Clifton, H. Edward1
(1) Consultant, Monterey, CA
ABSTRACT: A Re-Examination of Clastic Shoreface and Shelf Facies Models
Currently accepted depositional models of coastal and shelf facies derive 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
and shelf settings differ significantly from those in which many, if not most, ancient
coastal/shelf sediments accumulated. Second, input to a model from the rock record
commonly is specific to a particular tectonic and oceanographic setting and is not easily
exportable to other settings. This paper explores how these factors impact our
interpretive capability.
Many, if not most, ancient shelf and shoreface deposits accumulated under conditions of
progradation, a process relatively uncommon among the world’s present shorelines.
Instead, many modern post-glacial 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 coast
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.
AAPG Search and Discovery Article #90026©2004 AAPG Annual Meeting, Dallas, Texas, April 18-21, 2004.