四川盆地二叠纪两类典型碳酸盐台地边缘及古地理分异格局
doi: 10.19762/j.cnki.dizhixuebao.2024441
李雯1,2 , 陈安清1,2 , 张玺华3 , 孙诗1,2 , 黄荟文3 , 高兆龙3 , 徐胜林1,2 , 黄光辉1,2 , 解昊1,2 , 杨帅1,2 , 齐仁理4,5 , 邓模6 , 陈洪德1,2
1. 油气藏地质及开发工程全国重点实验室,成都理工大学,四川成都, 610059
2. 深时地理环境重建与应用自然资源部重点实验室,成都地理工大学,四川成都, 610059
3. 中国石油西南油气田公司勘探开发研究院,四川成都, 610041
4. 中原油田勘探开发研究院,河南濮阳, 457000
5. 中石化酸性气田开发重点实验室,四川达州, 635000
6. 中国石化石油勘探开发研究院无锡石油地质研究所,江苏无锡, 214000
基金项目: 本文为国家自然科学基金区域创新发展联合基金(编号U24A20591)、国家自然科学基金项目(编号42402120,42272132)、四川省科技计划项目(编号2023NSFSC1986)、成都理工大学优质青年人才培育特支计划(编号20200-000526-04)、成都理工大学珠峰科学研究计划项目(编号80000-2025ZF11402)、中国石油天然气股份有限公司西南油气田公司勘探开发研究院项目(编号XNS勘研院JS2022-2599)、中国石油化工股份有限公司中原油田普光分公司项目(编号2404100083)和中国石油化工股份有限公司项目 (编号P24146)联合资助的成果
Permian paleogeographic differentiation evolution and platform margin model comparison in Sichuan basin
LI Wen1,2 , CHEN Anqing1,2 , ZHANG Xihua3 , SUN Shi1,2 , HUANG Huiwen3 , GAO Zhaolong3 , XU Shenglin1,2 , HUANG Guanghui1,2 , XIE Hao1,2 , YANG Shuai1,2 , QI Renli4,5 , DENG Mo6 , CHEN Hongde1,2
1. State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, Sichuan 610059 , China
2. Key Laboratory of Deep-time Geography and Environment Reconstruction and Applications of Ministry of Natural Resources, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, Sichuan 610059 , China
3. Exploration and Development Research Institute, PetroChina Southwest Oil & Gas Field Company, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041 , China
4. Sinopec Zhongyuan Oilfield Research Institute of Exploration and Development, Puyang, Henan 457000 , China
5. Sinopec Key Laboratory of Acid Gas Field Development, Dazhou, Sichuan 635000 , China
6. Sinopec Wuxi Institute of Petroleum Geology, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214000 , China
摘要
碳酸盐台地边缘是规模油气资源的重要聚集场所,明确古地理分异格局是揭示碳酸盐台地边缘性质和控滩机制的关键。继在四川盆地上二叠统长兴组台地边缘礁滩相发现万亿方天然气黄金聚集带后,最近又在中二叠统茅口组探明了台地边缘滩相储层,多口超百万方无阻气流井展现出巨大的勘探潜力。然而,这两个时期的沉积充填规律和储层类型特征具有显著差异,详细的对比分析将有助于深化碳酸盐台地模式及其控储效应的认识。本文基于四川盆地及周缘二叠系的大量钻井、野外剖面和地震资料,分析了典型的沉积相特征和岩相古地理格局,并对比了两类台地边缘的差异性。结果表明:四川盆地二叠纪古地理从茅口期开始出现多个同沉积断裂影响下的浅水台地-深水陆棚分异,形成广元-旺苍海槽;长兴期受拉张性构造活动影响,台地-陆棚分异进一步加剧,深水范围扩大,形成开江-梁平海槽。长兴组碳酸盐台地边缘发育厚层生物礁滩,茅口组碳酸盐台地边缘发育薄层云化浅滩,二者向深水区均快速转变为硅质岩和碳质泥页岩;茅口期属于初始地貌继承型台地边缘,主要表现为均衡加/进积、多期间断成滩形成的宽边缘-薄滩体;长兴期则为沉积镶边叠加塑造型台地边缘,主要呈现出差异加/进积、持续成礁形成的窄边缘-厚礁体。总体上,两类台地边缘皆具有发育规模储层的潜力,可以作为大型油气聚集带勘探的重要领域。
Abstract
The carbonate platform margin is an important gathering place of large-scale oil and gas resources, and the study of paleogeographic differentiation is the basis to reveal the characteristics and development laws of the carbonate platform margin. Following the discovery of a trillion square meter natural gas gold accumulation zone in the platform margin reef-beach facies of the Upper Permian Changxing Formation in Sichuan basin, the platform margin beach reservoir of the Middle Permian Maokou Formation has recently been discovered, and several open flow wells of more than one million square meters have shown great exploration potential. However, there are significant differences in sedimentary filling and reservoir characteristics between these two periods, and detailed comparative analysis will help deepen the understanding of carbonate platform model and its reservoir control effect. Based on a large number of drilling, fieldoutcrop and seismic data from the Sichuan basin and its surrounding Permian system, the typical sedimentary facies and lithofacies paleogeographic pattern are analyzed, and the differences between the two types of platform margins are compared. The results show the differentiation from shallow-water platform to deep water shelf by multiple synsedimentary faults occurred in Permian paleogeography of Sichuan basin from Maokou period, with Kaijiang-Liangping trough being the most typical. The shallow-water carbonate platform of Changxing Formation is characterized by the development of thick platform margin reef-beach facies, and the shallow-water carbonate platform of Maokou Formation is characterized by the development of thin platform margin beach facies, both of which rapidly change into siliceous rock and carbonaceous shale. The Maokou period belongs to the initial geomorphic inherited platform margin, which is represented by several thin beach bodies with intermittent accretion under the background of wide margin. In the Changxing period, the platform margin was shaped by sedimentary border, showing a thick reef flat body with continuous accretion or prograding under the background of narrow margin. In general, both platform margins have the potential to develop large-scale reservoirs and are important targets for exploration of large oil and gas accumulation zones.
碳酸盐台地是指所有浅水(水深一般在风暴浪基面之上)碳酸盐沉积环境。由于碳酸盐台地相是油气资源赋存的重要场所而使其成为油气勘探中的持续研究热点。常见的碳酸盐台地类型有镶边型台地、缓坡型台地、陆表海台地、淹没台地和孤立台地等,并可进一步划分出浅滩、开阔台地、局限台地、台地边缘等环境(Wilson,1975Tucker,1981Read,1985;陈安清等,2017;王龙等,2018)。基于构造-沉积分异分析揭示最有利油气聚集的台地边缘礁滩相储层发育规律是当前碳酸盐沉积的重要研究进展(何登发等,2011陈洪德等,2014;李雯等,2021)。
四川盆地二叠纪是一个重要的海相碳酸盐台地发育期(关士聪等,1980何登发等,2011陈洪德等,2014;李雯等,2021;孟宪武等,2024),在其台地边缘带已获得多个层位的油气勘探突破。继21世纪初在川东北上二叠统长兴组台地边缘礁滩相发现万亿方天然气黄金聚集带(元坝气田、龙岗气田、普光气田等)后(马永生等,2005a2005b2010祝海华等,2013),最近又在川中八角场—南充地区中二叠统茅口组发现了台地边缘滩相储层(杨雨等,2020江青春,2024),多口超百万方无阻气流井展现出川中-川北台缘带上巨大的勘探潜力。然而,目前对于茅口组碳酸盐台地边缘类型及台缘滩展布规律仍未明确。岩相古地理研究是揭示碳酸盐台地边缘性质和分异规律的基础,同时有助于深化对碳酸盐台地模式及其控储效应的认识。因此,通过开展系统古地理分异研究,可以厘清碳酸盐台地边缘性质和结构特征,对四川盆地二叠系油气勘探具有现实的指导意义。
本文基于四川盆地及周缘二叠系的大量野外露头、钻井岩芯和地震资料,分析了茅口期和长兴期的典型浅水—深水的沉积相发育特征,开展了全盆尺度的地层-沉积相对比,恢复了岩相古地理格局,最终解析了两类台地边缘的差异性特征。结果表明,四川盆地二叠纪古地理从茅口期开始出现多个同沉积断层形成的浅水台地-深水陆棚分异,分异强度至长兴期达到鼎盛;茅口组浅水碳酸盐台地以发育薄层台缘滩相为特色,长兴组浅水碳酸盐台地以发育厚层台缘礁滩相为特征,二者向深水区均快速转变为硅质岩和碳质泥页岩;茅口期属于初始地貌继承型台地边缘,表现为宽边缘背景下断续加-进积的多个薄层滩体;长兴期则为沉积镶边塑造型台地边缘,呈现出窄边缘背景下连续加-进积的厚层礁滩体。总体上,两类台地边缘皆具有发育规模储层的潜力,是大型油气聚集带勘探的重要目标。
1 地质背景
二叠纪,华南板块处古特提斯洋东部赤道附近,发育大型碳酸盐岩台地(图1a)。本文研究区为四川盆地及周缘,位于华南板块西北缘,属上扬子地台。作为多期叠合型盆地(刘树根等,2011何登发等,2011),四川盆地及边缘发育多条断裂,例如北西向基底断裂(王鸿祯等,1990杨雨等,2023)(图1b)。石炭纪末期开始的云南运动使得四川盆地及周缘整体抬升并遭受暴露剥蚀,研究区普遍缺失下二叠统(陈洪德等,1999b)。盆地内主要保留中上二叠统,分别为中二叠统栖霞组、茅口组和上二叠统吴家坪组(龙潭组)和长兴组(大隆组)。栖霞期为加里东古地貌控制的隆坳分异格局(杨帅等,2021),整体发育浅水碳酸盐台地,在川西边缘发育云质浅滩;茅口期整体仍为碳酸盐台地,但在茅口中晚期古地理格局受北西向基底断裂活动影响,形成台地边缘浅滩和深水陆棚的分异格局。吴家坪期受构造和海侵共同影响,浅海氧化还原状态发生改变(雍茹男等,2024),沉积存在同期异相,在川西南主要沉积峨眉山玄武岩,在川南主要沉积陆相碎屑岩,煤层较发育,盆地其他地区则沉积厚层灰岩;长兴期造礁生物繁盛,主要发育厚层礁灰岩。在川北开江-梁平海槽内沉积深色薄层硅质岩,称为大隆组,与长兴组属同期异相。在川西南部分地区,同时期为陆相地层,称为沙湾组(图1c)。
四川盆地及周缘二叠系沉积岩中存在两类特殊岩性:一是硅质岩和泥页岩组合,分布在广元—旺苍和开江—梁平一带,茅口期与长兴期均有发育,指示深水沉积环境;二是白云岩与礁灰岩,分布在深水硅质岩发育区周缘,指示较浅水的沉积环境。其中白云岩主要发育于茅口期,厚度较薄;礁灰岩发育于长兴期,厚度较大。
2 典型沉积相分析
茅口组和长兴组目前均是四川盆地二叠系的主要产气层位,且主要产气区均围绕深水陆棚两侧,受构造-沉积分异作用控制明显。本文基于钻井岩芯资料和野外露头资料,对茅口组与长兴组开展了详细的典型相分析。结果显示,茅口组优质储层相带主要以滩相发育,主要岩性为白云岩和亮晶颗粒灰岩;长兴组具有丰富的海绵、珊瑚等造礁生物,局部存在白云岩化作用。此外,在广元-旺苍和开江-梁平海槽内部,茅口组和长兴组均发育深水陆棚相,沉积深色薄层硅质岩-泥页岩组合。
2.1 滩相(茅口期)
四川盆地茅口组厚度平均在300 m左右,其底部与栖霞组整合接触。受东吴运动和峨眉山大火成岩省的影响,其顶部在盆地内不同区域存在不同程度的暴露剥蚀,与上覆吴家坪组呈平行不整合接触。四川盆地茅口期主要发育灰岩和白云岩,其中白云岩和亮晶颗粒灰岩是滩相发育的主要岩石类型。通过对钻井岩芯与野外剖面的沉积相分析,四川盆地茅口组的滩相沉积体主要集中分布在川中和川南地区。在川中PY1井茅二段发育白云岩,颜色主要为灰白色和灰色(图2a)。该白云岩具有明显的雾心亮边结构,晶粒大小为100~300 μm(图2g)。在PY3井茅二段发育砾屑白云岩,岩芯柱颜色变化频繁,指示动荡的水体环境(图2d)。PY3井发育细晶白云岩,晶粒表面较干净,晶粒解理线被灰泥质充填(图2e)。川南地区的MC1井和YJ2井发育亮晶颗粒灰岩(图2h、f),芭蕉村剖面发育云质灰岩(图2i),指示存在滩相沉积环境。川东地区打风坳剖面茅口组发育浅色生屑灰岩,密集分布大量珊瑚、腕足、用孔虫等浅水生物化石,具有明显的滩相特征(图2b、c)。
1四川盆地地质背景图
Fig.1The geology background map of Sichuan basin
(a)—二叠纪华南古地理图;(b)—四川盆地,断裂引自李明雄(1995);(c)—四川盆地中晚二叠世综合柱状图
(a) —paleogeographic map of Permian South China; (b) —Sichuan basin, fault after Li Mingxiong, 1995; (c) —columnar section of the Middle-Late Permain in Sichuan basin
2.2 礁滩相(长兴期)
四川盆地长兴组沉积厚度较大,通常在300 m左右,其典型礁滩相沉积体主要发育礁灰岩和礁云岩两种岩性。在川东北渡口剖面和吊岩湾剖面,长兴组均发育厚层状礁灰岩,单个礁滩体厚度在3 m左右(图3a、b)。吊岩湾剖面长兴组上部发生白云岩化作用,发育细晶白云岩(图3c)。PS10井长兴组表现为灰白色白云岩(图3d)。结合显微镜下特征,PS10井长兴组发育海绵骨架云岩和海绵骨架云质灰岩,生物个体较为完整(图3e、f)。宣汉盘龙洞剖面发育厚层状海绵礁灰岩,海绵个体较为完整,指示其为水体较为平静的礁相沉积(图3g)。在YY2井和YY3-1HF井长兴组分别发育白云质灰岩和亮晶生屑灰岩,是滩相发育的典型特征。并且生物个体较小且破碎,指示该滩体发育区水动力较强(图3h、i)。
2.3 深水陆棚相(茅口期和长兴期)
四川盆地二叠纪中二叠世茅口期和晚二叠世长兴期分别发育深水硅质岩沉积,主要以薄层硅质岩和泥岩互层为主,指示较深水的沉积环境。在川北地区西北乡剖面茅口组顶部,发育孤峰段,其为黑色薄层硅质岩和泥岩互层(图4a、b、d),炭质含量较高(张玺华等,2018),岩层面上密集分布薄壳化石(图4a)。硅质岩中存在大量海绵骨针和放射虫等深水生物(图4c)。在川南白果坪剖面茅口组顶部,发育硅质灰岩、硅质岩和泥岩。硅质岩与泥岩互层段总厚度约1 m,单层厚度不足5 cm,指示高频变化的水体环境(图4b)。
2茅口组滩相典型沉积特征
Fig.2The typical sedimentological characteristics of beach in Maokou Formation
