Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-htx7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-09T12:24:04.536Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palaeomagnetism of the Lower Carboniferous Billefjorden Group, Spitsbergen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

D. R. Watts
D. R. Watts
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, The University, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Palaeomagnetic data from mid to late Palaeozoic rocks are potentially valuable for testing models of the assembly of Spitsbergen and for determining the palaeo-position of parts of Spitsbergen relative to the major tectonic elements that comprised the Old Red Continent. Fine-grained red sandstones from the Tournaisian to Namurian Billefjorden Group, collected by members of Cambridge Spitsbergen expeditions, were subjected to stepwise chemical and thermal demagnetization. The characteristic magnetization is found in normal and reverse polarities and corresponds to a pole position at 23° S, 332 °E, dp = 5.7°, dm = 10.5°, which is near an early Carboniferous pole computed for the Baltic Shield-Russian Platform (Baltica). When compared to Laurentia (North America) in the context of the revised Mauch Chunk palaeomagnetic study, Spitsbergen falls a few degrees south of the Bullard reconstruction but the error of the determination of the palaeolatitude overlaps with this position. Therefore relative motion between any part of Spitsbergen and Laurentia and Baltica during the Carboniferous is not resolved.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 122 , Issue 4 , July 1985 , pp. 383 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bachtadse, V., Heller, F. & Kröner, A. 1983. Palaeo-magnetic investigations in the Hercynian Mountain belt of central Europe. Tectonophysics 91, 285–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bidgood, D. E. T. & Harland, W. B. 1959. Rock compass: a new aid for collecting oriented specimens. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 70, 641–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bullard, E. C., Everett, J. E. & Smith, A. G. 1965. The fit of the continents around the Atlantic. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A 258, 41–51.Google Scholar
Creer, K. M., Irving, E. & Runcorn, S. K. 1957. Geophysicalinterpretationofpalaeomagnetic directions from Great Britain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A 250, 144–56.Google Scholar
Cutbill, J. L. & Challinor, A. 1965. Revision of the stratigraphical scheme for the Carboniferous and Permian rocks of Spitsbergen and Bjørnøya. Geological Magazine 102, 418–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A. 1953. Dispersion on a sphere. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A 217, 295–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harland, W. B. 1959. Palaeomagnetic investigation of Arctic rocks at Cambridge. The Polar Record 9, 556–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harland, W. B. 1978. The Caledonides of Svalbard. Geological Survey of Canada, Paper no. 78–13, 3–11.Google Scholar
Harland, W. B. 1980. A palaeomagnetic pole position from the folded Upper Devonian Catskill red beds, and its tectonic implications: comment. Geology 8, 258–9.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harland, W. B. & Wright, N. J. R. 1979. Alternative hypothesis for the pre-Carboniferous evolution of Svalbard. Saetrykk av Norsk Polarinstitutt 167, 90–117.Google Scholar
Kent, D. V. & Opdyke, N. D. 1978. Palaeomagnetism of the Devonian Catskill Red Beds: evidence for motion of coastal New England Canadian Maritime region relative to cratonic North America. Journal of Geophysical Research 83, 4441–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, D. V. & Opdyke, N. D. 1979. The early Carboniferous palaeomagnetic field of North America and its bearing on tectonics of the northern Appalachians. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 44, 365–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, D. V. & Opdyke, N. D. 1984. Revised palaeomagnetic directions for the Lower Carboniferous Mauch Chunk Formation of the central Appalachians and their tectonic implications. Journal of Geophysical Research. (In the press.)Google Scholar
Knowles, R. R. & Opdyke, N. D. 1968. Palaeomagnetic results from the Mauch Chunk Formation: a test of the origin of curvature in the folded Appalachians of Pennsylvania. Journal of Geophysical Research 73, 6515–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefort, J. P. & Van Der Voo, R. 1981. A kinematic model for the collision and complete suturing between Gondwanaland and Lauresia in the Carboniferous. Journal of Geology 89, 537–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, J. L. & Morris, W. A. 1983. A review of palaeo-magnetic results from the Carboniferous of North America; the concept of Carboniferous geomagnetic field horizon markers. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 65, 167–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scotese, C. R., Bambach, R. K., Barton, C., Van Der Voo, R. & Ziegler, A. M. 1979. Palaeozoic base maps. Journal of Geology 87, 217–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Der Voo, R. 1983. Palaeomagnetic constraints on the assembly of the Old Red Continent. Tectonophysics 91, 271–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Der Voo, R., French, A. N. & French, R. B. 1979. A Palaeomagnetic pole position from the folded Upper Devonian Catskill red beds and its tectonic implications. Geology 7, 345–8.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuderveld, J. D. A. 1967. AC demagnetization of rocks; analysis of results. In Methods in Palaeomagnetism (ed. Collinson, D. W., Creer, K. M. & Runcorn, S. K.), pp. 254–86. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar