本文選題：齊姆根 + 沖斷帶��； 參考：《浙江大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：相對于認(rèn)識較為統(tǒng)一的帕米爾西緣徑向逆沖模型,東緣的形成演化模型存在較多爭議(Strecker et al.,1995; Cowgill,2010;李康,2014)。Cowgill (2010)提出了帕米爾東北緣的走滑模型,并認(rèn)為喀什-葉城走滑轉(zhuǎn)換系統(tǒng)開始于。-25Ma; Sobel et al.(2011)提出該走滑轉(zhuǎn)換系統(tǒng)在～5Ma以來活動減弱。李康(2014)在走滑模型的基礎(chǔ)上提出了撕裂斷層模型,認(rèn)為存在垂直于喀什-葉城走滑轉(zhuǎn)換系統(tǒng)的北東向撕裂斷層,并認(rèn)為它們是造成帕米爾東北緣沖斷帶變形時空差異的主要原因。帕米爾東北緣沖斷帶的時空差異性前人做了大量研究(曲國勝等,1998；肖安成等,2000；沈軍等,2001；胡建中等,2008；陳漢林等,2009; Cowgill,2010;程曉敢等,2011)。但在變形樣式、變形時間、演化過程等方面還存在不同認(rèn)識。另外,山前沖斷帶晚于5Ma以來的變形起始時間(伍秀芳等,2004；程曉敢等,2012),與造山帶內(nèi)部大量的熱年代學(xué)數(shù)據(jù)揭示的大于20-25Ma的隆升剝露事件(Amaud,1993; Sobel and Dumitru,1997; Sobel et al.,2011)存在明顯的差異,前者在山前形成了巨厚的前緣坳陷。塔西南盆地最初的負(fù)載撓曲接受沉積的時間是什么時候還一直沒有得到解決。本文利用地表地質(zhì)調(diào)查、鉆井資料、地震解釋成果,通過構(gòu)造解析、生長地層分析和平衡剖面恢復(fù)等手段,對帕米爾東北緣沖斷帶的齊姆根及鄰區(qū)的構(gòu)造變形樣式、變形時間和變形強(qiáng)度等進(jìn)行了研究,分析了時空差異特征及其形成機(jī)制,恢復(fù)了形成演化過程。得出了如下幾點(diǎn)結(jié)論：1.齊姆根地區(qū)新發(fā)現(xiàn)烏恰群沉積時期前淵的存在,敲定了塔西南盆地最初負(fù)載撓曲接受沉積的時間為中新世早期,該時間和熱年代學(xué)的結(jié)論相呼應(yīng),而在兩側(cè)構(gòu)造帶沒找到該期前淵存在的證據(jù)。此外,齊姆根構(gòu)造帶阿圖什組沉積時期前淵更靠近盆地,證明前淵不斷向前陸方向遷移。2.變形時間上：兩側(cè)構(gòu)造帶起始活動時間早(上新世中、晚期),中間齊姆根構(gòu)造帶起始活動時間晚(更新世早期)。3.變形強(qiáng)度上：齊姆根構(gòu)造帶縮短量(20km)和縮短率(21%)明顯小于西側(cè)蘇蓋特構(gòu)造帶的46km和30.5%,以及東側(cè)柯東構(gòu)造帶普西段的64.2km和29.5%。4.提出了帕米爾東北緣沖斷帶變形時空差異的機(jī)制及形成演化過程：中新世早期帕米爾-西昆侖山的隆升在塔西南山前形成了一個統(tǒng)一的前淵。上新世以來,齊姆根構(gòu)造帶變形強(qiáng)度明顯弱于兩側(cè),另外,齊姆根構(gòu)造帶東、西側(cè)的伊利亞斯溝右行走滑斷層和同由路克左行走滑斷層的發(fā)育使得齊姆根構(gòu)造帶整體向北凸出,保留了中新世形成的前淵而兩側(cè)構(gòu)造帶強(qiáng)烈的沖斷抬升將中新世形成的前淵剝蝕、破壞。
[Abstract]:Compared with the unifying radial thrust model of Pamir's western margin, the formation and evolution model of the eastern margin is controversial (Strecker et al. 1995; Cowgill 2010; Li Kangwei 2014). Cowgill (2010) proposed a strike-slip model for the northeastern margin of Pamir. It is considered that the Kash-Yecheng strike-slip conversion system began from .-25 Ma; Sobel et al. (2011) and suggested that the activity of the strike-slip conversion system has weakened since 5 Ma. Li Kang (2014) proposed a tear fault model based on the strike-slip model. It is considered that there exists a north-east tearing fault perpendicular to the Kash-Yecheng strike-slip conversion system. It is considered that they are the main reasons for the temporal and spatial difference of deformation in the thrust zone of the northeastern margin of Pamir. The temporal and spatial differences of the thrust belt in the northeastern margin of Pamirs have been studied by previous scholars (qu Guosheng et al. 1998; Xiao Ancheng et al. 2000; Shen Jun et al. 2001; Hu Jianzhong et al. 2008; Chen Hanlin et al. 2009; Cowgillilln 2010; Cheng Xiao dang et al. 2011). However, there are still different views on deformation style, deformation time, evolution process and so on. In addition, the deformation initiation time of the Foreland thrust belt later than 5 Ma (Wu Xiufang et al. 2004; Cheng Xiaogang et al. 2012) is significantly different from the uplift and denudation events (Amaudine 1993; Sobel and Dumitruan 1997; Sobel et al.2011) revealed by a large number of thermochronological data in the orogenic belt. The former formed a very thick front depression at the front of the mountain. The time when the initial load deflection was accepted for deposition in the southwest Tarim Basin has not been resolved. By means of surface geological survey, drilling data, seismic interpretation results, structural analysis, growth stratigraphic analysis and balanced section restoration, the structural deformation patterns of Zimgen and its adjacent areas in the thrust belt of the northeastern margin of Pamir are studied in this paper. The time and intensity of deformation are studied, the characteristics of space-time difference and its formation mechanism are analyzed, and the process of formation and evolution is restored. The following conclusions were drawn: 1. In the Qimegan area, the existence of the foredeep of the Wuqia Group during the sedimentary period was newly discovered, and it was determined that the initial loading flexural acceptance time of the southwest Tarim Basin was the early Miocene, which coincided with the conclusion of thermochronology. However, no evidence of the existence of the foredeep was found in the two sides of the tectonic belt. In addition, the Artushi formation in the Qimegen tectonic belt is closer to the basin during the sedimentary period, which proves that the foredeep moves continuously in the forward continental direction. The deformation time of the two tectonic belts is early (middle and late Pliocene), and that of the middle Qimegan tectonic belt is late (early Pleistocene) .3. In terms of deformation strength, the shortening amount (20km) and shortening rate (21%) of the Qimegan tectonic belt are obviously smaller than those of the 46km and 30.5 branch of the west Sugaite tectonic belt, and the 64.2km and 29.5.4 of the Puxi section of the eastern Kedong structural belt. The mechanism of temporal and spatial difference of deformation in thrust belt of northeastern Pamir and its evolution process are put forward: the uplift of Pamir-West Kunlun Mountains in the early Miocene formed a unified fore-deep in front of the South Taxi Mountains. Since the Pliocene, the deformation intensity of the Qimegen tectonic belt has been obviously weaker than that of both sides. In addition, the development of the Ilyas trench right strike-slip fault in the east and west of the Zimgen tectonic belt and the synchronic Luke left strike-slip fault make the Zimegan tectonic belt protrude northward. The foredeep formed in Miocene is preserved and the strong thrust uplift on both sides of the tectonic belt will denude and destroy the foredeep formed in Miocene.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：P548

