基岩成岩作用对储层发育的影响:以济阳坳陷太古宇基岩为例

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2024.7.60

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

济阳坳陷太古宇已逐渐成为油气勘探重点目标之一,但储层形成机制认识不清,严重制约了勘探发现。本文通过野外地质考察、岩心观察和薄片鉴定,结合阴极发光、XRD、扫描电镜、流体包裹体等分析测试,对济阳坳陷太古宇基岩的成岩作用及其对储层发育的影响进行了系统研究。成岩作用特征通过岩心、铸体薄片、元素分析结果和流体包裹均一温度识别,其对储层发育的影响作用通过铸体薄片面孔率和物性测井数据表征。结果表明:研究区基岩岩性主要为岩浆岩和变质岩两大类,岩浆岩先后经历了冷凝固结、岩浆期后热液、风化剥蚀淋滤和埋藏成岩4个成岩阶段,其中岩浆岩先后经历了冷凝固结作用、压实作用、溶蚀作用、充填胶结作用和蚀变交代作用,最后经变质变形作用形成变质岩。冷凝固结作用可以形成少量原生基质孔隙,溶蚀作用可形成溶蚀孔和溶蚀缝,孔隙度贡献可达80%,对改善储层质量起关键性作用;压实作用和蚀变交代作用破坏孔隙,方解石和黏土矿物等次生矿物充填胶结裂缝,充填度为30%~70%,对储集空间有破坏作用。综合分析得出,片麻岩储层物性特征优于花岗岩,有利于储层主要发育在风化壳和内幕断裂带。风化壳分布于基岩潜山顶部,纵向具有分带性,主要受控于风化作用,多发育Ⅰ和Ⅱ类储层。内幕断裂带分布在潜山腹部,沿断裂发育,主要发育Ⅱ和Ⅲ类储层。该研究成果可为基岩储层成因研究提供参考。

关键词: 济阳坳陷, 太古宇, 基岩储层, 成岩阶段, 潜山

Abstract:

The Archean basement of the Jiyang Depression has emerged as a key target for oil and gas exploration; however, an unclear understanding of the reservoir formation mechanisms has severely limited exploration and discovery efforts. This paper systematically studies the diagenesis of Archean basement rock in the Jiyang Depression and its influence on reservoir development through field geological investigation, core observation, thin section identification, cathodoluminescence, X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy, and fluid inclusion analysis. Diagenetic characteristics are identified based on core analysis, flake and elemental analysis results, and fluid inclusion homogenization temperatures. The impacts of these characteristics on reservoir development are characterized through flake face rates and physical property logging data. The results indicate that the lithology of the basement rock in the study area is primarily divided into two categories: magmatic and metamorphic rocks. Magmatic rock has undergone four successive diagenetic stages: condensation consolidation, post-magmatic hydrothermal alterations, weathering denudation leaching, and buried rock formation. During these stages, magmatic rock has experienced processes such as condensation consolidation, compaction, dissolution, filling and cementation, as well as alteration and metasomatism. Eventually, metamorphic rock is formed through metamorphic deformation. Condensation consolidation can create a small number of primary matrix pores, while corrosion processes generate corrosion pores and fractures, contributing to up to 80% of the porosity, which is crucial for enhancing reservoir quality. Conversely, compaction, alteration, and metasomatism tend to destroy these pores, as calcite, clay minerals, and other secondary minerals fill and cement fractures, with a filling degree ranging from 30% to 70%, adversely affecting reservoir space. A comprehensive analysis reveals that the physical properties of gneiss reservoirs are superior to those of granite. Favorable reservoirs are mainly located in the weathering crust and the inner fracture zone. The weathering crust, which is situated at the top of the buried hill of the basement rock, displays longitudinal zoning and is primarily influenced by weathering, leading to the development of I and II reservoirs. The inner fault zone, located in the middle section of the buried hill and aligned along fault lines, predominantly develops II and III reservoirs. The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the genetic research of basement rock reservoirs.

Key words: Jiyang Depression, Archean, basement rock reservoir, diagenesis stage, buried hill

中图分类号:

P618.130.1

孟涛, 穆星, 石泉清, 李继岩, 刘鹏, 方正伟, 赵贤, 牛花朋. 基岩成岩作用对储层发育的影响:以济阳坳陷太古宇基岩为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2025, 32(1): 401-417.

MENG Tao, MU Xing, SHI Quanqing, LI Jiyan, LIU Peng, FANG Zhengwei, ZHAO Xian, NIU Huapeng. The implications of basement rock diagenesis on reservoir development: A case study of Archean basement rock in Jiyang Depression[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2025, 32(1): 401-417.

图/表 17

图1 研究区地质简图(据文献[32]修改)

Fig.1 Geological sketch of the study area. Modified after [32].

表1 济阳坳陷岩性特征统计表

Table 1 Statistical table of lithological characteristics of Jiyang Depression

岩性分类			主要矿物组分	结构特征
岩浆岩	脉岩类	煌斑岩	黑云母+角闪石(>50%)、钾长石、斜长石	暗色矿物较多,块状构造,煌斑结构,有蚀变
	辉长岩类	辉绿岩	斜长石(27%)、石英(5%)、黏土矿物(>50%)	可见模糊的辉绿结构,半自行斜长石呈格架分布,岩石蚀变严重,辉石已经全部黏土化(绿泥石、高岭石)
	辉长岩类	斜长岩	斜长石(>85%)	粗粒半自行结构,几乎全由斜长石组成,粒填隙少量绿泥石
	闪长岩- 正长岩类	石英二长岩	钾长石(45%)、斜长石(34%)、石英(16%)、黑云母(1%)	二长结构,石英含量5%~20%,板状斜长石,它形微斜长石
	花岗岩类	花岗闪长岩	斜长石(49%)、石英(27%)、钾长石(10%)、黑云母+角闪石(<10%)	花岗结构,斜长石占比大于65%
		花岗闪长斑岩	斜长石(53%)、钾长石(20%)、石英(20%)	似斑状结构,斑晶为钾长石、斜长石,基质为显微晶质结构
		二长花岗岩	石英(40%)、斜长石(28%)、钾长石(24%)、黑云母+角闪石(<5%)	花岗结构,钾长石、斜长石含量相当(接近1∶1),斜长石呈板状半自行晶
变质岩	片麻岩类	花岗质片麻岩	斜长石(45%)、钾长石(22%)、石英(18%)、黑云母(<10%)	变余花岗结构,黑云母定向排列呈片麻状构造
	片麻岩类	斜长片麻岩	斜长石(>60%)、石英(27%)、钾长石(4%)、黑云母(5%)	粒状变晶结构,云母、角闪石定向排列,片麻状构造
	角闪岩类	斜长角闪岩	角闪石(43%)、石英(13%)、斜长石(12%)、黑云母(17%)	粒状变晶结构,角闪石定向排列呈定向构造
	碎裂岩类	碎裂岩	斜长石(73%)、石英(13%)、钾长石(12%)	碎斑结构,斑晶基质成分一致,裂隙充填细小岩石碎屑、绿泥石、闪石等

表1 济阳坳陷岩性特征统计表

Table 1 Statistical table of lithological characteristics of Jiyang Depression

岩性分类			主要矿物组分	结构特征
岩浆岩	脉岩类	煌斑岩	黑云母+角闪石(>50%)、钾长石、斜长石	暗色矿物较多,块状构造,煌斑结构,有蚀变
	辉长岩类	辉绿岩	斜长石(27%)、石英(5%)、黏土矿物(>50%)	可见模糊的辉绿结构,半自行斜长石呈格架分布,岩石蚀变严重,辉石已经全部黏土化(绿泥石、高岭石)
	辉长岩类	斜长岩	斜长石(>85%)	粗粒半自行结构,几乎全由斜长石组成,粒填隙少量绿泥石
	闪长岩- 正长岩类	石英二长岩	钾长石(45%)、斜长石(34%)、石英(16%)、黑云母(1%)	二长结构,石英含量5%~20%,板状斜长石,它形微斜长石
	花岗岩类	花岗闪长岩	斜长石(49%)、石英(27%)、钾长石(10%)、黑云母+角闪石(<10%)	花岗结构,斜长石占比大于65%
		花岗闪长斑岩	斜长石(53%)、钾长石(20%)、石英(20%)	似斑状结构,斑晶为钾长石、斜长石,基质为显微晶质结构
		二长花岗岩	石英(40%)、斜长石(28%)、钾长石(24%)、黑云母+角闪石(<5%)	花岗结构,钾长石、斜长石含量相当(接近1∶1),斜长石呈板状半自行晶
变质岩	片麻岩类	花岗质片麻岩	斜长石(45%)、钾长石(22%)、石英(18%)、黑云母(<10%)	变余花岗结构,黑云母定向排列呈片麻状构造
	片麻岩类	斜长片麻岩	斜长石(>60%)、石英(27%)、钾长石(4%)、黑云母(5%)	粒状变晶结构,云母、角闪石定向排列,片麻状构造
	角闪岩类	斜长角闪岩	角闪石(43%)、石英(13%)、斜长石(12%)、黑云母(17%)	粒状变晶结构,角闪石定向排列呈定向构造
	碎裂岩类	碎裂岩	斜长石(73%)、石英(13%)、钾长石(12%)	碎斑结构,斑晶基质成分一致,裂隙充填细小岩石碎屑、绿泥石、闪石等

图2 济阳坳陷岩浆岩QAP分类图(边界据文献[34]) Q—石英;A—碱性长石;P—斜长石。

Fig.2 QAP classification diagram of the magmatic rock in Jiyang Depression. Modified after [34].

图3 济阳坳陷岩性分布特征 a—岩性厚度占比饼状统计图;b—各钻遇井岩性分布特征及厚度占比。

Fig.3 Characteristics of lithology distribution in Jiyang Depression

图4 济阳坳陷主要岩石类型 a—斜长岩,SHG6井,1 984.50 m,(+)×50;b—辉绿岩,YG70井,3 278.80 m,(+)×50;c—石英二长岩,ZHG606井,1 398.4 m,(+)×50;d—二长花岗岩,ZHG606井,1 301.32 m,(+)×50;e—花岗闪长岩,CH18井,1 168.8 m,(+)×50;f—花岗闪长斑岩,ZH36井,1 250.7 m,(+)×50;g—花岗质片麻岩,D712井,1 487.30 m,(+)×50;h—CHE60井,1 633.70 m,斜长片麻岩,(+)×50;i—斜长角闪岩,ZH39井,1 388.30 m,(+)×50;j—碎裂岩,CHB20井,2 437.25 m,岩心照片;k—花岗闪长岩,CH18井,1 169.5 m,岩心照片;l—斜长角闪岩,ZH39井,1 387.55 m,岩心照片。Pl—斜长石;Chl—绿泥石;Mc—微斜长石;Qtz—石英;Ep—绿帘石;Kfs—钾长石;Ab—钠长石;Cal—方解石;Bt—黑云母;Hbl—角闪石;Py—黄铁矿。

Fig.4 Main rock types of the Jiyang Depression

图5 济阳坳陷变质岩TiO2-SiO2和Ni-TiO2图解(a边界据文献[44];b边界据文献[45-46])

Fig.5 TiO2-SiO2 and Ni-TiO2 Diagrams of the Jiyang Depression metamorphic rocks (a according to [44]; b according to [45-46])

