TECTONICS, VOL. 8, NO.

5, PAGES 1015-1036, OCTOBER 1989

STRUCTURAL EVOLUTION OF THE

ARDMORE BASIN, OKLAHOMA:
PROGRESSIVE DEFORMATION IN
THE FORELAND OF THE OUACHITA
COLLISION

James W. Granath •

Exploration Research and Services

Division, Conoco Incorporated,
Ponca City, Oklahoma

Abstract. Synthesis of oil field studies, seis- Broadly spread left-lateral shear evolved into
mic reflection data, and surface geology has re- crustal scale transpression during the Pennsyl-
sulted in a reconstruction of the Pennsylvanian vanian Period. That progressivecontraction of
evolution of the structural style of fault systems deformation and the change in style correlate
bordering and within the Ardmore Basin in south with mid-Pennsylvanian approach and passage
central Oklahoma. Faults bounding the mar- of the Ouachita collision along the Ouachita em-
gins of the basin were part of a broader left- bayment(Thomas,1983)on the southernmargin
lateral shear belt that affected southern Okla- of the North American craton. Inasmuch as the
homa during the early Pennsylvanian. The mid- Ardmore Basin was located at the sharp internal
Pennsylvanian and later zone of deformation con- corner of the embayment, the coincidence sug-
tracted in southern Oklahoma to concentrate on geststhat the styleof evolutionrecords(1) early
the Washita Valley-Eola Robberson fault sys- far-field influence of the approaching Ouachita
tems along the northern edge of the basin, and collisionduringearlyPennsylvanian,
(2) passage
on the Criner Uplift-Healdton-Stephens County of the sutureduringmid-Pennsylvanian,
and (3)
fault systemsalong the southernand westernside concentration of foreland deformation at the cor-
of the basin. Deformation on the floor of the ner of the embayment as the Arkoma and Fort
basin was amplified, with left-lateral strike-slip Worth flexural basins evolved to the south and
faults slicing the basin into a system of rhom- east during late Pennsylvanian.
bohedral blocks. Deformation continued at least
into Virgil time (late Pennsylvanian). A two- INTRODUCTION
dimensional displacement field derived for the
middle to late Pennsylvanian deformation re- The Ardmore Basin is a fault-bounded basin
veals that a strong component of transpression of Pennsylvanian age in south central Oklahoma.
affected both the basin-bounding faults and, by It developed in concert with the emplacement of
reason of the geometry of their connectionsto the Ouachita fold and thrust belt on the edge
the west, the Wichita Mountain front as well. of the North American craton [Ham and Wil-
son,19671and consequently,
is relatedin time to
a number of Pennsylvanian to Permian tectonic
•Now at Worldwide Exploration Services, features scattered throughout the southwestern
Conoco Incorporated, Ponca City, Oklahoma. UnitedStates[Kluth and Coney1981].The Ard-
more Basin lies within the foreland immediately
Copyright 1989 adjacentto the fold and thrust front (Figure 1)
by the American Geophysical Union. and is confined to the floor of a lower Paleozoic
depositional trough that has come to be known
Paper number 89TCOO563. as the SouthernOklahomaAulacogen[Shatski,
0278-7407/ 89/89T C-00563$10.00 1947;Burkeand Dewey,1973;Burke,19771
. The
1016 Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

&4V¾,4'v PRINCIPAL TECTONIC ELEMENTS OF THE ARDMORE

.,, ^•.

BASIN AREA, SHOWING THE APPROXIMATE

EXTENT OF THE SOUTHERN OKLAHOMA
AULACOGEN

Fig. 1. Geologicalsketchmap of the Ardmore and Marietta Basins,showingdistribution of

basementtypes and the locationsof major fault systems. Patterned area outlines the floor
of the Southern Oklahoma aulacogen,as indicated by the distribution of late Precambrian
to Cambrian igneous rocks. Hatchures on faults indicate downthrown sides of the faults
regardlessof the true displacements.Ouachita thrust front indicated by barbed fault trace.

Pennsylvanian deformation apparently involved Axtmann, 1983; McLean and Stearns, 1983; Mc-
reactivation of older structures and inversion of Gookey and Budnick, 1983; Donovan et al., 1984;
parts of the aulacogen. The geological history of Islam and Nielsen, 1984; Granath and Morgan,
the Ardmore Basin is summarized in Figure 2, 1985]. There have been, however,considerable
formatted in terms of the life cycle of the aulaco- differencesof opinion as to the magnitude of hor-
gen. The late Paleozoic phase of that history is izontal offset and the predominant senseof dis-
the subject of this paper. placement. Estimates range from Ham's origi-
The geometry and relationships between the nal suggestion of a few kilometers offset, up to
Pennsylvanian fault systems have been recur- 120km or more[Budnick,1986].Onecommonly
rently controversial.TomlinsonI1952],for ex- quotedvalueis Tanner's[1967]estimateof about
ample, wrote specifically of the apparent con- 65 km of left-lateral offset on the Washita Val-
tradictions in the structural geometry. Most of ley fault, based on a jog in facies patterns in the
the problematic features have been attributed to Ordovician Simpson Group.
strike-slip motion, by reason of geometric sim- Recently, some authors have presented ev-
ilarity to more obvious wrench systems. Ham idence of oblique slip or transpression on ma-
[1950]cameto the earliestconclusion
that strike- jor strandsof the fault system[e.g., Donovan
slip displacement was important in the Ardmore et al., 1984; Islam and Nielsen, 1984], raising
Basin, with special reference to the Washita the question whether transpression was a fun-
Valley fault (Figure 1). Many authors have damental mode of deformation in this part of
since echoed that conclusion and expanded its the Ouachita foreland. Certainly transpressive
application throughout southern Oklahoma and elements should be expected in wrench systems
the panhandleof Texas[Tanner,1963;Tanner, [e.g.,Sylvesterand Smith,1976],but to demon-
1967; Walper, 1964; Wiltse, 1979a,b; Haas, 1981; strate transpression is difficult on the basis of
Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1017

STRATIGRAPHY OF SOUTHERN OKLAHOMA

MAXIMUMEQUIVALENT TECTONIC
SETTING
AULACOGEN CRATON
TIME STRAT ROCK STRAT IN ARDMORE-MARIETTA
THICKNESS THICKNESS
BASIN
(FEET) (FEET)

CRETACEOUS 0- ! 200 0-1200 Coastal Plain Sedimentation

PERMIAN 0-2000 0-2000 Post-Orogenic red beds

Z VirgilJan CISCO-VANOSS ! 550

Z
< Missourian HOXBAR 4000 Syntectonic Inter-Mountain
3OO0 Basin Sedimentation
>' Desmoinesian DEESE 6000
Z
Z
uJ Morrow-Atokan DORNICK HILLS 3000

SPRINGER-GODDARD 4500 350 Renewed sudsidence-early

Chester
orogenic
u) Meramec-Chester CANEY SH. 650 250

Kinderhook-Meramec SYCAMORE LS. 350 350

Cratonic Stability
• Frasnian-Kinderhook
WOODFORD FM. 550 550

l:3 Helderberg-Oriskany
SILURIAN HUNTON GROUP 350(600) • 3O0

Richmond 175
SYLVANSH. 325
C)
• Trenton-Cincinnatian VIOLA LS. 900' 400
O
Thermally controlled, post-rift
n- mid-Ord SIMPSON GROUP 2300' 1000' subsidence
O
Canadian
ARBUCKLE GROUP 6700' 4000
Croixlan

•: Franconlan TIMBERED HILLS GRP. 500 225

• CARLTON RHYOLITE, NAVAHO Rift basin vulcanism

< ?
C) MOUNTAIN BASALT

PRECAMBRIAN Arbuckle granites ? ? Crystalline basement

•Maximum of 600' preserved through mid-Devonian erosion

Fig. 2. Generalizedstratigraphyand tectonichistoryof the ArdmoreBasin[modifiedafter

Ham and Wilson, 1967].

geometry alone. Rarely can the smaller compo- in nature. This first part of the paper attempts
nents of displacement vectors be gleaned from to document the procedures by which the Penn-
common geometric data. The purpose of this sylvanJan structures were geometrically catego-
study is to test the applicability of the trans- rized and sorted into synchronoussystems. Two
pression hypothesis on a basin-wide scale. The paleotectonic maps for the Ardmore Basin Penn-
approach has been to derive a displacement field sylvanian are the basic product of the first part.
for interconnected faults in and around the Ard-
In the secondpart the paleotectonic map for the
more Basin.
younger deformation is used to derive the direc-
Several phases of Pennsylvanian deforma- tions of the horizontal components of the dis-
tion have been recognized in southern Okla- placement field. That derivation is based on the
homa(Figure3), sothe effectsof the overprinted assumption that the motion on adjoining fault
phases had to be separated into synchronously systemsmust be compatible, hence the empha-
related systemsbefore a displacementfield could sis on synchronous systems rather than on the
be derived. In the end, and as might be expected, evolution of separate fault strands. The central
data are clear enough only to characterize the conclusion is that middle to late Pennsylvanian
last and most pronounced phase of deformation deformation on the basin-boundingfault systems
as transpressional. was transpressional in nature. Strike-slip motion
This paper is based on a synthesisof a large characterized the early Pennsylvanian deforma-
amount of data, many of which are proprietary tion of the same fault systems, but it is not pos-
1018 Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

AGE TECTONIC
SERIES GROUP FORMATION MEMBERS
MYBP ACTIVITY
L. PERMIAN
280 PONTOTOC
GROUP Vanoil Fm.
x x x x x x x x x x

Coilings Ranch CGL.

