The Cretaceous-Paleogene Mexican orogen: Structure, basin development, magmatism and tectonics

Paleomagnetism and Geochronology of the Early Cretaceous Dipilto Batholith (NW Nicaragua): Chortís Block Large Rotation With Respect to SW North America

“…The previous scenario assumes that the Guerrero Terrane was closer to the northern part of the Chortís block, while this scenario does not rule out the possibility of an extension to the south of the tectonostratigraphic terranes of Mexico, or some oceanic crust. In turn, the consequences of the tectonic events of the Guerrero Terrane accretion, such as the development of the Cretaceous‐Paleogene Mexican Fold and Thrust Belt (MFTB; Fitz‐Díaz et al, ), could be linked, in part, to rotation of the Chortís block following the Aptian‐Albian, perhaps as part of a joint accretion mechanism of the Guerrero Terrane with the Mexican mainland, and the collision of the Siuna‐MCOT terrane with the southern margin of the Chortís block in the Late Cretaceous.…”

“…Several reviews of Mexican tectono-stratigraphic terranes and complexes include Campa and Coney (1983), Keppie (2004), Ortega-Gutiérrez et al (2018), and Sedlock et al (1993). Since Early Cretaceous time the Chortís block has interacted with the following terranes and complexes ( Figure 1a): (1) Oaxaca, with Grenville (1300-990 Ma) basement consisting mainly of granulite facies (Solari et al, 2003, and others); (2) Mixteco, with a Paleozoic polymetamorphic basement, comprising diverse metamorphic and igneous suites of Ordovician to Early Triassic ages (Ortega-Gutiérrez et al, 1999; and others); (3) Juárez, consisting of a Mesozoic sequence of low to medium-grade phyllites and schist, and some MORB Andjić et al, 2018;Campa & Coney, 1983;Centeno-García, 2017;Fitz-Díaz et al, 2018;Flores et al, 2015;Sedlock et al, 1993). In dotted lines, the classical models that position the Chortís block juxtaposed south of Mexico (x) and with a separation angle (y) Rogers, Mann, Scott, & Patino, 2007).…”

“…(a) Tectonic and geological frameworks of southwestern Mexico and Central America (based on Andjić et al, ; Campa & Coney, ; Centeno‐García, ; Fitz‐Díaz et al, ; Flores et al, ; Rogers, Mann, & Emmet, ; Sedlock et al, ). In dotted lines, the classical models that position the Chortís block juxtaposed south of Mexico ( x ) and with a separation angle ( y ) (Molina‐Garza et al, ; Rogers, Mann, Scott, & Patino, ).…”

Evidence for Whole Mantle Convection Driving Cordilleran Tectonics

“…followed by marine sedimentation throughout the North American Cordillera approximately 150-170 Myr ago (Shervais et al, 2004); (iv) the absence of tectonic shortening or foreland basin deposition in the retroarc region approximately 125-150 Myr ago (Yonkee & Weil, 2015); (v) a significant pene-contemporaneous magmatic lull in the arc complexes from approximately 120 to 140 Myr ago potentially implying subduction erosion along the arc system (Yamamoto et al, 2009); (vi) thinning of the magmatic arc crust of the North American Cordillera from approximately~145-110 Ma (Profeta et al, 2015); and (vii) a switch to an extensional stress regime indicated by the latest Jurassic Independence dike swarm (Chen & Moore, 1979). Candidates for the location of the arc-continent suture (Sigloch & Mihalynuk, 2017) predicted in the proposed model include, in northern North America, the Coast belt (Sigloch & Mihalynuk, 2013) or within the western Foreland belt of the Cordillera (Johnston, 2008;McLeish & Johnston, 2019;Zhang et al, 2019), as exemplified by the Salmon River suture (Selverstone et al, 1992) and the Arperos suture in Mexico (Fitz-Díaz et al, 2018).…”

“…The holistic model presented here also provides a unified explanation for otherwise enigmatic events such as the pene-contemporaneous formation of large back-arc basins along the entire Cordillera (Figure 4) during slab rollback as the arc retreats toward the meridional downwelling. In North America, geologic evidence for such a back-arc system are (i) the Gravina, Arperos, and Sabinas basins that have long been considered an intraarc to back-arc basin that formed from the Late Jurassic (Oxfordian) to Late Cretaceous (pre-Cenomanian;Fitz-Díaz et al, 2018;Mezger et al, 2001); (ii) the absence of continental ash deposits to accompany the Early Cretaceous plutonic rocks (Christiansen et al, 1994) despite extensive Early Cretaceous nonmarine sedimentation (Sames et al, 2010), suggesting that the magmatic arcs were located offshore with the bulk of volcanic ash deposited in the back-arc basins; (iii) the formation of ophiolites Note that compilation incorporates data reported by scholarly reviews from specific orogenic segments or regions. Undoubtedly, there are data in the scientific literature not included in this compilation; nevertheless, the data reported here are consistent with our interpretation that hemispheric back-arc formation followed by back-arc closure and initiation of foreland basin sedimentation/deformation.…”