text:
Evidence for hyperextension along the pre-Caledonian margin of Baltica
Torgeir B. Andersen, Fernando Corfu, Loic Labrousse and Per-Terje Osmundsen
Journal of the Geological Society, 169, 601-612, 3 September 2012, https://doi.org/10.1144/0016-76492012-011
Torgeir B. Andersen
University of Oslo, Physics of Geological Processes, PO Box 1048, Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway
For correspondence: t.b.andersen@geo.uio.no
Fernando Corfu
Department of Geosciences, University of Oslo, PO Box 1047, Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway
Loic Labrousse
Institut des Sciences de la Terre Paris, Université Pierre et Marie Curie—Paris 6, UMR 7193, Paris, France
Per-Terje Osmundsen
Geological Survey of Norway, 7491 Trondheim, Norway
We propose that a mantle-peridotite-bearing mélange unit, which has been mapped for more than 400 km in southern Norway, represents vestiges of deep basin(s) formed by hyperextension of the Baltic margin during the inception of the Caledonian Wilson cycle. In the mélange, which occurs below the crystalline nappes of the Middle Allochthon in southern Norway, solitary mantle peridotites, detrital serpentinites, metabasalts, gabbros and deep basin sediments are interlayered and imbricated with allochthonous, coarse-grained siliclastic sediments and slivers of Proterozoic basement rocks. The siliciclastic sediments have detritus derived from Proterozoic rocks, similar to those of the large crystalline nappes and the autochthonous basement of Baltica. The mélange unit shares many similarities with the hyperextended Tethyan margin complexes that have been described from the Alps, the Pyrenees and several segments of the present-day passive ocean margins, and we interpret it to represent an ancient late Proterozoic to Palaeozoic analogue to present-day hyperextended passive margins. Regional maps show that the mélange continues into the central Scandinavian Caledonides and that this basin assemblage may have had a much wider geographical distribution. The new model suggests that a major reinterpretation of the Lower and Middle Allochthons of the Scandinavian Caledonides is required.
Hyperextended ocean–continent transition (OCT) zones at passive margins are extremely complex geological provinces. Our conception of such provinces has recently changed, based on combinations of modern high-quality geophysical data, drill-core information and comparative studies of analogue areas onshore (e.g. Boillot et al. 1987; Manatschal 2004; Péron-Pinvidic & Manatschal 2009). One of the most novel results of these studies is that large areas of subcontinental mantle may be exhumed to the sea floor in mantle windows controlled by large-scale extensional detachments rather than by breakup-related magmatic processes. For example, one of the largest exhumed mantle peridotites in the world exposed to the sea floor or covered by thin post-rift sediments occurs along the continent–ocean boundary (COB) in the Brazilian passive margin of the South Atlantic (Zalan et al. 2011). Recently, it has been recognized that processes of hyperextension are not exclusive to magma-poor margins such as Iberia. The magma-rich NE Atlantic margin was affected by hyperextension in the Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous (Osmundsen & Ebbing 2008; Lundin & Doré 2011). Conversely, it has been argued that so-called magma-poor margins may host significantly higher magmatic volumes than previously recognized (Müntener & Manatschal 2006). The studies on passive margins have also stimulated academic research in mountain belts and inspired new concepts for the initiation of subduction and mountain building. These exposures of mantle material are related to extension rather than to magmatic emplacement and magmatic sea-floor spreading processes. The best-developed models for hyperextended passive margins have developed from offshore studies combined with onshore analogues (e.g. Manatschal 2004; Lagabrielle et al. 2010). New models have been presented for many Alpine ophiolites and associated sedimentary and tectonic units and have revolutionized palaeogeographical reconstructions even for the most mature study areas such as the western and central Alps, Alpine Corsica or the lherzolite-bearing assemblages of the Pyrenees (Lagabrielle & Bodinier 2008; Lagabrielle et al. 2010; Mohn et al. 2010; Vitale Brovarone et al. 2011). The main revision within the European Alps is that 'Alpine' peridotites associated with deep-marine basin deposits, which previously were viewed as Tethyan oceanic mantle sequences in dismembered ophiolite complexes, are now interpreted to represent subcontinental mantle rocks, exhumed in the footwalls of major low-angle detachments that formed by hyperextension of the European continental margin. Similar models have, however, not yet been tested for enigmatic peridotite-bearing mélanges within older Phanerozoic orogens, such as the Caledonides.
Contrary to sea-floor spreading ophiolites these Alpine peridotites are characterized by the 'Steinmann trinity' association (serpentinite, greenstone and chert) and a paucity of gabbros and basaltic lavas (e.g. Bernoulli & Jenkyns 2009). They mostly lack the sheeted-dyke complexes that commonly are taken to be the signature of an oceanic spreading-ridge. Unlike sea-floor spreading ophiolites, these peridotites are intimately associated with slivers of highly deformed older crystalline continental crust, and continentally derived siliciclastic sediments, as well as deep-water deposits and in some cases passive-margin carbonates (e.g. Manatschal et al. 2006; Lagabrielle et al. 2010). Intensely deformed contacts reflect several stages of deformation, superimposed on the original extensional fabrics, leading to juxtaposition on the mantle of rocks that originally had formed at different crustal levels. The reinterpretations of these mélange associations have resulted in revised models for the pre-Alpine Tethyan margins and basins: (1) they are hyperextended continental crust rather than ocean basins formed by sea-floor spreading and (2) their imbrication into the nappe complexes is part of the sequential slicing and stacking of the continental margin involved in the collision rather than the result of an obduction stage.
The mantle-peridotite-bearing mélange unit discussed here is structurally positioned below major nappes of crystalline continental crust of Proterozoic age including the Upper Bergsdalen, Jotun and Lindås nappes in the SW Norwegian Caledonides (Fig. 1). In previous tectonic models for the Scandinavian Caledonides the significance of the large number of mantle peridotites occurring below these crystalline nappe complexes has been mostly ignored. In this paper we present a new interpretation based on detailed field studies of selected areas combined with a regional study between Bergen and Vågå (Fig. 1).
Tectonostratigraphic map of the South Norwegian Caledonides, highlighting the regional distribution of the highly deformed transitional crust mélange assemblages structurally positioned below the large crystalline nappes (Lindås, Upper Bergsdalen, Jotun Nappes) of the Middle Allochthon. It should be noted that this level with solitary mantle peridotites can be traced continuously to the Rørøs area, and along the eastern side of the Western Gneiss Region past Lesja towards Trollheimen. Major units such as nappes assigned to the Gula and the Seve nappes are here labelled suspect, but they most probably belong to the hyperextended distal margin of Baltica. Major post-Caledonian extensional structures are shown in red. The Scandian collision pressure isobars in the Western Gneiss Region are also shown.
The Caledonian mountain belt of Scandinavia and east Greenland was assembled by a major, continent–continent collision comparable in dimensions, dynamics and relative chronology of events with the Himalayan collision (Labrousse et al. 2010). The collision commenced as the Iapetus Ocean closed by subduction in the Middle Silurian (c. 430 Ma) and the incipient collision is dated by the cessation of subduction-related island-arc magmatism (Torsvik & Cocks 2005; Corfu et al. 2006) and obduction of marginal basin ophiolites in the Middle Silurian (Andersen et al. 1990; Furnes et al. 1990). The convergence and continental collision continued for c. 30 Ma into the early Devonian when the high- and ultrahigh-pressure rocks of the Western Gneiss Region reached their maximum burial depth at c. 410–400 Ma (e.g. Hacker et al. 2010). The collision is commonly referred to as the Scandian Orogeny, but it also affected vast areas in East Greenland and caused shortening far into the overriding Laurentian plate.
The present models for the Scandinavian Caledonides were mostly developed during the IGCP project 27 summarized by Gee & Sturt (1985). An important result of this project was the compilation of a tectonostratigraphic map described by Roberts & Gee (1985). This map has since been a template for most regional studies and its four-fold division of allochthonous units (Lower, Middle, Upper and Uppermost Allochthons) has been extended to represent terranes of sequential origins (Stephens & Gee 1989). The Uppermost and Upper Allochthons (except the Seve Units) are considered outboard and believed to represent the overriding Laurentian plate (Uppermost Allochthon) and outboard oceanic terranes (Upper Allochthon), respectively (e.g. Roberts et al. 2002). Palaeomagnetic, palaeontological and geological studies show that major plate rotation and convergence accompanied by magmatic and collision events took place within wide (several thousand kilometre) oceanic domains (Ægir Sea and Iapetus Ocean) throughout the Ordovician and early Silurian, prior to the Scandian orogeny (Torsvik & Cocks 2005). The Upper and Uppermost Allochthons are of undisputed non-Baltican origin, whereas the regionally extensive Middle and Lower Allochthons originally were assigned to Baltica. This latter interpretation has recently been challenged by several detailed studies from northernmost Norway (Corfu et al. 2007, 2011; Kirkland et al. 2008a,b). These studies suggest that an exotic, non-Baltican origin of the continental basement–cover nappes of the Kalak Nappe complex cannot be excluded. Further to the south in the central Caledonides (between c. 64 and 69°N), large dyke-swarms, intrusions and associated volcanic rocks in the continental Seve Nappes lithologies have been interpreted to represent a volcanic passive margin formed in the latest Proterozoic and dated at 608 Ma (Andreasson 1994; Andreasson et al. 1998; Svenningsen 2001). In some of these units there are also minor volcanic rocks and gabbro, local occurrences of serpentinite conglomerates and peridotites with black-rock alteration zones at the border between the continental and oceanic terranes of the Seve–Køli units. Studies of these rocks demonstrate that the ultramafic mantle rocks and siliciclastic sediments were intimately associated throughout the Caledonian orogenic cycle (Qvale & Stigh 1985; van Roermund 1985; Bucher et al. 2005).
The complex tectonic evolution and assembly of the Middle to Upper Allochthon continental margin rocks is witnessed by at least two stages of eclogite-facies metamorphism, at 482 ± 1 and 446 ± 1 Ma respectively (e.g. Root & Corfu 2011). These parts of the mountain belt, which host the evidence of pre-Scandian, Early to Middle Ordovician deformation and metamorphic events, are normally considered endemic Baltican terranes (Andreasson et al. 1998). Given the new interpretations introduced for equivalent units of Finnmark and Troms (see above), their origin should be viewed with considerable caution, as it follows from the recent studies that major revisions in interpretations of the Seve–Kalak terranes in northernmost Scandinavia and their continuation toward southern Scandinavia are required (Corfu et al. 2011).
In southern Scandinavia the Middle Allochthon is dominated by very large crystalline nappe complexes of Proterozoic age. These include the Dalsfjord, Lindås, Jotun, Bergsdalen and Hardanger–Ryfylke nappe complexes (Fig. 1). Most of these have a cover of metasedimentary rocks dominated by quartzite, arkosic sandstone and schists. Geochronological studies of both the crystalline allochthonous basement units and their cover sequences suggest an affinity to the autochthonous basement of southern Baltica and hence an origin on its Caledonian margin before collision (Corfu & Andersen 2002; Lundmark et al. 2007; Glodny et al. 2008; Bingen et al. 2011). This simple relationship is, however, challenged by the regional occurrence of a relatively thin, but continuous mélange zone containing numerous lenses of peridotite and minor mafic meta-igneous rocks, which is located structurally below these crystalline nappe complexes along their western boundary adjacent to the Bergen Arcs and the Western Gneiss Region (Fig. 1). The mélange has largely been ignored in the compilation of the tectonostratigraphic map (see above) or believed to represent ophiolitic rocks belonging to the Upper Allochthon. This enigmatic mélange unit occurs structurally above the Western Gneiss Region and the discontinuous thin black schist–phyllite, micaschist and quartzite with local pockets of preserved basal conglomerates, which represent the original cover to the autochthonous gneisses below the Caledonian floor thrust. The mélange with solitary mantle peridotites can be identified almost continuously along a distance of more than c. 400 km from the Bergen Arcs northeastwards across South Norway. In the present study, this unit has been traced as far as Lom (Fig. 1), but a simple map correlation suggests that it continues further towards the Røros area as well as the western side of the Trondheim region north of Lesja (Fig. 1). These rocks have received very little attention in tectonic reconstructions of the Caledonides, in spite of their long economic history with talc and soapstone quarries.
The mélange
Ultramafic rocks
The most conspicuous rocks within the regionally extensive mélange are the metaperidotites, now mostly present as serpentinite, soapstone and talc-schist, which occur in very large numbers between the Bergen Arcs and the northeastern part of the study area in central South Norway and beyond (Fig. 1). In this study we have examined the structural setting and association of the solitary ultramafic rocks in the Samnanger–Osterøy area of the Major Bergen Arc (Fig. 2), in Stølsheimen (Fig. 3) and along the eastern border between the Jotun Nappe and the Western Gneiss Region between Sogn and Lom (Fig. 1).
(a) Geological map of the Bergen–Hardanger region and (b) map with cross-section of the Samnanger–Osterøy area simplified from Faerseth et al. (1977). It should be noted that the mélange unit is situated structurally above the Lower Bergsdalen and Kvalsida Gneiss Nappes, but below the Upper Bergsdalen and Lindås nappes as well as the ophiolite–island-arc units of the Upper Allochthon. Also noteworthy are the numerous solitary mantle peridotite bodies in the Samnanger area, and their intimate association with sheets of gneisses and quartz-rich sediments. Detrital serpentinites are found at Baldersheim, shown in (a), and on the south shore of Trengereidfjorden at locality D, shown in (b).
Geological map with cross-section of the Stølsheimen region. Noteworthy features are the abundance of solitary mantle peridotites in this area and that the mélange is sandwiched between the Lower and Upper Bergsdalen nappes. We suggest that the pre-Caledonian extensional exhumation of the mantle peridotites must have taken place along major extensional shear zone(s) positioned below the base of the Upper Bergsdalen and Jotun Nappe Complexes, here shown as the red line.
The majority of the ultramafic bodies are low-Al, high-Mg mantle peridotites, but more evolved varieties are also locally present (Qvale & Stigh 1985). Some of the best-preserved larger lenses still contain primary minerals and may attain dimensions of up to 2 km, but more commonly they occur as serpentinite lenses less than 100 m in size (Figs 3 and 4a, b). Hydration and metasomatic alteration zones are ubiquitous and many are completely serpentinized or talcified. Serpentine and soapstone veins are very common (Fig. 4f) and locally quartz–carbonate rocks (listwanite) and ophicalcite alterations are present. Some bodies have been mined to exhaustion for talc and soapstone such as the talc mines at Framfjord (Fig. 3) and the soapstone quarries in the Bergen Arcs (Fig. 2). Alteration to serpentinite and talc–carbonate–spinel rocks is very common; such rock types contain breunnerite, magnesite, chlorite, chromite and magnetite (see NGU mineral database, occurrence 1417-301, Rauberget). Black-wall alteration zones are common (Fig. 4e), but detailed descriptions of these are mostly lacking except from one that was described in detail from the Seve complex north of our study area, the ultramafic rocks at Baldersheim (Fig. 2) and the rodingite alteration present in the Major Bergen Arc (Bøe 1985; Qvale & Stigh 1985; Bucher et al. 2005).
(a) View towards the SE of a major solitary mantle peridotite near Rauberget (Fig. 3) in Stølsheimen. The regional SE-dipping foliation, placing the peridotite below the Upper Bergsdalen nappe seen in the hillside behind the peridotite, should be noted. (b) View towards the NE of a c. 100 m thick solitary mantle peridotite at Bøverdalen near Lom (see Fig. 1 for location). The steep SE-dipping regional foliation, clearly showing that the mélange unit occurs structurally above the Western Gneiss Region (left) and below the Jotun Nappe (right), should be noted. (c) Example of a little deformed fluviatile serpentinite conglomerate and sandstone from a quarry at Trengereidfjord marked D in Figure 2b. The detrital serpentinites with pebbles up to 15 cm long quarried from the now exhausted locality were used as decorative stone and building material in Bergen and elsewhere. Photograph provided by Ø. J. Jansen (see also Heldal & Jansen 2000, pp. 80 and 168). (d) Serpentinite breccia at Bøverdalen near Lom (Fig. 1) showing the highly brecciated nature, and possibly detrital structure(?), typically displayed by many serpentinite bodies. (e) Black-wall alteration zone (base of outcrop) along the top of the serpentinite shown in (a), where the hydrated peridotite makes contact with schists and conglomerates (top of outcrop; see also Fig. 5). (f) Serpentinite with soapstone (talc, magnesite) alteration (white) along veins and adjacent to the wall-rock schists. Locality near the dated conglomerate pebble (Figs 3 and 5).
Isolated detrital serpentinites (Fig. 4c) occur in several localities as both conglomerate and sandstone (Heldal & Jansen 2000; see also descriptions by Qvale & Stigh 1985). More common are lenses containing blocky to rounded serpentinite breccias that partly also may have a sedimentary origin (Fig. 4d). The intense Caledonian deformation and later syn- to post-orogenic extension have, however, largely obliterated primary structures. The most spectacular occurrence of detrital serpentinite, described by Sturt & Ramsay (1999), occurs near Otta (Fig. 1), where a Middle Ordovician fauna (Llanvirn) occurs in serpentinite conglomerates overlying ultramafic rocks assigned to the Vågåmo ophiolite. Those workers suggested that the serpentine conglomerate represents a major unconformable sequence deposited on the Vågåmo ophiolite after obduction onto Baltica. In view of the tectonostratigraphic position of these rocks, which is comparable with that of other ultramafic rocks discussed here, previous interpretations should probably be reconsidered. As pointed out by Qvale & Stigh (1985) and their obvious map signature, many of the peridotites including the detrital serpentinites are 'solitary ultramafites, where an ophiolite association is not easily recognized'. Lenses of metagabbro and metavolcanic rocks can be observed in many of the localities, but the traditional ophiolite pseudostratigraphy and in particular sheeted-dyke complexes are not present in these units.
Metasedimentary matrix
The metaperidotites are set in a matrix dominated by metasedimentary rocks, now graphitic schists, phyllites and garnet micaschists recrystallized during the Caledonian greenschist- to lower amphibolite-facies metamorphism. Metasomatic alteration is common and tremolite- to actinolite-bearing schists are intercalated with quartz-schists and originally pebbly sandstones in some localities. Similar intimate associations of metaperidotites engulfed in metasediments have been described from widely separated localities such as the Major Bergen Arc (Faerseth et al. 1977; Ingdahl 1985), in Stølsheimen and Sogn, as well as near Lom (Fig. 1). Metamorphism related to the Scandian orogeny attained low amphibolite-facies conditions at the level of the floor thrust along the eastern margin of the Western Gneiss Region in central South Norway (500 °C, 0.6–0.8 GPa; work in progress). Although now dominated by micaschist and phyllite, the original sediments of the matrix had a composition and grain-size variation from originally very fine-grained graphitic shale and cherty horizons to calcareous sandstone and marls with local limestone, to coarse sandstone and quartzite horizons with local conglomerates (see also www.ngu.no, geological map database). Matrix-supported, debris-flow-like conglomerate horizons are also locally present. In Stølsheimen (Figs 3 and 5), a conglomerate contains a variety of pebbles including fine-grained basement-derived granite, quartzite and vein quartz suggesting a dominantly continental provenance (see below). The transition zone from a peridotite into the sedimentary matrix is shown in Figure 4e. The ultramafic green-coloured schists occur in close proximity with conglomerate containing quartzite and granite pebbles (Fig. 5a), and grade into micaschists with scattered mafic lenses across few metres.
(a) Pebbly quartz-rich sandstone and quartz-rich conglomerate interlayered with the conglomerate immediately above one of the peridotites in Stølsheimen (Fig. 4a and e). (b) The conglomerate at Stølsheimen, with well-rounded pebbles of fine-grained granite. The dated pebble is shown above the car key, together with another white granitoid pebble to the right of the key. (c) Concordia U/Pb plots of zircon, rutile and titanite from the conglomerate pebble shown in (b). The image insets show dated zircons, titanite and rutile. Details of the U–Pb data are given in Table 1.
Continental basement and sediments in the mélange
In the western part of the study area, the ultramafic mélange is stacked together with sheets of felsic crystalline gneisses commonly referred to as the Bergsdalen nappes (e.g. Fossen 1993). In the Stølsheimen area and southwards towards the Bergen Arcs (Figs 2a and 3), basement of granitic gneiss, metasandstones and schists constitute the Upper Bergsdalen nappe (Fossen 1993). In the Rauberget area, this highly attenuated basement–cover pair immediately overlies the best-developed ultramafic mélange, which in turn is overlain by the Jotun and Lindås nappes (see Figs 2 and 3, and for further details, Fossen (1993)). The contact of the mélange with mantle peridotite and the overlying continental rocks is a tectonic contact, which preserves evidence of Scandian thrusting and the secondary post-collisional extension. Internally, however, some sheets of the Proterozoic ortho- and paragneisses are less deformed with granitic dykes cutting Proterozoic metasediments (Fossen 1993). This allochthonous basement contains Neoproterozoic granites (the youngest Rb/Sr whole-rock age of granite is 953 ± 16 Ma (Grey 1978)) cutting both the metavolcanic and sedimentary units as described by Fossen (1993). The structure is dominated by the Scandian thrust-fabric (top-to-the-SE) overprinted by a co-metamorphic to retrograde top-to-the-NW shear fabric formed during the regional orogenic extensional collapse of the Caledonides (Andersen 1998; Fossen 2010).
The mélange unit and the continental crust rocks were most likely juxtaposed prior to thrusting because both generations of thrust and extensional Caledonian fabrics are developed in the mantle-derived peridotites, their sedimentary matrix as well as in the continental basement–cover rocks. In spite of careful examination near the best-preserved peridotites at Raudberget in Stølsheimen (Figs 3 and 4), pre-thrusting structural relationships have not yet been observed and their exact stratigraphic and structural relationships prior to the Caledonian thrusting have not been determined. It is, however, obvious that the mélange with mantle peridotites constitute the substrate to both the highly attenuated Upper Bergsdalen nappe and the Jotun nappe (Fig. 3).
The most systematic mapping of the mélange has been carried out in the Major Bergen Arc (Faerseth et al. 1977; Qvale 1978; Henriksen 1981; Bøe 1985; Ingdahl 1985). This mapping demonstrates the intimate association of a large number of serpentinite and peridotite lenses with amphibolite, graphitic schists, hornblende-garben-schist, garnet-micaschists, quartz-rich metasandstone, quartzite conglomerates and several sheets of felsic gneisses. The researchers listed above regarded the Samnanger complex of the Major Bergen Arc to represent a tectonic mélange structurally positioned below the Gulfjellet ophiolite complex (Fig. 2b). The mélange was primarily considered to represent a tectonic mélange deformed, imbricated and assembled during several stages of Caledonian deformation (Faerseth et al. 1977; Thon 1985). The intimate mixing of mantle-derived rocks with continental gneisses and sediments is, however, not easily explained by deformation during the Scandian continental collision, and we suggest that juxtaposition of these rocks, particularly the Proterozoic basement and the solitary mantle peridotites, is inherited from pre-Caledonian extension.
U–Pb geochronology from the mélange conglomerate
Near Rauberget in Stølsheimen (Fig. 3) the contact relationships between 'talcified' ultramafic rocks (Fig. 4a and f) and the black-wall alteration zone in the sedimentary matrix is well exposed (Fig. 4e). Foliated black-wall alteration schists with abundant quartz veins are interlayered with pebbly quartzite and a matrix-supported conglomerate dominated by quartz and quartzite pebbles (Fig. 5a). The conglomerate also contains pebbles of a leucogranite, which may be up to 15 cm in size (Fig. 5b). One part of a pebble was crushed, pulverized and subjected to mineral separation following standard methods. The handpicked minerals were processed by isotope dilution thermal ionization mass spectrometry (Krogh 1973) as described in more detail by Corfu (2004). Besides rounded zircons, probably from the rind of the pebble and of detrital origin, there is a subpopulation of sharp euhedral short prisms (inset in Fig. 5c). A selection of these crystals was abraded and two of them were analysed. The data (Table 1, Fig. 5c) plot on or close to the concordia curve, and a line anchored at 420 ± 20 Ma, the approximate time of metamorphism, has an intercept age of 1033 ± 21 Ma, which dates the original crystallization of the rock. Dark rutile is nearly concordant and can be projected (anchoring the lower intercept at 420 ± 20 Ma) to an upper intercept age of 958 ± 35 Ma. In contrast, the red rutile is much younger, and is presumably on its way to full resetting owing to its reaction to titanite. It is also observed as inclusions in the latter (inset in Fig. 5c). The titanite analyses yield concordant data and give an age of 410 ± 3 Ma for the Scandian metamorphic event. The Proterozoic ages agree well with previously published Rb/Sr whole-rock ages from the Upper Bergsdalen nappe in the same area (Grey 1978). U/Pb dating of titanite from the same pebble is concordant and documents the Caledonian regional metamorphic overprint at 410.4 ± 3.1 Ma, which is similar to other Scandian metamorphic ages from the nappes in western Norway (e.g. Fossen & Dunlap 1998; Glodny et al. 2008).
U–Pb data for conglomerate pebble P4/10, Stølsheimen
Previous descriptions of Neoproterozoic basins in the Scandinavian Caledonides have documented that the Caledonian margin of Baltica constituted a wide (up to 600 km) extended margin facing the outboard oceanic domains (e.g. Nystuen et al. 2008). The mélange discussed here has, however, not been included in the previous models. The mélange with its numerous lenses of variably altered mantle peridotite constitutes an enigmatic unit that can be identified at the same structural level continuously through most of southern Norway and beyond into the central Scandinavian Caledonides. The mélange is allochthonous, situated structurally above the Caledonian floor thrust and above basement–cover units assigned to the Lower Allochthon, but below major nappe complexes such as the Jotun, Upper Bergsdalen and Lindås nappes (e.g. Roberts & Gee 1985; Wennberg et al. 1998). The mélange thus occupies a position between the Middle and Lower Allochthons: it is sandwiched between major continental nappe complexes and their associated cover sequences (Figs 1 and 3). This enigmatic structural position was pointed out by Andersen et al. (1991, fig. 2), who suggested that the mélange represented a 'suture-1' structurally below the main 'suture-2' represented by the ophiolite and island-arc complexes of the Upper Allochthon. The basement–cover nappes of the Lower and Middle Allochthons are commonly interpreted to have originated from the Caledonian margin of Baltica because their Proterozoic history is similar to that of the autochthonous basement of southern Scandinavia (Lundmark et al. 2007; see also Corfu & Andersen 2002; Glodny et al. 2002). A simple map examination reveals that the mélange with its abundant mantle peridotite lenses continues across southern Norway directly into the Gula, Seve and equivalent 'suspect' nappe complexes in the Røros area (Fig. 1). It is obvious that the Seve, Gula and lower parts of the Køli nappes containing abundant mantle peridotites, which commonly are of detrital origin (Stigh 1979), need a new interpretation. A revised interpretation of these units will also have major influence on our understanding of the continental crystalline rocks of the Lower, Middle and Upper Allochthons and therefore also of the original architecture of the pre-Caledonian margin of Baltica (Corfu et al. 2007, 2011; Kirkland et al. 2008b). Even if no specific structures can be assigned with confidence to the original pre-Caledonian formation of the basin in which the continental mantle peridotites were exhumed and the sediments of the mélange accumulated, the hypothesis of a hyperextended margin origin is supported by direct and indirect evidence.
First, sedimentary structures are preserved in some detrital serpentinites associated with larger lenses of altered peridotites (see also Qvale & Stigh 1985). Mantle peridotites must have been exhumed to the surface to provide clastic material to the basin. Their unroofing and erosion is therefore pre-tectonic with respect to Caledonian deformation and metamorphism. The best analogues for this type of deposits are probably the detrital and auto-brecciated serpentinites (S-type lherzolites) around major lherzolites, which were described in some detail from the partly well-preserved basins in the north Pyrenean zone by Lagabrielle et al. (2010). Those workers interpreted the mixed deposits to have formed by major synextensional olistostromes in the Middle Cretaceous prior to the early Eocene Pyrenean orogeny. Detrital serpentinites may also have formed around protrusions, giving rise to erosion and sedimentation of fluvial to marine clastic serpentinites such as those forming at present in the extended margin of the Red Sea (e.g. Bonatti et al. 1981; Marshak et al. 1992). The solitary peridotites discussed here underwent serpentinization before they were eroded, and the detrital serpentinites formed as part of the pre- Caledonian basin-forming (rifting) processes.
Second, the widespread alteration, which includes serpentinization, talcification and formation of ophicalcite, is a hallmark of the peridotites that were originally exhumed by hyperextension in passive continental margins (Bernoulli & Jenkyns 2009). Even if all the contacts between the various lithologies in the example discussed here were overprinted by deformation during the Scandian collision, here dated at 410 ± 3 Ma, as well as the late to post- orogenic extension, the lithological association and transitions from serpentinites to mafic micaschists are difficult to explain by a late-stage tectonic mixing of originally distinct peridotites separated from the sedimentary rocks. This was also pointed out by Qvale and Stigh (1985), who noted that the solitary Alpine-type peridotites had a more complex structure and geochemistry and were more 'polymetamorphic' than those associated with the typical ophiolites of the Upper Allochthon. The formation of the lithological association of the mélange is clearly pre-metamorphic with respect to the Caledonian orogeny and must therefore relate to an early stage in the evolution of the Caledonian Wilson cycle.
Third, it is not possible to explain the emplacement of the mélange peridotites by magmatic intrusion and crystallization, because there is no evidence to suggest intrusive relationships between high-T ultramafic magmas and the sediments. There is no contact metamorphism and common black-wall alteration zones are related to metasomatism, not contact metamorphism by heat diffusion from a crystallizing ultramafic magma (e.g. Bucher et al. 2005). Minor gabbros and metabasalts mapped in several areas of the mélange may, however, be related to magmatism and extension similar to those documented from other ocean–continent transition zones (Müntener et al. 2010). The emplacement of mantle peridotites within the mélange must therefore be caused by other mechanisms than magma emplacement, the only likely alternative being structural emplacement. We suggest that this most probably was related to large-scale unroofing of extensional detachment footwall(s), perhaps in combination with serpentinite protrusion where widespread hydration of an exhuming mantle lithosphere took place. Zones of exhumed mantle documented from present-day OCT zones, such as that offshore Iberia, are complex assemblages of faulted serpentinized mantle, rafted extensional allochthons of continental crust and sedimentary rocks derived from both crustal protoliths and from exhumed mantle rocks (e.g. Manatschal 2004; Péron-Pinvidic & Manatschal 2009). We propose that the mélange unit described in this paper represents an obducted part of a pre-Caledonian OCT with exhumed mantle.
The sedimentary matrix of the mélange has no preserved fossils except those found in the monomict serpentinite conglomerate east of Vågå (Fig. 1). The unusual 'Celtic fauna' with mixed provinciality of island origin was described by Bruton & Harper (1981), who suggested that the 'serpentinite island' was separated by a considerable distance from Baltica and other continents in the early Middle Ordovician (Llanvirn, 470–464 Ma). Other clastic serpentinites such as those in the Bergen–Hardanger area (Qvale 1978; Heldal & Jansen 2000) were probably also formed by erosion and sedimentation in and near island environments (serpentinite protrusions?), but are devoid of fossils.
Within the major Bergen Arc, fossiliferous rocks of late Ordovician age (448–443 Ma, Ashgill) unconformably overlie the mélange (Sturt & Thon 1976; Faerseth et al. 1977). It is obvious that the mélange as well as the associated basement lenses have evidence of a pre-Scandian tectonic history, which at present is poorly understood (see below).
The dominant graphitic micaschists and phyllites are commonly interlayered or foliated with coarser-grained (synrift?) conglomerates and sandstones. These clearly have provenance from continental crust, and the dated pebble from the conglomerate at Stølsheimen is one example. It suggests that the provenance of the mélange matrix was in a Proterozoic basement of similar age to the Lower and Middle Allochthons as well as the autochthonous basement of Baltica (see above). As shown above, the mélange occupies a position between the Lower and Middle Allochthons as originally defined by Roberts & Gee (1985). By comparison with equivalent Alpine complexes and present-day hyperextended margins, juxtaposition of thin slices of continental basement, synrift to post-rift sediment infill and hydrated mantle lithosphere commonly takes place in passive margins (Manatschal 2004; Péron-Pinvidic & Manatschal 2010; Unternehr et al. 2010).
Polyphase deformation and metamorphism in the mélange
Internally the mélange was intensely deformed during the Scandian orogeny, which at the present erosion level typically is characterized by upper greenschist- to amphibolite-facies metamorphism, here dated at 410 ± 3 Ma. The main fabric development in these rocks took place during the Scandian collision, accompanied by large-scale thrusting of nappes and deep burial of Baltica as witnessed by the high- to ultra-high pressure metamorphism (Fig. 1) developed in the basement of Baltica (e.g. Andersen et al. 1991; Fossen 1993). There are, however, also records of pre-Scandian deformation and metamorphism affecting the mélange in the study area and locally fabrics related to pre-Scandian events are preserved in the Major Bergen Arc (Sturt & Thon 1976; Faerseth et al. 1977; Henriksen 1981). This is also the case with the continental basement of the Dalsfjord Suite (c. 1640 Ma) covered by the sandstone-dominated Høyvik Group in Sunnfjord (Fig. 1), which experienced a pre- Scandian event at c. 450 Ma (Andersen et al. 1998; Corfu & Andersen 2002). Similar rocks in the Seve nappe c. 1000–1500 km to the NE also have evidence of early and middle Ordovician metamorphic events, which in parts reached eclogite-facies conditions (e.g. Root & Corfu 2011). Recently, eclogites most probably associated with the allochthonous Hardanger–Ryfylke Nappe Complex near Stavanger (Fig. 1) have been dated at c. 470 Ma (Smit et al. 2011). It is clear that these Middle Allochthon rocks, traditionally interpreted to have originated along the Caledonian margin of Baltica, experienced variably intense deformation and metamorphism prior to their emplacement onto Baltica during the Scandian collision. The early and middle Ordovician events post-date the formation of a hyperextended margin, and took place when these rocks had achieved their maximum separation by hyperextension and were partly outboard of Baltica. The exact nature of the pre-Scandian deformation and metamorphism is at present not understood, and the interpretation of the mélange unit has been significantly complicated as a result of these early Caledonian events.
Post-collision fabrics are also common, and in some areas constitute the dominant structure, particularly adjacent to major nappe boundaries (Andersen 1998; Fossen 2010). Both the Scandian collision and later extensional events were accompanied by regional amphibolite- to greenschist-facies metamorphism (Fossen 1993; Osmundsen & Andersen 1994). Therefore, there is no preserved record of pre-Caledonian extensional structures that can be assigned to the original rifting and formation of the deep basin(s) in which the mélange sediments accumulated and where the mantle peridotites were emplaced. Exceptions to this are the very local but well-preserved sedimentary structures observed within some detrital serpentinites. Otherwise, all main contacts are overprinted by the strong Scandian thrust fabrics and by the co-facial to retrograde post-orogenic deformation.
The rock association including mantle peridotites, which in parts were exposed to erosion, and the fine-grained graphitic schists and micaschists interlayered with coarser-grained metasandstones and conglomerates point to a very complex depositional environment in a basin, which at times was subjected to catastrophic deposition of coarser-grained material either from adjacent continental areas, from a severely faulted 'necking zone' or from extensional allochthons in the distal margin. Formation of the basin(s) was probably also accompanied by minor magmatic activity as evidenced by minor gabbros and metabasalt horizons. It is, however, not possible to explain the solitary peridotites by magmatic intrusion and crystallization, because there is no evidence to suggest intrusive relationships between ultramafic magmas and the sediments. There is no contact metamorphism other than the hydrothermal black-wall alteration related to fluid–rock interaction. Minor gabbros and metabasalts may, however, be related to magmatism and extension similar to those described from highly extended ocean–continent transition zones (Müntener et al. 2010).
The internal architecture of the Lower and Middle Allochthons, as well as the Seve nappes, changes considerably along strike in the Scandinavian Caledonides. In particular, the Lower Allochthon is a much larger tectonic unit in the central parts of the orogen than in the SW, whereas the crystalline nappes in the Middle Allochthon (Hardanger–Ryfylke, Bergsdalen and Lindås–Jotun nappe complexes) are reduced to mostly thin slivers of basement in the NE. Similarly, equivalents of the Seve nappes are less important in the SW than in the NE (see the tectonostratigraphic map of Roberts & Gee 1985). Already from these lateral variations it is clear that the Caledonian margin of Baltica originally must have had a very complex structure prior to the Scandian collision. By comparison with present-day passive margins (Fig. 6), such as the North Atlantic including the Norwegian Sea, this is not at all a surprising observation.
A conceptual drawing showing a possible geometry of a segment of the hyperextended, pre-Caledonian margin of Baltica. The most important implication of this study is that large crystalline nappes must have been positioned outboard of the deep basins as continental ribbons and/or microcontinents separated by transitional ocean–continent domain with exposed subcontinental mantle lithosphere. Large mantle culminations must have been exposed before plate convergence and collision commenced, as shown by the presence of detrital serpentinites. The new interpretation implies that distal units on the hyperextended margin may have experienced early Caledonian deformation and metamorphism not recorded in the margin of Baltica. The sketch of the present-day North Atlantic margin west of the British Isles and Ireland is shown for comparison and to indicate a possible present-day analogue (redrawn from Péron-Pinvidic & Manatschal 2010).
The regionally distributed mélange unit discussed in this paper has not been adequately incorporated in geotectonic reconstructions that are based on the traditional interpretation of tectonostratigraphic units in the Scandinavian Caledonides. Because of the polyphase deformation and metamorphic overprint in the mélange, attempts to explain its geodynamic significance will probably always be controversial. The association of solitary mantle peridotite with continentally derived deep-basin sediments and slivers of Proterozoic basement is, however, a characteristic feature that can be easily explained by comparison with Cenozoic mountain belts such as the Alps and the Pyrenees, and with the geometry and lithological association of present-day hyperextended continental margins.
The rock association of solitary mantle peridotites and detrital ultramafic rocks mostly without or with very limited volumes of associated gabbros and basalts and all intimately associated with a variety of siliciclastic- and carbonate-rich sediments points to formation in deep basin(s) formed by large-magnitude extension rather than in a magma-dominated spreading-ridge environment. Thin sheets of highly attenuated continental crystalline basement and associated metasediments structurally overlie the mantle-peridotite-bearing mélange. These may represent original extensional allochthons juxtaposed on continental mantle lithosphere by large-magnitude extensional detachments similar to those interpreted from the seismic structure in present-day continental margins (e.g. Unternehr et al. 2010) and partly preserved in exposed sections in the Alps (e.g. Manatschal 2004). We therefore suggest that the regional mélange unit found between the Lower and Middle Allochthons in the SW Scandinavian Caledonides is best explained as representing the vestiges of a hyperextended pre-Caledonian continental margin of Baltica (Fig. 6). Primary extensional fabrics between the mantle rocks, the continental crust and the deep basin sediments were destroyed by subsequent Caledonian events. The association of rocks in the mélange is very similar to those described from the Alps in a series of papers by Manatschal and co-workers (e.g. Manatschal 2004; Manatschal et al. 2006) and from the Pyrenees (Lagabrielle et al. 2010). The presence of such a highly extended continental margin below large crystalline nappes of southern Norway, including the Lindås and Jotun nappes, implies that these were separated from Baltica by wide and deep rift basins that included zones of exhumed continental mantle, and possibly also true oceanic basins, at the early stages of the Caledonian Wilson cycle. If this interpretation is correct the Lindås, Upper Bergsdalen and Jotun Nappe complexes can therefore be considered as ancient 'continental ribbons' or outboard 'microcontinents' (Fig. 6) with equivalent status to the Brianconnais zone of the Alps or even the Jan Mayen microcontinent of the Norwegian–Greenland sea. The pre-Caledonian margin of Baltica must therefore have had a much more complicated structure than the traditional simple passive margin as envisaged from previous reconstructions based on the interpretation of basement–cover systems of the Lower and Middle Allochthons. The shortening of the Caledonian margin of Baltica during the Scandian collision has consequently also been grossly underestimated, as the transitional ocean–continent domain now represented by the mélange below the major crystalline continental nappes has been largely ignored in previous reconstructions.
A detailed reconstruction that precisely explains the formation of the mélange by primary stratigraphic or structural relationships is not yet possible. Any advance in our understanding of the ocean–continent transition of the pre-Caledonian margin of Baltica, however, requires an adequate explanation of this hitherto unexplained association of rocks, which constitutes a continuous unit extending for several hundred kilometres in southern Norway and probably beyond in the Scandinavian Caledonides.
We conclude that the mélange unit described here, which contains abundant lenses of mantle peridotite and is associated with the Lower and Middle Allochthons of the Scandinavian Caledonides, represents the vestiges of a hyperextended pre-Caledonian passive continental margin. The key to understanding its complexity is to be found by new detailed studies and by comparisons with similar complexes from other orogenic belts, most notably the European Alpine systems, and from present-day continental margins.
We acknowledge Ø. J. Jansen for providing information about soapstone quarries in the Bergen area and the picture here shown as Figure 4c. G. Manatschal and O. Nilsen are thanked for discussion at several stages before and during the course of this work, which was financed by the Norwegian Research Council Centre of Excellence grant to Physics of Geological Processes (PGP).
© The Geological Society of London
Andersen T.B.
1998. Extensional tectonics in the Caledonides of southern Norway, an overview. Tectonophysics, 285, 333–351.
Andersen T.B.,
Furnes H.,
Skjerlie K.P.
1990. The Sunnfjord Mélange, evidence of Silurian ophiolite accretion in the West Norwegian Caledonides. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 147, 59–69.
Jamtveit B.,
Dewey J.F.,
Swensson E.
1991. Subduction and eduction of continental crust—major mechanisms during continent–continent collision and orogenic extensional collapse, a model based on the South Norwegian Caledonides. Terra Nova, 3, 303–310.
Berry H.N.,
Lux D.R.,
Andresen A.
1998. The tectonic significance of pre-Scandian 40Ar/39Ar phengite cooling ages in the Caledonides of western Norway. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 155, 297–309.
Andreasson P.G.
1994. The Baltoscandian margin in the Neoproterozoic–early Paleozoic times—some constraints on the terrane derivation and accretion in the Arctic Scandinavian Caledonides. Tectonophysics, 231, 1–32.
Andreasson P.G.,
Svenningsen O.M.,
Albrecht L.
1998. Dawn of Phanerozoic orogeny in the North Atlantic tract; evidence from the Seve–Kalak Superterrane, Scandinavian Caledonides. GFF, 120, 159–172.
Bernoulli D.,
Jenkyns H.C.
2009. Ancient oceans and continental margins of the Alpine–Mediterranean Tethys: deciphering clues from Mesozoic pelagic sediments and ophiolites. Sedimentology, 56, 149–190.
Bingen B.,
Belousova E.A.,
Griffin W.L.
2011. Neoproterozoic recycling of the Sveconorwegian orogenic belt: Detrital-zircon data from the Sparagmite basins in the Scandinavian Caledonides. Precambrian Research, 189, 347–367.
Bøe R.
1985. Rodingite from Lindås, western Norway. Norwegian Journal of Geology, 65, 301–320.
Boillot G.,
Recq M.,
. 1987. Tectonic denudation of the upper mantle along passive margins: a model based on drilling results (ODP Leg 103, western Galicia margin, Spain). Tectonophysics, 132, 335–342.
Bonatti E.,
Hamlyn P.R.,
Ottonello G.
1981. Upper mantle beneath a young oceanic rift: peridotites from the island of Zabargad (Red Sea). Geology, 9, 474–479.
Bruton D.L.,
Harper D.A.T.
1981. Brachiopods and trilobites of the early Ordovician serpentinite Otta Conglomerate, south central Norway. Norwegian Journal of Geology, 61, 3–18.
Bucher K.,
De Capitani C.,
Grapes R.
2005. The development of a margarite–corundum blackwall by metasomatic alteration of a slice of mica schist in ultramafic rock, Kvesjøen, Norwegian Caledonides. Canadian Mineralogist, 43, 129–156.
Corfu F.
2004. U–Pb age, setting, and tectonic significance of the anorthosite–mangerite–charnockite–granite suite, Lofoten–Vesterålen, Norway. Journal of Petrology, 45, 1799–1819.
Corfu F.,
2002. U–Pb ages of the Dalsfjord Complex, SW Norway, and their bearing on the correlation of allochthonous crystalline segments of the Scandinavian Caledonides. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 91, 955–963.
Torsvik T.H.,
Ashwal L.D.,
Ramsay D.M.,
Roberts R.J.
2006. Early Silurian mafic–ultramafic and granitic plutonism in contemporaneous flysch, Magerøy, northern Norway: U–Pb ages and regional significance. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 163, 291–301.
Roberts R.J.,
Ramsay D.M.
2007. Peri-Gondwanan elements in the Caledonian Nappes of Finnmark, Northern Norway: implications for the paleogeographic framework of the Scandinavian Caledonides. American Journal of Science, 307, 434–458.
Gerber M.,
Ashwal L.D.
2011. Age and significance of Grenvillian and Silurian orogenic events in the Finnmark Caledonides, northern Norway. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 48, 419–440.
Faerseth R.B.,
Thon A.,
Larsen S.G.,
Sivertsen A.,
Elvestad L.
1977. Geology of the lower Palaeozoic rocks in the Samnanger–Osterøy, area, major Bergen Arc, western Norway. Bulletin Norges Geologiske Undersøkelse, 334, 19–58.
Fossen H.
1993. Linear fabrics in the Bergsdalen Nappes, southwest Norway—implications for deformation history and fold development. Norwegian Journal of Geology, 73, 95–108.
2010. Extensional tectonics in the North Atlantic Caledonides: a regional view. In: Law R.D., Butler R.W.H., Holdsworth R.E., Krabbendam M., Strachan R.A. (eds) Continental Tectonics and Mountain Building: The Legacy of Peach and Horne. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 335, 767–793.
Fossen H.,
Dunlap W.J.
1998. Timing and kinematics of Caledonian thrusting and extension collapse, southern Norway; evidence from 40Ar/39Ar thermochronology. Journal of Structural Geology, 20, 765–781.
Skjerlie K.P.,
. 1990. The Solund–Stavfjord Ophiolite complex and associated rocks, West Norwegian Caledonides—geology, geochemistry and tectonic environment. Geological Magazine, 127, 209–224.
