EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS 7 (1970) 445-450. NORTH-HOLLAND PUBLISHING COMP.

, AMSTERDAM

MAGNETIC LINEATIONS IN THE NORTHEAST PACIFIC

Tanya ATWATER
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego,
La Jolla, California, USA

and
H.W.MENARD
Institute of Marine Resources, Scripps Institution of Oceanography,
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA

Received 17 September 1969

Revised manuscript received 5 January 1970

Magnetic data for the northeast Pacific are summarized and interpreted in terms of sea floor spreading. Unclear
areas exist in the "disturbed zone" and west of the Juan de Fuca Ridge. The direction of spreading changed about
55 my ago. An intermediate plate was gradually destroyed as segments of the ridge neared the continent and the
timing of this destruction appears related to the timing of the origin of the San Andreas fault system.

Fig. 1 shows our interpretation of anomalies on all
magnetic lines available to us in the northeast Pacific.
An earlier version of this was presented by Atwater
and Menard [19] and Menard [20] .. The data used
were compiled from sources indicated in fig. 2. The
numbering of the anomalies follows the time scale of
Heirtzler et al. [21]. When these anomaly numbers
are used in the text they will be followed by ages
from the same time scale in millions of years before
present. Although these ages were quite speculative
when they were proposed, they now appear to be
approximately correct [22, 23]. Track lines for the
profiles used are shown in fig. 2. Comparison of
figs. 1 and 2 shows our control on the existence and
orientation of the anomalies. We have dashed the
anomaly lines where they were obviously extrapolat-
ed without control. Also evident from the compar-
ison of the figures is the fact that in some areas no
reasonable interpretation could be found for existing
data.
The locations and trends of many of the fracture
zones were found from their topographic expression.
Zones which offset anomalies by large amounts pre-
dictably have great relief [24] and are well known
from detailed surveys [25]. On the other hand,
fracture zones with relatively small offsets have very
little topographic expression and often could only be
inferred from the anomaly offsets. For these zones
the control of the actual position and orientation is
very poor. They are dashed in the figures with solid
lines in places where they can be located by incon-
sistencies in the anomaly profiles which cross them.
The anomalies west and southwest of Baja Calif-
ornia are based upon new data from numerous short
cruises. A detailed compilation and interpretation of
these data is given by Chase et al. [16]. The trace of
the spreading system within the Gulf of California
was inferred from topography [26] and the major
faults in the San Andreas system were taken from
Dickinson and Grantz [27]. Data for the Gulf of
Alaska are from Pitman and Hayes [5] and we concur
with most of their identifications of anomalies. How-
ever, we postulate a different orientation for the
anomalies and relocate the fracture zones so that
anomalies usually have consistent trends throughout
the region for any given age. This new interpretation
446 T.ATWATER and H.W.MENARD

-' ' ' ' ........ "" Y ' ' 5t:lTi t",'l'~ifl~','l .... ,,' ' ~ ' ........ '

t
S jj
55* -'"" ' ~;i i ,, ', o~
-- ..........

15. --- I:

?
52. ~- T ' T "

45*
52

',, \\ ~\
"!'i-i£i
'S~OI~'VEYOR

40*
', " ".." T.~'~ ~
• pltOr~
- l

55"
\
~,0"

25* 30 , ~-% \\\\M IF.Z-

*" ~ 15 8
20*

I : ~ ] , l ~ l l 1 i I I I I I I I I ] i i,, ] J, ~ I I, I IiI I I I I ] I '' ' l j ' ' ' ] ' l ' ' l l ' j q l '
170" I65 ° 160 ° 155 ° 150 ° 145" 140" 155 ° 150" 125" 120 ° 115" IIO* 105"

Fig. 1. Magnetic anomalies in the northeast Pacific. Numbers refer to the time scale of Heirtzler et al. [21 ].
See text for discussion.

has been used by Hayes and Pitman [28]. lel to the spreading direction, fracture zones are indi-
In regions of sparse data, interpretation of trends cators of the pale, direction of spreading. Using these
and offsets was aided by use of some basic principles concepts and the assumption that ridge crests are
derived from plate tectonics theories [29-31]. In perpendicular to transform faults, we have developed
these idealizations, spreading occurs at a boundary various possibilities for configurations of ridges and
between large rigid moving plates of lithospere. Mag- transform faults when the direction of spreading
netic anomalies are created along ridge crests and changes [32]. We found that particular patterns
fracture zones are created along ridge-ridge transform ("Zed patterns") of anomalies are created and that on
faults, the entire pattern moving as a unit away from long straight segments of ridge crests, new transform
the spreading center. Thus, in any plate, the configu- faults might be created ([32], fig. 5). It was encour-
ration of a given anomaly with its offsets along frac- aging to find that in most cases where sufficient data
ture zones is a replica of the configuration of the exist to establish trends independently, they agree
pale, ridge crest with its offsets along transform remarkably well with the predicted ones.
faults. Furthermore, since transform faults are paral- A few areas exist that cannot so far be reconciled
 MAGNETICLINEATIONSIN THE NORTHEASTPACIFIC 447

55*

iiiii!ii!!iii~
.....~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiHii!iii~,-,,
50* --:5~iiiiiiiiiiii~ii~iii~iiiiiiiiiii!iii~iii~ ',,
-~"~ iiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiii!Qiiiiiiiii~,~,,i:;,
/~ 5~

45*

iiiiiii~iiiiii~

12-:--
.........~iiiiii!!!!!!i!!!i!iiii!iiiiiiiii ",'
40*
~iljiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil ',

.... 4
:55*

~iiiiiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii"~

50*

25*

~ 6 6 j
20*
/ c ) / ~ --9-- -9 ~

170 ° 165 ° 160 ° 155" 150 ° 145 ° 140 ° 155 ° 150 ° 125 ° 120 ° 115 ° I10 ° 105 °

Fig. 2. Track lines and detailed survey areas for which magnetic measurements were compiled. Numbers refer to data sources
which are listed below as references.

to simple spreading between two or three large rigid
plates. One is the "disturbed zone" between the Mur-
ray and Molokai fracture zones where too much
(400 kin) sea floor exists between anomaly 21
(53 my) and anomaly 13 (38 my) compared to the
surrounding region. Another is the section south of
the Molokai zone where about 250 km of sea floor
seems to be missing between anomalies 21 and 16
(42 my). Ridges offset by great distances sometimes
tend to jump in order to straighten themselves and
the first of these problem areas might be the result of
such a jump [24]. Another problem area lies west of
the Gorda and Juan de Fuca ridges. For anomalies
younger than anomaly 12 (35 my) the orderly pat-
tern begins to break down. Some anomalies are miss-
ing or repeated and fracture zone offsets disappear.
The configuration of given anomalies becomes con-
fused as indicated by the question marks, and the
manner of evolution of the present spreading system
from the former is not clear.
Aside from these problems, two major happenings
in the spreading history of the northeast Pacific can
be detected from the anomaly patterns shown in
fig. 1. One is a change in spreading direction at about
the time of anomalies 23-21 (58-53 my). This
change is expressed in the reorientation of the frac-
ture zones and anomalies [32] and in the creation of
new fracture zones in the long straight segment of
448 T.ATWATER and H.W.MENARD
ridge crest east of the magnetic bight. Fig. 3 shows
the data which supports the latter interpretation. The
fanning of anomalies is supported by the data be-
tween the Mendocino and Surveyor fracture zones
and between the Sedna and Sila zones while between
the Surveyor and Sedna zones and north of the Sila
zone the data are not inconsistent with it.
The interpretation in fig. 3 (and in [32], fig. 5) is
important because it demonstrates that a complicated
pattern of anomalies and fracture zones can be gener-
ated from a continuously spreading system by intro-
ducing a rather minor change in the direction of mo-
tion of one of its plates. This is particularly applicable
in geometries which involve a ridge-ridge-ridge triple
point [33] as ours does (the magnetic bight was
created by one [5 ] ). This type of triple point has the
peculiar property that it continually adds new length
to its ridges. To demonstrate this, one can measure
north from the Mendocino fracture zone and see that
the ridge segment between it and the magnetic bight
had 350 km added to it between anomalies 32
_(78 my) and 26 (64 my). In the traditional way of
50*
45 °
40 °
16o° 155° 15o°
Fig. 3. Magnetic data pertaining to the change in orientation
of anomalies and the creation of the Sedna and Sila fracture
zones. Magnetic profiles have the regional field removed and
are plotted along the ship's track. In detailed survey areas
positive anomalies are shaded.
considering spreading systems, transform faults must
inherit their offsets from some original transform
fault which formed when the system first started. In
our case the new section of ridge could not possibly
have inherited offsets from some primeval time.
Furthermore, the offset of the Aja fracture zone,
whatever it may be, cannot have had its origin with
the Sedna and Sila zones at 21 time since its segment
of ridge still did not exist at that time.
The second obvious feature of fig. 1 is the relative-
ly disordered appearance of the anomalies near the
coast of North America. These disruptions are prob-
ably related to the approach of the spreading ridge to
the coast [34]. A different cause has been given for
two of these disturbances. Namely, it has been sug-
gested that the change in orientation of the Juan de
Fuca and Gorda segments of the ridge and the seg-
ment at the mouth of the Gulf of California may be
related to a large scale change in plate motions be-
tween the times of anomaly 5 (10 my) and anomaly 3
(4.5 my) [35,36,32]. However, the anomaly patterns
in these two regions can be explained equally well as
disturbances caused by proximity of ridge and con-
tinent, while the other nearcoast disruptions occur at
times which clearly cannot be related to changes in
plate motions. For example, between the Pioneer and
Murray fracture zones the disturbances began about
anomaly 10 time (32 my) while elsewhere nearby the
anomalies in that part of the sequence are quite
orderly.
Interpretation of the pattern of magnetic anom-
alies in fig. 1 leads to several very important conclu-
sions concerning the geologic history of North Amer-
ica. One is that there was a trench offshore along the
entire west coast of North America at least until
anomaly 10 time (32 my). This follows from the
assumption that the ridge creating the anomalies was
spreading symmetrically and thus was creating an
eastern plate as well. This eastern plate (called the
Farallon plate by McKenzie and Morgan [33] ) has
now almost entirely disappeared beneath North
America. The rate at which it was overridden must
have been greater than 5 cm/yr (the rate at which it
145°
was being created) and has been estimated as 7 cm/yr
[33]. To decide the manner in which this rapid crus-
tal consumption occurred we look to present day
models and find that wherever a plate is postulated to
be overriding an oceanic plate rapidly, a trench exists
 MAGNETIC LINEATIONS IN THE NORTHEAST PACIFIC
with associated earthquakes and andesitic volcanism
[37, 31 ]. Thus we should expect to find geological
evidence of the trench, especially volcanics, all along
the western margin of North America throughout the
Paleogene.
Another conclusion is that segments of the ridge
approached the trench and met it with resulting dire
consequences for both features. We interpret the
near-coast breakup of anomalies as the manifestation
of the breakup of sections of the Farallon plate when
the trench had consumed it almost up to the ridge so
that the remaining piece became too narrow and
weak to act rigidly. The spreading at the ridge was
just the expression of the movement of the pieces of
the broken plate away from the Pacific plate so its
trace also broke up and as it continued to spread it
formed broken anomalies.
In plate tectonics theories [ 2 9 - 3 1 ] a spreading
ridge is just the boundary between two plates which
happen to be moving apart, while a trench is a bound-
ary between converging plates. In our case, the ridge
and trench are boundary phenomena related to mo-
tions of the Farallon plate. When that plate dis-
appeared, its boundary phenomena also disappeared,
and the surface expressions of the ridge and trench
annihilated one another. At this time, and not before,
the North American and main Pacific plates came
into contact and a new boundary regime developed
between these two plates. In present day schemes,
that boundary is the San Andreas fault and related
rifts in the Gulf of California [38, 39, 29, 30]. Thus
the timing of the origin of the various sections of the
San Andreas system may be related to the timing of
the ridge-trench collisions.
We have noted above that the configuration of an
anomaly shows the configuration of the ancient
spreading center. Fig. 1 shows that before anomaly
11 time (34 my) the ridge was offset by an especially
long transform fault along the Mendocino fracture
zone so that the section of ridge between the Men-
docino and Murray zones formed a prominent east-
ward projection. This was the first part of the ridge to
collide with the trench. The origin of the northern
portion of the San Andreas system may be related to
this collision which occurred at about anomaly 7 time
(27 my) while the Southern California part may be
related to collisions between 6A and 5B time ( 2 2 -
13 my), and the Gulf of California to one at about
449
5A time (11 my). The ceasing of volcanism and tec-
tonism related to the trench should also be correlat-
able to the collisions. These ideas have been outlined
in simple form by McKenzie and Morgan [33]. Their
expression in the continental geology of North Amer-
ica appears to be extremely complex and so far has
resisted straightforward explanation.
Acknowledgements
Dan McKenzie and John Mudie critically read this
manuscript and offered many useful suggestions. This
work was supported by the Office of Naval Research
Contract Nonr 2216 (23).
References
[ 1] P.J.Grim and B.H.Erickson, Fracture zones and mag-
netic anomalies south of the Aleutian trench, J. Geo-
phys. Res. 74 (1969) 1488.
[2] D.E.Hayes and J.R.Heirtzler, Magnetic anomalies and
their relation to the Aleutian Island arc, J. Geophys.
Res. 73 (1968) 4637.
[3] D.J.Elvers, C.C.Mathewson, R.E.Kohler and R.L.Moses,
Systematic Ocean Surveys by the USC & GSS Pioneer
1961-1963, Coast and Geod. Surv. Opr. Data Report
C&GSDR-1, Fredericksburg Geomagnetic Center,
Corbin, Va. (1967).
[4] G.Peter, Magnetic anomalies and fracture pattern in the
northeast Pacific Ocean, J. Geophys. Res. 71 (1966)
5365.
[5 ] W.C.Pitman, III and D.E.Hayes, Sea-floor spreading in
the Gulf of Alaska, J. Geophys. Res. 73 (1968) 6571.
[6] D.R.Bracey, Marine magnetic profiles in the Pacific
Ocean 1961-1962, Informal Manuscript Report
M-4-63, US Naval Ocean. Office, 1963.
[ 7 ] Project Magnet Data, US. Naval Oceanographic Office
Geomagnetic Surveys 1953-1965, Brochure No.3,
Magnetics Div., US Naval Ocean. Office (1966)
p IV-C-1.
[8] Unpublished line from Lamont-Doherty Geological
Observatory (Vema 20). We thank W.C.Pitman, III for
allowing us to use this unpublished data.
[9] Unpublished lines from Scripps Institution of Ocean-
ography.
[ 10] A.D.Raff and R.G.Mason, Magnetic survey off the west
coast of North America, 40°N latitude to 52°N latit-
ude, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 72 (1961) 1267.
[ 11 ] R.G.Mason and A.D.Raff, Magnetic survey off the west
coast of North America, 32°N latitude to 42°N latit-
ude, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 72 (1961) 1259.
450 T.ATWATER and H.W.MENARD
[12] V.Vacquier, A.D.Raff and R.E.Warren, Horizontal dis-
placements in the floor of the northeastern Pacific
Ocean, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 72 (1961) 1251.
[13] V.Vacquier, Transcurrent Faulting in the ocean floor,
Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, A 72 (1961) 1251.
[ 14] A.D.Raff, Boundaries of an area of very long magnetic
anomalies in the northeast Pacific, J. Geophys. Res. 71
(1966) 2631.
[15] Unpublished line from US Coast and Geodetic Survey
(McArthur, Opr. 394). We thank the Survey for its con-
tinuing generosity with unpublished data.
[16] C.G.Chase, H.W.Menard, R.L.Larson, G.F.Sharman, III
and S.M.Smith, History of sea-floor spreading west of
Baja California, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 81 (1970).
[17] R.L.Larson, H.W.Menard and S.M.Smith, Gulf of Calif-
ornia: A result of ocean-floor spreading and transform
faulting, Science 161 (1968) 781.
[ 18] D.C.Krause, Tectonics, bathymetry and geomagnetism
of the southern continental borderland west of Baja
California, Mexico, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. 76 (1965)
617.
[ 19] Tanya Atwater and H.W. Menard, Origin and evolution
of magnetic anomaly patterns in the northeast Pacific,
Geol. Soc. Amer., Program 1968 Annual Meetings
(1968) 9 (abstract only).
[20] H.W.Menard, The deep ocean floor, Scientific Amer.
221 (1969) 26.
[21] J.R.Heirtzler, G.O.Dickson, E.M.Herron, W.C.Pitman,
III and X.LePichon, Marine magnetic anomalies, geo-
magnetic field reversals and motions of the ocean floor,
J. Geophys. Res. 73 (1968) 2119.
[22] A.E.Maxwell, Recent deep sea drilling results from the
South Atlantic (abstract), Trans. Am. Geophys. Union
50 (1969) 113.
[23] B.P.Luyendyk and D.E.Fisher, Fission track age of
magnetic anomaly 10: a new point on the sea-floor
spreading curve, Science 164 (1969) 1516.
[24] H.W.Menard and Tanya Atwater, Origin of fracture
zone topography, Nature 222 (1969) 1037.
[25] H.W.Menard and T.E.Chase, Fracture zones, in: The
Sea, vol. 4, in press.
[26] T.E.Chase, Sea-floor topography of the central eastern
Pacific Ocean, US Dept. of Int., US Fish and Wildlife
Serv., Bur. of Commercial Fisheries, Circular 291.
[27] W.RiDickinson and A.Grantz, eds., Historically and
recently active faults of the California Region, Proc. of
Conference on Geologic Problems of San Andreas Fault
System, Stanford Univ. Pub. 1968, p. 376.
[28] D.E.Hayes and W.C.Pitman, III, Magnetic Lineations in
the North Pacific, The Sea, vol. 4, in press.
[29] W.J.Morgan, Rises, trenches, great faults and crustal
blocks, J. Geophys. Res. 73 (1968) 1959.
[30] D.P.McKenzie and R.L.Parker, The North Pacific: An
example of tectonics on a sphere, Nature 216 (1967)
1276.
[31 ] B.Isacks, J.Oliver and L.R.Sykes, Seismology and the
new global tectonics, J. Geophys. Res. 73 (1968) 5855.
[ 32] H.W.Menard and Tanya Atwater, Changes in direction
of sea floor spreading, Nature 219 (1968) 463.
[33] D.P.McKenzie and W.J.Morgan, Evolution of triple
point junctions, Nature, 224 (1969) 125.
[34] F.J.Vine, Spreading of the ocean floor: new evidence,
Science 154 (1966) 1405.
[35 ] W.J.Morgan, Pliocene reconstruction of the Juan de
Fuca ridge, Trans. Amer. Geophys. Un. 49 (1968) 327
(abstract only).
[36] F.J.Vine and H.H.Hess, Sea-floor spreading, The Sea,
Vol. 4, in press.
[37] X.LePichon, Sea floor spreading and continental drift,
J. Geophys. Res. 73 (1968) 3661.
[38] W.Hamilton, Origin of the Gulf of California, Bull.
Geol. Soc. Amer. 72 (1961) 1307.
[39] J.T.Wilson, Transform faults, oceanic ridges, and mag-
netic anomalies southwest of Vancouver Island, Science
150 (1965) 482.
[40] The names for the fracture zones Sedna, Sila and Aja
are from Alaskan mythology.