Jökull


Jökull - 01.12.1971, Síða 50

Jökull - 01.12.1971, Síða 50
son, 1966) have assumed that crustal subsidence followed formation of the ridge. There is addi- tional evidence of subsidence in the Norwegian- Greenland Sea in the case of the Jan Mayen Ridge (Johnson and Heezen, 1967). MAGNETICS Fig. 2 is a total field intensity chart south- east of Iceland. The anomalies in the southern part of Fig. 2 strike approximately N 30° E and are a continuation of the lineated Raff- Mason spreading anomalies reported by Avery et al., 1969, in their survey just to the south of this area. These anomalies strike about N 40° E with a spreading rate of 1.13 cm/yr (Avery et al., 1969) indicating a ten degree northward change in strike near Iceland. (In Fig. 1 (profile 3—6) it can be seen that ano- malies 20—21 can be traced as far north as profile 3.) North of profile 3 and from the eastern end of profile 4, the high ampli- tude short wave length anomalies of the Ice- land—Faeroe Ridge predominate. High inten- sity anomalies are superimposed on the (Raff- Mason) anomalies as clearly seen on anomaly 21 (profiles 4 & 5). Between 63° N, 10-12° W a northwest-southeast lineament is present which appears to truncate and bend the ano- malies to the NW. This represents the edge of the Iceland—Faeroe Ridge. A magnetic pro- file from the USNS Kane farther to the south (51° 30' N) is included in Fig. 1 for comparison with the profiles near Iceland. In Fig. 1 (profile 1 right hand edge) as has been previously reported by Avery et al. (1968) Fig. 2. Total field magnetic contour chart southeast of Iceland. Contour interval is 250 gammas. Survey lines were oriented east-west at approximately 20 miles line spacing with several north-east check lines; therefore the contour lines must be considered to be pro- visional. Mynd 2. Kort af heildarsegulsviði suðaustur af Islandi. Milli jafngildislina eru 250 gamma. Mcelilínur lágu A—V með um 20 milna bili. Auk þess voru teknar nokkrar línur með N—S stefnu til prófunar. Jafngildislínur eru þvi ekki nákvœmar. lower-frequency magnetic anomalies are present between the Faeroe and Shetland Islands in- dicative that the basement is considerably deeper. To the southwest, Stride et al. (1967) ancl Bott and Staeey (1967) obtained geo- physical data across the Faeroe bank channel also indicating that the igneous basement occurs at much greater depth (at least one kilometer) in this area. The influence of the Faeroe Is- lands can be seen in the short wave length anomalies just to the west of the “quiet” trace on this profile. SEISMIC REFLECTION As is apparent from the seismic reflection records there is very little sediment on the crest of the Iceland—Faeroe Ridge (Fig. 3). The existence of strong although intermittent bottom currents (Dietrich, 1967) carrying Nor- wegian Sea water south over the ridge to the Atlantic Basin, are the most likely cause of the lack of sediment cover (Johnson and Schneider, 1969; Jones et al., 1970). Jones et al. (1970) also speculate that the thinner sediment cover on the southern flank of the Iceland—Faeroe Ridge is the result of non-deposition or at least lower sedimentation rates caused by the descending Norwegian Sea water. A small sediment lens which may exceed 1 kilometer in depth has apparently filled the scarp wliich would normally act as the eastern insular slope of Iceland (Fig. 3, profiles 1—3). The crest of the Iceland—Faeroe Ridge is only lightly covered by sediment and in places the bed rock is doubtlessly exposed. Profile 5 has the greatest sediment accumulation of about 400 rneters on the crest. It is uncertain if this is representative of decreased bottom current velocity with concomitant greater sedimenta- tion rates. The sediment layers are highly disturbed indicative of tectonism and/or sculpt- ing by bottom currents and slumps. Fig. 4 shows four seismic reflection lines across the southern flank of the Iceland— Faeroe—Shetland Ridge. The sediment cover of up to 1.5 kilometers is apparent on the south flank. Profiles C and D show basement appro- aching the surface and thence rapidly dropping off to form an escarpment. Bott, personal com- munication, has noted similar structures in this 48 JÖKULL 21. ÁR
Síða 1
Síða 2
Síða 3
Síða 4
Síða 5
Síða 6
Síða 7
Síða 8
Síða 9
Síða 10
Síða 11
Síða 12
Síða 13
Síða 14
Síða 15
Síða 16
Síða 17
Síða 18
Síða 19
Síða 20
Síða 21
Síða 22
Síða 23
Síða 24
Síða 25
Síða 26
Síða 27
Síða 28
Síða 29
Síða 30
Síða 31
Síða 32
Síða 33
Síða 34
Síða 35
Síða 36
Síða 37
Síða 38
Síða 39
Síða 40
Síða 41
Síða 42
Síða 43
Síða 44
Síða 45
Síða 46
Síða 47
Síða 48
Síða 49
Síða 50
Síða 51
Síða 52
Síða 53
Síða 54
Síða 55
Síða 56
Síða 57
Síða 58
Síða 59
Síða 60
Síða 61
Síða 62
Síða 63
Síða 64
Síða 65
Síða 66
Síða 67
Síða 68
Síða 69
Síða 70
Síða 71
Síða 72
Síða 73
Síða 74
Síða 75
Síða 76
Síða 77
Síða 78
Síða 79
Síða 80
Síða 81
Síða 82
Síða 83
Síða 84

x

Jökull

Beinleiðis leinki

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Jökull
https://timarit.is/publication/1155

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.