The structure and evolution of AUTHORS

Tim P. Dooley  Bureau of Economic

sutures in allochthonous salt Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, Uni-
versity of Texas at Austin, University Station,
Tim P. Dooley, Michael R. Hudec, and Box X, Austin, Texas 78713-8924;
Martin P. A. Jackson tim.dooley@beg.utexas.edu
Tim P. Dooley received his Ph.D. from the Uni-
versity of London in 1994. After 9 yr of post-
doctoral research, he joined the Bureau of
ABSTRACT Economic Geology in 2003. Since then, his
Salt canopies, formed by the coalescence of salt sheets, are an focus has been on a variety of aspects of salt
tectonics using innovative physical modeling
integral part of the slope and deep-water areas of many passive
and analytical and graphical techniques. He
margin salt basins. A suture separates the two coalesced salt received the AAPG Jules Braunstein Memorial
sheets (allosuture) or two lobes from a single salt sheet (auto- Award in 2009.
suture), including any trapped sediments.
Michael R. Hudec  Bureau of Economic
Autosutures can form in two ways. An overriding auto-
Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences,
suture is produced when part of a salt sheet overrides its neighbor University of Texas at Austin, University Station,
in the direction of salt movement. The overridden roof sub- Box X, Austin, Texas 78713-8924;
sides into the salt sheet, and these trapped sediments appear as michael.hudec@beg.utexas.edu
intrasalt reflections on seismic data. An encircling autosuture Michael R. Hudec received his Ph.D. from the
forms when two lobes of a salt sheet separate to bypass an ob- University of Wyoming in 1990. He worked for
stacle and then rejoin on the downstream side of the obstacle. Exxon Production Research and taught at Baylor
Encircling autosutures tend to be short and parallel to the dom- University. He joined the Bureau of Economic
Geology in 2000, where he codirects the Applied
inant salt-flow direction.
Geodynamics Laboratory. His current research
Allosutures separate sheets sourced from two different interests include salt-sheet emplacement mech-
feeders. If neither salt sheet overrides the other, the resulting anisms and minibasin initiation. He is a co-
suture is symmetric, forming an upright zone of roof sediments recipient of the AAPG Jules Braunstein Memorial
trapped between the two sheets. More typically, one salt sheet Award.
is more vigorous (generally the larger sheet or the one whose Martin P. A. Jackson  Bureau of Eco-
feeder is farther updip) and overrides the other. Sediments nomic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences,
trapped in an asymmetric allosuture are mostly from the roof University of Texas at Austin, University Sta-
of the overridden sheet. The overriding sheet shears and ex- tion, Box X, Austin, Texas 78713-8924;
tends the roof of the overridden sheet, detaching it from the martin.jackson@beg.utexas.edu
base of the canopy and obscuring its origin. Martin P. A. Jackson received his Ph.D. from
We present diagnostic criteria to distinguish between su- the University of Cape Town in 1976. After
teaching, he joined the Bureau of Economic
ture types and provide physical-model examples of each. This
Geology in 1980 and founded the Applied
distinction between suture types is important because auto- Geodynamics Laboratory in 1988. He has re-
sutures and allosutures have very different implications for can- ceived several AAPG awards: the Sproule Award,
opy dynamics and evolution. the Matson Award, the Dott Award, and the
Berg Outstanding Research Award for his re-
search on salt tectonics.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Copyright ©2012. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. We thank Bill Hart, Russ Propes and colleagues
Manuscript received March 7, 2011; provisional acceptance July 1, 2011; revised manuscript received at BP for suggesting the concept and term
September 9, 2011; final acceptance September 23, 2011. “autosuture.” We thank Mark Rowan, Joseph
DOI:10.1306/09231111036

AAPG Bulletin, v. 96, no. 6 (June 2012), pp. 1045–1070 1045

 DeVay, and an anonymous reviewer whose
comments greatly improved the article. The
manuscript was edited by Lana Dieterich. Tim
Dooley thanks James Donnelly, Nathan Ivicic,
Josh Lambert, and Kenneth Edwards for
logistical support in the modeling laboratories.
The project was funded by the Applied
Geodynamics Laboratory consortium, compris-
ing the following companies: Anadarko, BHP
Billiton, BP, CGGVeritas, Chevron, Cobalt,
ConocoPhillips, Ente Nazionale Idrocarburi
(Eni), Ecopetrol, ExxonMobil, Fugro, Global Geo-
physical, Hess, Instituto Mexicano del Petróleo
(IMP), INEXS, ION Geophysical, Maersk, Mara-
thon, Mariner, McMoRan, Murphy, Nexen,
Noble, Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), Petrobras,
Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS), Repsol-YPF,
Samson, Saudi Aramco, Shell, Statoil, TGS-NOPEC,
Total, WesternGeco, and Woodside. We re-
ceived additional support from the Jackson
School of Geosciences, University of Texas at
Austin. The University of Texas at Austin, Bureau
of Economic Geology, acknowledges support
of this research project by Landmark Graphics
Corporation via the Landmark University Grant
Program. Publication was authorized by the
Director, Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson
School of Geosciences, University of Texas at
Austin.
The AAPG Editor thanks the following reviewers
for their work on this paper: Joseph C. DeVay,
Mark G. Rowan, and an anonymous reviewer.
1046 Salt Sutures
INTRODUCTION
Coalescence of salt sheets was first inferred by Correa Perez
and Gutierrez y Acosta (1983) solely on the basis of gravity
modeling in the southwestern Gulf of Mexico. The first sys-
tematic study of coalesced salt sheets was on structures exposed
in the Great Kavir in central Iran (Jackson and Cornelius, 1985;
Jackson et al., 1987, 1990; Jackson and Talbot, 1989). They
suggested the term “salt canopy” for a structure composed of
coalesced salt sheets. In 1989, maps of canopies (not neces-
sarily referred to as such) in the northern Gulf of Mexico began
to be published (Hardin, 1989; Lee et al., 1989). Salt canopies
are now recognized as critical components in the slope and
deep-water areas of many passive-margin salt basins, such as
the northern Gulf of Mexico (Diegel et al., 1995; Peel et al.,
1995), southern Gulf of Mexico (Gomez-Cabrera and Jackson,
2009), the Red Sea (Heaton et al., 1995), offshore Angola
(Cramez and Jackson, 2000; Marton et al., 2000), offshore Mo-
rocco (Tari et al., 2000), and offshore Brazil (Davison, 2007;
Mohriak et al., 2008). Canopies may consist of as few as two
salt sheets or may include more than 100 sheets covering thou-
sands of square kilometers, as in the Sigsbee canopy in the deep-
water Gulf of Mexico (Figure 1) (Pilcher et al., 2011).
The junction between the coalesced sheets has been var-
iously termed a “cell boundary” (Jackson and Cornelius, 1985),
a “collision zone” (Lee et al., 1989, 1992), a “lobe boundary”
(Hardin, 1989), and a “seam” (Jackson and Talbot, 1989). How-
ever, “salt-sheet suture” appeared in the literature in the early
1990s (e.g., Bryant et al., 1991; Jackson and Talbot, 1991;
Liro, 1992; Jackson et al., 1994) and is now the generally ac-
cepted term.
The key characteristics of salt-sheet sutures in section view
are well established (Figure 2). Many sutures are overlain by a
narrow, linear, bathymetric depression that we term a “suture
trench” (Jackson and Talbot, 1989; Lee et al., 1989; Bryant
et al., 1991; Liro, 1992; Jackson et al., 1994). These sediments
can extend downward into the salt as sediments trapped along
the suture to form variably disrupted intrasalt reflections on
seismic data (e.g., Bryant et al., 1991; Kadri et al., 2000; Liro
et al., 2004). These reflections can dip steeply or be nearly
parallel to the base of salt (Kadri et al., 2000). Some sutures
form nearly continuous bands completely separating adjoining
salt sheets, whereas others appear as shorter zones of high re-
flectivity separated by nonreflective regions (Liro et al., 2004).
Some have interpreted these trapped sediments as potential
drilling hazards (e.g., Liro et al., 2004; Perez et al., 2008; Rivas
et al., 2009; Ali et al., 2010; Cullen et al., 2010). Some sutures
Figure 1. Shaded-relief bathymetric image of part of the Sigsbee salt canopy, north-central Gulf of Mexico, showing the locations of
base-salt keels (probable feeders). The bathymetry is from Bryant and Liu (2000); the base-salt map is from Pilcher et al. (2011). The
interpretation of feeder locations from a base-salt map is highly subjective, but this work suggests more than 100 feeders in this part of
the canopy. Key to Gulf of Mexico protraction areas: EB = East Breaks; GB = Garden Banks; AC = Alaminos Canyon; KC = Keathley
Canyon; GC = Green Canyon; AV = Atwater Valley; WR = Walker Ridge; LU = Lund.

terminate upward in shortened, overlying roof
sediments (Lee et al., 1989, 1992; Liro et al., 2004).
Sutures typically intersect the base of salt at the
crest of a broad structural high in the base of salt;
this high is produced by two salt sheets climbing
upsection toward one another before they coalesce.
Superimposed on this broad high may be a nar-
rower notch of sediment at the base of the suture
(Liro et al., 2004).
In map view, sutures form polygonal networks
separating canopy feeders (e.g., Jackson and Cor-
nelius, 1985; Jackson et al., 1990; Liro et al., 2001,
2004) (Figure 2B). However, some areas contain
more sutures than can be explained by the num-
ber of mapped feeders (Kadri et al., 2000; Liro
et al., 2001). Small fold belts parallel to a suture
can deform roof strata on either side (Lee et al.,
1989). Where sutures intersect the edge of a salt
canopy, they typically coincide with the boundary
between lobes in the canopy outline (Hardin, 1989;
Jackson and Talbot, 1989; Lee et al., 1989). This
cusp is commonly the fastest way to identify a po-
tential suture. In the interior of a canopy, sutures
may also connect to windows through the canopy
where the sheets did not quite merge (Hardin, 1989;
Jackson and Talbot, 1989).
Despite all this information on suture geom-
etry, very little has been published on how sutures
form, leaving several unanswered questions. How
do sutures initiate? Is there more than one way a
suture evolves? Why do sutures have so many dif-
ferent geometries? Where do sediments trapped in
sutures come from, and how do they get incor-
porated into the salt? How can sutures outnumber
feeders in some places? Why are some parts of
sutures reflective on seismic data and others not?
Why are intrasalt reflectors abundant in some areas
and nearly absent in others? Why is there a narrow

Dooley et al. 1047

Figure 2. Schematic diagrams
showing published aspects of
sutures in (A) section and
(B) map view.

notch in the base of salt below many sutures? And,
finally, what can sutures tell us about the larger
scale evolution of salt-canopy systems?
The goals of this article are to describe system-
atically how individual sutures form and evolve
and to discuss how this knowledge clarifies the his-
tory of salt-canopy systems on a regional scale. Most
of our evolutionary models are based on physical-
model examples, which have the advantages that
the suture origin is unambiguous and the evolution
is fully documented. We also present several seis-
mic examples from the Gulf of Mexico, although
the link to evolutionary models is necessarily more
interpretive.
SUTURE TERMINOLOGY
Before describing processes, we must establish ter-
minology for salt-sheet sutures. Current usage is
loose, with “suture” used to refer to the three-
dimensional (3-D) surface separating salt supplied

1048 Salt Sutures

by different feeders, a two-dimensional trail of
reflectors on a vertical or horizontal seismic section,
a structural high in the base of salt, or a structural
low in the top of salt. In many situations, this am-
biguity poses no problem; however, a more precise
nomenclature is needed to describe sutures fully.
Our hope is that removing the ambiguity from de-
scriptive terms will also help us understand the ki-
nematics of canopy formation better. We, therefore,
propose the following set of terms (Figures 3–5):
Suture—the zone separating two coalesced salt
sheets (allosuture) or two lobes of a single salt
sheet (autosuture), including trapped sediments.
In common usage, the term has also been applied
imprecisely to a variety of individual compo-
nents of a suture.
Autosuture—a suture between two lobes of the
same salt sheet.
Allosuture—a suture between salt sheets having
separate feeders.
Frontal suture—a suture whose map trace is
roughly perpendicular to the main direction of
salt flow.
Lateral suture—a suture whose map trace is
roughly parallel to the main direction of salt flow.
Oblique suture—a suture whose map trace is
oblique to the main direction of salt flow.
Suture surface—the surface separating one al-
lochthonous salt body and its associated sedi-
ments from another allochthonous body and its
associated sediments. The allochthonous salt
bodies may be salt sheets derived from different
feeders (allosuture surface) or may be two lobes
from a single salt sheet (autosuture surface).
Suture line—the trace of a suture surface on the
plane of observation. A basal suture line is the
intersection of a suture surface with the base of
salt. An apical suture line is the intersection of a
suture surface with the top of salt. A composite
suture line is the intersection of three suture
surfaces at a salt-sheet triple junction.
Suture point—an end of a suture line. A basal su-
ture point is the intersection of a suture line
with the base of salt. An apical suture point is
the intersection of a suture line with the top of
salt. A terminal suture point is the end of a su-
ture line in map view. A composite suture point
is the intersection of a composite suture line
with the plane of observation.
AUTOSUTURES
The traditional definition of a suture implies that it
separates salt sourced from two separate feeders
(e.g., Jackson and Talbot, 1991). However, phys-
ical models and 3-D seismic data illustrate that a
second type of suture is possible—one that sepa-
rates two lobes of a single-feeder salt sheet that
moved at different speeds or in different directions.
These autosutures can form in two ways: by over-
riding or encircling.
Autosutures Formed by Overriding
Inflating salt lobes generated proximal to an active
supply of salt can override more distal and slower
moving parts of the salt sheet to form an auto-
suture (Figure 6). The weight of the overriding
lobe expels underlying salt from the frontal area,
causing the overridden roof to subside into the salt.
The overridden roof forms an upward-steepening
intrasalt reflection (Figure 7). The internal reflec-
tions may connect to the base of salt if subsidence
is sufficient to weld the roof to the bottom of the
sheet. However, overriding does not need this much
subsidence, and most overriding autosutures flat-
ten out and terminate within the sheet.
Overriding autosutures can form whenever one
part of a salt sheet advances faster than its front.
This phenomenon may occur if a thick, strong roof
inhibits advance of the sheet toe or if the toe is
buttressed against an obstacle, such as peripheral-
plain sediments or another salt sheet (Figures 7, 8).
Rapid advance of the rear of a sheet compresses its
front. This shortening inflates the salt and may
produce shortening in the sheet roof in the form of
small folds and thrusts. In our experiments, au-
tosutures formed primarily by the exploitation of
preexisting zones of weakness in the roof, espe-
cially precursor diapiric walls that squeeze shut
during shortening (Figures 8, 9A). The seismic
example and physical model in Figures 7–9A are
Dooley et al. 1049
Figure 3. Block diagrams showing the characteristics of allosutures and autosutures. (A) Allosutures form from coalescence of two salt
sheets sourced from different feeders. (B) Autosutures form between two lobes of the same salt sheet moving at different speeds or in
different directions.

1050 Salt Sutures

Figure 4. Terminology for salt-sheet sutures in cross section (A), map view (B), and in three dimensions (C). Note that, in the block
diagram, the sides around sheet A are transparent. The side showing sheet B is solid to illustrate the cross sectional view.

Figure 5. Seismic section in the northern

Gulf of Mexico showing the application
of terminology to a slightly overridden allo-
suture. The seismic data are courtesy of
CGGVeritas.

Dooley et al. 1051

Figure 6. Schematic block diagrams of overriding autosutures. The roof of a salt sheet shortens where sheet advance is buttressed by
peripheral plain or by another sheet. Overriding autosutures may initiate at any zone of weakness in the roof, especially preexisting
reactive diapirs formed by previous stretching as the salt sheet spreads. As it is overridden from the rear, the front of the roof is depressed
into the salt.

1052 Salt Sutures

Figure 7. Overriding autosutures near the Sigsbee Escarpment, deep-water Gulf of Mexico. We interpret these structures as autosutures
because all of them except autosuture 1 flatten into the middle of the canopy, they all lie downdip of the seaward-most feeder in the
system, and they lie just updip of a 3-km (1.8-mi)-high buttress formed by peripheral-plain sediments. Autosuture reflections (arrowed
and numbered) flatten out in the middle of the sheet, without connecting to any basal suture points. Autosuture 1 terminates upward into
a partly overridden minibasin. The seismic data are courtesy of CGGVeritas.

buttressed against a salt ramp, but frontal auto-
sutures can form anywhere faster moving parts of
a salt sheet encounter slower moving parts.
Because overriding autosutures form in a broad
zone of roof shortening, an autosuture is typically
accompanied by smaller shortening structures that
trend parallel to the autosuture trace. Multiple over-
riding autosutures are near the toes of some salt
sheets, resembling an imbricate thrust belt (Figure 7).
An analogy to thrusting is tempting, given the
presence of upward-steepening reflections that ac-
commodate override and shortening. However, the
similarities are limited. The contact between over-
ridden roof and the overlying salt may or may not be
a fault, depending on whether basal shear or frontal
rolling dominated while the salt was emplaced.
Furthermore, because the concave-upward (listric)
geometry is a function of roof subsidence, it is not
a fault trajectory. Finally, most of the rock above
and below the autosuture is viscous salt, which dis-
torts continuously as the autosuture grows. Thus,
no equivalents to fault-bend folds or most other
features of classic fold and thrust belts exist.
Roof sediments trapped in an overriding auto-
suture typically thicken toward the upper surface
of the sheet for two reasons. First, units closer to the
surface were overridden later, so they had a chance
to accumulate more sediment before override. Sec-
ond, the weight of the overriding lobe creates a
suture trench in front of its toe (Figures 6, 9B).
This trench fills with sediment and thickens the
sequence about to be overridden. This process ex-
plains why many overriding autosutures terminate
upward into partly overridden minibasins (Figure 7).
Autosutures Formed by Encircling
Two lobes of a spreading salt sheet can separate to
bypass an obstacle and then rejoin on the down-
stream side of the obstacle, forming an encircling
autosuture (Figures 10, 11). In our models, the ob-
stacle is typically a thicker part of the salt-sheet roof
(perhaps a carapace block), but it is most effective
as a minibasin whose base has nearly welded, slow-
ing its transport to the front of the sheet. Depending
on its strength, the obstacle may be deformed by
passage of the enveloping salt (Figure 11).
In contrast to overriding autosutures, which
form by imbrication of the top of salt, encircling
autosutures involve the entire thickness of a spread-
ing sheet and thus connect the top to the base of
salt. If sediments aggrade as the salt lobes approach
one another, the lobes may each climb slightly up-
section toward one another, producing a subtle
structural high along the basal suture line. This
structural high may grow faster if roof sediment

Dooley et al. 1053

Figure 8. Physical model showing the evolution
of overriding autosutures. The advance of the
salt sheet was retarded by a rapidly aggrading ramp
at the front of the salt sheet. (A) Four diapirs
(numbered) were seeded by removing wedge-
shaped strips of the blue prekinematic roof. The
model was then tilted 6° to the west. (B) Salt
and its roof flowed westward because of tilting
of the model and sediment loading at the updip
end of the model. The westward flow was but-
tressed against the ramp at the front of the sheet,
causing shortening in the sheet roof and squeezing
of the diapirs. This shortening was most intense
adjacent to the buttress and decreased eastward.
(C) Shortening propagated westward to incor-
porate all four precursor diapirs. Each diapir nu-
cleated an autosuture as the rear of the sheet
overrode the front (B–D). (D) Final configuration of
the model at 70% total shortening. Section xx′ is
shown in Figure 9A. See Appendix for model setup
details.

1054 Salt Sutures


above the two lobes slumps into the gap between
them, producing a pile of mass-transport complexes
that must be surmounted before the lobes can
merge. In the physical model, this pile of debris at
the base of salt records the advance direction of the
sheet (Figure 12). Similar ridges are seen on base-
salt maps from the Sigsbee Escarpment (Figure 13).
Unlike overriding autosutures, which are mostly
frontal, encircling autosutures are typically lateral
(Figures 11–13). The roofs of the two merging lobes
are trapped along the autosuture and form a zone
of seismic reflectivity that extends from top to base
of salt. In our models, neither lobe overrides the
other, so their autosuture is steeply dipping.
An encircling autosuture is typically associated
with much less roof shortening than an overriding
autosuture. A small belt of suture-parallel compres-
sional folds or thrusts in the roof may adjoin the
autosuture (Figure 11F). Farther from the suture,
roof structures in the lobes reflect the strongly 3-D
flow pattern produced by two lobes wrapping around
the obstacle (Figure 11). These may include exten-
sional faults and compressional folds or thrusts. The
Figure 9. Cross sections of
the physical models of overriding
autosutures (dotted). In both
models, autosutures had only
minor override compared with
the length of the entire salt sheet.
(A) Cross section from the
model in Figure 8; the location is
shown in Figure 8D. The listric
overriding autosuture formed as
diapir 4 closed and was over-
thrust. Nearer the front of the
sheet, a steeper autosuture formed
as diapir 3 closed. (B) Cross
section from a different model.
The sutures were nucleated at
the location of formerly exten-
sional reactive diapirs. Auto-
sutures formed where the faster
moving rear of the sheet over-
rode the front, which was mov-
ing slowly above thinner (in
places nearly welded) salt.
extensional structures are produced by stretching
of the roof as salt accelerates around an obstacle
(Figure 11B–D). Many of these extensional struc-
tures are then squeezed shut as salt decelerates in
the toe of the sheet.
ALLOSUTURES
A salt sheet typically climbs upsection away from
its feeder, especially where the sedimentation rate
is high relative to sheet advance (Vendeville and
Jackson, 1990, 1991). If subsalt strata are not de-
formed after a sheet is emplaced, the base of the
salt sheet also climbs structurally away from its
feeder and reaches its apex around the rim of the
sheet (Figure 3B). If two such sheets merge to form
an allosuture, then the basal suture line should lie
along a structural high in the base of salt (Figure 2).
The basal suture line marks where two salt sheets
collided. The line is a root zone from which the rest
of the allosuture extends upward. Any roof sedi-
ment trapped in the allosuture should, in principle,
Dooley et al. 1055
Figure 10. Schematic
block diagrams of an en-
circling autosuture. The
advancing salt sheet divided
into two lobes to bypass
a grounded minibasin. The
two lobes encircled this
obstacle and rejoined on
the downslope side,
forming an encircling
autosuture.

connect down to the basal suture line. The base of
an allosuture is similar to (but typically much longer
than) the base of an encircling autosuture. An allo-
suture is thus fundamentally different from an over-
riding autosuture, which forms entirely through im-
brication of the salt-sheet roof without necessarily
connecting to the base of salt.
In most allosutures one salt sheet overrides the
other, generally because the overriding salt sheet has
more salt or lies farther updip. Sheet override dur-
ing suturing produces a strongly asymmetric allo-
suture. In a few cases, neither sheet overrides the
other, and a much simpler symmetric allosuture is
formed.
Symmetric Allosutures
In some situations, neither salt sheet overrides the
other during allosuturing, producing a steeply dip-
ping symmetric suture (Figures 14, 15). Most sym-
metric allosutures form at the sides of salt sheets
instead of the front. Symmetric allosutures can re-
semble encircling autosutures in cross section but
can be distinguished by mapping feeder diapirs.
Symmetric allosutures separate feeders, whereas
encircling autosutures do not.
Following allosuturing, continued flow of salt
toward the suture from both sides inflates the salt
sheets and transports the roofs toward one another.

1056 Salt Sutures

Figure 11. Overhead views of a physical model showing the evolution of an encircling autosuture. Ellipses show finite strain during the
interval shown. The salt sheet divided into two lobes to flow around a small minibasin grounded at the toe of the salt sheet (A–C). Ex-
tensional and contractional fabrics parallel with the flow in the sheet roof illustrate where the lobes were accelerating and decelerating. The
lobes rejoined to form an encircling autosuture downstream of the minibasin, which was strongly deformed by the encircling flow (D–F).

Inward transport of the roofs produces compres-
sional zones in the roofs on either side of the suture,
which widen through time (Figure 14). In lateral
allosutures, these belts may also have a component
of strike slip if one sheet advances faster than the
other because of variations in salt supply.
The style of shortening in the roofs depends on
roof thickness and on any precursor salt structures.
Precursor structures, such as diapir walls, are weak
zones that localize deformation. Thin roofs without
precursor structures tend to form short-wavelength,
rounded buckle folds (Figure 14C). Precursor struc-
tures can invert to form squeezed diapirs or salt-
involved overthrusts (e.g., the roof of salt sheet A
in Figure 15). Thicker, stronger roofs without pre-
cursor structures can resist shortening or buckle into
gentle long-wavelength folds.
Asymmetric Allosutures
In most natural canopies, one salt sheet overrides
the other, producing an asymmetric allosuture (e.g.,

Dooley et al. 1057

Figure 12. Overhead views of a physical model showing evolution of a sediment ridge defining the basal suture line of a long-lived
encircling autosuture. The ridge is visible through the transparent salt sheet. Roof sediment was shed off the encircling lobes into the gap
between them, building a pile of sediment that was overridden as the sheet advanced. The result was a ridge along the base of salt
parallel to the advance direction of the sheet (d). At the crest of this ridge is the basal suture line (BSL) of the encircling autosuture.

Figures 5, 16). Overriding produces characteristic
structures both in the suture and in roof strata near
the apical suture line.
Overriding offsets the apical suture line in the
direction of override, producing a suture that dips
back toward the overriding sheet (Figure 17). In
section view, asymmetric suture lines are commonly
listric and connect the offset apical and basal su-
ture points.
A physical model illustrates how these inclined
sutures form (Figures 18, 19). As the overriding
sheet advanced, salt in the overridden sheet was
expelled away from the suture, causing the suture
to subside. This process deformed the suture, as
suture lines that were initially steep (Figure 19B, C)
became listric as suturing became more mature
(Figure 19D–G). Salt in the overridden sheet was
displaced away from the suture, inflating the other
parts of this sheet (Figure 19G). Subsidence and
salt expulsion thus compensated for override, re-
sulting in relatively little difference in freeboard be-
tween the two salt sheets. Suture subsidence and
inflation in front of the overriding sheet made it
progressively more difficult for this sheet to con-
tinue advancing across the top of the overridden
sheet. Instead, the overriding sheet began to bull-
doze its neighbor, pushing sediments trapped in
the suture forward (Figures 18B–D, 19D–G). This
bulldozing stretched the suture, eventually tearing
trapped sediments away from the basal suture line
and obscuring the connection between the suture
and the correlative basal suture line. Only a thin
trail of sedimentary fragments connects the main
body of suture sediments back to their basal point
(Figure 19E–G). The same dismemberment is seen
in natural sutures (e.g., Figure 16B). Similar suture
geometries could also be created if a salt sheet over-
rides the previously stretched and fragmented roof
of a neighboring sheet.
In models, most sediments trapped along the
allosuture form the core of an isoclinal fold; each
limb was separately derived from the different roofs
of the colliding sheets. This geometry arises because
the roof of the overriding sheet sheds sediment ei-
ther by slumping or frontal rolling against the roof
of the overridden sheet. In natural salt canopies, we
interpret the trapped sediments as mostly derived
from the overridden sheet, which would be the
likely outcome if the overriding sheet advances by
basal shear directly across the roof of its neighbor.

1058 Salt Sutures

Figure 13. Structure map of base of salt along a part of the Sigsbee Escarpment, deep-water Gulf of Mexico. Structural lows in green;
structural highs in orange. The base of salt features several ridges at high angles to the edge of the canopy. We interpret some of these as
allosutures between feeders F1 and F5. However, several of the smaller ridges in the lower right part of the sheet do not separate feeders.
Many of these ridges terminate into small cusps (microlobe boundaries) in the edge of salt. We interpret these ridges as basal suture lines
formed by small encircling autosutures along the edge of the canopy. In some cases, the base-salt map shows an irregularity at the updip
end of the basal suture line than may have been the (now overridden) obstruction that triggered the encircling autosuture. In other cases,
no irregularity is visible, suggesting that the obstruction may have been very small, formed at a time when the roof was thin. A physical
model of this process is shown in Figure 12. Images courtesy of CGGVeritas.

Whatever their origin, these sediments are com-
monly disrupted into boudins as the suture stretches
during overriding and subsidence (Figures 16B; 19F,
G). Less commonly, suture sediments may be im-
bricated or buckled if transported to a zone of
shortening (Figure 20).
Asymmetric allosutures may also be associ-
ated with structures in the salt-sheet roofs near the
apical suture line. Salt-sheet collision places the
adjacent roofs in compression, causing the roofs to
shorten if they are weak enough. In physical mod-
els, most shortening is in the roof of the overriding
sheet (Figures 18D, 19). Structures in this small
overriding fold belt include folds, squeezed diapirs,
salt-cored thrusts, and even overriding autosutures
that exploited preexisting weak zones in the roof
(Figures 8, 16, 18, 19). Compressional structures
adjacent to the apical suture line are typically much
more modest in the roof of the overridden sheet.
GUIDELINES FOR INTERPRETING
SUTURE TYPE
Allosutures form between two feeders, whereas
autosutures form from a single feeder. Distinguish-
ing between them is thus critically important in
interpreting salt-canopy evolution. Making this

Dooley et al. 1059

Figure 14. Physical model
showing evolution of a sym-
metric allosuture. (A, B) Over-
head views. (C) Cross section.
The two sheets were tilted
toward one another by equal
amounts, so they collided
without overriding. Roof sedi-
ments slumped into the gap be-
tween the sheets as they ap-
proached one another building
the triangular wedge in the
suture seen in the cross section.
After the sheets collided, they
inflated as salt flowed toward the
suture from both sides, as re-
vealed by the blue and green
markers in the cross section. The
roofs were carried inward with
the salt, forming fold belts on
each side of the apical suture
line (B, C).

distinction is not always possible, but several guide-
lines can help in the interpretation of the origin of
many sutures (Figure 21).
Encircling autosutures in many ways have the
clearest origin (Figure 21A). Encircling flows typi-
cally meet as a short lateral suture just downdip of
an enfolded obstacle, which is typically a grounded
minibasin. Structural fabrics in the top of salt or
roof reflect salt flow encircling this obstacle (e.g.,
Figure 13). The autosuture is merely an ornament
on the periphery of a single sheet whose edge first
divides into two small lobes and then sutures. Be-
cause encircling autosutures normally do not over-
ride much, sediments trapped in the suture typi-
cally remain connected to the basal suture line.
Overriding typically forms one or more frontal
autosutures near the toe of a salt sheet slowed by
another sheet or by aggradation of the abyssal plain
(Figure 21B). Sediments trapped in the autosuture
form a rearward-dipping, listric, intrasalt reflector

1060 Salt Sutures


that commonly terminates into a partly overridden
minibasin along the apical suture line (Figure 21B).
Overriding autosutures may occur in swarms, re-
sembling an imbricate thrust belt. Because an over-
riding autosuture forms by imbrication of the salt-
sheet roof, no basal suture line exists.
Allosutures are generally easy to identify, al-
though they share aspects of both encircling and
overriding autosutures (Figure 21C). Because allo-
sutures separate two independently sourced salt
sheets, they are marked by a broad base-salt cul-
mination below the basal suture line. These cul-
minations, together with salt-sheet edges, form a
regional network separating canopy feeders from
one another. Most lobe boundaries in the canopy
margin are terminal allosuture points (Figure 1),
although a few may instead be associated with en-
circling autosutures (e.g., Figures 11–13). Finally,
roof sediments trapped in allosutures may extend
in a near-continuous band from basal to apical su-
ture lines, if sheet override has been minor. How-
ever, these sediments may tear from the basal suture
line after major override, which can be difficult to
distinguish from an overriding autosuture.
Two factors can greatly complicate suture in-
terpretation. First, sutures are not the only sources
of intrasalt reflections in canopies. Material orig-
inally interbedded with the salt, igneous intrusions,
Figure 15. Seismic example of sym-
metric allosuture (dotted) in the northern
Gulf of Mexico, showing a geometry very
similar to that of the physical model in
Figure 14C. The basal triangular wedge is
interpreted to be composed of sediments
shed off the sheet roofs or bulldozed in
front of the advancing sheets. The suture is
nearly vertical because neither sheet sig-
nificantly overrode the other. Fold belts
formed in the roof on both sides of the
suture. Seismic data from Liro et al. (2001).
foundered roof material, and coherent seismic noise
may also produce reflections. In many cases, sutures
can be distinguished from these by their association
with lobe boundaries, apical and basal suture lines,
or location with respect to feeders. However, this
distinction may not be possible in cases where
intrasalt reflections are highly dismembered. Sec-
ond, subsalt structures may deform the base of a
salt canopy, creating structural highs and lows in
the base of salt that are unrelated to salt emplace-
ment. Care should be taken to map subsalt structure
as well as the base of salt to determine whether base-
salt highs and lows are related to canopy emplace-
ment or to subsequent deformation.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The questions posed in the introduction of the
article can be answered as follows.
How Do Sutures Initiate? Is There More Than
One Way a Suture Evolves?
Salt-sheet sutures form in one of three ways. (1) An
overriding autosuture forms when the back of a salt
sheet overrides the front. (2) An encircling auto-
suture forms after two lobes of the same salt sheet
Dooley et al. 1061
Figure 16. Seismic images of asymmetric allosutures from the northern Gulf of Mexico. (A) Moderately overridden allosuture. The over-
ridden roof of sheet B is trapped in the suture, producing intrasalt reflections. Stretching of the suture has slightly disrupted these sediments and
transported them 1 to 2 km (0.6–1.2 mi) from the basal suture point. (B) Strongly overridden allosuture. Stretching of the suture completely
disrupted sediments trapped in the suture so that the suture is only intermittently reflective (white dots in nonreflective parts). Intrasalt
sediments are detached from the apical suture point and the basal suture point (which is beyond this section). Modified from Liro et al. (2004).
Seismic imagery reprinted with the permission of the GCSSEPM Foundation, and all further use requires the Foundation’s permission.

separate to bypass an obstacle and then rejoin on
the downdip side of the obstacle. (3) An allosuture
forms when salt sheets sourced from separate feeders
collide.
Why Do Sutures Have So Many
Different Geometries?
Sutures have different geometries for two reasons.
First, sutures can have different geometries when
they first form. Because overriding autosutures form
by imbricating the salt-sheet roof, they have an api-
cal suture line but no basal suture line. In contrast,
encircling autosutures and allosutures form where
separate salt lobes and salt sheets collide. These
sutures extend across the entire salt allochthon
from the basal suture line to the apical suture line.
Second, sutures deform to varying extents. In
the absence of override, the suture is a near-vertical
zone above the basal suture line. If one lobe over-
rides the other, the weight of the overriding lobe
depresses the suture into the canopy, typically form-
ing a concave-up geometry steepening up to the
apical suture line. Continued override stretches the
suture, breaking trapped sediments into isolated
boudins and possibly tearing these sediments away

1062 Salt Sutures

Figure 17. Schematic block diagrams of an asymmetric allosuture. As one salt sheet overrides the other, sediments in the suture are
depressed, stretched, and dismembered to form boudins. These sediments eventually tear off from the basal suture line.

