Lower Cretaceous Lithostratigraphy Across a Regional Subaerial Unconformity in Spitsbergen 287
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY Lower Cretaceous lithostratigraphy across a regional subaerial unconformity in Spitsbergen 287 Lower Cretaceous lithostratigraphy across a regional subaerial unconformity in Spitsbergen: the Rurikfjellet and Helvetiafjellet formations Ivar Midtkandal, Johan Petter Nystuen, Jenö Nagy & Atle Mørk Midtkandal, I., Nystuen, J. P., Nagy, J. & Mørk, A.: Lower Cretaceous lithostratigraphy across a regional subaerial unconformity in Spitsbergen: the Rurikfjellet and Helvetiafjellet formations. Norwegian Journal of Geology, Vol. 88, pp. 287-304, Trondheim 2008, ISSN 029-196X During development of the Lower Cretaceous succession in the Spitsbergen domain of the epicontinental Boreal Basin, a fall in relative sea-level caused a major subaerial unconformity to form. This unconformity forms the lithostratigraphic boundary between the Rurikfjellet Formation below, and the Helvetiafjellet Formation above. The previous Ullaberget Member in the upper part of the Rurikfjellet Formation was originally defi- ned using the Ullaberget section in Nathorst Land as its stratotype. The Ullaberget section is not representative for the upper sandstone-rich mem- ber of the Rurikfjellet Formation, but is chosen here as the stratotype for the new Louiseberget Bed of the Festningen Member. The Louiseberget Bed consists of deltaic sandstone, located above the subaerial unconformity capping the Rurikfjellet Formation, and forms a facies body within the Festningen Member, the fluvially-dominated lower member of the Helvetiafjellet Formation. The Kikutodden Member is here defined as a new member substituting for the Ullaberget Member as the upper, sand-rich part of the Rurikfjellet Formation; the Kikutodden section in Sørkapp Land being the stratotype and the Strykejernet section being new hypostratotype for the member. The Festningen Member and the Glitrefjellet Member in the lower and upper parts of the Helvetiafjellet Formation, respectively, are re-established as formal members. Ivar Midtkandal, Johan Petter Nystuen and Jenö Nagy, University of Oslo, Department of Geosciences, P.O. Box 1047, Blindern, NO-0316 Oslo, Norway; Atle Mørk, SINTEF Petroleum Research NO-7465 Trondheim, Norway, and Department of Geology and Mineral Resources Engineering, NTNU, Norwegian University of Sciences and Technology, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway; Ivar Midtkandal, Present address: University of Adelaide, Australian School of Petroleum, Adelaide SA 5005, Australia [email protected] Introduction with Albian beds being the youngest Mesozoic units pre- served below the Paleocene deposits of the Central Terti- Svalbard’s Mesozoic succession is characterized by open ary Basin (Nagy 1970; Mørk et al. 1999). marine through marginal-marine to continental facies associations of mudstone, shale and sandstone deposited During the latest Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceous in a shallow epicontinental basin (e.g. Kelly 1988; Mørk et (Bathonian to Hauterivian/earliest Barremian), marine al. 1999). General overviews of the geological development clay and mud with sand intercalations of prodelta and/or of Svalbard and adjacent parts of the Barents Sea region shoreface origin accumulated in the Svalbard domain of are given by Steel and Worsley (1984), Nøttvedt et al. the Boreal Basin, presently part of the Janusfjellet Sub- (1993) and Worsley (2008). group in the Adventdalen Group (Dypvik et al. 1991a). This subgroup is subdivided into the Agardhfjellet For- Being part of the Boreal Basin along the northern margin mation (latest Bathonian to Volgian) and the Rurikfjel- of Laurasia (Fig. 1), the Spitsbergen domain of the basin let Formation (Berriasian to Early Barremian). Both comprised several depositional environments including formations are subdivided into several members related alluvial plain, paralic settings such as coastal plain, delta, to variations in sandstone content (Dypvik et al. 1991a; strandplain and shoreface to mud-dominated environ- Mørk et al. 1999). The lithostratigraphic subdivision is ments well below fair-weather and storm wave base. made independently of any sequence stratigraphic con- The basin was characterized by very low overall gradient sideration or genetic interpretation of the succession. slopes, thus giving rise to basin infill dynamics sensitive The overlying Helvetiafjellet Formation has been identi- to fluctuations in relative sea-level and changes in clas- fied as generally bipartite by Parker (1967), with a thick tic sediment input. Variation in these two allogenic fac- sandstone succession at its base, the Festningen Member, tors in combination with ongoing autogenic influence followed by a heterolithic upper part, the Glitrefjellet exerted the main control on the lithostratigraphy of the Member. Stratigraphically higher, the Cretaceous succes- Mesozoic sedimentary succession in Svalbard and in the sion is again mudstone dominated but with several sand- western Barents Sea area. By an oblique uplift of Spitsber- stone intervals, and is named the Carolinefjellet Forma- gen (most in the northwest) in Late Cretaceous time, the tion (Parker 1967; Edwards 1976; Nagy 1970; Mørk et al. Spitsbergen sedimentary succession was deeply eroded 1999). 288 I. Midtkandal et al. NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY Palaeo-land Fig. 1 Boreal Basin palaeogeography at 127 Ma, N showing Spitsbergen’s position relative to major land- Boreal Basin (ocean) Novaya Zemlya masses. Map data is modified from Torsvik et al. (2001, 2002). Sverdrup Basin Barents shelf domain Spitsbergen 60˚N domain Greenland Fennoscandia LAURASIA 1000 km 127 Ma The scope of the present paper is to revise the lithostrati- these new observations create the need for a revision of graphy of the uppermost part of the Rurikfjellet type sections and redefinition of members both above Formation and the overlying Helvetiafjellet Formation and below the unconformity. (Mørk et al. 1999). The Ullaberget Member has been defined as a sandstone unit in the uppermost part of the In other parts of Spitsbergen, sandstone units supposed Rurikfjellet Formation, located below a regional erosional to be lateral correlatives to the Ullaberget Member in the unconformity separating the open-marine Rurikfjellet stratotype section are all located below the regional ero- Formation from the fluvial and paralic Hevetia fjellet sional unconformity, at least within the Svalbard domain Formation above the unconformity (Różycki 1959; of the Boreal Basin. For this reason, we propose the name Birkenmajer 1975; Dypvik et al. 1991a, b; Mørk et al. Kikutodden Member of the Rurikfjellet Formation for this 1999). The Ullaberget cliff section has been assigned as sand-dominated unit below the unconformity, while for the stratotype for the member, although this particular the unit above the unconformity, we propose the name sandstone unit is not present at this locality. The first Louiseberget Bed of the Festningen Member (lower part of sandstone unit one encounters when walking up the Ulla- the Helvetiafjellet Formation in Nathorst Land, Appendi- berget section through the shale-dominated Rurik fjellet ces 1 and 2). We also propose to re-establish the formal Formation is the deltaic sandstone here defined as the status of the “Festningen sandstone member” (Mørk et Louiseberget Bed overlying the regional unconformity. al. 1999), as the Festningen Member in the lower part of the Helvetiafjellet Formation, and retain the Glitrefjellet The absence of a thick sandstone unit below the regional Member (Parker 1967) as a formal unit in the upper part unconformity at Ullaberget has been the source of of the Helvetiafjellet Formation. The Glitrefjellet Member repeated misunderstandings regarding the stratigraphy was abandoned as a lithostratigraphic unit by Mørk et al. at this locality during subsequent field activities (e. g. (1999). The changes in lithostratigraphic nomenclature excursions). The deltaic sandstones of the Louiseberget proposed in this paper were reviewed and accepted by Bed have been mistaken for the true Ullaberget Member, the Norwegian Stratigraphic Committee (NSK) prior to as they constitute the lowest sandstone interval at Ulla- submission of the article to the Norwegian Journal of berget. Recent investigations on the northern side of Van Geology for publication. Keulenfjorden in Nathorst Land (Ahokas 2004; Midt- kandal et al. 2005; Midtkandal et al. 2006; Midtkandal 2007; Midtkandal & Nystuen 2009) have shown that the Use of the name Ullaberget Member and regional erosional unconformity here can be traced at related terms through time the base of the lowest sandstone and along the entire cliff face that spans Annaberget, Louiseberget and Ullaberget. The starting point for events leading to use of the term These observations are in accordance with the geological Ullaberget in stratigraphic nomenclature dates back to map covering the area produced by the Norwegian Polar observations made by J. G. Anderson in 1898, dealing Research Institute (Dallmann et al.1990). with the shale-mudstone succession exposed below the sandstone cliffs at Ullaberget, located on the northern As the Ullaberget section on the north side of Van Keulen- side of Van Keulenfjorden. Referring to Anderson, these fjorden was chosen as stratotype for the Ullaberget Mem- observations came to be published by Nathorst (1910), ber of the Rurikfjellet Formation (cf. Mørk et al. 1999), including Anderson’s sketchy drawing of the eastern part NORWEGIAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY Lower Cretaceous lithostratigraphy across a regional subaerial unconformity