9

The Jurassic of Denmark is mainly known from subsur-face data including numerous boreholes and a densenet of seismic lines in the offshore areas. Exceptions tothis include the island of Bornholm in the Baltic Sea andadjacent areas of Skåne, southern Sweden, where theJurassic is exposed in many small outcrops. The Jurassicof Greenland, in contrast, can be studied in extensiveoutcrops and the succession forms the walls and tops ofmountains and plateaus over wide areas. The two regionswere once part of the same large-scale system of exten-sional basins in the Northwest European – North Atlantic

region (Fig. 1), but are today located on two differentplates separated by a thousand kilometres of ocean.

The aim of this introductory paper is to compareand contrast the stratigraphic evolution of the tworegions based primarily on the detailed studies includedin this book; the focus is on the timing and nature oftectonic events and on the overall stratigraphic trends.The goal is to provide a broad evolutionary frameworkfor the Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland to set thescene for the succeeding papers. For comprehensivereviews of the North Atlantic Mesozoic rift system, the

The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland:key elements in the reconstruction of the North Atlantic Jurassic rift system

Finn Surlyk and Jon R. Ineson

The Jurassic succession of Denmark is largely confined to the subsurface with the exception ofexposures on the island of Bornholm in the Baltic Sea. In East Greenland, in contrast, the Jurassicis extensively exposed. Comparison of basin evolution in the two regions, which now occur ontwo separate plates, thus relies on highly different datasets. It is possible nevertheless to con-struct an integrated picture allowing testing of hypotheses concerning basin evolution, regionaluplift, onset and climax of rifting, relative versus eustatic sea-level changes and sequence strati-graphic subdivision and correlation. On a smaller scale, it is possible to compare the signaturesof sequence stratigraphic surfaces as seen on well logs, in cores and at outcrop and of sequencesrecognised and defined on the basis of very different data types.

Breakdown of the successions into tectonostratigraphic megasequences highlights the highdegree of similarity in overall basin evolution and tectonic style. An important difference, how-ever, lies in the timing. Major events such as late Early – Middle Jurassic uplift, followed by onsetof rifting, basin reorganisation and rift climax were delayed in East Greenland relative to the Danishregion. This has important implications both for regional reconstructions of the rift system andfor the understanding and testing of classical sequence stratigraphic concepts involving eustaticversus tectonic controls of basin evolution and stratigraphy.

Keywords: Denmark, Greenland, Jurassic, correlation, parallel evolution

F.S., Geological Institute, University of Copenhagen, Geocenter Copenhagen, Øster Voldgade 10, DK-1350 Copen-

hagen K, Denmark. E-mail: finns@geo.geol.ku.dk

J.R.I., Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland, Geocenter Copenhagen, Øster Voldgade 10, DK-1350

Copenhagen K, Denmark. E-mail: ji@geus.dk

Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1, 9–20 (2003) © GEUS, 2003

reader is referred to Ziegler (1988, 1990), Doré (1992),Doré et al. (1999), Skogseid et al. (2000) and Brekkeet al. (2001).

Sequence stratigraphy – a conceptual noteMuch of the research presented in this book is basedon sequence stratigraphic analysis and it is pertinent inthis introduction to comment briefly on the conceptualbasis for these studies. As stressed by many workers(e.g. Carter et al. 1991; Posamentier & James 1993; Miall1997), sequence stratigraphy may be applied in twofundamentally different ways, either involving con-struction of age models based on correlation with theso-called global cycle chart of Haq et al. (1987) or lith-ology prediction based on the interpretation of cyclic-ity in the rock record (Posamentier & James 1993).These two distinct paradigms were termed the ‘global–eustasy paradigm’ and the ‘complexity paradigm’ byMiall & Miall (2001). It is significant that few of theauthors of the individual studies presented here use the‘global–eustasy paradigm’ but prefer the ‘complexity’model which deals with the stratigraphic architecture andpredictability of sequences and their components.Emphasis is on the recognition, interpretation and dat-ing of key surfaces and on the geometry and environ-mental nature of successive systems tracts. There is, incontrast, little reference to ‘global cycle charts’ and tothe potential use of sea-level curves as dating tools.Rather, the ages and significance of key surfaces andderived sea-level curves are used to construct robustgenetic stratigraphies, to chart basin evolution and tohighlight the importance of timing of tectonic eventsand pulses of sediment input. This approach is in markedcontrast to that adopted by most authors in the com-pilation by de Graciansky et al. (1998) in which the‘global–eustasy paradigm’ is prevalent.

TectonostratigraphySubdivision of the Jurassic successions of both regionsinto tectonostratigraphic packages (sensu Surlyk 1991)shows that the tectonic evolution and correspondingstratigraphic signals are broadly similar, although thetiming of the transition from pre-rift uplift to onset ofrifting and of rift culmination appears to be delayed inEast Greenland compared to the North Sea region. Thesedimentary environments and facies are also rather

similar for the successive tectonostratigraphic units. Theearly pre-rift succession (Rhaetian–Sinemurian) of EastGreenland is wholly non-marine, however, contrastingwith the marine Late Triassic – Early Jurassic record ofmuch of the Danish region. Conversely, the Aalenian–Callovian early syn-rift sediments of the North Sea andthe Danish Basin are more proximal and terrestrially-dominated than the correlatives in East Greenland whichare almost exclusively marine.

The investigated time interval includes the uppermostTriassic and the lowermost Cretaceous in order to covera complete set of genetically related units. This strati-graphic interval in Denmark and Greenland can bebroadly compared in terms of two megasequences, anUpper Triassic – Middle Jurassic pre-rift megasequenceand a Middle Jurassic – lowermost Cretaceous syn-riftmegasequence, separated by a regional uplift event(Fig. 2). Detailed correlation between the two regionsallowing comparison of short-term sea-level cycles isnot yet possible. The pre-rift biostratigraphy is basedto a large extent on dinocysts (Poulsen & Riding 2003,this volume), which are stratigraphically rather longranging and commonly show different ranges in the tworegions. Correlation by ammonites can only be doneat a few levels, notably in the Pliensbachian. Dating ofthe syn-rift succession is based mainly on dinocysts inthe North Sea – Danish Basin region but on ammonitessupported by dinocysts in East Greenland (Callomon2003, this volume; Surlyk 2003, this volume). Faunalprovincialism was strongly developed for much of theMiddle and Late Jurassic.

Pre-rift megasequenceIn East Greenland, the Rhaetian – Early Bajocian timeinterval was characterised by regional subsidence fol-lowing rift events in the Late Permian and Early Triassic(Surlyk 1990, 2003, this volume). The depositional basinwas centred over Jameson Land and stratigraphic unitshave a more or less basinwide extent and sheet-likegeometry, reflecting the relatively uniform subsidenceand the absence of major faulting (Dam & Surlyk 1995,1998). In general, however, individual units are thick-est in the basin centre.

A similar development is seen in Denmark, the UpperTriassic – Aalenian succession recording a phase of rel-atively uniform regional subsidence following rift eventsin the Late Carboniferous – Early Permian and theEarly–Middle Triassic. The sedimentary record is frag-mentary, however, as Lower Jurassic rocks are missing

10

11

60˚N

55˚N

50˚N

45˚N

Palae

olat

itude

500 km

WollastonForland

Kuhn Ø

Andøy

JamesonLand

MilneLand

Mid NorthSea High CG

UnitedKingdom

DenmarkDB

Skåne

Bornholm

Intr

a-rif

t high

Middle Jurassic

Land

Normal fault

Igneous activity

Inferred structural high

Deltaic/shallow marine sandstone

Offshore marine mudstone

Marine carbonate

?

Greenland

Norway

Sweden

BalticShield

LaurentianShield

Ringkøbing–Fyn High

Fig. 1. Schematic Middle Jurassic reconstruction showing the regional tectonic elements and Jurassic seaways in the North Sea regionand between Greenland and Norway. For location of intrabasinal structural elements (Danish Basin, Danish Central Graben) namedin the text, the reader is referred to Michelsen et al. (2003, this volume). Map based on Ziegler (1988, 1990), Doré (1992) and Surlyk(2003, this volume). CG, Central Graben; DB, Danish Basin.

from large parts of the area, particularly the CentralGraben, due to erosion following early Middle Jurassicuplift (e.g. Ziegler 1990; Underhill & Partington 1994;Andsbjerg et al. 2001; Andsbjerg & Dybkjær 2003, thisvolume; Nielsen 2003, this volume). The erosional rem-nants, which are located marginal to and outside themain uplifted areas, are indicative of laterally extensiveand sheet-like sedimentary packages, similar to thosedescribed from East Greenland. This architectural styleis recorded, in particular, by the marine Lower JurassicFjerritslev Formation, which is recognised both in theDanish sector of the Central Graben and in the DanishBasin (Michelsen et al. 2003, this volume). Over muchof the Danish area, the depositional environments andfacies are more offshore marine and finer-grained thanin the land-locked Jameson Land Basin of East Greenlandalthough the paralic successions on Bornholm and inSkåne display alternating lacustrine, estuarine andshoreface deposits that closely resemble the JamesonLand succession and show a comparable overall trans-gressive trend (Ahlberg et al. 2003, this volume; Frandsen& Surlyk 2003, this volume; Michelsen et al. 2003, thisvolume).

The pre-rift succession in East Greenland can be sub-divided into a Rhaetian–Sinemurian fluvial–lacustrine partand a Pliensbachian – Early Bajocian estuarine – offshoremarine part (Dam & Surlyk 1995, 1998; Surlyk 2003, thisvolume). Although a similar gross subdivision, reflect-ing an overall transgressive trend, can be demonstratedin the Lower Jurassic of Denmark, the timing of themarine inundation of non-marine/paralic settings canonly be compared in detail with that of East Greenlandin the most proximal areas (Skagerrak–Kattegat Platform,Skåne, Bornholm). Here, the Rhaetian–Hettangian suc-cession was deposited in terrestrial environments suc-ceeded by paralic Sinemurian and offshore marinePliensbachian conditions. In the Danish Central Grabenand the axial parts of the Danish Basin, marine condi-tions were already established in Late Triassic – earli-est Jurassic times (Fig. 2). A composite regressive eventtook place in the Danish Basin in the Rhaetian, corre-sponding broadly to a hiatus in the Danish CentralGraben (Fig. 2); the subsequent Hettangian–Sinemurianperiod was a time of stepwise deepening and expan-sion of the open marine environment, reaching Born-holm in the latest Sinemurian (Surlyk et al. 1995; Nielsen2003, this volume, fig. 31). Hence, inundation of the non-marine Jameson Land Basin at the Sinemurian–Pliens-bachian boundary was broadly coeval with a long-termmaximum transgression in the Danish area (Fig. 2). Inthe Danish Basin, the Toarcian records the onset of re-

gression and progressive basin restriction, heraldingregional uplift and erosion and the reversion to terres-trial conditions in the Middle Jurassic.

A comparable phase of basin restriction in EastGreenland, albeit somewhat later (latest Toarcian –Aalenian), appears to be indicated by evidence of brack-ish water conditions in the lower part of the offshoremarine Sortehat Formation (Dam & Surlyk 1998;Koppelhus & Hansen 2003, this volume). This event maybe attributable to progressive tectonic isolation of theJameson Land Basin due to regional uplift farther north.

Basin evolution in both East Greenland and Denmarkwas thus highly similar with regional subsidence bythermal contraction following rift events in the latestPalaeozoic and earliest Mesozoic. A marked transgres-sive trend characterised deposition in both areas; marineconditions were restricted to the axial parts of the sea-ways in the Late Triassic and earliest Jurassic, spread-ing to the basin margins (e.g. Skåne, Bornholm) andthe most proximal depocentres (e.g. Jameson LandBasin) by the latest Sinemurian – Early Pliensbachian.Stepwise regression and basin restriction in the DanishBasin in the Middle–Late Toarcian probably resultedfrom progressive uplift of the Ringkøbing–Fyn High,heralding the regional mid-Jurassic uplift event (Nielsen2003, this volume).

Mid-Jurassic regional uplift and erosionIn East Greenland, the Rhaetian – Lower Bajocian pre-rift megasequence is restricted to the Jameson LandBasin, which contains a relatively complete succession.The youngest strata beneath the unconformity that capsthe megasequence are of Early Bajocian age based ondinocysts (Underhill & Partington 1994; Koppelhus &Hansen 2003, this volume) and supported by Sr-isotopedata (M. Engkilde, personal communication 2000). Adetailed ammonite zonation has been established forthe shallow marine Pelion Formation overlying theunconformity but the ammonites are strictly boreal andthe Bajocian–Bathonian interval cannot be directly cor-related with European zonations. However, the imme-diate predecessor of the oldest of the boreal MiddleJurassic ammonites, Cranocephalites borealis, is thesubgenus Defonticeras of the genus Sphaeroceras fromthe north-eastern Pacific which is confidently dated tothe uppermost Lower Bajocian Stephanocerashumphriesianum Chronozone (Callomon 1985). Thegreat resemblance of Sphaeroceras (Defonticeras) obla-tum and C. borealis suggests that the age difference

12

between them is small and the age of the C. borealisZone and of the basal onlapping strata is thus earlyLate Bajocian. There is a short hiatus between theSortehat and Pelion Formations and combined evidencefrom dating by Sr-isotopes, dinocysts and ammonitessuggests that it covers an interval across the Lower–UpperBajocian boundary.

The hiatus is associated with a complete change inbasin configuration and drainage pattern marking theonset of rifting in East Greenland. The overlying depositsof the Pelion Formation and its correlatives show exten-sive onlap onto basin margins and northwards up theaxis of the new rift (Alsgaard et al. 2003, this volume;Engkilde & Surlyk 2003, this volume; Larsen et al. 2003,this volume). The base of this early syn-rift successionyoungs to the north and onlaps progressively olderrocks from Upper Triassic through Lower Triassic andUpper Permian to crystalline basement in a northwardsdirection (Surlyk 2003, this volume).

The absence of Lower Jurassic rocks north of JamesonLand has been interpreted to reflect large-scale, possi-bly domal, uplift of northern East Greenland in lateEarly Jurassic time (Surlyk 1977a, b; Surlyk et al. 1993).A similar situation is known from the Norwegian sideof the rift complex where large areas were uplifted inlate Early Jurassic time; the stratigraphy on Andøy onthe conjugate margin of northern East Greenland thusshows the same development as in Wollaston Forland,i.e. crystalline basement draped by a thin veneer ofUpper Palaeozoic carbonates is directly overlain byMiddle Jurassic sandstones (Dalland 1981). The realityof Early Jurassic uplift to the north of Jameson Land orig-inally suggested on stratigraphic grounds has recentlybeen corroborated on the basis of apatite fission trackthermochronology by Johnson & Gallagher (2000). Incontrast, the Jameson Land area shows no evidence ofEarly Jurassic uplift and cooling (Mathiesen et al. 2000).Data from the Norwegian shelf show that wide areaswere uplifted in late Early Jurassic time (Doré 1992).

It has long been known that major uplift took placein the North Sea in late Early – early Middle Jurassic times(Whiteman et al. 1975; Hallam & Sellwood 1976; Eynon1981; Ziegler 1988; Underhill & Partington 1993, 1994).The uplifted area is generally referred to as the ‘mid-North Sea dome’ and has been interpreted as having beencaused by pre-rift heating and uplift followed by vol-canism and rifting. The uplifted area underwent strongerosion and gradually deflated, being onlapped andsubsequently flooded during Middle and Late Jurassictimes. Underhill & Partington (1993, 1994) demonstratedthat the strata subcropping the erosional unconformity

became gradually older approaching the centre of theuplift while the onlapping strata became younger in thesame direction. More recent work has shown that theuplifted area was not a simple well-defined dome butinvolved the Ringkøbing–Fyn High, much of the DanishBasin and the Fennoscandian Border Zone (Nielsen1995, 2003, this volume; Andsbjerg et al. 2001).

In the North Sea, the main unconformity is typicallyconstrained to the mid-Aalenian in marginal areas. Inthe Sorgenfrei–Tornquist Zone of the Danish Basin, forexample, Lower Aalenian strata both underlie and over-lie the unconformity and, based on dinoflagellate data,the unconformity appears to lie within the upper lev-els of the lowermost Aalenian L. opalinum Chronozone(Nielsen 2003, this volume). As in East Greenland, how-ever, the limitations of the biostratigraphic data shouldbe acknowledged since dating of the dominantly ter-restrial sediments of the strata overlying the unconfor-mity in the North Sea is notoriously difficult.

Although the uplift and especially the onset of rift-ing and the associated radical basin reorganisationappear to have occurred earlier in the Danish regionthan in East Greenland, the main onlap phase onto theregional unconformity was broadly coeval, from theLate Bajocian to the Early Oxfordian (Underhill &Partington 1993, 1994; Andsbjerg et al. 2001; Andsbjerg& Dybkjær 2003, this volume; Nielsen 2003, this vol-ume; Surlyk 2003, this volume). It is noteworthy thatthis northwards delay in initial uplift from the Danishregion to East Greenland is mirrored passing south-wards from the Danish area to the Dutch sector of theCentral Graben where the uplift – rift onset hiatus spansthe mid-Bajocian – mid-Callovian (Herngreen et al.2003, this volume).

Regional uplift, erosion and subsequent subsidence,onset of rifting and onlap of the previously upliftedarea thus took place in both East Greenland andDenmark in late Early – early Middle Jurassic times. Acommon cause can be envisaged for both regions butthe succession of events seems to be delayed in EastGreenland compared to the Central North Sea.

Syn-rift megasequenceThe regional uplift event at the Early–Middle Jurassictransition was succeeded by the onset of a long-termrifting episode, which began in the Middle Jurassic,peaked in the Late Jurassic and persisted into the ear-liest Cretaceous. Rifting was not continuous but com-prised phases of more intense rifting and block rotation

13

alternating with more tranquil periods of regional sub-sidence. The syn-rift succession can be subdivided intoa number of tectonostratigraphic units marked by riftevents followed by more gradual subsidence. Sevenregional tectonostratigraphic sequences have beenrecognised for the Aalenian–Valanginian stratigraphicinterval in the Central and Northern North Sea (UK andNorwegian sectors) by Rattey & Hayward (1993); theevolution of the Danish Central Graben in theAalenian–Ryazanian described by Andsbjerg & Dybkjær(2003, this volume) is broadly compatible with theregional framework of Rattey & Hayward (1993) althoughmegasequences were not defined in the Danish CentralGraben study.

The seven North Sea tectonostratigraphic sequencesof Rattey & Hayward (1993) are equivalent to sixsequences for the correlative interval in East Greenland

(Surlyk & Noe-Nygaard 2000; Surlyk 2003, this volume).The main difference between the two regions seems tobe the delayed onset and culmination of rifting in EastGreenland compared to the North Sea and the appar-ent lack of a tectonostratigraphic sequence boundaryroughly at the Oxfordian–Kimmeridgian boundary in EastGreenland. Otherwise the sequences correspond broadlyto each other in timing and stratigraphic development,and it is not always clear if the differences, i.e. theslightly older positions of the boundaries in the NorthSea, are real. They may also reflect dating by ammonitesin Greenland and by dinocysts in the North Sea, respec-tively, and uncertainties in the correlation between thetwo zonations. It has been noted by a few workers thatthe base of dinocyst zones tend to occur at progressivelyhigher levels compared to ammonite zone boundariesin a North Sea – East Greenland – North Greenland tran-

14

Ryazan-ian

Volg-ian

Berri-asian

Tithon-ian

Kimmeridgian

Oxfordian

Callovian

Bathonian

Bajocian

Aalenian

Toarcian

Pliensbachian

Sinemurian

Hettangian

Rhaetian

Cre

tace

ous

Jura

ssic

Tria

ssic

Low

erLo

wer

Upp

erM

iddl

eU

pper

UM

L

UL

UMLUM

L

UML

U

L

UML

U

M

L

U

L

U

L

210

200

190

180

170

160

150

140

ChronostratigraphyMa NESW Danish Central GrabenRFHRFH STZ SKP

SW NEDanish Basin

Syn-

rift

meg

aseq

uenc

ePr

e-ri

ft m

egas

eque

nce

Syn-

rift

meg

aseq

uenc

ePr

e-ri

ft m

egas

eque

nce

sect (Smelror 1993; S. Piasecki, personal communica-tion 2002). The northwards younging of tectonostrati-graphic boundaries may thus be real, possibly reflect-ing progressive northward propagation of the rift systemas suggested by Surlyk & Clemmensen (1983), or appar-ent, reflecting correlation problems at a time of markedammonite provinciality or northward migration of indi-cator dinocysts with respect to the more finely-tunedammonite zonation that forms the basis for Jurassicchronostratigraphy.

Early syn-rift sedimentation (Late Aalenian – Bajocian)in the Danish Basin and the Danish Central Grabenwas confined to narrow subsiding grabens and the suc-cession is probably incomplete with a number of inferredunconformities within the Bajocian–Bathonian part. Itis noteworthy that a prominent unconformity is recordedin the uppermost Bathonian of the northern Danish

Central Graben, recording a marked shift in subsidencepatterns during early rifting (Andsbjerg 2003, this vol-ume). Although loosely constrained biostratigraphically,a hiatal surface is also inferred at this level in the DanishBasin (Fig. 2; Nielsen 2003, this volume). This event isnot detected in the East Greenland sedimentary recordwhere the Bathonian–Callovian transition is charac-terised by transgression and progressive backsteppingof sedimentary systems (Fig. 2); minor hiatuses arerecorded at this stratigraphic level but these resulted fromcondensation and non-deposition in offshore settings.

The syn-rift successions of Denmark and EastGreenland are suggestive of a northward youngingdiachroneity of rift phases. The rift climax occurred inthe Early Oxfordian – middle Middle Volgian in theDanish sector of the Central Graben, albeit with animportant lull in the Late Kimmeridgian characterised

15

No data

No data

S N

Source rock

Estuarine/lagoonal sandstones,heteroliths, mudstones and coal beds

Hiatus/condensed

Jameson Land Wollaston Forland – Kuhn ØS N

W E

Lacustrine deltas, sand-dominated

Lacustrine mudstones

Alluvial/delta plain – paralic,sand-dominatedFluvial and estuarine sandstones,conglomerates

Floodplain mudstones

Shallow marine sandstones

Offshore/basinal mudstones,heterolithsOrganic-rich offshore/basinalmudstones

Deep marine sandstones

Deep marine conglomerates

Coal

Syn-

rift

meg

aseq

uenc

ePr

e-ri

ft m

egas

eque

nce

Syn-

rift

meg

aseq

uenc

e

Fig. 2. Chronostratigraphic scheme ofthe uppermost Triassic – lowermostCretaceous of the Danish CentralGraben, the Danish Basin and EastGreenland showing the main litholo-gies, depositional environments andtectonostratigraphic sequences.Simplified from Andsbjerg & Dybkjær(2003, this volume), Nielsen (2003,this volume) and Surlyk (2003, thisvolume); time-scale after Gradsteinet al. (1994). RFH, Ringkøbing–FynHigh; SKP, Skagerrak–Kattegat Plat-form; STZ, Sorgenfrei–Tornquist Zone.

by regression and shoreface progradation (Andsbjerg& Dybkjær 2003, this volume; Johannessen 2003, thisvolume; Møller & Rasmussen 2003, this volume). Thelate Middle and Late Volgian saw a general waning inrift activity in the Danish Central Graben resulting inthe development of more symmetrical sub-basins, asso-ciated with a general reduction in the overall sedimen-tation rate. Indeed, the Upper Volgian – Lower Ryazanianin the Central Graben is characterised by a relativelycondensed stratigraphic package of organic-rich ‘hotshales’, associated locally with basin floor sands (Donovanet al. 1993; Ineson et al. 2003, this volume)

An Oxfordian – Early Volgian rift climax seems to beapplicable to the Jameson Land Basin at the southernend of the East Greenland rift basin where chaotic deep-water sandstones of the Upper Oxfordian – LowerVolgian Hareelv Formation mark the rift climax (Surlyk& Noe-Nygaard 2001; Surlyk 2003, this volume). It wassucceeded by rapid progradation and basin infill inMiddle and Late Volgian times as rift activity waned. InWollaston Forland at the northern end of the rift basin,however, the Late Oxfordian – Early Volgian was char-acterised by gentle block tilting, whereas the rift climaxaccompanied by strong block tilting took place in theMiddle Volgian.

Taken at face value, therefore, the stratigraphic syn-rift histories of the two regions are broadly similar butthe main events appear to have started earlier in thesouth.

ConclusionsUnravelling the complexities of the Jurassic rifted sea-way in the North Atlantic region continues to be a sub-ject of major research interest, not least due to thehydrocarbon potential of Jurassic basins on both sidesof the Atlantic Ocean. The basins of East Greenland andDenmark represent important pieces in this jigsaw puz-zle and the studies reported in the following papers willhelp to further constrain regional models of rift devel-opment, and to better understand Jurassic stratigraphicdevelopment in general. Comparison of the Jurassic evo-lution of these areas makes it possible to construct anintegrated picture of the long, relatively narrow seaways,allowing testing of ideas concerning basin evolution,domal versus regional uplift, and timing of the onsetand climax of rifting. In addition to this regional per-spective, parallel research into the Jurassic of the EastGreenland and Danish basins allows comparison of thesignatures of sequence stratigraphic surfaces as seen on

well logs, in cores and at outcrop, and of sequencesrecognised and defined on the basis of very different datatypes. Furthermore, experience gleaned from the exten-sive outcrops of East Greenland aids interpretation ofrestricted outcrops on Bornholm and in Skåne and allowsthem to be placed within a regional framework.

The tectonostratigraphic summary presented aboveshows that the main tectonic events and stratigraphictrends in East Greenland, Denmark and adjacent areasare highly similar but apparently somewhat out of phasefor the syn-rift successions (Fig. 3). The Rhaetian – EarlyJurassic was characterised by regional subsidence fol-lowing late Palaeozoic and early Mesozoic rift events andthe detailed stratigraphic signature reflects relative sea-level changes superimposed on a long-term sea-level rise.

Major regional uplift heralding the onset of rifting tookplace broadly at the Early–Middle Jurassic boundary andthe uplifted areas underwent marked erosion. Subsequentsubsidence began in the Aalenian in the North Sea andin the Late Bajocian in East Greenland concomitant withthe onset of rifting, resulting in major regional onlap andtransgression. Continued relative sea-level rise, reflect-ing the early rifting, took place in the Bathonian; deltasand shallow marine sandy systems were drowned almosteverywhere by the end of the Callovian. Rifting culmi-nated in Early Oxfordian – Volgian times with majorblock tilting and deposition of fault-scarp aprons andbasin-floor fans. The rift climax was delayed in northernEast Greenland compared to areas further south.

The timing and style of tectonic events thus exertedthe main control on the long-term trends in stratigraphicevolution. In the Early Jurassic, however, relative sea-level changes that were unrelated to local tectonicsseem to have exerted the main control on the deposi-tional motifs (Dam & Surlyk 1995, 1998; Andsbjerg &Dybkjær 2003, this volume; Nielsen 2003, this volume;Surlyk 2003, this volume). The Late Jurassic deepeningand transgressive trend, on the other hand, appears toreflect accelerated regional subsidence, increased tilt-ing of fault blocks, eustatic sea-level rise or a combi-nation of these factors, and isolation of the dominantcontrol is difficult without comparison with successionson other lithospheric plates.

AcknowledgementsThis introductory paper is based mainly on the detailedstudies reported in this book; we acknowledge theauthors and thank Peter R. Dawes, Peter N. Johannessen,Michael Larsen and Lars H. Nielsen for useful comments.

16

17

Loca

lised

faul

t re

-act

ivat

ion

Reg

iona

lth

erm

alsu

bsid

ence

Upl

ift a

ndde

ep e

rosi

on

Faul

t-co

ntro

lled

subs

iden

ce o

fea

ster

n D

CG

Min

or u

plift

(Søg

ne B

asin

)

Regi

onal

back

step

ping

Maj

or h

alf-

grab

ende

velo

pmen

t

Rift

hiat

us, s

edim

enta

rypr

ogra

datio

n

Shel

f dro

wni

ngSh

elf d

row

ning

Shel

f dro

wni

ngSh

elf d

row

ning

Ren

ewed

rift

sub

side

nce

–m

arke

d ba

sin

segm

enta

tion

and

bloc

k ro

tatio

n

Peak

tran

sgre

ssio

n

Upl

ift o

f RFH

,N

E-til

ting

of b

asin

,de

ep e

rosi

on t

o SW

Faul

t-co

ntro

lled

subs

iden

ce o

f ST

Z

Regi

onal

back

step

ping

Ren

ewed

reg

iona

lsu

bsid

ence

,in

clud

ing

RFH

Mar

ine

inun

datio

n

Ove

rall

tran

sgre

ssive

tren

d

Min

or u

plift

,ba

sin

reor

gani

satio

n

Gen

tle b

lock

rot

atio

n,in

itial

sed

imen

tary

prog

rada

tion

Regi

onal

back

step

ping

Dee

peni

ng –

per

sist

ent

regi

onal

sub

side

nce

(blo

ck r

otat

ion)

Prog

rada

tion

ofsh

elf s

yste

ms

Upl

ift a

nd in

cisi

on

Infil

l/dra

pe o

fer

osio

nal r

elie

f

Basi

n se

gmen

tatio

nan

d bl

ock

rota

tion

Upl

ift/e

rosi

onOnl

ap o

nto

pre-

Jura

ssic

base

men

t, se

dim

enta

rypr

ogra

datio

n

Gen

tle b

lock

rota

tion

Regi

onal

back

step

ping

Syn-

rift

pha

se

Pre-

rift

pha

se

Upl

ift

Faul

t-co

ntro

lled

subs

iden

ce (

min

or/m

ajor

)

Den

mar

kEa

st G

reen

land

Jam

eson

Lan

d –

Miln

e La

ndW

olla

ston

For

land

– K

uhn

ØC

entr

al G

rabe

n D

anis

h Ba

sin

Rift

clim

ax

?Upl

ift

Rift

clim

ax

Rift

clim

ax

Reg

iona

lth

erm

alsu

bsid

ence

Reg

iona

lth

erm

alsu

bsid

ence

Chr

onos

trat

igra

phy

Ma

Rya

zan-

ian

Volg

-ia

n

Berr

i-as

ian

Tith

on-

ian

Kim

mer

idgi

an

Oxf

ordi

an

Cal

lovi

an

Bath

onia

n

Bajo

cian

Aal

enia

n

Toar

cian

Plie

nsba

chia

n

Sine

mur

ian

Het

tang

ian

Rha

etia

n

Cretaceous Jurassic Triassic

Lower LowerUpper Middle UpperU M L U L U M L U M L U M L U L U M L U LM U L U L

210

200

190

180

170

160

150

140

Fig.

3. Sc

hem

e sh

ow

ing

the

mai

n tec

tonic

eve

nts

and tre

nds

in b

asin

evo

lutio

n in the

Dan

ish C

entral

Gra

ben

, th

e D

anis

h B

asin

and E

ast G

reen

land p

lotted

on a

tim

e ax

is. Tim

e-sc

ale

afte

r G

radst

ein e

t a

l. (1

994)

. D

CG

, D

anis

h C

entral

Gra

ben

; R

FH

, Rin

gkøbin

g–Fy

n H

igh;

STZ, So

rgen

frei

–Torn

quis

t Zone.

18

ReferencesAhlberg, A., Sivhed, U. & Erlström, M. 2003: The Jurassic of Skåne,

southern Sweden. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): TheJurassic of Denmark and Greenland. Geological Survey ofDenmark and Greenland Bulletin 1, 527–541 (this volume).

Alsgaard, P.C., Felt, V.L., Vosgerau, H. & Surlyk, F. 2003: TheJurassic of Kuhn Ø, North-East Greenland. In: Ineson, J.R. &Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland.Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1,865–892 (this volume).

Andsbjerg, J. 2003: Sedimentology and sequence stratigraphy ofthe Bryne and Lulu Formations, Middle Jurassic, northernDanish Central Graben. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): TheJurassic of Denmark and Greenland. Geological Survey ofDenmark and Greenland Bulletin 1, 301–347 (this volume).

Andsbjerg, J. & Dybkjær, K. 2003: Sequence stratigraphy of theJurassic of the Danish Central Graben. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk,F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland. GeologicalSurvey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1, 265–300 (thisvolume).

Andsbjerg, J., Nielsen, L.H., Johannessen, P.N. & Dybkjær, K.2001: Divergent development of two neighbouring basins fol-lowing the Jurassic North Sea doming event: the Danish CentralGraben and the Norwegian–Danish Basin. In: Martinsen, O.J.& Dreyer, T. (eds): Sedimentary environments offshore Norway– Palaeozoic to Recent. Norwegian Petroleum Society (NPF)Special Publication 10, 175–197.

Brekke, H., Sjulstad, H.I., Magnus, C. & Williams, R.W. 2001:Sedimentary environments offshore Norway – an overview.In: Martinsen, O.J. & Dreyer, T. (eds): Sedimentary environ-ments offshore Norway – Palaeozoic to Recent. NorwegianPetroleum Society (NPF) Special Publication 10, 7–37.

Callomon, J.H. 1985: The evolution of the Jurassic ammonitefamily Cardioceratidae. In: Cope, J.C.W. & Skelton, P.W. (eds):Evolutionary case histories from the fossil record. SpecialPapers in Palaeontology 33, 49–90. London: PalaeontologicalAssociation.

Callomon, J.H. 2003: The Middle Jurassic of western and north-ern Europe: its subdivisions, geochronology and correlations.In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmarkand Greenland. Geological Survey of Denmark and GreenlandBulletin 1, 61–73 (this volume).

Carter, R.M., Abbott, S.T., Fulthorpe, C.S., Haywick, D.W. &Henderson, R.A. 1991: Application of global sea-level andsequence-stratigraphic models in southern hemisphere Neogenestrata from New Zealand. In: MacDonald, D.I.M. (ed.):Sedimentation, tectonics and eustasy. International Associationof Sedimentologists Special Publication 12, 41–65.

Dalland, A. 1981: Mesozoic sedimentary succession at Andøy,northern Norway, and relation to structural development ofthe North Atlantic area. In: Kerr, J.W. & Fergusson, A.J. (eds):Geology of the North Atlantic Borderlands. Canadian Societyof Petroleum Geologists Memoir 7, 563–584.

Dam, G. & Surlyk, F. 1995: Sequence stratigraphic correlation ofLower Jurassic shallow marine and paralic successions acrossthe Greenland–Norway seaway. In: Steel, R.J. et al. (eds):

Sequence stratigraphy on the Northwest European margin.Norwegian Petroleum Society (NPF) Special Publication 5,483–499.

Dam, G. & Surlyk, F. 1998: Stratigraphy of the Neill Klinter Group;a Lower – lower Middle Jurassic tidal embayment succession,Jameson Land, East Greenland. Geology of Greenland SurveyBulletin 175, 80 pp.

de Graciansky, P.-C., Hardenbol, J., Jacquin, T. & Vail, P.R. (eds)1998: Mesozoic and Cenozoic sequence stratigraphy of Euro-pean basins. SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology) SpecialPublication 60, 481–506.

Donovan, A.D., Djakic, A.W., Ioannides, N.S., Garfield, T.R. &Jones, C.R. 1993: Sequence stratigraphic control on Middle andUpper Jurassic reservoir distribution within the UK CentralNorth Sea. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.): Petroleum geology of NorthwestEurope: proceedings of the 4th conference, 251–269. London:Geological Society.

Doré, A.G. 1992: Synoptic palaeogeography of the NortheastAtlantic Seaway: Late Permian to Cretaceous. In: Parnell, J. (ed.):Basins on the Atlantic seaboard: petroleum geology, sedi-mentology and basin evolution. Geological Society SpecialPublication (London) 62, 421–446.

Doré, A.G., Lundin, E.R., Jensen, L.N., Birkeland, Ø., Eliassen,P.E. & Fichler, C. 1999: Principal tectonic events in the evo-lution of the northwest European Atlantic margin. In: Fleet,A.J. & Boldy, S.A.R. (eds): Petroleum geology of NorthwestEurope: proceedings of the 5th conference, 41–61. London:Geological Society.

Engkilde, M. & Surlyk, F. 2003: Shallow marine syn-rift sedi-mentation: Middle Jurassic Pelion Formation, Jameson Land,East Greenland. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassicof Denmark and Greenland. Geological Survey of Denmarkand Greenland Bulletin 1, 813–863 (this volume).

Eynon, G. 1981: Basin development and sedimentation in theMiddle Jurassic of the northern North Sea. In: Illing, L.V. &Hobson, G.D. (eds): Petroleum geology of the continentalshelf of North-West Europe: proceedings of the 2nd confer-ence, 196–204. London: Heyden & Son Ltd.

Frandsen, N. & Surlyk, F. 2003: An offshore transgressive–regres-sive mudstone-dominated succession from the Sinemurian ofSkåne, Sweden. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassicof Denmark and Greenland. Geological Survey of Denmarkand Greenland Bulletin 1, 543–554 (this volume).

Gradstein, F.M., Agterberg, F.P., Ogg, J.G., Hardenbol, J., vanVeen, P., Thierry, J. & Huang, Z. 1994: A Mesozoic time scale.Journal of Geophysical Research 99, 24051–24074.

Hallam, A. & Sellwood, B.W. 1976: Middle Mesozoic sedimenta-tion in relation to tectonics in the British area. Journal ofGeology 84, 301–321.

Haq, B.U., Hardenbol, J. & Vail, P.R. 1987: Chronology of fluc-tuating sea levels since the Triassic. Science 235, 1156–1167.

Herngreen, G.F.W., Kouwe, W.F.P. & Wong, T.E. 2003: The Jurassicof the Netherlands. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): TheJurassic of Denmark and Greenland. Geological Survey ofDenmark and Greenland Bulletin 1, 217–229 (this volume).

Ineson, J.R., Bojesen-Koefoed, J.A., Dybkjær, K. & Nielsen, L.H.2003: Volgian–Ryazanian ‘hot shales’ of the Bo Member

19

(Farsund Formation) in the Danish Central Graben, North Sea:stratigraphy, facies and geochemistry. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk,F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland. GeologicalSurvey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1, 403–436 (thisvolume).

Johannessen, P.N. 2003: Sedimentology and sequence stratigra-phy of paralic and shallow marine Upper Jurassic sandstonesin the northern Danish Central Graben. In: Ineson, J.R. &Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland.Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1,367–402 (this volume).

Johnson, C. & Gallagher, K. 2000: A preliminary Mesozoic andCenozoic denudation history of the North East Greenlandonshore margin. Global and Planetary Change 24, 261–274.

Koppelhus, E.B. & Hansen, C.F. 2003: Palynostratigraphy andpalaeoenvironment of the Middle Jurassic Sortehat Formation(Neill Klinter Group), Jameson Land, East Greenland. In:Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark andGreenland. Geological Survey of Denmark and GreenlandBulletin 1, 777–811 (this volume).

Larsen, M., Piasecki, S. & Surlyk, F. 2003: Stratigraphy and sedi-mentology of a basement-onlapping shallow marine sand-stone succession, the Charcot Bugt Formation, Middle–UpperJurassic, East Greenland. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds):The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland. Geological Surveyof Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1, 893–930 (this volume).

Mathiesen, A., Bidstrup, T. & Christiansen, F.G. 2000: Denudationand uplift history of the Jameson Land Basin, East Greenland– constrained from maturity and apatite fission track data.Global and Planetary Change 24, 275–301.

Miall, A.D. 1997: The geology of stratigraphic sequences, 433pp. Berlin: Springer Verlag.

Miall, A.D. & Miall, C.E. 2001: Sequence stratigraphy as a scien-tific enterprise: the evolution and persistence of conflicting para-digms. Earth-Science Reviews 54, 321–348.

Michelsen, O., Nielsen, L.H., Johannessen, P.N., Andsbjerg, J. &Surlyk, F. 2003: Jurassic lithostratigraphy and stratigraphicdevelopment onshore and offshore Denmark. In: Ineson, J.R.& Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland.Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1,147–216 (this volume).

Møller, J.J. & Rasmussen, E.S. 2003: Middle Jurassic – EarlyCretaceous rifting of the Danish Central Graben. In: Ineson,J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland.Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1,247–264 (this volume).

Nielsen, L.H. 1995: Genetic stratigraphy of Upper Triassic – MiddleJurassic deposits of the Danish Basin and FennoscandianBorder Zone 2, 3, 162 pp. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Universityof Copenhagen, Denmark.

Nielsen, L.H. 2003: Late Triassic – Jurassic development of theDanish Basin and the Fennoscandian Border Zone, southernScandinavia. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassicof Denmark and Greenland. Geological Survey of Denmarkand Greenland Bulletin 1, 459–526 (this volume).

Posamentier, H.W. & James, D.P. 1993: An overview of sequence-stratigraphic concepts: uses and abuses. In: Posamentier, H.W.

et al. (eds): Sequence stratigraphy and facies associations.International Association of Sedimentologists Special Publica-tion 18, 3–18.

Poulsen, N.E. & Riding, J.B. 2003: The Jurassic dinoflagellate cystzonation of Subboreal Northwest Europe. In: Ineson, J.R. &Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmark and Greenland.Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland Bulletin 1,115–144 (this volume).

Rattey, R.P. & Hayward, A.B. 1993: Sequence stratigraphy of afailed rift system: the Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceous basinevolution of the Central and Northern North Sea. In: Parker,J.R. (ed.): Petroleum geology of Northwest Europe: proceed-ings of the 4th conference, 215–249. London: Geological Society.

Skogseid, J., Planke, S., Faleide, J.A., Pedersen, T., Eldholm, O.& Neverdal, F. 2000: NE Atlantic continental rifting and vol-canic margin formation. In: Nøttvedt, A. (ed.): Dynamics ofthe Norwegian margin. Geological Society Special Publication(London) 167, 295–326.

Smelror, M. 1993: Biogeography of Bathonian to Oxfordian(Jurassic) dinoflagellates: Arctic, NW Europe and circum-Mediterranean regions. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 102, 121–160.

Surlyk, F. 1977a: Mesozoic faulting in East Greenland. In: Frost,R.T.C. & Dikkers, A.J. (eds): Fault tectonics in NW Europe.Geologie en Mijnbouw 56, 311–327.

Surlyk, F. 1977b: Stratigraphy, tectonics and palaeogeography ofthe Jurassic sediments of the areas north of Kong Oscars Fjord,East Greenland. Bulletin Grønlands Geologiske Undersøgelse123, 56 pp.

Surlyk, F. 1990: Timing, style and sedimentary evolution of LatePalaeozoic – Mesozoic extensional basins of East Greenland.In: Hardman, R.F.P. & Brooks, J. (eds): Tectonic events respon-sible for Britain’s oil and gas reserves. Geological SocietySpecial Publication (London) 55, 107–125.

Surlyk, F. 1991: Tectonostratigraphy of North Greenland. In: Peel,J.S. & Sønderholm, M. (eds): Sedimentary basins of NorthGreenland. Bulletin Grønlands Geologiske Undersøgelse 160,25–47.

Surlyk, F. 2003: The Jurassic of East Greenland: a sedimentaryrecord of thermal subsidence, onset and culmination of rift-ing. In: Ineson, J.R. & Surlyk, F. (eds): The Jurassic of Denmarkand Greenland. Geological Survey of Denmark and GreenlandBulletin 1, 659–722 (this volume).

Surlyk, F. & Clemmensen, L.B. 1983: Rift propagation and eustacyas controlling factors during Jurassic inshore and shelf sedi-mentation in northern East Greenland. Sedimentary Geology34, 119–143.

Surlyk, F. & Noe-Nygaard, N. 2000: Jurassic sequence stratigra-phy of East Greenland. In: Hall, R.L. & Smith, P.L. (eds):Advances in Jurassic research 2000. Proceedings of the 5thInternational Symposium on the Jurassic System. GeoResearchForum 6, 357–366.

Surlyk, F. & Noe-Nygaard, N. 2001: Sand remobilisation and intru-sion in the Upper Jurassic Hareelv Formation of East Greenland.In: Surlyk, F. & Håkansson, E. (eds): Oscar volume. Bulletinof the Geological Society of Denmark 48, 169–188.

Surlyk, F., Dam, G. & Noe-Nygaard, N. 1993: High and low

20

resolution sequence stratigraphy in lithological prediction –examples from around the northern North Atlantic. In: Parker,J.R. (ed.): Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe: pro-ceedings of the 4th conference, 199–214. London: GeologicalSociety.

Surlyk, F., Arndorff, L., Hamann, N.-E., Hamberg, L., Johannessen,P.N., Koppelhus, E.B., Nielsen, L.H., Noe-Nygaard, N., Pedersen,G.K. & Petersen, H.I. 1995: High-resolution sequence strati-graphy of a Hettangian–Sinemurian paralic succession, Born-holm, Denmark. Sedimentology 42, 323–354.

Underhill, J.R. & Partington, M.A. 1993: Jurassic thermal domingand deflation in the North Sea: implications of the sequencestratigraphic evidence. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.): Petroleum Geologyof Northwest Europe: proceedings of the 4th conference,337–345. London: Geological Society.

Underhill, J.R. & Partington, M.A. 1994: Use of genetic sequence

stratigraphy in defining and determining a regional tectoniccontrol on the ‘mid-Cimmerian Unconformity’ – implicationsfor North Sea basin development and the global sea-levelchart. In: Weimer, P. & Posamentier, H.W. (eds): Siliciclasticsequence stratigraphy: recent developments and applications.American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 58,449–484.

Whiteman, A.J., Rees, G., Naylor, D. & Pegrum, R.M. 1975: NorthSea troughs and plate tectonics. Norges Geologiske Under-søkelse 316, 137–161.

Ziegler, P.A. 1988: Evolution of the Arctic – North Atlantic andthe western Tethys. American Association of Petroleum Geo-logists Memoir 43, 198 pp.

Ziegler, P.A. 1990: Geological atlas of western and central Europe,2nd edition, 239 pp. Amsterdam: Elsevier for Shell InternationalePetroleum Maatschappij.