286 x x x x x x'• x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxx xx +
Zuckerman
Ls.
]m misc.
Daube
Ls.
/Ims.
Hoxbar Fm.
Anadarche
Ls.} Pc:::tli:
' ARBUCKLE
Crinerville
Ls./conglomerate
288
Confederate
Ls.J

Deese Fm. milc.

"Warren
WestArm

Campground
•
Rocky Pt. Cgl.
Ranch
CGLS."

x x x x x x x

Devils Kitchen

Pumpkin Creek Ls.

Big Branch Fm.
DORNICK
300
Frensley Ls.
Lake Murray Fm. Lester Ls.
HILLS
BostwickCgl.
306 x x x x x x x x x x 2nd WlCHITAN
GROUP Jolliff Cgl.
Golf Course Fm.

Primrose . ! st WICHITAN
4-

XX•XXX X X X X X X X X4-Xx x x x x x x x x x x

Lake Ardmore SS.

SPRINGER
310 Overbrook
GROUP
U. MISS. Rod Club
Goddard-Ceney

+ + + Unconformitie$; generally unconformitle$ have to affect group-level

stratigraphic units to be regionally correlable.

Fig. 3. Pennsylvanian stratigraphy of the Ardmore Basin, as adapted for use in this
project.

sible with the available data to establish trans- involved in them versusthose that overlap them.
pressional relationships. The discussionfollows Successin using stratigraphy for that purpose, of
with some implications to the inversion of the course, depends on the reliability of established
rest of the Southern Oklahoma Aulacogen, and correlations. Several factors complicate the situ-
some thoughts on the foreland setting of this de- ation in southern Oklahoma. One is that struc-
formation. tural relations must be largely interpreted from
subsurfaceinformation, becausemost of the Ard-
BASIS OF RECONSTRUCTION more Basin is covered by posttectonic Permian
and Cretaceous sediments. Another is that the
Syntectonic Stratigraphy formal stratigraphy is confusedby a proliferation
of local drillers' names. But the major problem
It was critically important to this synthesis is inherent in the syntectonic nature of the sed-
that the Pennsylvanian stratigraphy is a syntec- iments themselves and their characteristic defi-
tonic stratigraphy. Procedurally, assignment of ciency in time diagnostic biota. Ordinarily, con-
structures to coeval families was possible only glomerates are important in dating orogenic ac-
because periods of structural activity could be tivity, but only a few of the many in the Ar-
separated on the basis of the stratigraphic units buckle area are extensive enough to be of use in
Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1019

subsurface correlation. For example, in mapping glomerate is the youngest unit to be deformed
the western part of the Arbuckle uplift, Dunham and is overlain by the undeformed Vanoss Con-
[1955]recognizedfive separatelate Pennsylva- glomerate[Ham, 1954]. To the southof Ardmore
nian conglomerates. But in the subsurface, it the Vanoss is an arkosic sandstone which is rel-
can prove impossible to trace each of those con- atively easy to distinguish from the underlying
glomerates for any distance or to correlate them Hoxbar lithologies.
with conglomerates intersected in other wells. To In the subsurface it is often di•cult to dis-
make matters worse, additional conglomerates tinguish the two Wichitan unconformities. Lo-
or nonconglomeratic facies equivalents may be cally, it is possible to identify both in situations
present in wells. where dense drilling has yielded extraordinarily
It is possible, however, to recognize at least detailed structure or where the upper and lower
two and in some places three unconformities Dornick Hills sections can be distinguished. Nei-
in the subsurface, and those have traditionally ther of those situations is generally the case, so
formed the basis for separating the Wichitan and for basin-wide correlation the two Wichitan un-
Arbuckleorogenic"pulses"(Figure 3) [van der conformities must be lumped together.
Gracht, 1931;Ham and Wilson, 1967]. The con- In practice, the two Wichitan unconformi-
sequence of this rather coarse time discrimina- ties, taken together, and the Arbuckle uncon-
tion is that paleotectonic maps represent the sit- formity divide the Ardmore Basin section into
uation within time slices of the Pennsylvanian three stratigraphic packages. The lowest pack-
rather than more ideal "snapshots" at particu- age is capped by the Springer Group, whose
lar times. Nevertheless, the maps presented here monotonous seismic reflection character serves
seem to record the principal features of the struc- to distinguish it from Dornick Hills and younger
tural evolution of the province, in that they ap- rocks. The second package contains the bulk of
pear to be kinematically realistic. the Pennsylvanian section: the upper Dornick
The three major unconformities were origi- Hills, Deese, and Hoxbar units. There are numer-
nally recognized in surface mapping in southern ous minor unconformities within each of those
Oklahoma(Figure 3). The oldest,reflectingthe units, but none are regionally correlable. In the
first Wichitan event, is an angular unconformity Ardmore area the upper Dornick Hills is com-
between Springer Group shales and sandstones posedof shalesand some interbedded limestones,
(Chesterianto Morrowan) and lower Dornick the youngest of which is the Pumpkin Creek
Hills Group (Morrowan)rocksin the vicinity of (lowerDesmoinesian
in age). The Deese,on the
the city of Ardmore. The Morrowan-aged Jolliff other hand, is dominated by shales and sand-
Conglomerate and Primrose Sandstone members stones with a few conglomerates. The Hoxbar
of the Golf Course Formation overlie Springer marked a return to shale and limestone deposi-
in various places, and the Jolliff occurs directly tion. Its base is picked at the basal Missourian
above the Springer, south of the city. North of Confederate Limestone Member and its top at
Ardmore, the Jolliff apparently thins out to dis- the base of the VirgilJan Collings Ranch Con-
appear above the Primrose Sandstone, which lies glomerate, particularly in the Arbuckle uplift.
conformably over the Springer Group. The on- Because of the differences in the internal
lap of Springer Group rocks against older Paleo- stratigraphy of the Dornick Hills, Deese, and
zoic rocks in the Criner Hills is also attributed to Hoxbar, they are fairly easy to distinguish in
the first Wichitanevent[Tomlinson
and McBee, subsurface data. In seismic sections each in-
1959]. terval yields distinctive reflection characteristics,
The second unconformity, defining the sec- and the rock types within each interval are suffi-
ond Wichitan tectonic event, is reflected in the ciently distinctive to be detected in logs and well
depositionof the BostwickConglomerate(basal cuttings.
Atokan in age) overthe Springerin someplaces The third package lies above the Arbuckle
and over the lower part of the Dornick Hills unconformity and contains the undeformed sec-
in others. The first Wichitan, then, records tion from Vanoss Conglomerate and its equiv-
events in the latest Mississippian to basal Penn- alents at the base up through the Cretaceous
sylvanian (Morrowan) and the secondWichi- coastal plain sediments.
tan records events in upper Morrowan to lower
Atokan. Basis of Geometric Discrimination
Deformation during the latter half of the
Pennsylvanian Period is attributed to the Ar- Most of the detailed structural information
buckleorogeny. Its culmination(Figure 3) is comes from oil field studies, both proprietary
marked by the Virgilian conglomerates on the and publishedover the years (Table 1). Con-
north central margin of the Ardmore Basin, nections between oil fields were made with seis-
which owe both their origin and deformation to mic reflection profiles and isolated unproductive
the Arbuckle event. The Collings Ranch con- wildcat wells. Subsurface studies in the Ardmore
1020 Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

TABLE 1. Oil and Gas Fields as Structural Elements

Type of
Structural Activity
First Second
Field Location Wichitan Wichitan Arbuckle Reference

Aylesworth T6S, R6-7E I -- I Womack [1956]

Bayou T4S, R3W ? I I(N),III(S) Williams [1954]
Caddo T3S, R1E .... I Nance [1960]
Camp T2S, R3-4W -- 17 III Parker [1956, 1959]
Carter-Knox T2N, R5W -- ? II Pate [1953]; Reedy and
Sykes [1959];
Reedy [1968]
Crinerville T5-6S, R1E I? I III Powers [1929]
Cumberland T5S, R7E I? i I-II Cram [1948]
East Durant T6-7S, R9E I? I I-II Jones [1968]
Eola TiN, R2-3W I? I I Harlton [1964]
Fox T2S, R3W I? I I Shaw [1955]
Healdton T4S, R3W I? I I Latham [1968a,b]
Hewitt T4S, R2W I? I II Burton [1929];
Mullen [1956]
Joiner City T4-5S, R3W II .... Hellman [1962]
Mansville T5S,R4E I -- I Godfrey [1956]

Milroy
North Alma T2S,R4W
T1S, R4W I?
.... I III i1 Schweers
[1959]
Norville
[1956]
NorthMadill T5S,R5E I oo 12 Gahring[1959]
North Wildcat T1S, R2W oo ? ? Walker [1956]
Jim

SantaFe T2S, R5W ? I I 1 Beasley[1956]

Sholom Alechem T1S, R3o4W .... III Billingsley [1956];
Riley [1974]
SE Hoover TIN, R1E I? I I Harlton [1964]
SE Velma Tlo2S, R4W oo i i Parker [1959]
South Palacine T2S R6W .... III Atkinson [1952, 1959]
SW Ardmore T5S R1E I? I II Hale [1959]
SW Lone Grove T5S, R1W .... III Westheimer and
Schweers [1956]
SW Velma Tlo2S, R5W I I I Hicks [1956]
Velma T1-2S, R5W -- I-II I-II Rutledge [1956]
West Brock T5S, R1W .... III Walker [1959]
West Hewitt T4S, R2W I? I Ioli Neustadt [1956]
West Velma T1S, R5-6W ? I-II I-II Harlton [1956]

I, wrench style' II, reverse faulting' III, normal faulting' double dashes, no
apparent activity' I-II, transpressive wrench' ?, questionably active; N and S, north
and south ends of field, respectively. Locations of the fields can be found on Figures
4,5, or6.

1Listricnormal
faults in Pennsylvanian
rocks.
2Styleindeterminate.
Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1021

Basin area particularly lend themselvesto three- cides with those that are typically regarded as
dimensional interpretation because petroleum is diagnosticof strike-slipdisplacement[Harding,
commonly produced from several stratigraphi- 1973, 1974, 1976; Wilcox et al., 1973; Sylvester
cally distinct reservoirs. Consequently, drilling and Smith, 1976]. Severalof the major Type I
data are more complete than is usually the case, faults form anastomosing, braided patterns on a
and the structure of several horizons in vertical large scale, particularly along parts of the trend
successioncan be reconstructed and compared. of the Criner Uplift and in the Eola-Robberson
Hence kinematic changes through time can, if field (Figure 6).
large enough, be detected by reasonof their effect Reverse j•aults. High-angle reverse faults
on successivelydeposited horizons. The syntec- (Type II structuralelements)are sometimes
dif-
tonic stratigraphy is key, as discussedabove. ficult to distinguish from strike-slip elements in
Essentially all the oil fields can be classified any one cross section, but their structural re-
in terms of three types, along the lines of the lationship are consistent along strike. In map
traditional families of faults. The classification view their trace is parallel to associated folds,
is based on the suite of minor structures repre- and they often terminate or grade into folds as
sented in the fields, assuming that they are diag- their offset diminishes. Dip and displacement re-
nostic of the kinematic development. versals are absent.
Strike-slip elements. The first group, Type Normalfaults. True normalfaults (Type III
I structural elements of Table 1, encompasses structuralelements)occurin two varieties.The
the set of structural relationships that con- kinematically significant normal faults cut pre-
cernedTomlinson[1952]. Individualfault sur- Pennsylvanian rocks with only broad, gentle fold-
faces within Type I systems commonly change ing. Their occurrence on southwesterly trends re-
dip direction both along strike and with depth lates to the strike-slip elements. Another variant
(Figure4). Subsidiaryfaultstrend into and are is a family of listric faults that cut only the Penn-
truncated by the larger faults. Their orientations sylvanJansection, soling in the Springer Group
are compatible with the orientations of synthetic shales. They appear to be growth faults devel-
and antithetic(Reidel)shearsin modelanalogs oped in response to thick Pennsylvanian depo-
of strikeslipsystems[Tchalenko andAmbraseys, sition in the northwestern part of the Ardmore
1970]. Associated foldsare typicallyen echelon Basinat SholomAlechem(Figure6).
in arrangement relative to the faults, and gener-
ally cut by the subsidiary faults, as is the case Technique oj• Classification
in the Healdtonfield (Figure5). Antiformaland
synformal structures are often juxtaposed across Much of the supporting data to this synthe-
the major faults, in part accounting for rever- sis is in fact reinterpretation of older published
sals in sense of offset along strike. Similarly, the data. Table I encapsilates that body of data,
senseof relative offset can prove to be reversed and the locations of the various fields are shown
on successive horizons at the same location. In in subsequentfigures. Several of the fields serve
short, the assemblageof minor structures coin- to illustrate how the data were reinterpreted.

Fig. 4. Generalizedcharacteristics
of strike-slip(Type I) structuralelementsin southern
Oklahoma. (a) Map view emphasizinganastomosing fault pattern, obliqueorientation
of associatedfolds, and up-downreversalsalongstrike. (b) Crosssectionof convergent
flower structure, emphasizingthrow reversalwith depth on different stratigraphic horizons.
Crossesindicate basement, coarsestipple and blank areas are lower Paleozoic rocks, and
fine stipple is the syntectonic Pennsylvanian rocks.
1022 Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

• A T3S R3WI
R2W
• •s I HEALDTON FIELD

A/ A
level

O.

I Ii -j--5ooo

A T3s R3WIR2W
SCALE
km
1 2
olF3
1
mile

after LATHAM I1•f•1

Fig. 5. Structureof the Healdtonfield[afterLatham,1968aandb]. (a) Structurecontour

map drawnon the top of the ArbuckleGroup. Townshipand rangecornerfor location
reference
torelate
toFigure
5B.(b)Structure
contours
onthetopoftheHealdton
Sand-
stone, a unit within the Hoxbar. •,c) Crosssectionacrossthe field. See text for further
discussion.

Figure 5 shows the structure of the Heald- Hence the interpretation of the Healalton field is
ton field, as derived from drilling data and pre- as follows: the strike-slip geometry in the Or-
sentedby Latham [1968a,b]. The map shows dovician rocks is a Wichitan structure with an
a southeasterlyplunging anticline in the pre- overlying Wichitan unconformity. Post-Hoxbar
Pennsylvanian, in fact contoured on the Kinblade (i.e., Arbuckle)strike-slipdeformationwas su-
Formation at the top of the Arbuckle Group. perimposed, creating the broader anticline in the
Its northwesternmargin is terminated by a ma- Hoxbar sedimentsand deforming the Wichitan
jor throughgoing fault, and the core of the an- unconformity. The Pontotoc onlap marks the
ticline is cut by several southwesterlyoriented central uplifted wrench zone above the Arbuckle
faults with normal separation(crosssections, unconformity. Because the Wichitan events are
Figure 5C). The faults to the left in the cross indistinguishableat Healdton, Type I deforma-
sectionsstrike subparallelto the major through- tion in the first Wichitan is queried in Table 1.
goingfault. The mildly deformedPennsylvanian Second Wichitan and Arbuckle deformation are
overlying the Ordovician in the fold is Hoxbar annotated as Type I.
Formation, supercededby Pontotoc Group rocks The WashitaValleyfault system(Figures1,
that onlap the Healalton structure. The structure 6, and 7) illustrateshow Type I elementscon-
within the Hoxbar is a broader anticline than nect together. Figure 7 is an original study of
that at the Arbucklelevel(Figure5B). It trends well data along80 km of the WashitaValley sys-
SE-NW at a larger angle to the Healdton fault tem. The contour map drawn on the Ordovician
trace than the closurein the pre-Pennsylvanian. Viola Limestoneshowsa seriesof en echelon,left-
Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1023

o I

(,

Z
t • [:: I t-- I I I I I I I
1024 Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

stepping anticlines spaced at about 15 km with

intervening shallowly plunging synclines. West-
erly oriented faults crosscut the structure within
the Cumberland oil field in a Riedel orienta-
tion [Cram,1948].Southwesterly
orientedfaults,
some of which are normal faults, cut the pre-
Pennsylvanian. Some of those can be seen at
the scale of Figure 7 in the area west of Durant
(city) and west of Ravia. Others at a smaller
scale than can be shown in Figure 7 cut the East
Durant field [Jones,1968].
Determination of the age of motion on the
Washita Valley system revolves around the age
of the Tishomingo Uplift. During the early Penn-
sylvanJan, detrital material from the north, ap-
parentlyderivedfrom the BeltonAnticline(Fig-
ure 8) couldreachthe northernpartsof the Ard-
more Basin acrossboth the Washita Valley fault
and its northern neighbors, the Reagan and Mill
Creekfault systems[Ham, 1969]. The detrital
material overlies and is involved in the en eche-
lon anticlines along the Washita Valley fault, all
of which were subsequently truncated by uplift
along the Washita Valley fault.
The structural geometry within the Washira
Valley fault system itself also implies post-
Wichitan uplift. The surface of the Washita
Valley fault is a steep, northerly inclined sur-
face that brings Precambrian crystalline rocksup
against lower Paleozoic. The Cumberland fault
(Figure 7) is a reversefault whosedip increases
with depth (verifiedby drilling intersections).
It brings Ordovician rocks up into contact with
Pennsylvanian rocks, thus cutting the anticlines
in the footwall. The Ravia "nappe"(Figure 6)
overlies the small anticline between the Cum-
berland and East Durant fields (Figure 7). It
contains the same Ordovician rocks that are up-
lifted along the Cumberland fault, but they are
interdigitated with mid-Pennsylvanian strata at
the distal(southerly)marginof the nappe.The
internal geometry of the nappe has several fea-
tures characteristic of gravity slides, a conclusion
alsoreachedby Jacobsen
[1983]. Data fromwell
bores aimed at testing the fold beneath the nappe
indicate that faults in the rear of the nappe's
body cut section out, whereas faults in the toe
repeat the stratigraphic section. In addition, the
sole surfaceitself (which is not cut by the in-
ternal faults) cuts downsection in the rear and
then upsection toward the toe. Because a com-
plete section of the units involved in the nappe
are also present everywhere within the footwall,
the nappe is most likely derived from the top
of the Tishomingo Uplift. Interdigitation with
mid-Pennsylvanian rocks in the toe implies rela-
tive uplift along this portion of the Washita Val-
ley very early in the Arbuckle phase of deforma-
tion if not between the conventionally recognized
orogenicphases. Jones[1968]showsa similar
Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1025
1026 Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

structure in his cross sections of the East Durant greater complexity with time also characterizes
field and implies that the gravity slide actually the south side and the floor of the basin.
cuts across the closure of the pre-Pennsylvanian
rocks, thus also implying early development of Criner Hills Trend
the en echelon folds.
Hence the notation for the Cumberland and Early deformation along the the southern
East Durant fields in Table 1 shows questionable marginof the ArdmoreBasin (Figure8) resulted
first Wichitan motion, definite strike-slip motion in the uplift of the Criner Hills and the sepa-
[or the secondWichitan, and strike-slip/thrust ration of the Ardmore Basin from the Marietta
motion for the Arbuckle. Basin to the south. Structures within the Mari-
The northeastern segment of the Washita etta Basin appear to have been active only dur-
Valley fault separates the Arbuckle Uplift from ing the first Wichitan, and, consequently,play a
the TishomingoUplift (Figure6). Surfacemap- small role in the Pennsylvanian history. Faults
ping and oil field studies in that area have doc- bordering the Criner Hills connected toward the
umentedstrike-slipcharacteristics
[Haas,1981]. northwest to the Healdton area where definitive
Just north of the Arbuckle Uplift, the fault sys- characteristics of strike slip are apparent, but the
tem negotiates a western bend to strike into the nature of the motion on those connecting faults is
Eola-Robberson area, which probably shows the somewhat obscured by subsequent deformation.
best Type I or strike-slip geometry in the whole The Healdton structure connected directly into
of the ArdmoreBasin. Harlton [1964]produced reversefaults in Stephens County and eventually
cross sections of the Eola field on the basis of into the Meers system outside the area of Figure
subsurface data that show the anatomy of the 8. High-quality seismic lines in Stephens County
flower structure; reinterpretation adds very little show that those reverse faults dip to the south-
to Harlton's picture despite more drilling data. west at an inclination of about 30ø to 45 ø and
Harlton's[1964]paperis readilyavailable,sohis apparently had the same senseof motion in both
illustrations are not reproduced here. early and late Pennsylvanian
time (compareFig-
About 20 km west of Eola the strike-slip sys- ures6 and 8).
tem merges with the reverse faults prominent in The Kirby fault was established in the Wi-
Stephens County, forming the tight 45ø north- chitan phases of the deformation, as an easterly
westerncornerof the ArdmoreBasin(Figure6). vergent high-angle reversefault connectingto the
Splaying off to the northwest, just west of Eola, northwest to a strike-slip system at Fox and Mil-
the Carter-Knox gas field shows the characteris- roy fields(Figure8). Unlikeits northwestern
ex-
ticstypicalof Type II (reversefaults)structures. tension, though, the Kirby fault was not con-
The Carter-Knox field produces from several nected to the main Criner Uplift trend to the
horizons in the pre-Pennsylvanian, Pennsylva- southeast. An apparently complete section of
nian, and Permian. The pre-Pennsylvanian is by lower Pennsylvanian strata lies conformably on
far the most important pool because closure has older rocks in the gap and shares Arbuckle-aged
been erosionally breached in Dornick Hills and deformationalfeatures(Figure 6) with them.
younger Pennsylvanian strata. The structure By late Pennsylvaniantime (Figure6), struc-
is, however, conformable throughout the section tures in the Marietta Basin became inactive. The
and persistent along strike: an asymmetric. east- Criner Uplift was rejuvenated, or had been un-
erly verging anticline flanked on the east by a re- dergoing continuous uplift. For significant por-
verse fault. Growth of the structure appears to tions of its length, the Criner Uplift was bounded
have begun in early Desmoinesian time, as the by faults with southerly (basin side up} ver-
upper Dornick Hills and Deese Formations thin genee. A depositional trough, trending NW-SE
toward their erosional breach at the crest of the just south of the city of Ardmore, had begun
fold. It continued during the Missourian with the to accumulate sediments within the basin on the
development of an unconformity at the base of NE side of the Criner Uplift. At the northwest
the Hoxbar and the deposition of an onlapping end of the Criner Uplift the Southwest Ardmore-
Hoxbarsection[Reedy1968]. Consequently,
in Overbrook area was occupied by a horst, clearly
Table 1, Carter-Knox is counted as an Arbuckle- defined by high-angle reverse faults. That horst
generation Type II structure with questionable shifted the depositional trough to the southwest,
Wichitan history. into a gap in the Criner trend where a minor ex-
tensionalbasin (the Brocksubbasin)brokethe
continuity of the strike-slip system. That small
PALEOTECTONIC MAPS subbasin is the reason why early Pennsylvanian
motion is obscure in the area. The oil fields at
Figures 6 and 8 are the results of this synthe- Southwest Lone Grove and West Brock border
sis of the Ardmore Basin structural data. The the small subbasin on its southern margin; faults
changes with time on the Washita Valley sys- with normal senseof displacement in those fields
tem have already been described. The trend to accommodate the thick sedimentation in the gap.
Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1027

The southern end of the Kirby fault had con- angle reverse fault that strikes 45 degrees more
nected through to the main strand of the Criner northerly off of the southeast end of the Caddo
trend by late Pennsylvanian,but as in the situ- anticline to connect with the Arbuckle uplift-
ation farther to the southeast, the basin side of boundingfault (Figure 6). The basinas a whole
the fault was uplifted. The northwestern exten- collected a thick sedimentary section throughout
sionof the depositionaltrough lieson the uplifted the Pennsylvanian, so it is not surprising that
side of the Kirby fault within the Ardmore Basin. other features connecting the basin floor to the
The Healdton fault system apparently continued margins have escaped detection. The clear im-
its strike-slip activity, as did the faults connect- pression, however, is that the flexures of early
ing the Graham, Fox, and Milroy to Velma struc- Pennsylvanian time evolved into a number of
tures, thus isolatinga subbasinwest of the Kirby distinct rhombohedral blocks by late Pennsylva-
fault. The Stephens County reversefault system nian.
carried on as in earlier Pennsylvanian time, but
the late Pennsylvanian displacement may have TRANSPRESSION
been somewhat smaller than in the Wichitan
events.
The geometric classification of the Ardmore
Basin's structures really only establishesthe loci
Floor of the Basin of strike-slip deformation. The kinematic rela-
tionships between the fault systems are neces-
The evolution of structural activity within sary to evaluate whether transpression occurred
the Basin is slightly different from that of the on any of the strike-slip strands.
margins. As shown in Figure 8, the earliest doc- McCoss[1986]has describeda construction
umented motion on the Madill-Aylesworth trend that can be used to formalize the observations in
appears to be first Wichitan in age, with sub- this study and to test for kinematic compatibility
dued activity in the second Wichitan. Several between intersecting fault systems. In building
gentle swells had developed by early Pennsylva- on the mathematical development of Sanderson
nian time elsewhere on the basin floor, as evi- and Marchini [1984], the constructionpredicts
denced by thinning in the lower Pennsylvanian the horizontal component of slip on established
stratigraphic units. But by the Arbuckle phase faults from incremental strain data. In its two-
of deformation (Figure 6) a number of block dimensionalapplication(Figure 9) the method
boundaries with scattered subbasins of accentu- involves centering a unit circle on the intersec-
ated deposition had appeared. The Caddo and tion of a fault trace and its normal. The max-
Woodford anticlines in particular developed over imum (M) and minimum(m) axesof the strain
what are interpreted here as northwest trend- ellipse for the plane of view are then constructed
ing strands of left slip, largely on the basis of from an intersection of the normal with the unit
their sigmoidal geometry and internal fracture circle. The horizontal component of slip on the
patterns[Nance,1960]. The Madill-Aylesworth fault is determined by connecting the intersec-
system was clearly rejuvenated. tions of the strain axes and the unit circle with a
The one clear connection to the basin- vector through the center of the circle. Reference
bounding structures is an easterly vergent high is madeto McCoss'[1986]paperfor moredetails

strain map bloc k construct ion

UNDEFORMED

overhang
-• •!•
DEFORMED

Fig. 9. Sketchof McCoss'I1986]construction, showingthe relationshipbetweenstrain

and the horizontalcomponentof displacement inducedon a preexistingfault (f). Displace-
ment vector d•, is obtainedby superimposition of the maximum (M) and minimum (m)
strain axeson the end of the fault normal (f•) in the constructionand connectingtheir
intersections with the unit circle by a vector through the center of the circle. See text for
more description.
1028 Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

and for the derivation of the construction. Appli- the Arbuckle-aged structures becauseof the nar-
cation to the structures of the Ardmore Basin is row window within which they developedand be-
shown in Figures 10 and 11, with the symbolism cause their geometry is clearer than older Penn-
as noted in the captions. sylvanianstructures. 2. Horizontal displacement
The purpose of this exercise is to test vectors derived in the construction, which tech-
for displacementcompatibility between adjacent nically are instantaneous vectors, represent the
strands of the fault system and thereby to de- direction of the average horizontal component of
duce components of transpression. The following finite displacementfor their respectivefaults. In-
assumptions are made: 1. The structures used sofar as the scale of the application of the tech-
in the analysis are synchronous, so that the ne- nique is comparable to the scale of the basin
cessity that they be kinematically compatible is as a whole, and that both are large relative to
sensible. The technique has been applied only to the displacementsthemselvesand any associated

WV

•O

<10 ø 10-• ;•0-60ø 60-80 ø >80 ø

APPARENT CONVERGENCE ANGLE

Fig. 10. Displacement

determinations
by the methodof McCoss[1986]for fault systems
bounding the margins of the Ardmore Basin. For each of the six locations the observed
style,the deducedorientationof the axesof the strain ellipse(m for short axis,M for long
axis), and the unit circleare given. Directionsof m and M shownas dashedlinesin each
circle, while the trace of the fault and its normal are shown by solid lines. Displacement
vectors denoted by dLC symbolism,with the subscriptkeyed to fault symbol. Convergence
angle defined as the angle between the displacementvector and the trace of the fault; barbs
are drawn on upthrown block for high convergences,solid barbs on upthrown block of
dominantly strike-slip boundary. Normal faults along Criner Hills trend shown with simple
ticks. CH, Criner Hills; O, Overbrook; K, Kirby; H, Healdton; ER, Eola-Robberson;and
WV, Washita Valley.
Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1029

large component of dip-slip displacementwith a

~M•,•W slight right-lateral component, again consistent
with the style.
The southwesterly trending normal faults in
the Lone Grove area confirm that the Eola-
Robberson strain ellipse is appropriate for the
Criner Hills system. The construction for the
Criner Hills (CH) trend southeastof the exten-
sional features is compatible with the structural
style, as is also the case for the Overbrook horst
(O). On the northernmarginof the basinthe left-
IdA
lateral displacementwith a consistentnorth-side-
up sense of uplift is predicted for the Washira
Valley (WV) fault system,as is observed.
Within the Basin, structural elements that
show an apparently pure strike-slip geometry
are oriented differently from the Eola-Robberson
trend (Figure 6). Madill-Aylesworth, Caddo,
Fig. 11. Displacement determinations for fault and Woodford all strike to the northwest, more
systemson the floor of the Ardmore Basin. MA, or lessparallel to the Washita Valley trend. The
Madill-Aylesworth; C, Caddo; W, Woodford; high-angle reversefault connectingCaddo to the
SA, Springer structures. Otherwise, symbolism Arbuckle Uplift, and in particular its 4.5ø orien-
as in Fig. 10. tation relative to Caddo, suggest that a differ-
ent strain condition applies within the basin. In
Figure 11 a pure strike-slip displacement field
is assumed for the Type I elements within the
plastic strain, this assumption seems reasonable. basin, and horizontal strain axes are deducedac-
Furthermore, if this assumption is not correct, cordingly. The resultant maximum shortening
the procedure of connecting adjacent structures direction that results is parallel to the displace-
around the basin would invariably fail somewhere ment vector derived for the margins of the basin
along the line. 3. The strain axes at the starting (compareFigures10 and 11). Henceif strike-
point are correct. Again, if this assumption is slip structures within the basin were parallel to
not correct, the likelihood of meeting an incon- planes of maximum shear stress, then the local
sistencyaround the basin is very high. 4. All the maximum principal stresswas parallel to the dis-
principal block boundarieshave been used in the placement field on the margin of the basin. The
construction. implication seemsto be that deformation within
the Ardmore Basin was initiated in viselike fash-
The starting point was selectedin the north-
ion by surrounding deformation, a supposition
western corner of the basin, where the trend of
compatible with the other observation that well-
the Eola-Robberson structures, the single best
organized structures generally did not appear
example of a strike-slip system, intersects the within the basin until well after displacements
southwest dipping reverse faults of southeastern
on the margins attained significant magnitudes.
StephensCountyat an angleof about 45ø (Figure
6). Given the two stylesof thosestructuresand
their angular relationship, a northeast-southwest DISCUSSION
shortening direction was assumed, with the asso-
ciated southeast-northwest maximum extension
direction. The resulting construction is given in It is apparent that the Wichitan through Ar-
Figure 10 with the code letters ER; note that buckle structural evolution of the Ardmore Basin
the displacement direction for ER parallels the involved some significant changesin style as well
trace of the fault system. The correspondingcon- as distribution of deformation. The early phases
struction for the Stephens County reverse faults of deformation(Morrowanto Atokan)weremore
is the trivial case in which the displacement is widely distributed, encompassingthe region from
parallel to the normal to the fault zone, and, well north of the Ardmore Basin south into the
consequently, is not shown. In connecting the Marietta Basin and into Texas. Uplifts along the
Stephens County faults with the Healdton fault fault trends tended to be isolated, for example,
(H), the samestrain axeswere used. The resul- the Criner Uplift and the Arbuckle-Tishomingo
tant displacement at Healdton is predominantly uplifts had not appeared. Strike-slip motion ap-
strike slip, with a small componentof shortening pears to be the dominant mode of deformation.
across the fault, in reasonable agreement with As the deformation progressedduring the Penn-
the localstyle. The result at Kirby (K) givesa sylvanian, into the Desmoinesian, and beyond,
1030 Granath' Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

the margins of the Ardmore Basin were selected {CK), thusconnectingto the northwestinto the
within that broader shear belt to undergo dom- Meetsfault system(M in Figure12). The Meets
inantly transpressional deformation. This two- fault trends on a bearing of roughly 295ø to 300ø,
phase evolution raises three issues: the relation closeto the orientation of the Washira Valley and
of the local history in the Ardmore area to the Criner Hills fault systems. McCoss and Dono-
rest of the Arbuckle-Wichita trend, to the Ances- van [1986]determineda displacement
vectorfor
tral Rocky Mountains and the Ouachita system, Pennsylvanian motion on the Meets that is vir-
and to estimates of the magnitude of strike-slip tually identical to that determined here for the
offset along the Southern Oklahoma Aulacogen. Washita Valley and Criner Hills systems, a vec-
tor direction of 250ø compared to trends of 255ø
and 262ø shown in Figure 10. The location where
Relationships to the Wichita Uplift System that vector was determined is shown at location
The Ardmore Basin connects to the rest of 1 in Figure 12. The age of deformation along the
the Arbuckle-Wichita system at its northwest- Meers is poorly constrained because Pennsylva-
ern corner(Figure12), and hencethe kinematics nian rocks are not locally involved.
of its bounding faults have implications for the The Meers in turn connects to the north-
nature of the Wichita system as a whole. At westinto the MountainView fault system(MV)
that northwestcornerthe WashitaValle•y.(WV at its nortwestern extremity. The Blue Creek
in Figure12) and the Reagan-MillCreek(R) sys- Canyon, Apache, and Rush Springs fault sys-
tems join with the high-angle reverse faults in tems, which parallel the Carter-Knox in Figure
StephensCounty and with the Carter-Knox fault 12, branch off of the Meers also to connect into

AN 2;

