Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T04:54:02.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Provenance investigation for the Cambrian–Ordovician strata from the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block: implications for locating the South China Block in Gondwana

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2019

Liang Luo Open the ORCID record for Liang Luo [Opens in a new window] ,
Lianbo Zeng ,
Kai Wang ,
Xiaoxia Yu ,
Yihang Li ,
Chenxi Zhu  and
Shuning Liu
Liang Luo*
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China
Lianbo Zeng
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China
Kai Wang
Affiliation:
Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing100037, China
Xiaoxia Yu
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China
Yihang Li
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China
Chenxi Zhu
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China
Shuning Liu
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China College of Geosciences, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing102249, China
*
Author for correspondence: Liang Luo, Email: luoliang1225@163.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We report new U–Pb isotopic data for detrital zircons from Cambrian–Ordovician strata on the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block, which together with published U–Pb isotopic data for coeval strata in the South China Block, provide critical constraints on the provenance of these sediments and further shed light on the early Palaeozoic position of the South China Block in the context of Gondwana. Detrital zircons in this study yield four major age peaks in the early Palaeoproterozoic, early Neoproterozoic, middle Neoproterozoic and late Neoproterozoic – early Palaeozoic. The dominant age population of 900–700 Ma matches well with magmatic ages from the nearby Panxi–Hannan Belt, which indicates that Cambrian–Ordovician sedimentary rocks in the western Yangtze Block were mainly of local derivation. However, compilations of detrital zircon ages for the Cambrian–Ordovician strata from the Cathaysia Block and the eastern Yangtze Block show that both blocks are dominated by late Mesoproterozoic- and early Neoproterozoic-aged detrital zircons, which suggests a remarkable exotic input with typical Gondwana signatures. According to the integrated detrital zircon age spectra of the Cambrian–Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the entire South China Block and palaeocurrent data, the South China Block should have been linked with North India and Western Australia within East Gondwana. Specifically, the Cathaysia Block was located adjacent to Western Australia, while the Yangtze Block was connected with North India.

Keywords

detrital zirconSouth China BlockYangtze BlockEast GondwanaPanxi–Hannan Belt

Information

Type
Original Article
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 157 , Issue 4 , April 2020 , pp. 551 - 572
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

1. Introduction

The assembly of Gondwana commenced after the break-up of the Rodinia supercontinent in Neoproterozoic time and was completed in early Palaeozoic time, with most of the constituent continents of Rodinia involved (Meert, Reference Meert2003; Cawood & Buchan, Reference Cawood and Buchan2007; Boger, Reference Boger2011; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Zhong and Hughes2014b). According to a large number of detrital zircon age, palaeontological and geochemical studies, the South China Block (SCB), consisting of the Yangtze Block to the northwest and the Cathaysia Block to the southeast (Fig. 1b), has long been recognized as a part of the Rodinia supercontinent (Li et al. Reference Li, Zhang and Powell1995, Reference Li, Bogdanova, Collins, Davidson, DE Waele, Ernst, Fitzsimons, Fuck, Gladkochub, Jacobs, Karlstrom, Lu, Natapov, Pease, Pisarevsky, Thrane and Vernikovsky2008a); however, the position of the block within Gondwana, or whether it was a part of Gondwana remains uncertain. It has been placed along the northern margin of East Gondwana, in the general region of North India (Jiang et al. Reference Jiang, Sohl and Christie-Blick2003; Hughes et al. Reference Hughes, Peng, Bhargava, Ahulwalia, Walia, Myrow and Parcha2005; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010), with more specific locations including near to the western Himalaya (McKenzie et al. Reference McKenzie, Hughes, Myrow, Choi and Park2011; Burrett et al. Reference Burrett, Zaw, Meffre, Lai, Khositanont, Chaodumrong, Udchachon, Ekins and Halpin2014), and adjacent to the eastern Himalaya with a nexus of India, Antarctic and Australia (Duan et al. Reference Duan, Meng, Zhang and Liu2011; Cawood et al. Reference Cawood, Wang, Xu and Zhao2013; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Hu, Yu, Zhu and Li2013, Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Huang and Wang2014a; Chen, Q. et al. 2018). Cocks & Torsvik (Reference Cocks and Torsvik2013) considered that the SCB was shifted from west to east along the Himalaya via strike-slip faulting. The SCB was even suggested to be part of Laurentia, instead of Gondwana, based on the absence of Gondwanan detritus in the upper Neoproterozoic – Ordovician strata in the Wuyishan area (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jia, Li, Deng and Li2010). Moreover, the relative positions of the constituent Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks in Gondwana are variable among some reconstruction models (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Duan et al. Reference Duan, Meng, Zhang and Liu2011; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Hu, Yu, Zhu and Li2013, Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Huang and Wang2014a; Yao, W. H. et al. 2014; Yao & Li, Reference Yao and Li2016; Cawood et al. Reference Cawood, Zhao, Yao, Wang, Xu and Wang2018; Chen, Q. et al. 2018).

Fig. 1.

(a) Sketch map showing the main tectonic units of eastern Asia with the location of the SCB (Chen, Q. et al. 2018). (b) Map showing the SCB consisting of the Yangtze (eastern, central and western parts) and Cathaysia blocks, with the distribution of Neoproterozoic intrusions along the western and northern margins of the Yangtze Block, termed the Panxi–Hannan Belt (Chen et al. Reference Chen, Sun, Long, Zhao and Yuan2016). (c) Simplified geologic map of the Micangshan–Longmenshan region along the western margin of the SCB (modified from Sichuan Geological Map at 1:200 < 2 > 000 scale). Location of samples in this study (represented by black stars).

Lower Palaeozoic stratigraphic successions along the northern margin of Gondwana, such as those in the Himalaya, Qiangtang, Lhasa and Western Australia (Myrow et al. Reference Myrow, Hughes, Goodge, Fanning, Williams, Peng, Bhargava, Parcha and Pogue2010; Metcalfe, Reference Metcalfe2013), are characterized by an unconformable contact relationship between the Cambrian and Ordovician strata. This unconformity, which is also widespread in the southern (Hainan and Yunkai domains) and western (Longmenshan–Micangshan region) parts of the SCB (BGMRGP, 1988; BGMRSP, 1991), was probably coeval with, and perhaps correlated with, the final Gondwana assembly (Cawood & Nemchin, Reference Cawood and Nemchin2000; Cawood et al. Reference Cawood, Johnson and Nemchin2007; Cawood & Buchan, Reference Cawood and Buchan2007; Myrow et al. Reference Myrow, Hughes, Goodge, Fanning, Williams, Peng, Bhargava, Parcha and Pogue2010; Zhu et al. Reference Zhu, Zhao, Niu, Dilek, Wang, Ji, Dong, Sui, Liu, Yuan and Mo2012; Metcalfe, Reference Metcalfe2013; Wang, Y. J. et al. 2013; Zhou, Y. et al. 2015).

A large number of Cambrian–Ordovician detrital zircon studies have been focused on the Cathaysia Block, while only a few coeval detrital zircon studies have been carried out in the Yangtze Block (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Chen, Q. et al. 2018). This paper presents a study of detrital zircon U–Pb geochronology of the Cambrian–Ordovician sandstones on the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block, and places constraints on the early Palaeozoic affinity of the SCB within Gondwana. According to the comparison of detrital zircon age patterns of the Cambrian–Ordovician strata from different parts of the SCB, a more precise position and configuration of the SCB within Gondwana is obtained.

2. Geologic background and sampling

The SCB is generally divided into two different crustal elements: the Yangtze Block to the northwest and the Cathaysia Block to the southeast, which were welded together along the Jiangnan Orogen (Li et al. Reference Li, Zhang and Powell1995, Reference Li, Li, Zhou and Kinny2002; Zhao & Cawood, Reference Zhao and Cawood2012). Some geologists have suggested that the Jiangnan Orogen belongs to part of the worldwide Grenvillian orogenic belts associated with the assembly of the Rodinia supercontinent (Li et al. Reference Li, Zhang and Powell1995, Reference Li, Li, Zhou and Kinny2002, 2Reference Li, Bogdanova, Collins, Davidson, DE Waele, Ernst, Fitzsimons, Fuck, Gladkochub, Jacobs, Karlstrom, Lu, Natapov, Pease, Pisarevsky, Thrane and Vernikovsky2008a,b; Greentree et al. Reference Greentree, Li, Li and Wu2006; Ye et al. Reference Ye, Li, Li, Liu and Li2007), whereas others have considered that the amalgamation lasted until ~820 Ma or even younger (Li, Reference Li1999; Zhao & Cawood, Reference Zhao and Cawood1999; Zhou et al. Reference Zhou, Kennedy, Sun, Malpas and Lesher2002a,b, 2007, 2009; Yan et al. Reference Yan, Hanson, Wang, Druschke, Yan, Wang, Liu, Song, Jian, Zhou and Jiang2004; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhou, Qiu, Zhang, Liu and Zhang2006, Reference Wang, Zhou, Griffin, Wang, Qiu, O’Reilly, Xu, Liu and Zhang2007, Reference Wang, Zhao, Zhou, Liu and Hu2008; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Zheng, Wu, Zhao, Zhang, Liu and Wu2006; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Zhang, Zhao, Wu, Li, Li and Wu2007; Yao, J. L. et al. 2014; Zhao, Reference Zhao2015; Lin et al. Reference Lin, Peng, Jiang, Polat, Kusky, Wang and Deng2016; Kou et al. Reference Kou, Liu, Huang, Li, Ding and Zhang2018). The Anhua–Luocheng and Qiyueshan faults divide the Yangtze Block into three individual structural segments from west to east (Fig. 1b) (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010, Reference Wang, Zhou, Griffin, Zhao, Yu, Qiu, Zhang and Xing2014; Zhao & Cawood, Reference Zhao and Cawood2012; Dong et al. Reference Dong, Zhang, Gao, Su, Liu and Li2015).

