Multi-stage modification of Paleoarchean crust beneath the Anabar tectonic province (Siberian craton)

V. S. Shatsky*, V. G. Malkovets, E. A. Belousova, I. G. Tretiakova, W. L. Griffin, A. L. Ragozin, Q. Wang, A. A. Gibsher, S. Y. O'Reilly

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

According to present views, the crustal terranes of the Anabar province of the Siberian craton were initially independent blocks, separated from the convecting mantle at 3.1 (Daldyn terrane), 2.9 (Magan terrane) and 2.5 Ga (Markha terrane) (Rosen, 2003, 2004; Rosen et al., 1994, 2005, 2009). Previous studies of zircons in a suite of crustal xenoliths from kimberlite pipes of the Markha terrane concluded that the evolution of the crust of the Markha terrane is very similar to that of the Daldyn terrane.

To test this conclusion we present results of U-Pb and Hf-isotope studies on zircons in crustal xenoliths from the Zapolyarnaya kimberlite pipe (Upper Muna kimberlite field), located within the Daldyn terrane, and the Botuobinskaya pipe (Nakyn kimberlite field) in the center of the Markha terrane. The data on xenoliths from the Botuobinskaya kimberlite pipe record tectonothermal events at 2.94, 2.8, 2.7 and 2 Ga. The event at 2 Ga caused Pb loss in zircons from a mafic granulite. U-Pb dating of zircons from the Zapolyarnaya pipe gives an age of 2.7 Ga. All zircons from the studied crustal xenoliths have Archean Hf model ages ranging from 3.65 to 3.11 Ga. This relatively narrow range suggests that reworking of the ancient crust beneath the Nakyn and Upper Muna kimberlite fields was minor, compared with the Daldyn and Alakit-Markha fields (Shatsky et al., 2016).

This study, when combined with dating of detrital zircons, implies that tectonic-thermal events at 2.9–2.85, 2.75–2.7 and 2.0–1.95 Ga occurred everywhere on the Anabar tectonic province, and could reflect the upwelling of superplumes at 2.9, 2.7 and 2 Ga. The presence of the same tectonic-thermal events in the Daldyn and Markha terranes (Rosen et al., 2006a,b) supports the conclusion that the identification of the Markha terrane as a separate unit is not valid.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)125-144
Number of pages20
JournalPrecambrian Research
Volume305
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2018

    Fingerprint

Cite this