DOCSLIB.ORG

ALASKA by Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ALASKA by Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements Rock and age relationships within the Talkeetna forearc subduction complex in the Nelchina area, Southern Alaska Item Type Thesis Authors Barefoot, John D. Download date 07/10/2021 06:12:08 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/10269 ROCK AND AGE RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE TALKEETNA FOREARC SUBDUCTION COMPLEX IN THE NELCHINA AREA, SOUTHERN ALASKA By John D. Barefoot, B.S. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Geology University of Alaska Fairbanks December 2018 APPROVED: Elisabeth Nadin, Committee Chair Rainer Newberry, Committee Member Mary Keskinen, Committee Member Paul McCarthy, Chair Department of Geosciences Leah Berman, Dean College of Natural Science and Mathematics Michael Castellini, Dean UAF Graduate School Abstract Subduction-zone processes are challenging to study because of the rarity of good exposures and the complexity of rock relationships within accretionary prisms. In south-central Alaska, a remarkably well-preserved exposure of subduction-related outcrops is located at the foot of Nelchina Glacier. Here, the crystalline basement of the Talkeetna volcanic arc is in contact with the melange of its associated accretionary complex along the Border Ranges fault. A new zircon U-Pb age of an amphibolite from the Talkeetna arc mid-crustal basement just north of the fault is 188.9 ± 2.2 Ma, coincident with previously published dates from the mafic section of the arc. A new amphibole 40Ar/39Ar age from the same outcrop yields a plateau age of 182.6 ± 1.3 Ma, reflecting cooling/exhumation of this part of the arc. The melange south of the arc and the Border Ranges fault, known as the McHugh Complex, comprises sheared metasedimentary rocks, metavolcanic rocks, and chert, and in the Nelchina area it includes a roughly 100-m- diameter block of pillow lavas that are undeformed but altered. Detailed compositional data show that the pillow lava block formed in an intraplate setting. New whole-rock 40Ar/39Ar analyses of two pillow-lava samples yielded irregular plateaus with an approximate age of 60 Ma, which we interpret to be largely reset due to reheating. Hypabyssal dikes crosscut the melange, as well as younger accretionary prism deposits in the area, and provide a new zircon U- Pb age of 53.0 ± 0.9 Ma, which coincides with ages of near-trench plutonism across southern Alaska. This plutonism has been ascribed to subduction of a spreading ridge that migrated eastward along the southern Alaska margin. These new ages constrain the McHugh Complex formation and subsequent hydrothermal alteration to pre-55 Ma. We suggest that the pillow lava was originally part of a Triassic (or earlier) seamount that was decapitated and incorporated into the melange as the oceanic plate entered the subduction zone. The pillow lava subsequently i underwent extensive hydrothermal alteration that almost completely reset its age during the ridge subduction event. We further posit that the Talkeetna volcanic arc and its associated accretionary prism sediments were in their current configuration during the ca. 55 Ma plutonism that was common throughout southern Alaska. ii Table of Contents Page Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ i Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................v List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vi Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................................1 Melange..................................................................................................................................... 3 Geologic Background ................................................................................................................5 Southern Alaska terranes .................................................................................................... 5 The McHugh Complex ........................................................................................................6 Southern Alaska Near-Trench Magmatism ........................................................................ 7 References..................................................................................................................................9 Chapter 2: Rock and age relationships of the Talkeetna forearc subduction complex in the Nelchina area, southern Alaska................................................................................................17 Abstract ....................................................................................................................................18 I. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................19 II. Geologic Background..........................................................................................................21 III. Methods..............................................................................................................................23 Mapping ............................................................................................................................ 23 Mineralogy ........................................................................................................................ 24 Geochemistry .................................................................................................................... 24 U-Pb Geochronology ........................................................................................................ 25 40Ar/39Ar Geochronology.................................................................................................. 25 IV. Results................................................................................................................................26 Map Units.......................................................................................................................... 26 Gabbro, undifferentiated (Jgu).................................................................................... 26 Metasedimentary rocks (Mzms) ..................................................................................28 Metavolcanic rocks (Mzmv) ........................................................................................29 iii Mesomelange (Mzm).................................................................................................. 31 Deformed melange (Mzdm)........................................................................................ 32 Hypabyssal (“felsite”) dikes (Pgi) ...............................................................................32 Chickaloon Formation (Pgcg)......................................................................................33 V. Discussion ...........................................................................................................................33 Cooling and uplift of the Talkeetna arc .............................................................................33 McHugh Complex deposition ............................................................................................34 Post-McHugh Complex deposition and deformation ........................................................37 VI. Conclusions........................................................................................................................39 VII. Acknowledgements ..........................................................................................................39 VIII. References ...................................................................................................................... 41 Appendix (40Ar/39Ar methodology) ........................................................................................ 67 References for Appendix .................................................................................................. 68 Chapter 3: Conclusion....................................................................................................................69 Future Work ............................................................................................................................ 71 References................................................................................................................................72 Appendix........................................................................................................................................74 iv List of Figures Page Figure 1.1: Regional map showing the general terrane configuration of southern Alaska............14 Figure 1.2: Detailed map of the Chugach-Prince William composite terrane .............................. 15 Figure 1.3: Schematic plate configuration map of the west coast of North America ....................16 Figure 1: Map showing the general terrane configuration of southern Alaska..............................51 Figure 2: Map of Nelchina area melange showing recently exposed bedrock............................. 52 Figure 3: Photomicrograph of amphibolite sample 16Ba21 ..........................................................53
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Paleobotanical Proxies for Early Eocene Climates and Ecosystems in Northern North 2 America from Mid to High Latitudes 3 4 Christopher K
    https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-2020-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 24 March 2020 c Author(s) 2020. CC BY 4.0 License. 1 Paleobotanical proxies for early Eocene climates and ecosystems in northern North 2 America from mid to high latitudes 3 4 Christopher K. West1, David R. Greenwood2, Tammo Reichgelt3, Alexander J. Lowe4, Janelle M. 5 Vachon2, and James F. Basinger1. 6 1 Dept. of Geological Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, 114 Science Place, Saskatoon, 7 Saskatchewan, S7N 5E2, Canada. 8 2 Dept. of Biology, Brandon University, 270-18th Street, Brandon, Manitoba R7A 6A9, Canada. 9 3 Department of Geosciences, University of Connecticut, Beach Hall, 354 Mansfield Rd #207, 10 Storrs, CT 06269, U.S.A. 11 4 Dept. of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-1800, U.S.A. 12 13 Correspondence to: C.K West ([email protected]) 14 15 Abstract. Early Eocene climates were globally warm, with ice-free conditions at both poles. Early 16 Eocene polar landmasses supported extensive forest ecosystems of a primarily temperate biota, 17 but also with abundant thermophilic elements such as crocodilians, and mesothermic taxodioid 18 conifers and angiosperms. The globally warm early Eocene was punctuated by geologically brief 19 hyperthermals such as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), culminating in the 20 Early Eocene Climatic Optimum (EECO), during which the range of thermophilic plants such as 21 palms extended into the Arctic. Climate models have struggled to reproduce early Eocene Arctic 22 warm winters and high precipitation, with models invoking a variety of mechanisms, from 23 atmospheric CO2 levels that are unsupported by proxy evidence, to the role of an enhanced 24 hydrological cycle to reproduce winters that experienced no direct solar energy input yet remained 25 wet and above freezing.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Mosses: What Do They Tell Us About Moss Evolution?
    Bry. Div. Evo. 043 (1): 072–097 ISSN 2381-9677 (print edition) DIVERSITY & https://www.mapress.com/j/bde BRYOPHYTEEVOLUTION Copyright © 2021 Magnolia Press Article ISSN 2381-9685 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/bde.43.1.7 Fossil mosses: What do they tell us about moss evolution? MicHAEL S. IGNATOV1,2 & ELENA V. MASLOVA3 1 Tsitsin Main Botanical Garden of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia 2 Faculty of Biology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia 3 Belgorod State University, Pobedy Square, 85, Belgorod, 308015 Russia �[email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1520-042X * author for correspondence: �[email protected], https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6096-6315 Abstract The moss fossil records from the Paleozoic age to the Eocene epoch are reviewed and their putative relationships to extant moss groups discussed. The incomplete preservation and lack of key characters that could define the position of an ancient moss in modern classification remain the problem. Carboniferous records are still impossible to refer to any of the modern moss taxa. Numerous Permian protosphagnalean mosses possess traits that are absent in any extant group and they are therefore treated here as an extinct lineage, whose descendants, if any remain, cannot be recognized among contemporary taxa. Non-protosphagnalean Permian mosses were also fairly diverse, representing morphotypes comparable with Dicranidae and acrocarpous Bryidae, although unequivocal representatives of these subclasses are known only since Cretaceous and Jurassic. Even though Sphagnales is one of two oldest lineages separated from the main trunk of moss phylogenetic tree, it appears in fossil state regularly only since Late Cretaceous, ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Report for the Navarin Basin Planning Area, Bering Sea, A1 Aska
    OCS Report MMS 85-0045 Geologic Report for the Navarin Basin Planning Area, Bering Sea, A1 aska Ronald F. Turner Gary C. Martin Tabe 0. Flett David A. Steffy edited by Ronald F. Turner United States Department of the Interior Mineral s Management Service Alaska OCS Region Any use of trade names is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement of these products by the Minerals Management Service. Engl ish-Metric Conversion (The following table gives the factors used to convert English units to metric units.) -- - -- - - - - -- multiply English units by to obtain metric units feet meters miles (statute) ki1 ometers acres hectares barrel s (U .S. petrol eum) 1i ters cubic meters inches centimeters pounds per gallon grams per cubic centimeter knots kilometers per hour miles per hour kilometers per hour square miles square ki1 ometers To convert from Fahrenheit (OF) to Celsius (OC), subtract 32 then divide by 1.8, - Abbreviations and Acronyms AAPG Arneri can As soci ati on of Petroleum Geol ogi sts aff. affinis (to have affinities with) APD Appl icdL ior~for Permit to Drill ARC0 Atlantic Richfield Company BHT Bottom Hole Temperature bop. before present BS R Bottom-Simulati ng Ref lector C carbon OC degrees Celsius CDP common depth point cf. confer (to be compared with) Co. Company c ommun . communication COST Continental Offshore Stratigraphic Test 0 darcy, darci es D downthrown DS T Drill Stem Test e, E early, Early E east Abbreviations and Acronyms--Continued EA Environmental Assessment ed . edi tor(s ) , edited by " F degrees Fahrenheit fig. figure ft.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic History of Siletzia, a Large Igneous Province in the Oregon And
    Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot Wells, R., Bukry, D., Friedman, R., Pyle, D., Duncan, R., Haeussler, P., & Wooden, J. (2014). Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot. Geosphere, 10 (4), 692-719. doi:10.1130/GES01018.1 10.1130/GES01018.1 Geological Society of America Version of Record http://cdss.library.oregonstate.edu/sa-termsofuse Downloaded from geosphere.gsapubs.org on September 10, 2014 Geologic history of Siletzia, a large igneous province in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range: Correlation to the geomagnetic polarity time scale and implications for a long-lived Yellowstone hotspot Ray Wells1, David Bukry1, Richard Friedman2, Doug Pyle3, Robert Duncan4, Peter Haeussler5, and Joe Wooden6 1U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefi eld Road, Menlo Park, California 94025-3561, USA 2Pacifi c Centre for Isotopic and Geochemical Research, Department of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences, 6339 Stores Road, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada 3Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1680 East West Road, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA 4College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, 104 CEOAS Administration Building, Corvallis, Oregon 97331-5503, USA 5U.S. Geological Survey, 4210 University Drive, Anchorage, Alaska 99508-4626, USA 6School of Earth Sciences, Stanford University, 397 Panama Mall Mitchell Building 101, Stanford, California 94305-2210, USA ABSTRACT frames, the Yellowstone hotspot (YHS) is on southern Vancouver Island (Canada) to Rose- or near an inferred northeast-striking Kula- burg, Oregon (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • The Geology, Paleontology and Paleoecology of the Cerro Fortaleza Formation
    The Geology, Paleontology and Paleoecology of the Cerro Fortaleza Formation, Patagonia (Argentina) A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Drexel University by Victoria Margaret Egerton in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy November 2011 © Copyright 2011 Victoria M. Egerton. All Rights Reserved. ii Dedications To my mother and father iii Acknowledgments The knowledge, guidance and commitment of a great number of people have led to my success while at Drexel University. I would first like to thank Drexel University and the College of Arts and Sciences for providing world-class facilities while I pursued my PhD. I would also like to thank the Department of Biology for its support and dedication. I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Kenneth Lacovara, for his guidance and patience. Additionally, I would like to thank him for including me in his pursuit of knowledge of Argentine dinosaurs and their environments. I am also indebted to my committee members, Dr. Gail Hearn, Dr. Jake Russell, Dr. Mike O‘Connor, Dr. Matthew Lamanna, Dr. Christopher Williams and Professor Hermann Pfefferkorn for their valuable comments and time. The support of Argentine scientists has been essential for allowing me to pursue my research. I am thankful that I had the opportunity to work with such kind and knowledgeable people. I would like to thank Dr. Fernando Novas (Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales) for helping me obtain specimens that allowed this research to happen. I would also like to thank Dr. Viviana Barreda (Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales) for her allowing me use of her lab space while I was visiting Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales.
    [Show full text]
  • P1616 Text-Only PDF File
    A Geologic Guide to Wrangell–Saint Elias National Park and Preserve, Alaska A Tectonic Collage of Northbound Terranes By Gary R. Winkler1 With contributions by Edward M. MacKevett, Jr.,2 George Plafker,3 Donald H. Richter,4 Danny S. Rosenkrans,5 and Henry R. Schmoll1 Introduction region—his explorations of Malaspina Glacier and Mt. St. Elias—characterized the vast mountains and glaciers whose realms he invaded with a sense of astonishment. His descrip­ Wrangell–Saint Elias National Park and Preserve (fig. tions are filled with superlatives. In the ensuing 100+ years, 6), the largest unit in the U.S. National Park System, earth scientists have learned much more about the geologic encompasses nearly 13.2 million acres of geological won­ evolution of the parklands, but the possibility of astonishment derments. Furthermore, its geologic makeup is shared with still is with us as we unravel the results of continuing tectonic contiguous Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, Kluane processes along the south-central Alaska continental margin. National Park and Game Sanctuary in the Yukon Territory, the Russell’s superlatives are justified: Wrangell–Saint Elias Alsek-Tatshenshini Provincial Park in British Columbia, the is, indeed, an awesome collage of geologic terranes. Most Cordova district of Chugach National Forest and the Yakutat wonderful has been the continuing discovery that the disparate district of Tongass National Forest, and Glacier Bay National terranes are, like us, invaders of a sort with unique trajectories Park and Preserve at the north end of Alaska’s panhan­ and timelines marking their northward journeys to arrive in dle—shared landscapes of awesome dimensions and classic today’s parklands.
    [Show full text]
  • Retallack 2021 Coal Balls
    Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 564 (2021) 110185 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/palaeo Modern analogs reveal the origin of Carboniferous coal balls Gregory Retallack * Department of Earth Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403-1272, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Coal balls are calcareous peats with cellular permineralization invaluable for understanding the anatomy of Coal ball Pennsylvanian and Permian fossil plants. Two distinct kinds of coal balls are here recognized in both Holocene Histosol and Pennsylvanian calcareous Histosols. Respirogenic calcite coal balls have arrays of calcite δ18O and δ13C like Carbon isotopes those of desert soil calcic horizons reflecting isotopic composition of CO2 gas from an aerobic microbiome. Permineralization Methanogenic calcite coal balls in contrast have invariant δ18O for a range of δ13C, and formed with anaerobic microbiomes in soil solutions with bicarbonate formed by methane oxidation and sugar fermentation. Respiro­ genic coal balls are described from Holocene peats in Eight Mile Creek South Australia, and noted from Carboniferous coals near Penistone, Yorkshire. Methanogenic coal balls are described from Carboniferous coals at Berryville (Illinois) and Steubenville (Ohio), Paleocene lignites of Sutton (Alaska), Eocene lignites of Axel Heiberg Island (Nunavut), Pleistocene peats of Konya (Turkey), and Holocene peats of Gramigne di Bando (Italy). Soils and paleosols with coal balls are neither common nor extinct, but were formed by two distinct soil microbiomes. 1. Introduction and Royer, 2019). Although best known from Euramerican coal mea­ sures of Pennsylvanian age (Greb et al., 1999; Raymond et al., 2012, Coal balls were best defined by Seward (1895, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineralogy of Non-Silicified Fossil Wood
    Article Mineralogy of Non-Silicified Fossil Wood George E. Mustoe Geology Department, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225, USA; [email protected]; Tel: +1-360-650-3582 Received: 21 December 2017; Accepted: 27 February 2018; Published: 3 March 2018 Abstract: The best-known and most-studied petrified wood specimens are those that are mineralized with polymorphs of silica: opal-A, opal-C, chalcedony, and quartz. Less familiar are fossil woods preserved with non-silica minerals. This report reviews discoveries of woods mineralized with calcium carbonate, calcium phosphate, various iron and copper minerals, manganese oxide, fluorite, barite, natrolite, and smectite clay. Regardless of composition, the processes of mineralization involve the same factors: availability of dissolved elements, pH, Eh, and burial temperature. Permeability of the wood and anatomical features also plays important roles in determining mineralization. When precipitation occurs in several episodes, fossil wood may have complex mineralogy. Keywords: fossil wood; mineralogy; paleobotany; permineralization 1. Introduction Non-silica minerals that cause wood petrifaction include calcite, apatite, iron pyrites, siderite, hematite, manganese oxide, various copper minerals, fluorite, barite, natrolite, and the chromium- rich smectite clay mineral, volkonskoite. This report provides a broad overview of woods fossilized with these minerals, describing specimens from world-wide locations comprising a diverse variety of mineral assemblages. Data from previously-undescribed fossil woods are also presented. The result is a paper that has a somewhat unconventional format, being a combination of literature review and original research. In an attempt for clarity, the information is organized based on mineral composition, rather than in the format of a hypothesis-driven research report.
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Exploration Permit Application for Mental Health Land Coal Lease Mht 9200375 Chickaloon Coal Project
    COAL EXPLORATION PERMIT APPLICATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH LAND COAL LEASE MHT 9200375 CHICKALOON COAL PROJECT Prepared For: Riversdale Alaska LLC A subsidiary of RIVERSDALE RESOURCES PTY LTD Level 2, Chifley Tower 2 Chifley Square Sydney NSW 2000 +61 2 9324 4499 US Cell 907 3016031 [email protected] Prepared By: Michael A. Belowich Alaska Earth Sciences, Inc. 1075 Check Street, Suite 210 Wasilla, Alaska 99654 March 23, 2012 Revised on May 04, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Table of Contents i List of Figures , Tables, and Plates ii PART A – GENERAL INFORMATION 1.0 Applicant Information iv 2.0 Location of the Exploration v 3.0 Period of Exploration vi 4.0 Ownership of Surface/Subsurface Mineral Estate vi 5.0 Chickaloon Land Owners vii PART B – EXPLORATION AREA DESCRIPTION 1.0 Location, Access and Physiography 1 2.0 Geology-General 4 3.0 Previous Mine History and Exploration Drilling 8 3.1 Chickaloon, Kings River, and Coal Creek Mines 8 3.2 Castle Mountain Mine 11 4.0 Coal Resources and Quality 13 5.0 Land Use 15 6.0 Climate 18 7.0 Hydrology – General 20 7.1 Surface Water 20 7.2 Ground Water 22 8.0 Soils 26 9.0 Vegetation 29 10.0 Birds and Other Terrestrial Wildlife 31 10.1 Birds 31 10.2 Terrestrial Wildlife 33 11.0 Aquatic Wildlife 34 12.0 Cultural and Historical Resources 36 PART C – EXPLORATION AND RECLAMATION PLAN 1.0 Introduction 39 2.0 2012 Surface Drilling Program 40 3.0 Trenching and Test Pits 47 4.0 Geophysical Exploration Methods 49 5.0 Equipment Types/Uses 50 6.0 Environmental Baseline Data Gathering 52 7.0 Borehole Plugging and Reclamation 54 8.0 Revegetation Procedures 57 9.0 Hydrologic Balance Control Measures 58 10.0 Transportation and Facilities 60 11.0 Reclamation Bond 62 i 12.0 Time Table 66 13.0 References 67 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Characteristics in Cook Inlet Area, Alaska
    SOCIE?I’YOF PETROLEUMENGINEERSOF AIME 6200 North CentralExpressway *R SPE 1588 Dallas,Texas 752C6 THIS IS A PREPRINT--- SUBJECTTO CORRECTION Geological Characteristics in Cook Inlet Area, Alaska Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEATCE/proceedings-pdf/66FM/All-66FM/SPE-1588-MS/2087697/spe-1588-ms.pdf by guest on 25 September 2021 By ThomasE. Kelly,Jr. MemberAIYE, Mickl T. Halbouty,Houston,Tex. @ Copyright 19G6 Americsn Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. This paper was preparedfor the 41st AnnualFall Meetingof the Societyof PetroleumEngineers of AIME, to be held in Dallas,l?ex.,Oct. 2-5, 1966. permissionto copy is restrictedto an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrationsmay not be copied. The abstractshouldcontainconspicu- ous acknowledgmentof whereand by whom the paper is presented. Publicationelsewhereafter publica- tion in the JOURNALOF l?i’TROI.WJMTECHNOLOGYor the SOCIETYOF PETROLEUMENGINEERSJOURNALis usually grantedupon requestto the Editorof the appropriatejournalprovideciagreementto give propercredit is made. Discussionof this paper is invited. Three copiesof any discussionshouldbe sent to the Societyof PetroleumEngineersoffice. Such discussionmay be presentedat the abovemeetingand, with the paper,may be consideredfor publicationin one of the two WE magazines. v, The Cook Inlet basin is a narrow, Although the general characteristics elongate trough of Mesozoic and Ter- of the basin are fairly well known, tiary sediments located north of new information, as it is made avail- latitude 59° in south-central Alaska able will cause many revisions of the (Fig. 1). The basin covers approxi- stratigraphic and structural fabric mately 11,000 square miles of th~ before a complete geological picture northerripart of the Matanuska geo- is possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Kinematic Evolution of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean
    Kinematic Evolution of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean James Pindell Tectonic Analysis, Ltd., Cokes, Barn, West Burton, West Sussex RH20 1HD, England Also: Dept. Earth Science, Rice University, Houston, Texas, USA Email: [email protected] Lorcan Kennan Tectonic Analysis, Ltd., Cokes, Barn, West Burton, West Sussex RH20 1HD, England Abstract We present a series of 14 updated tectonic reconstructions for the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean region since the Jurassic, giving due attention to plate kinematic and palinspastic accuracy. Primary elements of the model are: 1) a re-evaluation of the Mesozoic break-up of Pangea, to better define the Proto-Caribbean passive margin elements, the geology and kinematics of the Mexican and Colombian intra-arc basins, and the nature of the early Great Caribbean Arc; 2) pre-Albian circum-Caribbean rock assemblages are reconstructed into a primitive, west-facing, Mexico-Antilles-Ecuador arc (initial roots of Great Caribbean Arc) during the early separation of North and South America; 3) the subduction zone responsible for Caribbean Cretaceous HP/LT metamorphic assemblages was initiated during an Aptian subduction polarity reversal of the early Great Arc; the reversal was triggered by a strong westward acceleration of the Americas relative to the mantle which threw the original arc into compression; 4) the same acceleration led to the Aptian-Albian onset of back-arc closure and “Sevier” orogenesis in Mexico, the western USA, and the northern Andes, making this a nearly hemispheric event which must have
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Map of Alaska
    Geologic Map of Alaska Compiled by Frederic H. Wilson, Chad P. Hults, Charles G. Mull, and Susan M. Karl Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3340 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front cover. Color shaded relief map of Alaska and surroundings. Sources: 100-meter-resolution natural image of Alaska, http://nationalmap.gov/small_scale/mld/nate100.html; rivers and lakes dataset, http://www.asgdc.state.ak.us/; bathymetry and topography of Russia and Canada, https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/global.html. Back cover. Previous geologic maps of Alaska: 1906—Brooks, A.H., Abbe, Cleveland, Jr., and Goode, R.U., 1906, The geography and geology of Alaska; a summary of existing knowledge, with a section on climate, and a topographic map and description thereof: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 45, 327 p., 1 sheet. 1939—Smith, P.S., 1939, Areal geology of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 192, 100 p., 18 plates. 1957—Dutro, J.T., Jr., and Payne, T.G., 1957, Geologic map of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey, scale 1:2,500,000. 1980—Beikman, H.M., 1980, Geologic map of Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Special Map, scale 1:2,500,000, 2 sheets. Geologic Map of Alaska Compiled by Frederic H. Wilson, Chad P. Hults, Charles G. Mull, and Susan M. Karl Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3340 2015 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Director U.S.
    [Show full text]