Heldt Draw
fields (Cretaceous, Wyoming, USA) reinterpreted as lowstand
shoreface deposits: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B64, p. 184–
201.
BERGMAN, K.M., 1999, Cretaceous Sussex Sandstone in House Creek Field
(Wyoming, USA): Transgressive incised shoreface deposits, in
Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies:
Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 297–320.
BERGMAN, K.M., AND SNEDDEN, J.W., 1999, Isolated Shallow Marine Sand
Bodies: Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Inter-
pretation: SEPM, Special Publication 64, 362 p.
BERGMAN, K.M., AND WALKER, R.G., 1999, Campanian Shannon Sandstone:
an example of a falling stage systems tract deposit, in Bergman, K.M.,
and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies: Sequence Strati-
graphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special
Publication 64, p. 85–94.
392 JOHN R. SUTER
BERNÉ, S., LERICOLAIS, G., MARSSET, T., BOURILLET, J.-F., AND DE BATIST, M.,
1998, Erosional offshore sand ridges and lowstand shorefaces: ex-
amples from tide- and wave-dominated environments of France:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 68, p. 540–555.
BERNÉ, S., TRENTESAUX, A., STOLK, A., MISSIAEN, T., AND DE BATIST, M., 1994,
Architecture and long-term evolution of a tidal sand bank: The
Middelkerke Bank (southern North Sea): Marine Geology, v. 121, p.
57–72.
BERNÉ, S., VAGNER, P., GUICHARD, F., LERICOLAIS, G., LIU, Z., TRENTESAUX, A.,
YIN, P., AND YI, H.I., 2002, Pleistocene forced regressions and tidal sand
ridges in the East China Sea: Marine Geology, v. 188, p. 293–315.
BOESCH, D.F., AND RABALAIS, N.N., 1991, Effects of hypoxia on continental
shelf benthos: comparisons between the New York Bight and the Gulf
of Mexico, in Tyson, R.V., and Pearson, T.H., eds., Modern and
Ancient Continental Shelf Anoxia: Geological Society of London,
Special Publication 58, p. 27–34.
BOUMA, A.H., BERRYHILL, H.L., BRENNER, R.L., AND KNEBEL, H.J., 1982,
Continental shelf and epicontinental seaways, in Scholle, P.A., and
Spearing, D., eds., Sandstone Depositional Environments: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 31, p. 281–327.
BOYD, R., RUMING, K., DAVIES, S., PAYENBERG, T., AND LANG, S., 2004, Fraser
Island and Hervey Bay—a classic modern sedimentary environment,
in Boult, P.J., Johns, D.R., and Lang, S.C., eds., Eastern Australian
Basins Symposium II: Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia,
Special Publication, p. 511–521.
BOYD, R., RUMING, K., AND ROBERTS, J.J., 2004, Geomorphology and surficial
sediments of the southeast Australian continental margin: Australian
Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 51, p. 743–764.
BOYLES, J.M., AND SCOTT, A.J., 1982, A model for migrating shelf-bar
sandstones in Upper Mancos Shale (Campanian), northwestern Colo-
rado: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 66,
p. 491–508.
BRENNER, R., 1978, Sussex Sandstone of Wyoming—Example of Creta-
ceous offshore sedimentation: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 62, p. 181–200.
BURNS, B.A., TYE, R.S., KNOCK, D., KREMER, M., GINGRICH, D., SCOTT, A.J., AND
MACEACHERN, J.A., 2002, The Late Jurassic Alpine C sandstone, a
bioturbated, paralic reservoir deposited during a slow transgression:
North Slope, Alaska (abstract): American Association of Petroleum
Geologists–SEPM Annual Meeting, Proceedings.
CATTANEO, A., CORREGIARI, A., LANGONE, L., AND TRINCARDI, F., 2003, The
Late-Holocene Gargano subaqueous delta, Adriatic shelf: Sediment
pathways and supply fluctuations: Marine Geology, v. 193, p. 61–91.
CHAFETZ, H.S., AND REID, A., 2000, Syndepositional shallow-water precipi-
tation of glauconitic minerals: Sedimentary Geology, v. 136, p. 29–42
CLIFTON, H.E., 1999, Tidal Depositional Systems: ConocoPhillips, internal
document.
COLE, R.D., AND YOUNG, R.G., 1991, Facies characterization and architec-
ture of a muddy shelf sandstone complex: Mancos B interval of Upper
Cretaceous Mancos Shale, northwest Colorado–northeast Utah, in
Miall, A.D., and Tyler, N., eds., The Three-Dimensional Facies Archi-
tecture of Terrigenous Clastic Sediments and Its Implications for
Hydrocarbon Discovery and Recovery: SEPM, Concepts in Sedimen-
tology and Paleontology, v. 3, p. 277–287.
COLE, R.D., YOUNG, R.G., AND WILLIS, G.C., 1997, The Prairie Canyon Mem-
ber, a new unit of the Mancos Shale, west-central Colorado and east-
central Utah: Utah Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Publication 97-4.
COMPTON, J.S., WIGLEY, R., AND MCMILLAN, I.K., 2004, Late Cenozoic
phosphogenesis on the western shelf of South Africa in the vicinity of
the Cape Canyon: Marine Geology v. 206, p. 19–40.
CURRAY, J.R., 1960, Sediments and history of Holocene transgression,
continental shelf, northwest Gulf of Mexico, in Shepard, F.P., Phleger,
F.B., and Van Andel, T.H., eds., Recent Sediments, Northwest Gulf of
Mexico: Tulsa, Oklahoma, American Association of Petroleum Ge-
ologists, p. 221–266.
CURRAY, J.R., 1964, Transgression and regression, in Miller, R.L., ed.,
Papers in Marine Geology: New York, The Macmillan Company, p.
175–203.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1992, Tidal depositional systems, in Walker, R.G., and
James, N.P., eds., Facies Models: Response to Sea Level Change:
Geological Association of Canada, p. 195–218.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., BAKER, E.K., HARRIS, P.T., AND HUGHES, M.G., 2003,
Geomorphology and sedimentology of the muddy, tide-dominated
Fly River delta, Papua New Guinea, 2003, in Sidi, F.H., Nummedal,
D., Imbert, P., Darman, H., and Posamentier, H.W., eds., Tropical
Deltas of Southeast Asia—Sedimentology, Stratigraphy, and Petro-
leum Geology: SEPM, Special Publication 76, p. 147–174.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND CUMMINGS, D., 2004, The offshore transport of sand
and mud: implications for the determination of wave base and
shoreline migration distance, in Hampson, G., Steel, R., Burgess, P.,
and Dalrymple, R., eds., Recent Advances in Shoreline–Shelf Stratig-
raphy (abstract): SEPM Research Conference, Abstracts, p. 5.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., AND HOOGENDOORN, E.L., 1997, Erosion and deposition
on migrating shoreface-attached ridges, Sable Island, Eastern Canada:
Geoscience Canada, v. 24, p. 25–36.
DALRYMPLE, R.W., LEGRESLEY, E.M., FADER, G.B.J., AND PETRIE, B.D., 1992,
The western Grand Banks of Newfoundland: transgressive Holocene
sedimentation under the combined influence of waves and currents:
Marine Geology, v. 105, p. 95–118.
DAM, G., AND SURLYK, F., 1998, Stratigraphy of the Neill Klinter Group: a
Lower–lower Middle Jurassic tidal embayment succession; Jameson
Land; East Greenland: Geology of Greenland Survey, Bulletin 175,
80 p.
DAVIS, R.A., JR., AND BALSON, P.S., 1992, Stratigraphy of a North Sea tidal
sand ridge: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 62, p. 116–121.
DAVIS, R.A., JR., KLAY, J., AND JEWELL, P., 1993, Sedimentology and stratig-
raphy of tidal sand ridges, Southwest Florida inner shelf: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 63, p. 91–104.
DE HAAS, H., VAN WEERING, T.C.E., AND DE STIGTER, H., 2002, Organic carbon
in shelf seas: sinks or sources, processes and products: Continental
Shelf Research, v. 22, p. 691–717.
DEMCHUK, T.D., GONZALEZ-GUZMAN, E, GORDON, I.R., CURTIS, C.M., AND
SUTER, J.R., 2004, An integrated chronostratigraphy for the Oficina
Formation at Petrozuata, Venezuela: A year 2003 evaluation based on
additional stratigraphic and micropaleontological data: Palynology,
v. 28, p. 239.
DOTT, R.H., JR., AND BOURGEOIS, J., 1982, Hummocky stratification: Sig-
nificance of its variable bedding sequences: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 32, p. 167–194.
DRIESE, S.G., FISCHER, M.W., EASTHOUSE, K.A., MARKS, G.T., GOGOLA, A.R.,
AND SCHONER, A.E., 1991, Model for genesis of shoreface and shelf
sandstone sequences, southern Appalachians: paleoenvironmental
reconstruction of an Early Silurian shelf system, in Swift, D.J.P.,
Oertel, G.F., Tillman, R.W., and Thorne, J.A., eds., Shelf Sand and
Sandstone: Geometry, Facies, and Sequence Stratigraphy: Interna-
tional Association Sedimentologists, Special Publication 14, p. 309–
338.
DUKE, W.L., 1990, Geostrophic circulation or shallow marine turbidity
currents? The dilemma of paleoflow patterns in storm-influenced
prograding shoreline systems: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v.
60, p. 870–883.
DUKE, W.L., ARNOTT, R.W.C., AND CHEEL, R.J., 1991, Shelf sandstones and
hummocky cross stratification: new evidence on a stormy debate:
Geology, v. 19, p. 625–628.
DYER, K.R., 1995, Sediment transport processes in estuaries, in Perillo,
G.M.E., ed., Geomorphology and Sedimentology of Estuaries: Am-
sterdam, Elsevier, Developments In Sedimentology, v. 53, p. 423–450
DYER, K.R., AND HUNTLEY, D.A., 1999, The origin, classification and mod-
elling of sand banks and ridges: Continental Shelf Research, v. 19, p.
1285–1330.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES
EDWARDS, C.M., HODGSON, D.M., FLINT, S.S., AND HOWELL, J.A., 2005, Con-
trasting styles of shelf sediment transport and deposition in a ramp
margin setting related to relative sea-level change and basin floor
topography, Turonian (Cretaceous) Western Interior of central Utah,
U.S.A: Sedimentary Geology, v. 179, p. 117–152.
EMERY, K.O., 1968, The Atlantic continental shelf and slope of the United
States (geologic background): U.S. Geological Survey, Professional
Paper 529-A, p. 1–23.
EMMEL, F.J., AND CURRAY, J.R., 1982, A submerged late Pleistocene delta and
other features related to sea level changes in the Malacca Strait:
Marine Geology, v. 47, p. 197–216
FAAS, R.W., 1991, Rheological boundaries of mud: Where are the limits?:
Geo-Marine Letters, v. 11, p. 143–146.
FAN, S., SWIFT D.J.P., TRAYKOVSKI, P., BENTLEY, S., BORGELDD, J.C., REEDE, C.W.,
AND NIEDORODA, A.W., 2004, River flooding, storm resuspension, and
event stratigraphy on the northern California shelf: observations
compared with simulations: Marine Geology, v. 210, p. 17–41.
FLEMMING, B.W., 1980, Sand transport and bedform patterns on the conti-
nental shelf between Durban and Port Elizabeth (southeast African
continental margin): Sedimentary Geology, v. 26, p. 170–205.
FLEMMING, B.W., 1981, Factors controlling shelf sediment dispersal along
the southeast African continental margin, in Nittrouer, C.A., ed.,
Sedimentary Dynamics of Continental Shelves: Marine Geology, v.
42, p. 259–277.
FRAZIER, D.E., 1974, Depositional episodes: their relationship to the Qua-
ternary stratigraphic framework in the northwestern portion of the
Gulf basin: Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, Geological Circular
74-1, 28 p.
FREY, R.W., 1990, Trace fossils and hummocky cross stratification, Upper
Cretaceous of Utah: Palaios, v. 5, p. 203–218.
GALLOWAY, W.E., 1975, Process framework for describing the morphologic
and stratigraphic evolution of deltaic depositional systems, in
Broussard, M.L., ed., Deltas, Models for Exploration: Houston, Texas,
Houston Geological Society, p. 87–98.
GALLOWAY, W.E., 2002, Paleogeographic setting and depositional architec-
ture of a sand-dominated shelf depositional system, Miocene Utsira
Formation, North Sea Basin: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 72,
p. 476–490.
GALLOWAY, W.E., AND HOBDAY, D.K., 1996, Terrigenous Clastic Deposi-
tional Systems: Applications to Fossil Fuel and Ground Water Re-
sources: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 488 p.
GAYNOR, G.C., AND SCHEIHING, M.H., 1988, Shelf depositional environ-
ments and reservoir characteristics of the Kuparuk River Formation
(Lower Cretaceous), Kuparuk Field, North Slope, Alaska, in Lomando,
A.J., and Harris, P.M., eds., Giant Oil and Gas Fields: SEPM, Core
Workshop no. 12, v. 1, p. 333–389.
GAYNOR, G.C., AND SWIFT, D.J.P., 1988, Shannon Sandstone depositional
model: sand-ridge formation on the Campanian Western Interior
Shelf: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 58, p. 868–880.
GOESTEN, M.J.B.G., AND NELSON, P.H., 1992, Draugen Field, in Foster, N.H.,
and Beaumont, E.A., eds., Treatise of Petroleum Geology, Structural
Traps: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, vol. 1, p. 37–54.
GOFF, J.A., AUSTIN, J.A., GULICK, S., NORDFJORD, S., CHRISTENSEN, B.,
SOMMERFIELD, C., OLSON, H., AND ALEXANDER, C., 2005, Recent and
modern marine erosion on the New Jersey outer shelf: Marine Geol-
ogy, v. 216, p. 275–296.
GOFF, J.A., SWIFT, D.J.P., DUNCAN, C.S., MAYER, L.A., AND HUGHES-CLARKE, J.,
1999, High resolution swath sonar investigation of sand ridge, dune
and ribbon morphology in the offshore environment of the New
Jersey margin: Marine Geology, v. 161, p. 307–337.
GRAY, D.I., 1987, Troll, in Spencer, A.M., Thomas, M.T., Dorc, A.G., Home,
P.C., and Larsen, R.M., eds., Geology of the Norwegian Oil and Gas
Fields: London, Graham & Trotman, p. 389–401.
HAMBLIN, A.P., AND WALKER, R.G., 1979, Storm-dominated shallow ma-
rine deposits in the Fernie–Kootenay (Jurassic) transition, southern
393
Rocky Mountains: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 16, p.
1673–1690.
HAMPSON, G., HOWELL, J.A., AND FLINT, S.S., 1999, A sedimentological and
sequence stratigraphic re-interpretation of the Upper Cretaceous
Prairie Canyon Member (“Mancos B”) and associated strata, Book
Cliffs area, Utah, U.S.A.: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 69, p.
414–433.
HANDFORD, C.R., AND BARIA, L.R., 2003, Exploration potential and high-
resolution sequence stratigraphy of shelf-sand reservoirs, Miocene,
South Mississippi, Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies/
GCSSEPM, Transactions, v. 53, p. 304–312.
HANSLEY, P.L. AND WHITNEY, C.G., 1990, Petrology, diagenesis, and sedi-
mentology of oil reservoirs in Upper Cretaceous Shannon Sandstone
Beds, Powder River Basin, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey, Bulle-
tin 1917-C, 33 p.
HARDENBOL, J., THIERRY, J., FARLEY, M.B., JACQUIN, T., DE GRACIANSKY, P.-C.,
AND VAIL, P.R., 1998, Mesozoic and Cenozoic sequence chronostrati-
graphic framework of European basins, in de Graciansky, P.-C.,
Hardenbol, J., Jacquin, T., and Vail, P.R., eds., Mesozoic and Ceno-
zoic Sequence Stratigraphy of European Basins: SEPM, Special
Publication 60, p. 3–14, plus charts.
HARMS, J.C., SOUTHARD, J.B., SPEARING, D., AND WALKER, R.G., 1975, Deposi-
tional Environments as Interpreted from Primary Sedimentary Struc-
tures and Stratification Sequences: Society Economic Paleontologists
and Mineralogists, Short Course 2, 161 p.
HARRIS, N.B., 1989, Reservoir geology of Fangst Group (Middle Jurassic),
Heidrun Field, offshore Mid-Norway: American Association of Pe-
troleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 73, p. 1415–1435.
HARRIS, N.B., ed., 2005, The Deposition of Organic-Carbon-Rich Sedi-
ments: Models, Mechanisms, and Consequences: SEPM, Special Pub-
lication 82, 282 p.
HAYES, M.O., 1967, Hurricanes as Geological Agents: Case Studies of
Hurricanes Carla, 1961, and Cindy, 1963: Texas Bureau of Economic
Geology, Report of Investigations No. 61, 56 p.
HEIN, F., 1987, Tidal/littoral offshore shelf deposits—Lower Cambrian
Gog Group, Southern Rocky Mountains, Canada: Sedimentary Geol-
ogy, v. 52, p. 155–182.
HIGLEY, D.K., PANTEA, M.P., AND SLATT, R.M., 1997, 3-D Reservoir Charac-
terization of the House Creek Oil Field, Powder River Basin, Wyo-
ming, V1.00, U.S. Geological Survey, Digital Data Series DDS-33.
HOOGENDOORN, E.L., AND DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1986, Morphology, lateral
migration and internal structures of shoreface-connected sand ridges,
Sable Island Bank, Nova Scotia, Canada: Geology, v. 14, p. 400–403.
HOUBOLT, J.J.H.C., 1968, Recent sediments in the southern Bight of the
North Sea: Geologie en Mijnbouw, v. 47, p. 245–273.
HOUTHUYS, R., AND GULLENTOPS, F., 1988, The Vlierzele Sands (Eocene,
Belgium): a tidal ridge system, in de Boer, P.L., van Gelder, A., and
Nio, S.D., eds., Tide-Influenced Sedimentary Environments and Fa-
cies: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, D. Reidel Publishing Co., p. 139–
152.
HOWARD, J. D., 1975, The sedimentological significance of trace fossils, in
Frey, R.W., ed., The Study of Trace Fossils: New York, Springer-
Verlag, p. 131–146.
HULSCHER, S.J.M.H., DE SWART, H.E., AND DE VRIEND, H.J., 1993, The genera-
tion of offshore tidal sand banks and sand waves: Continental Shelf
Research, v. 13, p. 1183–1204.
HUTHNANCE, J. M., 1982, On one mechanism forming linear sand banks:
Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, v. 14, p. 79–99.
IMBRIE, J., SHACKLETON, N.J., PISIAS, N.G., MORLEY, J.J., PRELL, W.L., MARTINSON,
D.G., HAYS, J.D., MACINTYRE, A., AND MIX, A.C., 1984, The orbital theory
of Pleistocene climate: support from a revised chronology of the
marine δ18O record, in Berger, A., ed., Milankovitch and Climate, Part
I: Hingham, Massachusetts, Reidel, p. 269–305.
ITO, M., AND HORIKAWA, K., 2000, Millennial- to decadal-scale fluctuation
in the paleo–Kuroshio Current documented in the Middle Pleistocene
394 JOHN R. SUTER
shelf succession on the Boso Peninsula, Japan: Sedimentary Geology,
v. 137, p. 1-8.
JENNETTE, D.C., AND JONES, C.R., 1995, Sequence stratigraphy of the Upper
Cretaceous Tocito Sandstone: a model for tidally influenced incised
valleys, San Juan Basin, New Mexico, in Van Wagoner, J.C., and
Bertram, G.T., eds., Sequence Stratigraphy of Foreland Basin Depos-
its: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 64, p.
311–348.
JOHNSON, H.D., AND BALDWIN, C.T., 1996, Shallow clastic seas, in Reading,
H.G., ed., Sedimentary Environments; Processes, Facies and Stratig-
raphy: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell Science, p. 232–280.
JOHNSON, K.S., PAULL, C.K., BARRY, J.P., AND CHAVEZ, F.P., 2001, A decadal
record of underflows from a coastal river into the deep sea: Geology,
v. 29, p. 1019–1022.
KALDI, J.G., AND ATKINSON, C.D., 1997, Evaluating seal potential: example
from the Talang Akar Formation, offshore northwest Java, Indonesia,
in Surdam, R.C., ed., Seals, Traps, and the Petroleum System: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 67, p. 85–101.
KELLER, G.H., AND RICHARDS, J.F., 1967, Sediments of the Malacca Strait,
Southeast Asia: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 37, p. 102–127.
KHAN, S., IMRAN, J., BRADFORD, S., AND SYVITSKI, J.A., 2005, Numerical model-
ing of hyperpycnal plume: Marine Geology, v. 222–223, p. 193–211.
KINEKE, G.C., STERNBERG, R.W., TROWBRIDGE, J.H., AND GEYER, W.R., 1996,
Fluid-mud processes on the Amazon continental shelf: Continental
Shelf Research, v. 16, p. 667–696.
KINEKE, G.C., WOOLFE, K.J., KUEHL, S.A., MILLIMAN, J.D., DELLAPENNA, T.M.,
AND PURDON, R.G., 2000, Sediment export from the Sepik River, Papua
New Guinea: evidence for a divergent sediment plume: Continental
Shelf Research, v. 20, p. 2239–2266.
KITAMURA, A., 1998, Glaucony and carbonate grains as indicators of the
condensed section: Omma Formation, Japan: Sedimentary Geology,
v. 122, p. 151–163.
KRAUSE, F.F., COLLINS, H.N., NELSON, D.A., MACHEMER, S.D., AND FRENCH,
P.R., 1987, Multiscale anatomy of a reservoir: geological characteriza-
tion of Pembina–Cardium Pool, west-central Alberta, Canada: Ameri-
can Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 71, p. 1233–1260.
KRAUSE, F., AND NELSON, D.A., 1991, Evolution of an Upper Cretaceous
(Turonian) shelf sandstone ridge in the Cardium Formation, Pembina
area, west-central Alberta, Canada, in Swift, D.J.P., Oertel, G.F.,
Tillman, R.W., and Thorne, J.A., eds., Shelf Sand and Sandstone
Bodies; Geometry, Facies and Sequence Stratigraphy: International
Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 14, p. 427–456.
LE BOT, S., AND TRENTESAUX, A., 2004, Types of internal structure and
external morphology of submarine dunes under the influence of tide-
and wind-driven processes (Dover Strait, northern France): Marine
Geology, v. 211, p. 143–168.
LECKIE, D.A., 1988, Wave-formed, coarse-grained ripples and their rela-
tionship to hummocky cross-stratification: Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, v. 58, p. 607–622.
LECKIE, D.A., AND KRYSTINIK, L.F., 1989, Is there evidence for geostrophic
currents preserved in the sedimentary record of inner to middle-shelf
deposits?: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 59, p. 862–870.
LECKIE, D.A., AND POTOCKI, D.J., 1998, Sedimentology and petrography of
marine shelf sandstones of the Cretaceous, Scatter and Garbutt for-
mations, Liard Basin, northern Canada: Bulletin of Canadian Petro-
leum Geology, v. 46, p. 30–50.
LEEDER, M., 1999, Sedimentology and Sedimentary Basins; From Turbu-
lence to Tectonics: Oxford, U.K., Blackwell Science, 592 p.
LEVELL, B.K., 1980, A Late Precambrian tidal shelf deposit, the lower
Sandfjord Formation, Finnmark, North Norway: Sedimentology, v.
27, p. 539–557.
LI, M.Z., AND AMOS, C.L., 1999, Sheet flow and large wave ripples under
combined waves and currents: field observations, model predictions
and effects on boundary layer dynamics: Continental Shelf Research,
v. 19, p. 637–663.
LIU, J.P., MILLIMAN, J.D., GAO, S., AND PENG, C., 2004, Holocene develop-
ment of the Yellow River’s subaqueous delta, North Yellow Sea:
Marine Geology v. 209, p. 45–67.
LIU, Z.X., DIAS, D.X., BERNÉ, S., YANG, W.K., MARSSET, T., TANG, Y.X., AND.
BOURILLET, J.F., 1998, Tidal depositional systems of China’s continental
shelf, with special reference to the eastern Bohai Sea: Marine Geology,
v. 145, p. 225–268.
LOUTIT, T.S., HARDENBOL, J., AND VAIL, P.R., 1988, Condensed sections: the
key to age determination, an integrated approach, in Wilgus, C.K.,
Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and
Van Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Approach:
SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 188–213.
MACEACHERN, J.A., RAYCHAUDHURI, I., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1992, Strati-
graphic applications of the Glossifungites ichnofacies: delineating
discontinuities in the rock record, in Pemberton, S.G., ed., Application
of Ichnology to Petroleum exploration: A Core Workshop: SEPM,
Core Workshop 17, p. 169–198.
MACEACHERN, J.A., STELCK, C.R., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1999, Marine mud-
stone deposition: paleoenvironmental interpretations, in Bergman,
K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies: Sequence
Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM,
Special Publication 64, p. 205–225.
MCBRIDE, R.A., ANDERSON, L.C., TUDORAN, A., ROBERTS, H.H., SEN GUPTA,
B.K., AND BYRNES, M.R., 1999, Holocene stratigraphic architecture of a
sand-rich shelf and origin of linear shoals: northeastern Gulf of
Mexico, in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine
Sandbodies: Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic
Interpretation: SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 95–126.
MCBRIDE, R.A., AND MOSLOW, T.F., 1991, Origin, evolution, and distribution
of shoreface sand ridges, Atlantic inner shelf, U.S.A.: Marine Geology,
v. 97, p. 57–85.
MEIJER-DREES, N.C., AND MYHR, D.W., 1981, The Upper Cretaceous Milk
River and Lea Park formations in southeastern Alberta: Bulletin of
Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 29, p. 42–74.
MILLER, R.G., 1990, A paleoceanographic approach to the Kimmeridge
Clay Formation, in Huc, A.Y., ed., Deposition of Organic Facies:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology
30, p. 13–26.
MORRIS, W.R., HANNON, R.C., HELMOLD, K.P., KNOCK, D.G., AND POSAMENTIER,
H.W., 2000, Jurassic Alpine sandstone, North Slope, Alaska: an ex-
ample of shoreface deposition within a punctuated transgressive
succession (abstract): American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists–SEPM, Annual Meeting, Proceedings.
MORTON, R.A., 1981, Formation of storm deposits by wind-forced currents
in the Gulf of Mexico and the North Sea, in Nio, S.D., Shuttenhelm,
R.T.E., and van Weering, Tj.C.E., eds., Holocene Marine Sedimenta-
tion in the North Sea Basin: International Association of Sedimentolo-
gists, Special Publication 5, p. 385–396.
MULDER, T., AND SYVITSKI, J.P.M., 1995, Turbidity currents generated at
river mouths during exceptional discharges to the world oceans:
Journal of Geology, v. 103, p. 285–299.
MULLER, J., 1959, Palynology of Recent Orinoco delta and shelf sediments:
Reports of the Orinoco Shelf Expedition; Volume 5: Micropaleontol-
ogy, v. 5, p. 1–32.
MYROW, P.M., FISCHER, W., AND GOODGE, J.W., 2002, Wave-modified turbid-
ites: combined-flow shoreline and shelf deposits, Cambrian, Antarc-
tica: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 72, p. 641–656.
MYROW, P.M., AND SOUTHARD, J.B., 1996, Tempestite deposition: Journal of
Sedimentary Research, v. 66, p. 875–887.
NEILL, C.F., AND ALLISON, M.A., 2005, Subaqueous deltaic formation on the
Atchafalaya Shelf, Louisiana: Marine Geology, v. 214, p. 411–430.
NELSON, H.F., AND BRAY, E.B., 1970, Stratigraphy and history of the Ho-
locene sediments in the Sabine–High Island area, Gulf of Mexico, in
Morgan, J.P., ed., Deltaic Sedimentation, Modern and Ancient: SEPM,
Special Publication 15, p. 48–77.
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES
NIO, S.D., AND YANG, C., 1991, Diagnostic attributes of clastic tidal depos-
its: a review, in Smith, D.G., Reinson, G.E., Zaitlin, B.A., and Rahmani,
R.A., eds., Clastic Tidal Sedimentology: Canadian Society of Petro-
leum Geologists, Memoir 16, p. 3–28.
NITTROUER, C.A., KUEHL, S.A., DEMASTER, D.J., AND KOWSMANN, R.O., 1986,
The deltaic nature of Amazon shelf sedimentation: Geological Society
of America, Bulletin, v. 97, p. 444–458.
NITTROUER, C.A., AND STERNBERG, R.W., 1981, The formation of sedimentary
strata in an allochthonous shelf environment: The Washington conti-
nental shelf: Marine Geology., v. 42, p. 201–232.
NITTROUER, C.A., AND WRIGHT, L.D., 1994, Transport of particles across
continental shelves: Reviews of Geophysics, v. 32, p. 85–113.
NIXON, R.P., 1973, Oil source beds in Cretaceous Mowry Shale of north-
western interior United States: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 57, p. 136–161.
NOTTVEDT, A., AND KREISA, R.D., 1987, Model for the combined flow origin
of hummocky cross-stratification: Geology, v. 15, p. 357–361.
NUMMEDAL, D., AND RILEY, G.W., 1999, The origin of the Tocito Sandstone
and its sequence stratigraphic lessons, in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden,
J.W., eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sand Bodies: Sequence Strati-
graphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special
Publication 64, p. 227–254.
NUMMEDAL, D., AND SUTER, J.R., 2002, Continental shelf sand ridges: gen-
esis, stratigraphy, and petroleum significance, in 22nd Annual Gulf
Coast SEPM Foundation Bob F. Perkins Research Conference, p. 503–
518.
ODIN, G.S., AND MATTER, A., 1981, De glauconarium origine: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 28, p. 611–641.
PARSONS, J.D., BUSH, J.W.M., AND SYVITSKI, J.P.M., 2001, Hyperpycnal plume
formation with small sediment concentrations: Sedimentology, v. 48,
p. 465–478.
PATTISON, S.A.J., 2005, Isolated highstand shelf sandstone body of turbid-
itic origin, lower Kenilworth Member, Cretaceous Western Interior,
Book Cliffs, Utah, USA: Sedimentary Geology, v. 177, p. 131–144.
PEMBERTON, S.G., AND MACEACHERN, J.A., 1995, The sequence strati-
graphic significance of trace fossils: examples from the Cretaceous
foreland basin of Alberta, Canada, in Van Wagoner, J.C., and Bertram,
G., eds., Sequence Stratigraphy of Foreland Basin Deposits—Out-
crop and Subsurface Examples from the Cretaceous of North
America: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir
64, p. 429–475.
PEMBERTON, S.G., SPILA, M., PULHAM, A.J., SAUNDERS, T., MACEACHERN, J.A.,
AND SINCLAIR, I., 2001, Ichnology and Sedimentology of Shallow to
Marginal Marine Systems, Ben Nevis and Avalon Reservoirs, Jeanne
D’Arc Basin: Geological Association of Canada, Short Course Notes,
vol. 15, 343 p.
PENLAND, S., BOYD, R.L., AND SUTER, J.R., 1988, Transgressive depositional
systems of the Mississippi delta plain: a model for barrier shoreline
and shelf sand development: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 58,
p. 932–949.
PENLAND, S., SUTER, J.R., MCBRIDE, R.A., WILLIAMS, S.J., KINDINGER, J.L., AND
BOYD, R., 1989, Holocene sand shoals offshore of the Mississippi River
Delta plain: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, Transac-
tions, v. 39, p. 471–480.
PENLAND, S., SUTER, J.R., AND MOSLOW, T.F., 1986, Inner-shelf shoal sedimen-
tary facies and sequences: Ship Shoal, Northern Gulf of Mexico, in
Moslow, T.F., and Rhodes, E.G., eds., Modern and Ancient Shelf
Clastics: A Core Workshop: SEPM, Core Workshop 9, p. 73–122.
PICARELLI, A.T., SAVINI, R.R., ABREU, V., GROSO, S., ARGUELLO, J., AND SALAS,
D., 2002, Sequence stratigraphic evolution of the Oficina Formation,
eastern Venezuela Basin: Depositional systems and sand body geom-
etry in a non-marine to estuarine environment: American Association
of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 86, Supplement.
PLINK-BJÖRKLUND, P., MELLERE, D., AND STEEL, R.J., 2001, Turbidite variabil-
ity and architecture of sand-prone, deepwater slopes: Eocene clino-
395
forms in the Central Basin, Spitsbergen: Journal of Sedimentary
Research, v. 71, p. 897–914.
PLINK-BJÖRKLUND, P., AND STEEL, R.J., 2004, Initiation of turbidity currents:
outcrop evidence for Eocene hyperpycnal flow turbidites: Sedimen-
tary Geology, v. 165, p. 29–52.
PLINT, A.G., 1988, Sharp-based shoreface sequences and “offshore bars” in
the Cardium Formation of Alberta: their relationship to relative
changes in sea level, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C.,
Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level
Changes: An Integrated Approach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, p.
357–370.
PLINT, A.G., AND NUMMEDAL, D., 2000, The falling stage systems tract:
recognition and importance in sequence stratigraphic analysis, in
Hunt, D., and Gawthorpe, R.L., eds., Sedimentary Responses to
Forced Regressions: Geological Society of London, Special Publica-
tion 172, p. 1–17.
POPE, D.L., PENLAND, S., SUTER, J.R., AND MCBRIDE, R.A., 1990, Holocene
geologic framework of the Trinity Shoal region, Louisiana continental
shelf: Gulf Coast Section SEPM, 12th Annual Research Conference,
Proceedings, p. 191–201.
PORTER-SMITH, R., HARRIS, P.T., ANDERSEN, O.B., COLEMAN, R., GREENSLADE,
D., AND JENKINS, C.J., 2004, Classification of the Australian continental
shelf based on predicted sediment threshold exceedance from tidal
currents and swell waves: Marine Geology, v. 211, p. 1–20.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., 2002, Ancient shelf ridges—A potentially significant
component of the transgressive systems tract: Case study from off-
shore northwest Java: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Bulletin, v. 86, p. 75–106.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., ALLEN, G.P., JAMES, D.P., AND TESSON, M., 1992, Forced
regressions in a sequence stratigraphic framework: concepts, ex-
amples, and exploration significance: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1687–1709.
POUMOT, C., 1989, Palynological evidence for eustatic events in the tropical
Neogene: Centres de Recherches Exploration-Production Elf
Aquitaine, Bulletin, v. 13, p. 437–453.
RABALAIS, N. N., TURNER, R.E., AND WISEMAN, W.J., 2001, Hypoxia in the Gulf
of Mexico: Journal of Environmental Quality, v. 30, p. 320–329.
RABALAIS, N.N., TURNER, R.E., WISEMAN, W.J., AND BOESCH, D.F., 1991, A brief
summary of hypoxia on the northern Gulf of Mexico continental shelf:
1985–1988, in Tyson, R.V., and Pearson, T.H., eds., Modern and
Ancient Continental Shelf Anoxia: Geological Society of London,
Special Publication 58, p. 35–47.
RAMSAY, P.J., 1994, Marine geology of the Sodwana Bay shelf, southeast
Africa: Marine Geology, v. 120, p. 225–247.
REY, J., AND HIDALGO, M.C., 2004, Siliciclastic sedimentation and sequence
stratigraphic evolution on a storm-dominated shelf: the Lower Or-
dovician of the Central Iberian Zone (NE Jaén, Spain): Sedimentary
Geology, v. 164, p. 89–104.
REYNAUD, J.-Y., BERNADETTE, T., PROUST, J-N.L., DALRYMPLE, R.W., MARSSET,
T., DE BATIST, M., BOURILLET, J-F., AND LERICOLAIS, G., 1999, Eustatic and
hydrodynamic controls on the architecture of a deep shelf sand bank
(Celtic Sea): Sedimentology, v. 46, p. 703–721
RODRIGUEZ, A.B., AND ANDERSON, J. B., 2004, Contourite origin for shelf and
upper slope sand sheet, offshore Antarctica: Sedimentology v. 51, p.
699–711
RODRIGUEZ, A.B., ANDERSON, J.B., SIRINGAN, F.P., AND TAVIANI, M., 1999,
Sedimentary facies and genesis of Holocene sand banks on the east
Texas inner continental shelf, in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W.,
eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sandbodies: Sequence Stratigraphic
Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special Publica-
tion 64, p. 165–178.
ROY, P.S., CROWELL, P.J., FERLAND, M.A., AND THOM, B.G., 1994, Wave-
dominated coasts, in Carter, R.W.G., and Woodroffe, C.D., eds., Coastal
Evolution: Late Quaternary Shoreline Morphodynamics: Cambridge,
U.K., Cambridge University Press, p. 121–186.
396 JOHN R. SUTER
RINE, J.M., AND GINSBURG, R.N., 1985, Depositional Environments of a mud
shoreface in Suriname, South America—a mud analogue to sandy,
shallow marine deposits: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 55, p.
633–652.
RINE, J.M., TILLMAN, R.W., CULVER, S.J., AND SWIFT, D.J.P., 1991, Generation
of Late Holocene ridges on the middle continental shelf of New Jersey,
USA—Evidence for formation in a mid-shelf setting based upon
comparison with a nearshore ridge, in Swift, D.J.P. , Oertel, G.F.,
Tillman, R.W., and Thorne, J.A., eds., Shelf Sand and Sandstone
Bodies; Geometry, Facies and Sequence Stratigraphy: International
Association Sedimentologists, Special Publication 14, p. 395–426.
SCHEIHING, M.H., AND GAYNOR, G.C., 1991, The shelf sand-plume model: a
critique: Sedimentology, v. 38, p. 433–444.
SCHWARZKOPF, T.A., 1993, Model for prediction of organic carbon content
in possible source rocks: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 10, p. 478–
492.
SEILACHER, A., 1967, Bathymetry of trace fossils: Marine Geology, v. 5, p.
413–428.
SMITH, J.D., 1970, Stability of a sand bed subjected to a shear flow of low
Froude number: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 75, p. 5428–5940.
SNEDDEN, J.W., AND BERGMAN, K.M., 1999, Isolated shallow marine sand
bodies: deposits for all interpretations, in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden,
J.W., eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sandbodies: Sequence Strati-
graphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special
Publication 64, p. 1–11.
SNEDDEN, J.W., AND DALRYMPLE, R.W., 1999, Modern shelf sand bodies:
from historical perspective to a unified theory for sand body genesis
and evolution, in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated
Shallow Marine Sandbodies: Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and
Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 13–28.
SNEDDEN, J.W., AND JUMPER, R.S., 1990, Shelf and shoreface reservoirs, Tom
Walsh–Owen Field, Texas, in Barwis, J.H., McPherson, J.G., and
Studlick, J.R.J., eds., Sandstone Petroleum Reservoirs: New York,
Springer-Verlag, Casebooks in Earth Sciences, p. 415–436.
SNEDDEN, J.W., KREISA, R.D., TILLMAN, R.W., CULVER, S.J., AND SCHWELLER,
W.J., 1999, An expanded model for modern shelf sand ridge genesis
and evolution on the New jersey Atlantic shelf, in Bergman, K.M., and
Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies: Sequence Strati-
graphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation: SEPM, Special
Publication 64, p. 147–163.
SNEDDEN, J.W., KREISA, R.D., TILLMAN, R.W., SCHWELLER, W.J., CULVER, S.J.,
AND WINN, R.D., 1994, Stratigraphy and genesis of a modern shoreface-
attached sand ridge, Peahala Ridge, New Jersey: Journal of Sedimen-
tary Research, v. B64, p. 560–581.
SNEDDEN, J.W., AND NUMMEDAL, D., 1991, Origin and geometry of storm-
deposited sand beds in modern sediments of the Texas continental
shelf, in Swift, D.J.P., Tillman, R.W., and Oertel, G.F., eds., Shelf Sand
and Sandstone Bodies; Geometry, Facies and Sequence Stratigraphy:
International Association Sedimentologists, Special Publication 14, p.
283–308.
SNEDDEN, J.W., NUMMEDAL, D., AND AMOS, A.F., 1988, Storm- and fair-
weather combined flow on the Central Texas continental shelf: Jour-
nal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 58, p. 580–595.
SPEARING, D.R., 1976, Upper Cretaceous Shannon Sandstone: an offshore
shallow-marine sandbody: Wyoming Geological Association, Guide-
book, p. 65–72.
STONECIPHER, S.A., 1999, Genetic characteristics of glauconite and siderite:
implications for the origin of ambiguous isolated marine sand bodies,
in Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies:
Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 191–204.
STOW, D.A., FAUGERES, J-C., VIANA, A., AND GONTHIER, E., 1998, Fossil
contourites: a critical review: Sedimentary Geology, v. 115, p. 3–31.
STRIDE, A.H., BELDERSON, R.H., KENYON, N.H., AND JOHNSON, M.A., 1982,
Offshore tidal deposits: sand sheet and sand bank facies, in Stride,
A.H., ed., Offshore Tidal Sands: Processes and Deposits: London,
Chapman & Hall, p. 95–125.
STUBBLEFIELD, W.L., MCGRAIL, D.W., AND KERSEY, D.G., 1984, Recognition of
transgressive and post-transgressive sand ridges on the New Jersey
continental shelf, in Tillman, R.W., and Siemers, C.T., eds., Siliciclastic
Shelf Sediments: SEPM, Special Publication 34, p. 1–23.
SULLIVAN, M.D., VAN WAGONER, J.C., JENNETTE, D.C., FOSTER, M.E., STUART,
R.M., LOVELL, R.W., AND PEMBERTON, S.G., 1997, High resolution se-
quence stratigraphy and architecture of the Shannon Sandstone,
Hartzog Draw Field, Wyoming, in Gulf Coast Section SEPM, 18th
Annual Research Conference, p. 331–344.
SURLYK, F., AND NOE-NYGAARD, N., 1991, Sand bank and dune facies
architecture of a wide intracratonic seaway: late Jurassic–Early Creta-
ceous Raukelv Formation, Jameson Land, East Greenland, in Miall,
A.D., and Tyler, N., eds., The Three-Dimensional Facies Architecture
of Terrigenous Clastic Sediments and Its Implications for Hydrocar-
bon Discovery and Recovery: SEPM, Concepts in Sedimentology and
Paleontology, v. 3, p. 261–276.
SUTER, J.R., 1987, Ancient fluvial systems and Holocene deposits, south-
western Louisiana continental shelf, in Berryhill, H.L., Jr., ed., Late
Quaternary Facies and Structure, Northern Gulf of Mexico: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Studies in Geology 23, p. 81–
129.
SUTER, J.R., 2001, Sequence Stratigraphy in a Development Setting:
Petrozuata, Faja Petrolifera del Orinoco, Venezuela: American Asso-
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Distinguished Lecture 2001/2002.
SUTER, J.R., 2003, Late Quaternary shelf margin deltas, northwest Gulf of
Mexico, in Gulf Coast Section SEPM, 34th Annual Bob F. Perkins
Research Conference, p. 200–259.
SUTER, J.R., ABDULAH, K., TRAVIS, P.D., GLAGOLA, P.A., YOUNG, J.W., WATSO,
D.C., AND FINLEY, W.E, 1996, An integrated seismic and well-log
sequence stratigraphic study over 32 Grand Isle/West Delta OCS
Blocks: Gulf Coast Section SEPM, 17th Annual Research Conference,
p. 305–314.
SUTER, J.R., BERRYHILL, H.L., JR., AND PENLAND, S., 1987, Late Quaternary sea
level fluctuations and depositional sequences, southwest Louisiana
continental shelf, in Nummedal, D., Pilkey, O.H., and Howard. J.D.,
eds., Sea-Level Changes and Coastal Evolution: SEPM, Special Pub-
lication 41, p. 199–222.
SUTER, J.R. AND CLIFTON, H.E., 1999, The Shannon Sandstone and isolated
linear sand bodies: interpretations and realizations, in Bergman,
K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Shallow Marine Sand Bodies:
Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Special Publication 64, p. 321-356.
SUTER, J.R., AND D’ONFRO, P., 2000, Sequence stratigraphy and seal quality
prediction in Block B, Natuna Sea: the relationship between top seal
quality, lithofacies, and depositional environment: American Asso-
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 84, p. 1395–1518.
SWIFT, D.J.P., 1972, Implications of sediment dispersal from bottom cur-
rent measurements: some specific problems in understanding bottom
sediment distribution and dispersal on the continental shelf: a discus-
sion of two papers, in Swift, D.J.P., Duane, D.B., and Pilkey, O.H., eds.,
Shelf Sediment Transport; Process and Pattern: Stroudsberg, Penn-
sylvania, Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, p. 363–371.
SWIFT, D.J.P., 1975, Tidal sand ridges and shoal retreat massifs: Marine
Geology, v. 18, p. 105–134.
SWIFT, D.J.P., AND FIELD, M.F., 1981, Evolution of a classic ridge field,
Maryland sector, North American inner shelf: Sedimentology, v. 28,
p. 461–482.
SWIFT, D.J.P., FIGUEIREDO, A.G., FREELAND, G.L., AND OERTEL, G.F., 1983,
Hummocky cross-stratification and megaripples: a geological double
standard?: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 53, p. 1295–1318.
SWIFT, D.J.P., HAN, G., AND VINCENT, C.E., 1986, Fluid processes and sea-
floor response on a modern storm-dominated shelf: Middle Atlantic
shelf of North America: Part 1. The storm-current regime, in Knight,
 FACIES MODELS REVISITED: CLASTIC SHELVES
R.J., and McLean, J.R., eds., Shelf Sands and Sandstones: Canadian
Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 11, p. 99–119.
SWIFT, D.J.P., AND PARSONS, B.S., 1999, Shannon Sandstone of the Powder
River Basin: Orthodoxy and revisionism in stratigraphic thought, in
Bergman, K.M., and Snedden, J.W., eds., Isolated Marine Sandbodies:
Sequence Stratigraphic Analysis and Sedimentologic Interpretation:
SEPM, Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology, v. 6, p. 55–84.
SWIFT, D.J.P., AND THORNE, J.A., 1991, Sedimentation on continental
margins, I: a general model for shelf sedimentation, in Swift, D.J.P.,
Oertel, G.F., Tillman, R.W., and Thorne, J.A., eds., Shelf Sand and
Sandstone Bodies: International Association of Sedimentologists,
Special Publication 14, p. 3–31.
SWIFT, D.J.P., STANLEY, D.J., AND CURRAY, J.C., 1971, Relict sediments, a
reconsideration: Journal of Geology v. 79, p. 322–346.
SYVITSKI, J.M., HUTTON, E.W., MOREHEAD, M.D., AND COURTNEY, R., 2003,
Scaling and Integration of Process–Response Stratigraphic Models:
Final Office of Naval Research STRATAFORM report.
TESTA, V., AND BOSENCE, D.W.J., 1999, Physical and biological controls on
the formation of carbonate and siliciclastic bedforms on the north-east
Brazilian shelf: Sedimentology, v. 46, p. 279–301.
THOMAS, M.A., AND ANDERSON, J., 1994, Sea-level controls on the facies
architecture of the Trinity/Sabine incised valley system, in Dalrymple,
R.W., Boyd, R., and Zaitlin, B.A., eds., Incised-Valley Systems: Origin
and Sedimentary Sequences: SEPM, Special Publication 51, p. 85–142.
TILLMAN, R.W., AND MARTINSEN, R.S., 1984, The Shannon shelf ridge sand-
stone complex, Salt Creek Anticline area, Powder River basin, Wyo-
ming, in Tillman, R.W., and Siemers, C.T., eds., Siliciclastic Shelf
Sediments: SEPM, Special Publication 34, p. 1–34.
TILLMAN, R.W., AND MARTINSEN, R.S., 1987, Sedimentologic characteristics
and production model of Hartzog Draw Field, Wyoming, a Shannon
shelf-ridge sandstone, in Tillman, R.W., and Weber, K.J., eds., Reser-
voir Sedimentology: SEPM, Special Publication 40, p. 15–112.
TOEWS, C.N., LECKIE, D.A., AND BERGMAN, K., 2004, Offshore sand ridge
accumulation in a low accommodation setting, Bakken Formation,
west-central Saskatchewan (abstract): Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists, Annual Meeting, Proceedings.
TRAYKOVSKI, P., GEYER, W.R., IRISH, J.D., AND LYNCH, J.F., 2000, The role of
wave-induced density-driven fluid mud flows for cross-shelf trans-
port on the Eel River continental shelf: Continental Shelf Research, v.
20, p. 2113–2140.
TWICHELL, D.C., 1983, Bedform distribution and inferred sand transport on
Georges Bank, United States Atlantic Continental Shelf: Sedimentol-
ogy, v. 30, p. 695–710.
TYSON, R.V., AND PEARSON, T.H., 1991, Modern and ancient continental
shelf anoxia: an overview, in Tyson, R.V., and Pearson, T.H., eds.,
Modern and Ancient Continental Shelf Anoxia: Geological Society of
London, Special Publication 58, p. 1–24.
TYSON, R.V., AND PEARSON, T.H., eds., 1991, Modern and Ancient Continen-
tal Shelf Anoxia: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 58,
470 p.
VAN DEN MEENE, J.W.H., 1994, The shoreface-connected ridges along the
central Dutch coast: Universiteit Utrecht, Nederlandse Geografische
Studies, v. 174, 222 p.
VAN DER ZWAAN, G.J., AND JORISSEN, F.J., 1991, Biofacial patterns in river-
induced anoxia, in Tyson, R.V., and Pearson, T.H., eds., Modern and
Ancient Continental Shelf Anoxia: Geological Society of London,
Special Publication 58, p. 65-82.
VAN WAGONER, J.C., MITCHUM, R.M., CAMPION, K.M., AND RAHMANIAN, V.D.,
1990, Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigraphy in Well Logs, Cores, and
Outcrops: Concepts for High-Resolution Correlation of Time and
Facies: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Methods in
Exploration Series, v. 7, 63 p.
VIANNA, A.R., FAUGERES, J.C., AND STOW, D.A.V., 1998, Bottom current-
controlled sand deposits—a review of modern shallow to deep-water
environments: Sedimentary Geology, v. 115, p. 53–80.
397
VIANNA, M.L., SOLEWICZ, R., CABRAL, A.P., AND TESTA, V., 1991, Sandstream
on the northeast Brazilian shelf: Continental Shelf Research, v. 11, p.
509–524.
WALKER, R.G., 1984. Shelf and shallow marine sands, in Walker, R.G., ed.,
Facies Models: Geological Association of Canada, p. 141–170.
WALKER, R.G., AND BERGMAN, K.M., 1993, Shannon sandstone in Wyoming:
a shelf ridge complex reinterpreted as lowstand shoreface deposits:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 63, p. 839–851.
WALKER, R.G., AND PLINT, A.G., 1992, Wave- and storm-dominated shallow
marine systems, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models:
Response to Sea Level Change: Geological Association of Canada, p.
219–238.
WELLS, J.T., AND COLEMAN, J.M., 1981, Physical processes and fine-grained
sediment dynamics, coast of Surinam, South America: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 51, p. 1069–1075.
WHITLEY, P.K., 1992, The Geology of Heidrun: A giant oil and gas field on
the Mid-Norwegian Shelf, in Halbouty, M.T., ed., Giant Oil and Gas
Fields of the Decade 1978–1988, American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Memoir 54, p. 383–406.
WINN, R.D., JR., 1991, Storm deposition in marine sand sheets: Wall Creek
Member, Frontier Formation, Powder River Basin, Wyoming: Journal
of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 61, p. 86–101.
WINN, R.D., 1994, Shelf sheet-sand reservoir of the Lower Cretaceous
Greensand, North Celtic Sea Basin, offshore Ireland: American Asso-
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 1775–1789.
WRIGHT, L.D., FRIEDRICHS, C.T., KIM, S.C., AND SCULLY, M.E., 2001, Effects of
ambient currents and waves on gravity-driven sediment transport on
continental shelves: Marine Geology, v. 175, p. 25–45.
WRIGHT, L.D., WISEMAN, W.J., BORNHOLD, B.D., PRIOR, D.B., SUHAYDA, J.N.,
KELLER, G.H., YANG, Z.S., AND FAN, Y.B., 1988, Marine dispersal and
deposition of Yellow River silts by gravity driven underflows: Na-
ture, v. 332, p. 629–632.
YANG, C.S., 1989, Active, moribund, and buried tidal sand ridges in the
east China Sea and the Southern Yellow Sea: Marine Geology, v. 88,
p. 97–116.
YANG, C.S., AND SUN, J., 1988, Tidal sand ridges on the East China Sea shelf,
in de Boer, P.L., van Gelder, A., and Nio, S.D., eds., Tide-Influenced
Sedimentary Environments and Facies: Boston, D. Reidel Publishing
Company, p. 23–38.
398 JOHN R. SUTER
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 399

DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

HENRY W. POSAMENTIER
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, 1201 Lake Robbins Drive, The Woodlands, Texas 77380, U.S.A.
e-mail: henry_posamentier@anadarko.com
AND
ROGER G. WALKER
Roger Walker Consulting Inc., 83 Scimitar View NW, Calgary, Alberta T3L 2B4, Canada
e-mail: walkerrg@telus.net

Abstract: Depositional environments of deep-water deposits commonly are complex and consequently do not neatly fit any single facies
model. Rather than developing specific models we discuss these deposits within the context of depositional elements and first principles
of process sedimentology. Depositional elements are described using 3D seismic as well as outcrop data. Detailed facies descriptions from
outcrops are then integrated with these depositional elements. Following the theme of this publication, we emphasize facies and
depositional environments rather than the mechanics of turbidity currents and related processes.
The spatial and temporal distribution of depositional elements is determined largely by characteristics of the shelf-edge staging area.
Such factors as grain-size distribution, sediment caliber, frequency of flow events, and magnitude of flows are all a function of conditions
at the shelf edge and upper slope. Sediments are supplied from the staging area to the slope and basin floor beyond. Turbidity currents
traverse the slope through canyons and slope channels. When these flows reach the basin floor they continue to remain confined by levees
for a certain distance. This distance is a function of grain-size distribution in the flow, flow magnitude, and flow velocity. Levee height
diminishes seaward, and eventually where levees can no longer effectively confine the basal sand-rich part of the flow the leveed channel
transitions into a frontal splay or lobe.
Relative sea-level change plays an important role in turbidite deposition, in that sea level is a major factor controlling conditions in
the outer shelf and upper slope. During relative sea-level lowstands, shorelines and consequently depocenters tend to be located at the
shelf edge. This sets up conditions favorable for delivery of sediments to the slope and basin floor. Conversely, relative sea-level
highstands commonly are associated with depocenters at the inner to middle shelf, resulting in a paucity of coarse sediments being
actively delivered to the shelf edge and ultimately to the slope and basin floor. Variations in grain size delivered to the shelf edge during
a cycle of sea-level change can vary predictably hence the temporal and spatial distribution of depositional elements in linked deep-
water environments can likewise be better understood within this context.

INTRODUCTION
The scope of turbidite and submarine-fan facies models is
vast, extending from individual beds a few centimeters thick to
entire submarine fans with volumes up to a million cubic kilome-
ters or more (for example, Indus fan area 1.1 x 106 km2, thickness
3+ km, hence volume of the order of 3 x 106 km3). The unifying
theme is the central role played by individual turbidity currents,
where each bed (a turbidite) is the result of a relatively short-lived
depositional event. The environment is consistently below storm
wave base, such that, once deposited, a turbidite is unlikely to be
reworked by other currents aside from the occasional strong
contour current. Figure 1 schematically illustrates an idealized
shelf to basin-floor physiography displaying most of the key
elements of the deep-water depositional environment.
We will briefly examine the history of turbidite and subma-
rine fan models and show that, perhaps more than in any other
depositional environment, technology (2-D and 3-D seismic data)
has influenced the definition of depositional elements and hence
the facies models (e.g., Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a). No single
model comes close to embracing the complexity of huge ancient
and modern submarine-fan systems, making the depositional
elements and their lateral and vertical relationships the basis for
interpretation and prediction. Our treatment of facies models will
take a first-principles approach that will focus on the linkage
between physical processes and associated depositional elements.
Many aspects of turbidity-current generation, movement,
and deposition were reviewed by Walker (1992) in the third
edition of “Facies Models”. This work will be referenced here but
not repeated in detail.
HISTORY OF FAN MODELS
The turbidity-current concept was introduced in 1950, in the
classic paper “Turbidity currents as a cause of graded bedding”
by Kuenen and Migliorini (1950). The paper was based mainly on
Kuenen’s experimental work both before and after the Second
World War. The idea that sand could be transported to great
depths in the ocean was very controversial at the time (Walker,
1973), and for many years there was considerable debate about
the existence of turbidites and, about their properties. It was
understood that modern fans existed, but their internal character-
istics were completely unknown—indeed, Kuenen’s experiments
were much more concerned with the origin of submarine canyons
than the transport of sand onto the deep sea floor.
After a dozen years of observations, the first generalization
concerning turbidites was published by Bouma, (1962) (Fig. 2)—
what is now known as the “Bouma sequence” for the internal
structures in individual turbidites. The sequence from Division A
(generally structureless) to division B (parallel lamination in
sand) and division C (ripple cross-lamination) was compared
with flume experiments and interpreted to represent waning
flow (Harms and Fahnestock, 1965; Walker, 1965). Division D
consists of thin laminae of silt and clay, and Division E is pelitic,
probably largely turbidity-current mud with a small proportion
of hemipelagic mud

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 397–520.
400 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Inner- to Mid-Shelf (Highstand) Delta

Shelf-Edge (Lowstand) Delta

Slump Scars

Canyon/Slope Channel

Staging Area Avulsion Node

Mass-Transport
Complex

Leveed
Channel
Crevasse
Splay

Frontal Splay
Sediment
Waves
Oxbow

FIG. 1.—Schematic representation of shelf to deep-water physiography. The shelf staging area is connected to the deep-water
environment through slope channels and/or canyons. Depositional elements in the deep water include leveed channels, crevasse
splays, sediment waves, and frontal splays or lobes. (modified after Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a).

FIG. 2.—The Bouma (1962) sequence for classical turbidites. Division D is placed in brackets because it is difficult to identify in
weathered or tectonized outcrops. Division E can be subdivided into two parts: turbidite mud E(t) and hemipelagic mud E(h).
In most beds, the turbidite mud predominates.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
Gradually, as more information became available on modern
fans, the first model was proposed by Normark (1970) in another
classic paper—“Growth patterns of deep sea fans”. The data base
was small, and the paper concentrated on the La Jolla and San
Lucas fans. The model showed leveed channels on the upper fan,
depositional (“suprafan”) lobes on the middle fan, and a smooth
surface on the lower fan. This model was based largely on
shallow-penetration seismic data.
Shortly afterward, Emiliano Mutti and colleagues proposed
fan models based exclusively on observations of ancient rocks.
Mutti and Ricci Lucchi (1972) proposed a model with an inner-fan
channel that branched into multiple channels on the mid-fan (but
without depositional lobes). In the same year, Mutti and Ghibaudo
(1972) showed a similar model but with lobes at the ends of the
channels. Normark’s work was not cited, suggesting that the
modern and ancient fan models were derived independently—
the proposed models suggested that modern fans and ancient
rocks behaved in very similar ways.
The channel-feeding-lobe models dominated turbidite stud-
ies for about 10 years (1970–1980). The literature on modern fans
and ancient rocks was formally brought together into the model
proposed by Walker (1978); the models proved to be popular but
also attracted considerable discussion (e.g., Nilsen, 1980). In
retrospect, the models clearly had severe limitations—the distri-
bution of sand and mud on the fans was incorrect, and no
consideration was given to the influence of grain size or of local
and regional tectonics. Perhaps more importantly, the models did
not incorporate the influences of relative sea-level fluctuation.
With the advent of sequence stratigraphy, the fan models of
the 70s were updated first by Vail et al. (1977) and later by Mutti
(1985), Posamentier et al. (1988), and Posamentier et al. (1991),
who integrated the effects of relative sea-level fluctuation with
the channel-feeding-lobe models. This can be regarded as a
period of transition between the older, field-based models and
the rapidly evolving seismic-based models—the technology of
marine geology was overtaking the efforts of field geologists.
In 1982, the first side-scan sonar images of the Amazon Fan
were published by Damuth et al. (1982a), and Damuth et al.
(1982b). The presence of long, narrow, and sinuous channels
surprised most turbidite workers, as did the scale of the channel–
levee complexes, which stood at least 200 m above the adjacent
fan surface.
However, 1985 can be considered the year in which the
emphasis shifted significantly from ancient rocks to large-scale
studies of modern fans. In that year, the first compilation of
modern fan studies was published (Bouma et al., 1985), with
discussion of the Amazon, Astoria, Bengal, Cap-Ferrat, Crati,
Delgada, Ebro, Indus, La Jolla, Laurentian, Magdalena, Missis-
sippi, Monterey, Navy, Rhône, and Wilmington fans. That vol-
ume also had a very useful fold-out that tabulated the quantita-
tive descriptors of the fans (channel dimensions and slopes, fan
sizes, and fan volumes).
Also that year, Droz and Bellaiche (1985) published a seismic
study of the Rhône Fan, showing the existence of meandering
channels, channel–levee systems, and the lateral shifting and
stacking of these systems to make channel–levee complexes.
They also showed large slump masses (“acoustically transparent
units”) up to 160 milliseconds thick that represented both failure
on the slope above the fan and failure of the back of the channel
levees.
The studies in the Bouma et al. (1985) compilation essentially
changed the direction and style of turbidite research, focusing on
modern fans rather than ancient-rock studies. Droz and Bellaiche
(1985), without using the term, essentially introduced the idea of
depositional elements. This approach was also applied by Weimer
401
(1989) in a classic study of the Mississippi Fan. Weimer (1991)
recognized a succession of seismic facies based on reflection
patterns (subparallel, wavy, hummocky, divergent, mounded,
and convergent) which could be interpreted in terms of mass-
transport complexes (hummocky, mounded), channel fill (dis-
continuous, high amplitude), levee (subparallel to convergent),
and basin floor (subparallel to parallel). Work up to 1991 was
collected in the volume “Seismic Facies and Sedimentary Pro-
cesses of Submarine Fans and Turbidite Systems” (Weimer and
Link, 1991). The seismic evidence presented was mostly high-
quality 2-D data. In that volume, Mutti and Normark (1991) first
systematized the depositional-elements approach. They defined
depositional elements as the basic mappable components of both
modern and ancient turbidite systems and stages that can be
recognized in marine, outcrop, and subsurface studies. These
features are the building blocks of fan models.
The past ten years have seen an explosion in 3-D seismic
studies, with a corresponding better understanding of deposi-
tional elements (e.g., Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a). The best
sources of this information are in the proceedings volume of a
Gulf Coast Section of SEPM research conference (“Deep Water
Reservoirs of the World”, Weimer et al., 2000) and a thematic
compilation of papers on deep-water systems in Marine and
Petroleum Geology (Mutti et al., 2003). Various classifications of
depositional elements were suggested, but no attempt was made
to formulate a general model for submarine fans.
ORIGIN OF TURBIDITY CURRENTS
Density currents flow downslope as gravity acts on the den-
sity difference between the flow and the ambient seawater (Fig.
3). The density difference can be due to any or all of the following:
the increased salinity of the flow, the cold temperature of the
flow, and the suspended sediment within the flow. A turbidity
current is a special case of a density flow, where the increased
density is due to sediment maintained in turbulent suspension
within the flow. The turbulence is maintained by the downslope
movement of the flow.
Turbidity currents can originate by two mechanisms: some
begin with large sediment slumps that accelerate and become
turbulent. Many of these slumps are triggered by earthquakes,
the most famous being the Grand Banks (Newfoundland)
earthquake, slump, and flow of 1929. The flow broke a series of
submarine telegraph cables, and reconstructions of the flow
mechanics (Piper et al., 1988) suggest flow velocities up to 20
m/s, flow thicknesses of several hundred meters, and a mini-
mum flow volume of 175 km3. The flow bypassed the entire
Laurentian Submarine Fan, and the deposit, in places over 1 m
thick, now covers a large part of the Sohm Abyssal Plain
(Walker, 1992).
Similarly, slumps off the delta of the Magdalena River in
Colombia have broken telegraph cables up to 100 km from the
delta. In the period 1932–1955, there have been 15 cable breaks,
averaging one every 1.5 years (Heezen, 1956). The flow of 1935
had an estimated volume of sand of 3 x 108 m3 (Heezen, 1956).
Turbidity currents off the fronts of major deltas may be large and
frequent.
In the case of the Congo (Zaire) river, where there is no delta,
a submarine canyon has its head within the estuary of the Congo
River. At times of peak river discharge in December–January and
April–May, and during the years when the river is establishing a
new course among the estuarine sand bars (1892–1903 and 1925–
1929), submarine cables have been broken seaward of the estuary
within the Congo Canyon (Heezen et al., 1964). These cables lay
close to the estuary, at the shelf edge, and in water depths as great
402 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER
HORIZONTAL
FIG. 3.—Experimental turbidity current in a flume. Water depth is 28 cm. Note characteristic shape of the head and eddies behind the
head. Sediment is thrown out of the main flow by these eddies, and the body of the flow is about half the height of the head.
Experiment conducted by G.V. Middleton at Caltech.
as 2800 m, suggesting that sand swept into the canyon head from
the estuary continued down the canyon in flows powerful enough
to break cables in abyssal depths. Despite today’s relative high
stand of sea level, there were 26 cable breaks between 1893 and
1937—an average of one every 1.7 years.
Turbidity currents can also originate with delivery of river
flow charged with sediment directly onto the slope. During times
of river flood enough sediment can be entrained in the flow in
some instances to produce a mix that has greater density than sea
water, resulting in hyperpycnal flow down the slope (Mulder and
Syvitski, 1995; Mulder et al., 1998). With this mechanism, what
begins as inertial flow at the river mouth transforms into density
underflow and ultimately turbidity flow on the slope. Such flows
generally are of greater duration (i.e., days or weeks) than those
that originate from large sediment slumps (i.e., hours).
FAN BYPASSING AND DEPOSITION
ON MODERN ABYSSAL PLAINS
Turbidity currents traveling downslope may be moving at
several to many meters per second, at which velocities all of the
sand and finer sizes are in turbulent suspension. The flows
gradually decelerate to velocities of 1–2 m per second, when the
coarser sand fraction begins to be deposited from suspension.
During this period of deceleration, the flows may largely bypass
the slope and move long distances across the basin floor.
There are many studies of abyssal-plain deposition (Pilkey,
1988). The Grand Banks flow bypassed the Laurentian Fan at the
base of the slope and deposited a turbidite on the Sohm Abyssal
Plain, as discussed above. About 16,000 years ago, an even
larger flow bypassed the Hatteras Fan and deposited on the
Hatteras Abyssal Plain (western North Atlantic Ocean) (Elmore
et al., 1979). Deposition began about 120 km from the end of the
Hatteras Canyon system. This “Black Shell turbidite” (named
for the distinctive corroded shells contained in the deposit)
covers 44,000 km2 of Hatteras Abyssal Plain in a bed up to 4 m
thick, 500 km long, 200 km wide. The volume of the deposit is
between 100 and 200 km3. Characteristics of that deposit (grain
SLOPE
size, sorting, mud content, etc.) were discussed in detail by
Elmore et al. (1979).
One of the longest documented bypass systems is the Cascadia
Deep-Sea Channel (Nelson et al., 2000). The channel originates off
the coast of Washington, continues around the outer part of
Astoria Fan, cuts through the Blanco Fracture Zone, and ends on
the Tufts Abyssal plain. The “turbidity-current pathway [traverses]
1000 km of Cascadia Basin and remained open throughout the
late Quaternary … as shown by the presence of the 13 post-MA
(Mazama Ash, 7530 YBP) turbidites throughout the pathway in
all recent cores we have collected” (Griggs and Kulm, 1968; see
also Nelson et al., 2000). Beds within the channel include thick (2
m) Pleistocene graded gravel-to-sand beds over 400 km from the
heads of the channel at the Washington coast. These long dis-
tances of bypass have significant implications regarding the
location of sand deposits in ancient basins, as discussed through-
out this review.
Kneller (1995) described the effects of waxing and waning
flows within individual events. Waxing flows, commonly at or
near the head of a turbulent flow, erode the substrate over which
they pass. Significant amounts of sediment can bypass the system
during this time. As the flow wanes, coarser sediments tend to
come out of suspension and be deposited in the area formerly
characterized as a zone of bypass. Consequently, even in slope
and proximal basin-floor areas, where sediment bypass and
erosion during waxing phase may be common, some sedimenta-
tion in the form of lag deposits almost always occurs.
TURBIDITE FACIES—THE BUILDING BLOCKS
There are several schemes for classifying the family of rocks
that occur in deep-water settings. The first was proposed by Mutti
and Ricchi Lucchi (1972) and was later simplified by Walker in
1978. Subsequent facies classifications have become more com-
plex, including the all-inclusive but unwieldy schemes of
Ghibaudo and Vanz (1987) and Pickering et al. (1986).
A detailed subdivision of features within individual beds was
proposed by Lowe (1982), based on interpretations of how sedi-
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 403

ment was deposited from sandy and gravelly high-density tur-
bidity currents. For sandy flows, division S1 is characterized by
traction structures, division S2 contains “thin horizontal layers
showing inverse grading and basal shear laminations” and divi-
sion S3 “may be structureless or normally graded and it com-
monly contains water escape features”. For gravelly flows, divi-
sion R1 consists of coarse gravel with traction structures, division
R2 consists of an inversely graded gravel layer, and division R3
consists of a normally graded gravel layer. Lowe’s (1982) scheme
is akin to a Bouma sequence (see below) for individual coarse
beds, rather than a facies classification of coarse-grained beds.
Because it is genetically based, the scheme may change as more is
learned about the flow and depositional mechanics of high-
density flow events.
In this review, we suggest that deep-water rocks contain a
variety of depositional elements (discussed below) and that these
elements contain distinctive assemblages of facies. We have
chosen to use the simple scheme of Walker (1978), which is
descriptive (except for the various deformed facies), and based on
grain size. The categories included in this scheme are (1) classical
turbidites, (2) structureless sandstones, (3) pebbly sandstones, (4)
conglomerates, and (5) various types of deformed rocks. We are
more concerned with the descriptive and environmental aspect
of the facies than with the mechanics of flow and deposition
(which are very difficult to study in flumes a few meters long
when in nature flows may change and evolve over distances of
hundreds of kilometers).
Classical Turbidites
This category includes all of those rocks originally considered
as turbidites in the 1950s and 1960s—the beds that give rise to
little or no controversy today. The facies includes thick monoto-
nous successions of alternating sandstones and mudstones (Fig.
4). The sandstones have sharp, flat bases, and the only erosional
features are normally on the centimeter scale. They include scour
marks (commonly flute casts) and tool marks (commonly groove
casts). Channeling on a scale greater than a meter is very uncom-
mon.
Internally, classical turbidites contain some or all of the
divisions first proposed by Bouma (1962) (Fig. 2). Division A
implies rapid deposition producing structureless sandstone in
the absence of any equilibrium bedforms, whereas divisions B
and C imply traction of grains on the bed to form parallel
lamination and ripple cross lamination, respectively (a waning-
flow succession—Harms and Fahnestock, 1965; Walker, 1965).
Divisions D and E both imply deposition of fine-grained mate-
rial from suspension without traction on the bed. Note that
Bouma (1962) observed that division D (laminations of silt and
mud) was difficult to recognize in “weathered or tectonized

TOP

FIG. 4.—Alternating beds of sandstone and mudstone, Devonian, Cape Liptrap, South Australia. Note the monotonous alternation
of sandstones and mudstones, and the very parallel nature of the bedding with no evidence of any topography on the sea floor.
404 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER
outcrops”—consequently it may not be a useful or significant
part of the Bouma sequence.
Two sub-categories of classical turbidites have been sug-
gested by several workers: thin-bedded and thick-bedded. It
must be emphasized that there is a complete spectrum of bed
thicknesses and that their separation is arbitrary. The thick-
bedded turbidites (sandstones roughly in the range 10–100 cm in
thickness; Fig. 5) tend to be composed of Bouma’s division A,
with fewer beds also containing divisions B and C (Walker, 1968).
Thin-bedded turbidites (Fig. 4) tend to lack Bouma’s division A,
and the sandstones contain only the B–C or C divisions. The
nature of these divisions suggests two distinct types of thin-
bedded turbidites.
The simplest type of thin-bedded turbidite contains a single
set of ripple cross lamination, with or without division B parallel
lamination underneath (Fig. 6). In more complex thin-bedded
turbidites, the ripples in division C consist of climbing sets rather
than single sets, and the ripple cross lamination (and the parallel
lamination beneath) can be convoluted (Fig. 7). These complex
thin-bedded turbidites also commonly contain ripped-up mud-
stone clasts, and they have been termed “CCC turbidites” (Fig.
FIG. 5.—Thick-bedded sandstones consisting mainly of Bouma’s
division A, separated by very thin siltstone partings. Height
of cliff about 180 m. Compare with Figure 4. Annot Sandstone
(Eocene), southern France.
8A; Walker, 1985); C for climbing, C for convolution and C for
clasts.
The presence of convolute lamination implies rapid deposi-
tion of sediment and trapping of pore fluid, such that the primary
structures are easily deformed. The climbing ripples imply depo-
sition of sediment from suspension while the ripples are moving
on the bed. Within the category of thin-bedded turbidites, the
simple beds imply traction on the bed and essentially no deposi-
tion from suspension, whereas the CCC turbidites suggest high
rates of deposition from suspension during formation of the
primary bedforms. It has been suggested that thin beds showing
high rates of deposition commonly form on levees. The thin beds
that show little evidence of rapid deposition from suspension
may indicate basin-plain settings, where the turbidity currents
have much less sediment left in suspension (Fig. 8B; Walker,
1985). The presence of ripped-up mudstone clasts supports this
interpretation—there is more likelihood of erosion associated
with confined flows in channels than in unconfined settings on a
distal basin plain.
Structureless Sandstones
There is an association in facies between classical turbidites
and structureless sandstones. Individual structureless sandstone
beds tend to be thicker (several tens of centimeters to a few
meters) than the sandstones in classical turbidites, and mudstone
partings between beds tend to be thin (centimeters) or absent (Fig.
5). The deposits of several flows may be amalgamated, the
amalgamation planes being denoted by (1) abrupt changes in
grain size, (2) layers of ripped-up mudstone clasts, or (3) simply
the disappearance of thin mudstone partings (Fig. 9). On a larger
scale, scouring on the scale of meters is commonly observed in
this facies (Fig. 9). It follows that the monotonous interbedding of
sandstones and mudstones, typical of classical turbidites, does
not occur in structureless sandstones. Stacks of amalgamated
beds without mudstone partings can be as much as 200 m thick,
as in the Annot Sandstone (Fig. 5).
Parallel lamination and ripple cross lamination are rare, and
the term structureless (now preferred to the older term “mas-
sive”) denotes this absence of primary sedimentary structures.
Graded bedding is present in some beds and not in others; its
presence may be largely a function of the range of grain sizes
available in the flow.
Although most beds lack primary structures, secondary
structures indicating dewatering during compaction of the bed
are common (Lowe, 1975). These include vertical or subvertical
fluid-escape pipes (Fig. 10), which can become contorted if the
bed is sheared by continuing turbidity-current flow during the
fluid escape (Fig. 11). If the escaping water encounters a crude,
incipient parallel lamination with variations in permeability,
the water may be forced to flow horizontally until able to break
through the less permeable layers and continue its vertical
escape. The curved upward edges of these laminates take the
shape of an irregular stack of dishes, hence the term “dish
structure” (Figs. 10, 12).
The association of this facies with classical turbidites suggests
that individual structureless sandstones are also the deposits of
turbidity currents. This interpretation is strengthened by the
presence of fluid-escape features, which indicate initial deposi-
tion of a fluid-rich sediment–water mixture (rather than a more
rigid plug flow with grain-to-grain contacts and much less inter-
stitial water). Despite the thickness of individual beds and the
general absence of Bouma sequences, there is no compelling
observational or experimental evidence to reject turbidity cur-
rents in favor of speculative processes such as fluxoturbidity
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 405

FIG. 6.—Thin-bedded turbidites beginning with Bouma divisions B and C. Sharp bases shown by yellow arrows, parallel lamination
by a blue arrow, and ripple cross lamination by red arrows. Note the absence of convolute lamination, climbing ripples, and
ripped-up mudstone clasts. Ordovician turbidites at Chutes Montmorency, Quebec.

