Rare earth element characteristics of Paleoproterozoic cap carbonates pertaining to the Sausar Group, Central India: Implications for ocean paleoredox conditions

The current status of orogenesis in the Central Indian Tectonic Zone: A view from its Southern Margin

“…A Mesoproterozoic age of Sausar sedimentation (between ~1.42 and 1.06 Ga), argued here and before (e.g., Chattopadhyay, ; Saha, Bhowmik, Bose, & Sajeev, ), and if proved to be valid, will cast doubt on recent suggestions of Palaeoproterozoic glaciation (Mohanty et al, ; Sarangi et al, ) and palaeosol formation (Mohanty & Nanda, ) in the Sausar belt. More importantly, the granitoid basement near Waitola village near Mansar, over which the Palaeoproterozoic palaeosol is said to have formed (Mohanty & Nanda, ) records a magmatic crystallization age of ca.…”

“…The ages were correlated with the timing of peak and retrograde metamorphism of Sausar Group rocks (Bhowmik et al, ). Stein et al () presented Re‐Os age of molybdenite from calc‐silicate gneiss protolith of the Sausar metasediments at ~2.41–2.45 Ga, which sets the minimum depositional age of Sausar sediments to be >2.45 Ga (Mohanty, ; Mohanty et al, ; Mohanty & Nanda, ; Sarangi et al, ; Stein et al, ). Stein et al () also reported ca 1.0 Ga U–Pb titanite age in the calc‐silicate gneiss.…”

“…An answer to this query is also important to understand what happened between the two orogenic pulses. In several recent studies, Mohanty and his coworkers (Mohanty, ; Mohanty et al, ; Mohanty & Nanda, ; Sarangi et al, ) have suggested Earliest Palaeoproterozoic age for the formation of the Sausar Basin. This stems from c. 2.41‐ to 2.45‐Ga Re‐Os molybdenite age in the Sausar calc‐silicate gneiss (after Stein et al, ).…”

“…(c) Finally, does it mark a globally significant collisional event, hitherto unrecognized, and would require a revision of current models of assembly of the continental blocks in the Proterozoic? (4) When did the Sausar Basin in the central domain open up—in Earliest Palaeoproterozoic (e.g., between c. 2.45 and 2.5 Ga, Stein et al, ; Mohanty, Barik, Sarangi, & Sarkar, ; Mohanty & Nanda, ; Sarangi, Prasad Mohanty, & Barik, ) or between 1.54 and 1.1 Ga on a Pre‐Grenvillian cratonised basement (e.g., Bhowmik et al, ; Chattopadhyay, )? In this communication, the published metamorphic, geochronological, and tectonic modelling data from the three domains of the Sausar Mobile Belt have been reviewed to seek answers to these queries.…”

“…(3) What is the status of the Early Mesoproterozoic orogenesis in the CITZ in the context of Columbia and Rodinia supercontinent assembly events? (a) Is the orogenesis of only regional significance reflecting localized amalgamation of crustal blocks, which were dispersed after the break-up of the Columbia and 2.5 Ga, Stein et al, 2014;Mohanty, Barik, Sarangi, & Sarkar, 2015;Mohanty & Nanda, 2016;Sarangi, Prasad Mohanty, & Barik, 2017) or between 1.54 and 1.1 Ga on a Pre-Grenvillian cratonised basement (e.g., ? In this communication, the published metamorphic, geochronological, and tectonic modelling data from the three domains of the Sausar Mobile FIGURE 2 Geological map of the Sausar Mobile Belt (SMB) showing the three litho-tectonic elements, which from north to south are the following: the northern Ramakona-Katangi granulite (RKG) domain, central domain of Sausar Group of rocks and the Southern Bhandara-Balaghat granulite domain.…”