Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Geodynamic cycles and geodynamic systems of various ranks: Their relationships and evolution in the Earth’s history

  • Published:
Geotectonics Aims and scope

Abstract

The previously stated ideas of hierarchical geodynamic cyclicity [42] and geodynamics of hierarchically subordinate geospheres [13] are compared in detail. The convective geodynamic system of the first rank (GS-1) that functions throughout the mantle and crust beneath the entire surface of the Earth corresponds to the geodynamic cycle of the first rank (GC-1, or the Wilson cycle). The geodynamic system of the second rank (GS-2) that embraces the mantle and crust only beneath oceans corresponds to the geodynamic cycle of the second rank (GC-2, or the Bertrand cycle). The geodynamic system of the third rank (GS-3) functioning in the tectonosphere (asthenosphere + lithosphere) in zones of elevated heat flow (spreading, subduction, and collision zones) is brought into the line with the geodynamic cycle of the third rank (GC-3, or the Stille cycle). The geodynamic system of the fourth rank (GS-4) that embraces the sedimentary cover of mobile belts corresponds to the geodynamic cycle of the fourth rank (GC-4) (the phase cycle of increasing and decreasing intensity of folding and thrusting). This hierarchy controlled by internal endogenic factors, above all, by the heat flow from the Earth’s core and internal sources within the mantle, is supplemented by the geodynamic system of the zeroth rank (GS-0) that embraces the entire Earth and that is controlled by external rotational factors, primarily, the tidal effect of the Moon. The GS-0 is characterized by interference of the permanent westward and meridional (southward and northward, alternately) continental drift in frames of the zeroth geodynamic cycle (GC-0) twice as long as the Wilson cycle (GC-1). An attempt is made to connect cyclicity of various ranks with periodic excitation and waning of convection in a geosphere of the respective rank. The convective geospheres progressively grew downward in the course of geologic history. Only the GS-3 functioned in the Archean, embracing tectonosphere and creating greenstone belts around the gray-gneiss islands with gradual accretion of these belts and the formation of the granite-greenstone continent (Pangea-0). In the Paleoproterozoic, the process spread over the entire upper mantle with switching Rayleigh-Benard polygonal convection expressed in pure form as granulite belts along the polygon perimeters that bounded the protoplatform blocks. The contemporaneous limited convection in the lower mantle (GS-1) led to some divergence of these blocks and formation of minor oceans and their subsequent closure, resulting in the formation of Pangea-1. This tendency developed further in the Mesoproterozoic and completed with the formation of Pangea-2 (Rodinia). Afterward, in the Neogean, the cyclic-hierarchical geodynamics started to work in full as described above.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yu. V. Barkin, “Celestial Mechanics of the Earth’s Core and Mantle: Geodynamic and Geophysical Implications,” in Tectonics of the Earth’s Crust and Mantle. Tectonic Factors of the Spatial Distribution of Mineral Resources (GEOS, Moscow, 2005), Vol. 1, pp. 30–33 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  2. V. V. Belousov, Principles of Geotectonics, 2nd ed. (Nedra, Moscow, 1989) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  3. A. P. Bobryakov, A. F. Revuzhenko, and E. I. Shemyakin, “Tidal Deformation of Planets: Experience of Experimental Modeling,” Geotektonika, No. 6, 21–35 (1991).

  4. N. A. Bozhko, “Geodynamic Inversion in the Polar Systems of the Earth’s Northern and Southern Hemispheres,” Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 4. Geol., No. 1, 27–38 (1992).

  5. N. A. Bozhko, “Precambrian Orogenic Belts: Typification and Place in Supercontinental Cycles,” in Crust and Mantle Tectonics. Tectonic Factors of the Spatial Distribution of Mineral Resources (GEOS, Moscow, 2005), Vol. 1, pp. 60–65 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  6. N. Yu. Bocharova and A. A. Shreider, “Spatial Distribution of Differential Poles of Lithospheric Plates Rotation” Byull. Mosk. O-va Ispyt. Prir., Otd. Geol. 67(6), 20–28 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Wegener, Origin of Continents and Oceans (Methuen, London, 1966; Nauka, Leningrad, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. I. Volobuev and M. A. Goncharov, “Alternative Mantle Sources of CFB, OIB, and MORB: Geodynamic Model,” in Proceedings of Lomonosov Scientific Conference, Moscow, 2001 (Moscow State Univ., Moscow, 2001), pp. 10–11 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  9. Yu. G. Gatinsky, D. V. Rundquist, and S. V. Cherkasov, “102°–103° Geologic Boundary in Eastern Asia: Structural and Metallogenic Features,” in Crust and Mantle Tectonics. Tectonic Factors of the Spatial Distribution of Mineral Resources (GEOS, Moscow, 2005), Vol. 1, pp. 127–130 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. A. Goncharov, Density Inversion in the Earth’s Crust and Folding (Nedra, Moscow, 1979) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  11. M. A. Goncharov, Mechanisms of Geosynclinal Folding (Nedra, Moscow, 1988) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. A. Goncharov, “Balanced Arrangement of Tectonic Flow and Structural Parageneses,” Geotektonika, No. 4, 19–29 (1993).

  13. M. A. Goncharov, “From Plate Tectonics to the Geodynamics of Hierarchically Coordinated Geospheres,” Otech. Geol., No. 3, 10–14 (1999).

  14. M. A. Goncharov, “Western and Northern Components of Continental Drift As the Product of Forced Mantle Convection by Gimlet Rule,” in Tectonics and Geophysics of the Lithosphere (GEOS, Moscow, 2002), Vol. 1, pp. 128–131 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. A. Goncharov, “Quantitative Correlation between Geodynamic Systems and Geodynamic Cycles of Various Ranks,” Geotektonika, No. 2, 3–23 (2006) [Geotectonics 40 (2), 3–23 (2006)].

  16. M. A. Goncharov, V. G. Talitsky, and N. S. Frolova, Introduction to Tectonophysics (Knizhnyi Dom “Universitet,” Moscow, 2005) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  17. N. L. Dobretsov, “Mantle Superplumes As a Cause of the Main Geological Periodicity and Global Reorganizations,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk 357(6), 797–800 (1997) [Dokl. Earth Sci. 357A (9), 1316–1319 (1997)].

    Google Scholar 

  18. V. A. Dubrovsky and V. N. Sergeev, “Conservation Laws and Tectonics,” in Tectonics and Geophysics of the Lithosphere (GEOS, Moscow, 2002), Vol. 1, pp. 181–185 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  19. V. I. Zakuzenny, A. S. Baryshev, T. F. Ponushkova, and O. M. Mitrofanova, “Geodynamic Model of the Siberian Platform,” in Acceleration of the Scientific and Technical Progress in Geophysical Surveys in East Siberia (VostSibNIIGGiMS, Irkutsk, 1989), pp. 4–15 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  20. A. G. Kirdyashkin, Thermal Gravity Flows and Heat Exchange in the Asthenosphere (Nauka, Novosibirsk, 1989) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  21. L. N. Kogarko and V. E. Khain, “Alkaline Magmatism in the Earth’s History: A Geodynamic Interpretation,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk 377(5), 677–679 (2001) [Dokl. Earth Sci. 337A (3), 359–361 (2001)].

    Google Scholar 

  22. E. A. Konstantinovskaya, Tectonics of the Eastern Margins of Asia: Structural Evolution and Geodynamic Modeling (Nauchnyi Mir, Moscow, 2003) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  23. M. G. Leonov, “Phanerozoic Geodynamic Regimes of the Southern Tien Shan,” Geotektonika, No. 3, 36–53 (1996) [Geotectonics 30 (3), 200–216 (1996)].

  24. Yu. G. Leonov, “Continental Rifting: Modern Ideas, Problems, and Solutions,” in Basic Problems of Tectonics (Nauchnyi Mir, Moscow, 2001), pp. 155–173 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  25. L. I. Lobkovsky and V. D. Kotelkin, “Two-Level Thermochemical Model of Convection in Mantle and Its Geodynamic Consequences,” in Problems of Global Geodynamics (GEOS, Moscow, 2000), pp. 29–53 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  26. L. I. Lobkovsky, A. M. Nikishin, and V. E. Khain, Modern Problems of Geotectonics and Geodynamics (Nauchnyi Mir, Moscow, 2004) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  27. V. V. Belousov, A. V. Vikhert, M. A. Goncharov, et al., Modeling Methods in Structural Geology (Nedra, Moscow, 1988 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  28. A. A. Mossakovsky, Yu. M. Pushcharovsky, and S. V. Ruzhentsev, “The Earth’s Largest Structural Asymmetry,” Geotektonika, No. 5, 3–18 (1998) [Geotectonics 32 (5), 339–353 (1998)].

  29. A. M. Nikishin, “Supercontinental Cycles, Eustatic Fluctuations in the World Ocean, and Geological History of Water on the Earth,” in Areas of Active Tectogenesis in the Modern and Ancient History of the Earth (GEOS, Moscow, 2006), Vol. 2, pp. 67–71 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  30. L. L. Perchuk, “Gravitational Redistribution of Rocks in the Precambrian Continental Crust: Solution of the Problem,” Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 4. Geol., No. 5, 26–36 (2004).

  31. V. N. Puchkov, Paleogeodynamics of the Southern and Central Urals (Dauriya, Ufa, 2000) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  32. Yu. M. Pushcharovsky and D. Yu. Pushcharovsky, “Geospheres of the Earth’s Mantle,” Geotektonika, No. 1, 3–14 (1999) [Geotectonics 33 (1), 1–11 (1999)].

  33. Yu. M. Pushcharovsky, A. A. Peive, Yu. N. Raznitsin, and E. S. Bazilevskaya, Fault Zones in the Central Atlantic (GEOS, Moscow, 1995) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  34. Yu. N. Raznitsin, Tectonic Delamination of the Lithosphere in Young Oceans and Paleobasins (Nauka, Moscow, 2004) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  35. V. I. Makarov, K. E. Abdrakhmatov, I. T. Aitmatov, et al., Modern Geodynamics in Regions of Intracontinental Collisional Orogenesis (Central Asia) (Nauchnyi Mir, Moscow, 2005) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  36. O. G. Sorokhtin and S. A. Ushakov, Global Evolution of the Earth (Moscow State Univ., Moscow, 1991) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  37. A. I. Suvorov, “Tectonic Layering and Tectonic Motions in the Continental Lithosphere,” Geotektonika 34(6), 15–25 (2000) [Geotectonics 34 (6), 442–451 (2000)].

    Google Scholar 

  38. V. P. Trubitsyn, “Stages of Global Tectonics and Tectonic Model of the Present-Day Earth (Structure of Mantle Flows throughout the Mantle beneath Continents and Oceans from Global Seismic Tomography Data),” in Earth’s Crust and Mantle Tectonics. Tectonic Spatial Distribution of Mineral Resources (GEOS, Moscow, 2005), Vol. 1, pp. 60–65 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  39. V. P. Trubitsyn and V. V. Rykov, “Mantle Convection with Floating Continents,” in Problems of Global Geodynamics (GEOS, Moscow, 2000), pp. 7–28 [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  40. S. A. Tychkov, Mantle Convection and Platform Dynamics (Nauka, Novosibirsk, 1984) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  41. S. A. Tychkov, A. N. Vasilevsky, and E. V. Rychkova, “Evolution of Plume beneath Continental Lithosphere with Abruptly Varying Thickness,” Geol. Geofiz. 40(8), 1182–1196 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  42. V. E. Khain, “Large-Scale Cyclicity in the Earth’s Tectonic History and Its Possible Origin,” Geotektonika, No. 6, 3–14 (2000) [Geotectonics 34 (6), 431–441 (2000)].

  43. V. E. Khain, Main Problems of Modern Geology, 2nd ed. (Nauchnyi Mir, Moscow, 2003) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  44. V. E. Khain and A. N. Balukhovsky, Historical Geotectonics. The Mesozoic and Cenozoic (Nedra, Moscow, 1993) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  45. V. E. Khain and N. A. Bozhko, Historical Geotectonics. The Precambrian (Nedra, Moscow, 1988) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  46. V. E. Khain and M. G. Lomize, Geotectonics with Principles of Geodynamics, 2nd ed. (Knizhnyi Dom “Universitet”, Moscow, 2005) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  47. V. E. Khain and K. B. Seslavinsky, Historical Geotectonics. The Paleozoic (Nedra, Moscow, 1991) [in Russian].

    Google Scholar 

  48. G. H. R. Bokelmann, “Convection-Driven Motion of the North America Craton: Evidence from P-Wave Anisotropy,” Geophys. J. Int. 148, 278–287 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. N. A. Bozhko and M. A. Goncharov, “Global Balanced Arrangement of the Geodynamic Polarity of Earth’s Southern and Northern Hemispheres,” in Proceedings of Zonenshain Conference on Plate Tectonics (GEOMAR, Kiel, 1993), pp. 43–44.

    Google Scholar 

  50. I. W. D. Dalziel, “Pacific Margins of Laurentia and East Antarctica-Australia As a Conjugate Rift Pair: Evidence and Implications for an Eocambrian Supercontinent,” Geology 19, 598–601 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. W. B. Hamilton, “The Closed Upper-Mantle Circulation of Plate Tectonics,” in Plate Boundary Zones (Am. Geophys. Union. Geodynamics Ser., 2002), Vol. 30, pp. 359–410.

    Google Scholar 

  52. S. D. King and J. Ritsema, “African Hot Spot Volcanism: Small-Scale Convection in the Upper Mantle beneath Cratons,” Science 290(5494), 1137–1140 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. M. Pavoni and M. V. Müller, “Geotectonic Bioplarity, Evidence from the Pattern of Active Oceanic Ridges Bordering the Pacific and African Plates,” J. Geodynamics 30(5), 593–601 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. J. D. A. Piper and S. Grant, “A Paleomagnetic Test of the Axial Dipole Assumption and Implication for Continental Distribution through Geological Time,” Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 55, 37–53 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. J. H. Scarrow, V. Pease, C. Fleutelot, and V. Dushin, “The Late Neoproterozoic Enganepe Ophiolite, Polar Urals, Russia: An Extension of the Cadomian Arc?,” Precambrian Res., No. 110, 255–275 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  56. E. Seidler, W. R. Jacoby, and H. Cavsak, “Hotspot Distribution, Gravity, Mantle Tomography: Evidence for Plumes,” J. Geodynamics 27(4/5), 585–608 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. P. G. Silver and W. E. Holt, “The Mantle Flow Field beneath Western North America,” Science 295, 1054–1057 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. A. D. Smith and Ch. Lewis, “Differential Rotation of Lithosphere and Mantle and the Driving Forces of Plate Tectonics,” J. Geodynamics 28(2/3), 97–116 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. V. P. Trubitsyn, W. D. Mooney, and D. H. Abbott, “Cold Cratonic Roots and Thermal Blankets: How Continents Affect Mantle Convection,” Int. Geol. Review 45, 479–496 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  60. G. M. Young, “Late Proterozoic Stratigraphy and the Canada-Australia Connection,” Geology 20, 215–218 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Geological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Pyzhevskii per. 7, Moscow, 119017, Russia

    V. E. Khain

  2. Faculty of Geology, Moscow State University, Vorob’evy gory, Moscow, 119899, Russia

    M. A. Goncharov

Authors
  1. V. E. Khain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. A. Goncharov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Original Russian Text © V.E. Khain, M.A. Goncharov, 2006, published in Geotektonika, 2006, No. 5, pp. 3–24.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Khain, V.E., Goncharov, M.A. Geodynamic cycles and geodynamic systems of various ranks: Their relationships and evolution in the Earth’s history. Geotecton. 40, 327–344 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016852106050013

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016852106050013

Keywords

Search

Navigation