Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-kcxw8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-16T07:42:58.629Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Thick-skinned tectonics and basement-involved fold–thrust belts: insights from selected Cenozoic orogens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2016

OLIVIER LACOMBE*
Affiliation:
Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS, Institut des Sciences de la Terre de Paris (iSTeP), 4 place Jussieu 75005 Paris, France
NICOLAS BELLAHSEN
Affiliation:
Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS, Institut des Sciences de la Terre de Paris (iSTeP), 4 place Jussieu 75005 Paris, France
*
*Author for correspondence: olivier.lacombe@upmc.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Defining the structural style of fold–thrust belts and understanding the controlling factors are necessary steps towards prediction of their long-term and short-term dynamics, including seismic hazard, and to assess their potential in terms of hydrocarbon exploration. While the thin-skinned structural style has long been a fashionable view for outer parts of orogens worldwide, a wealth of new geological and geophysical studies has pointed out that a description in terms of thick-skinned deformation is, in many cases, more appropriate. This paper aims at providing a review of what we know about basement-involved shortening in foreland fold–thrust belts on the basis of the examination of selected Cenozoic orogens. After describing how structural interpretations of fold–thrust belts have evolved through time, this paper addresses how and the extent to which basement tectonics influence their geometry and their kinematics, and emphasizes the key control exerted by lithosphere rheology, including structural and thermal inheritance, and local/regional boundary conditions on the occurrence of thick-skinned tectonics in the outer parts of orogens.

Information

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Main geodynamic and tectonic settings of basement-involved FTBs.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Main characteristics of Tertiary and recent/active FTBs possibly documenting basement-involved, thick-skinned tectonics.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Examples of Cenozoic FTBs with different styles of basement-involved shortening. (a) Oisans (western Alps) style, with distributed shearing within the basement reflecting basement underplating then frontal accretion/exhumation thanks to crustal thrust ramps; (b) Mont Blanc (western Alps) style, with stacking of crustal slices at the rear of the frontal thin-skinned FTB as a result of basement underplating and localized exhumation then frontal accretion/exhumation thanks to crustal thrust ramps; (c) Zagros style, with superimposed thin-skinned and thick-skinned tectonic styles; (d) Sierras Pampeanas–Laramide style with the basement being involved in shortening in the foreland (Laramide/Sierras Pampeanas basement uplifts) of the thin-skinned FTBs (Sevier/Precordillera, respectively).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Examples of evolution of interpretations through time of two anticlines in the western Taiwan Foothills. Hsiaomei anticline (Central Taiwan): (a) Thin-skinned interpretation by Suppe & Namson (1979) as a fault-bend fold; the pre-Miocene ‘basement’ of the Chinese continental margin is not involved in shortening. (b) Interpretation by Hung et al. (1999) as related to the reverse reactivation of the upper part of an inherited normal fault. In this view, the crystalline upper crust remains undeformed and the style of deformation is still to be considered as thin-skinned. (c) Thick-skinned interpretation by Lacombe & Mouthereau (2006) modified after Yang et al. (2001). The anticline is related to basement-involved thrusting, i.e. the upper crust is involved in shortening. Shortening is much lower with the thick-skinned than with the thin-skinned interpretations. Chingtsaohu anticline (NW Taiwan): (d) Interpretation by Namson (1981) as a fault-bend fold. (e) Interpretation by Yang et al. (1996) as related to shallow thrusting rooting within shallow décollement levels interacting with a high-angle thrust resulting from the reverse reactivation of an inherited normal fault of the Chinese passive margin.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Evolution of ideas about the structural style of the Umbria–Marches domain of the Northern Apennines (modified after Scisciani et al.2014). (a) Thin-skinned tectonic style, with imbrication of sedimentary units detached along the Triassic evaporites, over an undeformed and buried basement (Bally et al.1986). (b) Thick-skinned tectonic style (Calamita et al.2000). (c) Thick-skinned tectonic style with imbricated array of gently dipping thrusts cutting through basement and sedimentary cover (Mirabella, Barchi & Lupattelli, 2008). (d) Thick-skinned tectonic style with inversion of Permo-Triassic basins with relatively steeply dipping faults (Tavarnelli et al.2004). (e) Thick-skinned tectonic style with deep-rooted basement-involved positive inversion of pre-existing extensional basins (Scisciani et al.2014). Note the different shortening estimates and depth of basement between cross-sections.

Figure 5

Figure 6. Shortening mechanisms in the cover and the basement in the Zagros (modified after Mouthereau, Lacombe & Verges, 2012). (a) Topography (GTOPO30) and main structural features of the SE Zagros belt (Fars). (b) Cross-section of the Fars region. (c) Observed wavelength components of the topography showing the superimposition of regional topography (crustal deformation) and local fold topography (folding), modified after Mouthereau, Lacombe & Meyer (2006). (d) Principles of the crustal-scale orogenic wedge modelling of the regional topography, modified after Mouthereau, Lacombe & Meyer (2006). (e) Interpretative sketch showing the relationships between seismogenic deformation, main decoupling levels and topography in the Zagros orogenic wedge (modified after Mouthereau, Lacombe & Verges, 2012).

Figure 6

Figure 7. Evolution of ideas about the structural style of the Fars province roughly along the section of Figure 6. (a) Interpretation of the Fars as completely detached on Hormuz salt (McQuarrie, 2004). (b) Interpretation considering basement thrusting responsible for major steps of the basement–cover interface and accounting for significant step-like changes in the base level of synclines below a detached faulted and folded cover (Sherkati, Letouzey & Frizon de Lamotte, 2006). (c) Interpretation with long-term shortening being achieved by cover folding (buckling) above the Hormuz salt that is cut occasionally by active basement thrusts (Mouthereau et al.2007; Mouthereau, Lacombe & Verges, 2012); the Fars thus results from the propagation and stacking of deep-reverse faults rooting at depth into the middle–lower crust. (d) Interpretation by Allen et al. (2013) with most cover thrusts as blind and not cutting through exposed anticlines, and a few basement faults associated with changes in structural relief and along which large earthquakes occur. MFF – Mountain Front Fault; HZF – High Zagros Fault; MZT – Main Zagros Thrust.

Figure 7

Figure 8. The Taiwan orogen. Insert: Main structural units of Taiwan. Isobaths in metres. PH, KH – Peikang/Kuanyin Highs; HR – Hsuehshan Range; S-PTFZ – Sanyi–Puli Transfer Fault Zone; CTFZ – Chishan Transfer Fault zone; J – 2010 Mw 6.2 Jiashian earthquake; N1 and N2 – 27 March ML 6.2 and 2 June ML 6.5 2013 Nantou earthquakes. (a1) Seismic evidence of reactivation of inherited basement faults from the Chinese continental margin in NW Taiwan (data after Yang et al.1996, 1997). (a2) Kinematic model of the NW Taiwan arcuate belt (modified after Lacombe et al.2003). The curvature of the basin-controlled salient is accommodated to the south by the Pakua Transfer Fault Zone (PTFZ) and to the north by a diffuse oblique ramp (the Kuanyin Transfer Fault Zone, KTFZ) where high-angle wrench-thrust faults inherited from the inversion of normal faults guided the emplacement of thin-skinned low-angle thrusts. WF – Western Foothills; HR – Hsuehshan Range; Central R – Central Range; CR – Coastal Range; a – local extension accommodating curvature along the limbs of the arc; b – normal fault of the margin; c – high-angle wrench-thrust fault; d – vertical axis rotations. (a3) Structural sketch map of the Taiwan thrust belt, showing locations of the different types of thrust-belt fronts in western Taiwan and their relationship with the shape of the pre-Miocene basement. The along-strike variation of structural style is correlated with along-strike variations in the main stress regimes and demonstrates the evolution from prominent strike-slip regimes to purely compressional regimes especially in areas where basin inversion occurs. (b) Seismological evidence for crustal shortening in western Central Taiwan: (b1) Crustal cross-section modified after Brown et al. (2012) and Camanni et al. (2014). (b2) Crustal cross-section modified after Chuang et al. (2013). The red beach balls denote the Nantou main shocks, and the black beach balls denote the Chi-Chi aftershocks and other ML > 5.5 events. (c) Seismological evidence of crustal shortening and a deep décollement in SW Taiwan. (c1) Distribution with depth of mean slip and aftershocks following the 2010 Jiashian earthquake (blue circles) together with background seismicity (grey circles). White star denotes the location of the 2010 Jiashian earthquake main shock (modified after Ching et al.2011; Rau et al.2012). (c2) Conceptual tectonic model for southern Taiwan inferred from the 2010 Jiashian earthquake. Red star denotes the location of the main shock. CCU – Chaochou fault; CKU – Chukou fault; CTFZ – Chishan Transfer Fault Zone (modified after Ching et al.2011).

Figure 8

Figure 9. (a) Structural sketch of the western Alps. AR – Aiguilles Rouges; MB – Mont Blanc; GR – Grandes Rousses; B – Belledonne. (b) Structural sketch of the Pyrenees. NPZ/SPZ – North/South Pyrenean Zone. (c) Structural sections across the external zones at the latitude of the northern Mont-Blanc ECM (c1), of the southern Mont-Blanc ECM (c2) and of the Oisans ECM (c3) (modified after Bellahsen et al.2014). Note the along-strike change in accommodation of basement shortening from c1 to c3. (d) Structural sections across the Axial Zone of the Pyrenees and the southern Pyrenean FTB. (d1) Modified after Jolivet et al. (2007). (d2) Modified after Mouthereau et al. (2014).

Figure 9

Figure 10. (a) Simplified structural map of the NW Alpine foreland. V – Vosges; BF – Black Forest; AR – Aiguilles Rouges; MB – Mont Blanc; B – Belledonne; O – Oisans. (b) Crustal-scale cross sections from the Bresse graben to the Belledonne massif emphasizing inversion of inherited Palaeozoic basin beneath the thin-skinned Jura FTB, basement thrusting and likely occurrence of a deep crustal décollement rooting at the brittle–ductile transition. Pz, Mz and Cz – Palaeozoic, Mesozoic and Cenozoic. (c) Two-stage tectonic evolution the northwestern Jura front. Late Miocene to early Pliocene thin-skinned deformation dominated in the Besançon Zone (BZ), followed by thick-skinned deformation involving both Mesozoic cover and Palaeozoic basement in the Avant-Monts Zone. This thick-skinned deformation is associated with compressional to transpressional reactivation of pre-existing normal faults of Palaeogene to Palaeozoic age of the intracontinental Rhine–Bresse Transfer Zone (RBTZ) and the underlying late Palaeozoic Burgundy Trough (modified after Madritsch, Schmid & Fabbri, 2008). BG – Bresse graben; LSH – La Serre Horst; URG – Upper Rhinegraben. (d) Distribution of inherited Permo-Carboniferous basins beneath the Jura and the Alpine foreland (modified after Truffert et al.1990). 1 – Palaeozoic basement. 2 – Permo-Carboniferous basins. 3 – Meso-Cenozoic cover of the Alpine foreland. 4 – Jura FTB. 5 – Faults bounding Permo-Carboniferous basins (documented = solid lines/inferred = dashed lines). (e) Seismic evidence for the compressional reactivation of an E–W-trending, N-dipping high-angle late Palaeozoic basement fault in northern Jura. This fault clearly cuts through the décollement and probably formed during the thick-skinned post-4–3 Ma tectonic stage. (f) Seismic evidence of inversion of a Permo-Carboniferous graben underneath the Jura and post-dating thin-skinned folding and thrusting (modified after Philippe et al.1996).

Figure 10

Figure 11. (a) Modern geodynamic setting of the Sierras Pampeanas of Argentina compared to the early Eocene geodynamic setting of the Laramide uplifts in the foreland of the Rockies (modified after Jordan & Allmendinger, 1986). (b) Structural section across the Precordillera and the Sierras Pampeanas (location shown by heavy line in a) (Bellahsen et al.2016, this issue). (c) Structural section across the easternmost Sevier thin-skinned FTB and the Laramide basement uplifts (location shown by heavy line in a) (modified after Stone, 1993; Marshak, Karlstrom & Timmons, 2000). (d) Possible models of accommodation of Laramide uplifts at the crustal/lithospheric scale, which could also apply to the Sierras Pampeanas.

Figure 11

Figure 12. Basement-cored folding. The shaded area denotes the domain where basement and/or cover are physically damaged and strained as a result of the accommodation of slip along the master thrust. (a) Folds where the forelimb basement–cover interface is a fault (a1) compared to folds where the forelimb basement–cover interface is a rotated unconformity (a2) (modified after Schmidt, Genovese & Chase, 1993). (b) Section across the Maverick Spring anticline (Laramide belt) (modified after Stone, 1993). (c) Trishear model (Erslev, 1991). (d) Interpretation of the Rattlesnake anticline (Laramide belt), involving distributed deformation along splay faults at the tip of the basement fault and at the top of the basement (Beaudoin et al.2012). (e) Sierra de Hualfın anticline (Sierras Pampeanas): basement folding is accommodated by both a main thrust trishear zone and a subordinate back-thrust trishear zone (modified after Garcia & Davis, 2004). (f) Sierra Pie de Palo anticline (Sierras Pampeanas): basement shortening is accommodated by reverse faults localized along inherited foliation planes in the basement (Bellahsen et al.2016, this issue). (g) Oisans ECM (western Alps): ‘folding’ of the basement–cover interface is spatially associated with low-angle basement shear zones distributed over a large thickness (modified after Bellahsen et al.2012).

Figure 12

Figure 13. Field examples of basement-involved shortening. (a) Photograph and schematic interpretative cross-section of the Rattlesnake Mountain anticline. (b) Field evidence of the brittle behaviour of the basement rocks that crop out along the Shoshone river in the Rattlesnake Mountain anticline, showing high-angle reverse faults parallel to major fractures within the basement (modified after Beaudoin et al.2012). (c) Field evidence of W-verging reverse shear zones within the basement of the Oisans ECM. Note the sigmoidal shape of the Alpine schistosity (S) within the shear zones. (d) Evidence for mylonitic deformation associated with basement shear zones in the Oisans Massif (western Alps) (modified after Bellahsen et al.2012). Qz – quartz.

Figure 13

Figure 14. Change of lithospheric rheology during stretching and thinning during passive margin formation, which will subsequently control deformation style during collision. (a) Rheological model for a passive margin, emphasizing the effects of thinning and stretching of the lithosphere that lead to the disappearance of ductile middle and lower crust and embrittlement of the crust that is coupled to the mantle (modified after Reston & Manatschal, 2011). (b) Change in rheological properties of the lithosphere as a result of differential stretching (modified after Cloetingh et al.2005).

Figure 14

Figure 15. Distinct groups of orogens recognized by Mouthereau, Watts & Burov (2013) on the basis of the style of deformation, percentage of shortening in foreland FTBs that did not undergo significant syn-collisional burial and heating, and the thermotectonic age of the lithosphere at the time of its involvement in collisional deformation. The first group is characterized by high crustal strain (up to 70%) and is observed within old (>1 Ga), cold and strong cratonic lithosphere. The second group is characterized by limited crustal strain (< 40%) and is observed within young, hot and weak Phanerozoic lithosphere. Modified after Mouthereau, Watts & Burov (2013).

Figure 15

Figure 16. Schematic rheological profiles of the continental crust illustrating possible thermal and structural weakening that may lead to thick-skinned deformation, with or without inversion tectonics.

Figure 16

Figure 17. Different spatial and temporal relationships/sequences between thin-skinned and thick-skinned tectonics in FTBs.