Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
deJong_The Contact between HP/LT Mulhacen Complex and Underlying LP/LT Veleta Complex, Betics, Spain_Geologie Mijnbouw 1993

deJong_The Contact between HP/LT Mulhacen Complex and Underlying LP/LT Veleta Complex, Betics, Spain_Geologie Mijnbouw 1993

Ratings: (0)|Views: 12 |Likes:
Published by Koen de Jong
The Veleta Complex is the lowermost Betic nappe and has not been deeply subducted in contrast to the overlying Mulhacen Complex. The contact of both complexes is parallel to the main tectonic foliation (S2) in them. The asymmetry of fabric elements in the top of the Veleta Complex demonstrates a westward movement of the Mulhacen Complex during its exhumation. The nappe contact was folded by D3 structures and subsequently reactivated as shown by concentration of extensional structures in the uppermost 20m of the Veleta Complex. The reactivation of the contact zone at low-pressure conditions explains why some petrological studies in the top of the Veleta Complex failed to demonstrate differences in metamorphic pressure with respect to the Mulhacen Complex.
The Veleta Complex is the lowermost Betic nappe and has not been deeply subducted in contrast to the overlying Mulhacen Complex. The contact of both complexes is parallel to the main tectonic foliation (S2) in them. The asymmetry of fabric elements in the top of the Veleta Complex demonstrates a westward movement of the Mulhacen Complex during its exhumation. The nappe contact was folded by D3 structures and subsequently reactivated as shown by concentration of extensional structures in the uppermost 20m of the Veleta Complex. The reactivation of the contact zone at low-pressure conditions explains why some petrological studies in the top of the Veleta Complex failed to demonstrate differences in metamorphic pressure with respect to the Mulhacen Complex.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Science
Published by: Koen de Jong on Jun 16, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/08/2014

pdf

text

original

 
Geologic en Mijnbouw
71:227
-237
,1993.
©
1993
Kluwer
Academic
Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
The tectono-metamorphic evolution
of
the Veleta Complex andthe development
of
the contact with the Mulhacen Complex (Betic Zone,SE Spain)
Koen de Jong
Institute
of
Earth Sciences, Vrije Universiteit,
De
Boelelaan 1085,
1081
HV
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Received 5
December
1991
;accepted in revised form
23
November
1992
Key words:
polyphase deformation, strain gradient,
shear
sense,
quartz
c-axis
preferred
orientation,extensional crenulation cleavage, relationship mineral growth-deformation
Abstract
Four
phases
of penetrative deformation (D
1vcl
to
D/c
1)
have
been
distinguished in
the uppermost
0.5
km of
theVele
ta
Complex,
the
lowest in the stack
of
four
nappe
complexes
of the Be
ic Zone.
The
contact
of the
VeletaComplex with the overlying Mulhacen Complex
is
parallel to S
2,
which
is
the main tectonic foliation in
both
complexes.
The
rotation sense
of
synkinematically grown D
2vcl
garnets and
the
asymmetry
of preferred
orientations
of quartz
c-axes in mylonites in the highest
part
of
the Veleta Complex
demonstrate
top-to-the-west
shear
,pointing to a westward
movement
ofthe
Mulhacen
Complex.
The
nappe contact
was folded and locally
overturned
during D
3vc
l,
demonstrating
that
the tectonic contact was formed during D
2ve
l.
During
D/e
1
thenappe
contact wasreactivatedas shown by
concentration of
extensional structures in
the uppermost
20m
of
the Veleta Complex.
It
is
argued
that
reactivation
occurred
during overthrusting
of
the
Alpujarride
Complex
at
higher structural level.
Although metamorphism of
the graphite-rich pelites has
not
resulted in characteristic mineral assemblages,
the
relationship
between
mineral growth
anddeformation
shows that, during the early tectonic evolution,
both
pressure and
temperature
in the Veleta
Complex
were
lower
than
in
the
overlying
Mulhacen
Complex.
Introduction
TheInternal
Zone
of
the Betic Cordilleras (Betic
Zone)
consists
of
a stack
of nappe
complexes,which
overrode
the
External
Zone
,equivalents
of
whichcrop
out
in windows as the (very) low-grade
meta
morphic Almagride Complex (Simon
1987,
De
Jong
1991).
The
structurally
deepest
rocks
of
the Betic
Zone
are
exposed in the Sierra Nevada and in
the
western Sierra de Ios Filabres.
They are
often garnet-bearing,graphite-rich mica schists and quartzites, reaching a thickness
of 7-8
kilometres,whichwere
incorporated
by
Egeler
&
Simon
(1969)
into
onemajornappe
complex, the Nevado-FilabrideComplex,which underlies
theAlpujarride
Complex.
Theseauthors
considered the graphite-richmetasediments as
the
pre
-Alpine
basement of the
lowermost Nevado-Filabride tectonic unit,the Nevado-Lubrin Unit.
Diaz
de
Federico
et
al.
(1979)
demonstrated
,however,
that
a
fundamental
twofold subdivision can
be made
within the
monoto
nous graphite-rich
metasedimentarysequenceof
the lower
part
of
theN
evado-Fila
bride
Complex into a Veleta Complex and an overlying MulhacenComplex.
They
based
their
conclusions on the basalspacing
of the
crystal lattice
of
colourless mica,
 
228which
is
pressure-dependent (Sassi
&
Scolari 1974).
It
appeared
that the rocks
of
the Veleta Complexexperiencedlower metamorphic pressures than theMulhacen Complex.
The
contact between bothnappe complexes
is
a shear zone (Gonzalez-Lodeiro
et
al.1984, Martfnez Martfnez 1986, Orozco1986,Garcfa Duefi.as
et
al.1987,
De
Jong
1991).
However, major controversies exist on the sense
of
shearin the mylonite zone
in
the top of the VeletaComplex,which
is
interpreted aseithertop-to-theeast (Gonzalez-Lodeiro
et
al.1984,Orozco 1986)
or
top-to-the-west (Garcfa Duefi.as
et
al.1987,
De
Jong
1991).
Deformation in the Veleta Complex was polyphase and three (Gonzalez-Lodeiro
et
al.1984)
or
four(Martfnez Martfnez 1986,
Gomez
-Pugnaire
&
Franz1988,
De
Jong
1991)
phases
of
penetrative deformationhave
been
recognized.Gomez-Pugnaire
&
Franz (1988) argued
that
theearliestand most im
portant
deformation structures were formed duringa pre-Alpine tectonic phase.
Their
conclusion wasbased on the composition of
garnet
in the VeletaComplex,which
is
similar to garnet included in
pre
sumedpre-Alpine chloritoid in the Mulhacen Complex.Untilnow little attention has
been
paid to thetiming
of
the establishment of the contact with theoverlying Mulhacen Complex, relative to the superimposedphases of deformation in the Veleta Complex.Overturning
of
mylonites by younger foldingphase
s,
or
overprinting
of
crystallographic fabricsdue to renewed shear have important bearing
on
the interpretation of the kinematics of this contact.Furthermore, establishment of the relationshipbetweensuperimposeddeformation phases and mineralgrowth sheds light
on
the importance of Alpineversuspre-Alpine mineral growth in the VeletaComplex.In
order
to
solve these problems, selectedareas in the easternmost Sierra Nevada and in thewestern Sierra de Ios Filabres (Fig.
1)
were studiedindetail
(De
Jong 1991), the results
of
which are re
ported
in this article.
The contact between the Veleta and MulhacenComplexes
The
Veleta Complex and the lowermost kilometres
of
the Mulhacen Complex are predominantly madeup
of
graphite-rich,often garnet-bearing micaschists with intercalations of quartzites. In the eastern
Be
ic
Zone
(Lomo de Bas) intercalated carbonates
ofthe
Veleta Complex yielded Eifelian (middleDevonian) fossils (Lafuste
&
Pavilion 1976). Puga
&
Diaz de Federico (1978) argued that a lighter col
our
of the rocks in the uppermost 200m
of
the Veleta Complex and their albite content,may point tothe presence,
at
least locally, of (Permo-)Triassicrocks
at
that structural level. This would imply
that
the
nappe
contact may be characterized by the superposition of older
on
younger rocks, as the metasedimentsof the basel
part
of the Mulhacen Complex were argued to
be
of pre-Permian age (Egeler
&
Simon 1969,
De
Jong
&
Bakker
1991).
Garnets
in the Veleta Complex are generallysmall
(<lmm)
compared to garnets of the Mulhacen Complex, which are
at
least a few millimetres indiameter;however,the size
of
garnets in the
top
ofthe Veleta Complex tends to increase upwards. Incontrast to the work
of
Diaz de Federico
et
al.(1979) in the central Sierra Nevada, the basal spacing
of
colourless mica in
both
the Mulhacen and Veleta Complexes failed as pressure indicator forearlyAlpine metamorphic conditions in the easternSierra Nevada, where
partof
the present study wasperformed. This
is
clearly shown by the
data
of Martfnez Martfnez (1986),which indicate similarly lowpressures for
both
nappe complexes.This review shows that distinction between
bothnap
pes purely
on
lithological and petrological criteria
is
not
conclusive. Therefore, the contact between the Veleta and Mulhacen Complexes was defined in the present study on structural criteria: theuppermost 200-300m of the Veleta Complex arecharacterized by a conspicuously upwards increasing strain,culminating in a zone
of
white-colouredquartz mylonites. They are overlain by a homogeneousseriesof garnet-bearing quartzitic micaschists
of
the Mulhacen Complex. This structuralandlithological contact has
been mapped out
(Fig.
1).
 
NACIMIENTO
D
Mulhacen ComplexVeleta ComplexQuaternaryD
2
nappe contact
229
3709
Fig.
1.
Tectonicmap of area betweentheeastern Sierra Nevada andtheSierra de los Filabres,displaying the contactbetweenthe Veleta Complexand the overlying Mulhacen Complex. Orientations
of
0
3
structures
(S:
foliation,
L:
lineation)in bothnappesare indicated.
Polyphasedeformation
On
the basis
of
overprinting criteria, four phases
of
superimposed penetrative deformationhave
been
identified in the uppermost 0.5 km
of
the VeletaComplex. This enables
to date
the establishment
of
the
nappe
contact with the overlying MulhacenComplex relative to the sequence
of
deformationphases.
Firstgenerationstructures
(D/e
1)
The
earliest deformation structures comprise
ami-
croscopically folded S
1
foliation, consisting of mica,chloritoid and epidote, within S
2
micro-lithonsandsigmoidalinclusion patterns
of
graphite and occasionally quartzin pre-to syn-D/e
1
garnets (Fig. 2).
The
preferredorientation
of
metamorphic mineralsindicatesa tectonicnature
of
S
1
Second generation structures
(D/e')
D
2
ve
lfolds aretight to isoclinal, inclined to recum
bent
structures with an axialplaneS
2,
whichrefracts
on
tightlyfolded thickquartzitebeds and forms a bedding-parallel foliationin isoclinally folded thin
bedded
quartzite-micaschist sequences.S
2
in micaschists is characterizedbyanalmost perfect quartz-

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->