Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr94714

Circum-North Pacific tectonostratigraphic terrane map

Abstract

The companion tectonostratigraphic terrane and overlap assemblage of map the Circum-North Pacific presents a modern description of the major geologic and tectonic units of the region. The map illustrates both the onshore terranes and overlap volcanic assemblages of the region, and the major offshore geologic features. The map is the first collaborative compilation of the geology of the region at a scale of 1:5,000,000 by geologists of the Russian Far East, Japanese, Alaskan, Canadian, and U.S.A. Pacific Northwest. The map is designed to be a source of geologic information for all scientists interested in the region, and is designed to be used for several purposes, including regional tectonic analyses, mineral resource and metallogenic analyses (Nokleberg and others, 1993, 1994a), petroleum analyses, neotectonic analyses, and analyses of seismic hazards and volcanic hazards. This text contains an introduction, tectonic definitions, acknowledgments, descriptions of postaccretion stratified rock units, descriptions and stratigraphic columns for tectonostratigraphic terranes in onshore areas, and references for the companion map (Sheets 1 to 5). This map is the result of extensive geologic mapping and associated tectonic studies in the Russian Far East, Hokkaido Island of Japan, Alaska, the Canadian Cordillera, and the U.S.A. Pacific Northwest in the last few decades. Geologic mapping suggests that most of this region can be interpreted as a collage of fault-bounded tectonostratigraphic terranes that were accreted onto continental margins around the Circum- . orth Pacific mainly during the Mesozoic and Cenozoic (Fujita and ewberry, 1983; 1987; Parfenov, 1984, 1991; Howell, 1985; Watson and Fujita, 1985; Parfenov and Natal'in, 1984; Jones and others. 1987; Monger and Berg, 1987, Fujita and Cook. 1990; Zonenshain and others. 1990; Natal'in, 1991, 1993; Moore and others, 1992; Silberling and others, 1992; Nokleberg and others. 1992, 1993, 1994a; Parfenov and others. 1993; Plaflcer and Berg, 1994; Tabor, 1994). This map is the result of extensive geologic mapping and associated tectonic studies in the Russian Far East, Hokkaido Island of Japan, Alaska, the Canadian Cordillera, and the U.S.A. Pacific Northwest in the last few decades. Geologic mapping suggests that most of this region can be interpreted as a collage of fault-bounded tectonostratigraphic terranes that were accreted onto continental margins around the Circum- . orth Pacific mainly during the Mesozoic and Cenozoic (Fujita and ewberry, 1983; 1987; Parfenov, 1984, 1991; Howell, 1985; Watson and Fujita, 1985; Parfenov and Natal'in, 1984; Jones and others. 1987; Monger and Berg, 1987, Fujita and Cook. 1990; Zonenshain and others. 1990; Natal'in, 1991, 1993; Moore and others, 1992; Silberling and others, 1992; Nokleberg and others. 1992, 1993, 1994a; Parfenov and others. 1993; Plaflcer and Berg, 1994; Tabor, 1994). On the companion map and in the descriptions bel?w· terranes are interpreted according to inferred tectonic environments. These environments are (I) cratonai; (2) passive continental margin; (3) metamorphosed continental margin; (4) continental-margin arc; (5) island arc; (6) oceanic crust, seamount, and ophiolite; (7) accretionary wedge and subduction zone: (8) turbidite basin; and (9) metamorphic for terranes that are too highly-deformed and metamorphosed to de~ermine the original tectonic environment. For terranes with complex geologic histories, the chosen color indicates the tectonic environment most prevalent during this history of the terrane. The tectonic environments inf~rred for igneous rocks are both temporal and genetic. The temporal environments are preaccretion and postaccretion. The genetic environments are subduction-related, rift-related, and collisional (anatectic)- related. In addition to terranes, the map also depicts postaccretion units that include: (I) Cenozoic and Mesozoic overlap assemblages of sedimentary and volcanic rocks that are deposited across two or more terranes that formed generally after accretion of most terranes in the region; (2) Cenozoic and Mesozoic basinal deposits that occur within a terrane or on the craton; (3) plutonic rocks. The postaccretion igneous units are identified by age-lithologic abbreviations and by name. These overlap assemblages and basinal deposits formed mainly during sedimentation and magmatism that occurred after accretion of terranes to each other or to a continental margin. Overlap assemblages provide minimum ages on the timing of accretion of terranes. Some Cenozoic and Mesozoic overlap assemblages and basinal deposits, as well as fragments of terranes, are extensively offset by movement along postaccretion faults. In addition, in onshore areas, the map depicts major preaccretion plutonic rocks that are limited to individual terranes. and in offshore areas. the map depicts major oceanic plates,-ocean floor magnetic lineations. oceanic spreading ridges, and seamounts. The map consists of five sheets. Sheets I and 2 depict, at a scale of I :5.000.000. the tectonostratigraphic terranes. preaccretion plutonic rocks, and postaccretion Cenozoic and Mesozoic overlap sedimentary, volcanic. and plutonic assemblages, and basinal deposits for the Circum- orth Pacific including the Russian Far East, northern Hokkaido Island of Japan, Alaska. the Canadian Cordillera, part of the U.S.A. Pacific Northwest. and adjacent offshore areas. Sheet 3 provides the list of map units for Sheets I and 2. Sheet 4 is a index map showing generalized onshore terranes and overlap assemblages for onshore parts of the Circum-North Pacific at a scale of I: I 0,000,000. Sheet 4 is a guide to the more complicated onshore features depicted on Sheets I and 2. Sheet 5 is an index map showing the major geographic regions for the Circum-North Pacific. Significant differences exist between the representation of onshore and offshore geology on Sheets I and 2. These are: (I) compared to the onshore part of the map, the offshore part is depicted in a more schematic fashion because of more limited data and because the offshore terranes and early Cenozoic and older overlap assemblages generally are obscured by extensive late Cenozoic sedimentary cover that is not shown unless thicker than two kilometers; (2) marginal contacts of offshore Cenozoic and Cretaceous sedimentary basins do not match contacts of onshore Cenozoic and Cretaceous sedimentary units because offshore basins are limited to those regions with sediment thicknesses greater than two kilometers; (3) stratigraphic columns, included at the end of this explanation. are provided only for onshore terranes because the geology of offshore terranes is generally less well-known; and (4) for simplicity, the major onshore Cenozoic sedimentary basins are generally not defined and described separately because the onshore part of the map is designed to emphasize terranes and overlap volcanic assemblages that are crucial for both for tectonic and metallogenic analyses published elsewhere (Nokleberg and others, 1993, 1994a). Several key geologic sources were used in the compilation of the map. For Alaska. the basic outcrop pattern for the map is from Beikman (1980), Gehrels and Berg (1992, 1994). Barker and others ( 1994). Brew (1994), and Moli-Stalcup and others ( 1994b). The distribution of terranes is from Jones and others (1987) and Monger and Berg (1987), with modification by Grantz and other (1991 ). Worall (199 1 ), okleberg and others (1993, 1994a), the cited references, and the Alaskan co-authors of this report. For the Canadian Cordillera. the basic outcrop pattern is from Monger and Berg ( 1987), Wheeler and other (1988). and Wheeler and McFeeley ( 1991) with modifications by the Canadian authors. For the northern part of the Russian Far East. the basic outcrop pattern is from So unov (1985) with modifications by the Russian authors. For the outhern part of the Russian Far East, the basic outcrop pattern is from Krasny (1991) and Bazhanov and Oleinik ( 1986) with modification by the Russian authors. The Russian Far East part of the map is the first attempt to define and delineate terranes in that region. In their compilation. the Russian authors utilized the methodology of U.S.A. and Canadian geologists. Because this map is the first attempt to display the terranes. Cenozoic and Mesozoic overlap assemblages. basinal deposit , and plutonic belts of the Russian Far East. the Russian author will appreciate constructive sugge tions for improving the map.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Warren J. Nokleberg, Leonid M. Parfenov, James W.H. Monger, Boris B. Baranov, Stanislav G. Byalobzhesky, Thomas K. Bundtzen, Tracey D. Feeney, Kazuya Fujita, Steven P. Gordey, Arthur Grantz, Alexander I. Khanchuk, Boris A. Natal’in, Lev M. Natapov, Ian O. Norton, William W. Patton, George Plafker, David W. Scholl, Sergei D. Sokolov, Gleb M. Sosunov, David B. Stone, Rowland W. Tabor, Nickolai V. Tsukanov, Tracy L. Vallier, Koji Wakita. 1994. Circum-North Pacific tectonostratigraphic terrane map. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr94714

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona