See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/307964588

Fluvial sequence stratigraphy: does it work?

Working Paper · October 2003

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23036.74885

CITATIONS READS

0 122

2 authors, including:

George Postma
Utrecht University
160 PUBLICATIONS   4,064 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

revisiting classical turbidite outcrops View project

Experimental Sequence Stratigraphy II - Interaction of climate and sea-level change View project

All content following this page was uploaded by George Postma on 10 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Fluvial sequence stratigraphy: does it work?
George Postma and John Holbrook

EP 2003-72101
Geology 2003-10-30

A brief summary is given of the most important architectural styles and sequence stratigraphical models of
fluvial systems. The large-scale architecture in fluvial-deltaic-shelf settings (5th order bounding surface and
higher, Miall, 1988) is defined by the amount of sediment transport that is induced by the rate of sea level
change and the ratio of discharge (climate signal) and available bed load (the latter depending on denudation
rate and temporarily-stored sediment). Since the amplitudinal variation in sea-level change is much different
for fourth order sea-level changes during greenhouse and icehouse periods we think that the present is not
the key to the past for understanding fluvial architecture and that present sequence stratigraphical models
need to accommodate for these differences.

Analogue flume models that are properly scaled toward real world prototype river-delta systems proof very
suitable to put constraints on existing models when and why rivers of any substantive size will or will not
aggrade and preserve systems tracts and their bounding surfaces along their course. Flume modelling
done so far have been proven to be adequate in ascribing variation in architectural style to rates of sea-
level change, to subsidence rates in growth fault settings, and to rates of climate change. Analogue flume
modelling proved suitable for systematic exploration of sedimentary system’s sensitivity to allocyclic
change. The paper briefly highlights some important results that have been done under contract of Shell
Research (Rijswijk, The Netherlands) in the period 1996-2000, and makes suggestions for future research.

Introduction
What are the links between evolution of fluvial systems and the driving forces climate, tectonics and sea level that
control the evolution of the landscape? Problems in finding such links are vast, not least because different causes
can lead to the same product (problem of convergence) and the same causes can lead to different products (problem
of divergence). Fluvial sequence stratigraphical studies so far have focussed on incised valleys and their associated
fills (Refs. 24, 2, 25, 15 and 3: Figure 1), and fewer studies on smooth sequence-boundaries (Refs. 23, 5 and 6, see
further below). From these studies three main questions emerge:

• How and to what degree can sea-level-dominated paralic and nearshore marine systems tracts be directly linked
to fluvial systems tracts that express strong and complex influence of more terrestrial variables (e.g., climate,
tectonics, etc.)
• How are variations in rate and direction of sea level change expressed in the architecture of any such fluvial
systems tracts?”
• What needs to be focus of future research to enhance identification of formational processes?

ECCN EAR99
This document is classified as Restricted to Shell Personnel Only ‘Shell Personnel’ includes all staff with a personal contract with a Shell Group Company, designated Associated Companies
and Contractors working on Shell projects who have signed a confidentiality agreement with a Shell Group Componay. Issuance of this document is restricted to staff employed by a Shell
Group Company. Neither the whole nor any part of this document may be disclosed to Non-Shell Personnel without the prior written consent of the copyright owners. 1
Figure 1: Examples of systems tracts models in incised valleys from Refs. 25 and 15.

