International Journal of Earth Sciences

, Volume 94, Issue 3, pp 385–400 | Cite as

Tectonic evolution of a continental magmatic arc from transpression in the upper crust to exhumation of mid-crustal orogenic root recorded by episodically emplaced plutons: the Central Bohemian Plutonic Complex (Bohemian Massif)

  • Jiří Žák
  • František V. Holub
  • Kryštof Verner
Original paper

Abstract

The Central Bohemian Plutonic Complex (CBPC) consists of episodically emplaced plutons, the internal fabrics of which recorded tectonic evolution of a continental magmatic arc. The ~354–350 Ma calc-alkaline plutons were emplaced by multiple processes into the upper-crustal Teplá-Barrandian Unit, and their magmatic fabrics recorded increments of regional transpression. Multiple fabrics of the younger, ~346 Ma Blatná pluton recorded both regional transpression and the onset of exhumation of mid-crustal orogenic root (Moldanubian Unit). Continuous exhumation-related deformation during pluton cooling resulted in the development of a wide zone of sub-solidus deformation along the SE margin of the CBPC. Finally, syn-exhumation tabular durbachitic pluton of ultrapotassic composition was emplaced atop the intrusive sequence at ~343–340 Ma, and the ultrapotassic Tábor pluton intruded after exhumation of the orogenic root (~337 Ma). We suggest that the emplacement of plutons during regional transpression in the upper crust produced thermally softened domain which then accommodated the exhumation of the mid-crustal orogenic root, and that the complex nature of the Teplá-Barrandian/Moldanubian boundary is a result of regional transpression in the upper crust, the enhancement of regional deformation in overlapping structural aureoles, the subsequent exhumation of the orogenic root domain, and post-emplacement brittle faulting.

Keywords

Pluton emplacement Magmatic fabrics Magmatic arc Transpression Exhumation Moldanubian Zone Bohemian Massif 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Thorough reviews by Gérard Gleizes and one anonymous reviewer significantly helped to improve the manuscript and are gratefully acknowledged. We thank the Charles University Grant Agency (GAUK) and the Czech National Grant Agency (GAČR) for financial support. Financial support by the Grant No.230/2001/B-GEO/PrF of the Charles University Grant Agency (to K. Schulmann) and in part also by the Grant No. 205/02/0514 of the Czech National Grant Agency (to F. V. Holub) are gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Brown M, Solar G (1999) The mechanism of ascent and emplacement of granite magma during transpression: a syntectonic granite paradigm. Tectonophysics 312:1–33Google Scholar
  2. Crawford ML, Klepeis KA, Gehrels G, Isachsen C (1999) Batholith emplacement at mid-crustal levels and its exhumation within an obliquely convergent margin. Tectonophysics 312:57–78Google Scholar
  3. Cruden AR (1998) On the emplacement of tabular granites. J Geol Soc Lond 155:853–862Google Scholar
  4. Cruden AR, McCaffrey KJW (2001) Growth of plutons by floor subsidence: implications for rates of emplacement, intrusion spacing and melt-extraction mechanisms. Phys Chem Earth 26:303–315Google Scholar
  5. Dobeš M, Pokorný L (1988) Gravimetry applied to the interpretation of the morphology of the Čertovo břemeno durbachite body in the Central Bohemian Pluton. Bull Geol Surv Prague 63:129–135Google Scholar
  6. Dörr W, Zulauf G, Fiala J, Franke W, Haack U, Philippe S, Schastok J, Scheuvens D, Vejnar Z, Wulf S (1998) Cambrian transtensional and Variscan normal fault related plutons: Tectonothermal evolution within the Teplá-Barrandian (Bohemian Massif, Czech Republic). Terra Nostra 98:42–46Google Scholar
  7. Gibbons W, Moreno T (2002) Tectonomagmatism in continental arcs: evidence from the Sark arc complex. Tectonophysics 352:185–201Google Scholar
  8. Gleizes G, Leblanc D, Olivier P, Bouchez JL (2001) Strain partitioning in a pluton during emplacement in transpressional regime: the example of Neouvielle granite (Pyrenees). Int J Earth Sci 90:325–340Google Scholar
  9. Holub FV (1997) Ultrapotassic plutonic rocks of the durbachite series in the Bohemian Massif: Petrology, geochemistry and petrogenetic interpretation. J Geol Sci Econ Geol Mineral (Prague) 31:5–24Google Scholar
  10. Holub FV, Žežulková V (1978) Relative ages of intrusives of the Central Bohemian Pluton near Zvíkov (English summary). Bull Geol Survey Prague 53:289–297Google Scholar
  11. Holub FV, Cocherie A, Rossi P (1997a) Radiometric dating of granitic rocks from the Central Bohemian Plutonic Complex (Czech Republic): constraints on the chronology of the thermal and tectonic events along the Moldanubian-Barrandian boundary. C R Acad Sci Paris Earth Planet Sci 325:19–26Google Scholar
  12. Holub FV, Machart J, Manová M (1997b) The Central Bohemian Plutonic Complex: Geology, chemical composition and genetic interpretation. J Geol Sci, Econ Geol Mineral (Praha) 31:27–50Google Scholar
  13. Hutton DHW (1992) Granite sheeted complexes: evidence for dyking ascent mechanism. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences 83:377–382Google Scholar
  14. Jakeš P (1968) Variation of the chemical and modal composition of the Tábor Massif: Časopis pro mineralogii a geologii (Prague) 13:63–73Google Scholar
  15. Janoušek V, Gerdes A (2003) Timing the magmatic activity within the Central Bohemian Pluton, Czech Republic: conventional U-Pb ages for the Sázava and Tábor intrusions and their geotectonic significance. J Czech Geol Soc 48:70–71Google Scholar
  16. Janoušek V, Bowes DR, Rogers G, Farrow CM, Jelinek E (2000) Modelling diverse processes in the petrogenesis of a composite batholith: the Central Bohemian Pluton, Central European Hercynides. J Petrol 41:511–543Google Scholar
  17. Kachlík V (1988) Representation and relationship of the Proterozoic and Paleozoic units of the Central Bohemian Pluton mantle and possibilities of their correlation In 1st International Conference on the Bohemian Massif, Prague, pp 144–149Google Scholar
  18. Kachlík V (1992) Lithostratigraphy, paleogeography and metamorphism of roof pendants in the NE part of the Central Bohemian Pluton. Unpublished PhD thesis (in Czech), Charles University, PragueGoogle Scholar
  19. Kachlík V (1999) Relationship between Moldanubicum, the Kutná Hora Crystalline Unit and Bohemicum (Central Bohemia, Czech Republic): a result of the polyphase Variscan nappe tectonics. J Czech Geol Soc 44:201–291Google Scholar
  20. Košler J, Aftalion M, Bowes DR (1993) Mid-late Devonian plutonic activity in the Bohemian Massif: U-Pb zircon isotopic evidence from the Staré Sedlo and Mirotice gneiss complexes. N Jb Mineral Mh 1993:417–431Google Scholar
  21. Košler J, Rogers G, Roddick JC, Bowes DR (1995) Temporal association of ductile deformation and granitic plutonism: Rb-Sr and 40 Ar–39 Ar isotopic evidence from roof pendants above the Central Bohemian Pluton, Czech Republic. J Geol 103:711–717Google Scholar
  22. Paterson SR, Fowler TK (1993) Re-examining pluton emplacement processes. J Struct Geol 15:191–206Google Scholar
  23. Paterson SR, Miller RB (1998a) Magma emplacement during arc-perpendicular shortening: An example from the Cascades crystalline core, Washington. Tectonics 17:571–586Google Scholar
  24. Paterson SR, Miller RB (1998b) Mid-crustal magmatic sheets in the Cascades Mountains, Washington: implications for magma ascent. J Struct Geol 20:1345–1363Google Scholar
  25. Paterson SR, Fowler TK, Miller RB (1996) Pluton emplacement in arcs: a crustal-scale exchange process. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Earth Sci 87:115–123Google Scholar
  26. Pitra P, Burg JP, Guiraud M (1999) Late Variscan strike-slip tectonics between the Teplá-Barrandian and Moldanubian terranes (Czech Bohemian Massif): petrostructural evidence. J Geol Soc Lond 156:1003–1020Google Scholar
  27. Rajlich P (1993) Variscan ductile tectonics of the Bohemian Massif. Knihovna ČGÚ 65:1–171Google Scholar
  28. Rajlich P, Schulmann K, Synek J (1988) Strain analysis on conglomerates from the Central Bohemian Shear Zone. Krystalinikum 19:119–134Google Scholar
  29. Saint-Blanquat M de, Tikoff B (1997) Development of magmatic to solid-state fabrics during syntectonic emplacement of the Mono Creek Granite, Sierra Nevada Batholith. In: Bouchez J-L, Hutton D, Stephens WE (eds) Granite: From segregation of melt to emplacement fabrics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dodrecht, pp 231–252Google Scholar
  30. Saint-Blanquat M de, Tikoff B, Teyssier C, Vigneresse JL (1998) Transpressional kinematics and magmatic arcs. In: Holdsworth RE, Strachan RA, Dewey JF (eds) Continental transpressional and transtensional tectonics. Geological Society, London, pp 327–340Google Scholar
  31. Scheuvens D, Zulauf G (2000) Exhumation, strain localization, and emplacement of granitoids along the western part of the Central Bohemian shear zone (Bohemian Massif). Int J Earth Sci 89:617–630Google Scholar
  32. Žák J, Schulmann K, Hrouda F (2005) Multiple magmatic fabrics in the Sázava pluton (Bohemian Massif, Czech Republic): a result of superposition of regional transpression on final emplacement. J Struct Geol: (in press)Google Scholar
  33. Yoshinobu AS, Okaya DA, Paterson SR (1998) Modelling the thermal evolution of fault-controlled magma emplacement models: implications for the solidification of granitoid plutons. J Struct Geol 20:1205–1218Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiří Žák
    • 1
    • 3
  • František V. Holub
    • 2
  • Kryštof Verner
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Geology and PaleontologyCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic
  2. 2.Institute of Petrology and Structural GeologyCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic
  3. 3.Czech Geological SurveyPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations