Neoproterozoic-early Palaeozoic tectonostratigraphy and palaeogeography of the peri-Gondwanan terranes: Amazonian v. West African connections
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Within the Appalachian–Variscan orogen of North America and southern Europe lie a collection of terranes that were distributed along the northern margin of West Gondwana in the late Neoproterozoic and early Palaeozoic. These peri-Gondwanan terranes are characterized by voluminous late Neoproterozoic ( c . 640–570 Ma) arc magmatism and cogenetic basins, and their tectonothermal histories provide fundamental constraints on the palaeogeography of this margin and on palaeocontinental reconstructions for this important period in Earth history. Field and geochemical studies indicate that arc magmatism generally terminated diachronously with the formation of a transform margin, leading by the Early–Middle Cambrian to the development of a shallow-marine platform–passive margin characterized by Gondwanan fauna. However, important differences exist between these terranes that constrain their relative palaeogeography in the late Neoproterozoic and permit changes in the geometry of the margin from the late Neoproterozoic to the Early Cambrian to be reconstructed. On the basis of basement isotopic composition, the terranes can be subdivided into: (1) Avalonian-type (e.g. West Avalonia, East Avalonia, Meguma, Carolinia, Moravia–Silesia), which developed on juvenile, c . 1.3–1.0 Ga crust originating within the Panthalassa-like Mirovoi Ocean surrounding Rodinia, and which were accreted to the northern Gondwanan margin by c . 650 Ma; (2) Cadomian-type (e.g. North Armorican Massif, Ossa–Morena, Saxo-Thuringia, Moldanubia), which formed along the West African margin by recycling ancient ( c . 2.0–2.2 Ga) West African crust; (3) Ganderian-type (e.g. Ganderia, Florida, the Maya terrane and possible the NW Iberian domain and South Armorican Massif), which formed along the Amazonian margin of Gondwana by recycling Avalonian and older Amazonian basement; and (4) cratonic terranes (e.g. Oaxaquia and the Chortis block), which represent displaced Amazonian portions of cratonic Gondwana. These contrasts imply the existence of fundamental sutures between these terranes prior to c . 650 Ma. Derivation of the Cadomian-type terranes from the West African craton is further supported by detrital zircon data from their Neoproterozoic–Ediacaran clastic rocks, which contrast with such data from the Avalonian- and Ganderian-type terranes that suggest derivation from the Amazonian craton. Differences in Neoproterozoic and Ediacaran palaeogeography are also matched in some terranes by contrasts in Cambrian faunal and sedimentary provenance data. Platformal assemblages in certain Avalonian-type terranes (e.g. West Avalonia and East Avalonia) have cool-water, high-latitude fauna and detrital zircon signatures consistent with proximity to the Amazonian craton. Conversely, platformal assemblages in certain Cadomian-type terranes (e.g. North Armorican Massif, Ossa–Morena) show a transition from tropical to temperate waters and detrital zircon signatures that suggest continuing proximity to the West African craton. Other terranes (e.g. NW Iberian domain, Meguma) show Avalonian-type basement and/or detrital zircon signatures in the Neoproterozoic, but develop Cadomian-type signatures in the Cambrian. This change suggests tectonic slivering and lateral transport of terranes along the northern margin of West Gondwana consistent with the transform termination of arc magmatism. In the early Palaeozoic, several peri-Gondwanan terranes (e.g. Avalonia, Carolinia, Ganderia, Meguma) separated from West Gondwana, either separately or together, and had accreted to Laurentia by the Silurian–Devonian. Others (e.g. Cadomian-type terranes, Florida, Maya terrane, Oaxaquia, Chortis block) remained attached to Gondwana and were transferred to Laurussia only with the closure of the Rheic Ocean in the late Palaeozoic.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».