Gravity evidence for an Alpine buckling of the crust beneath the Paris Basin

Lefort, Jean‐Pierre; Agarwal, B. N. P.

doi:10.1016/0040-1951(95)00148-4

Cited by 54 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, uplift of the Bohemian Massif, that is transected by the volcanic Eger rift, commenced only during the Pliocene (Ziegler, 1994). The crustal and lithospheric configuration of the Massif Central, the Burgundy transfer zone and the Vosges-Black Forest area (Prodehl et al, 1995;Lefort and Agarwal, 1996) suggests that lithospheric folding contributed significantly to the development of this system of arches. This concept is compatible with strong mechanical coupling of the Alpine Orogen with its northern foreland at lithospheric levels, as evidenced by its present stress regime (Müller et al, 1997) and the by Plio-Pleistocene accelerated subsidence of the North Sea Basin, which is also attributed to lithospheric folding (van Wees and Cloetingh, 1996).…”

Section: Central Alpine Forelandmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development – the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands

Ziegler¹,

Bertotti²,

Cloetingh³

2002

Stephan Mueller Spec. Publ. Ser.

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Depending on the polarity of the subduction system controlling the evolution of an orogenic wedge, we distinguish between pro-wedge (fore-arc, foreland) and retrowedge (retro-arc, hinterland) forelands. Flexural foreland basins and/or intraplate compressional structures can develop in retro-wedge domains of Andean-type and in pro-and retro-wedge domains of Himalayan-type orogens.Whereas the subsidence of retro-wedge foreland basins is exclusively controlled by the topographic load exerted by the orogenic wedge on the foreland lithosphere, the additional load of the subducted lithospheric slab contributes towards the subsidence of pro-wedge foreland basins. Flexural forebulges develop only if the orogenic wedge and the foreland lithosphere are mechanically decoupled at lithospheric levels.Under conditions of mechanical coupling between an orogenic wedge and its foreland at crustal and/or mantlelithospheric levels, compressional stresses are transmitted into the latter, inducing reactivation of pre-existing crustal discontinuities and broad crustal and lithosphere scale folding at distances up to 1700 km from the collision front. Such stresses can accentuate potential pre-existing flexural forebulges or impede their development. Depending on the thickness and rheological structure of the crust and its sedimentary cover, thick-and/or thin-skinned thrusts can propagate far into forelands, either disrupting pre-existing flexural foreland basins or impeding their development.Collision-related compressional stresses can be transmitted into pro-wedge forelands during 1) initiation of subduction zones, 2) periods of subduction impediment caused by the arrival of more buoyant crust at a subduction zone, 3) initial collision of an orogenic wedge with a passive margin, and 4) post-collisional over-thickening and uplift of an orogenic wedge and the development of a mantle-back-stop.Development of intraplate compressional/transpressional structures in forelands is indicative for the build-up of collision-related compressional stresses, and thus for strong Correspondence to: P. A. Ziegler (fax +41-061-421.55.35) mechanical coupling of a foreland with the associated orogenic wedge, either at crustal and/or mantle-lithospheric levels. The absence of syn-orogenic intraplate compressional structures suggests that the respective orogenic wedge and its foreland(s) were mechanically decoupled. The level of mechanical coupling between an orogenic wedge and its foreland is temporally and spatially variable.Mechanical coupling and uncoupling of orogenic wedges and their forelands probably depends on the geometry and frictional shear strength of their common boundary zone. Subduction resistance of the foreland, as well as the buildup of high fluid pressures in subducted sediments, presumably play an important role. Pro-wedge continental crust and mantle-lithosphere can be subducted to depths of 100-150 km at which it can no longer support the weight of the attached oceanic slab and fails. Slab-detachment results in uplift of th...

show abstract

Section: Central Alpine Forelandmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development – the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands

Ziegler¹,

Bertotti²,

Cloetingh³

2002

Stephan Mueller Spec. Publ. Ser.

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We believe that this rare pre-rift volcanism may be attributed to the flexure of the lithosphere associated with the first compressions recorded in the Alps [see the discussion in Michon and Merle, 2001], as testified by the oldest radiometric data at about 65 Ma in the Sesia Austro-Alpine unit [Froitzheim et al, 1996;Rubatto et al, 1999] and geophysical data about the buck ling of the French lithosphere during the Paleocene [i.e. Lefort and Agarwal, 1996].…”

Section: The Tectonic Paradox Of the Massif Centralmentioning

confidence: 99%

The formation of the West European Rift; a new model as exemplified by the Massif Central area

Merle

Michon²

2001

Bulletin De La Société Géologique De France

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we use mainly field data from the Massif Central area, which have been presented in a companion paper [Michon and Merle, 2001], to discuss the origin and the evolution of the West European Rift system. It is shown that the tectonic event in the Tertiary is two-stage. The overall geological evolution reveal a tectonic paradox as the first stage strongly suggests passive rifting, whereas the second stage displays the first stage of active rifting. In the north, crustal thinning, graben formation and sedimentation at sea level without volcanism during the Lower Oligocene, followed by scattered volcanism in a thinned area during Upper Oligocene and Lower Miocene, represent the classical evolution of a rift resulting from extensional stresses within the lithosphere (i.e. passive rifting). In the south, thinning of the lithospheric mantle associated with doming and volcanism in the Upper Miocene, together with the lack of crustal thinning, may be easily interpreted in terms of the first stage of active rifting due to the ascent of a mantle plume. This active rifting process would have been inhibited before stretching of the crust, as asthenospheric rise associated with uplift and volcanism are the only tectonic events observed. The diachronism of these two events is emphasized by two clearly distinct orientations of crustal thinning in the north and mantle lithospheric thinning in the south. To understand this tectonic paradox, a new model is discussed taking into account the Tertiary evolution of the Alpine chain. It is shown that the formation of a deep lithospheric root may have important mechanical consequences on the adjacent lithosphere. The downward gravitational force acting on the descending slab may induce coeval extension in the surrounding lithosphere. This could trigger graben formation and laguno-marine sedimentation at sea level followed by volcanism as expected for passive rifting. Concurrently, the descending lithospheric flow induces a flow pattern in the asthenosphere which can bring up hot mantle to the base of the adjacent lithosphere. Slow thermal erosion of the base of the lithosphere may lead to a late-stage volcanism and uplift as expected for active rifting.

show abstract

“…Through several studies (Lefort and Agarwal, 1996, 1999 using small and large data sets, it has been observed that a low-passfi ltered anomaly map with a cutoff wavelength around 150 km will effectively correspond to Moho anomalies. Though this cutoff wavelength may vary from area to area with variations in the geological setup, the computed Moho depth needs to be compared with seismic data to assess the quality of the outcome.…”

Section: Processing Of Gravity Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Crustal structure from gravity signatures in the Iberian Peninsula

Gómez-Ortíz

Agarwal

Tejero

et al. 2011

Geological Society of America Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Through two-dimensional fi ltering and spectral analysis of gravity data, we infer the density structure of the Iberia Peninsula's lithosphere (western Europe). The gravity anomaly map of the Iberian Peninsula displays long-wavelength anomaly minima related to Alpine ranges. These anomalies are primarily linked to a greater crustal thickness. Low-pass fi ltering of the anomaly map using a cutoff wavelength of 150 km was adequate for effective separation of shallow and deep sources used for computing the three-dimensional (3-D) Moho interface.

show abstract

Gravity evidence for an Alpine buckling of the crust beneath the Paris Basin

Cited by 54 publications

References 7 publications

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development – the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development – the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands

The formation of the West European Rift; a new model as exemplified by the Massif Central area

Crustal structure from gravity signatures in the Iberian Peninsula

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Gravity evidence for an Alpine buckling of the crust beneath the Paris Basin

Cited by 54 publications

References 7 publications

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development &#8211; the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development &#8211; the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands

The formation of the West European Rift; a new model as exemplified by the Massif Central area

Crustal structure from gravity signatures in the Iberian Peninsula

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development – the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands

Dynamic processes controlling foreland development – the role of mechanical (de)coupling of orogenic wedges and forelands