High-resolution stratigraphy AUTHORS

and facies architecture Michael D. Fairbanks ~ Apache

Corporation, 2000 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite
100, Houston, Texas 77056-4400; michael.
of the Upper Cretaceous fairbanks@apachecorp.com

(Cenomanian–Turonian) Eagle Michael D. Fairbanks is a petroleum geologist

for Apache Corporation. He graduated from
The University of Texas at Austin in 2012 with an
Ford Group, Central Texas M.S. in geology, and he received his B.S. in
geology from Brigham Young University, Utah,
Michael D. Fairbanks, Stephen C. Ruppel, and in 2010. His interests include sedimentological
Harry Rowe and depositional controls in unconventional
reservoir systems and chemostratigraphy of
source rock intervals.

Stephen C. Ruppel ~ Bureau of Economic

ABSTRACT Geology, The University of Texas at Austin,
Rock-based studies of the Eagle Ford Group of Central Texas University Station, Box X, Austin, Texas
demonstrate that mudrock deposition is more complicated than 78713-8924; stephen.ruppel@beg.utexas.edu
previously supposed. X-ray diffraction, x-ray fluorescence, total Stephen C. Ruppel has over 30 years of
organic carbon (TOC), and log data collected from eight cores and experience in sedimentological and
two outcrops demonstrate that bottom-current reworking and geochemical characterization of carbonate and
planktonic productivity are primary depositional controls, acting mudrock reservoir systems. He holds a Ph.D.
from the University of Tennessee as well as B.S.
independently from eustatic forcing. Central Texas Eagle Ford
and M.S. degrees from the University of Illinois
facies include (1) massive argillaceous mudrock, (2) massive and the University of Florida, respectively. He
foraminiferal calcareous mudrock, (3) laminated calcareous for- has published more than 200 scientific papers
aminiferal lime mudstone, (4) laminated foraminiferal wacke- and reports and is director of the Bureau’s
stone, (5) cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–grainstone, Mudrocks Systems Research Laboratory.
(6) massive bentonitic claystone, and (7) nodular foraminiferal
Harry Rowe ~ Bureau of Economic
packstone–grainstone. High degrees of lateral facies variability, Geology, The University of Texas at Austin,
characterized by pinching and swelling of units, lateral facies University Station, Box X, Austin, Texas
changes, truncations, and locally restricted units, are observed 78713-8924; harry.rowe@beg.utexas.edu
even at small lateral scales (50 ft [15 m]). At 10 mi (16 km) and Harry Rowe is a geologist at the Bureau of
greater lateral spacings, core and geochemical data signifi- Economic Geology, Austin, Texas. His main
cantly underestimate intraformational facies variability. Ap- interest is in developing chemostratigraphic
proximately 73% of units can be successfully correlated across a records of paleoceanographic change.
distance of 500 ft (152 m), 35% are traceable across 1 mi
(1.6 km), and only 16% of beds are correlative across 10 mi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
(16 km). Geochemical proxies (enrichment in molybdenum
and other trace elements) indicate that maximum anoxia oc- This paper comprises parts of the thesis of
Michael D. Fairbanks at The University of
curred within the Bouldin Member despite being composed of
Texas at Austin, under the direction of
the most calcareous and high-energy facies. Comparison of Stephen C. Ruppel and William L. Fisher.
total gamma ray (GR) logs to computed GR logs is requisite, Funding for this project came from the
because GR alone may provide misleading determination of industry members of the Mudrock Systems
Research Laboratory Consortium at the
Bureau of Economic Geology. Industry
Copyright ©2016. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved. members include Anadarko, Apache, BP,
Manuscript received October 8, 2014; provisional acceptance January 7, 2015; revised manuscript received Chesapeake, Chevron, Cima, Cimarex,
August 10, 2015; final acceptance December 7, 2015. ConocoPhilips, Cypress, Devon, Encana, EOG,
DOI:10.1306/12071514187

AAPG Bulletin, v. 100, no. 3 (March 2016), pp. 379–403 379

 EXCO, Husky, Marathon, Pangaea, Penn
Virginia, Penn West, Pioneer, Shell, StatOil,
Texas American Resources, The
Unconventionals, US EnerCorp, Valence, and
YPF. The Jackson School of Geosciences and
the Bureau of Economic Geology provided
the opportunity, resources, and facilities for
the study. Thanks go to Timothy Kearns, Brett
Huffman, Robert Nikirk, and Jessica Buckles
for their assistance in acquisition and analysis
of x-ray fluorescence data while at The
University of Texas at Arlington, to Necip
Guven of The University of Texas at San
Antonio, and to Henry Francis of the
Kentucky Geological Survey, Lexington, for
integrated analysis of x-ray diffraction data.
Thanks also go to Ryan Harbor, who laid the
foundation, and Greg Frébourg and Bob
Loucks, whose continual insights contributed
to the progression of this work.
380 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture
facies, TOC content, depositional environment, and sequence
stratigraphic implications.
INTRODUCTION
The Upper Cretaceous Eagle Ford Group has long been recog-
nized as an important source rock for productive reservoirs
throughout Texas. Heightened industry focus on the Eagle Ford is
a result of recent discoveries of producible unconventional pe-
troleum resources in this emerging play. However, little has been
published on the facies and facies heterogeneities within this
mixed-carbonate–clastic mudrock system. A rock-based study is
fundamental to understanding the controls, types, and scales of
inherent heterogeneities, which have implications for enhanced
comprehension of the Eagle Ford Group and other mixed-
carbonate–clastic mudrock depositional systems worldwide.
This study uses a unique data set of densely distributed cores
to constrain the controls on inherent facies heterogeneities and
variabilities, which helps to answer the following questions
regarding mudrock systems: What is the continuity of units
expressed by wireline log response? What causes variable
production response, and how can production be optimized
across large play areas? What controls the distribution of res-
ervoir properties?
The primary objectives of this study are to (1) define Eagle
Ford lithofacies present in the Austin, Texas, area; (2) determine
lithofacies continuity on various scales, along with the processes
that control intraformational heterogeneities; (3) explore the ef-
fectiveness of elemental abundance data in identifying lithological
variations within the Eagle Ford system; (4) use geochemical data
to refine lithofacies interpretations; and (5) evaluate the applic-
ability of total gamma ray (GR) logs in defining facies and rock
properties.
The eight cores and two outcrops of this rare data set span a
nearly 11 mi (18 km) transect, with seven of the cores located
within a 2 mi (3 km) area, providing a uniquely high-resolution
perspective for mudrock stratigraphy and facies continuity
(Figure 1). Energy-dispersive x-ray fluorescence (XRF), x-ray
diffraction (XRD), Rock-Eval total organic carbon (TOC), and
thin-section synthesis further enhance this study.
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The southwesternmost expression of the Grenville orogeny is the
1.15-1 Ga Llano uplift in Central Texas, resulting in vast ex-
posures of deformed crystalline basement, consisting of gneisses,
schists, and metavolcanic rocks (Culotta et al., 1992). An extension
Figure 1. Location map of the study area showing cores and outcrops in the Austin, Texas, area and cores used for regional correlation.
The Eagle Ford outcrop belt spans the Texas–Mexico border, passes through the study area, and continues across the Texas–Oklahoma
border and into Arkansas. Eagle Ford outcrop belt adapted from Barnes (1992). 204 = BT-204; 221 = BT-221 core; 222 = BT-222-PTPZ core;
301 = BO-301-PTPZ core; 302 = BO-302-PT core; 500 = BI-500-PT core; 514 = BI-514-PTPZ core; ACC = ACC 1 core; Blumberg = J. W.
Blumberg 1-B core; Brechtel = W. Brechtel 1 core; Hendershot = C. J. Hendershot 1 core; Orts = H. P. Orts 2 core; Schauer = F. T.
Schauer et al. 1 core; SH = state highway; St = street.

Fairbanks et al. 381

Figure 2. Paleogeographic map of Texas at the Cenomanian–Turonian time boundary. The study area lies on the northeastern flank of
the San Marcos arch, which separates the Maverick Basin from the East Texas Basin. The Sligo and Stuart City shelf margins form a
physiographic break toward the downdip extent of the Eagle Ford. Modified from Ruppel et al. (2012).

of the uplift, the San Marcos arch, trends southeast–
northwest (Dravis, 1980; Young, 1986) and, in the
Early Cretaceous, was a minor topographic high (Tyler
and Ambrose, 1986; Figure 2) where a large carbonate
platform developed (Donovan and Staerker, 2010).
During most of the Cretaceous, the San Marcos arch
was a low-lying subaerial terrain, receiving and sup-
plying little sediment, similar to modern-day Florida
(Young, 1986). The study location in Austin lies on the
northeastern flank of the San Marcos arch (Figure 2).
Thick progradational carbonate packages com-
prising the Comanche shelf developed during the

Figure 3. Generalized cross

section through the Cretaceous
Gulf of Mexico Basin. The Eagle
Ford overlies thick progradational
packages of the Lower Cretaceous
Comanche shelf. Modified from
Ruppel et al. (2012).

382 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture

Table 1. Description of Data Set, Identifying Cores, and Outcrop Locations

Austin Area Cores*

Core Number Name in Study Eagle Ford Depths (ft [m]) County

BT-222-PTPZ 222 51–88 (16–27) Travis

BI-500-PT 500 55–94 (17–29) Travis
BI-514-PTPZ 514 52–89 (16–27) Travis
BT-204 204 80–116 (24–35) Travis
BO-302-PT 302 52–90 (16–27) Travis
BO-301-PTPZ 301 51–88 (16–27) Travis
BT-221 221 52–88 (16–27) Travis
ACC 1 ACC 80–125 (24–38) Travis

Regional Cored Wells

Wells Name in Study Eagle Ford Depths (ft [m]) County API Operator
C. J. Hendershot 1 Hendershot 4734–4774 (1443–1455) Caldwell 4217730218 Tesoro Petroleum
W. Brechtel 1 Brechtel 3280–3315 (1000–1010) Wilson 4249330208 Prairie Producing Co.
H. P. Orts 2 Orts 7684–7757 (2342–2364) Gonzales 4217730203 Transocean Oil, Inc.
F. T. Schauer et al. 1 Schauer 8093–8159 (2467–2487) Gonzales 4217730394 Geological Res Corp.
J. W. Blumberg 1-B Blumberg 4175–4225 (1273–1288) Wilson 4218730532 Prairie Producing Co.
Burkland 1 Burkland 935–977 (285–298) Caldwell 4205534144 Vista Energy Corp.