CONVOLUTE
LAMINATION

CLIMBING RIPPLES

FIG. 7.—Thin-bedded turbidites in the Chatsworth Sandstone (Cretaceous), Chatsworth (Simi Hills), California. Bases shown by red
arrows, and climbing ripples shown by yellow arrows. Convolute lamination is outlined in blue. Compare with Figure 6 (where
there is no climbing and no convolution).
406 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 8.—Diagram showing two types of thin-bedded turbidites. One is characterized by single rows of ripple cross lamination without
climbing, and the other is characterized by climbing ripples, convolute lamination, and ripped-up mudstone clasts A). The “CCC
turbidites” are interpreted as levee deposits (see text), and the others as distal basin plain deposits B) (From Walker, 1985).

TOP

STRUCTURELESS SANDSTONES

CLASSICAL
TURBIDITES

SCOUR

AMALGAMATION

FIG. 9.—Devonian turbidites in Germany. Note the classical turbidites (right) and the underlying thick-bedded structureless
sandstones. Yellow arrows show thin mudstone partings that disappear along strike (amalgamation), and the red arrow shows
a small scour.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
A)
A) DISH
DISH STRUCTURES
STRUCTURES
TOP
FIG. 10.—Vertical fluid-escape pipes with overlying dish structures (outlined in yellow).
Ordovician Cap Enrage Formation, Gaspesie, Quebec.
currents (Dzulynski et al., 1959) or sandy debris flows
(Shanmugam et al., 1994; Shanmugam, 1996).
Pebbly Sandstones
As the coarse fraction within flows gradually increases, the
structureless sandstone facies grades through granule sandstones
into the pebbly sandstone facies. Graded bedding is common (Fig.
13) and readily observed because of the wide range of sizes present.
Internally, beds may show a crude horizontal stratification, and, in
rare cases, planar tabular and trough cross bedding may be present.
In the Cap Enrage Formation (Quebec), the trough sets are up to 50
cm thick, and trough widths seen in plan view are up to at least two
meters. Apart from structureless sandstone, the elements of the
Bouma sequence do not occur in pebbly sandstones, and hence the
Bouma sequence cannot be used as a descriptor in this facies
If blade-shaped or disc-shaped pebbles are present, they are
commonly well imbricated (Fig. 14). The features described
above—graded bedding, cross bedding, and imbrication—all
suggest turbulent flows in which grains are free to move relative
to one another, enabling the development of these features.
Making reasonable estimates of the turbulence of the flow and
particle settling velocities, it appears that a flow moving at 6 m/
s (the Grand Banks flow of 1929 near the toe of Laurentian Fan;
Uchupi and Austin, 1979) could suspend by fluid turbulence
alone clasts up to 2 or 3 cm in diameter. It therefore appears that
pebbles can be transported into deep water by turbidity currents
(flow velocities of 6 m/s or greater), and that such flows could
deposit graded, imbricated, and/or cross-bedded beds. In these
instances, despite the coarse nature of the beds, it is again not
necessary to appeal to alternative transport processes such as
fluxoturbidity currents and sandy debris flows.
Conglomerates
Conglomerates are not as common as the facies described
above, but they do make up an important part of the deep-water
407
VERTICAL
VERTICAL PIPES
PIPES
F IG . 11.—Distorted
fluid-escape pipes
in a core from the
Cretaceous Lysing
Formation, off-
shore mid-Nor-
way. Well 6506/
12-4, 3240.6 m
depth. 5 cm
sedimentary record. Four distinct facies were recognized by
Walker (1975a), but the classification is based on a relatively small
sample and does not have the authority of the Bouma sequence
for classical turbidites. The features used to define the facies are
(1) the style of grading (normal or inverse), (2) the type of
stratification, and (3) the fabric. In combination, these features
define the four facies.
The first consists of beds which are normally graded and pass
upward into finer-grained stratified pebbly sandstone (Fig. 15).
The second consists of beds that show only normal grading (Fig.
16) without a stratified component. The third consists of beds that
begin with inverse grading and pass upward into normally
graded beds (Fig. 17). Finally, the fourth facies lacks any of these
features and is described as disorganized or structureless (Fig.
18).
The first three facies may also display clast imbrication (Figs.
14, 17). In the stratified parts of the graded-stratified facies,
clasts lie with their long axes transverse to flow, and the short
axis dips upstream. In the graded and inversely graded parts of
408 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

3255.25 m 3255.44 m

FIG. 12.—Dish structures out-

DISH
DISH STRUCTURE
STRUCTURE lined in yellow from the
Agat 35/3-4well, 3255.5
m, offshore Norway. Note
darker (less permeable)
layer at base of each dish,
and a few fluid-escape
pipes red arrows) where
fluid has broken through
vertically.

AGAT. 35/3-4

5 cm

the beds, however, clasts more commonly lie with their long
axes parallel to flow, with the long axes dipping upstream. This
fabric suggests that the clasts have not been rolling on the bed
(if clasts roll, long axes tend to be transverse to flow). A full
discussion of conglomerate fabrics has been given by Walker
(1975a).
Bed thicknesses in the conglomerate facies are very variable.
Individual graded beds can be over 10 m thick (Fig. 16), but
alternatively, beds may be only one or two pebble diameters in
thickness. The example from Point Lobos, California, in Figure
19, shows several thin conglomerate layers alternating with
sandstone layers. The pebbles probably did not constitute the
bulk of the flow, because they would not have given a sufficient
density contrast with the surrounding fluid to drive the flow. It
is more likely that the flows that transported the pebbles were
large sandy turbidity currents, and that the thin pebble beds
represent lags left behind by the main flows.
Despite the suggestions made above, interpretations of con-
glomerate facies remain somewhat speculative because of the
lack of large-scale experimental work.

EXOTIC FACIES—OTHER TYPES OF DEPOSITS

IN DEEP-WATER ENVIRONMENTS

This category contains a variety of facies that do not fit into the
four facies described above. They are generally characterized by
poor sorting and lack of coherent bedding features. Some of the
main types are described below.

←
FIG. 13.—Pebbly sandstone about 1 m thick showing overall
graded bedding. Annot Sandstone at Chambre du Roi, south-
ern France. Fixed eyebolts for rock climbers are circled for
scale.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 409

FLOW

F IG . 14.—Graded con-
glomerate showing
clast imbrication (cen-
ter of bed above note-
book). Bed rests on de-
formed and slumped
mudstones. Tourma-
line State Surfing
Beach, north of San
Diego, California.

Pebbly Mudstones

Pebbly mudstones (Fig. 20) consist of granules and pebbles,

commonly along with distorted sandstone clasts, all embedded
in a deformed mudstone matrix. The term was introduced by
Crowell (1957), who suggested two mechanisms for their origin.
The first was emplacement by debris flows, wherein the strength
of the muddy matrix prevents the settling of the larger pebbles
and clasts during transport. Some debris flows may slide rapidly
on a basal layer of lubricating fluid (sea water) (Mohrig et al.,
1988), though it is likely that at least part of the moving mass
clearly is in contact with and erodes the substrate over which they
pass (Fig. 21; Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a) suggesting a more
complex rheology. As the flow velocity increases, there is a
tendency for sediment to be suspended at the head as well as the
upper parts of the flow. Rapidly moving debris flows therefore
may tend to transform at least in part into turbidity currents. The
transformation may be quite slow for muddy flows, but for sandy
debris flows moving at more than 1 to 2 m/s (the velocity at which
sand is carried in suspension) the transformation into a turbulent
turbidity current may be rapid, and take place over a short
distance.
A second mechanism for depositing pebbly mudstones
(Crowell, 1957) involves the passage of a sandy/pebbly turbidity
current over a bed of fluid-saturated, uncompacted mud. The
coarser material from the flow may be deposited on the muddy
surface and then quickly sinks into the uncompacted mud. The
pebble–sand–mud mixture may then flow for a short distance as
it dewaters, mixing the various grain sizes and then depositing an
ungraded, poorly sorted pebbly mudstone.

→
FIG. 15.—Graded conglomerate in the Cap Enrage Formation,
Ordovician, Quebec. Note the large carbonate blocks in the
base of the bed, and the gradation into structureless pebbly
sandstone, stratified pebbly sandstone, and finally structure-
less sandstone. Bed is at least 8 m thick.
410 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

BEDDING
BEDDING

TOP

FIG. 16.—Graded conglomerate about 14 m thick, Eocene of Oregon. Close field examination showed a progressive decrease in
maximum and estimated mean grain size throughout the bed, and no internal planes or grain size changes that might suggest
an amalgamated bed.

INVERSE
INVERSE GRADED
GRADED
BEDDING
BEDDING

BASE
BASE

FIG. 17.—Inversely to normally graded conglomerate, Cretaceous La Jolla Formation, California. Note also the well developed
imbrication with clasts dipping upstream (to the right).
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 411

TOP

STRUCTURELESS

FIG. 18.—Conglomerate in the Ordovician Cap Enrage Formation, Quebec, showing no grading and no imbrication. The bed is
described as disorganized or structureless.

SANDSTONE
SANDSTONE LAYERS
LAYERS

TOP

FIG. 19.—Thin conglomerate horizons separated by sandstone layers (shown by yellow arrows). Cretaceous, Point Lobos,
California.
412 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 20.—Pebbly mudstones from Pigeon Point, California. This is the classic location where Crowell (1957) first discussed the
origin of pebbly mudstones. Note clasts scattered throughout the muddy matrix, along with rolled-up sandstone beds (above
notebook).

Slumps Slumps with Stratified Blocks

Slumps (Figs. 22, 23) comprise a large category of variously
deformed sediments. The term in its most general sense de-
scribes chaotic unbedded units meters to tens of meters in
thickness. The lithology may consist only of mudstone (Fig.
22), or it may involve pulled-apart or rolled-up sandstone beds
in a matrix of mudstone. In all cases, deposition was probably
fairly rapid, and mudstones form an important part of the
facies. Transport distances vary from a few meters (e.g., col-
lapse of channel walls) to hundreds of kilometers across basin
floors. Original depositional conditions may have involved
rapid deposition of sandstone with trapped pore water, fol-
lowed by mudstone deposition and sealing of the pore fluid.
With continued deposition, the lithostatic load would in-
crease, but, if the pore fluid could not escape, the fluid pressure
would also increase. Slumping would be initiated if beds fail
along a weak layer with high pore pressure. The sediment may
move a few meters during dewatering and deposit a unit that
consequently would be identified as a slump. Alternatively, if
the sediment moved a greater distance the resulting deposit
may be identified as a debris flow. Some slumps may move fast
enough so that much of the sediment is taken into suspension
with turbulence characterizing the flow, transforming the
mass into a turbidity current.
Slumps with stratified blocks (Fig. 24) are not uncommon. The
stratified blocks may be meters in diameter, and they consist of
interbedded layers of sandstone and mudstone (perhaps origi-
nally classical turbidites). In most cases the blocks were probably
not lithified, so that transport in a turbulent medium would
probably result in splitting of the blocks along the cohesionless
sandstone layers. This would destroy the stratified blocks and
probably would give rise to large mudstone clasts. One sugges-
tion is that the blocks were derived from an undermined, col-
lapsed channel wall, where the blocks subsequently were buried
by turbidity-current sediment before they could be transported
downchannel. Later in this paper, examples will be shown of
large blocks that have been rafted on top of mass-transport
complexes. Such flows are not turbulent, and the rafted blocks
may retain some stratification.
Slumps involving only one or two beds (Fig. 25) are fairly
common. The deposit is characterized by undeformed bedding
below and above the slumped horizon, and coherent but rolled-
up beds within the slump. The beds are commonly thin (a few
tens of centimeters maximum), and are associated with other thin
beds and with “CCC” turbidites (Walker, 1985) interpreted as
levee deposits. Thus the slumps may indicate rapid deposition of
beds on the levee (either the side facing the channel, though more
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 413

A N

Flow Direction
1.5 km

one km

S 50 m N
S
B
one km

50 msec

one km

SSW NNE

FIG. 21.—A) Plan view of the erosional base of a mass-transport complex in the ultra-deep environment of the Makassar Strait,
Indonesia. Parallel to divergent erosional grooves are observed. B) Section-view image of mass-transport complex. The mass-
transport complex is characterized by chaotic seismic reflection character, with erosional scour in excess of 50 m locally, and up
to 1.5 km wide (modified from Posamentier et al., 2000). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

FIG. 22.—Large slump resulting in almost complete disruption of bedding, Carboniferous Bude Sandstones at Efford, southwest
England.
414 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

commonly on the back side of the levee), perhaps with trapped

pore fluid within the sandstones. The slopes associated with the
levee must have been sufficient to allow gentle sliding of just one
or two beds, without large-scale deformation of the underlying
sediment

CONTROLLING FACTORS
ON DEEP-WATER SYSTEMS

Here, we discuss some of the principles relevant to the depo-

sition of turbidites and the depositional elements within which
they occur. We will “set the stage” with regard to the context
within which deep-water depositional elements are deposited. A
sound understanding of process is key to the construction of
robust depositional models, enabling geoscientists to construct
models that will be applicable to their unique set of environmen-
tal circumstances. Such models can then be a useful predictor of

←
FIG. 23.—Slump folds in Eocene slope mudstones of the Cozy Dell
Formation, Highway 33 north of Wheeler Gorge, California.
Scale shown by notebook.

FIG. 24 (below).—Slump involving large stratified blocks in the

Upper Cretaceous Great Valley Sequence, Lake Berryessa,
California. The two heavy black lines show bedding (top to
the left)—the bedding is parallel but the lines converge be-
cause the camera is pointed steeply up the cliff. The matrix is
a silty mudstone with a large variety of pebbles and cobbles.
The stratified blocks consist of layers of sandstone and mud-
stone. It is argued that these would easily be disintegrated
along the unconsolidated sandstone layers if there had been
significant transport. It follows that they may have collapsed
from a nearby channel wall and were buried before they could
break up. Slumped bed is about 7 m thick.

BEDDING
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
BEDDING
15
15 cm
cm
FIG. 25.—Small-scale slump involving only two beds within otherwise flat-bedded succession, Eocene, Waitemata Group, New
Zealand.
spatial and temporal lithofacies distribution. A typical deep-
water depositional environment with associated depositional
elements is illustrated in Figure 1.
Sediment Staging Areas
The staging area can be defined as the shelf and/or upper-
slope location where turbulent flows originate (Fig. 1). This
staging area and the characteristics of the sediments delivered to
that area are all-important in dictating the nature of turbidity
currents and subsequently their deposits farther down-system.
In particular, the sand-to-mud ratio that characterizes these sedi-
ments plays an important role in determining whether long
leveed channels will develop down-system or whether short
leveed channels feeding frontal splays or lobes will characterize
downslope areas instead. The sediments that ultimately get in-
corporated into flows can be delivered to the staging area by
fluvial, eolian, or longshore-drift processes. Subsequent turbidity
currents originate as sediment failures, associated with seismic-
ity and slope instability. Alternatively, if rivers deliver sediment
directly to canyon heads, high-density flows within rivers can
continue directly into the deeper basin by density underflow (i.e.,
hyperpycnal flow). Such density underflows can transform into
true gravity flows farther down the slope.
The Significance of Sand-to-Mud Ratio within Flows
The initial sand-to-mud ratio within flows is dictated largely
by conditions in the staging area. The grain-size distribution in
these shelf-edge depocenters ultimately plays a critical role in the
415
style of turbidite deposition downslope, a relationship described
by Reading and Richards (1994). Posamentier and Kolla (2003a)
discuss how grain-size distribution exerts this control on the style
of turbidite deposition, and is schematically illustrated in Figure
26. This figure illustrates the relationship between total flow
height, the height of the high-density part of the flow, and levee
height, and the resulting transition between leveed channel and
frontal splay in the absence of a change in the gradient of the
slope.
As flows travel down-system, they progressively become
better organized, with finer sediments concentrating in the upper
part of the flow and coarser sediments concentrating in the lower
part of the flow. The result is that the upper part of the flow tends
to have a lower density and concentration than the lower part of
the flow. The tops of many turbulent flows are higher than the
associated levee crests (Fig. 27), the result of which is that the
lower part of the flow, where much of the sand-size sediment is
concentrated, is fully confined by the channel walls. In contrast,
the upper part of the flow, which rides well above the levee crests,
is largely unconfined by channel walls and hence is free to expand
laterally beyond the levee crests and onto the overbank. This
process of flow spillover results in the deposition of thin, fine-
grained turbidites (commonly CCC turbidites; Figs. 7, 8) on the
crests and backs of the levees, and it also results in progressive
impoverishment of mud within the total flow. In addition to mud
being lost from the flow by spillover, some sand may also be lost
from the flow because of sedimentation at the flow base and by
mixing with the remaining upper, lower-density part of the flow.
However, the amount of sand lost from the flow is volumetrically
significantly less than the amount of mud lost from the flow by
416 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Sand:Mud
Total Flow Height High
(i.e., Height of low-density +
high density columns)

Levee Height

Potential Overbank
Height Sediment Supply

Channel Complex
Single Leveed

(Frontal Splay)
Distributary
Channel
Low
Proximal Distance Down-System Distal
“Effective” Flow Height
Transition Point
(i.e., Height of high-density
column within turbidity flow)

FIG. 26.—Schematic depiction of the interplay between sediment gravity flows, net sand, and levee height with distance down-
system. Note that the high-density part of the gravity flow is located progressively more closely to the levee crest with distance
seaward. A transition from leveed channel to frontal splay/lobe occurs when the high-density part of the flow (i.e., the sand-rich
part of the flow) reaches bankfull stage. Note also that the highest sand-to-mud ratio occurs there as well (modified from
Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a).

Levee crests

Potentially prospective
overbank deposit

Confined channel flow

Overspill

Flow stripping

FIG. 27.—Schematic illustration of sediment gravity flow through a leveed channel (compare with Fig. 77). The cross-sectional view
illustrates that the flow top lies well above the levee crest. The part of the flow between the flow top and levee crest is unconfined
and systematically spills out of the channel. Enhanced spillover occurs at outer bends (by the process of flowstripping). These
locations constitute areas of preferred sand deposition in the levee environment.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
spillover. Thus the channel floor tends to aggrade somewhat
more slowly than the levee crests.
Also, somewhat counterintuitively, flows tend to become
sandier down-system (i.e., flows have a progressively higher
sand-to-mud ratio down-system) as a result of continual prefer-
ential shedding of muddier sediment due to spillover. Kolla and
Coumes (1987), Pirmez and Flood (1997), and Hiscott et al. (1997)
have observed that with increased distance down-system there is
a gradual increase of net sand deposited on levees, consistent
with a progressive impoverishment of mud within flows in the
down-system direction. The progressive loss of the upper or
mud-rich part of the flow results in a progressive decrease in
levee height down-system (Fig. 28). At some point down-system,
the high-concentration or sand-rich part of the flow reaches the
levee crests (bankfull stage). This is a critical location because
down-system from this point spillover is no longer associated
mainly with the muddy part of the flow; rather, sand-rich flows
are now directed across the overbank. Geomorphologically this is
expressed as a transition from a single leveed channel to a
distributary channel complex or frontal splay (Posamentier and
Kolla, 2003a). This location, referred to as the transition point, also
marks the location where the sand-to-mud ratio within the flow
is greatest. Downslope of this location the rate of sand being lost
from the flow exceeds the rate of mud being lost from the flow,
largely because the sand-rich part of the flow is now largely
unconfined. The increased cross-sectional area of the floor results
in decreased flow velocity and sand deposition.
The sand-to-mud ratio in the flow is critical to this analysis
insofar as changing this flow characteristic changes the location
FIG. 28.—Arbitrary seismic section constructed along a levee
crest. Levee facies are characterized by low-amplitude dis-
continuous reflections and overlie a high-amplitude continu-
ous to discontinuous frontal-splay complex (see Figs. 64 and
116). The section, which is flattened on the levee top, shows a
progressive decrease in levee thickness from landward to
seaward. It also shows a consistently thicker levee along outer
bends than along inner bends. Most notably, the location
where the levee thickness approaches zero is also where the
confined flow within the leveed channel transitions into a
frontal splay/lobe. This location is referred to as the transition
point. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
West Decreasing levee height
Top Levee
Base Levee
Seaward
417
of the transition point (Figs. 29, 30). Thus, if a succession of sand-
rich flows is followed by a succession of mud-rich flows, the
transition point shifts seaward and the result is the superposi-
tion of a single leveed channel across an older frontal splay (Fig.
31). Under certain circumstances, where later flows are more
sand rich, the reverse can occur as well. As previously dis-
cussed, such changes in sand-to-mud ratio commonly originate
in the staging area, and are manifestations of changing propor-
tions and rates of delivery by rivers and shelf processes, of
different sediment sizes.
Slope and Basin Physiography
The morphology of the slope and basin floor influences the
deposition of turbidites in a variety of ways. Physiographic
factors include (1) sea-floor rugosity on a large scale such as fault
scarps and intraslope basins associated with salt tectonics or toe-
of-slope thrust faults, (2) small-scale sea-floor rugosity compris-
ing sea-floor irregularities associated with earlier depositional
events such as slides or debris flows, (3) the height of the available
relief from shelf edge to basin floor, (4) the gradient of the slope,
(5) the presence of significant breaks in slope such as those that
can occur where the slope meets the basin floor, and 6) the rate of
change of the slope.
Perhaps the most well documented example of the effect of
sea-floor rugosity on turbidite systems is the fill-and-spill model
of turbidite systems that characterizes salt-supported intraslope
basins (Prather et al., 1998). They described a scenario whereby a
string of intraslope basins would fill progressively from the
West East
n
wD
low
Flo
F Dirireecctitioon
X’
X
Transition Point
East
100 msec
Inside Bend
five km
Outside Bend
418 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A Transition Point
Time 1
Leveed channel
Lev
ee C High Sand:Mud
rest
Height
(Early Lowstand)
Flow Top

Top of sand-rich
part of flow

Distance Down-System

Seaward Shift of Transition Point

Frontal splay

Time 2 Transition Point

Decreasing Sand:Mud
B
Leve Transition Point
e Cr
Height

est
Flow Top

Top of sand-rich
part of flow Distance Down-System

Time 3
Flow Top Low Sand:Mud
C Leve
(Late Lowstand)
e Cr Transition Point
est
Height

Top of sand-rich
part of flow Distance Down-System

FIG. 29.—Shift of the transition point in response to differences in sand-to-mud ratio with sediment gravity flows. A) A high sand-
to-mud ratio is associated with a transition point that is significantly farther landward than is the case with a lower sand-to-mud
ratio B, C).

Transition Point Transition Point

Time of high sand:mud Time of low sand:mud

A'

Migration of transition point in response

to change from high to low sand:mud

Leveed channel

A A'

Frontal splay

FIG. 30.—Superposition of leveed-channel system over a frontal splay/lobe, which would accompany a progressive muddying-up
of successive sediment gravity flows (compare with Figs. 31, 74, 116, and 163).
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
5 km
Late
Late Lowstand
Lowstand
Early
Early Lowstand
Lowstand
Late Lowstand
Early Lowstand
FIG. 31.—Two examples of the superposition of late lowstand leveed-channel deposits over early lowstand frontal-splay deposits
(compare with Fig. 30). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
proximal basin to ever more distal basins through time. Within
each intraslope basin, turbidite deposition comprises a succes-
sion from sheet-bedded deposits at the base to leveed-channel
deposits near the top. Flows entering an intraslope basin would
initially encounter markedly concave-up topography. This con-
cave-up morphology results in a rapid deceleration of flow,
which in turn favors deposition of sheet-like frontal splay depos-
its (Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a). As the basin gradually fills,
the topography progressively becomes less concave up. The
response is an upward transition from frontal splays to leveed
channels. As a result, leveed-channel deposits tend to dominate
the upper part of intraslope basin fill. This basin-fill evolution
from frontal-splay dominated to leveed-channel dominated is an
autocyclic phenomenon occurring in response to the evolution of
local topography. Posamentier and Kolla (2003a) describe a ma-
trix of possible outcomes associated with varying slope concavity
and varying sand-to-mud ratio (Fig. 32A).
419
5 km
Late
Late Lowstand
Lowstand
Early
Early Lowstand
Lowstand
The effect of a slope to intraslope-basin transition is shown in
Figure 32B and C. Flow vectors on the slope are directed primarily
downslope parallel to flow. Upon encountering an intraslope
basin, laterally directed flow vectors are significantly enhanced.
This increases the likelihood of levee breaching and a resultant
distributive channel pattern and deposition of a frontal splay.
Sea-floor rugosity associated with fault scarps or other abrupt
changes in slope gradient can also have profound influence on
turbidite deposition. In general, the farther a flow travels without
any significant breaks in slope the more the sand grains tend to
become concentrated towards the base of the flow and mud tends
to concentrate towards the top. Thus grain-size sorting or segre-
gation within the flow progressively improves down-system—
the flow becomes better organized. The presence of an abrupt
slope change in the path of the flow results in a perturbation (i.e.,
a hydraulic jump; Komar, 1971) within the flow and a consequent
tendency for abrupt increased flow disorganization. This pertur-
420 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

C Slo
pe/
bas
B in
flo
or
tra
ns
itio
n

Time 1

Time 2

Time 3
FIG. 32.—A) Matrix of possible responses of location of transition point to varying sand-to-mud ratio and varying slope curvature.
Increased slope curvature, a local or autocyclic parameter, results in a landward shift of the transition point. Increased sand-to-
mud ratio, an external or allocyclic parameter, has a similar effect (after Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a). B) Turbidity flow through
a leveed channel onto a basin floor. C) Upon encountering the basin floor, laterally directed flow vectors are significantly and
abruptly increased. This can result in deposition of a frontal splay on the basin floor. The degree to which a frontal splay forms
at the transition from slope to basin floor is a function of the abruptness of the slope change at this location.

bation results in poorer grain-size sorting within the body of the
flow down-system of the abrupt slope change. Consequently,
settings such as the base of a fault scarp or an abrupt slope-to-
basin transition can cause significant reorganization of flow. The
result of this reorganization is the tendency for the system to
change from relatively confined leveed channels to relatively
unconfined frontal splays (Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a) as
illustrated in Figure 33. The available relief from point of flow
origin to the basin floor can also play an important role in
determining the style of turbidite deposition. Assuming constant
slope gradient, the greater the relief from shelf edge to basin floor,
the longer the run of the turbidity flow, and therefore the greater
the tendency for concentration of sand towards the flow base.
This allows greater efficiency of levee construction and a greater
likelihood for levees to extend across the basin floor. All else
being equal, two flows of identical grain-size composition flow-
ing down two slopes with different length (each characterized by
the same gradient), one with relief of a few hundred meters and
the other with relief of a few thousand meters, can be associated
with a very different set of turbidite depositional elements on the
associated basin floor. As illustrated in Figure 34A the flow that
has reached the basin floor early in its run has not had the chance
to become organized from a grain-size distribution perspective,
hence the transition point is located significantly farther land-
ward. The basin floor in this instance is characterized by a
minimal leveed channel and a relatively widespread frontal
splay or lobe. Where the flow has had a long run before reaching
the basin floor (Fig. 34B) the flow is much better organized and the
transition point lies farther across the basin floor.
DEPOSITIONAL ELEMENTS
The integration of facies description and process sedimentol-
ogy leads to the identification of larger-scale depositional or
architectural elements and their linkage into depositional sys-
tems and ultimately depositional sequences. Depositional ele-
ments in deep-water systems are of the order of ten to a few tens
of meters in thickness, and may extend laterally for tens of meters
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 421

Confined flow (within leveed channel) Frontal splay

Lower-density
part of flow
Levee top

Higher-density part of flow

Location of hydraulic jump

Abrupt flow disorganization
and expansion

FIG. 33.—Schematic depiction of flow expansion that occurs at the base of slope where the change of gradient is abrupt. Flow on the
slope is sufficiently well organized so that coarser-grained sediments are entrained in the flow base and are fully confined by
levees. Once the flow strikes the abrupt change in gradient that is located at the base of slope, the flow abruptly becomes
disorganized as it experiences a hydraulic jump. This abrupt increased disorganization causes a sudden increase in sand content
within the upper part of the flow and results in a situation where the higher-density part of the flow lies above the levee crests
and avulsions are likely to occur at this location. At this abrupt base-of-slope location, transition from leveed channel to frontal
splay is likely (compare with Fig. 32B, C).

Lower-density part of flow

A

Higher-density part of flow

Lower-density part of flow

Higher-density part of flow

FIG. 34.—Schematic depiction of two similar sediment gravity flows at the point of initiation (i.e., similar sand-to-mud ratio, volume,
etc.), but facing slopes of the same grade but significantly different length. The sediment gravity flow that faces the short slope
A) has less distance available to it for sorting to occur than does the sediment gravity flow facing a long slope B). The result is that,
when the flow finally reaches the basin floor, the flow down the long slope is significantly better sorted, with coarser sediment
more concentrated near the flow base, than the flow down the short slope, where poorer sorting results in sands much higher up
in the flow.
422 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

up to tens of kilometers. The elements are defined by (1) their
external geometries and (2) the internal facies within the ele-
ments. Our approach will follow that of Mutti and Normark
(1991), and our analysis of depositional elements will integrate
stratigraphic, geomorphologic, and facies observations, based on
seismic, outcrop, and borehole data. Moreover, the relationships
between depositional elements in time and space will be within
the framework of process sedimentology. We will start with
depositional elements that are observed in proximal settings—
slope channels and canyons—and then move progressively far-
ther seaward down the slope and across the basin floor, where we
will examine leveed channels, overbank deposits (including sedi-
ment waves, crevasse splays, and planar levee deposits), frontal
splays (i.e., lobes or distributary channel complexes), and debris-
flow deposits (including debris-flow lobes, channels, and sheets).
In each instance we will suggest, based on process sedimentol-
ogy, what facies would be encountered in association with spe-
cific depositional elements.
Canyons and Slope Channels
Canyons and slope channels are the primary conduits for
sediments to travel from the shelf-edge staging area, across the
slope, and onto the basin floor. They can range in scale from a
few meters in depth and width (these would be referred to as
slope gullies) to ten or more kilometers wide and over a kilome-
ter deep (submarine canyons). They tend to be largely erosional
with significant incision into the substrate. In the context of this
discussion, the distinction we draw between canyons and slope
channels is that canyons consistently fully confine the flows that
pass through them, whereas slope channels only partially con-
fine the flows that pass through them (Fig. 35). The effect of
partial confinement is that some spillover from the tops of the
flows passing through slope channels occurs, resulting in the
construction of levees on the flanks of the channel. Levee con-
struction does not occur when the flows are fully confined, as
they are with canyons (though some canyons contain smaller
leveed channels within the confines of the canyon walls). An-
other distinction between canyons and slope channels is that,
whereas both can be deepened by the passage of turbidity
currents, canyons are more likely to widen by mass wasting on
the canyon walls than are slope channels. In the distal reaches of
canyons, as channel-wall relief diminishes, turbidity current
height eventually exceeds the height of the canyon walls, and
levees develop.
Canyons.—
An example of a canyon is shown in Figure 36. There is no
evidence of levee construction on the flanks of the canyons,
suggesting that flows were fully confined within this feature. The
presence of sand within this canyon is largely at the base (Figs. 37–
39), expressed as moderate- to high-sinuosity channel threads.
These channel deposits can be fully to partially preserved, the
latter illustrated by the segment of high-sinuosity channel depos-
its observed in the canyon terrace perched above the canyon floor
(Fig. 37). The canyon fill is inferred to be overwhelmingly mud
dominated, as evidenced by the seismic reflection character
observed within the confines of the canyon Figs. 37, 40). The
seismic reflection pattern of canyon fill commonly is character-
ized by moderate- to low-amplitude, discontinuous chaotic-con-
torted seismic reflections. This seismic reflection character com-
monly has been associated with mass-transport deposits such as
associated with slides and debris flows (Posamentier and Kolla,
2003a). The morphology of the top of the canyon fill is character-
ized by linear flow lines (Fig. 36A, C), further evidence for the
absence of turbulence in the flows responsible for at least the most
recent phase of canyon fill (Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a). How-
ever, there can exist isolated threads of channel sands, character-
ized by high-amplitude, continuous to discontinuous seismic
reflections at the canyon base or embedded within the canyon fill
near the canyon base.
The fill of many canyons is commonly fine grained, and it is
deposited after the canyon or channel has been abandoned. If
abandonment is due to cutoff of sediment supply during rela-
tive sea-level rise, the fill may consist largely of slump and slide
material from the canyon or slope channel walls with additional
contribution of hemipelagic mud and silt that gradually settles
over the area of the slope and in the canyon. The present-day
Mississippi Canyon appears to have filled in this way (Goodwin
and Prior, 1989). Consequently, it is likely that the preponder-
ance of canyon filling occurs only after the axial turbidity-

A B

Canyon Slope Channel or Gully

FIG. 35.—Schematic illustration showing section views across a canyon A) and slope channel or gully B). Sediment gravity flows
within canyons are fully confined by canyon walls. Consequently no levee deposits are observed outside the canyon. In contrast,
sediment gravity flows within slope channels or gullies are not fully confined by channel walls so that levee deposits are observed
outside the channels or gullies.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 423

A B C

Flo
w
dir
ec
tio
n

Figure 42

10 km

FIG. 36.—Seismic attributes of the modern sea floor in the vicinity of Mississippi Canyon, Gulf of Mexico; seaward is from upper left to
lower right. A) seismic dip azimuth map—this map highlights the principal canyon as well as smaller tributary channels. The canyon
floor is characterized by long linear grooves. The walls of the canyon are characterized by delicate tributary networks of small gullies.
B) seismic dip magnitude—this attribute highlights the edges of the canyon floor as well as the edges of the tributary channels. C)
seismic reflection curvature—this attribute highlights the drainage networks and drainage divides; it also clearly shows the arcuate
nature of the canyon walls in places (compare with Fig. 42). Seismic data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.

Mass-transport deposits

Flow direction

FIG. 37.—Seismic cross section through Mississippi canyon, with low-sinuosity to moderate-sinuosity turbidite channels at the
canyon base. Note that the bulk of the canyon fill comprises mass-transport deposits. The axial channel shown here corresponds
to the channel segment shown in Figure 38A. The sinuous channel on the flank of the canyon fill is only partially preserved. Seismic
data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.
424 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A B
A B

1 km
C
C

1 km 1 km

Sinuosity = 1.2

Flo
w
Di
rec
tio Channel width = 200–250m
n

Sinuosity = 1.5
10 km

FIG. 38.—Seismic reflection amplitude images of the channel at the base of Mississippi canyon (compare with Figs. 37 and 39).
Sinuosity ranges from 1.2 proximally to 1.5 distally. Seismic data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.

FIG. 39.—Coherence image of proximal Mississippi canyon channel. Note the discrete channel threads indicate meander loop
expansion (i.e., swing) and down-system migration (i.e., sweep). Seismic data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 425

current channels shut down. Once these “conveyer belts” cease
to be active, any sloughing off the canyon walls remains within
the confines of the canyon. Extensive slumping commonly
characterizes the canyon walls (Figs. 40, 41). Thus, the bulk of
canyon filling likely occurs as a result of mass wasting during
rapid sea-level rises and subsequent highstands, thus making
the fill predominantly part of the transgressive and highstand
systems tracts.
Some canyon systems characterized by supply of very coarse-
grained sediment can have extensive coarse-grained sediments
deposited within canyons (e.g., Pigeon Point Formation, Lowe,
1979; Carmelo Formation, Clifton, 1981, 1984). This is most com-
mon in active continental-margin settings where deep-water
turbidite systems are linked to short and steep fluvial drainage
systems.
The facies that would most likely characterize the bulk of the
canyon fill is that of a debrite, that is, a mud-dominated deposit
with minimal internal organization. Convolute bedding associ-
ated with isolated cohesive blocks can be present in some
instances. The isolated channel deposits (e.g., Fig. 37) observed
within the canyon would be characterized by true turbidite
facies, likely dominated by Bouma A and B units, with Bouma
C, D, and E units commonly lacking preservation potential
because of erosion by successive turbidity currents through the
channel. These channels commonly are not associated with
constructional levees, inasmuch as the canyon walls serve the
purpose of confining the flows in their entirety, thus precluding
the possibility of flow spillover and levee construction. In
isolated instances, small channels within the middle to upper
part of the canyon fill can have associated levees, all deposited
within the confines of the canyon walls. This situation can
develop when a turbidity flow travels across the relatively flat
floor of a partially filled canyon. Essentially, this constitutes an
underfit situation; the flows coming through the channel no
longer “feel” the canyon walls, hence they form their own
confining levees.
Some canyons can be completely mud filled and contain
channels that have no associated sand deposits. This commonly
occurs within tributary arms of larger canyon systems. Such
tributaries may have formed as a result of retrogressive slumping
on the canyon margin. The heads of these tributary systems do
not apparently link up with shelfal fluvial systems; hence there is
no significant sand input. These tributary systems commonly are
characterized by small slope gullies or rills, feeding larger, com-
monly straight axial channels. A tributary arm of Mississippi
Canyon, shown in Figure 42, is characterized by channels at the
base but notably no associated high-amplitude seismic reflec-
tions, suggesting a complete absence of sand in the channels.
Such features are thought to have formed by low-density, slow-
moving turbidity currents originating along the crests of steep
drainage divides.
Slope Channels.—
Sand-prone slope channels such as that shown in Figure 43
have been described in some detail by Hackbarth et al. (1994),
Mayall and Stewart (2000), Kolla et al. (2001), and Posamentier
(2003a). In contrast with the canyon previously discussed, this
type of sediment conduit is associated with levee construction.
Such levees can be observed high up on the slope at least to
within 8 km of the shelf-edge staging area (Posamentier, 2003a).
The channel thread at the base of the slope channel illustrated by
Posamentier (2003a) is characterized by high-amplitude seismic
reflections and a moderate- to high-sinuosity channel pattern
that persists landward nearly to the toe of slope of a small shelf-
edge delta, which itself is laterally confined to the head of the
slope channel (Fig. 44). The presence of channel sinuosity nearly
to the slope channel head suggests the presence of turbulent
flow at least this high up on the slope, if not all the way to the
shelf–slope break. Further, a time slice through the upper slope
and outer shelf reveals a protuberance of the shelf edge pre-
cisely where the slope channel is located (Fig. 45). The associa-

A B

Note scallop-shaped
slump scars on
canyon wall

Canyon Margin
Flow direction

FIG. 40.—A) Transverse profile through Mississippi Canyon illustrating canyon cut as well as sand-prone channel fill at base of
canyon. Dotted line indicates location of time slice shown in B. B) Time slice through Mississippi Canyon illustrating arcuate walls
indicative of extensive slumping along canyon walls. Dotted line indicates location of time slice shown in A. Data proprietary to
PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.
426 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A B

on
cti
re
Di
Flo

w
w

Flo
Dir
ec
tio
n

5 km

FIG. 41.—A) Curvature map of modern sea floor over Mississippi Canyon characterized by arcuate walls indicative of extensive
slumping. B) Time slice across Mississippi Canyon and 3D perspective view of interpreted arcuate wall of the canyon. Data
proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA

5 km

FIG. 42.—Seismic reflection curvature of the sea floor along southwestern side of Mississippi Canyon, Gulf of Mexico (detail of Fig. 36).
Three larger channels up to one kilometer wide, as well as numerous smaller gullies and rills, are shown. Note that many of the
smaller gullies and rills originate along knife-edge drainage divides. Seismic data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 427

Flow direction

FIG. 43.—3D perspective illumination of the Einstein Channel on the upper slope of the Desoto Canyon area, eastern Gulf of Mexico.
Note the presence of levees external to this channel as well as the sinuous nature of the channel pattern. The channel is
approximately 1.5 km wide, from levee crest to levee crest. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.

tion of a shelf-edge protuberance or delta with the slope channel
suggests a genetic link between shelf fluvial and distributary-
channel sediment delivery systems and the presence of turbid-
ite deposits on the slope. One can infer from this close connec-
tion between the fluvial distributary channels and the meander-
ing threads within the slope channel that the turbidity currents
which came through the slope channel may have originated as
density underflows (i.e., hyperpycnal flows) sourced by river-
borne sediments. Such processes likely would have been active
for days or weeks at a time, while the river was in flood. Direct
links between fluvial distributary channels and canyon systems
is also common. Most well-developed canyons are associated
with major river systems on the shelf (e.g., the Hudson canyon,
the Congo canyon, and the Mississippi canyon) (Posamentier
and Allen, 1999).
Slope channels commonly contain sand-prone facies at or
near the base of the conduit. Mayall and Stewart (2000) document
examples and propose a model for slope channel fill that contains
debris-flow deposits at the base overlain by amalgamated turbid-
ites. The fill culminates with late-stage, isolated underfit leveed
channels associated with diminishing flow discharge, located
within the master slope-channel walls. Other examples of com-
plex slope channel fill are documented in Kolla et al. (2001),
Sikkima and Wojcik (2000), and Abreu et al. (2003). The amalgam-
ated sandy facies are characterized predominantly by Bouma A
and B turbidites, whereas the underfit late-stage channels are
characterized by Bouma A to D turbidites. Climbing current
ripples can be observed most commonly within the levees asso-
ciated with the late-stage underfit channels.
Examples of Coarse-Grained Canyon Fills.—
In unusual cases, the upper parts of large canyons may
contain significant quantities of sand. Two examples have been
reported from the Atlantic margin of Brazil, in studies based on
closely spaced log and core control. The sand-prone fill of a large
slope channel (canyon?) has been documented in the Carapeba–
Pargo system on the Atlantic margin offshore Brazil (Fig. 46;
Bruhn and Walker, 1995), where a large slope channel can be
traced for at least 150 km. Turbidites have been studied in the
Carapeba and Pargo oilfields, which lie about 90 km down-
canyon from the updip erosional edge of Cretaceous rocks. The
slope-channel width is of the order of a few kilometers, the
precise width of the channel being hard to determine because
younger turbidites spread more and more widely over the upper
parts of the slope-channel margins. The thickness of the fill is
428 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Flow direction

Transverse
section
D

Axial
section

FIG. 44.—A) 3D perspective view of the Einstein channel (approximately 2 km wide) with associated sand-prone channel fill at the
base and shelf-edge delta at the slope-channel head. Each delta-front shingle is shown in a different color. B) Axial section through
the Einstein slope channel illustrating the shingled nature of the slope-channel-head delta as well as the high reflection amplitude
of both the delta as well as the channel fill at the base of the slope channel. C) Transverse section through the Einstein channel
illustrating high-amplitude sand-prone deposits at base of channel. D) Seismic reflection amplitude of the deposits at the base
of the slope channel illustrating the presence of sinuous narrow channel threads, characterized by down-system migration of
meander loops. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.

about 260 m (Turonian) plus 24 m (Maastrichtian). The turbidites
within the slope channel form eight thinning- and fining-upward
successions. Individual beds at the bases of the successions can be
up to 12 m thick and consist of granule sandstones with scattered
pebbles (Fig. 47; the pebbly sandstone facies described earlier in
this paper). The successions are 27 to 140 m thick and can be
mapped as tabular or linguoid sandbodies 1 to 12 km wide in
which the younger turbidites become finer grained, thinner
bedded, and more discontinuous upsection and downcanyon.
The successions are stacked in an overall retrogradational back-
stepping pattern for at least 20 km, recording the fill of the slope
channel.
The slope-channel morphology can be traced at least 60 km
downslope from Carapeba (Fig. 46), thus defining the deposi-
tional site at Carapeba and Pargo as within the slope channel. The
depositional elements consist of the thinning- and fining-upward
successions, which appear to spread with a sheet-like geometry
from wall to wall (Bruhn and Walker, 1995, their Figs. 5 and 6). A
hypothetical continuous outcrop of this canyon fill, 200 m thick
and covering one km2, would be almost impossible to interpret as
a canyon fill—the only suggestion of channelization might be the
very thick beds and the coarse grain sizes.
The second example of canyon filling is also from the Atlantic
margin of Brazil, in Regencia Canyon (Bruhn and Walker, 1997).
The canyon can be mapped near the mouth of the Doce River (Fig.
48) and is up to 6 km wide. It can be mapped for at least 15 km, and
the fill is up to 1 km thick. Lagoa Parda field is about 2.8 km long
and 2.5 km wide, and it has 70 wells with an average spacing of 200–
250 m. Seven wells are cored, with a total of 324 m of core. Because
of this unusually good control, individual beds can be traced from
well to well; where beds or groups of beds can no longer be
correlated, channel margins can be defined (detailed correlations
are shown by Bruhn and Walker, 1997, their fig. 13, and a schematic
correlation diagram is shown here in Fig. 49). The thirty-eight
channels so defined are 210 to more than 1050 m wide and over 1
km long. The channel fills range in thickness from 9 m to more than
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 429

e
ic
sl
e
m
Ti
Time slice

Shelf-Edge
Shelf-Edge Delta
Delta
B

FIG. 45.—A) Perspective view of Einstein channel and associated shelf edge, Gulf of Mexico, from 3D seismic data. The surface shown
lies at the base of the channel levees and is Late Pleistocene in age. B) Time slice through the upper part of the section reveals a
protuberance of the shelf edge corresponding to a shelf-edge delta (compare with Fig. 57). Note that this protuberance
corresponds precisely to the location of the Einstein slope channel. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.

50 m. Relationships of channels and their stacking patterns are
shown in Bruhn and Walker (1997, their figs. 14, 15, and 16).
Channel fills comprise bouldery to pebbly conglomerates in
normally graded beds up to 6.4 m thick, along with graded
sandstone beds up to 3.8 m thick. Finer-grained facies include
bioturbated mudstones and thin-bedded sandstones, and mo-
notonous dark gray mudstones. Detailed correlations show that
these finer-grained facies are deposited as the levees of channels
filled with the coarser facies.
The channels can be grouped into three channel complexes
(CC), colored orange (channels 1–11), yellow (13–35), and red
(36–38) in Figure 49. Overall, the channel fills become narrower,
thinner, and finer grained from CC 1 (orange) to CC 3 (red).
Channel complexes 1 and 2 are deeply incised. Channel orienta-
tions in CC1 suggest flows from smaller tributaries along the
northwest margin of Regencia Canyon (Fig. 48), and there are no
levee facies associated with the CC1 channels. Orientations in
CC2 suggest flows generally from west to east along the axis of
the canyon. Levees are associated with channels 19–35 (Fig. 48).
Slopes on the levees are up to 10 degrees, with slopes facing the
channels generally being steeper than slopes facing away from
the channels. Levees are also steeper on the left sides of the levees
(Coriolis effect in the southern hemisphere). In CC3, channel
orientations again suggest flow from the northwest margin of
Regencia Canyon, and asymmetrical levee growth appears to
have influenced channel switching (details in Bruhn and Walker,
1997). Channels are only 230–280 m wide, with fills 13–15 m thick.
Two main points emerge from this study. First, it is clear that
turbidity currents can deposit coarse sediment within canyon
heads, where the distance between flow initiation and sediment
deposition is only a few kilometers. Deposition may be strongly
influenced by the abrupt flattening of the gradient from canyon
margin to canyon floor, particularly in CC1 and CC3. Second, it
is clear that small (10–20 m deep, 200–300 m wide) leveed chan-
nels can develop within canyon heads—this makes the interpre-
tation of some limited outcrops very difficult. Specifically, the
channels at San Clemente, California (described below), have
coarse fills, muddy channel walls, and multiple incisions. They
have previously been described as mid-fan channels (Walker
(1975b), but this interpretation is revised below, partly in the light
430 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 46.—Location map of Carapeba and Pargo fields, offshore Brazil. Note Brazilian coastline and city of Campos. Long serrated
line shows limit of occurrence of Upper Cretaceous rocks (after Bruhn and Walker, 1995).

of a resemblance between the San Clemente channels and the CC3
channels of Lagoa Parda. The general point to emphasize is that,
unless an ancient example can be fairly positively identified, it
cannot be used to construct general facies models—using the data
from San Clemente without being sure of its setting (canyon head
or basin floor) could lead to distorted syntheses of data during
modern–ancient comparisons and facies modeling.
Example of Slope-Channel Fill,
San Clemente, California.—
A candidate for a slope-channel fill is observed in the
Capistrano Formation (Upper Miocene) at San Clemente, Califor-
nia (Fig. 50; Walker, 1975b; Campion et al., 2000; Camacho et al.,
2002). The channel complex cuts into mudstones containing some
beds of chert (similar to beds in the Monterey Chert). Bedding is
generally horizontal in these mudstones, but some beds are
broken by small soft-sediment faults suggesting movement on a
slope—thus the beds outside the channel may be slope deposits.
Within the channel complex, beds are very well exposed.
They are also horizontal, and the channel complex can be traced
for over 500 m (Fig. 51). The Upper Miocene part of the cliff is 20
m thick, with indications that the nested channels may be as much
as 40 m thick (Walker, 1975b). In addition to horizontal beds,
there are eight prominent inclined surfaces, seven of which are
draped with mudstone (Fig. 51). The surfaces have dips ranging
from 5 to 18 degrees, and the mudstone drapes vary from 30 cm
to 2 m in thickness.
The interpretation of the San Clemente section is that it
comprises a series of nested channels, separated by dipping mud-
draped surfaces. There were no outcrop indications that the
channels might be sinuous, although excavations of channel
walls suggested that the strikes of the walls varied from 230 to 300
degrees (Walker, 1975b).
The fill of the channels consists of interbedded sandstones
and mudstones. The grain size is up to coarse sand, with many
beds containing scattered granules and pebbles. Sandstone bed
thickness is variable; in some of the channels it is typically a few
tens of centimeters (Fig. 52), whereas in other channels beds can
be almost 1 m or thicker (Fig. 53). The thicker beds tend to be
amalgamated, without mudstone layers (Fig. 54). Amalgamation
surfaces are characterized by grain-size changes and bedding
irregularities that suggest loading of the upper sandstone into the
lower one (Fig. 54).
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
10 cm
FIG. 47.—Core photo of pebbly sandstone, Carapeba Field. Core
sleeves are 1 m long, top to left. The core shows one pebbly
sandstone bed, with prominent fluid-escape features in the
uppermost two core sleeves.
The finer layers between the sandstones consist of gray silt-
stones and mudstones with abundant bioturbation. On the in-
clined mudstone drapes, gray silty mudstones are irregularly
interbedded with very fine-grained brown claystones (Fig. 55).
The different fine-grained facies were not examined micro-
paleontologically, but commonly in Tertiary turbidites in Califor-
nia the gray silty mudstones contain transported shallow-water
foraminifera whereas the brown claystones contain deeper-wa-
ter benthonic foraminifera. It therefore is assumed that the in-
clined mudstone drapes consist of silt and mud introduced by
turbidity currents (the gray layers), as well as hemipelagic brown
claystones deposited between turbidity currents.
These relationships are particularly well displayed in channel
6 (Fig. 56). The lower three beds pinch out rapidly toward the
431
channel margin. In the case of the lower two beds, thin sandy
layers a few millimeters thick continue up the channel margin
and eventually disappear. It appears that the turbidity currents
transported sand close to the bed, and that silt and mud (with very
thin sand layers) was draped higher up over the channel margin.
Note also that potential reservoir rocks in the channel pinch out
laterally against the channel margin within a few meters.
The suggestion of soft-sediment disturbance in the beds out-
side the channel complex, and the proven occurrence of small
leveed channels within larger incisions (Lagoa Parda, Brazil;
Bruhn and Walker, 1997), suggests that the Capistrano Formation
at San Clemente can be interpreted as a slope-channel fill.
3D Seismic Examples.—
In contrast with outcrop data, good-quality 3D seismic data
can afford a comprehensive view of depositional elements and
their relationship to each other, though, of course, ground-truth
calibration may be lacking. In a well-documented example from
the eastern Gulf of Mexico, Posamentier (2003a) illustrates the
evolution of a linked shelf-edge delta and slope channel. The
shelf and slope environment became an active depocenter likely
in response to sea-level lowering and associated forced regres-
sion resulting in a seaward shift of the depocenter across the
shelf and to the shelf edge. Once the depocenter reached the
shelf edge a lowstand shelf-edge delta formed. This lowstand
delta, shown in axial view in Figure 57, is characterized first by
successive downstepping of the delta plain, likely associated
with falling sea level (i.e., the early lowstand systems tract of
Posamentier and Allen, 1999, or the falling stage systems tract of
Plint and Nummedal, 1998), and later aggradation of the delta
plain, likely associated with rising relative sea level (i.e., the late
lowstand systems tract of Posamentier and Allen, 1999, or
simply the lowstand systems tract of Plint and Nummedal,
1998). Numerous small slope channels or gullies are observed
on the surface that marks the base of this lowstand delta com-
plex (Posamentier, 2003a) (Fig. 58). These slope gullies are not
uniformly distributed along the entire breadth of the slope
shown, but rather tend to cluster in one area. The area where the
gullies are clustered directly coincides with the location of the
shelf-edge protuberance, suggesting a genetic link between
deltaic distributary channels and downdip slope gullies
(Posamentier, 2003a). These slope gullies are observed only at
the base of the lowstand delta complex; within and to the top of
the delta a single larger slope channel can be observed (Figs. 43,
44). This larger slope channel seems to have captured most of
the flow from the shelf systems at the expense of the numerous
smaller slope gullies that originally were present and seems to
represent the culmination of an evolution from many slope
gullies to a single slope channel within a single depositional
sequence.
Basin-Floor Leveed Channels
Basin-floor leveed channels commonly are genetically linked
with canyons or slope channels. Examples of basin-floor leveed
channels are illustrated in Figures 59 and 60 and are described by
Posamentier et al. (2000), Peakall et al. (2000), and Posamentier
(2003b). Aggradation of channel-fill deposits can occur both on
the basin floor (Fig. 61) and on the slope. The Joshua channel,
described by Posamentier (2003b), built a channel ridge that
stands c. 65 m above the adjacent basin floor. Likewise, the
channel shown in Figure 61 stands c. 90 m above its adjacent basin
floor. Sinuosity can be variable, from segments that are nearly
straight to segments that can display sinuosity of up to 3.0.
432 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 48.—Location map of Regencia Canyon, State of Espirito Santo, Brazil. The canyon head is just onshore, close to the present day
Doce River mouth, 550 km northeast of Rio de Janeiro.

FIG. 49.—Diagram of channels within the Lagoa Parda field, Regencia canyon head. Orange—channel fills of unstratified bouldery
to pebbly conglomerate and very coarse-grained sandstone. Yellow and red—unstratified coarse-grained sandstone and parallel
stratified medium-grained sandstone. Green—interbedded bioturbated mudstones and thin-bedded sandstones, interpreted as
levee facies. Note decrease in channel size and grain size upward. Lower channels do not have levees, but channel horizons 26
and higher have associated levees.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 433

San Clemente
N
0 0.5 km

Capistrano Formation
San Clemente
Outcrop Belt State Beach

L o Afte
0 160 km

ca r W
(
tio a
n o lke
y
dar

f C r, 1
oun

h a 97
k B
Par

n n 5)
els
1–
San Francisco

8
Pa
Pa
cif

cif
ic

ic
Oc

Oc
ea

Los Angeles
n

ea
n
Study Area

FIG. 50.—Location of the outcrop at San Clemente, California, south of the parking lot (from Campion et al., 2000).

40

Bioturb. Mdstns. Bioturb. Mdstns. Pleistocene

Parking
20 Lot Cgls. WIDE GULLY Cgls. Terrace

Mainly massive ssts Mainly massive ssts U. Miocene

Capistrano Fm
0
0 Meters 50 100 150 200
8 7
40

Path from Campground

Bioturb. Mdstns. at Top of Valley

20 Cgls.
Cgls.

CU
Path
0
210 250 300 350 Restrooms 400
6 5 4 4 3 Path Tunnel
40 2
Lifeguard

Bioturb. Mdstns.

20 Cgls.
Lower cliff edge

Bioturb. Mdstns. Bioturb. Mdstns.

0 Bioturb. Mdstns.
450 Poorly exposed 500 550 600 650
Tunnel 2 1 Tunnel

Mudstone Drape

FIG. 51.—Measured section of the cliff at San Clemente. Distances are in meters south of the parking lot. Regional bedding is
horizontal, and heavy dipping black lines indicate mudstone drapes on channel walls (numbered 2 through 7). Channel 6 is shown
with red arrow and is discussed in the text. From Walker (1975b).
434 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 52 (above).—Four thin but coarse-grained sandstone layers

separated by gray (turbidite) mudstones. Part of the fill of
channel 7, San Clemente.

Meander-loop migration is a common attribute of deep-water

channels, with both meander swing and sweep being common
features (Fig. 62). This can be observed both in section as well as
in map view (Figs. 62–64). In many instances, the seismic expres-
sion of meander loops in plan view can be characterized by a
series of scrolls (Fig. 62). Somewhat less common are meander-
loop cutoffs with associated oxbows (Fig. 65). Internal scour at
successive channel bases within an overall aggradational amal-
gamated channel package is very common. The base of basin- 15 CM
floor channel complexes is erosional with at least some incision
into the substrate (Fig. 64).
In association with meander-loop channel migration, lateral-
accretion deposits can be observed on seismic sections (Figs. 66–
69). Abreu et al. (2003) present a well-illustrated example of lateral-
accretion sets in a deep-water meandering channel offshore west
Africa. Such features are similar in stratigraphic architecture to
fluvial point bars (Fig. 70), though the formation process can be
quite different. Nonetheless stratigraphic compartmentalization
from a petroleum flow-unit perspective is quite similar.
Lateral-accretion surfaces have been observed in outcrop as
well, as in the Ross Sandstone and overlying Gull Island Forma-
tion of western Ireland (Lien et al., 2003). Figure 71 shows a cliff
outcrop with prominent lateral-accretion surfaces characterized
by alternating layers of sandstone and mudstone. These lateral-
accretion surfaces have a vertical relief of about 5 m. In the Gull
Island Formation, lateral-accretion surfaces can be seen in a
continuously sandy succession (Fig. 72).
Lateral accretion commonly can be seen in 3-D seismic images
(Figs. 66–69). In Figure 62 the “point bars” show a series of scrolls

→
FIG. 53.—Graded coarse sandstone at San Clemente, part of the
fill of channel 8.
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 435

←
FIG. 54.—Two coarse sandstone beds amalgamated along a
loaded contact (black line). Quarter for scale. Note gray
(turbidite) mudstones above and below.

that may be comparable to the mudstone-draped lateral-accre-

tion surfaces of the Ross Formation or to the channel-wall drapes
from San Clemente (Fig. 51).
In both the San Clemente and the Ross examples, the lateral-
accretion surfaces contain prominent mudstone layers. These
could form vertical and/or lateral baffles to fluid flow in a
reservoir situation. Meander-loop (“point bar”) settings in the
subsurface (Fig. 62) may therefore present engineering problems
with respect to fluid flow within the meander loops.
The process responsible for meander-loop migration may
involve a single flow event with lateral accretion developing in a
way similar to point-bar development in fluvial systems. That is,
a prolonged flow event would produce an undercut bank along
outer bends of a meandering channel, and at the same time
accretes sediment on inner bends, forming lateral-accretion sets
such as shown in Figures 71 and 72. An alternative explanation
for how deep-water meander loops migrate down system is
shown in Figure 73. This process involves a succession of discrete
flows, so that, with each flow event, cutting or erosion accompa-
nies the passage of the head and body of the turbidity flow, and
fill accompanies the tail. Each flow event would preferentially
erode outer bends more deeply, thus resulting in lateral shift of
channel axis (i.e., meander swing). Moreover, because the thal-
weg would exercise maximum erosive force on the outer bend
just down system of the channel bend itself, the meander loop

FIG. 55 (below).—Part of the drape on the wall of channel 2. The

gray layers are silty and easily disaggregated, and represent
mud introduced by the turbidity currents. The brown layers
are clay and contain a benthonic fauna. They represent hemi-
pelagic deposition between turbidity currents. Arrows indi-
cate truncation surface of the margin of channel 2 (see Fig. 51).
436 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

REGIONAL BEDDING

RESERVOIR SECTION

FIG. 56.—Channel 6 at San Clemente, California. Note the lateral pinchout of the lower three beds against the channel margin (red
arrows). In detail, the beds can be traced part way up the wall, where they are represented by very thin (< 1 cm) sandy layers. The
yellow dotted lines mark the mudstone drape on the channel wall—note that the lower two sandstones pinch out into the drape.
In the subsurface, the thick turbidites in the channel fill might make up a reservoir section—but note how rapidly this section
would disappear along strike.

one km

100 msec

one km
FIG. 57.—Shelf-edge delta in close proxim-
100 msec ity to Einstein Channel. Note the suc-
cessive downsteps of the delta top, in-
Late lowstand dicating that the delta prograded un-
der the influence of falling sea level.
This is an excellent example of deposits
om plex associated with forced regression. The
sta nd c slightly progradational to aggrada-
e low tional section that caps the delta repre-
Bas sents deposition during the latter
phases of a sea-level lowstand, when
sea level is slowly rising. Seismic data
courtesy of VeritasDGC.
Early lowstand
(forced regression)
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 437

A C

Shelf Shelf

Slo Slo
pe pe

one km
B D (approximately)

FIG. 58.—A, C) Clustering of slope gullies on two late Pleistocene surfaces in the area of the Einstein Channel, Gulf of Mexico, derived
from 3D seismic data. In each instance the gully clustering is at the base of a lowstand slope succession, and in each instance the
top of the lowstand slope succession is characterized by a single, larger slope channel, not coincidentally where gully clustering
at the base was greatest. B, D) illustrate seismic reflection profiles parallel to and transverse to the slope gullies. The relief of these
gullies commonly is less than 20 m. Seismic data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.

Sea floor dips gently Sea floor dips steeply Sea floor dips gently
(< 1 degree) to the East (~ 6 degrees) to the East (< 1 degree) to the East

Flow Direction

2 km
N
FIG. 59.—Seismic reflection dip-azimuth map of deep-water leveed channel system in the Makassar Strait, Indonesia. The sea floor
dips to the right at a very low angle (less than 1 degree) with the exception of a seaward-dipping segment as indicated. This steep
dip is associated with the surface expression of a syndepositional base-of-slope toe thrust. Note the abrupt increase in channel
sinuosity and decrease of channel width seaward of this toe thrust. Note also the extensive sediment waves on both sides of the
leveed channel (compare with Fig. 77) (after Posamentier et al., 2000). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
438 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Flow
Dire
ction

5 km

FIG. 60.—Seismic reflection dip-magnitude map of Joshua channel. The channel itself is part of a channel belt that lies within a larger
leveed channel (shown by red arrows). (Posamentier, 2003b). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

Levees

Flow direction

Crevasse splay 4 km
(approximately)
Leveed channel

FIG. 61.—3D view of the top of a Pliocene leveed channel with crosscutting seismic section.
Note the crevasse splay deposited upon the lower overbank. Seismic data courtesy of
WesternGeco.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 439

Flo
w
dir
ect
ion
Sweep

3
2
1
Swing

FIG. 62.—Seismic horizon slices illustrating meander-loop

swing and sweep within the Joshua Channel, Gulf of
Mexico. Channel threads indicate order of formation one km
(channel 1 is first, channel 3 is last). Seismic data courtesy
of WesternGeco.

n
r e ctio
w di
Flo

Sweep
1

3 one
one km
km
4

5 Amplitude extraction - horizon slice (-36 msec)

FIG. 63.—Seismic horizon slice through the deep-water leveed-channel system shown in Figure 59, in the Makassar Strait, Indonesia
section. Down-system migration of meander loop is well expressed. Channel threads indicate order of formation (channel 1 first,
channel 5 last) illustrating channel sweep. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 Passive channel fill 440
Channel fill
A
A Flow direction
C

Levee
Levee
A'

Frontal splay deposits

A' Channel
Channel base
base A

one km

D
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

No vertical exaggeration

one km
FIG. 64.—Seismic reflection profiles across the channel–levee system shown in Figures 59 and 63 (illustrated in plan view in A) and section view in B– D). This section
shows the channel fill to be characterized by high-amplitude reflections, inferred to be sand-prone (C). The transverse profile also is shown without vertical
exaggeration to reinforce the observation that interpretation of the architecture of these types of deposits can be greatly facilitated by “squashing” the profile. Seismic
data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 441

A B
Incipient neck cutoffs

Flo
w
di r
ec
tio
n
D
five km

C D

one km one km

FIG. 65.—Meander-loop development within the Joshua channel, eastern Gulf of Mexico, as observed on seismic reflection horizon
slices (compare with Fig. 62). A) Time slice that illustrates two incipient cutoffs of meander-loop necks. B) Slightly higher
(approximately 12 m) time slice that illustrates cutoff of meander-loop necks. C, D) Time-slice details of the neck cutoffs and
resulting oxbows shown in Parts A and B. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

would therefore display down-system migration (i.e., meander
sweep). Figure 73 illustrates how flow velocity vectors tend to be
greater along outer bends especially just down-system from each
meander bend, thus tending to cause a down-system shift of
successive channel axes (i.e., meander sweep). The resulting
architecture of cut and fill can readily appear as lateral-accretion
architecture on seismic data, whereas the outcrop expression
would be one of cut and fill accompanying a progressive shift of
channel axes. Within each cut and fill, it is possible that smaller-
scale true lateral accretion such as shown in Figures 71 and 72 can
be present.
Avulsion events in deep-water channels have been docu-
mented using 3D seismic data (Posamentier and Kolla, 2003b).
Figure 74B, C illustrates a late lowstand leveed channel that
underwent an avulsion event. Avulsion events tend to be asso-
ciated most commonly with levee breaches or crevasses on
outer channel bends (Figs. 61, 75), though in isolated instances,
because of flow perturbations, crevasses can form on inner
bends as well.
Channel-fill lithofacies in these basin-plain leveed channels
would be similar to that which is encountered within slope chan-
nels. Those basin-floor channels characterized by more significant
aggradation would allow greater preservation of waning-phase
turbidites, so that Bouma A to C units would be most common.
Levee and Overbank Deposits
Channel levees commonly are deposits with concave-up,
gull-winged shapes. In general, the facies common to this depo-
sitional element include CCC turbidites, lenticular bedding and
small-scale erosion, slumping involving one or two beds, and
large-scale chaotic failures. Seismically, levees tend to be charac-
terized by low-amplitude continuous to discontinuous reflec-
tions (Figs. 64, 67, 69, 74).
Because the tops of turbidity currents associated with channels
commonly ride higher than the channel walls, there is continual
spillover onto surrounding areas (Fig. 27). When this occurs, flows
abruptly become less confined, and in response to this flow expan-
442 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A
Flo
w
Dir
ec
tio
n

one
one km
km

100 ms

one km

Lateral accretion

Slice level

FIG. 66.—Seismic reflection horizon slice illustrating A) plan view and B) section view across a high-sinuosity deep-water leveed
channel, Gulf of Mexico. Down-system migration of meander loops (A) and lateral-accretion deposits (B) are clearly shown.
Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

sion (i.e., increase in cross-sectional area), flow velocity abruptly
decreases. Lowered flow velocity results in decreased sediment-
carrying capacity; that is, the flow is less capable to transport
sediment, and rapid sedimentation out of suspension takes place.
As noted before, thin-bedded turbidites in levees commonly con-
tain climbing current ripples (Bouma C facies), convolute lamina-
tion, and ripped-up mud clasts (CCC turbidites). These sedimen-
tary structures are more common in proximal overbank/levee
settings than in any other turbidite environment of deposition.
Enhanced spillover occurs at outer bends of channels as the
upper parts of flows tend to continue in a straight-line trajectory
whereas the lower parts of flows tend to follow the curving
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 443

A x y
FIG. 67.—Seismic reflection horizon slice illustrat-
ing A) plan view and B–C) section view across
the Joshua Channel shown in Figure 60. The
section views (B and C) clearly illustrate mean-
der-loop migration and lateral accretion. The
lateral accretion in this system is characterized
by a strong aggradational component. Seismic
X' data courtesy of WesternGeco.
ction
one
one km
km Flow Dire Y'

B C
x X' y Y'

Slice level

100 msec one km

FIG. 68.—A) Seismic reflection horizon slice

and B, C) section views across a leveed
A channel system, Gulf of Mexico. Both the
horizontal as well as the vertical sections
clearly show down-system meander-loop
X'
X' migration as well as lateral accretion (see
yy yellow boxes and line-drawing interpreta-
tions). The lateral accretion in this system is
characterized by minimal aggradation. Seis-
mic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

x Lateral accretion x’

n
ctio
w dire
Flo
x
x y y’

Y'
Y'
one
one km
km

B x
x X'
X'

Slice level

100 msec
C yy Y'
Y'
Slice level

one km
444 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A 55 km x y FIG. 69.—Seismic reflection horizon

km
slice through a meandering slope
channel, A) offshore Nigeria, il-
lustrating down-system migration
of meander loops. The two seis-
mic reflection cross sections B, C)
illustrate the lateral-accretion
tio
n packages that are associated with
irec meander-loop evolution. Seismic
d
w data courtesy of VeritasDGC.
Flo
x' y'

x' x
B
Lateral accretion

Slice level

y' y

C
Lateral accretion

100 msec 5 km

A B
Flo
n wd
tio ire
irec ctio
n
d
ow
Fl

C
nn
iioo
cctt
irree
i
dd
ooww
FFll F IG . 70.—Fluvial examples from
Wyoming showing plan-view
expression of lateral accretion,
meander-loop migration, and
meander-loop cutoffs. Channel
widths are approximately 500 m.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 445

LATERAL ACCRETION

BEDDING

FIG. 71.—The Ross Sandstone in Rehy Cliff, Shannon Estuary, western Ireland. Regional bedding here is horizontal, and the dips in
the sandstone and mudstone layers in the upper part of the cliff are interpreted to represent lateral accretion on a “point bar”-
like feature in a submarine channel. Vertical relief of the lateral accretion surfaces is about 5 m.

B C

2:1 Vertical exaggeration

FIG. 72.—A) Lateral-accretion surfaces in a sandstone from the Gull Island Formation (immediately above the Ross Formation) of
western Ireland. Thickness of sand body about 20 m. B) Two-to-one vertical exaggeration of outcrop photo with line-drawing
interpretation C).
446 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A
B

Flow direction
Time 1

Time 2
Slice Level
Time 3

Time 1 Time 2 Time 3

C
D
Flow-velocity contours Turbidite deposits
Time 1 Time 1 Cut – Initial phase
Fill – Late phase

Time 2 Time 2

Time 3 Time 3

FIG. 73.—Moderately sinuous deep-water channel, eastern Gulf of Mexico. Cross section view shows apparent lateral accretion A).
Seismic time slice shows meander loop expansion (i.e., swing) as well as down-system meander-loop migration (i.e., sweep)
B). Schematic cross section illustrates flow velocity contours with highest velocity shown in yellow. Note the progressive
lateral shift of channel axis through time in response to highest flow velocity occurring on the right side of each channel C).
Schematic depiction of successive turbidite channel fills. Note that with the progressive lateral shift of the channel axis through
time, only the left side of each channel (with the exception of the final channel position) is preserved D). Seismic data courtesy
of WesternGeco.

channel path. This process of enhanced spillover by which the
upper part of the flow tends to shear off and decouple from the
lower part of the flow has been referred to as flow stripping (Piper
and Normark, 1983). One result of flow stripping is that levee
crests on outer channel bends are consistently higher than those
on inner channel bends (Fig. 76). Flow-stripping deposits in
certain instances can take the form of transverse sediment waves
(Fig. 77–80). These sediment waves consistently appear to be
thicker on their proximal flanks, suggesting up-system migration
of wave crests (Fig. 78). The sedimentology of some sediment
waves has been documented by Migeon et al. (2000) in the Var
fan-channel turbidite system (Fig. 79). These waves also are
characterized by up-system wave-crest migration and have formed
transverse to flow direction. Cores taken from the updip, crestal,
and downdip limb of one of the Var sediment waves reveal
significantly greater amounts of sand present in the updip limb of
the sediment wave and the least amount in the downdip limb
(Fig. 79). Grain sizes up to medium sand were observed in the
updip limb. Other sediment waves observed in mid- to upper-
slope settings, which are not associated with turbidity-flow chan-
nels but rather with oceanic currents such as loop currents, likely
are not sand prone (Fig. 81).
Outcrop Example—Simi Hills, California.—
An excellent example of levee deposits in outcrop is the
Cretaceous Chatsworth Formation, Simi Hills, California, which
has been described by Link et al. (1984). Several hundred meters
of the Chatsworth Formation can be viewed along the north side
of the freeway (Highway 118) that traverses the Santa Susana
Pass (Fig. 82). Thick-bedded, channelized turbidites can be exam-
ined in Chatsworth State Park, with channel–levee facies exposed
just to the south.
The levee facies is characterized by interbedded sand-
stones and mudstones in beds up to a few tens of centimeters
thick. Sandstone grain size is up to medium sand. Beds in the
basal parts of thinning-upward successions tend to be struc-
tureless and amalgamated (Fig. 83), but the thinner beds at the
tops of successions are commonly lenticular (Fig. 84) and are
characterized by CCC turbidites (Fig. 8). Climbing ripples, and
climbing ripples that become convoluted, are well displayed
in Figure 7. A scour with ripped-up mudstone clasts is shown
in Figure 85. The combination of these features suggests an
environment in which minor erosion is common, yet indi-
vidual beds are fairly coarse though relatively thin. Also, the
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 447

Avulsion node
A B

Flo
wd
irec
tion

G
C D
Leveed channel

Slices
A–F

Frontal splay
Condensed section

100 msec one km

E F

FIG. 74.—Succession of horizon slices through a deep-water turbidite system, eastern Gulf of Mexico. A–F) Horizon slices illustrate
the evolution of this system from an initial frontal splay (F), eventually evolving into an isolated leveed channel (A). The cross-
section view (G) illustrates this evolution as well. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

climbing ripples and convolute lamination suggest rapid depo-
sition from suspension. The combination of features described
suggests rapid deposition of relatively coarse sand, yet in a
setting in which the beds are consistently relatively thin—that
is, high on a channel margin, or on the back side of a levee. In
this setting, turbidity currents may in places be erosive (Fig.
85), and the bedding lenticularity may be a function of depo-
sition in minor erosional scours and hollows (Fig. 84), or due
to the pinching of beds against a depositional topography (the
channel margin or levee).
Evidence for local slope instability within the levee deposits
is in the form of slump deposits involving a few beds, with
undeformed beds above and below. Such slumps are commonly
associated with CCC turbidites, and in this context probably
represent the local sliding of one or two beds, either on the back
of the levee away from the channel or down the channel wall
toward the channel. In many instances these slumps are sub-
seismic in scale. However, a seismic-scale example of slumps
into a channel is illustrated in Figures 76 and 80, and slumps on
the distal side of a levee in Figure 86.
The important architectural elements in these settings consist
of CCC turbidites, lenticular bedding styles, and slumps involv-
ing just one or two beds. Singly or in combination, these elements
combine to characterize the upper parts of channel margins, or
the backs of levees. These two settings can best be distinguished
by their context, as shown in the next example.
Outcrop Example—Wheeler Gorge, California.—
An outcrop example of distal thin-bedded turbidites overlain
by a channel–levee complex is observed in the Cretaceous Wheeler
Gorge channel systems north of Ojai, California (Rust, 1966;
Walker, 1975b). The beds are vertical and are preserved as a sliver
along the Santa Ynez Fault of the Transverse Ranges. They occur
as an isolated outcrop, and cannot be related to other Cretaceous
deposits in southern California. This example emphasizes the
importance of the vertical relationships of depositional elements
in establishing an overall interpretation of the depositional set-
ting. Once the overall setting has been established, individual
depositional elements can be reexamined in the light of the
overall setting.
The section can be subdivided into three parts (Walker, 1975b):
(1) a lower section of “zebra-striped” mudstones with 1-cm-scale
graded siltstones (about 250 m thick; Fig. 87); (2) a central section
that consists of three conglomerate-to-sandstone packages (105
m thick; Fig. 88); and (3) an upper section of interbedded sand-
 B 448

A A'
one km
Note positive relief

C
Channel fill eroded
50 m B B'

A Avulsion channel
Avulsion node

Note positive relief

A
A Note negative relief

B
B
Note negative relief
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

B'
B'

A'
A'
Knickpoints
Flow direction

FIG. 75.—A) Shaded oblique perspective view of channel shown in Figure 76. Two knickpoints are shown in association with an avulsion channel. The channel down-
system of the kickpoints remains unfilled and is characterized by a concave-up profile C). Upstream of the knickpoints the channel is filled with sand as indicated by
the convex-up profile B). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 Relief: ~ 6–7 m 625 m
Avulsion node 2
A A' A
B Fl
ow
di
re
ct
io
n

100 msec

Avulsion node 1

Avulsion node 2
A' D
A

Slump scars
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

five km

FIG. 76.—Images of Pleistocene Joshua channel, eastern Gulf of Mexico (Posamentier, 2003b). The perspective view B) and detail C) reveal the elevated nature of the channel
fill, suggesting a differential compaction effect associated with predominant sand fill of the channel. Note that levees are highest on outer bends. Note also the small
slump scars that characterize the inner levee slope. The channel is part of a channel belt that has accreted to a level 65 m above the adjacent basin plain D). Internally,
the channel is characterized by lateral accretion coupled with vertical aggradation A). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
449
 A 450

Flow direction
one km

B Sediment waves

C
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 77.—Leveed channel on the basin floor of the Makassar Strait, Indonesia C), characterized by overbank sediment waves illustrated on the associated dip magnitude
map A). Sediment waves are best developed on outer bends of the channel. Compare with the schematic illustration B). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 A Direction of wave migration
A'

100 m Accretion

Current direction

one km

A A'
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

FIG. 78.—Sediment waves associated with slope channels offshore Nigeria. Note that the levee crests migrate progressively up-system, suggesting landward migration
of these sediment waves. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.
451
 Overspill direction 452

A B
E7° 45 E7° 55
NW KN127 KN126 KN124 SE
Depth
(meters)

2400
N43° 30

Wave migration direction

2500
Overspill

KN127
KN126
KN124

2400
N43° 20

2500
1 km

Profile NIC34

KN127 KN126 KN124

HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

1m
F IG . 79.—Overbank sediment
waves from the Var system,
Mediterranean Sea, shown in
plan view A), section view B),
and core C) (from Migeon et al.,
2000). Note the up-system wave
migration (B) as well as the pres-
ence of sand that characterizes
primarily the upstream limb of
these waves.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 453

Sediment waves

Flow direction

Slump scars

one km

FIG. 80.—Sediment waves in the overbank of the Joshua channel, eastern Gulf of Mexico, shown on a curvature map extracted from
the upper bounding surface of the channel–levee complex. Note also the small-scale slump scars on the inner levee. Seismic data
courtesy of WesternGeco.
454 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A B

Direction of wave migration

Shelf/slope break
Shelf/slope break
D
C

one km

one km

FIG. 81.—Sediment waves on the middle to upper slope of the eastern Gulf of Mexico. These waves appear to be migrating obliquely
upslope. They are not associated with any nearby channel or canyon. Wavelength ranges from 400 to 600 m and wave amplitude
ranges from 5 to 10 m. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.

FIG. 82.—Outcrop of Cretaceous Chatsworth Sandstone on north side of Highway 118, Santa Susana Pass, California. Note subtle
changes in bed thickness and sand/shale ratio from highway to skyline.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 455

FIG. 83.—Sharp-based (yellow arrow), thick-bedded sandstones, with one prominent amalgamation surface (red arrow). The
irregular horizontal marks were made by an excavator! Total thickness of structureless sandstone about 3 m. This photograph
was taken about 20 years ago at the back of a trailer park—it is unlikely that the outcrop still exists; if it does it is probably
overgrown. Chatsworth Sandstone near Chatsworth, California.

FIG. 84.—Interbedded sandstones and mudstones in the Chatsworth Sandstone, stratigraphically a few meters above the structureless
sandstones of Figure 83. Note the lenticularity of many of the beds (arrows). Thickness of section about 5 m.
456 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 85 (above).—Scour outlined in yellow, with coarser-grained

structureless sandstone fill and abundant ripped-up mud-
A stones clasts. Chatsworth Sandstone near Chatsworth, Cali-
fornia.

FIG. 86.—Slump scar on levee of deep-water channel–levee

complex in Makassar Strait, Indonesia. Seismic data courtesy
of WesternGeco.

C
B
Flow direction

Slump scar

one km
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 457

Cgl. Seq. 1
Mudstones
Zebra Mudstones FIG. 87.—Pace-and-compass map of
the lower part of the Wheeler
Gorge section on Highway 33,
north of Ojai, California. Note that
bedding is essentially vertical, and
that by rotating the map it also
Mudstones, 90 m serves as a measured section. The
section is slightly disrupted by
faulting, but the thicknesses shown
probably are fairly close.

Zebra
Mudstones, 120 m

Slump

50 m
North
Santa Ynez Fault

FIG. 88.—Pace-and-compass map of the central channel complex at Wheeler Gorge, California. The channel complex can be divided
into three separate conglomerate sequences, interpreted as one channel fill.
458 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER
stones and mudstones with abundant soft-sediment deformation
(more than 120 m thick; Fig. 89).
The zebra-striped mudstones consist almost entirely of color-
graded siltstones 1 to 2 cm thick alternating with mudstones (Fig.
90). Right at the base, these beds are slumped in a section some 5
meters thick. The entire package is faulted, but it is estimated that
there are about 5500 of the graded siltstone beds. None of the
characteristics of levee deposits is present (i.e., no climbing
current ripples, no mud rip-up clasts, etc.); the depositional
environment is postulated to be very distal—either at a fan fringe
or lateral but very distal to a channel.
The central section comprises three stacked conglomerate-to-
sandstone packages. The base of the first sharply overlies the
zebra-striped mudstones and is characterized by large flute casts
(Fig. 91) and associated groove casts, some of which retain
pebbles at the ends of the grooves. There are also abundant
ripped-up clasts of the zebra mudstones within the basal channel
fill (Fig. 92). This lowest package is about 25 m thick, and it
consists of conglomerates and interbedded structureless sand-
stones and is interpreted as channel fill. The conglomerates are
characterized by abundant mudstone clasts, probably derived
from adjacent channel walls. The second package is approxi-
mately 50 m thick. There is a basal conglomerate, but the bulk of
the succession consists of graded conglomerate–sandstone beds
(Fig. 93) and graded pebbly sandstones (Fig. 94). The uppermost
part of this package overlies these channel-fill deposits and
comprises a 15-m-thick succession of thin-bedded turbidites and
mudstones. Convolute lamination (Fig. 95), bedding lenticularity
(Fig. 96), and minor erosion surfaces (Fig. 96) with small ripped-
up mudstone clasts suggest that this is a channel-margin or back-
of-levee facies.
FIG. 89.—Pace-and-compass map of the section above the channel complex at Wheeler Gorge, California. Two separate levee
complexes have been identified (both within the slumped turbidites).
As mentioned above, context is one of the most important
characteristics that allow architectural elements to be assigned to
depositional environments. The interbedded sandstones and
mudstones directly overlie the graded coarser facies of the chan-
nel fill. If the channel had migrated laterally, shifting the main
coarse-sand depocenter elsewhere, the channel margin could
migrate over the channel fill. A seismic example of this relation-
ship is shown in Figure 64B.
The third conglomerate-to-sandstone package is about 30 m
thick, and consists of conglomerates (25 m) that grade into
structureless sandstones (5 m) (Fig. 97). These are in turn overlain
by thin-bedded classical turbidites (Fig. 97). The base of this
package is spectacular, and erodes about 5 m into the underlying
beds. Large stratified sandstone–mudstone clasts have been ripped
from the channel wall and deposited in the channel, with a sand
and conglomerate matrix (Fig. 98). Conversely, coarse sand from
the channel has been injected into the beds of the channel wall as
sills (Fig. 99)—the sill in this photograph terminates abruptly, but
smaller sills splay from the top and bottom of the main sill. In
places, the sills feed dikes, clearly showing that these coarse
deposits are not original beds in the channel wall. Well developed
sills and dikes have also been documented in the subsurface (the
Tertiary Alba Field in the North Sea; Hurst et al., 2005) as well as
in outcrop (Surlyk and Noe-Nygaard, 2003; Hurst et al., 2005).
The uppermost part of the section exposed in Wheeler Gorge
consists of about 120 m of interbedded sandstones and mud-
stones. The lower 80 m consists of classical turbidites, with beds
averaging about 10 cm in thickness. Overall, there is a thinning-
upward succession. Individual beds have small ripped-up mud-
stone clasts, and convolute lamination is common. There is no
soft-sediment deformation. The upper 40 m contains similar
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 459

TOP

FIG. 90 (above).—Very thin-bedded “zebra-striped” mudstones

below the main channel complex (Fig. 87) at Wheeler Gorge,
California. The striped appearance is the result of the stacking
of a large number of thin graded siltstone (pale) to mudstone
(dark) beds. Flat lamination and ripple cross lamination are
rare.

classical turbidites, but soft-sediment deformation is abundant.

A few beds a meter or so in thickness are completely disrupted,
but more commonly the deformation is restricted to a few beds
that show distinct soft-sediment folds (Figs. 100, 101). Convolute
lamination is also present, and in places there are distinct trends
in bed thickness—two thinning-upward successions, one thick-
ening-upward succession, and one thickening-to-thinning up-
ward succession.
The sedimentary folds involving one or two beds, and the
presence of convolute lamination, suggest that these thin-bed-
ded turbidites are channel-margin or levee deposits. Unlike the
channel-margin deposits described above, these thin-bedded
turbidites are not closely associated with thick, coarse-grained
channelized deposits. They are interpreted to represent back-of-
levee deposits associated with a channel system different from
that described above—a channel that is not exposed at Wheeler
Gorge (Fig. 102).

→
FIG. 91.—Large flute casts on the base of the lowest conglomerate
sequence (Fig. 87), Wheeler Gorge, California. The bed is
vertical, flow direction is shown by the yellow arrow, and the
highway tunnel gives the scale.
460 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

MUDSTONE
CLASTS

BASE OF CONGLOMERATE

TOP

BASEMENT CLASTS

FIG. 92.—Very sharp base of conglomerate sequence 1 on the underlying zebra-striped mudstones. Note pale-colored basement clasts
and abundant ripped-up mudstone clasts.

TOP

FIG. 93.—Graded conglomerate-to-sandstone bed, as part of the fill of conglomerate sequence 2 (Fig. 88), Wheeler Gorge, California.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 461

←
TOP
TOP
FIG. 94.—Graded pebbly sandstone, part of conglomerate se-
quence 2 (Fig. 88). Irregular base shown by yellow dotted line.
Wheeler Gorge, California.

Outcrop Example of Levee Failure—New Zealand.—

Probably the best example of levee failure and collapse is in
the Waitemata Group (Eocene, New Zealand; Ballance, 1964).
The large-scale soft-sediment deformations have been described
by Gregory (1966). The best outcrop is on Whangaparaoa Head,
where there is about 4 km of continuous coastal exposure in high
cliffs. The facies consists dominantly of thin-bedded classical
turbidites, with soft-sediment folding occurring on many dif-
ferent scales. Some of the deformation consists of stacked dis-
harmonic folds that can be seen in the cliff (Fig. 103) and on the
wave-cut platform (Fig. 104). In other places, entire sections of
turbidites appear to have been rotated, as in Figure 105, where
the regional dip of the Waitemata Group is only 20 degrees. The
beds in this rotated section contain CCC turbidites (Fig. 106) and
slumps involving one or two beds (Figs. 25, 107); both of these
features strongly suggest a levee origin for the thin-bedded
turbidites, and hence a levee-failure origin for the disharmonic
folding and rotation. Locally, sections of thick-bedded turbid-
ites suggest associated channel fills (Figs. 108, 109).

FIG. 95 (below).—Convolute lamination in the uppermost part of

the fill of conglomerate sequence 2 (Fig. 88), Wheeler Gorge,
California.

TOP
462 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

TOP

FIG. 96.—Bedding lenticularity (red arrow) in the interbedded sandstones and mudstones, uppermost part of conglomerate sequence
2 (Fig. 88). Yellow dotted line shows scouring and more bed lenticularity. Wheeler Gorge, California.

CONGLOMERATE, SEQUENCE 3

STRUCTURELESS SANDSTONES

THIN-BEDDED TURBIDITES

FIG. 97.—Overview of conglomerate sequence 3 (Fig. 88) after a forest fire. Note overall change from conglomerate, via structureless
sandstone, into classical turbidites. Section is about 30 m thick. Wheeler Gorge, California.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 463

LEVEE, SEQUENCE 2
TOP

FIG. 98 (above).—Base of conglomerate sequence 3 (Fig. 88),

shown by yellow dotted line. Conglomerate cuts into levee
deposits of sequence 2 (yellow arrow). Channel fill consists of TOP
basement clasts, as well as stratified clasts plucked from the
channel wall (pink arrows). Green arrow shows a sill of coarse
sandstone injected into the fine-grained levee deposits.
Wheeler Gorge, California.

Crevasse Splays
Another form of overbank deposit is the crevasse splay. In
contrast with sediment waves, which are associated with flow
over the levee crest and onto the overbank, the crevasse splay is
associated with flow through the levee and into the overbank
environment. Because the crevasse splay involves flow through
the levee, this flow taps deeper into the main flow than simple
spillover flow, which taps only into the upper part of the flow. As
a result, flow through a breach in the levee is sourced by the more
sand-prone part of the main flow.
A typical crevasse splay is characterized by a short channel
leading away from the main channel and feeding a smaller
distributary channel system (Figs. 61, 110–112). Note the plan-
view similarities between deep-water turbiditic and shallow-
water, continental-shelf deltaic crevasse splays (Fig. 113). A cre-
vasse splay can be considered a failed avulsion channel. The
distinction is that, in the case of an avulsion channel, flow is
permanently diverted through the crevasse and associated chan-

→
FIG. 99.—Sill of coarse sand and granules (see Fig. 98) injected into
interbedded sandstones and mudstones of the wall of channel
3. Note very abrupt termination of the sill. Wheeler Gorge,
California.
464 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

REGIONALTOP
CONVOLUTE LAMINATION

FIG. 100.—Distinct soft-sediment folds involving two beds, with undisturbed bedding above and below. Note convolute
lamination in the uppermost bed of this small thickening-upward succession. Levee facies (Fig. 89) above the channel complex
in Wheeler Gorge.

REGIONAL TOP

FIG. 101.—Re-folded fold involving one bed in an otherwise well-stratified succession. Regional top shown by yellow arrow, and
way-up of the folded bed is shown by yellow arrows. Levee facies (Fig. 89), Wheeler Gorge, California.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 465

Wheeler Gorge

ps
rbank slum
Levee-ove
retion
ateral acc
L

Channel-Levee
System 2
retion
ateral acc
L
Vertical stacking

retion Channel-Levee
al acc
Later System 1

Basin floor zebra-striped mudstones

Fact Interpretation

FIG. 102.—Interpretation of the Wheeler Gorge section. The vertical line (“fact”) shows the location of the Wheeler Gorge section—
the rest of the diagram is a reconstruction based on Wheeler Gorge data plus models derived from channel shingling patterns in
fans such as the Amazon and the Rhone.

FIG. 103.—Large scale, disharmonically stacked soft-sediment folds in the Eocene Waitemata Group, Whangaparaoa Head, New
Zealand. Cliff is about 30 m high.
466 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 104.—View from cliff down onto the wave-cut platform, showing disharmonic soft-sediment folding. Width of section at
base of photo about 60 m.

REGIONAL DIP = 20o

70 m

FIG. 105.—The Eocene Waitemata Group has a regional dip of about 20 degrees—this photograph shows a section some 70 m thick
rotated by slumping to an angle of about 70 degrees. It lies just north of the disharmonic folds of Figure 101. The nature of the thin-
bedded turbidites in this outcrop is shown in Figures 106 and 107.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 467

CLIMBING
RIPPLES

TOP

CONVOLUTE
LAMINATION

FIG. 106.—Thin-bedded turbidites with convolute lamination and climbing ripples, exposed on the wave-cut platform as part of
the 70 m thick rotated section shown in Figure 105. Whangaparaoa Head, New Zealand.

SLUMPED BEDS

FIG. 107.—Thin-bedded turbidites, with one deformed horizon involving about 2 thin beds in a soft-sediment fold. Same location
as Figure 105.
468 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

←
FIG. 108.—Thick-bedded turbidites in the Eocene Waitemata
Group at Whangaparaoa Head, New Zealand. 15 cm scale is
circled.

nel, whereas with the crevasse splay the flow diversion is tempo-
rary and relatively short-lived. In some instances, as revealed by
3D seismic data, the early stage of a crevasse splay is character-
ized by a levee breach that feeds a field of transverse sediment
waves (Fig. 114). As the system becomes progressively better
organized, the sediment waves are overlain by a gradually ex-
panding distributary channel network (Posamentier and Kolla,
2003b; Van Wagoner et al., 2003). Channels within this distribu-
tary network are associated with low-relief, probably sand-prone
levees.
The most distinctive sedimentary structure associated with
crevasse-splay deposits is climbing current ripples. As with
overbank sediment waves, flow expansion, which occurs when
the confined flow within the main channel cuts through the levee
and becomes unconfined within the overbank environment, re-
sults in rapid sedimentation from suspension. In addition, be-
cause of erosion through the levee, locally derived mud rip-up
clasts can be common. The stratigraphic architecture of crevasse-
splay deposits is characterized by amalgamated turbidites near
the apex of the splay, becoming less amalgamated with distance
away from the splay apex.
In general, crevasse splays are far more common in basin-
floor environments than in slope environments. On the slope,
gravity-flow vectors tend to be directed parallel to flow, down the

FIG. 109 (below).—Thick-bedded turbidites, with a suggestion of

a thinning-upward succession, in the Eocene Waitemata
Group, Whangaparaoa Head, New Zealand.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 469

n
tio
ec
dir
ow
Fl
Five km

FIG. 110.—Seismic reflection horizon slice illustrating a crevasse splay associated with a channel–levee complex on the basin floor of
the Gulf of Mexico. Note that several crevasses seem to have formed along this outer channel bend, feeding multiple small
channels characterized by bifurcation. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

one km
FIG. 111.—Seismic reflection horizon slice illustrating a crevasse splay associated with a channel–levee complex on the basin floor of
the Gulf of Mexico. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 A 470

one
one km
km
C
Leveed
Leveed Channel
Channel
Line
Line D
D

Crevasse Splay

Line
Line E
E
one km

Leveed
Leveed Channel
Channel
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Crevasse
Crevasse splay
splay

Crevasse
Crevasse splay
splay
E

FIG. 112.—Crevasse splay associated with a basin-floor channel/levee complex, Gulf of Mexico. Seismic reflection horizon slices A, B) illustrate deeper and shallower
slices through this system respectively. The crevasse splay is illustrated in perspective view in Part C) (see Fig. 61). Cross-section views through the principal
channel D) and the crevasse splay E) illustrate the high-amplitude character of these depositional elements. The high-amplitude character suggests the presence
of sand in these deposits. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 A
B

one km

C
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

one km
one km

FIG. 113.—Comparison between A) a shallow-water deltaic crevasse splay (from the Mississippi River delta) and B, C) two deep-water crevasse splays (Figs. 110 and
114) suggesting a strikingly similar morphology and likely similar depositional processes. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
471
 A B C 472

Flow direction

Sediment waves

D E
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

one km

FIG. 114.—Seismic reflection horizon slices from base A to top E) showing the morphological evolution of a leveed-channel crevasse splay. Note that the early
morphology appears to be characterized by transverse sediment waves as indicated by arrow (A). As the system evolves it appears to become better organized,
developing a distributary pattern (B through E). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 473

relatively steep slope (i.e., slope angle commonly from 2 to 4
degrees), rather than normal to flow parallel to contour, thereby
diminishing the likelihood that sufficient force is exerted on
channel walls (i.e., levees) to form crevasses and hence crevasse
splays. Consequently the crevasse-splay sand habitat is an un-
common element in slope settings.
Frontal Splays (i.e., Lobes)
Leveed channels commonly are associated with terminal
lobes, or frontal splays (Figs. 115–120). The terms frontal splay,
distributary channel complex, and lobe or lobeform can be used
somewhat interchangeably. Each term describes a depositional
element that lies at the end of a leveed channel and tends to be fan
or lobe shaped in plan view. Each term implies a different
perspective on this feature: (1) frontal splay has process signifi-
cance, wherein a flow spreads out or expands, (2) distributary
channel complex has map-pattern significance, wherein succes-
sive channel bifurcation results in a distributive channel network,
and (3) lobe or lobeform has morphologic significance wherein
the deposit has a fan-shaped or lobate planform.
As discussed above, frontal splays form at the transition
point, the location where levee height is no longer capable of
fully confining the sand-prone or high-concentration part of the
turbidity flow. At that location the sand-prone part of the flow
readily flows over the levee and establishes new courses on the
associated overbank. Also at this location, the down-system
trend towards increasing sand-to-mud ratio in the flow changes
to a decreasing sand-to-mud ratio, as shown schematically in
Figure 26. Up-system of the transition point mud is preferen-
tially lost from the flow by overbank spillover, whereas down-
system of the transition point sand is lost more rapidly from the
flow by sedimentation in the overbank and within distributary
channels.
Frontal splays have much in common with crevasse splays
both sedimentologically and architecturally. Both are distin-
guished by relatively common current ripples and sheet-like
bedding geometry with shallow channels and sand-prone, low-
relief levees. Both tend to be more amalgamated near the splay
apex and less so distally. Preservation of interbedded mudstones
becomes progressively more common with increasing distance
away from the transition point, which corresponds to the frontal

Frontal splay

Transition point

Flow direction

five km

FIG. 115.—Frontal splay at the end of a leveed channel system on the basin floor of the Makassar Strait, Indonesia. The transition point
between leveed channel and frontal splay is located where levee height has diminished to below seismic resolution (compare with
Fig. 28). Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
474 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Y Y'

A
100 msec
Slice level
Frontal splay
one km

one km Y'

FIG. 116.—Frontal splay at base of channel–levee complex, Makassar Strait, Indonesia. This splay complex is characterized in section
view by continuous to discontinuous high-amplitude seismic reflections and in plan view by extensive bifurcation. Note that, as
with the channel-levee complex illustrated in Figure 117, the frontal splay immediately underlies a moderate- to high-sinuosity
solitary leveed channel. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

splay apex. However, several characteristics distinguish frontal
splays from crevasse splays: (1) Frontal splays tend to be larger,
insofar as they involve the entire flow discharge in contrast with
only part of the flow discharge (i.e., that part of the flow that is
temporarily diverted through the crevasse) associated with cre-
vasse splay. (2) Crevasse splays commonly tend to be associated
with levee-derived rip-up clasts. These clasts tend to be mud
prone. (3) Crevasse splays lie in close proximity to channel levees,
where the flows have passed through a breach. (4) Slope instabil-
ity with resulting bed convolution and slumping is more com-
mon in crevasse-splay settings, insofar as they are deposited on
potentially steeper slopes of the overbank environment.
Most commonly, frontal splays are deposited on basin floors
or on the floors of intraslope basins, with leveed channels and
channel complexes being the more common form of turbidite
element encountered in slope environments. In some instances,
however, frontal splays can be observed on slopes as well, espe-
cially in intraslope basins (Prather et al., 1998), but also in some
instances on open slopes as well (Fig. 121).
The splays shown in this paper are mostly channelized, with
channel widths from about 100 m to smaller than can be imaged.
The channels appear to be multiple (possibly “braided”), al-
though it is not clear if more than one channel is occupied and
active during any single turbidity current. Other images show
that in more distal settings, the top of the frontal splay may be
essentially smooth—any topography is too small to be imaged.
Outcrop Example—County Clare, Ireland.—
The outcrop example of a frontal splay discussed here is from
the Carboniferous Ross Sandstone of western Ireland (Figs. 122,
123; Martinsen et al., 2000; Lien et al., 2003). The Ross is about 460
m thick, and details of the regional geology, stratigraphy, and
paleotectonic setting are given by Lien et al. (2003). It can be
informally divided into lower and upper parts, 170 m and 290 m
thick, respectively.
Frontal splays are best seen in the lower Ross—the base is
gradational from the underlying Clare Shale. Initial turbidites are
very thin and widely spaced stratigraphically, but overall, through-
out the 170 m thickness, the beds tend to thicken upward (Lien et
al., 2003). In detail, however, there are no systematic thickening-
upward or thinning-upward trends (on the scale of ten meters, or
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 475

Slice level

Transition point

FIG. 117.—Cross section A) and horizon slice B) views of a deep-water leveed channel feeding a frontal splay, Gulf of Mexico. Note
the clear location of the transition point where the leveed channel transitions into a frontal splay. The frontal splay is characterized
by continuous to discontinuous high-amplitude seismic reflections in section view, and by extensive bifurcation and braiding (?),
forming a complex distributive network in plan view. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

a few tens of meters), and no readily recognizable channels. Beds
appear to be continuous for at least 200 m and of constant
thickness as far as they can be traced in the cliffs (Fig. 124). These
characteristics suggest that deposition was from unconfined
turbidity currents that could spread on the sea floor with no
apparent topographic obstructions—characteristic of the distal
parts of frontal splays. The absence of bed-thickness trends
suggests that each turbidity current was unrelated to the previ-
ous ones, with the deposits of larger and smaller flows interbed-
ded. The overall upward bed thickening suggests seaward step-
ping of the frontal splay over a long period of time.
The upper Ross is characterized by thickening-upward pack-
ages, channel fills, slump–slide horizons, and turbidites with no
bed-thickness trends. Lien et al. (2003) showed that the thicken-
ing-upward packages (Figs. 125, 126) represented aggrading
spillover lobes developed during the lateral migration of chan-
nels. The top surfaces of many of the packages show giant
erosional features resembling flutes (Fig. 127). The packages are
superficially very similar to the thickening-upward sequences
first described by Mutti and colleagues (Mutti and Ricci Lucchi,
1972) and interpreted to result from the progradation of deposi-
tional lobes. However, in the case of the Ross thickening-upward
packages, the intimate relationship with channel fills suggests
that they are spillover (sediment waves?) rather than frontal
lobes.
The channels in the upper Ross vary from about 10 to over 25
m and consist dominantly of amalgamated thick-bedded turbid-
ites. No consistent patterns of bed-thickness change were ob-
served. Two areas define the relationships of channels to pack-
ages best—Kilbaha Bay and Cloonconeen.
476 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Frontal
Frontal splay
splay

Flow direction

Transition point

Leveed channel
five km

FIG. 118.—Horizon slice view of a deep-water frontal splay, Gulf of Mexico. The transition point is located where the levees associated
with the up-system leveed channel have diminished in height to below seismic resolution. The frontal splay is characterized by
extensive bifurcation, forming a complex distributive network. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.

At Kilbaha Bay (Fig. 123) almost horizontally dipping beds
are exposed for 1.5 km along the cliff, with a composite strati-
graphic thickness of about 40 m. There are 20 thickening-upward
packages (Fig. 128). In several locations the thick-bedded por-
tions of the packages can be traced laterally and seen to split into
non-amalgamated, thin-bedded turbidites with mudstone part-
ings between beds. The Kilbaha Bay channel (Fig. 128) has a
visible depth of incision of about 3 m, with a fill of at least 6 m. The
base is characterized by a layer of mudstone clasts, with at least
two stratified sandstone blocks up to 3.5 m long and 35 cm thick;
these are interpreted to represent channel-wall collapse, as de-
scribed above from Wheeler Gorge. Most importantly, on the
eastern side of the channel fill, thick-bedded amalgamated chan-
nel-fill sandstones split into thinner beds and grade laterally into
adjacent packages (Fig. 128). This relationship suggests that the
packages are in some way related to channel filling (and not lobe
progradation)—the relationships are seen even better at
Cloonconeen Point.
The channel at Cloonconeen Point (Figs. 129, 130) has a
minimum fill thickness of 15 m. There appear to be at least three
separate incisions, and the fill consists of separate thick-bedded
turbidites close to the margin but an almost completely amalgam-
ated succession closer to the channel center. The uppermost part
of the fill consists of about 3 m of amalgamated sandstones, but
these beds can be walked out laterally for about 100 m (Fig. 130),
where they split progressively and pass into thin-bedded turbid-
ites separated by mudstone partings. These thin-bedded turbid-
ites are organized into a thickening-upward package identical to
the packages outside the channel. This relationship strongly
suggests that the thickening-upward packages represent aggra-
dation of spillover lobes rather than frontal splays developed
downstream from channel mouths. Both the Kilbaha and the
Cloonconeen channels suggest that the thickening-upward pack-
ages are closely related to channel filling. Lien et al. (2003) also
illustrate lateral-accretion surfaces, suggesting that the channels
can migrate laterally (Figs. 71–73).
These relationships between architectural elements suggest
the following interpretation. Where the channel is far from a
particular depositional site, the only overbank deposits to reach
that site consist of mudstones (Fig. 131). During lateral channel
movement toward the site, overbank deposition may consist of
thin-bedded turbidites. The closer the channel approaches, the
thicker and more amalgamated the overbank succession become.
Closest to the channel, turbidity currents may be scouring (form-
ing the giant flutes) and bypassing without depositing.
The detailed relationships between all of the architectural
elements are shown in Figure 131. In phase 1 the channel is active
and is migrating laterally, forming lateral-accretions deposits on
one side and eroding a cut bank on the other side. In phase 2
during channel filling, note the lateral shift of the cut bank,
resulting in thicker and thicker overbank deposits.
Integrated Interpretation of the Ross Sandstone
Lien et al. (2003) suggested that the upper Ross consists
mainly of sinuous channels stacked into sinuous channel belts.
 North South
Levee crests
A

100
Slice level msec

Levee Levee
one km

Channel

North South
B Frontal splay margin
Frontal splay margin

Slice level

100
msec
A
A B
B
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

one km

one km

FIG. 119.—Seismic reflection cross-section views through the frontal splay B) and the feeder leveed channel A) associated with the system shown in Figure 118. Note the
single leveed channel clearly shown in section view (A), contrasted with the high-amplitude continuous to discontinuous seismic reflection character of the frontal
splay. The section view through the frontal splay also shows that this system is characterized by numerous small channels that seem to coalesce into a sheet-like
morphology. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.
477
478 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Transition point
←
FIG. 120.—Leveed channel feeding frontal
splay in the Bering Sea offshore Alaska
(from Kenyon and Millington, 1995).