Gee D.G.,
Sturt B.A.
1985. The Caledonide Orogeny—Scandinavia and Related Areas. Wiley, Chichester.
Glodny J.,
Kuhn A.,
Austrheim H.
2002. Rb/Sr record of fluid–rock interaction in eclogites, Bergen Arcs, Norway. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 66, A280–A280.
2008. Geochronology of fluid-induced eclogite and amphibolite facies metamorphic reactions in a subduction–collision system, Bergen Arcs, Norway. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 156, 27–48.
Grey J.W.
1978. Structural history and Rb–Sr geochronology of Eksingedalen, West Norway. PhD thesis, University of Aberdeen.
Hacker B.R.,
Johnston S.,
Kylander-Clark A.,
Peterman E.,
Walsh E.,
Young D.
2010. Deformation during continental margin subduction and exhumation: the ultrahigh-pressure Western Gneiss Region of Norway. Tectonophysics, 480, 149–171.
Heldal T.,
Jansen O.J.
2000. Steinbyen Bergen: Fortellingen om Brostein, Bygg og Brudd. NGU, Trondheim.
Henriksen H.
1981. A major unconformity within the metamorphic Lower Palaeozoic sequence of the Major Bergen Arc, Osterøy, western Norway. Bulletin Norges Geologiske Undersøkelse, 367, 65–75.
Ingdahl S.E.
1985. Stratigraphy, structural geology and metamorphism in the Os area, Major Bergen Arc. Cand. scient. (Master) thesis, University of Bergen.
Kirkland C.L.,
Daly J.S.,
Chew D.M.,
Page L.M.
2008a. The Finnmarkian Orogeny revisited: an isotopic investigation in eastern Finnmark, Arctic Norway. Tectonophysics, 460, 158–177.
Whitehouse M.J.
2008b. Basement–cover relationships of the Kalak Nappe Complex, Arctic Norwegian Caledonides and constraints on Neoproterozoic terrane assembly in the North Atlantic region. Precambrian Research, 160, 245–276.
Krogh T.E.
1973. A low contamination method for hydrothermal decomposition of zircon and extraction of U and Pb for isotopic age determinations. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 37, 485–494, doi:10.1016/0016-7037(73)90213-5.
Labrousse L.,
Hetényi G.,
Raimbourg H.,
Jolivet L.,
2010. Initiation of crustal-scale thrusts triggered by metamorphic reactions at depth: insights from a comparison between the Himalayas and the Scandinavian Caledonides. Tectonics, 29, TC5002, doi:10.1029/2009TC002602, 2010.
Lagabrielle Y.,
Bodinier J.L.
2008. Submarine reworking of exhumed subcontinental mantle rocks: field evidence from the Lherz peridotites, French Pyrenees. Terra Nova, 20, 11–21.
Labaume P.,
de Saint Blanquat M.
2010. Mantle exhumation, crustal denudation, and gravity tectonics during Cretaceous rifting in the Pyrenean realm (SW Europe): insights from the geological setting of the lherzolite bodies. Tectonics, 29, TC4012.
Lundin E.R.,
Doré A.G.
2011. Hyperextension, serpentinisation and weakening: a new paradigm for rifted margin compressional deformation. Geology, 39, 347–350.
Lundmark A.M.,
Spürgin S.,
Selbekk R.S.
2007. Proterozoic evolution and provenance of the high-grade Jotun Nappe complex, SW Norway: U–Pb geochronology. Precambrian Research, doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2006.12.015.
Manatschal G.
2004. New models for evolution of magma-poor rifted margins based on a review of data and concepts from West Iberia and the Alps. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 93, 432–466.
OpenUrlWeb of Science
Manatschal G.,
Engstrom A.,
Desmurs L.,
Schaltegger U.,
Cosca M.,
Müntener O.,
Bernoulli D.
2006. What is the tectono-metamorphic evolution of continental break-up: the example of the Tasna ocean–continent transition. Journal of Structural Geology, 28, 1849–1869.
Marshak S.,
Brueckner H.K.,
Paulsen T.
1992. Fracture-zone tectonics at Zabargad Island, Red Sea (Egypt). Tectonophysics, 216, 379–385.
Mohn G.,
Beltrano M.,
Masini E.
2010. Unravelling the interaction between tectonic and sedimentary processes during lithospheric thinning in the Alpine Tethys margins. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 99, S75–S101.
2006. High degrees of melt extraction recorded by spinel harzburgite of the Newfoundland margin: the role of inheritance and consequences for the evolution of the southern North Atlantic. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 252, 437–452.
Pettke T.
2010. Plagioclase peridotites in ocean–continent transitions: refertilized mantle domains generated by melt stagnation in the shallow mantle lithosphere. Journal of Petrology, 51, 255–294.
Nystuen J.P.,
Andresen A.,
Kumpulainen R.A.,
Siedlecka A.
2008. Neoproterozoic basin evolution in Fennoscandia, East Greenland and Svalbard. Episodes, 31, 35–43.
Osmundsen P.T.,
1994. Caledonian compressional and late-orogenic extensional deformation in the Staveneset area, Sunnfjord, Western Norway. Journal of Structural Geology, 16, 1385–1401.
Ebbing J.
2008. Styles of extension offshore mid-Norway and implications for mechanisms of crustal thinning at passive margins. Tectonics, 27, TC6016, doi:10.1029/2007TC002242.
Péron-Pinvidic G.,
2009. The final rifting evolution at deep magma-poor passive margins: a new point of view based on observations from Iberia–Newfoundland. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 98, 1581–1597, doi:1510.1007/s00531-00008-00337-00539.
2010. From microcontinents to extensional allochthons: witnesses of how continents rift and break apart? Petroleum Geoscience, 16, 189–197.
Qvale H.
1978. Geologisk undersølelse av et kaledonsk serpentinittfelt ved Balderheim, Hordaland. Cand. Real (Master) thesis, University of Oslo.
Qvale H.,
Stigh J.
1985. Ultramafic rocks in the Scandinavian Caledonides. In: Gee D.G., Sturt B.A. (eds) The Caledonide Orogen—Scandinavia and Related Areas. Wiley, Chichester, 693–715.
Roberts D.,
Gee D.G.
1985. An introduction to the structure of the Scandinavian Caledonides. In: Gee D.G., Sturt B.A. (eds) The Caledonide Orogen—Scandinavia and Related Areas. Wiley, Chichester, 55–68.
Melezhik V.A.,
Heldal T.
2002. Carbonate formations and early NW-directed thrusting in the highest allochthons of the Norwegian Caledonides: evidence of a Laurentian ancestry. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 159, 117–120.
Root D.B.,
2011. U–Pb geochronology of two discrete Ordovician high-pressure metamorphic events in the Seve Nappe complex, Scandinavian Caledonides. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 163, 769–788.
Smit M.A.,
Bröcker M.,
Kooijman E.,
Scherer E.E.
2011. The provenance and exhumation of exotic eclogite-facies rocks in SW Norway: a Rb–Sr and U–Pb study. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 168, 423–439.
Stephens M.B.,
1989. Terranes and polyphase accretionary history in the Scandinavian Caledonides. In: Dallmeyer R.D. (ed.) Terranes in the Circum-Atlantic Paleozoic Orogens. Geological Society of America, Special Papers, 230, 17–30.
1979. Ultramafites and detrital serpentinites in the central and southern parts of the Caledonian Allochthon in Scandinavia. PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology Gothenburg.
Sturt B.A.,
1999. Early Ordovician terrane-linkages between oceanic and continental terranes in the central Scandinavian Caledonides. Terra Nova, 11, 79–85.
Thon A.
1976. The age of the orogenic deformation in the Swedish Caledonides. American Journal of Science, 276, 385–390.
Svenningsen O.
2001. Onset of seafloor spreading in the Iapetus Ocean at 608 Ma: precise age of the Sarek Dyke Swarm, northern Swedish Caledonides. Precambrian Research, 110, 241–254.
1985. The Gullfjellet ophiolite complex and the structural evolution of the major Bergen Arc, West Norwegian Caledonides. In: Gee D.G., Sturt B.A. (eds) The Caledonide Orogen—Scandinavia and Related Areas. Wiley, Chichester, 671–677.
Cocks L.R.M.
2005. Norway in space and time: a centennial cavalcade. Norwegian Journal of Geology, 85, 73–86.
Unternehr P.,
Peron-Pinvidic G.,
Sutra E.
2010. Hyperextended crust in the South Atlantic: in search of a model. Petroleum Geoscience, 16, 207–215.
van Roermund H.L.M.
1985. Eclogites of the Seve Nappe, central Scandinavian Caledonides. In: Gee D.G., Sturt B.A. (eds) The Caledonide Orogen—Scandinavia and Related Areas. Wiley, Chichester, 873–886.
Vitale Brovarone A.,
Beltrando M.,
. 2011. Inherited ocean–continent transition zones in deeply subducted terranes: insights from Alpine Corsica. Lithos, doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2011.02.013.
Wennberg O.P.,
Milnes A.G.,
Winsvold I.
1998. The northern Bergen Arc shear zone—an oblique-lateral ramp in the Devonian extensional detachment system of western Norway. Norwegian Journal of Geology, 78, 169–184.
Zalan P.V.,
Servino M.C.G.,
Rigoti C.A.,
Magnavita L.P.,
Oliveira J.A.B.,
Vianna A.R.
2011. Continuous mantle exhumation at the outer continental margin of the Santos, Campos and Espírito Santo Basins, Brazil. AGU-2011 Annual Meeting, Session T31D, Abstract T31D-02. World Wide Web address: http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm11/waisfm11.html
Thank you for sharing this Journal of the Geological Society article.
You are going to email the following Evidence for hyperextension along the pre-Caledonian margin of Baltica
Message Subject (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the Geological Society
Message Body (Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of the Geological Society.
Download PPT
Detrital zircon U-Pb geochronology and Lu-Hf isotopes of the Neoproterozoic Penglai Group and their comparisons with coevally sedimentary strata of the southeastern NCC: Provenance, tectonic affinity and implications
Evolution of a shear zone before, during and after melting
40Ar/39Ar mica dating of late Cenozoic sediments in SE Tibet: Implications for sediment recycling and drainage evolution
Show more: Research article
A lower Carboniferous (Visean) tetrapod trackway represents the earliest record of an edopoid amphibian from the UK
The nature and age of basement host rocks and fissure fills in the Lancaster field fractured reservoir, West of Shetland
The Mesoproterozoic Stac Fada proximal ejecta blanket, NW Scotland: constraints on crater location from field observations, anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility, petrography and geochemistry
Where does the time go? Assessing the chronostratigraphic fidelity of sedimentary geological outcrops in the Pliocene–Pleistocene Red Crag Formation, eastern England
The Sirius Passet Lagerstätte of North Greenland: a remote window on the Cambrian Explosion


Certifications can mean a lot of things -- prestige, acknowledgement, credibility, higher earnings and more -- and ESA is proud to provide certification to ecologists. Applications are now open for the 2019 cycle and will be accepted online through February 1, 2019 .
Visit the certification page to find out more, and download the ESA Certification Checklist to start the application process. Applications started by the deadline can be updated and edited after the fact.
Calling all graduate students! ESA is accepting applications for the 2019 Katherine S. McCarter Graduate Student Policy Award. Students receive an all-expense-paid trip to Washington, D.C. for policy training and to meet with lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Participants will represent ESA and engage first-hand at the interface of science and public policy. The event occurs March 25-27, 2019. Applications are due January 13. For information on how to apply, click here .
Two weeks ago, ESA announced the results of the 2018 election . These annual elections are crucial to the governance of the Society as all members have a voice. This year, 18.8% of members voted, which is a relatively high rate of participation among scientific societies, but still does not include everybody's voice.
We encourage all members to vote in each year's election and be an active part of the election process. Each year's past president chairs the nominations committee, which is currently seeking candidates, including nominations from the sections and chapters—think about who among your colleagues should be leading ESA in the future, and get in touch with your leadership! This year, we received excellent constructive feedback along with a 95% satisfaction rating from voters, and will be working to better educate the membership about the election and better highlight the candidates for each office next year to make a more inclusive process.
Thanks to everyone who participated this year—we look forward to seeing even more of you in 2019!
LDC will highlight the leading science, curriculum design and implementation and data exploration in a research-rich biology education for high school and undergraduate students. A major goal of the conference is to foster communities of practice and encourage the sharing of best practices in biology education across grade levels.
Click here for more information, and click the image to register at an early bird rate.
In the spirit of collaboration, inclusion and cross-disciplinary science, the Ecological Society of America will be holding its 104th Annual Meeting in partnership with the United States Society for Ecological Economics (USSEE), one of many regional professional organizations within the umbrella society of the International Society for Ecological Economics.
We will announce the call for contributed abstracts in January. Abstracts will be due Thursday, February 21, 2019. All ESA meeting deadlines are 5:00 PM Eastern (2:00 Pacific).
The meeting theme is " Bridging communities and ecosystems: Inclusion as an ecological imperative ".
Introducing a new section in the Bulletin , " Communicating Science ," edited by Bethann Garramon Merkle of the University of Wyoming. Articles and reports on any aspect of science communication and engagement in ecology are welcome.
As wildfires increase amid climate warming, and costs of human impacts escalate, multiple approaches for understanding and mitigation are presented in this collection of recent articles in ESA journals.
Can We Embrace A Weedy Future?
In the December issue of Frontiers , Zoë Doubleday and Sean Connell explore the potential for "weedy" marine species – such as algae, jellyfish, and cephalopods – to benefit society. These opportunistic species are difficult to manage, but also represent potential sources of food, medicine, and phytoremediation.


May I invite all of you to stand up and be silent in respect of the soul of Samdech Ov, Samdech Ta, Samdech Tatuat – Preah Borom Ratanakaod, in memory of his demise that our people will be celebrating tomorrow in the whole country. We all know that Samdech Ov Preah Borom Ratannakaod devoted his whole life for independence, freedom, national reconciliation for Cambodia. If there were without his crusade, we may ask a question what would happen to Cambodia, especially in his fight for independence on 9 November 1953, the final date that the French withdrew from Cambodia.
He led struggles internally and on the international arena. If he was not there and did not do a thing, would Cambodia now be a French territory oversea? In France, there is this Ministry of Overseas France. Would Cambodia be one of their territories overseas? That is perhaps one point to remember. It was because of his crusade, together with other movements, that secured independence from France.
… This year we are so pleased to see how positive the fundamental reform in secondary school exams has occurred in educational system from primary through to secondary levels. We have noticed that our students have understood that the level that they have to make efforts to pass is set high. Students cannot afford to care free and so their parents and superintendents. This has changed attitudes in our society.
Class would create social discrimination. I have tasted it. I would suggest to teachers everywhere help check this problem. Parents and superintendents also have a say in this. Parents must strengthen social moral among our youth. There are over three million of children and youth registered in schools […]./.


text:
Supreme Court Rules Immigrants Held In Detention Are Not Entitled To Bail Hearings
Published February 27, 2018 at 1:03 PM PST
It was a busy day at the U.S. Supreme Court. There was a major immigration decision and arguments in a case that tests whether the government with a warrant can obtain emails stored in other countries. NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg takes a look at both cases, starting with the immigration decision, which could factor in the Trump administration's aggressive deportation drive.
NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE: The court ruled that immigrants held in detention for months and even years are not entitled to a bail hearing. Although such detentions number in the tens of thousands, they're not the usual deportation cases where the facts are cut-and-dry and the people are deported within a month or two of their detention. Rather, these cases involve people who are legal permanent residents in the U.S. and are subject to potential deportation because they've committed some relatively minor crime or people who've come to the U.S. to seek asylum and have passed the first level of screening.
When their cases are ultimately decided, 70 percent of the asylum-seekers and 40 percent of the legal U.S. residents win. But the average period of their detention is 13 months, according to the government, and some remain in detention for far longer. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that under a federal law, people in these circumstances are entitled to a bail hearing every six months, and that if they can persuade a neutral judge that they're not a safety or a flight risk, they're entitled to temporary release if they post a money bond or agree to electronic monitoring or both.
But today the Supreme Court overturned that decision as an implausible reading of the federal statute. Writing for a splintered 5 to 3 majority, Justice Samuel Alito said that the statute does not allow for bail. The decision doesn't end the case, though. The court sent it back to the lower court with two questions unresolved. First, whether indefinite detention without a chance for bail is unconstitutional, and second, whether the challenge to that no-bail provision can be brought as a class action instead of in one-by-one individual cases.
Stanford Law professor Lucas Guttentag says that in practical terms, the class action question is enormously important since most of the 40,000 immigrants affected by today's decision don't have lawyers.
LUCAS GUTTENTAG: And if they're required to proceed individually, many of them will never be able to pursue their claims. The class action provides protection to everyone, not just to those who have a lawyer who can file a lawsuit.
TOTENBERG: For now, though, today's decision means that thousands of immigrants will be returned to or remain in detention. Justice Stephen Breyer, in a rare and passionate dissent from the bench, said the court should have decided the constitutional question instead of, as he put it, for the first time ever permitting long-term confinement without any chance for bail, a status that's usually reserved for those accused of serious crimes.
After Breyer's dissent, the court moved on today to one of the marquee cases of the term, a test of the government's power with a warrant to gain access to a suspect's email even if it's stored abroad. The case involves a federal drug trafficking investigation in which U.S. law enforcement authorities obtained a search warrant for all data associated with the suspect's Microsoft account. Microsoft refused to give the feds the email, which was stored in a data center in Ireland. The company argues that there's no legal authority for the U.S. warrant because it was issued under a law enacted by Congress in 1986, five full years before the World Wide Web was even created. Brad Smith is president and CEO of Microsoft.
BRAD SMITH: We've - have felt that this is fundamentally about whether people around the world can trust American technology.
TOTENBERG: Inside the court chamber today, the justices were less than fully sympathetic to Microsoft's arguments. Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor both suggested that it might be better for the court to let Congress deal with these issues, and both noted that there's a bill currently before Congress that has the support of both the technology industry and the U.S. Justice Department. As Ginsburg put it, wouldn't it be wiser to say, let's leave things as they are? If Congress wants to regulate this brave, new world, it should do it. That view, of course, doesn't necessarily help Microsoft.
Several justices asked about the process for transferring the data stored in Ireland back to the U.S. Justice Kennedy - does a human being have to do this? Microsoft's lawyers said a human being in Redmond, Wash., tells a robot to transfer the material to the United States. At that the justices gawked. Said Justice Sotomayor, my imagination is running wild. But several justices, perhaps a majority, seemed to buy the government's argument that it is Microsoft's U.S. headquarters that controls the data.
Chief Justice Roberts - if I send an email to someone in the next block and it's stored in Ireland, under Microsoft's argument, that email is going to be protected from disclosure even when the government gets a court-approved warrant in the course of a criminal investigation. Added Justice Alito, it's a little difficult for me to see what Ireland's interest in this is. Of course, all the members of the court are over 50. But then again, so am I. Nina Totenberg, NPR News, Washington.
(SOUNDBITE OF GLOBULDUB'S "FOREIGN EXCHANGE") Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Amazon.com has the Anker Wireless Charger PowerPort Wireless 5 Stand for Qi Phones for $21.99. Free shipping is included. For a limited time Amazon is offering free shipping on everything they ship with no minimum purchase needed, even if you don't have Prime!


On this page you can download the individual files by clicking the download button.
Payment plans are now available on all damp proofing work. If you would like more information on this, please contact us using the provided details in our website.


text:
Meet Wayne
Q&A with Wayne
Corporate & Conferences
Guides & Worksheets
LinkedIn Book
« 10 Quick Ways to Spring Clean Your LinkedIn Profile
Linkedin Job Search Secrets You Need To Know »
6 Amazing but Hard-to-Find Free LinkedIn Features
Wayne Breitbarth
Most LinkedIn users (79% according to my latest LinkedIn user survey) are not paying anything to use the site. That's why most of what I teach in my book, public workshops, corporate training sessions, and personal consultations focuses on becoming a skillful user of the free account.
Here are six simple ways you can capitalize on powerful, hard-to-find LinkedIn features without spending a cent.
1. Create Search Alerts for Advanced People Searches. This is like having a 24/7 virtual assistant who's always looking for the right people. Once you've completed an Advanced People Search that gives you a list of just the right folks, click the words Create search alert (top right corner).
Then each week LinkedIn will automatically show you new people who meet your defined search criteria. This is absolutely priceless.
2. Find fellow alumni. It's hard to explain the warm, fuzzy feelings fellow alumni have for each other, but LinkedIn makes it very easy to find and contact your fellow alumni—and many times they'll be quite willing to do business with you.
Type the name of the school you attended in the top search box. Then choose your school when it appears in the drop-down menu. Next, select Alumni. Choose your filter columns or keywords, and LinkedIn magically shows you just the right fellow alums—smiling faces and all. Ka-ching! Learn more about the Alumni feature here.
3. Add media to your profile. To create a compelling profile, you need to strategically tell your professional story. A simple way to enhance your written story is to add links to important websites and upload media or other files.
Click the Media button to add your best stuff to your Summary, Experience, and Education entries. Viewers will then be able to watch, download, and read your most important work samples, company information, personal testimonials and recommendations, and so much more. Learn more about adding media here.
4. Download your connections database. Who wouldn't want a spreadsheet of their first-level connections' first and last names, current companies and titles, and the dates you connected with them?
Simply select Me on your top toolbar, and then choose Settings & Privacy. Next, scroll down in the Privacy section, select Download your data, and then check the Connections box. Then click the blue Request archive button. You will then have to enter your password. Within minutes, LinkedIn will send you a file with that information in a helpful spreadsheet.
5. Send messages to fellow group members. Unless you have a premium account, you cannot send a direct message to people who are outside your first-level network without incurring an InMail fee—with one exception. Each month LinkedIn gives you 15 free direct messages you can send to people who have agreed to accept messages from fellow group members. InMails typically cost $10 each, so this is a $150 gift from LinkedIn.
You can join a group just long enough to send someone a free InMail. From the specific LinkedIn group page, click See all in the top right corner. Then enter the person's name in the Search members box. Next, select the Message button to the right of the person's name.
6. Search your connections' connections. This is an easy way to look for potential customers, employers, etc. whom your connection can introduce you to. This is like having each of your connection's Rolodex on your computer, phone or tablet, which you can easily filter and search through.
To perform this search, put your cursor in the big, white search box in the top toolbar, and select Search for People from the drop-down menu.
Then select All Filters in the white toolbar that appears. Next, go to the Connections of box and type in your connection's name. Choose his or her name when it appears in the drop-down menu, and then click the blue Apply button.
Now use any of the other filters to narrow the search to people at the right company, location, school attended, title, etc.
There you have it—six features that would certainly be worth paying for, but they're totally free. Thank you, LinkedIn!
Tags: Free LinkedIn Features
Free Weekly LinkedIn Tips and Book Updates
Buy Wayne's Book, Now In Its 4th Edition
Search LinkedIn Blog
There's Still Time to Make 2019 Your Best Year Ever
Don't Let Your Competitors be Highlighted on Your LinkedIn Profile
How To Build A Free LinkedIn Prospect Machine
How to Make Sure Your LinkedIn Profile Really Sounds Like You
LinkedIn: A Stealth Job Seeker's Best Friend
Archives Select Month July 2019 (2) June 2019 (5) May 2019 (3) April 2019 (1) March 2019 (5) February 2019 (4) January 2019 (4) December 2018 (2) November 2018 (3) October 2018 (4) September 2018 (4) August 2018 (4) July 2018 (4) June 2018 (2) May 2018 (4) April 2018 (4) March 2018 (4) February 2018 (2) January 2018 (4) December 2017 (3) November 2017 (1) October 2017 (5) September 2017 (3) August 2017 (4) July 2017 (4) June 2017 (3) May 2017 (4) April 2017 (2) March 2017 (4) February 2017 (4) January 2017 (4) December 2016 (4) November 2016 (3) October 2016 (4) September 2016 (4) August 2016 (4) July 2016 (4) June 2016 (4) May 2016 (4) April 2016 (3) March 2016 (3) February 2016 (4) January 2016 (4) December 2015 (4) November 2015 (4) October 2015 (4) September 2015 (4) August 2015 (5) July 2015 (3) June 2015 (4) May 2015 (5) April 2015 (3) March 2015 (4) February 2015 (4) January 2015 (4) December 2014 (3) November 2014 (3) October 2014 (4) September 2014 (4) August 2014 (4) July 2014 (4) June 2014 (5) May 2014 (4) April 2014 (4) March 2014 (5) February 2014 (3) January 2014 (6) December 2013 (1) November 2013 (4) October 2013 (4) September 2013 (4) August 2013 (4) July 2013 (4) June 2013 (5) May 2013 (3) April 2013 (4) March 2013 (4) February 2013 (4) January 2013 (4) December 2012 (4) November 2012 (4) October 2012 (4) September 2012 (5) August 2012 (4) July 2012 (5) June 2012 (4) May 2012 (4) April 2012 (4) March 2012 (4) February 2012 (4) January 2012 (4) December 2011 (3) November 2011 (4) October 2011 (5) September 2011 (4) August 2011 (4) July 2011 (5) June 2011 (4) May 2011 (3) April 2011 (5) March 2011 (4) February 2011 (6) January 2011 (1) December 2010 (3) November 2010 (4) October 2010 (5) September 2010 (4) August 2010 (4) July 2010 (6) June 2010 (2) May 2010 (5) April 2010 (4) March 2010 (4) February 2010 (5) January 2010 (3) December 2009 (4) November 2009 (6) October 2009 (5) September 2009 (4) August 2009 (3) November 2002 (1) September 2002 (2) March 2002 (1)
About Wayne
Contact Wayne
LinkedIn Help | Sales with LinkedIn | LinkedIn Tips | Wayne Breitbarth | PowerFormula for LinkedIn | LinkedIn Consulting
Copyright © 2019 by Power Formula
LinkedIn is a registered trademark of LinkedIn Corporation. LinkedIn does not endorse any of the material contained on this web site.
© 2014 BrandXLerator


Outdoor Wicker Patio Furniture – Patio furniture is necessary for the area to be used as well as show up even more comfy. Having these in the location makes it extra welcoming for the residents of the house as well as their guests. There are several kinds to select from, as well as the majority of these are ideal for the outdoors or direct exposure to the components. This is a great idea since a few of these locations are generally open as well as subjected to the outdoors as well as the components. In this article, we will certainly offer you a couple of pictures of the outdoor wicker patio furniture may be your ideal exterior style concepts.
outdoor wicker patio furniture. You almost certainly know already that outdoor wicker patio furniture has become the top issues on-line now. Based on the info we got from adwords, outdoor wicker patio furniture has incredibly search online search engine. We expect that outdoor wicker patio furniture present new options or references for readers.
We've learned numerous sources regarding outdoor wicker patio furniture but we think this is the best. I hope you would also accept our thoughts. This picture has been uploaded by the author and is in outdoor wicker patio furniture covers, outdoor wicker patio swing chair with stand and pillow, tags section. You'll be able to acquire this picture by simply clicking on the save link or right click the graphic and choose save.
We hope what we give to you could be useful. If you would like, you're able to share this article for your friend, family, community, or you can also book mark this page.


Those would certainly interest me if I happen upon any at a price that I like. Same goes for an HPIB 9 track tape drive. But since the HP Series 80 stuff lies more towards the fringes of my interests at this time, I have a hunch that I am not too likely to find one of those at a price I would like to pay any time soon. Naturally, I'm more prone to pay real money for things closer to my core interests. But if I do happen upon any of that sort of gear at the right time, place, and price, then that will be really cool. Sometimes I surprise myself. I never expected to be interested in the DG Nova until I stumbled over a chance to buy one along with a PDP-11/03 system that interested me more at the time. Now I am glad that I have that cool Nova system, even though I still haven't managed to get it talking to its hard drive.