@book{bouma1962sedimentology1,
    author = "Bouma, A. H",
    title = "Sedimentology of some flysch deposits",
    year = "1962",
    publisher = "Amsterdam, Elsevier, 168 p",
    note = "talkorigins\_source = {true}; raw\_reference = {Bouma, A. H., 1962, Sedimentology of some flysch deposits: Amsterdam, Elsevier, 168 p.}"
}

@book{openalexw1570283708,
    author = "Bouma, Arnold H. and Kuenen, Philip Henry and Shepard, Francis P.",
    title = "Sedimentology of some Flysch deposits: a graphic approach to facies interpretation",
    year = "1962",
    url = "https://openalex.org/W1570283708",
    openalex = "W1570283708"
}

@book{openalexw3120543430,
    author = "Bouma, Arnold H.",
    title = "Sedimentology of Some Flysch Deposits",
    year = "1962",
    journal = "Medical Entomology and Zoology",
    url = "https://openalex.org/W3120543430",
    openalex = "W3120543430"
}

@article{scott1966sedimentology,
    author = "Scott, Kevin M.",
    title = "Sedimentology and Dispersal pattern of a Cretaceous Flysch Sequence, Patagonian Andes, Southern Chile",
    year = "1966",
    journal = "AAPG Bulletin",
    abstract = "The Upper Cretactous Cerro Toro Formation is a flysch-like sequence overlain transitionally by molasse lithologic types and including conformable detached masses of coarse detritus emplaced in part as submarine mudflows. Sediment was dispersed in a pattern that reflects both a general eastward slope, indicated by apparent gravity-controlled structures, and the action of the dominant south-flowing currents. Axial trends and overturn directions of synsedimentary folds, trends of slide channels, overturn directions of flame structures, some clast imbrication, and one example of giant flutings on conglomerate bed soles suggest west-to-east movement of material. However, most current structures, including flute casts, current-ripple and convolute lamination, linear channels formed by current scour, rare large-scale cross-bedding, and some clast imbrication, show north-to-south flow. Continuous graded bedding in the sequence is rare, and grain orientations show that the sandstone beds themselves were deposited or redeposited by currents with the same orientation as those that cut basal flutings. Current structures, both internal and on bed soles, and perfection of graded bedding are inversely related. The conglomeratic mudflow deposits are noteworthy for a great variety of textural types, including pebbly mudstone, conglomerate with a dispersed framework and mud matrix, and other conglomerate with a sandy matrix or intact framework. The conglomerate beds are definite lateral equivalents of zones of failure up to 100 feet thick which include large synsedimentary contortions indicating mainly west-to-east slumping. The features of the zones indicate that they represent sea-floor deformation induced by the catastrophic introduction of the conglomeratic mudflows into the flysch environment. Geographic distribution, bed-thickness changes, and provenance of sandstone and conglomerate indicate original transverse sediment supply (normal or oblique to tectonic trends) into the flysch environment. In contrast, nearly all current structures indicate longitudinal distribution (parallel with tectonic trends). The deflection of gravity-controlled turbidity currents by the axial plunge of a geosynclinal trough could be indicated. However, the marked discordance between current and apparent slope directions over a wide area, the results of recent oceanographic research, and a general consideration of the paleogeography of flysch deposits with longitudinal paleocurrents suggest that an alternate working hypothesis be considered: downslope lateral supply by gravity-controlled mechanisms, including turbidity currents, sandflow, mudflow, or sliding, into a regime of marine bottom currents sufficiently powerful to distribute detritus and produce sedimentary structures. Sedimentary structures and paleontological evidence indicate that the dominant longitudinal currents in this example operated in both deep- and shallow-marine environments. Positive interpretation of either source or slope direction from current structures in flysch and flysch-like sequences is unwarranted without considerable supporting evidence.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1306/a663389e-16c0-11d7-8645000102c1865d",
    doi = "10.1306/a663389e-16c0-11d7-8645000102c1865d",
    number = "1",
    openalex = "W1964848741",
    pages = "72-107",
    volume = "50",
    references = "doi1010079783662010204, doi101086625710, doi101086626441, doi10113000167606195364381tfsaci20co2, doi101130spe65p1, doi101306bc74397316be11d78645000102c1865d, doi101306d42690f32b2611d78648000102c1865d, doi1023072982232, doi103929ethza000103455, openalexw3120543430"
}

@article{dejong1972flysch,
    author = "De Jong, J.D.",
    title = "Flysch sedimentology in North America",
    year = "1972",
    journal = "Sedimentary Geology",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/0037-0738(72)90005-x",
    doi = "10.1016/0037-0738(72)90005-x",
    number = "3",
    openalex = "W2921068569",
    pages = "232-233",
    volume = "7"
}

@incollection{dumitriu1972monte,
    author = "Dumitriu, Mircea and Dumitriu, Cristina",
    title = "Monte Carlo Simulation of Some Flysch Deposits from the East Carpathians",
    year = "1972",
    booktitle = "Computer Applications in the Earth Sciences",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-1995-5\_5",
    doi = "10.1007/978-1-4684-1995-5\_5",
    openalex = "W201330629",
    pages = "115-123",
    references = "openalexw1590525445, openalexw571657687, openalexw630529900"
}

@article{doi101306212f7f312b2411d78648000102c1865d,
    author = "Lowe, Donald R.",
    title = "Sediment Gravity Flows: II Depositional Models with Special Reference to the Deposits of High-Density Turbidity Currents",
    year = "1982",
    journal = "Journal of Sedimentary Research",
    abstract = "ABSTRACT Four principal mechanisms of deposition are effective in the formation of sediment gravity flow deposits. Grains deposited by traction sedimentation and suspension sedimentation respond individually and accumulate directly from bed and suspended loads, respectively. Those deposited by frictional freezing and cohesive freezing interact through either frictional contact or cohesive forces, respectively, and are deposited collectively, usually by plug formation. Sediment deposition from individual sediment flows commonly involves more than one of these mechanisms acting either serially as the flow evolves or simultaneously on different grain populations. Deposition from turbidity currents is treated in terms of three dynamic grain populations: 1) clay- to medium-grained sand-sized particles that can be fully suspended as individual grains by flow turbulence, 2) coarse-grained sand to small-pebble-sized gravel that can be fully suspended in large amounts mainly in highly concentrated turbulent suspensions where grain fall velocity is substantially reduced by hindered settling, and 3) pebble- and cobble-sized clasts having concentrations greater than 10 percent to 15 percent that will be supported largely by dispersive pressure resulting from clast collisions and by buoyant lift provided by the interstitial mixture of water and finer-grained sediment. The effects of hindered settling, dispersive pressure, and matrix buoyant lift are con entration dependent, and grain populations 2 and 3 are likely to be transported in large amounts only within flows having high particle concentrations, probably in excess of 20 percent solids by volume. Low-density turbidity currents, made up largely of grains of population 1, typically show an initial period of traction sedimentation, forming Bouma (Tb) and Tc) divisions, followed by one of mixed traction and suspension sedimentation (Td), and a terminal period of fine-grained suspension sedimentation (Te). The sediment loads of high-density turbidity currents commonly include grains belonging to populations 1, 2, and 3. Consequently, deposition often occurs as a series of discrete sedimentation waves as flows decelerate and individual grain populations can no longer be maintained in transport. Each sedimentation wave tends to show increasing unsteadiness and accelerating sedimentation rate as it evolves, passing from an initial stage of traction sedimentation, to one of mixed frictional freezing and suspension sedimentation within traction carpets, to a final stage of direct suspension sedimentation. Sequences of sedimentary structure divisions representing this succession of depositional stages are here termed the ecoR1-3) sequence, representing population 3 grains, and the S1-3) sequence, representing population 2. Deposition of the high-density suspended load leaves behind a residual low-density turbidity current composed largely of population 1 grains. At their distal ends, high-density turbidity currents deposit mainly by suspension sedimentation, forming thin (S3) divisions. These (S3) divisions are the same as Bouma (Ta) and, if subsequently capped by (Tb-e) deposited by the residual low-density flows, become the basal divisions of normal turbidities. Liquefied flows deposit by direct high-density suspension sedimentation. Grain flows of sand are characterized by frictional freezing and their deposits are limited mainly to angle-of-repose slipface units. Density-modified grain flows, in which larger clasts are partially supported by matrix buoyancy, and traction carpets, in which a dense frictional grain dispersion is driven by an overlying turbulent flow, are important in the buildup of natural deposits on submarine slopes. Cohesive debris flows depost sediment mainly by cohesive freezing, commonly modified by suspension sedimentation of the largest clasts.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1306/212f7f31-2b24-11d7-8648000102c1865d",
    doi = "10.1306/212f7f31-2b24-11d7-8648000102c1865d",
    openalex = "W2087125749"
}

@book{doi102110scn8209,
    author = "Harms, J. C. and Southard, J. B. and Southard, J. B. and Walker, R. G.",
    title = "Structure and Sequence in Clastic Rocks",
    year = "1982",
    booktitle = "SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology) eBooks",
    abstract = "These notes are for a course on the use of primary structures and stratification sequence as tools for interpretation of depositional environments. The emphasis is to provide a concise review of the factors that had led to the renaissance in clastic sedimentology during the decade leading up to 1975. The attempt is to provide an organized summary of both experimental studies and ideas on bed forms and primary sedimentary structures that was then relatively new and to show how this information could be applied to solving geologic problems. A second broad objective of the course is more philosophical, in that there is an attempt to outline some general approaches to interpretation and convey the goals of interpretation. The authors believe that there are a fairly small number of general depositional settings but that numerous environmental and process variables within each general setting lend considerable variation to the deposits themselves. The emphasis is at the scale of features and sequence that can commonly be observed in individual outcrops or cores. Interpretation begins with data collected at this level.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.2110/scn.82.09",
    doi = "10.2110/scn.82.09",
    openalex = "W1755726326"
}

@article{openalexw1598633756,
    author = "Nemec, Wojciech and Steel, R. J.",
    title = "Alluvial and Coastal Conglomerates: Their Significant Features and Some Comments on Gravelly Mass-Flow Deposits",
    year = "1984",
    abstract = "Abstract Conglomerates originating in coastal environments represent mainly beachface, shoreface, fan-deltaic or deltaic mouth bar, and Gilbert-type delta sequences. They show structures, textures and other features created mainly by the varied influence of waves and fluvial output in the shallow marine setting. Transitional, alluvial/marine systems show a broad range of facies characteristics and sequences, and these are discussed in detail. Conglomerates originating in alluvial environments comprise mainly braided stream and mass flow sequences. The former include regular braided river and fan (distributary) channel deposits, and show textures and structures which vary greatly with source and climatic setting. Braided stream sequences commonly show an upward fining motif, due to falling flood stage or to gradual abandonment of alluvial tracts. Mass flow conglomerates originate from a variety of debris flows in subaerial settings, but fluidal gravelly flows (like many ‘sheetfloods’ or ‘streamfloods’) may also be important, and they often become prominent subaqueously (high-density gravelly turbidites). In both instances, the deposits show remarkably varied texture, structure, and fabric. Subaerial flows are often considerably transformed when passing into water. A review of diagnostic features and facies sequences is presented. When interpreting the emplacement mechanics of mass flow conglomerates, particular effort must be made to extract maximum information from the individual bed characteristics. We illustrate with examples that even such basic data as bed thickness and maximum clast size may serve as a valuable source for some genetic inferences.",
    openalex = "W1598633756"
}

@article{doi101016s0012825297818582,
    author = "Shanmugam, G.",
    title = "The Bouma Sequence and the turbidite mind set",
    year = "1997",
    journal = "Earth-Science Reviews",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0012-8252(97)81858-2",
    doi = "10.1016/s0012-8252(97)81858-2",
    openalex = "W2086594561",
    references = "dejong1972flysch, doi1010160012825275900987, doi1010160012825288900645, doi1010160025322771900533, doi10108000206817809471524, doi10108000288306196910420225, doi101098rsta19560020, doi101130001676061959701089tifotp20co2, doi101306212f7f312b2411d78648000102c1865d, doi1013065d25c61516c111d78645000102c1865d, doi101306bc74397316be11d78645000102c1865d, doi105860choice295709, openalexw1558464430, openalexw1570283708, openalexw1590447055, openalexw2291433463, openalexw3120543430, openalexw602333724"
}

@article{shanmugam1997the,
    author = "Shanmugam, G.",
    title = "The Bouma Sequence and the turbidite mind set",
    year = "1997",
    journal = "Earth-Science Reviews",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0012-8252(97)81858-2",
    doi = "10.1016/s0012-8252(97)81858-2",
    number = "4",
    pages = "201-229",
    volume = "42"
}

@article{doi101046j13653091200100360x,
    author = "Mulder, Thierry and Alexander, Jan",
    title = "The physical character of subaqueous sedimentary density flows and their deposits",
    year = "2001",
    journal = "Sedimentology",
    abstract = "The complexity of flow and wide variety of depositional processes operating in subaqueous density flows, combined with post‐depositional consolidation and soft‐sediment deformation, often make it difficult to interpret the characteristics of the original flow from the sedimentary record. This has led to considerable confusion of nomenclature in the literature. This paper attempts to clarify this situation by presenting a simple classification of sedimentary density flows, based on physical flow properties and grain‐support mechanisms, and briefly discusses the likely characteristics of the deposited sediments. Cohesive flows are commonly referred to as debris flows and mud flows and defined on the basis of sediment characteristics. The boundary between cohesive and non‐cohesive density flows (frictional flows) is poorly constrained, but dimensionless numbers may be of use to define flow thresholds. Frictional flows include a continuous series from sediment slides to turbidity currents. Subdivision of these flows is made on the basis of the dominant particle‐support mechanisms, which include matrix strength (in cohesive flows), buoyancy, pore pressure, grain‐to‐grain interaction (causing dispersive pressure), Reynolds stresses (turbulence) and bed support (particles moved on the stationary bed). The dominant particle‐support mechanism depends upon flow conditions, particle concentration, grain‐size distribution and particle type. In hyperconcentrated density flows, very high sediment concentrations (>25 volume\%) make particle interactions of major importance. The difference between hyperconcentrated density flows and cohesive flows is that the former are friction dominated. With decreasing sediment concentration, vertical particle sorting can result from differential settling, and flows in which this can occur are termed concentrated density flows. The boundary between hyperconcentrated and concentrated density flows is defined by a change in particle behaviour, such that denser or larger grains are no longer fully supported by grain interaction, thus allowing coarse‐grain tail (or dense‐grain tail) normal grading. The concentration at which this change occurs depends on particle size, sorting, composition and relative density, so that a single threshold concentration cannot be defined. Concentrated density flows may be highly erosive and subsequently deposit complete or incomplete Lowe and Bouma sequences. Conversely, hydroplaning at the base of debris flows, and possibly also in some hyperconcentrated flows, may reduce the fluid drag, thus allowing high flow velocities while preventing large‐scale erosion. Flows with concentrations <9\% by volume are true turbidity flows (sensu Bagnold, 1962), in which fluid turbulence is the main particle‐support mechanism. Turbidity flows and concentrated density flows can be subdivided on the basis of flow duration into instantaneous surges, longer duration surge‐like flows and quasi‐steady currents. Flow duration is shown to control the nature of the resulting deposits. Surge‐like turbidity currents tend to produce classical Bouma sequences, whose nature at any one site depends on factors such as flow size, sediment type and proximity to source. In contrast, quasi‐steady turbidity currents, generated by hyperpycnal river effluent, can deposit coarsening‐up units capped by fining‐up units (because of waxing and waning conditions respectively) and may also include thick units of uniform character (resulting from prolonged periods of near‐steady conditions). Any flow type may progressively change character along the transport path, with transformation primarily resulting from reductions in sediment concentration through progressive entrainment of surrounding fluid and/or sediment deposition. The rate of fluid entrainment, and consequently flow transformation, is dependent on factors including slope gradient, lateral confinement, bed roughness, flow thickness and water depth. Flows with high and low sediment concentrations may co‐exist in one transport event because of downflow transformations, flow stratification or shear layer development of the mixing interface with the overlying water (mixing cloud formation). Deposits of an individual flow event at one site may therefore form from a succession of different flow types, and this introduces considerable complexity into classifying the flow event or component flow types from the deposits.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3091.2001.00360.x",
    doi = "10.1046/j.1365-3091.2001.00360.x",
    openalex = "W2120162798",
    references = "doi101007bf00301484, doi101016s0012825297818582, doi101017s0022112089000340, doi10102997rg00426, doi101046j136530912000047s1062x, doi101086626171, doi101086627725, doi101086629747, doi101098rspa19540186, doi101111j136530911983tb00702x, doi101130reg7p1, doi101146annurevearth25185, doi101306212f7f312b2411d78648000102c1865d, doi1013065ceadd7616bb11d78645000102c1865d, doi1013065d25cc7916c111d78645000102c1865d, doi10130674d723b52b2111d78648000102c1865d, doi10130674d7262b2b2111d78648000102c1865d, doi102110scn8403, doi102475ajs25012849, nardin1979a, normark1978fan, openalexw1570283708"
}

@article{doi102110sedred200434,
    author = "Gani, M. Royhan and Wegweiser, Marilyn D.",
    title = "From Turbid to Lucid: A Straightforward Approach to Sediment Gravity Flows and Their Deposits",
    year = "2004",
    journal = "The Sedimentary Record",
    abstract = "Deepwater sediment gravity flows are categorized on the basis of a combination of four parameters – sediment concentration, sediment-support mechanism, flow state (laminar or turbulent), and rheology. Because there is no agreement among sedimentologists about which of these parameters should be the decisive one, one school’s turbidites become another school’s debrites, and vice-versa. Except for rheology, all of these parameters change gradationally from one end member to another.Therefore, rheological classification of sediment gravity flows should be the most straightforward and the least controversial. These flows can be either Newtonian (i.e., turbidity currents), or non-Newtonian (i.e., debris flows). However, identification of flow rheology by examining the deposits may not be easy. Although we may confidently identify some rocks as turbidites and others as debrites, there are some transitional deposits, here called densites, that share both the characteristics of turbidites and debrites. Densites are the deposits of dense flows, which are rheologically stratified flows having a composite rheology of Newtonian fluids and non-Newtonian fluids. Moreover, the absence of a general term for all types of sediment gravity flow deposits has resulted in overuse and misuse of the term turbidite. The term ‘gravite’ is proposed here for deposits of any kind of sediment gravity flow, irrespective of their depositional environment.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.2110/sedred.2004.3.4",
    doi = "10.2110/sedred.2004.3.4",
    openalex = "W2789509564",
    references = "doi1010160037073880900524, doi101016s0264817299000112, doi101016s0278434300000716, doi101046j136530912000047s1062x, doi101046j13653091200100360x, doi101111j136530911995tb00395x, doi101306212f7f312b2411d78648000102c1865d, doi101306d426828e2b2611d78648000102c1865d, openalexw1570283708, openalexw2993540452"
}

@article{doi101111j13653091200801019x,
    author = "Mutti, Emiliano and Bernoulli, Daniel and Lucchi, Franco Ricci and Tinterri, Roberto",
    title = "Turbidites and turbidity currents from Alpine ‘flysch’ to the exploration of continental margins",
    year = "2008",
    journal = "Sedimentology",
    abstract = "Abstract The concept of turbidite has evolved so much since its original definition by Kuenen and Migliorini in 1950 – i.e. the deposit of turbidity currents exemplified by the sandy flysch successions of the Northern Apennines – that it is now used to define a variety of deposits, some of which have little in common with sandy flysch formations in terms of facies, geometry and geological significance. The extension of the concept to other geodynamic settings and deposits of non‐siliciclastic composition is considered only briefly in the concluding sections. With the diffusion of the concept of turbidity current, in the 1950s and early 1960s, an entirely new branch of sedimentology came into being, concerned with the inventory of sedimentary structures, palaeocurrent measurements and bedding patterns. The most representative expression of this branch came from the ‘Dutch school’ of Philip H. Kuenen and his students. Between the late 1960s and the mid‐1970s, there was a new development: facies analysis, in terms of modern environments and depositional systems. This development led to the introduction and discussion of ‘fan models’ that became an increasingly thorny issue with the accumulation of data from modern deep‐marine settings. In particular, most researchers emphasized the importance of channel and lobe elements and their mutual relationships in space and time. These models may differ in terms of specific features, e.g. canyon‐fed versus delta‐fed ramp settings and terminology, but the basic distinction between channels (sediment pathways), lobes and basin plains (sheet‐like depositional features) was and still is widely retained – a model that simply refers to a system where a distributary channel passes downstream to a depositional zone, like in most fluvio‐deltaic systems. Great caution should, however, be exercised when comparing modern and ancient fans – a problem discussed at length in the Committee on Submarine Fans I convened by A.H. Bouma and held in Pittsburgh in 1982. Different data sets and geological contexts, scaling problems and terminology still cast doubt over how meaningful such a comparison may be. Despite the many problems encountered, the elemental approach provides an easy, essentially descriptive tool to significantly compare recent with ancient, recent with recent, and ancient with ancient systems. Beginning in the 1970s, process‐oriented facies analysis led to increasingly complex facies classification schemes, which showed substantial departures from the classic Bouma sequence and introduced many new concepts: proximal versus distal sedimentation, sediment bypass and flow efficiency, in addition to deflection, reflection and ponding of turbidity currents in confined basins. During the last two decades, there has been an increased interest in attempting to interpret the incredibly detailed submarine landscapes obtained through advances in marine geology, technology and high‐resolution three‐dimensional seismic data provided by the oil industry. Outcrop ‘analogues’ derived from orogenic belts are used commonly to improve the interpretation of seismic‐reflection facies, although their actual value may be questioned in many cases. Seismic–stratigraphic concepts are used routinely to describe and interpret turbidite systems of continental margin basins where cyclic sea‐level variations are thought to be essentially controlled by eustasy. These concepts are difficult to apply to flysch basins, where the tectonic control on the development of cycles of relative sea‐level variations appears to be dominant. In particular, the huge volumes of sediment involved in the infill of flysch basins imply amounts of uplift of the source areas and subsidence of the receiving basins that clearly outstrip those of divergent continental margins controlled by eustasy and thermal subsidence. Cycles of tectonic uplift and denudation (Davisian‐type cycles in the sense of Mutti et al., 1996) apparently play a major role here. Most recent attempts to understand turbidite deposition are related to the increased economic importance of turbidite sandbodies as hydrocarbon reservoirs in many offshore basins (e.g. Gulf of Mexico, West Africa, Brazil, the North Sea). The many problems inherent to this situation have been reviewed extensively in a workshop held in Parma in 2002; only some of these problems are reconsidered briefly in this paper. Sandy turbidite systems can be generated by the resedimentation of deltaic deposits through submarine slides or be derived directly from flood‐generated hyperpycnal flows; in the latter case, climatic variations must have played a fundamental role in controlling flood frequency and magnitude with time. Recognizing these two different types of system is not always easy and requires a good understanding of the geological context of the basin under consideration and particularly of the role of marginal fluvio‐deltaic systems from which turbidites are ultimately derived. Unfortunately, this kind of integrated analysis is still in its infancy. There are other types of turbidite deposits, such as the calcareous flysch of the Western Alps and the Northern Apennines, whose origin still remains a matter of debate in terms of sediment source and triggering mechanisms of large‐volume turbidity currents essentially loaded with fine‐grained biogenic sediment. Some authors have referred to these sediments either as ‘megaturbidites’ or ‘seismoturbidites’. The importance of tectonic control and geodynamic setting is stressed for turbidite systems of orogenic belt basins, which is justified both by historical reasons (turbidites were from their recognition included in the definition of flysch) and recent studies of thrust belts. The time is now ripe for reconsidering these sediments within a broader framework that takes into account the enormous quantity of data and concepts that have been developed in the last 50 years; this in itself raises a problem, and no small one: the accuracy and quality of data collected in the field and the training of young scientists. How many field geologists are being produced in these times of increasingly computerized geology; and how good are they?",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.2008.01019.x",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1365-3091.2008.01019.x",
    openalex = "W2126274779",
    references = "doi1010160012825286900012, doi1010160012825289900020, doi101016jmargeo200410001, doi101016jmarpetgeo200309001, doi101016s0070457108709543, doi10102995rg03287, doi101086629606, doi101086629747, doi101111j13653091200801016x, doi101130001676061959701089tifotp20co2, doi101306212f7f312b2411d78648000102c1865d, doi101306mth7510, doi102110pec88010039, doi102110pec88010109, doi105860choice295709, openalexw1570283708, openalexw3160761443"
}

@article{doi10130612131010111,
    author = "Hubbard, Stephen M. and Smith, Derald G. and Nielsen, Haley and Leckie, Dale A. and Fustic, Milovan and Spencer, Ronald J. and Bloom, Lorraine",
    title = "Seismic geomorphology and sedimentology of a tidally influenced river deposit, Lower Cretaceous Athabasca oil sands, Alberta, Canada",
    year = "2011",
    journal = "AAPG Bulletin",
    abstract = "Abstract The bitumen of the Lower Cretaceous McMurray Formation in Alberta arguably represents one of the most important hydrocarbon accumulations in the world. In-situ development relies on heat transfer through the reservoir via horizontal steam injection wells placed 4 to 6 m (13–20 ft) above horizontal producers near the base of the sandstone reservoirs. Given this technology, understanding the distribution of the resource is paramount for a successful development program. Sedimentary facies provide a direct control on bitumen distribution and recovery. Most facies models developed to describe and predict sedimentary units of the McMurray Formation consider fluvial, estuarine, and/or deltaic depositional settings. In-situ development, however, requires a particularly high-resolution sedimentologic interpretation. High-quality three-dimensional seismic reflection data and extensive drill cores from acreage located approximately 50 km (31 mi) south of Fort McMurray provide important insights into the sedimentologic organization of reservoir and nonreservoir deposits in the upper one third (40 m [131 ft]) of the reservoir interval. Geomorphologic characteristics of the strata observed in seismic time slices reveal that a fluvial depositional setting was prevalent. Ichnologic and palynologic data, as well as sedimentary structures suggestive of tidal processes, indicate a marine influence in the upper reaches of a fluvial system characterized by channels that were 390 to 640 m (1280–2100 ft) wide and 28 to 36 m (92–118 ft) deep. The complex stratigraphic architecture consists of a mosaic of large-scale depositional elements, including abandoned channels or oxbow lake fills, point bars associated with lateral accretion, point bars associated with downstream accretion, counter point bars, and sandstone-filled channels. Reservoir deposits are primarily associated with point bars and sandstone-filled channels.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1306/12131010111",
    doi = "10.1306/12131010111",
    openalex = "W2160469173",
    references = "doi1010079783662010204, doi1010160037073880900524, doi101016jmarpetgeo200308003, doi101016s0037073887800064, doi101306212f7e4b2b2411d78648000102c1865d"
}

@article{bronswijk2012grandmaster,
    author = "Bronswijk, J.E.M.H. Van",
    title = "Grandmaster Herman Bouma in short",
    year = "2012",
    journal = "Gerontechnology",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.4017/gt.2012.11.01.004.00",
    doi = "10.4017/gt.2012.11.01.004.00",
    number = "1",
    volume = "11"
}

