Diachronous initiation of Arabia–Eurasia collision from eastern Anatolia to the southeastern Zagros Mountains since middle Eocene time

The Uplift of an Early Stage Collisional Plateau Unraveled by Fluvial Network Analysis and River Longitudinal Profile Inversion: The Case of the Eastern Anatolian Plateau

“…(2006), Vanacore et al. (2013), Ogden and Bastow (2022), Darin and Umhoefer (2022) for modern and past crustal thickness, on Angus et al. (2006), Nikogosian et al.…”

“…Available ages indicate that the plateau started to be emerged after ∼15 Ma (e.g., Okay et al., 2020 and references therein). From the middle‐late Miocene, the margins of the plateau experienced accelerated exhumation, possibly in response to a more advanced stage of the Arabia‐Eurasia collision (Ballato et al., 2011; Cavazza et al., 2018, 2019; Darin & Umhoefer, 2022; Gusmeo et al., 2021; Okay et al., 2010). Thermal histories from low‐temperature thermochronological data (mostly apatite fission track and apatite U‐Th/He) indicate that accelerated exhumation along the southern plateau margin started sometime between 18 and 14 Ma in the Bitlis mountains (Cavazza et al., 2018) and from 14 Ma in the Zagros (Kurdistan region of Iraq; Koshnaw et al., 2020).…”

“…The following closure of the southern branch of the Neotethys ocean along the Bitlis‐Zagros suture zone led to the amalgamation of Arabia to the composite southern Eurasian margin (Figure 1). The timing of this recent collision is highly debated with estimates ranging from the latest Eocene‐earliest Oligocene (possibly within a southeastward younging trend, see Darin & Umhoefer, 2022 for a recent review) to the early‐middle Miocene (e.g., Cavazza et al., 2018; Hüsing et al., 2009; Okay et al., 2010). Late Eocene‐Oligocene, deformation processes were spatially uniform across most of the upper plate from the northern margin of the collision zone (Lesser Caucasus and western Greater Caucasus) to the plateau interior, and did not produce significant exhumation (Albino et al., 2014; Forte et al., 2014; Vincent et al., 2016).…”

“…The thermal erosion of the lithosphere and the heating of the crust reduced the lithosphere strength and favored its deformation resulting in a further acceleration in surface uplift rate and a consequent generation of a third erosion wave (Trend 3; Figures5a, 7a-7c, and 10). The elaboration of the three cross sections is based onAngus et al (2006),Vanacore et al (2013),Ogden and Bastow (2022),Darin and Umhoefer (2022) for modern and past crustal thickness, onAngus et al (2006),Nikogosian et al (2018),Agostini et al (2021),Reid et al (2019),Rabayrol et al (2019) for modern and past magmatism and magma source, on Ismail-Zadeh et al (2020),Biryol et al (2011) for modern mantle structure.…”

Low‐Temperature Thermochronologic Response to Magmatic Reheating: Insights From the Takab Metallogenic District of NW Iran, (Arabia‐Eurasia Collision Zone)

“…The Arabia‐Eurasia continental collision has led to the development of a large deformation zone that extends from the Caucasus to the Persian Gulf and from eastern Turkey to western Afghanistan (e.g., Hatzfeld & Molnar, 2010 and reference therein). Although the timing of collision in NW and central Iran is still debated, an increasing number of studies suggest that it must have occurred sometime between the latest Eocene (∼35 Ma; e.g., Allen & Armstrong, 2008; Ballato et al., 2011; Darin & Umhoefer, 2022; Mouthereau et al., 2012) and the early (∼27 Ma; Koshnaw et al., 2019; McQuarrie & van Hinsbergen, 2013: Pirouz et al., 2017) to late Oligocene (Cai et al., 2021; Gholami Zadeh et al., 2017). The collision zone includes prominent mountain chains (e.g., Zagros, Alborz, Kopeh‐Dagh, and Talesh Mountains) and large N‐S to NW‐SE and NE‐SW oriented strike‐slip fault systems that bound relatively rigid crustal blocks (Central Iran, Lut and Helmand blocks, south Caspian basin, and IP, Figure 1; e.g., Vernant et al., 2004).…”