Sequence boundaries and erosional surfaces

Fluvial sequences are characterised by numerous erosional surfaces that are produced by sediment transport
processes. These erosional (bounding) surfaces display a very consistent hierarchy, with surfaces of up to 4th
order being associated with bed forms and bar migration within the channel. The river channel boundary itself is
generally of 5th order, while higher order bounding surfaces denote channel belt (6th), nested valleys (7th), valley floor
incision (8th) and sequence boundary (9th), as outlined by Refs. 8 and 9. Ref. 6 was the first to document a complete
hierarchy of fluvial erosion surfaces from middle Cretaceous strata in southeastern Colorado (Figure 2) and herewith
demonstrated a genetically linked continuum of erosional surfaces. The importance of Miall’s and Holbrook’s work is
that morphological features of ancient rivers can be objectively defined on basis of sedimentary sequences allowing,
for instance, accurate distinction between type of channel (i.e. lateral migrating or anastomosing channels) and type
of valley (i.e. lateral migrating valley or single valley incision), but also allowing precise determination of the order
of magnitude of aggradation and erosion cycles (Figure 3). Figure 3 not only shows how valley fills may lack one or
two orders in the maximal nine-story bounding surface hierarchy, but it also outlines two distinct forms of sequence
boundaries: one that outlines a valley and another that is made by lateral migration of valleys. Ref. 6 ascribes the
smooth sequence boundary in Cretaceous rocks to the very slow rate of change in sea-level that occurred in these
times, which is much in contrast with the present day situation, where we have large amplitude variations in sea-level
at a relatively high frequency.

• The question that arises here is whether perhaps valley-form sequence boundaries would be characteristic for
ice-house periods with short-duration (4th and 5th order), but large amplitude glacio-eustatic sea-level changes and
smooth sequence boundaries would be characteristic for greenhouse periods that have only minor variations in
4th and 5th order sea-level change?

2
Figure 2: Smooth sequence boundaries produced by lateral migration of valleys due to slow rates of base level
change [Ref. 6].

Figure 3: Summary of some possible genetic associations between sequence-boundary morphology and architecture
of overlying fluvial strata based on the Cretaceous of southeast Colorado and published examples [Ref. 6].

Fluvial Systems tracts — formation and preservation

Ref. 7 holds the view that icehouse-induced large-amplitude glacio-eustatic sea-level changes preclude the
preservation of transgressive and highstand systems tracts in valleys. In the Rhine valley, substantial fluvial
deposition occurred during the fall, with alternating terrace formations and incision during the FSST. During the rise,
estuarine deposits dominate the sequence, while the modern highstand shows less aggradation, all much like the
Refs. 25 and 15 models (Figure 1). During the next glacial lowstand, however, these Holocene interglacial deposits
will likely be scoured out by the more vigorous glacial systems, as appears to be the case for prior interglacial
deposits, leaving amalgamation of glacial lowstand deposits. This is also reported from eastern Kentucky by Ref. 1
for the Pennsylvanian, also an icehouse time. Intriguingly, in some aspects the sequences that are preserved are
similar to the Cretaceous sequences described by Ref. 6, who described preservation of fluvial deposits for the
Falling Stage Systems Tract (FSST). The sequences presented by Refs. 25 and 15 are based on the Castlegate
foreland basin sandstones in Utah, where the sequences appear to have a strong preservation of the transgressive
component, which is generally lacking in the passive margin sequences. Other sequence stratigraphic models, for
instance those developed for the Cenozoic growth-faulted passive margins in the Gulf Coast [Refs. 4, 10, 11 and
12] show also incised valley-fill sequences with FSST fluvial deposits and few highstand deposits, similar to the

3
sequences described by Refs. 17 and 6. Although the above review must be kept brief here, we hold the view that,
as yet, there is no clear concept that relates systems tracts formation and preservation to tectonics and greenhouse/
icehouse periods.

High frequency climate change in the hinterland causes important changes in run off and denudation rate, which will
affect both the gradient of the river profile and the accommodation space with consequences for temporary storage
and preservation of the sequence (Figure 4). The system will become more efficient with increase in discharge
resulting in flattening of the gradient and increase yields at the valley outlet. Hence, relatively small climate changes
that occur over periods of thousands of years will directly affect the fluvial system’s architecture and lithofacies
characteristics, as is exemplified by detailed studies of the Colorado River [Ref. 3] and of the Meuse River [Ref. 22].
High frequency, climate induced aggradation and incision of the river cause nesting of channels in between 6th order
bounding surfaces (e.g. Refs. 3 and 22). The high frequency changes in accommodation space induced by climate
change interact commonly with much lower frequency changes in tectonics sea-level. The degree of interaction will
depend on the distance upstream measured from the shoreline (e.g. Ref. 15) and will relate to the fluvial response
and the frequency and amplitude of change in accommodation space as governed by icehouse and greenhouse
periods. Interaction will inhibit unknown feedback mechanisms resulting from temporary storage of sediment (e.g.
Ref. 16). Hence, we adhere to the commonly asked question what exactly is the sequence stratigraphical meaning
of the preserved fluvial systems tracts in the stratigraphic record? In other words:

• What is the probability for FSST, TST and HST to preserve for a given (plate) tectonic and climate setting?

Figure 4: Diagram showing the change in accommodation space and river gradient as a cause of climate change. Qw
is water discharge and Qs bed load transport rate. rate of sea-level fall [mm/h].

Focus of future research

Hence, there is much scope for systematical analyses of systems tract stacking for various tectonic and climate
settings and for various river types. Fluvial architecture is complex, but fortunately, exhibits a bounding surface
hierarchy, which is governed by the dual control of base level change (here both including sea-level change and
tectonic subsidence) and climate change. The latter causes changes in discharge (Qw) and denudation rate
(available sediment Qs), so that valley gradients are at a maximum at times of minimum stream efficiency (low
Qw/Qs ratio), when little sediment is transported to the river mouth) and at a minimum when the stream efficiency is
high (high Qw/Qs ratios). Hence, climate variations define the amount of preservation of systems tracts in between
a range that is defined by maximum and minimum stream efficiency on the one hand, and the amount of base level
fall in conjunction with the frequency of these large amplitudinal changes on the other. Figure 5 is modified from Ref.
7 and shows the effect of these variables along the river course in a schematic form. No doubt the frequency and
amplitude of both climate and base level changes define ultimately the architecture and thickness of the preserved
sequences. Without quantitative insight into the interaction and possible feedback mechanisms of the effect of

4
climate and sea-level change over time, which may be co-dependant, and without insights into time lags that are
known to exist between sea level change and fluvial response, there is no way to relate fluvial stratigraphy to base-
level change or climate. A first concept that quantifies these relationships must come from systematic experimental
physical modelling that is scaled towards real world situations.

Figure 5: Schematic overview of the most important parameters that define fluvial architecture and systems tract
preservation (modified from Ref. 7)

Experimental work
Systematic physical analogue flume modelling into the effect of various rates of sea-level fall on systems tracts
preservation has been done for Shell Research in The Netherlands under responsibility of the senior author (1996-
2000). The model results were verified against prototype systems (Colorado and Brazos river systems), with model
dimensions that are proportionally scaled to the prototype and with non-dimensional variables to scale the response
time of the system (see Refs. 13, 19 and 20 for details on the scaling methodology). A non-dimensional Basin
Fill factor is used to compare the ratio between the time-averaged sedimentation rate and the rate of change in
accommodation space of model and prototype.

• The flume-modelling work not only shows results that are in the form of sediment budgets (mass balance),
but it also allows observation of formation and disappearance of temporary storage space and thus feedback
mechanisms between the large scale depositional and erosional processes that remain unrevealed, otherwise

Results of flume modelling

With the rate of sea–level change as only independent variable our experimental results support the common view
that neither fall nor rise in sea level effects the upstream fluvial system instantaneously. An important cause for the
delayed fluvial response is that a certain amount of time is required to connect initial incisions on the newly emergent
shelf (shelf edge canyons developed by headward erosion) with the fluvial valley. The process of connection of the
canyon with the river valley was quantified in relation to the rate of sea-level fall (Refs. 19 and 20; Figure. 6) and
controlled:
1) The amount of fluvial aggradation during sea-level fall (Figure. 7).
2) The total sediment volume that bypasses the shelf edge.
3) The percentage of fluvial relative to shelf sediment in the lowstand delta.
4) The volume of the transgressive systems tract and
5) The amount of diachroneity along the sequence boundary.

5
Our experiments demonstrate, for instance, that the original sequence-stratigraphic concept of Ref. 14 is difficult to
apply to continental successions, even when these successions have been deposited within the influence of sea
level.

The control of tectonics on systems tracts preservation have been studied for growth-fault systems in continental
margins to show how the amplitude of eustatic sea-level fall, which is superimposed on tectonic subsidence,
determines the potential amount of shelf cannibalism on the relatively stable footwall. A supply peak on the hanging
wall evidences the downcutting of canyon floors in the footwall, which is independent of the rate and total amount of
subsidence of the hanging wall (Ref. 22; Figure 8). The sequence stratigraphy of the model emphasized the strong
relationship between depositional architecture and rate of subsidence, which varies both along and perpendicular to
fault strike. The systems tract distribution of the modeled growth-faulted, shelf-margin delta shows that the expanded
hangingwall section preserves all tracts formed during eustatic fall, lowstand and early rise. The footwall section, in
contrast, only records a thin succession of late transgressive and highstand deposits which are repeatedly reworked
by erosion at times of eustatic fall, at lowstands, and even during early rise, much like found by Refs. 6 and 17.
Preservation of maximum flooding surfaces in the shallow marine strata of the footwall block is minimal.

The effect of climate change on the preservation of systems tracts (Figure 9, Figure. 5) is presently under investigation
by systematic modelling [Ref. 22]. Focus of the PhD research is the interaction between variation in the Qw/Qs ratio
and rate of sea-level change. Preliminary results indicate that short period climate changes (of the order of a few
thousand years) play an important role in the temporary storage of sediment in terraces, much like found by Refs. 3,
18, 17 and others. The amount of incision into the original shelf material depends both on the ability of the system
to erode (the discharge) and the amount of sediment available for deposition. As a consequence, at low Qw/Qs
ratios there is a minimum of shelf incision and cannibalisation of shelf stratigraphy, while sediments deposited in the
highstand and falling stage systems tract are continuously reworked and redeposited, as exemplified by comparison
of the Trinity and Colorado River shelf evolution during isotopic stage 3 sea-level stand (about 15 ± 2 m below present
sea level, see Figure. 9). Hence, the lowstand fans contain high amounts of fluvial material transported during the
sea-level fall. This is in contrast with high Qw/Qs ratios that lead to shelf incision and increased headward erosion
rates in the fluvial valleys. The connection time for shelf valleys to connect with the trunk river occurs earlier in the
latter case, which means that even though the system is fluvial dominated (i.e. strongly progradational), the influence
of sea-level fluctuation on the fluvial domain is strong.

6
Figure 6: Connection time (time required to connect shelf canyon with fluvial valley by headward erosion) determines
the amount and timing of valley erosion and herewith the thickness of the transgressive systems tract, and the
preserved sequences in the valley from Ref. 20.

���
�����

� � � � ���
� ��������� �����
���
��� � ������ ����
� � �� �� �� ����� ������������ �����
������������
��������� ������ �� ������� ���� ������ ��
��������� ������� ����
������� ���� ������ ����
���
���� ����
��������� �����
������ ����
������ ���� �����
�������� � ������������ �����
� �������� �����
�����������
���������
���������� ���
���
������ ���� ����� � ����� � ����� ����� ����� ������� ������ ������
���
�����
����
� � � � �������������
��� �����������
���������
� ��������� ����� �������������
���
���
� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ����� ��������� ������ ��
��������� ������ �� ������ ����
������� ���� ������ ��
�������� ����
��������� ����� ����� ������� ���� ������ ��
���
������� ��������
������ ���� � ���� ����
���������� ���
������������ ����� ������ ���� �����
� ������������ �����
�����������
� �������� ����� ���������
��� ������ ����
� ���� ���� ���� �� � � �� � � � �� � �� � �

Figure. 7: Composite stratigraphic sections compiled from Experiment 210 and 250. The stages a to d marked in the
sea- level curves correspond with the sediments and with the stages of Figures 3 to 6. The stratigraphic columns
on the shelf, coastal plain and river show that the amount of diachroneity of the sequence boundary with respect
to the duration of the sea- level cycle is largest for the fast- fall experiment. With increasing diachroneity of the
sequence boundary it becomes less straightforward to apply systems tracts terminology to upstream alluvial strata.
The fluvial deposits overlying the sequence boundary lag half a sea- level cycle behind the sediments overlying the
(lowstand) unconformity on the shelf. The comparison between the two experiments is a conceptual test that reveals
the problems related to attributing systems tract terminology to alluvial strata (vertical exaggeration 2.25 times) [Ref.
20].

7
 �������� ���� ����
�� �� �� �� �� �� ��
�
��
�� ��������������� �����
� ����� ����� ���� ��
��
��� ������ �����
���

��� �������
����
��� ����� ��
��������
� ��� ����� ���� ���
��� �������� ��� �����
��� ����������
���
���������� ������ � � �� � � �� � � � � �
�������� ��� � � � � �

� ������ �� ���������� �����

������������
� ��������� ������ �����������
��������������

��� ������� ������

�� ��� �����
��
�
����
� ��
� ����� ������ ��� � �
��
���
�����
��

��
������
�� �����
��������� ������
�� �
����� � � ���������
�� �����
��

�
������

���� �������� ����������

� �������� ���� ������� ��� ������ � ������ ����������� ��������� ����
�� ��� �����
�
��� �������
����������
�� �������� ������
�� ��������
�
��� � �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� ��
������� �������
Figure 8: Experimental observations compared with the imposed fault throw and relative sea-level changes. (a)
Imposed subsidence curve of the growth fault and the counter-regional fault. (b) Applied regional sea- level curve
(water level) that applies to the stable footwall block. The local level curve is the sum of fault throw (local subsidence)
and regional sea- level change and applies to the hangingwall. (c) Marked episodes denote when the down-thrown
block received sediment. (d) Observed changes in shoreline migration. (e) The total volume of accommodation space
added by subsidence (light gray) and the observed sediment supply from the fluvial valley to the basin (dark gray).
Both curves were calculated from the scans and illustrate in retrospect to what degree the hangingwall subsidence
was compensated by the sediment supply. Note that in spite of lowering the experimental fault window at a constant
rate, the observed rate of accommodation space increase is not constant, but shows a rapid positive increase from
stage A to H. (f) Quantification of sediment fluxes. The fluvial sediment supply varies during the first part of the
experiment and lingers around 1.15 dm3/hour since stage E. Peaks of footwall erosion seem related to sea-level
lowstands that created type-1 unconformities. Footwall cannibalism contributes a 150 to 200% increase of sediment
flux to the hangingwall with respect to the average fluvial supply rate. Footwall deposition shows maximum values
during episodes of highstand progradation [Ref. 21].

8
Figure 9: Morphological features produced in a landscape evolution flume compared with the Colorado River (left)
and Trinity River (right) systems on the shelf of the Gulf of Mexico. Note the difference in shelf evolution with green
marking time-averaged aggradation rate and in red the time-averaged erosion rates [Ref. 22].

References
[1] Aitkin, J.F. & Flint, S.S., 1994. High frequency sequences and the nature of incised-valley fills in fluvial systems
of the Breathitt Group (Pensylvanian). Apalachian foreland basin, Eastern Kentucky. Sedimentology, 42, 3-30.
[2] Allen, G.P. & Posamentier, H.W., 1993. Sequence stratigraphy and facies model of an incised valley fill: the
Gironde estuary, France. J. Sediment Petr. 63, 378-391
[3] Blum, M. D. & Valastro, S. (1994) Late Quaternary sedimentation, lower Colorado River, Gulf Coastal Plain of
Texas. Geological Society of America Bulletin 106, 1002-1016.
[4] Coterill, K., S. Allen, F. De Tagle, A. Soto, C. Liu, G. Perez-Cruz, W. W. Wornardt, and P. R. Vail, 1990, Well
log/seismic sequence stratigraphy of Miocene-Pleistocene, depositional sequences, High Island area, offshore
Texas, Sequence Stratigraphy as an Exploration Tool: Concepts and Practices From the Gulf Coast: Programs
and Abstracts, 11th Annual Research Conference, Gulf Coast Section of Society of Economic Paleontologists
and Mineralogists, Houston, Texas , p. 135-138
[5] Holbrook, J., 1996. Complex fluvial response to low gradients at maximum regression: A genetic link between
smooth sequence-boundary morphology and architecture of overlying sheet sandstone. J. Sediment. Research,
66, 713-724.
[6] Holbrook, J., 2001. Origin, genetic relationships, and stratigraphy over the continuum of fluvial channel form
bounding surfaces: an illustration from middle Creataceous strata, southeastern Colorado. Sediment. Geol.
2001, 179-222.
[7] Holbrook, J. & Oboh-Ikuenobe, F. (2003) Base-level Buffers and Buttresses as a Proposed Control on Fluvial
Valley-fill Geometry and Facies, Book of Abstracts, AAPG Mtg. 2003
[8] Miall, A.D., 1985 Architectural–element analysis: a new method of facies analysis applied to fluvial deposits.
Earth Sc. Rev. 22: 261-308.
[9] Miall, A.D. 1988. Facies architecture in clastic sedimentary basins. In: K.L. Kleinspehn and C. Paola (eds),
Frontiers in Sedimentary Geology, New Perpectives of Basin Analysis: 67-81. Springer Verlag, New York.

9
[10] Mitchum, R. M., J. B. Sangree, P. R. Vail, and W. W. Wornardt, 1990, Sequence stratigraphy in late Cenozoic
expanded sections, Gulf of Mexico, Sequence Stratigraphy as an Exploration Tool: Concepts and Practices
From the Gulf Coast: Programs and Abstracts, 11th Annual Research Conference, Gulf Coast Section of Society
of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Houston, Texas , p. 237-256.
[11] Mitchum, R. M., J. B. Sangree, P. R. Vail, and W. W. Wornardt, 1993, Recognizing Sequences and Systems
Tracts from Well Logs, Seismic Data, and Biostratigraphy: Examples from the Late Cenozoic of the Gulf of
Mexico, in P. Weimer, and H. W. Posamentier, eds., Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigraphy, Recent Developments
and Applications: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 58, p. 163-197
[12] Pacht, J. A., 1996, Sequence Stratigraphic framework of Neogene strata in off-shore Nigeria: American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 80, p. 1321.
[13] Paola, C., Heller, P. L. & Angevine, C. L. (1992) The large-scale dynamics of grain-size variation in alluvial
basins, 1: Theory. Basin Research 4, 73-90.
[14] Posamentier, H. W. & Vail, P. R. (1988) Eustatic controls on clastic deposition II - Sequence and Systems Tract
Models. In: Sea-level changes: an integrated approach (Ed. by C. K. Wilgus, B. S. Hastings, C. G. St Kendall,
H. W. Posamentier, C. A. Ross and J. C. Van Wagoner), Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists
Special Publication, 42, 125-154, Tulsa.
[15] Shanley, K. W. & McCabe, P. J. (1994) Perspectives of the Sequence Stratigraphy of Continental Strata.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 78(4), 544-568.
[16] Thorn, J.A., 1994. Constraints on riverine valley incision and the response to sea-level change based on fluid
mechanics. In: R.W. Dalrymple, R. Boyd and B.A. Zaitlin (eds) Incised-valley systems:origin and sedimentary
sequences. Soc. of Econom. Paleont. Mineral. Spec. Publ. 51
[17] Törnqvist, T. E., Wallinga, J., Murray, A. S., De Wolf, H., Cleveringa, P. & De Gans, W. (in press) Response
of the Rhine-Meuse system (west-central Netherlands) to the Last Quaternary glacio-eustatic cycles: a first
assessment. Global and Planetary Change, 27, 889-111
[18] Van den Berg, M.W. 1996. Fluvial sequences of the Maas: a 10 Ma record of neotectonics and climate changes
at various time-scales., PhD Thesis University Wageningen, The Netherlands, 181 pp.
[19] Van Heijst, M.I.W.M., Postma, G., Meijer, X.D., Snow J.N. and Anderson J.A. (2001) Analogue flume-model
study of the Late Quaternary Colorado/Brazos shelf (Basin Research, 13, 243-268).
[20] Van Heijst, M.I.W.M., Postma, G., (2001) Fluvial response to sea-level changes: a quantitative analogue,
experimental approach (Basin Research, 13, 269-292).
[21] Van Heijst, M.I.W.M., Postma, G., van Kesteren W.P., de Jongh, R.G. (2002) Control of Syn-Depositional
Faulting on Systems Tract Evolution across Growth-Faulted Shelf Margins: An Analogue Experimental Model of
the Miocene Imo River Field, Nigeria (AAPG Bull, 46, 1335-1366).
[22] Van den Berg van Saparoea, A.P., Postma, G., 2003. Impact of discharge and sediment flux on basin margin
architecture: an experimental approach, Book of Abstracts, AGU-EUG Mtg. Nice.
[23] Van Wagoner, J. C.. R.M. Mitchum. Jr.. K. M. Campion and v. D. Rahmanian ( 1990) Siliciclastic sequence
stratigraphy in well logs, cores and outcrops: concepts for high-resolution correlation of time and facies: Am. Ass.
Petrol. Geol. Methods in Exploration Series 7. 55 pp.
[24] Weimer, R.J.,1984. Relation of unconformities, tectonics and sea-level changes, Cretaceous of western interior,
United States of America. Interregional unconformities and Hydrocarbon Accumulation, Schlee, J.S. (Ed.), Am.
Ass. Petrol. Geol. Mem. 36, 7-36.
[25] Wright, V.P. & Marriott, S.B.,1993. The sequence stratigraphy of fluvial depositional systems: the role of floodplain
storage. Sediment. Geol. 86: 203-210.

10
Conclusions
1. Fluvial architecture and systems tract preservation depend much on the rate of base (relative sea-) level change
and climate change, the interaction of which is yet to be quantified and understood for various river types and river
lengths.
2. Large scale fluvial behavior and resultant architecture and systems tract preservation have been studied by
means of scaled flume models at the Utrecht University where the control of tectonics, climate and sea-level have
been simulated.
3. Analogue flume studies done so far at Utrecht University focused on quantification of changes in mass balance
along systems tracts related to allocyclic forcing, data that can be used to verify numerical models.
4. Analogue flume studies give a first order approximation of parameters that control the large scale landscape
evolution and their feedbacks and give pointers to field geologists.
5. Fluvial architecture may be quite different for greenhouse and icehouse periods: A systematic flume studies
into the interplay of climate and rate of sea-level change to reveal architectural differences for greenhouse and
icehouse periods will help to formulating new concepts and to checking existing empirical models.

George Postma
Associate Professor Utrecht University
George obtained his PhD in sedimentology at the University of Amsterdam. Until 1988, he held a
Lecturer position at the University of East Anglia (UK). In that year he went to Utrecht University,
where he was appointed Associate Professor in 2000. He has a wide range of research interest
in Sedimentology and Basin Research, following a holistic approach in source-to-sink studies
combining fieldwork with flume tank experiments.

John Holbrook
Department of Geosciences, Southeast Missouri State University, Cape Girardeau, Missouri

11
View publication stats