Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 49 72

www.elsevier.com/locate/sedgeo

Research paper

A genetic classification of carbonate platforms based on their

basinal and tectonic settings in the Cenozoic
Dan Bosence
Department of Geology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK
Received 8 April 2004; received in revised form 1 November 2004; accepted 7 December 2004

Abstract

This paper reassesses the usefulness of the morphological classification of carbonate platforms into rimmed shelves and
ramps. Whilst the existing classifications have value in describing platform margin morphology at any one time, the terms
rimmed-shelf and ramp are less successful at categorising the entire morphology and stratigraphy of carbonate platforms.
Research on Cenozoic carbonate platforms from a range of different tectono-stratigraphic settings indicates that the basinal and
tectonic setting of a platform can be used to erect a first-order, genetic classification of carbonate platforms. The basinal and
tectonic setting of carbonate platforms is shown to control their occurrence, the overall 3-D platform morphology, the large-
scale stratigraphic features and depositional sequences. Climate, ocean chemistry and biological evolution control grain types,
facies and some elements of platform margins but not the larger-scale features considered in this new classification.
From a review of well-exposed outcropping and seismically imaged Cenozoic platforms, it is proposed that eight types of
carbonate platform can currently be recognised and characterised based on their basinal and tectonic setting: Fault-Block, Salt
Diapir, Subsiding Margin, Offshore Bank, Volcanic Pedestal, Thrust-Top, Delta-Top and Foreland Margin carbonate platforms.
These eight types are described using information from Cenozoic platforms worldwide and the controls on their development
are discussed. Many platform types (e.g. Subsiding Margin, Offshore Bank, Salt Diapir, Thrust-Top and Foreland Margin) are
typical of particular classes of sedimentary basins, others (e.g. Fault-Block, Volcanic Pedestal and Delta-Top) are more
widespread in their occurrence and occur in a range of basin types.
The value of this classification is that it is genetic rather than morphological; the classification reflects the entire morphology
and large-scale stratigraphy of the platform and the controls on its development. In addition, the platform models can be used to
understand the details of less well exposed, or seismically imaged platforms so that they can be characterised and understood in
terms of tectono-sedimentary processes. Conversely, the classification also provides valuable information on basin evolution, as
carbonate platforms house information on palaeoenvironments, sea-level change and are sensitive recorders of the tectonic
environment.
D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Classification; Carbonate platforms; Tectonics; Basin setting; Cenozoic

E-mail address: d.bosence@gl.rhul.ac.uk.

0037-0738/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.sedgeo.2004.12.030
50 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972

1. Introduction widely spaced well data. In this situation the

eight models can be used as templates for more
Much research has been focused over the last 20 detailed interpretation and understanding, based
years on the effects that sea-level change, oceano- as they are on reasonably well-understood plat-
graphic factors and climate have on carbonate plat- form types established from recurring Cenozoic
form stratigraphies. Whilst these controls are examples.
important at the scale of grain types, facies, deposi-
tional sequences and types of platform margin, it is The widely used morphological classification of
considered here that it is the geotectonic setting of the carbonate platforms was presented nearly 30 years ago
platform that controls its gross morphology and large- by J.L. Wilson (1975). In this classification Wilson
scale stratigraphic evolution. This concept was intro- integrated Ahrs (1973) carbonate ramp with his
duced by Read (1985) and emphasised by Tucker and carbonate platform model, with major offshore banks,
Wright (1990) and Wilson (2002) but has not to provide a framework for the description and
previously been investigated in detail. In this paper, interpretation of carbonate platforms (Fig. 1). Sub-
eight different types of carbonate platform formed in sequently a major development in the understanding of
different basinal and tectonic settings in the Cenozoic the range of facies that occurs in carbonate platforms
are reviewed and presented as models or templates: and the detail of their spatial arrangements was made
Fault-Block, Salt Diapir, Subsiding Margin, Offshore by Read (1982, 1985) with his facies models. In
Bank, Volcanic Pedestal, Thrust-Top, Delta-Top and addition he clarified terminology by retaining
Foreland Margin carbonate platforms. bcarbonate platformQ as a general term encompassing
The purpose of this paper is to provide a genetic ramps, rimmed shelves and isolated platforms that has
classification of platform types to run alongside the been followed by many subsequent authors (e.g.
current morphological classification of ramps and Tucker and Wright, 1990). These facies models have
rimmed shelves (Wilson, 1975). also stood the test of time with few modifications over
The advantages of a genetic classification based on the last 20 years. The identification of the stratigraphic
Cenozoic examples are that: effects of relative sea-level changes over time sub-
sequently led to the development of sequence strati-
a) The new classification provides a comprehensive
genetic classification that is based on the major
controls on carbonate platform development and
their occurrence in sedimentary basins that will
enable better communication and a greater level
of understanding than the current scheme.
b) Where poorly exposed, or poorly understood
carbonate platforms are being studied they can
be compared to the eight carbonate platform
types that are from well-exposed and docu-
mented examples where the tectonic and basinal
controls are well known. Such comparisons will
enable a better understanding of the major
controls on the development of ancient carbonate
platforms.
c) In subsurface examples the tectonic setting, 3-D
morphology and gross stratigraphic features of
carbonate platforms may be known from seismic
data. However, the internal stratigraphy, nature Fig. 1. Morphological classification of carbonate platforms (after
of depositional sequences and facies associations Wilson, 1975 and modifications following Read, 1985, and Wright
are often poorly known as this comes from and Burchette, 1996).
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
graphic models for ramps and rimmed shelves (e.g.
Sarg, 1988; Handford and Loucks, 1993; Wright and
Burchette, 1996; Bosence and Wilson, 2003).
With this stability in classification and nomencla-
ture the following questions might well be asked: Do
geoscientists need a new classification of carbonate
platforms? Are there advances to be gained in our
understanding of carbonate platforms, and in the
prediction of their stratigraphy, from a re-investigation
of their classification? This paper presents evidence
that indicates that it is time to re-examine carbonate
platform classification because:
a) we now know there are some inherent limitations
in the structure of the current classification, and
b) many advances have been made in our under-
standing of what controls the siting, and the
morphological and stratigraphic evolution of
carbonate platforms.
Wilsons scheme for classifying carbonate plat-
forms (Bosence and Wilson, 2003) is based on the
external morphology of platforms (Fig. 1) that are
typified as bcarbonate rampsQ or bcarbonate shelf
with local buildupQ (now generally referred to as
rimmed carbonate shelves sensu Read, 1985).
However, the more we study carbonate platforms
the more we realise that these apparently funda-
mentally different types of platform are in fact
rather closely related to one another, both spatially
and temporally.
Ramps and rimmed shelves are related spatially in
some unattached platforms (e.g. Liuhua, Miocene; S.
China Sea; Erlich et al., 1993) and some attached
platforms (e.g. Florida shelf, Holocene, Florida,
southern USA; Bosence and Wilson, 2003). In both
these platforms one margin is reef-rimmed and steep-
sided (the eastern margin of Liuhua and the south-
eastern margin of Florida) whilst the opposing margin
of the platform, in each case, is a ramp. Students of
carbonate sedimentology might well ask: if ramps and
rimmed shelves are the two main types of carbonate
platforms then which category do the well known
platforms of Florida and Liuhua fit into? The terms
ramp and rimmed shelf are useful terms for describing
the morphology of the platform margins but are less
successful at describing the overall character of the
carbonate platform.
51
Ramps and rimmed shelves are also closely related
in time. This was emphasised by Wilson (1975; p.21)
and by Read (1985, pp. 1719) who both illustrated
the evolution of ramps into the steeper-margined,
rimmed shelves. Well-exposed Cenozoic outcrop
examples come from Mallorca (Pomar et al., 2002)
and the Nijar Basin, SE Spain (Dabrio et al., 1981;
Warrlich et al., in press) where Upper Miocene
carbonate ramps change up-section into reef rimmed
platforms. From the subsurface, seismic and borehole
data from the western margin of the Great Bahama
Bank also indicate an up-section change from a
Miocene ramp to a Pliocene rimmed shelf (Eberli et
al., 1997; Betzler et al., 1999; Reijmer et al., 2002).
Such changes are thought to be due to changes in
climate and oceanographic factors that change the
nature of the shallow-water carbonate factory from
bioclastic, skeletal production to a shallow-water,
framebuilding photozoan reef community (for review
see Pomar, 2001). If the term carbonate platform is to
embrace the entire carbonate buildup from internal
stratigraphy to external depositional surface then the
terms ramp and rimmed shelf are limited in use as
they describe the morphology of the different margins
at particular periods of time but they do not character-
ise the entire platform.
Advances in our understanding of the controls on
the morphology and stratigraphy of entire platforms
have come from both field-based studies of good
quality outcrops together with subsurface seismic data
where the basinal setting, overall 3-D morphology,
broad-scale stratigraphy and stratigraphic evolution
can be studied. Significantly, more and more studies
have been undertaken on carbonate platforms from
tectonic settings other than the well-documented
passive continental margins. In particular, a number
of PhD and MSc theses at Royal Holloway University
of London have focussed on the facies models and
sequence stratigraphy of carbonate platforms from
different tectonic settings (Dart, 1991; Pedley, 1994;
Wilson, 1995; Cross, 1996; Watchorn, 1997; Bantan,
1999; Gherardi, 1996; Lokier, 2000).
It is shown in this paper how eight different
genetic types of carbonate platforms characterise the
different major classes of sedimentary basins;
maritime rift, passive margin, mature ocean, fore-
arc, island arc, back-arc, foreland and intracratonic.
The reason for focussing on the Cenozoic Era is
52 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
that the tectonic setting is generally, well-docu-
mented, which is not always the case for older
examples, and because this work is largely based on
personal experience. It does not imply that Meso-
zoic and Palaeozoic examples do not occur; they
do, and some are referred to in this paper but their
documentation is left to future work.
2. Genetic types of carbonate platforms
Although it is generally recognised that the largest
and possibly the most studied carbonate platforms in
the world today, such as the Bahamian platforms (e.g.
Schlager and Ginsburg, 1981) and the Great Barrier
Reef (e.g. Davies et al., 1989), occur in passive
margin settings, by no means all platforms occur in
this geotectonic environment. Read (1985) mentioned
and illustrated platforms in arccontinent and con-
tinentcontinent collisional settings and gave Meso-
zoic and Palaeozoic examples of carbonate platforms
developing over extensional faults. This latter type of
platform has been studied in more detail to the extent
that a facies and sequence stratigraphic model has
been developed for carbonate platforms developing
over tilted fault-blocks by Leeder and Gawthorpe
(1987), Bosence (1998), Bosence et al. (1998b),
Brachert et al. (2002), and Ruiz-Ortiz et al. (2004).
A more comprehensive view of the variety of
tectonic settings in which Cenozoic carbonate plat-
forms are known to occur was provided by Wilson
(2002) for platforms in Southeast Asia and is given
in Fig. 2 and detailed in Table 1. Each of these
eight platform types are described and discussed in
the section below. The diversity of settings of
platform occurrence indicates that the controlling
factors for the accumulation of carbonates are not
too demanding. Essentially carbonate platforms can
be shown to occur in both low and high latitude,
shallow-marine settings where siliciclastic or volca-
niclastic supply is reduced for a number of reasons,
such as: isolation from clastic supply by an
intervening water mass (offshore bank, volcanic
pedestal, salt diapir), isolation through funnelling
and localisation of clastics (fault-block, thrust-top,
salt diapir), isolation through intermittent clastic
supply (arid climate delta-top), low relief hinterland
and low clastic supply (passive/subsiding margin,
Fig. 2. Tectonic settings of carbonate platforms discussed in this
paper. For examples of different platform types see Table 1.
foreland margin). The section below outlines the
characteristic features of eight different types of
carbonate platform developed in different tectonic
and basinal settings using examples from the
Cenozoic; both ancient and modern. These sections
differ in their detail and length reflecting the current
knowledge of these different platform types. Their
occurrence in different classes of sedimentary basin
is given in Table 2.
2.1. Fault-block platforms (Fig. 3A)
Carbonate platforms that develop on subsiding and/
or rotating fault blocks have been described and
interpreted from a number of Cenozoic extensional
basins. The most detailed studies come from the rifted
margins of the Gulf of Suez and northwest Red Sea
(Burchette, 1988; James et al., 1988; Purser et al.,
1998; Bosence et al., 1998b; Cross et al., 1998). Here,
Mid Miocene carbonate platforms developed on fault-
blocks rotated during Miocene extension and sub-
sidence of this rift basin. Early stages of rifting are
largely dominated by siliciclastic sedimentation with
sediment transport mainly controlled by the evolving
extensional fault systems and their oblique transfer
zones (Purser et al., 1998). Transfer zones and
hangingwall sub-basins generally persist as sites of
clastic sediment accumulation (but see below)
whereas footwall areas and horsts, isolated from
clastic supply, accumulate subtropical, photozoan
Table 1
Shapes, sizes, stratigraphic features and examples of different Cenozoic carbonate platform types discussed in text
Platform types Platform morphology Platform size Cenozoic examples (for details see text)
Plan Cross-section Length Width Thickness
Fault-Block Rectilinear Wedge-shaped 8 km 3 km b130 ma Red Sea, Gulf of Suez, Gulf of Aden,
Trapezoidal 100 km 50 km b1000 mb Malta, SE Spain, North Cyprus,
Polygonal 14 km 3 km 800 mc Southeast Spain, South China Sea,
Java Basin, NE Australia
Salt Diapir Circular, arcuate, Inverted bowl/saucer Irregular shapes from 1 to 140 450 md Salif (Yemen), Farasan (Saudi Arabia),
amoeboid, elongate with (convexo-convex) with km across (southern Red Sea) (Farasan) Daghlak (Eritrea), NW Red Sea (Egypt),
subcircular embayments large thickness variations Garden Flower Banks, Gulf of Mexico
and reentrants
Subsiding Margin Elongate and tracking Sigmoidal with thousands of hundreds of bkms NW Australian shelf, Brasilian shelf,

D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972

(or attached) coastline progradational kilometres kilometres SE USA shelf, Mediterranean margins,
geometries Murray Basin
Offshore Bank Equant, amoeboid, Hat to bell-shaped tens to hundreds of kilometres Bahama Banks, Rockall Bank
(or unattached) rectangular, polygonal (plano-convex) with across, up to 6600 m thicke
progradational
geometries
Volcanic Pedestal Circular; isolated or Inverted bowl/saucer 19 km 12.5 b1400 mf Anewetak, Comoro, Bermuda,
amalgamated (convexo-convex) 2200 km 300 km 131400 mg Muaruroa, Mauritius. Reunion, Hawaii
2 km 1.5 km b50 mh Emporer chain, Maldives, Saya de
Malha, Las Negras, El Hoyazo
Thrust-Top Elongate, lenticular Lenticular, inverted tens of kilometres kms b80 m Southern Cyprus, Central Sicily, SE
and sheet-like saucer-shaped (convexo- (Not well constrained, see text) Spain (Betic Cordillera)
convex), sigmoidal and
progradation
Delta-Top Lenticular, arcuate Sigmoidal and lenticular 8 km 3 km 40 mi NW Red Sea, Gulf of Aqaba, Gulf of
50 km 5 km 5 mj Suez, Central Sicily, Fortuna Basin,
Pyrenean Basin (Spain), Borneo.
Foreland Margin Ribbons following Lenticular to sigmoidal hundreds of b100 m b1200 mk Alps, S. Pyrenees, Arabian Gulf,
foreland margin with aggradational and kilometres Apennines, Himalayan Foredeep, Timor
palaeogeography backstepping geometries Trough, Papuan Basin
a
Outcropping sizes of fault-block platforms (n=9) of Red Sea and Gulf of Suez in Purser and Bosence (1998).
b
Maximum outcropping size of Tonasa fault-block platform, Indonesia of Wilson et al. (2000).
c
Malampaya platform (Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999).
d
Southern Red Sea (Bantan, 1999).
e
Great Bahama Bank (Schlager et al., 1988; Walles, 1993).
f
Sizes recorded for 10 Pacific and Indian Ocean volcanic pedestal platforms (Vacher and Quinn, 1997).
g
Maldives (Purdy and Bertram, 1993).
h
El Hoyazo (Warrlich et al., in press).
i
Sharm al Behary, NW Red Sea (Purser et al., 1998).
j
Centelles, Spain (Taberner and Bosence, 1995).
k

53
From Sinclair (1997).
 54
Table 2
Occurrence of carbonate platform types in different classes of sedimentary basins
Platform type Basin type
Rift Passive margin Mature ocean Fore-arc Back-arc Foreland Strike-slip Intracratonic
Fault-Block Red Sea, Gulf N.E. Australia S. Java Sulawesi, Carboneras
of Suez, Gulf S. China Sea,

D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972

of Aden Vietnam
Salt Diapir Red Sea, S. Gulf Gulf of Mexico Arabian Gulf
of Suez
Subsiding Margin Australian shelf, Murray
(or attached) Brasilian shelf, Basin
SE USA shelf,
Mediterranean
margins
Offshore Bank Red Sea Bahama Banks,
(or unattached) Queensland,
Rockall Bank
Volcanic Pedestal Pacific, Indian, S. China Sea Carboneras-
and Atlantic Nijar
Oceans
Thrust-Top Southern SE Spain
Cyprus, (Betic Cordillera)
Sicily,
Delta-Top NW Red Sea, Central Borneo Southern Pyrenees, Gulf of
Gulf of Suez, Sicily, Fortuna Basin, Aqaba
Gulf of Aden, (S. Spain)
Foreland Margin Pyrenees Alps,
Betics, Himalayas,
Arabian Gulf
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
carbonates (Fig. 3A). The platforms are rectilinear to
trapezoidal in plan shape with average, exposed (i.e.
mapped distances) width to length ratios of ~10 (Table
1) and maximum stratigraphic thicknesses of 130 m in
the Red SeaGulf of Suez. Within the platforms,
rimmed-shelves characterise the fault-truncated foot-
wall margins to fault-blocks whereas hangingwall dip-
slopes are ramps and generally pass down-dip into
hangingwall basin clastics (Fig. 3A). Fault accom-
modation zones, such as that preserved on the
southern margin of Abu Shaar (Cross et al., 1998)
have low relief and show progradational carbonate
platform geometries, or are dominated by through-
flowing, fan-deltas or submarine fans (Fig. 3A; Purser
et al., 1998; Bosworth et al., 1998). Fault-blocks may
be attached to the rift margin, detached (or unattached
sensu Fig. 1) to the margin but influenced by marginal
clastic supply or unattached and in an axial location.
In the latter case (e.g. Gebel Zeit) the platform
drowned and was overlain by deeper-water Mid
Miocene marls (Purser et al., 1998). Seaward-facing,
footwall platform margins are commonly coralgal,
reef-rimmed as are shallow (inner) ramp sites on the
hangingwall (Fig. 3A). Ooid shoals form margins less
commonly. Footwall platform-slopes in these Egyp-
tian examples are only exposed in their upper parts
and comprise reef and platform-top bioclastic and
intraclastic talus, with a composition reflecting the
coeval platform-top stratigraphy. Slope sediments are
commonly cemented, fractured and slumped, and
Miocene erosion may have removed 100 m to
kilometre sized blocks leaving lunate scars (Purser
and Plaziat, 1998) and a truncated footwall stratig-
raphy (Burchette, 1988; Cross et al., 1998). Platform-
top facies are bedded bioclastic and peloidal wacke-
stones, packstones and rudstones with scattered patch
reefs. These are arranged in unconformity-bound
depositional sequences; some of which can be
demonstrated to be of tectonic origin (Bosence et
al., 1998b; Cross et al., 1998). Such sequences thicken
down hangingwall dip-slopes and thin onto footwall
sites where sequence boundaries converge (Fig. 3A).
They consequently have wedge-shaped geometries
with stacked reefal facies cut by sequence boundaries
in footwall sites and coeval shallowing-upward
sequences separated by flooding surfaces on hanging-
wall dip-slopes. The shallower slopes in hangingwall
dip slopes and accommodation zones result in
55
progradational geometries but these may not develop
in footwall margins because of the steep, fault-related
slopes and relatively deep footwall basins.
Holocene examples include the abundant reef-
rimmed platforms of the Red Sea and Gulf of Suez
such as the offshore platforms north of Jeddah, Shoab
Ali, and Sanganeb Atoll (but as a horst, with two
faulted margins with distinct windward and leeward
margins) as reviewed by Dullo and Montaggioni
(1998).
The Gulf of Suez and Red Sea maritime rift basin
examples are probably the best exposed and studied
examples of fault-block platforms but there are also
fine examples of rifted platforms from extensional
settings in other maritime rifts. Subsurface examples
imaged in seismic sections showing the overall
platform morphology and broad stratigraphic geo-
metries that are consistent with the outcrop data
come from the early Neogene of the Gulf of Aden
(Brannan et al., 1997), the Malampaya buildup,
Shikoku Basin, southeast Asia (Grotsch and Mer-
cadier, 1999; Fournier et al., 2005).
Whereas the examples and model presented above
come from fault-block platforms in maritime rifts
these platforms also occur where extensional fault-
blocks are formed in passive margins of NE Australia
(e.g. Davies et al., 1989), back-arc basins of Indonesia
and South China Sea (e.g. Wilson, 1995, 2002;
Wilson and Bosence, 1996, 1997; Wilson et al.,
2000; Erlich et al., 1993; Mayall et al., 1997), fore-arc
(Lokier, 2000), and a transtensional strike-slip basin
(Brachert et al., 2002) (Table 2).
2.2. Salt diapir platforms (Fig. 3B)
Salt diapirism can result in shallow-marine sites
that may be isolated from siliciclastic supply thus
providing suitable substrate for platform growth.
Cenozoic examples come from diapirs of Miocene
salt in the Red Sea (Bosence et al., 1998a; Orszag-
Sperber et al., 1998) and of Jurassic salt in the Gulf of
Mexico (Rezak et al., 1985). The rise of diapirs
relative to base level results in sea floor highs that
develop into domes, islands and intervening mini-
basins. If the domes enter into the zone of significant
carbonate production they develop circular or ring-
shaped carbonate platforms or atolls (Fig. 3B). Where
salt movement is related to extensional faults in the
56 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972 57

