AVOIDING STRATIGRAPHIC CONFUSION IN EXPLORATION: THE NEED FOR STANDARDS IN SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
AVOIDING STRATIGRAPHIC CONFUSION IN EXPLORATION: THE NEED FOR STANDARDS IN SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY
复制标题
避免勘探中的地层混乱：层序地层学标准的必要性
DOI：
10.1071/aj98029
复制
发表时间：
1999
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
A. T. Brake
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. T. Brake
随着石油勘探文献中层序地层学解释的发表数量不断增加，由于没有对已识别层序的分类或命名的规则，因此产生混淆的可能性也随之增加。目前，很难将数据库和地理信息系统应用于层序地层学，特别是当具有不同观点和方法的组织试图协作和合并其数据库时。尽管层序地层学概念已在文献中出现了二十多年，但无论是澳大利亚国内还是国际上，地球科学界都没有就标准化方案达成共识。特别需要在三个方面达成一致：（1）如何定义序列单元； (2) 这些单位的层级及其依据； (3) 命名单位的标准方案。将序列细分为序列单元的两种基本方法，韦尔-埃克森方法和加洛韦方法，都依赖于首先定义的封闭边界。人们已经提出了各种单元的层次结构，其中常常明确希望将层序单元的规模与地质演化阶段或不同级的地层边界联系起来。此外，大多数工人使用非正式姓名，但正式姓名正变得越来越普遍。因此，必须制定可行的国家准则，以确保通信和计算机兼容性不受阻碍。
As interpretations of sequence stratigraphy are published in increasing numbers in the petroleum exploration literature, the potential for confusion also increases because there are no rules for the classification or naming of the identified sequences. At present it is difficult to apply databases and geographic information systems to sequence stratigraphy, particularly when organisations with different outlooks and approaches attempt to collaborate and merge their databases. Despite sequence stratigraphic concepts having been in the literature for over two decades, no scheme for standardisation has achieved consensus in the geoscientific community, either within Australia or internationally. Three areas in particular need to be agreed on: (1) how sequence units should be defined; (2) the hierarchy of those units, and on what basis; and (3) a standard scheme for naming units. The two basic ways of subdividing a succession into sequence units, the Vail–Exxon and Galloway methods, both rely on the enclosing boundaries being defined first. Various hierarchies of units have been proposed, in which there is often a clear desire to link the scale of sequence units to phases of geological evolution or stratal boundaries of different orders. In addition, most workers use informal names, but formal names are becoming more common. Consequently, it is essential that workable national guidelines be developed to ensure that communication and computer compatibility are not impeded.