@article{doi101130ges007931,
    author = "Talling, Peter J.",
    title = "Hybrid submarine flows comprising turbidity current and cohesive debris flow: Deposits, theoretical and experimental analyses, and generalized models",
    year = "2013",
    journal = "Geosphere",
    abstract = "Hybrid fl ows comprising both turbidity current and submarine debris fl ow are a signifi cant departure from many previous infl uential models for submarine sediment density fl ows. Hybrid beds containing cohesive debrite and turbidite are common in distal depositional environments, as shown by detailed observations from more than 20 modern and ancient systems worldwide. Hybrid fl ows, and cohesive debris fl ows more generally, are best classifi ed in terms of a continuum of decreasing cohesive debris fl ow strength. High-strength cohesive debris fl ows tend to be clast rich and relatively thick, and their deposit extends back to near the site of original slope failure. They are typically confi ned to higher gradient continental slopes, but may occasionally form megabeds on basin plains, in both cases overlain by a thin turbidite. Intermediate-strength cohesive debris fl ows typically contain clasts, but their deposits may be <1 or 2 m thick on low-gradient fan fringes, and are encased in turbidite sand and mud. Clasts may be fartraveled, and meter-sized clasts can be rafted long distances across very low gradients if they are less dense than surrounding fl ow. Low-strength cohesive debris fl ows generally lack mud clasts, and as cohesive strength decreases further there is a transition into fl uid mud layers that do not support sand. Intermediate-and low-strength cohesive debrites are consistently absent in more proximal parts of submarine systems, where faster moving sediment-charged fl ows are more likely to be turbulent. Intermediatestrength debris fl ows can run out for long distances on low gradients without hydroplaning. Very low strength cohesive debris fl ows most likely form through late-stage transformations near the site of debrite deposition, and emplaced gently to avoid mixing with surrounding seawater. The location and geometry of cohesive debrites in hybrid beds are controlled strongly by seafl oor morphology and small changes in gradient. Debrites occur as fringes around raised channel-levee ridges, or in the central and lowest parts of basin plains lacking such ridges. Small variations in mud fraction produce profound changes in cohesive strength, fl ow viscosity, permeability, and the time taken for excess pore pressures to dissipate that span multiple orders of magnitude. Reduction in fl ow speed can also cause substantial increases in viscosity and yield strength in shear thinning muddy fl uids. Small amounts of sediment can dampen or extinguish turbulence, especially as fl ow decelerates, affecting how sediment is supported or deposited. This ensures that cohesive debris fl ows and hybrid fl ows have a rich variety of behaviors.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1130/ges00793.1",
    doi = "10.1130/ges00793.1",
    openalex = "W2122272026",
    references = "doi101016jmarpetgeo200902012, doi1010292009jf001514, doi101038nature06273, doi101046j13653091199900204x, doi101046j13653091200100360x, doi101111j136530911995tb00395x, doi101111j13653091201201353x, doi101306212f7f312b2411d78648000102c1865d, doi102475ajs25012849, openalexw1570283708"
}

@incollection{mulder2014bouma,
    author = "Mulder, Thierry and Hüneke, Heiko",
    title = "Bouma Sequence",
    year = "2014",
    booktitle = "Encyclopedia of Marine Geosciences",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6644-0\_135-1",
    doi = "10.1007/978-94-007-6644-0\_135-1",
    pages = "1-2"
}

@incollection{mulder2016bouma,
    author = "Mulder, Thierry and Hüneke, Heiko",
    title = "Bouma Sequence",
    year = "2016",
    booktitle = "Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6238-1\_135",
    doi = "10.1007/978-94-007-6238-1\_135",
    pages = "68-69"
}

@article{doi101111sed12727,
    author = "Peakall, Jeff and Best, Jim and Baas, Jaco H. and Hodgson, David M. and Clare, Michael and Talling, Peter J. and Dorrell, R. M. and Lee, David R.",
    title = "An integrated process‐based model of flutes and tool marks in deep‐water environments: Implications for palaeohydraulics, the Bouma sequence and hybrid event beds",
    year = "2020",
    journal = "Sedimentology",
    abstract = "Abstract Flutes and tool marks are commonly observed sedimentary structures on the bases of sandstones in deep‐water successions. These sole structures are universally used as palaeocurrent indicators but, in sharp contrast to most sedimentary structures, they are not used in palaeohydraulic reconstructions or to aid prediction of the spatial distribution of sediments. Since Kuenen's famous 1953 paper, flutes and tool marks in deep‐water systems have been linked to turbidity currents, as reflected in the standard Bouma sequence taught to generations of geologists. Yet, these structures present a series of unaddressed enigmas. Detailed field studies in the 1960s and early 1970s observed that flutes are typically associated with thicker, more proximal beds, whilst tools are generally prevalent in thinner, more distal, beds. Additionally, flutes and tool marks are rarely observed on the same surfaces, and flutes are seen to change downstream from larger wider parabolic to smaller narrower spindle‐shaped forms. No model has been proposed that explains these field‐based observations. This contribution undertakes a radical re‐examination of the formative flow conditions of flutes and tool marks, and demonstrates that they are the products of a wide range of sediment gravity flows, from turbulent flows, through transitional clay‐rich flows, to debris flows. Flutes are not solely the product of turbulent flows, but can continue to form in transitional flows. Grooves are shown to be formed by debris flows, slumps and slides, not turbidity currents, and in many cases the debris flows are linked to the debritic component of hybrid flows. Discontinuous tool marks, including skim (bounce) marks, prod marks and skip marks, are shown to be formed by transitional mud‐rich flows. Consequently, the observed spatial distribution of flutes and tool marks can be explained by a progressive increase in flow cohesivity downstream. This model of flutes and tool marks dovetails with models of hybrid flows that predict such a longitudinal increase in flow cohesivity. However, some deposits show grooves preferentially associated with Bouma T A beds, and these are likely formed by flows transforming from higher to lower cohesion, and are present in basins where hybrid beds are absent or rare. The recognition that sole structures may have no genetic link to the later overlying turbidity current deposits, and can be formed by a wide range of flow types, indicates that the existing pictorial description of the Bouma sequence is incorrect. A modified Bouma sequence is proposed here that addresses these points. In utilizing the advances in fluid dynamics since Kuenen's pioneering research, this study demonstrates that it is possible to use flutes and tool marks to interpret flow type at the point of formation, the nature of flow transformations, and the mechanics of the basal layer. These advances suggest that it is then possible to predict the nature of deposit type down‐dip. This new understanding, in combination with further testing in outcrop of the proposed relationships between sole marks and palaeohydraulics, opens up a wealth of possibilities for improving the understanding of deep‐water clastic environments, with implications for developing more complete facies models, assessing subaqueous geohazards and the resilience of seafloor infrastructure, and advancing our understanding of deep‐water sediments as archives of palaeoenvironmental change.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1111/sed.12727",
    doi = "10.1111/sed.12727",
    openalex = "W3011315171",
    references = "doi101016jgeomorph201512008, doi101016jmarpetgeo201402016, doi101016jsedgeo201603008, doi101111bre12150, doi101111sed12376, doi101130b309961, doi101130ges007931"
}

