塔里木盆地库车前陆区侏罗系—白垩系构造应力分布及其控缝作用

操应长; 郇志鹏; 刘寅; 孙小龙; 王健

doi:10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2026119

塔里木盆地库车前陆区侏罗系—白垩系构造应力分布及其控缝作用

doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2026119

操应长^{1, 2,},
郇志鹏^{1, 2, 3,},
刘寅^{1, 2, ,},
孙小龙^{1, 2,},
王健^{1, 2,}

1.
深层油气全国重点实验室，山东青岛 266580
2.
中国石油大学（华东）地球科学与技术学院，山东青岛 266580
3.
中国石油天然气股份公司塔里木油田勘探开发研究院，新疆库尔勒 841000

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金项目（42488101, 42472192）；国家科技重大专项（2025ZD140050203, 2025ZD140050205）

详细信息

作者简介:
操应长（1969—），男，博士，教授，从事沉积学、储层地质学、石油地质学研究。Email：caoych@upc.edu.cn

通讯作者:
刘寅（1986—），男，博士，副教授，从事构造地质学、石油地质学研究。Email：liuyin@upc.edu.cn

中图分类号: P313.5；P618
计量
- 文章访问数: 59
- HTML全文浏览量: 8
- PDF下载量: 7
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2026-08-20
- 修回日期: 2026-09-25
- 录用日期: 2026-09-28
- 预出版日期: 2026-09-29
- 刊出日期: 2026-10-28

Tectonic stress distribution and its control on fracture development in the Jurassic–Cretaceous succession of the Kuqa foreland area, Tarim Basin

CAO Yingchang^{1, 2
,},
HUAN Zhipeng^{1, 2, 3
,},
LIU Yin^{1, 2
, ,},
SUN Xiaolong^{1, 2
,},
WANG Jian^{1, 2
,}

1.
Key Laboratory of Deep Oil and Gas, Qingdao 266580, Shandong, China
2.
School of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, Shandong, China
3.
Tarim Oilfield Company, PetroChina, Korla 841000, Xinjiang, China

Funds: This research was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 42488101 and 42472192) and the National Science and Technology Major Project (Grant Nos. 2025ZD140050203 and 2025ZD140050205).

More Information

Author Bio:
操应长，二级教授，博士生导师。2023年获第十八次李四光地质科学奖科研奖。现任中国石油大学（华东）副校长、油气储层研究中心和山东省泰山学者团队负责人。长期从事含油气盆地沉积学、储层地质学、非常规油气地质学等教学和科研工作，作为项目负责人先后承担了国家油气重大专项课题、国家自然科学联合基金重点项目、中国石油重大科技专项等，已在陆相湖盆层序地层与深水沉积砂体、储层流岩作用与油气储层成储机制、界面水微滴与有机-无机相互作用等领域形成了特色研究方向和国际重要影响的学术成果。在Nature Communications、PNAS、Sedimentology、GSA Bulletin、Earth-Sciences Reviews、AAPG Bulletin、中国科学：地球科学等期刊公开发表学术论文400余篇，其中被SCI收录200余篇，公开出版《陆相湖盆深水重力流沉积作用》《断陷湖盆层序地层学》等学术专著6部，授权发明专利20余件；研究成果获国家科技进步奖二等奖2项、国家教学成果二等奖2项、省部级科技进步奖一等奖3项。任国务院学位委员会第八、九届地质资源与地质工程学科评议组成员和《古地理学报》副主编、《石油勘探与开发》等期刊编委，先后获评中国地质学会会士、有突出贡献中青年专家、享受国务院政府特殊津贴等

摘要

摘要: 库车坳陷碎屑岩储层整体较为致密，构造裂缝的发育对于寻找优质储层及揭示油气富集规律具有重要意义。然而，受复杂构造应力环境控制，该区裂缝发育呈现出强烈的非均质性。文章以克拉苏构造带白垩系巴什基奇克组和迪北地区侏罗系阿合组为研究对象，综合运用构造解析、应力场数值模拟及裂缝定量表征等方法，深入探讨了构造应力分布特征及其对裂缝发育的控制作用。研究表明，该区宏观应力场可划分为3个带：北部滑脱释放带、中部断褶集中带和南部构造憋压带；各带内的应力非均质性受断裂组合、褶皱变形与膏盐层滑脱的共同控制。应力分带性显著控制着裂缝的发育特征：北部滑脱释放带以低密度的枢纽垂直缝和斜交缝为主；中部断褶集中带裂缝普遍发育且产状复杂；南部构造憋压带则以东西分段的枢纽平行缝为主。这一规律反映出裂缝成因自北向南由走滑调节与局部断层控制向褶皱变形控制转变。单一应力带内的构造样式对局部应力分异和裂缝发育具有关键的调节作用。其中，反冲构造内裂缝最为发育且连通性好，叠瓦构造次之，对冲构造内裂缝最不发育且有效性差。此次研究揭示了构造应力对裂缝发育及油气富集的关键控制作用，可为前陆盆地复杂应力区的储层评价与油气成藏研究提供理论支撑和实践参考。
- 构造应力场 /
- 构造样式 /
- 裂缝网络 /
- 库车坳陷 /
- 巴什基奇克组 /
- 阿合组
Abstract: Objective The clastic reservoirs in the Kuqa Depression are generally tight, making tectonic fractures crucial for identifying high-quality reservoirs and understanding hydrocarbon enrichment patterns. However, fracture development is highly heterogeneous under the influence of a complex tectonic stress field. This study aims to clarify the distribution patterns of tectonic stress in the Kuqa foreland area and elucidate how stress variations control fracture development and distribution. Methods The Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in the Kelasu structural belt and the Jurassic Ahe Formation in the Dibei area were selected as the study targets. Structural analysis, numerical simulation of the tectonic stress field, and quantitative fracture characterization were integrated to investigate stress distribution and evaluate the effects of stress variations and structural styles on fracture development. Results The macroscopic stress field can be divided into three zones: the northern detachment-release zone, the central fault-fold concentration zone, and the southern tectonically confined compressional zone. Stress heterogeneity within each zone is jointly controlled by fault assemblages, fold deformation, and the detachment along evaporite layers. This stress zonation strongly controls fracture development. The northern detachment-release zone is dominated by low-density, hinge-orthogonal, and oblique fractures; the central fault-fold concentration zone features widely developed fractures with complex attitudes; and the southern tectonically confined compressional zone is characterized by E-W segmented, hinge-parallel fractures. This spatial distribution reflects a genetic transition of fractures from north to south, shifting from strike-slip accommodation and local fault-related origins to fold-deformation-related origins. Furthermore, structural styles within a single stress zone play a critical role in regulating local stress differentiation and fracture development. Fractures are most developed with optimal connectivity in back-thrust structures, followed by imbricate structures, while counter-thrust structures exhibit the least developed fractures with poor effectiveness. Conclusions This study reveals the critical role of tectonic stress in controlling fracture development and hydrocarbon enrichment. Significance This study can provide theoretical support and practical references for reservoir evaluation and hydrocarbon accumulation in areas of complex stress in foreland basins.
- tectonic stress field /
- structural style /
- fracture network /
- Kuqa Depression /
- Bashijiqike Formation /
- Ahe Formation
注释:
Author’s Contributions:
CAO Yingchang, LIU Yin, WANG Jian, and SUN Xiaolong contributed to conceptualization, data analysis, methodology, and the initial drafting of the manuscript. LIU Yin, WANG Jian, and SUN Xiaolong were responsible for data curation, formal analysis, and visualization (figure preparation). HUAN Zhipeng participated in manuscript revision, critical review and data curation. WANG Jian, LIU Yin, and SUN Xiaolong contributed to methodology refinement and subsequent manuscript revisions. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript and agree to its submission and publication.
Conflict of Interests:
All authors declare no conflict of interests.

HTML全文

图 1 库车坳陷区域构造概况图

a—塔里木盆地大地构造位置（兰勃特投影示意图，据Xu et al.，2022修改）；b—构造单元划分；c—库车坳陷构造图

Figure 1. Geological units of the Tarim Basin and structural map of the Kuqa Depression

(a) Tectonic location of the Tarim Basin ( Lambert projection; modified from Xu et al., 2022); (b) Tectonic division; (c) Structural map of the Kuqa Depression

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 库车坳陷重点地层综合柱状图（据Zeng et al.，2010修改）

Figure 2. Comprehensive stratigraphic column of key strata in the Kuqa Depression (modified from Zeng et al., 2010)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 库车坳陷典型钻井岩石力学参数和现今应力特征

a—博孜102井巴什基奇克组；b—迪北501井阿合组

Figure 3. Rock mechanical properties and present-day stress characteristics of representative wells in the Kuqa Depression

(a) Bashijiqike Formation in Well Bozi 102; (b) Ahe Formation in Well Dibei 501

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 库车坳陷博孜−大北−克深地区和迪北地区构造纲要及最大主应力平面分布图

a—白垩系巴什基奇克组；b—侏罗系阿合组

Figure 4. Tectonic outline and planar distribution of the maximum principal stress in the Bozi–Dabei–Keshen and Dibei areas of the Kuqa Depression

(a) Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in the Bozi–Dabei–Keshen area; (b) Jurassic Ahe Formation in the Dibei area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 库车坳陷克深地区地质结构及最大主应力分布剖面

Pre-∈—前寒武纪地层；∈—寒武系；S—志留系；C—石炭系；T—三叠系；J₁—下侏罗统；J_2-3—中—上侏罗统；K₁y–K₁s—下白垩统亚格列木组–舒善河组；K₁bx–K₁bs—下白垩统巴西盖组–巴什基奇克组；E_1-2km—库姆格列木群；E₃s—苏维依组；N₁j—吉迪克组；N₁k—康村组；N₂k—库车组；Q—第四系a—过克深地区地质结构；b—剖面最大主应力分布；b—巴什基奇克组最大主应力分布

Figure 5. Geological structure and cross-sectional distribution of the maximum principal stress in the Keshen area of the Kuqa Depression

(a) Geological cross-section across the Keshen area; (b) Cross-sectional distribution of the maximum principal stress (Pa); (c) Distribution of the maximum principal stress in the Bashijiqike Formation (Pa)Pre-∈–Pre Cambrian; ∈–Cambrian; S–Silurian; C–Carboniferous; T–Triassic; J₁–Lower Jurassic; J_2-3–Middle–Upper Jurassic; K₁y–K₁s–Yageliemu–Shushanhe Formations of Lower Cretaceous; K₁bx–K₁bs–Baxigai–Bashijiqike Formations of Lower Cretaceous; E_1-2km–Kumugeliemu Group; E₃s–Suweiyi Formation; N₁j–Jidike Formation; N₁k–Kangcun Formation; N₂k–Kuqa Formation; Q–Quaternary

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 库车坳陷迪北地区地质结构及最大主应力分布剖面

Pre-∈—前寒武纪地层；∈—寒武系；Pre-C—前石炭系地层；C—石炭系；T—三叠系；J₁—下侏罗统；J_2-3—中—上侏罗统；K₁y–K₁s—下白垩统亚格列木组–舒善河组；K₁bx–K₁bs—下白垩统巴西盖组–巴什基奇克组；E_1-2km—库姆格列木群；E₃s—苏维依组；N₁j—吉迪克组；N₁k—康村组；N₂k—库车组；Q—第四系a—过迪北地区地质结构；b—剖面最大主应力分布；b—阿合组最大主应力分布

Figure 6. Geological structure and cross-sectional distribution of the maximum principal stress in the Dibei area of the Kuqa Depression

(a) Geological cross-section across the Dibei area; (b) Cross-sectional distribution of the maximum principal stress (Pa); (c) Distribution of the maximum principal stress in the Ahe Formation (Pa)Pre-∈–Pre Cambrian; ∈–Cambrian; Pre-C–Pre-Carboniferous; C–Carboniferous; T–Triassic; J₁–Lower Jurassic; J_2-3–Middle–Upper Jurassic; K₁y–K₁s–Yageliemu–Shushanhe Formations of Lower Cretaceous; K₁bx–K₁bs–Baxigai–Bashijiqike Formations of Lower Cretaceous; E_1-2km–Kemugeliemu Group; E₃s–Suweiyi Formation; N₁j–Jidike Formation; N₁k–Kangcun Formation; N₂k–Kuqa Formation; Q–Quaternary

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 库车坳陷巴什基奇克组和阿合组典型裂缝类型岩芯特征

a—未充填张裂缝，克深3102井，8123 m，巴什基奇克组；b—未充填剪裂缝，克深2-2-5井，6770 m，巴什基奇克组；c—方解石充填张裂缝，克深207井，6876 m，巴什基奇克组；d—未充填剪裂缝，迪北5井，5842 m，阿合组

Figure 7. Core characteristics of typical fractures in the Bashijiqike and Ahe Formations, Kuqa Depression

(a) Unfilled tensile fracture, Well Keshen 3102, 8123 m, Bashijiqike Formation; (b) Unfilled shear fracture, Well Keshen 2-2-5, 6770 m, Bashijiqike Formation; (c) Calcite-filled tensile fracture, Well Keshen 207, 6876 m, Bashijiqike Formation; (d) Unfilled shear fracture, Well Dibei 5, 5842 m, Ahe Formation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 库车坳陷博孜−大北−克深地区白垩系巴什基奇克组裂缝密度和产状分布特征

a—博孜–大北剖面；b—克深西剖面

Figure 8. Distribution of fracture density and orientations in the Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in the Bozi–Dabei–Keshen area, Kuqa Depression

(a) Bozi–Dabei section; (b) Western Keshen section

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 库车坳陷迪北地区侏罗系阿合组裂缝密度和产状分布特征

Figure 9. Distribution of fracture density and orientations in the Jurassic Ahe Formation in the Dibei area, Kuqa Depression

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 库车坳陷不同地区裂缝因子分布剖面

a—克深地区巴什基奇克组；b—迪北地区阿合组

Figure 10. Profiles showing the distribution of fracture parameters in different areas of the Kuqa Depression

(a) Bashijiqike Formation in the Keshen area; (b) Ahe Formation in the Dibei area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 库车坳陷博孜−大北−克深地区白垩系巴什基奇克组储层裂缝与应力组合类型

a—北部滑脱释放带；b—中部断褶集中带；c—南部构造憋压带

Figure 11. Types of fracture–stress associations in the Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in the Bozi–Dabei–Keshen area, Kuqa Depression

(a) Northern detachment-release zone; (b) Central fault-fold stress-concentration zone; (c) Southern tectonic stress-accumulation zone

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 库车前陆区典型构造样式及应力和裂缝分布理论模型

Figure 12. Theoretical model of typical structural styles and stress and the associated distributions of stress and fractures in the Kuqa foreland area

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 库车凹陷迪北地区阿合组典型构造样式与裂缝特征及其与产能的关系

a—构造剖面与典型构造样式；b—裂缝产状特征；c—有效裂缝密度与单井产能关系

Figure 13. Relationships among typical structural styles, fracture characteristics, and productivity in the Ahe Formation in the Dibei area, Kuqa Depression

(a) Structural cross-section and typical structural styles; (b) Fracture orientations; (c) Relationship between effective fracture density and single-well productivity

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 库车坳陷重点层系砂岩岩石力学参数分布范围

Table 1. Range of mechanical sandstone parameters for key stratigraphic systems of the Kuqa Depression

地层	静态岩石力学参数		动态岩石力学参数		S_Hmax/MPa	S_V/MPa	S_hmin/MPa
地层	杨氏模量/GPa	泊松比	杨氏模量/GPa	泊松比	S_Hmax/MPa	S_V/MPa	S_hmin/MPa
巴什基奇克组	26.68~32.89/30.26， n=15	0.16~0.41/0.31，n=15	9.22~36.36/28.58， n=172	0.17~0.37/0.25，n=165	76.71~212.37/166.23，n=173	64~198.07/157.96， n=171	63.13~174.63/135.57， n=173
阿合组	11.17~53.00/34.48，n=15	0.12~0.48/0.30， n=15	17.61~44.05/28.35，n=10	0.18~0.32/0.24， n=10	123.22~167.96/143.05，n=10	111.12~149.34/125.21，n=10	97.44~133.28/112.82，n=10
（数据范围）/平均值；n=样品或井数量

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(63)

[1]	DU H, MA B Y, WANG C C, et al., 2025. Pore-fracture fusion modeling method for ultra-deep clastic reservoirs[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 173: 107307. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2025.107307
[2]	FENG J W, SUN J F, ZHANG Y J, et al., 2020. Control of fault-related folds on fracture development in Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin[J]. Oil & Gas Geology, 41(3): 543-557. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	GUO Z K, GAO Z Y, FENG X L, et al., 2026. Analysis of heavy mineral assemblages and clastic components in sandstones and their implications for provenance transport pathways: a case study of the Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in Keshen area, Kuqa Depression[J]. Journal of Palaeogeography (Chinese Edition), 28(4): 1461-1477. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	JAEGER J C, COOK N G W, ZIMMERMAN R W, 2007. Fundamentals of rock mechanics[M]. 4th ed. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell: 1-488.
[5]	LAI J, WANG G W, CHAI Y, et al., 2017. Deep burial diagenesis and reservoir quality evolution of high-temperature, high-pressure sandstones: examples from Lower Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in Keshen area, Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin of China[J]. AAPG Bulletin, 101(6): 829-862. doi: 10.1306/08231614008
[6]	LI J F, ZHAO Y, PEI J L, et al., 2017. Cenozoic marine sedimentation problem of the Tarim Basin[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 23(1): 141-149. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	LIU C, ZHANG R H, ZHANG H L, et al., 2017. Genesis and reservoir significance of multi-scale natural fractures in Kuqa foreland thrust belt, Tarim Basin, NW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 44(3): 495-504. doi: 10.1016/s1876-3804(17)30057-5
[8]	LIU C, ZHAO J L, ZHANG X Q, et al., 2019. Effect of stress vertical zoning on reservoirs: an example from Kuqa foreland thrust belt[J]. Natural Gas Exploration and Development, 42(3): 21-31. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	LUO X R, YANG H J, WANG Z L, et al., 2023. Heterogeneity characteristics of clastic reservoirs and hydrocarbon accumulation mode in deep-ultradeep basins[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 97(9): 2802-2819. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	MO T, GUO H B, LIU Z J, et al., 2025. Deformation characteristics of detachment in gypsum salt series: a case study of the Kuqa Foreland based on sandbox modeling[J]. Geotectonica et Metallogenia, 49(3): 507-519. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	WANG K, DAI J S, FENG Z D, et al., 2013. Calculating model of equivalent rock mechanical parameters of sand-mud interbed and its application[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 19(2): 143-151. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	WANG K, ZHANG R H, YU C F, et al., 2020. Characteristics and controlling factors of Jurassic Ahe reservoir of the northern tectonic belt, Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 31(5): 623-635. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	WANG K, ZHANG R H, WANG J P, et al., 2022. Comparison of reservoir characteristics between Jurassic Ahe Formation and Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in Kuqa Depression of Tarim Basin and implications for exploration and development[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 33(4): 556-571. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	WANG Q H, ZHANG R H, YANG X Z, et al., 2022. Major breakthrough and geological significance of tight sandstone gas exploration in Jurassic Ahe Formation in Dibei area, eastern Kuqa Depression[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 43(8): 1049-1064. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	WANG Q H, XU Z P, ZHANG R H, et al., 2024. New fields, new types of hydrocarbon explorations and their resource potentials in Tarim Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 45(1): 15-32. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	WANG Q H, YANG H J, YANG W, 2025. New progress and future exploration targets in petroleum geological research of ultra-deep clastic rocks in Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin, NW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 52(1): 70-83. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.1016/s1876-3804(25)60006-1
[17]	XIAO J X, LIN C S, LIU J Y, 2005. Depositional palaeogeography of Cretaceous of Kuqa Depression in northern Tarim Basin[J]. Geoscience, 19(2): 253-260. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18]	XU K, YANG H J, ZHANG H, et al., 2022. Fracture effectiveness evaluation in ultra-deep reservoirs based on geomechanical method, Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin, NW China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 215: 110604. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2022.110604
[19]	XU K, LIU J S, ZHANG H, et al., 2024. Geological and engineering applications of full-stratum geomechanical modeling in complex structural areas[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 31(5): 195-208. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	YANG H J, ZHANG R H, YANG X Z, et al., 2018. Characteristics and reservoir improvement effect of structural fracture in ultra-deep tight sandstone reservoir: a case study of Keshen Gasfield, Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin[J]. Natural Gas Geoscience, 29(7): 942-950. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	YANG H J, XU Z P, YANG X Z, et al., 2026. Progress in oil and gas exploration during the 14^th Five–Year Plan Period and future exploration orientation in Tarim Basin[J]. China Petroleum Exploration, 31(1): 80-99. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	YUAN H, JU W, ZHANG H, et al., 2025. Differential structural styles and their influence on in-situ stress distribution in Kelasu tectonic belt, Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin[J]. Petroleum Geology & Experiment, 47(6): 1255-1267. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	ZENG L B, WANG H J, GONG L, et al., 2010. Impacts of the tectonic stress field on natural gas migration and accumulation: a case study of the Kuqa Depression in the Tarim Basin, China[J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 27(7): 1616-1627. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2010.04.010
[24]	ZHANG G J, LIU J S, XU K, et al., 2024. Characteristics and effectiveness of deep and ultradeep tight sandstone fractures: insights from geologic and geophysical data analysis[J]. Geophysics, 89(5): B383-B399. doi: 10.1190/geo2023-0597.1
[25]	ZHANG H, ZHANG G J, XU K, et al., 2024. Characteristics of stress state transitions and its geological and mechanical response in the Kuqa Depression[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 31(5): 177-194. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	ZHANG H, PEI C Y, WANG Z M, et al., 2026. A calculation method of the reservoir Biot coefficient based on the Griffith criterion and the equivalent inclusion theory[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 32(2): 481-490. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[27]	ZHANG H L, SHOU J F, CHEN Z L, et al., 2002. Sedimentary characteristics and sandstone body distribution of the Lower Jurassic in Kuqa Depression[J]. Journal of Palaeogeography, 4(3): 47-58. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[28]	ZHANG H L, ZHANG R H, YANG H J, et al., 2014. Characterization and evaluation of ultra-deep fracture-pore tight sandstone reservoirs: a case study of Cretaceous Bashijiqike Formation in Kelasu tectonic zone in Kuqa foreland Basin, Tarim, NW China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 41(2): 158-167. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.1016/s1876-3804(14)60020-3
[29]	ZHANG R H, YANG H J, WANG J P, et al., 2014. The Formation mechanism and exploration significance of ultra-deep, low-porosity and tight sandstone reservoirs in Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 35(6): 1057-1069. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[30]	ZHANG R H, ZENG Q L, WANG K, et al., 2020. New progress in the theory and technology of tectonic diagenesis on reservoir and the geological significance of ultra-deep oil and gas exploration[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 41(10): 1278-1292. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[31]	ZHANG R H, WEI G Q, WANG K, et al., 2021. Tectonic thrust nappe activity and sandstone rock response characteristics in foreland thrust belt: a case study of Middle and Lower Jurassic, Kuqa Depression, Tarim Basin[J]. Acta Petrologica Sinica, 37(7): 2256-2270. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.18654/1000-0569/2021.07.17
[32]	ZHAO J Q, CHENG X G, CHEN W L, et al., 2026. Characteristics and numerical simulation analysis of subsalt overthrust belts in Middle Kelasu structural belt, Kuqa Depression[J]. Earth Science, 51(1): 317-328. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[33]	ZHOU S J, ZHANG R H, YU C F, et al. , 2026. Main controlling factors of Jurassic Ahe Formation tight sandstone reservoirs in the Dibei area, Kuqa Depression[J/OL]. Marine Origin Petroleum Geology, 1-14[2026-09-08]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/33.1328.P.20260526.1759.006. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[34]	ZHU W L, MONTÉSI L G J, WONG T F, 2002. Effects of stress on the anisotropic development of permeability during mechanical compaction of porous sandstones[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 200: 119-136. doi: 10.1144/GSL.SP.2001.200.01.08
[35]	ZOBACK M D, 2007. Reservoir geomechanics[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1-452.
[36]	ZU K W, ZENG L B, ZHAO X Y, et al., 2014. Discussion on development models of the shearing fractures in fault bend folds[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 20(1): 16-24. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[37]	冯建伟, 孙建芳, 张亚军, 等, 2020. 塔里木盆地库车坳陷断层相关褶皱对裂缝发育的控制[J]. 石油与天然气地质, 41(3): 543-557. doi: 10.11743/ogg20200311
[38]	郭泽坤, 高志勇, 冯信荦, 等, 2026. 砂岩重矿物组合与碎屑组分特征分析及对物源通道的指示: 以库车坳陷克深地区白垩系巴什基奇克组为例[J]. 古地理学报, 28(4): 1461-1477. doi: 10.7605/gdlxb.2026.106
[39]	李建锋, 赵越, 裴军令, 等, 2017. 塔里木盆地新生代海相沉积问题[J]. 地质力学学报, 23(1): 141-149. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6616.2017.01.010
[40]	刘春, 赵继龙, 章学歧, 等, 2019. 应力垂向分带对储层的控制作用: 以库车前陆冲断带为例[J]. 天然气勘探与开发, 42(3): 21-31. doi: 10.12055/gaskk.issn.1673-3177.2019.03.003
[41]	罗晓容, 杨海军, 王震亮, 等, 2023. 深层—超深层碎屑岩储层非均质性特征与油气成藏模式[J]. 地质学报, 97(9): 2802-2819. doi: 10.19762/j.cnki.dizhixuebao.2023207
[42]	莫涛, 郭虹兵, 刘恣君, 等, 2025. 软弱膏盐层系滑脱构造变形特征: 以库车前陆盆地砂箱物理模拟为例[J]. 大地构造与成矿学, 49(3): 507-519. doi: 10.16539/j.ddgzyckx.2024.01.163
[43]	王珂, 戴俊生, 冯阵东, 等, 2013. 砂泥岩间互地层等效岩石力学参数计算模型及其应用[J]. 地质力学学报, 19(2): 143-151. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6616.2013.02.004
[44]	王珂, 张荣虎, 余朝丰, 等, 2020. 塔里木盆地库车坳陷北部构造带侏罗系阿合组储层特征及控制因素[J]. 天然气地球科学, 31(5): 623-635. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2020.04.005
[45]	王珂, 张荣虎, 王俊鹏, 等, 2022. 塔里木盆地库车坳陷侏罗系阿合组与白垩系巴什基奇克组储层特征对比与勘探开发启示[J]. 天然气地球科学, 33(4): 556-571. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2021.11.004
[46]	王清华, 张荣虎, 杨宪彰, 等, 2022. 库车坳陷东部迪北地区侏罗系阿合组致密砂岩气勘探重大突破及地质意义[J]. 石油学报, 43(8): 1049-1064. doi: 10.7623/syxb202208002
[47]	王清华, 徐振平, 张荣虎, 等, 2024. 塔里木盆地油气勘探新领域、新类型及资源潜力[J]. 石油学报, 45(1): 15-32. doi: 10.7623/syxb202401002
[48]	王清华, 杨海军, 杨威, 2025. 库车坳陷超深层碎屑岩油气地质研究新进展和下步勘探方向[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 52(1): 70-83. doi: 10.11698/PED.20240135
[49]	肖建新, 林畅松, 刘景彦, 2005. 塔里木盆地北部库车坳陷白垩系沉积古地理[J]. 现代地质, 19(2): 253-260. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-8527.2005.02.014
[50]	徐珂, 刘敬寿, 张辉, 等, 2024. 复杂构造区全层系地质力学建模及其地质与工程应用[J]. 地学前缘, 31(5): 195-208. doi: 10.13745/j.esf.sf.2024.6.28
[51]	杨海军, 张荣虎, 杨宪彰, 等, 2018. 超深层致密砂岩构造裂缝特征及其对储层的改造作用: 以塔里木盆地库车坳陷克深气田白垩系为例[J]. 天然气地球科学, 29(7): 942-950. doi: 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2018.06.018
[52]	杨海军, 徐振平, 杨宪彰, 等, 2026. 塔里木盆地“十四五”油气勘探进展及未来勘探方向[J]. 中国石油勘探, 31(1): 80-99. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7703.2026.01.007
[53]	袁航, 鞠玮, 张辉, 等, 2025. 塔里木盆地库车坳陷克拉苏构造带差异构造样式及其对地应力分布的影响[J]. 石油实验地质, 47(6): 1255-1267. doi: 10.11781/sysydz2025061255
[54]	张辉, 张冠杰, 徐珂, 等, 2024. 库车坳陷应力状态转换特征及其地质与力学响应[J]. 地学前缘, 31(5): 177-194. doi: 10.13745/j.esf.sf.2023.6.25
[55]	张辉, 裴晨阳, 王志民, 等, 2026. 基于格里菲斯准则及等效夹杂理论的储层Biot系数计算方法[J]. 地质力学学报, 32(2): 481-490. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2025086
[56]	张惠良, 寿建峰, 陈子料, 等, 2002. 库车坳陷下侏罗统沉积特征及砂体展布[J]. 古地理学报, 4(3): 47-58. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1505.2002.03.007
[57]	张惠良, 张荣虎, 杨海军, 等, 2014. 超深层裂缝-孔隙型致密砂岩储集层表征与评价: 以库车前陆盆地克拉苏构造带白垩系巴什基奇克组为例[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 41(2): 158-167. doi: 10.11698/PED.2014.02.04
[58]	张荣虎, 杨海军, 王俊鹏, 等, 2014. 库车坳陷超深层低孔致密砂岩储层形成机制与油气勘探意义[J]. 石油学报, 35(6): 1057-1069. doi: 10.7623/syxb201406003
[59]	张荣虎, 曾庆鲁, 王珂, 等, 2020. 储层构造动力成岩作用理论技术新进展与超深层油气勘探地质意义[J]. 石油学报, 41(10): 1278-1292. doi: 10.7623/syxb202010012
[60]	张荣虎, 魏国齐, 王珂, 等, 2021. 前陆冲断带构造逆冲推覆作用与岩石响应特征: 以库车坳陷东部中—下侏罗统为例[J]. 岩石学报, 37(7): 2256-2270. doi: 10.18654/1000-0569/2021.07.17
[61]	赵佳琦, 程晓敢, 陈维力, 等, 2026. 库车坳陷克拉苏构造带中段盐下逆掩推覆带特征与数值模拟[J]. 地球科学, 51(1): 317-328. doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2025.295
[62]	周世杰, 张荣虎, 余朝峰, 等, 2026. 库车坳陷迪北地区侏罗系阿合组致密砂岩储层主控因素[J/OL]. 海相油气地质, 1-14[2026-09-08]. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/33.1328.P.20260526.1759.006.
[63]	祖克威, 曾联波, 赵向原, 等, 2014. 断层转折褶皱剪切裂缝发育模式探讨[J]. 地质力学学报, 20(1): 16-24. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6616.2014.01.002