Surface uplift and erosion of the southernmost Argentine Precordillera

Walcek, A. A.; Hoke, G. D.

doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.02.021

Cited by 38 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 69 publications

(117 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The hillslope gradient seems to exert a primary control: the erosion rates increase non-linearly when the mean hillslope gradient is close to a critical slope of 0.53 m m 21 (Fig. 4), as noted by Carretier et al (2013) and Walcek & Hoke (2012) in this region or nearby, and confirming previous observations in other mountain ranges (Montgomery & Brandon 2002;Binnie et al 2007;Roering et al 2007;Ouimet et al 2009;DiBiase et al 2010;DiBiase & Whipple 2011).…”

Section: Patterns Of Erosion Rates and Control Factorssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Garcia & Hérail 2005;Thouret et al 2007;Schildgen et al 2009;Rodríguez et al in review). Because the topographic response time to uplift is of the order of Ma in this sector, as shown (for Chile) by Farías et al (2008) and (for the Argentine Precordillera) by Walcek & Hoke (2012), then the mean erosion rate may have just reached the peak illustrated in Figure 1. Between 358 and 388S, the AFT data provided by Spikings et al (2008) suggest that a first tectonic exhumation event occurred between 18 and 15 Ma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Figure 2 displays maps of decadal and millennial erosion rates. Millennial erosion rates calculated by Walcek & Hoke (2012) for three catchments of the Argentine Precordillera are also shown for comparison, bearing in mind that these catchments are two to three orders of magnitude smaller than the others. The erosion rates vary between 0.17 + 0.05 10 22 mm a 21 and 0.32 + 0.06 mm a 21 .…”

Section: Patterns Of Erosion Rates and Control Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A regression analysis was then carried out using the decadal erosion rates on the one hand, and the millennial erosion rates on the other hand, for E. The data of Walcek & Hoke (2012), which correspond to much smaller catchments, are not included in this analysis. In both cases, the results indicate cases in which only ln(C) (ln(C) ¼ 24.14 + 0.58, p-value ¼ 2.9E-7 for the decadal erosion rates and ln(C) ¼ 0.9 + 0.4, p-value ¼ 0.04 for the millennial erosion rates) and ln(Runoff) (a ¼ 0.57 + 0.14, p-value ¼ 6.0E-4 for the decadal erosion rates and a ¼ 0.50 + 0.08, p-value ¼ 7.6E-6 for the millennial erosion rates) were significant predictors of the left-hand side of the modified equation.…”

Section: Patterns Of Erosion Rates and Control Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Erosion in the Chilean Andes between 27°S and 39°S: tectonic, climatic and geomorphic control

Carretier

Tolorza

Rodríguez

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of mean precipitation rate on erosion is debated. Three hypotheses may explain why the current erosion rate and runoff may be spatially uncorrelated: (1) the topography has reached a steady state for which the erosion rate pattern is determined by the uplift rate pattern;(2) the erosion rate only depends weakly on runoff; or (3) the studied catchments are experiencing different transient adjustments to uplift or to climate variations. In the Chilean Andes, between 278S and 398S, the mean annual runoff rates increase southwards from 0.01 to 2.6 m a 21 but the catchment averaged rates of decadal erosion (suspended sediment) and millennial erosion ( 10 Be in river sand) peak at c. 0.25 mm a 21 for runoff c. 0.5 m a 21 and then decrease while runoff keeps increasing. Erosion rates increase non-linearly with the slope and weakly with the square root of the runoff. However, sediments trapped in the subduction trench suggest a correlation between the current runoff pattern and erosion over millions of years. The third hypothesis above may explain these different erosion rate patterns; the patterns seem consistent with, although not limited to, a model where the relief and erosion rate have first increased and then decreased in response to a period of uplift, at rates controlled by the mean precipitation rate.

show abstract

Section: Patterns Of Erosion Rates and Control Factorssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Patterns Of Erosion Rates and Control Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Patterns Of Erosion Rates and Control Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Erosion in the Chilean Andes between 27°S and 39°S: tectonic, climatic and geomorphic control

Carretier

Tolorza

Rodríguez

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…9). With the exception of a small dataset of erosion rates from the Washington Cascades (Moon et al, 2011), all oceanic-continent convergent zones erode more slowly than western Bhutan -for example, the Andes Mountains (Safran et al, 2005;Kober et al, 2007Kober et al, , 2009Vanacker et al, 2007;Abbühl et al, 2010;Insel et al, 2010;Placzek et al, 2010;Bookhagen and Strecker, 2012;Walcek and Hoke, 2012) and Panama (Nichols et al, 2005b;Sosa-Gonzalez, 2012) -though this comparison suffers from a lack of studies along oceanic plate subduction zones outside of South America. Compared to other continent-continent collisional zones, an ANOVA shows that erosion along the Himalayan Range (from all studies, Fig.…”

Section: Erosion In Active Orogensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Erosion rates of the Bhutanese Himalaya determined using in situ-produced 10Be

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retroarc basin reorganization and aridification during Paleogene uplift of the southern central Andes

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tectonic development of the Andean Cordillera has profoundly changed the topography, climate, and vegetation patterns of the southern central Andes. The Cenozoic Bermejo Basin in Argentina (~30°S) provides a key record of thrust belt kinematics and paleoclimate south of the high‐elevation Puna Plateau. Ongoing debate regarding the timing of initiation of upper plate shortening and Andean uplift persists, precluding a thorough understanding of the earlier tectonic and climatic controls on basin evolution. We present new sedimentology, detrital geochronology, sandstone petrography, and subsidence analysis from the Bermejo Basin that reveal siliciclastic‐evaporative fluvial and lacustrine environments prior to the main documented phase of Oligocene‐Miocene shortening of the Frontal Cordillera and Argentine Precordillera. We report the first radiometric dates from detrital zircons collected in the Ciénaga del Río Huaco Formation, previously mapped as Permian, that constrain a Late Cretaceous (~95–93 Ma) maximum depositional age. Provenance and paleocurrent data from these strata indicate that detritus was derived from dissected arc and cratonic sources in the north and northeast. Detrital zircon U‐Pb ages of ~37 Ma from the overlying red beds suggest that foredeep sedimentation began by at least the late Eocene. At this time, sediment dispersal shifted from axial southward to transversal eastward from the Andean Arc and Frontal Cordillera. Subsidence analysis of the basin fill is compatible with increasing tectonic deformation beginning in Eocene time, suggesting that a distal foredeep maintained fluvial connectivity to the hinterland during topographic uplift and unroofing of the Frontal Cordillera, prior to Oligocene‐Miocene deformation across the Precordillera.

show abstract

Surface uplift and erosion of the southernmost Argentine Precordillera

Cited by 38 publications

References 69 publications

Erosion in the Chilean Andes between 27°S and 39°S: tectonic, climatic and geomorphic control

Erosion in the Chilean Andes between 27°S and 39°S: tectonic, climatic and geomorphic control

Erosion rates of the Bhutanese Himalaya determined using in situ-produced 10Be

Retroarc basin reorganization and aridification during Paleogene uplift of the southern central Andes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About