1SeW
I
,15•N
•m

3
.o

100 * W

i WV, •.,3 om
-r Z

A '" '"
0 •

Fig. 12. Regionalsettingof the Ardmore Basin (A) in the south central midcontinent.
Major thick-skinnedfault systems(openbarbs) of Pennsylvanianagein front of the thin-
skinnedOuachitafold and thrust front (solidbarbs). Locationsof overhangsare shown
by the locations of barbs. Fault systemsare CH, Criner Hills; WV, Washira Valley; R,
=Reagan/Mill Creek;CK, Carter-Knox;M, Meers,and MV, MountainView. Location1,
displacementdeterminationfor Meetsfault by McCossand Donovan[1986]. Location2,
COCORPprofilesfromBreweret al. [1983].Location3, Waynefault system,asdescribed
by Axtmann [1983]. Displacement diagramderivedfor foldsin front of MV in southern
AnadarkoBasin(AN), seeFig. 10 for notation. Map drawnafter Breweret al. [1983,
Figure2] and Figure6 of this paper.
Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1031

the Mountain View. The Mountain View fault is nian displacementwas similar to the other strike-
the main fault system bordering the front of the slip systemsin the area, for example, the Washita
Wichita Mountains uplift and separating it from Valley, and that by late Pennsylvanian time,
the Anadarko Basin. COCORP deep reflection transpressional motion of the Ardmore Basin-
profiles(locations2 in Figure 12) of the Moun- Bounding faults fed into the Mountain View sys-
tain View fault surface suggest it consistently tem.
dips 3oø to 4oø to the southwest to perhaps 25
km depth [Breweret al., 1983]. Hencedisplace- Regional Tectonics
ment on faults around and to the north of the
Ardmore Basin are transferred into the Moun-
Pennsylvanian intraplate deformation along
tain View system. The Mountain View, then, the Southern Oklahoma Aulacogen and more
despite being a crustal scale structure with a re-
broadly, throughout the Ancestral Rockies is
verse senseof offset in two dimensions, must have
commonly linked to the collision between Africa-
absorbed at least some transcurrent slip.
South America and the southern margin of the
A group of folds in the southern part of the North Americancraton [e.g.,Kluth and Coney,
AnadarkoBasin(Figure12) alsosuggestthat the 1981; Budnick, 1986]. Although it is difficult
Mountain View has a transpressional component to pinpoint the beginning of the collision in
of displacement. The folds trend obliquely to time, the first effects appear in the Mississip-
Mountain View system. Industrial seismic reflec- pian record in the southern Appalachians in the
tion profilesshowthat they overliefaults that cut form of the Alleghanin oroõeny and progres-
lower Paleozoic rocks, and, consequently, they sively spread westward along the margin dur-
can be used as strain indicators in a similar way ing the Pennsylvanian in the form of the Oua-
to faults around the Ardmore Basin. If shorten-
chita and Marathon orogenies[Graham et al.,
ing normal to their traces is presumed, then dis- 1975, 1976]. Convergencealong the Ouachita
placementon a bearingof 230ø is obtained(Fig- segment is usually thought to have occurred via
ure 12), in reasonable
agreementwith all the pre- consumption of the North American plate at a
vious results.
south dippingsubductionzone [Wickhamet al.,
The age of activity on the Mountain View 1976; Lillie et at., 1983],with collisionbetween
system is less constrained by syntectonic sedi- North American continental crust and the accre-
ments than is the case in the Ardmore Basin. tionary prism tracking the diachronousorogeny.
In general, the Atokan to Desmoinesian section By Desmoinesian
time (mid Pennsylvanian),clo-
is an unroofing section composed of locally de- sure had reached and passed southeastern Okla-
rived detritus from the lower Paleozoic carbon- homa, as the Ouachita thrust belt was emplaced
ate rocks, overlain by detritus from the crys- on the edgeof the craton[Sutherland,
1988].
talline basement (the so-calledcarbonate and The record of deformation within the North
granitewashes).The wholePennsylvanian sec- American craton suggeststhat early Pennsylva-
tion is cut by the Mountain View fault system, nian activity was centered in the Southern Okla-
as are youngerrocks[e.g.,Takken,1967]. Con- homaAulacogen,the midcontinent(Nemahaand
sequently, the beginning of uplift on the Moun- Central Kansasuplifts), and the central Rocky
tain View is constrained to the Wichitan events, Mountain area. By mid-Pennsylvanian time, ac-
but significant displacement accumulated well tivity had spread to the southern Rocky Moun-
into middle and possibly even late Pennsylvanian tains as well [e.g., Kluth and Coney,1981, Fig-
time.
ure 2]. That mid-Pennsylvanian juncturein time
The eastern end of the Mountain View sys- also marks the style shift in the Ardmore kine-
tem furnishes insight into its displacement his- matic evolution. Hence it is tempting to equate
tory. Axtmann[1983]documented
the strike-slip the Wichitan events (Morrowan to Atokan) to
characteristics of the Mountain View's eastern the influence of the impending collision with
extension,the Wayne fault (location 3 in Fig- the accretionary prism, and the Arbuckle events
ure 12), but also noted that the magnitudeof (Desmoinesianand younger)to foreland defor-
both horizontal and vertical displacement on it mation, as the Ouachita thrust wedge was em-
is far less than that of the Mountain View. He placed.
suggests that about 1.6 km of left slip occurred The Ardmore-Arbuckle-Tishomingo area lies
on the eastern extremities of the Wayne and at the headof Thomas'[1983,Figure2] Ouachita
that the amount doubles to the west just before embayment, one of the larger bights along the
the Carter-Knox system feeds into the Mountain southern margin of the North American craton.
View (near point 3 in Figure 12). The ageof dis- It is precisely at that point, the mouth of the
placement on the Wayne fault is largely Atokan Southern Oklahoma Aulacogen, that the Oua-
to Morrowan (Wichitan events), with little or chita thrust belt makes a 90ø bend from its west-
no displacement accumulating subsequently. It erly trend in Arkansas to southerly in the sub-
would appear therefore that the early Pennsylva- surface in Texas, to form the Ouachita salient of
1032 Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

the thrust belt (Figure12) [Thomas,1983,Fig- hence also limiting the Stephens County reverse
ure 1]. Largelythen, the stylechangein the Ard- fault motion in late Pennsylvanian to something
more Basin may reflect a change in the loading of the same size. Seismic lines across those faults
geometry along the margin of the craton as the in Stephens County suggestthat the bulk of the
Ouachita fold belt wrapped around the embay- motion was early, as these estimates also do.
ment. The amount of displacement on the north-
Late Pennsylvanian intraplate deformation ern side of the Basin is more elusive to estimate.
was subdued in the midcontinent, with most ac- Transpressionappears to be a late Pennsylvanian
tivity concentrated to the west and southwest of feature of the northern side, so that the magni-
Oklahoma in front of the Marathon thrust belt tudes of dip-slip and strike-slip componentsare
[Kluth and Coney,1981, Figure 2]. The later probably comparable for the Arbuckle phase of
part of the Arbuckle phase of deformation in the deformation.
Ardmore Basin, which lasted at least until Virgil But the possibility is open that larger hor-
time (Figure3), however,is a notableexception. izontal offsets occurred earlier. The Washita
That protracted deformation may relate to the Valley-Eola-Robberson system is a throughgo-
Ardmore's position at the head of the salient, ing system in the sense that it is not made
which is also where the Arkoma and Fort Worth up of distinct reverse and normal faults linked
forelandbasinsmeet (Figure 11). Both of those along its length. Compare, for example, the
basins are asymmetric flexural basins, apparently Carter-Knox/Eola-Robberson
relationship
to the
generated by the load associated with the en- relationship between Healdton and the Stephens
croachment of the fold and thrust belt onto the
County faults in Figure 6: the Carter-Knox is
craton. Hence the continuation of deformation in
a splay off the strike-slip system, whereas the
the Ardmore Basin area well into the late Penn-
Stephens County fault terminates the Healdton
sylvanJan may relate more to the interference of fault. Hence early Pennsylvanian displacement
the flexural basins at the corner of the Ouachita on the Washita Valley could be transmitted west
salient than to far-field effectsof the activity clos- by way of the Meersfault (Figure12). Displace-
ing the Marathon sector of the orogenic belt, as ments have been variously estimated between 30
othershave suggested[e.g., Kluth and Coney, and 120 km [Tanner,1967; Carter, 1979;Bud-
1981]. Any structuresoccupyingthe juncture nick, 1986]on the basisof jogs in stratigraphic
of the two basins presumably would accommo- facies patterns. Regardless of the danger that
date the abrupt reorientation in trend of the flex- recurrent activity on old faults could have influ-
ure from east-west to north-south as it sweeped enced depositional patterns and led to apparent
around the corner of the Ouachita salient. offsets in facies distribution, those estimates are
the only ones currently available.
Magnitudes
of Strike-Slip
Displacement
The paleotectonicmaps (Figures6 and 8) CONCLUSIONS
show rather minor changes with time in the tec-
tonic style along the southern boundary of the There are three classically recognized events
Ardmore Basin. The strike-slip components of within the Pennsylvanian deformation of the
the fault system are punctuated by transpressive, SouthernOklahomaAulacogen[vander Gracht,
reverse, and normal segmentsbetween the Criner 1931; Ham and Wilson, 1967]: the first and
Hills and the Stephens County structures. As- second Wichitan orogenies and the Arbuckle
sumingthe faults boundrigid blocks(as appears orogeny. Their recognition was based on the
is justified by the coherent, undeformed stratig- region-wide unconformities that punctuate an
raphybetweenfault systems),then the amount otherwise more subtly complicated Pennsylva-
of strike-slip displacementmust be compensated nian stratigraphy. The synthesis presented in
by shortening in adjacent elements. For exam- this paper details the evolution of those three
ple, the Stephens County reverse faults limit events, from broad regional shear to strong trans-
the cummulative(i.e., Wichitan plus Arbuckle) pression on selected fault systems within the
amount of lateral motion on the Healdton and older aulacogen. Atokan to Morrowan deforma-
Kirby systems to the amount of shortening in- tion involved a number of left-slip shear zones af-
volved in the overhang on the reverse faults, fecting both the Marietta and Ardmore Basins,
which is of the order of 10 to 15 km. as well as areas to the north and west. The
The late Pennsylvanian component of that basins at that stage were broader and poorly de-
total displacement can be estimated from the fined insofar as the uplifts along the presentlyde-
overhang on the Overbrook Horst, which limits fined basins had not taken shape. By Desmoine-
Arbuckle strike-slip displacement on the Criner sian time the form of the Ardmore Basin was
Hills front to something less than 5 km. Simi- established with commencement of uplift on its
larly, opening of the Brock subbasin must limit northern margin (the Tishomingoand Arbuckle
displacementto its northwest to a few kilometers, uplifts) as well as rejuvenationof its southern
Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1033

margin (the Criner uplift). By Virgil time (late Acknowledgements. I would like to thank
Pennsylvanian)the last of the large conglomer- exploration staff and management of Conoco's
ate sheets has been emplaced along the northern Oklahoma City Division office in 1982 and 1983
side of the Basin. Deformation on the floor of for their complete cooperation in assemblingthe
the Basin became organized between Desmoines data that led to this paper, and in particular
and Virgil time, essentially breaking the Ard- Dorothy Z. Oehler who worked in tandem with
more Basin up into a number of rhombohedral- me on the petroleum geology of the region. Sev-
shaped subbasins. The Marietta Basin escaped eral colleagues outside Conoco helped in crys-
significant middle to late Pennsylvanian defor- tallizing my thoughts, notably Nowell Dono-
mation. van, Angus McCoss, and Dave Sanderson. The
Kinematic analysis of the middle to late text benefitted greatly from the conscientious-
Pennsylvanian deformation suggests that it was ness of Kevin Burke and two anonymous review-
strongly transpressional. Oblique slip on the ers. Conoco Incorporated graciously has allowed
Washita Valley and Criner Uplift fault systems release of this paper.
were connected to each other by way of pure
strike-slip and pure reverse slip fault segments.
The displacement on the bounding fault systems REFERENCES
of the Ardmore Basin fed into other transpres-
sional faults to the west, notably the Meers and Atkinson, W.E., A subsurfacestudy of the South
Blue Creek Canyon systems, and eventually into Palacine Oil Field, Stephens County, Okla-
the Wichita Mountain front fault systems. Hence homa, Shale Shaker Digest, 1, 114-126, 1952.
in the later half of the Pennsylvanian Period it Atkinson, W.E., South Palacine Field, Stephens
appears that deformation within the aulacogen County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Geology of
involved crustal scale transpression. Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 2, pp. 187-197,
The earlier phases of deformation in south- American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
ern Oklahoma correlate to the earlier phases of gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1959.
the Ancestral Rocky Mountain activity in the
Axtmann, T. C., Structural mechanisms and
central Rocky Mountain area and to activity
oil accumulation along the Mountain View-
in the midcontinent on the central Kansas up-
Wayne fault, south-central Oklahoma, I, Shale
lift and the NemahaRidge [Kluth and Coney, Shaker, 34, 1-21, 1983.
1981]. Collisionwith Africa and SouthAmerica
along the southern margin of the North Amer- Beasley, R.L., Santa Fe Field, in Petroleum Ge-
ican plate had not quite reached the western ology of Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp. 234-
part of the Ouachitasalient[Thomas,1983]. By 243, American Association of Petroleum Ge-
mid-Pennsylvanian time (Desmoinesian)the su- ologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956.
ture had passed the mouth of the Southern Ok- Billingsley, H.R., Sholom-Alechem Field, in
lahoma Aulacogen and closure was being com- Petroleum Geology of Southern Oklahoma,
pleted along the southern Texas segment, with Vol. 1, pp. 294-310, American Association
spreading of intraplate deformation to the south- of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa. Okla., 1956.
ern Rockies. By late Pennsylvanian only the Brewer, J.A., R. Good, J.E. Oliver, L.D. Brown,
aulacogen was undergoing deformation in the and S. Kaufman, COCORP profiling across
midcontinent region. On a regional level it is the Southern Oklahoma aulacogen: over-
possible to speculate that specific events within thrusting of the Wichita Mountains and com-
the Ardmore Basin correlate to events along the pression within the Anadarko Basin, Geology,
plate margin. (1) the approachof the impending 11, 109-114, 1983.
collision resulted in the Wichitan events and the
Budnick, R.T., Left-lateral intraplate deforma-
far-field effects in the Ancestral Rockies, what- tion along the Ancestral Rocky Mountains:
ever the ultimate mechanism of stress transmis-
implications for late Paleozoic plate motions,
sionover suchdistanceswas, (2) passageof the Tectonophysics,132, 195-214, 1986.
suture and the resulting changein the loading ge-
ometry of the Ouachita embayment relate to the Burke, K.A.P., Aulacogens and continental
change in style and contraction of deformation breakup, Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci., 5,
371-396, 1977.
during the early Arbuckle, and finally, (3) the
prolonged deformation localized in the Aulaco- Burke, K.A.P., and J.F. Dewey, Plume-generated
gen (until Virgil time) recordsadjustmentto an triple junctions' Key indicators in applying
arcuate flexural basin at the apex of the Ouachita plate tectonics to old rocks, J. Geol., 81, 406-
embayment, which had by that time been filled 433, 1973.
with the Ouachita salient of the thrust belt. Ev- Burton, G.E., Hewitt Oil Field, Carter County,
idently, foreland deformational style is quite sen- Oklahoma, in Structure of Typical American
sitive to, and potentially can record major events Oil Fields, pp. 290-299, American Association
along the plate margin. of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1929.
1034 Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

Carter, D.W., A study of strike-slip movement Oklahoma, Oklahoma Geol. Survey Guide 17,
along the Washira Valley Fault, Arbuckle 52 pp., Oklahoma Geological Survey, Norman,
Mountains, Oklahoma, Shale Shaker, 30, 79- Okla., 1969.
106, 1979. Ham, W.E., and J.L. Wilson, Paleozoic
Cram, I.E., Cumberland Oil Field, Bryan and epeirogeny and orogeny in the central United
Marshall Counties, Oklahoma, in Structure of States, Am. J. Sci., œ65, 332-407, 1967.
Typical American Oil Fields, Vol. 3, pp. 341- Harding, T.P., Newport-Inglewood trend,
358, American Association of Petroleum Ge- California-An example of wrenching style of
ologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1948. deformation, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull.,
Donovan, R.N., W. Beauchamp, and D. Mc- 57, 96-116, 1967.
Connell, Structure of the Washita Frontal Harding, T.P., Petroleum traps associatedwith
Fault zone (abstract), Geol. Soc. Am. Ab- wrench faults, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull.,
str. Programs, 16, 82, 1984. 58, 1290-1304, 1974.
Dunham, R.J., Pennsylvanian conglomerates, Harding, T.P., Tectonic significanceand hydro-
structure, and orogenic history of the Lake carbon trapping consequencesof sequential
Classen area, Arbuckle Mountains, Okla- folding synchronouswith San Andreas fault-
homa, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., 39, 1-30, ing, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., 60, 365-
1955.
378, 1976.
Gahring, R.R., History and development of Harlton, B.H., West Velma Oil Field, in
Madill Field, Marshall County, Oklahoma, Petroleum Geology of Southern Oklahoma,
in Petroleum Geology of Southern Oklahoma Vol. 1, pp. 221-233, American Association
Vol. 2, pp. 274-281, American Association of of Petroleum Geologists,Tulsa, Okla., 1956.
Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1959.
Harlton, B.H., Tectonic framework of Eola and
Godfrey, J.M., The subsurface geology of Southeast Hoover Oil Fields and the West
the Mannsville-Madill-Aylesworth Anticline, Timbered Hills area, Garvin and Murray
Shale Shaker Digest, œ, 115-132, 1956. Counties, Oklahoma, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.
Graham, S.A., W.R. Dickinson, and R.V. Inger- Bull., •8, 1555-1567, 1964.
soll, Himalayan-Bengal model for fiysch dis- Hellman, J.D., Subsurfacegeology of the Joiner
persal in the Appalachian-Ouachita System, City Field, Carter County, Oklahoma, Shale
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 86, 273-286, 1975. Shaker Digest, 4, 199-214, 1962.
Graham, S.A., R.V. Ingersoll, and W.R. Dick- Hicks, I.C., Geology of Southwest Velma Field,
inson, Common provenance for lithic grains Stephens County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum
in Carboniferous sandstones from Ouachita
Geologyof Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp.
Mountains and Black Warrior Basin, J. Sedi- 244-259, American Association of Petroleum
ment. Petrol., •6, 620-632, 1976. Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956.
Granath, J.W. and W.A. Morgan, Discussion: Islam, Q., and K.C. Nielsen, Detailed fault his-
Gravity slide thrusting and folded folds in tory in the east and central portions of the
western Arbuckle Mountains and vicinity, Arbuckle Mountains, Oklahoma (abstract),
Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., 69, 480-482, Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. Programs, 16, 87,
1985. 1984.
Haas, E.A., Structural analysis of a portion of Jacobsen, M.I., Ravia Nappe, Bryan County,
the Reagan fault zone, Murray County, Okla- Oklahoma' A gravity slide block off the
homa, Shale Shaker, 31, 93-105, 1981. TishomingoUplift (abstract), Am. Assoc.
Hale, G.C., Southwest Ardmore Field, in Pet. Geol. Bull., 67, 1325, 1983.
Petroleum Geology of Southern Oklahoma, Jones, F.B., East Durant Field, Bryan County,
Vol. 2, pp. 262-273, American Association Oklahoma, in Natural Gases of North Amer-
of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1959. ica, Mere. 9, Vol. 2. pp. 1467-1475,
Ham, W. E., Geology and petrology of the Ar- American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
buckle Limestone in the southern Arbuckle gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1968.
Mountains, Ph.D. dissertation, Yale Univ., Kluth, C.F., and P.J. Coney, Plate tectonics of
New Haven, Conn., 1950. the Ancestral Rocky Mountains, Geology, 9,
Ham., W.E., Collings Ranch Conglomerate, 10-15, 1981.
late Pennsylvanian, in the southern Arbuckle Latham, J.W., Petroleum geology of the Ar-
Mountains, Oklahoma, Am. Assoc. Pet. buckle Group, Healdton Field, Carter County,
Geol. Bull., 38, 2035-2045, 1954. Oklahoma, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., 5œ,
Ham, W.E., Part 1: Regional Geology, in Re- 3-20, 1968a.
gional Geology of the Arbuckle Mountains, Latham, J.W., Petroleum geology of Healdton
Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland 1035

Field, Carter County, Oklahoma, in Geology Oil Fields, Stephens and Grady Counties, Ok-
of Giant Petroleum Fields, Mere. 14, pp. 255- lahoma, Shale Shaker, d, 4-29, 1953.
276, American Association of Petroleum Ge- Powers, S., Crinerville Oil Field, Carter County,
ologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1968b. Oklahoma, in Structure of Typical American
Lillie, R.J., K.D. Nelson, B. DeVoogd, J.A. Oil Fields, Vol. 1, pp. 192-210, American
Brewer, J.E. Oliver, L.D. Brown, S. Kaufman, Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa,
and G.W. Viele, Crustal structure of Ouachita Okla., 1929.
Mountains, Arkansas: A model based on in- Reedy, H.J., Carter-Knox Gas Field, Oklahoma,
tegration of COCORP reflection profiles and in Natural Gases of North America, Mere. 9,
regional geophysicaldata, Am. Assoc. Pet. Vol. 2, pp. 1476-1491, American Association
Geol. Bull., 67, 907-931, 1983. of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1968.
McCoss, A.M., Simple constructions for defor- Reedy, H.J., and H.A. Sykes, Carter-Knox Oil
mation in transpressive/transtensionzones, Field, Grady and Stephens Counties, Okla-
J. Struct. Geol., 8, 715-718, 1986. homa, in Petroleum Geology of Southern Ok-
McCoss, A.M., and R.N. Donovan, Application lahoma, Vol. 2, pp. 198-219, American Asso-
of a construction for determining deformation ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla.,
in zones of transpressionto the Slick Hills in 1959.
southern Oklahoma, Guideb. 24, pp. 40-44, Riley, L.R., Recent Sycamore development in
Oklahoma Geological Survey, Norman, Okla., Stephens County, Oklahoma, Shale Shaker
1986. Digest, 8, 187-193, 1974.
McGookey, D.A., and R.T. Budnick, Tectonic Rutledge, R.B., The Velma Oil Field, Stephens
history and influence on sedimentation of County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Geology of
rhomb horsts and grabens associated with the Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp. 260-81,
Amarillo Uplift, TexasPanhandle(abstract), American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., 67, 511, 1983. gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956.
McLean, R., and D.W. Stearns, Fault analysis Sanderson. D.J., and W.R.D. Marchini, Trans-
in Wichita Mountains(abstract),Am. Assoc. pression, J. $truct. Geol., 6, 449-458, 1984.
Pet. Geol. Bull., 67, 511-512, 1983. Schweers, F.P., Milroy Field, Stephens and
Mullen, W.L., The Hewitt Oil Field of Carter Carter Counties, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Ge-
County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Geology of ology of Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 2, pp. 220-
Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp. 154-161, 226, American Association of Petroleum Ge-
American Association of Petroleum Geolo- ologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1959.
gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956. Shatski, N.S., Structural correlations of plat-
Nance, R.L., Caddo Oil Field, Carter County, forms and geosynclinal folded regions, Tr.
Oklahoma, Shale Shaker Digest, 5, 258-269, Geol. Inst. Akad. Nauk Gruz SSR, Ged. Ser.,
1960. 5, 37-56, 1947.
Neustadt, W., West Hewitt Field, Carter Shaw, R.F., A subsurface study of the post-
County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Geology of Morrowan series of the Pennsylvanian Sys-
Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp. 162-173, tem of T2S, R3W, Carter County, Oklahoma,
American Association of Petroleum Geolo- Shale Shaker Digest, 1, 343-346, 1955.
gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956. Sutherland, P.K., Late Mississippian and Penn-
Norville, G.C., North Alma Field, Carter sylvanian depositional history in the Arkoma
County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Geology of Basin area, Oklahoma and Arkansas, Geol.
Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp. 282-293, $oc. Am. Bull., 100, 1787-1802, 1988.
American Association of Petroleum Geolo- Sylvester, A.G., and R.R. Smith, Tectonic trans-
gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956. pression and basement-controlled deforma-
Parker, E.C., Camp Field, Carter County, Okla- tion in San Andreas fault zone, Salton trough,
homa, in Petroleum Geology of Southern Ok- California, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., 60,
lahoma, Vol. 1, pp. 174-185, American Asso- 2081-2102, 1976.
ciation of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., Takken, S., Subsurface geology of the North
1956. Gotebo area, Oklahoma, Shale Shaker, 18,
Parker, E.C., Structure and lithology of the 330-338, 1967.
Springer in Southeast Velma-Camp Area, in Tanner, J.H., Wrench fault movements along
Petroleum Geology of Southern Oklahoma, Washita Valley fault, Arbuckle Mountain
Vol. 2, pp. 227-248, American Association area, Oklahoma, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.
of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1959. Bull., 51, 126-134, 1967.
Pate, J.H., Subsurface geology of Carter-Knox Tanner, W.F., Tectonic patterns in the
1036 Granath: Ardmore Basin in the Ouachita Foreland

Appalachian- Ouachita-Oklahoma mountain Westheimer, J.M., and F.B. Schweers,Southwest

complex, Shale Shaker, 1,•, 2-6, 1963. Lone Grove Field, Carter County, Oklahoma,
Tchalenko, J.S., and N.N. Ambraseys, Structural in Petroleum Geologyof Southern Oklahoma,
analysisof the Dasht-e Bayaz (Iran) earth- Vol. 1, pp. 144-153, American Association of
quake fractures. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 81, Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956.
41-60, 1970. Wickham, J., D. Roeder, and G. Briggs, Plate
Thomas, W.A., Continental margins, orogenic tectonic models for the Ouachita foldbelt, Ge-
belts, and intracratonic structures, Geolo9y, ology, •, 173-176, 1976.
11, 270-272, 1983. Wilcox, R.E., T.P. Harding, and D.R. Seely, Ba-
sic wrench tectonics, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.
Tomlinson, C.W., Odd structures of southern Bull., 57, 74-96, 1973.
Oklahoma, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull.,
$6, 1820-1840, 1952. Williams, V.L., Subsurface geology of the
Bayou Field, Carter County, Oklahoma, Shale
Tomlinson, C.W., and W. McBee, Pennsylva- Shaker Digest, 1, 282-298, 1954.
nian sediments and orogenies of the Ard-
more District, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Ge- Wiltse, E.W., Surface and subsurface study of
olo9y of Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 2, pp. 3- the S.W. Davis Oil Field, Sections 11 and
52, American Association of Petroleum Geol- 14, TIS, RIE, Murray County, Oklahoma: 1,
ogists, Tulsa, Okla., 1959. Shale Shaker, 29, 82-86, 1979a.
Wiltse, E.W., Surface and subsurface study of
van der Gracht, W.A.J.M., Permo-Carboniferous the S.W. Davis Oil Field, Sections 11 and
orogeny in south-central United States, Am. 14, TIS, RIE, Murray County, Oklahoma: 2,
Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., 15, 991-1057, 1931. Shale Shaker, 29, 100-110, 1979b.
Walker, K.F., North Wildcat Jim Field, Carter Womack, J.L., Aylesworth Field, in Petroleum
County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Geolo9y of Geology of Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp.
Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 1, pp. 207-220, 373-391, American Association of Petroleum
American Association of Petroleum Geolo-
Geologists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956.
gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1956.
Walker, K.F., West Brock Oil Field, Carter
County, Oklahoma, in Petroleum Geolo9y of J.W. Granath, Worldwide Exploration Services,
Southern Oklahoma, Vol. 2, pp. 249-261, Conoco Incorporated, P.O. Box 1267, Ponca
American Association of Petroleum Geolo- City, OK 74603
gists, Tulsa, Okla., 1959.
Walper, J.L., Basement control in the structural (ReceivedMarch 19, 1987;
evolutionof southernOklahoma(abstract), revised February 8, 1989;
Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull., ,•8, 551, 1964. acceptedMarch 10, 1989.)