2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.02.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The South American retroarc foreland system: The development of the Bauru Basin in the back-bulge province

Abstract: The aim of this research is to understand the tectonic setting of the Bauru Basin. This basin in centraleastern South America has been classified as intracratonic, but the basin-fill geometry, the involved subsidence mechanisms and the age of the deposits are poorly understood. In this work, the ranges of the fossil taxa are analyzed and ages are proposed for the lithostratigraphic units. Isopach maps were used to reconstruct the stratigraphic intervals of the basin fill. The stratigraphy of the Bauru Basin is… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
39
0
4

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 117 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 224 publications
(385 reference statements)
4
39
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The species 83, a common ancestral to Notosuchidae, was isolated during the Coniacian/Santonian by the vicariant event of Node 66 causing the speciation of Notosuchus terrestris and Mariliasuchus amarali. Those events are probably associated to the uplift of Bauru Group margins in Santonian (Riccomini, 1997) and support a Santonian-Campanian age proposed by Menegazzo et al (2016) to Araçatuba and Adamantina formations. Node 56 is reconstructed as JP area by S-DIVA (100%), that result is found by BBM with 1.01% and area J with 97.77%.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…The species 83, a common ancestral to Notosuchidae, was isolated during the Coniacian/Santonian by the vicariant event of Node 66 causing the speciation of Notosuchus terrestris and Mariliasuchus amarali. Those events are probably associated to the uplift of Bauru Group margins in Santonian (Riccomini, 1997) and support a Santonian-Campanian age proposed by Menegazzo et al (2016) to Araçatuba and Adamantina formations. Node 56 is reconstructed as JP area by S-DIVA (100%), that result is found by BBM with 1.01% and area J with 97.77%.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…5). This Cenomanian to Santonian age for the Theropod has subsequently been applied to Gondwana vertebrate biostratigraphy in basins as far as the Bauru Basin in Brazil (Menegazzo et al, 2016). The existence of two ages for these deposits has required palaeontologists to continue to acknowledge the 30 Myr range of possible ages, making definitive placement of fossil discoveries in the context of Gondwanan vertebrate evolution difficult.…”
Section: Significance Of Stratigraphic Framework With Regard To Palamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Os marcadores mais antigos da incisão fl uvial na média bacia do Rio Grande são fornecidos pelos sedimentos suprabasálticos da Formação Marília (Grupo Bauru) de idade Neocretácica (MENEGAZZO et al, 2016) e da Formação Itaqueri, atribuída ao Paleógeno (MELO & PONÇANO 1983;RICCOMINI, 1997;MENEGAZZO et al, 2016). O posicionamento dessas unidades permite inferir de forma aproximada a provável superfície deposicional a partir da qual se deu a incisão cenozoica na borda leste da Bacia do Paraná (Figura 1C).…”
Section: Procedimentos Metodológicosunclassified
“…A idade paleocênica aparenta ser a mais coerente, pois a deposição dos leques aluviais demandaria a existência de área fonte ainda elevada a leste/nordeste mesmo após a deposição da Formação Marília. Provavelmente a área fonte estaria vinculada aos remanescentes do Soerguimento do Alto Paranaíba (SAP) (PERDONCINI, 2003), contemporâneo ao magmatismo alcalino do Neocretáceo (HASUI, 2010;MENEGAZZO et al, 2016).…”
Section: Procedimentos Metodológicosunclassified