hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Development of the Amerasia Basin: Where are we now?
University of Gävle, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Department of Industrial Development, IT and Land Management, Land management, GIS.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1744-7004
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

This contribution reviews our current understanding of the tectonic development of the Amerasia Basin and presents new analogue modelling results relating to its formation. The Amerasia Basin is separated into the Canada Basin and the Makarov-Povodnikov basins by the Alpha-Mendeleev Ridges. Published data supports a conjugate relationship between the Alaskan and Canadian Arctic margins, in which counterclockwise rotation of Arctic Alaska from Arctic Canada resulted in the opening of the Canada Basin. Thus the tectonic development of the Canada Basin is ‘broadly’ understood, although its precise timing and the role of the Chukchi Plateau remain disputed. This leaves the Amerasia Basin and we identify two significant barriers to understanding its tectonic development: i) The northward extent of the Canada Basin fossil spreading ridge, and ii) the role of LIP magmatism. In assessing the former, we constructed a series of two-plate analogue models with properties homologous of homogeneous continental crust and simulated extension between the plates around a common rotation axis. In all models, a triangular (ocean) basin forms between the two ‘diverging’ plates, however, depending on the mode of opening and initial plate configuration transpressive, transtensive, and ‘pure’ strike-slip structures can be generated. Plates with a fixed pole of rotation that move at the same rate produce a basin that widens away from the pole along a straight ridge, whereas models with a migrating pole of rotation produce a bend in the spreading ridge and this may explain the curved ridge observed in the Canada Basin. Both models produce strike-slip faults of reversed polarity in the region opposite the pole. If the spreading ridge extended to the Lomonosov Ridge (LR), a strike-slip fault boundary is generated ± associated transtensive/transpressive features. Two plates with different spreading rates generate asymmetric basins, which is also a component of the Amerasia Basin. These results elucidate the consequences of sea-floor spreading in the Amerasia Basin and constrain opening scenarios.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017.
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-24777OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-24777DiVA: diva2:1128974
Conference
GSA 2017, 22-25 October 2017, Seattle, Washington, USA
Available from: 2017-07-31 Created: 2017-07-31 Last updated: 2017-08-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nilfouroushan, Faramarz
By organisation
Land management, GIS
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Total: 60 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf