Loading…
Model for tectonically driven incision of the younger than 6 Ma Grand Canyon
Accurate models for the incision of the Grand Canyon must include characterization of tectonic influences on incision dynamics such as active faulting and mantle to surface fluid interconnections. These young tectonic features support other geologic data that indicate that the Grand Canyon has been...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Geology (Boulder) 2008-11, Vol.36 (11), p.835-838 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a346t-1b7fb987363a9113362275a2aa791d1191a67d4a8fb8aafa40d2aaf2a102078f3 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a346t-1b7fb987363a9113362275a2aa791d1191a67d4a8fb8aafa40d2aaf2a102078f3 |
| container_end_page | 838 |
| container_issue | 11 |
| container_start_page | 835 |
| container_title | Geology (Boulder) |
| container_volume | 36 |
| creator | Karlstrom, Karl E Crow, Ryan Crossey, L. J Coblentz, D van Wijk, J. W |
| description | Accurate models for the incision of the Grand Canyon must include characterization of tectonic influences on incision dynamics such as active faulting and mantle to surface fluid interconnections. These young tectonic features support other geologic data that indicate that the Grand Canyon has been carved in the past 6 Ma. New U-Pb dates on speleothems are reinterpreted here in terms of improved geologic constraints and understanding of the modern aquifer. The combined data suggest that Grand Canyon incision rates have been relatively steady since 3-4 Ma. Differences in rates in the eastern (175-250 m/Ma) and western (50-80 m/Ma) Grand Canyon are explained by Neogene fault block uplift across the Toroweap-Hurricane system. Mantle tomography shows an abrupt step in mantle velocities near the Colorado Plateau edge, and geodynamic modeling suggests that upwelling asthenosphere is driving uplift of the Colorado Plateau margin relative to the Basin and Range. Our model for dynamic surface uplift in the past 6 Ma contrasts with the notion of passive incision of the Grand Canyon due solely to river integration and geomorphic response to base-level fall. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1130/G25032A.1 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20302076</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1590052551</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a346t-1b7fb987363a9113362275a2aa791d1191a67d4a8fb8aafa40d2aaf2a102078f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0MFKAzEQBuAgCtbqwTcIHgSRrZlkm-weS9EqtHjR8zLdTdqUbVKTXaVvb0p7EE9zmI9_hp-QW2AjAMGeZnzMBJ-M4IwMoMxFxmXBz8mAsRIyJUFckqsYN4xBPlbFgMwXvtEtNT7QTtedd7bGtt3TJthv7ah1tY3WO-oN7daa7n3vVjrZNToq6QLpLKBr6BTd3rtrcmGwjfrmNIfk8-X5Y_qazd9nb9PJPEORyy6DpTLLslBCCizT10JyrsbIEVUJDUAJKFWTY2GWBaLBnDVpZzgC40wVRgzJ_TF3F_xXr2NXbW2sddui076PFWfiIGWCd__gxvfBpd-SASZFOp7QwxHVwccYtKl2wW4x7Ctg1aHU6lRqBck-Hu1K-1hb7Wr940Pb_M1lZZXqlaDEL66cdeI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>201063133</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Model for tectonically driven incision of the younger than 6 Ma Grand Canyon</title><source>GeoScienceWorld</source><creator>Karlstrom, Karl E ; Crow, Ryan ; Crossey, L. J ; Coblentz, D ; van Wijk, J. W</creator><creatorcontrib>Karlstrom, Karl E ; Crow, Ryan ; Crossey, L. J ; Coblentz, D ; van Wijk, J. W</creatorcontrib><description>Accurate models for the incision of the Grand Canyon must include characterization of tectonic influences on incision dynamics such as active faulting and mantle to surface fluid interconnections. These young tectonic features support other geologic data that indicate that the Grand Canyon has been carved in the past 6 Ma. New U-Pb dates on speleothems are reinterpreted here in terms of improved geologic constraints and understanding of the modern aquifer. The combined data suggest that Grand Canyon incision rates have been relatively steady since 3-4 Ma. Differences in rates in the eastern (175-250 m/Ma) and western (50-80 m/Ma) Grand Canyon are explained by Neogene fault block uplift across the Toroweap-Hurricane system. Mantle tomography shows an abrupt step in mantle velocities near the Colorado Plateau edge, and geodynamic modeling suggests that upwelling asthenosphere is driving uplift of the Colorado Plateau margin relative to the Basin and Range. Our model for dynamic surface uplift in the past 6 Ma contrasts with the notion of passive incision of the Grand Canyon due solely to river integration and geomorphic response to base-level fall.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0091-7613</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-2682</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1130/G25032A.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boulder: Geological Society of America (GSA)</publisher><subject>active faults ; age ; aquifers ; Arizona ; Basin and Range Province ; canyons ; carbonate rocks ; Cenozoic ; Coconino County Arizona ; Colorado Plateau ; erosion features ; erosion rates ; faults ; geodynamics ; Geomorphology ; Grand Canyon ; Hurricane Fault ; incised valleys ; karst ; Neogene ; neotectonics ; North America ; Plate tectonics ; sedimentary rocks ; speleothems ; Structural geology ; tectonics ; Tertiary ; Tomography ; travertine ; U/Pb ; United States ; uplifts ; water table</subject><ispartof>Geology (Boulder), 2008-11, Vol.36 (11), p.835-838</ispartof><rights>GeoRef, Copyright 2020, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data from GeoScienceWorld @Alexandria, VA @USA @United States. Reference includes data supplied by the Geological Society of America @Boulder, CO @USA @United States</rights><rights>Copyright Geological Society of America Nov 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a346t-1b7fb987363a9113362275a2aa791d1191a67d4a8fb8aafa40d2aaf2a102078f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a346t-1b7fb987363a9113362275a2aa791d1191a67d4a8fb8aafa40d2aaf2a102078f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,27957,27958,38916</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Karlstrom, Karl E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crow, Ryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crossey, L. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coblentz, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Wijk, J. W</creatorcontrib><title>Model for tectonically driven incision of the younger than 6 Ma Grand Canyon</title><title>Geology (Boulder)</title><description>Accurate models for the incision of the Grand Canyon must include characterization of tectonic influences on incision dynamics such as active faulting and mantle to surface fluid interconnections. These young tectonic features support other geologic data that indicate that the Grand Canyon has been carved in the past 6 Ma. New U-Pb dates on speleothems are reinterpreted here in terms of improved geologic constraints and understanding of the modern aquifer. The combined data suggest that Grand Canyon incision rates have been relatively steady since 3-4 Ma. Differences in rates in the eastern (175-250 m/Ma) and western (50-80 m/Ma) Grand Canyon are explained by Neogene fault block uplift across the Toroweap-Hurricane system. Mantle tomography shows an abrupt step in mantle velocities near the Colorado Plateau edge, and geodynamic modeling suggests that upwelling asthenosphere is driving uplift of the Colorado Plateau margin relative to the Basin and Range. Our model for dynamic surface uplift in the past 6 Ma contrasts with the notion of passive incision of the Grand Canyon due solely to river integration and geomorphic response to base-level fall.</description><subject>active faults</subject><subject>age</subject><subject>aquifers</subject><subject>Arizona</subject><subject>Basin and Range Province</subject><subject>canyons</subject><subject>carbonate rocks</subject><subject>Cenozoic</subject><subject>Coconino County Arizona</subject><subject>Colorado Plateau</subject><subject>erosion features</subject><subject>erosion rates</subject><subject>faults</subject><subject>geodynamics</subject><subject>Geomorphology</subject><subject>Grand Canyon</subject><subject>Hurricane Fault</subject><subject>incised valleys</subject><subject>karst</subject><subject>Neogene</subject><subject>neotectonics</subject><subject>North America</subject><subject>Plate tectonics</subject><subject>sedimentary rocks</subject><subject>speleothems</subject><subject>Structural geology</subject><subject>tectonics</subject><subject>Tertiary</subject><subject>Tomography</subject><subject>travertine</subject><subject>U/Pb</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>uplifts</subject><subject>water table</subject><issn>0091-7613</issn><issn>1943-2682</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpd0MFKAzEQBuAgCtbqwTcIHgSRrZlkm-weS9EqtHjR8zLdTdqUbVKTXaVvb0p7EE9zmI9_hp-QW2AjAMGeZnzMBJ-M4IwMoMxFxmXBz8mAsRIyJUFckqsYN4xBPlbFgMwXvtEtNT7QTtedd7bGtt3TJthv7ah1tY3WO-oN7daa7n3vVjrZNToq6QLpLKBr6BTd3rtrcmGwjfrmNIfk8-X5Y_qazd9nb9PJPEORyy6DpTLLslBCCizT10JyrsbIEVUJDUAJKFWTY2GWBaLBnDVpZzgC40wVRgzJ_TF3F_xXr2NXbW2sddui076PFWfiIGWCd__gxvfBpd-SASZFOp7QwxHVwccYtKl2wW4x7Ctg1aHU6lRqBck-Hu1K-1hb7Wr940Pb_M1lZZXqlaDEL66cdeI</recordid><startdate>20081101</startdate><enddate>20081101</enddate><creator>Karlstrom, Karl E</creator><creator>Crow, Ryan</creator><creator>Crossey, L. J</creator><creator>Coblentz, D</creator><creator>van Wijk, J. W</creator><general>Geological Society of America (GSA)</general><general>Geological Society of America</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20081101</creationdate><title>Model for tectonically driven incision of the younger than 6 Ma Grand Canyon</title><author>Karlstrom, Karl E ; Crow, Ryan ; Crossey, L. J ; Coblentz, D ; van Wijk, J. W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a346t-1b7fb987363a9113362275a2aa791d1191a67d4a8fb8aafa40d2aaf2a102078f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>active faults</topic><topic>age</topic><topic>aquifers</topic><topic>Arizona</topic><topic>Basin and Range Province</topic><topic>canyons</topic><topic>carbonate rocks</topic><topic>Cenozoic</topic><topic>Coconino County Arizona</topic><topic>Colorado Plateau</topic><topic>erosion features</topic><topic>erosion rates</topic><topic>faults</topic><topic>geodynamics</topic><topic>Geomorphology</topic><topic>Grand Canyon</topic><topic>Hurricane Fault</topic><topic>incised valleys</topic><topic>karst</topic><topic>Neogene</topic><topic>neotectonics</topic><topic>North America</topic><topic>Plate tectonics</topic><topic>sedimentary rocks</topic><topic>speleothems</topic><topic>Structural geology</topic><topic>tectonics</topic><topic>Tertiary</topic><topic>Tomography</topic><topic>travertine</topic><topic>U/Pb</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>uplifts</topic><topic>water table</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Karlstrom, Karl E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crow, Ryan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crossey, L. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coblentz, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Wijk, J. W</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Geology (Boulder)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Karlstrom, Karl E</au><au>Crow, Ryan</au><au>Crossey, L. J</au><au>Coblentz, D</au><au>van Wijk, J. W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Model for tectonically driven incision of the younger than 6 Ma Grand Canyon</atitle><jtitle>Geology (Boulder)</jtitle><date>2008-11-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>835</spage><epage>838</epage><pages>835-838</pages><issn>0091-7613</issn><eissn>1943-2682</eissn><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>Accurate models for the incision of the Grand Canyon must include characterization of tectonic influences on incision dynamics such as active faulting and mantle to surface fluid interconnections. These young tectonic features support other geologic data that indicate that the Grand Canyon has been carved in the past 6 Ma. New U-Pb dates on speleothems are reinterpreted here in terms of improved geologic constraints and understanding of the modern aquifer. The combined data suggest that Grand Canyon incision rates have been relatively steady since 3-4 Ma. Differences in rates in the eastern (175-250 m/Ma) and western (50-80 m/Ma) Grand Canyon are explained by Neogene fault block uplift across the Toroweap-Hurricane system. Mantle tomography shows an abrupt step in mantle velocities near the Colorado Plateau edge, and geodynamic modeling suggests that upwelling asthenosphere is driving uplift of the Colorado Plateau margin relative to the Basin and Range. Our model for dynamic surface uplift in the past 6 Ma contrasts with the notion of passive incision of the Grand Canyon due solely to river integration and geomorphic response to base-level fall.</abstract><cop>Boulder</cop><pub>Geological Society of America (GSA)</pub><doi>10.1130/G25032A.1</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0091-7613 |
| ispartof | Geology (Boulder), 2008-11, Vol.36 (11), p.835-838 |
| issn | 0091-7613 1943-2682 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20302076 |
| source | GeoScienceWorld |
| subjects | active faults age aquifers Arizona Basin and Range Province canyons carbonate rocks Cenozoic Coconino County Arizona Colorado Plateau erosion features erosion rates faults geodynamics Geomorphology Grand Canyon Hurricane Fault incised valleys karst Neogene neotectonics North America Plate tectonics sedimentary rocks speleothems Structural geology tectonics Tertiary Tomography travertine U/Pb United States uplifts water table |
| title | Model for tectonically driven incision of the younger than 6 Ma Grand Canyon |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T06%3A32%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Model%20for%20tectonically%20driven%20incision%20of%20the%20younger%20than%206%20Ma%20Grand%20Canyon&rft.jtitle=Geology%20(Boulder)&rft.au=Karlstrom,%20Karl%20E&rft.date=2008-11-01&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=835&rft.epage=838&rft.pages=835-838&rft.issn=0091-7613&rft.eissn=1943-2682&rft_id=info:doi/10.1130/G25032A.1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1590052551%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a346t-1b7fb987363a9113362275a2aa791d1191a67d4a8fb8aafa40d2aaf2a102078f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=201063133&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |