Skip to main content
Journal of Palaeogeography
Fig. 34 | Journal of Palaeogeography

Fig. 34

From: The turbidite-contourite-tidalite-baroclinite-hybridite problem: orthodoxy vs. empirical evidence behind the “Bouma Sequence”

Fig. 34

a Conceptual model of hybrid flows showing reworking the tops of downslope sandy debris flows by alongslope bottom currents. Such complex deposits would generate a sandy unit with a basal massive division and upper reworked divisions with traction structures (parallel or ripple laminae), mimicking the “Bouma Sequence.”; b The turbidite facies model (i.e., the Bouma Sequence) showing Ta, Tb, Tc, Td, and Te divisions. Conventional interpretation is that the entire sequence is a product of a turbidity current (Bouma 1962; Walker 1965; Middleton and Hampton 1973). White circles show location of bottom-current reworking on the seafloor (a) and corresponding interval in the depositional record (b). This may explain the upward transition of Ta to Tb, as discussed by Leclair and Arnott (2005). Source: a From Shanmugam (2006), with permission from Elsevier. b From Shanmugam et al. (1997), with permission from Elsevier

Back to article page