A universal power-law scaling exponent for

fracture apertures in sandstones

J.N. Hooker1,2†, S.E. Laubach1, and R. Marrett2

1
Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713, USA
2
Department of Geological Sciences, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713, USA

ABSTRACT large-fracture spacing estimations. The as- mal or log-normal size distribution (Table 1).
sumption of the scaling exponent should be In contrast, a well-documented distribution of
A high-resolution data set of kinematic supported by the presence of crack-seal tex- fracture sizes is the power law (Gudmundsson,
aperture (opening displacement) of opening- ture within fractures. 1987; Barton and Zoback, 1992; Clark et al.,
mode fractures, from large (up to 2 m long) 1995; Gross and Engelder, 1995; Loriga, 1999;
quartz-cemented sandstone samples, shows INTRODUCTION Marrett et al., 1999; Ortega and Marrett, 2000;
that microfractures are ubiquitous and that Gillespie et al., 2001; Laubach and Ward, 2006;
most natural-fracture sets are better fit by Although many opening-mode fracture arrays, Ortega et al., 2006; Davy et al., 2010; Guerriero
power-law size distributions than by expo- commonly including cement-barren joints, have et al., 2010; Hooker et al., 2011). The power-law
nential, normal, or log-normal distribu- narrow ranges of opening displacement (or equation returns a positive frequency for all posi-
tions. The data set includes 3822 fractures kinematic aperture) sizes (Odling et al., 1999), tive fracture sizes, in a fixed inverse proportion to
within 68 scanlines from eight formations on many other fracture arrays possess a range of fracture size, and thus implies a scale-free frac-
three continents. Kinematic apertures were apertures spanning multiple orders of magni- ture pattern, i.e., a pattern lacking a characteristic
measured along scanlines using scanning tude. Interpreting the cause of variation in frac- size (Bonnet et al., 2001). Because exponential
electron microscope cathodoluminescence ture size within a fracture population requires size distributions (Nur, 1982; Deschamps et al.,
(SEM-CL) and, for field data, using a hand more information than just the range in size. In 2007) return negative fracture sizes at some fre-
lens. Microtextural evidence from SEM-CL principle, even wide ranges of fracture size can quencies, implying a characteristic fracture spac-
shows that power law–distributed fractures be attributed to statistical aberration around a ing, they are better classified as characteristic as
typically have crack-seal texture and are characteristic size if the fractures follow a nor- opposed to scale-free.
composed of opening increments having a
narrow (characteristic) aperture size range.
TABLE 1. COMMON EQUATIONS DOCUMENTED FOR FRACTURE-SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
In contrast, rare non-power-law–distributed
Documented fracture-size
fracture populations lack crack-seal texture. or slip-magnitude
Power-law exponents, as measured in one Equation type Cumulative distribution function equation distribution examples
dimension, have values of –0.8 ± 0.1. Most 1⎡ ⎛ X − μ⎞⎤
F= 1+ erf ⎜ ⎟⎥
variation among fracture sets results from Normal 2 ⎢⎣ ⎝ 2σ ⎠⎦
power-law coefficients, which constitute a Gillespie et al., 2001
scale-invariant measure of fracture inten- 1⎡ ⎛ ln X − μ⎞⎤ Philipp, 2008
Log-normal F= ⎢1+ erf ⎜ ⎟⎥
sity. We show how observed scaling patterns 2⎣ ⎝ 2σ ⎠⎦ Larsen et al., 2010
Hooker et al., 2012
can be used to improve estimations of large- Gudmundsson, 1987
fracture spacing in cases where fracture Wong et al., 1989
sampling is limited, as by the width of cores. Marrett and Allmendinger, 1992
Sanderson et al., 1994
The low (<1) value of the power-law scal- Clark et al., 1995
ing exponent reflects but a gentle increase McCaffrey and Johnston, 1996
−b
in fracture frequency with decreasing size, Power law F = aX Marrett, 1997
Bohnenstiehl and Kleinrock, 1999
such that microfracture abundances in core Marrett et al., 1999
are commonly too low for statistically robust Ortega et al., 2006
Guerriero et al., 2010
sampling. On the other hand, the consistency Hooker et al., 2011, 2012
of the scaling exponent among fracture sets Le Garzic et al., 2011
within various tectonic settings is such that Exponential F = ce−dX Nur, 1982
the exponent can be assumed, facilitating Deschamps et al., 2007
−b −dX
F = aX e Kagan, 1997
Gamma law
†
Current address: Department of Earth Sciences, Sornette and Sornette, 1999
University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford, Note: Normal distribution equation is not documented but is included because it was tested in this study.
Oxfordshire OX1 3AN, UK; john.hooker@earth.ox F—fracture cumulative frequency; X—fracture size; erf—error function; μ—average; σ—standard deviation;
.ac.uk. a, b, c, d—best-fitting variables.

GSA Bulletin; September/October 2014; v. 126; no. 9/10; p. 1340–1362; doi: 10.1130/B30945.1; 18 figures; 4 tables; published online 22 May 2014.

For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org

1340
© 2014 Geological Society of America
 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones
The reasons that fracture sizes might follow
power laws versus characteristic size distribu-
tions are uncertain, although possible models
have been explored. Power-law size distribu-
tions arise in some numerical routines that
postulate rules for fracture interaction during
growth (Cowie et al., 1993; Clark et al., 1995;
Cladouhos and Marrett, 1996; Davy et al., 2010;
Hooker et al., 2012). A common theme among
such models is that large fractures emerge from
dynamic interaction (e.g., linkage) among
nearby smaller fractures.
Constraining the size distribution of a fracture
population can help quantify natural-fracture
abundance in the subsurface, where direct sam-
pling is difficult. Fractures that are large enough
to be important for fluid storage and permeabil-
ity may nonetheless be difficult to detect seis-
mically because they dip steeply and may not
juxtapose reflecting horizons, making seismic
fracture-network surveys incomplete (Hestham-
mer and Fossen, 2003; Marrett et al., 2007; Bur-
nett and Fomel, 2011; Cartwright, 2011). The
subsurface is commonly sampled directly using
only vertical well bores, and in typical cases
macrofracture spacing is considerably wider
than the well-bore diameter (Ladeira and Price,
1981). Fracture frequency (i.e., number of frac-
tures per unit length, area, or volume of rock)
in the inter-well-bore space can potentially
be constrained using microfracture scaling, if
microfractures and macrofractures are present
in relative abundances that may be statistically
extrapolated, as may be the case with power-
law size distributions (Marrett et al., 1999;
Gomez and Laubach, 2006; Ortega et al., 2006;
Hooker et al., 2009; Guerriero et al., 2010; Iñigo
et al., 2012).
The new fracture-aperture data set presented
here represents an opportunity for studying
size-distribution systematics because of its com-
bined breadth and consistent methods of collec-
tion. The data set is large, comprising fracture
populations from a wide range of tectonic set-
tings—including high-strain settings within fold
and thrust belts, as well as comparatively unde-
formed intramontane basins. The same data-col-
lection method was consistently deployed: all
fracture-size measurements quantify kinematic
aperture (cumulative opening displacement)
along one-dimensional (1-D) scanlines, using
scanning electron microscope cathodolumines-
cence (SEM-CL) to resolve fracture apertures
down to the micron scale. All data derive from
sandstones, thus partly controlling for system-
atic differences in fracture patterns by rock type.
The purpose of this paper is threefold. First,
we use new data and a literature review to docu-
ment a typical aperture-size distribution among
natural opening-mode fractures in sandstones:
Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
a power-law with an exponent, as measured in
1-D, of –0.8 ± 0.1. Second, we use SEM-CL
images of fractures to interpret the key growth
process that engenders this size distribution:
localization of individual, characteristic-size
opening increments. Third, we show how
microfracture populations measured from core
samples can be used to extrapolate macrofrac-
ture frequency in the inter-well-bore rock vol-
ume, if the typical size distribution is present.
Readers familiar with fractals (Mandelbrot,
1982) can appreciate the potential for using
power-law–distributed patterns at an observed
scale to describe unobserved scales. In geologi-
cal practice the opportunities to actually make
such extrapolations are rare. Here we demon-
strate how SEM analysis of core can, with care,
be used to constrain the fracture pattern in the
inter-well-bore space via power-law extrapola-
tion. Thus, we apply the fundamental science
of fractals to the reservoir-engineering bugbear
of subsurface fracture spacing. More generally,
we believe that our data-driven approach to the
fractal nature of geologic fractures can form the
basis of analogous exercises to quantify a vari-
ety of fracture-related attributes—such as strain
(Gross and Engelder, 1995), porosity and per-
meability (Marrett, 1996; Laubach, 2003; Guer-
riero et al., 2013), and network evolution (Davy
et al., 2010)—as well as attributes of other natu-
ral systems having fractal properties (see data
sets in Clauset et al., 2009).
MEASURES OF FRACTURE
ABUNDANCE
Previous Methods
The simplest measure of fracture abundance
is the number of fractures observed within a
given observation space. For example, the frac-
ture abundance of a layer within a core can be
quantified by counting the number of fractures
present at a given depth (Haynes, 1984; Wilson
and Paulsen, 1998). But for macrofracture spac-
ing wider than a 10 cm core diameter, cores at
many depths will lack any visible fractures, even
if fractures are present in the layer.
A method of calculating fracture spacing near
the well bore using the limited sampling typically
encountered with vertical well bores and steeply
dipping fractures was devised by Narr (1996). In
this method the volume of rock represented by
preserved core or image logs is assumed to sta-
tistically represent the reservoir rock, and aver-
age fracture spacing is derived by dividing the
core-face surface area by the cumulative fracture
height. Extensive subsurface observations and
calibration with outcrops or other methods can
support this spacing derivation.
The advantages of the Narr method are its
simplicity and its ease of application to any
sampled subsurface interval. However, errors
associated with this method will potentially be
great if the reservoir (1) is poorly sampled or
(2) displays significantly heterogeneous fracture
stratigraphy and the preserved core or well-bore
volume is insufficient to statistically represent
each type of fractured layer.
Image logs can be used to identify fractures,
and thus to measure fracture abundance, where
core is not retrieved from the (vertical or slant)
well (Davatzes and Hickman, 2005; Laongsakul
and Dürrast, 2011). However, several difficul-
ties plague the interpretation of fractures on
image logs: sealed or partially sealed fractures
are difficult to identify, aperture measurements
are imprecise, and natural fractures are difficult
to distinguish from drilling-induced fractures.
Consequently, image logs are of limited utility
for natural-fracture surveys where precise aper-
ture measurements are needed.
Just as the prevalence of power law–distrib-
uted fracture sets has been progressively recog-
nized, so has the value of accounting for fracture
size as a function of fracture abundance (Ortega
et al., 2006; Guerriero et al., 2011). In order to
establish a relationship between fracture size
and abundance, not only must fracture surveys
be systematic over a distance, area, or volume
of rock, but the resolution of the method of
observation must be considered. If the observ-
able size range is limited, then larger or smaller
fractures than those observed might be present
but uncounted, so that fracture index is exagger-
ated where fractures are more readily observed.
Subsurface cores are typically no more than
10 cm wide, and sidewall cores are rarely longer
than 5 cm. Therefore, only small layer-parallel
fracture surveys can be made within the subsur-
face except in the special case of horizontal core
(Hooker et al., 2009). The primary difficulty
associated with using microfractures to predict
macrofracture abundance is that, in core sam-
ples, few microfractures are typically observed
that can be reliably associated with larger frac-
tures. For example, within Travis Peak Forma-
tion, East Texas, USA (Cretaceous) samples,
the number of fractures (of any size) per thin
section, identified by associated fluid-inclusion
planes, is as high as 10–15 but is typically fewer
than five (Laubach, 1989).
The advent of microfracture detection using
SEM-CL greatly increased the precision of
microfracture measurement (Laubach et al.,
1995; Milliken and Laubach, 2000; Hooker
et al., 2009). However, because of the ambigu-
ous provenance of intra-granular microfractures
(Laubach et al., 1995; Laubach, 1997; Hooker
and Laubach, 2007), the enhanced capability
1341

of SEM-CL to detect microfractures does
not always result in substantially larger data
sets of microfractures that are clearly related
to macrofractures. In this paper, we use evi-
dence from SEM-CL imagery to illustrate how
natural-fracture-size distributions develop, and
we establish a method of extrapolating large-
fracture spacing from observed microfracture
size distributions.
Scanlines in Bedded Rock
In a structurally simple case, extensional
strain will be manifested in a single set of paral-
lel, opening-mode fractures. Many such fracture
arrays exist perpendicular to sedimentary bed-
ding in flat-lying or gently dipping beds (Pollard
and Aydin, 1988). Macrofractures in such cases
can be measured along layer-parallel, fracture-
perpendicular scanlines of observation. Along
the scanline, the kinematic aperture of each
fracture is measured where the fracture inter-
sects the scanline (Fig. 1). In the case of a single
set of parallel opening-mode fractures, trigono-
metric corrections are not needed. For multiple
fracture orientations, opening displacement can
be corrected by fracture strike, or multiple scan-
lines can be drawn. If multiple fracture sets are
present that all dip steeply with respect to bed-
ding, circular scanlines can provide a sample set
unbiased by orientation (Mauldon et al., 2001;
Rohrbaugh et al., 2002).
This study is focused on relatively simple
fracture arrays, for which linear scanlines suf-
fice. Except as noted, for each macrofracture
scanline measured in the field or in core, a cor-
responding microfracture scanline was taken.
For microfracture measurement, a sample was
taken from the rock along which the macrofrac-
ture scanline was made. From this sample, thin
sections were cut parallel to bedding such that
a microfracture-perpendicular scanline, parallel
to the macrofracture scanline, could be digitally
drawn across SEM-CL images. Samples were
processed such that no rock was lost between
serial thin sections for long, multi–thin-section
analyses (Gomez and Laubach, 2006).
Size distributions are here quantified by
plotting cumulative frequency (fracture-size
rank divided by scanline length) versus frac-
ture aperture (e.g., Marrett et al., 1999). Com-
bined macroscopic and microscopic scanline
measurements allow data from different scales
of observation from the same body of rock to
be compared on a single graph. Because scan-
lines for microfractures are shorter than those
for large fractures, such a comparison requires
normalizing the cumulative number of frac-
tures (fracture size rank) to the scanline length,
the result being the cumulative frequency. The
1342 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
Hooker et al.
technique also controls for scanlines of differ-
ent length collected at a single scale of obser-
vation. Lastly, the technique facilitates com-
parison of data from different places (Ortega A
et al., 2006).
Scanline
Scanlines in Core
In all core samples, microfracture scanlines
were constructed from the longest layer-parallel
(fracture-perpendicular) scanline possible; core
from deviated wells allows longer multi–thin-
section scanlines than does vertical core, whose
diameter limits scanline length to ~100 mm in
typical cases (Fig. 1). Our combined data set 0 cm 5
includes scanlines from outcrop, slant core, or
vertical core through dipping beds, in which
macrofractures and microfractures could be
observed. Additionally, we independently B
gathered data from short scanlines (from verti- Scanline
cal cores drilled through horizontal beds) and
show how these data can be used to predict
macrofracture spacing away from the well bore.
Except as noted, vertical cores are unoriented.
Where they occur together, microfractures and
macrofractures are parallel, and elsewhere we
assume macrofractures in vertical cores strike
parallel to (oriented) macrofractures in slant
cores from the same basins, but this may not
always be the case.
Scanlines versus Maps
C
To maximize the number of microfractures
sampled at a given depth within subsurface core Vertical core
samples, an entire cross section of core could be
mapped using SEM-CL. For this study, how- 0 mm 100
ever, fracture apertures were measured along
1-D transects, as opposed to 2-D maps, for three Approximate scale
Up
reasons. (1) The additional time and comput-
ing power required to assemble a fracture map Fracture Top
using SEM-CL increase with the square of
scanline length. (2) Fracture-size surveys within
2-D maps are subjective, because fracture link-
age can make it ambiguous where one fracture
ends and another begins. With scanlines, the Bottom
Thin section
surface
Figure 1. Fracture-aperture measurement
along scanlines. (A) Scanline drawn across Horizontal core
fractures in outcrop. Black scanline seg-
ments represent fractures; white segments
represent spacings between fractures. Fracture
(B) Scanline drawn across microfractures in ~15mm
scanning electron microscope cathodolumi- Thin section
~15mm
nescence (SEM-CL) image. (C) Method of surface
Up Fracture
cutting thin sections for core-microfracture
analysis. Outcrop thin-section method is
analogous.
 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones
locations of fractures are relatively straight-
forward. (3) If fractures are present in parallel
sets, then scanlines provide the same aperture-
size information that fracture maps do. These
reasons notwithstanding, more microfractures
might be sampled if core cross sections were
to be mapped in 2-D; 2-D map scaling might
therefore be preferable where data are scarce
and could be the subject of future study.
Barren and Cemented Fractures
Fractures observed in this study that lack
cement entirely have been omitted from this
analysis. Such barren fractures may have formed
naturally, but near the Earth’s surface, and so
have little to do with subsurface fracture for-
mation, in which diagenetically reactive fluids
commonly precipitate cement (Laubach et al.,
2010). Barren fractures might also have formed
in the subsurface but in response to fluid pres-
sure from natural gases that could potentially
suppress cement precipitation (Lacazette and
Engelder, 1992). Lastly, barren fractures may be
artificial. Barren fractures in core likely formed
during retrieval or handling. Barren fractures in
thin section may represent damage during saw-
ing and polishing. By restricting our attention
to cemented fractures, we focus on fractures
with apertures that are easily and objectively
measureable, and we omit possibly artificial or
surficial fractures.
Intra- and Trans-Granular Microfractures
Data collection in this study adheres to the
fracture-selection criteria used in Hooker et al.
(2009) with respect to intra- or trans-granularity
of fractures (Fig. 2). By omitting fractures that
do not crosscut grain boundaries and/or inter-
granular cement, this procedure omits any
fractures that may have already been present
within host sand grains at deposition. Inspec-
tion using SEM-CL shows that many such frac-
tures exist in sandstones (Laubach, 1997; Ber-
net and Bassett, 2005; Bernet et al., 2007), and
some of these can be identified by textural or
color criteria (Laubach, 1997; Seyedolali et al.,
1997; Götze et al., 2001; Hooker and Laubach,
2007; Augustsson and Reker, 2012). However,
these criteria cannot unambiguously identify all
such fractures. All intragranular fractures are
therefore removed for this analysis. It is likely
that filtering out all intragranular fractures also
omits some post-depositional fractures. Because
such fractures are sub-granular in scale, their
omission is equivalent to a truncation bias,
whereby the smallest fractures observed are
systematically under-recorded (Baecher and
Lanney, 1978).
Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
A The largest fractures in cumulative frequency
B To identify consistent patterns among
TF1
TF2 Quartz
Chert grain
Intra- fragment
granular
cement
IF
TF2
TF3
Figure 2. (A) Scanning electron microscope
cathodoluminescence image of quartzarenite
with microfractures. (B) Interpretation of A.
Intragranular fractures (IF) have unknown
provenance and may have been inherited
with grains (i.e., may have formed before the
sandstone was deposited). At least three sets
of transgranular fractures (TF) are pres-
ent, whose relative timing (1—oldest; 3—
youngest) can be assessed by crosscutting
relationships.
Curve-Fitting and Sampling Biases
For the purpose of accurate extraction of
statistical information from a fracture set, data
that appear to be biased may be removed before
equations are regressed, in the interest of deriv-
ing an equation that most closely approximates
the underlying distribution (Pickering et al.,
1995; Bonnet et al., 2001). A disadvantage to
such an approach is that it can be difficult to dis-
tinguish real and artificial complexities within
fracture intensity curves.
Truncation bias represents a systematic
under-recording of fractures among the small-
est fracture sizes measured. Truncation bias
may affect our data by omission of sub-grain-
scale microfractures and by our inability to
resolve fractures below the SEM pixel size
(0.77 microns in width) at the magnification
used (150×).
data are inherently poorly sampled (Guerriero
et al., 2010). Because of poor sampling, the
large-size end of a fracture size–frequency
curve has high associated uncertainty, which
commonly results in scattering of data in size-
frequency space. However, such scattered data
are not expected to systematically under- or
over-record fracture frequency for 1-D scan-
line data.
Statistical Tests for Power-Law Scaling
natural-fracture-size distributions, we regress
the fracture frequency data without removing
any data points. The assembled data sets may
be afflicted by the two types of bias described
above (i.e., small-size truncation from omis-
sion of intragranular fractures and poor large-
fracture sampling), but whether the observed
data are consistent with biased sampling of an
ideal type of size distribution is an interpreta-
tion which must be supported by independent
argument—bias should not be assumed at the
outset. Patterns to fracture scaling that are not
attributable to these types of bias require alter-
native explanations, possibly including natu-
rally complex scaling.
Aperture-size distributions from each scan-
line can be regressed with a variety of equa-
tions (Table 1). The equation type that best
fits each size distribution—among power law,
exponential, normal, and log-normal—can
be judged by the chi2 value for each equa-
tion type:
chi2 = Σ[(Fobs – Fmod)2/|Fmod|], (1)
where Fobs is observed fracture frequency and Fmod
is frequency modeled using the regressed equa-
tion. We prefer the chi2 test to the Kolmogorov-
Smirnov test suggested by Clauset et al. (2009)
because chi2 is equally sensitive to fracture fre-
quencies across the observed size range.
Natural-fracture sizes may not perfectly
adhere to simple size-distribution equations
(Table 1). Indeed, many ideal equations have
geometrical limits to the range of fracture-size
abundances that the equations can approxi-
mate (Hooker et al., 2011). Moreover, as we
show below (see Interpretation of Aperture-
Size Distributions), residuals from such simple
equations potentially reveal information about
how fractures grow. Therefore, rather than
hypothesizing that an observed fracture-size
distribution was sampled from an ideal power-
law or characteristic population, and testing
this hypothesis against random subsamples of
an ideal, artificial distribution, the approach
1343

Formation/group Folk (1981) classification
Travis Peak Formation Quartzarenite
Mesaverde Group Sublitharenite, litharenite
Formation X Sublitharenite
Huizachal Group Feldspathic litharenite, litharenite
Eriboll Formation Quartzarenite
Mesón Group Quartzarenite
*Fractures from Travis Peak Formation and Mesaverde Group are not related to obvious folds or faults; see text.
pursued here will be to examine natural-frac-
ture-size distributions of any number of frac-
tures in aggregate, so that patterns present
among natural-fracture networks can be iden-
tified and interpreted. A relevant description
of each fracture set includes which common,
simple equation best fits the data relative to the
other simple equations and judged via the chi2
criterion. However, such equations should not
be construed as the underlying or real distribu-
tion without accounting for natural complexi-
ties that are neither encompassed by the simple
equation nor even attributable to general, non-
site-specific growth histories.
This method could potentially result in a
power-law size distribution being classified as
characteristic, but likely not vice-versa. This is
because truncation bias tends to result in con-
cave-downward curves to scaling data. If this
effect is combined with a downward roll-off
at the large-size end, then data collected from
a natural-fracture set that strongly follows a
power law or gamma law could nonetheless be
better fit statistically by a characteristic distribu-
tion because of biased sampling. Therefore, the
effects of biases should result in overestimates
of the occurrence of characteristic-sized fracture
sets in this study.
Here we do not regress data using gamma-law
or stretched-exponential equations, although
such equations might closely fit the data. The
best interpretation of a gamma law known to
us is a power law with an upper size limit (Sor-
nette and Sornette, 1999; Bonnet et al., 2001),
akin to the truncated power law (Kolyukhin and
Torabi, 2013). Therefore, a best fit by a gamma
law would require the same interpretation that
a power law would, with an added implication
that the maximum size has been sampled. We
prefer to independently establish whether the
maximum size might have been sampled using
field observations. Likewise, the stretched-
exponential equation (e.g., Clauset et al., 2009;
Gudmundsson and Mohajeri, 2013) is an expo-
nential equation with an added parameter to the
exponent that stretches the curve. Adding this
parameter can potentially improve the fit of the
equation, but we would still interpret such a best
fit as a characteristic size distribution, as dis-
cussed in the Introduction.
1344 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
Hooker et al.
TABLE 2. OVERVIEW OF FRACTURE-SCALING DATA SET
Structural setting Major fracture-cement phases Average microfracture strain
Unstructured* Quartz 1.4 × 10–3
Unstructured* Quartz, carbonate 4.7 × 10–3
Foreland basin, fold-thrust belt Quartz, carbonate 1.4 × 10–2
Sub-décollement Quartz, carbonate 1.6 × 10–2
Sub-thrust belt Quartz 2.6 × 10–2
Fold-thrust belt Quartz 4.8 × 10–2
GEOLOGIC SETTINGS C
A
Among study areas, strain recorded among
microfracture populations (therefore over the
same fracture-size range) varies over more
than an order of magnitude. At the low end,
strain near 10–3 is present among fracture
sets in unstructured settings; at the high end, QC
strain near 5 × 10–2 is present among fracture QC
sets in fold-and-thrust belts (Table 2). The
Piceance Basin and East Texas Basin settings
(see Appendix) are unstructured in the sense
that samples were collected on broad (tens to CC
100 μm 500 μm
hundreds of kilometers), gentle arches within
sedimentary basins, distant (>0.5 km in most
cases) from mapped faults or folds. These are B D
“regional fractures” (Nelson, 1985) in that cur-
vature associated with these arches is unlikely
to affect fracture development (see Becker QC
et al., 2010; Fall et al., 2012; and English,
2012, for discussion of fracture origins). The
remaining fracture-sample locations are within
fold-and-thrust belts. In each case we assume
that the fractures represent tectonic deforma-
tion, on the basis of their association with
large-scale folds and faults. In any case, non-
tectonic fractures arising from local fluid injec- QC+CC
CC
tion (Mandl and Harkness, 1987) may scale
differently and are outside the scope of this
paper. Sample locations are listed in Table 2 in 100 μm
10 cm
increasing order of maximum fracture strain.
A brief description of each geologic setting is Figure 3. Natural fractures in sandstone.
provided in the Appendix. (A) Scanning electron microscope cathodo-
luminescence (SEM-CL) image of a thin
FRACTURE DESCRIPTION microfracture sealed with quartz cement
(QC). (B) SEM-CL image of a larger micro-
Fracture populations in this study include fracture lined with quartz cement and sealed
opening-mode fractures in distributed, parallel by later calcite cement (CC). (C) SEM-CL
sets. We analyzed only individual sets; where image of a macrofracture with bridging quartz
multiple fracture orientations are present, we cement, sealed by calcite cement. (D) Outcrop
identified a dominant strike based on fracture photograph of crosscutting fractures, each
strain and crosscutting relationships. Microfrac- filled with quartz and calcite cement.
tures systematically strike parallel to the domi-
nant macrofracture strike. Fractures measured at
both scales of observation are typically planar, form only thin veneers that line fracture walls
with sharp, discrete walls (Fig. 3). Macrofrac- or form fibrous or euhedral bridges that extend
tures dip steeply with respect to bedding. across fractures (Fig. 3). Calcite linings over-
All fractures represented in the data set are lap quartz and typically seal fractures entirely,
cemented by either quartz or some carbonate although rare euhedral calcite faces indicate par-
mineral, typically calcite. Quartz cement may tial filling by calcite cement.
 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones
Although this study is limited to fractures that
contain cement, the type of cement played no role
in the scanline selection process. Only upon obser-
vation in thin section was it confirmed that the
first cement phase deposited within all fractures in
each sample was quartz. Typically, this phase was
synkinematic (deposited during fracture opening).
In the Piceance Basin, the Sierra Madre Oriental,
and Basin X, overlapping, postkinematic carbon-
ate cements are common, but in all three cases,
later carbonate cements are heterogeneously dis-
tributed. Such heterogeneous distributions of late-
stage carbonate cement are common in fractured
tight-gas sandstones (Laubach, 2003), but causes
of this heterogeneity are obscure.
Crack-seal texture is common among
observed fractures and is readily apparent in
SEM-CL images. Crack-seal texture consists of
bands of cement that run parallel to the fracture
walls, suggesting repeated cracking of the frac-
ture along fracture wall–parallel surfaces within
the cement or at the cement-wall interface (Ram-
say, 1980; Urai et al., 1991). These bands form
as cement is deposited during fracture growth.
During growth, the fracture undergoes recurrent
opening, and cement fills in across each ephem-
eral gap. These cement bands are broken during
subsequent opening increments, and crosscutting
relations are evident in SEM-CL images (Becker
et al., 2010). As this process repeats, crack-seal
texture forms within the growing fracture.
Whether crack-seal develops within an opening
fracture therefore depends on the relative rates of
fracture opening and cement deposition. If frac-
ture opening outpaces cement deposition, the
local sealing step is not achieved, and crack-seal
texture does not form. Because the rate of cement
deposition is much faster on freshly broken sur-
faces than on euhedral crystal faces (Lander et al.,
2008), crack-seal cementation commonly forms
isolated bridge deposits on host-rock grains whose
fast-growth crystallographic axis is oriented at a
high angle to the fracture (Fig. 4).
Typically, pore space is present in the largest
fractures observed of each data set. In such large
fractures, synkinematic quartz cement is present
in isolated bridges, with porosity or late-stage,
porosity-occluding carbonate cement in between.
Fracture size–dependent porosity preservation has
been described for fractures above a characteristic
size within a given population (Laubach, 1988,
2003; Laubach et al., 2004b; Gale et al., 2010).
SCALING DATA
Outcrop and Slant-Core Samples
Fracture sizes (apertures) within the com-
bined data set range between 0.0005 and 14 mm
(Fig. 5). The small-size end of this range is near
Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
Euhedral quartz cement
Anhedral quartz cement
c-axis
Quartz grains
c-axis
Non-
quartz
grain
Fracture
kinematic
aperture
Figure 4. Local preservation of opening in-
crements (crack-seal structure) in fracture
cement. Crack-seal texture will form if ce-
ment precipitation can keep up with frac-
ture opening. Quartz-cement precipitation
can be locally variable, depending on the
substrate mineral and crystallographic axis
orientation (Lander et al., 2008).
the pixel resolution for SEM-CL images and
close to the width of fractures that are ubiquitous
in natural quartz grains (Sprunt and Nur, 1979;
Seyedolali et al., 1997; Bernet and Bassett,
2005; Hooker and Laubach, 2007). The fracture
sizes observed are therefore likely bounded at
the small end by image resolution and the inde-
terminate genesis of intragranular fractures, as
discussed above. However, it is not necessar-
ily true that the fracture sets observed contain
narrower, unmeasureable fractures. In the next
section (Interpretation of Aperture-Size Distri-
butions) we address whether the data set might
include the smallest extant fracture sizes. Larger
fractures could be present, but at each field site,
or within each slant core, the sets studied each
feature a millimeter- to centimeter-scale maxi-
mum observed fracture aperture.
Of 22 outcrop and slant-core fracture-size
data sets, 19 are best fit by power-law equations,
judging by the chi2 criterion (Table 3). The other
three are best fit by exponential (sample 20) or
log-normal (samples 21 and 22) size distribu-
tions. No observed fracture set is best fit by a
normal size distribution.
Vertical-Core Samples
Scanlines were constructed from vertical-core
thin-section samples from the Piceance Basin,
the East Texas Basin, and Basin X. Scanlines
from 46 vertical-core samples (from shallowly
dipping beds; Table 3) have an average scanline
length of 77.4 mm, limited by the width of the
sampled core, parallel to bedding. These scan-
lines intersect 12.6 fractures on average (mini-
mum zero, maximum 104). Fracture frequency,
irrespective of fracture size, averages 0.17
per mm and ranges from zero to 1.2 per mm.
Microfracture strain values are similar to those
observed in horizontal and slant cores from the
Piceance Basin (Table 3), from which most verti-
cal-core samples are derived .
Of the 44 vertical-core scanlines that intersect
fractures, 27 are best fit by power-law aperture
distributions; 17 are best fit by characteristic size
distributions. The average number of fractures
for power-law and characteristic size distribu-
tions is similar (13.5 and 12.7, respectively), but
strain is higher among power law–distributed
sets (8.9 × 10–3 versus 1.5 × 10–3).
Power-Law Size Distributions
Power-law size-distribution curves have a
coefficient a and exponent b (Table 1). The a
parameter of the power-law equation represents
the y-intercept of the line in log-log space [with
the y-axis at log(x) = 0]; the b parameter rep-
resents the line’s slope. It can be qualitatively
appreciated (Fig. 5 and Table 3) that variation in
a among individual data sets is greater than vari-
ation in b. In fact, a increases systematically with
increasing microfracture strain among power
law–distributed fracture sets (Fig. 6), whereas b
remains roughly constant with increasing strain.
In general, less variation in b exists among popu-
lations containing more fractures (Fig. 7), sug-
gesting that some variation of b can be attributed
to statistically inadequate sampling rather than
natural variation.
The greatest (steepest) value of b from those
data sets best fit by power-law equations is
1.75, observed among microfractures in the
Mesón Group at Yacoraite Canyon (sample
19). The size distribution of these fractures is
poorly characterized by all of the four tested
equation types. Yacoraite Canyon size data are
nearly equally as well fit by an exponential
equation as by a power law. The quality of fit
of an exponential equation, relative to that of
a power law, is better among these fractures
1345
 Hooker et al.

2
1
1 2 3
0
–1 Piceance Basin
–2
–3
–4
–5

2
4 5 6 7
1
0
Log cumulative frequency (fractures/mm)

–1 Mexican SMO
–2
–3
–4
–5

2
8 9 10 11
1
0
–1 Basin X
–2
–3
–4
–5

2
1
12 13 14
0
–1 NW Scotland
–2
–3
–4
–5
Argentinian Andes
2
15 16 17 18 19
1
0
–1
–2
–3
–4
–5
–4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 1

Log kinematic aperture (mm)

Figure 5. Apertures of power law–distributed fracture data sets, from outcrop and slant-core scanlines. Each graph is labeled with the
sample number (see Table 3). For reference, the plotted line in each graph has a slope –0.8 (b = 0.8) and y-intercept a = 10–3 fractures/mm.
SMO—Sierra Madre Oriental.

than any other power law–distributed data set
(Fig. 8). Therefore, despite the large number of
fractures present in the fracture set measured
from Yacoraite Canyon (n = 499), it is less clear
that this fracture set follows a power-law size-
distribution equation, compared with fractures
within smaller data sets. We further investigate
the anomalous scaling behavior of the fractures
in sample 19 using a numerical experiment in
the next section.
Observed b values, excluding the dubious
sample 19, range from 0.35 to 1.24, with an
average of 0.77 and a standard deviation of 0.12.
If sample 19 is included, b averages 0.82 (stan-
dard deviation 0.25). Values of b near 0.8 have

1346 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014

 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones

(continued )
been reported for fracture sets from previous

1.31
2.50
1.18

1.08

1.78

1.16
1.16
2.04
1.30

1.49
Cv
studies (Table 4) measured using the same 1-D
sampling technique.

2.6E–04
6.9E–03
8.5E–04

9.4E–03

1.1E–02

1.8E–02
2.8E–02
2.0E–03
1.1E–02

4.3E–02
Strain
Characteristic Size Distributions

Macrofractures
Scan-line length
Among outcrop and slant-core samples, the
Vertical core samples

only characteristic fracture-size distributions

(mm)

52151
2045
33054

2972

14235

2308
3091
7198
3594

1121
were measured from samples taken from the
Mesón Group, where it is exposed at Huasamayo
Canyon (Table 3). Outcrops contain poorly
cemented, bedding-perpendicular, opening-

12*

10
26

25

114

62
123
48
42

24
N
mode fractures with regular spacing and a low
range of submillimetric aperture sizes (Hooker
et al., 2013). These macrofractures are not sys-

1.01
2.38

1.78
1.01

3.69

1.82

0.88

1.20
1.63
0.80

1.09
1.27

1.53

1.20
1.08

0.96

0.94
1.65
1.77
1.87
1.85
1.37
1.65
1.53
1.80
1.02
1.87
1.79
1.47
1.98

0.79

1.70
1.51
1.07
1.40
1.89
Cv
tematically parallel to microfractures and may be
unrelated. Average fracture aperture for Huasa-

1.0E–04

3.0E–02

5.4E–04
3.8E–03

9.3E–04

4.7E–03
5.4E–04

3.9E–03
3.4E–03
2.8E–03

1.8E–02
1.5E–03

3.3E–03

9.6E–04
1.5E–04

9.5E–03
9.1E–03
2.4E–02
3.6E–02
5.4E–02
1.3E–02
6.7E–03
1.9E–02
8.8E–03
1.6E–02
3.6E–02
2.3E–02
9.9E–02
1.9E–01

6.0E–03

1.1E–04

3.8E–03
1.9E–02
1.1E–03
4.2E–03
7.6E–03
mayo Canyon microfractures is lower than those Strain
of power law–distributed fracture sets, as is the
Microfractures

fracture strain (Table 3).

Scan-line length

Opening-Increment Width and

(mm)

1017

41

85
120

94

86
2067
554

195
195

94

75
91

83

79
89

61
222
230
122
68
205
183
125
30
48
112
97
61
131

90

84
71
46
69
46
TABLE 3. FRACTURE SCANLINE-DATA STATISTICS

Overall Fracture Aperture

For fractures within sample 8, increment

sizes are well fit by a log-normal size distri-
20

499

17
155

12

18
174
16

14
26
101
131

64

24
4

18

7
3

8
157
160
65
77
153
38
104
134
150
97
416

27
6
6
3
5
bution (Fig. 9), indicating a characteristic size
N

for opening increments. Similar distributions

of opening-increment sizes within crack-seal
8.0E–05

9.0E–05

1.0E–04
2.0E–04

1.1E–03

4.2E–03
8.0E–04
3.0E–04

3.1E–03
8.0E–04
2.0E–03
1.2E–02

4.0E–04

2.0E–06
2.0E–04

6.0E–05

7.4E–03
2.0E–02
2.4E–02
5.0E–03
3.2E–03
4.2E–03
5.5E–03
2.9E–03
5.5E–03
5.0E–03
2.4E–02
1.6E–02

8.5E–03

3.0E–05

1.1E–02

2.1E–03
1.4E–02
4.0E–04
1.0E–02
1.4E–02
textures were documented by Laubach et al.
a

(2004a), Renard et al. (2005), and Hooker et al.

(2012). This relationship appears to be typical 1.75

1.13
1.31
0.74
0.74
0.87
0.52
0.89
0.87
0.60
0.63

1.17
0.73
0.64
0.78
0.83
0.78
0.93
0.85
0.90
0.66
0.82

for observed fractures. However, note that pre-

0.7

0.7
1.9
0.8

1.2

0.4
0.3

1.2

0.3

0.8
0.3
1.1
0.2
0.4
b

served crack-seal increment widths may not

accurately reflect opening-increment sizes. If
the fracture-opening rate accelerates or if the
3.51
0.21
0.07
0.27
0.12

785.52

0.04
9.28
2.82
5.34

0.12
0.05
0.44
0.09
0.02
0.02

0.06
10.34
1.79
0.72
23.84
17.42
21.73
13.75
115.18
26.33
56.14

0.06

0.01
0.04
0.14

0.32
0.09
0.03
0.02
0.04
LN

cement-precipitation rate slows, opening incre-

ments may not be preserved in the crack-seal
record. Therefore, preserved opening-increment
18.64
0.23
0.10
0.43
3.21
217533
949.58
4.E+08

1.22

0.23
0.01
8.E+11
6.E+09
9381.7
33.04
17.42
28.12
54.22
28.28

6.E+10
1.E+10
2.E+07

0.24

0.35

0.09
0.10

0.01

0.36

741.90
0.12
0.03
0.02
0.10
1.15
5.E+09

0.75
widths may overestimate true opening-incre-
N
Chi2 error

ment width. Moreover, for any preserved open-

ing increment, the fracture may have widened
in excess of what is preserved then closed to the
2.85
0.14
0.20
0.41
0.22
23.12
8.43
28.10
45.65
3.80
3.56
65.55
33.42
35.42
37.31
45.04
29.23
294.36
345.66
0.06

0.09
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.00
0.02
0.10

0.89
0.04
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.06
2.55

0.07
E

size at which cement bridged across.

Most fracture sets within the collective data
set feature some crack-seal texture, but fractures
0.17
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.65
0.64
0.56
1.80
0.07
0.19
1.14
0.83
3.52
1.08
4.60
1.28
10.04

0.34
0.01
0.04
0.01
0.15
0.00
0.01
0.02
1.75
0.22
22.08

0.06
0.24
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.00
PL

that follow characteristic size distributions are

330.6

mostly devoid of crack-seal (Fig. 10). Char-

acteristic-size microfractures from the Mesón
Formation

Group are thin (<10 microns in aperture), dark

WF

WF
WF
WF
WF
WF
WF
WF
WF
EA
EA
CZ
CZ

TP
TP
TP
TP
TP
TP
FX
FX
FX
FX
LB
LB

M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
E
E
E

luminescing, and mostly textureless. No charac-

teristic size–distributed fracture sets have frac-
tures more than two to three increments wide,
as preserved within crack-seal texture. Because
Location

MSM
MSM
MSM
MSM

NWS
NWS
NWS
NPB

NPB
NPB
NPB
NPB
NPB
NPB
NPB
NPB
SPB
SPB

ETB
ETB
ETB
ETB
ETB
ETB
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
BX
BX
BX
BX

of limited resolution of the SEM-CL imaging

technique, these observations do not preclude
the possibility of submicron-scale crack-seal
bands within these fractures. However, such
Sample

hypothetical, submicron-scale, crack-seal bands

c01
c02
c03
c04
c05
c06
c07
c08
c09
c10

c12
c13
c14
c11
10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
11

do not achieve wide variations in fracture size,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014 1347

 TABLE 3. FRACTURE SCANLINE-DATA STATISTICS (continued)

1348
Chi2 error Microfractures Macrofractures
Scan-line length Scan-line length
Sample Location Formation PL E N LN b a N (mm) Strain Cv N (mm) Strain Cv
c15 NPB WF 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.5 2.4E–03 3 61 5.2E–04 1.36
c16 NPB WF 0.02 0.06 0.18 0.08 0.5 6.5E–03 10 92 4.8E–03 1.28
c17 NPB WF 0.24 2.79 102226 18.22 0.8 3.5E–03 37 86 1.0E–02 2.90
c18 NPB WF 0.02 0.04 0.25 0.05 0.3 1.9E–02 10 75 1.7E–02 1.03
c19 NPB WF 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.6 1.7E–03 5 94 6.7E–04 0.95
c20 NPB WF 0.04 0.29 3.18 0.51 0.5 7.9E–03 14 93 1.3E–02 1.24
c21 NPB WF 0.04 0.14 0.32 0.19 0.4 1.2E–02 12 78 1.2E–02 1.31
c22 NPB WF 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.05 1.2 8.0E–05 7 75 4.5E–04 1.41
c23 NPB WF 3.95 28.63 50.97 25.93 0.8 6.4E–03 104 90 1.0E–01 2.03
c24 NPB WF 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.03 1.5 1.0E–05 7 95 4.2E–04 0.67
c25 NPB WF 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.3 8.5E–03 3 91 5.0E–03 1.40
c26 NPB WF 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 1.5 5.0E–06 2 88 1.1E–04
c27 NPB WF 0.02 0.09 0.31 0.16 0.4 1.0E–02 6 53 1.5E–03 0.74
c28 NPB WF 0.00 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.3 7.5E–03 5 65 2.7E–03 0.94
c29 NPB WF 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.6 2.3E–03 3 90 7.6E–04 1.27
c30 NPB WF 0 87 0
c31 NPB WF 0.04 0.15 1.24 0.12 0.6 3.1E–03 12 88 3.0E–03 1.46
c32 NPB WF 0.33 0.61 780.89 0.11 0.8 3.7E–03 36 89 6.8E–03 2.70
c33 NPB WF 0.03 0.27 3.12 0.42 0.6 3.6E–03 14 93 3.3E–03 1.08
c34 NPB WF 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.3 9.5E–03 3 91 4.9E–03 0.60
Vertical core samples

c35 SPB WF 0.06 0.02 0.11 0.06 1.8 1.0E–06 14 108 2.1E–04 1.61
c36 SPB WF 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.02 1.4 2.0E–05 10 98 3.7E–04 1.39
c37 SPB WF 0.00 0.01 0.04 0.03 1.6 3.0E–06 7 93 1.9E–04 0.86
c38 SPB WF 0.04 0.10 0.33 0.17 1.2 7.0E–05 20 98 7.0E–04 1.38
c39 SPB WF 0.01 0.00 0.12 0.08 2.0 2.0E–06 6 22 7.4E–04 0.90
c40 SPB WF 0.47 0.16 0.74 0.16 1.3 8.0E–05 14 38 7.2E–04 1.30
c41 SPB WF 0 20 0
c42 SPB WF 0.05 0.63 21.89 0.24 0.7 4.8E–03 18 39 6.1E–03 1.38
c43 SPB WF 0.29 0.03 0.18 0.06 0.8 2.1E–03 12 43 1.6E–03 1.03
c44 BX FX 0.07 0.01 0.13 0.03 1.1 1.0E–04 12 94 6.0E–04 1.06
Hooker et al.

c45 BX FX 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.02 1.1 2.0E–04 8 82 4.7E–04 1.39

c46 BX FX 0.22 0.06 1.28 0.08 1.6 3.0E–05 19 90 1.3E–03 1.30
Note: Locations: NPB—north Piceance Basin; SPB—south Piceance Basin; MSM—Mexican Sierra Madre Oriental; BX—Basin X; NWS—northwest Scotland; AA—Argentinian Andes; ETB—East Texas Basin.
Formations: WF—Williams Fork Formation; CZ—Cozzette Sandstone, Iles Formation; LB—La Boca Formation; EA—El Alamar Formation; FX—Formation X; E—Eriboll Formation; M—Mesón Group; TP—Travis
Peak Formation. PL—power-law; E—exponential; N—normal; LN—log-normal; b—power-law exponent; a—power-law coefficient; N—number of fractures; Cv—coefficient of variation, standard deviation of
spacings divided by average spacing. Best-fit chi2 error value in bold.
*All 12 macrofractures within sample 1 are included in the microfracture total, which spans the entire cored interval.

b Log10 a
0
1
2

0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
–6
–5
–4
–3
–2
–1
0

Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014

0.0001

in sample 19.
0.001

distribution equations.

fracture-bridging cements.

SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
0.01
0.1

Curves among Small Fracture Sizes

Microfracture strain

INTERPRETATION OF APERTURE-

Truncation Bias versus Fracture Localization

be the case. One is the aforementioned charac-

mum opening distance achieved when fractures
may be real and represent a characteristic mini-
Alternatively, the concave-downward curves
sample 6 and among fractures <0.004 mm wide
are present among fractures <0.03 mm wide in
bias. Representative examples of such curves
bution that are not consistent with truncation
ward curves at the small-size end of the distri-
examples, other samples have concave-down-
log space, but the residuals are progressively
above the pixel size form a straight line in log-
power law–distributed data, because the data
scaling curves are consistent with truncation of
sured. In samples 7 and 15, for example, such
present among the smallest aperture sizes mea-
Concave-downward scaling curves are locally
involved repeated breaking and re-sealing of
was incremental, then it does not appear to have
opened incrementally. But if fracture opening
does not preclude the possibility that fractures
ture sets. Furthermore, absence of crack-seal
as is the case for power law–distributed frac-
all data sets best fit by power-law aperture
Figure 6. Power-law coefficient (a) and ex-
1

propagate. Two observations suggest this might

negative near the pixel size. In contrast to these
ponent (b) versus microfracture strain, for
 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones

2 A (O
v
fra erall)
Sample 19 ap cture
ert
1.5 siz ure
e
Fra
op cture
inc e n i n g
1 re
wid ment
b

ths
Quartz grain

0.5
Slant core and outcrop
Vertical core 1000
0 B Power law
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Exponential

Cumulative number
Normal
Number of fractures Log-normal
100

Figure 7. Power-law exponent (b) versus number of fractures intersected by scanline, for Crack-seal
fracture sets best fit by power-law size distributions. In general, b converges with higher increment widths

number of fractures sampled. Sample 19 is a notable exception; see text for discussion. 10

100 1
(chi2EXP-chi2PL) / chi2PL

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1

Increment size (mm)

relative to exponential
10 Better power-law fit,
Figure 9. (A) Scanning electron microscope
cathodoluminescence image of fracture
1
from Formation X (sample 8) that grew by
repeated, incremental opening (crack-seal).
(B) Cumulative plot of widths of 11 such
0.1 fractures’ opening increments, within the
same sample. The opening increments are
19 best fit by a log-normal equation.
0.01
1 10 100 1000

Number of fractures teristic size of crack-seal increment widths—

fractures from Formation X, for example,
Figure 8. The y-axis is a relative measure of the quality of the power-law equation fit to the appear to be composed of multiple characteris-
exponential equation fit. It is the difference between the chi2 error from the two fits, divided tic-size opening increments (Fig. 9). The other
by the chi2 error from the power-law fit. This is plotted versus number of fractures that observation is apparently imperfect localization
are best fit by power-law size distributions. As more fractures are sampled, generally the of fractures, which is present locally along frac-
relative fit of the power-law equation becomes progressively better; as in Figure 7, sample tures within Formation X (Fig. 9) and within
19 is here again anomalous. Though best fit by a power-law size-distribution equation, this the El Alamar Formation, sample 6 (Fig. 11A).
data set is nearly as well fit by an exponential equation; other large data sets are easier to SEM-CL images reveal that neighboring open-
distinguish. ing increments may be generally connected and
thought of as parts of a single fracture, but are
locally dispersed, with host rock in between.
TABLE 4. VALUES OF POWER-LAW EXPONENT b REPORTED IN LITERATURE, FOR OPENING-MODE-
FRACTURE APERTURES MEASURED ALONG ONE-DIMENSIONAL SCANLINES
Therefore, a large fracture may be recorded
Author Year b Rock type
within the size distribution as either a single,
Gross and Engelder 1995 0.45 to 0.85 Dolostone
large fracture or a cluster of tiny fractures,
sedimentary rocks

Marrett 1997 0.758, 0.764 Sandstone depending on the location at which the scanline
Exclusively

Marrett et al. 1999 0.769, 1.042 Dolostone, sandstone intersects fractures that locally branch. Note that
Ortega et al. 2006 0.69 to 1.0 Limestone, dolostone
Ortega et al. 2010 0.2 to 2.0 Limestone, dolostone fractures within Formation X (sample 8) do not
Hooker et al. 2011 0.56 to 1.17 Quartzarenite feature a concave-downward curve in Figure 5
Guerriero et al. 2011 0.95 to 1.44 Limestone, dolostone because in that sample the fracture-trace disper-
Hooker et al. 2012 0.5 to 1.0 Limestone, dolostone
Wong et al. 1989 0.843, 0.804 Granite, quartzite
sion is minor, present only where fractures cut
Other rock types

Clark et al. 1995 1.33 Meta-turbidite monocrystalline quartz grains (Fig. 9).
McCaffrey and Johnston 1996 0.58 to 1.13 Metasediments Fractures within sample 19 show the same
Gillespie et al. 1999 0.49 to 1.24 Metasediments, granite, limestone, sandstone
Sasaki 2006 0.89 to 1.35 Volcanics, sedimentary rocks phenomenon—dispersed fracture traces with
André-Mayer and Sausse 2007 1.04 to 1.92 Igneous-hosted porphyry veins host rock in between crack opening incre-
Fagereng 2011 1.24 to 3.01 Mélange ments—to a greater degree (Fig. 11B). In this

Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014 1349


A relative to the fracture opening rate, fractures in
Fracture
Non-quartz
grain
100 μm
B and fewer fractures would therefore intersect the
surface pits
Fracture trace
100 μm
Figure 10. (A) Cathodoluminescence (CL)
and (B) secondary electron (SE) images of
microfracture from sample 20. Most of the
fracture is entirely occluded by textureless
quartz cement (luminescing medium gray).
Where the fracture cuts a non-quartz grain,
visible in CL by irregular and dark lumines-
cence, and in SE by pitted surface, the frac-
ture is porous (bright CL and pitted trace in
SE). (A) modified from Hooker et al. (2013).
sample, most fractures are individual crack
opening increments separated by host rock, and
individual fractures therefore lack crack-seal
texture sensu stricto.
If power-law size distributions indeed arise
from localization of micron-scale-width open-
ing increments into larger fractures, perhaps
deviations from the power law would be intro-
duced if this localization mechanism were
imperfect. The microfractures imaged in Fig-
ures 9 and 11 illustrate grain-scale cement-
precipitation effects on fracture opening. In
Figures 9 and 11A, where fractures cut quartz
grains on which quartz cement precipitation was
rapid enough to bridge the opening gaps as the
fracture grew, the bridges had to re-crack with
every widening increment. In regions of the
same fractures where cement precipitation was
slower, because the fractures remained open,
no cohesive material was there to break as the
fracture widened. Consequently, what appears
to be a single fracture with unambiguous walls
where cement precipitation was slow appears
elsewhere as a cluster of individual opening
1350 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
Hooker et al.
A the cement precipitation rate had been slower,
Quartz grain
200 μm
B
200 μm
Figure 11. Scanning electron microscope
cathodoluminescence images of branching
microfractures. (A) Sample 6, El Alamar
Formation. Dashed lines indicate fracture
walls away from quartz grain, in which
the fracture branches into numerous seg-
ments. (B) Sample 19, Mesón Group. Crack-
opening increments show little tendency to
coalesce into larger fractures with crack-
seal texture.
increments with local intervening host-rock
slivers where cement precipitation was fast.
This local branching of the fracture trace is a
consequence of inconsistency in the locations of
re-cracking surfaces within the cement bridges.
If a single fracture can be locally discrete where
cement precipitated slowly and locally diffuse
where cement precipitated quickly, then an
entire fracture, or most of a fracture, might be
diffuse if cement precipitation were fast, relative
to fracture opening, throughout. Such appears
to have been the case in sample 19 (Fig. 11B).
Microfractures within samples 6 and 19 super-
ficially resemble fractures described by Caputo
and Hancock (1998), which these authors inter-
preted to branch because the host-rock material
is weaker than the fracture fill.
Experiment to Investigate the Effects of
Localization on the Size Distribution
Consider the hypothesis that concave-down-
ward curves among the microfracture size dis-
tributions in samples 6 and 19 are not related to
bias, but instead represent diffuse fracturing. If
these samples would have been less thoroughly
sealed with cement during growth and would
have formed as discrete, larger fractures. Instead,
the cementation rate was sufficiently fast to
cause later opening increments to imperfectly
localize along earlier ones, the same way in
which the opening increments are locally diffuse
in Figures 9 and 11. With slower cement pre-
cipitation, the characteristic-size opening incre-
ments would combine to make larger fractures,
scanline. As observed, diffuse fracturing is mani-
fest in scanline data as a greater number of small
(characteristic-sized, <0.01-mm-wide) fractures.
Lacking a direct test of this hypothesis, the
effect of diffuse fracturing on size distributions
can nevertheless be examined via a geometric
experiment, eliminating the smallest spacings
from the scanline (Fig. 12A). We rearranged the
scanline data in order to create a hypothetical
arrangement in which the fractures separated by
distances smaller than a threshold value formed
together as a single fracture. A threshold spac-
ing value of 0.15 mm was applied, and any
fracture increments separated by less than this
threshold value were treated as a single frac-
ture. The hypothesis is thereby made that frac-
tures separated by less than this threshold value
would have formed together, as a larger fracture
with no separation in between, if the cement
precipitation rate had been slower. Figure 12B
shows the original microfracture size distribu-
tions from samples 6 and 19, as well as those
resulting from the summation of nearby fracture
increments. The latter, hypothetical size distri-
butions are better fit by power-law equations;
as well, the power-law equations best fit to the
resulting size distributions have b values closer
to the average for power-law data sets (0.8).
Curves among Large Fracture Sizes
Fracture-size data also typically deviate from
best-fit power-law equations at the large-size
end of the data distribution. This deviation has
at least five plausible explanations:
1. The largest fracture sizes sampled in a
scanline are necessarily statistically inade-
quate. As explained by Guerriero et al. (2010),
progressively smaller, cumulative sample sizes
increase the statistical error of the cumulative
frequency calculation toward the right side of
the scaling plot. Greater deviation from any
underlying ideal size distribution can therefore
be expected to increase among the largest frac-
ture sizes encountered in a single data set. This
deviation may occur upward or downward from
the distribution regressed to smaller fractures.
 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones

100 μm
Original data Combine fractures with spacing < threshold

{
15 μm threshold

Result

B 1000 Observed
distribution b = 1.75
Accumulated
Cumulative number

b = 0.98 microfractures

100

10

b = 0.67
b = 0.80
Sample 6 Sample 19
1
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Kinematic aperture (mm)

Figure 12. Fracture size distribution numerical experiment. (A) To test what the size distribution would be had separate fracture
increments formed together, fractures separated by less than a threshold value are combined to a single fracture. (B) Original
microfracture data have concave-downward curves to their size distributions. Each resulting size distribution is better fit by a
power-law equation with the exponent b closer to the typical value observed in sandstones (0.8).

2. Rocks undergo finite strain. The large-size
end of the distribution may systematically curve
downward from a power-law equation because
the rocks have undergone only limited strain.
Finite strain necessitates some upper limit to
fracture size. Because fractures may be sam-
pled near their upper size limit, the downward
curve to the size distribution may be real. An
upper size limit is consistent with the paucity
of centimeter-scale or wider fractures exposed
in the field and analogous to the upper mag-
nitude limit of earthquakes (e.g., Sornette and
Sornette, 1999).
3. Opening-mode fractures are commonly
height restricted by their host strata. Assuming

Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014 1351


fracture propagation stops, and aperture goes
to zero, at a layer boundary, linear-elastic frac-
ture mechanics predicts that fracture aperture
should scale with fracture height, height being
the shortest length dimension (Olson, 2003).
Thus a power law among small fracture aper-
tures might be interrupted among fractures
long enough to reach bedding boundaries
(Bonnet et al., 2001). In our data set the frac-
ture arrays most strongly bound to sedimentary
layering are also among the lowest-strain rocks
(Piceance and East Texas Basins), so it is dif-
ficult to distinguish the relative importance of
layer thickness, finite strain, and poor sampling
on the large-size end of these aperture distribu-
tions. Macroscopic fractures in the beds from
which samples 20–22 were taken are also
strongly layer bound and too thin to reliably
measure in the field, but it is unclear whether
these macro- and microscopic fractures are
genetically related (Hooker et al., 2013).
4. Progressive fracture strain is commonly
accommodated by faults. Faults may form with
progressive strain, either by fracture propa-
gation to depths of higher differential stress
(Gudmundsson, 1987) or by a relative rotation
between the stress field and fracture orientation
that produces shear stress on fracture surfaces
(Gudmundsson, 1992; Myers and Aydin, 2004).
It is highly likely that a scaling law for opening-
mode apertures would be modified by the emer-
gence of faults, because fault displacements are
not perpendicular to the fault plane. As stated in
the Geologic Settings section above, most of our
samples derive from fold-and-thrust belts; these
settings commonly include faults that strike par-
allel to opening-mode fractures. In this study we
exclusively measured opening-mode fractures,
so a transition to faults might simply show up in
our data as a downward roll-off to the size dis-
tribution. Gudmundsson and Mohajeri (2013)
investigated the scaling transition between
opening- and shear-mode fracture lengths in
Iceland, interpreting a steeper scaling exponent
for longer fractures with shear offset.
5. Lastly, for fracture populations that fol-
low power-law aperture-size distributions with
< 1, the frequency of large fractures must nec-
essarily fall below the best-fit size-distribution
equations because such equations eventually
predict a greater frequency of large fractures
than can fit within the rock observed (Hooker
et al., 2011). In each observed scanline,
because ample space is available for more large
fractures to fit into, such geometric limitations
do not apply to curves to the large-size ends
of the distributions. However, observed power
laws must end at some upper size limit, regard-
less of whether the upper limit is sampled in
this study.
1352 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
Hooker et al.
APPLICATION
Open-Fracture Spacing from
Microfracture Scaling
Open-fracture spacing in the subsurface can
be estimated by solving a power-law fracture-
frequency equation using a fracture size equal
to the emergent threshold—the fracture aperture
above which some porosity is preserved (Lau-
bach, 2003). The reciprocal of the calculated
frequency is the average spacing of fractures.
Such a frequency model can be derived by
regressing a scaling equation to observed size-
frequency data (see Curve-Fitting and Sampling
Biases, above). The examples presented here
suggest that a power-law scaling equation more
commonly best fits natural-fracture data than
will exponential, normal, or log-normal scaling
equations. Notable exceptions may be made if
the fractures most likely have a characteristic
size distribution, which may be the case, for
example, if crack-seal texture is absent.
Such possibilities notwithstanding, natural-
fracture sets that grew in diagenetically reac-
tive environments tend to follow power-law
aperture-size distributions, with b near 0.8, as
measured in 1-D. The prevalence of this b value
has two important ramifications for estimating
open-fracture spacing in the subsurface.
First, although power laws in general imply
the presence of systematic microfracture popu-
lations whereas characteristic size distributions
do not, the abundance of microfractures depends
on b. The shallow b value (<1) present among
natural fractures means that for every macro-
fracture there aren’t myriad microfractures
present, especially considering the ambiguity of
origin of fractures smaller than the grain scale
(Hooker and Laubach, 2007). Imagine a hypo-
thetical case in which the average spacing of
visible fractures (>0.1 mm aperture) is equal
to a core width (100 mm). If such a population
were to follow a power-law size distribution of
b = 0.8, then a, in fractures per mm, would be
0.0016. Because of this shallow slope, ~40 frac-
tures more than 1 micron wide would be present
within a core width, a total substantially below
the 200 called for by Bonnet et al. (2001) to
independently establish a size-distribution equa-
tion. In contrast, if the scaling exponent were
2.5, there would be 1000 microfractures pres-
ent, and statistically robust populations could be
sampled within a single core width.
On the other hand, the low variability of
the exponent carries an implicit benefit: if b is
roughly constant, then we can assume b = 0.8
and vary only a to regress the data. Such an
approach presupposes the existence of a regional
fracture set, in the sense described by Hancock
(1985) and Lorenz et al. (1991), of parallel frac-
tures forming over a broad area in response to
a single loading event. If fractures formed in
response to local folding, then such scaling esti-
mates may be applicable only to local structural
domains having equivalent fracture strain, as we
discuss later in this section.
Below we subdivide our macrofracture data
in order to test whether typical data sets derived
from core-width scanlines (<100 mm in length)
in tight-gas sandstone reservoirs can be used to
predict macrofracture frequency. Microfracture-
derived scaling extrapolations were tested by
subsampling scanlines made from horizontal
and slant cores within the Piceance Basin (sam-
ples 1, 2, and 3). Because typical vertical cores
are no wider than 100 mm, the scanline data
from these microfracture samples were divided
into 100-mm-long segments, each of which was
best fit with power-law equations. First, these
tasks were done using Microsoft Excel’s auto-
mated regression routine, which varies a and b.
As an alternative method, the frequency equa-
tion was solved by holding b fixed at 0.8 and
solving for a at each data point, averaging a val-
ues to establish a frequency equation. For zero
microfractures intersected, zero macrofractures
are expected (infinite spacing).
For comparison, we include an analogous
subsampling of two outcrop samples: one from
the Mesón Group (sample 18) and one from the
Huizachal Group (sample 6). These samples
were selected for their long microfracture scan-
lines (Table 3). As well, these fracture popula-
tions record higher strain, and allow us to assess
the accuracy and precision of microfracture-
based fracture-frequency predictions.
Macrofracture Spacing from Core
and Outcrop Observation
The north Piceance Basin sample (sample 1)
derives from slant core, drilled ~45° from verti-
cal. Fracture data were collected from a sand-
stone bed within the Williams Fork Formation,
at least 2 m thick, at a measured depth (MD)
of 3138–3140 m (true vertical depth [TVD]
2649 m). Near-vertical fractures intersect the
core obliquely (Fig. 13), and abundant calcite
cement is present that overlaps quartz cement.
The microfracture scanline for this sample
comprises 72 bedding-parallel thin sections,
arranged in a stair-step pattern so as to sample
the maximum layer-parallel length possible
(~2 m). The scanline therefore moves progres-
sively lower within the bed (Fig. 14).
South Piceance Basin samples (samples 2 and
3) derive from cores drilled parallel to layering
through the Cozzette Sandstone member of the
Iles Formation, which underlies the Williams
 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones
A long microfracture sample was taken, intersect-
Sample 3
MD 2177.0 m
Fracture
face
2 cm
B
Sample 1
2 cm
MD 3137.6 m
Figure 13. Macrofractures in slant cores re-
covered from the Piceance Basin. (A) Frac-
ture has a thin veneer of quartz cement.
(B) Fracture covered in calcite cement;
microscopy revealed quartz-cement lining.
Modified from Hooker and Laubach (2010).
Fork Formation. Macrofractures within these
samples contain no calcite cement and only thin
veneers of quartz cement (mostly <1 mm thick)
lining the fracture walls (Fig. 13). The micro-
fracture scanlines for sample 2 comprise 16 total
thin sections, taken from 2755 m MD (8 thin
sections) and 2762 m (8 thin sections). These
scanline data were reported in Hooker et al.
(2009). All sample 2 core was recovered from
2420 m TVD. The microfracture scanline for
sample 3 comprises 29 thin sections, sampled
from 2135 m MD (16 thin sections) and 2167 m
(13 thin sections). TVD for all scanlines from
sample 3 is 2045 m.
Because all three Piceance Basin cores are
typically broken along natural fractures, frac-
ture apertures are minimum estimates made by
measuring the thickness of cement deposits that
line the fracture walls.
The Mesón Group fractures (sample 18) rep-
resent a single set of parallel fractures. All frac-
tures are filled mostly with quartz cement, with
local porosity among quartz-cement bridges
within the widest fractures. From the Mesón
Group, 24 macrofractures were measured over
a 1.1-m-long exposure, from which a 131-mm-
Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
ing 416 microfractures (Fig. 15).
The Huizachal Group fractures (sample 6) are
a set of east-west–striking fractures exposed on
a canyon floor (Fig. 3) containing at least three
other fracture sets (Laubach and Ward, 2006).
These fractures contain abundant calcite cement
overlapping quartz and little or no porosity.
From the Huizachal Group, 114 macrofractures
were measured over a 14.2-m-long exposure,
from which a 222-mm-long microfracture sam-
ple was taken, intersecting 101 microfractures
(Fig. 15).
The average macrofracture spacing for each
of the five samples used in this exercise was
calculated simply as the number of macroscopic
fractures divided by scanline length. To estimate
error for the observed frequency of macrofrac-
tures, we assumed that macrofractures were
randomly spaced and that macrofracture inter-
section by the scanline is therefore a Poissonian
process (Guerriero et al., 2010). Therefore the
expected fracture spacing S is:
S = L/N, (2)
where L is scanline length and N is number of
fractures intersected. The upper and lower 95%
confidence intervals are:
S025,975 = L/N025,975, (3)
where N025 and N975 are the mean values of the
cumulative Poisson distributions for which
the probability of intersecting N or more fractures
is 0.025 and 0.975, respectively. As we discuss
later in this section, if fractures are systematically
clustered, this method of error quantification may
underestimate true spacing uncertainty.
Macrofracture-Spacing Prediction
using Microfractures
To estimate macrofracture spacing using
power laws extrapolated from microfracture
size-frequency data, a fracture aperture must be
selected for which average spacing can be cal-
culated (Ortega et al., 2006). We used 0.5 mm,
which is approximately the smallest macro-
fracture size that can be reliably detected (i.e.,
smaller macrofracture sizes may be truncated).
Microfracture frequency, measured from
100-mm-long scanlines, varies systematically
with macrofracture spacing (Fig. 16). In all three
Piceance Basin core samples analyzed, the dis-
parity between observed and predicted macro-
fracture spacing is smaller using the constant-b
assumption, versus varying both a and b (Fig.
16). Relative to the Piceance Basin samples,
the higher-fracture-frequency outcrop samples
contain more microfractures within 100-mm-
long scanlines, and the predicted macrofracture
frequency is closer to the observed frequency
(Fig. 16). Error bars are substantially narrower
for high-fracture-frequency samples, but for
all samples error is decreased by assuming b =
0.8. Our least-accurate result was derived from
the slant core (sample 1), from which only 12
macrofractures were observed in ~2 m of layer-
parallel rock (Fig. 14). Thus, the poor predic-
tion from this sample may result from the short
macrofracture scanline.
We performed the same analysis on the
46 vertical-core samples from three basins
(Table 3). Microfracture spacing data are highly
variable within basins (Fig. 17A). Future work
could identify correlations between these results
and other hypothetical controls on fracture fre-
quency, such as layer thickness, rock mechanical
properties, and proximity to local structures, as
well as correlations with other methods of frac-
ture prediction, such as seismic anisotropy.
The wide variation in a among core-width
scanlines implies an inverse correlation between
fracture strain and predicted fracture spacing
(Fig. 17B). A consistent relationship between
fracture strain and macrofracture spacing could
potentially simplify the estimation process. For
ideal power-law size distributions having the
same largest fracture size, strain is expected
to vary with a1/b (Marrett, 1996). For b = 0.8,
1/b = 1.25. We observe that overall microfrac-
ture strain varies as a1.7. Strain proportional to
a1.25 roughly describes a lower limit to the data.
The observed result is consistent with high strain
measurements from varying largest-fracture size
among the sampled populations. Large frac-
tures by definition provide more fracture strain
than small fractures, but the spacing prediction
and a calculation are equally sensitive to each
size-frequency data point. Therefore, chance
intersection of large fractures will skew strain
calculations higher than frequency (or spacing)
calculations. To control for this effect, strain can
be calculated from only microfractures smaller
than 0.01 mm. Strain at this size range varies
as a 0.7 (Fig. 17C), possibly reflecting varying
degrees of truncation from varying grain sizes.
As a consequence, strain is a poor predictor of
macrofracture spacing using this technique.
Effects of Clustering
Many natural fracture sets are not regularly
spaced but, rather, are either randomly arranged
or systematically clustered. Spacings between
randomly arranged fractures should have a
coefficient of variation, Cv, near 1:
Cv = σ/μ, (4)
1353
 Hooker et al.

(Not preserved) MD = 3,138 m TVD = 2,649 m

Microfracture kinematic aperture (mm)

10
TS Sandstone
TS

TS
1
TS
Sample 1 core
TS
drilled at ~45° to bedding
TS
0.1
TS

TS
True
bedding
TS
0.01 thickness
TS > 2m

TS

TS
0.001
TS

TS
Two apparent macrofracture
clusters intersected TS

TS

Sandstone TS
Shale
0 1000 2000
Horizontal distance (mm)
10 10

Sample 2 macrofractures Sample 3 macrofractures

1 1
Kinematic aperture (mm)

0.1 0.1

0.01 0.01
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000

10 10
Sample 2 Sample 3
microfractures 6. microfractures
1 1
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

0.1 0.1

0.01 0.01

0.001 0.001
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 200 400 600 800 1000

Distance along scanline (mm)

Figure 14. Slant-core macrofracture (filled symbols) and microfracture (open symbols) scanline data. Sample 1 was
taken from core drilled at ~45° to bedding, so thin-section surfaces (TS) were cut in a stair-stepping fashion. Samples 2
and 3 were taken from layer-parallel cores. Each microfracture scanline was divided into 100-mm-long subsets (num-
bered arrows); the data within subsets were then used to predict macrofracture spacing.

1354 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014

 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones

10
El Alamar Fm. macrofractures Sample 6

0.1
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
10
El Alamar Fm. microfractures Sample 6
1
1. 2.
0.1
3.

0.01

0.001
0 50 100 150 200 250
Kinematic aperture (mm)

10
Mesón Gp. macrofractures Sample 18

0.1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

10
Mesón Gp. microfractures Sample 18
1
1.
2.
0.1

0.01

0.001

0.0001
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Distance along scanline (mm)

Figure 15. Microfracture (open symbols) and macrofracture (filled symbols) apertures measured along scanlines, samples 6 and 18. Micro-
fracture data are subdivided into 100-mm-long subsets (numbered arrows). Subsets were used to predict macrofracture spacing.

Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014 1355

 Hooker et al.

Sample
number
A
Mesón Gp. 18
El Alamar Fm. 6

Mesaverde Gp.
(Williams Fork Fm.)
1

Mesaverde Gp.
(Iles Fm.)
2

Mesaverde Gp.
(Iles Fm.)
3

10 100 1000 10000 100000

Mesón Gp. 18
B
El Alamar Fm. 6

Mesaverde Gp.
(Williams Fork Fm.)
1

Mesaverde Gp.
(Iles Fm.)
2

Mesaverde Gp.
(Iles Fm.)
3

10 100 1000 10000 100000

Average fracture spacing, mm

Figure 16. Predictions of macrofracture spacing based on power-law extrapolations of microfracture size distributions.
(A) Best-fit method, varying power-law coefficient (a) and exponent (b). (B) Best-fit method holding b constant at 0.8 and vary-
ing a. Vertical bars are average macrofracture spacing (solid) with 95% confidence intervals (dashed). Filled symbols are pre-
dictions made from all microfractures measured; open symbols are the same data split into 100-mm-long scanline segments.

1356 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014

 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones

1 conditions, including host rocks having extreme

A East Texas Basin
subcritical-crack-index values (Olson, 1993;
Northern Piceance Basin
Olson et al., 2009). Such fractures may open
Southern Piceance Basin
from increased effective tension near the tips
0.1 Basin X
of other growing fractures, resulting in clusters
y = 61.398x-1.677 that formed by feedback inherent to the growing
fracture population. Internally imposed clus-
0.01 ters present a challenge to subsurface fracture-
pattern characterization, which is outside the
scope of this paper.

0.001
Comparison with Narr’s (1996) Method

The method described by Narr (1996) to esti-

0.0001
mate subsurface fracture spacing (see Previous
10 100 1000 10000 100000 Methods, above) was applied, in that study, to
Figure 17. (A) Macrofracture
Predicted fracture spacing, 0.5 mm-wide fractures fractures within cores of the U.S. Department
(aperture ≥ 0.5 mm) spacing
of Energy’s Multiwell Experiment (MWX) site
predictions made from micro- 1
(samples c39–c42; Table 3), which are vertical
fractures measured from scan- B
Microfracture strain

cores drilled at the same site as the SHCT-1 core

lines across vertical cores.
(B) Measured microfracture
strain versus best-fit power-law
coefficient (a) value, holding
the exponent (b) constant at 0.8.
(C) Same data as in B but with
strain calculated only from frac-
tures <0.01 mm wide.
0.0001
0.0001
where μ is the average fracture spacing and
σ is the standard deviation (Gillespie et al.,
1999). Fracture populations presented here are
generally more clustered than random arrange-
ments, by this measure (Table 3). If a fracture
population is more clustered than random, then
observed fracture frequency in the inter-well-
bore space may show more variation than the
error bars in macrofracture spacing (Figs. 16,
17) imply. Note that clustering of fractures can
be either externally or internally controlled.
If fracture clusters are externally controlled,
as from changes in layer thickness (Schöpfer
et al., 2011), layer mechanical properties (Lau-
bach et al., 2009; Zahm et al., 2010; Ellis et al.,
y = 155.63x1.677
0.1
0.01
0.001
Theoretical slope = 1.25
1 to intervening fractureless mudstones.
C Open-fracture spacing estimates using the
0.1
y = 0.0573x0.720
0.01
0.001
0.0001 0.001 0.01
a dicted using the scaling method. Estimates from
2012), proximity to folds or faults (Anders and
Wiltschko, 1994; Guerriero et al., 2013; Iñigo
et al., 2012), preferential fracturing of hetero-
geneously distributed cements (Eichhubl et al.,
2004, 2009), or local fluid-pressure anomalies
(Jolly and Lonergan, 2002; Philipp, 2008), then
an adequate description of far-field fracture
frequency must take into account the external
control(s). Perhaps frequency systematically
varies within different spatial domains of the
fracture population.
Internally controlled fracture clustering may
arise from the dynamic nature of fracture-set
evolution. Fracture clusters are predicted by
linear-elastic fracture mechanics under some
(sample 2). Thus, the fracture spacings mea-
sured from the SHCT-1 core were used as a test
of Narr’s method. Unlike the scaling method
presented in this study, the Narr method is not
specific to a single stratigraphic interval, but,
rather, core-fracture geometries are collected
from as many intervals as are represented within
the core. Narr’s method was first applied to
sandstone layers within the MWX core and not
microfracture scaling method, with associated
error bars, are similar to those made by Narr
(1996). Estimates overlap with those made
using the Narr (1996) method (Fig. 18).
Spacing estimates were also calculated for
this study based on microfracture frequencies
observed from four depths within the Williams
Fork interval of the MWX well. MWX micro-
fracture scanlines span single thin sections only.
From one scanline (depth 1503 m), because no
fractures are present, infinite spacing is pre-
the other three scanlines indicate closer frac-
ture spacing within the Williams Fork interval
compared to the paludal zone and the Cozzette
Sandstone. This result is consistent with higher
fracture frequency in the Williams Fork Forma-
tion, as measured in sample 1 (Fig. 18; Table 3),
although our samples of the two stratigraphic
intervals derive from different parts of the basin
(see Appendix).
IMPLICATIONS FOR FRACTURE
GROWTH AND THE EVOLUTION
OF FRACTURE SETS
Consistency of the natural b value is a phe-
nomenon that could provide evidence of an
underlying process. Higher variation in b is

Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014 1357

 Hooker et al.

MWX 1554 increase could hypothetically be achieved by

MWX 1503: no microfractures (infinite spacing) the addition of new fractures having a variety
MWX 1414 of sizes, although crack-seal texture suggests
MWX 1383 that even large fractures began as microscopic
fractures. Alternatively, the constant slope and
increasing coefficient could arise from addi-
tion of microfractures and gradual widening of
SHCT (Cozzette) existing fractures. Either case suggests that new
microfractures develop throughout the accumu-
SHCT (Total) lation of fracture strain.
SHCT (Cozzette) Narr, 1996
SHCT (Paludal zone)
SUMMARY

10 100 1000 10000 100000 Natural fractures in sandstones from a range

Fracture spacing, mm of geographic and geologic settings follow
power-law size distributions having a consis-
Figure 18. Comparison of this study’s spacing estimates to those tent exponent. Although the reasons for this
of Narr (1996). Spacing estimates are for aperture size 0.5 mm or pattern are unclear, the effects of synkinematic
greater, corresponding to Narr’s (1996) general estimated fracture cement precipitation may play an important role
aperture. Circles are Narr’s (1996) spacing estimates based on visi- because fractures with contrasting size-distri-
ble fractures in the MWX-1 vertical core. Horizontal dashed lines bution statistics also feature contrasting cement
are Narr’s (1996) calculations of probabilities of intersecting visible textures. Namely, power law–distributed frac-
fractures within the vertical core, given the SHCT-1 core macro- tures typically feature crack-seal texture, sig-
fracture spacing. Vertical lines and triangles are SHCT-1 spacing nifying synkinematic cement precipitation; in
estimates based on microfractures (same as Fig. 16). Squares are contrast, fracture sets that have a characteristic
microfracture spacing estimates from the MWX-1 vertical core size do not have significant evidence of synkine-
(Fig. 17). matic cement.
The observed power-law exponent that
characterizes so many natural fracture sets is
present among scanlines with lower numbers commonly have characteristic size distributions. shallow (<1). This shallow exponent has two
of fractures (Fig. 7); some variation in b can Early in the evolution of a fracture set, when important consequences for the application of
therefore be attributed to poor sampling. Further only a small amount of fracture strain has accu- fracture-size scaling to subsurface fracture-
variation in b might be systematically related mulated, most fractures probably result from spacing estimations. First, because the typical b
to some geological conditions. For example, only a single opening increment; very few frac- value is <1, microfractures are not excessively
greater b values have been reported in previous tures are more than five increments wide. There- abundant in natural fracture sets. However, and
studies of metamorphic and hydrothermal sys- fore, the size distribution of the overall fracture second, because b varies little, assuming a fixed
tems (Table 4). set resembles that of the individual opening b of 0.8 can substantially increase the precision
The relatively good fit of power-law versus increments. As fracture strain increases, indi- of subsurface fracture-spacing estimates. Such
characteristic size-distribution equations sug- vidual fractures can become much larger than a method represents a complement or alterna-
gests that as a general tendency, but not as a the characteristic opening-increment size, and tive to existing methods and may be preferable
strict rule, natural fractures that formed in the the power-law distribution can emerge. This when only small amounts of core are retrieved
subsurface follow power-law size distributions. process likely requires some positive feedback or otherwise available.
Previous simulations of fracture growth (Cowie loop between fracture size and fracture-growth
et al., 1993; Cladouhos and Marrett, 1996; Davy rate; otherwise, fracture widening would be APPENDIX
et al., 2010; Hooker et al., 2012) show that equally shared among fractures, and the size East Texas Basin—Cretaceous
power-law fracture-size distributions may arise distribution would remain characteristic. Travis Peak Formation
by interaction among growing fractures, par- The observed range in b among natural power
ticularly when such interaction provides posi- law–distributed fractures is narrow, despite the Fractures are widespread in vertical core from the
Lower Cretaceous Travis Peak Formation, a fluvial-
tive feedback mechanisms that promote further range of tectonic settings and fracture strains deltaic accumulation (Dutton et al., 1991) on the
growth of already-large fractures or inhibit the sampled. This constant b value suggests that western flank of the Sabine Arch, East Texas, USA
growth of small fractures. In contrast, popu- as fracture strain accumulates, the power law (Laubach and Jackson, 1990). Fracture abundance
lations of characteristic-size fractures might maintains its slope as its coefficient increases. reported as cumulative fracture height per core or
signify external controls on fracture size, such This hypothesis is supported by the positive cor- rock-type interval shows that channel sandstones are
highly fractured relative to floodplain and lacustrine
as sedimentary layer thickness (Odling et al., relation between a and fracture strain and by the sediments; layer thickness correlates poorly with frac-
1999; Gillespie et al., 2001). poor correlation between b and strain (Fig. 6). ture abundance in the core (Laubach, 1988, 1989).
Power law–distributed fracture sets appear For fracture strain to increase, fractures must Fluid inclusions in synkinematic quartz cement have
to represent coalescence of characteristic-size become larger or more numerous, or both. A homogenization temperatures (a proxy for precipita-
tion temperature) between 134 and 151 °C (Becker
opening increments, systematically localized power-law size distribution of consistent slope et al., 2010), corresponding to fracture-propagation
into fractures of larger sizes (Fig. 9), partly and increasing coefficient requires that fractures initiation near maximum burial depth and persisting
explaining why lower-strain data sets more of all sizes present increase in number. This for ~48 m.y. (Becker et al., 2010).

1358 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014

 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones
Piceance Basin—Cretaceous Mesaverde Group
The Piceance Basin (northwest Colorado, USA)
comprises sediments consisting of marginal-marine
and nonmarine siliciclastics deposited in or near the
Cretaceous seaway that covered much of present-day
North America (Quigley, 1965; Johnson and Keighin,
1981). The sequence features minor transgressions
but is broadly regressive, from marine to paludal up-
section. Samples studied for fracture analysis derive
from the Mesaverde Group, mostly from the Williams
Fork and the Iles Formations. The sequence’s burial
history, constrained by Nuccio and Condon (1996)
and Nuccio and Roberts (2003) using vitrinite reflec-
tance and heat-flow modeling, indicates that maximum
burial was attained near 35 Ma and uplift began near
10 Ma. At maximum burial the Cozzette Sandstone,
within the Iles Formation, reached a temperature of
~170 °C. Analysis of fluid-inclusion assemblages
within synkinematic fracture cements indicates that
fractures were opening throughout this extended
period of maximum burial (Fall et al., 2012). Samples
were collected from the north Piceance Basin and the
south Piceance Basin (Table 3), the dividing line be-
tween which we place at 39.7°N latitude. Fractures in
all three slant cores studied strike WNW to E-W.
Mexican Sierra Madre Oriental—
Triassic–Jurassic Huizachal Group
Samples studied from northeast Mexico derive
from the Triassic–Jurassic Huizachal Group, a fluvial
succession deposited at the margin of Pangaea (Mixon
et al., 1959; Michalzik, 1991). Barboza-Gudiño et al.
(2010) established the El Alamar Formation at the
base of the Huizachal Group, distinct from the overly-
ing Jurassic redbed succession. These outcrops were
previously interpreted to be part of the La Boca For-
mation (Laubach and Ward, 2006). The Huizachal
Group is overlain by Jurassic evaporites and Cre-
taceous limestones, dolostones, and shales, which
compose the passive-margin paleodepositional envi-
ronments of the Gulf of Mexico (Goldhammer and
Johnson, 2001; Ocampo-Diaz et al., 2008). The sand-
stones studied, where exposed near Galeana, Nuevo
Leon, consist of feldspathic litharenites; grain size is
medium in the lower unit (El Alamar Formation) and
coarse in the upper unit (La Boca Formation).
The overlying evaporites (Minas Viejas Formation)
represent a detachment layer, separating kilometer-
scale, Laramide-age folds of the Sierra Madre Orien-
tal above from complexly deformed, but more gently
folded, strata below (Marrett and Aranda-García, 2001;
Zhou et al., 2006; Latta and Anastasio, 2007).
Four fracture sets (A through D of Laubach and
Ward, 2006) cut the El Alamar Formation sandstone at
the study area. This study includes data from fractures
striking NW-SE (set B) and E-W (set C), which are
the two most abundant fracture sets. Crosscutting re-
lationships indicate that set B predates set C. Fractures
in the overlying La Boca Sandstone strike E-W and
NE-SW; the relative timing is unclear. All fractures
dip steeply, near vertical.
Basin X—Formation X
Fractures were sampled from core derived from
folded and unfolded beds at a confidential site, more
than 1000 km from the nearest sample site within the
data set. The samples are dominantly sublitharenites.
Two vertical cores were studied. Core A was drilled
through a sequence of tight folds that overlies nearly
horizontal beds. Folded layers allowed long micro-
Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
scopic scanlines (Table 3) to be sampled perpendicular
to fractures and within single fractured layers. Bed-
ding planes within the folds of the core are commonly
smooth, with faint striae, particularly in horizons rich
in organic matter. Fractures in core A show a tendency
to develop perpendicular to bedding, but exceptions
are abundant. Fractures commonly show multiple ori-
entations in the same interval; crosscutting and abut-
ting relationships indicate simultaneous propagation
of fractures with different orientations. Downsection
of the folds, macrofractures are less abundant. Core B
was drilled through horizontal beds, away from folds.
No macrofractures were observed in core B.
Scottish Highlands—Cambrian
Eriboll Formation
The Cambrian Eriboll Formation of the Ardvreck
Group crops out west of and within the Moine thrust
belt (MTB) in northwest Scotland. The Eriboll Forma-
tion includes the 75- to 125-m-thick Basal Quartzite
Member and the overlying 75- to 100-m-thick Pipe
Rock Member. The current study focuses on fractures
from the latter. This sedimentary sequence records a
broad marine transgression (Park et al., 2002). Eriboll
sandstones are indurated, quartz-cemented quartz
arenites.
Cambro-Ordovician rocks dip 10°–15°SE beneath
the adjacent thrust belt and are unconformable on
Archaean Lewisian gneisses and Proterozoic (Torri-
donian) sandstone. The ESE-dipping MTB marks Si-
lurian and Early Devonian WNW-directed shortening,
juxtaposing Neoproterozoic sedimentary rocks to the
east over the Cambro-Ordovician sequence to the west
(Strachan et al., 2002, 2010; Cawood et al., 2004). The
Eriboll Formation is cut by the lowest thrust faults
of the MTB, which are associated primarily with
brittle deformation and repeated imbricate sequences
(Holdsworth et al., 2007). The Eriboll Formation is
also cut by later faults whose motion accommodated
extension, tilting, and wrenching in the Paleozoic
and Mesozoic (Peach et al., 1907; Laubach and Mar-
shak, 1987; Roberts and Holdsworth, 1999; Wilson
et al., 2010; Ellis et al., 2012). Poorly cemented and
therefore likely post-MTB faults are locally present
in outcrops that we studied; maximum displacements
are centimeter scale. Samples and measurements were
taken at least 10 m away from such faults. Several sets
of opening-mode fractures are present, having consis-
tent crosscutting relationships and reflecting distinct
fracturing episodes (Laubach and Diaz-Tushman,
2009). This study includes data from fractures strik-
ing 000N (sample 12), 110N (sample 13), and 030N
(sample 14); therefore, fracture sets included here
likely formed at different times.
Central Andes—Cambrian Mesón Group
Fractures were measured in the Mesón Group at
Huasamayo Canyon, ~5 km southeast of Tilcara,
Argentina, and at Perchel Canyon, 10 km to the north.
The lowest rocks exposed there are of the Puncoviscana
Formation (latest Precambrian), a mostly turbiditic se-
quence that underwent low-grade metamorphism and
exhumation before deposition of overlying sediments
(Turner, 1960; Aceñolaza et al., 1999). Overlying the
Precambrian rocks are hundreds of meters of pink and
red, well-sorted, medium- to fine-grained sandstones
of the Cambrian Mesón Group (Turner, 1970; Kumpa
and Sanchez, 1988; Such et al., 2007). The sandstones
are quartzarenites and are thoroughly indurated with
quartz cement. Beds are typically several centimeters
to a few decimeters thick; crossbedding is common
but does not generally affect fracture orientation. The
sandstones’ mature mineralogy, crossbedding, and
local Skolithos burrows indicate deposition in a high–
wave-energy, marginal-marine setting (Turner, 1970).
Conformably overlying the Mesón Group in the study
area is the Ordovician Santa Victoria Group. Absence
of a major unconformity between the Cambrian and
Ordovician sequences suggests that these rocks were
not strongly affected by Ordovician orogenesis (Mon
and Hongn, 1991; Mon and Salfity, 1995). Regional
rifting occurred during the Cretaceous, along with
deposition of the Pirgua Formation (Kley et al., 1997,
2005; Deeken et al., 2006). Furthermore, Cretaceous
deformation (horizontal extension) does not appear
to have left an outcrop-scale structural imprint on the
study area. Bedding in the study area strikes NNE and
dips moderately (25°–30°) to the west, consistent with
regional Andean folding, which was likely most active
from the Eocene to the Miocene in the Eastern Cor-
dillera of Argentina, but continues today (Mon, 1987;
Marrett et al., 1994; Marrett and Strecker, 2000; Hor-
ton, 2005; Carrera and Muñoz, 2008; DeCelles et al.,
2011; Siks and Horton, 2011).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was funded partly by grant DE-FG02-
03ER15430 from Chemical Sciences, Geosciences
and Biosciences Division, Office of Basic Energy Sci-
ences, Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy;
the GDL Foundation (fieldwork); the Fracture Re-
search and Application Consortium; and the Geology
Foundation of the Jackson School of Geosciences,
The University of Texas at Austin (UT). Data in part
of Figure 17 and Table 3 were collected as part of the
UT ExxonMobil Unconventionals project. We thank
J. Gale, P. Eichhubl, S. Fomal, B. Horton, R. Ketcham,
J. Olson, O. Ortega, and J. Sharp for helpful discus-
sion. We thank Lana Dieterich for editing an early
version of the manuscript. This paper benefitted from
reviews by H. Fossen, A. Gudmundsson, E. Beutel,
C. Koeberl, and an anonymous reviewer.
REFERENCES CITED
Aceñolaza, F.G., Buatois, L.A., Mángano, M.G., Esteban,
S.B., Tortello, M.F., and Aceñolaza, G.F., 1999, Cám-
brico y Ordovícico del noroeste Argentino: Instituto de
Geología y Recursos Minerales Anales, v. 29: Geología
Argentina, p. 169–187.
Anders, M.H., and Wiltschko, D.V., 1994, Microfracturing,
paleostress and the growth of faults: Journal of Struc-
tural Geology, v. 16, p. 795–815, doi:10.1016/0191
-8141(94)90146-5.
André-Mayer, A.-S., and Sausse, J., 2007, Thickness and
spatial distribution of veins in a porphyry copper de-
posit, Rosia Poieni, Romania: Journal of Structural
Geology, v. 29, p. 1695–1708, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2007
.06.010.
Augustsson, C., and Reker, A., 2012, Cathodoluminescence
spectra of quartz as provenance indicators revisited:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 82, p. 559–570,
doi:10.2110/jsr.2012.51.
Baecher, G.B., and Lanney, N.A., 1978, Trace length biases
in joint surveys, in Proceedings, 19th U.S. Symposium
on Rock Mechanics: Reno, University of Nevada,
p. 56–65.
Barboza-Gudiño, J.R., Zavala-Monsiváis, A., Venegas-
Rodríguez, G., and Barajas-Nigoche, L.D., 2010, Late
Triassic stratigraphy and facies from northeastern
Mexico: Tectonic setting and provenance: Geosphere,
v. 6, p. 621–640, doi:10.1130/GES00545.1.
Barton, C.A., and Zoback, M.D., 1992, Self-similar distri-
bution of macroscopic fractures at depth in crystalline
rock in the Cajon Pass scientific drill hole: Journal of
Geophysical Research, v. 97, p. 5181–5200, doi:10
.1029/91JB01674.
1359

Becker, S.P., Eichhubl, P., Laubach, S.E., Reed, R.M.,
Lander, R.H., and Bodnar, R.J., 2010, A 48 m.y. his-
tory of fracture opening, temperature, and fluid pres-
sure: Cretaceous Travis Peak Formation, East Texas
basin: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 122,
p. 1081–1093, doi:10.1130/B30067.1.
Bernet, M., and Bassett, K., 2005, Provenance analysis
by single-quartz-grain SEM-CL/optical microscopy:
Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 75, p. 492–500,
doi:10.2110/jsr.2005.038.
Bernet, M., Kapoutsos, D., and Bassett, K., 2007, Diagene-
sis and provenance of Silurian quartz arenites in south-
eastern New York State: Sedimentary Geology, v. 201,
p. 43–55, doi:10.1016/j.sedgeo.2007.04.006.
Bohnenstiehl, D.R., and Kleinrock, M.C., 1999, Faulting
and fault scaling on the median valley floor of the trans-
Atlantic geotraverse (TAG) segment, ~26°N on the
Mid-Atlantic Ridge: Journal of Geophysical Research,
v. 104, p. 29,351–29,364, doi:10.1029/1999JB900256.
Bonnet, E., Bour, O., Odling, N.E., Davy, P., Main, I.,
Cowie, P., and Berkowitz, B., 2001, Scaling of fracture
systems in geological media: Reviews of Geophysics,
v. 39, p. 347–383, doi:10.1029/1999RG000074.
Burnett, W., and Fomel, S., 2011, Azimuthally anisotropic
3D velocity continuation: International Journal of Geo-
physics, doi:10.1155/2011/484653.
Caputo, R., and Hancock, P.L., 1998, Crack-jump mecha-
nism and its implications for stress cyclicity during ex-
tension fracturing: Geodynamics, v. 27, p. 45–60, doi:
10.1016/S0264-3707(97)00029-X.
Carrera, N., and Muñoz, J.A., 2008, Thrusting evolution in
the southern Cordillera Oriental (northern Argentine
Andes): Constraints from growth strata: Tectono-
physics, v. 459, p. 107–122, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2007
.11.068.
Cartwright, J., 2011, Diagenetically induced shear failure
of fine-grained sediments and the development of
polygonal fault systems: Marine and Petroleum Geol-
ogy, v. 28, p. 1593–1610, doi:10.1016/j.marpetgeo
.2011.06.004.
Cawood, P.A., Nemchin, A.A., Strachan, R.A., Kinny, P.D.,
and Loewy, S., 2004, Laurentian provenance and an
intracratonic tectonic setting for the Moine Super-
group, Scotland, constrained by detrital zircons from
the Loch Eli and Glen Urquhart successions: Journal
of the Geological Society, v. 161, p. 861–874, doi:10
.1144/16-764903-117.
Cladouhos, T.T., and Marrett, R., 1996, Are fault growth and
linkage models consistent with power law distributions
of fault lengths?: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 18,
p. 281–293, doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(96)80050-2.
Clark, M.B., Brantley, S.L., and Fisher, D.M., 1995, Power-
law vein-thickness distributions and positive feedback in
vein growth: Geology, v. 23, p. 975–978, doi:10.1130
/0091-7613(1995)023<0975:PLVTDA>2.3.CO;2.
Clauset, A., Shalizi, R., and Newman, M.E.J., 2009, Power-
law distributions in empirical data: SIAM (Society for
Industrial and Applied Mathematics) Review, v. 51,
p. 661–703, doi:10.1137/070710111.
Cowie, P.A., Vanneste, C., and Sornette, D., 1993, Statisti-
cal physics model for the spatiotemporal evolution
of faults: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 98,
p. 21,809–21,821, doi:10.1029/93JB02223.
Davatzes, N.C., and Hickman, S., 2005, Comparison of
acoustic and electrical image logs from the Coso Geo-
thermal Field, CA, in Proceedings, Thirtieth Workshop
on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford Uni-
versity: Stanford, California, SGP-TR-176, 11 p.
Davy, P., Le Groc, R., Darcel, C., Bour, O., de Dreuzy, J.R.,
and Munier, R., 2010, A likely universal model of
fracture scaling and its consequence for crustal hydro-
mechanics: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 115,
B10411, doi:10.1029/2009JB007043.
DeCelles, P.G., Carrapa, B., Horton, B.K., and Gehrels,
G.E., 2011, Cenozoic foreland basin systems in the
central Andes of northwestern Argentina: Implications
for Andean geodynamics and modes of deformation:
Tectonics, v. 30, TC6013, doi:10.1029/2011TC002948.
Deeken, A., Sobel, E.R., Coutand, I., Haschke, M., Riller, U.,
and Strecker, M.R., 2006, Development of the south-
ern Eastern Cordillera, NW Argentina, constrained by
apatite fission track thermochronology: From early
1360 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
Hooker et al.
Cretaceous extension to middle Miocene shortening:
Tectonics, v. 25, TC6003, doi:10.1029/2005TC001894.
Deschamps, A., Tivey, M., Embley, R.W., and Chadwick,
W.W., 2007, Quantitative study of the deformation
at Southern Explorer Ridge using high-resolution
bathymetric data: Earth and Planetary Science Letters,
v. 259, p. 1–17, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2007.04.007.
Dutton, S.P., Laubach, S.E., Tye, R.S., Baumgardner, R.W.,
Jr., and Herrington, K.L., 1991, Geologic characteriza-
tion of low-permeability gas reservoirs, Travis Peak
Formation, East Texas: The University of Texas at Aus-
tin Bureau of Economic Geology Report of Investiga-
tions 204, 89 p.
Eichhubl, P., Taylor, W.L., Pollard, D.D., and Aydin, A.,
2004, Paleo-fluid flow and deformation in the Aztec
Sandstone at the Valley of Fire, Nevada—Evidence for
the coupling of hydrogeologic, diagenetic, and tectonic
processes: Geological Society of America Bulletin,
v. 116, p. 1120–1136, doi:10.1130/B25446.1.
Eichhubl, P., Davatzes, N.C., and Becker, S.P., 2009, Struc-
tural and diagenetic control of fluid migration and ce-
mentation along the Moab fault, Utah: AAPG Bulletin,
v. 93, p. 653–681, doi:10.1306/02180908080.
Ellis, M.A., Laubach, S.E., Eichhubl, P., Olson, J.E., and
Hargrove, P., 2012, Fracture development and diagen-
esis of Torridon Group Applecross Formation, near An
Teallach, NW Scotland: Millennia of brittle deforma-
tion resilience?: Journal of the Geological Society,
v. 169, p. 297–310, doi:10.1144/0016-76492011-086.
English, J.M., 2012, Thermo-mechanical origin of regional
fracture systems: AAPG Bulletin, v. 96, p. 1597–1625,
doi:10.1306/01021211018.
Fagereng, A., 2011, Fractal vein distributions within a fault-
fracture mesh in an exhumed accretionary mélange,
Chrystalls Beach Complex, New Zealand: Journal of
Structural Geology, v. 33, p. 918–927, doi:10.1016/j
.jsg.2011.02.009.
Fall, A., Eichhubl, P., Cumella, S.P., Bodnar, R.J., Laubach,
S.E., and Becker, S.P., 2012, Testing the basin-centered
gas accumulation model using fluid inclusion observa-
tions: Southern Piceance Basin, Colorado: AAPG Bul-
letin, v. 96, p. 2297–2318, doi:10.1306/05171211149.
Folk, R.L., 1981, Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks (2nd ed.):
Austin, Hemphill Publishing Company, 184 p.
Gale, J.F.W., Lander, R.H., Reed, R.M., and Laubach, S.E.,
2010, Modeling fracture porosity evolution in dolo-
stone: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 32, p. 1201–
1211, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2009.04.018.
Gillespie, P.A., Johnston, J.D., Loriga, M.A., McCaffrey,
K.J.W., Walsh, J.J., and Watterson, J., 1999, Influence
of layering on vein systematics in line samples, in Mc-
Caffrey, K.J.W., Longeran, L., and Wilkinson, J.J., eds.,
Fractures, Fluid Flow and Mineralization: Geological
Society [London] Special Publication 155, p. 35–56.
Gillespie, P.A., Walsh, J.J., Watterson, J., Bonson, C.G., and
Manzocchi, T., 2001, Scaling relationships of joint
and vein arrays from The Burren, Co. Clare, Ireland:
Journal of Structural Geology, v. 23, p. 183–201, doi:
10.1016/S0191-8141(00)00090-0.
Goldhammer, R.K., and Johnson, C.A., 2001, Middle Juras-
sic–Upper Cretaceous paleogeographic evolution and
sequence-stratigraphic framework of the northwest
Gulf of Mexico rim, in Bartolini, C., Buffler, R.T., and
Cantú-Chapa, A., eds., The Western Gulf of Mexico
Basin: Tectonics, Sedimentary Basins, and Petroleum
Systems: AAPG Memoir 75, p. 45–81.
Gomez, L.A., and Laubach, S.E., 2006, Rapid digital quan-
tification of microfracture populations: Journal of
Structural Geology, v. 28, p. 408–420, doi:10.1016/j
.jsg.2005.12.006.
Götze, J., Plötze, M., and Habermann, D., 2001, Origin,
spectral characteristics, and practical applications of the
cathodoluminescence of quartz: Mineralogy and Petrol-
ogy, v. 71, p. 225–250, doi:10.1007/s007100170040.
Gross, M.R., and Engelder, T., 1995, Strain accommodated
by brittle failure in adjacent units of the Monterey For-
mation, U.S.A.: Scale effects and evidence for uniform
displacement boundary conditions: Journal of Struc-
tural Geology, v. 17, p. 1303–1318, doi:10.1016/0191
-8141(95)00011-2.
Gudmundsson, A., 1987, Geometry, formation, and develop-
ment of tectonic fractures on the Reykjanes Peninsula,
southwest Iceland: Tectonophysics, v. 139, p. 295–308,
doi:10.1016/0040-1951(87)90103-X.
Gudmundsson, A., 1992, Formation and growth of normal
faults at the divergent plate boundary in Iceland: Terra
Nova, v. 4, p. 464–471, doi:10.1111/j.1365-3121.1992
.tb00582.x.
Gudmundsson, A., and Mohajeri, N., 2013, Relations be-
tween the scaling exponents, entropies, and energies of
fracture networks: Bulletin de la Société Géologique
de France, v. 184, p. 377–387.
Guerriero, V., Iannace, A., Mazzoli, S., Parente, M., Vitale,
S., and Giorgioni, M., 2010, Quantifying uncertainties
in multi-scale studies of fractured reservoir analogues:
Implemented statistical analysis of scan line data from
carbonate rocks: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 32,
p. 1271–1278, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2009.04.016.
Guerriero, V., Vitale, S., Ciarcia, S., and Mazzoli, S., 2011,
Improved statistical multi-scale analysis of fractured
reservoir analogues: Tectonophysics, v. 504, p. 14–24,
doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2011.01.003.
Guerriero, V., Mazzoli, S., Iannace, A., Vitale, S., Carravetta,
A., and Strauss, C., 2013, A permeability model for
naturally fractured carbonate reservoirs: Marine and
Petroleum Geology, v. 40, p. 115–134, doi:10.1016/j
.marpetgeo.2012.11.002.
Hancock, P.L., 1985, Brittle microtectonics: Principles and
practice: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 7, p. 437–
457, doi:10.1016/0191-8141(85)90048-3.
Haynes, F.M., 1984, Vein densities in drill core, Sierrita
porphyry copper deposit, Pima County, Arizona:
Economic Geology and the Bulletin of the Society of
Economic Geologists, v. 79, p. 755–758, doi:10.2113
/gsecongeo.79.4.755.
Hesthammer, J., and Fossen, H., 2003, From seismic data
to core data: An integrated approach to enhance reser-
voir characterization, in Ameen, M., ed., Fracture and
In-Situ Stress Characterization of Hydrocarbon Reser-
voirs: Geological Society [London] Special Publica-
tion 209, p. 39–54.
Holdsworth, R.E., Alsop, G.I., and Strachan, R.A., 2007,
Tectonic stratigraphy and structural continuity of the
northernmost Moine Thrust Zone and Moine Nappe,
Scottish Caledonides, in Ries, A.C., Butler, R.W.H.,
and Graham, R.D., eds., Deformation of the Conti-
nental Crust: The Legacy of Mike Coward: Geo-
logical Society [London] Special Publication 272,
p. 123–144.
Hooker, J.N., and Laubach, S.E., 2007, The geologic his-
tory of quartz grains, as revealed by color SEM-CL:
Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Trans-
actions, v. 57, p. 375–386.
Hooker, J.N., and Laubach, S.E., 2010, Using empirical
tends in fracture size-frequency data to constrain sub-
surface fracture abundance: American Rock Mechan-
ics Association 44th US Rock Mechanics Symposium
and 5th US-Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, Salt
Lake City, UT, June 27–30, 2010, ARMA 10-325,
11 p.
Hooker, J.N., Gale, J.F.W., Gomez, L.A., Laubach, S.E.,
Marrett, R., and Reed, R.M., 2009, Aperture-size scal-
ing variations in a low-strain opening-mode fracture
set, Cozzette Sandstone, Colorado: Journal of Struc-
tural Geology, v. 31, p. 707–718, doi:10.1016/j.jsg
.2009.04.001.
Hooker, J.N., Laubach, S.E., Gomez, L.A., Marrett, R.,
Eichhubl, P., Diaz-Tushman, K., and Pinzon, E., 2011,
Fracture size, frequency, and strain in the Cambrian
Eriboll Formation sandstones, NW Scotland: Scottish
Journal of Geology, v. 47, p. 45–56, doi:10.1144/0036
-9276/01-420.
Hooker, J.N., Gomez, L.A., Laubach, S.E., Gale, J.F.W.,
and Marrett, R., 2012, Effects of diagenesis (cement
precipitation) during fracture opening on fracture
aperture-size scaling in carbonate rocks, in Garland, J.,
Neilson, J.E., Laubach, S.E., and Whidden, K.J., eds.,
Advances in Carbonate Exploration and Reservoir
Analysis: Geological Society [London] Special Publi-
cation 370, p. 187–206.
Hooker, J.N., Laubach, S.E., and Marrett, R., 2013, Frac-
ture-aperture size—Frequency, spatial distribution,
and growth processes in strata-bounded and non-
strata-bounded fractures, Cambrian Mesón Group,
 A universal power-law scaling exponent for fracture apertures in sandstones

NW Argentina: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 54,
p. 54–71, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2013.06.011.
Horton, B.K., 2005, Revised deformation history of the
central Andes: Inferences from Cenozoic foredeep and
intermontane basins of the Eastern Cordillera, Bolivia:
Tectonics, v. 24, TC3011, doi:10.1029/2003TC001619.
Iñigo, J.F., Laubach, S.E., and Hooker, J.N., 2012, Fracture
abundance and patterns in the Subandean fold and
thrust belt, Devonian Huamampampa Formation petro-
leum reservoirs and outcrops, Argentina and Bolivia:
Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 35, p. 201–218, doi:
10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2012.01.010.
Johnson, R.C., and Keighin, C.W., 1981, Cretaceous and
Tertiary history and resources of the Piceance Creek
Basin, western Colorado, in Epis, J.C., and Callen-
der, J.F., eds., Western Slope Colorado: New Mexico
Geological Society 32nd Field Conference Guidebook,
p. 199–210.
Jolly, R.J.H., and Lonergan, L., 2002, Mechanisms and con-
trols on the formation of sand intrusions: Journal of the
Geological Society, v. 159, p. 605–617, doi:10.1144
/0016-764902-025.
Kagan, Y.Y., 1997, Seismic moment-frequency relation for
shallow earthquakes: Regional comparison: Journal of
Geophysical Research, v. 102, p. 2835–2852, doi:10
.1029/96JB03386.
Kley, J., Müller, J., Tawacholi, S., Jacobshagen, V., and
Manutsoglu, E., 1997, Pre-Andean and Andean-age
deformation in the Eastern Cordillera of southern Bo-
livia: Journal of South American Earth Sciences, v. 10,
p. 1–19, doi:10.1016/S0895-9811(97)00001-1.
Kley, J., Rossello, E.A., Monaldi, C.R., and Habighorst, B.,
2005, Seismic and field evidence for selective inver-
sion of Cretaceous normal faults, Salta rift, northwest
Argentina: Tectonophysics, v. 399, p. 155–172, doi:10
.1016/j.tecto.2004.12.020.
Kolyukhin, D., and Torabi, A., 2013, Power-law testing for
fault attributes distributions: Pure and Applied Geo-
physics, v. 170, p. 2173–2183, doi:10.1007/s00024
-013-0644-3.
Kumpa, M., and Sanchez, M.C., 1988, Geology and sedi-
mentology of the Cambrian Grupo Mesón (NW Ar-
gentina), in Bahlburg, H., Breitkreuz, C., and Giese, P.,
eds., The South Central Andes: Contributions to Struc-
ture and Evolution of an Active Continental Margin:
Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences 17: Berlin, Springer-
Verlag, 261 p.
Lacazette, A., and Engelder, T., 1992, Fluid-driven cyclic
propagation of a joint in the Ithaca Sandstone, Appa-
lachian Basin, New York, in Evans, B., and Wong, T.-F.,
eds., Fault Mechanics and Transport Properties of
Rocks: San Diego, Academic Press, p. 297–323.
Ladeira, F.L., and Price, N.J., 1981, Relationship between
fracture spacing and bed thickness: Journal of Struc-
tural Geology, v. 3, p. 179–183, doi:10.1016/0191
-8141(81)90013-4.
Lander, R.H., Larese, R.E., and Bonnell, L.M., 2008, Toward
more accurate quartz cement models—The importance
of euhedral vs. non-euhedral growth rates: AAPG Bul-
letin, v. 92, p. 1537–1563, doi:10.1306/07160808037.
Laongsakul, P., and Dürrast, H., 2011, Characterization of
reservoir fractures using conventional geophysical log-
ging: Songklanakarin Journal of Science and Technol-
ogy, v. 33, p. 237–246.
Larsen, B., Grunnaleite, I., and Gudmundsson, A., 2010,
How fracture systems affect permeability development
in shallow-water carbonate rocks: An example from the
Gargano Peninsula, Italy: Journal of Structural Geol-
ogy, v. 32, p. 1212–1230, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2009.05
.009.
Latta, D.K., and Anastasio, D.J., 2007, Multiple scales of
mechanical stratification and decollément fold kine-
matics, Sierra Madre Oriental foreland, northeast
Mexico: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 29, p. 1241–
1255, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2007.03.012.
Laubach, S.E., 1988, Subsurface fractures and their relation-
ship to stress history in East Texas Basin sandstone:
Tectonophysics, v. 156, p. 37–49, doi:10.1016/0040
-1951(88)90281-8.
Laubach, S.E., 1989, Paleostress directions from the pre-
ferred orientation of closed microfractures (fluid-
inclusion planes) in sandstone, East Texas basin,
U.S.A.: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 11, p. 603–
611, doi:10.1016/0191-8141(89)90091-6.
Laubach, S.E., 1997, A method to detect natural fracture
strike in sandstones: AAPG Bulletin, v. 81, p. 604–623.
Laubach, S.E., 2003, Practical approaches to identify-
ing sealed and open fractures: AAPG Bulletin, v. 87,
p. 561–579, doi:10.1306/11060201106.
Laubach, S.E., and Diaz-Tushman, K., 2009, Laurentian
paleostress trajectories and ephemeral fracture permea-
bility, Cambrian Eriboll Formation sandstones west
of the Moine thrust zone, northwest Scotland: Journal
of the Geological Society, v. 166, p. 349–362, doi:10
.1144/0016-76492008-061.
Laubach, S.E., and Jackson, M.L.W., 1990, Origin of arches
in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico basin: Geology,
v. 18, p. 595–598, doi:10.1130/0091-7613(1990)018
<0595:OOAITN>2.3.CO;2.
Laubach, S.E., and Marshak, S., 1987, Fault patterns gen-
erated during extensional deformation of crystalline
basement, NW Scotland, in Coward, M.P., Dewey, J.F.,
and Hancock, P.L., eds., Continental Extensional Tec-
tonics: Geological Society [London] Special Publica-
tion 28, p. 495–499.
Laubach, S.E., and Ward, M.E., 2006, Diagenesis in porosity
evolution of opening-mode fractures, Middle Triassic
to Lower Jurassic La Boca Formation, NE Mexico:
Tectonophysics, v. 419, p. 75–97, doi:10.1016/j.tecto
.2006.03.020.
Laubach, S.E., Hentz, T.F., Johns, M.K., Baek, H., and Clift,
S.J., 1995, Using diagenesis information to augment
fracture analysis: Austin, The University of Texas at
Austin Bureau of Economic Geology, report for the Gas
Research Institute, contract no. 5082-211-0708, 189 p.
Laubach, S.E., Lander, R.H., Bonnell, L.M., Olson, J.E., and
Reed, R.M., 2004a, Opening histories of fractures in
sandstones, in Cosgrove, J.W., and Engelder, T., eds.,
The Initiation, Propagation, and Arrest of Joints and
Other Fractures: Geological Society [London] Special
Publication 231, p. 1–9.
Laubach, S.E., Reed, R.M., Olson, J.E., Lander, R.H., and
Bonnell, L.M., 2004b, Coevolution of crack-seal tex-
ture and fracture porosity in sedimentary rocks: Cath-
odoluminescence observations of regional fractures:
Journal of Structural Geology, v. 26, p. 967–982, doi:
10.1016/j.jsg.2003.08.019.
Laubach, S.E., Olson, J.E., and Gross, M.R., 2009, Mechan-
ical and fracture stratigraphy: AAPG Bulletin, v. 93,
p. 1413–1426, doi:10.1306/07270909094.
Laubach, S.E., Eichhubl, P., Hilgers, C., and Lander, R.H.,
2010, Structural diagenesis: Journal of Structural
Geology, v. 32, p. 1866–1872, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2010
.10.001.
Le Garzic, E., de l’Hamaide, T., Diraison, M., Géraud, Y.,
Sausse, J., de Urreiztieta, M., Hauville, B., and Cham-
panhet, J.-M., 2011, Scaling and geometric proper-
ties of extensional fracture systems in the Proterozoic
basement of Yemen: Tectonic interpretation and fluid
flow implications: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 33,
p. 519–536, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2011.01.012.
Lorenz, J.C., Teufel, L.W., and Warpinski, N.R., 1991,
Regional fractures I: A mechanism for the formation
of regional fractures at depth in flat-lying reservoirs:
AAPG Bulletin, v. 75, p. 1714–1737.
Loriga, M.A., 1999, Scaling systematics of vein size: An
example from the Guanajuato mining district (central
Mexico), in McCaffrey, K.J.W., Longeran, L., and
Wilkinson, J.J., eds., Fractures, Fluid Flow and Miner-
alization: Geological Society [London] Special Publi-
cation 155, p. 57–67.
Mandelbrot, B.B., 1982, The Fractal Geometry of Nature:
San Francisco, W.H. Freeman, 460 p.
Mandl, G., and Harkness, R.M., 1987, Hydrocarbon mi-
gration by hydraulic fracturing, in Jones, M.E., and
Preston, R.M.F., eds., Deformation of Sediments and
Sedimentary Rocks: Geological Society [London] Spe-
cial Publication 29, p. 39–53.
Marrett, R., 1996, Aggregate properties of fracture popula-
tions: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 18, p. 169–178,
doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(96)80042-3.
Marrett, R., 1997, Permeability, porosity, and shear-wave
anisotropy from scaling of open fracture populations,
in Hoak, T.E., Klawitter, A.L., and Blomquist, P.K.,
eds., Fractured Reservoirs: Characterization and Mod-
eling Guidebook: Denver, Rocky Mountain Associa-
tion of Geologists, p. 217–226.
Marrett, R., and Allmendinger, R.W., 1992, Amount of ex-
tension on “small” faults: An example from the Viking
graben: Geology, v. 20, p. 47–50, doi:10.1130/0091
-7613(1992)020<0047:AOEOSF>2.3.CO;2.
Marrett, R., and Aranda-García, M., 2001, Regional struc-
ture of the Sierra Madre Oriental fold-thrust belt,
Mexico, in Marrett, R., ed., Genesis and Controls of
Reservoir-Scale Carbonate Deformation, Monterrey
Salient, Mexico: The University of Texas at Austin Bu-
reau of Economic Geology Guidebook 28, p. 31–55.
Marrett, R., and Strecker, M.R., 2000, Response of intra-
continental deformation in the central Andes to late
Cenozoic reorganization of South American Plate
motions: Tectonics, v. 19, p. 452–467, doi:10.1029
/1999TC001102.
Marrett, R., Allmendinger, E.W., Alonso, R.N., and Drake,
R.E., 1994, Late Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the
Puna Plateau and adjacent foreland, northwestern
Argentine Andes: Journal of South American Earth
Sciences, v. 7, p. 179–207, doi:10.1016/0895-9811
(94)90007-8.
Marrett, R., Ortega, O.J., and Kelsey, C.M., 1999, Extent
of power-law scaling for natural fractures in rock:
Geology, v. 27, p. 799–802, doi:10.1130/0091-7613
(1999)027<0799:EOPLSF>2.3.CO;2.
Marrett, R., Laubach, S.E., and Olson, J.E., 2007, Aniso-
tropy and beyond: Geologic perspectives on geophysi-
cal prospecting for natural fractures: The Leading
Edge, v. 26, p. 1106–1111, doi:10.1190/1.2780778.
Mauldon, M., Dunne, W.M., and Rohrbaugh, M.B., Jr.,
2001, Circular scanlines and circular windows: New
tools for characterizing the geometry of fracture traces:
Journal of Structural Geology, v. 23, p. 247–258, doi:
10.1016/S0191-8141(00)00094-8.
McCaffrey, K.J.W., and Johnston, J.D., 1996, Fractal analy-
sis of a mineralised vein deposit: Curraghinalt gold
deposit, County Tyrone: Mineralium Deposita, v. 31,
p. 52–58, doi:10.1007/BF00225395.
Michalzik, D., 1991, Facies sequence of Triassic-Jurassic
red beds in the Sierra Madre Oriental (NE Mexico) and
its relation to the early opening of the Gulf of Mexico:
Sedimentary Geology, v. 71, p. 243–259, doi:10.1016
/0037-0738(91)90105-M.
Milliken, K.L., and Laubach, S.E., 2000, Brittle deforma-
tion in sandstone diagenesis as revealed by scanned
cathodoluminescence imaging with application to
characterization of fractured reservoirs, in Pagel, M.,
ed., Cathodoluminescence and Related Techniques
in Geosciences and Materials: New York, Springer-
Verlag, p. 225–243.
Mixon, R.B., Murray, G.E., and Diaz-Gonzales, T.E., 1959,
Age and correlation of Huizachal Group (Mesozoic),
State of Tamaulipas, Mexico: AAPG Bulletin, v. 43,
p. 757–771.
Mon, R., 1987, Structural geology of two geothermal areas
in the Andes: Copahue and Tuzgle (Argentina): Bul-
letin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,
v. 35, p. 79–85.
Mon, R., and Hongn, F., 1991, The structure of the Precam-
brian and lower Paleozoic basement of the Central
Andes between 22° and 32°S lat.: Geologische Rund-
schau, v. 80, p. 745–758.
Mon, R., and Salfity, J.A., 1995, Tectonic evolution of the
Andes of northern Argentina, in Tankard, A.J., Suarez
Soruco, R., and Welsink, H.J., eds., Petroleum Basins
of South America: AAPG Memoir 62, p. 269–283.
Myers, R., and Aydin, A., 2004, The evolution of faults
formed by shearing across joint zones in sandstone:
Journal of Structural Geology, v. 26, p. 947–966, doi:
10.1016/j.jsg.2003.07.008.
Narr, W., 1996, Estimating average fracture spacing in sub-
surface rock: AAPG Bulletin, v. 80, p. 1565–1586.
Nelson, R.A., 1985, Geologic Analysis of Naturally Frac-
tured Reservoirs: Houston, Gulf Publishing, 320 p.
Nuccio, V.F., and Condon, S.M., 1996, Burial and thermal
history in the Paradox basin, Utah and Colorado,
and petroleum potential of the Middle Pennsylvanian
Paradox Formation: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin
2000-O, 41 p.

Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014 1361


Nuccio, V.F., and Roberts, L.N.R., 2003, Thermal matu-
rity and oil and gas generation history of petroleum
systems in the Uinta-Piceance Province, Utah and
Colorado, in USGS Uinta-Piceance Assessment Team,
Petroleum Systems and Geologic Assessment of Oil
and Gas in the Uinta-Piceance Province, Utah and
Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series
DDS-69-B, Chapter 4, 35 p.
Nur, A., 1982, The origin of tensile fracture lineaments:
Journal of Structural Geology, v. 4, p. 31–40, doi:10
.1016/0191-8141(82)90004-9.
Ocampo-Diaz, Y.Z.E., Jenchen, U., and Guerrero-Suastegui,
M., 2008, Facies and depositional systems of the
Galeana Sandstone Member (Taraises Formation,
Lower Cretaceous, northeastern Mexico): Revista
Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas, v. 25, p. 438–464.
Odling, N.E., Gillespie, P., Bourgine, B., Castaing, C.,
Chiles, J.-P., Christensen, N.P., Fillion, E., Genter, A.,
Olsen, C., Thrane, L., Trice, R., Aarseth, E., Walsh,
J.J., and Watterson, J., 1999, Variations in fracture sys-
tem geometry and their implications for fluid flow in
fractured hydrocarbon reservoirs: Petroleum Geosci-
ence, v. 5, p. 373–384, doi:10.1144/petgeo.5.4.373.
Olson, J.E., 1993, Joint pattern development: Effects of sub-
critical crack growth and mechanical crack interaction:
Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 98, p. 12,251–
12,265, doi:10.1029/93JB00779.
Olson, J.E., 2003, Sublinear scaling of fracture aperture versus
length: An exception or the rule?: Journal of Geophysi-
cal Research, v. 108, 2413, doi:10.1029/2001JB000419.
Olson, J.E., Laubach, S.E., and Lander, R.H., 2009, Natural
fracture characterization in tight gas sandstones: In-
tegrating mechanics and diagenesis: AAPG Bulletin,
v. 93, p. 1535–1549, doi:10.1306/08110909100.
Ortega, O.J., and Marrett, R., 2000, Prediction of macro-
fracture properties using microfracture information,
Mesaverde Group sandstones, San Juan basin, New
Mexico: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 22, p. 571–
588, doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(99)00186-8.
Ortega, O.J., Marrett, R., and Laubach, S.E., 2006, A scale-
independent approach to fracture intensity and average
spacing measurement: AAPG Bulletin, v. 90, p. 193–
208, doi:10.1306/08250505059.
Ortega, O.J., Gale, J.F.W., and Marrett, R., 2010, Quanti-
fying diagenetic and stratigraphic controls on fracture
intensity in platform carbonates: An example from the
Sierra Madre Oriental, northeast Mexico: Journal of
Structural Geology, v. 32, p. 1943–1959.
Park, R.G., Stewart, A.D., and Wright, D.T., 2002, The
Hebridean terrane, in Trewin, N.H., ed., The Geology
of Scotland: London, The Geological Society, p. 45–81.
Peach, B.N., Horne, J., Gunn, W., Clough, C.T., Hinxman,
L.W., and Teall, J.J., 1907, The Geological Structure
of the North-West Highlands of Scotland: Geological
Survey of Great Britain Memoir, 668 p.
Philipp, S.L., 2008, Geometry and formation of gypsum
veins in mudstones at Watchet, Somerset, SW England:
Geological Magazine, v. 145, p. 831–844, doi:10.1017
/S0016756808005451.
Pickering, G., Bull, J.M., and Sanderson, D.J., 1995, Sam-
pling power law distributions: Tectonophysics, v. 248,
p. 1–20, doi:10.1016/0040-1951(95)00030-Q.
1362 Geological Society of America Bulletin, September/October 2014
Hooker et al.
Pollard, D.D., and Aydin, A., 1988, Progress in understand-
ing jointing over the past century: Geological Society
of America Bulletin, v. 100, p. 1181–1204, doi:10.1130
/0016-7606(1988)100<1181:PIUJOT>2.3.CO;2.
Quigley, M.D., 1965, Geologic history of Piceance Creek–
Eagle basins: Bulletin of the American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, v. 49, p. 1974–1996.
Ramsay, J.G., 1980, The crack-seal mechanism of rock
deformation: Nature, v. 284, p. 135–139, doi:10.1038
/284135a0.
Renard, F., Andréani, M., Boullier, A.-M., and Labaume,
P., 2005, Crack-seal patterns: Records of uncorrelated
stress release variations in crustal rocks, in Gapais,
D., Brun, J.P., and Cobbold, P.R., eds., Deformation
Mechanisms, Rheology and Tectonics: From Minerals
to the Lithosphere: Geological Society [London] Spe-
cial Publication 243, p. 67–79.
Roberts, A.M., and Holdsworth, R.E., 1999, Linking on-
shore and offshore structures: Mesozoic extension in
the Scottish Highlands: Journal of the Geological So-
ciety, v. 156, p. 1061–1064, doi:10.1144/gsjgs.156.6
.1061.
Rohrbaugh, M.B., Jr., Dunne, W.M., and Mauldon, M.,
2002, Estimating fracture trace intensity, density, and
mean length using circular scan lines and windows:
AAPG Bulletin, v. 86, p. 2089–2104.
Sanderson, D.J., Roberts, S., and Gumiel, P., 1994, A frac-
tal relationship between vein thickness and gold grade
in drill core from La Codosera, Spain: Economic
Geology and the Bulletin of the Society of Economic
Geologists, v. 89, p. 168–173, doi:10.2113/gsecongeo
.89.1.168.
Sasaki, M., 2006, Statistical features of vein systems in the
Hishikari epithermal gold deposit, Japan: Resource
Geology, v. 56, p. 27–36, doi:10.1111/j.1751-3928
.2006.tb00265.x.
Schöpfer, M.P.J., Arslan, A., Walsh, J.J., and Childs, C.,
2011, Reconciliation of contrasting theories for frac-
ture spacing in layered rocks: Journal of Structural
Geology, v. 33, p. 551–565, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2011.01
.008.
Seyedolali, A., Krinsley, D.H., Boggs, S., Jr., O’Hara, P.F.,
Dypvik, H., and Goles, G.G., 1997, Provenance inter-
pretation of quartz by scanning electron microscope–
cathodoluminescence fabric analysis: Geology, v. 25,
p. 787–790, doi:10.1130/0091-7613(1997)025<0787:
PIOQBS>2.3.CO;2.
Siks, B.C., and Horton, B.K., 2011, Growth and fragmen-
tation of the Andean foreland basin during eastward
advance of fold-thrust deformation, Puna Plateau and
Eastern Cordillera, northern Argentina: Tectonics,
v. 30, TC6017, doi:10.1029/2011TC002944.
Sornette, D., and Sornette, A., 1999, General theory of the
modified Gutenberg-Richter Law for large seismic mo-
ment: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Amer-
ica, v. 89, p. 1121–1130.
Sprunt, E.S., and Nur, A., 1979, Microcracking and healing
in granites: New evidence from cathodoluminescence:
Science, v. 205, p. 495–497, doi:10.1126/science.205
.4405.495.
Strachan, R.A., Smith, M., Harris, A.L., and Fettes, D.J.,
2002, The northern Highland and Grampian terranes,
in Trewin, N.H., ed., The Geology of Scotland: Lon-
don, The Geological Society, p. 81–148.
Strachan, R.A., Holdsworth, R.E., Krabbendam, M., and
Alsop, G.I., 2010, The Moine Supergroup of NW
Scotland: Insights into the analysis of polyorogenic
supracrustal sequences, in Law, R., Butler, R.W.H.,
Strachan, R.A., and Krabbendam, M., eds., Continen-
tal Tectonics and Mountain Building: The Legacy of
Peach and Horne: Geological Society [London] Spe-
cial Publication 335, p. 233–254.
Such, P., Buatois, L.A., and Mángano, M.G., 2007, Stratig-
raphy, depositional environments and ichnology of the
Lower Paleozoic in the Azul Pampa area—Jujuy Prov-
ince: Revista de la Asociación Geológica Argentina,
v. 62, p. 331–344.
Turner, J.C.M., 1960, Estratigrafía de la Sierra se Santa Vic-
toria y adyacencias: Academia Nacional de Ciencias
Boletín, v. 41, p. 163–196.
Turner, J.C.M., 1970, The Andes of northwestern Argentina:
Geologische Rundschau, v. 59, p. 1028–1063, doi:10
.1007/BF02042283.
Urai, J.L., Williams, P.F., and van Roermund, H.L.M., 1991,
Kinematics of crystal growth in syntectonic fibrous
veins: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 13, p. 823–836,
doi:10.1016/0191-8141(91)90007-6.
Wilson, R.W., Holdsworth, R.E., Wild, L.E., McCaffrey,
K.J.W., England, R.W., Imber, J., and Strachan, R.A.,
2010, Basement-influenced rifting and basin develop-
ment: A reappraisal of post-Caledonian faulting pat-
terns from the North Coast Transfer Zone, Scotland,
in Law, R., Butler, R.W.H., Strachan, R.A., and Krab-
bendam, M., eds., Continental Tectonics and Mountain
Building: The Legacy of Peach and Horne: Geological
Society [London] Special Publication 335, p. 795–826.
Wilson, T.J., and Paulsen, T.S., 1998, CRP-1 fracture arrays:
Constraints on the Neogene–Quaternary stress regime
along the Transantarctic Mountains Front, Antarctica:
Terra Antarctica, v. 5, p. 327–335.
Wong, T.-F., Friedrich, J.T., and Gwanmesia, G.D., 1989,
Crack aperture statistics and pore space fractal geom-
etry of Westerly Granite and Rutland Quartzite:
Implications for an elastic contact model of rock com-
pressibility: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 94,
p. 10,267–10,278, doi:10.1029/JB094iB08p10267.
Zahm, C.K., Zahm, L.C., and Bellian, J.A., 2010, Integrated
fracture prediction using sequence stratigraphy within
a carbonate fault damage zone, Texas, USA: Journal of
Structural Geology, v. 32, p. 1363–1374, doi:10.1016/j
.jsg.2009.05.012.
Zhou, Y., Murphy, M.A., and Hamade, A., 2006, Structural
development of the Peregrina-Huizachal anticlinorium,
Mexico: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 28, p. 494–
507, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2005.11.005.
SCIENCE EDITOR: CHRISTIAN KOEBERL
ASSOCIATE EDITOR: ERIN K. BEUTEL
MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 11 JUNE 2013
REVISED MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 14 FEBRUARY 2014
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED 30 APRIL 2014
Printed in the USA