Next Article in Journal
Offensive Patterns and Performance Analysis in One-Possession Scenarios During the Last Minute and Overtime in the EuroLeague
Previous Article in Journal
Predicting the Compression Index of Clayey Soils Using a Hybrid Genetic Programming and XGBoost Model
Previous Article in Special Issue
Matching of Water Breakthroughs in a Low-Resistivity Oil Reservoir Using Permeability Anisotropy
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 15
Issue 4
10.3390/app15041927
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Depositional History Reconstruction of the Miocene Formations in the Carpathian Foredeep Area Based on the Integration of Seismostratigraphic and Chemostratigraphic Interpretation

by
Anna Łaba-Biel
1,
Andrzej Urbaniec
1,*,
Benedykt Kubik
1,
Anna Kwietniak
2 and
Robert Bartoń
1
1
Oil and Gas Institute—National Research Institute, 25A Lubicz Str., 31-503 Cracow, Poland
2
Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental Protection, University of Science and Technology AGH, 30 Mickiewicz Av., 30-059 Kraków, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(4), 1927; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15041927
Submission received: 4 December 2024 / Revised: 27 January 2025 / Accepted: 10 February 2025 / Published: 13 February 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Petroleum Exploration and Structural Geology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Detailed recognition of the paleoenvironment of sedimentation for the monotonous series of heterolithic sediments of the Machow Formation in the central part of the Carpathian Foredeep is still relatively poor. This study presents an unconventional approach of integrating results of seismostratigraphic interpretation with conclusions from analyses of chemostratigraphic profiles in boreholes. The results obtained from the studies allowed the resolution of the seismic data to be increased, enabling it to be accurately tied to the well data. The studies showed a high consistency between results obtained by the two methods mentioned above, and their combination provided a range of additional information and conclusions that could not be drawn from using a single method. The possibility of correlating interpreted sedimentary sequences with specific elements of the paleoenvironment and stages of the depositional history of the analyzed sedimentary basin was also demonstrated. An important benefit of the integrated interpretation methodology used is the possibility to recognize an apparently monotonous profile of heterolithic formations, which was previously not possible with standard interpretation methods.

1. Introduction

The Carpathian Foredeep Basin is the northern part of a huge Pannonian Basin System (PBS) developed in the central European region (Figure 1). The PBS sediment series is the subject of extensive geological analysis in the aspect of conventional and unconventional reservoirs [1,2,3,4]. The sedimentary basin of the Carpathian Foredeep, which was a fragment of a large foreland graben basin stretching along the whole Carpathian arc, is not as thoroughly recognized in terms of stratigraphy and lithology as other parts of the PBS [5,6,7,8].
The studied Miocene formations from the Polish part of the Carpathian Foredeep are mainly represented by thin-bedded sediments presenting considerable diversity with regard to lithology, thickness, and position in the sedimentary basin [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. The complex facies model of these formations in the central part of the Carpathian Foredeep is characterized by dynamic horizontal and vertical variability and a significant, although not always obvious, influence of tectonic processes on the sedimentation and configuration of the foreland sedimentary basin.
Applsci 15 01927 g001
Figure 1. Generalized outline of the Central Europe region (A); location of the study area (pink rectangle—see Figure 2) in relation to the Carpathians and the Pannonian Basin System (PBS) (B) (after Kováč et al. [17], Golonka et al. [18]).
Figure 1. Generalized outline of the Central Europe region (A); location of the study area (pink rectangle—see Figure 2) in relation to the Carpathians and the Pannonian Basin System (PBS) (B) (after Kováč et al. [17], Golonka et al. [18]).
Applsci 15 01927 g001
Applsci 15 01927 g002
Figure 2. Location of the research area against the range of the Carpathian Foredeep in Poland; ranges of geological units are according to Porębski and Warchoł [13].
Figure 2. Location of the research area against the range of the Carpathian Foredeep in Poland; ranges of geological units are according to Porębski and Warchoł [13].
Applsci 15 01927 g002
Commonly used methods of interpreting this type of formation, based on both well data and standard seismic correlation, do not contribute significantly to reconstructing the depositional architecture of the sedimentary basin. Procedures for transferring high-resolution geological information derived from the interpretation of well logs from significantly distant wells to seismic data are often inefficient. Low-resolution seismic data cannot be used to reliably reconstruct the detailed configuration of the sedimentary basins, as a single seismic reflector may represent up to several ‘sedimentary episodes’ [15,19,20].
The methodology used is based on a chemostratigraphic interpretation of the well data integrated with the results of the seismic image interpretation. The seismic image in the chronostratigraphic reconstruction was interpreted using the sequence stratigraphy method [21,22,23].
The results indicate that the chemostratigraphic series distinguished in the wells studied correlate well with the depositional sequences interpreted on the seismic chronostratigraphic images. The independently conducted research performed using these different interpretation methods revealed a high coherence of results.

2. Geological Background

The study area is located in southern Poland within the central part of the Carpathian Foredeep area (Figure 1 and Figure 2).
The oldest structural stage in the research area is represented by a series of clastic rocks that are strongly diagenised and slightly transformed by regional metamorphism processes [24]. The Ediacaran age of that complex is confirmed by the results of micropaleontological analyses [25,26,27].
The middle stage is composed of Meso-Paleozoic rocks of a significant total thickness up to 2000 m. In the southern part of the analyzed region, the Lower Paleozoic deposits (Ordovician and Silurian) directly overlie the Ediacaran rocks [28,29], while in the northern part, the oldest Paleozoic member is the carbonate series of Devonian and Carboniferous sediments [30,31,32]. The Mesozoic interval is represented by clastic and carbonate Triassic sediments, and above them lie mostly shallow-water carbonate complexes of the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods [33,34,35,36].
The youngest structural stage is formed by the Miocene formations (Badenian–Sarmatian), which were initially deposited in the Carpathian Foredeep basin. The complex of autochthonous Miocene strata in the research area can be divided into three main units: the Lower Badenian clastic sub-evaporite series, the Upper Badenian evaporite series, and the Upper Badenian–Sarmatian clastic series [37,38,39] (Figure 3).
The sub-evaporite sediments, distinguished as the Skawina Formation [40], are mainly represented by a set of claystone and mudstone, with thicknesses up to a few dozen meters. The evaporite series lying above in the Miocene profile is represented mainly by anhydrites (and less commonly gypsums) and is distinguished as the Krzyzanowice Formation [40] (Figure 3).
The entire profile of clastic sediments occurring above the evaporite series, with thicknesses up to 1500 m, is classified as the Machow Formation [38,40]. This formation manifests significant lithofacial diversity, and it is an essential part of the autochthonous Miocene profile in the analyzed region of the Carpathian Foredeep. The Machow Formation is assigned to NN6/NN7 calcareous nanoplankton zones (Late Badenian–Sarmatian) (Figure 3) [10,39,41,42]. A detailed seismostratigraphic analysis of the middle part of this formation is the main subject of the analysis.
Applsci 15 01927 g003
Figure 3. Miocene lithostratigraphic units of the Carpathian Foredeep basin in Poland (on the basis of publications: Gaździcka [43]; Garecka et al. [44]; Garecka and Olszewska [45]; Jasionowski [38]; Olszewska [39]; Andreyeva-Grigorovich et al. [46]; Moryc [47]; Oszczypko et al. [48]; time scale after Oszczypko et al. [49]).
Figure 3. Miocene lithostratigraphic units of the Carpathian Foredeep basin in Poland (on the basis of publications: Gaździcka [43]; Garecka et al. [44]; Garecka and Olszewska [45]; Jasionowski [38]; Olszewska [39]; Andreyeva-Grigorovich et al. [46]; Moryc [47]; Oszczypko et al. [48]; time scale after Oszczypko et al. [49]).
Applsci 15 01927 g003

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Seismic and Well Data

The analyzed 3D seismic survey from the central part of the Carpathian Foredeep (Figure 2) is characterized by high-resolution seismic data, especially in the Miocene, Cretaceous, and Jurassic formations. The good quality of the seismic data made it possible to identify many details of the geological structure of this area, which is still poorly recognized in the facies and paleoenvironmental context. Two wells (named Well-1 and Well-2) with preserved sets of drill cutting samples from Miocene intervals were selected for chemostratigraphic studies. Well-1 is located in the central part of the interpreted seismic survey, while Well-2 is located in its northwestern part (Figure 2). Both wells intersected the full profile of the Miocene strata, as Well-1 finished drilling in the Carboniferous formation and Well-2 reached the upper part of the Jurassic carbonate formations.

3.2. Seismostratigraphy and Tectonostratigraphy

Seismostratigraphic interpretation of the chronostratigraphic image and Wheeler diagram is the most useful method to provide detailed recognition for interpretation of seismic data in the areas dominated by thin-bedded formations. Its most important idea is to transform the seismic image into a sequence of chronostratigraphic horizons that provide the necessary basis for further interpretation. Each chronostratigraphic horizon in the seismic image is associated with a specific position in the depositional sequence and is associated with a specific sedimentary event in the interpreted basin, associated with eustatic sea-level changes. By possessing a set of chronostratigraphic horizons with the correct depositional succession, a Wheeler diagram can be constructed. The Wheeler domain is a plot that shows the continuity of the flatten horizon along the profile; this approach can also be adopted for seismic horizons and seismic profiles. As a result, the plot of chronological geological events is produced [50,51]. Analyses of the relative position of the flatten horizons allow us to reason about transport direction and range of sedimentation within sedimentary episodes. Gaps that are present at the plot can be interpreted as hiatuses and/or erosional surfaces [50,52]. The analyses aim to define sedimentary sequences by adopting its paradigms from the sequence stratigraphy method and depositional models developed for different sequence stratigraphy approaches and depositional models compiled for various types of sedimentary basins (vide [21,53]). Falling stage systems tracts (FSSTs), lowstand systems tracts (LSTs), transgressive systems tracts (TSTs), and highstand systems tracts (HSTs) can be interpreted. Defining these systems tracts and their connections allows the interpretation of individual depositional sequences.
This method is helpful in the interpretation of siliciclastic, carbonate, and mixed formations, characterized by small thicknesses of individual depositional sequences, high facies diversity, variability in the sedimentary material transport directions, and noticeable effects of tectonic processes. Following the continuity of seismostratigraphic horizons in the reconstruction can give insight into tectonic development and/or tectonic reconstructions of the analyzed interval [54,55]. The integration of sequence stratigraphy methodology with tectonostratigraphic interpretation enables dividing the interpreted interval into higher-order structural units, characterized by a different tectonic style. These units usually correspond to megasequences that are linked to the most crucial sedimentary stages [56]. Thus, tectonostratigraphic units most often correspond to regional events, representing particular phases (compressional and extensional) of basin development [55,57].

3.3. Chemostartigraphy

Chemostratigraphy is a widely used research methodology that uses geochemical data to characterize variability in rock formation profiles. The field of chemostratigraphy can be broadly subdivided into isotope and elemental [58,59], but the present work focuses on elemental chemostratigraphy. This method is based on a comparison of the chemical composition content, the relationship between individual elements, and their variation in the profile, i.e., the identification of the unique elemental composition, characteristic of individual rock formations [60]. The ability to use cutting samples and not only core samples to study rock formations is the greatest benefit of this method [61,62,63], especially as the amount of core material currently available is often strictly limited. It is important to note that the effect of drilling mud is generally negligible on the identifiable elemental composition and does not have a greater impact on the application of this method [58]. It has been proven that well-cutting studies can be useful in identifying and mapping chemostratigraphic units with unique geochemical signatures [64]. Furthermore, the method can be applied to sediments of any age and lithology and deposited in different sedimentary environments [59].
Analysis of elemental composition variability in the well profiles based on measurements of the chemical composition of the rocks (for example, energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence methods) makes it possible to determine the boundaries defining the individual differing parts of the profile (usually described as chemostratigraphic series). Moreover, fluctuations in the ratios of selected trace elements can illustrate changes in the deposition environment, e.g., a transition from anoxic to aerobic conditions in the sedimentary basin.
With the results of XRF and reference mineral composition measurements (XRD), it is possible to determine the mineralogical composition of the rocks analyzed [65]. Chemostratigraphic studies are also used in the identification of sequence units (in the sense of sequence stratigraphy method) within thin-bedded sedimentary successions.

3.4. Integration of Seismic and Well Data

An essential phase of the work was the precise correlation of well and seismic data by linking high-resolution chronostratigraphic images (chronostratigraphic horizons) with the record of well logs in selected wells (Figure 4). The comparison of independently distinguished chemostratigraphic units with seismostratigraphic units was a key step of the work.

4. Results

4.1. Results of Seismostratigraphic and Tectonostratigraphic Studies

Within the analyzed interval of Miocene deposits in the Well-1 area, located in the central part of the seismic survey, 94 complete depositional sequences (named successively from S1 to S94) were identified and followed, a large part of which is represented by sequences of heterolithic sediments. Most of the sequences interpreted in this zone are local in range and do not continue in a northwestern direction. Meanwhile, in the Well-2 area, located in the NW part of the seismic survey, 31 depositional sequences (named successively from S0 to S30) were recognized. Most of the depositional sequences identified in this zone are characterized by well-defined sequence boundaries, although differences in geometry and thickness are observed.
Using a seismostratigraphic method based on the sequence stratigraphy approach, it was also possible to identify depositional architecture elements typical for siliciclastic sedimentary basins (such as incised valleys, slope fans, and basin floor fans) genetically associated with systems tracts (LSTs, FSSTs), as well as suites of deposits resulting from debris flows. The spatial relations between individual sequence units and their variability in vertical geological profile were determined. Moreover, the directions of paleotransport of sedimentary material in the analyzed segment of the sedimentary basin of the Carpathian Foredeep were defined, which allowed us to reconstruct the depositional history of the analyzed sedimentary series of the Miocene Machow Formation. In the analyzed profiles of Miocene formations, the sediments of the highstand systems tracts (HSTs) are represented mainly by fluvial delta deposits (clinoform-type of the arrangement of chronostratigraphic horizons, marked in orange in Figure 5). Transgressive systems tracts (TSTs, marked in green in Figure 5) also make up a large proportion of the interpreted Machow Formation profile. Both of these sediment types are mainly associated with the extension of the shelf zone together with its marginal part. The results of the interpretation indicate that the greatest thicknesses of this type of formation are observed in the southwestern part of the study area. In the more distal areas, i.e., the slope zone and the basin plain, sediments of falling stage systems tracts (FSSTs, marked in dark blue in Figure 5) and lowstand systems tracts (LSTs), represented by slope fans and basin floor fans sediments (marked in yellow in Figure 5) and lowstand delta sediments (marked in pink in Figure 5), are significantly predominant above the HST and TST sediments.
Olistostromes, created as a result of gravitative debris flows and occurring within underlying and overlying stratified sediments, are recorded in a characteristic way in the chronostratigraphic image. In the chronostratigraphic image, some elements can be identified as slump blocks forming sequences or as isolated elements. Furthermore, a series of surfaces were identified in the image that can be interpreted as areas of detachment of the above-mentioned blocks. It was observed that in many cases, the development of fault planes was initiated along these surfaces in later phases.
On the basis of the interpretation carried out, a series of tectonostratigraphic units were distinguished in the profile of Machow Formation (Figure 6), clearly differing regarding their structural and tectonic style. Each of the distinguished units is characterized by a distinct chronostratigraphic image related to the specific arrangement of chronostratigraphic horizons in the Wheeler diagram, as well as to the specific configuration of dislocations. Furthermore, it can be assumed that each of the distinguished tectonostratigraphic units is closely related to a different stage in the geological history of the interpreted region and is reflected in the paleoenvironmental pattern of sedimentation resulting from the chemostratigraphic interpretation.

4.2. Results of Chemostratigraphic Studies

Purified drill cutting samples were pre-crushed and then ground in a planetary mill using agate bins. The material was compacted using a hydraulic press, resulting in pastille preparations on which measurements were made using an X-ray fluorescence spectrometer (XRF).
A mineralogical–chemical model for converting elemental composition into mineralogical composition was created on the basis of chemical and mineralogical analyses. Furthermore, in order to better calibrate the results obtained by the XRF method with the mineral composition of the analyzed sediments, quantitative X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements were made for selected samples, ensuring that the true proportions of minerals occurring in the sediments were obtained. On the basis of mineralogical–chemical models built by correlating XRD results with XRF data, a continuous profile of the mineralogical composition in the analyzed well profile was obtained. The content of the following minerals was determined: quartz, potassium feldspar, plagioclase, calcite, dolomite, pyrite, anhydrite (including gypsum), and clay minerals.
The chemostratigraphic series in the profiles of the interpreted wells (Figure 7) were determined on the basis of analyses of chemical composition variability (chemostratigraphic indicators), and additionally, in some cases, the well logs and six-arm dipmeter interpretation were used. A total of 26 units of different chemostratigraphic features were identified in the profiles of interpreted wells.
In the first stage, changes due to the origin (provenance) of the detritic material were considered, as reflected by variations in the ratios of selected trace elements (such as Zr, Hf, Cr, Th, Ti, Ta, Nb, P, U, Y, and rare earth elements (REEs)). A further chemostratigraphic subdivision can be made based on elemental ratios with more complicated relationships to minerals. Their fluctuations may represent changes in the sedimentary environment, such as anoxic conditions (Mo, Ni, Zn, Cu, U, Co). The selected indicators also provide information on basic lithological changes, such as the increase in carbonates (Ca, Mg, Sr) or the increase in the content of clay minerals (Al, K). They also indicate changes reflecting weathering and diagenetic processes or relative changes in the grain size of the sediments.
The proposed chemostratigraphic subdivision within the analyzed profile of Miocene sediments is of two levels. The higher-order subdivision corresponds to 10 series in both analyzed wells, each of which is subdivided into lower-order units (Figure 7).

4.3. Integration of Chemostratigraphic and Seismostratigraphic Research

The next work stage involved following the variability of the features of the geochemical record in the wells and verified that the determined chemostratigraphic intervals are reflected in the results of the seismostratigraphic interpretation. The correctness of the tie between the interpretation results obtained using the seismostratigraphic and chemostratigraphic methods was verified by comparing the directions of seismic dips obtained on the chronostratigraphic image with the record of the six-arm dipmeter (SED), as well as with information from the high-resolution borehole micro-imager (XRMI).
The dips and azimuths of the layers measured with a six-arm dipmeter most often correlate very well with the systems of chronostratigraphic horizons. Variations in dip values also correspond with the boundaries of depositional systems tracts and depositional sequences. The fault planes interpreted independently on the chronostratigraphic image can be traced on the six-arm dipmeter. Moreover, the interpreted sequence units were related to gamma-ray log shapes. The tying of well information to the analysis of seismic sequences was carried out with reference to the current state of recognition of depositional environments and the processes that occur in such environments [21,53].
The research performed showed a high correspondence between the results obtained by the aforementioned methods, and their integration allowed further conclusions to be drawn that were not possible on the basis of a single method. An example includes the conclusions that indicate the existence of possible anoxic paleoenvironmental conditions during the sedimentation of the lowermost part of the Machow Formation. Meanwhile, the seismostratigraphic analysis shows that the paleoenvironment of sedimentation for this part of the profile can be described as a stagnating shallow basin located on a tectonically elevated basement block. Moreover, the results of both methods show unambiguously that a phase of major tectonic remodeling occurred after the deposition of these formations in the basin. These conclusions would have been impossible to obtain from a standard analysis of well logs, as well as from a standard interpretation of seismic imaging.
A significant benefit of the interpretation methodology used is the possibility of recognizing an apparently monotonous profile of heterolithic formations, which has not previously been possible with standard interpretation methods, mainly due to the lack of heterogeneity of the recording well logs within the series. The series currently established based on the chemostratigraphic studies provides a basis for distinguishing individual parts of the profile, differing in their geochemical characteristics. Furthermore, the series thus defined correlates very well with the sequence units interpreted from the seismic data in the chronostratigraphic image (Figure 8 and Figure 9). This may be crucial in correlating the autochthonous Miocene formations because apparently similar profile fragments (with similar lithology) in the geophysical record may have different origins, related to distinct alimentation areas and different deposition directions and processes, and may have been deposited at different times.

5. Discussion

The problem of integration well and seismic data for apparently homogeneous complexes of heterolithic formations with a large thickness has been quite often discussed in scientific papers. An example of this type of analysis is the work of Martinius et al. [66] regarding the Aptian (Lower Cretaceous) heterolithic strata of McMurray Formation from Alberta, Canada. The work focuses on defining the depositional model of formation using abundant well data (core, HMI, traditional well logs) and high-resolution seismic data combined with principles of process-based fluvial sedimentology. Corfield et al. [67], based on seismic and well log correlation, gained a considerable amount of new information for understanding paleogeographic development and reservoir geometry of the Jurassic Garn Formation in the Smørbukk area, mid-Norway. An integrated study of seismic, seismic attribute, core, and biostratigraphic data in this area indicate that the Garn Formation is strongly age and facies diachronous, often over short distances (5–10 km). Furthermore, it can be demonstrated that sediment dispersal and stratigraphic architecture were influenced by fault-created topography.
Regarding Miocene formations of the Carpathian Foredeep, the problem of correlation between well data and seismic data interpretation for heterolithic formations has been discussed in publications by several authors (for example [12,68,69,70,71,72,73]). The use of borehole data in these works is mainly based on the correlation and interpretation of well logs, while the use of seismic data is based on standard structural interpretation or, less frequently, a lithofacial interpretation supported by the seismic image analysis or seismic attributes analysis. Whereas the results of chemostratigraphic interpretation for Miocene formations in the northern part of the Pannonian Basin System are presented i.a. in the works of Palzer-Khomenko et al. [74] or Hülscher et al. [75], the set of chemostratigraphic markers is limited to just a few. The distribution of more elements was analyzed in the works of Gąsiewicz et al. [76] and Gąsiewicz [77], but the research in the second publication was carried out on a few tens of meters section of the Miocene profile from the boundary between Badenian and Sarmatian.
Taking these aspects into account, it should be noted that it is difficult to find publications from the analyzed region in which chemostratigraphic results from wells are being compared with the seismostratigraphic interpretation of seismic data. The idea of integrating these data proposed in this paper represents a new approach to the interpretation of fine-grained and tectonically disturbed formations.
The authors of several works have approached the issue of integrating chemostratigraphic data with paleoenvironmental analysis and with eustatic sea-level changes [78,79,80], as well as using the chemostratigraphic method to more precisely define the boundaries of depositional sequences [81,82,83,84,85]. The issues of integrating the results of chemostratigraphic and seismostratigraphic analyses have been attempted by research teams in other sedimentary basins around the world. Examples of this type of work include the analysis of the Lower Ordovician and Upper Cambrian carbonate series in the Tarim Basin in northwest China [86], comprehensive interpretation of Nieuwerkerk Formation (Delfland subgroup) in West Netherlands Basin [87], or multidisciplinary (seismostratigraphic, lithotectonic, and chemostratigraphic) analysis of Late Permian and Triassicc sediments in the Andean–Amazonian foreland basins of Huallaga, southern Marañón, and the Eastern Cordillera, Peru [88].
The results obtained in the present study allowed precise correlation of well and seismic data, thanks to the use of chemostratigraphic and seismostratigraphic methods. The improved resolution of the seismic data obtained on the chronostratigraphic image made it possible to precisely correlate the interpreted sequence and their boundaries with the well data, i.e., with the six-arm dipmeter and the interpreted chemostratigraphic units. It should be emphasized that the studies carried out by the two methods mentioned above were performed completely independently, and their comparison was made only in the final stage of the work. Moreover, it was possible to connect the interpreted sedimentary sequences with specific elements of the palaeoenvironment of sedimentation in the analyzed segment of the Miocene sedimentary basin, as well as with subsequent stages of the depositional history of the mentioned basin.
Based on the interpretation, it may be concluded that the transgressive-regressive sedimentation type, which varies over time, is well documented in the analyzed segment of the Miocene basin of the Carpathian Foredeep. It should be emphasized that this sedimentation is strictly controlled by both sea-level fluctuations and the successive remodeling of the sedimentary basin.
It should be noted that the presence of the olistostrome series is recorded in the chronostratigraphic image. The presence of olistostromes in the Miocene formations in the central part of the Carpathian Foredeep has been noted in earlier publications [89,90,91], but their identification on the basis of well and seismic data is not always evident. The most important factors influencing the formation of the olistotromes are the tectonic uplift of the basin parts and the instability of the sediments accumulated on the slopes.
Moreover, the research carried out revealed a significant correlation between the higher-order chemostratigraphic units and tectonostratigraphic units interpreted as megasequences. Each of the megasequences identified on the seismic image (defined by the slightly different character of the dislocations and configuration of the seismic reflectors) corresponds to a higher-order chemostratigraphic unit characterized by its typical relationships and composition of individual elements. The variability of individual megasequences in the profile of the Machow Formation indicates the influence of successive phases of basin remodelling that have occurred in the Carpathian Foredeep sedimentary basin during Miocene, as well as associated changes in the character of deposition, source of delivery of terrigenous material, and general conditions prevailing in the sedimentary basin.

6. Conclusions

The independently conducted interpretations of the seismic and well data demonstrate a high consistency of results in relation to the determined sequence boundaries, leyer dips, and fault planes. Although the methods used are not novel, the analyses presented above are rarely a standard approach to interpreting seismic and geological data in projects. The integration from the results of the different interpretative approaches allowed the reconstruction of a number of detailed information concerning both the present structural layout of the Miocene formations and the paleomorphology of the sedimentary basin during the sedimentation of these deposits.
On the basis of the results obtained, it was possible to increase the resolution of the seismic data to the borehole scale and thus interpret depositional sequences of small thicknesses, of a few meters, which is very important for a correct understanding of the history of deposition and the influence of tectonic events on the current structural image of the interpreted geological formations. The possibility of identifying even small discontinuities (such as fault planes, angular unconformities, and areas of detachment of olistostromic series), which are usually impossible to interpret on standard seismic reconstructions and well data, was also proven.
The results provided the possibility of a detailed recognition of the apparently monotonous heterolithic sediments of the Machow Formation. The chemostratigraphic series distinguished in the analyzed wells correlate well with the depositional sequences interpreted on the basis of seismic data.
The conducted studies clearly indicate that the integrated research methodology, based on chemostratigraphic, seismostratigraphic, and tectonostratigraphic studies, is useful for a more detailed recognition of the paleoenvironment and deposition history of monotonous thin-bed sedimentary complexes.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.Ł.-B. and B.K.; methodology, A.Ł.-B., B.K. and A.K.; software, A.K., B.K. and R.B.; validation, A.U. and R.B.; formal analysis, A.K. and A.U.; investigation, A.Ł.-B., B.K., A.K. and A.U.; resources, B.K. and A.K.; data curation, A.Ł.-B. and B.K.; writing—original draft preparation, A.Ł.-B., B.K. and A.U.; writing—review and editing, A.U. and R.B.; visualization, A.Ł.-B., B.K., A.K. and A.U.; supervision, A.U.; project administration, R.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded based on the statutory works—the works of the Oil and Gas Institute-National Research Institute (OGI-NRI) commissioned by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education; order numbers: 0027/SR/2023 and 0028/SR/2023; archive numbers: DK-4100-0010/2023 and DK-4100-0011/2023. Work was part of a statutory grant of the AGH University of Krakow, No. 16.16.140.315. Additionally, Ms. Anna Kwietniak was supported by the program “Excellence initiative—research university for the AGH University of Krakow”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Original data are not shared (third party data). Data were obtained from ORLEN PGNiG Exploration and Production Division, and the authors were not authorized to share source data.

