Paleomagnetic results from the Early Cretaceous Lakang Formation lavas: Constraints on the paleolatitude of the Tethyan Himalaya and the India–Asia collision

Paleomagnetic and Geochronologic Results of Latest Cretaceous Lava Flows From the Lhasa Terrane and Their Tectonic Implications

“…In this case, a larger Greater India with a northward promontory of ~2,780 km is required in the early Paleocene to “fill the gap” (Figure e). This northward extension is much larger than that (≤950 km) estimated for the Early Cretaceous based on paleomagnetic data, balanced cross‐section analyses, as well as the fitting of India in‐Gondwana (Ali & Aitchison, ; Long et al, ; Ma et al, ; Murphy & Yin, ; Yang, Ma, Bian, et al, ). This discrepancy requires a ~1,800 km wide post‐Neotethyan Ocean (basin) opened within Greater India in the Cretaceous, leading to a two stage collision (van Hinsbergen et al, ).…”

“…This discrepancy requires a ~1,800 km wide post‐Neotethyan Ocean (basin) opened within Greater India in the Cretaceous, leading to a two stage collision (van Hinsbergen et al, ). This two‐stage continental collision includes the first collision between the TH and the LT at ~59 Ma (DeCelles et al, ; Hu et al, ) and a final collision between the TH and the “remaining Greater India” at no later than ~39 Ma based on the latest initial collision age constructed in Figure a (Huang, Lippert, Dekkers, et al, ; Ma et al, ; van Hinsbergen et al, ; Yang, Ma, Bian, et al, ). Notably, considering potential challenges to different collision models described in Hu et al (), as well as debates on the shapes of the leading edges of the collisional units, especially the TH, more late Cretaceous and Paleocene paleomagnetic investigations from the TH and the LT are needed to further constrain the collision history and paleogeography of Greater India (Ali & Aitchison, , ; Ingalls et al, ; Jagoutz et al, ).…”

“…Geology and sampling location. (a) Regional geological map of Himalayan‐Tibetan orogen, simplified from Yin and Harrison (), Yin (), and Yang, Ma, Bian, et al (). Closed circles (squares) show the locations of paleomagnetic investigations on sedimentary (volcanic) rocks (abbreviation see Table ).…”

“…Especially, Lippert et al () reevaluated available paleomagnetic data using a statistically rigorous filtering criteria and concluded that the LT was located at high tropical/low subtropical latitudes (e.g., ~20°N) since early Cretaceous. Later paleomagnetic investigations further supported this conclusion (e.g., Ma et al, ; Huang, Dupont‐Nivet, Lippert, Hinsbergen, Dekkers, Guo, et al, ; Huang, Dupont‐Nivet, Lippert, Hinsbergen, Dekkers, Waldrip, et al, ; Yang, Ma, Zhang, et al, ). The precollisional paleolatitude of the LT dated the TH‐LT collision to ~55–50 Ma and suggests that less than 1/3 of Cenozoic convergence is partitioned into Asian lithosphere (Lippert et al, ; van Hinsbergen et al, ).…”

Remagnetization of the Paleogene Tibetan Himalayan carbonate rocks in the Gamba area: Implications for reconstructing the lower plate in the India‐Asia collision

“…Paleomagnetic data from Lhasa and the Himalaya are therefore required to better quantify the precollisional paleogeography. Paleomagnetic data from Lower Cretaceous strata of the Tibetan Himalaya show insignificant paleolatitudinal separation between the Tibetan Himalaya and the modern northern limit of the undeformed Indian continent (i.e., at the Main Frontal Thrust of the Himalaya) and thus indicate a small size of “Greater” India [ Klootwijk and Bingham , ; Huang et al , ; Yang et al , ; Ma et al , ]. Paleomagnetic data from uppermost Cretaceous and Paleogene strata, however, show a paleolatitudinal separation of Tibetan Himalaya from India of some 2675 ± 700 km (N‐S) or a very large Greater India [ Patzelt et al , ; Dupont‐Nivet et al , ; Yi et al , ].…”