Archaean–Palaeoproterozoic crystalline basement of the Yangtze Block is sporadically exposed and is represented by the Douling Complex, which has yielded ages of ~2.5 Ga (Hu et al. Reference Hu, Liu, Chen, Qu, Li and Geng2013; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Zhou, Gao, Liu, Qin, Wang, Yang and Yang2014; Nie et al. Reference Nie, Yao, Wan, Zhu, Siebel and Chen2016), the Kongling Complex, yielding ages in the ranges of 3.2–2.9 Ga, 2.7–2.4 Ga and 2.1–1.8 Ga (Gao et al. Reference Gao, Ling, Qiu, Lian, Hartmann and Simon1999; Qiu & Gao, Reference Qiu and Gao2000; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Griffin, O’Reilly, Zhang, Pearson and Pan2006), the Phan si Pan Complex, yielding ages in the range of 2.9–2.8 Ga (Lan et al. Reference Lan, Chung, Lo, Lee, Wang, Li and Van Toan2001; Nam et al. Reference Nam, Toriumi, Sano, Terada and Thang2003), the Yudongzi Complex, yielding ages in the range of 2.8–2.45 Ga (Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Zhang, Tang and Wang2001, Reference Zhang, Xu, Song, Wang, Chen and Li2010; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Chen, Yan, Li and Zhu2011; Hui et al. Reference Hui, Dong, Cheng, Long, Liu, Yang, Sun, Zhang and Varga2017), and the Zhongxiang Complex, yielding ages in the range of 2.9–2.6 Ga (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Wang, Du, Deng and Yang2013a,b, 2018; Zhou, G. Y. et al. 2015). The ~850–720 Ma plutonic complexes, termed the Panxi–Hannan Belt, extend along the western and northern margins of the Yangtze Block (Fig. 1b) (Zhao & Zhou, Reference Zhao and Zhou2007; Zhao & Cawood, Reference Zhao and Cawood2012). These plutonic complexes consist mainly of tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) gneisses, granites, diorites and gabbros, the genesis of which still remains controversial, with some interpreting them as the products of subduction (Zhou et al. Reference Zhou, Ma, Yan, Xia, Zhao and Sun2006a,b), whereas others argue that they resulted from mantle plumes (Li et al. Reference Li, Li, Ge, Zhou, Li, Liu and Wingate2003). The basement is unconformably overlain by an upper Neoproterozoic to Middle Triassic marine sedimentary sequence (Yan et al. Reference Yan, Hanson, Wang, Druschke, Yan, Wang, Liu, Song, Jian, Zhou and Jiang2004; Zhao & Cawood, Reference Zhao and Cawood2012). The exposed basement rocks are mostly of Proterozoic age in the Cathaysia Block. The oldest Palaeoproterozoic (1.9–1.8 Ga) granitoids and supracrustal rocks, known as the Badu Complex, are distributed in the Wuyishan area (Yu et al. Reference Yu, O’Reilly, Wang, Griffin, Zhou, Zhang and Shu2010, Reference Yu, O’Reilly, Zhou, Griffin and Wang2012; Zhao & Cawood, Reference Zhao and Cawood2012). The composite basement rocks are unconformably overlain by middle to upper Neoproterozoic sequences.

We have studied the Cambrian–Ordovician strata that are distributed in limited areas owing to an early Palaeozoic phase of shortening and denudation in the Micangshan fold–thrust belt located on the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block (Fig. 1c). Within the Nanjiang area, the lower and middle Cambrian sequence mainly consists of marine carbonate and siliciclastic rocks, and includes the Guojiaba, Kongmingdong and Douposi formations from base to top (Fig. 2). The Ordovician sequence, which includes the Banhe, Zhaojiaba, Zhaozibei, Baota, Jiancaogou and Wufeng formations from base to top, is dominated by carbonate rocks (Fig. 2). The disconformably overlying Banhe Formation consists of coarse-grained sandstone with gravel in the lower unit passing up into sandstone, marl and dolomitic limestone. Four samples were collected from exposures of sandstone for detrital zircon U–Pb age analysis, including one sample from the lower Cambrian Guojiaba Formation (WN9), one sample from the Kongmingdong Formation (WN6) and the other two samples from the Lower Ordovician Banhe Formation (WN5 and WN10). Their lithology and locations are summarized in Table 1, and are shown in Figures 1c and 2.

Fig. 2.

Schematic stratigraphy of the front of the Micangshan fold–thrust belt, northern margin of the western Yangtze Block. The blue stars indicate sampling locations.

Table 1.

U–Pb dating results for detrital zircons from the Cambrian–Ordovician strata on the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block

3. Analytical methods

3.a. Zircon separation and CL imaging

Zircons were extracted from whole-rock samples by using conventional techniques that include crushing, sieving, and magnetic and heavy liquid techniques and were then handpicked under a binocular microscope with a comprehensive consideration of size, clarity, colour and morphology. The selected crystals were cast in an epoxy mount, which was then polished down to expose their centres. Prior to U–Pb dating, the internal structure of the zircons was studied in detail with cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging and was used to select the appropriate positions for laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) analysis.

3.b. U–Pb dating

U–Pb dating and trace-element analysis of the zircons was conducted synchronously by LA-ICP-MS at the Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Co., Ltd. Detailed operating conditions for the laser ablation system and the ICP-MS instrument and data reduction are the same as described by Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Hu, Gao, Günther, Xu, Gao and Chen2008a, 2010). Laser sampling was performed with a GeoLas 2005. Ion-signal intensities were acquired by an Agilent 7700e ICP-MS instrument. Helium was used as the carrier gas. Argon was applied as the make-up gas and mixed with the carrier gas via a T-connector before entering the ICP. A ‘wire’ signal smoothing device is included in this laser ablation system, by which smooth signals are produced even at very low laser repetition rates down to 1 Hz (Hu et al. Reference Hu, Liu, Gao, Xiao, Zhao, Günther, Li, Zhang and Zong2012). Each analysis incorporated a background acquisition of approximately 20–30 s (gas blank) followed by 50 s of data acquisition from the sample. An in-house Excel-based software ICPMSDataCal (Ver. 10.0) was used to perform off-line selection and integration of background and analyte signals, and time-drift correction and quantitative calibration for trace-element analysis and U–Pb dating (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zong, Kelemen and Gao2008b, 2010).

Zircon 91500 was used as the external standard for U–Pb dating, and was analysed twice every five analyses. Time-dependent drifts of U–Th–Pb isotopic ratios were corrected using a linear interpolation (with time) for every five analyses according to the variations of 91500 (i.e. two zircon 91500 + five samples + two zircon 91500) (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Gao, Hu, Gao, Zong and Wang2010). Preferred U–Th–Pb isotopic ratios used for 91500 are from Wiedenbeck et al. (Reference Wiedenbeck, Alle, Corfu, Griffin, Meier, Oberli, Quadt, Roddick and Spiegel1995). Concordia diagrams and weighted mean calculations were calculated in-house by using Isoplot software (Ludwig, Reference Ludwig2003).

4. Results

4.a. Zircon CL images and Th/U ratios

The internal structure of the zircons was examined using CL imaging via a scanning electron microprobe at the Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Co., Ltd. The detrital zircon grains show a wide range of morphologies and complex internal structures. Zircons range in size from 75 μm to 150 μm (Fig. 3). Some zircon grains are well rounded, implying long-distance transportation. CL images show that most zircons are characterized by a euhedral prismatic shape and concentric oscillatory zoning (Fig. 3), and the Th/U ratios of all of the analysed zircons are >0.1 (Table 1), indicating an igneous origin.

Fig. 3.

Representative CL images of the Cambrian–Ordovician zircon samples from the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block showing internal structure and morphology.

4.b. U–Pb zircon ages

Zircon U–Pb isotopic compositions of a total of 382 analyses on the zircon cores are presented in Table 1. Uncertainties on individual analyses in the data table and on concordia plots are presented at 1σ, whereas errors on averages of multiple analyses are given at the 2σ level. All analyses are shown on concordia plots (Fig. 4); however, analyses that show discordance greater than 10 % were not included in frequency diagrams, and ages less than 1000 Ma are based on the 206Pb/238U ratio whereas older ages are based on the 207Pb/206Pb ratio.

Fig. 4.

Concordia plots for zircons from the Cambrian–Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block. Grains yielding ages with more than 10 % discordance are represented by blue ellipses.

4.b.1. Age pattern of zircons from the Lower Ordovician samples (WN5 and WN10)

A total of 157 of 183 analyses on 183 zircons display 90 % or greater concordance, and range in age from 3229 Ma to 486 Ma (Table 1), indicating multiple sources for the zircons. Most ages fall into five groups: 2.6–2.3 Ga, 1.0–0.9 Ga, 0.9–0.7 Ga, 0.7–0.55 Ga and 0.55–0.47 Ga, with peaks at 2415 Ma, 942 Ma, 818 Ma, 595 Ma and 495 Ma (Fig. 5). Two older grains yield concordant ages of 3006 ± 39.2 Ma and 3229 ± 24.7 Ma. CL images and Th/U values indicate that most zircons are of magmatic origin.

Fig. 5.

Probability density distribution curves of ages showing the results of LA-ICP-MS dating of detrital zircons from the Cambrian–Ordovician samples from the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block.

4.b.2. Age pattern of zircons from the lower Cambrian samples (WN6 and WN9)

Detrital zircon U–Pb ages were determined on 199 grains. Almost all of the analyses plot on or near concordia and give a wide age range from 3087 Ma to 518 Ma (Table 1), suggesting multiple source regions for the lower Cambrian sequence in the study area. The most significant age cluster, constituting 67 % of the analysed grains, lies between 900 Ma and 700 Ma and shows an age peak at 775 Ma (Fig. 5). Most grains are euhedral, suggesting a near-source region. Subordinate age peaks at 2480 Ma and 933 Ma can also be seen. CL images and Th/U values indicate that most zircons are of magmatic origin.

5. Discussion

5.a. Age pattern comparison

The detrital zircon age spectra of the Cambrian strata from the Cathaysia, eastern Yangtze and western Yangtze blocks are similar to those of Ordovician strata from the same regions (Fig. 6), which suggests that there was probably no change in provenance from the Cambrian to Ordovician periods. However, some differences are obvious from the detrital zircon age spectra for the Cambrian and Ordovician rocks among the Cathaysia, eastern Yangtze and western Yangtze blocks. The most notable difference is manifested in the age distribution between 1000 Ma and 700 Ma. Only one dominant peak at ~950 Ma in the Cathaysia Block and ~800 Ma in the western Yangtze Block was shown, respectively, whereas these two peaks were both prominent in the eastern Yangtze Block (Fig. 6). The detrital zircon age distribution of the Cambrian and Ordovician sedimentary rocks in the Cathaysia Block is characterized by a major age group between 2000 Ma and 1000 Ma, which peaks at ~1100 Ma. The percentage of detrital zircons with ages of 2000–1000 Ma gradually decreases from the Cathaysia Block to the western Yangtze Block (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6.

Detrital zircon age distributions for (a) Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the western Yangtze Block (this study); (b) Cambrian sedimentary rocks from the western Yangtze Block (this study; Chen, Q. et al. 2018); (c) Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the eastern Yangtze Block (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Du, Cawood, Zhu, Li and Yu2012; Yao et al. Reference Yao, Shu, Santosh and Li2012; Li et al. Reference Li, Jia, Wu, Zhang, Yin, Wei and Li2013); (d) Cambrian sedimentary rocks from the eastern Yangtze Block (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010); (e) Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the Cathaysia Block (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jia, Li, Deng and Li2010; Yao et al. Reference Yao, Shu and Santosh2011; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Huang and Wang2014a); (f) Cambrian sedimentary rocks from the Cathaysia Block (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jia, Li, Deng and Li2010; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Huang and Wang2014a; Yao, W. H. et al. 2014).

5.b. Provenance of detrital zircons in the SCB

The oldest age population with a peak at ~2500 Ma is widely distributed in the Cambrian–Ordovician detrital zircons in the SCB (Fig. 6) (Yu et al. Reference Yu, O’Reilly, Wang, Griffin, Zhang, Wang, Jiang and Hu2008, Reference Yu, O’Reilly, Wang, Griffin, Zhou, Zhang and Shu2010; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jia, Li, Deng and Li2010; Yao et al. Reference Yao, Shu and Santosh2011; Duan et al. Reference Duan, Meng, Zhang and Liu2011, Reference Duan, Meng, Wu, Ma and Li2012; Chen, Q. et al. 2018). However, direct evidence of widespread late Archaean – early Palaeoproterozoic basement for the SCB has not been reported. The Douling, Kongling, Phan si Pan, Yudongzi and Zhongxiang complexes, which represent the oldest rocks of the Yangtze Block, are only distributed along the northern and southern Yangtze margins (Qiu & Gao, Reference Qiu and Gao2000; Lan et al. Reference Lan, Chung, Lo, Lee, Wang, Li and Van Toan2001; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Zhang, Tang and Wang2001, Reference Zhang, Xu, Song, Wang, Chen and Li2010; Nam et al. Reference Nam, Toriumi, Sano, Terada and Thang2003; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Griffin, O’Reilly, Zhang, Pearson and Pan2006; Jiao et al. Reference Jiao, Wu, Yang, Peng and Wang2009; Gao et al. Reference Gao, Yang, Zhou, Li, Hu, Guo, Yuan, Gong, Xiao and Wei2011; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Chen, Yan, Li and Zhu2011, Reference Wang, Li, Dong, Cui, Han and Zheng2018; Hu et al. Reference Hu, Liu, Chen, Qu, Li and Geng2013; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Zhou, Gao, Liu, Qin, Wang, Yang and Yang2014; Nie et al. Reference Nie, Yao, Wan, Zhu, Siebel and Chen2016; Hui et al. Reference Hui, Dong, Cheng, Long, Liu, Yang, Sun, Zhang and Varga2017). In addition, most ~2500 Ma zircons identified in this study show a rounded shape (Fig. 3). Consequently, an exotic source that was once connected with the SCB or an unexposed Neoarchaean – early Palaeoproterozoic basement beneath the SCB was suggested to be the provenance. The age peak at ~2500 Ma correlates with similar ages reported for the end Archaean – early Palaeoproterozoic event of global continental growth (Yao et al. Reference Yao, Shu and Santosh2011). Neoarchaean crustal generation in the Yilgarn Craton, Western Australia, took place at ~2.8–2.6 Ga (Griffin et al. Reference Griffin, Belousova, Shee, Pearson and O’Reilly2004) but with some activity as young as ~2.5 Ga along the northern and southern margins of the craton (Cawood & Tyler, Reference Cawood and Tyler2004; Cawood & Korsch, Reference Cawood and Korsch2008). Such growth occurred at ~2.6–2.4 Ga in India (Mondal et al. Reference Mondal, Goswami, Deomurari and Sharma2002).

Grenvillian-aged detrital zircons with a peak at ~1100 Ma are abundant in the Cambrian–Ordovician samples from the Cathaysia and eastern Yangtze blocks (Fig. 6). Recently, the magmatic ages of some igneous rock units from the Yangtze Block and Shaoxing–Jiangnan Fault zone have been determined to be ~1100 Ma (Qiu et al. Reference Qiu, Ling, Liu, Kusky, Berkana, Zhang, Gao, LU, Kuang and Liu2011; Gao et al. Reference Gao, Liu, Ding, Song, Huang, Zhang, Zhang and Shi2013; Chen, W. T. et al. 2014, 2018; Du et al. Reference Du, Wang, Wang, Deng and Yang2015; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Li, Gao, Geng, Ding, Liu and Kou2015; Zhu et al. Reference Zhu, Zhong, Li, Bai and Yang2016). Li et al. (Reference Li, Li, Zhou and Kinny2002) also reported Grenvillian metamorphism (1.3–1.0 Ga) from Hainan Island. However, the limited areal extent and mafic composition indicate that these rocks may not be the major source. The rounded shape of these zircons supports a relatively long transport distance from source to sink (Fig. 3). Grenvillian-aged belts are widespread globally, including in eastern North America and Baltica (Rivers, Reference Rivers1997; Bingen et al. Reference Bingen, Nordgulen and Viola2008), South America (Tohver et al. Reference Tohver, Van Der Pluijm, Scandolara and Essene2005) and south-central Africa and Antarctica (Boger et al. Reference Boger, Carson, CJL and Fanning2000; Fitzsimons, Reference Fitzsimons2000; Harley & Kelly, Reference Harley and Kelly2007). These belts are suggested to be the major source for the Grenvillian-aged detrital zircons in the SCB.

A large number of zircon grains in the Cathaysia and eastern Yangtze blocks yield earliest Neoproterozoic ages, which peaked at ~950 Ma (Fig. 6). Several rock units from the Yangtze Block have been reported to be of 1000–900 Ma age, which includes the Yanbian and Bikou groups in the western Yangtze Block (Yan et al. Reference Yan, Hanson, Wang, Druschke, Yan, Wang, Liu, Song, Jian, Zhou and Jiang2004; Zhou et al. Reference Zhou, Ma, Yan, Xia, Zhao and Sun2006a; Sun et al. Reference Sun, Zhou, Gao, Yang, Zhao and Zhao2009), trondhjemites and metapelites in the Kongling area, and amphibole and biotite granulites in the Xichang area (Qiu & Gao, Reference Qiu and Gao2000; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Liu, Wang, Yu, Li, Wan and Fang2004; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Griffin, O’Reilly, Zhang, Pearson and Pan2006). Yao et al. (Reference Yao, Shu and Santosh2011) suggested that the Jiangnan Orogen is likely to be part of the Grenvillian orogen and that a major Grenvillian orogenic belt probably existed in the southern part of the Cathaysia Block. In addition, the Rayner–Eastern Ghats province, with an age of 990–900 Ma, is widespread in Antarctica and India (Fitzsimons, Reference Fitzsimons2000; Boger et al. Reference Boger, Wilson and Fanning2001). Moreover, the 1000–900 Ma zircons identified here show various shapes, from euhedral to rounded (Fig. 3). Therefore, the earliest Neoproterozoic zircons are suggested to be mainly derived from both the SCB and the Grenvillian orogens within Gondwana.

The most prominent age population in the eastern and western Yangtze blocks is middle Neoproterozoic, with a peak at ~800 Ma (Fig. 6). Middle Neoproterozoic igneous rocks, represented by the Jiaoziding (~790 Ma; Pei et al. Reference Pei, LI, Ding, Li, Feng, Sun, Zhang and Liu2009) and Xuelongbao granite intrusions (~750 Ma; Zhou et al. Reference Zhou, Yan, Wang, Qi and Kennedy2006b) in the Longmenshan Belt, and the Gongcai (~860 Ma; Zhou et al. Reference Zhou, Yan, Kennedy, Li and Ding2002b; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Sun, Long and Yuan2015) and Qinganlin (~830 Ma; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Sun, Long and Yuan2015) felsic plutons in the Danba region, are well exposed in the Panxi–Hannan Belt (Duan et al. Reference Duan, Meng, Zhang and Liu2011). Additionally, upper Neoproterozoic strata distributed in the western Yangtze Block also contain abundant zircon grains of ~900–700 Ma age (Sun et al. Reference Sun, Zhou, Gao, Yang, Zhao and Zhao2009; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Yu, Griffin and O’Reilly2012). In view of the younger ophiolite mélange, middle Neoproterozoic peraluminous granite intrusions and basement depositions, the Jiangnan Orogen was recently considered to be formed at ~860–820 Ma or ~760–750 Ma (Li, Reference Li1999; Li et al. Reference Li1999, Reference Li, Zhu, Zhong, Wang, He, Bai and Liu2010; Yan et al. Reference Yan, Hanson, Wang, Druschke, Yan, Wang, Liu, Song, Jian, Zhou and Jiang2004; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhou, Qiu, Zhang, Liu and Zhang2006; Zhou et al. Reference Zhou, Li, Ge and Li2007, Reference Zhou, Wang and Qiu2009; Shu et al. Reference Shu, Deng, Yu, Wang and Jiang2008; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Zhou, Yan, Zheng and Li2011, Reference Zhao2015; Yao et al. Reference Yao, Shu, Santosh and Li2013; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Santosh, Zou, Li and Huang2013; Zhao, Reference Zhao2015; Lin et al. Reference Lin, Peng, Jiang, Polat, Kusky, Wang and Deng2016). Moreover, most 900–700 Ma zircons in this study show a euhedral shape (Fig. 3). Thus, it is likely that the middle Neoproterozoic zircons were sourced from a local supply within the SCB, and mainly from the Panxi–Hannan Belt.

The Cambrian–Ordovician samples from the SCB also show an age population of 700–470 Ma (Fig. 6). Coeval magmatic rocks are rare in both the Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks. Metavolcanic rocks with an age of ~528 Ma (Ding et al. Reference Ding, Xu, Long, Zhou and Liao2002), and mafic igneous and volcaniclastic sedimentary rocks with ages of 520–440 Ma, have only been reported from Hainan Island (Xu et al. Reference Xu, Xia, Li, Chen, Ma and Zhang2007, Reference Xu, Xia, Bakun-Czubarow, Bachlinski, Li, Chen and Chen2008). In contrast, such an age is comparable to the timing of major thermo-tectonic events that affected much of Gondwana. These include the 650–550 Ma East African Orogen (DeCelles et al. Reference DeCelles, Gehrels, Quade, Lareau and Spurlin2000), the 600–500 Ma Prydz–Darling Orogen (Cawood & Buchan, Reference Cawood and Buchan2007), the 530–480 Ma Ross–Delamerian Orogen (Cawood, Reference Cawood2005; Cawood & Buchan, Reference Cawood and Buchan2007) and the 550–470 Ma Bhimphedian Orogen (Cawood et al. Reference Cawood, Johnson and Nemchin2007). In addition, most 700–470 Ma zircons in this study show rounded shapes (Fig. 3). Therefore, we suggest that the late Neoproterozoic zircons were mainly derived from the other continents of Gondwana.

5.c. Implications for continental affinity of the SCB

The integrated detrital zircon age spectra of the Cambrian–Ordovician samples from the Cathaysia and eastern Yangtze blocks display two prominent age peaks at ~1100 Ma and ~950 Ma (Fig. 6), which suggests the sources lay within Gondwana. Gondwanan sources involve the combined input from the Wilkes–Albany–Fraser Belt in SW Australia/Antarctica for the end Mesoproterozoic detritus and the Rayner–Eastern Ghats Belt in India for the early Neoproterozoic detritus, along with detritus from their adjoining cratons, including Western Australia, North India and Qiangtang (Fig. 7) (Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Hu, Yu, Zhu and Li2013, Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Huang and Wang2014a; Chen, Q. et al. 2018). These age relationships are consistent with the interpretation that the SCB was placed at the nexus of India, Antarctic and Australia (Fig. 8a) (Duan et al. Reference Duan, Meng, Zhang and Liu2011; Cawood et al. Reference Cawood, Wang, Xu and Zhao2013; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Hu, Yu, Zhu and Li2013, Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Huang and Wang2014a; Yao, W. H. et al. 2014; Yao & Li, Reference Yao and Li2016; Chen, Q. et al. 2018). The proposed East Gondwana source regions can also provide a likely source for the Neoarchaean, late Palaeoproterozoic and Neoproterozoic detritus in the Cambrian–Ordovician strata of the SCB (Fig. 7). The Cambrian and Ordovician shallow marine faunas in the SCB (Li, Reference Li and Hongfu1994; Yang, Reference Yang and Yin1994) have close affinities with those in East Gondwana, especially Australian Gondwana (Burrett, Reference Burrett1973; Burrett & Stait, Reference Burrett and Stait1985; Metcalfe, Reference Metcalfe, Audley-Charles and Hallam1988; Burrett et al. Reference Burrett, Long, Stait, McKerrow and Scotese1990). Additionally, the model that the SCB was located on the northern margin of East Gondwana during early Palaeozoic time is also supported by most palaeomagnetic investigations (Yang et al. Reference Yang, Sun, Yang and Pei2004; Huang et al. Reference Huang, Zhou and Zhu2008; Torsvik & Cocks, Reference Torsvik, Cocks and Bassett2009; Han et al. Reference Han, Yang, Tong and Jing2015).

Fig. 8.

(a) Reconstruction of early Palaeozoic East Gondwana showing position of the SCB (modified after Fitzsimons, Reference Fitzsimons2000; Boger et al. Reference Boger, Wilson and Fanning2001; Metcalfe, Reference Metcalfe2006; Zhu et al. Reference Zhu, Zhao, Niu, Dilek and Mo2011; Burrett et al. Reference Burrett, Zaw, Meffre, Lai, Khositanont, Chaodumrong, Udchachon, Ekins and Halpin2014; Chen, Q. et al. 2018). LH – Lesser Himalaya; GH – Greater Himalaya; TH – Tethyan Himalaya; GI – Greater India. (b) The palaeogeographic pattern for the Cathaysia and Yangtze blocks during the Cambrian and Ordovician periods (modified after Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Jia, Li, Deng and Li2010).

The relative positions of the Cathaysia and Yangtze blocks in East Gondwana vary in several early Palaeozoic reconstruction models. The Cathaysia Block was placed adjacent to the northern margin of East Gondwana, while the Yangtze Block was in the distal position (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Hu, Yu, Zhu and Li2013, Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Huang and Wang2014a; Yao, W. H. et al. 2014; Yao & Li, Reference Yao and Li2016). However, because of the dominant carbonate platform of the central Yangtze Block (Fig. 8b) (BGMRSP, 1982; BGMRJX, 1984; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Hu, Yu, Zhu and Li2013), it is impossible for the sediments derived from East Gondwana to traverse the platform and be deposited in the western Yangtze Block during the Cambrian and Ordovician periods. Duan et al. (Reference Duan, Meng, Zhang and Liu2011) placed the Yangtze Block adjacent to Western Australia, and the Cathaysia Block near North India. The Wilkes–Albany–Fraser Belt and Western Australia would provide abundant late Mesoproterozoic detritus for the western Yangtze Block in this situation, obviously, which is not consistent with the Cambrian–Ordovician detrital zircon age pattern of the western Yangtze Block (Fig. 6). The age spectra support the position proposed by Cawood et al. (Reference Cawood, Zhao, Yao, Wang, Xu and Wang2018) and Chen, Q. et al. (2018), in which the Cathaysia Block was located adjacent to Western Australia, while the Yangtze Block was connected with North India (Fig. 8a). This position is also supported by the palaeocurrent data, which suggest that the source for the lower Palaeozoic sedimentary rocks in the western Cathaysia Block and eastern Yangtze Block lay to the east and southeast (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Chen, Cawood and Zhang2010; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Cawood, Du, Hu, Yu, Zhu and Li2013; Shu et al. Reference Shu, Jahn, Charvet, Santosh, Wang, Xu and Jiang2014). Therefore, sediments in the Cathaysia Block and eastern Yangtze Block should have been mainly derived from the Ross–Delamerian Orogen, Wilkes–Albany–Fraser Belt and Western Australia (Fig. 8a). However, most detritus in the western Yangtze Block, with one dominant age peak at ~800 Ma (Fig. 6), was mainly derived locally from the nearby Panxi–Hannan Belt. Only a small amount of detritus was transported from the Rayner–Eastern Ghats Belt, East African Orogen, North India and Qiangtang (Fig. 8a).

6. Conclusions

  1. (1) Cambrian–Ordovician sedimentary rocks in the western Yangtze Block contain detrital zircons with a wide age range, with a dominant peak at ~800 Ma, which suggests a mainly local supply.

  2. (2) The integrated detrital zircon age spectra of the Cambrian–Ordovician samples from the SCB indicate that the block was placed at the nexus of India, Antarctic and Australia. Specifically, the Cathaysia Block was located adjacent to Western Australia, while the Yangtze Block was connected with North India.

Acknowledgements

We thank the editor and reviewers for their constructive comments that have greatly improved the manuscript. This work is financially supported by Petrochemical Fund Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. U1663203) and Science Foundation of China University of Petroleum, Beijing (No. ZX20150066). The study is also financially sponsored by the foundation of State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resources and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing) (No. PRP/indep–2–1501).

References

BGMRGP: Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources of Guangdong Province (1988) Regional Geology of the Guangdong Province. Beijing: Geological Publishing House, 941 pp.Google Scholar
BGMRJX: Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources of Jiangxi Provence (1984) Regional Geology of Jiangxi Province. Beijing: Geological Publishing House, pp. 6–151.Google Scholar
BGMRSP: Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources of Sichuan Province (1982) Regional Geology of Sichuan Province. Beijing: Geological Publishing House, 730 pp.Google Scholar
BGMRSP: Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources of Sichuan Province (1991) Regional Geology of the Sichuan Province. Beijing: Geological Publishing House, 745 pp.Google Scholar
Bingen, B, Nordgulen, Ø and Viola, G (2008) A fourphase model for the Sveconorwegian orogeny, SW Scandinavia. Norwegian Journal of Geology 88, 43–72.Google Scholar
Boger, SD (2011) Antarctica–before and after Gondwana. Gondwana Research 19, 335–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boger, SD, Carson, CJ, CJL, Wilson and Fanning, CM (2000) Neoproterozoic deformation in the Radok Lake region of the northern Prince Charles Mountains, east Antarctica: evidence for a single protracted orogenic event. Precambrian Research 104, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boger, SD, Wilson, CJL and Fanning, CM (2001) Early Paleozoic tectonism within the East Antarctic craton: the final suture between east and west Gondwana? Geology 29, 463–6.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrett, C (1973) Ordovician biogeography and continental drift. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 13, 161–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrett, C, Long, J and Stait, B (1990) Early–Middle Palaeozoic biogeography of Asian terranes derived from Gondwana. In Palaeozoic Paleogeography and Biogeography (eds McKerrow, WS and Scotese, CR), pp. 163–74. Geological Society of London, Memoirs no. 12.Google Scholar
Burrett, C and Stait, B (1985) South-east Asia as part of an Ordovician Gondwanaland. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 75, 184–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrett, C, Zaw, K, Meffre, S, Lai, CK, Khositanont, S, Chaodumrong, P, Udchachon, M, Ekins, S and Halpin, J (2014) The configuration of greater Gondwana–evidence from LA ICPMS, U–Pb geochronology of detrital zircons from the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic of Southeast Asia and China. Gondwana Research 26, 31–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA (2005) Terra Australis Orogen: Rodinia breakup and development of the Pacific and Iapetus margins of Gondwana during the Neoproterozoic and Paleozoic. Earth-Science Reviews 69, 249–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA and Buchan, C (2007) Linking accretionary orogenesis with supercontinent assembly. Earth-Science Reviews 82, 217–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA, Johnson, MRW and Nemchin, AA (2007) Early Palaeozoic orogenesis along the Indian margin of Gondwana: tectonic response to Gondwana assembly. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 255, 70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA and Korsch, RJ (2008) Assembling Australia: Proterozoic building of a continent, Precambrian Research 166, 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA and Nemchin, AA (2000) Provenance record of a rift basin: U/Pb ages of detrital zircons from the Perth Basin, Western Australia. Sedimentary Geology 134, 209–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA and Tyler, IM (2004) Assembling and reactivating the Proterozoic Capricorn orogen: lithotectonic elements, orogenies, and significance. Precambrian Research 128, 201–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA, Wang, YJ, Xu, YJ and Zhao, GC (2013) Locating South China in Rodinia and Gondwana: a fragment of greater India lithosphere? Geology 41, 903–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawood, PA, Zhao, GC, Yao, JL, Wang, W, Xu, YJ and Wang, YJ (2018) Reconstructing South China in Phanerozoic and Precambrian supercontinents. Earth-Science Reviews 186, 173–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Q, Sun, M, Long, XP and Yuan, C (2015) Petrogenesis of Neoproterozoic adakitic tonalites and high-K granites in the eastern Songpan-Ganze Fold Belt and implications for the tectonic evolution of the western Yangtze Block. Precambrian Research 270, 181–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Q, Sun, M, Long, X, Zhao, G, Wang, J, Yu, Y and Yuan, C (2018) Provenance study for the Paleozoic sedimentary rocks from the west Yangtze Block: constraint on possible link of South China to the Gondwana supercontinent reconstruction. Precambrian Research 309, 271–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Q, Sun, M, Long, XP, Zhao, GC and Yuan, C (2016) U–Pb ages and Hf isotopic record of zircons from the late Neoproterozoic and Silurian–Devonian sedimentary rocks of the western Yangtze Block: implications for its tectonic evolution and continental affinity. Gondwana Research 31, 184–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, WT, Sun, WH, Wang, W, Zhao, JH and Zhou, MF (2014) “Grenvillian” intra-plate mafic magmatism in the southwestern Yangtze Block, SW China. Precambrian Research 242, 138–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, WT, Sun, WH, Zhou, MF and Wang, W (2018) Ca. 1050 Ma intra-continental rift-related A-type felsic rocks in the southwestern Yangtze Block, South China. Precambrian Research 309, 22–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cocks, LRM and Torsvik, TH (2013) The dynamic evolution of the Palaeozoic geography of eastern Asia. Earth-Science Reviews 117, 40–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeCelles, PG, Gehrels, GE, Quade, J, Lareau, B and Spurlin, M (2000) Tectonic implications of U–Pb zircon ages of the Himalayan orogenic belt in Nepal. Science 288, 497–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ding, SJ, Xu, CH, Long, WC, Zhou, ZY and Liao, ZT (2002) Tectonic attribute and geochronology of metavolcanic rocks, Tunchang, Hainan Island. Acta Petrologica Sinica 18, 83–90.Google Scholar
Dong, CY, Li, C, Wan, YS, Wang, W, Wu, YW, Xie, HQ and Liu, DY (2011) Detrital zircon age model of Ordovician Wenquan quartzite south of Lungmuco-Shuanghu Suture in the Qiangtang area, Tibet: constraint on tectonic affinity and source regions. Science China Earth Sciences 54, 1034–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, SW, Zhang, YQ, Gao, R, Su, JB, Liu, M and Li, JH (2015) A possible buried Paleoproterozoic collisional orogen beneath central South China: evidence from seismic-reflection profiling. Precambrian Research 264, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, QD, Wang, ZJ, Wang, J, Deng, Q and Yang, F (2015) Geochronology and geochemistry of tuff beds from the Shicaohe Formation of Shennongjia Group and tectonic evolution in the northern Yangtze Block, South China. International Journal of Earth Sciences 105, 521–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duan, L, Meng, QR, Wu, GL, Ma, SX and Li, L (2012) Detrital zircon evidence for the linkage of the South China Block with Gondwanaland in early Palaeozoic time. Geological Magazine 149, 1124–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duan, L, Meng, QR, Zhang, CL and Liu, XM (2011) Tracing the position of the South China Block in Gondwana: U–Pb ages and Hf isotopes of Devonian detrital zircons. Gondwana Research 19, 141–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzsimons, ICW (2000) Grenville-age basement provinces in East Antarctica: evidence for three separate collisional orogens. Geology 28, 879–82.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, S, Ling, W, Qiu, Y, Lian, Z, Hartmann, G and Simon, K (1999) Contrasting geochemical and Sm–Nd isotopic compositions of Archean metasediments from the Kongling high-grade terrain of the Yangtze craton: evidence for cratonic evolution and redistribution of REE during crustal anatexis. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 63, 2071–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, LZ, Liu, YX, Ding, XZ, Song, ZR, Huang, ZZ, Zhang, CH, Zhang, H and Shi, ZG (2013) Geochronographic dating of the Tieshajie formation in the Jiangshan-Shaoxing fault zone and its implications. Geological Bulletin of China 32, 996–1005.Google Scholar
Gao, S, Yang, J, Zhou, L, Li, M, Hu, ZC, Guo, JL, Yuan, HL, Gong, HJ, Xiao, GQ and Wei, JQ (2011) Age and growth of the Archean Kongling Terrain, South China, with emphasis on 3.3 Ga granitoid gneisses. American Journal of Science 311, 153–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehrels, G, Kapp, P, DeCelles, P, Pullen, A, Blakey, R, Weislogel, A, Ding, L, Guynn, J, Martin, A, McQuarrie, N and Yin, A (2011) Detrital zircon geochronology of pre-Tertiary strata in the Tibetan–Himalayan orogen. Tectonics 30. doi: 10.1029/2011TC002868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greentree, MR, Li, ZX, Li, XH and Wu, H (2006) Late Mesoproterozoic to earliest Neoproterozoic basin record of the Sibao orogenesis in western South China and relationship to the assembly of Rodinia. Precambrian Research 151, 79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, WL, Belousova, EA, Shee, SR, Pearson, NJ and O’Reilly, SY (2004) Archean crustal evolution in the northern Yilgarn Craton: U–Pb and Hf-isotope evidence from detrital zircons. Precambrian Research 131, 231–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, ZR, Yang, ZY, Tong, YB and Jing, XQ (2015) New paleomagnetic results from Late Ordovician rocks of the Yangtze Block, South China, and their paleogeographic implications. Journal of Geophysical Research, Solid Earth 120, 4759–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, SL and Kelly, NM (2007) The impact of zircon-garnet REE distribution data on the interpretation of zircon U–Pb ages in complex high-grade terrains: an example from the Rauer Islands, east Antarctica. Chemical Geology 241, 62–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, J, Liu, XC, Chen, LY, Qu, W, Li, HK and Geng, JZ (2013) A 2.5 Ga magmatic event at the northern margin of the Yangtze craton: evidence from U–Pb dating and Hf isotope analysis of zircons from the Douling Complex in the South Qinling orogen. Chinese Science Bulletin 58, 3564–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, ZC, Liu, YS, Gao, S, Xiao, SQ, Zhao, LS, Günther, D, Li, M, Zhang, W and Zong, KQ (2012) A “wire” signal smoothing device for laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry analysis. Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy 78, 50–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, B, Zhou, Y and Zhu, R (2008) Discussions on Phanerozoic evolution and formation of continental China, based on paleomagnetic studies. Earth Science Frontiers 15, 348–59.Google Scholar
Hughes, NC, Peng, SC, Bhargava, ON, Ahulwalia, AD, Walia, S, Myrow, PM and Parcha, SK (2005) The Cambrian biostratigraphy of the Tal Group, Lesser Himalaya, India, and early Tsanglangpuan (late early Cambrian) trilobites from the Nigali Dhar syncline. Geological Magazine 142, 57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hui, B, Dong, YP, Cheng, C, Long, XP, Liu, XM, Yang, Z, Sun, SS, Zhang, FF and Varga, J (2017) Zircon U–Pb chronology, Hf isotope analysis and whole-rock geochemistry for the Neoarchean–Paleoproterozoic Yudongzi Complex, northwestern margin of the Yangtze craton, China. Precambrian Research 301, 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, GQ, Sohl, LE and Christie-Blick, N (2003) Neoproterozoic stratigraphic comparison of the Lesser Himalaya (India) and Yangtze Block (South China): paleogeographic implications. Geology 31, 917–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiao, WF, Wu, YB, Yang, SH, Peng, M and Wang, J (2009) The oldest basement rock in the Yangtze Craton revealed by zircon U–Pb age and Hf isotope composition. Science in China Series D 52, 1393–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kettanah, YA (2015) Provenance of the Ordovician–lower Silurian Tumblagooda Sandstone, Western Australia. Journal of the Geological Society of Australia 62, 817–30.Google Scholar
Kou, CH, Liu, YX, Huang, H, Li, TD, Ding, XZ and Zhang, H (2018) The Neoproterozoic arc-type and OIB-type mafic-ultramafic rocks in the western Jiangnan Orogen: implications for tectonic settings. Lithos 312–313, 38–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lan, CY, Chung, SL, Lo, CH, Lee, TY, Wang, PL, Li, H and Van Toan, D (2001) First evidence for Archean continental crust in northern Vietnam and its implications for crustal and tectonic evolution in Southeast Asia. Geology 29, 219–22.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, ZM (1994) Ordovician. In The Palaeobiogeography of China (ed. Hongfu, Y), pp. 64–87. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Li, XH (1999) U–Pb zircon ages of granites from the southern margin of Yangtze Block: timing of the Neoproterozoic Jinning Orogeny in SE China and implications for Rodinia Assembly. Precambrian Research 97, 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, ZX, Bogdanova, SV, Collins, AS, Davidson, A, DE Waele, B, Ernst, RE, Fitzsimons, ICW, Fuck, RA, Gladkochub, DP, Jacobs, J, Karlstrom, KE, Lu, S, Natapov, LM, Pease, V, Pisarevsky, SA, Thrane, K and Vernikovsky, V (2008a) Assembly, configuration, and break-up history of Rodinia: a synthesis. Precambrian Research 160, 179–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, HB, Jia, D, Wu, L, Zhang, Y, Yin, HW, Wei, GQ and Li, BL (2013) Detrital zircon provenance of the Lower Yangtze foreland basin deposits: constraints on the evolution of the early Paleozoic Wuyi-Yunkai orogenic belt in South China. Geological Magazine 150, 959–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, XH, Li, ZX, Ge, WC, Zhou, HW, Li, WX, Liu, Y and Wingate, MTD (2003) Neoproterozoic granitoids in South China: crustal melting above a mantle plume at ca. 825 Ma? Precambrian Research 122, 45–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, ZX, Li, XH, Kinny, PD and Wang, J (1999) The breakup of Rodinia: did it start with a mantle plume beneath South China? Earth and Planetary Science Letters 173, 171–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, ZX, Li, XH, Li, WX and Ding, S (2008b) Was Cathaysia part of Proterozoic Laurentia? – new data from Hainan Island, South China. Terra Nova 20, 154–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, ZX, Li, XH, Zhou, H and Kinny, PD (2002) Grenvillian continental collision in South China: new SHRIMP U–Pb zircon results and implications for the configuration of Rodinia. Geology 30, 163–6.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, ZX, Zhang, L and Powell, CMA (1995) South China in Rodinia: part of the missing link between Australia-East Antarctica and Laurentia? Geology 23, 407–10.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, XH, Zhu, WG, Zhong, H, Wang, XC, He, DF, Bai, ZJ and Liu, F (2010) The Tongde picritic dikes in the western Yangtze Block: evidence for ca. 800-Ma mantle plume magmatism in South China during the breakup of Rodinia. The Journal of Geology 118, 509–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, MS, Peng, SB, Jiang, XF, Polat, A, Kusky, T, Wang, Q and Deng, H (2016) Geochemistry, petrogenesis and tectonic setting of Neoproterozoic mafic-ultramafic rocks from the western Jiangnan Orogen, South China. Gondwana Research 35, 338–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, YS, Gao, S, Hu, ZC, Gao, CG, Zong, KQ and Wang, DB (2010) Continental and oceanic crust recycling-induced melt-peridotite interactions in the Trans-North China Orogen: U–Pb dating, Hf isotopes and trace elements in zircons of mantle xenoliths. Journal of Petrology 51, 537–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, YS, Hu, ZC, Gao, S, Günther, D, Xu, J, Gao, CG and Chen, HH (2008a) In situ analysis of major and trace elements of anhydrous minerals by LA-ICP-MS without applying an internal standard. Chemical Geology 257, 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, YS, Zong, KQ, Kelemen, PB and Gao, S (2008b) Geochemistry and magmatic history of eclogites and ultramafic rocks from the Chinese continental scientific drill hole: subduction and ultrahigh-pressure metamorphism of lower crustal cumulates. Chemical Geology 247, 133–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludwig, KR (2003) Isoplot 3.00: A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel. Berkeley: Berkeley Geochronology Center, Special Publication no. 4.Google Scholar
McKenzie, NR, Hughes, NC, Myrow, PM, Choi, DK and Park, TY (2011) Trilobites and zircons link north China with the eastern Himalaya during the Cambrian. Geology 39, 591–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McQuarrie, N, Robinson, D, Long, S, Tobgay, T, Grujic, D, Gehrels, G and Ducea, M (2008) Preliminary stratigraphic and structural architecture of Bhutan: implications for the along strike architecture of the Himalayan system. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 272, 105–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meert, JG (2003) A synopsis of events related to the assembly of eastern Gondwana. Tectonophysics 362, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metcalfe, I (1988) Origin and assembly of Southeast Asian continental terranes. In Gondwana and Tethys (eds Audley-Charles, MG and Hallam, A), pp. 101–18. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 37.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, I (2006) Paleozoic and Mesozoic tectonic evolution and palaeogeography of East Asian crustal fragments: the Korean Peninsula in context. Gondwana Research 9, 24–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metcalfe, I (2013) Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion: tectonic and palaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethys. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 66, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondal, MEA, Goswami, JN, Deomurari, MP and Sharma, KK (2002) Ion microprobe 207Pb/206Pb ages of zircons from the Bundelkhand massif, northern India: implications for crustal evolution of the Bundelkhand-Aravalli protocontinent. Precambrian Research 117, 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myrow, PM, Hughes, NC, Goodge, JW, Fanning, CM, Williams, IS, Peng, S, Bhargava, ON, Parcha, SK and Pogue, KR (2010) Extraordinary transport and mixing of sediment across Himalayan central Gondwana during the Cambrian–Ordovician. Geological Society of America Bulletin 122, 1660–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myrow, PM, Hughes, NC, Paulsen, TS, Williams, IS, Parcha, SK, Thompson, KR, Bowring, SA, Peng, SC and Ahluwalia, AD (2003) Integrated tectonostratigraphic analysis of the Himalaya and implications for its tectonic reconstruction. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 212, 433–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nam, TN, Toriumi, M, Sano, Y, Terada, K and Thang, TT (2003) 2.9, 2.36, and 1.96 Ga zircons in orthogneiss south of the Red River shear zone in Viet Nam: evidence from SHRIMP U–Pb dating and tectonothermal implications. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 21, 743–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nie, H, Yao, J, Wan, X, Zhu, XY, Siebel, W and Chen, FK (2016) Precambrian tectonothermal evolution of South Qinling and its affinity to the Yangtze Block: evidence from zircon ages and Hf–Nd isotopic compositions of basement rocks. Precambrian Research 286, 167–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pei, XZ, LI, ZC, Ding, SP, Li, RB, Feng, JY, Sun, Y, Zhang, YF and Liu, ZQ (2009) Neoproterozoic Jiaoziding peraluminous granite in the northwest margin of Yangtze Block: zircon SHRIMP U–Pb age and geochemistry, and their tectonic significance. Earth Science Frontiers 16, 231–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qiu, YMM and Gao, S (2000) First evidence of N 3.2 Ga continental crust in the Yangtze craton of South China and its implications for Archean crustal evolution and Phanerozoic tectonics. Geology 28, 11–14.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qiu, XF, Ling, LW, Liu, XM, Kusky, T, Berkana, W, Zhang, YH, Gao, YJ, LU, SS, Kuang, H and Liu, CX (2011) Recognition of Grenvillian volcanic suite in the Shennongjia region and its tectonic significance for the South China Craton. Precambrian Research 191, 101–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rivers, T (1997) Lithotectonic elements of the Grenville province: review and tectonic implications. Precambrian Research 86, 117–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, LS, Deng, P, Yu, JH, Wang, YB and Jiang, SY (2008) The age and tectonic environment of the rhyolitic rocks on the western side of Wuyi Mountain, South China. Science in China 51, 1053–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, LS, Jahn, BM, Charvet, J, Santosh, M, Wang, B, Xu, XS and Jiang, SY (2014) Early Palaeozoic depositional environment and intraplate tectonomagmatism in the Cathaysia Block (South China): evidence from stratigraphic, structural, geochemical and geochronological investigations. American Journal of Science 314, 154–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, WH, Zhou, MF, Gao, JF, Yang, YH, Zhao, XF and Zhao, JH (2009) Detrital zircon U–Pb geochronological and Lu–Hf isotopic constraints on the Precambrian magmatic and crustal evolution of the western Yangtze Block, SW China. Precambrian Research 172, 99–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tohver, E, Van Der Pluijm, BA, Scandolara, JE and Essene, EJ (2005) Late Mesoproterozoic deformation of SW Amazonia (Rondonia, Brazil): geochronological and structural evidence for collision with southern Laurentia. Journal of Geology 113, 309–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torsvik, TH and Cocks, LRM (2009) The Lower Palaeozoic palaeogeographical evolution of the northeastern and eastern peri-Gondwanan margin from Turkey to New Zealand. In Early Palaeozoic Peri-Gondwana Terranes: New Insights from Tectonics and Biogeography (ed. Bassett, MG), pp. 3–21. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 325.Google Scholar
Veevers, JJ, Belousova, EA, Saeed, A, Sircombe, K, Cooper, AF and Read, SE (2006) Pan-Gondwanaland detrital zircons from Australia analysed for Hf-isotopes and trace elements reflect an ice-covered Antarctic provenance of 700–500 Ma age, T DM of 2.0–1.0 Ga, and alkaline affinity. Earth-Science Reviews 76, 135–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, K, Li, ZX, Dong, SW, Cui, JJ, Han, BF and Zheng, T (2018) Early crustal evolution of the Yangtze Craton, South China: new constraints from zircon U–Pb–Hf isotopes and geochemistry of ca. 2.9–2.6 Ga granitic rocks in the Zhongxiang Complex. Precambrian Research 314, 325–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, ZJ, Wang, J, Du, QD, Deng, Q and Yang, F (2013a) The evolution of the Central Yangtze Block during early Neoarchean time: evidence from geochronology and geochemistry. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 77, 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, ZJ, Wang, J, Du, QD, Deng, Q, Yang, F and Wu, H (2013b) Mature Archean continental crust in the Yangtze craton: evidence from petrology, geochronology and geochemistry. Chinese Science Bulletin 58, 2360–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, YJ, Xing, XW, Cawood, PA, Lai, SC, Xia, XP, Fan, WM, Liu, HC and Zhang, FF (2013) Petrogenesis of early Paleozoic peraluminous granite in the Sibumasu Block of SW Yunnan and diachronous accretionary orogenesis along the northern margin of Gondwana. Lithos 182–183, 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, HL, Xu, XY, Chen, JL, Yan, Z, Li, T and Zhu, T (2011) Constraints from zircon U–Pb chronology of Yudongzi Group magnetite-quartzite in the Lueyang area, Southern Qinling, China. Acta Geologica Sinica 85, 1284–90.Google Scholar
Wang, LJ, Yu, JH, Griffin, WL and O’Reilly, SY (2012) Early crustal evolution in the western Yangtze Block: evidence from U–Pb and Lu–Hf isotopes on detrital zircons from sedimentary rocks. Precambrian Research 222, 368–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, YJ, Zhang, FF, Fan, WM, Zhang, GW, Chen, SY, Cawood, PA and Zhang, AM (2010) Tectonic setting of the South China Block in the early Paleozoic: resolving intracontinental and ocean closure models from detrital zircon U–Pb geochronology. Tectonics 29. doi: 10.1029/2010TC002750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, XL, Zhao, GC, Zhou, JC, Liu, YS and Hu, J (2008) Geochronology and Hf isotopes of zircon from volcanic rocks of the Shuangqiaoshan Group South China: implications for the Neoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the eastern Jiangnan orogen. Gondwana Research 18, 355–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, XL, Zhou, JC, Griffin, WL, Wang, RC, Qiu, HS, O’Reilly, SY, Xu, XS, Liu, XM and Zhang, GL (2007) Detrital zircon geochronology of Precambrian basement sequences in the Jiangnan orogen: dating the assembly of the Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks. Precambrian Research 159, 117–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, XL, Zhou, JC, Griffin, WL, Zhao, G, Yu, JH, Qiu, JS, Zhang, YJ and Xing, GF (2014) Geochemical zonation across a Neoproterozoic orogenic belt: isotopic evidence from granitoids and metasedimentary rocks of the Jiangnan orogen, China. Precambrian Research 242, 154–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, XL, Zhou, JC, Qiu, JS, Zhang, WL, Liu, XM and Zhang, GL (2006) LA-ICP-MS U–Pb zircon geochronology of the Neoproterozoic igneous rocks from Northern Guangxi Province, South China: implications for the tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research 145, 111–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiedenbeck, M, Alle, P, Corfu, F, Griffin, WL, Meier, M, Oberli, F, Quadt, AV, Roddick, JC and Spiegel, W (1995) Three natural zircon standards for U–Th–Pb, Lu–Hf, trace element and REE analyses. Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research 19, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, L, Jia, D, Li, HB, Deng, F and Li, YQ (2010) Provenance of detrital zircons from the late Neoproterozoic to Ordovician sandstones of South China: implications for its continental affinity. Geological Magazine 147, 974–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, RX, Zheng, YF, Wu, YB, Zhao, ZF, Zhang, SB, Liu, XM and Wu, FY (2006) Reworking of juvenile crust: element and isotope evidence from Neoproterozoic granodiorite in South China. Precambrian Research 146, 179–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, YB, Zhou, GY, Gao, S, Liu, XC, Qin, ZW, Wang, H, Yang, JZ and Yang, SH (2014) Petrogenesis of Neoarchean TTG rocks in the Yangtze Craton and its implication for the formation of Archean TTGs. Precambrian Research 254, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, YJ, Cawood, PA, Du, YS, Hu, LS, Yu, WC, Zhu, YH and Li, WC (2013) Linking South China to northern Australia and India on the margin of Gondwana: constraints from detrital zircon U–Pb and Hf isotopes in Cambrian strata. Tectonics 32, 1547–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, YJ, Cawood, PA, Du, YS, Huang, HW and Wang, XY (2014a) Early Paleozoic orogenesis along Gondwana’s northern margin constrained by provenance data from South China. Tectonophysics 636, 40–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, YJ, Cawood, PA, Du, YS, Zhong, ZW and Hughes, NC (2014b) Terminal suturing of Gondwana along the southern margin of South China Craton: evidence from detrital zircon U–Pb ages and Hf isotopes in Cambrian and Ordovician strata, Hainan Island. Tectonics 33, 2490–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, YJ, Du, YS, Cawood, PA, Zhu, YH, Li, WC and Yu, WC (2012) Detrital zircon provenance of Upper Ordovician and Silurian strata in the northeastern Yangtze Block: response to orogenesis in South China. Sedimentary Geology 267–268, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, SJ, Liu, WZ, Wang, RC, Yu, HB, Li, DM, Wan, JL and Fang, Z (2004) The history of crustal uplift and metamorphic evolution of Panzhihua-Xichang micro-palaeoland, SW China: Ar40/Ar39 and FT ages of granulites. Science in China Series D 47, 689–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, DR, Xia, B, Bakun-Czubarow, N, Bachlinski, R, Li, P, Chen, G and Chen, T (2008) Geochemistry and Sr–Nd isotope systematics of metabasites in the Tunchang area, Hainan Island, South China: implications for petrogenesis and tectonic setting. Mineralogy and Petrology 92, 361–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, DR, Xia, B, Li, PC, Chen, GH, Ma, C and Zhang, YQ (2007) Protolith natures and U–Pb sensitive high mass-resolution ion microprobe (SHRIMP) zircon ages of the metabasites in Hainan Island, South China: implications for geodynamic evolution since the late Precambrian. Island Arc 16, 575–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yan, QR, Hanson, AD, Wang, ZQ, Druschke, PA, Yan, Z, Wang, T, Liu, DY, Song, B, Jian, P, Zhou, H and Jiang, CF (2004) Neoproterozoic subduction and rifting on the northern margin of the Yangtze Plate, China: implications for Rodinia reconstruction. International Geology Review 46, 817–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, JL (1994) Cambrian. In The Palaeobiogeography of China (ed. Yin, H), pp. 35–63. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Yang, ZY, Sun, ZM, Yang, TS and Pei, YL (2004) A long connection (750–380 Ma) between South China and Australia: paleomagnetic constraints. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 220, 423–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, WH and Li, ZX (2016) Tectonostratigraphic history of the Ediacaran–Silurian Nanhua foreland basin in South China. Tectonophysics 674, 31–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, WH, Li, ZX and Li, WX (2014) From Rodinia to Gondwanaland: a tale of detrital zircon provenance analyses from the southern Nanhua basin, South China. American Journal of Science 314, 278–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, JL, Shu, LS and Santosh, M (2011) Detrital zircon U–Pb geochronology, Hf-isotopes and geochemistry – new clues for the Precambrian crustal evolution of Cathaysia Block, South China. Gondwana Research 20, 553–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, JL, Shu, LS, Santosh, M and Li, JY (2012) Precambrian crustal evolution of the South China Block and its relation to supercontinent history: constraints from U–Pb ages, Lu–Hf isotopes and REE geochemistry of zircons from sandstones and granodiorite. Precambrian Research 208–211, 19–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, JL, Shu, LS, Santosh, M and Li, JY (2013) Geochronology and Hf isotope of detrital zircons from Precambrian sequences in the eastern Jiangnan Orogen: constraining the assembly of Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks in South China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 74, 225–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, JL, Shu, LS, Santosh, M and Zhao, GC (2014) Neoproterozoic arc-related mafic-ultramafic rocks and syn-collision granite from the western segment of the Jiangnan Orogen, South China: constraints on the Neoproterozoic assembly of the Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks. Precambrian Research 247, 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ye, MF, Li, XH, Li, WX, Liu, Y and Li, ZX (2007) SHRIMP zircon U–Pb geochronological and whole-rock geochemical evidence for an early Neoproterozoic Sibaoan magmatic arc along the southeastern margin of the Yangtze Block. Gondwana Research 12, 144–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, JH, O’Reilly, SY, Wang, LJ, Griffin, WL, Zhang, M, Wang, RC, Jiang, SY and Hu, LS (2008) Where was South China in the Rodinia supercontinent? Evidence from U–Pb geochronology and Hf isotopes of detrital zircons. Precambrian Research 164, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, JH, O’Reilly, SY, Wang, LJ, Griffin, WL, Zhou, MF, Zhang, M and Shu, LS (2010) Components and episodic growth of Precambrian crust in the Cathaysia Block, South China: evidence from U–Pb ages and Hf isotopes of zircons in Neoproterozoic sediments. Precambrian Research 181, 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, JH, O’Reilly, SY, Zhou, MF, Griffin, WL and Wang, LJ (2012) U–Pb geochronology and Hf–Nd isotopic geochemistry of the Badu Complex, Southeastern China: implications for the Precambrian crustal evolution and paleogeography of the Cathaysia Block. Precambrian Research 222–223, 424–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H, Li, TD, Gao, LZ, Geng, SF, Ding, XZ, Liu, YX and Kou, CH (2015) Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb dating, geochemical, zircon Hf isotopic features of the Mesoproterozoic Tieshajie Formation in Northeastern Jiangxi. Geological Review 61, 65–78.Google Scholar
Zhang, CL, Santosh, M, Zou, HB, Li, HK and Huang, WC (2013) The Fuchuan ophiolite in Jiangnan Orogen: geochemistry, zircon U–Pb geochronology, Hf isotope and implications for the Neoproterozoic assembly of South China. Lithos 179, 263–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, X, Xu, XY, Song, GS, Wang, HL, Chen, JL and Li, T (2010) Zircon LA-ICP-MS U–Pb dating and significance of Yudongzi Group deformation granite from Lueyang area, western Qinling, China. Geological Bulletin of China 29, 510–17.Google Scholar
Zhang, ZQ, Zhang, GW, Tang, SH and Wang, JH (2001) On the age of metamorphic rocks of the Yudongzi Group and the Archean crystalline basement of the Qinling Orogen. Acta Geologica Sinica 75, 198–204.Google Scholar
Zhao, GC (2015) Jiangnan Orogen in South China: developing from divergent double subduction. Gondwana Research 27, 1173–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, GC and Cawood, PA (1999) Tectonothermal evolution of the Mayuan assemblage in the Cathaysia Block: implications for Neoproterozoic collision-related assembly of the South China Craton. American Journal of Science 299, 309–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, GC and Cawood, PA (2012) Precambrian geology of China. Precambrian Research 222, 13–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, L, Zhai, M, Zhou, X, Santosh, M and Ma, X (2015) Geochronology and geochemistry of a suite of mafic rocks in Chencai area, South China: implications for petrogenesis and tectonic setting. Lithos 236–237, 226–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, JH and Zhou, MF (2007) Neoproterozoic adakitic plutons and arc magmatism along the western margin of the Yangtze Block, South China. The Journal of Geology 115, 675–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, JH, Zhou, MF, Yan, DP, Zheng, JP and Li, JW (2011) Reappraisal of the ages of Neoproterozoic strata in South China: no connection with the Grenvillian Orogeny. Geology 39, 299–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, JP, Griffin, WL, O’Reilly, SY, Zhang, M, Pearson, N and Pan, YM (2006) Widespread Archean basement beneath the Yangtze craton. Geology 34, 417–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, YF, Zhang, SB, Zhao, ZF, Wu, YB, Li, XH, Li, ZX and Wu, FY (2007) Contrasting zircon Hf and O isotopes in the two episodes of Neoproterozoic granitoids in South China: implications for growth and reworking of continental crust. Lithos 96, 127–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, MF, Kennedy, AK, Sun, M, Malpas, J and Lesher, CM (2002a) Neoproterozoic arc-related mafic intrusions along the northern margin of South China: implications for the accretion of Rodinia. Journal of Geology 110, 611–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, JB, Li, XH, Ge, WC and Li, ZX (2007) Age and origin of middle Neoproterozoic mafic magmatism in southern Yangtze Block and relevance to the break-up of Rodinia. Gondwana Research 12, 184–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Y, Liang, XQ, Liang, XR, Jiang, Y, Wang, C, Fu, JG and Shao, TB (2015) U–Pb geochronology and Hf-isotopes on detrital zircons of Lower Paleozoic strata from Hainan Island: new clues for the early crustal evolution of southeastern South China. Gondwana Research 27, 1586–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, MF, Ma, YX, Yan, DP, Xia, XP, Zhao, JH and Sun, M (2006a) The Yanbian terrane (Southern Sichuan Province, SW China): a Neoproterozoic arc assemblage in the western margin of the Yangtze Block. Precambrian Research 144, 19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, JC, Wang, XL and Qiu, JS (2009) Geochronology of Neoproterozoic mafic rocks and sandstones from northeastern Guizhou, South China: coeval arc magmatism and sedimentation. Precambrian Research 170, 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, GY, Wu, YB, Gao, S, Yang, JZ, Zheng, JP, Qin, ZW, Wang, H and Yang, SH (2015) The 2.65 Ga A-type granite in the northeastern Yangtze craton: petrogenesis and geological implications. Precambrian Research 258, 247–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, MF, Yan, DP, Kennedy, AK, Li, YQ and Ding, J (2002b) SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronological and geochemical evidence for Neoproterozoic arc-magmatism along the western margin of the Yangtze Block, South China. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 196, 51–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, MF, Yan, DP, Wang, CL, Qi, L and Kennedy, A (2006b) Subduction-related origin of the 750 Ma Xuelongbao adakitic complex (Sichuan Province, China): implications for the tectonic setting of the giant Neoproterozoic magmatic event in South China. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 248, 286–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, DC, Zhao, ZD, Niu, YL, Dilek, Y and Mo, XX (2011) Lhasa terrane in southern Tibet came from Australia. Geology 39, 727–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, DC, Zhao, ZD, Niu, YL, Dilek, Y, Wang, Q, Ji, WH, Dong, GC, Sui, QL, Liu, YS, Yuan, HL and Mo, XX (2012) Cambrian bimodal volcanism in the Lhasa Terrane, southern Tibet: record of an early Paleozoic Andean-type magmatic arc in the Australian proto-Tethyan margin. Chemical Geology 328, 290–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, WG, Zhong, H, Li, ZX, Bai, ZJ and Yang, YJ (2016) SIMS zircon U–Pb ages, geochemistry and Nd–Hf isotopes of ca. 1.0 Ga mafic dykes and volcanic rocks in the Huili area, SW China: origin and tectonic significance. Precambrian Research 273, 67–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Sketch map showing the main tectonic units of eastern Asia with the location of the SCB (Chen, Q. et al. 2018). (b) Map showing the SCB consisting of the Yangtze (eastern, central and western parts) and Cathaysia blocks, with the distribution of Neoproterozoic intrusions along the western and northern margins of the Yangtze Block, termed the Panxi–Hannan Belt (Chen et al. 2016). (c) Simplified geologic map of the Micangshan–Longmenshan region along the western margin of the SCB (modified from Sichuan Geological Map at 1:200 < 2 > 000 scale). Location of samples in this study (represented by black stars).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Schematic stratigraphy of the front of the Micangshan fold–thrust belt, northern margin of the western Yangtze Block. The blue stars indicate sampling locations.

Figure 2

Table 1. U–Pb dating results for detrital zircons from the Cambrian–Ordovician strata on the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Representative CL images of the Cambrian–Ordovician zircon samples from the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block showing internal structure and morphology.

Figure 4

Fig. 4. Concordia plots for zircons from the Cambrian–Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block. Grains yielding ages with more than 10 % discordance are represented by blue ellipses.

Figure 5

Fig. 5. Probability density distribution curves of ages showing the results of LA-ICP-MS dating of detrital zircons from the Cambrian–Ordovician samples from the northern margin of the western Yangtze Block.

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Detrital zircon age distributions for (a) Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the western Yangtze Block (this study); (b) Cambrian sedimentary rocks from the western Yangtze Block (this study; Chen, Q. et al. 2018); (c) Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the eastern Yangtze Block (Wang et al. 2010; Xu et al. 2012; Yao et al. 2012; Li et al. 2013); (d) Cambrian sedimentary rocks from the eastern Yangtze Block (Wang et al. 2010); (e) Ordovician sedimentary rocks from the Cathaysia Block (Wang et al. 2010; Wu et al. 2010; Yao et al. 2011; Xu et al. 2014a); (f) Cambrian sedimentary rocks from the Cathaysia Block (Wang et al. 2010; Wu et al. 2010; Xu et al. 2014a; Yao, W. H. et al. 2014).

Figure 7

Fig. 7. Detrital zircon age distributions for the main blocks in East Gondwana. (a) Western Australia (Cawood & Nemchin, 2000; Veevers et al. 2006; Kettanah, 2015); (b) Himalaya and North India (Myrow et al. 2003, 2010; McQuarrie et al. 2008; Gehrels et al. 2011); (c) Qiangtang (Dong et al. 2011; Zhu et al. 2011).

Figure 8

Fig. 8. (a) Reconstruction of early Palaeozoic East Gondwana showing position of the SCB (modified after Fitzsimons, 2000; Boger et al. 2001; Metcalfe, 2006; Zhu et al. 2011; Burrett et al. 2014; Chen, Q. et al. 2018). LH – Lesser Himalaya; GH – Greater Himalaya; TH – Tethyan Himalaya; GI – Greater India. (b) The palaeogeographic pattern for the Cathaysia and Yangtze blocks during the Cambrian and Ordovician periods (modified after Wang et al. 2010; Wu et al. 2010).