03.01.2015 Views

Terrestrial Palaeoecology and Global Change

Terrestrial Palaeoecology and Global Change

Terrestrial Palaeoecology and Global Change

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

146 Valentin A. Krassilov. <strong>Terrestrial</strong> <strong>Palaeoecology</strong><br />

Fig. 64. Crustal structures of New Zeal<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> adjacent<br />

Pacific rises (plateaux) interpreted as crustal<br />

blocks borderd by imbricate forel<strong>and</strong>/foredeep/isl<strong>and</strong>arc<br />

belts over the major fault zones. Blocks: (Ca)<br />

Campbell, (Ch) Chatham, (Lh) Lord Howe, (No)<br />

Norfolk, (Tk) Three Kings. Ophiolitic thrust belts:<br />

(AP) Alpine, (HR) Hikurangi, (KM) Kermadek, (TA)<br />

Taupo, (VM) Vening Meinesz.<br />

(1) Ophiolites, (2) Flysch trough, (3) Volcanic arc, (4)<br />

Granitoid belt (Forel<strong>and</strong>), (5) Faults, (6) Contours of<br />

oceanic structures.<br />

Turning to the eastern margin, we find a similar, although differently interpreted, collage<br />

of “terrains”, some equivalent to cratonic blocks of the western margin, the other<br />

appearing as giant overthrusts. A once popular idea of their transequatorial drift from<br />

various locations in the Southern Hemisphere is presently under a revision (Colpron &<br />

Price, 1995; Keppie et al., 2001; Morozov et al., 2001; Stamatakos et al., 2001). New<br />

palaeolatitude estimates indicate a Cretaceous location in the Northern Hemisphere midlatitudes<br />

(about 53°N for Wrangellia: Stamatakos et al., 2001). The available factual<br />

evidence for long-distance transport is far from convincing (see Colpron & Price, 1995<br />

for a critical review). The discrepant magnetic signatures might have been due to tectonic<br />

rotation rather than long-distance rafting. However, a counterclockwise rotation<br />

might have actually displaced continental fragments north of their original location in the<br />

circum-Pacific shear zone.<br />

The western <strong>and</strong> eastern arms of circum-Pacific belt are linked by the tectonic structures<br />

of Chukotka, Koryak Highl<strong>and</strong>s, Alaska <strong>and</strong> the Bering Shelf (Fig. 65). The Triassic<br />

– Jurassic geosyncline deposits of northern Alaska are traceable over the – dextrally<br />

displaced – Chukotsk Peninsula from Laurentiy Bay to Kolyuchinskaya Guba (Inlet),<br />

while the Late Jurassic to Neocomian Koyukuk <strong>and</strong>esite belt (Globerman et al., 1983)<br />

might extend to the coeval Kuryan belt of southern Anyuy (Migachev et al., 1984).<br />

A volcanic belt of the same age has developed along the southern margin of Talkitna<br />

block. It is overthrust by the Maastrichtian to Eocene Valdis/Orca ophiolitic nappes (Tysdal<br />

& Case, 1983) <strong>and</strong> intruded by the Aleutian-Alaskan batholites. The thrust belts appear<br />

continuous form the Kenai – Koryak arc over the Bering Shelf to the Olyutorsk Range<br />

of northern Kamchatka, where the coeval nappes constitute the Campanian/Maastrichtian<br />

to mid-Eocene sequence of the Olyutorsk, Ukelayat <strong>and</strong> Koryak complexes (inter-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!