Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe –
localized inversion vs. large-scale domal uplift
Hilmar von Eynatten1 , Jonas Kley2 , István Dunkl1 , Veit-Enno Hoffmann1 , and Annemarie Simon1
1 University
of Göttingen, Geoscience Center, Department of Sedimentology and Environmental Geology,
Goldschmidtstrasse 3, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
2 University of Göttingen, Geoscience Center, Department of Structural Geology and Geodynamics,
Goldschmidtstrasse 3, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
Correspondence: Hilmar von Eynatten (heynatt@gwdg.de)
Received: 27 October 2020 – Discussion started: 11 November 2020
Revised: 19 February 2021 – Accepted: 20 February 2021 – Published: 23 April 2021
Abstract. Large parts of central Europe experienced exhumation in Late Cretaceous to Paleogene time. Previous studies mainly focused on thrusted basement uplifts to
unravel the magnitude, processes and timing of exhumation. This study provides, for the first time, a comprehensive thermochronological dataset from mostly PermoTriassic strata exposed adjacent to and between the basement uplifts in central Germany, comprising an area of at
least some 250–300 km across. Results of apatite fissiontrack and (U–Th) / He analyses on > 100 new samples reveal
that (i) kilometre-scale exhumation affected the entire region,
(ii) thrusting of basement blocks like the Harz Mountains and
the Thuringian Forest focused in the Late Cretaceous (about
90–70 Ma), while superimposed domal uplift of central Germany is slightly younger (about 75–55 Ma), and (iii) large
parts of the domal uplift experienced removal of 3 to 4 km of
Mesozoic strata. Using spatial extent, magnitude and timing
as constraints suggests that thrusting and crustal thickening
alone can account for no more than half of the domal uplift.
Most likely, dynamic topography caused by upwelling asthenosphere significantly contributed to the observed pattern
of exhumation in central Germany.
1 Introduction
Widespread intraplate compressional stresses affected central Europe in Cretaceous to Paleogene time and generated
numerous basement uplifts and inverted sedimentary basins
(e.g. Ziegler et al., 1995; Kley and Voigt, 2008). The base-
ment uplifts cover a large area of at least 1300 km west to
east and 600 km north to south in extension. It stretches from
the Ardennes in Belgium (western Rhenish Massif) to southeastern Poland (Holy Cross Mountains) and includes prominent fault-bounded blocks composed of crystalline basement
rocks and pre-Permian metasedimentary rocks such as the
Bohemian Massif, the Vosges and Black Forest, and the Harz
Mountains (Fig. 1a). The major phase of exhumation and
uplift is mostly assigned to the Late Cretaceous (Kley and
Voigt, 2008). However, earlier onset of exhumation and uplift and/or its continuation into the Paleogene are proposed
for certain areas and structures (e.g. Barbarand et al., 2018;
Sobczyk et al., 2020).
Inverted sedimentary basins (i.e. basins that have been exhumed along former extensional faults; Cooper et al., 1989)
occur partly between and within these blocks and are common further north in the Central European Basin system (see
Littke et al., 2008), which includes large parts of Poland,
northern Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark and the North
Sea. The timing of basin inversion has been mostly assigned
to Late Cretaceous to Paleogene time (e.g. Kockel, 2003;
Krzywiec, 2006). Some authors have attributed all documented Mesozoic and Cenozoic uplift events in central Europe to increased tangential stress and inversion, regardless
of their magnitude and extent (e.g. Ziegler et al., 1995; Sissingh, 2006). Others pointed out marked differences in the expression of these events and suggested that alternative mechanisms may be involved such as increased or decreased amplitudes of lithospheric folds due to stress buildup, stress re-
Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.
936
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Figure 1. (a) Pre-Tertiary geological sketch map of central Europe (modified after Ziegler, 1990). The black rectangle indicates the position of
the detailed geological map in Fig. 3, and the straight line indicates the trace of the section shown in (b). The inset indicates the location within
Europe. AR – Ardennes, FH – Flechtingen High, H – Harz Mountains, K – Karkonosze, NEGB – Northeast German Basin, LSB – Lower
Saxony Basin, MB – Münsterland Basin, OW – Odenwald, S – Sudetes, TB – Thuringian Basin, TF – Thuringian Forest, URG – Upper
Rhine Graben. (b) Simplified geological section across the central part of the study area, highlighting the major fault-bordered basement
highs. For a detailed section see Fig. 4. (c) Compilation of apatite fission-track ages obtained on structural highs exposing Paleozoic rocks
in central Europe. a: Ibbenbüren High, Senglaub et al. (2005); b: Flechtingen High, Fischer et al. (2012); c: Harz Mountains, von Eynatten
et al. (2019); d: Halle volcanic complex, Jacobs and Breitkreuz (2003); e: Northern Rhenish Massif, Karg et al. (2005); f: Ardennes/Venn,
Glasmacher et al. (1998), Xu et al. (2009) and references therein, Barbarand et al. (2018); g: Thuringian Forest, Thomson and Zeh (2000);
h: Erzgebirge, Ventura and Lisker (2003), Lange et al. (2008), Wolff et al. (2015); i: Lusatian Block, Lange et al. (2008), Ventura et al. (2009);
j: NE Bohemian Massif, Danisík et al. (2010, 2012), Migoń and Danišík (2012), Sobczyk et al. (2015, 2020); k: Holy Cross Mountains, Botor
et al. (2018); l: E Bohemian Massif, Botor et al. (2017); m: S Bohemian Massif, Hejl et al. (2003); n: Barrandian, central Bohemian Massif,
Glasmacher et al. (2002); o: Bavarian Forest, Vamvaka et al. (2014); p: W Bohemian Massif, Hejl et al. (1997); q: Odenwald, Wagner (1968);
r: Black Forest/Vosges, Timar-Geng et al. (2006), Link (2009), Dresmann et al. (2010), Meyer et al. (2010).
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
laxation relaxation or dynamic topography (Nielsen et al.,
2005; Deckers and van der Voet, 2018; Kley, 2018).
This paper aims at a comprehensive understanding of the
Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe from
a thermochronological point of view. We (i) review the existing thermochronological data on cooling and exhumation
in central Europe, (ii) present new thermochronological data
from the main study area in the central part of central Europe,
(iii) integrate apatite fission-track (AFT) and (U–Th) / He
(AHe) data through thermal modelling that allows for estimating the thickness of eroded sequences, and (iv) discuss
various models to explain the temporal and spatial pattern of
exhumation and uplift in central Europe.
2 Geological setting
Central Europe has been an intraplate region since the
Variscan orogeny that terminated about 300 Myr ago (e.g.
Ziegler, 1987; Oncken, 1997). Its post-orogenic history began with the evolution and demise of the “Rotliegend” wide
rift in Permian time (Lorenz and Nicholls, 1976). From the
latest Permian through the Mesozoic a continuous cover of
sediments was deposited over large parts of central Europe.
These sediments belong to the intracontinental Southern Permian Basin in the north (Littke et al., 2008; Doornenbal
and Stevenson, 2010) and to the proximal Tethys shelf in
the south. Both basins were connected via an intervening
platform and at times formed a contiguous region of marine deposition, e.g. in Middle Triassic (Muschelkalk) and
Early Jurassic time (Ziegler, 1990). The long-lasting slow
subsidence in this system of basins was mostly of thermal
origin (Cacace and Scheck-Wenderoth, 2016). Nevertheless,
distributed and intermittent extension of generally low magnitude affected varying areas from the latest Permian to the
Early Cretaceous (Geluk, 1999; Mohr et al., 2005; Warsitzka
et al., 2019). Despite the evidence for some large extensional
faults (Best, 1996; Baldschuhn and Kockel, 1999; De Jager,
2003), normal fault offsets typically do not exceed a few hundred metres and there is no associated volcanism. Periods
of intensified extension are recognized in Late Triassic time
and, for our area, in the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous
when the Lower Saxony Basin formed (Ziegler, 1990; Stollhofen et al., 2008). Extension was centred on a belt stretching
from the southern North Sea over the Netherlands and northern Germany to Poland. The southern border of this belt is
sometimes abrupt and sometimes gradual, involving normal
faults at considerable distance from the main preserved depocentres (Kley et al., 2008; Danišík et al., 2012). Very subtle Mesozoic extension structures occur on the Helvetic shelf
in the southwest (Wetzel et al., 2003; Malz et al., 2015).
The tectonic regime changed fundamentally from extension to contraction in Late Cretaceous time (Ziegler, 1987).
Syntectonic basins formed along the margins of inverting
sub-basins and uplifting basement blocks (Voigt, 1963; Krzyhttps://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
937
wiec, 2002; Voigt et al., 2004; von Eynatten et al., 2008). The
area of contraction closely coincides with the previous extension tectonics, even though not all major thrust faults are
reactivated normal faults (Voigt et al., 2009). South of the
main inversion axis extending from the North Sea basins to
the Polish Trough, contraction attenuates abruptly or gradually. For instance, shortening structures of small magnitude
are widespread in the German uplands. Mesozoic structures
in the Southern Permian Basin and the northern Alpine Molasse basin are sealed by an extensive cover of locally latest
Cretaceous but mostly Cenozoic sediments (Bachmann et al.,
1987; Baldschuhn et al., 2001; Krzywiec and Stachowska,
2016; Voigt et al., 2021).
In Germany, uplift and erosion in Mesozoic and/or Cenozoic time are evidenced by large areas where the Variscan
basement and Permian to Triassic strata are exposed today.
The Rhenish and Bohemian massifs are commonly interpreted as long-lived highs that never had a substantial cover
of Permo-Mesozoic sediments (Ziegler, 1990), although this
model has been recently challenged for parts of the Rhenish
Massif (Augustsson et al., 2018). Between these massifs, Triassic strata were continuous from northern to southern Germany (Fig. 1a). For Jurassic and Cretaceous time much of
the sedimentary record, if any, has been lost due to erosion in
the central part of Germany (Fig. 1b). Remnants of Cenozoic
strata show that denudation to the level of Triassic strata was
completed by Paleogene or Neogene time, varying by region
(Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, 1993).
Several processes have been proposed to have driven Late
Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central and western Europe. There is a consensus that Late Cretaceous inversion (often termed the “Subhercynian” event) was caused
by far-field tectonic stresses related by different authors either to Alpine collision (e.g. Ziegler, 1987; Stackebrandt
and Franzke, 1989; Ziegler et al., 1995; Krzywiec, 2006)
or the onset of Africa–Iberia–Europe convergence (Kley
and Voigt, 2008). In contrast, the Paleogene (“Laramide”
and “Pyrenean”) uplift events have received very different interpretations. Many authors attributed them to continued, if weaker, shortening and inversion (Ziegler, 1990;
De Jager, 2003; Sissingh, 2006; Holford et al., 2009b) or
long-wavelength folding (Deckers and van der Voet, 2018).
Nielsen et al. (2005) argued instead that the Laramide event
reflects stress relaxation. This concept is consistent with
numerical modelling suggesting that plate coupling across
the Iberia–Europe boundary rapidly decreased with increasing incorporation of mechanically weak continental crust
(Dielforder et al., 2019), but it does not correctly predict the
pattern of Laramide uplift and subsidence in some basins
(Deckers and van der Voet, 2018). Paleogene regional exhumation of the Irish Sea has been explained as an isostatic response to magmatic underplating (Brodie and White,
1994; Ware and Turner, 2002). Kley (2018), based on its very
large areal extent, advocated dynamic topography and lithospheric thinning (see also Meier et al., 2016) as the causes of
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
938
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Laramide uplift. In this paper we focus on the timing, magnitude and possible mechanisms of Late Cretaceous and Paleogene exhumation in Germany. Because of the coincidences
in time with widespread exhumation events all over central
Europe, these will be reviewed in the next section.
3 Review of thermochronological data
The available thermochronological data on Mesozoic to Tertiary exhumation in central Europe are widespread and focus
on individual regions exposing Paleozoic basement rocks.
Only near-surface samples (except for a few drill cores with a
sampling depth < 500 m) are considered for this compilation
to ensure comparability. The most comprehensive dataset is
available for apatite fission-track data, which are summarized in Fig. 1c with respect to individual regions and the
respective range of AFT ages. Many regions show a predominance of Cretaceous AFT ages; however, others show
a much broader range including Jurassic and Permo-Triassic
ages and/or a noticeable contribution of Tertiary ages.
The Ardennes, forming a large part of the western Rhenish Massif in the Rhenohercynian zone of the central European Variscan orogeny (location f in Fig. 1c), are predominantly composed of very low-grade Devonian to Carboniferous metasedimentary rocks, with some early Paleozoic low- to medium-grade inliers. Low-T thermochronology comprises mostly AFT data along with some zircon
fission-track (ZFT) data. The latter indicate ages between
422 and 218 Ma, while AFT ages range from Permian to
Early Cretaceous (290 to 130 Ma; Glasmacher et al., 1998;
Xu et al., 2009, and references therein; Barbarand et al.,
2018). Although the age range is rather consistent across the
various studies, interpretations based on thermal modelling
and various geological evidence are quite different. Xu et
al. (2009) propose slow exhumation and cooling for most
of the Mesozoic, followed by accelerated cooling since middle Eocene time. Glasmacher et al. (1998) suggest a major
phase of cooling in the middle Cretaceous (120 to 80 Ma)
along with approximately 2000 m of exhumation. In contrast,
Barbarand et al. (2018) use paleoweathering geochronology
based on Mn-oxide phases to constrain the thermochronological modelling. They suggest Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous uplift and erosion of the Ardennes Massif, which subsequently stayed close to the surface until the present. For the
northeastern Rhenish Massif, on the right side of the River
Rhine, Karg et al. (2005) reported AFT ages ranging from
291 to 136 Ma (location e in Fig. 1c). The data indicate cooling in the late stages and/or after the Variscan orogeny. Triassic to Jurassic sedimentation is interpreted below 1000 m
in thickness, and the samples remained in the apatite partial annealing zone (PAZ) during most of the Mesozoic. Final uplift and denudation did not start before the Late Cretaceous, with slightly accelerated cooling in the Tertiary (Karg
et al., 2005). Similar data have already been reported by
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
Büker (1996) for the same area (AFT 286–159 Ma). No thermochronological data have been published so far from the
eastern margin of the Rhenish Massif; however, some new
data will be presented in this study.
East to northeast of the Rhenish Massif, several
thrusted basement blocks expose Paleozoic crystalline and/or
metasedimentary rocks at the surface. These are the Ibbenbüren High, the Flechtingen High, the Harz Mountains and
the Thuringian Forest (a, b, c and g in Fig. 1c, respectively). They are all characterized by long apatite fission
tracks and narrow track length distributions, and despite the
wide area and a pretty high number of samples (n = 41) the
AFT age range is impressively tight, i.e. fully restricted to
Campanian time (83–72 Ma; Thomson and Zeh, 2000; Senglaub et al., 2005; Fischer et al., 2012; von Eynatten et al.,
2019). For the Harz Mountains, the observation of rapid Late
Cretaceous exhumation is further supported by zircon (U–
Th) / He (ZHe) and AHe thermochronology (von Eynatten et
al., 2019) as well as independent evidence from facies distribution and provenance information from well-dated syntectonic sediments in the foreland (Voigt et al., 2006; von Eynatten et al., 2008). ZFT data from the four basement blocks
range from the latest Carboniferous (306 Ma) to latest Triassic (202 Ma). While the oldest ages may directly reflect
cooling after the Variscan orogeny, most ages are PermoTriassic and interpreted as mixed ages, reflecting partial reset due to widespread Permo-Mesozoic burial heating (Fischer et al., 2012; von Eynatten et al., 2019). Slightly east of
the Harz Mountains, the Halle volcanic complex (location d
in Fig. 1c) consists of Permo-Carboniferous felsic volcanic
rocks yielding thermochronological data rather similar to the
Harz Mountains, although AFT ages are slightly older (ZFT
231–194 and AFT 108–74 Ma; Jacobs and Breitkreuz, 2003).
The Bohemian Massif represents the largest inlier of basement rocks exposed in central Europe (Linnemann et al.,
2008). It is mainly composed of late Neoproterozoic to early
Paleozoic (Cadomian) and late Paleozoic (Variscan) granitoids with a large variety of metamorphic rocks comprising
late Neoproterozoic to Carboniferous protoliths and metamorphic grades from very low grade to high grade, including ultrahigh-pressure metamorphism (Kroner et al., 2008;
Schönig et al., 2020). Morphologically, the Bohemian Massif
comprises several mountain ranges. Their low-temperature
evolution has been investigated by numerous studies (as reviewed below) in order to unravel the post-Variscan exhumation and uplift history of the Bohemian Massif. Results indicate a complex spatial pattern caused by various partly superimposed processes including Mesozoic burial, Late Cretaceous exhumation due to far-field compression and/or reheating, and exhumation related to the European Cenozoic Rift
System and associated volcanism (e.g. Danišík et al., 2012).
The northern margin of the Bohemian Massif can be
roughly separated, from west to east, into the Erzgebirge, the Lusatian Block and the Sudetes including the
Karkonosze Mountains. The central Erzgebirge is characterhttps://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
ized by medium- to high-grade metamorphic rocks, including relics of ultrahigh-pressure metamorphism, surrounded
by lower-grade metasedimentary rocks and intruded by late
Variscan granitoids. AFT data reveal a large age spread from
210 to 45 Ma with predominantly (19 out of 24) Late Jurassic
and Cretaceous ages (location h in Figs. 1c and 2a; Lange et
al., 2008). Similar ages are reported from a borehole in the
western Erzgebirge (Ventura and Lisker, 2003). The diverse
spatial pattern of thermochronological data is supported by
ZHe and AHe data and indicates dissection into individual
structural blocks, variable Mesozoic burial and hydrothermal
activity, significant Late Cretaceous exhumation, and only
minor Cenozoic overprint (Wolff et al., 2015). The Lusatian Block (location i in Fig. 1c), which is separated from
the Erzgebirge by the Elbe fault zone, is characterized by
mostly Late Cretaceous AFT ages, as reported by two different studies. The first is based on 28 predominantly granodiorite samples covering the entire area, which yield an AFT
age range of 102 to 50 Ma (Fig. 2a; Lange et al., 2008). The
second is based on 10 samples from three boreholes (sample depth < 500 m) from the northern and southern boundaries of the block, which yield a tighter Late Cretaceous
AFT age range from 94 to 72 Ma (Ventura et al., 2009).
Roughly similar data are reported from various studies of
the Sudetes, forming the structurally complex NE margin of
the Bohemian Massif (location j in Fig. 1c). The Variscan
granite intrusion of the Karkonosze Mountains experienced
punctuated Late Cretaceous fast cooling and exhumation as
evidenced by ZHe (98 Ma), AFT (90–82 Ma) and AHe (87–
79 Ma) thermochronology (Danišík et al., 2010). Metamorphic rocks to the north of the intrusion show a somewhat
broader Cretaceous age range (121–63 Ma; Martínek et al.,
2006, 2008; cited in Migoń and Danišík, 2012). From the
easternmost part of the intrusion and adjacent metamorphic
rocks, Early Cretaceous ZHe ages (131–100 Ma) and Cretaceous to Paleogene AFT ages (106–51 Ma) are reported
(Sobczyk et al., 2015). In the SE Sudetes, crystalline rocks
of the Rychlebské hory Mountains region reveal Late Cretaceous to Paleocene exhumation history evidenced by ZHe
(79 and 89 Ma) and AHe (90–69 Ma) data along with slightly
younger AFT ages (81–39 Ma); the youngest of them were
most likely influenced by Cenozoic volcanism (Danišík et
al., 2012). However, nearby samples from small crystalline
massifs reveal similar Late Cretaceous to Eocene AFT ages
(84–45 Ma), which are interpreted to reflect Late Cretaceous
onset of cooling with a climax in the Paleocene to middle
Eocene (Sobczyk et al., 2020). The cumulative distribution
of all AFT ages from the NE margin of the Bohemian Massif
shows distinct age groups in the Late Cretaceous, around the
K–T boundary and in the Paleocene to Eocene (Fig. 2a).
At the eastern margin of the Bohemian Massif, the
Moravo–Silesian zone exposes lower Carboniferous synorogenic clastic sedimentary rocks (Moravo–Silesian Culm
Basin, location l in Fig. 1c), which experienced post-Variscan
anchimetamorphic overprint. ZHe ages range from 303–
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
939
163 Ma, while AFT ages range from Late Jurassic (152 Ma)
to Eocene (44 Ma), with the majority of ages belonging to the
Late Cretaceous (Fig. 2b; Botor et al., 2017). In the southernmost part of the Bohemian Massif (Waldviertel) AFT ages
from granitoids and gneisses show a broad range from 233–
92 Ma (location m in Fig. 1c; Hejl et al., 2003). Despite some
spatial variation and generally older ages towards the northeast, thermal modelling suggests general Jurassic to Early
Cretaceous cooling, followed by some reburial in the Late
Cretaceous. Cenozoic bulk denudation is estimated of the order of 1–3 km (Hejl et al., 2003). At the southwestern margin
of the Bohemian Massif, the crystalline rocks of the Bavarian
Forest (location o in Fig. 1c) yield AFT ages that are almost
entirely Cretaceous (148–83 Ma), with most of them falling
into the Late Cretaceous (Fig. 2c; Vamvaka et al., 2014).
Thermal modelling of these data suggests enhanced heat flow
in the Middle Jurassic to Early Cretaceous, likely caused by
lithospheric extension, followed by Late Cretaceous to Paleogene cooling (Vamvaka et al., 2014). At the western margin
of the Bohemian Massif (Oberpfalz; location p in Fig. 1c),
Permo-Triassic ZFT ages (283–215 Ma) are thought to indicate post-Variscan unroofing and denudation (Hejl et al.,
1997). This observation is complemented by a series of AFT
data that reveal a relatively tight age cluster (110–54 Ma),
implying accelerated denudation in Late Cretaceous to Paleogene time (Fig. 2c).
In contrast to the numerous studies from the margins of
the Bohemian Massif reporting Cretaceous AFT median ages
(Fig. 2a–c), data from the Tepla–Barrandian and adjacent areas in the centre of the Bohemian Massif are relatively scarce
and indicate remarkably older AFT ages (324–161 Ma, location n in Fig. 1c). They are interpreted to indicate late
Variscan cooling, reburial during the post-Variscan Molasse
stage and relatively slow Mesozoic cooling (Glasmacher et
al., 2002; Suchý et al., 2019).
Northeast of the Bohemian Massif, the Holy Cross Mountains in SE Poland (location k in Fig. 1c) expose Paleozoic
sedimentary rocks that experienced deformation during the
Variscan orogeny, followed by significant burial during prolonged Permo-Mesozoic subsidence within the Mid-Polish
Trough of the Polish Basin and exhumation in the Late Cretaceous to Paleocene (e.g. Krzywiec et al., 2009). The available
thermochronological data reveal mostly late Paleozoic ZHe
ages (417–283 Ma) that are generally younger than the sedimentation ages, along with a few scattered Mesozoic AFT
ages (202–88 Ma) and Late Cretaceous to Paleogene AHe
ages (91–43 Ma). Thermal modelling indicates late to postVariscan (Carboniferous to Permian) cooling from at most
deep diagenetic temperatures that were reached during the
Variscan orogeny. Mesozoic burial and Late Cretaceous fast
cooling and exhumation are most pronounced in the eastern
part of the Holy Cross Mountains (Botor et al., 2018).
The Upper Rhine Graben (URG) forms part of the Cenozoic European Rift System and exposes crystalline basement
domains at its exhumed flanks. The most prominent ones
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
940
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Figure 2. Cumulative frequency distributions of apatite fission-track data from various regions across central Europe. Characters in brackets
refer to locations in Fig. 1; for references see the caption to Fig. 1. The stippled purple line in (b) is from the NE Bohemian Massif, like in
(a), for reference. The green area indicates the time interval of the Late Cretaceous.
are located adjacent to the southern URG, i.e. the Vosges
at the western and the Black Forest at the eastern flank (location r in Fig. 1c). Thermochronological data show broad
age ranges, reflecting the complex superposition of variable
Mesozoic hydrothermal activity (that reached the zircon partial annealing zone, most likely in Jurassic time), Late Cretaceous cooling and exhumation, and Cenozoic reheating related to rifting in the URG followed by final exhumation
(Timar-Geng et al., 2006; Link, 2009; Dresmann et al., 2010;
Walter et al., 2018). ZFT ages range from the Late Carboniferous to Early Cretaceous (312–109 Ma; the youngest ages
are related to a fault zone at the southern margin of the Black
Forest; Dresmann et al., 2010), while AFT ages range from
the Cretaceous to Miocene (103–15 Ma) with distinct age
components in the Late Cretaceous and Paleogene (Fig. 2d).
AHe data yield only Cenozoic ages ranging from the Paleocene to early Miocene (61–20 Ma; Link, 2009). Adjacent
to the northern URG, the Odenwald region (location q in
Fig. 1c) exposes Variscan granitoids from the Mid-German
Crystalline Rise, which yield a relatively tight Cretaceous
AFT age range (105–70 Ma, Fig. 2d; Wagner, 1968). Late
Cretaceous AFT ages (∼ 80–70 Ma) of the Odenwald and
the opposing western flank of the URG (Palatinate Forest)
are confirmed by Link (2009). The almost entire restriction
to Late Cretaceous AFT ages point to an essentially similar thermal evolution, as described before for the Thuringian
Forest and the Harz Mountains further northeast (Fig. 1).
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
In summary, thermochronological data from most of the
basement uplifts in central Europe provide evidence for a
phase of Late Cretaceous cooling and exhumation. This is
most obvious and accentuated for an approximately 300 ×
250 km region in central Germany, encompassing the Harz
Mountains and the Thuringian Forest, as well as the Flechtingen and Ibbenbüren High in the north and the Odenwald in
the south (i.e. the main study area as outlined in Sect. 4).
Further south, at the flanks of the URG, this event also
seems important but is partly masked by Cenozoic rifting
and magmatic–hydrothermal activity. Towards the east, the
margins of the Bohemian Massif provide ample evidence
for Late Cretaceous cooling and exhumation, with variable
expansion into the Paleogene, especially at its western and
eastern margins. Even for the most distant areas in the west
(Ardennes) and east (Holy Cross Mts.), Late Cretaceous to
Paleogene cooling is considered a relevant part of the postVariscan evolution.
4 Study area in central Germany and sample coverage
The main study area approximately coincides with the northern half of the German uplands region (“Mittelgebirge”,
Fig. 3). It is underlain by a mostly sedimentary substrate
of variable lithology and structural complexity. Its northern
part borders the inverted Lower Saxony Basin (LSB) in the
west and the Northeast German Basin (NEGB) in the east
(Fig. 1). The southern border of the LSB is thrust onto the
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Cretaceous Münsterland Basin along the Osning Fault, a regional reactivated normal fault. The Münsterland Basin overlies the margin of the Rhenish Massif. The NEGB is bounded
to the south by the Gardelegen reverse fault, which creates
a major basement step (Fig. 4). Two additional prominent
basement uplifts related to major Cretaceous thrust faults follow towards the south (Harz Mountains and Thuringian Forest), separated by wide synclinal areas dominated by Triassic
strata. The Gardelegen Fault and northern Harz thrust fault
are associated with syn-inversion Cretaceous growth strata in
the Northeast German Basin and the Subhercynian Basin, respectively. The Thuringian Forest passes into the Thuringian
Schiefergebirge and the Bohemian Massif towards the southeast. All three are bordered by the Franconian Line, a regional southwest-directed reverse fault. The Osning Fault
and Franconian Line approximately mark the southwestern
limit of strong Mesozoic deformation. They are connected
by an array of smaller fault zones (e.g. the Hessian grabens),
most of which are extensional structures displaying signs of
inversion (e.g. Lotze, 1948; Kley et al., 2008). Similar fault
zones south of the Franconian Line are the southernmost expression of Late Cretaceous inversion on the transect in Fig. 4
(Kämmlein et al., 2020). The Odenwald and Spessart in the
west are uplifts of the Variscan basement not associated with
major Cretaceous thrust faults (Fig. 3). The gently warped
Franconian platform underlies the cuesta landscape of southern Germany (“Süddeutsches Schichtstufenland”) and dips
under the Cenozoic of the northern Alpine Molasse foreland
basin in the south.
A total of 10 major geological–structural units are defined in the study area considering the major fault patterns as
well as contrasts in the thickness, facies and preservation of
the Mesozoic–Cenozoic sequences (Fig. 5). Only the Lower
Saxony Basin and the Harz Foreland Basin show a more or
less complete record of Mesozoic sedimentation. In the central part of the study area, drained by the Werra, Fulda and
Weser rivers (WFW), as well as the Thuringian Basin and
the Franconian platform, Triassic sedimentary rocks are exposed at the surface, while Jurassic and Cretaceous strata
are rarely preserved (Fig. 3). The latter also applies for the
Leipzig Basin, but a largely continuous Tertiary cover is preserved there. The deepest denudation has obviously affected
the crystalline basement highs, namely the Harz Mountains,
Thuringian Forest, Rhenish Massif and Bohemian Massif,
where Variscan metamorphic and intrusive rocks as well as
some Permian deposits are exposed at the surface, and no
stratigraphic evidence is available for the thickness of the former Mesozoic and Cenozoic cover.
Samples
More than 300 samples have been collected, and the results
are based on the analysis of more than 100 samples suitable
for thermochronology, covering an area of about 300 km in
E–W extension and 220 km in N–S extension (see Supplehttps://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
941
Figure 3. Geological map of the study area (simplified after Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, 2004; ∗ affected
by a variable degree of metamorphic overprint). Abbreviations are
used for geological–structural units mentioned in the text and correspond to the stratigraphical columns in Fig. 5a: LSB – Lower Saxony Basin, HFB – Harz Foreland Basin, HM – Harz Mountains, LB
– Leipzig Basin, TB – Thuringian Basin, TF – Thuringian Forest,
WFW – Werra–Fulda–Weser region, E-RM – eastern Rhenish Massif, FP – Franconian platform, W-BM – western Bohemian Massif. Locations of further geographical–geological units mentioned
in the text are labelled with numbers: (1) Thuringian Schiefergebirge, (2) Odenwald, (3) Spessart, (4) Vogelsberg, (5) Rhön,
(6) Kyffhäuser High, (7) Münsterland Basin. The black line indicates the trace of the section shown in Fig. 4.
ment S1 and S2). Because the basement uplifts are largely
well characterized in terms of thermochronology (Sect. 3),
the sampling strategy focuses on areas between these uplifts such as the Thuringian Basin, the Weser hills (Weserbergland) and the Hessian grabens as well as areas marginal
to the Rhenish Massif and the western Bohemian Massif.
Moreover, a couple of samples have been taken from the
Thuringian Forest and the Franconian platform to trace the
thermal history of the Triassic strata towards the south.
Samples comprise mostly siliciclastic rocks from the Early
Triassic (Buntsandstein, n = 63), late Paleozoic (Devonian to
Permian, n = 33), Late Triassic (Keuper, n = 8) and Early
Jurassic (n = 1). Further samples include Variscan granite
(n = 2 including one granite pebble from Permian clastics),
Devonian diabase (n = 2) and Permian rhyolite (n = 1). The
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
942
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Figure 4. Regional cross section from the Danube to the Elbe (location in Fig. 3). Strong inversion-related deformation from the Thuringian
Forest towards the north contrasts with long-wavelength undulations of the area to the south. Faults are shown schematically but with correct
general dip. The area north of the Harz Mountains is simplified from Jähne (in Kley et al., 2008, p. 105) and Malz et al. (2020).
distribution of the samples with respect to stratigraphical levels of the different geological–structural units in the study
area is outlined in Fig. 5a. Almost all samples are surface
samples except for four drill-core samples taken from depths
shallower than 500 m. All 110 samples listed were used for
apatite fission-track analysis, while 37 of them were also
suited for apatite (U–Th) / He thermochronology.
5 New thermochronological data
5.1
Methods
For apatite fission-track analysis, the external detector
method was used (Gleadow, 1981). Highly enriched apatite concentrates were embedded in epoxy resin, diamondpolished in five steps and etched by 5.5 N HNO3 solution
for 20 s at 21 ◦ C (Donelick et al., 1999). The apatite grain
mounts with the etched spontaneous tracks were covered
with freshly cleaved muscovite sheets as external track detectors and irradiated with thermal neutrons in the research
reactor of the TU Munich in Garching. A Corning glass
dosimeter (CN5) was used to monitor the neutron fluence.
After irradiation the tracks in the external detectors were revealed by etching in 40 % HF for 40 min at 21 ◦ C. Spontaneous and induced fission tracks were counted under 1000×
magnification using a Zeiss Axioskop microscope equipped
with a computer-controlled stage system (Dumitru, 1993).
Only apatite crystals with a well-polished surface parallel to
the crystallographic c axis were considered. In most cases
20 to 25 grains were measured per sample. Additionally, the
Dpar values were measured in each dated apatite crystal, and
the lengths of horizontal confined tracks were determined in
most of the samples. AFT ages were calculated using the zeta
age calibration method (Hurford and Green, 1983) with the
standards listed in Hurford (1998). Data processing and plotting were performed with the TRACKKEY software (Dunkl,
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
2002), while errors were calculated using the classical procedure described in Green (1981).
For apatite (U–Th) / He analysis the crystals were
wrapped in platinum capsules and heated in the full-metal
extraction line by an infrared laser for 2 min in high vacuum.
The extracted gas was purified using a SAES Ti–Zr getter
kept at 450 ◦ C. The chemically inert noble gases and a minor amount of other rest gases were then expanded into a
Hiden triple-filter quadrupole mass spectrometer equipped
with a positive ion-counting detector. Beyond the detection
of helium the partial pressures of some rest gases were continuously monitored (H2 , CH4 , H2 O, N2 , Ar and CO2 ). He
blanks were estimated using the same procedure on empty
Pt tubes, and the crystals were checked for degassing of He
by sequential reheating and He measurement. The amount of
He extracted in the second runs is usually below 1 %. Following degassing, samples were retrieved from the gas extraction
line and spiked with calibrated 230 Th and 233 U solutions. The
apatite crystals were dissolved in a 4 % HNO3 + 0.05 % HF
acid mixture in Savillex Teflon vials. Each sample batch was
prepared with a series of procedural blanks and spiked normals to check the purity and calibration of the reagents and
spikes. Spiked solutions were analysed by a Thermo iCAPQ ICP-MS. The ejection correction factors (Ft) were determined for the single crystals by a modified algorithm of Farley et al. (1996) using an in-house spreadsheet.
Single-crystal aliquots were dated, usually with three
aliquots per sample. The crystals were inspected for inclusions under 250× magnification and cross-polarized light.
Inclusion- and fissure-free, intact, mostly euhedral apatite
crystals were selected from igneous samples. The siliciclastic samples, however, contain mostly well-rounded apatite
grains with dull or rugged surfaces. The interiors of such
grains were controlled in alcohol immersion, but due to the
limited optical resolution they may contain tiny inclusions
that were overlooked and may have led to minor contributions of excess helium. The shape parameters for the Ft
correction were determined and archived by multiple digihttps://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
943
Figure 5. (a) Compilation of stratigraphical data for various geological–structural units of the study area as mentioned in the text and
indicated in Fig. 3. The approximate thicknesses of the strata are given in kilometres. C and V: Carboniferous (meta)sedimentary and Variscan
metamorphic or igneous basement rocks, respectively. Black dots represent the stratigraphic levels of the samples used for thermochronology.
(b) Transect along the cross section in Fig. 4, showing primary variations in thickness and different preservation. The units shown in (a) are
projected onto the transect if appropriate. Zechstein to Triassic strata exhibit a relatively monotonous southward thickness decrease and
onlap onto Variscan basement of the southern basin margin. Eroded thicknesses of Jurassic and Cretaceous strata from the central segment
are primarily constrained by thermochronological data. Thickness data are from Boigk and Schöneich (1974) and Hoth et al. (1993); contour
maps can be found in Freudenberger and Schwerd (1996) and Franke (2020).
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
944
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
tal microphotographs. The morphology of the euhedral crystals was approximated by the combination of prismatic and
pyramidal faces, while in the case of rounded grains it was
approximated by oblate and prolate ellipsoids.
5.2
Results of apatite fission-track analysis
The AFT apparent ages range from 208–53 Ma, with the
majority of ages (∼ 60 %) falling into the Late Cretaceous
(Fig. 6 and Supplement S3). Paleocene to earliest Eocene
ages contribute ∼ 21 % and Early Cretaceous ages ∼ 17 %
to the entire distribution, while older ages are very rare.
Track length measurements reveal mean values between 11.5
and 14.1 µm and standard deviations between 0.9 and 2.7 µm
(Supplement S4). Relations between track length data and
apparent ages display boomerang-like shapes (Green, 1986);
i.e. the youngest and the oldest ages tend to have slightly
longer tracks and narrow track length distributions (Fig. 6).
Dpar values range from 1.70 to 3.47 µm with a mean of
2.46 µm, pointing to overall relatively high thermal retentivity of fission tracks in the lattice of the dated apatite crystals
(Donelick et al., 2005).
For evaluation, the new apatite fission-track data are assigned to five regions according to the spatial clustering
of the samples, data coherence, and their belonging to the
geological–structural units and stratigraphic levels as introduced in Figs. 3 and 4. These are the following: (i) the core
of the study area formed by the Buntsandstein uplands in
northern Hesse and southern Lower Saxony, drained by the
Weser, Fulda and Werra rivers (WFW); (ii) Triassic of the
centre of the Thuringian Basin (TB); (iii) the transition from
the eastern Thuringian Basin into the Thuringian Schiefergebirge (i.e. western margin of the Bohemian Massif; W-BM);
(iv) late Paleozoic to Early Triassic of the eastern margin of
the Rhenish Massif (E-RM); and (v) the Franconian platform (FP) south of the Thuringian Forest (Fig. 7). The elevated basement highs of the Harz Mountains (HM) and the
Thuringian Forest (TF) also yield very coherent age data. For
the evaluation of these two units a few new data are combined
with published data by von Eynatten et al. (2019) and Thomson and Zeh (2000), respectively. Note that not all samples
are included in these seven regions.
The core region of the study area, WFW, exhibits Late
Cretaceous to earliest Eocene ages (90–53 Ma). It shows a
relatively large contribution of early Tertiary ages (17 out
of 26) compared to the overall age distribution and includes
the youngest ages of the entire study area (Fig. 7a). Remarkably, WFW includes a small basement uplift (mostly Devonian greywackes, “Werra-Grauwackensattel”), which yields
a similar Paleocene AFT age as the adjacent Buntsandstein
(57 vs. 62 Ma, respectively; see Fig. 7a and Supplement S1–
S3). South of the Thuringian Forest and on the Franconian
platform AFT data reveal a narrow Late Cretaceous to Paleocene AFT age range (74–57 Ma), rather similar to WFW.
In the Thuringian Basin AFT apparent ages range from 123–
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
Figure 6. Cumulative frequency distributions of apatite fissiontrack (AFT) and apatite (U–Th) / He (AHe) ages from the study
area. Bold numbers indicate the medians of the two datasets. The
green area indicates the time interval of Late Cretaceous. The inset
highlights the fact that long mean track lengths (MTLs) are mostly
associated with AFT ages younger than ∼ 80 Ma.
57 Ma. Late Cretaceous ages are predominant in the central
part of the basin (TB, except for one Paleocene age); however, towards its eastern margin several Early Cretaceous
ages are observed (123–104 Ma). This trend towards older
ages extends into the Thuringian Schiefergebirge with Early
Cretaceous to Late Jurassic ages (151–131 Ma). Because this
trend does not allow clear separation, the eastern Thuringian
Basin and the Schiefergebirge have been grouped together
(W-BM; Fig. 7a). A similar situation, although flipped in
the orientation of the age trend, is observed at the eastern
margin of the Rhenish Massif (E-RM). Late Paleozoic rocks
within the massif reveal, besides Late Cretaceous ages, several Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous ages (101–151 Ma)
and a single Late Triassic age at the westernmost location.
East of the Rhenish Massif, Lower Triassic sandstones reveal exclusively Late Cretaceous ages (90–67 Ma; Fig. 7a).
The Permo-Triassic samples clustering to the southeast of the
Harz Mountains and around the fault-bounded Kyffhäuser
High range between 106 and 61 Ma. Due to structural complexity they were not treated as a coherent group here. The
oldest age of 106 Ma occurs at the western edge of the
Kyffhäuser High and suggests transition to the Early Cretaceous ages observed along the western and southern rim of
the Harz (von Eynatten et al., 2019).
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
945
Figure 8. (a) Cumulative distribution of apatite fission-track ages
sorted for the individual regions outlined in Fig. 7. Note that the central Thuringian Basin data (TB) are plotted together with its eastern
transition into the Bohemian Massif (W-BM) in a single cumulative curve but with a different colour. The Harz Mountains data are
taken from von Eynatten et al. (2019), and the Thuringian Forest
dataset is composed of our new results and data published by Thomson and Zeh (2000). (b) Histograms and kernel density estimates
(KDEs; Vermeesch, 2012) to emphasize the highly significant contrast of Werra–Fulda–Weser (WFW) and Franconian platform (FP)
data versus Harz Mountains (HM) and Thuringian Forest (TF) data,
which differ by 15 to 20 Myr.
Figure 7. Spatial presentation of the new apatite fissiontrack (a) and (U–Th) / He ages (b). The map is a simplified version
of Fig. 3; grey represents Permian Rotliegend and older formations
(i.e. pre-Zechstein). Coloured envelopes in (a) highlight the regions
defined in the text and Fig. 3, where most of the samples are clustering. Small white circles in and around the Harz Mountains indicate localities of low-T thermochronology data by von Eynatten
et al. (2019). The bigger white circle in the Thuringian Forest indicates the locality of the AFT samples from the Ruhla Crystalline
Complex; Thomson and Zeh (2000).
The comparison of the cumulative distributions of the individual regions reveals almost identical pairwise patterns for
the following regions: (i) WFW and FP, (ii) E-RM and TB +
W-BM, and (iii) the thrusted basement blocks represented by
the Harz and the Thuringian Forest (Fig. 8a). The age contrast between (i) and (iii) is about 10–15 Ma, rather constant
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
over most of the age distribution. Given the high number of
samples this age contrast is highly significant (Fig. 8b). At
the margins of the study area (E-RM and W-BM), the apparent ages are mostly older, including high proportions of
Turonian and older ages (> 90 Ma), which tend to have a
shorter track length (Fig. 6). However, their youngest Late
Cretaceous age components, derived from the Lower Triassic sandstones bordering the Rhenish Massif and the central
Thuringian Basin (TB), are similar to the youngest ages of
the thrusted basement blocks (Fig. 8a).
5.3
Results of apatite (U–Th) / He analysis
The calculated unweighted average sample ages (referred to
as AHe age) range from 90–44 Ma, with the majority of ages
(∼ 62 %) falling into the Late Cretaceous (Fig. 6 and Supplement S5). The rest are Paleocene ages and a single middle
Eocene age. Standard deviations of the AHe ages vary from 1
to 12 Myr. The median of all AHe ages (67.5 Ma) is younger
than the median of all AFT ages (74.7 Ma; Fig. 6). The AHe
cumulative age distribution overlaps the AFT distribution for
the youngest ages.
The spatial distribution of the AHe ages is rather uniform, without a significant contrast between the individual
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
946
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
regions considered (Fig. 7b). For the core region of the study
area (WFW), AHe ages range from 82 to 57 Ma, which is
well in line with the overall range. In fact, the mean age of
WFW is almost undistinguishable from the mean of all AHe
ages (66.8 vs. 68.6 Ma, respectively). The two oldest AHe
ages (87 and 90 Ma) occur in the eastern Thuringian Basin.
However, a trend of increasing ages towards the Thuringian
Schiefergebirge (W-BM) is not observed, in contrast to the
AFT data. Similarly, no trend is visible at the eastern margin of the Rhenish Massif (E-RM). The single Eocene AHe
age of 44 Ma is obtained from Late Triassic sandstone of the
Franconian platform (FP) with an AFT age of 63 Ma.
6 Thermal modelling
6.1
Temperature–time paths based on low-T
thermochronological data
Details of the low-T thermal history of the different regions are elucidated using the HeFTy modelling programme
(Ketcham, 2005), operating with the multikinetic fissiontrack annealing model of Ketcham et al. (2007) and using
Dpar as a kinetic parameter. For the diffusion kinetics of helium in apatite the constraints of Farley (2000) were used.
For the modelling the following constraints were considered: (i) current annual mean temperature for the surface
samples and the relevant borehole temperature for the drill
cores, (ii) onset of the cooling history at the late stages of
the Variscan orogeny at ∼ 300 Ma, (iii) surface temperature
of approximately 20 ◦ C at ca. 290–250 Ma for the Permian
and 250–230 Ma for the Triassic sediments, and (iv) surface temperature of approximately 20 ◦ C for the onset of
the Paleogene burial (ca. 45–35 Ma). The latter constraint is
crucial for the modelling of the study area. The Paleogene
sediments are widespread and seal the erosional surface of
the Permo-Triassic strata, especially in the west (E-RM) and
east (Leipzig Basin, see Fig. 5a). At least the eastern part of
the Thuringian Basin corresponds to a planation surface, as
demonstrated by scattered remnants of thin fluvial sediments
of supposedly Oligocene age (“Hochflächensedimente”; Seidel, 2003, p. 415). Thus, although these areas are currently
uncovered their surface can be considered the prolongation
of the Triassic–Paleogene unconformity. We allowed an unsupervised run for the modelling algorithm in the time range
between the Permo-Triassic and Eocene surface temperature
constraints.
The modelled temperature–time (tT ) paths are rather uniform within the individual regions outlined above; Fig. 9
shows a selection covering all regions including a northern
and a southern example for the core region WFW (Fig. 9d
and e, respectively). A prominent feature of the tT paths obtained in many samples is a characteristic inflexion at around
90–70 Ma indicating the onset of cooling. It appears in all
Triassic samples from the WFW, FP and TB regions, but also
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
in the basement samples of TF. If we zoom into the post90 Ma cooling paths a striking difference can be recognized
for the samples from WFW and the Franconian platform
when compared to the samples from the Thuringian Forest
and the Harz Mountains (see pairwise comparison of the tT
paths in Fig. 9a vs. d and b vs. e). The former show a quasilinear cooling path between the inflexion point and the age
of the onlapping Paleogene sediments, while the basement
highs (TF and HM) show a more hyperbolic cooling trend
(i.e. initial quick cooling followed by slower cooling). This
observation explains, besides the slightly younger inflexion
points, the significantly younger apparent ages of the WFW
and FP samples.
At the boundaries of the study area, the eastern flank of
the Rhenish Massif (E-RM) and the western flank of the Bohemian Massif (W-BM), the time–temperature paths (Fig. 9g
and h) are clearly different compared to both the central
part and the internal basement highs: the thermal climax is
older and mostly Jurassic in age, and the Late Cretaceous
inflexion does not appear except for samples having approximately 80 Ma or younger AFT apparent ages (Fig. 7a). The
samples selected for illustration in Fig. 9 (g and h) represent
the > 90 Ma AFT ages, which are dominant in the late Paleozoic rocks detected at the margins of both massifs (W-BM
and E-RM at 131 and 141 Ma, respectively).
6.2
Reconstruction of the missing sequence
The very characteristic thermal paths described above and
the lithology and thickness conditions of the post-Triassic sequences in the well-preserved basins (Fig. 5) form the base
for the reconstruction of the missing sequences from the
deeply eroded regions, where only Variscan basement rocks
and Permo-Triassic formations are exposed at the surface.
The modelling was performed by a combination of PetroMod
(Schlumberger) and HeFTy (Ketcham, 2005) software.
In the first step, the stratigraphic information from the preserved surrounding basins is crucial for the modelling. The
Triassic sequences have relatively constant thickness (Figs. 4
and 5) and were thus considered invariable for the modelling.
In contrast, the Jurassic and Cretaceous strata are highly variable in thickness, and thus the magnitude of late Mesozoic
burial was considered variable for the modelling (e.g. Hoth
et al., 1993). Sensitivity analyses reveal that the influence
of relative proportions of the Jurassic and Cretaceous thicknesses is negligible because their variation impacts the prograde thermal path only, while the thermal reset of the AFT
age is mostly sensitive to the temperature at the deepest burial
stage, i.e. around the onset of basin inversion. For constraining the lithological parameters, we used limestone for the
Middle Triassic, siltstone for the Upper Triassic, shale and
siltstone for the Jurassic, and marl for the Cretaceous sequences. The outcome of this step is a thermal path generated for the specific stratigraphic level, which was dated by
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
947
Figure 9. Time–temperature (tT ) plots showing the envelopes of the good results of the modelling series performed on selected samples from
the different regions. The modelling has been performed by HeFTy software (Ketcham, 2005) using the AFT data. Only tT paths classified
as good fits by the programme are considered. The dark grey sections represent the well-constrained intervals of the cooling histories, while
the light grey fields indicate the time–temperature regime where the modelling results carry insignificant information, as these ranges are
older than the oldest fission tracks in the samples. Grey boxes indicate the time–temperature constraints when the dated samples experienced
surface temperature conditions. The graphs in the upper right emphasize the contrast in the post-climax cooling paths between the exhumed
basement blocks (a, b) and the Permo-Triassic of the WFW core region (d, e).
the AFT method using the assumed burial history and heat
flow.
In a second step, this thermal path was used to calculate
an apatite fission-track age. The calculated age is then compared to the measured age, and according to the difference a
misfit plot is constructed using the goodness of fit (GoF; see
Fig. 10), which expresses the probability of failing the null
hypothesis that the model and data are different (Ketcham,
2005). A detailed description of the two-step modelling procedure is given in Arató et al. (2018). Figure 10 shows the relation of the missing burial and the heat flow calculated for a
sample from the Thuringian Forest and the WFW region. The
negative correlation between the heat flow and the (paleo)burial is obvious; the undulation and lenses in the plots are
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
artefacts related to the calculated nodes within the plotting
areas. Considering heat flow values of 60–68 mW m−2 (see
discussion below) the removed thicknesses are of the order
of 3.5 to 4 km and very similar for both the TF and WFW
regions. Note that assuming much higher heat flow values of
80–85 mW m−2 still requires removal of 2.5 to 3 km of overburden (Fig. 10).
7 Discussion
In the following we first outline the principal constraints imposed by both the new and the published thermochronological data regarding magnitudes and timing of Mesozoic to
Cenozoic burial, exhumation and denudation. We then disSolid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
948
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
7.1
Figure 10. Modelled relations between heat flow and the thickness
of the missing sequence. The plots were generated by running 56
combinations of assumed heat flow and cover sequence thicknesses
using PetroMod (Schlumberger) and HeFTy (Ketcham, 2005) software. The isolines represent the goodness of fit (GoF) calculated
according to the apatite fission-track ages measured on the Lower
Triassic Bunter sandstone samples V-27 from the Thuringian Forest (a) and V-144 from the WFW region (b). A high GoF value
(max = 1) indicates a good match between the measured and calculated values. The burial and exhumation trends applied for the burial
modelling follow the observed characteristics obtained by the thermal modelling of the Thuringian Forest and WFW samples. In case
(a) the inflexion of the thermal history was set to 90 Ma, followed
by rapid and then decreasing cooling, while in case (b) the inflexion is set to 75 Ma and the cooling rate is kept constant until the
Eocene (see text and top right panels in Fig. 9). The light vertical band represents a most likely heat flow of 60 to 68 mW m−2 .
The corresponding burial amounts to 3.5 to 4 km, which is actually
undistinguishable for the two modelled scenarios.
cuss the validity of the range of assumed heat flow values in
the light of Late Cretaceous to Paleogene volcanism. Eventually, we evaluate potential driving mechanisms for the inferred uplift and exhumation based on their magnitudes and
rates. Although the discussion is focused on the main study
area in central Germany, any model has to consider that the
entire region which experienced Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation and erosion is considerably larger, as summarized in Sect. 3.
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
Constraints from thermochronology and thermal
modelling
Thermochronological data and modelling results in concert
with sedimentological and/or stratigraphic data related to
thrusted basement blocks in central Europe suggest exhumation and erosion of several kilometres of late Paleozoic to
Mesozoic overburden in Late Cretaceous to Paleocene time
(see Sect. 3 and Fig. 2). For the basements blocks within or
adjacent to the main study area in central Germany the removed overburden amounts to at least 6 km in the case of
the Harz Mountains (von Eynatten et al., 2019) and about 3–
4 km in the case of the Thuringian Forest. For the latter similar values are obtained for the crystalline core (Ruhla Crystalline Complex; Thomson and Zeh, 2000) and Lower Triassic sandstones from the rim (Fig. 10a). Most of this removal
occurred in Late Cretaceous time. Similar timing and magnitude have also been reported for the Flechtingen High to the
north of the Harz Mountains (Fischer et al., 2012; Figs. 1 and
4).
The new thermochronological data presented for the Triassic sedimentary rocks exposed between and around the
thrusted basement blocks (Fig. 7) suggest extensive exhumation and substantial erosion that are similar in magnitude to
many thrusted basement blocks (i.e. 3–4 km assuming typical geothermal gradients and heat flow for continental crust;
see Fig. 10 and Sect. 7.2). This regional exhumation feature holds at least for the main study area, covering about
200 × 300 km in central Germany and referred to here as domal uplift (Fig. 11). In contrast to the basement blocks, the
areas in between, reflecting the domal uplift, are associated
with significantly younger AFT ages mostly ranging from
75–55 Ma (compared to 85–70 Ma for the basement blocks,
Fig. 8b). This contrast is also recorded by a later onset of
cooling and exhumation in the tT paths (Fig. 9, at ∼ 75 Ma
instead of ∼ 90 Ma). Overall, long tracks, narrow track length
distributions and mostly tight ranges of apparent ages suggest that uplift and erosion occurred over a relatively short
time interval of several million years to a few tens of million years, translating into exhumation rates of about 0.1 to
0.5 mm yr−1 . The 75–55 Ma age range for regional exhumation in Germany is similar to an early Cenozoic (65–55 Ma)
exhumation event affecting most of the British Isles (Holford
et al., 2009a, and references cited therein). Whether or not
these spatially separated events reflect a common underlying
process remains to be established.
Towards the margins of the study area, at the transition
to the Rhenish Massif in the west and Bohemian Massif in
the east, exhumation is less pronounced and extends over a
longer time span (Late Jurassic to Cretaceous). Although a
general trend of increasing AFT ages towards the exposed
Paleozoic basement rocks is visible (Fig. 7a), the age patterns
are rather heterogeneous for these two regions, most likely
because the margins of the large basement massifs are structurally complex and the thickness and facies of the Mesozoic
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
sedimentary coverage was variable at relatively small spatial scales. The magnitudes of Late Cretaceous to Paleocene
exhumation and erosion are remarkably reduced, most likely
due to a combination of overall less Mesozoic burial, the lack
of pronounced thrusting comparable to, e.g. the Harz Mountains, and waning uplift towards the margins of the dome.
Interestingly, the tT paths for these regions (Fig. 9g and h)
are rather flat at 100–75 Ma, implying relatively stable thermal conditions, which preclude both strong cooling due to
exhumation and a regional thermal pulse in Late Cretaceous
time. The slight increase in temperature at around 75–55 Ma
appears similar to the southern rim of the Harz Mountains
(Fig. 9i), where it has been interpreted as temporal burial
due to storage of detritus delivered from the exhuming Harz
Mountains (von Eynatten et al., 2019).
7.2
Volcanism and heat flow
Mostly Tertiary alkaline basic volcanic rocks such as basanites, nephelinites and alkali olivine basalts, along with minor occurrences of more differentiated rocks such as phonolites and trachytes, characterize the Central European Volcanic Province (Wilson and Downes, 1991; Wedepohl et al.,
1994). It includes major occurrences of volcanic rocks like
the Eifel, Westerwald, Vogelsberg and Rhön in central Germany (Fig. 3) and the Eger rift in the Czech Republic. Published ages vary from the middle Eocene to Quaternary; however, most occurrences are Oligocene–Miocene in age (e.g.
Becker, 1993; Wedepohl et al., 1994). The Miocene Vogelsberg volcano in northern Hesse, dated between 18 and 14 Ma
(Bogaard and Wörner, 2003), forms the centre of the Central European Volcanic Province with respect to both location and volume. The geochemical and isotopic characteristics of the volcanic rocks mainly suggest derivation from
an upwelling asthenospheric mantle source, although some
parts of the melts indicate a cooler origin in the lithosphere
affected by asthenospheric melts (“veined lithospheric mantle”; Boogaard and Wörner, 2003; Jung et al., 2005). The
more differentiated rocks of the Central European Volcanic
Province suggest variable crustal contamination (e.g. Wörner
et al., 1985; Kolb et al., 2012; Jung et al., 2013).
Although the Central European Volcanic Province is
mainly a late Eocene to Miocene feature, there is widespread
evidence for Late Cretaceous to Paleocene volcanic activity
in the entire area. This includes zircon U–Pb ages of 70–
67 Ma from trachytes and syenites from the Vogelsberg area
and further occurrences to the north and south of the Odenwald (Schmitt et al., 2007; Martha et al., 2014). Similar ages
(68 and 69 Ma) are reported from Ar / Ar dating of amphibole from camptonite dikes cutting the Paleozoic–Mesozoic
basement of the Vogelsberg volcano (Bogaard and Wörner,
2003). Further south, along the margins of the Upper Rhine
Graben, Ar / Ar dating of basic alkaline volcanic intrusions
and dikes revealed Paleocene to early Eocene ages between
61 and 47 Ma (see compilation in Walter et al., 2018). Siebel
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
949
et al. (2009) reported radiometric data from zircon crystals
derived from alkaline basalts of the Eger rift. Whereas the
(U–Th) / He cooling ages of these zircons reflect the wellknown late Oligocene eruption of the lavas, their U–Pb data
suggest crystallization ages ranging from 83–51 Ma. The
data reflect multiple or protracted zircon growth events or
reset at different times long before eruption and suggest survival of the in zircons in a locally enriched chemical environment affected by asthenospheric upwelling processes or
zircon growth in a metasomatically enriched subcontinental
lithospheric mantle (Siebel et al., 2009).
The contrast between the inferred eroded thicknesses from
thermochronological data for the Thuringian Forest and the
significantly lower thicknesses derived from stratigraphic
data for the adjacent basins led Thomson and Zeh (2000) to
speculate about (i) hitherto unreported thicknesses of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous strata (which in required thickness
are only available in the Lower Saxony Basin and small confined basins like the Harz Foreland Basin, Fig. 5) and/or
(ii) increased geothermal gradients. The latter, however,
would have to be as high as ∼ 55–60 ◦ C km−1 to fully account for the temperatures attained under a thin overburden.
Assuming common thermal conductivity values for upper
crustal rocks of 2–3 W mK−1 (e.g. Mielke et al., 2017), the
corresponding heat flow would be about 110–180 mW m−2 ,
which is even higher than the extreme values recorded in the
Pannonian Basin and most of the Basin-and-Range Province
at present (Lenkey et al., 2002; Sass et al., 1994). Northeast
of the study area, in the Northeast German Basin, present
heat flow values range from about 70 to 90 mW m−2 (Norden et al., 2008). Towards the study area, these values appear
to decrease to thermal gradients around 30 ◦ C km−1 (Agemar et al., 2012, their Figs. 8 and 11). However, data coverage regarding the present subsurface temperature distribution
is rather poor for the central German uplands region. Thermometric and thermochronological studies from the Rhenish
Massif call for a “normal” and stable geothermal gradient
since late Paleozoic times (Glasmacher et al., 1998; Karg et
al., 2005). Further north, in the strongly inverted central and
southern part of the LSB, Senglaub et al. (2005) assumed
a slightly elevated gradient of about 40 ◦ C km−1 during the
time of maximum burial (i.e. Jurassic to Early Cretaceous).
To summarize, there is clear evidence that central Europe
was affected by alkaline intraplate volcanic activity in latest
Cretaceous to early Eocene time. The volumes are negligible
with respect to a regional heating event throughout the crust,
implying that our thermochronological data are not directly
influenced by volcanic heat production. Moreover, there is no
other clear evidence for large-scale and long-term increased
or reduced heat flow in central Europe. Therefore, it seems
justified to assume a typical gradient of ∼ 30 ◦ C km−1 and
heat flow of ∼ 65 mW m−2 for the modelling. However, the
widespread occurrence of volcanic activity, although thermally insignificant, points to synchronous and large-scale
processes in the asthenospheric mantle and/or across the
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
950
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Figure 11. The two superposed uplift and exhumation processes illustrated on the cross section in Fig. 4. Thrust-related uplift confined to
three discrete basement blocks is followed, possibly with some temporal overlap, by domal uplift persisting into the Paleogene. Uplift and
exhumation magnitudes are not to scale.
asthenospheric–lithospheric mantle boundary that likely affected geodynamics and uplift in central Europe at that time.
7.3
Potential mechanisms for uplift, exhumation and
denudation
The observable to be explained by a model for exhumation
away from the thrusted basement uplifts is domal uplift of an
area at least some 250–300 km across, with concomitant denudation of 3–4 km. Uplift and erosion occurred over a relatively short time interval of several million years to a few
tens of million years, corresponding to exhumation rates of
0.5 to 0.1 mm yr−1 . Afterwards, the crust subsided slightly,
as indicated by the remnants of Cenozoic marine strata, but
remained significantly uplifted above its previous elevation
and has not accommodated a new, thick sedimentary cover
to the present. With respect to timing, this event occurred
approximately 10 to 20 Myr after thrusting of the basement
blocks (Figs. 8 and 9).
In general, mechanisms capable of inducing longwavelength uplift of the continental crust can be grouped into
two categories. (1) The first category is isostatic. Elevation
change is caused by variations in the density and/or thickness of lithospheric materials or the asthenosphere. The crust
can be thickened via tectonic shortening or addition of melt
(Brodie and White, 1994; Ware and Tuner, 2002). Isostatic
mechanisms involving the mantle comprise thinning of the
lithospheric mantle by heating (thermal erosion) and translation of the lithosphere over more buoyant asthenosphere
(Carminati et al., 2009). (2) The second category is dynamic.
Uplift in this case is due to viscous stress from upwelling
mantle, or it results from buckling of the crust or entire lithosphere under tangential tectonic stress.
In the following paragraphs, we derive first-order estimates of key parameters for each mechanism listed, e.g. the
required magnitude of crustal shortening or lithospheric thinSolid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
ning. We do not exclude any mechanism beforehand, but the
estimated parameters suggest that some are highly unlikely.
For most mechanisms it is relatively straightforward to estimate whether they could have created uplift of sufficient
magnitude and rapidity. We conservatively consider 4 km of
uplifted crust to be fully eroded (no topography). In the case
of wholesale lithospheric uplift, the base of the lithosphere is
raised by h = 4 km, creating room for 4 km of asthenosphere
at the bottom of the column, while an equal amount of crust is
eroded from the top (Fig. 12a). The pressure increase equals
the load of the added asthenosphere minus the load of the
eroded crust following Eq. (1):
1p = ρast · g · h − ρc · g · h or
1p = (ρast − ρc ) · g · h, (1)
where ρast and ρc are the densities of the asthenosphere and
continental crust, and g is gravity acceleration. The pressure increase 1p must be compensated for by an equal but
upward-directed force per area, which can be created by the
addition of less dense material (for instance, rock of basaltic
composition instead of mantle rock) or removal of denser
material (for instance, mantle lithosphere replaced by asthenosphere). As 1p is the product of a density difference
and thickness (and constant gravity acceleration), the required thickness change for any material added or lost can
be calculated using Eq. (2):
(ρast − ρc ) · g · h = (ρast − ρx ) · g · x
or, eliminating g and rearranging,
(ρast − ρc )
x = h·
,
(ρast − ρx )
(2)
where x and ρx are the thickness and density of the material added or removed. The results are listed in Table 1 and
briefly discussed in the following. For the sake of simplicity,
we have chosen single density values rather than ranges. The
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
951
Figure 12. Scenarios for domal uplift inducing 4 km of erosion as discussed in the text. All indicated density values are in grams per cubic
centimetre (g cm−3 ). Sketches are not to scale. (a) Generic case of lithospheric uplift with 4 km of crust eroded and 4 km of asthenosphere
added; the thickness of the lithospheric mantle is unchanged. (b) Crust thickened by folding and thrusting restored to original thickness by
erosion. Tectonic thickening of lithospheric mantle depends on its original thickness and was not considered in our estimate. (c) Underplating
by mafic melt. The mafic lens lifts up the Moho but does not replace continental crust. The thickness of the lithospheric mantle unchanged.
(d) Thinning of the mantle lithosphere by thermal erosion. (e) Dynamic topography caused by mantle upwelling. After erosion, the configuration is similar to (a), with asthenosphere replacing continental crust. In nature, (c), (d) and (e) are not mutually independent. See Table 1
for a derivation of numerical values.
Table 1. Estimates of parameters for the mechanisms of uplift and exhumation discussed in the text.
Mechanism
Material x
Density
Replacing
(g cm−3 )
Tectonic thickening
Magmatic underplating
Lithospheric thinning
Continental crust
Basalt
Asthenosphere
2.7
3
3.25
Asthenosphere
Asthenosphere
Lithospheric mantle
Asthenosphere
Asthenosphere
3.25
3.25
Air
Continental crust
Density
Density
difference
Thickness
change∗
Pressure
change
(ρast –ρx )
Density
difference
ratio
(ρast –ρc ) / (ρast –ρx )
(g cm−3 )
(km)
(MPa)
3.25
3.25
3.3
0.55
0.25
−0.05
1
2.2
−11
4
8.8
−44
22
22
22
0
2.7
3.25
0.55
0.17
1.00
1
5.9
32.5
32.5
Upwelling mantle
Surface uplift (no erosion)
Erosion of crust
∗ The thickness change is calculated for 4 km of exhumation, except for the upwelling mantle case in which it is calculated from 1 km of dynamic topography.
results do not change fundamentally if densities are varied
within reasonable limits.
7.3.1
Tectonic thickening of the crust
Thrusting and folding would have to thicken the crust by
4 km before erosion restores it to its original thickness
(Fig. 12b). Increasing the crustal thickness in the core region from its present (and, by inference, also pre-inversion)
value of 30 to 34 km requires shortening by 12 %. This is a
conservative estimate because we assume that no topography
is left at the end of erosion and do not consider the subsidence caused by tectonically thickened lithospheric mantle.
The total shortening accommodated by folding and thrusting in Germany during Late Cretaceous inversion has been
estimated at 13.5 to 15 km (Jähne et al., 2009), corresponding to an average percent shortening across the 250 km wide
uplift of around 6 %. Crustal shortening could thus make
a significant contribution to exhumation but not explain its
full amplitude, even if the shortening accommodated by inhttps://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
dividual inversion structures may be underestimated (Eisenstadt and Withjack, 1995; Holford et al., 2009b; Bolz and
Kley, 2021). The need for an additional uplift mechanism is
also evidenced by the observation that structural lows such
as the Thuringian Basin (syncline) did not subside but were
strongly exhumed (Fig. 4). As regards the uplift rate, tectonic
shortening thickens the crust at the shortening rate divided by
the aspect ratio of the deforming cross-sectional area, in our
case about 10 (300 km length / 30 km thickness); 1 mm yr−1
of shortening would give 0.1 mm yr−1 of thickening, and it
would take 40 Myr to thicken the crust by 4 km. Notice, however, that this shortening rate derives from the estimated magnitude of less than 20 km shortening and does not provide an
independent constraint on the capability of crustal thickening
to drive exhumation.
7.3.2
Magmatic underplating
Isostatic uplift due to underplating by basaltic melts has been
proposed for parts of the British Isles (e.g. Brodie and White,
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
952
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
1994; associated with the Iceland plume). The ca. 9 km thick
column of basalt required to drive 4 km of upper crustal erosion (Fig. 12c, Table 1) is similar to the thickness of layered
mafic lower crust observed in many parts of central Europe.
However, this lower crust is commonly interpreted to reflect
crustal re-equilibration in Permian time (e.g. Lüschen et al.,
1990), and it seems unlikely that the crust before Cretaceous
uplift was only 25 km thick (calculated as the pre-erosion
thickness of 34 km minus 9 km of basalt). The attainable uplift rate depends on the rate of magma production. Underplating the entire area of Cretaceous uplift (ca. 70 000 km2 ) by
several kilometres of basaltic melt would require a magma
volume typical of large igneous provinces (LIPs; e.g. Stein
et al., 2018, their Fig. 8). As the production of basaltic melts
can be very fast and continental flood basalts are typically
erupted over only a few million years (Self et al., 2014), the
emplacement rate is not limiting. However, the sparse Late
Cretaceous to Paleocene volcanism makes central Europe a
highly unlikely location for a LIP of that age, ruling out magmatic underplating as a driver of Late Cretaceous to Paleogene regional uplift.
by faster dynamic uplift as the plume reaches the base of the
lithosphere (see also Friedrich et al., 2018, for predicted geological effects of mantle plumes). Extremely fast removal of
the continental lithosphere over only a few hundred thousand
years by an impinging thermochemical plume that contains
a large amount of recycled oceanic crust was modelled by
Sobolev et al. (2011) but creates only about 200 m of noneroded uplift.
7.3.3
Isostatic calculations can also be used to estimate uplift and
exhumation due to mantle flow. Observational data suggest
that upwelling mantle is able to sustain about 1 km of dynamic topography t (Braun et al., 2013), or 1 km of asthenosphere added to the base of the lithospheric column. If the topography is eroded while the mantle flow is maintained, the
eliminated crustal load allows for additional uplift of mantle. Eventually, the load of the mantle replacing eroded crust
equals that of the mantle column before erosion following
Eq. (3) (Fig. 12a, e):
Thinning of the lithospheric mantle
The lithospheric mantle must thin by several tens of kilometres to induce 4 km of erosion due to the small density
contrast of the lithosphere and asthenosphere (Fig. 12d, Table 1). Thickness variations of the lithospheric mantle over
time have been invoked to explain Mesozoic subsidence and
Cenozoic uplift in central Europe (Meier et al., 2016), but the
magnitude of these changes is difficult to constrain independently. Our approach of equating lithospheric thinning with
replacement of constant-density lithosphere by constantdensity asthenosphere is highly simplistic. The densities of
the asthenosphere and subcontinental lithospheric mantle
vary considerably with depth and geothermal gradient, and
our chosen density contrast of 0.05 g cm−3 may be on the
high side as an average value (Djomani et al., 2001). Duesterhoeft et al. (2012) modelled the density changes due to temperature, pressure and metamorphic reactions in a lithosphere
that undergoes protracted heating from a plume impinging on
its base at 1800 ◦ C. Metamorphic density changes were responsible for 350 m out of 1400 m total uplift after 130 Myr.
The effect would be smaller in our case in which the mantle temperature is presumably lower with less time available for heating. Thinning of the lithospheric mantle by upwelling asthenosphere strongly depends on the size of the uplifted area and thus the distance over which the asthenosphere
spreads laterally. Semi-analytical models (Davies, 1994) suggest that an initially 120 km thick continental lithosphere can
be thinned to less than 60 km within 25 Myr above a narrow
plume of 70 km diameter, creating 1.5 km of non-eroded uplift, but thinning and uplift are much less efficient for an area
300 km across. However, Davies (1994) also pointed out that
thinning of the lithosphere by a thermal plume is preceded
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
7.3.4
Relative motion of the lithosphere and
asthenosphere
Westward absolute motion of the European Plate over asthenosphere of lower density created at the Mid-Atlantic
Ridge was proposed as a cause of Cenozoic uplift (Carminati
et al., 2009). In Late Cretaceous time the mid-ocean ridge of
the North Atlantic did not exist yet, and central Europe cannot have moved over depleted asthenosphere formed there.
However, absolute motion could have moved central Europe
over long-lived dynamic topography (see next paragraph).
7.3.5
Dynamic topography
e · (ρast − ρc ) = ρast · t
or e = t ·
ρast
(ρast − ρc )
(3)
where e is eroded crustal thickness, t is dynamic topography,
and ρc and ρast are the densities of the crust and asthenosphere.
Mantle upwelling capable of sustaining 1 km of dynamic
topography could thus drive some 6 km of erosion (Table 1).
The rates at which dynamic topography grows and decays
depend on the mechanism assumed: topography can result
from (i) a lithospheric plate moving across a stable upwelling
area or swell related to long-term mantle convection (Braun
et al., 2013) or (ii) a plume-like perturbation rising beneath
the lithosphere. In the first case, the uplift rate depends on
absolute plate velocity and the geometry of the swell. In
the second case it depends on the properties of the plume.
The absolute motion of Eurasia underwent major changes
between 120 and 60 Ma, from a fast northwest to a slower
west-directed motion at velocities decreasing from about 40
to 10 mm yr−1 for central Europe (Seton et al., 2012). At
these velocities it would take 7.5 to 30 Myr to move a 300 km
wide area onto a swell.
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
7.3.6
Lithospheric folding
The potential contribution of lithospheric folding to domal uplift is more difficult to assess because its amplitude
strongly depends on lithosphere age and rheology as well as
the magnitude and rate of shortening. Numerical modelling
results indicate that folding-induced erosion can attain magnitudes way beyond the 4 km discussed here with sufficient
shortening and time. On the other hand, a generic model approximately matching our case of a 300 Myr old lithosphere
(thermotectonic age; Cloetingh et al., 1999) develops noneroded topography of only 200 m amplitude at 6 % shortening (a 1500 km wide model area shortened by 90 km; Cloetingh and Burov, 2011, their Fig. 10) despite a shortening rate
of 15 mm yr−1 , which is more than 10 to 100 times higher
than Germany during Late Cretaceous time. At low shortening rates lithospheric folds take time to grow (e.g. 5–10 Myr
for 1 km amplitude at 4 mm yr−1 for Iberia; Cloetingh et al.,
2002). A stronger argument against lithospheric folding driving uplift in our case can be drawn from the large-scale structure. The area that underwent regional doming coincides with
a wide syncline today (Fig. 11). Before the uplift event this
syncline must have been deeper. This decrease in fold amplitude accompanying uplift cannot be the result of maintained
or increased horizontal stress. It could be due to a decrease in
stress if we assume that the syncline was formed or tightened
by lithospheric folding (see Nielsen et al., 2005). However,
since stress relaxation cannot exhume the syncline more than
it was originally deepened by horizontal stress, this assumption restricts the time available for deposition of the missing
overburden to the short interval of the inversion phase (90 to
75 Ma).
8 Conclusions
– A compilation of several hundred published and about
150 new thermochronological analyses (AFT and AHe)
indicates generalized, kilometre-scale exhumation over
substantial parts of central Europe in Late Cretaceous to
Paleocene time.
– The magnitude of exhumation attains > 6 km over basement uplifts such as the Harz Mts. and 3–4 km for the
other regions in central Germany.
– The spatial pattern of exhumation exhibits two types
of exhumation: (i) thrust-bordered basement uplifts and
(ii) superimposed regional-scale domal uplift. While
thrust-related exhumation is spatially well defined, the
extent of the doming area is still poorly defined.
– In detail, thrust-related uplift predates regional doming
(90–70 Ma vs. 75–55 Ma) with some temporal overlap.
– Thrusting and crustal thickening associated with inversion tectonics can contribute at best half of the doming
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
953
signal. An additional process or processes are required
to explain the widespread exhumation.
– Thinning of the mantle lithosphere and dynamic topography, both caused by upwelling asthenosphere, are able
to produce uplift of the required magnitude, wavelength
and rate. The exhumed region coincides with a raised
lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary at present.
– Alkaline volcanism potentially associated with mantleinduced uplift is dated at about 70–50 Ma, roughly similar to domal uplift, but its scarcity and negligible volume
are puzzling.
– The apparent southern border of the Southern Permian
Basin is due to exhumation. Its original depositional
realm extended much further to the south in Jurassic to
Early Cretaceous time.
Additional data are needed to constrain the spatial extent
of domal uplift and exhumation and to decide whether it is an
isolated occurrence or linked to other regions of Paleogene
uplift such as the British Isles or the western and northeastern margins of the Bohemian Massif. The temporal contrast
between the well-known Late Cretaceous thrusting in central
Europe and the newly discovered, younger, long-wavelength
domal uplift should also be investigated, verified or falsified
for other regions in central Europe.
Code availability. The codes used for thermal modelling are published and the relevant citations are given in the text.
Data availability. The new data presented in this study are documented in the Supplement related to this paper.
Supplement. The Supplement related to this article includes sample data and thermochronological data (Figures and Tables S1
to S5). The supplement related to this article is available online
at: https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021-supplement.
Author contributions. HvE and JK designed the study. VH and ID
performed the fission-track analyses, and AS and ID performed the
(U–Th) / He analyses. ID performed the thermal modelling. HvE
and ID evaluated and interpreted the thermochronological data, and
JK compiled and interpreted structural data. HvE, JK and ID jointly
prepared the paper.
Competing interests. The authors declare that they have no conflict
of interest.
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
954
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Special issue statement. This article is part of the special issue “Inversion tectonics – 30 years later”. It is not associated with a conference.
Acknowledgements. We appreciate the support by Irina Ottenbacher and Judit Dunklné-Nagy during sample preparation as
well as mineral separation and selection. Thomas Voigt (Jena)
helped us during fieldwork and sampling. Fabian Jähne-Klingberg
(BGR, Hannover) contributed to the structural geology work in
the early phase of this project and helped us to develop our
ideas in many later discussions. Careful and constructive reviews
by Christoph von Hagke and an anonymous reviewer as well as
thoughtful comments by Gerhard Wörner are greatly acknowledged. We acknowledge support by the Open Access Publication
Funds of the Göttingen University.
Financial support. This research has been supported by the
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (grant no. EY23/9 and
KL495/9).
Review statement. This paper was edited by Piotr Krzywiec and reviewed by Christoph von Hagke and one anonymous referee.
References
Agemar, T., Schellschmidt, R., and Schulz, R.: Subsurface temperature distribution in Germany, Geothermics, 44, 65–77, 2012.
Arató, R., Dunkl, I., Takács, Á., Szebényi, G., Gerdes, A., and
von Eynatten, H.: Thermal evolution in the exhumed basement of a stratovolcano: case study of the Miocene Mátra Volcano, Pannonian Basin, J. Geol. Soc. London, 175, 820–835,
https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2017-117, 2018.
Augustsson, C., Voigt, T., Bernhart, K., Kreißler, M., Gaupp, R.,
Gärtner, A., Mofmann, M., and Linnemann, U.: Zircon size-age
sorting and source-area effect: The German Triassic Buntsandstein Group, Sediment. Geol., 375, 218–231, 2018.
Bachmann, G. H., Müller, M., and Weggen, K.: Evolution of the
Molasse Basin (Germany, Switzerland), Tectonophysics, 137,
77–92, 1987.
Baldschuhn, R. and Kockel, F.: Das Osning-Lineament am Südrand
des Niedersachsen-Beckens, Zeitschrift der deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 150, 673–695, 1999.
Baldschuhn, R., Binot, F., Fleig, S., and Kockel, F.: Geotektonischer
Atlas von Nordwest-Deutschland und dem deutschen NordseeSektor [Tectonic Atlas of Northwest Germany and the German
North Sea Sector], Geologisches Jahrbuch Reihe A, Band 153,
Schweizerbart, Stuttgart, Germany, 2001.
Barbarand, J., Bour, I., Pagel, M., Quesnel, F., Delcambre, B.,
Dupuis, C., and Yans, J.: Post-Paleozoic evolution of the northern Ardenne Massif constrained by apatite fission-track thermochronology and geological data, Earth Sci. Bull., 189, 16,
https://doi.org/10.1051/bsgf/2018015, 2018.
Becker, A.: An attempt to define a “neotectonic period” for central
and northern Europe, Geol. Rundsch., 82, 67–83, 1993.
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
Best, G.: Floßtektonik in Norddeutschland: Erste Ergebnisse reflexionsseismischer Untersuchungen an der Salzstruktur, Zeitschrift
der deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 147, 455–464, 1996.
Bogaard, P. J. F. and Wörner, G.: Petrogenesis of basanitic to tholeiitic volcanic rocks from the Miocene Vogelsberg, Central Germany, J. Petrol., 44, 569–602, 2003.
Boigk, H. and Schöneich, H.: The Rhinegraben: geologic history
and neotectonic activity. Approaches to Taphrogenesis. InterUnion Commission on Geodynamics, Sci. Rep., 8, 60–71, 1974.
Bolz, J. and Kley, J.: Emplacement of “exotic” Zechstein slivers along the inverted Sontra Graben (northern Hessen, Germany): clues from balanced cross-sections and geometrical forward modelling, this volume, 2021.
Botor, D., Dunkl, I., Anczkiewicz, A., and Mazur, S.: Post-Variscan
thermal history of the Moravo-Silesian lower Carboniferous
Culm Basin (NE Czech Republic–SW Poland), Tectonophysics,
712/713, 643–662, 2017.
Botor, D., Anczkiewicz, A. A., Dunkl, I., Golonka, J.,
Paszkowski, M., and Mazur, S.: Tectonothermal history of
the Holy Cross Mountains (Poland) in the light of lowtemperature thermochronology, Terra Nova, 30, 270–278,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ter.12336, 2018.
Braun, J., Robert, X., and Simon-Labric, T.: Eroding dynamic topography, Geophys. Res. Lett., 40, 1494–1499, 2013.
Brodie, J. and White, N.: Sedimentary basin inversion caused by igneous underplating: Northwest European continental shelf, Geology, 22, 147–150, 1994.
Büker, C.: Absenkungs-, Erosions- und Wärmeflußgeschichte
des Ruhr-Beckens und des nordöstlichen Rechtsrheinischen
Schiefergebirges, PhD thesis, University Bochum, Bochum, Germany, 212 pp., 1996.
Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe: Geologische
Karte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1: 1,000,000, Hannover,
Germany, 1993.
Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe: Geowissenschaftliche Karte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1 :
2 000 000, Hannover, Germany, 2004.
Cacace, M. and Scheck-Wenderoth, M.: Why intracontinental basins subside longer: 3-D feedback effects of lithospheric cooling and sedimentation on the exural strength of
the lithosphere, J. Geophys. Res. Sol. Ea., 121, 3742–3761,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JB012682, 2016.
Carminati, E., Cuffaro, M., and Doglioni, C.: Cenozoic
uplift
of
Europe,
Tectonics,
28,
TC4016,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2009TC002472, 2009.
Cloetingh, S. and Burov, E.: Lithospheric folding and sedimentary
basin evolution: a review and analysis of formation mechanisms,
Basin Res., 23, 257–290, 2011.
Cloetingh, S., Burov, E., Beekman, F., Andeweg, B., Andriessen, P., Garcia-Castellanos, D., De Vicente, G., and Vegas, R.: Lithospheric folding in Iberia, Tectonics, 21, 1041,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2001TC901031, 2002.
Cloetingh, S. A. P. L., Burov, E., and Poliakov, A.: Lithosphere
folding: Primary response to compression? (from central Asia
to Paris basin), Tectonics, 18, 1064–1083, 1999.
Cooper, M. A., Williams, G. D., De Graciansky, P. C., Murphy, R.
W., Needham, T., De Paor, D., Stoneley, R., Todd, S., Turner,
J.P., and Ziegler, P. A.: Inversion tectonics – a discussion, in: Inversion tectonics, edited by: Williams, G. D. and Cooper, M. A.,
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Geological Society Special Publications, London, UK, 335–347,
1989.
Danišík, M., Migoń, P., Kuhlemann, J., Evans, N. J., Dunkl, I., and
Frisch, W.: Thermochronological constraints on the long-term
erosional history of the Karkonosze Mts., Central Europe, Geomorphology, 117, 78–89, 2010.
Danišík, M., Štěpančiková, P., and Evans, N. J.: Constraining longterm denudation and faulting history in intraplate regions by
multi-system thermochronology – an example of the Sudetic
Marginal Fault (Bohemian Massif, Central Europe), Tectonics,
31, 1–19 https://doi.org/10.1029/2011TC003012, 2012.
Davies, G. F.: Thermomechanical erosion of the lithosphere by
mantle plumes, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 99, 15709–15722,
1994.
Deckers, J. and van der Voet, E.: A review on the structural styles
of deformation during Late Cretaceous and Paleocene tectonic
phases in the southern North Sea area, J. Geodyn., 115, 1–9,
2018.
De Jager, J.: Inverted basins in the Netherlands, similarities and differences, Neth. J. Geosci., 82, 339–349, 2003.
Dielforder, A., Frasca, G., Brune, S., and Ford, M.: Formation of the
Iberian-European convergent plate boundary fault and its effect
on intraplate deformation in Central Europe, Geochem. Geophy.
Geosy., 20, 2395–2417, 2019.
Djomani, Y. H. P., O’Reilly, S. Y., Griffin, W. L., and Morgan, P.:
The density structure of subcontinental lithosphere through time,
Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 184, 605–621, 2001.
Donelick, R. A., Ketcham, R. A., and Carlson, W. D.: Variability of
apatite fission-track annealing kinetics; II, Crystallographic orientation effects, Am. Mineral., 84, 1224–1234, 1999.
Donelick, R. A., O’Sullivan, P. B., and Ketcham, R. A.: Apatite
fission-track analysis, Rev. Mineral. Geochem., 58, 49–94, 2005.
Doornenbal, H. and Stevenson, A.: Petroleum geological atlas of
the Southern Permian Basin area: European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers (EAGE), Houten, the Netherlands, 352
pp., 2010.
Dresmann, H., Keulen, N., Timar-Geng, Z., Fügenschuh, B., Wetzel, A., and Stünitz, H.: The south-western Black Forest and the
Upper Rhine Graben Main Border Fault: thermal history and hydrothermal fluid flow, Int. J. Earth Sci., 99, 285–297, 2010.
Duesterhoeft, E., Bousquet, R., Wichura, H., and Oberhänsli,
R.: Anorogenic plateau formation: The importance of density
changes in the lithosphere, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 117,
B07204, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JB009007, 2012.
Dumitru, T. A.: A new computer-automated microscope stage system for fission-track analysis, Nucl. Tracks Radiat. Meas., 21,
575–580, 1993.
Dunkl, I.: TRACKKEY: a Windows program for calculation and
graphical presentation of fission track data, Comput. Geosci., 28,
3–12, 2002.
Eisenstadt, G. and Withjack, M. O.: Estimating inversion: results
from clay models, Geol. Soc. London Spec. Publ., 88, 119–136,
1995.
Farley, K. A.: Helium diffusion from apatite: General behavior as
illustrated by Durango fluorapatite, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 2903–
2914, 2000.
Farley, K. A., Wolf, R. A., and Silver, L. T.: The effects of
long alpha-stopping distance on (U-Th)/He ages, Geochim. Cosmochim. Ac., 60, 4223–4229, 1996.
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
955
Fischer, C., Dunkl, I., von Eynatten, H., Wijbrans, J. R., and
Gaupp, R.: Products and timing of diagenetic processes in Upper
Rotliegend sandstones from Bebertal (North German Basin,
Parchim Formation, Flechtingen High, Germany), Geol. Mag.,
149, 827–840, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756811001087,
2012.
Franke, D.: Geologie von Ostdeutschland – Ein Kompendium,
available at: http://www.regionalgeologie-ost.de, last access: 18
December 2020.
Freudenberger, W. and Schwerd, K.: Erläuterungen zur Geologischen Karte von Bayern 1: 500.000, Bayerisches Geologisches
Landesamt, München, Germany, 1996.
Friedrich, A. M., Bunge, H.-P., Rieger, S. M., Colli, L., Ghelichkhan, S., and Nerlich, R.: Stratigraphic framework for the
plume mode of mantle convection and the analysis of interregional unconformities on geological maps, Gondwana Res., 53,
159–188, 2018.
Geluk, M.: Late Permian (Zechstein) rifting in the Netherlands;
models and implications for petroleum geology, Petrol. Geosci.,
5, 189–199, 1999.
Glasmacher, U., Zentilli, M., and Grist, A. M.: Apatite fission
track thermochronology of Paleozoic sandstones and the Hillintrusion, northern Linksrheinisches Schiefergebirge, Germany,
in: Advances in Fission-Track Geochronology, edited by: van
den Haute, P. and De Corte, F., Kluwer, Dordrech, The Netherlands, 151–172, 1998.
Glasmacher, U. A., Mann, U., and Wagner, G. A.: Thermotectonic
evolution of the Barrandian, Czech Republic, as revealed by apatite fission-track analysis, Tectonophysics, 359, 381–402, 2002.
Gleadow, A. J. W.: Fission-track dating methods: what are the real
alternatives?, Nuclear Tracks, 5, 3–14, 1981.
Green, P. F.: A new look at statistics in fission track dating, Nuclear
Tracks, 5, 77–86, 1981.
Green, P. F.: On the thermo-tectonic evolution of Northern England:
evidence from fission track analysis, Geol. Mag., 153, 493–506,
1986.
Hejl, E., Coyle, D., Lal, N., Van den Haute, P., and Wagner, G. A.:
Fission-track dating of the western border of the Bohemian massif: thermochronology and tectonic implications, Geol. Rundsch., 86, 210–219, 1997.
Hejl, E., Sekyra, G., and Friedl, G.: Fission-track dating of the
south-eastern Bohemian massif (Waldviertel, Austria): thermochronology and long-term erosion, Int. J. Earth Sci., 92, 677–
690, 2003.
Holford, S. P., Green, P. F., Duddy, I. R., Turner, J. P., Hillis, R. R.,
and Stoker, M. S.: Regional intraplate exhumation episodes related to plate-boundary deformation, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 121,
1611–1628, 2009a.
Holford, S. P., Turner, J. P., Green, P. F., and Hillis, R. R.: Signature
of cryptic sedimentary basin inversion revealed by shale compaction data in the Irish Sea, western British Isles, Tectonics, 28,
TC4011, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008TC002359, 2009b.
Hoth, K., Rusbült, J., Zagora, K., Beer, H., and Hartmann, O.:
Die tiefen Bohrungen im Zentralabschnitt der Mitteleuropäischen Senke: Dokumentation für den Zeitabschnitt 1962–1990,
Schriftenreihe für Geowissenschaften, 2, 7–145, Verlag der
Gesellschaft für Geowissenschaften, Berlin, German, 1993.
Hurford, A. J.: Zeta: the ultimate solution to fission-track analysis
calibration or just an interim measure?, in: Advances in fission-
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
956
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
track geochronology, edited by: Van den Haute, P. and De Corte,
F., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands,
19–32, 1998.
Hurford, A. J. and Green, P. F.: The zeta age calibration of fissiontrack dating, Chem. Geol. Isot. Geosci., 41, 285–312, 1983.
Jacobs, J. and Breitkreuz, C.: Zircon and apatite fission-track thermochronology of Late Carboniferous volcanic rocks of the NE
German Basin, Int. J. Earth Sci., 92, 165–172, 2003.
Jähne, F., Kley, J., Hoffmann, V. E., von Eynatten, H., and Dunkl,
I.: Timing and Kinematics of Cretaceous to Paleogene inversion
at the SE margin of the Central European Basin System: Part
1, Kinematics, EGU General Assembly, Vienna, Austria, 19–24
April 2009, EGU2009-8176, 2009.
Jung, S., Pfänder, J. A., Brügmann, G., and Stracke, A.: Sources
of primitive alkaline volcanic rocks from the central European
Volcanic province (Rhön, Germany) inferred from Hf, Pb and Os
isotopes, Contrib. Mineral. Petr., 150, 546–559, 2005.
Jung, S., Mezger, K., Hauff, F., Pack, A., and Hoernes, S.: Petrogenesis of rift-related tephrites, phonolites and trachytes (Central
European Volcanic Province, Rhön, FRG): Constraints from Sr,
Nd, Pb and O isotopes, Chem. Geol., 354, 203–215, 2013.
Kämmlein, M., Bauer, W., and Stollhofen, H.: The Franconian
Basin thermal anomaly, SE Germany revisited: New thermal conductivity and uniformly corrected temperature data, J. Appl. Reg.
Geol., 171, 21–44, 2020.
Karg, H., Carter, A., Brix, M. R., and Littke, R.: Late- and postVariscan cooling and exhumation history of the northern Rhenish massif and the southern Ruhr Basin: new constraints from
fission-track analysis, Int. J. Earth Sci., 94, 180–192, 2005.
Ketcham, R. A.: Forward and inverse modeling of low-temperature
thermochronometry data, Rev. Mineral. Geochem., 58, 275–314,
2005.
Ketcham, R. A., Carter, A., Donelick, R. A., Barbarand,
J., and Hurford, A. J.: Improved modeling of fissiontrack annealing in apatite, Am. Mineral., 92, 799–810,
https://doi.org/10.2138/am.2007.2281, 2007.
Kley, J.: Timing and spatial patterns of Cretaceous and Cenozoic
inversion in the Southern Permian Basin, in: Mesozoic Resource
Potential of the Southern Permian Basin, edited by: Kilhams, B.,
Kukla, P. A., Mazur, S., McKie, T., Munlieff, H. F., and van Ojik,
K., Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 469, 19–
31, https://doi.org/10.1144/SP469.12, 2018.
Kley, J. and Voigt, T.: Late Cretaceous intraplate thrusting in central
Europe: effect of Africa-Iberia-Europe convergence, not Alpine
collision, Geology, 36, 839–842, 2008.
Kley, J., Franzke, H. J., Jähne, F., Krawczyk, C., Lohr, T., Reicherter, K., Scheck-Wenderoth, M., Sippel, J., Tanner, D., and
van Gent, H.: The SPP Structural Geology Group: Strain and
Stress (Chapter 3.3), in: Dynamics of Complex Intercontinental
Basins – the Central European Basin System, edited by: Littke,
R., Bayer, U., Gajewski, D., and Nelskamp, S., Springer-Verlag,
Berlin and Heidelberg, Germany, 97–124, 2008.
Kockel, F.: Inversion structures in central Europe – Expressions and
reasons, an open discussion, Neth. J. Geosci., 82, 367–382, 2003.
Kolb, M., Paulick, H., Kirchenbaur, M., and Münker, C.: Petrogenesis of mafic to felsic lavas from the Oligocene Siebengebirge
Volcanic Field (Germany): implications for the origin of intracontinental volcanism in Central Europe, J. Petrol., 53, 2349–
2379, 2012.
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
Kroner, U., Mansy, J. L., Mazur, S., Aleksandrowski, P., Hann,
H. P., Huckriede, H., Lacquement, F., Lamarche, J., Ledru, P.,
Pharaoh, T. C., Zedler, H., Zeh, A., and Zulauf, G.: The Geology of Central Europe, Vol. 1: Precambrian and Palaeozoic, in:
Variscan Tectonics, edited by: McCann, T., Geological Society,
London, UK, 599–664, 2008.
Krzywiec, P.: Mid-Polish Trough inversion – seismic examples,
main mechanisms and its relationship to the Alpine-Carpathian
collision, Stephan Mueller Special Publication Series, 1, 151–
165, https://doi.org/10.5194/smsps-1-151-2002, 2002.
Krzywiec, P.: Structural inversion of the Pomeranian and Kuiavian
segments of the Mid-Polish Trough – lateral variations in timing
and structural style, Geol. Q., 50, 151–168, 2006.
Krzywiec, P. and Stachowska, A.: Late Cretaceous inversion of the
NW segment of the Mid-Polish Trough – how marginal troughs
were formed, and does it matter at all?, Zeitschrift der deutschen
geologischen Gesellschaft, 167, 107–119, 2016.
Krzywiec, P., Gutowski, J., Walaszczyk Wróbel, G., and
Wybraniek, S.: Tectonostratigraphic model of the Late Cre ta
ceous in ver sion along the Nowe Miasto–Zawichost Fault Zone,
SE Mid-Polish Trough, Geol. Q., 53, 27–48, 2009.
Lange, J.-M., Tonk, C., and Wagner, G. A.: Apatite fission track
data for the Postvariscan thermotectonic evolution of the Saxon
basement – first results, Zeitschrift der deutschen geologischen
Gesellschaft, 159, 123–132, 2008.
Lenkey, L., Dövényi, P., Horváth, F., and Cloetingh, S. A. P. L.:
Geothermics of the Pannonian basin and its bearing on the neotectonics, Stephan Mueller Special Publication Series, 3, 29–40,
https://doi.org/10.5194/smsps-3-29-2002, 2002.
Link,
K.:
Die
thermo-tektonische
Entwicklung
des
Oberrheingraben-Gebietes seit der Kreide, PhD Thesis,
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg, Germany, 373 pp., 2009.
Linnemann, U., D’Lemos, R., Drost, K., Jeffries, T., Gerdes, A.,
Romer, R. L., Samson, S. D., and Strachan, R. A.: Cadomian
Tectonics, in: The Geology of Central Europe, Vol. 1: Precambrian and Palaeozoic, edited by: McCann, T., Geological Society,
London, UK, 103–154, 2008.
Littke, R., Bayer, U., Gajewski, D., and Nelskamp, S.: Dynamics
of complex intracontinental basins: the central European basin
system, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2008.
Lorenz, V. and Nicholls, I. A.: The Permocarboniferous basin and
range province of Europe. An application of plate tectonics, in:
The Continental Permian in Central, West, and South Europe,
Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1976.
Lotze, F.: 100 Jahre Forschung in der saxonischen Tektonik,
Zeitschrift der deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 100, 321–
337, 1948.
Lüschen, E., Nolte, B., and Fuchs, K.: Shear-wave evidence for an
anisotropic lower crust beneath the Black Forest, southwest Germany, Tectonophysics, 173, 483–493, 1990.
Malz, A., Madritsch, H., and Kley, J.: Improving 2D seismic interpretation in challenging settings by integration of restoration techniques: A case study from the Jura fold-and-thrust belt
(Switzerland), Interpretation, 3, 37–58, 2015.
Malz, A., Nachtweide, C., Emmerlich, S., and Schimpf,
L.: Mesozoic intraplate deformation in the southern
part of the Central European Basin-Results from largescale 3D modelling, Tectonophysics, 776, 228315,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2019.228315, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Martha, S. O., Zulauf, G., Dörr, W., Nesbor, H.-D., Petschick,
R., Prinz-Grimm, P., and Gerdes, A.: The SaxothuringianRhenohercynian boundary underneath the Vogelsberg volcanic
field: evidence from basement xenoliths and U-Pb zircon data
of trachyte, Zeitschrift der deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft,
165, 373–394, 2014.
Meier, T., Soomro, R. A., Viereck, L., Lebedev, S., Behrmann,
J. H., Weidle, C., Cristiano, L., and Hanemann, R.: Mesozoic
and Cenozoic evolution of the Central European lithosphere,
Tectonophysics, 692, 58–73, 2016.
Meyer, H., Hetzel, R., Fügenschuh, B., and Strauss, H.: Determining the growth rate of topographic relief using in situ-produced
10 Be: a case study in the Black Forest, Germany, Earth Planet.
Sci. Lett., 290, 391–402, 2010.
Mielke, P., Bär, K., and Sass, I.: Determining the relationship of
thermal conductivity and compressional wave velocity of common rock types as a basis for reservoir characterization, J. Appl.
Geophys., 140, 135–144, 2017.
Migoń, P. and Danišík, M.: Erosional history of the Karkonosze
Granite Massif – Constraints from adjacent sedimentary basins
and thermochronology, Geol. Q., 56, 441–456, 2012.
Mohr, M., Kukla, P. A., Urai, J. L., and Bresser, G.: Multiphase salt
tectonic evolution in NW Germany: seismic interpretation and
retro-deformation, Int. J. Earth Sci., 94, 917–940, 2005.
Nielsen, S. B., Thomsen, E., Hansen, D. L., and Clausen, O. R.:
Plate-wide stress relaxation explains European Palaeocene basin
inversions, Nature, 435, 195–198, 2005.
Norden, B., Förster, A., and Balling, N.: Heat Flow and lithospheric
thermal regime in the Northeast German Basin, Tectonophysics,
460, 215–229, 2008.
Oncken, O.: Transformation of a magmatic arc and an orogenic
root during oblique collision and it’s consequences for the evolution of the European Variscides (Mid-German Crystalline Rise),
Geol. Rundsch., 86, 2–20, 1997.
Sass, J. H., Lachenbruch, A. H., Galanis Jr., S. P., Morgan, P., Priest,
S. S., Moses Jr., T. H., and Munroe, R. J.: Thermal regime of the
southern Basin and Range Province: 1. Heat flow data from Arizona and the Mojave Desert of California and Nevada, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 99, 22093–22119, 1994.
Schmitt, A. K., Marks, M. A., Nesbor, H. D., and Markl, G.: The
onset and origin of differentiated Rhine Graben volcanism based
on U-Pb ages and oxygen isotopic composition of zircon, Eur. J.
Mineral., 19, 849–857, 2007.
Schönig, J., von Eynatten, H., Meinhold, G., Lünsdorf, N. K., Willner, A. P., and Schulz, B.: Deep subduction of felsic rocks hosting
UHP lenses in the central Saxonian Erzgebirge: Implications for
UHP terrane exhumation, Gondwana Res., 87, 320–329, 2020.
Seidel, G.: Geologie von Thüringen, Schweizerbart, Stuttgart, Germany, 2003.
Self, S., Schmidt, A., and Mather, T. A.: Emplacement characteristics, time scales, and volcanic gas release rates of continental
flood basalt eruptions on Earth, Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap., 505,
https://doi.org/10.1130/2014.2505(16), 2014.
Senglaub, Y., Littke, R., and Brix, M. R.: Numerical modelling of
burial and temperature history as an approach for an alternative
interpretation of the Bramsche anomaly, Lower Saxony Basin,
Int. J. Earth Sci., 95, 204–224, 2005.
Seton, M., Müller, R. D., Zahirovic, S., Gaina, C., Torsvik, T., Shephard, G., Talsma, A., Gurnis, M., Turner, M., Maus, S., and
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021
957
Chandler, M.: Global continental and ocean basin reconstructions since 200Ma, Earth-Sci. Rev., 113, 212–270, 2012.
Siebel, W., Schmitt, A. K., Danišík, M., Chen, F., Meier, S.,
Weiss, S., and Eroglu, S.: Prolonged mantle residence of zircons
xenocrysts from the western Eger rift, Nat. Geosci., 2, 886–890,
https://doi.org/10.1038/NGEO695, 2009.
Sissingh, W.: Syn-kinematic palaeogeographic evolution of the
West European Platform: correlation with Alpine plate collision
and foreland deformation, Neth. J. Geosci., 85, 131–180, 2006.
Sobczyk, A., Danišik, M., Aleksandrowski, P., and Anczkiewicz,
A.: Post-Variscan cooling history in the central Western Sudetes
(NE Bohemian Massif) and its implications for topographic evolution: Insights from apatite fission-track and zircon (U-Th)/He
thermochronology, Tectonophysics, 649, 47–57, 2015.
Sobczyk, A., Sobel, E. R., and Georgieva, V.: Meso-Cenozoic
cooling and exhumation history of the Orlica-Śnieżnik Dome
(Sudetes, NE Bohemian Massif, Central Europe): Insights from
apatite fission-track thermochronometry, Terra Nova, 32, 122–
133, https://doi.org/10.1111/ter.12449, 2020.
Sobolev, S. V., Sobolev, A. V., Kuzmin, D. V., Krivolutskaya, N.
A., Petrunin, A. G., Arndt, N. T., Radko, V. A., and Vasiliev, Y.
R.: Linking mantle plumes, large igneous provinces and environmental catastrophes, Nature, 477, 312–316, 2011.
Stackebrandt, W. and Franzke, H. J.: Alpidic reactivation of the
Variscan consolidated lithosphere – the activity of some fracture
zones in Central Europe, Z. Geol. Wissenschaft., 17, 699–712,
1989.
Stein, S., Stein, C. A., Elling, R., Kley, J., Keller, G. R., Wysession, M., Rooney, T., Frederiksen, A., and Moucha, R.: Insights
from North America’s failed Midcontinent Rift into the evolution of continental rifts and passive continental margins, Tectonophysics, 744, 403–421, 2018.
Stollhofen, H., Bachmann, G. H., Barnasch, J., Bayer, U., Beutler, G., Franz, M., Kästner, M., Legeler, B., Mutterlose, J., and
Radies, D.: Upper Rotliegend to Early Cretaceous basin development, in: Dynamics of Complex Intracontinental Basins. The
Central European Basin System, edited by: Littke, R., Bayer,
U., Gajewski, D., and Nelskamp, S., Springer-Verlag, Berlin and
Heidelberg, Germany, 181–210, 2008.
Suchý, V., Filip, J., Sýkorová, I., Pesek, J., and Korínková, D.:
Palaeo-thermal and coalification history of Permo-Carboniferous
sedimentary basins of Central and Western Bohemia, Czech Republic: first insights from apatite fission track analysis and vitrinite reflectance modelling, B. Geosci., 94, 201–219, 2019.
Thomson, S. N. and Zeh, A.: Fission-track thermochronology of the
Ruhla Crystalline Complex: new constraints on the post-Variscan
thermal evolution of the NW Saxo-Bohemian Massif, Tectonophysics, 324, 17–35, 2000.
Timar-Geng, Z., Fügenschuh, B., Wetzel, A., and Dresmann, H.:
Low-temperature thermochronology of the flanks of the southern
Upper Rhine Graben, Int. J. Earth Sci., 95, 685–702, 2006.
Vamvaka, A., Siebel, W., Chen, F., and Rohrmuller, J.: Apatite
fission-track dating and low-temperature history of the Bavarian Forest (southern Bohemian Massif), Int. J. Earth Sci., 103,
103–119, 2014.
Ventura, B. and Lisker, F.: Long-term landscape evolution of the
northeastern margin of the Bohemian Massif: apatite fissiontrack data from the Erzgebirge (Germany), Int. J. Earth Sci., 92,
691–700, 2003.
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
958
H. von Eynatten et al.: Late Cretaceous to Paleogene exhumation in central Europe
Ventura, B., Lisker, F., and Kopp, J.: Thermal and denudation history of the Lusatian Block (NE Bohemian Massif, Germany) as
indicated by apatite fission-track data, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ.,
324, 1–12, 2009.
Voigt, E.: Über Randtröge vor Schollenrändern und ihre Bedeutung
im Gebiet der Mitteleuropäischen Senke und angrenzender Gebiete, Z. Dtsch. Geol. Ges., 114, 378–418, 1963.
Voigt, T., von Eynatten, H., and Franzke, H. J.: Late Cretaceous unconformities in the Subhercynian Cretaceous Basin (Germany),
Acta Geol. Pol., 54, 765–765, 2004.
Voigt, T., Wiese, F., von Eynatten, H., Franzke, H.-J., and Gaupp,
R.: Facies evolution of syntectonic Upper Cretaceous Deposits
in the Subhercynian Cretaceous Basin and adjoining areas (Germany), Zeitschrift der deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 157,
203–244, 2006.
Voigt, T., von Eynatten, H., and Kley, J.: Kommentar zu
Nördliche Harzrandstorung: Diskussionsbeitrage zu Tiefenstruktur, Zeitlichkeit und Kinematik von Volker Wrede (ZDGG 159,
293–316), Zeitschrift der deutschen gesellschaft für Geowissenschaften, 160, 93–99, 2009.
Voigt, T., Kley, J., and Voigt, S.: Dawn and Dusk of Late Cretaceous
Basin Inversion in Central Europe, this volume, 2021.
von Eynatten, H., Voigt, T., Meier, A., Franzke, H.-J., and Gaupp,
R.: Provenance of the clastic Cretaceous Subhercynian Basin fill:
constraints to exhumation of the Harz Mountains and the timing
of inversion tectonics in the Central European Basin, Int. J. Earth
Sci., 97, 1315–1330, 2008.
von Eynatten, H., Dunkl, I., Brix, M., Hoffmann, V.-E., Raab, M.,
Thomson, S. N., and Kohn, B.: Late Cretaceous exhumation and
uplift of the Harz Mountains, Germany: a multi-method thermochronological approach, Int. J. Earth Sci., 108, 2097–2111,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00531-019-01751-5, 2019.
Wagner, G. A.: Fission track dating of apatites, Earth Planet. Sci.
Lett., 4, 411–415, 1968.
Walter, B. F., Gerdes, A., Kleinhanns, I. C., Dunkl, I., von Eynatten, H., Kreissl, S., and Markl, G.: The connection between hydrothermal fluids, mineralization, tectonics and magmatism in a
continental rift setting: Fluorite Sm-Nd and hematite and carbonates U-Pb geochronology from the Rhinegraben in SW Germany,
Geochim. Cosmochim. Ac., 240, 11–42, 2018.
Solid Earth, 12, 935–958, 2021
Ware, P. D. and Turner, J. P.: Sonic velocity analysis of the Tertiary
denudation of the Irish Sea basin, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ., 196,
355–370, 2002.
Warsitzka, M., Jähne-Klingberg, F., Kley, J., and Kukowski, N.: The
timing of salt structure growth in the Southern Permian Basin
(Central Europe) and implications for basin dynamics, Basin
Res., 31, 337–360, 2019.
Wedepohl, K. H., Gohn, E., and Hartmann, G.: Cenozoic alkali
basaltic magmas of western Germany and their products of differentiation, Contr. Min. Petrol., 115, 253–278, 1994.
Wetzel, A., Allenbach, R., and Allia, V.: Reactivated basement
structures affecting the sedimentary facies in a tectonically “quiescent” epicontinental basin: an example from NW Switzerland,
Sediment. Geol., 157, 153–172, 2003.
Wilson, M. and Downes, H.: Tertiary-Quaternary extension-related
alkaline magmatism in western and central Europe, J. Petrol., 32,
811–849, 1991.
Wolff, R., Dunkl, I., Lange, J.-M., Tonk, C., Voigt, T., and von
Eynatten, H.: Superposition of burial and hydrothermal events:
post-Variscan thermal evolution of the Erzgebirge, Germany,
Terra Nova, 27, 292–299, 2015.
Wörner, G., Staudigel, H., and Zindler, A.: Isotopic constraints
on open system evolution of the Laacher See magma chamber
(Eifel, West Germany), Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 75, 37–49, 1985.
Xu, C., Mansy, J. L., van den Haute, P., Guillot, F., Zhou, Z., Chen,
J., and de Grave, J.: Late- and post-Variscan evolution of the Ardennes in France and Belgium: constraints from apatite fissiontrack data, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ., 324, 167–179, 2009.
Ziegler, P. A.: Late Cretaceous and Cenozoic intra-plate compressional deformations in the Alpine foreland – a geodynamic
model, Tectonophysics, 137, 389–420, 1987.
Ziegler, P. A.: Geological Atlas of Western and Central Europe,
Shell Internationale Petroleum Mij, BV and Geological Society
of London, 2nd Edn., London, UK, 239 pp., 1990.
Ziegler, P. A., Cloetingh, S., and van Wees, J. D.: Dynamics of intraplate compressional deformation: the Alpine foreland and other
examples, Tectonophysics, 252, 7–59, 1995.
https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-935-2021