DOCSLIB.ORG

Durham Research Online

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Durham Research Online Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 23 September 2020 Version of attached le: Published Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Heron, Philip J. and Murphy, J. Brendan and Nance, R. Damian and Pysklywec, R. N. (2020) 'Pannotia's mantle signature: the quest for supercontinent identication.', Geological Society, London, special publications. Further information on publisher's website: https://doi.org/10.1144/SP503-2020-7 Publisher's copyright statement: c 2020 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Published by The Geological Society of London. Additional information: Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2020 Pannotia’s mantle signature: the quest for supercontinent identification Philip J. Heron1*, J. Brendan Murphy2, R. Damian Nance3,4 and R. N. Pysklywec5 1Department of Earth Sciences, Durham University, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK 2Department of Earth Sciences, St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, B2G 2W5, Canada 3Department of Geological Sciences, Ohio University, Ohio, 45701, USA 4Department of Earth & Planetary Sciences, Yale University, Connecticut, 06511, USA 5Department of Earth Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3B1, Canada PJH, 0000-0002-4813-0504 *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: A supercontinent is generally considered to reflect the assembly of all, or most, of the Earth’s con- tinental lithosphere. Previous studies have used geological, atmospheric and biogenic ‘geomarkers’ to supple- ment supercontinent identification. However, there is no formal definition of how much continental material is required to be assembled, or indeed which geomarkers need to be present. Pannotia is a hypothesized landmass that existed in the interval c. 0.65–0.54 Ga and was comprised of Gondwana, Laurentia, Baltica and possibly Siberia. Although Pannotia was considerably smaller than Pangaea (and also fleeting in its existence), the pres- ence of geomarkers in the geological record support its identification as a supercontinent. Using 3D mantle con- vection models, we simulate the evolution of the mantle in response to the convergence leading to amalgamation of Rodinia and Pangaea. We then compare this supercontinent ‘fingerprint’ to Pannotian activity. For the first time, we show that Pannotian continental convergence could have generated a mantle signature in keeping with that of a simulated supercontinent. As a result, we posit that any formal identification of a supercontinent must take into consideration the thermal evolution of the mantle associated with convergence leading to continental amalgamation, rather than simply the size of the connected continental landmass. The formation of supercontinent Pangaea (Fig. 1a) 2013), biogeochemical cycles (Nance et al. 1986), had a profound effect on the thermal evolution of and profound sea-level change (Worsley et al. the mantle. An increase in deep mantle upwelling 1984; Nance and Murphy 2013). Such geomarkers and plume formation is thought to follow supercon- are interpreted as signals of supercontinent conver- tinent formation (Gurnis 1988; Lowman and Jarvis gence leading to amalgamation and may be useful 1993; Zhong and Gurnis 1993; Zhong et al. 2007; proxies for identifying the existence of previous Li and Zhong 2009; Yoshida 2010; Heron and Low- supercontinents for which palaeocontinental recon- man 2010; Yoshida 2013; Gamal El Dien et al. structions may be less refined (Nance and Murphy 2019), with large igneous provinces (LIPs) being the 2019). surface manifestations of such plumes (e.g. Yale and Although their ages of amalgamation and Carpenter 1998; Courtillot et al. 1999; Ernst et al. break-up are still being refined, a number of pre- 2005; Ernst and Bleeker 2010; Sobolev et al. 2011). Pangaean supercontinents have been proposed Additional ‘geomarkers’ (see Nance et al. 1986) (based on the identification of geomarkers in the geo- have also been identified for supercontinent Pan- logical record). Rodinia (Fig. 1b), with Laurentia at gaea, including global-scale orogenesis (Nance et al. its centre, was formed by 1.1–0.9 Ga global-scale 1988; Santosh 2010a; Condie 2011; Müller et al. orogenesis (Dalziel 1991; Hoffman 1991; Moores 2013), crustal growth (Hawkesworth et al. 2010, 1991; Torsvik 2003; Li et al. 2004, 2008). It was 2016), the distribution of metamorphic belts fully assembled by c. 900 Ma and is believed to (Brown 2007) and mineral deposits (Goldfarb et al. have rifted apart in two separate episodes (c. 0.85– 2010), rapid climate swings (Hoffman et al. 1998; 0.70 Ga and c. 0.62–0.54 Ga) (Li et al. 2008, Strand 2012; Young 2012), major events in the evo- 2013; Li and Evans 2011). Earlier supercontinents lution of life and the atmosphere (Lindsay and Bras- include Nuna/Columbia (Hoffman 1997; Rogers ier 2002; Santosh 2010b ; Knoll 2013; Melezhik et al. and Santosh 2002) whose existence is most recently From: Murphy, J. B., Strachan, R. A. and Quesada, C. (eds) 2020. Pannotia to Pangaea: Neoproterozoic and Paleozoic Orogenic Cycles in the Circum-Atlantic Region. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 503, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP503-2020-7 © 2020 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Published by The Geological Society of London. Publishing disclaimer: www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2020 P. J. Heron et al. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Fig. 1. Continental configurations at (a) 320 Ma (Matthews et al. 2016) for Pangaea formation; (b) 900 Ma (Merdith et al. 2017) for Rodinia formation; (c) 700 Ma (Merdith et al. 2017) for Pannotia amalgamation ; (d) 650 Ma (Merdith et al. 2017) for Pannotia formation and change in subduction pattern; (e) 600 Ma (Merdith et al. 2017) showing Pannotia formation and region of CIMP; (f) 550 Ma (Merdith et al. 2017) for Pannotia dispersal. S, Siberia; L, Laurentia; B, Baltica; A, Amazonia; CIMP, Central Iapetus Magmatic Province. In (c–e) convergence zones leading to the amalgamation of the Gondwanan portion of Pannotia (blue lines) correspond with the approximate location of subduction zones. dated at c. 1.6–1.4 Ga (e.g. Pehrsson et al. 2015), Fig. 1c–f), is an example of the ongoing debate Kenorland (Williams et al. 1991) thought to have about what constitutes a supercontinent (see Mur- existed during the interval c. 2.7–2.5 Ga, and possi- phy et al. 2020; Evans, in press, this volume). bly Ur (c. 3.0 Ga), although the latter is better Given the uncertainties inherent in Neoproterozoic described as a supercraton (i.e. transient, late Archean palaeogeographical reconstructions, Nance and landmasses which broke up to form cratons, e.g. Murphy (2019) argue that Pannotia’s status as a Bleeker 2003). supercontinent is apparent from a number of Although there are geological markers for super- ‘supercontinent’ markers around the time of its pro- continent assembly (e.g. Nance et al. 2014), no for- posed formation (e.g. global-scale orogeny, rapid mal system exists for supercontinent identification, continental growth, profound changes in the chemis- as a result of which there is no formal definition of try of the oceans and atmosphere, rapid and dramatic a supercontinent (e.g. Meert 2012). Even a basic climate swings, as well as an explosion in biolog- understanding of how much contiguous landmass ical activity; Nance et al. 1986; Hoffman 1991; is required is open to debate. For example, Meert Hoffman et al. 1998; Maruyama and Santosh 2008; (2012) proposed a figure of 75% of available conti- Knoll 2013). However, there is general agree- nent crust but, as pointed out by Nance and Murphy ment that Pannotia’s size and duration were sig- (2019), this is both difficult to estimate and views nificantly less than that of Pangaea, drawing supercontinents as objects rather than the conse- controversy as to whether it can be classified as a quence of a geodynamic process. unique supercontinent or was simply part of Rodinia The status of Pannotia (c. 0.65–0.54 Ga; Gond- after initial break-up (e.g. Mitchell et al. 2012; Li wana–Laurentia–Baltica and possibly Siberia, et al. 2019). Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 23, 2020 Pannotia’s mantle signature An area of Pannotian dynamics that has not been mantle, describing the mass, momentum and energy fully explored is the response of the mantle to the balance (taking into account adiabatic heating, shear continental convergence leading to its amalgam- heating and radiogenic heat production), and the ation. Late Neoproterozoic continental convergence transport of chemical composition: and protracted subduction leading to the assembly of the Gondwanan portion of Pannotia is strongly −∇ · (2ηε˙) +∇p = ρg, (1) indicated by widespread ‘Pan-African’ collisional orogenic activity between 0.62 and 0.53 Ga (e.g. Li et al. 2008; Merdith et al. 2017). Investigating the ∇·(ρu) = 0, (2) effect of continental convergence and assembly on Late Neoproterozoic–Early Paleozoic (0.6–0.5 Ga) ∂T ρC + u ·∇T −∇·k∇T mantle convection patterns, could allow for super- p ∂t continent identification through its impact on mantle = ρ + ηε˙ ε˙ + α ·∇ρ dynamics (e.g.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Assembly, Configuration, and Break-Up History of Rodinia
    Author's personal copy Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Precambrian Research 160 (2008) 179–210 Assembly, configuration, and break-up history of Rodinia: A synthesis Z.X. Li a,g,∗, S.V. Bogdanova b, A.S. Collins c, A. Davidson d, B. De Waele a, R.E. Ernst e,f, I.C.W. Fitzsimons g, R.A. Fuck h, D.P. Gladkochub i, J. Jacobs j, K.E. Karlstrom k, S. Lu l, L.M. Natapov m, V. Pease n, S.A. Pisarevsky a, K. Thrane o, V. Vernikovsky p a Tectonics Special Research Centre, School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia b Department of Geology, Lund University, Solvegatan 12, 223 62 Lund, Sweden c Continental Evolution Research Group, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia d Geological Survey of Canada (retired), 601 Booth Street, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0E8 e Ernst Geosciences, 43 Margrave Avenue, Ottawa, Canada K1T 3Y2 f Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton U., Ottawa, Canada K1S 5B6 g Tectonics Special Research Centre, Department of Applied Geology, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia h Universidade de Bras´ılia, 70910-000 Bras´ılia, Brazil i Institute of the Earth’s Crust SB RAS, Lermontova Street, 128, 664033 Irkutsk, Russia j Department of Earth Science, University of Bergen, Allegaten 41, N-5007 Bergen, Norway k Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Northrop Hall University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA l Tianjin Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources, CGS, No.
    [Show full text]
  • Helicobacter Pylori's Historical Journey Through Siberia and the Americas
    Helicobacter pylori’s historical journey through Siberia and the Americas Yoshan Moodleya,1,2, Andrea Brunellib,1, Silvia Ghirottoc,1, Andrey Klyubind, Ayas S. Maadye, William Tynef, Zilia Y. Muñoz-Ramirezg, Zhemin Zhouf, Andrea Manicah, Bodo Linzi, and Mark Achtmanf aDepartment of Zoology, University of Venda, Thohoyandou 0950, Republic of South Africa; bDepartment of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, 44121 Ferrara, Italy; cDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Ferrara, 44121 Ferrara, Italy; dDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Research Institute for Physical-Chemical Medicine, 119435 Moscow, Russia; eDepartment of Diagnostic and Operative Endoscopy, Pirogov National Medical and Surgical Center, 105203 Moscow, Russia; fWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom; gLaboratorio de Bioinformática y Biotecnología Genómica, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas, Unidad Profesional Lázaro Cárdenas, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, 11340 Mexico City, Mexico; hDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, United Kingdom; and iDepartment of Biology, Division of Microbiology, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 91058 Erlangen, Germany Edited by Daniel Falush, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom, and accepted by Editorial Board Member W. F. Doolittle April 30, 2021 (received for review July 22, 2020) The gastric bacterium Helicobacter pylori shares a coevolutionary speakers). However, H. pylori’s presence, diversity, and structure history with humans that predates the out-of-Africa diaspora, and in northern Eurasia are still unknown. This vast region, hereafter the geographical specificities of H. pylori populations reflect mul- Siberia, extends from the Ural Mountains in the west to the tiple well-known human migrations. We extensively sampled H.
    [Show full text]
  • Proterozoic East Gondwana: Supercontinent Assembly and Breakup Geological Society Special Publications Society Book Editors R
    Proterozoic East Gondwana: Supercontinent Assembly and Breakup Geological Society Special Publications Society Book Editors R. J. PANKHURST (CHIEF EDITOR) P. DOYLE E J. GREGORY J. S. GRIFFITHS A. J. HARTLEY R. E. HOLDSWORTH A. C. MORTON N. S. ROBINS M. S. STOKER J. P. TURNER Special Publication reviewing procedures The Society makes every effort to ensure that the scientific and production quality of its books matches that of its journals. Since 1997, all book proposals have been refereed by specialist reviewers as well as by the Society's Books Editorial Committee. If the referees identify weaknesses in the proposal, these must be addressed before the proposal is accepted. Once the book is accepted, the Society has a team of Book Editors (listed above) who ensure that the volume editors follow strict guidelines on refereeing and quality control. We insist that individual papers can only be accepted after satis- factory review by two independent referees. The questions on the review forms are similar to those for Journal of the Geological Society. The referees' forms and comments must be available to the Society's Book Editors on request. Although many of the books result from meetings, the editors are expected to commission papers that were not pre- sented at the meeting to ensure that the book provides a balanced coverage of the subject. Being accepted for presentation at the meeting does not guarantee inclusion in the book. Geological Society Special Publications are included in the ISI Science Citation Index, but they do not have an impact factor, the latter being applicable only to journals.
    [Show full text]
  • Balkatach Hypothesis: a New Model for the Evolution of the Pacific, Tethyan, and Paleo-Asian Oceanic Domains
    Research Paper GEOSPHERE Balkatach hypothesis: A new model for the evolution of the Pacific, Tethyan, and Paleo-Asian oceanic domains 1,2 2 GEOSPHERE, v. 13, no. 5 Andrew V. Zuza and An Yin 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, USA 2Department of Earth, Planetary, and Space Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095-1567, USA doi:10.1130/GES01463.1 18 figures; 2 tables; 1 supplemental file ABSTRACT suturing. (5) The closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean in the early Permian was accompanied by a widespread magmatic flare up, which may have been CORRESPONDENCE: avz5818@gmail .com; The Phanerozoic history of the Paleo-Asian, Tethyan, and Pacific oceanic related to the avalanche of the subducted oceanic slabs of the Paleo-Asian azuza@unr .edu domains is important for unraveling the tectonic evolution of the Eurasian Ocean across the 660 km phase boundary in the mantle. (6) The closure of the and Laurentian continents. The validity of existing models that account for Paleo-Tethys against the southern margin of Balkatach proceeded diachro- CITATION: Zuza, A.V., and Yin, A., 2017, Balkatach hypothesis: A new model for the evolution of the the development and closure of the Paleo-Asian and Tethyan Oceans criti- nously, from west to east, in the Triassic–Jurassic. Pacific, Tethyan, and Paleo-Asian oceanic domains: cally depends on the assumed initial configuration and relative positions of Geosphere, v. 13, no. 5, p. 1664–1712, doi:10.1130 the Precambrian cratons that separate the two oceanic domains, including /GES01463.1. the North China, Tarim, Karakum, Turan, and southern Baltica cratons.
    [Show full text]
  • African Families in a Global Context
    RR13X.book Page 1 Monday, November 14, 2005 2:20 PM RESEARCH REPORT NO. 131 AFRICAN FAMILIES IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT Edited by Göran Therborn Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, Uppsala 2006 RR13X.book Page 2 Monday, November 14, 2005 2:20 PM Indexing terms Demographic change Family Family structure Gender roles Social problems Africa Ghana Nigeria South Africa African Families in a Global Context Second edition © the authors and Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 2004 Language checking: Elaine Almén ISSN 1104-8425 ISBN 91-7106-561-X (print) 91-7106-562-8 (electronic) Printed in Sweden by Elanders Infologistics Väst AB, Göteborg 2006 RR13X.book Page 3 Monday, November 14, 2005 2:20 PM Contents Preface . 5 Author presentations . 7 Introduction Globalization, Africa, and African Family Pattern . 9 Göran Therborn 1. African Families in a Global Context. 17 Göran Therborn 2. Demographic Innovation and Nutritional Catastrophe: Change, Lack of Change and Difference in Ghanaian Family Systems . 49 Christine Oppong 3. Female (In)dependence and Male Dominance in Contemporary Nigerian Families . 79 Bola Udegbe 4. Globalization and Family Patterns: A View from South Africa . 98 Susan C. Ziehl RR13X.book Page 4 Monday, November 14, 2005 2:20 PM RR13X.book Page 5 Monday, November 14, 2005 2:20 PM Preface In the mid-1990s the Swedish Council for Planning and Coordination of Research (Forskningsrådsnämnden – FRN) – subsequently merged into the Council of Sci- ence (Vetenskaprådet) – established a national, interdisciplinary research committee on Global Processes. The Committee has been strongly committed to a multidi- mensional and multidisciplinary approach to globalization and global processes and to using regional perspectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Back Matter (PDF)
    Index Page numbers in italic refer to tables, and those in bold to figures. accretionary orogens, defined 23 Namaqua-Natal Orogen 435-8 Africa, East SW Angola and NW Botswana 442 Congo-Sat Francisco Craton 4, 5, 35, 45-6, 49, 64 Umkondo Igneous Province 438-9 palaeomagnetic poles at 1100-700 Ma 37 Pan-African orogenic belts (650-450 Ma) 442-50 East African(-Antarctic) Orogen Damara-Lufilian Arc-Zambezi Belt 3, 435, accretion and deformation, Arabian-Nubian Shield 442-50 (ANS) 327-61 Katangan basaltic rocks 443,446 continuation of East Antarctic Orogen 263 Mwembeshi Shear Zone 442 E/W Gondwana suture 263-5 Neoproterozoic basin evolution and seafloor evolution 357-8 spreading 445-6 extensional collapse in DML 271-87 orogenesis 446-51 deformations 283-5 Ubendian and Kibaran Belts 445 Heimefront Shear Zone, DML 208,251, 252-3, within-plate magmatism and basin initiation 443-5 284, 415,417 Zambezi Belt 27,415 structural section, Neoproterozoic deformation, Zambezi Orogen 3, 5 Madagascar 365-72 Zambezi-Damara Belt 65, 67, 442-50 see also Arabian-Nubian Shield (ANS); Zimbabwe Belt, ophiolites 27 Mozambique Belt Zimbabwe Craton 427,433 Mozambique Belt evolution 60-1,291, 401-25 Zimbabwe-Kapvaal-Grunehogna Craton 42, 208, 250, carbonates 405.6 272-3 Dronning Mand Land 62-3 see also Pan-African eclogites and ophiolites 406-7 Africa, West 40-1 isotopic data Amazonia-Rio de la Plata megacraton 2-3, 40-1 crystallization and metamorphic ages 407-11 Birimian Orogen 24 Sm-Nd (T DM) 411-14 A1-Jifn Basin see Najd Fault System lithologies 402-7 Albany-Fraser-Wilkes
    [Show full text]
  • Paleozoic 3: Alabama in the Paleozoic
    UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH ALABAMA GY 112: Earth History Paleozoic 3: Alabama in the Paleozoic Instructor: Dr. Douglas W. Haywick Last Time The Paleozoic Part 2 1) Back to Newfoundland 2) Eastern Laurentian Orogenies (Appalachians) 3) Other Laurentian Orogenies (Antler, Ouachita) (web notes 25) Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) Even though this coastline of Laurentia was a passive continental margin, a plate tectonic boundary was rapidly approaching… A B A B Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) The resulting Taconic Orogeny first depressed the seafloor Laurentia (localized transgression) and A Island arc then pushed previously deposited passive continental B margin sediments up into thrust fault mountains. Baltica There was only minimal metamorphism and igneous A intrusions. B Middle Ordovician Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) Laurentia Baltica Middle Ordovician Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) Laurentia Baltica Middle Ordovician Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) The next tectonic event (the Acadian Orogeny) was caused Laurentia by the approach of Baltica A B Baltica A B Baltica Baltica Late Ordovician Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) The Acadian Orogeny was more extensive and more intense (metamorphism and A lots of igneous intrusions) B A B Early Devonian Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) The Acadian Orogeny was more extensive and more intense (metamorphism and lots of igneous intrusions) Early Devonian Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) Lastly, along comes Gondwanna and…. …well you get the idea. A B B A B Mississippian Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) Lastly, along comes Gondwanna and…. …well you get the idea. A B B A B Pennsylvannian Suture zone Laurentia (Paleozoic North America) Lastly, along comes Gondwanna and…. …well you get the idea.
    [Show full text]
  • The Making and Unmaking of a Supercontinent: Rodinia Revisited
    Tectonophysics 375 (2003) 261–288 www.elsevier.com/locate/tecto The making and unmaking of a supercontinent: Rodinia revisited Joseph G. Meerta,*, Trond H. Torsvikb a Department of Geological Sciences, University of Florida, 241 Williamson Hall, PO Box 11210 Gainesville, FL 32611, USA b Academy of Sciences (VISTA), c/o Geodynamics Center, Geological Survey of Norway, Leif Eirikssons vei 39, Trondheim 7491, Norway Received 11 April 2002; received in revised form 7 January 2003; accepted 5 June 2003 Abstract During the Neoproterozoic, a supercontinent commonly referred to as Rodinia, supposedly formed at ca. 1100 Ma and broke apart at around 800–700 Ma. However, continental fits (e.g., Laurentia vs. Australia–Antarctica, Greater India vs. Australia– Antarctica, Amazonian craton [AC] vs. Laurentia, etc.) and the timing of break-up as postulated in a number of influential papers in the early–mid-1990s are at odds with palaeomagnetic data. The new data necessitate an entirely different fit of East Gondwana elements and western Gondwana and call into question the validity of SWEAT, AUSWUS models and other variants. At the same time, the geologic record indicates that Neoproterozoic and early Paleozoic rift margins surrounded Laurentia, while similar-aged collisional belts dissected Gondwana. Collectively, these geologic observations indicate the breakup of one supercontinent followed rapidly by the assembly of another smaller supercontinent (Gondwana). At issue, and what we outline in this paper, is the difficulty in determining the exact geometry of the earlier supercontinent. We discuss the various models that have been proposed and highlight key areas of contention. These include the relationships between the various ‘external’ Rodinian cratons to Laurentia (e.g., Baltica, Siberia and Amazonia), the notion of true polar wander (TPW), the lack of reliable paleomagnetic data and the enigmatic interpretations of the geologic data.
    [Show full text]
  • Earth History
    Earth History Geography 106 LRS Doug Fischer Introduction – Overview of geologic history • Plate positions over time • Major biogeographic events Earth’s tectonic history • Gondwanaland – Southern continents – Formed 650mya Precambrian • Laurasia – Northern Continents – Most converged in Devonian 400mya as “old sandstone continent” • Formation of Pangaea – Late Permian ~ 275 mya Breakup of Pangaea • Started 180 mya (early Jurassic) – Prior to breakup, great mixing of biota – However, regionalization did still occur as it does on (smaller) continents today Breakup of Laurasia • Separated Europe & N. America 100 mya • Beringia rejoined them 75 mya • Intermittent connection via Greenland & Beringia through Tertiary Breakup of Gondwanaland • 180-160mya Gondwanaland started to split – Mesozoic (Triassic/Jurassic) • Mostly finished by 90 mya 152 mya 94 mya Central America and Antilles • Caribbean Plate was sandwiched between N&S America between 80 and 20 mya • Formed ring of islands • Landbridge closed ~ 3.5 mya – Great American Interchange 14 mya Biogeographic consequences of plate tectonics • Fragmentation and dispersal of ancestral biota (vicariance) • Changing barriers and coridors – biotic interchange • Speciation and extinction – changing physical and biological conditions Tour of Geologic History The geologic time scale • Phanerozoic starts with Cambrian explosion of species with hard body parts – (Some multi- cellular algae and animals lived at the end of the Precambrian) Paleozoic Paleozoic Cambrian • Animals with hard-shells appeared in great numbers for the first time • The continents were flooded by shallow seas. • The supercontinent of Gondwana had just formed and was located near the South Pole. Ordivician • ancient oceans separated the barren continents of Laurentia, Baltica, Siberia and Gondwana. • The end of the Ordovician was one of the coldest times in Earth history.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Neoarchaean-Palaeoproterozoic Supracrustal Basin-Fills of The
    Late Neoarchaean-Palaeoproterozoic supracrustal basin-fills of the Kaapvaal craton: relevance of the supercontinent cycle, the "Great Oxidation Event" and "Snowball Earth"? P.G. Erikssona, N. Lenhardta, D.T. Wrightb, R. Mazumderc and A.J. Bumbya a Department of Geology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa b Department of Geology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH c Geological Studies Unit and Fluvial Mechanics Laboratory, Indian Statistical Institute, 203 B.T. Road, Kolkata 700 108, India _____________________________________________________________ Abstract The application of the onset of supercontinentality, the “Great Oxidation Event” (GOE) and the first global-scale glaciation in the Neoarchaean-Palaeoproterozoic as panacea-like events providing a framework or even chronological piercing points in Earth’s history at this time, is questioned. There is no solid evidence that the Kaapvaal craton was part of a larger amalgamation at this time, and its glacigenic record is dominated by deposits supporting the operation of an active hydrological cycle in parallel with glaciation, thereby arguing against the “Snowball Earth Hypothesis”. While the Palaeoproterozoic geological record of Kaapvaal does broadly support the GOE, this postulate itself is being questioned on the basis of isotopic data used as oxygen-proxies, and sedimentological data from extant river systems on the craton argue for a prolongation of the greenhouse palaeo-atmosphere (possibly in parallel with a relative elevation of oxygen levels) which presumably preceded the GOE. The possibility that these widespread events may have been diachronous at the global scale is debated. Keywords: Neoarchaean-Palaeoproterozoic; Kaapvaal craton; sedimentary record; supercontinentality, ca. 2.3 Ga oxidation event, global glaciation _____________________________________________________________________________________ 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Pannotia to Pangaea: Neoproterozoic and Paleozoic Orogenic Cycles in the Circum-Atlantic Region: a Celebration of the Career of Damian Nance
    Downloaded from http://sp.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on September 27, 2021 Pannotia to Pangaea: Neoproterozoic and Paleozoic Orogenic Cycles in the Circum-Atlantic Region: A celebration of the career of Damian Nance J. Brendan Murphy1,2*, Robin A. Strachan3 and Cecilio Quesada4 1Department of Earth Sciences, St Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, Nova Scotia, B2G 2W5, Canada 2Earth Dynamics Research Group, the Institute for Geoscience Research (TIGeR), School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Curtin University, WA 6845, Australia 3School of the Environment, Geography and Geosciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 3QL, UK 4Instituto Geológico y Minero de España (IGME), C/Ríos Rosas, 23, 28003 Madrid, Spain JBM, 0000-0003-2269-1976 *Correspondence: [email protected] Special Publication 503 celebrates the career of between tectonic events and biogeochemical cycles, R. Damian Nance. It features 27 articles, with more as exemplified in the late Neoproterozoic–Early than 110 authors based in 18 different countries. Cambrian by the amalgamation of Gondwana span- The wide range of topics presented in this volume ning a time interval characterized by dramatic climate mirrors the breadth and depth of Damian’s contribu- swings, profound changes in the chemistry of the tions, interests and expertise. Like Damian’s papers, oceans and atmosphere, and the evolution of multi- the contributions range from the predominantly con- cellular animals (see Hoffman 1991; Hoffman et al. ceptual to detailed field work, but all are targeted at 1998; Narbonne 2010; Knoll 2013). understanding important tectonic processes. Their As reconstructions became more refined, scope not only varies in scale from global to regional several authors proposed that Gondwana was part to local, but also in the range of approaches required of a larger entity called Pannotia that included Lau- to gain that understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Supercontinents on Planet Earth
    By Alasdair Wilkins Jan 27, 2011 2:31 PM 47,603 71 Share A history of supercontinents on planet Earth Earth's continents are constantly changing, moving and rearranging themselves over millions of years - affecting Earth's climate and biology. Every few hundred million years, the continents combine to create massive, world-spanning supercontinents. Here's the past and future of Earth's supercontinents. The Basics of Plate Tectonics If we're going to discuss past and future supercontinents, we first need to understand how landmasses can move around and the continents can take on new configurations. Let's start with the basics - rocky planets like Earth have five interior levels: heading outwards, these are the inner core, outer core, mantle, upper mantle, and the crust. The crust and the part of the upper mantle form the lithosphere, a portion of our planet that is basically rigid, solid rock and runs to about 100 kilometers below the planet's surface. Below that is the asthenosphere, which is hot enough that its rocks are more flexible and ductile than those above it. The lithosphere is divided into roughly two dozen major and minor plates, and these plates move very slowly over the almost fluid-like asthenosphere. There are two types of crust: oceanic crust and continental crust. Predictably enough, oceanic crust makes up the ocean beds and are much thinner than their continental counterparts. Plates can be made up of either oceanic or continental crust, or just as often some combination of the two. There are a variety of forces pushing and pulling the plates in various directions, and indeed that's what keeps Earth's crust from being one solid landmass - the interaction of lithosphere and asthenosphere keeps tearing landmasses apart, albeit very, very slowly.
    [Show full text]