3D Seismic Interpretation of Mass Transport
Deposits: Implications for Basin Analysis
and Geohazard Evaluation
J. Frey-Martínez
Abstract Mass-transport deposits (MTDs) are widely recognized from many
continental margins and are an important component of slope systems. Although
MTDs have been studied since the early 1920s, much of the research has been
conducted on ancient features partially preserved at outcrop. The incompleteness
of outcrop examples has been a persistent obstacle to a fuller, process based analysis of their causes, mechanisms, and results. In the last few decades, increasing
use has been made of geophysical techniques such as 2D reflection seismology,
sonar, and multibeam bathymetry to study modern MTDs. Many valuable insights
have accrued from this approach, but it is, in essence, a two-dimensional analytical framework, and suffers from many of the same limitations as the field-based
approach. Recent advent of 3D seismic technology offers a novel method for investigations of both modern and subsurface MTDs that promises to add significantly to
the understanding of slope failure processes. Modern, high-resolution 3D seismic
surveys are now acquired on many continental margins for hydrocarbon exploration
purposes, and often in areas that are or have been affected by slope failure. This
means that the remarkable spatial resolving power of the 3D seismic method can
be used to define the full areal extent and morphology of MTDs with a precision
that cannot be achieved with any other combination of methods. This paper illustrates the potential for 3D seismic interpretation of MTDs by describing a suite of
complex examples from different continental margins worldwide. The application
of seismic-based analyses for seafloor and near-surface geohazard evaluation associated with submarine slope failure is also discussed.
Keywords Mass Transport Deposit • 3D seismic • geohazard • seismic geomorphology • seismic attribute
J. Frey-Martínez ()
Repsol-YPF, Repsol Oil Operations Libya (Akakus). Airport Road, Tripoli, Libya
e-mail: jmfreym@repsol.com
D.C. Mosher et al. (eds.), Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences,
Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, Vol 28,
© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2010
553
554
1
J. Frey-Martínez
Introduction
Analysis of MTDs is inherently limited by the resolving power of the tools used to
make the primary observation set. This is particularly the case in offshore areas where
high-resolution data is often restricted in areal extend and limited to the shallow
stratigraphic record. Recent development of 3D seismic techniques allows detailed
visualizations of modern and buried MTDs in comparable (or superior) resolution to
that achieved by multibeam bathymetry. One of the greatest strengths of the 3D seismic method is the dense, regular sampling of data over the region of interest, which
provides images that accurately represent the areal extent of MTDs. In addition, the
high-spatial resolution provided by 3D seismic data allows detailed seafloor analysis,
interpretation of the geological environment, and calculation of parameters such as
seafloor slope angles. Improved resolution also allows exceptional visualization of
the internal geometry of modern and buried MTDs, hence increasing the ability to
erect more sophisticated kinematic and dynamic models for mass-wasting processes.
Application of 3D seismic interpretation has also proven to be a powerful tool for
geohazard identification and assessment of slope failure in offshore deepwater areas
(e.g., Steffens et al. 2004; Heiniö and Davies 2006; Frey-Martínez et al. 2009).
The improved spatial resolution of 3D seismic surveys is mainly due to smaller bin
sizes relative to large footprints of multibeam echo sounders (Mosher et al. 2006; Bulat
2005; Carwright and Huuse 2005). Grid spacing in 3D seismic surveying is typically
25 m or less thus ensuring dense sampling in the lateral dimension comparable with the
vertical resolution (Brown 2003). In addition, modern 3D seismic migration algorithms
(i.e., 3D dip move out) allow accurate positioning of reflections in all directions, thus
collapsing the Fresnel Zone in 3D, and allowing complex geological structures to be
accurately imaged in a fully volumetric sense (Carwright and Huuse 2005). Evolving
computer technology has also facilitated the proliferation of 3D seismic data with a trend
of decreasing cost but increasing data quality and areal extend (Davies et al. 2004).
Application of analytical techniques derived from 3D seismic geomorphology
(i.e., Posamentier 2004; Posamentier et al. 2007) has significantly facilitated the
study of the three-dimensional configuration of MTDs. Seismic geomorphology
integrates seismic profile analysis with various reflection attributes (i.e., amplitude,
curvate, dip magnitude and azimuth) to yield accurate images of geological features. When applied to the analysis of MTDs, this approach provides detailed
information of their external and internal architecture in a fully volumetric sense.
The aim of this paper is to illustrate the potential for 3D seismic data as a research
tool in the analysis of mass-wasting processes by describing a suite of worldwide
case studies using seismic geomorphological techniques.
2
Recognition of MTDs on 3D Seismic Data
Interpretation of geomorphological features associated with mass-wasting processes
on 3D seismic data is generally complex, due to their discontinuous configuration
and variations in seismic response. 3D seismic technology currently allows reduced
3D Seismic Interpretation of Mass Transport Deposits
555
interpretation uncertainty by using seismic geomorphological techniques (e.g.,
Posamentier and Kolla 2003; Posamentier et al. 2007). These techniques include
(amongst others) detailed correlation between vertical and horizontal seismic profiles, seismic attribute extractions and generation of flattened horizontal slices
through volumes of seismic data. The use of seismic geomorphological techniques
to the study of mass-wasting processes often reveals four main geological features
that are considered critical for the correct recognition of MTDs: (1) headscarp, (2)
toe region, (3) basal shear surface, and (4) internal architecture. The main recognition criteria for these four features are illustrated with reference to Fig. 1 and are
explained as follows.
2.1
Headscarp
The headscarp is a high-slope surface marking the shallowest portion of an MTD,
where sediment excavation/evacuation initiates (Fig. 1). In plan view, it usually
appears as an arcuate feature in the upslope areas of the continental margin (Fig. 2).
On seismic cross-sections, it is recognized as an excisional feature, where there
is an abrupt reduction of stratigraphic section in a downslope direction (Fig. 3a).
Immediately downslope, there is a region of marked extensional thinning, where
the MTD is frequently cut by minor listric faults (Fig. 3a). In this region, the top
of the MTD tends to be depressed with respect to the undeformed strata (Fig. 3b).
Upslope of the headscarp, there is generally a region affected by smaller-scale
faults and fractures (i.e. crown-cracks; Fig. 2). Crown-cracks normally form in
the undisplaced material adjacent to the headscarp because of extensional stresses
Retrogressive
failure
Headscarp
Mass-transport deposit
Basal shear surface
Toe region
Fig. 1 Conceptual model of a Mass Transport Deposit showing the main geological features: (1)
headscarp, (2) toe region, (3) basal shear surface, and (4) internal architecture
556
J. Frey-Martínez
Toe region
Fig. 3c
Debris
flows?
Toe region
MTD 3
Blocks?
Blocks?
MTD 2
Lateral
margin
Headscarp
MTD 1
Headscarp
Lateral
margin
Lateral
margin
Crowncrack
N
Headscarp
Crowncrack
MTD
Fig. 3b
Lateral
margin
Fig. 3a
Crowncrack
Crowncrack
0
km
Lateral
margin
Crowncracks
4
Fig. 2 Dip map extracted from the present day seabed in the Levant Basin (offshore Israel).
Various MTDs are observed as elongated bodies extending though the slope areas. Note the
presence of clear headscarps located close to the shelf-break
km
km
3
Listric
faults
3
Lateral
margin
Fault
systems
Headscarp
Fig. 3b
Basal
shear surface
Lateral
margin
NE
Discontinuous
reflections
Block?
Basal
shear surface
625
500
TWT (ms)
0
SW
c
Toe region
km
Lateral
margin
3
Headscarp
Basal
shear surface
Basal
shear surface
Lateral
margin
Frontal
ramp
Fig. 3c
Toe region
NE
NW
1250
1050
TWT (ms)
1500
1300
1100
900
700
500
300
TWT (ms)
Fig. 3 Catalog of seismic sections through a recent MTD illustrating the seismic appearance of its internal parts. The white dashed line marks the basal shear
surface. (a) Seismic section parallel to the direction of transport. Depletion (dotted box) and accumulation (dashed box) zones are clearly seen. (b) Seismic section
perpendicular to the direction of transport through the headscarp (see Fig. 3a for location). Note the two clear lateral margins creating a negative topography and the
presence of a block-like feature. (c) Seismic section perpendicular to the direction of transport through the toe region (see Fig. 3a for location). The lateral margins form
a positive topographic relief
0
SW
b
0
Discontinuous
reflections
SE
a
558
J. Frey-Martínez
developed by undermining during sediment removal. Crown-cracks represent
the upslope propagation of slope instability during retrogressive failure and
their identification is critical to highlight potential areas for future events of masswasting.
