Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T06:27:15.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Petrogenesis and tectonic implications of the early Mesozoic granitoids in the northern Alxa region, Central Asian Orogenic Belt

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2022

Xiaochen Zhao*
Affiliation:
College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
Chiyang Liu
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Department of Geology, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China
Jianqiang Wang*
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Department of Geology, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China
Yazhuo Niu
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory for the Study of Focused Magmatism and Giant Ore Deposits, Xi’an Centre of Geological Survey (Northwest China Centre of Geoscience Innovation), China Geological Survey, Xi’an, 710054, China
Lei Huang
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Department of Geology, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China
Shaohua Zhang
Affiliation:
Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Petroleum Accumulation Geology, School of Earth Sciences and Engineering, Xi’an Shiyou University, Xi’an, 710065, China
Fangpeng Du
Affiliation:
College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
Heng Peng
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Department of Geology, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China
Yingtao Chen
Affiliation:
College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
Tao Peng
Affiliation:
College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
Zhengzheng Mao
Affiliation:
College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
*
Authors for correspondence: Jianqiang Wang, Email: wjq@nwu.edu.cn; Xiaochen Zhao, Email: zxcnwu@126.com
Authors for correspondence: Jianqiang Wang, Email: wjq@nwu.edu.cn; Xiaochen Zhao, Email: zxcnwu@126.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The northern Alxa region is located in the central segment of the southern Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Many controversies and deficiencies still exist regarding the magma source characteristics, petrogenesis and tectonic regimes during the late Palaeozoic – early Mesozoic period within this region. This study presents whole-rock compositions and zircon U–Pb and Lu–Hf isotopic data for three early Mesozoic I- and A-type granitic plutons occurring in the northern Alxa region. The Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada I-type granitoids yielded zircon 206Pb–238U ages of 245 ± 5 Ma and 245 ± 2 Ma, respectively. The variable positive zircon ϵHf(t) values between +1.8 and +11.8, with young TDM ages of 425–837 Ma, indicate that these I-type granitoids were mainly derived from juvenile crustal materials. The Wulantaolegai pluton has a zircon 206Pb–238U age of 237 ± 2 Ma and is classified as having high-K calc-alkaline A-type affinity. Furthermore, the positive zircon ϵHf(t) values of the Wulantaolegai granite range from +3.3 to +8.7 with young TDM ages of 545–778 Ma, suggesting the involvement of a juvenile crustal source as well. Furthermore, the major-element compositions of the Chahanhada and Wulantaolegai granites suggest the input of metasedimentary components. Geochemically, the Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada I-type granitoids show an arc affinity, while the Wulantaolegai granite exhibits a post-collisional affinity. However, with regional data, we suggest that the Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada I-type granitoids were also emplaced in a post-collisional setting, and the arc affinity was probably inherited from recycled subduction-related materials. These lines of evidence obtained in this study enable us to argue that the Palaeo-Asian Ocean in the central segment of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt closed before Middle Triassic time.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

1. Introduction

The Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB), which is located in northcentral Asia from the Uralides to the Pacific Ocean (e.g. Şengör et al. Reference Şengör, Natal’in and Burtman1993; Jahn et al. Reference Jahn, Capdevila, Liu, Vernon and Badarch2004; Windley et al. Reference Windley, Alexeiev, Xiao, Kröer and Badarch2007; Li et al. Reference Li, Wang, Wilde and Tong2013; Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Sun, Han, Eizenhöfer, Hou, Zhang, Zhu, Wang, Liu and Xu2016) (Fig. 1a), has been regarded as one of the world’s largest and most complex accretionary orogens (Şengör et al. Reference Şengör, Natal’in and Burtman1993; Windley et al. Reference Windley, Alexeiev, Xiao, Kröer and Badarch2007; Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Huang, Han, Yuan, Chen, Sun, Sun and Li2009; Wilhem et al. Reference Wilhem, Windley and Stampfli2012). The CAOB has been widely considered to have undergone long-lived, giant orogenic processes driven by the evolution and closure of the Palaeo-Asian Ocean (PAO) during the Neoproterozoic to Mesozoic period (Şengör et al. Reference Şengör, Natal’in and Burtman1993; Jahn et al. Reference Jahn, Capdevila, Liu, Vernon and Badarch2004; Cope et al. Reference Cope, Ritts, Darby, Fildani and Graham2005; Windley et al. Reference Windley, Alexeiev, Xiao, Kröer and Badarch2007; Shen et al. Reference Shen, Shen, Liu, Meng, Dai and Yang2009; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Zhou, Kusky, Yan, Chen and Zhao2009; Cai et al. Reference Cai, Sun, Yuan, Long and Xiao2011 a,b; Li et al. Reference Li, Wang, Wilde and Tong2013, Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Wang, Xiao and Guo2016 a,b, Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Jahn, Xiao, Wang and Guo2017; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Charvet, Chen, Zhao and Shi2013; Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Allen and Han2013, Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Tong, Zhang, Li, Huang, Zhang, Guo, Yang, Hong, Donskaya, Gladkochub and Tserendash2017; He et al. Reference He, Dong, Xu, Chen, Liu and Li2018; Song et al. Reference Song, Xiao, Collins, Glorie and Han2018 a,b; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Wu, Gan, Zhang and Fu2019; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Liu, Wang, Zhang and Guan2020).

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic geological map of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (modified after Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017). (b) Geological map of the northern Alxa region (modified after 1:200 000 geological maps from BGMRIM, 1991).

Numerous studies have focused on the multi-stage evolution of the PAO and CAOB, with significant progress made (e.g. Şengör et al. Reference Şengör, Natal’in and Burtman1993; Windley et al. Reference Windley, Alexeiev, Xiao, Kröer and Badarch2007; Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Huang, Han, Yuan, Chen, Sun, Sun and Li2009, Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015; Wilhem et al. Reference Wilhem, Windley and Stampfli2012; Eizenhöfer et al. Reference Eizenhöfer, Zhao, Zhang and Sun2014; Eizenhöfer & Zhao, Reference Eizenhöfer and Zhao2018). However, the timing of the final closure of the PAO is still debated, with estimates ranging from Late Devonian to Triassic time (e.g. Charvet et al. Reference Charvet, Shu, Laurent-Charvet, Wang, Faure, Cluzel, Chen and De Jong2011; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Charvet, Chen, Zhao and Shi2013; Eizenhöfer et al. Reference Eizenhöfer, Zhao, Zhang and Sun2014, Reference Eizenhöfer, Zhao, Sun, Zhang, Han and Hou2015 a,b; Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015, Reference Xiao, Windley, Han, Liu, Wan, Zhang, Ao, Zhang and Song2018; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Zhao, Eizenhöfer, Sun, Han, Hou, Liu, Wang, Liu and Xu2015 a,b; Zhang, W. et al. Reference Zhang, Pease, Meng, Zheng, Thomsen, Wohlgemuth-Ueberwasser and Wu2015; Shi, G. Z. et al. Reference Shi, Zhang, Wang, Zhang, Liu, Zhou and Yan2016; Yin et al. Reference Yin, Zhou, Zhang, Zheng and Wang2016; Song et al. Reference Song, Xiao, Collins, Glorie, Han and Li2018 b). These controversies are mainly due to: (1) the various objects studied, such as the late Palaeozoic magmatic rocks (e.g. Shi et al. Reference Shi, Tong, Wang, Zhang, Zhang, Zhang, Guo, Zeng and Geng2012, Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Li, Zhu, Eizenhöfer, Zhang, Wang and Tsui2018; Song et al. Reference Song, Xiao, Collins, Glorie and Han2018 a), tectonic deformation and regional unconformity (e.g. Tang, Reference Tang1990; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Charvet, Chen, Zhao and Shi2013; Xu, X. Y. et al. Reference Xu, Li, Chen, Ma, Li, Wang, Bai and Tang2014), or detrital zircon indicators (e.g. Chen et al. Reference Chen, Wu, Gan, Zhang and Fu2019; Song et al. Reference Song, Xiao, Collins, Glorie, Han and Li2018 b, Reference Song, Xiao, Windley and Han2021; Niu et al. Reference Niu, Shi, Wang, Liu, Zhou, Lu, Song and Xu2021); (2) limited study areas (different segments probably closed at diverse times); and (3) relatively poor study in some areas because of execrable natural conditions, e.g. the northern Alxa region. Actually, the CAOB evolved with multiple convergences and the accretion of many orogenic components during multiple phases of amalgamation (Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015), i.e. the closure of the PAO was probably diachronous. Furthermore, previous studies of magmatic rocks mainly focused on the Tianshan–Beishan in the western segment (e.g. Yang et al. Reference Yang, Zhang, Wang, Shi, Zhang, Tong, Guo and Geng2014; Zhang, W. et al. Reference Zhang, Pease, Meng, Zheng, Thomsen, Wohlgemuth-Ueberwasser and Wu2015; Tian et al. Reference Tian, Xiao, Windley, Zhang, Zhang and Song2017) or Inner Mongolia in the eastern segment (e.g. Jian et al. Reference Jian, Liu, Kröner, Windley, Shi, Zhan, Shi, Miao, Zhang, Zhang, Zhang and Ren2008, Reference Jian, Liu, Kröner, Windley, Shi, Zhang, Zhang, Miao, Zhang and Tomurhuu2010; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Jahn and Tian2009; Xu et al. Reference Xu, Charvet, Chen, Zhao and Shi2013; Li et al. Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Wang, Xiao and Guo2016 a,b, Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Jahn, Xiao, Wang and Guo2017; Shi, Y. R. et al. Reference Shi, Jian, Kröner, Li, Liu and Zhang2016; Zhao, P. et al. Reference Zhao, Sun, Diwu, Zhu, Ao, Zhang and Yan2017) along the southern CAOB. Much less is known, however, about the central segment of the southern CAOB (the northern Alxa region), which is a crucial junction between the North China Block (NCB) and the Tarim Block (Fig. 1a). It has hampered us from better understanding the evolutionary history of the PAO and subsequent development of the CAOB. In the central segment of the southern CAOB, the late Palaeozoic magmatic rocks are widely exposed and have attracted the attention of many scholars (e.g. Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Pease, Meng, Zheng, Wu, Chen and Gan2017; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Li, Zhu, Eizenhöfer, Zhang, Wang and Tsui2018; Song et al. Reference Song, Xiao, Collins, Glorie and Han2018 a; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Liu, Wang, Zhang and Guan2020). Nevertheless, the timing of tectono-magmatic switching from an arc-related to a post-collisional process is still actively debated. Previous research indicated that this region was in a subduction setting during most of the late Palaeozoic period (e.g. Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Pease, Meng, Zheng, Wu, Chen and Gan2017; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Li, Zhu, Eizenhöfer, Zhang, Wang and Tsui2018; Song et al. Reference Song, Xiao, Collins, Glorie and Han2018 a; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Liu, Wang, Zhang and Guan2020). Therefore, the earliest Mesozoic should be a key period in the evolution of the PAO and probably provides significant information to constrain the tectonic switch from a subduction setting to a post-collisional setting.

Thus, this research focused on the earliest Mesozoic magmatic rocks, which have been rarely reported, exposed in the northern Alxa region of the central segment of the southern CAOB. We report new geochronological, geochemical and isotopic data from three early Mesozoic granitoids in the northern Alxa region and evaluate their petrogenesis and tectonic implications, in order to decipher the evolution of the central segment of the southern CAOB.

2. Geological background

The northern Alxa region is situated in western Inner Mongolia, which borders the NCB to the east separated by the Zunnbayan fault belt and the Langshan fault belt (Fig. 1a) (Huang et al. Reference Huang, Yang, Otofuji and Zhu1999; Geng & Zhou, Reference Geng and Zhou2010; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Wu, Feng, Zheng and He2013), and the North Qilian Orogen to the southwest separated by the Longshoushan fault belt (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017). Largely covered by the Badain Jaran desert, the Alxa Block exposes sporadic Precambrian rocks, Palaeozoic to Mesozoic volcanic and intrusive rocks, and Phanerozoic sedimentary rocks. The Alxa Block is generally considered to be a Precambrian block belonging to the westernmost part of the NCB at present (Fig. 1a). Based on palaeontology, sedimentary sequences and magmatic events, some researchers have argued that the northern Alxa region comprised a complete trench–arc–basin system during late Palaeozoic time (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Wang and Wang1994; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Wu, Feng, Zheng and He2013). In this region, there are two significant ophiolite belts, i.e. the Qagan Qulu Ophiolite Belt and the Enger Us Ophiolite Belt (Fig. 1b). The Enger Us Ophiolite Belt (∼302 Ma) is regarded as the major suture of the PAO in the northern Alxa region (BGMRIM, 1991; Wang et al. Reference Wang, Wang and Wang1994; Wu et al. Reference Wu, He and Zhang1998; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Yin, Zhou and Zhang2014; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Wu, Zhang, Xu, Meng and Zhang2014), and the Qagan Qulu Ophiolite Belt (∼275 Ma) is considered to have been generated in a back-arc setting (Wu et al. Reference Wu, He and Zhang1998; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Wu, Zhang, Xu, Meng and Zhang2014). Based on these two sutures and the Yagan fault belt, the northern Alxa region can be further subdivided into four units (from north to south): the Yagan Tectonic Belt (YTB), the Zhusileng–Hangwula Tectonic Belt (ZHTB), the Zongnaishan–Shalazhashan Tectonic Belt (ZSTB) and the Nuoergong–Honggueryulin Tectonic Belt (NHTB) (Wu & He, Reference Wu and He1992, Reference Wu and He1993) (Fig. 1b).

The ZSTB extends southwestward to the Badain Jaran desert and northeastward to the south of the Solonker region in a nearly ENE–WSW direction (Fig. 1b). To the south, the ZSTB borders the NHTB separated by the Qagan Qulu Ophiolite Belt. Northward, the Enger Us fault separates the ZSTB from the ZHTB. Palaeozoic–early Mesozoic plutons are widely exposed in the ZSTB, including voluminous calc-alkaline granitoids and minor gabbro–diorites (e.g. Shi, G. Z. et al. Reference Shi, Song, Wang, Huang, Zhang and Tang2016). The geochemical characteristics show that the late Palaeozoic plutonic rocks were mainly involved in the subduction process of the PAO (e.g. Wang et al. Reference Wang, Wang and Wang1994; Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b). The early Mesozoic plutonic rocks are mainly medium–fine-grained monzogranite and K-feldspar granite, which intruded into the pre-Mesozoic rocks as small stocks or branches (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Wang and Wang1994). Minor Precambrian rocks are also exposed in the ZSTB, which are mainly composed of metamorphosed supracrustal rocks and meta-intrusive rocks with an age of 1.4∼1.5 Ga (Shi, X. J. et al. Reference Shi, Zhang, Wang, Zhang, Liu, Zhou and Yan2016). The lower Palaeozoic sedimentary rocks are absent, while the upper Palaeozoic sedimentary rocks are more prevalent, represented by the upper Carboniferous – lower Permian Amushan Formation (BGMRIM, 1991; Bu et al. Reference Bu, Niu, Wu and Duan2012; Lu et al. Reference Lu, Wei, Li and Wei2012; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Wu, Zhang, Xu, Meng and Zhang2014; Zhang & Zhang, Reference Zhang and Zhang2016). The lithology of the lower and middle sections of the Amushan Formation is obviously different from that of the upper section, suggesting a significant tectonic event occurred (Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017). The Jurassic sequences are sporadically exposed, which are composed of coarse-grained clastic rocks. By contrast, the Cretaceous sequences are more developed, characterized by volcaniclastic rocks.

3. Field observations and sampling

3.a. Field observations

In the ZSTB, the late Palaeozoic – Early Triassic intrusive rocks constitute the principal part of the Zongnaishan–Shalazhashan Mountain (NXBG, 1980 a,b, 1982, 2001; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Wu, Feng, Zheng and He2013; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wu, Sun, Wang, Wu and Jia2021). The majority of the Triassic intrusive rocks in this region are controlled by E–W or NW-directed faults and are emplaced into the late Palaeozoic granitoids (Fig. 1b) (NXBG, 1980 a,b, 1982, 2001). Furthermore, these Triassic plutons are mainly exposed as small-scale stocks or branches, and mainly consist of granite, monzogranite and granodiorite (NXBG, 1980 a,b, 1982; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Wu, Feng, Zheng and He2013; Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a; Zhang, Z. P. et al. Reference Zhang, Liu, Xu, Meng and Guo2016; Zhao, Z. L. et al. Reference Zhao, Li, Dang, Tang, Fu, Wang, Liu, Zhao and Liu2016). In this study, we conducted detailed studies on three plutons (the Haerchaoenji, Wulantaolegai and Chahanhada plutons) in the ZSTB. Mafic enclaves associated with these plutons were not observed during the field studies. The locations of the investigated plutons are shown in Figures 1 and 2.

Fig. 2. Geological map of the (a) Zongnaishan and (b) Shalazhashan areas.

The Haerchaoenji pluton is the largest pluton in the southwestern Zongnaishan area with an outcrop area of ∼100 km2 (NXBG, 1982). The shape of this pluton is complex, and it is mainly exposed as branches and dykes. The strike of this pluton is mostly near N–S, implying that the rock mass intruded along a N–S-directed fault (Yebuerhai Fault) (NXBG, 1982). This pluton intruded the Precambrian gneiss and the Palaeozoic granitoids, and is unconformably covered by the Middle Jurassic strata in the south (Fig. 2a) (NXBG, 1982). The Haerchaoenji pluton is dominated by medium–fine-grained granite, biotite granite and granodiorite (NXBG, 1982). The Wulantaolegai pluton intruded into the upper Carboniferous strata (Fig. 2b) and is dominated by medium-grained granite and monzonitic granite (NXBG, 1980 a, 2001). The Wulantaolegai pluton is exposed as a rock branch. The Chahanhada pluton is located in the eastern Shalazhashan area, and trends in a NE–SW direction with an outcrop area of ∼12 km2 (NXBG, 1980 b). This pluton is in the form of an elliptical stock and intrudes the late Palaeozoic granitoids (Fig. 2b). The Chahanhada pluton is unconformably covered by Lower Cretaceous strata (Bayingebi Fm) in the south and east areas (Fig. 2b) (NXBG, 1982). The main rock types are granite and monzonitic granite with a medium to coarse-grained granitic texture (Fig. 3g).

Fig. 3. Field photographs and photomicrographs showing petrographic features of the studied samples. (a–c) YE-17-69; (d–f) YE-17-78; (g–i) YE-17-88. Mineral abbreviations: Pl – plagioclase; Qtz – quartz; Kf-K – feldspar; Bt – biotite. Length of hammer for scale is 290 mm; length of hammer head for scale is 175 mm.

3.b. Sampling

A total of 16 samples were collected from the Haerchaoenji, Wulantaolegai and Chahanhada plutons for systematic zircon U–Pb–Hf isotopic and whole-rock geochemical analysis. The detailed description of these samples is carried out below.

The samples (YE-17-69, 69-1, 69-2, 69-3, 69-4) from the Haerchaoenji pluton are light grey, homogeneous, undeformed medium-grained granodiorites (3–5 mm) (Fig. 3a). The major mineral assemblages are quartz (∼25 vol. %), plagioclase (∼45–55 vol. %), K-feldspar (∼10–15 vol. %) and biotite (∼5–10 vol. %) (Fig. 3b, c), while the main accessory minerals are zircon, apatite and titanite. The plagioclases are subhedral–euhedral and show polysynthetic twinning (Fig. 3b). Most of the K-feldspars are subhedral to anhedral and show features of alteration on their surfaces (Fig. 3c). Some quartz crystals exhibit an anhedral granular texture among other minerals with wavy extinction, indicating dynamic recrystallization (Fig. 3c). Sub- to anhedral biotite is characterized by strong pleochroism, and it occasionally appears as mineral aggregates.

The samples (YE-17-78, 78-1, 78-2, 78-3, 78-4) from the Wulantaolegai pluton are pale red, fine–medium-grained granite (Fig. 3d), primarily composed of K-feldspar (∼30–35 vol. %), quartz (∼35 vol. %) and plagioclase (20–25 vol. %), with minor biotite (∼3 vol. %) (Fig. 3e, f) and accessory minerals (e.g. zircon, magnetite, titanite and apatite). K-feldspars are euhedral or subhedral and show relatively strong alteration. In addition, some K-feldspars show the distinctive feature of gridiron twinning. Quartz crystals are anhedral with rounded borders, while plagioclases are euhedral with polysynthetic twinning (Fig. 3e, f).

The samples (YE-17-88, 88-1, 88-2, 88-3, 88-4, 88-5) from the Chahanhada pluton are pale red, homogeneous medium-grained (3–5 mm) granites (Fig. 3g). Quartz (∼35–40 vol. %), K-feldspar (∼35–40 vol. %), plagioclase (∼20–27 vol. %) and biotite (∼1–2 vol. %) (Fig. 3h, i) are the major minerals. Zircon, apatite and titanite are the main accessory minerals. The K-feldspars show obvious evidence of alteration. The plagioclases are zoned with idiomorphic plates and show polysynthetic twinning. The quartz grains exhibit an anhedral granular texture among other minerals and have wavy extinction (Fig. 3h, i).

4. Analytical methods

4.a. Whole-rock major and trace elements

Whole-rock major and trace elements of the studied samples were analysed at the State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Northwest University, China. Fresh chips of whole-rock samples were powdered to ∼200 mesh using a tungsten carbide ball mill. Major elements were analysed using a Rigaku RIX 2100 X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometer, and trace elements were analysed by an Agilent 7500a inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS) using United States Geological Survey (USGS) and international rock standards (BHVO-2, AGV-2, BCR-2 and GSP-1). For the trace-element analysis, sample powders were digested using an HF + HNO3 mixture in high-pressure Teflon bombs at 190 °C for 48 hours. The analytical precision and accuracy for most of the major and trace elements is better than 5 % and 10 %, respectively (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Liu, Hu, Diwu, Yuan and Gao2007).

4.b. Zircon Lu–Hf isotopic analyses

In situ zircon Hf isotope analysis was undertaken on a Nu Plasma HR multi-collector ICP-MS (Nu Instrument Ltd, UK) equipped with a GeoLas 2005 193 nm ArF excimer laser-ablation system. Analysis was carried out using a beam size of 44 μm and helium was used as a carrier gas. The laser repetition rate was 10 Hz and the energy density applied was 15–20 J cm−2. Instrumental conditions and data acquisition methods were described by Zhao, Y. et al. (Reference Zhao, Sun, Diwu, Zhu, Ao, Zhang and Yan2017). Time-dependent drifts of Lu–Hf isotopic ratios were corrected using a linear interpolation according to the variations of 91500 and GJ-1. A decay constant of 1.867 × 10–11 a−1 for 176Lu (Albarède et al. Reference Albarède, Scherer, Blichert, Rosing, Simionovici and Bizzarro2006) and the present chondritic ratios of 176Hf/177Hf = 0.282772 and 176Lu/177Hf = 0.0332 (Blichert-Toft & Albarède, Reference Blichert-Toft and Albarède1997) were adopted to calculate ϵHf(t) values (ϵHf(t) = ((176Hf/177Hf)s − (176Lu/177Hf)s × (eλt − 1))/((176Hf/177Hf)CHUR,0 − (176Lu/177Hf)CHUR × (eλt − 1)) − 1) × 10 000; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Li, Zheng and Gao2007). Bea et al. (Reference Bea, Montero, Molina, Scarrow, Cambeses and Moreno2018) proposed that the best strategy to calculate the Hf TDM is to use the analytically determined whole-rock Lu/Hf ratio as a proxy for the source Lu/Hf. In this study, we use the analytically determined whole-rock Lu/Hf ratio as described by Bea et al. (Reference Bea, Montero, Molina, Scarrow, Cambeses and Moreno2018).

4.c. Zircon U–Pb geochronology

Zircon grains for U–Pb dating were extracted by using a combined technique of heavy liquid and magnetic separation, and then handpicked under a microscope, mounted in epoxy resin and polished until the centres of the zircon grains were exposed. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images were taken to reveal their internal structures and select the suitable U–Pb dating spots by using a Quanta 400FEG environmental scanning electron microscope.

Laser-ablation ICP-MS (LA-ICP-MS) zircon U–Pb dating was carried out at the State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Northwest University, China. The U–Pb dating was conducted on an Agilent 7500a ICP-MS instrument equipped with a 193 nm ArF excimer laser and a homogenizing imaging optical system. A fixed spot size of 32 μm with a laser repetition rate of 6 Hz was adopted throughout this study. Helium was used as carrier gas to provide efficient aerosol delivery to the torch. The standard silicate glass NIST 610 was used to optimize the instrument to obtain maximum signal intensity (238U signal intensity >460 cps/ppm) and low oxide production (ThO/Th <1 %). The ICP-MS measurements were carried out using time-resolved analysis operating in fast peak jumping mode and DUAL detector mode using a short integration time. 207Pb/206Pb, 206Pb/238U, 207Pb/235U and 208Pb/232Th ratios were calculated using the GLITTER 4.0 program (Macquarie University). The zircon 91500 was used as an external standard with a recommended 206Pb–238U age of 1065.4 ± 0.6 Ma (Wiedenbeck et al. Reference Wiedenbeck, Alle, Corfu, Griffin, Meier, Oberli, von Quadt, Roddick and Speigel1995) for correction of both instrumental mass bias and depth-dependent elemental and isotopic fractionation. U, Th and Pb concentrations were calibrated by using 29Si as an internal standard and NIST SRM 610 as an external standard. Concordia diagrams and weighted mean calculations were made using the Isoplot program (version 3.0) (Ludwig, Reference Ludwig2003).

5. Analytical results

5.a. Whole-rock geochemistry

In this research, field investigation and photomicrographs reveal that these intermediate–acid intrusive rocks have rarely been affected by regional metamorphism. Major- and trace-element compositions of selected granitoids from the study area are listed in online Supplementary Material Table S1.

The samples from the Haerchaoenji granodiorite have SiO2 = 63.10–65.80 wt %, total Fe2O3 = 3.86–4.65 wt %, Na2O = 4.52–4.77 wt %, K2O = 1.94–2.15 wt %, MgO = 1.55–1.91 wt %, Mg no. = 48–49 and CaO = 3.78–4.14 wt % (online Supplementary Material Table S1). In the plot of total alkalis versus SiO2, these samples all fall into the subalkaline series field (Fig. 4a). In the plot of K2O versus SiO2, all samples fall into the medium-K calc-alkaline field (Fig. 4b). These granodiorites collected from the Haerchaoenji pluton are metaluminous to slightly peraluminous, with A/CNK (molecular ratio of Al2O3/(CaO + Na2O + K2O)) ratios ranging from 0.97 to 1.01 (Fig. 4c). In addition, these samples show enrichment of light rare earth elements (LREEs) ((La/Yb)N = 27.13–41.31) and no obvious Eu anomalies (Eu = 0.95–1.02) in the chondrite-normalized REE diagrams (Fig. 5). They also exhibit depletion of Nb, Ta and Ce, and enrichment of Ba, Th, U and Pb contents in the primitive mantle-normalized spider diagrams (Fig. 5).

Fig. 4. (a) (Na2O + K2O) versus SiO2, (b) K2O versus SiO2 and (c) A/NK versus A/CNK plots for investigated samples from the ZSTB. The field boundaries in the three diagrams are from Irvine & Baragar (Reference Irvine and Baragar1971), Peccerillo & Taylor (Reference Peccerillo and Taylor1976) and Maniar & Piccoli (Reference Maniar and Piccoli1989), respectively. Previous data of ZHTB and ZSTB are cited from Shi et al. (Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a) and Zhang et al. (Reference Zhang, Pease, Meng, Zheng, Wu, Chen and Gan2017).

Fig. 5. (a, c, e) Chondrite-normalized REE patterns; the normalization values of chondrite are from Taylor & McLennan (Reference Taylor and McLennan1985). (b, d, f) Primitive mantle-normalized trace-element patterns; data for primitive mantle are from Sun & McDonough (Reference Sun, McDonough, Saunders and Norry1989).

The samples of the Wulantaolegai granite show SiO2 = 68.6–70.70 wt %, total Fe2O3 = 1.76–1.90 wt %, Na2O = 5.63–6.30 wt %, K2O = 3.52–3.74 wt % and CaO = 0.89–1.12 wt % (online Supplementary Material Table S1). In addition, they have low MgO contents of 0.23–0.25 wt % and Mg no. values of 23–24. Theses granites are light peraluminous, with A/CNK from 1.0 to 1.08 (Fig. 4c). In the plot of K2O versus SiO2, all samples fall into the high-K calc-alkaline field (Fig. 4b). In the chondrite-normalized REE diagrams, the granite samples show enrichment of LREEs ((La/Yb)N = 5.87–6.66) and negative Eu anomalies (δEu = 0.80–0.82) (Fig. 5). They also exhibit depletion of Ba, Nb, Ce and Sr, and enrichment of Rb, Th, U and Pb contents in the primitive mantle-normalized spider diagrams (Fig. 5).

The samples from the Chahanhada granite show SiO2 = 72.76–77.70 wt %, total Fe2O3 = 0.98–1.26 wt %, Na2O = 4.05–4.77 wt %, K2O = 3.20–3.77 and CaO = 0.35–0.51 wt % (online Supplementary Material Table S1). In addition, they have low MgO contents of 0.26–0.36 wt % with Mg no. values of 38–40. These granites are peraluminous, with an A/CNK from 1.15 to 1.17 (Fig. 4c). In the plot of K2O versus SiO2, all samples fall into the medium to high-K calc-alkaline field (Fig. 4b). Chondrite-normalized REE patterns of these samples show enrichment of LREEs ((La/Yb)N = 10.27–12.93) with obvious Eu anomalies (δEu = 0.49–0.53) (Fig. 5). They exhibit depletion of Ba, Nb, Ce, Sr and Eu, and enrichment of Rb, Th, U, La, Pb and Nd contents in the primitive mantle-normalized spider diagrams as well (Fig. 5).

5.b. U–Pb zircon geochronological data

The results of zircon LA-ICP-MS U–Pb dating are presented in online Supplementary Material Table S3. The zircons separated from the granodiorite (YE-17-69) and granites (YE-17-78, YE-17-88) are mostly colourless, transparent and well crystallized, with grain diameters of 200–300 μm, 150–200 μm and 50–120 μm, respectively (Fig. 6). The length/width ratios of the zircon grains range from 1:1 to 5:1 (YE-17-69), 1:1 to 3:1 (YE-17-78) and 1:1 to 2:1 (YE-17-88), respectively. The CL images revealed that the selected zircons display clear oscillatory zoning and platy structures (Fig. 6). All zircon grains are euhedral to subhedral with prismatic to sub-prismatic shapes (Fig. 6). Moreover, the relatively high Th/U ratios of the three samples (0.43–1.34, 0.37–0.62 and 0.47–1.30, respectively) also suggest a magmatic origin (Hoskin & Schaltegger, Reference Hoskin and Schaltegger2003). The 206Pb–238U weighted average ages of concordant points are 245 ± 5 Ma (MSWD = 0.56, N = 19) for YE-17-69, 237 ± 2 Ma (MSWD = 0.43, N = 25) for YE-17-78 and 245 ± 2 Ma (MSWD = 0.38, N = 17) for YE-17-88.

Fig. 6. (a) Cathodoluminescence (CL) images of representative zircons of investigated samples from the ZSTB. (b) Chondrite-normalized REE patterns of the zircons from investigated samples.

5.c. Zircon Lu–Hf results

The zircon grains that were previously analysed by U–Pb methods were also analysed for Lu–Hf isotopes on the same spot, and the results are listed in online Supplementary Material Table S2. Fifteen spots on zircons selected from sample YE-17-69 yielded variable ϵHf(t) values between +1.8 and +6.4 (Fig. 7), with Hf model ages (TDM) of 636–837 Ma, and initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios from 0.282676 to 0.282807. Fifteen spots on zircons selected from sample YE-17-78 showed variable ϵHf(t) values ranging from +3.3 to +8.7 (Fig. 7), corresponding to TDM ages varying from 545 to 778 Ma, with the initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios ranging from 0.282712 to 0.282864. Fifteen spots on zircons from sample YE-17-88 yielded positive ϵHf(t) values ranging from +5.5 to +11.8 (Fig. 7), corresponding to young TDM ages from 425 to 729 Ma, and the initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios varied between 0.282776 and 0.282955.

Fig. 7. Zircon Hf isotopic compositions of intrusive rocks from the CAOB. ZSTB – Zongnaishan–Shalazhashan Tectonic Belt; ZHTB – Zhusileng–Hangwula Tectonic Belt; NHTB – Nuoergong–Honggueryulin Tectonic Belt. The ϵHf(t) values are cited from Shi et al. (Reference Shi, Tong, Wang, Zhang, Zhang, Zhang, Guo, Zeng and Geng2012, Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b), Dan et al. (Reference Dan, Li, Wang, Tang and Liu2014, Reference Dan, Wang, Wang, Liu, Wyman and Liu2015, Reference Dan, Li, Wang, Wang, Wyman and Liu2016), Ye et al. (Reference Ye, Zhang, Wang, Shi, Zhang and Liu2016), Zhang, W. et al. (Reference Zheng, Li, Xiao, Liu and Wu2016), Liu et al. (Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017) and Zhao et al. (Reference Zhao, Liu, Wang, Zhang and Guan2020).

6. Discussion

6.a. Geochronological framework of the ZSTB

The geochronological data are important to constrain the magmatic event and further understand the tectonic evolution of the northern Alxa region. In this study, the obtained zircon U–Pb ages are considered to reflect the timing of magmatic events. The zircon U–Pb dating of the samples from three plutons in the ZSTB yielded weighted mean 206Pb–238U ages of 237∼245 Ma (Fig. 8). These dates provide robust evidence for the presence of early Mesozoic magmatism in the northern Alxa region. Furthermore, we collected previously reported magmatic events in the ZSTB (e.g. Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Wu, Feng, Zheng and He2013; Liu & Zhang, Reference Liu and Zhang2014 a,b; Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Yang et al. Reference Yang, Zhang, Wang, Shi, Zhang, Tong, Guo and Geng2014; Shi, G. Z. et al. Reference Shi, Song, Wang, Huang, Zhang and Tang2016; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Li, Xiao, Liu and Wu2016; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wu, Sun, Wang, Wu and Jia2021) and revealed several magmatic episodes in the ZSTB (Fig. 9; online Supplementary Material Table S4). Although such late Palaeozoic – early Mesozoic magmatism is successive, the statistical data display three main age peaks at c. 270, 250 and 228 Ma (Fig. 9). When these age data are combined, they show multi-stage magmatism in the ZSTB (Fig. 9), implying a long-lived magmatism from late Palaeozoic to early Mesozoic times in response to a prolonged subduction, collision and extension in the central segment of the CAOB.

Fig. 8. Zircon U–Pb concordia diagrams and histograms for investigated samples.

Fig. 9. Histogram of zircon U–Pb ages of the Phanerozoic magmatism in the ZSTB, northern Alxa region. Data sourced from online Supplementary Material Table S4.

6.b. Genetic type

Granitoids are commonly classified into I-, A-, S- and M-types based on their source compositions, mineral assemblages and geochemical features (Chappell & White, Reference Chappell and White2001; Bonin, Reference Bonin2007). The Haerchaoenji granodiorite and Chahanhada granite are similar to typical I-type granitoids. Specifically, these granitoids are metaluminous to weakly peraluminous and medium-K to high-K calc-alkaline with A/CNK and A/NK ratios of 0.97–1.17 and 1.24–1.74, respectively. These features suggest that they represent an I-type or A-type granitoid rather than an S-type (Chappell & White, Reference Chappell and White1992; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Pease, Meng, Zheng, Wu, Chen and Gan2017; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Liu, Wang, Zhang and Guan2020). Moreover, these granitoids have relatively lower 10 000 Ga/Al ratios (1.86–2.34) and Zr + Nb + Ce + Y contents (269.88–347.60 ppm) than A-type granitoids (Whalen et al. Reference Whalen, Currie and Chappell1987) (Fig. 10a–d). The negative correlation between P2O5 and SiO2 appears to follow the I-type trend (Fig. 10e). The relatively low Zr and Ce contents of the samples also suggests that these rocks are I-type granitoids. This conclusion can be further supported by the Na2O versus SiO2 diagram (Fig. 10f).

Fig. 10. Petrogenetic discrimination diagrams for early Mesozoic granitoids in the ZSTB. (a) (K2O + Na2O/CaO) versus Zr + Nb + Ce + Y. (b) FeOT/MgO versus Zr + Nb + Ce + Y. (c) Zr versus 10 000Ga/Al. (d) FeOT/MgO versus 10 000Ga/Al. (e) P2O5 versus SiO2. (f) Na2O versus SiO2 (a–d are after Whalen et al. Reference Whalen, Currie and Chappell1987, and e, f are after Chappell & White, Reference Chappell and White1992).

However, the Wulantaolegai granite has characteristics more similar to A-type granitoids. These samples have high K2O + Na2O, FeOT/MgO, Zr and Ga/Al ratios, which are consistent with those of A-type granitoids (e.g. Dan et al. Reference Dan, Li, Wang, Tang and Liu2014; Ao et al. Reference Ao, Zhao, Zhang, Zhai, Zhang, Zhang, Wang and Sun2019). In addition, the samples have higher 10 000*Ga/Al (2.67–2.74) and Zr + Nb + Ce + Y (1051–1230 ppm), and plot into the A-type granitoid field on the discrimination diagrams (Fig. 10a–d). Thus, the Haerchaoenji granodiorite and Chahanhada granite are considered to be I-type granitoids, while the Wulantaolegai granite is classified as A-type granitoid.

6.c. Temperature–pressure conditions of melting

Zircon saturation thermometry can be used to make an approximate estimate of the temperature of crustal-derived silicic magmas at the early stage of crystallization (Hui et al. Reference Hui, Zhang, Zhang, Qu, Zhang, Zhao and Niu2021 and references therein). Zircon saturation temperatures (T Zr) of magma are estimated using zirconium concentrations of melt using the equation from Boehnke et al. (Reference Boehnke, Watson, Trail, Harrison and Schmitt2013). Based on the Zr content of the studied samples, the T Zr ranged from 728 to 747 °C (av. 738 °C) in the Haerchaoenji granodiorites, 928 to 981 °C (av. 955 °C) in the Wulantaolegai granites, and 740 to 792 °C (av. 778 °C) in the Chahanhada granites. The mean values of T Zr in the Haerchaoenji granodiorite and Chahanhada granite are consistent with those in typical I-type granites (781 °C, e.g. Chappell & White, Reference Chappell and White1992). The mean value of T Zr in the Wulantaolegai granite points to a hot granitoid (TZr >800 °C; Miller et al. Reference Miller, McDowell and Mapes2003), which is consistent with that of A-type granites (Watson & Harrison, Reference Watson and Harrison1983).

With respect to pressure, low Sr contents and Sr/Y ratios, as well as negative Eu anomalies in the Wulantaolegai and Chahanhada granites (online Supplementary Material Table S1), reflect low-pressure conditions of the magma source region (e.g. Martin et al. Reference Martin, Smithies, Rapp, Moyen and Champion2005). The coupled observations of the two pressure-dependent ratios, namely Sr/Y and La/Yb, point to a low pressure as well (Fig. 11). The low-pressure conditions inferred for these granites are consistent with their high silica contents as well (e.g. Blundy & Cashman, Reference Blundy and Cashman2001). In contrast, the Haerchaoenji granodiorites exhibit high Sr and Ba contents with high Sr/Y ratios, low Y and heavy rare earth element (HREE) contents, implying high-pressure conditions (pressure >12 kbar) (e.g. Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999; Martin et al. Reference Martin, Smithies, Rapp, Moyen and Champion2005; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Sun, Han, Eizenhöfer, Hou, Zhang, Zhu, Wang, Liu and Xu2016).

Fig. 11. Plots of (a) La/Sm versus La; (b) Zr/Nb versus Zr; (c) Sr/Y versus Y; and (d) Sr/Y versus LaN/YbN (a, b are after Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wu, Sun, Wang, Wu and Jia2021, and c, d are after Castro et al. Reference Castro, Moreno-Ventas, Fernández, Vujovich, Gallastegui, Heredia, Martino, Becchio, Corretgé, Díaz-Alvarado, Such, García-Arias and Liu2011).

6.d. Petrogenesis and magma source

6.d.1. The Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada I-type granitoids

The Haerchaoenji granodiorite and Chahanhada granite are calc-alkaline and peraluminous I-type granitoids, which could be formed by: (1) partial melting of pre-existing igneous rocks in the crust (Clemens et al. Reference Clemens, Stevens and Farina2011; Topuz et al. Reference Topuz, Candan, Zack, Chen and Li2019; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wu, Sun, Wang, Wu and Jia2021); (2) mixing of mantle-derived magmas with crustal-derived materials (Clemens et al. Reference Clemens, Darbyshire and Flinders2009); and (3) assimilation and fractional crystallization processes of mantle-derived basaltic melts (Barth et al. Reference Barth, Wooden, Tosdal and Morrison1995; Quelhas et al. Reference Quelhas, Mata and Dias2020).

The investigated samples have Rb/Sr = 0.80–1.00, K/Rb = 326.32–435.50 and Zr/Hf = 35.66–46.95, which differs from the high Rb/Sr (> 5), low K/Rb (110) and low Zr/Hf (20) ratios of fractionated granitoids (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Liu, Liu, Wang, Xie, Wang, Ji, Yang, Liu, Khanal and He2020). The fractional crystallization of mafic melts would leave large amounts of mafic–ultramafic cumulates (Clemens et al. Reference Clemens, Stevens and Farina2011), which is obviously different from the field investigation. This supposition is also evidenced by the absence of xenocrystic zircons in the investigated granitoids. In addition, these samples from the Haerchaoenji granodiorite and Chahanhada granite show low MgO (0.26–1.91), Cr (4.25–17.04) and Ni (2.61–6.49) contents and moderate Mg no. values (38–49), similar to those of magma formed by partial melting of thickened lower crust instead of fractional crystallization from the mantle directly (Ao et al. Reference Ao, Zhao, Zhang, Zhai, Zhang, Zhang, Wang and Sun2019; Yomeun et al. Reference Yomeun, Wang, Tchouankoue, Kamani, Ndofack, Huang, Basua, Lu and Xue2022). Furthermore, the positive correlation of La/Sm versus La and Zr/Nb versus Zr presented by the studied rocks can be produced by either magma mixing or partial melting rather than fractional crystallization (Fig. 11). Commonly, the magma mixing model can generate massive mafic enclaves and geochemical variations (Kemp et al. Reference Kemp, Hawkesworth, Foster, Paterson, Woodhead, Hergt, Gray and Whitehouse2007). As mentioned above, there are no mafic microgranular enclaves discovered in the field investigation. The studied samples do not show obvious geochemical variations either. In the Mg no. versus SiO2 diagram, these samples are also not in conformity with the magma mixing trend (Fig. 12c). The ϵHf(t) values of the Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada granitoids are distinct from the variable ϵHf(t) values of granitoids formed by magma mixing (usually from negative to positive; Griffin et al. Reference Griffin, Wang, Jackson, Pearson, O’Reilly, Xu and Zhou2002). The zircon trace elements of the Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada granitoids have medium Th and U contents, indicating a crustal affinity as well. Thus, the Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada granitoids were probably generated by partial melting of pre-existing crustal basements.

Fig. 12. (a) Al2O3/(MgO + FeOT + TiO2) versus Al2O3 + MgO + FeOT + TiO2 (Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999). (b) (Na2O + K2O)/CaO versus Na2O + K2O + CaO (Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999). (c) Mg no. versus SiO2 diagram (after Zhu, R. Z. et al. Reference Zhu, Lai, Qin and Zhao2018; reference fields after Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999; Wolf & Wyllie, Reference Wolf and Wyllie1994). (d) (Na2O + K2O)/(FeOT + MgO + TiO2) versus (Na2O + K2O + FeOT + MgO + TiO2) (Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999). (e) CaO/(MgO + FeOT + TiO2) versus (CaO + MgO + FeOT + TiO2) (Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999). (f) Rb/Ba versus Rb/Sr (Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999).

Partial melting of different source rocks would generate compositional variations in the magmas that could be visualized in terms of major-element compositions (Altherr et al. Reference Altherr, Holl, Hegner, Langer and Kreuzer2000). The major-element compositions of the Haerchaoenji granodiorites (e.g. high Na2O and Al2O3, medium CaO, low MgO, etc) are similar to those of the intermediate to granitic rocks generated by the partial melting of basaltic (mafic) rocks (Rapp & Watson, Reference Rapp and Watson1995; Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999). In the major-element feature diagrams (Fig. 12a–e), the granodiorites display a similarity with the experimental melts of amphibolite-bearing mafic rocks (Patiño Douce, Reference Patiño Douce, Castro, Fernández and Vigneresse1999; Lu et al. Reference Lu, Zhao and Zheng2016, Reference Lu, Zhao and Zheng2017). The low Rb/Ba (0.07–0.08) and Rb/Sr (0.08–0.10) ratios indicate basalt-derived components as well (Fig. 12f). The low Th/La ratios (<0.5) of these granodiorites are also consistent with those of the products yielded by partial melting of mafic crustal sources. The positive zircon ϵHf(t) values between +1.8 and +6.4 (Fig. 7), with young TDM ages of 636–837 Ma, indicate that the granodiorites were mainly derived from Neoproterozoic juvenile mafic crustal materials. In contrast, the Chahanhada granite samples have relatively high Al2O3/TiO2 ratios (52.54–93.76), A/CNK values (1.00–1.17) and low CaO/Na2O ratios (0.09–0.18), suggesting the derivation from a parental magma that was probably generated by the partial melting of a metasedimentary source (Sylvester, Reference Sylvester1998; Zhu, R. Z. et al. Reference Zhu, Lai, Qin and Zhao2018). In the source discrimination diagrams (Fig. 12), the Chahanhada granites plot into the fields of metagreywacke and metapelite melts. Actually, it is common that the source of I-type granites involves mature sedimentary materials (Zhu, Y. et al. Reference Zhu, Lai, Qin, Zhu, Zhang and Zhang2018). However, the positive zircon ϵHf(t) values ranged from +5.5 to +11.8 (Fig. 7), with young TDM ages of 425–729 Ma, suggesting the significant involvement of juvenile crustal materials. Thus, the Chahanhada granites might have originated from juvenile crust with the input of metasedimentary components.

6.d.2. The Wulantaolegai A-type granite

The Wulantaolegai granite displays the features of A-type granite, which is generally attributed to: (1) differentiation of mantle-derived alkaline basalts (Turner et al. Reference Turner, Foden and Morrison1992; Mushkin et al. Reference Mushkin, Navon, Halica, Hartmann and Stein2003); (2) partial melting of crustal materials at high temperatures (Collins et al. Reference Collins, Beams, White and Chappell1982; King et al. Reference King, White, Chappell and Allen1997), and (3) a combination of crustal and mantle sources, i.e. crustal assimilation and fractional crystallization of mantle-derived magmas, or magma mixing of mantle-derived melts and crustal magmas (Kemp et al. Reference Kemp, Paterson and Hawkesworth2005). The Mg no. values and Cr and Ni contents of the Wulantaolegai granites are much lower than those of the mantle-derived melts (Mg no. = 73–81, Cr >1000 ppm, Ni >400 ppm) (Wilson, Reference Wilson1989). The Nb/Ta (8 on average) and Zr/Hf (43 on average) ratios of the Wulantaolegai granites in this study are consistent with those of the crust. The low Nb/Y (0.38–0.41) and Rb/Y (2.37–2.71) ratios also suggest a lower crustal source (Rudnick & Fountain, Reference Rudnick and Fountain1995). Furthermore, the Wulantaolegai granites have higher Y/Nb (2.45–2.60, >1.2), i.e. A2-type granite affinities (Eby, Reference Eby1992; Frost & Frost, Reference Frost and Frost2011), which also suggests that the magmas were derived from continental crust or underplated basaltic protoliths (Eby, Reference Eby1992). So far, coeval mantle-derived mafic rocks have not been recognized in the study area. The absence of mafic microgranular enclaves in the Wulantaolegai pluton does not support the model of a combination of crustal and mantle sources. In the Mg no. versus SiO2 diagram (Fig. 12c), the Wulantaolegai granite samples are not in conformity with the magma mixing trend. In the La/Sm versus La and Zr/Nb versus Zr diagrams, the Wulantaolegai granite samples also display the feature of partial melting processes rather than magma mixing or fractional crystallization (Fig. 11). The Wulantaolegai granite samples have positive ϵHf(t) values ranging from +3.3 to +8.7, indicating a magma source from juvenile crustal basement rather than a mixed source. In addition, the zircon saturation temperatures of the Wulantaolegai granite indicate high-temperature conditions. Thus, the model of partial melting of juvenile crustal materials at high temperatures is reasonable for the petrogenesis of the Wulantaolegai granite.

The relatively low Sr (57.50–62.60 ppm) and high HREE contents, and weakly fractionated HREEs and low Sr/Y ratios (1.72–1.99) suggest these rocks were mainly derived from a crustal source above the garnet stability depth (Cai et al. Reference Cai, Sun, Yuan, Zhao, Xiao, Long and Wu2011 b), and the high Rb/Y ratios (2.37–2.71) and low Nb/Y ratios (0.38–0.41) display the approach to the upper crustal source (Taylor & McLennan, Reference Taylor and McLennan1985). These features suggest that the source region of these granites is relatively shallow. In the source discrimination diagrams (Fig. 12), the Wulantaolegai granites variably fall into the overlapping fields of the partial melts of metagreywackes, psammite and meta-igneous rocks. The positive zircon ϵHf(t) values between +3.3 and +8.7 (Fig. 7) with young TDM ages of 545–778 Ma suggest the involvement of juvenile mafic crust for the Wulantaolegai granites, which is similar to other granitoids in the southern CAOB (e.g. Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wu, Sun, Wang, Wu and Jia2021). The low Th/La ratios (<0.5) of the A-type granites in this study are also consistent with that of the partial melting products of mafic crustal sources. The variable zircon ϵHf(t) units of these granites were probably caused by some recycled sediments in the magma source.

6.e. Tectonic setting and geological implications

6.e.1. Tectonic setting

In this study, the investigated granitoids display the common features of volcanic arc granites, such as the depletion of Nb, Ta and enrichment of large ion lithophile elements with low Sr/Y and (La/Yb)N (e.g. Zhao, Y. et al. Reference Zhao, Sun, Diwu, Zhu, Ao, Zhang and Yan2017; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wu, Sun, Wang, Wu and Jia2021). On the Th/Yb versus Ta/Yb and Ta*3–Rb/30–Hf ternary diagram, these granitoids also display the affinity of volcanic arc granitoids, analogous to a subduction-related compressional setting (Fig. 13a, b). On the tectonic discrimination diagrams, the Haerchaoenji and Chahanhada granitoid samples plot in the volcanic arc field, while the Wulantaolegai samples show trends from the arc to post-collisional fields (Fig. 13a–f). These findings suggest that these granitoids either formed in a subduction-related setting, or a post-collisional setting with arc-like geochemical signatures which are inherited from a previous arc source. In this study, we prefer a post-collisional setting with arc affinity based on the following regional data: (1) the magmatism ranging from late Carboniferous to middle–late Permian times exhibits a marked petrogenetic, geochemical and isotopic transition and trends from the subduction to post-collisional fields (e.g. Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Wu, Feng, Zheng and He2013; Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Xu, D. Z. et al. Reference Xu, Zhang, Zhou and Sun2014; Yang et al. Reference Yang, Zhang, Wang, Shi, Zhang, Tong, Guo and Geng2014; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Wu, Zhang, Xu, Meng and Zhang2014; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Shi, Jiang, Zhang, Li and Wang2015; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wang, Li, Shi, Chen and Wei2015; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Li, Zhu, Eizenhöfer, Zhang, Wang and Tsui2018); (2) the regional unconformity and the change of sedimentary facies also suggest that a significant tectonic event happened during early–middle Permian time (Zhang, Reference Zhang2019); (3) the palaeomagnetic, provenance and palaeontological studies further suggest that the PAO in the northern Alxa region closed before earliest Mesozoic time (Fig. 14a) (Pu et al. Reference Pu, Wu, Duan, Jiang, Shi and Chen2013; Huang et al. Reference Huang, Yan, Piper, Zhang, Yi, Yu and Zhou2018; Zhang et al. Reference Zhang, Huang, Zhao, Meert, Zhang, Liang, Bai and Zhou2018).

Fig. 13. Tectonic setting discrimination diagrams for the early Mesozoic granitoids in the ZSTB. (a) Ta*3–Rb/30–Hf ternary plot (Harris et al. Reference Harris, Stone and Turner1987). (b) Th/Yb versus Ta/Yb (Gorton & Schandl, Reference Gorton and Schandl2000). (c) Rb versus Y + Nb (Pearce et al. Reference Pearce, Harris and Tindle1984; Pearce, Reference Pearce1996). (d) Ta versus Yb (Pearce et al. Reference Pearce, Harris and Tindle1984). (e) Rb versus Ta + Yb (Pearce et al. Reference Pearce, Harris and Tindle1984). (f) Nb versus Y (Pearce et al. Reference Pearce, Harris and Tindle1984). Syn-COLG – syn-collision granites; VAG – volcanic arc granites; WPG – within plate granites; ORG – ocean ridge granites.

Fig. 14. (a) Palaeogeographic reconstructions of Eastern Asian blocks (modified after Huang et al. Reference Huang, Yan, Piper, Zhang, Yi, Yu and Zhou2018). (b, c) Diagrams illustrate the tentative tectonic scenario showing the Middle Triassic evolution of the ZSTB and adjacent areas. IC – Indochina Block; MOB – Mongolian Block; NCB – North China Block; NQ – North Qiangtang block; SCB – South China Block; Si – Sibumasu block; SQ – South Qiangtang block.

Therefore, the Middle Triassic granitoids in the ZSTB are interpreted as post-collisional granites (Fig. 14b, c). Furthermore, in the scenario of subduction and subsequent continental collision processes, asthenospheric mantle upwelling would be inevitable owing to slab roll-back or break-off (Ersoy et al. Reference Ersoy, Palmer, Genç, Prelević, Akal and Uysal2017; Collins et al. Reference Collins, Huang, Bowden, Kemp, Janoušek, Bonin, Collins, Farina and Bowden2020). The Wulantaolegai A-type granite was probably generated by an extensional setting in response to slab break-off during the final amalgamation (Fig. 14c).

6.e.2. Geological implications

As mentioned above, extensive studies have been carried out on the closure of the PAO, producing a large quantity of data and competing models (e.g. Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Allen and Han2013, Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015, Reference Xiao, Windley, Han, Liu, Wan, Zhang, Ao, Zhang and Song2018; Eizenhöfer et al. Reference Eizenhöfer, Zhao, Zhang and Sun2014, Reference Eizenhöfer, Zhao, Sun, Zhang, Han and Hou2015 a,b; Li et al. Reference Li, Jin, Hou, Chen and Lu2015, Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Wang, Xiao and Guo2016 a, Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Jahn, Xiao, Wang and Guo2017; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Li, Zhu, Eizenhöfer, Zhang, Wang and Tsui2018, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Zhu, Wang, Eizenhöfer and Zhang2019 a,b; Han & Zhao, Reference Han and Zhao2018; Eizenhöfer & Zhao, Reference Eizenhöfer and Zhao2018; Du et al. Reference Du, Han, Shen, Han, Song, Gao, Han and Zhong2019; Shen et al. Reference Shen, Du, Han, Song, Han, Zhong and Ren2019; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Han, Liu and Wang2019; Niu et al. Reference Niu, Shi, Wang, Liu, Zhou, Lu, Song and Xu2021). Generally, the western segment of the PAO closed along the Tianshan Orogen during the Carboniferous–early Permian period (e.g. Han & Zhao, Reference Han and Zhao2018; Zheng et al. Reference Zheng, Han, Liu and Wang2019). However, the eastern segment of the PAO closed during late Permian to Middle Triassic times along the Solonker Suture Belt (e.g. Eizenhöfer et al. Reference Eizenhöfer, Zhao, Zhang and Sun2014, Reference Eizenhöfer, Zhao, Sun, Zhang, Han and Hou2015 a,b; Li et al. Reference Li, Jin, Hou, Chen and Lu2015, Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Wang, Xiao and Guo2016 a, Reference Li, Chung, Wilde, Jahn, Xiao, Wang and Guo2017; Eizenhöfer & Zhao, Reference Eizenhöfer and Zhao2018). Recent studies demonstrated that the central segment of the PAO closed at c. 280–265 Ma (Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Sun, Han, Eizenhöfer, Hou, Zhang, Zhu, Wang, Liu and Xu2016, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017, Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Li, Zhu, Eizenhöfer, Zhang, Wang and Tsui2018; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Wang, Huang, Dong, Li, Zhang and Yu2018), which is also consistent with this study. Combining these data together, we still tend to support the scissor-like closure manner, which is in accordance with previous studies (e.g. Boucot et al. Reference Boucot, Chen and Scotese2013; Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Wang, Huang, Dong, Li, Zhang and Yu2018; Han & Zhao, Reference Han and Zhao2018; Shen et al. Reference Shen, Du, Han, Song, Han, Zhong and Ren2019). This conclusion is also supported by the constraints from sedimentary strata (Zhao, Y. L. et al. Reference Zhao, Li, Wen, Liang, Feng, Zhou and Shen2016; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Zhu, Wang, Eizenhöfer and Zhang2019 a; Du et al. Reference Du, Han, Shen, Han, Song, Gao, Han and Zhong2019), syn-collisional magmatic rocks (Wang et al. Reference Wang, Xu, Pei, Wang, Li and Cao2015; Chen et al. Reference Chen, Ren, Zhao, Yang and Shang2017; Ma et al. Reference Ma, Zhu, Zhou and Qiao2017), structural evidence (Xiao et al. Reference Xiao, Windley, Sun, Li, Huang, Han, Yuan, Sun and Chen2015) and plate reconstruction (Domeier & Torsvik, Reference Domeier and Torsvik2014; Domeier, Reference Domeier2018).

In order to decipher the nature of the different tectonic units of the northern Alxa region, we collected comprehensive Hf isotopic data in this region (Fig. 7) (Shi et al. Reference Shi, Tong, Wang, Zhang, Zhang, Zhang, Guo, Zeng and Geng2012, Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Dan et al. Reference Dan, Li, Wang, Tang and Liu2014, Reference Dan, Wang, Wang, Liu, Wyman and Liu2015, Reference Dan, Li, Wang, Wang, Wyman and Liu2016; Ye et al. Reference Ye, Zhang, Wang, Shi, Zhang and Liu2016; Zhang, W. et al. Reference Zheng, Li, Xiao, Liu and Wu2016; Liu et al. Reference Liu, Zhao, Han, Eizenhöfer, Zhu, Hou and Zhang2017; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Liu, Wang, Zhang and Guan2020). It turns out that the magmatic rocks from the ZHTB and ZSTB have the most positive to low negative ϵHf(t) values and relatively young Hf model ages (Fig. 7), suggesting a juvenile nature for the basement (Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Zhao et al. Reference Zhao, Liu, Wang, Zhang and Guan2020). Significantly, these characteristics are similar to those of the granitoids in the CAOB (Guo et al. Reference Guo, Nakamuru, Fan, Kobayoshi and Li2007; Cao et al. Reference Cao, Xu, Pei and Zhang2011, Reference Cao, Xu, Pei, Guo and Wang2012; Meng et al. Reference Meng, Xu, Pei, Yang, Wang and Zhang2011; Li et al. Reference Li, Wang, Wilde, Tong, Hong and Guo2012, Reference Li, Wang, Wilde and Tong2013). However, the magmatic rocks from the southernmost NHTB display negative ϵHf(t) values and ancient Hf model ages (Fig. 7), indicating an ancient nature for the basement (Zhang, J. J. et al. Reference Zhang, Wang, Zhang, Tong, Zhang, Shi, Guo, Huang, Yang, Huang, Zhao, Ye and Hou2015; Ye et al. Reference Ye, Zhang, Wang, Shi, Zhang and Liu2016). Therefore, the juvenile nature of the ZHTB and ZSTB is similar to the CAOB (Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a,b; Zhang, J. J. et al. Reference Zhang, Wang, Zhang, Tong, Zhang, Shi, Guo, Huang, Yang, Huang, Zhao, Ye and Hou2015; Xie et al. Reference Xie, Wu, Sun, Wang, Wu and Jia2021), but is different from the Alxa Block (NHTB). This conclusion is further reinforced by whole-rock Nd isotopic studies of the Phanerozoic granitoids and volcanic rocks (e.g. Dolgopolova et al. Reference Dolgopolova, Seltmann, Armstrong, Belousova, Pankhurst and Kavalieris2013; Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a), and obvious differences in magmatism record and Precambrian rock constitution (e.g. Geng & Zhou, Reference Geng and Zhou2010, Reference Geng and Zhou2011; Shi et al. Reference Shi, Wang, Zhang, Castro, Xiao, Tong, Zhang, Guo and Yang2014 a). Thus, the boundary of the CAOB and Alxa Block is most likely the border between the ZSTB and NHTB (Badain Jaran fault or Qagan Qulu Ophiolite Belt) rather than the Enger Us belt previously proposed (e.g. Shi, Reference Shi2015; Zhang, J. J. et al. Reference Zhang, Wang, Zhang, Tong, Zhang, Shi, Guo, Huang, Yang, Huang, Zhao, Ye and Hou2015). On a larger scale, this boundary is most likely the central segment of the Tianshan–Solonker suture zone, which connects the northern CAOB with the southern Tarim and North China cratons.

7. Conclusion

  1. (1) New LA-ICP-MS zircon U–Pb dating results have revealed the Middle Triassic magmatism in the Zongnaishan and Shalazhashan areas: the Haerchaoenji granodiorite (245 ± 5 Ma), the Wulantaolegai granite (237 ± 2 Ma) and the Chahanhada granite (245 ± 2 Ma). This study and previous data provide evidence of a prolonged mafic–intermediate magmatism in the ZSTB related to the subduction and closure of the PAO.

  2. (2) The Haerchaoenji granodiorite and Chahanhada granite are classified as I-type granitoids, while the Wulantaolegai granite is considered to be an A-type granite. They were probably derived from partial melting of juvenile crustal materials, inferred from the variable positive Hf isotopic signature and young TDM model ages. The major-element compositions of the Chahanhada granite and Wulantaolegai granites suggest input of a metasedimentary component as well.

  3. (3) Based on the compilation of magmatic, sedimentary, palaeomagnetic and palaeobiogeographic evidence, we propose that the Middle Triassic granitoids in this study were formed in a post-collisional setting, and the arc affinity was probably inherited from recycled subduction-related materials.

  4. (4) The findings of this study support the scissor-like closure mode of the PAO as well as the different tectonic affinities of the ZHTB + ZSTB and NHTB.

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756822001157

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 41802119, 41330315, 41972153 and 42072132], Special Projects of China Geological Survey [grant number 121201011000161111], Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi [grant number 2019JQ-088 and 2021JQ-591], China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [grant number 2019M663779] and Special Scientific Research Programme of Shaanxi Provincial Department of Education [grant number18JK0518].

Conflict of interest

None.

References

Albarède, F, Scherer, EE, Blichert, TJ, Rosing, M, Simionovici, A and Bizzarro, M (2006) γ–ray irradiation in the early Solar System and the conundrum of the 176Lu decay constant. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 70, 1261–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altherr, R, Holl, A, Hegner, E, Langer, C and Kreuzer, H (2000) High-potassium, calc-alkaline I-type plutonism in the European Variscides: northern Vosges (France) and northern Schwarzwald (Germany). Lithos 50, 5173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ao, WH, Zhao, Y, Zhang, YK, Zhai, MG, Zhang, H, Zhang, RY, Wang, Q and Sun, Y (2019) The Neoproterozoic magmatism in the northern margin of the Yangtze Block: insights from Neoproterozoic (950–706 Ma) gabbroic-granitoid rocks of the Hannan Complex. Precambrian Research 333, 105442. doi: 10.1016/j.precamres.2019.105442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barth, AP, Wooden, JL, Tosdal, RM and Morrison, J (1995) Crustal contamination in the petrogenesis of a calc-alkalic rock series: Josephine Mountain intrusion, California. Geological Society of America Bulletin 107, 201–12.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bea, F, Montero, P, Molina, JF, Scarrow, JH, Cambeses, A and Moreno, JA (2018) Lu-Hf ratios of crustal rocks and their bearing on zircon Hf isotope model ages: the effects of accessories. Chemical Geology 484, 179–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BGMRIM (Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region) (1991) Regional Geology of Inner Mongol Autonomous Region. Beijing: Geological Publishing House (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Blichert-Toft, J and Albarède, F (1997) The Lu–Hf geochemistry of chondrites and the evolution of the mantle–crust system. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 148, 243–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blundy, J and Cashman, K (2001) Ascent-driven crystallization of dacite magmas at Mount St Helens, 1980–1986. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 140, 631–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehnke, P, Watson, EB, Trail, D, Harrison, TM and Schmitt, AK (2013) Zircon saturation re-revisited. Chemical Geology 351, 324–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonin, B (2007) A-type granites and related rocks: evolution of a concept, problems and prospects. Lithos 97, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boucot, AJ, Chen, X and Scotese, CR (2013) Phanerozoic Paleoclimate: An Atlas of Lithologic Indicators of Climate. SEPM, Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology, vol. 11, 478 pp.Google Scholar
Bu, JJ, Niu, ZJ, Wu, J and Duan, XF (2012) Sedimentary characteristics and age of Amushan Formation in Ejin Banner and its adjacent areas, western Inner Mongolia. Geological Bulletin of China 31, 1669–83 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Cai, KD, Sun, M, Yuan, C, Long, XP and Xiao, WJ (2011a) Geological framework and Paleozoic tectonic history of the Chinese Altai, NW China: a review. Russian Geology and Geophysics 52, 1585–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cai, KD, Sun, M, Yuan, C, Zhao, GC, Xiao, WJ, Long, XP and Wu, FY (2011b) Prolonged magmatism, juvenile nature and tectonic evolution of the Chinese Altai, NW China: evidence from zircon U–Pb and Hf isotopic study of Paleozoic granitoids. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 42, 949–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cao, HH, Xu, WL, Pei, FP, Guo, PY and Wang, F (2012) Permian tectonic evolution of the eastern section of the northern margin of the North China Plate: constraints from zircon U–Pb geochronology and geochemistry of the volcanic rocks. Acta Petrologica Sinica 28, 2733–50 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Cao, HH, Xu, WL, Pei, FP and Zhang, XZ (2011) Permian tectonic evolution in Southwestern Khanka massif: evidence from zircon U–Pb chronology, Hf isotope and geochemistry of gabbro and diorite. Acta Geologica Sinica (English Edition) 85, 1390–402.Google Scholar
Castro, A, Moreno-Ventas, I, Fernández, C, Vujovich, G, Gallastegui, G, Heredia, N, Martino, RD, Becchio, R, Corretgé, LG, Díaz-Alvarado, J, Such, P, García-Arias, M and Liu, DY (2011) Petrology and SHRIMP U-Pb zircon geochronology of Cordilleran granitoids of the Bariloche area, Argentina. Journal of South American Earth Sciences 32, 508–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, BW and White, AJR (1992) I- and S-type granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences 83, 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chappell, BW and White, AJR (2001) Two contrasting granite types: 25 years later. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences 48, 489–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charvet, J, Shu, LS, Laurent-Charvet, S, Wang, B, Faure, M, Cluzel, D, Chen, Y and De Jong, K (2011) Palaeozoic tectonic evolution of the Tianshan belt, NW China. Science China: Earth Sciences 54, 166–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, B, Jahn, BM and Tian, W (2009) Evolution of the Solonker suture zone: constraints from zircon U-Pb ages, Hf isotopic ratios and whole-rock Nd-Sr isotope compositions of subduction- and collision-related magmas and forearc sediments. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 34, 245–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, C, Ren, YS, Zhao, HL, Yang, Q and Shang, QQ (2017) Age, tectonic setting, and metallogenic implication of Phanerozoic granitic magmatism at the eastern margin of the Xing’an-Mongolian Orogenic Belt, NE China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 144, 368–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, GC, Shi, JZ, Jiang, T, Zhang, HY, Li, W and Wang, BW (2015) LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating and geochemistry of granitoids in Tamusu, Alxa Right Banner, Inner Mongolia. Geological Bulletin of China 34, 1884–96 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Chen, Y, Wu, TR, Gan, LS, Zhang, ZC and Fu, B (2019) Provenance of the early to mid-Paleozoic sediments in the northern Alxa area: implications for tectonic evolution of the southwestern Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Gondwana Research 67, 115–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, JD, Darbyshire, DPF and Flinders, J (2009) Sources of post-orogenic calcalkaline magmas: the Arrochar and Garabal Hill–Glen Fyne complexes, Scotland. Lithos 112, 524–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clemens, JD, Stevens, G and Farina, F (2011) The enigmatic sources of I-type granites: the peritectic connexion. Lithos 126, 174–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, WJ, Beams, SD, White, AJR and Chappell, BW (1982) Nature and origin of A-type granites with particular reference to southeastern Australia. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 80, 189200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, WJ, Huang, HQ, Bowden, P and Kemp, AIS (2020) Repeated S–I–A-type granite trilogy in the Lachlan Orogen, and geochemical contrasts with A-type granites in Nigeria: implications for petrogenesis and tectonic discrimination. In Post-Archean Granitic Rocks: Petrogenetic Processes and Tectonic Environments (eds Janoušek, V, Bonin, B, Collins, WJ, Farina, F and Bowden, P), pp. 5376. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 491.Google Scholar
Cope, T, Ritts, BD, Darby, BJ, Fildani, A and Graham, SA (2005) Late Paleozoic sedimentation on the northern margin of the North China block: implications for regional tectonics and climate change. International Geology Review 47, 270–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dan, W, Li, XH, Wang, Q, Tang, GJ and Liu, Y (2014) An Early Permian (ca. 280 Ma) silicic igneous province in the Alxa Block, NW China: a magmatic flare-up triggered by a mantle-plume. Lithos 204, 144–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dan, W, Li, XH, Wang, Q, Wang, XC, Wyman, DA and Liu, Y (2016) Phanerozoic amalgamation of the Alxa Block and North China Craton: evidence from Paleozoic granitoids, U–Pb geochronology and Sr–Nd–Pb–Hf–O isotope geochemistry. Gondwana Research 32, 105–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dan, W, Wang, Q, Wang, XC, Liu, Y, Wyman, DA and Liu, YS (2015) Overlapping Sr–Nd–Hf–O isotopic compositions in Permian mafic enclaves and host granitoids in Alxa Block, NW China: evidence for crust–mantle interaction and implications for the generation of silicic igneous provinces. Lithos 230, 133–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolgopolova, A, Seltmann, R, Armstrong, R, Belousova, E, Pankhurst, RJ and Kavalieris, I (2013) Sr-Nd-Pb-Hf isotope systematics of the Hugo Dummett Cu-Au porphyry deposit (Oyu Tolgoi, Mongolia). Lithos 164, 4764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domeier, M (2018) Early Paleozoic tectonics of Asia: towards a full-plate model. Geoscience Frontiers 9, 789862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domeier, M and Torsvik, TH (2014) Plate tectonics in the late Paleozoic. Geoscience Frontiers 5, 303–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, QX, Han, ZZ, Shen, X, Han, C, Song, ZG, Gao, LH, Han, M and Zhong, WJ (2019) Geochronology and geochemistry of Permo-Triassic sandstones in eastern Jilin Province (NE China): implications for final closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Geoscience Frontiers 10, 683704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eby, GN (1992) Chemical subdivision of the A-type granitoids: petrogenetic and tectonic implications. Geology 20, 641–4.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eizenhöfer, PR and Zhao, GC (2018) Solonker Suture in East Asia and its bearing on the final closure of the eastern segment of the Palaeo-Asian Ocean. Earth-Science Reviews 186, 153–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eizenhöfer, PR, Zhao, GC, Sun, M, Zhang, J, Han, YG and Hou, WZ (2015a) Geochronological and Hf isotopic variability of detrital zircons in Paleozoic strata across the accretionary collision zone between the North China craton and Mongolian arcs and tectonic implications. Geological Society of America Bulletin 127, 1422–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eizenhöfer, PR, Zhao, GC, Zhang, J, Han, YG, Hou, WZ, Liu, DX and Wang, B (2015b) Geochemical characteristics of the Permian basins and their provenances across the Solonker Suture Zone: assessment of net crustal growth during the closure of the Palaeo-Asian Ocean. Lithos 224–225, 240–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eizenhöfer, PR, Zhao, G, Zhang, J and Sun, M (2014) Final closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean along the Solonker Suture Zone: constraints from geochronological and geochemical data of Permian volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Tectonics 33, 441–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ersoy, EY, Palmer, MR, Genç, ŞC, Prelević, D, Akal, C and Uysal, İ (2017) Chemo-probe into the mantle origin of the NW Anatolia Eocene to Miocene volcanic rocks: implications for the role of, crustal accretion, subduction, slab roll-back and slab break-off processes in genesis of post-collisional magmatism. Lithos 288–289, 5571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, CD and Frost, BR (2011) On ferroan (A-type) granitoids: their compositional variability and modes of origin. Journal of Petrology 52, 3953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geng, YS and Zhou, XW (2010) Early Neoproterozoic granite events in Alxa area of Inner Mongolia and their geological significance: evidence from geochronology. Acta Mineralogica et Petrologica 29, 779–95 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Geng, YS and Zhou, XW (2011) Characteristics of geochemistry and zircon Hf isotope of the Early Neoproterozoic granite in Alax area, Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrologica Sinica 27, 897908.Google Scholar
Gorton, MP and Schandl, ES (2000) From continents to island arcs: a geochemical index of tectonic setting for arc-related and within-plate felsic to intermediate volcanic rocks. Canadian Mineralogist 38, 1065–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, WL, Wang, X, Jackson, SE, Pearson, NJ, O’Reilly, SY, Xu, X and Zhou, X (2002) Zircon chemistry and magma mixing, SE China: in-situ analysis of Hf isotopes, Tonglu and Pingtan igneous complexes. Lithos 61, 237–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, F, Nakamuru, E, Fan, WM, Kobayoshi, K and Li, CW (2007) Generation of Palaeocene adakitic andesites by magma mixing; Yanji area, NE China. Journal of Petrology 48, 661–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, YG and Zhao, GC (2018) Final amalgamation of the Tianshan and Junggar orogenic collage in the southwestern Central Asian Orogenic Belt: constraints on the closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Earth-Science Reviews 186, 129–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, RA, Stone, DB and Turner, DL (1987) Tectonic implications of paleomagnetic and geochronologic data from the Yukon-Koyukuk province, Alaska. Geological Society of America Bulletin 99, 362–75.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, DF, Dong, Y, Xu, X, Chen, JL, Liu, XM and Li, W (2018) Geochemistry, geochronology and Hf isotope of granitoids in the Chinese Altai: implications for Paleozoic tectonic evolution of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Geoscience Frontiers 9, 1399–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoskin, PWO and Schaltegger, U (2003) The composition of zircon and igneous and metamorphic petrogenesis. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry 53, 2762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, BC, Yan, YG, Piper, JDA, Zhang, DH, Yi, ZY, Yu, S and Zhou, TH (2018) Paleomagnetic constraints on the paleogeography of the East Asian blocks during Late Paleozoic and Early Mesozoic times. Earth-Science Reviews 186, 836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, BC, Yang, ZY, Otofuji, Y and Zhu, RX (1999) Early Paleozoic paleomagnetic poles from the western part of the North China Block and their implications. Tectonophysics 308, 377402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hui, J, Zhang, KJ, Zhang, J, Qu, JF, Zhang, BH, Zhao, H and Niu, PF (2021) Middle–late Permian high-K adakitic granitoids in the NE Alxa block, northern China: orogenic record following the closure of a Paleo-Asian oceanic branch? Lithos 400–401, 106379. doi: 10.1016/j.lithos.2021.106379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irvine, TH and Baragar, WRA (1971) A guide to the chemical classification of the common volcanic rocks. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 8, 523–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jahn, BM, Capdevila, R, Liu, DY, Vernon, A and Badarch, G (2004) Sources of Phanerozoic granitoids in the transect Bayanhongor-Ulaan Baatar, Mongolia: geochemical and Nd isotopic evidence, and implications for Phanerozoic crustal growth. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 23, 629–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jian, P, Liu, D, Kröner, A, Windley, BF, Shi, Y, Zhan, F, Shi, G, Miao, L, Zhang, W, Zhang, Q, Zhang, L and Ren, J (2008) Time scale of an early to mid-Paleozoic orogenic cycle of the long-lived Central Asian Orogenic Belt, Inner Mongolia of China: implications for continental growth. Lithos 101, 233–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jian, P, Liu, D, Kröner, A, Windley, BF, Shi, YR, Zhang, W, Zhang, FQ, Miao, LC, Zhang, LQ and Tomurhuu, D (2010) Evolution of a Permian intra oceanic arc–trench system in the Solonker suture zone, Central Asian Orogenic Belt, China and Mongolia. Lithos 118, 169–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp, AIS, Hawkesworth, CJ, Foster, GL, Paterson, BA, Woodhead, JD, Hergt, JM, Gray, CM and Whitehouse, MJ (2007) Magmatic and crustal differentiation history of granitic rocks from Hf-O isotopes in zircon. Science 315, 980–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kemp, T, Paterson, B and Hawkesworth, C (2005) A coupled Lu-Hf and O isotope in zircon approach to granite genesis. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 69 (Suppl.), 243.Google Scholar
King, PL, White, AJR, Chappell, BW and Allen, CM (1997) Characterization and origin of aluminous A-type granites from the Lachlan Fold Belt, Southeastern Australia. Journal of Petrology 38, 371–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S, Chung, SL, Wilde, SA, Jahn, BM, Xiao, WJ, Wang, T and Guo, QQ (2017) Early-Middle Triassic high Sr/Y granitoids in the southern Central Asian Orogenic Belt: implications for ocean closure in accretionary orogens. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 122, 2291–309.Google Scholar
Li, S, Chung, SL, Wilde, SA, Wang, T, Xiao, WJ and Guo, QQ (2016a) Linking magmatism with collision in an accretionary orogen. Scientific Reports 6, 25751. doi: 10.1038/srep25751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, DP, Jin, Y, Hou, KJ, Chen, YL and Lu, Z (2015) Late Paleozoic final closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean in the eastern part of the Xing-Meng Orogenic Belt: constrains from Carboniferous–Permian (meta-) sedimentary strata and (meta-) igneous rocks. Tectonophysics 665, 251–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S, Wang, T, Wilde, SA and Tong, Y (2013) Evolution, source and tectonic significance of Early Mesozoic granitoid magmatism in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (central segment). Earth-Science Reviews 126, 206–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S, Wang, T, Wilde, SA, Tong, Y, Hong, DW and Guo, QQ (2012) Geochronology, petrogenesis and tectonic implications of Triassic granitoids from Beishan, NW China. Lithos 134–135, 123–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S, Wilde, SA, Wang, T, Xiao, WJ and Guo, QQ (2016b) Latest Early Permian granitic magmatism in southern Inner Mongolia, China: implications for the tectonic evolution of the southeastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Gondwana Research 29, 168–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y, Liu, XM, Hu, ZC, Diwu, CR, Yuan, HL and Gao, S (2007) Evaluation of accuracy and long-term stability of determination of 37 trace elements in geological samples by ICP-MS. Acta Petrologica Sinica 23, 1203–10 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Liu, Q, Zhao, G, Han, Y, Eizenhöfer, PR, Zhu, YL, Hou, WZ and Zhang, XR (2017) Timing of the final closure of the Paleo-Asian Ocean in the Alxa Terrane: constraints from geochronology and geochemistry of Late Carboniferous to Permian gabbros and diorites. Lithos 274–275, 1930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Q, Zhao, GC, Han, YG, Li, XP, Zhu, YL, Eizenhöfer, PR, Zhang, XR, Wang, B and Tsui, RW (2018) Geochronology and geochemistry of Paleozoic to Mesozoic granitoids in Western Inner Mongolia, China: implications for the tectonic evolution of the Southern Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Journal of Geology 126, 451–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Q, Zhao, GC, Han, YG, Zhu, YL, Wang, B, Eizenhöfer, PR and Zhang, XR (2019a) Detrital zircon provenance constraints on the final closure of the middle segment of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Gondwana Research 69, 7388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Q, Zhao, GC, Han, YG, Zhu, YL, Wang, B, Eizenhöfer, PR, Zhang, XR and Tsui, RW (2019b) Timing of the final closure of the middle segment of the Paleo-Asian Ocean: insights from geochronology and geochemistry of Carboniferous–Triassic volcanosedimentary successions in western Inner Mongolia, China. Geological Society of America Bulletin 131, 941–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Q, Zhao, G, Sun, M, Han, YG, Eizenhöfer, PR, Hou, WZ, Zhang, XR, Zhu, YL, Wang, B, Liu, DX and Xu, B (2016) Early Paleozoic subduction processes of the Paleo-Asian Ocean: insights from geochronology and geochemistry of Paleozoic plutons in the Alxa Terrane. Lithos 262, 546–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, ZB and Zhang, WJ (2014a) Geochemical characteristics and LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating of the Late Permian granodiorite in Hanggale, Alxa Right Banner, Inner Mongolia. Geological Review 60, 409–26 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Liu, ZB and Zhang, WJ (2014b) Geochemical characteristics and LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating of Late Permian quartz monzodiorite in Hanggale, Inner Mongolia, China. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology 41, 329–38 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Lu, JC, Wei, XY, Li, YH and Wei, JS (2012) Geochemical characteristics of Carboniferous-Permian hydrocarbon source rocks of Xiangtan 9 well in Ejin Banner, western Inner Mongolia. Geological Bulletin of China 31, 1628–38 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Lu, YH, Zhao, ZF and Zheng, YF (2016) Geochemical constraints on the source nature and melting conditions of Triassic granites from South Qinling in central China. Lithos 264, 141–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, YH, Zhao, ZF and Zheng, YF (2017) Geochemical constraints on the nature of magma sources for Triassic granitoids from South Qinling in central China. Lithos 284–285, 3049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludwig, KR (2003) User’s Manual for Isoplot 3.00: A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel. Berkeley Geochronology Center, Special Publication no. 4.Google Scholar
Ma, XH, Zhu, WP, Zhou, ZH and Qiao, SL (2017) Transformation from Paleo-Asian Ocean closure to Paleo-Pacific subduction: new constraints from granitoids in the eastern Jilin-Heilongjiang Belt, NE China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 144, 261–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maniar, PD and Piccoli, PM (1989) Tectonic discrimination of granitoids. Geological Society of America Bulletin 101, 635–43.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, H, Smithies, RH, Rapp, R, Moyen, JF and Champion, D (2005) An overview of adakite, tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite (TTG), and sanukitoid: relationships and some implications for crustal evolution. Lithos 79, 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meng, E, Xu, WL, Pei, FP, Yang, DB, Wang, F and Zhang, XZ (2011) Permian bimodal volcanism in the Zhangguangcai Range of eastern Heilongjiang Province, NE China: zircon U–Pb–Hf isotopes and geochemical evidence. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 41, 119–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, CF, McDowell, SM and Mapes, RW (2003) Hot and cold granites: implications of zircon saturation temperatures and preservation of inheritance. Geology 31, 529–32.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mushkin, A, Navon, O, Halica, L, Hartmann, G and Stein, M (2003) The petrogenesis of A type magmas from the Amram Massif, Southern Israel. Petrology 44, 815–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niu, YZ, Shi, GR, Wang, JQ, Liu, CY, Zhou, JL, Lu, JC, Song, B and Xu, W (2021) The closing of the southern branch of the Paleo-Asian Ocean: constraints from sedimentary records in the southern Beishan Region of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt, NW China. Marine and Petroleum Geology 124, 104791. doi: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NXBG (Ningxia Bureau of Geology) (1980a) Geological Report of Wuliji. Ningxia Bureau of Geology (in Chinese).Google Scholar
NXBG (Ningxia Bureau of Geology) (1980b) Geological Report of Yingen. Ningxia Bureau of Geology (in Chinese).Google Scholar
NXBG (Ningxia Bureau of Geology) (1982) Geological Report of Shalataoerhan. Ningxia Bureau of Geology (in Chinese).Google Scholar
NXBG (Ningxia Bureau of Geology) (2001) Geological Report of Wuliji. Ningxia Bureau of Geology (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Patiño Douce, AE (1999) What do experiments tell us about the relative contributions of crust and mantle to the origin of the granitic magmas? In Understanding Granites: Integrating New and Classical Techniques (eds Castro, A, Fernández, C and Vigneresse, JL), pp. 5575. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 168. Google Scholar
Pearce, JA (1996) Sources and settings of granitic rocks. Episodes 19, 120–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearce, JA, Harris, NBW and Tindle, AG (1984) Trace element discrimination diagram for the tectonic interpretation of granitic rocks. Journal of Petrology 25, 956–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peccerillo, A and Taylor, AR (1976) Geochemistry of Eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks from the Kastamonu area, Northern Turkey. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 58, 6381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pu, JJ, Wu, J, Duan, XF, Jiang, T, Shi, JZ and Chen, GC (2013) Permian brachiopod faunas from Engeerwusu Area in Yingen-Ejin Banner basin and its significance. Geological Science and Technology Information 32, 15 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Quelhas, P, Mata, J and Dias, Á (2020) Evidence for mixed contribution of mantle and lower and upper crust to the genesis of Jurassic I-type granites from Macao, SE China. Geological Society of America Bulletin 133, 3756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rapp, RP and Watson, EB (1995) Dehydration melting of metabasalt at 8–32 kbar: implications for continental growth and crust-mantle recycling. Journal of Petrology 36, 891931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudnick, RL and Fountain, DM (1995) Nature and composition of the continental crust: a lower crustal perspective. Reviews of Geophysics 33, 267309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Şengör, AMC, Natal’in, BA and Burtman, VS (1993) Evolution of the Altaid tectonic collage and Palaeozoic crustal growth in Eurasia. Nature 364, 299307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shen, XL, Du, QX, Han, ZZ, Song, ZG, Han, C, Zhong, WJ and Ren, X (2019) Constraints of zircon U-Pb-Hf isotopes from Late Permian-Middle Triassic flora-bearing strata in the Yanbian area (NE China) on a scissor-like closure model of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 183, 103964. doi: 10.1016/j.jseaes.2019.103964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shen, P, Shen, YC, Liu, TB, Meng, L, Dai, HW and Yang, YH (2009) Geochemical signature of porphyries in the Baogutu porphyry copper belt, western Junggar, NW China. Gondwana Research 16, 227–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, XJ (2015) The tectonic affinity of the Zongnaishan-Shalazhashan zone in northern Alxa and its implications: evidence from intrusive and metamorphic rocks. Ph.D. thesis, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing, China. Published thesis.Google Scholar
Shi, YR, Jian, P, Kröner, A, Li, LL, Liu, C and Zhang, W (2016) Zircon ages and Hf isotopic compositions of Ordovician and Carboniferous granitoids from central Inner Mongolia and their significance for early and late Paleozoic evolution of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 117, 153–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, GZ, Song, GZ, Wang, H, Huang, CY, Zhang, LD and Tang, JR (2016) Late Paleozoic tectonics of the Solonker Zone in the Wuliji area, Inner Mongolia, China: insights from stratigraphic sequence, chronology, and sandstone geochemistry. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 127, 100–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, XJ, Tong, Y, Wang, T, Zhang, JJ, Zhang, ZC, Zhang, L, Guo, L, Zeng, T and Geng, JZ (2012) LA-ICP-MS zircon U–Pb age and geochemistry of the Early Permian Halinudeng granite in northern Alxa area, western Inner Mongolia. Geological Bulletin of China 31, 662–70 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Shi, XJ, Wang, T, Zhang, L, Castro, A, Xiao, XC, Tong, Y, Zhang, JJ, Guo, L and Yang, QD (2014a) Timing, petrogenesis and tectonic setting of the Late Paleozoic gabbro-granodiorite-granite intrusions in the Shalazhashan of northern Alxa: constraints on the southernmost boundary of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Lithos 208–209, 158–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, XJ, Zhang, L, Wang, T, Xiao, XC, Tong, Y, Zhang, JJ, Geng, JZ and Ye, K (2014b) Geochronology and geochemistry of the intermediate-acid intrusive rocks from Zongnaishan area in northern Alxa, Inner Mongolia, and their tectonic implications. Acta Petrologica et Mineralogica 33, 9891007 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Shi, XJ, Zhang, L, Wang, T, Zhang, JJ, Liu, MH, Zhou, HS and Yan, YT (2016) Zircon geochronology and Hf isotopic compositions for the Mesoproterozoic gneisses in Zongnaishan area, northern Alxa and its tectonic affinity. Acta Petrologica Sinica 32, 3518–36 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Song, DF, Xiao, WJ, Collins, A, Glorie, S and Han, CM (2018a) Late Carboniferous-early Permian arc magmatism in the south-western Alxa Tectonic Belt (NW China): constraints on the late Palaeozoic subduction history of the Palaeo-Asian Ocean. Geological Journal 54, 1046–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, DF, Xiao, WJ, Collins, AS, Glorie, S, Han, CM and Li, YC (2018b) Final subduction processes of the Paleo-Asian Ocean in the Alxa Tectonic Belt (NW China): constraints from field and chronological data of Permian arc-related volcano-sedimentary rocks. Tectonics 37, 1658–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, DF, Xiao, WJ, Windley, BF and Han, CM (2021) Provenance and tectonic setting of late Paleozoic sedimentary rocks from the Alxa Tectonic Belt (NW China): implications for accretionary tectonics of the southern Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Geological Society of America Bulletin 133, 253–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, SS and McDonough, WF (1989) Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts: implications for mantle composition and processes. In Magmatism in the Ocean Basins (eds Saunders, AD and Norry, MJ), pp. 313–45. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 42.Google Scholar
Sylvester, PJ (1998) Post-collisional strongly peraluminous granites. Lithos 45, 2944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, K (1990) Tectonic development of Paleozoic fold belts at the north margin of the Sino-Korean Craton. Tectonics 9, 249–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, SR and McLennan, SM (1985) The continental crust: its composition and evolution. An examination of the geochemical record preserved in sedimentary rocks. Journal of Geology 94, 632–3.Google Scholar
Tian, ZH, Xiao, WJ, Windley, BF, Zhang, JE, Zhang, ZY and Song, DF (2017) Carboniferous rifted arcs leading to an archipelago of multiple arcs in the Beishan–Tianshan orogenic collages (NW China). International Journal of Earth Sciences 106, 2319–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Topuz, G, Candan, O, Zack, T, Chen, F and Li, QL (2019) Origin and significance of Early Miocene high-potassium I-type granite plutonism in the East Anatolian plateau (the Taşlıçay intrusion). Lithos 348–349, 105210. doi: 10.1016/j.lithos.2019.105210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, SP, Foden, JD and Morrison, RS (1992) Derivation of some A-type magmas by fractionation of basaltic magma—an example from the Padthaway Ridge, South Australia. Lithos 28, 151–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, T, Tong, Y, Zhang, L, Li, S, Huang, H, Zhang, JJ, Guo, L, Yang, QD, Hong, DW, Donskaya, T, Gladkochub, D and Tserendash, N (2017) Phanerozoic granitoids in the central and eastern parts of Central Asia and their tectonic significance. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 145, 368–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, ZJ, Xu, WL, Pei, FP, Wang, ZW, Li, Y and Cao, HH (2015) Geochronology and geochemistry of middle Permian-Middle Triassic intrusive rocks from central-eastern Jilin Province, NE China: constraints on the tectonic evolution of the eastern segment of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Lithos 238, 1325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, TY, Wang, SZ and Wang, JR (1994) The Formation and Evolution of Paleozoic Continental Crust in Alaxa Region. Lanzhou: Lanzhou University Press (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Watson, EB and Harrison, TM (1983) Zircon saturation revisited: temperature and composition effects in a variety of crustal magma types. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 64, 295304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalen, JB, Currie, KL and Chappell, BW (1987) A-type granites: geochemical characteristics, discrimination and petrogenesis. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 95, 407–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiedenbeck, M, Alle, P, Corfu, F, Griffin, WL, Meier, M, Oberli, F, von Quadt, A, Roddick, JC and Speigel, W (1995) Three natural zircon standards for U-Th-Pb, Lu-Hf, trace and REE analyses. Geostandards Newsletter 19, 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilhem, C, Windley, BF and Stampfli, GM (2012) The Altaids of Central Asia: a tectonic and evolutionary innovative review. Earth-Science Reviews 13, 303–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, M (1989) Igneous Petrogenesis. London: Chapman & Hall, 466 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windley, BF, Alexeiev, D, Xiao, WJ, Kröer, A and Badarch, G (2007) Tectonic models for accretion of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Journal of the Geological Society, London 164, 3147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, MB and Wyllie, PJ (1994) Dehydration-melting of amphibolite at 10 kbar: the effects of temperature and time. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 115, 369–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, TR and He, GQ (1992) Ophiolitic melange belts in the northern margin of the Alxa Block. Geoscience 6, 286–96 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Wu, TR and He, GQ (1993) Tectonic units and their fundamental characteristics on the northern margin of the Alxa block. Acta Geologica Sinica 6, 373–85.Google Scholar
Wu, TR, He, GQ and Zhang, C (1998) On Palaeozoic tectonics in the Alxa Region, Inner Mongolia, China. Acta Geologica Sinica 72, 256–63.Google Scholar
Wu, FY, Li, XH, Zheng, YF and Gao, S (2007) Lu-Hf isotopic systematics and their applications in petrology. Acta Petrologica Sinica 23, 185–20 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Wu, FY, Liu, XC, Liu, ZC, Wang, RC, Xie, L, Wang, JM, Ji, WQ, Yang, L, Liu, C, Khanal, GP and He, SX (2020) Highly fractionated Himalayan leucogranites and associated rare metal mineralization. Lithos 352–353, 105319. doi: 10.1016/j.lithos.2019.105319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, WJ, Windley, BF, Allen, MB and Han, CM (2013) Paleozoic multiple accretionary and collisional tectonics of the Chinese Tianshan orogenic collage. Gondwana Research 23, 1316–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, WJ, Windley, BF, Han, CM, Liu, W, Wan, B, Zhang, JE, Ao, SJ, Zhang, ZY and Song, DF (2018) Late Paleozoic to early Triassic multiple roll-back and oroclinal bending of the Mongolia collage in Central Asia. Earth-Science Reviews 186, 94128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, WJ, Windley, BF, Huang, BC, Han, CM, Yuan, C, Chen, HL, Sun, M, Sun, S and Li, JL (2009) End-Permian to mid-Triassic termination of the accretionary processes of the southern Altaids: implications for the geodynamic evolution, Phanerozoic continental growth, and metallogeny of Central Asia. International Journal of Earth Sciences 98, 1189–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, WJ, Windley, B, Sun, S, Li, JL, Huang, BC, Han, CM, Yuan, C, Sun, M and Chen, HL (2015) A tale of amalgamation of three Permo-Triassic collage systems in Central Asia: oroclines, sutures, and terminal accretion. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 43, 477507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xie, FQ, Wang, LD, Li, Q, Shi, CX, Chen, XB and Wei, A (2015) Zircon LA-ICP-MS dating of granites from the Southeastern Zongnai Mountain Alax and its geochemical characteristics. Rock and Mineral Analysis 34, 375–82 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Xie, FQ, Wu, JH, Sun, YH, Wang, LD, Wu, JZ and Jia, WJ (2021) Permian to Triassic tectonic evolution of the Alxa Tectonic Belt, NW China: constraints from petrogenesis and geochronology of felsic intrusions. Lithos 384–385, 105980. doi: 10.1016/j.lithos.2021.105980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xie, L, Yin, HQ, Zhou, HR and Zhang, WJ (2014) Permian radiolarians from the Engeerwusu suture zone in Alxa area of Inner Mongolia and its geological significance. Geological Bulletin of China 33, 691–7 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Xu, B, Charvet, J, Chen, Y, Zhao, P and Shi, G (2013) Middle Paleozoic convergent orogenic belts in western Inner Mongolia (China): framework, kinematics, geochronology and implications for tectonic evolution of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Gondwana Research 23, 1342–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, XY, Li, RS, Chen, JL, Ma, ZP, Li, ZP, Wang, HL, Bai, JK and Tang, Z (2014) New constrains on the Paleozoic tectonic evolution of the northern Xinjiang area. Acta Petrologica Sinica 30, 1521–34.Google Scholar
Xu, DZ, Zhang, WJ, Zhou, HT and Sun, QK (2014) Characteristics, zircon dating and tectonic significance of the gabbros along the north-central segments of the Alxa Block, Inner Mongolia. Geological Bulletin of China 33, 661–71 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Yang, QD, Zhang, L, Wang, T, Shi, XJ, Zhang, JJ, Tong, Y, Guo, L and Geng, JZ (2014) Geochemistry and LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb age of Late Carboniferous Shalazhashan pluton on the northern margin of the Alxa Block, Inner Mongolia and their implications. Geological Bulletin of China 33, 776–87 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Ye, K, Zhang, L, Wang, T, Shi, XJ, Zhang, JJ and Liu, C (2016) Geochronology, geochemistry and zircon Hf isotope of the Permian intermediate acid igneous rocks from the Yabulai Mountain in western Alxa, Inner Mongolia, and their tectonic implications. Acta Petrologica et Mineralogica 35, 901–28 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Yin, HQ, Zhou, HR, Zhang, WJ, Zheng, XM and Wang, SY (2016) Late Carboniferous to early Permian sedimentary–tectonic evolution of the north of Alxa, Inner Mongolia, China: evidence from the Amushan Formation. Geoscience Frontiers 7, 733–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yomeun, BS, Wang, W, Tchouankoue, JP, Kamani, MSK, Ndofack, KIA, Huang, SF, Basua, EAA, Lu, GM and Xue, EK (2022) Petrogenesis and tectonic implication of Neoproterozoic I-type granitoids and orthogneisses in the Goa-Mandja area, Central African Fold Belt (Cameroon). Lithos 420-421, 106700. doi: 10.1016/j.lithos.2022.106700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, SH (2019) Geological characteristics and later reformation of the Permo-Carboniferous basin in Yingen-Ejina area, NW China. Ph.D. thesis, Northwest University, Xi’an, China. Published thesis.Google Scholar
Zhang, DH, Huang, B, Zhao, J, Meert, JG, Zhang, Y, Liang, YL, Bai, QH and Zhou, TH (2018) Permian paleogeography of the Eastern CAOB: paleomagnetic constraints from volcanic rocks in Central Eastern Inner Mongolia, NE China. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 123, 2559–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, ZP, Liu, G, Xu, C, Meng, QT and Guo, C (2016) Geochemical characteristics and LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb dating of the Late Permian granites in the Tamusu area of Alxa Right Banner, Inner Mongolia and their implications. Geology and Exploration 52, 893909 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Zhang, W, Pease, V, Meng, QP, Zheng, RG, Thomsen, TB, Wohlgemuth-Ueberwasser, C and Wu, TR (2015) Timing, petrogenesis, and setting of granites from the southern Beishan late Palaeozoic granitic belt, Northwest China and implications for their tectonic evolution. International Geology Review 57, 1975–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W, Pease, V, Meng, QP, Zheng, RG, Thomsen, TB, Wohlgemuth-Ueberwasser, C and Wu, TR (2016) Discovery of a Neoproterozoic granite in the northern Alxa region, NW China: its age, petrogenesis and tectonic significance. Geological Magazine 153, 512–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W, Pease, V, Meng, QP, Zheng, RG, Wu, TR, Chen, Y and Gan, LS (2017) Age and petrogenesis of late Paleozoic granites from the northernmost Alxa region, Northwest China, and implications for the tectonic evolution of the region. International Journal of Earth Sciences 106, 7996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, JJ, Wang, T, Zhang, L, Tong, Y, Zhang, ZC, Shi, XJ, Guo, L, Huang, H, Yang, QD, Huang, W, Zhao, JX, Ye, K and Hou, JY (2015) Tracking deep crust by zircon xenocrysts within igneous rocks from the northern Alxa, China: constraints on the southern boundary of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 108, 150–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W, Wu, TR, Feng, JC, Zheng, RG and He, YK (2013) Time constraints for the closing of the Paleo-Asian Ocean in the Northern Alxa Region: evidence from Wuliji granites. Science China Earth Sciences 56, 153–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, YQ and Zhang, T (2016) Amushan Formation in Inner Mongolia. Geology in China 43, 1000–15 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Zhang, XR, Zhao, GC, Eizenhöfer, PR, Sun, M, Han, YG, Hou, WZ, Liu, DX, Wang, B, Liu, Q and Xu, B (2015a) Paleozoic magmatism and metamorphism in the Central Tianshan block revealed by U-Pb and Lu-Hf isotope studies of detrital zircons from the South Tianshan belt, NW China. Lithos 233, 193208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, XR, Zhao, GC, Eizenhöfer, PR, Sun, M, Han, YG, Hou, WZ, Liu, DX, Wang, B, Liu, Q and Xu, B (2015b) Latest Carboniferous closure of the Junggar Ocean constrained by geochemical and zircon U-Pb-Hf isotopic data of granitic gneisses from the Central Tianshan block, NW China. Lithos 238, 2636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Z, Zhou, G, Kusky, TM, Yan, S, Chen, B and Zhao, L (2009) Late Paleozoic volcanic record of the Eastern Junggar terrane, Xinjiang, Northwestern China: major and trace element characteristics, Sr-Nd isotopic systematics and implications for tectonic evolution. Gondwana Research 16, 201–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, ZL, Li, JJ, Dang, ZC, Tang, WL, Fu, C, Wang, SG, Liu, LS, Zhao, LJ and Liu, XX (2016) TIMS zircon U-Pb isotopic dating of Salazha Mountain granites from the North Margin of Alxa, Inner Mongolia, and its tectonic implications. Geological Bulletin of China 35, 599604 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Zhao, YL, Li, W, Wen, QB, Liang, CY, Feng, ZQ, Zhou, JP and Shen, L (2016) Late Paleozoic tectonic framework of eastern Inner Mongolia: evidence from the detrital zircon U–Pb ages of the Mid-late Permian to Early Triassic sandstones. Acta Petrologica Sinica 32, 2807–22 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Zhao, XC, Liu, CY, Wang, JQ, Zhang, SH and Guan, YZ (2020) Geochemistry, geochronology and Hf isotope of granitoids in the northern Alxa region: implications for the Late Paleozoic tectonic evolution of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Geoscience Frontiers 11, 1711–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Y, Sun, Y, Diwu, CR, Zhu, T, Ao, WH, Zhang, H and Yan, JH (2017) Paleozoic intrusive rocks from the Dunhuang tectonic belt, NW China: constraints on the tectonic evolution of the southernmost Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 138, 562–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, GC, Wang, YJ, Huang, BC, Dong, YP, Li, SZ, Zhang, GW and Yu, S (2018) Geological reconstructions of the East Asian blocks: from the breakup of Rodinia to the assembly of Pangea. Earth-Science Reviews 186, 262–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, P, Xu, B and Zhang, C (2017) A rift system in southeastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt: constraint from sedimentological, geochronological and geochemical investigations of the Late Carboniferous-Early Permian strata in northern Inner Mongolia (China). Gondwana Research 47, 342–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, B, Han, BF, Liu, B and Wang, ZZ (2019) Ediacaran to Paleozoic magmatism in West Junggar Orogenic Belt, NW China, and implications for evolution of Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Lithos 338–339, 111–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, RG, Li, JY, Xiao, WJ, Liu, JF and Wu, TR (2016) Discovery of Silurian pluton in the Enger Us region in the northern margin of Alxa Block. Acta Geologica Sinica 80, 1725–36 (in Chinese with English abstract).Google Scholar
Zheng, RG, Wu, TR, Zhang, W, Xu, C, Meng, QP and Zhang, ZY (2014) Late Paleozoic subduction system in the northern margin of the Alxa block, Altaids: geochronological and geochemical evidences from ophiolites. Gondwana Research 25, 842–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, RZ, Lai, SC, Qin, JF and Zhao, SW (2018) Petrogenesis of late Paleozoic-to-early Mesozoic granitoids and metagabbroic rocks of the Tengchong block, SW China: implications for the evolution of the eastern paleo-Tethys. International Journal of Earth Sciences 107, 431–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, Y, Lai, SC, Qin, JF, Zhu, RZ, Zhang, FY and Zhang, ZZ (2018) Geochemistry and zircon U–Pb–Hf isotopes of the 780 Ma I-type granites in the western Yangtze Block: petrogenesis and crustal evolution. International Geology Review 61, 1222–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic geological map of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (modified after Liu et al.2017). (b) Geological map of the northern Alxa region (modified after 1:200 000 geological maps from BGMRIM, 1991).

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Geological map of the (a) Zongnaishan and (b) Shalazhashan areas.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Field photographs and photomicrographs showing petrographic features of the studied samples. (a–c) YE-17-69; (d–f) YE-17-78; (g–i) YE-17-88. Mineral abbreviations: Pl – plagioclase; Qtz – quartz; Kf-K – feldspar; Bt – biotite. Length of hammer for scale is 290 mm; length of hammer head for scale is 175 mm.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. (a) (Na2O + K2O) versus SiO2, (b) K2O versus SiO2 and (c) A/NK versus A/CNK plots for investigated samples from the ZSTB. The field boundaries in the three diagrams are from Irvine & Baragar (1971), Peccerillo & Taylor (1976) and Maniar & Piccoli (1989), respectively. Previous data of ZHTB and ZSTB are cited from Shi et al. (2014a) and Zhang et al. (2017).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. (a, c, e) Chondrite-normalized REE patterns; the normalization values of chondrite are from Taylor & McLennan (1985). (b, d, f) Primitive mantle-normalized trace-element patterns; data for primitive mantle are from Sun & McDonough (1989).

Figure 5

Fig. 6. (a) Cathodoluminescence (CL) images of representative zircons of investigated samples from the ZSTB. (b) Chondrite-normalized REE patterns of the zircons from investigated samples.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Zircon Hf isotopic compositions of intrusive rocks from the CAOB. ZSTB – Zongnaishan–Shalazhashan Tectonic Belt; ZHTB – Zhusileng–Hangwula Tectonic Belt; NHTB – Nuoergong–Honggueryulin Tectonic Belt. The ϵHf(t) values are cited from Shi et al. (2012, 2014a,b), Dan et al. (2014, 2015, 2016), Ye et al. (2016), Zhang, W. et al. (2016), Liu et al. (2017) and Zhao et al. (2020).

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Zircon U–Pb concordia diagrams and histograms for investigated samples.

Figure 8

Fig. 9. Histogram of zircon U–Pb ages of the Phanerozoic magmatism in the ZSTB, northern Alxa region. Data sourced from online Supplementary Material Table S4.

Figure 9

Fig. 10. Petrogenetic discrimination diagrams for early Mesozoic granitoids in the ZSTB. (a) (K2O + Na2O/CaO) versus Zr + Nb + Ce + Y. (b) FeOT/MgO versus Zr + Nb + Ce + Y. (c) Zr versus 10 000Ga/Al. (d) FeOT/MgO versus 10 000Ga/Al. (e) P2O5 versus SiO2. (f) Na2O versus SiO2 (a–d are after Whalen et al. 1987, and e, f are after Chappell & White, 1992).

Figure 10

Fig. 11. Plots of (a) La/Sm versus La; (b) Zr/Nb versus Zr; (c) Sr/Y versus Y; and (d) Sr/Y versus LaN/YbN (a, b are after Xie et al.2021, and c, d are after Castro et al. 2011).

Figure 11

Fig. 12. (a) Al2O3/(MgO + FeOT + TiO2) versus Al2O3 + MgO + FeOT + TiO2 (Patiño Douce, 1999). (b) (Na2O + K2O)/CaO versus Na2O + K2O + CaO (Patiño Douce, 1999). (c) Mg no. versus SiO2 diagram (after Zhu, R. Z. et al.2018; reference fields after Patiño Douce, 1999; Wolf & Wyllie, 1994). (d) (Na2O + K2O)/(FeOT + MgO + TiO2) versus (Na2O + K2O + FeOT + MgO + TiO2) (Patiño Douce, 1999). (e) CaO/(MgO + FeOT + TiO2) versus (CaO + MgO + FeOT + TiO2) (Patiño Douce, 1999). (f) Rb/Ba versus Rb/Sr (Patiño Douce, 1999).

Figure 12

Fig. 13. Tectonic setting discrimination diagrams for the early Mesozoic granitoids in the ZSTB. (a) Ta*3–Rb/30–Hf ternary plot (Harris et al.1987). (b) Th/Yb versus Ta/Yb (Gorton & Schandl, 2000). (c) Rb versus Y + Nb (Pearce et al.1984; Pearce, 1996). (d) Ta versus Yb (Pearce et al.1984). (e) Rb versus Ta + Yb (Pearce et al.1984). (f) Nb versus Y (Pearce et al.1984). Syn-COLG – syn-collision granites; VAG – volcanic arc granites; WPG – within plate granites; ORG – ocean ridge granites.

Figure 13

Fig. 14. (a) Palaeogeographic reconstructions of Eastern Asian blocks (modified after Huang et al.2018). (b, c) Diagrams illustrate the tentative tectonic scenario showing the Middle Triassic evolution of the ZSTB and adjacent areas. IC – Indochina Block; MOB – Mongolian Block; NCB – North China Block; NQ – North Qiangtang block; SCB – South China Block; Si – Sibumasu block; SQ – South Qiangtang block.

Supplementary material: File

Zhao et al. supplementary material

Table S3

Download Zhao et al. supplementary material(File)
File 152.1 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhao et al. supplementary material

Table S2

Download Zhao et al. supplementary material(File)
File 114.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhao et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Zhao et al. supplementary material(File)
File 101.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhao et al. supplementary material

Table S4

Download Zhao et al. supplementary material(File)
File 96.3 KB