4.0 Article

The early crust of the Volgo-Uralian segment of the East European Craton: Isotope-geochronological zirconology of metasedimentary rocks of the Bolshecheremshanskaya Formation and their Sm-Nd model ages

Journal

STRATIGRAPHY AND GEOLOGICAL CORRELATION
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 1-23

Publisher

PLEIADES PUBLISHING INC
DOI: 10.1134/S0869593815010037

Keywords

Volgo-Uralia; metasedimentary rocks; model age; clastic zircon; U-Pb isotope dating; ion microprobe

Funding

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research [12-05-00186]
  2. Swedish Research Council
  3. project NORDSIM, Stockholm

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present the results of isotope-geochronological study of metasedimentary rocks of the Bolshecheremshanskaya Formation of the Volgo-Uralian segment of the East European Craton carried out to identify their protoliths. 16 samples of high-alumina gneisses from well cores were studied using the Sm-Nd isotope method and T-Nd(DM) model ages. Accessory zircons were selected from rocks with the most ancient model ages (more 3.2 Ga) in three wells: Minnibaevskaya 20000, Novo-Elkhovskaya 20009, and Zai-Karatayskaya 12930 in South Tatarstan. The isotope U-Pb dating of 200 zircon grains was performed on a Cameca 1280 NORDSIM secondary ion mass spectrometer at the Natural History Museum (Stockholm, Sweden). The most applicable sites for analysis of zircon crystals were pre-selected based on cathodoluminescence images. The analytical results demonstrate the diversity of zircon groups in age from 3.8 to 2.6 Ga and together with geochemical features of metasedimentary rocks of the Bolshecheremshanskaya Formation suggest the heterogeneous composition and age of provenance areas under denudation. Occurrence of Eoarchean and Paleoarchean zircons in the clastic material of the protolith of the Bolshecheremshanskaya gneisses indicates the existence of Early Archean crustal terrains in Volgo-Uralia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available