Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.

org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

Sequence stratigraphy: a revolution without a cause?

R. C. L. W I L S O N
Department of Earth Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK

Abstract: The paper presents personal reflections on the origins and utility of sequence
stratigraphic models. These focus on two questions: (1) does sequence stratigraphy represent a
revolution in our understanding of the stratigraphic record, and (2) does it provide a new means
of global correlation? The f-n-st question is answered in the affirmative, at least insofar as
sequence stratigraphy enables us to integrate a wide range of data and interpretations across a
huge range of spatial and temporal scales. The recognition of the importance of stratal surfaces
has led to a greater understanding of the response by sedimentary to climatic, tectonic and
eustatic changes. But it has yet to be shown that eustatic signals can be detected unequivocally in
the stratigraphic record. Therefore this 'new global stratigraphy', based on the premise that
sequence boundaries are primarily controlled by eustatic changes, is not yet a reality. Testing this
hypothesis is beyond the resolution of current biostratigraphic and chronostratigraphic
techniques.

When I was invited to contribute to the Lyell
bicentenary meeting, I was asked to talk about
'Sequence stratigraphy and sea-level change'. It
was hardly surprising that 'sea-level change' was
included in the title, because over 150 years after
Lyell addressed the sea-level controversy, we are
still trying to unravel tectonic and eustatic signals
from the sedimentary record. But sequence strati-
graphy is not just about sea-level change. It
identifies genetic packages of strata bounded by
time-related physical surfaces: unconformities and
their correlative conformities, and surfaces caused
by flooding events. Peter Vail and the 'Exxon
school' claimed that eustatic sea-level changes are
the dominant control on stratal geometries and
facies distributions within them. For readers not
familiar with it, the sequence stratigraphic
approach is summarised in Fig. 1. It develops a
simplified version of a frequently used diagram
which is often referred to as the 'Exxon slug'.
To some geologists, the sequence stratigraphic
approach heralded the possibility of the 'new global
stratigraphy' whereby stratigraphic surfaces caused
by globally synchronous eustatic sea-level changes
could be used as a means of global correlation.
However, others regarded it as dressing up
regressions, transgressions etc. in unnecessary new
terminology.
This paper presents personal reflections on the
sequence stratigraphic approach gained both as a
teacher and researcher. It focuses on the questions
explicitly and implicitly stated in the title, but does
not attempt to provide a thorough description or
comprehensive critical review. Brief introductions
to the subject are given by Wilson (1992) and
Christie-Blick and Driscoll (1995). Textbooks by
Miall (1996) and Emery and Myers (1996) provide
in-depth coverage, with Miall's text offering much
constructive criticism. The best introduction from
the Exxon school is the colourful volume on
siliciclastic stratigraphy (Van Wagoner et al.
1990). Reflective articles by Posamentier and
Weimer (1993) and Walker (1990) are well worth
reading.
Method, problems and doctrine
The beginnings
The roots of sequence stratigraphy lie in the recog-
nition, some 40 years ago, of packages of strata
bounded by continent-wide unconformities. Tech-
nological advances that enabled the petroleum
exploration industry to move offshore played a key
role in stimulating stratigraphers to take this 'big
view'. High-quality marine seismic data enabled
stratigraphic architecture to be determined at the
basin and continental margin scales. Out of this
grew the conceptual framework that enables the
integration of a range of scales of stratigraphic
information from a single laminae to a first order
stratigraphic sequence.
I first learnt about seismic and sequence
stratigraphy through a workshop run by Esso UK
soon after the 'old testament' was published
(Payton 1977). They ran another in the 1980s,
around the time of the appearance of the 'new
testament' (Wilgus et al. 1988). The first meeting

WILSON,R. C. L. 1998. Sequence stratigraphy: a revolution without a cause?. 303

In: BLUNDELL,D. J. & SCOTT,A. C. (eds) Lyell: the Past is the Key to the Present. Geological Society,
London, Special Publications, 143, 303-314.
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

304 R.C.L. WILSON

was, of course, seismically oriented, and the second
one focused more on the outcrop and well log
scales.
At the first meeting there was some robust
discussion about a number of problems and
contentious issues, which was hardly surprising
with people such as Drummond Matthews and
Tony Hallam present. A few of these problems are
discussed below.
Are seismic reflections really time lines?
The examples given by the Exxon group at the Esso
workshop (e.g. Vail, Todd & Sangree 1977, figs
3-6) were not entirely convincing. A diagram for
which I find more use with students is given in Fig.
2 - b u t this is not proof of the proposition!
How can eustatic signals be determined from
coastal onlap charts ?
Exxon charts have a characteristic saw-tooth shape
with abrupt initial falls followed by gradual rises.
The early derivative sea-level curves reflected such
asymmetry. In the early 1980s revised smoother
curves were published, as by then it had been
recognised that the landward encroachment of
sediments across older strata (onlap) along
continental margins, as seen on seismic sections,
involved marine and fluvial sediments. The latter
were deposited during periods when coastlines
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 305

