Linear Inversion of Fluvial Topography in the Northern Apennines: Comparison of Base‐Level Fall to Crustal Shortening

Abstract

Geomorphic and stratigraphic markers such as fluvial terraces, growth strata, and river longitudinal profiles record the deformation history of tectonically active landscapes. Fault slip-driven rock uplift at the deformation front of an actively shortening fold and thrust belt, for example, creates base-level fall at the mouth of transverse drainages. This base-level fall initiates a transient wave of incision, a knickpoint (KP in Figure 1), that migrates upstream through the fluvial system (Harkins et al., 2007;Leopold & Bull, 1979;Seidl & Dietrich, 1992). The incision wave locally abandons the old river floodplain leaving fluvial terraces (Tr in Figure 1) that preserve the elevation of prebase-level fall topography and can be dated to determine a long-term vertical incision rate (e.g.,

Integrated uplift, subsidence, erosion and deposition in a tightly coupled source‐to‐sink system, Pagliara basin, northeastern Sicily, Italy

“…We define the fluvial topography of the Pagliara catchment using a LiDAR data‐derived 2‐m resolution DEM and set a total of twelve experiments with 1000 Monte Carlo iterations, considering different upslope channel threshold areas ranging from 0.125 to 1 km 2 (Montgomery & Foufoula‐Georgiou, 1993; Wobus et al., 2006), variable concavity index, response time discretization and erosion rates. The inversion is carried out in MATLAB using codes developed for a related study in northern Sicily and Apennines and available on GitHub (Pavano & Gallen, 2021; https://github.com/sfgallen/Block_Uplift_Linear_Inversion_Models) and Zenodo (Fisher et al., 2022; https://zenodo.org/record/6503006#.Y8FY0tLMI9F), respectively. These codes work in concert with the MATLAB‐based TopoToolbox (Schwanghart & Scherler, 2014, 2017) and TAK (Forte & Whipple, 2019) software packages.…”

“…The inversion is carried out in MATLAB using codes developed for a related study in northern Sicily and Apennines and available on GitHub (Pavano & Gallen, 2021; https:// github. com/ sfgal len/ Block_ Uplift_ Linear_ Inver sion_ Models) and Zenodo (Fisher et al, 2022; https:// zenodo. org/ record/ 65030 06#.…”

Morpho‐Tectonic Evolution of the Southern Apennines and Calabrian Arc: Insights From Pollino Range and Surrounding Extensional Intermontane Basins

“…The estimates of K values are consistent with those observed in other tectonically active regions (Stock & Montgomery, 1999) and higher than quiescent tectonic settings (Clementucci et al., 2022). Interestingly, they are slightly higher but in the same order of magnitude of estimates from the Northern Apennines and NE Sicily, respectively, where carbonate lithologies are also exposed (Fisher et al., 2022; Pavano & Gallen, 2021). All the selected rivers show a similar rock‐uplift history and U * (non‐dimensionalized rock‐uplift rate) starting approximately from 800 ka, despite few minor knickpoints, which cause spikes in the overall uplift trend (Figure S4 in Supporting Information S1).…”

Surface and Crustal Response to Deep Subduction Dynamics: Insights From the Apennines, Italy

“…The orogenic divide reconstruction back in time reveals fluvial capture on both sides of the wedge, suggesting a bi‐directional divide migration while, thermochronological cooling ages do not show variations across the Central Apennines indicating limited and slow exhumation on both sides of the wedge. Moreover, extension across the Central Apennines started almost simultaneously at about 2.5 Ma (Cosentino et al., 2017; Fisher et al., 2022). This implies that the Central Apennines and Southern Apennines do not show the eastward migration of the extensional domain as observed in the Northern Apennines 2, at least over the Pleistocene.…”