Elsevier

Tectonophysics

Volume 655, 1 August 2015, Pages 1-14
Tectonophysics

Has the Yangtze craton lost its root? A comparison between the North China and Yangtze cratons

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2015.04.008Get rights and content

Highlights

  • A comprehensive study reveals that the Yangtze craton has lost part of its root.

  • A comparison of two cratons reveals a common three stage root-loss mechanism.

  • The first stage is regional weakening/thinning/modification of the lithosphere.

  • The second stage is lithospheric delamination caused by slab subduction and rollback.

  • The third stage is further destruction of the lithosphere via thermo-chemical erosion.

Abstract

A review and comparison of the tectonic history and lithospheric structure of the Yangtze craton and North China craton (NCC) are made to test whether the Yangtze craton has lost part of its lithospheric root like the NCC has, and if so, is there a common driving tectonic force for root-loss. The results show that many similarities and some significant differences exist between these two cratons. The similarities include the following: (1) The eastern parts of the NCC and Yangtze craton have both been destroyed. The destroyed areas are bounded on the west by the North–South Gravity Lineament. (2) Fast velocity bodies located above depths between 200 and 400 km are detected beneath the NCC and Yangtze craton, implying that delamination may be an important mechanism of cratonic destruction for these two cratons. (3) The destruction of the NCC and Yangtze craton can be divided into several stages. The differences mainly lie in the tectonic evolution during Neoproterozoic-early Mesozoic. The tectonothermal events which are beneficial for the lithospheric weakening of the NCC dominantly affected the marginal regions. However, for the Yangtze craton, they are not only limited to the marginal regions, but also extend to the eastern and middle parts of the craton. This may be a key factor why the Yangtze craton shows more continuous slow velocity anomalies.

We also make a study on the time and dynamic mechanism of the destruction of the Yangtze craton. The results show that the initial destruction started in the Neoproterozoic and may be caused by the aggregation and breakup of Rodinia. The large scale destruction occurred mostly in the Mesozoic (190–90 Ma) with a peak time of 130–120 Ma. The subduction and rollback of the Paleo-Pacific (Izanagi) plate may play a vital role in the destruction of the Yangtze craton.

Introduction

Cratons are stable geological regions which are characterized by low density, fast P and S wave velocities, and cold and dry lithospheric roots whose thickness is typically more than 200 km (Body, 1989, James et al., 2001, Jordan, 1975, Morgan, 1984, Peslier et al., 2010). Due to these features, few destructive earthquakes, significant magmatism and deformation events are found within a craton (Windley, 1995). Thus cratons can attain long-term stability and preserve previous geological records (Zhu et al., 2012). However, recent studies indicate that many cratons have been destroyed (Table 1). A study on how these cratons lose their roots is important to make a better understanding of continental formation and evolution (Kusky et al., 2014).

Craton destruction means the process related to loss of its stability and is not equal to lithospheric thinning (Wu et al., 2008, Wu et al., 2014). Table 1 gives a brief introduction to cratons that have been destructed. From the table, it is clear that both the triggering forces and root loss mechanisms corresponding to the destruction of cratons are complex. There are mainly four triggering forces (subduction of oceanic plates beneath the craton, collision events along the marginal regions, mantle plumes, and rifting) and three root loss mechanisms (delamination, thermo-chemical erosion, and melt-peridotite reactions) (e.g., review by Kusky et al., 2007b). The study of cratonic destruction is still in an early stage, thus one has many difficulties determining with certainty the major triggering force and root loss mechanism of the destroyed cratons. The main reason lies in the lack of data and multidisciplinary research results in a variety of interpretations, which makes it hard to make a good understanding of cratonic destruction. It is necessary to choose several cratons to make a further study on the basis of the newest published data and comprehensive analysis of different subjects.

Many studies suggest that the NCC has been destructed in the Mesozoic (Wu et al., 2008, Zhu and Zheng, 2009; Zuo et al., 2013). The current NCC is regarded as a natural Earth Science laboratory for the coexistence of the destroyed Eastern Block and the locally modified Western Block. However, whether the Yangtze craton, which experienced similar tectonothermal events during the Mesozoic, has been destructed is a controversial issue (Zheng and Wu, 2009) for the lack of lithospheric information earlier than the Neoproterozoic. Due to the proximity of these two cratons and their similar tectonic history since the Mesozoic, we choose them as our study objects.

In the last several decades, many scientists concentrated their attention on the study of the destruction of the NCC using geophysical, geological and geochemical data. Four main root loss mechanisms have been proposed, including delamination (Gao et al., 2002, Gao et al., 2004), thermo-chemical erosion (Menzies et al., 2007), melt-peridotite reactions (Zhang, 2009, Zhang et al., 2008a, Zhang et al., 2008b), and delamination of marginal regions and thermo-chemical erosion for interior regions (Gao et al., 2009). As to the dynamic process, some investigations (Zheng and Wu, 2009, Lan et al., 2011, Wu et al., 2014) reveal that the subduction of the Paleo-Pacific (Izanagi) plate during the Mesozoic (190–90 Ma) is one of the main dynamic factors that led to root-loss, and the collision and subduction events along the northern and southern margins have a certain contribution (e.g., Kusky et al., 2007b, Windley et al., 2010), but are not main factors (e.g., Wang et al., 2014b).

Compared to the NCC, relatively fewer studies have been made on the Yangtze craton (Fig. 4). Based on studies which suggest that the Yangtze craton has lost its root, there are mainly two root loss mechanisms: (1) delamination, based on the fast velocity bodies found from tomographic maps (Cai et al., 2003, Jiang et al., 2013a) and outcrops of Mesozoic volcanic rocks with high Mg content beneath the Yangtze craton (Xu et al., 2002a); and (2) thermo-chemical erosion. This idea is based on the fast and slow velocity bodies that are distributed alternatively with a high angle between them (Yuan, 2007). Limited studies reveal that there are three possible dynamic mechanisms for the destruction: the aggregation and breakup of Rodinia (Zheng and Zhang, 2007), the subduction and rollback of the Paleo-Pacific (Izanagi) plate (Kusky et al., 2014), and the collision between the NCC and Yangtze craton (Jiang et al., 2013a).

In this paper, we review and compare the tectonic history and lithospheric structure of the Yangtze and North China cratons using geophysical, geological and geochemical data to solve two questions. First, we test if the Yangtze craton has lost its root. Second, we propose a possible general process for cratonic destruction.

Section snippets

Geological background

The Yangtze craton (Fig. 1), which is located in southeastern China, formed in the Archean (Ge et al., 2013, Wang et al., 2013b, Cheng et al., 2013) with Archean–Paleoproterozoic crystalline basement (Zheng et al., 2006b, Ge et al., 2013) and has a crustal remnant as old as 3.8 Ga (Zhang et al., 2006b). It is surrounded by younger fold belts. To the north, the Triassic Qinling–Dabie–Sulu Belt separates the Yangtze craton from the NCC. To the west, the Mesozoic Longmenshan Orogenic Belt separates

Has the Yangtze craton been destroyed?

Many studies suggest that the Paleo-Pacific (Izanagi) plate subduction in the Mesozoic played an important role in the destruction of the NCC (e.g., Kusky et al., 2007b, Wu et al., 2014). However, whether the Yangtze craton, which experienced similar tectonothermal events in the Mesozoic, has been destroyed has remained controversial. We conclude that the eastern part, middle part and marginal regions of the Yangtze craton have been destructed for the following reasons: (1) The

Conclusions

  • (1)

    Geological, geophysical and geochemical data reveal that the eastern part of the Yangtze craton has been destroyed. The destroyed areas are bounded on the west by the North–South Gravity Lineament and are characterized by the coexistence of both refractory and fertile lithosphere. The destruction was concentrated in two periods. The first period was in the Neoproterozoic. The destructed regions are limited to the marginal regions, and the possible dynamic factor is the aggregation and breakup

Acknowledgments

Two anonymous reviews and Editor Rob Govers are thanked for their constructive comments. We are grateful to Xiaofei Yin and Xu Wang who helped us with the translation calibration for this paper. We appreciate the constructive suggestions on the evolution of the NCC and the Yangtze craton made by Zhensheng Wang. We also thank Xingfu Jiang who provides us the figure of tectonic map of the Yangtze craton. This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 91014002).

References (194)

  • J.L. Guo et al.

    3.45 Ga granitic gneisses from the Yangtze Craton, South China: implications for Early Archean crustal growth

    Precambrian Res.

    (2014)
  • L.J. He et al.

    Heat flow and thermal history of the South China Sea

    Phys. Earth Planet. Inter.

    (2001)
  • S.B. Hu et al.

    Heat flow in the continental area of China: a new data set

    Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.

    (2000)
  • Z.L. Hu et al.

    Geochronological and geochemical constraints on genesis of the adakitic rocks in Outang, South Tan–Lu Fault Belt (Northeastern Yangtze Block)

    Tectonophysics

    (2014)
  • J.L. Huang et al.

    Crustal heterogeneity and seismotectonics of the region around Beijing, China

    Tectonophysics

    (2004)
  • Z.X. Huang et al.

    The lithosphere of North China Craton from surface wave tomography

    Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.

    (2009)
  • R. Huang et al.

    Crustal structure of Hubei Province of China from teleseismic receiver functions: evidence for lower crust delamination

    Tectonophysics

    (2014)
  • G.M. Jiang et al.

    3-D velocity model beneath the Middle–Lower Yangtze River and its implication to the deep geodynamics

    Tectonophysics

    (2013)
  • M.M. Jiang et al.

    Local modification of the lithosphere beneath the central and western North China Craton: 3-D constraints from Rayleigh wave tomography

    Gondwana Res.

    (2013)
  • I.T. Kukkonen et al.

    Delamination of eclogitized lower crust: control on the crust–mantle boundary in central Fennoscandian shield

    Tectonophysics

    (2008)
  • T.M. Kusky et al.

    Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the North China Craton

    J. Asian Earth Sci.

    (2003)
  • T.M. Kusky et al.

    The Paleoproterozoic North Hebei Orogen: North China craton's collisional suture with the Columbia supercontinent

    Gondwana Res.

    (2007)
  • T.M. Kusky et al.

    Active tectonics of the Alaotra–Ankay Graben System, Madagascar: possible extension of Somalian–African diffusive plate boundary?

    Gondwana Res.

    (2010)
  • T.M. Kusky et al.

    Flat slab subduction, trench suction, and craton destruction: comparison of the North China, Wyoming, and Brazilian Cratons

    Tectonophysics

    (2014)
  • T.G. Lan et al.

    Multiple crust–mantle interactions for the destruction of the North China Craton: geochemical and Sr–Nd–Pb–Hf isotopic evidence from the Longbaoshan alkaline complex

    Lithos

    (2011)
  • Y.Y. Li et al.

    Gravity data inversion for the lithospheric density structure beneath North China craton from EGM 2008 model

    Phys. Earth Planet. Inter.

    (2011)
  • Z.X. Li et al.

    Geochronology of Neoproterozoic syn-rift magmatism in the Yangtze craton, South China and correlations with other continents: evidence for a mantle superplume that broke up Rodinia

    Precambrian Res.

    (2003)
  • X.H. Li et al.

    Amalgamation between the Yangtze and Cathaysia Blocks in South China: constrains from SHRIMP U–Pb zircon ages, geochemistry and Nd–Hf isotopes of the Shuangxiwu volcanic rocks

    Precambrian Res.

    (2009)
  • J.H. Li et al.

    Cretaceous tectonic evolution of South China: a preliminary synthesis

    Earth-Sci. Rev.

    (2014)
  • J.G. Liu et al.

    Mapping lithospheric boundaries using os isotopes of mantle xenoliths: an example from the North China Craton

    Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta

    (2011)
  • C.Z. Liu et al.

    Mesozoic accretion of juvenile sub-continental lithospheric mantle beneath South China and its implications: geothemical and Re–Os isotopic results from Ningyuan mantle xenoliths

    Chem. Geol.

    (2012)
  • C.Z. Liu et al.

    The Xinchang peridotite xenoliths reveal mantle replacement and accretion in southeastern China

    Lithos

    (2012)
  • J.G. Lu et al.

    Petrology and geochemistry of peridotite xenoliths from the Lianshan region: nature and evolution of lithospheric mantle beneath the lower Yangtze Block

    Gondwana Res.

    (2013)
  • G. Lu et al.

    Strong intracontinental lithospheric deformation in South China: implication from seismic from seismic observations and geodynamic modeling

    J. Asia Earth Sci.

    (2014)
  • X.L. Mao et al.

    Effective elastic thickness and mechanical anisotropy of South China and surrounding regions

    Tectonophysics

    (2012)
  • M.A. Menzies et al.

    Fluid processes in diamond to spinel facies shallow mantle

    J. Geodyn.

    (1995)
  • M. Menzies et al.

    Integration of geology, geophysics and geochemistry: a key to understanding the North China craton

    Lithos

    (2007)
  • C. Michaut et al.

    Thermal evolution of cratonic roots

    Lithos

    (2009)
  • P. Morgan

    The thermal structure and thermal evolution of the continental lithosphere

  • X.Q. Pan et al.

    Syntectonic emplacement of Late Cretaceous mafic dyke swarms in coastal southeastern China: insights from magnetic fabrics, rock magnetism and field evidence

    Tectonophysics

    (2014)
  • J.L. Paquette et al.

    A new insight into Pan-African tectonics in the East–West Gondwana collision zone by U–Pb zircon dating of granites from central Madagascar

    Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.

    (1998)
  • S.B. Peng et al.

    Geology, geochemistry, and geochronology of the Miaowan ophiolite, Yangtze craton: implications for South China's amalgamation history with the Rodinian supercontinent

    Gondwana Res.

    (2012)
  • P. Peng et al.

    Spatial distribution of similar to 1950–1800 Ma metamorphic events in the North China craton: implications for tectonics subdivision of the craton

    Lithos

    (2014)
  • M. Barazangi et al.

    Spatial distribution of earthquakes and subduction of the Nazca plate beneath South America

    Geology

    (1976)
  • S.L. Beck et al.

    The nature of orogenic crust in the central Andes

    J. Geophys. Res.

    (2002)
  • F.R. Body

    Compositional distinction between oceanic and cratonic lithosphere

    Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.

    (1989)
  • O.S. Boyd et al.

    Foundering lithosphere imaged beneath the Southern Sierra Nevada, California, USA

    Science

    (2004)
  • X.L. Cai et al.

    Three-dimensional tectonic types and evolutional dynamics of lithosphere of South China region

    Geotecton. Metallog.

    (2003)
  • L. Chen et al.

    Discontinuity structure of the mantle transition zone beneath the North China Craton from receiver function migration

    J. Geophys. Res.

    (2009)
  • L. Chen et al.

    A thinned lithospheric image of the Tanlu Fault Zone, eastern China: constructed from wave equation based receiver function migration

    J. Geophys. Res.

    (2006)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text