Geologic and U–Pb geochronologic evidence for early Paleozoic tectonism in the Dadeldhura thrust sheet, far-west Nepal Himalaya

Petrographic features as an effective indicator for the variation in strength of granites

“…The early Paleozoic granitic rocks intrude different GHS and LHS lithologies confirmed by their several geochronological investigations (e.g. Girard and Bussy, 1999;Miller et al, 2001;Gehrels et al, 2006a). …”

“…Tso-Morari granite (Trivedi et al, 1986;Girard and Bussy, 1999), Rupshu granite (Girard and Bussy, 1999), Miyar orthogneisses (Pognante et al, 1990) and Nepal e.g. Simchar granite (LeFort et al, 1983), Bhimphedi (Gehrels et al, 2006a), Kathmandu support the existence of this magmatic event in Himalayan terrane. The major Himalayan granitic plutons in the northern western Pakistan are restricted to zone between Khairabad thrust and MMT ( Fig.…”

Provenance of Early Paleozoic metasediments in the central Chinese Altai: Implications for tectonic affinity of the Altai-Mongolia terrane in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt

“…In the East Antarctica Block, the age spectrum is relatively simple and dominated by late Mesoproterozoic ages with a strong peak at 1.14 Ga, with minor zircon groups formed at~2.7 and~2.45 Ga (Bisnath et al, 2006;Clark et al, 2012;Grew et al, 2012;Marschall et al, 2013). The main zircon populations of the northern India Block have pre-Neoproterozoic age peaks at 2.55 and 1.77 Ga slightly older than those of the Tarim Craton, with more extensive Neoproterozoic magmatic records with peaks at 1178, 979 and 609 Ma (Decelles et al, 2004;Gehrels et al, 2006;Kaur et al, 2011;McKenzie et al, 2011;Ravikant et al, 2011). The age distribution of the South China Block is similar to that of the Tarim Craton, characterized by three age peaks at 2.48, 1.85 and 0.8 Ga (Wan et al, 2007;Wang et al, 2007Wang et al, , 2010bXu et al, 2007;Sun et al, 2009;Yu et al, 2010;Li et al, 2011).…”

“…Comparing relative probability plots for detrital zircons from the Paleozoic metasediments in the Chinese Altai and detrital zircons from several other blocks. Original data are from the references: the Chinese Altai ; and data in this study), the North China Craton (Darby and Gehrels, 2006;Zhou et al, 2008;Wan et al, 2011;Liu et al, 2012bLiu et al, , 2013, the Siberia Craton (Khudoley et al, 2001;Wang et al, 2011;Gladkochub et al, 2013), the Tarim Craton Zhang et al, 2011Zhang et al, , 2012Zhu et al, 2011;Wang et al, 2013), the Yilgarn Craton (Cawood et al, 2003;Veevers et al, 2005;Pidgeon and Nemchin, 2006), the Gawler Craton (Swain et al, 2005;Belousova et al, 2009), the East Antarctica Block (Bisnath et al, 2006;Clark et al, 2012;Grew et al, 2012;Marschall et al, 2013), the northern India Block (Decelles et al, 2004;Gehrels et al, 2006;Kaur et al, 2011;McKenzie et al, 2011;Ravikant et al, 2011), and the South China Block (Wan et al, 2007;Wang et al, 2007Wang et al, , 2010bXu et al, 2007;Sun et al, 2009;Yu et al, 2010;Li et al, 2011). materials for the Early Paleozoic metasediments in the Chinese Altai. Therefore, we suggest that the Tarim Craton is most likely the main source of old detritus of the Early Paleozoic metasedimentary rocks in the Chinese Altai, which therefore suggests that the whole AltaiMongolia terrane has a close tectonic affinity to the Tarim Craton.…”

Abstract Volume of Sixth Nepal Geolgical Congress on Geology, Natural Resources, Infrastructures, Climate Change and Natural Disasters, 15 – 17 November 2010, Kathmandu, Nepal

“…Apatite FT ages down to 0.6 Ma further underline accelerated diachronous sub-recent exhumation of different parts of the orogen, the counterpart of this extensional exhumation being reflected by NE normal faulting of Higher Himalayan units along the KNF and the STDZ, and extensive uplift-related Plio-Pleistocene fluviatile-lacustrine sediment accumulation in the Transhimalayan headwaters of the Sutlej, in Western Tibet. Detrital zircon ages and Sm-Nd isotopic data from Himalayan Orogen (DeCelles et al 2000;Myrow et al 2003;Gehrels et al 2006) suggest that the Lesser Himalayan Metasediments (LHM) might have received material from the Northern Indian Craton, while the Higher Himalayan Gneisses (HHG) mostly from the Circum-East Antarctic Orogen (CEAO) including western Australia and east Antarctica, and partly from the LHM and the Arabian Nubian Shield (Yoshida and Upreti 2006). The original material of the Tibetan Tethys Sedimentary Sequence is considered to be mostly derived from the HHG and partly from the CEAO and only small amount on the western area from the Arabian Nubian Shield (Yoshida et al 2005).…”