Paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya from primary and secondary magnetizations of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sedimentary rocks

Wentao Huang, Douwe J.J. Van Hinsbergen, Mark J. Dekkers, Eduardo Garzanti, Guillaume Dupont-Nivet, Peter C. Lippert, Xiaochun Li, Marco Maffione, Cor G. Langereis, Xiumian Hu, Zhaojie Guo, Paul A Kapp

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

29 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Tibetan Himalaya represents the northernmost continental unit of the Indian plate that collided with Asia in the Cenozoic. Paleomagnetic studies on the Tibetan Himalaya can help constrain the dimension and paleogeography of "Greater India," the Indian plate lithosphere that subducted and underthrusted below Asia after initial collision. Here we present a paleomagnetic investigation of a Jurassic (limestones) and Lower Cretaceous (volcaniclastic sandstones) section of the Tibetan Himalaya. The limestones yielded positive fold test, showing a prefolding origin of the isolated remanent magnetizations. Detailed paleomagnetic analyses, rock magnetic tests, end-member modeling of acquisition curves of isothermal remanent magnetization, and petrographic investigation reveal that the magnetic carrier of the Jurassic limestones is authigenic magnetite, whereas the dominant magnetic carrier of the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones is detrital magnetite. Our observations lead us to conclude that the Jurassic limestones record a prefolding remagnetization, whereas the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones retain a primary remanence. The volcaniclastic sandstones yield an Early Cretaceous paleolatitude of 55.5°S [52.5°S, 58.6°S] for the Tibetan Himalaya, suggesting it was part of the Indian continent at that time. The size of "Greater India" during Jurassic time cannot be estimated from these limestones. Instead, a paleolatitude of the Tibetan Himalaya of 23.8°S [21.8°S, 26.1°S] during the remagnetization process is suggested. It is likely that the remagnetization, caused by the oxidation of early diagenetic pyrite to magnetite, was induced during 103-83 or 77-67 Ma. The inferred paleolatitudes at these two time intervals imply very different tectonic consequences for the Tibetan Himalaya.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)77-100
Number of pages24
JournalGeochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Sedimentary rocks
paleolatitude
Calcium Carbonate
sedimentary rocks
limestone
magnetization
sedimentary rock
sandstones
Magnetization
Ferrosoferric Oxide
Sandstone
Jurassic
remagnetization
Cretaceous
sandstone
magnetite
Indian plate
remanent magnetization
India
Remanence

Keywords

  • paleolatitude
  • remagnetization
  • Tibetan Himalaya

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geophysics
  • Geochemistry and Petrology

Cite this

Paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya from primary and secondary magnetizations of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sedimentary rocks. / Huang, Wentao; Van Hinsbergen, Douwe J.J.; Dekkers, Mark J.; Garzanti, Eduardo; Dupont-Nivet, Guillaume; Lippert, Peter C.; Li, Xiaochun; Maffione, Marco; Langereis, Cor G.; Hu, Xiumian; Guo, Zhaojie; Kapp, Paul A.

In: Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2015, p. 77-100.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Huang, W, Van Hinsbergen, DJJ, Dekkers, MJ, Garzanti, E, Dupont-Nivet, G, Lippert, PC, Li, X, Maffione, M, Langereis, CG, Hu, X, Guo, Z & Kapp, PA 2015, 'Paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya from primary and secondary magnetizations of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sedimentary rocks', Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 77-100. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GC005624
Huang, Wentao ; Van Hinsbergen, Douwe J.J. ; Dekkers, Mark J. ; Garzanti, Eduardo ; Dupont-Nivet, Guillaume ; Lippert, Peter C. ; Li, Xiaochun ; Maffione, Marco ; Langereis, Cor G. ; Hu, Xiumian ; Guo, Zhaojie ; Kapp, Paul A. / Paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya from primary and secondary magnetizations of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sedimentary rocks. In: Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems. 2015 ; Vol. 16, No. 1. pp. 77-100.
@article{d2e5b45cd5b04ae68c1c0fc3004490dd,
title = "Paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya from primary and secondary magnetizations of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sedimentary rocks",
abstract = "The Tibetan Himalaya represents the northernmost continental unit of the Indian plate that collided with Asia in the Cenozoic. Paleomagnetic studies on the Tibetan Himalaya can help constrain the dimension and paleogeography of {"}Greater India,{"} the Indian plate lithosphere that subducted and underthrusted below Asia after initial collision. Here we present a paleomagnetic investigation of a Jurassic (limestones) and Lower Cretaceous (volcaniclastic sandstones) section of the Tibetan Himalaya. The limestones yielded positive fold test, showing a prefolding origin of the isolated remanent magnetizations. Detailed paleomagnetic analyses, rock magnetic tests, end-member modeling of acquisition curves of isothermal remanent magnetization, and petrographic investigation reveal that the magnetic carrier of the Jurassic limestones is authigenic magnetite, whereas the dominant magnetic carrier of the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones is detrital magnetite. Our observations lead us to conclude that the Jurassic limestones record a prefolding remagnetization, whereas the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones retain a primary remanence. The volcaniclastic sandstones yield an Early Cretaceous paleolatitude of 55.5°S [52.5°S, 58.6°S] for the Tibetan Himalaya, suggesting it was part of the Indian continent at that time. The size of {"}Greater India{"} during Jurassic time cannot be estimated from these limestones. Instead, a paleolatitude of the Tibetan Himalaya of 23.8°S [21.8°S, 26.1°S] during the remagnetization process is suggested. It is likely that the remagnetization, caused by the oxidation of early diagenetic pyrite to magnetite, was induced during 103-83 or 77-67 Ma. The inferred paleolatitudes at these two time intervals imply very different tectonic consequences for the Tibetan Himalaya.",
keywords = "paleolatitude, remagnetization, Tibetan Himalaya",
author = "Wentao Huang and {Van Hinsbergen}, {Douwe J.J.} and Dekkers, {Mark J.} and Eduardo Garzanti and Guillaume Dupont-Nivet and Lippert, {Peter C.} and Xiaochun Li and Marco Maffione and Langereis, {Cor G.} and Xiumian Hu and Zhaojie Guo and Kapp, {Paul A}",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1002/2014GC005624",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "77--100",
journal = "Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems",
issn = "1525-2027",
publisher = "American Geophysical Union",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya from primary and secondary magnetizations of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sedimentary rocks