2.2
Toe Region
The toe region is the downslope limit of an MTD and it corresponds to the
base of the area where sediment accumulates (Fig. 2). On seismic profiles, it
is usually recognized as a zone of gross thickening of stratigraphic section
(Fig. 3a, c). In shallow MTDs, where seismic resolution is the greatest, toe
regions appear on dipmaps as areas of intense rugosity with ridge-like features
that are approximately arcuate in the downslope direction (Fig. 3a). These
ridges generally appear in cross-sections as short wavelength and low relief
‘crumpling’ of the seabed (Fig. 2). On seismic profiles, these ridges may be
recognized as discrete thrusts and folds, arranged in series into imbricated
thrust and fold structures (Fig. 3a). Compressional features are invaluable as
kinematic indicators since they allow direction and magnitude of translation to
be constrained (Strachan 2002).
2.3
Basal Shear Surface
The basal shear surface is a critical element for the recognition of MTDs since it
clearly delimits the deformed interval. This surface represents the plane above
which downslope translation occurs, and corresponds to a stratigraphic layer
where the sediment losses its shear strength (usually by sediment liquefaction)
and it is no longer able to resist downslope gravitational shear. The basal shear
surface can be identified in a similar way to unconformities i.e., by termination
of stratal reflections (Fig. 3a). This is usually aided by the significant contrast
between the chaotic seismic facies within the MTD and the much more continuous facies of the outer deposits (Fig. 3a). Generally, the basal shear surface forms
a continuous plane that dips parallel to the underlying strata. However, it may
locally ramp up and down stratigraphy to form a staircase-like geometry. Such
ramps appear as conspicuous erosional features against which underlying seismic
reflections truncate (Fig. 3b). Towards the headscarp, the basal shear surface
exhibits a listric, concave upward appearance, cutting upslope strata (Figs. 3a and
4a). Approaching the toe region, it ramps upwards crosscutting downslope strata
to form a frontal ramp (Figs. 3a and 4b).
3D Seismic Interpretation of Mass Transport Deposits
559
a
Downlap
Headscarp
Ramp
Top
Top
Ramp
MTD
Basal shear
surface
Basal shear
surface
100 TWT (ms)
N
1000 m
b
Hemipelagic
deposits
Top
Top
Onlap
Onlap
MTD
Toe
MTD
Top
Ramp
Ramp
MTD
Basal shear
surface
Basal shear
surface
N
Frontal
ramp
Basal shear
surface
Top
MTD
200 TWT (ms)
250 m
Fig. 4 3D visualization of representative MTDs. MTDs form intervals of disrupted and chaotic
seismic facies enclosed by the basal shear and top surfaces. (a) 3D seismic volume showing the
upslope parts of an MTD. Note the listric character of the basal shear surface towards
the headscarp and the irregular morphology of the top surface. (b) 3D seismic volume showing the
downslope parts of an MTD. Note the presence of a frontal ramp towards the toe of the masswasting deposit. MTDs delimited by thin dashed lines correspond to previous and separate
mass-wasting events
560
2.4
J. Frey-Martínez
Internal Architecture
Possibly the most significant advance in the analysis of MTDs resulting from
application of 3D seismic interpretation is the description of their internal architecture.
In this respect, additional resolving power of 3D seismic data has revealed much
greater internal complexity than previously appreciated from 2D-based interpretation. As previously stated, MTDs are typically distinguished as intervals of chaotic
or highly disrupted seismic facies (Fig. 4). Nevertheless, there is often sufficient
coherence of individual seismic reflections to allow good visualization of internal
features. MTDs undergo complex internal deformation as they move downslope.
The degree and style of this deformation vary with the strength and heterogeneity
of the failed mass and with the position in the deposit. In a simplistic case, upslope
parts of an MTD are dominated by extensional structures (e.g., normal and listric
faults), while downslope areas, where movement ceases, tend to be dominated by
compressional features (e.g. folds and thrusts) (see Fig. 1).
The limited lateral correlation of the stratal reflections within MTDs means that
the interpretation of such deformational structures on seismic profiles can be
extremely difficult because of their highly disrupted patterns. In such cases, integration of seismic profiles and attribute maps can be an optimum method for defining
their detailed internal architecture. This methodology will be further explained in
the next section.
3
Seismic Attribute Characterization of MTDs
Among the various geophysical techniques available for characterizing MTDs, 3D
seismic attributes have proven to be some of the most useful. Seismic attributes can
generate three-dimensional volumes that facilitate the analysis of MTDs by avoiding the need to pre-interpret irregular horizons, and by enhancing sub-seismic lateral variations in reflectivity. Although there are several seismic attributes that are
in common use today, geometric attribute mapping is, possibly, the most useful
methodology for MTDs characterization. This technology, originally designed by
the oil industry to detect subtle structures with an impact on reservoir performance
(i.e., faults or fractures), is an excellent edge-detection tool, and is especially useful
for defining geobodies with sharply defined margins such as MTDs. Geometric
attributes include coherence, variance, dip, and azimuth, amongst others.
3.1
Coherence
Coherence is a well-established technology that measures lateral changes in
waveform and is sensitive to breaks in reflectors. Bahorich and Farmer (1995)
3D Seismic Interpretation of Mass Transport Deposits
561
developed coherence attributes comparing adjacent seismic waveforms using
cross-correlation, semblance, and eigenstructure measures along the dip and
azimuth of a seismic reflector. Coherence images often provide enhanced visualization of small-scale geologic features and allow accurate mapping of the
internal architecture of MTDs. Figure 5 is a representative flattened horizontal
coherence slice showing the utility of this attribute in defining complex structures within the toe region of an MTD. The interpretational approach here
consisted of defining the limits between the different coherence ‘facies’, and
correlating them with vertical profiles. Concentric linear discontinuities correspond to thrust faults as interpreted on vertical seismic profiles (e.g., C in Fig. 6).
Low coherence facies in the frontal parts of the toe region coincide with intensively deformed sediments that have no original stratification preserved in the
seismic character.
a
b
Outline
of MTD
Undisturbed
sediment
Lateral
margin
Fig. 6
In situ
block
In situ
block
C
D
C
D
N
Lateral
margin
Undisturbed
sediment
00
Km
Km
Outline
of MTD 0
10
10
Km
10
Frontal ramp
C
Compressional structure
Direction of transport
D
Thrust structure
In situ block
Dislocation plane
Intensively deformed material
Fig. 5 (a) Structurally flattened horizontal coherence slice across part of the toe region of
an MTD. Note the presence of arc-like concentric structures (marked C). These are interpreted
as thrust fault planes. There are coherent parts within the slump deposit interpreted as “in
situ” blocks. A dislocation plane (marked D) is also interpreted. (A) marks a seismic artifact.
(b) Interpretation. The black arrows indicate the inferred directions of displacement
562
J. Frey-Martínez
NW
SE
1750
Top
Thrusts
Fig. 5
Thrusts
Thrusts
0
Km
2
Basal shear
surface
2000
TWT
(ms)
Fig. 6 Seismic profile in the dip direction along an MTD (see Fig. 5 for location). The internal
parts of the MTD are composed of upslope dipping tilted seismic reflections. These reflections are
offset and locally create developed listric geometries. Thrust structures ramping from the basal
shear surface up to the top of the MTD and minor extensional structures (i.e. faults) are observed
3.2
Variance
Variance attribute is the result of calculating localized waveform variability over a
seismic volume in both inline and crossline directions. Map views of variance data
are particularly effective to identify structural and stratigraphic discontinuities, and
to characterize geologic features that involve significant changes in seismic trace
pattern (such as MTDs). Importantly, variance maps may not be helpful if the
changes in the patterns of the neighbouring traces are gradual, in which case, all
variance values are almost identical and no features are apparent. Figure 7 is a variance map of the seafloor on the Ebro Continental Margin (offshore northeastern
Spain). This map clearly highlights a complex system of mass-failed features
(Lubina MTD) located ca. 75 km from the present-day coastline. The Lubina MTD
is inferred to be Holocene in age due to its proximity to the seafloor, covers an area
of ca. 80 km2, and has a volume of up to ca. 5 km3 (see Frey-Martínez et al. 2009).
3.3
Dip, Azimuth, and Curvature
Dip, azimuth, and curvature are, possibly, the most comprehensive types of geometric attributes for the study of MTDs. These attributes are familiar concepts from
structural geology, and are powerful tools for delineating faults, folds, and other
structural elements. Rijks and Jaufred (1991) demonstrated that maps of dip-magnitude
and dip-azimuth computed from interpreted horizons can highlight geologic
features with significantly smaller offsets than the width of seismic wavelet, and
3D Seismic Interpretation of Mass Transport Deposits
563
N
Lateral flank
H1
H2
I
Fig. 8
Lu
bin H3
aB
3D
Toe region
Ar
ea
Lateral flank
0
km
4
Fig. 7 Variance map extracted from the present day seabed on the Ebro Continental Margin
(northeastern Spain). White dotted line marks outline of the Lubina MTD. Three headscarps
(H1, H2, and H3) have been identified suggesting a complex history of instability. An area of
low variance in the headscarp region is interpreted as intact deposits (I). Seismic sections (indicated with long red dashed lines) are used to illustrate the seismic character of the mass-failed
deposit in Fig. 8
W
E
TWT (ms)
Headscarp
X
X
BSS
Fault
LTMD
X
0
km
2
Fig. 8 Seismic profile in the dip direction along the headscarp area of the Lubina MTD (LMTD;
see Fig. 7 for location). The profile is parallel to the interpreted main direction of movement.
There are resolvable seismic reflectors within the mass-failed deposit (X), interpreted as extensional features. Several paleo-pockmarks are seen below the Lubina MTD. Basal shear surface
(BSS) marks base of the mass-failed deposit
564
J. Frey-Martínez
provide improved visualization of subtle geologic features. Reflector curvature, for
instance, is well correlated to fracture intensity (Roberts 1998, 2001), which allows
detailed interpretation of crown-cracks and headscarp areas. Dip, dip-azimuth, and
curvature attributes can be calculated from horizon time structure maps or as
volume attributes.
Figure 9 is a 3D visualization of a dip map on the continental margin of Israel.
Arrows highlight a series of MTDs in a water depth ranging from 500 to 1,150 m.
These MTDs involve up to an 80 m thick section of fine-grained sediments within
the shallowest part of the basin succession, and are considered to be Late
Pleistocene-Holocene in age. Well-developed headscarps and lateral scarps are
recognised along the MTDs defining a slip domain that is chute-like, with an aspect
ratio strongly elongated in a downslope direction. Toe regions appear as areas of
intense rugosity with local development of ridges that are concordant with one
another, and are almost arcuate in a convex downslope direction. These ridges are
interpreted as compressional features.
4
Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production
Slope failure represents a major offshore geohazard, and constitutes an issue that has
a bearing on safety, environment, and economy. It has been recognised that understanding the mechanisms and consequences of mass-wasting events can significantly
influence offshore strategies (e.g., Piper and Normark 1982; Piper et al. 1988;
Løseth et al. 2003; Shipp et al. 2004). In this section, a review of the most relevant
implications to deepwater operations by the energy industry is summarized.
The importance of MTDs in the exploration and production of hydrocarbons is
critical and multifold. Firstly, they are recognized worldwide as major geohazards
with potential catastrophic consequences for safety and facilities in offshore
operations. A variety of slope failures are known to occur in numerous offshore
oil provinces such as Israel (e.g., Frey-Martínez et al. 2005), Norway (e.g., Bryn
et al. 2005), the Niger Delta (e.g., Heiniö and Davies 2006), and the Gulf of
Mexico (e.g., Sawyer et al. 2007). Secondly, MTDs can be critical for the hydrocarbon prospectivity of sedimentary basins as they represent a highly effective
mechanism in redistributing vast amounts of sediment from shallow into deepwater settings. Thirdly, slope failures have the potential to alter the original properties and architecture of reservoir intervals, generate traps, and influence migration
pathways. When mass-wasting occurs, the original stratification is modified, the
lithological compositions are remixed, and the primary volumes of sediment are
altered. Such modifications frequently cause a decrease in the net to gross, porosity,
and permeability of the sediments, coupled with an increase in their lithological
complexity. In addition, the occurrence of large-scale MTDs can trigger seal failure
and vertical migration of hydrocarbons due to a rapid drop in the lithostatic pressure
(e.g., Haflidason et al. 2002, 2004).
565
20 km
Toe region
0
N
Toe region
Head scarp
Lateral
margin
Head scarp
Head scarp
Toe region
Head scarp
Toe region
3D Seismic Interpretation of Mass Transport Deposits
Fig. 9 3D visualization of a dipmap of the present day seabed offshore southern Israel and Gaza
Strip. Several MTDs (white arrows) cover the slope region. These MTDs form arrays of elongated
features extending from the shelf to the base of slope
566
J. Frey-Martínez
Another major implication of slope failure for the exploration and production of
hydrocarbons is its impact on operational performance of jetted conductors and
suction anchors piles design (Newlin 2003; Shipp et al. 2004). The transportation
and deformation of mass-wasting deposits causes the expulsion of water (Piper
et al. 1997) and, as a consequence, the shear zones at the base of MTDs in the nearsubsurface are commonly overcompacted when compared to unfailed, conformable
sediments. It has been demonstrated that sediment overcompaction can reduce
significantly the rate of conductor penetration during deepwater jetting operations
(Shipp et al. 2004). Also, the presence of mass-wasting deposits within a development area has been confirmed to be a key design criterion for suction anchor piles
(Newlin 2003). Embedment of suction anchor piles is achieved through a combination of self-weight penetration and application of an induced underpressure within
the pile. Thus, presence of overcompacted surficial and near-surface mass-wasting
deposits may lead to unexpected problems during pile installation, and/or adverse
performance while in service (e.g., Newlin 2003).
Importantly, 3D seismic-based analyses of the type presented here are
proven to be an effective approach for rig and facilities site-survey planning in
offshore deepwater areas (also see Steffens et al. 2004). The high spatial resolution provided by 3D seismic data allows detailed seafloor analysis, interpretation of the geologic environment, and calculation of parameters such as seafloor
slope angles.
5
Conclusions
3D seismic interpretation has proved to be a very powerful tool for analysing
submarine MTDs and mass wasting processes. 3D seismic data provides excellent
coverage of both recent and ancient MTDs, allowing for a better understanding
of their basinal distribution and geological setting. In addition, the high spatial
resolution provided by the 3D seismic data has offered a better definition of the
different elements forming MTDs, which improves our ability to construct more
sophisticated kinematic and dynamic models for mass-wasting processes. A further
conclusion from this work is the possible value of 3D seismic data as a tool for
submarine slope instability risk assessment. An interesting aspect of this approach
is the possibility to map the extent of zones where diagnostic features of mass
movement (i.e., crown-cracks) can be inferred, thus highlighting potential areas
affected by slope instability.
Acknowledgments The author is indebted to BG-Group and Repsol-YPF for permission to
publish the data and to present these examples. The paper benefited from valuable comments
from Jason Chaytor, and Matt O’Regan. The ideas and interpretations presented herein are
those of individuals, and thus do not necessarily reflect those of BG-Group, Repsol-YPF or
their partners.
3D Seismic Interpretation of Mass Transport Deposits
567
References
Bahorich ME, Farmer S (1995) 3D seismic discontinuity for faults and stratigraphic features: the
coherence cube. The Leading Edge 14:1053–1058.
Brown AR (2003) Interpretation of Three Dimensional Seismic Data, 6th edition, Am Assoc Pet
Geol Memoir 42, 541 pp., Tulsa, OK.
Bryn P, Kjell B, Forsberg CF, Solheim A, Kvalstad TJ (2005) Explaining the Storegga Slide, In:
Solheim A, Bryn P, Berg K, Mienert J (eds.) Ormen Lange – An Integrated Study for the Safe
Development of a Deep-water Gas Field within the Storegga Slide Complex, NE Atlantic
Continental Margin. Mar Pet Geol 22:11–19.
Bulat J (2005). Some considerations on the interpretation of seabed images based on commercial
3D seismic in the Faroe-Shetland channel. Basin Res 17:21–42.
Carwright JA, Huuse M (2005) 3D seismic technology: the geological “Hubble”. Basin Res
17:1–20.
Davies RJ, Cartwright JA, Stewart SA, Lappin M, Underhill JR (2004) 3D Seismic Technology:
Application to the Exploration of Sedimentary Basins. Geol Soc Lond Mem 29, 355 pp.
Frey-Martinez J, Cartwright JA, Hall B (2005) 3D seismic interpretation of slump complexes:
examples from the continental margin of Israel: Basin Res 17:83–108.
Frey-Martinez J, Bertoni C, Gerard J, Matias H (2009) Submarine slope failure and fluid migration processes on the Ebro Continental: Implications for offshore exploration and development. In: Shipp RC, Weimer P, Posamentier HW (eds.), Mass-transport Deposits in Deepwater
Settings. SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology) Special Publication, in press.
Haflidason H, Sejrup HP, Berstad IM, Nygård A, Richter T, Bryn P, Lien R, Berg K (2002) Weak
layer features on the northern Storegga Slide escarpment. In: Mienert J, Weaver P (eds.)
European Margin Sediment Dynamics: Springer Berlin
Haflidason H, Sejrup HP, Nygård A, Mienert J, Bryn P, Lien R, Forsberg CF, Berg K, Masson D (2004)
The Storegga Slide: architecture, geometry and slide development. Mar Geol 213:201–234.
Heiniö P, Davies RJ (2006) Degradation of compressional fold belts: deep-water Niger Delta. Am
Assoc Pet Geol Bull 90:753–770.
Løseth H, Wensaas L, Arntsen B, Hovland M (2003) Gas and fluid injection triggering shallow mud
mobilization in the Hordaland Group, North Sea. In: Van Rensbergen P, van Hillis RR, Maltman
AJ, Morley CK (eds.) Subsurface Sediment Mobilization. Geol Soc Spec Publ 216:139–157.
Mosher DC, Bigg S, LaPierre A (2006) 3D seismic versus multibeam sonar seafloor surface renderings for geohazard assessment: Case examples from the central Scotian Slope. The Leading
Edge 25:1484–1494.
Newlin JA (2003) Suction anchor piles for the Na Kika FDS mooring system, part 1: site characterization and design. Deepwater Mooring Systems: Concepts, Design, Analysis, and Materials,
ASCE 28–54. Houston, USA.
Piper DJW, Normark WR (1982) Effects of the 1929 Grand Banks earthquake on the continental
slope off eastern Canada. Geol Surv Can Curr Res Part B, Paper 82-01B:147–151.
Piper DJW, Shor AN, Clarke JEH (1988) The 1929 “Grand Banks” Earthquake, Slump, and
Turbidity Current. In: Clifton HE (ed), Sedimentologic Consequences of Convulsive Geologic
Events. Geol Soc Am Spec Pap 229:77–92.
Piper DJW, Pirmez C, Manley PL, Long D, Food RD, Normark WR, Showers W (1997) Masstransport deposits of the Amazon Fan. In: Flood RD, Piper DJW, Klaus A, Peterson LC (eds.),
Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results 155:109–146.
Posamentier HW, Kolla V (2003) Seismic geomorphology and stratigraphy of depositional elements in deep-water settings. J Sed Res 73:367–388.
Posamentier HW (2004) Seismic geomorphology: imaging elements of depositional systems from
shelf to deep basin using 3D seismic data, In: Davies RJ, Cartwright JA, Stewart SA, Lappin
M, Underhill JR (eds.) 3D Seismic Technology: Application to the Exploration of Sedimentary
Basins. Geol Soc Spec Publ 29:11–24.
568
J. Frey-Martínez
Posamentier HW, Davies RJ, Cartwright JA, Wood L (2007) Seismic geomorphology – an overview. In: Davies RJ, Posamentier HW, Wood LJ, Carwright JA (eds.) Seismic Geomorphology:
Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration and Production. Geol Soc Spec Publ 277:1–14.
Rijks EJH, Jauffred JCEM (1991) Attribute extraction: an important application in any detailed
3D interpretation study. The Leading Edge 10:11–19.
Roberts A (1998) Curvature analysis: “new” attributes for the delineation of faults, map lineaments and surface shape. 1998 AAPG Annual Convention Program with Abstracts (CD-ROM),
Salt Lake City, 17–28 May.
Roberts A (2001) Curvature attributes and application to 3D interpreted horizons. First
Break19:85–99.
Sawyer DE, Flemings PB, Shipp RC, Winker CD (2007) Seismic geomorphology, lithology, and
evolution of the late Pleistocene Mars-Ursa turbidite region, Mississippi Canyon area, northern
Gulf of Mexico. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull 91:215–234.
Shipp RC, Nott JA, Newlin JA (2004) Physical characteristics and impact of mass transport complexes on deepwater jetted conductors and suction anchor piles. Offshore Technology
Conference, OTC Paper #16751, 11 p.
Steffens GS, Shipp RC, Prather BE, Nott JA, Gibson JL, and Winker CD (2004) The use of nearseafloor 3D seismic data in deepwater exploration and production. In Davies RJ, Cartwright
JA, Stewart SA, Lappin M, and Underhill JR (eds.), 3D Seismic Technology: Application to
the Exploration of Sedimentary Basins. Geol Soc Spec Publ 29:35–43.
Strachan L (2002) Slump-initiated and controlled syndepositional sandstone remobilisation: an
example from the Namurian of County Clare, Ireland. Sedimentology 49:25–41.