Hubbry Logo
Cross-beddingCross-beddingMain
Open search
Cross-bedding
Community hub
Cross-bedding
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Cross-bedding
Cross-bedding
Cross-bedding
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Cross-bedding of sandstone near Mt. Carmel road, Zion Canyon, indicating wind action and sand dune formation had occurred prior to formation of the rock.
Cross-bedding in a sandstone dome in the Canyons of the Escalante.
Sand dune cross-beds can be large, such as in the Jurassic-age erg deposits of Navajo Sandstone in Canyonlands National Park. Aztec Butte shown here
Formation of cross-stratification
Schematic of aeolian cross-bedding
Close up of cross-bedding and scour, Logan Formation, Ohio
Tabular cross-bedding in the Navajo Sandstone in Zion National Park
Tabular cross-bedding in the South Bar Formation in Nova Scotia
Idealized cross-section of sets of cross-bedding left behind by migrating subaqueous dunes in unidirectional current
Trough cross-bedding in the Waddens Cove Formation in Nova Scotia
Animation showing deposition and erosion of cross-beds

In geology, cross-bedding, also known as cross-stratification, is layering within a stratum and at an angle to the main bedding plane. The sedimentary structures which result are roughly horizontal units composed of inclined layers. The original depositional layering is tilted, such tilting not being the result of post-depositional deformation. Cross-beds or "sets" are the groups of inclined layers, which are known as cross-strata.

Cross-bedding forms during deposition on the inclined surfaces of bedforms such as ripples and dunes; it indicates that the depositional environment contained a flowing medium (typically water or wind). Examples of these bedforms are ripples, dunes, antidunes, sand waves, hummocks, bars, and delta slopes.[1] Environments in which water movement is fast enough and deep enough to develop large-scale bed forms fall into three natural groupings: rivers, tide-dominated coastal and marine settings.[2]

Significance

[edit]

Cross-beds can tell geologists much about what an area was like in ancient times. The direction the beds are dipping indicates paleocurrent, the rough direction of sediment transport. The type and condition of sediments can tell geologists the type of environment (rounding, sorting, composition...). Studying modern analogs allows geologists to draw conclusions about ancient environments. Paleocurrent can be determined by seeing a cross-section of a set of cross-beds. However, to get a true reading, the axis of the beds must be visible. It is also difficult to distinguish between the cross-beds of a dune and the cross-beds of an antidune. (Dunes dip downstream while antidunes dip upstream.)[1]

The direction of motion of the cross-beds can show ancient flow or wind directions (called paleocurrents). The foresets are deposited at the angle of repose (~34 degrees from the horizontal), so geologists are able to measure dip direction of the cross-bedded sediments and calculate the paleoflow direction. However, most cross-beds are not tabular, they are troughs[citation needed]. Since troughs can give a 180 degree variation of the dip of foresets, false paleocurrents can be taken by blindly measuring foresets. In this case, true paleocurrent direction is determined by the axis of the trough. Paleocurrent direction is important in reconstructing past climate and drainage patterns: sand dunes preserve the prevalent wind directions, and current ripples show the direction rivers were moving.

Formation

[edit]

Cross-bedding is formed by the downstream migration of bedforms such as ripples or dunes[3] in a flowing fluid. The fluid flow causes sand grains to saltate up the stoss (upstream) side of the bedform and collect at the peak until the angle of repose is reached. At this point, the crest of granular material has grown too large and will be overcome by the force of the moving water, falling down the lee (downstream) side of the dune. Repeated avalanches will eventually form the sedimentary structure known as cross-bedding, with the structure dipping in the direction of the paleocurrent.

The sediment that goes on to form cross-stratification is generally sorted before and during deposition on the "lee" side of the dune, allowing cross-strata to be recognized in rocks and sediment deposits.[4]

The angle and direction of cross-beds are generally fairly consistent. Individual cross-beds can range in thickness from just a few tens of centimeters, up to hundreds of feet or more depending upon the depositional environment and the size of the bedform.[5] Cross-bedding can form in any environment in which a fluid flows over a bed with mobile material. It is most common in stream deposits (consisting of sand and gravel), tidal areas, and in aeolian dunes.

Internal sorting patterns

[edit]

Cross-bedded sediments are recognized in the field by the many layers of "foresets", which are the series of layers that form on the downstream or lee side of the bedform (ripple or dune). These foresets are individually differentiable because of small-scale separation between layers of material of different sizes and densities.

Cross-bedding can also be recognized by truncations in sets of ripple foresets, where previously-existing stream deposits are eroded by a later flood, and new bedforms are deposited in the scoured area.

Geometries

[edit]

Cross-bedding can be subdivided according to the geometry of the sets and cross-strata into subcategories. The most commonly described types are tabular cross-bedding and trough cross-bedding. Tabular cross-bedding, or planar bedding consists of cross-bedded units that are extensive horizontally relative to the set thickness and that have essentially planar bounding surfaces.[3] Trough cross-bedding, on the other hand, consists of cross-bedded units in which the bounding surfaces are curved, and hence limited in horizontal extent.[3]

Tabular (planar) cross-beds

[edit]

Tabular (planar) cross-beds consist of cross-bedded units that are large in horizontal extent relative to set thickness and that have essentially planar bounding surfaces. The foreset laminae of tabular cross-beds are curved so as to become tangential to the basal surface.[3]

Tabular cross-bedding is formed mainly by migration of large-scale, straight-crested ripples and dunes. It forms during lower-flow regimes. Individual beds range in thickness from a few tens of centimeters to a meter or more, but bed thickness down to 10 centimeters has been observed.[6] Where the set height is less than 6 centimeters and the cross-stratification layers are only a few millimeters thick, the term cross-lamination is used, rather than cross-bedding. Cross-bed sets occur typically in granular sediments, especially sandstone, and indicate that sediments were deposited as ripples or dunes, which advanced due to a water or air current.[7]

Trough cross-beds

[edit]

Cross-beds are layers of sediment that are inclined relative to the base and top of the bed they are associated with. Cross-beds can tell modern geologists many things about ancient environments such as- depositional environment, the direction of sediment transport (paleocurrent) and even environmental conditions at the time of deposition. Typically, units in the rock record are referred to as beds, while the constituent layers that make up the bed are referred to as laminae, when they are less than 1 cm thick and strata when they are greater than 1 cm in thickness.[1] Cross-beds are angled relative to either the base or the top of the surrounding beds. As opposed to angled beds, cross-beds are deposited at an angle rather than deposited horizontally and deformed later on.[8] Trough cross-beds have lower surfaces which are curved or scoop shaped and truncate the underlying beds. The foreset beds are also curved and merge tangentially with the lower surface. They are associated with sand dune migration.[9]

Sediment

[edit]

The shape of the grains and the sorting and composition of sediment can provide additional information on the history of cross-beds. Roundness of the grains, limited variation in grain size, and high quartz contents are generally attributed to longer histories of weathering and sediment transport. For example: well-rounded, and well-sorted sand that is mostly composed of quartz grains is commonly found in beach environments, far from the source of the sediment. Poorly sorted and angular sediment that is composed of a diversity of minerals is more commonly found in rivers, near the source of the sediment.[8] However, older sedimentary deposits are frequently eroded and re-mobilized. Thus, a river may well erode an older formation of well-rounded, well-sorted beach sands of nearly pure quartz.

Environments

[edit]

Rivers

[edit]

Flows are characterized by climate (snows, rain, and ice melting) and gradient. Discharge variations measured on a variety of time scales can change water depth, and speed. Some rivers can be characterized by a predictable seasonably controlled hydrograph (reflecting snow melt or rainy season). Others are dominated by durational variations characteristic of alpine glaciers run-off or random storm events, which produce flashy discharge. Few rivers have a long term record of steady flow in the rock record.[2]

Bed forms are relatively dynamic sediment storage bodies with response times that are short relative to major changes in flow characteristics. Large scale bed forms are periodic and occur in the channel (scaled to depth). Their presence and morphologic variability have been related to flow strength expressed as mean velocity or shear stress.[2]

In a fluvial environment, the water in a stream loses energy and its ability to transport sediment. The sediment "falls" out of the water and is deposited along a point bar. Over time the river may dry up or avulse and the point bar may be preserved as cross-bedding.

Tide-dominated

[edit]

Tide dominated environments include:

  • Coastal water bodies that are partially enclosed by topography, yet have a free connection to the sea.
  • Coast lines that have a tidal range of greater than one meter.
  • Areas in which the water run-off volume is low relative to the tidal volume or impact.

In general, the greater the tidal range the greater the maximum flow strength.[2] Cross-stratification in tidal-dominated areas can lead to the formation of Herringbone cross-stratification.

Although the flow direction reverses regularly, the flow patterns of flood on ebb currents commonly do not coincide. Consequently, the water and transport sediment may follow a roundabout route in and out of the estuary. This leads to spatially varied systems where some parts of the estuary are flood dominated and other parts are ebb dominated. The temporal and spatial variability of flow and sediment transport, coupled with regular fluctuating water levels creates a variety of bed form morphology.[2]

Shallow marine

[edit]

Large scale bed forms occur on shallow, terrigenous or carbonate clastic continental shelves and epicontinental platforms which are affected by strong geostrophic currents, occasional storm surges and/or tide currents.[2]

Aeolian

[edit]

In an aeolian environment, cross-beds often exhibit inverse grading due to their deposition by grain flows. Winds blow sediment along the ground until they start to accumulate. The side that the accumulation occurs on is called the windward side. As it continues to build, some sediment falls over the end. This side is called the leeward side. Grain flows occur when the windward side accumulates too much sediment, the angle of repose is reached and the sediment tumbles down. As more sediment piles on top the weight causes the underlying sediment to cement together and form cross-beds.[8]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Cross-bedding

