4.6 Article

Why is Svalbard an island? Evidence for two-stage uplift, magmatic underplating, and mantle thermal anomalies

Journal

TECTONICS
Volume 32, Issue 3, Pages 473-486

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/tect.20039

Keywords

subsidence; uplift; flexure; erosion; lithosphere; Svalbard

Funding

  1. University of Bremen
  2. German Science Foundation (DFG) [LI-745/13-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Svalbard is an anomalous, subaerial part of the Barents Shelf, Northeast Atlantic Ocean. In this study, we performed both, one- and two-dimensional subsidence analyses based on basin structure, water depth, and thermochronology, to quantify and date the phases of uplift affecting Svalbard during the Cenozoic. Svalbard has experienced two phases of uplift, from >36 to similar to 10 Ma, and since similar to 10 Ma, similar in timing to uplift phases identified in Greenland, Scandinavia, and the Barents Shelf. Total uplift across much of the Central Tertiary Basin of Svalbard is >1.5 km and exceeds 2.5 km in parts of the West Spitsbergen Foldbelt (WSFB). Uplift from >36 to similar to 10 Ma accounts for the greatest part of the vertical motion and like the younger phase reduces in magnitude towards the east. Flexural rigidity of the lithosphere is estimated to be low (Te approximate to 5 km), so that post-36 Ma erosion of the WSFB contributes little to the uplift, whose permanent nature and proximity to the synchronous Yermak Plateau favors a link to regional magmatic underplating. Plume dynamic support and flexural unloading along the western transform plate margin can be ruled out as influences on vertical motions. Since similar to 10 Ma renewed uplift, generating the modern topography may be linked to thermal erosion of the mantle lithosphere under Svalbard. We suggest that a likely cause of much of the surface uplift is the northward propagation of the Knipovich Ridge to establish continuous seafloor spreading through the Fram Strait after similar to 10 Ma.

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