The latest achievements of international geotectonics: on the way to chaos
https://doi.org/10.25587/SVFU.2022.27.3.010
Abstract
Geotectonical investigations have big importance for development of geology, and this is why their results deserve close attention. The present review focuses on the latest achievements of the principal direction of international geotectonics linked to the studies of dynamics of tectonic blocks in the geological time and space, which are represented in three articles published by the leading scientific journals. The methodological foundation is a critical analysis of the content of these works, which allows revealing the main problems of the related investigations. The results indicate on the advanced character of the latter, the significance of which is diminished by some methodological and factological problems. First of all, these problems are related to geotectonical nomenclature. Platform domains are characterized simplistically and with mixed terms. For example, platforms are named as shield, and shields are named as cratons. The attempt to map last orogenic phases faces the irregularity of orogenic phase naming. For some plots, orogenic regimes are not established. The considered works are based on incomplete information, especially for the Russian territory. For instance, the relation between the Greater Caucasus orogen and the preceding sedimentary basin is interpreted incorrectly. In other cases, it is possible to note unjustified treatment of the Uralian and East Siberian structures. Generally, the problems established in the present review indicate on controversies in the contemporary international geotectonical investigations. Insufficient attention to conceptual developments is thought to be one of the main causes. The traditions of the Russian geotectonics form the basis for overcoming the noted chaos by domestic specialists.
About the Author
D. A. Ruban
K.G. Razumovsky Moscow State University of Technologies and Management (the First Cossack University)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
RUBAN Dmitry Aleskandrovitch – Candidate of Geological and Mineralogical Sciences, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Researcher
Moscow
References
1. Ruban D.A. Obzor nekotoryh global’nyh i regional’nyh paleotektonicheskih rekonstrukcij, opublikovannyh v 2001-2004 gg. / D.A. Ruban // Geotektonika. – 2006. – № 5. – S. 92–95. doi:10.1134/S0016852106050074.
2. Muller R.D., Zahirovic S., Williams S.E., Cannon J., Seton M., Bower D.J., Tetley M.G., Heine C., Le Breton E., Liu S., Russell S.H.J., Yang T., Leonard J., Gurnis M. A Global Plate Model Including Lithospheric Deformation Along Major Rifts and Orogens Since the Triassic // Tectonics. – 2019. – vol. 38. – P. 1884–1907. doi:10.1029/2018TC005462.
3. Domeier M., Torsvik T.H. Full-plate modeling in pre-Jurassic time // Geological Magazine. – 2019. – vol. 156. – P. 261–280. doi:10.1017/S0016756817001005.
4. Mitchell R.N., Spencer C.J., Kirscher U., Wilde S.A. Plate tectonic–like cycles since the Hadean: Initiated or inherited? // Geology. – 2020. – vol. 50. – P. 827–831. doi:10.1130/G49939.1.
5. Nance R.D., Evans D.A.D., Murchy J.B. Pannotia: To be or not to be? // Earth-Science Reviews. – 2022. – vol. 232. – P. 104128. doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2022.104128.
6. Kocsis A.T., Scotese C.R. Mapping paleocoastlines and continental flooding during the Phanerozoic // Earth-Science Reviews. – 2021. – vol. 213. – P. 103463. doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103463.
7. Van Hinsbergen D.J.J., Torsvik T.H., Schmid S.M., Matenco L.C., Maffione M., Vissers R.L.M., Gurer D., Spakman W. Orogenic architecture of the Mediterranean region and kinematic reconstruction of its tectonic evolution since the Triassic // Gondwana Research. – 2020. – vol. 82. – P. 79-229. doi:10.1016/j.gr.2019.07.009
8. Hasterok D., Halpin J.A., Collins A.S., Hand M., Kreemer C., Gard M.G., Glorie S. New Maps of Global Geological Provinces and Tectonic Plates // Earth-Science Reviews. – 2022. – vol. 231. – P. 104069. doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2022.104069
9. Ruban D.A. Kljuchevye intervaly tektonicheskoj istorii Juga Rossii v svete rezul’tatov novyh issledovanij. – Rostov-na-Donu: DGTU-Print, 2019. – 62 s.
10. Ulanovskaja T.E. Fundament Skifskoj plity: kak nedorabotki v stratigrafii skazalis’ na predstavlenijah o tektonike / T.E. Ulanovskaja, V.V. Kalinin // Groznenskij estestvennonauchnyj bjulleten’. – 2016. – № 3. – S. 76–84.
11. Mosar J., Mauvilly J., Koiava K., Gamkrelidae I., Enna N., Lavrishev V., Kalberguenova V. Tectonics in the Greater Caucasus (Georgia – Russia): From an intracontinental rifted basin to a doubly verging fold-and-thrust belt // Marine and Petroleum Geology. – 2022. – vol. 140. – P. 105630. doi:10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2022.105630.
12. Pushharovskij Ju.M. Tektonicheskie karty / Ju.M. Pusharovskij // Priroda. – 1968. – № 10. – S. 40–45
13. Spizharskij T.N. Obzornye tektonicheskie karty SSSR (Sostavlenie kart i osnovnye voprosy tektoniki). – L.: Nedra, 1973. – 240 s.
14. Hain V.E., Agabekov M.G., Shardanov A.N. Tektonicheskaja karta Azerbajdzhanskoj SSR v masshtabe 1:500000 (K metodike sostavlenija) // Trudy soveshhanija po tektonike Al’pijskoj geosinklinal’noj oblasti Juga SSSR. – Baku: AN AzSSR, 1956. – S. 37–52.
15. Bachmanov D.M. Neotektonika Urala (problemy i reshenija) / D.M. Bachmanov, N.N. Govorova, S.F. Skobelev, V.G. Trifonov // Geotektonika. – 2001. – № 5. – S. 61-75.
16. Rozhdestvenskij A.P. Novejshij orogenez i formirovanie Ural’skih gor / A.P. Rozhdestvenskij // Geologicheskij sbornik. – 2000. – № 1. – S. 22-24.
17. Ruban D.A. Unawareness and Theorizing in Modern Geology: Two Examples Based on Citation Analysis // Earth. – 2020. – vol. 1. – P. 1-14. doi:10.3390/earth1010001.
Review
For citations:
Ruban D.A. The latest achievements of international geotectonics: on the way to chaos. Vestnik of North-Eastern Federal University Series "Earth Sciences". 2022;(3):5-13. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25587/SVFU.2022.27.3.010
Views:
254
Email this article 