@article{doi101186s42501021000851,
    author = "Shanmugam, G.",
    title = "The turbidite-contourite-tidalite-baroclinite-hybridite problem: orthodoxy vs. empirical evidence behind the “Bouma Sequence”",
    year = "2021",
    journal = "Journal of Palaeogeography",
    abstract = "Abstract The underpinning problems of deep-water facies still remain unresolved. (1) The Tb, Tc, and Td divisions of the turbidite facies model, with traction structures, are an integral part of the “Bouma Sequence” (Ta, Tb, Tc, Td, Te). However, deposits of thermohaline contour currents, wind-driven bottom currents, deep-marine tidal currents, and baroclinic currents (internal waves and tides) also develop discrete rippled units, mimicking Tc. (2) The application of “cut-out” logic of sequences, which was originally introduced for the “Bouma Sequence”, with sharp basal contacts and sandy divisions containing well-developed traction structures, to muddy contourites with gradational basal contacts and an absence of well-developed traction structures is incongruent. (3) The presence of five internal divisions and hiatus in the muddy contourite facies model is in dispute. (4) Intersection of along slope contour currents with down slope sediment-gravity flows, triggering hybrid flows, also develops traction structures. (5) The comparison of genuine hybrid flows with down slope flow transformation of gravity flows is inconsistent with etymology of the term “hybrid”. (6) A reexamination of the Annot Sandstone at the Peira Cava type locality in SE France fails to validate either the orthodoxy of five internal divisions of the “Bouma Sequence” or their origin by turbidity currents. For example, the “Ta” division is composed of amalgamated units with inverse grading and floating mudstone clasts, suggesting a mass-transport deposit (MTD). The “Tb” and “Tc” divisions are composed of double mud layers and sigmoidal cross bedding, respectively, which suggest a tidalite origin. (7) Although it was reasonable to introduce a simplistic “Bouma Sequence” in 1962, at a time of limited knowledge on deep-water processes, it is obsolete now in 2021 to apply this model to the rock record amid a wealth of new knowledge. (8) The disconnect between 12 observed, but questionable, modern turbidity currents and over 10,000 interpreted ancient turbidites defies the doctrine of uniformitarianism. This disconnect is attributed to routine application of genetic facies models, without a pragmatic interpretation of empirical data. (9) A suggested solution to these problems is to interpret traction structures in the sedimentary record pragmatically on the basis of empirical field and experimental evidence, without any built-in bias using facies models, such as the “Bouma Sequence”. (10) Until reliable criteria are developed to distinguish traction structures of each type of bottom currents based on uniformitarianism, a general term “BCRS” (i.e., bottom-current reworked sands) is appropriate for deposits of all four kinds of bottom currents.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1186/s42501-021-00085-1",
    doi = "10.1186/s42501-021-00085-1",
    openalex = "W3165613736"
}