*Outcrop: West Bouldin Creek, approximate coordinates: N30°1599.88860 and W97°45941.31660; Walnut Creek, approximate coordinates: N30°24928.25940 and
W97°42931.79520.

Early Cretaceous (Figure 3). During the Hauterivian
Stage of the Early Cretaceous, the Sligo shelf margin
developed (Salvador and Muñeton, 1989), forming
a raised rim shelf margin profile (Galloway, 2008;
Figure 3). Flooding during the Aptian Stage initiated
a landward shift in reef development, forming the
Stuart City shelf margin (Salvador and Muñeton,
1989; Phelps, 2011). Until the Cenomanian, rudist–coral
communities acted as constructers and formed baffles
to normal wave action, which formed the nearly con-
tinuous carbonate reef of the Stuart City rimming the
Gulf of Mexico (Sohl et al., 1991; Scott, 2010; Figure 2).
A major transgression of the Comanchean
shelf in the middle-to-late Cenomanian initiated the
deposition of the Eagle Ford Group (Sohl et al., 1991;
Phelps, 2011; Figure 3). To the northeast, sedimentation
in the Woodbine delta system resulted in deposition of
the coeval Tuscaloosa and Woodbine Formations in
a fluvial and deltaic setting (Sohl et al., 1991; Dubiel
et al., 2010), as well as incised-valley-fill, nearshore
marine, and wave-dominated-delta deposits (Hentz
et al., 2014). During the Cretaceous, much of the
riverborne detritus included illite (Pratt, 1984),
which contributed a substantial clay mineral com-
ponent within the Eagle Ford facies. Figure 2
summarizes the paleogeographic setting near the
Cenomanian–Turonian boundary. Eagle Ford dep-
osition was immediately followed by Coniacian–
Santonian Austin Chalk deposition and subsequently
the rest of the Upper Cretaceous Series strata (Hentz
and Ruppel, 2010; Hentz et al., 2014; Figure 3).
STUDY AREA
In Central Texas, the Eagle Ford outcrop belt passes
through Travis County and directly through the city
of Austin (Figure 1). An outcrop located along West
Bouldin Creek forms the type locality for the
Bouldin Member (Adkins and Lozo, 1951; Jiang,
1989) and has been described in detail by previous
authors (Feray and Young, 1949; Adkins and Lozo,
1951; Pessagno, 1969; Young, 1977; Liro et al., 1994;
Lundquist, 2000). Another outcrop in north Austin is
encountered along a cutbank of Walnut Creek, south
of Park Bend Road (Figure 1).

Fairbanks et al. 383

 Located between the West Bouldin Creek and
Walnut Creek outcrops, 11 cores comprising the entire
Eagle Ford interval were also used in this study
(Figure 1). One core, ACC 1, was recovered during
the development of an Edwards aquifer monitoring
well in north Austin. Also, 10 additional geotechnical
cores form a tightly spaced, 1-mi (1.6-km)-long
transect along Waller Creek in Austin (Figure 1).
To obtain a regional perspective and evaluate the
regional correlatability of the Eagle Ford in the Austin
study, this work includes cored subsurface wells,
which were described by Harbor (2011; Figures 1, 2).
Two cross-section lines span the San Marcos arch, one
extending to the southwest from Austin across the
arch, and the other extending to the south along the
dip of the arch (Figure 1). The subsurface Eagle Ford
extends in a dip section from the shallow surface and
outcrop belt to the Late Cretaceous shelf margin, with
depths reaching 14,000 ft (4267 m) (Harbor, 2011).
Table 1 summarizes the data set used in the current
study and the cores studied by Harbor (2011).
METHODS AND DATA
Handheld energy-dispersive XRF is quickly be-
coming an industry standard for acquiring inorganic
geochemical data from cores and cuttings of mudrock
intervals. Elemental calibrations involved reference
materials from five internationally accepted standards,
SDO-1, SGR-10, SCo-1, GBW-0717, and SARM-41,
along with 86 reference materials from diverse mu-
drock systems, including the Woodford, Smithwick,
Barnett, Eagle Ford, and Ohio Shale (Kearns, 2011;
Rowe et al., 2012).
All analyses were undertaken using a Bruker AXS
Tracer III-V XRF unit, equipped with an Rh x-ray
tube. Major element analyses were conducted at 15
kV, with the beam and detector under vacuum. Trace
element analyses were conducted at 40 kV, with an
Al–Ti–Cu beam filter. Core samples for XRF analysis
were taken at a 1 ft (31 cm) interval and were ana-
lyzed by placing the flat slab side down on the
nose of the instrument. Raw sample XRF spectra
were calibrated using proprietary Bruker software
(Rowe et al., 2012).
Dominant mineral abundances are quickly de-
termined from major element composition (e.g.,
calcium (Ca), aluminum (Al), and silicon (Si) serve
384 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture
as proxies for calcite, clay minerals, and quartz, re-
spectively) to aid in facies definition. Trace elements
(e.g., molybdenum (Mo), uranium (U), vanadium
(V)) help to evaluate levels of oxygenation during
deposition (Tribovillard et al., 2006). Elemental
abundances of U, thorium (Th), and potassium (K)
can be used to create the equivalent of a total GR
for purposes of comparing core data to borehole
log data through the formula
ðU8Þ + ðTh4Þ + ðK16Þ = GR
where U is the uranium content (ppm), Th is the
thorium content (ppm), and K is the weight percent
of potassium (Doveton and Merriam, 2004). An
equivalent computed GR (CGR) log can be calcu-
lated by omitting the U, which ensures that the signal
is representative of the clay mineral content and re-
flects lithological changes. To replicate the appear-
ance of downhole logs, discrete XRF data points are
smoothed and plotted.
Samples for thin-section, organic geochemistry,
and XRD analysis were removed from the intact core
and prepared and processed by National Petrographic
Services, GeoMark Research Ltd., and Necip Guven,
respectively. Sample locations were selected based on
representative facies identification and distributed
throughout the cores. A thorough discussion of the
methods involved in acquiring these data are provided
by Harbor (2011) and Fairbanks (2012).
RESULTS
Facies
Although deceptively homogenous at the core-face
scale because of their grain size and dark color, mu-
drocks are extremely heterogeneous; this has important
implications for depositional environment and sedi-
ment delivery processes. The following seven distinctive
facies are identified within the Eagle Ford group: (1)
massive argillaceous mudrock, (2) massive fora-
miniferal calcareous mudrock, (3) laminated cal-
careous foraminiferal lime mudstone, (4) laminated
foraminiferal wackestone, (5) cross-laminated for-
aminiferal packstone–grainstone, (6) massive
bentonitic claystone, and (7) nodular foramini-
feral packstone–grainstone. A summary of Eagle
 Table 2. Summary Table of Central Texas Eagle Ford Facies and Associated Attributes

Facies Name Sedimentary Structures Mineralogy Dominant Fauna Color Occurrence (Formation) Thickness
Massive argillaceous Massive 53% clay minerals, Rare globigerinid Dark gray to Pepper Shale 4–6 ft (1.2–1.8 m)
mudrock 32% calcite, foraminifera medium-dark gray
17% quartz

Massive foraminiferal Massive 50% calcite, 38% Globigerinid foraminifera, Medium-dark gray Unnamed unit, South 1–5 ft (0.3–1.5 m)
calcareous mudrock clay minerals, inoceramid, and Bosque Formation
14% quartz pelecypod fragments

Laminated calcareous Very thin planar 62% calcite, 24% Globigerinid foraminifera, Medium gray Unnamed unit, South 1–5 ft (0.3–1.5 m)
foraminiferal lime laminations, scours clay minerals, inoceramid, and Bosque Formation
mudstone 8% quartz pelecypod fragments

Laminated foraminiferal Very thin planar–subplanar 76% calcite, 10% Globigerinid foraminifera, Medium gray with Bouldin Member 0.5–1 ft (15–30 cm)
wackestone laminations, slump folds, clay minerals, inoceramid, and white-to–light-gray
fine ripple laminations, 7% quartz pelecypod fragments bands
scours

Cross-laminated Thin subplanar and 86% calcite, 5% Globigerinid foraminifera, Light-to-medium gray Unnamed unit, 0.5–6 in. (1–15 cm)
foraminiferal cross-laminations, scours quartz, 3% clay inoceramid, and Bouldin Member
packstone– grainstone minerals pelecypod fragments

Massive bentonitic Massive 69% smectite, Rare globigerinid Whitish gray to Primarily Bouldin 0.5–6 in. (1–15 cm)
claystone 12% kaolinite, foraminifera medium rust orange Member
8% illite

Nodular foraminiferal Massive, planar and 84% calcite, Globigerinid foraminifera, Light-to-medium gray Bouldin Member, 1–6 in. (2–15 cm)
packstone– grainstone cross-laminated 13% clay minerals, inoceramid, and unnamed unit
2% quartz pelecypod fragments

Fairbanks et al.
385
Figure 4. Composite strati-
graphic chart reviewing nomen-
clature used in the Central Texas
Eagle Ford intervals, compared
with those used in West Texas
and near Waco, Texas. This study
adopts the names of Pepper
Shale, unnamed unit of the Lake
Waco Formation, Bouldin Mem-
ber of the Lake Waco Formation,
and South Bosque Formation.

Ford facies and their associated attributes is found
in Table 2.
Massive Argillaceous Mudrock Facies
Restricted to the basal Pepper Shale of the Eagle Ford
Group (Figure 4), this facies is dark-to–medium-dark
gray in core (Figure 5), weathers recessively in out-
crop, and displays a distinctively smooth or soapy
texture (Table 2). It splits into thin sheets along
planar as well as irregular partings, with common
ammonite impressions in the partings. The mineral
composition, as revealed by XRD and XRF data, is
primarily clay minerals (average 53%, range
32%–68%), which in decreasing abundance include
illite, kaolinite, illite and smectite mixed, and
smectite. Calcite and dolomite constitute an average
of 32% (range 3%–60%). Although not apparent
from the scope of this study, previous studies have
shown that much of the fine silt and clay-sized car-
bonate in Eagle Ford rocks is composed of coccolith
debris. The depositional environment of this facies is
interpreted to have been in anoxic marine conditions
below storm weather wave base, as suggested by the
paucity of benthonic fauna, bioturbation, and wave-
generated structures.
Massive Foraminiferal Calcareous Mudrock Facies
Massive foraminiferal calcareous mudrock is the
most common facies in the Eagle Ford succes-
sion in Central Texas, and it is found in the
unnamed member as well as the South Bosque
Formation (Figure 4). Medium-to-dark gray in
core, this facies is dominantly structureless and
weathers recessively (Figure 5). Compared with

386 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture


(A) (C)
(B) (D)
the massive argillaceous mudrock facies, this
facies is coarser grained and more calcareous,
and it contains a higher quantity of planktonic
(forams) and benthonic (inoceramid and bivalve
fragments) fauna (Table 2). The XRF and XRD
data indicate that this facies is composed of car-
bonate (average 50%, range 36%–68%) and clay
minerals (average 39%, range 21%–67%). The
dark-gray color, presence of low-oxygen ben-
thonic fauna, and lack of sedimentary structures
Figure 5. Core photographs,
thin-section photomicrographs,
and summaries of characteristic
features of massive argillaceous
mudrock facies (A and B) and
massive foraminiferal calcareous
mudrock facies (C and D). (A)
Slab photograph showing the
massive, dark-gray fissile char-
acter. (B) Thin-section photo-
micrograph depicting the
fine-grained nature and rare
globigerinid foraminifera. (C)
Slab photo showing the massive,
medium-dark-gray character.
(D) Thin-section photomicro-
graph showing fine-grained na-
ture and abundant globigerinid
foraminifera, inoceramid, and
bivalve shells.
suggest that the depositional environment was
in oxygen-poor marine conditions below storm
weather wave base.
Laminated Calcareous Foraminiferal Lime Mudstone Facies
This facies is composed of very thinly planar-to-
subplanar laminated medium-dark gray (Figure 6),
calcareous mudrock-to-lime mudstone that is present
in the unnamed unit and the South Bosque Formation
(Figure 4). Laminations are primarily composed of
Fairbanks et al. 387
grain-sized globigerinid foraminifera, with lesser
amounts of inoceramid and other bivalve fragments.
Calcite and dolomite content from XRD analysis
average 62% (range 57%–73%), whereas clay mineral
content measures an average of 24% (range 18%–31%)
(Table 2). These rocks are interpreted to have
been deposited below storm weather wave base
where suspension settling supplied planktonic com-
ponents and bottom-current-winnowing–created planar
laminations.
Laminated Foraminiferal Wackestone Facies
Restricted to the Bouldin Member (Figure 4), this
facies is characterized by higher calcite (average
76%, range 75%–80%) and abundant globigerinid
foraminifera compared with previously described
facies (Figure 6; Table 2). Although generally a
wackestone, these rocks locally grade into foramini-
feral packstones or grainstones. Based on the high
degree of current-induced structures (very thin planar
and subplanar laminations, fine ripple laminations,

Figure 6. Core photographs,

thin-section photomicrographs,
(A) (D)
and summaries of characteristic
features of laminated calcareous
foraminiferal lime mudstone fa-
cies (A–C) and laminated fora-
miniferal wackestone (D and E).
(A) Slab photograph showing the
laminated, medium-gray charac-
ter. (B) Thin-section photo show-
ing fine lamination and abundant
globigerinid foraminifera. (C)
Thin-section photomicrograph
showing erosional scouring. (D)
Slab photograph showing the fine
ripple laminations and medium-
gray character. (E) Thin-section (B)
photomicrograph showing dis-
turbed bedding, abundant globi-
gerinid foraminifera, and
inoceramid fragments. (E)

(C)

388 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture


(A) (C)
(D)
(B)
scours) and slump folds, this facies is interpreted to
have been deposited below storm weather wave base
on a gradually dipping seafloor with bottom-current
reworking.
Cross-Laminated Foraminiferal Packstone–Grainstone
Facies
Highly calcareous (XRD average 86%, range 82%–97%
calcite) (Table 2), this facies is encountered solely
in the Bouldin Member (Figure 4) and contains
Figure 7. Core photographs,
thin-section photomicrographs,
and summaries of characteristic
features of cross-laminated fora-
miniferal packstone–grainstone
(A and B) and massive bentonitic
claystone facies (C and D). (A)
Slab photograph showing the
cross-laminated and light-gray
nature. (B) Thin-section photo-
micrograph showing the abun-
dant globigerinid foraminifera,
inoceramid fragments, bioclasts,
pyrite, and grain-rich texture. (C)
Slab photograph showing the
structureless, poorly lithified na-
ture. (D) Thin-section photo-
micrograph showing rare
globigerinid foraminifera and
fine-grained texture.
mostly fine sand-sized globigerinid foraminifera
tests, as well as highly abraded inoceramid and
other bivalve fragments (Figure 7). Cross-laminated
sedimentary structures and pervasive scouring sug-
gest that this facies records the highest energy of
deposition within the study area. Based on sedi-
mentary structures and paleoredox proxies from
XRF, the depositional environment of this fa-
cies is interpreted to have been an oxygen-poor
sediment–water interface in a marine basin where
Fairbanks et al. 389
bottom-current reworking was the prominent sedi-
ment dispersal mechanism and sediment supply was
accelerated by stimulated organic productivity in the
photic zone.
Massive Bentonitic Claystone Facies
In cores and outcrop, thin (0.5–6 in. [1–15 cm])
bentonitic claystone beds display a characteristically
recessive and poorly lithified nature (Figure 7; Table 2),
are structureless, and contain only trace foramin-
ifera. The XRD analysis reveals that clay minerals,
dominated by smectite and kaolinite, are their dom-
inant constituent, averaging 91% (range 88%–93%).
These rocks are present primarily in the Bouldin
Member (Figure 4), with few occurrences in the
unnamed unit and South Bosque Formation. Several
studies have interpreted these rocks as volcanic ash
deposits (Jiang 1989; Liro et al., 1994; Dawson 1997)
potentially sourced from northern Mexico and the
Balcones igneous province (Pierce, 2014).
Nodular Foraminiferal Packstone–Grainstone Facies
Resistant in outcrop, this facies comprises horizontal
lenses that exhibit oblate ellipsoidal cross sections
and differential compaction in adjacent mudstones

Figure 8. Core photographs,

thin-section photomicrographs, (A) (B)
and summary of characteristic
features of nodular foraminiferal
packstone–grainstone (A–D). (A
and B) Slab photographs de-
picting characteristic expression
in core, where (A) displays in-
clined bedding at the terminus of
a nodule, and (B) displays a
gradational contact. (C) Outcrop
photograph depicting the oblate
ellipsoid geometry (12-in. [31-cm]
hammer for scale). (D) Thin-
section photomicrograph showing
abundant globigerinid foramin-
ifera and cemented nature.
(C)

(D)

