Provenance of late Paleozoic and Mesozoic clastic

sediments of Taimyr and their significance for understanding Arctic tectonics

Xiaojing Zhang

Stockholm University

1

Abstract

The Taimyr Peninsula is a key element in the circum-Arctic region and represents

the northern margin of the Siberian Craton. The Taimyr Peninsula preserves late

Paleozoic through Mesozoic clasitic sedimentary successions in its Mesozoic fold belt,

providing an ideal location to investigate the Mesozoic tectonic evolution associated

with the opening of Amerasia Basin within a circum-Arctic framework. This thesis aims

to establish the tectonic setting in which the late Paleozoic through Mesozoic

sediments of Taimyr were deposited, in order to correlate Taimyr with other Arctic

terranes utilizing provenance investigations. Multiple methods are adopted, including

petrography, heavy mineral analysis and detrital zircon U-Pb geochronology.

The preliminary results of this work indicate that the late Paleozoic sediments of

southern Taimyr were deposited in a foreland basin of the Uralian orogen during

Uralian orogeny. The final collision between Baltica and Siberia in the last stage of

Uralian orogenesis occurred between Early and Late Permian. Early Cretaceous

sediments in northern Taimyr were mainly derived from Siberian Trap-related

magmatism in Taimyr. Cretaceous sediment deposition is unrelated to Jurassic to

Cretaceous rifting associated with the Verkhoyansk fold belt and instead relates to a

rifting or post- rifting passive margin setting.

2

Index

Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3

Geological setting ................................................................................................................ 6

Methods ............................................................................................................................... 7

1 Petrographic method ................................................................................................. 7

2 Heavy Mineral Analysis ............................................................................................. 9

Conventional HMA .............................................................................................. 10

Varietal study ....................................................................................................... 11

3 Detrital Zircon U-Pb Geochronology ....................................................................... 12

Rationale ..................................................................................................................... 13

Results and Conclusions ................................................................................................... 14

Future Work ....................................................................................................................... 15

Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................. 16

References: ........................................................................................................................ 16

3

Fig.1 Location map of the Arctic region. Bathymetry and topography are from the IBCAO

Arctic Bathymetry database (Jakobsson et al., 2012). The Taimyr Peninsula is marked in

red. Arctic Alaska-Chukotka microcontinent (AACM) is indicated by grey (after Rowley and

lawver, 1988).

Introduction

The tectonic development of the circum-Arctic region is important for

understanding both global tectonics and the framework of petroleum and mineral

resources of the Arctic. The Taimyr Peninsula lies at the edge of the Eurasian

epicontinental shelf, which represents a major part of the Arctic, facing the Kara Sea

and Laptev Sea. It contains major fold-thrust belts and igneous, metamorphic and

sedimentary rocks of Proterozoic to Cretaceous ages (Fig. 1 and 2) and consequently

has a crucial role for understanding the tectonic evolution of Northern Eurasia within a

circum-Arctic framework (Inger et al., 1999; Walderhaug et al., 2005).

4

The northward continuation of the late Paleozoic Uralian orogen in the Arctic

region is debated and is relevant to Taimyr. The Uralian orogen developed through

collision between the eastern margin of Baltica with the Siberia and Kazakhstan

plates during the late Paleozoic. It extends from the Aral Sea to the south and is

nearly 2500 km long, but the inferred continuation northward into the Arctic region is

controversial. Some authors believe Uralian orogeny terminates at the Polar Urals

(Puchkov, 1997; Gee et al., 2006) while many others suggest its northward

continuation reaches Taimyr (Drachev et al., 2010; Scott et al., 2010; Malyshev et al.,

2012), or that it projects from Pai Khoi to Novaya Zemlya, then to Taimyr, Severnaya

Zemlya and at last back to the Asian mainland (Sengör et al., 1993; Otto and Bailey,

1995). Northern Taimyr, together with Severnaya Zemlya, is traditionally treated as an

independent microcontinent (Uflyand et al., 1991; Gramberg and Ushakov, 2000;

Metelkin et al., 2005), but a growing body of evidence suggests that the Kara Block

was a part of Baltica since at least Neoproterozoic time (see Gee and Pease, 2004

and references therein; Lorenz et al., 2007; Lorenz et al., 2008; Pease and Scott,

2009; Lorenz et al., 2012). The collision of northern Taimyr with central-southern

Taimyr is correlated with Uralian orogeny (Vernikovsky, 1996; Inger et al., 1999;

Walderhaug et al., 2005; Pease and Scott, 2009; Pease, 2011), however, the absence

of characteristics typical of Uralian orogenesis in the southern Urals, such as

westward thrusted oceanic crustal fragments, requires better constraints to reveal the

nature, timing and kinematics of the collision in Taimyr.

The Arctic Basin comprises two sub-basins, the Amerasia Basin and the

Eurasian Basin, which are separated by the Lomonosov Ridge (Fig. 1). The Eurasia

Basin has been well constrained as a continuation of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and

opened by sea-floor spreading in the Early Cenozoic (e.g., Herron et al., 1974;

Rowley and Lottes, 1988; Glebovsky et al., 2006). However, the origin of the

Amerasia Basin is a controversial tectonic issue and many models have been

proposed addressing its origins. The Amerasia Basin consists of the Canada Basin,

the Alpha and Mendeleev Ridges, and the Makarov Basin. The popular simple

rotation model suggests that the Canada Basin opened as the Arctic Alaska-Chukotka

microcontinent (AACM) (Fig.1) rotated counterclockwise away from the Arctic Canada

margin during early Cretaceous (e.g., Grantz et al., 1979; Rowley and Lottes, 1988;

Grantz et al., 1998; Lawver et al., 2002). On the basis of detrital zircon data, Miller et

al. (2006; 2010) argue that the Chukotka part of the AACM had affinity with Siberia

rather than the Canadian margin and the Amerasia Basin opened in a more complex

but unclear way. Lane (1997) challenged the counterclockwise rotation model and

presented a three-stage non-rotation spreading formation for the Amerasia Basin.

The Mesozoic development of Taimyr is complicated both spatially and

5

temporally. At present it is debated whether one or two fold belts exist in eastern

Taimyr (Pease, 2011). In SE Taimyr, the mid (?)-Cretaceous and younger rocks are

undeformed, and Triassic and Jurassic or earliest Cretaceous strata are folded and

faulted; in NE Taimyr, all Jura- Cretaceous rocks are undeformed. Two kinds of

deformation mechanism have been proposed to explain this complexity. First, a single,

but diachronous compressional event may have developed across Taimyr to

Verkhoyansk. In the Verkhoyansk region, the Verkhoyansk fold belt is a late

Mesozoic structure resulting from collision between the Siberian craton and the

Kolyma–Omolon superterrane (Prokopiev et al., 2001; Oxman, 2003; Konstantinovsky,

2007). Alternatively, two distinct Mesozoic compressional events may have occurred,

an older early Jurassic event in central Taimyr, and a younger late Jurassic/early

Cretaceous event across eastern Taimyr and Verkhoyansk. Both explanations are

related to the opening of Amerasia Basin, and thus a better understanding of the

timing and causes to Mesozoic deformation in Taimyr is essential to assess different

models for the development of the Amerasia Basin.

The Taimyr Peninsula lies on the passive margin of the Siberian craton. It usually

divides into three southern, central and northern NE-SW trending domains

(Vernikovsky, 1996) (Fig. 1 and 2). Southern Taimyr, located between the Paleozoic

Uralian orogen and the Mesozoic Verkhoyansk fold belt, represents the passive

margin of the Siberian craton. The late Carboniferous to Early Triassic siliciclastic

succession deposited on the passive margin is coeval with Uralian orogenisis and

likely sourced from erosion of the developing Uralian collision belt to the north and

west. Uplift of the Siberian craton to the south due to Permo-Triassic plume-related

magmatism may also be a possible source. The tectonic setting of, and sediment

source(s) for, the late Carboniferous to early Triassic and Jurassic to Cretaceous

sedimentary units are important for understanding the tectonic evolution of the

Eurasian shelf from late Paleozoic through Mesozoic and for constraining Arctic

tectonic reconstructions.

Although some geochemical and geochronological work has been conducted on

igneous rocks of Taimyr (Pease and Vernikovsky, 2000; Pease et al., 2001;

Vernikovsky and Vernikovskaya, 2001b; Vernikovsky et al., 2003; Walderhaug et al.,

2005; Pease and Persson, 2006; Vernikovsky et al., 2011), few studies investigate the

sedimentary rocks. This thesis aims to establish the paleogeographical affinities of the

Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary successions in southern Taimyr using

provenance studies, which can provide precise information on the timing and tectonic

setting of events preserved within the sediment and derived from it’s source area(s).

Furthermore, this provenance information can be used to compare with

equivalent-aged Mesozoic stratigraphy from Eurasia and North America for a more

6

Fig. 2 Simplified geological map of the Taimyr Peninsula (after Bezzubtsev et al., 1983;

Vernikovsky and Vernikovskaya, 2001a)

comprehensive understanding of circum-Arctic tectonic evolution.

Geological setting

Southern Taimyr contains weakly to unmetamorphosed Ordovician to

mid-Carboniferous carbonate-dominated passive margin shelf succession of Siberia

craton (Bezzubtsev et al., 1986; Inger et al., 1999; Torsvik and Andersen, 2002). The

passive margin succession is overlain by late Carboniferous to early Triassic

shallow-marine and continental siliciclastic rocks interlayered with Permian - Triassic

extrusive and intrusive rocks of the Taimyr igneous suite (Inger et al., 1999;

Walderhaug et al., 2005). This siliciclastic package records an influx of continental

detritus, possibly caused by erosion of the developing Uralian collision belt to the

north and west. Rare thrust faults observed within the Paleozoic carbonate

succession are considered to be Late Paleozoic structures of Uralian age (Inger et al.,

1999). During late Triassic to earliest Jurassic time, all of the Triassic and older rocks

in southern Taimyr were folded and faulted southward during dextral transpression

(Inger et al., 1999; Torsvik and Andersen, 2002; Walderhaug et al., 2005).

Central Taimyr is structurally and lithologically complex. It contains a varied

assemblage of Precambrian crystalline units. Greenschist facies Neoproterozoic

volcano-sedimentary successions predominate, including fragmented ophiolites,

island-arc volcanic rocks and continental crust (Zonenshain et al., 1990; Uflyand et al.,

7

1991; Vernikovsky et al., 2004). Associated with them are Mesoproterozoic to early

Neoproterozoic amphibolite-facies metasedimentary units intruded by c. 900 Ma

granites (Pease et al., 2001). Unconformably overlying the basement is a weakly to

unmetamorphosed latest Neoproterozoic (Vendian) to early Paleozoic continental

margin succession, which is interpreted to be deposited on the continental slope of

Siberia (Inger et al., 1999), and indicates that central - southern Taimyr has been a

coherent part of Siberia since at least latest Neoproterozoic time.

Northern Taimyr is dominated by interbedded Neoproterozoic and early Paleozoic

sandstones, siltstones and mudstones interpreted as continental slope turbidites

(Bezzubtsev et al., 1986). Regional greenschist to amphibolites facies metamorphism

resulted from late Paleozoic deformation are developed. They are extensively

intruded by Carboniferous to Permian age (300 - 265 Ma) syenites thought to

represent syn- to post-tectonic magmatism (Vernikovsky et al., 1995,

Pease,unpublished data).

Methods

The sedimentary successions in basins are direct records of mountain uplift and

erosion. Provenance investigations of sediment aims to identify the source area(s)

and assemblages of parent-rock (Weltje and von Eynatten, 2004). In this thesis,

petrography, heavy mineral analysis, and detrital zircon U-Pb dating are employed for

provenance study of Paleozoic to Mesozoic sediments in Taimyr.

1 Petrographic method

The petrographic method is used to determining tectonic settings and

provenance by identifying the detrital modes of sandstone, obtained from point

counting of thin sections (Dickinson and Suczek, 1979; Dickinson, 1985). The most

widely used detrital framework mode is that of Dickinson and Suczek (1979), who

made quantitative statistical assessments of the composition of sandstone from ’type’

areas, and then proposed a suite of discrimination plots (Fig. 3). Sandstone detrital

framework minerals larger than 0.0625 mm are counted and include: 1. stable

quartzose grains (Qt), including monocrystalline quartz (Qm), and polycrystalline

quartzose lithic fragments (Qp); 2. monocrystalline feldspar grains (F), including

plagioclase (P), and K-feldspar (K); and 3. unstable polycrystalline lithic fragments (L),

including volcanic and metavolcanic lithic fragments (Lv), and sedimentary and

metasedimentary lithic fragments (Ls).

