Jökull

Ataaseq assigiiaat ilaat

Jökull - 01.01.2014, Qupperneq 56

Jökull - 01.01.2014, Qupperneq 56
J. Helgason and R. Duncan Borgarfjörður. The Borgarfjörður sequence, W- Iceland is unique in its thorough recording of mag- netic reversals where the study of McDougall et al. (1977) added the Þverá and Síðufjall subchrons to the geomagnetic time scale. The Gauss sequence in Borg- arfjörður is about 435-m-thick but only 234-m-thick in Hafrafell. The Borgarfjörður sequence consists of subaerially erupted lava flows intercalated with 2 to 3 glacial horizons. In Borgarfjörður pillow basalts first occur well above Gauss or in strata with an age of about 1.6 Ma (McDougall et al., 1977) wheras in Hafrafell the oldest pillow basalts have an age over 3.2 Myr. In the Borgarfjörður sequence the first 8 glacials have an age range of between 2.8 to 1.6 Myr and ap- pear sharply intercalated between lava flows without any noticeable relief. In Hafrafell, strata belonging to Gauss time have a total thickness of only 234 m com- posed of: subaerially erupted lavas (169 m, 26 flows), sediments (34 m), and pillow basalts (31 m) with just two clear examples of glaciations and clear erosion surfaces that cut unconformably the underlying lava sequences. What has caused the great difference in Gauss-age volcanic stratigraphy between these two regions? At least two factors could contribute to the observed dif- ferences, namely: (a) different accumulation rates (or volcanic pro- duction). The comparison shows that the magne- tostratigraphy in Borgarfjörður is more complete in containing a number of subchrons that are not present in Hafrafell, namely the reverse Kaena and Mammoth subchrons within Gauss in addition to the normal Jaramillo and Reunion subchrons of the Matuyama chron higher up in the composite section. This would suggest that even if intervals of intense erosion had occurred in Hafrafell, some remains of the subchron strata would still be present as erosion tends to be het- erogeneous in valleys and thus leaving behind the val- ley walls. As this is not the case it is reasonable to conclude that the two times thicker Gauss section in Borgarfjörður is due to higher accumulation rates, be- ing closer to a mature rift zone and more complete recording of the geomagnetic polarity time scale. b) axial rift zone versus rift flank environment. The strata in Hafrafell (Figure 9) consist of lenses of lavas, sediments and breccias that are of much smaller dimensions, than seen at Borgarfjörður. There is a strong indication that strata in Hafrafell were built by progradational oblique lenses toward south during Gauss time. Clearly, considerable relief was present in Hafrafell while gentle lava plains with rivers and lakes appear to have characterized the Borgarfjörður section. Considering these two factors we conclude that volcanic production/accumulation rates (McDougall et al., 1977) were indeed much higher during Gauss time in Borgarfjörður than in Hafrafell. In Borgar- fjörður the greater distance from the main ice sheet favoured greater preservation of the stratigraphic record compared to Hafrafell. Subsidence and burial within the accreting rift in Borgarfjörður also con- tributed to better preservation of the strata, a charac- teristic that did not apply to the Hafrafell region. Most likely, a large portion of the magmatic production in SE Iceland during Gauss time, and other intervals as well, formed intrusions (Walker, 1975) whereas in Borgarfjörður the magmas reached the surface and produced lavas. The Gauss-age sequences in Hafrafell and Borgar- fjörður both have glacial strata. At Hafrafell we ob- serve a well-defined glacial deposit near the mountain base, of age close to ∼3.6 Ma. On the other hand the oldest glacial in Borgarfjörður is no older than ∼2.8 Myr. We note that for both areas only two to three glacials are found in the Gauss sequence. Three fac- tors may explain the different stratigraphic thickness of the two Gauss sequences, namely that much greater erosion took place in the Hafrafell area that caused hiatuses there and smaller volcanic production caused slower accumulation rates. Thirdly, the early onset of glaciation in Hafrafell, at ∼3.60 Ma, compared with ∼2.80 Ma in Borgarfjörður, led to greater erosion dur- ing Gauss time in Hafrafell. Fljótsdalur. Geirsdóttir et al. (2007) show five glacials during the Gauss magnetic chron in Fljóts- dalur, E Iceland, some 120 km NNE of Hafrafell. Thus it is likely that glaciers there would simultane- ously have occupied the Hafrafell area. However, the relatively thin stratigraphic Gauss sequence and as- sociated erosion surfaces in Hafrafell, with only two 56 JÖKULL No. 64, 2014
Qupperneq 1
Qupperneq 2
Qupperneq 3
Qupperneq 4
Qupperneq 5
Qupperneq 6
Qupperneq 7
Qupperneq 8
Qupperneq 9
Qupperneq 10
Qupperneq 11
Qupperneq 12
Qupperneq 13
Qupperneq 14
Qupperneq 15
Qupperneq 16
Qupperneq 17
Qupperneq 18
Qupperneq 19
Qupperneq 20
Qupperneq 21
Qupperneq 22
Qupperneq 23
Qupperneq 24
Qupperneq 25
Qupperneq 26
Qupperneq 27
Qupperneq 28
Qupperneq 29
Qupperneq 30
Qupperneq 31
Qupperneq 32
Qupperneq 33
Qupperneq 34
Qupperneq 35
Qupperneq 36
Qupperneq 37
Qupperneq 38
Qupperneq 39
Qupperneq 40
Qupperneq 41
Qupperneq 42
Qupperneq 43
Qupperneq 44
Qupperneq 45
Qupperneq 46
Qupperneq 47
Qupperneq 48
Qupperneq 49
Qupperneq 50
Qupperneq 51
Qupperneq 52
Qupperneq 53
Qupperneq 54
Qupperneq 55
Qupperneq 56
Qupperneq 57
Qupperneq 58
Qupperneq 59
Qupperneq 60
Qupperneq 61
Qupperneq 62
Qupperneq 63
Qupperneq 64
Qupperneq 65
Qupperneq 66
Qupperneq 67
Qupperneq 68
Qupperneq 69
Qupperneq 70
Qupperneq 71
Qupperneq 72
Qupperneq 73
Qupperneq 74
Qupperneq 75
Qupperneq 76
Qupperneq 77
Qupperneq 78
Qupperneq 79
Qupperneq 80
Qupperneq 81
Qupperneq 82
Qupperneq 83
Qupperneq 84
Qupperneq 85
Qupperneq 86
Qupperneq 87
Qupperneq 88
Qupperneq 89
Qupperneq 90
Qupperneq 91
Qupperneq 92
Qupperneq 93
Qupperneq 94
Qupperneq 95
Qupperneq 96
Qupperneq 97
Qupperneq 98
Qupperneq 99
Qupperneq 100
Qupperneq 101
Qupperneq 102
Qupperneq 103
Qupperneq 104
Qupperneq 105
Qupperneq 106
Qupperneq 107
Qupperneq 108
Qupperneq 109
Qupperneq 110
Qupperneq 111
Qupperneq 112
Qupperneq 113
Qupperneq 114
Qupperneq 115
Qupperneq 116
Qupperneq 117
Qupperneq 118
Qupperneq 119
Qupperneq 120
Qupperneq 121
Qupperneq 122
Qupperneq 123
Qupperneq 124
Qupperneq 125
Qupperneq 126
Qupperneq 127
Qupperneq 128
Qupperneq 129
Qupperneq 130
Qupperneq 131
Qupperneq 132
Qupperneq 133
Qupperneq 134
Qupperneq 135
Qupperneq 136
Qupperneq 137
Qupperneq 138
Qupperneq 139
Qupperneq 140
Qupperneq 141
Qupperneq 142
Qupperneq 143
Qupperneq 144
Qupperneq 145
Qupperneq 146
Qupperneq 147
Qupperneq 148
Qupperneq 149
Qupperneq 150
Qupperneq 151
Qupperneq 152
Qupperneq 153
Qupperneq 154
Qupperneq 155
Qupperneq 156
Qupperneq 157
Qupperneq 158
Qupperneq 159
Qupperneq 160

x

Jökull

Direct Links

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.