Magmatic and geodynamic evolution of Urumieh–Dokhtar basic volcanism, Central Iran: major, trace element, isotopic, and geochronologic implications

Yeganehfar, Hadi; Ghorbani, Mohammad Reza; Shinjo, Ryuichi; Ghaderi, Majid

doi:10.1080/00206814.2012.752554

Cited by 53 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Babazadeh et al () attributed the generation of the Ardestan magmas to the interaction between dominantly asthenospheric mantle melt with overlying crust to and this line of reasoning is also followed here; 22 Ma zircons in a diorite (GN4 sample) have trace element signatures that are similar to those of older zircons of south Ardestan samples. This observation is in accordance with the hypothesis that the magmatic processes dominating the formation of the Oligocene melts may have persisted into Early Miocene time (Chiu et al, ; Ghorbani et al, ; Yeganehfar et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The presence of such mafic dikes in the intermediate and felsic rocks can plausibly be related to ongoing magmatic activity after emplacement of the main plutons. Post‐Oligocene continuity of magmatism in the Ardestan area has already been documented by Yeganehfar et al () and Ghorbani et al (). These dikes are fine‐grained along the contact and become coarser towards the centre of the dikes.…”

Section: Field Geologymentioning

confidence: 53%

“…Map of Iran showing the major structural units (modified after Alavi, ) as well as the distribution of Tertiary magmatic rocks in the central and southeast UDMA with compilation of published age data (Babazadeh et al, ; Berberian et al, ; Chiu et al, ; Dargahi, Arvin, Pan, & Babaei, ; Ghorbani et al, ; Hassanzadeh, ; Honarmand et al, ; Hosseini, Hassanzadeh, Alirezaei, Sun, & Li, ; Kouhestani et al, ; McInnes et al, , ; Pang et al, ; Sarjoughian & Kananian, ; Shahabpour, ; Shahsavari Alavijeh, Rashidnejad Omran, & Corfu, ; Verdel et al, ; Yeganehfar et al, Tables S1 and S2) and locations of the samples dated in the present study [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Multistage tectono‐magmatic evolution of the central Urumieh–Dokhtar magmatic arc, south Ardestan, Iran: Insights from zircon geochronology and geochemistry

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combining high‐spatial resolution geochronology and geochemistry of zircon provides constraints on the geodynamic evolution of the Zagros orogen. This study underlines the significance of hitherto unknown magmatic/geological events in the central Urumieh–Dokhtar magmatic arc (UDMA) of Iran at ca. 35–22 and 10 Ma. Recently reported U–Pb zircon ages of 25–24 Ma for the granodioritic rocks from the south Ardestan area were interpreted to constrain the crystallization age. Newly determined U–Pb zircon ages of ca. 35 to 22 Ma from south Ardestan gabbroic to granitic rocks and related dikes indicate that the melt evolution continued from the Oligocene into Early Miocene time. In addition, a ca. 10 Ma U–Pb age for the zircons from a south Ardestan diorite provides evidence for a so far unknown, igneous episode. Representing the youngest magmatic stage recognized in the central part of the UDMA, the 10 Ma age is interpreted to document magmatic activity related to the Arabia–Eurasia collision, as recognized elsewhere in the Zagros orogen. South Ardestan zircons with geochemical signatures indicating continental affinity likely recrystallized in the course of a major event (asthenospheric mantle melt formation) that has affected crustal rocks. The significant lower LREEs of these zircons compared to hydrothermal zircons, moderate Th/U (>0.4), and high (Sm/La)N (>10) ratios associated with low [La] (<1 ppm) suggest that these crystals have an igneous origin and are not related to hydrothermal or metamorphic processes. These findings bear important implications for the geodynamic evolution of the Zagros orogen and support a model suggesting that magmatic activity still affected the UDMA in Late Miocene time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Field Geologymentioning

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multistage tectono‐magmatic evolution of the central Urumieh–Dokhtar magmatic arc, south Ardestan, Iran: Insights from zircon geochronology and geochemistry

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study have allowed us to clarify the magmatic, geodynamic and metallogenic evolution , 2011Asiabanha and Foden, 2012;Castro et al, 2013), IV -Eocene rocks from central Alborz (Verdel et al, 2011), V -Eocene to Mio-Pliocene rocks from the northern UrumiehDokhtar belt (Omrani et al, 2008;Rezaei-Kahkhaei et al, 2011;Sarjoughian et al, 2012;Yeganehfar et al, 2013;Honarmand et al, 2014). The Zangezur and Nakhitchevan blocks belong to the South Armenian block of Gondwanian origin.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…from Yeganehfar et al (2013) and Honarmand et al (2014). Upper crust and orogene lead isotopic evolution curves generated by the plumbotectonics model of Zartman and Doe (1981).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-lived, stationary magmatism and pulsed porphyry systems during Tethyan subduction to post-collision evolution in the southernmost Lesser Caucasus, Armenia and Nakhitchevan

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. Geneva, Switzerland; e-mail: robert.moritz@unige.ch A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

show abstract

A hidden crust beneath the central Urumieh‐Dokhtar Magmatic Arc revealed by inherited zircon ages, Tafresh, Iran

Chaharlang

Ghorbani

2019

Geological Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laser ablation ICP‐MS U–Pb dating on inherited zircons from Neogene volcanic rocks of the Tafresh area in the central part of Urumieh‐Dokhtar Magmatic Arc (UDMA) yielded Paleoproterozoic, Late Neoproterozoic–Early Cambrian, Carboniferous, and Cretaceous ages. These ages improve our understanding of the geodynamical evolution of central UDMA. The 2,379 Ma age (i.e., Paleoproterozoic) is the oldest age reported in the central UDMA and is similar to the age of detrital zircons from Central Iran. The Paleoproterozoic zircons may come from the African Craton and fed from Central Iran sedimentary sequences. The Late Neoproterozoic–Early Cambrian ages (605 ± 11 Ma to 533 ± 9.2 Ma) indicate a basement for the UDMA, which is similar to that of the Sanandaj‐Sirjan Zone, Central Iran, and northwest Iran. The Carboniferous zircon age (328.4 Ma) is interpreted as being derived from the Eurasian arc produced by northward subduction of the Paleo‐Tethys Oceanic Plate. The Late Cretaceous zircon ages (106 to 71.2 Ma) might be regarded as indicating the Late Cretaceous magmatic episode, marking the subduction of oceanic crust that followed the Neo‐Tethys subduction.

show abstract

Magmatic and geodynamic evolution of Urumieh–Dokhtar basic volcanism, Central Iran: major, trace element, isotopic, and geochronologic implications

Cited by 53 publications

References 60 publications

Multistage tectono‐magmatic evolution of the central Urumieh–Dokhtar magmatic arc, south Ardestan, Iran: Insights from zircon geochronology and geochemistry

Multistage tectono‐magmatic evolution of the central Urumieh–Dokhtar magmatic arc, south Ardestan, Iran: Insights from zircon geochronology and geochemistry

Long-lived, stationary magmatism and pulsed porphyry systems during Tethyan subduction to post-collision evolution in the southernmost Lesser Caucasus, Armenia and Nakhitchevan

A hidden crust beneath the central Urumieh‐Dokhtar Magmatic Arc revealed by inherited zircon ages, Tafresh, Iran

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About