Provenance of the Liuqu Conglomerate in southern Tibet: A Paleogene erosional record of the Himalayan–Tibetan orogen

Wang, Jiangang; Hu, Xiumian; Wu, Fu‐Yuan; Jansa, L. F.

doi:10.1016/j.sedgeo.2010.09.004

Cited by 50 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The conglomerates may have formed penecontemporaneously with the Yamdrok mélange (Aitchison et al, 2000) and are not considered to have derived from terranes north of the YTSZ, but rather from between an intra-oceanic arc and India's leading margin, given coarse-grained, immature clast textures and stratigraphic relationships (Davis et al, 2002;Davis et al, 1999). Provenance studies of the Liuqu conglomerate clasts, with both Indian and Asian sources, identify an erosional record from the Middle Eocene for the Asian sources (Wang et al, 2010).…”

Section: Yarlung-tsangpo Suture Zonementioning

confidence: 97%

A tectonic model reconciling evidence for the collisions between India, Eurasia and intra-oceanic arcs of the central-eastern Tethys

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Yarlung-tsangpo Suture Zonementioning

confidence: 97%

A tectonic model reconciling evidence for the collisions between India, Eurasia and intra-oceanic arcs of the central-eastern Tethys

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is widely considered as a molasse (or proximal foreland basin) unit deposited immediately following initial India-Asia collision in the Paleocene (e.g. Fang et al, 2006;J.G. Wang et al, 2010;DeCelles et al, 2011;Wei et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fang et al, 2006;J.G. Wang et al, 2010;DeCelles et al, 2011;Wei et al, 2011). Aitchison et al (2007) however, consider that collision occurred between India and an intra-oceanic arc during the Eocene, prior to the main India-Asian collision sensu-stricto, although this view is disputed widely (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraining the age of Liuqu Conglomerate, southern Tibet: Implications for evolution of the India–Asia collision zone

Kohn

Sandiford

et al. 2015

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is dominated by basaltic, serpentinized ultramafic, chert and quartzite clasts that were rapidly deposited in oblique-slip basins that developed along the zone of an arc-continent collision . Wang et al (2010) refuted this interpretation and proposed that the Xigaze continental forearc terrane was the source region for the Liuqu Conglomerate. However, this seems untenable as the feldspathic-dominated volcaniclastics, felsic volcanics and plutonic clasts that dominate the Xigaze forearc sediments (Dürr, 1996) are unknown from the Liuqu Conglomerate Wang et al, 2010).…”

Section: Southern Tibet: Tethyan Himalayamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wang et al (2010) refuted this interpretation and proposed that the Xigaze continental forearc terrane was the source region for the Liuqu Conglomerate. However, this seems untenable as the feldspathic-dominated volcaniclastics, felsic volcanics and plutonic clasts that dominate the Xigaze forearc sediments (Dürr, 1996) are unknown from the Liuqu Conglomerate Wang et al, 2010). The maximum depositional age of 53.0 ± 1.6 Ma for the Liuqu Conglomerate (Aitchison et al 2011) is slightly younger than the deposition age for the Sangdanlin conglomerate.…”

Section: Southern Tibet: Tethyan Himalayamentioning

confidence: 99%

Detrital chrome spinel evidence for a Neotethyan intra-oceanic island arc collision with India in the Paleocene

Baxter

Aitchison

Ali

et al. 2016

Journal of Asian Earth Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models that support a single collision scenario for India and Eurasia are incompatible with the evidence that an intra-oceanic island arc (IOIA) existed within the Neotethyan Ocean. Understanding the spatial and temporal extent of any IOIA is crucial for India-Eurasia collision studies as the entire ocean, including any intraoceanic features, must have been consumed or emplaced prior to continental collision.Here, we review what is known about the Neotethyan IOIA and report evidence from sedimentary successions in NW India and southern Tibet to constrain when and where it was emplaced. We use detrital mineral geochemistry and supporting provenance 2 and age data to identify the source of the sediments and compare the timing of erosion of IOIA-derived material in both regions. Detrital chrome spinels, extracted from distinct sedimentary horizons in southern Tibet (Sangdanlin) and NW India (Ladakh), exhibit similar average geochemical values (TiO 2 = 0.09 and 0.24%, Cr# = 0.66 and 0.68 and Mg# = 0.45 and 0.53, respectively) and supra-subduction zone (SSZ), forearc peridotite signatures. Furthermore, they overlap with in-situ chrome spinels reported from the Spongtang Ophiolite in NW India and the Sangsang Ophiolite in southern Tibet. As with many of the ophiolitic remnants that crop out in and adjacent to the Yarlung-Tsangpo and Indus suture zones (YTSZ and ISZ respectively), the Spongtang and Sangsang ophiolites formed in an IOIA setting. Linking the source of the detrital chrome spinels to those analysed from remnant IOIA massifs in the YTSZ and ISZ is strong evidence for the emplacement of the IOIA onto the Indian margin.The timing of the IOIA collision with India is constrained by the depositional ages of the chrome spinel-bearing sediments to the end of the Paleocene (Thanetian) in southern Tibet and the Early Eocene in NW India. This indirectly provides a maximum age constraint of Late Paleocene-Early Eocene for intercontinental collision between India and Eurasia. Additionally, this study highlights the importance of targeting distinct sedimentary horizons in collision zones to find evidence for discrete tectonic events that may be obfuscated by later collisions.

show abstract

Provenance of the Liuqu Conglomerate in southern Tibet: A Paleogene erosional record of the Himalayan–Tibetan orogen

Cited by 50 publications

References 70 publications

A tectonic model reconciling evidence for the collisions between India, Eurasia and intra-oceanic arcs of the central-eastern Tethys

A tectonic model reconciling evidence for the collisions between India, Eurasia and intra-oceanic arcs of the central-eastern Tethys

Constraining the age of Liuqu Conglomerate, southern Tibet: Implications for evolution of the India–Asia collision zone

Detrital chrome spinel evidence for a Neotethyan intra-oceanic island arc collision with India in the Paleocene

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About