MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2755284352 · doi:10.1130/b31529.1

Mantle and geological evidence for a Late Jurassic−Cretaceous suture spanning North America

2017· article· en· W2755284352 on OpenAlexaff
Karin Sigloch, Mitchell G. Mihalynuk

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society of America Bulletin · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySubductionLithosphereNorth American PlateMantle (geology)Seafloor spreadingPaleontologyCretaceousTerranePacific PlateTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crustal blocks accreted to North America form two major belts that are separated by a tract of collapsed Jurassic-Cretaceous basins extending from Alaska to Mexico.Evidence of oceanic lithosphere that once underlay these basins is rare at Earth's surface.Most of the lithosphere was subducted, which accounts for the general difficulty of reconstructing oceanic regions from surface evidence.However, this seafloor was not destroyed; it remains in the mantle beneath North America and is visible to seismic tomography, revealing configurations of arc-trench positions back to the breakup of Pangea.The double uncertainty of where trenches ran and how subducting lithosphere deformed while sinking in the mantle is surmountable, owing to the presence of a special-case slab geometry.Wall-like, linear slab belts exceeding 10,000 km in length appear to trace out intra-oceanic subduction zones that were stationary over tens of millions of years, and beneath which lithosphere sank almost vertically.This hypothesis sets up an absolute lower-mantle reference frame.Combined with a complete Atlantic spreading record that positions paleo-North America in this reference frame, the slab geometries permit detailed predictions of where and when ocean basins at the leading edge of westwarddrifting North America were subducted, how intra-oceanic subduction zones were overridden, and how their associated arcs and basement terranes were sutured to the continent.An unconventional paleogeography is predicted in which mid-to late Mesozoic arcs grew in a long-lived archipelago located 2000-4000 km west of Pangean North America (while also consistent with the conventional view of a continental arc in early Mesozoic times).The Farallon Ocean subducted beneath the outboard (western) edge of the archipelago, whereas North America converged on the archipelago by westward subduction of an intervening, major ocean, the Mezcalera-Angayucham Ocean.The most conspicuous geologic prediction is that of an oceanic suture that must run along the entire western margin of North America.It formed diachronously between ca.155 Ma and ca.50 Ma, analogous to diachro nous suturing of southwest Pacific arcs to the northward-migrating Australian continent today.We proceed to demonstrate that this suture prediction fits the spatio-temporal evidence for the collapse of at least 11 Middle Jurassic to Late Cretaceous basins wedged between the Intermontane and Insular-Guerrero superterranes, about half of which are known to contain mantle rocks.These relatively late suturing ages run counter to the Middle Jurassic or older timing required and asserted by the prevailing, Andean-analogue model for the North American Cordillera.We show that the arguments against late suturing are controvertible, and we present multiple lines of direct evidence for late suturing, consistent with geophysical observations.We refer to our close integration of surface and subsurface evidence from geology and geophysics as "tomotectonic analysis."This type of analysis provides a stringent test for currently accepted tectonic models and offers a blueprint for similar, continental-scale investigations in other accretionary orogens.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations91
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society of America Bulletin→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→