Mesozoic-Cenozoic evolution of the Eastern Kunlun Range, central Tibet, and implications for basin evolution during the Indo-Asian collision

Abstract

The present-day Tibetan plateau, which is the largest highland on Earth, formed primarily due to the India-Asia collision since 50–60 Ma. The development of the plateau has been associated with the Cenozoic development of two large intra-plateau sedimentary basins in north-central Tibet: the Qaidam and Hoh Xil basins to the north and south of the Eastern Kunlun Range, respectively. We conducted an integrated study of these two basins and the Eastern Kunlun Range that separates them to understand the timing and mechanisms of their development in order to decipher the growth and uplift history of the plateau. Crustal shortening in the Fenghuoshan-Nangqian and Qilian Shan-Nan Shan thrust belts initiated no later than the early Eocene, which formed the northern and southern boundaries of the combined Hoh Xil and Qaidam basins in central Tibet. The distinct two-stage development of the Hoh Xil basin suggests emergence of a topographic barrier between the Hoh Xil basin in the south and Qaidam basin in the north in the early Neogene, which is supported by the existing and new apatite fission-track data from the Eastern Kunlun Range that suggest rapid cooling after ca. 20 Ma. Previous and newly collected geochronological, petrological, and thermochronological data are best interpreted in the context of the Paleogene Paleo-Qaidam hypothesis, which requires Hoh Xil and Qaidam basins to have been parts of a single integrated basin during the early stage of the Cenozoic Tibetan plateau development.

Late Eocene–Oligocene High Relief Paleotopography in the North Central Tibetan Plateau: Insights From Detrital Zircon U–Pb Geochronology and Leaf Wax Hydrogen Isotope Studies

“…The n-alkanes has long been regarded as a geolipid with high content of isotopically conservative alkyl H due to the strong and nonpolar bond linked to carbon, which is resistant to Figure 7. The Kernel density estimate (KDE) diagram of detrital zircon U-Pb ages of (a) The Yaxicuo Group in Tuotuohe subbasin (this study); (b) The Yaxicuo Group in Erdaogou subbasin (Dai et al, 2012;Wu et al, 2019); (c) Fenghuoshan Group in Erdaogou subbasin (Dai et al, 2012;McRivette et al, 2019;Wu et al, 2019). (d) Cumulative probability diagram of all the detrital zircon U-Pb ages of Yaxicuo and Fenghuoshan groups in the eastern Hoh Xil Basin.…”

“…Zircon U-Pb ages of one sample (EHX09Y06) range from 132 ± 2 to 2,949 ± 10 Ma with the youngest group of 130 ± 2 to 298 ± 4 Ma (Dai et al, 2012); a fine-grained sandstone (12YX06D) from the marginal lacustrine facies shows two young age peaks at 223-202 and 286-230 Ma and three major age peaks at 794-749, 1,869-1,812, and 2,499-2,409 Ma (L. . Recently, zircon U-Pb ages of Sample WC072717-3 show dominant peaks at 168-300a, 375-485, 700-850, and 1,500-2,100 Ma; whereas Sandstone Sample WC072817-1 has dominant zircon age population of 64-300 Ma, with two other minor populations at 350-480 and 2,000-2,550 Ma (Wu et al, 2019).…”

Tectonics of the Eastern Kunlun Range: Cenozoic Reactivation of a Paleozoic‐Early Mesozoic Orogen

“…Available chronologic evidence indicates that the onset of Cenozoic deformation in the Eastern Kunlun region occurred in the late Oligocene to early Miocene at 30–20 Ma, possibly related to initiation of slip on the Kunlun fault (Liu et al, ; Mock et al, ; F. Wang,Lo, et al, ; G. C. Wang, Wang, et al, ; Wang et al, ). Apatite fission‐track studies indicate that the Eastern Kunlun region experienced rapid and widespread cooling at ~20–10 Ma (e.g., X. H. Chen, McRivette, et al, ; Duvall et al, ; He et al, ; Jolivet et al, ; Liu et al, ; McRivette et al, ; Yuan et al, , ; F. Wang, Lo, et al, ; G. C. Wang, Wang, et al, ; Wu et al, ). Earlier circa 40‐ to 35‐Ma exhumation of the Eastern Kunlun Range has also been proposed (e.g., Clark et al, ; Wang et al, ).…”

Detrital zircon provenance comparison between the Paleocene-Eocene Nangqian-Xialaxiu and Gongjue basins: New insights for Cenozoic paleogeographic evolution of the eastern Tibetan Plateau

“…To understand the growth and uplift of the Tibetan Plateau, the study of the basin development, sedimentary provenance, and depositional processes are crucial (e.g., Fielding, 1996;Clark et al, 2005;Zhu et al, 2006b;Li et al, 2012;Yuan et al, 2013;Zhang et al, 2013;Zhang et al, 2014). Previous geological investigations of the A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T sedimentary records within and along the periphery of the Tibetan Plateau have significantly improved our understanding of the terrane accretion and associated tectonic deformation and uplift since the Paleozoic (e.g., Wang et al, 2001a;Otofuji et al, 2007;Pullen et al, 2008;Li et al, 2009;Dupont-Nivet et al, 2010;Zhai et al, 2011a;Ma et al, 2014;Yu et al, 2014Yu et al, , 2017Huang et al, 2015;Tong et al, 2015;Li et al, 2017Li et al, , 2018bMcRivette et al, 2019;Wu et al, 2019aWu et al, , 2019b. The India-Asia collision in the early Paleogene and the subsequent continental deformation are thought to have induced most of the plateau growth as expressed by the development of a series of foreland basins within and in the periphery of the Himalayan-Tibetan orogen (e.g., Allégre et al, 1984;Yin and Harrison, 2000;Najman, 2005;Wu et al, 2010;DeCelles et al, 2014).…”