The cretaceous opening of the Northeast Atlantic

Hanisch, Jörg

doi:10.1016/0040-1951(84)90039-8

Cited by 37 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This spreading occurs first in the Labrador Sea (Chron 27, 63 Ma) [ Chalmers , ; Chalmers and Laursen , ; Chalmers and Pulvertaft , ], and later in Baffin Bay (starting at ~55 Ma) [ Kristoffersen and Talwani , ; Srivastava , ] and in the Norwegian‐Greenland Sea and Atlantic Ocean (Paleocene‐Eocene) [ Kristoffersen and Talwani , ; Talwani and Eldholm , ] (Figure ). A combination of these spreading events results first in easterly motion followed by a counterclockwise rotation of Greenland motion relative to the North American plate [ De Paor et al , ; Hanisch , ].…”

Section: Regional Geologymentioning

confidence: 99%

A reconstruction of the Eurekan Orogeny incorporating deformation constraints

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Eurekan Orogeny records Paleogene convergence between Greenland and the Canadian Arctic. The complexity of the region, well represented by the disputed magnitude of Cenozoic sinistral displacement of Greenland relative to Ellesmere Island, stems from the simultaneous evolution of multiple tectonic regimes, as well as overprinting of later tectonic activity. Presented here is a plate model of regional crustal deformation constructed with the interactive GPlates software that enables an evaluation of previous reconstructions of the Eurekan Orogeny. This model is built upon a synthesis of published geological and geophysical data and their interpretations. It incorporates two phases of deformation from ~63 to 35 Ma. Phase 1, ~63 to ~55 Ma, involves ~85 km of Paleocene extension between Ellesmere and Devon Island, extension of ~20 km between Axel Heiberg and Ellesmere Island, and ~85 km of sinistral strike slip along the Nares Strait/Judge Daly Fault System, matching a range of 50–100 km indicated by the offset of marker beds, facies contacts, and platform margins between the conjugate Greenland and Ellesmere Island margins. Phase 2, ~55 to 35 Ma, results in total east‐west compression of ~30 km and ~200 km of north‐south compression across Ellesmere Island. This model confirms, for the first time, that key observations from subregions deformed by the Eurekan Orogeny are compatible on a broad scale. We have also identified potential problem areas in southwestern Ellesmere Island that are less compatible with a best fit model, given current constraints. This deforming plate model offers a platform and base model for future research.

show abstract

Section: Regional Geologymentioning

confidence: 99%

A reconstruction of the Eurekan Orogeny incorporating deformation constraints

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hanisch, 1984) and extension of the Bay of Biscay to Armorican continental margin (Montadert et ul., 1979). Hanisch, 1984) and extension of the Bay of Biscay to Armorican continental margin (Montadert et ul., 1979).…”

Section: Early Cretaceousmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 Rapid opening and sea-floor spreading in the Northeast Atlantic (e.g. Hanisch, 1984) and extension of the Bay of Biscay to Armorican continental margin (Montadert et ul., 1979). Rifting is reported for the same period from the Central and Viking grabens.…”

Section: Early Cretaceousmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subsidence analysis in the Paris Basin: a key to Northwest European intracontinental basins?

Loup

Wildi

1994

Basin Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the frequently observed disparities between stretching amounts obtained from faults, crustal thickness and tectonic subsidence, the development of intracratonic basins cannot always be explained by a simple model of lithospheric extension. Basin evolution may then be regarded as the result of superimposed and successive processes. The Paris Basin is chosen as a type example for the discussion of European intracratonic basins. The tectonic subsidence, reconstructed using a standard method, is small (maximum of 1600 m. The long-term linear or concave curves are interrupted by periods of short-term acceleration and deceleration. Thus, tectonic subsidence is clearly discontinuous and five phases, with duration of 20-60 Myr, constitute the long-term Meso-Cenozoic Subsidence. The boundaries and pattern of each phase are identical all over the basin. Subsidence is interpreted as the result of several modifications of the lithospheric structure. The uniform stretching model can explain the first Triassic to early 1iassic phase, the only one with a concave-upward trend (deceleration). The Jurassic to Cretaceous subsidence could be explained by superposing (1) a long-term component caused by lower crustal flow and/or underplating and (2) several short-term accelerations (convex-upward trend) related to compressive or transpressive forces. Geophysical control is insufficient to test the first postulate accurately and the generation of sufficiently high compressional stresses during the Jurassic-Cretaceous is questionable for the second. Other Northwest European basins are compared with the Paris Basin. Although similar features can be observed, the overall image is not uniform: ‘Paris Basin’ (intracratonic)as well as ‘Celtic Sea Basin’ (passive margin) signatures, variable long-term trends, lack of synchronism of subsidence phases. This picture necessitates different driving mechanisms for subsidence across Northwest Europe. The variable subsidence patterns and processes result from the ‘remote’ geodynamics of the Atlantic and Tethyan realms, combined with mainly ‘active’ processes similar to those proposed for the Paris Basin

show abstract

“…Cretaceous (Hanisch, 1984); Permo-Triassic, Jurassic and Early Cretaceous (Knott et al, 1993); Cretaceous to Cenozoic but with older pre-Cretaceous phases (e.g. Nadin et al, 1999);…”

Section: Rockall Basin and Associated Marginal Basinsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional gravity and magnetic modelling of the Irish sector of the NE Atlantic margin

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new 3D lithospheric model has been constructed using high-resolution gravity data from the Irish National Seabed Survey. The sedimentary component of the model incorporated density variations due to laterally varying overcompaction associated with Cenozoic denudation. After optimisation based on gravity inversion, regional crustal thickness variations were defined which are in reasonable agreement with the results of wide-angle seismic experiments. High crustal extension factors (β>5) characterise the deeper parts of the Rockall and Porcupine basins and in places the model indicates extreme stretching (β>10) beneath these basins. This could be because of instability in the gravity inversion, although other recent investigations have independently suggested similarly high extension factors. In contrast, the Hatton Basin is characterised by an apparent extension factor of about 2. The modelling resolves a pattern of NE-to NNE-trending local Mesozoic basins on the margins of the Rockall Trough, helping to delineate structures that were previously only sparsely sampled by seismic surveys. It appears possible that rifts with similar trends underlie the volcanic rocks which obscure the deeper parts of the Hatton Basin. The linear trends of the basins to the south and east of Ireland are interpreted to have been inherited from a basement fabric that was initially established during the late Precambrian assembly of this basement and subsequently subjected to Caledonian and Variscan reactivation. Magnetic modelling indicates that the variations in the thickness of the crystalline crust predicted by the gravity models can explain the regional magnetic anomaly patterns over the Rockall and Porcupine basins, but that significant additional magnetic material (probably igneous rocks of both Palaeogene and Cretaceous ages) is required to explain the anomalies in the Hatton Basin region. The magnetic signature of the Rockall Basin is distinctly different to that over the basement (of similar apparent thickness) formed during mid Cretaceous (C34N) opening of the ocean basin to the south. This is an impediment to hypotheses that invoke mid Cretaceous sea-floor spreading rather than intracontinental rifting to explain the development of the basin. The exception is in the extreme south of the basin where the volcanism associated with the Barra Volcanic Ridges combined with indications of relatively strong lithosphere could be evidence of incipient ocean opening.

show abstract

The cretaceous opening of the Northeast Atlantic

Cited by 37 publications

References 28 publications

A reconstruction of the Eurekan Orogeny incorporating deformation constraints

A reconstruction of the Eurekan Orogeny incorporating deformation constraints

Subsidence analysis in the Paris Basin: a key to Northwest European intracontinental basins?

Three-dimensional gravity and magnetic modelling of the Irish sector of the NE Atlantic margin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About