Where was Baltica in the Ediacaran to the Ordovician?

Ediacaran–Early Ordovician paleomagnetism of Baltica: A review

Authors:

Joseph G. Meert

Abstract:

The Ediacaran–Early Ordovician interval is of great interest to paleogeographer's due to the vast evolutionary changes that occurred during this interval as well as other global changes in the marine, atmospheric and terrestrial systems. It is; however, precisely this time period where there are often wildly contradictory paleomagnetic results from similar-age rocks. These contradictions are often explained with a variety of innovative (and non-uniformitarian) scenarios such as intertial interchange true polar wander, true polar wander and/or non-dipolar magnetic fields. While these novel explanations may be the cause of the seemingly contradictory data, it is important to examine the paleomagnetic database for other potential issues.

This review takes a careful and critical look at the paleomagnetic database from Baltica. Based on some new data and a re-evaluation of older data, the relationships between Baltica and Laurentia are examined for ~ 600–500 Ma interval. The new data from the Hedmark Group (Norway) confirms suspicions about possible remagnetization of the Fen Complex pole. For other Baltica results, data from sedimentary units were evaluated for the effects of inclination shallowing. In this review, a small correction was applied to sedimentary paleomagnetic data from Baltica. The filtered dataset does not demand extreme rates of latitudinal drift or apparent polar wander, but it does require complex gyrations of Baltica over the pole. In particular, average rates of APW range from 1.5° to 2.0°/Myr. This range of APW rates is consistent with ‘normal’ plate motion although the total path length (and its oscillatory nature) may indicate a component of true polar wander. In the TPW scenario, the motion of Baltica results in a back and forth path over the south pole between 600 and 550 Ma and again between 550 and 500 Ma. The rapid motion of Baltica over the pole is consistent with the extant database, but other explanations are possible given the relative paucity of high-quality paleomagnetic data during the Ediacaran–Cambrian interval from Baltica and other continental blocks.

A sequence of three paleogeographic maps for Laurentia and Baltica is presented. Given the caveats involved in these reconstructions (polarity ambiguity, longitudinal uncertainty and errors), the data are consistent with geological models that posit the opening of the Iapetus Ocean around 600 Ma and subsequent evolution of the Baltica–Laurentia margin in the Late Ediacaran to Early Ordovician, but the complexity of the motion implied by the APWP remains enigmatic.