See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/249552905

Structural evolution of minibasins on the Utsira High, Northern North Sea;

implications for Jurassic sediment dispersal and reservoir distribution

Article  in  Petroleum Geoscience · April 2010

DOI: 10.1144/1354-079309-011

CITATIONS READS

15 979

3 authors, including:

Christopher A-L Jackson Eirik Larsen

Imperial College London Earth Science Analytics AS
254 PUBLICATIONS   3,301 CITATIONS    27 PUBLICATIONS   159 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Earth Science Analytics AS View project

North Sea Rift evolution View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Christopher A-L Jackson on 18 February 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Structural evolution of minibasins on the Utsira High, northern North
Sea; implications for Jurassic sediment dispersal and reservoir
distribution
Christopher A-L. Jackson1,*, Karla E. Kane1,2 and Eirik Larsen3,4
1
Department of Earth Science & Engineering, Imperial College, London SW7 2BP, UK
2
Present address: Statoil (U.K.) Ltd, 1 Kingdom Street, London W2 6BD, UK
3
Statoil ASA, Forusbreen 50, N-4035, Stavanger, Norway
4
Present address: Rocksource ASA, Olav Kyrresgate 22, N-5808, Bergen, Norway
*
Corresponding author (e-mail: c.jackson@imperial.ac.uk)

ABSTRACT: 3D seismic and well data are integrated to determine the tectono-
stratigraphic evolution of the SW margin of the Utsira High, northern North Sea rift
system. During the Triassic, a series of minibasins formed due to passive diapirism
of the evaporite-bearing, Upper Permian, Zechstein Supergroup. Subsequently,
during the Jurassic, a series of secondary minibasins developed as the underlying salt
walls collapsed. These minibasins were a few hundred metres deep, bound by
sub-circular to elongate salt-cored structural highs and caused the development of
complex subaerial topography and submarine bathymetry on the SW margin of the
Utsira High. Salt withdrawal may have been related to: (i) partial dissolution of salt;
(ii) differential erosion of the salt walls and adjacent Triassic-filled minibasins; or (iii)
salt remigration caused by sub- or supra-salt extension or sediment loading. This
study provides insights into the tectono-stratigraphic evolution of the SW margin of
the Utsira High and has implications for (i) facies distribution of the Zechstein
Supergroup within the northern North Sea rift system; and (ii) depositional system
development, and thus reservoir distribution, within the Jurassic sedimentary
succession.

KEYWORDS: Utsira High, salt tectonics, Zechstein Supergroup, minibasin, South Viking
Graben

INTRODUCTION style and evolution of the main structural elements and

The South Viking Graben, an asymmetric half-graben located
along the northern arm of the North Sea trilete rift system,
hosts several major hydrocarbon accumulations with estimated
recoverable reserves of 340.7  106 Sm3 of oil equivalent
(Fig. 1). This value includes fields in production and fields with
approved development plans up to December 2007, and does
not include 56 discoveries yet to be approved for development
(www.npd.com). In the Norwegian sector of the basin, the
main proven reservoir-trap pairs are Middle Jurassic shallow
marine sandstones within structural traps (e.g. Sleipner Vest
and Volve fields; Fig. 1) (Cockings et al. 1992; Isaksen et al.
2002; Husmo et al. 2003), and Paleocene deep-water sandstones
in structural or combination traps (e.g. Enoch, Sleipner East
and Glitne fields; Caers et al. 2001; Eidsvik et al. 2002). In the
UK sector, Upper Jurassic, syn-rift, deep-water sandstones
form additional important reservoirs (e.g. T-Block, Brae, Miller
and Kingfisher fields; Fig. 1) (Branther 2003; Fletcher 2003a, b;
Fraser et al. 2003; Gambaro & Donagemma 2003; Rooksby
2003; Spence & Kreutz 2003). To better understand the control
of syn-rift tectonics on Upper Jurassic reservoir distribution,
the majority of previous studies have focused on the structural
Petroleum Geoscience, Vol. 16 2010, pp. 105–120
DOI 10.1144/1354-079309-011
domains of the South Viking Graben. These include the
Graben Boundary Fault Zone, in the immediate hanging wall of
which the main UK sector fields are located, and the axial part
of the graben, where large salt diapirs and sub-salt, basement-
involved normal faults generated large structural traps (Fig. 1)
(e.g. Pegrum & Ljones 1984; Thomas & Coward 1996;
Branther 2003; Fletcher 2003a, b; Fraser et al. 2003; Husmo et al.
2003; Gambaro & Donagemma 2003; Rooksby 2003; Spence &
Kreutz 2003). The equivalent Upper Jurassic succession in the
Norwegian sector remains underexplored, largely due to diffi-
culties in predicting both reservoir distribution and the configu-
ration of structural traps. This reflects the complex control that
rift-related normal faults and salt movement exerted on coeval
sedimentation patterns.
To address these uncertainties and aid exploration within
the South Viking Graben, this study focuses on the SW margin
of the Utsira High which bounds the south-eastern margin of
the basin (Fig. 1). In particular, the study aims to outline the
structural style at the level of the Jurassic succession and
investigate the controls on Jurassic depositional patterns and
hence reservoir distribution; this is achieved through seismic-
stratigraphic analysis of a 400 km2 3D seismic reflection dataset
1354-0793/10/$15.00  2010 EAGE/Geological Society of London
106 C. A-L. Jackson et al.

Fig. 1. (a) Simplified map and (b) cross-section of the South Viking Graben (SVG), northern North Sea. The regional geographical setting of
the study area is shown in the inset map in (a). The location of (b) is shown on (a). The study area and the locations of Figs 8 and 10 are shown
on (a). GBFZ, Graben Boundary Fault Zone; FGS, Fladen Ground Spur; LD, Ling Depression. Note that pre-, syn- and post-rift are used with
respect to the main Late Jurassic rift event.

tied to limited well data. As outlined below, it is critical to
establish the temporal and spatial development of pre-Jurassic
structures, as the presence and subsequent development of
these structures controls, in part, the tectono-stratigraphic
evolution of the study area during the Jurassic. Furthermore,
the evaporite-rich, Upper Permian, Zechstein Supergroup,
which is known to have been mobile in many areas of the
North Sea rift system during the Mesozoic and Cenozoic (e.g.
Cutts 1991; Erratt 1993; Stewart & Clark 1999; Davison
et al. 2000; Stewart 2007) is present within the pre-rift (used
with respect to the late Middle to Late Jurassic rift event)
succession. Current models indicate that the study area is
located towards the north-eastern limit of the Zechstein Super-
group (see compilation by Stewart 2007; Fig. 2) and it is,
therefore, expected to be characterized by non-mobile, ‘mar-
ginal’ evaporite facies (Fig. 3; Thomas & Coward 1996). As
such, it is hypothesized that Late Jurassic rift-related normal
faulting, rather than differential subsidence related to salt
movement, would dominate the structural style and influence
coeval sedimentation patterns (cf. Clark et al. 1998; Stewart
2007). However, the results presented here demonstrate that
salt movement was the primary control on the structural
development of the SW margin of the Utsira High and that
mobile, basinal evaporite facies within the Zechstein Super-
group are more areally extensive in the South Viking Graben
than previously documented (Fig. 3). The structural style
 Minibasins on the SW margin of the Utsira High
Fig. 2. Map illustrating the main halokinetic domains present in the
UK sector of the North Sea rift system (modified from Stewart
2007). The present study area is located on the SW margin of the
Utsira High (UH) (boxed). The map has been modified to include
the minibasin terrain identified in this study.
observed within the study area contrasts markedly to that
encountered in the axis of the basin where rift-related normal
faults and large salt structures dominate the basin geometry
(Thomas & Coward 1996; Jackson & Larsen 2009; Kane et al.
107
Fig. 3. Simplified map of the SVG illustrating the distribution of
Zechstein Supergroup and constituent facies types within the pre-rift
fill of the basin (modified from Thomas & Coward 1996 and
Glennie et al. 2003). Only major basement-involved structures are
indicated. GBFZ, Graben Boundary Fault Zone. The map has been
modified to indicate the greater spatial extent of mobile Zechstein
Supergroup facies based on identification of the minibasin terrain on
the SW margin of the Utsira High (UH).
2010). In addition to improving the general understanding of
the tectono-stratigraphic evolution of the SW margin of the
Utsira High, this study also helps constrain facies distribution
within the Zechstein Supergroup and depositional system
development, and thus reservoir distribution, within the
Jurassic sedimentary succession.
GEOLOGICAL HISTORY AND STRATIGRAPHIC
FRAMEWORK
The structural framework and key tectono-stratigraphic
events in the South Viking Graben are summarized here in
order to provide a regional context for the descriptions and
interpretations which follow.
Permian–Triassic
The South Viking Graben formed in response to several
periods of crustal extension during the Mesozoic, with the
Graben Boundary Fault Zone in the west forming the main
108 C. A-L. Jackson et al.
basin-bounding structure (Fig. 1). The earliest period of exten-
sion and fault-controlled basin subsidence is generally consid-
ered to have occurred in the Early–Late Permian (e.g.
Gabrielsen et al. 1990; Coward 1995; Glennie 1998; Glennie &
Underhill 1998). During this time, the South Viking Graben
was located along the northern margin of the North Permian
Salt Basin where it formed a broadly north–south-trending,
fault-bounded embayment (e.g. Glennie & Underhill 1998;
Ziegler 1990; Hodgson et al. 1992). Within this embayment, a
thick succession of evaporites were deposited (the Zechstein
Supergroup), characterized by anhydrite and halite-rich units
(Turbot Anhydrite Formation) in the axis of the basin and
carbonate-rich, ‘marginal’ evaporite facies (Halibut Carbonate
Formation) towards the basin margins (Fig. 3; Pegrum &
Ljones 1984; Thomas & Coward 1996; Glennie et al. 2003).
Note that the north-eastern limit of the Zechstein Supergroup
Fig. 4. (a) Composite stratigraphic
column for the Norwegian sector of the
northern part of the SVG. The regional
tectono-stratigraphic significance of the
various stratigraphic units is also
indicated. The ornament of the various
stratigraphic units applies to Figs 6, 7
and 11. Note that only ‘Group’ level
nomenclature is indicated for the
post-Cretaceous succession. (b)
Detailed stratigraphic column focused
on the Middle to Upper Jurassic, late
pre-rift to syn-rift interval of interest.
The stratal units (SU) discussed in the
text are indicated. Key surfaces
bounding lithostratigraphic units are
shown as solid bold lines.
Regionally-mapped seismic reflection
events and the stratal units (SU) they
bound are shown as thick bold lines
which link parts (a) and (b).
(Fig. 3) is defined by the present-day extent of the unit as
constrained by relatively sparse well data (Thomas & Coward
1996; Glennie et al. 2003). This present-day distribution may
represent the true depositional extent (i.e. stratigraphic pinch-
out) of the unit or it may have originally extended further to the
NE and been subsequently eroded.
Mobility of salt within the Zechstein Supergroup resulted in
marked thickness variations in the unit, with a series of
low-relief ‘pillows’ being commonly developed (see below). Salt
movement commenced during the Triassic, as indicated by
seismically-observed thickness variations in the Triassic succes-
sion (see below and Pegrum & Ljones 1984; Thomas &
Coward 1996). Within the South Viking Graben, the impact of
this initial phase of salt movement on facies distribution within
the non-marine Smith Bank (shale-dominated) and Skagerrak
(sand-dominated) formations (Fig. 4) is largely unknown due
 Minibasins on the SW margin of the Utsira High
to a lack of well data and generally poor seismic imaging at
depth (Pegrum & Ljones 1984; Fisher & Mudge 1990). In
the east–central part of the South Viking Graben, sub-salt
basement-involved normal faulting appears to have controlled
the location and development of large salt-walls and diapirs
(e.g. in the vicinity of the Sleipner Vest field; Fig. 1b).
During the Early Jurassic, the formation of the Mid-North
Sea Dome caused uplift and erosion of the South Viking
Graben (Ziegler 1990; Underhill & Partington 1993, 1994).
Consequently, Early Jurassic stratigraphic units are absent
within the study area and the Triassic is separated from
overlying Middle Jurassic stratigraphic units by the Mid-
Cimmerian Unconformity (Fig. 4; Underhill & Partington 1993,
1994). The first sediments above the unconformity are delta-
plain deposits of the Sleipner Formation (Late Bajocian–Late
Bathonian), which were deposited towards the end of the
pre-rift phase (with respect to the main Late Middle to Upper
Jurassic rift event).
Middle–Late Jurassic
During the Middle Jurassic (Early–Middle Callovian), collapse
of the Mid-North Sea Dome and activity on the Graben
Boundary Fault Zone resulted in rapid subsidence and an
associated marine transgression within the South Viking
Graben (Harris & Fowler 1987; Ziegler 1990; Cockings et al.
1992; Coward 1995; Thomas & Coward 1996). During the
earliest part of the rift phase, shallow marine sediments of the
Hugin Formation (Early Callovian–Middle Callovian) were
deposited above delta-plain deposits of the Sleipner Formation
(Fig. 4). The main phase of extension and subsidence occurred
during the Oxfordian to Volgian (Cockings et al. 1992; Cherry
1993; McClure & Brown 1992; Fletcher 2003a, b). Coupled
with a eustatic rise in sea-level, the increase in fault-driven
subsidence rates resulted in continued deepening of the basin,
and deposition of shelf mudstones of the Heather Formation
(Middle Callovian–Late Oxfordian) and deep marine mud-
stones of the Draupne Formation (Late Oxfordian–Late
Volgian) (Fig. 4). Activity on the Graben Boundary Fault Zone
and subsidence in the South Viking Graben waned during the
latest Volgian to Ryazanian, as parts of the basin underwent a
period of inversion (e.g. Thomas & Coward 1996; Brehm 2003;
Fletcher 2003a, b; Jackson & Larsen 2008).
Deposition of both the upper Middle and Upper Jurassic
successions was influenced by both thick- and thin-skinned,
rift-related normal faulting (along the western margin and
within the axial parts of the South Viking Graben; Harris &
Fowler 1987; Cockings et al. 1992; Thomas & Coward 1996;
Jackson & Larsen 2009), and movement of the Zechstein
Supergroup (towards the south-eastern basin margin; Kane
et al. 2010). As a result, Middle and Upper Jurassic stratigraphic
units generally thicken towards rift-related faults (Thomas &
Coward 1996; Jackson & Larsen 2009) or infill elliptical basins
related to salt movement (see below). Present-day, the syn-rift
succession is buried beneath a thick succession (>2 km) of
post-rift deposits (Fig. 1b), the lowermost part of which was
deposited during a period of inversion after the cessation of
Late Jurassic rifting and salt movement. The Lower Cretaceous
early post-rift succession typically onlaps rift- and/or inversion-
related structural highs (Thomas & Coward 1996; Jackson &
Larsen 2008).
DATASET
Seismic data
This study used a time-migrated 3D dataset covering 400 km2
of the south-western margin of the Utsira High (North Sea
109
exploration blocks 15/6, 15/9, 16/4, 16/5, 16/7 and 16/8;
Fig. 1a). The seismic data have a record length of 5500
milliseconds two-way time (ms TWT) and line spacing of
12.5 m in both inline (north–south) and crossline (east–west)
direction. These data have not been depth-converted, thus key
measurements, such as fault throw, thickness of stratigraphic
packages, structural dips, are estimated in metres based on
velocity data from the available wells and interval velocities
published by Thomas & Coward (1996). Data are displayed
with reverse polarity (SEG European convention; Brown
1999), such that a downward increase in acoustic impendence is
represented by a trough (blue) and a downward decrease in
acoustic impedance is represented by a peak (red). Note that
this seismic dataset comprises several merged surveys and
amplitude balancing between adjacent surveys is, in some cases,
sub-optimal, resulting in variations in the imaging of individual
reflection events across the dataset. This variability in imaging is
reflected in some of the maps presented and is highlighted
where appropriate.
Within the study area three key, age-constrained strati-
graphic surfaces are identified; top Triassic, Late Oxfordian and
top Volgian (Fig. 4). As these surfaces define major changes in
lithology, they are characterized by marked and abrupt changes
in seismic velocity and density. Accordingly, they manifest on
seismic data as moderate to high-amplitude reflection events
that can be mapped over much of the study area and, based on
tentative ties to wells (16/4–2 and 16/7–2), are interpreted to
bound two latest pre-rift to syn-rift stratal units (SU);
SU1 = top Triassic–Late Oxfordian (Sleipner, Hugin and
Heather formations); and SU2 = latest Oxfordian–Late Volgian
(Draupne Formation) (Fig. 4). Three additional reflection
events have been locally mapped to illustrate some of the key
structural geometries within the pre-rift (top Rotliegend Group
and top Zechstein Supergroup) and post-rift (top Cromer
Knoll Group) successions (Fig. 4).
Well data
Four vertical exploration wells were available for this study
(16/4–1, 16/4–2, 16/5–1 and 16/7–2; Fig. 1a). Two of these
wells (16/4–1 and 16/5–1) have electrical log data (i.e. gamma-
ray, velocity, density and resistivity), although neither well
penetrates a seismically-resolvable thickness of Jurassic-age
deposits. Core data do not exist for the Jurassic interval of
interest within any of the available wells. Composite logs, with
detailed cuttings descriptions and supporting original well
reports, allow the lithologies of the studied seismic-stratigraphic
units to be constrained. By using velocity data from nearby
wells, well data (in depth) were tied to seismic data (in
milliseconds two-way time) by depth conversion of key
biostratigraphically-constrained formation tops.
STRUCTURAL STYLE
The present-day structural style of the study area is best
illustrated with a time-structure map of the top Triassic
reflection event (Fig. 5). The relatively flat-lying terrace
between the crest of the Utsira High to the NE and the Sleipner
Terrace to the SW is structurally complex, and is characterized
by a series of sub-circular or, more rarely, elongate structural
highs that are up to 39 km2 in plan-view. Several of these highs
are isolated, whereas others (particularly those in the NE) are
partially-linked (Fig. 5). In cross-section, these structural highs
are up to 250 ms (c. 330 m) high (Fig. 6) and are sometimes
bound by moderately steep (50–70), planar to listric normal
faults which detach downwards into the Zechstein Supergroup.
110 C. A-L. Jackson et al.

Fig. 5. Time–structure map of the top of the Triassic illustrating the complex, salt-influenced structure of the study area. See text for full
discussion. The location of seismic lines in Fig. 6 are shown as are three of the wells used in the study (16/4–1, 16/4–2 and 16/7–2; note that
15/9–17 was not available for this study).

The structural highs are separated by basins with comparable
plan-view geometries and sizes (i.e. several tens of square
kilometres in plan-view and a few hundred metres deep;
Figs 5, 6). A series of low-relief ridges serve to partially-connect
isolated structural highs and internally partition the adjacent
basins (Figs 5, 6). These ridges are up to 2 km wide and display,
on average, 20–30% of the relief of the flanking structural
highs. Despite normal faulting being locally observed, seismic
sections clearly indicate that the complex morphology observed
at the top of the Triassic is a result of folding rather than
faulting or erosion (Figs 6, 7).
SEISMIC-STRATIGRAPHY
Before the origin and timing of formation of the present-day
structural style of the top Triassic can be interpreted further,
the seismic-stratigraphy of stratal units above and beneath this
surface must be considered. The spatial and temporal evolution
of the structures is reconstructed, with emphasis placed on
relative thickness variations and onlap patterns within and
between the different stratigraphic units, particularly with
respect to the structural highs and adjacent basins described
above. Although typical pre-rift (i.e. broadly tabular and lacking
thickness variations with respect to rift-related normal faults)
and syn-rift (i.e. highly variable thickness adjacent to rift-related
normal faults) stratal geometries are well-developed in the
northern, western and axial parts of the South Viking Graben
(e.g. Harris & Fowler 1987; Cockings et al. 1992; Thomas &
Coward 1996; Brehm 2003; Fletcher 2003a, b; Jackson &
Larsen 2009; Kane et al. 2010), these geometries are not
observed within the study area. Accordingly, these terms are
not used in this study.
Upper Permian to Triassic
The structural highs are cored by Triassic strata (Smith Bank
and Skagerrak formations; Figs 6, 7). Detailed seismic analysis
indicates that these units are internally-deformed, displaying an
anticlinal geometry with apparent downlap onto the underlying
Zechstein Supergroup (Figs 6, 7). Significantly, and in contrast
to the Triassic succession, the Zechstein Supergroup is com-
monly thin below the structural highs (Figs 1b, 6, 7). More
rarely, the Zechstein Supergroup is locally absent and Triassic
units directly overlie Lower Permian deposits of the Rotliegend
Group. Within intervening basins, the thickness relationships
described above are reversed, such that the Triassic succession
is thin, whilst the underlying Zechstein Supergroup is relatively
thick (Figs 1b, 6, 7). Locally, the Triassic succession appears to
be absent and lower Middle and Upper Jurassic deposits
directly overlie the Zechstein Supergroup. However, the appar-
ent absence of the Triassic succession in these locations may be
 Minibasins on the SW margin of the Utsira High 111

Fig. 6. (a) ENE–WSW and (b) NE–SW trending seismic lines and corresponding geoseismic sections across the SW margin of the UH. Note
that the thin black vertical lines on the seismic sections are the location of ‘bends’ in the arbitrary seismic sections (see Fig. 5). Some of the key
seismic-stratigraphic relationships (i.e. onlap, (apparent) downlap, erosional truncation) are shown. Legend to stratigraphic units is the same as
in Figure 4. TMB, Triassic minibasin; JMB, Jurassic minibasin. The location of Figure 7 is shown on (a).

due to the unit being very thin and, thus, not resolved by the
seismic data.
Middle–Upper Jurassic
Lower Middle (i.e. Sleipner Formation) and Middle–Upper
Jurassic (i.e. Hugin, Heather and Draupne formations) units
thicken into the centres of basins and thin over the Triassic-
cored structural highs, indicating a general ‘Jurassic’ age for the
development of these structures (Figs 6, 7, 8). More detailed
observations reveal that thickness variations and onlap relation-
ships within the Jurassic succession vary markedly between the
constituent stratal units with respect to the topography
described above (Fig. 9). SU1 (Late Bajocian–Late Oxfordian;
Sleipner, Hugin and Heather formations) thickens into and is
largely restricted to the basins and onlaps onto adjacent
structural highs (Figs 6, 7, 9a). In contrast, within SU2 (latest
Oxfordian–Late Volgian; Draupne Formation), major and
rapid thickness variations related to the underlying topography
are confined to the western part of the study area. In the east,
thickness variations within SU2 are relatively subtle because
most of the relief in this area has been filled by SU1 (Figs 6a,
9b). Cross-sections in the east and west of the study area
indicate that SU2 blankets and only rarely directly onlaps
relief associated with the Triassic-cored structural highs (cf.
SU1 and 2 in Figs 6, 7).
WELL DATA CALIBRATION AND LITHOLOGY
In order to investigate the lithology and thickness variations of
stratal units deposited during development of the Jurassic-age
basins, a NNE–SSW-trending stratigraphic correlation panel
was constructed through the four available wells (Fig. 10).
Towards the NE, i.e. towards the crest of the Utsira High,
pre-Late Palaeozoic and Early Mesozoic (Jurassic) units are
absent and Cretaceous age units directly overlie metamorphic
basement (i.e. 16/5–1). The absence of Permian, Triassic and
Jurassic units across much of this area are interpreted to reflect
non-deposition and/or erosion due to the persistence of the
112 C. A-L. Jackson et al.
Fig. 7. Seismic and geoseismic section illustrating the nature of
deformation within a Triassic minibasin on the SW margin of the
UH. TMB, Triassic minibasin; JMB, Jurassic minibasin. Note the
apparent downlap of the pod-fill onto the underlying Zechstein
Supergroup; this is interpreted to represent original onlap relation-
ships which have subsequently been rotated during diapir collapse.
See text for full discussion.
Utsira High as a relative structural high during the Permo-
Triassic and Late Jurassic rift events. 20.8 km to the west, away
from the crest of the Utsira High, Permian (Rotliegend Group
and Zechstein Supergroup) and Triassic (Hegre Group) units
are relatively well-developed. The Rotliegend Group is 264 m
thick and comprises interbedded sandstone and conglomerates.
This is overlain by the Zechstein Supergroup which is 189 m
thick and consists of two anhydrite-dominated units (30–40 m
thick) separated by a claystone-dominated unit (c. 130 m)
containing thin intervals of dolomite. The overlying Hegre
Group consists of a c. 40 m thick lower fluvial channel
sandstone-dominated unit overlain by a c. 60 m thick, finer-
grained, channel ‘overbank’ unit. The Middle Jurassic is absent
and only a very thin (4 m), mudstone-dominated Upper
Jurassic section is present which directly overlies the Hegre
Group across the Mid-Cimmerian Unconformity (i.e. 16/4–1).
7.8 km further to the SW, the Upper Jurassic interval is thick
(>100 m) and mudstone-dominated (i.e. 16/4–2) within a
basin which extends and widens towards the NW (labelled X in
Figs 6b, 8). Seismic observations indicate that the Middle
Jurassic is present and underlain by a relatively thick Triassic
and Permian succession (Fig. 6b). Finally, on the south-western
edge of the Utsira High and on the crest of a Triassic-cored
structural high, both the Permian (Rotliegend Group at least
29 m thick; Zechstein Supergroup 112 m thick) and Triassic
(318 m thick) are well-developed and comprise similar litho-
facies to that developed further to the NE. The sand-rich
Middle Jurassic unit is 34 m thick and this is overlain by a 89 m
thick, mudstone-dominated, Upper Jurassic section (16/7–2;
Fig. 10).
Fig. 8. Seismic isochron map of the Middle to Upper Jurassic
succession (SU1 and 2; Fig. 4) on the SW margin of the UH.
Pronounced thickness variations are related to this interval infilling
minibasins (blue to purple areas) developed above subsiding Zech-
stein Supergroup salt-cored highs (red areas; see also salt-cored
structural highs and intervening basins illustrated in Fig. 5). See text
for full discussion. The locations of some of the wells used in this
study are indicated; note that well 16/4–4 terminates in the Upper
Cretaceous and was not used in this study. 15/9–17 was also not
available for this study. The outline of maps shown in Figure 9 is
indicated.
TECTONO-STRATIGRAPHIC EVOLUTION OF
THE SW MARGIN OF THE UTSIRA HIGH
Based on the structural styles described above and the seismic-
stratigraphic architecture of the related depositional units, a
two-stage model involving Triassic followed by Jurassic mini-
basin development is proposed for the tectono-stratigraphic
evolution of the study area. The second stage of the model
incorporates various potential mechanisms for the development
of the Jurassic-age minibasins.
Triassic minibasin development
The apparently random distribution and complex morphology
of salt-related highs and adjacent basins in the study area
(Figs 5, 8) suggests that sub-salt, basement-involved normal
faulting within the Lower Permian ‘basement’ was not a key
‘trigger’ for salt movement (cf. Erratt 1993; Koyi et al. 1993;
Dooley et al. 2005; Stewart 2007). Instead, subtle spatial
variations in the amount and rates of deposition of Early
Triassic Smith Bank Formation lacustrine mudstones may have
caused differential loading that both ‘triggered’ and initially
‘drove’ movement of salt within the Zechstein Supergroup
(Figs 11a, 11b) (cf. Hodgson et al. 1992). Variable accommo-
dation development and differential loading may in turn have
 Minibasins on the SW margin of the Utsira High 113

Fig. 9. (a) Seismic isochron of SU1 which includes the Sleipner, Hugin and Heather formations (Late Bajocian–Late Oxfordian) and (b) seismic
isochron of SU2 which includes the Draupne Formation (Late Oxfordian–Late Volgian). Note the variability in thickness patterns between the
two units, particularly across the central part of the study area. See text for full discussion. The locations of some of the wells used in this study
are indicated; note that well 16/4–4 and 16/4–4 terminates in the Upper Cretaceous and were not used in this study.

been initiated by the generation of subtle surface topography
related to gentle westward tilting of the Zechstein Supergroup
on the margin of the Utsira High in response to activity on
the Graben Boundary Fault Zone to the W (Fig. 1b) (cf.
Cartwright et al. 2001 study of the Forth Approaches Basin, UK
North Sea). Irrespective of the exact trigger mechanism(s), the
Zechstein Supergroup flowed laterally to form a series of
low-relief salt pillows, which were flanked by shallow elliptical
basins underlain by areas of salt withdrawal (Fig. 11a, b) (cf.
passive diapirism; Jackson et al. 1994; Davison et al. 2000;
Rowan et al. 2003; Hudec & Jackson 2007; Stewart 2007).
Salt-controlled basins of this type have previously been termed
‘pods’ in other areas of the North Sea rift system (e.g. Hodgson
et al. 1992; Smith et al. 1993), but the term ‘minibasins’, which
has been more recently and widely applied to similar structures
identified in other salt-influenced basins, is used here (e.g.
Clark et al. 1998; Rowan & Weimer 1998; Cartwright et al.
2001; Stewart 2007; Hudec & Jackson 2007; Hudec et al.
2010). Movement of the Zechstein Supergroup, salt body
growth and minibasin deepening above depleted salt continued
into the Late Triassic during deposition of the Skagerrak
Formation (cf. Hodgson et al. 1992). Given the high sedi-
mentation rates typically associated with non-marine settings,
any accommodation is interpreted as having been relatively
rapidly filled, thus preventing significant topography from
developing during the Triassic.
Formation of Triassic minibasins (TMB; Fig. 6) was inter-
rupted by development of the North Sea Dome and formation
of the Mid-Cimmerian Unconformity during the Early Jurassic
(Underhill & Partington 1993, 1994). The exact impact of this
event on salt movement within the study area is unknown,
although regional uplift may have led to variable erosion of the
underlying Triassic minibasins and adjacent salt bodies and/or
dissolution of the Zechstein Supergroup (see below) (cf. Clark
et al. 1999; Cartwright et al. 2001).
Jurassic minibasin development
Seismic data clearly indicate that salt-driven subsidence patterns
were markedly different during the Jurassic compared to
the preceding Triassic phase of minibasin development
(Figs 6, 7, 9). Most significantly, Zechstein-cored structural
highs, which were previously sites of low accommodation
capped by a relatively thin Triassic succession, became sites of
114 C. A-L. Jackson et al.

Fig. 10. Correlation panel of selected wells on the SW margin of the UH showing the thickness variations within the Permian to Upper Jurassic
succession. The line of section is shown on Figure 1a. Salt-related thickness variations between well locations are not shown, although where
units are not penetrated by wells, the thickness and geometry of these units is based on seismic observations. Wireline data were only available
for two of the four wells (16/4–1 and 16/5–1) and only thickness and lithology information were available for the other two wells (16/4–2 and
16/7–2).

minibasin formation and accommodation during the Jurassic
(JMB; Fig. 6). This apparent salt body collapse or withdrawal
during the Jurassic is also deemed responsible for internal
deformation of earlier-formed Triassic minibasins, the margins
of which are rotated downward such that original depositional
onlaps now manifest, present-day, as downlap relationships
(Figs 6, 7) (cf. Cartwright et al. 2001). Although these downlaps
may be primary depositional features related to the develop-
ment of clinoforms within the Triassic succession, this is
considered highly unlikely. Clinoforms of this scale (>100 m
high) would probably not have developed during deposition of
predominantly lacustrine and fluvial units which characterized
the Smith Bank and Skagerrak formations.
Based on the mechano-stratigraphy and porosity and per-
meability structure of the stratigraphic succession within the
study area, and by comparison with other salt-influenced basins
within the North Sea rift system, three principal mechanisms
are proposed for the generation of the Jurassic minibasins;
(i) salt dissolution; (ii) early Middle Jurassic erosion; and (iii)
salt remigration related to sub- and/or supra-salt extension,
and/or differential sediment loading.
Salt dissolution Subsurface dissolution of the Zechstein Super-
group may have driven at-surface subsidence and minibasin
formation during Jurassic times (Fig. 11ci). Such a mechanism
has previously been invoked to account for the development
and migration of predominantly Triassic-age minibasins in the
Forth Approaches Basin and on the West Central Shelf, central
North Sea (Clark et al. 1999; Cartwright et al. 2001). Migration
of NaCl-undersaturated pore waters, either over (superjacent),
along the margins of (lateral), underneath (subjacent) and/or
within salt-cored highs (see summary by Warren 1997) would
have led to the development of cavern-like voids into which the
Triassic overburden progressively collapsed (Fig. 11ci).
Although there is no well data or clear seismic evidence to
confirm the presence of anhydrite-rich caprock beneath the
Jurassic minibasins (i.e. at the top of previous Triassic salt-
cored highs; cf. Stewart 1993; Clark et al. 1999; Cartwright et al.
2001), superjacent dissolution of the Zechstein Supergroup
evaporites is an appealing mechanism to account for the
development of these structures. This model requires that the
crests of Zechstein-cored salt bodies were located at or near
the depositional surface (Fig. 11ci) which seems reasonable
given that: (i) salt bodies are likely to have been at or near the
depositional surface throughout the development of the
Triassic minibasins (cf. Hodgson et al. 1992; Cartwright et al.
2001); and (ii) regional uplift and erosion occurred during the
Early Jurassic, immediately prior to the main phase of Jurassic
minibasin formation. Dissolution of the Zechstein Supergroup
also accounts for the patterns of internal deformation observed
within the Triassic minibasins (cf. Figs 6 and 7 with Fig. 11ci).
Furthermore, and in contrast to a model of differential erosion
(see below), the dissolution mechanism could account for
Jurassic minibasin subsidence even in areas where a thin Triassic
cover is present above the salt bodies (Fig. 6a, b). Finally, the
thickness of SU1 is relatively consistent between individual
 Minibasins on the SW margin of the Utsira High
minibasins (Fig. 9a) suggesting they were of approximately
equal depth during the Early–Middle Jurassic. This supports a
model of regional uplift and a regional level of sub-surface
dissolution (Fig. 11ci). Mantling of salt-related topography by
low-permeability, Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous mudstones
would eventually have impeded superjacent dissolution-related
collapse of Zechstein-cored salt bodies.
Subjacent dissolution (not shown in Fig. 11ci), related to
groundwater flow from the axis of the South Viking Graben
towards the Utsira High within permeable clastics of the Lower
Permian Rotliegend Group, may also have been an important
process in sub-regional scale dissolution of the Zechstein
Supergroup. A similar process has been invoked by Cartwright
et al. (2001) to account for large volume (c. 40%) dissolution of
the Zechstein Supergroup in the Broad Fourteens Approaches
Basin, UK North Sea (see their figure 13b). Although this
mechanism accounts for sub-regional and essentially uniform
dissolution and subsidence of the Zechstein Supergroup, it
does not account for the strong coupling between Triassic
salt-cored highs and Jurassic minibasins (Figs 6, 11d).
Dissolution-related collapse by any of the mechanisms
described above is considered a viable mechanism for the
formation of Jurassic minibasins. However, it is not clear if: (i)
groundwater could penetrate so deeply (i.e. up to several
hundred metres) beneath Triassic-capped salt-cored highs; and
(ii) dissolution of the Zechstein Supergroup was sufficient to
balance the volume of sediments preserved in the Jurassic
minibasins. In addition, physical modelling indicates that disso-
lution of salt bodies is often associated with the formation of
both normal and reverse faults within the overburden (Ge &
Jackson 1998). These are not observed within the study area,
although such small-displacement structures may be below the
limit of seismic data resolution. Alternatively, their absence may
be associated with the mechanical properties of the poorly-
lithified Jurassic overburden, which would be more likely to
undergo ductile (folding) rather than brittle (faulting) deforma-
tion.
Early Middle Jurassic differential erosion Regional uplift during the
Early Jurassic may have promoted differential erosion of
Triassic minibasins and adjacent salt-cored highs, with the
former being more resistant to subaerial erosion than the latter.
This would be especially true if coupled with varying degrees of
dissolution (Fig. 11cii). This process could have continued into
the early part of the Middle Jurassic in response to erosion
associated with Sleipner Formation fluvial systems. As a result
of differential erosion, topographic depressions would have
developed above the earlier-formed salt-cored highs, whereas
the Triassic units would form the core of adjacent, less erodable
topographic highs (cf. Hodgson et al. 1992; Høiland et al. 1993;
Wakefield et al. 1993; Stewart, 1993; Stewart, 2007). This model
would account for the superimposition of Jurassic minibasins
on previous Triassic structural highs, and the lateral offset of
Triassic and Jurassic minibasins (Figs 6, 11cii). In addition,
regional sub-aerial erosion associated with the Early Jurassic
uplift event would explain the presence of approximately equal
thicknesses of SU1 within individual minibasins (Fig. 9a).
A number of observations discount Early to Middle Jurassic
differential erosion as the main driver for Jurassic minibasin
development. First, seismic-scale truncation is not observed at
the margins of the Triassic minibasins, even though the Jurassic
minibasins are up to several hundred metres deep (cf. Figs 6
and 11cii). Secondly, differential erosion does not account for
the folding and apparent collapse of the margins of the
underlying Triassic minibasins associated with Jurassic mini-
basin development (Figs 6, 7, 11ci and 11d). Finally, seismic
115
data suggest that, at least locally, a thin Triassic interval is
preserved at the base of the Jurassic minibasins (Fig. 6); an
observation that is clearly incompatible with a model invoking
differential erosion of Triassic and Zechstein strata across a
regional unconformity (MCU, Fig. 11cii). Consequently,
although Early Jurassic differential erosion may have occurred
locally, it is not considered to be the principal mechanism for
the formation of Jurassic minibasins on the SW margin of the
Utsira High.
Salt remigration A third possible mechanism for Jurassic mini-
basin formation is salt withdrawal and remigration into coeval
growing structures (not shown in Fig. 11). Physical modelling
has demonstrated that this process is common during regional
supra-salt extension (e.g. Vendeville & Jackson 1992). The lack
of normal faults in the Jurassic minibasin succession, both
adjacent to and overlying the salt-cored structural highs, (see
Figs 5, 6, 8) argues strongly against supra-salt extension as a key
driver for salt body subsidence. An alternative mechanism to
trigger salt remigration is differential loading related to spatially-
variable sedimentation patterns. If sedimentation patterns
changed from the Triassic to Middle Jurassic, salt may have
remigrated to a position underneath Triassic-filled depocentres,
resulting in ‘inflation’ of areas that were previously character-
ized by thin salt and subsidence. However, this mechanism of
remigration is deemed unfeasible as, based on mechanical
considerations (Hudec & Jackson 2007), it is considered
unlikely that salt would flow from within the salt-cored highs
to significantly more high-pressured areas beneath the deep
Triassic minibasins. Similarly, based on mechanical considera-
tions, it is unlikely that local depletion of the Zechstein
Supergroup would have been augmented by regional migration
of the unit westwards from the more shallowly-buried, less
pressured basin margin towards the more-deeply buried, more
pressured axis of the South Viking Graben. In addition, and
perhaps most critically, regional migration and withdrawal of
the Zechstein Supergroup does not explain the strong inverse
spatial relationship between the Triassic and Jurassic minibasins
(Figs 6, 11d).
Summary and other considerations
Whatever mechanism triggered the formation of Jurassic mini-
basins above Triassic salt-cored highs, seismic data indicate
pronounced spatial shifts in the loci of minibasin formation and
filling during the Jurassic. For example, deposition of SU1
during the Late Bajocian–Late Oxfordian (SU1; Sleipner, Hugin
and Heather formations) occurred within a complex array of
isolated and partially-linked minibasins (Fig. 9a). In contrast,
thickness patterns within the Late Oxfordian–Volgian age SU2
(Draupne Formation) suggest that by the latest Oxfordian, the
majority of minibasins in the eastern part of the study area had
been infilled (Fig. 9b), whilst underfilled minibasins persisted to
the west. This variability in the filling history of Jurassic
minibasins may reflect several factors. For example, minibasins
in the east may have been first to fill due to higher sediment
supply in this area. Alternatively, if sediment supply was equal
across the study area, the variability may indicate that mini-
basins in the east stopped subsiding earlier than those to the
west. This may have been due to earlier ‘grounding’ of the mini-
basins in this area, which may in turn have been related to the
initial thickness and mobility of the Zechstein Supergroup (cf.
Hodgson et al. 1992; Stewart 2007). If Early Jurassic dissolution
is invoked as the main driver on Jurassic minibasin formation
then, under the influence of equal sediment supply, the earlier-
filling of minibasins in the may reflect the formation of deeper
minibasins due to a greater amount of dissolution in this area.
116 C. A-L. Jackson et al.
 Minibasins on the SW margin of the Utsira High 117

Salt movement eventually waned during the latest Jurassic
and Cretaceous, although thinning of Lower Cretaceous units
across underlying highs, suggests that early post-rift subsidence,
driven by differential compaction across the underlying Jurassic
minibasins, continued until at least the Albian. The diminishing
influence of salt during the post-rift may reflect the final
grounding of predominantly Triassic minibasins and local
depletion of the Zechstein Supergroup source layer. Alterna-
tively, and as stated above, mantling of the salt-related topogra-
phy by low-permeability mudstones of the latest Jurassic and
Early Cretaceous would have impeded superjacent dissolution-
related collapse of Zechstein-cored salt bodies. Additionally,
permeability reduction within the Rotliegend Group clastics,
due to continued burial and cementation, may have reduced
fluid flux through this unit and reduced subjacent dissolution.
DISCUSSION
Structural evolution of the South Viking Graben and
distribution of the Zechstein Supergroup
The salt-influenced structural style observed in the study area is
geometrically and genetically similar to that encountered in
minibasin terrains elsewhere within the North Sea rift system
(e.g. Hodgson et al. 1992; Høiland et al. 1993; Wakefield et al.
1993; Clark et al. 1998, 1999; Cartwright et al. 2001; Stewart
2007). This structural style differs from that observed in the
main part of the South Viking Graben where sub-salt,
basement-involved normal faulting and associated large-scale
halokinesis (e.g. diapirism) dominate (Fig. 1b) (Pegrum &
Ljones 1984; Thomas & Coward 1996; Husmo et al. 2003).
This spatial variability in structural style over relatively short
(i.e. <10 km) length-scales may reflect a combination of several
factors. First, facies distribution within the Zechstein Super-
group may be different to that currently suggested by
the somewhat sparse well data (Thomas & Coward 1996).
These data suggest the north-easterly pinch-out of the mobile
(halite-dominated) part of the Zechstein Supergroup is to the
SW of the present study area and that non-mobile, anhydrite
and carbonate-dominated strata characterize the unit in the area
considered here. The identification of distinct salt-related struc-
tural styles in this study implies that the mobile part of the
Zechstein Supergroup extends further to the NE than pre-
viously documented (Figs 2, 3). This highlights the importance
of the internal mechano-stratigraphy of the Zechstein Super-
group on controlling subsequent structural styles in the North
Sea rift system (Clark et al. 1998; Stewart 2007). Secondly,
although Permo-Triassic normal faults are observed in the
sub-salt basement succession (Fig. 6), it appears that very few
of these structures were reactivated during the Jurassic. In
contrast, in axial parts of the South Viking Graben (e.g. beneath
the Sleipner West field and further westwards within the Ve
sub-basin; Fig. 1b), it appears that many of the Permo-Triassic
structures were reactivated during the Late Jurassic rift event,
thereby causing the earlier-formed, salt-related structural style
to be strongly overprinted (Kane et al. 2010). A similar over-
printing of previously-formed structural styles has also been
documented in the northern part of the North Sea rift system
in locations where salt (Zechstein Supergroup) is absent (e.g.
Færseth 1996; Tomasso et al. 2008).
Implications for Middle and Upper Jurassic sediment
dispersal and reservoir development
The tectono-stratigraphic model presented here has implica-
tions for Jurassic sediment dispersal patterns and reservoir
distribution on the SW margin of the Utsira High (Fig. 10).
During the Late Bajocian–Late Bathonian, north- to
NW-flowing fluvial systems of the Sleipner Formation
(Cockings et al. 1992; Husmo et al. 2003) would have been
routed along the axis of the Jurassic minibasins and may have
been able to ‘spill’ across low-relief ridges between the larger
Triassic-cored structural highs. Subsequently, during the Early–
Middle Callovian, a relative sea-level rise occurred and the
minibasin terrain on the SW margin of the Utsira High would
have become flooded and occupied by a series of shallow
marine embayments. These depocentres would have received
sediment from the NE, from Utsira High-derived fluvial
systems, or from their western or south-western seaward ends,
by longshore sediment transport processes. In addition, sedi-
ment could have been locally derived from the crest of exposed
Triassic-cored pods (cf. Hodgson et al. 1992; Stewart 1993). A
broadly similar salt-controlled, Late Jurassic, shallow marine
depositional setting has been interpreted from both the western
(Wakefield et al. 1993; Stewart et al. 1999) and eastern (Stewart
1993) margins of the Central North Sea (Fig. 2). In all these
settings it has been indicated that reservoir sandstone deposi-
tional patterns are complex due to the pre-existing and syn-
depositional development of salt and fault-related topography.
Furthermore, in shallow-marine systems, reservoir distribution
is further complicated due to the interaction of various extra-
and intra-basinal sediment supply, transport and depositional
processes (e.g. wave, tides and rivers).

Fig. 11. A sequence of broadly east–west-trending schematic cross-sections across the study area illustrating the temporal and spatial
development of Triassic and Jurassic minibasins in response to movement of the Zechstein Supergroup on the SW margin of the UH. Note that
ornamentation of stratigraphic units is the same as that used in Figures 4 and 6. This model is broadly based on the ‘podology’ model developed
by Hodgson et al. (1992) for salt-related structural styles in the Central Graben, UK North Sea. (a) Early Triassic: initial stage of minibasin
development (TMB, Triassic minibasin) and salt wall formation within the Zechstein Supergroup; (b) Middle Triassic: minibasin deepening and
salt wall growth due to continued sediment loading. Note that pods in the central and eastern parts of the slope (labelled W and X) are
interpreted to have become grounded at this time; (ci) Late Triassic–Early Jurassic: regional Early Jurassic uplift, relative base level fall (from
position ① to ②) and formation of the Mid-Cimmerian Unconformity (MCU) is accompanied by subterranean dissolution of the Zechstein
Supergroup and the initiation of collapse of the overburden to form the Jurassic minibasins. Dashed grey line indicates the previous position of
the top of the Zechstein Supergroup. Dissolution-related subsidence may have been locally augmented by differential erosion of Triassic
minibasins and salt-cored highs by Sleipner Formation fluvial systems. Note the deformation and seismic-stratigraphic geometries associated with
this mechanism for Jurassic minibasin formation and the similarities to data presented in Figures 6 and 7. See text for full discussion; (cii) Early
Jurassic – Regional Early Jurassic uplift, relative base level fall (from position ① to ②) and formation of the Mid-Cimmerian Unconformity
(MCU) is accompanied by major differential erosion of Triassic minibasins and adjacent salt-cored highs. This results in the formation of Jurassic
minibasins above the more easily erodible salt-cored highs. Note that subaerial incision may have been associated with, and augmented by,
dissolution of the Zechstein Supergroup evaporites. Dashed grey line indicates the previous position of the top of the Zechstein Supergroup.
Note the seismic-stratigraphic geometries associated with this mechanism for Jurassic minibasin formation and the differences to data presented
in Figures 6 and 7. See text for full discussion; (d) Middle–Late Jurassic: Filling of minibasins (JMB, Jurassic minibasins) formed due to
dissolution-related subsidence (see (ci)). Note that minibasins in the east are filled earlier (i.e. by SU1) than those in the west due to either earlier
cessation of subsidence related to Triassic minibasin grounding and/or higher sediment supply to that area. In contrast, minibasins in the central
and western parts of the study area continue to subside into latest Jurassic. See text for full discussion. BCU, Base Cretaceous Unconformity.
118 C. A-L. Jackson et al.
Ongoing relative sea-level rise during the Late Jurassic
would have resulted in flooding of the SW margin of the Utsira
High and drowning of the previous shallow marine embay-
ments. As a result, particularly in the west of the study area,
complex seabed bathymetry would have been present due to
the presence of underfilled minibasins. During the early stages
of deposition (e.g. early stage of SU2), sand-rich gravity-flows
within the Draupne Formation may have been routed through
the complex interpod-related bathymetry and may have become
‘ponded’ or ‘deflected’ by structural highs (Figs 9a, 11d).
However, during the latter stages of deposition (e.g. late stage
of SU2) after much of the bathymetry had been ‘healed’ and a
more direct conduit had been established in the west (Figs 9b,
11e), gravity-flows would have been more areally expansive
(on the central and eastern part of the slope) or focused
through the western conduit. The suggested control of the
evolving structure on coeval deep-water depositional patterns is
comparable with ‘fill-and-spill’ processes described in other
structurally-complex, deep-water settings either with (cf.
Prather et al. 1998; Prather 2003; Smith 2004) or without (cf.
Sinclair 2000; Sinclair & Tomasso 2002; Amy et al. 2007) the
influence of mobile salt. On the SW margin of the Utsira High
and in the other examples referenced above, temporal and
spatial variations in the location of accommodation and the
subsequent impact of this on gravity-current routing and
deposition, would clearly impact reservoir development.
CONCLUSIONS
The main conclusions of this 3D seismic and well-based
analysis of the SW margin of the Utsira High are:
1. During the Triassic to early Middle Jurassic a series of
minibasins (pods) formed on the SW margin of the Utsira
High in response to mobilization of the evaporite-rich
Zechstein Supergroup (Upper Permian). It is interpreted
that passive diapirism, related to variable sedimentation
patterns and loading by the Smith Bank and Skagerrak
formations, was the main trigger and driver for salt body
movement and growth.
2. During the Middle–Late Jurassic a series of secondary
minibasins (interpods) began to develop as the underlying
salt bodies collapsed. These minibasins were a few hundred
metres deep and were bound by sub-circular to elongate
salt walls. The cause of salt withdrawal is unknown, although
near-surface dissolution of salt underpinning Triassic
structural highs appears to have played a key role.
3. Mobile (halite-dominated) facies within the Zechstein
Supergroup extend further to the NE than presently
mapped. In the absence of well data, seismic-stratigraphic
studies similar to that presented here may help constrain the
distribution of facies in the Zechstein Supergroup within the
North Sea rift system.
4. Minibasin development during the Triassic and Jurassic
influenced the routing of fluvial channel systems (i.e.
Skagerrak and Sleipner formations), the geometry of shallow
marine depocentres (i.e. Hugin Formation) and the routing
of submarine sediment gravity flows (i.e. Draupne Forma-
tion). Although well data in the study area is sparse, it is
anticipated that this structural development influenced the
distribution of reservoir sandstones.
We would like to thank Rachel Kieft, Elisabeth Evrard, Nick Satur,
Sabina Solymar, Signe Ottesen and Unni Stalsberg Sjursen for
discussions during the course of this study and StatoilHydro ASA
(now Statoil ASA) for providing financial support. Two anonymous
journal reviewers are also thanked for their insightful reviews which
greatly improved the manuscript. Thanks also to Landmark Graphics
Cooperation (LGC) for provision of Seisworks and Stratworks
software via an Academic Licence Agreement. The views expressed
in this paper are the authors and do not necessarily represent those
of Statoil ASA.
REFERENCES
Amy, L.A., Kneller, B.C. & McCaffrey, W.D. 2007. Facies architecture of the
Grès de Peïra Cava, SE France: landward stacking patterns in ponded
turbiditic basins. Journal of the Geological Society of London, 164, 143–162.
Branther, S.R.F. 2003. The East Brae Field, Blocks 16/03a, 16/03b, UK
North Sea. In: Gluyas, J.G. & Hichens, H.M. (eds) United Kingdom Oil and
Gas Fields, Commemorative Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London,
Memoir, 20, 191–197.
Brehm, J. 2003. The North Brae and Beinn Fields, Blocks 16/7a, UK North
Sea. In: Gluyas, J.G. & Hichens, H.M. (eds) United Kingdom Oil and
Gas Fields, Commemorative Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London,
Memoir, 20, 199–209.
Brown, A.R. 1999. Interpretation of Three-Dimensional Seismic Data. American
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir, 42/Society of Economic
Geologists, Investigations, No. 9.
Caers, J., Avseth, P. & Mukerji, T. 2001. Geostatistical integration of rock
physics, seismic amplitudes, and geologic models in North Sea turbidite
systems. The Leading Edge, 20, 308–312.
Cartwright, J.A., Stewart, S. & Clark, J. 2001. Salt dissolution and salt-related
deformation of the Forth Approaches Basin, UK North Sea. Marine and
Petroleum Geology, 18, 757–778.
Cherry, S.T.J. 1993. The interaction of structure and sedimentary process
controlling deposition of the Upper Jurassic Brae Formation Conglomer-
ate, Block 16/17, North Sea. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.) Petroleum Geology of
Northwest Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference. The Geological Society,
London, 387–400.
Clark, J.A., Stewart, S.A. & Cartwright, J.A. 1998. Evolution of the NW
margin of the North Permian Basin, UK North Sea. Journal of the Geological
Society of London, 155, 663–676.
Clark, J.A., Cartwright, J.A. & Stewart, S.A. 1999. Mesozoic dissolution
tectonics on the West Central Shelf, UK Central North Sea. Marine and
Petroleum Geology, 16, 283–300.
Cockings, J.H., Kessler, G.L. II, Mazza, T.A. & Riley, L.A. 1992. Bathonian
to mid-Oxfordian sequence stratigraphy of the South Viking Graben,
North Sea. In: Hardman, R.F.P. (ed.) Exploration Britain: Insights for the Next
Decade. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 67, 65–105.
Coward, M.P. 1995. Structural and tectonic setting of the Permo-Triassic
basins of northwest Europe. In: Boldy, S.A.R. (ed.) Permian and Triassic
Rifting in Northwest Europe. Geological Society, London, Special Publication,
91, 7–39.
Cutts, P.L. 1991. The Maureen Field, Block 16/29a, UK North Sea. In:
Abbotts, I.L. (ed.) United Kingdom Oil and Gas Fields 25 Years Commemorative
Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London, Memoir, 14, 347–352.
Davison, I. & Alsop, I. et al. 2000. Geometry and late-stage structural
evolution of Central Graben salt diapirs, North Sea. Marine and Petroleum
Geology, 17, 499–522.
Dooley, T., McClay, K.R., Hempton, M. & Smit, D. 2005. Salt tectonics
above complex basement extensional fault systems: results from analogue
modelling. In: Doré, A.G. & Vining, B.A. (eds) Petroleum Geology: North-West
Europe and Global Perspectives – Proceedings of the 6th Petroleum Geology Conference.
Geological Society, London, 1631–1648.
Eidsvik, J., Omre, H., Mukerji, T., Mavko, G. & Avseth, P. 2002. Seismic
reservoir prediction using Bayesian integration of rock physics and Markov
random fields: A North Sea example. The Leading Edge, 21, 290–294.
Erratt, D. 1993. Relationship between basement faulting, salt withdrawal and
Late Jurassic rifting. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.) Petroleum Geology of Northwest
Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference. Geological Society of London,
1211–1219.
Færseth, R.B. 1996. Interaction of Permo-Triassic and Jurassic extensional
fault-blocks during the development of the northern North Sea. Journal of
the Geological Society, 153, 931–944.
Fisher, M.J. & Mudge, D.C. 1990. Triassic. In: Glennie, K.W. (ed.) Introduction
to the Petroleum Geology of the North Sea. Blackwell, Oxford, 191–218.
Fletcher, K.J. 2003a. The South Brae Field, Blocks 16/07a, 16/07b, UK
North Sea. In: Gluyas, J.G. & Hichens, H.M. (eds) United Kingdom Oil and
Gas Fields, Commemorative Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London,
Memoir, 20, 211–221.
Fletcher, K.J. 2003b. The Central Brae Field, Blocks 16/07a, 16/07b, UK
North Sea. In: Gluyas, J.G. & Hichens, H.M. (eds) United Kingdom Oil and
 Minibasins on the SW margin of the Utsira High
Gas Fields, Commemorative Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London,
Memoir, 20, 183–190.
Fraser, S.I., Robinson, A.M., Johnson, H.D., Underhill, J.R., Kadolsky,
D.G.A., Connell, R., Johannessen, P. & Ravnås, R. 2003. Upper Jurassic.
In: Evans, D., Graham, C., Armour, A. & Bathurst, P. (eds) The Millennium
Atlas: Petroleum Geology of the Central and Northern North Sea. The Geological
Society, London, 157–189.
Gabrielsen, R.H., Færseth, R.B., Steel, R.J., Idil, S. & Kløvjan, O.S. 1990.
Architectural styles of basin fill in the northern Viking Graben. In:
Blundell, D.J. & Gibbs, A.D. (eds) Tectonic Evolution of the North Sea Rifts.
International Lithosphere Programme, 81, 158–179.
Gambaro, M. & Donagemma, V. 2003. The T-Block fields, Block 16/17, UK
North Sea. In: Gluyas, J.G. & Hichens, H.M. (eds) United Kingdom Oil and
Gas Fields, Commemorative Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London,
Memoir, 20, 369–382.
Ge, H. & Jackson, M.P.A. 1998. Physical modelling of structures formed by
salt withdrawal: implication for deformation caused by salt withdrawal.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 82, 228–250.
Glennie, K.W. 1998. Lower Permian-Rotliegend. In: Glennie, K.W. (ed.)
Introduction to the Petroleum Geology of the North Sea: Basic Concepts and Recent
Advances. Blackwell Science, Oxford, 137–173.
Glennie, K.W. & Underhill, J.R. 1998. The development and evolution of
structural styles in the North Sea. In: Glennie, K.W. (ed.) Introduction to the
Petroleum Geology of the North Sea: Basic Concepts and Recent Advances. Blackwell
Science, Oxford, 42–84.
Glennie, K., Higham, J. & Stemmerik, L. 2003. Permian. In: Evans, D.,
Graham, C., Armour, A. & Bathurst, P. (eds) The Millennium Atlas: Petroleum
Geology of the Central and Northern North Sea. The Geological Society,
London, 91–103.
Harris, J.P. & Fowler, R.M. 1987. Enhanced prospectivity of the Mid-Late
Jurassic sediments of the South Viking Graben, northern North Sea. In:
Brooks, J. & Glennie, K. (eds) Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe:
Proceedings of the 4th Conference. Graham & Trotman, London,
879–898.
Hodgson, N.A., Farnsworth, J. & Fraser, A.J. 1992. Salt-related tectonics,
sedimentation and hydrocarbon plays in the Central Graben, North
Sea, UKCS. In: Hardman, R.F.P. (ed.) Exploration Britain: Insights for
the Next Decade. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 67,
31–63.
Høiland, O., Kristensen, J. & Monsen, T. 1993. Mesozoic evolution of the
Jæran High area, Norwegian Central North Sea. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.)
Petroleum Geology of North-West Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference.
Geological Society of, London, 1189–1195.
Hudec, M.R. & Jackson, M.P.A. 2007. Terra infirma: Understanding salt
tectonics. Earth-Science Reviews, 82, 1–28.
Husmo, T., Hamar, G., Høiland, O., Johannessen, E.P., Rømuld, A., Spencer,
A. & Titterton, R. 2003. Middle Jurassic. In: Evans, D., Graham, C.,
Armour, A. & Bathurst, P. (eds) The Millennium Atlas: Petroleum Geology of
the Central and Northern North Sea. The Geological Society, London,
128–155.
Isaksen, G.H., Patience, R., van Graas, G. & Jenssen, A.I. 2002. Hydrocarbon
system analysis in a rift basin with mixed marine and nonmarine source
rocks: The South Viking Graben, North Sea. American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 86, 557–591.
Jackson, C.A-L. & Larsen, E. 2008. Temporal constraints on basin inversion
provided by 3D seismic and well data: a case study from the South Viking
Graben, offshore Norway. Basin Research, 20, 397–417.
Jackson, C.A-L. & Larsen, E. 2009. Temporal and spatial development
of a gravity-driven normal fault array: Middle-Upper Jurassic, South
Viking Graben, northern North Sea. Journal of Structural Geology, 31,
388–402.
Jackson, M.P.A., Vendeville, B.C. & Ela-Schultz, D.D. 1994. Structural
dynamics of salt systems. Annual Review of Earth and Plantery Sciences, 22,
93–117.
Kane, K.E., Jackson, C.A-L. & Larsen, E. 2010. Salt-influenced normal fault
growth in rifts basins: Sleipner Graben, South Viking Graben, offshore
Norway. Journal of Structural Geology, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2010.02.005.
Koyi, H., Jenyon, M.K. & Petersen, K. 1993. The effect of basement faulting
on diapirism. Journal of Petroleum Geology, 16, 285–312.
McClure, N.M. & Brown, A.A. 1992. A subtle Upper Jurassic submarine fan
trap in the South Viking Graben, United Kingdom, North Sea. In:
Halbouty, M. (ed.) Giant Oil and Gas Fields of the Decade (1978–1988).
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir, 54, 307–322.
Pegrum, R.M. & Ljones, T.E. 1984. 15/9 Gamma gas field offshore Norway,
new trap type for North Sea Basin with regional structural implications.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 68, 874–902.
119
Prather, B.E. 2003. Controls on reservoir distribution, architecture and
stratigraphic trapping in slope settings. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 20,
529–545.
Prather, B.E., Booth, J.R., Steffans, G.S. & Craig, P.A. 1998. Classification,
lithologic calibration, and stratigraphic succession of seismic facies of
intraslope basins, deep-water Gulf of Mexico. American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 82, 701–728.
Rooksby, S.K. 2003. The Miller Field, Blocks 16/7B, 16/8B, UK North Sea.
In: Gluyas, J.G. & Hichens, H.M. (eds) United Kingdom Oil and Gas Fields,
Commemorative Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London, Memoir, 20,
159–164.
Rowan, M.G. & Weimer, P. 1998. Salt-sediment interaction, northern Green
Canyon and Ewing Bank (offshore Louisiana), northern Gulf of Mexico.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 82, 1055–1082.
Rowan, M.G., Lawton, T.F., Giles, K.A. & Ratliff, R.A. 2003. Near-salt
deformation in La Popa basin, Mexico, and the northern Gulf of Mexico:
A general model for passive diapirism. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Bulletin, 87, 733–756.
Sinclair, H.D. 2000. Delta-fed turbidites infilling topographically complex
basins: a new depositional model for the Annot Sandstones, SE France.
Journal of Sedimentary Research, 70, 504–519.
Sinclair, H.D. & Tomasso, M. 2002. Depositional evolution of confined
turbidite basins. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 72, 451–456.
Spence, S. & Kreutz, H. 2003. The Kingfisher Field, Block 16/8A, UK North
Sea. In: Gluyas, J.G. & Hichens, H.M. (eds) United Kingdom Oil and
Gas Fields, Commemorative Millennium Volume. Geological Society, London,
Memoir, 20, 305–314.
Smith, R. 2004. Silled sub-basins to connected tortuous corridors: sediment
distribution systems on topographically complex sub-aqueous slopes.
In: Lomas, S. A., Baker, & Joseph, P. (eds) Confined Turbidite Systems.
Geological Society, London, Special Publication, 222, 23–43.
Smith, R.I., Hodgson, N. & Fulton, M. 1993. Salt control on Triassic
reservoir distribution. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.) Petroleum Geology of Northwest
Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference. Geological Society of London,
547–557.
Stewart, I.J. 1993. Structural controls in the Late Jurassic age shelf system, Ula
Trend, Norwegian North Sea. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.) Petroleum Geology of
North-West Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference. Geological Society of,
London, 469–483.
Stewart, S.A. 2007. Salt tectonics in the North Sea Basin: a structural style
template for seismic interpreters. In: Ries, A.C., Butler, R.W.H. & Graham,
R.H. (eds) Deformation of the Continental Crust: The Legacy of Mike Coward.
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 272, 361–396.
Stewart, S.A. & Clark, J.A. 1999. Impact of salt on the structure of the Central
North Sea hydrocarbon fairways. In: Fleet, A.J. & Boldy, S.A.R. (eds)
Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe: Proceedings of the 5th Conference. Geologi-
cal Society of London, 179–200.
Stewart, S.A., Fraser, S.I., Cartwright, J.A., Clark, J.A. & Johnson, H.D. 1999.
Controls on Upper Jurassic sediment distribution in the Durward-
Dauntless area, UK Blocks 21/11. 21/16. In: Fleet, A.J. & Boldy, S.A.R.
(eds) Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe: Proceedings of the 5th Conference.
Geological Society of London, 879–896.
Thomas, D.W. & Coward, M.P. 1996. Mesozoic regional tectonics and South
Viking Graben formation: evidence for localized thin-skinned detachments
during rift development and inversion. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 13,
149–177.
Tomasso, M., Underhill, J.R., Hodgkinson, R.A. & Young, M.J. 2008.
Structural styles and depositional architecture in the Triassic of the
Ninaian and Alwyn North fields: Implications for basin development and
prospectivity in the Northern North Sea. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 25,
588–605.
Underhill, J.R. & Partington, M.A. 1993. Jurassic thermal doming and
deflation in the North Sea: implications of the sequence stratigraphic
evidence. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.) Petroleum Geology of Northwest
Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference. Geological Society of London,
337–345.
Underhill, J.R. & Partington, M.A. 1994. Use of genetic sequence stratigra-
phy in determining a regional tectonic control on the “Mid-Cimmerian
Unconformity”: implications for North Sea basin development. In:
Weimer, P. & Posamentier, H.W. (eds) Siliciclastic Sequence Stratigra-
phy. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir, 58,
449–484.
Vendeville, B.C. & Jackson, M.P.A. 1992. The fall of diapirs during
thin-skinned extension. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 9, 354–371.
Wakefield, L.L., Droste, H., Giles, M.R. & Janssen, R. 1993. Late Jurassic
plays along the western margin of the Central Graben. In: Parker, J.R. (ed.)
120 C. A-L. Jackson et al.

Petroleum Geology of Northwest Europe: Proceedings of the 4th Conference. Geologi- Ziegler, P.A. 1990. Tectonic and palaeogeographic development of the North
cal Society of London, 459–468. Sea rift system. In: Blundell, D.J. & Gibbs, A.D. (eds) Tectonic Evolution of
Warren, J.K. 1997. Evaporites, brines and base metals: fluids, flow and ‘the the North Sea Rifts. International Lithosphere Programme, 81, 1–36.
evaporite that was. Australian Journal of Earth Science, 44, 149–183.

Received 27 May 2009; revised typescript accepted 1 March 2010.

View publication stats