High Frequency Eustatic and Siliciclastic Sedimentation Cycles in a Foreland Basin, Upper Devonian, Appalachian Basin

Filer, Jonathan K.

doi:10.2110/csp.94.04.0133

Cited by 8 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The suggested correlation is based on two tie-points. First, we correlate the major prograding 3rd-order HST that culminates with the Briery Gap Sandstone Member in outcrop (cycle 6 herein) with the upper part of cycle 7 in the subsurface; this agrees with the interpretation presented by Filer (1994Filer ( , 2002Filer ( , 2003. Second, the major 3rd-order TST comprising the uppermost Foreknobs Formation (cycle 12 herein) correlates with the lower Dunkirk Shale in the subsurface; this is consistent with the IVFs representing the major sea level fall at, or very close to, the Frasnian-Famennian boundary, followed by major transgression.…”

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasysupporting

confidence: 87%

“…Interestingly, we recognize the same number of 4th-order cycles as Filer (1994Filer ( , 2002Filer ( , 2003, and suggest that the 12 cycles recognized herein basically correlate with those of Filer as shown in Fig. 15.…”

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasysupporting

confidence: 69%

“…Our 4th-order cycles are more easily recognized in the middle to proximal facies belts where lithofacies contrasts are most obvious. In contrast, Filer (1994Filer ( , 2002Filer ( , 2003 recognized the cycles in the very distal parts of the ramp west of our study area, where well logs are more sensitive to subtle changes in shales making recognition of these cycles easier. In the shalier, western outcrops, the greater degree of covered sections further complicates confident identification of cycles, as opposed to continuous data from subsurface well logs.…”

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasymentioning

confidence: 73%

“…1), a time of major world-wide sea-level fall (Johnson et al, 1985;Haq and Schutter, 2008). Filer (1994) convincingly correlated the Foreknobs Formation with widespread black shale-gray shale cycles within the Upper Devonian of the Appalachian Basin, thus permitting reliable correlation with the New York state section (Rickard, 1975;Filer, 1994Filer, , 2002Ver Straeten, 2010). The Mallow Member of the Foreknobs Formation correlates to the upper part of the Rhinestreet Shale, whereas the uppermost portion of the Foreknobs Formation (upper Red Lick Member) correlates to the Dunkirk Shale (Rickard, 1975;Filer, 1994).…”

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Van Tassell (1987, Cotter and Driese (1998) and Filer (1994, 2003 attributed cyclicity in the Foreknobs Formation of northern West Virginia to Milankovitch cycles. Castle (2000) ascribed cyclicity in distal facies in Pennsylvania to a combination of eustasy and tectonics, however, he did not discuss more proximal facies, making estimates of sea-level amplitude difficult.…”

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Sequence stratigraphic hierarchy of the Upper Devonian Foreknobs Formation, central Appalachian Basin, USA: Evidence for transitional greenhouse to icehouse conditions

McClung

Eriksson

Terry

et al. 2013

Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe Foreknobs Formation (Upper Devonian; Upper Frasnian to basal Famennian) comprises the uppermost marine strata of the progradational "Catskill clastic wedge" of the south-central Appalachian Mountains (VirginiaWest Virginia; USA). The Foreknobs Formation consists of 14 lithofacies arranged in four facies associations which record the following depositional settings: 1) storm-dominated distal to proximal offshore to shoreface (facies association A); 2) sharp-based conglomeratic shoreface (facies association B); 3) fluvial redbed (facies association C); and 4) incised-valley fill (IVF; facies association D). Vertical juxtaposition and stacking patterns of lithofacies and facies associations permit recognition of a hierarchy of three scales of cyclicity. Up to 70 short-term 5th-order cycles, each averaging~65 kyr, consist of coarsening-upward parasequences of stormdominated offshore marine facies in the distal setting which correspond to high frequency (unconformity bound) sequences (HFS) of fluvial redbed strata overlain by offshore marine strata in the proximal setting. These facies relationships are a consequence of 10-15 m of sea-level fluctuations. Up to 12 intermediate-term 4th-order cycles, each averaging~375 kyr, consist of stacked 5th-order cycles. The 4th-order cycles are bounded by regressive surfaces of marine erosion (RSME) at the base of sharp-based conglomeratic shoreface sandstones in the distal setting that correspond with paleosols in the proximal setting. In some cases, the 5th-order cycles within each 4th-order cycle exhibit stacking patterns indicative of increasing or decreasing accommodation space. These facies relationships are a consequence of 25-35 m of sea-level fluctuations. Three complete and portions of two additional 3rd-order cycles, each averaging~1.12 Myr, consist of stacked 4th-order cycles. The 3rd-order sea-level trends reflected in the Foreknobs Formation are nearly identical to published eustatic sealevel curves. Incised-valley fills are present at one of the 3rd-order cycle boundaries and are a consequence of a 35-45 m sea-level fluctuation. The amplitudes of the inferred sea-level fluctuations are comparable to the expansion and contraction of ice volumes within the current Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets which suggests glacioeustasy was the primary control on sea-level fluctuations and cyclicity within the Foreknobs Formation. Such an interpretation is consistent with knowledge of Devonian climate, transitioning from Middle Devonian greenhouse to Late Devonian icehouse, as indicated by evidence of glaciation during parts of the Late Devonian in South America and the Appalachians.

show abstract

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasysupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasysupporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasymentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fourth-and Fifth-order: Glacioeustasymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Sequence stratigraphic hierarchy of the Upper Devonian Foreknobs Formation, central Appalachian Basin, USA: Evidence for transitional greenhouse to icehouse conditions

McClung

Eriksson

Terry

et al. 2013

Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Chapter 4 The Appalachian Foreland Basin in Eastern United States

Ettensohn¹

2008

Sedimentary Basins of the World

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Appalachian basin stratigraphic response to convergent‐margin structural evolution

Castle¹

2001

Basin Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From study of Palaeozoic formations in the Appalachian foreland basin, a predictive stratigraphic model is proposed based on facies tract development during convergent‐margin structural evolution. Five major facies tracts are recognized: shallow‐water carbonates that formed during interorogenic quiescence and initial foreland subsidence; deep‐water siliciclastics that accumulated in the proximal foreland basin during early collision; syn‐collisional shallow‐water siliciclastics; syn‐collisional, channellized fluvial sandstones that aggraded in the proximal foreland; and progradational shoreline sandstones that were deposited in response to filling of the proximal foreland. Two other facies tracts that occur are organic‐rich siliciclastics (‘black shales’), which accumulated in oxygen‐deficient areas of low clastic‐sediment influx, and incised valley‐fill deposits, which formed where subsidence rate was low. Because the origin of each facies tract is dependent upon a unique combination of rate of accommodation change and rate of sediment supply, facies tract distribution is predictable from spatial and temporal patterns of subsidence and uplift associated with plate convergence. Alternating phases of thrust loading and quiescence caused fluctuations between underfilled and overfilled conditions during Palaeozoic evolution of the Appalachian basin. Along‐strike variations in stratigraphic thickness, facies tract distribution, and development of unconformities in the Appalachian basin reflect the influence of structural irregularities along the collisional margin. In distal parts of the Appalachian foreland and in areas of structural recesses, eustatic influence on stratigraphic patterns is expressed more clearly than in areas of higher subsidence rate.

show abstract

High Frequency Eustatic and Siliciclastic Sedimentation Cycles in a Foreland Basin, Upper Devonian, Appalachian Basin

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Sequence stratigraphic hierarchy of the Upper Devonian Foreknobs Formation, central Appalachian Basin, USA: Evidence for transitional greenhouse to icehouse conditions

Sequence stratigraphic hierarchy of the Upper Devonian Foreknobs Formation, central Appalachian Basin, USA: Evidence for transitional greenhouse to icehouse conditions

Chapter 4 The Appalachian Foreland Basin in Eastern United States

Appalachian basin stratigraphic response to convergent‐margin structural evolution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About