The eastern Black Sea-Caucasus region during the Cretaceous: New evidence to constrain its tectonic evolution M. Sosson, R. Stephenson, E. Sheremet, Y. Rolland, Sh Adamia, R. Melkonian, T. Kangarli, M. Hässig, A. Avagyan, Gh. Galoyan, et al. To cite this version: M. Sosson, R. Stephenson, E. Sheremet, Y. Rolland, Sh Adamia, et al.. The eastern Black Sea- Caucasus region during the Cretaceous: New evidence to constrain its tectonic evolution. Comptes Rendus Géoscience, Elsevier Masson, 2016, 348 (1), pp.23-32. 10.1016/j.crte.2015.11.002. hal- 01347807 HAL Id: hal-01347807 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01347807 Submitted on 6 Jun 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. C. R. Geoscience 348 (2016) 23–32 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Comptes Rendus Geoscience ww w.sciencedirect.com Tectonics, Tectonophysics The eastern Black Sea-Caucasus region during the Cretaceous: New evidence to constrain its tectonic evolution a, b c a Marc Sosson *, Randell Stephenson , Yevgeniya Sheremet , Yann Rolland , d e f c Shota Adamia , Rafael Melkonian , Talat Kangarli , Tamara Yegorova , e e g a Ara Avagyan , Ghazar Galoyan , Taniel Danelian , Marc Ha¨ssig , h i e d d Maud Meijers , Carla Mu¨ ller , Lilit Sahakyan , Nino Sadradze , Victor Alania , d j Onice Enukidze , Jon Mosar a Universite´ de Nice Sophia Antipolis, CNRS, IRD, Observatoire de la Coˆte d’Azur, UMR Ge´oazur, 250, rue Albert-Einstein, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France b University of Aberdeen, School of Geosciences, Aberdeen, United Kingdom c I. Subbotin Institute of Geophysics, Kiev, Ukraine d Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia e Institute of Geological Sciences, Yerevan, Armenia f Institute of Geology, Baku, Azerbaijan g Universite´ de Lille - Sciences et Technologies, CNRS, UMR 8198 Evo-Eco-Paleo, 59655 Villeneuve d’Asq, France h University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA i Nannoplankton biostratigraphy consulting, Santok, Ludzislawice 36, Poland j University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Article history: We report new observations in the eastern Black Sea-Caucasus region that allow Received 3 November 2015 reconstructing the evolution of the Neotethys in the Cretaceous. At that time, the Accepted after revision 3 November 2015 Neotethys oceanic plate was subducting northward below the continental Eurasia plate. Available online 18 December 2015 Based on the analysis of the obducted ophiolites that crop out throughout Lesser Caucasus and East Anatolides, we show that a spreading center (AESA basin) existed within the Handled by Isabelle Manighetti Neotethys, between Middle Jurassic and Early Cretaceous. Later, the spreading center was Keywords: carried into the subduction with the Neotethys plate. We argue that the subduction of the spreading center opened a slab window that allowed asthenospheric material to move Black Sea Caucasus upward, in effect thermally and mechanically weakening the otherwise strong Eurasia Ophiolites upper plate. The local weakness zone favored the opening of the Black Sea back-arc basins. Cretaceous Later, in the Late Cretaceous, the AESA basin obducted onto the Taurides–Anatolides– Neotethys South Armenia Microplate (TASAM), which then collided with Eurasia along a single Paleotectonic reconstruction suture zone (AESA suture). ß 2015 Acade´mie des sciences. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Barrier and Vrielynck, 2008; Dercourt et al., 1986; Finetti et al., 1988; Khain, 1974; Nikishin et al., 1998, 2015; The Black Sea and Caucasus regions (Fig. 1) have a Robinson et al., 1996; Saintot and Angelier, 2002; Saintot complex geological history (Adamia et al., 1981, 2011; et al., 2006; Stampfli et al., 2001; Stephenson and Schellart, 2010; Zonenshain and Le Pichon, 1986), which is well attested to by their contrasting topography: while the Black Sea is a 2245-m-deep ‘‘marine’’ basin, the Caucasus is * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Sosson). a mountain belt with peaks as high as 5642 m (in the http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crte.2015.11.002 1631-0713/ß 2015 Acade´mie des sciences. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved. 24 M. Sosson et al. / C. R. Geoscience 348 (2016) 23–32 Fig. 1. Structural sketch map of the Black Sea-Caucasus region in the general framework of the Middle East. Modified from Sosson et al., 2010. Greater Caucasus). This makes the region overall a are found on the Eurasian southern margin from Moesia in landmark feature of Eurasia (Forte et al., 2010, 2013; the west to the Lesser Caucasus in the east, passing through Mosar et al., 2010; Ross et al., 1974; Starostenko et al., Crimea and Pontides (Fig. 1; Adamia et al., 1981; 2004). The Black Sea and Caucasus belong to the Alpine Lordkipanidze et al., 1989; Meijers et al., 2010; Okay belt (s.l.) and their formation is related to the closure of the and Nikishin, 2015; Robinson et al., 1996). Subduction Neotethys Ocean (Barrier and Vrielynck, 2008; Dercourt started in the Middle Jurassic. The Neotethys oceanic plate et al., 1986; Stephenson and Schellart, 2010; Zonenshain was entirely subducted from Late Cretaceous to Early and Le Pichon, 1986). The northward subduction of the Paleocene in the east (region of Lesser Caucasus; Ha¨ssig Neotethys oceanic plate under the Eurasian continental et al., 2015; Rolland et al., 2012; Sosson et al., 2010) and plate is attested to by the arc-type magmatic products that from Paleocene to Eocene in the west (region of Pontides; M. Sosson et al. / C. R. Geoscience 348 (2016) 23–32 25 Espurt et al., 2014; Lefebvre et al., 2013; Okay and Nikishin, of the Neotethys domain, with particular attention to the 2015; Robertson et al., 2014; Sengo¨r et al., 2003). From opening of the Black Sea. these times on, the northward convergence of the Neotethys plate led to the collision of continental 2. New insights from studies of ophiolitic units microplates (two principal ‘‘continental blocks’’, the Taurides–Anatolides–South Armenia Microplates or Ophiolites along the present suture zone that marks the TASAM, and the Kirsehir block) with the Eurasian plate closure of the Neotethys ocean (the ‘‘Ankara–Erzincan– (Fig. 1). Therefore, the subduction process of the Neotethys Sevan–Akera suture zone’’ or AESA, Fig. 1) attest to the oceanic plate has been operating for about 100–120 existence of a back-arc basin (the ‘‘AESA basin’’) within the million years. Such a long duration is supported by the northern branch of the Neotethys (e.g., Ha¨ssig et al., 2013b reconstruction of the Neotethys domain derived from and Robertson et al., 2014 for a review). The AESA basin paleomagnetic and paleogeographic data (e.g., Barrier and formed from Middle Jurassic to Late Cretaceous above and Vrielynck, 2008). These reconstructions additionally sug- as a result of an intra-oceanic subduction zone within the gest that in late Early Jurassic (Toarcian), the approximate Neotethys (Rolland et al., 2009a, 2010; Sosson et al., 2010). oceanic plate width between Gondwana and Laurasia was That intra-oceanic subduction was dipping north. at most 3000 km. The long-living subduction process is More recently in the Lesser Caucasus, our further also attested to by the tomographic images that were analyses of the ophiolitic units along the AESA suture have obtained beneath Eurasia and Anatolia. These images revealed the existence of ophiolites of Jurassic age at many reveal an important accumulation of cold lithosphere on sites along the suture. These Jurassic ophiolites are the top of the lower mantle and within it (at a depth from magmatic rocks of back-arc geochemistry tendencies (E- 500 to 660 km; Faccenna et al., 2006; Lei and Zhao, 2007; MORB), covered by OIB of Early Cretaceous age (Galoyan Spakman, 1991; Zor, 2008), which is interpreted as a et al., 2009; Ha¨ssig et al., 2014; Robertson et al., 2014; remnant of the Neotethys slab. The Neotethys slab would Rolland et al., 2009b, 2010). We also found radiolarites and thus have sustained break off. pelagic carbonates mixed with the ophiolites. Those have a During the long Neotethys subduction process, several Middle Jurassic to Late Cretaceous age (Danelian et al., domains formed in back-arc positions within the Eurasia 2012, 2014, 2015). They overlie ultrabasic, basic, and Plate, mainly the Greater Caucasus basin that opened in plagiogranitic rocks, and some of them are interbedded Early–Middle Jurassic (no oceanic crust was formed with basaltic and volcanoclastic layers. These additional however; Adamia et al., 1981, 2011; Barrier and Vrielynck, findings suggest that the back-arc oceanic basin remained 2008; Dercourt et al., 1986; Khain, 1974), and the western well preserved from the Mid Jurassic to the Late Cretaceous and eastern Black Sea basins that opened during the interval. Cretaceous and/or Cenozoic (Yegorova and Gobarenko, From Anatolia to the Lesser Caucasus and then to NW- 2010; Cloetingh et al., 2003; Finetti et al., 1988; Khriacht- Iran, ophiolitic units attributed to the oceanic back-arc chevskaia et al., 2010; Letouzey et al., 1977; Okay et al., basin form a 700-km-long and 200-km-wide nappe. These 1994, 2013; Robinson et al., 1996; Spadini et al., 1996; now obducted ophiolites have an age of 150–170 Ma Stephenson and Schellart, 2010; Vincent et al., 2005; (Avagyan et al., 2015; C¸elik et al., 2011; Galoyan et al., Zonenshain and Le Pichon, 1986).