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Cross-bedding is a primary sedimentary structure characterized by sets of inclined layers, known as foresets, within otherwise horizontal beds of , typically forming in environments where or currents transport and deposit granular material such as . Cross-bedding is a form of cross-stratification, often referring to larger-scale features. These inclined layers develop as avalanches down the slip face of migrating bedforms like ripples or dunes, creating a series of overlapping laminae that dip at angles often between 20° and 35° relative to the main bedding plane. The formation process occurs under steady-state conditions where the flow rate and direction remain consistent, allowing bedforms to advance and deposit successive layers while partially eroding previous ones, resulting in a preserved record of the depositional surface's slope. In subaqueous settings, such as rivers or tidal zones, cross-bedding arises from unidirectional currents moving in ripples or dunes, whereas eolian cross-bedding forms in deserts from wind-driven dunes. The scale varies: stream-formed sets are typically centimeters to tens of centimeters thick, while eolian sets can reach meters in height, reflecting the size and migration rate of the bedforms involved. Cross-bedding is classified based on stratum thickness and geometry, with cross-bedding denoting layers thicker than 1 cm and cross-lamination for thinner ones, and further subdivided into types such as tabular (planar) or trough (scooped) based on the bedform shape. It commonly appears in sandstone formations, such as the Jurassic Navajo Sandstone in Zion National Park, where large-scale sets indicate ancient desert dunes. In oscillatory flows, like waves, it produces hummocky cross-stratification with irregular, low-angle laminae. Geologically, cross-bedding provides critical evidence for paleocurrent directions, as the dip of foresets points downcurrent or downwind, aiding in reconstructing ancient flow patterns and depositional environments. It also reveals flow velocities and sediment transport rates, with set heights correlating to bedform dimensions and climb angles indicating aggradation relative to migration. This structure is absent in fine-grained deposits like mudstones, highlighting its association with coarser, traction-transported sediments in high-energy settings.

Definition and Characteristics

Definition and Basic Features

Cross-bedding consists of inclined layers of , termed cross-strata, that are deposited at an angle to the overall horizontal orientation of the enclosing bed. These cross-strata form through the accumulation of on the downcurrent () sides of migrating bedforms, such as ripples or dunes, creating a series of inclined foresets bounded above and below by nearly horizontal surfaces. A fundamental feature of cross-bedding is the thickness of individual sets, which ranges from a few centimeters in small-scale examples to several meters in larger ones, reflecting the size of the originating bedforms. The foresets within these sets typically dip at angles of 20° to 35°, approximating the angle of repose for granular sediments like . Unlike secondary deformational features such as folds, which exhibit irregular, overturned, or chaotic inclinations due to post-depositional slumping, cross-bedding displays consistent, unidirectional dips that preserve the primary depositional fabric without evidence of or flow disruption. Cross-bedding is visually identifiable in rock outcrops as a series of sloping laminae that truncate against the base of the overlying bed, often creating a distinctive "herringbone" or staircase pattern in two-dimensional exposures. In core samples, it manifests as angled layers oblique to the vertical core axis, aiding recognition even in limited views. Simple cross-bedding is particularly evident in quartz-rich sandstones, where clean, well-sorted grains enhance the contrast of the inclined strata.

Types of Cross-Bedding

Cross-bedding is classified primarily based on the of its bounding surfaces and foreset shapes, with the two most common types being tabular (or planar) and trough cross-beds. These distinctions arise from the morphology of the migrating bedforms that produce them, such as dunes or ripples. Tabular cross-beds feature a flat, sheet-like characterized by planar lower bounding surfaces and straight to slightly concave foreset boundaries that dip consistently at angles typically between 20° and 35°. These sets often display extensive lateral continuity, with thicknesses exceeding 1 m in many cases, reflecting deposition from straight-crested bedforms. Trough cross-beds, in contrast, exhibit scooped or U-shaped troughs in three dimensions, with curved, concave-upward lower bounding surfaces and foresets that converge tangentially toward the base of the trough. These structures typically form sets with thicknesses of 10–50 cm, though larger examples up to a few meters occur, and are linked to sinuous-crested bedforms that create scoured depressions during migration. Cross-bedding scales are distinguished as small-scale, such as ripple cross-lamination with set thicknesses under 10 cm, versus large-scale cross-bedding exceeding 1 m in thickness; these categories reflect the size of the generating bedforms without overlap in typical descriptions.

Internal Features and Sediment Properties

Cross-bed sets exhibit distinctive internal sorting patterns, particularly within their foreset laminae, where grading may occur, featuring coarser grains at the base transitioning to finer grains toward the top. This grading arises from particle segregation during deposition, often resulting in bimodal grain size distributions that reflect the mixing of saltation and avalanche-transported . Such distributions typically show a primary mode in medium sands (around 200-300 μm) alongside a secondary finer mode, enhancing the textural heterogeneity of the sets. Sediment properties in cross-bedded deposits are typically dominated by sands in the medium to coarse range (0.25-1 mm), with moderate to good sorting. Variations include admixtures of grains, such as micritic intraclasts, more prevalent in coarser foresets, and lithic fragments that introduce and influence diagenetic alteration. These textural and compositional traits yield primary of 15-30%, with secondary porosity from grain dissolution, leading to permeability contrasts (0.9-19 darcys) that significantly impact performance by creating baffles in finer-grained layers.

Formation Processes

Physical Mechanisms

Cross-bedding forms through the migration of bedforms such as ripples and dunes under the influence of unidirectional currents in water or air, where sediment is transported and deposited in inclined layers known as foresets. The process begins when fluid flow exceeds the critical shear stress required to initiate grain motion, leading to the molding of the sediment bed into rhythmic undulations. These bedforms migrate downstream as erosion occurs on the gentle stoss (upstream) side and deposition on the steeper lee (downstream) side, preserving the inclined foresets that characterize cross-bedding. The core mechanism of bedform migration involves bedload transport, primarily through saltation, where sediment grains are dislodged by fluid drag and impact, bouncing along the stoss slope toward the crest. Upon reaching the or ripple crest, the angle of repose is exceeded, causing grains to downslope on the lee side under , forming the tangential to angular foreset laminae. This cyclic erosion-deposition process results in the downstream advancement of the bedform at speeds much slower than the fluid velocity, typically on the order of centimeters to meters per day depending on flow strength./12:_Bed_Configurations_Generated_by_Water_Flows_and_the_Wind/12.04:_Movement_of_Ripples_and_Dunes) Both planar-tabular and trough cross-bedding can arise from this migration, depending on the straight-crested or sinuous nature of the bedforms. Fluid dynamics play a pivotal , with unidirectional currents generating boundary-layer shear that entrains once velocities surpass the threshold for , often around 0.5–2 m/s for medium sands in subaqueous settings./12:_Bed_Configurations_Generated_by_Water_Flows_and_the_Wind/12.02:_Unidirectional-Flow_Bed_Configurations) At these speeds, lift and drag forces overcome grain submergence and intergranular , transitioning the bed from plane to rippled and then to configurations as flow depth and increase. The resulting and over the bedforms enhance suspension near the crest, facilitating the avalanching process. Preservation of cross-bedding occurs during , when the rate of deposition exceeds potential , allowing foreset layers to accumulate vertically and form cosets or sets bounded by reactivation or scour surfaces. Stacked sets develop as successive bedforms migrate and deposit without significant reworking of underlying layers, capturing pauses in flow or minor changes in current direction at the set boundaries. This preservation requires a balance where net accumulation outpaces lateral migration, often under waning flow conditions that reduce transport capacity.

Influencing Factors

Cross-bedding formation and characteristics are strongly modulated by the prevailing flow regime, which dictates the type and stability of bedforms that generate these structures. In the lower flow regime, characterized by moderate flow velocities, bedforms such as ripples and dunes develop through bedload transport, leading to the preservation of inclined laminae as cross-stratification./09:_Draft_Textbook/9.06:_Bedforms) These bedforms migrate downstream, with ripples typically exhibiting wavelengths less than 50 cm and heights under 4 cm, while dunes can reach wavelengths of 60 cm to hundreds of meters and heights of tens of centimeters to meters, producing larger-scale cross-beds./09:_Draft_Textbook/9.06:_Bedforms) In contrast, the upper flow regime, associated with higher velocities, promotes plane beds and antidunes, where intense flattens existing bedforms, thereby reducing or eliminating cross-bedding development; antidunes, which migrate upstream, are particularly unstable and seldom preserved due to their transient nature./09:_Draft_Textbook/9.06:_Bedforms) plays a critical role in bedform stability, as lower turbulence in the laminar sublayer favors small ripples, whereas increased turbulence creates larger separation zones and roller vortices essential for dune formation and sustained cross-bedding./09:_Draft_Textbook/9.06:_Bedforms) The , reflecting the ratio of inertial to viscous forces in the flow, further influences this by scaling with flow speed and , determining transitions between bedform types in depths typically under 1 m./09:_Draft_Textbook/9.06:_Bedforms) Sediment supply and grain size exert significant control over the scale and morphology of cross-bedding, with coarser grains generally promoting larger structures capable of generating thicker sets. Cross-beds form across a wide range of and sizes, from fine to coarse , but larger clasts demand higher flow velocities to initiate motion, which in turn enhances energy vortices and scour, favoring the development of three-dimensional trough cross-beds over planar tabular ones. In deposits with graded grain sizes, coarser particles concentrate at the base of foresets, fining upward, a pattern more pronounced in larger bedforms (decimeters to meters thick) where variability is greater. Abundant supply sustains bedform growth, but in mud-rich environments, cohesion from fine or clay inhibits cross-bed development by dampening and stabilizing the bed against and avalanching, often resulting in flatter or absent structures. This cohesive effect is evident even in wet , where allows steeper foreset dips up to 45°, compared to 34° in dry conditions or 15°–30° in fully saturated ones, though excessive mud content suppresses bedform migration altogether. Preservation of cross-bedding is often incomplete due to post-depositional processes that erode or modify sets, influencing their final scale and integrity in the rock record. Subsequent flows commonly truncate the upper portions of cross-beds, as ongoing grain movement erodes the tops while preserving the basal "runout" of avalanching layers, leading to sets bounded by sharp erosional surfaces. Variations in sea level can exacerbate this by exposing sets to subaerial erosion or reworking during transgressions and regressions, particularly in coastal settings where falling relative sea levels incise into deposits, removing parts of highstand systems tracts. Post-burial diagenetic alterations further impact preservation, as early cementation in sandstones can stabilize structures against compaction, while dissolution or mineral replacement in limestones and mixed sediments may obscure or mimic original bedding through processes like shallow burial instability and compaction. These factors collectively result in partial sets, with preservation ratios heightened in rapidly buried environments but diminished where episodic high-energy events dominate.