Dooley et al. 1063

Figure 18. Overhead views of a physical model showing evolution of an asymmetric allosuture. Ellipses show finite strain during the interval
shown. The toes of the two sheets were oblique, so collision began in the south and then moved northward, producing a suture having variable
maturity along strike. Sheet A dipped more steeply than sheet B, so it overrode it. Fold belts formed in the roofs on each side of the apical
suture line, but shortening in the overriding sheet was much more pronounced (C, D). The overriding sheet A pushed the roof in sheet B
backward to the west. Dashed lines (D) show the locations of the sections in Figure 19. TSP = terminal suture point; ASL = apical suture line.

from their basal and apical suture lines. Subsequent
deformation within the canopy system, such as
secondary diapirism or gravity-driven deformation,
would likely result in increasing dismemberment
of the sutures.
Where Do Sediments Trapped in Sutures
Come from, and How Do They Get
Incorporated Into the Salt?
Sediments trapped in sutures are from the roofs
of the sheets involved in the collision. With negli-
gible override, both roofs may contribute sediments
trapped in the suture. If an advancing lobe overrides
by frontal rolling, then both roofs contribute sedi-
ment. If an advancing lobe overrides by basal shear,
then most of the material in the suture comes from
the overridden roof. Some roof material from the
overriding sheet may also be included by slumping
onto the overridden sheet. Sediments closest to the
apical suture line were overridden most recently, so
they may include units younger than those trapped
at depth in the suture.
Why Can Sutures Outnumber Feeders in
Some Places?
Sutures may locally outnumber feeders for two
reasons. First, autosutures do not require a second
feeder. Second, allosutures may get transported for
long distances, obscuring the relationship with the
original feeders. If allosutures get transported be-
yond adjacent feeders into other parts of the can-
opy, they may outnumber nearby feeders.
Why Are Some Parts of Sutures Reflective on
Seismic and Others Not?
Sediments trapped along the suture can produce
seismic reflections. In the absence of these sediments,

1064 Salt Sutures

Figure 19. Cross sections of a physical model showing the evolution of an asymmetric allosuture. Suturing was diachronous, so the
suture was most mature in the south. The serial sections thus depict the evolution from (A) earliest to (G) latest. See Figure 18D for
section locations. The suture was (B) initially symmetric but became more asymmetric as sheet A overrode sheet B. Sediments trapped in
the suture tore away from (E) the basal suture point , leaving only a thin trail of (F) sediment fragments or isolated boudins. The weight of
sheet A expelled salt from the front of sheet B, inflating the rear of sheet B and (G) depressing the suture into the canopy.

a salt-on-salt suture surface will in most cases be
nonreflective. Discontinuous suture reflections typ-
ically result from dismembering sediments as a salt
sheet overrides, which stretches the suture and
separates the sedimentary inclusions (Figures 18).
Alternatively, roof sediments may be discontinu-
ous before being trapped in the suture possibly
because the roof extended during initial advance
or a suture may be complexly folded and difficult
to image seismically (Figure 20).

Dooley et al. 1065

Figure 20. Section from a physical model showing complex deformation of a sedimentary roof in an asymmetric allosuture. Salt sheet
B completely overrode sheet A, depressing the front edge of sheet A roof to weld against the base of the canopy. The rear part of the roof
continued to move rapidly, but the front end moved slowly because it was welded. This velocity variation caused shortening in the front
part of the roof, producing a series of isoclinal overturned folds. These folds would be confusing to interpret on seismic data, and wells
might intersect the same layer of sedimentary inclusions several times.

Why Are Intrasalt Reflectors Abundant in Why Is There a Narrow Notch in the Base of
Some Areas and Nearly Absent in Others? Salt Below Many Sutures?

Intrasalt reflections in allochthonous salt are not
all related to sutures. They may instead be caused
by (1) sediments, lavas, or other evaporites orig-
inally interbedded within the evaporites; (2) igne-
ous intrusions; (3) foundered roof sediments; or
(4) coherent seismic noise. However, many intra-
salt reflections in salt canopies are related to su-
tures, and two main reasons exist for their spatial
variability.
First, sutures need a contrast in seismic im-
pedance to be reflective, which in most cases re-
quires trapped sediments. Where salt sheets suture
before roof sediments are deposited, no sediments
can be trapped in the suture, which is less likely
to be seismically reflective. Reflective sutures are
much more likely where salt sheets are covered by
a continuous seismically resolvable roof before
suturing.
Second, more suture-related intrasalt reflec-
tions occur where sutures are abundant: (1) where
feeders are closely spaced, giving rise to numerous
allosutures; (2) at the downdip ends of major can-
opy systems, where transported allosutures may
accumulate; or (3) where salt sheets are buttressed
against peripheral-plain sediments or other salt
sheets, creating stacked, overriding autosutures.
This notch in the salt is filled with a wedge of subsalt
sediments, which we interpret to be composed of
either (1) a mass-transport complex sourced from
the roof escarpments of the two sheets, transported
into the narrowing gap between them (Figure 14),
or (2) a peripheral-plain material bulldozed in front
of the advancing salt sheets (imbricate wedges of
Hudec and Jackson, 2009). Either process can pro-
duce a wedge of complexly deformed sediments at
the base of the suture. The two sheets had to climb
over this pile of debris before they could collide.
What Can Sutures Tell Us About the Larger
Scale Evolution of Salt-Canopy Systems?
Sutures can help us understand salt-canopy evo-
lution in at least three ways.
First, the number and spatial distribution of
allosutures reveal the number and location of feeders
(Liro et al., 2004). Using allosutures to determine
feeder location is easier where sutures have been
minimally overridden and harder after allosutures
are sheared from their original positions.
Second, bands of overriding autosutures show
where salt sheets have been buttressed against an
obstacle, inhibiting their advance. For example, the

1066 Salt Sutures

Figure 21. Criteria for recognizing suture types.

Dooley et al. 1067

Figure 22. (A) Model setup for advance and collision of salt sheets having parallel edges. Passive marker plugs of colored polymer
within the salt sheets recorded internal flow profiles. (B) Model setup for advance and collision of salt sheets having edges oblique to one
another. The pinch-outs diverged, so suturing was diachronous. (C) Overhead view of salt sheets having lobate pinch-outs. (D) Pre-
deformation cross section illustrating the subsalt ramp, thin prekinematic roof, and marker plugs.

rise of the Perdido fold belt in the northwestern
Gulf of Mexico may have blocked advance of salt
sheets on its landward side, which accounts for
abundant autosuturing there.
Finally, the distribution and vectors of suture
override can be used to explain regional patterns of
salt flow within the canopy. This picture can help
identify the largest feeders, the most rapidly ad-
vancing sheets, and the areas of thickest source salt.
All of these are important factors in structural
restoration and the evolution of subsalt sediment-
transport systems.
The geometries, locations, and types of sutures
are thus elements key to an understanding of how
salt canopies evolve. Canopy evolution, in turn, has
implications for supracanopy traps, subsalt imag-
ing, intrasalt drilling hazards, base-salt geometry,
and the distribution of some subsalt reservoirs.
Correct interpretation of sutures should, therefore,
be an important component of exploration in the
deep-water Gulf of Mexico and on other passive
margins having salt canopies.
APPENDIX: MODELING METHODOLOGY
High-resolution reproducible experiments recorded the evo-
lution of salt-sheet sutures in a variety of initial setups for
symmetric, asymmetric, and oblique collision between two salt
sheets spreading by gravity. Colored passive markers tracked
salt flow within individual salt sheets. A thin, neutral-density,
brittle overburden recorded suturing and a surface grid tracked
salt-sheet motion and strains.

1068 Salt Sutures

Materials
We simulated rock salt using ductile silicone and its silici-
clastic overburden using brittle, dry, granular materials. The
silicone was a near-Newtonian viscous polydimethylsiloxane.
This long-chain polymer has a density of 950 to 980 kg m3 and
a dynamic shear viscosity of 2.5 × 104 Pa s at a strain rate of 3 ×
10−1 s−1 (Weijermars, 1986; Weijermars et al., 1993). The thin,
yet layered, brittle overburden was composed of a mixture of
silica sand (bulk density of ∼1700 kg m−3; grain size of 300 mm;
internal coefficient of friction, m = 0.55–0.65; McClay, 1990;
Krantz, 1991; Schellart, 2000) and hollow ceramic microspheres
(bulk density of 600 kg m−3, grain size 90 mm, and typical m ≅
0.45; Rossi and Storti, 2003) (Figure 22D).
So that models that can be directly compared with com-
posite salt allochthons can be created, density contrasts between
roof sediments and the underlying salt need to be realistic. In the
early stages of extrusive advance, roofs of salt sheets are likely to
be thinner than salt, undercompacted, and less dense. The silica
sand and ceramic beads were mixed to form different-colored
composite layers, with densities equal to that of salt (to avoid
foundering) and thicknesses 10 to 15% of the salt-sheet initial
thickness (Figure 22). With a model length ratio of 10−5, the salt
sheets represent a maximum initial thickness of 4 km (2.5 mi),
thinning to zero at the initial pinch-outs, and roof thicknesses of
between 300 and 600 m (984–1969 ft). Each salt sheet had a
uniquely colored stratigraphy so that sediments sourced from
different roofs in serial section could be identified (e.g., Figure 19).
Design
Suturing between salt sheets during symmetric and asymmetric
advance was modeled in a deformation rig having horizontal
dimensions of 130 × 60 cm (51 × 24 in.) (Figures 8; 14; 17; 18;
22A, B). Initially, a medial wedge was built with 20° subsalt
ramp angles to separate the salt sheets. Polymer was deposited
on either side of this medial wedge and allowed to settle out
horizontally for several days. Minute quantities of intense pig-
ments were uniformly mixed with silicone polymer to create
passive markers that tracked flow patterns within the salt
sheets (Figure 22). These markers were emplaced as vertical
plugs into the salt sheets on either side of the median wedge.
Models were then initiated by tilting each half of the rig toward
the other. Equal dips formed symmetric sutures (Figure 14)
and unequal dips formed asymmetric sutures (Figures 17, 18).
We used 3-D lobate models to investigate radial spread-
ing and formation of encircling autosutures (Figures 11, 12,
22C). Lobate salt sheets were built in a 100 × 100-cm (39 ×
39-in.)-dimension rig by carving out semicircular pinch-outs
in a wetted sand and glass-bead mixture. The polymer was de-
posited and allowed to settle. Different-colored passive markers
were emplaced in each salt sheet.
REFERENCES CITED
Ali, T. H., R. Mathur, and N. Sharma, 2010, Build-to-suit
technologies for wellbore construction in deep-water
and ultra deep water Gulf of Mexico: Society of Petro-
leum Engineers Deepwater Drilling and Completions
Conference, Galveston, Texas, October 5–6, 2010, SPE
Paper 136840, 14 p.
Bryant, W. R., and J. Y. Liu, 2000, Bathymetry of the Gulf of
Mexico: College Station, Texas, Texas Sea Grant, TAMU-
SG-00-606, CD-ROM.
Bryant, W. R., G. R. Simmons, and P. Grim, 1991, The mor-
phology and evolution of basins on the continental slope
northwest Gulf of Mexico: Gulf Coast Association of
Geological Societies Transactions, v. 41, p. 73–82.
Correa Perez, I., and J. Gutierrez y Acosta, 1983, Interpreta-
cion gravimetrica y magnetometrica del occidente de la
Cuenca Salina del Istmo: Revista del Instituto Mexicano
del Petroleo, v. 15, no. 4, p. 5–25.
Cramez, C., and M. P. A. Jackson, 2000, Superposed defor-
mation straddling the continental-oceanic transition in
deep-water Angola: Marine and Petroleum Geology,
v. 17, p. 1095–1109.
Cullen, P. J., J. M. R. Taylor, W. C. Thomas, and P. Whitehead,
2010, Technologies to identify salt-related deep-water
drilling hazards: Offshore Technology Conference, Hous-
ton, Texas, May 3–6, OTC Paper 20854, 5 p.
Davison, I., 2007, Geology and tectonics of the South Atlan-
tic Brazilian salt basins, in A. C. Ries, R. W. H. Butler,
and R. H. Graham, eds., Deformation of the continental
crust: The legacy of Mike Coward: Geological Society
(London) Special Publication 272, p. 345–359.
Diegel, F. A., J. F. Karlo, D. C. Schuster, R. C. Shoup, and P. R.
Tauvers, 1995, Cenozoic structural evolution and tecto-
nostratigraphic framework of the northern Gulf Coast
continental margin, in M. P. A. Jackson, D. G. Roberts,
and S. Snelson, eds., Salt tectonics: A global perspective:
AAPG Memoir 65, p. 109–151.
Gómez-Cabrera, P. T., and M. P. A. Jackson, 2009, Regional
Neogene salt tectonics in the offshore Salina del Istmo Ba-
sin, southeastern Mexico, in C. Bartolini and J. R. Román
Ramos, eds., Petroleum systems in the southern Gulf of
Mexico: AAPG Memoir 90, p. 1–28.
Hardin, N. S., 1989, Salt distribution and emplacement pro-
cesses, northwest lower slope: A suture between two
provinces: Gulf Coast Section-SEPM Foundation Tenth
Annual Research Conference Program and Extended
Abstracts, Houston, Texas, p. 54–59.
Heaton, R. C., M. P. A. Jackson, M. Bamahoud, and A. S. O.
Nani, 1995, Superposed Neogene extension, contraction,
and salt canopy emplacement in the Yemeni Red Sea, in
M. P. A. Jackson, D. G. Roberts, and S. Snelson, eds.,
Salt tectonics: A global perspective: AAPG Memoir 65,
p. 333–351.
Hudec, M. R., and M. P. A. Jackson, 2009, Interaction be-
tween spreading salt canopies and their peripheral thrust
systems: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 31, p. 1114–
1129, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2009.06.005.
Jackson, M. P. A., and R. R. Cornelius, 1985, Tertiary salt
diapirs exposed at different structural levels in the Great
Kavir (Dasht-i Kavir) south of Semnan, north-central Iran:
A remote-sensing study of their internal structure and
shape: University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic
Geology Open File Report OF-WTWI-1985-22, 108 p.
Dooley et al. 1069
Jackson, M. P. A., and C. J. Talbot, 1989, Salt canopies: Gulf
Coast Section-SEPM Foundation Tenth Annual Research
Conference Program and Extended Abstracts, Houston,
