Evidence for a mantle and/or basaltic component in KT boundary distal ejecta is apparently inconsistent with ejection from Chicxulub Crater since it is located on;5km thick continental crust（De Paolo et al.,1983;Mont...Evidence for a mantle and/or basaltic component in KT boundary distal ejecta is apparently inconsistent with ejection from Chicxulub Crater since it is located on;5km thick continental crust（De Paolo et al.,1983;Montanari et al.,1983;Hildebrand and Boynton,1988,1990）.This evidence,along with ejected terrestrial chromites（Olds et al.,2016）suggest the impact sampled terrestrial mafic and/or ultramafic target rocks which are not known to exist in the Chicxulub target area.Possible resolutions to the paradox are:1)the existence of an unmapped/unknown suture in Yucatan Platform basement,2)an additional small unmapped/unknown impact site on oceanic lithosphere,or 3)an additional large impact on oceanic lithosphere or continental margin transitional to oceanic lithosphere.The third hypothesis is elaborated here since:1)Ophiolites nearest to Chicxulub crater are found in Cuba and apparently were obducted in latest Cretaceous/earliest Danian times（García-Casco,2008）,inconsistent with the documented Eocene collision of Cuba with the Bahamas platform;and 2)Cuba hosts the world’s thickest known KT boundary deposits（Iturralde-Vinent,1992;Kiyokawa et al.,2002;Tada et al.,2003）.These and geometric considerations suggest oceanic crust and upper mantle rock,exposed as ophiolite in the Greater Antilles island chain,marks the rim of a roughly 700 km diameter impact basin deformed and dismembered from an originally circular form by at least 50 million years of left-lateral shear displacement along the North American-Caribbeantransform plate boundary.展开更多
文摘Evidence for a mantle and/or basaltic component in KT boundary distal ejecta is apparently inconsistent with ejection from Chicxulub Crater since it is located on;5km thick continental crust（De Paolo et al.,1983;Montanari et al.,1983;Hildebrand and Boynton,1988,1990）.This evidence,along with ejected terrestrial chromites（Olds et al.,2016）suggest the impact sampled terrestrial mafic and/or ultramafic target rocks which are not known to exist in the Chicxulub target area.Possible resolutions to the paradox are:1)the existence of an unmapped/unknown suture in Yucatan Platform basement,2)an additional small unmapped/unknown impact site on oceanic lithosphere,or 3)an additional large impact on oceanic lithosphere or continental margin transitional to oceanic lithosphere.The third hypothesis is elaborated here since:1)Ophiolites nearest to Chicxulub crater are found in Cuba and apparently were obducted in latest Cretaceous/earliest Danian times（García-Casco,2008）,inconsistent with the documented Eocene collision of Cuba with the Bahamas platform;and 2)Cuba hosts the world’s thickest known KT boundary deposits（Iturralde-Vinent,1992;Kiyokawa et al.,2002;Tada et al.,2003）.These and geometric considerations suggest oceanic crust and upper mantle rock,exposed as ophiolite in the Greater Antilles island chain,marks the rim of a roughly 700 km diameter impact basin deformed and dismembered from an originally circular form by at least 50 million years of left-lateral shear displacement along the North American-Caribbeantransform plate boundary.