(a)—PY1井,白云岩,茅口组,5991.43 m;(b)—打风坳剖面,珊瑚灰岩,茅口组;(c)—打风坳剖面,生屑灰岩,茅口组;(d)—PY3井,砾屑白云岩,茅口组,6058.4 m;(e)—PY3井,细晶白云岩,茅口组,6070.4 m;(f)—YJ2井,亮晶生屑灰岩,茅口组,3342.8 m;(g)—PY1井,白云岩,茅口组,5991.46 m;(h)—MC1井,亮晶生屑灰岩,茅口组,2578.15 m;(i)—芭蕉村剖面,云质灰岩,茅口组
(a) —PY1 well, dolomite, Maokou Formation, 5991.43 m; (b) —Dafengao section, coral limestone, Maokou Formation; (c) —Dafengao section, bioclastic limestone, Maokou Formation; (d) —PY3 well, dolorudite, Maokou Formation, 6058.4 m; (e) —PY3 well, fine grained dolomite, Maokou Formation, 6070.4 m; (f) —YJ2 well, sparry bioclastic limestone, Maokou Formation, 3342.8 m; (g) —PY1 well, dolomite, Maokou Formation, 5991.46 m; (h) —MC1 well, sparry bioclastic limestone, Maokou Formation, 2578.15 m; (i) —Bajiaocun section, dolomitic limestone, MaokouFormation
川北地区上寺剖面大隆组,发育薄层硅质岩,存在泥岩与凝灰岩夹层(图5a、c、d)。其下伏吴家坪组灰岩(图5b),上覆三叠系飞仙关组微生物灰岩(图5f),指示大隆组沉积期存在水体迅速变深的沉积环境转换。岩层层面分布大量完整的菊石类化石,且个体较大,指示较为平稳的水体环境(图5e)。硅质岩中亦存在大量放射虫和海绵骨针等深水生物(图5c)。
3长兴组礁相典型沉积特征
Fig.3The typical sedimentological characteristics of reef in Changxing Formation
(a)—渡口剖面,厚层状礁灰岩,长兴组;(b)—吊岩湾剖面,礁灰岩,长兴组;(c)—芭蕉村剖面,礁灰岩,长兴组;(d)—万足剖面,厚层状礁灰岩,长兴组;(e)—宣汉盘龙洞剖面,海绵礁灰岩,长兴组;(f)—PS10井,海绵骨架云质灰岩,长兴组,5465.92 m;(g)—吊岩湾剖面,细晶白云岩,长兴组;(h)—YY2井,云质灰岩,长兴组,2951 m;(i)—YY3-1HF井,亮晶生屑灰岩,长兴组,2923 m
(a) —Dukou section, thick bedded reef limestone, Chanxing Formation; (b) —Diaoyanwan section, reef limestone, Chanxing Formation; (c) —Bajiaocun section, reef limestone, Chanxing Formation; (d) —Wanzu section, thick bedded reef limestone, Chanxing Formation; (e) —Panlongdong section in Xuanhan, spongy reef limestone, Chanxing Formation; (f) —PS10 well, spongy skeleton dolomitic limestone, Chanxing Formation, 5465.92 m; (g) —Diaoyanwan section, fine grained dolomite, Chanxing Formation; (h) —YY2 well, dolomitic limestone, Chanxing Formation, 2951 m; (i) —YY3-1HF well, sparry bioclastic limestone, Chanxing Formation, 2923 m
3 地层-沉积相对比
本研究基于盆地内大量已有钻井及野外露头资料,针对茅口组和长兴组开展了全盆地尺度的地层-沉积相综合对比研究,以进一步揭示四川盆地茅口期与长兴期的地层充填结构特征和沉积相发育分布规律。
在茅口期,地层厚度普遍在250~350 m,主要发育灰岩、生屑灰岩和白云岩。但在LT1井一带地层厚度明显减薄,约为170 m(图6)。LT1井底部岩性为灰岩和泥晶灰岩,顶部沉积薄层硅质岩和泥岩互层,被称为孤峰段,指示茅口组中沉积晚期一次明显的构造-沉积分异,被称为广元-旺苍海槽(王兴志等,2021)。在以LT1井为代表的深水区边缘,识别出YB7井—PY1井范围可达数十千米宽的台地边缘带,且在台缘带范围内广泛发育薄层滩体。受海平面频繁波动的影响(王成善等,1999; Haq and Schutter,2008),该时期滩体主要为间断加-进积的发育形式,最早出现于茅二下亚段,岩性主要为亮晶生屑灰岩和云质灰岩。茅二上亚段是茅口组滩体发育的鼎盛时期,川中地区大量发育白云岩。在ST1井区域,茅口组晚期发育次深水台洼,主要岩性为泥晶灰岩和硅质灰岩。在JT1井—ZG1井一带,茅口期主要发育开阔台地相,存在多个台内滩,滩体岩性为白云岩、云质灰岩和生屑灰岩,GR值较低。
4深水陆棚相典型沉积特征
Fig.4The typical sedimentological characteristics of deepwater shelf
(a)—西北乡剖面,薄层硅质岩与泥岩互层,孤峰段;(b)—白果坪剖面,硅质岩与泥岩互层,茅四段;(c)—西北乡剖面,硅质岩,孤峰段;(d)—西北乡剖面,泥岩,孤峰段
(a) —Xibeixiang section, thin layer siliceous rock and mudstone, Gufeng Member; (b) —Baiguoping section, siliceous rock and mudstone, Mao 4 Member; (c) —Xibeixiang section, siliceous rock, Gufeng Member; (d) —Xibeixiang section, mudstone, Gufeng Member
在长兴期,盆地地层充填格架发生显著变化,在川西南出现陆相和海陆过渡相沉积,区域地层被称为沙湾组,岩性主要为紫红色砂质泥岩、紫红色泥岩和灰色铝土质泥岩(例如图7中ZG1井、DS1井)。PS1井—ZY1井为海相沉积,地层厚度普遍在180~250 m之间,岩性主要为灰岩、礁灰岩和生屑灰岩。但CT1井(120 m)、YB6井(50 m)和MS1井(40 m)地层厚度明显减薄,CT1井主要岩性为深色灰岩和泥页岩,YB6井和MS1井主要岩性硅质岩和泥页岩。地层厚度和岩性上的显著变化共同指示了四川盆地北部在长兴期一次明显的构造-沉积分异,是对茅口期构造-沉积分异的继承性发展(马永生等,2006王兴志等,2021),被称为开江-梁平海槽(王一刚等,2001)。在海槽内部,存在如YB7井的浅水碳酸盐岩沉积,岩性以海绵礁灰岩和泥质灰岩为主,指示在深水陆棚中发育孤立台地(图7)。在开江-梁平海槽两侧,PS2井、CS1井和ZY1井处发育大量礁滩体,礁体和滩体交互出现,礁体岩性主要为海绵礁灰岩,滩体以沉积亮晶生屑灰岩和云质灰岩为主。该套礁滩体连续沉积,最厚可达百米。根据礁滩体发育区的钻井资料(如LG2井、YT1井和YB2井等)进行发育范围界定,结果表明礁滩体发育范围较窄,仅数千米宽。
5上寺剖面大隆组典型沉积特征
Fig.5The typical sedimentological characteristics of Dalong Formation in Shangsi section
(a)—大隆组宏观特征;(b)—吴家坪组和大隆组界限;(c)—硅质岩镜下特征;(d)—凝灰岩夹层;(e)—菊石化石;(f)—超薄层微生物灰岩,飞仙关组
(a) —macro characteristics of Dalong Formation; (b) —boundary between Wujiaping Formation and Dalong Formation; (c) —microscopic characteristics of siliceous rock; (d) —tuff intercalation; (e) —ammonite fossil; (f) —ultra-thin layer microbial limestone, Feixianguan Formation
6四川盆地中二叠统茅口组沉积相对比图
Fig.6The sedimentary facies comparison of Middle Permian Maokou Formation in Sichuan basin
7四川盆地晚二叠统长兴组沉积相对比图
Fig.7The sedimentary facies comparison of Late Permian Changxing Formation in Sichuan basin
4 古地理格局及分异特点
基于典型沉积相分析与详细的地层-沉积相对比等研究,绘制了四川盆地及周缘茅口组和长兴组厚度图和单因素图,并结合区域地质背景,编制了四川盆地及周缘茅口组和长兴组岩相古地理图。结果显示两个时期均以海相碳酸盐台地为主要沉积相。在构造隆升背景下,盆地内持续的拉张作用使得盆内拉张槽发育范围由茅口期向长兴期持续扩张,并沿拉张槽周缘发育大量礁滩体。
茅口期岩相古地理揭示该时期四川盆地整体以碳酸盐岩台地为主,周缘分布深水盆地,其中西北部的海盆为断裂控制的陆缘裂陷盆地,东部的深水区被称为城口-鄂西海槽,深入盆地内部的部分被称为广元-旺苍海槽,也是随后晚二叠世开江-梁平海槽的雏形。受广元-旺苍海槽控制,其沿剑阁—南充—石柱一带发育大型北西-南东向的台缘带,以发育白云岩和亮晶颗粒灰岩为主。同时,受两组基底断裂带控制,在川南宜宾—泸州一带发育“半岛型”台缘带,其滩相沉积白云化程度相比于川中较弱,主要为云质灰岩和亮晶颗粒灰岩(图8)。
长兴期岩相古地理揭示该时期四川盆地海相碳酸盐岩台地和陆相碎屑岩并存,盆地西南缘为康滇古陆与陆相滨岸,沿陆相边界向东发育潮坪相。其中黔西-南川和盐亭-广安两个台洼伸入四川盆地内部,盐亭-广安台洼周缘连续发育台缘生物礁。陆棚与台洼内部发育孤立台地,孤立台地上发育生物礁。而在广元—巴中—开江一带有深水陆棚深入台地内部,被称为开江-梁平海槽,且处于海槽鼎盛时期(马永生等,2006),海槽内发育典型薄层硅质岩。海槽周缘台缘带发育大量生物礁,目前已拥有元坝、龙岗和普光等三大气田,是四川盆地最大产气区之一。海槽内发育多个孤立台地,台地上礁相发育。此外,在泸州—荣昌一带发育大量异常高带,可能是潜在的高能有利相带(图9)。
8四川盆地中二叠世茅口期岩相古地理图
Fig.8Lithofacies palaeogeography of Middle Permian Maokou in Sichuan basin
5 两类不同的台地边缘模式
5.1 茅口组初始地貌继承型台地边缘
中二叠世晚期,东吴运动和峨眉山地幔柱隆升共同造成上扬子地台地壳差异性抬升(何斌等,2005; 马永生等,2006),四川盆地及周缘茅口组遭受不同程度的暴露剥蚀。该地区茅口期发育广元-旺苍海槽(王一刚等,2001张玺华等,2019王兴志等,2021),海槽内发育深水硅质岩沉积,且在该深水区边缘发育大范围台地边缘带,台缘带上发育台缘浅滩,岩性以亮晶颗粒灰岩与白云岩为主。茅口组的钻井和地震资料揭示,在台地边缘带上发育大量台缘滩,滩体厚度较薄,通常在5~10 m左右,并且发育多期次滩体,具有明显的均衡加积,间断成滩特点(图10)。基于台缘带上钻井资料,揭示出滩体的分布宽度达数十千米,具备明显的宽边缘特征(图11a)。关于该宽边缘-薄滩体的形成原因,推测原因可能为:一方面受到东吴运动与峨眉山地幔柱隆升等构造运动影响,使滩体发育区处于构造高点;另一方面,茅口晚期发生了一次大规模的海退,海平面下降至显生宙以来的最低点(Haq and Schutter,2008),四川盆地整体水体较浅,有利于滩体的发育与白云岩化作用的发生;最关键的是,茅口期的海平面频繁升降一定程度上控制了滩体的生长和中断。
9四川盆地晚二叠世长兴期岩相古地理图
Fig.9Lithofacies palaeogeography of Late Permian Changxing in Sichuan basin
10四川盆地二叠系地震剖面结构解析
Fig.10Structural analysis of Permian seismic profile in Sichuan basin
11四川盆地中—晚二叠世台地边缘模式对比
Fig.11Platform margin model contrast of Middle-Late Permian in Sichuan basin
5.2 长兴组沉积镶边塑造型台地边缘
晚二叠世,华南地区发生大范围火山活动(He Bin et al.,2014; 陈军和徐义刚,2017),加之地裂运动导致克拉通盆地内部拉张作用持续增强,广元-旺苍海槽进一步发展,并在绵阳—南充一带发育台洼环境。克拉通内拉张裂陷快速扩张,碳酸盐台地范围急剧缩小,深水陆棚范围进一步扩大,沿着台地边缘仅发育数千米宽的窄边缘。
该时期华南板块向北漂移至赤道附近,使其由冷水或温水生物群转向暖水生物群(Shen Shuzhong et al.,2009; Shi and Archbold,1998; Wang Xiangdong et al.,2003),是长兴期海绵、珊瑚等暖水造礁生物突然繁盛的重要原因。除纬度变化外,海平面的变化也是影响生物礁发育的重要因素,海平面的上升是生物礁形成的先决条件之一(曾鼎乾,1995)。晚二叠世长兴期处于快速海侵阶段(Haq and Schutter,2008),使得区内水体清洁,为生物礁的生长提供了充足的可容空间和良好的发育环境。并且深水区的扩张带来了大量洋流,成为了台缘区生物礁大量发育的稳定供养通道。此外,该时期具有较高的沉积速率(李凤杰等,2007),形成了长兴组近400 m的厚层沉积以及几十米的厚层礁滩体(图11b)。在长兴末期,海侵放缓(Haq and Schutter,2008),生物礁的生长速度超过可容纳空间扩张速度(王兴志等,2002),在长兴组顶部发生显著云化,形成礁云岩。受板块纬度变化的影响,长兴期海绵、珊瑚等暖水造礁生物突然繁盛,使得长兴期台缘浅水区沉积镶边效应明显,形成与茅口期初始地貌继承型台地边缘不同的镶边建隆型台地边缘。
综上所述,二叠系茅口组和长兴组的台缘滩发育分布受相控作用明显,两个时期的台地边缘存在着显著差异。茅口期为初始地貌继承型边缘模式,台地边缘较宽,滩体厚度较薄但分布范围较宽,呈现为均衡加积,间断成滩的特点。长兴组在初始地貌基础上改造了边缘模式,为沉积镶边塑造型边缘模式,沿台缘带发育大量造礁生物,具备较强的镶边塑造能力,礁滩体厚度较大但分布范围较窄,呈现为差异加积,持续成礁的特点(图12)。根据这两种台地边缘模式,揭示了川中茅口组宽边缘的云化浅滩和川东北长兴组窄边缘的礁滩是四川盆地二叠系海相油气勘探的有利区。并根据本次上扬子地台的岩相古地理重建,以刘宝珺(1991)何登发(2011)的华南古地理图为基础,更新了中国南方二叠纪的古地理格局(图1a)。
12四川盆地二叠纪台地边缘模式
Fig.12Platform margin model of Permian in Sichuan basin
6 结论
(1)四川盆地茅口期发育浅水高能浅滩,以沉积白云岩和颗粒灰岩为主;长兴期发育浅水高能礁滩,以沉积生物礁灰岩为主。两个时期均发育深水陆棚,沉积薄层硅质岩与泥页岩。
(2)四川盆地茅口期和长兴期具有显著台缘-陆棚的古地理分异。茅口期受基底断裂带活化影响,形成广元-旺苍海槽,并在川中剑阁—南充—石柱一带和川南宜宾—泸州一带发育大面积台缘浅滩。长兴期克拉通盆地内深水裂陷进一步扩张,形成开江-梁平海槽,并在川东北普光—达州等地区密集分布台缘礁滩复合体。
(3)受全球海平面升降与构造运动的共同影响,四川盆地茅口期呈现出初始地貌继承型台地边缘,在宽边缘下间断沉积薄层云质浅滩;长兴期表现为沉积镶边塑造型台地边缘,在窄边缘下连续沉积厚层生物礁滩。
1四川盆地地质背景图
Fig.1The geology background map of Sichuan basin
2茅口组滩相典型沉积特征
Fig.2The typical sedimentological characteristics of beach in Maokou Formation
3长兴组礁相典型沉积特征
Fig.3The typical sedimentological characteristics of reef in Changxing Formation
4深水陆棚相典型沉积特征
Fig.4The typical sedimentological characteristics of deepwater shelf
5上寺剖面大隆组典型沉积特征
Fig.5The typical sedimentological characteristics of Dalong Formation in Shangsi section
6四川盆地中二叠统茅口组沉积相对比图
Fig.6The sedimentary facies comparison of Middle Permian Maokou Formation in Sichuan basin
7四川盆地晚二叠统长兴组沉积相对比图
Fig.7The sedimentary facies comparison of Late Permian Changxing Formation in Sichuan basin
8四川盆地中二叠世茅口期岩相古地理图
Fig.8Lithofacies palaeogeography of Middle Permian Maokou in Sichuan basin
9四川盆地晚二叠世长兴期岩相古地理图
Fig.9Lithofacies palaeogeography of Late Permian Changxing in Sichuan basin
10四川盆地二叠系地震剖面结构解析
Fig.10Structural analysis of Permian seismic profile in Sichuan basin
11四川盆地中—晚二叠世台地边缘模式对比
Fig.11Platform margin model contrast of Middle-Late Permian in Sichuan basin
12四川盆地二叠纪台地边缘模式
Fig.12Platform margin model of Permian in Sichuan basin
Chen Hongde, Wang Chengshan, Liu Wenjun, Qin Jianxiong. 1999. Permiansequence stratigraphy and basin evolution in south of China. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 17(4): 529~534(in Chinese with English abstract).
Chen Hongde, Zhong Yijiang, Hou Mingcai, Lin Liangbiao, Dong Guiyu, Liu Jiahong. 2009. Sequence styles and hydrocarbon accumulation effects of carbonate rock platfom in the Changxing-Feixianguan Formations in the northeastern Sichuan basin. Oil & Gas Geology, 30(5): 539~547(in Chinese with English abstract).
Chen Hongde, Zhong Yijiang, Xu Xiaosong, Chen Anqing, Wu Chaosheng, Zheng Haofu. 2014. Types and characteristics of carbonate platform margins of marine carbonate rock in three major basins in western China. Acta Petrologica Sinica, 30(3): 609~621(in Chinese with English abstract).
Chen Jun, Xu Yigang. 2017. Permian large igneous provinces and impact on paleoenvironment and biodiversity: Progresses and perspectives. Bulletin of Mineralogy, Petrology and Geochemistry, 36(3): 374~393(in Chinese with English abstract).
Fang Qiang, Jing Xiuchun, Deng Shenghui, Wang Xunlian. 2012. Roadian-Wuchiapingian conodont biostratigraphy at the Shangsi section, northern Sichuan. Journal of Stratigraphy, 36(4): 692~699(in Chinese with English abstract).
Guan Shicong, Yan Huaiyu, Qiu Dongzhou, Wang Shoude, Chen Xianqun, Zhou Jingcai. 1980. Investigations on the marine sedimentary environmental model of China in late Proterozoic to Triassic periods. Oil & Gas Geology, 1(1): 2~17(in Chinese with English abstract).
Haq B U, Schutter S R. 2008. A chronology of Paleozoic sea-level changes. Science, 322 (5898): 64~68.
He Bin, Xu Yigang, Wang Yamei, Xiao Long. 2005. Nature of the Dongwu movement and its temporal and spatial evolution. Earth Science, 30(1): 89~96(in Chinese with English abstract).
