Uplift of the Sierra Nevada of California

Abstract

Research Article| September 01, 1986 Uplift of the Sierra Nevada of California Clement G. Chase; Clement G. Chase 1Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721 Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Terry C. Wallace Terry C. Wallace 1Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721 Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Author and Article Information Clement G. Chase 1Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721 Terry C. Wallace 1Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721 Publisher: Geological Society of America First Online: 01 Jun 2017 Online ISSN: 1943-2682 Print ISSN: 0091-7613 Geological Society of America Geology (1986) 14 (9): 730–733. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1986)14<730:UOTSNO>2.0.CO;2 Article history First Online: 01 Jun 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation Clement G. Chase, Terry C. Wallace; Uplift of the Sierra Nevada of California. Geology 1986;; 14 (9): 730–733. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1986)14<730:UOTSNO>2.0.CO;2 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyGeology Search Advanced Search Abstract Gravity and most seismic interpretations agree that the Sierra Nevada is at present isostatically compensated by a crustal root. The most reasonable timing for emplacement of the root was during Mesozoic batholithic intrusions. This is difficult to reconcile with the evidence that major uplift of the mountains occurred in the past 10 m.y. A simple quantitative model for flexural isostasy of an elastic plate before and after breaking resolves this problem and explains the tilt of the Sierra Nevada block and variations in topography along the range. We postulate that cooling and elastic strengthening of the Mesozoic magmatic arc prevented its reaching local isostatic equilibrium during erosion in the Cenozoic. Thus, an overcompensated residual mountain range was held down elastically until Basin and Range extension broke the elastic plate along the Owens Valley and allowed rapid uplift. The Moho density contrast that best models the amplitude of both late Cenozoic uplift and prior topography is slightly larger than seismic and gravity models suggest; this implies that up to 20% of the uplift may be driven by density contrasts in the upper mantle. The idea of overcompensated erosional remnants and their release upon lithospheric faulting has a more general application to “anorogenic” uplift of mountain blocks. This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access. First Page Preview Close Modal You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.