MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119828277 · doi:10.2110/jsr.2009.020

Clinoforms, Paleobathymetry, and Mud Dispersal Across the Western Canada Cretaceous Foreland Basin: Evidence from the Cenomanian Dunvegan Formation and Contiguous Strata

2009· article· en· W2119828277 on OpenAlexafffundabout
A. Guy Plint, Adish Tyagi, M. Hay, B. L. Varban, H. Zhang, Xavier Roca

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sedimentary Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsImperial Oil (Canada)Alberta EnergyWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsForeland basinCenomanianCretaceousGeologyBiological dispersalPaleontologyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Large-scale muddy clinoform stratification is rare in Cretaceous marine strata of the Western Canada Foreland Basin; most offshore mudstone units show near-parallel to gently diverging stratification that reflects differential basin subsidence. The early to middle Cenomanian Dunvegan Formation, of broadly deltaic character, is unusual in that it comprises a spectacular set of clinothems. These clinothems have been mapped over a 950 km dip transect, and downlap from NW to SE onto a phosphatic condensed section termed the FSU marker. Our regional mapping shows that the FSU marker is of basin-wide extent and marks the abrupt cessation of deposition for up to about 2 My in the south. In the northwest, the Dunvegan Formation forms a prominent wedge over 300 m thick, interpreted to fill a high-accommodation area. Muddy clinothems in this high-accommodation area are relatively tall (~ 80 m; 115 m decompacted) and extend about 80 km from the delta front to a zero edge at the downlap surface. Wave-rippled and hummocky cross-stratified fine sandstones of the upper delta front record the effects of storms, and extend about 30 m (~ 42 m decompacted) below contemporaneous beach facies, suggesting that effective wave base for sand transport was at about 40 m water depth; mud was transported in deeper water, presumably by storm-driven flows. Towards the SE, the Dunvegan Formation gradually changes from a wedge to a tabular shape, interpreted to indicate deposition in a low-accommodation area. In the transition from high- to low-accommodation areas, clinothems become progressively less tall (50 to about 20 m; 70 to about 29 m decompacted) but longer (150 to > 250 km). The most down-dip “clinothems” are essentially tabular and > 400 km in extent. In the high-accommodation area, offshore mud dispersal is inferred to have been limited by episodic geostrophic flows, and possibly by permanent along-shelf flows that swept mud (probably suspended, flocculated, and pelleted) into a shore-parallel prism, producing relatively short, steep clinothems. Muddy clinothems downlap onto sandy condensed facies of the FSU marker, the latter interpreted to have been deposited in shallow water prior to Dunvegan deposition, but which subsided below wave base in response to loading by the advancing deltaic clinothems. In the southern, low-accommodation area, tabular Dunvegan mudstones suggest that the sea floor was able to aggrade to effective wave base (i.e., about 40 m or less), at which point, wave resuspension of mud became frequent, resulting in efficient off- and along-shore dispersal of mud by geostrophic currents. The initiation of clinothem deposition is interpreted to coincide (a) with a phase of accelerated flexural subsidence in the northwest, related to renewed tectonic loading, and (b) possibly with the onset of large-scale anticlockwise marine circulation at the inception of the Greenhorn Seaway in the early Cenomanian. Together, these tectonic and oceanographic events formed an effective sediment trap along the western margin of the seaway. Only after the western sediment trap had filled, in late Dunvegan time, was mud again dispersed widely across the basin by storm processes in water less than about 40 m deep.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sedimentary ResearchSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207