图6 济阳坳陷基岩储集空间类型 a—云母晶间微孔,CHEG202井,4 619 m,扫描电镜(BSE);b—云母晶间微孔,SHG102井,1 213.6 m,扫描电镜(SE);c—黄铁矿晶间微孔,CHG19井,1 785.3 m,扫描电镜(BSE);d—黄铁矿晶间微孔,CHG19井,1 785.3 m,扫描电镜(BSE);e—伊利石晶间微孔,CHB302井,4 175.98 m,扫描电镜(BSE);f—绿泥石晶间微孔,CHB502井,2 417.82 m,扫描电镜(SE);g—粒间溶孔,CHE60井,1 633.7 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;h—粒内溶孔,ZHG1井,1 407.1 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;i—解理缝、粒内溶孔,CHE60井,1 633.7 m,扫描电镜(SE);j—构造缝,CH18井,1 406.8 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;k—溶蚀缝,CHB502井,2 445 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;l—构造缝溶蚀扩大,CHB302井,4 175.98 m,阴极发光。

Fig.6 Types of reservoir space in the Jiyang Depression basement rock

表2 济阳坳陷基岩储层分类标准

Table 2 Classification standards for basement rock reservoirs in Jiyang Depression

储层类型	CNL/%	AC/ (μs·ft^-1)	DEN/ (g·cm^-3)	孔隙度/%	渗透率/mD	主要储集空间类型	主要发育的构造位置	主要岩性	典型井
Ⅰ类	>3.9	>62	<2.52	>5.0	>4.0	溶蚀孔、缝构造裂缝	风化壳	片麻岩类	CHBG25 SHG6
Ⅱ类	2.5~3.9	59~62	2.52~<2.55	1.0~5.0	1.0~4.0	溶蚀孔、缝构造裂缝	风化壳内幕	片麻岩类	ZH39 CHG19
Ⅲ类	0.2~<2.5	56~<59	2.55~2.60	0.1~<1.0	0.1~<1.0	构造裂缝基质微孔	风化壳内幕	片麻岩类花岗岩类	ZH606 CHG19

图7 微米CT孔隙三维重构与孔喉半径分布特征 a—孔隙提取图;b—孔隙连通性分析图;c—孔隙等效半径分布图;d—喉道等效半径分布图。

Fig.7 Three-dimensional reconstruction of micro-CT porosity and characteristics of pore throat radius distribution

图8 岩性与孔渗关系图 a—孔隙度-岩性-基岩顶距关系图;b—渗透率-岩性-基岩顶距关系图。

Fig.8 Relationship between lithology and porosity-permeability

表3 济阳坳陷岩浆岩成岩阶段划分表

Table 3 Diagenesis stage table of magmatic rock in Jiyang Depression

成岩阶段		温度/℃	地层埋深/m	不同成岩阶段识别特征
冷却成岩		1 300~古地温	(浅成侵入岩)<3 000 (中深成侵入岩)>3 000	中粗粒结构,主要矿物为长石、石英、云母等,长石自行程度较高
岩浆后热液作用		1 300~古地温	根据岩浆岩产状	可见绿泥石等热液蚀变矿物充填孔缝
风化剥蚀及淋滤作用		<40	<300	岩石经溶蚀作用形成溶蚀裂缝、溶蚀孔洞,斜长石高岭石化
浅埋成岩	A	40~<55	300~<1 500	先成孔隙受压实作用变小或丧失,孔隙度减小;但有机酸与其在温度压力下转化的无机酸对岩石强烈溶蚀,可发育大量次生孔隙;可见次生方解石充填孔隙,高岭石伊利石化,针状伊利石
浅埋成岩	B	55~<80	1 500~<2 500
深埋成岩	A	80~<100	2 500~<3 000	断裂形成裂缝和伴生孔隙,白云石形成
	B	100~135	3 000~4 000	次生孔隙大量消减,裂缝开始形成,发育粒状微晶石英
	C	>135	>4 000	裂缝主导阶段,内幕储集空间形成,片状伊利石,粒状微晶石英,斜长石绢云母化

图9 济阳坳陷基岩成岩演化图

Fig.9 Diagenesis evolution diagram of basement rock in Jiyang Depression

图10 济阳坳陷基岩储层成岩作用特征 a—中粗粒结构,CHB502井,2 747.67 m,岩心照片;b—脉状绿泥石、方解石充填,CHE60井,1 633.7 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;c—斜长石溶蚀,ZH606井,1 325 m,铸体薄片;d—脉状绿泥石充填,CH18井,1 406.8 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;e—流体裹体均一温度,CH18井,1 406.8 m,包裹体薄片(-)×500;f—机械压实、钙质胶结,CHG19井,1 785.3 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;g—构造裂缝,CH918井,2 291.6 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;h—斜长石绢云母化,YG98井,2 327.7 m,铸体薄片(-)×50;i—方解石交代长石,ZH36井,1 250.7 m,阴极发光。

Fig.10 Diagenetic characteristics of basement rock reservoirs in Jiyang Depression

图11 流体包裹体均一温度箱形统计图 a—埕北地区;b—沾车地区;c—东营地区。

Fig.11 Box-shaped statistical diagram of fluid inclusion homogenization temperature

图12 济阳坳陷主要变质相特征 a—绿片岩相,CHEG202井,4 619.0 m(+)×50;b—角闪岩相,ZH39井,1 325.00 m(+)×50。Ep—绿帘石;Qtz—石英;Chl—绿泥石;Bt—黑云母;Hbl—角闪石;Pl—斜长石;Gln—蓝闪石。

Fig.12 Characteristics of the main metamorphic facies in Jiyang Depression

图13 CHBG25井太古宇基岩纵向物性特征

Fig.13 Vertical physical property characteristics of Archean basement rock in well CHBG25

图14 AMICSCAN矿物定量分析图 a—ZH36井,1 250.7 m,花岗闪长斑岩,扫描电镜(BSE);b—ZH36井,1 250.7 m,花岗闪长斑岩,矿物定量分析图。

Fig.14 AMICSCAN quantitative analysis of minerals

参考文献 68

[1]	WALTERS R F. Oil production from fractured pre-Cambrian basement rocks in central Kansas[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 1953, 37: 300-313.
[2]	吴伟涛, 高先志, 刘兴周, 等. 基岩油气藏的形成与分布[J]. 地质科技情报, 2014, 33(1): 106-113.
[3]	朱茂林, 刘震, 刘惠民, 等. 东营凹陷北带基岩风化壳储层发育特征及控制因素[J]. 地学前缘, 2024, 31(3): 324-336. DOI
[4]	WANG Z C, JIANG Q C, WANG J F, et al. Hydrocarbon accumulation characteristics in basement reservoirs and exploration targets of deep basement reservoirs in onshore China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2024, 51(1): 31-43.
[5]	GUO Z Q, MA Y S, LIU W H, et al. Main factors controlling the formation of basement hydrocarbon reservoirs in the Qaidam Basin, Western China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2017, 149: 244-255.
[6]	ARESHEV E G, DONG T L, SAN N T, et al. Reservoirs in fractured basement on the continental shelf of southern Vietnam[J]. Journal of Petroleum Geology, 1992, 15(3): 451-464.
[7]	TRICE R. Basement exploration, west of shetlands: progress in opening a new play on the UKCS[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2014, 397(1): 81-105.
[8]	杨飞, 徐守余. 全球基岩油气藏分布及成藏规律[J]. 特种油气藏, 2011, 18(1): 7-11, 135.
[9]	吴丽荣, 黄成刚, 袁剑英, 等. 咸化湖盆高效基岩气藏储层中基质孔隙的发现及意义[J]. 地球科学与环境学报, 2015, 37(4): 54-62.
[10]	李延丽, 苟迎春, 马新民, 等. 柴达木盆地坪西地区基岩气藏储层特征[J]. 天然气地球科学, 2019, 30(2): 219-227. DOI
[11]	陶鹏. 东海盆地丽水凹陷前新生界潜山岩性特征、储层量化模式与地球物理综合刻画[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2022.
[12]	穆星, 孟涛, 石泉清, 等. 济阳坳陷太古宙基岩储层特征及油气成藏条件分析[J/OL]. 现代地质, 1-18[2024-12-27]. https://doi.org/10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2024.135.
[13]	谢文彦, 孟卫工, 张占文, 等. 辽河坳陷潜山内幕多期裂缝油藏成藏模式[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2006, 33(6): 649-652.
[14]	孟卫工, 李晓光, 刘宝鸿. 辽河坳陷变质岩古潜山内幕油藏形成主控因素分析[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2007, 28(5): 584-589.
[15]	庞雄奇, 谢文彦, 孟卫工, 等. 辽河断陷沉积岩之下0-1600 m变质岩中大油气田的发现及其意义[J]. 地质论评, 2011, 57(4): 541-548.
[16]	李江涛, 付锁堂, 王任一, 等. 柴达木盆地阿尔金山前深层基岩气藏储集空间再认识与成储潜力区探讨[J]. 天然气工业, 2020, 40(2): 90-96.
[17]	毛治国, 崔景伟, 綦宗金, 等. 风化壳储层分类、特征及油气勘探方向[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2018, 30(2): 12-22.
[18]	黄成刚, 张小军, 胡贵, 等. 高原咸化湖盆基底储层特征与成藏主控因素: 以柴达木盆地东坪地区为例[J]. 石油学报, 2020, 41(2): 179-196. DOI
[19]	陈更新, 王建功, 杜斌山, 等. 柴达木盆地尖北地区裂缝性基岩气藏储层特征[J]. 岩性油气藏, 2020, 32(4): 36-47.
[20]	LI J T, FU S T, WANG R Y, et al. Reservoir space and potential reservoir-formation areas in deep bedrock gas reservoirs in altun forelands, Qaidam Basin: recognition and discussion[J]. Natural Gas Industry B, 2020, 7(5): 498-504.
[21]	YE T, CHEN A Q, NIU C M, et al. Structural, petrophysical and lithological characterization of crystalline bedrock buried-hill reservoirs: a case study of the southern Jinzhou oilfield in offshore Bohai Bay Basin, North China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2021, 196: 107950.
[22]	潘忠祥. 不整合对于油气运移聚集的更要性[J]. 石油学报, 1983(4): 1-10.
[23]	邹才能, 张光亚, 陶士振, 等. 全球油气勘探领域地质特征、重大发现及非常规石油地质[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2010, 37(2): 129-145.
[24]	邹才能, 朱如凯, 吴松涛, 等. 常规与非常规油气聚集类型、特征、机理及展望: 以中国致密油和致密气为例[J]. 石油学报, 2012, 33(2): 173-187. DOI
[25]	ZHU M L, LIU Z, LIU H M, et al. Alteration-destruction-preservation of bedrock weathering crusts and the influence on reservoir distribution in Dongying Sag, Bohai Bay basin[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2021, 129: 105078.
[26]	陆诗阔, 郭玉新, 孙建孟. 济阳坳陷太古宇储层特征与常规测井识别[J]. 特种油气藏, 2012, 19(2): 21-24, 135-136.
[27]	刘惠民, 张鹏飞, 宋国奇, 等. 鲁西地区太古宇裂缝类型与发育规律[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 38(5): 34-40.
[28]	张鹏飞, 刘惠民, 王永诗, 等. 济阳坳陷太古宇潜山储集体发育模式[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 41(6): 20-29.
[29]	周健, 林承焰, 刘惠民, 等. 准噶尔盆地哈山地区石炭系-二叠系火山岩储层发育机制研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2024, 31(2): 327-342. DOI
[30]	漆家福, 杨桥, 陆克政, 等. 渤海湾盆地基岩地质图及其所包含的构造运动信息[J]. 地学前缘, 2004, 11(3): 299-307.
[31]	谯汉生. 渤海湾盆地隐蔽油气藏[J]. 地学前缘, 2000, 7(4): 497.
[32]	王世虎, 夏斌, 陈根文, 等. 济阳坳陷构造特征及形成机制讨论[J]. 大地构造与成矿学, 2004, 28(4): 428-434.
[33]	宋明水, 王惠勇, 张云银. 济阳坳陷潜山“挤-拉-滑” 成山机制及油气藏类型划分[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2019, 26(4): 1-8.
[34]	王世进, 万渝生. 山东省前寒武纪地质及地质公园地质特征概述[J]. 华北地质, 2022, 2(45): 18-36.
[35]	STRECKEISEN A. To each plutonic rock its proper Name[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 1976, 12(1): 1-33.
[36]	ZHAO G C, ZHAI M G. Lithotectonic elements of Precambrian basement in the North China Craton: review and tectonic implications[J]. Gondwana Research, 2013, 23(4): 1207-1240.
[37]	翟明国. 克拉通化与华北陆块的形成[J]. 中国科学: 地球科学, 2011, 41(8): 1037-1046.
[38]	ZHAI M G, SANTOSH M. Metallogeny of the North China Craton: link with secular changes in the evolving earth[J]. Gondwana Research, 2013, 24(1): 275-297.
[39]	赵磊, 张儒诚, 孙伟清, 等. 华北克拉通东部胶北地体早前寒武纪表壳岩系: 研究进展与综述[J]. 岩石学报, 2023, 39(8): 2211-2237.
[40]	王世进, 王来明, 万渝生, 等. 鲁东地区侵入岩形成时代和期次划分: 锆石SHRIMP U-Pb年龄的证据[J]. 山东国土资源, 2009, 25(12): 8-20, 25.
[41]	张旗, 翟明国. 太古宙TTG岩石是什么含义?[J]. 岩石学报, 2012, 28(11): 3446-3456.
[42]	孙国正. 华北克拉通东部中-新太古代花岗岩与岩石圈热状态研究[D]. 北京: 北京大学, 2021.
[43]	周廷全, 郭玉新, 孟涛, 等. 济阳坳陷太古宇岩浆岩常规测井综合识别[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2011, 18(6): 37-41, 113.
[44]	高坤顺, 叶涛, 孙哲, 等. 渤海海域JZ25-1 S太古宇潜山储层特征及其油气产能差异控制因素[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2020, 50(3): 694-704.
[45]	TARNEY J. Geochemistry of Archaean high-grade gneisses, with implications as to the origin and evolution of the Precambrian crust[M]// WINDLEY B F. The early history of Earth. London: Wiley, 1976: 405-417.
[46]	FLOYD P A, WINCHESTER J A, PARK R G. Geochemistry and tectonic setting of Lewisian clastic metasediments from the Early Proterozoic Loch Maree Group of Gairloch, NW Scotland[J]. Precambrian Research, 1989, 45(1/2/3): 203-214.
[47]	焦小芹, 牛花朋, 谢庆宾, 等. 柴达木盆地尖北斜坡基岩储层特征及天然气成藏条件[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 2020, 41(2): 305-315.
[48]	曾维特, 丁文龙, 张金川, 等. 渝东南—黔北地区牛蹄塘组页岩微纳米级孔隙发育特征及主控因素分析[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(3): 220-235. DOI
[49]	曾联波, 漆家福, 王成刚, 等. 构造应力对裂缝形成与流体流动的影响[J]. 地学前缘, 2008, 15(3): 292-298.
[50]	XIA Z Y, LIU Z G, LI S M, et al. Characteristics of parametamorphic rock reservoirs in Pingxi area, Qaidam Basin, NW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(1): 93-103.
[51]	LI J, WEI P S, SHI L T, et al. Fluid interaction mechanism and diagenetic reformation of basement reservoirs in Beier Sag, Hailar Basin, China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(1): 46-58.
[52]	潘虹, 李晓山, 钱川川, 等. 准噶尔盆地克百断裂带石炭系内幕型火山岩储层特征及成藏规律[J]. 东北石油大学学报, 2022, 46(1): 62-75, 122.
[53]	焦小芹. 柴西北缘阿尔金山前基岩储层特征及成藏条件研究[D]. 北京: 中国石油大学(北京), 2020.
[54]	谷文龙, 牛花朋, 张关龙, 等. 乌伦古地区石炭系火山岩成岩作用及其对储层发育的影响[J]. 地学前缘, 2023, 30(2): 296-305. DOI
[55]	曹江骏, 罗静兰, 范彩伟, 等. 深部热流体活动对储层成岩作用及孔隙演化的影响: 以莺歌海盆地LDX区中新统黄流组为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(4): 412-429. DOI
[56]	周瑶琪, 周振柱, 陈勇, 等. 东营凹陷民丰地区深部储层成岩环境变化研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2011, 18(2): 268-276.
[57]	HONG H L, JI K P, HEI H T, et al. Clay mineral evolution and formation of intermediate phases during pedogenesis on picrite basalt bedrock under temperate conditions (Yunnan, south western China)[J]. Catena, 2023, 220: 106677.
[58]	WORTHINGTON S R H, DAVIES G J, ALEXANDER E C. Enhancement of bedrock permeability by weathering[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2016, 160: 188-202.
[59]	HU J, JIANG Y, TANG H, et al. Quantitative characterization of vertical zonation of Mesozoic granite weathering reservoirs in the coastal area of eastern Fujian Province, China[J]. Petroleum Science. 2023, 20(5): 2664-2682.
[60]	YE T, CHEN A Q, YANG H F, et al. Tectonism and fracture-related dissolution induced the formation of the large-scale metamorphic granite reservoir: implications from bozhong 26-6 Precambrian bedrock trap, offshore Bohai Bay Basin, Northern China[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2024, 160: 106593.
[61]	VÁZQUEZ M, RAMÍREZ S, MORATA D, et al. Regolith production and chemical weathering of granitic rocks in central Chile[J]. Chemical Geology, 2016, 446: 87-98.
[62]	樊太亮, 高志前, 吴俊. 塔里木盆地深层碳酸盐岩建造-改造作用与多类型储层有序性分布[J]. 地学前缘, 2023, 30(4): 1-18. DOI
[63]	LIU G P, ZENG L B, LI H N, et al. Natural fractures in metamorphic basement reservoirs in the Liaohe Basin, China[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2020, 119: 104479.
[64]	周琦杰, 刘永江, 王德英, 等. 渤海湾中部中、新生代构造演化与潜山的形成[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(5): 147-160. DOI
[65]	叶涛, 牛成民, 王德英, 等. 渤海西南海域中生代构造演化、动力学机制及其对华北克拉通破坏的启示[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(5): 133-146. DOI
[66]	何登发, 马永生, 刘波, 等. 中国含油气盆地深层勘探的主要进展与科学问题[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(1): 1-12. DOI
[67]	李映涛, 邓尚, 张继标, 等. 深层致密碳酸盐岩走滑断裂带核带结构与断控储集体簇状发育模式: 以塔里木盆地顺北4号断裂带为例[J]. 地学前缘, 2023, 30(6): 80-94. DOI
[68]	金凤鸣, 张飞鹏, 韩国猛, 等. 黄骅坳陷断裂发育特征及其对新生古储型潜山成藏控制作用[J]. 地学前缘, 2023, 30(1): 55-68. DOI