The Menderes Massif of western Turkey and the Cycladic Massif in the Aegean—do they really correlate?

Abstract

Based on lithostratigraphic comparisons the Menderes Massif has been correlated with the Cycladic Massif, thereby implying that the eastern Mediterranean consists of a narrow pre-Alpine basement belt which is laterally continuous over a long distance and which experienced a similar Alpine orogenic history. Our work indicates that the architecture, the age of basement and the pre-Alpine and Alpine tectonometamorphic history of both massifs differ fundamentally from each other. The Menderes Massif consists of remnants of the Cycladic Massif which overly an exotic unit, the Menderes nappes. Both massifs do not represent lateral continuations which has implications for palaeogeographic reconstructions.

Exhumation with a twist: Paleomagnetic constraints on the evolution of the Menderes metamorphic core complex, western Turkey

“…However, Ring et al [1999aRing et al [ , 2003a and Pe- already noted that the amount of N-S extension in west Anatolia is significantly less. Comparably, post-Eocene extension in western Greece is restricted to half graben tectonics [van Hinsbergen et al, 2005c[van Hinsbergen et al, , 2006 and is insignificant compared to the strain in the central back arc.…”

“…[14] The CMM is a bivergent metamorphic dome that was exhumed along two extensional detachments: the northern one has a top-to-the-north sense of shear and has many names in literature, including Alaşehir detachment [Isik et al, 2003], Gediz detachment [Lips et al, 2001], Çanköy detachment [Koçyiğit et al, 1999] or Kuzey detachment [Ring et al, 1999a]). The southern detachment has a top-to-the-south sense of shear and is referred to as the Büyük Menderes detachment [Bozkurt, , 2001bLips et al, 2001] or Güney detachment [Ring et al, 1999a].…”

“…The southern detachment has a top-to-the-south sense of shear and is referred to as the Büyük Menderes detachment [Bozkurt, , 2001bLips et al, 2001] or Güney detachment [Ring et al, 1999a]. Exhumation of the CMM dome seems essentially parallel, although Lips et al [2001] reported only semibrittle fabrics and no overprint of the 40 Ar/ 39 Ar system in the footwall of the Büyük Menderes detachment, suggesting a slight dominance of the Alaşehir detachment.…”

Kinematic reconstructions and magmatic evolution illuminating crustal and mantle dynamics of the eastern Mediterranean region since the late Cretaceous

“…Ring et al, 1999b;Bozkurt & Oberhänsli, 2001;Gessner et al, 2001aGessner et al, , 2013Jolivet et al, 2004b]. Following this accretionary event, this massif has been exhumed in a back-arc extensional context, forming a dome-like structure [e.g.…”

An overview on the main stratigraphic and structural features of a geothermal area: the case of Nazilli-Buharkent section of the Büyük Menderes Graben, SW Turkey

“…In general, graben fills are about 2 km in thickness, Miocene-Quaternary in age and well-exposed not only in the Nazilli-Buharkent geothermal area but also throughout the Büyük Menderes and Denizli grabens located between Kuşadası-Söke to the west and Denizli to the east (Figure 1(b)). In the Büyük Mernderes-Denizli grabens, graben fills were studied locally, mapped, named formally to informally and dated differently by numerous researchers (Alçiçek, 2007;Cohen, Dart, Akyuz, & Barka, 1995;Gürer, Bozcu, Yılmaz, & Yılmaz, 2001;Gürer, Sarıca-Filoreau, Özburun, Sangu, & Doğan, 2009;Koçyiğit, 2005;Koçyiğit, Yusufoğlu, & Bozkurt, 1999;Ring et al, 1999;Sarıca, 2000;Şimşek, 1984;Sözbilir & Emre, 1990;Sun, 1990), but there is no a common agreement among previous workers on age and naming of the graben fills. This is seen obviously on Figure 5.…”