Advertisement

Swiss Journal of Geosciences

, Volume 112, Issue 2–3, pp 475–506 | Cite as

Deep structure of the Pieniny Klippen Belt in Poland

  • Jan GolonkaEmail author
  • Kaja Pietsch
  • Paweł Marzec
  • Monika Kasperska
  • Jerzy Dec
  • Kamil Cichostępski
  • Stanisław Lasocki
Open Access
Article

Abstract

An interpretation of the deep structure of the Pieniny Klippen Belt in Poland is presented, utilizing a high-resolution deep seismic reflection survey. The studied profiles reach a depth of around 23 km. The seismic lines depict the structure and mutual relationships between the main domains analyzed—the Central Carpathians (CC), the Pieniny Klippen Belt (PKB) and the Outer Carpathians. The seismic lines show the Central Carpathian Paleogene (CCP) sediments covering the Tatric units and overlying Krížna and Choč nappes of the CC south of the PKB. The entire nappe pile comprising the CC units is thrust over sedimentary rocks that probably derived from the European Plate, representing a mixture of autochthonous platform Paleozoic to Neogene sediments and slices of Outer Carpathian and PKB rocks. The older crystalline basement of the European Plate is suspected to be below these sedimentary rocks. The reflections below 20 km depth show a possible boundary between different crustal elements within this plate. The PKB is part a of 3–5 km wide flower structure, limited by fault zones that include faults cutting across sediments of the CCP and the Magura Nappe. The fault marking the southern limit of the PKB is particularly well visible in the seismic sections. The Albian–Lower Miocene flysch sequences, constituting the main components of the PKB, form north-vergent thrust-sheets. During the Albian to Miocene the PKB originated as an accretionary prism in front of the moving CC Plate, followed by plate rotation and strike-slip processes. The entire CC nappe pile is thrust over the Precambrian and Lower Paleozoic crystalline basement of the European Plate and probably slices of the PKP. The Outer Carpathians display an allochthonous character above the European Plate and comprise several north-verging imbricated nappes (thrust-sheets). The European plate dips gently southwards below the PKB and the CC Plate, cut by several deep-reaching faults.

Keywords

Pieniny Klippen Belt Central Carpathians Outer Carpathians Reflection seismics Tectonics Olistoliths 

1 Introduction

The goal of this research was the interpretation of the deep structure of the Pieniny Klippen Belt (PKB) in Poland and mutual relationships between the main analyzed domains: Central Carpathians, Pieniny Klippen Belt (PKB) and Outer (Flysch) Carpathians (Fig. 1). Previously, Golonka et al. (2018b) reprocessed and interpreted the older seismic lines 24-5-87K and 24A-5-87K, that illustrate the plates suture of the Central Carpathian Plate European Plate collision zone along the major Carpathian transect Kraków–Zakopane (Figs. 2 and 3; see also Sikora et al. 1980; Golonka et al. 2005). Here, we present the newest deep seismic reflection survey available in the central part of the Polish Carpathians (Fig. 3). This survey was carried out in the framework of the IS-EPOS: Digital Research Space of Induced Seismicity for EPOS Purposes project (Lasocki and Orlecka-Sikora 2016).
Fig. 1

Geological map of Carpathians and adjacent areas with location of investigated area. Modified from Kováč et al. 1998; Golonka et al. 2018b

Fig. 2

Map of the northern part of the Outer Western Carpathians in Poland with locations of the study area (Fig. 3) and of the cross-sections A–A′ (Fig. 19), B–B′ (Fig. 20), C–C′ (Fig. 4) and Celebration CEL01 deep seismic profile (Fig. 20) (see Sroda et al. 2006). Compiled and modified from various sources (Lexa et al. 2000; Ślączka et al. 2006; Golonka et al. 2018b)

Fig. 3

Sketch map of the central part of the Pieniny Klippen Belt in Poland with the locations of the seismic profiles presented and segments of cross-sections A–A′ (Fig. 18), B–B′ (Fig. 19), C–C′ (Fig. 4).

Modified from Golonka et al. (2018b)

The PKB suture zone and its relationship with the other main domains in the area was the subject of conflicting interpretations based on surface geology, geophysical investigations and deep drillings. Picha (1996) and Picha et al. (2006) postulated that the Central Carpathian plate was thrust over the North European Plate in the western part of the Carpathians. A similar conceptual idea was presented by Roca et al. (1995), Zattin et al. (2011), Jurewicz (2005), Castelluccio et al. (2015, 2016) following Lefeld and Jankowski (1985). On the other hand, Froitzheim et al. (2008) and Plašienka (2018) depicted a steep to subvertical contact between the North European and Central Carpathians deriving from the Adriatic plate. Several deep boreholes in the study area (see Figs. 2 and 3) did not reach the crystalline basement of the Central Carpathian or European plate.

The Deep Seismic sounding CELEBRATION 2000 revealed the deep structure of Central Europe (Grad et al. 2006; Sroda et al. 2006; Janik et al. 2009, 2011; Hrubcová and Środa 2015). The CEL01 line located west of the investigated area (Fig. 2) shows the existence of feature interpreted by the authors (Janik et al. 2011) as a shear zone related to collision and possibly ongoing convergence between major lithospheric plates. The Moho depth rises southward from the Outer Carpathians (European Plate) towards the Central Carpathians and the Pannonian Basin (Fig. 4). Detailed geological maps depict the PKB as bordering the sedimentary cover of the Central Carpathian Plate, represented by the Central Carpathian Paleogene in the south, and the Outer Carpathians Magura Flysch in the north (Watycha 1964a, b; Kulka et al. 1985; Nemčok 1990; Gross et al. 1993; Janočko et al. 2000; Golonka et al. 2018a, b). Geomorphological studies revealed active vertical movements, which led to the uplift of the Pieniny Klippen Belt (PKB) causing incision of the antecedent Dunajec River into a gorge (Golonka and Krobicki 2007). Vertical movements were also postulated by Castelluccio et al. (2015, 2016).
Fig. 4

Fragment of Celebration CEL01 deep seismic profile taken from Sroda et al. (2006). See Fig. 2 for profile location

2 General outline of the geology

The Central Carpathians, Pieniny Klippen Belt (PKB) and Outer Carpathians units are the main domains marking the boundary between Central Carpathian units derived from the Adria Plate and the European Plate in Poland (Fig. 1) (Golonka et al. 2018b). The European Plate is a continental plate amalgamated in the Precambrian and Paleozoic. Its basement consists of Proterozoic, Vendian (Cadomian) and Lower Paleozoic (Caledonian) fragments, deformed and metamorphosed. The sedimentary cover includes Paleozoic, Mesozoic and autochthonous Miocene sequences (Golonka et al. 2011).

The Central Carpathians, PKB and Outer Carpathians are parts of the Carpathian orogen, which forms an extensive mountain arc, stretching for a distance of more than 1300 km from Austria to Romania (Fig. 1). The Central Carpathians are also part of the ALCAPA mega-unit (Csontos et al. 1992). They include a pre-Alpine Protocarpathian basement and a complex Alpine nappe pile primarily formed during the Late Cretaceous (e.g. Plašienka 2018). The term Protocarpathian refers to the igneous and metamorphic Precambrian–Paleozoic rocks occurring in the Central Carpathians, exposed or forming the basement below younger Mesozoic and Cenozoic rocks. The Precambrian–Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks are exposed in the Tatra Mountains, in the southernmost part of Poland, south of Zakopane (Fig. 2). North of the Tatra Mountains, in Poland, they are covered by the Paleogene rocks known as the Central Carpathian Paleogene (CCP) and recognized only from boreholes and geophysical data (Fig. 5; Golonka et al. 2005, 2018b).
Fig. 5

Cross-section through the Podhale Trough between the Central Carpathian Tatra Mountains and the Pieniny Klippen Belt (southern part of Zakopane–Kraków line, Fig. 2), based on Wieczorek and Barbacki (1997), Krobicki and Golonka (2008), Golonka et al. (2018b)

The pre–Alpine Tatric basement consists of Paleozoic polygenetic granitoids intruded during the Variscan orogeny and pre-Variscan to Variscan metamorphics. The metamorphic envelope is composed of two units: the Upper Structural Unit and the underlying Lower Structural Unit, divided by a zone of ductile thrusting, recognized in the Tatra Mts. (i.e. Kahan 1969; Putiš 1992, 1994; Burda and Gawęda 2009). Rocks of the Upper Structural Unit are generally migmatised. Both metapelitic gneisses and amphibolites occur there (Burda and Gawęda 1999; Gawęda et al. 2000).

The crystalline basement cropping out in the Tatra Mts. is covered by Mesozoic rocks. The rocks that are in stratigraphic contact with the basement are called High Tatric “autochthonous succession” (e.g. Łuczyński and Jezierska 2018). They are thrust by an only a few km thick pile of cover napped also belonging to the High Tatric Nappe system and traditionally and confusingly called “Subtatric” although in a higher tectonic position (e.g. Kotański 1959, 1973; Lefeld 1985, 1999; Wieczorek 2000, Golonka et al. 2005), following Uhlig’s (1897, 1908) subdivision into “Hochtatrische and Subbtatrische Zone”. The Subtatric slices in Poland correspond to the Krížna and Choč (or Hronic) cover nappes defined in Slovakia (e.g. Mahel 1974) forming units of the Central Carpathian nappe stack tectonically overlying the High Tatric nappe). The term High Tatric is still being used by Alpine and Carpathian geologist (e.g. Dumont et al. 1996; Madzin and Sýkora 2014; Jurewicz 2018). We decided to follow Jurewicz’s (2018) example and use the term High Tatric (Tatricum) and the terms Krížna and Choč (both parts of the Fatricum) in the present paper.

The High Tatric (Tatricum), Krížna and Choč (Fatricum) units include Permian, Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous cover rocks, mainly clastics and carbonates. Most cover rocks belonging to the High Tatric succession form the direct sedimentary cover of the Tatric crystalline basement. However, some sedimentary slices belonging to the High Tatric nappe system are thrust over basement and cover of the main body of the High Tatric rocks, forming High Tatric nappe. The next higher Krížna nappe is thrust over the High Tatric nappe while the Choč nappe is thrust over the Krížna nappe.

The Mesozoic sedimentary rocks, mainly carbonates, were drilled by several boreholes located between the Tatra Mts. and PKB that reached the Mesozoic sedimentary rocks. These rocks were assigned to structural units named after the names of the boreholes (see Fig. 5). These are the Biały Dunajec and Bańska units, which were distinguished in the deep wells Bańska IG-1, Bańska PGP-1, Biały Dunajec PGP-2 and Biały Dunajec PAN-1 (Wieczorek and Barbacki 1997; Chowaniec and Kępińska 2003; Chowaniec 2009; Golonka et al. 2018b). Middle Eocene conglomerates and limestones, followed by up to 3000 m thick CCP rocks (mostly Podhale flysch), cover the Mesozoic units. The lithostratigraphic section of these deposits has been recognized by numerous natural exposures (Gołąb 1959; Watycha 1959, 1968, 1975, 1976a, b, 1977) and by several deep boreholes (Fig. 3) (Wieczorek and Barbacki 1997; Chowaniec and Kępińska 2003; Chowaniec 2009). The largest thickness of the CCP, ca. 3000 m, was recorded in borehole Chochołów PIG-1 (Chowaniec et al. 2001; Golonka et al. 2005). The flysch rocks are strongly deformed along their boundary with the PKB, cropping out in an about 2 km wide zone. Castelluccio et al. (2016) observed a normal fault at the southern border of the PKB with the CCP. Ludwiniak (2018) documented faults parallel to the PKB that he relates to dextral strike-slip motion. NE–SW and W–E trending dextral-reverse oblique slip faults are also present (Mastella 1975; Mastella et al. 2012; Ludwiniak 2010, 2018). The W–E fault zone related to the sinistral strike slip at the northern boundary of the CCP also separates the underlying Central Carpathian units from the PKB (Birkenmajer 1960; Mastella 1975; Sperner et al. 2002; Schmid et al. 2008; Mastella et al. 2012). Ludwiniak (2018) argued that late-stage brittle structures in the Central Carpathians and PKB contact zone indicate dextral transpression along of this contact. Ludwiniak et al. (2019) noted evidence of large-scale Miocene to Quaternary sinistral wrenching in this area.

In summary, the PKB marks the boundary between Central Carpathians and European plate not only at the surface but also at depth (Książkiewicz 1977; Birkenmajer 1986; Kovač et al. 1993; Roca et al. 1995; Nemčok et al. 1998; Plašienka 2012, 2018; Oszczypko et al. 2015; Golonka et al. 2018b; Ludwiniak 2018). The name Pieniny Klippen Belt first used by Neumayr (1871) was derived from the Pieniny Mountains (mountain range in Poland and adjacent Slovakia) and from the term “Klippen”, denoting erosion-resistant blocks surrounded by and rising above less competent rocks, mainly turbiditic sandstones and mudstones (flysch), shales and marls. These blocks or “Klippen” are composed of different successions of mainly deep and shallow-water limestones, covering a time span from the Early Jurassic to the Early Cretaceous (Andrusov 1938; Birkenmajer 1977, 1986, 1988; Mišík 1994). The map pattern of the PKB in the investigated area (Watycha 1964a, b, 1975; Kulka et al. 1985) generally reveals the presence of blocks of Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous carbonate rocks. Several formations were assigned to these different successions that define paleogeographical domains (Fig. 6) (Birkenmajer 1977).
Fig. 6

Stratigraphic table for the sedimentary successions in the Pieniny Klippen Belt (southernmost units to the left) and the adjacent part of the Outer Carpathian Magura Nappe (right) called Krynica Subunit in Poland and bordering part of Slovakia. Table compiled after Andrusov (1965), Sikora (1971), Birkenmajer (1977), Golonka and Sikora (1981), Potfaj (1997), Golonka et al. (2006b, 2015, 2018a), Wierzbowski et al. (2006), Golonka and Waśkowska (2014), Oszczypko and Oszczypko-Clowes (2010), Oszczypko et al. (2015)

During the Jurassic and Cretaceous, the sedimentary rocks of the PKB were deposited in a SW–NE oriented paleogeographic realm that is part of the Alpine Tethys and divided into deeper basins to both sides of a submarine high named Czorsztyn Ridge and Czorsztyn sequence of Fig. 6 (Fig. 7) (Birkenmajer 1977, 1986; Golonka and Krobicki 2004; Schmid et al. 2008; Golonka et al. 2015, 2018a). The submarine Czorsztyn Ridge and its slopes were characterized by a pelagic type of sedimentation from the Bathonian onwards (Birkenmajer 1977, 1986). The Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous rocks deposited on the southeastern slopes of the Czorsztyn Ridge represent the Czorsztyn, Niedzica, Czertezik, Branisko and Pieniny klippen successions (sensu Birkenmajer 1977, 1986, with modification by Wierzbowski et al. 2006; Golonka et al. 2018a; see Fig. 6). Very deep-water pelagic limestones and radiolarites were followed by Albian–Lower Miocene clastics within the basins surrounding the Czorsztyn Ridge (Sikora 1962, 1974; Birkenmajer 1977; Golonka and Krobicki 2004; Oszczypko et al. 2015). Golonka and Krobicki (2004) proposed the name Złatne Basin for the southeasternmost basin preserved within the Alpine Tethys(future PKB) following Sikora (1971, 1974), who characterized the Złatne Succession as being composed of a thin Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous sequence, covered by Albian–Lower Miocene flysch (see also Golonka and Sikora 1981; Oszczypko et al. 2005; Golonka et al. 2018a). The Magura Basin represented the northwestern part of the Alpine Tethys (future PKB) (Fig. 7).
Fig. 7

Palaeoenvironment and paleo lithofacies and main paleogeographical elements of the Alpine Tethys and adjacent areas during the Albian (from Golonka et al. 2017, modified). Plate reconstruction at 112 Ma

The deposits of the marginal part of the Magura Basin incorporated into the Pieniny Klippen Belt structure are known as Hulina, Grajcarek or Šariš Unit, depending on the authors (see Sikora 1962; Golonka and Sikora 1981; Birkenmajer 1986, 1988; Golonka and Krobicki 2004; Pieńkowski et al. 2008; Plašienka 2012; Oszczypko et al. 2015; Birkenmajer and Gedl 2017; Golonka et al. 2018a). We prefer the name Hulina (Fig. 6) following Sikora (1962, 1971, 1974), who first described this succession from Hulina Mountain in Szczawnica emphasizing the nature of the of Upper Cretaceous—Cenozoic flysch succession, while Birkenmajer (Birkenmajer 1977, 1986, 1988; Birkenmajer and Gedl 2017) mainly highlighted the Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous pelagic rocks, using the name Grajcarek name for this unit. Plašienka (2012) defined his Šariš Unit as lateral eastward continuation of the Hulina formation. Later, Jurewicz (2018) used the name Šariš Transitional Zone postulating a mélange character for this unit. The Albian–Upper Cretaceous sediments of the Hulina sequence, as well all other sequences shown in Fig. 6, are represented by flysch deposits and/or pelagic marls. Flysch sedimentation continued through the Paleogene and even reached Early Miocene times (Fig. 6). The flysch sequences contain numerous exotic elements in the form of large exotic blocks that constitute olistoliths. The exotics from the Złatne Basin mainly reveal Central Carpathian material, while the exotics from the Hulina and Krynica (Magura) sequences contain a lot of material derived from the Czorsztyn, Niedzica, Czertezik, Branisko and Pieniny successions (Sikora 1971, 1974, Birkenmajer 1986, 1988; Pieńkowski et al. 2008; Plašienka 2012; Oszczypko et al. 2015; Golonka et al. 2015, 2017, 2018a, b). These blocks composed of several successions of limestones and cherts are distributed as blocks-in-matrix within flysch of the Złatne and Hulina sequences. Castelluccio et al. (2015, 2016) depicted the stratigraphy of PKB in terms of a Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous ridge (Czorsztyn) succession followed by Upper Cretaceous Eocene “wildflysch”.

The PKB displays a particular tectonic character first noted by Uhlig (1897, 1903), visible in the maps of this region, as well as in regional cross-sections (e.g. Watycha 1964a, 1964b, 1975, Sikora et al. 1980; Birkenmajer 1983, 1986; Kulka et al. 1985; Jurewicz 1994, 1997; Froitzheim et al. 2008; Chrustek et al. 2004; Mastella et al. 2012; Ludwiniak 2010; Castelluccio et al. 2015, 2016; Golonka et al. 2018b). The Polish segment of the PKB shows both strike-slip and thrust components (e.g., Książkiewicz 1977; Birkenmajer 1986; Ratschbacher et al. 1993; Nemčok and Nemčok 1994; Jurewicz 1994, 1997). Birkenmajer (1986, 1988) distinguished several tectonic units that correlate with Czorsztyn, Niedzica, Czertezik, Branisko, Pieniny and Hulina successions. The entire tectonic sequence of units of the PKB is visible only in the Pieniny Mts. located in Poland and adjacent Slovakia, i.e. between Spišská Stará Ves and Krościenko (Fig. 3). In other places the Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous rocks of these successions are only found in olistoliths or small tectonic slivers embedded within Lower Jurassic and Late Cretaceous-Paleogene flysch sequences. Uhlig (1907) distinguished two nappes, a lower Sub-Pieniny Nappe, and an upper Pieniny Nappe. Książkiewicz (1977) followed Uhlig and distinguished upper (Branisko and Pieniny successions) and lower (Czorsztyn, Czertezik and Niedzica successions) nappes. According to Sikora (1971, 1974), the Czorsztyn (Sub-Pieniny) Nappe is thrust over the Hulina Nappe, while the Złatne Nappe is thrust over the Pieniny Nappe. Plašienka (2012) depicted the Sub-Pieniny thrust over the Šariš Unit (equivalent of Hulina Nappe). The thrust of the Złatne Nappe over the Hulina Nappe is visible in the Zakopane–Kraków cross-section along the Biały Dunajec River (Golonka et al. 2018b).

Roca et al. (1995), Zattin et al. (2011) and Castelluccio et al. (2015, 2016) treated the PKB as a single entity in their balanced cross-sections. Jurewicz (2018) depicted the PKB as thrust over what she refers to as Šariš Transitional Zone exhibiting a gradual transition between PKB and Magura Unit. The margins of the PKB are generally represented by subvertical faults and shear zones (e.g. Birkenmajer 1983; Ludwiniak 2018). The shortening of the original sedimentary basins took place during foreland thrusting followed by strike-slip shearing.

Typically, a subvertical strike-slip fault zone separates the PKB from the present-day Outer Carpathians (e.g. Watycha 1964a, b, 1975; Sikora et al. 1980; Kulka et al. 1985). Several Outer Carpathian nappes and thrust-sheets are thrust 70 km (distance between the Carpathian front in the vicinity of Kraków and the PKB in the vicinity of Nowy Targ) onto the North European Plate in a section between Nowy Targ and Kraków (Książkiewicz 1977; Sikora et al. 1980). These Outer Carpathian nappes are built by Upper Jurassic–Lower Miocene, up to six kilometers thick, continuous flysch sequences, mainly deep-water turbidites. Magura, Fore-Magura (Grybów and Dukla), Silesian, Subsilesian and Skole (Skiba) nappe were distinguished within the Outer Carpathians (Fig. 2) (e.g. Książkiewicz 1977; Żytko et al. 1989; Żytko 2001a; Ślączka et al. 2006). The rocks of the Magura nappe, the southernmost unit of the Outer Carpathians, were deposited within the Magura Basin. Some of the deposits of the Magura basin became incorporated into the Pieniny Klippen Belt tectonic structure, while the remaining parts presently form the Magura Nappe. According to Kaczmarek et al. (2016), marine Miocene deposits occur in the zone next to the PKB in the vicinity of Nowy Targ (see also Cieszkowski 1992).

The Central Carpathians, PKB and Outer Carpathian nappes are cut by several local and regional major young faults of different origins (e.g. Mastella et al. 1988; Kovač and Hók 1993; Ratschbacher et al. 1993; Nemčok and Nemčok 1994; Sperner 1996; Plašienka et al. 1997; Soták and Janočko 2001; Sperner et al. 2002; Marko 2003; Marko et al. 2017; Golonka et al. 2005; Jurewicz 2018). The Carpathian rivers often follow S–N faults. The major dextral strike-slip S-N Dunajec fault cuts PKB and Outer Carpathians (Jurewicz 2018). The faults along Biały Dunajec and Białka river cut CCP and PKB (Mastella et al. 1988). The E–W subvertical faults separate the PKB from CCP and Outer Carpathians (e.g. Watycha 1964a, b, 1975; Sikora et al. 1980; Birkenmajer 1983; Ludwiniak 2018). Faulting and uplifting played a tremendous role during the Neogene tectonic evolution of the PKB in Poland (Roca et al. 1995; Zattin et al. 2011), Castelluccio et al. (2015, 2016). A subhorizontal Late Badenian to Quaternary sequence, which partially covers the Magura Nappe (including deformed Lower Miocene rocks) above an unconformity in the western part of the investigated area (Figs. 2, 3) belongs to the Orava-Nowy Targ Neogene Basin, which contains over 900 m of gravel, sand-silt and clay deposits in the Polish and adjacent parts of western Slovakia. 920 m of Miocene and Pliocene deposits were encountered in the borehole in the vicinity of Czarny Dunajec (Watycha 1977). The Orava-Nowy Targ Neogene Basin stretches parallel to the PKB and is bordered by sets of normal faults (Pomianowski 2003; Golonka et al. 2005; Struska 2009 and references therein). A large-scale, NE–SW directed, sinistral strike-slip fault of Miocene age also played an important role in the development of Orava-Nowy Targ basin (Fig. 2; near the western end of this basin) (see Struska 2009; Ludwiniak et al. 2019). The PKB unit is submerged entirely below this young basin between Stare Bystre in Poland and Trstená in Slovakia (Chowaniec and Cieszkowski 2009). Fresh-water sedimentation started in the Late Badenian (Serravallian) in the Orava-Nowy Targ Basin (Oszast and Stuchlik 1977; Golonka et al. 2005; Łoziński et al. 2017; Wysocka et al. 2018). The youngest sediments are represented by the recent pebbles of the Dunajec River and its subsidiaries. The Nowy Targ PIG-1 borehole revealed 59.5 m of the Quaternary gravels and sands (Paul and Poprawa 1992).

3 Methods

3.1 Seismic surveys

Input data for this study come from the 2D seismic survey “Czorsztyn” (lines 01-01-15K, 02-01-15K, 03-01-15K and 04-01-15K), which was acquired in 2015 by Geofizyka Kraków SA for the Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences (IG PAS) in the framework of the IS-EPOS: Digital Research Space of Induced Seismicity for EPOS Purposes project (Lasocki et al. 2016; Lasocki and Orlecka-Sikora 2016), as well as four archival profiles (24-5-87K, 24A-5-87K, 26-5-87K and 28-5-87K) acquired in 1987 by the same company. The location of the seismic profiles is shown in Fig. 3. Shot station spacing was 50 m, and receiver station spacing was 25 m, giving 12.5 m between the CMPs (Common Mid Points-related to Common Depth, reflecting Points). Maximum offset ranges were up to 16.560 m, and the average fold was 125. A seismic sweep signal was generated by vibroseis, with the length of 16 s and bandwidth 6–80 Hz. The data have a record length of 8 s (two-way time) and a sampling rate of 2 ms. Four archival seismic lines were acquired in the same way. The differences were only in record length (4 s two-way time), maximum offset (up to 1935 m), and average fold of 32. For actual and archival profiles, the seismic processing steps included geometrical spreading compensation, coherent noise and anomalous amplitude attenuation, time-variant surface-consistent predictive deconvolution, surface-consistent amplitude compensation, high resolution multiple removal, DMO (deep move-out—partial time migration), NMO (normal move-out) velocity estimation, post-stack time migration and FX deconvolution (procedure removing the random noise). The data were processed with relative amplitude preservation. The main goal of the seismic surveys was to recognize the velocity field and the deep structure. Often, a part of the records related to the shallow subsurface zone was muted in processing of seismic data. Therefore, the seismic image lacks a part corresponding to a depth interval of 0–200 m below datum (650 m a.s.l.). Despite complex topography and geological structure, the acquired seismic data provide sufficient quality.

3.2 Seismic well tie

Geological interpretation of seismic profiles requires borehole data tied through the synthetic seismograms to the acquired and migrated seismic data. This procedure allows for correlation of geological boundaries identified in a borehole with specific seismic reflections on the seismic section. The Bańska IG-1 borehole (Fig. 8), located on the south side of the Pieniny Klippen Belt (PKB), penetrates the CCP. It was used to correlate seismic horizons on lines 24A-87K, 26-5-87K, 28-5-87K, 01-01-15K, 03-01-15K and 04-01-15K (Fig. 3). The Maruszyna IG-1 borehole (Fig. 9) (Birkenmajer and Gedl 2012; Golonka 2012), which penetrates the PKB, was used for correlation of seismic horizons on lines 24-5-87K, 02-01-15K, 03-01-15K and 04-01-15K. The seismic depth sections are depicted in Figs. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. The Maruszyna IG-1 borehole was projected on line 24-5-87K (Fig. 10). The geological profile and calculated synthetic seismogram (Fig. 9) allowed the authors to identify, in particular, the base of the Złatne Nappe and the base of the Hulina Nappe on seismic profiles. The Nowy Targ PIG-1 borehole is the only borehole located on the northern side of the PKB (Outer Carpathians) and provided the only geological profile (Paul and Poprawa 1992), which was used to correlate seismic horizons on profile 24-5-87K (Fig. 10).
Fig. 8

Synthetic seismogram of borehole Bańska IG-1. GR gamma ray, VP_CS interval velocities from check shot, VP_well log interval velocities acoustic log, VP_seism. Process interval velocities from stacking process (calibration of time to depth conversion velocity model). Markers: Sz_top top of Szaflary Formation, En_top top of Eocene nummulitic limestone, BD base base of Biały Dunajec Unit, Bańska base base of Bańska Unit

Fig. 9

Synthetic seismogram of borehole Maruszyna IG-1. GR gamma ray, VP_CS interval velocities from check shot, VP_well log interval velocities acoustic log, VP_seism. process interval velocities from stacking process (calibration of time to depth conversion velocity model)

Fig. 10

Seismic depth section—composite line 24-5-87K and 24A-5-87K. a Raw data with selected reflections highlighted and with marked PKB border faults. b Interpreted. ZF Zakopane Formation, SF Szaflary Formation, BU Bańska Unit, BDU Biały Dunajec Unit, HTN High Tatric Nappe, HTa High Tatric “autochthonous”, Hrz high reflections zone, PKB_N north PKB fault, PKB_S south PKB fault. Black lines—other faults.

Modified from Golonka et al. (2018b)

Fig. 11

Seismic depth section of line 03-01-15K (see Fig. 3 for its location west of line B–B′ presented in Fig. 20). a Section with raw data and selected reflections highlighted and with marked PKB border faults. b Interpreted section. PKB_N northern PKB border fault, PKB_S southern PKB border fault

Fig. 12

Shallow parts of seismic depth section of line 03-01-15K (see Fig. 3 for its location west of line B–B′ presented in Fig. 20. a Simplified shallow geological cross-sections along seismic profile 03-01-15K. b Interpreted shallow parts of seismic profile 03-01-15K. Abbreviations in seismic profile 03-01-15K are: Zn Złatne Nappe, Bn Branisko Unit, BD Biały Dunajec Unit (Fatric), Q+N Quaternary and Neogene, PKB_N northern PKB boundary fault, PKB_S southern PKB boundary fault

Fig. 13

Seismic depth section line 04-01-15K (see Fig. 3 for its location east of line B–B′ presented in Fig. 20). a raw data with selected reflections highlighted and with marked PKB border faults. b interpreted. PKB_N north PKB border fault, PKB_S south PKB border fault

Fig. 14

Shallow parts of seismic depth section line 04-01-15K (see Fig. 3 for its location east of line B–B′ presented in Fig. 20). a Simplified shallow geological cross-sections along seismic profile 04-01-15K (see Fig. 3 for its location east of line B–B′ presented in Fig. 20). b Shallow part of the seismic profile 04-01-15K. PKB_N north PKB border fault, PKB_S south PKB border fault

Fig. 15

Seismic depth section line 02-01-15K running E–W (see Fig. 3 for its location within the PKB). a Raw data with selected reflections highlighted and with marked PKB border faults. b Interpreted section. PKB_N northern PKB border fault

Fig. 16

Shallow parts of seismic section line 02-01-15K running E–W (see Fig. 3 for its location within the PKB). a Simplified geological cross-sections along seismic profile 02-01-15K. b Shallow part of the seismic profile 02-01-15K. PKB_N northern PKB border fault

Fig. 17

Seismic depth section of composite lines 28-5-87K and 01-01-15K (see Fig. 3 for its location south of the PKB). a Raw data with selected reflections highlighted. b Interpreted section

3.3 Seismic interpretation

The seismic time sections were converted to depth with the application of a smoothed velocity field. Stacking velocities were converted to interval velocities and next to average velocities, which was finally calibrated by wells (Figs. 8, 9) and smoothed. In the seismic image, we observe strong reflections and non-reflective zones (e.g. profiles 03-01-15K of Fig. 11 and profile 01-01-15K of Fig. 17 discussed later). Intervals with strong reflections are associated with sedimentary rocks containing very high velocity beds (e.g. carbonate rocks inside of the Bańska and Biały Dunajec units (Figs. 8, 11) or sequences of high and low impedance (e.g. Oligocene shale and sandstone sequences forming the top of the Grybów and Dukla units (Fig. 11). Non-reflective zones can be interpreted as crystalline rocks (e.g. Tatric Crystalline Basement (TCB) in Fig. 17) or heterolithic flysch (e.g. lower part of the Szaflary Formation in Figs. 13 and 15). Sometimes, the seismic image also shows discontinuities of reflections. There are many areas of rapid dip changes and faults (e.g. Figs. 11, 13). The composite line 24-5-87K and 24A-5-87K, as well as seismic profiles 03-01-15K and 04-01-15K, which cross all geological domains from South to North, are shown as raw data (Figs. 10a, 11a, 13a) and as interpreted versions (Figs. 10b, 11b, 13b). The profile 02-01-15K (Fig. 15) and the composite line 28-5-87K and 01-01-15K (Fig. 17) are located in parallel to the PKB. The seismic interpretation in this area (Figs. 12, 14, 16) is also based on variability of the recorded wave field in connection with the surface geological map. Mapping was conducted along the seismic profiles and across major tectonic zones. The observations in outcrops allowed us to correlate seismic intervals with geological formations, within the limits caused by the aforementioned gap in seismic imaging between surface and 200 m depth. For example, Fig. 12a presents a simplified shallow geological cross-sections alongside the seismic profile 03-01-15K (Fig. 12b). The southern part of this section shows a sharp contrast between the CCP (Szaflary Formation, oldest CCP flysch deposits) and Cretaceous flysch of the Złatne Nappe. The tectonic contact crops out quite well (Ludwiniak 2018). The Central part allows for observing the contact between carbonate olistoliths and the surrounding flysch matrix (in outcrops), as well as tectonic boundaries between nappes. The boundaries repeating sequences of Upper Cretaceous red and variegated shales of the Malinowa Formation and Upper Cretaceous–Paleocene sandstones, conglomerates and shales (flysch) of the Jarmuta Formation were used for correlation of scale boundaries within Hulina Nappe (see also Figs. 14, 16). The interpretation of seismic sections in some parts can be debatable because of missing deep boreholes, which are essential for good geological interpretation of seismic reflections. Sometimes seismic data quality is insufficient and the tectonics of the PKB and Magura units are very complex.

4 Results

The seismic profiles based on old and recently acquired seismic data depict the structure and mutual relationship between the main analyzed domains—the Central Carpathians, PKB and Outer Carpathians. The orientation of seismic boundaries, south of the PKB (CCP) was estimated based on lithostratigraphic data from the deep borehole Bańska IG-1 (Fig. 8). The CCP structure is shown on seismic sections 24A-5-87K (Fig. 10), 03-01-15K (Figs. 11, 12) and 04-01-15K (Figs. 13, 14). The bottom surface of the CCP rocks is expressed as high-amplitude horizon in the seismic sections 24A-5-87K (Fig. 10), 03-01-15K (Fig. 11), 04-01-15K (Fig. 13) and composite lines 28-5-87K and 01-01-15K (Fig. 17). The Szaflary Formation represents the oldest CCP flysch deposits, which are heavily deformed and often vertical in the border zone near the PKB (Mastella 1975; Golonka et al. 2018b; Ludwiniak 2018). The Szaflary formation is covered by younger shaly flysch strata of the Zakopane Formation. They dip gently towards the center of the Podhale Basin. The CCP is cut by several north-dipping faults (Figs. 10, 11, 13, 17). The large listric, transverse, faults are (see also e.g. Mastella et al. 1996, 2012; Ludwiniak et al. 2012) displace formations between tens and more than 200 meters.

The tectonic units below the Central Carpathian Paleogene visible in Fig. 17 are correlated with the Tatra Mts., depicted in the diagrammatic cross section (Fig. 5). Tatric (“autochthonous” and High Tatric nappe system) and Fatric (Krížna and Choč) units include Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous sedimentary rocks, clastics and carbonates. The Krížna and Choč nappes south of the PKB are represented by the Biały Dunajec Unit (BDU), mainly composed of Jurassic–Cretaceous rocks, and the Triassic of the Bańska Unit (Figs. 8, 10, 11, 13, 17) (Golonka et al. 2018b). These Fatric cover nappes are underlain by the High Tatric sedimentary successions and Tatric crystalline basement (Figs. 5, 10, 11, 13, 17). The reflection pattern within the both High Tatric units stems from the bedding of the sediments that is parallel to the top of the crystalline basement succession. The reflections are parallel to the base of this unit, sometimes chaotic or dipping southwards displaying a tectonic boundary between two High Tatric subunits. A detached sedimentary slice of the High Tatric nappes system is thrust over the sedimentary cover (“autochthonous High Tatric succession”) of the crystalline Tatric basement. A high-reflection zone is visible between two non-reflective zone rocks of the Tatric crystalline basement (Figs. 5, 10, 11, 13, 17), allowing one to divide this basement into two units. Two alternative interpretations are possible: (1) correlation of these two units with the aforementioned Upper Structural Unit and Lower Structural Unit within the Tatric basement, or, (2) correlation of the upper unit with the Tatric basement and the lower unit with a mixture of Paleozoic–Neogene rocks of the European Plate, allochthonous Outer Carpathian units and Pieniny Klippen Belt rocks.

The Pieniny Klippen Belt is limited by two fault zones: the northern PKB_N and the southern PKB_S faults (Figs. 10, 11 and 13). These are sub-parallel in the map view (Fig. 18). PKB_N dips steeply south, while PKB_S dips steeply north. The two merge into a single vertical fault, which goes down all the way to the top of the descending European Plate. The PKB forms, in general, a strongly tectonized, subvertical structure that is about 3 km wide. It includes Jurassic, Cretaceous, Paleogene and Neogene sedimentary sequences. Several north-vergent thrust-sheets or nappes are visible in the analyzed profiles: 24-5-87 (Fig. 10), 03-01-15K (Figs. 11, 12), 04-01-15K (Figs. 13, 14) and 02-01-15K (Fig. 15). The chaotic structural arrangement within these thrust-sheets suggests the existence of olistoliths surrounded by flysch deposits (see Golonka et al. 2015, 2017) and red marls. The seismic data only allow distinguishing boundaries between structural units. Two larger units or nappes, containing several thrust-sheets each, were distinguished in the analyzed profiles: the northern Hulina Nappe and the southern Złatne Nappe (Golonka et al. 2018b). The northern Hulina Nappe contains up to seven thrust-sheets. These thrust-sheets were observed in the surface geology as repeated sequences of upper Cenomanian–Coniacian variegated shales of the Malinowa Formation and Maastrichtian–Paleocene sandstones of the Jarmuta Formation. The southern Złatne Nappe contains up to five thrust-sheets in the eastern part of the analyzed region. Four thrust-sheets were distinguished in the analyzed seismic profiles, and the fifth is visible at outcrop (Fig. 18). These thrust-sheets were recognized as repeated sequences of the Cretaceous (Sromowce Formation) and Paleocene–Oligocene flysch sequences, with thick-bedded coarse-grained sandstones and conglomerates. The Złatne Nappe is quite narrow in the western part of the analyzed region. These Hulina and Złatne nappes unconformably cover the lower unit. The reflection pattern within this unit resembles the pattern within the Krynica Subunit of the Magura Nappe (Figs. 10, 11, 13, 15). We named it Maruszyna Unit. The Upper Cretaceous flysch rocks, belonging to the Maruszyna Unit were encountered in the Maruszyna IG-1 borehole below the base of Hulina Nappe (Figs. 9, 10) (Golonka et al. 2018b). The lithology of these rocks is similar to the lithology of the Magura Flysch known from the outcrops. Similar rocks were also recognized in the borehole in Szczawnica (outside study area) below the Hulina Nappe (Birkenmajer et al. 1979).
Fig. 18

Map of the tectonic units of the Pieniny Klippen Belt and the Orava-Nowy Targ Basin in the investigated area (see Fig. 3 for location of investigated area)

The tectonic boundaries illustrating the structure north of the PKB (Outer Carpathians) were estimated based on the seismic sections 02-01-15K (Figs. 15, 16), 04-01-15K (Fig. 13), 03-01-15K (Fig. 11), 24-5-87K (Fig. 10) and on results of the Nowy Targ PIG-1 borehole (Paul and Poprawa 1992). Unconformable Quaternary and Neogene deposits are exposed in basins close to the northern boundary of the PKB. They were mapped, while gravity and electric surveys (Pomianowski 2003) were used to estimate their thickness, which does not exceed 100 m in the investigated area.

The allochthonous Outer Carpathians nappes are thrust over each other and onto the European Plate, which is dipping gently southwards. Several boreholes allow for distinguishing a pile of nappes (thrust-sheets) verging northwards (Figs. 19, 20).
Fig. 19

Cross-section A–A′ through the Western Carpathians, between the Central Carpathian Tatra Mountains and the Carpathian Foredeep (Zakopane–Kraków line), based on Cieszkowski in Golonka et al. (2005), Chowaniec and Cieszkowski (2009), Golonka et al. (2018b) including results of the interpretation of seismic profiles. Upper and lower version display alternative possible interpretations. For the location of the trace of the cross-section see Figs. 2 and 3

Fig. 20

Cross-section B-B’ through the Western Carpathians between the Central Carpathian Tatra Mountains and the Wiśniowa area (based on Burtan et al. 1974; Watycha 1975; Oszczypko 2004; Szczęch et al. 2016 and results of seismic profiles interpretation). Upper and lower parts display alternative interpretations. Upper and lower version display alternative possible interpretations. For the location of the trace of the cross-section see Figs. 2 and 3

The Magura flysch complex belonging to the Krynica Subunit of the Magura Nappe reaches 4000–5000 m in thickness. It is cut by several faults striking W–E. These faults are well visible, especially in the area adjacent to the PKB. They do not reach the European basement, but probably cut the basal horizons of the Magura nappe. They are similar to the northern PKB_N fault and could be part of the PKB flower structure. The Magura Nappe rocks in the vicinity of the PKB crop out in the eastern part of the investigated area. In the western part of this area, the Magura nappe is partially covered by the Neogene and Quaternary complex (Figs. 3, 12, 18). The Upper Cretaceous, Paleogene and Lower Miocene deposits (Ślączka et al. 2006 and references therein; Cieszkowski 1992; Kaczmarek et al. 2016), dip southwards, detached from their substratum. A part of the Magura flysch deposits was incorporated into the PKB tectonic structure during the Miocene, and is separated from the Krynica Subunit by the PKB_N fault. It is located now below Hulina and Złatne nappes and distinguished as the Maruszyna Subunit (Figs. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16).

The deposits visible in the seismic profiles tectonically beneath the Magura Nappe were identified as the Fore-Magura group of nappes, represented by the Grybów and Dukla nappes (Figs. 10, 11, 13, 15). This Fore-Magura group of nappes is exposed in the Mszana Dolna area (e.g. Mastella 1988), north of the Gorce Mts. and encountered in the Obidowa IG-1, Chabówka 1, and Niedźwiedź IG-1boreholes (e.g. Mastella 1988; Sikora et al. 1980; Cieszkowski 1985, 2001; Oszczypko 2004; Golonka et al. 2005). We extrapolated these outcrop and borehole results into our investigated area. The lower part of the Outer Carpathian nappes gently dip southwards, parallel to the sedimentary cover of the European Plate (Figs. 11, 13, 15). The European Plate reaches the area south of the PKB flower structure (Figs. 19, 20).

A transitional zone is visible in the seismic profiles 01-01-15K, 03-01-15K and 04-01-15K (Figs. 11, 13, 17) below the Tatric Crystalline Basement (TCB), at a depth of 8–12 km The upper part of this zone at a depth of 8–9 km (high reflection zone) has a continuous layered structure while the lower part is discontinuous, and the reflections are chaotic (depth of 9–12 km). This zone possibly represents a mixture, which can include autochthonous Paleozoic–Neogene rocks, as well as allochthonous Outer Carpathian and Pieniny Klippen Belt rocks. A group of the almost horizontal seismic horizons is observed below at depth interval 12–14 km and is interpreted as the sedimentary cover of the North European Plate. This sedimentary cover perhaps includes autochthonous Paleozoic, Mesozoic and Neogene rocks. The mostly non-reflective complex visible in profile 01-01-15K (Fig. 17) is characteristic for non-sedimentary rocks and represents the crystalline rocks of the North European Plate. The reflectors visible in this profile at a depth below 20 km (Fig. 17) show a possible boundary between crustal elements within the European Plate. This boundary is related to the abrupt change in seismic velocity (Fig. 4). The nature of this boundary is uncertain. It is possibly related to the thrust between two crustal units.

5 Discussion

The studied profiles cover the depth interval of around 23 km. The reflections visible at a depth of 20 km in the Central Carpathian study area (Fig. 17) possibly show the boundary between different crustal elements within the European Plate. These elements were identified as Pieniny Lower Crust and Pieniny Upper and Middle Crust in deep seismic profiles CELEBRATION 2000 (CEL012, CEL04 and CEL01) in SE Poland in the PKB zone (Janik et al. 2009, 2011). Schmid et al. (2008, 2019) depicted a similar boundary at the same depth between Tatricum and an underlying unit they attribute to the Briançonnais. The lower boundary of thinned continental crust, a possible Moho, could also theoretically be considered as a candidate. We decided to follow the interpretation of Janik et al. (2009), showing that the depth of these reflections is far too shallow to represent the Moho of the European Plate. However, we did not apply names such as Pieniny Lower Crust and Pieniny Upper and Middle Crust, because this boundary is visible only in the E–W running seismic profile 01-01-15K (Fig. 17), located south of the PKB (Fig. 3). Similar reflectors to those visible in the Central Carpathians have not been recorded north of the PKB. Hence, the lower boundary of the thinned continental European crust is probably located below 23 km in the area of the profile of Fig. 17. The seismic profiles from refraction and the wide-angle reflection of the Celebration experiment show a similar boundary in the Western and Eastern Carpathians (Grad et al. 2006; Środa et al. 2006; Janik et al. 2009, 2011; Starostenko et al. 2013; Hrubcová and Środa 2015). Figure 4 displays a segment of the Celebration CEL01 deep seismic profile located close to our research area (Fig. 2). The abrupt change of seismic velocity, related to the boundary between crustal elements is visible at a depth of 22–25 km. The nature of this boundary is uncertain and, as mentioned earlier, might also possibly be related to a thrust between older, i.e. Cadomian (see Gawęda et al. 2019), and younger, i.e. Variscan crustal units. As seen in Fig. 4 the Moho of the European Plate beneath the Outer Carpathians north of the PKB rises southward towards the Pannonian Basin. This is perhaps due to the extension in the Pannonian basin and the southern Carpathians (Schmid et al. 2019). The mantle rising towards the Pannonian Basin is manifested by high heat flow (Boldizsár 1967), as well as by Miocene and Quaternary volcanism in Slovakia and Hungary (Fig. 1) (Seghedi et al. 2004; Wilson and Downes 2006). The northern boundary of this volcanism is located within the PKB (Birkenmajer and Pécskay 1999; Golonka et al. 2005; Jurewicz and Nejbert 2005; Anczkiewicz and Anczkiewicz 2016; Jurewicz 2018).

The seismic profiles (Figs. 10, 11, 13, 17), together with borehole data, show that the CCP rocks cover the Tatric and Fatric units south of the PKB. These units include the Krížna and Choč nappes (Fatricum), the detached High Tatric sedimentary slices, the Paleozoic Tatric crystalline basement and its stratigraphically overlying High Tatric “autochthonous” sedimentary cover (e.g. Kotański 1959, 1973; Lefeld 1985, 1999; Wieczorek 2000; Golonka et al. 2005 and references therein). A zone of high reflectivity was distinguished within the Tatric basement (Figs. 11, 13, 17). Two alternative interpretations are possible. The first interpretation correlates the high reflectivity zone with a zone of ductile thrusting between the upper and lower structural units known from the Tatra Mts. (Burda and Gawęda 1997, 1999; Gawęda et al. 1998, 2001; Golonka et al. 2005). The second alternative interprets that the unit below the high reflectivity represents a mixture of Paleozoic to Neogene rocks, allochthonous Outer Carpathian units and Pieniny Klippen Belt rocks. The Tatric crystalline rocks thrust the sedimentary rocks of the European Plate (Figs. 11, 13, 17). The European Plate is suspected below these sedimentary rocks. These sedimentary rocks possibly represent a mixture of platform Paleozoic to Neogene sediments, as well as Outer Carpathian and PKB rocks (see e.g. Jurewicz 2005, 2018).

The present day structure of the PKB and the strong shortening of the former sedimentary basins evolved during a complex history of this domain. The older sediments were deposited in a several hundred kilometers wide paleogeographic realm of Alpine Tethys in Jurassic to Early Cretaceous times (Fig. 7) (see e.g. Schmid et al. 2008 and references therein). The younger sediments were accumulated in Late Cretaceous to Neogene times in a synorogenic setting during the closure of the Alpine Tethys. An accretionary prism formed in front of the moving plate (Golonka et al. 2006a). During the Late Cretaceous–Paleocene, the accretionary prism was overriding the Czorsztyn Ridge, causing partial destruction of this ridge. The ridge supplied huge amounts of coarse-clastic material, including olistoliths located within the flysch deposits of the Hulina Nappe (Golonka et al. 2015, 2017; Jurewicz 2018). This sediment accumulation led to further development of the accretionary prism and formation of flysch nappes. Imbricated thrusting led to the formation of a nappe stack consisting of the Złatne, Hulina, Magura and Outer Carpathian nappes. The Central Carpathian Plate, including the Outer Carpathian flysch units, was subsequently thrust onto the European Plate. According to Plašienka (2018), complex translational and rotational movements of ALCAPA dominated the Miocene evolution of the Western Carpathians (see also Csontos and Vörös 2004; Márton et al. 1999, 2004, 2013). The strike-slip process along the boundary between the Central Carpathians and the European Plate led to the deformation of previously created nappes within the Pieniny Klippen Belt. The latter is preserved within a 3–5 km wide flower structure limited by fault zones that include faults that cut the Central Carpathian Paleogene rocks as well as the Krynica subunit of the Magura Nappe.

The fault marking the southern limit of the PKB is especially well visible in the seismic sections (Figs. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16). This PKB flower structure developed in Neogene times. It displays mixed transpressional and transtensional features. Similar phenomena were observed in the eastern part of the PKB in Slovakia, where, according to Hrušecký et al. (2006), the boundary zone was reactivated several times in Paleogene to Neogene times as transpressional and/or transtensional (see also Ratschbacher et al. 1993; Nemčok and Nemčok 1994). According to Marko (2003) and Marko et al. (2017), a WSW–ENE oriented dextral strike-slip fault zone exists within the PKB in Poland and the adjacent part of western Slovakia, however the sinistral strike slip at the northern ALCAPA boundary is dominant (Birkenmajer 1960; Sperner et al. 2002; Schmid et al. 2008; Ustaszewski et al. 2008; Mastella et al. 2012). Castelluccio et al. (2015, 2016) argued that Neogene vertical movements, uplift and related faulting also played an important role during the formation of PKB structure.

At least some of the transverse faults, as well as faults perpendicular to the strike of the PKB were still active during the Quaternary time (Zuchiewicz et al. 2002). Białoń et al. (2015) studied the earthquakes likely to be triggered by the filling of the Czorsztyn artificial lake located in the northeastern part of the study area (Fig. 4). The earthquake occurrences signify the presence of remnant tectonic loading. The earthquakes exhibit strike-slip mechanisms with nodal planes oriented NS and EW, which could be linked to the mentioned transpression. The recent uplift rates in the area are up to + 0.5 mm per year (Vanko 1988; Vass 1998) while the horizontal movement attain up to 5 mm per year (Łój et al. 2007).

Transtension prevailed during the formation of the Neogene Orava–Nowy Targ Basin, which postdates the Serravallian formation of the Outer Carpathian fold-and-thrust belt. According to Ludwiniak et al. (2019), this basin developed under the influence of transtension between two large NE–SW-directed sinistral fault zones.

The Złatne Nappe, the southernmost thrust-sheet within the PKB (Golonka et al. 2018b), contains mainly Upper Cretaceous to Paleogene flysch. It is visible in the studied profiles as a narrow sliver in the western part of the study area (Figs. 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14). It is wider in the eastern part, where the type locality of the Złatne Succession was defined by Sikora (1971, 1974; see also Golonka and Sikora 1981 and references therein). The Złatne Nappe is thrust over the Hulina Nappe. Both units are thrust over lower units, distinguished as the Maruszyna Subunit, which possibly belongs to the Magura Nappe. A similar thrust of the Hulina Nappe over the Magura Nappe was also recognized in the borehole in Szczawnica (Birkenmajer et al. 1979). The Magura Nappe also emerges as tectonic windows from the olistostrome type mélange of the Hulina Nappe in the Małe Pieniny Mountains (Golonka and Rączkowski 1984a, b; Jurewicz 1994, 1997; Oszczypko and Oszczypko-Clowes 2014). These observations support our interpretation that the Hulina Nappe was thrusted over rocks that possibly belong to the Magura Nappe (Krynica Subunit).

The Krynica Subunit crops out along the PKB_N fault. This unit was also encountered in the deep drillings in Nowy Targ PIG-1 and Obidowa IG-1. The youngest, Miocene marine rocks belonging to the Waksmund, Stare Bystre, Kopaczyska and Pasieka formations are exposed between Stare Bystre and Waksmund (Cieszkowski and Olszewska 1986; Cieszkowski 1992). The Upper Cretaceous to Paleocene rocks of the Szczawnica Formation form the southern marginal part of the Krynica Unit in the slopes of the Pieniny Mountains and in the Krościenko-Szczawnica area (Kulka et al. 1985; Chrustek et al. 2004; Golonka and Waśkowska 2014). We extrapolated the Upper Cretaceous to Paleogene and Lower Miocene rocks under the Złatne-Hulina thrust.

The Fore-Magura group of nappes was encountered in the Obidowa IG-1 and Chabówka 1 wells. The Grybów and Dukla nappes were distinguished in these wells (Ślączka et al. 2006). The strata of these units gently dip towards the south, usually without any intense tectonic deformations, except in the higher part. The position of the lower unit within the Outer Carpathian structure is a matter of controversy (Sikora et al. 1980; Cieszkowski et al. 1981a, b; Cieszkowski 1985, 2001; Żytko and Malata 2001; Żytko 2001). It is meant to belong either to the Dukla (our preference) or to the Skole nappes. The Dukla Nappe forms the lowermost Outer Carpathian Nappe or is underlain by the Silesian Nappe (Figs. 19, 20). The deep seismic reflection profile 2T, which is located in Slovakia southwest of the research area, demonstrates two groups of south-dipping reflections located north of the Pieniny Klippen Belt (Tomek 1993; Bielik et al. 2004). The upper one belongs to the boundary between the Magura Nappe and the lower to the accretionary wedge complex (Dukla-Silesian-Subsilesian group of units).

6 Conclusions

The 40 km long Polish part of the Pieniny Klippen Belt (PKB) belongs to a complex geological structure that is some 600 km long, 1–20 km wide and stretching from Vienna in Austria to northern Romania. The PKB marks the boundary between the Central Carpathian Plate and the European Plate.

Seismic lines show the CCP rocks covering the Paleozoic Tatric Basement, stratigraphically overlain by its sedimentary cover, which is in turn overlain by detached High Tatric sedimentary successions and finally still higher slices of the Krížna and Choč nappes, all located south of the PKB. The crystalline Central Carpathian rocks are thrust over sedimentary rocks possibly belonging to the European Plate cover and representing a mixture of Paleozoic to Neogene platform sediments, as well as rocks from the Outer Carpathian units and PKB rocks. The basement of the European Plate is visible below these sedimentary rocks. The reflections at a depth below 20 km show a hypothetical boundary between crustal elements within this plate.

The PKB forming the main part of the 3–5 km wide flower structure is limited by fault zones, including faults cutting across the Central Carpathian Paleogene rocks and the Magura Nappe. Especially the fault marking the southern limit of the PKB is well visible in the seismic sections. The Albian to Lower Miocene flysch sequences, constituting much of the volume of the PKB, form north-vergent thrust-sheets. The PKB originated during the development of the accretionary prism in front of the moving Central Carpathian Plate during the Albian to Early Neogene. This was followed by vertical axis rotations and strike-slip processes, taking place along the interface between the Central Carpathians and the European plate.

The Central Carpathian units as derivatives of the Adriatic plate are thrust over the European Plate. The Outer Carpathians represent an allochthonous thrust complex above the European Plate. They form several north-verging imbricated nappes (thrust-sheets) thrust onto the North European Plate. This European plate gently dips southwards below the suture zone between the Central Carpathians and the Europe-derived allochthons located along the PKB. The latter is cut by several deep-reaching faults.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research has been supported by the National Centre for Research and Development (NCBiR) Grants, IS-EPOS “Digital Research Space of Induced Seismicity for EPOS Purposes” (POIG.02.03.00-14-090/13-00), BG2/ShaleCarp/14, National Science Centre (NCN) Grant 2016/23/B/ST10/01896, statutory activities no 3841/E-41/S/2019 of the Ministry of Science and in Kraków Grant nos. 5.5.14.588, 11.11.140.005 and 11.11.140.645. Our paper was greatly improved thanks to reviews by Dušan Plašienka, an anonymous reviewer and Associate Editor Adrian Pfiffner.

References

  1. Anczkiewicz, A. A., & Anczkiewicz, A. (2016). U-Pb zircon geochronology and anomalous Sr–Nd–Hf isotope systematics of late orogenic andesites: Pieniny Klippen Belt, Western Carpathians, South Poland. Chemical Geology,427, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrusov, D. (1938). Geologický výskum vnitřního bradlového pásma v Západních Karpatech III Tektonika. Praha: Rozpravy (tátnego geologickego Ústavu ČSR. (in Czech).Google Scholar
  3. Andrusov, D. (1965). Geologie der tschechoslowakischen Karpaten. II. Bratislava. Berlin: Academie-Verlag. (in Czech).Google Scholar
  4. Białoń, W., Zarzycka, E., & Lasocki, S. (2015). Seismicity of Czorsztyn Lake region: A case of reservoir triggered seismic process. Acta Geophysica,63, 1080–1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bielik, M., Šefara, J., Kováč, M., Bezák, V., & Plašienka, D. (2004). The Western Carpathians—Interaction of Hercynian and Alpine processes. Tectonophysics,393, 63–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Birkenmajer, K. (1960). Geology of the Pieniny Klippen Belt of Poland. Jahrbuch der Geologischen Bundesanstalt,103, 1–36.Google Scholar
  7. Birkenmajer, K. (1977). Jurassic and Cretaceous lithostratigraphic units of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Carpathians, Poland. Studia Geologica Polonica,45, 1–158.Google Scholar
  8. Birkenmajer, K. (1983). Strike-slip faults in the northern boundary zone of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Carpathians. Studia Geologica Polonica,77, 89–112. (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  9. Birkenmajer, K. (1986). Stages of structural evolution of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Carpathians. Studia Geologica Polonica,88, 7–32.Google Scholar
  10. Birkenmajer, K. (1988). Exotic Andrusov Ridge: Its role in plate-tectonic evolution of the West Carpathian Foldbelt. Studia Geologica Polonica,91, 7–37.Google Scholar
  11. Birkenmajer, K., Dudziak, J., & Jednorowska, A. (1979). Subsurface geological structure of the northern boundary fault zone of the Pieniny Klippen Belt of Poland, Carpathians. Studia Geologica Polonica,61, 7–36. (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  12. Birkenmajer, K., & Gedl, P. (2012). Jurassic and Cretaceous strata in the Maruszyna IG-1 Deep Borehole (Pieniny Klippen Belt, Carpathians, Poland): lithostratigraphy, dinoflagellate cyst biostratigraphy, tectonics. Studia Geologica Polonica,135, 7–54.Google Scholar
  13. Birkenmajer, K., & Gedl, P. (2017). The Grajcarek Succession (Lower Jurassic–mid Paleocene) in the Pieniny Klippen Belt, West Carpathians, Poland: a stratigraphic synthesis. Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae,87, 55–88.Google Scholar
  14. Birkenmajer, K., & Pécskay, Z. (1999). K-Ar dating of the Miocene andesite intrusions, Pieniny Mts. Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Earth Sciences,47, 155–169.Google Scholar
  15. Boldizsár, T. (1967). Terrestrial heat and geothermal resources in Hungary. Bulletin Volcanologique,30, 221–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Burda, J., & Gawęda, A. (1997). Mass-balance calculations in migmatites from the Upper Kościeliska Valley (The Western Tatra Mts. S-Poland). Mineralogia Polonic, 28, 53–68.Google Scholar
  17. Burda, J., & Gawęda, A. (1999). Petrogenesis of migmatites from the Upper Kościeliska Valley (Western Tatra Mountains). Archiwum Mineralogiczne,52, 163–194.Google Scholar
  18. Burda, J., & Gawęda, A. (2009). Shear-influenced partial melting in the Western Tatra metamorphic complex: Geochemistry and geochronology. Lithos,110, 373–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Burtan, J., Sokołowski, S., Liszkowa, J., Szotowa, W., & Szczurowska, J. (1974). Problem Karpat fliszowych i głębokiego podłoża w oknie tektonicznym Wiśniowej. Biuletyn Instytu Geologicznego,273, 97–179. (In Polish).Google Scholar
  20. Castelluccio, A., Andreucci, B., Zattin, M., Ketcham, R. A., Zattin, M., Ketcham, R. A., et al. (2015). Coupling sequential restoration of balanced cross-section and low-temperature thermochronometry: The case study of the Western Carpathians. Lithosphere,7(4), 367–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Castelluccio, A., Mazzoli, S., Andreucci, B., Jankowski, L., Szaniawski, R., & Zattin, M. (2016). Building and exhumation of the Western Carpathians: New constraints from sequentially restored, balanced cross sections integrated with low temperature thermochronometry. Tectonics,35, 2698–2733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chowaniec, J. (2009). Studium hydrogeologii zachodniej części Karpat polskich. Studies of hydrogeology of the western part of Polish Carpathians. Biuletyn Państwowego Instytutu Geologicznego,734, 1–98. (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  23. Chowaniec, J., & Cieszkowski, M. (2009). Neogen i czwartorzęd Kotliny Orawsko-Nowotarskiej. In A. Uchman & J. Chowaniec (Eds.), LXXIX Zjazd Polskiego Towarzystwa Geologicznego, Budowa geologiczna Tatr i Podhala ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem zjawisk geotermalnych na Podhalu, Bukowina Tatrzańska, 26-29.09.2009 (pp. 67–75). Warszawa: PIG (in Polish).Google Scholar
  24. Chowaniec, J., & Kępińska, B. (2003). Podhale geothermal system—selected issues In Geology, geophysics, geothermics and deep structure of the West Carpathians and their basement. In J. Golonka & M. Lewandowski (Eds.), Publications of the Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Monographic Volume 28 (pp. 13–23). Kraków: Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  25. Chowaniec, J., Poprawa, D., & Witek, K. (2001). Występowanie wód termalnych w polskiej części Karpat. Przegląd Geologiczny,49(8), 734–742.Google Scholar
  26. Chrustek, M., Golonka, J., Janeczko, A., & Stachyrak, F. (2004). Lithostratigraphy and tectonics of the Krynica Unit, Magura Nappe in the vicinity of Krościenko on Dunajec River, Poland. Geolines,17, 45–46.Google Scholar
  27. Cieszkowski, M. (1985). Stop 21: Obidowa. In K. Birkenmajer (Ed.), Main geotraverse of the Polish Carpathians (Cracow-Zakopane). Guide to excursion 2, Carpatho-Balkan Geological Association, 13 Congress, Cracow, Poland (pp. 54–58). Warszawa: Geological Institute.Google Scholar
  28. Cieszkowski, M. (1992). Marine Miocene deposits near Nowy Targ, Magura Nappe, Flysch Carpathians (South Poland). Geologica Carpathica,43, 339–346.Google Scholar
  29. Cieszkowski, M. (2001). Fore-Magura Zone of the Outer Carpathians in Poland. Biuletyn Państwowego Instytutu Geologicznego,396, 32–33.Google Scholar
  30. Cieszkowski, M., Durkovič, T., Jawor, E., Korab, T., & Sikora, W. (1981a). A new tectonic unit in the Polish and Slovak Flysch Carpathians. In: Abstracts, Carpatho-Balkan Geological Association, 12 Congress, Bucharest, 1981 (pp. 118-120). Bucharest: Institute of Geology and Geophysics.Google Scholar
  31. Cieszkowski, M., Durkovič, T., Jawor, E., Korab, T., & Sikora, W. (1981b). Geological interpretation of the Obidowa-Słopnice tectonic unit in the Polish and Slovak Flysch Carpathians. In: Abstracts, Carpatho-Balkan Geological Association, 12 Congress, Bucharest, 1981 (pp. 272–274). Bucharest: Institute of Geology and Geophysics.Google Scholar
  32. Cieszkowski, M., & Olszewska, B. (1986). Malcov beds in the Magura Nappe near Nowy Targ, Outer Carpathians, Poland. Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae,56, 53–71.Google Scholar
  33. Csontos, L., Nagymarosy, A., Horvat, F., & Kováč, M. (1992). Tertiary evolution of the Intra-Carpathian area: A model. Tectonophysics,208, 221–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Csontos, L., & Vörös, A. (2004). Mesozoic plate tectonic reconstruction of the Carpathian region. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology,210, 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Dumont, T., Wieczorek, J., & Bouillin, J. P. (1996). Inverted Mesozoic rift structures in the Polish Western Carpathians (High-Tatric units). Comparison with similar features in the Western Alps. Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae,89, 181–202.Google Scholar
  36. Froitzheim, N., Plašienka, D., & Schuster, R. (2008). Alpine tectonics of the Alps and Western Carpathians. In T. McCann (Ed.), The Geology of Central Europe. Volume 2: Mesozoic and Cenozoic (Vol. 2, pp. 1141–1232). London: Geological Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gawęda, A., Goławska, B., Jędrysek, M., Leichman, J., Paulo, A., & Włodyka, R. (2001). Carbonate mineralisation in the Tatra Mts. crystalline basement. Mineralogical Society of Poland, Special Papers, 18, 39–42.Google Scholar
  38. Gawęda, A., Golonka, J., Waśkowska, A., Szopa, K., Chew, D., Starzec, K., et al. (2019). Neoproterozoic crystalline exotic clasts in the Polish Outer Carpathian flysch: remnants of the Proto-Carpathian continent? International Journal of Earth Sciences,108, 1409–1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gawęda, A., Kozłowski, K., & Piotrowska, K. (1998). Tectonic development of the crystalline basement of the Polish part of the Western Tatra Mts. Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Geologica, 42, 252–253.Google Scholar
  40. Gawęda, A., Winchester, J. A., Kozłowski, K., Narębski, W., & Holland, J. G. (2000). Geochemistry and paleotectonic setting of amphibolites from the Western Tatra Mts., southern Poland. Geological Journal,35, 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gołąb, J. (1959). On the geology of the Western Podhale Flysch area. Biuletyn Instytutu Geologicznego,149, 225–237. (in Polish with English summary).Google Scholar
  42. Golonka, J. (2012). Paleozoic paleoenvironment and paleolithofacies maps of Gondwana. Kraków: AGH University of Science and Technology Press.Google Scholar
  43. Golonka, J., Aleksandrowski, P., Aubrecht, M., Chowaniec, J., Chrustek, M., Cieszkowski, M., et al. (2005). Orava Deep Drilling Project and the Post Paleogene tectonics of the Carpathians. Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae,75, 211–248.Google Scholar
  44. Golonka, J., Gahagan, L., Krobicki, M., Marko, F., Oszczypko, N., & Ślączka, A. (2006a). Plate Tectonic Evolution and Paleogeography of the Circum-Carpathian Region. In J. Golonka & F. Picha (Eds.), The Carpathians and their foreland: Geology and hydrocarbon resources. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 84 (pp. 11–46). Tulsa: AAPG.Google Scholar
  45. Golonka, J., & Krobicki, M. (2004). Jurassic paleogeography of the Pieniny and Outer Carpathian basins. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia,110, 5–14.Google Scholar
  46. Golonka, J., & Krobicki, M. (2007). Dunajec River rafting as one of the most important geotouristic objects of the future trans-bordering PIENINY Geopark. Geoturystyka,3(10), 29–44.Google Scholar
  47. Golonka, J., Krobicki, M., Oszczypko, N., & Salata, D. (2006b). Stop 7. Krościenko-Zawiasy Klippe-Contact Zone between the Pieniny Klippen Belt and the Magura Nappe. Geolines,20, 182–183.Google Scholar
  48. Golonka, J., Krobicki, M., & Waśkowska, A. (2018a). The Pieniny Klippen Belt in Poland. Geology, Geophysics and Environment,44, 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Golonka, J., Krobicki, M., Waśkowska, A., Cieszkowski, M., & Ślączka, A. (2015). Olistostromes of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Northern Carpathians. Geological Magazine,152, 269–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Golonka, J., Krobicki, M., Waśkowska, A., Cieszkowski, M., & Ślączka, A. (2017). Reply. Discussion of ‘Olistostromes of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Northern Carpathians’. Geological Magazine,154, 193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Golonka, J., Pietsch, K., & Marzec, P. (2011). Structure and plate tectonic evolution of the northern Outer Carpathians. In D. Closson (Ed.), Tectonics (pp. 65–92). Rijeka, Croatia: INTECH.Google Scholar
  52. Golonka, J., Pietsch, K., & Marzec, P. (2018b). The North European Platform suture zone in Poland. Geology, Geophysics and Environment,44, 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Golonka, J., & Rączkowski, W. (1984a). Arkusz Piwniczna Szczegółowa mapa geologiczna Polski 1:50000, Detailed Geological Map of Poland, Piwniczna Sheet. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne. (in Polish).Google Scholar
  54. Golonka, J., & Rączkowski, W. (1984b). Objaśnienia do Szczegółowej mapy geologicznej Polski 1: 50000, arkusz Piwniczna. Detailed Geological Map of Poland, Piwniczna Sheet. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne. (in Polish).Google Scholar
  55. Golonka, J., & Sikora, W. (1981). Microfacies of the Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous sedimentarily thinned deposits of the Pieniny Klippen Belt in Poland. Biuletyn Instytutu Geologicznego,31, 7–37. (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  56. Golonka, J., & Waśkowska, A. (2014). Paleogene of the Magura Nappe adjacent to the Pieniny Klippen Belt between Szczawnica and Krościenko (Outer Carpathians, Poland). Geology, Geophysics and Environment,40, 359–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Grad, M., Guterch, A., Keller, G. R., Janik, T., Hegedűs, E., Vozár, J., et al. (2006). Lithospheric structure beneath trans-Carpathian transect from Precambrian platform to Pannonian basin: CELEBRATION 2000 seismic profile CEL05. Journal Geophysical Research,111, B3301.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JB003647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Gross, P., Filo, I., Halouzka, R., Haško, J., Havrila, M., Kováč, P., et al. (1993). Geological map of the southern and eastern part of Orava. Bratislava: Ministerstvo Životného Prostredia—Geologický Ústav Dionýza Štúra. (in Slovak).Google Scholar
  59. Hrubcová, P., & Środa, P. (2015). Complex local Moho topography in the Western Carpathians: Indication of the ALCAPA and the European Plate contact. Tectonophysics,638, 63–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hrušecký, I., Plašienka, D., & Pospišil, L. (2006). Identification of the North-European Platform below the eastern part of the West Carpathian Flysch Belt. In J. Golonka & F. Picha (Eds.), The Carpathians and their foreland: Geology and hydrocarbon resources. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 84 (pp. 717–728). Tulsa: AAPG.Google Scholar
  61. Janik, T., Grad, M., Guterch, A., & Celebration 2000 Working Group. (2009). Seismic structure of the lithosphere between the East European Craton and the Carpathians from the net of Cellebration 2000 profiles in SE Poland. Geological Quarterly,53, 141–158.Google Scholar
  62. Janik, T., Grad, M., Guterch, A., Vozar, J., Bielik, M., Vozarova, A., et al. (2011). Crustal structure of the Western Carpathians and Pannonian Basin System: Seismic models from CELEBRATION 2000 data and geological implication. Journal of Geodynamics,52(2), 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Janočko, J., Gross, P., Buček, S., Karoli, S., Žec, B., Rakus, M., et al. (2000). Geologická mapa Spišskej Magury 1:50000. Bratislava: Ministerstvo Životneho Prostredia—Geologicky Ustav Dionyza Štura. (in Slovak).Google Scholar
  64. Jurewicz, E. (1994). Structural analysis of the Pieniny Klippen Belt at Jaworki, Carpathians, Poland. Studia Geologica Polonica,106, 7–87.Google Scholar
  65. Jurewicz, E. (1997). The contact between the Pieniny Klippen Belt and Magura Unit (the Małe Pieniny Mts.). Geological Quarterly,41, 315–326.Google Scholar
  66. Jurewicz, E. (2005). Geodynamic evolution of the Tatra Mts. and the Pieniny Klippen Belt (Western Carpathians): Problems and comments. Acta Geologica Polonica,55, 295–338.Google Scholar
  67. Jurewicz, E. (2018). The Šariš Transitional Zone, revealing interactions between Pieniny Klippen Belt, Outer Carpathians and European platform. Swiss Journal of Geosciences.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00015-017-0297-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Jurewicz, E., & Nejbert, K. (2005). Geotectonic position of the so-called “Pieniny Mts. andesites”. Mineralogical Society of Poland, Special Papers,25, 179–183.Google Scholar
  69. Kaczmarek, A., Oszczypko-Clowes, M., & Cieszkowski, M. (2016). Early Miocene age of Stare Bystre Formation (Magura Nappe, Outer Carpathians, Poland) indicated by the calcareous nannoplankton. Geological Quarterly,60, 341–354.Google Scholar
  70. Kahan, S. (1969). Eine neue Ansicht über den geologischen Aufbau des Kristallinikums der West Tatra. Acta Geologica et Geographica Universitatis Comenianae,12, 115–122.Google Scholar
  71. Kotański, Z. (1959). Stratigraphy, sedimentology and paleogeography of the High-Tatric Triassic in the Tatra Mts. Acta Geologica Polonica,9, 113–145.Google Scholar
  72. Kotański, Z. (1973). Upper and Middle Subtatric nappe in the Tatra Mts. Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Earth Sciences,21, 75–83.Google Scholar
  73. Kováč, M., & Hók, J. (1993). The Central Slovak Fault System: Field evidence of a strike-slip. Geologica Carpathica,44, 155–160.Google Scholar
  74. Kováč, M., Nagymarosy, A., Oszczypko, N., Ślączka, A., Csontos, L., Marunteanu, M., et al. (1998). Palinspastic reconstruction of the Carpathian-Pannonian region during the Miocene. In M. Raks (Ed.), Geodynamic development of the Western Carpathians (pp. 189–217). Bratislava: Dionýz Štúr Publishers, Geological Survey of Slovac Republic.Google Scholar
  75. Kovač, M., Nagymarosy, A., Sotak, J., & Šutovska, K. (1993). Late Tertiary paleogeographic evolution of the Western Carpathians. Tectonophysics,226, 401–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Krobicki, M., & Golonka, J. (2008). Geotouristical values of the Pieniny Klippen Belt and Tatra Mountains regions (Poland). Przegląd Geologiczny,56, 670–679.Google Scholar
  77. Książkiewicz, M. (1977). The Tectonics of the Carpathians. In W. Pożaryski (Ed.), Geology of Poland, IV. Tectonics (pp. 476–620). Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne.Google Scholar
  78. Kulka, A., Rączkowski, W., Żytko, K., & Paul, Z. (1985). Szczegółowa Mapa Geologiczna Polski. 1:50.000. Arkusz Szczawnica-Krościenko. Detailed Geological Map of Poland, Szczawnica-Krościenko Sheet. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne (in Polish).Google Scholar
  79. Lasocki, S., Orlecka Sikora, B., Leptokaropoulos, K., Lizurek, G., Sterzel, M., et al. (2016). Platforma IS-EPOS jako nowoczesne narzędzie w badaniach sejsmiczności antropogenicznej. Zeszyty Naukowe Instytutu Gospodarki Surowcami Mineralnymi i Energią Polskiej Akademii Nauk, 93, 49–62 (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  80. Lefeld, J. (1985). Jurassic and Cretaceous lithostratigraphic units in the Tatra Mountains. Studia Geologica Polonica,84, 82–93.Google Scholar
  81. Lefeld, J. (1999). Tectonics of the Subtatric Units, Eastern Tatra Mts. Studia Geologica Polonica,115, 139–166.Google Scholar
  82. Lefeld, J., & Jankowski, J. (1985). Model of deep structure of the Polish Inner Carpathians. Publications of the Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences,A-16(175), 71–100.Google Scholar
  83. Lexa, J., Bezák, V., Elečko, M., Mello, J., Polák, M., Potfaj, M., et al. (2000). Geological map of the Western Carpathians and adjacent areas, 1:500,000. Bratislava: Min. Envir. Slov. Repub., GSSR.Google Scholar
  84. Łój, M., Madej, J., Porzucek, S., & Zuchiewicz, W. (2007). Periodic gravity changes in the young tectonic movement investigation of selected area in the Polish Western Carpathians. Acta Geodynamica et Geomaterialia,4, 97–107.Google Scholar
  85. Łoziński, M., Ziółkowski, P., & Wysocka, A. (2017). Tectono-sedimentary analysis using the anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility: A study of the terrestrial and freshwater Neogene of the Orava Basin. Geologica Carpathica,68, 479–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Łuczyński, P., & Jezierska, A. (2018). Neptunian dykes penetrating the Lower Jurassic Dudziniec Formation in the autochthonous High-Tatric succession, Tatra Mountains, Western Carpathians, Poland. Acta Geologica Polonica,68, 555–570.Google Scholar
  87. Ludwiniak, M. (2010). Multi-stage development of the joint network in the flysch rocks of western Podhale (Inner Western Carpathians, Poland). Acta Geologica Polonica,60, 283–316.Google Scholar
  88. Ludwiniak, M. (2018). Miocene transpression effects at the boundary of Central Carpathian Paleogene Basin and PieninyKlippen Belt: examples from Polish-Slovakian borderland. Geology, Geophysics and Environment,44, 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Ludwiniak, M., Rybak-Ostrowska, B., & Gąsiński, A. (2012). Fault rocks of the Jelešňa fault zone (Central Carpathian Paleogene Basin, SE Orava, Slovakia). Mineralia Slovaca,44, 92.Google Scholar
  90. Ludwiniak, M., Śmigielski, M., Kowalczyk, S., Łoziński, M., Czarniecka, U., & Lewińska, L. (2019). The intramontane Orava Basin—Evidence of large-scale Miocene to Quaternary sinistral wrenching in the Alpine–Carpathian–Pannonian area. Acta Geologica Polonica.  https://doi.org/10.1515/agp-2018-0028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Madzin, J., Sýkora, M., & Soták, J. (2014). Stratigraphic position of alkaline volcanic rocks in the autochthonous cover of the High-Tatric Unit (Western Tatra Mts., Central Western Carpathians, Slovakia). Geological Quarterly,58(1), 163–180.  https://doi.org/10.7306/gq.1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Mahel, M. (1974). The Inner Carpathians. In M. Mahel (Ed.), Tectonics of the Carpathian-Balkan Regions (pp. 91–133). Bratislava: Geologický Ústav Dionyza Štura.Google Scholar
  93. Marko, F. (2003). Slickensides and related paleostress field in the western part of the Pieniny Klippen Belt. In J. Golonka & M. Lewandowski (Eds.): Geology, geophysics, geothermics and deep structure of the West Carpathians and their basement. Publications of the Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Monographic Volume 28 (pp. 145–146). Kraków: Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  94. Marko, F., Andriessen, P. A. M., Tomek, Č., Bezák, V., Fojtíková, L., Bošanský, M., et al. (2017). Carpathian Shear Corridor—A strike-slip boundary of an extruded crustal segment. Tectonophysics,703–704, 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Márton, E., Grabowski, J., Plašienka, D., Túnyi, I., Krobicki, M., Haas, J., et al. (2013). New paleomagnetic results from the Upper Cretaceous red marls of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Western Carpathians: Evidence for general CCW rotation and implications for the origin of the structural arc formation. Tectonophysics,592, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Márton, E., Mastella, L., & Tokarski, A. K. (1999). Large counterclockwise rotation of the Inner West Carpathian Paleogene Flysch—Evidence from paleomagnetic investigation of the Podhale Flysch (Poland). Physics and Chemistry of the Earth. Part A,24(8), 645–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Márton, E., Tokarski, A. K., & Halász, D. (2004). Late Miocene counter-clockwise rotation of the Pieniny andesites at the contact of the Inner and Outer Carpathians. Geologica Carpathica,55, 411–419.Google Scholar
  98. Mastella, L. (1975). Tektonika fliszu we wschodniej części Podhala. Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae,45, 361–401.Google Scholar
  99. Mastella, L. (1988). Budowa i ewolucja strukturalna okna tektonicznego Mszany Dolnej, polskie Karpaty Zewnętrzne. Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae,58, 53–173.Google Scholar
  100. Mastella L., Konon A. & Mardal T. (1996). Tektonika fliszu podhalańskiego w dolinie Białki. Przegląd Geologiczny, 12, 1189–1194 (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  101. Mastella, L., Ludwiniak, M. & Klimkiewicz, D. (2012). Budowa geologiczna doliny Białego Dunajca. Przegląd Geologiczny60, 496–505 (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  102. Mastella, L., Ozimkowski, W., & Szczęsny, R. (1988). Tectonics of the northwestern Podhale Flysch. Przegląd Geologiczny, 36, 566–572 (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  103. Mišík, M. (1994). The Czorsztyn submarine ridge (Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous, Pieniny Klippen Belt): an example of a pelagic swell. Mitteilungen der (sterreichischen Geologischen Gesellschaft,86, 133–140.Google Scholar
  104. Nemčok, J. (1990). Geologická mapa Pienin, Čergova, L’ubovnianskej a Ondavskej Vrchoviny. Bratislava: Slovenský Geologický Úrad - Geologický Ústav Dionýza Štúra. (in Slovak).Google Scholar
  105. Nemčok, M., Hók, J., Kováč, P., Marko, F., Coward, M. P., Madarás, J., et al. (1998). Tertiary extension development and extension/compression interplay in the West Carpathian mountain belt. Tectonophysics,239, 81–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Nemčok, M., & Nemčok, J. (1994). Late Cretaceous deformation of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, West Carpathians. Tectonophysics,239, 81–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Neumayr, M. (1871). Jurastudien. Der penninische Klippenzug. Jahrbuch der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Geologischen Reichsanstalt,21, 451–536.Google Scholar
  108. Lasocki S., & Orlecka-Sikora, B. (2016). Integrated approach to geophysical hazards induced by exploration and exploitation of georesources - to facilitate the way of attaining excellence. The EPOS Newsletter issue 01, July 2016, Article 03. https://www.epos-ip.org/news-press/epos-ip-newsletter, http://www.rich2010.eu/rich-success-stories. Accessed 01 April 2016.
  109. Oszast, J., & Stuchlik, L. (1977). The Neogene vegetation of the Podhale (West Carpathians, Poland). Acta Palaeobotanica,18, 45–86. (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  110. Oszczypko, N. (2004). The structural position and tectonosedimentary evolution of the Polish Outer Carpathians. Przegląd Geologiczny,52, 780–791. (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  111. Oszczypko, N., & Oszczypko-Clowes, M. (2010). The Paleogene and Early Neogene stratigraphy of the Beskid Sądecki Range and L’ubovnianska Vrchovina (Magura Nappe, Western Carpathians). Acta Geologica Polonica,60, 317–348.Google Scholar
  112. Oszczypko, N., & Oszczypko-Clowes, M. (2014). Geological structure and evolution of the Pieniny Klippen Belt to the east of the Dunajec River—A new approach (Outer Western Carpathians, Poland). Geological Quarterly,58, 737–758.Google Scholar
  113. Oszczypko, N., Oszczypko-Clowes, M., Golonka, J., & Marko, F. (2005). Oligocene-Lower Miocene sequences of the Pieniny Klippen Belt and adjacent Magura Nappe between Jarabina and the Poprad River (East Slovakia and South Poland): Their tectonic position and palaeogeographic implications. Geological Quarterly, 49, 379–402.Google Scholar
  114. Oszczypko, N., Ślączka, A., Oszczypko-Clowes, A., & Olszewska, B. (2015). Where was the Magura Ocean. Acta Geologica Polonica,65, 319–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Paul, Z., & Poprawa, D. (1992). Budowa geologiczna płaszczowiny magurskiej w strefie przypienińskiej w świetle wyników badań uzyskanych z wiercenia Nowy Targ PIG1. Przegląd Geologiczny,40, 404–409. (in Polish, English Summary).Google Scholar
  116. Picha, F. (1996). Exploring for hydrocarbons under thrust belts—A challenging new frontier in the Carpathians and elsewhere. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin,80, 1547–1564.Google Scholar
  117. Picha, F., Stranik, Z., & Krejci, O. (2006). Geology and hydrocarbon resources of the Outer Western Carpathians and their foreland, Czech Republic. In J. Golonka & F. Picha (Eds.), The Carpathians and their foreland: Geology and hydrocarbon resources. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 84 (pp. 49–175). Tulsa: AAPG.Google Scholar
  118. Pieńkowski, G., Schudack, M. E., Bosák, P., Enay, R., Feldman-Olszewska, A., Golonka, J., et al. (2008). Jurassic. In T. McCann (Ed.), The Geology of Central Europe. Volume 2: Mesozoic and Cenozoic (Vol. 2, pp. 823–922). London: Geological Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Plašienka, D. (2012). Early stages of structural evolution of the Carpathian Klippen Belt (Slovakian Pieniny sector). Mineralia Slovaca,44, 1–16.Google Scholar
  120. Plašienka, D. (2018). Continuity and episodicity in the early Alpine tectonic evolution of the Western Carpathians: how large-scale processes are expresses by the orogenic architecture and rock record data. Tectonics,37, 2029–2079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Plašienka, D., Grecula, P., Putiš, M., Kováč, M., & Hovorka, D. (1997). Evolution and structure of the Western Carpathians: An overview. In P. Grecula, D. Hovorka & M. Putiš (Eds.), Geological evolution of the Western Carpathians. Mineralia Slovaca, Monograph (pp. 1–24). Bratislava: Alfa.Google Scholar
  122. Pomianowski, P. (2003). Tectonics of the Orava-Nowy Targ Basin - results of the combined analysis of the gravity and geoelectrical data. Przegląd Geologiczny,51, 498–506. (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  123. Potfaj, M. (1997). Relation of the Klippen belt and the Flysch zone in the territory of western Slovakia. In D. Plašienka, J. Hók, J. Vozar & M. Elečko M. (Eds.) Alpine evolution of the Western Carpathians and related areas (pp. 119–125). Bratislava: Dionýz Štúr Publishers.Google Scholar
  124. Putiš, M. (1992). Variscan and Alpidic nappe structures of the Western Carpathian crystalline basement. Geologica Carpathica,43, 369–380.Google Scholar
  125. Putiš, M. (1994). South Tatric-Veporic Basement Geology: Variscan Nappe Structures; Alpine Thick-Skinned and Extensional Tectonics in the Western Carpathians (Eastern Low Tatra Mountains, Northwestern Slovak Ore Mountains). Mitteilungen der Osterreichischen Geographischen Gesellschaft, 86, 83–99.Google Scholar
  126. Ratschbacher, L., Frisch, W., Linzer, H. G., Sperner, B., Meschede, M., Decker, K., et al. (1993). The Pieniny Klippen Belt in the western Carpathians of northeastern Slovakia: structural evidence for transpression. Tectonophysics,226, 471–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Roca, E., Bessereau, G., Jawor, E., Kotarba, M., & Roure, F. (1995). Pre-Neogene evolution of the Western Carpathians: Constraints from the Bochnia—Tatra Mountains section (Polish Western Carpathians). Tectonics,14, 855–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Schmid, S. M., Bernoulli, D., Fügenschuh, B., Matenco, L., Schefer, S., Schuster, R., et al. (2008). The Alpine-Carpathian-Dinaridic orogenic system: Correlation and evolution of tectonic units. Swiss Journal of Geosciences,101, 139–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Schmid, S. M., Fügenschuh, B., Kounov, A., Matenco, L., Nievergelt, P., et al. (2019). Tectonic units of the Alpine collision zone between Eastern Alps and western Turkey. Gondwana Research (in press).Google Scholar
  130. Seghedi, I., Downes, H., Szakács, A., Balogh, K., & Pécskay, Z. (2004). Post-collisional Tertiary-Quaternary mafic alkali magmatism in the Carpathian-Pannonian region: A review. Tectonophysics,393, 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Sikora, W. (1962). New data on the geology of the Pieniny Klippen Belt. Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Earth Sciences,10, 203–211.Google Scholar
  132. Sikora, W. (1971). Esquisse de la tectogene`se de la zone des Klippes des Pieniny en Pologne d’apre` s de nouvelles donne´es ge´ologiques. Rocznik Polskiego Towarzystwa Geologicznego, 41, 221–239 (in Russian, French summary).Google Scholar
  133. Sikora, W. (1974). The Pieniny Klippen Belt (Polish Carpathians). In M. Maheľ (Ed.), Tectonics of the Carpathian-Balkan Regions (pp. 177–180). Bratislava: Geological Institute of D. Štur.Google Scholar
  134. Sikora, W., Borysławski, A, Cieszkowski, M., Gucik, S., & Jasionowicz, J. (1980). Geological cross-section Cracow-Zakopane Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne (in Polish).Google Scholar
  135. Ślączka, A., Kruglow, S., Golonka, J. Oszczypko, N., & Popadyuk, I. (2006). The General Geology of the Outer Carpathians, Poland, Slovakia, and Ukraine. In J. Golonka & F. Picha (Eds.), The Carpathians and their foreland: Geology and hydrocarbon resources. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 84 (pp. 221–258). Tulsa: AAPG.Google Scholar
  136. Soták, J., & Janočko, J. (2001). Central-Carpathian Paleogene Basin—an outline to sedimentology, sequence stratigraphy and basin history. In J. Janočko & J. Soták (Eds.), Sedimentary sequences and depositional systems of the Central-Carpathian Paleogene Basin. Guidebook to IAS field trip, Slovakia 2001 (pp. 1–32). Košice: Cassovia Print.Google Scholar
  137. Sperner, B. (1996). Computer programs for the kinematic analysis of brittle deformation structures and the Tertiary tectonic evolution of the Western Carpathians (Slovakia). Tübinger Geowissenschaftliche Arbeiten,27, 1–120.Google Scholar
  138. Sperner, B., Ratschbacher, L., & Nemčok, M. (2002). Interplay between subduction retreat and lateral extrusion: Tectonics of the Western Carpathians. Tectonics,21, 1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Środa, P., Czuba, W., Grad, M., Guterch, A., Tokarski, A. K., Janik, T., et al. (2006). Crustal and upper mantle structure of the Western Carpathians from CELEBRATION 2000 profiles CEL01 and CEL04: seismic models and geological implications. Geophysical Journal International,167, 737–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Starostenko, V., Janik, T., Kolomiyets, K., Czuba, W., Środa, P., Grad, M., et al. (2013). Seismic velocity model of the crust and upper mantle along profile PANCAKE across the Carpathians between the Pannonian Basin and the East European Craton. Tectonophysics,608, 1049–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Struska, M. (2009). Budowa tektoniczna Kotliny Orawskiej. In A. Uchman & J. Chowaniec (Eds.), LXXIX Zjazd Polskiego Towarzystwa Geologicznego, Budowa geologiczna Tatr i Podhala ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem zjawisk geotermalnych na Podhalu, Bukowina Tatrzańska, 26-29.09.2009. Materiały konferencyjne (pp. 76–80). Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Geologiczny (in Polish).Google Scholar
  142. Szczęch, M., Cieszkowski, M., Chodyń, R., & Loch, J. (2016). Geotouristic values of the Gorce National Park and its surroundings (The Outer Carpathians, Poland). Geoturystyka,1–2(44–45), 27–44.Google Scholar
  143. Tomek, Č. (1993). Deep crustal structure beneath the central and inner West Carpathians. Tectonophysics,226, 417–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Uhlig, V. (1897). Die Geologie des Tatragebirges, I. Denkschriften der Mathematisch Naturwissenschaftlichen Classe.,64, 643–684.Google Scholar
  145. Uhlig V. (1903). Bau und Bild der Karpathen. In K. Diener, V. Uhlig, R. Hoernes & F. Suess (Eds.), Bau und Bild Österreichs (pp. 652–911). Wien: F. Tempsky, Leipzig: G. Freytag.Google Scholar
  146. Uhlig, V. (1907). Über die Tektonik der Karpathen. Akademie der Wissenschaften, matematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Klasse, 116(1), 871–982.Google Scholar
  147. Uhlig, V. (1908). Geologisches aus dem Tatragebirge. Mitteilungen der Geologischen Gesellschaft in Wien,1, 343–364.Google Scholar
  148. Ustaszewski, K., Schmid, S.M., Fügenschuh, B., Tischler, M., Kissling, E. & Spakman,W., 2008. A map-view restoration of the Alpine-Carpathian-Dinaridic system for the Early Miocene. In: Orogenic processes in the Alpine collision zone. In N. Froitzheim & S.M. Schmid Eds.). Swiss Journal of Geosciences, 101(Suppl 1), S273–S294.Google Scholar
  149. Vanko, J. (1988). Mapa recentných vertikálnych pohybov Západných Karpát na Slovensku v epochu 1952–1977. Geodetický a Kartografický Obzor,34(76), 216–222. (In Slovak).Google Scholar
  150. Vass, D. (1998). Neogene geodynamic development of the Carpathian arc and associated basins. In M. Rakús (Ed.), Geodynamic development of the Western Carpathians (pp. 155–158). Bratislava: Geological Survey of Slovak Republic, Dionýz Štúr Publishers.Google Scholar
  151. Watycha, L. (1959). Uwagi o geologii fliszu podhalańskiego we wschodniej części Podhala. Przegląd Geologiczny,7, 350–356. (in Polish).Google Scholar
  152. Watycha, L. (1964a). Szczegółowa Mapa Geologiczna Polski 1:50.000. (bez utworów czwartorzędowych). Rejon Karpat i Przedgórza. Arkusz Krościenko. Warszawa: Wyd. Geologiczne (in Polish).Google Scholar
  153. Watycha, L. (1964b). Szczegółowa Mapa Geologiczna Polski 1:50.000. (bez utworów czwartorzędowych). Rejon Karpat i Przedgórza. Arkusz Nowy Targ. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne (in Polish).Google Scholar
  154. Watycha, L. (1968). Preliminary estimation of conditions and possibilities of formation of oil deposits in the eastern part of the Podhale flysch. Geological Quarterly,12, 898–915.Google Scholar
  155. Watycha, L. (1975). Szczegółowa Mapa Geologiczna Polski 1:50 000, Arkusz Nowy Targ. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne. (in Polish).Google Scholar
  156. Watycha, L. (1976a). Explanations to Geological Map of Poland, Nowy Targ sheet, scale 1:50 000. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne. (In Polish).Google Scholar
  157. Watycha, L. (1976b). Szczegółowa Mapa Geologiczna Polski 1:50 000, Arkusz Czarny Dunajec. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne. (in Polish).Google Scholar
  158. Watycha, L. (1977). Explanations to Geological Map of Poland, 1:50000, Czarny Dunajec sheet, scale 1:50 000. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Geologiczne. (in Polish).Google Scholar
  159. Wieczorek, J. (2000). Mesozoic evolution of the Tatra Mountains (Carpathians). Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft der Geologie und Bergbaustudenten in Wien,44, 241–262.Google Scholar
  160. Wieczorek, J., & Barbacki, A. (1997). Przekrój geologiczny przez nieckę podhalańską i jej podłoże na podstawie danych sejsmicznych i wiertniczych; implikacje dla geotermii. Przegląd Geologiczny,45, 715–720. (in Polish).Google Scholar
  161. Wierzbowski, A., Aubrecht, R., Golonka, J., Gutowski, J., Krobicki, M., Matyja, B. A, Pieńkowski, G., & Uchman, A. (2006). Jurassic of Poland and adjacent Slovakian Carpathians. Field trip guidebook. 7th International Congress on the Jurassic System, 618 September 2006, Kraków, Poland. Warszawa: Polish Geological Institute.Google Scholar
  162. Wilson, M., & Downes, H. (2006). Tertiary-Quaternary intra-plate magmatism in Europe and its relationship to mantle dynamics. Geological Society, London, Memoirs,32, 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Wysocka, A., Łoziński, M., Śmigielski, M., Czarniecka, U., & Bojanowski, M. (2018). New data on the age of the sedimentary infill of the Orava-Nowy Targ Basin—A case study of the Bystry Stream succession (Middle/Upper Miocene, Western Carpathians). Geological Quarterly,62, 327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Zattin, M., Andreucci, B., Jankowski, L., Mazzoli, S., & Szaniawski, R. (2011). Neogene exhumation in the Outer Western Carpathians. Terra Nova,23, 283–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Zuchiewicz, W., Tokarski, A. K., Jarosiński, M., & Márton, E. (2002). Late Miocene to present day structural development of the Polish segment of the Outer Carpathians. EGU Stephen Mueller Special Publication Series,3, 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Żytko, K. (2001). Jednostki strukturalne Karpat zewnętrznych między Sołą a Dunajcem. Przegląd Geologiczny 49, 703–709 (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  167. Żytko, K., & Malata, T. (2001). Paleogeograficzna pozycja fliszu jednostki Obidowej-Słopnic w basenie Karpat zewnętrznych. Przegląd Geologiczny, 49, 425–430 (in Polish, English summary).Google Scholar
  168. Żytko, K., Zając, R., Gucik, S., Ryłko, W., Oszczypko, N., Garlicka, I., et al. (1989). Map of the tectonic elements of the Western Outer Carpathians and their foreland, 1:500 000. In D. Poprawa & J. Nemčok (Eds.), Geological Atlas of the Western Outer Carpathians and their Foreland (1sheet). Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Geologiczny.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environmental ProtectionKrakówPoland
  2. 2.Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of SciencesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations