4.6 Article

Paleoproterozoic reworking of ancient crust in the Cathaysia Block, South China: Evidence from zircon trace elements, U-Pb and Lu-Hf isotopes

Journal

CHINESE SCIENCE BULLETIN
Volume 54, Issue 9, Pages 1543-1554

Publisher

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11434-009-0096-4

Keywords

zircon U-Pb age; Hf isotope; Paleoproterozoic; crustal reworking; southwestern Zhejiang Province

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [40873004]
  2. Ministry of Land and Resources of China [2008110015]
  3. Northwest University [06LCD12]
  4. Project of Land and Resources Bureau of Zhejiang Province [2004005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A combined study of zircon LA-ICP-MS U-Pb dating, trace elements and Hf isotope was carried out for gneissic granite from the Sanzhishu area in Jingning, SW Zhejiang Province. Nearly all the zircons separated from the granite exhibited oscillatory zoning and high Th/U ratios (> 0.1). The REE profile showed a pronounced positive Ce anomaly, negative Eu anomaly and an enrichment of HREE, which are typical characteristics of magmatic zircon. Thirteen concordant or nearly concordant analytical data yielded a weighted mean Pb-207/Pb-206 age of 1860 +/- 13 Ma (MSWD=0.084), representing the formation age of the granite. The magmatic zircons had negative epsilon Hf(t) values of -15.6 to -10.0 and two-stage Hf model ages of 3.1 to 3.4 Ga, indicating that the granites were formed by reworking of ancient crust. The major- and trace-element data indicate that the gneissic granites are metaluminous high-K calc-alkaline rocks and exhibit the same geochemical characteristics as aluminous A-type granites, implying the emplacement of the granite in a post-orogenic extensional tectonic setting. We conclude that the Paleoproterozoic crustal reworking event in the Cathaysia Block of South China marked the transition from assembly to break-up of the Columbia supercontinent.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available