He Bin, Zhong Yuting, Xu Yigang, Li Xianhua. 2014. Triggers of Permo-Triassic boundary mass extinction in South China: The Siberian Traps or Paleo-Tethys ignimbrite flare-up? Lithos, 204: 258~267.
He Dengfa, Li Desheng, Zhang Guowei, Zhao Luzi, Fan Chun, Lu Renqi, Wen Zhu. 2011. Formation andevolution of multi-cycle superposed Sichuan basin, China. Chinese Journal of Geology (Scientia Geologica Sinica), 46(3): 589~606(in Chinese with English abstract).
Huang Hu, Huyskens M H, Yin Qingzhu, Cawood P A, Hou Mingcai, Yang Jianghai, Xiong Fuhao, Du Yuansheng, Yang Chenchen. 2022. Eruptive tempo of Emeishan large igneous province, southwestern China and northern Vietnam: Relations to biotic crises and paleoclimate changes around the Guadalupian-Lopingian boundary. Geology, 50(9): 1083~1087.
Jiang Qingchun. 2024. Hydrocarbon accumulation conditions of karst reservoirs of Maokou Formation in central-southern Sichuan basin and favorable plays prediction. Petroleum Geology & Oilfield Development in Daqing, 43(4): 48~58(in Chinese with English abstract).
Jin Yugan, Zhang Jin, Shang Qinghua. 1994. Two phases of the end-Permian mass extinction, Pangea: Global environments and resources. Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir, (17): 813~822.
Li Fengjie, Zheng Rongcai, Luo Qinglin, Lei Guangming. 2007. Analysis of Milankovitchcycles of the Changxing Formation in northeastern Sichuan basin. Journal of China University of Mining & Technology, 36(6): 805~810(in Chinese with English abstract).
Li Mingxiong. 1995. Research Report on Prediction of Natural Gas Exploration and Development Prospects in Sichuan Basin Using Gravity and Magnetic Data. Chengdu: Geology and Mineral Resources Bureau Prospecting Team in Sichuan (in Chinese with English abstract).
Li Sigang. 1931. Variscan orogeny of the southeast of China. Bulletin Geological Society China, 11(2): 200~217.
Li Wen, Yang Shuai, Chen Anqing, Zhang Xihua, Chen Cong, Xu Shenglin, Sun Shi, Luo Jian, Chen Hongde. 2023. Thelithofacies paleogeographic of the middle Permian deep Maokou Formation and its significance for hydrocarbon exploration, northwestern Sichuan basin. Earth Science, 48(2): 609~620(in Chinese with English abstract).
Liu Baojun, Xu Xiaosong. 1991. Lithofacies Paleogeography Atlas of Southern China (Sinian-Triassic). Beijing: Science Press, 134~135(in Chinese with English abstract).
Liu Shugen, Li Zhiwu, Sun Wei, Deng Bin, Luo Zhili, Wang Guozhi, Yong Ziquan, Huang Wenming. 2011. Basic characteristics of oil and gas overlapping basins in Sichuan. Chinese Journal of Geology (Scientia Geologica Sinica), 46(1): 233~257(in Chinese with English abstract).
Ma Yongsheng, Cai Xunyu, Li Guoxiong. 2005a. Basic characteristics and concentration of the Puguang gas field in Sichuan basin. Acta Geologica Sinica, 79(6): 858~865(in Chinese with English abstract).
Ma Yongsheng, Guo Xusheng, Guo Tonglou, Huang Rui, Cai Xunyu, Li Guoxiong. 2005b. Discovery of the large-scale Puguang gas field in the Sichuan basin and its enlightenment for hydrocarbon prospecting. Geological Review, 51(4): 477~480(in Chinese with English abstract).
Ma Yongsheng, Mou Chuanlong, Tan Qinyin, Yu Qian. 2006. A discussion on Kaijiang-Liangping ocean trough. Oil & Gas Geology, 27(3): 326~331(in Chinese with English abstract).
Ma Yongsheng, Cai Xunyu, Zhao Peirong, Zhang Xuefeng. 2010. Formation mechanism of deep-buried carbonate reservoir and its mode of Three-Element Controlling Reservoir: A case study from the Puguang oil field in Sichuan. Acta Geologica Sinica, 84(8): 1087~1094(in Chinese with English abstract).
Mei Shilong, Jin Yumo. 1994. Succession of conodont zones from the Permian“Kuhfeng”Formation, Xuanhan, Sichuan and its implication in global correlation. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 33(1): 1~133(in Chinese with English abstract).
Meng Qi. 2022. Middle Permian sedimentary evolution of thesouthern Yangtze carbonate platform and its geological significance. China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) (in Chinese with English abstract).
Meng Xianwu, Chen Anqing, Li Wen, Su Chengpeng, Sun Shi, Song Xiaobo, Huang Guanghui, Yong Runan, Wang Zeyu, Zhu Qian. 2024. Platform margin tectono-sedimentary differentiation and reservoir controeffects of the Permian Maokou Formation, southern margin of Sichuan basin. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology (Science & Technology Edition), 52(1): 1~16(in Chinese with English abstract).
Read J F. 1985. Carbonate platform facies models. AAPG Bulletin, 69 (1): 94~107.
Scotese C R. 2009. Late Proterozoic plate tectonics and palaeogeography: A tale of two supercontinents, Rodinia and Pannotia. GeolSoc London Spec Publ, 326(1): 67~83.
Shen Shuzhong, Shi G R. 1996. Diversity and extinction patterns of Permian brachiopoda of South China. Historical Biology, 12(2): 93~110.
Shen Shuzhong, Shi G R. 2009. Latest Guadalupian brachiopods from the Guadalupian/Lopingian boundary GSSP section at Penglaitan in Laibin, Guangxi, South China and implications for the timing of the pre-Lopingian crisis. Palaeoworld, 18(2~3): 152~161.
Shi G R, Archbold N W. 1998. PermianMarine Biogeography of SE Asia. Leiden: Backbuys Publishers, 57~72.
Song Jinmin, Liu Shugen, Li Zhiwu, Zhang Benjian, Deng Bin, Jiang Qingchun, Jin Xin, Sun Wei, Wang Hua, Guo Haiyang, Chen Xiao, Wang Jiarui, Tian Xiaobin, Zhang Xihua, Ye Yuehao, Yang Di, Fan Jianping, Luo Ping. 2023. Accumulation model and favorable exploration area distribution of the Middle Permian oil and gas in the Sichuan basin. Natural Gas Industry, 43(11): 54~71(in Chinese with English abstract).
Song Jinmin, Jiang Qingchun, Liu Shugen, Jin Xin, Fan Jianping, Li Zhiwu, Huang Shipeng, Su Wang, Yang Di, Jiang Hua, Ye Yuehao, Wang Jiarui, Wang Junke, Ren Shan. 2024. Paleoenvironment and sedimentary significances of sepiolite-containingsuccession in the first Member of Middle Permian Maokou Formation Sichuan basin. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 45(6): 914~931(in Chinese with English abstract).
Stanley S M, Yang X. 1994. A double mass extinction at the end of the Paleozoic Era. Science, 266(5189): 1340~1344.
Tucker M E. 1981. Sedimentary Petrology: An Introduction to the Origin of Sedimentary Rocks. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wilson J L. 1975. CarbonateFacies in Geologic History. Berlin: Springer.
Wang Chengshan, Li Xianghui, Chen Hongde, Qin Jianxiong. 1999. Permain sea level changes and rising-falling events in south China. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 17(4): 536~541(in Chinese with English abstract).
Wang Hongzhen, Liu Benpei, Li Sitian. 1990. Tectonic Paleogeography and Paleobiogeography of China and Its Neighboring Regions. Wuhan: China University of Geosciences, 1~88(in Chinese with English abstract).
Wang Long, Wu Hai, Zhang Rui, Li Changwei. 2018. The types, characteristics and depositional models of carbonate platform: Implications for Cambrian sedimentary patterns of epeiric-drowned carbonate platform in North China. Geological Review, 64(1): 62~76 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Wang Xiangdong, Sugiyama T. 2000. Diversity and extinction patterns of Permian coral faunas of China. Lethaia, 33(4): 285~294.
Wang Xiangdong, Shen Shuzhong, Sugiyama T, West R R. 2003. Late Palaeozoic corals of Tibet (Xizang) and West Yunnan, Southwest China: Successions and palaeobiogeography. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 191(3~4): 385~397.
Wang Xingzhi, Zhang Fan, Ma Qing, Yang Manping, Wang Yigang, Wen Yingchu, Yang Yu, Zhang Jing. 2002. The characteristics of reef and bank and the fluctuation of sea-level in Feixianguan period ofLate Permian-early Triassic, east Sichuan basin. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 20(2): 249~254(in Chinese with English abstract).
Wang Xingzhi, Li Bo, Yang Xiyan, Wen Long, Xu Liang, Xie Shengyang, Du Yao, Feng Mingyou, Yang Xuefei, Wang Yaping, Pei Senqi. 2021. Characteristics of“Guangyuan-Wangcang” trough during late Middle Permian and its petroleum geological significance in northern Sichuan basin, SW China. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 48(3): 562~574(in Chinese with English abstract).
Wang Yigang, Chen Shengji, Xu Shiqi. 2001. The Conditions for Natural Gas Accumulation in the Paleozoic-Upper Proterozoic Sedimentary Rocks in the Sichuan Basin and Exploration techniques. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press, 67~68(in Chinese with English abstract).
Yang Shuai, Chen Anqing, Zhang Xihua, Li Qian, Xu Shenglin, Chen Cong, Sun Shi, Li Fuxiang, Luo Qian, Wen Long, Chen Hongde. 2021. Paleogeographic transition of the Permian chihsia-Maokou period in the Sichuan basin and indications for oil-gas exploration. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 39(6): 1466~1477(in Chinese with English abstract).
Yang Yu, Wen Long, Xie Jirong, Luo Bing, Huang Pinghui, Ran Qi, Zhou Gang, Zhang Xihua, Wang Hua, Tian Xingwang, Zhang Ya, Chen Cong. 2020. Progress and direction of marine carbonate gas exploration in Sichuan basin. China Petroleum Exploration, 25(3): 44~55(in Chinese with English abstract).
Yang Yu, Wen Long, Chen Cong, Wang Hua. 2023. Oil and gas exploration potential of the Permian multi-stage platformmargin zone, western Sichuan basin. Earth Science Frontiers, 30(1): 1~10(in Chinese with English abstract).
Yang Yueming, Wen Long, Luo Bing, Song Jiarong, Chen Xiao, Wang Xiaojuan, Hong Haitao, Zhou Gang, He Qinglin, Zhang Xiaoli, Zhong Jiaqi, Liu Ran, Shan Shujiao. 2016. Sedimentary tectonic evolution and reservoir-forming conditions of the Dazhou-Kaijiang paleo-uplift, Sichuan basin. Natural Gas Industry, 36(8): 1~10(in Chinese with English abstract).
Yong Runan, Sun Shi, Chen Anqing, Hou Mingcai, Li Kuizhou, Li Qian, HuangGuanghui, Li Wen, Xie Hao, Chen Hongde. 2024. Reconstruction of ocean redox environment during the Late Permian wuchiapingian, northern margin of Upper Yangtze. Acta Sedimentologica Sinica, 42(6): 2066~2078(in Chinese with English abstract).
Zeng Dingqian. 1995. Selected Geological Literature for Zeng Dingqian. Beijing: Petroleum Industry Press (in Chinese with English abstract).
Zhang Bolin, Yao Suping, Wignall P B, Hu Wenxuan Ding Hai, liu Biao, Ren Yongle. 2018. Widespread coastal upwelling along the eastern Paleo-Tethys margin (South China) during the Middle Permian (Guadalupian): Implications for organic matter accumulation. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 97: 113~126.
Zhu Haihua, Zhong Dakang. 2013. Characteristics and formation mechanism of the Triassic Feixianguan Formation reservoir in Longgang gas field, Sichuan basin. Journal of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition), 15(2): 275-282.
Zhang Xihua, Chen Cong, Zhang Ya, Wen Long, Luo Bing, Chen Shuangling, Wang Liying, Li Ya, Yang Yuran. 2018. Geologicalcharacteristics of trough facies, Maokou Formation, northwestern Sichuan basin: Implications for geology. Natural Gas Exploration and Development, 41(3): 42~50(in Chinese with English abstract).
Zhang Xihua, Chen Cong, Huang Jie, Wen Long, Shen Chen, Xu Shiwei, Gao Zhaolong. 2019. The discovery of Middle Permian Guangyuan-Bazhong extensional trough in the Sichuan basin and its petroleum geological significance. China Petroleum Exploration, 24(4): 466~475(in Chinese with English abstract).
Zhang Zuqi. 1983. Dongwu movement. Coal Geology & Exploration, 24(3): 14~21(in Chinese with English abstract).
陈洪德, 王成善, 刘文均, 覃建雄. 1999. 华南二叠纪层序地层与盆地演化. 沉积学报, 17(4): 529~534.
陈洪德, 钟怡江, 侯明才, 林良彪, 董桂玉, 刘家洪. 2009. 川东北地区长兴组-飞仙关组碳酸盐岩台地层序充填结构及成藏效应. 石油与天然气地质, 30(5): 539~547.
陈洪德, 钟怡江, 许效松, 陈安清, 吴朝盛, 郑浩夫. 2014. 中国西部三大盆地海相碳酸盐岩台地边缘类型及特征. 岩石学报, 30(3): 609~621.
陈军, 徐义刚. 2017. 二叠纪大火成岩省的环境与生物效应: 进展与前瞻. 矿物岩石地球化学通报, 36(3): 374~393.
房强, 景秀春, 邓胜徽, 王训练. 2012. 川北上寺剖面罗德阶-吴家坪阶牙形石生物地层. 地层学杂志, 36(4): 692~699.
关士聪, 演怀玉, 丘东洲, 王守德, 陈显群, 周经才. 1980. 中国晚元古代至三迭纪海域沉积环境模式探讨. 石油与天然气地质, 1(1): 2~17.
何斌, 徐义刚, 王雅玫, 肖龙. 2005. 东吴运动性质的厘定及其时空演变规律. 地球科学, 30(1): 89~96.
何登发, 李德生, 张国伟, 赵路子, 樊春, 鲁人齐, 文竹. 2011. 四川多旋回叠合盆地的形成与演化. 地质科学, 46(3): 589~606.
江青春. 2024. 川中—蜀南地区茅口组岩溶储层油气成藏条件与有利区带预测. 大庆石油地质与开发, 43(4): 48~58.
李凤杰, 郑荣才, 罗清林, 雷光明. 2007. 四川盆地东北地区长兴组米兰科维奇周期分析. 中国矿业大学学报, 36(6): 805~810.
李明雄. 1995. 四川盆地利用重磁资料预测天然气勘探开发前景研究报告. 成都: 四川省地质矿产局物探队.
李雯, 杨帅, 陈安清, 张玺华, 陈聪, 徐胜林, 孙诗, 罗健, 陈洪德. 2023. 川西北深层中二叠统茅口组岩相古地理及勘探意义. 地球科学, 48(2): 609~620.
刘宝珺, 许效松. 1991. 中国南方岩相古地理图集(震旦纪-三叠纪). 科学出版社, 134~135.
刘树根, 李智武, 孙玮, 邓宾, 罗志立, 王国芝, 雍自权, 黄文明. 2011. 四川含油气叠合盆地基本特征. 地质科学, 46(1): 233~257.
马永生, 蔡勋育, 李国雄. 2005a. 四川盆地普光大型气藏基本特征及成藏富集规律. 地质学报, 79(6): 858~865.
马永生, 郭旭升, 郭彤楼, 黄锐, 蔡勋育, 李国雄. 2005b. 四川盆地普光大型气田的发现与勘探启示. 地质论评, 51(4): 477~480.
马永生, 牟传龙, 谭钦银, 余谦, 2006. 关于开江-梁平海槽的认识. 石油与天然气地质, 27(3): 326~331.
马永生, 蔡勋育, 赵培荣, 张学丰. 2010. 深层超深层碳酸盐岩优质储层发育机理和“三元控储”模式——以四川普光气田为例. 地质学报, 84(8): 1087~1094.
梅仕龙, 金玉玕. 1994. 四川宣汉渡口二叠纪“孤峰组”牙形石序列及其全球对比意义. 古生物学报, 33(1): 1~23+131~133.
孟琦. 2022. 中二叠世扬子碳酸盐岩台地南部沉积演化及其地质意义. 中国地质大学.
孟宪武, 陈安清, 李雯, 苏成鹏, 孙诗, 宋晓波, 黄光辉, 雍茹男, 王泽宇, 朱茜. 2024. 四川盆地南缘二叠系茅口组构造-沉积分异及控储效应. 成都理工大学学报(自然科学版), 52(1): 94~107.
宋金民, 刘树根, 李智武, 张本健, 邓宾, 江青春, 金鑫, 孙玮, 汪华, 郭海洋, 陈骁, 王佳蕊, 田小彬, 张玺华, 叶玥豪, 杨迪, 范建平, 罗平. 2023. 四川盆地中二叠统油气成藏模式与有利勘探区分布. 天然气工业, 43(11): 54~71.
宋金民, 江青春, 刘树根, 金鑫, 范建平, 李智武, 黄士鹏, 苏旺, 杨迪, 姜华, 叶玥豪, 王佳蕊, 王俊轲, 任杉. 2024. 四川盆地中二叠统茅口组一段含海泡石层系古环境与沉积格局指示意义. 石油学报, 45(6): 914~931.
王成善, 李祥辉, 陈洪德, 覃建雄. 1999. 中国南方二叠纪海平面变化及升降事件. 沉积学报, 17(4): 536~541.
王鸿祯, 刘本培, 李思田. 1990. 中国及邻区构造古地理和生物古地理. 武汉: 中国地质大学出版社, 1~88.
王龙, 吴海, 张瑞, 李昌伟. 2018. 碳酸盐台地的类型、特征和沉积模式-兼论华北地台寒武纪陆表海—淹没台地的沉积样式. 地质论评, 64(1): 62~76.
王兴志, 张帆, 马青, 杨满平, 王一刚, 文应初, 杨雨, 张静. 2002. 四川盆地东部晚二叠世—早三叠世飞仙关期礁、滩特征与海平面变化. 沉积学报, 20(2): 249~254.
王兴志, 李博, 杨西燕, 文龙, 徐亮, 谢圣阳, 杜垚, 冯明友, 杨雪飞, 王雅萍, 裴森奇. 2021. 四川盆地北部中二叠世晚期“广元-旺苍”海槽特征及其油气地质意义. 石油勘探与开发, 48(3): 562~574.
王一刚, 陈盛吉, 徐世琦. 2001. 四川盆地古生界—上元古界天然气成藏条件及勘探技术. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 67~68.
杨帅, 陈安清, 张玺华, 李乾, 徐胜林, 陈聪, 孙诗, 李富祥, 罗倩, 文龙, 陈洪德. 2021. 四川盆地二叠纪栖霞-茅口期古地理格局转换及勘探启示. 沉积学报, 39(6): 1466~1477.
杨雨, 文龙, 谢继容, 罗冰, 黄平辉, 冉崎, 周刚, 张玺华, 汪华, 田兴旺, 张亚, 陈聪. 2020. 四川盆地海相碳酸盐岩天然气勘探进展与方向. 中国石油勘探, 25(3): 44~55.
杨雨, 文龙, 陈聪, 汪华. 2023. 四川盆地西部二叠系多期台缘带油气勘探潜力. 地学前缘, 30(1): 1~10.
杨跃明, 文龙, 罗冰, 宋家荣, 陈骁, 王小娟, 洪海涛, 周刚, 何青林, 张晓丽, 钟佳倚, 刘冉, 山述娇. 2016. 四川盆地达州-开江古隆起沉积构造演化及油气成藏条件分析. 天然气工业, 36(8): 1~10.
雍茹男, 孙诗, 陈安清, 侯明才, 李夔洲, 李乾, 黄光辉, 李雯, 解昊, 陈洪德. 2024. 上扬子北缘晚二叠世吴家坪期海洋氧化还原环境重建. 沉积学报, 42(6): 2066~2078.
曾鼎乾. 1995. 曾鼎乾地质文选. 石油工业出版社.
祝海华, 钟大康. 2013, 四川盆地龙岗气田三叠系飞仙关组储集层特征及成因机理. 古地理学报, 15(2): 275~282.
张玺华, 陈聪, 张亚, 文龙, 罗冰, 陈双玲, 王丽英, 李亚, 杨雨然. 2018. 川西北地区茅口组海槽相地质特征及其油气地质意义. 天然气勘探与开发, 41(3): 42~50.
张玺华, 陈聪, 黄婕, 文龙, 谢忱, 徐诗薇, 高兆龙. 2019. 四川盆地中二叠世广元-巴中拉张槽的发现及其油气地质意义. 中国石油勘探, 24(4): 466~475.
张祖圻. 1983. 论东吴运动. 煤田地质与勘探, 11(3): 14~21.