南乍得盆地Doseo坳陷背形负花状构造成因分析

doi:10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2023.007

现代地质 ›› 2023, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (05): 1146-1154.DOI: 10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2023.007

南乍得盆地Doseo坳陷背形负花状构造成因分析

周小蓉¹^,²(), 陈石¹^,²(), 张新顺³, 丁宝通¹^,², 宋兴国¹^,², 潘楚琦¹^,², 彭梓俊⁴

1.中国石油大学(北京)地球科学学院,北京 102249
2.中国石油大学(北京) 油气资源与探测国家重点实验室,北京 102249
3.中国石油勘探开发研究院,北京 100083
4.中国石油塔里木油田分公司勘探开发事业部,新疆库尔勒 841000

收稿日期:2022-08-09 修回日期:2023-01-06 出版日期:2023-10-10 发布日期:2023-11-14
通讯作者: 陈石,男,博士,副教授,1986年出生,石油地质学专业,主要从事含油气盆地构造分析研究。Email:chenshi4714@163.com。
作者简介:周小蓉,女,硕士研究生,1998年出生,地质学专业,主要从事含油气盆地构造分析研究。Email: zxrcup@126.com。
基金资助:
中国石油勘探开发研究院项目“南乍得盆地Doseo坳陷构造演化及其对圈闭控制作用研究”(R2PED-2021-J5-1574)

Genetic Mechanism of Antiformal Negative Flower Structure in the Doseo Depression, Southern Chad Basin

ZHOU Xiaorong¹^,²(), CHEN Shi¹^,²(), ZHANG Xinshun³, DING Baotong¹^,², SONG Xingguo¹^,², PAN Chuqi¹^,², PENG Zijun⁴

1. College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
3. PetroChina Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Beijing 100083, China
4. Petroleum Exploration and Development Division, Tarim Oilfield Company, PetroChina, Korla, Xinjiang 841000, China

Received:2022-08-09 Revised:2023-01-06 Online:2023-10-10 Published:2023-11-14

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

南乍得盆地Doseo坳陷是中非剪切带重要的含油气盆地,其北东东—南西西向走滑断裂带上发育一种特殊的由正断层组成的花状构造,背形负花状构造。断层在平面上呈现雁列式排布,在地震剖面上兼具正花状和负花状构造的特点,表现为下部“向形”、上部“背形”的花状构造。根据断裂的发育特征以及区域应力演化特征,结合二维和三维地震资料解释,并通过平衡剖面恢复技术,将Doseo坳陷划分为5个演化期次。结合走滑位移量结果,对坳陷内背形负花状构造进行成因机制分析,认为其是坳陷中部北东东—南西西向的基底正断层在早白垩世张扭期负花状构造形成阶段和古近纪压扭反转期背形构造形成阶段叠加的结果,且早期张扭强度远大于后期压扭改造强度,二者走滑位移分量相差10~30倍,强度的差异使其主要呈现正断层组成的负花状构造样式,并叠加反转期形成的背形样式。

关键词: Doseo坳陷, 背形负花状构造, 走滑断裂, 构造反转, 成因机制

Abstract:

The Doseo depression in the South Chad Basin is an important petroliferous basin in the Central African Shear Zone.A new kind of flower structure composed of normal faults (termed antiformal negative flower structure), is developed on the ENE-WSW-trending strike-slip fault zone.The faults there exhibit an en echelon arrangement in plane view, and have characteristics of positive flower-like and negative flower-like structures in the seismic profile, which are shown as a flower structure of lower "synform" and upper "antiform" shape.According to the development characteristics of the faults and the regional stress evolution, combined with 2D and 3D seismic data interpretation, the Doseo depression is divided into five evolution stages by the balanced cross-section reconstruction technique.Based on the strike-slip displacement, we analyzed the genetic mechanism of the antiformal negative flower structure in the depression.We considered that it is the result of superposition of the ENE-WSW-trending basement normal fault in the middle part of the depression in the formation stage of negative flower structure in the Early Cretaceous transtension period, and the antiform formation stage in the Paleogene transpression reversal.The early transtension strength is much greater than the later transpression reversal strength, and the difference between the strike-slip displacement components of the two is 10 to 30 times.The difference in strength makes it mainly present the negative flower structural style composed of normal faults, and only the antiform style formed during the inversion period is superimposed.

Key words: Doseo depression, antiformal negative flower structure, strike slip fault, structural inversion, genetic mechanism

中图分类号:

P618

周小蓉, 陈石, 张新顺, 丁宝通, 宋兴国, 潘楚琦, 彭梓俊. 南乍得盆地Doseo坳陷背形负花状构造成因分析[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(05): 1146-1154.

ZHOU Xiaorong, CHEN Shi, ZHANG Xinshun, DING Baotong, SONG Xingguo, PAN Chuqi, PENG Zijun. Genetic Mechanism of Antiformal Negative Flower Structure in the Doseo Depression, Southern Chad Basin[J]. Geoscience, 2023, 37(05): 1146-1154.

图/表 9

图1 Doseo坳陷区域构造位置(a)及基底埋藏深度示意图(b)

Fig.1 Structure (a) and basement burial depth (b) in the Doseo depression

图2 Doseo坳陷地层综合柱状图

Fig.2 Stratigraphic column of the Doseo depression

图3 花状构造类型对比

Fig.3 Comparison of the different flower structure types in cross-sections

图4 Doseo坳陷研究区断裂平面图

Fig.4 Fault plan of the study area in the Doseo depression

图5 Doseo坳陷二维地震剖面构造解释(剖面AA’和BB’位置见图4)

Fig.5 Structural interpretation of 2D seismic profile in the Doseo depression (seeing Fig.4 for the locations of section AA’ and BB’)

图6 Doseo坳陷构造演化剖面(剖面AA’位置见图4)

Fig.6 Tectonic evolution profiles of the Doseo depression (seeing Fig.4 for the location of section AA’)

图7 Doseo坳陷背形负花状构造演化模式

Fig.7 Evolution models for the antiformal negative flower structures in the Doseo depression

图8 Doseo坳陷中央低凸起带Kedeni组顶面断裂系统图(位置见图4)

Fig.8 Fracture system diagram for the top Kedeni Formation in central low uplift zone of the Doseo depression (seeing Fig.4 for the location)

表1 Doseo坳陷各断层走滑位移量统计

Table 1 Statistics of strike-slip displacement of the various faults in the Doseo depression

	断层	最大离距 OO’(m)	走滑断层与派生断层夹角α	走滑分量 D_i(m)
张扭断层	F01	291.42	72.00	943.05
	F02	401.31	70.50	1202.22
	F03	129.86	76.91	573.38
	F04	205.57	75.46	818.82
	F05	273.69	73.50	963.65
	F06	318.79	63.58	716.47
	F07	585.21	62.83	1281.58
压扭断层	F08	69.32	0.50	69.32
	F09	38.44	17.15	40.23
	F10	70.62	22.70	76.55
	F11	49.35	6.27	49.65
	F12	40.06	8.34	40.49

参考文献 31

[1]	王义天, 李继亮. 走滑断层作用的相关构造[J]. 地质科技情报, 1999, 18(3): 30-34.
[2]	HARDING T P. Seismic characteristics and identification of negative flower structures, positive flower structures, and positive structural inversion[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 1985, 69(4): 582-600.
[3]	刘晓峰, 董月霞, 王华. 渤海湾盆地南堡凹陷的背形负花状构造[J]. 地球科学, 2010, 35(6): 1029-1034.
[4]	王越, 潘继平. 非洲油气资源及其宏观投资环境[J]. 中外能源, 2013, 18(5): 22-27.
[5]	GENIK G J. Petroleum geology of Cretaceous-Tertiary rift basins in Niger, Chad, and central Africanrepublic[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 1993, 77: 1405-1434.
[6]	童晓光, 窦立荣, 田作基, 等. 苏丹穆格莱特盆地的地质模式和成藏模式[J]. 石油学报, 2004, 25(1): 19-24. DOI
[7]	魏永佩, 刘池阳. 位于巨型走滑断裂端部盆地演化的地质模型: 以苏丹穆格莱德盆地为例[J]. 石油实验地质, 2003, 25(2): 129-136, 142.
[8]	张亚敏, 漆家福. 穆格莱德盆地构造地质特征与油气富集[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2007, 28(5): 669-674.
[9]	窦立荣, 潘校华, 田作基, 等. 苏丹裂谷盆地油气藏的形成与分布: 兼与中国东部裂谷盆地对比分析[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2006, 33(3): 255-261.
[10]	孔令武, 张树林, 韩文明, 等. 走滑—拉分盆地构造特征及盆地成因模式探讨:以中非多赛奥盆地为例[J]. 高校地质学报, 2019, 25(5): 722-729.
[11]	黄迟君, 胡望水, 李希元, 等. 中非Doseo盆地构造特征及成因演化机制[J]. 东北石油大学学报, 2021, 45(4): 35-45, 7.
[12]	张光亚, 余朝华, 黄彤飞, 等. 非洲地区裂谷盆地类型及油气成藏特征[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2020, 25(4): 43-51. DOI
[13]	GENIK G J. Regional framework, structural and petroleum aspects of rift basins in Niger, Chad and the Central African Republic (C.A.R.)[J]. Tectonophysics, 1992, 213(1/2): 169-185. DOI URL
[14]	吕彩丽, 赵阳. 中非裂谷盆地构造演化差异性与构造动力学机制[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 40(6): 23-34.
[15]	REYNOLDS D J, JONES C R. Tectonic evolution of the Doba and Doseo Basins, Chad: controls on trap formation and depositional setting of the Three Fields area, Chad[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 2004, 88: 15-16.
[16]	FAIRHEAD J D, GREEN C M, MASTERTON S M, et al. The role that plate tectonics, inferred stress changes and stratigraphic unconformities have on the evolution of the West and Central African Rift System and the Atlantic continentalmargins[J]. Tectonophysics, 2013, 594: 118-127. DOI URL
[17]	FAIRHEAD J D. Regional tectonics and basin formation: The role of potential field studies-an application to the Mesozoic West and Central African RiftSystem[M]//egional Geology and Tectonics:Principles of Geologic Analysis. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2020: 541-556.
[18]	张艺琼, 何登发, 童晓光. 中非剪切带含油气盆地成因机制与构造类型[J]. 石油学报, 2015, 36(10): 1234-1247. DOI
[19]	黄超, 余朝华, 肖高杰, 等. 中西非裂谷系B盆地构造演化及其对油气成藏的影响研究[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2012, 12(17): 4079-4085.
[20]	BROWNE S, FAIRHEAD J. Gravity study of the Central African Rift system: A model of continental disruption 1.TheNgaoundere and Abu Gabra Rifts[J]. Tectonophysics, 1983, 94: 187-203. DOI URL
[21]	FAIRHEAD J D. Mesozoic plate tectonic reconstructions of the central South Atlantic Ocean:The role of the West and Central African rift system[J]. Tectonophysics, 1988, 155(1/2/3/4): 181-191. DOI URL
[22]	BINKS R M, FAIRHEAD J D. A plate tectonic setting for Mesozoic rifts of West and CentralAfrica[J]. Tectonophysics, 1992, 213(1/2): 141-151. DOI URL
[23]	GUIRAUD R, BOSWORTH W, THIERRY J, et al. Phanerozoic geological evolution of Northern and Central Africa: An overview[J]. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 2005, 43(1/2/3): 83-143. DOI URL
[24]	余朝华, 肖坤叶, 张桂林, 等. 乍得Bongor盆地反转构造特征及形成机制分析[J]. 中国石油勘探, 2018, 23(3): 90-98. DOI
[25]	张庆莲, 侯贵廷, 潘校华. 中西非裂谷系形成的动力学机制[J]. 地质力学学报, 2018, 24(2): 169-176.
[26]	李江海, 王洪浩, 李维波, 等. 显生宙全球古板块再造及构造演化[J]. 石油学报, 2014, 35(2): 207-218. DOI
[27]	黄宝春, 陈军山, 易治宇. 再论印度与亚洲大陆何时何地发生初始碰撞[J]. 地球物理学报, 2010, 53(9): 2045-2058.
[28]	EL HASSAN W M, FARWA A G, AWAD M Z. Inversion tectonics in central Africa rift system: Evidence from theheglig field[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2017, 80: 293-306. DOI URL
[29]	JEAN C. The East African riftsystem[J]. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 2005, 43(1/2/3): 379-410. DOI URL
[30]	MORLEY C K, HARANYA C, PHOOSONGSEE W, et al. Activation of rift oblique and rift parallel pre-existing fabrics during extension and their effect on deformation style: Examples from the rifts ofThailand[J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 2004, 26(10): 1803-1829. DOI URL
[31]	詹润, 杨贵丽, 张盛, 等. 青东凹陷复合型花状构造成因分析[J]. 大地构造与成矿学, 2012, 36(4): 473-482.

南乍得盆地Doseo坳陷背形负花状构造成因分析

Genetic Mechanism of Antiformal Negative Flower Structure in the Doseo Depression, Southern Chad Basin

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	宋清, 孙盼科, 相金元, 田发金, 吕凤清, 贾浪波, 姜世一, 沈宇豪, 徐怀民, 张林, 何太洪, 方向阳. 鄂尔多斯盆地苏里格东二区走滑断裂结构特征及其对流体分布的控制作用[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(05): 1110-1122.
[2]	王清华. 塔里木盆地17号走滑断裂带北段差异变形与演化特征[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(05): 1136-1145.
[3]	曾帅, 马志刚, 赵聪, 杨磊, 张肃, 董继红, 梁京涛, 鄢圣武. 青藏高原东部大渡河流域太平桥乡古滑坡群复活特征多源遥感识别[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(04): 994-1003.
[4]	左亮, 能源, 黄少英, 罗彩明, 陈石, 朱铁, 王川, 卢成美. 哈拉哈塘地区超深层走滑断裂构造变形特征及其石油地质意义[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(02): 270-282.
[5]	张银涛, 陈石, 刘强, 冯光, 谢舟, 梁鑫鑫, 李婷, 宋兴国, 康鹏飞, 彭梓俊. 塔里木盆地富满油田F_Ⅰ19断裂发育特征及演化模式[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(02): 283-295.
[6]	田安琦, 陈石, 余一欣, 修金磊, 金峰. 准噶尔盆地莫索湾凸起西缘走滑断裂分层变形特征及形成机理[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(02): 296-306.
[7]	庞思晨, 李传新, 毛凤军, 王涛, 袁圣强, 何松高, 师晨一. 西非裂谷系Grein坳陷构造几何学与运动学特征[J]. 现代地质, 2023, 37(02): 328-339.
[8]	唐名鹰, 华磊, 丁正江, 董振昆, 王炜晓, 翟孝志, 王汝杰, 郑成龙. 东昆仑祁漫塔格地区乌腊德石墨矿床地球化学特征及成矿机制研究[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(06): 1475-1485.
[9]	黄雷, 张忠民, 赵晓辰, 吕雪雁, 王爱国, 刘池洋, 宋世骏, 殷珂, 李鑫, 刘静静. 北非地区中生代盆地区域沉积中心发育机制新认识及油气差异富集效应[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(05): 1218-1229.
[10]	彭梓俊, 冯磊, 罗彩明, 陈石, 宋兴国, 梁鑫鑫, 周小蓉. 塔中隆起走滑断裂分层变形机制研究的物理模拟实验[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(04): 1022-1034.
[11]	况安鹏, 余一欣, 朱秀香, 陈石, 金峰, 梁鑫鑫, 余浪. 塔里木盆地顺北地区11号走滑断裂带变形及其活动特征[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(06): 1809-1817.
[12]	黄少英, 宋兴国, 罗彩明, 能源, 马小丹, 漆家福, 陈石. 塔北隆起X型走滑断裂成因机制的新解释[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(06): 1797-1808.
[13]	张薇, 王贵玲, 赵佳怡, 刘峰. 四川西部中高温地热流体地球化学特征及其地质意义[J]. 现代地质, 2021, 35(01): 188-198.
[14]	张江涛, 郭涛, 王冰洁, 李虹霖, 王茂桢. 渤海辽北地区新生代断裂特征及其演变过程[J]. 现代地质, 2020, 34(06): 1110-1118.
[15]	梁杰, 张向涛, 许新明, 罗泽, 吴静. 珠江口盆地番禺4洼古近系文昌组构造变形特征及成因机制[J]. 现代地质, 2018, 32(04): 750-757.