Page 5 - gt1502
P. 5

116°E  118°E  120°E  122°E  124°E                                         significant proportion of its deep mantle keel (e.g., Griffin et al.,
                                                                                1998). From the Late Mesozoic through the Cenozoic, deforma-
38°N                                                                            tion of the eastern Asian continent was dominated by extensional
                                                                                tectonics leading to the formation of several rift systems (Yin,
36°N                                                                            2010). The Pacific plate began to subduct along the eastern margin
34°N                                                                            of the Asian continent at 180 Ma (Maruyama et al., 1997). The
32°N                                                                            lithospheric deformation in eastern China caused by the conver-
30°N                                                                            gence between the SCB and NCB was probably modified during
                                                                                these subsequent tectonic events.
Figure 1. Topography of eastern China and the distribution of seismic stations                                                                                GSA TODAY | www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/
(red points). Gray lines represent the boundaries between tectonic units or       In this study, we present shear wave splitting observations using
major faults; the large white arrow indicates the absolute plate motion (APM)   data sets from eastern China and explore the “frozen” LPO that may
of the Eurasian plate (Gripp and Gordon, 2002). Blue dots in inset show the     be associated with the convergence between the SCB and NCB.
spatial distribution of earthquakes used in this study. EU—Eurasian plate;
JXF—Jiashan-Xianshui fault; NA—North American plate; NCB—North                  DATA, METHODS, AND RESULTS
China block; PA—Pacific plate; PS—Philippine Sea plate; QLDB—Qinling-
Dabie orogenic belts; SCB—South China block; SULU—Sulu orogenic belt;             We use teleseismic shear wave (including SKS, SKKS, and PKS)
TLF—Tan-Lu fault; XGF—Xiangfan-Guangji fault; XSF—Xinyang-Shucheng              splitting measurements to evaluate the lithosphere and upper
fault; YQWF—Yintai-Qingdao-Wulian fault. All other abbreviations are            mantle deformation beneath this region. The broadband seismic
station names.                                                                  data used in this study were recorded during August 2007 to April
                                                                                2013 employing 75 permanent stations in the eastern China.
pressure (UHP) metamorphic rocks (Guo et al., 2012; Yin and                     These stations are widely distributed in the southeastern part of
Nie, 1993). The eastward extension of the orogenic belt is thought              the NCB and the northeastern part of the SCB. Station locations
to have been offset sinistrally several hundred kilometers by the               are shown in Figure 1 and are listed in Table S1 (see the GSA
Tan-Lu fault following the collision (e.g., Li, 1994). Some workers             Supplemental Data Repository1). In order to observe distinct, high
believe the collision first occurred in the east during the Early               signal-to-noise ratio shear wave phases, we systematically selected
Triassic and propagated westward (e.g., Guo et al., 2012).                      seismic events with magnitudes (MW) larger than 5.3 occurring at
However, the direction of convergence and the location of the                   epicentral distances of 85°–120° and 120°–150° for SKS and PKS
suture remain ambiguous (e.g., Faure et al., 2001) because of the               phases, respectively. In these epicentral distances, the SKS or PKS
irregular shape of the northern edge of the SCB and the offset                  phase are both well isolated from other shear-waves and are suffi-
along the Tan-Lu fault (Yin and Nie, 1993). In the east, a north-               ciently energetic. We obtained 215 events that fit these criteria. All
south direction of convergence has been suggested based on linear               the events are shown in Figure 1 and listed in Table S2 (see foot-
aeromagnetic anomalies (Li, 1994). Whether this direction of                    note 1).
convergence occurred on a lithospheric scale or not needs to be
evaluated geophysically.                                                          We used the measurement method of Tian et al. (2011) to
                                                                                extract (1) the difference in arrival times (or delay time, �t)
  Following convergence between the SCB and NCB, extensive                      between the fast and slow shear waves, which is a function of the
cratonic reactivation affected the eastern NCB during the late                  thickness and intrinsic anisotropy of the anisotropic medium;
Mesozoic, and the thick cratonic lithosphere in this region lost a              and (2) the orientation of the polarization planes of the fast shear
                                                                                wave (or the fast polarization direction, �), which reflects the
                                                                                orientation of the structure. The details of splitting measurement
                                                                                are provided in the supplemental appendix (see footnote 1).

                                                                                  We obtained a total of 1326 pairs of good splitting parameters �
                                                                                (fast polarization direction) and �t (delay time). Figure 2A presents
                                                                                the whole set of individual splitting measurements plotted at each
                                                                                respective station. The station averages computed from the indi-
                                                                                vidual measurements are plotted in Figure 2B and listed in Table S1
                                                                                (see footnote 1). At stations CSH, ANQsd and NLA, we obtained a
                                                                                large number of measurements (56, 44, and 37, respectively) and
                                                                                large back-azimuth variations. These back-azimuth variations of the
                                                                                splitting parameters are clearly not random but rather are well orga-
                                                                                nized. Such back-azimuth variations have been suggested to result
                                                                                from the presence of two anisotropic layers (Silver and Savage, 1994).
                                                                                Following the scheme proposed by these authors, we tried to
                                                                                constrain the possible geometries of these anisotropic layers beneath
                                                                                the three stations. The best fitting models are plotted in Figure 3 and
                                                                                listed in Table S3 (see footnote 1).

1GSA supplemental data item 2015006, detailed methods, data tables, and supplementary figures, is online at www.geosociety.org/pubs/ft2015.htm. You can also
request a copy from GSA Today, P.O. Box 9140, Boulder, CO 80301-9140, USA; gsatoday@geosociety.org.

                                                                                                                                                              5
   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10