Mesozoic paleomagnetic results of the Tarim Craton: Tertiary relative motion between China and Siberia?
Yianping Li, Zhengkun Zhang, Michael McWilliams, Robert Sharps, Yongjian Zhai, LI Yong-an, Qiang Li, Allan Cox
Abstract
Yianping Li, Zhengkun Zhang, Michael McWilliams, Robert Sharps, Yongjian Zhai, LI Yong-an, Qiang Li, Allan Cox
Abstract
Paleomagnetic poles from two Late Jurassic to Late Cretaceous stratigraphic sections on the northern boundary of the Tarim Craton in western China are concordant with poles of similar age from eastern China. When combined with previously published data, these new results suggest that the major tectonic blocks which comprise China (the Tarim, Yangtze and Sino‐Korean cratons) have been arranged in approximately their present relative configuration since Cretaceous times. The averaged Cretaceous paleomagnetic pole for China is significantly different from the averaged Cretaceous pole for Siberia. The difference may reflect significant relative post‐Cretaceous motion between the composite China terrane and the Siberian craton. Alternatively, the Cretaceous pole for Siberia may not be reliable.
OpenAlex reports 64 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Paleomagnetic poles from two Late Jurassic to Late Cretaceous stratigraphic sections on the northern boundary of the Tarim Craton in western China are concordant with poles of similar age from eastern China. When combined with previously published data, these new results suggest that the major tectonic blocks which comprise China (the Tarim, Yangtze and Sino‐Korean cratons) have been arranged in approximately their present relative configuration since Cretaceous times. The averaged Cretaceous paleomagnetic pole for China is significantly different from the averaged Cretaceous pole for Siberia. The difference may reflect significant relative post‐Cretaceous motion between the composite China terrane and the Siberian craton. Alternatively, the Cretaceous pole for Siberia may not be reliable.
Key concepts: Cretaceous, Craton, Paleomagnetism, Geology, Terrane, Paleontology, Mesozoic, China