Miocene burial and exhumation of the India-Asia collision zone in
southern Tibet: Response to slab dynamics and erosion
B. Carrapa1, D.A. Orme1, P.G. DeCelles1, P. Kapp1, M.A. Cosca2, and R. Waldrip1
1
Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA
U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado 80225, USA
2
ABSTRACT
The India-Asia collision zone in southern Tibet preserves a record of geodynamic and
erosional processes following intercontinental collision. Apatite fission-track and zircon and
apatite (U-Th)/He data from the Oligocene–Miocene Kailas Formation, within the India-Asia
collision zone, show a synchronous cooling signal at 17 ± 1 Ma, which is younger than the
ca. 26–21 Ma depositional age of the Kailas Formation, constrained by U-Pb and 40Ar/39Ar
geochronology, and requires heating (burial) after ca. 21 Ma and subsequent rapid exhumation. Data from the Gangdese batholith underlying the Kailas Formation also indicate Miocene exhumation. The thermal history of the Kailas Formation is consistent with rapid subsidence during a short-lived phase of early Miocene extension followed by uplift and exhumation
driven by rollback and northward underthrusting of the Indian plate, respectively. Significant
removal of material from the India-Asia collision zone was likely facilitated by efficient incision of the paleo–Indus River and paleo–Yarlung River in response to drainage reorganization
and/or intensification of the Asian monsoon.
INTRODUCTION
The India-Asia collision zone in southern Tibet, including the Indus-Yarlung suture (Fig. 1),
is located at the heart of one of the greatest plate
tectonic collisions in Earth’s recent history, and
marks the position where the Indian and Asian
continental landmasses collided during the early
Cenozoic (e.g., Allégre et al., 1984; Garzanti et
al., 1987). As a result, the India-Asia collision
zone has undergone intense deformation and
surface uplift to over 6 km modern elevations,
and provides a unique archive of collisional processes (Yin et al., 1999; Ding et al., 2005). Today the India-Asia collision zone is the source
of the headwaters of two of Asia’s largest river
systems, the Yarlung-Brahmaputra River in the
east and the Indus River in the west (Fig. 1).
One of the most significant elements of the
India-Asia collision zone is the Kailas basin,
a narrow, ~1500-km-long strike-parallel basin
that formed during latest Oligocene–early Miocene time (more than 30 m.y. after the onset of
the collision) (Najman et al., 2010; DeCelles
et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2013). The lower and
middle parts of the basin fill consist of organicrich, fossiliferous, profundal lacustrine shale,
coal, turbiditic sandstones, and fringing conglomeratic alluvial deposits suggestive of a
low elevation and relatively humid, tropical
environment. The basin fill is thermally mature,
suggesting deep burial, but is exposed today at
elevations of >6500 m. The processes by which
the Kailas basin was formed, filled, buried, and
eventually uplifted to modern elevations and exhumed are not well understood, but surely must
evince a series of events not generally considered germane to the suturing process. Perhaps
most enigmatic is the fact that the basin fill is
generally weakly deformed (near Mount Kai-
las), overlying in low-angle buttress unconformity Cretaceous–Eocene volcanic and plutonic
rocks of the Gangdese magmatic arc (Gansser,
1964; Yin et al., 1999; DeCelles et al., 2011).
In this paper, we present the first multidating study of the Kailas Formation and underlying Gangdese arc rocks constraining the timing
of regional cooling of the India-Asia collision
zone and exhumation associated with tectonic
and erosional processes after India-Asia collision. New U-Pb and 40Ar/39Ar geochronological data are combined with published data to
constrain the timing of deposition of the Kailas
Formation. New apatite fission-track (AFT)
and apatite and zircon (U-Th)/He (AHe, ZHe)
data from the Kailas Formation and underlying
Gangdese batholith intrusive rocks, distributed
for ~600 km along strike in the India-Asia collision zone (Fig. 1), show rapid regional cooling and exhumation at ca. 17 Ma (Fig. 2), interpreted to be related to India underthrusting
and removal of material from the suture zone by
efficient river incision.
GEOLOGICAL SETTING
The India-Asia collision zone is dissected
by the Yarlung River valley (Fig. 1) and comprises a southern belt of ophiolite and mélange
in fault contact with Paleozoic and Mesozoic
sedimentary rocks of the Tethyan Himalaya to
the south (e.g., Burg and Chen, 1984), a medial
belt of Cretaceous Xigaze forearc basin deposits (Wang et al., 2012), and a northern district
that includes the south-dipping Great Counter
thrust and the Kailas Formation (or Gangrinboche Conglomerate; Aitchison et al., 2002) in
its footwall (Yin and Harrison, 2000) (Fig. 1B).
The Kailas Formation overlaps the Gangdese
magmatic arc in the southern Lhasa terrane.
GEOLOGY, May 2014; v. 42; no. 5; p. 443–446; Data Repository item 2014156
|
doi:10.1130/G35350.1
|
Thermochronological data show accelerated
exhumation of the Gangdese batholith, near the
Indus-Yarlung suture, at ca. 48–42, ca. 26–17,
and ca. 11–8 Ma (e.g., Copeland et al., 1987;
Harrison et al., 2000; He et al., 2007; Dai et
al., 2013). Published chronostratigraphic data
from the Kailas Formation near Mount Kailas in
southwestern Tibet (Fig. 1) indicate that it was
deposited between ca. 26 and 23 Ma (DeCelles
et al., 2011).
The Miocene was a time of active tectonics
and exhumation in southern Tibet and the Himalaya; major structures, such as the Great Counter thrust and the South Tibetan detachment
system, were active at the time (e.g., Burchfiel
et al., 1992; Murphy and Harrison, 1999). The
Great Counter thrust was active between 25 Ma
or earlier and 10 Ma (Quidelleur et al., 1997;
Yin et al., 1999; Harrison et al., 2000); the
South Tibetan detachment was active between
ca. 22 Ma and ca. 17 Ma (Hodges et al., 1996;
Dézes et al., 1999; Murphy and Harrison, 1999;
Searle et al., 1999), and at least locally as early
as ca. 35 Ma (Lee and Whitehouse, 2007) and
as late as 12 Ma (Murphy and Copeland, 2005).
MULTIDATING OF THE INDIA-ASIA
COLLISION ZONE
We collected 12 samples of Kailas Formation
and 5 samples of Gangdese batholith granite between ~80.9°E and ~86.7°E (see the GSA Data
Repository1) for geochronology and thermochronology. Samples of Kailas Formation from
previously published sections (DeCelles et al.,
2011) together with newly investigated sections
near Xiao Gurla (Yagra Valley), Lopukangri,
and Geydo (Fig. 1), were analyzed (for analytical details and information about the locations
and stratigraphic positions of the analyzed samples, see the Data Repository).
Phlogopite crystals were separated from
two basaltic flows from a section of the middle
Kailas Formation (lacustrine facies) at its type
locality near Mount Kailas (Fig. 1) (4KR363
and 4KR388; DeCelles et al., 2011) and yielded
40
Ar/ 39Ar plateau ages of 23.2 ± 0.2 Ma and 23.8
± 0.3 Ma (Fig. 2; Fig. DR1 in the Data Reposi1
GSA Data Repository item 2014156, analytical
details; AFT, ZHe, AHe, U-Pb, and 40Ar/ 39Ar data
tables; figures; and thermal modeling results, is
available online at www.geosociety.org/pubs/ft2014.
htm, or on request from editing@geosociety.org or
Documents Secretary, GSA, P.O. Box 9140, Boulder,
CO 80301, USA.
Published online XX Month 2014
GEOLOGY
©
2014 Geological
2014 | of
www.gsapubs.org
America. For permission to copy, contact Copyright Permissions, GSA, or editing@geosociety.org.
| May Society
443
A
Tibet
QIANT
IAN
IA
NT
TAN
ANG T
ANG
TE
ERR
RRAN
ANE
K
(K aila
R sR
s
X ec t a n
(Y iao ion ge
YA agr Gu s)
, s a V r la
ec al Ra
tio ley n
ns , ge
)
Indus River
s
la
ai
t. K
M
Bangong Suture
Lo
(L pu
K ka
se n
ct gr
io i R
ns a
) ng
e
Ge
GY yd
se o,
ct
io
n
A
A
LH
L
HA
AS
SA T
TE
ER
RR
RA
AN
NE
28°N
M
t.
STD
Kailas Fm. samples
28°N
Gangdese batholith samples
Kailas Formation
78°E
Brahmaputra River
A’
0
80°E
100
82°E
Main Central Thrust
86°E
88°E
90°E
India-Asia
collision zone
South Tibetan
detachment (STD)
Great Counter
IYS
Thrust
zone Xigaze
Forearc Kailas Fm.
Gangdese Arc
Liuqiu
uqiu Fm.
Tethyan Thrust Belt
Lesser Him.
Sequence
~25 km Indian plate
A'
200 km
84°E
B
A'
t
Ev
er
es
Upper Indus drainage
3800
Yarlung River
IInd
IndusIn
ndus
nd
uss-Yar
usYarrlu
Ya
llun
un
u
ng Su
utu
ut
turre
tu
e
Lower Brahmaputra drainage
5700
5200
4700
4300
30°N
Lhasa
X
Xigaze
Yarlung drainage
m
32°N
India
A
Ophiolites
Asian plate
Lhasa terrane
Greater Himalayan
Sequence
~100 km
0
92°E
94°E
96°E
Figure 1. A: Digital elevation model of
Tibet with location of major sutures,
drainages (Indus, Yarlung, Brahmaputra), Kailas exposures, and samples.
STD—South Tibetan detachment. B:
Simplified north-south cross section
of southern Tibet and Tethyan Himalaya, modified after Yin and Harrison
(2000). IYS—Indus-Yarlung suture.
A. Geochronology and low-T-thermochronology of the India-Asia collision zone
45
burial T: >120°C–<200-230°C
40
B. Timing of major regional events
burial T: >120°C–<200-230°C
30
30
burial T: >200-230°C
Depositional age of Kailas Fm.
25
25
20
7
20
15
6
*
15
GC
T
rc- ST
p
ara D
e
a
x
r
ea
tio ten lle
Int
se
n a si l
en
in
t E on
sifi
I
ca ndus sed
ve
tio
res
n o and imen
t
No Rollb f the Ben tatio
rt h
ga n i
a
A
c
s
l fa n
wa
kr
i
a
n
e
r
n
an d und lated mon s
s
dr
etu erthr exte oon
u
rn
n
to sting sion
ha
rd of In
co
llis d i a
ion
da
lize
lev
Inc
This study:
AFT ages of sandstones from Kailas Fm.
(*granite clast in Kailas Fm)
4KR366, 388, 40Ar/ 39Ar phlogopite
plateau ages from basaltic flows
ZHe ages from Kailas Fm.
AFT ages from Gangdese batholith granite samples
5YA167, U-Pb zircon age from ash
AFT average age of Kailas samples
(does not include 8KR67DZ)
ca
Lopukangri Geydo section
Range
5
3
Lo
GY1-0
*
GY1-m
iddle*
Vp2
LK600
5
1LK26
0
1LK19
4DZ
4
-12
Xiao Gurla
E
8
5
he
Kailas Range
GU-gr1
-1
6-4-05
8KR67
W
4
2
10
tension
DZ
5KR14
7*
5KR24
7*
5KR
Coal M 380*
ine gr
4KR40
8
1KR35 *
3DZ
2KR10
7DZ
localized ex
5YA43
10
5
1
Hig
Age (Ma)
35
GY3-144 youngest detrital U-Pb zircon age
8KR67DZ youngest zircon U-Pb age
(after DeCelles et al., 2011)
Figure 2. A: Apatite fission-track (AFT) and zircon (U-Th)/He (ZHe) ages versus stratigraphic ages of Kailas Formation, Tibet (constrained
by zircon U-Pb and 40Ar/39Ar geochronology; see footnote 1) and relative geographic position. T—temperature. B: Timing of regional exhumation and major tectonic and climatic events around Indo-Asia collision zone (left axis is in Ma). *Timing of Great Counter thrust (GCT)
activity if heating was associated with GCT burial (from this study); 1—after Harrison et al. (2000); 2—timing of South Tibetan detachment
(STD) at Rongbuk (Mount Everest; after Murphy and Harrison, 1999); 3—Xiao Gurla and Gurla Mandhata extension (after Murphy et al.,
2002; Pullen et al., 2011); 4—high elevation by 17 Ma (minimum age; after Gébelin et al., 2013); 5, 6—after Clift et al. (2008, and references
therein); 7—timing of rollback extension; 8—India underthrusting and return to hard collision (inferred by DeCelles et al., 2011, and us).
444
www.gsapubs.org
|
May 2014
|
GEOLOGY
tory). Zircon U-Pb geochronology from one ash
(5YA167) and from one detrital sample (GY3–
144) within the Kailas Formation provided a
depositional age of 24.4 ± 0.5 Ma for the Yagra
Valley section and a maximum depositional age
of 21.2 ± 1.4 Ma for the Geydo section (Fig. 2;
see the Data Repository). These dates, together
with other geochronological data (DeCelles et
al., 2011), constrain the age of the Kailas Formation to 26–21 Ma.
ZHe, AFT, and AHe thermochronology provide information on the timing and rates of cooling through an ~230–40 °C closure temperature
window (Gleadow and Duddy, 1981; Wolf et al.,
1998; Reiners et al., 2002). ZHe ages from the
Kailas Formation are between 31.8 ± 0.5 and
9.7 ± 0.1 Ma, and AFT ages are between ca. 19
and 7 Ma; most samples range between ca. 14
and 18 Ma, with a weighted mean age of 16.7
± 0.9 Ma (Fig. 2), regardless of stratigraphic
position. AFT ages from 5 samples of the Gangdese batholith are between ca. 15 and 11 Ma
(Fig. 2). The anomalously young AFT and ZHe
ages are from samples 8KR67 and 6–4–05–1,
which are near the active Karakoram strike-slip
(Murphy et al., 2002) and Xiao Gurla extensional (Pullen et al., 2011) fault systems. Sample LK6005 from Gangdese granite below the
basal Kailas Formation has a 13.8 ± 0.6 Ma AFT
age (see the Data Repository) that does not pass
χ2, which suggests multiple age populations
and a disturbed signal. Sample VP2 from near
LK6005 yielded an AFT age of 14.2 ± 1.3 Ma.
AHe ages from three samples of Kailas Formation are between 9.9 ± 0.8 Ma and 3.5 ± 0.2 Ma
(see the Data Repository).
Overall, the AFT ages from the Kailas Formation samples are younger than its depositional age (ca. 26–21 Ma) and require burial
to >120 °C (Fig. 2) after ca. 21 Ma and before
ca. 17 Ma. The youngest ZHe component is generally younger than the depositional age of the
Kailas Formation and requires burial to >200 °C
(Fig. 2). ZHe ages older than the depositional
age together with AFT ages younger than depositional age indicate partial or no resetting of the
ZHe system between 120 °C and 230 °C after
deposition of the Kailas Formation (Fig. 2). Assuming a paleogeothermal gradient of 30 °C/
km, these data indicate between ~4 and 7 km of
burial after ca. 21 Ma, followed by rapid cooling
and exhumation at ca. 17 ± 1 Ma (Fig. 2). The
rapid nature of this exhumation is supported by
the similarity between AFT and ZHe ages and
thermal modeling (see the Data Repository), indicating that cooling occurred rapidly between
ca. 15 Ma and ca. 18 Ma. AHe ages, along with
thermal modeling, indicate possible accelerated
cooling between ca. 4 Ma and the present.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Our data indicate >200 °C of heating along
the India-Asia collision zone in the early Mio-
GEOLOGY
|
May 2014
|
www.gsapubs.org
cene; this basin burial can be explained by either
rapid sedimentation or overthrusting by Great
Counter thrust hanging-wall rocks. Overthrusting would require a thick, regionally extensive
tectonic sliver of Xigaze forearc and IndusYarlung suture rocks overlying the Kailas Formation. We favor burial by sedimentation in a
rapidly subsiding basin, related to southward
rollback of Indian lithosphere, as the mechanism for regional subsidence (DeCelles et al.,
2011; Wang et al., 2013). An extensional setting
is supported by the presence of phlogopitic trachyandesites and/or basalts in the Kailas Formation. The rapid shift (within a few million years)
from basin subsidence (26 to 21 Ma or later) to
basin exhumation (17 ± 1 Ma) is here interpreted to be related to northward underthrusting of
the Indian plate following rollback and breakoff of a portion of the Indian slab. If this model
is correct, it shows that regional uplift and exhumation of the India-Asia collision zone can occur without significant upper crustal shortening
several millions of years after collision.
It is interesting that the regional exhumation
signal at ca. 17 Ma coincides with initiation of the
South Tibetan detachment north of Mount Everest (Murphy and Harrison, 1999) (Fig. 2), which
attained its high elevation by the early Miocene
(ca. 17–16 Ma) (Gébelin et al., 2013). Regional
Miocene exhumation is also recorded by Himalayan foreland basin and Bengal and Indus submarine fan deposits (e.g., Copeland and Harrison,
1990; Métivier et al., 1999; DeCelles et al., 2001;
White et al., 2002; Bernet et al., 2006; Najman,
2006; Clift et al., 2002, 2008; Clift, 2006).
Our new thermochronological data also require removal of a significant volume of rock
from the India-Asia collision zone within a few
million years; a conservative volumetric estimate for removal of 6 km (vertical) of rock by
a drainage system measuring 50 km north-south
and 600 km east-west would be >180,000 km3;
for example, this is the same order of magnitude
of sediment volume (km3) delivered per million years in the Indus fan (Clift et al., 2008).
Although we recognize that most of the material
delivered to the Bengal and Indus fans during
the Miocene was derived from the frontal part of
the Himalaya, our results suggest that a significant portion of the sediment volume may have
come from the interior of the orogen. Rapid
evacuation of large volumes of material from
the India-Asia collision zone could have been
accomplished by efficient paleo–Yarlung River
incision in response to drainage reorganization
related to capture by the Brahmaputra River
(Bracciali et al., 2013; Robinson et al., 2013)
and/or runoff enhanced by intensification of the
Asian monsoon (e.g., Clift et al., 2008).
High-magnitude exhumation of the frontal
part of the Himalaya is part of a feedback relationship between tectonics and climate (Clift et
al., 2008; Thiede and Ehlers, 2013). Significant
erosion in the deep interior of the orogenic system may be related to a similar feedback relationship with important effects on the behavior
of the orogenic system that should be considered in future geodynamic models.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Peter Reiners and Uttam Chowdhury for
analytical help with (U-Th)/He analyses, and Ding
Lin for assistance with obtaining research permits to
work in Tibet. We also thank four anonymous reviewers and editor James Spotila for constructive criticism.
This research was supported by U.S. National Science
Foundation grant EAR-1008527.
REFERENCES CITED
Aitchison, J.C., Davis, A.M., Badengzhu, B., and
Luo, H., 2002, New constraints on the IndiaAsia collision: The lower Miocene Gangrinboche conglomerates, Yarlung Tsangpo suture
zone, SE Tibet: Journal of Asian Earth Sciences,
v. 21, p. 251–263, doi:10.1016/S1367-9120(02)
00037-8.
Allégre, C.J., and 34 others, 1984, Structure and evolution of the Himalaya-Tibet orogenic belt: Nature, v. 307, p. 17–22, doi:10.1038/307017a0.
Bernet, M., van der Beek, P., Pik, R., Huyghe, P.,
Mugnier, J.L., Labrin, E., and Szulc, A., 2006,
Miocene to Recent exhumation of the central
Himalaya determined from combined detrital
zircon fission-track and U/Pb analysis of Siwalik sediments, western Nepal: Basin Research, v. 18, p. 393–412, doi:10.1111/j.1365
-2117.2006.00303.x.
Bracciali, B., Najman, Y., Parrish, R.R., Akhter, S.H.
and Garzanti, E., 2013, Early Miocene river capture in the Eastern Himalaya: A multi-technique
provenance study of the paleo-Brahmaputra deposits (Bengal Basin, Bangladesh): Vienna, Austria, European Geosciences Union General Assembly 7–12 April 2013, abs. EGU2013–9299–2.
Burchfiel, B.C., Zhiliang, C., Hodges, K.V., Yuping,
L., Royden, L.H., Changrong, D., and Jiene, X.,
1992, The South Tibetan detachment system,
Himalayan orogen: Extension contemporaneous
with and parallel to shortening in a collisional
mountain belt: Geological Society of America
Special Paper 269, 41 p., doi:10.1130/SPE269.
Burg, J.P., and Chen, G.M., 1984, Tectonics and structural formation of southern Tibet, China: Nature,
v. 311, p. 219–223, doi:10.1038/311219a0.
Clift, P.D., 2006, Controls on the erosion of Cenozoic
Asia and the flux of clastic sediment to the ocean:
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 241,
p. 571–580, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2005.11.028.
Clift, P.D., Carter, A., Krol, M., and Kirby, E., 2002,
Constraints on India-Eurasia collision in the
Arabian Sea region taken from the Indus Group,
Ladakh Himalaya, India, in Clift, P.D., et al.,
eds., The tectonic and climatic evolution of
the Arabian Sea region: Geological Society of
London Special Publication 195, p. 97–116,
doi:10.1144/GSL.SP.2002.195.01.07.
Clift, P.D., Hodges, K.V., Heslop, D., Hannigan, R.,
Van Long, H., and Calves, G., 2008, Correlation of Himalayan exhumation rates and Asian
monsoon intensity: Nature Geoscience, v. 1,
p. 875–880, doi:10.1038/ngeo351.
Copeland, P., and Harrison, T.M., 1990, Episodic uplift
in the Himalaya revealed by 40Ar/ 39Ar analysis of
detrital K-feldspar and muscovite, Bengal fan:
Geology, v. 18, p. 354–357, doi:10.1130/0091
-7613(1990)018<0354:ERUITH>2.3.CO;2.
Copeland, P., Harrison, T.M., Kidd, W.S.F., Xu, R.,
and Zhang, Y., 1987, Rapid early Miocene ac-
445
celeration of uplift in the Gangdese Belt, Xizang (southern Tibet), and its bearing on accommodation mechanisms of the India-Asia
collision: Earth and Planetary Science Letters,
v. 86, p. 240–252, doi:10.1016/0012-821X(87)
90224-X.
Dai, J., Wang, C., Hourigan, J., Li, Z., and Zhuang,
G., 2013, Exhumation history of the Gangdese
Batholith, Southern Tibetan Plateau: Evidence
from apatite and zircon (U-Th)/He thermochronology: Journal of Geology, v. 121, p. 155–172,
doi:10.1086/669250.
DeCelles, P.G., Robinson, D.M., Quade, J., Ojha,
T.P., Garzione, C.N., Copeland, P., and Upreti,
B.N., 2001, Stratigraphy, structure, and tectonic evolution of the Himalayan fold-thrust
belt in western Nepal: Tectonics, v. 20, p. 487–
509, doi:10.1029/2000TC001226.
DeCelles, P., Kapp, P., Quade, J., and Gehrels, G.,
2011, Oligocene–Miocene Kailas basin, southwestern Tibet: Record of postcollisional upperplate extension in the Indus-Yarlung suture
zone: Geological Society of America Bulletin,
v. 123, p. 1337–1362, doi:10.1130/B30258.1.
