Search

The Jinghong mafic–ultramafic complex, exposed in the eastern margin of the Lancangjiang tectonic belt, is related to the subduction of the Paleo‐Tethys Ocean. Its petrogenesis plays a key role in constraining the tectonic evolution of the eastern Paleo‐Tethys Ocean in southwestern China. In this study, we present petrological, geochemical and geochronological results of the Jinghong complex rocks, in order to decipher their origin and tectonic significance. The Jinghong mafic–ultramafic complex was composed of peridotite, gabbro, basalt and minor plagiogranite. Whole‐rock geochemical data of the mafic rocks indicate that they have both MORB and IAB affinities and plot in the back‐arc basin basalt (BABB) field in the FeO∗/MgO vs. TiO2 diagram. Combined with their trace element characteristics, it can be concluded that the Jinghong mafic–ultramafic complex represents an ophiolite suite that was formed in a back‐arc ocean basin. Precise LA‐ICP‐MS zircon U‐Pb dating yielded weighted mean 206Pb/238U ages of 298.4 ± 1.7 Ma, 294.3 ± 1.6 Ma, and 292.8 ± 2.0 Ma for gabbroic rocks from this complex, which indicates that the Jinghong ophiolites were formed during the early Permian (298–293 Ma). We propose that during subduction of the main Paleo‐Tethys Ocean, a back‐arc ocean basin was formed at the east of the Lancangjiang tectonic belt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Neoarchean basement rocks of the Qixingtai region in the northwest of western Shandong, eastern North China Craton are divided into western and eastern domains, separated by a ductile shear zone. The western domain is mainly composed of early Neoarchean tonalitic and supracrustal rocks, and the eastern domain is composed of late Neoarchean crustally‐derived granite with diverse early Neoarchean enclaves up to several kilometres long of supracrustal and gneissic TTG‐diorite rocks. This study reports an integrated field, whole‐rock geochemistry and zircon U–Pb‐Hf study on the granites and their enclaves in the eastern domain. The supracrustal enclaves are mainly composed of meta‐basaltic and meta‐ultramafic rocks and are the same in lithological association and formation time as the 2,750–2,700 Ma Liuhang "Formation" in the western area. The TTG‐diorite enclaves can be divided into early and late groups. Magmatic zircons from early TTG‐diorite samples have U–Pb ages of 2,731 ± 17 to 2,748 ± 13 Ma and εHf(t) values of +2.7 to +9.5, whereas trondhjemite samples of the late group have U–Pb zircon ages of 2,588 ± 18 to 2,606 ± 12 Ma and εHf(t) values of +0.6 to +6.5. The Hf isotopic signatures on magmatic zircon from the >2,700 Ma diorite‐tonalites indicate that they are predominantly juvenile crustal additions, probably with minor involvement of older crust in their genesis, as given by tDM (Hf) ages ranging back to 2.92 Ga. The eastern granites range from monzogranite to syenogranite in composition and commonly have negative Eu anomalies, indicating residual plagioclase in the source region. Magmatic zircons from two granite samples have U–Pb ages of 2,516 ± 24 and 2,527 ± 18 Ma and εHf(t) values of +1.0 to +7.0. A fine‐grained syenogranite dyke contains inherited early Neoarchean zircons with εHf(t) values of +1.6 to +7.4. The isotopic signatures of the late Neoarchean granites that dominate the eastern domain show that they were derived from partial melting recycling of older continental crust recognized in the region – early Neoarchean rocks formed as a result of juvenile crustal additions. This is a common signature for late Archean crustal evolution throughout much of the North China Craton, and is the hallmark of some other Archean terranes, such as the Dharwar Craton of south India. The geodynamic explanations for the formation globally of vast amounts of crustally‐derived late Neoarchean granite are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]