Supercontinents signify self-organization in plate tectonics. Over the past ~2 billion years 3 major supercontinents have been identified, with increasing age: Pangaea, Rodinia, and Columbia. In a prototypal form, a cyclic pattern of continental assembly and breakup likely extends back to ~3 billion years ago, albeit on the smaller scale of Archaean supercratons which, unlike global supercontinents, were tectonically segregated. In this Review, we discuss how the emergence of supercontinents provides a minimum age for the onset of the modern global plate tectonic network, whereas Archaean supercratons might reflect an earlier geodynamic and nascent tectonic regime.

The Australia-Laurentia connection in the Paleoproterozoic to Mesoproterozoic supercontinent Nuna is thought to have initiated by ca. 1.6 Ga when both continents were locked in a proto-SWEAT (southwestern U.S.–East Antarctic) configuration. However, the longevity of that configuration is poorly constrained. Here, we present a new high-quality paleomagnetic pole from the ca. 1.3 Ga Derim Derim sills of northern Australia that suggests Australia and Laurentia were in the same configuration at that time. This new paleopole also supports a connection between Australia and North China and, in conjunction with previously reported data from all continents, indicates that the breakup of Nuna largely occurred between ca. 1.3 and 1.2 Ga.

No abstract

Many Archean cratons exhibit Paleoproterozoic rifted margins, implying they were pieces of some ancestral landmass(es). The idea that such an ancient continental assembly represents an Archean supercontinent has been proposed but remains to be justified. Starkly contrasting geological records between different clans of cratons have inspired an alternative hypothesis where cratons were clustered in multiple, separate “supercratons.” A new ca. 2.62 Ga paleomagnetic pole from the Yilgarn craton of Australia is compatible with either two successive but ephemeral supercontinents or two long-lived supercratons across the Archean-Proterozoic transition. Neither interpretation supports the existence of a single, long-lived supercontinent, suggesting that Archean geodynamics were fundamentally different from subsequent times (Proterozoic to present), which were influenced largely by supercontinent cycles.

No abstract