4.7 Article

Linking sedimentary provenance, climate and tectonics in the Neoproterozoic Serid & oacute; Belt, Borborema Province (NE Brazil)

期刊

GEOSCIENCE FRONTIERS
卷 14, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

CHINA UNIV GEOSCIENCES, BEIJING
DOI: 10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101681

关键词

Whole-rock geochemistry; Marinoan Glaciation; U-Pb detrital zircon; Brasiliano Orogeny

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Serido Belt in the northeast of Brazil is a Neoproterozoic mobile belt related to the Brasiliano/Pan-African Orogeny. The sedimentary provenance of the rocks in the Serido Belt was investigated using geochemistry, isotopes, detrital zircon ages, and trace element analyses. The rocks in the Equador Formation have a cratonic sandstone provenance, while the Jucurutu and Serido formations indicate an increase in intermediate-mafic sources. The geochemical proxies suggest brackish to marine conditions and anoxic to euxinic conditions for the Jucurutu and Serido formations.
The Serido Belt, at the extreme northeast of Brazil, is one of the several Neoproterozoic mobile belts related to the Brasiliano/Pan-African Orogeny in Western Gondwana. The lithostratigraphy of the Serido Belt comprises basal quartzites and metaconglomerates (Equador Formation) overlain by hornblende-bearing paragneisses, calc-silicate rocks and marbles (Jucurutu Formation) and biotiteschists (Serido Formation). We investigated the sedimentary provenance of these rocks based on an integration of compiled whole-rock geochemistry, Sm-Nd isotopes, U-Pb detrital zircon ages and a new set of whole-rock trace elements analyses. Equador Formation quartzites have major and trace elements patterns that resemble cratonic sandstones, with a typical felsic provenance consistent with the isotopic composition of plutonic Archean to Paleoproterozoic basement rocks. Geochemical proxies suggest that these rocks were deposited in fresh waters under anoxic conditions and moderate to intense weathering conditions (CIA = 58-79). A shift in provenance led to an increase in intermediate-mafic sources during the deposition of the Jucurutu and Serido formations. Trace elements from rock types in these units are nearly identical, yet they differ on the contents of some high field-strength elements (e.g., Sc, V and Ni), which are higher in the Serido Formation than average pelites. Geochemical proxies show similar depositional environments, with brackish to marine conditions for the Jucurutu and Serido formations under anoxic to euxinic conditions. Weathering conditions are consistently lower in the Jucurutu Formation (CIA = 58-66) in comparison with the Serido Formation (CIA = 60-88). Compiled U-Pb data suggest maximum depositional ages of 633 & PLUSMN; 11 Ma and 633 & PLUSMN; 6 Ma for Jucurutu and Serido formations, respectively, suggesting deposition following the ca. 645-635 Ma Marinoan glaciation. We compared the geochemistry of the Serido Formation schists with currently exposed basement rocks and showed a strong affinity with Neoproterozoic arc-related intermediate rocks, which is in agreement with their slightly radiogenic signature (average eNd(630 Ma) = -1.68). When comparing with other pelitic sequences on the western Borborema Province, most of them fit the same sources and weathering conditions of the Serido Formation schists and Jucurutu Formation paragneisses. We propose that the Serido Belt represents an intracontinental rift basin (Equador Formation) that was overlain by fine-grained magmatic arc-related sediments (Serido and Jucurutu formations) during the post-Marinoan deglaciation and sea level rise. Similar pelitic deposits in western Borborema Province suggest a large marine-influenced continental depositional system that was mostly sourced from magmatic arcs of the West Gondwana Orogen. & COPY; 2023 China University of Geosciences (Beijing) and Peking University. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China University of Geosciences (Beijing). This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据