13.07.2015 Views

Himalayan hinterland-verging superstructure folds related to ...

Himalayan hinterland-verging superstructure folds related to ...

Himalayan hinterland-verging superstructure folds related to ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

8L. Godin et al. / Journal of Structural Geology xxx (2010) 1e14Fig. 7. Sequential pho<strong>to</strong>graphs of Model 50 (Stages 1e6), documenting infrastructural flow induced after layer-parallel shortening. The model was divided in two: one side withoutpolydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) at the infrastructure (IS)e<strong>superstructure</strong> (SS) contact (A), and the other side with a thin (w0.5 mm) layer of PDMS placed in the upper part of the IS <strong>to</strong>simulate the presence of leucogranites and migmatites in the upper part of the Greater <strong>Himalayan</strong> sequence (B). In Stages A1 and A2, the layer-parallel shortening is accommodatedby buckle <strong>folds</strong> in the SS and by active migration of IS material in cores of SS anticlines. In B1 and B2, the anticlinal cores are filled by PDMS, with minimal vertical IS migration. InSteps 3e6 in both A and B IS lateral flow, characterised by vertical thinning and horizontal stretching, is associated with isoclinal folding near the exhumation front. The geometry ofSS <strong>folds</strong> are modified by IS flow in A6, whereas there is a more efficient SS/IS decoupling visible in B5 and B6. The presence of PDMS favours more efficient decoupling between theSS and the IS, but inhibits geometrical modification of SS <strong>folds</strong> during subsequent IS lateral flow.4.2.1. Stages 1 and 2 e deformation during the shortening phaseDuring the first two stages of shortening, <strong>folds</strong> in the <strong>superstructure</strong>nucleate and propagate from the <strong>hinterland</strong> <strong>to</strong>wards theforeland (Fig. 7, Stages 1e2), comparable <strong>to</strong> the propagation of insequencethrusts predicted by critical taper (Davis et al., 1983). Theinitial phases of shortening produced upright open <strong>folds</strong> in the<strong>superstructure</strong> with a dominant wavelength of 8 mm. As shorteningprogresses, the initially open <strong>folds</strong> become progressively tighter butremain upright. The ductility of the detachment surface (presence orabsence of PDMS) has no apparent effect on fold style and developmentin the <strong>superstructure</strong> (Fig. 7; Stages 1e2). The absence ofthrusts in the model is likely due <strong>to</strong> the limitations of the materialsused but may also be the product of the initial coupling between the<strong>superstructure</strong> and the underlying material that inhibits thrusting(Bonini, 2007). Fold style in the <strong>superstructure</strong> is presumablycontrolled by internal viscosity contrasts, depending on the rheologyof the microlaminates, and coupling with the infrastructure.When strongly coupled <strong>to</strong> the <strong>superstructure</strong> (Fig. 7a), theinfrastructure developed upright <strong>to</strong> gently-inclined <strong>folds</strong> witha similar wavelength <strong>to</strong> <strong>folds</strong> in the overlying <strong>superstructure</strong>. These<strong>folds</strong> were most likely controlled by perturbations created at thebase of the overlying <strong>superstructure</strong>, such as in the core of antiforms,indicating that fold style in the ductile infrastructure wasmost likely controlled by <strong>folds</strong> in the more competent <strong>superstructure</strong>and not vice versa (Fig. 7a; Stages 1e2).When decoupled from the <strong>superstructure</strong> (Fig. 7b), the infrastructuredevelops broad open <strong>folds</strong>, which have a longer wavelengththan those in the <strong>superstructure</strong>. These <strong>folds</strong> becomeprogressively tighter as shortening continues. This suggests thatwhen coupled with the infrastructure, the <strong>superstructure</strong> controlsdeformation in the infrastructure and when decoupled, the infrastructuredeforms independently of the <strong>superstructure</strong> in the earlystages of shortening (Fig. 7b; Stages 1e2).4.2.2. Stages 3e6 e deformation during erosionThe style of deformation in the <strong>superstructure</strong> during erosionappears <strong>to</strong> be controlled by the proximity of the extruding channeland the ductility of the detachment. The most extreme change in<strong>superstructure</strong> fold geometry is found at the erosion front, proximal<strong>to</strong> the extruding infrastructure (Fig. 7a; Stages 5e6). When theductility contrast at the interface is small and significant <strong>superstructure</strong>-infrastructurecoupling exists, <strong>superstructure</strong> <strong>folds</strong> areprone <strong>to</strong> subsequent geometrical modification. When PDMS ispresent and the <strong>superstructure</strong>-infrastructure are effectivelydecoupled, modification of existing structures is slightly lessapparent, but still prominent. Upright <strong>folds</strong> in the <strong>superstructure</strong> arecommonly progressively modified in<strong>to</strong> inclined-<strong>to</strong>-the-<strong>hinterland</strong><strong>folds</strong> during lateral stretching of the infrastructure (Fig. 7a; Stage 6).Erosion in the model foreland decreases the vertical lithostatic load,which creates a lateral lithostatic pressure gradient that triggers thePlease cite this article in press as: Godin, L., et al., <strong>Himalayan</strong> <strong>hinterland</strong>-<strong>verging</strong> <strong>superstructure</strong> <strong>folds</strong> <strong>related</strong> <strong>to</strong> foreland-directed..., Journal ofStructural Geology (2010), doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2010.09.005

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!