4.3 Article

Tectonic evolution of the Cretaceous Ankara Ophiolitic Melange during the Late Cretaceous to pre-Miocene interval in Central Anatolia, Turkey

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEODYNAMICS
卷 65, 期 -, 页码 66-81

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jog.2012.06.006

关键词

Olistostrome; Accretionary tectonics; Cenomanian; Ankara ophiolitic melange; Cretaceous; Turkey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The chaotic tectonic belt, which is distinguished in northern Anatolia, is called the - Ankara Accretionary Complex - in the Ankara region, central Anatolia. The belt is differentiated into three imbricated tectonic subbelts, namely, pre-Triassic metamorphics, Melange with calcareous blocks and Cretaceous melange with ophiolitic blocks (Ankara Ophiolitic Melange). The Ankara Ophiolitic Melange (AOM) is a chaotic tectono-sedimentary mixture made up of detached blocks of Mesozoic ultramafic rocks, Cretaceous pillow basalts, Cretaceous radiolarites, Upper Jurassic-Cretaceous limestones and closely associated Upper Cretaceous basinal sequences. The detached and dismembered blocks lie within a highly sheared and brecciated ophiolitic detrital matrix or a block-on-block to sheared sedimentary matrix that varies along the melange belt. Cenomanian-Turonian and Turonian-Santonian trench-linked basin deposits onlap the Cenomanian sedimentary and Cretaceous ophiolitic melanges. The elements of the ophiolitic melange were comixed as a result of tectonic recycling in the accretionary wedge. The belt is unconformably overlain by Campanian-Maastrichtian to Paleogene accretionary fore-arc basin deposits. The AOM developed in an accretionary wedge setting in which oceanic leading edge of the Anatolide-Tauride platform subducted toward north during the post-Barremian-pre-Campanian period. The AOM emplaced episodically and progressively as a result of in thrust tectonics with vergence ranging from SSW to SE during the post-Turonian to pre-Miocene in the Ankara terrain. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据