TY - JOUR

T1 - Connection between tectonothermal events of the Yakutian kimberlite province and assembly of the Siberian craton

AU - Shatsky, Vladislav S.

AU - Wang, Qin

AU - Ragozin, Alexey L.

AU - Su, Wenhao

AU - Ilyin, Andrei A.

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - The tectonic framework of the Siberian craton is still under debate. It is generally assumed that the Markha andDaldyn terranes collided at 2.2–2.1 Ga and the final assembly of the Siberian craton occurred at 1.9–1.8 Ga.However, previous study on zircons from xenoliths of the Zapolyarnaya pipe, which is located in the Upper Munakimberlite field and close to the boundary between the Markha and Daldyn terranes, do not show tectonothermalevidence younger than 2.7 Ga. To clarify the tectonothermal evolution of the Siberian craton, we present U-Pbages and Hf isotope data of zircons from crustal xenoliths in the Novinka and Komsomolskaya Magnitnayakimberlite pipes in the Upper Muna field. The zircon ages confirm only one major tectonothermal event at 2.7 Gain the Upper Muna field, which doubts the existence of the collision zone between the Markha and Daldynterranes. The middle-lower crust beneath the Upper Muna field is mainly composed of mafic and intermediategranulites and experienced long-term cooling. The negative values of εHf(2.7) suggests ignorable addition ofjuvenile component during partial melting of the Paleoarchean crust at 2.7 Ga. Compared with crustal xenolithsfrom other kimberlite pipes in the Yakutian diamondiferous province, the crust of the Anabar province showsvertical and lateral heterogeneity and the absence of a relationship between the crustal reworking degree and themain collision zones. We propose that the widespread 2.7 and 1.9 Ga tectonothermal events in the Anabartectonic province were associated with the episodic rise of superplumes, which not only caused the crustalgrowth and reworking but also facilitated collision and amalgamation of terranes.

AB - The tectonic framework of the Siberian craton is still under debate. It is generally assumed that the Markha andDaldyn terranes collided at 2.2–2.1 Ga and the final assembly of the Siberian craton occurred at 1.9–1.8 Ga.However, previous study on zircons from xenoliths of the Zapolyarnaya pipe, which is located in the Upper Munakimberlite field and close to the boundary between the Markha and Daldyn terranes, do not show tectonothermalevidence younger than 2.7 Ga. To clarify the tectonothermal evolution of the Siberian craton, we present U-Pbages and Hf isotope data of zircons from crustal xenoliths in the Novinka and Komsomolskaya Magnitnayakimberlite pipes in the Upper Muna field. The zircon ages confirm only one major tectonothermal event at 2.7 Gain the Upper Muna field, which doubts the existence of the collision zone between the Markha and Daldynterranes. The middle-lower crust beneath the Upper Muna field is mainly composed of mafic and intermediategranulites and experienced long-term cooling. The negative values of εHf(2.7) suggests ignorable addition ofjuvenile component during partial melting of the Paleoarchean crust at 2.7 Ga. Compared with crustal xenolithsfrom other kimberlite pipes in the Yakutian diamondiferous province, the crust of the Anabar province showsvertical and lateral heterogeneity and the absence of a relationship between the crustal reworking degree and themain collision zones. We propose that the widespread 2.7 and 1.9 Ga tectonothermal events in the Anabartectonic province were associated with the episodic rise of superplumes, which not only caused the crustalgrowth and reworking but also facilitated collision and amalgamation of terranes.

KW - Continental growth

KW - Crustal reworking

KW - Granulites

KW - Siberian craton

KW - Tectonothermal events

KW - Zircon geochronology

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/098a0748-1dbe-38ac-ae29-15f38172654e/

U2 - 10.1016/j.precamres.2024.107379

DO - 10.1016/j.precamres.2024.107379

M3 - Article

VL - 405

JO - Precambrian Research

JF - Precambrian Research

SN - 0301-9268

M1 - 107379

ER -