There are four complementary triangular plots in common use, and each of them

is based on different detrital grain suites (Fig. 3) (Dickinson and Suczek, 1979). In

QFL and QmFLt plots, all the grain types are used. Both polycrystalline quartz and

8

Fig. 3 Petrographic discrimination diagrams showing tectonic settings related to source

areas (after Dickinson, 1985).

monocrystalline quartz are calculated together for the QtFL plot, reflecting the stability

of grains, and thus the influence of weathering, provenance relief, and transport

mechanism, along with source rock composition. All the lithic fragments and

polycrystalline quartz are combined in the QmFLt plot, emphasizing the grain size of

the parent-rock. In QpLvLs and QmPK plots, only part of detrital grain types is used.

The QpLvLs plot indicates the polycrystalline grain features of sandstone, while the

QmPK reveals the monocrystalline grain features (Dickinson and Suczek, 1979).

Three main provenance types are identified in these plots -- continental block,

magmatic arc, and recycled orogen (Dickinson and Suczek, 1979; Dickinson, 1985).

This method is easy,quick, and has been widely used. It has subsequently been

developed further by many other workers (Ingersoll et al., 1984; Ingersoll et al., 1993;

Garzanti et al., 2002; Weltje, 2002; Garzanti et al., 2008). Generally, the QtFL and

QmFLt plots are most commonly used.

9

Fig. 4 Schematic illustration of processes that modify the composition of sediment and its

heavy mineral suite during the sedimentary cycle (after Morton and Hallsworth, 1994).

Note the idealized reflection of detrital zircon age spectra and the heavy mineral

assemblage used to indicate source region.

2 Heavy Mineral Analysis

Minerals with a density greater than 2.86 g/cm3 in siliciclastic sediments are

called ‘heavy’ minerals. They usually occur as accessory minerals in rocks. Heavy

mineral analysis is one of the most powerful and widely used methods in determining

sediment provenance because of their sensitivity to source rock lithology (Morton,

1992; Morton and Hallsworth, 1994). It is especially useful in investigations of

sedimentation related to tectonic uplift, since the evolution and unroofing of orogens

are reflected in their foreland deposits (Mange and Maurer, 1992). However, source

rock is not the only control on the heavy mineral assemblage - several other

parameters have the ability to change the relative abundance of heavy minerals,

including weathering at the source area, mechanical destruction during transport from

the source area, hydraulic factors to do with mineral shape and size, as well as

diagenetic process (intrastrata dissolution) (Fig. 4). The most important factors are

hydraulics and burial diagenesis (Mange and Maurer, 1992; Morton and Hallsworth,

1999). Hydraulic factors influence the variety of heavy minerals deposited under

certain hydraulic conditions and burial diagenesis can dissolve unstable minerals

resulting in a decrease of heavy mineral diversity. The relative stability of heavy

minerals in deeply buried sandstone is shown in Table 1.

10

Table 1 Heavy mineral order of stability in deeply buried

sandstone modified after Morton and Hallsworth (1994)

Most stable

Rutile, Anatase, Brookite, Zircon, Apatite

Tourmaline, Monazite, Spinel

Garnet, Chloritoid

Allanite

Staurolite

Sodic amphibole

Kyanite

Titanite

Epidote

Calcic amphibole, Andalusite, Sillimanite

Sodic pyroxene

Orthopyroxene, Clinopyroxene

Olivine

Least stable

There are two means to obtain data that is likely to reflect the source area in

provenance studies: conventional heavy mineral suite analysis (HMA) and varietal

studies (Morton and Hallsworth, 1999). These are discussed below. Conventional

HMA is the method adopted in this thesis.

Conventional HMA

Many heavy minerals have restricted parageneses that indicate the involvement

of particular source rocks (Morton and Hallsworth, 1994), and thus the number and

the species of possible minerals present in sediments can reflect the parent rocks.

Determining the relative abundance of heavy minerals in sedimentary rocks is one of

the conventional HMA methods, which is achieved by counting grains on grain mounts.

To obtain precise data, at least 200 non-opaque minerals should be counted (Mange

and Maurer, 1992). However, due to the varied stability of different heavy minerals to

diagenetic conditions, variations in relative abundance of heavy minerals may be

caused by differering diagenetic processes. Therefore, only minerals stable during

diagenetic process can be used for conventional HMA to constrain provenance. Such

minerals include apatite, the TiO2 polymorphs (rutile, anatase and brookite),

tourmaline, monazite, spinel minerals and chloritoid. When garnet does not show

corrosion of its surface texture, it is also a useful indicator mineral for provenance.

because garnet is sensitive to acid leaching (Mange and Maurer, 1992) and its

11

Table 2 Provenance sensitive mineral pairs (Morton and Hallsworth,1994). The minerals

are hydraulically similar, stable heavy minerals.

Index Mineral pair Definition

ATi apatite-tourmline 100×apatite/(apatite+tourmaline)

GZi garnet-zircon 100×garnet/(garnet+zircon)

RZi rutile-zircon 100×rutile/(rutile+zircon)

CZi chrome spinel-zircon 100×chrome spinel/(chrome spinel+zircon)

MZi monazite-zircon 100×monazite/(monazite+zircon)

variation in abundance can only be used when garnet dissolution is not significant.

The presence of minerals such as staurolite, kyanite, titanite, epidote, amphibole and

pyroxene, can suggest the nature of the source rocks, but their variations in

abundance cannot be used for constraining provenance due to the instability of these

minerals (Morton and Hallsworth, 1994).

Another conventional HMA method is to study the ratios of specific mineral pairs.

These minerals should be relatively stable, with similar hydraulic and diagenetic

behavior (Morton and Hallsworth, 1994). The mineral ratios typically used are outlined

in Table 2. Since such mineral pairs are less likely to reflect hydraulic or diagenetic

factors, they generally reflect the characteristics of their source rock(s). For example,

a high monazite to zircon (MZi) ratio (or index) indicates the involvement of granite or

pegmatite, because monazite is a common accessory mineral in granitic rocks and

pegmatites; a high chrome spinel to zircon (CZi) index suggests a significant

contribution from ultramafic rocks because chrome spinel is common in ultramafic

rocks (Mange and Maurer, 1992; Morton and Hallsworth, 1994; Morton and Berge,

1995; Morton et al., 2011).

Varietal study

Another approach is to study the variations of an individual mineral or mineral

group using different techniques. Crystal optical properties, such as color, habit and

shape, are applied to subdivide mineral populations (Koen, 1955; Poldervaart, 1955;

Hansley, 1986). This work is easily conducted using a polarizing microscope, or using

advanced techniques such as X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, or

cathodoluminescence imaging (e.g., Mange and Maurer, 1992). Single grain

geochemistry has been widely utilized for varietal studies since the advent of the

electron microprobe (e.g. Leterrier et al., 1982; Morton, 1985; Zack et al., 2004;

Morton et al., 2005). A large range of heavy minerals are used for geochemical

analysis, including garnet, chrome spinel, tourmaline, amphibole, pyroxene, zircon,

apatite, ilmenite and rutile (see Mange and Morton, 2007, and references therein).

Due to the diversity of heavy mineral species, the varietal results should be always

12

integrated with conventional HMA data to get the most reliable provenance

information.

3 Detrital Zircon U-Pb Geochronology

Zircon is a common accessory mineral in most rock types. It is mechanically

and chemically stable and therefore can endure successive cycles of transport, burial

and erosion (Carter and Bristow, 2000). The development and application of

secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) and laser ablation - inductively coupled

plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) techniques can generate ages efficiently and

with high accuracy, which make zircon U-Pb geochronology by far the most powerful

and popular approach for sedimentary provenance study today (Gehrels et al., 1995;

Fedo et al., 2003, and references therein; Gehrels, 2011).

In provenance investigations, detrital zircon ages are compared with the ages of

potential source terranes to determine the ultimate source(s) of the sediment (Gehrels,

2011; Thomas, 2011). The aim of zircon analysis is to produce an age distribution that

reflects the population in the sediment and hence is an accurate signature of its

source rock(s). The strategy to achieve this is to select zircons randomly, irrespective

of grain size, color, shape and so on (Gehrels, 2011). However, due to analytical

requirements of the technique, very small grains are excluded. Morton et al. (1996)

suggest using the 63 - 125 μm (very fine sand) fraction in detrital zircon studies. At

least 117 analyses for each sample are needed to achieve statistical representation

(Vermeesch, 2004).

U-Pb analyses are usually plotted on a conventional or inverse (Tera and

Wasserburg, 1972) concordia diagram. This is done using a spreadsheet with macros

such as Isoplot (Lugwig, 2010). For analyses <1.0 Ga, 206Pb/238U ages are used, and

206Pb/207Pb ages are used for analyses >1.0 Ga. This is due to the better precision

associated with 206Pb/238U ages associated with “young” zircons, while for “older”

zircons the 206Pb/207Pb ages have more reliable uncertainties (Gehrels, 2011). If the 206Pb/238U, 207Pb/235U and 206Pb/207Pb ages are similar (within error), an analysis is

considered to be concordant (Wetherill, 1956). However, there are always some

discordant analyses in a dataset (Nemchin and Cawood, 2005; Gehrels, 2011).

Usually, analyses more than 10% discordance or with large errors (>10%) are

excluded from the final data synthesis. The acceptable results are plotted in a

probability plot with histograms in order to represent both the age and associated

uncertainty (DeGraaff-Surpless et al., 2003; Lugwig, 2010; Gehrels, 2011). The

cumulative probability plots and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test (Massey Jr, 1951)

are adopted to make comparisons between samples (Fig. 6). The K-S test is applied

to examine the statistical possibility of significant differences between zircon age

13

Fig. 5 Schematic illustration showing the application of detrital zircon ages, heavy mineral

analysis and petrography for constraining tectonic setting of sediment sources (after

Cawood et al., 2012). Red arrows indicate the deposition age of sediment.

populations of different samples. The confidence level is 95% and when the P value is

larger than 0.05 the zircon populations are considered to be similar.

Rationale

Sediment composition in basins is controlled by many parameters, such as the

parent-rock type, tectonic setting, transport path-way, deposition and digenesis, etc.,

of which the parent-rock type and tectonic setting exert the primary effects (Dickinson

and Suczek, 1979; Dickinson et al., 1983; Dickinson, 1985; Zuffa, 1987; McLennan et

al., 1993). A sedimentary basin may reflect detritus from several sources. For

example, multiple magmatic events can occur in a single locality, or rocks of different

lithology and age may come from different localities mixing during transport or during

recycling of older sediments with younger primary sources (Thomas, 2011). The

combination of heavy mineral analysis and detrital zircon age dating has made

high-resolution characterization and differentiation of sediment provenance viable

(Hallsworth et al., 2000). While heavy mineral data is used to identify the source rock

types, the detrital zircon age data is used to constrain the age of source terrains (Fig.

4). In this way, both the nature and the age of the possible source(s) can be

determined.

It is well recognized that tectonic evolution is reflected in sedimentary rocks

(McLennan et al., 1993). Cawood et al. (2012) classified the tectonic setting of a

sedimentary package as extensional, convergent, and collisional, which correspond

to the continental block, magmatic arc, and recycled orogen of Dickinson et. al (1985),

respectively. They proposed that detrital zircon age spectra can also reflect the

14

Fig. 6 Cumulative probability plots of zircon age spectra for Taimyr late Paleozoic and

Mesozoic samples. The grey region represents Jurassic-Cretaceous detrital zircon spectra

from Miller et al. (2008) (b) P values resulting from the K-S test (Massey Jr, 1951). The

values in grey indicate a strong correlation.

tectonic setting of basins (Cawood et al., 2012) (Fig. 5). Detrital zircons from basins in

an extensional setting, including rift-basins and post-rift passive margins, usually lack

grains with syn-sedimentary ages and are dominated by older input from the continent.

Detrital zircon spectra of sediments in arc flanking basins along convergent margins

are characterized by young ages of syn-sedimentary igneous activity, and little older

continental input is involved in their deposition. Foreland basin sediments in

continental collisional settings contain zircon with ages close to the deposition age

along with significant older zircon from the continent (Cawood et al., 2007; Cawood et

al., 2012). The heavy mineral assemblage and morphology also preserve features

reflecting the tectonic setting of basins: sediment in extensional settings have a higher

proportion stable heavy minerals (zircon, tourmaline, rutile, and apatite) and a higher

proportion rounded grains; sediment from continental collisional settings have a

moderate proportion of stable heavy minerals and both rounded and euhedral grains

are common; sediment in magmatic arc settings have a lower proportion of stable

heavy minerals and are more euhedral (Nie et al., 2012).

Results and Conclusions

The results and conclusions of this investigation are presented in the following

submitted manuscript, and a brief summary is given here. The petrographic, heavy

mineral and detrital zircon U-Pb age results are summarized in Table 3 and Fig. 6.

15

Table 3 Summary of results from Taimyr Paleozoic and Mesozoic sediment provenance investigations

Sample

strata Location

Petrography Heavy mineral analysis Detrital zircon U-Pb geochronology

classify provenanc

e type assemblage

GZi

Ratio

Inferred detrital

zircon sources

tectonic setting of

basin

Creta-

ceous

northern

Taimyr subarkose

craton

interior

staurolite, zircon,

garnet,

tourmaline

43-4

9

Siberia Trap, Uralian,

Caledonian

rift-basins or

post-rift passive

margins

P2bk SE

Taimyr

feldspathic

litharenite

Recycled

orogen

Apatite,

tourmaline,

garnet, zircon

63

Uralian, peak and late

Timanian, Northern

Taimyr, Baltica

foreland basin

P1sk SE

Taimyr lithic arkose

Recycled

orogen

Zircon, apatite,

rutile 7 Uralian, late Timanian, foreland basin

P1br central-S

Taimyr sublitharenite

Recycled

orogen

Apatite, zircon,

tourmaline 3-5

pre-Timanian and

Timanian, Uralian foreland basin

C2-P1tr SE

Taimyr subarkose

Recycled

orogen

Zircon, apatite,

rutile 6 Uralian, late Timanian, foreland basin

Permo-Carboniferous samples have a mixed provenance of recycled and first cycle

sediment, sourced from metamorphic and igneous terranes. The occurrence of

syn-depositional ages and older ages indicates that the Permo-Carboniferous sediments

were deposited in a foreland setting. The decreasing maturity of sandstones and younging

detrital zircon age peaks with time is consistent with a diachronous Uralian orogen, younging

from south to north. The petrographic, heavy mineral and detrital zircon results all document

a dramatic difference between the late Permian and older formations, indicating a real

provenance change from late Carboniferous and early Permian time to late Permian time.

The late Carboniferous to early Permian Turozovskya Formation to the Early Permian

Sokolinskaya Formation show little evidence for derivation from northern Taimyr and are

more consistent with Uralian sources to the WSW, such as the Polar Urals or sources which

may currently lie beneath the Kara Sea. The Late Permian Baykurskaya Formation records

local derivation from northern Taimyr with a large component of sediment derived having a

Baltica provenance. The data suggest that:

1. Permo-Carboniferous successions were deposited in a foreland basin of the Uralian

orogen. The final collision between Baltica and Siberia in the last stage of Uralian orogenesis

occurred between Early and Late Permian.

2. Early Cretaceous sediments in northern Taimyr were mainly derived from Siberian

Trap-related magmatism in Taimyr. Cretaceous sediment deposition is unrelated to Jurassic

to Cretaceous rifting associated with the Verkhoyansk fold belt and instead reflects a rifting or

post- rifting passive margin setting.

Future Work

About 60 sedimentary samples were collected during fieldwork in Taimyr in 2010 and

2012. The 2010 fieldwork was in SE Taimyr, and the 2012 fieldwork was in central-southern

Taimyr. Provenance studies using petrography, heavy mineral analysis, and detrital zircon

16

U-Pb dating will be conducted for the remaining samples. These samples were collected from

the late Carboniferous to early Triassic strata and Jurassic to Cretaceous strata and the

results will be used to establish a comprehensive and systematic late Paleozoic to Mesozoic

sediment provenance database for revealing the tectonic development of the Taimyr

Peninsula within a circum-Arctic framework. The results from SE Taimyr will be compared

with those from central-southern Taimyr to confirm Uralian orogenesis occured in Taimyr.

Detrital apatite fission track ages (AFTA) from deposits of the sedimentary basins along

the continental margins can preserve the exhumation history of the corresponding source

terranes (Carrapa et al., 2006). Identification of different age modes can be used to define

source areas (Hurford and Carter, 1991). We will obtain AFTA ages across two traverses in

Taimyr to trace the provenance changes and reveal the influence of tectonic events in the

region. One traverse extends from Severnaya Zemlya, through northern Taimyr to southern

Taimyr along its eastern margin. A second traverse extends from the central part of northern

Taimyr to the central part of southern Taimyr. .

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank my main supervisor Victoria Pease for her excellent guidance and

great help. Her unwavering enthusiasm for geology keeps me constantly engaged with my

research. I miss my co-supervisor at CASP, Robert Scott, who passed away in September

2012 unexpectedly. His help and kindness will never be forgotten. I would also thank Eve

Arnold for her support to my PhD studies.

I am extremely grateful to my husband Bo. I left you behind in China when we just got

married to pursue my dream, but you were always there for me. Thank you for your emotional

support.

I thank A. Morton for the guidance to the heavy mineral analysis. Thanks C.

Wohlgemuth-Ueberwasser at Stockholm University, P. Persson and K. Lindén at the Natural

History Museum for assistance with the laboratory work. I would also like to appreciate my

Russian colleagues Alex and Alina, without whom, the field study in 2012 at Taimyr would not

have been so successful. Acknowledgement is also given to all my colleagues and friends at

Stockholm University. They make my life happy and colorful. Thank my parents for being

supportive and missing me.

YMER-80 funding to X. Zhang in 2012 funded training for heavy mineral analysis at

CASP. VR funding to V. Pease is also acknowledged.

References:

Bezzubtsev, V., Malitch, N., Markov, F. and Pogrebitsky Yu, E., 1983. Geological map of mountainous

Taimyr 1: 500 000, Ministry of Geology of the USSR. Ministry of Geology of the Russian

Federation (RSFSR), Krasnoyarskgeologia, Krasnoyarsk [in Russian].

Bezzubtsev, V., Zalyaleyev, R. and Sakovich, A., 1986. Geological map of mountainous Taimyr 1: 500

000: explanatory notes. Krasnoyarskgeologia, Krasnoyarsk [in Russian].

Carrapa, B., Strecker, M. and Sobel, E., 2006. Cenozoic orogenic growth in the Central Andes:

Evidence from sedimentary rock provenance and apatite fission track thermochronology in the

Fiambalá Basin, southernmost Puna Plateau margin (NW Argentina). Earth and Planetary

Science Letters, 247(1): 82-100.

Carter, A. and Bristow, C., 2000. Detrital zircon geochronology: enhancing the quality of sedimentary

source information through improved methodology and combined U–Pb and fission‐track

techniques. Basin Research, 12(1): 47-57.

17

Cawood, P.A., Hawkesworth, C.J. and Dhuime, B., 2012. Detrital zircon record and tectonic setting.

Geology, 40(10): 875-878.

Cawood, P.A., Nemchin, A.A., Strachan, R., Prave, T. and Krabbendam, M., 2007. Sedimentary basin

and detrital zircon record along East Laurentia and Baltica during assembly and breakup of

Rodinia. Journal of the Geological Society, 164(2): 257-275.

DeGraaff-Surpless, K., Mahoney, J.B., Wooden, J.L. and McWilliams, M.O., 2003. Lithofacies control

in detrital zircon provenance studies: Insights from the Cretaceous Methow basin, southern

Canadian Cordillera. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 115(8): 899-915.

Dickinson, W.R., 1985. Interpreting provenance relations from detrital modes of sandstones.

Provenance of arenites, 148: 333-361.

Dickinson, W.R., Beard, L., Brakenridge, G.R., Erjavec, J.L., Ferguson, R.C., Inman, K.F., Knepp,

R.E.X.A., Lindberg, F. and Ryberg, P.T., 1983. Provenance of North American Phanerozoic

sandstones in relation to tectonic setting. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 94(2):

222.

Dickinson, W.R. and Suczek, C.A., 1979. Plate tectonics and sandstone compositions. American

Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 63(12): 2164–2182.

Drachev, S.S., Malyshev, N.A. and Nikishin, A.M., 2010. Tectonic history and petroleum geology of the

Russian Arctic Shelves: an overview. Geological Society, London, Petroleum Geology

Conference series, 7: 591-619.

Fedo, C.M., Sircombe, K.N. and Rainbird, R.H., 2003. Detrital Zircon Analysis of the Sedimentary

Record. Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry, 53(1): 277-303.

Garzanti, E., Andò, S. and Vezzoli, G., 2008. Settling equivalence of detrital minerals and grain-size

dependence of sediment composition. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 273(1-2):

138-151.

Garzanti, E., Canclini, S., Foggia, F.M. and Petrella, N., 2002. Unraveling magmatic and orogenic

provenance in modern sand: the back-arc side of the Apennine thrust belt, Italy. Journal of

Sedimentary Research, 72(1): 2-17.

Gee, D.G., Bogolepova, O.K. and Lorenz, H., 2006. The Timanide, Caledonide and Uralide orogens in

the Eurasian high Arctic, and relationships to the palaeo-continents Laurentia, Baltica and

Siberia. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 32(1): 507-520.

Gee, D.G. and Pease, V., 2004. The Neoproterozoic Timanide Orogen of Eastern Baltica. Geological

Society Pub House.

Gehrels, G., 2011. Detrital zircon U‐Pb geochronology: Current methods and new opportunities.

Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins: 45-62.

Gehrels, G.E., Dickinson, W.R., Ross, G.M., Stewart, J.H. and Howell, D.G., 1995. Detrital zircon

reference for Cambrian to Triassic miogeoclinal strata of western North America. Geology,

23(9): 831-834.

Glebovsky, V., Kaminsky, V., Minakov, A., Merkur’ev, S., Childers, V. and Brozena, J., 2006. Formation

of the Eurasia Basin in the Arctic Ocean as inferred from geohistorical analysis of the

anomalous magnetic field. Geotectonics, 40(4): 263-281.

Gramberg, I. and Ushakov, V., 2000. Severnaya Zemlya—geology andmineral resources (in Russian).

VNIIOkeangeologia, St. Petersburg.

Grantz, A., Clark, D.L., Phillips, R.L., Srivastava, S.P., Blome, C.D., Gray, L.B., Haga, H., Mamet, B.L.,

McIntyre, D.J., McNeil, D.H., Mickey, M.B., Mullen, M.W., Murchey, B.I., Ross, C.A., Stevens,

C.H., Silberling, N.J., Wall, J.H. and Willard, D.A., 1998. Phanerozoic stratigraphy of

Northwind Ridge, magnetic anomalies in the Canada basin, and the geometry and timing of

rifting in the Amerasia basin, Arctic Ocean. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 110(6):

801-820.

Grantz, A., Eittreim, S. and Dinter, D.A., 1979. Geology and tectonic development of the continental

margin north of Alaska. Tectonophysics, 59(1–4): 263-291.

Hallsworth, C.R., Morton, A.C., Claoué-Long, J. and Fanning, C.M., 2000. Carboniferous sand

provenance in the Pennine Basin, UK: constraints from heavy mineral and detrital zircon age

18

data. Sedimentary Geology, 137(3-4): 147-185.

Hansley, P.L., 1986. Relationship of detrital, nonopaque heavy minerals to diagenesis and provenance

of the Morrison Formation, southwestern San Juan basin. New Mexico, this volume.

Herron, E.M., Dewey, J.F. and Pitman, W.C., 1974. Plate Tectonics Model for the Evolution of the Arctic.

Geology, 2(8): 377-380.

Hurford, A.J. and Carter, A., 1991. The role of fission track dating in discrimination of provenance.

Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 57(1): 67-78.

Inger, S., Scott, R. and Golionko, B., 1999. Tectonic evolution of the Taimyr Peninsula, northern Russia:

implications for Arctic continental assembly. Journal of the Geological Society, 156(6): 1069.

Ingersoll, R.V., Fullard, T.F., Ford, R.L., Grimm, J.P., Pickle, J.D. and Sares, S.W., 1984. The effect of

grain size on detrital modes; a test of the Gazzi-Dickinson point-counting method. Journal of

Sedimentary Research, 54(1): 103-116.

Ingersoll, R.V., Kretchmer, A.G. and Valles, P.K., 1993. The effect of sampling scale on actualistic

sandstone petrofacies. Sedimentology, 40(5): 937-953.

Jakobsson, M., Mayer, L., Coakley, B., Dowdeswell, J.A., Forbes, S., Fridman, B., Hodnesdal, H.,

Noormets, R., Pedersen, R. and Rebesco, M., 2012. The international bathymetric chart of the

Arctic Ocean (IBCAO) version 3.0. Geophysical Research Letters, 39(12).

Koen, G., 1955. Heavy minerals as an aid to the correlation of sediments of the Karroo system in the

Northern part of the Union of South Africa. Trans, geol. Soc. S. Afr, 58.

Konstantinovsky, A., 2007. Structure and geodynamics of the Verkhoyansk Fold-Thrust Belt.

Geotectonics, 41(5): 337-354.

Lane, L.S., 1997. Canada Basin, Arctic Ocean: evidence against a rotational origin. Tectonics, 16(3):

363-387.

Lawver, L.A., Grantz, A. and Gahagan, L.M., 2002. Plate kinematic evolution of the present Arctic

region since the Ordovician. Geological Society of America Special Papers, 360: 333-358.

Leterrier, J., Maury, R.C., Thonon, P., Girard, D. and Marchal, M., 1982. Clinopyroxene composition as

a method of identification of the magmatic affinities of paleo-volcanic series. Earth and

Planetary Science Letters, 59(1): 139-154.

Lorenz, H., Gee, D.G., Larionov, A.N. and Majka, J., 2012. The Grenville–Sveconorwegian orogen in

the high Arctic. Geological Magazine, 149(5): 875.

Lorenz, H., Gee, D.G. and Whitehouse, M.J., 2007. New geochronological data on Palaeozoic igneous

activity and deformation in the Severnaya Zemlya Archipelago, Russia, and implications for

the development of the Eurasian Arctic margin. Geological Magazine, 144(1): 105.

Lorenz, H., Männik, P., Gee, D. and Proskurnin, V., 2008. Geology of the Severnaya Zemlya

Archipelago and the North Kara Terrane in the Russian high Arctic. International Journal of

Earth Sciences, 97(3): 519-547.

Lugwig, K., 2010. Isoplot/Ex version 4.1, a geochronological toolkit for Microsoft Excel. Berkeley

Geochronology Center Special Publication No. 4

Malyshev, N., Nikishin, V., Nikishin, A., Obmetko, V., Martirosyan, V., Kleshchina, L. and Reydik, Y.V.,

2012. A new model of the geological structure and evolution of the North Kara Sedimentary

Basin, Doklady Earth Sciences. Springer, pp. 791-795.

Mange, M.A. and Maurer, H.F.W., 1992. Heavy minerals in colour, 147. Chapman & Hall, 145 pp.

Mange, M.A. and Morton, A.C., 2007. Geochemistry of heavy minerals. Developments in

Sedimentology, 58: 345-391.

Massey Jr, F.J., 1951. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. Journal of the American

statistical Association, 46(253): 68-78.

McLennan, S., Hemming, S., McDaniel, D. and Hanson, G., 1993. Geochemical approaches to

sedimentation, provenance, and tectonics. SPECIAL PAPERS-GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF

AMERICA: 21-21.

Metelkin, D.V., Vernikovsky, V.A., Kazansky, A.Y., Bogolepova, O.K. and Gubanov, A.P., 2005.

Paleozoic history of the Kara microcontinent and its relation to Siberia and Baltica:

Paleomagnetism, paleogeography and tectonics. Tectonophysics, 398(3-4): 225-243.

19

Miller, E.L., Soloviev, A., Kuzmichev, A., Gehrels, G., Toro, J. and Tuchkova, M., 2008. Jurassic and

Cretaceous foreland basin deposits of the Russian Arctic: Separated by birth of the Makarov

Basin? Norwegian Journal of Geology, 88: 201-226.

Miller, E.L., Toro, J., Gehrels, G., Amato, J.M., Prokopiev, A., Tuchkova, M.I., Akinin, V.V., Dumitru, T.A.,

Moore, T.E. and Cecile, M.P., 2006. New insights into Arctic paleogeography and tectonics

from U-Pb detrital zircon geochronology. Tectonics, 25(3): TC3013.

Miller, J.D., 2010. Geology, Mineralogy, and Genesis of Precambrian Iron Formations: Field Guide to

the Geology of Precambrian Iron Formations in the Western Lake Superior Region,Minnesota

and Michigan.

Morton, A., 1992. Provenance of Brent Group sandstones: heavy mineral constraints. Geological

Society, London, Special Publications, 61(1): 227-244.

Morton, A., Whitham, A. and Fanning, C., 2005. Provenance of Late Cretaceous to Paleocene

submarine fan sandstones in the Norwegian Sea: Integration of heavy mineral, mineral

chemical and zircon age data. Sedimentary Geology, 182(1): 3-28.

Morton, A.C., 1985. A new approach to provenance studies: electron microprobe analysis of detrital

garnets from Middle Jurassic sandstones of the northern North Sea. Sedimentology, 32(4):

553-566.

Morton, A.C. and Berge, C., 1995. Heavy mineral suites in the Statfjord and Nansen Formations of the

Brent Field, North Sea; a new tool for reservoir subdivision and correlation. Petroleum

Geoscience, 1(4): 355-364.

Morton, A.C., Claoué-Long, J.C. and Berge, C., 1996. SHRIMP constraints on sediment provenance

and transport history in the Mesozoic Statfjord Formation, North Sea. Journal of the Geological

Society, 153(6): 915-929.

Morton, A.C. and Hallsworth, C., 1994. Identifying provenance-specific features of detrital heavy

mineral assemblages in sandstones. Sedimentary Geology, 90(3-4): 241-256.

Morton, A.C. and Hallsworth, C.R., 1999. Processes controlling the composition of heavy mineral

assemblages in sandstones. Sedimentary Geology, 124(1-4): 3-29.

Morton, A.C., Meinhold, G., Howard, J.P., Phillips, R.J., Strogen, D., Abutarruma, Y., Elgadry, M.,

Thusu, B. and Whitham, A.G., 2011. A heavy mineral study of sandstones from the eastern

Murzuq Basin, Libya: Constraints on provenance and stratigraphic correlation. Journal of

African Earth Sciences.

Nemchin, A.A. and Cawood, P.A., 2005. Discordance of the U–Pb system in detrital zircons:

implication for provenance studies of sedimentary rocks. Sedimentary Geology, 182(1):

143-162.

Nie, J., Horton, B.K., Saylor, J.E., Mora, A., Mange, M., Garzione, C.N., Basu, A., Moreno, C.J.,

Caballero, V. and Parra, M., 2012. Integrated provenance analysis of a convergent retroarc

foreland system: U–Pb ages, heavy minerals, Nd isotopes, and sandstone compositions of the

Middle Magdalena Valley basin, northern Andes, Colombia. Earth-Science Reviews, 110(1–4):

111-126.

Otto, S. and Bailey, R., 1995. Tectonic evolution of the northern Ural Orogen. Journal of the Geological

Society, 152(6): 903-906.

Oxman, V.S., 2003. Tectonic evolution of the Mesozoic Verkhoyansk–Kolyma belt (NE Asia).

Tectonophysics, 365(1-4): 45-76.

Pease, V., 2011. Eurasian orogens and Arctic tectonics: an overview. Geological Society, London,

Memoirs, 35(1): 311-324.

Pease, V., Gee, D.G., Vernikovsky, V., Vernikovskaya, A. and Kireev, S., 2001. Geochronological

evidence for late-Grenvillian magmatic and metamorphic events in central Taimyr, northern

Siberia. Terra Nova, 13(4): 270-280.

Pease, V. and Persson, S., 2006. Neoproterozoic island arc magmatism of northern Taimyr. In: R. Scott

and D. Thurston (Editors), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Arctic

Margins. US Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service OCS Study, pp. 31-49.

Pease, V. and Scott, R.A., 2009. Crustal affinities in the Arctic Uralides, northern Russia: significance

20

of detrital zircon ages from Neoproterozoic and Palaeozoic sediments in Novaya Zemlya and

Taimyr. Journal of the Geological Society, 166(3): 517-527.

Pease, V. and Vernikovsky, V., 2000. The Tectono-Magmatic Evolution of the Taimyr Peninsula: Further

Constraints from New Ion-Microprobe Data. POLARFORSCHUNG, 68: 171-178.

Poldervaart, A., 1955. Zircons in rocks; Part 1, Sedimentary rocks; Part 2, Igneous rocks. American

Journal of Science, 253(8): 433-461.

Prokopiev, A., Fridovsky, V.Y. and Deikunenko, A.V., 2001. Some Aspects of the Tectonics of the

Verkhoyansk Fold-and-Thrust Belt (Northeast Asia) and the Structural Setting of the Dyandi

Gold Ore Cluster. POLARFORSCHUNG, 69: 169-176.

Puchkov, V., 1997. Tectonics of the Urals: modern concepts. Geotectonics, 31(4): 294-312.

Rowley, D.B. and Lottes, A.L., 1988. Plate-kinematic reconstructions of the North Atlantic and Arctic:

late Jurassic to present. Tectonophysics, 155(1-4): 73-120.

Scott, R.A., Howard, J.P., Guo, L., Schekoldin, R. and Pease, V., 2010. Offset and curvature of the

Novaya Zemlya fold-and-thrust belt, Arctic Russia. Geological Society, London, Petroleum

Geology Conference series, 7: 645-657.

Sengör, A., Natal'in, B. and Burtman, V., 1993. Evolution of the Altaid tectonic collage and Paleozoic

crustal growth in Eurasia. Nature, 364: 299-307.

Tera, F. and Wasserburg, G.J., 1972. U-Th-Pb systematic in three Apollo 14 basalts and the problem of

initial Pb in lunar rocks. Earth and Planetary Science Letters(14): 281-304.

Thomas, W.A., 2011. Detrital-zircon geochronology and sedimentary provenance. Lithosphere, 3(4):

304-308.

Torsvik, T.H. and Andersen, T.B., 2002. The Taimyr fold belt, Arctic Siberia: timing of prefold

remagnetisation and regional tectonics. Tectonophysics, 352(3-4): 335-348.

Uflyand, A., Natapov, L., Lopatin, V. and Chernov, D., 1991. On the Taimyr tectonic nature.

Geotectonics, 6: 76-79.

Vermeesch, P., 2004. How many grains are needed for a provenance study? Earth and Planetary

Science Letters, 224(3): 441-451.

Vernikovsky, V., 1996. The geodynamic evolution of the Taimyr folded area. Geology of the Pacific

Ocean, 12(4): 691-704.

Vernikovsky, V., Metelkin, D., Vernikovskaya, A., Sal’nikova, E., Kovach, V. and Kotov, A., 2011. The

oldest island arc complex of Taimyr: Concerning the issue of the Central-Taimyr accretionary

belt formation and paleogeodynamic reconstructions in the arctic. Doklady Earth Sciences,

436(2): 186-192.

Vernikovsky, V., Neimark, L., Ponomarchuk, V., Vernikovskaya, A., Kireev, A. and Kuz'Min, D., 1995.

Geochemistry and age of collision granitoides and metamorphites of the Kara microcontinent

(Northern Taimyr). RUSSIAN GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS C/C OF GEOLOGIIA I

GEOFIZIKA, 36: 46-60.

Vernikovsky, V., Vernikovskaya, A., Pease, V. and Gee, D., 2004. Neoproterozoic orogeny along the

margins of Siberia. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 30(1): 233-248.

Vernikovsky, V.A., Pease, V.L., Vernikovskaya, A.E., Romanov, A.P., Gee, D.G. and Travin, A.V., 2003.

First report of early Triassic A-type granite and syenite intrusions from Taimyr: product of the

northern Eurasian superplume? Lithos, 66(1-2): 23-36.

Vernikovsky, V.A. and Vernikovskaya, A.E., 2001a. Central Taimyr accretionary belt (Arctic Asia):

Meso-Neoproterozoic tectonic evolution and Rodinia breakup. Precambrian Research,

110(1-4): 127-141.

Vernikovsky, V.A. and Vernikovskaya, A.E., 2001b. Central Taimyr accretionary belt (Arctic Asia):

Meso–Neoproterozoic tectonic evolution and Rodinia breakup. Precambrian Research,

110(1-4): 127-141.

Walderhaug, H., Eide, E., Scott, R., Inger, S. and Golionko, E., 2005. Palaeomagnetism and 40Ar/39Ar

geochronology from the South Taimyr igneous complex, Arctic Russia: a Middle–Late Triassic

magmatic pulse after Siberian flood‐basalt volcanism. Geophysical Journal International,

163(2): 501-517.

21

Weltje, G.J., 2002. Quantitative analysis of detrital modes: statistically rigorous confidence regions in

ternary diagrams and their use in sedimentary petrology. Earth-Science Reviews, 57(3-4):

211-253.

Weltje, G.J. and von Eynatten, H., 2004. Quantitative provenance analysis of sediments: review and

outlook. Sedimentary Geology, 171(1): 1-11.

Wetherill, G.W., 1956. Discordant uranium-lead ages. International Transactions of the American

Geophysical Union,(37): 320-326.

Zack, T., von Eynatten, H. and Kronz, A., 2004. Rutile geochemistry and its potential use in quantitative

provenance studies. Sedimentary Geology, 171(1–4): 37-58.

Zonenshain, L., Kuzmin, M. and Natapov, L., 1990. Geology of the USSR: A Plate-Tectonic Synthesis

(American Geophysical Union, Geodynamics Series), 21. Washington DC.

Zuffa, G.G., 1987. Unravelling hinterland and offshore palaeogeography from deep-water arenites,

Marine clastic sedimentology. Springer, pp. 39-61.