Crustal balance and crustal flux from shortening estimates in the Central Andes

Hindle, D.; Kley, J.; Oncken, Onno; Sobolev, Stephan V.; 2.2 Geophysical Deep Sounding, 2.0 Physics of the Earth, Departments, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum

doi:doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2004.11.004

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Journal Article

Crustal balance and crustal flux from shortening estimates in the Central Andes

Authors

Hindle, D.
External Organizations;

Kley, J.
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/oncken

Oncken, Onno
3.1 Lithosphere Dynamics, 3.0 Geodynamics and Geomaterials, Departments, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

/persons/resource/stephan

Sobolev, Stephan V.
2.5 Geodynamic Modelling, 2.0 Physics of the Earth, Departments, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

External Ressource

No external resources are shared

Fulltext (public)

There are no public fulltexts stored in GFZpublic

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Hindle, D., Kley, J., Oncken, O., Sobolev, S. V. (2005): Crustal balance and crustal flux from shortening estimates in the Central Andes. - Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 230, 1-2, 113-124.
https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2004.11.004

https://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_232529

Abstract

The Central Andes of South America form the second largest high elevation plateau on earth. Extreme elevations have formed on a noncollisional margin with abundant associated arc magmatism. It has long been thought that the crustal thickness necessary to support Andean topography was not accounted for by known crustal shortening alone. We show that this may in part be due to a two-dimensional treatment of the problem. A three-dimensional analysis of crustal shortening and crustal thickness shows that displacement of material towards the axis of the bend in the Central Andes has added a significant volume of crust not accounted for in previous comparisons. We find that present-day crustal thickness between 12°S and 25°S is accounted for (not, vert, similar−10% to not, vert, similar+3%)with the same shortening estimates, and the same assumed initial crustal thickness as had previously led to the conclusion of a not, vert, similar25–35% deficit in shortening relative to volume of crustal material. We suggest that the present-day measured crustal thickness distribution may not match that predicted due to shortening, and substantial redistribution of crust may have occurred by both erosion and deposition at the surface and lower crustal flow in regions of the thermally weakened middle and lower crust.