Evolution of the South China Sea: Revised ages for breakup and seafloor spreading

Intra- and intertrench variations in flexural bending of the Manila, Mariana and global trenches: implications on plate weakening in controlling trench dynamics

“…Normal faults of both the Manila and Mariana Trenches were found to distribute over a broad region from the outer-rise region to the trench axis. In areas with good multibeam bathymetry coverage (Barckhausen et al 2014;Zhang et al 2014), our analysis revealed that the location of the calculated X r is in general consistent with the observed outer boundary of the surficial normal faulting zones, providing further confidence in the overall results.…”

Coupled onshore erosion and offshore sediment loading as causes of lower crust flow on the margins of South China Sea

“…Furthermore, rifting was terminated during active propagation as result of the collision of the southern Dangerous Grounds margin with Borneo (Hutchison et al 2000;Clift et al 2008;Hinz et al 1989). This basin was formed as a result of extension starting in the Late Cretaceous and accelerating during the Eocene, culminating in breakup and the onset of seafloor spreading likely around 30 Ma, at least offshore of southern China (Su et al 1989;Briais et al 1993;Ru and Pigott 1986;Franke et al 2014;Barckhausen et al 2014). Studies of extension in this system, based on industrial seismic reflection profiles, suggested that the high degrees of subsidence seen, especially in the oceanward parts of the rifted margins around this basin could be explained in terms of depth-dependent extension (Davis and Kusznir 2004;Clift and Lin 2001).…”

Shear wave velocity structure of Reed Bank, southern continental margin of the South China Sea

“…Briais et al (1993) reinterpreted the youngest anomalies at the spreading axis identified by Taylor and Hayes (1983) to be 5C, and dated the anomalies in the triangular southwestern sub-basin as 6B through 5C much different from that of Yao (1996) and Ru and Piggott (1986). Barckhausen and Roeser (2004) and Barckhausen et al (2014) presented a model largely agree with that of Briais et al (1993) in the older part of the spreading history including the ridge jump at 25 Ma, but for the younger part, their model involves faster spreading rates and reinterpreted the end of the seafloor spreading at anomaly 20.5 Ma. For marginal conjugation relationship, Yao (1996) suggested Reed Bank and Dongsha block are two pieces from the same rigid continental block.…”

“…Based on magnetic anomaly, it is generally accepted that the Cathysia begun to rift in Eocene (40 Ma) or even earlier in the Late Cretaceous (85-65 Ma), and then following multiple episodes of seafloor spreading from late Oligocene to mid Miocene (32-17 Ma) resulted in the formation of the South China Sea (SCS) with asymmetry conjugate margins in the north and south (Barckhausen and Roeser, 2004;Barckhausen et al, 2014;Briais et al, 1993;Franke, 2013;Ru and Pigott, 1986;Hayes, 1980, 1983;Yao, 1996). However, at present there are still various points of view on the formation mechanism and spreading anomaly model of SCS and on the ages of basin magnetic anomalies and consequently on the chronology sequences of seafloor spreading between sub-basins.…”