Differential evolution of marginal basin fault: A case from numerical simulation of Pingbei Slope, Xihu Sag
-
摘要:
东海陆架盆地中生代以来的成盆过程中，发育了大量陆倾控盆断裂，其发育模式与形成演化与东亚其他边缘海盆地差异明显。前人关注东海陆架盆地迁移特征，而忽略了断层差异演化的形成机制，对断层发育过程控制因素缺少深入研究。西湖凹陷平北斜坡带北部为海倾断层组成的断阶区，南部为陆倾断层组成的半地堑区，断裂差异演化指示着东海陆架盆地的成盆过程。本文通过离散元数值模拟，模拟陆倾和海倾断层的形成及演化，以探讨断层几何发育特征的控制因素。结果表明，岩性差异对斜坡带断层演化有较大影响，较高抗剪强度岩层破裂易产生陆倾控盆断裂，而低抗剪强度岩石则易形成向海倾断层。应力作用方向是区域差异演化的重要控制因素，岩石强度相同，应力作用方向相反时，断层倾向相反。盆地形成过程中发育众多凹陷斜坡，但坡度不是断层差异演化的主导因素。平北斜坡带和边缘海盆地的差异演化可能是由基底强度差异或应力方向差异导致的。本文利用离散元数值模拟平北斜坡带断裂差异演化过程，为东海盆地构造演化机制及边缘海盆地的形成提供了思路和理论依据。
Abstract:In the East China Sea shelf basin, massive landward-dipping boundary faults were developed since the basin was born in the Mesozoic. Its structural geometry and tectonic process differ from those of other East Asian marginal basins. Previous studies focused on mainly tectonic migration of the East China Sea shelf basin, but differential evolution mechanism and its controlling factors in fault geometry were generally neglected. The northern part of the Pingbei Slope is the fault terrace zone formed by seaward-dipping normal faults, while the southern part is half-grabens controlled by landward-dipping normal faults. Differential evolution of faults in this region reflects the overall formation of the entire basin. To clarify the controlling factors, we investigated the development of landward-dipping and seaward-dipping faults by discrete element modeling. Results show that lithological differences affected the fault development. The landward-dipping normal faults tended to develop in the context of high-strength rocks, while seaward-dipping normal faults usually formed in the region of low strength. The stress orientation was another important factor for regional differential evolution, giving rise to faults development in opposite dipping. Although many slopes were developed during the formation of marginal basins, the topographic slope alone were not able to dominate the fault differential evolution. The differential evolution of the Pingbei Slope and the marginal basins might be controlled by the bedrock strength and geostress orientation. This study provided an insight and theory basis for understanding the mechanism of differential evolution in marginal basins.
-
Keywords:
- fault differential evolution /
- discrete element method /
- marginal basins /
- Xihu Sag /
- Pingbei Slope
-
海底多金属硫化物矿床蕴藏着丰富的Cu、Zn、Fe、Co、Au、Ag等金属，是未来可供人类开发利用的重要资源[1-2]。根据Hannington等[3]的估算，现代海底热液作用形成的多金属硫化物矿床储量可达6×108 t。在水深1 500～5 000 m的各类构造环境中均有发现多金属硫化物矿床[4-5]。前人通过矿物学、岩石学以及地球化学等方面的研究[6-8]，对海底多金属硫化物矿床中的矿物结构、组合以及化学组成特征有了较为详细的认识。近年来海底多金属硫化物矿床中的贵金属Au和Ag的赋存形式和沉淀机制一直被广泛关注[9-10]。前人对海底多金属硫化物中Au和Ag的研究表明，在富铜和富锌的矿石中均可以含有较高的Au含量，而Ag主要在富锌的矿石中富集[11]。此外，洋中脊环境中超基性岩赋存的多金属硫化物矿床中的Au平均含量为2.63×10−6（n=11），高于玄武岩赋存的多金属硫化物中的0.89×10−6（n=47），但是超基性岩赋存的多金属硫化物矿床中的Ag含量为30.4×10−6（n=11），低于玄武岩赋存的多金属硫化物中的60.6×10−6（n
=48）[10-13]。这些统计结果表明，在海底热液中Au和Ag两种元素可能有着不同的地球化学行为和沉淀机制。Ye等[9]曾对西南印度洋龙旂热液区中的Au进行研究，得知该区域的Au主要是以AuHS0的形式存在的。杨铭等[14]对卡尔斯伯格脊天休热液区的研究表明，高温、强还原性条件下，Au以AuCl2−的形式迁移并且发生沉淀。相比于Au，前人对大洋中脊热液区中银的成矿作用研究相对较少，因此开展大洋中脊热液区银成矿作用研究具有重要的理论和经济意义。 在全球大洋中脊系统中，不同扩张速率的洋中脊均发育有热液喷口[15-16]。相对于慢速和超慢速扩张洋中脊，中速和快速扩张洋中脊由于其频繁的火山和构造活动导致热液区发育程度低，金属资源量低[17]，但是中速扩张洋中脊中的Edmond热液区Ag含量为47×10−6，明显高于洋中脊环境产出的多金属硫化物中的平均Ag含量（2.78×10−6）[10]。前人对Edmond热液区的研究主要聚焦于闪锌矿中Ag的赋存形式以及闪锌矿与银矿化之间的关系[18-19]，我们的研究发现Edmond热液区黄铁矿中也可以含有大量的自然银包体，因此，本文主要聚焦于黄铁矿和自然银之间的关系。通过对Edmond热液区矿物结构、组合以及黄铁矿中银赋存形式的详细研究，探讨Edmond热液区中银元素的富集和沉淀机制，这对揭示大洋中脊环境下热液区银矿化作用具有重要意义。
1. 地质背景
印度洋中脊呈“入”字形展布，根据扩张速率与洋盆演化过程可以分为西南印度洋中脊（SWIR）、中印度洋中脊（CIR）和东南印度洋中脊（SEIR）3段（图1），其中SEIR的扩张速率最快，CIR的扩张速率次之，SWIR的扩张速率最慢[20-21]。中印度洋中脊南起罗德里格斯三联点，北止于2°N附近，与卡尔斯伯格洋中脊相连，长约4 000 km，扩张速率约为47.5 mm/a，属于中速扩张洋中脊[22]。中印度洋中脊广泛发育轴部中央裂谷，裂谷跨度为5～8 km，整条洋中脊被众多非转换不连续带（NTD）和转换断层切割成若干条洋中脊段[23]。该区域内岩浆活动异常频繁，可见洋中脊玄武岩广泛裸露于洋底[24]。
![]()
Edmond热液区（23°52.68′S、69°35.80′E）位于CIR段S3北端的东裂谷壁上，距相邻山脊轴约6 km，深度范围为3 290～3 320 m。Edmond热液区是中印度洋上最早发现的活动热液系统之一[23, 25]。该热液区总面积约为6 000 m2，除了有块状多金属硫化物堆积体之外，还常见被大量微生物覆盖的橙棕色铁氧化物沉积物，在洼地中积聚几厘米厚，并覆盖在许多硫化物结构和大部分坡积物上[26]。多金属硫化物矿物主要有黄铁矿、闪锌矿、白铁矿和黄铜矿[27]。Edmond热液温度相对较高，喷口测量的热液流体温度最高可达382 °C[26]。前人从Edmond热液喷口收集的所有流体都具有低pH值（平均值为3.2, N=5）、铁含量较高（平均值为12.8 μmol/kg, N=4）和H2S含量较高（平均值为3.6 μmol/kg, N=4）的特征[28-29]。最值得注意的是，由于海水在超临界条件下存在相分离过程，Edmond热液流体的氯离子含量比环境海水高约70%，使其成为迄今为止观察到的大洋中脊热液系统排放的最热卤水，从而导致Fe、Mn、Cu、Zn、Cd等过渡族金属的浓度异常高[28, 30]。
2. 样品及分析方法
本研究的Edmond热液区的样品（编号17A-IR-TVG-12-1、17A-IR-TVG-12-2、17A-IR-TVG-12-3、17A-IR-TVG-13-1、17A-IR-TVG-13-2、17A-IR-TVG-13-3、 17A-IR-TVG-13-4、17A-IR-TVG-13-5）来自中国大洋DY105-17航次，通过电视抓斗采集。通过观察手标本可以发现，Edmond热液区多金属硫化物质地比较致密，孔隙度较低，外观主要呈黄色或灰色，黄色矿物以黄铁矿为主（图2a），灰色矿物以闪锌矿为主（图2b），红褐色则主要是含铁矿物在表生风化作用下被氧化后形成的铁氧化物（图2c）。
![]()
图 2 中印度洋Edmond热液区代表性硫化物样品Figure 2. Typical sulfide samples from the Edmond hydrothermal field in the Central Indian Ocean把研究的样品进行打磨制成标靶和薄片以便于在光学显微镜和扫描电镜下详细观察。光学显微镜、扫描电镜以及能谱分析全部在河海大学海洋科学研究中心实验室内完成，扫描电镜型号为TESCAN MIRA3，工作电压20.0 kV。使用光学显微镜初步观察标靶和薄片，利用反射光识别样品中所含的主要常见矿物，寻找一些特殊的现象（如共生现象、交代现象等），对视域内具有代表性的矿物和特殊现象进行标记并拍照记录。扫描电镜主要是对光学显微镜观察后在薄片和标靶上标记的区域进一步放大观察，同时寻找薄片中是否存在稀有矿物以及贵金属矿物。能谱分析是对在扫描电镜下观察到的未知矿物进行元素半定量分析，从而确定矿物种类。
3. 结果与讨论
3.1 Edmond热液区硫化物的矿物学特征及其反应的流体演化过程
光学显微镜和扫描电镜的观察结果表明，Edmond热液区硫化物样品中所包含的主要矿物有黄铁矿、闪锌矿、黄铜矿和白铁矿，其次还有少量等轴古巴矿、针钠铁矾、重晶石、硬石膏以及自然银等矿物。
根据结构、形态以及矿物组合等特征，可知Edmond热液区硫化物中明显发育两期黄铁矿。一期黄铁矿（Py1）结晶较为松散，发育富含缝隙和孔洞，以细粒状和胶状形态分布（图3a）。因为在热液活动早期，喷口产生的高温热液与较冷海水（约2 °C）接触导致流体温度迅速降低，结晶时间短暂，形成细粒状和胶状黄铁矿，并且此过程伴随着“烟囱体”的产生。“烟囱体”外壁主要由重晶石、硬石膏以及早期结晶的硫化物所组成[31]。重晶石主要呈放射状，硬石膏为长条状（图3b-d）。二期黄铁矿（Py2）通常呈自形—半自形，粒径较大且杂质较少（图3e），形成于热液活动中后期。该时期存在的“烟囱体”阻滞了热液与海水的直接混合，使金属硫化物等矿物有足够的时间沉淀，矿物自形程度较高[32]。自形程度较高的黄铁矿、黄铜矿和闪锌矿等矿物组成了“烟囱体”的内壁。两期黄铁矿除了伴生之外，还可以形成长条状或者椭圆形的包体（图3f-i），Py1通常被Py2所包裹和交代。
![]()
图 3 Edmond热液区黄铁矿和其他矿物显微照片a. 细粒黄铁矿，b-d. 重晶石和硬石膏，e. 自形—半自形黄铁矿，f-i. 两期黄铁矿共生所形成的长条状和椭圆形的包裹体。Py1-一期黄铁矿，Py2-二期黄铁矿，Sp-闪锌矿，Brt-重晶石，Anh-硬石膏。Figure 3. Photomicrograph of minerals in the Edmond hydrothermal fielda: fine-grained pyrite; b-d: barite and anhydrite; e: euhedral-subhedral pyrite; f-i: elongated and elliptical inclusions formed by the symbiosis of two stages of pyrite. Py1: pyrite Ⅰ; Py2: pyrite Ⅱ; Sp: sphalerite; Brt: barite; Anh: anhydrite.Edmond热液区的闪锌矿有细粒和粗粒之分，并且他们多数都与Py1和Py2伴生。细粒闪锌矿主要存在于Py1和Py2的内部孔洞之中（图4a、b），而粗粒闪锌矿可以包裹Py2或者以集合体的形式出现（图4c-f），周围有时可见黄铁矿包裹体，部分黄铁矿包裹体内部可出现针钠铁矾。
![]()
图 4 Edmond热液区黄铜矿和闪锌矿显微照片a、b. 存在于黄铁矿内部的细粒闪锌矿, c-e. 粗粒闪锌矿包裹黄铁矿, f. 黄铜矿集合体，并且出溶等轴古巴矿, g-i. 存在于闪锌矿内部的黄铜矿。Py1-黄铁矿Ⅰ, Py2-黄铁矿Ⅱ, Sp-闪锌矿, Ccp-黄铜矿, Iso-等轴古巴矿, Frt-针钠铁矾。Figure 4. Photomicrograph of chalcopyrite and sphalerite in the Edmond hydrothermal fielda-b: fine sphalerite in pyrite; c-e: coarse sphalerite surrounded by pyrite; f: chalcopyrite aggregate and exsolution texture of isocubanite; g-i: chalcopyrite exists in sphalerite. Py1: pyrite Ⅰ; Py2: pyrite Ⅱ; Sp: sphalerite; Ccp: chalcopyrite; Iso: isocubanite; Frt: ferrinatrite.黄铜矿主要有两种存在形式。第一种是以圆弧状集合体的形式出现（图4g），并且部分集合体呈破碎状。第二种是与闪锌矿共生，以细小晶粒的形式出现在粗粒闪锌矿的内部（图4h、i），表明黄铜矿和粗粒闪锌矿是同期结晶形成。除此之外，黄铜矿普遍出溶等轴古巴矿，出溶体具有明显的网格状结构（图4g），并且与Py2和闪锌矿共生。等轴古巴矿作为一种高温矿物[33]，其可以指示黄铜矿以及共生的矿物形成于高温环境（T＞335 °C）[34]。
白铁矿在Edmond热液区硫化物样品中也是普遍存在的，呈胶状甚至自形—半自形的形态填充于Py1和Py2之间。白铁矿与Py1有明显的边界，并且Py1被白铁矿包裹（图5a、b），表明白铁矿的形成时期晚于Py1。Py2则大多包裹在白铁矿的外部（图5c、d），根据其包裹关系可知，Py2的形成时期晚于白铁矿。根据3种矿物之间的共生关系（图5e、f），可以合理地推断出这些矿物形成的先后顺序为：Py1、白铁矿、Py2。
![]()
图 5 Edmond热液区白铁矿显微照片a、b. 白铁矿包裹在一期黄铁矿的外部，存在明显界限；c、d. 二期黄铁矿包裹白铁矿，存在界限明显；e、f. 两期黄铁矿与白铁矿伴生。Py1-一期黄铁矿，Py2-二期黄铁矿，Mrt-白铁矿。Figure 5. Photomicrograph of marcasite in the Edmond hydrothermal fielda-b: marcasite surrounded by pyrite Ⅰ with a clear boundary; c-d: pyrite Ⅱ surrounded by marcasite with a clear boundary; e-f: two stages of pyrite and marcasite symbiosis. Py1: pyrite Ⅰ; Py2: pyrite Ⅱ; Mrt: marcasite.通过扫描电镜还可以观察到亮白色的自然银颗粒，其形状类似且粒径较小（图6）。大多数自然银颗粒位于Py1的边缘位置（图6a-c、f），部分自然银颗粒赋存于Py1的缝隙之中（图6d-g），少量自然银颗粒存在于Py2的包体矿物中（图6h、i）。根据自然银的晶体形态以及矿物共生组合关系可知，其形成时期应晚于Py1。
![]()
图 6 Edmond热液区自然银显微照片a-c、f. 存在于黄铁矿和其他矿物之间的自然银颗粒，d、e、g. 存在于一期黄铁矿缝隙的自然银颗粒，h、i. 存在于黄铁矿内部缝隙中的自然银颗粒。Py1-一期黄铁矿，Py2-二期黄铁矿，Ag-自然银，Frt-针钠铁矾。Figure 6. Photomicrograph of native silver in the Edmond hydrothermal fielda-c and f: native silver particles in-between pyrite and other minerals; d-e and g: native silver particles present in the crevices of pyrite Ⅰ; h-i: native silver particles present within internal crevices of pyrite. Py1: pyrite Ⅰ; Py2- pyrite Ⅱ; Ag: native silver; Frt: ferrinatrite.根据上述的矿物学特征以及共生关系，可将Edmond热液区硫化物成矿过程大致分为3个阶段（图7）：第一阶段为早期低温环境矿物迅速结晶阶段，热液与海水的混合导致温度迅速降低，主要的结晶组合为Py1、重晶石、硬石膏、细粒闪锌矿等；第二阶段为中低温环境成矿阶段，此阶段为热液活动早期和晚期的过渡阶段，主要有白铁矿的结晶和交代；第三阶段为晚期中高温成矿阶段，“黑烟囱”的存在阻隔了热液与海水的直接混合，使得矿物有足够的时间结晶，自形程度较高，此阶段有Py2、黄铜矿、粗粒闪锌矿、等轴古巴矿等矿物结晶，并且具有明显的共生关系。
![]()
图 7 Edmond热液区矿物生成顺序及成矿阶段Figure 7. The mineralization sequence of hydrothermal sulfide in the Edmond field3.2 Ag的迁移形式和沉淀机制
通过对Edmond热液区硫化物的矿物学特征进行研究，探明了该热液区硫化物的成矿顺序以及流体演化过程，并且在黄铁矿的周围发现了自然银颗粒。根据前人对热液流体中金属元素的研究，结合Edmond热液区流体演化过程，可以探究该热液区Ag的迁移形式和沉淀机制。
金属元素在热液流体中的迁移和沉淀是一个非常复杂的物理化学综合过程。根据前人的研究可知，热液流体中的贵金属主要以络合物的形式存在，其络合物的种类取决于外界物理化学条件的变化，包括温度、pH、压力以及流体成分等[35-37]。在热液流体中可以与Ag形成络合物的配体主要有HS−和Cl−，存在形式包括AgHS0、Ag(HS)2−和AgCl2− [38-39]。在碱性、中高温及以上（200～500 ℃）的热液流体中，占主导作用的络合物为Ag(HS)2− [18, 38-39]。在酸性至近中性、低氯化物浓度和中低温热液流体中，Ag的主要络合物形式为AgHS0 [38-40]。在酸性、弱酸性、中高温及以上（200～500 ℃）的热液流体中，AgCl2−是占主导作用的络合物，其反应方程式如下[18, 38]：
$$\rm Ag(s) + 2 Cl^- + H^+ + 1/4 O_{2} = AgCl_{2}^- + 1/2 H_{2}O $$ (1) 前人的研究表明，Edmond热液区的热液温度较高，最高达382℃，pH为酸性[24, 26]，所以该热液区Ag的存在形式为AgCl2−，形成过程如反应式(1)所示。根据反应式(1)可知，促进Ag沉淀的因素有Cl-浓度降低，pH值升高以及氧逸度降低。由于Edmond热液流体中Cl−含量显著高于环境海水[28, 30]，当高温热液与海水混合时Cl−浓度会大幅度降低，从而促进了热液流体中Ag沉淀。混合作用也会导致H+浓度降低，pH值升高，对Ag的沉淀起到促进作用。除此之外，混合作用会导致温度的迅速降低，AgCl2−的溶解度随着温度的降低而减小[39]。根据前人的研究可知[41-42]，海底热液中可用配体（HS−和Cl−）的浓度几乎都超过了形成稳定的Ag络合物所需的量，AgCl2−在热液流体中达到了饱和的状态，所以AgCl2−溶解度的减少对Ag的沉淀起到了促进作用。前人对闪锌矿中的Ag研究表明，热液流体中的Ag主要以AgCl2−的形式存在，并且影响其沉淀的因素包括温度、pH以及流体的氧化还原条件，与本文对黄铁矿中Ag的迁移形式与沉淀机制的研究所得结论基本一致[18-19]。
4. 结论
（1）Edmond热液区硫化物主要是闪锌矿、黄铁矿和黄铜矿，黄铜矿出溶等轴古巴矿现象普遍。除此之外，还观察到针钠铁矾、重晶石、硬石膏以及自然银等矿物。自然银粒径较小，主要存在于Py1边缘和缝隙之中。
（2）根据矿物组合和共生关系，Edmond热液区硫化物成矿过程大致可以分为3个阶段：第一阶段的主要矿物结晶组合为Py1、重晶石、硬石膏等；第二阶段主要有白铁矿结晶；第三阶段则有Py2、黄铜矿、粗粒闪锌矿、等轴古巴矿等矿物结晶，并且具有明显的共生关系。
（3）Edmond热液区Ag的主要迁移形式为AgCl2−，促进其沉淀的因素主要是高温热液与海水混合作用导致的Cl−浓度降低、pH值的升高和温度的降低。
致谢：感谢中国大洋17航次全体科考队员和船员的辛勤工作，感谢实验过程中老师和同学的帮助，感谢两名匿名审稿专家提出的宝贵意见。
-
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
图 5 离散元数值模拟的模型边界条件
a：向海方向拉伸，模型1强基底，模型2弱基底；b：模型3强基底，向陆方向拉伸；c：模型4，强基底表面斜坡，右侧地层厚4 km、2 km；d：模型5 强基底，应力作用位置向海方向迁移。韧性变形域：红色，刚性板：蓝色。
Figure 5. Marginal conditions setup of the discrete element numerical simulation
a: Extending toward the sea: Model 1: strong basemen rock; Model 2: weak basement rock; b: Model 3: strong basement rock extending toward the continent; c: Model 4: strong basement rock with topographic slope, 4 km and 2 km thickness of the stratum in the right; d: Model 5: strong basement rock with stress location migrating toward the sea. Deformed region: red; rigid region: blue.
![]()
图 6 模型1构造变形、体积应变及断层断距统计
a, c, e：构造变形；b, d, f：体积应变；g：断距统计。
Figure 6. Structural deformation and volume strain in Model 1
a, c, e: Structural deformation; b, d, f: volume strain; g: fault displacement.
![]()
图 7 模型2构造变形、体积应变及断层断距统计
a, c, e：构造变形；b, d, f：体积应变；g：断距统计。
Figure 7. Structural deformation and volume strain in Model 2
a, c, e: Structural deformation; b, d, f: volume strain; g: fault displacement.
![]()
图 8 模型3构造变形、体积应变及断层断距统计
a, c, e：构造变形；b, d, f：体积应变；g：断距统计。
Figure 8. Structural deformation and volume strain in Model 3
a, c, e: Structural deformation; b, d, f: volume strain; g: fault displacement.
![]()
图 9 模型4构造变形与体积应变
左：构造变形，右：体积应变。 a-b：高差1 km ，c-d：高差3 km。
Figure 9. Structural deformation (left) and volume strain (right) in Model 4
Height difference: 1 km (a, b) or 3 km (c, d).
![]()
图 10 模型5构造变形、体积应变及断层断距统计
a, c, e：构造变形；b, d, f：体积应变；g：断距统计。
Figure 10. Structural deformation and volume strain in Model 5
a, c, e: Structural deformation; b, d, f: volume strain; g: fault displacement.
![]()
![]()
图 12 斜坡带与模型断层断距对比
a：斜坡带南部与模型1断层，断层名称见图4a；b：斜坡带北部与模型2断层，断层名称见图3a。虚线为模型断层，实线为剖面断层。
Figure 12. Comparison between slope belt and fault displacement in Model 1
a: Between the southern area and fault displacement in Model 1 (see Fig.4a for names of the faults); b: between the northern area and fault displacement in Model 2 (see Fig.3a for names of the faults). Dotted line: faults in the models; solid line: faults in slope belt.
表 2 模型粘结参数设置
Table 2 The model parameters
杨氏模量Eb/Pa 剪切模量Gb/Pa 抗拉强度Tb/Pa 剪切强度Cb/Pa 模型1，3，4，5 模型2 模型1，3，4，5 模型2 新生代基底 2.0×108 2.0×108 2.5×107 8.0×106 5.0×107 1.6×107 沉积层 1.0×107 2.0×107 
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] Karig D E. Origin and development of marginal basins in the western Pacific [J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 1971, 76(11): 2542-2561. doi: 10.1029/JB076i011p02542
[2] Xu S M, Ye Q, Li S Z, et al. Sequential patterns in Cenozoic marginal basins of the northwest Pacific [J]. Geological Journal, 2016, 51(S1): 387-415.
