Quaternary Off-Axis Tectonic Deformation Along the Southern Arava Segment of the Dead Sea Transform As Expressed by Geomorphic Indicators
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Quaternary off-axis tectonic deformation along the southern Arava segment of the Dead Sea transform as expressed by geomorphic indicators Thesis for the Degree of Master of Science submitted by: Yedidia Gellman Under the supervision of: Prof. Ari Matmon Dr. Amit Mushkin 30/3/2015 Department of Geology Institute of Earth Sciences Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Quaternary off-axis tectonic deformation along the southern Arava segment of the Dead Sea transform as expressed by geomorphic indicators Thesis for the Degree of Master of Science submitted by: Yedidia Gellman Under the supervision of: Prof. Ari Matmon Dr. Amit Mushkin 30/3/2015 Department of Geology Institute of Earth Sciences Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem I Abstract The Eilat area is considered to be one of the most seismically hazardous regions in Israel in large due to the active Eilat fault system. While the Eilat fault has been studied in a series of recent paleoseismic and historical investigations, our understanding of the spatial distribution and timing of recent off-axis deformation in this region remains less clear. In this context, the goal of this study is to improve the current understanding of the spatial distribution of late Quaternary tectonic deformation in the southern Arava. To achieve this goal, interpretation of recent changes in the characteristics of drainage systems was examined using field based geomorphic mapping of middle Quaternary to Holocene fluvial units, detailed high-resolution topographic cross-sections and luminescence dating across the Zefunot, Amram and Shehoret basins in southern Israel. Results indicate recent changes in channel flow directions that appear to be most consistent with recent tectonic surface tilting. Multiple geomorphic evidences indicate coeval southward migration of the active channel in the Zefunot basin and northward migration in the Shehoret basin. These changes point towards off-axis N-S compressional deformation. OSL dating indicates that this tilting initiated in middle Pleistocene and continued at least up to middle Holocene. This research suggests that the spatial extent of late Quaternary tectonic deformation along the southern Arava segment of the Dead Sea Transform is wider than previously considered. Such off-axis deformation contradicts the localized deformation expected for the maturity and cumulative offset of the Dead Sea Transform and is most likely associated with changes in the geometry of relative movement between the Arabian plate and the Sinai sub-plate. II Acknowledgments I would like to express my gratitude to my advisors, Prof. Ari Matmon from the Hebrew University and Dr. Amit Mushkin from the Geology Survey of Israel for their experienced and patient guidance, their enrichment of discussions and for joining on-field research trips. I would like to thank Prof. Michael Beyth from the Geology Survey of Israel, whose ideas introduced this research, for his most helpful discussions and guidance. I would like to thank Prof. Naomi Porat and Galina Faershtein who helped and guided the OSL sampling, processing and analyzing. I am grateful to Yaakov Refael, Iyad Swaed and Yuval Levy for their assistance in the field work. I would like to thank my friends from the Institute of Earth Science for fruitful discussions, reviews and encouragement: Elchanan Zuker, Aner Paldor and Matias Groisman. I want to thank Batya Moshey, Magi Perken and Yosi Sherer for all their help. I would also like to thank all my teachers and friends whom I may have forgotten to mention in this page. Last but not least, I am gratefully indebted to my beloved wife Rachel and our three sons: Segev, Zemer and Kedem for the moral and physical support along this journey, for accepting my long absences from home and for showing interest in my work. Without your support this work would not be possible. This research granted me a fascinating opening to and a close observation of the marvelous wonders of nature and its evolutionary processes. During this work I was provided with many spiritual insights and above all a meaningful understanding of the saying: "What is harder than rock, or softer than water? Yet soft water hollows out hard rock" -Ovidius III Table of contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................. 4 1.1. Tectonic background ............................................................................................... 4 1.1.1. Theoretical tectonics ............................................................................................... 4 1.2 Motivation ................................................................................................................. 8 1.3. Regional Geology ..................................................................................................... 8 1.4 Geomorphic background ....................................................................................... 14 1.5 Climatic background .............................................................................................. 15 2. Properties & Methods ........................................................................... 16 2.1 Study site ................................................................................................................. 16 2.2 Mapping ................................................................................................................... 16 2.3 OSL dating .............................................................................................................. 18 3. Results..................................................................................................... 22 3.1 The Zefunot Sub - Basin ........................................................................................ 22 3.1.1 General................................................................................................................... 22 3.1.2 Mapping results ..................................................................................................... 22 3.1.2.1 Topographic cross sections ............................................................................................. 31 3.1.3. OSL dating ............................................................................................................ 35 3.1.4 Zefunot sub-basin Discussion ................................................................................ 37 3.1.4.1 Geomorphic outcomes..................................................................................................... 37 3.1.4.2 Tectonic outcomes........................................................................................................... 40 3.2 The Amram basin ................................................................................................... 42 3.2.1 General................................................................................................................... 42 3.2.2 Mapping results ..................................................................................................... 43 3.2.2.1 Topographic cross section ............................................................................................... 48 3.1.4 Amram basin Discussion ....................................................................................... 51 3.1.4.1 Geomorphic outcomes..................................................................................................... 51 3.1.4.2 Tectonic outcomes........................................................................................................... 52 3.3 The Amir-Shehoret basin ....................................................................................... 54 3.3.1 General................................................................................................................... 54 3.3.2 Mapping results ..................................................................................................... 54 3.3.3 Discussion .............................................................................................................. 57 3.4 The Shehoret basin ................................................................................................. 59 3.4.1 General................................................................................................................... 59 3.4.2 Mapping results ..................................................................................................... 61 3.4.2.1 Topographic cross sections ............................................................................................. 69 3.4.3. OSL dating ............................................................................................................ 72 3.4.4 Discussion .............................................................................................................. 72 3.4.4.1 Geomorphic outcomes..................................................................................................... 72 3.4.4.2 Tectonic outcomes........................................................................................................... 74 4. Tectonic discussion ................................................................................ 76 5. Summary ................................................................................................ 80 6. Bibliography .........................................................................................