DOCSLIB.ORG

Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop Held in St. Petersburg, Russia 10-13 October 2003 June 2004 Table of Contents Table of Contents..........................................................................................................................................................i Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................................................2 I. Workshop Description.............................................................................................................................................2 A. Background..........................................................................................................................................................2 B. The Values of Boreal Forests in the context of the World Heritage Convention...........................................3 C. Workshop Methodology and Outputs ...............................................................................................................4 II. Workshop Outputs .................................................................................................................................................6 A. Site Specific Recommendations..........................................................................................................................6 B. The St. Petersburg Statement...........................................................................................................................10 C. Frameworks Developed at the Workshop.......................................................................................................13 1. Canada Framework of existing World Heritage sites and Values............................................................13 2. Canada Framework for World Heritage Values and Potential New Sites to Fill Gaps ..........................16 3. Russia Framework for World Heritage Values and Potential New Sites to Fill Gaps ............................18 Annex 1: Details on Sites for Potential Nomination................................................................................................20 Canada ....................................................................................................................................................................20 Atikaki/Woodland Caribou/First Nations Accord Area................................................................................20 Wood Buffalo.....................................................................................................................................................20 Nahanni..............................................................................................................................................................21 Muskwa-Kechika...............................................................................................................................................21 Hudson Bay........................................................................................................................................................21 Lake Superior....................................................................................................................................................22 Wabikimi............................................................................................................................................................22 Mealy Mountains...............................................................................................................................................23 Thelon Wildlife Sanctuary and Queen Maud Migratory Bird Sanctuary ...................................................23 Canada – US Transboundary Site: Ivvavik and Vuntut National Parks with Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.................................................................................................................................................................24 Finland ....................................................................................................................................................................25 Green Belt of Fennoscandia .............................................................................................................................25 The Northern Kvarken.....................................................................................................................................26 Saimaa-Pielinen Lakeland................................................................................................................................28 Aapamire Complexes of Northern Finland.....................................................................................................31 Norway....................................................................................................................................................................32 North Norwegian Fjord Landscape.................................................................................................................32 Russia ......................................................................................................................................................................33 Basegi Nature Reserve ......................................................................................................................................33 Kuril Islands ......................................................................................................................................................33 Magadansky Nature Reserve ...........................................................................................................................34 Malaya Sos’va Reserve .....................................................................................................................................35 The Putorana Plateau Natural Complex.........................................................................................................36 The Western Sayan ...........................................................................................................................................36 Tsentralno-Sibirsky State Nature Reserve......................................................................................................37 The Tungussky phenomenon............................................................................................................................37 Valdai – the Great Watershed..........................................................................................................................38 The Bikin River valley (for extension of "Central Sikhote-Alin" World Heritage site) .............................38 Annex 2. List of Participants ....................................................................................................................................40 Table 1. Natural World Heritage Sites in the Boreal Ecozone ................................................................................3 Table 2. Criteria for World Heritage Designation....................................................................................................5 Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop i 10-13 October 2003 Disclaimer The recommendations found in this report represent the output of a technical workshop and do not necessarily represent the official views of States Parties to the World Heritage Convention nor the organizations which provided financial support. The recommendations reflect the opinions expressed by the workshop participants, which are not necessarily those of IUCN or UNESCO. Moreover, the recommendations cannot preclude the outcome of the official IUCN process to evaluate World Heritage nominations. The designation of geographical entities in this report, and the presentation of material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN or UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Proceedings of the World Heritage Boreal Zone Workshop 1 10-13 October 2003 Acknowledgements IUCN gratefully acknowledges the financial contributions of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, the Ministry of the Environment in Finland, and the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade for the workshop. IUCN would also like to thank the Baltic Fund for Nature for logistical support in organizing the workshop. I. Workshop Description A. Background The Convention on the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage was adopted at the General Conference of the United Nations on 16 November 1972, and came into effect on 17 December 1975. Currently 176 States Parties have signed the Convention, making it one of the most representative conventions for environmental protection. In 1976, the World Heritage Committee and Fund were established to enhance the efficiency of the Convention. As a result, the first cultural and natural sites were inscribed in UNESCO’s World Heritage List in 1978. Over the past 30 years, sites and ecosystem types from many regions of the world have been nominated. However, not all sites of outstanding universal value have been identified and nominated. Therefore, the World Heritage Committee established the so-called ‘Global Strategy’ in 1994 to encourage nominations from regions and biomes that are not sufficiently covered under
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Assessment of Undiscovered Conventionally Recoverable Petroleum Resources of the Northwest European Region
    U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 922-A Assessment of Undiscovered Conventionally Recoverable Petroleum Resources of the Northwest European Region Assessment of Undiscovered Conventionally Recoverable Petroleum Resources of the North\Nest European Region By Charles D. Masters and H. Douglas Klemme U. S. G E 0 L 0 G I CAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 9 2 2- A Prepared in cooperation with Weeks Exploration Company under contract to the U.S. Geological Survey A resource assessment and a brief description of the petroleum geology, including play distribution, that accounts for the petroleum accumulation in the North Sea and adjoining areas 1984 Department of the Interior WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Dallas L. Peck, Director Free on application to Distribution Branch, Text Products Section, U. S. Geological Survey, 604 South Pickett Street, Alexandria, VA 22304 CONTENTS Page Pref~--------------------------------------------------------------------- v Absttact-------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Inbuduction ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Regional geology ------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Pettoleum geology ------------------------------------------------------------ 6 Resource assessment---------------------------------------------------------- 14 COmmen~ ------------------------------------------------------------------ 15 References cited -------------------------------------------------------------- 22 ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURE 1. Map
    [Show full text]
  • GY 112 Lecture Notes D
    GY 112 Lecture Notes D. Haywick (2006) 1 GY 112 Lecture Notes Archean Geology Lecture Goals: A) Time frame (the Archean and earlier) B) Rocks and tectonic elements (shield/platform/craton) C) Tectonics and paleogeography Textbook reference: Levin 7th edition (2003), Chapter 6; Levin 8th edition (2006), Chapter 8 A) Time frame Up until comparatively recently (start of the 20th century), most geologists focused their discussion of geological time on two eons; the “Precambrian” and the Phanerozoic. We now officially recognize 4 eons and the Precambrian is just used as a come-all term for all time before the Phanerozoic: Eon Time Phanerozoic 550 MA to 0 MA Proterozoic 2.5 GA to 550 MA Archean 3.96 GA to 2.5 GA Hadean 4.6 GA to 3.96 GA The “youngest” of these two new eons, the Archean, was first introduced by field geologists working in areas where very old rocks cropped out. One of these geologists was Sir William Logan (pictured at left; ess.nrcan.gc.ca ) one of the most respected geologists working with the Geological Survey of Canada. His study area was the Canadian Shield. Logan was able to identify two major types of rocks; 1) layered sedimentary and volcanic rocks and 2) highly metamorphosed granitic gneisses (see image at the top of the next page from http://www.trailcanada.com/images/canadian-shield.jpg). Logan found evidence that the gneisses mostly underlayed the layered rocks and hence, they had to be older than the layered rocks. The layered rocks were known to be Proterozoic in age.
    [Show full text]
  • Periodicity of Rayleigh Phase Velocities Observed in Scandinavia
    Originally published as: Mauerberger, A., Maupin, V., Gudmundsson, Ó., Tilmann, F. (2021): Anomalous azimuthal variations with 360° periodicity of Rayleigh phase velocities observed in Scandinavia. - Geophysical Journal International, 224, 3, 1684-1704. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa553 Institutional Repository GFZpublic: https://gfzpublic.gfz‐potsdam.de/ Geophys. J. Int. (2021) 224, 1684–1704 doi: 10.1093/gji/ggaa553 Advance Access publication 2020 November 13 0GJI Seismology Anomalous azimuthal variations with 360◦ periodicity of Rayleigh phase velocities observed in Scandinavia Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/224/3/1684/6012847 by Bibliothek des Wissenschaftsparks Albert Einstein user on 12 February 2021 Alexandra Mauerberger ,1,2 Valerie´ Maupin ,3 Olafur´ Gudmundsson4 and Frederik Tilmann 1,2 1GFZ German Research Center for Geosciences, Geophysics, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] 2Freie Universitat¨ Berlin, Institute of Geological Sciences, 12249 Berlin, Germany 3University of Oslo, CEED, 0371 Oslo, Norway 4 Uppsala University, Geocentrum, 752 36 Uppsala, Sweden Accepted 2020 November 13. Received 2020 November 6; in original form 2020 February 27 SUMMARY We use the recently deployed ScanArray network of broad-band stations covering most of Norway and Sweden as well as parts of Finland to analyse the propagation of Rayleigh waves in Scandinavia. Applying an array beamforming technique to teleseismic records from ScanArray and permanent stations in the study region, in total 159 stations with a typical station distance of about 70 km, we obtain phase velocities for three subregions, which collectively cover most of Scandinavia (excluding southern Norway). The average phase dispersion curves are similar for all three subregions.