Acknowledgments

The Authors would like to acknowledge the ORLEN PGNiG for sharing the data for research purposes and to thank them for the permission to publish the results.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Kiraly, A.; Milota, K.; Magyar, I.; Kiss, K. Tight gas exploration in the Pannonian Basin. In Petroleum Geology: From Mature Basins to New Frontiers. Proceedings of the 7th Petroleum Geology Conference, Geological Society Petroleum Geology Conference Series; Vining, B.A., Pickering, S.C., Eds.; Geological Society: London, UK, 2010; Volume 7, pp. 1125–1129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Badics, B.; Vető, I. Source rocks and petroleum systems in the Hungarian part of the Pannonian Basin: The potential for shale gas and shale oil plays. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2012, 31, 53–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Malvić, T.; Sučić, A.; Cvetković, M.; Resanović, F.; Velić, J. Low permeability Neogene lithofacies in Northern Croatia as potential unconventional hydrocarbon reservoirs. Cent. Eur. J. Geosci. 2014, 6, 82–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bartha, A.; Balazs, A.; Szalay, A. On the tectonostratigraphic evolution and hydrocarbon systems of extensional back-arc basins: Inferences from 2D basin modelling from the Pannonian basin. Acta Geod. Geophys. 2018, 53, 369–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Nagymarosy, P.; Muller, P. Some Aspects of Neogene Biostratigraphic in the Pannonian Basin. The Pannonian Basin: A Study in Basin Evolution Basin Evolution. AAPG Mem. 1988, 45, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sacchi, M.; Horvath, F. Towards a new time scale for the Upper Miocene continental series of the Pannonian basin (Central Paratethys). EGU Stephan Mueller Spec. Publ. Ser. 2002, 3, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Malvić, T. Review of Miocene shallow marine and lacustrine depositional environments in Northern Croatia. Geol. Q. 2012, 56, 493–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Pavelić, D.; Kovačić, M. Sedimentology and stratigraphy of the Neogene rift-type North Croatian Basin (Pannonian Basin System, Croatia): A review. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2018, 91, 455–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Połtowicz, S.; Starczewska-Popow, A. The development of the Carpathian Foredeep between Tarnow and Przemysl, Polish eastern Carpathians. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 1973, 43, 495–517. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  10. Oszczypko, N. The Western Carpathian Foredeep—Development of the foreland basin in front of the accretionary wedge and its burial history (Poland). Geol. Carpathica 1998, 49, 415–431. [Google Scholar]
  11. Krzywiec, P. Contrasting tectonic and sedimentary history of the central and eastern parts of the Polish Carpathian foredeep basin—Results of seismic data interpretation). Mar. Pet. Geol. 2001, 18, 13–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Porębski, S.; Pietsch, K.; Hodiak, R.; Steel, R.J. Origin and sequential development of Badenian-Sarmatian clinoforms in the Carpathian Foreland Basin (SE Poland). Geol. Carpathica 2003, 54, 119–136. [Google Scholar]
  13. Porębski, S.J.; Warchoł, M. Hyperpycnal flows and deltaic clinoforms—Implications for sedimentological interpretations of late Middle Miocene fill in the Carpathian Foredeep Basin. Przegląd Geol. 2006, 54, 421–429. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  14. Lis, P.; Wysocka, A. Middle Miocene deposits in Carpathian foredeep: Facies analysis and implications for hydrocarbon reservoir prospecting. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 2012, 82, 239–253. [Google Scholar]
  15. Łaba-Biel, A.; Kwietniak, A.; Urbaniec, A. Seismic Identification of Unconventional Heterogenous Reservoirs Based on Depositional History—A Case Study of the Polish Carpathian Foredeep. Energies 2020, 13, 6036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Przelaskowska, A.; Zagórska, U.; Urbaniec, A.; Łykowska, G.; Klaja, J.; Grela, J.; Kędracka, K. Mineralogical characteristics of the heterolithic formations from the Carpathian Foredeep Miocene sediments, south-eastern Poland. Geol. Geophys. Environ. 2022, 48, 219–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kovač, M.; Nagymarosy, A.; Oszczypko, N.; Ślączka, A.; Csontos, L.; Marunteanu, M.; Matenco, L.; Marton, E. Palinspastic reconstruction of the Carpathian-Pannonian region during the Miocene. In Geodynamic Development of the Western Carpathians; Rakuš, M., Ed.; Geological Survey of Slovak Republic (GSSR): Bratislava, Slovakia, 1998; pp. 189–217. [Google Scholar]
  18. Golonka, J.; Pietsch, K.; Marzec, P. Structure and plate tectonic evolution of the northern Outer Carpathians. In Tectonics; Closson, D., Ed.; NTECH: Rijeka, Croatia, 2011; pp. 65–92. [Google Scholar]
  19. Urbaniec, A.; Łaba-Biel, A.; Kwietniak, A.; Fashagba, I. Seismostratigraphic Interpretation of Upper Cretaceous Reservoir from the Carpathian Foreland, Southern Poland. Energies 2021, 14, 7776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Łaba-Biel, A.; Urbaniec, A.; Filipowska-Jeziorek, K. Example of seismostratigraphic and tectonostratigraphic interpretation of the Miocene sediments from the central part of the Carpathian Foredeep. Naft.–Gaz 2022, 8, 565–579. (In Polish) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Catuneanu, O. Principles of Sequence Similarity. Wyd; Elsevier: Edmonton, AL, Canada, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  22. Catuneanu, O.; Galloway, W.E.; Kendall, C.G.S.C.; Miall, A.D.; Posamentier, H.W.; Strasser, A.; Tuckeret, M.E. Sequence Stratigraphy: Methodology and Nomenclature. Newsl. Stratigr. 2011, 44, 173–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Catuneanu, O. Sequence stratigraphy in the context of the ‘modeling revolution’. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2020, 116, 104309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kowalska, S. Diagenesis/anchimetamorphism boundary in rocks of the uppermost Proterozoic and Cambrian from the eastern part of the Malopolska block determined on the basis of clay minerals studies. Pr. Nauk. Inst. Naft. I Gazu 2012, 187, 1–152. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  25. Buła, Z.; Żaba, J.; Habryn, R. Tectonic subdivision of Poland: Southern Poland (Upper Silesian Block and Małopolska Block). Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 912–920. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  26. Żelaźniewicz, A.; Buła, Z.; Fanning, M.; Seghedi, A.; Żaba, J. More evidence on Neoproterozoic terranes in southern Poland and southeastern Romania. Geol. Q. 2009, 53, 93–124. [Google Scholar]
  27. Jachowicz-Zdanowska, M. Organic microfossil assemblages from the late Ediacaran rocks of the Małopolska Block, southeastern Poland. Geol. Q. 2011, 55, 85–94. [Google Scholar]
  28. Moryc, W.; Nehring-Lefeld, M. Ordovician between Pilzno and Busko in the Carpathian Foreland (Southern Poland). Geol. Q. 1997, 41, 139–150. [Google Scholar]
  29. Buła, Z.; Habryn, R. Precambrian and Palaeozoic basement of the Carpathian Foredeep and the adjacent outer Carpathians (SE Poland andWestern Ukraine). Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 2011, 81, 221–239. [Google Scholar]