Texas, p. 72–78.
Jackson, M. P. A., and C. J. Talbot, 1991, A glossary of salt
tectonics: University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Eco-
nomic Geology Geological Circular 91-4, 44 p.
Jackson, M. P. A., R. R. Cornelius, C. H. Craig, and C. J. Talbot,
1987, The Great Kavir salt canopy: A major new class
of salt structure (abs.): Geological Society of America, Ab-
stracts with Programs, v. 19, no. 7, p. 714.
Jackson, M. P. A., R. R. Cornelius, C. H. Craig, A. Gansser, J.
Stöcklin, and C. J. Talbot, 1990, Salt diapirs of the Great
Kavir, central Iran: Geological Society of America Mem-
oir 177, 139 p.
Jackson, M. P. A., B. C. Vendeville, and D. D. Schultz-Ela,
1994, Salt-related structures in the Gulf of Mexico: A field
guide for geophysicists: The Leading Edge, v. 13, no. 8,
p. 837–842.
Kadri, M. S., L. M. Liro, M. J. Lahr, R. S. Hobbs, and P.
Montecchi, 2000, Occurrence and distribution of seismic
reflectors internal to allochthonous salt, Walker Ridge
lease area, deep-water Gulf of Mexico: AAPG Annual
Meeting, extended abstracts on CD-ROM, http://www
.searchanddiscovery.com/abstracts/html/2000/annual
/abstracts/0337.htm (accessed November 21, 2011).
Krantz, R. W., 1991, Measurements of friction coefficients
and cohesion for faulting and fault reactivation in labora-
tory models using sand and sand mixtures: Tectonophysics,
v. 188, p. 203–207, doi:10.1016/0040-1951(91)90323-K.
Lee, G. H., W. R. Bryant, and J. S. Watkins, 1989, Salt struc-
tures and sedimentary basins in the Keathley Canyon
area, northwestern Gulf of Mexico: Their development
and tectonic implications: Gulf Coast Section-SEPM
Foundation Tenth Annual Research Conference Pro-
gram and Extended Abstracts, Houston, Texas, p. 90–93.
Lee, G. H., J. S. Watkins, and W. R. Bryant, 1992, Origin and
evolution of Keathley Canyon, northwestern Gulf of Mex-
ico, in J. S. Watkins, F. Zhiqiang, and K. J. McMillen, eds.,
Geology and geophysics of continental margins: AAPG
Memoir 53, p. 361–373.
Liro, L. M., 1992, Distribution of shallow salt structures, lower
slope of the northern Gulf of Mexico, U.S.A.: Marine and
Petroleum Geology, v. 9, p. 433–451, doi:10.1016/0264
-8172(92)90053-H.
Liro, L. M., N. Weber, S. O’Hara, M. Eternadi, S. Lock-
Williams, M. Cubsanski, M. Kadri, and P. Montecchi,
2001, Subsalt exploration trap styles, Walker Ridge and
Keathley Canyon areas, deep-water Gulf of Mexico, in R. H.
Fillon, N. C. Rosen, P. Weimer, A. Lowrie, H. Pettingill,
R. L. Phair, H. H. Roberts, and B. van Hoorn, eds., Petro-
leum systems of deep-water basins: Global and Gulf of
Mexico experience: Gulf Coast Section-SEPM Foundation
21st Annual Research Conference, December 2–5, 21 p.
Liro, L. M., J. Murillas, L. Villalobos, G. Gatenby, and V.
Mathur, 2004, Salt sutures in single- and multi-tiered
allochthons, Green Canyon and Walker Ridge areas,
deep-water Gulf of Mexico, in P. J. Post, D. L. Olson,
K. T. Lyons, S. L. Palmes, P. F. Harrison, and N. C. Rosen,
eds., Salt-sediment interactions and hydrocarbon pro-
1070 Salt Sutures
spectivity: 24th Annual Research Conference, Gulf Coast
Section-SEPM Foundation, Houston, Texas, p. 200–219.
Marton, L. G., G. C. Tari, and C. T. Lehmann, 2000, Evolu-
tion of the Angolan passive margin, West Africa, with
emphasis on post-salt structural styles, in W. U. Mohriak
and M. Talwani, eds., Atlantic rifts and continental mar-
gins: American Geophysical Union Geophysical Mono-
graph 115, p. 129–149.
McClay, K. R., 1990, Extensional fault systems in sedimen-
tary basins: A review of analog model studies: Marine
and Petroleum Geology, v. 7, p. 206–233.
Mohriak, W., M. Nemèok, and G. Enciso, 2008, South Atlan-
tic divergent margin evolution: Rift-border uplift and
salt tectonics in the basins of SE Brazil, in R. J. Pankhurst,
R. A. J. Trouw, B. B. Brito Neves, and M. J. De Wit, eds.,
West Gondwana: Pre-Cenozoic correlations across the
South Atlantic region: Geological Society (London) Spe-
cial Publication 294, p. 365–398.
Peel, F. J., C. J. Travis, and J. R. Hossack, 1995, Genetic struc-
tural provinces and salt tectonics of the Cenozoic offshore
U.S. Gulf of Mexico: A preliminary analysis, in M. P. A.
Jackson, D. G. Roberts, and S. Snelson, eds., Salt tectonics:
A global perspective: AAPG Memoir 65, p. 153–175.
Perez, A. P., R. Clyde, P. D’Ambrosio, R. Israel, T. Leavitt, L.
Nutt, C. Johnson, and D. Williamson, 2008, Meeting the
subsalt challenge: Oilfield Review, v. 20, no. 3, p. 32–45.
Pilcher, R., B. Kilsdonk, and J. Trude, 2011, Primary basins
and their boundaries in the deep-water northern Gulf of
Mexico: Origin, trap types and petroleum system impli-
cations: AAPG Bulletin, v. 95, no. 2, p. 219–240, doi:10
.1306/06301010004.
Rivas, L. F., J. F. Sanclemente, and K. Ricketts, 2009, Tahiti
subsurface: Drilling and completion technology challenges
and accomplishments: Offshore Technology Conference,
Houston, Texas, May 4–7, 2009, OTC Paper 19861, 15 p.
Rossi, D., and F. Storti, 2003, New artificial granular materials
for analog laboratory experiments: Aluminum and sili-
ceous microspheres: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 25,
p. 1893–1899, doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(03)00041-5.
Schellart, W. P., 2000, Shear test results for cohesion and friction
coefficients for different granular materials: Scaling impli-
cations for their usage in analog modeling: Tectonophysics,
v. 324, p. 1–16, doi:10.1016/S0040-1951(00)00111-6.
Tari, G., J. Molnar, P. Ashton, and R. Hedley, 2000, Salt tec-
tonics in the Atlantic margin of Morocco: The Leading
Edge, v. 19, no. 10, p. 1074–1078, doi:10.1190/1.1438481.
Vendeville, B. C., and M. P. A. Jackson, 1990, Physical modeling
of the growth of extensional and contractional salt tongues
on continental slopes (abs.): AAPG Bulletin, v. 74, p. 784.
Vendeville, B. C., and M. P. A. Jackson, 1991, Deposition, ex-
tension, and the shape of downbuilding diapirs: AAPG
Bulletin, v. 75, p. 687–688.
Weijermars, R., 1986, Flow behavior and physical chemistry
of bouncing putties and related polymers in view of tec-
tonic laboratory applications: Tectonophysics, v. 124,
p. 325–358, doi:10.1016/0040-1951(86)90208-8.
Weijermars, R., M. P. A. Jackson, and B. C. Vendeville, 1993,
Rheological and tectonic modeling of salt provinces: Tec-
tonophysics, v. 217, p. 143–174, doi:10.1016/0040-1951
(93)90208-2.