Detrital zircon U–Pb geochronological and sedimentological study of the Simao Basin, Yunnan: Implications for the Early Cenozoic evolution of the Red River

Comparison of Detrital Zircon U-Pb and Muscovite 40Ar/39Ar Ages in the Yangtze Sediment: Implications for Provenance Studies

“…U-Pb rim ages of detrital zircons record the last zircon-forming tectonothermal event in the original source rock, while core ages record inheritance from the local country rocks or co-genetic Magmatic ages derived from earlier melt pulses in the Magma plumbing system [57]. In the Yangtze River, detrital zircon U-Pb dating is widely used to reconstruct evolution of this river in the previous studies [17,18,[58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67]. However, no consensus exists on when and how the present drainage pattern formed based on detrital zircon data from various basins.…”

Provenance and Drainage Evolution of the Red River Revealed by Pb Isotopic Analysis of Detrital K‐Feldspar

“…One of the long‐debated issues regarding the drainage evolution in East Asia involves whether the upper Yangtze River (including the Yalong, Dadu, and Jinsha Rivers), Mekong River, and other nearby drainage systems once flowed southward as the major tributaries of the paleo‐Red River (Chen et al, ; Clift, Carter, et al, ; Hoang et al, ; Wei et al, ; Zhang, Tyrrell, et al, ; Zheng, ). Combined with the Pb isotopic data from the Jinsha, Red, Mekong, Yalong, and Dadu Rivers, our study provides an opportunity to test whether the Pb isotopic data are appropriate to understand the hypothesis that the paleo‐Red River has been captured in the geological past.…”

“…The Red River, which is the dominant river system that transports sediments from the eastern Tibetan Plateau and the South China Block to the South China Sea (Hoang et al, 2009), has been a special focus of research, because it may have been much larger in the past than it is currently. Despite disagreements on the patterns and timing of its reorganization, drainage capture of the paleo-Red River is proposed to have occurred from the Paleocene to the middle Miocene (Chen et al, 2017;Clift, Blusztajn, & Nguyen, 2006;Clift et al, 2008;Hoang et al, 2009;Zheng et al, 2013). Recent observations, however, argue against large-scale river capture (Wei et al, 2016;Wissink et al, 2016;Yan et al, 2011;Zhang et al, 2019;Zhao et al, 2015).…”

Into Africa via docked India: a fossil climbing perch from the Oligocene of Tibet helps solve the anabantid biogeographical puzzle

“…47 Ma), followed by dispersal to Tibet and then the Indian subcontinent ( Figs. 3 and S2 (online)), given the presence of some favorable wet and lowland habitat along the southern and central part of Tibet [42][43][44][45][46] which were positioned at the paleolatitudes of 21°-24°N then [47], and a river system connecting Southeast Asia and Tibet during the Paleocene to Eocene [48], and the completion of the India-Asia collision [40]. The lineage represented by yEoanabas had inhabited Tibet at least until the late Oligocene and eventually it was eliminated by the cooling linked to the rise of the plateau [49].…”