Basin stratigraphy, sea‐level fluctuations and their global tectonic connections—evidence from the Proterozoic Cuddapah Basin

Abstract

The Cuddapah Supergroup succession can be divided into four unconformity-bound sequences, namely, the Papaghni, Chitravati, Srisailam and Kurnool groups and formation representing four major cycles of sedimentation. The oldest sequence, the Papaghni Group is represented by fan-delta, prodelta and shallow shelf deposits. The rifting stage of the basin evolution is attested by the immature delta succession deposited as a major fault-controlled basin evolution, and was followed by the early subsidence stage. Basement uplift and a hiatus in deposition follows the first cycle of sedimentation. The Chitravati Group, representing the second cycle of sedimentation, consists of mature sandstones separated by a heterogeneous shale-sandstone-dolomite interval. The third cycle starts with the deposition of widespread coastal fluvial to shallow marine sandstone of the Srisailam Formation, and the fourth cycle is represented by the Kurnool Group consisting of conglomerates, feldspathic sandstones, supermature quartzarenites, minor shale and carbonates. Each cycle represents a rifting phase followed by a stable subsidence stage when the basin evolved into a large epicontinental sea. The supermature Gandikota Quartzite of the Chitravati Group and the Paniam Quartzite of the Kurnool Group represent relative sea-level fall and forced regression. The siliciclastics in each of the sequences display signatures of macrotidal sedimentation pointing to open ocean connection. The sequences further display signatures of passive margin sedimentation with multiple events of carbonate-shale rhythmite deposition. Mafic flows and dykes in the Papaghni and Chitravati groups reflect thermal anomalies associated with phased crustal extension; successive extensional phases were punctuated by basin inversion. Extensive and pulsed development of epicontinental seas as recorded in the Cuddapah sequences in the south Indian craton, possibly reflect global sea-level changes associated with supercontinent (eg. Columbia in the Palaeoproterozoic) break-up and assembly.

Petrogenesis of Mesoproterozoic lamproite dykes from the Garledinne (Banganapalle) cluster, south-western Cuddapah Basin, southern India

“…1a), is one of the largest of the Purāna (Holland 1907) Paleo-to Meso-Proterozoic sedimentary basins of India. It has been extensively studied for well over a century with regard to its structure, tectonics, igneous activity, sedimentation, stratigraphy, geochronology and mineral wealth (e.g., King 1872; Nagaraja Rao et al 1987;Anand et al 2003;Chetty 2011;Patranabis-Deb et al 2012;Tripathy and Saha 2013;Basu and Bickford 2013;Bickford et al 2013;Collins et al 2014;Deb and Pal 2014). Despite these studies, the origin and evolution of the Cuddapah Basin still remains unclear with diverse models in vogue viz.…”

Tuff beds in Kurnool subbasin, southern India and implications for felsic volcanism in Proterozoic intracratonic basins

“…Felsic volcanics/volcaniclastics from the lower part of the Vindhyan Supergroup in the Bundelkhand craton, from the Chhattisgarh Supergroup in the Bastar craton, from the Somanpalli Group in the PranhitaGodavari basin are well documented (e.g. Ghosh, 1987, 1998;Patranabis-Deb et al, 2007;Mishra and Sen, 2008). Although mafic flows, sills and dykes are common in the western part of the Cuddapah basin (Nagaraja Rao et al, 1987;Anand et al, 2003), felsic tuffs are rare in the lower Cuddapah successions of the Papaghni Group and the Chitravati Group, except that the middle to upper part of the Tadpatri Formation (Chitravati Group) is reported to contain minor felsic tuffs (e.g.…”

“…1400 Ma old Singhora tuff in the Chhattisgarh Basin are also considered to be of volcanic arc setting (Das et al, 2009). The 990e1020 Ma old Sukhda Tuff from the upper part of the Chhattisgarh Supergroup has rhyolitic affinity (Patranabis-Deb et al, 2007), but there is no detailed information on the tectonic setting of the magmatic activity except a broad hint that the felsic eruption toward closure of the basin may be related to Rodinia amalgamation (Patranabis-Deb and Chaudhuri, 2008).…”

“…Unconformity bound sedimentary successions in these intracratonic basins have recently been interpreted to have links with sea-level changes (Patranabis-Deb et al, 2012), possibly influenced by more than one cycle supercontinent break-up and assembly through the Paleoproterozoic to the Eocambrian . Felsic volcanics/volcaniclastics from the lower part of the Vindhyan Supergroup in the Bundelkhand craton, from the Chhattisgarh Supergroup in the Bastar craton, from the Somanpalli Group in the PranhitaGodavari basin are well documented (e.g.…”

Relative role of accommodation zones in controlling stratal architectural variability and facies distribution: Insights from the Fushan Depression, South China Sea

“…Within the last few decades, the theory of sequence stratigraphy has been widely embraced as a mature method for basin analysis by both academic and industry practitioners (Vail et al, 1977;Van Wagoner et al, 1990;Nelson et al, 1992;Posamentier and Allen, 1993;Schlüter et al, 1996;Catuneanu et al, 2009;Patranabis-Deb et al, 2012). In tectonically active sedimentary basins, the rate, magnitude and style of tectonic movements plays a key role in determining the locations of sediments sources, the depositional facies and the strata architecture (Gawthorpe and Leeder, 2000;Dorsey et al, 2001;Lin et al, 2001 andAlves et al, 2002;Leeder, 2011;Hou et al, 2012), although the effects of relative base level changes can still be important (Howell and Flint,1996;Dorsey and Umhoefer, 2000).…”