We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Reply to Comment by A.P. Nutman et al. on "Tectonics of the Isua Supracrustal Belt 1: P‐T‐X‐d Constraints of a Poly‐Metamorphic Terrane" by A. Ramírez‐Salazar et al. and "Tectonics of the Isua Supracrustal Belt 2: Microstructures Reveal Distributed Strain in the Absence of Major Fault Structures" by J. Zuo et al
- Authors
Ramírez‐Salazar, Anthony; Zuo, Jiawei; Müller, Thomas; Webb, A. Alexander G.; Sorger, Dominik; Piazolo, Sandra; Haproff, Peter; Harvey, Jason; Wang, Qin; Hauzenberger, Christoph; Wong, Tsz Kin
- Abstract
Structural and metamorphic analyses from the works under discussion (Ramírez‐Salazar et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006516; Zuo et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006514) show that the Isua supracrustal rocks can be interpreted to record one single deformation and metamorphic event featuring quasi‐homogeneous deformation and amphibolite facies metamorphism, followed by late static retrogression or thermal event(s). Observed deformation and metamorphic records are consistent with three hypotheses: (a) they represent Neoarchean plate tectonic overprints following Eoarchean plate tectonic evolution (e.g., Nutman et al., 2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021TC007036); (b) they represent Eoarchean heat‐pipe and/or plate tectonic deformation that survived later tectonic event(s) (e.g., Ramírez‐Salazar et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006516; Zuo et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006514), and; (c) they represent one major Neoarchean tectonic event, such that the Isua supracrustal belt (ISB) records Eoarchean protolith‐related processes but does not record Eoarchean metamorphism nor deformation. While a heat‐pipe model for crustal formation is central to hypothesis 2, it is also a viable crustal formation mechanism for hypothesis 3 where the ISB would still form in a heat‐pipe setting in Eoarchean time, but the major deformation of the heat‐pipe lithosphere happened during Neoarchean time, probably by (proto‐)plate tectonic processes. If the data presented in Zuo et al. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006514 and Ramírez‐Salazar et al. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1029/2020tc006516 only reflect Neoarchean histories, then these cannot be used to refute or support any Eoarchean geodynamic background for the formation of the ISB. Key Points: Neoarchean tectono‐metamorphism is viable and may be the only deformation event. It would likely involve (proto‐)plate tectonicsAll prograde metamorphic records can be interpreted as amphibolite faciesIsua Eoarchean crustal formation is feasible within a heat‐pipe tectonic context
- Publication
Tectonics, 2022, Vol 41, Issue 5, p1
- ISSN
0278-7407
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1029/2021TC007148