Você está na página 1de 4

Types of Carbonate Platforms: A Genetic Approach

LUIS POMAR
Departament de Cincies de la Terra, Universitat de les Illes Balears, E-07071 Palma de Mallorca, Spain (e-mail: lpomar@uib.es)

INTRODUCTION
Many terms exist in the literature to describe carbonate platforms - from homoclinal ramps to rimmed shelves and a full spectrum of variations in between. Classification of carbonate platforms is not just a semantic or academic issue and it is clearly important to interpret accurately the seismic imaging of facies geometry and the potential of stratigraphic traps. Nevertheless, there are still several major uncertainties about the role of the controlling factors on the development of the different depositional profiles and distribution of facies belts, and the distinction between different types of carbonate platform may be problematic (Wright and Burchette, 1996). Over geological time scales, the shelf can be viewed as a surface of dynamic equilibrium controlled by the variables of relative sea-level changes, the rate and character of sediment input and rate of sediment transport. On siliciclastic shelves, base level for sediment to accumulate (accommodation) tends to be the shelf equilibrium profile, which is a balance between sediment input and fluid power (Swift and Thorne (1991). In carbonates, the greater diversity of depositional profiles and distribution of facies-belts reflect major differences in the genetic factors. Because hydraulic energy depends on oceanographic conditions on the shelf, the existing differences between carbonate and terrigenous systems should relate to differences in sediment input.

Three groups of carbonate producing biota are distinguished according to their dependence upon light. 1) Euphotic biota refers to organisms (autotrophs and mixotrophs) that need good light conditions and live in shallow-water environments (the euphotic zone). This zone may either be wave agitated or low energy (lagoons). 2) Oligophotic biota refers to organisms (autotrophs and mixotrophs) requiring poor light conditions. They may either live in shaded shallowwater zones or deeper on the shelf. On the shelf, this zone is the "oligophotic zone" and it is characterized by a decrease in light and temperature. The lower limit of this zone depends on the light-penetration coefficient in seawater. 3) Photo-independent biota refers to heterotroph organisms that do not require light. Although they may live in any environment, depending of limiting factors as temperature, salinity or hydraulic energy, they can either be abundant in the photic- or in the aphotic zones depending of food availability. Sorting and dispersal of carbonates, however, can be grasped in terms of the interaction between the size, shape and relative density of clasts, with the hydraulic energy. This is particularly significant when analyzing lithofacies: rock textures and structures are related to this interaction, whereas the amount of production influences the rock volume.

TYPES OF DEPOSITIONAL PROFILE


The variability of depositional profiles between carbonate platforms can be considered as a balance between the type of sediment produced, the locus of sediment production and the hydraulic energy. Among the panoply of possibilities, and for simplification purposes, only some scenarios are considered and all of them in wave-dominated seas. A first scenario to consider is the euphotic frameworkbuilding biota, like modern coral reefs. The framework produced by large-sized skeletons and encrusting organisms will resist the wave action and, consequently, a rigid buildup may develop in the highest-wave energy zone up to sea level. Finergrained sediments, if uncemented, will be shed-off the reef and accumulate to form a depositional slope. Depending on inherited topography, type of biota and changes of sea level, the rim may produce a barrier along the shelf margin and restrict circulation in the back-reef area and a lagoon may develop. A good example is the Upper Miocene Reef Complex of Mallorca, Spain (Pomar et al., 1996). The rigid rim at the platform margin, nevertheless, can be produced either by organic skeleton-built framestone, by chemical/biochemical cementstone, or

CARBONATE PRODUCTION
Carbonate production (sediment supply) mainly depends on biological systems, and consequently on intrabasinal conditions (nutrient availability, temperature, salinity, water energy, etc.). Location of sediment input occurs throughout the shelf. In addition, biological evolution has greatly affected carbonate production throughout the Phanerozoic. Sediment dispersal depends of the interaction between the type of sediment (relative-density, size and shape of grains) and the hydraulic energy on the production loci, and it is frequently modified by biological processes (binding, baffling, etc) and even cementation. Accordingly, sediment sorting may reflect the sizerange of local organisms rather than hydrodynamic conditions. Additionally, accommodation and carbonate-production are inter-dependent factors in carbonates. Sea-floor bathymetry/physiography and relative sea level determine the area of the water-depth zones occupied by the different types of carbonateproducing biota, and influences the net production of carbonate.

by both. Through the Phanerozoic, different types of frame-rimmed platforms are unlike modern reefrimmed platforms and have developed as a result of the existing differences in both types of frame-producing processes (biotic and/or chemical) and production loci. The Devonian carbonate platforms from Canning basin, Western Australia, are mostly reef-rimmed platforms flanked by steep marginal slopes (Playford, 1980; Playford et al., 1989; Ward, 1999). In this case, whereas platform-building stromatoporoids and corals seems to have been limited to shallow water, other reef-builders extended into deeper water. This extended depth range of frame-building organisms, together with the strong early submarine cementation around the platform margins and upper slopes, was very important in developing and maintaining the high-relief margins and very steep reefal slopes. The worldwide mass extinction that occurred at the end of the Frasnian did not much affect the type of platform margin, although it included most of the stromatoporoids, because it did not affect the main reef-builders of the platform margin and slope. Another different type of depositional profile can be seen in the Upper Permian Capitan reef in New Mexico and Texas, where the reef facies is composed of microbially-bound, marine-cemented calcareous sponge, algal, bryozoan, framestone and bindstone, and was deposited at the shelf-slope break in water depths ranging from 15 to 75 m, in a fair-weather- to substorm-wave-base position (Tinker, 1998). In this example, although a rigid rim existed along the platform margin, it was produced in the oligophotic zone and did not restrict circulation and wave action on the adjacent shelf as is characteristic of rimmed shelves. A carbonate system dominated by up to gravel-sized skeletons in the euphotic zone is another possible scenario to consider (see figure). These large skeletons may have been produced by soft-substrate platform dwellers, like the rudists, corals and stromatoporoids in some Mesozoic platforms. Depending on the hydraulic regime, fine-to-coarse sand-grained bioclasts may be shed off the platform building out a depositional slope whereas gravel- (granule to cobble or even boulder) sized skeletons will mostly remain on the platform top. An open-shelf flat-topped type of carbonate platform will result from this scenario of sediment production and dispersion (see figure). Open shelves with steep margins having grainy slopes with angles in excess of 10, are common in the Upper Cretaceous (Ross and Skelton, 1993). Examples of this type of open shelf can be seen in the Upper Cretaceous successions of Sardinia, the Apennines and Apulia, Italy (Carannante et al., 1997, 1999; Laviano et al., 1998). Another possible scenario to consider is a carbonate system producing coarse-grained sediment deeper in the oligophotic zone, as could be the case with red algae and some larger foraminifera, particularly during the Tertiary (see figure). In this context, fine-grained

skeletal components produced in the shallow euphotic zone may aggrade until they reach the shelfequilibrium profile, but they will be subsequently moved down-shelf and offshore in response to storms and currents. Nevertheless, gravel-sized skeletons produced in the deeper oligophotic zone will mostly accumulate in situ, being only episodically moved by currents or during exceptional storms. In this scenario, the main locus of deposition will be located downshelf, at a particular water depth, in the oligophotic zone. There, a slope will form as a result of increased sedimentation rate. The resulting depositional profile will be a distally-steepened ramp (see figure), with the angle of the slope obviously depending of the sediment fabric and the storm/current intensity and frequency (reworking processes). The Lower Tortonian (Upper Miocene) ramp cropping out on the southern sea cliffs of Menorca, Spain (Pomar, in press), is a good example of a distallysteepened ramp resulting from high rates of sediment production/accumulation in the oligophotic zone, forming large-scale rhodolithic-rudstone clinoforms. Nummulites, and other larger foraminifera, common in the Eocene marginal shelves bordering Tethys, should be related to a system dominated by coarse-grained skeletal carbonate production in the oligophotic (or mesophotic) zone and a distally-steepened ramp profile can be expected. The Lower Eocene El Garia Formation in Tunisia (Loucks et al., 1996) is a good example. Larger Permo-Carboniferous fusuline foraminifera were bathymetrically sensitive and abundantly widespread in shallow-marine carbonates. In the well-documented example of the Permian Upper San Andres Formation of Last Chance Canyon, New Mexico (Sonnenfeld and Cross, 1993), depositional topography and time-significant surfaces directly reveal a distally-steepened type of ramp. Another possible scenario to consider is a carbonate system dominated by fine-grained carbonate production (see figure). Sediment produced in the shallow euphotic zone will be easily shed downshelf but sediment produced in the oligophotic or aphotic zone may remain mostly in place. Notwithstanding, low-velocity currents may move fines down into deeper water. The angle of repose of fine-grained sediment is very low and the resulting depositional profile of the mud-dominated system will be an homoclinal ramp. And in fact, this is the common pattern in many ancient ramp successions, on which the volume of carbonate sediment in the mid-ramp zone is largely composed of mud and exceeds that in the inner ramp (Burchette and Wright, 1992). According to the hydraulic regime and energy-dissipation processes on the wave-friction-dominated zone, coarse-grained components may accumulate in shallow-water settings as beach- or shoal deposits. These characteristics are well documented in the Late Jurassic carbonate ramp of the Iberian basin, NE Spain, by Aurell et al. (1998), as well as the Hungarian Muschelkalk (Trk, 1998) and

the Mississippian Caballero-Andrecito platform in New Mexico, the last showing many similarities with others from Western Europe and Montana (Ahr 1989). Heterotroph organisms that do not require light, like bryozoans, crinoids, brachiopods and sponges have been important carbonate producers through the Phanerozoic, particularly during times of absence of frame-building organisms. They may live and be abundant in the shallow and wave-agitated photic zone or in the low-energy aphotic zone depending of food supply. If the carbonate production occurs in the shallow-agitated zone, reworking and downshelf shedding will produce a depositional profile intermediate between open shelf and homoclinal ramp, depending on the dominant size of skeletal components and the hydraulic regime. The Tierra Blanca Shelf in the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico, is a good example, where thick-encrinite sedimentary prism with a definite slope break formed by passive deposition during a period of relative tectonic stability (Ahr 1989). If carbonate production occurs below the base of wave/current sweeping, the resulting product will be a mound that will aggrade until it reaches the sweeping level and, at this level, flanks will start to prograde. Carbonate buildups of Early Mississippian (Tournaisian to Visan) age occur worldwide as frameless, lime mud/cementstone mounds with abundant primary cavities, resulting from in situ mud/peloid production and multiple generations of submarine cement (Ahr and Stanton, 1996). Not wishing to enter on the controversy about the origin of the Waulsortian-type of mounds, the growth phases of the mounds in the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico, can be approached by using the model of interaction between light penetration, type of carbonate production and hydrodynamic energy.

DISCUSSION
Current difficulties in the study of carbonate platforms are the uncertainties in identification of the particular type of platform and its coeval distribution of facies belts and the fact that more than one morphosedimentary system can occur within a carbonate-rock succession. Some of these difficulties also may result from defining the type of platform only from the facies array found from shore to basin. Notwithstanding these problems, the genetic approach helps to identify the essential factors controlling depositional profiles and facies distribution and helps to detect needs for improving models of carbonate platform development and evolution. In any case, predictive efficiency of conceptual models depends on the degree of comprehension of the genetic factors controlling development of different depositional profiles and distribution of the facies belts.

REFERENCES
AHR, W.M. (1989) Sedimentary and tectonic controls on the development of an Early Mississippian carbonate ramp, Sacramento Mountains area, New Mexico. In: Controls on Carbonate Platform

and Basin Development (Ed. by P.D. Crevello, J.L. Wilson, J.F. Sarg and J.F. Read), Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication, 44, 203-212. AHR, W.M. & STANTON (JR.), R.J. (1996) Constituent composition of Early Mississippian carbonate buildups and their level-bottom equivalents, Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico. In: Recent Advances in Lower Carboniferous Geology (Ed. by P. Strogen, I.D. Somerville and G.Ll. Jones), Geological Society Special Publication, No. 107, 83-95. AURELL, M., BADENAS, B., BOSENCE, D.W.J. & WALTHAM, D.A. (1998) Carbonate production and offshore transport on a Late Jurassic carbonate ramp (Kimmeridgian, Iberian basing, NE Spain): evidence from outcrops and computer modelling. In: Carbonate Ramps (Ed. by V.P. Wright and T.P. Burchette), Geological Society Special Publication No. 149, 137-161. BURCHETTE, T.P. & WRIGHT, V.P. (1992) Carbonate ramp depositional systems. Sedimentary Geology, 79, 3-57. CARANNANTE, G., GRAZIANO, R., RUBERTI, D. & SIMONE, L. (1997) Upper-Cretaceous temperate-type open shelves from northern (Sardinia) and southern (Apennines-Apulia) Mesozoic Tethyan margins. In: Cool-Water Carbonates (Ed. by N.P. James and J. Clarke), SPEM Spec. Publication, 56, 309-325. CARANNANTE, G., GRAZIANO, R., PAPPONE, G., RUBERTI, D. & SIMONE, L. (1999) Depositional systemand response to sea level oscillations of the Sennonian rudist-bearing carbonate shelves. Examples from central Mediterranean areas. Facies, 40, 1-24. LAVIANO, A., GALLO MARESCA, M. & TROPEANO, M. (1998) Stratigraphic organization of rudist biogenic beds in the Upper Cenomanian successions of the Western Murge (Apulia, Southern Italy). Geobios, Mm, sp., 22, 159-168. LOUCKS, R. G., MOODY, R. T., BELLIS, J. K. AND BROWN, A. A. (1996) Regional depositional setting and pore network of the El Garia Fm. (Metlaoui Group, Lower Eocene), Offshore Tunisia. Abstracts of the Fifth Tunisian Petroleum Exploration Conference. ETAP. Tunis. pp. 147-171. PLAYFORD, P . E . (1980) Devonian "Great Barrir Reef" of Canning Basin, Western Australia. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 64, 814-840. PLAYFORD, P.E., HURLEY, N.F., KERANS, C. & MIDDLETON, M.F. (1989) Reefal platform development, Devonian of the Canning Basin, Western Australia. In: Controls on Carbonate Platform and Basin Development (Ed. by P.D. Crevello, J.L. Wilson, J.F. Sarg and J.F. Read), S. E. P. M. Special Publication No. 44, 187-202. POMAR, L., WARD, W.C. & GREEN, D.G. (1996) Upper Miocene Reef Complex of the Llucmajor area, Mallorca, Spain. In: Models for Carbonate Stratigraphy from Miocene Reef Complexes of the Mediterranean regions (Ed. by E. Franseen, M. Esteban, W.C. Ward and J.M. Rouchy), S. E. P. M. Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology Series, n. 5, 191-225. POMAR, L. (in press) Ecological Enhancement of Sedimentary Accommodation: Evolution from a Carbonate Ramp to Rimmed Shelf, Upper Miocene, Balearic Islands. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, (in press). ROSS, D.J. & SKELTON, P.W. (1993) Rudist formations of the Cretaceous: a palaeoecological, sedimentological and stratigraphical review. In: Sedimentology Review/1 (Ed. by P.V. Wright), Blackwell Scientific Publications, 73-91. SONNENFELD, M.D. & CROSS, T.A. (1993) Volumetric partitioning and facies differentiation within the Permian Upper San Andres Formation of Last Chance Canyon, Guadalupe Mountains, New Mexico. In: Carbonate Sequence Stratigraphy: Recent Developments and Applications (Ed. by B. Louks and R.J. Sarg), A. A. P. G. Memoir No. 57, 435-474. SWIFT, D.J.P. & THORNE, J.A. (1991) Sedimentation on continental margins, I: a general model for shelf sedimentation. In: Shelf sand and sandstone bodies (Ed. by D.J.P. Swift, G.F. Oertel, R.W. Tillman and J.A. Thorne), International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication, No 14, 3-31. TINKER, S.W. (1998) Shelf-to-basin facies distributions and sequence stratigraphy of a steep-rimmed carbonate margin: Capitan depositional system, McKittrick Canyon, New Mexico and Texas. Journal Sedimentary Research, 68, 1146-1174.

TRK, A. (1998) Controls on development of Mid-Triassic ramps: examples from southern Hungary. In: Carbonate Ramps (Ed. by V.P. Wright and T.P. Burchette), Geological Society Special Publication No. 149, 339-367. WARD, W.B. (1999) Tectonic control on backstepping sequences revealed by mapping of Frasnian backstepped platforms, Devonian Reef Complexes, Napier Range, Canning Basin, Western Australia. In: Advances in Carbonate Sequence Stratigraphy: Application to

Reservoirs, Outcrops and Models (Ed. by P.M. Harris, A.H. Saller and J.A. Simo), S. E. P. M. Special Publication n. 63, 47-74. WRIGHT, V.P. & BURCHETTE, T.P. (1996) Shallow-water carbonate environments. In: Sedimentary Environments: Processes, Facies and Stratigraphy, Chapter 9 (Ed. by H.G. Reading), Blackwell Science Ltd, 325-394.

grain-size production
m s S g b F

grain-size deposition
m s S g b F

amount of production

grain-size production
m s S g b F

grain-size deposition
m s S g b F

1
Reef Slope Shallow basin

euphotic
carbonate production

platform
depth

euphotic
carbonate production

depth

oligophotic
hydraulic competence

slope

oligophotic
hydraulic competence

t fl a ps m ra

ed pp to

ATTACHED PLATFORM S
RIMMED SHELF

depth

m s S g b F

NON RIMM ED SHEL F

HO MO CL IN AL

DIS TAL STE LY EPE NED

mud silt sand gravel boulder framestone

sediment removed sediment in situ sediment transferred transferred + in situ

grain-size production
m s S g b F

grain-size deposition
m s S g b F

4
depth

grain-size production m s S g b F

grain-size deposition m s S g b F

3
Shallow ramp Ramp slope

euphotic
depth

homoclinal ramp

oligophotic Deep ramp

carbonate production

FIGURE CAPTION
The spectrum of depositional profiles and facies belts existing in carbonate platforms can be grasped, in addition to antecedent topography and geotectonic context, by means of the interaction between the different types of sediment being produced and the hydraulic energy acting on the diverse loci of production. Four examples are presented here: 1: Euphotic framework-producing biota will create rimmed shelves. 2: Gravel-sized skeletons produced in the euphotic zone by soft-substrate platform dwellers will create a flat-topped type of carbonate platform. 3: Coarse-grained sediment produced deeper in the oligophotic zone will produce a distally-steepened ramp. 4: Predominantly mudproducing biota will give rise to a homoclinal ramp resulting from the low angle o f repose of fine-grained sediments.

depth

hydraulic competence

Você também pode gostar