OIL AND GAS FIELDS OF LOUISIANA:
the NEBO-HEMPHILL FIELD,
LASALLE PARISH.
by
Paul N. Lawless, M.S., & George F. Hart, Ph.D.,
Basin Research Institute,
Louisiana Geological Survey,
School of Geoscience,
LSU.
June 1st., 1990.
ABSTRACT
The
LaSalle Arch is a southerly trending anticline in north-central Louisiana. The northern end of the Arch separates the
Louisiana and Mississippi interior salt basins. The structural trend of the arch is supported by relict
paleo-highs. The paleo-high beneath the
Nebo-Hemphill Field, as seen on reflection seismic data, is the nose of an
Ouachitan thrust fault which was partially rifted during the opening of the
Gulf of Mexico. The western limb of the
Arch formed by differential subsidence expanding the stratigraphic section
toward the southwest. The eastern limb
of the Arch formed by regional tilting to the east after deposition of the
Claibornian Sparta Formation. Late
Cretaceous uplift of the LaSalle Arch is seen as a truncational unconformity within
the Tayloran Demopolis Formation.
The
Wilcox and Midway groups of central Louisiana have been subdivided into three
genetic sequences which were bounded above and below by regionally correlatable
flooding surfaces. They are T1
(the Midway), T2 (the Holly Springs), and T3 (the Carrizo). This sequence stratigraphic framework
correlates with other studies in the type section in Alabama.
The
highstand systems tract of T1 and T3 were deposited during a relative sea
level fall resulting in similar homogenous wave dominated deltaic morphologies
and electrofacies. Channel facies
within T1 and T3 lie over the rift graben and thin over the thrust fault
nose. This indicates subsidence played
a key role in the location of depositional environments within T1 and T3, but
did not prevent progradation to the southwest.
The structural trend of the LaSalle Arch was unmodified during T1 and
T3. The highstand systems tract of T2
was deposited during a relative sea level rise resulting in heterogenous
fluvial dominated deltaic morphologies and electrofacies capped by a meandering
channel system. The structural trend of
the LaSalle Arch was highly modified during the T2 highstand systems
tract. Channel facies are not
controlled by the rift graben or thrust fault nose indicating subsidence did
not play an important role in the location of depositional environments within
T2.
Major
hydrocarbon reserves are found over the nose of the thrust fault and to the
northwest along the structural trend of the LaSalle Arch within the upper part
of genetic sequence T2. Minor
hydrocarbon reserves are found off of the structural trend of the Arch within
the upper part of genetic sequence T3.
No hydrocarbons have been found along the structural trend of the
LaSalle Arch, were the few well penetrations are located, of genetic sequence
T1. Added deeper pool potential may
exist in sandy facies of T1 on the downthrown side of normal faults, which lie
further to the south, north, and east of Nebo-Hemphill Field, where potential
reservoirs would be juxtaposed against Midway shale.
Geochemical
analysis of liquids and rock samples has shown hydrocarbons found within the
Nebo-Hemphill Field to be similar to liquid hydrocarbons found in the expanded
Tertiary reservoirs in southern Louisiana and dissimilar to pyrolytic products
derived from local organic matter.
Rock-Eval pyrolysis has shown organic matter from the Wilcox Group of
the study area to be type III and immature.
INTRODUCTION
Nebo-Hemphill
Field is located in T7N,R3E LaSalle Parish, Louisiana over the southern end of
the LaSalle Arch (figure 1). Production
in the field is predominantly found in the middle part of the Wilcox Group and
belongs to the updip Wilcox Trend. The
trapping mechanism for the main reservoirs within the Nebo-Hemphill field is
partially structural, the LaSalle Arch, and partially stratigraphic, updip
stratigraphic pinchouts. The H.L. Hunt,
Goodpine A #1 Sec10,T7N,R3E (LA# 24685 and API# 170590291900) was the discovery
well for the field which spud on August 15, 1940, drilled to a TD of 3694 ft,
and perforated from 3480 ft to 3490 ft.
Total production to date (October 1989) and 1987 annual production for
the field are as follows:
Crude
Oil Production (Total): 72,561,334 bbls
Crude
Oil Production (1987): 900,881 bbls
Condensate
Production (Total): 4,295 bbls
Condensate
Production (1987): NA
Natural
Gas Production (Total): 41,372,296 ft3
Natural
Gas Production (1987): 406,000 ft3
The natural gas production is predominantly casing head gas. Gas reservoirs do exist, but are seldom
produced due to the economics. Average
initial production values were obtained for each of the productive intervals
within the middle Wilcox.
INTERVAL INITIAL
OIL PRODUCTION INITIAL
WATER PRODUCTION
A-zone 94.6 bbls/day 71.4 bbls/day
B-zone 137.3 83.2
C-zone 102.8 83.9
D-zone 123.7 143.6
E-zone 98.4 91.2
F-zone 138.9 84.4
G-zone 115.2 107.8
H-zone
NA NA
Crude oil gravity averages around 40o and as of the end of 1987
there were 136 oil wells still producing.
The reservoirs are produced under a strong water drive, but there is a
component of solution gas drive also.
Sidewall core porosity and permeability data from the Senior G&A
Operating Co., Kauffman #2, Sec2-T7N-R3E generally run from 250 to 500
millidarcies and 30% to 35% respectively in the productive intervals. Appendix A contains the well log, core locations,
and core analysis form the Senior G&A, Kauffman #2.
Six
seismic lines, 476 well logs, and 27 side-wall cores were used to determine the
origin and structural development of Nebo-Hemphill Field as it relates to the
LaSalle Arch; to subdivide the lithostratigraphic Wilcox Group into a genetic sequence
stratigraphic framework; and, to reconfirm depositional systems and
environments, described in the literature, acting as reservoirs in order to
better understand reservoir heterogeneities.
Because the Nebo-Hemphill Field lies in an area where the Wilcox Group
is dominated by fluvio-deltaic deposition, paleontological data is not
available for chronostratigraphic correlations. However, it is still possible to lithostratigraphically correlate
the studied interval and make comparisons (figure 52). A biostratigraphic subdivision of the
Sabinian Stage using palynomorphs is currently being prepared by William
Gregory at LSU. This will enable
biostratigraphic correlation of the updip Wilcox Group in the future.
Although
476 wells penetrate the upper parts of the Wilcox Group (figure 2), the data
base declines to about 350 wells at the "D" horizon, to 240 wells at
the deeper "H" horizon, and to 11 wells that penetrated the
underlying Porters Creek Formation. A
1"=2000' basemap of the field is provided as Enclosure 1.
Six
reflection seismic lines were used to augment structural and stratigraphic
interpretations (figure 3). These cover
an expanded region around the well-log study area. Seismic reflectors were tied to well logs by means of a
proprietary check-shot velocity survey from a deeply drilled well within the
study area.
An
amalgamation of ideas from Galloway (1989a), Van Wagoner, et al. (1987), and
Posamentier, et al. (1988) was used for ease of description. Galloway's "genetic sequence",
bounded above and below by maximum flooding surfaces (MFS), was used as a model
because flooding surfaces and MFSs are relatively easy to find and correlate in
the subsurface compared with subaerial unconformities. Each genetic sequence represents a
progradational pulse into the basin and is composed of three types of systems
tracts, a highstand systems tract (HST), a lowstand systems tract (LST), and a
transgressive systems tract (TST) (Posamentier, et al. 1988). Van Wagoner, et al. (1987) described the HST
to be composed of a progradational parasequence set, LST to be composed of
various seafloor fans or aggradational parasequence set, and the Tst to be
composed of retrogradational parasequence set.
Structure,
cumulative isopach, interval isopach, net sand, sand percent, and selected
electrofacies maps as well as various cross-sections were generated. This was done in order to define the
depositional systems and environments which made up each genetic sequence. Finally reservoir maps were constructed,
based on perforation groupings, in order to determine the size, extent, and
controlling factors on the distribution of the oil and gas. Ten structural horizons were picked within
the Wilcox using the well log data and mapped for the following horizons from
youngest to oldest (figure 4):
1) Top of
Wilcox (Top of Carrizo Fm)
2) Top of
"A" horizon (Base of Carrizo Fm)
3) Base of
Big Shale Mbr (Top "Z" horizon)
4) Top of
"B" horizon
5) Top of
"C" horizon
6) Top of
"D" horizon
7) Top of
"E" horizon
8) Top of
"F" horizon
9) Top of
"G" horizon
10) Top of "H" horizon
Seven structural horizons were picked and mapped using the seismic data
for the following reflectors from youngest to oldest (fig. 4):
1)
Top of Sparta Fm
2) Top of Wilcox Gp
3) Top of Selma Gp
4) Top of Eagle Ford Fm
5) Top of Glen Rose Gp
6) Top of Sligo Fm
7) Top of Louann Gp.
REGIONAL
GEOLOGIC HISTORY
Structural Framework
Nebo-Hemphill
Field lies on the southern end of the LaSalle Arch which is one of a number of
northern rim basement features associated with the opening of the Gulf of
Mexico during the Triassic Period (figure 5).
The Arch is flanked to the northwest by the North Louisiana Salt Basin,
to the northeast by the Central Mississippi Salt Basin, and to the southwest by
the Angelina-Caldwell Flexure.
Nunn
(1984) showed the Interior Salt Basins occur on thinned continental
lithosphere. The Sabine and Monroe
Uplifts possibly represent unstretched or only slightly stretched continental
lithosphere. If this is correct, the
Angelina-Caldwell Flexure, the LaSalle Arch, and the Wiggins Arch also might be
interpreted as unstretched or only slightly stretched continental
lithosphere. The LaSalle Arch may be
analogous to the Wiggins and Sabine arches, which are composed of metamorphic, volcanic,
and plutonic rocks formed during the Paleozoic Era (Cagle and Khan, 1983). The arches are associated with the suture
zone formed during the Carboniferous Period when Gondwanaland and Laurentia
collided to form Pangea. After Pangea
broke apart during the Triassic Period, overthrusted igneous and metamorphic
terranes, formed during the Carboniferous Period, were left behind as relict
terranes.
Jackson
and Laubach (1988) showed that the tectonic history of the Sabine Arch was more
complex than the result from an association with passive margin
subsidence. They summarize possible
tectonic explanations for the occurrence of the Sabine Arch into three models:
the "Plutonic Dome Model", the "Persistent Buoyant Element
Model", and the "Anticlinal Model". These models also indicate the structural development of the
LaSalle Arch.
The
Plutonic Dome Model was dismissed by Jackson and Laubach (1988) because large
gravity and magnetic anomalies are not present, such as the high relief
anomalies that occur over the Jackson Dome (figures 6 and 7). These anomalies are believed to have formed
as a result of deep plutonic emplacement.
The
Persistent Buoyant Element Model calls for the Sabine Arch to act as a relict
positive feature from the Paleozoic Era or Jurassic; and, that it subsided less
rapidly than adjacent less buoyant crust.
Alternatively the Arch originated as a structure that was episodically
reactivated and uplifted because it was more buoyant than the adjacent
rocks. Detailed stratigraphic analysis
implies that the Sabine Arch was not a continuously positive element making
this model unacceptable (Jackson and Laubach, 1988).
The
Anticline Model allows the Sabine Uplift to act as a positive element, a
neutral element, or a negative element.
Jackson and Laubach (1988) hypothesize that foreland basin tectonics
caused by the Sevier and Laramide orogenic thrusting during the Cretaceous and
Tertiary periods might have caused periodic uplift and subsidence of the Sabine
Arch. If crustal loading occurring in
the Western Cordillera caused the Sabine Arch to uplift, then other basement
highs, like the LaSalle Arch, would be effected by the same load (Nunn, pers.
comm. 1989) and might show similar periods of uplift and subsidence.
To
the south of the LaSalle Arch the Cretaceous Reef Trend occurs. This marks the flexure zone between the
stable continental margin to the north, and the unstable continental margin
with prolific growth faulting to the south.
South of the Cretaceous Reef Trend, the sediments are underlain by
extremely thinned continental lithosphere or transitional lithosphere (Buffler
et al, 1980).
Stratigraphic Framework
The
lithostratigraphic Wilcox Group in the subsurface of Louisiana was defined by Echols
and Malkin (1948) as the first Wilcox sand below the Cane River Formation, the
Carrizo Formation, to the last Wilcox sand above the Porters Creek Formation
(fig. 8). They subdivided the Wilcox
Group into a Lower, Middle, and Upper Wilcox.
Echols and Malkin (1948) recognized that the sediments of the Wilcox
Group were deposited during an extensive regressive-transgressive cycle.
Sediments
of the Middle Wilcox, which are the major reservoir interval within
Nebo-Hemphill, were deposited during a period of aerially extensive delta
construction, when the Holly Springs Deltaic System in Mississippi and
Louisiana prograded into the northern margin of the Gulf of Mexico Basin
(figure 9a). Arenaceous, argillaceous, and
bituminous (lignitic) lithologies occur at the surface, with interbedded marine
clastics downdip (Echols and Malkin, 1948; Galloway, 1968). According to Galloway (1968) the two major
deltaic systems, the Holly Springs of Mississippi and Louisiana and the
Rockdale of Texas, coalesced downdip.
Progradation of the Middle Wilcox extended into the Gulf of Mexico Basin
where the interval rapidly thickens.
The
upper part of the Wilcox Group of Nebo-Hemphill Field was deposited during a
transgressional phase and ended with the regression represented by the Carrizo
Formation. The sediments are detrital
sands and shales, that are less terriginous and more marine than the Middle
Wilcox. Echols and Malkin (1948) noted
that the only marine faunas found in the Wilcox Group of central Louisiana and
Mississippi are found in the Upper Wilcox.
The
depositional systems and electrofacies of the Holly Springs Delta System of
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama were described by Galloway (1968). That investigator used the base of the Big
Shale as the upper boundary for the lower part of the Wilcox Group. Both Galloway and Echols and Malkin picked
the base of the Wilcox Group as the lowest occurring sand above the Midwayan
Porters Creek Formation. Galloway
suggested the underlying Porters Creek Formation was genetically related to the
lower part of the Wilcox Group as the prodeltaic facies of the Holly Springs
Delta.
Within
the lower part of the Wilcox Group, Galloway recognized four main spatially
distributed depositional systems (figure 9b):
1. The Holly Springs Delta System in central
Mississippi and Louisiana,
2. The Pendleton Bay-Lagoon System in northwest
Louisiana,
3. A Restricted Shelf System in Alabama,
4.
An Unnamed Fluvial System cropping out along the flanks of the Mississippi
Embayment.
Within Galloway's "Lower Wilcox Group", he defined seven
principle electrofacies. They are a
bar-finger sand facies, an interdistributary bay mud-silt facies, a
distributary channel sand facies, a prodelta mud facies, a distributary mouth
bar-delta front sand facies, an interdistributary deltaic plain
sand-mud-lignite facies, and a destructional phase sand-mud-lignite facies.
South
of the Nebo-Hemphill Field, the Holly Springs Delta System prograded out and
over the Cretaceous Shelf Margin. As a
result the Wilcox shelf edge extended further into the basin. McCulloh and Eversull (1986) mapped a shale
filled canyon system within the Wilcox Group in Avoyelles and St. Landry
Parishes of Louisiana lying directly south of Nebo-Hemphill Field (figure
10). Incised canyons may result from
fluvial incisement as sea level falls below the shelf edge (Vail et al, 1977)
or downdip slope failure followed by retrogressive slumping (Coleman et al,
1983).
Sequence Stratigraphic Framework
Dockery
(1986) subdivided the sediments of the Paleogene Period of the northeastern
Gulf of Mexico Basin into five successional cycles which correspond to major
marine transgressions and regressions.
This was based on a study of changes in the amount of speciation of
molluscan faunas occurring at the beginning of each cycle, corresponding with a
transgression. Each cycle ends with an
increased number of extinctions, corresponding with a regression. Dockery interprets these major extinctions
as a result of increased selection pressure due to the sea level falling below
the shelf edge, causing a reduction in the areal extent of molluscan habitats.
Two
of Dockery's cycles include the subsurface Wilcox and Midway Groups (figure
11). The first cycle, encompassing the
Midway Group, begins with the transgressive Clayton Formation and ends with the
regressive Naheola Formation both of the Midwayan Stage. A prominent disconformity occurs between the
Naheola Formation and the overlying Nanafalia Formation all over the Gulf of
Mexico's Midwayan shelf. The second
cycle, encompassing the Wilcox Group, is represented by the overlying Nanafalia
Formation, the Tuscahoma Formation, and the Hatchetigbee Formation of the
Sabinian Stage. Dockery shows a
prominent disconformity between the Hatchetigbee Formation and the overlying
Meridian (Carrizo) Formation of the Claibornian Stage.
In
related studies to the northeast of the Holly Springs delta, Hazel et al (1984)
used graphic correlation to determine the extent and duration of the
unconformities in Alabama, South Carolina, and Virginia for the Paleogene
Period (figure 12). This is the region
where Galloway (1968) indicated restricted shelf conditions. Stratigraphic sections in Alabama have major
unconformities occurring between the Naheola Formation and the Nanafalia
Formation and in the middle of the Tallahatta Formation.
In
a sequence stratigraphic study of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, Baum and
Vail (1988) recognized seven complete Type 1 and 2 depositional sequences, and
portions of two Type 1 depositional sequences, in the Midway, Wilcox, and lower
Claiborne groups (figure 13). Type 1
depositional sequences are bounded below by subareal unconformities formed
during a sea level fall below the shelf edge and presumably correspond with the
major boundaries in Dockery's (1986) and Hazel et al's (1984) works. Type 2 depositional sequences are bounded
below by subareal unconformities formed during a relative sea level drop which
does not fall below the shelf edge and should not appear in Dockery's or Hazel,
et al's works. The boundary between the
Maastrichtian and Danian stages (K-T boundary) is represented by a condensed
section. This would manifest itself as
a downlap surface on a reflection seismic section.
RESULTS
Origin of the LaSalle Arch and General Stratigraphic Effect
The
imaged stratigraphy in the region of Nebo-Hemphill Field can be broken into two
major intervals: 1) a pre-Triassic Period rift lower interval and 2) a
post-Triassic Period upper interval (figures 14, 15, 16, and 17). The post-Triassic Period upper interval can
in turn be broken down into three gross seismic stratigraphic groups: A) the
base of the Eagle Mills Formation to the top of the Hosston Group, onlap
interval, B) the top of the Hosston Group to the middle of the Wilcox Group,
downlap interval, and C) the middle of the Wilcox Group to the top of the
section incised valley interval (figure 18).
The
pre-Triassic Period rift interval is only partially imaged due to seismic
energy dispersion in the folded strata.
The reflections which are imaged indicate that this interval has been
intensely folded, faulted, and eroded.
The mound shaped erosional unconformity which lies at 3.2 seconds (2-way
travel time) is the most important feature of the pre-rift strata (figures 14
and 15). This erosional unconformity is
interpreted as the nose of a Paleozoic thrust.
Although not readily apparent at first, the thrust fault has been drawn
in where reflectors terminate and the fault is partially imaged as the fault
plane flattens out.
The
post-Triassic rift interval represents the basin fill of the passive margin of
the northern Gulf of Mexico. The entire
stratigraphic interval is well imaged and is typified by generally unfaulted
and only slightly folded strata with onlap.
Group
1 represents sedimentation during the rift and drift phase of the opening of
the Gulf of Mexico (Buffler, 1980).
Seismic reflectors are typified by onlap of basinal facies. The only faults in the area are normal
faults occurring in the graben just to the north of the erosive thrust fault
nose. Eagle Mills redbeds are
interpreted to be present in the half-graben (figures 14 and 15). Louann evaporites appear as thin, bedded,
and undeformed layers. Two episodes of
evaporite deposition are interpreted to have occurred. An early episode which is thickest in the
graben and off to the sides of the thrust fault nose thinning considerably over
that same nose. A late episode of
Louann deposition changes reflector character over the same erosive nose may be
a result of changing lithology within the late evaporite deposition in the
area. A paleogeographic map showing the
graben, thrust fault nose, and distribution of early salt is seen in figure 19.
A
generalization of the Louark, Cotton Valley, and Hosston strata is to say that
their major centers of deposition were further to the north in the interior
salt basins. Moore (1984) has shown
this to be true for the Louark Group.
Although the normal fault on the north end of the graben does not cut
strata higher than the Louann Group, expanded section is still seen over the
fault indicating that subsidence in the graben was still a very important
factor up until the end of the Jurassic.
Palinspastic reconstruction of seismic line P-P' confirms that the
largest amount of subsidence occurred in the area of the half-graben for group
1 (figure 20).
Group
2 records early sedimentation after sea floor spreading has presumed to have
ceased in the Gulf of Mexico (Buffler, 1980).
This records the initial progradational pulses into the study area. Seismic reflectors are typified by
downlapping clinoforms and represent a transition zone between terrigenous and
marine deposits.
The
prograding clinoforms occur on the stable margin and appear relatively
flat. However the clinoforms in the
middle of the Glen Rose Group show significant aggradation as well as
progradation whereas the clinoforms at the base of the Midway Group are
shingled which indicates little or no aggradation with very quick progradation. Palinspastic reconstruction of seismic line
P-P' and R-R' has shown that greater subsidence occurred to the south and west
resulting in expanded stratigraphy in those directions (figures 21 and 22).
Interval
isopach maps generally show small amounts of stratigraphic thinning except in the
Top Selma to Top Eagle Ford interval isopach map where large amounts of
thinning is seen (figure 23). The
stratigraphic thinning corresponds with a truncational unconformity seen in the
Tayloran Demopolis Formation (figures 14 and 15). This is the only time when the LaSalle Arch experienced
relatively major uplift.
Group
3 represents dominantly terrigenous non-marine deposition, the filling of this
part of the basin, and finally sediment bypass to the unstable margin south of
the Cretaceous Reef trend. Seismic
reflectors are typified by incised valley and incised valley fill in the upper
Claiborne, Jackson, and Vicksburg Groups (figures 16 and 17). Incised valleys have been described as being
associated with sea level dropping below the shelf edge resulting in
downcutting by rivers.
The
Top Sparta structure map shows a very different picture of the LaSalle Arch in
that the western limb of the Arch is greatly reduced (figure 24). The trend of the Arch at lower intervals is north-south
and is northwest-southeast on the Top Wilcox structure map (figure 25). By hanging seismic line Q-Q' on the Sparta
reflector, the east limb of the LaSalle Arch disappears and only the western
limb remains (figure 26).
Wilcox Group Genetic Stratigraphy
The
stratigraphic history of the Wilcox Group sediments in Nebo-Hemphill Field over
the LaSalle Arch were produced by the interaction of sediment supply,
subsidence, and sea level change.
Lithostratigraphically the subsurface Wilcox Group extends from the last
sand above the Porters Creek Formation, the Naheola Formation, to the first
sand below the Cane River Formation, the Carrizo Formation (figure 27). Chronostratigraphically this is believed to
represent the upper Midwayan, the Sabinian, and the lower Claibornian
stages. Lithostratigraphy was used to
subdivide the subsurface Wilcox Group into genetic sequences.
Seismic
sequence analysis of the Wilcox and related intervals has shown only one set of
shingled prograding clinoforms and no truncational unconformities in the
area. The downlap surface is seen on
seismic line P-P' at the base of the Porters Creek Formation (figure 28). Posamentier, et al. (1988) have shown that
downlap surfaces occur just above the maximum flooding surface of a transgression
and is marked by a condensed section.
Well
log analysis has revealed four persistant regionally correlatable units within
and around the Nebo-Hemphill Field.
They are the Porters Creek Formation, an "Unnamed" Shale
Member, the Big Shale Member, and the Tallahatta Marl Member (figure 29). The marl member capping the Clayton
Tormation, also marking the Porters Creek downlap surface, is not present over
the LaSalle Arch but appears off to the flanks and further downdip. The "Unnamed" Shale Member lies
above the lowermost cylindrically shaped sand of the Wilcox Group. The Big Shale Member lies above the Z-unit
and mards the base of the upper Wilcox.
The Big Shale of Louisiana is thought to be correlatable to the Bashi
Marl of Alabama. The Tallahatta Member
of the Cane River Formation is a thin, 10 feet, marl lying directly on top of
the Carrizo Formation over the Arch. On
the flanks and further to the south of the Arch, a thin shale member develops
between the Tallahata Member and the Carrizo Formation and represents the
Recklaw interval in Texas. A second
marl, the Weches Formation, also appears above the Tallahatta Formation off of
the Arch. A thin, 20 foot, shale break
seperates the Weches and Tallahatta formations and represents the distal
portions of the Queen City regression.
Because each of the four units are regionally correlatable, they are
thought to have chronostratigraphic/sequence stratigraphic significance with
flooding surfaces near their respective bases.
In
a small region, such as this study area, flooding surfaces may only represent
local transgressions caused by shifting deltas or by low order cyclic
fluctuations in sea level and not actually represent maximum flooding surfaces
which record the main transgression.
However, because this study area lies in a region which received large
amounts of sediment and correlations have been carried beyond the confines of
the study area, the low order sea level fluctuations are dampened and major
deltaic abandonment can be discounted. Therefore the base of these shale intervals represent flooding
surfaces which reflect major transgressions.
Based on the recognition of flooding surfaces, the subsurface Wilcox and
Midway groups have been subdivided into three genetic sequences (figure 29). It is recognized that the thinner shale
intervals, the "Unnamed" Shale Member and the Big Shale Member do not
contain actual condensed sections at their flooding surfaces. However, they are correlative with the
condensed sections, i.e. time planes marking the point in time where
transgression ended and regression began.
Genetic
sequence T1, the Midway, extends from the maximum flooding surface at the
base of the Porters Creek Formation, to the flooding surface at the base of the
"Unnamed" Shale Member (figure 29).
It is composed of seismic facies #4 and the lowest part of seismic
facies #3 (figure 28). Correlation of
the base of the "Unnamed" Shale Member, the Porters Creek Shale, and
the regionally ubiquitous cylindrically shaped sand at the top of this genetic
sequence is very easy.
Because
only 11 wells penetrate the base of the Wilcox and only 4 wells penetrate the
Porters Creek Formation, no structural maps were made for these intervals from
the well log data. A seismic structure
map was generated on top of the Arkadelphia Formation (figure 30). The Porters Creek Formation is a 600 ft (183
m) thick shale unit which appears to be homogenous from the log responses, is
part of the highstand systems tract, and represents clastic shelf and prodelta
depositional environments. The
cylindrically shaped well log response of the sand occurring at the top of the
genetic sequence looks similar to a sharp-based shoreface sequence described by
Plint (1988) and is interpreted to be the time equivalent of the Naheola
Formation in Alabama. Shingled
prograding clinoforms and sharp-based shoreface sequences are formed during
very fast progradation (Hardenbol, et al, 1977; and Plint, 1988).
Genetic
sequence T2, the Holly Springs, extends from the base of the "Unnamed"
Shale Member to the base of the Big Shale Member (figure 29). It is composed of the majority of seismic
facies #3 excluding the time equivalent of the Naheola Formation at its' base
(figure 28). The sand percentage map of
the lower part of the Wilcox Group (H-unit) indicate deltaic progradation was
from the northeast to southwest (figure 31).
Electrofacies and depositional systems from the T2 correspond with those
described by Galloway (1968) as formed by a highly constructive highstand
systems tract sediment dominated delta.
As seen in stratigraphic cross-section E-E' (figure 32), correlation of
sand units above the "Unnamed" Shale Member is difficult whereas
below that member it was simple.
Isopach
and sand percentage maps indicate channels generally oriented northeast to
southwest in the middle part of the Wilcox Group. All channel morphologies are strait with the exception of the
B-unit which is sinuous. An electrofacies
map of the B-unit (figure 33) shows depositional environments to represent a
meandering channel, a point-bar, and a cut bank. Productive areas within the B-unit are shaded on the Top B-unit
structure map (figure 34). Intervals
mapped within the middle part of the Wilcox Group do not appear to incise
downward when comparing respective interval isopach and structure maps. As in the lower part of the Wilcox Group,
electrofacies seen within each of the units change rapidly laterally,
reflecting changing depositional environments (figure 32). Correlation within this interval was made
possible only because of the large number of lignites present. Once again electrofacies correspond with
those described by Galloway (1968) and represent interdistributary bay/swamp
deposits as well as deltaic plane channel deposits, all of which belong in the
regressive highstand systems tract. The
Z-unit represents deltaic abandonment transgressive systems tract deposits of
the Holly Springs delta. An
electrofacies map of the Z-unit shows a transgressive shelf sand lying to the
southwest of the structural crest of the Arch (figure 35). Productive areas within the Z-unit are
shaded on the Base Big Shale structure map (figure 36).
Rock-Eval
pyrolysis data from the middle part of the Wilcox Group (figure 37), indicates
that the associated organic matter is Type III kerobitumen, or derived
predominantly from a terrigenous source.
This corresponds with the deltaic plain interpretation of the middle
part of the Wilcox Group.
Genetic
sequence T3, the Carrizo, extends from the flooding surface at the base of
the Big Shale Member to the flooding surface at the top of the Tallahatta
Member of the Cane River Formation (figure 29). Only the Carrizo Formation and the A-unit were mapped in the
upper part of the Wilcox Group. This
was due to a lack of lignite markers in the upper part of the Wilcox Group,
like those found in the stratigraphically lower Holly Springs Delta.
Echols
and Malkin (1948) reported that the Sabinetown Formation (A-unit) contained the
only marine faunas of the Wilcox Group.
The isopach map of the A-unit shows a thinning in the southeast quadrant
of the study area (figure 38). The
sand-percentage map of the A-unit (figure 39) shows average values to be 20%,
much less than the underlying middle parts of the Wilcox Group which is about
50%. There is a sand shadow directly to
the southwest of the structural trend of the Arch. The fact that the nose of the thrust fault effects deposition in
T3 indicates less deposition occurred in area during Genetic Sequence T3
compared with Genetic Sequence T2.
Electrofacies in the A-unit are generally 5 to 25 ft (1.5 to 7.6 m)
spikes which grade upward into funnel shaped sands and the Carrizo Formation at
the top of the subsurface Wilcox Group in the Nebo-Hemphill Field. The A-unit is interpreted as highstand
systems tract marine deposits grading upward into Carrizo Formation.
The
isopach and sand percentage maps of the Carrizo Formation, and the A-unit,
indicate fluvial incisement into the underlying A-unit. An electrofacies map of the Carrizo and
underlying related strata from the A-unit shows the distribution of deltaic
deposits in relation to the paleo high in the southeast part of Nebo-Hemphill
Field (figure 40). Productive areas of
the Carrizo Formation are shaded on the Top Wilcox structure map (figure
41). The channel is oriented
northeast-southwest and is located in the northwestern quadrant of the study
area. Seismically the Carrizo channel
system is seen on lines P-P' and R-R' (figures 26 and 28). Electrofacies of the Carrizo Formation are
dominantly cylindrically shaped with an occasional funnel shaped pattern at the
base. The Carrizo Formation is
interpreted as a highstand systems tract fluvial deposits.
The
upper part of the Wilcox Group is composed of two seismic facies (figure 28). Seismic facies 1 exhibits medium to
medium-high subparallel reflectors which is interpreted as increasing sand
content of the upper part of the Wilcox Group, associated with the regression. Seismic facies 2 exhibits medium-low
amplitude parallel reflectors interpreted as lower sand content of marine
deposition. The boundary between
seismic facies 1 and 2 may represent the boundary between the Sabinian and
Claibornian stages.
Hazel
et al (1984) have shown that there are three recognizable unconformities in the
Paleogene Period of the northeast Gulf of Mexico (Alabama). They occur at the base of the Midwayan
Stage, at the Midwayan-Sabinian stage boundary, and in the middle of the
Claibornian Tallahata Formation.
Dockery
(1986) demonstrated two major molluscan extinctions in the same interval and
related them to sea level falling below the shelf edge, causing a type 1
subareal unconformity which effectively reduced molluscan habitat. The first unconformity caps the Naheola
Formation and the second is at the base of the Meridian (Carrizo)
Formation. However, no marine faunas
were found in the Meridian and the unconformity could actually lie at the top.
Baum
and Vail (1988) have shown five type 1 and three type 2 subareal unconformities
and nine condensed section unconformities in the same interval as Dockery and
Hazel et al. Although they indicate
many sequences, their coastal onlap curves do indicate two larger groupings of
depositional sequences which tend to somewhat match the ideas of Hazel et al
and Dockery.
Structural Effect on Wilcox Stratigraphy
The
structural trend of the LaSalle Arch at the base of the Porters Creek Formation
(Top Arkadelphia Formation) is north-south (figure 30). This corresponds to the
same as the general trend of the positive gravity anomaly interpreted to be the
LaSalle Arch (figure 6). Due to the
large influx of sediment in the area during the time of progradation of genetic
sequence T2, the Holly Springs, the trend of the LaSalle Arch was modified
from north-south to northwest-southeast in the region of the Nebo-Hemphill
Field. The shift is seen on structural
maps of the top of units G, F, and E of the middle Wilcox (figures 42, 43, and
44). The small narrow trough in the
western portion of the study area filled and became a small structural nose at
the F horizon and higher. The overall
structure of the LaSalle Arch becomes much broader up to the base of the Big
Shale Member (figure 36).
The
isopach map of the Middle Wilcox (figure 45) indicates an expanded stratigraphic
interval west of the structural trend of the LaSalle Arch. No stratigraphic thinning is seen over the
paleohigh. Seismic and log analysis do
not indicate faulting associated with the expanded interval (figures 28 and
32). The A-unit isopach map (figure 46)
shows no expanded section on the west side of the Arch, but there is
stratigraphic thinning over the paleohigh.
Niether the Middle Wilcox or A-unit isopach maps show expanded section
on the east side of the LaSalle Arch.
When seismic section Q-Q' is hung stratigraphically on the top Sparta
reflector (figure 26), the eastern limb of the LaSalle Arch disappears while
the western limb remains.
Hydrocarbon Occurrence
Since
1940 significant petroleum accumulations have been found in the middle part of
the Wilcox Group, genetic sequence T2, of Nebo-Hemphill Field. Minor accumulations have been found in the
Carrizo Formation, genetic sequence T3, and even higher intervals. No production has been found as yet in the
potential reservoir facies of genetic sequence T1 within the Nebo-Hemphill
Field, but production is present a short distance to the north. Gas caps have been found but are not
produced due to small reservoir size and marginal economic value. A crude oil sample from the Huffman-Bailey
#1 of the E-unit within the middle part of the Wilcox Group was typed
geochemically for saturates, aromatics, resins, and asphaltenes. The analysis included C15+ saturated
hydrocarbon fraction as well as carbon and sulfur stable isotope analyses. The results of the geochemical analysis are
presented in table 2 and graph 1.
Saturates 65.3 API
Gravity 41.7
Aromatics 18.2 Sulfur 00.2
Resins 14.8 delta
S34 (oil) -00.5
Asphaltenes 01.7 delta
C13 (oil) -26.8
Sat./Arom. 03.6 delta
C13 (sat) -26.8
C15-
fraction 44.3 delta C13
(aro) -25.9
C15+
fraction 55.7 delta C13
(NSO) -25.9
delta C13
(asp) -26.0
Table 2: Analyses of the Huffman-Bailey #1 crude oil. All physical values are expressed as a wt %.
Delta C13 values are relative to the PDB
standard (ppm) and delta S34 values are relative to the CDT standard (ppm).
Typical
reservoirs in the upper part of T2 are seen in the Z and B-units. The electrofacies map of the Z-unit (figure
35) shows a transgressive shelf sand lying to the southwest of the structural
crest of the LaSalle Arch. Productive
areas within the Z-unit (figure 36) are parallel to and located over and to the
southwest of the structural crest of the Arch.
The electrofacies map of the B-unit (figure 33) indicates the interval
to be a meandering channel and point bar.
Production within the B-unit (figure 34) is generally located within the
point bar and in the meandering channel over the structural axis of the Arch. Although electrofacies maps at lower
intervals were not constructed, production generally follows similar entrapment
patterns in deltaic and lower deltaic plane reservoir facies.
The
only reservoir within T3 occurs in the Carrizo Formation, Urania Sand
locally. The electrofacies map of the
Carrizo Formation and the underlying A-unit (figure 40) shows a Carrizo channel
lying over the rift graben and bending around the thrust fault nose lying at
depth. Productive areas in the Carrizo
Formation are generally located off the main structural trend of the Arch
(figure 41) and are not associated with the paleohigh.
Twenty
seven sidewall cores from the productive horizons of T2, the Middle
Wilcox, were sampled for the purposes of Rock-Eval pyrolysis (table 1). Total Organic Carbon (TOC), Temperature of Maximum
Hydrocarbon Generation (Tmax), and a kerogen type indicator as seen through the
Hydrogen Index (HI) and Oxygen Index (OI) were measured during this procedure
in order to evaluate the source potential for these samples. Rock-Eval pyrolysis and interpretation
proceedures are described by Peters (1986).
Sample # TOC(%) Tmax(oC) HI OI Production
Unit
Ward #1, Sec40,T7N,R3E
3280 0.45 586
184 68 A
3482 0.33 436
230 57 Z
3484 0.38 575
152 68 Z
3642 0.27 470
192 248 B
3816 0.58 405
181 82 D
*
3818 0.38 382
128 139 D
3822 0.37 430
145 243 E
3824 0.64 426
125 170 E *
3852 0.33 507
151 96 E
3876 0.54 428
111 272 E *
3878 0.18 588
177 66 E
3880 0.22 498
136 231 E
3896 0.12 584
175 158 E
3898 0.31 533
129 283 E
3969 1.45 426
178 63 E
*
Huffman-Bailey #2, Sec25,T7N,R3E
3643 0.79 432
100 67 B
*
3682 0.24 515
141 145 C
3683 0.35 435
168 91 C
3730 0.54 432
124 205 C *
3731 0.58 584
127 128 C *
3799 0.44 431
186 43 D
3802 0.34 424
164 47 D
3804 0.26 434
165 65 D
3816 27.66
420 212 41 D
lignite
3820 0.08 532
300 312 D
3842 0.25 472
92 404
E
3843 0.07 471
571 357 E
Table #1: Rock-Eval Pyrolysis Data (* indicates samples with >0.50%
TOC)
TOC
is measured in order to determine organic richness of the samples. Seven out of the twenty-seven samples had
TOC values over 0.5%, the value needed for the proceedure to be valid (Peters,
1986), and are noted with an asterisk (table 1). Tmax is a measure of the samples thermal maturity at which
the maximum amount of hydrocarbons were produced during pyrolysis. Average Tmax values for the seven samples
with >0.5% TOC is 490oC.
If the anomolously high value, 584oC, and the low value, 405oC, are
discarded, the average Tmax value is then 429oC which is
just below the oil generative window and still immature. By plotting HI versus OI on a modified van
Krevelen diagram, kerogen type may be estimated (figure 37). The seven samples with >0.5% TOC
displayed HI values averaging 135 mg/g (ranging from 100 to 181 mg/g) and OI
values averaging 163 mg/g (ranging from 63 to 284 mg/g). These values plot along the Type III organic
matter maturation pathway which is indicative of terrestrially derived organic
matter.
DISCUSSION
The
LaSalle Arch in the Nebo-Hemphill area is interpreted from reflection seismic
data to be cored by the nose of a Paleozoic thrust fault which was rifted apart
during the opening of the Gulf of Mexico.
The graben lies directly to the north of the erosive thrust fault
nose. Although the graben is seen on
only one line, the isopach map of the Sligo to Louann interval and the bow
ties, interpreted to be out of the plain, suggest the graben to be oriented west-northwest
to east-southeast. This also suggests
that extension occurred in a north-northeast to south-southwest direction. Although the Nebo-Hemphill Field makes up
only part of the LaSalle Arch, the trend of the Arch is interpreted to be
supported by a series of relict continental crust pieces separating the
Louisiana and Mississippi Interior Salt Basins, seen as positive gravity
anomalies between the basins, then trending to the southeast through
Nebo-Hemphill Field.
The
structural development of the LaSalle Arch occurred in two steps. The western limb formed due to stratigraphic
expansion due to differential subsidence between a less rifted area along the
LaSalle Arch trend and a more rifted area to the west and southwest. This is indicated by onlap of basinal facies
from the south and west in seismic group 1 and diverging reflectors higher in
the section on seismic section Q-Q' and R-R'.
The eastern limb of the Arch formed due to regional tilting towards the
east sometime after deposition of the Claibornian Sparta Formation. This is seen best when seismic section Q-Q'
is hung stratigraphically on the Top Sparta reflector and the eastern limb
disappears. Above the Top Sparta
reflector, stratigraphic expansion occurs toward the east. Active uplift of the LaSalle Arch happened
only once, and that occurred during the Tayloran Stage of the Upper
Cretaceous. Therefore uplift of the
LaSalle Arch occurred at a different time than uplift on the Sabine Arch
(Jackson and Laubach, 1988).
Overthrusting in the Western Cordillera, which would predict synchronous
uplift (pers. com. Jeff Nunn, 1989), is not a satisfactory mechanism driving
basement uplift on the northern Gulf of Mexico rim.
The
lower Paleogene Wilcox and Midway groups were broken into three genetic
sequences bounded above and below by regionally correlatable flooding
surfaces. They are T1 (the
Midway), T2 (the Holly Springs), and T3 (the Carrizo) (figure 13 and 30). T1 and T3 were shown by Dockery (1986) to
have major subaerial unconformities capping their respective regressive sediments
(figure 30) due to sea level fall below the shelf edge. Sea level falls below the shelf edge
indicates that the rate of subsidence is less than the rate of eustatic sea
level fall and a type 1 subaerial unconformity forms (Posamentier and Vail, 1988). Although the HST of T1 is much less sand
rich than T3, they have similar characteristics. Interpreted channel facies within the HSTs of T1 and T3 lie over
the rift graben, bend around, and thin over the thrust fault nose lying in the
basement. This indicates that the
thrust fault nose was a very low order positive feature during the type 1
genetic sequences. It is also noted
that even though the thrust fault nose, beneath the Nebo-Hemphill field was a
positive feature during these type 1 genetic sequences, the LaSalle Arch did
not prevent progradation to the southwest.
Higher
frequency fluctuations described by Baum and Vail (1988) (figure 30) are seen
within T3, but not T1. The higher
frequency fluctuations within T3 appear to represent classic examples of Van
Wagoner's (1987) parasequence and not an entire depositional sequence
containing a recognizable suite of systems tracts. Dockery (1986) and Baum and Vail (1988) place the type 1
subaerial unconformity at the base of the regionally correlatable laterally
continuous Carrizo (Meridian) Formation where a prominent disconformity does
exist. If this were true, then the
sequence stratigraphic model would predict the Carrizo Formation to be incised
valley fill (IVF). The problem with the
IVF interpretation is that the Carrizo Formation does not appear to be confined
within an incised valley. An
alternative interpretation for the Carrizo Formation is that it represents the
end of highstand when "vertical stacking grades into lateral migration,
resulting in the development of sheet bedding geometry with relatively high
lateral continuity" (Posamentier and Vail, 1988). Therefore the type 1 subaerial unconformity
would lie towards the top of the Carrizo and not at its' base.
T2 depositional patterns
and electrofacies within the study area are those of a highly constructive
fluvial dominated deltaic complex (Galloway, 1968). Parasequences as well as interpreted depositional environments
exhibit a progradational, or proximal over distal, stacking pattern. A meandering fluvial system, the B-unit, is
interpreted to cap the T2 HST.
Therefore T2 is interpreted as a type 2 genetic sequence where the rate
of subsidence is less than the rate of eustatic sea level fall. The locations of channel facies within T2
are not constrained by the rift graben or the thrust fault nose like the HSTs
of T1 and T3. This indicates that the
thrust fault nose was not a positive feature during deposition of the T2 HST. The presence of the transgressive shelf sand
on the seaward side of the LaSalle Arch's structural trend indicates that the
entire Arch, and not just the thrust fault nose, was a positive feature during
the T2 TST.
Higher
sedimentation rates during the T2 HST modified the structural trend of the
LaSalle Arch within the Nebo-Hemphill Field from north-south to
northwest-southeast in the direction of progradation. The structural trend of the Arch during the HSTs of T1 and T3 was
unmodified. Agradational parasequence
stacking patterns, which indicate shelf margin systems tract (Posamentier, et
al. 1988), are not present within the study area but may occur further downdip
in the expanded Wilcox shelf interval.
TST deposits, the Z-unit, onlap directly on top of the T2 HST. Higher frequency fluctuations seen by Baum
and Vail (1988) (figure 30) are not recognized within the study area. Many parasequences are seen within T2, but
they seem to be more related to delta growth processes.
Migration
pathways include deltaic and fluvial channels of the HST, which prograded
toward the southwest, and interconnected sands along the trend of the LaSalle
Arch. As liquids migrated up dip and
encountered the Arch, oil would accumulate in the three-way closure formed by
updip pinchouts and the anticline. As
initial reservoirs were charged, hydrocarbons would spill under the trap and
preferentially follow the structural trend of the Arch.
In order for hydrocarbons to form, like those found in the Nebo-Hemphill
Field, sediments must contain sufficient amounts of hydrogen rich organic
matter capable of producing liquids when heated over time. The best kinds of organic matter for
producing liquid hydrocarbons are predominantly derived from algal rich marine
sources and fall along the type I and type II kerogen maturation pathways on
modified van Krevelan diagrams.
Rock-Eval pyrolisis of sidewall cores from T2 and T3 indicate
organic matter to be type III, or predominantly terrigenous phytoclastic
material which is hydrogen poor. Even
if the organic matter in the study area were of the correct type, Tmax values
indicate the organic matter present is still immature. If surrounding rocks could not have
generated the crude found in the present reservoirs, the oil must have migrated
from mature source areas further down-dip in the direction of progradation,
south and southwest (Sassen, in press).
CONCLUSIONS
1) The LaSalle Arch basement complex is made up of relict Paleozoic
continental crust which was presumably rifted apart during the Triassic
Period. Rifting, within T7N,R3E,
preferentially occurred to the north of the eroded nose of a Paleozoic thrust
fault. Crustal extension occurred in a
north-northeast to south-southwest direction.
2) The anticline overlying the basement complex was formed in two
steps. The western limb formed syndepositionally
by stratigraphic expansion as a result of differential subsidence. Within the lower Paleogene interval,
stratigraphic expansion was caused by sediment loading from genetic sequence T2. The eastern limb formed as the result of
regional tilting toward the east sometime during deposition of the Claibornian
Sparta Formation.
3) Active uplift of the LaSalle Arch only occurred during the Upper
Cretaceous Tayloran Stage where an angular unconformity is observed on
reflection seismic data. Because uplift
timing is not synchronous for the LaSalle and Sabine arches, overthrusting in
the Western Cordillera could not be the mechanism for uplift.
4) The lithostratigraphic Wilcox Group of central Louisiana centered around
Nebo-Hemphill Field, was subdivided into three genetic sequences: T1
(Midway), T2 (Holly Springs), and T3 (Carrizo). The HST of T1 and T3 (type 1 genetic sequences) are interpreted
to have been deposited during a relative fall in sea level. This resulted in similar homogenous wave
dominated deltaic systems capped by braided stream systems. T1 and T3 did not modify the structural
trend of the Arch. The HST of T2 (a type
2 genetic sequence) is interpreted to have been deposited during a relative rise
in sea level. This resulted in
heterogenous fluvial dominated deltaic systems. T2 greatly modified the structural trend of the LaSalle Arch.
5) The LaSalle Arch acted as a very low positive feature with relief of
probably only a few meters during T1 and T3, type 1 genetic sequences, and
had no relief during T2, a type 2 genetic sequence. Although the thrust fault nose and rift graben controlled the
location of channel facies within T1 and T3, the LaSalle Arch itself did not
prevent deltaic sedimentation to the southwest in any of the progradational
events.
6) Pyrolysis of sidewall core samples from T2 has shown the
kerobitumen to be type III and thermogenically immature. Because type III kerobitumen is
terrestrially derived and hydrogen deficient, crude oil found within the Wilcox
reservoirs of Nebo-Hemphill Field could not have come from the resident organic
matter.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I
wish to gratefully acknowledge and thank EXXON, U.S.A. and its' employees Bill
Drennan, Mark Solien, and Niel Sammis for the use of reflection seismic data
and overall help with this research.
Without their help, a major portion of this study could not have been
accomplished. Jeff Nunn provided many
helpful comments regarding Gulf of Mexico basement features, and theoretical
advice about rifting and crustal loading.
Partial support for this research was provided by the Basin Research
Institute at Louisiana. Final thanks go
to Greg Riley, Mark Pasley, and Bill Gregory for reviewing various parts of the
manuscript and for putting up with my ideas.
REFERENCES
Baum, G. R., and Vail, P. R., 1988, Sequence
Stratigraphy, Allostratigraphy, Isotope Stratigraphy and Biostratigraphy:
Putting it all Together is the Atlantic and Gulf Paleogene. GCSSEPM Foundation Eighth Annual Research
Conference, 1988, PP.15-23.
Buffler, R. T., et al, 1980, Structure and Early
Geologic History of the Deep Central Gulf of Mexico Basin. Proceedings of a symposium at Louisiana
State University, Rex H. Pilger (ed.), March 3-5, 1980, pp.3-16.
Bulling, T.P. and Breyer, J.A., 1989, Exploring for
Subtle Traps with High-Resolution Paleogeographic Maps: Reklaw 1 Interval
(Eocene), South Texas. AAPG Bulletin,
V. 73, No. 1, p.24-39.
Cagle, J. W., and Khan, M. A., 1983,
Smakover-Norphlet Stratigraphy, South Wiggins Arch, Mississippi and Alabama.
Transactions, GCAGS, Vol. 33, pp.23-29.
Coates, E. J., et al, 1980, Subsurface Wilcox Lignite
in West-Central Louisiana.
Transactions: GCAGS, Vol. 30, pp.309-332.
Cross, T. A., and Lessenger, M. A., 1988, Seismic
Stratigraphy. Ann. Rev. Earth Planet, Sce. 1988, 16:319-54.
Dockery, III, D. T., 1986, Punctuated Succession of
Paleogene Mollusks in the Northern Gulf Coastal Plain. Palaios, 1986, Vol. 1, pp.582-589.
Echols, D. J., and Malkin, D. S., 1948, Wilcox (Eocene)
Stratigraphy, A Key to Production. AAPG
Bulletin, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp.11-33.
Galloway, W. E., 1968, Depositional Systems of the
Lower Wilcox Group, North-Central Gulf Basin.
Transactions: GCAGS, Vol. 18, 1968, pp.275-289.
Galloway, W. E., 1989, Genetic Stratigraphic
Sequences in Basin Analysis I: Architecture and Genesis of Flooding-Surface
Bounded Depositional Units. AAPG
Bulletin, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp.125-142.
Galloway, W. E., 1989, Genetic Stratigraphic
Sequences in Basin Analysis II: Application to Northwest Gulf of Mexico
Cenozoic Basin. AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 73,
No. 2, pp.143-154.
Glawe, L.N., 1989, Stratigraphic Relationships
Between Odontogryphaea Thirsae Beds and the Big Shale of the Wilcox
(Paleocene-Eocene) in Louisiana. Transactions,
GCAGS, Vol.34, pp.375-383.
Haq, B. U., Hardenbol, J., and Vail, P. R., 1987,
Chronology of Fluctuating Sea Levels Since the Triassic. Science, Vol. 235, 6 March 1987,
pp.1156-1167.
Hazel, J. E., 1984, Significant Unconformities and
the Hiatuses Represented by them in the Paleogene of the Atlantic and Gulf
Coastal Province. AAPG Memoir 36,
pp.59-66.
Jackson, M., and Laubach, S. E., 1988, Sabine Arch:
Cretaceous and Tertiary Compressional Tectonics as the cause of the Sabine
Arch, East Texas and Northwest Louisiana.
Transactions, GCAGS, Vol. 38, pp.245-256.
Lawless, P.N., 1989, The Effect of the LaSalle Arch
on Wilcox Group Stratigraphy. An
unpublished Master's Thesis at Louisiana State University, 204 pages.
Lawless, P.N., 1989, Origin and
Structural Development of the LaSalle Arch, LaSalle Parish, Louisiana. ABS. AAPG
Bulletin, May 1990.
Lawless, P.N., 1989, Lower
Paleogene Genetic Sequence Stratigraphy, Nebo-Hemphill Field, LaSalle Parish, Louisiana. ABS. AAPG Bulletin, May 1990.
Lawless, P.N., and Hart, G.F., 1990, The LaSalle Arch
and Its' Effect on Lower Paleogene Genetic Sequence Stratigraphy, North-Central
Louisiana, Transactions, GCAGS, Vol.35,
in press.
Lowry, P., Lemoine, R., and Moslow, T., 1986,
Sedimentary Facies of the Uppermost Wilcox Shelf-Margin Trend, South-Central
Louisiana, SEPM Core Workshop 9, pp. 363-412.
Loutit, T.S., Hardenbol, J., Vail, P.R., and Baum,
G.R., 1988, Condensed Sections: The Key to Age Determination and Correlation of
Continental Margin Sequences. SEPM
Special Publication #42, edited by: Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall,
C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., pp.184-213.
McCulloh, R.P., and Eversull, L.G., 1986,
Shale-Filled Channel System in the Wilcox Group (Paleocene-Eocene),
North-Central South Louisiana.
Transactions, GCAGS, Vol. 36, pp.213-218.
Mitchum, Jr., R.M., Vail, P.R., and Thompson, III,
S., 1977, Seismic Stratigraphy and Global Changes of Sea Level, Part 2: The
Depositional Sequence as a Basic Unit for Stratigraphic Analysis. AAPG Memoir #26, edited by: Payton, C.E.,
pp.53-62.
Mitchum, Jr., R.M., Vail, P.R., and Thompson, III,
S., 1977, Seismic Stratigraphy and Global Changes of Sea Level, Part 6:
Stratigraphic Interpretation of Seismic Reflection Patterns in Depositional
Sequences. AAPG Memoir #26, edited by:
Payton, C.E., pp.117-133.
Nunn, J.A., et al, 1984, Thermal Evolution of the
North-Central Gulf Coast. Tectonics,
Vol. 3, No. 7, pp.723-740, 1984.
Peters, K.E., 1986, Guidelines for Evaluating
Petroleum Source Rock Using Programmed Pyrolysis, AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 70, No.
3, pp. 318-329.
Posamentier, H.W., et al. 1988, Eustatic Controls on
Clastic Deposition I - Conceptual Framework.
SEPM Special Publication #42, edited by: Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S.,
Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., pp.
Posamentier, H.W., and Vail, P.R., 1988, Eustatic
Controls on Clastic Deposition II - Sequence and Systems Tract Models. SEPM Special Publication #42, edited by:
Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross,
C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., pp.125-154.
Sassen, R., 1987, Organic Geochemistry of the Salt
Dome Cap Rocks, Gulf Coast Basin, in: Dynamical Geology of Salt and Related
Structures: I. Lerche and J.J. O'Brien, eds., Academic Press, pp. 163-175.
Sassen, R., in press, Lower Tertiary and Upper
Cretaceous Source Rocks in Louisiana and Mississippi: Implications to the Gulf
of Mexico Crude Oil.
Scardina, A.D., 1982, Tectonic Subsidence History of
the North Louisiana Salt Basin, LSU Publications in Geology and Geophysics,
Gulf Coast Studies, Vol. 2, 1982.
Serra, O., editor, 1985, Sedimentary Environments from Wireline Logs. a
Schlumberger Technical Publication.
Snedden, J.W., 1984, Validity of the use of the
Spontaneous Potential Curve Shape in the Interpretation of Sandstone
Depositional Environments.
Transactions, GCAGS, Vol. 34, pp.255-263.
Vail, P.R., 1987, Seismic Stratigraphy Interpretation
Using Sequence Stratigraphy, Part One: Seismic Stratigraphy Interpretation
Procedure. Atlas of Seismic
Stratigraphy, Volume 1, edited by Bally, A.W., pp.1-10.
Van Wagoner, J.C., Mitchum, Jr., R.M., Posamentier,
H.W., and Vail, P.R., 1987, Part 2: Key Definitions of Sequence Stratigraphy.
in: AAPG Studies in Geology #27: Atlas of Seismic Stratigraphy, Vol. 1, edited
by: Bally, A.W.
Winker, C.D., 1982, Cenozoic Shelf Margins,
Northwestern Gulf of Mexico.
Transactions, GCAGS, Vol. 32, pp.427-448.
APPENDIX 1
Sidewall Core Analysis of the Senior G&A, Kauffman #2
Sec2,T7N,R3E Nebo-Hemphill
Field LaSalle Parish, Louisiana