390 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture

(Figure 8). The primary allochem within this
facies is globigerinid foraminifera (Table 2). This
facies differs from the cross-laminated foraminiferal
packstone–grainstone facies largely in that it is laterally
discontinuous in outcrop and even at the core scale.
In core, it is difficult to differentiate between this
facies and cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–
grainstone facies. These rocks are most abundant
in the Bouldin Member, but they are also present
in the unnamed unit (Figure 4). Frébourg et al.
(2016) proposed that similar nodular foraminiferal
packstone–grainstones in West Texas were deposited
by bottom currents as sediment waves and dunes
and that they represent reworked accumulations of
planktonic debris.
Stratigraphy
In Central Texas, the Eagle Ford Group is typically
divided into two or three units (Figure 4). A recent
study (Fairbanks, 2012) has proposed that the section
can be subdivided into four units: a basal Pepper Shale,
an unnamed unit that has been informally referred to
as the Waller member (Fairbanks, 2012; Denne and
Breyer, in press), an overlying Bouldin Member, and
an uppermost South Bosque Formation (Figure 4).
The Pepper Shale (Figure 4) is a recessive, dark
gray, argillaceous claystone, comprised solely of the
massive argillaceous mudrock facies (Figure 6;
Table 2). This interval is relatively thin; it is 4–6 ft
(0.6–1.0 m) thick in the study area (Figure 4). This
highly siliceous and argillaceous unit is interpreted by
recent authors as distal deltaic and prodelta facies
(Hentz et al., 2014), suggesting time equiva-
lence to the Woodbine section (Adkins and Lozo,
1951; Childs et al., 1988; Dawson et al., 1993) facies.
Overlying the Pepper Shale is an unnamed
member of the Lake Waco Formation (Figure 4).
Visually, the basal contact of this unit is gradational
and subtle. The contact is marked by the transition
to a gritty calcareous mudrock composed of massive
foraminiferal calcareous mudrock and laminated
calcareous foraminiferal lime mudstone (Table 2).
Minor amounts of cross-laminated foraminiferal
packstone–grainstone, nodular foraminiferal packstone–
grainstone, and massive argillaceous mudrock are
also found within this unnamed member
(Table 2). This unit is poorly exposed in outcrop,
and the full succession is observed only in core,
totaling 10 ft (3 m) of thickness in the ACC 1 core
(Table 1).
The Bouldin Member of the Lake Waco For-
mation (Figure 4) averages 10–12 ft (3.5–4.0 m) of
thickness in the study area. The Bouldin is more
calcite rich than other Central Texas Eagle Ford Units
(Figure 4), the calcite being primarily composed of
planktonic foraminifera, which is consistent with the
findings of recent investigators (Denne et al., 2014).
Dominant facies include cross-laminated foramini-
feral packstones–grainstones, laminated foraminiferal
wackestones, massive bentonitic claystones, and
nodular foraminiferal packstones–grainstones (Table 2).
A particularly interesting aspect of the bentonitic
claystone facies is their strong association with the
cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–grainstones
and nodular foraminiferal packstones–grainstones. Ex-
cept for a few isolated beds in the underlying unnamed
unit and the overlying South Bosque Formation, ben-
tonitic claystones are largely confined to the Bouldin
Member. Also confined primarily to the Bouldin
Member are the laminated foraminiferal wackestones
and the cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–
grainstone facies (Table 2). The strong association
between abundant planktonic foraminifera and
bentonite claystones suggests that these deposits are
genetically related. Recent studies have connected
surface water nutrient enrichment to volcanic erup-
tions (Duggen et al., 2007, 2010; Jones and Gislason,
2008; Langmann et al., 2010). It is proposed that
nutrients introduced into the ocean water system
by volcanic eruptions led to higher productivity
within the oxic zone and stimulated planktonic
blooms that led to higher rates of carbonate
sedimentation.
The contact between the Bouldin Member and
the underlying argillaceous foraminiferal mudrock
of the unnamed unit is picked as the base of the first
bed of cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–
grainstone facies. The upper contact is defined by
the last occurrence of foraminiferal packstone–
grainstone.
The South Bosque Formation is composed pri-
marily of medium-dark–to-medium gray silty mu-
drocks and includes beds of massive foraminiferal
calcareous mudrock and laminated calcareous fora-
miniferal lime mudstone (Table 2). This unit, which
forms the top of the Eagle Ford Group in the study
area, averages 16 ft (5 m) in thickness.
Fairbanks et al. 391
Figure 9. North–south litho-
stratigraphic cross section of the
study area. The vertical columns
are described cores and out-
crops with color shading repre-
senting facies continuity. Note
the degree of facies and thick-
ness variability within each
stratigraphic unit. Location of
wells and outcrops is provided in
Figure 1. ACC = ACC 1 core;
Fm = formation; Mbr = member.

Cyclicity and Facies Continuity
This study uses a unique data set that provides an
excellent insight into variations in lateral facies con-
tinuity. The 10 cores and outcrops in the Austin study
area (Figure 1) constitute an approximately 11 mi,
north–south transect. The measured sections from
these cores and outcrops allow facies continuity to be
evaluated at several scales, ranging from 50 ft (15 m)
to 10 mi (16 km) (Figure 9). Correlation between
cores was conducted based on facies characteristics
and associations, as defined previously in the Facies
and Stratigraphy sections.
High degrees of facies discontinuity are observed
within each stratigraphic interval, even in close spac-
ings (50 ft [15 m]). For example, a nodular fora-
miniferal packstone–grainstone bed in core 514 at 75
ft (23 m), or 14 ft (4 m) above the top of the Buda, is

392 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture

not present 50 ft (15 m) to the northwest in core 500
(Figure 9). Likewise, a massive bentonitic claystone
bed at 79 ft (24 m), or 14 ft (4 m) above the top of the
Buda, in core 500 is not present in core 514 (Figure 9).
Additionally, two repetitive beds of massive argilla-
ceous mudrock observed in core 204 at 109 ft (33 m),
or 7 ft (2 m) above the top of the Buda, are not
represented 500 ft (150 m) to the south in core 302
(Figure 9).
Facies continuity decreases substantially with
distance. For example, 73% of units can be success-
fully correlated across a distance of 500 ft (152 m),
35% are traceable across 1 mi (1.6 km), and only
16% of beds are correlatable across 10 mi (16 km)
(Figure 9). At spacings of 10 mi (16 km) and greater,
bed-scale correlations based on inorganic geochemical
data (XRD, XRF), organic geochemical data (Rock-
Eval TOC), and well-log data (GR) are suspect. It is
possible to correlate and define the boundaries of the
four Eagle Ford stratigraphic units (Pepper Shale, un-
named unit, Bouldin Member, and South Bosque
Formation) with reasonable confidence through the
study area (Figure 9).
Cyclicity of facies is readily observed within the
Eagle Ford, with the highest degrees of alternating
units contained within the Bouldin Member of the
Lake Waco Formation. Beds ranging in thickness
from 1 in. (2.5 cm) to 1 ft (30 cm) alternate between
cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–grainstone
and laminated foraminiferal wackestone, with local
massive bentonitic claystones (Figure 9; Table 2).
Several individual cycles can be laterally traced at
scales less than 1 mi (1.6 km), like those between the
Walnut Creek outcrop and the ACC core at ap-
proximately 95–99 ft (29–30 m), or 26–30 ft (8–9 m)
above the top of the Buda (Figure 9).
Chemostratigraphic Analysis
Energy-dispersive XRF analysis provided elemental
composition data that were used to evaluate the in-
organic geochemistry of the Eagle Ford system. Var-
iations in elemental composition have implications for
ocean water chemistry as well as depositional setting.
Certain trace metals are used as proxies for bottom
water anoxia because they are redox sensitive and
relatively immobile in the sediment, thus preserving
primary signals (Algeo and Rowe, 2012). One such
trace metal, Mo, has been widely used as a proxy for
benthonic redox potential because of its generally
strong enrichment in organic-rich marine facies de-
posited under oxygen-depleted, sulfide-rich conditions
(Algeo and Lyons, 2006; Tribovillard et al., 2006; Algeo
and Tribovillard, 2009). In anoxic marine systems, Mo
shows significant variations from normal oceanic con-
ditions. For example, normal open-oceanic conditions
contain 80%–100% of the Mo concentration in the
Saanich Inlet of British Colombia, Canada; 70%–80%
in the Framvaren Fjord of Norway; and just 3%–5%
in the Black Sea (Algeo and Rowe, 2012).
Other redox-sensitive trace elements include U,
V, Mn, and chromium (Cr), which some have linked
to changing oxygen conditions during the Ceno-
manian and Turonian (Tribovillard et al., 2006; Smith
and Malicse, 2010; Algeo and Rowe, 2012). In this
study, Mo, U, V, Mn, and Cr were all assessed as
geochemical paleoredox proxies. Of these trace ele-
ments, Mo is selected as a representative proxy for
anoxic bottom water conditions.
Major excursions and enrichments in these key
trace elements occur in the Bouldin Member
(Figure 10), suggesting a period of maximum bottom
water anoxia during this time. The Mo values, for
example, reached 50 ppm within the Bouldin
Member, compared with the typical 5–10 ppm
throughout the other members (Figure 10). Another
small enrichment in the Mo curve is observed
within the upper part of the unnamed unit, suggest-
ing another interval of anoxia (Figure 10).
Regional Facies Architecture: Regional
Lithostratigraphic Correlation
The four-component stratigraphy described in the
previous section comprises the major depositional
successions of the Eagle Ford Group in Central
Texas (Figure 4). In the deeper subsurface where
these members have not been defined, the Eagle
Ford is typically divided into informal upper and
lower units. However, it is possible to correlate the
Central Texas stratigraphy into the deeper sub-
surface by comparing facies defined in the current
study to those in the San Marcos arch area defined
by Harbor (2011) (see Table 1). This comparison
(Figure 11) illustrates that the Pepper Shale, the
Lake Waco Formation (unnamed unit and Bouldin
Fairbanks et al. 393
Figure 10. Composite log and
type section for the ACC 1 core
showing the borehole gamma
ray (GR) log compared with the
computed gamma ray (CGR)
(potassium-thorium) from x-ray
fluorescence (XRF) data, the
identified facies from core de-
scription, a calcium curve from
XRF data suggesting mineralogy,
a molybdenum curve from XRF
data as a paleoredox proxy, and a
percent total organic carbon (%
TOC) curve as measured from
core. Note that the greatest pa-
leoredox enrichment occurs
within the Bouldin Member of
the Lake Waco Formation, which
is associated with elevated Ca
and high energy facies, and not
with greatest enrichment of %
TOC, which might be expected in
the unnamed unit.

Members), and the South Bosque Formation can all
be defined regionally in cored wells in the subsurface.
Three cores, Hendershot, Orts, and Schauer, are used
in conjunction with the ACC core in Austin, Texas, to
provide a north–south transect of nearly 70 mi
(128 km) (Figure 11).
All stratigraphic intervals experience a south-
ward downdip thickening along the axis of the arch.
The Pepper Shale thickens from 5 ft (1.5 m) in Austin
to approximately 12 ft (3.6 m) in the Schauer core
(Figure 11), at which point it undergoes a facies
change from massive argillaceous mudstone to lami-
nated calcareous foraminiferal lime mudstone toward
the shelf margin (Figures 2, 11). The unnamed unit
also displays thickening southward along the arch,
from 10 ft (3 m) near Austin to 16 ft (5 m) in the
Schauer core (Figure 11).
The Bouldin Member not only thickens south-
ward from approximately 13 ft (4 m) (ACC core)
to approximately 25 ft (7.5 m) (Schauer core)
(Figure 11), but also it displays a general facies change.
In the Austin study area, there is a higher ratio of
high-energy cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–
grainstone and laminated foraminiferal wackestone
relative to lower-energy mudrocks. Southward, that
ratio diminishes, such that finer, low-energy mudrock
facies become more abundant in the Schauer core
(Figure 11).
South Bosque lithologies remain fairly un-
changed from Austin southward. The Schauer core
(Figure 11) reveals that facies of the South Bosque,
massive (and laminated) argillaceous foraminiferal
mudrock (which are also facies of the unnamed
unit), become the dominant facies of the Eagle
Ford Group.
The general thickening of individual units and
the entire Eagle Ford Group toward the south is pro-
bably associated with differential accommodation
around the San Marcos arch. Distal locations likely
experienced greater subsidence than the arch did
(Figure 11). The facies change observed in the Bouldin
Member unit from high planktonic sediment con-
centration facies in Austin to the argillaceous and
foraminiferal mudrock facies toward the Schauer core
(Figure 11) is interpreted to result from a change in
planktonic productivity. Oxic zone productivity likely

394 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture


decreased to the south, based on the relative lack of
planktonic debris in the Schauer core.
Harbor (2011) described a transitional Eagle
Ford–Austin Chalk interval that is not represented in
Austin but overlies the South Bosque Formation in
the subsurface (Figure 11). This unit contains dis-
rupted bedded foraminiferal packstone and adjacent
cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–grainstone
(Harbor, 2011) (Figure 11). The lack of this unit in
the Austin study area suggests the presence of an
unconformity at the top of the Eagle Ford, marked
by a period of erosion. Alternatively, this unit
observed by Harbor (2011) could also represent a
facies change from massive foraminiferal calcareous
mudrock in the ACC core to disrupted bedded fora-
miniferal packstone and cross-laminated foramini-
feral packstone–grainstone in the Hendershot and
Orts cores.
Figure 11. Cross section AA9
based on lithostratigraphy. This
subsurface correlation is based
on facies observed in core. The
C. J. Hendershot 1, H. P. Orts 2,
and F. T. Schauer et al. 1 cores
were described in detail by
Harbor (2011). The section
shows a general continuity of
stratigraphic intervals along the
San Marcos arch and thickening
southward. Location of transect
is provided in Figure 1. The up-
permost unit observed by Har-
bor (2011) refers to a transitional
Eagle Ford–Austin Chalk facies.
Modified from Harbor (2011).
ACC = ACC 1 core.
Use of Gamma Ray Logs for Correlation
Core–Log Relationships in Study Area
Because of the lack of conventional borehole GR logs
for the cores in the study, pseudo GR logs were
constructed from elemental abundances of Th, U,
and K gathered from XRF. Both CGR, which com-
bines the Th and K responses, and total GR, which
combines the Th, K, and U responses, were generated
(Table 3). Recent studies have shown that spectral
GR logs are critical for the calibration and application
of GR logs to identifying mineralogy and facies in
mudrocks (Rowe and Ruppel, 2013). Because of the
abundant K in the minerals, CGR logs are good in-
dicators of clay mineralogy abundance in mudrocks.
However, GR logs provide a more complex indica-
tion of rock properties, because they combine the
mineral response of K in clay minerals with an
Fairbanks et al. 395
Table 3. Data for the ACC 1 Core, Containing Depth of Sample, Potassium Percentage, Uranium Parts per Million, and Thorium Parts per
Million from X-Ray Fluorescence, As Well As Measured Percent Total Organic Carbon

Depth (ft) Depth (m) K (%) U (ppm) Th (ppm) TOC (%) Depth (ft) Depth (m) K (%) U (ppm) Th (ppm) TOC (%)

70.4 21.46 0.545 -12 3 n/a 97.5 29.72 0.665 3 4 1.48

71.1 21.67 0.469 -12 2 n/a 98.4 29.99 0.148 -18 1 2.48
71.5 21.79 0.417 -13 2 n/a 98.6 30.05 1.407 7 1 0.24
72.0 21.95 1.548 -3 3 n/a 99.4 30.30 0.331 -11 1 3.29
72.4 22.07 1.372 0 4 n/a 99.8 30.42 1.278 9 4 0.28
72.9 22.22 1.389 1 5 n/a 100.3 30.57 1.460 -3 4 n/a
73.4 22.37 0.433 -14 3 n/a 101.2 30.85 0.195 -14 3 0.71
74.1 22.59 0.583 -12 3 n/a 101.8 31.03 1.118 -1 3 4.63
74.7 22.77 0.542 -11 3 0.22 102.6 31.27 1.210 1 3 4.56
75.5 23.01 0.382 -16 2 n/a 103.5 31.55 1.245 1 3 4.51
75.8 23.10 0.318 -11 2 n/a 103.8 31.64 0.147 -12 1 0.58
76.3 23.26 0.380 -9 4 0.15 104.7 31.91 1.267 -4 4 4.07
77.0 23.47 0.783 -8 3 n/a 105.5 32.16 1.229 0 2 5.40
77.7 23.68 0.673 -12 3 n/a 105.8 32.25 0.718 7 2 n/a
78.3 23.87 0.852 -4 4 0.60 106.2 32.37 1.715 -1 2 n/a
78.8 24.02 0.520 -14 2 n/a 106.5 32.46 1.318 1 4 6.48
79.7 24.29 1.091 -5 4 n/a 106.9 32.58 0.280 -11 1 1.11
80.1 24.41 1.538 0 3 n/a 107.4 32.74 1.336 -1 3 3.89
80.5 24.54 1.866 4 5 2.13 107.9 32.89 0.225 -14 3 n/a
80.9 24.66 1.834 0 3 n/a 108.8 33.16 0.564 -6 4 0.32
81.4 24.81 2.063 2 5 n/a 109.4 33.35 1.466 11 3 6.47
81.9 24.96 2.133 3 5 n/a 110.1 33.56 1.599 11 7 n/a
82.4 25.12 1.612 1 5 1.34 110.9 33.80 0.969 3 2 8.91
82.9 25.27 1.593 1 6 n/a 111.5 33.99 1.400 2 6 7.16
83.5 25.45 1.711 7 6 n/a 112.4 34.26 1.549 9 5 5.37
84.1 25.63 1.522 0 5 n/a 113.0 34.44 0.234 -14 2 1.20
84.5 25.76 1.420 0 5 2.81 113.7 34.66 1.847 9 5 7.99
85.6 26.09 1.627 -2 4 n/a 114.3 34.84 1.398 6 4 0.88
86.1 26.24 1.695 -1 4 n/a 115.5 35.20 0.981 -10 5 6.29
86.6 26.40 1.589 -7 6 3.16 116.5 35.51 1.440 16 6 5.20
87.5 26.67 1.650 4 4 n/a 117.3 35.75 1.512 7 6 5.92
88.6 27.01 1.336 2 3 3.75 118.7 36.18 1.449 9 6 1.00
89.5 27.28 1.266 -2 3 n/a 119.5 36.42 1.449 15 13 1.31
90.4 27.55 1.405 0 6 3.62 120.5 36.73 1.901 15 13 1.20
91.5 27.89 1.141 2 5 n/a 121.3 36.97 1.813 7 15 1.20
92.4 28.16 1.675 9 5 2.05 122.5 37.34 1.887 7 15 1.47
92.8 28.29 1.614 -2 4 n/a 123.6 37.67 1.308 9 11 3.96
93.4 28.47 1.803 2 4 n/a 124.3 37.89 1.212 14 11 2.33
94.5 28.80 1.762 1 5 4.34 124.8 38.04 1.740 12 15 n/a
95.5 29.11 0.433 -13 1 n/a 125.2 38.16 0.355 -13 3 0.20
96.3 29.35 1.163 0 4 n/a 126.3 38.50 0.098 -20 2 0.13
96.6 29.44 1.268 2 4 0.31 127.7 38.92 0.069 -14 0 0.22

Abbreviations: K = potassium; n/a = no data available; Th = thorium; TOC = total organic carbon; U = uranium.

396 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture

indication of bottom water redox conditions from
the U response.
Examination of the Central Texas Eagle Ford
Group illustrates differences in spectral GR response
that can be related to the four-component stratig-
raphy defined in the ACC 1 core (Figure 10). The
basal Pepper Shale is typically defined by a high CGR
and GR response, especially compared with the
underlying Buda Limestone (Figure 10). The high
CGR and GR values exhibited by the Pepper Shale
are a function of the massive (and laminated) cal-
careous foraminiferal lime mudstone facies, which
contain abundant illite, kaolinite, and smectite
(Figure 10).
The overlying unnamed unit is characterized by
lower CGR and GR responses caused by higher
carbonate and lower clay mineral abundances,
compared with the Pepper Shale (Figure 10). The
similarity between the values of the CGR and the
GR indicates that little U is present in the massive-
to-laminated calcareous foraminiferal lime mud-
stone of the unnamed unit.
The Bouldin Member is unique among the Eagle
Ford units in that the CGR and GR logs from its rocks
display a significant separation (Figure 10). The low
CGR values indicate low clay mineral content. This
is consistent with the higher carbonate content in
the high-energy, highly calcareous, laminated fora-
miniferal wackestone–packstone and cross-laminated
foraminiferal packstone–grainstone facies that con-
stitute this unit. The high frequency oscillations in
both CGR and GR curves reflect the cyclic alter-
nations in these two facies. The separation of the
CGR and GR in the Bouldin identifies an abundance
of U in these rocks (Figure 10), which is reflected in
the high total GR. The implications of the high U
concentrations are considerable when trying to use
total GR logs to interpret or correlate facies. Note
that, based solely on a total GR log, most workers
would interpret the very high GR response in this
interval as an indication that the rocks are higher in
clay mineral content than any other part of the Eagle
Ford. Instead, the Bouldin contains the highest car-
bonate and lowest clay mineral concentrations of the
entire Eagle Ford (Figure 10).
Like the unnamed unit, the South Bosque For-
mation displays similar low values for both the CGR
and GR, suggesting low U content (Figure 10). Like
the unnamed unit, the dominant facies are massive
foraminiferal calcareous mudrock and laminated calca-
reous foraminiferal lime mudstone. The CGR values for
both of these units are higher than those of the Bouldin,
indicating higher clay mineral abundance (Figure 10).
Regional Log-Based Correlations
Comparison of GR log trends in the ACC cored well
with other subsurface wells extending to the south
across the San Marcos arch suggests that general
correlations of facies may be possible (Figure 12).
However, the GR logs available for these wells do
not closely follow core-based lithological relationships
(Figure 12). Based on these observations, it must be
concluded that facies determination founded solely on
total GR logs (K–Th–U) is liable to be misleading. As
illustrated in Figure 10, a moderate total GR response
in the ACC core corresponding to the unnamed unit
that is followed by a high GR zone corresponding
to the Bouldin Member could be interpreted as a
carbonate-rich interval succeeded by a clay mineral–
rich interval. However, core, CGR, and total GR
response reveal the opposite facies relationships
(Figure 10). Thus, GR logs alone are insufficient for
facies determination in the Eagle Ford, and CGR logs
must be used for accurate facies recognition.
Because sequence stratigraphic interpretations
hinge on accurate determination of facies and accom-
modation, correlations and facies designations based
solely on total GR logs are likely to produce erroneous
results. For example, although the high total GR of the
Bouldin Member appears generally correlative, what, if
anything, can be reliably interpreted about sediment
supply, water depth, accommodation, or even miner-
alogy from the total GR log? Without knowledge of
the concentration of and variations in U in the unit
(made possible by comparison of CGR and total GR
logs), none of these key factors that are necessary for
stratigraphic correlation (using sequence concepts or
not) can be reliably defined.
Total Organic Carbon Analysis
The Upper Cretaceous Eagle Ford is a proven source
rock in Texas (Robison, 1997). Samples collected in
the current study for source rock analysis vary in
TOC stratigraphically (Figure 10; Table 3) but con-
tain an average of 2.4% (range 0.1%–8.4%) TOC. At
the base of the Eagle Ford, a dramatic increase in
Fairbanks et al. 397
Figure 12. Cross section BB9
based on gamma ray (GR) and
pseudo computed GR (CGR) log
(ACC core). The GR log sig-
natures are somewhat recog-
nizable to the southwest across
the San Marcos arch. ACC = ACC
1 core; Fm = formation; Mbr =
member.
TOC is observed in comparison with the underlying
Buda Limestone (Figure 10). The Pepper Shale dis-
plays a general upward increase in TOC, with an
average of 2.9% (range 1.7%–6.3%) TOC (Figure 10).
The overlying unnamed unit displays a large range in
organic enrichment but contains the highest overall
average of 4.0% (range 0.1%–8.4%) TOC (Figure 10).
In contrast, the Bouldin Formation is characterized by
the lowest TOC, with an average of only 2.3% (range
0.4%–4.1%) TOC (Figure 10), a finding that is cor-
roborated by Corbett and Watkins (2013), who ob-
served sharp declines in TOC within the Bouldin. The
overlying South Bosque Formation displays an aver-
age increase to 2.4% (range 0.2%–5.4%) TOC and
then gradually decreases upward into the Austin
Chalk (Figure 10).
DISCUSSION
According to conventional wisdom in mudrock suc-
cessions, an association exists between a restricted
398 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture
basin environment and ideal conditions for organic
matter preservation (Demaison and Moore, 1980).
Recognition criteria for restricted basin conditions in-
clude the presence of black, organic rich shales con-
taining high TOC; a lack of benthonic fauna; and
enrichment in redox-sensitive trace elements. However,
the correspondence of these characteristics is not ob-
served in the Central Texas Eagle Ford succession,
substantiating the recent findings that paleoceano-
graphic changes controlling anoxia were more complex
than previously suggested (Corbett and Watkins, 2013).
Maximum TOC enrichment is observed in the
unnamed unit (average TOC 4%, maximum 8.4%)
(Figure 10). Facies within the unnamed unit domi-
nantly consist of massive foraminiferal calcareous
mudrock and laminated calcareous foraminiferal
lime mudstone (Figure 10). The association between
relatively low-energy facies and high TOC would
suggest that this interval represents the most distal
setting and the greatest degree of basin restriction.
However, geochemical proxies for anoxia (enrichment
in Mo, U, Mn, V, Cr) indicate that greatest bottom
water anoxia occurred during deposition of the
Bouldin Member (Figure 10). Surprisingly, the
Bouldin Member is composed of the highest energy
grain-rich facies (Figures 7, 10). These grain-rich facies
are not traditionally expected to form within restricted
basin conditions. The Bouldin Member is also the in-
terval characterized by the highest total GR and highest
U concentrations but the lowest TOC (Figure 10).
Hence, two unlikely associations are observed: (1) high
GR signatures with corresponding calcareous high-
energy facies, and (2) lowest TOC values corre-
sponding to maximum basin restriction (Figure 10).
Planktonic globigerinid foraminifera are the
dominant grain type within the Bouldin Member.
This sediment type was sourced from the photic zone
and reflects surface water environmental conditions,
not bottom water conditions. The high concentration
of planktonic debris indicates accentuated pro-
ductivity during this interval, providing high rates of
carbonate sediment supply. As mentioned earlier, a
strong association exists between the massive bentonitic
claystone layers and calcareous foraminiferal units. In
fact, the massive bentonitic claystones (interpreted to
result from volcanic ash settling into marine waters) are
generally restricted to the Bouldin Member. This close
relationship suggests that heightened productivity in
the oxic zone of the water column is stimulated by
nutrient enrichment from volcanic input, and it drives
sediment supply independent of eustatic forcing.
Notwithstanding paleoredox conditions suggest-
ing maximum bottom water anoxia and ideal con-
ditions for organic preservation (Figure 10), TOC
enrichment is lowest in the Bouldin Member, aver-
aging 2.3% compared with a 4.0% average in the
unnamed unit (Figure 10). The discrepancy between
high preservation potential and low TOC during
deposition of the Bouldin Member is interpreted
to result from carbonate dilution. Frequent influx,
higher associated sedimentation rates, and relatively
rapid deposition of foraminiferal tests resulted in
grain-rich carbonate facies within which very little
TOC was preserved. The high proportion of carbo-
nate beds to mudrock beds within the Bouldin
Member resulted in low TOC values overall for this
interval. Additionally, higher calcite content from
the planktonic material caused the Bouldin Member
to become more resistant to postdepositional com-
paction. Greater compaction in other Eagle Ford
units allowed for differentially concentrated TOC
when compared with the Bouldin Member. Recent
investigators (Ratcliffe et al., 2012) suggested that
TOC can be estimated from paleoredox proxies,
particularly enrichment in Mo. However, in the
current study, the disparity between paleoredox
indicators and low TOC in the Bouldin Member
suggests that TOC estimation from inorganic chem-
istry data may provide misleading results.
High-energy facies within the Bouldin Mem-
ber are recognized in core and outcrop by cross-
laminations, dune foreset laminations, low angle
ripple laminations, planar-to-subplanar laminations,
mud rip-up clasts, pebble and bioclastic lags, and
scour and truncation surfaces. Facies variability is also
most pronounced in the Bouldin Member, even at
small scales (50 ft [15 m]). Bedding thickness var-
iations, pinchouts, erosional scouring and trunca-
tions, and localized nodular facies are all recognized
as facies variability in the Bouldin Member. These
