Lt

Aa

b

a

ARRAA

KZHLmCN

1

nCsp1cS2td

iet2Z

(

0h

Precambrian Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Precambrian Research

journa l h omepa g e: www.elsev ier .com/ locate /precamres

ate-Neoarchean magmatism and metamorphism at the southeastern margin ofhe North China Craton and their tectonic implications

n-Dong Wanga,∗, Yi-Can Liua,∗, Xiao-Feng Gua, Zhen-Hui Houa, Biao Songb

CAS Key Laboratory of Crust-Mantle Materials and Environments, School of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, ChinaBeijing SHRIMP Center, Institute of Geology, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences, Beijing 100037, China

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:eceived 21 May 2012eceived in revised form 28 July 2012ccepted 30 July 2012vailable online 10 August 2012

eywords:ircon U–Pb datingf isotopeate-Neoarchean magmatism and

a b s t r a c t

In the present study, two gneiss xenoliths from the Mesozoic Jiagou intrusion at the southeastern marginof the North China Craton (NCC) are examined for in situ zircon SHRIMP U–Pb dating in combination withzircon trace element and Hf isotope analyses. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images and trace element datareveal that most zircons from the dated samples display distinct core–rim structures, i.e., magmatic coresand metamorphic rims. The cores show typical igneous characteristics with oscillatory growth zoning andhigh rare earth element (REE) contents, whereas the metamorphic rims are characterized by spherical tooval shape, and high and homogeneous luminescent intensity. Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb dating results suggestthat the xenoliths formed at 2.55–2.64 Ga and experienced high-grade metamorphism at 2.48–2.49 Ga.The lower HREE contents, negative Eu anomalies, high Th/U ratios (generally >0.5) and high Ti-in-zircon

◦

etamorphismrustal growthorth China Craton

temperatures (>800 C) of metamorphic zircon rims suggest that the 2.48–2.49 Ga event represents anepisode of granulite facies metamorphism. These results demonstrate that the lower-crustal rocks in thestudied area experienced late-Neoarchean magmatism and subsequent metamorphism. Positive εHf(t)values of +2 to +5, with model ages younger than 3.0 Ga and formation ages of 2.55–2.64 Ga for igneouszircons from the xenoliths indicate that they were derived from juvenile crustal sources and stronglysuggest the existence of significant late-Neoarchean crustal growth in the region.

. Introduction

Episodic growth of juvenile continental crust has been recog-ized by a number of authors (e.g., McCulloch and Bennett, 1994;ondie, 1998), and early Precambrian is regarded to be a crucialtage for continental crust formation, occurring during several peakeriods such as 3.6 Ga, 2.7 Ga and 1.8 Ga (McCulloch and Bennett,994; Condie, 1998; Condie et al., 2011). However, in some Pre-ambrian cratons such as the North China Craton (NCC) and Indianhield, the major tectonothermal events occurred extensively in.5–2.6 Ga (Clark et al., 2009; Wang and Liu, 2012 and referencesherein) and the Neoarchean history of these cratons are markedlyifferent from that of most other cratons.

In the past two decades, great achievements have been maden understanding the formation and evolution of the NCC. How-ver, the history of cratonization of the NCC and the nature of

ectonothermal events are highly controversial (e.g., Zhai et al.,000; Wilde et al., 2002; Kusky and Li, 2003; Polat et al., 2005;hao et al., 2005, 2011; Geng et al., 2011; Nutman et al., 2011;

∗ Corresponding authors. Tel.: +86 551 3600367; fax: +86 551 3600367.E-mail addresses: adw008@mail.ustc.edu.cn (A.-D. Wang), liuyc@ustc.edu.cn

Y.-C. Liu).

301-9268/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2012.07.011

© 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Ying et al., 2011; Zhai and Santosh, 2011; Santosh et al., 2012a,b).An important approach to solve this debate is to obtain moregeochronological and geochemical data related to the Precam-brian magmatism and metamorphism over the craton. With theaim to avoid the influence of late geological processes and thedisequilibrium of Sr–Nd isotopes between minerals, zircon canbe regarded as an ideal mineral for dating multistage magma-tism and metamorphism of rocks involved in complex processes(e.g., Y.C. Liu et al., 2011a). As a consequence, due to its highstability and closure temperature (Lee et al., 1997; Cherniak andWatson, 2000; Gardés and Montel, 2009) and the rapid develop-ment of in situ micro-analytical techniques such as SHRIMP andLA-ICP-MS methods, zircon has been widely used to date variousextreme geologic processes such as ultrahigh-temperature (UHT)and ultrahigh-pressure (UHP) metamorphism (e.g., Katayama et al.,2001; Ayers et al., 2002; Santosh et al., 2009; Y.C. Liu et al., 2011a),and to trace the formation and evolution of early Precambriancontinent (Liu et al., 1992; Trail et al., 2007; Geng et al., 2011;Wang and Liu, 2012). However, it is well known that zircon cangrow in a relatively wide range of P–T conditions and at differ-

ent metamorphic stages (Katayama et al., 2001; Rubatto, 2002;Liu et al., 2007; Y.C. Liu et al., 2011a). Therefore, how to linkthe obtained ages of different zircon grains or different zircondomains (core, mantle, rim and inherited zircon domains) within a

6 Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

stt(22eeB(ido22tH

taePvl12222SNr(BBf1Tas2coattibWK22L2W2e2oKeb

tsU

Fig. 1. Geologic sketch map of the southeastern margin of the NCC (modified fromXu et al., 2006). The inset shows the major tectonic division of China and the locationof the studied area. YZ and SC denote the Yangtze craton and South China Orogen,

6 A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian

ingle zircon grain with a given metamorphic stage is a difficultask. In the past decade, various methods have been developedo discern zircon genesis: external shape and internal structureCorfu et al., 2003; Grant et al., 2009), mineral inclusions (Ye et al.,000), trace element ratios and contents (Hoskin and Schaltegger,003), chondrite-normalized REE distribution patterns and tracelement partitioning between zircon and other coexisting min-rals such as garnet (Rubatto, 2002; Herman and Rubatto, 2003;ingen et al., 2004; Rubatto and Hermann, 2007), and Hf–O isotopesHawkesworth and Kemp, 2006; Zheng et al., 2006). Furthermore,n situ zircon Hf isotope analyses have been proven to provide moreetailed and reliable information on precursor nature and genesisf rocks (e.g., Griffin et al., 2000; Andersen et al., 2002; Iizuka et al.,005; Hawkesworth and Kemp, 2006; Wu et al., 2006; Zheng et al.,006; Zeh et al., 2009). In addition, the Ti-in-zircon thermome-er has also been rapidly developed in recent years (Watson andarrison, 2005; Watson et al., 2006).

The NCC is referred to the Chinese part of the Sino-Korean Cra-on, which is one of the oldest cratons in the world and preservesncient crustal remnants as old as 3.8 Ga (Liu et al., 1992; Zhengt al., 2004a; F.Y. Wu et al., 2005; Zhai and Santosh, 2011). Therecambrian tectonic framework of the NCC has been addressed inarious investigations based on a large number of structural, litho-ogical, geochronological and geochemical data (Jahn and Zhang,984; Zhao et al., 1998, 1999, 2000a,b, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2007,008, 2011; Kusky and Li, 2003; Polat et al., 2005; Kusky et al.,007; Jahn et al., 2008; Zhao, 2009; Huang et al., 2010; Li et al.,010, 2011; Peng et al., 2010, 2011; Santosh, 2010; Geng et al.,011; Kusky, 2011; Trap et al., 2011; Wan et al., 2011; Zhai andantosh, 2011; Santosh et al., 2012a,b; Wang and Liu, 2012). TheCC comprises a collage of Precambrian nuclei which were incorpo-

ated into four major crustal blocks: the Yinshan, Ordos, LonggangYanliao) and Nangrim Blocks, of which the Ordos and Yinshanlocks amalgamated along the Khondalite Belt to form the Westernlock at about 1.95 Ga, and the Longgang and Nangrim Blocks were

used along the Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt to form the Eastern Block at about.90 Ga. Finally, the Eastern and Western Blocks collided along theans-North China Orogen to form the coherent NCC basement atbout 1.85 Ga, coinciding with the final assembly of the Columbiaupercontinent (Wilde et al., 2002; Zhao et al., 2005, 2011; Santosh,010; Santosh et al., 2012a,b). Numerous investigations have beenarried out on the various rocks from the metamorphic basementf the Eastern and Western Blocks, the Trans-North China Orogennd Khondalite Belt. A large data repository related to the struc-ural, petrological, geochemical and geochronological evolution ofhe NCC has been collected, and various tectonic models involv-ng different collisional ages/stages and subduction polarities haveeen put forward in the past few years (Guo et al., 2002, 2005;ilde et al., 2002, 2005; Li et al., 2004, 2005, 2006, 2010, 2011;

röner et al., 2005, 2006; F. Wu et al., 2005; Wan et al., 2006a,b,009; Zhang et al., 2006, 2007, 2009; Li and Zhao, 2007; Zhou et al.,008, 2010; Yin et al., 2009, 2011; Lu et al., 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008;uo et al., 2004, 2006, 2008; Santosh et al., 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009,012a,b; Diwu et al., 2008, 2010, 2011; J. Wang et al., 2010; Z.H.ang et al., 2010; Zhao et al., 2007, 2008, 2010a,b; Liu et al., 2002,

004, 2005, 2006; F. Liu et al., 2009; D.Y. Liu et al., 2009; S.W. Liut al., 2011a,b; Huang et al., 2010; Jiang et al., 2010; Geng et al.,011; Tam et al., 2011, 2012; Wang and Liu, 2012). However, mostf these studies are restricted to the Trans-North China Orogen,hondalite Belt and Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt in the central, western andastern parts of the NCC, respectively, but only few studies haveeen carried out on the southeastern margin of the NCC.

In the present study, two representative gneiss xenoliths fromhe Mesozoic Jiagou intrusion in northern Anhui Province at theoutheastern margin of the NCC were collected, and SHRIMP zircon–Pb geochronological analyses in combination with zircon trace

respectively. Also shown are the tectonic subdivisions of the NCC (Zhao et al., 2005),where EB, WB and TNCO represent the Eastern and Western Blocks, and Trans-NorthChina Orogen, respectively.

element and Lu–Hf isotope determinations were performed. Thesenew results provide important insights into understanding the lateNeoarchean evolution and crustal growth of the region.

2. Geological setting and samples

The NCC is one of the three main cratons in China and cov-ers an area of more than 1,500,000 km2. Geographically, the NCCis bounded to the north and to the west by the Late PaleozoicTianshan-Xing’an-Mongolian and Early Paleozoic Qilianshan Oro-gens, and to the south it is separated from the Yangtze Craton (YZ)by the Qinling-Dabie-Sulu UHP metamorphic belt (Fig. 1).

The area studied in this contribution (Xuzhou–Suzhou) islocated in the Eastern Block along the southeastern margin of theNCC, bounded by the Tan-Lu Fault zone to the east and by the DabieOrogen and Hefei Basin to the south (Fig. 1). The deformed Neo-proterozoic to late Paleozoic cover was intruded by several smallMesozoic intrusions (e.g. Liguo, Jiagou and Bangjing intrusions)(Fig. 1), with compositions varying from dioritic to monzodioriticporphyry (Xu et al., 2002, 2006). The Precambrian metamorphicbasement at the southeastern margin of the NCC is dominantlyexposed in the Bengbu area (Wuhe Group/Complex) close to theXuzhou–Suzhou area (Wang et al., 2012), whereas there is no meta-morphic basement occurring in the Xuzhou–Suzhou area, whereabundant deep-seated xenoliths occur in the Mesozoic intrusions.This study focuses on the Jiagou intrusion, which is located innorthern Anhui Province (Fig. 1). Various types of deep-seatedxenoliths such as spinel-bearing garnet clinopyroxenite, garnetgranulite, garnet amphibolite and garnet-bearing mafic and felsicgneiss occur in the Mesozoic Jiagou dioritic porphyry (Xu et al.,2002, 2004, 2006, 2009; Guo and Li, 2009; Y.C. Liu et al., 2009;Liu et al., 2012). Previous investigations suggested that the xeno-liths have different protoliths with different formation ages andtectonic settings, and experienced multi-stage metamorphism and

metasomatism (Liu et al., 2012). However, the studied xenolithsin the present contribution yield additional features such as alate Neoarchean magmatic and metamorphic event, and positiveεHf(t) values, further documenting the complex compositions and

A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79 67

heaste

eo

zbhaafgtuY

3

clfbMopWtT

dauw(ccmpewGwPw

Fig. 2. Photomicrographs of deep-seated xenoliths at the sout

volutional processes of the deep crust in the southeastern marginf the NCC.

Samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 were collected from a Meso-oic intrusion at Jiagou. Sample 08JG18 is a garnet-bearingasic gneiss and is mainly composed of plagioclase, quartz,ornblende, garnet, clinopyroxene with minor rutile and otherccessory minerals (Fig. 2a). Sample 08JG34 is a granitic gneissnd comprises quartz, plagioclase, hornblende, ilmenite andew secondary minerals (Fig. 2b). The mineral assemblage ofarnet + plagioclase ± clinopyroxene ± rutile ± quartz suggests thathe samples experienced high-grade metamorphism up to gran-lite facies conditions (Yardley, 1989; O’Brien and Rötzler, 2003;.C. Liu et al., 2009) (see below).

. Analytical methods

Whole-rock major element analysis was carried out by wethemical methods at the Langfang Laboratory, Hebei Bureau of Geo-ogical and Mineral Resources. Analytical uncertainties have a rangerom ±1 to ±5% for major elements. Trace elements were measuredy Elan DRCII ICP-MS at the CAS Key Laboratory of Crust-Mantleaterials and Environments, University of Science and Technology

f China in Hefei. Detailed analytical procedures and instrumentarameters for trace element analyses are documented in Hou andang (2007). Analytical uncertainties range from ±5% to ±10% for

race elements. The major and trace element results are listed inable 1.

Zircon grains were extracted from whole-rocks through stan-ard procedures by crushing and sieving, followed by magneticnd heavy liquid separation and then hand-picking under binoc-lar microscope. The zircon grains of samples 08JG18 and 08JG34ere mounted in an epoxy disc with a zircon U–Pb standard TEM

417 Ma) (Black et al., 2003). Then the mount was cleaned, gold-oated and polished until all zircon grains were approximatelyut in half. After that, all zircon grains were disposed by trans-itted and reflected light micrographs and CL imaging with the

urpose of selecting potential target locations for mass spectrom-try analyses. Both CL imaging and mass spectrometry analysesere undertaken at Beijing SHRIMP Center, Chinese Academy of

eological Sciences (CAGS). The standard analytical proceduresere described by Nelson (1997) and Williams (1998). Common

b corrections were made using measured 204Pb, and the raw dataere reduced following Compston et al. (1992) with the ISOPLOT

rn margin of the NCC. (a) Sample 08JG18, (b) sample 08JG34.

program of Ludwig (2001). Individual analyses in the data tablesand concordia diagrams are presented with 1� error, while themean and intercepted ages are given with 2� error (95% confi-dence level). The zircon age data of these two samples are listed inTables 2 and 3.

Zircon trace element analyses for samples 08JG08 and 08JG34were undertaken by the laser ablation ICP-MS at the CAS Key Lab-oratory of Crust-Mantle Materials and Environments, University ofScience and Technology of China in Hefei. The detailed parametersof the instrument can be found in Y.C. Liu et al. (2011a), and theanalytical procedure was previously reported by Yuan et al. (2004).Element contents of zircons were calculated by using Pepita soft-ware with the zircon SiO2 as internal standard and the NIST610 asexternal standard. The simultaneous analysis results of the stan-dard suggest that the accuracy and precision of trace elements arebetter than 10%. The detection limit for the different REE variesfrom 0.02 to 0.09 ppm. The analytical data are shown in Table 4.

Mineral inclusions in zircon were identified by using Ramanspectroscopy at the Continental Dynamics Laboratory, ChineseAcademy of Geological Sciences (CAGS), and/or substantiated usingthe electron microprobe analyzer (EMPA) at the Institute of Min-eral Resources, CAGS in Beijing. The analytical conditions on theRaman and EMPA were described by Xu et al. (2005) and Y.C. Liuet al. (2009).

The laser ablation multi-collector inductively coupled plasmamass spectrometry (LA-MC-ICP-MS) Hf isotope analysis was con-ducted at the Institute of Geology and Geophysics, the ChineseAcademy of Sciences (CAS) in Beijing. Instrumental parametersand data acquisition followed that described by Wu et al. (2006).Detailed processes are shown in Liu et al. (2012). During analyticalprocesses, the 176Hf/177Hf ratios of two standard zircons Mud Tankand GJ-1 were 0.282502 ± 5 and 0.282008 ± 7, respectively, whichare in good agreement with the referenced 176Hf/177Hf ratios of0.282507 ± 6 and 0.281999 ± 8 measured by the solution method(Woodhead and Hergt, 2005; Wu et al., 2006). The main parame-ters used in the εHf(t) (t = crystallization time of zircon) and modelage calculations are listed as follows: (176Lu/177Hf)CHUR = 0.0332and (176Hf/177Hf)CHUR,0 = 0.282772 for chondritic uniform reservoir(Blichert-Toft and Albarede, 1997) (176Lu/177Hf)DM = 0.0384 and

(176Hf/177Hf)DM = 0.28325 for depleted mantle reservoir (Griffinet al., 2000). 176Lu decay constant � = 1.865 × 10−5 m.y. was usedfor calculations (Soderlund et al., 2004).The analytical results arelisted in Table 5.

68 A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

Table 1Whole-rock major and trace element compositions for xenoliths from the southeastern margin of the North China Craton. The major elements are in wt.% and the traceelements are in ppm.

Sample SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 TiO2 FeO CaO MgO K2O Na2O P2O5 H2O+ LOI Total

08JG18 52.74 16.16 4.17 0.75 7.47 3.93 4.57 2.70 4.10 0.19 1.79 2.64 99.5408JG34 70.85 14.22 1.65 0.29 1.48 2.90 1.24 1.26 4.50 0.09 0.87 1.14 99.66

Sample Sc V Cr Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Cs Rb Ba Sr Th

08JG18 13.7 145 128 26.3 68 55.9 142 23.3 5.32 65.6 1505 752 2.3208JG34 4.47 27.5 7.02 7.16 9.7 3.91 33.8 17.4 2.05 32.1 478 316 0.35

Sample U Pb Nb Ta La Ce Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy

08JG18 1.39 28.9 7.23 0.18 33.7 62.4 6.82 24.5 3.86 1.48 2.76 0.33 1.6008JG34 0.4 17.9 4.61 0.17 22.8 38.9 3.87 12.7 2.04 0.64 1.78 0.24 1.24

Sample Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Zr Hf Y∑

REE (La/Yb)cn

08JG18 0.29 0.83 0.12 0.80 0.12 250 6.24 7.72 139.6 30.208JG34 0.24 0.67 0.09 0.62 0.10 137 3.51 6.57 85.93 26.4

F normo

4

4

lt7g

otudaWhisscYpv1

ig. 3. Chondrite-normalized rare earth element diagram (a) and primitive-mantle-f chondrite and primitive-mantle are from Sun and McDonough (1989).

. Results

.1. Elemental geochemistry

The major and trace element compositions of the samples areisted in Table 1 and shown in Fig. 3. The SiO2 and MgO con-ents for samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 are 52.74 wt.% and 4.57 wt.%,0.85 wt.% and 1.24 wt.%, respectively, indicative of basaltic andranitic protoliths.

They have relatively higher total REE contents with values beingf 139 and 86 ppm. In the chondrite-normalized diagrams (Fig. 3a),hey display relatively larger LREE/HREE ratios with (La/Yb)cn val-es of 30.2 and 26.4. In the primitive-mantle normalized spideriagrams (Fig. 3b), they exhibit consistent Nb, Ta, P and Ti negativenomalies, suggesting a magmatic arc origin (e.g., Li et al., 2001;ang et al., 2011). Additionally, the basic gneiss sample 08JG18

as La content of 33.7 ppm and La/Nb ratio of 4.7, which is locatedn the island arc basalt (IAB) field in the La vs. La/Nb diagram (nothown) (Li et al., 2001; Wang et al., 2011). The granitic gneissample 08JG34 displays high Sr (316 ppm) and low Y (6.6 ppm)ontents with high Sr/Y ratio (48) locating in adakite field in the

vs. Sr/Y diagram (Defant and Drummond, 1990), and it is alsolotted in the field of volcanic arc granite (VAG) in the Y + Nbs. Rb diagram (Y + Nb = 11.2 ppm, Rb = 32.1 ppm) (Pearce et al.,984).

alized spider diagram (b) for samples 08JG18 and 08JG34. The normalization values

4.2. Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb dating

4.2.1. CL imaging, trace element, mineral inclusion andTi-in-zircon thermometry for zircons

The samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 contain abundant zircon grains.In color, the zircon grains are light orange to gray, and in shapethey are mostly spherical and oval to irregular. The lengths of mostzircon grains from sample 08JG18 have a range between 100 and300 �m with length and width ratios varying from 1 to 2, whilethe lengths of zircon grains from sample 08JG34 range from 100 to200 �m with aspect ratios varying from 1 to 3. In terms of zirconinternal structures revealed by CL imaging, the zircons from thesamples can be roughly categorized into three types: (1) irregularsingle zircon grains with low to variable luminescent and blurryoscillatory zoning, indicating that they are magmatic or inheritedzircon grains but influenced by later metamorphism or recrystal-lization in some degree (type 1) (Fig. 4c and e) (Hoskin and Black,2000); (2) spherical to oval single zircon grains with highly homo-geneous luminescent and no growth zoning (type 2) (Fig. 4b); (3)double-layer (core–rim structure) zircon grains with dark coressurrounded by light rims (type 3) (Fig. 4a and f), the core domains

showing weak or no growth zoning with low to variable lumines-cence, whereas the rim domains exhibiting high and homogeneousluminescence. Generally, zircons of the type 2 are predominantwhile the magmatic or inherited zircons are few. The CL images

A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79 69

r samp

sgadg2diccdobmi

mpRsah4ti

Fig. 4. Representative zircon CL images fo

uggest that type 1 zircon grains and core domains of type 3 zirconrains are magmatic or inherited zircons, although only few wereffected by recrystallization, and that type 2 zircon grains and rimomains of type 3 zircon grains are metamorphic zircons in ori-in (Corfu et al., 2003; Hoskin and Schaltegger, 2003; Möller et al.,003; Grant et al., 2009). These observations are further consoli-ated by the zircon mineral inclusions (not shown). The mineral

nclusions in type 1 zircon grains and core domains of type 3 zir-on grains are abundant and contain plagioclase, quartz and apatite,onsistent with their magmatic origin; type 2 zircon grains and rimomains of type 3 zircon grains contain few mineral inclusions withnly sparse plagioclase and quartz, no other metamorphic mineralseing identified (Fig. 4d). Eventually, two kinds of zircons, i.e., mag-atic and metamorphic zircons are identified in the two samples

n terms of their structure and mineral inclusion features.In terms of trace element composition, the magmatic and

etamorphic zircons also exhibit notable differences. No markedositive or negative correlations have been observed in the totalEE (TREE) vs. Th and P diagrams for all the analytical spots (nothown), suggesting that the analyzed spots are not influenced bypatite and monazite inclusions. For sample 08JG18, eleven spots

ave been carried out for trace element analyses (Table 4). Of them,

and 5 spots belong to magmatic and metamorphic zircons, respec-ively, and the other 2 spots (spots 7.1 and 17.1) belong to thenherited zircons. For sample 08JG34, 14 spots have been analyzed,

le 08JG18 (a–d) and sample 08JG34 (e–f).

including 3 magmatic, 10 metamorphic and 1 recrystallized (spot10.1) zircons. As a whole, the magmatic zircons from these twosamples exhibit higher TREE contents, higher HREE contents rep-resented by higher LuN ratios, relatively smaller Eu negativeanomalies (Eu* = 0.20–0.30 and 0.25–0.40 for samples 08JG18 and08JG34, respectively) and marked Ce positive anomalies, high REEcontents in the chondrite-normalized REE patterns, in good agree-ment with the features of magmatic zircons (Fig. 5a–c) (Rubatto,2002). In contrast, the metamorphic zircons are dominantly char-acterized by low TREE contents, lower Nb, Ta and Hf contents,relatively flat HREE distribution patterns, and marked Eu negativeanomalies (Eu = 0.16–0.26 and 0.00–0.25 for samples 08JG18 and08JG34) (Table 4; Fig. 5), implying that they co-existed with garnetand plagioclase, i.e., in the granulite facies metamorphism (Rubatto,2002; Z.H. Wang et al., 2010). It is also noted here that there aresome differences in Th and U contents of zircons from these twosamples. For sample 08JG18, there is no marked difference in Th andU contents between magmatic and metamorphic zircons, whereasfor sample 08JG34 the Th and U contents in magmatic zircons arehigher than those in metamorphic zircons, further suggesting thatthere are some differences in whole-rock compositions between

samples 08JG18 and 08JG34.

There are also some differences in Ti-in-zircon temperaturesbetween samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 based on the Ti-in-zirconthermometer (Table 4) (Watson and Harrison, 2005). For sample

70 A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

F hondrR s from

02o2vT7gy

tAomrtrstot

4

s1sb

ig. 5. (a) Chondrite-normalized REE diagram for zircons from sample 08JG18; (b) cEE diagram (TREE) for samples 08JG18 and 08JG34; (d) total REE vs. Eu* for zircon

8JG18, the magmatic zircons have Ti contents ranging from 16.9 to8.0 ppm with temperature range of 789–840 ◦C and a mean valuef 811 ◦C. The metamorphic zircons give Ti contents from 14.9 to8.9 ppm, defining a temperature range of 777–844 ◦C with a meanalue of 815 ◦C. As for sample 08JG34, three magmatic zircons havei contents of 2.0, 10.4 and 15.2 ppm and yield temperatures of 615,45 and 779 ◦C, respectively, whereas the ten metamorphic zirconsive a relatively wider range of Ti contents from 4.1 to 45.4 ppm andield Ti-in-zircon temperatures from 669 to 894 ◦C.

Another important aspect is that the trace element composi-ions in magmatic zircons can be used to trace their precursors.ccording to the classification and regression trees (CART) modelf Belousova et al. (2002), the trace element compositions of mag-atic zircons from samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 show their source

ocks belong to syenite (low Lu contents) and granite (high Hf con-ents), roughly consistent with their basic and acid compositions,espectively. In short, the zircon internal structures, mineral inclu-ions, trace elements and Ti-in-zircon temperatures indicate thathere are two kinds of zircons, i.e., magmatic and metamorphic inrigin for the studied samples, implying that they recorded at leastwo episodes of magmatism and metamorphism.

.2.2. Zircon U–Pb ageTwenty-two analyses were conducted on zircon grains from

ample 08JG18 (Table 2; Fig. 6). Ten spots were located on type zircon grains and core domains of type 3 zircon grains; twopots (8.1 and 6.2) were not considered for the age calculationecause they were located on micro-cracks; the remaining 8 spots

ite-normalized REE diagram for zircons from sample 08JG34; (c) LuN ratios vs. total sample 08JG34.

yielded a weighted mean age of 2552 ± 13 Ma (MSWD = 1.5), repre-senting its formation age. Twelve analytical spots were conductedon type 2 zircon grains and rim domains of type 3 zircon grains.Spots 13.1 and 15.1 (both are rim domains of type 3 zircongrains) were not considered for the age calculation because ofpossible mixed ages without geological significance. At the sametime, analytical spots 3.2 and 4.1 were also excluded from theage calculation as they have some micro-cracks. Except for these4 data-points, the remaining 8 spots defined a weighted mean207Pb/206Pb age of 2473 ± 15 Ma (MSWD = 1.4), which is interpretedto be the metamorphic age at the Neoarchean–Paleoproterozoicboundary. In addition, spots 7.1 and 17.1 give relatively older agesof 2635 ± 51 Ma and 2660 ± 25 Ma, respectively, which can be con-sidered to represent inherited zircon ages.

Fourteen U–Pb spot analyses were undertaken on zircons fromsample 08JG34 (Table 3; Fig. 6). Five spots were located on type1 zircon grains, 5 and 4 spots were located on the rim domainsof type 3 zircon grains and type 2 zircon grains; no analyses weremade on the core domains of type 3 zircon grains due to their rel-atively small sizes and the likely occurrence of mixed core andrim domains. On the concordia diagrams, the analytical spots ofmagmatic zircons have relatively large discordance but show a linearray, suggesting that they were influenced by later tectonic ther-mal events or experienced some Pb loss (Fig. 6). The 5 spots define a

disconcordia line with an upper intercept age of 2665 ± 23 Ma anda lower intercept age of 570 ± 38 Ma (MSWD = 0.79) (Fig. 6), thegeological significance of the lower intercept age being unclear. Inaddition, the analytical spot 8.1 display a small discordance (3%), its

A.-D

. W

ang et

al. /

Precambrian

Research

220– 221 (2012) 65– 7971

Table 2SHRIMP U–Pb zircon data for sample 08JG18 from the southeastern margin of the NCC.

Spot Domain 206Pbc (%) U (ppm) Th (ppm) Th/U 206Pb* (ppm) 207Pb*/206Pb* ±% 207Pb*/235U ±% 206Pb*/238U ±% % disc 207Pb/206Pb age

08JG18 1.1 me,s 0.44 33 88 2.67 13.7 .166 1.7 10.75 2.8 .4821 1.9 −2 2474 ± 35 Ma08JG18 2.1 ma,i 0.22 28 69 2.51 11.4 .172 2.9 11.28 3.8 .4809 2.2 1 2559 ± 52 Ma08JG18 3.1 d-c 0.42 218 82 0.38 86.9 .173 0.7 10.78 1.1 4612 0.7 4 2553 ± 15 Ma08JG18 4.1 me,s 0.18 21 44 2.09 8.3 .167 2.2 10.54 3.4 .4609 2.4 3 2516 ± 40 Ma08JG18 3.2 d-r 0.77 44 60 1.37 14.6 .158 1.8 8.08 3.1 .3877 1.7 12 2359 ± 45 Ma08JG18 5.1 ma,i 0.00 27 75 2.83 10.4 .174 2.2 10.89 3.2 .4554 2.4 7 2592 ± 37 Ma08JG18 6.1 d-r 0.79 27 48 1.76 10.6 .164 2.3 9.65 3.6 .4447 2.3 2 2428 ± 48 Ma08JG18 7.1 ma,i 1.25 19 41 2.15 8.1 .189 2.6 11.97 4.2 .4876 2.8 3 2635 ± 51 Ma08JG18 8.1 d-c 0.04 306 160 0.52 121.5 .163 0.6 10.36 0.9 .4621 0.6 1 2483 ± 10 Ma08JG18 9.1 me,s 0.98 24 54 2.25 10.1 .170 1.9 10.70 3.2 .4812 2.0 −2 2470 ± 41 Ma08JG18 10.1 ma,i 0.15 54 81 1.49 23.7 .174 1.2 12.06 1.8 .5063 1.3 −2 2584 ± 21 Ma08JG18 11.1 d-r 0.54 26 62 2.41 10.1 .164 1.9 9.90 2.9 .4521 2.0 2 2443 ± 36 Ma08JG18 12.1 me,s 1.49 20 48 2.37 8.2 .166 2.1 9.63 5.2 .4583 2.3 −2 2373 ± 79 Ma08JG18 13.1 d-r 0.08 116 60 0.52 51.4 .171 0.8 12.05 1.6 .5138 1.4 −4 2559 ± 14 Ma08JG18 14.1 ma,i 0.00 25 58 2.32 9.5 .171 1.9 10.36 3.0 .4401 2.3 9 2565 ± 32 Ma08JG18 15.1 d-r 0.37 50 39 0.78 15.9 .169 1.5 8.44 2.3 .3705 1.4 24 2510 ± 31 Ma08JG18 16.1 me,s 0.21 27 73 2.70 11.4 .164 1.6 10.94 2.5 .4897 1.7 −4 2477 ± 31 Ma08JG18 6.2 d-c 0.31 57 186 3.27 22.0 .158 1.2 9.61 1.9 .4499 1.2 0 2400 ± 25 Ma08JG18 17.1 ma,c 0.04 28 69 2.48 12.0 .181 1.5 12.56 2.3 .5040 1.7 1 2660 ± 25 Ma08JG18 18.1 me,s 0.29 21 48 2.30 8.6 .165 3.1 10.60 3.7 .4722 1.9 0 2485 ± 54 Ma08JG18 19.1 me,s 0.54 22 52 2.37 8.3 .163 2.1 8.54 3.2 .4373 1.9 4 2436 ± 43 Ma08JG18 13.2 d-c 0.04 188 70 0.37 78.6 .168 0.6 11.23 1.3 .4863 1.1 −1 2533 ± 10 Ma

Note: me,s—metamorphic zircon grains with spherical shape; ma,i—magmatic zircon grains with irregular shape; d-c—the core domain of the double-layered zircon grains; d-r—the rim domain of the double-layered zircon grains.

Table 3SHRIMP U–Pb zircon data for sample 08JG34 from the southeastern margin of the NCC.

Spot Domain 206Pbc (%) U (ppm) Th (ppm) Th/U 206Pb* (ppm) 207Pb*/206Pb* ±% 207Pb*/235U ±% 206Pb*/238U ±% % disc 207Pb/206Pb age

08JG34 1.1 d-r 0.16 88 72 0.81 38.0 .1648 0.8 11.37 1.2 .5005 0.9 −4 2505 ± 13 Ma08JG34 2.1 s 0.10 195 115 0.59 78.3 .1628 0.8 10.48 1.1 .4670 0.7 1 2485 ± 13 Ma08JG34 3.1 d-r 0.05 373 150 0.40 144.9 .1633 0.5 10.16 0.7 .4514 0.5 4 2490 ± 9 Ma08JG34 4.1 ma,l 0.08 594 189 0.32 194.5 .1728 0.5 9.06 0.6 .3805 0.4 24 2585 ± 8 Ma08JG34 5.1 d-r 0.19 109 63 0.57 44.2 .1623 1.1 10.53 1.5 .4707 1.0 0 2480 ± 18 Ma08JG34 6.1 s 0.06 327 172 0.53 132.0 .1626 0.6 10.52 0.8 .4693 0.6 0 2483 ± 9 Ma08JG34 7.1 s 0.07 362 172 0.47 145.8 .1637 0.6 10.58 0.8 .4686 0.5 1 2494 ± 9 Ma08JG34 8.1 ma,l 0.03 378 165 0.44 159.0 .1787 0.5 12.07 0.9 .4898 0.8 3 2641 ± 8 Ma08JG34 9.1 d-r 0.13 153 85 0.55 60.1 .1626 0.8 10.21 1.2 .4555 0.8 3 2483 ± 14 Ma08JG34 10.1 RE 0.05 1287 1142 0.89 317.6 .1602 0.4 6.34 0.5 .2871 0.3 51 2458 ± 6 Ma08JG34 11.1 s 0.08 244 86 0.35 95.3 .1601 0.7 10.03 1.0 .4547 0.8 2 2456 ± 12 Ma08JG34 12.1 ma,l 0.12 396 81 0.20 107.1 .1631 0.6 7.08 0.8 .3148 0.5 41 2488 ± 10 Ma08JG34 13.1 d-r 0.03 190 111 0.59 77.6 .1645 0.7 10.79 1.0 .4755 0.7 0 2503 ± 12 Ma08JG34 14.1 ma,l 0.07 244 88 0.36 115.6 .1839 0.6 13.95 1.4 .5500 1.2 −5 2689 ± 10 Ma

Note: d-r—rim domain of the double-layered zircon grains; s—single zircon grains with spherical shape; ma,l—magmatic zircon grains with long prismatic shape; RE—recrystallization zircon.

72 A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

aemt2cainettma

sm

4

ct

Fig. 6. Zircon U–Pb concordia diagrams for samples 08JG18 and 08JG34.

ge 2641 ± 8 Ma being consistent with the upper intercept age inrror margin, which can be regarded as to be the Neoarchean mag-atic crystallization age. This age is also in good agreement with

he inherited zircon ages within sample 08JG18. The 9 spots on type zircon grains and rim domains of type 3 zircon grains yield a dis-oncordia line with upper and lower intercept age of 2491 ± 10 Mand 618 ± 500 Ma (MSWD = 1.11), respectively (Fig. 6). The lowerntercept age has a large error, most probably of no geological sig-ificance. With the exception of one spot with relatively largerrror, the remaining 8 spots show small discordance (−5% to 4%),heir weighted mean age being 2486 ± 8 Ma (MSWD = 1.4), consis-ent with the upper intercept age in error margin, representing a

etamorphic age at the late-Neoarchean–Paleoproterozoic bound-ry.

In summary, zircons from the dated samples 08JG18 and 08JG34how that the xenoliths formed at 2.55–2.64 Ga and underwentetamorphism at 2.48–2.49 Ga.

.3. Zircon Hf isotope

The dating spots on zircons from the xenoliths have also beenarried out for in situ Hf-isotope analyses with the aim to traceheir petrogenesis. Generally, most of the analytical spots are

Fig. 7. Cumulative plots of εHf(t) values for zircon from samples 08JG18 and 08JG34.Dark and gray symbols represent magmatic and metamorphic zircons, respectively.

characterized by positive εHf(t) values and consistent Hf modelages (Table 5; Figs. 7 and 8). For sample 08JG18, except forspot 9.1 (metamorphic zircons) with negative εHf(t) value (−0.3)and TDM2 age of 2941 Ma, the remaining analytical spots showpositive εHf(t) values with a range from +0.6 to +6.7 andTDM2 ages of 2798–2895 Ma. The magmatic zircons yield rel-atively higher 176Lu/177Hf ratios of 0.000123–0.000346 withmost spots being larger than 0.000170, and show 176Hf/177Hfratios of 0.281230–0.281280. The magmatic zircons also exhibitεHf(t) values of +2.3 to +3.9 and Hf TDM2 model ages of2798–2895 Ma. However, the metamorphic zircons display rela-tively lower 176Lu/177Hf ratios of 0.000083–0.000245 with mostspots being smaller than 0.000140, and show 176Hf/177Hf ratios of0.281229–0.281283. With the exception of spot 9.1, the other meta-morphic zircon spots show εHf(t) values of +0.6 to +2.3 and Hf TDM2model ages of 2804–2890 Ma (Table 5). In addition, the magmaticand metamorphic zircons are arranged in the same evolution line(Fig. 8), indicating that the metamorphic zircons were crystallizedor grown in a closed system (Wu et al., 2008).

For sample 08JG34, with the exception of two analytical spots(spots 1.1 and 12.1 show negative εHf(t) values of −0.2 and −1.6)(Table 5, Fig. 7), the remaining spots exhibit positive εHf(t) val-

ues with a range of +0.6 to +4.2 (Table 5). All the analytical spotshave consistent TDM2 ages of 2720–2923 Ma (the spot 12.1 yieldsan older model age of 2989 Ma) (Table 5). Two magmatic zirconspots (spots 8.1 and 14.1) have high 176Lu/177Hf ratios of 0.000821

A.-D

. W

ang et

al. /

Precambrian

Research

220– 221 (2012) 65– 7973

Table 4LA-ICP-MS trace element analysis for zircon in samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 from the southeastern margin of the North China Craton (ppm).

Spot Nb Ta La Ce Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Hf P Ti T (◦C)a

08JG181.1Me 1.23 0.14 0.00 9.46 0.09 1.62 2.37 0.36 7.91 1.93 17.1 5.05 17.6 3.47 29.5 5.33 9248 143.3 22.3 8175.1Ma 1.36 0.08 0.03 10.2 0.14 2.03 2.96 0.44 12.7 3.14 29.2 9.30 34.1 6.70 56.7 10.3 9415 192.9 22.7 8406.1Me 1.44 0.00 bdb 7.54 0.03 0.58 2.43 0.29 7.11 1.50 14.5 5.20 20.3 3.29 24.6 6.15 8333 291.3 14.9 7777.1IN 1.50 0.19 0.03 8.12 0.06 1.25 1.80 0.22 5.74 1.47 14.7 4.30 16.3 3.49 28.1 5.47 9277 118.0 28.0 81110.1Ma 1.61 0.71 0.01 7.70 0.04 0.83 1.68 0.23 8.25 2.62 30.0 10.7 48.4 10.6 99.3 19.2 10229 139.3 16.9 78912.1Me 0.97 0.03 bd 8.83 0.14 1.23 2.22 0.29 8.20 2.24 19.4 6.04 24.8 4.56 41.2 7.80 8949 87.6 19.8 80513.1Ma 1.23 0.45 bd 7.59 0.01 0.75 1.41 0.20 6.45 2.50 27.7 9.68 41.1 8.92 87.1 17.8 9348 52.0 21.3 81214.1Ma 1.83 0.39 0.10 8.10 0.12 0.98 1.64 0.33 7.52 2.32 25.2 8.89 36.5 8.18 76.8 15.4 10227 118.0 28.0 84016.1Me 1.34 0.15 0.01 9.48 0.09 1.44 2.22 0.30 7.59 1.99 18.6 5.61 22.6 4.53 38.9 7.32 9007 190.9 28.9 84417.1IN 2.90 0.19 0.05 9.03 0.09 2.12 2.52 0.41 8.83 2.16 21.0 6.59 26.4 4.91 43.2 8.28 9403 133.1 21.0 81018.1Me 1.39 0.15 0.01 9.15 0.11 1.72 2.44 0.29 9.16 2.17 20.1 5.90 22.8 4.66 38.1 6.99 9461 140.0 21.1 811

08JG341.1Me 3.14 1.36 0.16 11.8 0.19 1.29 0.99 0.17 8.76 3.42 41.6 16.4 76.8 16.7 170 33.9 10434 208.4 21.8 8145.1Me 2.35 0.72 0.00 13.6 0.01 0.59 1.38 0.10 9.57 3.60 44.8 16.7 75.6 15.5 147 28.7 11453 174.0 9.48 736A1.1Ma 3.18 1.91 1.34 22.3 1.42 8.91 5.00 1.08 22.8 7.54 101 40.6 196 41.7 434 85.2 10807 190.3 15.2 7796.1Me 2.83 0.96 0.00 17.2 0.03 0.34 2.31 0.00 13.4 5.29 60.0 23.7 104 21.5 205 41.1 11450 264.3 4.58 677A2.1Me 2.88 1.35 0.03 14.3 0.05 0.67 1.53 0.07 10.3 3.76 49.2 18.7 83.9 17.9 169 33.5 11498 176.8 45.4 8947.1Me 3.63 2.48 0.02 17.1 0.07 0.64 1.89 0.06 11.1 4.21 51.0 19.4 93.2 19.0 182 36.1 12159 198.6 14.2 7738.1Ma 2.83 0.60 0.03 9.08 bd 1.09 2.03 0.71 14.4 5.13 73.8 29.2 137 31.5 305 65.0 7723 136.1 10.4 745A3.1Me 4.17 2.20 0.03 13.2 0.03 0.53 2.00 0.13 8.78 3.14 45.4 16.0 75.7 18.1 168 31.5 11174 197 4.13 6899.1Me 2.33 0.71 bd 12.7 0.01 0.15 0.99 0.06 8.72 3.15 43.0 16.2 71.9 15.1 142 26.8 10220 260.4 4.84 68110.1RE 6.99 2.04 0.44 36.3 0.30 4.26 7.60 2.64 54.4 18.3 224 88.4 397 86.7 793 150 8026 502 39.9 879A4.1Me 3.44 1.32 bd 11.8 0.00 0.01 1.57 0.01 8.91 3.59 41.9 18.3 82.5 15.9 155 29.7 10245 159.4 15.0 77811.1Me 3.97 1.88 0.01 14.7 0.02 0.62 1.46 0.07 9.54 3.82 47.0 18.9 83.1 17.0 162 31.6 12020 235.0 6.90 70913.1Me 2.43 1.04 bd 10.9 bd 0.14 0.55 0.06 8.96 3.23 40.8 14.0 69.7 15.5 145 33.0 9475 160.5 6.31 70214.1Ma 1.46 0.89 0.16 13.6 0.17 2.45 3.93 0.71 16.2 5.79 61.9 23.4 104 22.2 203 42.9 7807 163.1 1.95 615

Note: Me—metamorphic zircon; Ma—magmatic zircon; IN—inherited zircon; RE—recrystallization zircons; A—analytical spot without SHRIMP age determinations.a T was calculated by using Ti-in-zircon thermometer of Watson and Harrison (2005), Watson et al. (2006).b bd—below detection.

74 A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian Research 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

Table 5Hf isotopic compositions of zircons within samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 from the southeastern margin of the North China Craton.

No. 176Yb/177Hf 176Lu/177Hf 176Hf/177Hf ±(2�) Age (Ma) εHf(t) ±(2�) TDM1 (Ma) ±(2�) fLu/Hf TDM2 (Ma) ±(2�)

Sample 08JG18 (t = 2470/2550 Ma)12.1 0.007291 0.000274 0.281266 0.000020 2373 1.7 0.4 2720 27 −0.99 2825 4313.2 0.008894 0.000346 0.281280 0.000018 2533 3.8 0.3 2707 24 −0.99 2804 3811.1 0.006428 0.000245 0.281283 0.000018 2443 2.3 0.3 2695 24 −0.99 2786 3814.1 0.003838 0.000140 0.281172 0.000020 2565 3.9 0.4 2702 27 −1.00 2798 4410.1 0.010070 0.000366 0.281256 0.000017 2584 3.0 0.3 2740 23 −0.99 2857 3713.1 0.004975 0.000183 0.281230 0.000019 2559 2.3 0.4 2762 25 −0.99 2895 4019.1 0.003045 0.000109 0.281229 0.000019 2436 0.6 0.4 2759 25 −1.00 2890 4117.1 0.003393 0.000123 0.281277 0.000018 2660 6.7 0.3 2695 23 −1.00 2717 3818.1 0.002824 0.000103 0.281260 0.000018 2485 1.7 0.3 2717 24 −1.00 2821 3915.1 0.005804 0.000219 0.281262 0.000020 2510 1.7 0.4 2718 26 −0.99 2822 439.1 0.002463 0.000087 0.281204 0.000019 2470 −0.3 0.4 2790 25 −1.00 2941 418.1 0.005738 0.000221 0.281262 0.000014 2483 1.6 0.3 2722 22 −0.99 2829 367.1 0.003169 0.000113 0.281236 0.000017 2635 4.7 0.3 2748 23 −1.00 2819 385.1 0.004611 0.000172 0.281233 0.000018 2592 2.5 0.4 2757 25 −0.99 2887 404.1 0.003887 0.000139 0.281256 0.000018 2516 1.5 0.3 2724 24 −1.00 2833 3916.1 0.003870 0.000138 0.281249 0.000018 2477 1.3 0.4 2733 25 −1.00 2848 401.1 0.002316 0.000083 0.281274 0.000020 2474 2.2 0.4 2696 26 −1.00 2788 422.1 0.003473 0.000123 0.281244 0.000018 2559 3.0 0.4 2739 24 −1.00 2857 406.2 0.003445 0.000121 0.281244 0.000019 2400 1.1 0.4 2739 25 −1.00 2858 41

Sample 08JG34 (t = 2480/2640 Ma)1.1 0.021688 0.000850 0.281235 0.000023 2502 −0.2 0.4 2802 32 −0.97 2899 502.1 0.011505 0.000426 0.281237 0.000020 2485 0.6 0.4 2770 26 −0.99 2850 434.1 0.023444 0.000935 0.281234 0.000020 2585 3.2 0.4 2810 28 −0.97 2912 445.1 0.009688 0.000369 0.281224 0.000019 2480 0.2 0.4 2782 25 −0.99 2871 413.1 0.024594 0.000968 0.281264 0.000019 2490 0.6 0.4 2772 26 −0.97 2851 426.1 0.025075 0.000975 0.281299 0.000019 2483 1.9 0.4 2724 25 −0.97 2774 408.1 0.019879 0.000821 0.281257 0.000022 2641 4.2 0.4 2771 30 −0.98 2849 489.1 0.011787 0.000449 0.281298 0.000022 2483 2.7 0.4 2690 29 −0.99 2720 4710.1 0.025502 0.001012 0.281301 0.000021 2458 1.9 0.4 2725 29 −0.97 2775 4711.1 0.015150 0.000601 0.281246 0.000017 2456 0.6 0.3 2769 23 −0.98 2848 3712.1 0.034714 0.001377 0.281221 0.000020 2488 −1.6 0.4 2861 28 −0.96 2989 44

avmw0om

Fbc(

14.1 0.027829 0.001087 0.281236 0.000019 2689

nd 0.001087, 176Hf/177Hf ratios of 0.281257 and 0.281236, εHf(t)alues of +4.2 and +3.0, and Hf TDM2 ages of 2849 and 2923 Ma. Theetamorphic zircons give 176Lu/177Hf ratios of 0.000601–0.001012ith most values being less than 0.000900, 176Hf/177Hf ratios of

.281221–0.281301, εHf(t) values of +0.6 to +2.7 and Hf TDM2 agesf 2720–2871 Ma (Table 5). As a whole, all the metamorphic andagmatic zircons are arranged in the same evolution line in the

ig. 8. Zircon Hf-isotope evolution diagram for samples 08JG18 and 08JG34. Sym-ols are the same as in Fig. 5. The dotted line represents initial zircon Hf isotopicomposition range of Archean metamorphic basement rocks of the Eastern BlockGeng et al., 2011).

3.0 0.4 2818 26 −0.97 2923 42

age–εHf(t) diagram (Fig. 8), suggesting that the metamorphic zir-cons formed in a closed system.

5. Discussion

5.1. Interpretation of zircon U–Pb ages

Numerous ages obtained from the Precambrian metamor-phic basement rocks and lower-crust xenoliths of the NCC, withspecial regards to the in situ zircon SHRIMP ages, supply a pre-cious opportunity to investigate the formation and evolution of theNCC. A salient feature is the near contemporaneity of the 2.6–2.5 Gamagma emplacement and the subsequent metamorphism, whichwas widely reported in the northern segment of the Eastern Blockof the NCC. For example, Jahn and Zhang (1984) firstly recognizedthat the emplacement of felsic granulites in the Eastern Hebei Com-plex was shortly followed by a granulite facies metamorphism at∼2.5 Ga, the time interval is less than 100 Ma, which is consis-tent with the zircon U–Pb data of Pidgeon (1980). Similarly, Yanget al. (2008) also identified 2526–2515 Ma magma emplacementage and 2500–2490 Ma metamorphic age in Eastern Hebei. In theJianping Complex of Liaoning Province, Kröner et al. (1998) docu-mented widespread intrusion of granitoid rocks at 2522–2500 Maand granulite facies metamorphism at 2490–2485 Ma by usingPb–Pb evaporation and SHRIMP in situ micro-analysis methods,the time span being less than 50 Ma. These results are further con-firmed by the recent study of S.W. Liu et al. (2011b), whereasthe authors gave more ancient emplacement age up to 2615 Ma.

Later, Zheng et al. (2004b) obtained U–Pb ages of 2528 ± 18 Ma and2573 ± 18 Ma from the metamorphic rim and magmatic core in asingle zircon grain collected from a mafic granulite xenolith in akimberlite from Fuxian, Liaoning Province. Recently, Grant et al.

Resea

(aJZagHmeFnmsb

msboTbimucaclTmboatmabhwezmmttgdTem2fwRgowsp0beHuSt

A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian

2009) also obtained 2559–2553 Ma magmatic emplacement agend 2517–2490 Ma granulite facies metamorphic age from Southilin Complex in the northern extremity of the NCC. More recently,hang et al. (2012) obtained igneous zircon ages of 2.54–2.55 Gand metamorphic zircon ages of ∼2.51 Ga from amphibolite andneiss hosting banded iron deposit (BIF) in Shirengou in easternebei Province. The Neoarchean magmatism and subsequent meta-orphism has also been confirmed by a very recent study of Sun

t al. (2012) from the detrital zircons from the Proterozoic Jing’eryuormation. However, most of these data are collected from theorthern part of the Eastern Block and from the metamorphic base-ent rocks with the exception of Zheng et al. (2004b). As for the

outheastern margin of the NCC, no Neoarchean–Paleoproterozoicoundary metamorphic ages have been reported so far.

In the present study, two episodes of discrete magmatic andetamorphic events were recognized in the xenoliths from the

outheastern margin of the NCC. The first event is representedy ∼2.55 Ga and ∼2.64 Ga magmatic zircon ages, and the sec-nd one is represented by 2.48–2.49 Ga metamorphic zircon ages.he differences between these two age groups are supportedy the zircon internal structures as revealed by their CL imag-

ng, mineral inclusions, and trace element compositions. Theagmatic zircons are characterized by oscillatory zoning, irreg-

lar or long prismatic shape, low to variable luminescence andomparatively higher Th/U ratios, abundant mineral inclusionsnd high TREE contents. However, the metamorphic zircons areharacterized by spherical to oval shape, highly homogeneousuminescence, no or weakly sector to planar zoning and lowh/U ratios with some exceptions for the granulite facies meta-orphic zircon. The 2.48–2.49 Ga metamorphic zircon ages can

e considered as to be the granulite facies metamorphic timingn the basis of the following lines of evidence: (1) the mineralssemblage garnet + plagioclase ± clinopyroxene ± rutile of thesewo samples could suggest that they experienced granulite facies

etamorphism, the sparsity of clinopyroxene being possiblyscribed to the replacement/breakdown of clinopyroxene by horn-lende + plagioclase; (2) the metamorphic zircons exhibit high andomogeneous luminescence, and spherical to oval shape in accordith the features of granulite facies metamorphic zircons (Corfu

t al., 2003); (3) although the mineral inclusions in metamorphicircons are very rare, yet sparse plagioclase which is the commonineral in the granulite facies metamorphism is identified in theetamorphic zircons (Fig. 4d); (4) the relatively flat HREE dis-

ribution patterns and notable Eu negative anomalies also implyhe co-occurrence of garnet and plagioclase, i.e. compatible withranulite facies metamorphic conditions; (5) another line of evi-ence in support of the granulite facies metamorphic origin is highi-in-zircon temperatures (>800 ◦C) for metamorphic zircons. Gen-rally, the highest Ti-in-zircon temperature represents the peaketamorphic temperature (e.g., Liu et al., 2010; Y.C. Liu et al.,

011b). Notably, the high metamorphic temperatures of 844 ◦Cor sample 08JG18 and 894 ◦C for sample 08JG34 are consistentith granulite facies metamorphic conditions (e.g., O’Brien andötzler, 2003; Y.C. Liu et al., 2009); (6) additional evidence sug-estive of the granulite facies metamorphism is high Th/U ratiosf metamorphic zircon. Both magmatic and metamorphic zirconsithin samples 08JG18 and 08JG34 exhibit high Th/U ratios and

how no marked differences. The zircons in sample 08JG18 dis-lay Th/U ratios ranging from 0.37 to 3.23, while those in sample8JG34 show Th/U ratios with a range of 0.20–0.89. There is aroad consensus that the magmatic and metamorphic zircons gen-rally show substantially high and low Th/U ratios, respectively.

owever, high Th/U ratios are also broadly documented for gran-lite facies metamorphic zircons (Vavra et al., 1999; Hoskin andchaltegger, 2003; Liu et al., 2007; Grant et al., 2009). In this regard,he high Th/U ratios of metamorphic zircons from the studied

rch 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79 75

samples imply that they probably experienced granulite faciesmetamorphism.

It is emphasized here that the Nd–Pb isotope data of the stud-ied xenoliths show clear NCC affinity (Wang et al., submitted forpublication), suggesting that they represent the unexposed deepcrust compositions of the NCC. In summary, the southeasternmargin of the NCC experienced late-Neoarchean–Paleoproterozoicgranulite facies metamorphism, similarly to the northern segmentof the NCC. This study for the first time provides direct evidence onthe late-Neoarchean magmatism and subsequent granulite faciesmetamorphism in the southeastern margin of the NCC.

5.2. Tectonic significance

The ∼2.5 Ga magmatism marks one of the major tectono-thermal events in the NCC (Zhai and Santosh, 2011; Wang and Liu,2012; Liu et al., 2012). However, whether this event reflects mag-mas underplated from a mantle plume or represents arc-relatedmagmatism that culminated in collisional orogeny or both remainsdebated (Zhai et al., 2000; Kusky and Li, 2003; Polat et al., 2005,2006; Zhao, 2009; Grant et al., 2009; Geng et al., 2011; Zhai andSantosh, 2011; Wang and Liu, 2012). Although the mantle plumemodel is advocated by many researches in terms of structural,petrologic, geochemical and geochronological data (Zhao et al.,2005; Yang et al., 2008; Grant et al., 2009; Zhao, 2009), yet the mag-matic arc model is also proposed to explain the unique petrologicaland geochemical features of some rocks especially at the marginsof the craton (Xu et al., 2009; Zhou et al., 2011; Diwu et al., 2011;Wang et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2012).

As described above, the study area is located at the southeasternmargin of the NCC, and on the basis of other published data fromthe xenoliths (Xu et al., 2009; Liu et al., 2012) and the metamorphicbasement rocks (Wang et al., 2012), it is inferred that the magmaticarc model is more suitable for the explanation of precursor originof the studied xenoliths from the southeastern margin of the NCC.This hypothesis is also supported by the zircon Hf isotope com-positions. The positive εHf(t) values for the igneous zircons (+2.0to +5.0) (Fig. 7) are clearly a signature for the growth of juvenilecrust during the Neoarchean and probably imply that the rocksformed in a subduction-related arc setting as suggested by Zehet al. (2009) and Yu et al. (2011). Similar conclusions have also beenobtained from the east Shandong Province by Wang et al. (2009).Additional evidence in support of a magmatic arc origin of the stud-ied samples is their low radiogenic Pb-isotope compositions (Wanget al., submitted for publication), in contrast to the plume-derivedmelts which are generally characterized by high radiogenic Pb iso-tope compositions (Bolhar et al., 2007). In addition, the whole-rockelemental geochemistry data show that the xenoliths have neg-ative Nb, Ta, Ti and P anomalies in the PM-normalized diagram(Fig. 3), and their precursors are of IAB and VAG affinities (Pearceet al., 1984; Li et al., 2001; Wang et al., 2011), further suggestingthat they formed in a magmatic arc setting. However, it cannotbe ruled out another possibility that some of lower crustal xeno-liths and metamorphic basement rocks in the region formed in amantle plume setting or had significant mantle contributions inorigin at the Neoarchean as proposed by Zhao et al. (2001, 2005),Yang et al. (2008) and Liu et al. (2012). Some inherited zircons fromsample 08JG18 imply that it was contaminated by ancient crustalmaterials. The detailed petrogenesis of the samples is beyond theaim of the present study. Therefore, the southeastern margin ofthe NCC experienced late-Neoarchean–Paleoproterozoic granulitefacies metamorphism and Neoarchean represents consequently an

important timing of crustal growth.

As mentioned above, the studied xenoliths formed at2.55–2.64 Ga and underwent 2.48–2.49 Ga peak metamorphismwithout record of post-peak metamorphic overprint at ∼2.1 Ga

7 Resea

olfmMbmtrtnmsIpfthtim

6

(

(

(

A

dNtaagts

R

A

A

B

B

B

6 A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian

r ∼1.85 Ga. However, previous investigations suggest that otherower crustal xenoliths from the same locality (Jiagou) mainlyormed at ca. 2.5 Ga and 2.1 Ga and suffered variable degrees of

etamorphic overprint at ∼2.1 Ga or ∼1.85 Ga (Liu et al., 2012).ost probably, some xenoliths formed simultaneously but proba-

ly located at different crustal levels and escaped from subsequentetamorphic overprinting, strongly depending on their forma-

ion depths. Recently, Pb-isotopic compositions reported from theegion (Wang et al., submitted for publication) also documentedhat the rocks or xenoliths from the lowermost part of lower crustear the subduction zone might be strongly metasomatised byarine sediments and homogenized during the ∼2.1 Ga oceanic

ubduction, resulting in high radiogenic Pb-isotopic compositions.n contrast, those xenoliths with low radiogenic Pb-isotopic com-ositions and devoid of ∼2.1 and ∼1.85 Ga metamorphosed recordsormed in the uppermost level of the lower crust and escaped addi-ional metamorphic overprinting or modification and Pb-isotopeomogenization. In this regard, the present study further confirmshat the deep-seated xenoliths formed at different ages and orig-nated at different levels of the deep crust in the southeastern

argin of the NCC, as suggested by Liu et al. (2012).

. Conclusions

1) In CL images, zircon from the studied xenoliths in the south-eastern margin of the NCC generally preserves typical core–rimmicrostructures, i.e., magmatic core and metamorphic rim.

2) Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb ages suggest that the xenoliths formed at2.55 and 2.64 Ga and experienced 2.48–2.49 Ga metamorphism.Relatively lower HREE contents and negative Eu anomalies,high Th/U ratios (generally >0.5) and high Ti-in-zircon temper-atures (>800 ◦C) for metamorphosed zircons from the xenolithssuggest their peak metamorphism occurred at granulite faciesconditions.

3) Positive εHf(t) values of +2 to +5, with model ages youngerthan 3.0 Ga and formation ages of 2.55–2.64 Ga for igneous zir-cons from the xenoliths indicate that they were derived fromjuvenile crustal sources and strongly suggest the existence ofsignificant late-Neoarchean crustal growth in the southeasternmargin of the North China Craton.

cknowledgements

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foun-ation of China (90814008, 40634023 and 40973043) and theational Basic Research Program of China (2009CB825002). We

hank D.-Y. Liu for their help in SHRIMP U–Pb dating, J.-H. Yangnd Y.-H. Yang for Hf-isotope analysis on zircon, L. Yan for Ramannalysis and Z.-Y. Chen for electron microprobe analysis. Many sug-estions and constructive comments by Prof. Guochun Zhao andwo anonymous reviewers have greatly improved the paper. Wepecially thank Dr. F. Rolfo for polishing English.

eferences

ndersen, T., Griffin, W.L., Pearson, N.J., 2002. Crustal evolution in the SW part of theBaltic Shield: the Hf isotope evidence. Journal of Petrology 43, 1725–1747.

yers, J.C., Dunkle, S., Gao, S., Miller, C.F., 2002. Constraints on timing of peak andretrograde metamorphism in the Dabie Shan ultrahigh-pressure metamorphicbelt, east-central China, using U–Th–Pb dating of zircon and monazite. ChemicalGeology 186, 315–331.

elousova, E.A., Griffin, W.L., O’Reilly, S.Y., Fisher, N.I., 2002. Igneous zircon: traceelement composition as an indicator of source rock type. Contributions to Min-eralogy and Petrology 143, 602–622.

ingen, B., Austrheim, H., Whiteous, M., Davis, W.J., 2004. Trace element signatureand U–Pb geochronology of eclogite–facies zircon, Bergen Arcs, Caldeonides ofW Norwary. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 147, 671–683.

lack, L.P., Kamo, S.L., Allen, C.M., Aleinikoff, J.N., 2003. TEMORA 1: a new zirconstandard for phanerozoic U–Pb geochronology. Chemical Geology 200, 155–170.

rch 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

Blichert-Toft, J., Albarede, F., 1997. The Lu–Hf isotope geochemistry of chondritesand the evolution of the mantle-crust. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 148,243–258.

Bolhar, R., Kamber, B.S., Collerson, K.D., 2007. U–Th–Pb fractionation in Archaeanlower continental crust: implications for terrestrial Pb isotope systematics. Earthand Planetary Science Letters 254, 127–145.

Cherniak, D.J., Watson, E.B., 2000. Pb diffusion in zircon. Chemical Geology 172, 5–24.Clark, C., Collins, A.S., Timms, N.E., Kinny, P.D., Chetty, T.R.K., Santosh, M., 2009.

SHRIMP U–Pb age constraints on magmatism and high-grade metamorphism inthe Salem Block, southern India. Gondwana Research 16, 27–36.

Compston, W., Williams, I.S., Kirschvink, J.L., Zhang, Z., Ma, G., 1992. Zircon U–Pb agesfor the early Cambrian time-scale. Journal of the Geological Society (London)149, 171–184.

Condie, K.C., 1998. Episodic continental growth and supercontinents: a mantleavalanche connection? Earth and Planetary Science Letters 163, 97–108.

Condie, K.C., Bickford, M.E., Aster, R.C., Belousova, E., Scholl, D.W., 2011. Episodiczircon ages, Hf isotopic composition, and the preservation rate of continentalcrust. Geological Society of America Bulletin 123, 951–957.

Corfu, F., Hanchar, J.M., Hoskin, P.W.O., Kinny, P., 2003. Altas of zircon textures.Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry 53, 469–500.

Defant, M.J., Drummond, M.S., 1990. Derivation of some modern arc magmas bymelting of young subducted lithosphere. Nature 247, 662–665.

Diwu, C.R., Sun, Y., Yuan, H.L., Wang, H.L., Zhong, X.P., Liu, X.M., 2008. U–Pb ages andHf isotopes for detrital zircons from quartzite in the Paleoproterozoic SongshanGroup on the southwestern margin of the North China Craton. Chinese ScienceBulletin 53, 2828–2839.

Diwu, C.R., Sun, Y., Lin, C.L., Wang, H.L., 2010. LA-(MC)-ICPMS U–Pb zircongeochronology and Lu–Hf isotope compositions of the Taihua complex onthe southern margin of the North China Craton. Chinese Science Bulletin 55,2557–2571.

Diwu, C.R., Sun, Y., Guo, A.L., Wang, H.L., Liu, X.M., 2011. Crustal growth in the NorthChina Craton at ∼2.5Ga: evidence from in situ zircon U–Pb ages, Hf isotopesand whole-rock geochemistry of the Deng complex. Gondwana Research 20,149–170.

Gardés, E., Montel, J.M., 2009. Opening and resetting temperatures in heatinggeochronological systems. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 158,185–195.

Geng, Y.S., Du, L.L., Ren, L.D., 2011. Growth and reworking of the early Precambriancontinental crust in the North China Craton: constraints from zircon Hf isotopes.Gondwana Research 21, 517–529.

Guo, J.H., O’Brien, P.J., Zhai, M.G., 2002. High-pressure granulites in the Sangganarea, North China Craton: metamorphic evolution, P–T paths and geotectonicsignificance. Journal of Metamorphic Geology 20, 741–756.

Guo, J.H., Sun, M., Chen, F.K., Zhai, M.G., 2005. Sm–Nd and SHRIMP U–Pb zircongeochronology of high-pressure granulites in the Sanggan area, North ChinaCraton: timing of Paleoproterozoic continental collision. Journal of Asian EarthSciences 24, 629–642.

Guo, S.S., Li, S.G., 2009. SHRIMP zircon U–Pb ages for the Paleoproterozoicmetamorphic–magmatic events in the southeastern margin of the North China.Science China Series D: Earth Science 52 (8), 1039–1045.

Grant, M.L., Wilde, S.A., Wu, F.Y., Yang, J.H., 2009. The application of zircon cathodolu-minescence imaging Th–U–Pb chemistry and U–Pb ages in interpreting discretemagmatic and high-grade metamorphic events in the North China Craton at theArchean/Proterozoic boundary. Chemical Geology 261, 155–171.

Griffin, W.L., Pearson, N.J., Belousova, E., Jackson, S.E., van Achterbergh, E.,O’Reilly, S.Y., Shee, S.R., 2000. The Hf isotope composition of cratonic man-tle: LA-MC-ICPMS analysis of zircon megacrysts in kimberlites. Geochimica etCosmochimica Acta 64, 133–147.

Hawkesworth, C.J., Kemp, A.I.S., 2006. Using hafnium and oxygen isotopes inzircons to unravel the record of crustal evolution. Chemical Geology 226,144–162.

Herman, J., Rubatto, D., 2003. Relating zircon and monazite domains to garnetgrowth zones: age and duration of granulite facies metamorphism in the ValMalenco lower crust. Journal of Metamorphic Geology 21, 833–852.

Hou, Z.H., Wang, C.X., 2007. Determination of 35 trace elements in geological sam-ples by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Journal of University ofScience and Technology of China 37, 940–944 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Hoskin, P.W.O., Black, L.P., 2000. Metamorphic zircon formation by solid-staterecrystallization of protolith igneous zircon. Journal of Metamorphic Geology18, 423–439.

Hoskin, P.W.O., Schaltegger, U., 2003. The composition of zircon and igneous andmetamorphic petrogenesis. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry 53, 27–55.

Huang, X.L., Niu, Y.L., Xu, Y.G., Yang, Q.J., Zhong, J.W., 2010. Geochemistry of TTG andTTG-like gneisses from Lushan–Taihua complex in the southern North ChinaCraton: implications for late Archean crustal accretion. Precambrian Research182, 43–56.

Iizuka, T., Hirata, T., Komiya, T., Rino, S., Katayama, I., Motoki, A., Maruyama, S.,2005. U–Pb and Lu–Hf isotope systematics of zircons from the Mississippi Riversand: implications for reworking and growth of continental crust. Geology 33,485–488.

Jahn, B.M., Zhang, Z.Q., 1984. Archean granulitic gneisses from eastern Hebei

Province, China: rare earth geochemistry and tectonic implications. Contribu-tion to Mineralogy and Petrology 85, 224–243.

Jahn, B.M., Liu, D.Y., Wan, Y.S., Song, B., Wu, J.S., 2008. Archean crustal evolution of theJiadong Peninsula, China, as revealed by zircon SHRIMP geochronology, elemen-tal and Nd-isotope geochemistry. American Journal of Science 208, 232–269.

Resea

J

K

K

K

K

K

K

K

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian

iang, N., Guo, J.H., Zhai, M.G., Zhang, S.Q., 2010. ∼2.7 Ga crust growth in the NorthChina craton. Precambrian Research 179, 37–49.

atayama, I., Maruyama, S., Parkinson, C.D., Terada, K., Sano, Y., 2001. Ion micro-probe U–Pb zircon geochronology of peak and retrograde stages of ultrahigh-pressure metamorphic rocks from the Kokchetav massif, northern Kazakhstan.Earth and Planetary Science Letters 188, 185–198.

röner, A., Cui, W.Y., Wang, S.Q., Wang, C.Q., Nemchin, A.A., 1998. Single zircon agesfrom high-grade rocks of the Jianping Complex, Liaoling Province, NE China.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 16, 519–532.

röner, A., Wilde, S.A., Li, J.H., Wang, K.Y., 2005. Age and evolution of a lateArchean to Paleoproterozoic upper to lower crustal section in the Wutais-han/Hengshan/Fuping terrain of northern China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences24, 577–595.

röner, A., Wilde, S.A., Zhao, G.C., O’Brien, P.J., Sun, M., Liu, D.Y., Wan, Y.S., Liu, S.W.,Guo, J.H., 2006. Zircon geochronology and metamorphic evolution of mafic dykesin the Hengshan Complex of northern China: evidence for late Paleoprotero-zoic extension and subsequent high-pressure metamorphism in the North ChinaCraton. Precambrian Research 146, 45–67.

usky, T.M., Li, J.H., 2003. Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the North ChinaCraton. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 22, 383–397.

usky, T.M., Li, J.H., Santosh, M., 2007. The Paleoproterozoic North Hebei Oro-gen: North China Craton’s collisional suture with the Columbia supercontinent.Gondwana Research 12, 4–28.

usky, T.M., 2011. Geophysical and geological tests of tectonic models of the NorthChina Craton. Gondwana Research. 20, 26–35.

ee, J., Williams, I., Eillis, D., 1997. Pb, U and Th diffusion in nature zircon. Nature390, 159–162.

i, S.G., Huang, F., Nie, Y.H., Han, W.L., Long, M., Li, H.M., Zhang, S.Q., Zhang, Z.H., 2001.Geochemical and geochronological constraints on the suture location betweenthe North and South China blocks in the Dabie orogen, central China. Physicsand Chemistry of Earth (A) 26, 655–672.

i, S.Z., Zhao, G.C., Sun, M., Wu, F.Y., Liu, J.Z., Hao, D.F., Han, Z.Z., Luo, Y., 2004.Mesozoic, not paleoproterozoic SHRIMP U–Pb zircon ages of two Liaoji granites,Eastern Block, North China Craton. International Geology Review 46, 162–176.

i, S.Z., Zhao, G.C., Sun, M., Han, Z.Z., Luo, Y., Hao, D.F., Xia, X.P., 2005. Deformationhistory of the Paleoproterozoic Liaohe assemblage in the Eastern Block of theNorth China Craton. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 24, 659–674.

i, S.Z., Zhao, G.C., Sun, M., Han, Z.Z., Zhao, G.T., Hao, D.F., 2006. Are the South andNorth Liaohe Groups of North China Craton different exotic terranes? Nd isotopeconstraints. Gondwana Research 9, 198–208.

i, S.Z., Zhao, G.C., 2007. SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronology of the Liaoji grani-toids: constraints on the evolution of the paleoproterozoic Jiao-Liao-Ji belt inthe Eastern Block of the North China Craton. Precambrian Research 158, 1–16.

i, T., Zhai, M.G., Peng, P., Chen, L., Guo, J., 2010. Ca. 2.5 billion year old coevalultramafic-mafic and syenitic dykes in Eastern Hebei: implications for cratoniza-tion of the North China Craton. Precambrian Research 180, 143–155.

i, N., Chen, Y., Santosh, M., Yao, J., Sun, Y., Li, J., 2011. The 1.85 Ga Mo mineral-ization in the Xiong’er Terrane, China: implications for metallogeny associatedwith assembly of the Columbia supercontinent. Precambrian Research 186,220–232.

iu, D.Y., Nutman, A.P., Compston, W., Wu, J.S., Shen, Q.H., 1992. Remnants of≥3800 Ma crust in the Chinese part of the Sino-Korean craton. Geology 20,339–342.

iu, S.W., Pan, Y.M., Li, J.H., Li, Q.G., Zhang, J., 2002. Geological and isotopic geochem-ical constraints on the evolution of the Fuping Complex, North China Craton.Precambrian Research 117, 41–56.

iu, S.W., Pan, Y.M., Xie, Q.L., Zhang, J., Li, Q.G., 2004. Archean geodynamics in theCentral Zone, North China Craton: constraints from geochemistry of two con-trasting series of granitoids in the Fuping and Wutaishan complex. PrecambrianResearch 130, 229–249.

iu, S.W., Pan, Y.M., Xie, Q.L., Zhang, J., Li, Q.G., 2005. Geochemistry of the Paleopro-terozoic Nanying granitic gneisses in the Fuping complex: implications for thetectonic evolution of the central zone, North China Craton. Journal of Asian EarthSciences 24, 643–658.

iu, S.W., Zhao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Shu, G.M., Sun, M., Li, Q.G., Tian, W., Zhang, J.,2006. Th–U–Pb monazite geochronology of the Lüliang and Wutai Complex:constraints on the tectonothermal evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen.Precambrian Research 148, 205–224.

iu, Y.C., Li, S.G., Xu, S.T., 2007. Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb dating for gneisses in northernDabie high T/P metamorphic zone, central China: implications for decouplingwithin subducted continental crust. Lithos 96, 170–185.

iu, F., Guo, J.H., Lu, X.P., Diwu, C.R., 2009. Crustal growth at ∼2.5 Ga in the NorthChina Craton: evidence from whole-rock Nd and zircon Hf isotopes in theHuai’an gneiss terrane. Chinese Science Bulletin 54, 4704–4713.

iu, D.Y., Wilde, S.A., Wan, Y.S., Guo, A.L., Wang, H.L., Liu, X.M., 2009. Combined U–Pb,hafnium and oxygen isotope analysis of zircons from meta-igneous rocks in thesouthern North China Craton reveal multiple events in the Late Mesoarchean-Early Neoarchean. Chemical Geology 261, 139–153.

iu, Y.C., Wang, A.D., Rolfo, F., Groppo, C., Gu, X.F., Song, B., 2009. Geochrono-logical and petrological constraints on Paleoproterozoic granulite faciesmetamorphism in southeastern margin of the North China Craton. Journal of

Metamorphic Geology 27, 125–138.

iu, S.J., Li, J.H., Santosh, M., 2010. First application of the revised Ti-in-zircon geothermometer to Paleoproterozoic ultrahigh-temperature granulitesof Tuguiwula, Inner Mongolia, North China Craton. Contributions to Mineralogyand Petrology 159, 225–235.

rch 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79 77

Liu, Y.-C., Gu, X., Li, S., Hou, Z.H., Song, B., 2011a. Multistage metamorphic eventsin granulitized eclogites from the North Dabie complex zone, central China:evidence from zircon U–Pb age, trace element and mineral inclusion. Lithos 122,107–121.

Liu, S.W., Zhang, J., Li, Q., Zhang, L., Wang, W., Yang, P., 2011a. Geo-chemistry and U–Pb zircon ages of metamorphic volcanic rocks of thePaleoproterozoic Lüliang Complex and constraints on the evolution ofthe Trans-North China Orogen, North China Craton. Precambrian Research,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2011.07.006.

Liu, S.W., Santosh, M., Wang, B.W., Bai, X., Yang, P.T., 2011b. Zircon U–Pb chronol-ogy of the Jianping Complex: implications fro the Precambrian crustal evolutionhistory of the northern margin of North China Craton. Gondwana Research 20,48–63.

Liu, Y.C., Gu, X.F., Deng, L.P., 2011b. High-T/UHP metamorphism and multistageexhumation history of the North Dabie complex zone. Acta Petrologica Sinica27, 589–600 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Liu, Y.C., Wang, A.D., Li, S.G., Rolfo, F., Li, Y., Groppo, C., Gu, X.F., Hou,Z.H., 2012. Composition and geochronology of the deep-seated xenoliths inthe southeastern margin of the North China Craton. Gondwana Research,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2012.06.009.

Lu, S.N., Yang, C.L., Li, H.K., Li, H.M., 2002. A group of rifting events in the terminalPaleoproterozoic in the North China Craton. Gondwana Research 5, 123–131.

Lu, X.P., Wu, F.Y., Lin, J.Q., Sun, D.Y., Zhang, Y.W., Guo, G.L., 2004. Geochronologicalsuccessions of the early Precambrian granitic magmatism in Southern LiaodongPeninsula and its constraints on tectonic evolution of the North China Craton.Chinese Journal of Geology 39, 123–138 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Lu, X.P., Wu, F.Y., Guo, J.H., Wilde, S.A., Yang, J.H., Liu, X.M., Zhang, X.O., 2006. ZirconU–Pb geochronological constraints on the Paleoproterozoic crustal evolutionof the Eastern Block in the North China Craton. Precambrian Research 146,138–164.

Lu, S.N., Zhao, G.C., Wang, H.C., Hao, G.J., 2008. Precambrian metamorphic base-ment and sedimentary cover of the North China Craton: a review. PrecambrianResearch 160, 77–93.

Ludwig, K.R., 2001. User’s Manual for Isoplot/Ex (rev.2.49): A GeochronologicalToolkit for Microsoft Excel. Berkeley Geochronology Center, Berkeley, CA, SpecialPublication, No. 1a, pp. 55.

Luo, Y., Sun, M., Zhao, G.C., Li, S.Z., Xu, P., Ye, K., Xia, X.P., 2004. LA-ICP-MS U–Pbzircon ages of the Liaohe Group in the Eastern Block of the North China Craton:constraints on the evolution of the Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt. Precambrian Research 134,349–371.

Luo, Y., Sun, M., Zhao, G.C., Li, S.Z., Xia, X.P., 2006. LA-ICP-MS U–Pb zircongeochronology of the Yushulazi Group in the Eastern Block, North China Craton.International Geology Review 48, 828–840.

Luo, Y., Sun, M., Zhao, G.C., Ayers, J.C., Li, S.Z., Xia, X.P., Zhang, J.H., 2008. A comparisonof U–Pb and Hf isotopic composition of detrital zircons from the North and SouthLiaohe Group: constraints on the evolution of the Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt, North ChinaCraton. Precambrian Research 163, 279–306.

McCulloch, M.T., Bennett, V.C., 1994. Progressive growth of the Earth’s continentalcrust and depleted mantle: geochemical constraints. Geochimica et Cosmochim-ica Acta 58, 4717–4738.

Möller, A., O’Brien, P.J., Kennedy, A., Kröner, A., 2003. Linking growth episodes ofzircon and metamorphic textures to zircon chemistry: an example from theultrahigh-temperature granulites of Rogaland (SW Norway). EMU Notes in Min-eralogy 5, 65–81.

Nelson, D.R., 1997. Compilation of SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronology data, 1996.Geological Survey of Western Australia, Record 1997/1.

Nutman, A.P., Wan, Y., Du, L., Friend, C.R.L., Dong, C., Xie, H., Wang, W., Sun, H., Liu,D., 2011. Multistage Neoarchaean crustal evolution of the North China Craton,eastern Hebei. Precambrian Research 189, 43–65.

O’Brien, P.J., Rötzler, J., 2003. High-pressure granulites: formation, recovery of peakconditions and implications for tectonics. Journal of Metamorphic Geology 21,3–20.

Pearce, J.A., Harris, N.B.W., Tindle, A.G., 1984. Trace element discrimination dia-grams for the tectonic interpretation of granitic rocks. Journal of Petrology 25,956–983.

Peng, P., Guo, J., Zhai, M., Bleeker, W., 2010. Paleoproterozoic gabbronoriticand granitic magmatism in the northern margin of the North ChinaCraton: evidence of crust–mantle interaction. Precambrian Research 183,635–659.

Peng, P., Guo, J., Windley, B.F., Li, X., 2011. Halaqin volcano-sedimentary succes-sion in the central-northern margin of the North China Craton: products of LatePaleoproterozoic ridge subduction. Precambrian Research 187, 165–180.

Pidgeon, R.T., 1980. Isotopic ages of the zircons from the Archean granulite faciesrocks, Eastern Hebei, China. Geological Reviews 26, 198–207.

Polat, A., Kusky, T., Li, J.H., Fryer, B., Kerrich, R., Patrick, K., 2005. Geochemistry ofNeoarchean (ca. 2.55–2.50 Ga) volcanic and ophiolitic rocks in the Wutaishangreenstone belt, central orogenic belt, North China craton: implications for geo-dynamic setting and continental growth. Geological Society of American Bulletin117, 1387–1399.

Polat, A., Li, J., Fryer, B., Kusky, T., Gagnon, J., Zhang, S., 2006. Geochemical char-acteristics of the Neoarchean (2800–2700 Ma) Taishan greenstone belt, North

China Craton: evidence for plume–craton interaction. Chemical Geology 230,60–87.

Rubatto, D., 2002. Zircon trace element geochemistry: partitioning with garnetand the link between U–Pb ages and metamorphism. Chemical Geology 184,123–138.

7 Resea

R

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

T

T

T

T

V

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

8 A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian

ubatto, D., Hermann, J., 2007. Experimental zircon/melt and zircon/garnet traceelement partitioning and implications for the geochronology of crustal rocks.Chemical Geology 241, 38–61.

antosh, M., Sajeev, K., Li, J.H., 2006. Extreme crustal metamorphism duringColombia supercontinent assembly: evidence from North China Craton. Gond-wana Research 10, 256–266.

antosh, M., Wilde, S.A., Li, J.H., 2007. Timing of paleoproterozoic ultrahigh-temperature metamorphism in the North China Craton: evidence from SHRIMPU–Pb zircon geochronology. Precambrian Research 159, 178–196.

antosh, M., Tsunogae, T., Ohyama, H., Sato, K., Li, J.H., Liu, S.J., 2008. Carbonic meta-morphism at ultrahigh-temperatures: evidence from North China Craton. Earthand Planetary Science Letters 266, 149–165.

antosh, M., Wan, Y.S., Liu, D.Y., Dong, C.Y., Li, J.H., 2009. Anatomy of zircons froman ultra-hot orogen: suturing the North China Craton within Columbia super-continent. Journal of Geology 117, 429–443.

antosh, M., 2010. Assembling North China Craton within the Columbia superconti-nent: the role of double-sided subduction. Precambrian Research 178, 149–167.

antosh, M., Liu, S.J., Tsunogae, T., Li, J.H., 2012a. Paleoproterozoic ultrahigh-temperature granulites in the North China Craton: implications for tec-tonic models on extreme crustal metamorphism. Precambrian Research,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2011.05.003.

antosh, M., Liu, D.Y., Shi, Y.R., Liu, S.J., 2012b. Paleoproterozoic accretionary oroge-nesis in the North China Craton: a SHRIMP zircon study. Precambrian Research,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2011.11.004.

oderlund, U., Patchett, P.J., Vervoort, J.D., Isachsen, C.E., 2004. The 176Lu decay con-stant determined by Lu–Hf and U–Pb isotope systematics of Precambrian maficintrusions. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 219, 311–324.

un, S.S., McDonough, W.F., 1989. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanicbasalts: implications for mantle composition and process. In: Saunders, A.D.,Norry, M.J. (Eds.), Magmatism in the Ocean Basins, vol. 42. Geological SocietyLondon Special Publications, pp. 313–345.

un, J.F., Yang, J.H., Wu, F.Y., Wilde, S.A., 2012. Precambrian crustal evolution of theeastern North China Craton as revealed by U–Pb ages and Hf isotopes of detri-tal zircons from the Proterozoic Jing’eryu Formation. Precambrian Research,200–203, 184–208.

am, P.Y., Zhao, G.C., Liu, F.L., Zhou, X.W., Liu, X.M., Sun, M., Li, S.Z., 2011. Timingof metamorphism in the Paleoproterozoic Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt: new SHRIMP U–Pbzircon dating of granulites, gneisses and marbles of the Jiaobei massif in theNorth China Craton. Gondwana Research 19, 150–162.

am, P.Y., Zhao, G.C., Zhou, X.W., Sun, M., Guo, J.H., Li, S.Z., Yin, C.Q., Wu, M.L., He, Y.H.,2012. Metamorphic P–T path and implications of high-pressure politic granulitesfrom the Jiaobei massif in the Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt, North China Craton. GondwanaResearch 22, 104–117.

rail, D., Mojzsis, S.J., Harrison, T.M., Schmitt, A.K., Watson, E.B., Yong, E.D., 2007.Constraints on Hadean zircon protoliths from oxygen isotopes, Ti-thermometry,and rare earth elements. Geochemistry, Geophysics and Geosystems, 1–22,http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006GC001449.

rap, P., Fuare, M., Lin, W., Augier, R., Fouassier, A., 2011. Syn-collisional channelflow and exhumation of Paleoproterozoic high pressure rocks in the Trans-North China Orogen: the critical role of partial-melting and orogenic bending.Gondwana Research 20, 498–515.

avra, G., Schmid, R., Gebauer, D., 1999. Internal morphology, habit and U–Th–Pbmicroanalysis of amphibole to granulite facies zircon: geochronology of theIvren Zone (Southern Alps). Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 134,380–404.

atson, E.B., Harrison, T.M., 2005. Zircon thermometer reveals minimum meltingconditions on earliest Earth. Science 308, 841–844.

atson, E.B., Wark, D.A., Thomas, J.B., 2006. Crystallization thermometers for zirconand rutile. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 151, 413–433.

an, Y.S., Song, B., Liu, D.Y., Wilde, S.A., Wu, J.S., Shi, Y.R., Yin, X.Y., Zhou, H.Y.,2006a. SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronology of Palaeoproterozoic metasedimen-tary rocks in the North China Craton: evidence for major Late Palaeoproterozoictectonothermal event. Precambrian Research 149, 249–271.

an, Y.S., Wilde, S.A., Liu, D.Y., Yang, C.X., Song, B., Yin, X.Y., 2006b. Further evidencefor ∼1.85 Ga metamorphism in the Central Zone of the North China Craton:SHRIMP U–Pb dating of zircon from metamorphic rocks in the Lushan area,Henan Province. Gondwana Research 9, 189–197.

an, Y.S., Liu, D.Y., Dong, C.Y., Xu, Z.Y., Wang, Z.J., Wilde, S.A., Yang, Y.H., Liu, Z.H.,Zhou, H.Y., 2009. The Precambrian Khondalite Belt in the Daqingshan area, NorthChina Craton: evidence for multiple metamorphic events in the Palaeoprotero-zoic era. Journal of the London Geological Society Special Publications 323,73–97.

an, Y., Liu, D., Wang, S., Yang, E., Wang, W., Dong, C., Zhou, H., Du, L., Yang,Y., Diwu, C., 2011. ∼2.7 Ga juvenile crust formation in the North China Cra-ton (Taishan–Xintai area, western Shandong Province): further evidence of anunderstated event from zircon U–Pb dating and Hf isotope composition. Pre-cambrian Research 186, 169–180.

ang, Y.J., Zhang, R., Zhao, G., Fan, W., Xia, X., Zhang, F., Zhang, A., 2009. ZirconU–Pb geochronological and geochemical constraints on the petrogenesis of theTaishan sanulitoids (Shandong): implications for Neoarchean subduction in theEastern Block, North China Craton. Precambrian Research 174, 273–286.

ang, J., Wu, Y., Gao, S., Peng, M., Liu, X.C., Zhao, L.S., Zhou, L., Hu, Z.C., Gong, H.J.,Liu, Y.S., 2010. Zircon U–Pb and trace element data from rocks of the Huai’anComplex: new insights into the late Paleoproterzoic collision between the East-ern and Western Blocks of the North China Craton. Precambrian Research 178,59–71.

rch 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79

Wang, Z.H., Wilde, S.A., Wang, J.L., 2010. Tectonic setting and signifi-cance of 2.3–2.1 Ga magmatic events in the Trans-North China Orogen:new constraints from the Yanmenguan mafic–ultramafic intrusion in theHengshan–Wutai–Fuping area. Precambrian Research 178, 27–42.

Wang, W., Liu, S., Bai, X., Yang, P., Li, Q., Zhang, L., 2011. Geochemistry and zirconU–Pb–Hf isotopic systematics of the Neoarchean Yixian–Fuxin greenstone belt,northern margin of the North China Craton: implications for petrogenesis andtectonic setting. Gondwana Research 20, 64–81.

Wang, A.D., Liu, Y.C., 2012. Neoarchean (2.5–2.8 Ga) crustal growth of the NorthChina Craton revealed by zircon Hf isotope: a synthesis. Geoscience Frontiers 3,147–132.

Wang, A.D., Liu, Y.C., Santosh, M., Gu, X.F., 2012. Zircon U–Pb geochronol-ogy, geochemistry and Sr–Nd–Pb isotopes from the metamorphic base-ment in the Wuhe Complex: implications for Neoarchean active con-tinental margin along the southeastern North China Craton and con-straints on the petrogenesis of Mesozoic granitoids. Geoscience Frontier,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2012.05.001.

Wang, A.D., Liu, Y.C., Santosh, M., Gu, X.F. High and low radiogenic Pb-isotopic com-positions of the Precambrian lower-crustal rocks in the southeastern margin ofthe North China Craton and their geological significance. Lithos, submitted forpublication.

Wilde, S.A., Zhao, G.C., Sun, M., 2002. Development of the North China Craton dur-ing the late Archean and its final amalgamation at 1.8 Ga: some speculationson its positions within a global Palaeoproterozoci supercontinent. GondwanaResearch 55, 85–94.

Wilde, S.A., Cawood, P.A., Wang, K.Y., Nemchin, A.A., 2005. Granitoid evolution inthe Late Archean Wutai Complex, North China Craton. Journal of Asian EarthSciences 24, 597–613.

Williams, I.S., 1998. U–Th–Pb geochronology by ion microprobe. In: McKibben, M.A.,Shanks III, W.C., Ridley, W.I. (Eds.), Applications of Microanalytical Techniquesto Understanding Mineralizing Processes. Review of Economic Geology 7, 1–35.

Woodhead, J.D., Hergt, J.M., 2005. A preliminary appraisal of seven natural zirconreference materials for in situ Hf isotope determination. Geostandards and Geo-analytical Research 29, 183–195.

Wu, F.Y., Yang, J.H., Liu, X.M., Li, T.S., Xie, L.W., Yang, Y.H., 2005. Hf isotopes of the3.8 Ga zircons in eastern Hebei Province, China: implications for early crustalevolution of the North China Craton. Chinese Science Bulletin 50, 2473–2480.

Wu, F., Zhao, G., Wilde, S.A., Sun, D.Y., 2005. Nd isotopic constraints on crustal for-mation in the North China Craton. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 24, 523–545.

Wu, F.Y., Yang, Y.H., Xie, L.W., Yang, J.H., Xu, P., 2006. Hf isotopic compositions of thestandard zircons and baddeleyites in U–Pb geochronology. Chemical Geology234, 105–126.

Wu, Y.B., Gao, S., Zhang, H.F., Yang, S.H., Jiao, W.F., Liu, Y.S., Yuan, H.L., 2008. Timingof UHP metamorphism in the Hong’an area, western Dabie Mountains, China:evidence from zircon U–Pb age, trace element and Hf isotope composition. Con-tribution to Mineralogy and Petrology 155, 123–133.

Xu, W.L., Wang, D.Y., Liu, X.C., Wang, Q.H., Lin, J.Q., 2002. Discovery of eclogiteinclusion and its geological significance in early Jurassic intrusive complex inXuzhou-northern Anhui, eastern China. Chinese Science Bulletin 47, 1212–1216.

Xu, W.L., Wang, Q.H., Liu, X.C., Wang, D.Y., Guo, J.H., 2004. Chronology and sources ofMesozoic intrusive complex in Xu-Huai region, central China: constraints fromSHRIMP zircon U–Pb dating. Acta Geologica Sinica 78, 96–106.

Xu, S.T., Liu, Y.C., Chen, G.B., Ji, S.Y., Ni, P., Xiao, W., 2005. Microdiamonds, theirclassification and tectonic implications for the host eclogites from the Dabieand Sulu regions in central eastern China. Mineralogical Magazine 69, 509–520.

Xu, W.L., Gao, S., Wang, Q.H., Wang, D.Y., Liu, Y., 2006. Mesozoic crustal thickening ofthe eastern North China craton: evidence from eclogite xenoliths and petrologicimplications. Geology 34, 721–724.

Xu, W.L., Gao, S., Yang, D.B., Pei, F.P., Wang, Q.H., 2009. Geochemistry of eclogitexenoliths in Mesozoic adakitic rocks from Xuzhou–Suzhou area in central Chinaand their tectonic implications. Lithos 107, 269–280.

Yang, J.H., Wu, F.Y., Wide, S.A., Zhao, G.C., 2008. Petrogenesis and geodynamics of LateArchean magmatism in eastern Hebei, eastern North China Craton: geochrono-logical, geochemical and Nd–Hf isotopic evidence. Precambrian Research 167,125–149.

Yardley, B.W.D., 1989. Metamorphism of pelititc rocks. In: An Introduction to Meta-morphic Petrology. Longman Scientific and Technical, England, pp. 82–90.

Ye, K., Yao, Y., Katayama, I., Cong, B., Wang, Q., Maruyama, S., 2000. Large areal extentof ultrahigh-pressure metamorphism in the Sulu ultrahigh-pressure terrane ofEast China: new implications from coesite and omphacite inclusions in zirconof granitic gneiss. Lithos 52, 157–164.

Yin, C.Q., Zhao, G.C., Sun, M., Xia, X.P., Wei, C.J., Zhou, X.W., Leung, W.H., 2009. LA-ICP-MS U–Pb zircon ages of the Qianlishan Complex: constrains on the evolution ofthe Khondalite Belt in the Western Block of the North China Craton. PrecambrianResearch 174, 78–94.

Yin, C.Q., Zhao, G.C., Guo, J.H., Sun, M., Xia, X.P., Zhou, X.W., Liu, C.H., 2011. U–Pband Hf isotopic study of zircons of the Helanshan Complex: constraints on theevolution of the Khondalite Belt in the Western Block of the North China Craton.Lithos 122, 25–38.

Ying, J., Zhou, X., Su, B., Tang, Y., 2011. Continental growth and secular evolution:constraints from U–Pb ages and Hf isotope of detrital zircons in Proterozoic Jixian

sedimentary section (1.8–0.8 Ga), North China Craton. Precambrian Research189, 229–238.

Yu, J.H., O’Reilly, S.Y., Zhou, M.F., Griffin, W.L., Wang, L., 2011. U–Pbgeochronology and Hf-Nd isotopic geochemistry of the Badu Complex,Southeastern China: implications for the Precambrian crustal evolution

Resea

Y

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

Z

A.-D. Wang et al. / Precambrian

and paleogeography of the Cathaysia Block. Precambrian Research,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2011.07.014.

uan, H.L., Gao, S., Liu, X.M., Gunther, D., Wu, F.Y., 2004. Accurate U–Pb age and traceelement determinations of zircon by laser ablation-inductively coupled plasmamass spectrometry. Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research 28, 353–370.

eh, A., Gerdes, A., Barton, J.M., 2009. Archean accretion and crustal evolution ofthe Kalahari Craton—the zircon age and Hf isotope record of granitic rocks fromBarberton/Swaziland to the Francistown arc. Journal of Petrology 20, 933–966.

hang, J., Zhao, G., Sun, M., Wilde, S.A., Li, S., Liu, W., 2006. High-pressure mafic gran-ulites in the Trans-North China Orogen: tectonic significance and age. GondwanaResearch 9, 349–362.

hang, J., Zhao, G., Li, S., Sun, M., Liu, S., Wilde, S., Kröner, A., Yin, C., 2007. Deformationhistory of the Hengshan Complex: implications for the tectonic evolution of theTrans-North China Orogen. Journal of Structural Geology 29, 933–949.

hang, J., Zhao, G., Li, S., Sun, M., Liu, S., Yin, C., 2009. Deformational history of theFuping Complex and new U–Th–Pb geochronological constraints: implicationsfor the tectonic evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen. Journal of StructuralGeology 31, 177–193.

hang, L.C., Zhai, M.G., Zhang, X.J., Xiang, P., Dai, Y.P., Wang, C.L., Pira-jno, F., 2012. Formation age and tectonic setting of the ShirengouNeoarchean banded iron deposit in eastern Hebei Province: constraintsfrom geochemistry and SIMS zircon U–Pb dating. Precambrian Research,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2011.09.007.

hao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Cawood, P.A., Lu, L.Z., 1998. Thermal evolution of the Archaeanbasement rocks from the eastern part of the North China Craton and its bearingon tectonic setting. International Geology Review 40, 706–721.

hao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Cawood, P.A., Lu, L.Z., 1999. Tectonothermal history of thebasement rocks in the western zone of the North China Craton and its tectonicimplications. Tectonophysics 310, 37–53.

hao, G.C., Cawood, P.A., Wilde, S.A., Sun, M., Lu, L.Z., 2000a. Metamorphism ofbasement rocks in the Central Zone of the North China craton: implications forPaleoproterozoic tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research 103, 55–88.

hao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Cawood, P.A., Lu, L.Z., 2000b. Petrology and P–T path of theFuping mafic granulites: implications for tectonic evolution of the central zoneof the North China craton. Journal of Metamorphic Geology 18, 375–391.

hao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Cawood, P.A., Sun, M., 2001. Archean blocks and their bound-aries in the North China Craton: lithological, geochemical, structural and P–Tpath constraints and tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research 107, 45–73.

hao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Cawood, P.A., Sun, M., 2002. SHRIMP U–Pb zircon ages of theFuping Complex: implications for late Archean to Paleoproterozoic accretion andassembly of the North China Carton. American Journal of Science 302, 191–226.

hao, G.C., Sun, M., Wilde, S.A., Li, S.Z., 2005. Late Archean to Paleoproterozoic evolu-tion of the North China Craton: key issues revisited. Precambrian Research 136,177–202.

hao, G.C., Kröner, A., Wilde, S.A., Sun, M., Li, S.Z., Li, X.P., Zhang, J., Xia,X.P., He, Y.H., 2007. Lithotectonic elements and geological events in the

rch 220– 221 (2012) 65– 79 79

Hengshan–Wutai–Fuping belt: a synthesis and implications for the evolutionof the Trans-North China Orogen. Geological Magazine 144, 753–775.

Zhao, G., Wilde, S.A., Sun, M., Guo, J.H., Kröner, A., Li, S.Z., Li, X.P., Zhang, J., 2008.SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronology of the Huai’an complex: constraints on lateArchean to Paleoproterozoic magmatic and metamorphic events in the Trans-North China Orogen. American Journal of Science 308, 270–303.

Zhao, G.C., 2009. Metamorphic evolution of major tectonic units in the basement ofthe North China Craton: key issues and discussion. Acta Petrologica Sinica 25,1772–1792 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Zhao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Guo, J.H., Cawood, P.A., Sun, M., Li, X.P., 2010a. Single zircongrains record two Paleoproterozoic collisional events in the North China Craton.Precambrian Research 177, 266–276.

Zhao, G.C., Yin, C.Q., Guo, J.H., Sun, M., Li, S.Z., Li, X.P., Wu, C.M., Liu, C.H.,2010b. Metamorphism of the Lüliang amphibolite: implications for the tec-tonic evolution of the North China Craton. American Journal of Science 310,1480–1502.

Zhao, G., Li, S., Sun, M., Wilde, S.A., 2011. Assembly, accretion, and break-up ofthe Paleo-Mesoproterozoic Columbia supercontinent: record in the North ChinaCraton revisited. International Geology Review 53, 1331–1356.

Zhai, M.G., Bian, A.G., Zhao, T.P., 2000. The amalgamation of the supercontinent ofNorth China Craton at the end of Neo-Archaean and its breakup during latePaleoproterozoic and Meso-Proterozoic. Science in China (Series D) 43 (Supple-ment), 219–232.

Zhai, M.G., Santosh, M., 2011. The early Precambrian odyssey of the North ChinaCraton: a synoptic overview. Gondwana Research 20, 6–25.

Zheng, J.P., Griffin, W.L., O’Reilly, S.Y., Lu, F.X., Wang, C.Y., Zhang, M., Wang, F.Z., Li,H.M., 2004a. 3.6 Ga lower crust in central China: new evidence on the assemblyof the North China craton. Geology 32, 229–232.

Zheng, J.P., Griffin, W.L., O’Reilly, S.Y., Li, F.X., Yu, C.M., Zhang, M., Li, H.M., 2004b.U–Pb and Hf-isotope analysis of zircons in mafic xenoliths from Fuxian kimber-lites: evolution of the lower crust beneath the North China Craton. Contributionsto Mineralogy and Petrology 148, 79–103.

Zheng, Y.F., Zhao, Z.F., Wu, Y.B., Zhang, S.B., Liu, X.M., Wu, F.Y., 2006. Zircon U–Pb age,Hf and O isotope constraints on protolith origin of ultrahigh-pressure eclogiteand gneiss in the Dabie orogen. Chemical Geology 231, 135–158.

Zhou, X.W., Zhao, G.C., Wei, C.J., Geng, Y.S., Sun, M., 2008. EPMA U–Th–Pb monaziteand SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronology of high-pressure pelitic granulites inthe Jiaobei massif of the North China Craton. America Journal of Science 308,328–350.

Zhou, X., Zhao, G., Geng, Y., 2010. Helanshan high pressure pelitic granulite: petro-logic evidence for collision event in the western block of the North China Craton.

Acta Petrologica Sinica 26, 2113–2121.

Zhou, Y.Y., Zhao, T.P., Wang, S.Y., Hu, G.H., 2011. Geochronology and geochemistryof 2.5 to 2.4 Ga granitic plutons from the southern margin of the North ChinaCraton: implications for a tectonic transition from arc to post-collisional setting.Gondwana Research 20, 171–183.