    [Show full text]
  • Tectonic Regimes in the Baltic Shield During the Last 1200 Ma • a Review
    Tectonic regimes in the Baltic Shield during the last 1200 Ma • A review Sven Åke Larsson ' ', Bva-L^na Tuliborq- 1 Department of Geology Chalmers University of Technology/Göteborij U^vjrsivy 2 Terralogica AB November 1993 TECTONIC REGIMES IN THE BALTIC SHIELD DURING THE LAST 1200 Ma - A REVIEW Sven Åke Larsson12, Eva-Lena Tullborg2 1 Department of Geology, Chalmers University of Technology/Göteborg University 2 Terralogica AB November 1993 This report concerns a study which was conducted for SKB. The conclusions and viewpoints presented in the report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily coincide with those of the client. Information on SKB technical reports from 1977-1978 (TR 121), 1979 (TR 79-28), 1980 (TR 80-26), 1981 (TR 81-17), 1982 (TR 82-28), 1983 (TR 83-77), 1984 (TR 85-01), 1985 (TR 85-20), 1986 (TR 86-31), 1987 (TR 87-33), 1988 (TR 88-32),. 1989 (TR 89-40), 1990 (TR 90-46), 1991 (TR 91-64) and 1992 (TR 92-46) is available through SKB. ) TECTONIC REGIMES IN THE BALTIC SHIELD DURING THE LAST 1200 Ma - A REVIEW by Sven Åke Larson and Eva-Lena Tullborg Department of Geology, Chalmers University of Technology / Göteborg University & Terralogica AB Gråbo, November, 1993 Keywords: Baltic shield, Tectonicregimes. Upper Protero/.oic, Phanerozoic, Mag- matism. Sedimentation. Erosion. Metamorphism, Continental drift. Stress regimes. , ABSTRACT 1 his report is a review about tectonic regimes in the Baltic (Fennoscandian) Shield from the Sveeonorwegian (1.2 Ga ago) to the present. It also covers what is known about palaeostress during this period, which was chosen to include both orogenic and anorogenic events.
    [Show full text]
  • South and North Barents Triassic-Jurassic Total Petroleum System of the Russian Offshore Arctic
    U. S. Department of the Interior U. S. Geological Survey South and North Barents Triassic-Jurassic Total Petroleum System of the Russian Offshore Arctic Paper Edition by Sandra J. Lindquist1 Open-File Report 99-50-N This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with the U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 1999 1 Consulting Geologist, Contractor to U. S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado Page 1 of 16 South and North Barents Triassic-Jurassic Total Petroleum System of the Russian Offshore Arctic2 Sandra J. Lindquist, Consulting Geologist Contractor to the U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO October, 1999 FOREWORD This report was prepared as part of the World Energy Project of the U.S. Geological Survey. In the project, the world was divided into 8 regions and 937 geologic provinces. The provinces have been ranked according to the discovered oil and gas volumes within each (Klett and others, 1997). Then, 76 "priority" provinces (exclusive of the U.S. and chosen for their high ranking) and 26 "boutique" provinces (exclusive of the U.S. and chosen for their anticipated petroleum richness or special regional economic importance) were selected for appraisal of oil and gas resources. The petroleum geology of these priority and boutique provinces is described in this series of reports. A detailed report containing the assessment results will be available separately, if such results are not reported herein. The priority South Barents Basin Province ranks 35th in the world, exclusive of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Rutile Mineral Chemistry and Zr-In-Rutile Thermometry In
    minerals Article Rutile Mineral Chemistry and Zr-in-Rutile Thermometry in Provenance Study of Albian (Uppermost Lower Cretaceous) Terrigenous Quartz Sands and Sandstones in Southern Extra-Carpathian Poland Jakub Kotowski * , Krzysztof Nejbert and Danuta Olszewska-Nejbert Faculty of Geology, University of Warsaw, Zwirki˙ i Wigury 93, 02-089 Warszawa, Poland; [email protected] (K.N.); [email protected] (D.O.-N.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The geochemistry of detrital rutile grains, which are extremely resistant to weathering, was used in a provenance study of the transgressive Albian quartz sands in the southern part of extra-Carpathian Poland. Rutile grains were sampled from eight outcrops and four boreholes located on the Miechów, Szydłowiec, and Puławy Segments. The crystallization temperatures of the rutile grains, calculated using a Zr-in-rutile geothermometer, allowed for the division of the study area into three parts: western, central, and eastern. The western group of samples, located in the Citation: Kotowski, J.; Nejbert, K.; Miechów Segment, is characterized by a polymodal distribution of rutile crystallization temperatures ◦ ◦ ◦ Olszewska-Nejbert, D. Rutile Mineral (700–800 C; 550–600 C, and c. 900 C) with a significant predominance of high-temperature forms, Chemistry and Zr-in-Rutile and with a clear prevalence of metapelitic over metamafic rutile. The eastern group of samples, Thermometry in Provenance Study of corresponding to the Lublin Area, is monomodal and their crystallization temperatures peak at Albian (Uppermost Lower 550–600 ◦C. The contents of metapelitic to metamafic rutile in the study area are comparable. The Cretaceous) Terrigenous Quartz central group of rutile samples with bimodal distribution (550–600 ◦C and 850–950 ◦C) most likely Sands and Sandstones in Southern represents a mixing zone, with a visible influence from the western and, to a lesser extent, the eastern Extra-Carpathian Poland.
    [Show full text]
  • Precambrian Plate Tectonics: Criteria and Evidence
    VOL.. 16,16, No.No. 77 A PublicAtioN of the GeoloGicicAl Society of America JulyJuly 20062006 Precambrian Plate Tectonics: Criteria and Evidence Inside: 2006 Medal and Award Recipients, p. 12 2006 GSA Fellows Elected, p. 13 2006 GSA Research Grant Recipients, p. 18 Call for Geological Papers, 2007 Section Meetings, p. 30 Volume 16, Number 7 July 2006 cover: Magnetic anomaly map of part of Western Australia, showing crustal blocks of different age and distinct structural trends, juxtaposed against one another across major structural deformation zones. All of the features on this map are GSA TODAY publishes news and information for more than Precambrian in age and demonstrate that plate tectonics 20,000 GSA members and subscribing libraries. GSA Today was in operation in the Precambrian. Image copyright the lead science articles should present the results of exciting new government of Western Australia. Compiled by Geoscience research or summarize and synthesize important problems Australia, image processing by J. Watt, 2006, Geological or issues, and they must be understandable to all in the earth science community. Submit manuscripts to science Survey of Western Australia. See “Precambrian plate tectonics: editors Keith A. Howard, [email protected], or Gerald M. Criteria and evidence” by Peter A. Cawood, Alfred Kröner, Ross, [email protected]. and Sergei Pisarevsky, p. 4–11. GSA TODAY (ISSN 1052-5173 USPS 0456-530) is published 11 times per year, monthly, with a combined April/May issue, by The Geological Society of America, Inc., with offices at 3300 Penrose Place, Boulder, Colorado. Mailing address: P.O. Box 9140, Boulder, CO 80301-9140, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermochronology and Exhumation History of The
    Thermochronology and Exhumation History of the Northeastern Fennoscandian Shield Since 1.9 Ga: Evidence From 40 Ar/ 39 Ar and Apatite Fission Track Data From the Kola Peninsula Item Type Article Authors Veselovskiy, Roman V.; Thomson, Stuart N.; Arzamastsev, Andrey A.; Botsyun, Svetlana; Travin, Aleksey V.; Yudin, Denis S.; Samsonov, Alexander V.; Stepanova, Alexandra V. Citation Veselovskiy, R. V., Thomson, S. N., Arzamastsev, A. A., Botsyun, S., Travin, A. V., Yudin, D. S., et al. (2019). Thermochronology and exhumation history of the northeastern Fennoscandian Shield since 1.9 Ga:evidence from 40Ar/39Ar and apatite fission track data from the Kola Peninsula. Tectonics, 38, 2317–2337.https:// doi.org/10.1029/2018TC005250 DOI 10.1029/2018tc005250 Publisher AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION Journal TECTONICS Rights Copyright © 2019. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved. Download date 01/10/2021 04:51:21 Item License http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ Version Final published version Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/634481 RESEARCH ARTICLE Thermochronology and Exhumation History of the 10.1029/2018TC005250 Northeastern Fennoscandian Shield Since 1.9 Ga: Key Points: 40 39 • Since 1.9 Ga, the NE Fennoscandia Evidence From Ar/ Ar and Apatite Fission was characterized by a slow exhumation (1‐2 m/Myr) Track Data From the Kola Peninsula • Total denudation of the NE Roman V. Veselovskiy1,2 , Stuart N. Thomson3 , Andrey A. Arzamastsev4,5 , Fennoscandia since 1.9 Ga did not 6 7,8 7,8 9 exceed ~3‐5km Svetlana Botsyun , Aleksey V. Travin , Denis S. Yudin , Alexander V. Samsonov , • The Kola part of Fennoscandia and Alexandra V.
    [Show full text]
  • Crustal Conductivity in Fennoscandia—A Compilation of a Database on Crustal Conductance in the Fennoscandian Shield
    Earth Planets Space, 54, 535–558, 2002 Crustal conductivity in Fennoscandia—a compilation of a database on crustal conductance in the Fennoscandian Shield Toivo Korja1, Martin Engels3, Abdoulkhay A. Zhamaletdinov2, Aida A. Kovtun4, Nikolai A. Palshin5, Maxim Yu. Smirnov4, Alexander D. Tokarev2, Vladimir E. Asming2, Leonid L. Vanyan5†, Isabella L. Vardaniants4, and the BEAR Working Group 1Academy of Finland/University of Oulu/Geological Survey of Finland, POB 96 FIN-02151, Espoo, Finland 2Russian Academy of Sciences, Kola Science Centre, Geological Institute, Apatity RUS-184200, Russia 3Uppsala University, Department of Earth Sciences, Geophysics, Uppsala SE-75236, Sweden 4Institute of Physics, St. Petersburg University, St. Petersburg RUS-198904, Russia 5Russian Academy of Sciences, Shirsov Institute of Oceanology, Moscow RUS-117218, Russia (Received February 19, 2001; Revised October 4, 2001; Accepted December 5, 2001) A priori knowledge on large-scale sub-surface conductivity structure is required in many applications investi- gating electrical properties of the lithosphere. A map on crustal conductivity for the Fennoscandian Shield and its surrounding oceans, sea basins and continental areas is presented. The map is based on a new database on crustal conductance, i.e. depth integrated conductivity, where all available information on the conductivity of the bedrock, sedimentary cover and seawater are compiled together for the first time for the Fennoscandian Shield. The final model consists of eight separate layers to allow a 3D description of conductivity structures. The first three layers, viz. water, sediments and the first bedrock layer, describe the combined conductance of the uppermost 10 km. The other five bedrock layers contain the data of the crustal conductance from the depth of 10 km to the depth of 60 km.
    [Show full text]
  • Mid-Proterozoic Magmatic Arc Evolution at the Southwest Margin of the Baltic Shield$
    Lithos 73 (2004) 289–318 www.elsevier.com/locate/lithos Mid-Proterozoic magmatic arc evolution at the southwest margin of the Baltic Shield$ T. Andersena,b,*, W.L. Griffinb, S.E. Jacksonb, T.-L. Knudsenc, N.J. Pearsonb a Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1047 Blindern, N-0316 Oslo, Norway b GEMOC Key Centre, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia c Geological Museum, P.O. Box 1172 Blindern, N-0318 Oslo, Norway Received 29 January 2003; accepted 9 December 2003 Abstract Mid-Proterozoic calc-alkaline granitoids from southern Norway, and their extrusive equivalents have been dated by LAM- ICPMS U–Pb on zircons to ages ranging from 1.61 to 1.52 Ga; there are no systematic age differences across potential Precambrian terrane boundaries in the region. U–Pb and Lu–Hf data on detrital zircons from metasedimentary gneisses belonging to the arc association show that these were mainly derived from ca. 1.6 Ga arc-related rocks. They also contain a minor but significant fraction of material derived from (at least) two distinct older (1.7–1.8 Ga) sources; one has a clear continental signature, and the other represents juvenile, depleted mantle-derived material. The former component resided in granitoids of the Transscandinavian Igneous Belt, the other in mafic rocks related to these granites or to the earliest, subduction-related magmatism in the region. Together with published data from south Norway and southwest Sweden, these findings suggest that the western margin of the Baltic Shield was the site of continuous magmatic arc evolution from at least ca 1.66 to 1.50 Ga.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fennoscandian Shield Within Fennoscandia
    SCIENTIFIC CORRESPONDENCE THE FENNOSCANDIAN SHIELD WITHIN FENNOSCANDIA JOAKIM DONNER DONNER, JOAKIM, 1996. The Fennoscandian Shield within Fennoscandia. Bull. Geol. Soc. Finland 68, Part 1, 99-103. Keywords: nomenclature, Baltic Shield, Fennoscandian Shield, Precambrian, Fennoscandia. Joakim Donner, Department of Geology, P.O. Box 11, FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland The Commission for the Geological Map of the Platform (Russian Platform), as seen, for in- World, CGMW, recommended in a resolution at stance, on the maps presented by Holmes (1944, its General Assembly in Kyoto, 24-28 August 1965). It is for this area (Fig. 1), geologically 1992, "that the name Baltic Shield should be similar to the Canadian Shield, that the name replaced by the name Fennoscandian Shield". Fennoscandian Shield should, according to the This was taken as an international acceptance of above-mentioned recommendation, be used. the use of this name (Vorma 1993), earlier rec- The wish to replace the name Baltic Shield by ommended both by the unofficial Finnish work- the the name Fennoscandian Shield stems fore- ing group of bedrock stratigraphy (Aro 1986, most from a linguistic confusion, as pointed out by 1988) and by the Geological Survey of Finland Saltikoff (1992). The name Baltic Shield, as it has (Marttila 1988), and mentioned as an alternative been used, refers to the Baltic (Sea), the English name already by Simonen (1980). The area of name corresponding to Mare balticum in Latin and the shield with exposed Precambrian rocks, al- la Baltique in French, as also to the name in Rus- though largely covered by a sheet of Quaternary sian, Baltiiskoye morye.
    [Show full text]
  • Seismic Structure of the Crust and Uppermost Mantle of South America and Surrounding Oceanic Basins
    Journal of South American Earth Sciences 42 (2013) 260e276 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of South American Earth Sciences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsames Seismic structure of the crust and uppermost mantle of South America and surrounding oceanic basins Gary S. Chulick a, Shane Detweiler b,*, Walter D. Mooney b a Mt. Aloysius College, 7373 Admiral Peary Hwy, Cresson, PA 16630, USA b United States Geological Survey, MS 977, 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA article info abstract Article history: We present a new set of contour maps of the seismic structure of South America and the surrounding Received 19 July 2011 ocean basins. These maps include new data, helping to constrain crustal thickness, whole-crustal average Accepted 5 June 2012 P-wave and S-wave velocity, and the seismic velocity of the uppermost mantle (Pn and Sn). We find that: (1) The weighted average thickness of the crust under South America is 38.17 km (standard deviation, Keywords: s.d. Æ8.7 km), which is w1 km thinner than the global average of 39.2 km (s.d. Æ8.5 km) for continental Crustal structure crust. (2) Histograms of whole-crustal P-wave velocities for the South American crust are bi-modal, with Seismic velocity the lower peak occurring for crust that appears to be missing a high-velocity (6.9e7.3 km/s) lower crustal South America layer. (3) The average P-wave velocity of the crystalline crust (Pcc) is 6.47 km/s (s.d. Æ0.25 km/s). This is essentially identical to the global average of 6.45 km/s.
    [Show full text]