The protolith age of high-grade metamorphic rocks exposed in structurally deep parts of the Omineca Crystalline Belt has been the subject of investigation and controversy for decades. We have applied multiple isotopic dating techniques to rocks of three structural culminations: the Monashee complex (which includes the Frenchman Cap and Thor–Odin gneiss domes), the Grand Forks horst, and the Vaseaux Formation, which lies in the footwall of the Okanagan Valley fault.Frenchman Cap core gneisses contain highly radiogenic Sr that scatters about a 2206 ± 117 Ma (1σ) Rb–Sr isochron with 87Sr/86Sr initial ratio of 0.700 ± 0.002. Monazite and zircon dates for the same rocks are 1851 ± 7 to 2103 ± 16 Ma (only U–Pb dates are given with 2σ errors), with lower intercepts from about 100 to 300 Ma. Sm–Nd whole-rock and crustal-residence (TDM) dates are 2.3 ± 0.2 Ga. Mafic–felsic layering in the core gneiss is also of Early Proterozoic age. There is no geochronometric evidence for Late Proterozoic or Mesozoic migmatization.Frenchman Cap mantling gneisses, including samples from above the Monashee décollement, have radiogenic Sr and unradiogenic Nd compositions that are not consistent with current inferences of a Late Proterozoic to Paleozoic depositional age. Two intrusive granitic rocks, which cut mantling gneiss, are either Early Proterozoic or Mesozoic–Cenozoic with a Proterozoic Sr isotopic signature acquired by assimilation of core gneiss. One other intrusive studied is probably Paleocene Ladybird granite. The age of the mantling gneiss is not yet consistently resolved.Grand Forks Gneiss Unit I paragneiss gives radiogenic whole-rock Sr, zircon U–Pb upper intercept, and Sm–Nd whole-rock crustal-residence dates of 1.7 ± 0.4 Ga, 1681 ± 3 Ma (2σ, but the apparent high precision is very dependent on the assumption made about the time of Pb loss), and 1.9 ± 0.3 Ga, respectively. Unit II and younger Grand Forks Gneiss units are Late Proterozoic or Phanerozoic. All isotope systems have been considerably reset on a centimetre to metre scale by Mesozoic–Cenozoic regional metamorphism. Grand Forks Sr, Pb, and Nd isotope data are much like those for Spokane area pre-Purcell basement.Vaseaux Formation micaceous schist and gneiss give radiogenic whole-rock Sr, zircon U–Pb upper intercept, and Sm–Nd crustal-residence dates of 2.1 ± 0.6 Ga, 1899 ± 49 Ma (2σ), and 2.2 ± 0.1 Ga, respectively. Hornblende-bearing schist and gneiss contain much less radiogenic Sr and more radiogenic Nd. The latter are either tectonic intercalations of Late Proterozoic to Paleozoic eugeosynclinal rocks or Mesozoic–Cenozoic mixtures of mantle-derived magma and older crustal rock. The Vaseaux Formation paragneiss is similar isotopically to paragneiss in the Frenchman Cap core gneiss. This may indicate a similar age, or that Vaseaux sedimentary rocks could be much younger and isochemically derived from a basement of Frenchman Cap character. The first alternative is favored because the three isotope systems are usually not preserved in unison through sedimentary processes. Sr isotopes, in particular, do not usually preserve a provenance age.In all three areas, late Mesozoic to early Cenozoic metamorphic monazite, hornblende, muscovite, and biotite dates provide a record of cooling from a Cretaceous to Paleocene culmination of regional metamorphism, with particularly rapid cooling during Paleocene to Eocene crustal extension and tectonic unroofing.The localities studied are tectonic windows on structural culminations that expose basement that we infer to be part of North America. Their ages fit the pattern of basement ages established for the stable craton. Their extent is consistent with the reconstruction of compressed miogeoclinal rocks. The eastern half of the Cordilleran region on both sides of the United States – Canada border is underlain by Early Proterozoic basement that was attenuated in Late Proterozoic time, compressed during Mesozoic–Cenozoic orogeny, and finally extended in early Cenozoic collapse of the thickened crust. During Mesozoic–Cenozoic orogeny the sedimentary cover of that basement was pushed approximately 200 km eastward and replaced by allochthonous terranes. The tectonic displacements documented in the southern Canadian Cordillera are truly exceptional.
Regional tectonic features of the westem C•-mdian Cordillera can be interpreted in terms of Middle Jurassic accretion of a single composite supenerrane (Stikinia + Wrangellia + Alexander) to ancestral North America. Closure of the intervening Cache Creek-Bridge River ocean moved the continental edge to a new position west of the accreted superterrane. The Coast Belt is primarily a succession of superimposed Middle Jurassic to early Tertiary magmatic arcs related to prolonged subduction of Pacific Ocean lithosphere beneath the new North American margin. Discrete magmatic pulses, separated by lulls or periods of relative quiescence, successively overprinted the new margin. The Insular and Intermontane superterrane•, previously viewed as widely separate entities prior to mid-Cretaceous time, were already amalgamated before an initial Middle Jurassic overprint produced an ancestral Coast Belt. Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous riftrelated(?) marine basins, mid to Late Cretaceous compressional structures, and early Tertiary extensional features coincident with the Coast Belt are subsidiary intraplate attributes that reflect extemal adjustments in plate motions within a primary, subduction-related Andean magmatic arc• Paper number 91•183. 0278-7407•92/91TC-02183510.00 model relates to a new east-dipping subduction zone beneath the accreted supenerrane. Recent work in the Coast Belt suggests that a magmatic arc linking the Insular superterrane to the Intermontane supenerrane may already have been established as far back as Middle Jurassic time [van der Heyden, 1989]. Other observations also argue against the concept of two superterranes, separated along the Coast Belt by a mid-Cretaceous oceanic suture. There is, for instance, no compelling record within the Coast Belt of Mesozoic oceanic lithosphere, subduction assemblage, or forearc basin between the supertermne•, and essentially concordant paleomagnetic signatmes suggest that the supertenanes were close together during early Mesozoic time [Irving and Wynne, 1990]. These observations, and others summarized in this paper, call for a critical evaluation of the mid-Cretaceous collision model. In recent years observations have also been made which have implications for the validity of the broader superterrane concept. In Monger et al.'s [1982] scenario, the Sfikine, Cache Creek, and Quesnel terranes were amalgamated into Intermontane superterrane by Late Triassic time, and Wrangellia and Alexander terrane were amalgamated into Insular superterrane by Late lurassic time. New stratigraphic, paleontologic, and geochronologic data suggest that Wrangellia and Alexander terranes were already together by Pennsylvanian time [Gardner et al., 1988] and that Stikinia was not accreted to the rest of the Intermontane superterrane until Middle lucassic time [Mo•er, 1986; Cordey et al., 1987, 1991; Rusmore et al., 1988; Rusmore and Woodsworth, 1991; also B. Ricketts, manuscript in preparation]. In combination, these observations suggest the possibility that Stikinia was already attached...
One of the least-known aspects of the evolution of the Gulf of Mexico is the nature and location of shear zones along which the relevant continental fragments were displaced. The Sierra de Juárez mylonitic complex, located in southern Mexico, is a polyorogenic north-northwest-trending structure. Here we report U-Pb mylonitization dates of 165 ؎ 20 Ma for igneous zircon from the syntectonic San Felipe granite, and an integrated 40 Ar/ 39 Ar age of 169.3 ؎ 1.7 Ma from synkinematic muscovite, both of which indicate a Middle Jurassic age for the strike-slip event along the Sierra de Juárez mylonitic complex. This event therefore occurred during the opening of the Gulf of Mexico, and we propose that the shear zone was kinematically related to the southeast displacement of the Yucatan block.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.