Premium
Does subduction polarity control metallogeny? The Mediterranean case
Author(s) -
Nimis Paolo,
Omenetto Paolo
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
terra nova
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.353
H-Index - 89
eISSN - 1365-3121
pISSN - 0954-4879
DOI - 10.1111/ter.12141
Subject(s) - subduction , geology , metallogeny , cretaceous , cenozoic , paleontology , skarn , geochemistry , seismology , tectonics , structural basin , hydrothermal circulation , sphalerite , fluid inclusions
The distribution of ore‐deposit types in different sectors of the circum‐Mediterranean realm that have been affected by subduction processes since the Cretaceous varies in space and time. Sectors involved in W‐directed subduction (Sardinia, Apennines–Maghrebides, Internal Betics, Tyrrhenian, Western–Eastern Carpathians) are dominated by relatively low‐sulphidation epithermal (± VMS ) deposits. Orogens formed by NE ‐directed subduction (Dinarides–Hellenides–Pontides–Anatolides–Taurides; DHPAT ) were initially dominated by pluton‐related porphyry–skarn–high‐sulphidation epithermal associations. These distinct metallogenic styles can be related to the systematic tectono‐magmatic asymmetry of E–NE‐ and W‐directed subduction systems and are analogous to the relationship observed in circum‐Pacific belts. Exceptions to this simple pattern occurred in the DHPAT in the Cenozoic, when deposit associations typical of both E‐directed and W‐directed systems were formed. Such exceptions are interpreted to reflect superimposition of contrasting subduction trends and inheritance from earlier metallogenic stages (Apuseni) or the interference of subduction processes with subduction‐unrelated extension (Hellenides, West Anatolia).