4.4 Article

Extreme crustal thinning in the south Porcupine Basin and the nature of the Porcupine Median High: implications for the formation of non-volcanic rifted margins

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
卷 161, 期 -, 页码 783-798

出版社

GEOLOGICAL SOC PUBL HOUSE
DOI: 10.1144/0016-764903-036

关键词

Porcupine Basin; seismic reflection; rifting; detachment faults; serpentinization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The southern Porcupine Basin is characterized by axial stretching factors that are greater than six and typical of rifted margins. As such, the basin can be regarded as a natural laboratory to investigate the evolution and symmetry of rifting leading towards continental separation and breakup. A bright reflection (here named P) cuts down to the west from the base of the sedimentary section, is overlain by small fault blocks and appears to represent a detachment fault. P may in part follow the top of partially serpentinized mantle: this interpretation is consistent with gravity modelling, and with numerical models of crustal embrittlement and mantle serpentinization during extension. Furthermore, P closely resembles the S reflection west of Iberia, where such serpentinites are well documented. Although overall the basin remains symmetrical, the consistent westward structural dip of the detachment implies that, at high stretching factors, extension became asymmetric. Farther south, the 'Porcupine Median High', appearing lens-shaped in cross-section, overlies the tilted fault blocks and is onlapped by postrift sediment. Despite no evidence for symift magmatism, this high has previously been interpreted as a basaltic structure. However, it develops above the line of intersection of the crust-mantle boundary with the P detachment, and hence may be related to the spatial limit of serpentinization. The median high may represent a serpentinite mud volcano or diapir; we suggest that such structures produce the serpentinite breccias found within the rifted continent-ocean transition of nonvolcanic margins.

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

4.4
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