Abstract Marine geological and geophysical data from Alpha Ridge in the Arctic Ocean are sparse because of thick perennial sea-ice cover, which prevents access by most surface vessels. Rare seismic data in this area, acquired largely from drifting ice-camps, had shown the hemipelagic drape that covers most of the ridge is highly disrupted within a large (>90 000 km 2 ) south central region. Here, evidence of pronounced seafloor erosion and debris flows infilling seafloor lows was previously interpreted to be the result of a possible bolide impact. In recent years, several icebreaker expeditions have successfully acquired multibeam bathymetry and sub-bottom profiler data in the western segment of this region. Analysis of these data reveals a complex seafloor morphology characterized by ridges and troughs, angular blocks and escarpments as well as seismic facies characterized by hyperbolic seafloor reflections, and convoluted to incoherent and transparent sub-bottom reflectivity. These features are interpreted as evidence of sediment mass movement with varying degrees of lateral transport deformation. At least two episodes of failure are interpreted based on the presence of both buried and surficial mass-transport features. As multiple events are interpreted, seismicity is the most plausible trigger mechanism rather than bolide impact.

Abstract This paper synthesizes the framework and geological evolution of the Arctic Alaska–Chukotka microplate (AACM), from its origin as part of the continental platform fringing Baltica and Laurentia to its southward motion during the formation of the Amerasia Basin (Arctic Ocean) and its progressive modification as part of the dynamic northern palaeo-Pacific margin. A synthesis of the available data refines the crustal identity, limits and history of the AACM and, together with regional geological constraints, provides a tectonic framework to aid in its pre-Cretaceous restoration. Recently published seismic reflection data and interpretations, integrated with regional geological constraints, provide the basis for a new crustal transect (the Circum-Arctic Lithosphere Evolution (‘CALE’) Transect C) linking the Amerasia Basin and the Pacific margin along two paths that span 5100 km from the Lomonosov Ridge (near the North Pole), across the Amerasia Basin, Chukchi Sea and Bering Sea, and ending at the subducting Pacific plate margin in the Aleutian Islands. We propose a new plate tectonic model in which the AACM originated as part of a re-entrant in the palaeo-Pacific margin and moved to its present position during slab-related magmatism and the southward retreat of palaeo-Pacific subduction, largely coeval with the rifting and formation of the Amerasia Basin in its wake. Supplementary material: Supplementary material Plate 1 (herein referred to as Sup. Pl. 1) comprises Plate 1 and its included figures, which are an integral part of this paper. Plate 1 contains regional reflection-seismic-based cross sections and supporting material that collectively constitute CALE Transects C1 and C2 and form an important part of our contribution. Plate 1 is referred to in the text as Sup. Pl. 1, Transects C1 and C2 as Plate 1A and 1B, and plate figures as fig. P1.1, fig. P1.2, etc.). Supplementary material 2 contains previously unpublished geochronologic data on detrital zircon suites and igneous rocks. Supplementary material are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3826813

Abstract This paper considers the lithospheric structure and evolution of the wider Barents–Kara Sea region based on the compilation and integration of geophysical and geological data. Regional transects are constructed at both crustal and lithospheric scales based on the available data and a regional three-dimensional model. The transects, which extend onshore and into the deep oceanic basins, are used to link deep and shallow structures and processes, as well as to link offshore and onshore areas. The study area has been affected by numerous orogenic events in the Precambrian–Cambrian (Timanian), Silurian–Devonian (Caledonian), latest Devonian–earliest Carboniferous (Ellesmerian–svalbardian), Carboniferous–Permian (Uralian), Late Triassic (Taimyr, Pai Khoi and Novaya Zemlya) and Palaeogene (Spitsbergen–Eurekan). It has also been affected by at least three episodes of regional-scale magmatism, the so-called large igneous provinces: the Siberian Traps (Permian–Triassic transition), the High Arctic Large Igneous Province (Early Cretaceous) and the North Atlantic (Paleocene–Eocene transition). Additional magmatic events occurred in parts of the study area in Devonian and Late Cretaceous times. Within this geological framework, we integrate basin development with regional tectonic events and summarize the stages in basin evolution. We further discuss the timing, causes and implications of basin evolution. Fault activity is related to regional stress regimes and the reactivation of pre-existing basement structures. Regional uplift/subsidence events are discussed in a source-to-sink context and are related to their regional tectonic and palaeogeographical settings.

Abstract Transform-margin development around the Arctic Ocean is a predictable geometric outcome of multi-stage spreading of a small, confined ocean under radically changing plate vectors. Recognition of several transform-margin stages in the development of the Arctic Ocean enables predictions to be made regarding tectonic styles and petroleum systems. The De Geer margin, connecting the Eurasia Basin (the younger Arctic Ocean) and the NE Atlantic during the Cenozoic, is the best known example. It is dextral, multi-component, features transtension and transpression, is implicated in microcontinent release, and thus bears close comparison with the Equatorial Shear Zone. In the older Arctic Ocean, the Amerasia Basin, Early Cretaceous counterclockwise rotation around a pole in the Canadian Mackenzie Delta was accommodated by a terminal transform. We argue on geometric grounds that this dislocation may have occurred at the Canada Basin margin rather than along the more distal Lomonosov Ridge, and review evidence that elements of the old transform margin were detached by the Makarov–Podvodnikov opening and accommodated within the Alpha–Mendeleev Ridge. More controversial is the proposal of transform along the Laptev–East Siberian margin. We regard an element of transform motion as the best solution to accommodating Eurasia and Makarov–Podvodnikov Basin opening, and have incorporated it into a three-stage plate kinematic model for Cretaceous–Cenozoic Arctic Ocean opening, involving the Canada Basin rotational opening at 125–80 Ma, the Makarov–Povodnikov Basin opening at 80–60 Ma normal to the previous motion and a Eurasia Basin stage from 55 Ma to present. We suggest that all three opening phases were accompanied by transform motion, with the right-lateral sense being dominant. The limited data along the Laptev–East Siberian margin are consistent with transform-margin geometry and kinematic indicators, and these ideas will be tested as more data become available over less explored parts of the Arctic, such as the Laptev–East Siberia–Chukchi margin.