The Cenozoic and Late Cretaceous evolution of the Indian Ocean Basin: uncertainties in the reconstructed positions of the Indian, African and Antarctic plates

• Published in: Basin Research
• Main Authors: Molnar, Peter, Pardo-Casas, Federico, Stock, Joann
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: unknown
• Published: Blackwell Publishing 1988
• Subjects: Antarc*; Antarctic; Antarctica
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.1988.tb00003.x

Reconstructions of the relative positions of the Indian, African, and Antarctic plates and their uncertainties are given for the times of selected magnetic anomalies that could be identified on adjacent pairs of these plates. Among the most certain reconstructions are those for the Antarctic and African plates, which can be determined directly from recently published magnetic anomalies from both sides of the Southwest Indian Ridge. As Patriat and his colleagues reported, there was an important change in direction and a decrease in rate of separation between Africa and Antarctica between the times of anomalies 33 and 20. India moved rapidly away from both Africa and Antarctica in the Late Cretaceous and early Tertiary periods, but slowed markedly near the time of anomaly 20 (≅ 45 Myr). The positions of the Indian plate with respect to the others are poorly constrained between the times of anomaly 5 (≅ 10 Myr) and anomaly 23 (≅ 54 Myr), but using the reconstructions of the African and Antarctic plates, the uncertainties can be reduced. Despite the relatively large uncertainties, the positions of anomalies 5, 6, and 13 on the Antarctic and Indian plates apparently cannot be described by the same parameters that describe the history of separation of Australia and Antarctica. Therefore, Stein and Okal's contention that Australia and India lie on separate plates appears to be valid not only for the present, but for the last 35 Myr. © 1988 Blackwell Publishing. We thank Ph. Patriat for sending us data from his thesis in advance of publication and V. Courtillot and J.-Y. Royer for critical reviews of the manuscript. This research was supported by the National Science Foundation (OCE-8400090). M. Stock was supported during part of this work by a Fannie and John Hertz Foundation Fellowship.