Anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility as an indicator for palaeocurrent analysis in folded turbidites (Outer Western Carpathians, Poland)

Abstract

The anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility is a well-known geological proxy in revealing the directional tectonic and sedimentological features of rocks, although it can be ambiguous in situations where these two factors co-occur. This paper demonstrates the usefulness of the anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility in determining palaeotransport directions in turbiditic rocks that underwent subsequent thrusting and folding. This study demonstrates that the magnetic lineation is largely unsuitable as a palaeocurrent direction proxy, and suggests that the imbrication of magnetic foliation is better in such cases. Moreover, the anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility results were analyzed in reference to a joint and fold study within the framework of the regional structural geology. Magnetic fabric investigations were conducted in the eastern part of the Outer Western Carpathians (south-east Poland). During the study, a total of 191 oriented palaeomagnetic samples were collected from three outcrops (Nasiczne, Dwernik and Hoczew) in the Krosno Beds, Silesian Unit. For the purpose of sedimentological analysis, 121 m of turbidite successions were documented and 126 directional sedimentary structures were measured. The magnetic anisotropy of sandstones revealed typical sedimentary fabrics, often overprinted by variably intense tectonic deformation. Oblate susceptibility ellipsoids from Nasiczne showed tilt coherent with the palaeoflow direction, whereas the rocks from Dwernik and Hoczew contained triaxial magnetic fabric developed during compressional palaeostress. This paper suggests that medium-grained and coarse-grained sandstones, preferably with high mica content, are the most suitable for palaeotransport reconstructions among the studied lithologies. Keywords Anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS), joint and fold analysis, Outer Western Carpathians, palaeocurrents, turbidites. structures, which allowed for an assessment of palaeocurrent tendencies ranging from smallscale accumulation forms up to large sedimentary basins and their source areas (e.g. D _ zuły nski & 1 Deceased March 2019.

Decoding Rocks: An Assessment of Geomaterial Microstructure Using X-ray Microtomography, Image Analysis and Multivariate Statistics

“…[43]. The direction of the paleo-current inferred from the surrounding strata indicates a NE-SW-directed material transport [44]. This direction coincides with the orientation of the observed deformation, but the arrangement of grains indicates that the deformation overprinted the primary sedimentary microstructure.…”

The Pleistocene ice-sheet dynamics in north-central Poland based on magnetic fabrics of tills and landform analysis

“…The filtration was based on the median and 25% and 75% quartiles. Samples above the level described by the formula Q3 + 1.5 × IQR, where Q3 is the 75% quartile, and IQR is the interquartile range between the 25% and 75% quartiles, were removed due to anomalously high values of the parameters (Hodge and Austin, 2004; Stachowska et al, 2020; Teodorski et al, 2021). The IQR outliers method is not dependent on abnormally high boundary values, unlike the standard deviation method.…”

Middle Ordovician bottom current deposits in the western margin of the North China craton: Evidence from sedimentary and magnetic fabrics

“…Parameters ε 12 and ε 23 are used to evaluate the statistical significance of L and F , where ε 12 is the confidence angle of K max in the plane joining K max and K int , and ε 23 is the confidence angle of K int in the plane joining K int and K min , following the approach of Lagroix & Banerjee (2004). For simplicity, this study considers the larger of the two confidence angles calculated for both the K max and K int axes, with their confidence angles denoted as ε 12 and ε 23 , respectively (Stachowska et al ., 2020). These confidence angles are used to arbitrarily classify L (ε 12 ) and F (ε 23 ) as follows: ε < 45° (defined) and ε > 45° (absent; Lagroix & Banerjee, 2004; Stachowska et al ., 2020).…”

“…For simplicity, this study considers the larger of the two confidence angles calculated for both the K max and K int axes, with their confidence angles denoted as ε 12 and ε 23 , respectively (Stachowska et al ., 2020). These confidence angles are used to arbitrarily classify L (ε 12 ) and F (ε 23 ) as follows: ε < 45° (defined) and ε > 45° (absent; Lagroix & Banerjee, 2004; Stachowska et al ., 2020). All of the above parameters and experimental results were corrected, counted and calculated using the Anisoft‐4.2 and Safyr software packages (AGICO; Constable & Tauxe, 1990).…”