Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:15:17.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pleistocene to Recent tectonics in the Rhenish Massif (Germany)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2016

W. Meyer  and
J. Stets
W. Meyer*
Affiliation:
Geologisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Nussallee 8, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
J. Stets
Affiliation:
Geologisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Nussallee 8, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
*
2corresponding author; e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Uplift of the Rhenish Massif can be demonstrated by means of the stream-made river terrace system that accompanies the Rhine river and its tributaries along their way through or within this part of the Variscan fold and thrust belt. The height difference between a former valley floor, especially that of the Younger ‘Hauptterrasse’ (Main Terrace), and the recent one allows to quantify the uplift by the amount of downcutting erosion. The uplift velocity increased just after the BRUNHES / MATUYAMA boundary, i.e. about 0.8 Ma B.R Since that time, a domal uplift of more than 250 m is documented in the eastern Hunsriick and in the south-eastern Eifel. The area of this maximum height anomaly is situated just between the East-and West-Eifel Quaternary volcanic districts. Thus, causal connections are supposed. The domai uplift is affected by normal faulting partly inherited since Tertiary rifting.

Keywords

Rhenish MassifPleistocenefluvial terrace systemdowncutting erosionneotectonicsdomal upliftEifelHunsrückRhineMoselLower Rhine BasinNeuwied Basin
Type
Research Article
Information
Netherlands Journal of Geosciences , Volume 81 , Special Issue 2: Rift tectonics and syngenetic sedimentation - the Cenozoic Lower Rhine Basin and related structures , August 2002 , pp. 217 - 221
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2002

References

Ahorner, L., 1962. Untersuchungen zur quartären Bruchtektonik in der Niederrheinischen Bucht. Eiszeitalter und Gegenwart 13: 24–105.Google Scholar
Cloos, H., 1939. Hebung - Spaltung - Vulkanismus; Elemente einer geometrischen Analyse irdischer Großformen. Geologische Rundschau 30: 401–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fromm, K., 1987. Paläomagnetische Bestimmungen zur Korrelierung altpleistozäner Terrassen am Mittelrhein. Mainzer geowissenschaftliche Mitteilungen 16: 7–29.Google Scholar
Fuchs, K., von Gehlen, K., Mälzer, H., Murawski, H. & Semmel, A. (eds), 1983. Plateau Uplift, The Rhenish Shield - a Case History. Springer (Heidelberg): 411 pp.Google Scholar
Griesshaber, E., 1998. The distribution pattern of mantle derived volatiles in mineral waters of the Rhenish Massif. In: Neugebauer, H.J., (ed.): Young Tectonics - Magmatism - Fluids, a Case Study of the Rhenish Massif, Publications of SFB 350, 74: 51–59.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, R., 1996. Die quartäre Tektonik des südwestlichen Schiefergebirges begründet mit der Höhenlage der jüngeren Hauptterrasse der Mosel und ihrer Nebenflüsse. Bonner geowissenschaftliche Schriften 19: 156 pp.Google Scholar
Hoselmann, C. 1996. Der Hauptterrassen-Komplex am unteren Mittelrhein. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft 147:481–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klostermann, J., 1992. Das Quartär der Niederrheinischen Bucht. Geologisches Landesamt Nordrhein-Westfalen (Krefeld): 200 pp.Google Scholar
Meyer, W. & Stets, J., 1998a. Junge Tektonik im Rheinischen Schiefergebirge und ihre Quantifizierung. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft 149: 359–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, W. & Stets, J., 1998b. Young Pleistocene to Recent Uplift in the Rhenish Massif. In: Neugebauer, H.J., (ed.):YoungTectonics - Magmatism - Fluids, a Case Study of the Rhenish Massif, Publications of SFB 350, 74: 7–10.Google Scholar
Ploschenz, C. 1994. Quartäre Vertikaltektonik im südöstlichen Rheinischen Schiefergebirge begründet mit der Lage der Jüngeren Hauptterrasse. Bonner geowissenschaftliche Schriften 12: 185 pp.Google Scholar
Quitzow, H.W., 1982. Die Hochflächenlandschaft der zentralen Eifel und der angrenzenden Teile des Rhein-Troges und Neuwieder Beckens. Mainzer geowissenschaftliche Mitteilungen 11:173–206.Google Scholar
Ritter, J.R.R., 1998. Imaging the Mantle under the Rhenish Massif: The Eifel Plume Project.- In: Neugebauer, H.J., (ed.):Young Tectonics - Magmatism - Fluids; a Case Study of the Rhenish Massif, Publications of SFB 350, 74: 91–95.Google Scholar
Schnütgen, A., 1974. Die Hauptterrassenfolge am linken Niederrhein aufgrund der Schotterpetrographie.- Forschungs-Berichte des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, 2399: 150 pp.Google Scholar
Spell, T.L. & McDougall, I., 1992. Revisions to the Age of the BRUNHES / MATUYAMA Boundary and the Pleistocene Geomagnetic Polarity Timescale. Geophysical Research Letters 19: 1181–1184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar