Temporal and Spatial Variations in Rock Uplift From River‐Profile Inversions at the Central Anatolian Plateau Southern Margin

Abstract

 Linear inversion of longitudinal river profiles for the Central Anatolian Plateau southern margin rock-uplift history;  The drainage system records a strong middle Pleistocene rock-uplift pulse that affected the margin of the plateau;  Evidence of eastward migration of the rock-uplift pulse through time;  Possible relation between rock-uplift timing and rates with break-off of the Cyprus slab.

Surface Uplift and Topographic Rejuvenation of a Tectonically Inactive Range: Insights From the Anti‐Atlas and the Siroua Massif (Morocco)

“…Consequently, the abrupt break in the river longitudinal profiles and χ−z plots at the highest non‐lithological knickpoints and the position of the same knickpoints in the χ space (Figures 5b, 5d, 5f, 8a and Figure S2 in Supporting Information S1) indicate that the two portions of the landscape erode at different rates (Miller et al., 2012, 2013; Olivetti et al., 2016; Schildgen et al., 2012). This is consistent with an increase in erosion and rock uplift rates propagating from the river outlet to the uppermost river segments (Gallen & Wegmann, 2017; Miller et al., 2013; Racano et al., 2021). Consequently, the highest knickpoints represent a response of the fluvial system to an increase in rock uplift rates and hence mark a phase of topographic rejuvenation, while the uplifted relict landscape records the previous erosional conditions predating such an increase.…”

Active Deformation Pattern in the Western Flank of the Central Taurides, Southern Margin of the Central Anatolian Plateau: Inferences From Geomorphic Markers and Kinematic Indicators

“…The cumulative surface uplift slightly increases from west to east, from 1,600 ± 50 to 1,800 ± 50 m. The increasing trend of the ksn values, more rugged topography and more evident slope‐break knickzones in the longitudinal profiles provide further morphometric evidence of the intensifying deformation toward the eastern parts of western CT. Results of the previous studies also mentioned a trend of increasing cumulative uplift from the western to the eastern flank of the CT for the last 8 Ma (Cosentino et al., 2012; Schildgen et al., 2012a, 2014) and an increasing Quaternary rock uplift rate from the eastern flank toward the western flank of the CT (Racano et al., 2021) (Figure 7). Integration of our results with findings of previous studies suggests a differential uplift pattern in the west‐east direction across the southern margin that reaches up to maximum values in the region of Alanya‐Başyayla‐Ermenek‐Gazipaşa, with a gradually decreasing pattern from this region toward the eastern and western parts of the CT (Figure 7).…”

“…Our geomorphic outputs point out to an actively deforming transient landscape and changing deformation patterns across western CT (Figure 6). Downstream increases in the channel steepness values and major slope-break cumulative uplift from the western to the eastern flank of the CT for the last 8 Ma (Cosentino et al, 2012;Schildgen et al, 2012aSchildgen et al, , 2014 and an increasing Quaternary rock uplift rate from the eastern flank toward the western flank of the CT (Racano et al, 2021) (Figure 7). Integration of our results with findings of previous studies suggests a differential uplift pattern in the west-east direction across the southern margin that reaches up to maximum values in the region of Alanya-Başyayla-Ermenek-Gazipaşa, with a gradually decreasing pattern from this region toward the eastern and western parts of the CT (Figure 7).…”

The role of tectonic deformation and landscape evolution in the occurrence of Mass Rock Creep driven landslides: the Loumar landslide (Zagros Belt, Iran)

“…Although the equation system of the stream power incision model is a powerful tool by which it is possible to decipher the history of uplift evolution (Delchiaro et al, 2021;Fox et al, 2014;Gallen & Fernandez-Blanco, 2021;Goren et al, 2014;Ma et al, 2020;Pritchard et al, 2009;Racano et al, 2021;Roberts & White, 2010;Rudge et al, 2015), it was not yet applied to the reconstruction of the evolution of creep evolving slopes. Moreover, several landscape evolution models have been proposed so far to explain the dynamic feedback between surface processes and tectonics in the Zagros (Bretis et al, 2011;Burberry et al, 2008Burberry et al, , 2010Oberlander, 1965Oberlander, , 1968Oberlander, , 1985Ramsey et al, 2008;Tucker & Slingerland, 1996), neglecting however the relationship among time-dependent rock mass deformations, landscape evolution rates, and tectonics in the triggering of large rock landslide.…”

“…Bedrock channels and hillslope topography record tectonic and climatic signals across the landscape, thus dictating, to first order, the dynamic response of mountainous landscapes to external forcings (Whipple & Tucker, 1999). Then, terrain analysis and the equation system of the stream power incision model are powerful tool by which it is possible to decipher the history of uplift evolution (Delchiaro et al, 2021;Fox et al, 2014;Gallen & Fernández-Blanco, 2021;Goren et al, 2014;Ma et al, 2020;Pritchard et al, 2009;Racano et al, 2021;Roberts & White, 2010;Rudge et al, 2015).…”