[3] 赵淑娟, 李三忠, 索艳慧, 等. 黄海盆地构造特征及形成机制[J]. 地学前缘, 2017, 24(4):239-248 ZHAO Shujuan, LI Sanzhong, SUO Yanhui, et al. Structure and formation mechanism of the Yellow Sea Basin [J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2017, 24(4): 239-248.
[4] Wang R, Shi W Z, Xie X Y, et al. Coupling of strike-slip faulting and lacustrine basin evolution: sequence stratigraphy, structure, and sedimentation in the North Yellow Sea Basin (West Bay basin offshore North Korea), eastern China [J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2020, 120: 104548. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104548
[5] Zhu Y B, Liu S F, Zhang B, et al. Reconstruction of the Cenozoic deformation of the Bohai Bay Basin, North China [J]. Basin Research, 2021, 33(1): 364-381. doi: 10.1111/bre.12470
[6] Sun Z, Zhong Z H, Keep M, et al. 3D analogue modeling of the South China Sea: a discussion on breakup pattern [J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2009, 34(4): 544-556. doi: 10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.09.002
[7] Wang P C, Li S Z, Suo Y H, et al. Structural and kinematic analysis of Cenozoic rift basins in South China Sea: a synthesis [J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2021, 216: 103522. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103522
[8] Zhu W L, Zhong K, Fu X W, et al. The formation and evolution of the East China Sea Shelf Basin: a new view [J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2019, 190: 89-111. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.12.009
[9] 刘金水, 许怀智, 蒋一鸣, 等. 东海盆地中、新生代盆架结构与构造演化[J]. 地质学报, 2020, 94(3):675-691 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0001-5717.2020.03.001 LIU Jinshui, XU Huaizhi, JIANG Yiming, et al. Mesozoic and Cenozoic basin structure and tectonic evolution in the East China Sea basin [J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 2020, 94(3): 675-691. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0001-5717.2020.03.001
[10] Li C F, Xu X, Lin J, et al. Ages and magnetic structures of the South China Sea constrained by deep tow magnetic surveys and IODP Expedition 349 [J]. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 2014, 15(12): 4958-4983. doi: 10.1002/2014GC005567
[11] Dai L M, Li S Z, Lou D, et al. Numerical modeling of Late Miocene tectonic inversion in the Xihu Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin, China [J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2014, 86: 25-37.
[12] Wang P Z, Li S Z, Suo Y H, et al. Plate tectonic control on the formation and tectonic migration of Cenozoic basins in northern margin of the South China Sea [J]. Geoscience Frontiers, 2020, 11(4): 1231-1251. doi: 10.1016/j.gsf.2019.10.009
[13] Anders M H, Schlische R W. Overlapping faults, intrabasin highs, and the growth of normal faults [J]. The Journal of Geology, 1994, 102(2): 165-179. doi: 10.1086/629661
[14] McLeod A E, Dawers N H, Underhill J R. The propagation and linkage of normal faults: insights from the Strathspey–Brent–Statfjord fault array, northern North Sea [J]. Basin Research, 2000, 12(3‐4): 263-284.
[15] Tsuji T, Kawamura K, Kanamatsu T, et al. Extension of continental crust by anelastic deformation during the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake: the role of extensional faulting in the generation of a great tsunami [J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2013, 364: 44-58. doi: 10.1016/j.jpgl.2012.12.038
[16] Clerc C, Ringenbach J C, Jolivet L, et al. Rifted margins: ductile deformation, boudinage, continentward-dipping normal faults and the role of the weak lower crust [J]. Gondwana Research, 2018, 53: 20-40. doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2017.04.030
[17] Peron-Pinvidic G, Manatschal G, Osmundsen P T. Structural comparison of archetypal Atlantic rifted margins: a review of observations and concepts [J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2013, 43: 21-47. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2013.02.002
[18] Zhao Y H, Ren J Y, Pang X, et al. Structural style, formation of low angle normal fault and its controls on the evolution of Baiyun Rift, northern margin of the South China Sea [J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2018, 89: 687-700. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2017.11.001
[19] McClay K R. Extensional fault systems in sedimentary basins: a review of analogue model studies [J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1990, 7(3): 206-233. doi: 10.1016/0264-8172(90)90001-W
[20] Mandl G. Faulting in Brittle Rocks[M]. Berlin: Springer, 1999: 376-406.
[21] Cowie P A, Underhill J R, Behn M D, et al. Spatio-temporal evolution of strain accumulation derived from multi-scale observations of Late Jurassic rifting in the northern North Sea: a critical test of models for lithospheric extension [J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2005, 234(3-4): 401-419. doi: 10.1016/j.jpgl.2005.01.039
[22] Bose S, Mitra S. Controls of listric normal fault styles in the northern Gulf of Mexico: insights from experimental models [J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2012, 35(1): 41-54. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2012.01.012
[23] Deng C, Gawthorpe R L, Finch E, et al. Influence of a pre-existing basement weakness on normal fault growth during oblique extension: insights from discrete element modeling [J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 2017, 105: 44-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jsg.2017.11.005
[24] Bukhari S W H, Li S Z, Liu Z, et al. Deep and surface driving forces that shape the Earth: insights from the evolution of the northern South China sea margin[J]. Gondwana Research, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2022.05.005.
[25] Hardy S, Finch E. Discrete element modelling of the influence of cover strength on basement-involved fault-propagation folding [J]. Tectonophysics, 2006, 415(1-4): 225-238. doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2006.01.002
[26] Morgan J K. Effects of cohesion on the structural and mechanical evolution of fold and thrust belts and contractional wedges: discrete element simulations [J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 2015, 120(5): 3870-3896. doi: 10.1002/2014JB011455
[27] 杨彩虹, 曾广东, 李上卿, 等. 东海西湖凹陷平北地区断裂发育特征与油气聚集[J]. 石油实验地质, 2014, 36(1):64-69,82 doi: 10.11781/sysydz201401064 YANG Caihong, ZENG Guangdong, LI Shangqing, et al. Fault development characteristics and hydrocarbon accumulation in Pingbei area of Xihu Sag, East China Sea [J]. Petroleum Geology and Experiment, 2014, 36(1): 64-69,82. doi: 10.11781/sysydz201401064
[28] 唐贤君, 蒋一鸣, 张建培, 等. 东海盆地西湖凹陷平北区断陷层断裂特征及其对圈闭的控制[J]. 海洋地质前沿, 2019, 35(8):34-43 doi: 10.16028/j.1009-2722.2019.08005 TANG Xianjun, JIANG Yiming, ZHANG Jianpei, et al. Fault characteristic and its control on traps of fault structural layer in the northern Pinghu Slope Belt, Xihu Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin [J]. Marine Geology Frontiers, 2019, 35(8): 34-43. doi: 10.16028/j.1009-2722.2019.08005
[29] 李长圣. 基于离散元的褶皱冲断带构造变形定量分析与模拟[D]. 南京大学博士学位论文, 2019 LI Changsheng. Quantitative analysis and simulation of structural deformation in the fold and thrust belt based on discrete element method[D]. Doctor Dissertation of Nanjing University, 2019.
[30] 江东辉, 蒲仁海, 苏思羽, 等. 断陷盆地斜坡带大型油气田成藏条件: 西湖凹陷平北缓坡断裂与岩性控藏有利区[J]. 天然气工业, 2021, 41(11):33-42 JIANG Donghui, PU Renhai, SU Siyu, et al. Conditions for the formation of large oil and gas reservoirs in the slope belts of rift basins: fault-and lithology-controlled accumulation zones in the Pingbei slope of Xihu Sag [J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2021, 41(11): 33-42.
[31] 李峻颉, 蒋一鸣, 侯国伟, 等. 坡折带对油气圈闭发育的约束效应: 以平湖斜坡带孔雀亭区平湖组为例[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2021, 41(3):141-150 LI Junjie, JIANG Yiming, HOU Guowei, et al. Constraints of slope break belt on oil and gas trapping: an example from the Pinghu Formation in the Kongqueting area of Pinghu Slope [J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2021, 41(3): 141-150.
[32] 蒋一鸣, 邹玮, 刘金水, 等. 东海西湖凹陷中新世末反转背斜构造成因机制: 来自基底结构差异的新认识[J]. 地球科学, 2020, 45(3):968-979 JIANG Yiming, ZOU Wei, LIU Jinshui, et al. Genetic mechanism of inversion anticline structure at the end of Miocene in Xihu Sag, East China Sea: a new understanding of basement structure difference [J]. Earth Science, 2020, 45(3): 968-979.
[33] Dean S L, Morgan J K, Fournier T. Geometries of frontal fold and thrust belts: insights from discrete element simulations [J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 2013, 53: 43-53. doi: 10.1016/j.jsg.2013.05.008
[34] Cundall P A, Strack O D L. A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies [J]. Géotechnique, 1979, 29(1): 47-65.
[35] 崔幸, 王亮亮, 罗洪明, 等. 东海陆架盆地南部中生代盆地性质与演化: 砂箱物理模拟检验[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2017, 37(4):181-192 CUI Xing, WANG Liangliang, LUO Hongming, et al. Sandbox modeling test for Mesozoic basins in southern East China Sea Shelf Basin [J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2017, 37(4): 181-192.
[36] 李长圣, 尹宏伟, 吴珍云, 等. 一种基于离散元的裂谷盆地伸展过程模拟方法: 中国, CN111008472A[P]. 2020-04-14 LI Changsheng, YIN Hongwei, WU Zhenyun, et al. A simulation method for the extension of rift basins based on discrete element: CN, CN111008472A[P]. 2020-04-14.
[37] Hardy S. Coupling a frictional-cohesive cover and a viscous substrate in a discrete element model: first results of application to thick- and thin-skinned extensional tectonics [J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2018, 97: 32-44. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2018.06.026
[38] Vora H B. Shear fracture growth in granular rocks and porosity-permeability relationships in mudstones[D]. Doctor Dissertation of Rice University, 2019.
[39] 张绍亮, 张建培, 唐贤君, 等. 东海西湖凹陷断裂系统几何学特征及其成因机制[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2014, 34(1):87-94 ZHANG Shaoliang, ZHANG Jianpei, TANG Xianjun, et al. Geometry characteristic of the fault system in Xihu sag in East China Sea and its formation mechanism [J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2014, 34(1): 87-94.
[40] 郭太宇. 西湖凹陷平湖构造带三维古地形恢复[D]. 中国海洋大学硕士学位论文, 2015 GUO Taiyu. 3D palaeotopography recovery of Pinghu structural belt in Xihu depression[D]. Master Dissertation of Ocean University of China, 2015.
[41] Clerc C, Jolivet L, Ringenbach J C. Ductile extensional shear zones in the lower crust of a passive margin [J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2015, 431: 1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpgl.2015.08.038
[42] Michon L, Sokoutis D. Interaction between structural inheritance and extension direction during graben and depocentre formation: an experimental approach [J]. Tectonophysics, 2005, 409(1-4): 125-146.
[43] Abe S, van Gent H, Urai J L. DEM simulation of normal faults in cohesive materials [J]. Tectonophysics, 2011, 512(1-4): 12-21. doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2011.09.008
[44] Yin A. Mechanics of wedge-shaped fault blocks: 2. An elastic solution for extensional wedges [J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 1994, 99(B4): 7045-7055. doi: 10.1029/93JB02389
[45] McClay K R, Ellis P G. Geometries of extensional fault systems developed in model experiments [J]. Geology, 1987, 15(4): 341-344. doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1987)15<341:GOEFSD>2.0.CO;2
[46] Childs C, Manzocchi T, Walsh J J, et al. A geometric model of fault zone and fault rock thickness variations [J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 2009, 31(2): 117-127. doi: 10.1016/j.jsg.2008.08.009
[47] Henza A A, Withjack M O, Schlische R W. How do the properties of a pre-existing normal-fault population influence fault development during a subsequent phase of extension? [J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 2011, 33(9): 1312-1324. doi: 10.1016/j.jsg.2011.06.010
[48] Su J B, Zhu W B, Chen J, et al. Cenozoic inversion of the East China Sea Shelf Basin: implications for reconstructing Cenozoic tectonics of eastern China [J]. International Geology Review, 2014, 56(12): 1541-1555. doi: 10.1080/00206814.2014.951004
[49] Liu Z, Dai L M, Li S Z, et al. Earth's surface responses during geodynamic evolution: Numerical insight from the southern East China Sea Continental Shelf Basin, West Pacific [J]. Gondwana Research, 2022, 102: 167-179. doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2020.12.011
[50] Suo Y H, Li S Z, Zhao S J, et al. Continental margin basins in East Asia: tectonic implications of the Meso-Cenozoic East China Sea pull-apart basins [J]. Geological Journal, 2015, 50(2): 139-156. doi: 10.1002/gj.2535
[51] Wang Q, Li S Z, Guo L L, et al. Analogue modelling and mechanism of tectonic inversion of the Xihu Sag, East China Sea Shelf Basin [J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2017, 139: 129-141. doi: 10.1016/j.jseaes.2017.01.026
[52] Wang P C, Suo Y H, Peng G R, et al. Three-stage extension in the Cenozoic Pearl River Mouth Basin triggering onset of the South China Sea spreading[J]. Gondwana Research, 2022, doi: 0.1016/j.gr.2022.05.023.
[53] Cao X Z, Zahirovic S, Li S Z, et al. A deforming plate tectonic model of the South China Block since the Jurassic [J]. Gondwana Research, 2022, 102: 3-16.
[54] Zhu W L, Zhong K, Li Y C, et al. Characteristics of hydrocarbon accumulation and exploration potential of the northern South China Sea deepwater basins [J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2012, 57(24): 3121-3129. doi: 10.1007/s11434-011-4940-y
[55] Qun L. Concept, principle, model and significance of the fault controlling hydrocarbon theory [J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2010, 37(3): 316-324. doi: 10.1016/S1876-3804(10)60035-3
[56] Yang C Q, Sun J, Yang Y Q, et al. Key factors controlling Mesozoic hydrocarbon accumulation in the southern East China Sea basin [J]. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 2020, 118: 104436. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104436
计量
- 文章访问数: 811
- HTML全文浏览量: 274
- PDF下载量: 53
