Geodynamical implications of a Moscovian palaeomagnetic pole from the stable Saharan craton (Illizi basin, Algeria)

Henry, B.; Merabet, N.; Yellès, Abdelkarim; Derder, M. M.; Daly, L.

doi:10.1016/0040-1951(92)90177-8

Cited by 36 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These two directions are not very different and the fold test is of little significance because all the corresponding sites are in the same weakly dipping limb of the fold (taking into account only the precision parameter values, the deformation should be older than the magnetization). The directions are very close to that determined in some sites of the Moscovian El Adeb Larache formation, which show Permian remagnetization directions (Henry et al . 1992).…”

Section: Palaeomagnetic Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…This direction is better grouped in geographical coordinates (for progressive unfolding, the maximum k ‐value is obtained for −5 per cent unfolding) and is very close to that of the present Earth's magnetic field at the site. The palaeomagnetic pole corresponding to this component before dip correction (88.8°N, 164°E, K = 262, A 95 = 3.3°) is close to that from some sites of other formations of the Illizi basin that show Cenozoic remagnetization (82.6°N, 97.6°E, Henry et al . 1992; 74.6°N, 73.3°E, Derder et al .…”

Section: Palaeomagnetic Resultssupporting

confidence: 70%

“…The sampling sites were located in the Edjeleh region, in the eastern part of the Illizi basin (Fig. 1a), approximately 70 km east of the El Adeb Larache locality where the previous Moscovian study was undertaken (Henry et al . 1992).…”

Section: Sampling and Analysis Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies led to the determination of five new African palaeomagnetic poles. The first, determined in the ‘El Adeb Larache’ area, is of Moscovian age (Henry et al . 1992), the second is of Stephano–Autunian age from the Tiguentourine Formation (Derder et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

New Moscovian palaeomagnetic pole from the Edjeleh fold (Saharan craton, Algeria)

Derder

Henry²,

Bayou

et al. 2001

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary A palaeomagnetic study was carried out in the Moscovian (∼ 305 Ma) formation in the Edjeleh anticline, the only area where important dips can be observed in the Upper Palaeozoic series of the Illizi basin (Algeria). This study shows the existence of three magnetization components. Two of them are interpreted as Cenozoic and Permian remagnetizations; their poles are 88.8°N, 164.0°E, K = 262, A95 = 3.3° and 43.4°S, 61.7°E, K = 93, A95 = 5.9°, respectively. The third component is determined by both well‐defined ChRMs and remagnetization circles analysis. Its associated fold test is positive and significant. Because the folding started before or during the Autunian, this third component was acquired very early and is very probably the primary magnetization. Its corresponding palaeomagnetic pole (28.3°S, 58.9°E, K = 157, A95 = 4.2°) is close to the poles from the Saharan platform obtained from neighbouring periods. The positive fold test of this study thus validates these previous Upper Palaeozoic poles. This new result is in agreement with the geodynamical model (Matte 1986; Henry et al. 1992), which proposed the occurrence of a large clockwise rotation of Africa during the Carboniferous; such a motion agrees with the Permian Pangaea A2 reconstruction.

show abstract

Section: Palaeomagnetic Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Palaeomagnetic Resultssupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: Sampling and Analysis Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

New Moscovian palaeomagnetic pole from the Edjeleh fold (Saharan craton, Algeria)

Derder

Henry²,

Bayou

et al. 2001

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This assertion is corroborated by the presence of both polarities contrary to previous studies of Mid Carboniferous Saharan formations where only reversed polarities were isolated. The counter clockwise rotation of Africa during Hercynian times (Matte, 1986;Henry et al, 1992) was therefore not finished during the Serpukhovian period (Fig. 14).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Autunian age constrained by fold tests for paleomagnetic data from the Mezarif and Abadla basins (Algeria)

Merabet

Henry²,

Kherroubi

et al. 2005

Journal of African Earth Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavior of the Paleosecular Variation During the Permian‐Carboniferous Reversed Superchron and Comparisons to the Low Reversal Frequency Intervals Since Precambrian Times

Oliveira

Franco

Brandt

et al. 2018

Geochem Geophys Geosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the (paleo)latitudinal dependence of angular dispersion sets of virtual geomagnetic poles (VGPs) for the Permian‐Carboniferous Reversed Superchron (PCRS: 262–318 Ma). In order to analyze the paleosecular variation during this period, we prepared different paleomagnetic data sets from scientific databases and recent literature, based on selection criteria which provided high degree of refinement. Model G of McFadden et al. (1988) was fitted to the VGP dispersion data, providing the shape parameters a and b, which were further compared with similar results for the Cretaceous Normal Superchron (CNS) and other periods of different geomagnetic reversal rates throughout the last 3 Ga. Our results indicate high similarity between the angular VGP dispersion from the PCRS and CNS (a low VGP dispersion at low paleolatitudes, and strong paleolatitudinal dependence), in contrasting difference for periods of higher reversal rates (the last 5 Ma). Despite the geodynamic differences related to both Phanerozoic superchrons, such evidence could point out similar heat flux conditions in the CMB, which may favor compatible stability conditions throughout these magnetozones. Notably, two additional observations which arose from the shape parameters relations for both Phanerozoic superchrons and Precambrian data sets demand further investigation: (i) a pattern of increase for the b/a ratio throughout the 0.5–1.6 Ga interval was observed, which could be partially explained by the Maya Superchron, recently proposed by Gallet et al. (2012) and (ii) the b × a relationship for both Phanerozoic superchrons and the 2.45–2.82 Ga interval pointed to the presence of one or more long‐term magnetozones throughout the Paleoproterozoic.

show abstract

Geodynamical implications of a Moscovian palaeomagnetic pole from the stable Saharan craton (Illizi basin, Algeria)

Cited by 36 publications

References 25 publications

New Moscovian palaeomagnetic pole from the Edjeleh fold (Saharan craton, Algeria)

New Moscovian palaeomagnetic pole from the Edjeleh fold (Saharan craton, Algeria)

Autunian age constrained by fold tests for paleomagnetic data from the Mezarif and Abadla basins (Algeria)

Behavior of the Paleosecular Variation During the Permian‐Carboniferous Reversed Superchron and Comparisons to the Low Reversal Frequency Intervals Since Precambrian Times

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About