About This Item

Share This Item

The AAPG/Datapages Combined Publications Database

AAPG Bulletin

Abstract

AAPG Bulletin, V. 90, No. 9 (September 2006), P. 1309-1336.

Copyright copy2006. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved.

DOI:10.1306/03090605075

Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the Middle Ordovician Hawaz Formation (Murzuq Basin, Libya)

Emilio Ramos,1 Mariano Marzo,2 Jordi M. de Gibert,3 Khaeri S. Tawengi,4 Abdalla A. Khoja,5 Neacutestor D. Bolatti6

1Geodynamics and Basin Analysis Research Group, Universitat de Barcelona, Martiacute Franquegraves s/n, 08028 Barcelona, Spain; [email protected]
2Geodynamics and Basin Analysis Research Group, Universitat de Barcelona, Martiacute Franquegraves s/n, 08028 Barcelona, Spain; [email protected]
3Departament d'Estratigrafia, Paleontologia i Geociegravencies Marines, Universitat de Barcelona, Martiacute Franquegraves s/n, 08028 Barcelona, Spain; [email protected]
4REPSOL Exploration in Murzuq S.A., Dat el Imad Tower Complex, Tower 3, Floor 8, Tripoli, Libya; [email protected]
5National Oil Corporation, Tripoli, Libya
6REPSOL-YPF, Praia de Botafogo, 300, 7 andar. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; [email protected]

ABSTRACT

The Middle Ordovician Hawaz Formation is a 200-m (660-ft)-thick succession made up of fine-grained quartzarenites displaying a variable degree of bioturbation. It records the deposition in a large-scale, low-gradient estuary, which was partially controlled by tectonic extension. The upper Previous HitboundaryNext Hit of the formation is marked by two erosion surfaces (unconformities U1 and U2), related to the Late Ordovician glaciation. The U1 and U2 erosion surfaces generated a pronounced paleotopography that controlled the deposition of the Upper Ordovician sequences.

Tectonism influenced the paleogeography, although faults were unimportant from the point of view of sedimentary thickness. Tectonic subsidence was moderate, and accumulation rates were low. Physiography favored tidal power, especially during transgressive episodes, when the coastal embayment was flooded.

We defined 11 lithofacies, forming 6 facies associations. These associations are subtidal sandstones; storm-reworked, shoreface sandstones; shoreface-to-beach sandstones; channel-sandstone bodies; nearshore to inner-platform sandstones; and K-bentonites. Trace-fossil assemblages match Skolithos and Cruziana archetypal ichnofacies. On the basis of the dominant facies associations and ichnofacies, we divided the formation into three informal units, from base to top: HW.1, HW.2 and HW.3.

Periodically, volcanic ash was supplied to the basin from distal eruptive centers and was preserved as thin beds of K-bentonite interstratified with the shoreface sandstones, but not with the tidal-dominated sandstones.

We divided the Hawaz Formation into five third-order depositional sequences. Lowstand deposits were not identified. The lower boundaries of transgressive systems tracts are tidal ravinement surfaces or sequence boundaries, whereas the upper boundaries are flooding surfaces. The transgressive systems tracts are constituted by early transgressive tidal deposits separated by a Previous HitwaveTop ravinement surface from the late transgressive storm-dominated deposits. Highstand systems tracts consist of bioturbated shoreface-to-beach sandstones, which record seaward, shoreline progradation.

Pay-Per-View Purchase Options

The article is available through a document delivery service. Explain these Purchase Options.

Watermarked PDF Document: $14
Open PDF Document: $24

AAPG Member?

Please login with your Member username and password.

Members of AAPG receive access to the full AAPG Bulletin Archives as part of their membership. For more information, contact the AAPG Membership Department at [email protected].