4.6 Article

Style of rifting and the stages of Pangea breakup

Journal

TECTONICS
Volume 34, Issue 5, Pages 1009-1029

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2014TC003760

Keywords

Pangea breakup; rifting style; mantle plume; large igneous province; mantle global warming

Funding

  1. Total EP(R) (PN-BTF, project: Grands Systemes de Rift)
  2. Total EP(R)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pangea results from the progressive amalgamation of continental blocks achieved at 320Ma. Assuming that the ancient concept of active versus passive rifting remains pertinent as end-members of more complex processes, we show that the progressive Pangea breakup occurred through a succession of rifting episodes characterized by different tectonic evolutions. A first episode of passive continental rifting during the Upper Carboniferous and Permian led to the formation of the Neo-Tethys Ocean. Then at the beginning of Triassic times, two short episodes of active rifting associated to the Siberian and Emeishan large igneous provinces (LIPs) failed. The true disintegration of Pangea resulted from (1) a Triassic passive rifting leading to the emplacement of the central Atlantic magmatic province (200Ma) LIP and the subsequent opening of the central Atlantic Ocean during the lowermost Jurassic and from (2) a Lower Jurassic active rifting triggered by the Karoo-Ferrar LIP (183Ma), which led to the opening of the West Indian Ocean. The same sequence of passive then active rifting is observed during the Lower Cretaceous with, in between, the Parana-Etendeka LIP at 135Ma. We show that the relationships between the style of rifts and their breakdown or with the type of resulting margins (as magma poor or magma dominated) are not straightforward. Finally, we discuss the respective role of mantle global warming promoted by continental agglomeration and mantle plumes in the weakening of the continental lithosphere and their roles as rifting triggers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available