Mass Transport

9-419

9 Deepwater-Reservoir Elements:Mass-Transport Deposits and Slides

Introduction

Slides and mass-transport-related materials constitute large volumes of sediments indeepwater settings. During the past decade, extensive interpretations of 3D seismic data, con-ducted by many companies, have indicated that such deposits are quite common along mostdeepwater margins. In some basins, individual depositional sequences in the upper Quaternarymay consist of more than 50% slides and/or deformed sediments. For example, in Basin 4 ofthe Brazos Trinity system in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, 50–60% of the pondedsequence is composed of mass–transport deposits (Beaubouef et al., 2003); in deepwater Bru-nei, such elements comprise 50% of the depositional sequences (McGilvery and Cook, 2003);offshore the Nile they average 50% of the depositional sequences, and in some areas, theyconstitute as much as 90% of the sequences (Newton et al., 2004); and offshore eastern Trin-idad they comprise 50% of the Quaternary depositional sequences (C. Shipp, personalcommunication, 2004).

Slides and mass-transport-related sediments are rarely primary reservoirs and are cer-tainly not primary exploration targets in siliciclastic settings. However, we review thesedeposits here because (1) they constitute important aspects of deepwater sediment fill, (2) theycan be important regional seals, and, most critically, (3) their distribution in the shallow sub-surface is an important factor that should be identified in any assessment of drilling hazardsand in geotechnical studies for exploration and development planning.

Specifically, the transportation and deformation of mass-transport deposits and slidesappear to cause water expulsion. As a consequence, these features commonly are overcom-pacted in the shallow subsurface (< 100 m; 330 feet), so that jetting or pile driving operationsthrough them can significantly decrease penetration rates (Shipp et al., 2004). With rig costs indeep water averaging $0.25 to 0.4 million/day, shorter drilling times are imperative. Theaccomplishment of shorter drilling times requires detailed study of these depositional features.In addition, for proper design of subsea infrastructure, it is important that we understand thedistribution of the upper tens of meters of sediments in the slope.

As we discussed in Chapter 1, the terms “mass-transport deposits (MTDs),” “mass-transport complexes (MTCes),” and “slide” will be used in the following ways in this chapter.MTD’s are defined as most deepwater features or stratigraphic intervals that have been resedi-mented (moved) since their time of original deposition. They commonly overlie an erosionalbase upfan, becoming mounded downfan, are externally mounded in shape, and pinch out lat-erally. Seismic facies vary from parallel, thrust, to rotated blocks, to chaotic to hummockyreflections with poor to fair continuity and variable amplitude (Figure 9-1). This term is prima-rily a seismic facies description. We specifically do not include turbidites (see Chapter 4). Inlarge part due to confusing terminology, MTDs include what is commonly termed slumps,slides, mass flows, debris flows, slope failure complexes, mass-transport complexes, andnumerous other terms.

Weimer (1989) used the term “mass-transport complexes” for those features that occurat the base of depositional sequences and are overlain and/or onlapped by channel and leveesediments (Figure 9-2). In its original usage, the term MTC had a clear sequence stratigraphicconnotation that was used to distinguish it from the generic term “slide.” More recently, theterm has been used in industry to describe any mass transport–related deposits. For this chap-ter, we use it in its original definition, meaning only those MTCs that have a clear sequencestratigraphic occurrence are called MTCs. In the following examples, we use the term as itwas originally used by each author.

Deepwater Reservoir Elements: Mass-Transport Deposits and Slides

9-420

Figure 9-1. Schematic figure illustrating the different facies present in mass-transport deposits.Deposits include slide blocks (rotated, glide, thrust), and areas of chaotic sediments, interpretedas debris flows. Individual glide blocks are present within a more deformed matrix. Modifiedfrom Prior et al. (1984).

Figure 9-2. Seismic profile across an upper Pleistocene sequence (ca. 0.5 Ma) in the Mississippi Fan, northerndeep Gulf of Mexico: (a) uninterpreted, (b) interpreted. Key elements are a mass-transport complex (MTC) atthe base, overlain by channel-fill and levee-overbank sediments. The MTC has an externally mounded form.Internal reflections are mounded, hummocky, and chaotic, with poor continuity, indicating poor reservoirpotential. The MTC overlies an erosional sequence boundary and laps out against the eroded portion of theunderlying sequence to the east and west. The top of the MTC is an irregular surface that has been eroded intoseveral channels (high-amplitude reflections). After Weimer (1990). Reprinted with permission of AAPG.

Glide Blocks

Debris Flows

ThrustBlocks

Outrunner Blocks

Escarpment

Rotated Blocks

Regional-Scale Characteristics

9-421

Jackson (1997) defined slides as “a mass movement or descent from failure of earth …or rock under shear stress along one or several surfaces…. the moving mass may or may not begreatly deformed, and movement may be rotational or planar.” Thus, we use the term slidewhen there is no sequence stratigraphic context. By contrast, we use the term mass-transportcomplex when the deposit clearly can be placed in a sequence stratigraphic context.

The terms turbidite and debris flow have been used in geoscience literature to describecertain aspects of MTDs and slides. Without integrating cores or borehole image logs throughthese deposits, however, we prefer to avoid using process-related terms such as debris flowand turbidite in describing such deposits, if they are primarily imaged on seismic data. Varioustypes of slides (rotated, glide, and thrust) usually are acceptable terms where the structural andstratal relationships can be determined (Figure 9-1). In general, there is a decrease in the strati-graphic order downslope in these features, which is expressed as a decrease in coherent slideblocks and an increase in hummocky to chaotic reflections. The exception is where thrustslides are present, which indicates localized contraction.

The purpose of this chapter is to review the characteristics of MTDs and slides as theyappear on the seafloor, seismic data, wireline logs, outcrops, cores, and borehole images. Webriefly review two petroleum-producing examples. In addition, we address the importance ofslides and MTDs in geotechnical studies. Unlike the reasons to study the reservoir elementswe described in Chapter 6 through Chapter 8, and Chapter 10, the primary reason to studyMTDs and slides is to avoid problems in drilling and subsea development. Finally, we brieflydiscuss the origins and sequence stratigraphic context of MTDs and slides. Those similar car-bonate features, debris aprons and related deposits, are described in Chapter 3 and Chapter 10.


The term MTD is a seismic-stratigraphic term that can only be applied to features largeenough to be imaged on volumetrically large seismic surveys. Such features are much largerthan those that can be imaged in outcrops, yet outcrops can be helpful in unraveling the inter-nal architecture of an MTD. There are three informal end-members for MTDs. (1) SomeMTDs develop in unconfined settings from open-slope failures and can be areally quite exten-sive and widespread; these are common in divergent margins with major deltas. (2) OtherMTDs develop from the failure of delta front or canyon walls, have extensive erosion at theirbase, and overlying sediment fill; these occur in both intraslope basins and in unconfined sys-tems. (3) Still other MTDs develop from local canyon wall failures with wedges in adjacentcanyons or intraslope basins.

Surficial images

The salient aspects of MTDs and slides are shown in Figures 9-1 and 9-3. In Figure 9-3,a prominent escarpment is present to the left, marking the updip edge of a major submarineslide. Within the slide mass (to the right) are distinct subparallel, elongate blocks, includingrotated and thrust blocks. These form “pressure ridges.” Farther to the right (west) is an area ofjumbled topography, reflecting disorganization of sediments within the MTD. Internal to anMTD, a series of discrete blocks may be present (Figure 9-3). An irregular bathymetry ispresent on the top of the slide and MTD.

Many lower-resolution images of the United States’ continental margins, based onGLORIA II side-scan sonar, show similar surficial features in the areas of MTDs and slides(Schwab et al., 1991). However, those studies lack the surficial resolution and the seismic pro-files of the 3D data sets.


9-422

Figure 9-3. High-angle oblique 3D perspective of the seafloor in the Brunei deepwater margin.Display is a maximum-amplitude extraction. The large slide to the east (left) is characterized byan updip escarpment and many elongate slide masses consisting of rotated and thrust slides.Pressure ridges are interpreted to mark where contraction and thrusting occurred. These masseshave subsequently been eroded and modified by currents. The MTC consists of an irregular,mounded surface. After McGilvery and Cook (2003). Reprinted with permission of the GulfCoast Section SEPM Foundation.

Seismic-stratigraphic and wireline-log expressions

As with all the other elements described in this book, resolution of the sedimentary pro-cesses of MTDs and slides is largely a function of seismic resolution. In older 2D seismic datawith lower frequencies (20–30 Hz), deposits that characterize MTDs and slides were com-monly described as “chaotic.” However, with increasing seismic resolution (55–70 Hzfrequencies), more detail can be observed within these deposits, which helps us to interprettheir depositional origin and processes.

Shape and size

The shape of MTDs and slides in plan view is quite variable. Generally, MTDs tend tobe slightly to considerably elongate downslope (Figures 9-3 to 9-9). The shape of the depositprobably reflects the size of the initial area that failed, the relative confinement of the basin,and the distance of downfan transportation. Slides with little downslope translation can beconsiderably longer in strike view than in dip view. In cross section, MTDs and slides areexternally mounded to wedge shaped (Figures 9-2, 9-5 through 9-9).

The area of slides and MTDs is also quite variable. In unconfined settings, they com-monly are 50–75 km (30-45 miles) across and more than 200 km (125 miles) in dip direction(Lee et al., 2004; Newton et al., 2004).


9-423

Figure 9-4. 3D RMS amplitude map of 50–100 ms below the seafloor, Brunei deepwater margin.A prominent MTD is present (darker gray) that widens to the north. Inset image is an enlarge-ment of the central part of the MTD. Several discrete blocks are present in the MTD. Locations ofFigures 9-10a and 9-10b are shown. After McGilvery and Cook (2003). Reprinted with permis-sion of the Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation.

Figure 9-5. Seismic profile across an uppermost Pleistocene MTD, offshore Trinidad. Severalthrust slides are present, indicating local contraction within the MTD. Vertical exaggeration isabout 10:1. After Brami et al. (2000). Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast Section SEPMFoundation.

Figure 7-10a

Figure 7-10b


9-424

Figure 9-7. Seismic profile across one intraslope minibasin, northern deep Gulf of Mexico. Theprofile shows three depositional sequences, which consist of alternating deepwater elements. Cha-otic reflections with poor continuity (MTC) overlie an erosional base, and are overlain by high-amplitude, laterally continuous reflections (in the lower, middle, and upper fan). These are inter-preted to be sand-rich sheet deposits in the lower and middle fan and channelized facies in theupper fan. Note that the MTCes lap out against the flanks of the basin. After Beauboeuf et al.(2003). Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation.

Figure 9-6. 3D seismic image ofan elongate MTC in the upper-most Pleistocene, offshore Trin-idad. Note the several linearfeatures indicating the locationof the thrust planes, the sharpedges of the MTC, and the over-lying channel. Mud volcanoesare also present along the seaf-loor. After Brami et al. (2000).Reprinted with permission of theGulf Coast Section SEPM Foun-dation.

Mud volcanoes

Internal thrusts

Overlying channel

MTC edge


9-425

Figure 9-8. 3D maximum-positive-amplitude maps of the basal surfaces of two separate MTDs inthe shallow subsurface, Brunei deepwater margin. (a) Updip, the MTD has a narrow, elongatetrend with sharp edges; this changes downdip to a more digitate pattern with sharp terminaledges. Flow direction was to the northwest. (b) The MTD has diverging, elongate features withsharp terminal edges. Flow direction was to the northeast. After McGilvery and Cook (2003).Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation.

Figure 9-9. Amplitude map and seismic profiles across a shallow MTC, Brunei deepwater margin. (a) 3D RMSamplitude map extracted 20–60 ms above the base of the shallow MTC (yellow to blue interval in profiles band c). The MTC consists of several features that were transported different distances downslope. (b) Dip-ori-ented seismic profile across a smaller MTC, illustrating a chaotic reflection updip that changes to possiblythrust slides downdip. The distinct, linear-thrust slides appear as the regularly spaced lineations in the map.(c) Regional, dip-oriented seismic profile across an elongate MTC, illustrating different internal facies andindividual deposits. After McGilvery and Cook (2003). Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast SectionSEPM Foundation.

a b

Chaotic Thrust Slides

MTC

a b

c

b

c


9-426

In contrast, they can be confined to one intraslope basin, as are some MTDs in the north-ern Gulf of Mexico that are probably 20–30 km2 (12-18 square miles) in area (Figure 9-7). Inunconfined basins, they can extend for thousands of square kilometers.

The thickness of an MTD can vary from five to hundreds of meters (e.g., Kowsmann etal., 2002; McGilvery and Cook, 2003; Lee et al., 2004; Newton et al., 2004). Larger andthicker complexes are associated with large, catastrophic failure of slope margins.

The upper surface of an MTD or slide is usually irregular, indicating the bathymetryafter the time of erosion (Figures 9-2, 9-3, 9-5, 9-9, 9-10). This surface then becomes filledwith whatever sediments are delivered to the basin. MTDs are generally overlain by channels,overbank, and possibly sheet sands (Chapter 6 through Chapter 8) (Figures 9-2, 9-6, 9-7). Inintraslope basins, there commonly are alternating series of ponded turbidite deposits withMTDs. After sediment loading of the filled intraslope basins, massive MTDs sourced from theflanks of the basin can fill the entire basin (Twichell et al., 2000). Slides can be overlain bychannels, levees, or hemipelagic sediments (Figures 9-3, 9-9 to 9-11). Thus, the upper surfaceof MTDs and slides is often altered by channel systems and bottom currents.

Figure 9-10. Dip-oriented seismic profiles across two portions of one MTD, deepwater Brunei. See Figure 9-4for location of profiles. (a) Updip profile illustrates (1) high-amplitude, basal reflection of the MTD thatextends across the truncated fold, (2) chaotic reflections internal to the MTD, and (3) irregular bathymetrycreated from the MTD. Note the extreme vertical exaggeration of the profile (about 20X). (b) Downdip seismicprofile illustrates (1) gently dipping basal surface of detachment, (2) the alternating facies from high-ampli-tude, irregularly bedded reflections (slide blocks) and low-amplitude chaotic reflections, and (3) irregularbathymetry caused by pelagic drape over the slide blocks that were transported within the MTD. The pink barat the left of the profile indicates the extraction interval for the amplitude map in Figure 9-4. After McGilveryand Cook (2003). Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation.

Chaotic

Slide Blocks

a

b

1

32

Mass-transport deposit


9-427

Figure 9-11. Seismic profiles across a shallow MTC (“debris-flow sheet”) in the upper Pleistocene, Makassar

Straits, deepwater Indonesia. The MTC is externally mounded and overlies an irregular, erosional surface.

The internal reflections are chaotic, hummocky, and possibly mounded, with poor continuity. Locations of the

profiles are shown in Figure 9-12. After Posamentier et al. (2000). Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast

Section SEPM Foundation.

The basal surface of an MTD is quite variable. The surface may (1) be planar, with little

to no apparent erosion (Figures 9-5, 9-7, 9-10b), (2) have considerable erosional relief, result-

ing from removal of as much as 200 m (655 feet) of the underlying sediment (Figures 9-2, 9-9)

(Weimer, 1990), or (3) have a distinct stair-step profile of erosion, where one slide has a hori-

zontal décollement and then cuts down through the stratigraphic section to an underlying

horizontal décollement. On 3D seismic, the basal surfaces can be characterized by common

groove scours of various widths and distances (Figures 9-4, 9-12, 9-13) (Posamentier et al.,

2000; McGilvery and Cook, 2003; Newton et al., 2004). These lineations suggest that blocks

or individual clasts are being transported in the flows.

SSW

SSW NNE

50 msec one kmone km

Line 1

Line 2

MTC

Erosional BaseMTC

Erosional Base

Erosional Base


9-428

Edge relations

The updip extent of slides and MTDs is marked by one or several steeply dipping mastersurfaces that form the head scarp and reflect the updip extension (Figure 9-3). These surfacesflatten at depth and become the décollement or glide plane for the MTD or slide. In caseswhere there has been considerable downslope transportation of sediment, it may be impossibleto trace the slide or MTD back to the original updip failure surface.

The lateral edges of slides and MTDs vary from abrupt to gradational. An MTD com-monly overlies an erosional surface, and its sediments onlap against the lateral edge of theerosional container (Figures 9-2 to 9-4, 9-8, 9-9). In some basins, the MTD onlaps onto aregional surface (Figure 9-7). Local contraction, as indicated by thrust slides, is also commonat the edges of MTDs (Figures 9-5, 9-6).

Figure 9-12. Azimuth map of the reflection atthe base of the MTC shown in Figure 9-11.Note the distinct grooves and striation marksacross which the MTC has been transported.One groove is 30 m deep, 1 km wide, and 20 kmlong. Locations of the profiles in Figure 9-11are shown. After Posamentier et al. (2000).Reprinted with permission of the Gulf CoastSection SEPM Foundation.

1

2

one km


9-429

The nature of the downdip termination of an MTD or slide is variable. (1) Where theslide or MTD is transported on a smooth surface, it appears to stop in place, and debris flowsmay form at the end. (2) Where the slide or MTD runs onto a local slope, it ends in a series ofimbricate toe thrusts. (3) Where the deformed sediment (fold) loses fluids, pressure ridges mayform wherever there is no local contraction to create thrusting.

Internal reflections

The seismic-stratigraphic expression of slides and MTDs varies greatly, reflecting thevariability in the kinds of deposits and in their internal stratigraphy. At least four reflectionpatterns are common. (1) Rotated or glide blocks, where the original stratigraphy is preserved,are areas of extension and lateral translation of the blocks (Figures 9-3, 9-10, 9-14, 9-15,9-16). In 3D, these features tend to have elongate blocks; pressure ridges can develop perpen-dicularly to the direction of flow (Figure 9-3). In a few places, outrunner blocks can extend inform of the largely deformed MTD (Figure 9-1). (2) Thrust blocks, where some of the originalstratigraphy is preserved, reflect the ongoing contraction within the deformation (Figures 9-3,9-5, 9-6). (3) Chaotic reflections (Figures 9-3, 9-4, 9-9, 9-10, 9-15) can occur anywhere withinthe slide or MTD, but they generally occur in the downslope portion of the feature, often

Figure 9-13. (a) Three successive seismicprofiles across a shallow MTC (“debrisflow”) in the upper Pleistocene, MakassarStraits, deepwater Indonesia. Locations ofthe profiles are shown in (c). (b) Seismictime slice across the linear channel at thebase of an MTD. (c) Azimuth map of thereflection at the base of the MTD. Note (1)the sharp lateral edges of the MTD, (2) thedistinct striations and grooves indicatingthe direction of sediment transport, and(3) the grooves diverging down fan. AfterPosamentier et al. (2000). Reprinted withpermission of the Gulf Coast SectionSEPM Foundation.

1

2

one km

one km

B)

one kmHorizon Slice

A)

one kmHorizon Slice

A)

one km

100 msec

1 2

3

a

c

b


9-430

between glide blocks. The mottled appearance on an amplitude extraction map is a characteris-tic seismic facies of an MTD (Figure 9-4); this facies does not really appear in other deepwaterdepositional settings.

A large sediment failure (about 3500 km2)(2100 square miles) in the lower slope of theLower Cretaceous Torok Formation of northern Alaska illustrates the progressive change indeformation within one major slide (Figures 9-17, 9-18). Several distinct zones of deformationcan be observed, viewing from updip to downdip (Weimer, 1987; Homza, 2004). Near theupdip failure, a zone is present that consists of rotated slides, laterally transported slides, andthrust slides. Farther downdip, the deformed strata change to more mounded and chaoticreflections on 2D seismic data.

Commonly, MTDs and slides deform along a zone of inherent mechanical weakness.These décollements can have different lithologies. Doyle et al. (1992) and Dixon and Weimer(1998) noted that the décollements for many late Pleistocene slides in the northern deep Gulfof Mexico occur within, or on top of, condensed sections associated with relative highstands insea level. Condensed sections appear to be weak geotechnical units; this weakness may havebeen caused by a diagenetic fabric with burrows in the foraminiferal oozes. In other basins, thecondensed section has a combination of high clay content, water content, gas content gener-ated from organic debris causing local overpressuring. In the example of the LowerCretaceous slides in northern Alaska, two décollements have been identified (Weimer, 1987;Homza, 2004). The shallower is an organic-rich shale (with 2–6% organic matter), and thedeeper zone is a shale-rich layer, about 300 ft (90 m) lower in the stratigraphic section.

Figure 9-14. Seismic profile across the lower Paleocene strata, offshore Morocco. Seismic profileis flattened on the base Tertiary unconformity and illustrates the irregular relief associated withindividual slide blocks. Note that the original stratigraphy is largely preserved within the glideblocks, and the onlapping and draping reflections between the glide blocks. After Lee et al.,(2004). Reprinted with permission of OTC and Lee et al.

3.1

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.2

Base Tertiary Unconformity

2 km

Tw

o-W

ay T

ravel T

ime (

sec)


9-431

Figure 9-15. Seismic profile across the lower Paleocene strata, offshore Morocco, illustrating anindividual slide block with original stratigraphy preserved that overlyeis and is encased in chaoticreflections. See Figure 9-16 for semblance slide through this interval. After Lee et al., (2004).Reprinted with permission of OTC and Charles Lee et al.

Figure 9-16. Flattened semblance slice of lower Paleocene strata, offshore Morocco, illustratingseveral discrete slide blocks within areas of less continuity (more chaotic to discontinuous reflec-tions in Figure 9-15). After Lee et al., (2004). Reprinted with permission of OTC, Charles Lee andLee et al.

3.0

3.8

3.6

3.2

3.4Tw

o-W

ay

Tra

ve

l T

ime

(s

ec

)

S N

Transported Block

2 km

N

2 km


9-432

Figure 9-17. Plan-view images of the Lower Cretaceous Fish Creek slide, northern Alaska. (a)Two-way time map of the top Sag River horizon (see Figure 9-18) superposed with coherencydata. Lines A-A' and B-B' mark the position of shear zones in the slide blocks. Location ofFigure 9-18 is shown. (b) Time slice through the Fish Creek slide illustrates the transition fromorganized slides to disorganized slides. Discrete rotated, translated, and thrust slides are noted bythe linear trend of the blocks. The western (updip) edge of the slide is an abrupt escarpment. (c)Schematic reconstruction of the slide blocks. Average extension is estimated to be 65%, with aclockwise rotation of the slide of 10%. After Homza (2004). Reprinted with permission of AAPGand Tom Homza.

Wireline-log to seismic response

The lithologies of slides and MTDs reflect the nature of the sediments that are beingdeformed. In general, these deposits have a high percentage of shale. MTDs and slides are rou-tinely penetrated during drilling in deepwater, especially in the shallow section. Commonly,logs are not run in this part of the section; thus, few good published examples of MTDs exist.We show five examples here that illustrate MTDs and slides of different scales.

1. MTD deposits were cored at five sites in ODP Leg 155 in the Amazon Fan (Piper et al.,1997). Wireline logs (and cores) showed dominantly clay-rich intervals (Figure 9-19).Importantly, the dipmeter logs indicated a wide range in the dips of the beds, corre-sponding to the many directions of dip in the deformed beds (Figure 9-20a). Thus, dip-meter logs can play a significant role in an evaluation of the presence of MTDs and

3

a

bb

cc

cc

10 mi10 miA

BB

BB

AA

AA

BB

B

A

Escarpment fixedEscarpment fixed

1

2

45

Fig. 7-18

6

1

2

45

6

3

Org

aniz

ed

slid

ezo

ne

Dis

-org

aniz

ed

slid

ezo

ne

cc

cc

Rollover

10 mi10 mi

3

1

2

45

6

Blocks 3 & 4

Escarpment

cc

Antiformal stack

a

b

c


9-433

slides, especially in deeper sections where the features may be beneath the limit of seis-mic resolution.

2. In offshore Angola, Sikkema and Wocjik (2000) presented an example of a shale-richMTD at the base of a depositional sequence that laps out against the sides of the basin(Figures 9-21, 9-22). The MTD is overlain by amalgamated channels, which in turn areoverlain by aggradational channel-levee systems.

3. In the northern deep Gulf of Mexico, a significant MTD overlies the middle Miocenereservoir interval in the Thunder Horse discovery (Figures 9-23, 9-24) (Lapinski, 2003).A package of chaotic-to-mounded reflections overlies the reservoir interval. Two wellsthat penetrate the MTD indicate that it consists dominantly of shale. The MTD is not theseal for this reservoir, as a condensed section separates the reservoir from the MTD.

4. In the Lower Cretaceous Fish Creek slide of northern Alaska (Figures 9-17, 9-18), sev-eral wells have penetrated the lower-slope strata of the Torok Formation. The unde-formed lower-slope strata consist primarily of shale, with minor siltstones andsandstones. The deformed strata in the Fish Creek slide also have the same strata(Figure 9-18).

5. In the northwestern Gulf of Mexico Basin, several areas of major erosional embaymentsin the Cenozoic slope systems have been described (e.g., Morton, 1993; Edwards, 2000)(Figure 9-25a). In the upper slope of the lower Eocene Wilcox Formation in southernTexas, extensive slides formed in association with the catastrophic failure of the margin(Figure 9-25b). Edwards (2000) noted that the rotated slide blocks consist of deltaicstrata from the undeformed updip section.

Figure 9-18. Seismic profile across the Lower Cre-taceous Fish Creek slide, northern Alaska. (a)Unflattened time profile and (b) profile flattened onthe underlying Sag River reflection. Note the sharpupslope edge of the slide. Several facies are present:rotated and glide slide blocks (parallel facies) andonlap fill (low-amplitude, transparent facies)between the slide blocks. The slide is overlain by theprograding clinoforms of the Torok Formationslope. A time-based gamma-ray log from the WestFish Creek well indicates that the slide and overly-ing clinoform deposits are primarily shale. Theirregular distribution of the reflections underlyingthe slide in (a) are caused by velocity pushdownsresulting from the absence of a low-velocity shale atthe base of the slide. Location of the time sliceshown in Figure 9-17 is shown. After Homza (2004).Reprinted with permission of AAPG and TomHomza.

(A)

(B)


9-434

Figure 9-19. Core summaries, and gamma-ray, resistivity, and velocity logs from ODP Leg 155 Sites 935A, 936A, and 944A from one MTD, Amazon Fan.The sites move from updip (935) to downdip (944). Each site is about 25–30 km from its neighbors. Note the overall fine-grained nature of the deposits,although some thick sands are present in site 944A. Base and top of the MTD are shown by the arrows. After Piper et al. (1997).


9-435

Figure 9-20. Dip azimuth plots through an MTD and slide block. (a) Plot of Site 933A, ODP Leg 155, AmazonFan. Note the relatively low dips in the overlying channel-fill sediments and in the underlying levee sediments,and the higher and somewhat random dips within the MTD (labeled BMDT) (99 to 154 ft [30 to 47 m]). AfterPiper et al. (1997). (b) Well in the lower Oligocene Hackberry slide block, southern Louisiana. Note the sharpincrease in dip at 7510 ft (2290 m), corresponding to penetration of a rotated slide block (labeled unconfor-mity). See Figure 9-34 for summary of the play. After Cossey and Jacobs (1992). Reprinted with permission ofthe AAPG.

ab


9-436

Figure 9-21. Seismic profile from Block 16, offshore Angola. The highlighted sequence consists of an MTD (labeled “sandy debrite”) at the base, consist-ing of low-amplitude chaotic, mounded, and hummocky reflections overlain by amalgamated channelized and channel-levee systems. The MTD laps outagainst the flanks of the basin. See Figure 9-22 for a representative well through this interval. After Sikkema and Wojcik (2000). Reprinted with permis-sion of the Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation.


9-437

Figure 9-22. Wireline log through one deepwater sequence, Block 16, Angola. The base of thesequence consists of fine-grained sediments, corresponding to the MTD at the base of thesequence. Overlying sediments consist of channelized systems (sandy debrite, amalgamated chan-nel-fill sands). See Figure 9-21 for the representative sequence on a seismic profile. After Sikkemaand Wojcik (2000). Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast Section SEPM Foundation.


9-438

Figure 9-23. Seismic profile across the southern portion of the Thunder Horse field, northerndeep Gulf of Mexico. Profile is flattened on the 13.05 Ma horizon, illustrating the turtle structure(external mound) over the Thunder Horse field area. Strata onlap (red arrows) the turtle struc-ture on the 14.35-Ma horizon (light green). An MTC (chaotic reflections) is present between the14.35-Ma and 13.05-Ma horizons. Inset map shows the location of the seismic profile, two wells inFigure 9-24, and an outline of shallow allochthonous salt (black line). After Lapinski (2003).Reprinted with permission of Todd Lapinski.

Development-Scale Characteristics

MTDs and slides imaged in the subsurface are considerably larger (by 3–4 orders ofmagnitude) than similar features exposed in outcrops or in what is traditionally collected inone core barrel or seen on an image log. Consequently, any studies of MTDs or slides are lim-ited to the small areas of exposures in outcrop and in subsurface-development data sets.

Outcrop characteristics

Table 9-1 summarizes some of the better-exposed mass-transport and slide deposits in thegeologic literature, and Figure 9-26 shows their locations. The table focuses on outcrops withgood lateral exposure, where the slides are interbedded with other deepwater elements. The tableis not a comprehensive list, because many deepwater outcrops contain slides at some scale.

2 mi0

-2.0

-1.0

0

EWT

wo

Wa

y T

rave

l Tim

e (s

ec)

2.0

NN

Scale

3 mi3 mi

24 Ma

11.4 Ma

MTC

14.35 Ma

1.0

9.0 Ma

10.75 Ma

822

778


9-439

Figure 9-24. Wireline logs for Mississippi Canyon 778 and 822 wells, Thunder Horse discovery, northern deepGulf of Mexico. Both wells penetrated the MTC shown in Figure 9-23. (a) In the MC 778 well, the MTC(20,300–21,800 ft [6190–6640 m]) consists primarily of shale with discrete zones of interbedded sands (21,400–21,700 ft [6520 –6610 m], 20,700–20,850 ft [6310–6360 m]). (b) The MTC in the MC 822 well is dominantlyshale, with a few zones of sands. See Figure 9-23 for locations of wells. After Lapinski (2003). Reprinted withpermission of Todd Lapinski.

In outcrop, slides consist of folded and deformed beds (Figures 9-26 to 9-29). Where theoriginal stratigraphy is preserved, detailed structural measurements can be taken to helpunravel the history of an individual slide (e.g., Kleverlaan, 1987; Strachan, 2002) and place itwithin a larger stratigraphic context.

Core expression and image log

Small slides, at the scale of centimeters to several meters, are common in cores andimage logs from levees and channel-fill reservoirs. The thickness of the features reviewed inthis chapter is greater than one core barrel (60 ft [9 m]). Because slides and MTDs are rarelyreservoirs, development geoscientists generally do not want to core them or retrieve imagelogs from them. Consequently, there are few examples in the literature of cores through MTDsor slides.

Fortunately, ODP Leg 155 cored two MTDs at five sites in the Amazon Fan: sites 931,933, 935, 936, and 944 (Piper et al., 1997). These cores recovered primarily clays that hadextensive deformation and dipping beds and contained blocks of varying sizes (Figure 9-30).Five basic facies were described in the cores: (1) uniform mud with large blocks, (2) variable

a b


9-440

Figure 9-25. (a) Map of the northwestern Gulf of Mexico Basin, showing the distribution of some erosional embayments caused by retrogressive failure offailed shelf margins: middle Wilcox (upper Paleocene), Yegua/Cook Mountain (upper Eocene), Hackberry (middle Oligocene), Abbeville (lowerMiocene), and several Neogene features of the current Texas continental shelf.

a


9-441

Figure 9-25. (b) Dip-oriented wireline-log cross section through the middle Wilcox Formation in south Texas, illustrating how the updip stratigraphy is trans-lated downdip in a series of rotated slide blocks. After Edwards (2000). Reprinted with permission of the Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies.

b


9-442

mud with inferred meter-size blocks, (3) abundant centimeter- to decimeter-size blocks, (4)sand and silt mud, and (5) contorted mud with silty laminae. Many MTDs with surficialexpression in modern deepwater systems have been studied with shallow penetration cores(< 5 m; 16.5 feet); similar facies have been recorded in the cores (Nelson and Nilsen, 1984).

Image logs through these features show the internal structures associated with slides andMTDs (Figure 9-31): highly deformed beds, floating clasts within debris flows, and abrupt contacts.

Examples of MTDs and Slides as Reservoirs, Seals, and Source Rocks

Slides generally are not considered to be good reservoirs, and certainly they are rarelyprimary exploration targets. Their extensive deformation tends to disrupt bed continuity, andthe abundant amount of clay tends to destroy porosity and permeability. Where the stratig-raphy of an individual slide block is preserved, multiple wells may be necessary to develop it.Our experiences indicate that many basins globally have a field that produces from MTD/slidedeposit. The fields consisted of one or two wells. Few of these examples have been cited ordescribed in any detail in the literature, so they are not included here. The point is that these

Table 9-1. Outcrops with significant mass transport deposits, in terms of thickness and areal extent.

Outcrop (location) Formation Age References

1. Brooks Range (northern Alaska, U.S.A.)

Torok Lower CretaceousHouseknecht and Schenk (2006)

2. Northwestern British Columbia, Canada

Isaac Formation,Kaza Group

Upper ProterozoicGammon et al. (2006), Meyer and Ross (2006)

3. Pt. Lobos, central Califor-nia, U.S.A.

Carmelo Paleocene Clifton (2006)

4. Delaware Mountains (western Texas, U.S.A.)

Cutoff Permian King (1948)

5. Ouachita Mountains (central Arkansas, U.S.A.)

Jackfork Pennsylvanian Slatt et al. (2000)

6. Baja California, Mexico, Rosario Upper Cretaceous Dykstra and Kneller (2006)

7. eastern Mexico Chicontepec Cenozoic Cossey (2006)

8. southern Chile Tres Pasos Upper Cretaceous Romans et al. (2006)

9. Quebrada de la Lajas, Argentina

Jejienes Carboniferous Dykstra et al. (2006)

10. Western Ireland (County Clare)

Ross Upper Carboniferous Strachan (2002)

11. Peira Cava, southern France

Gres D’Annot Eocene-OligoceneBouroullec et al. (2004)Amy et al. (2006)

12. Ainsa Basin, northern Spain

Santa Liestra, Campodarbe Groups

Eocene Pickering and Corregidor (2005)

13. Tabernas (southern Spain) Gordo Megabed Miocene Kleverlaan (1987)

14. Karoo, South AfricaVischkuil Formation

Permian Flint et al. (2006)

15. New Zealand, western North Island

Mt. Messenger Miocene King et al. (2006)


9-443

Figure 9-26. Map showing location of outcrops of mass transport deposits (orange dots) and producing fields (yellow dots) discussed in the text. The num-bered outcrops correspond to those numbered in Table 9-1.

Outcrop Examples

F ield Examples

(11) France

(5) CentralArkansas

Statfjord

(14) South Africa

(13) Southern Spain

(15) NewZealand

Alaska(1)

(4) West Texas

(3) California

(2) British Columbia(10) Western Ireland

(6) Mexico(7) Mexico

(8) Chile

(9) Argentina

Hackberry

(12) Northern Spain


9-444

Figure 9-27. Photograph of a major slide complex in the Lower Permian Cutoff Formation, Dela-ware Mountains, west Texas. The interval consists of mixed carbonate sands and mudstonesdeformed into a series of recumbent folds. The interval is overlain by gently dipping strata of theupper Cutoff Formation.

Figure 9-28. Photograph of the Upper Carboniferous Ross slide, western Ireland. The slide con-sists of a series of folded shale beds, overlain by flat-lying channel-fill strata. A prominent sand-stone injection feature is present in the middle of the photograph. Strachan (2002) described theRoss slide in detail.


9-445

Figure 9-29. Photograph of the upper Miocene Gordo megabed, Tabernas Basin, southern Spain.Strata are deformed into a series of folds and are overlain by gently dipping channel-fill strata.Kleverlaan (1987) described the feature in detail.

Figure 9-30. Photograph of cores from anMTD, ODP Leg 155, Amazon Fan. (a)Folded sediments that are the result ofdrilling deformation; (b) highly biotur-bated sandy interval that corresponds toa large, transported block; (c) deformedlaminations resulting from rotationwithin blocks, and (d) a series of smallfaults in a laminated mud clast. AfterPiper et al. (1997).

a

d

c

b


9-446

Figure 9-31. Borehole-image log from an MTD cored at ODP Leg 155 Site 944A. Images indicateabrupt changes in grain size and dip azimuth and show the floating clasts. After Piper et al.(1997).

features are productive of petroleum, but are rarely key targets. A few examples of reservoirsin deepwater carbonate debris aprons are included in Chapter 3 and Chapter 10. Slides blocksin chalk facies are also reviewed in Chapter 10. Here, we review two examples of fields thatproduce from slides, and briefly describe their potential as seals and source rocks.

The Statfjord field in the northern Viking Graben of the North Sea produces from Mid-dle Jurassic fluvial sandstones that have been deformed by a Late Jurassic rifting(Figures 9-32a, 9-32b, and 9-33) (Hesthammer and Fossen, 1999). At the crest of the structure,a series of slide blocks formed that translated the original reservoir sands downdip to the east.These sands produce petroleum because the original stratigraphy of the slide block has beenlargely preserved. Deformation is interpreted to have occurred during and after rifting, whenthe rotated fault blocks had subsided to greater water depths.


9-447

Figure 9-32. (b) Seismic profile across the eastern flank of the Stafjord field, illustrating rotatedslide blocks in the Statfjord and Hegre Groups. See Figure 9-33 for evolution of the structure.After Hesthammer and Fossen (1999). Reprinted with permission of Elsevier.

Figure 9-32. (a) 3D image of the top Statfjord Formation,Statfjord field, Viking Graben, North Sea. Red is shallowdepths and green is the deeper depths. Image is illuminatedfrom the west. Black indicates where the formation is miss-ing because of slides. Bright colors indicate a dip to thenorthwest, and darker colors indicate a southeasterly dip.Red circles mark where wells have penetrated the detach-ment surface.

a

b


9-448

Figure 9-33. Schematic cross sections across the crest of the Statfjord field, illustrating the sequential develop-ment of the slides at the crest of the structure. (a) Localized slides developed initially on the crest within theBrent group. (b–c) With fault activation, deformation extended to a deeper stratigraphic level (DunlinGroup). (d–f) With continued movement of the fault, deformation extended to a deeper stratigraphic level(Statfjord Formation). After Hesthammer and Fossen (1999). Reprinted with permission of Elsevier.

A massive failure of the lower slope of the middle Oligocene Hackberry Formation ofthe Gulf Coast of Louisiana also has some small producing fields. Two elements there are jux-taposed: rotated slide blocks and channel-fill sediments that infilled the bathymetric lows thatwere created by the slides on the slope (Figure 9-34) (DiMarco and Shipp, 1991; Cossey andJacobs, 1992). During the past few years, several small fields with 40- to 80-acre spacing andwith one or two wells produce from the top of these slide blocks. The tops of individual slideblocks have prominent amplitude expressions on seismic data. No production has been estab-lished in the channel-fill facies.

MTDs have the potential of being seals for deepwater reservoirs with the high clay con-tent. Recent discoveries in offshore Malaysia (Sabah) in northwestern Borneo indicate thatMTDs are both top seals and lateral seals to some of the reservoirs. At the Kikeh and Gumusutfields, the MTDs overlying the reservoir may have originated from the overlying sequence orwithin the same sequence. Where channels have eroded into a MTD creating an irregular sur-face with bathymetric relief, the MTD may act as a lateral seal for the incised reservoir. In thefuture, we can expect that more fields will be discovered where MTDs are the seals.

Finally, it is quite possible that MTDs are one mechanism for the transportation of largevolumes of land-derived organic material into deepwater that then serve as source rocks(Chapter 2 and Chapter 16). Some outcrop studies in Borneo indicate that some MTDs havehigh organic content (P. Crevello, personal communication, 2004). Whether large enough vol-umes of fluids can be generated and expulsed from organic-rich MTDs for reservoirs remainsto be proven.


9-449

Figure 9-34. Wireline cross section across the lower Oligocene Hackberry slide blocks, southern Louisiana, Gulf Coast, U.S.A. Several small fields pro-duce from sandstones in the top of individual slide blocks. Channel-fill strata, which onlap and overlie the slide blocks, do not produce petroleum. AfterCossey and Jacobs (1992). Reprinted with permission of the AAPG.

-

0 3000

feet


9-450

The Role of MTDs and Slides in Drilling-Hazard Assessment and Geotechnical Studies

During the past decade, companies have increasingly used 3D seismic data for drilling-hazard assessment and geotechnical studies to plan exploration and development. These dataare used to study shallow-flow problems (overpressured shallow sand bodies), to plan drillingpaths, and to locate pipelines. Thus, for economic reasons, it is quite important to understandthe distribution of slides and MTD deposits in the shallow subsurface. The first problem, shal-low flow, is briefly summarized in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6. We discuss the two latterproblems here.

Shipp et al. (2004) reviewed several deepwater margins where drilling through MTDs inthe shallow subsurface (50–100 m below the seafloor) caused a significant increase in drillingtime because of geotechnical aspects of the MTD. They concluded the following. (1) There aredifferences in degree of consolidation between MTDs and the over- and underlying parallel-bedded hemipelagic sediments. (2) Quantitative evidence indicates that MTDs are slightlyoverconsolidated in relation to the overlying and underlying sediments. Water content of anMTD is 15 to 20% lower than that of the overlying and underlying sediments (Piper et al.,1997). This lower value in water content (because of overcompaction) is caused by the expul-sion of water during the deformation associated with MTDs and slides. (3) The increasedconsolidation in MTDs should be factored into well planning for the surface-conductor inter-val during drilling operations and for jetting operations during development drilling.

For near-surface drilling or jetting operations in deepwater settings, Shipp et al. (2004)recommended that (1) both the distribution of sediment and environment of deposition beunderstood prior to drilling, (2) the surface location be selected after considering the impact ofthe environment of deposition, and (3) the length of surface conductor casing be designed withenvironment of deposition in mind (e.g., shorter length of pipe for more-consolidatedsediments).

Seafloor instability is a major problem for pipeline design and location (Kaluza et al.,2004). Prior to the establishment of a pipeline, seafloor studies are routinely undertaken to (1)ascertain if there is any recent sediment movement along the seafloor that can cause pipelinedeformation or rupture, and (2) study the subsidence of sediments that drape areas of any massmovement. Typically, a smooth seafloor will consist of late Pleistocene MTDs and slides thatare draped by Holocene sediments varying in thickness from two to tens of meters. Thesehemipelagic sediments can subside differentially across the underlying MTD, thus causingpotential engineering problems. Such problems can be addressed by using the appropriate rel-ative stoutness or flexibility of pipe and by building bridges for the pipes across thesepotentially problematic areas (an extremely expensive proposition).

Origins of MTDs and Slides

MTDs and slides form from multiple processes. This subject is largely academic,because we are incapable of observing when and how these features form. Consequently, wemust speculate about their origin and be cognizant that we do not have all the answers yet.

Several publications summarize the causal mechanisms for slides and MTDs (e.g.,Schwab et al., 1991, Morton, 1993; Hampton et al., 1996; Hesthammer and Fossen, 1999;Locat and Mienert, 2003; Marine Geology, 2004). Ultimately, however, the basic cause of allmass movement is overpressured sediment that deforms to reduce the pressure, and the pres-ence of a potentially weak surface of deformation. Several general causes have been cited.

1. Rapid sedimentation has been described as causing slides in many different settings,especially in deltaic settings (Coleman et al., 1983).

Sequence Stratigraphic Occurrence of MTDs and Slides

9-451

2. The formation of submarine canyons from retrogressive slides can contribute the bulk ofthe sediments in MTDs (Goodwin and Prior, 1989; Weimer, 1990).

3. Piper et al. (1997) suggested that the origins of the MTDs studied in the Amazon Fanwere associated with gas-hydrate decompression and sublimation. More recently, thistopic has drawn considerable attention in the geologic literature for causes of slides andpotential causes of abrupt climatic changes.

4. Earthquakes have been cited for generating slides in many places. A magnitude 6.8earthquake in Algeria on May 21, 2003, generated large mass-movement flows on thecontinental slope, thereby causing 60 cable breaks on the slope. The Grand Banks Earth-quake of 1929 is also commonly cited as having induced a slide (Heezen and Ewing,1952; Piper et al., 1988). In both examples, the timing of the earthquake and the cablebreaks indicates that the mass flows were generated in association with the earthquake.

5. Deep ocean currents have been suggested as a cause for some slides (Embley, 1982).Currents are interpreted to have eroded sediments at the base of the continental slope,thereby causing oversteepening and deformation.

6. Meteorite impacts are rare but have been interpreted to cause major slides. Examplesinclude the end-Cretaceous Chicxulub impact in Mexico (Grajales-Nishimura et al.,2000) and the Early Cretaceous Avak impact of northern Alaska (Kirschner et al., 1992;Homza, 2004).

Sequence Stratigraphic Occurrence of MTDs and Slides

As we stated in the definitions of MTDs and slides at the beginning of this chapter, someof these features definitely develop within certain positions in a sequence stratigraphic frame-work (allocyclic control), whereas others clearly do not (autocyclic control). Where theyclearly fit into a sequence stratigraphic framework, they have been called “mass-transportcomplex” (MTC) (Weimer, 1989, 1990).

MTCs appear to have an allocyclic control on the timing of their sedimentation. Thisinterpretation is largely based on their stratigraphic position and occurrence within one deposi-tional sequence. The key observations are that (1) the MTCs overlie an erosional surface, (2)this surface erodes the condensed section interpreted to have been deposited during relativehighstands in sea level, (3) the MTC is overlain by channel-fill, levee-overbank, and sheet sed-iments, (4) the MTC can be traced to an updip submarine canyon from which it originated, and(5) canyon formation is interpreted to have occurred during relative lowering of sea level(Figure 9-2). Thus, MTCes are considered to be a part of the early lowstand systems tract in asequence stratigraphic framework (Chapter 3).

Some slides occur within the overbank sediments of one depositional sequence(Chapter 7). The slides may be local in origin, or they may have been transported from ups-lope. Because these slides do not occur at the base of a depositional sequence, they areinterpreted to have formed as the result of autocyclic processes, such as deformation fromoverpressured sediments.

However, the timing of most slides is extremely difficult to determine. Some clearlyhave formed during relative highstands in sea level (TST and HST), whereas the timing of oth-ers—especially older, buried ones—is impossible to determine.

Summary: Lessons learned

1. MTDs and slides are an important portion of deepwater basin fill. In the upper Pleis-tocene strata of many deepwater margins, they can constitute as much as 50% of thesediments.


9-452

2. For petroleum geoscientists, the most important reason to understand MTDs and slidesis for drilling-hazard assessment and geotechnical studies conducted for exploration anddevelopment planning. Generally, these features are overcompacted, in contrast to theover- and underlying sediments. This overcompaction can cause a decrease in drillingrate, as well as problems with conductor pipe. Differential subsidence of hemipelagicsediments draping MTDs and slides along the seafloor can also cause significant prob-lems with pipeline locations.

3. On seismic data, several different deposits are recognized. In an updip setting, rotatedslides, glide blocks, or thrust slides are present. Moving downdip, increasing disorgani-zation occurs with chaotic reflections.

4. The lithologies of MTDs and slides reflect the nature of the sediments that have beendeformed. Generally, these include outer-shelf to deep-marine strata. Consequently,most MTDs and slides are interpreted as being shale-rich. Dipmeter logs can be mosthelpful in distinguishing the deformed zones from nondeformed intervals.

5. The sizes of most MTDs and slides in the subsurface are considerably larger than anyoutcrop exposures. However, outcrop studies can help us understand the details ofdeformation and sedimentation within these features.

6. Cores and borehole images record the deformed nature of these features. The sedimentsare extensively folded and deformed.

7. Generally, MTDs and slides are poor reservoirs because of their poor continuity and thedestruction of their permeability. Only a few examples are known in which slides andMTDs are the primary reservoirs.

8. Slides and MTDs have multiple origins, including sediment overpressuring, rapid sedi-mentation rates, submarine canyon formation and downslope transportation of materi-als, gas-hydrate decompression and sublimation, deep-marine erosion by currents, andinduction by earthquakes and meteorite impacts. Determining the origin of slides andMTDs is extremely difficult, especially once they have been buried in the subsurface.

9. The timing of MTD and slide formation is variable. MTDs are sediments that occur atthe base of a depositional sequence as part of the earliest lowstand systems tract. Inother settings, slides appear to develop during other relative positions of sea level (TSTand HST). In most cases, the timing of sedimentation and deformation cannot be deter-mined.

References

9-453

ReferencesAmy, L. A., W. D. McCaffrey, and B. C. Kneller, in press, The Peira Cava Outlier, Annot Sandstones, southeastern

France, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G. S. Steffens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPGStudies in Geology.

Beaubouef, R. T., V. Abreu, and J. C. Van Wagoner, 2003, Basin 4 of the Brazos-Trinity slope system, westernGulf of Mexico: The terminal portion of a late Pleistocene lowstand systems tract, in H. H. Roberts, N. C.Rosen, R. H. Fillon, and J. B. Anderson, eds., Gulf Coast Section–SEPM Foundation 23rd Annual Bob F.Perkins Research Conference, p. 182–203.

Bouroullec, R., J. A. Cartwright, H. D. Johnson, C. Lansigu, J-M. Quemener, and D. Savanier, 2004, Syndeposi-tional faulting in the Grés d’Annot Formation, SE France: High-resolution kinematic analysis and strati-graphic response to growth faulting, in P. Joseph and S. A. Lomas, eds., Deep-water sedimentation in theAlpine Basin of SE France: New perspectives on the Grés d'Annot and related systems: Geological Society[London] Special Publication No. 221, p. 241–265.

Brami, T. R., C. M. Tenney, C. Pirmez, K. L. Holman, C. Archie, S. Heeralal, and R. Hannah 2000, Late Pleis-tocene deepwater stratigraphy and depositional processes offshore Trinidad & Tobago using 3D seismicdata, in P. Weimer, R. M. Slatt, J. L. Coleman, N. Rosen, C. H. Nelson, A. H. Bouma, M. Styzen, and D. T.Lawrence, eds., Global deep-water reservoirs: Gulf Coast Section–SEPM Foundation Bob F. Perkins 20thAnnual Research Conference, p. 402–421.

Clifton, H. E., in press, Submarine canyon fill, Point Lobos State Reserve, California, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G.S. Steffens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Coleman, J. M., D. B. Prior, and J. F. Lindsay, 1983, Deltaic influences on shelfedge instability processes, in D. J.Stanley and G. T. Moore, eds, The shelfbreak; critical interface on continental margins: SEPM Special Pub-lication No. 33, p. 121-137.

Cossey, S. P. J., in press, Mass transport complexes, Chicontepec Formation, eastern Mexico, in T. Nilsen, R. D.Shew, G. S. Steffens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Cossey, S. P. J., and R. E. Jacobs, 1992, Oligocene Hackberry Formation of southwest Louisiana: sequence stratig-raphy, sedimentology, and hydrocarbon potential: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, p. 589–606.

DiMarco, M. J., and R. C. Shipp, 1991, Stratigraphic characteristics and sandstone distribution of the Hackberrydepositional systems (mid Oligocene), southeast Texas and southwest Louisiana: a sand-rich slope-fan com-plex: GCAGS Transactions, v. 41, p. 187–190.

Dixon, B. T., and P. Weimer, 1998, Sequence stratigraphy of the eastern Mississippi Fan (Pleistocene), northeast-ern deep Gulf of Mexico: AAPG Bulletin, v. 82, p. 1207–1232.

Doyle, E. H., M. J. Kaluza, and H. H. Roberts, 1992, Use of manned submersibles to investigate slumps in the Gulfof Mexico: ASCE Civil Engineering in the Oceans V, Texas A&M University, November 2–5, p. 770–782.

Dykstra, M., and B. Kneller, in press, Canyon San Fernando: A deep-marine channel-levee complex exhibitingevolution from submarine-canyon confined to unconfined, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G. S. Steffens, and J.Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Dykstra, M., B. Kneller, and J. P. Milana, in press, A high-resolution record of deep water processes in a confinedpaleovalley: the Carboniferous Jejenes Formation, San Juan, Argentina, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G. S.Steffens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Edwards, M. B., 2000, Origin and significance of retrograde failed shelf margins, Tertiary northern Gulf Coastbasin: GCAGS Transactions, v. 50, p. 81–93.

Embley, R. W., 1982, Anatomy of some Atlantic margin sediment slides and some comments on ages and mecha-nisms, in S. Saxov and J. K. Niewenhuis, eds., Marine slides and other mass movements: New York, Ple-num Press, p. 189–213.

Flint, S., D. Hodgson, P. Sixsmith, and M. Grecula, in press, An exposed third-order basin-floor to shelf-edgesequence: Laingsburg depocenter, Karoo basin, South Africa , in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G. S. Steffens, andJ. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Gammon, P. R., R. W. C. Arnott, and G. M. Ross, in press, Channel 6 complex, lower Isaac formation, WindemereSupergroup: architectural relationships between channels, levees and debris flows, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew,G. S. Steffens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Goodwin, R. H., and D. B. Prior, 1989, Geometry and depositional sequences of the Mississippi Fan Gulf of Mex-ico: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 59, p. 318–329.

Grajales-Nishimura, J., et al., 2000, Chicxulub impact: the origin of reservoir and seal facies in the southeasternMexico oil fields: Geology, v. 28, p. 307–310.

Hampton, M. A., H. J. Lee, and J. Locat, 1996, Submarine landslides: Review of Geophysics, v. 35, p. 33–59.Heezen, B. C., and M. H. Ewing, 1952, Turbidity currents and submarine slumps, and the 1929 Grand Banks earth-

quake: American Journal of Science, v. 250, p. 849–873.


9-454

Hesthammer, J., and H. Fossen, 1999, Evolution of geometries of gravitational collapse structures with examplesfrom Statfjord field, northern North Sea: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 16, p. 259–281.

Homza, T., 2004, A structural interpretation of the Fish Creek slide (Lower Cretaceous), northern Alaska: AAPGBulletin, v. 88, p. 265–278.

Houseknecht, D. and C. Schenk, in press, Torok Formation oil-charged, exhumed stratigraphic trap, Alaska NorthSlope, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G. S. Steffens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPGStudies in Geology.

Howell, D. G., and J. M. Joyce, 1981, Field guide to the Upper Cretaceous Pigeon Point Formation, in V. Frizzell,ed., Upper Cretaceous and Paleocene turbidities, central California coast: Pacific Section SEPM Guide-book, p. 61–77.

Kaluza, M., J. Hoffman, T. Nguyen, J. Hall, G. McCullough, and R. Griffiths, 2004, Addressing the challenges inthe placement of seafloor infrastructure on the East Breaks Slide: OTC Contribution #16748.

King, P. B., 1948, Geology of the southern Guadalupe Mountains, Texas: U.S. Geological Survey ProfessionalPaper P-215, 183 p.

King. P., G. Browne, M. Arnot, R. M. Slatt, and I. Stromsoyen, in press, Taranaki basin, Tongaporutu River andbeach section, New Zealand, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G. S. Steffens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwa-ter outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Kirschner, C. E., A. Grantz, and M. W. Millen, 1992, Impact origin of the Avak structure, Arctic Alaska, and gene-sis of the barrow gas fields: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, p. 651–679.

Kleverlaan, K., 1987, Gordo megabed: a possible seismite in a Tortonian submarine fan: Tabernas basin, provinceAlmeria: Sedimentary Geology, v. 51, p. 165–180.

Kowsmann, R. O., L. C. R, . Machado, A. R. Viana, A. Almeida, M. A. Vicalvi, 2002, Controls on mass-wasting indeep water of the Campos Basin: OTC Contribution # 14030, 11 p.

Lapinski, T. G., 2003, 3-D stratigraphic and structural evolution of the Thunder Horse mini-basin, Mississippi Can-yon, northern deep Gulf of Mexico: unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Colorado, 165 p.

Lee, C., J. Nott, A. Parrish, and F. B. Keller, 2004, Seismic expression of the Tertiary mass transport complexes,deepwater Tarfaya-Agadir Basin, offshore Morocco: OTC Contribution #16741, 18 p.

Locat, J., and J. Mienert, eds., 2003, Submarine mass movements and their consequences: First International Sym-posium: Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, v. 19: Dordecht, The Netherlands, Klu-wer Academic Publishers, 552 p.

Marine Geology, 2004, Submarine-slump-generated tsunamis, v. 204, issues 3–4, p. 189–386.Martinsen, O. J., T. Lien, R. G. Walker, J. D. Collinson, 2003, Facies and sequential organization of a mudstone-

dominated slope and basin floor succession: the Gull Island Formation, Shannon basin, western Ireland:Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 20, p. 789–807.

McGilvery, T. A., and D. L. Cook, 2003, The influence of local gradients on accommodation space and linked dep-ositional elements across a stepped slope profile, offshore Brunei, in H. H. Roberts, N. C. Rosen, R. H. Fil-lon, and J. B. Anderson, eds., Gulf Coast Section–SEPM Foundation 23rd Annual Bob F. Perkins ResearchConference, p. 23–55.

McGilvery, T. A., G. Haddad, and D. L. Cook, 2004, Seafloor and shallow subsurface examples of mass transportcomplexes, offshore Brunei: OTC Conference 16780.

Morton, R. A., 1993, Attributes and origins of ancient submarine slides and filled embayments: example from theGulf Coast basin: AAPG Bulletin, v. 77, p. 1064–1081.

Mutti, E., M. Segruet, and M. Sgavetti, 1988, Sedimentation and deformation in the Tertiary sequences of thesouthern Pyrenees: AAPG Mediterranean Basin Conference Field Trip No. 7, 153 p.

Meyer, L., and G. M. Ross, in press, Channelized lobe and sheet sandstones of the Upper Kaza Group basin-floorturbidite system, Windemere Supergroup, British Columbia, Canada, in T. Nilsen, R. D. Shew, G. S. Stef-fens, and J. Studlick, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops: AAPG Studies in Geology.

Nelson, C.H., and T. H. Nilsen, 1984, Modern and ancient deep-sea fan sedimentation: SEPM Short Course No. 14,404 p.

Newton, S., D. Mosher, C. Shipp, and G. Wach, 2004, Importance of mass transport complexes in the Quaternarydevelopment of the Nile Fan, Egypt: OTC Conference proceedings, 16742, 10 p.

Pickering, K. T., and J. Corregidor, 2005, Tectonic control, rates of lateral migration and growth patterns of con-fined basin-floor submarine fans (seismosequence), and importance of mass transport complexes (MTCs),in A. G. Dore, and B. Vining, eds., Petroleum geology: north-west Europe and global perspective- proceed-ings of the 6th Petroleum Geology Conference: The Geological Society, London, included in core workshopsection.

References

9-455

Piper, D. J. W., A. N. Shor, and J. E. Hughes-Clarke, 1988, The 1929 “Grand Banks” Earthquake, slump and tur-bidity current, in H. E. Clifton, ed., Sedimentologic consequences of convulsive geologic events: GSA Spe-cial Paper 229, p. 77-92.

Piper, D. J. W., C. Pirmez, P. L. Manley, D. Long, R. D. Flood, W. R. Normark, and W. Showers, 1997, Mass-transport deposits of the Amazon fan, in R. D. Flood, D. J. W. Piper, A. Klaus, and L. C. Peterson, eds., Pro-ceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, v. 155, p. 109–146.

Posamentier, H., W. Meizarwin, P. S. Wisman, and T. Plawman, 2000, Deep water depositional systems—ultra-deep Makassar Strait, Indonesia, in P. Weimer, R. M. Slatt, J. L. Coleman, N. Rosen, C. H. Nelson, A. H.Bouma, M. Styzen, and D. T. Lawrence, eds., Global deep-water reservoirs: Gulf Coast Section–SEPMFoundation 20th Annual Bob F. Perkins Research Conference, p. 806–816.

Prior, D.B., B. Bornhold, and M. Johns, 1984, Depositional characteristics of a submarine debris flow: Journal ofGeology, v. 92, p. 707-727.

Romans, B., M. Schultz, S. Hubbard, and S. Graham, in press, Mass transport deposits of the Cero Toro Formation,southern Chile , in J. Studlick, G. S. Steffens, R. D. Shew, and T. Nilsen, eds., Atlas of deepwater outcrops:AAPG Memoir.

Schwab, W. C., H. J. Lee, and D. C. Twichell, eds., 1991, Submarine landslides: selected studies in the U. S. exclu-sive economic Zones: USGS Survey Bulletin 2002, 204 p.

Shipp, C., J. Nott, and J. Newlin, 2004, Variations in jetting performance in deepwater environments: geotechnicalcharacteristics and effects of mass transport complexes: OTC Conference, 16751, 11 p.

Sikkema, W., and K. M. Wojcik, 2000, 3D visualization of turbidite systems, lower Congo Basin, offshore Angola,in P. Weimer, R. M. Slatt, J. L. Coleman, N. Rosen, C. H. Nelson, A. H. Bouma, M. Styzen, and D. T.Lawrence, eds., Global deep-water reservoirs: Gulf Coast Section–SEPM Bob F. Perkins 20th AnnualResearch Conference, p. 928–939.

Slatt, R. M., C. G. Stone, and P. Weimer, 2000, Updip to downdip variations in turbidite facies, Lower Pennsylva-nian Jackfork Group, south-central Arkansas, USA, in P. Weimer, R. M. Slatt, J. L. Coleman, N. Rosen, C.H. Nelson, A. H. Bouma, M. Styzen, and D. T. Lawrence, eds., Global deep-water reservoirs: Gulf CoastSection–SEPM Foundation Bob F. Perkins 20th Annual Research Conference, p. 836–876.

Strachan, L. J., 2002, Slump-initiated and controlled syndepositional sandstone remobilization: an example fromthe Namurian of County Clare, Ireland: Sedimentology, v. 49, p. 25–41.

Twichell, D. C., H. Nelson, and J. E. Damuth, 2000, Late-stage development of the Bryant Canyon turbidite path-way on the Louisina continental slope, in P. Weimer, R. M. Slatt, J. L. Coleman, N. Rosen, C. H. Nelson, A.H. Bouma, M. Styzen, and D. T. Lawrence, eds., Global deep-water reservoirs: Gulf Coast Section–SEPMFoundation Bob F. Perkins 20th Annual Research Conference, p. 1032-1044.

Weimer, P., 1987, Seismic stratigraphy of three areas of lower slope failure, Torok Formation, northern Alaska, inI. L. Tailleur, and P. Weimer, eds., Alaskan North Slope geology: SEPM Pacific Section Special Publica-tion No. 50, p. 481–496.

Weimer, P., 1989, Sequence stratigraphy of the Mississippi Fan (Plio-Pleistocene), Gulf of Mexico: Geo-MarineLetters, v. 9, p. 185–272.

Weimer, P., 1990, Sequence stratigraphy, seismic geometries, and depositional history of the Mississippi Fan, deepGulf of Mexico: AAPG Bulletin, v. 74, p. 425–453.

Wignall, P. B., and J .L. Best, 2000, The western Irish Namurian basin reassessed: Basin Research, v. 12, p. 59–78.


9-456

Mass Transport

Documents

mass flows

masstransport complexes

deformation of mass

depositional features

deepwater features

related sediments

sequences newton

important factor