See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272030289

The Yucatan, a Laurentian or Gondwanan fragment? Geophysical and

palinspastic constraints

Article  in  International Journal of Earth Sciences · July 2013

DOI: 10.1007/s00531-013-0953-x

CITATION

1READS

137

2 authors, including:

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Hidrocarbons structural geology View project

John Keppie

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

261 PUBLICATIONS   7,088 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by John Keppie on 14 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ORIGINAL PAPER

The Yucatan, a Laurentian or Gondwanan fragment?Geophysical and palinspastic constraints

D. Fraser Keppie • J. Duncan Keppie

Received: 15 December 2012 / Accepted: 7 August 2013

� Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Abstract Current reconstructions suggest that the Yuca-

tan block has Gondwanan provenance and orient the

Yucatan E–W in the Ouachita embayment where it over-

laps southern Laurentia and Florida. Alternatively, if the

Yucatan is oriented NE–SW, it fits neatly into the Ouachita

embayment with minimal overlap. Furthermore, many of

the V-shaped, magnetic anomalies in the Yucatan that are

discordant in the E–W reconstruction can be traced across

the Yucatan–Laurentian boundary in the NE–SW recon-

struction: (a) NW-trending anomalies continue into south-

ern Laurentia where they are associated with Cambrian

mafic rocks in the southern Oklahoma and Reelfoot rifts

and (b) NE-trending anomalies in the eastern Yucatan are

parallel to those over Grenvillian rocks in the western

Appalachians. Furthermore, Silurian plutons in the Maya

Mountains of Belize that have no counterpart in Texas may

be correlated with the Concord–Salisbury plutons in Car-

olinia, a terrane of Gondwanan provenance in the southern

Appalachians. Nd isotopic data from the Chicxulub ejecta

in the northern Yucatan block are similar to those in the

Llano Grenvillian rocks and differ from those in Oaxaquia.

These correlations suggest that much of the Yucatan is of

Laurentian provenance and implies that the Laurentia–

Gondwana suture crosses the Yucatan west of the Maya

Mountains. In this scenario, the Ouachita embayment

results from the formation of the Gulf of Mexico during the

breakup of Pangea, rather than the Cambrian removal of

the Argentine Cuyania terrane. Cambrian (515 Ma)

paleomagnetic and faunal data are consistent with Cuyania

forming either east of the Yucatan or off eastern Laurentia.

Keywords Yucatan � Laurentia � Gondwana �Pangea � Magnetics

Introduction

The Yucatan block of northeastern Mexico and surround-

ing platform has traditionally been regarded as of Gon-

dwanan provenance accreted to the southern margin of

Laurentia in the Ouachita embayment during the Carbon-

iferous–Permian assembly of Pangea (e.g., Carey 1958;

Pindell and Dewey 1982; Sedlock et al. 1993; Dalziel

1997; Dickinson and Lawton 2001). Recent analyses of

seafloor spreading in the Atlantic Ocean have resulted in

more limited space for the Yucatan block between North

and South America (Torsvik et al. 2008; Labails et al.

2010). This requires a tighter fit of the Yucatan within the

Ouachita embayment suggesting that some or all of the

Yucatan may be Laurentian. These two alternatives may be

tested by comparing the geology and geophysical data

(Fig. 1). Thus, if the Yucatan is Gondwanan and of African

origin, there should be no pre-Permian connections. On the

other hand, if the Yucatan is partly Laurentian, then pre-

Pangean connections should be present. Unfortunately, the

pre-Permian rocks are largely obscured by the uncon-

formably overlying Mesozoic and Cenozoic rocks in the

Yucatan and adjacent parts of southern Laurentia, Florida,

and Mexico, so only the subsurface geological record and

geophysical data are available for this test.

D. F. Keppie (&)

Department of Natural Resources, 1701 Hollis St.,

Halifax, NS B3J 2T9, Canada

e-mail: fkeppie@tectonics.ca

J. D. Keppie

Departamento de Geologia Regional, Instituto de Geologia,

Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico,

04510 Mexico D.F., Mexico

123

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

DOI 10.1007/s00531-013-0953-x

Different orientations for the Yucatan in Pangean

reconstructions have been proposed (e.g., Carey 1958;

Bullard et al. 1965; Pindell and Dewey 1982; Buffler and

Sawyer 1985; Ross and Scotese 1988; Seton et al. 2012;

Keppie and Keppie 2012). Thus, Seton et al. (2012) rotate

the Yucatan block anticlockwise by 40�–50� into an E–W

orientation, which results in considerable overlap with

southern Laurentia and southern Florida (Fig. 2a). Such

overlap is minimized in the reconstruction of Keppie and

Keppie (2012), who orient the Yucatan block NE–SW after

a combination of both clockwise and anticlockwise rota-

tions that approximately cancel one another out (Fig. 2b).

This paper evaluates the merits of the two reconstructions

using geometric, geophysical, and geological constraints.

We conclude that a NE–SW-oriented Yucatan best fits the

data and that most of the Yucatan is Laurentian with

southern and eastern margins being of Gondwanan origin.

This has implications for the source of the Argentine Pre-

cordillera (Cuyania), which is generally inferred to have

originated in the Ouachita embayment (e.g., Thomas and

Astini 1996). We reexamine Cuyania and, using paleo-

magnetic and faunal data, propose that it formed a penin-

sula off the eastern margin of Laurentia.

Geological setting

Yucatan Peninsula

The pre-Permian rocks of the Yucatan Peninsula are lar-

gely unconformably overlain by Mesozoic and Cenozoic

rocks. In the southern part of the Yucatan block, the

Fig. 1 Map with free-air gravity anomaly grid of Sandwell and Smith (2009, v. 18.1) showing the blocks used in this paper

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

Guichicovi complex includes metasedimentary rocks and a

ca. 1.24 Ga anorthosite–mangerite–charnockite–granite

(AMCG) suite metamorphosed to granulite facies at ca.

990–975 Ma (Ruiz et al. 1999; Weber and Kohler 1999;

Weber and Hecht 2003). TDM model ages are 1.35–1.63 Ga

for the metaigneous rocks (Weber and Kohler 1999). In the

Chiapas Massif, Weber et al. (2005, 2006) have recorded

Carboniferous sedimentary rocks, Permian orthogneisses,

and plutons with inheritance model ages of 1.4–1.5 Ga. In

the Maya Mountains of eastern Yucatan block, diorite–

granodiorite–granite intruding sedimentary rocks yielded

an intrusive age of 418 ± 4 Ma (upper intercept, U–Pb

zircon data; Steiner and Walker 1996) with an inheritance

age of 1,210 ± 136 Ma (upper intercept, U–Pb zircon data;

Steiner and Walker 1996). These rocks are unconformably

overlain by Lower Devonian–middle Permian shelf clastic,

carbonate, and volcanic rocks displaying folds accompa-

nied by lower greenschist facies metamorphism (Steiner

and Walker 1996; Martens et al. 2010). Detrital zircons

in Devonian and Pennsylvanian–Permian rocks are

predominantly of ca. 1 Ga and Early Devonian age (Mar-

tens et al. 2010). In the northern part of the Yucatan block,

ejecta from the 65.5 Ma Chicxulub impact crater came

from Cretaceous carbonates, Late Paleozoic sedimentary

and volcanic rocks, and Ediacaran–Cambrian, ca. 546 Ma,

volcanic rocks (Vera-Sanchez 2000; Steiner 2005; Martens

et al. 2010). Granitic gneiss clasts yielded a TDM age of

1.2–1.4 Ga (Kettrup et al. 2000), whereas impact melt

rocks have yielded depleted mantle Nd model TDM ages of

ca. 1.06 Ga (Blum et al. 1993) to 1.1–1.2 Ga (Kettrup et al.

2000). U–Pb zircon and titanite ages from Chicxulub in-

tracrater breccias and ejecta have yielded Paleoproterozoic,

Ediacaran–Cambrian, Silurian, and Carboniferous–Perm-

ian dates (Krogh et al. 1993; Kamo and Krogh 1995;

Keppie et al. 2010).

Oaxaquia

The geological history of Oaxaquia has recently been

summarized by Keppie and Ortega-Gutierrez (2009), and

Fig. 2 Alternative Middle American reconstructions of Pangea: a after Seton et al. (2012); and b after Keppie and Keppie (2012)

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

so only an outline is presented here. Oaxaquia (ss.) is

limited to the N–S backbone of Mexico, and their geo-

logical record consists of the following: (1) ca.

1,300–1,200 Ma juvenile arc–backarc magmatism and

deposition of sediments; (2) ca. 1,160–1,100 Ma intrusion

of syenite, granite, and anorthosite terminated with mig-

matization; (3) intrusion of a ca. 1,035–1,010 Ma anor-

thosite–gabbro–charnockite–granite (AMCG) suite; (4) a

1,000–980 Ma granulite facies tectonothermal event; (5)

gradual exhumation at 750 and/or 545 Ma; (6) deposition

of uppermost Cambrian and Silurian platform rocks con-

taining Gondwanan fauna; and (7) deposition of Carbon-

iferous sedimentary rocks containing a Mid-Continent

(USA) fauna (Navarro-Santillan et al. 2002).

Ouachita Orogen (southern Laurentia)

Mosher et al. (2008) have summarized the Precambrian

evolution of the Grenvillian Orogen in southern Laurentia,

whereas Thomas (2011) has provided a recent synthesis of

the Ouachita Orogen, and so only a brief summary is pre-

sented here. The geological history involved the following:

(1) ca. 1,370–1247 Ma formation of magmatic protoliths,

both volcanic and plutonic; (2) ca. 1,150–1,120 Ma high-,

medium-, and low-pressure tectonothermal events; (3) ca.

1,090 Ma intrusion of plutons; (4) 540–530 Ma rift-related

volcanism and plutonism; (5) Cambrian–Devonian devel-

opment of a rift-passive margin sequence; and (6) Missis-

sippian deposition of foreland basin deposits associated

with Carboniferous–Permian deformation attributed to the

Ouachita orogenesis. The Wichita, [10 km thick, bimodal

igneous province consisting of layered mafic complex,

gabbro, granite, and rhyolite dated at 535–530 Ma occur in

the Southern Oklahoma rift zone (Hanson et al. 2011).

Southern Appalachians

Recent syntheses of the southern Appalachians divide it

into a number of pre-Silurian, NE-trending terranes of

either Laurentian and Gondwanan provenances that are

separated along the central Piedmont suture (Hatcher et al.

2004; Hatcher 2005; Hibbard et al. 2006, 2010). These

syntheses are only briefly summarized here. Terranes of

Laurentian affinity consist of a ca. 1.0–1.2 Ga Grenvillian

basement unconformably overlain by the following: (1)

Ediacaran–Lower Cambrian, bimodal, rift-related volcanic

rocks; (2) Cambrian–Ordovician rift-passive margin sedi-

mentary rocks; (3) Ordovician arc-related rocks that were

accreted to the Laurentian margin during the Taconian

Orogeny associated with the deposition of foreland basin

deposits. At ca. 460 Ma, accretion of Carolinia along the

central Piedmont suture occurred. Carolinia consists of

Ediacaran arc-related rocks overlain by rare Cambrian–

Ordovician sedimentary rocks containing Gondwanan

fauna. Accretion was followed by deposition of an overstep

sequence (Cat Square: Dennis 2007) and intrusion of the

ca. 421–415 Ma, Concord and Salisbury plutonic suites

into western Carolinia.

Carolinia wedges out southward against the WNW-

trending, dextral, ca. 300 Ma Suwannee–Wiggins suture

that juxtaposes the Suwannee terrane (Steltenpohl et al.

2008). The Suwannee terrane consists of a Mesoprotero-

zoic basement overlain by Ediacaran–Cambrian volcanic

rocks, and an Ordovician–Devonian platformal sequence

(Hatcher 2005; Hibbard et al. 2010). The Upper Ordovician

rocks contain Gondwanan palynomorphs (Cramer 1974).

Reconstructions

Methods

The limited exposure of pre-Permian rocks in and sur-

rounding the Yucatan Peninsula necessitates the use of

geophysics to identify the locations and trends of potential

Paleozoic and Precambrian correlatives. In this study, we

use the free-air gravity anomaly grid of Sandwell (v. 18.1)

to identify the outlines of main blocks of continental lith-

osphere in the Middle American region that are to be

reconstructed (Fig. 1). We have digitized block boundaries

by hand and have not implemented any rigorous methods

to constrain block boundaries for two reasons. First, we are

principally concerned with evaluating the accuracy of plate

tectonic models of Middle America, rather than their pre-

cision. For this question, the application of precise methods

of block boundary identification is premature. Second, in

order to assess the possibility of geophysical and/or geo-

logical correlations between blocks at ca. 200 Ma, we

reconstruct geological and geophysical raster datasets in

Pangean reconstructions that have been clipped along

block boundaries that are slightly larger than may strictly

be the case in order to minimize the exclusion of raster

data based on incorrect assumptions regarding block

boundaries.

Our plate polygon model includes three major blocks for

North America, Northwest Africa, and Amazonia corre-

sponding to the North America–Africa–South America

plate circuit introduced by Torsvik et al. (2008). Our

polygons include the Baja California, North Mexico,

Central Mexico, South Mexico, and Jocotan blocks for the

western Mexican region; Chiapas, North Chiapas, and

Yucatan blocks for eastern Mexico; the Chortis block for

the northwest Caribbean; northern Andes, Maracaibo, and

Bonaire blocks for northwestern South America; and South

Florida and Bahamas Platform blocks for the southeastern

United States. We do not include the Greater and Lesser

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

Antilles and Costa Rica, Panama, and Choco blocks either

because they formed after 200 Ma or lay outside the

Middle American region at this time.

We adopt the global reconstruction of Seton et al. (2012)

as a framework for our reconstructions of the blocks

defined above. Seton et al. (2012) have implemented the

new results of Labails et al. (2010) for the Central Atlantic

rift history and of Torsvik et al. (2008) for the South

Atlantic rift history: Together they provide a unified, new

plate circuit governing the Middle American region. Seton

et al. (2012) generally follow the Middle American tec-

tonic model that derives the Caribbean plate and the

Chortis block from the Pacific (e.g., Ross and Scotese

1988) and were updated with more recent contributions

(e.g., Pindell and Kennan 2009). The alternative Pirate

model for Middle America implements the rotations pro-

posed for western Mexico, the Chortis, Chiapas, and

Yucatan Blocks, in which the Chortis block is derived from

the western Gulf of Mexico (Keppie 2012, 2013; Keppie

and Keppie 2012). Another alternative model for Middle

American tectonics model is the in situ model of Keith

James and others (e.g., James 2005, 2013). However,

quantitative reconstruction poles for this hypothesis are not

in the literature, so specific evaluation of this model is not

undertaken here. Figures illustrating the in situ model

appear to reconstruct the Yucatan block with an orientation

similar to Keppie and Keppie (2012), but in a position

further to the south (James 2005). Debate over the tectonic

history of the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean regions and

proposed paleo-positions for various blocks underscores

the need to evaluate and compare competing aspects of the

different proposals.

Using our plate polygon model and the two rotation

trees, we then produce a series of figures of Pangea at ca.

200 Ma using GMT software (Wessel and Smith 1991) that

reconstructs the plate polygons according to the two

models. In Fig. 2, we only include reconstructions of

polygon outlines, so that the main differences between the

two models can be clearly illustrated and named. In Fig. 3,

we reconstruct modern magnetic data for the Seton et al.

(2012) and Keppie and Keppie (2012) reconstructions,

which are blown up in Fig. 4. This allows us to identify and

compare potential geophysical and geological correlations

and piercing points that can be used to test the two

reconstructions. In Fig. 5, we show the geology by age and

outline potential Precambrian and Paleozoic units that may

have been spatially linked in the past.

Geometric fit

The two 200 Ma reconstructions of the blocks shown in

Fig. 2 are similar for the position of the Yucatan block

(Fig. 2a, b), but differ in their orientations and degree of

overlap. In the Seton et al. (2012) reconstruction (Fig. 2a),

the southern and northern Yucatan blocks overlap Texas

and Florida, respectively, whereas in Fig. 2b, the Yucatan

fits neatly into the Ouachita embayment with minimal

overlap. The two reconstructions also differ for the Chortis

block because they are based on different models for the

origin of the Caribbean plate: (1) in the Pacific model for

the origin of the Caribbean plate, the Chortis block is

placed along the southern coast of Mexico (Seton et al.

2012 based on Ross and Scotese 1988; Pindell and Kennan

2009); and (2) in the Pirate model of Keppie and Keppie

(2012), the Chortis block is placed in the western Gulf of

Mexico, and the subducted forearc off southern Mexico is

resurrected (Keppie et al. 2012). Seton et al. (2012) omit

the Bonaire, Maracaibo, and northern Andean blocks from

their reconstruction probably to avoid overlap with Mex-

ico; however, Mesoproterozoic, Paleozoic, and Jurassic

rocks occur in these blocks (Ayala et al. 2012). Moving

Mexico westward along the Mojave–Sonora megashear

obviates overlap between the Maracaibo and northern

Andean blocks. On the other hand, the Bonaire block

would overlap adjacent Middle American blocks in either

reconstruction (Fig. 2a, b).

Magnetic data

The magnetic data in the Yucatan show a V-shaped pattern

with the apex lying in the southeastern corner. When

plotted on Fig. 2a, they show no correspondence, which is

what one might expect if it accreted during the Carbonif-

erous–Permian. On the other hand, in Fig. 2b, both trends

of the V-shaped, Yucatan pattern are similar to those in

southern Laurentia and appear to transect the Yucatan–

Laurentian boundary. Potential correlatives have been

labeled in Fig. 4a; however, the most prominent anomalies

that traverse the Yucatan–Laurentia boundary are as fol-

lows: (1) the WNW-trending, linear MY1 anomaly in the

Yucatan and Wichita gravity and magnetic highs and lows

(ML2); (2) the NE-trending, linear MY3 anomaly in the

Yucatan and the Reelfoot (Mississippi Valley graben) high

and magnetic low anomalies (ML4); and (3) the NE-

trending, linear MY4 anomaly in the eastern Yucatan

appear to continue into southern Laurentia as the ML6

anomalies. The Wichita high anomalies coincide with

Cambrian Wichita rift-related igneous (Hanson et al.

2011). On the other hand, the Chicxulub breccias in the

northern Yucatan containing ca. 546 Ma igneous clasts

(Keppie et al. 2010) may continue into the Reelfoot rift

(ML4), where associated gravity highs have been inter-

preted as due to Cambrian mafic intrusions (Ervin and

McGinnis 1975). The Reelfoot rift was reactivated and

intruded in the Mesozoic and is still active today (Csontos

et al. 2008). The basement beneath the potential

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

continuation of the Reelfoot rift into the Yucatan block is

covered by Mesozoic–Cenozoic rocks. The magnetic

anomalies in the eastern half of the Yucatan block (MY4)

appear to continue in southern Laurentia where the highs

correspond to Grenvillian mafic rocks in the Blue Ridge

(Hatcher et al. 2004; Hatcher 2005).

The magnetic high in Belize lies over the 220–210 Ma,

Silurian–Devonian plutons in the Maya Mountains (out-

lined by black lines in Fig. 5: Steiner and Walker 1996):

No such Silurian–Devonian plutons have been recorded in

the Texas craton. The Belize magnetic high is truncated by

the Yucatan coastline, but may reappear in the western

Florida block and the southern Appalachians (ML7 in

Fig. 4). The only, ubiquitous, Silurian–Devonian intrusions

in the southern Appalachians are the Concord–Salisbury

plutons, which are intruded into the western part of Caro-

linia (ML7 in Fig. 4: Hibbard et al. 2010), although a few

small plutons have been recorded in the Cat Square terrane

that oversteps the central Piedmont suture (Dennis 2007).

The magnetic anomalies in the Suwannee terrane (ML9)

appear to be oblique to the NE-trending anomalies in the

southern Appalachians (ML7 and 8), which is consistent

with its ca. 300 Ma accretion and terrane maps (Hatcher

2005). The blotchy magnetic pattern south of the Bruns-

wick anomaly is similar to that in the displaced Florida

block (Fig. 4).

Isotopic data

The Nd isotopic data from the Chicxulub are similar to data

from the Llano and west Texas, and shows very little

overlap with Oaxaquia ss. (Fig. 6). This is consistent with

placing the northern Yucatan adjacent to the Llano as part

of the southern Laurentian Grenville (Fig. 2b). On the

other hand, the Guichicovi Nd data straddle across the

Llano, Oaxaquia, and upper part of the southern Appala-

chian basement fields making it difficult to assign the

Guichicovi to either Laurentia or Gondwana (Fisher et al.

2010: Keppie et al. 2010, 2012). Alternatively, the Gui-

chicovi may be an extension of the Chiapas block (Keppie

2012; Keppie and Keppie 2012) and may therefore be of

Gondwanan provenance.

Summary

The outline of the Yucatan block matches the Ouachita

embayment best if it is oriented NE–SW (Fig. 2b: Keppie

and Keppie 2012), because when oriented E–W it overlaps

southern Laurentia in the Lllano region and part of Florida

(Fig. 2a: Seton et al. 2012). Furthermore, in the NE–SW

orientation, magnetic and gravity anomalies appear to cross

from southern Laurentia into the Yucatan, whereas they are

truncated at the boundary in an E–W orientation (Figs. 3,

Fig. 3 Palinspastic maps with an overlay of magnetic data: a after Seton et al. (2012), and b after Keppie and Keppie (2012)

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

4). Two of the anomalies in southern Laurentia coincide

with Cambrian rifts and mafic rocks (southern Oklahoma

and Reelfoot rifts), whereas the anomalies along the eastern

margin of the Yucatan block appears to continue into those

in Grenvillian rocks of southern Laurentia. Silurian–

Devonian igneous rocks in the Maya Mountains of Belize

correlate with similar-aged intrusions of the Concord–

Salisbury plutons in western Carolinia. In addition, Nd

isotopic data from the northern Yucatan (Chicxulub ejecta)

are similar to those from the Llano Grenville rocks in

southern Laurentia. Correlation of these features leads one

to conclude that much of the Yucatan block was part of

Laurentia in the Mesoproterozoic and Lower Paleozoic. If

this is correct, it implies that the Argentine Precordillera

(Cuyania) cannot have been derived from the Ouachita

embayment as it is currently inferred (Astini and Thomas

1999): This is further investigated below. On the other

hand, a correlation of the Maya Mountains with western

Carolinia suggests that the easternmost margin of the

Yucatan was part of Gondwana. Although the data are

equivocal, the Guichicovi complex may also have a Gon-

dwanan provenance. Thus, the Laurentia–Gondwana

boundary appears to curve around and through the southern

part of the Yucatan.

Fig. 4 Blow-up of circum-Gulf of Mexico palinspastic maps with an overlay of magnetic data showing features discussed in the text: a after

Seton et al. (2012), and b after Keppie and Keppie (2012)

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

Argentine Cuyania

Using a combination of faunal and paleomagnetic data,

Thomas and Astini (1996, 1999) have made an elegant case

for derivation of Cuyania from the Ouachita embayment.

Paleomagnetic data for the Lower Cambrian Cerro Tortora

Formation in Cuyania yielded a paleopole at 37�N and

314� longitude with 95 % confidence level of 68, from

which a paleolatitude of ca. 20�S was derived (Rapalini

and Astini 1998): The latest estimate for the age of the

Cerro Tortora Formation is ca. 515 Ma (Rapalini 2012). If

Cuyania is relocated in the Ouachita embayment (Astini

and Thomas 1999), the 515 Ma Cerro Tortora data does not

overlap the 515 Ma pole for Laurentia; however, the 95 %

error circles touch one another (Fig. 7a). On the other hand,

if the 515 Ma Cerro Tortora and Laurentian paleopoles are

superimposed, Cuyania is located off southeastern Laur-

entia (Fig. 7b). In a third alternative, where Cuyania is

placed east of the relocated Yucatan block in the Ouachita

embayment results in 50 % overlap of the 95 % error cir-

cles (Fig. 7c).

The stratigraphic record of Cuyania is as follows: (1)

Lower Cambrian rift sandstones, overlain by (2) Middle

Cambrian–Lower Ordovician, passive margin platformal-

deep water carbonates, and (3) Middle–Upper Ordovician

clastic sedimentary rocks inferred to have been deposited

Fig. 5 Palinspastic maps showing geology: a after Seton et al. (2012), and b after Keppie and Keppie (2012). Stars show locations/trends of

Silurian–Devonian plutons

Fig. 6 Nd isotopic data from the Chicxulub ejecta, Oaxaquia,

Guichicovi Complex, and southern Laurentian Grenville rocks plotted

on eNd versus age (see text for data sources)

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

in either a foreland basin (Thomas and Astini 1996, 2003)

or an extensional, strike-slip, pull-apart basin deposits

(Peralta and Heredia 2005). An anomalous feature of the

Cambrian rocks is the polarity of the facies change that

progresses from inner shelf in the east through outer shelf

to slope in the west (Bornodaro 2003). This observation is

opposite to what would be predicted if the previously

proposed reconstructions of Cuyania in the Gulf of Mexico

during this time are adopted (e.g., Astini and Thomas

1999); in reconstructions which place the western margin

of modern Cuyania against the North American paleo-

margin western Cuyania should record the inner shelf

facies and eastern Cuyania should record the slope and

outer shelf facies. This suggests that Cuyania may have

rotated clockwise through 90� following its separation

from Laurentia but prior to the deposition of the clastic

wedge which records the accretion of Cuyania with the

Argentinian margin of Gondwana.

The Cambrian–Ordovician fauna of Cuyania shows

progressive replacement of Laurentian by endemic and

cosmopolitan fauna (Fig. 8a: Benedetto 1998). If Cuyania

originated in the Ouachita embayment, one would expect

the Cambrian benthic fauna to be identical to those in the

Laurentian passive margin. However, whereas, eleven

genera/subgenera of shallow water, benthic olenellids

occur within the middle and lower upper parts of the

Olenellus zone (Lower Cambrian) of Laurentia, only four

occur in Cuyania and they are represented by endemic

forms at the species level. Although Salterella occurs in

both Cuyania and Laurentia, the olenellid Wanneria and

archaeocyathids are absent in Cuyania, whereas they

commonly occur with Salterella in Laurentia (Fritz and

Yochelson 1988). The numbers of Laurentian trilobite

species in Cuyania decrease to two–three species in the

Middle–Upper Cambrian compared with 117 species in 27

genera in Laurentia (Resser 1938; Lochman-Balk and

Wilson 1958; Vaccari 1994; Bornodaro 2003). A recent

analysis of Ordovician Cuyanian fauna shows the follow-

ing: (a) the dominant Lower–Middle Ordovician endemic

trilobites being gradually replaced by Gondwanan and

Laurentian trilobites in the Middle–Upper Ordovician and

(b) progressive replacement of endemic and Laurentian

brachiopods by Celtic/Baltic and Gondwanan brachiopods

(Fig. 8b: Benedetto 2004). The lower Ordovician bra-

chiopods have been compared with the Toquima–Table

Head Province, a slope facies along the eastern margin of

Laurentia in western Newfoundland (Astini et al. 1995).

The mixed endemic and sparse, Laurentian, Lower

Cambrian, and benthic trilobite fauna in Cuyania compared

with that in Laurentia suggests that although it retained a

tenuous connection with Laurentia, Cuyania had already

begun to separate from Laurentia by the Early Cambrian, as

indicated by the Lower Cambrian rift facies. This led to

transfer of Cuyania to South America during the Ordovi-

cian. The subsequent ca. 300 Ma emplacement of the Su-

wannee terrane may have pushed the Yucatan slightly

westward relative to southern Laurentia, which may explain

the slight offset of the geophysical anomalies (Fig. 3b).

Conclusions

A NE–SW-oriented Yucatan block within the Ouachita

embayment is favored by the geometry, and the congruent

magnetic anomalies between the Yucatan and southern

Laurentia. As most of the magnetic anomalies are either

Cambrian, rift-related, igneous rocks or Grenvillian fea-

tures, most of the Yucatan must have formed part of

southern Laurentia during the Mesoproterzoic–Cambrian.

Nd isotopic data show a close similarity between Texas

Grenville and the Chicxulub breccias in northern Yucatan.

On the other hand, correlation of the Silurian plutons in

Maya Mountains with those in the Concord–Salisbury belt

of western Carolinia accreted during the Ordovician sug-

gests that the eastern margin of the Yucatan had a

(a)

(b)

Fig. 7 Provincial affinity (%) of benthic Cuyanian fauna: a all

(modified from Benedetto 1998); and b trilobites and brachiopods

(data from Benedetto 2004)

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

Gondwanan provenance, as may the Guichicovi complex.

Placing the Yucatan block within the Ouachita embayment

necessitates finding another location for the provenance of

Cuyania. Paleomagnetic and faunal data are consistent with

locating Cuyania along the southeastern margin of either

Laurentia or east of the Yucatan block (Fig. 7b, c).

Acknowledgments We would like to thank Drs. Jim Hibbard and

Victor Ramos for their constructive reviews of the manuscript.

References

Astini RA, Thomas WA (1999) Origin and evolution of the

Precordillera terrane of western Argentina: a drifted Laurentian

orogen. In: Ramos VA, Keppie JD (eds) Laurentia-Gondwana

connections before Pangea, vol 336. Geological Society of

America Special Paper, pp 1–20

Astini RA, Benedetto JL, Vaccari NE (1995) The early Paleozoic

evolution of the Argentine Precordillera as a Laurentian rifted,

drifted, and collided terrane: a geodynamic model. Geol Soc Am

Bull 107:253–273

Ayala RC, Bayona G et al (2012) The paleogene synorogenic

succession in the northwestern Maracaibo block: tracking

intraplate uplifts and changes in sediment delivery systems. J S

Am Earth Sci 39:93–111

Benedetto JL (1998) Early Palaeozoic brachiopods and associated

shelly faunas from western Gondwana: its bearing on the

geodynamic history of the pre-Andean margin. In: Pankhurst RJ,

Rapela CW (eds) The proto-Andean margin of Gondwana. Geol

Soc Lond Spec Publ 142:57–83

Benedetto JL (2004) The allochthony of the Argentine Precordillera

ten years later (1993–2003): a new paleobiogeographic test of

the microcontinental model. Gondwana Res 7(4):1027–1039

Fig. 8 Cambrian, ca. 515 Ma, paleogeographic map with paleopoles

for Cuyania and Laurentia showing the Cuyania terrane: a within the

Ouachita embayment as inferred by Astini and Thomas (1999): 95 %

error circle touch but do not overlap; b along the southeastern margin

of Laurentia with coincident 95 % error circle; and c east of the

relocated Yucatan block with some overlap between the 95 % error

circles

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

Blum JD, Chamberlain CP, Hingston MP, Koeberl C, Marin LE,

Schuraytz BC, Sharpton VL (1993) Isotopic comparison of K/T

boundary impact glass with melt rocks from the Chicxulub and

Manson impact structures. Nature 364:325–327

Bornodaro O (2003) Review of the Cambrian stratigraphy of the

Argentine Cuyania. Geologica Acta 1:11–21

Buffler RT, Sawyer DS (1985) Distribution of crust and early history,

Gulf of Mexico basin. Gulf Coast Assoc Geol Soc Trans

35:334–344

Bullard EC, Everett JE, Smith AG (1965) The fit of the continents

around the Atlantic: a symposium on continental drift. Philos

Trans R Soc Lond Ser A 258:41–51

Carey SW (1958) Continental drift, a symposium, Hobart, pp 177–355

Cramer FH (1974) Early Paleozoic palynomorph provinces and

paleoclimate. Soc Econ Palaeo Min Spec Publ 21:177–188

Csontos R, van Arsdale R, Cox R, Waldron B (2008) Reelfoot rift and

its impact on quaternary deformation in the central Mississippi

River valley. Geosphere 4(1):145–158. doi:10.1130/GES00107.1

Dalziel IWD (1997) Neoproterozoic–Paleozoic geography and tec-

tonics: review, hypothesis, environmental speculation. GSA Bull

109:16–42

Dennis AJ (2007) Cat Square basin, Catskill clastic wedge: Silurian-

Devonian orogenic events in the central Appalachians and the

crystalline southern Appalachians. In: Sears JW, Harms TA,

Evenchick CA (eds) Whence the Mountains? Inquiries into the

evolution of orogenic systems: a volume in Honor of Raymond

A. Price. GSA Spec Pap 433:313–329. doi:10.1130/2007.

2433(15)

Dickinson WR, Lawton TF (2001) Carboniferous to Cretaceous

assembly and fragmentation of Mexico. GSA Bull 113:

1142–1160. doi:10.1130/00167606(2001)113\1142:CTCAAF[2.

0.CO;2

Ervin CP, McGinnis LD (1975) Reelfoot rift: reactivated precursor to

the Mississippi embayment. GSA Bull 86:1287–1295. doi:10.

1130/0016-7606(1975)86\1287:RRRPTT[2.0.CO;2

Fritz WH, Yochelson EL (1988) The status of Salterella as a Lower

Cambrian index fossil. Can J Earth Sci 25:403–416

Hanson RE, Puckett RE Jr et al (2011) Voluminous A-type rhyolites

within a major, largely buried Cambrian rift zone in southern

Oklahoma. GSA Abstr Progr 43(5):651

Hatcher RD (2005) Non-survey, non-digital completed geologic maps

in file drawers and theses: how can they be transformed into

useful available digital geo-spatial data? USGS Open File

2005-1428

Hatcher RD Jr, Bream BR, Miller CF, Eckhert JO Jr, Fullagar PD,

Carrigan CW (2004) Paleozoic structure of internal massifs,

southern Appalachian Blue Ridge, incorporating new geochro-

nologic, Nd and Sr isotopic, and geochemical data. In: Tollo RP,

Corriveau L, McLelland J, Batholomew MJ (eds) Proterozoic

tectonic evolution of the Grenville orogen in North America.

Geological Society of America Memoir 197:525–547

Hibbard J, van Staal C, Rankin D, Williams H (2006) Geology,

Lithotectonic Map of the Appalachian Orogen (South), Canada-

United States of America. Geological Survey of Canada,

Map 02096A, scale 1:1500000

Hibbard J, van Stall C, Rankin D (2010) Comparative analysis of the

geological evolution of the northern and southern Appalachian

orogen: late Ordovician–Permian. In: Tollo RP (ed) From

Rodinia to Pangea: the lithotectonic record of the Appalachian

region, vol 206. Geological Society of America Memoir,

pp 51–69

James KH (2005) A simple synthesis of Caribbean geology.

Transactions of the 16th Caribbean Geological conference,

Barbados. Caribb J Earth Sci 39(2005):69–82

James KH (2013) Caribbean geology: extended and subsided

continental crust sharing history with eastern North America,

the Gulf of Mexico, the Yucatan Basin, and northern South

America. Geosci Can 40(1). doi:10.12789/geocanj.2013.40.001

Kamo SL, Krogh TE (1995) Chicxulub crater source for shocked

zircon crystals from the Cretaceous–Tertiary boundary layer,

Saskatchewan: evidence from new U–Pb data. Geology

23:281–284

Keppie DF (2012) Derivation of the Chortis and Chiapas blocks from

the western Gulf of Mexico in the latest Cretaceous–Cenozoic:

the Pirate mode. Int Geol Rev l 54:765–775

Keppie, DF (2013) The rationale and essential elements for the new

Pirate model of Caribbean tectonics. Geosci Can 40(1). doi:10.

12789/geocanj.2013.40.002

Keppie DF, Keppie JD (2012) An alternative Pangea reconstruction

for Middle America with the Chortis Block in the Gulf of

Mexico: tectonic implications. Int Geol Rev 54:1685–1696.

doi:10.1080/00206814.2012.676361

Keppie JD, Ortega-Gutierrez F (2009) 1.3–0.9 Ga Oaxaquia (Mex-

ico): remnant of an arc/backarc on the northern margin of

Amazonia. J S Am Earth Sci 29:21–27. doi:10.1016/j.jsames.

2009.07.001

Keppie JD, Norman M, Dostal J, Urrutia-Fucagauchi J, Grajales-

Nishimura M (2010) Study of melt and a clast of 546 Ma

magmatic arc rocks in the 65 Ma Chicxulub bolide breccia,

northern Maya block, Mexico: western limit of Ediacaran arc

peripheral to northern Gondwana. Int Geol Rev 53. doi:10.1080/

00206810903545527

Keppie JD, Murphy JB, Nance RD, Dostal J (2012) Mesoproterozoic

Oaxaquia-type basement in peri-Gondwanan terranes of Mexico,

the Appalachians and Europe: TDM age constraints on extent and

significance. Int Geol Rev 54(3):313–324. doi:10.1080/

00206814.2010.543783

Kettrup B, Deutsch A, Ostermann M, Agrinier P (2000) Chicxulub

impactites: Geochemical clues to the precursor rocks. Meteorites

Planet Sci 35:1229–1238

Krogh TE, Kamo SL, Sharpton B, Marin L, Hildebrand AR (1993) U–

Pb ages of single shocked zircons linking distal K/T ejecta to the

Chicxulub crater. Nature 366:232–236

Labails C, Olivet J, Aslanian D, Roest W (2010) An alternative early

opening scenario for the Central Atlantic Ocean. EPS Lett

279:355–368

Lochman-Balk C, Wilson JL (1958) Cambrian biostratigraphy in

North America. J Paleontol 32(2):312–350

Martens U, Weber B, Valencia V (2010) U/Pb geochronology of

Devonian and older Paleozoic beds in the southeastern Maya

Block, Central America: its affinity with peri-Gondwanan

terranes. GSA Bull 122:815–829

Mosher S, Levine JSF, Carlson WD (2008) Mesoproterozoic plate

tectonics: a collisional model for the Grenville-aged orogenic

belt in the Llano uplift, central Texas. Geology 36:55–58. doi:10.

1130/G24049A.1

Navarro-Santillan D, Sour-Tovar F, Centeno-Garcia E (2002) Lower

Mississippian (Osagean) brachiopods from the Santiago Forma-

tion, Oaxaca, Mexico: stratigraphic and tectonic implications. J S

Am Earth Sci 15:326–327

Peralta SH, Heredia S (2005) Depositos de olistostroma del Devonico

(inferior?-medio?), Formacion Los Sombreros, en la quebrada de

San Isidro, Cuyania de Mendoza, Argentina. XVI Congreso

Geologico Argentino, La Plata, Actas 4:326–331

Pindell JL, Dewey JF (1982) Permo-Triassic reconstruction of western

Pangea and the evolution of the Gulf of Mexico/Caribbean region.

Tectonics 1:179–211. doi:10.1029/TC001i002p00179

Pindell JL, Kennan L (2009) Tectonic evolution of the Gulf of

Mexico, Caribbean and northern South American in a mantle

reference frame: an update. In James KH, Lorente MA, Pindell J

L (eds) The origin and evolution of the Caribbean plate. Geol

Soc Lond Spec Publ 328:1–55. doi:10.1144/SP328

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

Rapalini AE (2012) Paleomagnetic evidence for the origin of the

Argentine Precordillera, fifteen years later: what is new, what

has changed, what is still valid? LatinMag Lett 2(1):1–20, LL12-

0102Rv

Rapalini AE, Astini RA (1998) Paleomagnetic confirmation of the

Laurentian orogen of the Argentine Precordillera. Earth Planet

Sci Lett 155:1–14

Resser CE (1938) Cambrian system (restricted) of the Southern

Appalachians. Geological Society of American Special Paper 15,

140 pp

Ross MI, Scotese CE (1988) A hierarchical model of the Gulf of

Mexico and Caribbean region. Tectonophysics 155:139–168

Ruiz J, Tosdal RM, Restrepo PA, Marillo-Muneton G (1999) Pb isotope

evidence for Colombia-southern Mexico connections in the

Proterozoic. In: Ramos VA, Keppie JD (eds) Laurentia–Gondwana

connections before Pangea. GSA Spec Pap 336:183–198

Sandwell DT, Smith WHF (2009) Global marine gravity from

retracked Geosat and ERS-1 altimetry: ridge segmentation

versus spreading rate. J Geophys Res 114:B01411. doi:10.

1029/2008JB006008

Sedlock RL, Ortega-Gutierrez F, Speed RC (1993) Tectonostrati-

graphic terranes and tectonic evolution of Mexico. GSA Special

Paper 278, 153 pp

Seton M, Muller RD et al (2012) Global continental and ocean basin

reconstructions since 200 Ma. Earth Sci Rev 113:212–270

Steiner MB (2005) Pangean reconstruction of the Yucatan Block: its

Permian, Triassic, and Jurassic geologic and tectonic history. In:

Anderson TH, Nourse JA, McKee JW, Steiner MB (eds) The

Mojave–Sonora megashear hypothesis: development, assess-

ment, and alternatives, vol 393. Geological Society of America

Special Paper, Boulder, Colorado, pp 457–480. doi:10.1130/

2005.2393(17)

Steiner MB, Walker JD (1996) Late Silurian U–Pb ages from the

Yucatan Block. J Geophys Res 101:17727–17735

Steltenpohl M, Mueller P, Heatherington A, Hanley T (2008)

Gondwanan/Peri-Gondwanan origin for the Uchee terrane,

Alabama and West Georgia: Carolina zone or Suwannee terrane

(?) and its suture with Grenvillian basement of the Pine

Mountain window. Geosphere 2:131–144

Thomas AT (2011) The Iapetan rifted margin of southern Laurentia.

Geosphere 7(1):97–120. doi:10.1130/GES00574.1

Thomas WA, Astini RA (1996) The Argentine Cuyania: a traveler

from the Ouachita embayment of North American Laurentia.

Science 273:752–757

Thomas WA, Astini RA (1999) Simple-shear conjugate rift margins

of the Argentine Precordillera and the Ouchita embayment of

Laurentia. GSA Bull 111:1069–1079

Thomas WA, Astini RA (2003) Ordovician accretion of the Argentine

Cuyania terrane to Gondwana: a review. J S Am Earth Sci 16:67–79

Torsvik T, Steinberger B, Cocks L, Burke K (2008) Longitude:

linking Earth’s ancient surface to its deep interior. EPS Lett

276:273–282

Vaccari NE (1994) Las faunas de trilobites de las sucesiones

carbonaticas del Cambrico y Ordovıcico temprano de la

Precordillera Septentrional Argentina. Doctoral thesis. Univers-

idad Nacional de Cordoba, Argentina, 271 pp

Vera-Sanchez P (2000) Caracterizacion geoquimica de las unidades

basales del bloque de Yucatan y su afinidad con unidades similares

en el Golfo de Mexico. MSc thesis, Instituto de Geofisica,

Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico, 105 pp

Weber B, Hecht L (2003) Petrology and geochemistry of metaigneous

rocks from a Grenvillian basement fragment in the Maya block:

the Guichicovi complex, Oaxaca, southern Mexico. Precambrian

Res 124:41–67

Weber B, Kohler H (1999) Sm/Nd, Rb/Sr, and U–Pb geochronology

of a Grenville terrane in southern Mexico: origin and geologic

history of the Guichicovi complex. Precambrian Res 96:245–262

Weber B, Cameron KL, Osorio M, Schaaf P (2005) A late Permian

tectonothermal event affected former Grenville crust in the

southern Maya terrane: U–Pb zircon ages from the Chiapas

massif, SE Mexico. Int Geol Rev 47:509–529

Weber B, Schaaf P, Valencia VA, Iriondo A, Ortega-Gutierrez F

(2006) Provenance ages of late Paleozoic sandstones (Santa Rosa

Formation) from the Maya block, SE Mexico. Implications on

the tectonic evolution of western Pangea. Rev Mex Cienc Geol

23(3):262–276

Wessel P, Smith WHF (1991) Free software helps map and display

data. EOS Trans AGU 72:441

Fisher CM, Loewy SL et al (2010) Whole-rock Pb and Sm-Nd

isotopic constraints on the growth of southeastern Laurentia

during Grenvillian orogenesis. GSA Bull 122(10):1646–1659.

doi:10.1130/B30116.1

Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)

123

View publication statsView publication stats