Dézes, P., Vannay, J.-C., Steck, A., Bussy, F., and
Cosca, M., 1999, Synorogenic extension: Quantitative constraints on the age and displacement of the Zanskar shear zone (northwest
Himalaya): Geological Society of America
Bulletin, v. 111, p. 364–374, doi:10.1130/00167606(1999)111<0364:SEQCOT>2.3.CO;2.
Ding, L., Kapp, P., and Wan, X.Q., 2005, Paleocene–
Eocene record of ophiolite obduction and initial
India-Asia collision, south central Tibet: Tectonics, v. 24, TC3001, doi:10.1029/2004TC001729.
Gansser, A., 1964, The geology of the Himalayas:
New York, Wiley Interscience, 289 p.
Garzanti, E., Baud, A., and Mascle, G., 1987, Sedimentary record of the northward flight of India
and its collision with Eurasia (Ladakh Himalaya,
India): Geodinamica Acta, v. 1, p. 297–312.
Gébelin, A., Mulch, A., Teyssier, C., Jessup, M.J.,
Law, R.D., and Brunel, M., 2013, The Miocene
elevation of Mount Everest: Geology, v. 41,
p. 799–802, doi:10.1130/G34331.1.
Gleadow, A.J.W., and Duddy, I.R., 1981, A natural
long-term annealing experiment for apatite: Nuclear Tracks and Radiation Measurements, v. 5,
p. 169–174, doi:10.1016/0191-278X(81)90039-1.
Harrison, T.M., Yin, A., Grove, M., Lovera, O.M.,
Ryerson, F.J., and Zhou, X., 2000, The Zedong
Window: A record of superposed Tertiary convergence in southeastern Tibet: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 105, p. 19,211–19,230,
doi:10.1029/2000JB900078.
He, S., Kapp, P., DeCelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., and
Heizler, M., 2007, Cretaceous–Tertiary geology of the Gangdese Arc in the Linzhou area,
southern Tibet: Tectonophysics, v. 433, p. 15–
37, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2007.01.005.
446
Hodges, K.V., Parrish, R.R., and Searle, M.P., 1996,
Tectonic evolution of the central Annapurna
Range, Nepalese Himalaya: Tectonics, v. 15,
p. 1264–1291, doi:10.1029/96TC01791.
Lee, J., and Whitehouse, M.J., 2007, Onset of midcrustal extensional flow in southern Tibet: Evidence from U/Pb zircon ages: Geology, v. 35,
p. 45–48, doi:10.1130/G22842A.1.
Métivier, F., Gaudemer, Y., Tapponnier, P., and Klein,
M., 1999, Mass accumulation rates in Asia during the Cenozoic: Geophysical Journal International, v. 137, p. 280–318, doi:10.1046/j.1365
-246X.1999.00802.x.
Murphy, M.A., and Copeland, P., 2005, Transtensional deformation in the central Himalaya
and its role in accommodating growth of the
Himalayan orogen: Tectonics, v. 24, TC4012,
doi:10.1029/2004TC001659.
Murphy, M.A., and Harrison, T.M., 1999, Relationship between leucogranites and the Qomolangma detachment in the Rongbuk Valley,
south Tibet: Geology, v. 27, p. 831–834, doi:
10.1130/0091-7613(1999)027<0831:RBLATQ
>2.3.CO;2.
Murphy, M.A., Yin, A., Kapp, P., Harrison, T.M.,
Manning, C.E., Ryerson, F.J., Ding, L., and
Guo, J., 2002, Structural and thermal evolution of the Gurla Mandhata detachment system,
southwest Tibet: Implications for the eastward
extent of the Karakoram fault system: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 114, p. 428–
447, doi:10.1130/0016-7606(2002)114<0428:
SEOTGM>2.0.CO;2.
Najman, Y., 2006, The detrital record of orogenesis:
A review of approaches and techniques used
in the Himalayan sedimentary basins: EarthScience Reviews, v. 74, p. 1–72.
Najman, Y., and 11 others, 2010, Timing of India-Asia
collision: Geological, biostratigraphic, and palaeomagnetic constraints: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 115, B12416, doi:10.1029
/2010JB007673.
Pullen, A., Kapp, P., DeCelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., and
Ding, L., 2011, Cenozoic anatexis and exhumation of Tethyan sequence rocks in the Xiao Gurla
Range, southwest Tibet: Tectonophysics, v. 501,
p. 28–40, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2011.01.008.
Quidelleur, X., Grove, M., Lovera, O.M., Harrison,
T.M., Yin, A., and Ryerson, F.J., 1997, The
thermal evolution and slip history of the Renbu
Zedong thrust, southeastern Tibet: Journal of
Geophysical Research, v. 102, p. 2659–2679,
doi:10.1029/96JB02483.
Reiners, P.W., Farley, K.A., and Hickes, H.J., 2002,
(U-Th)/He thermochronometry of zircon: Initial results from Fish Canyon Tuff and Gold
Butte: Tectonophysics, v. 349, p. 297–308, doi:
10.1016/S0040-1951(02)00058-6.
Robinson, R.A.J., Brezina, C.A., Parrish, R.R., Horstwood, M.S.A., Oo, N.W., Bird, M.I., Thein,
M., Walters, A.S., Oliver, G.J.H., and Zaw, K.,
2013, Large rivers and orogens: The evolution
of the Yarlung Tsangpo–Irrawaddy system and
the eastern Himalayan syntaxis: Gondwana Research, doi:10.1016/j.gr.2013.07.002.
Searle, M., Noble, S., Hurford, A.J., and Rex, D., 1999,
Age of crustal melting, emplacement and exhumation history of the Shivling leucogranite, Garhwal Himalaya: Geological Magazine, v. 136,
p. 513–525, doi:10.1017/S0016756899002885.
Thiede, R.C., and Ehlers, T.A., 2013, Large spatial and
temporal variations in Himalayan denudation:
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 371–372,
p. 278–293, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2013.03.004.
Wang, C., Li, X., Liu, Z., Li, Y., Jansa, L., Dai, J.,
and Wei, Y., 2012, Revision of the Cretaceous–Paleogene stratigraphic framework, facies architecture and provenance of the Xigaze
forearc basin along the Yarlung Zangbo suture
zone: Gondwana Research, v. 22, p. 415–433,
doi:10.1016/j.gr.2011.09.014.
Wang, J.-G., Hu, X.-M., Garzanti, E., and Wu, F.-Y.,
2013, Upper Oligocene–Lower Miocene Gangrinboche Conglomerate in the Xigaze area,
southern Tibet: Implications for Himalayan
uplift and paleo-Yarlung-Zangbo initiation:
Journal of Geology, v. 121, p. 425–444, doi:
10.1086/670722.
White, N.M., Pringle, M., Garzanti, E., Bickle, M.,
Najman, Y., Chapman, H., and Friend, P., 2002,
Constraints on the exhumation and erosion of
the High Himalayan Slab, NW India, from
foreland basin deposits: Earth and Planetary
Science Letters, v. 195, p. 29–44, doi:10.1016
/S0012-821X(01)00565-9.
Wolf, R.A., Farley, K.A., and Kass, D.M., 1998,
Modeling of the temperature sensitivity of the
apatite (U-Th)/He thermochronometer: Chemical Geology, v. 148, p. 105–114, doi:10.1016
/S0009-2541(98)00024-2.
Yin, A., and Harrison, T.M., 2000, Geologic evolution of the Himalayan-Tibetan orogen: Annual
Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, v. 28,
p. 211–280, doi:10.1146/annurev.earth.28.1.211.
Yin, A., Harrison, T.M., Murphy, M., Grove, M., Nie,
S., Ryerson, F., Feng, W.X., and Le, C.Z., 1999,
Tertiary deformation history of southeastern
and southwestern Tibet during the Indo-Asian
collision: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 111, p. 1644–1664, doi:10.1130/0016
-7606(1999)111<1644:TDHOSA>2.3.CO;2.
Manuscript received 3 December 2013
Revised manuscript received 23 February 2014
Manuscript accepted 28 February 2014
Printed in USA
www.gsapubs.org
|
May 2014
|
GEOLOGY