AU - Huang, Wentao

AU - Van Hinsbergen, Douwe J.J.

AU - Dekkers, Mark J.

AU - Garzanti, Eduardo

AU - Dupont-Nivet, Guillaume

AU - Lippert, Peter C.

AU - Li, Xiaochun

AU - Maffione, Marco

AU - Langereis, Cor G.

AU - Hu, Xiumian

AU - Guo, Zhaojie

AU - Kapp, Paul A

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - The Tibetan Himalaya represents the northernmost continental unit of the Indian plate that collided with Asia in the Cenozoic. Paleomagnetic studies on the Tibetan Himalaya can help constrain the dimension and paleogeography of "Greater India," the Indian plate lithosphere that subducted and underthrusted below Asia after initial collision. Here we present a paleomagnetic investigation of a Jurassic (limestones) and Lower Cretaceous (volcaniclastic sandstones) section of the Tibetan Himalaya. The limestones yielded positive fold test, showing a prefolding origin of the isolated remanent magnetizations. Detailed paleomagnetic analyses, rock magnetic tests, end-member modeling of acquisition curves of isothermal remanent magnetization, and petrographic investigation reveal that the magnetic carrier of the Jurassic limestones is authigenic magnetite, whereas the dominant magnetic carrier of the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones is detrital magnetite. Our observations lead us to conclude that the Jurassic limestones record a prefolding remagnetization, whereas the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones retain a primary remanence. The volcaniclastic sandstones yield an Early Cretaceous paleolatitude of 55.5°S [52.5°S, 58.6°S] for the Tibetan Himalaya, suggesting it was part of the Indian continent at that time. The size of "Greater India" during Jurassic time cannot be estimated from these limestones. Instead, a paleolatitude of the Tibetan Himalaya of 23.8°S [21.8°S, 26.1°S] during the remagnetization process is suggested. It is likely that the remagnetization, caused by the oxidation of early diagenetic pyrite to magnetite, was induced during 103-83 or 77-67 Ma. The inferred paleolatitudes at these two time intervals imply very different tectonic consequences for the Tibetan Himalaya.

AB - The Tibetan Himalaya represents the northernmost continental unit of the Indian plate that collided with Asia in the Cenozoic. Paleomagnetic studies on the Tibetan Himalaya can help constrain the dimension and paleogeography of "Greater India," the Indian plate lithosphere that subducted and underthrusted below Asia after initial collision. Here we present a paleomagnetic investigation of a Jurassic (limestones) and Lower Cretaceous (volcaniclastic sandstones) section of the Tibetan Himalaya. The limestones yielded positive fold test, showing a prefolding origin of the isolated remanent magnetizations. Detailed paleomagnetic analyses, rock magnetic tests, end-member modeling of acquisition curves of isothermal remanent magnetization, and petrographic investigation reveal that the magnetic carrier of the Jurassic limestones is authigenic magnetite, whereas the dominant magnetic carrier of the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones is detrital magnetite. Our observations lead us to conclude that the Jurassic limestones record a prefolding remagnetization, whereas the Lower Cretaceous volcaniclastic sandstones retain a primary remanence. The volcaniclastic sandstones yield an Early Cretaceous paleolatitude of 55.5°S [52.5°S, 58.6°S] for the Tibetan Himalaya, suggesting it was part of the Indian continent at that time. The size of "Greater India" during Jurassic time cannot be estimated from these limestones. Instead, a paleolatitude of the Tibetan Himalaya of 23.8°S [21.8°S, 26.1°S] during the remagnetization process is suggested. It is likely that the remagnetization, caused by the oxidation of early diagenetic pyrite to magnetite, was induced during 103-83 or 77-67 Ma. The inferred paleolatitudes at these two time intervals imply very different tectonic consequences for the Tibetan Himalaya.

KW - paleolatitude

KW - remagnetization

KW - Tibetan Himalaya

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027924674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027924674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/2014GC005624

DO - 10.1002/2014GC005624

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 77

EP - 100

JO - Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems

JF - Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems

SN - 1525-2027

IS - 1

ER -