Significance

Paleocurrent Analysis

Paleocurrent analysis utilizes the orientation of cross-bedding to reconstruct the direction of ancient flows that deposited sedimentary layers. The dip direction of foreset laminae serves as the primary indicator, pointing downcurrent as sediment avalanched on the lee side of migrating bedforms. In planar cross-bedding, the direction of maximum dip approximates the paleoflow, while in trough cross-bedding, measurements from multiple foreset segments within a trough axis provide a more robust estimate, though cross-bed types can influence measurement accuracy by varying the dispersion of dip directions. Foreset inclinations typically range from 15° to 35°, with eolian settings averaging 30-34° corresponding to of repose for dry , while subaqueous settings generally show lower angles around 15-30° due to saturation. allowing geologists to measure these dips using a compass-clinometer in plan or vertical sections to record values. For vector analysis, multiple measurements from a cross-bed set are averaged to determine the mean paleocurrent direction, often employing stereonets to project data and compute the resultant vector, which corrects for three-dimensional exposure biases. In deformed terrains, tectonic tilt must be removed to avoid directional bias; this involves restoring the to its original horizontal attitude using principles, such as plotting poles to bedding and cross-beds on a stereonet and rotating about the hinge line until the bedding pole aligns with the vertical. Variability in dip directions arises from bedform dynamics and flow conditions, with statistical tools essential for population analysis. Rose diagrams, constructed as circular histograms in 10-30 degree class intervals, visualize unimodal (unidirectional flow), bimodal, or polymodal distributions to quantify dispersion and mean direction. For instance, tidal settings may exhibit bimodal dips due to reversing ebb and currents, requiring separation of populations for accurate interpretation.

Environmental Indicators

Cross-bedding features serve as key indicators of ancient depositional regimes and flow dynamics, extending beyond directional analysis to reveal broader environmental conditions. The scale of cross-bed sets, typically measured by their and thickness, reflects the magnitude of flow during formation; large-scale sets exceeding several meters in suggest sustained high- conditions capable of mobilizing substantial volumes, while smaller-scale sets under a meter indicate lower- regimes. Continuity of these sets further elucidates flow steadiness: extensive, laterally persistent cross-beds point to uniform, prolonged currents that allowed bedforms to migrate without significant interruption, whereas discontinuous or lenticular sets imply episodic or variable flows prone to and redeposition. Associated sedimentary structures provide additional clues to the prevailing energy levels and environmental fluctuations. For instance, the presence of reactivation surfaces—subtle erosional planes within cross-bed sets—signals intermittent pauses or reversals in , often linked to tidal cycles or seasonal variations that temporarily reduced . Integration with overlying or interbedded features, such as in finer-grained intervals or flaser bedding with thin mud layers, helps delineate shifts in hydraulic regimes, where ripple cross-lamination denotes waning energy post-deposition of coarser cross-beds, and flaser patterns suggest intermittent suspension fallout in moderately energetic settings. These associations collectively highlight transitions from high- to low-energy phases within the depositional system. The preservation or disruption of cross-bedding also bears evolutionary significance, particularly through interactions with biogenic mixing that influence habitat development and macroevolutionary patterns. In ancient settings, intact cross-bed structures often indicate limited bioturbation, reflecting low-diversity benthic communities incapable of deep sediment reworking, whereas pervasive biogenic disruption points to enhanced ecosystem engineering by burrowing organisms that homogenized sediments and expanded habitable subsurface zones. Recent studies link these shifts to major evolutionary transitions, such as the , where deepening mixed layers facilitated infaunal habitat diversification and altered biogeochemical cycles, driving broader macroevolutionary dynamics in marine ecosystems.

Depositional Environments

Fluvial Systems

In fluvial systems, cross-bedding commonly develops within river channels and associated bars, where by unidirectional currents creates inclined layers within larger bedforms. Longitudinal bars, prevalent in environments, generate large-scale tabular cross-bedding as straight-crested dunes migrate downstream, producing planar foresets with consistent dip directions that reflect the dominant flow orientation. Transverse bars, often found perpendicular to the main channel flow, also form extensive tabular cross-beds through avalanching on their slopes, with set thicknesses typically ranging from tens of centimeters to several meters depending on bar height and . In contrast, sinuous meandering channels favor the formation of trough cross-bedding, where sinuous-crested dunes or lunate bedforms migrate, resulting in scooped-out troughs filled by curved foresets that capture the three-dimensional variability of channel flow. The unsteadiness of fluvial flows, particularly during episodic , significantly influences cross-bed preservation and . events erode underlying deposits, creating sharp, concave-up bases to new cross-bed sets, which then stack vertically to form cosets representing multiple stages of channel migration or . These stacked sets often exhibit reactivation surfaces—flat, low-angle planes—that indicate pauses or reversals in bedform advance during fluctuating discharge. composing these structures is typically gravelly to coarse sands, with coarser grains concentrated at the base of foresets due to high-energy transport, transitioning to finer sands upward as flow wanes. Modern analogs illustrate these processes vividly in active river systems like the , where dune-scale cross-strata in channel bars record backwater effects and variable flow regimes, with preserved sets up to 1-2 meters thick formed by migrating bedforms during seasonal floods. Ancient examples include the of the Anglo-Welsh Basin, where low-sinuosity fluvial channels deposited cross-bedded sandstones in a semi-arid setting, with tabular and trough types indicating braided to meandering river dynamics under episodic high-discharge conditions.

Tidal and Coastal Settings

In tidal and coastal environments, cross-bedding primarily reflects bidirectional flows driven by alternating flood and ebb tides, which generate opposing current directions and result in distinctive . Herringbone cross-bedding, characterized by alternating sets of cross-beds with opposing dip directions, forms when subaqueous dunes migrate alternately onshore and offshore during successive tidal cycles, providing unequivocal of current reversals. These structures are relatively rare in the rock record due to the need for balanced current strengths and minimal erosion between cycles, as observed in modern tidal flats where one tidal phase often dominates. Reactivation surfaces—subtle erosional boundaries within cross-bed sets—further indicate the influence of tidal cycles, where a weakening or reversing current erodes the upper portion of a foreset before new deposition resumes in a slightly different direction. These surfaces are particularly prevalent in compound dune complexes, where subordinate tidal currents modify primary bedforms, leading to bundled foresets with varying orientations. In estuarine settings, cross-bedding typically occurs as medium-scale troughs with set thicknesses of 0.1 to 3.0 m, formed by three-dimensional dunes in shallow subtidal channels under mixed tidal and fluvial influences. These troughs are often interbedded with flaser or wavy , where thin layers drape foresets during low-energy slack-water periods, highlighting the rhythmic alternation of and . Unlike the relatively steady, unidirectional flows in fluvial systems, tidal cross-bedding arises from oscillatory that promote such heterolithic associations. Recent studies on coastal deposits, such as those examining soft-sediment deformation in gravelly units, reveal how cross-beds can be affected by seismic-induced , with small-scale folds and rotated blocks preserving evidence of deformation on the lee sides of foresets.

Shallow Marine Environments

In shallow marine environments, particularly on continental shelves and nearshore zones, cross-bedding manifests prominently through wave-dominated processes that generate hummocky cross-stratification (HCS), a variant characterized by low-angle dips typically ranging from 5° to 15°. HCS forms under the influence of oscillatory storm waves interacting with the seafloor at depths between fair-weather and storm wave bases, often resulting in undulatory with subtle, hummocky relief and lateral continuity over tens of meters. These structures represent the preserved morphology of storm-induced dunes or bedforms that migrate and aggrade during high-energy events, with the low dips reflecting the dominance of combined-flow regimes where wave orbital motion predominates over unidirectional currents. Current influences in these settings contribute to more organized cross-bedding forms, such as linear trough cross-beds in shelf sands, where unidirectional flows—often storm-generated or geostrophic—erode troughs and deposit concave-up foresets with dips up to 25°. These trough structures, commonly 0.5 to 2 m in set thickness, indicate along shelf margins, with linear orientations aligned to prevailing current directions. In mixed siliciclastic-bioclastic systems, cross-bedding incorporates significant bioclastic components, such as shell fragments and skeletal debris, which enhance grain roughness and influence bedform stability under wave-current interactions. Representative examples include shelf deposits where tangential cross-bedding, with gently curving foresets tangent to the basal scour surface, reaches set thicknesses up to 2 m, as documented in lower sandstones of the Neuquén Basin, . These features highlight the role of storm-reworked shelf sands in building laterally extensive, storm-dominated sequences. In hybrid coastal zones, brief overlaps with tidal processes can introduce subtle bidirectional elements to these cross-beds, though wave dominance persists in open-shelf contexts.

Aeolian Deposits

Aeolian cross-bedding forms through the migration of wind-driven dunes in arid environments, where dry conditions allow for the development of large-scale bedforms without significant water influence. These structures typically exhibit high-angle foresets, often dipping at 30° or more, resulting from the avalanching of on the lee faces of dunes as they advance under consistent flow. Vast sets of cross-bedding can reach thicknesses up to 30 m in eolianites, preserving records of prolonged dune activity over extensive areas. The composing these deposits consists primarily of well-sorted, rounded grains, typically fine- to medium-sized, which have been shaped and polished by repeated aeolian . Inverse grading is common within the laminae, particularly in wind-ripple strata, where coarser grains settle at the base and finer ones accumulate above due to traction and suspension processes during deposition. These properties reflect the selective of lighter particles by wind, leading to highly mature sands with minimal impurities. Unidirectional wind regimes, such as prevailing , dominate the formation of specific dune types that generate cross-bedding. Barchan dunes, crescent-shaped and isolated, develop under these conditions with limited sand supply, producing simple, high-angle cross-sets as they migrate across hard surfaces. Transverse dunes, elongated ridges perpendicular to the , form in areas of abundant sand and unidirectional flow, resulting in compound cross-bedding from smaller bedforms migrating atop larger ones. surfaces, erosional planes scoured by removing fines, often bound these sets, marking pauses in deposition or shifts in wind strength. A classic ancient example is the Jurassic Navajo Sandstone in the southwestern United States, where cross-bedded sets exceeding 20 m thick record the migration of transverse dunes across a vast erg under strong, unidirectional equatorial winds from the north-northwest. Modern analogs occur in the Sahara Desert, such as the Selima Sand Sheet, where similar unidirectional winds produce transverse and dunes with comparable cross-stratification patterns, aiding in the interpretation of ancient deposits.

Modern Analysis and Applications

Measurement Techniques

Field measurements of cross-bedding typically involve the use of a compass-clinometer to determine the dip and strike of foreset beds, providing essential data on their orientation and inclination. This traditional tool allows geologists to directly record the and angle of cross-bed surfaces in outcrops, often targeting multiple measurements within a single set to capture variability. For instance, in surveys, the compass-clinometer measures attitudes with high precision, enabling the documentation of cross-bed dips that range from low-angle to near-vertical foresets. Photogrammetry enhances field analysis by generating three-dimensional models of s, facilitating the mapping of cross-bedding geometries over larger areas. Structure-from-motion techniques, applied to overlapping photographs from ground-based or unmanned aerial vehicles, reconstruct detailed digital models (DOMs) that reveal spatial relationships between cross-bed sets, such as bounding surfaces and set boundaries. These models support the extraction of dip and strike data without physical access to hazardous exposures, improving accuracy in complex terrains. Emerging digital tools include drone-based for high-resolution topographic surveys of cross-bedded strata, which integrate elevation data with visual imagery to quantify bedform scales and orientations. point clouds from drones capture subtle topographic variations in aeolian or fluvial deposits, allowing for the delineation of cross-bed sets up to several meters in extent. In core analysis, computed tomography (CT) scanning provides non-destructive visualization of internal cross-bedding structures, revealing foreset laminations and dip angles within cores. CT images enable the identification of bedding dips and set thicknesses at millimeter resolution, particularly useful for subsurface samples where surface exposure is limited. Post-2020 advancements include methods like for classifying lithofacies in models from drone . For example, in the Entrada , supervised distinguishes from interdune deposits using multi-scale features such as texture and color, achieving accuracies of 0.967–0.971. These tools process large datasets from DOMs to highlight lithofacies features, reducing manual interpretation time while maintaining accuracy in feature extraction. Quantitative metrics derived from these measurements include histograms of cross-bed set thicknesses, which distribute data on set heights to assess depositional energy and bedform migration rates. For example, in limestone sequences, set thicknesses are binned into frequency histograms to reveal modal values typically ranging from centimeters to decimeters. Orientation statistics compile dip directions into rose diagrams or circular distributions, quantifying unimodal or bimodal patterns without deriving flow vectors. These statistics, often using measures of angular dispersion, summarize the variability in cross-bed azimuths across an outcrop. Measurements of cross-bed orientations support paleocurrent analysis by indicating sediment transport directions.

Geological and Practical Applications

Cross-bedding plays a crucial role in characterization of formations, particularly in assessing permeability through the connectivity of cross-bed sets. In cross-bedded s, such as those in the Bunter Formation, permeability ranges from 4 to 5400 millidarcies, with variations driven by the alternation of clay-rich and clay-poor laminae within foresets, enhancing overall heterogeneity that influences fluid flow pathways. The orientation and connectivity of cross-bed sets further contribute to anisotropic permeability, impacting well performance and recovery efficiency in reservoirs by directing preferential flow along or across planes. Soft-sediment deformation structures, including deformed beds, serve as key indicators for reconstructing events, providing evidence of high-energy flow dynamics and substrate deformation. In the Montrose Basin, North-East , such structures within deposits from the 8.15 ka yr BP Storegga include asymmetric flame structures and synforms deforming underlying units, reflecting basal and during inundation. These features expand the proxy toolkit, enabling detailed modeling of flow regimes and depositional processes in ancient events. For paleoclimate reconstruction, the scale of eolian dunes preserved in cross-bedding offers insights into past aridity and wind regimes; in the Early Cretaceous Ordos paleo-desert, dune heights averaging 58 meters and wavelengths up to 2252 meters indicate severe under a with elevated CO₂ levels around 1000 ppm and annual precipitation of 190–320 mm. Recent from 2020–2025 highlights cross-bedding's interaction with biogenic processes, where bioturbation disrupts preservation and alters permeability in mixed sedimentary layers. Studies show that bioturbation intensity non-linearly affects permeability in cross-bedded , with moderate levels increasing it and intense levels reducing it by homogenizing laminae, with effects varying by facies type and cementation, as observed in Pennsylvanian formations of the Permian Basin. In deep-water settings, pseudo-dune cross-stratification associated with channels preserves trace fossils like lingulide burrows, revealing infaunal activity in deep-marine environments and informing ecosystem dynamics during sediment gravity flows. Additionally, integrating roughness with cross-bedding orientations enables refined burial depth estimation; bedding-parallel in carbonates yield paleopiezometric data for maximum burial up to several kilometers, calibrated against cross-bed dip angles to account for compaction and stress history in sedimentary basins.

References

  1. https://open.maricopa.edu/physicalgeologymaricopa/chapter/6-4-sedimentary-structures-and-fossils/
  2. https://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/sedimentary/images/cross_bedding.html
  3. https://geo.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Geology/Sedimentary_Geology:_Rocks_Environments_and_Stratigraphy/04:_Sedimentary_Structures/4.02:_Structures_Formed_by_Unidirectional_Currents
  4. https://geologyistheway.com/sedimentary/cross-bedding/
  5. https://www2.tulane.edu/~sanelson/eens1110/sedrx.htm
  6. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/12-090-introduction-to-fluid-motions-sediment-transport-and-current-generated-sedimentary-structures-fall-2006/b76e182106487208fe4e449ccd40400e_ch16.pdf
  7. https://www.geo.mtu.edu/KeweenawGeoheritage/The_Fault/Crossbedding.html
  8. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/12-110-sedimentary-geology-spring-2007/1b78c74af7ef300050b88a24adfaa78d_ch3.pdf
  9. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/cross-bedded-sandstone
  10. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/gsabulletin/article-abstract/64/4/381/4550/TERMINOLOGY-FOR-STRATIFICATION-AND-CROSS
  11. https://open.maricopa.edu/physicalgeologymaricopa/chapter/5-4-sedimentary-structures/
  12. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/sepm/jsedres/article/94/6/903/650655/Discerning-coastal-process-signatures-and
  13. https://eas2.unl.edu/~dloope/pdf/DownslopeCoarsening.pdf
  14. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1993.tb01360.x
  15. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/aapg/aapgbull/article/84/3/345/39789/The-Effect-of-Ductile-Lithic-Sand-Grains-and
  16. https://opengeology.org/historicalgeology/using-sedimentary-structures-to-interpret-ancient-environments/
  17. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/1063/chapter/10543113
  18. https://opentextbc.ca/physicalgeologyh5p/chapter/sedimentary-structures-and-fossils/
  19. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2004JF000218
  20. https://www.geological-digressions.com/tabular-and-trough-crossbed-lithofacies/
  21. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:172262/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  22. https://www.lyellcollection.org/doi/10.1144/SP556-2024-94
  23. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019GL085910
  24. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/sepm/books/book/1052/Cross-Bedding-Bedforms-and-Paleocurrents
  25. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-94-011-7683-5_2.pdf
  26. https://www.geological-digressions.com/measuring-and-representing-paleocurrents/
  27. https://zarmesh.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Sedimentary-Rocks-in-the-Field.pdf
  28. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adu7719
  29. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/cross-bedding
  30. https://geo.libretexts.org/Courses/University_of_California_Davis/GEL_109%253A_Sediments_and_Strata_%28Sumner%29/09%253A_Draft_Textbook/9.12%253A_Marine_Deposition/9.12.1%253A_Tidal_Flows_and_Facies
  31. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444641342000146
  32. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166263504800094
  33. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393952642_Soft-sediment_deformation_structures_in_Holocene_coastal_gravel_deposits_reveal_two_18-20_ka_old_Mw_70_earthquakes_in_southern-central_Hispaniola
  34. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/sed.12791
  35. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/book/chapter-pdf/3799891/9781565762312_ch06.pdf
  36. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0037073821002293
  37. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235972670_Sedimentology_and_hydrodynamics_of_mixed_siliciclastic-bioclastic_shallow-marine_deposits_of_Acerenza_Pliocene_Southern_Apennines_Italy
  38. https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/bitstream/handle/11336/33826/CONICET_Digital_Nro.ee1b220e-cf0f-478c-82a9-20eed2757c60_A.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y
  39. https://www.earthlearningidea.com/PDF/194_Cross_bedding_1.pdf
  40. https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/sepm/aapgbull/article/39975/An-Eolian-Facies-within-the-Upper-Jurassic
  41. https://npshistory.com/publications/zion/uga-28-2000.pdf
  42. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S163107051500016X
  43. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1998/0131a/report.pdf
  44. https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/deserts/eolian/
  45. https://nhmu.utah.edu/sites/default/files/trail-resource/Navajo%20Sandstone.pdf
  46. https://geology.utah.gov/docs/emp/pump/pdf/poster6.pdf
  47. https://sp.lyellcollection.org/content/35/1/337.full.pdf
  48. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191814117300822
  49. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019181412030434X
  50. https://www.jsg.utexas.edu/news/2024/12/geology-by-drone-2/
  51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308795661_Techniques_for_Using_Core_CT_Data_for_Facies_Identification_and_Analysis
  52. https://www.mines.edu/undergraduate-research/classifying-lithofacies-of-the-entrada-sandstone-using-drone-photogrammetry-and-machine-learning/
  53. https://www.kgs.ku.edu/Publications/Bulletins/194_2/
  54. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/627551
  55. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583624000835
  56. https://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings/89SPE/All-89SPE/SPE-19587-MS/63815
  57. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09596836251350227
  58. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/earth-science/articles/10.3389/feart.2023.1142034/full
  59. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/14/12/339
  60. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-49875-8
  61. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328730367_Bedding-parallel_stylolites_as_a_tool_to_unravel_maximum_burial_depth_in_sedimentary_basins_Application_to_Middle_Jurassic_carbonate_reservoirs_in_the_Paris_basin_France
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.