Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T06:00:12.112Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Geochronology and geochemistry of the c. 80 Ma Rutog granitic pluton, northwestern Tibet: implications for the tectonic evolution of the Lhasa Terrane

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2008

TAI-PING ZHAO*
Affiliation:
Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, P.R. China
MEI-FU ZHOU
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, P.R. China
JUN-HONG ZHAO
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, P.R. China
KAI-JUN ZHANG
Affiliation:
Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, P.R. China
WEI CHEN
Affiliation:
Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, P.R. China
*
†Author for correspondence: tpzhao@gig.ac.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Rutog granitic pluton lies in the Gangdese magmatic arc in the westernmost part of the Lhasa Terrane, NW Tibet, and has SHRIMP zircon U–Pb ages of c. 80 Ma. The pluton consists of granodiorite and monzogranite with SiO2 ranging from 62 to 72 wt% and Al2 O3 from 15 to 17 wt%. The rocks contain 2.33–4.93 wt% K2O and 3.42–5.52 wt% Na2O and have Na2O/K2O ratios of 0.74–2.00. Their chondrite-normalized rare earth element (REE) patterns are enriched in LREE ((La/Yb)n = 15 to 26) and do not show significant Eu anomalies (δEu = 0.68–1.15). On a primitive mantle-normalized trace element diagram, the rocks are rich in large ion lithophile elements (LILE) and poor in high field strength elements (HFSE), HREE and Y. Their Sr/Y ratios range from 15 to 78 with an average of 30. The rocks have constant initial 87Sr/86Sr ratios (0.7045 to 0.7049) and slightly positive ɛNd(t) values (+0.1 to +2.3), similar to I-type granites generated in an arc setting. The geochemistry of the Rutog pluton is best explained by partial melting of a thickened continental crust, triggered by underplating of basaltic magmas in a mantle wedge. The formation of the Rutog pluton suggests flat subduction of the Neo-Tethyan oceanic lithosphere from the south. Crustal thickening may have occurred in the Late Cretaceous prior to the India–Asia collision.

Information

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008
Figure 0

Figure 1. Simplified geological map of the Shiquanhe region, NW Tibet, showing the tectonic framework of the Tibetan Plateau (inset map) and the location of the Rutog pluton. JS – Jinshajiang suture; BNS – Bangong–Nujiang suture; YZS – Indus–Yarlung–Zangbo suture.

Figure 1

Table 1. SHRIMP zircon U–Pb analytical data for rocks from the Rutog pluton

Figure 2

Table 2. Major and trace element compositions for Rutog granites

Figure 3

Figure 2. Cathodoluminescence images of zircons from the Rutog pluton. SHRIMP analysis points are white circles. The scale is 200 μm.

Figure 4

Figure 3. SHRIMP U–Pb concordia plots of zircons from the Rutog pluton.

Figure 5

Figure 4. SiO2 v. other major element oxides of rocks of the Rutog pluton.

Figure 6

Figure 5. Chondrite-normalized REE patterns for rocks from the Rutog pluton. Normalization values are from Sun & McDonough (1989).

Figure 7

Figure 6. Primitive mantle-normalized trace-element diagram for rocks from the Rutog pluton. Normalization values are from Sun & McDonough (1989).

Figure 8

Table 3. Sr–Nd isotope compositions of rocks from the Rutog pluton

Figure 9

Figure 7. Plots of Sr–Nd isotopes for rocks from the Rutog pluton.

Figure 10

Figure 8. Fractional crystallization vector diagrams of Sr v. Ba (a) and Sr v. Rb (b) for the Rutog granites. The vectors are from Li et al. (2007).

Figure 11

Figure 9. CIPW-normative Qz–Ab–Or diagram with low-temperature melt compositions at 1, 5 and 10 kbar (Johannes & Holtz, 1996).

Figure 12

Figure 10. (a) Sr/Y v. Y for the rocks from the Rutog pluton. Fields for adakite or high-Al TTG and normal arc andesite and dacite are from Drummond & Defant (1990). (b) MgO v. Y for the rocks from the Rutog pluton showing the fractional crystallization of amphibole.

Figure 13

Figure 11. Plots of Zr concentration against the cation ratios of (Na+K+2Ca)/(Al*Si) (Watson & Harrison, 1983).

Figure 14

Figure 12. Plots of Y v. Nb (a) and Y+Nb v. Rb (b) for rocks from the Rutog pluton. Reference fields are from Pearce, Harris & Tindle (1984). Syn-COLG – Syn-collisional Granite; WPG – Within Plate Granite; ORG – Orogenic Granites; VAG – Volcanic Arc Granite.

Figure 15

Figure 13. R1–R2 multi-cationic diagram of rocks from the Rutog pluton (after De la Roche et al. 1980). R1 and R2 are parameters calculated from chemical analyses, R1 = 4Si − 11(Na+K) − 2(Fe+Ti) and R2 = 6Ca+ 2Mg+ Al.