Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Geosphere Email Content Delivery
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Geosphere; February 2008; v. 4; no. 1; p. 75-106; DOI: 10.1130/GES00116.1
© Geological Society of America
Right arrow Help viewing high resolution images
Right arrow Return to article
Click on image to view larger version.


Figure 20


Figure 20. Cartoon model showing evolution of the Caetano caldera. Sections are ~N-S through the center of the caldera. No vertical exaggeration. (A) ca. 34 Ma shortly before caldera formation. Caldera site underlain by irregular erosional surface on Paleozoic rocks locally cut by Tertiary paleovalleys, partly filled with gravels and andesite lava flows. (B) 33.8 Ma following eruption of the thick lower unit of Caetano Tuff, caldera collapse with megabreccia blocks and meso-breccia lenses shed into the caldera, and eruption of the much thinner upper unit of Caetano Tuff. Caldera collapse was significantly greater in the eastern part of the caldera than in the western part. (C) 33.7 Ma following intrusion of the Carico Lake and Redrock Canyon plutons, resurgent doming around Carico Lake pluton, shedding of breccias off the resurgent dome, circulation of hydrothermal fluids and extensive hydrothermal alteration in western part of caldera probably related to the Redrock Canyon intrusion, and emplacement of small, ring-fracture intrusion; (D) 25.3 Ma following a long period of deposition of sediments and distal outflow tuffs (mostly Bates Mountain Tuffs) in caldera depression. Early sediments may have been lacustrine and deposited in a moat around the resurgent dome. Later sediments are mostly fluvial.





Right arrow Return to article


JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by Geological Society of America