Depositional ''cyclicity'' on carbonate platforms: Real-world limits on computer-model output

Computer-models which attempt to define interactions among dynamic parameters believed to influence the development of ''cyclic'' carbonate platform sequences have been popularized over the past few years. These models typically utilize vectors for subsidence (constant) and cyclical (sinusoidal) eustatic sea-level to create accommodation space which is filled by sedimentation (depth-dependent rates) following an appropriate lag time (non-depositional episode during initial platform flooding). Since these models are intended to reflect general principles of cyclic carbonate deposition, it is instructive to test their predictive utility by comparing typical model outputs with an actively evolving depositional cycle on a modern carbonate platform where rates of subsidence, eustatic sea-level and sediment accumulation are known. Holocene carbonate deposits across northern Great Bahama Bank provide such an ideal test-platform for model-data comparisons. On Great Bahama Bank, formation of accommodation space depends on eustatic sea-level rise because tectonic subsidence is very slow. Contrary to typical model input parameters, however, the rate of formation of accommodation space varies irregularly across the bank-top because irregular bank-top topography (produced by subaerial erosion and karstification) results in differential flooding of the platform surface. Results of this comparison indicate that typical computer-model input variables (subsidence, sea-level, sedimentation, lag-time) and output depositional geometriesmore » are poorly correlated with real depositional patterns across Great Bahama Bank. Since other modern carbonate platforms and ancient carbonate sequences display similarly complex stratigraphies, it is suggested that present computer-modeling results have little predictive value for stratigraphic interpretation.« less