Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 1741

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2011

Beschreibung

Investigating the complex interplay between tectonics and sedimentation is a key endeavor in modern earth science. Many of the world's leading researchers in this field have been brought together in this volume to provide concise overviews of the current state of the subject. The plate tectonic revolution of the 1960's provided the framework for detailed models on the structure of orogens and basins, summarized in a 1995 textbook edited by Busby and Ingersoll. Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins: Recent Advances focuses on key topics or areas where the greatest strides forward have been made, while also providing on-line access to the comprehensive 1995 book. Breakthroughs in new techniques are described in Section 1, including detrital zircon geochronology, cosmogenic nuclide dating, magnetostratigraphy, 3-D seismic, and basin modelling. Section 2 presents the new models for rift, post-rift, transtensional and strike slip basin settings. Section 3 addresses the latest ideas in convergent margin tectonics, including the sedimentary record of subduction intiation and subduction, flat-slab subduction, and arc-continent collision; it then moves inboard to forearc basins and intra-arc basins, and ends with a series of papers formed under compessional strain regimes, as well as post-orogenic intramontane basins. Section 4 examines the origin of plate interior basins, and the sedimentary record of supercontinent formation. This book is required reading for any advanced student or professional interested in sedimentology, plate tectonics, or petroleum geoscience. Additional resources for this book can be found at: href="http://www.wiley.com/go/busby/sedimentarybasins">www.wiley.com/go/busby/sedimentarybasins.

Leseprobe

Contents

Cover

Series Page

Title Page

Copyright

Contributors

Preface

Part 1: “Introduction”

Part 2: “New Techniques and Modeling”

Part 3: “Rift, Post-Rift, Transtensional, and Strike-Slip Basin Settings”

Part 4: “Convergent Margins”

Part 5: “Plate Interior Basins and Widespread Basin Types”

Chapter Reviewers

Part 1: Introduction

Chapter 1: Tectonics of sedimentary basins, with revised nomenclature

Introduction

Nomenclature

Subsidence Mechanisms and Preservation Potential

Divergent Settings

Intraplate Settings

Convergent Settings

Transform Settings

Miscellaneous and Hybrid Settings

Discussion

Acknowledgments

References

Part 2: New Techniques and Modeling

Chapter 2: Detrital zircon U-Pb geochronology: current methods and new opportunities

Introduction

What is the Optimal Instrumentation Used for a Detrital Zircon Study?

Which Ages Should be Used, and How Should Ages be Evaluated and Filtered?

How Many Analyses Should be Conducted from Each Sample, and How Should Grains be Selected for Analysis?

Representation Of U-PB Data on Concordia Diagrams, Relative Age Probability Diagrams, and Cumulative Probability Plots

What is the Best Method of Describing a Set of Detrital Zircon Ages (e.g., The Youngest Age Component)?

What is the Best Method for Comparing Age Distributions of Several Samples?

Future Opportunities

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 3: Terrestrial cosmogenic nuclide techniques for assessing exposure history of surfaces and sediments in active tectonic regions

Overview of the TCN Method

Applications of TCN Dating to Active Tectonics

Tectonic Applications Requiring Erosion or Incision Determination

Outlook

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 4: Magnetostratigraphic methods and applications

Introduction

Principles and Methods

Testing the Reliability of the Magnetostratigraphy

Applications and Case Studies

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 5: 3D seismic interpretation techniques: applications to basin analysis

Introduction

Structure and Thickness Maps

Seismic Attribute Analysis

Concluding Remarks

References

Chapter 6: Dispersal and preservation of tectonically generated alluvial gravels in sedimentary basins

Introduction

The Sediment Routing System and Active Tectonics

Landscape Adjustment Time Scales

Lag Times in Gravel Deposition

Dispersal of Gravel from Tectonically Active Range Fronts

Down-System Fining of Gravel by Selective Deposition

Basin Response Time

Coupled Responses

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 7: Source-to-sink sediment volumes within a tectono-stratigraphic model for a Laramide shelf-to-deep-water basin: methods and results

Introduction

The Lewis-Fox Hills Source-to-Sink System

Methodology: Determining Clinothems and Calculating Volumes

Delineating Compartments

Results: Volumes in Compartments and Trends Through Time

Discussion: Volumes, Tectonic-Stratigraphic Model, and Source-to-Sink Characterization

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 8: Modeling the interaction between lithospheric and surface processes in foreland basins

Introduction

Loading, Flexure, and Rheology of the Lithosphere

Role of Pre-Orogenic Extension and Late-Stage Compression on Foredeep Evolution

Feedback Between Lithospheric and Surface Processes

Discussion and Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Part 3: Rift, Post-Rift, Transtensional, and Strike-Slip Basin Settings

Chapter 9: Continental rift basins: the East African perspective

Introduction

Rift Basin Formation and Sedimentary Fill

Rift Basin Sedimentary Fills: the Interplay of Tectonics and Climate

East African Rift Basin Evolution

East African Rift Basin Evolution

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 10: Influence of sediment input and plate-motion obliquity on basin development along an active oblique-divergent plate boundary: Gulf of California and Salton Trough

Introduction

Basin Terminology

Tectonic Setting and Structural Overview

Summary of Basins

Discussion

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 11: Active transtensional intracontinental basins: Walker Lane in the western Great Basin

Introduction

Transtensive Basins, Walker Lane

Conclusion

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 12: Post-rift deformation of the North East and South Atlantic margins: are “passive margins” really passive?

Introduction

Recognition of Subsidence and Uplift

Observations of Non-Uniform Post-Rift Margin Subsidence from the NE Atlantic

Observations of Non-Uniform Post-Rift Margin Subsidence from the South Atlantic

Conclusions and Implications

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 13: The impact of early Cretaceous deformation on deposition in the passive-margin Scotian Basin, offshore eastern Canada

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Stratigraphy of the Scotian Basin

Regional Early Cretaceous Deformation

Salt Tectonics of the Scotian Basin

Sources of Detrital Sediment

Interpretation of Lower Cretaceous Sedimentary Facies

The Interplay of Tectonics and Sedimentation

Conclusion

Acknowledgments

References

Part 4: Convergent Margins: Subduction and Collision, from Outboard to Inboard Settings

Chapter 14: Sedimentation at plate boundaries in transition

Introduction

Convergent Margin Inception

Triple Junctions

Relationships Among Ophiolite Obduction, Subduction Initiation, and Triple Junctions

Active to Passive Margin Transitions

Summary and Conclusion

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 15: Evolution of sedimentary environments in the subduction zone of southwest Japan: recent results from the NanTroSEIZE Kumano transect

Introduction

Toe of Accretionary Prism

Seaward Edge of Splay Fault System

Kumano Basin

Conclusions

References

Chapter 16: Modification of continental forearc basins by flat-slab subduction processes: a case study from southern Alaska

Introduction

Geologic Configuration of the Southern Alaska Forearc Basin System

Paleocene-Eocene Spreading Ridge Subduction

Oligocene to Holocene Subduction of Thick Oceanic Crust

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 17: Basins in arc-continent collisions

Introduction

Intra-Oceanic Arc Basins and their Fate in Collision Zones

Basins Formed During Arc-Continent Collision

Case Study: Synchronous Basin Destruction and Formation During Arc-Continent Collision at Taiwan

Summary

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 18: The Pampa del Tamarugal forearc basin in Northern Chile: the interaction of tectonics and climate

Introduction, Primary Characteristics, and Geological Setting

Forearc Morphology and Tectonics Trenchward of The Pampa del Tamarugal Basin

Basement and Tectonic Features of The Pampa del Tamarugal Basin

Surface Processes and Geomorphology of the Pampa del Tamarugal Basin

Paleoclimate and Sedimentary Facies

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 19: Extensional and transtensional continental arc basins: case studies from the southwestern United States

Introduction

Tectonic Settings and Evolution of Thought

Early-Stage Low-Lying Continental Arc Basins

Summary of Early-Stage Low-Lying Continental Arc Basins

Late-Stage High-Standing Continental Arc Basins

Contrasts and Comparisons Between Late-Stage and Early-Stage Continental Arc Basins

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 20: Foreland basin systems revisited: variations in response to tectonic settings

Introduction

Tectonic Settings of Foreland Basins

Lithospheric Flexure in Foreland Basins

Lateral Mobility of the Thrust Belt-Foreland System

Retroarc Foreland Basin Systems

Collisional Foreland Basin Systems

Retreating Collisional Foreland Basin Systems

Stratigraphic Records of Foreland Basins: Deconvolving Tectonic Processes

Influence of Tectonic Setting

Remaining Questions

Summary

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 21: Cenozoic evolution of hinterland basins in the Andes and Tibet

Introduction

Andean Hinterland Basins

Tibetan Hinterland Basins

Discussion and Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 22: Basin response to active extension and strike-slip deformation in the hinterland of the Tibetan Plateau

Introduction

Tibet Rifts

The Lunggar Rift

The Nyainqentanglha Rift

Dem Analysis

Rift Basin Development

Strike-Slip Faults and Associated Basins in Central Tibet

Kinematic Development of V-Shaped Conjugate Strike-Slip Basins

Discussion and Conclusions

Acknowledgments

Reference

Chapter 23: The Betic intramontane basins (SE Spain): stratigraphy, subsidence, and tectonic history

Introduction

Geological Setting

Sedimentary Record of the Betic Intramontane Basins

Subsidence History of the Betic Intramontane Basins

Tectonic Setting and Origin of the Betic Intramontane Basins

Concluding Remarks

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 24: Dynamic relationship between subsidence, sedimentation, and unconformities in mid-Cretaceous, shallow-marine strata of the Western Canada Foreland Basin: links to Cordilleran tectonics

Introduction

New Stratigraphic Results

Flexural Depocenters

Discussion

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 25: Structural, geomorphic, and depositional characteristics of contiguous and broken foreland basins: examples from the eastern flanks of the central Andes in Bolivia and NW Argentina

Introduction

Retroarc Topography, Deformation, and Deposition in the Central Andes

Topographic and Geomorphic Characteristics of the Eastern Andean Margin In Bolivia and NW Argentina

Differential Flexural Response to Topographic Loading Along the Central Andes

Conclusion

References

Chapter 26: Thrust wedge/foreland basin systems

Introduction

Mechanical Coupling in Thrust Wedge/Foreland Basin Systems

Pro- Versus Retro-Foreland Basins

Foreland Basin Subsidence

Tectonic/Surface Process Coupling in Thrust Wedge/Foreland Basin Systems

Erosion and Sediment Flux

Wedge-Top Sedimentation

Time Scales in the System

Concluding Remarks

References

Chapter 27: 2D kinematic models of growth fault-related folds in contractional settings

Introduction

Fold Amplification Mechanisms

Growth Triangles

Geometry of the Growth Axial Surfaces

Progressive Unconformities

Angular Unconformities

Onlaps, Offlaps, and Overlaps

Erosion and Inclined Primary Dips of the Growth Strata

Growth Strata Applications

Concluding Remarks

Acknowledgments

References

Part 5: Plate Interior Basins and Widespread Basin Types

Chapter 28: Plate interior poly-phase basins

Introduction

Tarim Basin

Ordos Basin

East Gobi Basin, Mongolia

Discussion

Sedimentary Facies and Architecture

Provenance and Sediment Dispersal

Subsidence History

Basement and Structural Drivers

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 29: The great Grenvillian sedimentation episode: record of supercontinent Rodinia's assembly

Introduction

Rodinia and the Grenvillian Orogeny

Theory: Big River Systems in the Proterozoic

The Grenvillian Sedimentation Event and Paleogeography of Rodinia

Evidence for Recycling of Grenvillian Basins into Younger Sedimentary Deposits

Summary

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 30: Cratonic basins

Introduction

The Timing of Initiation and Geological Context of Cratonic Basins

Modeling Cratonic Basin Evolution

Discussion

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 31: Endorheic basins

Introduction

Modern Examples of Endorheic Basins

Endorheic Basins in the Stratigraphic Record

Facies Classification of Endorheic Basins

Facies and Depositional Architecture

Endorheic-Exorheic and Exorheic-Endorheic Transitions

Conclusions

Acknowledgments

References

Index

COMPANION WEBSITE

Scanned files of the previous edition are available on the companion website:

www.wiley.com/go/busby/sedimentarybasins

This edition first published 2012 © 2012 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell's publishing program has been merged with Wiley's global Scientific, Technical and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell.

Registered office: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

Editorial offices: 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK

The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774, USA

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.

The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

TECTONICS OF SEDIMENTARY BASINS: Recent Advances / edited by Cathy Busby and Antonio Azor.

p. cm.

Includes index.

ISBN 978-1-4051-9465-5 (cloth)

1. Sedimentary basins. 2. Plate tectonics. I. Busby, Catherine. II. Antonio Azor.

QE615.R43 2011

551.8–dc22

2011012200

This book is published in the following electronic formats: ePDF 9781444347135; Wiley Online Library 9781444347166; ePub 9781444347142; Mobi 9781444347159

Contributors

Philip A. Allen Department of Earth Science & Engineering, Imperial College, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, UK

John J. Armitage Department of Earth Science & Engineering, Imperial College, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, UK

José Miguel Azañón Instituto Andaluz de Ciencias de la Tierra (CSIC-UGR), Campus de Fuentenueva, s/n, 18071 Granada, Spain and Departamento de Geodinámica, Universidad de Granada, Campus de Fuentenueva, s/n, 18071 Granada, Spain

Antonio Azor Departamento de Geodinámica, Universidad de Granada, Campus de Fuentenueva, s/n, 18071 Granada, Spain

Bodo Bookhagen Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA

Marcus Bursik Department of Geology, University at Buffalo, 411 Cooke Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260-1350, USA

Cathy J. Busby Department of Earth Science, University of California, Santa Barbara CA 93106, USA

Cristian Carvajal Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA

Peter Cawood School of Earth and Environment, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia and Department of Geography and Geosciences, University of St. Andrews, North Street, St. Andrews, KY16 9AL, UK

Peter D. Clift School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3UE, UK

Sierd Cloetingh Netherlands Research Centre for Integrated Solid Earth Science (ISES), the Netherlands.

Peter G. DeCelles Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA

Rebecca J. Dorsey Department of Geological Sciences, 1272 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403 USA

Amy E. Draut U.S. Geological Survey, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, USA

Guillaume Dupont-Nivet Paleomagnetic Laboratory ‘Fort Hoofddijk’, Faculty of Geosciences - Utrecht University, Budapestlaan 17, 3584 CD Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Cynthia Ebinger Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA

Emily S. Finzel Department of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2051, USA

Daniel Garcia-Castellanos Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra Jaume Almera (ICTJA-CSIC), Barcelona, Spain

George Gehrels Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA

John C. Gosse Department of Earth Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H4J1, Canada

Michael J. Hay Talisman Energy Inc., Suite 3400, 888, 3rd St. S.W., Calgary, AB T2P 5C5, Canada

Paul L. Heller Department of Geology & Geophysics, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA

George E. Hilley Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2115, USA

Brian K. Horton Department of Geological Sciences and Institute for Geophysics, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712, USA

Y. Greg Hu Loring Tarcore Laboratories Ltd., #2-666 Goddard Ave. NE, Calgary, AB T2K 5X3, Canada

Raymond V. Ingersoll Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567, USA

Christopher A-L. Jackson Department of Earth Science & Engineering, Imperial College, London SW7 2BP, UK

Angela S. Jayko Regional Tectonics, U.S. Geological Survey, U.C. White Mountain Research Station, 3000 E. Line St., Bishop, CA 93514, USA

Cari L. Johnson Geology and Geophysics, University of Utah, 115 S. 1460 East – FASB 383, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

Teresa Jordan Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Cornell University, Snee Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA

Karla E. Kane Statoil (U.K.) Ltd, 1 Kingdom Street, London W2 6BD, UK

Paul A. Kapp Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA

Jessica R. Krawetz Canadian Natural Resources Limited, Suite 2500, 855-2nd Street SW, Calgary, AB, T2P 4J8, Canada

Michael A. Kreitner Suncor Energy Inc., 150 6th Ave SW, P.O. Box 2844, Calgary, AB T2P 3E3, Canada

Wout Krijgsman Paleomagnetic Laboratory ‘Fort Hoofddijk’, Faculty of Geosciences - Utrecht University, Budapestlaan 17, 3584 CD Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Kathleen M. Marsaglia Department of Geological Sciences, California State University Northridge, 18111 Nordhoff St., Northridge, CA 91330-8266, USA

Phil J.A. McCausland Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada

Gregory F. Moore Department of Geology & Geophysics, University of Hawaii-Manoa, 2500 Campus Road, Honolulu, HI 96822 USA

Peter Nester Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Cornell University, Snee Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA

Gary Nichols Department of Earth Sciences, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK

Douglas Paton School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK

Georgia Pe-Piper Department of Geology, Saint Mary's University, Halifax, NS B3H 3C3, Canada

David J.W. Piper Geological Survey of Canada (Atlantic), Bedford Institute of Oceanography, P.O. Box 1006, Dartmouth, NS B2Y 4A2, Canada

A. Guy Plint Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada

Josep Poblet Departamento de Geología, Universidad de Oviedo, C/Jesús Arias de Velasco s/n, 33005 Oviedo, Spain

Robert Rainbird Geological Survey of Canada, 615 Booth St, Ottawa, ON K1A 0E9, Canada

Kenneth D. Ridgway Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University, 550 Stadium Mall Drive, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2051, USA

Bradley D. Ritts Chevron Energy Technology Company, 6001 Bollinger Canyon Rd., San Ramon, CA 94583, USA

Xavier Roca Imperial Oil Resources, 5th Avenue Place, 237, 4th Avenue SW, Calgary, AB, T2P 3M9, Canada

José Rodríguez-Fernández Instituto Andaluz de Ciencias de la Tierra (CSIC-UGR), Campus de Fuentenueva, s/n, 18071 Granada, Spain

Christopher A. Scholz Department of Earth Sciences, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA

Hugh Sinclair School of GeoSciences, Drummond Street, University of Edinburgh, EH8 9XP, UK

Edward R. Sobel Institut für Geowissenschaften, Universität Potsdam, 14476 Potsdam, Germany

Ron Steel Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA

Manfred R. Strecker Institut für Geowissenschaften, Universität Potsdam, 14476 Potsdam, Germany

Michael H. Taylor Department of Geology, University of Kansas, 1735 Jayhawk Blvd., Lawrence, KS 66045, USA

Jeffrey M. Trop Department of Geology, Bucknell University, Moore Avenue, Lewisburg, PA 17837, USA

Aditya Tyagi Department of Earth Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5B7, Canada

Paul J. Umhoefer Department of Geology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011 USA

Michael B. Underwood Department of Geological Sciences, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO, 65211 USA

Bogdan L. Varban Imperial Oil Resources, 5th Avenue Place, 237, 4th Avenue SW, Calgary, AB T2P 3M9, Canada

Heng Zhang Apt. 1204, 108, 3rd Avenue SW, Calgary, AB T2P 0E7, Canada

Preface

The plate tectonic revolution of the 1960's provided the first unified framework for models on the origin of mountain belts and basins; this resulted in an outpouring of landmark papers in the 1970's and 1980's. When Ray Ingersoll and Cathy Busby taught Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins in the late 1980s (at UCLA and UCSB respectively), they were frustrated by a lack of textbooks or summary papers on this topic. Instead, professors were forced to compile impossibly long reading lists for their students, and try to synthesize the material for them. For this reason, Professors Busby and Ingersoll decided to edit a textbook on the topic for Blackwell, to be aimed at the senior undergraduate to professional geologist level. This was an exhaustive treatment that took five years to produce, and it was published in 1995 (Busby and Ingersoll, 1995). Online access to the 1995 book is provided by the publisher, because it still provides a valid and complete introduction to the topic. We recommend that the undergraduate geology student begin with the 1995 book, and that the graduate student and professional refer to it as needed while reading the new book.

Fifteen years later, there have been many advances in our understanding of the plate tectonic controls on basin formation and evolution. One large area of growth has been in the field of active tectonics, where advances in global positioning and stratigraphic or surface dating techniques allow workers to compare present-day plate motions with the growth of structures on the time scale of thousands of years. Our understanding of the sedimentary response to tectonic events has been improved through numerical/analog modeling and detailed field observations. Major advances have been made in studies of the subsurface, through seismic surveys of crustal to upper mantle structure, as well as 3D seismic surveys of basin fills, in some areas augmented by cores. Isotopic studies of detrital minerals (e.g., U-Pb zircon) are now widely used to reconstruct tectonic events, including large-scale basin translation, patterns of unroofing in regions around basins, and reconstruction of sediment pathways across continents through time. Paleomagnetic methods are now very widely employed for precise dating and correlation of strata, for determining sources and flow paths of widespread volcanic units, and for evaluating the importance of tectonic rotation. Another new approach to understanding tectonic problems is the use of ArcGIS to manipulate geochronological, geochemical, biostratigraphic, and paleomagnetic databases, in concert with satellite, air photograph, and geologic map data. At the same time, proliferation of detailed models for complex volcanic-volcaniclastic dispersal-depositional systems has permitted detailed tectonic reconstruction of a wider range of basin types, with dateable fill. Last but not least, numerical and analog modeling of geodynamic processes is more sophisticated than ever.

The new book presented here was produced in response to the demand for an update on the topic, hence the title Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins: Recent Advances. Our mission was to assemble an all-star cast in the field of basin tectonics, and give them a venue to present “cutting-edge” material. Unlike the 1995 book, this is not a comprehensive treatment of the entire subject; that was useful 15 years ago, but online access to publications has reduced the need for such comprehensive treatment. Instead, we think our new book represents the state of the art in research on basin tectonics. This book was produced very rapidly (in about two years), because it consist of numerous short chapters, most of them authored by only one or two people. The authors accomplished brevity by focusing on results of global importance and key issues raised over the last 15 years. Primary data are not generally presented here, but primary data sources are well cited, so the reader has a guide to all of the important recent literature on each topic. We believe the resulting chapters showcase methods and results that use innovative approaches and have led to a new understanding of tectonic processes, being, furthermore, “transportable” to other regions. We offer a very brief summary of the main topics addressed in the book, giving the rationale for their order of appearance.

Part 1: “Introduction”

The first part of the book is an overview of the topic of this book, by Ingersoll (Chapter 1). This chapter is a thorough update on his grand overviews published in the Geological Society of America Bulletin in 1988, and in Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins (with Busby) in 1995. This chapter provides the reader with an understanding of the processes and nomenclature common to all succeeding chapters in the book.

Part 2: “New Techniques and Modeling”

Everyone involved agreed that Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins: Recent Advances needed a part on techniques, because they have proliferated and been refined so much in the past 15 years (the 1995 book did not have a part like this). We made a conscious choice to limit discussions of applications in these chapters, thereby keeping each chapter as short as possible while providing references to applied studies. This part gives the reader an overview of the most important advances in techniques applied to tectonic analysis of sedimentary basins. Detrital zircon geochronologic techniques (Chapter 2) and terrestrial cosmogenic nuclide techniques (Chapter 3) have come into widespread use. Meanwhile, magnetostratigraphic techniques, seismic interpretation techniques, and basin/stratigraphic modeling techniques, while not entirely new, have become far more sophisticated (Chapters 4–8). This part of the book is missing a chapter on the huge and diverse field of chemostratigraphic techniques, which have been evolving for decades, but a treatment of that topic would require a second book.

