Traces of intra-oceanic arcs recorded in sandstones of eastern Kazakhstan: implications from U–Pb detrital zircon ages, geochemistry, and Nd–Hf isotopes

Safonova, Inna; Perfilova, Alina; Обут, О Т; Котлер, П. Д.; Aoki, Shogo; Komiya, Tsuyoshi; Wang, Bo; Sun, Min

doi:10.1007/s00531-021-02059-z

Cited by 15 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparison with the samples from the Middle Gobi Belt and the NE Mongolia shows that during 265 Ma, magmatism experienced stronger juvenile addition (Figure 11a,b), possibly related to the rifting. The juvenile Hf and Nd isotopic characters also are typical of greywackes formed by the destruction of juvenile igneous rocks formed in a supra‐subduction setting (Safonova, 2017; Safonova et al, 2021). Therefore, we suggest that the peraluminous granites may have formed by melting of the arc‐related volcanogenic sedimentary in the inter‐arc rift setting (Healy et al, 2004; Jeon et al, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This scenario was applied to the Permian S-type granitoids in NE Mongolia (Zhao et al, 2017) (Safonova, 2017;Safonova et al, 2021). Therefore, we suggest that the peraluminous granites may have formed by melting of the arc-related volcanogenic sedimentary in the inter-arc rift setting (Healy et al, 2004;Jeon et al, 2012).…”

Section: Tectonic Settings and Implicationmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Age, petrogenesis, and tectonic implications of the late Permian magmatic rocks in the Middle Gobi volcanoplutonic Belt, Mongolia

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Mongol-Okhotsk Belt, the youngest segment of Central Asian Orogenic Belt, was formed by the evolution and closure of the Mongol-Okhotsk Ocean. The oceanic closure formed two volcanoplutonic belts: Selenge Belt in the north and the Middle Gobi Belt in the south (in present day coordinates). However, the origin and tectonic evolution of the Mongol-Okhotsk Belt in general, and the origin and formation age of the Middle Gobi Belt in particular, remain enigmatic. To better understand the history of the magmatic activity in the Middle Gobi Belt, we conducted geochemical, U-Pb geochronological, zircon Hf, and whole-rock Nd isotopic analyses of samples from the Mandalgovi volcanoplutonic suite, the major component of the Middle Gobi Belt. Our results show that the plutonic rock consists of $285 Ma gabbro, $265 Ma biotite-granite and $250 Ma hornblende-granodiorite. The volcanic counterpart is represented by a Permian Sahalyn gol rhyolite and $247 Ma Ikh khad andesite. The geochemical compositions of biotite-granite and hornblende-granodiorite indicate that their precursors were metagraywacke and amphibolite, respectively. They are characterized by positive whole-rock ε Nd (t) and zircon ε Hf (t) values, indicating juvenile protoliths. The gabbro was derived by partial melting of a metasomatized lithospheric mantle source in a supra-subduction setting. The biotite-granite and Sahalyn gol

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Tectonic Settings and Implicationmentioning

confidence: 97%

Age, petrogenesis, and tectonic implications of the late Permian magmatic rocks in the Middle Gobi volcanoplutonic Belt, Mongolia

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The western part of the Zharma-Saur arc consists of the Middle Devonian-Early Carboniferous basaltic and andesitic volcanics, turbidites, cherts and limestones, and these volcano-sedimentary strata are invaded by the Early Carboniferous gabbros, diorites and granitoids (Khromykh et al, 2020;Safonova et al, 2012Safonova et al, , 2018. The Late Carboniferous-Early Permian bimodal volcanics are widespread in the Zharma area and coexist with terrigenous molasse deposits (Khromykh et al, 2020;Kuibida et al, 2019;Safonova et al, 2021).…”

Section: The Zharma Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Serpukhovian–Bashkirian Amalgamation of Laurussia and the Siberian Continent and Implications for Assembly of Pangea

Han

Liao

et al. 2022

Tectonics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The final assembly of Pangea is thought to be marked by the Siberia‐Laurussia amalgamation during the Late Carboniferous–Permian, but there are large uncertainties on the timing of the amalgamation in the previous paleogeographic reconstructions because there are no high‐quality Carboniferous–Permian paleomagnetic data available from the Siberian continent. The Zharma‐Saur area in the junction between the Siberia‐Laurussia amalgamation, involving the Zharma‐Saur arc on the northern margin of the Kazakhstan microcontinent, the South Chinese Altai terrane in the southern margin of the Siberian continent and the Irtysh‐Zaisan suture in between, can provide crucial geological constraints for the assembly of Pangea. In the Zharma‐Saur arc, the Tournaisian–Visean marine sequences are interbedded with thick pillow lavas, which were formed during southward subduction of the Irtysh‐Zaisan Ocean and unconformably covered by the Moscovian terrestrial bimodal volcanic associations and sedimentary successions, in which the basalts are columnar‐jointed in structure and the sandstones also contain the detritus derived from the South Chinese Altai terrane. The Serpukhovian–Bashkirian unconformity was coeval with the transition from the Tournaisian–Visean calc‐alkaline to the Moscovian–Early Permian high alkaline and bimodal volcanism. These dramatic changes in sedimentary environments, provenances and volcanism together indicate the Siberia‐Laurussia amalgamation during the Serpukhovian–Bashkirian and this event was almost simultaneous with the Laurussia‐Gondwana collision and the welding of Laurussia with the Kazakhstan microcontinent, but slightly earlier than the Laurussia‐Tarim collision. Therefore, the final assembly of Pangea could be completed in the Late Carboniferous.

show abstract

“…(5) Zharma-Saur zone consisting of two different fragments: a Devonian-Early Carboniferous oceanic fragment with basalts and cherts formed in island-arc and spreading settings in the northeast [18,20]; an Early Devonian area of felsic volcanism and continental deposition on the active-margin of Kazakhstan in the southwest [21].…”

Section: Geological Structures and Metallogenic Zones Of The Great Altaimentioning

confidence: 99%

Geological History of the Great Altai: Implications for Mineral Exploration

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Great Altai region, located at the boundary of Russia, Mongolia, China, and Kazakhstan, belongs to the system of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. It has undergone a long complex geological and metallogenic history. Extremely rich resources of base, precious, and rare metals (Fe, Cu, Pb, Zn, Ag, Au, Li, Cs, Ta, Nb, REE, etc.) maintain developed mining and metallurgical industry, especially in East Kazakhstan, which is the key metallogenic province. The East Kazakhstan province comprises the Rudny Altai, Kalba-Narym, West-Kalba, and Zharma-Saur metallogenic belts, each having its typical mineralization profiles and deposits. The reconstructed geodynamic and metallogenic history of the Great Altai province, along with the revealed relationships between tectonic settings and mineralization patterns, allowed us to formulate a number of geodynamic, structural, lithostratigraphic, magmatic, mineralogical, and geochemical criteria for exploration and appraisal of mineral potential in Eastern Kazakhstan. Geodynamic criteria are based on the origin of different mineralization types in certain geodynamic settings during the Late Paleozoic–Early Mesozoic orogenic cycle. Structural criteria mean that the location of base-metal deposits in Rudny Altai, gold deposits in the West Kalba belt, rare and base metals in the Kalba-Narym and Zharma-Saur zones is controlled by faults of different sizes. Lithostratigraphic criteria consist of the relation of orebodies with certain types of sedimentary or volcanic-sedimentary rocks. Magmatic criteria are due to the relation between mineralization types and igneous lithologies. Mineralogical and geochemical criteria include typical minerals and elements that can serve as tracers of mineralization. The joint use of all these criteria will open new avenues in prospecting and exploration at a more advanced level.

show abstract

Traces of intra-oceanic arcs recorded in sandstones of eastern Kazakhstan: implications from U–Pb detrital zircon ages, geochemistry, and Nd–Hf isotopes

Cited by 15 publications

References 67 publications

Age, petrogenesis, and tectonic implications of the late Permian magmatic rocks in the Middle Gobi volcanoplutonic Belt, Mongolia

Age, petrogenesis, and tectonic implications of the late Permian magmatic rocks in the Middle Gobi volcanoplutonic Belt, Mongolia

The Serpukhovian–Bashkirian Amalgamation of Laurussia and the Siberian Continent and Implications for Assembly of Pangea

Geological History of the Great Altai: Implications for Mineral Exploration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About