Geology of the Kai Islands: implications for the

evolution of the Aru Trough and Weber Basin,

Banda Arc, Indonesia
T. R. Charlton* and S. J. Kaye
Department of Geological Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London
WC1E 6BT, UK

and H. Samodra and Sardjono

Geological Research and Development Centre, JI. Diponegoro 57, Bandung, Indonesia

Received23 February 1990; accepted 10May 1990

The Kai archipelago is situated at the apex of the 180 bend in the Banda island arc.
Topographically, the islands occupy a forearc position between the Aru Trough to the east and
the Weber (forearc) Basin to the west. However, the structural style of the eastern Kai islands is
very different from the rest of the Banda forearc, being dominated by normal faults
downthrowing to the Aru Trough, with no sign of earlier compressive forearc deformation. The
Aru Trough is an extensional feature, although it is in direct bathymetric continuity with the
compressional Timor-Tanimbar Trough to the south. The Banda Arc thrust front does not
continue simply northward from the Timor-Tanimbar Trough, but steps westward as a result of
extension in the Aru Trough. The thrust front runs N - S through the Kai group, separating an
inactive accretionary complex to the west from active extension in the east. The Weber Basin
results from E - W extension, with pre-existing thrust faults probably reactivated in extension as
low-angle normal faults. Both the compressional and extensional deformation phases have
occurred since the Pliocene - - a period of less than 5 My.
Keywords: Kai archipelago, Indonesia; forearc basin; extensional features

Introduction
The Kai archipelago, eastern Indonesia, is located at
the eastern extremity of the Banda Arc, at the apex of
an island arc system which bends through 180 (Figure
1). Reconnaissance geological and geophysical
fieldwork carried out in the Kai islands in 1987 by
London University and the Indonesian Geological
Research and Development Centre (GRDC) has led to
a significant reappraisal of this eastern segment of the
Banda Arc, and of the adjacent Aru Trough and Weber
Basin.
The Banda Arc is situated in an area of interaction
between three of the earth's major crustal plates: the
Indo-Australian, Eurasian and Pacific plates (Figure 1).
It is a highly anomalous arc system, with old, probably
Mesozoic oceanic crust located on the inner side of the
arc, and Australian continental crust bordering the
outer bathymetric trough around the complete 180
bend of the arc. The outer trough can be divided into
four segments: the Timor, Tanimbar, Aru and Seram
Troughs anticlockwise around the arc. In cross-section,
the Timor, Tanimbar and Seram Troughs have many of
the structural characteristics of subduction trenches,
and have generally been interpreted in terms of
*Present address: 342l Canoncita Lane. Piano. TX 75023, USA

subduction processes (Katili, 1971; v o n d e r Borch,

1979; Hamilton, 1979; Bowin et al., 1980; Schluter and
Fritsch, 1985, Karig et al., 1987). The Aru Trough
immediately east of the Kai islands does not show the
typical subduction zone cross-sectional profile, but has
nevertheless been frequently interpreted as marking
the thrust front in the eastern Banda Arc (Cardwell and
Isacks, 1978; Hamilton, 1979; Schluter and Fritsch,
1985). The interpretation of the Aru Trough as the
thrust front of the Banda Arc places the Kai islands in a
forearc position. However, other studies (e.g. Bowin et
al., 1980, their Figure 16; A. J. Barber, unpublished
report, 1985; Jongsma et al., 1989) have recognised an
extensional rather than compressional origin for the
Aru Trough, and suggested that the thrust front in the
eastern Banda Arc is located further west, bisecting the
Kai islands. The geology of the Kai islands therefore
becomes important for delineating the eastward limit of
compressional deformation in the eastern Banda Arc.
The westernmost islands of the Kai group are
separated from the Banda volcanic arc further west by
the highly anomalous Weber Basin. In terms of its
tectonic position, the Weber Basin is a forearc basin.
However, it is unlike the other forearc basins around
the Banda Arc, and is indeed unique globally. Its major
distinguishing feature is its bathymetric depth (>7 km),

0264-8172/91/010062-08
1991 Butterworth-Heinemann ktd
62

Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1991, Vol 8, February

Evolution of the Banda Arc, Indonesia: T. R. Charlton et al.

--oo

I ~

-~

\ ~

PACIFIC OCEAN

o~-

+cc.:".," /
~

- ,o~

?" ~

o~...-i _Zo@

'"~-t~

INDIAN C~EAN

T*N'MB*";yJ, e~O'I

~,<o~

t ~

"

.,A~U,. s..,,

,o:-

'

//r~

AUSTRALIA

"

] 120E

Figure 1 Location of the Kai archipelago in the Banda Arc, eastern Indonesia

,,,,,J132E "STERN PROVINCE :

"
i

0
I

km
I
I
,-, . . . .
uepms in Km

30
t

[
1
~
~

"
"
:

I133E

EASTERN PROVINCE

CENTRAL PROVINCE

, .~Q / V/JKAI"
_~
" ~ ' ) . ,(DULAH
~ , h - ~ ~,,/jua~\
:

L___~_~,a/
"~"L TAYANDU
" ~ ISLANDS

,,

.h

t4U)J

//KECILI ." /

I< ,II
BESAR
/

/El~/

(
\

1~3~E

Figure 2 Location map of the Kai islands showing bathymetry (in km) and location of the line of section in Figure 5

M a r i n e a n d P e t r o l e u m G e o l o g y , 1991, Vol 8, F e b r u a r y

63

Evolution of the Banda Arc, Indonesia: T. R. Char/ton et al.

which makes it the deepest point in the world's oceans
not situated in a subduction trench. The origin of this
basin is important to a full understanding of the Banda
Arc, and clues to its origins can be gained from the
geology of the adjacent Kai islands.

["

Geology of the Kai Islands

The Kai archipelago can be divided into three
geological regions (Figure 2): an eastern province
consisting of Kai Besar; a central province including the
islands of Kai Kecil, Kai Dulah and the Tayandu
islands; and a western province comprising Kur, Fadol
and adjacent islands. The geology of these three
provinces will be described in order from east to west.

km

10

MUN

Eastern province (Kai Besar)

The island of Kai Besar (Figure3) is a long, narrow (85
10 km) and rugged (up to 800 m) island elongated in
a NNE-SSW direction. It is bordered to the east by the
inner slope of the Aru Trough, and to the west by the
relatively shallow Nerong Straits. During our 1987 visit,
reconnaissance fieldwork was carried out in the central
portion of the island near Elat, around the village of
Mun on the northern west coast, and south from Elat
near the village of Wetuar (Warkuk on the map of
Achdan and Turkandi, 1982). The fieldwork
complemented aerial photographic studies carried out
beforehand.

Stratigraphy. The stratigraphy of Kai Besar has

most recently been described during compilation of the
GRDC 1:250000 geological map of Kai (Achdan and
Turkandi, 1982). The oldest stratigraphic unit consists
of flat-bedded poorly fossiliferous caicilutites and marls
interbedded on a decimetre scale (Elat Formation).
Achdan and Turkandi (1982) reported Upper Eocene
ages from planktonic foraminifera in the marls, with
reworked Middle-Upper Eocene benthic foraminimera in the calcilutites. They estimated the formation
to be about 500 m thick. In 1987, we logged
approximately 450 m of this unit from continuous
coastal exposures north and south of Mun, and we
suspect that the total exposed thickness may be
somewhat greater, perhaps 600-800 m. The Elat
Formation is interpreted as pelagic or hemipelagic
carbonates deposited in a distal continental slope
setting, possibly slightly shallowing upward.
The Elat Formation is overlain (disconformably?) by
yellowish or reddish-brown shallow water limestones of
the Tamangil Formation (Heim, 1939) or Member
(Achdan and Turkandi, 1982). The limestone is a
characteristic
calcirudite
containing
numerous
Lepidocyclina benthic foraminifera up to 6 cm
diameter. Achdan and Turkandi (1982) reported a
Middle-Upper Oligocene age for this unit, and
identified a stratigraphic thickness of up to 50 m. In our
opinion the unit is sufficiently distinct to warrant
separate formational status.
The overlying Weduar Formation consists of reef
limestone, calcilutite, calcarenite and marl deposited in
neritic shelf environments. It is believed to be entirely
Miocene in age. According to Achdan and Turkandi
(1982), the formation is approximately 500 m thick.
The youngest stratigraphic unit recognised in Kai
Besar by Achdan and Turkandi (1982) is the Weryahan
64

seep

ELAT

WETUAR
No Pliocen~
(cf. Achdan
& Turkandi~

KAI
BESAR

Tamangil and Weduar

Formations(Oligo-Miocene)

I lat Formation
(Eocene)

Normal fault

Figure 3 Simplified geological map of Kai Besar from fieldwork

and aerial photo-interpretation

Formation, which consists of shallow water limestone

and marl of Pliocene age. On their map, Achdan and
Turkandi (1982) indicated stratigraphic contacts
between the Weryahan Formation and both the Elat
Formation
(Eocene)
and
Weduar
Formation
(Miocene). This suggests that the Weryahan Formation
has an unconformable relationship with these older
sequences. In our fieldwork we visited the locality
south of Wetuar village (Figure3) where the Weryahan
Formation was indicated in stratigraphic contact with
the Eocene rocks. We were unable to confirm these
relationships: the area indicated consisted of unbroken
outcrops of the Elat Formation. At the second
indicated locality of the Weryahan Formation
immediately north of Wetuar village, a simple
gradation was observed in a series of outcrops from the
Weryahan Formation down into the Weduar
Formation. Bedding dips in the Weryahan and Weduar

Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1991, Vol 8, February

Evolution of the Banda Arc, Indonesia: T. R. Charlton et al.

area is structurally more disturbed, as reflected in the
Formations are similar, indicating that the boundary is
greater scatter of poles to bedding from this area
at most a disconformity.
compared with Mun (Figure 4). The offset between the
two halves of the island suggests a right-lateral
Structure. The structural geology of Kai Besar is
displacement. This is also suggested by the clockwise
remarkably simple considering its apparent position
rotation of the mean bedding dip in Figure 4b
within the Banda forearc. From aerial photographic
compared to Figure 4a.
interpretation (Figure 3), two sets of lineaments clearly
An alternative interpretation which has been
stand out: a dominant set oriented NNE-SSW parallel
previously considered (see for instance Jongsma et al.,
to the long axis of the island; and a secondary set
1989) is that the NNE-SSW set of lineaments are
oriented W N W - E S E , approximately at right-angles to
left-lateral wrench faults. We believe this interpretation
the first set. However, despite the stronger expression
of the NNE-SSW set, these lineaments often terminate
to be incorrect because: (1) the lineaments are
expressed as large escarpments predominantly facing
or are displaced by the W N W - E S E set.
eastward. This seems more consistent with normal
Morphologically, the NNE-SSW lineaments are
expressed as spectacular east-facing escarpments up to
faulting. (2) The regularity of bedding dips does not
several hundred metres high. In the northern half of the
appear consistent with a major wrench fault zone. (3)
island, three or four such escarpments are seen across
The NNE-SSW lineaments are offset or terminated by
the island, giving the island a sawtooth topographic
the W N W - E S E lineaments. At the very least, this
profile. The scarps are interpreted as recently active
suggests that the NNE-SSW lineaments are not active
normal faults downthrowing to the east towards the
wrench faults. (4) Extensional calcite veining shows a
Aru Trough. The much gentler western back slopes of
very regular orientation parallel to the NNE-SSW
the escarpments are virtual dip slopes, reflecting highly
lineaments. This suggests extension normal to the
uniform bedding dips to the west at about 5-15 . This
lineaments, which is better explained by normal
faulting than by wrench faulting.
uniformity of bedding dip is clearly demonstrated by a
stereographic plot of poles to bedding recorded from
The normal faulting and associated transfer faulting
the Mun area (Figure 4a). In other localities, the only
is the only significant deformation to have affected Kai
exception to this gentle westward dip occurs near to the
Besar since at least the Eocene. The timing of this
normal faults, where dips of up to 45 eastward are seen
deformation is well constrained by our fieldwork.
in small footwall anticlines and hangingwall synclines.
According to Achdan and Turkandi (1982), the
The W N W - E S E set of lineaments are less clearly
Pliocene Weryahan Formation rests unconformably on
expressed morphologically, although they frequently
the Eocene Elat Formation near Wetuar. If this were
true, it would suggest that the main deformation phase
correspond to topographic depressions cutting across
the elevated spine of the island. As noted above, the
was probably pre-Pliocene. However, we were not able
second set of lineaments displace or terminate the first
to find such an unconformable relationship. Instead, we
set, and they are interpreted as transfer zones linking
found a simple stratigraphic contact between the
extension on the NNE-SSW normal faults. Although
Pliocene Weryahan Formation and the Miocene
Weduar Formation. The Pliocene rocks are folded in a
these transfer zones are presumably strike-slip in
footwall syncline to one of the major normal faults, and
character, their field expression is often as normal
are cut by a minor normal fault oriented E - W . The
faults. For instance, the rather minor transfer fault
3 km south of Mun (Figure 3) consists primarily of a
Pliocene rocks are therefore as deformed as the older
Tertiary rocks. This suggests that the normal faulting
steep normal fault downthrowing to the north. On the
coast just north of this fault, two low-angle normal
has occurred in post-Pliocene times.
faults downthrowing to the south are seen. These
In summary, the structure of Kai Besar is dominated
appear from the aerial photographs to link into the
by normal faults downthrowing towards the Aru
larger normal fault inland. In cross-section, this
Trough. This normal faulting occurred in post-Pliocene
transfer zone would probably have the form of a
times, and is the only significant deformation to have
divergent flower structure.
affected the island since at least the Eocene.
In the central segment of Kai Besar near Elat, the
Central province
cross-lineaments trend more nearly NW-SE. This may
represent a more fundamental break between the
The central geological province of the Kai islands
northern and southern halves of the island. The Elat
(Figure 2) consists of low-lying islands composed
predominantly of Quaternary reef. The eastern islands
of Kai Kecil and Kai Dulah are dissected by long
N
N
lagoonal channels with a N - S orientation. These
Mun
N =63
Elat
N =35
channels have been interpreted (Heim, 1939; Achdan
and Turkandi, i982) as the result of recent structural
warping of the reef terraces. Locally the Weryahan
Formation (Pliocene) crops out in south-central Kai
Kecil, possibly in the core of such an anticlinal warp.
The other notable characteristic of the central Kai
geological province is the presence of mud volcanoes.
Within the Kai islands, mud volcanoes are only
found in the central geological province. The mud
volcano indicated by Achdan and Turkandi (1982) on
the east coast of Kai Besar has been searched for by
A. J. Barber (unpublished report, 1985) and by ourFigure 4 S t e r e o g r a p h i c p l o t s (equal area, l o w e r h e m i s p h e r e ) o f
p o l e s t o b e d d i n g , Kai Besar. (a) M u n area; (b) Flat area
selves without success. It seems likely that the mud
Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1991, Vol 8, February

65

Evolution of the Banda Arc, Indonesia: T. R. Char~ton

volcano designation refers rather to the well known gas
seep at this location (e.g. Brouwer, 1921). In other
parts of the Banda Arc, mud volcanoes are widely
found in the forearc accretionary complex (Barber et
al., 1986), and in particular close to the forearc
deformation front where shale-rich sedimentary
sequences enter the subduction system (Breen et al.,
1986). The central geological province of the Kai
islands is therefore interpreted as the foremost part of
the Banda Arc accretionary complex. The Quaternary
reef was presumably deposited unconformably on the
accretionary complex after thrusting had ceased. The
Weryahan Formation was not examined in detail on
Kai Kecil, and so it is not known whether this unit is
part of the imbricated sequence, or part of the
post-deformation sedimentary drape. The thrustrelated deformation in the central province is therefore
certainly pre-Quaternary, but cannot at this stage be
more accurately dated. The present day mud volcanism
may be occurring along faults active after the main
deformation, as is also seen on Timor (Barber et al.,
1986). These might be wrench faults as on Timor, or
normal faults related to the extension seen in Kai
Besar.

et al.

emergent or covered by water less than 200 m deep,

and the floor of the Weber Basin is a steep submarine
slope descending 5 km vertically over a distance of
about 15 km. The extreme depth of the Weber
(forearc) Basin must result from vertical movements
post-dating formation of the west Kai forearc complex
on which it is presumably built. Extension in the Weber
Basin suggests that from east to west the eastern Banda
Arc consists of two active extensional zones (the Aru
Trough and Weber Basin) separated by an inactive
zone of compression (the west Kai accretionary
complex).

Structural interpretation of the Kai region

Figure 5 shows a crustal scale cross-section through the
Kai region from the Aru islands on the Australian
continental margin (Arufura Shelf) to the centre of the
Weber Basin. The location of the line through the Kai
islands is shown in Figure 2. The eastern half of the
section follows approximately the same line as the
gravity profile of Untung (1985). The major controls on
the cross-section in Figure 5 are: (1) our own field
geological observations
and
Bouguer
gravity
measurements from Kai Besar, Kai Kecil, Kai Dulah
and the Tayandu islands; (2) bathymetry, gravity and
shallow seismic control over the Aru Trough and
Weber Basin from Jongsma et al. (1989); and (3) crustal
thickness values beneath the Arafura Shelf, Aru
Trough and Weber Basin from seismic refraction
experiments reported by Bowin et al. (1980).
The Aru Trough is interpreted as a zone of recent
crustal extension. There is, however, a marked offset
between the bathymetric low at the axis of the Aru
Trough and the Bouguer gravity anomaly high centred
on Kai Besar (Jongsma et al., 1989, their Figures 3 and
6b). This implies that the brittle upper crustal extension
responsible for the Aru Trough bathymetric low is
offset relative to lower crustal extension which accounts
for most of the Bouguer gravity anomaly. The young
extension in the eastern Kai islands and the Aru
Trough is therefore interpreted in terms of a
Wernicke-type extensional model (Wernicke, 1981),
linking brittle upper crust extension under the axis of
the Aru Trough with ductile extension of the lower
continental crust beneath Kai Besar. The steep gravity
gradient recorded between Kai Kecil and Kai Besar

Western province
High grade metamorphic rocks (silicic schists, gneiss
and migmatite; Bowin et al., 1980; Achdan and
Turkandi, 1982) outcrop on the islands of Kur and
Fadol in the western geological province of Kai. They
are found together with Late Miocene-Pliocene
claystone and sandstone (Bowin et al., 1980) and
Quaternary reef. The nature of the contact between the
metamorphics and the Miocene sediments (structural
or stratigraphic) has not been recorded.
The western province of Kai is interpreted as the
innermost part of the west Kai forearc complex. The
acid metamorphic rocks are probably Australian
continental basement emplaced by thrusting on to the
imbricated Australian cover sequence of the central
Kai province. The metamorphics of western Kai
probably occupy a similar structural position to the
Kobipoto Complex on Scram (Audley-Charles et al.,
1979; Tjokrosapoetro and Budhitrisna, 1982).
The western boundary of the west Kai geological
province is the east flank of the Weber Basin (Figure 2).
The boundary between the Kai block, which is
~o

o 200-

.100

-<

(D

0
W

"~

201

EsBEN
R

KUR

4oj

'

I"AYANDU

MESOZOIC- PALEOGENE
KAI BESAR

KAI KECIL

_~

L_ i

J.

NEOGENE

ARe,Roeo.[

-LOWER CONTINENTAL CRUS'r/: ;',L,;;2?'.C':;'

MANTLE
j

0
I

km
I

50
I

Figure 5 Crustal-scale cross-section through the Kai islands from the Weber Basin to the Aru islands (Arafura Shelf)

66

M a r i n e and P e t r o l e u m G e o l o g y , 1991, Vol 8, February

ARU iSLANDS

Evolution of the Banda Arc, Indonesia: T. R. Char/ton et al.

places a strong constraint on the western limit of lower
and Fadol. The basal decollement as drawn in Figure 5
crustal extension. The marked gravity low centred on
dips westward towards the Weber Basin at about 8.
A peculiarity of the present arrangement of
the west-central Kai islands indicates that the lower
structural elements in the Kai area is the apparent
continental crust beneath central and western Kai has
typical continental thickness, similar to that under the
continuity of the extensional Aru Trough with the
Arafura Shelf. The crustal extension in the Aru Trough
compressional Timor-Tanimbar Trough to the south.
is therefore restricted to a zone bounded by the western
The nature of the change northward from compressive
edge of the Arafura Shelf in the east, and Kai Besar in
tectonics near Tanimbar to recent extension south-east
the west. Within this zone, about 35 km of extension is
of Kai Besar is well illustrated by seismic lines across
estimated, corresponding to a 40% extension factor
the Tanimbar-Aru Trough figured by Schluter and
Fritsch (1985, their Figures 12-14). Line drawings of
([3= 1.4).
Present day shallow seismicity in the eastern Banda
these seismic sections are shown here as Figure 6.
Arc is primarily associated with extension in the Aru
These lines show that several of the arcward dipping
Trough. This is shown by the concentration of
reflectors in the forearc complex have normal rather
earthquake epicentres in the Aru Trough with fault
than the expected reverse fault offsets. The extension
plane solutions indicating either normal or strike-slip
in the Aru Trough therefore presumably links
faulting (Hamilton, 1974; Cardwell and Isacks, 1978;
southward into the northern Tanimbar Trough by
McCaffrey, 1988). The primary extension direction
reactivation of forearc thrusts as low-angle normal
indicated by the normal fault earthquake mechanisms is
faults. Further north, at the latitude of the Kai islands,
approximately perpendicular to the long axis of the
the extension has been entirely taken up within the
trough. The strike-slip mechanisms commonly show a
previously undeformed Australian crust forward of the
roughly N - S and E - W quadrantic arrangment of
Banda Arc deformation front. The inactive Kai thrust
nodal planes in which any particular quadrant can be
front, located between Kai Besar and Kai Kecil in the
either compressional or dilatational with about equal
Nerong Straits, has been displaced westward relative to
likelihood. Such a pattern is inconsistent with
the Tanimbar Trough thrust front by this extension in
left-lateral wrench faulting parallel to the long axis of
the Aru Trough. The two inactive thrust fronts must be
the Aru Trough (e.g. Jongsma et al., 1989), where the
joined by a left-lateral transfer fault located south of
earthquake mechanisms should show the SW and NE
the Kai islands and oriented approximately
quadrants as predominantly compressional, and the NE
WNW-ESE. The present limited seismic coverage of
and SW quadrants predominantly dilatational.
this area does not constrain the precise position of this
Alternatively, this pattern is consistent with transfer
inferred transfer fault.
faulting associated with roughly E - W extension,
To the west of the Kai islands, the Weber Basin is a
similar to that seen on Kai Besar. The transfer faults on
second zone of active E - W extension. Raised Bouguer
Kai Besar have both left- and right-lateral offsets, and a
gravity values (>250 mgal: Bowin et al., 1980; Jongsma
similar fault pattern in the Aru Trough would account
et al., 1989) and seismic refraction data (Bowin et al.,
for the mixed polarity of the strike-slip earthquake
1980) suggest considerable reduction in crustal
mechanisms.
thickness under the Weber Basin relative to the Kai
block and Banda volcanic arc on either side. Previous
Earthquake epicentres are particularly concentrated
interpretations (e.g. Bowin et al., 1980) took this to
under the eastern flank of the Aru Trough, suggesting
indicate that the Weber Basin is underlain by oceanic
that the extension system is growing eastward by
crust. Alternatively, the thinner crust beneath the
footwall collapse. The seismicity in the Aru Trough
Weber Basin may be the result of extreme attentuation
dies out southward at the junction with the Tanimbar
of continental or intermediate crust resulting from a
Trough, and forms an approximately triangular zone
high degree of E - W extension. The east flank of the
northward up to the Tarera-Aiduna Fault in the north
Weber Basin is interpreted as a zone of normal faulting
(e.g. Jongsma et al., 1989, their Figure 5). This suggests
superimposed on the older Banda forearc deformation.
that the extension may be induced by drag on the
Thrust planes within the west Kai accretionary complex
left-lateral Tarera-Aiduna Fault. The primary
may have been reactivated as low angle normal faults,
extension direction in the Aru Trough, as indicated
as is seen at the junction of the Aru and Tanimbar
both by earthquake fault plane solutions and by the
Troughs (Figure 6).
geology of Kai Besar, is W N W - E S E , which is the
Subduction in the Kai region had evidently ceased
expected extension direction associated with left-lateral
wrench faulting parallel to the Tarera-Aiduna Fault.
before the deposition of undeformed Quaternary reef
Prior to this phase of extension, the central and
sediments which overlie deformed sequences in central
western parts of the Kai islands were the site of
and eastern Kai. This is similar to what is seen in the
compressive deformation related to subduction of the
Tanimbar islands to the south, where subduction also
Australian continental margin beneath the Banda Arc.
ceased prior to the Pleistocene (de Smet et al., 1990),
The western and central Kai islands are modelled in
and is also similar to the Timor forearc where
Figure 5 as an imbricate stack of Australian continental
subduction virtually ceased during the Quaternary
basement and cover thrust back on to normal thickness
(Veevers et al., 1978; Johnston and Bowin, 1981;
Australian continental crust. The deformation front of
Charlton, 1988). This suggests that the southern and
this forearc/accretionary complex is situated to the west
eastern segments of the Banda Arc have been largely
of Kai Besar in the Nerong Straits. The dip of the basal
inactive as subduction zones for 1-2 My. As in Timor
decollement to the accretionary complex is constrained
and the Tanimbar islands, the collision phase between
by gravity modelling and by the necessity for the
the Banda Arc and the Australian margin in the Kai
decollement to intersect the Australian basement at the
area is probably an essentially Piiocene event (Johnston
western margin of the Kai block in order for
and Bowin, 1981; Audley-Charles, 1986; de Smet etal.,
continental basement to be raised to the surface in Kur
1990).
Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1991, Vol 8, February

67

Evolution of the Banda Arc, Indonesia." T. R. Char/ton et al.

0

93

92

km

10

J
j l

II

Figure 6 Line drawings of seismic sections across the Tanimbar Trough (from Schluter and Fritsch, 1985). Note the increasing
extension from south to north

The E - W extension in the Aru Trough and Weber

Basin can be explained as a result of subduction largely
ceasing around the Banda Arc since the Pliocene. The
continuing northward convergence of Australia on the
Eurasian
and
Pacific
plates
during
the
Pleistocene-Recent has led to N - S compression across
the Banda Sea region. This had led to E - W
compensatory expansion within the Banda Sea,
primarily taken up on left-lateral wrench faults oriented
E N E - W S W (McCaffrey, 1988; Figure 7a). The Weber
forearc basin, located at the apex of the bend in the
Banda Arc, is analogous to an incompetent lithological
horizon between two competent horizons (the volcanic
arc and the Kai block) at the hinge of a fold. Continued
tightening of the fold leads to zones of alternating

68

compression and extension in the hinge (Figure 7b).

The contrast in structural rigidity between the Weber
Basin and the adjacent crustal blocks focuses extension
in the forearc basin region. Extension within the Aru
Trough can be seen as a second zone of extension at the
hinge of the Banda 'megafold', with extension
concentrated on an old line of weakness within the
Australian continental basement (the northward
continuation of the Halls Creek Mobile Zone: Figure

1).

Conclusions
The apparent continuity of geological structures around
the Banda Arc is not as simple as first impressions

Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1991, Vol 8, February

Evolution of the Banda Arc, Indonesia: T. R. Char/ton et al.

= _-

Figure7

Comparison of the tectonics of the Banda Arc (a) with the strain pattern around a fold (b) from Dieterich, 1969 via Hobbs eta/.,
1976. Shaded area in (a) is the volcanic arc. Short lines in (b) are parallel to the long axes of strain ellipses at those points. Note the two
zones of E-W extension (the Aru Trough and the Weber Basin) at the eastern apex of the arc, and the corresponding zones of extension
in the fold

would indicate. Not only is the northern Banda Arc

separated from the southern and eastern arcs by the
Tarera-Aiduna Fault (Cardwell and Isacks, 1978), but
the Kai islands and adjacent Aru Trough are not simple
northward continuations of the Timor-Tanimbar
forearc ridge and the Timor-Tanimbar Trough,
respectively. The Kai islands can be divided into two
structural zones. Firstly there is an eastern zone
consisting essentially of Kai Besar. This is a fragment of
the Australian continental margin isolated in
post-Pliocene times by extension in the Aru Trough.
The second structural zone consists of the central and
western Kai islands. This region has a very different
structural history, probably having been deformed
within a forearc setting during the Pliocene. This
forearc region can be subdivided into the central Kai
islands which are composed of imbricated Australian
continental margin sediments, and the western islands
which are largely composed of backthrust Australian
continental basement. The Kai structural block is
bordered on its western edge by the Weber Basin,
which is interpreted as a zone of extreme forearc
extension superimposed on earlier subduction-related
compression.

Acknowledgements
Thanks to Tony Barber (Royal Holloway and Bedford
New College, London University) for useful
discussions; to Herman Sugilar and Zainal Hayat
(GRDC) who worked with us in Kai, and to GRDC
(former Director Dr M. Untung; present Director Dr
R. Sukamto) for logistical arrangements. The fieldwork
was sponsored by Union Texas (SE Asia) Inc. and
Idemitsu Oil Development Co., with special thanks to
Haydn Rickard (UTSEA) for discussions and support.
Thanks to Janet Baker and Colin Stewart for the
artwork.

References
Achdan, A. and Turkandi, T. (1982) Preliminary geologic map of
the Kai (Tayandu and Tual) Quadrangles, Maluku, 1:250,000,
and accompanying GRDC Open File Report
Audley-Charles, M. G. (1986) Rates of Neogene and Quaternary
tectonic movements in the southern Banda Arc based on
micropaleontology J. GeoL Soc. Lond. 143, 161-175
Audley-Charles, M. G., Carter, D. J., Barber, A. J., Norvick, M. S.
and Tjokrosapoetro, S. (1979) Reinterpretation of the
geology of Seram: implications for the Banda Arcs and
northern Australia J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 136, 547-568
Barber, A. J., Tjokrosapoetro, S. and Charlton, T. R. (1986) Mud
volcanoes, shale diapirs, wrench faults and melanges in
accretionary complexes, eastern Indonesia Bull. Am. Assoc.
Petrol. GeoL 70, 1729-1741

Bowin, C., Purdy, G. M., Johnston, C., Shor, G. G. Lawver, L.,

Hartono, H.M.S. and Jezek, P. (1980) Arc-continent collision
in the Banda Sea region Bull. Am. Assoc. Petrol. GeoL 64,
868-915
Breen, N. A., Silver, E. A. and Hussong, D. M. (1986) Structural
styles of an accretionary wedge south of the island of
Sumba, Indonesia revealed by SeaMARC II side scan sonar
Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 97, 1250-1261
Brouwer, H. A. (1921) Contribution to the geology of Great Kei
and smaller islands between Ceram and the Kei islands
GRDC Open File Report
Cardwell, R. K. and Isacks, B. L. (1978) Geometry of subducted
lithosphere beneath the Banda Sea in eastern Indonesia from
seismicity and fault plane solutions J. Geophys. Res. 83,
2825-2838
Charlton, T. R. (1988) Tectonic erosion and accretion in
steady-state trenches Tectonophysics 149, 233-243
de Smet, M. E. M. Charlton, T. R., Kaye, S. J., Faeni, H., Troelstra,
S. R. and van Marie, L. J. (1990) Late Cenozoic history of the
island of Yamdena, Tanimbar archipelago, eastern Indonesia
submitted to Geol. Rundsch.
Dieterich, J. H. (1969) Origin of cleavage in folded rocks Am. J.
Sci. 272, 155-165
Hamilton, W. (1974) Earthquake map of the Indonesian region
US Geol. Surv. Misc. Invest. Ser. 1-875-C
Hamilton, W. (1979) Tectonics of the Indonesian region US GeoL
Surv. Prof, Pap. 1078
Helm, A. (1939) Geological reconnaissance report on the
Tanimbar, Kai and Aroe islands - - N.E.I. GRDC Open File
Report
Hobbs, B. E., Means, W. D. and Williams, P. F. (1976) An Outline
of Structural Geology Wiley, New York, 571 pp
Johnston, C. R. and Bowin, C. O. (1981) Crustal reactions
resulting from the Mid-Pliocene to Recent continent-island
arc collision in the Timor region BMRJ. Aust, Geol. Geophys.
6, 223-243
Jongsma, D., Huson, W., Woodside, J. M., Suparka, S.,
Sumantri, T. and Barber, A. J, (1989) Bathymetry and
geophysics of the Snellius II Triple Junction and tentative
seismic stratigraphy and neotectonics of the northern Aru
Trough Neth, J. Sea Res. 24, 231-250
Karig, D. E., Barber, A. J., Charlton, T. R., Klemperer, S. and
Hussong, D. M. (1987) Nature and distribution of
deformation across the Banda Arc-Australia collision zone
at Timor Bull. Geol, Soc. Am. 98, 18-32
Katili, J. A. (1971) A review of geotectonic theories and tectonic
maps of Indonesia Earth-Sci. Rev. 7, 143-163
McCaffrey, R. (1988) Active tectonics of the eastern Sunda and
Banda arcs. J. Geophys. Res. 93, 15163-15182
Schluter, H. U. and Fritsch, J. (1985) Geology and tectonics of
the Banda Arc between Tanimbar island and Aru island
(Indonesia) Geol. Jahrb. 30, 3-41
Tjokrosapoetro, S. and Budhitrisna, T. (1982) Geology and
tectonics of the northern Banda Arc GRDC Bull. 6, 1-17
Untung, M. (1985) Subsidence of the Aru Trough and the Aru
island, Irian Jaya, Indonesia Tectonophysics 112, 411-422
v o n d e r Borch, C. C. (1979) Continent-island arc collision in the
Banda Arc Tectonophysics 54, 169-193
Veevers, J. J., Falvey, D. A. and Robins, S. (1978) Timor Trough
and Australia: facies show topographic wave migrated 80 km
during the past 3 m.y. Tectonophysics 46, 217-227
Wernicke, B. (1981) Low-angle normal faults in the Basin and
Range province: nappe tectonics in an extending orogen
Nature 291,645-648

Marine and Petroleum Geology, 1991, Vol 8, February

69