The third and fourth parts of this book are organized by tectonic setting, divided into broadly divergent and broadly convergent margins.

Part 3: “Rift, Post-Rift, Transtensional, and Strike-Slip Basin Settings”

Part 3 opens with a chapter on the classic active orthogonal rift in East Africa (Chapter 9). It then moves to transtensional rift basins in a “successful” continental rift (Gulf of California, Chapter 10), and a transtensional rift that is still in progress (Walker Lane, Chapter 11). Transform margins are not dealt with here; for a global catalogue and description of strike-slip fault systems, see the 142-page opus by Paul Mann, published in 2007 (Geological Society of London Special Publications, vol. 290). In keeping with our theme of tectonics and sedimentation, Part 3 of our book also includes the so-called passive margins that show evidence of deformation long after sea-floor spreading began (Chapters 12 and 13).

Part 4: “Convergent Margins”

Part 4 is broadly organized to move from the trench to more inboard settings, and from sea-floor subduction settings to collisional settings. This begins with an examination of processes involved in subduction initiation (Chapter 14), and continues with new results from what is probably the best-studied modern subduction complex on Earth (Chapter 15). Part 4 then proceeds through a study of forearc deformation by flat-slab subduction (Chapter 16), and the basinal record of bringing arcs into continental subduction zones (Chapter 17). It continues on the theme of sea-floor subduction by examining an Andean forearc basin (Chapter 18), as well as extensional and transtensional intra-arc basins of the Southwestern USA (Chapter 19). An overview of both subduction-related and collisional foreland basins follows (Chapter 20). Then we look at basins that lie on top of orogens, referred to as “hinterland basins” (a term included in the revised nomenclature of Chapter 1). These are described from both subduction and collisional settings (Andes and Tibet), on the time scale from millions of years (Chapter 21) to hundreds of thousands and thousands of years (Chapter 22). We then move to “intramontane” basins of the Betic Cordillera of Spain, interpreted to be extensional basins formed in a late orogenic setting due to mantle delamination and/or slab rollback or detachment (Chapter 23). Part 4 then moves inboard in tectonic setting, to the foreland. Chapter 24 examines patterns of flexural subsidence in the western Canada foreland basin, inferred to be broadly controlled by oceanic plate subduction, and at the Cordilleran scale controlled by terrane accretion events. Chapter 25 contrasts the elements of a typical contiguous foreland basin (Bolivia) with those of a broken foreland (Argentina). These case studies are followed by studies that deal with general kinematic models for thrust wedge-foreland systems (Chapter 26), and models for growth fault-related folds in contractional settings (Chapter 27). Part 4 has an unfortunate absence of oceanic/island arc convergent margin basin tectonic studies; that, too, is deserving of a separate book.

Part 5: “Plate Interior Basins and Widespread Basin Types”

The last part of the book treats sedimentary basin tectonic topics that do not fit neatly into divergent or convergent plate tectonic settings. Plate interior poly-phase (PIP) basins are important for their size and long-term structural and stratigraphic record (Chapter 28). The vast sedimentary record of the Grenvillian tectonomagmatic event is described in the context of supercontinent assembly (Chapter 29). In Chapter 30, cratonic basins are described as long-lived circular or elliptical crustal sags on thick, relatively stable continental lithosphere, and are interpreted to be primarily formed by protracted plate-wide stretching at low strain rate. Last, Chapter 31 describes the distinctive stratigraphic and sedimentary facies characteristics that are common to endorheic (internally drained) basins in a wide variety of tectonic settings.

There were at least a few additional topics that were garnering increasing attention at the time this book was being produced. The halokinetic basin, important for commonly containing petroleum, is now included in Ingersoll's revised nomenclature (Chapter 1), and it deserved its own chapter here. New techniques are rapidly evolving to deduce paleo-elevations from sedimentary basin fills, using stable isotopes in paleosols, fossils, silicates, and volcanic glasses, but these are treated elsewhere (e.g., see Reviews in Mineralogy & Geochemistry, 2007, vol. 66). A very rapidly expanding, huge field of research uses global seismic tomography studies to infer linkages between mantle and surface processes. For example, how important is the role of “mantle/lithospheric drips” in causing surface subsidence (e.g., the Tulare Lake Basin of the San Joaquin Valley, California)? Are they too small and too transient to be important? How does the subduction of huge oceanic plateaus control uplift and subsidence events on continents? And how do surface tectonic basin processes provide a record of tomographically imaged subduction processes? Slab rollback is discussed in this book, but what are the effects of other processes, such as stalled slabs and broken slabs?

Like all geologic research, this book is a “progress report” on our understanding of the tectonics of sedimentary basins, which we think has advanced greatly in recent years. We hope you find the book useful. We give our sincere thanks to the many reviewers who worked hard to give us valuable feedback (listed below).

We thank the Spanish Ministry of Education for granting Cathy Busby funds to work with Antonio Azor in the Department of Geodynamics at the University of Granada in 2007–2008 and in 2010. Without that support, this book would not have been possible.

Cathy Busby and Antonio Azor, EditorsFebruary 12, 2011

Chapter Reviewers

Anonymous (3)

Ramon Arrowsmith, Arizona State University

Peter Burgess, Royal Holloway University

Kevin Burke, University of Houston

Reynaldo Charrier, University of Chile

Peter Clift, University of Aberdeen

Christopher Connors, Washington and Lee University

Rob Crossley, Fugro Robertson Ltd

Peter DeCelles, University of Arizona

Alex Densmore, Durham University

Mark Deptuk, Canada Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board

William R. Dickinson, University of Arizona

Christopher Fedo, University of Tennessee

Stanley C. Finney, California State University, Long Beach

William Galloway, University of Texas Institute for Geophysics

Miguel Garcés, University of Barcelona

Martin Gibling, Dalhousie University

Adrian Hartley, University of Aberdeen

Richard Heermance, California State University, Northridge

William Helland-Hansen, University of Bergen

Paul Heller, University of Wyoming

Matthew Horstwood, British Geological Survey

Brian Horton, University of Texas at Austin

Raymond V. Ingersoll, University of California, Los Angeles

Cari Jonson, University of Utah

Teresa Jordan, Cornell University

Paul Kapp, University of Arizona

Tim Lawton, New Mexico State University

Andrew Leier, University of Calgary

Nathaniel Lifton, Purdue University

Juan M. Lorenzo, Louisiana State University

Paul Mann, University of Texas Institute for Geophysics

Mariano Marzo, University of Barcelona

Margot McMechan, Geological Survey of Canada

Andrew Miall, University of Toronto

Ivan Marroquin, Paradigm Geophysical

Nick Mortimer, GNS Science

Lorean Moscardelli, University of Texas at Austin

Michael Murphy, University of Houston

Andrew Meigs, Oregon State University

Nadine MacQuarrie, Princeton University

Neil Opdyke, University of Florida

Michael Oskin, University of California, Davis

Chris Palola, University of Minnesota

Kevin Pickering, University College London

Marith Reheis, US Geological Survey

Ken Ridgway, Purdue University

Scott Samson, Syracuse University

David Scholl, US Geological Survey

John Shimeld, Geological Survey of Canada

Glen Stockmal, Geological Survey of Canada

Manfred Strecker, Universität Potsdam

Michael Taylor, University of Kansas

Reinoud Vissers, Utrecht University

Martha Withjack, Rutgers University

Part 1

Introduction

Chapter 1

Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins, with Revised Nomenclature

Raymond V. Ingersoll

Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, California

ABSTRACT

Actualistic plate-tectonic models are the best framework within which to understand the tectonics of sedimentary basins. Sedimentary basins develop in divergent, intraplate, convergent, transform, hybrid, and miscellaneous settings. Within each setting are several variants, dependent on type(s) of underlying crust, structural position, sediment supply, and inheritance. Subsidence of sedimentary basins results from (1) thinning of crust (2) thickening of mantle lithosphere (3) sedimentary and volcanic loading (4) tectonic loading (5) subcrustal loading (6) asthenospheric flow, and (7) crustal densification. Basins vary greatly in size, life span, and preservation potential, with short-lived basins formed in active tectonic settings, especially on oceanic crust, having low preservation potential, and long-lived basins formed in intraplate settings having the highest preservation potential.

Continental rifts may evolve into nascent ocean basins, which commonly evolve into active ocean basins bordered by intraplate continental margins with three types of configurations: shelf-slope-rise, transform, and embankment. Continental rifts that do not evolve into oceans become fossil rifts, which later become sites for development of intracratonic basins and aulacogens. If all plate boundaries within and around an ocean basin become inactive, a dormant ocean basin develops, underlain by oceanic crust and surrounded by continental crust.

Sites for sedimentary basins in convergent settings include trenches, trench slopes, forearcs, intra-arcs, backarcs, and retroarcs. Complex dynamic behavior of arc-trench systems results in diverse configurations for arc-related basins. Most notable is the overall stress regime of the arc-trench system, with resulting response along and behind the magmatic arc. Intra-arc rifting in highly extensional arcs commonly evolves into backarc spreading to form new oceanic crust. Backarcs of neutral arcs can contain any type of preexisting crust that was trapped there at the time of initiation of the related subduction zone. Highly compressional arcs develop retroarc foldthrust belts and related retroforeland basins, and may develop hinterland basins; in extreme cases, broken retroforelands may develop in former cratonal areas.

As nonsubductable continental or arc crust is carried toward a subduction zone, collision generally initiates at one point and the resulting suture propagates away from this point of initial impact. Remnant ocean basins form on both sides of the initial impact point, and rapidly fill with sediment derived from the suture zone. As collision continues, the flux of sediment into the remnant ocean basin(s) increases concurrently with shrinkage of the basin until final suturing and obduction of the accreted sediment occur. Concurrently with collision, proforeland basins form on continental crust of the subducting plate and collisional retroforeland basins form on the overriding plate. Impactogens, broken forelands, and hinterland basins also may result.

In transform settings and along complex strike-slip fault systems related to convergent settings, changing stress regimes related to irregularities in fault trends, rock types, and plate motions result in transtension, transpression, and transrotation, with associated complex, diverse, and short-lived sedimentary basins.

Two previously unnamed basin types that have received increasing attention recently are halokinetic basins (related to salt tectonics, especially along intraplate margins with embankment configurations) and bolide basins (resulting from extraterrestrial impacts). Sediment accumulates in successor basins following cessation of basin-controlling processes, whether in divergent, convergent, transform, or hybrid settings.

The ultimate goal of classifying and reviewing all types of sedimentary basins is the improvement of paleotectonic and paleogeographic reconstructions through the application of actualistic models for basin evolution. Interdisciplinary studies that test and refine these models will improve our knowledge of Earth history.

Keywords: basin nomenclature; plate-tectonic settings; subsidence mechanisms; preservation potential; paleotectonic reconstruction

Introduction

It has been more than a decade since I reviewed and revised my original basin classification (i.e., Ingersoll, 1988; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995), which was based primarily on Dickinson's (1974b, 1976a) statement of fundamental principles that should guide discussion of the tectonics of sedimentary basins. Many new insights and models have been developed recently; in addition, nomenclature has evolved in complex ways. Therefore, now is an appropriate time to consolidate, revise, and discuss how to communicate about the tectonics of sedimentary basins.

As in my previous papers on this subject, I follow Dickinson's (1974b, 1976a) suggestions that nomenclature and classification be based on the following actualistic plate-tectonic processes and characteristics, which ultimately control the location, initiation, and evolution of sedimentary basins in diverse tectonic settings. Horizontal motions of plates, thermal changes through time, stretching and shortening of crust, isostatic adjustments, mantle dynamics, surficial processes, and even extraterrestrial events influence sedimentary basins. Additional study of sedimentary basins, inevitably, leads to greater complexity of models to explain them. Although we should search for unifying principles that lead to deeper understanding of processes and results, the complexity of the real world dictates that enhanced knowledge about sedimentary basins results in more complex models. Thus, new types of sedimentary basins are added to the list provided in Ingersoll and Busby (1995) because these are actual features that need to be understood. Gould (1989, 98) stated, “Classifications are theories about the basis of natural order, not dull catalogues compiled only to avoid chaos.” I hope that my discussion serves the dual purposes of reducing nomenclatural chaos and suggesting a framework within which to understand the complex controls on the origin and evolution of sedimentary basins.

Nomenclature

First-order criteria for classifying sedimentary basins (Dickinson, 1974b, 1976a) are (1) type of nearest plate boundary(ies) (2) proximity of plate boundary(ies), and (3) type of substratum. Thus, the first-order classification, based on criteria (1) and (2) is divergent, intraplate, convergent, transform, hybrid, and miscellaneous settings (Table 1.1). Within each of these categories are several variants, dependent on type of substratum (oceanic, transitional, continental, and anomalous crust), as well as structural position, sediment supply, and inheritance.

Table 1.1 Basin classification with modern and ancient examples Modified after Ingersoll and Busby (1995)(1995).

Basin classification and nomenclature are based on characteristics of a basin at the time of sedimentation. Thus, many stratigraphic successions are multidimensional and multigenerational in terms of plate-tectonic controls on their evolution. A single stratigraphic succession may represent several different tectonic settings. “The evolution of a sedimentary basin thus can be viewed as the result of a succession of discrete plate-tectonic settings and plate interactions whose effects blend into a continuum of development” (Dickinson, 1974b, 1).

It is important to realize that “basin,” as used herein, refers to any stratigraphic accumulation of sedimentary or volcanic rock; the three-dimensional architecture of basins may approximate saucers, wedges, sheets, and odd shapes. Also, basins may form by subsidence of a substrate, development of a barrier to transport of sediment, filling of a preexisting hole, or relative movement of source and sink.

Subsidence Mechanisms and Preservation Potential

Surfaces of deposition may subside due to the following processes (Dickinson, 1974b, 1976a, 1993; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995) (Table 1.2): (1) thinning of crust due to stretching, erosion, and magmatic withdrawal (2) thickening of mantle lithosphere during cooling (3) sedimentary and volcanic loading (local crustal isostasy or regional lithospheric flexure)(4) tectonic loading of both crust and lithosphere (5) subcrustal loading of both crust and lithosphere (6) dynamic effects of asthenospheric flow, and (7) crustal densification. Figure 1.1 illustrates that crustal thinning dominates during early stages of extension (e.g., rifts and transtensional basins), and mantle-lithospheric thickening dominates following the initiation of seafloor spreading (during the rift-to-drift transition along divergent margins which evolve into intraplate margins). Sedimentary loading dominates along continental-oceanic crustal boundaries which are supplied by major rivers and deltas (e.g., continental embankments and remnant ocean basins). Tectonic loading dominates in settings where crustal shortening dominates (e.g., trenches and foreland basins). The other three types of subsidence mechanisms are generally subordinate.

Table 1.2 Subsidence mechanisms.

Crustal thinningExtensional stretching, erosion during uplift, and magmatic withdrawalMantle-lithospheric thickeningConversion of asthenosphere to mantle lithosphere during cooling following cessation of stretching and/or heatingSedimentary and volcanic loadingLocal isostatic compensation of crust and/or regional lithospheric flexure during sedimentation and volcanismTectonic loadingLocal isostatic compensation of crust and/or regional lithospheric flexure during overthrusting and/or underpullingSubcrustal loadingLithospheric flexure during underplating of dense lithosphereAsthenospheric flowDynamic effects of asthenospheric flow, commonly due to descent or delamination of subducted lithosphereCrustal densificationIncreased density of crust due to changing pressure/temperature conditions and/or emplacement of higher-density melts into lower-density crust

Fig. 1.1 Suggested subsidence mechanisms for all types of sedimentary basins.

The diversity of tectonic and structural settings of sedimentary basins dictates that they vary greatly in size, life span, and preservation potential (Fig. 1.2) (Ingersoll, 1988; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995; Woodcock, 2004). Many sediment accumulations are destined to be destroyed relatively soon after deposition (e.g., most basins residing on oceanic crust or in rapidly uplifting orogenic settings). In contrast, basins formed during and following stretching of continental crust (e.g., continental rifts that either evolve into seafloor spreading or fail to do so) have high preservation potential because they subside and are buried beneath intraplate deposits following rifting. On the other hand, stratigraphic sequences along intraplate continental margins are destined to be partially subducted as they are pulled into trenches, thus preserving them at moderate to deep crustal levels as highly deformed and metamorphosed terranes. Such metasedimentary and metavolcanic terranes, along with voluminous sediments deposited in remnant ocean basins, are major rock bodies involved in the construction of continental crust, although their substrates (oceanic crust) are mostly subducted (e.g., Graham et al., 1975; Ingersoll et al., 1995, 2003).

Fig. 1.2 Typical life spans for sedimentary basins versus their post-sedimentation preservation potential, which refers to average time interval during which basins will not be uplifted and eroded during and following sedimentation. Sedimentary or volcanic fill may be preserved as accretionary complexes during and after basin destruction (especially true for all strata deposited on oceanic crust). Intraplate continental margins have high preservation potential in the sense of retaining their basement, but are likely to be highly deformed and metamorphosed beneath and within suture belts, and may be difficult to recognize in ancient settings.

Divergent Settings

Sequential Rift Development and Continental Separation

The relative importance of “active” (mantle-convective-driven) versus “passive” (lithospheric-driven) processes during initiation of continental rifting is debated (e.g., Sengor and Burke, 1978; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995; Sengor, 1995). Regardless of the mechanisms of initiation of rifting, continental rifts may experience two life paths: “successful” rifting that evolves into seafloor spreading to form nascent ocean basins (Ingersoll and Busby, 1995; Leeder, 1995), which then evolve into active ocean basins with paired intraplate margins (Fig. 1.3), or “failed” rifting, which does not evolve into nascent ocean basins, instead producing fossil rifts, commonly overlain by intracratonic basins (Sengor, 1995). Ingersoll and Busby (1995), Leeder (1995), and Sengor (1995) reviewed most aspects of continental stretching, basin formation, structural development, and different life paths during and after continental rifting. Here, I highlight changes in nomenclature and models involved in the evolution from continental rifts to intraplate margins (the rift-drift transition).

Fig. 1.3 True-scale actualistic analog models for sedimentary basins in divergent, intraplate and miscellaneous settings. Mantle lithosphere thins during decompression melting as plates diverge; mantle lithosphere thickens during cooling, following cessation of divergence. Also shown are two miscellaneous basins (bolide and halokinetic). Placement of bolide basin is arbitrary; they may form anywhere on Earth's surface, although preservation is more likely in cratonal areas (as shown in E). Halokinetic basins may form anywhere that salt is deeply buried; however, continental embankments (as shown in F) are the most common locations. Continental crust = jackstraw pattern; oceanic crust = vertical lines; mantle lithosphere and derived igneous rocks = black; asthenosphere and derived melts = orange; salt (halokinetic only) = black.

Continental Rifts

The most common basins associated with continental rifts (Fig. 1.3b) (“terrestrial rift valleys” of Dickinson, 1974b; Ingersoll, 1988) are half grabens developed on the hanging walls of normal faults (Leeder and Gawthorpe, 1987; Leeder, 1995; Gawthorpe and Leeder, 2000). Gawthorpe and Leeder (2000) summarized conceptual models for the tectono-sedimentary evolution of continental rift basins, including their three-dimensional development. They discussed structural, geomorphic, climatic, and lake/sea-level influences on basin development.

All of the models presented by Gawthorpe and Leeder (2000) involve high-angle normal faults. In these half grabens, most sediment is derived from the hanging wall, whereas the coarsest material, which is derived primarily from the footwall, is restricted to small steep alluvial fans or fan deltas along the faulted basin boundary. In contrast, supradetachment basins (formed above low-angle normal faults) receive most of their sediment from the breakaway footwall and tend to be dominated by coarse-grained detritus (Friedmann and Burbank, 1995). Additional variants on the Gawthorpe and Leeder (2000) half-graben model include development of accommodation zones, relay ramps, anticlinal-full-graben basins, and synclinal-horst basins (Rosendahl, 1987; Faulds and Varga, 1998; Ingersoll, 2001; Mack et al., 2003).

Nascent Ocean Basins and Continental Margins

As continental lithosphere is stretched and thinned, mantle asthenosphere eventually rises close to the surface (Fig. 1.3c). During the transition from continental rifting to seafloor spreading, transitional crust forms, either as stretched continental crust (quasicontinental) or sediment-rich basaltic crust (quasioceanic) (Dickinson, 1974b; Ingersoll, 2008b). Continental rifting evolves into seafloor spreading only in the absence of significant sediment so that oceanic crust is the only solid material with which rising asthenospheric melts can interact (Einsele, 1985; Nicolas, 1985). Thus, a significant width of transitional crust typically forms on the margins of nascent ocean basins prior to initiation of true seafloor spreading.

As these transitional types of crust form and the two continental margins move apart, a nascent ocean basin develops (“proto-oceanic gulf” and “narrow ocean” of Dickinson 1974b; “proto-oceanic rift trough” of Ingersoll 1988). The Red Sea is the type nascent ocean basin, with active seafloor spreading, clastic and carbonate sedimentation along the margins, and uplifted rift shoulders along the continental margins (Cochran, 1983; Bohannon, 1986a, 1986b; Coleman, 1993; Leeder, 1995; Purser and Bosence, 1998; Bosworth et al., 2005). Thick evaporite deposits may form during the transition from rift basin to nascent ocean basin, as well as during much of the history of nascent ocean basins, given the right combination of arid climate, limited communication with other marine bodies, and lack of detrital input (Dickinson, 1974b). The Gulf of California is an example of a transtensional nascent ocean basin (e.g., Atwater, 1989; Lonsdale, 1991; Atwater and Stock, 1998; Axen and Fletcher, 1998).

Intraplate Settings

Intraplate Continental Margins

Nascent ocean basins evolve into wide (Atlantic-type) oceans as two continents diverge along spreading ridges. During this evolutionary process, the newly rifted continental margins with uplifted rift flanks cool and subside as they move away from the spreading ridge. This process is referred to as the “rift-to-drift” transition, as a divergent setting evolves into an intraplate setting (Dickinson, 1974b, 1976a; Ingersoll, 1988; Bond et al., 1995; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995). Withjack et al. (1998) discussed complications in timing and process during this transition.

Subsidence mechanisms evolve from (1) thinning of continental crust by stretching and erosion during doming and rifting, to (2) thermal subsidence following rifting as the intraplate margin moves away from the spreading ridge, to (3) both local crustal and regional lithospheric sediment loading during the later history of the intraplate continental margin (Bond et al., 1995; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995). Lower-crustal and subcrustal flow and densification can locally modify subsidence.

Shelf-slope-rise Configuration

Most mature intraplate continental margins consist of a seaward thickening wedge of shelf deposits on top of continental crust, which is thinner seaward (Fig. 1.3d). Transitional crust (both quasicontinental and quasioceanic; Dickinson, 1974b, 1976a) underlies the seaward transition from thick shelf deposits to thin slope deposits, which, in turn, merge into thick turbiditic rise and abyssal-plain deposits on oceanic crust (Bond et al., 1995; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995). Most modern Atlantic continental margins have this configuration, with carbonate environments dominating at lower latitudes devoid of extensive clastic input.

Transform Configuration

Intraplate continental margins that originate along transform boundaries rather than rift boundaries have narrower sediment prisms and transitional crust (Fig. 1.3e). Tens of millions of years may pass between the time of initiation of transform motion (coincident with the rift-to-drift transition on adjoining margins) and the time of intraplate sedimentation (following passage of the spreading ridge along the transform boundary) (e.g., Bond et al., 1995; Turner et al., 2003; Wilson et al., 2003). The southern coast of West Africa exemplifies these characteristics; the latest Proterozoic - early Paleozoic Alabama-Oklahoma transform margin is an ancient example (e.g., Thomas, 1991).

Embankment Configuration

Major rivers along intraplate continental margins commonly are localized by fossil rifts trending at high angle to the margins (Burke and Dewey, 1973; Dickinson, 1974b; Audley-Charles et al., 1977; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995). The best examples are the Niger Delta (Burke, 1972) and the Mississippi Delta (Worrall and Snelson, 1989; Salvador, 1991; Galloway et al., 2000), where the shelf edge has prograded over oceanic crust because the maximum sediment thickness allowed by isostatic loading (16–18 km; Kinsman, 1975) has been reached inland of the shelf edge (Fig. 1.3f). In the case of the USA Gulf Coast, several rivers in addition to the Mississippi have contributed to considerable progradation of the continental margin over a wide area; this is the type example of a continental embankment, a distinctly different configuration than either the shelf-slope-rise or transform configuration.

Intracratonic Basins

Most intracratonic basins (e.g., Michigan basin) overlie fossil rifts (e.g., DeRito et al., 1983; Quinlan, 1987; Klein, 1995; Sengor, 1995; Howell and van der Pluijm, 1999) (Fig. 1.3a). Renewed periods of subsidence in cratonic basins can generally be correlated with changes in lithospheric stress related to orogenic activity in neighboring orogenic belts (DeRito et al., 1983; Howell and van der Pluijm, 1999). Subsidence occurs when lithospheric rigidity lessens, allowing uncompensated mass in the upper crust (remnants of fossil rifts) to subside over a broad area. Between times of orogenic activity, the lithosphere strengthens so that attainment of local isostatic equilibrium is interrupted. Thus, an intracratonic basin may take hundreds of millions of years to reach full isostatic compensation (DeRito et al., 1983; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995; Howell and van der Pluijm, 1999).

Continental Platforms

Cratonal stratigraphic sequences primarily reflect global tectonic events and eustasy (e.g., Sloss, 1988; Bally, 1989), although mantle dynamics, and local and regional events also influence continental platforms (e.g., Cloetingh, 1988; Burgess and Gurnis, 1995; van der Pluijm et al., 1997; Burgess, 2008). In contrast to intracratonic basins, platforms (Fig. 1.3a) accumulate sediment of uniform thickness over continental scales. Platformal stratigraphic sequences are transitional into continental margins, intracratonic basins, foreland basins, and other tectonic settings along continental margins (Ingersoll and Busby, 1995; Burgess, 2008). The distinction of distal foreland and platform sequences may be arbitrary, especially during times of high sea level, high carbonate productivity, and broad foreland flexure. Eustatically induced cyclothems are best expressed on platforms (e.g., Heckel, 1984; Klein, 1992; Klein and Kupperman, 1992), and paleolatitude and paleoclimate signals are best isolated in platformal sequences (Berry and Wilkinson, 1994). Platforms have generally experienced exposure and erosion during times of supercontinents, and have experienced maximum flooding approximately 100 My after supercontinent breakup (Heller and Angevine, 1985; Cogne et al., 2006).

Active Ocean Basins

The systematic exponential thermal decay of oceanic lithosphere as it moves away from spreading ridges is expressed by increasing water depth with age of oceanic crust (Sclater et al., 1971; Parsons and Sclater, 1977; Stein and Stein, 1992) (Fig. 1.3g). As oceanic crust subsides with age and distance from spreading ridges, systematic pelagic and hemipelagic deposits accumulate (Berger, 1973; Heezen et al., 1973; Winterer, 1973; Berger and Winterer, 1974). Carbonate ooze accumulates above the carbonate compensation depth (CCD), which is depressed under areas of high biologic productivity; silica ooze accumulates above the poorly defined silica compensation depth (SCD); and only abyssal clay accumulates below the SCD. The result is a dynamic and predictive stratigraphy relating the age, depth, and paleoaltitude of oceanic crust to oceanic depositional facies. Volcaniclastic and turbidite deposits near magmatic arcs and continental margins complicate predicted stratigraphic sequences on oceanic plates (e.g., Cook, 1975; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995).

Oceanic Islands, Seamounts, Aseismic Ridges, and Plateaus

Islands, seamounts, ridges, and plateaus thermally subside as oceanic plates migrate away from spreading ridges. Thermal anomalies independent of spreading ridges (e.g., hot spots) create new islands, ridges, and plateaus, which may have complex subsidence histories, dependent on their magmatic histories. Clague (1981) divided the post-volcanic history of seamounts into three sequential stages: subaerial, shallow water, and deep water or bathyal (Ingersoll, 1988; Ingersoll and Busby, 1995). As an island is eroded and subsides, fringing reefs and atolls may form, depending on latitude, climate, and relative sea level (e.g., Jenkyns and Wilson, 1999; Dickinson, 2004). Oceanic features, which may become accreted terranes at convergent margins (e.g., Wrangellia of the North American Cordillera; Ricketts, 2008), range in size from small seamounts to large mafic igneous provinces, such as the Ontong Java Plateau and related features (e.g., Taylor, 2006).

Dormant Ocean Basins

Dormant ocean basins are floored by oceanic crust, which is neither spreading nor subducting; in other words, there are no active plate margins within or adjoining the basin (Ingersoll and Busby, 1995) (Fig. 1.3h). This setting contrasts with active ocean basins, which include at least one active spreading ridge (e.g., Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans), and remnant ocean basins, which are small shrinking oceans bounded by at least one subduction zone (e.g., Bay of Bengal and Huon Gulf). The term “dormant” implies that there is no orogenic or taphrogenic activity within or adjacent to the basin; “oceanic” requires that the basin is underlain by oceanic lithosphere, in contrast to intracratonic basins, which are typically underlain by partially rifted continental lithosphere (Ingersoll and Busby, 1995).

Dormant ocean basins are created by two contrasting processes: (1) spreading ridges of nascent ocean basins cease activity (e.g., Gulf of Mexico; Pindell and Dewey, 1982; Pindell, 1985; Dickinson and Lawton, 2001), or (2) backarc basins (either extensional or neutral) are not subducted during suturing of continents and/or arcs (e.g., Black Sea; Okay et al., 1994) or South Caspian basin (Brunet et al., 2003; Vincent et al., 2005). The origin of dormant ocean basins may be difficult to determine because basement and original strata commonly remain deeply buried for hundreds of millions of years following cessation of seafloor spreading (e.g., Tarim and Junggar basins of western China) (e.g., Sengor et al., 1996). Following cessation of plate activity within and around the basin, sediment loading is the dominant subsidence mechanism, although lithospheric thickening due to residual cooling may be important (Ingersoll and Busby, 1995). Dormant ocean basins may have life spans of hundreds of millions of years and may vary considerably in size. The modern Gulf of Mexico, the largest known dormant ocean basin, is filling rapidly along its northern margin (the continental embankment of the Gulf Coast), but still contains oceanic crust with thin sediment cover in the south (e.g., Buffler and Thomas, 1994; Galloway et al., 2000; Dickinson and Lawton, 2001). The South Caspian Basin is small and partially filled with sediment (locally over 20 km thick; Brunet et al., 2003), and yet still is an oceanic basin. In contrast, the Tarim basin has a comparable sediment thickness, but is completely filled. These three basins are likely underlain by oceanic crust, or in the case of Tarim, an oceanic Plateau (Sengor et al., 1996); their long histories of cooling means that they are also underlain by thick and strong mantle lithosphere (Ingersoll and Busby, 1995). When a dormant ocean basin is filled to sea level, it may superficially resemble an intracratonic basin. The former, however, contains 16–20 km of sedimentary strata on top of strong oceanic lithosphere, whereas the latter contains a few km of sedimentary strata underlain primarily by continental crust, with one or more fossil rifts beneath the basin center. Thus, when in-plate stresses affect dormant ocean basins and their surroundings, deformation usually occurs along their weak boundaries, whereas deformation of intracratonic basins is concentrated along the fossil rifts underlying their interiors. Foreland basins may form above the edges of dormant ocean basins during contractional deformation (e.g., the margins of the modern Tarim basin). Intracratonic basins may experience renewed subsidence or inversion tectonics (e.g., the modern North Sea) (Cooper and Williams, 1989; Cameron et al., 1992).

Convergent Settings

Arc-trench Systems

Arc-trench systems may be categorized into three fundamental types: (1) extensional (2) neutral, and (3) compressional (Dickinson and Seely, 1979; Dewey, 1980) (Fig. 1.4). Arc-trench systems with significant strike slip may be considered a fourth type (Dorobek, 2008); strike-slip faults may occur in all types of arc-trench system, but they are especially common in strongly coupled systems experiencing oblique convergence (Beck, 1983). Many parameters determine the behavior of arc-trench systems, but the most important factors appear to be (1) convergence rate (2) slab age, and (3) slab dip (Molnar and Atwater, 1978; Uyeda and Kanamori, 1979; Jarrard, 1986; Kanamori, 1986), based on analyses of modern arc-trench systems (although see Cruciani et al., 2005, for an alternative interpretation). A major question arises from these analyses of contemporary Earth: is the present arrangement of spreading ridges and arc-trench systems typical of Earth history or an unusual configuration? Almost all modern east-facing arcs (e.g., Marianas) are extensional, with subduction of old lithosphere at steep angles. Almost all west-facing arcs (e.g., Andes) are compressional, with subduction of young lithosphere at shallow angles. Most south-facing arcs (e.g., Aleutians) are neutral, with subduction of middle-aged lithosphere at moderate angles. There are no north-facing arcs. Thus, it is very difficult to separate the covarying parameters of slab age, slab dip, facing direction, and type of arc-trench system. There is growing consensus (although see Schellart, 2007, 2008, for a contrary view) that facing direction of arc-trench systems may be the fundamental determinant of the behavior of arc-trench systems because of westward tidal lag of the eastward rotating planet (e.g., Bostrom, 1971; Moore, 1973; Dickinson, 1978; Doglioni, 1994; Doglioni et al., 1999). If this is the case today, then it should have been the case throughout Earth history because of the constancy of eastward planetary rotation. Therefore, models for ancient arc-trench systems must account for the azimuth of their facing directions when they were active. Lack of recognition of this fundamental characteristic of arc-trench systems has resulted in many invalid analog models of ancient mountain belts (Dickinson, 2008).

Fig. 1.4 True-scale actualistic analog models for sedimentary basins in convergent settings. A remnant arc is shown on the left side of (A). Trench, trench-slope and forearc basins are labeled only in (A and B), but they are associated with all types of arc-trench systems. Intra-arc basins may be associated with any magmatic arc, but they are more common and more likely to be preserved in extensional and neutral settings (A, B, and C). Hinterland basins may form in compressional arc-trench systems (D, E), or in collisional systems (F and Figure 1.6A–B). Remnant ocean basins form between any colliding crustal margins; a compressional arc-trench system is shown converging with an intraplate margin in (E). Wedgetop basins may form in any compressional setting; a proforeland example is shown in (F). If neutral continental arc-trench systems (C) become extensional, then they may evolve into extensional oceanic systems (A). Symbols same as in Figure 1.3; slab-generated melts = red.

Dickinson (1974a, 1974b), Ingersoll (1988), Ingersoll and Busby (1995) and Dorobek (2008) summarized tectonic settings and subsidence mechanisms of the diverse basin types related to arc-trench systems. Ingersoll and Busby (1995), and Smith and Landis (1995) also discussed construction and erosion of arc edifices that provide most sediment to neighboring basins.

The distinction of forearc, intra-arc, and backarc basins is not always clear. Intra-arc basins are defined as thick volcanic-volcaniclastic and other sedimentary accumulations along the arc platform, which is formed of overlapping or superposed volcanoes. The presence of vent-proximal volcanic rocks and related intrusions is critical to the recognition of intra-arc basins in the geologic record, since arc-derived volcaniclastic material may be spread into forearc, backarc, and other basins. A more general term, “arc massif,” refers to crust generated by arc magmatic processes (Dickinson, 1974a, 1974b), and arc crust may underlie a much broader region than the arc platform. The distinction of forearc and intra-arc basins is also discussed by Dickinson (1995). Many backarc basins form by rifting within the arc platform (Marsaglia, 1995), and were intra-arc basins in their early stages. Also, forearc, intra-arc and backarc settings change temporally and are superposed on each other due to both gradual evolution and sudden reorganization of arc-trench systems resulting from collisional events, plate reorganization, and changes in plate kinematics.

Trenches

Karig and Sharman (1975), Schweller and Kulm (1978), Thornburg and Kulm (1987), and Underwood and Moore (1995) summarized the dynamic nature of sedimentation and tectonics in active trenches (Fig. 1.4a). The sediment wedge of a trench is in dynamic equilibrium when subduction rate and angle, sediment thickness on the oceanic plate, rate of sedimentation, and distribution of sediment within the trench are constant. Thornburg and Kulm (1987) provided documentation of the dynamic interaction of longitudinally transported material (trench wedge with axial channel) and transversely fed material (trench fan). With increasing transverse supply of sediment to the trench, the axial channel of the trench wedge is forced seaward and the trench wedge widens. Contrasts in dynamic trench-fill processes help determine not only trench bathymetry and depositional systems, but also accretionary architecture (Thornburg and Kulm, 1987; Underwood and Moore, 1995). This dynamic model may be useful in reconstruction of sedimentary and tectonic processes in trenches, as expressed in ancient subduction complexes.

Scholl et al. (1980) developed conceptual models relating accretionary processes to subduction and sedimentary parameters that influence forearc and trench characteristics. Cloos and Shreve (1988a, 1988b) developed quantitative models for processes at greater depths in subduction zones, which affect the nature of deformation and metamorphism, and the overall character of forearcs. Reconstruction of sedimentary systems within the transient settings of ancient trenches is highly problematic because of difficulty of studying modern systems at such great water depths, contrast in scale of resolution between modern and ancient studies, and extreme structural deformation that occurs within subduction environments (Underwood and Moore, 1995). Nonetheless, advances in technology and continuing studies of modern and ancient systems are providing incremental improvements in our understanding of the sedimentary and tectonic systems (e.g., Maldonado et al., 1994; Mountney and Westbrook, 1996; Leverenz, 2000; Kopp and Kukowski, 2003).

Trench-slope Basins

Moore and Karig (1976) developed a model for sedimentation in small ponded basins along inner trench walls (Fig. 1.4b