Paleomagnetic Constraints on the Origin and Drift History of the North Qiangtang Terrane in the Late Paleozoic

Abstract

To better constrain the origin and drift history of the North Qiangtang terrane (NQT), we report a well‐dated paleomagnetic pole from the Late Permian volcanics of the NQT that appears to average out secular variation. Our new results yield a paleolatitude of −7.6 ± 5.6°N at ~259 Ma for our sampling area, which confirms the NQT drifted northward during the Permian and Triassic periods. The equatorial paleolatitude of the NQT is similar to that of the coeval South China block, demonstrating that they were in close proximity. Combined with palaeontological and magmatic evidence, paleomagnetic constraints on the drift of the NQT in the Permian indicate that the NQT moved northward together with the South China block at this time. The paleolatitude evolution of the NQT implies that the NQT rifted from the northern margin of the Gondwana in the Devonian, which is earlier than the departure time of the South Qiangtang terrane.

Direct Paleomagnetic Constraint on the Closure of Paleo‐Tethys and Its Implications for Linking the Tibetan and Southeast Asian Blocks

“…Abbreviation: SQT (South Qiangtang), NQT (North Qiangtang), TC (Tengchong), WB (West Burma), IBR (Indo-Burma Range), EKL-ANMQS (East Kunlun-A'nyemaqen Suture), JSJS (Jinshajiang Suture), LSS (Longmu Co-Shuanghu Suture), BNS (Bangong Co-Nujiang Suture), ITS (Indus-Tsangbu Suture), MFT (Main Frontal Thrust), XSH-XJ F. (Xiaoshuihe-Xiaojiang Fault), ALS-RR F. (Ailaoshan-Red River Fault), DBPF (Dien Bien Phu Fault), GLG F. (Gaoligong Fault), MJ (Mojiang), CN (Changning), ML (Menglian), CL (Chianglai), and CM (Chiangmai). References of paleomagnetic studies: A2013 (Ali et al, 2013), C2012 (Cheng et al, 2012), C2013 (Cheng et al, 2013), C2016 (Chi et al, 2016), HO1991 (Huang & Opdyke, 1991), H1992 (Huang et al, 1992), HO2016 (Huang & Opdyke, 2016), M2019 (Ma et al, 2019), S2012 (Song et al, 2012), S2015 (Song et al, 2015), S2017 (Song et al, 2017), X2014 (Xu et al, 2014), YB1993 (Yang & Besse, 1993), Y2017 (Yan et al, 2017), Y2018 (Yan et al, 2018), Z2015 , and Z2019 . (b) Geological map and sampling locations in the south Lancangjiang volcanic belt.…”

“…During the Late Permian, the North Qiangtang-Indochina are interpreted to have been located in equatorial areas (Figure 3c; Huang et al, 1992;Chi et al, 2016;Ma et al, 2019), as well as the Karakoram (Muttoni et al, 2009). Their breakup with the South China Block is interpreted to be trigged by the eruption of the Emeishan Large Igneous Province (Chung et al, 1998).…”

Paleomagnetic Constraint on the Carboniferous Paleoposition of Indochina and Its Implications for the Evolution of Eastern Paleo‐Tethys Ocean

“…In this study, the paleomagnetic data (Table 1 and Figure 5) provide two plausible positions at a latitude of ~18.4° in the Northern or Southern Hemispheres for the Indochina in the middle Carboniferous (~315 Ma) because of the symmetry of geomagnetic dipole field. We prefer that the Indochina Bock was located at 18.4 ± 4.0°S because of two reasons: first, its paleobiogeographic (Audley‐Charles, 1983) and lithofacies paleogeographic (Helmcke, 1985) relationships with North Qiangtang has long been documented (Li, 1987; Li et al, 1995; Metcalfe, 1996, 2013), and the Late Carboniferous‐Permian northward transition of North Qiangtang from the Southern Hemisphere to the Northern Hemisphere has been reconstructed paleomagnetically (Cheng et al, 2013; Ma et al, 2019; Song et al, 2017; Yang et al, 2016). Therefore, it is reasonable to consider that Late Carboniferous Indochina was located at the Southern Hemisphere; second, the breakup of the South China Block from Gondwana during the Middle‐Late Devonian was proved by paleomagnetic studies (Xian et al, 2019; Yang et al, 2004), which is consistent with the initial occurrence of pelagic radiolarian cherts and ophiolites in the Paleo‐Tethys suture zone (Li et al, 1995, 2016; Metcalfe, 2013; Zhong, 1998).…”

“…This interpretation is supported paleomagnetically through fitting apparent polar wander paths which indicated the rifting of South China‐Indochina from Gondwana occurred during ~400–385 Ma (Xian et al, 2019). Considering the Permian‐Triassic drifting history of the North Qiangtang and Indochina blocks has been schematically described (Ma et al, 2019; Song et al, 2017; Yan et al, 2018, 2019), reconstructing the Carboniferous configuration of eastern Gondwana blocks is essential to depict the evolution of the Paleo‐Tethys Ocean and provides clues for understanding the geodynamic mechanism of the dispersion. For instance, Wan et al (2019) proposed that it is the Laurasia‐directed subduction that opened the Paleo‐Tethys Ocean as well as the Neo‐Tethys; Muttoni et al (2003, 2009) correlated the closing of Paleo‐Tethys Ocean and the accompanying opening of Neo‐Tethys Ocean with the transformation of Pangea from an Early Permian Irvingian B configuration (Irving, 1977; Morel & Irving, 1981) to a Late Permian‐Early Triassic Wegenerian A configuration (Bullard et al, 1965; Van der Voo, 1993).…”

Early Mesozoic Magmatism Within the Tibetan Plateau: Implications for the Paleo‐Tethyan Tectonic Evolution and Continental Amalgamation

“…The Northern Qiangtang terrane is covered by late Neoproterozoic to Paleozoic sedimentary rocks (Zhu et al, ) and has a Mesozoic cover, which ranges from Lower Triassic to Lower Cretaceous in age (Pan et al, ; Zhu, Zhao, et al, ; Figure ). Paleomagnetic data reveal that the Northern Qiangtang terrane drifted northward together with the South China Block during the Permian and that the Northern Qiangtang drifted away from the northern margin of Gondwana in the Devonian, which is earlier than the departure time of the Southern Qiangtang terrane (Ma et al, ). The Southern Qiangtang terrane, also known as the Western Qiangtang (cf.…”