U–Pb SHRIMP zircon geochronology and T–t–d history of the Kampa Dome, southern Tibet

Tectonic implications of felsic tuffs within the Lower Miocene Gangrinboche conglomerates, southern Tibet

“…The domes are regionally extensive and crop out along a belt sub-parallel to and locally <25 km south of the felsic tuff-bearing GC along the YTSZ. Several recent descrip- tions also suggest that dome emplacement was associated with a tectonic regime initially involving N-S contraction followed by top to the north extension (Lee et al, 2000(Lee et al, , 2004Aoya et al, 2005;Quigley et al, 2006Quigley et al, , 2007. Potentially, this could have generated the relative uplift necessary to provide a southern source of detritus shed into the GC and may have been linked to north-directed back-thrusting (GCT) nearer the suture.…”

Petrographic features as an effective indicator for the variation in strength of granites

“…Ma) granitoids intruding in LHS and GHS (DeCelles et al, 1998(DeCelles et al, , 2000(DeCelles et al, , 2004Godin et al, 2001;Gehrels et al, 2003;Booth et al, 2004;Lee and Whitehouse, 2007;Quigley et al, 2008) indicate an early Paleozoic orogenic event in Himalayan terrane.…”

Eocene high grade metamorphism and crustal anatexis in the North Himalaya Gneiss Domes, Southern Tibet

“…With the exception that granites in the core of some domes (e.g. Kangma) formed during the early Paleozoic (566 to 507 Ma) [40,[47][48][49], most of them are of Cenozoic (44 to 10 Ma) [13,16,17,24,29,40,45,46,50].…”