current-induced sedimentary structures and facies
variabilities do not reflect shallow water processes
but are interpreted to result from bottom-current
reworking. Bottom currents, which are capable of
transporting grains up to fine sand and even gravels
(Faugéres and Stow, 1993; Stow et al., 2002;
Frébourg et al., 2016), can be independent of
eustatic control. Furthermore, many of the minor
components, consisting of benthonic fauna (mainly
inoceramids), live in dysoxic environments and can be
transported into more anoxic settings, as supported
by the fragmented nature of the grains.
Although extremely calcareous and represented
by the highest energy facies, the Bouldin Member
is interpreted to have been deposited in a marine
setting with substantial bottom water anoxia. This
interpretation contrasts with classical sequence strati-
graphic perspectives that interpret such high-energy,
carbonate-rich deposits as forming proximal to an
active carbonate platform. Expected characteristics of
a deposit from such a shallow water setting would be
increased carbonate sediment supply, high-energy fa-
cies from storm waves or turbidity currents, and de-
creased TOC resulting from sediment dilution and
poor preservation in an oxygenated environment. The
Bouldin Member displays these characteristics. How-
ever, the presence of current-induced sedimentary
structures from deep water bottom-current reworking
(Frébourg et al., 2016), high degrees of facies vari-
ability, and paleoredox proxies demonstrate that this
Fairbanks et al. 399
traditional model does not apply to the Central Texas
Bouldin Member.
Defining mineralogies and the facies they rep-
resent is not simple, because over-reliance on total
GR logs (K–Th–U) can provide very misleading
concepts of mineralogy and facies distribution. As
observed in Figure 10, the unnamed unit and South
Bosque Formation exhibit moderate total GR values,
whereas the intervening Bouldin Member displays
much higher values. Based solely on these GR pat-
terns, the following interpretations could justifiably
but erroneously be drawn: (1) the unnamed unit and
South Bosque successions contain the highest levels
of carbonate in the Eagle Ford and should contain
low levels of TOC, and (2) the Bouldin Member
contains lower levels of carbonate and higher
amounts of clay minerals, suggesting that these rocks
accumulated in a more distal, low-energy setting,
where high levels of TOC would be expected. Core
data show the relationships to be just the opposite.
Even when mineralogy is well constrained (e.g.,
by spectral GR logs), the conditions under which
these facies were deposited cannot be readily defined
from logs. Conventional thinking regarding many
carbonate-rich successions is that carbonate is sourced
from shallow water settings and that high levels
of carbonate indicate relatively shallow water sed-
imentation regardless of the setting. Abundant car-
bonate in the Eagle Ford, however, is the result of
two processes not interpreted to be connected with
water depth: nutrient driven productivity and bottom-
current reworking. Accordingly, attempts to place
Eagle Ford rocks into a simple sequence stratigraphic
framework based on an assumed connection between
mineralogy (i.e., carbonate content) and accom-
modation or water depth are of questionable merit.
Alone, GR profiles are insufficient in the Eagle
Ford for determination of (1) facies, (2) TOC content,
(3) depositional environment, and (4) sequence strati-
graphic correlations. Comparison of the GR curves with
CGR curves provides Eagle Ford investigators with
more accurate means for rock character determination.
Primary controls on Eagle Ford character are
(1) sediment supply from planktonic foraminifera
and (2) depositional reworking by bottom-current
activity. Globigerinid foraminifera comprise the
dominant carbonate sediment type and originate in
the photic zone of the water column. Changes in
carbonate sedimentation rates are driven by surface
400 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture
water nutrient enrichment, stimulated in part by
volcanic activity. Bottom-current activity results from
the interplay of thermohaline and wind-driven cur-
rents because of both Coriolis forces and seafloor
topography (Stow et al., 2002; Frébourg et al., 2016).
These two primary controls are processes that may
be independent from eustatic fluctuation, rendering
classical sequence stratigraphic applications unreli-
able in the Eagle Ford system of Central Texas.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian–Turonian)
Eagle Ford Group of Central Texas contains the
following seven distinct facies: (1) massive argillaceous
mudrock, (2) massive foraminiferal calcareous mu-
drock, (3) laminated calcareous foraminiferal lime
mudstone, (4) laminated foraminiferal wackestone, (5)
cross-laminated foraminiferal packstone–grainstone,
(6) massive bentonitic claystone, and (7) nodular
foraminiferal packstone–grainstone. These seven facies
comprise four stratigraphic packages defined herein as
the Pepper Shale, the unnamed unit of the Lake Waco
Formation, the Bouldin Member of the Lake Waco
Formation, and the South Bosque Formation.
The basal Pepper Shale is an argillaceous, fine-
grained (clay-sized) unit. The unnamed unit, newly
designated in this study, is an argillaceous and
calcareous (foraminiferal), massive mudrock. The
Bouldin Member is a high-energy, carbonate-rich
(foraminiferal) interval with high degrees of facies
variability. The uppermost unit is the South Bosque
Formation, which, like the unnamed unit, is an
argillaceous and calcareous (foraminiferal) massive
and laminated mudrock.
The Bouldin Member is defined by high API
total GR values and low API CGR (GR K–Th)
values. The disparity between total GR and CGR
values is commensurate with U content. Enrichment
in U, as well as in other paleoceanographic proxies
(i.e., Mo, V, Cr), suggests that the Bouldin Member
represents maximum basin restriction, despite being
composed of the most carbonate-rich, highest energy
facies. The comparison of total GR logs to CGR logs
is requisite, because GR alone may provide mis-
leading determination of facies, TOC content, dep-
ositional environment, and sequence stratigraphic
implications.
 High energy deposition within the Bouldin Mem-
ber resulted from bottom-current activity. Carbonate
content was controlled by heightened productivity
in the oxic zone, which led to a higher sediment
supply of planktonic foraminiferal skeletal debris.
Both bottom-current reworking and planktonic
sediment supply were controlling factors that were
decoupled from eustatic sea-level fluctuations, thus
rendering classical sequence stratigraphy unreliable
in the Eagle Ford system.
Even at a small lateral spacing (50 ft [15 m]),
much variability of Eagle Ford facies is observed in
cores and outcrops, and this is attributed to bottom-
current reworking and planktonic productivity.
Bottom-current reworking is responsible for erosional
scouring, truncation, and localized distribution of
facies. Planktonic productivity, possibly resulting
from the nutrient enrichment of volcanic ash settling
into marine waters, influenced sediment supply.
Facies continuity decreases substantially with
distance. For example, 73% of units can be success-
fully correlated across a distance of 500 ft (152 m),
35% are traceable across 1 mi (1.6 km), and only 16%
of beds are correlatable across 10 mi (16 km). At
spacings of 10 mi (16 km) and greater, bed scale
correlations based on inorganic geochemical data
(XRD, XRF), organic geochemical data (Rock-Eval
TOC), and well-log data (GR) are suspect. However,
it is possible at these distances to define and correlate
the approximate boundaries of the four Eagle Ford
stratigraphic units, at least in the study area.
Contrary to conventional schemas, mudrock dep-
osition is complex, involving the interplay of many
controlling processes. Facies variability, often over-
looked by stratigraphers and explorationists, is a signif-
icant aspect of the Eagle Ford system and has
implications for source rock quality, seal capacity, res-
ervoir characterization, and hydraulic fracture potential.
Caution must be employed when evaluating mudrock
systems, because nodular facies, ash beds, and other
heterogeneities can dramatically influence correlatability.
REFERENCES CITED
Adkins, W. S., and F. E. Lozo, Jr., 1951, Stratigraphy of the
Woodbine and Eagle Ford, Waco area, Texas: Southern
Methodist University Fondren Science Series 4,
p. 105–161.
Algeo, T. J., and T. W. Lyons, 2006, Mo–total organic carbon
covariation in modern anoxic marine environments:
Implications for analysis of paleoredox and paleohydro-
graphic conditions: Paleoceanography, v. 21, doi:
10.1029/2004PA001112.
Algeo, T. J., and H. Rowe, 2012, Paleoceanographic ap-
plications of trace-metal concentration data: Chem-
ical Geology, v. 324–325, p. 6–18, doi:10.1016
/j.chemgeo.2011.09.002.
Algeo, T. J., and N. Tribovillard, 2009, Environmental analysis of
paleoceanographic systems based on molybdenum-uranium
covariation: Chemical Geology, v. 268, p. 211–225, doi:
10.1016/j.chemgeo.2009.09.001.
Barnes, V. E., 1992, Geologic map of Texas: Austin, Texas,
Bureau of Economic Geology, scale 1:500,000, 4 sheets,
SM0003.
Childs, O. E., G. Steele, and A. Salvador, 1988, Gulf Coast
region, correlation of stratigraphic units of North America
(COSUNA) project: AAPG, oversize chart, 20 map sheets.
Corbett, J. M., and D. K. Watkins, 2013, Calcareous nan-
nofossil paleoecology of the mid-Cretaceous Western
Interior Seaway and evidence of oligotrphic surface waters
during OAE2: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,
Palaeoecology, v. 392, p. 510–523, doi:10.1016/j
.palaeo.2013.10.007.
Culotta, R., T. Latham, M. Sydow, J. Oliver, L. Brown, and
S. Kaufman, 1992, Deep structure of the Texas Gulf
Passive Margin and its Ouachita-Precambrian basement:
Results of the COCORP San Marcos arch survey: AAPG
Bulletin, v. 76, no. 2, p. 270–283.
Dawson, W. C., 1997, Limestone microfacies and sequence
stratigraphy: Eagle Ford Group (Cenomanian-Turonian)
North-Central Texas outcrops: Gulf Coast Association of
Geological Societies Transactions, v. 47, p. 99–105.
Dawson, W. C., B. J. Katz, L. M. Liro, and V. D. Robison,
1993, Stratigraphic and geochemical variability: Eagle
Ford Group, east-central Texas, in Rates of geologic pro-
cesses, tectonics, sedimentation, eustasy and climate—
Implications for hydrocarbon exploration: 14th Annual
Gulf Coast Section of the Society of Economic Pale-
ontologists and Mineralogists Foundation Research
Conference, Houston, Texas, December 5–8, 1993,
p. 19–28, doi:10.5724/gcs.93.14.0019.
Demaison, G. J., and G. T. Moore, 1980, Anoxic environ-
ments and oil source bed genesis: AAPG Bulletin, v. 64,
no. 8, p. 1179–1209.
Denne, R. A., and J. A. Breyer, in press, Integrated stratigraphy
and biostratigraphy of the Cenomanian-Turonian interval
(Eagle Ford and Woodbine groups), Texas. Part 2: Re-
gional depositional episodes of the Cenomanian-Turonian
Eagle Ford and Woodbine groups of Texas, in J. A. Breyer,
ed., The Eagle Ford Shale—A renaissance in U.S. oil
production: AAPG Memoir 110.
Denne, R. A., R. E. Hinote, J. A. Breyer, T. H. Kosanke,
J. A. Lees, N. Englelhardt-Moore, J. M. Spaw, and
N. Tur, 2014, The Cenomanian-Turonian Eagle Ford
Group of South Texas: Insights on timing and
paleoceanographic conditions from geochemisty
and micropaleontologic analyses: Palaeogeography,
Fairbanks et al. 401
 Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 413, p. 2–28,
doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.05.029.
Donovan, A. D., and S. T. Staerker, 2010, Sequence strat-
igraphy of the Eagle Ford (Boquillas) Formation in the
subsurface of South Texas and outcrops of West Texas:
Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Trans-
actions, v. 60, p. 861–899.
Doveton, J. H., and D. F. Merriam, 2004, Borehole petro-
physical chemostratigraphy of Pennsylvanian black shales
in the Kansas subsurface: Chemical Geology, v. 206,
p. 249–258.
Dravis, J. J., 1980, Sedimentology and diagenesis of the Upper
Cretaceous Austin Chalk Formation, South Texas and
northern Mexico, Ph.D. thesis, Rice University, Houston,
Texas, 513 p.
Dubiel, R. F., P. D. Warwick, L. Biewick, L. Burke,
J. L. Coleman, K. O. Dennen, and C. Doolan et al., 2010,
Geology and assessment of undiscovered oil and gas re-
sources in Mesozoic (Jurassic and Cretaceous) rocks of
the onshore and state waters of the Gulf of Mexico region,
U.S.A.: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies
Transactions, v. 60, p. 207–216.
Duggen, S., P. Croot, U. Schacht, and L. Hoffmann, 2007,
Subduction zone volcanic ash can fertilize the surface
ocean and stimulate phytoplankton growth: Evidence
from biogeochemical experiments and satellite data:
Geophysical Research Letters, v. 34, p. L01612–L01617,
doi:10.1029/2006GL027522.
Duggen, S., N. Olgun, P. Croot, L. Hoffmann, H. Dietze,
P. Delmelle, and C. Teschner, 2010, The role of airborne
volcanic ash for the surface ocean biogeochemical iron-
cycle: A review: Biogeosciences, v. 7, p. 827–844, doi:
10.5194/bg-7-827-2010.
Fairbanks, M. D., 2012, High resolution stratigraphy and facies
architecture of the Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian-
Turonian) Eagle Ford Group, Central Texas, M.S. thesis,
The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, 120 p.
Faugères, J.-C., and D. A. Stow, 1993, Bottom-current-
controlled sedimentation: A synthesis of the contourite
problem: Sedimentary Geology, v. 82, p. 287–297, doi:
10.1016/0037-0738(93)90127-Q.
Feray, D. E., and K. Young, 1949, Guidebook, Cretaceous of
Austin, Texas area, 1949: 17th annual field trip by
Shreveport Geological Society: Shreveport, Louisiana,
Shreveport Geological Society, p. 51–56.
Frébourg, G., S. C. Ruppel, R. G. Loucks, and J. Lambert,
2016, Depositional controls on sediment body archi-
tecture in the Eagle Ford/Boquillas system: Insights from
outcrops in west Texas, United States, AAPG Bulletin,
doi:10.1306/12091515101.
Galloway, W. E., 2008, Depositional evolution of the Gulf of
Mexico sedimentary basin, in A. D. Miall, ed., The
sedimentary basins of the United States and Canada: New
York, Elsevier, p. 505–549, doi:10.1016/S1874-5997
(08)00015-4.
Harbor, R. L., 2011, Facies characterization and stratigraphic
architecture of organic-rich mudrocks, Upper Cretaceous
Eagle Ford Formation, South Texas, M.S. thesis, The
University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, 184 p.
402 Eagle Ford Stratigraphy and Facies Architecture
Hentz, T. F., W. A. Ambrose, and D. C. Smith, 2014, Ea-
glebine play of the southwestern East Texas basin:
Stratigraphic and depositional framework of the
Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian-Turonian) Woodbine
and Eagle Ford Groups: AAPG Bulletin, v. 98, no. 12,
p. 2551–2580, doi:10.1306/07071413232.
Hentz, T. F., and S. C. Ruppel, 2010, Regional lithostratig-
raphy of the Eagle Ford Shale: Maverick Basin to East
Texas Basin: Gulf Coast Association of Geological So-
cieties Transactions, v. 60, p. 325–337.
Jiang, M. J., 1989, Biostratigraphy and geochronology of the
Eagle Ford Shale, Austin Chalk, and Lower Taylor Marl in
Texas based on calcareous nannofossils, Ph.D. dissertation,
Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, 524 p.
Jones, M. T., and S. R. Gislason, 2008, Rapid releases of metal
salts and nutrients following the deposition of volcanic
ash into aqueous environments: Geochimica et Cosmo-
chimica Acta, v. 72, p. 3661–3680, doi:10.1016
/j.gca.2008.05.030.
Kearns, T. J., 2011, Chemostratigraphy of the Eagle Ford
Formation, M.S. thesis, The University of Texas at Ar-
lington, Arlington, Texas, 254 p.
Langmann, B., K. Zaksek, M. Hort, and S. Duggen, 2010,
Volcanic ash as fertilizer for the surface ocean: Atmos-
pheric Chemistry and Physics, v. 10, p. 3891–3899, doi:
10.5194/acp-10-3891-2010.
Liro, L. M., W. C. Dawson, B. J. Katz, and V. D. Robison,
1994, Sequence stratigraphic elements and geochemical
variability within a “condensed section”: Eagle Ford
Group, East-Central Texas: Gulf Coast Association of
Geological Societies Transactions, v. 44, p. 393–402.
Lundquist, J. J., 2000, Foraminiferal biostratigraphic and
paleoceanographic analysis of the Eagle Ford, Austin, and
lower Taylor Groups (middle Cenomanian through
lower Campanian) of Central Texas, Ph.D. thesis, The
University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, 544 p.
Pessagno, E. A., 1969, Upper Cretaceous stratigraphy of the
western gulf coast area of Mexico, Texas, and Arkansas:
Geological Society of America, v. 111, p. 59–64.
Phelps, R. M., 2011, Middle-Hauterivian to Lower-
Campanian sequence stratigraphy and stable isotope
geochemistry of the Comanche platform, South Texas,
Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, Texas, 240 p.
Pierce, J. D., 2014, U-Pb geochronology of the Late Creta-
ceous Eagle Ford shale, Texas; defining chronostrati-
graphic boundaries and volcanic ash source, M.S. thesis,
The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, 144 p.
Pratt, L. M., 1984, Influence of paleoenvironmental factors
on preservation of organic matter in Middle Cretaceous
Greenhorn Formation, Pueblo, Colorado: AAPG Bulle-
tin, v. 68, no. 9, p. 1146–1159.
Ratcliffe, K. T., A. M. Wright, and K. Schmidt, 2012, Ap-
plication of inorganic whole-rock geochemistry to shale
resource plays: An example from the Eagle Ford Shale
Formation, Texas: Sedimentary Record, v. 10, no. 2,
p. 4–9, doi:10.2110/sedred.2012.2.4.
Robison, C. R., 1997, Hydrocarbon source rock variability
within the Austin Chalk and Eagle Ford Shale (Upper
 Cretaceous), East Texas, U.S.A.: International Journal of
Coal Geology, v. 34, p. 287–305, doi:10.1016/S0166-
5162(97)00027-X.
Rowe, H., N. Hughes, and K. Robinson, 2012, The quantifi-
cation and application of handheld energy-dispersive
x-ray fluorescence (ED-XRF) in mudrock chemo-
stratigraphy and geochemistry: Chemical Geology, v.
324–325, p. 122–131, doi:10.1016/j.chemgeo.2011.12.023.
Rowe, H., and Ruppel, S. C., 2013, High-resolution chemo-
stratigraphy of the Bakken Formation, Williston Basin (abs.):
AAPG International Conference and Exhibition, Cartagena,
Colombia, September 8–11, 2013, accessed June 9, 2014,
http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/abstracts/html/2013
/90166ice/abstracts/rowe.htm.
Ruppel, S. C., R. G. Loucks, and G. Frébourg, 2012, Guide to
field exposures of the Eagle Ford-equivalent Boquillas
Formation and related Upper Cretaceous units in
southwest Texas: The University of Texas at Austin,
Bureau of Economic Geology, Mudrock Systems Re-
search Laboratory Field-Trip Guidebook, 151 p.
Salvador, A., and J. M. Q. Muñeton, 1989, Stratigraphic
correlation chart of Gulf of Mexico Basin, in A. Salvador,
ed., The Gulf of Mexico Basin: The geology of North
America, v. J: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of
America, plate 5.
Scott, R. W., 2010, Cretaceous stratigraphy, depositional
systems, and reservoir facies of the northern Gulf of
Mexico: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies
Transactions, v. 60, p. 597–609.
Smith, C. N., and A. Malicse, 2010, Rapid handheld x-ray
fluorescence (HHXRF) analysis of gas shales: AAPG
Search and Discovery article 90108, accessed March
16, 2011, http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/pdfz
/abstracts/pdf/2010/intl/abstracts/ndx_smith.pdf.html.
Sohl, N. F., E. Martı́nez, P. Salmercón-Urreña, and
F. Soto-Jaramillo, 1991, Upper Cretaceous, in A. Sal-
vador, ed., The Gulf of Mexico Basin: The geology of
North America, v. J: Boulder, Colorado, Geological
Society of America, p. 205–244.
Stow, D. A., J.-C. Faugeres, J. A. Howe, C. J. Pudsey, and
A. R. Viana, 2002, Bottom currents, contourites and
deep-sea sediment drifts: Current state-of-the-art, in
D. A. Stow, C. J. Pudsey, J. A. Howe, J.-C. Faugères,
and A. R. Viana, eds., Deep-water contourite systems:
Modern drifts and ancient series, seismic and sedimentary
characteristics: Geological Society, London, Memoirs
2002, v. 22, p. 7–20.
Tribovillard, N., T. J. Algeo, T. Lyons, and A. Riboulleau,
2006, Trace metals as paleoredox and paleoproductivity
proxies: An update: Chemical Geology, v. 232, p. 12–32,
doi:10.1016/j.chemgeo.2006.02.012.
Tyler, N., and W. A. Ambrose, 1986, Depositional systems
and oil and gas plays in the Cretaceous Olmos Formation,
South Texas: Report of Investigations 152: Austin, Texas,
Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at
Austin, 42 p.
Young, K., 1977, Guidebook to the geology of Travis County:
Austin, Texas, The University of Texas at Austin, ac-
cessed October 6, 2011, http://www.lib.utexas.edu/geo
/ggtc/toc.html.
Young, K., 1986, Cretaceous marine inundations of
the San Marcos Platform, Texas: Cretaceous Re-
search, v. 7, p. 117–140, doi:10.1016/0195-6671(86)
90013-3.
Fairbanks et al. 403