2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2010.01.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Riphean basins of the central and western Siberian Platform

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
29
0
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
2
29
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Isostasy in the Tunguska basin is achieved by thick sediments and the large depth of the intraecrustal discontinuity compensating the 0.5e1.0 kmthick lavas. This feature is consistent with the available geological evidence of the Tunguska basin formation followed by the trap magmatism (Czamanske et al, 1998;Ivanov, 2007;Foulger, 2010;Frolov et al, 2011). Note also that the velocity in the lower crust beneath Tunguska does not differ from that in Yakutia, which rules out plumeerelated thermal velocity effects (Foulger, 2010;Korenaga et al, 2002;Ridley and Richards, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Isostasy in the Tunguska basin is achieved by thick sediments and the large depth of the intraecrustal discontinuity compensating the 0.5e1.0 kmthick lavas. This feature is consistent with the available geological evidence of the Tunguska basin formation followed by the trap magmatism (Czamanske et al, 1998;Ivanov, 2007;Foulger, 2010;Frolov et al, 2011). Note also that the velocity in the lower crust beneath Tunguska does not differ from that in Yakutia, which rules out plumeerelated thermal velocity effects (Foulger, 2010;Korenaga et al, 2002;Ridley and Richards, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…1). The major tectonic units and igneous provinces show up as changes in the thickness of sediments of different ages and in the respective basement topography (Egorkin et al, 1987;Frolov et al, 2011;Nikishin et al, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Oktyabrsk complex is one of several hundred pipe structures formed via high temperature interactions between Tunguska Basin sediments and magma driven by the emplacement of Siberian Trap sill intrusions (Von der Flaass, 1997). Mature hydrocarbons from Cambrian source rocks also existed in the Tunguska Basin by the end-Permian (Frolov et al, 2011;Polyansky et al, 2003) and basin modeling suggested that the sill emplacement was associated with a major pulse of gas generation (Frolov et al, 2011). The high temperatures that would have been required to deposit the metal ores in the diatreme, would have resulted in transformation and boiling of any hydrocarbons or organic matter in the basin, producing a suite of carbon gases, including CO 2 , CO, and CH 4 , enriched in 12 C. Given the opportunity for magmatic CO 2 and heating of organic matter around sills, it is reasonable to expect that carbon gases were emitted to the atmosphere through structures in the upper crust as occurs in present-day hydrothermal systems (Giggenbach et al, 1991;Pirrung et al, 2003).…”
Section: Carbon Isotope Record Interpretationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first is thermogenic carbon, produced by contact metamorphic heating of Tunguska Basin petroleum and organic matter in the aureoles around Siberian Trap sills (Svensen et al, 2009). Ample reactive carbon existed in the form of mature hydrocarbon deposits in Neoproterozoic and Cambrian horizons by the end-Permian and immature organic matter throughout the basin in carbonates and marls of Cambrian to Silurian age (Frolov et al, 2011;Petrychenko et al, 2005;Zharkov, 1984). Although suggested in recent literature (Ogden and Sleep, 2012;Retallack and Jahren, 2008), coals of Devonian to Permian age were sparse and shallow in the southern portion of the Tunguska Basin and were unlikely to be major contributors of contact metamorphic carbon through the diatremes (Frolov et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lack of reliable palaeomagnetic data from cratonic basement has led to a number of different reconstructions for the two continents (Pisarevsky & Natapov 2003). Frost et al (1998) and Rainbird et al (1998) point out that stable platform sedimentation from 1.8 Ga combined with the lack of Grenville age deformation (1.25 -0.98 Ga) implies that the Siberian continent was on the northeastern periphery of Rodinia. It is believed that during Neoproterozoic time Siberia was located at equatorial/subtropical latitudes, south of the palaeoequator (Pavlov et al 2002;Cocks & Torsvik 2007).…”
Section: Tectonic Evolution Of East Siberiamentioning
confidence: 99%