Fig. 1. Sketch cross-sections illustrating the basic concepts and terminology of sequence stratigraphy. Sketches (a) to
(g) illustrate the stages in the development of one depositional sequence during one cycle of relative sea-level change.
Slightly modified from Skelton et al. (1997).

moved seaward, yet on seismic sections landward
onlap continued.
H o w can sea-level curves f o r individual locations
yield a means o f global correlation ?
This was, and still is, a minefield. Different
approaches, and different authors, produce different
curves for the same period of time (Fig. 3). Twenty
years after the first global curves were published,
all the evidence on which a series of Exxon school
curves are based have still not been published
although some is contained in the appendix of Haq
et al. (1988). Despite such shaky foundations (and
others which are discussed by Miall 1996) many
geologists felt that the contents of the old and
new testaments, and especially the famous - or
infamous - Haq curve (Haq et al. 1988), heralded
the start of a new era of stratigraphic studies.
Perhaps a means of global chronostratigraphic
correlation was within reach? This euphoria
probably resulted from the fact that, to many
people, traditional stratigraphy had slipped into the
doldrums. Many with an historical geology bent
had taken refuge in sedimentology and found that
the sequence stratigraphic approach widened their
horizons - in space and time - as they attempted to
analyse basin-wide data sets and interpretations.
The historical development of sequence strati-
graphy was significantly different from the way
Lyell's ideas were introduced to, and eventually
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

306 R.C.L. WILSON

Fig. 2. A cartoon to explain why seismic reflections are time lines, and do not follow lithostratigraphic boundaries.
Changes in tone density depict facies changes; these are relatively abrupt across time lines, but gradual parallel to them.

accepted by, the scientific community, or for that
matter the exposure to peer review of later
conceptual advances. Seismic stratigraphy came
out of the corporate closet in the late 1970s, about
ten years after it had been routinely applied during
petroleum exploration activities. The birth and
early childhood of sequence stratigraphy were not
subjected to open debate as were Lyell's
observations and interpretations. Perhaps there
were robust debates within Exxon, but they failed
to ensure that the method was distanced from
eustatic explanations when the subject entered the
public domain in 1977. Unfortunately, this led to
judgements about the value of the sequence
stratigraphic approach being clouded by the claim
that it provides a new means of g l o b a l correlation
based on the supposed eustatic signals. So method
became tainted by doctrine. Lyell avoided this trap,
as discussed by Jim Secord during his Linnean
Society lecture at the Bicentenary Meeting (see also
Secord 1997).
Therefore it is important to distinguish the
analytical framework of sequence stratigraphy from
debates about eustatic signals and the 'new global
stratigraphy'. With this in mind, this paper addres-
ses two questions contained within its title: (1) does
sequence stratigraphy represent a revolution in our
understanding of the stratigraphic record, and (2)
does it enhance our ability to determine the causes
(i.e. the relative contributions made by eustasy,

sea level rise

lOOm 50 0 50m
,i it 4

-= Berriasian
,0)
LUL)

o Volgian

~ Kimm.
.J

Oxfordian
,.2
~ Callovian

Fig. 3. Late Jurassic sea-level curves compared. (a) Haq et al. (1988) based on a compilation of coastal onlap and
sequence stratigraphic studies. (b): Hallam (1988) based on 'stage by stage analysis of the areal spread of seas over
the continents as inferred from palaeographic studies' with shorter-term cyclic changes inferred from facies analyses
which enabled 'the recognition of extensive shallowing and deepening events in epicontinental marine sequences'. (c)
Sahagian et al. (1996) based on the sedimentary record of repeated flooding and exposure of the very low gradient
ramp of the Russian Platform.
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023
SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
tectonics and depositional processes) of relative
sea-level change at single locations and across
basins?
A revolution?
What are we looking for in a revolution? I have
neither the space nor the expertise to discuss at
length ideas about scientific revolutions, so I will
quote just two views. Kuhn (1970) used the
concepts of 'normal' and 'extraordinary' science to
explain what he considered to be the nature of
scientific revolutions. Normal science is like puzzle
solving; it is research firmly based on one or more
past scientific achievements that a particular
discipline acknowledges for a time as supplying the
foundation for its continued practice. Extraordinary
science is preceded by a period of uncertainty,
when investigators may divide into different
schools of thought, so that there is no generally
accepted consensus. Extraordinary science begins
when a new paradigm takes over from a previously
held one: a new consensus then prevails and the
'revolution' has begun. New ideas suddenly enable
a whole range of previously puzzling phenomena to
be explained, and so a rigorous 'mopping-up'
operation commences. The emergence of plate
tectonics fits this definition of a scientific revo-
lution very well.
Not all historians of science agree with Kuhn,
maintaining that it is too simplistic to define just
two distinct kinds of scientific progress (normal
and extraordinary). Jevons (1973) wrote:
Contributions form a continuous spectrum,
within which really major changes are rare, and
minor ones most frequent, but with intermediate
ones occurring with intermediate frequency.
Did the advent of sequence stratigraphy represent a
Fig. 4. Sketch cross section across a basin margin showing the controls that determine the space available for
sediment to accumulate. The primary controls are eustatic, tectonic and climatic. They determine sediment supply,
and the development of equilibrium profiles in erosional and depositional systems that are linked to base levels
related to sea level, the water table and wave base.
307
revolution in historical geology, or a minor or
intermediate step forward? Consider this question
in the context of the following definitions:
The subdivision of basin fills into genetic
packages bounded by unconformities and their
correlative conformities. (Emery & Myers
(1996).
The predictable succession of physical
stratigraphic units including sequences, systems
tracts and parasequences. These depositional
units are defined on the basis of internal stratal
'geometries' and evolve in response to changes
in shelfal accommodation space. (Vail, pers.
comm. 1992).
Notice that the definition given by Peter Vail in a
short course avoids the dreaded word 'eustasy'.
'Shelfal accommodation space' is used instead,
which is perhaps a tacit recognition of the difficulty
(many geologists would say impossibility) of
unravelling from the rock record the relative
contributions of eustasy, tectonics and sedimentary
processes in creating and filling the space available
for sediments to fill (Fig. 4). Both the definitions
quoted above focus on method, but 'explanation'
still figures in the Vail definition. So has sequence
stratigraphy enabled 'a whole range of previously
puzzling phenomena to be explained', or is it just
another step forward in stratigraphic procedures
and understanding? We do not have a global model
- a cause - that integrates a variety of observations
and interpretations in a manner similar to that
achieved by plate tectonics. The Vail definition
quoted above clearly recognises this by leaving out
the link with eustasy. So have we witnessed a
revolutionary change in method and approach? I
will consider this question first and then return to
the issue of 'causes'.
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

308 R.C.L. WILSON

Building on the shoulders o f others A n e w p a r a d i g m or an effective catalyst?

Table 1 is a chronological list of geologists, and the
concepts they proposed, that are embraced by
sequence stratigraphy. These are the foundations
that underpin sequence stratigraphy, starting with
Hutton and Lyell. The younger roots of sequence
stratigraphy lie in our fascination with cyclic
sequences, and the recognition by Larry Sloss of
stratal assemblages bounded by continent wide
unconformities (Sloss et al. 1949; Sloss 1963).
Sloss also contributed to the evolution of sequence
stratigraphy through his supervisory role when
Peter Vail was a graduate student. We should not
forget other contributions, such as Rich's (1951)
depositional topography (fondoform, clinoform,
undaform) which was the forerunner of the Exxon
'slug', Wheeler's (1958) chronostratigraphic charts
that were (and still are) used to dissect the Exxon
'slug' in time, and Busch's (1971) genetic incre-
ments of strata and genetic sequences of strata, the
definitions of which are similar to the para-
sequences and parasequence sets of the Exxon
school.
The ability to take the 'big view', as was done by
Sloss and Rich, was significantly enhanced by
technological advances that enabled stratigraphic
architecture at the basin and continental margin
scales to be determined using high quality marine
seismic data. Out of this has grown the conceptual
framework, albeit with a continental margin bias,
that enables the integration of a range of scales of
stratigraphic information (see below).
Sequence stratigraphy represents a new
paradigm in geology. (Miall 1996)
Sequence stratigraphy is often regarded as a
relatively new science, evolving in the 1970s
from seismic stratigraphy. In fact sequence
stratigraphy has its roots in the centuries-old
controversies over the origin of cyclic
sedimentation and eustatic versus tectonic
controls on sea level. (Emery & Myers 1996)
These two views represent end members of a
range of opinion about the significance of the
sequence stratigraphic approach. Miall's view is
perhaps a little surprising, given that he has been
such a strong critic of the 'new global stratigraphy'
claims of the Exxon school. However his accolade
is for the method, not the doctrine of eustatic
control.
Few stratigraphers would deny that sequence
stratigraphy has reinvigorated stratigraphic
research over the past 25 years. At the very least, it
has enabled us to look at old data with new eyes,
and take a basin scale (and larger) view when
accumulating and interpreting new data. This has
resulted in the publication of a multitude of papers
and special volumes on the subject. The burgeoning
sequence stratigraphic literature consists of a
spectrum of papers from those applying the new
nomenclature in a predominantly descriptive way,
to others who use the concept to come to a better
understanding of basin dynamics. For an example