Fig. 3. Tectono-stratigraphic models for A) Fault-Block carbonate platforms, B) Salt Diapir platforms, C) Subsiding Margin platforms and D)
Offshore Bank, or unattached platforms, E) Volcanic Pedestal platforms, F) Thrust-Top platforms, G) Delta-Top platforms and H) Foreland
Margin platforms (for details of each platform type see text and Table 1).
58 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
Red Sea then salt walls and more elongate platforms
are developed (Orszag-Sperber et al., 1998) with
associated horst and graben. The stratigraphy and
sedimentology of platforms developing over salt
diapirs have been studied in outcrops along the
northern coast of Yemen (Davison et al., 1996;
Bosence et al., 1998a) and the Farasan Islands
offshore southwestern Saudi Arabia (Bantan, 1999).
These are complemented by outcrops of salt diapir
platforms from the opposing margin of the southern
Red Sea in the Dahlak Islands, offshore Eritrea
(Carbone et al., 1998).
The southern Red Sea is dominated by the
morphologically similar groups of islands known as
the Farasan and Dahlak archipelagos that mirror each
other on the eastern and western shelves respectively.
These comprise low relief, reef-fringed, late Cenozoic
limestone islands. These islands, and the surrounding
submarine topography, are commonly circular carbo-
nate platforms that have circular or arcuate bays and
promontories in plan view (Fig. 3B). The shapes
(sometimes amoeboid) are too complex to quantify but
the platforms vary from 1 km across at Salif (Bosence
et al., 1998a) to 140 km across at Dhalak Kebir
(Carbone et al., 1998). The margins to these platforms
are largely steep-sided and coral-reef rimmed (Bantan,
1999; Carbone et al., 1998) with bioclastic sands and
gravels on exposed shelves and internal lagoons with
seagrass meadows and fine-grained carbonates. Out-
crops at Salif in northwest Yemen indicate colonisation
of the irregular dissolved upper surface of the salt
diapir by reef corals and molluscs (Bosence et al.,
1998a) indicating that the diapir has moved up into the
zone of shallow-marine photozoan carbonate produc-
tion. Carbonate stratigraphies are up to 450 m thick
and most exposed successions commonly shallow-
upwards. To achieve this stratigraphic thickness on a
substrate that is rising in relation to regional base level,
the platforms must subside as well as rise and
unconformities over circular diapirs are described
from Farasan (Bantan, 1999; Bosence et al., 1998a).
Seismic sections illustrate multiple onlap and surfaces
adjacent to diapirs indicating the balance between
diapir growth, subsidence and platform production
(Bosence et al., 1998a). The stratigraphy of the
platforms is complex with rapid lateral and vertical
facies changes in these shallow-water, biogenic
carbonates reflecting the complex morphology of the
islands. Similarly, depositional sequences have com-
plex 3-D geometries with local thickening and thin-
ning. Sequence boundaries converge over positive
diapers and eroded vertical strata on diapir walls, and
diverge into minibasins (Fig. 3B). Vertical movements
are rapid (35 m/ky; Bosence et al., 1998a). Exten-
sional faulting, including horst and graben, occurs over
areas of salt movement and many areas of the
stratigraphy are blistered and brecciated (Fig. 3B).
Other examples, that do not have the documented
record of stratigraphic geometries are the Garden
Flower Banks of the Gulf of Mexico. Here, Jurassic
salt diapirs generate shallow, sub-circular to elongate
highs on the seafloor. In detail they have the same
arcuate arms and circular embayments that are seen in
the Red Sea examples which both result in a circular
to amoeboid shaped structures in plan view. In the
Gulf of Mexico the positive areas reach water depths
of 2050 m and accumulate biogenic carbonate
sediment that contrasts with the siliciclastic muds of
the surrounding seafloor at and below 100 m (Rezak
et al., 1985). The carbonate facies comprise a complex
mosaic of coral and coralline algal communities and
mollusc and foraminifer-rich bioclastic sands with
local brine pools. The carbonates are faulted and
brecciated by salt movement and downslope, gravita-
tional movement of sediment off the platforms.
These Cenozoic examples provide useful ana-
logues for presumed subsurface salt diapir platforms
from the Cretaceous offshore Brazil (Guardado et
al., 1990), Gabon (Teisserenc and Villemin, 1990)
and the Late Jurassic of Texas (Montgomery, 1996),
USA. In these examples the critical interpretation to
be made is whether the limestones were simply
involved with later salt tectonics, or whether the
platforms were growing during salt movement, and
thus had their stratigraphy and platform development
controlled by the salt diapirism. The latter case has
been demonstrated above for the Cenozoic examples
from the Red Sea. In the restoration of Albian
platforms occurring as isolated segments on top of
Aptian salt, offshore Gabon by Eichenseer et al.
(1999) it is assumed that all deformation was post
platform growth. They were able, to a large extent,
to refit the Albian platform blocks back to their
original positions but gaps in the restoration and
local thickness changes may suggest some Aptian
syn-diapiric, segmentation of the platform.
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
Salt diapir platforms are only documented to date
from early rift (Red Sea) to passive margin (Gulf of
Mexico and Atlantic margins) settings but salt diapirs
are known to locally control present-day carbonate
sedimentation in the foreland margin carbonate plat-
form of the Arabian Gulf. These are described as
bbathymetric highsQ and bsalt-dome islandsQ by Purser
(1973) because they are circular highs that rise from
the surrounding sea-floor. The highs comprise con-
centrically arranged carbonate facies belts around the
salt diapirs; the evidence for a salt core comes from
exposed salts on some islands and exotic lithoclasts
mixed within the modern skeletal carbonates down-
current from the seafloor highs.
2.3. Subsiding margin platforms and offshore carbo-
nate banks (Fig. 3C and D)
Passive margin basins are generally considered to
be the major site of carbonate platform formation (e.g.
Tucker and Wright, 1990; Einsele, 1992). It is here
that the largest and most extensively studied Cenozoic
platforms come from such as the FloridaBahamas
region (e.g. Schlager and Ginsburg, 1981; Ginsburg,
2001), the Great Barrier Reef (e.g. Davies et al., 1989)
and the NW shelf of Australia (Butcher, 1990). The
dominant controls on the sedimentology and stratig-
raphy of these platforms are the low rates, or
localisation, of siliciclastic supply from the adjacent
mature continental landscape, for attached platforms,
or isolation from clastic supply in offshore banks,
subsidence at relatively slow rates in the Cenozoic
(~0.030.04 m/ky, from Schlager and Ginsburg, 1981)
as well as regional or eustatic sea-level changes. As
these controls are seen in both attached platforms (Fig.
3C) and offshore bank platforms (Fig. 3D) from these
settings, they are grouped together in this section.
The FloridaBahamas area has a pre-Cenozoic
history that can be traced back to Jurassic carbonate
platforms establishing themselves on the newly rifted
margin of the North Atlantic (Sheriden et al., 1988).
Since that time up to 5 km of sediment has
accumulated in the flat-topped platforms of the
Bahama Banks that are tens to hundreds of kilometres
across in dip and strike sections (Schlager and
Ginsburg, 1981; Ginsburg, 2001). Despite earlier
(pre Miocene?) faulting the platform has essentially
aggraded to sea level, or wave base, and developed
59
into a flat-topped carbonate platform with a prograda-
tional leeward margin and erosional, and reefal,
windward margin (Eberli and Ginsburg, 1987,
1989). The very large accommodation space for these
platforms is likely to be a combination of thermal
subsidence, sediment and water loading, and com-
paction (Bott, 1992). Eberli and Ginsburg (1987,
1989) demonstrated with seismic sections that the
large structure that is seen today was formed from
earlier platforms that coalesced through leeward
progradation. The platform-top stratigraphy comprises
shallow-water photozoan carbonates truncated by
unconformity-bound, depositional sequences that are
subhorizontal (Fig. 3C and D). The facies have been
studied in great detail (e.g. Ginsburg and Lowenstam,
1958; Purdy, 1963; Mullins and Neumann, 1979;
Schlager and Ginsburg, 1981; Ginsburg, 2001) and
are also summarised in many textbooks as classic
examples of modern tropical carbonates (e.g. Tucker
and Wright, 1990; Wright and Burchette, 1996;
Bosence and Wilson, 2003). These sequences and
the related leeward prograding slope deposits are
interpreted to form during relative, or eustatic (Eberli
and Ginsburg, 1989) sea level highstands with low-
stands generating sequence boundaries. They also
show that the leeward margin of this platform evolved
from a Miocene distally steepened ramp to a rimmed
carbonate shelf; a common feature of subsiding
margin platforms (Read, 1985; Fig. 3C).
The extensive carbonate shelves of Australia
developed passive margin platforms over rifted and
siliciclastic-dominated Mesozoic basement. The
northwest shelf preserves a mid-Eocene to Recent
carbonate platform stratigraphy as a northwesterly
thickening wedge that progrades and aggrades many
tens of kilometres into the Indian Ocean. Inner-shelf
areas show parallel to oceanward diverging reflectors
and outer-shelf areas progradational packages that
diverge to the Indian Ocean (Butcher, 1990). In the
latest Miocene the outer continental shelf is subjected
to increased subsidence from loading of the Indone-
sian arc leading to tectonically induced deepening. A
more detailed view is provided by Cathro et al. (2003)
who document the progradational clinoform front of
the evolving shelf margin and slope that, at the
seismic scale, produce essentially progradational,
shelf depositional sequences. These, however, do not
always fill accommodation space, and sequence
60 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
boundaries are not of subaerial origin demonstrating
that shelf-wide heterozoan production on an ocean-
ward-facing shelf can produce a clinoform rollover at
around 100 m (Cathro et al., 2003). The northeastern
Australian shelf has a more complex basin history and
is discussed later in the paper (see Discussion).
At a smaller scale, outcrop studies from the
Miocene of the western Mediterranean basin illustrate
carbonate platform growth on passive, subsiding
margins on an eroded Alpine basement (Pomar,
1993; Pomar and Ward, 1999; Pomar et al., 2002).
The stratigraphy comprises a lower distally steepened,
Tortonian ramp that outcrops on Menorca (Pomar et
al., 2002) and a reef-rimmed late Tortonian to
Messinian platform that outcrops mainly in Mallorca
(Pomar, 1993; Pomar and Ward, 1999). A high
energy, relatively deep, wave-base controls sequence
stacking patterns within the ramp (cf. Cathro et al.,
2003) whereas hierarchical sets of sigmoidal shaped
units deposited on the platform top, reef slope and
fore-reef area characterise the reef-rimmed platform.
The platform-top sequence boundaries are sub-hori-
zontal and sub-parallel and platform-slope stratal
packages are progradational and agradational (Pomar,
1993; Pomar and Ward, 1999). The construction of
this 20 km wide and several 100 m thick reef-rimmed
platform as a basinward-thickening wedge is funda-
mentally controlled by the interaction of high-fre-
quency sealevel changes and background subsidence
and shallow-water photozoan carbonate production,
and has been numerically modelled as such (Bosence
et al., 1994). The change from ramp to rimmed shelf is
interpreted as a change in the location of the shelf
carbonate factory from mid shelf (heterozoan, rhodo-
lith belt) production on a ramp to shallow photozoan
(coralgal reef) production for the rimmed platform in
response to climatic changes (Pomar, 2001; Pomar et
al., 2002).
These platforms, as their name implies, come
exclusively from mature passive (or subsiding) ocean
basin margins. The stratigraphies with their character-
istic (tens of kilometres) progradational geometries
(Fig. 3C and D) indicate production rates in excess of
the relatively low subsidence rates recorded for passive
margin settings. They are known from both low and
high latitude settings with the southern margin of
Australia being the best example of a cool-water,
passive margin carbonate platform (James and von der
Borch, 1991; James et al., 1994). The adjacent Murray
Basin (SE Australia) is an intracratonic basin with
warm temperate carbonates forming much of the
Murray Supergroup (Lukasik et al., 2000; Lukasik
and James, 2003). The laterally extensive facies belts
(tens to hundreds of kilometres, Lukasik et al., 2000)
and laterally persistant, parallel sided, metre-scale
cycles (Lukasik and James, 2003) suggest affinities
with attached, Subsiding Margin platforms. The north-
east Atlantic has an extensive cool-water, Holocene
carbonate shelf (e.g. Shetland shelf; Light and Wilson,
1998) and offshore bank (Rockall Bank; Scoffin et al.,
1980) today but siliciclastic supply was too high earlier
in the Cenozoic for widespread carbonates to have
accumulated.
2.4. Volcanic pedestal platforms (Fig. 3E)
Oceanic volcanos, being shallow-water sites iso-
lated from siliciclastic input, are common sites for
carbonate platform development. Volcanic Pedestal
platforms were first studied by Darwin (1842) and
significant recent contributions come from the Mal-
dives in the Indian Ocean (Purdy and Bertram, 1993)
and from the HawaiianEmporer Chain in the Pacific
(Grigg, 1982, 1997). In these sites accommodation for
platform growth is provided by thermal subsidence of
the oceanic crust and volcanic pedestal. This has
resulted in 2200 and 2400 m of shallow-water
carbonate platform stratigraphy in the Maldives and
the Saya de Malha Bank respectively (Purdy and
Bertram, 1993), 13001400 m in Anewetak (Quinn
and Saller, 1997) and 180450 m in the Mururoa
volcanic pedestal platform in the Pacific (Buigues,
1997). Platform morphology is initially controlled by
morphology of the volcanic edifice and varies from
subcircular (e.g. Anewetak; Quinn and Saller, 1997;
Reunion, Mayotte and Mauritius; Camoin et al., 1997)
to elliptical (Bermuda; Vacher and Rowe, 1997) (Fig.
3E) to a complex of amalgamated volcanic pedestals
and subcircular volcanic pedestals with an intervening
graben (Maldives; Purdy and Bertram, 1993). Sizes
vary from single edifice platforms (average 18.6
m12.5 m measured across reef rim for 10 volcanic
pedestal platforms in Vacher and Quinn (1997) to
2200 m300 m to platforms developing from
amalgamated volcanic edifices such as the Maldives
(Purdy and Bertram, 1993). Stratigraphic geometries
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
in these low latitude Volcanic Pedestal platforms are
largely aggradational (Fig. 3E) and to an extent
progradational from reef-rimmed margins enclosing
extensive lagoons (Purdy and Bertram, 1993; Warrlich
et al., 2002). Limited progradational geometries occur
where the substrate slopes are at lower angles. In the
Maldives more progradation occurs towards the
Inland Sea platform margins than towards the Indian
Ocean facing margins where steep slopes descend to
oceanic depths. These relatively small platforms
surrounded by waters, many thousands of metres in
depth, clearly limit the extent to which progradation
can occur (Fig. 3E). The slopes are unstable and show
slumps, slides and chaotic reflectors on seismic
sections (Purdy and Bertram, 1993). Some present-
day Volcanic Pedestal platform margins have near
vertical walls of cemented and encrusted reef and
bioclastic debris resulting from a combination of reef
aggradation, lowstand erosion, rapid late Cenozoic
sea-level rises and sediment bypassing (Dullo et al.,
1998).
There do not appear to be any examples of ocean
basin Volcanic Pedestal platforms in high latitude
settings. Grigg (1982, 1997) argued that a combina-
tion of decreasing production rates, climate change,
island morphology and sea-level history causes
drowning of Hawaiian atolls as they are carried
northward on the Pacific plate. The highest latitude
Cenozoic volcanic pedestal platform currently
reported from an oceanic setting is Bermuda
(32820VN). This island also lies at the northern limit
of present-day coral reef growth and preserves about
100 m of carbonates overlying 33 Ma volcanics
(Vacher and Rowe, 1997). Approximate subsidence
rates based on depths and strontium isotope ages of
Anewetak atoll carbonates in the Pacific suggest
Eocene rates of 0.05 to 0.13 m/ky decreasing to a
Miocene to Recent rate of 0.02 m/ky (Quinn and
Saller, 1997). Schlagers (2000) review of accumu-
lation rates for cool-water carbonates measured over
geological timescales indicates rates from 0 to 0.1 m/
ky which suggests that rates of carbonate production
are not sufficient to cope with the relatively high, but
exponentially decreasing, subsidence rates on these
structures in these oceanic settings.
In addition to oceanic settings volcanic pedestal
platforms are also reported from the strike-slip Nijar
Carboneras Basin of southeast Spain (Dabrio et al.,
61
1981; Franseen et al., 1998; Warrlich et al., in press).
Here, at Las Negras, Miocene platform growth is
found to be restricted by steep submarine basement
slopes and progradation was favoured on lower angle
slopes. At Nijar a small, elongate ridge (31 km) of
dacite forms the substrate for the Miocene atoll of El
Hoyazo (Dabrio et al., 1981; Warrlich et al., in press).
This small platform has progradational geometries
along the ediface but steep (288), thin, slope deposits
occur where basement slopes are high coming off the
dacite ridge (Warrlich et al., in press).
2.5. Thrust-top platforms (Fig. 3F)
Carbonate platforms developing over thrusts and
thrust folds have been described and interpreted from
compressional settings in the Miocene of the eastern,
central and western Mediterranean Basin. Such plat-
forms are not extensive laterally, or of great thickness,
as might be expected from carbonate platforms
growing on a substrate that is rising through the
shallow-marine carbonate factory.
From southern Cyprus, Robertson et al. (1991) and
Follows et al. (1996) described carbonate platforms of
Miocene age as two members (Terra and Koronia) of
the Pakhna Formation. These reefal limestones are
mapped out as elongate bodies parallel to compres-
sional folds and faults within this fore-arc setting.
Although the outcrops are not extensive (E. Follows,
personal communication, 2003) the platforms map out
to rest unconformably on eroded earlier strata and to
be up to 10 km long and a few km wide (cf. Fig. 3F).
Coralgal patch reefs (b80 m thick), slumped reef
blocks and heterozoan packstones and grainstones
comprise the shallow-water facies. These are adjacent
to slope facies of redeposited shallow-water facies
(Follows et al., 1996). These are associated with
ophiolite-derived conglomerates and pass downslope
into hemipelagic marls. Robertson et al. (1991)
invoked global sea-level rise in the Tortonian for the
accommodation space for platform growth above the
thrust tops.
Similar aged (Tortonian to Messinian) reefal plat-
forms developed in the fore-arc (Caltanissetta) basin
of Sicily where the occurrence of carbonates is
controlled by thrust generated sea-floor ridges (Grasso
and Pedley, 1988; Pedley, 1996). Bioclastic photozoan
carbonates of the Terravechia Fm. and interbedded
62 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
arc-derived, siliciclastics reach up to 70 m in thickness
and occur as sheets or lenses above the southeasterly
thrusted, Oligo-Miocene, Numidian Flysch (Grasso
and Pedley, 1988). These platform carbonates com-
prise patch reefs, reef-derived breccias and associated
bioclastic packstones. They are intimately interbedded
with clays and conglomerates. Reefs and breccias
prograde to the south away from the thrust front and
into the basin. Whilst the origin, and large scale
morphology of the Terravechia platform relates to its
thrust-top geotectonic setting (Pedley, 1996) in detail
the facies and platform geometries are controlled by
underlying siliciclastic deltaic morphologies (Grasso
and Pedley, 1988) and these carbonates are discussed
again in the following section (delta-top platforms).
In the foreland (External Zone) margin of the Betic
Cordillera, SE Spain, Beets (1992) described and
interpreted coralline algal-rich carbonates that are
localised over emergent thrust-related highs. These
heterozoan carbonates form units 550 m thick that
fringe and onlap unconformities on anticlinal ridges
(cf. Fig. 3F). These Lower Miocene limestones are
themselves folded, capped by a hardground, and
onlapped by uppermost Lower to Mid Miocene marls,
indicating a syntectonic origin of the platform lime-
stones. Dating of the platforms indicates progressively
older thrust-top platforms towards the foreland margin
in line with the expected foreland propagation of
thrusts (Platt, 1988).
2.6. Delta-top platforms (Fig. 3G)
In spite of the fact that the rate of siliciclastic
supply appears to be an overriding control on the
occurrence of shelf carbonates (Hay et al., 1988),
deltas building out into shallow-marine areas are
recurring sites of carbonate platform and reef develop-
ment. Examples are known from both semi-arid (e.g.
Red Sea; Purser et al., 1998) and humid (e.g. Borneo;
Wilson and Lokier, 2002, and Belize; Ferro et al.,
1999) low latitude settings. High latitude, cool-water
carbonates are apparently unreported from this setting.
A number of examples have been described from
the Miocene to Recent of the Red Sea, Gulf of Suez
and Gulf of Aqaba basins. In this semi-arid climate
setting fluvial discharge is intermittent and generally
carries a coarse load and there is a strong tectonic
control on the pathway of drainage systems (e.g.
following basement fractures and fault transfer zones,
Purser et al., 1998). At Sharm el Behari a long-lived
(Late Oligocene to Recent) fluvial system that
deposited continental and then marine fluvio-deltaic
sediments formed the substrate for later platform
growth. A Mid Miocene fan delta with 30 m foresets
progrades southeastwards through a half-graben
towards the NE Red Sea. These comprise coarse
conglomerates passing downslope to marls. Coralgal
patch reefs (b10 m thick) colonise the upper part of the
delta cone which subsequently forms the substrate for
a larger (8 km3 km) onlapping carbonate platform
with up to 40 m of shallow-marine and peritidal facies
(Purser et al., 1998). They (Purser et al., 1998) along
with Roberts and Murray (1983) working in the Gulf
of Suez considered that the intermittent, coarse,
siliciclastic supply from these semi-arid drainage
systems was an important feature that allowed
carbonates to accumulate in such settings.
Small Quaternary platforms and reefs also develop
along the tops and slopes of deltas in the strike-slip
basin of the Gulf of Aqaba (Gvirtzman et al., 1977;
Roberts and Murray, 1983; Dullo and Montaggioni,
1998). The morphology of the delta and the channels
on the delta-top control the pattern of reef growth as
corals preferentially colonise channel and delta
margins. However, active channels prevent reef
growth and instead provide down-slope pathways
for the export of reef and clastic debris to deeper water
sites (Dullo and Montaggioni, 1998; Fig. 3G).
Because of the intermittent nature of clastic supply,
reefs destroyed by flash floods are able to recolonise
or continue to grow elsewhere. In addition, these
authors consider that periods of turbid flood-waters
are too brief to influence reef growth.
These small, delta-top platforms are useful ana-
logues for the delta-top platforms in the fore-arc basin
of the Miocene of Sicily described by Grasso and
Pedley (1988; see also previous section). Here fluvial
systems, draining off, and between, emergent thrust
slices, develop distributary channels on deltas with
reefs growing on channel margins and small platforms
developing on the delta top. These were considered by
Grasso and Pedley (1988) to grow during phases of
eustatic sea-level rise in the late Tortonian. Platforms
are reconstructed with an arcuate shape in plan and are
sigmoidal in cross-section following the morphology
of the deltas (cf. Fig. 3G).
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
Santisteban and Taberner (1988) described a
number of Tortonian platforms that are developed
over fan-deltas entering the Fortuna Basin of south-
east Spain. Reefs are developed over lobate marine,
proximal, fan-delta conglomerates. They are arcuate,
and elongate parallel to the coastline over distances
of 105000 m, up to 200 m wide, but only a few
metres thick. They interfinger with delta lobes
laterally indicating synchronous delta and reef
accumulation as in the Gulf of Aqaba examples
(above and in Fig. 3G).
Eocene examples come from the Pyrenean foreland
basin where deltas build out from both northern and
southern margins in an equatorial to semi-arid setting
(Santisteban and Taberner, 1988; Taberner et al.,
1999). Small platforms and reefs develop over the
deltas during a number of phases of relative sealevel
rise. These are mapped as arcuate in shape and up to
50 m thick. Well-exposed platforms are up to 50 km
wide and 5 km from proximal to distal margins
(Taberner and Bosence, 1995). Marls form in more
distal platform slopes, reef-rims are common and
back-reef to lagoonal areas accumulate mudmounds,
and coral, mollusc and nummulite grainstonesrud-
stones. Shorewards the carbonates interbed with
distributary channel sands, (Taberner and Bosence,
1995). A main control on the occurrence of these
platforms appears to be sea-level as carbonate systems
are commonly found to be characteristic of sea-level
highs and siliciclastics of sea-level lows.
The back-arc basin of equatorial east Borneo
provides a contrasting setting. Here, Wilson and
Lokier (2002) provide Miocene examples, and
Roberts and Sydow (1996) a modern example, of
Delta-Top carbonate platforms. Both relate to the
Mahakam Delta which is fed by an essentially large
and continuous supply of clay- to silt-sized particles.
On the modern delta a combination of active
southern lobes and a southerly flowing current
encourage carbonate sedimentation in the northern
part of the delta front. Coral patch reefs develop on
seaward margins of delta mouth bars and distal
settings accumulate Halimeda and foraminiferal
buildups in waters down to 100 m. Outcrops and
cores indicate carbonate facies going back to the
Neogene in this setting (Roberts and Sydow, 1996).
Mid Miocene limestones are exposed in sections
through anticlinal ridges within the delta. These
63
record mud-rich delta clastics that pass up-section
into coral reef facies. Palaeoecological analysis by
Wilson and Lokier (2002) suggests that particular
carbonate producing communities are adapted to
turbid, low light level waters of likely increased
nutrient content and are therefore able to persist in
this muddy deltaic environment.
Although lacking in detail at this stage, Ferro et al.
(1999) interpret high resolution seismic images,
supported by cores, that lowstand fan deltas from
the last glacial maximum in the English Cay channel
area of Belize formed the substrate for subsequent
reefs. During the postglacial sea-level rise reefs
became established on these lowstand deltas (Ferro
et al., 1999) as well as surrounding preexisting,
karstified reefs. These reefs and associated siliciclas-
tics form part of a much larger Subsiding Margin
platform (see Discussion).
To conclude, there appear to be different controls
on the ability of small carbonate platforms to develop
on delta tops and slopes. In semi-arid settings with
coarse intermittant supply, clastics and clear water
carbonate systems can coexist; however in humid
climates with continuous mud-rich supply carbonate
and clastic systems can coexist through hydrological
isolation and adaptive strategies of biogenic carbonate
producers. Alternatively, clastic and carbonate sys-
tems can be isolated in time by the reciprocal
occurrence of carbonates in transgressive and high-
stand periods and clastics in falling stages and
lowstands.
2.7. Foreland margin platforms (Fig. 3H)
The foreland or distal margin of low-latitude,
underfilled foreland basins is a favoured site for the
accumulation of large carbonate platforms (Pigram et
al., 1990; Dorobek, 1995; Sinclair, 1997). The
controls on the recurrence of platforms in this location
relates to their initial isolation from major siliciclastic
supply in an extensive area of marine shelf generated
in response to flexural loading by the orogenic wedge
on the proximal side of the basin (Fig. 3H).
Depositional topography and therefore carbonate
facies patterns constantly evolve in response to this
differential loading (Dorobek, 1995). This persistent
differential loading continually creates accommoda-
tion space along the depositional profile and is likely
64 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
to be the reason why most foreland margin carbonate
platforms are ramps (Fig. 3H). As the loading
increases at any one place, through advance of the
orogenic wedge, the foreland margin platform must
either aggrade faster to keep pace with increasing
subsidence, backstep or drown (Dorobek, 1995;
Galewski, 1998). Significantly, small-scale cycles
are developed within these ramp successions that
may either shallow-up, or deepen-up (Pedley, 1994;
Pedley et al., 1996). Deepening-upward cycles are not
common in tropical, photozoan carbonates and this
may well reflect the increased subsidence rates in
foreland margins. Because basin subsidence contin-
ues, with accompanying increasing rates of clastic
supply, drowned or backstepped platforms are
unlikely to re-establish themselves at the same site
on foreland margins. Modelling rates of carbonate
accumulation against rates of foreland basin subsi-
dence and different rates of orogenic advance Dor-
obek (1995) indicated that foreland platforms at any
one site will drown within a few million years but that
the composite platform is diachronous, becoming
younger and younger towards the foreland (Fig.
3H). This is well demonstrated from the extensive
examples from the Eocene to Oligocene foreland
platform of the Alps (Sinclair, 1997) where the upper
surface of the ramp carbonates is a sharp or transi-
tional passage into deeper-water globigerinid marls.
High rates of siliciclastic supply sourced from the
advancing orogenic wedge, onlap, overlie and bury
the platforms at the base of the foreland basin fill
(Sinclair, 1997). Based on flexural rigidity, foreland
topography and photic zone depths for carbonate
production Dorobek (1995) proposed that foreland
margin platforms should be less than 100 km wide but
this will vary with eustatic sealevel changes, tectonic
history, etc. Thicknesses of these platforms are
moderate; tens to hundreds of metres, but up to
1200 m in the Papua New Guinea basin (in Sinclair,
1997). Lengths are determined by basin size and
platforms may be hundreds of kilometres along and
around the basin margin (e.g. Alps, Sinclair, 1997;
Arabian Gulf, Purser, 1973; Papua New Guinea,
Pigram et al., 1990) which results in a ribbon shaped
morphology for the entire platform (Table 1; Fig. 3H).
Major variations in the stratigraphic fill are depend-
ant upon the angle of convergence within a foreland
basin. Backstepping will be highly diachronous if
platform margins are normal to the orogenic wedge as
in the Papuan Basin between NE Australia and Papua
New Guinea (Davies et al., 1989; Pigram et al., 1990).
Here, the northern margin of the temperate climate,
Eocene and Oligocene Subsiding Margin platform
converges into the Papuan Foreland Basin in the mid
Oligocene. Following a basal unconformity, and
coincident with the migration of the platform into a
tropical belt, Neogene carbonates on the NE Australian
margin aggrade or backstep in response to loading of
the northern orogenic wedge, normal to the carbonate
platform. Some Neogene foreland margin platforms
such as the AshmoreBootPortlok platform were able
to persist with aggradational geometries through to
today, possibly due to their open marine setting with a
likely optimum reefal carbonate production rate. This
contrasts significantly with the backstepping Palae-
ogene platforms of the Alpine basins of NW Europe
that are dominated by large benthic foraminifer and
coralline algal carbonate producing communities of
likely lower production rates.
Local variations in the controls on foreland margin
platform stratigraphies include syndepositional exten-
sional (Sinclair, 1997), strike-slip (Dorobek, 1995) or
emergent thrust faults (Beets, 1992) and from anti-
clinal highs in the foreland that may be from inherited
structures or salt diapirism as in the Pyrenean foreland
basin (Luterbacher et al., 1991; Pedley, 1994; Pedley et
al., 1996) and the Holocene of the Arabian Gulf
(Purser, 1973, see also Salt Diapir Platforms).
3. Discussion
3.1. Occurrence of platform types within sedimentary
basins
The distribution of different platform types pro-
posed in this paper with respect to sedimentary basin
classes is given in Table 2. The wide range of
occurrences of platforms in different basin types (also
shown in Fig. 2) has not been fully appreciated before
as most texts focus on the better-known examples
from passive-margin settings. Only one platform type
(Foreland Margin) has a unique occurrence and most
platform types are more promiscuous in their occur-
rence and are found across a range of commonly
recognised basin classes (e.g. Fault-Block platforms
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
occur in rift, passive margin, fore-arc, back arc and
strike-slip basins). Most sedimentary basins (barring
foreland basins) are therefore not characterised by
unique types of carbonate platform. However, most
classes of sedimentary basin have a set of carbonate
platform types that is unique; i.e. rift basin carbonate
platforms have little in common with mature ocean,
fore-arc or foreland basin carbonate platforms but they
have more similarities with platforms from back-arc
basins.
Also significant is the limited occurrence of plat-
forms from some basin types. Examples of carbonate
platforms in strike-slip basins appear to be rare and
this may reflect the rapid subsidence and uplift rates
recorded in these basins. This results in a steep basin
margin topography and high clastic sediment supply
and accumulation. Nilsen and Sylvester (1995) report
accumulation rates of 2.53.0 m/ky in their review of
strike-slip basins which is near the upper limit for
tropical carbonate production (Schlager, 2000). Tor-
tonianMessinian carbonate platforms are described
from the transtensional, Carboneras sub-basin, in
southeast Spain, by Brachert et al. (2002). They
provide details of facies relations and depositional
sequences in a platform dissected by extensional
faults. The exposures provided a good integrated
view of facies and sequences in adjacent footwall and
hangingwall areas. Holocene examples come from the
Gulf of Aqaba but here only the surface geology has
been studied. Dullo and Montaggioni (1998)
described thin fringing-reefs from this narrow,
strike-slip basin that have steep, fault-related forereef
slopes and the reefs are displaced by Holocene faults,
including a 1995 coseismic fault.
There appears to be only one example of a
Cenozoic platform from an interior plate (intracra-
tonic) basin, the Murray Group limestones from the
Murray Basin, SE Australia. This is despite their
abundance in these settings in the past such as the
Devonian of the Williston Basin, USA, Permian Basin
of West Texas and the Zechstein of the North Sea
Basin. Their rarity in the Cenozoic appears to be a
reflection of the specific arrangements of plates and
plate boundaries in the Cenozoic with few intra-
cratonic basins occurring in low-latitude marine
settings.
Whereas the pattern of occurrence of platforms is
in part due to the chosen method of classification of
65
platforms; there is always a choice in the way
geoscientists can carve at the joints in natural systems,
the limited occurrence of platforms in different basin
classes (the large number of blanks in Table 2)
suggests an overriding control on platform type by
the tectonic or basinal setting. Conversely, the
carbonate platforms within each of these basins will
provide significant information on the evolution of
that basin in terms of palaeoenvironments, differential
subsidence and evolution of accommodation space.
3.2. Hierarchy of tectonic controls
This paper proposes the common recurrence of
eight genetic types of carbonate platforms. This comes
from the synthesis of stratigraphic data from Cenozoic
platforms from around the world that have been shown
above to have distinctive basinal or tectonic settings,
morphology and stratigraphic geometries. Whereas the
platforms are presented in this paper as distinct
models, in reality platforms may show features
characteristic of different types because within any
one setting different tectonic processes may be
operating and at different scales. In such cases it may
be possible to recognise intermediate types or primary
and secondary tectonic controls. An example of the
former is where extensional faults act as pathways for
salt diapirism so that fault blocks are also salt diapirs as
is found in the Miocene of the southern Gulf of Suez
(Orszag-Sperber et al., 1998; Bosworth et al., 1998).
One such example of the latter case is the Belize
platform. Seismic sections and borehole data indicate
a long-lived Cretaceous to Recent attached platform
with some interbedded marginal clastics and a reef-
rimmed margin (Purdy et al., 2003). The Barrier
Platform has essentially horizontal reflectors, passing
oceanward to sigmoidal shaped reflectors of the
platform margin. These characters and the scale of
the platform indicate a Subsiding Margin platform.
However, the platform is also cut by transpressional
and transtensional faults that can be seen from
associated seismic geometries to be syndepositional
structures (Purdy et al., 2003) and are the likely
mechanism for the formation of the Dangriga Trough
and shelf lagoon. Also on a smaller-scale is the local
control of Holocene facies distribution by a precurser
karst topography (Purdy, 1974; Purdy et al., 2003),
combined with syndepositional faulting (Purdy et al.,
66 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
2003), or, siliciclastic channels (Choi and Ginsburg,
1982), or, a combination of faulting and Quaternary
incised valleys and intervening highs with reefs and
shoals (Esker et al., 1998). Ferro et al. (1999)
indicate that the foundations of some of the barrier
reefs are siliciclastic delta lobes suggestive of Delta-
Top platforms.
This platform therefore shows a complex hierarchy
of controls and of platform types. The Mesozoic
development of the platform on the southern margin
of the Caribbean would appear from its overall
geometry and stratigraphy to be a Subsiding Margin
platform. Within this setting strike-slip tectonics
driven by the westerly movement of the Caymen
Trench oceanic crust against the Yucatan basement
generated transtensional and transpressive structures
that control some parts of the carbonate platform
development (Purdy et al., 2003), and the interaction
of local-scale faulting, drainage systems and karstic
morphology has acted as a control on the distribution
of Quaternary facies within this long-lived platform.
A simpler case comes from the southern carbonate
shelf of the Arabian Gulf has two main tectonic
controls on its origin. The entire platform conforms to
a Foreland Margin platform (Tables 1 and 2; Purser,
1973) but locally the stratigraphy is pierced by salt
diapirs from the Hormuz salt and these develop small
(kilometre scale), bathymetric highs on the present-
day sea-floor with many of the features of Salt Diapir
platforms. The foreland margin can be said to be the
primary tectonic setting that controls the entire Fore-
land Margin platform and the salt diapirs are the
secondary local control as well as sea-level history
and environmental variations within the Gulf.
These examples indicate that a hierarchy of scale
exists within the proposed platform types. Subsiding
Margin and Foreland Margin platforms, by defini-
tion, are both large-scale basin margin structures
that may in some cases (e.g. Belize and Arabian
Gulf) be made up in part by a number of smaller
platform types (e.g. Fault-Block, Salt Diapir, Delta-
Top). This situation is explored further in the
following section.
3.3. Evolution of platform types
Wilson (1975) emphasised that ramps commonly
evolved into rimmed shelves as ba normal process of
carbonate sedimentationQ. This was later discussed by
Read (1985) who examined the processes whereby
ramps on rifted margins evolved into rimmed carbo-
nate shelves on passive margins (see also Ginsburg,
2001; Reijmer et al., 2002). Read (1985) also
discussed the evolution of ramps and rimmed shelves
in collisional settings. What is clear from this is that
carbonate depositional systems are robust enough to
exist in a range of plate tectonic settings and to
survive the changes that take place as maritime rifts
evolve into mature ocean basins and subsequently
undergo collision (Fig. 2).
In this paper a more detailed genetic classification
of platform types based on their tectonic and basinal
setting allows the concepts of Read (1985) to be
developed further. In situations where rifted continen-
tal margins evolve into subsiding margins of ocean
basins any carbonate platforms on this margin would
be expected to show a stratigraphic evolution from
one set of platform types to another. On a rifted
marine margin Fault-Block, Salt Diapir and Delta-Top
platforms are the common types of platforms that
occur (Table 2) as has been shown for the Gulf of
SuezRed SeaGulf of Aden. The platforms of this
basin would be predicted to evolve into Subsiding
Margin platforms if the basin were to evolve into a
mature ocean basin. An example of this is seen in the
evolution of the Atlantic margins from the Jurassic
and Cretaceous through to the Recent. The Jurassic of
the NW Atlantic margin shows a continental to
marine, rifted-margin and diapiric structures are
known to underlie the Blake Plateau of Florida
(Sheriden et al., 1988) that is now a drowned,
Subsiding Margin platform. Similarly, the early stages
of evolution of the Bahama Bank are known to be
fault segmented (Eberli and Ginsburg, 1987) prior to
its evolution into an Offshore Bank platform. Further
south in the subsurface of the Cretaceous in Brazil,
Guardado et al. (1990) documented platforms devel-
oping over fault-blocks and salt diapirs that evolve
into extensive Subsiding Margin platforms later in the
Cretaceous.
In a more complex history the extensive carbonate
shelves of northeast Australia develop on a Creta-
ceous rifted basement. An attached Subsiding Margin
platform (Great Barrier Reef) and Offshore Bank
platforms (Marion and Queensland Plateaus) devel-
oped diachronously as the subsiding margin moved
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
northward with plate movement. This carried the
platforms into warmer waters so that the northern
GBR accumulated tropical carbonates from the
Oligocene onwards. However, the southern part
shows a transition from temperate to tropical carbo-
nates in the Late Miocene. Seismic profiles indicate
early (northern) phases of platform growth as Fault-
Block platforms, but later stratigraphies develop large-
scale, oceanward thickening wedges of carbonates
with flat platform top geometries typical of Subsiding
Margin platforms. However, this platform type does
not persist because of the collision with Papua New
Guinea that developed a foreland basin to the north
(Davies et al., 1989) and a Foreland Margin carbonate
platform. The entire northeastern margin shows
evidence of increased rates of subsidence from the
mid Miocene onwards with subsidence rates reaching
0.04 to 0.14 m/ky (Davies et al., 1989). This
subsidence may be in part responsible for the
drowning of the Marion Plateau to south and the
large amount of unfilled accommodation space on the
GBR and Queensland Plateau farther north.
4. Conclusions
This paper reviews the wide range of tectono-
sedimentary environments within which Cenozoic
carbonate platforms occur. Previous works and
classifications have focused on platforms from
passive (subsiding) margin and ocean island settings
but platforms are also known to occur in maritime
rifts, fore-arc, back-arc, foreland, strike-slip and
intracratonic basins. Based on this review it is
apparent that the overall morphology, size and
stratigraphic evolution of carbonate platforms is
primarily controlled by their basinal or tectonic
setting. Biotic evolution, sea-level history and
climatic factors (Pomar, 2001) play a role in
determining smaller-scale features within the plat-
forms such as grain types, facies, depositional
sequences and the nature of some platform margins.
A classification is proposed that is genetic, being
based on the main tectonic controls on platform
origin, rather than on the morphology of the margin
that forms the basis of the current classification into
rimmed-shelves and ramps. The new classification
should clarify understanding and communication on
67
the nature and origin of platforms, provide models
for the interpretation of less well exposed, or
understood examples, and serve as templates to aid
in the understanding of subsurface, seismically
imaged examples. The classification identifies eight
main types of carbonate platform:
1) Fault-Block Platforms develop mainly in mar-
itime rift basins such as the Red SeaGulf of Suez
and specifically on the footwall highs to rotating
fault-blocks. As fault-blocks rotate in shallow-
marine areas wedge-shaped depositional sequen-
ces are formed that thicken in carbonate ramp
stratigraphies down hangingwall dip slopes and
thin onto footwall highs. Footwall areas are
commonly reef- or shoal-rimmed margins.
2) Salt Diapir Platforms occur over the rising salt
diapirs and are found in maritime rifts, passive
margins and foreland basins. The platforms have
distinctive circular, arcuate or amoeboidal shapes
in plan with complex internal stratigraphic geo-
metries. These are controlled by the rise and fall
of the diapir and salt dissolution at the sea-floor.
Depositional sequences shallow-upwards in
aggradational stratigraphies responding to the
relative shallowing of the rising diapir.
3) Subsiding Margin Platforms develop as very
extensive and thick platforms on passive margins
such as the Atlantic and the western, eastern and
southern Australian shelf. Subsiding Margin plat-
forms are known to occur in both cool and warm-
water climatic settings in the Cenozoic. Low
subsidence rates mean that stratigraphic geo-
metries are largely progradational and sequence
boundaries subhorizontal reflecting their forma-
tion from eustatic or regional sealevel falls.
4) Offshore Bank (or unattached) Platforms also
occur in passive margin settings where the base-
ment may comprise an earlier Fault-Block plat-
form. As with Subsiding Margin platforms they
are characterised by low subsidence rates and
progradational depositional sequences. Depend-
ing on climatic setting they may have strong
differentiation into erosional, or reefal, windward
margins and progradational leeward margins and
slopes.
5) Volcanic Pedestal Platforms, which often form
atolls, develop as thick aggradational carbonate
68 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
platforms over thermally subsiding oceanic vol-
canos. They are common in tropical ocean waters
of the Indo-Pacific. These platforms are steep
sided, surrounded by deep waters and therefore
develop little progradation. Margins are charac-
terised by slumps and redeposited carbonates.
Sequence boundaries are subhorizontal over the
platform top and are likely to reflect eustatic sea-
level falls.
6) Thrust-Top Platforms develop in compressional
tectonic settings where bathymetric highs over
thrust sheets move into a shallow-marine setting.
The platforms are ribbon-like in plan and of
limited thickness on this rising substrate. Rede-
posited slope deposits are generated off the
platforms which may be intermixed with eroded
basement lithoclasts. Such platforms are known
from fore-arc and foreland basin settings in the
Oligo-Miocene of the Mediterranean region.
7) Delta-Top Platforms form where deltas enter
shallow-marine settings. They have a complex
and intimate association with the deltaic clastic
deposits, have distinctive arcuate plan shapes and
limited stratigraphic thicknesses. In arid areas
with coarse, intermittant clastic supply, carbo-
nates and clastics can coexist as is the case in the
Cenozoic of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aqaba. In
humid areas (e.g. southeast Asia) where clastic
supply is continuous, and finer-grained, specific
carbonate-producing communities occur that can
tolerate such conditions and thrive in the rela-
tively cleaner delta front sites.
8) Foreland Margin Platforms uniquely form in
foreland basins where large, relatively clastic-free
shelf areas exist on the distal margin. High
subsidence rates from the advancing orogenic
wedge mean that platforms onlap onto the fore-
land, drown in axial settings and largely have ramp
profiles. Platforms are ribbon-like in shape follow-
ing the palaeogeography of the foreland margin
and are generally buried by clastics derived axially
or from the uplifting proximal margin. Cenozoic
examples come from the Alpine, Pyrenean and
Betic foreland basins of Europe and from the
Papuan Basin of southeast Asia.
Whereas these platform types are presented as end
member models there are cases where intermediate
types occur and a hierarchy of scale exists whereby
the large-scale Subsiding Margin and Foreland Mar-
gin platforms may comprise elements of other plat-
form types (e.g. Salt Diapir platforms). Contrary to
common opinion it is shown that carbonate platforms
are widespread in their occurrence in different classes
of sedimentary basin and most sedimentary basins are
characterised by particular associations of carbonate
platform types. Where basin margins evolve from one
geotectonic setting to another (e.g. rift to passive
margin) it can be shown that the carbonate platform
types also change.
Acknowledgements
The ideas behind this paper come from research at
RHUL into what drives the large-scale formation and
structure of carbonate platforms and I wish to thank
my colleagues and research students within the
dBasins GroupT for opportunities and discussions
arising from our field-based research programmes in
the Middle East, Southeast Asia and the Mediterra-
nean area. Funding for this research has come from a
number of sources over the years and in particular I
wish to acknowledge grants from the British Council,
BP Exploration, European Union, NERC, Royal
Society, Shell International, Southeast Asia Group
(RHUL), TotalFinaElf and the University of London.
My original manuscript has benefited considerably
from thoughtful and appropriate comments and
criticisms from reviewers Maurice Tucker and Jeff
Lukasik and Sedimentary Geology editor John
Reijmer and I thank them for their input.
References
Ahr WM. The carbonate ramp: an alternative to the shelf model.
Trans-Gulf Coast Assoc Geol Soc 1973;23:221 5.
Bantan RA. Geology and sedimentary environments of Farasan
Bank (Saudi Arabia), southern Red Sea: a combined remote
sensing and field study. PhD thesis, London Univ. London,
UK; 1999.
Beets CJ. Calibration of late Cenozoic marine strontium isotope
variations and its chronostratigraphic and geochemical applica-
tions. PhD thesis, Vrije Univ. Amsterdam, Netherlands; 1992.
Betzler C, Reijmer JJG, Bernet K, Eberli GP, Anselmetti FS.
Sedimentary variations in space and time along the leeward
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
flank of the Great Bahama Bank (ODP Leg 166). Sedimento-
logy 1999;46:1127 44.
Bosence DWJ. Stratigraphic and sedimentological models of rift
basins. In: Purser BH, Bosence DWJ, editors. Sedimentary and
tectonic evolution of rift basinsthe Red SeaGulf of Aden.
London (UK)7 Chapman Hall-Kluwers; 1998. p. 9 25.
Bosence DWJ, Wilson RCL. Carbonate depositional systems. In:
Coe A, editor. The sedimentary record of sea-level change.
Milton Keynes (UK)7 The Open University/Cambridge Univer-
sity Press; 2003. p. 209 33.
Bosence DWJ, Pomar L, Waltham D, Lankester TG. Computer
modelling a Miocene carbonate platform, Spain. Am Assoc Pet
Geol Bull 1994;78:247 66.
Bosence DWJ, Al-Aawah MH, Davison I, Rosen BR, Vita-Finzi C,
Whitaker E. Salt domes and their control on basin margin
sedimentation; a case study from the Tihama Plain, Yemen. In:
Purser BH, Bosence DWJ, editors. Sedimentary and tectonic
evolution of rift basinsthe Red SeaGulf of Aden. London
(UK)7 Chapman Hall-Kluwers; 1998. p. 448 64.
Bosence DWJ, Cross NE, Hardy S. Architecture and depositional
sequences of Tertiary fault-block carbonate platforms; an
analysis from outcrop and computer modelling. Mar Pet Geol
1998b;15:203 21.
Bosworth W, Crevello P, Winn RD, Steinmetz J. Structure,
sedimentation and basin dynamics during rifting of the Gulf
of Suez and northwestern Red Sea. In: Purser BH, Bosence
DWJ, editors. Sedimentary and tectonic evolution of Rift
Basinsthe Red SeaGulf of Aden. London (UK)7 Chapman
Hall-Kluwers; 1998. p. 77 96.
Bott MHP. Passive margins and their subsidence. J Geol Soc (Lond)
1992;149:805 12.
Brachert TC, Krautworst UMR, Stueckrad OM. Tectono-climatic
evolution of a Neogene intramontane basin (Late Miocene,
Carboneras subbasin, southeast Spain): revelations from basin
mapping and biofacies analysis. Basin Res 2002;14:503 21.
Brannan J, Gerdes KD, Newth IR. Tectono-stratigraphic develop-
ment of the Qamar basin, eastern Yemen. Mar Pet Geol
1997;14:701 30.
Buigues DC. Geology and hydrogeology of Mururoa and Fanga-
taufa, French Polynesia. In: Vacher HL, Quinn TM, editors.
Geology and hydrogeology of carbonate islands. Amsterdam,
Netherlands7 Elsevier; 1997. p. 433 52.
Burchette TP. Tectonic control on carbonate platform facies
distribution and sequence development: Miocene, Gulf of Suez.
Sediment Geol 1988;59:179 204.
Butcher BP. Northwest shelf of Australia. In: Edwards JD,
Santogrossi PA, editors. Divergent/passive margin basins.
Mem-Am Assoc Pet Geol, vol. 48; 1990. p. 81 115.
Camoin GF, Colonna M, Montaggioni LF, Casanova J, Faure G,
Thomassin BA. Holocene sea level changes and reef develop-
ment in the southwestern Indian Ocean. Coral Reefs
1997;16:247 59.
Carbone F, Matteucci R, Angelucci A. Present day sedimentation on
the carbonate platform of the Dahlak Islands, Eritrea. In: Purser
DWJ, Bosence DWJ, editors. Sedimentary and tectonic evolu-
tion of rift basinsthe Red SeaGulf of Aden. London (UK)7
Chapman Hall-Kluwers; 1998. p. 523 36.
69
Cathro DL, Austin JA, Moss GD. Progradation along a deeply
submerged OligoceneMiocene heterozoan carbonate shelf:
how sensitive are clinoforms to sea level variations? Am Assoc
Pet Geol Bull 2003;87:1547 74.
Choi DR, Ginsburg RN. Siliciclastic foundations of Quaternary
reefs in the southernmost Belize lagoon, British Honduras. Geol
Soc Amer Bull 1982;93:116 26.
Cross NE. Sedimentology and sequence stratigraphy of a Miocene
fault-block platform, Gulf of Suez, Egypt. PhD thesis, London
Univ. London, UK; 1996.
Cross NE, Purser BH, Bosence DWJ. The tectono-sedimentary
evolution of a rift margin carbonate platform: Abu Shaar, Gulf
of Suez, Egypt. In: Purser BH, Bosence DWJ, editors.
Sedimentary and tectonic evolution of rift basinsthe Red
SeaGulf of Aden. Amsterdam, Netherlands7 Chapman Hall-
Kluwers; 1998. p. 271 95.
Dabrio CJ, Esteban M, Martin JM. The coral reef of Njar,
Messinian (Uppermost Miocene), Almera province, SE Spain.
J Sediment Petrol 1981;51:521 39.
Dart CJ. Carbonate sedimentation and extensional tectonics in the
Maltese graben system. PhD thesis, London Univ. London, UK;
1991.
Darwin C. The structure and distribution of coral reefs. Being the
first part of the geology of the voyage of the Beagle under the
command of Captain Fitzroy, RN, during the years 1832 to
1836. London7 Smith Elder and Co.; 1842.
Davies PJ, Symonds PA, Feary DA, Pigram CJ. The evolution of the
carbonate platforms of northeastern Australia. In: Crevello PD,
Wilson JL, Sarg JF, Read JF, editors. Controls on carbonate
platform and basin development. Spec Publ-Soc Econ Paleontol
Mineral, vol. 44; 1989. p. 233 58.
Davison I, Bosence D, Alsop I, Al-Aawah MH. Deformation and
sedimentation around active Miocene salt diapirs on the Tihama
Plain, northwest Yemen. In: Alsop I, Blundell DJ, Davison I,
editors. Salt tectonics. Spec Publ-Geol Soc Lond, vol. 100;
1989. p. 23 39.
Dorobek S. Synorogenic carbonate platforms and reefs in foreland
basins: controls on stratigraphic evolution and platform/reef
morphology. In: Dorobek S, Ross GM, editors. Stratigraphic
evolution of foreland basins. Spec Publ-Soc Econ Paleontol
Mineral, vol. 52; 1995. p. 127 47.
Dullo W-C, Montaggioni L. Modern Red Sea coral reefs: a review
of their morphologies and zonation. In: Purser BH, Bosence
DWJ, editors. Sedimentary and tectonic evolution of rift
basinsthe Red SeaGulf of Aden. London (UK)7 Chapman
Hall-Kluwers; 1998. p. 583 94.
Dullo W-C, Camoin GF, Blomeier D, Colonna M, Eisenhauer A,
Faure G, et al. Morphology and sediments of the foreslopes of
Mayotte, Comoro Islands: direct observations from a submer-
sible. In: Camoin GF, Davies PJ, editors. Reefs and carbonate
platforms in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Spec Publ Int Assoc
Sedimentol, vol. 25; 1998. p. 219 36.
Eberli G, Ginsburg RN. Segmentation and coalescence of Cenozoic
carbonate platforms in northwestern Great Bahama Bank.
Geology 1987;15:75 9.
Eberli G, Ginsburg RN. Growth and progradation of Northwestern
Great Bahama Bank a record of lateral platform growth and
70 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
platform progradation. In: Crevello PD, Wilson JL, Sarg JF,
Read JF, editors. Controls on carbonate platform and basin
development. Spec Publ-Soc Econ Paleontol Mineral, vol. 44;
1989. p. 339 61.
Eberli GP, Swart PK, McNeil DF, Kenter JAF, Anselmetti FS,
Melim LA, et al. A synopsis of the Bahamas Drilling Project:
results from two deep core borings drilled on the Great Bahama
Bank. In: Swart PK, Eberli GP, Malone MJ, Sarg FJ, editors.
Proceedings of ODP scientific research 166. Texas, USA7 Ocean
Drilling program, College Station; 1997. p. 23 41.
Eichenseer HT, Walgenwitz FR, Biondi PJ. Stratigraphic control on
facies and diagenesis of dolomitised oolitic siliciclastic ramp
sequences (Pinda Group, Albian, Offshore Angola). Am Assoc
Pet Geol Bull 1999;83:1729 58.
Einsele G. Sedimentary basins. Berlin7 Springer Verlag; 1992.
Erlich RN, Longo AP, Hyare S. Response of platform margins to
drowning; evidence of environmental collapse. In: Loucks RG,
Sarg JF, editors. Carbonate sequence stratigraphy recent devel-
opments and applications. Mem Am Assoc Pet Geol, vol. 57;
1993. p. 241 66.
Esker D, Eberli GP, McNeill D. The structural and sedimentological
controls on the reoccupation of Quaternary incised valleys,
Belize Southern Lagoon. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull 1998;82:
2075 109.
Ferro CE, Droxler AW, Anderson JB, Mucciarone D. Late
Quaternary shift of mixed siliciclasticcarbonate environments
induced by glacial eustatic sea-level fluctuations in Belize. In:
Harris PM, Saller AH, Simo JA, editors. Advances in carbonate
sequence stratigraphy: application to reservoirs, outcrops and
models. Spec Publ-Soc Econ Paleontol Mineral, vol. 63; 1999.
p. 385 411.
Follows E, Robertson AHF, Scoffin TP. Tectonic controls on
Miocene reefs and related carbonate facies in Cyprus. In:
Franseen EK, Esteban M, Ward WC, Rouchy J-M, editors.
Models for carbonate stratigraphy from Miocene reef complexes
of Mediterranean regions. Soc Econ Pal Min Concepts
Sedimentol Paleontol, vol. 5; 1996. p. 295 316.
Fournier F., Borgomano J., Montaggioni L.F.. Development patterns
and controlling factors of Tertiary carbonate build-ups: new
insights from high-resolution 3-D seismic and well data from the
Malampaya gas field (Offshore Palawan, Philippines). Sediment
Geol 2005;175:189 215.
Franseen EK, Goldstein RH, Farr MR. Quantitative controls on
location and architecture of carbonate depositional sequences:
Upper Miocene, Cabo de Gata region, SE Spain. J Sediment Res
1998;68:283 98.
Galewski J. The dynamics of foreland basin carbonate platforms:
tectonic and eustatic controls. Basin Res 1998;10:409 16.
Gherardi DFM. Recent carbonate sedimentation on the coralline
algal Atol das Rocas, equatorial south Atlantic, Brazil. PhD
thesis, London Univ. London, UK; 1996.
Ginsburg RN. Subsurface geology of a prograding carbonate
platform; results of the Bahama Drilling Project. Spec Publ-
Soc Econ Paleontol Mineral 2001;70. [Tulsa, USA].
Ginsburg RN, Lowenstam HA. The influence of marine bottom
communities on the depositional environment of sediments. J
Geol 1958;66:310 8.
Grasso M, Pedley HM. The sedimentology and development of
Terravechia Formation carbonates (Upper Miocene) of North
Central Sicily: possible eustatic influence on facies develop-
ment. Sediment Geol 1988;57:131 49.
Grigg RW. The Darwin point: a threshold for atoll formation. Coral
Reefs 1982;1:29 34.
Grigg RW. Paleoceanography of coral reefs in the Hawaiian
Emporer chain. Coral Reefs 1997;16:S33 8.
Grftsch J, Mercadier C. Integrated 3-D reservoir modelling based
on 3-D seismic: the Tertiary Malampaya and Camargo buildups,
offshore Palawan, Philippines. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull
1999;83:1703 28.
Guardado LR, Gamboa LAP, Lucchesi CF. Petroleum geology of
the Campos Basin, Brazil, a model for a producing Atlantic type
basin. In: Edwards JD, Santogrossi PA, editors. Divergent/
passive margin basins. Mem-Am Assoc Pet Geol, vol. 48; 1990.
p. 3 79.
Gvirtzman G, Buchbinder B, Sneh A, Nir Y, Friedman GM.
Morphology of the Red Sea fringing reefs; a result of the
erosional pattern of the last-glacial-low-stand sea level and the
following Holocene recolonization. 2e Symposium international
sur les coraux et recifs corallines fossils. Mem Bur Rech Geol
Min 1977;89:480 91.
Handford CR, Loucks RG. Carbonate depositional sequences and
systems tractsresponses of carbonate platforms to relative sea-
level changes. In: Loucks RG, Sarg JF, editors. Carbonate
sequence stratigraphy; recent developments and applications.
Mem Am Assoc Pet Geol, vol. 57; 1993. p. 3 42.
Hay WW, Rosol MJ, Sloan JL. Plate tectonic control of global
patterns of detrital and carbonate sedimentation. In: Doyle LJ,
Roberts HH, editors. CarbonateClastic Transitions. Nether-
lands7 Elsevier; 1988. p. 1 34.
James NP, von der Borch CC. Carbonate shelf edge off southern
Australia: a prograding open-platform margin. Geology 1991;19:
1005 8.
James NP, Coniglio M, Aissaoui DM, Purser BH. Facies and
geological history of an exposed Miocene rift margin carbonate
platform, Gulf of Suez, Egypt. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull
1988;72:555 72.
James NP, Boreen TD, Bone Y, Feary DA. Holocene carbonate
sedimentation on the west Eucla Shelf, Great Australian Bight: a
shaved shelf. Sediment Geol 1994;90:161 77.
Leeder M, Gawthorpe RL. Sedimentary models for extensional tilt-
block/half-graben basins. In: Coward MP, Dewey JF, Hancock
PL, editors. Continental extensional tectonics. Spec Publ-Geol
Soc Lond, vol. 28; 1987. p. 139 52.
Light JL, Wilson JB. Cool-water carbonate deposition on the West
Shetland Shelf: a modern distally steepened ramp. In: Wright
VP, Burchette TP, editors. Carbonate ramps. Spec Publ-Geol
Soc Lond, vol. 149; 1998. p. 73 105.
Lokier SW. The Miocene Wonosari Formation, Java, Indonesia:
Volcaniclastic influences on carbonate platform development.
PhD thesis, London Univ, London UK; 2000.
Lukasik JJ, James NP. Deepening-upward subtidal cycles, Murray
basin, South Australia. J Sediment Res 2003;73:653 71.
Lukasik JJ, James NP, McGowran B, Bone Y. An epeiric ramp:
low energy, cool-water carbonate facies in a Tertiary inland
 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
sea Murray basin, South Australia. Sedimentology 2000;47:
851 81.
Luterbacher HP, Eichenseer H, Betzler C, van den Hurk AM.
Carbonate siliciclastic depositional systems in the Paleogene of
the South Pyrenean foreland basin; a sequence stratigraphic
approach. In: MacDonald DIM, editor. Sedimentation, tecton-
ics and eustasy. Spec Publ Int Assoc Sedimentol, vol. 12;
1991. p. 391 407.
Mayall MJ, Bent A, Roberts DM. Miocene carbonate buildups
offshore Socialist Republic of Vietnam. In: Fraser AJ, Mathews
SJ, Murphy RW, editors. Petroleum geology of Southeast Asia.
Spec Publ-Geol Soc Lond, vol. 126; 1997. p. 117 20.
Montgomery SL. Cotton Valley lime pinnacle reef play: Branton
Field. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull 1996;80:617 29.
Mullins HT, Neumann AC. Deep arbonate bank margin structure
and sedimentation in the northern Bahamas. In: Doyle LJ,
Pilkey OH, editors. Geology of continental slopes. Spec
Publ-Soc Econ Paleontol Mineral, vol. 27; 1979. p. 165 92.
Nilsen TH, Sylvester AG. Strike-slip basins. In: Busby CJ, Ingersoll
RV, editors. Tectonics of sedimentary basins. Oxford (UK)7
Blackwell Science; 1995. p. 425 57.
Orszag-Sperber F, Harwood G, Kendall AC, Purser BH. A review
of the evaporites of the Red SeaGulf of Suez rift. In: Purser
BH, Bosence DWJ, editors. Sedimentary and tectonic evolu-
tion of rift basinsthe Red SeaGulf of Aden. London (UK)7
Chapman Hall and Kluwers; 1998. p. 409 26.
Pedley A. Eocene foreland basin carbonate facies, the External
Sierras, Spanish Pyrenees. PhD thesis, London Univ. London,
UK; 1994.
Pedley HM. Miocene reef distributions and their associations in the
central Mediterranean region: an overview. In: Franseen EK,
Esteban M, Ward WC, Rouchy J-M, editors. Models for
carbonate stratigraphy from Miocene reef complexes of
Mediterranean regions. Soc Econ Pal Min Concepts Sedimentol
Paleontol, vol. 5; 1996. p. 73 88.
Pedley A, Bosence DWJ, Nichols GJ. Eocene foreland basin
carbonate ramp facies and depositional sequences, the External
Sierras, Spanish Pyrenees. Abstract; Carbonate Ramps; Oceano-
graphic and Biological Controls, Modelling and Diagenesis
Geological Society of London, 23rd July 1996.
Pigram CJ, Davies PJ, Feary DA, Symonds PA, Chapman GCH.
Controls on Tertiary carbonate platform evolution in the
Papuan Basin: new play concepts. In: Carmen GJ, editor.
Petroleum exploration in Papua New Guinea. Proceedings of
the First PNG Petroleum Convention, Port Moresby; 1990.
p. 185 95.
Platt JP. The mechanism of frontal imbrication: a first order analysis.
Geol Rundsch 1988;77:577 89.
Pomar LWC. High-resolution sequence stratigraphy in prograding
carbonates: applications to seismic interpretation. In: Loucks RG,
Sarg JF, editors. Carbonate sequence stratigraphy; recent devel-
opments and applications. Mem-Am Assoc Pet Geol, vol. 57;
1993. p. 389 407.
Pomar LWC. Types of carbonate platform: a genetic approach.
Basin Res 2001;13:313 34.
Pomar LWC, Ward WC. Reservoir scale heterogeneity in
depositional packages and diagenetic patterns on a reef-rimmed
71
platform, Upper Miocene, Mallorca, Spain. Am Assoc Pet
Geol Bull 1999;83:1759 73.
Pomar L, Obrador A, Westphal H. Sub-wavebase cross-bedded
grainstones on a distally steepened carbonate ramp, Upper
Miocene, Menorca, Spain. Sedimentology 2002;49:139 69.
Purdy EG. Recent calcium carbonate facies of the Great Bahama
Bank: 2 Sedimentary facies. J Geol 1963;71:472 97.
Purdy EG. Karst determined facies patterns in the British Honduras:
Holocene carbonate sedimentation model. Am Assoc Pet Geol
Bull 1974;58:825 55.
Purdy EG, Bertram GT. Carbonate concepts from the Maldives,
Indian Ocean. Am Assoc Pet Geol Stud Geol 1993;34. [Tulsa,
USA].
Purdy EG, Gischler E, Lomando AJ. The Belize Margin revisited: 2
Origin of Holocene antecedent topography. Int J Earth Sci
2003;92:552 72.
Purser BH. The Persian Gulf: Holocene Carbonate Sedimentation
and Diagenesis in a Shallow Epicontinental Sea. Heidelberg7
Springer Verlag; 1973.
Purser BH, Bosence DWJ. Sedimentation and Tectonics of Rift
Basins: Red SeaGulf of Aden. London (UK)7 Chapman Hall-
Kluwers; 1998.
Purser BH, Plaziat J-C. Miocene periplatform slope sedimentation
in the northwestern Red Sea rift, Egypt. In: Purser BH, Bosence
DWJ, editors. Sedimentation and tectonics of rift basins: Red
SeaGulf of Aden. London (UK)7 Chapman Hall-Kluwers;
1998. p. 320 46.
Purser BH, Barrier P, Montenat C, Orszag-Sperber F, Ott dEstevou
J-C, Plaziat J-C, et al. Carbonate and siliciclastic sedimentation
in an active tectonic setting: Miocene of the Northwest Red Sea
rift Egypt. In: Purser BH, Bosence DWJ, editors. Sedimentation
and tectonics of rift basins: Red SeaGulf of Aden. London
(UK)7 Chapman Hall-Kluwers; 1998. p. 239 70.
Quinn T, Saller AH. Geology of Anewetak Atoll, Republic of the
Marshall Islands. In: Vacher HL, Quinn TM, editors. Geology
and hydrogeology of carbonate islands. Amsterdam, Nether-
lands7 Elsevier; 1997. p. 637 66.
Read JF. Carbonate platforms of passive (extensional) continental
marginstypes, characteristics and evolution. Tectonophysics
1982;81:195 212.
Read JF. Carbonate platform facies models. Am Assoc Pet Geol
Bull 1985;69:1 21.
Reijmer JJG, Betzler C, Kroon D, Tiedemann R, Eberli GP.
Bahamian carbonate platform development in response to sea-
level changes and the closure of the Isthmus of Panama. Int J
Earth Sci 2002;91:482 9.
Rezak R, Bright TJ, McGrail DW. Reefs and Banks of the
Northwestern Gulf of Mexico, their Geological and Biological
Dynamics. New York7 Wiley; 1985.
Roberts HH, Murray SP. Gulfs of the northern Red Sea: depositional
settings of abrupt siliciclasticcarbonate transitions. In: Doyle
HH, Roberts HH, editors. CarbonateClastic Transitions.
Amsterdam, Netherlands7 Elsevier; 1983. p. 99 142.
Roberts HH, Sydow J. The offshore Mahakam Delta: strati-
graphic response of late Pleistocene to modern sea level
cycles. Proc 25th ann conv Indonesian petrol assoc; 1996.
p. 147 61.
72 D. Bosence / Sedimentary Geology 175 (2005) 4972
Robertson AHF, Eaton S, Follows EJ, McCallum JE. The role of
local tectonics versus global sea-level change in the Neogene
evolution of the Cyprus active margin. In: Macdonald DIM,
editor. Sedimentation, tectonics and eustasy; sea level changes at
active margins. Spec Publ Int Assoc Sedimentol, vol. 12; 1991.
p. 331 72.
Ruiz-Ortiz PA, Bosence DWJ, Rey J, Nieto LM, Castro JM, Molina
JM. Tectonic control of facies architecture, sequence stratig-
raphy and drowning of a Liassic carbonate platform (Betic
Cordillera, southern Spain). Basin Res 2004;16:235 58.
Santisteban C, Taberner C. Sedimentary models of siliciclastic
deposits and coral reef interrelation. In: Doyle LJ, Roberts HH,
editors. Carbonateclastic transitions. Amsterdam, Netherlands7
Elsevier; 1988. p. 35 76.
Sarg JF. Carbonate sequence stratigraphy. In: Wilgus CK,
Hastings BS, Kendall CGStC, Posamentier HW, Ross CA,
van Wagoner JC, editors. Sea level changes: an integrated
approach. Spec Publ-Soc Econ Paleontol Mineral, vol. 42;
1988. p. 155 81.
Schlager W. Sedimentation rates and growth potential of tropical,
cool-water and mud-mound carbonate systems. In: Insalaco E,
Skelton PW, Palmer TJ, editors. Carbonate platform systems;
components and interactions. Spec Publ-Geol Soc Lond, vol.
178; 2000. p. 217 27.
Schlager W, Ginsburg RN. Bahama carbonate platformsthe deep
and the past. Mar Geol 1981;44:1 24.
Schlager W, Bourgeois F, Mackenzie G, Smit J. Boreholes at
Great Isaac and Site 626 and the history of the Florida Straits.
In: Austin JA, Schlager W, editors. Proc ODP Sci results, vol.
101. Texas, USA7 Ocean Drilling Program, College Station;
1988. p. 425 37.
Scoffin TP, Alexandersson ET, Bowes ET, Clokie JJ, Farrow GE,
Milliman JD. Recent, temperate, sub-photic, carbonate sedi-
mentation: Rockall Bank, northeast Atlantic. J Sediment Petrol
1980;50:331 56.
Sheriden RE, Crosby JT, Bryan GM, Stoffa PL. Stratigraphy and
structure of the southern Blake Plateau, northern Florida Straits
and northern Bahama Platform from recent multichannel
seismic reflection data. Am Assoc Pet Geol Bull 1988;65:
2571 93.
Sinclair HD. Tectonostratigraphic model for underfilled periferal
foreland basins: an Alpine perspective. Geol Soc Amer Bull
1997;109:324 46.
Taberner C, Bosence DWJ. An Eocene biodetrital mud-mound from
the Pyrenean Foreland Basin, Spain: ancient analogue for
Florida Bay mounds? In: Monty C, Bosence DWJ, Bridges P,
editors. Carbonate mud-mounds: their origin and evolution.
Spec Publ Int Assoc Sedimentol, vol. 23; 1995. p. 423 7.
Taberner C, Dinares-Turrell J, Gimenez J, Docherty C. Basin infill
architecture and evolution from magnetostratigraphic cross-
basin correlations in the southeastern Pyrenean foreland basin.
Geol Soc Amer Bull 1999;111:1155 74.
Teisserenc P, Villemin J. Sedimentary basin of Gabongeology
and oil systems. In: Edwards JD, Santogrossi PA, editors.
Divergent/passive margin basins. Mem-Am Assoc Pet Geol,
vol. 48; 1990. p. 117 99.
Tucker ME, Wright VP. Carbonate sedimentology. Blackwell
Scientific Publications; 1990. 482 pp.
Vacher HL, Quinn TM. Geology and hydrogeology of Carbonate
Islands. Amsterdam, Netherlands7 Elsevier; 1997.
Vacher HL, Rowe MP. Geology and hydrogeology of Bermuda.
In: Vacher HL, Quinn TM, editors. Geology and hydrogeology
of carbonate islands. Amsterdam, Netherlands7 Elsevier; 1997.
p. 35 90.
Walles FE. Tectonic and diagenetically induced seal failure within
the southwestern Great Bahama Bank. Mar Pet Geol 1993;10:
14 28.
Warrlich GMD, Waltham DA, Bosence DWJ. Controls on atoll
stratigraphies; insights from 3D forward computer modelling.
Basin Res 2002;14:379 400.
Warrlich GM, Bosence DWJ, Waltham DA. 3-D to 4-D controls on
carbonate systems through palaeoenvironmental and sequence
stratigraphic analysis of a Miocene attached platform and atoll,
Nijar Basin, SE Spain. Sedimentology in press; 52 [000000].
Watchorn FG. The structure and stratigraphy of the South Hadhra-
maut, Yemen. PhD thesis, London Univ. London, UK; 1997.
Wilson JL. Carbonate facies in geologic history. New York7
Springer Verlag; 1975.
Wilson MEJ. The Tonassa Limestone Formation, Sulawesi, Indo-
nesia: development of a Tertiary carbonate platform. PhD thesis,
London Univ. London, UK; 1995.
Wilson MEJ. Cenozoic carbonates in southeast Asia: implications
for equatorial carbonate development. Sediment Geol 2002;147:
295 428.
Wilson MEJ, Bosence DWJ. The Tertiary evolution of South
Sulawesi: a record in redeposited carbonate facies of the
Tonasa Limestone Formation. In: Hall R, Blundell DJ, editors.
Tectonic evolution of Southeast Asia. Spec Publ-Geol Soc
Lond, vol. 106; 1996. p. 365 89.
Wilson MEJ, Bosence DWJ. Platform top and ramp deposits of
the Tonasa Carbonate Platform, Sulawesi, Indonesia. In:
Fraser AJ, Mathews SJ, Murphy RW, editors. Petroleum
geology of Southeast Asia. Spec Publ-Geol Soc Lond, vol.
126; 1997. p. 247 80.
Wilson MEJ, Lokier SW. Siliciclastic and volcaniclastic influences
on equatorial carbonates: insights from the Neogene of
Indonesia. Sedimentology 2002;49:583 601.
Wilson MEJ, Bosence DWJ, Limbong A. Tertiary syntectonic
carbonate platform development in Indonesia. Sedimentology
2000;47:395 419.
Wright VP, Burchette TP. Shallow-water carbonate sediments. In:
Reading HG, editor. Sedimentary environments: processes,
facies and stratigraphy. Oxford (UK)7 Blackwell Science;
1996. p. 325 94.