Abstract

Inversion structures are now recognized in most orogenic belts and in many other tectonic settings, however, this has not always been the case. For many years the thin-skinned paradigm dominated the interpretation of thrust belts which resulted in many inversion structures being erroneously interpreted as thin-skinned thrusts. In rift basins, intra-cratonic basins and on passive margins inversion structures were often interpreted as having alternative origins, for example, strike-slip deformation. The classic paper of Bally described the geometric characteristics of inversion structures, in which he identified the extensional fault geometry and its subsequent compressional reactivation as essential requirements of an inversion structure. The increased recognition of inversion structures in a wide variety of tectonic settings is illustrated by four hydrocarbon exploration case studies. The geometric characteristics of inversion structures are remarkably consistent irrespective of the tectonic setting and by applying a few simple criteria they can easily be identified. The impact of inversion on hydrocarbon prospectivity is a function of the control on the petroleum system elements from the initial extensional tectonic history and of the later compressional tectonic history which commonly creates new, or modifies old trap configurations.