Quantitative structural analyses and numerical modelling of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

82 O. LEXA ET AL.(a)(a´)(b)(b´)(a)(b´)(b)(a´)Fig. 2. Geological maps of Blansky´ les and St. Leonhard granulite areas with schematic structural profiles. Two P–T space insetsshow the metamorphic evolution of lower crustal and middle crustal rocks (Petrakakis, 1997; Pitra et al., 1999; Scheuvens, 2002;Sˇtı´pska´ & Powell, 2005b; Racek et al., 2006, 2008). Protolith ages (Kro¨ ner et al., 2000; Friedl et al., 2004; Verner et al., 2008) ofmajor rock types are shown on the map.boundary between the root domain and the Bruniamicrocontinent is shifted 50–70 km westwards relativeto their contact on the surface suggesting that the highdensity basement rocks are covered by a thin sheet oflight granulites and migmatites in this area (Schulmannet al., 2008). North-west of the Moldanubian domainthere is an important gravity high corresponding to theNeoproterozoic basement of the Tepla´-BarrandianUnit. This is limited to the north by southeast dippingreflectors of the Tepla´ suture, which is characterized byhigh density eclogites and ultramafic rocks. The footwallof the suture corresponds to low density felsiccrust of the Saxothuringian basement.The seismic reflection and refraction sections andgravity modelling suggest a complex lithologicalstructure of the Moldanubian domain marked by a lowdensity, 5–10 km thick lower crustal layer locatedabove the Moho, a 5–10 km thick dense mafic layer, a10-km thick mid-crustal layer of intermediate densityand a locally developed 2–5 km thick low density layerat the top (Fig. 3). The low density lower crust correlateswell with low-P velocities in the range 6.0–6.4 km s )1 in the CEL09 section (Ru˚žek et al., 2007).Guy et al. (2010) proposed that the low density layerlocated above the Moho corresponds to felsic rocks,which are interpreted as deep crustal equivalents ofsurface outcrops of the Gfo¨ hl Unit. These authorsinterpreted the high density thick layer located abovelight granulites as an equivalent of the AGB (Fig. 3).The intermediate density layer forming recent uppercrust of the Moldanubian domain is interpreted asMonotonous and Varied group rocks, whereas the lowdensity rocks on the surface are directly correlated withexposures of the Gfo¨ hl Unit. It is suggested that thislayered structure of the Variscan crust reflects that ofthe original thick root, which was thinned by lateVariscan and Permian extensional processes (Burget al., 1994).Exhumation model connecting deep crustal geophysics andsurface geologyGuy et al. (2010) and Franěk et al. (2011a) proposed amodel connecting the deep structure of the Variscancrust with surface distribution of lower and mid-crustalrocks. The layered structure of the orogenic rootreported by geophysics thus represents a relict ofCarboniferous distribution of horizontally layeredcrust prior to exhumation. In addition, it is supposedthat the observed vertically layered distribution oforogenic lower crust surrounded by middle crustalunits reflects steepening of the deep crustal horizontallayering. The model connecting deep crustal layeringwith surface geology is based on several recent studiessuggesting that the granulites were exhumed alongsteep channels from lower crustal depth by a ductileextrusion mechanism (Sˇtı´pska´ et al., 2004; Schulmannet al., 2005; Franeˇk et al., 2006, 2011a; Tajcˇmanova´et al., 2006).In this view, the granulites represented, beforeexhumation, the structurally deepest orogenic lowercrust located at a depth of 60–70 km (18–20 kbar,Ó 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd184
HEAT SOURCES AND EXHUMATION MECHANISMS 83ABABFig. 3. Bouguer anomaly map of the Bohemian Massif (combined data provided by the Czech Geological Survey and Guy et al.(2010)) and gravimetric model for section A–B (profile no. 4 in Guy et al., 2010). The main lithological unit boundaries are representedby superimposed thick black lines. The section A–B emphasizes the present density structure of the Moldanubian Domain with relictsof felsic rocks in the lower crust.800–900 °C; Sˇtı´pska´ & Powell, 2005b; Tajcˇmanova´et al., 2006). Structurally above were mafic rocks of theAGB, which formed during early Palaeozoic magmaticunderplating of the Proterozoic crust of the MonotonousGroup (Schulmann et al., 2005, figs 16 & 17), andthe structurally highest Varied Group corresponding tosupracrustal early Palaeozoic sequences (Schulmannet al., 2009). According to this hypothesis, the extrusionÓ 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd185
Page 3:
“It strikes me that all our knowl
Page 8 and 9:
Contentsviii4.7 Schulmann, Konopás
Page 11:
Dedicated to my wife Markéta, daug
Page 14 and 15:
Foreword 2First topic “Quantitati
Page 16 and 17:
Foreword 4source and freely availab
Page 18 and 19:
1. Quantitative analysis of deforma
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 31 and 32:
Chapter 2Mechanisms of lower crusta
Page 33 and 34:
2. Mechanisms of lower crustal flow
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Chapter 3Quantitative analyses ofme
Page 43 and 44:
3. Quantitative analyses of metamor
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51:
Page 54 and 55:
Bibliography 42Culshaw, N., Beaumon
Page 56 and 57:
Bibliography 44sources and trigger
Page 58 and 59:
Bibliography 46Skrzypek, E., Štíp
Page 61 and 62:
Journal of Structural Geology 23 20
Page 63 and 64:
J. KonopaÂsek et al. / Journal of
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VO
Page 83 and 84:
SCHULMANN ET AL.: STRAIN DISTRIBUTI
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95:
Page 98 and 99:
5 - 2 LEXA ET AL.: COLLISION IN WES
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
5 - 10 LEXA ET AL.: COLLISION IN WE
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
156O. Lexa et al. / Journal of Stru
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 121 and 122:
DTD 5ARTICLE IN PRESSJournal of Str
Page 123 and 124:
DTD 5ARTICLE IN PRESSL. Baratoux et
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Table 1Statistical values of the qu
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Table 2Summary of parameters derive
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146: J. metamorphic Geol., 2008, 26, 273
Page 147 and 148: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 275m
Page 149 and 150: Probabi l irequencyProbabi l ireque
Page 151 and 152: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 279y
Page 153 and 154: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 281N
Page 155 and 156: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 283w
Page 157 and 158: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 285a
Page 159 and 160: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 287w
Page 161 and 162: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 289T
Page 163 and 164: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 291O
Page 165 and 166: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 293r
Page 167 and 168: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 295B
Page 169: EXHUMATION IN LARGE HOT OROGEN 297R
Page 172 and 173: Author's personal copyK. Schulmann
Page 193 and 194: J. metamorphic Geol., 2011, 29, 79-
Page 195: HEAT SOURCES AND EXHUMATION MECHANI
Page 199 and 200: HEAT SOURCES AND EXHUMATION MECHANI
Page 217 and 218: J. metamorphic Geol., 2011, 29, 53-
Page 219 and 220: EXTRUSIONOFLOWERCRUSTINVARISCANOROG
Page 243 and 244: J. metamorphic Geol., 2005, 23, 649
Page 245 and 246: CONTRASTING TEXTURAL RECORD OF TWO
Page 247 and 248:
CONTRASTING TEXTURAL RECORD OF TWO
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Contrasting microstructures and def
Page 263 and 264:
TEXTURES OF NATURALLY DEFORMED META
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
1.0--0.9__Mg~(Mg2++Fe2+)9 Core of p
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
' ~'-----2~--~----TEXTURES OF NATUR
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289:
Page 292 and 293:
B10210ZÁVADA ET AL.: EXTREME DUCTI
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 307 and 308:
ClickHereforFullArticleJOURNAL OF G
Page 309 and 310:
B10406SCHULMANN ET AL.: RHEOLOGY OF
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
J. metamorphic Geol., 2008, 26, 29-
Page 329 and 330:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 31Ó 20
Page 331 and 332:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 33durin
Page 333 and 334:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 35(a)Ty
Page 335 and 336:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 37(a)Pl
Page 337 and 338:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 39Grain
Page 339 and 340:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 41(a)(b
Page 341 and 342:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 43(a)(b
Page 343 and 344:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 45Fig.
Page 345 and 346:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 47produ
Page 347 and 348:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 49stron
Page 349 and 350:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 51Cmı
Page 351:
ORIGIN OF FELSIC MIGMATITES 53easte
Page 354 and 355:
104 J. FRANĚK ET AL.in terms of th
Page 356 and 357:
106 J. FRANĚK ET AL.Fig. 2. Struct
Page 358 and 359:
108 J. FRANĚK ET AL.(a)perthite po
Page 360 and 361:
110 J. FRANĚK ET AL.(a)(b)(c) (d)
Page 362 and 363:
112 J. FRANĚK ET AL.Table 1. Repre
Page 364 and 365:
114 J. FRANĚK ET AL.at these P-T c
Page 366 and 367:
116 J. FRANĚK ET AL.(a)(b)Fig. 10.
Page 368 and 369:
Page 370 and 371:
120 J. FRANĚK ET AL.Table 2. Quant
Page 372 and 373:
Page 374 and 375:
124 J. FRANĚK ET AL.Fig. 16. Inter
Page 376 and 377:
126 J. FRANĚK ET AL.development of
Page 378 and 379:
128 J. FRANĚK ET AL.Behrmann, J.H.
Page 380:
130 J. FRANĚK ET AL.Southern Bohem
show all

Quantitative structural analyses and numerical modelling of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?