Zircon (U-Th)/(He-Pb) double-dating constraints on the interplay between thrust deformation and foreland basin architecture, Sevier foreland basin, Utah

Abstract

The Cretaceous Cordilleran foreland basin strata exposed in the Book Cliffs of eastern Utah and western Colorado have motivated important concepts linking thrust belt deformation and foreland basin evolution largely on the basis of sequence stratigraphy, stratal architecture, and sediment provenance evolution. However, these methods and approaches generally cannot provide critical insights into the temporal or causal linkages between foreland basin architecture and thrust belt deformation. This is in part due to discrepancies in age resolution and lack of evidence with which to directly couple sediment supply and basin-fill evolution to thrust belt unroofing. New detrital zircon (DZ) geothermochronometric data from Upper Cretaceous proximal to distal foreland basin strata in the Book Cliffs provide new quantitative insights into sediment origin and dispersal in relation to thrust belt deformation and exhu­mation. Detailed DZ U-Pb and (U-Th)/He double dating reveals that the Book Cliffs foredeep detritus was mainly delivered by transverse routing systems from two major sources: (1) Neoproterozoic and Lower Paleozoic strata from the central Utah Sevier thrust belt, and (2) Permian–Jurassic and synorogenic Cretaceous strata recycled from the frontal part of the thrust belt. A dramatic increase in Sierran magmatic arc and Yavapai-Mazatzal DZ U-Pb ages, as well as Paleozoic DZ He ages, in the deeper marine portions of the foreland basin points to axial fluvial and littoral sediment input from the Sierran magmatic arc and Mogollon highland sources. Both transverse and axial transport sys­tems acted contemporaneously during eastward propagation of the Late Cretaceous thrust belt. DZ He depositional lag time estimates reveal three distinct exhumation pulses in the Sevier thrust belt in the Cenomanian and Campanian. The exhumation pulses correlate with shifts in sediment prove­nance, dispersal style, and progradation rates in the foreland basin. These new data support conceptual models that temporally and causally link accelerated exhumation and unroofing in the thrust belt to increases in sediment supply and rapid clastic progradation in the foreland basin.

Challenging assumptions of sediment routing in retroarc foreland basins: Detrital zircon evidence for axial versus transverse drainages in the Late Cretaceous of southern Utah, USA

“…Samples from the Calico Bed and Drip Tank Members are more likely to deviate from the broader trends. These samples have increased zircons of Population B, which we interpret to have come from the Sevier fold-thrust belt during punctuated events related to Sevier thrust-belt movements, a phenomenon that is also documented in the central and northern Utah foreland (Pujols & Stockli, 2021).…”

“…Similarly, sediment supply in foreland basin systems is broadly attributed to the actively exhuming orogenic belt. This interpretation is central to traditional sequence stratigraphic models, which link both stratigraphic architecture and provenance to fold-thrust belt tectonics (Catuneanu, 2002;El Euch-El Koundi et al, 2018;Oruche & Dix, 2021;Pujols & Stockli, 2021;Pujols et al, 2020;Van Wagoner, 1995). Climatic, eustatic and autogenic signals are widely acknowledged as factors controlling foreland basin architecture and evolution (e.g., Drummond et al, 1996;Wang et al, 2011), but these are typically assessed as secondary to orogen tectonics in terms of clastic sediment supply into the basin.…”

Decoding post‐orogenic sediment recycling and dispersal using detrital zircon core and rim ages

“…Helium ages of DZ could constrain the timing of erosion and thus narrow the timeframe of the recycling process (e.g. Pujols & Stockli, 2021; Xu, Stockli, et al, 2017). Moreover, U–Pb and (U‐Th)/He double dating could also quantify the proportion of the recycled DZ grains (Campbell et al, 2005).…”

Zircon U‐Pb‐He Double Dating of Modern Sands From the Inn River Catchment: Assessing Resolution and Potential in a Complex Orogenic Setting

“…This double dating (DD) procedure unifies the advantages of these methods and allows highly specific discrimination of the sources (e.g., Carter & Moss, 1999; D. M. Chew & Donelick, 2012; Lu et al., 2020; Reiners et al., 2005). The best examples for the application of DD are the studies when detritus of the foreland basins associated with active or young orogens were dated (Pujols & Stockli, 2021; Thomson et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2014). Detrital grains with low‐T ages close to the age of deposition (i.e., short lag time, Garver et al., 1999) can derive either from coeval volcanism or from rapidly exhuming basement blocks.…”