@article{doi101016jjop202208004,
    author = "Shanmugam, G.",
    title = "150 Years (1872–2022) of research on deep–water processes, deposits, settings, triggers, and deformation: A difficult domain of progress, dichotomy, diversion, omission, and groupthink",
    year = "2022",
    journal = "Journal of Palaeogeography",
    abstract = "In capturing a snapshot of 150 years (1872–2022) of research on deep–water processes, deposits, settings, triggers, and deformation, the following 22 topics are selected: (1) H.M.S. Challenger expedition (1872–1876): The discovering of the “Challenger Deep” by the H.M.S. Challenger in the Mariana Trench has been the single most important achievement in deep-water research. (2) Five pioneers amid 50 notable contributors: R. A. Bagnold, J. E. Sanders, G. D. Klein, F. P. Shepard, and C. D. Hollister. (3) Mass transport: Mass-transport deposits (MTD) are the most important deep-water facies in terms of volume, geohazards, and petroleum reservoirs. (4) Gravity flows: There are six basic types, namely (a) hyperpycnal flows, (b) turbidity currents, (c) debris flows, (d) liquefied/fluidized flows, (e) grain flows, and (f) thermohaline contour currents. Sandy debrites are the most important petroleum reservoir facies. Despite their popularity, turbidites are not an important reservoir facies. (5) Kelvin-Helmholtz (KH) waves: Turbidites, related to KH waves, with internal hiatus are not qualified to function as predictive facies models; nor are they fit for stratigraphic correlations. (6) High-density turbidity currents (HDTC): Misclassification of density-stratified gravity flows with laminar debris flows and turbulent turbidity currents as HDTC is flawed. Experimental generation of density-stratified gravity flows in flume studies has debunked the concept of HDTC. (7) Classification of turbidites: Contrary to the popular groupthink, turbidites are exclusive deposits of turbidity currents. (8) Bottom currents: The four basic types of deep-marine bottom currents are: (a) thermohaline-induced geotropic contour currents, (b) wind-driven bottom currents, (c) tide-driven bottom currents (mostly in submarine canyons), and (d) internal wave/tide-driven baroclinic currents. (9) Classification of contourites: Contrary to the popular groupthink, contourites are the exclusive deposits of thermohaline-induced geotropic contour currents. (10) Tidal currents in submarine canyons: Their velocity measurements have been the single most important achievement in deep-water process sedimentology. (11) Modern and ancient systems: There is a dichotomy between rare observations of turbidity currents in modern settings and overwhelming cases of interpretations of ancient turbidites in outcrops and cores. The reason is that turbidity currents are truly rare in nature, but the omnipotent presence of turbidites in the ancient rock record is the manifestation of groupthink induced by the turbidite facies model (i.e., the Bouma Sequence). (12) Internal waves and tides: Despite their ubiquitous documentation in modern oceans, their ancient counterparts in outcrops are extremely rare. This is another dichotomy. (13) Hybrid flows: They are commonly developed by intersecting of down-slope gravity flows with along-slope contour currents. However, they are often misapplied to down-slope flow transformation of gravity flows. (14) Density (sediment) plumes: Deflected sediment plumes by wind forcing are common. Despite their importance in provenance studies, they are not adequately studied. (15) Hyperpycnal flows: They occur near the shoreline, next to the plunge point; but are of no relevance in deep-water environments. However, their importance in deep-marine settings is overhyped in recent literature. (16) Omission of erosional contact and internal hiatus: In order to promote genetic facies models that must not contain internal hiatuses, some researchers selectively omit internal hiatuses observed by the original authors. (17) Triggers of sediment failures: There are 22 types, but short-term triggers, such as earthquakes and meteorite impacts are more important than the conventional long-term trigger known as Eustasy. (18) Tsunami waves: Despite their sedimentologic importance, there are no reliable criteria for recognizing tsunami deposits in the ancient rock record. (19) Soft-Sediment Deformation Structures (SSDS): Although most SSDS are routinely interpreted as seismites, not all SSDS are caused by earthquakes. There are 10 other mechanisms, such as sediment loading, which can trigger liquefaction that can develop SSDS. (20) The Jackfork Group, Pennsylvanian, Ouachita Mountains, USA: Our reinterpretation of this classic North American flysch turbidites as MTD and bottom-current reworked sands has resulted in the longest academic debate with 42 printed pages in the AAPG Bulletin history since its founding in 1917. (21) Basin-floor fan model, Tertiary, North Sea: Our examination of nearly 12,000 ft (3658 m) of conventional core from Paleogene and Cretaceous deep-water sandstone reservoirs cored in 50 wells in 10 different areas or fields in the North Sea and Norwegian Sea reveals that these reservoirs are predominantly composed of MTDs, mainly sandy slumps and sandy debrites, and bottom-current reworked sands. Our core-seismic calibration debunked the conventional wisdom (groupthink) that basin-floor fans are composed of sandy turbidites in a sequence-stratigraphic framework. (22) Turbidite groupthink: A case study in illustrating how turbidite groupthink functions, without sound scientific methods, on the basis of published information on modern turbidity currents in Bute Inlet (fjord and estuary), British Columbia, Canada. This compendium is hybrid in composition between an atlas (with 108 figures) and a review article (with 348 references). The author admonishes scientists against deep-sea groupthink and provides a roadmap for future researchers by identifying potential topics for research involving density plumes, internal waves, tidal currents, tsunami waves, sediment deformation, and lowstand braid deltas.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jop.2022.08.004",
    doi = "10.1016/j.jop.2022.08.004",
    openalex = "W4306178612",
    references = "doi1010160012825283900223, doi10102997rg00426, doi101130g332171, doi101146annurevfluid40111406102203, doi101306212f7f312b2411d78648000102c1865d, doi102113gseegeosci73221, doi105670oceanog199107, doi105860choice295709, doi105860choice444462, openalexw1570283708"
}

@article{doi101016jearscirev2025105277,
    author = "Sharrocks, Patrick D. and Peakall, Jeff and Hodgson, David M. and Barlow, Natasha",
    title = "Tsunami versus storms: Diagnostic sedimentary criteria in coastal lakes, lagoons and sinkhole deposits",
    year = "2025",
    journal = "Earth-Science Reviews",
    abstract = "Sedimentary deposits of coastal flooding by tsunamis and storms extend archives of these events across millennia. However, the utility of these records remains clouded by an inability to unequivocally differentiate between a deposit of storm or tsunami origin. This review takes a novel approach by compiling a large integrated dataset of modern and palaeo tsunami and storm deposits in coastal lakes and lagoons to infer the processes that occur during these events. We find that storm and tsunami deposits each comprise three differing groups. Using these groups, we infer the processes involved in tsunamis, including the formation of a sediment gravity flow as the tsunami flows into the lake; the progression of a dense, cohesionless flow head, or the displacement of the shallow lake water by the tsunami wave. In contrast, storm deposits are inferred to be formed by bedload under an overwash regime or in a dilute flow under full inundation of the coastal lake or lagoon. From these processes, we show that the composition of tsunami deposits is dependent on the environmental setting of the lake or lagoon whereas, for storms, the event size is a greater factor. Our findings show that in most cases, storm events are inherently unable to generate the tsunami deposits found in coastal lakes and lagoons. This insight enables the establishment of recognition criteria and a framework that can be applied to candidate deposits to differentiate unequivocally between the two event types. Nonetheless, for some deposits, a differentiation on sedimentology alone is impossible.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2025.105277",
    doi = "10.1016/j.earscirev.2025.105277",
    openalex = "W4414256133",
    references = "doi101111sed12376"
}

@incollection{bryant2026sedimentology,
    author = "Bryant, Ian D.",
    title = "Sedimentology of glaciofluvial deposits",
    year = "2026",
    booktitle = "Glacial Deposits in Great Britain and Ireland",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003763413-43",
    doi = "10.1201/9781003763413-43",
    openalex = "W7125960282",
    pages = "437-442"
}