Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 5 – uploaded by Natalia Lubnina

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Fig. 5. Remagnetization clusters formed at different con- tributions of secondary magnetization components of uneven ages: (/) cluster formed by summing of Ural, Devo- nian, and recent remagnetization directions; (2) cluster formed by summing of Caledonian, Ural, Devonian, and Mesozoic remagnetization; (3) primary directions identi- fied in the Neoarchean— Neoproterozoic complexes of the Karelian Craton and key poles with (a) positive and (b) negative inclination used in the calculations; (4) sec- ondary magnetization components identified in the Pre- cambrian complexes of the Karelian Craton; (5) Phanero- zoic remagnetization directions with (a) positive and (b) negative inclination. Letter designations of paleomag- netic directions are given in Tables 1—3.

Figure 5 Remagnetization clusters formed at different con- tributions of secondary magnetization components of uneven ages: (/) cluster formed by summing of Ural, Devo- nian, and recent remagnetization directions; (2) cluster formed by summing of Caledonian, Ural, Devonian, and Mesozoic remagnetization; (3) primary directions identi- fied in the Neoarchean— Neoproterozoic complexes of the Karelian Craton and key poles with (a) positive and (b) negative inclination used in the calculations; (4) sec- ondary magnetization components identified in the Pre- cambrian complexes of the Karelian Craton; (5) Phanero- zoic remagnetization directions with (a) positive and (b) negative inclination. Letter designations of paleomag- netic directions are given in Tables 1—3.

Related Figures (7)

Fig. 1. The paleolatitudinal position of the Karelian Craton at different stages of its Neoarchean—Neoproterozoic history. Digits indicate the age of the Precambrian key poles. Letter designations of the key poles are given in Table 1.
Fig. 1. The paleolatitudinal position of the Karelian Craton at different stages of its Neoarchean—Neoproterozoic history. Digits indicate the age of the Precambrian key poles. Letter designations of the key poles are given in Table 1.
Fig. 2. Comparison of the Precambrian key poles of the Karelian Craton and the Paleoproterozoic—Phanerozoic remagnetization poles with the reference Phanerozoic apparent pole migration path of the East European Craton, according to (Smethurst et al., 1998): (7) Phanerozoic apparent pole migration path of the East European Craton, according to (Smethurst et al., 1998); (2) Pre- cambrian key poles of the Karelian Craton; (3) paleomagnetic poles recalculated from the Paleoproterozoic—Paleozoic second- ary magnetization components of the Karelian Craton; (4) paleomagnetic poles of the global Phanerozoic rock remagnetization of the East European craton. Digits in circles indicate the age of paleomagnetic poles. Letter designations of key poles for the Karelian Craton are given in Table 1; letter designations of secondary components and global remagnetization are given in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
Fig. 2. Comparison of the Precambrian key poles of the Karelian Craton and the Paleoproterozoic—Phanerozoic remagnetization poles with the reference Phanerozoic apparent pole migration path of the East European Craton, according to (Smethurst et al., 1998): (7) Phanerozoic apparent pole migration path of the East European Craton, according to (Smethurst et al., 1998); (2) Pre- cambrian key poles of the Karelian Craton; (3) paleomagnetic poles recalculated from the Paleoproterozoic—Paleozoic second- ary magnetization components of the Karelian Craton; (4) paleomagnetic poles of the global Phanerozoic rock remagnetization of the East European craton. Digits in circles indicate the age of paleomagnetic poles. Letter designations of key poles for the Karelian Craton are given in Table 1; letter designations of secondary components and global remagnetization are given in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
Fig. 3. Basic rock remagnetization areas of the Karelian Craton on the tectonic map, according to (Bogdanova et al., 2016) with additions.
Fig. 3. Basic rock remagnetization areas of the Karelian Craton on the tectonic map, according to (Bogdanova et al., 2016) with additions.
Fig. 4. The correlation of rock remagnetization time with major events of the tectonic evolution of the East European Craton, according to (Bogdanova et al., 2016) with additions: (/—4) tectonic events: (/) accretion and growth of the continental crust; (2) major collision events; (3) postcollision magmatism (AMCG, type A, bimodal); (4) major rift and plume events; (5—8&) rock remagnetization: (5) complete remagnetization, one polarity; (6) complete remagnetization, two polarities; (7) partial remagne- tization, two polarities; (8) partial remagnetization, one polarity.
Fig. 4. The correlation of rock remagnetization time with major events of the tectonic evolution of the East European Craton, according to (Bogdanova et al., 2016) with additions: (/—4) tectonic events: (/) accretion and growth of the continental crust; (2) major collision events; (3) postcollision magmatism (AMCG, type A, bimodal); (4) major rift and plume events; (5—8&) rock remagnetization: (5) complete remagnetization, one polarity; (6) complete remagnetization, two polarities; (7) partial remagne- tization, two polarities; (8) partial remagnetization, one polarity.
(N) Number of samples; (Dec®, Inc°) declination and inclination of average component directions in the geographic coordinate system; (K) vector clustering; (O95) confidence circle radius at a 95% probability for average direction; paleomagnetic pole in terms of coordi- nates of sampling points: (Plat, Plong) latitude and longitude of paleomagnetic pole; (dp » d) ratio of minimum and maximum axes of 95% confidence oval, respectively. References: (1) (Scherbakova et al., 2017); (2) (Mertanen et al., 2006); (3) (Lubnina et al., 2017); (4) (Lubnina et al., 2016); (5) (Lub- nina et al., 2010); (6) (Buchan, 2000); (7) (Walderhaug et al., 2007). lable 1. “Key” paleomagnetic poles obtained from the Neoarchean rocks of the Karelian Craton
(N) Number of samples; (Dec®, Inc°) declination and inclination of average component directions in the geographic coordinate system; (K) vector clustering; (O95) confidence circle radius at a 95% probability for average direction; paleomagnetic pole in terms of coordi- nates of sampling points: (Plat, Plong) latitude and longitude of paleomagnetic pole; (dp » d) ratio of minimum and maximum axes of 95% confidence oval, respectively. References: (1) (Scherbakova et al., 2017); (2) (Mertanen et al., 2006); (3) (Lubnina et al., 2017); (4) (Lubnina et al., 2016); (5) (Lub- nina et al., 2010); (6) (Buchan, 2000); (7) (Walderhaug et al., 2007). lable 1. “Key” paleomagnetic poles obtained from the Neoarchean rocks of the Karelian Craton
(N) Number of samples; (Dec®, Inc®) declination and inclination of average component directions in the geographic coordinate system; (K) vector clustering; (0195) confidence circle radius at a 95% probability for average direction; paleomagnetic pole in terms of coordi- nates of sampling points: (Plat, Plong) latitude and longitude of paleomagnetic pole; (dp, d,,) tatio of minimum and maximum axes of 95% confidence oval, respectively. References: (1) (Scherbakova et al., 2017); (2) (Mertanen et al., 2006); (3) (Lubnina et al., 2017); (4) (Fedotova et al., 1999); (5) (Lub- nina et al., 2009); (6) (Buchan, 2000); (7) (Lubnina et al., 2015); (8) (Mertanen, 1995); (9) (Smethurst et al., 1998).
(N) Number of samples; (Dec®, Inc®) declination and inclination of average component directions in the geographic coordinate system; (K) vector clustering; (0195) confidence circle radius at a 95% probability for average direction; paleomagnetic pole in terms of coordi- nates of sampling points: (Plat, Plong) latitude and longitude of paleomagnetic pole; (dp, d,,) tatio of minimum and maximum axes of 95% confidence oval, respectively. References: (1) (Scherbakova et al., 2017); (2) (Mertanen et al., 2006); (3) (Lubnina et al., 2017); (4) (Fedotova et al., 1999); (5) (Lub- nina et al., 2009); (6) (Buchan, 2000); (7) (Lubnina et al., 2015); (8) (Mertanen, 1995); (9) (Smethurst et al., 1998).
(N) Number of samples; (Dec®, Inc®) declination and inclination of average component directions in the geographic coordinate system; (K) vector clustering; (0195) confidence circle radius at a 95% probability for average direction; paleomagnetic pole in terms of coordi- nates of sampling points: (Plat, Plong) latitude and longitude of paleomagnetic pole; (dp, dj) tatio of minimum and maximum axes of 95% confidence oval, respectively. (A95) 95% confidence circle radius; (@,,) paleolatitude: (*) recent magnetic field direction in the investigation area in terms of 61° N, 35° E. Table 3. Phanerozoic paleomagnetic poles used to calculate a contribution of secondary magnetization components
(N) Number of samples; (Dec®, Inc®) declination and inclination of average component directions in the geographic coordinate system; (K) vector clustering; (0195) confidence circle radius at a 95% probability for average direction; paleomagnetic pole in terms of coordi- nates of sampling points: (Plat, Plong) latitude and longitude of paleomagnetic pole; (dp, dj) tatio of minimum and maximum axes of 95% confidence oval, respectively. (A95) 95% confidence circle radius; (@,,) paleolatitude: (*) recent magnetic field direction in the investigation area in terms of 61° N, 35° E. Table 3. Phanerozoic paleomagnetic poles used to calculate a contribution of secondary magnetization components
Related topics:
GeologyPaleontology
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved