CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 22

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fold origin of the NE-lobe of the Sudbury Basin, Canada: Evidence from heterogeneous fabric development in the Onaping Formation and the Sudbury Igneous Complex

Klimczak, Christian, Wittek, Andrea, Doman, Daniel, Riller, Ulrich·2007·Journal of Structural Geology
DOI 10.1016/j.jsg.2007.09.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsg.2007.09.003

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Sudbury structure has been extensively tectonized following the impact.

    “The structural situation is further complicated by the fact that the Sudbury structure has been extensively tectonized following the impact (Riller 2005;Klimczak et al. 2007).”

    From Observations and interpretations at Vredefort, Sudbury, and Chicxulub: Towards an empirical model of terrestrial impact basin formation (2008) · cites this paper as Klimczak et al. 2007

  • Given that the northeast lobe of the SIC represents a fold and the SIC in the East Range has been extensively deformed by the Penokean orogeny, and given the relatively crude nature of the scaling of Vredefort structures to Sudbury, this is not necessarily an inconsistency.

    “In as much as the northeast lobe of the SIC represents a fold (Klimczak et al. 2007) and the SIC in the East Range has been extensively deformed by the Penokean orogeny, e.g., it dips ~70° towards the center of the Sudbury Basin (Riller 2005), and given the relatively crude nature of the scaling of Vredefort structures to Sudbury, this is not necessarily an inconsistency.”

    From Observations and interpretations at Vredefort, Sudbury, and Chicxulub: Towards an empirical model of terrestrial impact basin formation (2008) · cites this paper as Klimczak et al. 2007

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. Avermann, 1999, The Green Member of the Onaping Formation, the collapsed fireball layer of the Sudbury impact structure, Ontario, Canada, vol. 339, 323
  2. Bailey, 2004, Mazatzal–Labradorian-age (1.7–1.6Ga) ductile deformation of the South Range Sudbury impact structure at the Thayer Lindsley mine, Ontario, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 41, 1492, 10.1139/e04-098 · DOI
  3. Boerner, 2000, Seismic images and three-dimensional architecture of a Proterozoic shear zone in the Sudbury structure (Superior Province, Canada), Tectonics, 19, 397, 10.1029/1999TC900060 · DOI
  4. Bray, 1966, Shatter cones at Sudbury, Journal of Geology, 74, 243, 10.1086/627158 · DOI
  5. Brocoum, 1974, The Sudbury Basin, Southern Province, Grenville Front, and the Penokean Orogeny, Geological Society of America Bulletin, 85, 1571, 10.1130/0016-7606(1974)85<1571:TSBTSP>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  6. Card, 1984, The Sudbury Structure: its regional geological and geophysical setting, vol. 1, 25
  7. Coleman, A.P., 1905. The Sudbury Nickel region. Ontario Bureau of Mines Annual Report 14 (3), 1–188.
  8. Coleman, 1907, The Sudbury laccolith sheet, Journal of Geology, 15, 759, 10.1086/621473 · DOI
  9. Collins, 1935, Life history of the Sudbury Nickel Irruptive. Part II. Intrusion and deformation, Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, 29, 27
  10. Cowan, 1999, Magnetic fabric constraints on the initial geometry of the Sudbury Igneous Complex: a folded sheet or a basin-shaped igneous body?, Tectonophysics, 307, 135, 10.1016/S0040-1951(99)00123-7 · DOI
  11. Cowan, 1999, Emplacement geometry of the Sudbury Igneous Complex: structural examination of a proposed impact melt-sheet, vol. 339, 399
  12. Cowan, E.J., Schwerdtner, W.M., 1994. Fold origin of the Sudbury Basin. In: Ontario Geological Survey Special Paper, vol. 5, 45–55.
  13. Deutsch, 1995, The Sudbury Structure (Ontario, Canada): a tectonically deformed multi-ring basin, Geologische Rundschau, 84, 697, 10.1007/s005310050034 · DOI
  14. Doman, 2007, The importance of discontinuous deformation in the eastern Sudbury Igneous Complex, Geophysical Research Abstracts, 9, 10220
  15. Dressler, 1984, General geology of the Sudbury Structure, vol. 1, 57
  16. Dressler, 1984, The effects of the Sudbury event and the intrusion of the Sudbury Igneous Complex on the footwall rocks of the Sudbury structure, vol. 1, 97
  17. Ferry, 1979, Reaction mechanisms, physical conditions, and mass transfer during hydrothermal alteration of mica and feldspar in granitic rocks from south-central Maine, USA, Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 68, 125, 10.1007/BF00371895 · DOI
  18. Fitz Gerald, 1993, Deformation of granitoids at low metamorphic grades. I. Reactions and grain size reduction, Tectonophysics, 221, 269, 10.1016/0040-1951(93)90163-E · DOI
  19. Fleet, 1987, Prograde metamorphism of the Sudbury Igneous Complex, Canadian Mineralogist, 25, 499
  20. Grieve, 1991, The Sudbury Structure: controversial or misunderstood?, Journal of Geophysical Research, 96, 22753, 10.1029/91JE02513 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Ivanov, 1999, Sudbury impact event: cratering mechanics and thermal history, vol. 339, 389
  22. Klimczak, C., 2006. Deformation of the Onaping Formation in the NE-lobe of the Sudbury Igneous Complex, Ontario, Canada. Unpublished Diploma thesis. Free University Berlin, Germany, 72 pp.
  23. Krogh, 1982, Two high-precision U–Pb zircon ages for the Sudbury Nickel Irruptive, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 19, 723, 10.1139/e82-061 · DOI
  24. Krogh, 1984, Precise U–Pb Zircon and Baddeleyite ages for the Sudbury area, vol. 1, 431
  25. Milkereit, 1992, Deep geometry of the Sudbury structure from seismic reflection profiling, Geology, 20, 807, 10.1130/0091-7613(1992)020<0807:DGOTSS>2.3.CO;2 · DOI
  26. Muir, 1984, The Onaping Formation, vol. 1, 139
  27. Peredery, 1984, Discussion of the origin of the Sudbury structure, vol. 1, 491
  28. Prevec, 2002, Thermal evolution and interaction between impact melt sheet and footwall: a genetic model for the contact sublayer of the Sudbury Igneous Complex, Canada, Journal of Geophysical Research, 107, 2176, 10.1029/2001JB000525 · DOI
  29. Riller, 2005, Structural characteristics of the Sudbury impact structure, Canada: impact-induced versus orogenic deformation – a review, Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 40, 1723, 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2005.tb00140.x · DOI · Paper page
  30. Riller, 1997, Mid-crustal deformation at the southern flank of the Sudbury Basin, central Ontario, Canada, Geological Society of America Bulletin, 109, 841, 10.1130/0016-7606(1997)109<0841:MCDATS>2.3.CO;2 · DOI
  31. Riller, 1998, Low-temperature deformation mechanisms at a lithotectonic interface near the Sudbury Basin, Eastern Penokean Orogen, Canada, Tectonophysics, 287, 59, 10.1016/S0040-1951(98)80061-9 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Riller, 1999, Transpressive tectonism in the eastern Penokean orogen, Canada: consequences for Proterozoic crustal kinematics and continental fragmentation, Precambrian Research, 93, 51, 10.1016/S0301-9268(98)00097-7 · DOI
  33. Rousell, 1984, Structural geology of the Sudbury basin, vol. 1, 83
  34. Schwerdtner, 1998, Graphic derivation of the local sense of shear of shear strain components in stretched walls of lithotectonic boundaries, Journal of Structural Geology, 20, 957, 10.1016/S0191-8141(98)00019-4 · DOI
  35. Schwerdtner, 2005, Structural testing of tectonic hypotheses by field-based analysis of distributed tangential shear: concrete examples from major high-strain zones in the Grenville Province and other parts of the southern Canadian Shield, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 42, 1905, 10.1139/e05-047 · DOI
  36. Shanks, 1991, Structural analysis of the central and southwestern Sudbury Structure, Southern Province, Canadian Shield, Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 28, 411, 10.1139/e91-037 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Spray, 1995, Friction melt distribution in a multi-ring impact basin, Nature, 373, 130, 10.1038/373130a0 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Stipp, 2002, The eastern Tonale fault zone: a ‘natural laboratory’ for crystal plastic deformation of quartz over a temperature range from 250 to 700°C, Journal of Structural Geology, 24, 1861, 10.1016/S0191-8141(02)00035-4 · DOI
  39. Therriault, 2002, The Sudbury Igneous Complex, a differentiated impact melt sheet, Economic Geology, 97, 1521, 10.2113/gsecongeo.97.7.1521 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Zieg, 2005, The Sudbury Igneous Complex: viscous emulsion differentiation of a superheated impact melt sheet, Geological Society of American Bulletin, 117, 1427, 10.1130/B25579.1 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Klimczak, C., Wittek, A., Doman, D., & Riller, U.
Venue
Journal of Structural Geology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-11
Volume
29
Issue
11
Pages
1744-1756
ISSN
0191-8141
DOI
10.1016/j.jsg.2007.09.003
Cited by
22
References
2
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review