塔里木盆地东北缘敦煌群的形成和演化:锆石U-Pb年代学和Lu-Hf同位素证据

采用LA-MC-ICP-MS手段对敦煌地块中敦煌群的白云母石英片岩、石榴斜长角闪岩、石榴黑云斜长片麻岩和长英质伟晶岩脉中的锆石进行了U-Pb 和Lu-Hf同位素分析,获得白云母石英片岩碎屑岩浆锆石的²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb表面年龄为1545~756Ma,主要集中在1200~1000Ma,表明地层的最大沉积时代为756Ma,蚀源区存在中、新元古代的岩浆事件。白云母石英片岩锆石的ε_Hf(t)分为两组,一组为正值,ε_Hf(t)=1.2~10.1,单阶段模式年龄为t_DM=1.09~1.66Ga;一组为负值,ε_Hf(t)=-1~-16,两阶段模式年龄为t_DM2=1.91~2.42Ga。表明蚀源区存在古元古代、中元古代的再造地壳。石榴斜长角闪岩的两粒捕获锆石的年龄为2272Ma 和1208Ma,ε_Hf(t)为-3和14,t_DM2和t_DM为2.82Ga和1.1Ga,暗示捕获区存在太古代再造地壳和中元古代晚期新生地壳。石榴斜长角闪岩碎屑锆石的Th/U比值为0.02~0.42,²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U年龄为441±5Ma,代表了岩石遭受变质作用的时代。石榴黑云斜长片麻岩中的碎屑锆石与长英质伟晶岩脉中的继承锆石特征相同,锆石年龄集中在3个峰值区间:2.2~2.1Ga,1.8~1.6Ga,1.2~0.8Ga,相应的的ε_Hf(t)分别为-9~4,-5.4~15,-27~20,相应锆石的模式年龄分别为3.1~2.4Ga,2.6~1.4Ga,3.1~1.7Ga,均大于其形成年龄,表明蚀源区锆石来自于再循环的新太古代、古元古代和中元古代地壳,样品代表的地层的最大沉积时代为新元古代早期。岩石中检测出早古生代的变质锆石, ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U年龄为464~422Ma,可能代表了沉积岩的变质时代。敦煌群锆石U-Pb和Lu-Hf同位素表明蚀源区岩石类型和时代的多样性,也表明部分敦煌群不是前寒武纪的变质基底,而是塔里木盆地变质基底之上新元古代的沉积盖层,后卷入了我国西北部早古生代的造山事件。     

桐柏山造山带南麓随州群变沉积岩中碎屑锆石的年代学及其地质意义

扬子克拉通北缘的随州——枣阳地区是整个秦岭——桐柏山——大别山——苏鲁造山带及其前陆地区受晚三叠世(印支期)扬子板块向华北板块深俯冲并发生高压——超高压变质作用影响最小的地区,因而扬子克拉通北缘的前寒武纪基底在这里得到了较多的保存。它们不仅为研究扬子克拉通北缘新元古代构造环境提供了难得的样品,也为研究造山带内变质杂岩的原岩性质提供了参照物。出露的前寒武纪基底包括新元古代的变质火山——沉积岩系(随州群)以及大量的超镁铁质——镁铁质岩床群。本文用LA-ICP-MS锆石U-Pb法对随州群中变质沉积岩中的碎屑锆石进行了系统的年代学研究,结果表明:①随州群变质沉积岩中最年轻碎屑锆石的年龄约为720Ma,表明随州群的主要沉积作用应晚于该时间;②年龄介于700～1000Ma时间段的锆石颗粒构成了随州群变质沉积岩中最大的碎屑锆石群体,峰值在800Ma左右,说明新元古代,尤其是新元古代中、晚期形成的岩浆岩是随州群沉积岩最重要的一个物源;③随州群变质沉积岩中也出现了较多1700～2100Ma年龄段的锆石颗粒,说明古元古代中、晚期形成的岩浆岩也是随州群沉积岩的重要物源之一;④随州群沉积岩具有古元古代早期,甚至太古代年龄的碎屑锆石,说明扬子克拉通北缘可能存在层位相当的物源。     

Detrital-zircon geochronology of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks in the Hangay–Hentey basin, north-central Mongolia: Implications for the tectonic evolution of the Mongol–Okhotsk Ocean in central Asia

Understanding the development of the Central Asian Orogenic System (CAOS), which is the largest Phanerozoic accretionary orogen in the world, is critical to the determination of continental growth mechanisms and geological history of central Asia. A key to unraveling its geological history is to ascertain the origin and tectonic setting of the large flysch complexes that dominate the CAOS. These complexes have been variably interpreted as deep-marine deposits that were accreted onto a long-evolving arc against large continents to form a mega-accretionary complex or sediments trapped in back-arc to fore-arc basins within oceanic island-arc systems far from continents. To differentiate the above models we conducted U–Pb geochronological analyses of detrital-zircon grains from turbidites in the composite Hangay–Hentey basin of central Mongolia. This basin was divided by a Cenozoic fault system into the western and eastern sub-basins: the Hangay Basin in the west and Hentey basin in the east. This study focuses on the Hentey basin and indicates two groups of samples within this basin: (1) a southern group that were deposited after the earliest Carboniferous ( 339 Ma to 354 Ma) and a northern group that were deposited after the Cambrian to Neoproterozoic ( 504 Ma to 605 Ma). The samples from the northern part of the basin consistently contain Paleoproterozoic and Archean zircon grains that may have been derived from the Tuva–Mongol massif and/or the Siberian craton. In contrast, samples from the southern part of the basin contain only a minor component of early Paleozoic to Neoproterozoic zircon grains, which were derived from the crystalline basement bounding the Hangay–Hentey basin. Integrating all the age results from this study, we suggest that the Hangay–Hentey basin was developed between an island-arc system with a Neoproterozoic basement in the south and an Andean continental-margin arc in the north. The initiation of the southern arc occurred at or after the early Carboniferous, allowing accumulation of a flysch complex in a long-evolving accretionary complex.     

The Langjiexue Group is an in situ sedimentary sequence rather than an exotic block: Constraints from coeval Upper Triassic strata of the Tethys Himalaya(Qulonggongba Formation)

The Upper Triassic Langjiexue Group in southeastern Tibet has long been an enigmatic geological unit. It belongs tectonically to the northern Tethys Himalayan zone, but provenance signatures of the detritus it contains are significantly different from those of typical Tethys Himalayan sandstones. Because the Langjiexue Group is everywhere in fault contact with Tethys Himalayan strata, its original paleogeographic position has remained controversial for a long time. According to some researchers, the Langjiexue Group was deposited onto the northern edge of the Indian passive continental margin, whereas others interpreted it as an independent block accreted to the northern Indian margin only during final India-Asia convergence and collision in the Paleocene. This study compares the Langjiexue Group and coeval Upper Triassic strata of the southern Tethys Himalayan zone(Qulonggongba Formation). Our new provenance data indicate that Qulonggongba Formation sandstones contain common felsic volcanic rock fragments, minor plagioclase, and euhedral to subhedral zircon grains yielding Late Paleozoic to Triassic ages. These provenance features compare well with those of the Langjiexue Group. Because the Qulonggongba Formation certainly belongs to the Tethys Himalayan zone, the provenance similarity with the Langjiexue Group indicates that the latter is also an in situ Tethys Himalayan sedimentary sequence rather than part of an exotic block. Volcanic detritus including Late Paleozoic to Triassic zircon grains in both Langjiexue Group and Qulonggongba Formation are interpreted to have been derived from the distant Gondwanide orogen generated by Pan-Pacific subduction beneath the southeastern margin of Gondwana. The Qulonggongba Formation, deposited above marlstones of the lower Upper Triassic Tulong Group, is overlain by India-derived coastal quartzose sandstones of the uppermost Triassic Derirong Formation. Deposition of both the Qulonggongba Formation and the Langjiexue Group were most likely controlled by regional tectonism, possibly a rifting event along the northern margin of Gondwana.