Flow direction

5 km

Frontal splay

FIG. 121 (below).—Leveed channel feeding frontal splay on the

mid-slope, eastern Gulf of Mexico. This 3D perspective
view illustrates a reflection amplitude map draped onto
the upper bounding surface of the channel–levee complex.
Note that in the final stages of this channel-frontal splay
Leveed channel complex a solitary leveed channel flows across the top of
the frontal splay. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.

Flow direction

Transition point

Frontal
Frontal splay
splay
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 479

FIG. 122.—Location map for the Ross Sandstone of western Ireland. Rectangle shows location of detailed map in Figure 123 (after
Lien et al., 2003).

FIG. 123.—Detailed location map for the Ross Sandstone (yellow) and the overlying Gull Island Formation (brown), western
Ireland (see Fig. 122) (after Lien et al., 2003).
480 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 124.—Classical turbidites in the Lower Ross Sandstone. Note the bedding continuity and absence of any thickening- or
thinning-upward successions. Cliff north of Ballybunion, about 10 m high.

FIG. 125.—Thickening-upward packages shown by yellow arrows in the upper Ross Sandstone, south side of Ross Bay. Note
succession from mudstones into thin-bedded turbidites, with thicker-bedded amalgamated turbidites in the upper parts of the
packages.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 481

Scoured surface

FIG. 126.—Thickening-upward packages at Kilbaha Bay. Note the mudstones at the base, overlain by thin-bedded turbidites, overlain
in turn by amalgamated thick-bedded turbidites. The uppermost surface is scoured, but the scours are not visible in this picture.

11 m
m

FLOW DIRECTION

FIG. 127.—Giant flute at Ross Bay. The shape of the flute is shown by the yellow arrows, and the flow direction by the red arrow.
The flute scours into amalgamated sandstones with a top surface covered in sinuous-crested ripples. The flute itself is partly
filled with mudstones and thin-bedded turbidites, with one surface showing straighter-crested ripples. There are no ripples
on the steeply dipping walls of the flute. Note the scale—the flute is nearly 2 m wide.
482 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

LATERAL PASSAGE FROM THICK-BEDDED TO THIN-BEDDED TURBIDITES

10 m

CHANNEL GIANT SCOURS

FIG. 128.—Cliff face at Kilbaha Bay. Beds can be walked out along the cliff and in the wave-cut platform. Mudstones and thin-bedded
turbidites are yellow, and amalgamated sandstones orange. Note lateral passage from amalgamated turbidites into thin-bedded
turbidites in several locations (blue arrows). Note also the giant scours (black arrows). The thick-bedded amalgamated turbidites
that fill the channel also pass laterally into thinner beds.

THICKENING-UPWARD PACKAGE LATERAL TO CHANNEL

THICKENING-UPWARD PACKAGES THICK-BEDDED SANDSTONES –

CUT BY CHANNEL CHANNEL FILL

FIG. 129.—Diagram of channel at Cloonconeen Point. Exposure is almost 100 percent, but details of the channel wall are partly
obscured by rock rubble and minor tectonics. Channel is filled with amalgamated structureless sandstones and cuts into adjacent
thickening-upward packages. Note that the uppermost amalgamated sandstones of the channel fill can be walked out laterally
into an overbank thickening-upward package.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 483

SANDIER-UPWARD PACKAGE

CHANNEL FILL

FIG. 130.—Channel margin at Cloonconeen point. Photographer is standing in the middle of the channel fill (two yellow arrows). The
channel margin is outlined in yellow (see Fig. 129), and the lateral passage from thick amalgamated channel sandstones to a
thickening-upward package (red arrow) is shown with a dotted yellow arrow. Person for scale at end of dotted yellow arrow.

PHASE 1
Lateral-accretion distance Lateral-accretion distance
▼

Lateral-accretion distance

▼
Thin-bedded turbidites

Vertical
aggradation
mostly mudstone

Overbank spill during lateral Lateral migration with minimum Sandstones and mudstones on gently
migration of channels channel-floor aggradation dipping lateral accretion surface

Amalgamated beds
PHASE 2 Thick- to thin-bedded turbidites
Thin-bedded turbidites
Giant flutes within amalgamated sandstones Thick-bedded fill on Surface of erosional
Mudstones
and on erosional bypass surface cut-bank side of channel bypass with giant flutes Onlap of vertical
accretion deposits
Mudstone drape on
Ross Bay bypass surface

Clooconeen Rehy Cliff

Complete
sandier-upward package Rinevella Lateral-accretion deposits
Sandstones pass laterally into mudstones
as they onlap the lateral-accretion surface

FIG. 131.—Composite diagram for the upper Ross Sandstone, showing the development of a channel. In phase 1, note the lateral
shifting, with lateral accretion on one side, and a cut bank on the opposite side. Thickening-upward sequences form as the
channel migrates, with mudstones deposited when the channel is far away (blue dotted line), thin-bedded turbidites as the
channel approaches (red dotted line), and thick-bedded amalgamated turbidites when the channel is closest (green dotted
line). As the channel migrates, the opposite bank may receive lateral accretion deposits. In phase 2, the main channel is filled
with structureless amalgamated turbidites, probably resembling those of Figure 68.
484 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

The thickening-upward packages represented overbank spill,
and the non-packaged turbidites represented deposition on a
smooth basin floor far from any channels. The exact position of
the channels and channel belts was not discussed. The model is
shown in Figure 132, where three individual sinuous channels
are shown diagrammatically within a sinuous channel belt. At
the end of the sinuous channel belt, turbidity currents spread
laterally to form the unchannelized lower Ross turbidites.
In the light of the seismic images presented here, particularly
those that show channelization in the proximal parts of frontal
splays, it is possible that the entire Ross Sandstone represents a
frontal splay. The lower Ross would represent the smooth outer
portion of the splay, with the overall thickening-upward succes-
sion resulting from gradual progradation of the splay. The upper
Ross would then represent the proximal channelized part of the
splay, with the non-packaged parts of the upper Ross being
deposited on smoother parts of the splay.
Importance of the Ross Formation Case History.—
The importance of this case history is that it illustrates how a
stratigraphic unit can first be subdivided into architectural ele-
ments—non-packaged turbidites, thickening-upward packages,
channel fills, and slump–slide depositional units. The channels
are the easiest individual element to interpret, and the interpre-
tation of the thickening-upward packages follows from their
detailed relationships to the channel fills. Reliance on earlier
models that would suggest prograding depositional lobes would
give an alternative (and probably incorrect) interpretation. The
suggestion that the upper Ross might represent the proximal part

Area of non-packaged
and poorly packaged
tabular turbidites

Area of
non-packaged and
poorly packaged
tabular turbidites

Sinuous
Sinuous belt
belt
reestablished
reestablished after
after
sea-level
sea-level fluctuation
fluctuation Sinuous belt width ~ 5 km
(marine
(marine band)
band)
Sinuous belt of
channels and packages

FIG. 132.—Overall interpretation of the Ross Sandstone. Individual sinuous channels in the upper Ross (shown as red, green and
blue) are stacked into sinuous channel belts (yellow). At curves in the individual channel, overbank spill can create thickening-
upward packages (red, green and blue “lobes”). Thus the sinuous channel belt consists of two main depositional elements—
channel fills and overbank spills. At the downstream end, the channels lose their topography and feed a smooth basin plain
(the lower Ross). The passage from lower to upper Ross implies progradation of the sinuous channel belts over the smooth
basin plain.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
of a frontal splay is based on stratigraphic context and compari-
son with 3-D seismic images. Thus an interpretation has been
constructed that relies on defining architectural elements, defin-
ing their particular stratigraphic relationships, and comparing
this construction with seismic images of the deep sea floor. In this
way, we build our own model or interpretation without reliance
on a preexisting model—the theme developed by Walker (this
volume) in the introduction to this volume.
Debris-Flow Deposits—Mass-Transport Complexes
Various forms of debris-flow and mass-transport deposits
comprise common depositional elements in many deep-sea envi-
ronments (Fig. 133). These deposits can assume a variety of
shapes and sizes. A characteristic that seems common to all is
their highly erosional nature and their contorted, chaotic, and
structureless internal architecture. Erosional relief at the bases of
such deposits can exceed 250 m in some instances (Figs. 134, 135).
Where clasts were embedded in the flow base, erosion of the
substrate is marked by long, linear striations or grooves that tend
to diverge in the downsystem direction (Figs. 21, 136–140). Clast
sizes can range from cobbles to clasts larger than houses (Fig. 141).
In some instances, small outcrop-scale scour can also be observed
beneath mass-transport deposits (Fig. 142).
Large mass-transport deposits have been observed to origi-
nate at shelf edge (Fig. 143) as well as mid-slope locations (Fig.
144), where fault scarps as high as 54 m mark the point of slope
failure. Smaller mass-transport deposits originating on the flanks
100 msec
one km
MTD
FIG. 133.—Seismic section from the eastern Gulf of Mexico illus-
trating the extensive nature of mass-transport deposits. At
this location, the mass-transport deposits constitute approxi-
mately 45% of the total section shown. Seismic data courtesy
of WesternGeco.
485
of salt domes and mud volcanoes also have been observed, and
on the flanks of turbidity-flow channel levees (Figs. 80, 86).
Because in most instances mass transport originates in low-
energy environments, the associated deposits of such processes
tend to be mud-rich.
In plan view these deposits can be lobate or channelized (Figs.
145–148). In some instances mass-transport deposits can oppor-
tunistically use the channel of an earlier-formed turbidity-flow
channel (Fig. 149). The seismic character in both planar horizontal
or vertical section commonly is chaotic to contorted (Figs. 135,
150–153), though in some instances they can be characterized by
large-scale convolute bedding (Fig. 154).
Where debris flows encounter obstructions or where flow
velocities diminish abruptly, as is common near their termini,
internal compressional structural features (i.e., low-angle thrust
faults) can be common (Figs. 151,155, 156). On the basin floor, a
commonly observed aspect of mass-transport deposits is an
apparent large-scale channelization that is not so much related to
erosion of a channel and subsequent fill as it is a consequence of
“plowing” of the sea floor by a plug of debris analogous to the
effect of a shovel pushing through a snow layer (Figs. 157, 158). In
instances such as these it is possible to calculate the travel distance
of the mass-transported debris (Fig. 159). Lateral compression
caused by multiple phases of mass-transport events also has been
observed (Figs. 152, 160).
The hallmark of the lithofacies of mass-transport deposits is
its lack of organization. Commonly they comprise mud-sup-
ported conglomerates, though they can also occur as pure mud-
stone containing muddy rip-up clasts. In isolated instances they
can also be relatively sand-rich (Jennette et al., 2000).
The upper bounding surfaces of mass-transport complexes
can vary from smooth to highly rugose. In some instances this
surface rugosity can exert an influence over subsequent turbidity
-flow deposits (Fig. 161), whereas in other instances, because the
short wavelength of the bathymetric lows, only ponding of
mudstones seems to occur (Fig. 162).
SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
A typical deep-water depositional sequence on the basin floor
has been proposed by Posamentier and Kolla (2003a) as consist-
ing of basal debris-flow material, overlain by sand-rich frontal-
splay deposits, in turn overlain by isolated leveed-channel de-
posits and finally by debris-flow deposits and a condensed
section. This sequence is in part a distillation of the work of
Weimer (1991), Piper et al. (1997), Pirmez et al. (1997), Manley and
Flood (1998), Maslin et al. (1998), Beauboeuf and Friedmann
(2000), Brami et al. (2000), and Winker and Booth (2000) (Fig. 163).
It is relatively unlikely that each of these stratigraphic units
would be observed at any given location; debris-flow deposits are
most common on basin floors and within canyons, frontal splays
are most common on basin floors, and leveed channels are com-
mon in both slope and basin-floor environments. In contrast,
condensed sections are widespread and ubiquitous. Figure 74G
shows a section of a deep-water depositional sequence, character-
ized by frontal-splay deposits overlying a condensed section (thin
stratigraphic unit corresponding to the transgressive and high-
stand systems tract of the preceding sequence). In this example,
frontal-splay deposits gradually give way to an isolated leveed
channel. We suggest that this transition from frontal splay to
leveed channel during the waning phase of a deep-water deposi-
tional sequence occurs because of a progressive decrease in sand-
to-mud ratio within the flows, which originate at the shelf-edge
staging area. This diminished overall sand content results in a
seaward shift of the transition point as discussed above.
 A 486
Line C B

Line D

Flow direction one km

five km

South North
C

Slice level

100 msec
five km
West East
D
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Flow direction
Slice level

Terminal wall

FIG. 134.—A) Mass-transport complex in the basin floor environment, eastern Gulf of Mexico, which lies within a broad, flat-floored channel C) that ends abruptly
at a terminal wall D). These sediments likely did not travel far but rather comprise a mass of material that was pushed from behind and slid to some degree
along a decollement surface at the base (note the relatively flat base in section view (C and D). The complex rheology of this deposit is illustrated by the chaotic
nature of the seismic reflections within the mass-transport complex as well as the tongues of sediments that extend beyond the terminal wall B). The relief of
the channel is approximately 240 m. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 12.5 km

240 m

Flo
wd
irec
tion

30 km
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

Terminal wall

FIG. 135.—Perspective-view image of the base of the mass-transport complex shown in Figure 134. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
487
488 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Flow
Flow direction
direction

←
FIG. 136.—Grooves beneath mass-transport complex deposited
in a continental-slope environment (image courtesy of D.
Mosher).

FIG. 137 (below).—Grooves beneath mass-transport deposit at

Five km the base Paleocene, North Sea, in a basin-floor environment
(after Wilson et al., 2005).

Flow
Flow direction
direction

10 km
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 489

one km

Grooves

FIG. 138.—Dip-azimuth map of surface at the base of a channelized mass-transport deposit. Note the grooves that characterize this
surface and the tendency for these grooves to diverge down-system. This suggests that internal deformation characteristic of
flow rather than slide processes have occurred. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

Basal grooves

Outrunner blocks

one km
FIG. 139.—Grooves at the base of a mass-transport complex, basin floor, eastern Gulf of Mexico. Note the outrunner blocks (yellow
arrows). Compare with Figure 154, a seismic slice through the middle of this mass-transport deposit. Seismic data courtesy of
WesternGeco.
490 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Line 1

100 msec

Line 2

1
2
Line 3 3
1 km

FIG. 140.—Linear grooves at base of levees of slope channel shown in Figure 43. The events responsible for eroding these grooves
occurred just prior to levee construction, suggesting that these mass-transport events represent the earliest phases of a sea-level
lowstand. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.

Vertical section

Horizontal section

Debris “Clasts” Near Top of

Mass Transport Complex

52
0
m

FIG. 141.—Seismic reflection time slice as well as section view through a mass-transport complex with a single megaclast over 500
m wide highlighted. This clast is observed to be rafted near the top of the mass transport complex.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 491

Debris-flow
deposit

Base of
debris flow

←
FIG. 142.—Small-scale grooves and striations on top of sandstone
deposit at base of mass-transport complex, Borneo, Malaysia.

FIG. 143 (below).—Shelf-edge-detachment slump scars offshore

Indonesia. These slump scars likely represent the point of
detachment or staging area of sediments that traveled down
the slope, possibly transforming from slump to slide to flow
with increased distance from the shelf edge.
5 km Shelf edge
Shelf edge

Slump scar

1 km
 492

Shelf edge Slump scar

A
B
Slope channel

Basin floor
C

Slump scar
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Scar Characteristics
Relief: 45 m
Width: ~ 16.4 km
Length: ~ 52 km
Area: 916 km2
Volume: 41.2 km3

FIG. 144.—Perspective A), dip-azimuth B), and section C) views across the slope of the eastern Gulf of Mexico illustrating massive slump/slide scars and evacuation
of massive amounts of material onto the basin floor to the south of this area. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
1 km
FIG. 145.—Debris flow off flank of submarine mud volcano.
The principal driver in deep-water sequence evolution is
relative sea-level change—primarily the effect it has on character-
istics of the staging area, including sand-to-mud ratio, sediment
caliber, and depth of storm wave base. The stratigraphic, geomor-
phic, and sedimentologic expression of deep-water deposits is
directly linked to the conditions at the shelf edge. It is there that
sediments are delivered by rivers and other processes from
hinterland areas. The locus of sedimentation, or depocenter,
shifts seaward and landward as a direct result of sea-level fall or
rise, respectively. During sea-level fall, forced regression occurs
on the shelf (Posamentier et al., 1992) and depocenters shift
rapidly toward the shelf edge. Even before the shoreline reaches
the shelf edge, instability of the upper slope has been exacerbated
both by lowered wave base and by unloading of a wedge of water
493
(i.e., corresponding to the magnitude of sea-level fall). Another
factor that may play a role in destabilizing the slope at this time
is the shifting of oceanic currents that could accompany relative
falls of sea level. Such instability can commonly result in mass
failure in the mid- to upper-slope environment (Fig. 144) and
subsequent deposition of a mass-transport complex on the slope
and basin floor.
Ultimately, when river mouths are close enough to deliver
sediments directly to the outer shelf or upper slope, deep-water
turbidity currents become common across the slope and associ-
ated basin floor. During periods of relative sea-level fall, erosion
by incising rivers results in increased sediment delivery to the
shoreline, but more importantly increased sand-to-mud ratio of
sediments delivered there. Whether the sediments are delivered
directly from rivers by density underflow (i.e., hyperpycnal flow)
or are initially deposited and then later remobilized as slumps
transforming to slides and ultimately flows is not clear, and likely
both occur. At these times of relative sea-level fall, relatively
sand-rich flows tend to build relatively short leveed channels
transitioning into relatively large frontal splays.
When relative sea-level rise resumes, initially stationary shore-
lines with aggrading coastal deltas and plains (Fig. 57) and then
later transgressing shorelines result in a progressive decrease of
sands available for transport to the deep-water environment. At
these times coarser sands tend to be preferentially deposited
behind the shoreline within incised valleys, back-barrier lagoons,
and delta plains, producing gravity flows with potentially lower
sand-to-mud ratio late in the relative sea-level lowstand and
subsequent transgression. In response to this relative increase in
mud content within flow events, levee construction becomes
more efficient and leveed channels can extend significantly far-
ther basinward. The transition point is observed to shift signifi-
cantly farther seaward late in a sea-level cycle. This results in a
juxtaposition of frontal splays overlain by solitary leveed chan-
nels corresponding to early and late lowstand systems tract
times, respectively (Figs. 31, 74, 163, 164).
During subsequent periods of shoreline transgression, mini-
mal amounts of river-supplied sediments reach the shelf edge
and turbidite deposition largely ceases. Mass-transport deposi-
tion may continue at this time because of reequilibration of
residual oversteepened, upper-slope deposits associated with
lowstand shelf-edge delta deposition (Booth, 1979) or
oversteepening of canyon walls associated with lowstand canyon
or slope-channel cutting (Figs. 37, 165). A typical depositional
sequence within a canyon is illustrated in Figs. 37 and 165. In most
instances canyons are filled with relatively minor amounts of
channelized turbidites (Figs. 37–39) and an overwhelming amount
of mass-transport deposits that constitute the bulk of the canyon
fill that forms during times when active turbidity flows have
ceased (Fig. 165).
CONCLUSIONS
The complexity of deep-water deposits is apparent from the
examples and discussions above. Large-scale, complex systems
are particularly difficult to distill into simple models that can act
as norms, predictors, and guides for future observations (Walker,
this volume).
In the 1970s, little of this complexity was understood, and
models such as those of Normark (1970, 1978), Mutti and Ricci
Lucchi (1972), Mutti and Ghibaudo (1972), and Walker (1978)
summarized observations from modern fans and ancient rocks,
and combined such observations into models based on modern
and ancient data (Walker, 1978). The models made little attempt
to incorporate data from turbidity-current processes (laboratory
 494

MTC
MTC lobes
channel

Line 1

Levees
Line 1
Deflated MTC lobe
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

MTC
5 km

FIG. 146.—Seascape of the lower slope and basin floor, DeSoto Canyon area, eastern Gulf of Mexico. Note the varying types of mass-transport deposits, including a
leveed mass-transport deposit, a lobate mass-transport deposit characterized by positive relief, and a flattened or deflated mass-transport deposit showing no
positive relief and characterized only by a debris field. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.
 A Knickpoint • Channel depth = ~ 26 m
• Channel width = ~ 1.2 km

Debr
is-flo
w ch
anne
l

Turbidity-current channel

B C
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

five
five km
km

FIG. 147.—A) Dip-magnitude, B) curvature, and C) time-structure maps of a debris-flow channel. This channel is characterized by low sinuosity and the presence of
a well-defined knickpoint at its head. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
495
496 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A B Line 1
five km

MTC Lobes

n
tio
rec
Di
l w
Fo
Structural Ridge

South North FIG. 148.—Illuminated sea floor based on 3D seismic data

A) and interpretation of mass-transport deposits B) on
C five km
the basin floor of the Makassar Strait, Indonesia. Sec-
tion view C) through several shallowly buried mass-
transport lobes of various age. Note that these elon-
gate lobes represent flow complexes imbedded within
a low-amplitude seismic reflection package sugges-
tive of hemipelagic to pelagic sedimentation. Because
of the draping effect of the hemipelagic and pelagic
sediments, these buried lobes all have sea-floor ex-
pression. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

FIG. 149.—Seismic reflection horizon slice showing an

“opportunistic” mass-transport deposit within an
earlier-formed turbidity-current leveed channel.
Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

one km
B

Flo
wd
irec
tion

one km
 South North
one km
A

Lobe 4
Slice level

100
msec
Lobe 1 Lobe 3

B
five km
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

Lobe 3
Flow direction

Lobe 2

Lobe 4

FIG. 150.—Seismic reflection cross-section A) and plan-view B) images illustrating a succession of amalgamating mass-transport deposits. Note the typical chaotic to
transparent reflection character within these deposits, suggesting a severely disrupted and discontinuous stratigraphic architecture. Seismic data courtesy of
WesternGeco.
497
 Compressional ridges 498
A

five km

one km
100 msec
B
Flow direction

Flow
Flow Direction
Direction
Terminal wall

C D
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

15°

100 msec

one km
FIG. 151.—Seismic reflection plan view A) and section views B–D) through a mass-transport complex, Gulf of Mexico. The transverse lineaments are the plan-view
expression of thrust faults caused by the mass flow abutting against the terminal wall. Thrust faults are measured at approximately a 15 degree dip. Seismic data
courtesy of WesternGeco.
 A

5 km C
(approximate)

Event 3
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

Event 1

Mass-transport complex

Toe-thrust faults
Event 2
Lateral
compression
FIG. 152.—A, B) Oblique and C) section views through an amalgamated mass-transport complex. At least three event units can be recognized. Internal deformation in
the form of compression-associated low-angle thrust faults can be observed within events 2 and 3 (B). Both toe thrusts as well as thrusts associated with lateral
compression caused by later flows are seen. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
499
 500

2 km

Nigeria

2 km

Indonesia
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

2 km

Gulf of Mexico
FIG. 153.—Cross-section view through three mass-transport deposits. Each is characterized by chaotic and contorted seismic facies pattern. Top line, seismic data
courtesy of VeritasDGC. Middle and lower lines, seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
FIG. 154.—Seismic horizon slice through mass-transport deposit characterized by convolute bedding, basin floor of the eastern Gulf of
Mexico. Compare with Figure 139, a seismic slice at the base of this mass-transport deposit. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
or modern ocean observations), and thus remained observational
rather than process based. In retrospect, we note that the Walker
(1978) model showed a very simplistic and commonly incorrect
distribution of sand and mud on the fan, and also ignored the
effects of different grain-size distributions, tectonic settings, and
relative sea-level fluctuations.
Relative sea-level fluctuations were built into the models of
Mutti (1985), Vail et al. (1977), and Posamentier and Vail (1985).
This model essentially combined three aspects of older Mutti
models into one evolving model, with sandy detached lobes
forming during lowstands of relative sea level. During relative
sea-level rise, the fan evolved into one where the channels were
attached to smaller depositional lobes. At highstand, with a much
reduced sediment supply, either condensed sections or finer-
grained channels and levee formed, with little or no lobe forma-
tion.
The 1980s marked the time when geophysical observations
became important, particularly side-scan sonar and shallow-
penetration seismic profiles across fan surfaces. This information
was very different in nature and scale from the rock observations
and poorer-quality side-scan data from the 1970s. Because the
data were so different—for example, data on the meandering
channels from the Amazon Fan (Damuth et al., 1982a; Damuth et
al., 1982b) and the data on channel, levee, and large-scale slump
from the Rhône Fan (Droz and Bellaiche, 1985), it was difficult to
combine older models with this new data—in fact, there are no
published attempts to do so.
At around the same time, 3-D seismic data from Tertiary and
Modern fans was becoming available to oil companies, but few of
these studies made their way into the public literature until the
1990s. The seismic data revealed superb three-dimensional rela-
tionships between all of the depositional elements, but again it
was difficult to relate seismic-scale data to outcrop data. With the
advent of seismic geomorphology (Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a)
the integration of such observations was made possible. Because
501
one km
the seismic data revealed so well the geometrical relationships
between elements, it became possible to infer and better under-
stand the processes that gave rise to the various depositional
geometries—processes such as channel meandering and avul-
sion, and lobe development by crevassing, overbank spill, or flow
expansion at the ends of channels.
Thus any attempts at modeling of turbidite systems must
incorporate information of four different types and scales: pro-
cesses (on the flume experimental scale as well as the scale of
modern fans), 3-D seismic studies, observations of ancient rocks,
and numerical models. There is still a rather incomplete linkage
between these different sources of data, and we have tried to
show how some of these linkages might be made. Our conclu-
sions are based in fact as much as possible but are nevertheless
somewhat process and conceptual in flavor. Future fan models
will evolve as more work is done relating experimental studies to
ancient rocks and relating the geometry of large outcrops to 3-D
seismic data derived both from modern fans and Cretaceous–
Tertiary turbidite systems. As the seismic studies evolve, so the
large-scale processes of fan development will be better under-
stood, and the future conceptual basis for modeling will be better
established.
In this paper, we have integrated facies with depositional
elements and then discussed modern and subsurface 3-D seis-
mic examples to show how the depositional facies fit into the
various depositional systems. Because in most instances ground
truth is lacking in studies based on 3D seismic, we have inte-
grated information from outcrop examples to help provide
insights to assist in interpreting the 3-D seismic images (for
example, the San Clemente and Ross outcrop examples help to
calibrate the seismic images of meander loops; Figs. 51, 71, 72).
Rather than create a model that would serve as a template, we
have focused on first principles based largely on process sedi-
mentology. In this way, we leave it to geoscientists to build their
own models using depositional elements as building blocks in
 A B
B C
C 502
A A B A
A A'
A'

Terminal wall

Slice
C'
C' level
B'
B'

1 km

A' one km C
A'

Leveed channel
Turbidite
frontal splay

Mass-transport complex

D B B'
B B'

100 m
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

E C
C C'
C'

one km

FIG. 155.—Example of the terminus of a mass-transport deposit, eastern Gulf of Mexico. This deposit shows evidence of having been transported across a decollement
surface that likely was located within a condensed section at the base of a frontal-splay complex. In response to compression against a terminal wall, internal
deformation in the form of thrust faulting occurred. The plan-view A) as well as the section views B–E) the clearly show the mass-transport unit entraining earlier-
deposited, sand-prone leveed-channel and frontal-splay deposits. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 A B Transport
direction

Small thrust faults

C
D
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

Transport
direction

Transport
direction

FIG. 156.—Seismic time slice in the coherence A) and amplitude B) domains illustrating the plan view and oblique view C) expression of thrust faults within mass-transport
deposits. D) Seismic reflection profile across mass transport deposits characterized by low-angle thrust faults. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
503
504 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER
Trench
Thrust faults
FIG. 157.—Small-scale analog for mass-transport deposits shown
in Figures 134, 135, and 155. The snow shovel slides on a hard
base, pushing snow before it. The semi-rigid snow pack
deforms internally predominantly by low-angle thrust fault-
ing as the mass slides on the underlying decollement surface
and is compressed against the snow pack before it. The trench,
which is formed in the wake of the shovel, is characterized by
steep walls produced by shearing of the flowing mass.
space and time. On the basis of a sound understanding of local
physiography, sediment flux, and sediment caliber, integrated
with process sedimentology, predictive facies models can be
constructed. Lateral as well as vertical facies successions can be
predicted.
Sediment accumulates in staging areas, moves down can-
yons or slope channels, and ultimately travels onto the basin
floor through leveed channels and frontal splays. Principal
deep-water sand habitats include slope-channel complexes,
basin-floor channel fills, crevasse splays and sediment waves in
overbank settings, and frontal splays. Canyons also can be sites
of confined leveed channel deposits, though the bulk of canyon
fill commonly is mud prone. To a lesser extent, sand deposition
also occurs within levees in response to repeated spillover
across levee crests. Where slopes are characterized by high
rugosity, such as areas underlain by mobile salt or complex toe-
thrust ridges, deposition of a broad range of depositional ele-
ments can occur within relatively small areas. Intraslope basins
can be characterized by the full range of sand habitats, insofar as
they comprise, in microcosm, slope and basin-floor physiogra-
phy. Figures 166–168 illustrate and summarize the various
significant sand habitats on the basin floor. Figures 169 and 170
illustrate the significant sand habitats on the slope.
The role of grain-size distribution within a flow as well as in
a succession of flows is critical to understanding the evolution of
depositional elements, especially those on the basin floor. The
more mud in the system, the farther seaward the leveed-channel
depositional element extends. As flows travel seaward they are
preferentially impoverished of their mud content through con-
tinual spillover of the upper parts of the flows into the overbank
environment. At the point where the levees are low enough to
allow sand from the higher-density, lower part of the flow to spill
over the levees, the system morphology transitions from leveed
channel to frontal splay. The frontal splays are commonly chan-
nelized in their proximal parts, but the channels are shallow and
have small levees. Channel paths probably switch rapidly. In the
distal parts of the frontal splays, flows become even less channel-
ized and more sheet-like.
Mass-transport deposits, largely debrites, are common com-
ponents of deep-water environments (Fig. 133). These deposits,
which are largely mud prone, commonly originate in mid-slope
to upper-slope environments. They commonly directly overlie
erosional surfaces characterized by long grooves and striations.
Near their termini as well as along their margins, they are
characterized by internal compressive deformation in the form of
imbricate thrust faults. Mass-transport complexes likely are char-
acterized by complex rheology that reflects frequent transitions
from turbulent to laminar to “plug” flow within a single flow
event.
In summary, we urge caution in adopting overly simple facies
models in deep-water environments. The deep water is a poten-
tially complex depositional setting. The degree of complexity of
the facies model desired should be dependent on the quality of
data available and should be built upon depositional elements
observed and inferred. However, as the geoscientist well knows,
the devil is in the details!
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
for permission to publish. Permission to publish seismic data
from VeritasDGC, Western Geophysical, PGS Geophysical is
gratefully acknowledged. We also wish to thank the various
colleagues with whom we have had lengthy conversations about
the world of deep-water sedimentation through the years. These
include V. Kolla, P. Weimer, W. Normark, H. DeV. Wickens, B.
Kneller, and W. Morris. This paper benefited from and was
significantly improved thanks to the comprehensive reviews of
Todd Greene and Octavian Catuneaunu.
REFERENCES
ABREU, V., SULLIVAN, M., PIRMEZ, C., AND MOHRIG, D., 2003, Lateral accretion
packages (LAPs): an important reservoir element in deep water
sinuous channels: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 20, p. 631–648.
BALLANCE, P.F., 1964, The sedimentology of the Waitemata Group in the
Takapuna section, Auckland: New Zealand Journal of Geology and
Geophysics, v. 7, p. 466–499.
BEAUBOEUF, R.T., AND FRIEDMANN, S.J., 2000, High-resolution seismic/
sequence stratigraphic framework for the evolution of Pleistocene
intra slope basins, Western Gulf of Mexico: depositional models and
reservoir analogs, in Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M., Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C.,
Nelson, H., Bouma, A.H., Styzen, M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds.,
A B

C D

Slice level
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

FIG. 158.—Seismic time slice and section views A, B, D) of mass-

transport deposits characterized by thrust faults induced by
compressional stress regime. The interpreted thrust faults C)
formed as a result of “country rock” being “pushed” and com-
pressed by stress directed from the right by a mass flow E).
505
 Distance traveled = 6.6 km 506
[Assumption: 30 faults @ 220 m/fault]

Terminal wall

Restoration of fault results in 220 m of lengthening Distance Traveled = 0 km

100 msec
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Terminal wall
one km

FIG. 159.—Seismic profile through mass-transport deposit shown in Figure 149. Approximate palinspastic reconstruction results in 220 m of lengthening for each thrust
fault. With approximately 30 faults along an axial profile within the study area, restoration results in extension of approximately 6.6 km at the up-system limit of
the deposit, whereas it can be assumed that the sediments near the terminal wall would have moved only minimally. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.
 A Turbidite channel B

Lateral
compression

MTD Transport
margin direction

C
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

Lateral
compression

FIG. 160.—A) Illuminated horizon at the top of a mass-transport deposit illustrating a lateral compressional bulge. B, C) Seismic reflection profile illustrating lateral
compression associated with a later phase of mass transport.
507
508 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

A Transition point

Transition point

Onlap of frontal splay

Transport
direction

FIG. 161.—Influence on turbidites by rugosity atop mass-transport deposits. A) Seismic time slice that shows the transition point
of a frontal splay, with extensive frontal-splay deposits seaward of that location. B) Seismic section that illustrates the onlap
of frontal-splay deposits against a bathymetric high associated with the irregular top of a mass-transport complex. Seismic data
courtesy of WesternGeco.

Deep-Water Reservoirs of the World: Gulf Coast Section SEPM, 20th
Annual Research Conference, p. 40–60.
BOOTH, J.S., 1979, Recent history of mass-wasting on the upper continental
slopes, northern Gulf of Mexico, as interpreted from the consolidation
states of the sediment, in Doyle, L.J., and Pilkey, O.H., eds., Geology
of Continental Slopes: SEPM, Special Publication 27, p. 153–165.
BOUMA, A.H., 1962, Sedimentology of Some Flysch Deposits; A Graphic
Approach to Facies Interpretation: Amsterdam, Elsevier, 168 p.
BOUMA, A.H., NORMARK, W.R., AND BARNES, N.E., eds., 1985, Submarine Fans
and Related Turbidite Systems: New York, Springer-Verlag, 351 p.
BRAMI, T.R., PIRMEZ, C., ARCHIE, C., HEERALAL, S., AND HOLMAN, K.L., 2000,
Late Pleistocene deep-water stratigraphy and depositional processes,
offshore Trinidad and Tobago, in Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M, Coleman, J.,
Rosen, N.C., Nelson, H., Bouma, A.H., Styzen, M.J., and Lawrence,
D.T., eds., Deep-Water Reservoirs of the World: Gulf Coast Section
SEPM Foundation, 20th Annual Research Conference, p. 104–115.
BRUHN, C.H.L., AND WALKER, R.G., 1995, High-resolution stratigraphy and
sedimentary evolution of coarse-grained canyon-filling turbidites
from the Upper Cretaceous transgressive megasequence, Campos
Basin, Brazil: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. B65, p. 426–442.
 A B

C Scarp relief up to 22 m
D
Relief up to 32 m
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

one km

FIG. 162.—Rugose upper surface of a mass-transport deposit. Small-scale accommodation atop the mass-transport deposits shows no apparent influence on
subsequent turbidite deposition.
509
 510

B
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 163.—A) Seismic reflection profile across deep-water deposits on the basin floor of the Makassar Strait, Indonesia, illustrating a stratigraphic succession with mass-
transport deposits at the base, overlain by frontal-splay deposits, leveed-channel deposits, a further mass-transport deposit and ultimately a condensed-section
deposit. B) Idealized cross section and well logs through a deep-water depositional sequence (after Posamentier and Kolla, 2003a). Seismic data courtesy of
WesternGeco.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS 511

Relative sea level

High

Lowstand interval

Low Time

Condensed section
Interval that shoreline is
located near the shelf edge
(turbidity currents dominate)
Interval of upper-slope
instability (mass-transport dominates)
Leveed channels dominate
(relatively low sand:mud)
Frontal splays dominate
(relatively high sand:mud)

Interval of upper-slope instability Condensed

(mass-transport dominates) section

FIG. 164.—Schematic depiction of sediment transport events associated with relative sea-level change. As sea level begins its fall,
lowered wave base results in slope disequilibrium conditions, which favor mass-transport events. Once sea level has lowered
to the point where river mouths are in close proximity to the shelf edge, direct and indirect delivery of turbidites to the slope
and basin floor is facilitated. During the early stages of this process, associated with the interval of relative sea-level fall, shelf
valleys are incised and canyons can form. This results in sediment bypass of the shelf, which favors delivery of a relatively sand-
prone sediment load to the deep water. During the late stages of sea-level lowstand, when sea level is slowly rising, sediments
(preferentially coarse-grained sediment) tend to be trapped within earlier-formed incised valleys, resulting in muddier
turbidites at that time. This progression favors an evolution from sand-rich frontal splays to mud-rich isolated leveed channels.
Finally rapid sea-level rise again is associated with slope disequilibrium and deposition of mass-transport deposits. When sea
level finally stabilizes, background deposition of hemipelagic and pelagic sediments dominates in the deep-water environ-
ment, forming a condensed section.

BRUHN, C.H.L., AND WALKER, R.G., 1997, Internal architecture and sedi-
mentary evolution of coarse-grained turbidite channel–levee com-
plexes, Early Eocene Regencia Canyon, Espirito Santo Basin, Brazil:
Sedimentology, v. 44, p. 17–46.
CAMACHO, H., BUSBY, C.J., AND KNELLER, B., 2002, A new depositional model
for the classical turbidite locality at San Clemente State Beach, Califor-
nia: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 86, p.
1543–1560.
CAMPION, K.M., SPRAGUE, A.R., MOHRIG, D., LOVELL, R.W., DRZEWIECKI, P.A.,
SULLIVAN, M.D., ARDILL, J.A., JENSEN, G.N. AND SICKAFOOSE, D.K., 2000,
Outcrop expression of confined channel complexes, in Weimer, P.,
Slatt, R.M, Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C., Nelson, H., Bouma, A.H., Styzen,
M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds., Deep-Water Reservoirs of the World:
Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation, 20th Annual Research Confer-
ence, p. 127–150.
CLIFTON, H.E., 1981, Submarine canyon deposits, Point Lobos, California,
in Frizzel, E., ed., Upper Cretaceous and Paleocene Turbidites, Cen-
tral California Coast: Pacific Section SEPM, Guidebook to Field Trip
no. 6, p. 79–92.
CLIFTON, H.E., 1984, Sedimentation units in stratified resedimented con-
glomerate, Paleocene submarine canyon fill, Point Lobos, California,
in Koster, E.H., and Steel, R.J., eds., Sedimentology of Gravels and
Conglomerates: Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir
10, p. 429–-441.
 512
10 km

450 m

1170 m
Mass-transport deposits

18°

Seismic section
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 165.—Seismic section across Mississippi canyon, along with perspective shaded relief. Seismic data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.
 Mud plug

Blocky to fining upward

50 m
one km Amalgamated
channel fill
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

FIG. 166.—Basin-floor leveed-channel sand habitats—channel. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

513
 514

50 m

one km

Crevasse splay
Sediment waves
Thin-bedded overbank
HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

FIG. 167.—Basin-floor leveed-channel sand habitats—levee. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

 50 m
one km

Frontal splay
Frontal splay
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

FIG. 168.—Basin-floor frontal-splay sand habitats. Seismic data courtesy of WesternGeco.

515
 516

Onlap at channel wall with shale drape

HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

Slope-channel lateral-accretion package

Slope-channel amalgamated fill

FIG. 169.—Slope-channel sand habitats. Seismic data courtesy of VeritasDGC.
 Canyon filled with predominantly mass transport deposits

one km

one km

Partially preserved channel

(erosional remnant) Coarse-grained canyon-axis fill
DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS

one km

Axial leveed channel Canyon-fill onlap onto canyon wall

FIG. 170.—Slope-canyon sand habitats. Seismic data proprietary to PGS Marine Geophysical NSA.
517
518 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER
CROWELL, J.C., 1957, Origin of pebbly mudstones: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 68, p. 993–1009.
DAMUTH, J.E., KOWSMANN, R.O., FLOOD, R.D., BELDERSON, R.H., AND GORINI,
M.A., 1983a, Age relationships of distributary channels on Amazon
deep-sea fan: implications for fan growth pattern: Geology, v. 11, p.
470–473.
DAMUTH, J.E., KOLLA, V., FLOOD, R.D., KOWSMANN, R.O., GORINI, M.A., AND
BELDERSON, R.H., 1983b, Distributary channel meandering and bifur-
cation patterns on the Amazon deep-sea fan as revealed by long-
range side-scan sonar (GLORIA): Geology, v. 11, p. 94–98.
DROZ, L., AND BELLAICHE, G., 1985, Rhône deep-sea fan: morphostructure
and growth pattern: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
Bulletin, v. 69, p. 460–479.
DZULYNSKI, S., KSIAZKIEWICZ, M., AND KUENEN, P.H., 1959, Turbidites in
flysch of the Polish Carpathian Mountains: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 70, p. 1089–1118.
ELMORE, R.D., PILKEY, O.H., CLEARY, W.J., AND CURRAN, H.A., 1979, Black
Shell turbidite, Hatteras Abyssal Plain, western Atlantic Ocean:
Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 90, p. 1165–1176.
GHIBAUDO, G., AND VANZ, V., 1987, Proposta di classificazione delle facies
“torbiditiche” e di un metodo practico per la loro descrizione sul
terreno: Giornale di Geologia, v. 49, p. 31/43.
GOODWIN, R.H., AND PRIOR, D.B., 1989, Geometry and depositional se-
quences of the Mississippi Canyon, Gulf of Mexico: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology, v. 59, p. 318–329.
GREGORY, M.R., 1966, Sedimentary features and penecontemporaneous
slumping in the Waitemata Group, Whangaparaoa Peninsula, north
Auckland, New Zealand: New Zealand Journal of Geology and
Geophysics, v. 12, p. 248–282.
GRIGGS, G.B., AND KULM, L.D., 1970, Sedimentation in Cascadia deep-sea
channel: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 81, p. 1361–1384.
HACKBARTH, C.J., AND SHAW, R.D., 1994, Morphology and stratigraphy of
a mid-Pleistocene turbidite leveed channel from seismic, core and
log data, northeastern Gulf of Mexico, in Weimer, P., Bouma, A.H.,
and Perkins, B.F., eds., Submarine Fans and Turbidite Systems: Gulf
Coast Section SEPM Foundation, 15th Annual Research Conference,
p. 127–133.
H ARMS, J.C., AND F AHNESTOCK, K., 1965, Stratification, flow phenom-
ena and bed forms (with an example from the Rio Grande), in
Middleton, G.V., ed., Primary Sedimentary Structures and Their
Hydrodynamic Interpretation: SEPM , Special publication 12, p.
84–115.
HEEZEN, B.C., 1956, Corrientes de turbidez del Rio Magdalena: Sociedad
Geográfica de Colombia, Boletín, v. 51/52, p. 135–143.
HEEZEN, B.C., MENZIES, R.J., SCHNEIDER, E.D., EWING W.M., AND GRANELLI,
N.C.L., 1964, Congo submarine canyon: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 48, p. 1126–1149.
HISCOTT, R.N., HALL, F.R., AND PIRMEZ, C., 1997, Turbidity-current overspill
from the Amazon Channel: texture of the silt/sand load, paleoflow
from anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility and implications for
flow processes, in Flood, R.D., Piper, D.J.W., Klaus, A., and Peterson,
L.C., eds., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program: Scientific
Results, v. 155, p. 53–78.
HURST, A., CARTWRIGHT, J.A., DURANTI, D., HUUSE, M., AND NELSON, M.,
2005, Sand injectites: an emerging global play in deep-water clastic
environments, in Doré, A.G., and Vining, B.A., eds., Petroleum
Geology: Northwest Europe and Global Perspectives: Geological
Society of London, Proceedings of the 6th Petroleum Geology Con-
ference, p. 133–144.
JENNETTE, D.C., GARFIELD, T.R., MOHRIG, D.C., AND CAYLEY, G.T., 2000, The
interaction of shelf accommodation, sediment supply and sealevel
in controlling the facies, architecture and sequence stacking pat-
terns of the Tay and Forties/Sele basin-floor fans, Central North Sea,
in Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M, Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C., Nelson, H.,
Bouma, A.H., Styzen, M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds., Deep-Water
Reservoirs of the World: Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation, 20th
Annual Research Conference, p. 402–421.
KENYON, N.H., AND MILLINGTON, J., 1995, Contrasting deep-sea deposi-
tional systems in the Bering Sea, in Pickering, K.T., Hiscott, R.N.,
Kenyon, N.H., Ricci Lucchi, F., and Smith, R.D.A., eds., Atlas of Deep
Water environments: London, Chapman & Hall, p. 196–202.
KNELLER, B.C., 1995, Beyond the turbidite paradigm: physical models
for deposition of turbidites and their implications for reservoir
prediction, in Hartley, A.J., and Prosser, D.J., eds., Characterisation
of Deep Marine Clastic Systems: Geological Society of London,
Special Publication 94, p. 31–49.
KOLLA, V., AND COUMES, F., 1987, Morphology, internal structure, seis-
mic stratigraphy and sedimentation of Indus Fan: American Asso-
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 71, p. 650–677.
KOLLA, V., BOURGES, P., URRUTY, J.M., AND SAFA, P., 2001, Evolution of
deepwater Tertiary sinuous channels offshore, Angola (West Af-
rica) and implications to reservoir architecture: American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin v. 85, p. 1373–1405.
KOMAR, P.D., 1971, Hydraulic jumps in turbidity currents: Geological
Society America, Bulletin, v. 82, p. 1477–1488.
KUENEN, P.H., AND MIGLIORINI, C.I., 1950, Turbidity currents as a cause
of graded bedding: Journal of Geology, v. 58, p. 91–127.
LIEN, T., WALKER, R.G., AND MARTINSEN, O.J., 2003, Turbidites in the
Upper Carboniferous Ross Formation, western Ireland: recon-
struction of a channel and spillover system: Sedimentology, v. 50,
p. 113-148.
LINK, M.H., SQUIRES, R.L., AND COLBURN, I.P., 1984, Slope and deep-sea
fan facies and paleogeography of Upper Cretaceous Chatsworth
Formation, Simi Hills, California: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 68, p. 850–873.
LOWE, D.R., 1975, Water escape structures in coarse-grained sedi-
ments: Sedimentology, v. 22, p. 157–204.
LOWE, D.R., 1979, Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the Pigeon point
Formation, San Mateo County, California, in Nilsen, T.H., and
Brabb, E.E., eds., Geology of the Santa Cruz Mountains, California:
Geological Society of America, Cordilleran Section, Field Trip
Guidebook, p. 17–29.
LOWE, D.R., 1982, Sediment gravity flows: II. Depositional models with
special reference to the deposits of high-density turbidity currents:
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 52, p. 279–297.
MANLEY, L., AND FLOOD, R.D., 1998, Cyclic sediment deposition within
Amazon deep-sea fan: American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
gists, Bulletin, v. 72, p. 912–925.
MARTINSEN, O.J., LIEN, T., AND WALKER, R.G., 2000, Upper Carboniferous
deep-water sediments, western Ireland: analogs to passive margin
plays, in Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M., Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C., Nelson,
H., Bouma, A.H., Styzen, M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds., Deep
Water Reservoirs of the World: SEPM, Gulf Coast Section, 20th
Annual Bob F. Perkins Research Conference, Houston, p. 533–555
(available only on CD).
MASLIN, M., MIKKELSEN, N., VILELA, C., AND HAQ, B.U., 1998, Sea-level
and gas-hydrate–controlled catastrophic sediment failures of the
Amazon fan: Geology, v. 26, p. 1107–1110.
MAYALL, M., AND STEWART, I., 2000, The architecture of turbidite slope
channels, in Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M, Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C.,
Nelson, H., Bouma, A.H., Styzen, M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds.,
Deep-Water Reservoirs of the World: Gulf Coast Section SEPM
Foundation, 20th Annual Research Conference, p. 578–586.
MIGEON, S., SAVOYE, B., AND FAUGERES, J.-C., 2000, Quaternary develop-
ment of migrating sediment waves in the Var deep-sea fan: distri-
bution, growth pattern and implication for levee evolution: Sedi-
mentary Geology, v. 133, p. 265–293.
MOHRIG, D., WHIPPLE, K.X., HONDZO, M., ELLIS, C., AND PARKER, G., 1998,
Hydroplaning of subaqueous debris flows: Geological Society of
America, Bulletin, v. 110, p. 387–394.
 DEEP-WATER TURBIDITES AND SUBMARINE FANS
MULDER, T., AND SYVITSKI, J.P.M., 1995, Turbidity currents generated at
river mouths during exceptional discharges to the world oceans:
Journal of Geology, v. 103, p. 285–299.
MULDER, T., SYVITSKI, J.P.M., AND SKENE, K.I., 1998, Modeling of erosion
and deposition by turbidity currents generated at river mouths:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 68, p. 124–137.
MUTTI, E., 1985, Turbidite systems and their relations to depositional
sequences, in ZUFFA, G.G., ed., Provenance of Arenites: NATO-ASI
Series, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Reidel, p. 65–93.
MUTTI, E., AND GHIBAUDO, G., 1972, Un esempio di torbiditi di conoide
sottomarina esterna: le Arenario di San Salvatore (formazione di
Bobbio, Miocene) nell’Appennino di Piacenza: Memorie
dell’Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, Classe di Scienze Fisiche,
Matematiche e Naturale, Serie 4a, no. 16, p. 1–41.
MUTTI, E., AND NORMARK, W.R., 1991, An integrated approach to the study
of turbidite systems, in Weimer, P., and Link, M.H., eds., Seismic
Facies and Sedimentary Processes of Submarine Fans and Turbidite
Systems: New York, Springer-Verlag, p. 75–106.
MUTTI, E., AND RICCI LUCCHI, F., 1972, Le torbiditi dell’Appennino
settentrionale: introduzioni all’analisi de facies: Società Geologica
Italiana Memorie, v. 11, p. 161–199.
MUTTI, E., STEFFENS, G.S., PIRMEZ, C., ORLANDO, M., AND ROBERTS, D., EDS.,
2003, Thematic set: Turbidites: models and problems: Marine and
Petroleum Geology, v. 20, p. 523–933.
NELSON, C.H., GOLDFINGER, C., JOHNSON, J.E., AND DUNHILL, G., 2000, Varia-
tion of modern turbidite systems along the subduction zone margin
of Cascadia Basin and implications for turbidite reservoir beds, in
Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M., Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C., Nelson, H., Bouma,
A.H., Styzen, M.J. and Lawrence, D.T., eds., Deep Water Reservoirs of
the World: SEPM, Gulf Coast Section, 20th Annual Bob F. Perkins
Research Conference, Houston, p. 714–738 (available only on CD).
NILSEN, T.H., 1980, Modern and ancient submarine fans: discussion of
papers by R.G. Walker and W.R. Normark: American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 64, p. 1094–1101.
NORMARK, W.R., 1970, Growth patterns of deep-sea fans: American Asso-
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 54, p. 2170–2195.
PEAKALL, J., MCCAFFREY, W.D., KNELLER, B.C., STELTING, C.E., MCHARGUE,
T.R., AND SCHWELLER, W.J., 2000, A process model for the evolution of
submarine fan channels: Implications for sedimentary architecture, in
Bouma, A.H., and Stone, C.G., eds., Fine-Grained Turbidite Systems:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 72 and SEPM,
Special Publication 68, p. 73–88.
PICKERING, K.T., STOW, D., WATSON, M., AND HISCOTT, R.N., 1986, Deep-
water facies, processes and models: a review and classification scheme
for modern and ancient sediments: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 23, p.
75–174.
PILKEY, O.H., 1988, Basin plains: giant sedimentation events, in Clifton,
H.E., ed., Sedimentologic Consequences of Convulsive Geological
Events: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 229, p. 93–99.
PIPER, D.J.W., AND NORMARK, W.R., 1983, Turbidite depositional patterns
and flow characteristics, Navy submarine fan, California borderland:
Sedimentology, v. 30, p. 681–694.
PIPER, D.J., SHOR, A.N., AND HUGHES-CLARK, J.E., 1988, The “1929” Grand
Banks earthquake, slump and turbidity current, in Clifton, H.E., ed.,
Sedimentological Consequences of Convulsive Geological Events:
Geological Society of America, Special Paper 229, p. 77–92.
PIPER, D.J.W., PIRMEZ, C., MANLEY, P.L., LONG, D., FLOOD, R.D., NORMARK,
W.R., AND SHOWERS, W., 1997, Mass-transport deposits of the Amazon
Fan, in Flood, R.D., Piper, D.J.W., Klaus, A., and Peterson, L.C., eds.,
Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, v. 155,
p. 109–146.
PIRMEZ, C., AND FLOOD, R.D., 1997, Morphology and structure of Amazon
Channel, in Flood, R.D., Piper, D.J.W., Klaus, A., and Peterson, L.C.,
eds., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, v.
155, p. 23–45.
519
PIRMEZ, C., HISCOTT, R.N., AND KRONEN, J.K., 1997, Sandy turbidite succes-
sions at the base of channel–levee systems of the Amazon Fan re-
vealed by FMS logs and cores: unraveling the facies architecture of
large submarine fans, in Flood, R.D., Piper, D.J.W., Klaus, A., and
Peterson, L.C., eds., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program,
Scientific Results, v. 155, p. 7–22.
PLINT, A.G., AND NUMMEDAL, D., 1998, The falling stage systems tract:
recognition and importance in sequence stratigraphic analysis, in
Gawthorpe, R.L.G., and Hunt, E., eds., Sedimentary Responses to
Forced Regression: Geological Society of London, Special Publica-
tion.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., 2003a, A linked shelf edge delta and slope channel
turbidite system: 3D seismic case study from the eastern Gulf of
Mexico, in Roberts, H.H., Rosen, N.C., Fillon, R.H., and Anderson,
J.B., eds., Shelf Margin Deltas and Linked Down Slope Petroleum
Systems: Global Significance and Future Exploration Potential: Gulf
Coast Section of SEPM Foundation, Proceedings of the 23rd Annual
Bob F. Perkins Research Conference, p. 115–134.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., 2003b, Depositional elements associated with a basin
floor channel–levee system: case study from the Gulf of Mexico:
Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 20, p. 677–690.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., AND ALLEN, G.P., 1999, Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigra-
phy—Concepts and Applications: SEPM, Concepts in Sedimentology
and Paleontology, no. 7, 210 p.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., ALLEN, G.P., JAMES, D.P., AND TESSON, M., 1992, Forced
regressions in a sequence stratigraphic framework: concepts, ex-
amples, and exploration significance: American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1687–1709.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., ERSKINE, R.D., AND MITCHUM, R.M., JR., 1991, Models for
submarine fan deposition within a sequence stratigraphic frame-
work, in Weimer, P., and Link, M.H., eds., Seismic Facies and Sedi-
mentary Processes of Submarine Fans and Turbidite Systems: New
York, Springer-Verlag, p. 127–136.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., JERVEY, M.T., AND VAIL, P.R., 1988, Eustatic controls on
clastic deposition I—conceptual framework, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings,
B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van
Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Approach:
SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 109–124.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., AND KOLLA, V., 2003a, Seismic geomorphology and
stratigraphy of depositional elements in deep-water settings: Journal
of Sedimentary Research, v. 73, p. 367–388.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., AND KOLLA, V., 2003b, Anatomy of a deep-water
channel avulsion—Example from the basin floor of the Desoto Can-
yon area, Gulf of Mexico (abstract): American Association of Petro-
leum Geologists, Annual Meeting, Abstracts Volume, p. A140.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., MEIZARWIN, WISMAN, P.S., AND PLAWMAN, T., 2000, Deep
water depositional systems—Ultra-deep Makassar Strait, Indonesia,
in Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M., Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C., Nelson, H.,
Bouma, A.H., Styzen, M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds., Deep-Water
Reservoirs of the World: Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation, 20th
Annual Research Conference, p. 806–816.
POSAMENTIER, H.W., AND VAIL, P.R., 1985, Eustatic controls on deposi-
tional stratal patterns: SEPM, Research Conference no. 6, Sea Level
Changes—An Integrated Approach, October 20–23, 1985 (Abstract
and Poster).
PRATHER, B.E., BOOTH, J.R., STEFFENS, G.S., AND CRAIG, P.A., 1998, Classifica-
tion, lithologic calibration and stratigraphic succession of seismic
facies of intraslope basins, deep-water Gulf of Mexico: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 82, p. 701–728.
READING, H.G., AND RICHARDS, M., 1994, Turbidite system in deep-water
basin margins classified by grain size and feeder system: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 792–822.
RUST, B.R., 1966, Late Cretaceous paleogeography near Wheeler Gorge,
Ventura County, California: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Bulletin, v. 50, p. 1389–1398.
520 HENRY W. POSAMENTIER AND ROGER G. WALKER

SHANMUGAM, G., 1996, High-density turbidity currents: are they sandy Processes of Submarine Fans and Turbidite Systems: New York,
debris flows?: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 66, p. 2–10. Springer-Verlag, p. 323–347.
SHANMUGAM, G., LEHTONEN, L.R., STRAUME, T., SYVERTSEN, S.E., HODGKINSON, WEIMER, P., AND LINK, M.H., eds., 1991, Seismic Facies and Sedimentary
R.J., AND SKIBELI, M., 1994, Slump and debris-flow dominated upper Processes of Submarine Fans and Turbidite Systems: New York,
slope facies in the Cretaceous of the Norwegian and northern North Springer-Verlag, 447 p.
Seas (61–67°N): implications for sand distribution: American Asso- WEIMER, P., SLATT, R.M., COLEMAN, J., ROSEN, N.C., NELSON, H., BOUMA,
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 910–937. A.H., STYZEN, M.J., AND LAURENCE, D.T., eds., 2000, Deep-Water
SIKKIMA, W., AND WOJCIK, K.M., 2000, 3D visualization of turbidite sys- Reservoirs of the World: SEPM, Gulf Coast Section, 20th Annual Bob
tems, Lower Congo Basin, offshore Angola, in Weimer, P., Slatt, F. Perkins Research Conference, Houston (available only on CD).
R.M., Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C., Nelson, H., Bouma, A.H., Styzen, WILSON J., WALL, G., KLOOSTERMAN, H.J., CONEY, D., CAYLEY, G., WALKER, J.,
M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds., Deep-Water Reservoirs of the World: AND LINSKAILL, C., 2005, The discovery of Goldeneye: in Doré, A.G.,
Gulf Coast Section of SEPM Foundation, 20th Annual Research and Vining, B.A., eds., Petroleum Geology: North-West Europe and
Conference, p. 928–939. Global Perspectives: 6th Petroleum Geology Conference, Proceed-
SURLYK, F., AND NOE-NYGAARD, N., 2003, A giant sand injection complex: ings, p. 199–216.
the Upper Jurassic Hareelv Formation of East Greenland: Geologia WINKER, C.D., AND BOOTH, J.R., 2000, Sedimentary dynamics of the salt-
Croatica, v. 56, p. 69–81. dominated continental slope, Gulf of Mexico: integration of obser-
UCHUPI, E., AND AUSTIN, J., 1979, The stratigraphy and structure of the vations from the sea floor, near-surface and deep subsurface, in
Laurentian Cone region: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 16, Weimer, P., Slatt, R.M., Coleman, J., Rosen, N.C., Nelson, H., Bouma,
p. 1726–1752. A.H., Styzen, M.J., and Lawrence, D.T., eds., Deep-Water Reservoirs
VAIL, P.R., MITCHUM, R.M., JR., AND THOMPSON, S., III, 1977, Seismic of the World: SEPM, Gulf Coast Section, 20th Annual Bob F. Perkins
stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, part 3: relative changes Research Conference, Houston, p. 1059–1086.
of sea level from coastal onlap, in Payton, C.E., ed., Seismic Stratig-
raphy—Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration: American Asso-
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 26, p. 63–81.
VAN WAGONER, J.C., BEAUBOUEF, R.T., HOYAL, J.C.J.D., DUNN, P.A., ADAIR,
N.L., ABREU, V., LI, D., WELLNER, R.W., AWWILLER, D.N., AND SUN, T.,
2003, Energy dissipation and the fundamental shape of siliciclastic
sedimentary bodies (abstract): American Association of Petroleum
Geologists, Annual Meeting, Abstracts Volume, p. A175.
VAN WEERING, T.C.E., NIELSEN, T., KENYON, N.H., KATJA, A., AND KUIJPERS,
A.H., 1998, Large submarine slides on the NE Faeroe continental
margin, in Stoker, M.S., Evans, D., and Cramp, A., eds., Geological
Processes on Continental Margins: Sedimentation, Mass-Wasting,
and Stability: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 129:
p. 5–27.
WALKER, R.G., 1965, The origin and significance of the internal sedimen-
tary structures of turbidites: Yorkshire Geological Society, Proceed-
ings, v. 35, p. 1–32.
WALKER, R.G., 1967, Turbidite sedimentary structures and their relation-
ship to proximal and distal depositional environments: Journal of
Sedimentary Petrology., v. 37, p. 25–43.
WALKER, R.G., 1973, Mopping up the turbidite mess, in Ginsburg, R.N.,
ed., Evolving Concepts in Sedimentology: Baltimore, The Johns
Hopkins Press, p. 1–37.
WALKER, R.G., 1975a, Generalized facies models for resedimented con-
glomerates of turbidite association: Geological Society of America,
Bulletin, v. 86, p. 737–748.
WALKER, R.G., 1975b, Nested submarine channels at San Clemente,
California: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 86, p. 915–
924.
WALKER, R.G., 1978, Deep-water sandstone facies and ancient submarine
fans: models for exploration and stratigraphic traps: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 62, p. 932–966.
WALKER, R.G., 1985, Mudstones and thin-bedded turbidites associated
with the Upper Cretaceous Wheeler Gorge conglomerates, Califor-
nia: a possible channel–levee complex: Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, v. 55, p. 279–290.
WALKER, R.G., 1992, Turbidites and submarine fans, in Walker, R.G., and
James, N.P., eds., Facies Models; Response to Sea Level Change:
Geological Association of Canada, p. 239–263.
WEIMER, P., 1989, Sequence stratigraphy of the Mississippi Fan (Plio-
Pleistocene), Gulf of Mexico: Geo-Marine Letters, v. 9, p. 185–272.
WEIMER, P., 1991, Seismic facies, characteristics and variations in channel
evolution, Mississippi Fan (Plio-Pleistocene), Gulf of Mexico, in
Weimer, P., and Link, M.H., eds., Seismic Facies and Sedimentary
 INDEX 521
Index
bioturbation 57, 60, 119, 133–134, 179, 195, 201, 203, 207, 212,
A 249, 251, 253, 258–259, 262, 265, 311–312, 314, 318, 320, 336,
abrasion 23, 137 350, 363, 369, 371, 385, 389, 431
Abu Dhabi 40 Blackhawk Formation 303–304, 321, 333
accommodation 22, 58, 60, 63, 171, 199, 211, 344, 350–351 Bouma sequence 12–13, 369, 399, 403–404, 407
accumulation rate 52, 66, 71 boundary layer 22–23
accumulation surface 32, 50, 52–53, 55, 57, 66–68, 74 bounding surface 13, 15, 19–20, 22, 32, 34, 38–40, 48, 57, 60, 63,
adhesion plane beds 32 67, 73, 159, 179, 453, 478, 485
adhesion ripples 32, 39 braid delta 256
adhesion strata 30, 32, 38 braiding 91, 96–98, 102, 112, 138, 475
adhesion warts 32, 39 Brazil 62, 252, 256, 361, 427–428, 430–432
aerodynamic configuration 53, 55, 60 breaker bars 295, 299–300, 311
Al Liwa sand sea 40 brinkline 31
algal growth 33 brittle failure 33
allocyclic 19, 175, 179, 189, 237, 281, 420 burrow 33, 45–47, 65, 107–108, 122–123, 126, 129–134, 193, 203,
allogenic 50, 60, 67, 73 219, 248–249, 251, 259, 261, 265–267, 280, 314, 329, 363–364,
alluvial architecture 129, 141–145, 147–148, 150, 153–156, 159 385
alluvial fan 24, 50, 71, 80, 85, 119, 135, 137, 139, 140–141, 145, bypass 22, 50, 52, 55, 57, 59–60, 66, 69, 71, 199–200, 216–217,
148, 156–157 246, 267, 280, 344, 359, 365, 401–402, 476, 483, 511
alluvial valley 87, 119, 138, 141, 145, 217, 249
anastomosing 96, 134–135, 138, 139, 160
angle of climb 52–53, 55–56, 62, 66–69, 73, 75–77 C
angle of internal friction 33 Caliente Range 321, 331–332, 337
angle of repose 27, 31–32, 89, 91, 104, 122, 272 California 50, 249, 302, 304, 307, 319–321, 323–325, 328–329, 331–
anhydrite 65 332, 335, 337, 377, 405, 408–412, 414, 429–431, 433, 436, 446–
animal activity 46 447, 454–464
animal trackway (footprint) 33, 43, 46 canyon 8, 113, 279, 304, 361, 363, 373–374, 399–402, 415, 422–
antidune 85–86, 90, 95, 99, 104, 119 432, 454, 485, 493–494, 504, 511–512, 517
arid 19, 22, 24, 70–71, 73, 107, 119, 124, 129–130, 133, 139, 140, capillary fringe 45, 53, 55, 65, 68, 126
156–157 carbonates 157, 200
Arizona 60 Carmel Formation 60, 62
armored lag 26, 58 Carmelo Formation 425
Askja sand sheet 29, 36 CCC turbidite 6, 9, 404, 406, 415, 441, 458–459, 461, 474
Askja, Iceland 39, 44, 50, 55 Cedar Mesa Sandstone 36–38, 43–44, 46–47, 58, 65, 68–70, 77
Atchafalaya 241, 243, 246, 250, 272, 347, 352, 355, 381 cement 22, 55, 62–65, 71, 73, 136, 220, 279, 314, 344, 350, 364, 409
Australia 5, 32, 44, 47, 65, 176–177, 185, 221, 226, 249, 255, 340, cementation 63, 65
342, 360, 366, 369–371, 390–391, 403 channel 1–2, 5–7, 9, 12, 24, 63, 68, 71, 85–87, 91, 93–124, 126,–127,
autocyclic 19, 34, 57, 175, 179, 243, 348, 359, 419–420 129, 133–148, 150–151, 156–160, 171, 176–177, 179–180, 184,
autogenic 73 186, 188–196, 199–200, 202–204, 206–208, 210–211, 216–217,
avalanche 27, 30–32, 40, 104, 107 220, 225, 227, 237, 240–241, 243–244, 246–247, 249–250, 252–
avalanche strata 30–31 253, 257, 260, 262–263, 265–272, 274–275, 279, 281, 285, 300,
avulsion 119, 121–122, 134–143, 147, 150–151, 156–160, 237, 243, 312–313, 316–317, 331, 353, 361, 367–369, 372, 399–404, 412,
249, 252–253, 266–267, 274, 285, 421, 441, 448, 463, 501 414–451, 453–454, 456–459, 461, 463–465, 468–470, 472–478,
482–485, 486, 489–490, 493, 495–496, 501–502, 504, 510–511,
513–514, 516
B channel belt 85, 87, 91, 97, 102, 108–112, 115–122, 126, 134–139,
Bahrain 50 141–144, 146, 151, 156, 158, 270, 438, 449, 476, 484
bar and trough system 316 channel fill 2, 6, 91, 96, 100–101, 104, 107–110, 112, 114, 117–118,
barchan (barchanoid) 28, 32, 34, 40–43, 53, 63 122, 133, 141, 159, 257, 265, 401, 425, 427–432, 436, 440, 446,
barrier island 10, 200, 240, 244, 260, 271, 297–298, 300, 303, 381, 389 449, 457–458, 461, 463, 475–476, 482–484, 504
basalt 25, 62–64 channel migration 86, 96–97, 99, 103, 119, 137, 141, 176, 190, 253,
baseline of erosion 58 266, 434
bedform 19–20, 22, 27–30, 32, 34–40, 43, 45–53, 55–57, 62–64, 66, channel pattern 91, 93, 96–99, 102–103, 116, 118–119, 134–135,
68, 70, 72–73, 76, 85, 89–91, 102, 104–105, 113, 174, 221, 243, 137–138, 140, 143–144, 147–148, 156–159, 186, 203, 253, 419,
270–271, 295, 306–307, 311, 313, 361, 363, 366, 371–372, 385, 425, 427
403–404 chenier 243, 268, 271–272, 355
bedform behavior 34 climate 19, 22, 43, 46–47, 58, 60, 63, 69, 71, 73, 80, 85, 107, 119,
bedform climb 22, 43, 50, 52, 56–57, 62 121–122, 124, 126, 130, 133–135, 139, 141, 143, 147–149, 151,
bedform migration 19, 22, 34, 39, 48–49, 52, 56, 66, 68, 73 155–160, 171, 178–179, 199, 216, 225, 241, 254, 307
bedload 23, 86–87, 89, 94, 97–99, 104, 119, 137, 182–183, 186, 191, climate change 22, 58, 60, 69, 71, 73, 122, 135, 141, 143, 148–149,
243, 267, 295, 353, 361 151, 156–158, 241
bedload sheet 86–87, 89, 98–99, 104 climatic cyclicity 71

Facies Models Revisited

SEPM Special Publication No. 84, Copyright © 2006
SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 1-56576-121-9, p. 521–527.
522 INDEX

climb 3, 36, 40, 52, 53, 55–56, 62, 66–69, 75–76 Devonian 5, 11, 44, 63, 112, 114–115, 123, 129, 131, 157, 238, 253–
clinoform 237, 239, 250, 262, 271–276, 280, 362, 363, 367, 385 254, 274, 403, 406
coastal 1, 22, 27, 43, 45–47, 50, 57–58, 60, 62, 73, 119, 139, 147, 150, Dhahran 45, 50
157–159, 171, 175–177, 179–182, 191–193, 197, 215, 217–218, diachronous 58, 199
221, 226–227, 237, 240, 249, 254, 258, 293, 297–298, 300, 303, diagenetic cement 55
305–306, 318–320, 323–324, 327,332, 344, 347, 349, 350, 357, diastem 58, 191, 194, 390
367, 461, 493 directional variability 27
coastal classification 180, 182, 218, 221, 226 distributary channel 9, 199, 202–203, 237, 241, 243–244, 246, 249–
cohesive 22, 32, 44, 97, 425 250, 252–253, 257, 260, 262–263, 265–272, 274–275, 279, 417,
cold-climate desert 47 422, 427, 431, 463, 468, 473
Colorado 11, 40, 60, 62, 201–202, 210, 373, 391 distributary mouth bar 3, 9, 237, 241, 246, 250, 253, 263, 344
Colorado Plateau 60, 62 diurnal 27, 34, 156, 361, 364
compaction 58, 142, 143, 158, 404, 449 draa 27–31, 35, 43, 51, 62–63
compound bar 86, 91, 94, 98, 100–102, 104–105, 108 drift potential 28, 34
contorted bedding 46 drift potential (resultant, RDP) 28, 34
core 3, 5, 9, 12, 39, 50, 70, 73, 116, 201, 203, 218, 255, 272, 275–277, drift direction (resultant, RDD) 28, 34
304–305, 319, 363, 367, 379, 381–382, 386, 407, 427, 431, 452 dry eolian system 19, 52–53, 55-56, 60–62, 68, 74
crawling trace 33, 129 dry interdune 31, 43, 45, 66, 68, 78
creep 23, 26–27, 37 Duero Basin 46
Cretaceous 3–4, 6, 9–12, 36, 62–63, 153, 157, 174, 177, 180, 184, dune 13, 19–20, 22–23, 25, 27–36, 38–48, 50–57, 60, 62–63, 65–76,
186, 191–192, 196–197, 199–200, 202, 204, 206–208, 237, 243, 78, 85–91, 94–95, 98–100, 104, 107, 109, 112, 115–116, 119, 121–
248, 253, 261–263, 266–268, 270–271, 273–274, 276–281, 283, 122, 139, 187, 191, 227, 268, 295, 312, 316–317, 319, 329, 361,
285, 302–303, 333, 341, 374–376, 405, 407, 410–411, 414, 427, 365–366, 370, 372
430, 446–447, 454, 501 dune element 40, 43, 45–46, 54, 62–63, 66–67, 69
crevasse splay 91, 115, 119–124, 126–127, 134–135, 137, 139, 270, dune flank 27
400, 422, 438, 463, 468–474, 504 Dunvegan Formation 180, 191, 248, 261, 266, 268–270, 274, 276–
crinkly laminae 47 282
critical climbing 52 dynamic facies model 19, 22, 67, 69, 73, 77
cross bedding (cross-bedding) 2, 6–8, 10–11, 19, 32, 34, 38–39, 42,
190, 249, 258, 261, 265, 298, 307, 311–313, 317, 319, 322–323,
331, 363–364, 366, 371, 373, 375, 380, 389, 407 E
cross strata 32, 33–35, 38–41, 48–50, 52, 55, 63, 86, 89–90, 94, 98– Ebro delta 252
100, 104, 107, 109, 112, 121–122, 127, 268 ejecta 23
cross stratification 7, 13, 15, 32, 78, 88, 104, 195, 249, 258, 260, 281,
England 3, 10, 13, 43–44, 47, 62, 65–66, 191, 215, 364, 413
381 Entrada Sandstone 48, 62, 65
crust 33, 46, 129, 134, 148, 149, 153, 157, 353 entrainment 19, 22–23, 25, 50, 53, 119, 351
curl 33, 45, 46 eolian 6, 8, 13, 19–20, 22, 23, 25–40, 43–48, 50, 52–58, 60–63, 65–
current ripple(s) 33, 107, 126, 258, 260, 375, 427, 442, 458, 468, 473 76, 78, 80, 139, 153, 157, 270, 272, 329, 415
eolian plane beds 43
eolian system, wet 19, 53, 55–57, 61–62, 68–69, 73, 75
D eolian system, wet–dry 74
damp interdune 32, 38, 45, 47, 53, 65, 68 ephemeral 46, 50, 62, 119, 122, 126, 129, 133, 139, 153, 156, 176,
Danube 240, 244, 249, 255, 259–260, 267, 270 180, 237
deflation 19, 22, 26, 28, 43, 47–48, 52, 55, 57–61, 65–66, 69–70 erg 22, 24, 45–46, 50, 53, 57–58, 60, 62– 63, 65, 66–67, 69–71, 75–
delta 2–3, 6, 9–10, 13, 16, 50, 85, 107, 115, 119, 121–122, 134–135, 77, 80, 88, 143–145, 176, 180, 239, 257, 272, 297
138–139, 143, 153, 157–158, 173–174, 176, 178–180, 182, 184– erg construction 22, 50
185, 189–191, 194, 196, 199–204, 206–208, 210, 215–220, 225, extra-erg 46
237–268, 270–282, 284–285, 293, 320, 324, 339, 342, 344–345, estuarine lithosome 189, 190
347, 349–350, 352–353, 355, 360, 363, 367, 371–373, 375, 381– estuary 5, 171, 173, 176–177, 180, 182–191, 193, 195, 198–201, 206–
383, 390, 401, 425, 427–429, 431, 436, 463, 471, 493 208, 212, 215–221, 225–226, 237, 256, 265, 268, 282, 285, 344,
delta front 184, 246–247, 249–251, 253, 256, 257, 259, 261–262, 363, 372, 401–402, 445
266–268, 270–272, 279 Etendeka igneous province 62
delta, lacustrine 115, 119, 121–122, 139, 249, 276 Etjo Formation 36, 62–63
delta plain 157–158, 184, 237, 244, 249–250, 253–257, 265, 270, eustasy 147, 158, 254, 281, 297, 339
272, 355, 381, 431, 493 evaporite 33, 47, 65, 124, 129, 156–157
density 22–23, 37, 89, 129, 153, 179, 203, 241, 243, 246, 258, 347, evaporite precipitation 33, 47
369, 370, 401–403, 408, 415–416, 421, 425, 427, 493, 504
density current 369, 401
depositional elements 2, 9–11, 13, 15–16, 24, 183, 399–401, 403, F
414–415, 420, 422, 428, 431, 447, 470, 484–485, 501, 504 facies architecture 19, 69, 172, 237–238, 240, 255, 258, 264, 268,
depositional model 64, 66–68, 85, 86, 99–100, 111, 119, 121–124, 270, 281, 388
135, 171, 293, 355, 414 facies association(s) 1, 5–7, 13, 15, 54, 71, 298–299
desert 13, 19, 22–23, 33, 39–40, 45–47, 50–51, 58, 63, 66, 129 facies definition 2
desert rose 33 facies model(s) 1–3, 6–10, 12–13, 15–16, 19, 22, 39, 66–67, 69–70,
desiccation cracks 11, 33, 45–46, 57, 107, 119, 122, 126, 133, 156 72, 73, 75, 77, 85, 171–172, 174–180, 182–183, 189, 191, 212,
 INDEX 523

215–218, 220, 223, 225, 237, 282, 293–298, 300, 302, 304–305, Great Sand Dunes 40
311, 322, 324, 339, 341, 345, 347, 363, 369, 379–380, 390, 399, ground-penetrating radar 22, 85, 179, 270
430, 504 growth fault 243, 256–259, 263, 274, 279
facies modeling 1–3, 13, 16, 66–67, 177, 430 Guerrero Negro 46, 58
facies succession(s) 1–2, 6–7, 71, 177, 179, 183, 215, 237, 240, 255, Gulf of Mexico 9, 147, 200, 237, 239–240, 243, 253, 272, 275, 305,
257–258, 260–261, 264, 267, 272, 277–281, 304, 504 339, 341, 348–349, 352, 356, 369, 372, 378, 383, 390, 423, 426–
fair weather (fair-weather) 9, 15, 250–251, 294, 296, 300, 311–314, 427, 429, 431, 437, 439, 441–443, 446–447, 449, 453–454, 469–
317–320, 323–324, 326, 328, 336, 356, 360, 369, 377 470, 475–476, 478, 485–486, 489, 492, 494, 498, 501–502
fenestral porosity 33 gutter casts 317, 323, 367, 374
Ferron Sandstone 262–263, 268, 271, 283 gypsum 33, 46, 50, 65, 129
flake 33, 46
flash flood 46
flood basalt 62, 64 H
flood basin 115, 117, 119–121–122, 126, 134, 136–137 halite 33
flood deposit 107, 137, 255–256, 259, 377 hard-pan 46
flood plain 85–87, 96, 110, 113, 115, 117–123, 126, 129–130, 134– Helsby Sandstone 43–44, 62, 66–68
139, 141–145, 147, 150, 153, 156–157, 159–160, 179, 186, 192, high-energy coast 293, 304, 311–314, 319–320, 324
194, 196, 201, 210, 237, 255, 267 Holocene 14, 43, 113, 116, 134, 143, 157, 217, 247, 293, 302, 339,
flow concentration 52 343, 349, 351, 367, 379
flow fluctuation 34 homopycnal 241, 249
flow reattachment 27 humid 22, 43, 58, 107, 121, 124, 139, 156
flow separation 27, 93, 95 hummocky cross-stratification 301, 317, 370–371, 373–374
fluid mud 243, 246, 253, 311, 345, 355 hyperpycnal 241, 246–247, 249, 253, 258, 282, 344, 347–348, 350,
fluvial 2, 6, 9–11, 15, 19, 27, 43, 46, 50, 62–63, 65–66, 68–71, 85–88, 353, 356, 358, 370, 374, 402, 415, 427, 493
111, 113, 129, 131–135, 141–144, 146–150, 153, 156–160, 171– hypopycnal 241, 243, 249,–250, 258, 344–345, 348, 352–353, 355,
172, 174–176, 178–180, 182–183, 186, 189–192, 194, 195–202, 358
204–205, 207, 209–212, 215–218, 225–226, 237, 240, 242, 249,
253, 255–256, 258, 260–262, 265, 270, 272, 277, 279–282, 331,
339, 344, 347–348, 350, 353–354, 359, 415, 425, 427, 434–435, I
444 Iceland 29, 36, 39, 44, 47, 50, 55
fluvial inundation 46 ichnofacies 129–130, 193, 195, 219–221, 251, 259, 265, 280–281,
fog 65 300, 302, 305, 369, 373, 375, 377, 381–382, 385–386
forced regression 257, 260, 279, 293, 299–301, 318, 320–322, 324, ichnology 171, 195, 218, 281, 379, 385, 386, 390
349, 354, 431, 436, 493 impact zone 27
forcing parameter 34, 71 incised valley 145, 159–160, 171–175, 177, 179–180, 184, 191–193,
foreset 10, 13, 30, 39, 41, 43, 47, 49–50, 238–239, 249–250, 272–274, 195–201, 206, 208, 215–217, 219–220, 223, 253–254, 279–280,
320, 329–331 341, 372, 374, 389, 493, 511
foreset azimuth 39, 43, 49 inclined strata 86–87, 99–105, 107–108, 110–111, 113–114
fossil 4–5, 15, 47, 123, 129–134, 157, 182, 190, 203, 207, 209, 212, Indian Ocean 360
215, 218–219, 249, 300, 304, 359, 379 infiltration capacity 46
friction 22–23, 33, 112, 183, 186, 241, 243, 246, 249, 253, 258, 267, interdistributary bay 3, 243, 249, 253, 268, 270
270, 350, 356, 360 interdune 19–20, 22, 27, 31–33, 38, 40, 43, 45–48, 51–57, 60, 62–63,
frontal splay 250, 270–271, 399–400, 415–417, 419–422, 447, 473– 65–71, 73–76, 78
478, 484–485, 493, 504, 508, 511 interdune flat 38, 43, 45, 52–53, 55, 57, 62, 68–69
Frontier Formation 261, 273–274, 277, 279, 284 interdune hollow 38, 51, 56, 66–68
interdune migration surface 38, 48, 56
interglacial 43, 156–158, 201, 346
G intra-erg 46, 63
Gallup Sandstone 265 inverse grading 27, 30, 37, 247, 403, 407
gas 1, 3, 19, 70–71, 79, 85, 123, 129, 133–134, 157, 159, 202, 210, isochronous 58
221, 237–238, 244, 266, 278, 341, 362, 383, 407 isolated bedforms 45
geomorphic element 22, 40, 47 isolated sandstone bodies 299
Gilbert delta 250
glacial 19, 22, 43, 50, 97, 135, 139, 156–158, 201, 246, 293, 302, 346,
366 J
Gondwana 62 Jackson Group 320, 328, 330
graded bedding 258, 399, 404, 407–408 Jafurah area 46
grain packing 32 Jurassic 48, 60, 62, 65, 133, 153, 354
grainfall 30–33, 36, 38, 40–41, 78
grainfall strata 30–32, 40
grainflow 27, 31–32, 37, 40–41, 43–44, 78 K
grainflow, amalgamated 31 Kelso Dune Field 50
grainflow strata 31–32, 44, 78 Kuiseb River 27
Gran Desertio 40 Kuwait 50
524 INDEX

Mekong 243, 251, 253, 261, 270

L Mexico 9, 19, 40, 45–46, 50, 62, 147, 157, 200, 237, 239–240, 243,
lacustrine 27, 50, 107, 115, 119, 121–122, 124, 127, 129–130, 139, 253, 265, 272, 274v275, 298, 305, 309, 339, 341, 348–349, 352–
146, 156, 180, 200, 238, 240, 249, 268, 276 353, 356, 369, 372, 378, 383, 390, 423, 426, 427, 429, 431, 437,
lacustrine delta (see delta, lacustrine) 439, 441, 442, 443, 446, 447, 449, 453–454, 469, 470, 475–476,
lag 2, 7, 9–15, 26, 28, 30, 43, 47, 50, 58, 63, 91, 148–149, 172–173, 478, 485–486, 489, 492, 494, 498, 501–502
180, 182, 193, 201–204, 217, 221, 237, 239–240, 249, 256, 260, migration 19–20, 22, 27–28, 30, 32, 34–35, 37–40, 43, 48–49, 52,
264, 267, 270, 275, 280, 284, 297, 314, 320, 322, 349, 353, 365, 55–56, 58, 62–63, 66, 68, 70, 73–75, 85, 86, 89–91, 96–97, 99,
368–369, 402, 408, 430, 432, 493 101–105, 109–112, 115, 119, 121–122, 124, 137, 141, 143, 148,
Lagniappe delta 275 159, 176, 179–180, 184, 190–191, 210, 243, 253, 266, 268, 272,
lagoon 7, 9–10, 13–15, 173, 180, 182, 215, 217, 237, 239–240, 242, 279, 297, 300, 306–307, 313, 362–363, 372, 379–380, 383, 385,
249, 256, 260, 264, 267, 270, 493 387, 390, 424, 428, 434, 435, 439, 441–444, 446, 451–452, 475,
lagoonal 10, 13–15, 237, 240, 264, 267 483
lake 24, 32–33, 45–47, 50, 57–58, 60, 62, 71, 80, 102, 113, 119, 121– migration direction 28, 34, 39–40, 48, 49
124, 127, 129–130, 134–135, 137–139, 143, 153, 156–157, 180, migration speed 34
184–185, 191, 197, 201–202, 206, 238–239, 246, 249, 253, 414 Milankovitch 58, 62, 157, 158
Lake Lucero 50 mineralogy 22, 157, 379, 388
laminar flow 25 Mississippi 8–9, 96–97, 116, 121, 157–159, 174, 176, 180, 191, 197,
lateral accretion 434–435, 441, 443–446, 449, 483 201, 237–238, 240, 242–243, 246, 249–250, 253–254, 258, 260,
lee 20, 27–28, 31–35, 37–39, 48, 52–53, 91, 104, 216, 305, 311, 315, 264, 270, 272, 285, 344, 347, 349, 352, 355, 371, 373, 381–382,
363 390, 401, 422–427, 471, 512
lee-side depression 27, 31, 38 Mississippian 180, 191, 197, 201
Leman Sandstone 62, 78 mixed eolian system 65, 69
Lena River 252 Mobile Bay 215, 352
levee 1–2, 6, 9, 12, 91, 115, 119–124, 126, 134, 137, 139, 179, 189, moisture 22, 43, 45, 52–53, 65, 126, 130
199, 243, 270, 399–401, 404, 406, 412, 414–422, 425, 427, 429, mojave 22, 43, 45, 52–53, 65, 126, 130
431–432, 437–443, 446–447, 449–451, 453, 456, 458–459, 461, morphology 19, 27, 38–39, 42, 45, 50, 55, 62, 66–67, 70, 73, 171,
463–464, 468–470, 472–478, 485, 490, 493, 494, 496, 501–502, 174–176, 178, 182–184, 215, 227, 237–238, 240–242, 253, 255–
504, 510–511, 513–514 256, 316, 323, 339, 390, 417, 419, 422, 428, 471–472, 477, 501,
leveed channel 1, 400, 401, 415–417, 419–422, 427, 429, 431, 437– 504
438, 441–443, 447, 450, 473–478, 485, 493, 496, 504, 511 mud curl 45–46
liquefaction 32–33, 43 mud drape 46, 50, 107, 195, 198, 203, 205, 262, 267, 361, 373, 375
lobe 1, 2, 91, 96–97, 104, 119, 139–141, 158, 237, 240–242, 244, 246, mud flake 33, 46
250, 255–256, 260, 262, 264, 267–268, 270–271, 274–275, 277– muddy substrate 46
281, 340, 343, 381, 390, 399–401, 415–418, 420, 422, 473, 475–
476, 484, 496, 501
loess 23 N
low accommodation 175, 191, 199, 202, 209 Namib Desert 45, 47, 50–51, 63
low-energy coast 317–319, 324, 333 Namib Sand Sea 27, 32, 35, 45–46, 50, 52
Lower Cutler Beds 36, 45, 63, 68 Namibia 27, 29, 32, 36–37, 45–46, 55, 58, 62–63
lower shoreface 300–301, 318, 320–323, 329, 340 Navajo Sandstone 35, 62, 68
lower-stage plane bed 89, 95, 104 nearshore circulation cells 295, 299, 311, 316, 321
lunate megaripples 307, 312, 316–317, 319, 323, 327 nearshore profile 313, 320
Nebraska Sand Hills 43, 46
negative sediment budget (see sediment budget negative)
M nested reactivation surface 34
Macaronichnus 300 net sediment budget (see sediment budget net)
Mahakam 250 neutral sediment budget (see sediment budget, neutral)
marine flooding 57 New Mexico 19, 45, 50, 62, 265, 272, 353, 372
marine regression 60, 149, 159, 297 Niger 47, 261
marine, shallow 16, 19, 50, 159, 176, 246, 280, 293, 297, 302, 308, Nile River 174
320, 324, 349, 386 Nile delta 238, 249, 270
marine transgression 58, 62, 149, 156, 159–160, 199, 297, 300, 323 North Sea 19, 58, 62, 70, 78–81, 358, 375
mass-transport complex 401, 412–413, 485–491, 493, 498–499, 504, numerical modeling 220–221
508
Mauritania 43
meandering 7, 9, 12, 15, 91, 96–98, 101–102, 108, 112, 116–117, O
135, 138, 140, 142, 156, 175, 186, 188, 190–191, 196, 199–202, oblique migration 35, 63
209–210, 212, 268, 401, 427, 434–435, 444, 501 Oman 25
meandering channel 97, 101, 188, 401, 434–435, 501 Ophiomorpha 265, 300, 382
mechanical loading 33 optically stimulated luminescence 22, 58, 85
mega-bedforms 30 orbital forcing 58, 158
megaripple 27, 29, 47, 306–307, 311– 312, 315–317, 319, 323, 327, Oregon coast 45, 312, 320
370 Ormskirk 62, 68
 INDEX 525

overbank 71, 94, 107, 115, 119, 121, 124, 136–138, 140, 143, 156, ravinement 189–191, 194, 199–201, 206, 209, 218, 224, 251, 279–
158, 160, 194, 199–200, 210–211, 415, 417, 422, 438, 441–442, 280, 297, 300, 349, 351, 372, 376, 381–382, 386, 388
450, 452–453, 463, 468, 473–474, 476, 482–484, 501, 504 reactivation surface 34–35, 38, 48, 65, 195, 261–262, 375
recognition criteria 197, 217, 361
reg 26
P regional climate 46, 58, 157
Padre Island 41, 45–46, 305, 308, 320, 326 regression 15, 60, 113, 149, 159, 180–181, 192–193, 197, 215, 257,
Page Sandstone 60 260, 277, 279, 293, 296, 297, 299–301, 318, 320–322, 324, 337,
paleoenvironment 19, 57 349, 354, 431, 436, 493
paleosol 33, 46, 68, 113, 126, 128–130, 156–160, 193–194, 196, 201– remote sensing 85
202, 209–211, 267 reptation 23, 26–27
parabolic 33, 40 reservoir prediction 70, 73
Paradox Basin 63 resultant drift direction (see drift direction, resultant)
Paraíba do Sul 252, 259, 271 resultant drift potential (see drift potential, resultant)
Paraná Basin 62 reversing dune 40
parasequence 196–197, 202, 268, 279, 294, 297, 300, 321, 383, 386, rhizoliths 33, 47, 57–58, 60, 69, 133–134
388 Rhone (Rhône) (River, delta, fan) 8, 259–260, 274, 401, 465, 501
particle size 22, 25 rip channel 312, 316–317
pebble lag 7, 43, 193, 201–202 rip current(s) 178, 293, 295, 311, 313–314, 317, 320–321, 357, 366
Pennsylvanian 3, 36, 63, 68, 180, 253–254, 272, 274 ripple 3–4, 6, 9, 11–13, 27–33, 36–41, 43, 45–47, 52, 56, 78, 85–87,
perched water table 46 89–90, 94–95, 98–100, 104, 107, 112, 119, 122–123, 126–127,
permafrost 63 191, 203, 207, 210, 248–249, 258, 260–262, 298, 301, 306–307,
permeability 46, 85, 107–108, 110, 144, 201–205, 207, 210, 211– 311–320, 323, 327, 331, 363–365, 369–370, 373–375, 399, 403–
212, 404 406, 427, 442, 446–447, 458–459, 467–468, 473, 481
Permian 8, 19, 36–38, 43–47, 58, 60, 62–63, 65, 68–71, 77–81, 180 ripple indices 27
pinstripe lamination 31, 36 ripple strata 30–31, 36–38, 41, 43, 45, 78
planar strata 86, 89, 99, 104, 122 ripple trough 27, 30, 37
plane beds 32, 43, 47, 86, 89, 95, 99, 104, 119, 122 rippleform laminae 30
plant colonization 46, 58 river delta 252, 273, 367, 471
plant root(s) 33, 63, 121, 126, 129, 133–134, 156 river mouth 176–177, 189, 199, 215–216, 218, 226, 240, 249, 253,
playa 45, 47, 71, 139 255, 257–258, 267, 282, 304, 344–345, 347, 350, 356, 402, 432,
Pleistocene 4, 14, 43, 113, 157–158, 198, 223, 238, 320, 323–324, 493, 511
328, 329, 335, 349, 375, 379, 402, 429, 437, 449 river-influenced 9, 240
Pleistocene terrace deposits 328–329 root structure 33, 45, 47, 63, 330
plinth 27, 32, 36 Ross Sandstone 434, 445, 474, 476, 479–480, 483–484
Po delta (Po River) 243, 247, 252 Rotliegend 19, 58, 70–71, 73, 78, 80–81
point bar 1, 12, 91, 94, 96, 98–102, 104, 109, 118, 186, 212, 434–
435, 445
polygon 33, 57, 60 S
polygonal fracture 57, 60 sabkha 24, 47, 50, 55, 60, 62, 71–72, 80
pore-water pressure 32 Sahara 47, 52
potential sediment load 50 Salima sand sheet 47
pour-in texture 30 salt crust 33
primary airflow 27, 55 salt flat 24, 47
prodelta 184, 190, 199, 218, 237, 239, 248–249, 251, 253, 255, 257– salt-growth 47
258, 260, 262–264, 267–268, 270–272, 274, 280, 347 salt precipitation 47
progradational shoreline 297, 299 saltation 23, 27, 30, 37–38
prograding strand plain 298 saltation cloud 23
Proterozoic 60, 65, 186 saltation path length 27, 37
pseudomorph 33, 46, 65 San Clemente 429–431, 433–436, 501
pumice 25 San Miguel Formation 280, 285
sand sea 20, 22, 27, 32, 35, 40, 45–46, 50, 52, 40
sand transport direction 27–28, 33
Q sand-accumulating bedform 28
Quaternary 22, 43, 58, 73, 134, 156–158, 180, 199, 210, 239, 272, sand-transporting bedform 28, 34
339, 341, 343, 348, 354, 359, 363–364, 371–374, 375, 381, 385, sandflow 31, 34
388, 389, 390, 402 sandsheet 29
Queensland 65, 371 satellite 22, 24, 85, 221, 340–342, 352, 369, 391
Saudi Arabia 45–46, 50
scarp recession grainflow 31
R scour pit 39, 48
raindrop imprint 33, 122 sea level 2, 7, 9–10, 13, 22, 50, 58, 73, 122, 124, 141, 148, 150, 152–
rainfall 30–33, 36, 38, 40–41, 46, 78, 130, 149 153, 156–160, 171, 173–175, 179–182, 184–185, 189–192, 197–
526 INDEX
202, 215–218, 220, 224–225, 227, 238–239, 246, 254–256, 279,
281–282, 285, 293–294, 296–297, 299–303, 306, 324, 337, 339,
346–349, 354, 359, 390, 399, 401–402, 425, 431, 436, 490, 493,
501, 511
seabed imagery 221
seasonal 27, 34, 46, 68, 119, 121, 129–130, 133, 156, 241, 249, 360,
363
secondary airflow 27, 35
sediment availability 19, 50, 68–70, 73, 76–77, 121, 148
sediment budget, negative 47, 57
sediment budget, net 40, 52, 55, 57, 59, 61, 67
sediment budget, neutral 57
sediment compaction 58
sediment flux 22, 57, 67, 149, 179–180, 182–183, 218, 220, 504
sediment supply 2, 9–10, 13, 19, 22, 27, 30, 50, 55, 64–65, 69, 85,
91, 122–124, 135, 137, 138, 141, 144–145, 148–149, 151, 156–
159, 171, 179–182, 191–192, 197, 199–200, 216, 225, 250–251,
255, 258, 279, 281, 297, 303, 341, 344, 347, 349–350, 355–356,
374, 380, 390, 422, 501
sediment transport 23, 50, 52, 85–86, 91–95, 98–100, 107, 112, 119,
135–139, 141, 145, 147–149, 158, 176, 179, 186, 217, 221, 242,
258, 295, 320, 343, 350–352, 360, 362, 366, 369, 370, 511
sediment transport rate 50, 52, 91–93, 95, 99, 135,–136, 139, 141,
145, 148–149, 179, 242
sediment waves 400, 422, 437, 446, 450–451, 453–454, 463, 468,
472, 475, 504
sedimentary basin 137, 141, 147–149, 180, 202, 211, 219, 220
seif 28, 144, 146
seismic 1–2, 5, 70, 85, 115–116, 118, 141, 144–145, 159, 171, 175,
179, 192, 197, 203, 206, 216, 218, 220–221, 223, 238, 239, 256–
257, 267, 270, 272, 274–275, 305, 362–364, 367–368, 372, 375–
376, 383–385, 399, 401, 413, 415, 417, 422–426, 428–429, 431,
434, 437–444, 446–447, 458, 468–470, 473–477, 484–486, 489,
490, 496–498, 500–501, 503–508, 510, 512
semiarid 22, 70, 119
separation cell 27
sequence 11, 13, 22, 27, 32, 40, 48, 50, 52, 57–58, 60, 66–69, 71, 73,
77, 91–92, 100–101, 103–104, 107, 115–116, 122, 124, 126–127,
129–130, 134, 137, 141–145, 156, 157, 158–160, 171, 175, 179,
189, 191–200, 202, 209, 211, 215–216, 218–219, 221, 237–239,
241, 253, 255–256, 260, 266, 268, 274, 279, 281–283, 294–295,
297, 299–300, 318, 320–322, 325, 328–339, 341, 348, 351, 369,
376, 383, 385–389, 399–401, 403–404, 407, 414, 420, 431, 457,
459–463, 475, 483, 485, 493, 510
sequence boundary 57, 189, 191–194, 197–200, 202, 209, 215–216,
218, 348, 388–389
sequence stratigraphy 159, 171, 175, 239, 274, 281–282, 299, 341,
385–386, 401, 485
serir 26
setdown 295, 299, 321
setup 295, 299, 321, 350, 357, 366–367
shadow zone 27, 37
shallow marine (see marine, shallow)
shear stress 23, 25, 88–89, 91–95, 112, 119, 137, 139, 243, 350, 360,
368
Shikaoda Formation 65
shoreface 180, 184, 189–190, 196, 199–200, 202, 207–208, 210, 215,
217–218, 221, 224, 237, 249–251, 258–260, 265, 267, 271–272,
278–279, 281–282, 293–305, 307–314, 317–324, 327, 329–333,
339–341, 349–350, 355, 357, 366–367, 370–374, 380–381, 385,
390
shoreface profile 299–300, 304, 308–309, 323, 327, 339
shoreface-attached ridges 305, 310, 370–372
Silurian 63, 157, 179
Skeleton Coast 27, 29, 32, 46, 55
slab slide 33, 37, 44
slipface 27, 28, 31–32, 40, 62–63, 127
slope channel 399–400, 422, 425, 427–429, 431, 437, 441, 444, 451,
490, 504
slump degradation grainflow 31
slumping 32, 412, 425–426, 441, 466, 474
soft-sediment deformation 32, 43–44, 258, 260, 274, 458–459, 461
soil 119, 126, 128–130, 133, 138, 156, 160, 193, 353
sole marks 367, 374
South Atlantic 62
southern North Sea 19, 58, 62, 70, 78–81, 358, 375
Spain 45–46, 252, 319–320, 324, 327–329, 335
spatial complexity 73
sphericity 25
staging area 399–400, 415, 417, 422, 425, 485, 491, 493, 504
static facies model 67, 174
stepped transgression 297, 300, 321
Stokes surface 19, 57, 59
storms 14, 86, 90, 139, 241, 247, 249, 253, 258, 293, 295, 313–314,
317–319, 339, 350, 356–357, 359–360, 366–367, 369–370
stoss 27, 29, 36–37, 52, 91, 305
strataset 85–87, 90–91, 102, 108, 110, 115, 121–123, 137
stratigraphic modeling 22
stratigraphic organization 175, 198, 200, 281
subsidence 11, 46, 57–58, 61, 65, 67, 119, 135–136, 138–139, 141–
142, 147–151, 153, 156, 159, 237, 257, 274, 279, 282, 297, 302,
339, 342, 381
superimposed bedform 20, 30, 35, 39, 40, 48, 102, 104–105, 366,
385
superimposition 27, 35, 38, 40, 43, 48, 62
supersurface 22, 48, 55, 57–60, 62, 66, 67, 69–71
supratidal flat 65
surface creep 23, 26
surface stabilization 22, 55, 58
surface trace 45
suspended load 23, 97, 119, 255, 311, 345, 353
swaly cross-stratification 301, 311
systems tracts 193, 199, 216–218, 238, 281–282, 339, 348–349, 359,
386, 388, 390, 425
T
tectonism 58, 85–86, 119, 122, 124, 135–138, 141, 143–144, 151,
156, 158–160, 293
teepee 33, 47
Ténéré 47
Tertiary 63, 132, 134, 148, 153, 157, 359, 383, 431, 458, 501
Texas 41, 45–46, 180, 200–201, 238, 249, 259, 281–282, 285, 308, 310,
312, 320, 324, 326, 328, 330, 336, 349, 353, 369,–371, 373, 378
tide 3, 8–10, 171–172, 176–179, 181–184, 186, 189–191, 196, 197,
215, 217–218, 225, 237–241, 243, 249–256, 261–262, 266–267,
270, 273, 277, 279–280, 282, 285, 293, 307, 344, 349–350, 359–
364, 366, 372, 375, 380
tide-dominated 8, 171, 177–179, 183–184, 186, 189–191, 196, 215,
217–218, 237, 240–241, 252–254, 256, 267, 270, 277, 282, 344,
362–363, 372
tide-influenced 239, 241, 251, 254, 256, 261–262, 266, 270, 273,
279–280
top-truncated delta 251, 279, 281
topset 238–239, 249, 251, 260, 272, 279, 281
trackway 33, 43, 46–47, 134
transgression (transgressive) 10, 14–15, 58, 60, 62, 149, 156, 159–
160, 171–172, 176, 179–182, 184, 189–192, 194–202, 207, 210,
215–218, 224, 237–238, 240, 251, 255–256, 260, 265, 277–278,
280–282, 284–285, 293–294, 297, 299–300, 303–305, 308, 321,
 INDEX 527

323, 332, 339, 343–344, 348–349, 351, 354, 359, 362–364, 367,
371, 374, 379, 380–381, 383, 386–388, 390, 425, 485, 493 W
transition point 417–418, 420, 473, 475–476, 485, 493, 508 Waitemata Group 415, 461, 465–466, 468
translatent rippleform stratification 30 Walther’s Law 237, 293
transport 2, 19, 22–23, 25–28, 30–31, 33–35, 38, 40, 45, 47, 50–53, water flow 86, 91, 93–94, 99, 107, 119, 137, 312
55, 57, 63, 67, 85–86, 89, 91–95, 97–100, 107, 112, 119, 122, water table 19, 22, 33, 45–47, 50, 52, 53, 55–63, 65–70, 74–75, 77,
129, 133–139, 141, 145, 147–149, 158–59, 171, 176, 179–180, 85, 126, 130, 133, 138, 160, 193
183, 186, 196, 200, 217, 221, 225, 242–243, 253, 258, 295, 298– water-table elevation 46
299, 303, 306, 311, 314–315, 320, 343–345, 348, 350–353, 356, wave base 15, 294–296, 318, 328, 369, 399, 493, 511
359–363, 365–366, 369–371, 373–374, 377, 390, 399, 401, 407– wave energy 183–184, 250, 254, 305–306, 311, 317–321, 323–324,
409, 412–414, 422–423, 431, 442, 485–491, 493–494, 496–511 328, 343, 356, 366
transport capacity 31, 50, 55, 171, 179, 243 wave ripple 46, 107, 260, 312, 331, 365, 370
transport distance 25, 412 wave-dominated 8–10, 171, 173, 177, 179, 183–186, 189–191, 193–
transport rate 27, 30, 50, 52, 57, 89, 91–95, 99, 135–136, 139, 141, 194, 196–197, 199, 200, 202, 207, 215, 225, 241, 249, 251–252,
145, 148–149, 179, 242 255–257, 260, 265, 267, 270–272, 281, 285, 293, 295, 300, 311,
transverse 22, 28, 32–35, 39–43, 45, 50–51, 53, 62–63, 67, 70, 72, 318, 344, 349, 363–364, 366, 374, 376, 381
95, 104, 139–140, 407–408, 425, 428, 437, 440, 446–447, 468, wave-influenced 237, 240, 242, 244, 250, 253, 255–256, 258–262,
472, 498 267, 270, 279–281
Triassic 43–44, 47, 60, 62, 65–67, 153 wavy laminae 32, 46
Tsondab Sandstone 63 wet grainfall 33
turbidite 2, 4–6, 8–9, 12–13, 203, 247, 250, 279, 370, 399–407, 412, wet interdune 38, 46, 51, 62–63, 66, 69, 71, 74–75
414–415, 417, 419–420, 423, 425, 427–428, 431, 434–436, 441– wetting front 32
442, 446–447, 458–459, 461–462, 466–468, 474–476, 480–484, Wheeler Gorge 8, 414, 447, 457–465, 476
493, 501, 508–509, 511 White Sands 19, 45, 50
turbidity current 356, 369, 373, 399–404, 407–409, 412, 415, 422, Wilmslow Sandstone 62, 65
425, 427, 429, 431, 435, 441, 447, 474,–476, 484, 493 wind gustiness 25
wind power 50, 52
wind regime 19, 22, 34, 40
U wind reversal 34
unidirectionality index 28 wind strength 27
unit bar 86– 87, 91, 93–102, 104–105, 107–110 wind velocity 22–23, 27, 37
United Arab Emirates 25 wind-ripple stratification 30, 36
universal facies 6, 13 Wingate Sandstone 62
upper shoreface 265, 300, 311–314, 317, 321, 323, 327, 329–332 winnowing 26, 243, 271
Utah 7–8, 36–38, 43–48, 58, 60, 62–63, 65, 68–70, 77, 186, 199, 238, wireline log 70, 73, 115–116, 197, 203, 209
243, 248, 262–263, 268, 271, 278–279, 283, 302–304, 321, 333, 373

Y
V Yellow Sands 62
valley 46, 87, 93, 119, 121, 134–139, 141, 143, 145, 147–148, 157–
160, 171–175, 177, 179–180, 182–185, 189–204, 206–212, 215–
221, 223–226, 237, 249, 253–254, 265, 267–270, 278–280, 282, Z
300, 341, 353, 372–374, 383, 389–390, 414, 493, 511 Zechstein Sea 62
valley fill 145, 147, 158–160, 171–172, 174, 180, 183, 191, 193–202, zibar 47
207, 211, 216, 219–220, 224, 253, 265, 267–268, 279–280
vegetation 22, 32–33, 43, 47, 50, 55, 63, 86, 91, 97–98, 103–104,
108, 110, 119, 121, 126, 134, 141, 147–149, 156–158, 270
velocity gradient 23
ventifact 26
Volga basin 269
528 INDEX