Temporal, spatial and geochemical evolution of late Cenozoic post-subduction magmatism in central and eastern Anatolia, Turkey

Rabayrol, Fabien; Hart, Craig J.R.; Thorkelson, Derek J.

doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2019.03.022

Cited by 49 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 197 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several aspects of Neo‐Tethyan slab evolution are debated, one of the most contentious of which concerns the style and relative timing of collision and break‐off of the northern and southern Neo‐Tethyan Oceans. Below the Bitlis‐Zagros suture (Figure 1), the Bitlis slab, which represents the southern branch of the Neo‐Tethys Ocean, is thought to have undergone complete break‐off (e.g., Lei & Zhao, 2007; Memiş et al., 2020; Zor, 2008), though proposed ages span several geological periods, from 40–5 Ma (e.g., Keskin, 2003; Rabayrol et al., 2019; Schleiffarth et al., 2018). The Izmir‐Ankara‐Erzincan suture, between the Anatolide‐Taurides and the Pontides (Figure 1), marks the former location of the northern branch of the Neo‐Tethys Ocean (e.g., Hässig et al., 2017; Okay & Tüysüz, 1999), often termed the Pontides slab.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic Tomographic Imaging of the Eastern Mediterranean Mantle: Implications for Terminal‐Stage Subduction, the Uplift of Anatolia, and the Development of the North Anatolian Fault

Kounoudis

Bastow

Ogden

et al. 2020

Geochem Geophys Geosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Eastern Mediterranean captures the east‐west transition from active subduction of Earth's oldest oceanic lithosphere to continental collision, making it an ideal location to study terminal‐stage subduction. Asthenospheric‐ or subduction‐related processes are the main candidates for the region's ∼2 km uplift and Miocene volcanism; however, their relative importance is debated. To address these issues, we present new P and S wave relative arrival‐time tomographic models that reveal fast anomalies associated with an intact Aegean slab in the west, progressing to a fragmented, partially continental, Cyprean slab below central Anatolia. We resolve a gap between the Aegean and Cyprean slabs, and a horizontal tear in the Cyprean slab below the Central Anatolian Volcanic Province. Below eastern Anatolia, the completely detached “Bitlis” slab is characterized by fast wave speeds at ∼500 km depth. Assuming slab sinking rates mirror Arabia‐Anatolia convergence rates, the Bitlis slab's location indicates an Oligocene (∼26 Ma) break‐off. Results further reveal a strong velocity contrast across the North Anatolian Fault likely representing a 40–60 km decrease in lithospheric thickness from the Precambrian lithosphere north of the fault to a thinned Anatolian lithosphere in the south. Slow uppermost‐mantle wave speeds below active volcanoes in eastern Anatolia, and ratios of P to S wave relative traveltimes, indicate a thin lithosphere and melt contributions. Positive central and eastern Anatolian residual topography requires additional support from hot/buoyant asthenosphere to maintain the 1–2 km elevation in addition to an almost absent lithospheric mantle. Small‐scale fast velocity structures in the shallow mantle above the Bitlis slab may therefore be drips of Anatolian lithospheric mantle.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic Tomographic Imaging of the Eastern Mediterranean Mantle: Implications for Terminal‐Stage Subduction, the Uplift of Anatolia, and the Development of the North Anatolian Fault

Kounoudis

Bastow

Ogden

et al. 2020

Geochem Geophys Geosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The surface geology across the East Anatolian Plateau is dominated by widespread Neogene-Quaternary magmatism approximately (40,000 km 2 ), varying in composition from basaltic to granitic (Innocenti et al, 1976(Innocenti et al, , 1980(Innocenti et al, , 1982Pearce et al, 1990;Yılmaz, 1990;Ercan et al, 1990;Notsu et al, 1995;Bigazzi et al, 1997;Keskin et al, 1998;Keskin, 2003Keskin, , 2007Şen et al, 2004;Özdemir et al, 2006;Hubert-Ferrari et al, 2009;Kheirkhah et al, 2009;Çolakoğlu & Arehart, 2010;Lebedev et al, 2010;Lebedev, Volkov, et al, 2013;Lebedev, Chugaev, et al, 2016, Lebedev et al, 2018Özdemir, 2011;Sumita & Schmincke, 2013;Özdemir & Güleç, 2014;Selçuk et al, 2016;Oyan et al, 2016Oyan et al, , 2017Oyan, 2018;Di Giuseppe et al, 2017;Açlan & Altun, 2018;Rabayrol et al, 2019) (Figures 1a and 2a). These petrological studies infer the lava chemistry, the origin, and the depth of melting in Eastern Anatolia.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long Wavelength Progressive Plateau Uplift in Eastern Anatolia Since 20 Ma: Implications for the Role of Slab Peel‐Back and Break‐Off

Memiş

Gogus

Uluocak

et al. 2020

Geochem Geophys Geosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stratigraphic evidence is used to interpret that the East Anatolian Plateau with 2 km average elevation today was below sea level ~20 Ma and uplift began in the northern part. The presence of voluminous volcanic rocks/melt production across the plateau—younging to the south—corroborates geophysical interpretations (e.g., high heat flow and lower seismic velocities) that suggest progressive removal of the slab subducting under the Pontides. Here, we conduct numerical experiments that investigate the change in the surface uplift as a response to slab peel‐back and potential break‐off processes under subduction‐accretionary complexes as well as continental lithosphere. Model results show similar types of tectonic behavior and magnitudes of uplift‐subsidence in both oceanic and continental removal processes, and they satisfactorily explain 1.5 km of plateau rise and a ~280 km wide asthenospheric upwelling zone beneath Eastern Anatolia over 18 Myr timescale. Parametric investigation for varying plate strength and convergence velocities show that such model parameters control the amount of surface uplift (1 to 3 km), the width of the asthenospheric upwelling zone, and the potential timing/depth of break‐off of the steepening/peeling slab. Experiments show that slab break‐off develops during the terminal phase, which may correspond to only a few million years ago. Therefore, the long wavelength plateau uplift and magmatism over the Eastern Anatolian‐Lesser Caucasus region since 20 Ma is controlled by progressive slab peel‐back and resulting mantle dynamics. The slab break‐off process (if it happened) has yet an indiscernible role.

show abstract

“…1; Ş engör and Yilmaz, 1981;Jolivet and Faccenna, 2000;Rolland et al, 2012;McQuarrie and van Hinsbergen, 2013). This geodynamic setting caused steepening and subsequent break-off of the subducted oceanic slab (Schleiffarth et al, 2018), which propagated westward beginning in the late Oligocene (Rabayrol et al, 2019b). By contrast, in central Anatolia, which remained unaffected by the direct collision with the Arabian plate, the magmatic front migrated southward beginning in the early Miocene during tectonic escape and slab rollback/delamination of the subducting Cyprus slab ( Fig.…”

Section: Late Cretaceous To Cenozoic Evolution Of Central and Easternmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By contrast, in central Anatolia, which remained unaffected by the direct collision with the Arabian plate, the magmatic front migrated southward beginning in the early Miocene during tectonic escape and slab rollback/delamination of the subducting Cyprus slab ( Fig. 1; Delph et al, 2017;Schleiffarth et al, 2018;Rabayrol et al, 2019b). The combined effects of the collision with Arabia in the east and slab retreat and extension in the Aegean region explain westward tectonic escape of the Anatolian plate since the latest Miocene and Pliocene along the northern and eastern Anatolian faults (e.g., Faccenna et al, 2006).…”

Section: Late Cretaceous To Cenozoic Evolution Of Central and Easternmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metallogeny of the Tethyan Orogenic Belt: From Mesozoic Magmatic Arcs to Cenozoic Back-Arc and Postcollisional Settings in Southeast Europe, Anatolia, and the Lesser Caucasus: An Introduction

Moritz

Baker

2019

Economic Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The Tethyan mountain ranges stretch from northwestern Africa and western Europe to the southwest Pacific Ocean and constitute the longest continuous orogenic belt on Earth. It is an extremely fertile metallogenic belt, which includes a wide diversity of ore deposit types formed in very different geodynamic settings, which are the source of a wide range of commodities mined for the benefit of society (Janković, 1977, 1997; Richards, 2015, 2016). There are other ore deposit types in this segment of the Tethyan metallogenic belt that are not covered in this special issue, such as bauxite and Ni laterite deposits (Herrington et al., 2016), ophiolite-related chromite deposits (Çiftçi et al., 2019), sedimentary exhalative and Mississippi Valley-type deposits (Palinkaš et al., 2008; Hanilçi et al., 2019), or deposits related to surficial brine processes (Helvacı, 2019).

show abstract

Temporal, spatial and geochemical evolution of late Cenozoic post-subduction magmatism in central and eastern Anatolia, Turkey

Cited by 49 publications

References 197 publications

Seismic Tomographic Imaging of the Eastern Mediterranean Mantle: Implications for Terminal‐Stage Subduction, the Uplift of Anatolia, and the Development of the North Anatolian Fault

Seismic Tomographic Imaging of the Eastern Mediterranean Mantle: Implications for Terminal‐Stage Subduction, the Uplift of Anatolia, and the Development of the North Anatolian Fault

Long Wavelength Progressive Plateau Uplift in Eastern Anatolia Since 20 Ma: Implications for the Role of Slab Peel‐Back and Break‐Off

Metallogeny of the Tethyan Orogenic Belt: From Mesozoic Magmatic Arcs to Cenozoic Back-Arc and Postcollisional Settings in Southeast Europe, Anatolia, and the Lesser Caucasus: An Introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About