The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 6 of 37
Back to Result List

Paleomagnetic tests of tectonic reconstructions of the India-Asia collision zone

  • Several solutions have been proposed to explain the long-standing kinematic observation that postcollisional upper crustal shortening within the Himalaya and Asia is much less than the magnitude of India-Asia convergence. Here we implement these hypotheses in global plate reconstructions and test paleolatitudes predicted by the global apparent polar wander path against independent, and the most robust paleomagnetic data. Our tests demonstrate that (1) reconstructed 600-750km postcollisional intra-Asian shortening is a minimum value; (2) a 52Ma collision age is only consistent with paleomagnetic data if intra-Asian shortening was 900km; a 56-58Ma collision age requires greater intra-Asian shortening; (3) collision ages of 34 or 65Ma incorrectly predict Late Cretaceous and Paleogene paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya (TH); and (4) Cretaceous counterclockwise rotation of India cannot explain the paleolatitudinal divergence between the TH and India. All hypotheses, regardless of collision age, require major Cretaceous extension withinSeveral solutions have been proposed to explain the long-standing kinematic observation that postcollisional upper crustal shortening within the Himalaya and Asia is much less than the magnitude of India-Asia convergence. Here we implement these hypotheses in global plate reconstructions and test paleolatitudes predicted by the global apparent polar wander path against independent, and the most robust paleomagnetic data. Our tests demonstrate that (1) reconstructed 600-750km postcollisional intra-Asian shortening is a minimum value; (2) a 52Ma collision age is only consistent with paleomagnetic data if intra-Asian shortening was 900km; a 56-58Ma collision age requires greater intra-Asian shortening; (3) collision ages of 34 or 65Ma incorrectly predict Late Cretaceous and Paleogene paleolatitudes of the Tibetan Himalaya (TH); and (4) Cretaceous counterclockwise rotation of India cannot explain the paleolatitudinal divergence between the TH and India. All hypotheses, regardless of collision age, require major Cretaceous extension within Greater India.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author details:Wentao Huang, Douwe J. J. van Hinsbergen, Peter C. Lippert, Zhaojie Guo, Guillaume Dupont-NivetORCiD
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063749
ISSN:0094-8276
ISSN:1944-8007
Title of parent work (English):Geophysical research letters
Publisher:American Geophysical Union
Place of publishing:Washington
Publication type:Article
Language:English
Year of first publication:2015
Publication year:2015
Release date:2017/03/27
Tag:India-Asia collision; paleomagnetism; tectonic reconstruction
Volume:42
Issue:8
Number of pages:8
First page:2642
Last Page:2649
Funding institution:Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO); VIDI [864.08.005]; DJJvH [864.11.004]; ERC [306810 (SINK)]; Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; CIG "HIRESDAT"; U.S. National Science Foundation [EAR-1008527]; French ministry of foreign affairs; French ministry of higher education and research; Chinese Ministry of Education
Organizational units:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Geowissenschaften
Peer review:Referiert
Institution name at the time of the publication:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften
Accept ✔
This website uses technically necessary session cookies. By continuing to use the website, you agree to this. You can find our privacy policy here.