The Scandinavian mountain chain: deep processes (TopoScandiaDeep)

山脉主要形成在会聚或走滑边缘，预计不会在板内环境中形成。然而，在始新世早期发生大陆解体后，东北大西洋周围的许多地方都发生了隆升。在北欧大陆边缘(挪威北部和南部、苏格兰)、格陵兰斯皮茨卑尔根(JAPSEN和CHALMERS，1999；JAPSEN等人，2006年)的大陆边缘发现了几个穹顶状结构。对大陆-海洋转换过程中的隆起的识别导致了一些早期的动力学模型，这些模型将隆起与北大西洋大约60 Ma的裂谷事件直接联系起来(Chery等人，1992；Clip等人，1998)。然而，越来越多的证据表明，许多观测到的隆起是由马来的几个10‘S时代后的裂谷形成的，并且可能发生在几个阶段(贾普森和查尔默斯，1999年；贾普森等人，2006年；罗尔曼和范德比克，1996年)。此外，沿边缘的隆升并不是均匀的(JAPSEN和CHALMERS，1999；Lundin和Dore，2002)，而是集中在离散的穹顶状构造中，这表明裂谷作用和隆起之间不存在简单的一一对应关系。所建议的模型(例如气候强迫、地幔热柱物质在岩石圈之下的侵位，可能与冰岛热点有关、岩浆底侵作用、板内挤压或与隆起的变薄的裂谷本身的挠曲耦合)都没有得到现有数据的坚定支持。为了了解新近系隆升的机制，我们需要知道地形载荷是如何被支撑的，即均衡地、动态地还是挠性地。如果支承是均衡补偿的，那么对应的浮力在哪里？(在地壳、岩石圈还是岩石圈以下的地幔？)在本提案中，我们将集中分析位于斯堪的纳维亚半岛的两个穹顶，即北斯堪的纳维亚山脉和南斯堪的纳维亚山脉。

Mountains form mostly at convergent or strike-slip margins and are not expected to form in intraplate settings. Uplift occurred, however, in various places around the northeast Atlantic after continental break-up took place in the earliest Eocene. Several dome-like structures have been identified along the continental margins in northern Europe (northern and southern Norway, Scotland), Spitzbergen, Greenland (Japsen and Chalmers, 1999; Japsen et al., 2006). Identification of uplift at the continent-ocean transition led to a number of early dynamic models relating the uplift directly to the North Atlantic rifting event at around 60 Ma (Chery et al., 1992; Clift et al., 1998). However, there is a growing body of evidence indicating that much of the observed uplift post-dates rifting by several 10’s of Ma and probably occurred in several stages (Japsen and Chalmers, 1999; Japsen et al., 2006; Rohrmann and van der Beek, 1996). Moreover, the fact that uplift is not uniform along the margins (Japsen and Chalmers, 1999; Lundin and Dore, 2002) but instead is concentrated into discrete dome-like structures suggests that there is no simple 1-to-1 correspondence between rifting and uplift. None of the suggested models (e.g. climatic forcing, emplacement of mantle plume material underneath the lithosphere, possibly in relation to the Icelandic hotspot, magmatic underplating, intraplate compression or flexural coupling to the uplifted, thinned rift itself) has firm support from existing data. In order to understand the mechanisms of Neogene uplift, we need to know how the topographic load is supported, i.e., isostatically, dynamically, or flexurally. If the support is by isostatic compensation, where is the corresponding buoyancy located? (In the crust, lithosphere, or sub-lithospheric mantle?). In this proposal, we will concentrate on analysing the two domes located in Scandinavia, the Northern and Southern Scandinavian mountain ranges (Scandes).