Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,034

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Natural Fractures in shale: A review and new observations

Gale, Julia F.W., Laubach, Stephen E., Olson, Jon E., Eichhuble, Peter, Fall, András·2014·AAPG Bulletin

Abstract

Natural fractures have long been suspected as a factor in production from shale reservoirs because gas and oil production commonly exceeds the rates expected from low-porosity and low-permeability shale host rock. Many shale outcrops, cores, and image logs contain fractures or fracture traces, and microseismic event patterns associated with hydraulic-fracture stimulation have been ascribed to natural fracture reactivation. Here we review previous work, and present new core and outcrop data from 18 shale plays that reveal common types of shale fractures and their mineralization, orientation, and size patterns. A wide range of shales have a common suite of types and configurations of fractures: those at high angle to bedding, faults, bed-parallel fractures, early compacted fractures, and fractures associated with concretions. These fractures differ markedly in their prevalence and arrangement within each shale play, however, constituting different fracture stratigraphies—differences that depend on interface and mechanical properties governed by depositional, diagenetic, and structural setting. Several mechanisms may act independently or in combination to cause fracture growth, including differential compaction, local and regional stress changes associated with tectonic events, strain accommodation around large structures, catagenesis, and uplift. Fracture systems in shales are heterogeneous; they can enhance or detract from producibility, augment or reduce rock strength and the propensity to interact with hydraulic-fracture stimulation. Burial history and fracture diagenesis influence fracture attributes and may provide more information for fracture prediction than is commonly appreciated. The role of microfractures in production from shale is currently poorly understood yet potentially critical; we identify a need for further work in this field and on the role of natural fractures generally.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1306/08121413151

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 54 references

Cited by

See all 1,034

Metadata

Authors
Gale, J. F. W., Laubach, S. E., Olson, J. E., Eichhuble, P., & Fall, A.
Venue
AAPG Bulletin
Published
2014-11
Volume
98
Issue
11
Pages
2165-2216
ISSN
0149-1423 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2101691304
Cited by
1,034
References
54
FWCI
53.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Natural Fractures in shale: A review and new observations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1306/08121413151
The paper
Gale, J. F. W., Laubach, S. E., Olson, J. E., Eichhuble, P., & Fall, A. (2014). Natural Fractures in shale: A review and new observations. AAPG Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1306/08121413151

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.