Sedimentology (1996) 43, 611-629

A depositional model for storm- and tide-influenced

prograding siliciclastic shorelines from the Middle Devonian of
the central Appalachian foreland basin, USA
ANTHONY R . PRAVE,* WILLIAM L. DUKEt a n d WILLIAM SLATTERYS
"Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, The City College of The City University of N e w York,
New York, N Y 10031, U S A
tDepartment of Geology, T h e University of Kuwait, Safat 13060, Kuwait
*Department of Geological Sciences, Wright Sate University, Dayton, OH 45435, U S A

ABSTRACT
A stratigraphic motif observed in many foreland basins is the development of
basinward tapering siliciclastic wedges characterized by various scales of
depositional cycles. The Middle Devonian (Givetian) Mahantango Formation in the
central Appalachian foreland basin is such an example. It consists of both small-
and large-scale thickening- and coarsening-upward cycles; the small-scale cycles are
typically less than 10 m thick whereas larger-scale cycles are generally a few tens of
metres thick and commonly contain several of the smaller-scale cycles. Outcrop-
based facies analyses indicate that the depositional cyclicity resulted from episodic
progradation of a regionally straight, tide-dominated shoreline onto a storm-
dominated, shallow marine shelf. The depositional model for this ancient shallow
marine system consists of a vertical facies succession in which storm-dominated
offshore marine mudstone and fine sandstone pass gradationally upward into storm-
dominated nearshore marine shelf and shoreface sandstone overlain by, in proximal
sections, tide-dominated shoreline sandstone, pebbly sandstone and mudstone.
Transgressively reworked lag deposits cap most of the thickening- and coarsening-
upward packets. In this model, coarse-grained rocks, rather than implying basinward
shifts of facies, are a consanguineous part of the stacked shoaling cycles. Lateral facies
relationships show that the dominance of storm- vs. tide-generated sedimentary
features is simply a function of palaeogeographical position within the basin;
proximal sections contain tidally influenced sedimentary features whereas more distal
sections only display evidence for storm-influenced deposition. These results suggest
caution when inferring palaeoceanographic conditions from sedimentological datasets
that do not contain preserved examples of palaeoshorelines.

INTRODUCTION storm- or tide-dominated (e.g. Tillman & Siemers,

In many modern shallow marine and nearshore
settings, both tides and storms are recognized as
nearly co-effective agents of sediment transport.
However, most ancient shallow-marine depo-
sitional systems are interpreted typically as end-
products of two main processes, i.e. either being
*Present address: Department of Geology, University of
St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9ST, UK.
'C) 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists
1984; Knight & McLean, 1986; Swift et a]., 1991;
Dalrymple, 1992; Walker & Plint, 1992). One
such ancient system is recorded in the Middle
Devonian Mahantango Formation and its equiva-
lents, a remarkably cyclical siliciclastic succes-
sion of nearshore marine sandstones and
mudstones that record the initial Acadian oro-
genic phase in the central Appalachian foreland
basin (Fig. 1).Based on our facies analyses and
interpretations, we conclude that depositional
611
612 A. R. Prave et al.
0 loo
1 km
MIDDLE DEVONIAN
3 sw
cyclicity of the Mahantango rocks records the
episodic advance and retreat of a tide-dominated
shoreline onto a storm-dominated shelf. Thus,
in this ancient shelf-shoreline system, field
evidence that reflects the principal sediment
transport process is strongly biased by palaeogeo-
graphical position within the basin; shorelines
were tide-dominated whereas sediment dispersal
on the shelf was mainly by storms. An appreci-
ation of this potential preservational bias (distal
vs. proximal settings rather than changing palae-
oceanographic condition) is important because
palaeoclimate and palaeoceanographic models
are strongly dependent on sedimentological data
indicative of tide- or storm-generated currents
along palaeoshelves. In many instances then, a
tidal influence may be fully appreciated only if
palaeoshorelines are preserved.
STRATIGRAPHIC FRAMEWORK
The Mahantango Formation (Givetian) comprises
the bulk of the Middle Devonian Hamilton Group
0 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedirnentology, 43, 611-629
Fig. 1.(A) Location of measured
sections (circles) along the Middle
Devonian outcrop belt within the
Appalachian fold and thrust belt of
Pennsylvania and south-eastern
New York. Solid arrows indicate
line of section for (b). Letters
correspond to sections used to
construct the stratigraphic cross-
sections on Figs 15-17: A -
Websters Mill; B - Midway Exit;
C - Watts Exit; D - Girtys Notch;
E - Marysville, F - Rockville;
G - Dalmatia Quarry; H -
Bowmanstown; I - Raymondskill;
J - Sawkill Creek; K - Port Jervis,
NY. (B) Lithostratigraphic
subdivision of the Middle
NE Devonian Hamilton Group of
which the Mahantango Formation
forms the bulk (modified slightly
from Dennison & Hasson, 1976;
Faill et a!., 1978; Sevon &
Woodrow, 1985). Heavier stippling
denotes sandstone and pebbly
sandstone; lighter stippling denotes
finer sandstone and siltstone;
dashes denote siltstone with some
fine sandstone; brick pattern
denotes limestone and calcareous
shale; unpatterned areas are mostly
mudstone.
in Pennsylvania and adjacent New York (Fig. 1).
The formation is up to 400m thick and defines
one of the earliest basinward prograding clastic
wedges associated with the Mid to Late Devonian
Acadian orogeny [Dennison & Hasson, 1976;
Ettensohn, 1985; Faill, 1985). It consists mostly
of shallow marine fossiliferous mudstone and
sandstone arranged in a nested hierarchy of
coarsening-upward cycles each several metres to
a few tens of metres thick. Numerous workers
have investigated the Mahantango succession and
have offered contrasting interpretations of the
depositional cyclicity. These include a fluvial-
dominated delta (Willard, 1935; Willard et al.,
1939; Ellison, 1965; Kaiser, 1972; Faill & Wells,
1974; Faill et al., 1978; Hoskins, 1978), a storm-
dominated prograding shoreline (Goldring &
Bridges, 1973) and a storm-generated shelf sand
ridge system (Sarwar & Smoot, 1983; Sarwar,
1984). Our work indicates that depositional
cyclicity resulted from the repeated progradation
and retreat of a regionally straight, tide-influenced
shoreline system onto a storm-dominated marine
 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 613
Fig. 2. Mudstone with interbedded
thin siltstone of facies association
1. Siltstone beds pinch-and-swell
laterally above sharp, flat bases.
Notebook (lower right corner)
appearing in photographs is 0.19m
high.
shelf. This interpretation is based on a descriptive
data set consisting of detailed measurements of 1 6
sections supplemented by additional scrutiny of
numerous less complete sections. As documented
below, a total of 20 facies were defined and
grouped into seven facies associations (for ad-
ditional details and slight variants see Duke et al.,
1991; Prave & Duke, 1991; Slattery, 1993).
Facies associations 1 and 2:
mudstone-dominated intervals and mudstone
interbedded with hummocky cross-stratified
sandstone
Description. Facies association 1 consists mostly
of fossiliferous shale or mudstone units ranging in
thickness from several decimetres to a few tens of
metres. Colours typically are grey, but locally are
red. At many localities, thin beds (generally
5 10 cm thick) of siltstone and fine sandstone are
interbedded with the mudstone (Fig. 2). These
beds are a minor component of this association
but can comprise up to 40% of any given section.
Most of these coarser beds are continuous across
the outcrop, but in places can be observed to
pinch out laterally. Typically these beds display
grading above sharp, planar bases and internally
consist of flat to wavy-parallel lamination grading
upward into ripple cross-lamination. Bed tops
are either gradational into overlying mudstone
intervals or sharp and commonly capped with
combined-flow ripples (symmetric forms with
spacings of many centimetres and unidirection-
ally orientated foresets). Some of the thicker
siltstone and fine sandstone beds display small-
0 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
scale hummocky cross-stratification. Dispersed
throughout these fine siliciclastics are abundant
body fossils of brachiopods, crinoids and corals;
bryozoans and molluscs are present but less
common. Trace fossils are similarly abundant
and mostly from the Cruziana ichnofacies. Bio-
turbation ranges from slight to intense, locally
resulting in a completely homogenized inter-
val characterized by a mottled to knotted
appearance.
Facies association 2 consists of interbedded fine
sandstone and mudstone beds in intervals up to
10 m in thickness. The mudstones are similar to
those described above but are thinner and sub-
ordinate to the sandstones. In contrast to facies
association 1, sandstones are thicker (0.2-1-5 m),
pinch-and-swell laterally and are ubiquitously
hummocky cross-stratified (Fig. 3) to flat lami-
nated. The bases of sandstone beds are sharp and,
rarely, sole marks can be observed. In places,
some of the thicker sandstones display soft-
sediment deformation in the form of load casts
and ball-and-pillow structures. Bed tops com-
monly exhibit current, symmetric and combined-
flow ripples. A variety of trace and body fossils
are present. Body fossils are similar to those
described for facies association 1 but, in the
hummocky sandstones, generally are concen-
trated near bed bases as disarticulated and
abraded fragments. Trace fossils are common
and mostly from the Cruziana ichnofacies but
Skolithos occurs locally. The degree of biotur-
bation varies from place to place; from isolated
burrows in the tops of sandstone beds to com-
pletely homogenized, decimetre-thick intervals of
614 A. R. Prave et al.
mottled, argillaceous sandstone or sandy mud-
stone containing isolated remnants of stratified
layers.
The rocks of facies associations 1 and 2 contain
a variety of palaeoflow indicators including asym-
metric ripple crests, ripple cross-lamination and
sole marks. The combined measurements of these
features from throughout the study area are
shown on Fig. 4.
Interpretation. Both facies associations contain
an abundant body and trace fossil assemblage
indicative of an open marine setting. We interpret
the decimetres-thick, sharp-based sandstones of
facies association 2, which display hummocky
cross-stratification, grading and symmetric to
combined-flow rippled bedtops, as episodic storm
deposits under oscillatory-dominated combined
flows (e.g. Dott & Bourgeois, 1982; Duke, 1985). In
many instances their emplacement was rapid
enough to cause loading and foundering into the
underlying muddy substrate (detached load casts
and ball-and-pillow structures). The mudstone
represents hemipelagic deposition during post-
storm and fair-weather conditions. Thus, the
interbedded mudstone and sandstone beds of
facies association 2 record deposition well above
effective storm wave base in an offshore marine
setting. In contrast, the dominance of mudstone
and the thinness of sandstone beds in facies
association 1 implies deposition in settings
experiencing far fewer high-energy events. We
interpret the mudstones as hemipelagites of an
open marine setting well below fair-weather wave
base and the thin, sharp-based siltstone and fine
(-, 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
Fig. 3.Hummocky cross-stratified
fine sandstone and interbedded
mudstone typical of facies
association 2. Hummock spacings
generally are up to 1-2 m.
sandstone beds as the distal portions of the
thicker, coarser storm deposits of facies associ-
ation 2. Accordingly, the arrangement of these
two facies associations into metre(s1-scale
thickening- and coarsening-upward packets (Fig.
5) records progradation of proximal offshore
marine over distal deeper marine deposits.
The palaeoflow data from the storm deposits are
dispersed (Fig. 4). Nevertheless, the ripple cross-
lamination and sole mark data broadly indicate
that most sediment was transported west-north-
westward. If, as Duke (1990) argued, these
small-scale features reflect generally shore-
normal directions of peak instantaneous shear
stress beneath storm-generated flows, then a more-
or-less NE-SW-trending shoreline is implied.
Such a trend is supported by the (admittedly
sparse) wave ripple crest data (Fig. 4). This con-
clusion is not surprising given that workers since
the time of Barrel1 (1913) and Willard (1935) have
inferred such shoreline orientations for the Mid to
Late Devonian strata of the central Appalachian
foreland basin.
Facies associations 3 and 4: hummocky and
swaley cross-stratified sandstone bodies
Description. Facies associations 3 and 4 are char-
acterized by tabular sandstone bodies a few to
several metres in thickness. Facies association 3
consists of fine sandstone beds that typically are
several decimetres in thickness. Bed bases are
erosional, resulting in an undulatory, pinch-and-
swell bed geometry; lateral amalgamation of beds
 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 615
SHORELINE DATA
facies assoc. 5-6
trough cross-bedding
'1
20" classes
u Interpretation. We interpret the hummocky and
- 'l'd SHELF-SHOREFACE DATA
Fig. 4. Summary of palaeoflow data for facies associ-
ations 1 4 and 5 & 6. Equal-area rosette for facies
associations 1-4 in lower panel represents ripple cross-
lamination, wave ripple crests and sole lineation data
combined from throughout the field area. Individual
equal-area rosettes in upper panel represent trough
cross-bed data combined for facies association 5 & 6
from localities keyed to sections denoted on Fig. 1(A).
is common. Most beds display hummocky cross-
stratification with spacings of many decimetres
up to 2 m (Fig. 6), but some beds are flat laminated
and a few are structureless. Thin mudstone layers
and partings separating beds are present in the
lower parts of occurrences of facies association 3,
but these decrease upward. Symmetrical or cur-
rent ripples are rare. Shale rip-up clasts and
rounded quartz granules and pebbles (having
apparent long axis diameters up to 1cm) locally
occur dispersed along laminae or as 1-5-cm-thick
lenses along bed bases. Body fossils consisting of
fragmented and abraded, disarticulated, thick-
shelled brachiopods, crinoid ossicles and other
0 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
shallow marine invertebrates are disseminated
throughout beds but most commonly occur as
concentrates along the erosional contacts of
individual beds. Trace fossils are sparse and
mostly Skolithos burrows.
Facies association 4 similarly consists of fine
sandstone in decimetre- to metre-thick tabular
bodies. However, in contrast to facies association
3, individual beds are difficult to distinguish
because of their textural similarity. These sand-
stones are well sorted and compositionally
mature with no mudstone partings or rip-up
clasts. They are characterized by swaley cross-
stratification and flat lamination (Fig. 7). Locally,
thick-shelled brachiopod fragments and rounded
quartz granules and pebbles occur as thin concen-
trates along the bases of swales. No biogenic
structures were observed. Rarely, decimetre-thick
lenses of medium sandstone occur and display
trough cross-bedding in 5-20-cm-thick sets.
swaley stratified sandstones of facies associations
3 and 4 as storm deposits in nearshore marine
settings. The low density of body and trace
fossils, the abraded nature of the former, and
the amalgamated beds and erosional contacts
similarly support the inference for episodic
storm emplacement. Although inferring palaeo-
bathymetries is speculative, the most likely geo-
morphic setting for these rocks is the innermost
shelf and shoreface (e.g. Walker & Plint, 1992).
The presence or absence of argillaceous layers in
facies association 3 denotes the palaeodepth at
which hydrodynamic energy conditions either
permitted or prevented the deposition and pres-
ervation of fines, i.e. the 'fair-weather mudline'. In
contrast, swaley- and flat-stratified sandstones of
facies association 4 record deposition under
somewhat higher energy conditions. The paucity
of body and trace fossils or other sedimentary
structures implies that the substrate was under
continual agitation. Such characteristics are typi-
cally attributed to the middle and upper shoreface
well above fair-weather wave base (Walker &
Plint, 1992). The presence of pebbles, though rare,
suggests that the sediment was being derived from
an adjacent, coarser grained shoreline.
Facies associations 5 and 6: variably bedded
sandstone with flow reversal indicators
Description. Occurrences of facies association 5
range in thickness from 1 to 5 m and consist of
thin (generally 2-10cm thick), fine to medium
616 A. R. Prave et al.
sandstone beds. The sandstones are more argilla-
ceous than those in other facies associations. Beds
are laterally continuous across the outcrop and
typically separated by similarly continuous, thin
mudstone partings (Fig. 8). Bed thicknesses re-
main more-or-less consistent both laterally and
vertically, thus no thickening-upward trends are
produced. There is a tendency, albeit weak, for
coarsening-upward trends to occur. The bases of
sandstone beds are mostly sharp, flat, and non-
erosive (there is no evidence of scour into or
truncation of underlying mudstone partings). Bed
tops are commonly capped with symmetric, cur-
rent or combined-flow ripples and draped by
mudstone. Internally, beds display a wide variety
of sedimentary structures. The most common are
0 1996 International
Fig. 5. Small-scale thickening- and
coarsening-upward trend ( z 3 m
thick) from the mudstone and thin
siltstone of facies association 1
upward into the hummocky
stratified sandstone with lesser
mudstone of facies association 2.
Fig. 6. Hummocky cross-stratified
fine sandstone of facies association
3. Note that lateral amalgamation of
beds is common, with mudstones
variably preserved as either
discontinuous partings or
somewhat thicker, more continuous
layers.
flat and wavy-parallel lamination, but ripple and
climbing ripple cross-lamination, and small-scale
trough cross-bedding can be locally abundant.
Much less common are occurrences of small-scale
hummocky cross-stratification and structureless
intervals. A relatively diverse ichnofossil assem-
blage dominated by Skolithos and Planolites is
present in varying densities. Brachiopods are the
most plentiful body fossil and occur dispersed
throughout beds as disarticulated, abraded frag-
ments or, rarely, as articulated valves. In places
brachiopod coquinites up to 1cm thick can be
found. Crinoid ossicles and ostracods also are
present but are much less common.
Facies association 6 consists of relatively thick
bodies (1-lorn) of poorly sorted, medium to
Association of Sedimentologists, Sedirnentology, 43,611-629
 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 6 1 7

Fig. 7. Swaley stratified fine

sandstone of facies association 4.
This facies also contains
structureless (upper sandstone
layers) and flat laminated intervals
(sandstone beds in bottom-right).

Fig. 8. Typical occurrence of facies

association 5 rocks. Bases of
sandstone beds are mostly flat and
nonerosive. Bed tops are commonly
rippled and draped by mudstone.
Note lateral continuity of sandstone
beds and mudstone partings. Upper
beds in photograph display
abundant burrows.

coarse sandstone and, locally, sandy conglomer-
ate. Beds are several decimetres up to a couple of
metres in thickness. Basal contacts are slightly
undulatory to irregularly scoured with local relief
up to 0-5 m. Many beds fine upward from basal
pebbly lags into medium sandstone. Pebbles
are predominantly rounded to subangular, vein
quartz and quartzite clasts with apparent long
axis diameters u p to 5 cm. Very rare gneissic and
schistose clasts (1-2 cm diameters) occur in the
most proximal sections. Some of the thicker beds
define large channel-like structures infilled with
lateral accretion sets 1-10 m thick (Fig. 9). These
lateral accretion sets display sigmoidal forms
(epsilon cross-bedding) that dip up to 15relative
to basal bedding surfaces. Decimetre-thick cosets
(> 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
of trough cross-bedding are the most prevalent
sedimentary structure (Fig. 10)although flat lami-
nated and structureless intervals also occur. Many
cross-bed set boundaries as well as individual
foresets are marked by millimetre-thick argilla-
ceous partings and drapes (Fig. 11) and some
superposed sets show reversing flow direc-
tions. In other instances, reactivation surfaces,
small current ripples, or thin sets of ripple
cross-lamination having migration directions
opposite those of the subjacent cross-beds, define
coset bounding surfaces. In numerous places,
decimetre-thick intervals of repetitively bundled
finer, argillaceous and coarser, cleaner laminae
sets occur (Fig. 1 2 ) . Shale rip-up clasts and dis-
articulated thick-shelled brachiopod fragments are
618 A. R. Prave et al.
dispersed through many beds. Trace fossils are
common and dominated by Skolithos and other
unidentified large subvertical to subhorizontal
burrows (diameters up to 1 cm and lengths of
1-15 cm); some of these larger burrows display a
knobby ornamentation (Rosselia?).
Interpretation. The presence of marine inverte-
brates and ichnofauna indicate a nearshore
marine environment for both facies associations.
However, the lithological character of facies
association 5 rocks, typified by diverse stratifi-
cation types in sandstone of uniform grain size and
a consistent vertical repetition of laterally continu-
ous, thin sandstone-mudstone beds, implies
0 1996 International
Fig. 9. Large channellized beds
characteristic of facies association
6. Channels are infilled with
low-angle lateral accretion bedsets
of medium to coarse sandstone.
Note that most bedsets are
separated by laterally continuous
mudstone layers. Car is about 3 m
for scale.
Fig. 10. Trough cross-bedded
medium to coarse sandstone of
facies association 6. Note how most
sets, as well as individual foresets
within many sets, are separated by
mudstone drapes and partings.
Several superposed sets in bottom
centre and top centre of
photograph display opposed
migration directions.
that the depositing flows within this marine set-
ting varied in magnitude over relatively brief time
intervals. Additionally, the argillaceous textures,
nonerosive sandstone bases, tabular bed geometry
(i.e. retaining a more-or-less constant thickness at
any given occurrence) and the presence of climb-
ing ripples suggest that the sands were deposited
under rapidly decelerating flows and sediment
fallout. The repeated draping of rippled bed tops
by mudstone indicates that the transition from
higher energy sand-depositing events to lower
energy mud deposition was rather abrupt and
of short duration. These inferences and obser-
vations, combined with bidirectional palaeocur-
rent indicators from this facies association (Fig.
Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 619

Fig. 11. Argillaceous drapes on

cross-bed foresets of medium
sandstone of facies association 6.
Note how set boundaries are also
marked by argillaceous partings.
Pen is 0.14 m for scale.

Fig. 12. Centimetre-scale bundling

of mud-rich and mud-poor layers
in low-angle laminated, medium
sandstone of facies association 6.
Pen is 0.14 m for scale.

4), are evidence that the depositing flows periodi-
cally reversed and were separated by relatively
short episodes of slack water. Thus, we interpret
these rocks as tidally influenced deposits of a
subtidal, nearshore setting. The paucity of wave-
formed sedimentary structures (rarity of sym-
metric ripples and small-scale hummocky
cross-stratification) suggests that this setting was
somewhat protected from waves and storms, in
strong contrast to the open marine settings inferred
for facies associations 1-4.
Facies association 6 rocks are characterized
by their coarseness, decimetre-thick cosets of
trough cross-beds, commonly channellized bed
geometries, fining-upward trends and lateral
accretion bedsets. Cross-bed sets typically display
0 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
reactivation surfaces, mudstone drapes, and yield
bidirectional rosettes (Fig. 4). Flat laminae sets
commonly display centimetre-scale bundling.
Such features imply strong, in places locally con-
fined, periodically reversing flows and we inter-
pret these rocks as tide-dominated deposits of
sandy subtidal (and possibly intertidal) flats dis-
sected by a tidal channel network. The lateral
accretion bedsets and fining-upward channellized
beds record the lateral migration and gradual
abandonment of the tidal channels.
Critical to the interpretation of these two facies
associations is the observation that facies associ-
ation 6 always occurs stratigraphically above
facies association 5. Combining the observations
and inferences for both facies associations, we
620 A. R. Prave et al.
conclude that they represent different but related
components of a tide-influenced shoreline; coarse
sediment was transported via an ebb-dominated
distributary system (implied by the greater
number of offshore-directed palaeocurrent indi-
cators for facies association 6; Fig. 4) into sandy
subtidal settings. The evidence for rapid sediment
fallout for facies association 5 can be explained
within the context of flow expansion and conse-
quent deceleration common to the seaward flaring
(funnel-shaped) mouths of tidal channels in their
subtidal portions (e.g. Dalrymple, 1992). Thus, we
envisage facies association 5 as subtidal channel-
mouth shoals (ebb-tidal deltas?) which accumu-
lated in or seaward of the tidal channel and flat
depositional system of facies association 6.
Although there are no preserved exposures of
Middle Devonian fluvial systems in Pennsylvania,
it was argued early on (e.g. Willard, 1935) that the
gravels in the Mahantango rocks must have been
supplied by relatively high-gradient rivers drain-
ing the rising Acadian highlands. The gravels
could not have been derived from reworking
because similarly coarse material is mostly absent
in subjacent facies. Thus, the coarseness of tidal
channel deposits certainly supports the inference
for a fluvial derivation and implies that the tidal
channels were connected to rivers via a distri-
butary network debouching across a coastal plain.
Facies association 7: cycle bounding lag
deposits
Description. This facies association consists of
variably developed, sharp-based lags composed
C) 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
Fig. 13. Cycle-bounding lag deposit
of facies association 7 (top corner
of notebook in centre is leaning
against the lag). The lag rests with
sharp, erosional contact on
underlying coarse sandstones of
facies association 6 and is itself
abruptly overlain by fossiliferous
mudstones of facies association 1.
of poorly sorted, commonly bioturbated, argil-
laceous sandstone to sandy quartz-pebble con-
glomerate (Figs 13 and 14). The composition and
size of pebbles and clasts within this facies are the
same as those described above for facies associ-
ation 6. The lags vary from laterally discontinu-
ous, thin veneers of coarse clasts one to a few
grain diameters thick to laterally continuous
decimetre-thick intervals composed of several
distinct beds generally separated by mudstones of
lesser thickness. Most occurrences contain vary-
ing abundances of abraded fossil fragments, typi-
cally brachiopod valves, crinoid ossicles and
coral fragments; in some places coquinites form.
Differing degrees of cementation occur; some lags
are well cemented and stand in relief, others are
poorly cemented and weather recessively. Several
of the lags are ferruginous with iron oolites and
hematitic cement and locally become ironstones
(Kaiser, 1972; Prave & Duke, 1990).
Four distinct lag types were defined on their
stratification and textural character; single-bed,
multi-bed, bioturbated and cross-bedded. Single-
bed lags range in thickness from several centi-
metres to a few decimetres. These lags typically
are laterally continuous across the outcrop but
the thinner examples can exhibit pinching-and-
swelling. Textures are independent of thickness
and can consist of either poorly sorted argilla-
ceous sandstone, pebbly sandstone or fossilifer-
ous wackestone (mostly abraded brachiopod
fragments). Bioturbation is not typical, but verti-
cal burrows are present locally. Multi-bed lags
define occurrences in which two or more single-
bed lags are separated by mudstone layers up to
 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 6 2 1
Fig. 14.Occurrence of facies association 7 as a discon-
tinuous pebbly lag. Lag consists of an argillaceous
quartz-pebble and brachiopod-fragment sandstone lens
(dark coloured unit with light coloured clasts directly
above notebook) irregularly scoured into underlying
fine sandstones of facies association 4. Both facies are
abruptly overlain by mudstone with thin siltstone beds
of facies association 1. Stratigraphic top is to the left.
several centimetres thick. These lags generally
range in thickness from a few decimetres to a few
metres. Lag bases are demonstrably erosional
with centimetre-scale relief. Lateral continuity is
variable, ranging from continuous across the
outcrop to lensing out over distances of a few
tens of meters. Bioturbated lags are typically a
decimetres-thick interval of intensely biotur-
bated, argillaceous sandstone or sandy mudstone.
They commonly exhibit a mottled, knobby ap-
pearance and generally weather in relief. Widely
dispersed brachiopod valves, coral fragments,
crinoid ossicles and, rarely, quartzitic pebbles
are disseminated throughout these lags. Cross-
bedded lags are many decimetres to a couple of
metres thick and consist of poorly sorted pebbly
sandstones or sandy conglomerates. Fossil frag-
ments, mostly thick-shelled brachiopod and coral
(01996 International Association of Sedirnentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
fragments, are highly abraded. Weakly developed,
large-scale, broad, shallow trough cross-bedding
gives this lag its distinctive character.
All lag occurrences, regardless of exact litho-
logical character, consistently occur at the top of
coarsening-upward cycles (Figs 1 3 and 14). In
nearly every instance, the lags comprise concen-
trates of the coarsest material eroded from sub-
jacent deposits. In several occurrences, the lags
contain clasts coarser than any present in the
immediately underlying rocks [see Fig. 14), but
nowhere are clasts larger than the largest ones
observed in facies association 6.
Interpretation. Three observations are critical to
our interpretation. First, the lags always occur
at depositional cycle boundaries that separate
underlying shallower from overlying deeper
marine deposits. Second, the coarsest material in
the lags is no coarser than the coarsest clasts
observed in facies elsewhere in Mahantango
rocks. Third, the coarsest lags occur in regions
characterized by the overall coarsest facies. Con-
sequently, we interpret facies association 7 rocks
as transgressive lag deposits formed by erosional
shoreface retreat during relative rises of sea level.
Additionally, the presence of intense bioturbation
or local oolitic ironstones within some lags
implies sediment starvation, as is likely to occur
during the initial stages of transgressive episodes.
The few occurrences in which lags contain clasts
coarser than those in the immediately underlying
facies we interpret as simply recording some
offshore clast transport prior to deposition. This is
commonly the case for sediment dispersal during
transgressive erosional bevelling of shorefaces
(Swift, 1968; Swift & Thorne, 1991). Unfortu-
nately, palaeocurrent data for the lags are difficult
to obtain. However, our qualitative observations
on cross-strata orientation suggest mostly west-
erly transport directions which is consistent with
the inference for downwelling, storm-generated
currents remobilizing sediment during trans-
gressive shoreface retreat. It is also noteworthy
that lag types do show a more-or-less preferential
development with respect to palaeobasinal pos-
ition; the finer lags and particularly the multi-bed
and bioturbated lags tend to occur in more distal
positions whereas coarser lags, mainly single-bed
and cross-bedded types, are more typical of proxi-
mal settings. This suggests that transgressive
reworking did not result in broad redistribution
of sediment across the basin. In particular, the
occurrence of multi-bed lags implies that a trans-
gressive episode was not necessarily a smooth,
6 2 2 A. R. Prave et al.
uniform flooding event, but rather a somewhat
episodic or stuttered one.
DEPOSITIONAL FRAMEWORK
Definition of depositional cycles
The recognition of depositional cyclicity is some-
times considered to be in the eye of the beholder.
In order to avoid such criticism, we have adopted
three criteria by which to define cycles and their
bounding surfaces: (1) abrupt superposition of
two disparate facies (i.e. those that do not repre-
sent adjacent environments in the Waltherian
sense) across a sharply defined surface; (2) the
presence of erosively based transgressive lags of
facies association 7 along such a surface; and
( 3 ) the presence of either, or both, of the above at
the top of a sedimentary succession exhibiting a
systematic coarsening- and thickening-upward
trend. Accordingly, the depositional framework
we propose for the Mahantango rocks is based on
the consistency of internal facies successions
within depositional cycles, the magnitude of
inferred palaeobathymetric variation across and
within groupings of such cycles, and the relative
stratigraphic position and hierarchical rank of
those cycles. We use the superposed clustering of
smaller-scale cycles which display a progressive
upward increase in sandstone-to-mudstone ratios
and, by inference, of shallower vs. deeper marine
deposits, as the criterion to define larger-scale
depositional cycles. Note that, in assessing depo-
sitional cycle development, we have kept in mind
the possibility of potential loss of a significant
portion of shallower marine deposits during
transgressive ravinement. Thus, we emphasize
overall vertical facies trends to define larger-scale
cycles rather than relying solely on the presence
or absence of shallowest water deposits at the
tops of such cycles.
Characteristics of depositional cycles
The small-scale depositional cycles are generally
a few to many metres in thickness and their
development is limited to sandstone-dominated
regions in proximal settings. Neither the number
of such cycles nor their internal facies character
can be correlated cycle-by-cycle from section-to-
section (Fig. 15). There are instances in which
the number of small cycles correspond between
portions of closely spaced proximal sections,
but nowhere have we been able to document
:C) 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedirnentology, 43,611-629
persistent one-to-one cycle equivalence and cor-
relation between sections. The small-scale cycle
development from proximal to distal sections is
even more striking; distal sites contain no evi-
dence for the smaller-scale depositional cyclicity
so characteristic of proximal settings (Fig. 15).
Thus, our stratigraphic observations indicate
that the small-scale cycles are laterally discon-
tinuous over a few kilometres and limited to the
coarser, more proximal sections. In contrast,
everywhere along the orogenic margin of the cen-
tral Appalachian foreland basin the Mahantango
succession is characterized by thickening- and
coarsening-upward cycles typically tens of metres
in thickness (Fig. 16). These larger-scale deposi-
tional cycles are defined by an upward increase in
the proportion of shallow marine and shoreline
sandstones concomitant with a decrease in deeper
marine mudstone and finer sandstone. Such
cycles are terminated by an abrupt contact with
overlying deeper, offshore marine mudstone and
much finer sandstone.
Significantly, Brett & Baird (1985, 1986, 1990)
found that equivalent strata (i.e. the Skaneateles-
Ludlowville-Moscow Formations) adjacent to
the cratonic (i.e. north-western) margin of the
Appalachian foreland basin in north-western
Pennsylvania and western New York lacked the
two styles of depositional cycles we describe
here. Consequently, we conclude that the
Mahantango-style cycles record progradational
processes genetically linked to the orogenic mar-
gin of the basin. Such processes include spatial-
temporal variation in the physiography of the
advancing shoreline (subject to the combined
effects of wave attack, longshore drift and tidal
reworking), local variation in the position of the
locus of a point source (the lateral accretion
bedsets in facies association 6 are evidence that
tide-dominated channels migrated along the
shoreline), and fluctuations in siliciclastic influx
rate. The scalar difference between the small-
and large-scale cycles we attribute to relatively
shorter- vs. longer-term advance and retreat of the
shoreline. The larger-scale cycles record longer
duration progradational episodes of wide seg-
ments of the shoreline in contrast to more local-
ized, short-lived progradational events of the
small-scale cycles. We will examine in more
detail in a forthcoming paper the potential mech-
anisms controlling such cyclicity, but note that
the genesis of similar depositional cycles in fore-
land basins elsewhere has commonly been linked
to variations in accommodation space associated
with the repetitive emplacement and denudation
 110 km -
Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 623
2 kmA
-.

Splriler hrllius
horizon
-
100

f - flooding surface

Fig. 15. Characteristics of

depositional cyclicity in
representative proximal (sections
E - Marysville & F - Rockville) and
distal (section A - Websters Mill)
settings (see Fig. 1A for locations). mO
These sections are bracketed
between the Spirifer tullius \
horizon (Ellison, 1965) and top of \
the Marcellus black shale (only \
mudstones occur between the bases \
/ shoaling cycle
of these sections and the
\
Marcellus). Smaller-scale cycles
(denoted by smaller arrows to right %*%
of columns) are developed only in
the proximal settings (sections E &
*,o/
00
F) and are lacking in more distal
ones (section A). Both settings,
however, are typified by
larger-scale depositional cyclicity
(bolder arrows to right of the
columns). The two proximal
sections are less than 2 km apart
but neither the number of smaller
cycles nor their internal facies
characteristics can be correlated on
a one-to-one basis. Facies numbers
refer to those discussed in the text
and depicted on Fig. 18. \

of thrust loads (e.g. Jordan, 1981; Quinlan &
Beaumont, 1984; Ettensohn, 1985; Flemings &
Jordan, 1989, 1990; Jordan & Flemings, 1991;
Stockmal et al., 1992; Plint et al., 1993;
Slingerland et al., 1994).
Storms vs. tides
Sedimentologists commonly use the preponder-
ant sedimentary feature within a given facies
succession to invoke the principal mechanism by
which sediment was mobilized and dispersed
along ancient nearshore marine depositional
(3 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
systems. As such, specific facies models have
been advanced as guides for recognizing storm-
vs. tide-dominated shelf deposits and thereby as
evidence for palaeogeographical reconstructions
and palaeoceanographic circulation (e.g. Leckie
& Walker, 1982; Cant & Hein, 1986; Knight &
McLean, 1986; McCrory & Walker, 1986; Swift
et a]., 1991; Dalrymple, 1992; Walker & Plint,
1992). The depositional cycles exhibited by the
Mahantango rocks indicate that the evidence for
storms vs. tides is strongly dependent upon the
basinal position of any given section. Sections in
nearshore marine settings contain evidence for
624 A. R. Prave et al.

/base Tullyl
I I I I I

I !
I

i
I I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I

0I
i i
I Facies Association -1 7

I50

depositional
cycle 1-2

Fig. 16. Stratigraphic development of the Mahantango depositional cycles from selected sections across the orogenic
margin of the foreland basin (see inset and Fig. 1A for locations; note that sections B & C are shown as a composite
section: B is from 0 to 80 m and C is from 80 m upward). These sections are chronostratigraphically bracketed
between the base Tully surface (in most cases, exposure is poor from the top of sections to the base Tully as implied
by the vertical dashed lines) and the underlying Marcellus black shale (the Marcellus surface is not shown but occurs
several tens up to about 50 m below the base of any given section).Note that, regardless of the sandstone-to-mudstone
ratio, all sections are characterized by relatively large-scale depositional cycles (denoted by arrows to right of
columns). Facies numbers refer to those discussed in the text and depicted on Fig. 18.

strong tidal currents whereas more distal sections
only contain evidence for shoaling into the zone
of storm-generated flows. Figure 1 7 illustrates this
relationship using two sections representative of
depositional cycle development in proximal (sec-
tion F, upper part of Rockville locality) and more
distal positions (section C, Watts locality). Expo-
sures are not continuous between these two
sections, and thus we cannot physically trace the
bounding surfaces of individual cycles and can-
not confidently establish cycle-to-cycle matches.
We do know, however, that, overall, these two
successions are coeval because they are bounded
by the superposed Mediospirifer and Devon-
ochonetes zones (Ellison, 1965). The critical
observation is that, regardless of the exact cycle-
to-cycle correlation, cycles in more distal posi-
tions are dominated by storm deposits in contrast
to tidal deposition in proximal settings. This sug-
gests that, unless shorelines are preserved, sedi-
mentological datasets should be used cautiously
0 1996 International
when gauging storm- vs. tide-dominated circu-
lation on ancient shelves. Although it is difficult
to assess tidal ranges, tidal channels must have
incised to depths equivalent to heights of indi-
vidual lateral accretion bedsets (some are up to
4 m). This implies, assuming bankfull stage, that,
in places, the Mahantango shoreline could have
experienced high mesotidal and possibly macro-
tidal ranges. Similar ranges have been suggested
for the somewhat younger Frasnian-Famennian
Catskill seaway by Slingerland (1986).
The idealized depositional cycle and
Mahantango palaeography
Three major depositional systems can be inferred
from a synthesis of our field data: storm-
dominated offshore marine mudstone and fine
sandstone (facies associations 1 and 2), storm-
dominated nearshore marine shelf and shore-
face sandstone (facies associations 3 and 4) and
Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 625
80
m defined local depocentres related to switching or
20
transgressive lag
f-flooding surface
Tide-dominatedfacies
Storm-dominated
Fig. 17. Correlative portions of the more distal Watts
section (C) and the more proximal Rockville section (F;
see Fig. 1A for locations). These two successions record
more-or-less contemporaneous development because
they occur within the superposed Mediospirifer and
Devonochonetes zones (Ellison, 1965). Regardless of
the exact cycle-to-cycle correlation (the two flooding
surfaces are considered correlative based on regional
trends), these overall correlative sections show strik-
ingly different sedimentation patterns; tide-dominated
deposition characterizes proximal positions (section F)
whereas storm-dominated deposition typifies more
distal settings (section C). The tectonic shortening
between these two sections is minimal, at most
10-15%, and thus original palaeogeographical relation-
ships are more-or-less maintained. Facies numbers
refer to those discussed in the text and depicted on
Fig. 18.
tide-dominated shoreline sandstone, pebbly sand-
stone and mudstone (facies associations 5 and 6).
They are systematically arranged in thickening-
and coarsening-upward cycles up to a few tens of
metres thick and most cycles are capped by trans-
gressively reworked lag deposits (facies associ-
ation 7). In general, offshore marine tempestites
G 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists,Sedimentology, 43, 6 1 1-629
and hemipelagic mudstone pass upward into
storm-emplaced shoreface sandstones which, in
more proximal settings, are overlain by tidal
channel mouth shoals, flats and distributary sys-
tem sandstones (Fig. 18A,B). A relative rise in sea
level terminated each progradational episode
and produced a transgressive lag above which
deeper marine deposits herald the beginning of a
new cycle.
Most previous interpretations of the Mahantango
inferred that the large-scale depositional cycles
avulsing of delta lobes (e.g. Willard, 1935; Kaiser,
1972; Faill et al., 1978). This interpretation implies
that such cycles are regionally restricted, yet our
work documents large-scale depositional cycles
everywhere along the orogenic margin (Fig. 16).
Additionally, if switching, lobate deltas were
developed, then palaeocurrent data should record
such patterns; they do not. As shown on Fig. 4 ,
throughout the area of the central Pennsylvania
depocentre, palaeoflow directions from shoreline
facies retain a persistent NW-SE orientation. As
importantly, where chronostratigraphic constraints
can be established, the coarsest shoreline deposits
appear to have limited areal development. For
example, some of the thickest such deposits in the
Mahantango do not extend even 20 km in the depo-
sitional dip direction (Fig. 17). The same is true in
depositional-strike parallel directions. It appears
that the major point sources delivering coarse de-
tritus to the shoreline maintained relatively fixed
positions. Furthermore, rates of generation of
accommodation space were increasing markedly
by Middle Devonian time (Quinlan & Beaumont,
1984; Faill, 1985). If progradation was limited to
delta lobes, then inter-delta regions should record
significantly deeper marine settings lacking large-
scale cycle development. Many sections between
the coarse depocentres are relatively fine grained
(such as section H, Fig. 16), but even the finest
grained sections exhibit large-scale cycles. Thus,
we surmise that the shoreline underwent region-
ally more-or-less uniform advances (Fig. 18C).
Switching of major point source locations over
time did not occur and that the depocentres associ-
ated with these point sources did not protrude far
out into the basin. Regions between those locations
probably received their finer sediment from numer-
ous, smaller point sources and alongshore currents.
On a final note, a previous interpretation for the
Mahantango cycles was that they resulted from
migrating shelf sand ridges (Sarwar & Smoot,
1983; Sarwar, 1984). We reject this interpret-
ation because it fails to satisfactorily explain the
626 A. R. Prave et al.

A IDEALDEPoSiT'oNAL CYCLE Poorly sorted, bloclastic & bloturbated, mud-

7
- stone
- - -to-pebbly sandstone. Transgressivelag.
flooding surface - - - - -
Trough cross-bedded and channelized
6 sandstone & pebbly sandstone with re-
versing paleoflow Indicators. Sub- to
intertidal ffafs and tidal channels.

5 Thin, tabular, heteroiithlc beds with rever-

sing paleoflow Indicators; bioturbation
common. Tidal channel mouth shoals.

Amalgamated swaley (4) and hum-

3 mocky cross-stratified(3) sandstone.
Upper to lower shoreface.

lnterbedded hummocky cross-stratifled

sandstone and mudstone. Proximal off-
shore storm and hemipelagic deposits.
Fig. 18. (A) Idealized vertical facies
Mudstone with thin, flat laminated siltstone 1-10 m succession for a Mahantango
1 and very flne sandstone. Various ripple depositional cycle. The cycle
forms and bioturbation common. Distal
offshore storm & hemipelagic deposits. records a progradational episode -
storm-dominated offshore shelf
through shoreface upward into a

B -q
Distal

"
many tens of kilometres - Proximal

rl
I
tide-dominated shoreline -
truncated by a marine
floodingldrowning surface typically
marked by a transgressive lag
deposit which heralds the
initiation of the next progradational
episode. Facies numbers refer to
TIDE-INFLUENCED those described and interpreted in
SEDIMENTATION detail in the text. (B) Tide- vs.
storm-dominated deposition simply
reflects palaeogeographical position
INFLUENCED within the basin; more proximal
SEDIMENTATION positions adjacent to the shoreline
contain evidence for tidal
influences on sedimentation
whereas those in more offshore
1-10 m positions only contain evidence for
DISTAL TO PROXIMAL CYCLE CORRELATIONS storm-influenced and hemipelagic
deposition. Numbers refer to facies
associations discussed in the text
and shown on (A). (C) Inferred
palaeogeography of the
Mahantango depositional system
0 km 100 during progradation along the
orogenic margin of the central
Appalachian foreland basin.
Terrestrial components of the
Mahantango system are not
preserved in Pennsylvania, thus
relationships landward of the
shoreline are hypothetical.
Numbers refer to facies associations
discussed in the text and shown on
(A) and (B). Letters refer to sections
shown on Fig. 1(A).

0 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629

 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 627
following: (1) systematically thickening- and
coarsening-upward cycles which are consistently
many tens of metres thick; (2) progradational
episodes within those cycles and from cycle-to-
cycle are too persistent and systematic to be
attributed to random shelf sand ridge migration;
(3) the sandstones at the tops of many cycles are
coarser than the immediately subjacent strata and
therefore cannot represent reworking of shelf
material to form a sand ridge; and (4) lateral
accretion surfaces within channellized sandstone
bodies are too steep to be reasonably interpreted
as the gently inclined margins of shelf sand
ridges.
Significance of coarse-grained facies
The renaissance of sequence stratigraphy has
brought into greater focus the significance of
coarse-grained rocks in cyclically arranged
shallow and nearshore marine successions. In
our interpretation of the genesis of depositional
cycles in the Mahantango Formation, we have
inferred that the coarse rocks of facies associ-
ation 6 and 7 are genetically related to
underlying, more offshore deposits. In other
words, Waltherian relationships within a given
Mahantango depositional cycle remained un-
broken and no abrupt basinward shift in facies
occurred. Several observations are critical to this
interpretation and need to be (re)stressed. (1)The
coarse tidal channel-fill deposits of facies associ-
ation 6 always occur above uppermost shore-
face and ebb-tidal delta rocks. This consistent
stratigraphic and palaeobathymetric relationship
argues against a genesis for an abrupt basinward
shift of facies. (2) Tidal channels and their coarse
fill only occur at the top of proximal depositional
cycles. This indicates that their preservation
simply reflects the palaeogeographical position
where such deposits were typical, i.e. within the
channellized portions of tide-dominated shore-
lines. (3) Tidal channels are everywhere filled
with coarse siliciclastic material. If the channels
represent incision and bypassing during sequence
boundary development, then somewhere at least
one of the channels should have been filled with
relatively finer transgressive deposits. Addition-
ally, coarse sediment would have been intro-
duced into more distal parts of the Mahantango
basin as lowstand deposits or sharp-based shore-
face sandstones (e.g. Plint, 1988). We have never
observed such deposits and none has ever been
noted in the literature. (4) Pebbles occur as
scattered lenses and out-sized clasts along swales
0 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedirnentology, 43,611-629
and laminae in the shoreface deposits of facies
associations 3 and 4. This indicates that gravel
was already being supplied to the shoreline dur-
ing the progradational episode. Finally, (5) the
coarsest clasts in facies association 7 are never
larger than and commonly slightly smaller than
clasts in the channel-fill conglomerates of facies
association 6. Subsequent transgressive ravine-
ment preferentially concentrated the clasts into
lags, thereby negating the need to invoke fluvial
incision and sediment bypassing to obtain such
coarse detritus. Rivers may very well have
brought the coarse detritus to the Mahantango
shoreline. However, the vertical and lateral facies
development exhibited by the Mahantango rocks
indicates that it was the progressive prograda-
tional advance of all facies belts which intro-
duced coarse sediment into the basin rather than
the punctuated flushing of such material through
a coupled estuarine-fluvial system incised and
shifted basinward. Combined, these observations
imply that the coarse facies of the Mahantango
depositional cycles are an intimate genetic
component of the progradational packet.
CONCLUSIONS
The siliciclastic strata of the Givetian Mahantango
Formation define one of the earliest basinward
tapering clastic wedges associated with the Mid to
Late Devonian Acadian orogenic phase along the
active margin of the Appalachian foreland basin.
Three major depositional systems have been rec-
ognized for these rocks: storm-dominated offshore
marine mudstone and fine sandstone, storm-
dominated nearshore marine shelf and shoreface
sandstone, and tide-dominated shoreline deposits
consisting of variably bedded sandstone, pebbly
sandstone and mudstone. Importantly, the coarse-
grained rocks, such as the pebbly sandstones of
the tidal channels, were an integral part of the
progradational phase; they do not represent
basinward shifts of facies. Reworking of these
deposits during transgressive ravinement formed
lags. The Mahantango rocks are arranged in a
hierarchy of variously scaled (from metres to
many tens of metres thick) depositional cycles
which reflect the episodic advance and retreat of a
regionally straight, tide-dominated shoreline onto
a storm-dominated shallow marine shelf. The
dominance of storm vs. tides recorded within
these strata reflects the palaeogeographical
position of any given section, not changing
palaeoceanographic conditions.
628 A. R. Prave et al.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Critical reviews by G. Baird, A. G. Plint and F.
Surlyk thoroughly improved this manuscript.
REFERENCES
Barrell, J. (1913) The Upper Devonian delta of the
Appalachian geosyncline. Am. J. Sci., 36,4 2 9 4 7 2 .
Brett, C.E. and Baird, G.C. (1985) Carbonate-shale
cycles in the Middle Devonian of New York: evalu-
ation of models for the origin of limestones in terrig-
enous shelf sequences. Geology, 13, 324-327.
Brett, C.E. and Baird, G.C. (1986) Symmetrical and
upward shallowing cycles in the Middle Devonian of
New York state and their implication for the punctu-
ated aggradational hypothesis. Palaeoceanography,
1,431-445.
Brett, C.E. and Baird, G.C. (1990) Submarine erosion
and condensation in a foreland basin: examples from
the Devonian of Erie County, New York. In: Fieldtrip
Guidebook Western N e w York and Ontario (Ed. by
G. G. Lash), pp. 1-56. New York State Geol. Ass.
62nd Ann. Meet.
Cant, D.J. and Hein, F.J. (1986) Depositional sequences
in ancient shelf sediments: some contrasts in style.
In: Shelf Sands and Sandstones (Ed. by R. J. Knight
and J. R. McLean), Mem. Can. SOC.petrol. Geol., 11,
303-3 1 2 .
Dalrymple, R.W. (1992) Tidal depositional systems.
In: Facies Models, Response to Sea Level Change
(Ed. by R. G. Walker and N. P. James), pp. 195-218.
Geological Association of Canada.
Dennison, J.M. and Hasson, K.O. (1976) Stratigraphic
cross-section of Hamilton Group (Devonian) and
adjacent strata along south border of Pennsylvania.
Bull. Am. Ass. petrol. Geol., 60, 278-298.
Dott, R.H., Jr and Bourgeois, J. (1982) Hummocky
stratification: significance of its variable bedding
sequences. Bull. geol. SOC.A m . , 93, 663-680.
Duke, W.L. (1985) Hummocky cross-stratification,
tropical hurricanes and intense winter storms. Sedi-
mentology, 32, 167-194.
Duke, W.L. (1990) Geostrophic circulation or shallow
marine turbidity currents? The dilemma of palaeo-
flow patterns in storm-influenced prograding shore-
line systems. J. sedim. Petrol., 60, 870-883.
Duke, W.L., Prave, A.R. and PennStrat (1991) Storm-
and tide-influenced prograding shoreline sequences
in the Middle Devonian Mahantango Formation in
Pennsylvania. In: Clastic Tidal Sedimentology (Ed.
by D. G. Smith, G. E. Reinson, B. A. Zaitlin and R. A.
Rahmani), Mem. Can. SOC.petrol. Geol., 16,349-370.
Ellison, R.L. (1965) Stratigraphy and palaeontology
of the Mahantango Formation in south-central
Pennsylvania. Gen. Geol. Rep., Penn. Geol. Surv. 4th
ser., 48.
Ettensohn, F.R. (1985) Controls on the development
of the Catskill Delta complex basin facies. In: The
Catskill Delta (Ed. by D. L. Woodrow and W. D.
Sevon), Spec. Pap. geol. SOC.Am., 201,63-77.
0 1996 International
Faill, R.T. (1985)The Acadian Orogeny and the Catskill
Delta. In: The Catskill Delta (Ed. by D. L. Woodrow
and W. D. Sevon), Spec. Pap. geol. SOC.Am., 201,
31-50.
Faill, R.T., Hoskins, D.M. and Wells, R.B. (1978) Mid-
dle Devonian stratigraphy in central Pennsylvania-a
revision. Gen. Geol. Rep., Penn. Geol. Sum. 4th ser.,
70.
Faill, R.T. and Wells, R.B. (1974) Geology and mineral
resources of the Millerstown quadrangle, Perry,
Juniata, Snyder Counties, Pennsylvania. Atlas, Penn.
Geol. Surv. 4th ser., 136.
Flemings, P.B. and Jordan, T.E. (1989) A synthetic
model of foreland basin development. J. geophys.
Res., 94, 3851-3866.
Flemings, P.B. and Jordan, T.E. (1990) Stratigraphic
modelling of foreland basins: interpreting thrust
deformation and lithosphere rheology. Geology, 18,
4 30-4 34.
Goldring, R. and Bridges, P. (1973) Sublittoral sheet
sandstones. J. sedim. Petrol., 43, 736-747.
Hoskins, D.M. (1978) Geology and mineral resources of
the Millersburg 15-minute quadrangle, Dauphin,
Juniata, Northumberland, Perry, and Snyder Coun-
ties, Pennsylvania. Atlas, Penn. Geol. Surv. 4th ser.,
146.
Jordan, T.E. (1981) Thrust loads and foreland basin
evolution, Cretaceous, western United States. Bull.
Am. Ass. petrol. Geol., 65, 2506-2520.
Jordan, T.E. and Flemings, P.B. (1991) Large-scale
stratigraphic architecture, eustatic variation, and
unsteady tectonism: a theoretical evaluation. J.
geophys. Res., 96, 6681-6699.
Kaiser, W.R. (1972) Delta cycles in the Middle
Devonian of central Pennsylvania. PhD thesis, Johns
Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Knight, R.J. and McLean, J.R. (1986) Shelf sands and
sandstones. Mem. Can. SOC.petrol. Geol., 11.
Leckie, D.A. and Walker, R.G. (1982) Storm- and tide-
dominated shorelines in Late Cretaceous Moosebar-
Lower Gates interval--outcrop equivalents of deep
basin gas traps in western Canada. Bull. Am. Ass.
petrol. Geol., 62,1130-1146.
McCrory, V.L.C. and Walker, R.G. (1986) A storm- and
tidally influenced prograding shoreline-Upper Creta-
ceous Milk River Formation southern Alberta,
Canada. Sedimentology, 33,47-60.
Plint, A.G. (1988) Sharp-based shoreface sequences and
offshore-bars in the Cardium Formation of Alberta
and their relationship to relative changes in sea-
level. In: Sea Level Changes-An Integrated Approach
(Ed. by C. K. Wilgus, B. S. Hastings, C. G. St. C.
Kendall, H. W. Posamentier, C. A. Ross and J. C.
Van Wagoner), Spec. Publ. SOC. econ. Palaeont.
Miner., 42, 357-370.
Plint, A.G., Hart, B.S. and Donaldson, W.S. (1993)
Lithospheric flexure as a control on stratal ge-
ometry and facies distribution in Upper Cretaceous
rocks of the Alberta foreland basin. Basin Res., 5 ,
69-77.
Prave, A.R. and Duke, W.L. (1990) Sequence-capping
oolitic ironstones in the Mahantango Formation
Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43,6 1 1-629
 Storm- and tide-influenced prograding shorelines 629
(Middle Devonian) of Pennsylvania: responses to
basin dynamics. Abs. w. Progs., Geol. Soc. A m . , 22,
63.
Prave, A.R. and Duke, W.L. (1991) Sedimentology
and sequence stratigraphic framework of the
Middle Devonian Mahantango Formation in central
Pennsylvania. In: Geological Evolution of the Eastern
United States (Ed. by A. Schultz and E. Compton-
Gooding), Fieldtrip and Guidebook NE-SE Sects.
Geol. Soc. Amer., Virginia Mus. Nut. Hist. Guidebook,
2, 207-228.
Quinlan, G.M. and Beaumont, C. (1984) Appalachian
thrusting, lithospheric flexure, and the palaeozoic
stratigraphy of the eastern interior of North America.
Can. J. Earth Sci., 21, 973-996.
Sarwar, G. (1984) Depositional model for the Middle
Devonian Mahantango Formation of south-central
Pennsylvania. MS thesis, S.U.N.Y Stony Brook, New
York.
Sarwar, G. and Smoot, J.P. (1983) Depositional model
for the Middle Devonian Mahantango Formation of
south-central Pennsylvania. Abs. w. Progs., Geol. Soc.
Am., 15, 1 2 7 .
Sevon, W.D. and Woodrow, D.L. (1985) Middle and
Upper Devonian stratigraphy within the Appalachian
basin. In: T h e Catskill Delta (Ed. by D. L. Woodrow
and W. D. Sevon), Spec. Pap. geol. Soc. A m . , 201,
1-7.
Slattery, W. (1993) T h e sequence stratigraphic frame-
work of the Middle-Upper Devonian Mahantango
Formation in northeastern Pennsylvania and south-
eastern N e w York. PhD thesis, City University of
New York, New York.
Slingerland, R.L. (1986) Numerical computation of
co-oscillating palaeotides in the Catskill epeiric Sea
of eastern North America: Sedimentology, 33, 487-
497.
0 1996 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology, 43, 611-629
Slingerland, R.L., Harbaugh, J.W. and Furlong, K.P.
(1994) Simulating Clastic Sedimentary Basins.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Stockmal, G.S., Cant, D.J. and Bell, J.S. (1992) Relation-
ship of the stratigraphy of the western Canada fore-
land basin to Cordilleran tectonics: insights from
geodynamical models. In: Foreland Basins and Fold-
belts (Ed. by R. W. Macqueen and D. A. Leckie), Mem.
Am. Ass. petrol. Geol., 55, 107-127.
Swift, D.J.P. (1968) Coastal erosion and transgressive
stratigraphy. J. Geol., 76, 444-456.
Swift, D.J.P., Oertel, G.F., Tillman, R.W. and Thorne,
J.A. (1991) Shelf sand and sandstone bodies: geom-
etry, facies and sequence stratigraphy. Spec. Publ.
int. Ass. Sediment., 14.
Swift, D.J.P. and Thorne, J.A. (1991) Sedimentation on
continental margins, I. A general model for shelf
sedimentation. In: Shelf Sand and Sandstone Bodies
(Ed. by D. J. P. Swift, G. F. Oertel, R. W. Tillman and
J. A. Thorne), Spec. Publ. int. Ass. Sediment., 14,
3-3 1.
Tillman, R.W. and Siemers, C.T. (1984) Siliciclastic
Shelf Sediments. Spec. Publ. Soc. econ. Palaeont.
Miner., 34.
Walker, R.G. and Plint, A.G. (1992) Wave- and storm-
dominated shallow marine systems. In: Facies
Models, Response to Sea Level Change (Ed. by R. G.
Walker and N. P. James), pp. 219-238. Geological
Association of Canada.
Willard, B. (1935) Hamilton Group of central
Pennsylvania. Bull. geol. Soc. A m . , 46, 195-224.
Willard, B. Swartz, F.M. and Cleaves, A.B. (1939) The
Devonian of Pennsylvania. Bull. Penn. Geol. Surv.
4th Ser., G19.
Manuscript received 13 June 1994; revision accepted
6 December 1995.