Table 1. The foundations of sequence stratigraphy

Year Author(s) Concepts

1788 Hutton Unconformities separating cycles of uplift, erosion and deposition

1835 Lyell Sea-level change and uplift of land
1839 Sedgwick & Murchison Unconformitiesas physical boundaries of geological Periods
1840 Agassiz Glacial theory
1842 Maclaren Glacioeustasy
1894 Walther Law of succession of facies
1898/1909 Chamberlin Diastrophic control of stratigraphy by sea-level changes
1906 Suess Onlap and offiap attributed to eustasy
1913 Grabau Recognised interrelationshipof subsidence and sediment supply
1924 Stille Global unconformities caused by tectonism and resulting eustatic effects
1935 Wanless & Shephard Carboniferous cyclothems and glacioeustacy
1940 Grabau -30 Ma 'rhythm of the ages': heat flow and transgressions/regressions
1949 Sloss et al. First proposal of concept of stratigraphic sequences
1951 Rich Depositional topography: genetically related associations of sediment types.
1958 Teichert Facies sequence
1958 Wheeler Chronostratigraphic charts
1963 Sloss Major continent-wide unconformity-boundsequences related to orogenies
1965 De Raaf et al. Vertical profiles (facies successions)
1971 Busch Genetic increments (GIS) and sequences of strata (GSS)
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023
SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
of the utility of the method one has only to look at
the extent to which papers presented at successive
meetings on the petroleum geology of NW Europe
(Woodland 1975: Illing & Hobson 1981; Brooks &
Glennie 1987; Parker 1993) show the degree to
which geologists and managements of companies
have progressively espoused the new approach.
However, a mountain of paper does not signal a
revolution in stratigraphy.
Sequence stratigraphy does not provide an all
embracing global causal model. It is a catalyst, or
perhaps an up-to-date toolkit, designed to utilize
and integrate a wide range of data sets and explore
more deeply spatial and temporal stratal relation-
ships. Integration and interrelationships are the
essence of sequence stratigraphy, based on the well
established traditions of biostratigraphy, facies
analysis and chemostratigraphy. It provides a
framework with which to integrate observations
and interpretations derived from different data sets,
from outcrops through basins to crustal plates, and
through time (Figs 4 & 5). It has forced us to think
more deeply about how space for sediments to
accumulate is created, about the significance of
stratal surfaces and units, and about the hierarchical
structure of sedimentary successions and the factors
that shape their architecture.
The difficulty of manipulating so much data, and
the complexity of considering possible controls,
inevitably led to the development and application
of modelling studies. Not surprisingly, there are
optimistic and pessimistic views about their value,
as the following quotations from the same volume
(Dott 1992) show:
Mathematical modelling in the late 1970s ...
allowed us to relate sea level, subsidence, and
sediment supply to produce the curves on our
global cycle chart, which implies a major role for
eustasy throughout Panerozoic time. (Vail 1992)
A wide range of geological characteristics places
limits on the tectonism and eustasy. This allows
the application of a family of reasonable tectonic
and eustatic models to explain basin history ...
models can generate complex basinal sequences
with high fidelity using plausible inputs. Thus
assumptions heaped on assumptions work.
(Kendall et al. 1992)
Using modelling studies, can we really unravel
the effect of a multitude of controls on the archi-
tecture of a given basin fill? They help us under-
stand a multitude of possibilities and rule out
unlikely combinations of possible controls, but they
cannot separate and quantify the effects of different
controls on real stratigraphic patterns which we
observe. This does not mean that stratigraphic
modelling is worthless: it makes us aware that
309
similar patterns may be produced by several
different combinations of controlling factors.
Modelling aids our understanding of what rates of
processes are unrealistic or impossible, and what
combination of rates are plausible (Fig. 5(c)).
Models can also be used to predict facies distri-
butions ahead of drilling in partially explored
basins (e.g. Lawrence et al. 1990).
Modelling studies demonstrate the likelihood
that the combination of eustatic changes and
differential subsidence across rift basins can
produce sequence boundaries and depositional
systems tracts differing in age across a relatively
small area (e.g. Gawthorpe et al. 1994). Christie-
Blick and Driscoll (1995) highlighted the difficulty
of predicting the timing of the sedimentary
response to external 'drivers'. They stated:
if the phase relation between the eustatic signal
and the resulting stratigraphic record varies from
one place to another, then the synchrony or lack
thereof of observed stratigraphic events may
prove to be less useful then previously thought as
a criterion for distinguishing eustasy from other
controls on sedimentation.
The new global stratigraphy
M i s s i o n impossible?
The identification of facies and their environmental
interpretation is crucial to the application of
sequence stratigraphic concepts. As this approach
is, to say the least, not entirely objective, it is not
surprising that different workers may arrive at
different interpretations, as demonstrated by the
examples from the Upper Jurassic shown in Fig. 6.
So can sequence boundaries and other stratal
surfaces offer a means of global correlation because
they are generated by eustatic changes of sea level?
As already discussed, the hypothesis that
sequence boundaries and flooding-related surfaces
signal global changes in sea level is fundamentally
flawed because we are unable to isolate the eustatic
signals from those caused by tectonic and
sedimentary processes. This is not the only
difficulty. Notwithstanding the problem that
different workers may not be able to agree on
sequence stratigraphic interpretations of the same
succession, proving that stratal surfaces are
globally synchronous is an almost impossible task
within the resolution of the current geological
timescale. This is particularly difficult in
successions deposited before the current icehouse
period began, and there is still a long way to go
even within this interval of time.
Miall (1994) pointed out the problems of
correlating stratal surfaces between basins: the
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

310 l~. c . L. WILSON

Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY 311

Fittoni
Rotunda
NOT
Pallasioides STUDIED
NOT
Pectinatus STUDIED
Hudlestoni
Wheatleyensis
Scitulus
Elegans
IAutissiodorensis
Eudoxus
Mutabilis
NOT
Cymodoce STUDIED
Baylei

Wignall 1991 Hantzpergue Haq. etaL Proust etal.

1985 1989 1995

Fig. 6. The difficulty of reaching agreement on the location of sequence boundaries: alternative interpretations of the
Kimmeridgian sensu anglico of northwestern Europe (from Proust et al. 1995). Sequence boundaries are shown as
thick lines.

inability to map them directly from place to place

means that they must be correlated using
biostratigraphy or exceptionally chemostratigraphy
or magnetostratigraphy. He showed how the
limitations of time resolution involved in the
various steps necessary to date and correlate
stratigraphic events ranges between a few hundred
thousand and several millions years. Thus error
may be heaped on error so that the error range in
biostratigraphic resolution is often greater than the
duration of stratigraphic sequences.
The existence of cycles occurring at different
frequencies and amplitudes adds to the problems of
recognising global signals (Fig. 7), because differ-
ent depositional settings may record different
frequency events. So there is a danger that a lower
order event in one place may be correlated with a
higher order one in another, and so on.
Optimists argue that if key events as indicated by
sequence boundaries and transgressive/flooding
surfaces do turn up in the same zonal positions in
many places around the world, then there is a
possibility that the global signal is strong enough to
overcome regional variability in tectonic sub-
sidence and uplift.
The future
Despite all the difficulties of global correlation,
there can be little doubt that our profession will
pursue cycles in the geological record for a long
time to come - j u s t as it has done in the past. A
promising line of investigation is to determine the
extent to which global geochemical signatures
correlate with flooding events identified using
stratigraphic and sedimentological features. Studies
of Cretaceous pelagic limestones suggest that
'within certain limits, the correlation of the ~13C
profile with published sea-level curves may be
extremely close' and that 'such a relationship could
well relate to shelf-sea area governing the global
burial rate of organic carbon' (Jenkyns 1996).
During the present icehouse period, 0180 variations
are a proxy for glacioeustatic sea-level changes,
and in some areas these have been shown to be
correlated with sequence boundaries (e.g. Carter et
al. 1991; Naish & Kemp 1997). Notably, the
oxygen isotope studies of Browning et al. (1996)
showed that ice-volume changes occurred across
sequence boundaries beneath the New Jersey
coastal plain after 42 Ma (when Antarctic ice sheets

Fig. 5. Sequence stratigraphy: its role in promoting the integration of different data sets, and as a framework for
exploring the interrelationships in space and time of the controls on the creation of sediment accommodation and the
resultant stratal units. (a) Sequence stratigraphy provides a framework for the integration of data sets collected across
a range of scales, shown on a log-log plot. (b) The hierarchy of scale of stratal units in thickness and time, shown on
a log-log plot. (c) Estimates of the ranges of sediment accommodation space versus the time periods over which
various processes operate to produce such space, shown on a log-log plot (Dickinson et al. 1994).
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023

312 R.C.L. WILSON

Fig. 7. Changing frequencies and amplitudes of eustatic change. (A) The 'first order' curves of Hallam (1977) and
Vail et al. (1977) show sea-level peaks in the Early Palaeozoic and Cretaceous, separated by a low in the Permo~
Triassic. The smaller scale fluctuations on the Hallam curve represent second order changes. Left side of (B) and (C)
(from Tucker 1993): cartoons showing the possible changes in the amplitude of third-fifth-order sea-level changes
during icehouse and greenhouse periods. During icehouse periods, higher frequency and amplitude Milankovich-
related changes dominate over lower frequency and amplitude third order changes. During greenhouse times, the
third-order changes probably had higher amplitudes than Milankovich-related changes, and so are more likely to
generate sequences. Right side of (B) and (C): cartoons (not to scale) showing differences in mean elevation and
amplitudes of sea levels during icehouse and greenhouse periods. Lower mean sea level during icehouse times are
accompanied by high amplitude short-term changes so that the upper parts of continental slopes, continental shelves
and coastal plains are subjected to frequent flooding and exposure. In contrast, high mean sea level during greenhouse
periods result in extensive epeiric seas covering platforms and low angle ramps, so that relatively small changes in
sea level cause extensive flooding or emergence over large areas.

began to form), but no link was revealed between

~180 variations and sequence boundaries before
this time.
There are limitations to the application of studies
of recent sedimentary systems and Neogene basin
architecture in order to understand the controls on
sequence development during greenhouse periods.
This is because during icehouse periods deposi-
tional systems may not reach equilibrium during
the relatively short time spanned by a single higher
order cycle of sea-level change (Fig. 7B). They
were more likely to have done so during
greenhouse periods. Would storm processes be
more or less significant than they are today in
controlling architecture during greenhouse times?
During greenhouse times, the amplitudes of global
sea-level changes were probably much smaller than
those of icehouse times, and they occurred over
longer periods of time: this must have had a
significant effect on rates of sediment supply. So
does sequence architecture change between
greenhouse and icehouse times as suggested by
Read et al. (1991)? These and many other questions
remain to be explored.
Conclusion
Few geologists would deny that sequence strati-
graphy has reinvigorated stratigraphic research
over the past 25 years. At the very least, it has
enabled us to look at old data with new eyes, and
take a basin scale (and larger) view when acquiring
and interpreting new data. This has resulted in the
publication of a plethora of papers and special
volumes on the subject. But does this signal a
revolution in stratigraphy?
Judgements about the value of the sequence
stratigraphic approach are often clouded by argu-
ments concerning whether it provides a new
method for g l o b a l correlation because sequences
were largely the result of eustatic sea-level changes.
Therefore it is important to distinguish the
analytical framework and predictive capability of
sequence stratigraphy from debates about eustatic
signals and the 'new global stratigraphy'.
It is probably unlikely that high resolution
sequence stratigraphic studies will ever, on their
own, succeed in proving that sequence boundaries
can be used as globally synchronous stratigraphic
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023
SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
markers, especially during greenhouse periods. In
the absence o f a significant i m p r o v e m e n t in the
resolution o f dating methods, the ultimate test will
be to show whether these surfaces are related to
geochemical signals of global change.
The quotation below provides a strong reminder
about the need to objectively record the nature of
the stratigraphic record, and then consider the
p r o c e s s e s that w e r e responsible for what we
observe.
Perhaps Lyell's greatest single contribution was
to separate study of the geological record -
geology in its historical sense - from the study o f
processes that p r o d u c e d this record. Sutton
(1975)
We should not forget the pitfalls of using the
genetic stratigraphy route to interpreting the rock
record, for there is always the risk that method will
slip into doctrine.
I am indebted to Peter Vail and his Exxon colleagues for
stimulating my interest in sequence stratigraphy. An
unpublished perspective on sequence stratigraphy by
Gerald Salisbury provided food for thought a year before
this paper was written. The comments of Angela Coe and
two anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowledged. I
thank Angela Coe and the Open University for permission
to reproduce Fig. 1. The contributions of Yvonne
Englefield and Denise Swann (word processing) and
Andrew Lloyd and John Taylor (figure drafting) are
gratefully acknowledged.
References
AGASSIZ, L. 1840. Etudes sur les Glaciers. Privately
published, Neuchatel.
BROOKS, J. & GLENNIE, K. W. (eds) 1987. Petroleum
geology of North-West Europe, Graham & Trotman.
London, vols 1-2.
BROWNING, J. V., MILLER, K. G. & PAK, D. K. 1996.
Global implications of Lower to Middle Eocene
sequence boundaries on the New Jersey coastal
plain: the icehouse cometh. Geology, 24, 639-642.
BUSCH, D. A. 1971. Genetic units in delta prospecting.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Bulletin, 55, 1137-1154.
CARTER, R. M., ABBOTT, S. T., FULTHORPE, C. S.,
HAYWICK, D. W, & HENDERSON, R. A. 1991.
Applications of global sea-level and sequence
stratigraphic models in southern hemisphere
Neogene strata from New Zealand. In: MACDONALD,
D. I. M. (ed.) Sedimentation, Tectonics and Eustasv:
Sea-Level Changes at Active Margins. International
Association of Sedimentologists Special Publication
12, 41-65.
CHAMBERLAIN, T. C. 1898. The ulterior basis of time
divisions and the classification of geologic history.
Journal of Geology, 6, 449-462.
1909. Diastrophism as the ultimate basis of
correlation. Journal of Geology, 17, 685-693.
313
CHRISTIE-BLICK, N. & DRISCOLL, N. W. 1995. Sequence
stratigraphy. Annual Reviews of Earth and
Planetary Science, 23, 451-478.
DICKINSON, W. R., SOREHEGAN, G. S. & GILES., K. A.
1994. Glacioeustatic origin of Permo-Carboniferous
stratigraphic cycles; evidence from the southern
Cordilleran foreland region. In: DENNISON, J. M. &
ETTENSOHN F. R. (eds) Tectonic and Eustatic
Controls on Sedimentary Cycles. Concepts in
Sedimentology and Palaeontology 4, Society of
Sedimentary Geology, 25-34.
DoTr, R. H., Jr 1992. An bTtroduction to the Ups and
Downs of Eustao'. Geological Society of America
Memoir 180, 17-24.
EMERY, D. & MYERS, K. (eds) 1996. Sequence
Stratigraphy. Blackwell Science, Oxford.
GAWTHORPE. R. L.. FRASER, A. J. & COLLIER, R. E. LL.
1994. Sequence stratigraphy in active extensional
basins: implications for the interpretation of ancient
basin fills. Marine and Petroleum Geology, ll,
642-648.
GRABAU, A. W. 1913. Principles of Stratigraphy. Seiler,
New York.
-- 1940. The Rhythm of the Ages. Henri Vetch, Peking.
HAQ, B. V., HARDENBOL,J. 8,: VAIL, P. R. 1988. Mesozoic
and Cenozoic chronostratigraphy and cycles of sea-
level change. In: WILOL'S, C. K., POSAMENTIER.H.,
VAN WAGONER,J., ROSS, C. & KENDALL, C. St. C.
(eds) Sea-Level Changes: an Integrated Approach.
Society of Economic Palaeontologists and
Mineralogists Special Publication 42, 71-108.
HALLAM, A. 1977. Secular changes in marine inundation
of USSR and North America through the
Phanerozoic. Nature, 269, 762-772.
1988. A re-evaluation of Jurassic eustasy in the light
of new data and the revised Exxon curve, ln:
WILGUS, C. K., HASTINGS,B. S., KENDALL,C. G. ST.
C., POSAMENTIER, H. W., Ross, C. A., VAN
WAGONER, J, C. (eds) Sea-Level Changes: an
Integrated Approach. Society of Economic
Palaeontologisls and Mineralogists Special
Publication 42, 261-273.
ILLING, L. V. & HOBSON, G. D. (eds) 1981. Petroleum
Geology qf the Continental Shelf of North-West
Europe. Heyden & Son, Institute of Petroleum,
London.
JENKYNS, H. C. 1996. Relative sea-level change and
carbon isotopes: data from the Upper Jurassic
(Oxfordian) of central and southern Europe. Terra
Nova, 8, 75-85.
JEVONS, E R. 1973. Science Observed. Allen & Unwin,
London.
KENDALL, C. G. ST. C., MOORE, E & WHIYrLE, G. 1992.
A challenge: is it possible to determine eustasy and
does it matter? bT: DOTT, R. H., Jr (ed.) Eustasv: the
Historical Ups and Downs of a Major Geological
Concept. Geological Society of America Memoir
180, 93-107.
KL'HN, T. S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
2nd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
LAWRENCE, D. T., DOYLE, M. & AIGNER, T. 1990.
Stratigraphic simulation of sedimentary basins:
concepts and calibration. American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 74, 273-295.
Downloaded from https://www.lyellcollection.org by Guest on Nov 02, 2023
314 R . C . L . WILSON
LYELL, C. 1835. The Bakerian Lecture - On the proofs of
a gradual rising of the land in certain parts of
Sweden. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society of London, 125, 1-38.
MACLAREN, C. 1842. Art XVI - The glacial theory of Prof
Agassiz. Reprinted in American Journal qf Science,
42, 346-365.
MIALL, A. D. 1994. Sequence stratigraphy and
chronostratigraphy: problems of definition and
precision in correlation, and their implications for
global eustasy. Geoscience Canada. 21, 1-26.
1996. The Geology of Stratigraphic Sequences.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
NAISH, T & KEMP, R J. J. 1997. Sequence stratigraphy of
sixth-order (41 k.y.) Pliocene-Pleistocene
cyclothems, Wanganui Basin, New Zealand. A case
for regressive systems tract. Geological Society" of
America Bulletin, 109, 978-999.
PARKER, J. R. (ed.) 1993. Petroleum Geology of North-
West Europe: Proceedings q[ the 4th Conference.
Geological Society, London, vols 1-2.
PAYTON, C. E. (ed.) 1997. Seismic Stratigraphy -
Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Memoir 26.
POSAMENTIER, H. W. & WEIMER, P. 1993. Siliciclastic
sequence stratigraphy and petroleum exploration -
where to from here? American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Bulletin. 77, 731-742.
PROUST J. N., DECONNICK, J. F., GEYSSANT. J. R., HERBIN.
J. P. & VIDIER, J. P. 1995. Sequence analytical
approach to the Upper Kimmeridgian - Lower
Tithonian storm-dominated ramp deposits of the
Boulonnais (Northern France). A landward time-
equivalent to offshore marine source rocks.
Geologische Rundshau, 84. 255-271.
READ, J. E, OSLEGER, D. A. & ELRICK, M. E. 1991. Two-
dimensional modelling of carbonate ramp
sequences and component cycles. In: FRANSEEN,E.
K., WATNEY, W. L., KENDALL, C. G. ST. C., & ROSS,
W. (eds) Sedimentary modelling: Computer
Simulations and Methods for Improved Parameter
Definition. Kansas Geological Survey Bulletin 233,
473-488.
RICH, J. L. 1951. Three critical environments of
deposition, and criteria for recognition of rocks
deposited in each of them. Bulletin, Geological
Society of America. 62, 1-20.
SAHAGIAN, D., PINOVS, O., OLFERIEV, A. & ZAKHAROV,V.
1996. Eustatic curve for the Middle Jurassic -
Cretaceous based on Russian Plattbrm and Siberian
stratigraphy: zonal resolution. American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 80,
1433-1458.
SECORD, J. A. 1997. Introduction. In: LYELL,C. Principles
olCGeology (abridged). Penguin9 London.
SEDGWICK, A. & MURCHISON. R. J. 1839. On the
classification of the older rocks of Devon and
Cornwall. Proceedings of the Geological Society of
London, 3, 121 - 123.
SKELTON, P,, TURNER, C., WILSON, C.. HYDEN. E & COE.
A. 1997. Siliciclastic Sediments and Environments:
Study Commentao" for Block 1, $338 Sedimentary
Processes and Basin Anah'sis. Open University,
Milton Keynes.
SLOSS. L. L. 1963. Sequences in the cratonic interior of
North America. Geological Society of America
Bulletin, 74, 93-114.
KRL'MBEIN, W. C. & DAPPLES, E. C. 1949.
Integrated Facies anah'sis. Geological Society of
America Memoir 39, 91-124.
ST1LLE, H. 1924. Grundfi'agen der vergleichenden
Tektonik, Bomtraeger, Berlin.
SLESS, E. 1906. The Face of Earth. Clarendon, Oxford.
Suyroy, J. 1975. Charles Lyell and the liberation of
geology. New Scientist, (20 February), 442-445.
TEICHERT. C. 1958. Concepts of facies. American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin. 42,
2718-2744.
TUCKER. M. E. 1993. Carbonate diagenesis and sequence
stratigraphy. In: WRIGHT, V. R (ed.) Sedimentology
Review 1. Blackwell Scientific Publications,
Oxford, 51-72.
VAIL, R R. 1992. The evolution of seismic stratigraphy
and the global sea-level curve, bt: DOTT, R. H., Jr
(ed). Eustasv: The Historical Ups and Downs of a
Major Geological Concept. Geological Society of
America Memoir 180, 83-91.
--, MITCHLM, R. M. & THOMPSON, S. 1977. Seismic
stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, b~:
Seismic Stratigraphy - Applications to Hydro-
carbon Exploration. American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Memoir 26, 83-97
TODD, R. G. & SANGREE, J. B. 1977. Seismic
stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, part 5'
chronostratigraphic significance of seismic
reflections. In: PAYTON, C. E. (ed.) 1997. Seismic
Stratigraphy - Applications to Hydrocarbon
Eaploration. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Memoir 26, 99-116.
~5\N WAGONER,J. C., MITCHUM,R. M., CAMPION, K. M, &
RAHMANIAN, V. O. 1990. Siliciclastic Sequence
Stratigraphy in Well Logs, Cores, and Outcrops.
Methods in Exploration Series, No. 7, American
Association of Petroleum Geologists.
WALKER, R. G. 1990. Facies modelling and sequence
stratigraphy. Journal of Sedimentar)' Petrology. 60,
777-786.
WALTHER, J. 1894. Einleitung in die Geologie als
Historische Wissenschaft. Fischer Verlag, Jena,
535-1055.
WHEELER, H. E. 1958. Time-stratigraphy. American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 77,
1208-1218.
WILGUS. C. K., POSAMENTIER, H., VAN WAGONNER, J.,
ROSS, C. & KENDALL, C. G. ST C. (eds) 1988. Sea-
Level Changes: all bztegrated Approach.Special
Publication 42, Society of Economic Palaeontol-
ogists and Mineralogists.
WILSON, R. C. L. 1992. Sequence stratigraphy. In:
BROWN, G. C., HAWKESWORTH.C. J. & WILSON, R.
C. L. (eds) Understanding the Earth. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 388-414.
WOODLAND,A. (ed.) 1975. Petroleum and the Continental
Shelf of North-west Europe, Vol. 1, Geology.
Applied Science Publishers, Institute of Petroleum,
London.