  30. Zając, R. Stratigraphy and facies development of the Devonian and Lower Carboniferous in southern part of the Carpathian Fordeep. Geol. Q. 1984, 28, 291–316. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  31. Moryc, W. Geological structure of Miocene Substratum in Kraków-Pilzno Region. Part I. Precambrian and palaeozoic period. Naft. –Gaz 2006, 62, 197–216. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  32. Urbaniec, A.; Bartoń, R.; Bajewski, Ł.; Wilk, A. Results of the structural interpretation of Triassic and Palaeozoic formations of the Carpathian Foreland based on new seismic data. Naft. –Gaz 2020, 76, 559–568. (In Polish) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Gutowski, J.; Urbaniec, A.; Złonkiewicz, Z.; Bobrek, L.; Świetlik, B.; Gliniak, P. Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous of the middle Polish Carpathian Foreland. Biul. Państwowego Inst. Geol. 2007, 426, 1–26. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  34. Matyja, B.A. Development of the Mid-Polish Trough versus Late Jurassic evolution in the Carpathian Foredeep area. Geol. Q. 2009, 53, 49–62. [Google Scholar]
  35. Urbaniec, A.; Bobrek, L.; Świetlik, B. Lithostratigraphy and micropalaeontological characteristic of Lower Cretaceous strata in central part of the Carpathian Foreland. Przegląd Geol. 2010, 58, 1161–1175. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  36. Moryc, W. The Permian and Triassic of the Polish Carpathian Foreland. Biul. Państwowego Inst. Geol. 2014, 457, 43–68. (In Polish) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Oszczypko, N. The Early–Middle Carpathian peripheral foreland basin (Western Carpathians, Poland). Przegląd Geol. 1997, 45, 1054–1063. [Google Scholar]
  38. Jasionowski, M. Lithostratigraphy of the Miocen deposits in the easteen part of the Carpathian Foredeep. Biul. Państwowego Inst. Geol. 1997, 375, 43–59. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  39. Olszewska, B. Biostratigraphy of Neogene in the Carpathian Foredeep in the light of new micropalaeontological data. Pr. Państw. Inst. Geol. 1999, 168, 9–28. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  40. Alexandrowicz, S.W.; Garlicki, A.; Rutkowski, J. Basic lithostratigraphic units of the Miocene of the Carpathian Foredeep. Geol. Q. 1982, 26, 470–471. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  41. Dziadzio, P.; Maksym, A.; Olszewska, B. Miocene deposition in the eastern part of the Carpathian Foredeep inPoland. Przegląd Geol. 2006, 54, 413–420. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  42. Oszczypko-Clowes, M.; Lelek, D.; Oszczypko, N. Sarmatian paleoecological environment of the Machow Formation based on the quantitative Nannofossil analysis—Case study from Sokołów area (Polish Carpathian Foredeep). Geol. Carpathica 2012, 63, 267–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Gaździcka, E. Nannoplankton stratigraphy of the Miocene deposits in Tarnobrzeg area (northeastern part of the Carpathian Foredeep). Geol. Q. 1994, 38, 553–569. [Google Scholar]
  44. Garecka, M.; Marciniec, P.; Olszewska, B.; Wójcik, A. New biostratigraphic data and an attempt of correlation of Miocene formations in the basement of the Western Carpathians. Przegląd Geol. 1996, 44, 495–501. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  45. Garecka, M.; Olszewska, B. Biostratigraphy of the Early Miocene of the Southern Poland based on planctic foraminifera and calcareous nannoplankton. Przegląd Geol. 1998, 46, 712–721. [Google Scholar]
  46. Andreyeva-Grigorovich, A.S.; Oszczypko, N.; Savitskaya, N.A.; Ślączka, A.; Trofimovich, N.A. Correlation of Late Badenian salts of the Wieliczka, Bochnia and Kalush areas (Polish and Ukrainian Carpathian Foredeep). Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 2003, 73, 67–89. [Google Scholar]
  47. Moryc, W. Development of research on Western Carpathian Miocene deposits in the Bielsko—Kraków area. Geologia 2005, 31, 5–73. [Google Scholar]
  48. Oszczypko, N.; Krzywiec, P.; Popadyuk, I.; Peryt, T. Carpathian Foredeep Basin (Poland and Ukraine): Its Sedimentary, Structural, and Geodynamic Evolution. In The Carpathians and Their Foreland: Geology and Hydrocarbon Resources; Golonka, J., Picha, F.J., Eds.; AAPG Memoir; American Association of Petroleum Geologists: Tulsa, OK, USA, 2006; Volume 84, pp. 293–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Oszczypko, N.; Uchman, A.; Bubniak, I. The Stebnyk Formation (Miocene) in the Boryslav–Pokuttya and Sambir nappes of the Ukrainian Carpathians: A record of environmental change in the Carpathian Foredeep. Geol. Q. 2016, 60, 473–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ligtenberg, H.; de Bruin, G.; Hemstra, N.; Geel, C.R. Sequence Stratigraphic Interpretation in the Wheeler Transformed (Flattened) Seismic Domain. In Proceedings of the 68th European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers Conference and Exhibition, incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2006, Vienna, Austria, 12–15 June 2006; EAGE 2006: Opportunities in Mature Areas. Volume 3, pp. 1622–1626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. de Bruin, G.; McBeath, K.; Hemstra, N. Unravelling a Carbonate System: Technical Advances in Seismic Sequence Stratigraphy. First Break 2007, 25, 57–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Qayyum, F.; de Groot, P.; Hemstra, N. Using 3D Wheeler Diagrams in Seismic Interpretation—The Horizon Cube Method. First Break 2012, 30, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Morse, D.G. Siliciclastic resevoir rocks; the petroleum system—From source to trap. AAPG Mem. 1994, 60, 121–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Watkinson, M.P.; Hart, M.B.; Joschi, A. Cretaceous Tectonostratigraphy and the Development of the Cauvery Basin, Southeast India. Pet. Geosci. 2007, 13, 181–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Haqiqie, F.A.; Sunardi, E.; Ilmii, N.N.; Ginting, A.S. Determination of Potential Hydrocarbon and Tectonostatigraphy Analysis Based on 2D Seismic in Padamarang Sub-Basin, Bone Basin, South Part of Sulawesi. J. Geol. Sci. Appl. Geol. 2018, 2, 38–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Nikishin, A.M.; Kopaevich, L.F. Tectonostratigraphy as a Basis for Paleotectonic Reconstructions. Moscow Univ. Geol. Bull. 2009, 64, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Mantilla, O.; Castellanos, J.; Ramirez, V.; Hurtado, D.; Rubio, C. Tectono–stratigraphic events of the Northern Caribbean Offshore, Colombia. In Proceedings of the AAPG International Conference and Exhibition, Cartagena, Colombia, 8–11 September 2013. AAPG Search and Discovery Article #30292. [Google Scholar]
  58. Craigie, N. Principles of Elemental Chemostratigraphy; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  59. Ramkumar, M. (Ed.) Chemostratigraphy: Concepts, Techniques and Applications; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Eisenberg, R.A.; Harris, P.M. Application of chemostratigraphy in multivariate statistical analysis to differentiating bounding stratigraphic surfaces. In Carbonate Facies and Sequence Stratigraphy: Practical Applications of Carbonate Models; Pause, P.H., Candelaria, M.P., Eds.; Permian Basin section-SEPM publication; Permian Basin Graduate Center Publication: Odessa, TX, USA, 1995; Volume 5, pp. 83–102. [Google Scholar]
  61. Mansour, A.; Gentzis, T.; Carvajal-Ortiz, H.; Tahoun, S.S.; Wagreich, M. Geochemistry and palynology of the upper Albian at the Abu Gharadig Basin, southern Tethys: Constraints on the oceanic anoxic event 1d. Geol. J. 2020, 55, 5991–6605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Rosenberg, Y.O.; Reznik, I.J.; Vinegar, H.J.; Feinstein, S.; Bartov, Y. Comparing natural and artificial thermal maturation of a Type II-S source rock, Late Cretaceous, Israel. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2021, 124, 104773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Wesenlund, F.; Grundvåg, F.A.; Engelschiøn, V.S.; Thießen, O.; Pedersen, J.H. Multi-elemental chemostratigraphy of Triassic mudstones in eastern Svalbard: Implications for source rock formation in front of the World’s largest delta plain. Depos. Rec. 2022, 8, 718–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Craigie, N.W. Applications of chemostratigraphy in Middle Jurassic unconventional reservoirs in eastern Saudi Arabia. Geoarabia 2015, 20, 79–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kowalska, S.; Kubik, B.; Skupio, R.; Wolański, K. Downhole lithological profile reconstruction based on chemical composition of core samples and drill cuttings measured with portable X-ray fluorescences spectrometer. Minerals 2020, 10, 1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Martinius, A.W.; Fustic, M.; Garner, D.L.; Jablonski, B.V.J.; Strobl, R.S.; MacEachern, J.A.; Dashtgard, S.E. Reservoir characterization and multiscale heterogeneity modeling of inclined heterolithic strata for bitumen-production forecasting, McMurray Formation, Corner, Alberta, Canada. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2017, 82, 336–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Corfield, S.; Sharp, I.; Häger, K.O.; Dreyer, T.; Underhill, J. An Integrated Study of the Garn and Melke Formations (Middle to Upper Jurassic) of the Smorbukk Area, Halten Terrace, Mid-Norway; Norwegian Petroleum Society Special Publications; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2001; Volume 10, pp. 199–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Krzywiec, P.; Wysocka, A.; Oszczypko, N.; Mastalerz, K.; Papiernik, B.; Wróbel, G.; Oszczypko-Clowes, M.; Aleksandrowski, P.; Madej, K.; Kijewska, S. Evolution of the Miocene deposits of the Carpathian Foredeep in the vicinity of Rzeszów (the Sokołów–Smolarzyny 3D seismic survey area). Przegląd Geol. 2008, 56, 232–244. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  69. Baran, U.; Jawor, E. Seismogeologic documentation of prospects for new gas discoveries in Miocene sandstones under the Carpathian overthrust between Husów and Przemyśl. Geologia 2009, 35, 223–253. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  70. Puskarczyk, E.; Jarzyna, J.; Porębski, S.J. Application of multivariate sta tis ti cal methods for characterizing heterolithic reservoirs based on wire line logs—Example from the Carpathian Foredeep Basin (Middle Miocene, SE Poland). Geol. Q. 2015, 59, 157–168. [Google Scholar]
  71. Marzec, P.; Sechman, H.; Kasperska, M.; Cichostępski, K.; Guzy, P.; Pietsch, K.; Porębski, S.J. Interpretation of a gas chimney in the Polish Carpathian Foredeep based on integrated seismic and geochemical data. Basin Res. 2016, 30, 210–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Cichostępski, K.; Kwietniak, A.; Dec, J. Verification of bright spots in the presence of thin beds by AVO and spectral analysis in Miocene sediments of Carpathian Foredeep. Acta Geophys. 2019, 67, 1731–1745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Urbaniec, A.; Stadtmüller, M.; Bartoń, R. Possibility of a more detailed seismic interpretation within the Miocene formations of the Carpathian Foredeep based on the well logs interpretation. Naft.–Gaz 2019, 75, 527–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Palzer-Khomenko, M.; Wagreich, M.; Knierzinger, W.; Meszar, M.; Gier, S.; Kallanxhi, M.E.; Soliman, A. A calcite crisis unravelling Early Miocene (Ottnangian) stratigraphy in the North Alpine–Carpathian Foreland Basin: A litho- and chemostratigraphic marker for the Rzehakia Lake System. Geol. Carpathica 2018, 69, 315–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hülscher, J.; Fischer, G.; Grunert, P.; Auer, G.; Bernhardt, A. Selective Recording of Tectonic Forcings in an Oligocene/Miocene Submarine Channel System: Insights from New Age Constraints and Sediment Volumes From the Austrian Northern Alpine Foreland Basin. Front. Earth Sci. 2019, 7, 302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Gąsiewicz, A.; Czapowski, G.; Paruch-Kulczycka, J. Badenian–Sarmatian boundary in geochemical record in the Carpathian Foredeep area: Stratigraphic implications. Przegląd Geol. 2004, 52, 413–420. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  77. Gąsiewicz, A. Geochemical features of the Badenian–Sarmatian boundary series of the Miocene evaporite overburden in the Busko (Młyny) PIG-1 and Kazimierza Wielka (Donosy) PIG-1 boreholes, northern part of the Carpathian Foredeep. Biul. Państwowego Inst. Geol. 2015, 461, 61–78. (In Polish) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Mutti, M.; John, C.M.; Knoerich, A.C. Chemostratigraphy in Miocene heterozoan carbonate settings: Applications, limitations and perspectives. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 2006, 255, 307–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Turner, B.W.; Tréanton, J.A.; Slatt, R.M. The use of chemostratigraphy to refine ambiguous sequence stratigraphic correlations in marine mudrocks. An example from the Woodford Shale, Oklahoma, USA. J. Geol. Soc. 2016, 173, 854–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Dantas, M.V.S.; Uhlein, A.; Uhlein, G.J.; Okubo, J.; Moura, S.A. Stratigraphy, isotope geochemistry, seismic stratigraphy and paleogeography of the Lagoa do Jacaré Formation, Bambuí Foreland Basin (Ediacaran-Cambrian), Southeast Brazil. J. S. Am. Earth Sci. 2023, 121, 104137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Ver Straeten, C.A.; Brett, C.E.; Sageman, B.B. Mudrock sequence stratigraphy: A multi-proxy (sedimentological, paleobiological and geochemical) approach, Devonian Appalachian Basin. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 2011, 304, 54–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Hammes, U.; Frébourg, G. Haynesville and Bossier mudrocks: A facies and sequence stratigraphic investigation, East Texas and Louisiana, USA. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2012, 31, 8–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Ratcliffe, K.T.; Wright, A.M.; Spain, D.R. Unconventional methods for unconventional plays: Using elemental data to understand shale resource plays. Pet. Explor. Soc. Aust. News Res. 2012, 117, 50–54. [Google Scholar]
  84. Sano, J.L.; Ratcliffe, K.T.; Spain, D.R. Chemostratigraphy of the Haynesville Shale. In Geology of the Hanyesville Gas Shale in East Texas and West Louisiana, U.S.A.; Hammes, U., Gales, J., Eds.; AAPG Memoir: Tulsa, OK, USA, 2013; Volume 105, pp. 137–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Harris, N.B.; McMillan, J.M.; Knapp, L.J.; Mastalerz, M. Organic matter accumulation in the Upper Devonian Duvernay Formation, Western Canada Sedimentary Basin, from sequence stratigraphic analysis and geochemical proxies. Sediment. Geol. 2018, 376, 185–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Hongyu, W.; Zhiqian, G.; Machel, H.G.; Tailiang, F.; Duan, W. The Cambrian-Ordovician boundary in the Tarim Basin, NW China: Geochemistry and geophysics data anomalies. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2017, 156, 497–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. DeVault, B.; Jeremiah, J. Tectonostratigraphy of the Nieuwerkerk Formation (Delfland subgroup), West Netherlands Basin. AAPG Bull. 2002, 86, 1679–1707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Carrillo, E.; Barragán, R.; Hurtado, C.; Calderón, Y.; Martín, G.; Vázquez-Taset, Y.; Parra, M.; Rivera, A.; Cadena, F.M.; Sarmiento, L. Depositional sequences in northern Peru: New insights on the palaeogeographic and palaeotectonic reconstruction of western Gondwana during late Permian and Triassic. J. Geol. Soc. 2021, 178, jgs2020-186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Połtowicz, S. Palinspastic reconstruction of the palaeogeography of the Badenian salinary basin in Poland. Geologia 1993, 19, 203–233. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  90. Połtowicz, S. Badenian olisthostromes and turbidity fans near Tarnow (Middle Carpathian Foreland). Geologia 1999, 25, 153–187. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
  91. Urbaniec, A.; Filipowska-Jeziorek, K.; Bartoń, R.; Wilk, A. Characteristics of the conglomerate-olistostrome series in the Szczurowa–Wojnicz paleovalley based on an interpretation of seismic image. Naft.–Gaz 2021, 77, 709–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Applsci 15 01927 g004
Figure 4. The seismic and borehole data integration procedure used in the work.
Figure 4. The seismic and borehole data integration procedure used in the work.
Applsci 15 01927 g004
Applsci 15 01927 g005
Figure 5. Detailed interpretation of sequence units in the profile of Machow Formation in the Well-1 area based on the chronostratigraphic image (A) and Wheeler diagram (B).
Figure 5. Detailed interpretation of sequence units in the profile of Machow Formation in the Well-1 area based on the chronostratigraphic image (A) and Wheeler diagram (B).
Applsci 15 01927 g005
Applsci 15 01927 g006
Figure 6. Tectonostratigraphic interpretation of the profile of Machow Formation in the Well-1 area.
Figure 6. Tectonostratigraphic interpretation of the profile of Machow Formation in the Well-1 area.
Applsci 15 01927 g006
Applsci 15 01927 g007
Figure 7. Results of mineralogical and chemostratigraphic studies of the Machow Formation and subdivision into chemostratigraphic units in the Well-2 profile: tracks A and G—depth, tracks B and F—chemostratigraphic zones, track C—well logs, track D—mineralogical profile, track E—chemical composition analysis.
Figure 7. Results of mineralogical and chemostratigraphic studies of the Machow Formation and subdivision into chemostratigraphic units in the Well-2 profile: tracks A and G—depth, tracks B and F—chemostratigraphic zones, track C—well logs, track D—mineralogical profile, track E—chemical composition analysis.
Applsci 15 01927 g007
Applsci 15 01927 g008
Figure 8. Compilation of seismostratigraphic and chemostratigraphic interpretation results for the Well-1 analyzed: track A—depth, track B—chemostratigraphic zones, track C—well logs, track D—dipmeter, track E—mineralogical profile, track F—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of InLine), track G—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track H—stick plot in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track I—gamma-ray in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track J—stick plot in the background of tectonostratigraphic (megasequences) interpretation (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track K—depositional sequence numbers, track L—chemical composition analysis.
Figure 8. Compilation of seismostratigraphic and chemostratigraphic interpretation results for the Well-1 analyzed: track A—depth, track B—chemostratigraphic zones, track C—well logs, track D—dipmeter, track E—mineralogical profile, track F—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of InLine), track G—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track H—stick plot in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track I—gamma-ray in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track J—stick plot in the background of tectonostratigraphic (megasequences) interpretation (fragment of XLine presented in Figure 5 and Figure 6), track K—depositional sequence numbers, track L—chemical composition analysis.
Applsci 15 01927 g008
Applsci 15 01927 g009
Figure 9. Compilation of seismostratigraphic and chemostratigraphic interpretation results for the Well-2 analyzed: track A—depth, track B—chemostratigraphic zones, track C—well logs, track D—dipmeter, track E—mineralogical profile, track F—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of InLine), track G—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of XLine), track H—stick plot in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine), track I—gamma-ray in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine), track J—stick plot in the background of tectonostratigraphic (megasequences) interpretation (fragment of XLine), track K—depositional sequence numbers, track L—chemical composition analysis.
Figure 9. Compilation of seismostratigraphic and chemostratigraphic interpretation results for the Well-2 analyzed: track A—depth, track B—chemostratigraphic zones, track C—well logs, track D—dipmeter, track E—mineralogical profile, track F—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of InLine), track G—synthetic seismogram and stick plot in the background of seismic section (fragment of XLine), track H—stick plot in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine), track I—gamma-ray in the background of systems tracts interpretation (fragment of XLine), track J—stick plot in the background of tectonostratigraphic (megasequences) interpretation (fragment of XLine), track K—depositional sequence numbers, track L—chemical composition analysis.
Applsci 15 01927 g009
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Łaba-Biel, A.; Urbaniec, A.; Kubik, B.; Kwietniak, A.; Bartoń, R. Depositional History Reconstruction of the Miocene Formations in the Carpathian Foredeep Area Based on the Integration of Seismostratigraphic and Chemostratigraphic Interpretation. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 1927. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15041927

AMA Style

Łaba-Biel A, Urbaniec A, Kubik B, Kwietniak A, Bartoń R. Depositional History Reconstruction of the Miocene Formations in the Carpathian Foredeep Area Based on the Integration of Seismostratigraphic and Chemostratigraphic Interpretation. Applied Sciences. 2025; 15(4):1927. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15041927

Chicago/Turabian Style

Łaba-Biel, Anna, Andrzej Urbaniec, Benedykt Kubik, Anna Kwietniak, and Robert Bartoń. 2025. "Depositional History Reconstruction of the Miocene Formations in the Carpathian Foredeep Area Based on the Integration of Seismostratigraphic and Chemostratigraphic Interpretation" Applied Sciences 15, no. 4: 1927. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15041927

APA Style

Łaba-Biel, A., Urbaniec, A., Kubik, B., Kwietniak, A., & Bartoń, R. (2025). Depositional History Reconstruction of the Miocene Formations in the Carpathian Foredeep Area Based on the Integration of Seismostratigraphic and Chemostratigraphic Interpretation. Applied Sciences, 15(4), 1927. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15041927

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop