International Journal of Geosciences, 2012, 3, 133-152
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ijg.2012.31016 Published Online February 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ijg)
Structural Architecture for Development of Marginal
Extensional Sub-Basins in the Red Sea Active Rift Zone
Reda Amer1, Mohamed Sultan2, Robert Ripperdan1, John Encarnación1
1Department of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, Saint Louis, USA
2Department of Geosciences, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, USA
Received September 9, 2011; revised October 12, 2011; accepted November 15, 2011
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a robust kinematic model that describes northern Red Sea and Gulf of Suez rifting and the devel-
opment of marginal extensional half-graben sub-basins (ESB). A combination of Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper
Plus (ETM+) and structural data was used to provide model constraints on the development of rift segments and ESB in
the active rift zones. Structural analysis shows rotation and change in strike of rift-bounding faults. The model describes
the northern Red Sea region as a poly-phase rift system initiated by late Oligocene (30 - 24 Ma) orthogonal rifting and
the development of marginal ESB (now inland ESB), followed by oblique rifting and flank uplift during the early Mio-
cene (24 - 18 Ma). The oblique rifting fragmented the rift depression into segments separated by oblique-slip accom-
modation within reactivated Pan-African (ca. 600 Ma) fracture zones, resulting in the development of antithetic faults
and an en-echelon distribution of inland ESB. The current phase of rifting was instigated by the development of the
Dead Sea Transform in response to increased northeasterly extension during the middle Miocene (ca. 18 Ma). The
model explains the widening of the Red Sea rift during the last phase more than the Gulf of Suez rift by developing
more antithetic faults and formation of offshore ESB, and deepening the rift depression.
Keywords: Remote Sensing; Tectonic Model; Marginal Sub-Basins; Rift Zone; Red Sea
1. Introduction
It is generally accepted that the Red Sea Rift was initi-
ated during the late Oligocene and early Miocene about
30 Ma [1,2]. The rift split the Arabian Nubian Shield
(ANS) into two parts, the eastern part in Arabia, and west-
ern part in east Africa (Figure 1). Several models have
been proposed for the tectonic development of the Red
Sea Rift. One of the earliest models predicted a terrain of
horsts and grabens during widespread rifting along steep
normal faults [3]. Although this model adequately ac-
counted for modern terrain features along the margins of
the Red Sea, it did not explain the shallow Moho levels
beneath the continental shelves and coastal plains. Coch-
ran and Martinez proposed a model that attributed the
shallow Moho to diffuse extension in the lower crust com-
bined with localized brittle extension in the shallow brit-
tle crust that form half-grabens [4]. Bohannon et al.
challenged the diffuse extension model on the grounds
that it required unrealistic rates of extension in the lower
crust, and suggested a passive rifting model where early
rifting resulted from a detachment fault that extended
from near the surface on the western rift shoulder to the
middle crust beneath the eastern rift shoulder [5]. Ac-
cording to their model, lithospheric mantle beneath the
detachment rose and spread by ductile lateral extension,
leading to a thinned shallow crust that evolved into a
seafloor spreading center. [6] Makris and Rhim sug-
gested the Red Sea was formed by left lateral strike-slip
motion along pre-existing zones of crustal weakness (i.e.
the Najd Fault system and the Central African Fault Zone)
in late Oligocene-early Miocene times that produced
pull-apart basins off Egypt and the Sudan, followed by
seafloor spreading in the central part of the Red Sea and
subsequently propagating to the south [6].
The lateral change of the African plate from collision
at Mediterranean and Bitlis to active subduction zones
and variation in the force distribution along the subduc-
tion zones with the presence of an intra plate weakness
zone represented by the Afar plume resulted in an exten-
sional deformation belt resembling the Red Sea and Gulf
of Aden rift systems [7]. The Red Sea Rift started as a
continental rift but recently, isolated volcanoes were found
on the floor of the axial depression in one segment in the
northern Red Sea which indicates an oceanic spreading
center is beginning to develop [8]. The Red Sea Rift is
controlled by pre-existing structures that determined the
initial geometry of the rift axis [9]. The early Red Sea
Rift was segmented along strike into distinct sub-basins
C
opyright © 2012 SciRes. IJG

R. AMER ET AL. 134
Figure 1. Landsat image shows the Arabian Nubian Shield (ANS), and Seasat-derived bathymetry of the Red Sea—Gulf of
Aden rift system show major tectonic elements of the ANS, Najd fault system, the Dead Sea transform boundary, the Bit-
lis-Zagros convergence zone, and East African rift (modified from Bosworth, 2005). Blue rectangle delineates the location of
study area (Figure 2).
with half-graben rift blocks separated by accommodation
zones spaced at 40 - 60 km intervals along the rift [8,10].
The location and orientation of the accommodation zones
were strongly influenced by pre-existing basement struc-
tures and in particular, N-S and WNW trending shear
zones [11]. The border faults of the half-graben sub-ba-
sins were formed by linking the reactivated faults and
fractures, producing a zigzag shape [11].
The purpose of this paper is to propose a kinematic
model for the development of the marginal extensional
sub-basins (ESB) in the Gulf of Suez and northwestern
Red Sea active rift zones (Figure 2). The integration of
remote sensing data from the Landsat Enhanced The-
matic Mapper Plus (ETM+) and structural analysis pro-
vide new constraints on the role of the pre-existing
structures in the development of the rift segments and the
ESB. Our study is focused on the only area in the ANS
that has a sedimentary succession preserved in discon-
nected inland ESB.
2. Tectonic Setting
The orogenic evolution of the ANS can be classified into
two phases: a contractional tectonic phase that lasted from
about 900 - 600 Ma, followed by an extensional tectonic
phase from about 595 - 575 Ma [12-14]. The contrac-
tional tectonic phase developed during the collision be-
tween east and west Gondwana and includes sutures, folds,
thrust belts and strike-slip faults [15]. A second com-
pressional tectonic event resulted in crustal shortening in
the ANS which offset the east to northeast trending su-
tures in the northern part of the shield [15]. This occurred

R. AMER ET AL. 135
Figure 2. Landsat ETM+ of the study area. Bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue, show the distri bution of rift segments (RS)
in the Gulf of Suez and northwestern Red Sea. (1) Suez RS; (2) Gharib RS; (3) Safaga RS; (4) Quseir RS; (DST) Dead Sea
Transform Fault (AZ) accommodation zone. Yellow circles are the main cities. Blue rectangle delineates the location of study
area Figure 3.
in the late Proterozoic (670 - 610 Ma) during the colli-
sion of the ANS with the Nile Craton to the west and the
Ar-Rayn microplate to the east, resulting in the exhuma-
tion of metamorphic core complexes such as the Meatiq,
Gabal Sibai, and Hafafit domes in the Eastern Desert of
Egypt and development of the NW-striking sinistral
strike-slip fault Najd Fault System to accommodate the
shortening [16,17].
The extensional phase of ANS evolution started in the
late Proterozoic during the last stages of the Pan-African
Orogen, with widespread NW-SE extension due to gra-
vitational instability at the end of the arc-accretion phase.
This caused collapse and widespread NW-SE extension
represented by metamorphic core complexes (i.e. Meatiq-

R. AMER ET AL. 136
gneisses); extensional basins (i.e. molasse sediments);
and large strike slip zones (i.e . Najd Fault Systems) [18-
20] (Figure 3). The Najd Fault Systems is a northwest-
trending sinistral strike-slip system that extends over
1200 km and has a width of approximately 300 km in
Saudi Arabia and the ED of Egypt [21,22] (Figure 1).
The displacement of Najd Fault Systems developed the
sinistral strike-slip Hamraween Shear Zone and Queih
Shear Zone [23] (Figure 3). In the late Neoproterozoic
(630 - 590 Ma) the thickened lithospheric mantle roots of
the northern ANS were delaminated and the northern
ANS uplifted to elevations of more than 3 km, thus trig-
gering rapid erosional unroofing and lateral extension and
formation of intermontane basins (i.e. molasse sediment
basins) [24].
The most recent extensional tectonic event of the ANS
is the Red Sea rift which started opening in the late Oli-
gocene to early Miocene at about 30 Ma [1,2]. The rift
was associated with uplift which resulted in erosion of
the sedimentary succession and exposure of the underly-
ing basement rocks [24]. The rift reactivated the accre-
tionary and post-accretionary Pan-African fault systems
Figure 3. Landsat ETM+ bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue, show th e locations of metamorphic core complexes and Najd
fault system-related shear zones in the central eastern desert. Quieh Shear Zone (QSZ); Meatiq Shear Zone (MSZ); Sibai
Shear Zone (SSZ).

R. AMER ET AL. 137
and led to the development of ESB in the Gulf of Suez
and the northern Red Sea [2,25,26]. The ESB in the
Eastern Desert of Egypt were formed in the late Creta-
ceous and nucleated as small pull-apart basins by reacti-
vating the Najd Fault System [26,27]. Paleostress analy-
sis of the Duwi sub-basin in the Central Eastern Desert
show that it was formed compatible with principal stress
directions with sub-horizontal σ1 (ENE-WSW) and σ3
(NNW-SSE), and a sub-vertical σ2 [27] (Figure 3). Flank
uplift accompanied by NE-SW extension in the Oligo-
cene resulted from a change to a stress field with sub-
vertical σ1 [27]. A series of N40˚W-trending normal
faults associated with strike-slip faults resulted in the
creation of numerous pull-apart basins along the Red Sea
coastal area [28]. The thickness of the sedimentary suc-
cession preserved in the inland ESB is about 400 - 500 m
and reach up to 4 km offshore [28].
The Dead Sea Transform Fault is one of the most tec-
tonically active features in the ANS. It is a left lateral
strike-slip fault that extends for about 1000 km and links
a region of extension in the Red Sea to a region of con-
traction in the Zagros-Bitlis Convergence Zone, with slip
rates that vary between 1 and 10 mm/yr [29,30]. Igneous
activity and local subsidence along the Dead Sea Trans-
form Fault suggest that the movement started in the mid-
dle Miocene (ca. 18 Ma) with a total displacement of
approximately 105 km [31] (Figure 2).
3. Lithology of the Study Area
The study area is predominantly covered by Precambrian
igneous and metamorphic terranes (basement rocks), with
Phanerozoic sedimentary rocks preserved in isolated ex-
tensional sub-basins within the basement rocks and on-
shore and offshore of the Red Sea and Gulf of Suez
(Figure 4). Basement rocks include gneisses and ophioli-
tic mélanges represented by serpentinites, metagabbros,
and metabasalts, which were subsequently intruded by
granitic rocks, overlain by the Dokhan volcanics, and
covered by molàsse-type sediments [22,32-35].
The Phanerozoic sedimentary succession is classified
into pre-rift, syn-rift and post-rift deposits [28,36,37]
(Figure 4). The pre-rift sedimentary section is thick in
the Gulf of Suez region and consists of intercalations of
sandstone, shale, dolomite, and limestones ranging from
Cambrian to Eocene in age (Figure 4). In the northwest-
ern Red Sea the pre-rift succession consists of clastic and
carbonate units of the late Cretaceous to Eocene. The
syn-rift succession ranges from late Oligocene to Plio-
cene onshore and late Oligocene to Recent offshore. Some
of the succession is exposed on the surface and some for-
mations are subsurface. The succession starts with late
Oligocene clastics of the Nakhil Formation, unconform-
ably overlain by early Miocene clastics of the Ranga and
carbonates of the Um Mahara Formations; these are cor-
related to the Thayiba, Nukhul, and Rudeis Formations in
the Gulf of Suez subsurface, respectively. This succes-
sion is overlain by middle and late Miocene deposits in-
clude intercalations of evaporites and clastics of the Abu
Dabbab and Marsa Alam formations. These formations
are correlated to the Kareem, Belayim, South Gharib, and
Zeit in the Gulf of Suez subsurface, respectively. On-
shore this succession is overlain by post-rift sediments
that include undifferentiated Pliocene to Recent clastics
of terrace deposits and wadi outwash deposits, and raised
beaches [28,36-38].
4. Rift Segments
The rift system is composed of antithetically tilted rift
segments delimited by the main rift bounding faults and
separated by accommodation zones [25,39]. The rift
segments consist of half-graben extensional sub-basins
(ESB) delimited by both border faults and internal exten-
sional faults [40], and separated by oblique-slip and
strike-slip transfer faults [11]. The Gulf of Suez and
northwestern Red Sea Rift consist of four rift segments
from north to south: the Suez, Gharib, Safaga, and Quseir
segments [11,25,41] (Figure 2). The northern Red Sea
margin is formed by narrow continental shelves that are
dissected by active faults, rimmed by a series of terraces
stepping down to an axial depression [8].
Herein we classified the ESB into: 1) inland ESB en-
closed within basement rocks and entirely bounded by
faults; 2) coastal ESB that extend from inland margins
with basement rocks to the shoreline and continental shelf;
and 3) offshore ESB from the continental shelf to the rift
depression. These ESB are separated by NW-SE internal
extensional faults. The inland ESB consist of pre-rift up-
per Cretaceous to Eocene sedimentary successions over-
lain by the syn-rift late Oligocene Nakhil Formation. The
coastal ESB consist of pre-rift and syn-rift successions
and overlain by post-rift sediments. The offshore ESB
consists of pre-rift and syn-rift deposits. The inland ESB
are found in separate half-graben sub-basins between 25˚
- 28˚N in the northwestern Red Sea and the Gulf of Suez.
The thickness of the sedimentary succession in the north-
western Red Sea and Gulf of Suez varies from 430 - 500
m in the inland ESB to 500 - 700 m in the coastal ESB,
to as much as 4 km in the offshore ESB [25,41].
4.1. Structural Architecture of the Suez Rift
Segment
The Suez rift segment represents the northern tip of the
Gulf of Suez and Red Sea rift system. It consists of off-
shore ESB that represents the Gulf of Suez rift depres-
sion and a SW-dipping coastal ESB found only on the
eastern side of the Gulf of Suez, There are no inland ESB
on either side of the rift (Figure 5). The rift segment is

R. AMER ET AL. 138
Figure 4. Stratigraphic section of the Eastern Desert, northwestern Red Sea, and Gulf of Suez. Modified after Klitzch, 1987,
Saied, 1990, Alsharhan, 2003. The formation names used by petroleum companies are shown in red.
bounded on both sides by faults. The western bounding
fault is a NE-dipping normal fault broken into four seg-
ments with strikes of N25W, N20E, N50W, and N15W
from north to south, respectively, connected by relay ramps
(Figure 5). The eastern bounding normal fault dips to the
SW and consists of three segments with strikes of N-S,
N30W, and N35W from north to south respectively, also
connected by relay ramps. Slip on the eastern bounding
fault segments has juxtaposed middle Miocene syn-rift
coastal ESB sediments against the pre-rift Cambrian to
Eocene succession. The change in strike of the bounding
faults on both sides is related to translation along NE-SW
dextral transfer faults. The western transfer faults divided
the Galala limestone Plateau into four unequal parts from
north to south: Gabal Ataqa, Gabal Akhdar, Gabal El Ga-
lala El Bahriya, and Gabal El Galala El Qibliya. The
eastern and western transfer faults have similar orienta-
tion and strike-slip sense of movement, indicating they
are pre-rift faults reactivated by NE-SW extension and
sinistral strike-slip movement of the Dead Sea Transform.
These faults were displaced left-laterally by the dip-slip
bounding fault during the opening of the Gulf of Suez (Fig-

R. AMER ET AL. 139
Figure 5. Landsat ETM+ bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue shows the Suez rift segments separated by Accommodation
Zones (AZ); (ZAZ) Zaafarana; (RSZ) Rihba Shear Zone. Small black arrows show the strike-slip movements of transfer
faults.
ure 5).
4.2. Structural Architecture of the Gharib Rift
Segments
The Gharib rift segment represents the middle part of the
Gulf of Suez Rift. It is separated from the northern Suez
and the southern Safaga rift segments by the Zaafaran
and Morgan accommodation zones (Figure 6). The off-
shore ESB in this rift segment represents the Gulf of
Suez Rift depression. There is a coastal ESB on the west-
ern side of the Gharib rift segment and an inland ESB on
the eastern side. Both tilt to the NE and are bounded by
bounding faults. The western bounding fault has five
segments with strikes of N35W, N20W, N25W, N50W,
and N25W, from north to south, respectively. The dif-
ferent segments are connected by relay-ramps. The east-
ern bounding fault dips to the SW and consists of three
segments connected by relay-ramps. striking N45W, N-S,
and N40W from north to south, respectively. The bound-
ing fault segments have been translated by dextral strike
slip movement on the NE-SW transfer faults (Figure 6).
The transfer faults are found in the basement rocks on
both sides of the Gulf of Suez and have similar orienta-
tion and sense of movement, indicating they are pre-rift
faults that were reactivated by NE-SW extension and DST
sinistral strike-slip movement.

R. AMER ET AL. 140
Figure 6. Landsat ETM+ bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue, shows the Gharib rift segment bounded from the north by the
(ZAZ) Zaafaran Accommodation Zone, and from the south by the (MAZ) Morgan Accommodation Zone; (RSZ) Rihba
Shear Zone. Small black arrows show the strike-slip movements of transfer faults.
4.3. Structural Architecture of the Safaga Rift
Segment
The Safaga rift segment consists of five disconnected
inland ESB include Esh El Mallaha; Um Taghir, Rabah,
Wasif, and Um Huweitat, in addition to the coastal and
offshore sub-basins (Figures 7 and 8). El Mallaha sub-
basin is the largest ESB in the Safaga rift segment. It is
bounded on the north by the Morgan accommodation
zone and on the south by the Dead Sea Transform Fault.
It is bounded from the east by bounding fault dips to the
NE and segmented into six segments with average strike
N30W and connected by relay-ramps. The western
bounding fault dips SW and consists of two segments with
average strikes of N35W connected by relay-ramps. The
relay-ramps developed at the intersection of the bounding
fault and the NE-SW dextral strike-slip transfer faults.
The inland ESB has NW antithetic extensional faults sub-
parallel to the bounding faults (Figure 7).
Um Taghir sub-basin is the smallest inland ESB in the
Safaga rift segment, covering an area of about 6 km2. The
bounding fault here strikes N-S and dips to the E, and the
sedimentary strata dip 20˚W. The bounding fault is trun-
cated on the north and south ends by NE extensional
faults (Figure 8).
The Rabah ESB covers an area about 20 km2 and the
sedimentary strata dip 20˚SW. The bounding fault con-

R. AMER ET AL. 141
Figure 7. Landsat ETM+ bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue, show half-graben Extensional Sub-Basins (ESB) of Esh El
Mallaha and the (MAZ) Morgan Accommodation Zone. Small black ar r ows show strike-slip movement.
sists of two segments striking N35W and N10E from
north to south, respectively, and connected by relay-ramps.
It is terminated at its northern and southern ends by NE
sinistral strike-slip faults. The relay-ramp developed at
the intersection of the bounding fault and the NE-SW
dextral strike-slip transfer fault (Figure 8).
Wasif ESB covers an area about 33 km2. The bound-
ing fault is divided into two parts striking N-S and N40W
and connected by relay-ramp. An extensional syncline
developed against the northern segment of the bounding
fault; some of the sedimentary rocks overlying the base-
ment rocks on the hanging wall are dipping about 45˚E,
while the strata of the Wasif ESB are found in the foot-
wall and dip about 20˚ to the W (Figures 8 and 9).
Um Huweitat ESB covers an area about 50 km2 and is
bounded by a fault striking NNW and dipping 40˚E. It is
segmented into five parts by dextral strike-slip transfer
faults that are connected by relay-ramps. The NE-SW
transfer faults extended into the basement rocks found
between Um Huweitat and Wasif ESB and are termi-

R. AMER ET AL. 142
Figure 8. Landsat ETM+ bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue, shows half-graben Extensional Sub-Basins (ESB) of (TG) Um
Taghir; (RA) Rabah; (WA) Wasif; (UH) Um Hewitat; (CB) Coastal Basin; (DAZ) Duwi Accommodation Zone; (QSZ) Queih
Shear Zone. Small black arrows show strike-slip move me nt; A-A' cr oss-se c tion.
nated at the bounding fault of the Wasif ESB. This may
indicate they are pre-rift faults that were reactivated by
rifting due to NE-SW extension. The strata of the Um
Huweitat blocks change their dip from 13˚W in the
northern part to 15˚W in the middle, and 25˚W in the
southern part. This is attributed to dextral strike-slip
movement of transfer faults due to NW-SE extension that
resulted in translation of the Um Huweitat bounding fault
(Figures 8 and 9).
4.4. Structural Architecture of the Qusier Rift
Segment
The Qusier rift segment consists of five disconnected
inland ESB—Gabal Duwi, Nakhil, Atshan, Hamadat, and
Zog el-Bohar—in addition to coastal and offshore sub-
basins (Figures 10 and 11).
Gabal Duwi sub-basin is the largest inland ESB in the
Eastern Desert of Egypt, covering an area of approxi-
mately 300 km2 (Figure 10). It is bounded by a SW-

R. AMER ET AL. 143
Figure 9. Regional cross-section A-A' (location is shown in Figure 5) across extensional sub-basins of Wasif (WA); Um
Hewitat (UH); and Coastal Sub-Basin (CB); (DSF) Dextral Strike-Slip Fault.
Figure 10. Landsat ETM+ bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue, shows half-graben extensional sub-basins (ESB) of Um
Hammad-Duwi (HD); (NA) Nakhil; and (AT) Atshan sub-basins; (CB) Coastal Basin; (DAZ) Duwi Accommodation Zone;
(MSZ) Meatiq Shear Zone; (QSZ) Queih Shear Zone; (HSZ) Hamraween Shear Zone. Small black arrows show strike-slip
movement; B-B' and C-C' cross sections.

R. AMER ET AL. 144
Figure 11. Landsat ETM+ bands (7, 4, 2) in red, green, and blue, shows the sedimentary sub-basin s ESB) of (HA) Hamadat;
(ZB) Zog el Bohar; and (UG) Um Gheig. (CB) Coastal Basin; (SSZ) Sibai Shear Zone. Small black arrows show strike-slip
movement.
dipping bounding fault that extends for about 30 km to
the northwest. The fault juxtaposed the Eocene Thebes
Formation against basement rocks with about 1000 - 1300
m of offset (Mustafa, 1997, [11]). It is segmented into six
segments with an average strike of N40W and connected
by relay-ramps. The Precambrian basement rocks on the
eastern side of the bounding fault represent the footwall,
and the Phanerozoic sedimentary rocks of Gabal Duwi
comprise the hanging wall and dip 20˚NE. Large exten-
sion-related asymmetric synclines formed in the hanging
wall because of slip on the bounding fault [41].
The Gabal Duwi ESB is divided into four blocks sepa-
rated by three NE-SW oblique-slip faults (Figure 10).
These blocks were subjected to translation because of
change in the extension vector and the development of
transfer faults. The Gabal Duwi ESB is traversed by two
antithetic NW extensional internal fault “domino-like”
fault blocks with down throw about 2 m to the NE. The
northern part of Gabal Duwi is divided into the northern
Al Saqi and southern Sodmain blocks [25]. These blocks
are separated by the NW-trending Hamraween Shear
Zone, which splays into four branches at its intersection
with the bounding fault. The main branch represents the
Duwi accommodation zone between the SW-dipping
Safaga rift segment and the NE-dipping Qusier rift seg-
ment. The opposing dips of the Al Saqi block and the
Sodmain block form a syncline with a hinge line that lies
within the Duwi accommodation zone [25]. The Ham-

R. AMER ET AL. 145
raween Shear Zone splays were reactived by NE-SW
extension that resulted in the development of negative
flower structures in the Al Saki and Sodmain blocks.
The Nakhil sub-basin covers an area about 28 km2.
Strata within the basin dip 20˚NE. The bounding fault
dips to the SW and has an average strike of N40˚W, par-
alleling the Gabal Duwi bounding fault. It is divided into
four segments by movement on NE-SW dextral strike-
slip faults that are connected by relay ramps. It is termi-
nated at its northern end by the Hamraween Shear Zone
and at its southern end by a NE dextral strike-slip fault
(Figures 10 and 12).
The Atshan sub-basin covers an area of approximately
14 km2. The bounding fault dips to the SW and strikes
N-S. Sedimentary strata dip about 20˚E. The Atshan sub-
basin is the only ESB in the Quseir rift segment that is
bounded by a N-S bounding fault (Figure 10).
The Hamadat sub-basin covers an area of approximately
27 km2. It is bounded on the east side by a bounding fault
dips SW and is divided into three segments by NE-SW
strike-slip faults that are connected by relay ramps. There
are three extension-related synclines developed on the
hanging wall opposite to each segment of the bounding
fault [41] (Figure 11). Strata dip 25˚ to the northeast and
form the long limb of the synclines. The second, shorter
limb is comprised of the sedimentary units that overly
basement rocks and dips 45˚ to the southwest.
Zoug el Bohar sub-basin covers an area about 10 km2
and is separated from the Hamadat and coastal sub-ba-
sins by basement rocks. The bounding fault dips to the
SW with an average strike of N35˚W and is divided into
two parts by a NE-trending sinistral strike-slip fault
(Figure 11).
The Um Gheig sub-basin covers an area of approxi-
mately 26 km2. It is bounded by bounding fault which
dips SW. The bounding fault is intersected by two NE-
trending strike-slip transfer faults that have segmented it
into three parts connected by relay-ramps. The transfer
faults are active; they affect the recent deposits of syn-rift
and post-rift sediments in the coastal sub-basin, and have
induced displacement of the bounding fault. The Um Gheig
sub-basin consists entirely of recent wadi wash deposits
and does not have pre-rift or syn-rift deposits (Figure
11).
The coastal sub-basin extends along the Safaga and
Quseir rift segments from its contact with basement rocks
to the shoreline and offshore continental shelf. The width
of the coastal sub-basin is greater in the Gulf of Suez rift
segment than the other rift segments. The coastal sub-
basin strata dip to the northeast, indicating they are bounded
by an antithetic extensional fault that dips to the south-
west (Figures 5 to 12). The sedimentary succession of
Figure 12. Regional cross-section B-B’ and C-C’ (location is shown in Figure 7) across extensional sub-basins of Um Ham-
mad-Duwi (WA); Nakhil (NA); and Coastal Basin (CB); (SD) Sodmain Block; (ES) El Saki block; (WN) Wadi Al Nakhil;
(DAZ) Duwi Accommodation Zone; (HSZ ) Hamraween Shear Zone; (QSZ) Queih Shear Z one; (DSF) Dextral Strike-Slip Fault.

R. AMER ET AL. 146
the coastal sub-basin consists of pre-rift, syn-rift, and post-
rift sediments unconformably overlying the basement rocks
and exposed from older to younger when traversed from
west to east. The coastal sub-basin is cut by two NW-SE
sub-parallel rift-related internal faults that dip to the NE
and have created “domino-like” fault blocks. The dip of
strata changes from 40˚NE at the contact with basement
rocks to approximately 15˚ - 25˚ NE) in the middle and
only 10˚ - 5˚NE) at the shoreline. The change in dip of
sedimentary units is interpreted to be the result of differ-
ential slip on the internal faults. The coastal sub-basin is
also cut by NE-SW strike-slip transfer faults that have
displaced both the sedimentary units and other internal
faults.
4.5. Accommodation Zones (AZ)
Accommodation zones occur between adjacent half-
grab en basins that switch dip-polarity [11,25]. Accom-
modation zones in rift systems are typically 15 - 30 km
wide [42] and show a wide range of deformation that
include faults affected by normal slip, oblique-slip, and
strike-slip movement [43]. Younes and McClay proposed
a model for localization of accommodation zones in the
Gulf of Suez and northwestern Red Sea [11]. The model
shows that accommodation zones developed at the inter-
section between rift-related bordering faults and preexisting
W-NW and N-S shear zones that were reactivated by the
Oligocene-early Miocene N60E extension. This resulted
in left-lateral and right lateral oblique-slip on the N-S and
W-NW shear zones, respectively, and changed the dip
direction of sediments within the ESB. The accommoda-
tion zones offset the axial depressions of the northern
Red Sea [8]. The study area has three accommodation
zones the Zaafarana, the Morgan, and the Duwi separate-
ing the Suez, Gharib, Safaga, and Quseir rift segments,
respectively (Figure 2).
Younes and McClay proposed the Zaafarana accom-
modation zone has a NW-SE trend and is located at the
intersection between the pre-existing NW-trending Rihba
shear zone and the rift bounding faults [11]. Moustafa
and Khalil [44] suggested that the Zaafarana accommo-
dation zone is oriented NE-SW and controlled by Wadi
Araba folding which is part of the Syrian Arc system.
Herein we propose that the Zaafarana accommodation
zone is developed on pre-existing NE-SW oblique-slip
that juxtaposes pre-rift and syn-rift deposits of the coastal
ESB against the eastern side of the Gulf of Suez, and on
the western side, places the pre-rift succession of El Ga-
lala El Qibliya against basement rocks. Our interpretation
is based on several key observations: 1) Zaafarana ac-
commodation is represented by the intersection between
a NE-SW right-oblique fault with downthrow to the north
and the bounding fault; 2) it represents the northern end
of basement rock exposure on both sides of the Gulf of
Suez and juxtaposes pre-rift and syn-rift sediments against
the basement rocks; 3) kinematically, right-lateral move-
ment on this NE-SE oblique-slip fault accompanied by
the NE-SW extension could account for the development
of southwesterly dips in the Suez rift segment, and north-
easterly dips in the Gharib rift segment; 4) the coastal
ESB switched their depocenters from east to west; and 5)
the dominant fault trend in the Gulf of Suez region is
NE-SW (Figures 5 and 6).
The Morgan accommodation zone inherited its ENE-
WSW orientation from pre-existing faults. Sinistral strike-
slip movement is related to the rotation of the rift blocks
[25]. We agree with this conclusion based on the follow-
ing: 1) the Morgan accommodation zone is marked by
the intersection between the rift-bounding fault and a
pre-existing NE-SW left-oblique fault with downthrow to
the north, and parallels the dominant NE-SW-oriented
strike-slip faults in the Gulf of Suez region (Figures 5
and 6); 2) the coastal ESB and the inland ESB switched
their depocenters from the eastern to western side of the
Gharib rift segment and the northern part of the Safaga
rift segment (Esh El Mallaha ESB); 3) the narrow strip of
basement rocks within the Gharib rift segment on the
western side of the Gulf of Suez has the same lithologies
as Sinai basement rocks and is terminated at its southern
end by the accommodation zone, and the basement strips
of Esh El Malaha on the western side of the Gulf of Suez
of the Safaga rift segment have the same rock types as
the Northern Eastern Desert basement complex and is
terminated at its northern end by the Morgan accommo-
dation zone; 4) the inland ESB of Gharib is filled with
sediments from Cambrian to recent while the ESB of Esh
El Mallah has sediments from Upper Cretaceous to re-
cent, which indicates the Morgan accommodation zone
has been developed on a pre-rift oblique-slip fault that
submerged the northern Arabian Nubian Shield during
the Cambrian time while keeping the southern ANS
above sea level until the upper Cretaceous; 5) kinemati-
cally, sinistral strike-slip movement combined with NE-
SW extension and a SW-dipping bounding fault would
result in NE-dipping strata in the Gharib ESB (Figure 6).
The Duwi accommodation zone strikes NW-SE and is
marked by the intersection between the SW-dipping boun-
ding fault and the Hamraween Shear Zone [11]. Analysis
and interpretation of Landsat ETM+ imagary shows dex-
tral strike-slip movement within the Hamraween shear
zone is recorded by the displacement of NE-trending
fractures in basement rocks (Figure 10). Field investiga-
tions revealed the presence of kinematic indicators in-
cluding strike-parallel grains and mineral lineations in
green breccias at the entrance of Wadi Al Saqi. Shear-
sense indicators and quartz-filled en-echelon frac-
tures in metavolcanics suggest old sinistral displacements.

R. AMER ET AL. 147
Displacement along the Hamraween Shear Zone switched
from left-lateral displacement in conjunction with the
Najd Fault System, to right-lateral movement due to
NE-SW extension [11,23]. Kinematically, dextral strike-
slip movement of the Hamraween Shear Zone accompa-
nied by NE-SW extension would result in a SW-dipping
bounding fault and northeasterly dipping strata in Gabal
Duwi.
5. Kinematic Model for the Development of
the Half-Graben Extensional Sub-Basin
A model was developed by Agostini et al. to explain the
rifting of continental lithosphere that contains a pre-
existing zone of weakness [40]. The model shows that
the deformation pattern is controlled by the angle between
the extension direction and the pole to the plane of rifting.
When the applied extension was perpendicular to the
weakness zone, orthogonal rifting developed and mar-
ginal grabens delimited a central horst. Increased exten-
sion developed internal faults and formed a graben
within the central horst. Increasing displacement on the
internal faults resulted in deepening the central graben,
forming a rift depression flanked with marginal grabens
[40]. A change of extension direction generated oblique
rifting which was characterized by en-echelon boundary
faults bordering subsiding rift blocks and linked by a com-
plex of transfer zones [40].
The Gulf of Suez and Red Sea were developed in the
late Oligocene to early Miocene about (30 Ma) [2]. They
opened with an axial rift strike of N30W, with very low
amounts of extension directed at N60E [11,45]. During
the initial stage of the Gulf of Suez rifting, the rate of
subsidence was very low, increasing in the early Miocene
as evidenced by rapid subsidence, and slowed again by
the middle Miocene [45].
We developed a model that describes the kinematic
stages of the northern Red Sea and Gulf of Suez rifting
and development of the marginal ESB based on struc-
tural analysis of inland and coastal ESB. The results
show that the Red Sea and Gulf of Suez rifting is poly-
phase and occurred in three different extension directions.
The first phase was dominated by orthogonal rifting in
response to N60E extension that started in the late Oli-
gocene to early Miocene (30 - 24 Ma). The angle be-
tween the extension direction and the rift trend was right
angle (θ = 90˚) (Figure 13(a)). The rift started by nu-
cleation of bounding faults that followed major pre-ex-
isting weak zones but individually were perpendicular to
the extension direction. The first marginal ESB (cur-
rently the inland and coastal ESB) were formed by slip
on NE-dipping bounding fault, resulting in subsidence of
the pre-rift succession. The Tethys Seaway covered the
sub-sided ESB, resulting in the deposition of the syn-rift
Al Nakhil Formation during the late Oligocene. A change
of stress direction is indicated by a paleostress analysis of
markers within the Duwi ESB, which show that it was
formed at principal stress directions with sub-horizontal
σ1 is (ENE-WSW), and σ3 is (NNW-SSE), and a sub-
vertical σ2 [27]. Increasing extension formed the SW-
dipping internal antithetic extensional faults in the ESB.
These faults are found in the Um Huwitat, Gabal Duwi,
and coastal ESB. They are sub-parallel to the bounding
fault and form a “domino-like” pattern of fault blocks
(Figure 12). There are several SW-dipping extensional
faults that strike N-S and NNW in basement rocks and
were developed in response to E-W and NE-SW exten-
sion, which supports our inferences.
The second phase of rifting started in the early to mid-
dle Miocene (24 - 18 Ma) by increased the NE extension,
as indicated by increasing slip on the internal faults and
deepening of the central graben. This is supported by
~1200 m deposits of the lower Miocene in the Gulf of
Suez, including the subsurface Nukhul and Rudeis For-
mations [38]. The direction of extension began to rotate
anticlockwise and the flanks were uplifted, resulting in
uplift of the marginal ESB (currently inland ESB). Depo-
sition was interrupted in these ESB, either due to uplift or
regression of the Tethys Sea, so that only the rift depres-
sion was marine (Figure 13(b)). This is indicated by the
presence of early Miocene deposits in the coastal ESB
overlying the pre-rift succession and syn-rift Late Oligo-
cene-aged Al Nakhil Formation. By the middle Miocene,
the extension direction changed to be N40E which shifted
the rifting from orthogonal to oblique (θ = 70˚). The
oblique rifting resulted in fragmentation of the rift de-
pression into en-echelon rift segments separated by obli-
que-slip accommodation zones (Figure 2 and 13(b)).
The third phase, which includes ongoing rifting, started
in the middle Miocene (~18 Ma) by increased extension
at N40E associated with a N50W compression that pro-
duced the left-lateral Dead Sea Transform between the
Arabian plate and the Sinai Peninsula [31,46-48]. The
segmentation of the rift appears to have occurred before
the development of the Dead Sea Transform because the
extension of the Dead Sea Transform in the northern
Eastern Desert separated the Safaga rift segment into two
parts (Figure 2). The sinistral strike-slip movement of
the Dead Sea Transform resulted in clockwise rotation of
the extension direction, which lowered the opening rate
to <1 mm/yr in the Gulf of Suez [45]. The slowdown of
the Gulf of Suez rift rate coincides with its separation
from the main rift (Red Sea), which continues to open by
oblique rifting (Figure 13(c)). Oblique rifting in the Red
Sea developed new internal faults and more offshore
ESB and deepened the rift depression, and offers a sim-
ple explanation for why the rate of Red Sea rifting is
seven times greater than the rate for the Gulf of Suez
during the last 18 Ma. The current western bounding fault

R. AMER ET AL. 148
Figure 13. Evolutionary kinematic model demonstrate polyphase rifting of the northern Red Sea and Gulf of Suez, and de-
velopment of the rift segments and the marginal half-graben extensional sub-basins (ESB). (DST) Dead Sea Transfor m; (SRS)
Suez Rift Segment; (GRS) Gharib Rift Segment; (FRS) Safaga Rift Segment; (QRS) Quseir Rift Segment; (ZAZ) Zaafarana
accommodation zone, (MAZ) Morgan Accommodation Zone; (DAZ) Duwi Accommodation Zone; (EM) Esh Al Malaha half-
graben sub-basin; (UH) Um Huweitat half-graben sub-basin; (HD) Um Hammad-Duwi half-graben sub-basin; (HA)
Hamadat half-graben sub-basin.

R. AMER ET AL. 149
of the Gulf of Suez has average strike N35W, which in-
dicates that the current extension direction in the Sinai
Peninsula is now N55E (Figure 13(c)). Therefore, the
Gulf of Suez rifting has changed again to almost or-
thogonal rifting (θ = 85˚). Slip rates on the bounding
fault were very low but were higher on the internal faults
and the rift depression, as indicated by deposition of al-
most 1900 m of sediment during the last 7 Ma; include
the Zeit, Wardan, and Zaafarana Formations [38]. Flank
uplift continued and resulted in formation of marginal
coastal ESB that have early Miocene deposits overlying
the pre-rift and syn-rift of late Oligocene and early Mio-
cene deposits, which were then overlain by post-rift de-
posits. The coastal ESB is wide in the Gulf of Suez be-
cause of orthogonal rifting and small in the northwestern
Red Sea due to oblique rifting. Oblique extension in the
northern Red Sea resulted in an en-echelon distribution
of the inland ESB and development of NE-SW sinistral
and dextral strike-slip transfer faults to accommodate the
increasing N40E extension, resulting in rotation and transla-
tion of some of the bounding fault (Figures 2-13).
6. Discussion and Conclusions
Transgression of the Tethys Sea from north to south and
the active oblique-slip faults in the northern ANS re-
sulted in deposition of a thick (~2000 m) pre-rift succes-
sion of Cambrian to Eocene sediments in the Gulf of
Suez region. The pre-rift succession in the northwestern
Red Sea is approximately 400 - 500 m thick [25] and was
deposited during the late Cretaceous to Eocene, indicat-
ing this region was predominantly continent during the
Paleozoic and most of the Mesozoic. The introduction of
N60E extension and the presence of NW and N-S-
trending zones of lithospheric weakness within the ANS
resulted in the nucleation of rift-bounding faults by or-
thogonal rifting. Increased extension in the late Oligo-
cene led to the formation of marginal half-graben exten-
sional sub-basins (ESB) that represent the current inland
and coastal ESB. Slip on the boundary faults resulted in
subsidence and submergence of the pre-rift succession,
leading to deposition of the Late Oligocene the Nakhil
Formation. This indicates the ESB were formed as ex-
tensional basins rather than pull-apart basins. The inland
ESB are now isolated because their bounding faults de-
veloped on pre-existing weak zones that were crosscut by
relatively competent younger rocks that interrupted the
continuity of the bounding faults. These younger rocks,
including granites and the Dokhan volcanics, were em-
placed during the final stages of the Pan-African orogeny
[19,49] and yield ages of 605 - 595 Ma and 600 - 590 Ma,
respectively [50,51]. The Um Huweitat ESB is separated
from the Wasif ESB by the younger granitic plutons of
Gabal Gasus, and the Duwi ESB is separated from the
Wasif ESB by the Dokhan volcanics.
The presence of early Miocene sediments in the
coastal ESB indicate that the rift flanks were uplifted and
slip increased on internal faults, resulting in the forma-
tion of marginal (currently coastal) ESB. Segmentation
of the rift depression and development of the Dead Sea
Transform during the middle Miocene (ca. 18 Ma) re-
sulted from N40˚E-oriented extension, indicating the rift
had switched from orthogonal to oblique. The rift seg-
ments are separated by oblique-slip accommodation zones
that were developed on pre-existing NE-SW strike-slip
faults in the Gulf of Suez region and on the NW-SE Ham-
raween Shear Zone in the northwestern Red Sea. In-
creased oblique extension led to the development of an
en-echelon distribution of the inland ESB and translation
of the bounding faults. The Gulf of Suez was separated
from the Red Sea because of sinistral strike-slip move-
ment of the Dead Sea Transform, which slowed the rift
rate within the Gulf of Suez and increased oblique rifting
in the Red Sea. During the last 18 Ma (after development
of the Dead Sea Transform), the Red Sea has become
seven times wider than the Gulf of Suez by developing
more antithetic internal faults, which has led to an ex-
pansion of offshore ESB and a deepening of the rift de-
pression [8]. The Dead Sea Transform movement also ro-
tated the extension direction of the Gulf of Suez, which
has widened the marginal coastal ESB more than the Red
Sea coastal ESB.
Oblique rifting in the Red Sea resulted in development
of NE-SW sinistral and dextral strike-slip transfer faults
to accommodate the ongoing N40E extension. The trans-
fer faults are active, as evidenced by their displacement
of the bounding faults. This has affected recent deposits
in the coastal plain and may be a source of earthquakes
[52,53]. It is believed that the inland ESB release the
stress that has resulted from the accumulated strain on
the transfer faults, because most of the transfer faults
truncate within the inland ESB and do not continue into
basement rocks. Strata within coastal ESB in the Safaga
and Quseir rift segments dip to the NE and do not change
their dipping direction across the Duwi accommodation
zone because they are controlled by slip on a SW-dipping
antithetic internal fault. Increased NE extension has in-
creased the slip on the internal fault, and therefore, the
accommodation zone has changed the dip of the inland
ESB strata and bounding fault but has not affected the
dip direction of the coastal ESB. The marginal ESB
found on the western side of the Red Sea preserve pre-
rift sediments while the single marginal ESB on the east-
ern side of the Red Sea contains no pre- or syn-rift de-
posits. The eastern marginal ESB formed in the Ajjaj
shear zone (a branch from the Najd fault system) and is
interpreted to have formed recently due to oblique exten-
sion. This interpretation is consistent with the presence of

R. AMER ET AL. 150
a detachment fault that extends from near the surface on
the western rift shoulder and roots in the middle crust
beneath the eastern rift shoulder [5].
This study suggested a new model to describe northern
Red Sea and Gulf of Suez rifting and the development of
marginal ESB. The model results indicate the Red Sea
has developed through multiple phases of rifting that
have been controlled by the direction of extension and pre-
existing lithosphere weak zones. We propose that inland
ESB were formed by orthogonal rifting during the first
stages of the Red Sea rift and were later uplifted along
the rift flanks during the next stage of oblique rifting.
The model also relates development of the Gulf of Suez
to sinistral strike-slip movement along the Dead Sea
Transform, which arrested the Gulf of Suez opening by
clockwise rotation of the Gulf of Suez extension direc-
tion. This model may be broadly applicable to the develop-
ment of marginal ESB in any active rift system.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Egyptian Ministry of
Higher Education and Scientific Research for supporting
this work. Many thanks for The Land Processes Distrib-
uted Active Archive Center (LP DAAC) at NASA for
providing Landsat ETM data.
REFERENCES
[1] W. Ghebreab, “Tectonics of the Red Sea Region Reas-
sessed,” Earth Science Reviews, Vol. 45, No. 1-2, 1998,
pp. 1-44. doi:10.1016/S0012-8252(98)00036-1
[2] W. Bosworth, P. Huchon and K. McClay, “The Red Sea
and Gulf of Aden Basins,” Journal of African Earth Sci-
ences, Vol. 43, No. 1-3, 2005, pp. 334-378.
doi:10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2005.07.020
[3] J. D. Lowell and G. J. Genik, “Sea Floor Spreading and
Structural Evolution of Southern Red Sea,” AAPG Bulle-
tin, Vol. 56, No. 2, 1972, pp. 247-259.
[4] J. R. Cochran and F. Martinez, “Evidence from the Nor-
thern Red Sea on the Transition from Continental to
Oceanic Rifting,” Tectonophysics, Vol. 153, No. 1-4, 1988,
pp. 25-53. doi:10.1016/0040-1951(88)90006-6
[5] R. G. Bohannon, C. W. Naeser, D. L. Schmidt and R. A.
Zimmerman, “The Timing of Uplift, Volcanism, and
Rifting Peripheral to the Red Sea: A Case for Passive
Rifting,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 94, No.
B2, 1989, pp. 1683-1701. doi:10.1029/JB094iB02p01683
[6] J. Makris and R. Rhim, “Shear Controlled Evolution of
the Red Sea: Pull Apart Model,” Tectophysics, Vol. 198,
No. 2-4, 1991, pp. 441-446.
doi:10.1016/0040-1951(91)90166-P
[7] N. Bellahsen, C. Faccenna, F. Funiciello, J. Daniel and L.
Jolivet, “Why Did Arabia Separate from Africa?” Insights
from 3-D Laboratory Experiments, Earth & Planetary
Science Letter, Vol. 216, No. 3, 2003, pp. 365-381.
doi:10.1016/S0012-821X(03)00516-8
[8] J. Cochran, “Northern Red Sea: Nucleation of an Oceanic
Spreading Center within a Continental Rift,” Geochemis-
try Geophysics Geosystems, Vol. 6, 2005, p. 34.
doi:10.1029/2004GC000826
[9] T. H. Dixon, R. J. Stern and I. M. Hussein, “Control of
Red Sea Rift Geometry by Precambrian Structures,” Tec-
tonics, Vol. 6, No. 5, 1987, pp. 551-571.
doi:10.1029/TC006i005p00551
[10] W. Bosworth, “A Model for the Three-Dimensional Evo-
lution of Continental Rift Basins, North-East Africa,” In:
H. Schandelmeier and R. J. Stern, Eds., Geology of Northeast
Africa, Geologische Rundschau 83, 1994, pp. 671-688.
[11] A. Younes and K. McClay, “Development of Accommo-
dation Zones in the Gulf of Suez-Red Sea Rift, Egypt,”
AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 86, No. 6, 2002, pp. 1003-1026.
[12] R. J. Stern and C. E. Hedge, “Geochronologic and Iso-
topic Constraints on Late Precambrian Crustal Evolution
in the Eastern Desert of Egypt,” American Journal of
Science, Vol. 285, 1985, pp. 97-l 27.
[13] A. Krőner, J. Krǜger and A. Rashwan, “Age and Tectonic
Setting of Granitoid Gneisses in the Eastern Desert of
Egypt and South-West Sinai,” Geologische Rundschau,
Vol. 83, No. 3, 1994, pp. 502-513.
doi:10.1007/BF01083223
[14] M. Miller and T. Dixon, “Proterozoic Evolution of the
Northern Part of the Hamisana Zone, Northeast Sudan:
Constraints on Pan-African Accretionary Tectonics,” Jour-
nal of the Geological Society of London, Vol. 149, 1992,
pp. 743-750.
[15] M. G. Abdelsalam and R. J. Stern, “Sutures and Shear
Zones in the Arabian Nubian Shield,” Journal of African
Earth Sciences, Vol. 23, No. 3, 1996, pp. 289-310.
doi:10.1016/S0899-5362(97)00003-1
[16] M. G. Abdelsalam, “The Oko Shear Zone: Postaccretionary
Deformations in the Arabian-Nubian Shield,” Journal Geo-
logical Society London, Vol. 151, No. 5, 1994, pp. 767-
776. doi:10.1144/gsjgs.151.5.0767
[17] H. Fritz, E. Wallbrecher, A. Khudeir, F. Abu El Ela and D.
Dallmeyer, “Formation of Neoproterozoic Metamorphic
Core Complexes during Oblique Convergence Eastern
Desert, Egypt,” Journal of African Earth Sciences, Vol.
23, No. 3, 1996, pp. 311-329.
doi:10.1016/S0899-5362(97)00004-3
[18] R. J. Stern, “The Najd Fault System, Saudi Arabia and
Egypt: A Late Precambrian Rift-Related Transform Sys-
tem,” Tectonics, Vol. 4, No. 5, 1985, pp. 497-511.
doi:10.1029/TC004i005p00497
[19] O. Greiling, M. Abdeen, A. Dardir, H. El Akhal, M. El
Ramly, G. Kamal El Din, A. Osman, A. Rashwan, A.
Rice and M. Sadek, “A Structural Synthesis of the Prote-
rozoic Arabian-Nubian Shield in Egypt,” Geologische Run-
dschau, Vol. 83, No. 3, 1994, pp. 484-501.
doi:10.1007/BF01083222
[20] B. Blasband, S. White, P. Brooijmans, H. De Boorder and
W. Visser, “Late Proterozoic Extensional Collapse in the
Arabian-Nubian Shield,” Journal of the Geological Soci-
ety, Vol. 157, No. 3, 2000, pp. 615-628.
doi:10.1144/jgs.157.3.615

R. AMER ET AL. 151
[21] R. A. Agar, “The Najd Fault System Revisited; a Two-
Way Strike Slip Orogen in the Saudi Arabian Shield,”
Journal of Structural Geology, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1987, pp. 41-
48. doi:10.1016/0191-8141(87)90042-3
[22] M. Sultan, R. E. Arvidson, I. J. Duncan, R. J. Stern and B.
Elkaliouby, “Extension of the Najd Shear System from
Saudi-Arabia to the Central Eastern Desert of Egypt Ba-
sed on Integrated Field and Landsat Observations,” Tec-
tonics, Vol. 7, No. 6, 1988, pp. 1291-1306.
doi:10.1029/TC007i006p01291
[23] M. M. Abdeen and R. O. Greiling, “A Quantitative Struc-
tural Study of Late Pan-African Compressional Deforma-
tion in the Central Eastern Desert (Egypt) during Gond-
wana Assembly,” Gondwana Research, Vol. 8, No. 4, 2005,
pp. 457-471. doi:10.1016/S1342-937X(05)71148-5
[24] D. Avigad and Z. Gvirtzman, “Late Neoproterozoic Rise
and Fall of the Northern Arabian-Nubian Shield: The
Role of Lithospheric Mantle Delamination and Subse-
quent Thermal Subsidence,” Tectonophysics, Vol. 477, No.
3-4, 2009, pp. 217-228. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2009.04.018
[25] A. R. Moustafa, “Controls on the Development and Evo-
lution of Transfer Zones: The Influence of Basement
Structure and Sedimentary Thickness in the Suez Rift and
Red Sea,” Journal of Structural Geology, Vol. 19, No. 6,
1997, pp. 755-768. doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(97)00007-2
[26] M. Sultan, A. Yousef, S. Metwally, R. Becker, A. Milew-
ski, W. Sauck, N. Sturchio, A. Mohamed, A. Wagdy, Z.
El Alfy, D. Becker, Z. Sagintayev, M. El Sayed and B.
Welton, “Red Sea Rifting Controls on Aquifer Distribu-
tion: Constraints from Geochemical, Geophysical, and Re-
mote Sensing Data,” Geological Society of America Bul-
letin, Vol. 123, No. 5-6, 2011, pp. 911-924.
doi:10.1130/B30146.1
[27] A. Bojar, H. Fritz, S. Kargl and W. Unzog, “Phanerozoic
Tectonothermal History of the Arabian Nubian Shield in
the Eastern Desert of Egypt: Evidence from Fission Track
and Paleostress Data,” Journal of African Earth Sciences,
Vol. 34, No. 1, 2002, pp. 191-202.
doi:10.1016/S0899-5362(02)00018-0
[28] C. Montenat, P. D’estevou, B. Purser, P. Burollet, J. Jar-
rige, F. Sperber, E. Philobbos, J. Plaziat, P. Part, J. Richert,
N. Roussel and J. Thiriet, “Tectonic and Sedimentary
Evolution of the Gulf of Suez and the Northwestern Red
Sea,” Tectophysics, Vol. 153, No. 1-4, 1988, pp. 161-177.
doi:10.1016/0040-1951(88)90013-3
[29] Z. Garfunkel, “Internal Structure of the Dead Sea Leaky
Transform (Rift) in Relation to Plate Kinematics,” Tecto-
nophysics, Vol. 80, No. 1-4, 1981, pp. 81-108.
doi:10.1016/0040-1951(81)90143-8
[30] R. S. Yeats, K. Sieh and C. R. Allen, “The Geology of
Earthquakes,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997.
[31] Z. Garfunkel and Z. Ben-Avraham, “The Structure of the
Dead Sea Basin,” Tectonophysics, Vol. 266, No. 1-4, 1996,
pp. 155-176. doi:10.1016/S0040-1951(96)00188-6
[32] A. C. Ries, R. M. Shackleton, R. H. Graham and W. R.
Fitches, “Pan-African Structures, Ophiolites and Mélange
in the Eastem Desert of Egypt: A Traverse at 26˚N,” Jour-
nal of the Geological Society, Vol. 140, No. 1, 1983, pp.
75-95. doi:10.1144/gsjgs.140.1.0075
[33] S. El Gaby, F. K. List and R. Tehrani, “Geology, Evolu-
tion and Metallogenesis of the Pan-Afrcan Belt in Egypt,”
In: S. El Gaby and R. Greiling, Eds., The Pan-African
Belt of NE Africa and Adjacent Areas, Tectonic Evolution
and Economic Aspects, Braunschweig, 1988, pp. 17-68.
[34] M. F. El Ramly, R. O. Greiling, A. A. Rashwan and A. H.
Ramsy, “Explanatory Note to Accompany the Geological
and Structural Maps of Wadi Hafafit Area, Eastern Desert
of Egypt,” Annals Geological Survey of Egypt, Vol. 9,
1993, pp. 1-53.
[35] R. J. Stern, P. Johnson, A. Kröner and B. Yibas, “Neo-
proterozoic Ophiolites of the Arabian-Nubian Shield,” In:
T. M. Kusky, Ed., Precambrian Ophiolites and Related
Rocks, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2004, pp. 95-128.
doi:10.1016/S0166-2635(04)13003-X
[36] B. Issawi, M. Francis, M. El Hinnawy, A. Mehanna and T.
El Deftar, “Geology of the Safaga-Quseir Coastal Plain
and of Mohamed Rabah Area,” Annals Geological Survey
of Egypt, Vol. 1, 1971, pp. 1-19.
[37] R. Said, “The Geology of Egypt,” Balkema Publishers,
Rotterdam, 1990.
[38] A. Al Sharhan, “Petroleum geology and Potential Hydro-
carbon Plays in the Gulf of Suez Rift Basin, Egypt,”
AAPG Bulletin, Vol. 87, No. 1, 2003, pp. 143-180.
[39] A. R. Mustafa, “Controls on the Geometry of Transfer
Zones in the Suez Rift and Northwest Red Sea: Implica-
tions for the Structural Geometry of Rift Systems,” AAPG
Bulletin, Vol. 86, No. 6, 2002, pp. 979-1002.
[40] A. Agostini, G. Corti, A. Zeoli and G. Mulugeta, “Evolu-
tion, Pattern, and Partitioning of Deformation during Ob-
lique Continental Rifting: Inferences from Lithospheric-
Scale Centrifuge Models,” Geochemistry Geophysics Geo-
systems, Vol. 10, 2009, p. 23. doi:10.1029/2009GC002676
[41] S. Khalil and K. McClay, “Extensional Fault-Related
Folding, Northwestern Red Sea, Egypt,” Journal of Struc-
tural Geology, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2002, pp. 743-762.
doi:10.1016/S0191-8141(01)00118-3
[42] W. Bosworth, “Geometry of Propagating Continental Rifts,”
Nature, Vol. 316, 1985, pp. 625-627.
doi:10.1038/316625a0
[43] J. Chorowicz and C. Sorlien, “Oblique Extensional Tec-
tonics in the Malawi Rift Africa,” Bulletin of the Geo-
logical Society of America, Vol. 104, No. 8, 1992, pp. 1015-
1023.
doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1992)104<1015:OETITM>2.3.CO;2
[44] A. R. Moustafa and H. M. Khalil, “Superposed Deforma-
tion in the Northern Suez Rift, Egypt: Relevance to Hy-
drocarbons Exploration,” Journal of Petroleum Geologists,
Vol. 18, No. 3, 1995, pp. 245-266.
doi:10.1111/j.1747-5457.1995.tb00905.x
[45] M. Steckler, F. Berthelot, N. Lyberis and X. Pichon,
“Subsidence in the Gulf of Suez: Implications for Rifting
and Plate Kinematics,” Tectonophysics, Vol. 153, No. 1-4,
1988, pp. 249-270. doi:10.1016/0040-1951(88)90019-4
[46] N. Lyberis, “Tectonic Evolution of the Gulf of Suez and
the Gulf of Aqaba,” Tectonophysics, Vol. 153, No. 1-4,
1988, pp. 209-220. doi:10.1016/0040-1951(88)90016-9
[47] R. Reilinger, S. McClusky, M. Oral, R. King, M. Toksoz,

R. AMER ET AL. 152
A. Barka, I. Kinik, O. Lenk and I. Sanli, “Global Posi-
tioning System Measurements of Present-Day Crustal Move-
ments in the Arabia-Africa-Eurasia Plate Collision Zone,”
Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 102, No. B5, 1997,
pp. 9983-10000. doi:10.1029/96JB03736
[48] S. McClusky, R. Reilinger, S. Mahmoud, D. Ben Sari and
A. Tealeb, “GPS Constraints of Africa (Nubia) and Ara-
bia Plate Motions,” Geophysical Journal International,
Vol. 155, No. 1, 2003, pp. 126-138.
doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.02023.x
[49] R. J. Stern and C. E. Gottfried, “Geochronologic and Iso-
topic Constraints on Late Precambrian Crustal Evolution
in the Eastern Desert of Egypt,” American Journal of Sci-
ence, Vol. 285, No. 2, 1985, pp. 97-l27.
doi:10.2475/ajs.285.2.97
[50] E. M. Moussa, R. J. Stern, W. Manton and K. A. Ali,
“SHRIMP Zircon Dating and Sm/Nd Isotopic Investiga-
tions of Neoproterozoic Granitoids, Eastern Desert, Egypt,”
Precambrian Research, Vol. 160, No. 3-4, 2008, pp. 341-
356. doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2007.08.006
[51] H. Eliwa, J. I. Kimura and T. Itaya, “Late Neoproterozoic
Dokhan Volcanics, North Eastern Desert, Egypt: Geoche-
mistry and Petrogenesis,” Precambrian Research, Vol. 151,
No. 1-2, 2006, pp. 31-52.
doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2006.08.005
[52] A. El Sayed, R. Wahlstrom and O. Kulhanek, “Seismic
Hazard of Egypt,” Natural Hazard, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1994,
pp. 247-259. doi:10.1007/BF00596145
[53] A. Badawy, “The Present Day Stress Field in Egypt,”
Annali Di Geofisical, Vol. 44, No. 3, 2001, pp. 557-570.