4.6 Article

Geochronology and geochemistry of the late Neoproterozoic A-type granitic clasts in the southwestern Tarim Craton: petrogenesis and tectonic implications

期刊

INTERNATIONAL GEOLOGY REVIEW
卷 61, 期 3, 页码 280-295

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/00206814.2017.1423521

关键词

Tarim Craton; A-type granite; U-Pb-Hf isotopes; breakup of the Rodinia

类别

资金

  1. National Science and Technology Major Project [2016ZX05004001]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41472103]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to sparse data for deciphering the late Neoproterozoic tectonic history, there is still considerable debate on whether long-lasting superplume-related or long-duration subduction-related dynamics dominated the Tarim Craton. In this contribution, our field investigations detail the late Neoproterozoic siliciclastic successions, and we report the first granitic conglomerates with zircon U-Pb ages of 753.9 +/- 3.7 Ma in the SW Tarim Craton. Importantly, detrital zircons from the thick Cryogenian sedimentary basin also contain a major zircon population at ca. 750 Ma. Together with seismic data, this suggests a large ca. 750 Ma magmatic event in the SW Tarim Craton. Geochemically, the granitic clasts exhibit A-type granite features with high SiO2, high alkali but extremely low K, high FeOT/MgO and Ga/Al, and high high-field strength elements (HFSEs) (i.e. Nb, Hf, and Ta) with significant depletion in Rb, K, Sr, P, Eu, and Ti, and significant negative Eu anomalies (Eu* = 0.13-0.36), showing ferroan granite affinities. Including the detrital zircons, the ca. 750 Ma zircons have a large range of negative epsilon Hf(t) values (-19.46 to -1.16). Elemental and zircon Hf isotope data suggest that the granites were derived from Palaeoproterozoic reworked continental crust and are probably related to crustal thinning and extension. By comparison with previous studies, we conclude that Rodinia breakup was diachronous in the outer parts of the supercontinent.

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

4.6
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