Search

Highlights • Erosion rates in the MTJ region vary from 0.21 to 0.69 mm/yr. • Erosion rates are higher in drainage basins close to the MTJ. • Erosion rates are similar to uplift rates inferred for the past 96–305 ka. • Erosion rates are lower than uplift rates inferred for the past ∼72 ka. • The MTJ region landscape shows a transient response to an increase in uplift rates. Abstract The Mendocino Triple Junction (MTJ) region in northern California is an archetype for studying landscape response to varying rock uplift rates as they increase toward the triple junction. Underpinning these studies lies the assumption that this landscape has reached a dynamic equilibrium in which rock uplift and erosion rates are equal; however, no study has shown that such an equilibrium actually exists around the MTJ region. Here, we report 10Be- and 26Al-derived erosion rates calculated from isotope concentrations in detrital, fluvial sediment from coastal drainage basins; we then compare these rates with uplift rates inferred from marine terraces that were formed and preserved by uplift during the last ∼305 ka. Erosion rates in the more slowly uplifting southern part of the region range from 0.21–0.32 mm/yr and are consistent with rock uplift rates since 305 ka. However, in the northern transition zone, where uplift rates apparently started to increase about ∼100 ka due to northward migration of the MTJ, erosion rates are higher, 0.43 to 0.69 mm/yr. These rates are similar to uplift rates from 96–305 ka, but substantially less than recent uplift rates of ∼3.5–4 mm/yr inferred for the past ∼72 ka. In the central part of the King Range, finite erosion rates cannot be determined due to (i) the presence of excess 10Be that does not appear to have originated from in-situ cosmic-ray production during erosion and transport of the sediment, and (ii) 26Al concentrations below detection limits. The difference between catchment-wide erosion and recent uplift rates in coastal catchments may be related to a lag in response of hillslopes and tributaries to changes in rates of tectonically-driven relative base-level fall or the uncertainties in rock uplift rates inferred from marine terraces. This study suggests that measurements of both erosion and uplift rates are crucial in assessing the equilibrium state of landscapes and in understanding the topographic features made by surface and tectonic processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]