Neotectonic development of the Çameli Basin, southwestern Anatolia, Turkey

Abstract

This study of the ~ameli Basin presents a detailed basin evolution combined with structural analysis and provides the first detailed time-stratigraphic framework for the neotectonic development of Neogene grabens along the Fethiye-Burdur Fault Zone in southwestern Anatolia. During the Early Tortonian, the ~ameli Basin was established as a broad fault-bounded fluviolacustrine basin that experienced NW-SE extension. By Mid-Pliocene time, continued NW-SE extension resulted in the formation of a new intrabasinal fault zone that split the basin longitudinally into two compartments. The development of a new generation of normal faults further split the basin into four narrow half-graben compartments at the end of the Late Pliocene. Structural analysis of basin-bounding and intrabasinal faults related to this three-stage basin development shows that NW-SE extension apparently persisted from Late Miocene to early Quaternary time. The youngest (i.e. Holocene), deformation is characterized by dextral shear along NE-SW-trending strikeslip faults and continuing NW-SE extension. The Late Miocene foundering of the basin was related to extension in the northerly hinterland zone of the still-emplacing Lycian nappes, whereas outward growth of the Hellenic Arc in response to the westward Anatolian extrusion is the main cause for NW-SE extension from the Pliocene onward. Dextral strike-slip faulting is localized and is associated with the activity of NW-SE-trending faults that accommodated NE-SW extension. The simultaneous activity of these faults suggests the existence of biaxial extensional tectonics, as initially proposed for the Burdur-Dinar area. Sinistral strike-slip faulting, continuing along the eastern Hellenic Arc, penetrated the southernmost part of Turkey but has not yet reached the Cameli Basin area. Our biostratigraphically well-constrained tectonosedimentary model for the evolution of the Cameli Basin provides a reliable time-stratigraphic framework for NE-SW extension in the 'Fethiye-Burdur Fault Zone' of SW Anatolia. We believe that this fault zone represents a broad zone of isolated or interconnected NE-SW-trending basins that formed under prevailing NW-SE extension, rather than being a significant strike-slip fault zone.

Exhumation with a twist: Paleomagnetic constraints on the evolution of the Menderes metamorphic core complex, western Turkey

“…The results from the lower Miocene deposits of locality Acıpayam reveal a somewhat smaller CCW rotation, but the loosely dated upper Miocene of Kelekçi in the Çameli basin, indicating 16°CCW rotation, suggest that this is likely the result of minor local rotations, e.g., due to formation of the Çameli basin and other Neogene basins in the Lycian Nappes [Price and Scott, 1994;Alçiçek et al, 2005Alçiçek et al, , 2006Alçiçek, 2007;Alçiçek and ten Veen, 2008;ten Veen et al, 2009]. Note that the Bey Dağları platform also reveals minor rotation variations related to local tectonics [Kissel and Poisson, 1987;Morris and Robertson, 1993;van Hinsbergen et al, 2010].…”

“…Additionally, we collected 70 samples from 4 sites in beige marls and blue clays in the Çameli basin. The basin fill was dated at upper Miocene to Pliocene (∼11-3 Ma [Alçiçek et al, 2005[Alçiçek et al, , 2006, and references therein]).…”

Nature and onset age of neotectonic regime in the northern core of Isparta Angle, SW Turkey

“…This is indicated by highly widespread shallow-focus earthquakes occurring in the continental crust and their focal mechanism solutions (Ambraseys, 2001;Ambraseys & Tchalenko, 1972;Eyidoğan & Jackson, 1985;Kalafat, 1998;Koçyiğit & Özacar, 2003;McKenzie, 1972;Westaway, 1990;Yılmaztürk & Burton, 1999;Zanchi & Angelier, 1993). However, in most of previous papers (Alçiçek, ten Veen, & Özkul, 2006;Barka et al, 1995;Boray, Saroğlu, & Emre, 1985;Kelling, Robertson, & Buchem, 2005;Seyitoğlu & Scott, 1994;Yılmaz et al, 2000), it has been reported that the southwest Anatolian extensional province is bounded by the western flank of the Isparta Angle (IA) to the east, i.e. the IA is under the control of a compressive tectonic regime and not included in the southwest Anatolian extensional neotectonic domain; whereas new field and seismic data presented in the present study clearly reveal that one of the most diagnostic areas included in the southwestern Anatolian extensional province is the IA.…”

“…The ideas suggested to solve these geological problems can be classified into two categories: (1) the evolutionary history of the graben-horst systems in southwest Anatolia is continuous, i.e. it commenced in Early or Late Miocene and is still lasting (Cohen et al, 1995;Hetzel et al, 1995;Karaman, 2010;Paton, 1992;Price & Scott, 1994;Şengör, 1987;Westaway, 1990;Yağmurlu, 1991;Alçiçek et al, 2006); and (2) the evolutionary history of the graben-horst systems is episodic, i.e. they evolved at two stages interrupted by an intervening contraction phase, and the commencement age of the neotectonic regime is Early Quaternary (its base goes back up to 2.588 Ma before present based on 2013 International Commission on Stratigraphy) (Beccaletto & Steiner, 2005;Bozkurt & Rojay, 2005;Bozkurt & Sözbilir, 2004;Erkül et al, 2005;Gürboğa, Koçyiğit, & Ruffet, 2013;Koçyiğit & Deveci, 2007;Koçyiğit et al, 1999Tokçaer et al, 2005).…”

“…Consequently, two models were suggested to explain both the type of the neotectonic regime and its onset age in the IA: (1) the present-day configuration of the IA is a contractional structure, and the initiation age of the contractional neotectonic regime through it is Late Miocene (Alçiçek et al, 2006;Altunel et al, 1999;Barka et al, 1995;Boray et al, 1985;Karaman, 2010;Yağmurlu, Savaşçın, & Ergun, 1997), and (2) the present-day configuration of the IA is an extensional structure and the onset age of the extensional neotectonic period is Early Quaternary (Glover & Robertson, 1998b;Koçyiğit, 1996Koçyiğit, , 2005Koçyiğit & Deveci, 2007;Koçyiğit & Özacar, 2003;Poisson et al, 2003). Thus, the present paper has two major aims: (1) to present new seismic and field data obtained from field geological mapping carried out at several type localities comprising the northern core of the IA (Boxes in Figure 1(b)), and (2) to reevaluate abovementioned two ideas in the lights of both newly gathered data and literature.…”