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 肖安成,楊樹鋒,陳漢林,賈承造,魏國齊;西昆侖山前沖斷系的結(jié)構(gòu)特征[J];地學(xué)前緣;2000年S2期

2 崔軍文;郭憲璞;丁孝忠;李朋武;張曉衛(wèi);;西昆侖—塔里木盆地盆-山結(jié)合帶的中、新生代變形構(gòu)造及其動力學(xué)[J];地學(xué)前緣;2006年04期

3 劉和甫;前陸盆地類型及褶皺－沖斷層樣式[J];地學(xué)前緣;1995年03期

4 沈軍,汪一鵬,趙瑞斌,陳杰,曲國勝;帕米爾東北緣及塔里木盆地西北部弧形構(gòu)造的擴(kuò)展特征[J];地震地質(zhì);2001年03期

5 陳杰;李濤;李文巧;袁兆德;;帕米爾構(gòu)造結(jié)及鄰區(qū)的晚新生代構(gòu)造與現(xiàn)今變形[J];地震地質(zhì);2011年02期

6 伍秀芳,劉勝,汪新,楊樹鋒,顧雪梅;帕米爾—西昆侖北麓新生代前陸褶皺沖斷帶構(gòu)造剖面分析[J];地質(zhì)科學(xué);2004年02期

7 曲國勝,陳杰,陳新安,張興林,李濤,尹軍平,周洪清;西昆侖—帕米爾造山帶及其北緣前陸盆地板內(nèi)變形構(gòu)造[J];地質(zhì)論評;1998年04期

8 何登發(fā),賈承造,德生,張朝軍,孟慶任,石昕;塔里木多旋回疊合盆地的形成與演化[J];石油與天然氣地質(zhì);2005年01期

9 李向東,王克卓;帕米爾隆升過程中地殼的一種重要縮短機(jī)制——以齊姆根構(gòu)造轉(zhuǎn)換域為例[J];新疆地質(zhì);2003年01期

10 程曉敢;黃智斌;陳漢林;杜治利;李康;師駿;;西昆侖山前沖斷帶斷裂特征及構(gòu)造單元劃分[J];巖石學(xué)報;2012年08期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 廖林;西昆侖新生代構(gòu)造事件及其沉積響應(yīng)[D];浙江大學(xué);2010年

2 李康;帕米爾東北緣晚新生代構(gòu)造與沉積演化[D];浙江大學(xué);2014年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 高敏;塔里木盆地西南坳陷西段構(gòu)造幾何學(xué)和運(yùn)動學(xué)特征[D];中國地質(zhì)大學(xué)(北京);2012年

2 范小根;塔西南新生代前陸盆地東段的盆地結(jié)構(gòu)與沖斷帶變形規(guī)律[D];浙江大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號：2110719