4.3 Article

Flanking microstructures

期刊

GEOLOGICAL MAGAZINE
卷 146, 期 4, 页码 517-526

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0016756809005986

关键词

flanking microstructure; flanking structure; microstructure; ductile shear; Higher Himalayan Crystallines

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ductile sheared rocks of the Higher Himalayan Crystalline unit (HHC) in micro-scale reveal flanking microstructures defined by nucleated minerals (the cross-cutting elements, CEs), and deflected cleavages and grain margins (the host Fabric elements, HEs) of other minerals. Depending on different or the same senses of drag across the cross-cutting elements, the flanking microstructures are grouped into Type 1 or Type 2 varieties, respectively. Cross-cutting elements of Type 2 flanking microstructures connote post-tectonic directional growth. The cross-cutting elements of the Type I flanking microstructures consistently demonstrate top-to-SW non-coaxial shearing in the Higher Himalayan Crystalline unit. Here the external host fabric elements bounding the cross-cutting elements act as the C-planes. These cross-cutting element minerals are usually parallelogram-shaped, underwent crystal-plastic deformation and their nucleations are pre- or syntectonic. The facts that the host fabric elements are dragged even in absence of rheological softening at the boundaries of the cross-cutting elements, and that the cross-cutting elements are non-rigid, indicate strong bonds between the host fabric elements and the cross-cutting elements. Salient morphological variations in the flanking microstructures are: (1) variable intensity and senses of drag along the single and the opposite crosscutting element margins; (2) host fabric elements defined only at one side of the cross-cutting elements; and (3) presence of a thin hazy zone at the HE-CE contacts. The observed cross-cutting element minerals are either of nearly the same or of greater competency than the mineral grains which host them.

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