Timing and causes of the mid-Cretaceous global plate reorganization event

Olierook, Hugo K.H.; Jourdan, Fred; Whittaker, Joanne M.; Merle, Renaud; Jiang, Qiang; Pourteau, Amaury; Doucet, Luc S.

doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2020.116071

Cited by 25 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The CNS (C34n; informally called “the Cretaceous quiet zone,” e.g., Gee & Kent, 2007) is a long period of nearly uniform normal polarity, first observed by Helsley and Steiner (1968) in ocean‐floor magnetic anomaly profiles. The CNS begins between 123.0 and 121.2 Ma, with a duration of 38.0–40.5 Ma (see review by Olierook et al., 2020), and it provides an opportunity to investigate the geomagnetic field behavior before, during, and after a superchron. Indeed, the CNS is preceded by the so‐called “Mesozoic dipole low” (Prèvot et al., 1990) with an average intensity value of ∼32 ZAm 2 (e.g., Tauxe et al., 2013), possibly linked to a change of state of the geomagnetic field from a state of relatively rapid reversals, to a period of stability during the CNS.…”

Section: The Cretaceous Normal Superchron (Cns)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These in turn have significant implications for the geodynamo and mantle modeling (Biggin et al., 2012). Moreover, understanding the long‐term variations of the geomagnetic field strength (Ingham et al., 2014; Juarez et al., 1998; Kulakov et al., 2019; McFadden & McElhinny, 1982; Tauxe et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2015) over thousands to millions of years is not only fundamental for modeling the geodynamo origin and behavior (e.g., Biggin et al., 2012) but also for other applications, such as estimating the solar standoff distance (Tarduno et al., 2014) or geodynamic plate reconstructions (e.g., Olierook et al., 2020). However, there is no consensus yet as to the average strength of the geomagnetic field, with estimates ranging from 80 ± 7 ZAm 2 (where ZAm 2 = 10 21 Am 2 ) for the last 5 Ma (McFadden & McElhinny, 1982), to 42 ± 23 ZAm 2 for the last 160 Ma (all intensity values errors are 1σ; Juarez et al., 1998; Tauxe et al., 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Earth's Magnetic Field Strength and the Cretaceous Normal Superchron: New Data From Costa Rica

Chiara

Tauxe

Staudigel

et al. 2021

Geochem Geophys Geosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Constraining the long‐term variability and average of the Earth's magnetic field strength is fundamental to understanding the characteristics and behavior of the geomagnetic field. Questions remain about the strength of the average field, and the relationship between strength and reversal frequency, due to the dispersion of data from key time intervals. Here, we focus on the Cretaceous Normal Superchron (CNS; 121‐84 Ma), during which there were no reversals. We present new intensity results from 41 submarine basaltic glass (SBG) sites collected on the Nicoya Peninsula and Murcièlago Islands, Costa Rica. New and revised 40Ar/39Ar and biostratigraphic age constraints from previous studies indicate ages from 141 to 65 Ma. One site with an age of 135.1 ± 1.5 Ma (2σ) gave a reliable intensity result of 34 ± 8 µT (equivalent to a virtual axial dipole moment, VADM, value of 88 ± 20 ZAm2), three sites from 121 to 112 Ma, spanning the onset of the CNS, vary from 21 ± 1 to 34 ± 4 µT (53 ± 3 to 87 ± 10 ZAm2). These results from the CNS are all higher than the long‐term average of ∼42 ZAm2 and data from Suhongtu, Mongolia (46–53 ZAm2) and are similar to the Troodos Ophiolite, Cyprus (81 ZAm2, reinterpreted in this study). Together with the reinterpreted data, the new Costa Rica results suggest that the strength of the geomagnetic field was approximately the same both before and after the onset of the CNS. Therefore, the data do not support a strict correlation between polarity interval length and the strength of the magnetic field.

show abstract

Section: The Cretaceous Normal Superchron (Cns)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earth's Magnetic Field Strength and the Cretaceous Normal Superchron: New Data From Costa Rica

Chiara

Tauxe

Staudigel

et al. 2021

Geochem Geophys Geosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data compiled from Adams et al (2016Adams et al ( , 2013 with minimum zircon grains n = 3, younger zircons where n < 3 not shown. Olierook et al, 2020;Schellart et al, 2006;Veevers, 2000;Zundel et al, 2019). Uncertainty remains, however, regarding the timing and manner of East Gondwanan subduction shut-down (and collision of the Hikurangi Plateau) with estimates ranging between 100 and 86 Ma based variously on mapping of sea-floor fabrics, stratigraphy, plate reconstructions, and geochronology (Barrett et al, 2018;Billen & Stock, 2000;Crampton et al, 2019;Davy, 2014;Kamp, 1999Kamp, , 2000Mazengarb & Harris, 1994;Mortimer et al, 2019;Müller et al, 2016).…”

Section: Geologic Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Forearc Stratigraphic Response to Cretaceous Plateau Collision and Slab Detachment, South Island, New Zealand

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The subduction of oceanic lithosphere at convergent plate margins is frequently disrupted by second-order processes, such as collision of plateaus, aseismic and spreading ridges ("ridges" hereafter), and seamounts. These disruptions can result in a range of sedimentological, magmatic, deformational and tectonic responses, and potentially lead to changes of subduction polarity or the termination of subduction (Austermann et al.

show abstract

“…The CNS (C34n; informally called "the Cretaceous quiet zone," e.g., Gee & Kent, 2007) is a long period of nearly uniform normal polarity, first observed by Helsley and Steiner (1968) in ocean-floor magnetic anomaly profiles. The CNS begins between 123.0 and 121.2 Ma, with a duration of 38.0-40.5 Ma (see review by Olierook et al, 2020), and it provides an opportunity to investigate the geomagnetic field behavior before, during, and after a superchron. Indeed, the CNS is preceded by the so-called "Mesozoic dipole low" (Prèvot et al, 1990) with an average intensity value of ∼32 ZAm 2 (e.g., Tauxe et al, 2013), possibly linked to a change of state of the geomagnetic field from a state of relatively rapid reversals, to a period of stability during the CNS.…”

Section: The Cretaceous Normal Superchron (Cns)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These in turn have significant implications for the geodynamo and mantle modeling (Biggin et al, 2012). Moreover, understanding the long-term variations of the geomagnetic field strength (Ingham et al, 2014;Juarez et al, 1998;Kulakov et al, 2019;McFadden & McElhinny, 1982;Tauxe et al, 2013;Wang et al, 2015) over thousands to millions of years is not only fundamental for modeling the geodynamo origin and behavior (e.g., Biggin et al, 2012) but also for other applications, such as estimating the solar standoff distance (Tarduno et al, 2014) or geodynamic plate reconstructions (e.g., Olierook et al, 2020). However, there is no consensus yet as to the average strength of the geomagnetic field, with estimates ranging from 80 ± 7 ZAm 2 (where ZAm 2 = 10 21 Am 2 ) for the last 5 Ma (McFadden & McElhinny, 1982), to 42 ± 23 ZAm 2 for the last 160 Ma (all intensity values errors are 1σ; Juarez et al, 1998;Tauxe et al, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The strength of the Earth's magnetic field and the Cretaceous Normal Superchron: New data from Costa Rica

Chiara

Tauxe

Florindo

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the analysis of satellite data, a rapid decrease of the present-day Earth's magnetic (geomagnetic) field strength (intensity) is observed, thus raising the question of whether Earth is currently approaching a polarity reversal (e.g., Hulot et al., 2002; Pavón-Carrasco & De Santis, 2016) or not (Brown et al., 2018). Constraining the past evolution of intensity (paleointensity) can provide context for this scenario and help us to understand fundamental properties of the geomagnetic field, such as the long-term average dipole moment and how the field's strength is related to polarity reversals, reversal frequency and secular variation (e.g., Cox, 1968).Generally, paleointensity minima are associated with magnetic excursions and reversals but they are not always associated with these events (Channell et al., 2020). Identifying a relationship between dipole strength

show abstract

Timing and causes of the mid-Cretaceous global plate reorganization event

Cited by 25 publications

References 72 publications

Earth's Magnetic Field Strength and the Cretaceous Normal Superchron: New Data From Costa Rica

Earth's Magnetic Field Strength and the Cretaceous Normal Superchron: New Data From Costa Rica

A Forearc Stratigraphic Response to Cretaceous Plateau Collision and Slab Detachment, South Island, New Zealand

The strength of the Earth's magnetic field and the Cretaceous Normal Superchron: New data from Costa Rica

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About