Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T06:34:22.671Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A revised chronostratigraphic framework for International Ocean Discovery Program Expedition 355 sites in Laxmi Basin, eastern Arabian Sea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2019

Claire M. Routledge
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
Denise K. Kulhanek*
Affiliation:
International Ocean Discovery Program, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845, USA
Lisa Tauxe
Affiliation:
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0220, USA
Giancarlo Scardia
Affiliation:
Instituto de Geociências e Ciências Exatas, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Rio Claro 19014-020, Brazil
Arun D. Singh
Affiliation:
Center of Advanced Study in Geology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221005, India
Stephan Steinke
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Oceanography and State Key Laboratory of Marine Environmental Science, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361002, China
Elizabeth M. Griffith
Affiliation:
School of Earth Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
Rajeev Saraswat
Affiliation:
Geological Oceanography Division, National Institute of Oceanography, Dona Paula, Goa 403004, India
*
*Author for correspondence: Denise K. Kulhanek, Email: kulhanek@iodp.tamu.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

International Ocean Discovery Program Expedition 355 drilled Sites U1456 and U1457 in Laxmi Basin (eastern Arabian Sea) to document the impact of the South Asian monsoon on weathering and erosion of the Himalaya. We revised the chronostratigraphic framework for these sites using a combination of biostratigraphy, magnetostratigraphy and strontium isotope stratigraphy. The sedimentary section at the two sites is similar and we divided it into six units bounded by unconformities or emplaced as a mass-transport deposit (MTD). Unit 1 underlies the MTD, and is of early–middle Miocene age at Site U1456 and early Paleocene age at Site U1457. An unconformity (U1) created by emplacement of the MTD (unit 2) during the late Miocene Epoch (at c. 9.83–9.69 Ma) separates units 1 and 2 and is identified by a marked change in lithology. Unit 3 consists of hemipelagic sediment with thin interbeds of graded sandstone of late Miocene age, separated from unit 4 by a second unconformity (U2) of 0.5–0.9 Myr duration. Unit 4 consists of upper Miocene interbedded mudstone and sandstone and hemipelagic chalk deposited between c. 8 and 6 Ma. A c. 1.4–1.6 Myr hiatus (U3) encompasses the Miocene–Pliocene boundary and separates unit 4 from unit 5. Unit 5 includes upper Pliocene – lower Pleistocene siliciclastic sediment that is separated from unit 6 by a c. 0.45 Myr hiatus (U4) in the lower Pleistocene sediments. Unit 6 includes a thick package of rapidly deposited Pleistocene sand and mud overlain by predominantly hemipelagic sediment deposited since c. 1.2 Ma.

Information

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Map of Expedition 355 drill sites and surrounding land masses. Bathymetric map of the Arabian Sea and surrounding landmasses from GeoMapApp (Ryan et al.2009). Yellow circles – Expedition 355 sites; white lines – major branches of the Indus River and its tributaries; red stars – earlier scientific drilling sites that have sampled the Indus Fan; pink line – approximate extent of the fan after Kolla and Coumes (1987); black box highlights the area covered in Figure 2. Figure modified from Pandey et al. (2016).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Expedition 355 drill sites and other bathymetric features. Bathymetric map of Laxmi Basin and surrounding area showing the location of Expedition 355 sites in relation to other major bathymetric features, especially Laxmi Ridge. Yellow circles – Expedition 355 sites; black lines – contours in metres below sea level. Bathymetric data are from GeoMapApp (Ryan et al.2009). Figure modified from Pandey et al. (2016).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Examples of behaviour of palaeomagnetic specimens during alternating field (AF) demagnetization. (a–d, f) Vector end-point diagrams. Red circles are x, y pairs (in vertically oriented co-ordinate system where x and y are in the horizontal plane, but are unoriented with respect to geographic north) and the blue squares are x, z pairs. In these plots x is parallel to the natural remnant magnetization (NRM) direction and z is taken as positive down, as per palaeomagnetic practice. The NRM is the untreated initial measurement. Subsequent treatment steps in alternating fields of up to 100 mT are labelled and the bounds of interpretation are indicated by the green squares. (e) Remanence decay versus alternating field treatment. (c, e) Insets are equal-area projections. The line from the centre to the edge is the azimuth of the NRM remanence vector. Figure modified from Pandey et al. (2016).

Figure 3

Table 1. Biostratigraphic datums and magnetic polarity tie points for Site U1456 Holes A–E. CN – calcareous nannofossil; PF – planktonic foraminifer; MR – magnetic reversal; T – top event; B – base event. All palaeomagnetic chron boundaries are the tops.

Figure 4

Table 2. Biostratigraphic datums and magnetic polarity tie points for Site U1457 Holes A–C. CN – calcareous nannofossil; PF – planktonic foraminifer; MR – magnetic reversal; T – top event; B – base event. All palaeomagnetic chron boundaries are the tops.

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Revised magnetostratigraphic data and interpretations for Site U1456. (a) Inclinations versus composite depth (m CCSF). (b) Gyromagnetic resonance (GRM) index as described in the text. (c) As for (a), but plotted against inferred age. (d) Geomagnetic polarity time scale of Gradstein et al. (2012).

Figure 6

Fig. 5. Revised magnetostratigraphic data and interpretations for Site U1457. (a) Inclinations versus composite depth (m CCSF). (b) Gyromagnetic resonance (GRM) index as described in the text. (c) As for (a) but plotted against inferred age. (d) Geomagnetic polarity time scale of Gradstein et al. (2012).

Figure 7

Fig. 6. Photomicrographs of selected calcareous nannofossils from Site U1457. A 5 µm scale bar is shown next to the first image. (1–4) Ceratolithus cristatus; (5) Reticulofenestra pseudoumbilicus; (6) R. pseudoumbilicus (5–7 µm); (7, 8) Helicosphaera carteri; (9) Pontosphaera japonica; (10) Reticulofenestra bisecta (reworked); (11) Calcidiscus leptoporus; (12) Sphenolithus abies; (13, 14) Discoaster brouweri; (15, 16) Discoaster surculus; (17) Discoaster asymmetricus; (18) Discoaster tamalis; (19) Discoaster triradiatus; (20) Discoaster bergenii; and (21, 22) D. berggrenii. (1–6, 8, 10, 12, 21) from U1457C-45R-4, 7 cm; (7, 9, 17, 18) from U1457C-35R-3, 32 cm; and (11, 13–16, 19, 20, 22) from U1457C-49R-2, 27 cm.

Figure 8

Fig. 7. Chronostratigraphic framework for Site U1456. Blue triangles are calcareous nannofossil events (up are tops, down are bases); green triangles are foraminifera events (up are tops, down are bases); orange circle is change in foraminifer coiling direction; and maroon diamonds are palaeomagnetic chron boundaries. Black lines represent error bars (both age and depth). See text (Section 5.d) for discussion of red arrow. Number represents chronostratigraphic event (refer to datum labels in Table 1).

Figure 9

Fig. 8. Chronostratigraphic framework for Site U1457. Symbols as for Figure 3; pink squares are strontium isotope values. See text (Section 5.d) for discussion of red arrows. Number represents chronostratigraphic event (refer to datum labels in Table 2).

Supplementary material: File

Routledge et al. supplementary material

Routledge et al. supplementary material 1

Download Routledge et al. supplementary material(File)
File 660.8 KB