Fluvial response to sea‐level changes: a quantitative analogue, experimental approach
- 1 September 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Basin Research
- Vol. 13 (3) , 269-292
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2117.2001.00149.x
Abstract
Quantitative evaluation of fluvial response to allogenic controls is crucial for further progress in understanding the stratigraphic record in terms of processes that control landscape evolution. For instance, without quantitative insight into time lags that are known to exist between sea‐level change and fluvial response, there is no way to relate fluvial stratigraphy to the sea‐level curve. It is difficult to put firm constraints on these time‐lag relationships on the basis of empirical studies. Therefore, we have started to quantify time‐averaged erosion and deposition in the fluvial and offshore realms in response to sea‐level change by means of analogue modelling in a 4 × 8‐m flume tank. The rate of sea‐level change was chosen as an independent variable, with other factors such as sediment supply, discharge and initial geometry kept constant over the course of 18 experiments. Our experimental results support the common view that neither fall nor rise in sea level affects the upstream fluvial system instantaneously. An important cause for the delayed fluvial response is that a certain amount of time is required to connect initial incisions on the newly emergent shelf (canyons) with the fluvial valley. Lowering of the fluvial longitudinal profile starts only after the connection of an active shelf canyon with the fluvial valley; until that moment the profile remains steady. We quantified the process of connection and introduced the quantity ‘connection rate’. It controlled, in conjunction with the rate of sea‐level fall: (1) the amount of fluvial degradation during sea‐level fall; (2) the total sediment volume that bypasses the shelf edge; (3) the percentage of fluvial relative to shelf sediment in the lowstand delta; (4) the volume of the transgressive systems tract and (5) the amount of diachroneity along the sequence boundary. Our experiments demonstrate also that the sequence‐stratigraphic concept is difficult to apply to continental successions, even when these successions have been deposited within the influence of sea level.Keywords
This publication has 60 references indexed in Scilit:
- Stranded parasequences and the forced regressive wedge systems tract: deposition during base-level fall—replyPublished by Elsevier ,2000
- The falling stage systems tract: recognition and importance in sequence stratigraphic analysisGeological Society, London, Special Publications, 2000
- Dynamics of the stream‐power river incision model: Implications for height limits of mountain ranges, landscape response timescales, and research needsJournal of Geophysical Research, 1999
- How and where do incised valleys form if sea level remains above the shelf edge?Geology, 1998
- Scour in large braided rivers and the recognition of sequence stratigraphic boundariesNature, 1997
- Modeling fluvial erosion on regional to continental scalesJournal of Geophysical Research, 1994
- Variability of the sequence stratigraphic model: effects of local basin factorsSedimentary Geology, 1993
- Relation of sequence stratigraphy to modern sedimentary environmentsGeology, 1989
- Geomorphic and tectonic process rates: Effects of measured time intervalGeology, 1987
- Fluvial response to on-going tectonism and base-level changes, lower Amargosa River, Southern Death Valley, CaliforniaSedimentary Geology, 1984