Chapter 21 Mineral potential of Proterozoic intracratonic basins in India

Abstract

There are three large intracratonic basins (Vindhyan, Cuddapah and Chattisgarh) and several smaller basins (Kaladgi, Bhima, Pakhal, Penganga, Indravati, Khariar, Sabari and Kolhan) covering a large part of peninsular India. They are not known to host any significant metallic resource -except for a substantial uranium resource and Pb-Zn sulphide mineralization in the Cuddapah Basin, uranium in Bhima and Kaladgi basins and manganese in the Penganga sequence -but are nevertheless the repository of vast resources of industrial rocks (limestone, dolomite, phosphorite, aluminous laterite, building materials) and minerals (including pyrite, barite and diamond) in the country. The temporal distribution of these resources indicates a Mesoproterozoic age for all the deposits and occurrences except the uranium deposits in the Vempalle dolostones in the southwestern fringe of the Cuddapah Basin, which are Palaeoproterozoic in age. The Cuddapah Basin is the most intensely mineralized Proterozoic basin, with the Cumbum Formation in the Nallamalai belt hosting stratabound base metals and barite, dated c. 1.6 Ga, all the way from north to south. Potential mineralization, still undiscovered in the basin, is a large SEDEX-type Pb-Zn orebody in the vicinity of the Mangampet barite deposit and unconformity-proximal U deposits in the Kurnool Group, similar to those of the Bhima Basin.

Pyrite Textures, Trace Elements and Sulfur Isotope Chemistry of Bijaigarh Shales, Vindhyan Basin, India and Their Implications

“…Structurally, the basin is divided into a number of sub-basins, the biggest amongst which are the Rajasthan sector in the west and Son Valley sector in Uttar Pradesh-Madhya Pradesh-Bihar in the east (Figure 1). In this large space-time framework, spanning from~1800 tõ 900 Ma [1][2][3], the basin witnessed supercontinental cycles (including apparent polar wandering), volcanic activity, episodic igneous intrusions, formation of mineral deposits and evolution of complex life forms, that has prompted multidisciplinary research in the basin [3][4][5][6][7][8].…”

Quantitative analysis of the sedimentary architecture of eolian successions developed under icehouse and greenhouse climatic conditions

“…Several of the studied Precambrian successions are associated with deposition in intracratonic basins, which are preferentially developed in the interiors of stable ancient cratons (e.g., Shaw et al, 1991;Aspler and Chiarenzelli, 1997;Deb and Pal, 2015), and which act as sites where relatively thin eolian elements can accumulate and be preserved, through episodic deposition between long periods of sediment bypass, controlled in part by relatively slow rates of subsidence and accommodation generation (e.g., Bethke, 1985;Aspler and Chiarenzelli, 1997). However, the differences in eolian element thickness between icehouse and greenhouse successions cannot be ascribed to the basin setting that hosts them (Fig.…”

A database of Aeolian Sedimentary Architecture for the characterization of modern and ancient sedimentary systems

“…7F and 7I-K). This may reflect the fact that the majority of Proterozoic successions are recorded from intracratonic basin settings, which are preferentially preserved in the central parts of stable ancient cratons (e.g., Shaw et al, 1991;Aspler and Chiarenzelli, 1997;Deb and Pal, 2015), and which typically experienced low rates of subsidence compared to other basin types (e.g., Bethke, 1985;Aspler and Chiarenzelli, 1997). This might have favoured the accumulation and preservation of relatively thin genetic aeolian units, in which aeolian dune-sets likely climbed at low-angles and accumulated sporadically between long episodes of sediment bypass under conditions of low rates of accommodation generation.…”