Next Article in Journal
Microbial Community Response to Photoelectrons and Regulation on Dolomite Precipitation in Marine Sediments of Yellow Sea
Next Article in Special Issue
Genesis and Geological Significance of Siderite in the First Member of the Nantun Formation of Dongming Sag, Hailar Basin
Previous Article in Journal
Geochemistry and Petrology of the Bellecombe Lava Sequence, Enclos Fouqué Caldera, Piton de la Fournaise Volcano (Réunion, France)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Low-Temperature Fluorocarbonate Mineralization in Lower Devonian Rhynie Chert, UK
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 13
Issue 6
10.3390/min13060752
minerals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Paleoproterozoic Evolution of Basement Rocks of the Taebaeksan Basin, Korean Peninsula, and Their Correlation to Those of the Paleoproterozoic Massifs in the Korean Peninsula

by
Bo Young Lee
1,
Deung-Lyong Cho
1,*,
Chang Whan Oh
2,*,
Byung Choon Lee
3 and
Seung Hwan Lee
1
1
Geology Division, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources, 124 Gwahak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34132, Republic of Korea
2
Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The Earth and Environmental Science System Research Center, Jeonbuk National University, 567 Baekje-daero, Deokjin-gu, Jeonju 54896, Republic of Korea
3
Department of Earth and Environment Sciences, Chonnam National University, 77 Yongbong-ro, Buk-gu, Gwangju 61186, Republic of Korea
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2023, 13(6), 752; https://doi.org/10.3390/min13060752
Submission received: 13 April 2023 / Revised: 19 May 2023 / Accepted: 24 May 2023 / Published: 31 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Petrogenesis, Geochronology, Mineralization and Geochemistry of Granite Rocks)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The Korean Peninsula mainly comprises the Paleoproterozoic Gwanmo, Nangnim, Gyeonggi, and Yeongnam massifs from north to south. The Paleoproterozoic basement is rarely exposed in the Paleozoic Taebaeksan basin, which is located in the northeastern part of the Okcheon belt between the Gyeonggi and Yeongnam massifs. One of the most important issues in the tectonic interpretation of the Korean Peninsula is whether Paleoproterozoic rocks in the Taebaeksan basin have an affinity with those in the Gyeonggi or Yeongnam massifs. To solve this problem, we focused on the petrogenesis of the Imgye gabbroic diorite, Jungbongsan granite, and Jangsan quartzite in the Imgye area of the Taebaeksan basin. The Imgye gabbroic diorite shows mafic to intermediate compositions with slightly enriched LREEs compared to HREEs, slightly positive Rb, K, and Pb anomalies, and negative Ta, Nb, and P anomalies. The Imgye gabbroic diorite formed in a volcanic arc tectonic setting. The geochemical compositions of the Jungbongsan granite show enriched LREEs compared to HREEs with negative Eu anomalies, and reveal strong positive Rb, Th, K, and Pb anomalies with negative Ba, Ta, Nb, Sr, P, Eu, and Ti anomalies. This Jungbongsan granite also formed in an arc tectonic setting like the Imgye gabbroic diorite. LA-ICP-MS zircon age dating of the Imgye gabbroic diorite gives an intrusion age of 1948 ± 21 Ma, whereas SHRIMP U–Pb zircon age dating on the Jungbongsan granite yields an emplacement age of 1873 ± 14 Ma. The εHf(t) values of the Imgye gabbroic diorite are from 3.5 to 9.7, whereas those of the Jungbongsan granite are from −2.9 to 0.6. These data imply that the Imgye gabbroic diorite formed from a depleted mantle in the arc tectonic environment, whereas the Jungbongsan granite formed by reworking pre-existing crust material in the arc environment. The detrital zircons in the Jangsan quartzite show ages ranging from 3.06 to 1.85 Ga, with a peak concentration of ca. 2.5 Ga. Previous studies have suggested that the northern Gyeonggi and Nangnim massifs underwent collision-related magmatism and metamorphism at ca. 1.93–1.90 Ga, and then post-collisional magmatism and metamorphism at ca. 1.89–1.83 Ga, whereas the southern Gyeonggi massif underwent subduction-related magmatism and metamorphism at ca. 1.94–1.92 Ga, and then post-collision-related magmatism and metamorphism at ca. 1.84–1.78 Ga. By contrast, subduction-related events were recognized in the northern Yeongnam massif at ca 2.02–1.96 Ga and 1.90–1.85 Ga. This work, combined with the previous studies, suggests that the Paleoproterozoic basement in the Imgye area of the Taebaeksan basin can be correlated with the Paleoproterozoic basement of the northern Yeongnam massif rather than with those of the Nangnim and Gyeonggi massifs.

1. Introduction

Various geological events in Northeast Asia from the Precambrian to Cenozoic provide critical information for the interpretation of the tectonic evolution of Northeast Asia, including the Korean Peninsula. In the past, the Korean Peninsula was correlated with the North China Craton [1]. However, the discovery of the Dabie–Sulu collisional belt between the North China and South China Cratons provided the possibility that the whole Korean Peninsula does not belong to the North China Craton (Figure 1a) [2,3,4,5,6]. Since then, several tectonic models of the Permo–Triassic collision in Northeast Asia have been proposed, and each model gives different interpretations for the extension of the Dabie–Sulu collisional belt into the Korean Peninsula [2,3,4,5,6]. However, it is still uncertain which tectonic model is more reasonable, and more research is needed to interpret the tectonic evolution of Northeast Asia. Understanding the Paleoproterozoic basement rocks in the Korean Peninsula is one of the essential topics to determine which model is more appropriate.
The basement of the Korean Peninsula is composed of the Paleoproterozoic Gwanmo, Nangnim, Gyeonggi, and Yeongnam massifs from north to south (Figure 1b). In the Nangnim and northern Gyeonggi massifs, continental collision-related metamorphism occurred ca. 1933–1903 Ma and 1925–1917 Ma, respectively [7,8,9,10], and was followed by post-collisional igneous activities at ca. 1854–1830 Ma and 1885–1867 Ma, respectively [7,8,9,11,12]. These events were caused by the collision of the Longgang block in the North China Craton with the Nangnim massif in the Korean Peninsula along the Jiao–Liao–Ji collision belt at ca. 1.93–1.90 Ga [13,14]. By contrast, the southern Gyeonggi massif underwent igneous and metamorphic activities in an arc tectonic setting at ca. 1.94–1.92 Ga, which was followed by post-collisional magmatism and metamorphism at 1.84–1.78 Ga [15,16,17], whereas the northern Yeongnam massif experienced different Paleoproterozoic tectonic events compared to both the Nangnim and Gyeonggi massifs. The northern Yeongnam massif underwent prolonged arc-related magmatic and metamorphic events at ca. 2.02–1.96 Ga and 1.90–1.85 Ga [18,19,20,21,22]. Thus, the Nangnim and northern Gyeonggi massifs, southern Gyeonggi massif, and northern Yeongnam massif may have undergone different Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolutions, and the understanding of these differences will give new insights into the geological correlation between the Korean Peninsula and China, as well as into the Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of Northeast Asia. Therefore, a clear understanding of the Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the Korean Peninsula is essential.
The Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the Okcheon belt between the Gyeonggi and Yeongnam massifs is still unclear because Neoproterozoic and Paleozoic sedimentary and volcanic rocks mainly cover the Paleoproterozoic rock. The Okcheon belt consists of the Taebaeksan basin and the Okcheon metamorphic belt. The Okcheon metamorphic belt underwent Permo–Triassic intermediate-P/T type metamorphism, but the Taebaeksan basin underwent no or very low-grade metamorphism [23,24]. The Paleoproterozoic basement is exposed in the Imgye area in the northern part of the Taebaeksan basin, the northeastern Okcheon belt. Therefore the Imgye area is important for interpreting the Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution in the Korean Peninsula. However, few studies have been conducted in this area. Although a Paleoproterozoic intrusion age of 1837 Ma was obtained for granite using the whole-rock Rb/Sr method [25], the exact age is uncertain due to the possibility of Sr loss during later geologic events. Therefore, a detailed petrological and petrochemical study on the potential Paleoproterozoic rocks in the Imgye area is necessary to establish the Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the Precambrian basement of the Taebaeksan basin.
This study presents new zircon U–Pb data on the igneous and sedimentary rocks in the Imgye area, including the emplacement ages for the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite, and the maximum depositional age for the Jangsan quartzite. Mineral chemistry, whole-rock geochemistry, and Lu–Hf isotope analysis of zircon in the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite were also carried out to investigate the petrogenesis of these rocks. The data presented herein and in previous studies allow us to determine the tectonic evolution of the Paleoproterozoic basement in the Taebaeksan basin and its correlation with those in other Paleoproterozoic basements on the Korean Peninsula and in China.

2. Regional Geology and Petrography

The Korean Peninsula consists of four Precambrian basements: the Gwanmo, Nangnim, Gyeonggi, and Yeongnam massifs. The Imjingang and Okcheon belts are located between the Nangnim and Gyeonggi massifs and the Gyeonggi and Yeongnam massifs, respectively (Figure 1b). From west to east, the Okcheon belt is divided into the Okcheon metamorphic belt and the Taebaeksan basin.
The Taebaeksan basin consists of Paleozoic sedimentary units, which are divided into the Joseon and Pyeongan supergroups [1,26]. The Joseon supergroup was deposited during the Cambrian–Ordovician and the Pyeongan supergroup was deposited unconformably during the Carboniferous–Permian. The Joseon supergroup comprises the Taebaek, Yeongweol, Pyeongchang, Yongtan, and Mungyeong groups. The Taebaek group consists of ten formations: the Jangsan, Myobong, Daegi, Hwajeol, Sesong, Dongjeom, Dumugol, Maggol, Jigunsan, and Duwibong formations. The Jangsan formation is considered the lowermost part of the Taebaek group and mainly consists of quartzite [1,26,27,28,29].
The Imgye area is located in the northern part of the Taebaeksan basin (Figure 1c). The Precambrian Taebaeksan gneiss complex in the Imgye area mainly comprises gneiss, schist, and quartzite. In the northern part of the Taebaeksan gneiss complex, granitic rocks are abundant and classified into Jungbongsan granite, leucocratic granite, Imgye granite, and Samhwa granite. However, it is difficult to distinguish each granite due to gradual mineral assemblage changes [30]. From the Jungbongsan granite and leucocratic granite, ca. 1837 Ma and ca. 2108–2088 Ma were obtained using Rb/Sr whole-rock age dating, respectively [25]. The Imgye gabbroic diorite is exposed along the western part of the Jungbongsan granite with the Jangsan quartzite. However, the contact among them is still uncertain. Chang et al. [31] suggested that the Imgye gabbroic diorite formed in a subduction-related environment based on whole-rock geochemical data. The Jangsan quartzite occurs between the Precambrian basement and the Cambrian Myobong formation. The Jungbongsan granite lies below the Jangsan quartzite [32]. Recently, the Jangsan quartzite has been interpreted as a Precambrian formation rather than a Cambrian formation due to the youngest Precambrian detrital zircon ages ranging from 2.0 to 1.8 Ga, with a peak at 2.5 Ga and no Paleozoic detrital zircon [33,34,35,36]. However, this issue is still under debate [37]. The Cambrian sedimentary rocks of the Taebaek group are distributed in the west and consist of the Myobong, Daegi, and Hwajeol formations from bottom to top. The Myobong formation was deposited unconformably on the Jangsan quartzite and consists of fine-grained slate. The Daegi formation mainly consists of limestone, and the Hwajeol formation mainly consists of shale and limestone. The Ordovician sedimentary rocks unconformably overlie the Cambrian sedimentary rocks and consist of the Dongjeom formation, the Dumugo formation, and the Maggol formation from bottom to top with conformable relationships. In the Imgye area, several deformations occurred from the Paleozoic to the early Tertiary period [30]. Firstly, mylonitization occurred along the boundary of the Cambrian–Precambrian formation [31,38]. Then, the thrust and fold were formed in the middle of the Triassic [32,39,40]. After that, the Jurassic Daebo Orogeny caused another thrust fault and folding [41]. Lastly, this area was folded with east–west-trending axial traces because of the Bulgugsa Orogeny from the late Cretaceous to early Tertiary [42]. The deformation degree increases as the region approaches the faults and mylonite zones.
Minerals 13 00752 g001 550
Figure 1. (a) Tectonic map of the China Craton and Korean Peninsula (modified after [43]). (b) Simplified tectonic map of the Korean Peninsula (modified after [44]). (c) Geological map of the study area and sample locations [45]. Abbreviations: LB, Longgang block; GwM, Gwanmo massif; MB, Macheonllyeong belt; NM, Nangnim massif; PB, Pyeongnam basin; IB, Imjingang belt; NGM, northern Gyeonggi massif; SGM, southern Gyeonggi massif; OMB, Okcheon metamorphic belt; TB, Taebaeksan basin; YM, Yeongnam massif; GB, Gyeongsang basin; JVT, Jeju volcanic terrain.
Figure 1. (a) Tectonic map of the China Craton and Korean Peninsula (modified after [43]). (b) Simplified tectonic map of the Korean Peninsula (modified after [44]). (c) Geological map of the study area and sample locations [45]. Abbreviations: LB, Longgang block; GwM, Gwanmo massif; MB, Macheonllyeong belt; NM, Nangnim massif; PB, Pyeongnam basin; IB, Imjingang belt; NGM, northern Gyeonggi massif; SGM, southern Gyeonggi massif; OMB, Okcheon metamorphic belt; TB, Taebaeksan basin; YM, Yeongnam massif; GB, Gyeongsang basin; JVT, Jeju volcanic terrain.
Minerals 13 00752 g001
In this study, the Imgye gabbroic diorite, Jungbongsan granite, and Jangsan quartzite were studied to determine their intrusion or maximum depositional ages, petrogenesis, and tectonic evolution. These rocks did not experience metamorphism. The Imgye gabbroic diorite far from the fault and mylonite zones shows weak foliation due to the deformation, with well-developed joints in the outcrop (Figure 2a). The Imgye gabbroic diorite comprises medium-grained amphibole, plagioclase, biotite, quartz with minor fine-grained epidote, and titanite. The color of the amphibole becomes darker from the core to the rim. The feldspar and quartz usually show an irregular shape, and fine-grained amphibole and biotite are included within the feldspar (Figure 2b). The Jungbongsan granite comprises medium-grained K-feldspar, plagioclase, biotite, and muscovite with coarse-grained K-feldspar phenocrysts. The length of the feldspar phenocrysts is about 2–3 cm (Figure 2c). Closer to the mylonitization zone, the feldspar phenocrysts were deformed into an augen shape. The biotite generally shows a well-developed orientation (Figure 2d). The feldspar phenocrysts include fine-grained muscovite and show twining. The Jangsan quartzite shows bedding and comprises more than 80% quartz (Figure 2e), which was cemented by fine-grained quartz and mica (Figure 2f). Quartz of the Jangsan quartzite occurs as single grains or aggregates, and some quartz grains show undulose extinction. However, the whole rock does not show a deformed texture, indicating that some quartz was deformed before sedimentation.

3. Analytical Methods

3.1. Whole-Rock Geochemistry

Representative samples of the Imgye gabbroic diorite (n = 13) and Jungbongsan granite (n = 4) in the study area were analyzed for major, trace, and rare-earth elements. These samples were crushed so 95% could pass through a 200-mesh sieve to provide homogenous and representative samples for analysis. In the induction furnace, a flux of lithium metaborate and lithium tetraborate blended together was used to fuse the powder samples. When the materials were melted, 5% nitric acid (in-house standard) was added and blended until the samples dissolved. The major elements of all samples were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AEC) (Termo Jarrel-Ash ENVIRO ⅠⅠ), and trace and rare-earth elements were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) (Perkin Elmer Sciex ELAN 9000) at Activation Laboratories Ltd., Ancaster, ON, Canada. The detailed analyses are described on their website [46]. The representative whole-rock compositions of the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite are given in Tables S1 and S2, respectively.

3.2. Mineral Chemistry

Amphibole, plagioclase, and biotite in the Imgye gabbroic diorite were analyzed using a Field-Emission Electron Probe Micro-Analyzer (FE-EPMA) JEOL JXA-8100 instrument at the Center of Research Facilities, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju, Republic of Korea. The instrument has an accelerating voltage of 15 kV, a probe current of 10 nA, and a probe diameter of 5 µm. The wavelength-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (WDS) detection limit is about 10–100 ppm. The ZAF correction program was calculated for matrix correction. The natural and synthetic mineral standards used in the analysis were albite (Na), kyanite (Si, Al), Fe (Fe), orthoclase (K), wollastonite (Ca), rhodonite (Mn), Mgo (Mg), and TiO (Ti). The results are shown in Tables S3–S5.

3.3. Zircon U–Pb Isotope Analysis

For U–Pb age dating, zircons from the Imgye gabbroic diorite (IG-9), Jungbongsan granite (IG-15), and Jangsan quartzite (TB-7) were separated by crushing, magnetic separation, and heavy-liquid techniques, and then handpicked. The handpicked zircon grains from the Imgye gabbroic diorite were mounted onto an epoxy disk. After the mount was polished to obtain cross-sectional views, cathodoluminescence (CL) images were obtained using a Jeol JXA-8800R scanning electron microscope. The reference materials GJ-1, Plesovice, and silicate glass NIST 610 were used as the primary standards for optimizing the machine. The Imgye gabbroic diorite was analyzed for zircon U–Pb dating using Agilent 7900 laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) at the Wuhan Sample Solution Analytical Technology Company, Wuhan, China. The ICP-MS is equipped with approximately 80 mJ laser energy, a 32 μm diameter, and a 5 Hz repetition rate. The zircon standards GJ-1 and Plesovice used for instrument monitoring and stability had Concordia ages ca. 602 ± 1.4 Ma (n = 13, MSWD = 0.036) and ca. 338 ± 0.96 Ma (n = 8, MSWD = 2.6), respectively. The data reduction was performed using an ICPMS DataClav10.8 and Isoplot/Ex 3.0 [47]. The results of the LA-ICP-MS age dating on the Imgye gabbroic diorite (IG-9) are shown in Table S6.
The handpicked zircon grains from the Jungbongsan granite (IG-15) and Jangsan quartzite (TB-7) were mounted onto an epoxy disk with the zircon standards SL13 (U = 238 ppm) and FC1 (206Pb*/238U = 0.1859). After the mount was polished to expose observed cross-sectional views, cathodoluminescence (CL) images were obtained using a Jeol JSM-6610LV scanning electron microscope. The zircon U–Pb isotope analysis was conducted using a SHRIMP ⅠⅠe/MC instrument at the Korea Basic Science Institute (KBSI), Ochang, Republic of Korea. The primary beam was a 4–6 nA negative ion oxygen (O2−) beam with a 20–30 μm diameter. The U–Pb age dating procedures were based on those reported in [48,49]. The data reduction was performed using an Isoplot/Ex 3.4 program and SQUID 2.5 Excel macro. The age and common Pb correction were conducted following the methods described in [50,51], and the decay constants used were those determined by the International Union of Geological Sciences Subcommission on Geochronology [52]. The SHRIMP age dating results on the Jungbongsan granite (IG-15) and Jangsan quartzite (TB-7) are shown in Tables S7 and S8, respectively.

3.4. Zircon Lu–Hf Isotope Analysis

Zircon Lu–Hf isotope analysis of the Jungbongsan granite was measured by laser ablation multi-collector inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-MC-ICP-MS) at the KBSI, Ochang, Republic of Korea. The instrument comprises an ESI NWA193UC LA system and a Nu plasma ⅠⅠ MC-ICP-MS. The analysis was conducted with approximately 5.0 J/cm2 laser energy, a 50 μm diameter, and a 10–13 Hz repetition rate. The in-situ Lu–Hf isotope analyses were conducted on the same zircon domains that were used for the U–Pb age dating. The zircon standards 91500 and FC1 used for instrument monitoring and stability had 176Hf/177Hf weighted averages of 0.2822979 ± 0.0000089 (n = 34, MSWD = 1.11) and 0.282165 ± 0.0000014 (n = 8, MSWD = 1.9), respectively. These standard values were close to the recommended values [53].
The zircon Lu–Hf isotope of the Imgye gabbroic diorite was analyzed using a NEPTUNE MC-ICP-MS. The analysis was conducted with approximately 10 J/cm2 laser energy, a 44 μm diameter, and an 8 Hz repetition rate. The in-situ Lu–Hf isotope analyses were conducted on the same zircon domains that were used for the U–Pb age dating. The zircon standards 91500, GJ-1, and Plesovice used for instrument monitoring and stability had 176Hf/177Hf weighted averages of 0.282297 ± 0.000010 (n = 6, MSWD = 0.21), 0.282016 ± 0.000013 (n = 4, MSWD = 0.82), and 0.2824782 ± 0.0000052 (n = 16, MSWD = 0.70), respectively. The zircon Lu–Hf isotope data from the Imgye gabbroic diorite (IG-9) and Jungbongsan granite (IG-15) are given in Tables S9 and S10, respectively, and are reported at an uncertainty level of 2σ.

4. Results

4.1. Whole-Rock Geochemistry

The geochemistry of Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite has low loss-on-ignition (LOI) values of 0.81–2.03 and 0.88–1.05, respectively, and shows Ce* values of 1.01–1.02 and 1.05–1.08, respectively. These indicate that the whole-rock geochemistry was immobile (0.9 < Ce* < 1.1) (Tables S1 and S2) [54]. The geochemical data of each sample show similar values without significant differences (Figure 3). They also represent no change in their whole-rock geochemical data of igneous rocks by hydrothermal alteration and metamorphism.
Almost all samples from the Imgye gabbroic diorites are plotted in the gabbro to gabbroic diorite field. The Jungbongsan granites are plotted in the granite field on the total alkali (Na2O + K2O) vs. SiO2 diagram (Figure 3a). On the K2O vs. SiO2 (wt%) diagram, most of the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite samples show the medium-K calc-alkaline series and high-K calc-alkaline series characters, respectively (Figure 3b). The Imgye gabbroic diorites are tholeiitic, whereas the Jungbongsan granites are calc-alkaline (Figure 3c). The Jungbongsan granite consists of quartz (40%), K-feldspar (45%), and plagioclase (55%). It is classified as typical monzogranite among the granite series based on the CIPW normative mineral composition (Figure 3d). The Imgye gabbroic diorite plots in the calc-alkaline basalt and volcanic arc basalt fields in the Y/15-La/10-Nb/8 and Ti vs. Zr diagrams, respectively (Figure 4a,b). In the Ti/100-Zr-Y*3 and ThN vs. NbN diagrams, the Imgye gabbroic diorite falls in the calc-alkaline basalt field (Figure 4c,d). The Jungbongsan granite samples plot in the volcanic arc granite + syn-collision granite field in the Nb vs. Y diagram (Figure 4e), and plot between the syn-collision granite and volcanic arc granite fields in the Rb vs. Y + Nb diagram (Figure 4f).
The chondrite-normalized rare-earth element (REE) patterns of the Imgye gabbroic diorite show relative enrichment in light REEs (LREEs) compared to heavy REEs (HREEs), with (La/Yb)N = 7.91–8.90 and Eu/Eu* = 0.82–0.94 (Figure 5a; Table S1). The Jungbongsan granite samples show more enrichment in LREEs than HREEs, with (La/Yb)N values of 42.90–54.80 and strong negative Eu anomalies (Eu/Eu* = 0.216–0.234; Figure 5c; Table S2). In the primitive-mantle-normalized spider diagram, the Imgye gabbroic diorite shows positive Rb and Pb anomalies and negative Ta, Nb, and P anomalies (Figure 5b). In comparison, the Jungbongsan granite has relatively strong positive Rb, Th, K, and Pb anomalies with strong negative Ba, Ta, Nb, Sr, P, Eu, and Ti anomalies (Figure 5d). The Nb–Ta negative anomalies in both units support their formation in an arc tectonic setting.

4.2. Mineral Chemistry

In the case of Imgye gabbroic diorite, the colors of the core and rim of the amphiboles were observed to be different under the microscope. Thus, we carried out a mineral analysis to confirm the change in the amphibole composition. In the Imgye gabbroic diorite, the chemical composition of the amphibole changes from core to rim (Table S3). The amphibole cores have XFe = 0.239–0.354, XMg = 0.646–0.761, and TSi = 7.384–7.737, while the amphibole rims have XFe = 0.344–0.571, XMg = 0.429–0.656, and TSi = 6.174–7.125. The Mg/(Mg + Fe2+) ratio decreases, and the TSi component decreases toward the rim. The amphibole cores have the actinolite to actino hornblende compositions, while the amphibole rims have magnesio hornblende to hornblende tschermakite compositions in the Mg/(Mg + Fe2+) vs. TSi diagram (Figure 6a). The plagioclases are mostly albite (Table S4). Although the XAb component in plagioclase slightly increases toward the rim, there are no significant compositional differences between the core and rim. Most plagioclases show oligoclase to andesine components in the Or-Ab-An diagram (Figure 6b). Biotite has XFe = 0.511–0.995 and AllV = 2.713–3.841 (Table S5). They are plotted between phlogopite and siderophyllite in the XFe vs. AllV diagram.

4.3. Zircon U–Pb Isotope Analysis

4.3.1. Imgye Gabbroic Diorite

The zircon grains in the Imgye gabbroic diorite (IG-9) are fine- to medium-grained (20–100 μm) with an irregular shape and sector or irregular zonings (Figure 7a). The zircons have Th and U concentrations of 16–571 and 71–630 ppm, respectively, and Th/U ratios of 0.23–1.56, representing an igneous origin. As a result of checking whether the zircon was affected by hydrothermal using the (Sm/La)N vs. La and Ce/Ce* vs. (Sm/La)N diagrams suggested by [74], all thirty points except two points were confirmed as magmatic zircons (La: 0.002–0.093 ppm; (Sm/La)N: 34.92–1817.32) unaffected by hydrothermal. The results of the U–Pb isotope analyses of thirty-two grains are plotted on a Tera–Wasserburg diagram (Figure 7b; Table S6) and give 207Pb/206Pb dates ranging between 2021 ± 25 Ma and 1854 ± 33 Ma. The upper intercept age is 1948 ± 21 Ma (n = 28 of 32, MSWD = 1.4).

4.3.2. Jungbongsan Granite

Zircons from the Jungbongsan granite (IG-15) are medium- to coarse-grained (50–250 μm) with angular or elongated shapes and show oscillatory zoning, representing an igneous origin (Figure 7c). The zircons have Th and U concentrations of 48–123 and 82–186 ppm, respectively, and Th/U ratios of 0.46–0.78, supporting an igneous origin. The U–Pb isotope analyses of seventeen grains are plotted on a Tera–Wasserburg diagram (Figure 7d; Table S7) and give 207Pb/206Pb dates ranging between 1914 ± 18 Ma and 1824 ± 23 Ma. The upper intercept age is 1873 ± 14 Ma (n = 17, MSWD = 1.18).

4.3.3. Jangsan Quartzite

Zircons from the Jangsan quartzite (TB-7) are medium- to coarse-grained (80–200 μm) with rounded or elongated shapes and show various zonings, such as oscillatory zoning, sector zoning, and unzoning (Figure 7e). The zircons have Th and U concentrations of 11–334 and 21–315 ppm, respectively, and Th/U ratios of 0.36–1.75. The results of the U–Pb isotope analyses of sixty grains are plotted on a Tera–Wasserburg diagram (Figure 7f; Table S8). The date analyses obtained from the detrital zircons in the Jangsan quartzite gave 207Pb/206Pb dates ranging between 3064 ± 13 Ma and 1856 ± 10 Ma (n = 50 of 60, discordance < 10%), with a strong peak at around 2.5 Ga.

4.4. Zircon Lu–Hf Isotope Analysis

The 176Lu/177Hf and 176Hf/177Hf ratios of the dated zircons from the Imgye gabbroic diorite (IG-9) are 0.000317–0.001628 and 0.281661–0.281853, respectively (Table S9). The initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios are almost constant at 0.281646–0.281820 (Figure 8a). The Imgye gabbroic diorite zircons give positive εHf(t) values of 3.5–9.7 and two-stage model ages (TDM2) of 2803–1982 Ma (Figure 8b,c). Zircons from the Jungbongsan granite (IG-15) have 176Lu/177Hf ratios of 0.00042–0.00100 and 176Hf/177Hf ratios of 0.281486–0.281584 (Table S10). The initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios are 0.281465–0.281563 (Figure 8a). This sample shows mostly negative εHf(t) values from −2.9 to 0.6 with TDM2 model ages of 3851–3389 Ma (Figure 8b,d).

5. Discussion

5.1. Paleoproterozoic Igneous Event in the Imgye Area

The following results are from the study on the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite in the Taebaeksan basin. The Imgye gabbroic diorite plots in the calc-alkaline basalt and volcanic arc basalt fields in the tectonic discrimination diagrams (Figure 4a–d). In addition, the Imgye gabbroic diorite shows slightly enriched LREEs compared to HREEs, with negative Ta and Nb anomalies (Figure 5a,b), suggesting their subduction-related environment. These trace elements’ characteristics indicate that the Imgye gabbroic diorite formed in the subduction-related arc tectonic environment. The Imgye gabbroic diorite does not show a geochemical change by metamorphism or alteration. In the Imgye gabbroic diorite, the amphibole core has a brighter color than the amphibole rim under a microscope (Figure 2b). From core to rim, the XFe of amphibole increases from 0.239–0.354 to 0.344–0.571, and the XMg and TSi components decrease from 0.646–0.761 to 0.429–0.656 and from 7.384–7.737 to 6.174–7.125, respectively (Figure 6a). These compositional changes may indicate fractional crystallization. The intrusion age obtained for the Imgye gabbroic diorite is ca. 1948 Ma (Figure 7b). The positive εHf(t) values of 3.5–9.7 for zircon in the Imgye gabbroic diorite imply a depleted mantle source (Figure 8b). The TDM2 ages (2803–1982 Ma) of the Imgye gabbroic diorite are similar to the intrusion age (Figure 8c). These geochemical characteristics suggest that the Imgye gabbroic diorite was derived from a juvenile source at 1948 Ma. In the Zr/Yb vs. Nb/Yb diagram, the Imgye gabbroic diorites plot in the enriched part of the mantle array, but they plot above the mantle array in the Th/Yb vs. Nb/Yb diagram, indicating that their source was a mantle that underwent metasomatism by fluid supplied from the subducted oceanic crust and sediments within an arc setting (Figure 9a,b). In the Sm/Yb vs. La/Yb diagram, they plot in the melting curve of spinel lherzolite with a starting composition of primitive mantle, suggesting that the Imgye gabbroic diorite formed at a relatively shallow depth (<60 km) (Figure 9c) [75]. In addition, the partial-melting modeling reveals that the primary magma source of the Imgye gabbroic diorite was generated by a low degree of partial melting (less than 5%) of the spinel-bearing mantle source.
The Jungbongsan granites plot in the syn-collision granite and volcanic arc granite fields in the tectonic discrimination diagrams (Figure 4e,f). The Jungbongsan granite has more enriched LREEs compared to HREEs (Figure 5c). The Jungbongsan granites show a negative Eu anomaly (Eu/Eu* = 0.216–0.234) and negative Ba, Sr, P, Eu, and Ti troughs (Figure 5c,d), suggesting that the magma from which the Jungbongsan granite formed underwent the fractional crystallization of K-feldspar and P–Ti-bearing oxide minerals. The fractional crystallization of K-feldspar increased in Rb and decreased Sr and Ba (Figure 10). The increase in Rb due to a fractional crystallization can make it difficult to determine the tectonic setting. In the Yeongnam massif, which can be correlated to the Imgye area, as discussed in Section 5.2, the Rb contents in the Paleoproterozoic granitoid rocks increase from typical granite to leucogranite to pegmatite due to the fractional crystallization [62,63,64,65]. Typical granite, such as the 1.98 Ga Pyeonghae and 1.97 Ga Buncheon granite, plot in the volcanic arc tectonic setting, whereas the leucogranite plots both in the volcanic arc and syn-collisional fields in the Rb vs. Y + Nb tectonic discrimination diagram (Figure 4e,f). The pegmatite underwent a strong fractional crystallization compared to the leucogranite plot in the syn-collision field (Figure 4e,f). Considering the effect of fractional crystallization with the fact that ca. 1.87 Ga mafic igneous rocks in the northern margin of the Yeongnam massif formed in an arc tectonic setting [21], the leucogranite and pegmatite, which intruded at ca. 1.87 Ga in the northern margin of the Yeongnam massif, can be considered to have formed in an arc tectonic setting instead of syn-collisional tectonic setting. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the Jungbongsan granite shows geochemical characteristics similar to leucogranite formed in the arc tectonic setting, although they plot in both the volcanic arc and syn-collisional fields. The Jungbongsan granites show mostly negative zircon εHf(t) values from −2.9 to 0.6, suggesting an origin from the pre-existing crustal material (Figure 8b). Their TDM2 ages (3851–3389 Ma) indicate input from the Archean crust (Figure 8d). After the intrusion of the Imgye gabbroic diorite, the Jungbongsan granite formed from pre-existing crust material in the arc tectonic setting at 1873 Ma.

5.2. Comparison between Paleoproterozoic Igneous Activities in the Study Area with Those in Other Paleoproterozoic Basements in the Korean Peninsula and China Craton

The Yeongnam massif, one of the Precambrian basements in the Korean Peninsula (Figure 1b), had been long considered to be correlative with the Nangnim and Gyeonggi massifs until Yin and Nie proposed a tectonic model [2] in which the Yeongnam and Nangnim massifs are correlated with the North China Craton and the Gyeonggi massif with the South China Craton. Furthermore, recent studies have reported that the southern Gyeonggi massif and Yeongnam massif underwent a different Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution compared to that of the Nangnim massif, suggesting the possibility that they belonged to different cratons [20,21,22,23,24]. The Nangnim massif and the northern Gyeonggi massif experienced a collision-related event at ca. 1.93–1.90 Ga due to a collision between the Longgang block in the northeastern North China Craton and the Nangnim massif in the Korean Peninsula along the Jiao–Liao–Ji collision belt (Figure 11a; Table 1) [7,8,9,10,11,43]. After that, magmatism and metamorphism occurred in a post-collisional environment at ca. 1.89–1.83 Ga in the Jiao–Liao–Ji collision belt, Nangnim massif, and northern Gyeonggi massif (Figure 4 and Figure 11a) [11,43]. The post-collisional event occurred due to the heat supplied by the asthenospheric mantle, which uplifted through the opening formed by the slab break-off between continental and oceanic slabs during the post-collisional stage (Figure 11d). In contrast, the southern Gyeonggi massif underwent subduction-related igneous and metamorphic activities at ca. 1.94–1.92 Ga, followed by post-collisional magmatism and metamorphism at ca. 1.84–1.78 Ga (Figure 11b; Table 1) [12,16,17]. Based on these events, it has been suggested that the southern Gyeonggi massif is correlated to the Yangtze block in the South China Craton [12,16]. In contrast, there were continuous subduction-related igneous and metamorphic activities along the northern margin of the Yeongnam massif at ca. 2.02–1.96 Ga and 1.90–1.85 Ga (Figure 4 and Figure 11c,e; Table 1). A hypothesis was proposed that the Yeongnam massif could be correlated with the Cathaysia block in the South China Craton, although it remains to be confirmed further [12].
As discussed in Section 5.1, the Imgye gabbroic diorite was derived from a depleted mantle source within an arc tectonic setting at 1948 Ma, and the Jungbongsan granite formed from pre-existing crust material in an arc tectonic setting at 1873 Ma. These data suggest that the Precambrian basement of the Taebaeksan basin underwent magmatism in the arc tectonic setting at ca. 1948 Ma and 1873 Ma (Figure 11c). This tectonic evolution of the Precambrian basement of the Taebaeksan basin is different from that of the Nangnim and northern Gyeonggi massifs, in which the collision-related activities occurred at ca. 1.93–1.90 Ga and the post-collisional-related activities occurred at ca. 1.89–1.83 Ga. It is also different from that of the southern Gyeonggi massif in which post-collisional igneous activities occurred at ca. 1.84–1.78 Ga, whereas the tectonic evolution of the Precambrian basement of the Taebaeksan basin can be well correlated to the tectonic evolution of the northern Yeongnam massif, which underwent arc-related igneous activities at ca. 2.02–1.96 Ga and 1.90–1.85 Ga (Figure 11).
The Jangsan quartzite in the Imgye area dated herein contains detrital zircons ranging in age mainly between ca. 3.06 Ga and ca. 1.86 Ga, with a peak age of 2.5 Ga (Figure 7f). This pattern is well matched with that in the quartzite deposited unconformably on the Paleoproterozoic basement in the northeastern Yeongnam massif [36]. The depositional age of the Jangsan quartzite is still uncertain and has been suspected to be Neoproterozoic or Paleozoic in age [34,83]. In the northern Gyeonggi and Nangnim massifs, the Paleoproterozoic basements are uncomfortably overlain by Meso- and Neoproterozoic sediments deposited in a rift tectonic setting with an intrusion of within-plate type mafic and felsic igneous rocks [21]. The Meso- and Neoproterozoic sedimentary rocks mainly consist of biotite schist, marble, and quartzite. The detrital zircons in them contain not only Paleoproterozoic detrital zircons but also Meso- and Neoproterozoic detrital zircons [84,85,86,87,88]. In the southern Gyeonggi massif, Meso- and Neoproterozoic detrital zircons were also found in the Meso- and Neoproterozoic metasedimentary rocks, which overlie the Paleoproterozoic basement [89]. Therefore, the quartzite without Meso- and Neoproterozoic detrital zircons is another piece of evidence that supports the correlation between the Paleoproterozoic basement of the Imgye area and the northeastern Yeongnam massif. As discussed above, the Yeongnam massif underwent a different Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution compared to the North China Craton, suggesting that the basement of the Taebaeksan basin cannot be correlated to the North China Craton. This suggestion is well matched with Oh and Kusky’s tectonic model [6] in which the Taebaeksan basin was correlated to the South China Craton but contradicted a paleontological interpretation in which trilobite fossil in the Taebaeksan basin was correlated with that in the North China Craton [90,91]. More studies will be needed to solve the contradiction between the Petrological and Paleontological interpretations.

5.3. Paleoproterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Northern Yeongnam Massif and the Imgye Area

In the northeastern Yeongnam massif, three types of (meta)granitoid rocks and Okbang amphibolite occur. The three types of (meta)granitoids are banded or augen biotite gneisses (group I: Pyeonghae and Buncheon metagranitoids), massive cordierite or two-mica granitic gneisses (group II: Hongjesa and Icheonri granitic metagranitoids), and garnet-bearing leucogranite (group III: Imwon leucogranite and S-type leucogranite) [18,61,63,92,93]. The intrusion ages of the first two groups are indistinguishable within their error ranges: 1.98 Ga (Pyeonghae gneiss), 1.97 Ga (Buncheon gneiss), 1.99 Ma (Icheonri granitic gneiss), and 1.98 Ga (Hongjesa granitic gneiss). The Imwon and S-type leucogranites intruded at 1.90–1.85 Ga. The Okbang amphibolite intruded 1.87 Ga and metamorphosed at 1.86 Ga [61]. The group I and II granitoids were interpreted to have formed in a continental arc tectonic setting at 1.99–1.97 Ga (Figure 4) [18,63,92,93]. The leucogranite also formed in an arc tectonic setting, as discussed in Section 5.1 (Figure 4e,f), and the Okbang amphibolites plot in the back-arc basin field in the Y/15-La/10-Nb/8 diagram and the island arc tholeiite field in the ThN vs. NbN diagram (Figure 4a,d). These data suggest that the 1.90–1.85 Ga leucogranites and Okbang amphibolites intruded in the island arc tectonic setting with the back-arc basin. Similar to the northeastern Yeongnam massif, in the northcentral and northern Yeongnam massif, 2.02–1.96 Ga granitoids intruded in a continental arc tectonic setting, and then 1.87 Ga mafic igneous rocks intruded in an island arc tectonic setting (Figure 4) [20,21,22].
This study reveals that the 1.95 Ga Imgye gabbroic diorite and 1.87 Ga Jangbongsan granite formed in an arc tectonic setting. This study, together with the data in previous studies, suggests igneous activities in an arc tectonic setting at ca. 2.02–1.95 Ga and igneous activities in an island arc tectonic setting at 1.90–1.85 Ga in the northern Yeongnam massif. The Okbang amphibolite was metamorphosed at 1.86 Ga, and the paragneiss in the northeastern Yeongnam massif also underwent low-P/T type metamorphism at 1.87–1.86 Ga [61,92,93]. During this low-P/T type metamorphism, the northeastern Yeongnam massif underwent metamorphism from the greenschist facies to granulite facies. As a peak metamorphic condition, Kim and Cho [93] reported 750–800 °C/4–6 kbar, and Cheong and Na [92] reported 740–800 °C/4.8–5.8 kbar. In the northcentral Yeongnam massif, the 1.87–1.86 Ga metamorphism (720–730 °C and 7.3–7.4 kbar) was also reported [21]. The arc tectonic setting in the northern Yeongnam massif can also be supported by the low-P/T metamorphism at ca. 1.87–1.86 Ga because low-P/T type metamorphism has been reported from the arc environment [61].
The data in this and previous studies suggest that there was a continental arc during 2.02–1.95 Ga along the northern margin of the Yeongnam massif, and a continental arc may have transformed into an island arc at ca. 1.90–1.85 Ga with low-P/T metamorphism. In the previous studies on the Mesozoic arc-related igneous activities along the eastern margin of Northeastern Asia, ca. 0.5 Ga magmatic gap was reported during continuous subduction [94,95,96,97]. No igneous activities other than arc-related igneous activities occurred from 1.95 Ga to 1.90 Ga in the northern margin of the Yeongnam massif. Therefore, although there is ca. 0.5 Ga gap between the two arc-related igneous activities, these data suggest continuous subduction along the northern margin of the Yeongnam massif during 2.02–1.85 Ga.

6. Conclusions

  • In the Imgye area, the Imgye gabbroic diorite intruded ca. 1948 Ma and the Jungbongsan granite intruded ca. 1873 Ma in an arc tectonic setting.
  • The zircons in the Imgye gabbroic diorite have positive εHf(t) values from 3.5 to 9.7, whereas the zircons in the Jungbongsan granite show mostly negative εHf(t) values from −2.9 to 0.6. These data indicate that the Imgye gabbroic diorite was derived from a depleted mantle, and the Jungbongsan granite was derived from pre-existing Archean crust in an arc tectonic environment.
  • The Jangsan quartzite in the Imgye area has the youngest detrital zircon of ca. 1856 Ma, with a peak concentration of ca. 2.5 Ga. These characteristics correlate well with the quartzite in the northeastern Yeongnam massif.
  • The tectonic evolution of the Paleoproterozoic igneous rocks in the Imgye area differs from those of the Gyeonggi and Nangnim massifs but can be correlated well with that of the northern Yeongnam massif. Therefore, the Taebaeksan basin can be correlated to the northern Yeongnam massif.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/min13060752/s1, Table S1: Whole-rock compositions of the Imgye gabbroic diorite in the Imgye area. Table S2: Whole-rock compositions of the Jungbongsan granite in the Imgye area. Table S3: Representative compositions of amphibole from the Imgye gabbroic diorite in the Imgye area. Table S4: Representative compositions of plagioclase from the Imgye gabbroic diorite in the Imgye area. Table S5: Representative compositions of biotite from the Imgye gabbroic diorite in the Imgye area. Table S6: LA-ICP-MS zircon age data of the Imgye gabbroic diorite in the Imgye area. Table S7: SHRIMP zircon age data of the Jungbongsan granite in the Imgye area. Table S8: SHRIMP zircon age data of the Jangsan quartzite in the Imgye area. Table S9: The results of zircon Lu–Hf analysis of the Imgye gabbroic diorite in the Imgye area. Table S10: The results of zircon Lu–Hf analysis of the Jungbongsan granite in the Imgye area. Table S11: Summary of Paleoproterozoic U–Pb age data reported from Gyeonggi massif [8,11,12,16,43,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113] and Yeongnam massifs [18,19,20,21,22,62,63,64,80,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123].

Author Contributions

Formal analysis, writing—original draft, review, and editing, B.Y.L.; supervision and investigation, D.-L.C.; supervision, review, and editing, C.W.O.; conceptualization, review and editing, B.C.L.; review and editing, S.H.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by grants (GP2020-003) and (GP2021-004) from the Basic Research Project of the Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM) funded by the Korean Ministry of Science and ICT, and grants (NRF-2017K1A1A2013180) and (RS-2023-00210128) from the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Korean Government.

Data Availability Statement

All data analyzed during this study are included in this published article (Table 1, Supplementary Table S11).

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions that helped to improve the manuscript. We would like to thank Keewook Yi and Shinae Lee from the KBSI Ochang Center in the Republic of Korea and Hongfang Chen from the Sample Solution Company in China for helping with the zircon age dating. We also appreciate Yongheon Kim, Minsu Kang, Jinhyeok Choi, and Soyeon Kim from the Jeonbuk National University for their help with the geological field survey.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lee, D.S. (Ed.) Geology of Korea; Geological Society of Korea: Seoul, Republic of Korea, 1987; p. 514. [Google Scholar]
  2. Yin, A.; Nie, S. An indentationmodel for the north and South China collision and the development of the Tan-Lu and Honam fault systems, eastern Asia. Tectonics 1993, 12, 801–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zhang, K.J. North and South China collision along the eastern and southern North China margins. Tectonophysics 1997, 270, 145–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ishiwatari, A.; Tsujimori, T. Paleozoic ophiolites and blueschists in Japan and Russian Primorye in the tec-tonic framework of East Asia: A synthesis. Isl. Arc 2003, 12, 190–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Oh, C.W. A new concept on tectonic correlation between Korea, China and Japan: Histories from the late Proterozoic to cretaceous. Gondwana Res. 2006, 9, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Oh, C.W.; Kusky, T. The Late Permian to Triassic Hongseong-Odesan Collision Belt in South Korea, and Its Tectonic Correlation with China and Japan. Int. Geol. Rev. 2007, 49, 636–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhao, G.; Cao, L.; Wilde, S.; Sun, M.; Choe, W.; Li, S. Implications based on the first SHRIMP U-Pb zircon dating on Precambrian granitoid rocks in North Korea. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2006, 251, 365–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yengkhom, K.S.; Lee, B.C.; Oh, C.W.; Yi, K. Tectonic and deformation history of the Gyeonggi Massif in and around the Hongcheon area, and its implications in the tectonic evolution of the North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2014, 240, 37–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zhao, L.; Zhang, Y.B.; Wu, F.Y.; Li, Q.L.; Yang, J.H.; Kim, J.N.; Choi, W.J. Paleoproterozoic high temperature metamorphism and anatexis in the northeastern Korean Peninsula: Constraints from petrology and zircon U-Pb geochemistry. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2016, 32, 3045–3069. [Google Scholar]
  10. Lee, B.C.; Cho, D.L. Zircon U-Pb and Rare Earth Elements Analyses on Banded Gneiss in Euiam Gneiss Complex, Central Gyeonggi Massif: Consideration for the Timing of Depositional Event and Metamorphism of the Basement Rocks in the Gyeonggi Massif. Korean J. Mineral. Petrol. 2022, 35, 215–233. [Google Scholar]
  11. Lee, B.C.; Oh, C.W.; Yengkhom, K.S.; Yi, K. Paleoproterozoic magmatic and metamorphic events in the Hongcheon area, southern margin of the Northern Gyeonggi Massif in the Korean Peninsula, and their links to the Paleoproterozoic orogeny in the North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2014, 248, 17–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lee, B.C.; Oh, C.W.; Kim, T.S.; Yi, K. The metamorphic evolution from ultrahigh-temperature to amphibolite facies metamorphism in the Odaesan area after the collision between the North and South China Cratons in the Korean Peninsula. Lithos 2016, 256, 109–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wang, X.H.; Oh, C.W.; Lee, B.C.; Liu, F.L. Paleoproterozoic postcollisional metamor-phic and igneous activities in the Jinan area of the Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt in the North China Craton and their tectonic implications. Precambrian Res. 2020, 346, 105793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wang, X.H.; Oh, C.W.; Wang, X.; Zhai, M.G.; Zhao, L. The ~1.87 Ga granulite facies metamorphism of the South Liaohe Group in the Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt and its tectonic implications. Lithos 2021, 392–393, 106081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Kim, S.W.; Williams, I.S.; Kwon, S.H.; Oh, C.W. SHRIMP zircon geochronology, and geochemical characteristics of metaplutonic rocks from the southwestern Gyeonggi Block, Korea: Implications for Paleoproterozoic to Mesozoic tectonic links between the Korean Peninsula and eastern China. Precambrian Res. 2008, 162, 475–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lee, B.C.; Oh, C.W.; Yi, K.W. Geochemistry, zircon U-Pb ages, and Hf isotopic compositions of Precambrian gneisses in the Wonju-Jechon area of the southern Gyeonggi Massif: Implications for the Precambrian tectonic evolution of Korea and northeast Asia. Precambrian Res. 2016, 283, 169–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kim, J.S. The Tectonic Evolution of Early Paleoproterozoic to Jurassic in the Janghowon Area of the Southern Middle Gyeonggi Massif. Master’s Thesis, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju-si, Republic of Korea, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kim, N.; Cheong, C.S.; Park, K.H.; Kim, J.; Song, Y.S. Crustal evolution of northeastern Yeongnam Massif, Korea, revealed by SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronology and geochemistry. Gondwana Res. 2012, 21, 865–875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lee, Y.; Cho, M.; Cheong, W.; Yi, K. A massif–type (1.86 Ga) anorthosite complex in the Yeongnam Massif, Korea: Late–orogenic emplacement associated with the mantle delamination in the North China Craton. Terra Nova 2014, 26, 408–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lee, B.C.; Oh, C.W.; Cho, D.L.; Yi, K. Paleoproterozoic (2.0–1.97 Ga) subduction-related magmatism on the north–central margin of the Yeongnam Massif, Korean Peninsula, and its tectonic implications for reconstruction of the Columbia supercontinent. Gondwana Res. 2019, 72, 34–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lee, B.C.; Oh, C.W.; Wang, X. Paleoproterozoic (ca. 1.87–1.69 Ga) arc-related tectonothermal events on northcentral Yeongnam Massif, South Korea and its tectonic implications: Insights from metamorphism, geochemistry and geochronology. Precambrian Res. 2020, 338, 105562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Cho, D.L.; Lee, B.C.; Oh, C.W. Petrogenesis of paleoproterozoic (2.02–1.96 Ga) metagranitoids in the southwestern Yeongnam Massif, Korean Peninsula, and their significance for the tectonic history of northeast Asia: Insights from zircon U–Pb–Hf isotope and whole-rock geochemical compositions. Precambrian Res. 2020, 340, 105631. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lee, K.S.; Chang, H.W.; Park, K.H. Neoproterozoic bimodal volcanism in the central Ogcheon belt, Korea: Age and tectonic implication. Precambrian Res. 1998, 89, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kim, S.W.; Oh, C.W.; Ryu, I.-C.; Willians, I.S.; Sajeev, K.; Santosh, M.; Rajesh, V.J. Neoproterozoic Bimodal Volcanism in the Okcheon Belt, South Korea, and its comparison with the Nanhua Rift, South China: Implications for rifting in Rodinia. J. Geol. 2006, 114, 717–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ju, S.H.; Kim, S.J. Dating Study of Yeongnam Massif by Rb-Sr Method (Ⅰ); Research Report; Korea Power Resource Institute: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 1985; Volume 85–24, pp. 7–40. [Google Scholar]
  26. Cheong, C.H. Stratigraphy and paleontology of the Samcheog coalfield, Gangweon-do, Korea. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 1969, 5, 13–56. [Google Scholar]
  27. Cheong, C.H.; Lee, D.S.; Um, S.H.; Chang, K.H. Investigation of Geological Classification of Korea. Minist. Sci. Technol. 1973, R-73-51, 68, (In Korean with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  28. Yun, S. Petrography, chemical composition, and depositional environments of the Cambro-Ordovician sedimentary sequence in the Yeonhwa I Mine area, southeastern Taebaegsan region, Korea. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 1978, 14, 145–174. [Google Scholar]
  29. Woo, J.; Shinn, Y.J.; Kwon, Y.K.; Chough, S.K. The Jangsan and Myeonsan formations (Early Cambrian) of the Taebaek Group, mideast Korea: Depositional processes and environments. Geosci. J. 2006, 10, 35–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kim, J.H.; Kee, W.S.; Seo, S.K. Geological Structures of the Yeoryang-Imgye area, northern part of Mt. Taebaeg Region, Korea. Geol. Soc. Korea 1996, 32, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  31. Chang, H.W.; Lee, D.H.; Park, K.H. Magmatism and metamorphism of the Proterozoic in the northeastern part of Korea: Petrogenetic and geochemical characteristics of the Okbang amphibolites. Econ. Environ. Geol. 1993, 26, 489–498. [Google Scholar]
  32. Kim, J.H.; Kee, W.S. Geological structures of the Imgye area, Kangweondo, Korea. Econ. Environ. Geol. 1991, 24, 43–55. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lee, Y.I.; Choi, T.; Lim, H.S.; Orihashi, Y. Detrital zircon U-Pb ages of the Jangsan Formation in the northeastern Okcheon belt, Korea and its implications for material source, provenance, and tectonic setting. Sediment. Geol. 2012, 282, 256–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lee, Y.I.; Choi, T.; Lim, H.S. Depositional age and petrological characteristics of the Jangsan Formation in the Taebaeksan Basin, Korea-revisited. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 2016, 52, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Lee, Y.I.; Choi, T.; Lim, H.S.; Orihashi, Y. Detrital zircon geochronology and Nd isotope geochemistry of the basal succession of the Taebaeksan Basin, South Korea: Implications for the Gondwana linkage of the Sino-Korean (North China) block during the Neoproterozoic-early Cambrian. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 2016, 441, 770–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cho, K.; Park, K.-H.; Song, Y.-S.; Choi, J.E. Comparison of U-Pb Age Distribution Characteristics of Detrital Zircons in the Age-unknown Geumsusan Formation and Jangsan Formation of the Joseon Supergroup. Econ. Environ. Geol. 2019, 52, 49–64. [Google Scholar]
  37. Chough, S.K.; Kwon, Y.K.; Lee, H.S.; Woo, J. The Jangsan Formation refined. Geosci. J. 2022, 26, 545–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kee, W.S.; Kim, J.H. Tectonic Significances of the Soonchang Shear Zone, the Hwasun Coalfield, Korea. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 1991, 27, 642–655. [Google Scholar]
  39. Kim, J.H.; Koh, H.J. Structural analysis of the Danyang area. Danyang Coalfield, Korea. Econ. Environ. Geol. 1992, 25, 61–72. [Google Scholar]
  40. Kim, J.H.; Lee, J.Y.; Nam, K.H.; Choi, B.Y. Paleostress analysis within the thrust zone. Yeongchun. Danyang Coalfield, Korea. J. Min. Geol. 1992, 28, 184–195. [Google Scholar]
  41. Park, H.I.; Jang, H.W.; Jin, M.S. Forming age of mineral deposits in Mt. Taebaek. J. Min. Geol. 1988, 21, 56–67. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kim, B.K.; Cheong, C.H.; Paik, K.H.; Kim, J.H.; Kim, J.Y. Crustal Evolution of the Korean Peninsula—In the eastern part of the Mt. Taebaeg Area—Part 1: Stratigraphy, paleontology and the geologic structures in the eastern part of the Samcheong Coalfied. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 1986, 22, 21–39. [Google Scholar]
  43. Oh, C.W.; Lee, B.C.; Yi, S.-B.; Rye, H.I. Correlation of Paleoproterozoic igneous and metamorphic events of the Korean Peninsula and China; Its implication to the tectonics of Northeast Asia. Precambrian Res. 2019, 326, 344–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kee, W.S.; Kim, S.W.; Hong, P.S.; Lee, B.C.; Cho, D.R.; Byun, U.H.; Ko, K.; Kwon, C.W.; Kim, H.C.; Jang, Y.; et al. 1:1,000,000 Geological Map of Korea; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Repblic of Korea, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  45. Geological Investigation Corps of Taebaegsan Region (GICTR). Geological Maps of Taebagsan Region; Geological Survey of Korea and Geological Society of Korea: Seoul, Republic of Korea, 1962. [Google Scholar]
  46. Actlabs: Geochemistry/Assay Overview. Available online: https://actlabs.com/geochemistry/lithogeochemistry-and-whole-rock-analysis/lithogeochemistry/ (accessed on 22 December 2014).
  47. Ludwig, K.R. ISOPLOT 3.00: A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel; Berkeley Geochronology Center: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2003; p. 39. [Google Scholar]
  48. Williams, I.S. U-Th-Pb geochronology by ion microprobe. In Applications of Microanalytical Techniques to Understanding Mineralizing Processes; McKibben, M.A., Shanks, W.C.P., Ridley, W.I., Eds.; Reviews in Economic Geology; Society of Economic Geologists (SEG): Littleton, CO, USA, 1998; Volume 7, pp. 1–35. [Google Scholar]
  49. Ireland, T.R.; Williams, I.S. Considerations in zircon geochronology by SIMS. In Zircon; Hanchar, J.M., Hoskin, P.W.O., Eds.; Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry; Mineralogical Society of America: Chantilly, VA, USA, 2003; Volume 53, pp. 215–241. [Google Scholar]
  50. Ludwig, K. A User’s Manual for Isoplot 3.6: A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel; Berkeley Geochronology Center Special Publication; Berkeley Geochronology Center: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2008; Volume 4, p. 77. [Google Scholar]
  51. Ludwig, K. SQUID 2.50. A User’Manual; Berkley Geochronology Center Special Publication; Berkeley Geochronology Center: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2009; Volume 5, p. 110. [Google Scholar]
  52. Steiger, R.H.; Jäger, E. Subcommission on geochronology: Convention on the use of decay constants in geo- and cosmochronology. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1977, 36, 359–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Griffin, W.L.; Pearson, N.J.; Belousova, E.A.; Saeed, A. Comment: Hf-isotope heterogeneity in zircon 91500. Chem. Geol. 2006, 233, 358–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Polat, A.; Hofmann, A.W. Alteration and geochemical patterns in the 3.7–3.8 Ga Isua greenstone belt, West Greenland. Precambrian Res. 2003, 126, 197–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Middlemost, E.A. Naming materials in the magma/igneous rock system. Earth-Sci. Rev. 1994, 37, 215–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Peccerillo, A.; Taylor, S.R. Geochemistry of Eocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks from the Kastamonu area, Northern Turkey. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1976, 58, 63–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Irvine, T.N.; Baragar, W.R.A. A guide to the chemical classification of the common volcanic rocks. Can. J. Earth Sci. 1971, 8, 523–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Streckeisen, A. To each plutonic rock its proper name. Earth-Sci. Rev. 1976, 12, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. So, C.-S.; Kim, Y.-K.; Chi, S.-J.; Park, M.-E. Origin of Massive amphibolitic rocks in Imgye area, Korea. Min. Geol. 1981, 14, 183–191. [Google Scholar]
  60. Chang, H.W.; Lee, D.H. Magmatism and Metamorphism of the Proterozoic in the Northeastern part of Korea: Tectonomagmatic characteristics of the Imgye hornblendites. J. Korea Inst. Min. Geol. 1993, 26, 499–505. [Google Scholar]
  61. Lee, Y.; Cho, M.; Roeske, S.M. Fluid-present partial melting of Paleoproterozoic Okbang amphibolite in the Yeongnam Massif, Korea. Lithosphere 2020, 2020, 8854615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kim, N.H.; Song, Y.S.; Park, K.H.; Lee, H.S. SHRIMP U-Pb Zircon Ages of the Granite Gneisses from the Pyeonghae Area of the northeastern Yeongnam Massif (Sobaeksan Massif). J. Petrol. Soc. Korea 2009, 18, 31–47. [Google Scholar]
  63. Kim, N.; Cheong, C.S.; Yi, K.; Song, Y.S.; Park, K.H.; Geng, J.Z.; Li, H.K. Zircon U-Pb geochronological and Hf isotopic constraints on the Precambrian crustal evolution of the north-eastern Yeongnam Massif, Korea. Precambrian Res. 2014, 242, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Lee, S.G.; Asahara, Y.; Tanaka, T.; Kim, N.H.; Kim, K.H.; Yi, K.; Masuda, A.; Song, Y.S. La-Ce and Sm-Nd isotopic systematics fo early Paleoproterozoic leucogranite with tetrad Ree pattern. Chem. Geol. 2010, 276, 360–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Lee, S.G.; Shin, S.C.; Jin, M.S.; Ogasawara, M.; Yang, M.K. Two Paleoproterozoic strongly peraluminous granitic plutons (Nonggeori and Naedeokri granites) at the northeastern part of Yeongnam Massif, Korea: Geochemical and isotopic constraints in East Asian crustal formation history. Precambrian Res. 2005, 139, 101–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Cabanis, B.; Lecolle, M. Le diagramme La/10-Y-15-Nb/8: Unoutil pour la discrimination des series volcaniques et al mise enevidence des porcessus de mélange et/ou de contamination crustale. Comptes Rendus L’academie Des Sci. 1989, 309, 2023–2029. [Google Scholar]
  67. Pearce, J.A. Trace element characteristics of lavas from destructive plate boundaries. In Orogenic Andesites and Related Rocks; John Wiley and Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1982; pp. 528–548. [Google Scholar]
  68. Pearce, J.A.; Cann, J.R. Tectonic setting of basic volcanic setting of basic volcanic rocks determined using trace element analyses. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1973, 19, 290–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Saccani, E. A new method of discriminating different types of post-Archean ophiolitic basalts and their tectonic significance using Th-Nb and Ce-Dy-Yb systematics. Geosci. Front. 2015, 6, 481–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Pearce, J.A.; Harris, N.B.; Tindle, A.G. Trace element discrimination diagrams for the tectonic interpretation of granitic rocks. J. Petrol. 1984, 25, 956–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. McDonough, W.F.; Sun, S.S. The composition of the Earth1. Chem. Geol. 1995, 120, 223–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Leake, B.E.; Woolley, A.R.; Arps, C.E.S.; Birch, W.D.; Gilbert, M.C.; Grice, J.D.; Hawthorne, F.C.; Kato, A.; Kisch, H.J.; Krivovichev, V.G.; et al. Nomenclature of amphiboles: Report of the subcommittee on amphiboles of the International Mineralogical Association Commission on new mineral and mineral names. Mineral. Mag. 1997, 61, 295–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Smith, J.V.; Brown, W.L. Feldspar Minerals; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 1974; pp. 1–690. [Google Scholar]
  74. Fu, B.; Mernagh, T.P.; Kita, N.T.; Kemp, A.I.; Valley, J.W. Distinguishing magmatic zircon from hydrothermal zircon: A case study from the Gidginbung high-sulphidation Au–Ag–(Cu) deposit, SE Australia. Chem. Geol. 2009, 259, 131–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Farmer, G.L.; Holland, H.D.; Turekian, K.K. Continental basaltic rocks. Crust 2003, 3, 85–121. [Google Scholar]
  76. Pearce, J.A. Geochemical fingerprinting of oceanic basalts with applications to ophiolite classification and the search for Archean oceanic crust. Lithos 2008, 100, 14–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Aldanmaz, E.R.C.A.N.; Pearce, J.A.; Thirlwall, M.F.; Mitchell, J.G. Petrogenetic evolution of late Cenozoic, post-collision volcanism in western Anatolia, Turkey. J. Volcanol. Geother. Res. 2000, 102, 67–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Shaw, E.F. Agenda-Setting and Mass Communication Theory; Gazette: Leiden, The Netherlands, 1979; Volume 25, pp. 96–105. [Google Scholar]
  79. Gurenko, A.A.; Chaussidon, M. Enriched and depleted primitive melts included in olivine from Icelandic tholeiites: Origin by continuous melting of a single mantle column. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 1995, 59, 2905–2917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Lee, B.C.; Park, J.H.; Oh, C.W.; Yi, K. Metamorphic and magmatic evolution of the Paleoproterozoic gneisses in the Sancheong area, Yeongnam Massif, South Korea, and their implications to the tectonic in the Northeast Asia. Precambrian Res. 2017, 298, 439–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kim, Y.H. The Study on the Igneous and Metamorphic Activities from the Precambrian to the Triassic in Gapyeong Area, Located in the Central Part of the Gyeonggi Massif in the Korean Peninsula. Master’s Thesis, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju-si, Republic of Korea, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  82. Kang, M.S. The Tectonic Evolution from the Archean to Triassic in the Hongcheon Area, the Central Part of the Northern Gyeonggi Massif in the Korean Peninsula. Master’s Thesis, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju-si, Republic of Korea, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  83. Lee, Y.I.; Choi, T.; Lim, H.S. Reply to the comment on “Depositional age and petrological characteristics of the Jangsan Formation in the Taebaeksan Basin, Korea-revisited” by Lee, Y.I.; Choi, T.; Lim, H.S.; J. Geol. Soc. Korea, 2016, 52, 67–77. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 2016, 52, 969–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Hu, B.; Zhai, M.; Li, T.; Li, Z.; Peng, P.; Guo, J.; Kusky, T.M. Mesoproterozoic magmatic events in the eastern North China Craton and their tectonic implications: Geochronological evidence from detrital zircons in the Shandong Peninsula and North Korea. Gondwana Res. 2012, 22, 828–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Cho, D.-L.; Lee, S.H.; Park, J.-Y. Geological Report of the Baengyeongdo·Daecheongdo·Socheongdo sheets (1:50,000). Korea Inst. Geosci. Miner. Resour. 2021. (In Korean with English abstract). [Google Scholar]
  86. Jeong, J.W.; Oh, C.W.; Cho, D.-L. The Neoproterozoic to Triassic tectonic evolution of Jangbong Island in the northwestern Gyeonggi Massif on the Korean Peninsula. Lithos 2021, 390–391, 106102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kim, M.J.; Ha, Y.; Park, J.-W.; Park, K.-H. U-Pb ages and Hf isotopic compositions of the detrital Zircons from Baengnyeongdo and Daecheongdo: Correlation with North Korea and the North China Craton. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 2021, 57, 17–33, (In Korean with English abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Peng, P.; Zhang, Z.Y.; Zhang, Y.B.; Guo, J.H.; Zhai, M.G. Review on geological evolution of the Pyongnam basin in Korean Peninsula. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2021, 37, 129–142, (In Chinese with English abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Kim, S.W.; Kee, W.S.; Santosh, M.; Cho, D.-L.; Hong, P.S.; Ko, K.; Lee, B.C.; Byun, U.K.; Jang, Y. Tracing the Precambrian tectonic history of East Asia from Neoproterozoic sedimentation and magmatism in the Korean Peninsula. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2020, 209, 103311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Choi, D.K. A new view on the early Paleozoic paleogeography and paleoenironments of the Taebaeksan Basin Korea. J. Paleontol. Soc. Korea 2011, 27, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  91. McKenzie, N.R.; Hughes, N.C.; Myrow, P.M.; Choi, D.K.; Park, T.Y. Trilobites and zircons link north China with the eastern Himalaya during the Cambrian. Geology 2011, 39, 591–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Cheong, W.S.; Na, K.C. Origin and Evolution of Leucogranite of NE Yeongnam Massif from Samcheok Area, Korea. J. Petrol. Soc. Korea 2008, 17, 16–35. [Google Scholar]
  93. Kim, J.; Cho, M. Low-pressure metamorphism and leucogranite magmatism, northeastern Yeongnam Massif, Korea: Implication for Paleoproterozoic crustal evolution. Precambrian Res. 2003, 122, 235–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Lee, S.H.; Oh, C.W.; Park, J.W. The age and geochemistry of the mid-Cretaceous volcanic rocks in the Jinan Basin: Implications for the mid-Cretaceous tectonic environments of the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia. Lithos 2020, 358, 105383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Lee, S.H.; Oh, C.W.; Jung, S. Jurassic Igneous Activity in the Yuseong Area on the Southern Margin of the Gyeonggi Massif, Korean Peninsula, and Its Implications for the Tectonic Evolution of Northeast Asia during the Jurassic. Minerals 2021, 11, 466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Lee, S.H.; Oh, C.W.; Kawaguchi, K. Cretaceous igneous activity and tectonic evolution of the northeast Asia including the Korean Peninsula. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 2021, 57, 589–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Zhai, M.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Wu, F.; Peng, P.; Li, Q.; Hou, Q.; Li, T.; Zhao, L. Renewed profile of the Mesozoic mag-matism in Korean Peninsula: Regional correlation and broader implication for cratonic destruction in the North China Craton. Sci. China Earth Sci. 2016, 59, 2355–2388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Oh, C.W.; Kim, S.W.; Williams, I.S. Spinel granulite in Odesan area, South China blocks. Lithos 2006, 92, 557–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Yi, K.; Cho, M. SHRIMP geochronology and reaction texture of monazite from a retrogressive transitional layer, Hwacheon Granulite Complex, Korea. Geosci. J. 2009, 13, 293–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Lee, S.R.; Cho, M.; Yi, K.; Stern, R.A. Early Proterozoic granulites in central Korea: Tectonic correlation with Chinese cratons. J. Geol. 2000, 108, 729–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Oh, C.W.; Lee, J.Y.; Yengkhom, K.S.; Lee, B.C.; Ryu, H.I. Neoproterozoic igneous activity and Permo-Triassic metamorphism inthe Gapyeong area within the Gyeonggi Massif, South Korea, and theirimplication for the tectonics of northeastern Asia. Lithos 2018, 322, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Kee, W.; Kim, H.; Kim, B.C.; Choi, S.; Park, S.; Hwang, S.K. Geological Report of the Seoraksan Sheet scale 1:50,000; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  103. Cho, M.; Kim, T.; Yang, S.; Yi, K. Paleoproterozoic to Triassic crustal evolution of the Gyeonggi Massif, Korea: Tectonic correlation with the North China craton. Mem. Geol. Soc. Am. 2017, 213, 165–197. [Google Scholar]
  104. Kee, W.; Koh, H.; Kim, S.W.; Kim, Y.B.; Kihm, Y.H.; Kim, H.; Park, S.; Song, K.; Lee, S.R.; Lee, Y.; et al. Tectonic Evolution of the Upper Crustal Units in the Mid-Western Part of the Korean Peninsula; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  105. Song, K.; Cho, D. Geological Report of the Mandaeri Sheet Scale 1:50,000; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  106. Choi, P.; Kim, H.; Lee, S.R.; Gwon, S. Geological Report of the Inje Sheet Scale 1:50,000; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  107. Kee, W.; Cho, D.; Kim, B.C.; Jin, K. Geological Report of the Pocheon Sheet Scale 1:50,000; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  108. Oh, C.W.; Imayama, T.; Lee, S.Y.; Yi, S.B.; Yi, K.; Lee, B.C. Permo-Triassic and Paleoproterozoic metamorphism related to continental collision in Yangpyeong, South Korea. Lithos 2015, 216, 264–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Kim, J.S. The Paleoproterozoic Igneous and Metamorphic Activities in the Janghowon Area, the Southern Middle Gyeonggi Massif and Their Meaning to the Tectonic Evolution of the Northeast Asia. Master’s Thesis, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, Republic of Korea, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  110. Song, Y.-S.; Park, K.-H.; Seo, J.; Jo, H.J.; Yi, K. SHRIMP zircon Ages of the Basement Gneiss Complex in the Pyeongchang-Wonju Area, Gyeonggi Massif, Korea. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 2011, 20, 99–114. (In Korean) [Google Scholar]
  111. Santosh, M.; Hu, C.N.; Kim, S.W.; Tang, L.; Kee, W.S. Late Paleoproterozoic ultrahigh-temperature metamorphism in the Korean Peninsula. Precambrian Res. 2018, 308, 111–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Koh, H.J.; Kim, S.W.; Lee, S.R. Geological Report of the Anheungri Sheet Scale 1:50,000; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  113. Kim, S.W.; Koh, H.J.; Kim, J.M. Geochronological study for the gneiss complex in the Wonju-Anheung-Pyeongchang area, central part of the Korean Peninsula. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 2014, 50, 327–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Kim, N.H. Petrology, Geochemistry and Geochronology Study of Precambrian Basement Rocks in the Northeastern Yeongnam Massif, South Korea: Their Tectonic Implications. Doctoral Dissertation, Pukyong National University, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  115. Lee, H.S.; Park, K.-H.; Song, Y.S.; Kim, N.H.; Orihashi, Y. LA-ICP-MS U-Pb Zircon Age of the Hongjesa Granite in the Northeast Yeongnam Massif. J. Petrol. Sci. Korea 2010, 19, 103–108. [Google Scholar]
  116. Kim, J.; Lee, Y. A Study on the Geochronology of the Precambrian Basement Rocks in the Korean Peninsula; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  117. Ryoo, C.; Kang, H.; Lee, S. Ductile Shear Deformation around Jirisan Area, Korea. J. Petrol. Soc. Korea 2019, 28, 53–69. [Google Scholar]
  118. Oh, C.W.; Lee, B.C.; Lee, S.; Kim, M.; Lee, B.; Choi, S. The tectonic evolution and important geoheritages in the Jinan and Muju area, Jeollabuk-do. J. Geol. Soc. Korea 2016, 52, 709–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Lee, Y.; Cho, M.; Kim, T.; Kim, H. Incipient charnockite formation at the waning stage of Paleoproterozoic hot orogenesis, Yeongnam Massif, Korea. Precambrian Res. 2021, 365, 106388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Kim, S.W.; Kwon, S.; Yi, K.; Santosh, M. Arc magmatism in the Yeongnam massif, Korean Peninsula: Imprints of Columbia and Rodinia supercontinents. Gondwana Res. 2014, 26, 1009–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Lee, Y.Y.; Cho, M.; Yi, K. In situ U–Pb and Lu–Hf isotopic studies of zircons from the Sancheong–Hadong AMCG suite, Yeongnam Massif, Korea: Implications for the petrogenesis of 1.86 Ga massif-type anorthosite. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2017, 138, 629–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Lee, Y.Y.; Cho, M.; Cheong, W.; Yi, K. Prolonged high–temperature, low–pressure metamorphism associated with 1.86 Ga Sancheong–Hadong anorthosite in the Yeongnam Massif, Korea: Paleoproterozoic hot orogenesis in the North China Craton. Precambrian Res. 2018, 307, 175–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Kim, S.W.; Park, S.; Kee, W.; Kim, B.C. Geological Report of the Goheung Sheet Scale 1:50,000; Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources: Daejeon, Republic of Korea, 2015. [Google Scholar]
Minerals 13 00752 g002 550
Figure 2. Outcrop photographs and photomicrographs showing textures and mineral assemblages of the studied igneous rocks and sedimentary units in the Imgye area: (a,b) Imgye gabbroic diorite, (c,d) Jungbongsan granite, and (e,f) Jangsan quartzite. Abbreviations: Amp, amphibole; Bt, biotite; Ep, epidote; Kfs, K-feldspar; Mus, muscovite; Pl, plagioclase; Qtz, quartz; PPL, plane-polarized light; XPL, cross-polarized light.
Figure 2. Outcrop photographs and photomicrographs showing textures and mineral assemblages of the studied igneous rocks and sedimentary units in the Imgye area: (a,b) Imgye gabbroic diorite, (c,d) Jungbongsan granite, and (e,f) Jangsan quartzite. Abbreviations: Amp, amphibole; Bt, biotite; Ep, epidote; Kfs, K-feldspar; Mus, muscovite; Pl, plagioclase; Qtz, quartz; PPL, plane-polarized light; XPL, cross-polarized light.
Minerals 13 00752 g002
Minerals 13 00752 g003 550
Figure 3. Geochemical classifications of the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite in the Imgye area and the Paleoproterozoic mafic and felsic igneous rocks in the Gyeonggi and northern Yeongnam massifs: (a) total alkali vs. silica diagram after [55]; (b) K2O vs. SiO2 diagram after [56]; (c) AFM diagram showing whole-rock composition (A = Na2O + K2O; F = FeOt; M = MgO). The line between the calc-alkaline and tholeiitic series derived from Irvine and Baragar [57]; (d) quartz–alkali feldspar plagioclase classification diagram [58]. Abbreviations: 1, quartzolite; 2, quartz-rich granitoid; 3, alkali feldspar granite; 4, granodiorite; 5, tonalite; 6, quartz alkali feldspar syenite; 7, quartz monzodiorite, quartz monzogabbro; 8, quartz diorite, quartz gabbro, quartz anorthosite; 9, alkali feldspar syenite; 10, monzodiorite, monzogabbro; 11, diorite, gabbro. The whole-rock data are from [11,12,16,18,20,21,59,60,61,62,63,64,65].
Figure 3. Geochemical classifications of the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite in the Imgye area and the Paleoproterozoic mafic and felsic igneous rocks in the Gyeonggi and northern Yeongnam massifs: (a) total alkali vs. silica diagram after [55]; (b) K2O vs. SiO2 diagram after [56]; (c) AFM diagram showing whole-rock composition (A = Na2O + K2O; F = FeOt; M = MgO). The line between the calc-alkaline and tholeiitic series derived from Irvine and Baragar [57]; (d) quartz–alkali feldspar plagioclase classification diagram [58]. Abbreviations: 1, quartzolite; 2, quartz-rich granitoid; 3, alkali feldspar granite; 4, granodiorite; 5, tonalite; 6, quartz alkali feldspar syenite; 7, quartz monzodiorite, quartz monzogabbro; 8, quartz diorite, quartz gabbro, quartz anorthosite; 9, alkali feldspar syenite; 10, monzodiorite, monzogabbro; 11, diorite, gabbro. The whole-rock data are from [11,12,16,18,20,21,59,60,61,62,63,64,65].
Minerals 13 00752 g003
Minerals 13 00752 g004 550
Figure 4. Tectonic discrimination diagrams for the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite in the Imgye area and the Paleoproterozoic mafic and felsic igneous rocks in the Gyeonggi and Yeongnam massifs: (a) Y/15-La/10-Nb/8 ternary diagram after [66]; (b) Ti vs. Zr diagram after [67]; (c) Ti/100-Zr-Y*3 diagram after [68]; (d) ThN vs. NbN diagram after [69]; (e) Nb vs. Y diagram after [70]; (f) Rb vs. Yb + Ta diagram after [70]. The symbols are the same as those in Figure 3. Abbreviations: VAB, volcanic arc basalt; MORB, mid-ocean ridge basalt; WPB, within-plate basalt; IAT, island arc tholeiite; CAB, calc-alkaline basalt; MTB, medium-Ti basalt; SSZ D-MORB, supra-subduction zone depleted mid-ocean ridge basalt; G-MORB, garnet-influenced mid-ocean ridge basalt; E-MORB, enriched mid-ocean ridge basalt; P-MORB, plume mid-ocean ridge basalt; AB, alkaline basalt; OIB, ocean island basalt; VAG, volcanic arc granite; ORG, ocean ridge granite; Syn-COLG, syn-collisional granite; WPG, within-plate granite; Post-COLG, post-collisional granite.
Figure 4. Tectonic discrimination diagrams for the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite in the Imgye area and the Paleoproterozoic mafic and felsic igneous rocks in the Gyeonggi and Yeongnam massifs: (a) Y/15-La/10-Nb/8 ternary diagram after [66]; (b) Ti vs. Zr diagram after [67]; (c) Ti/100-Zr-Y*3 diagram after [68]; (d) ThN vs. NbN diagram after [69]; (e) Nb vs. Y diagram after [70]; (f) Rb vs. Yb + Ta diagram after [70]. The symbols are the same as those in Figure 3. Abbreviations: VAB, volcanic arc basalt; MORB, mid-ocean ridge basalt; WPB, within-plate basalt; IAT, island arc tholeiite; CAB, calc-alkaline basalt; MTB, medium-Ti basalt; SSZ D-MORB, supra-subduction zone depleted mid-ocean ridge basalt; G-MORB, garnet-influenced mid-ocean ridge basalt; E-MORB, enriched mid-ocean ridge basalt; P-MORB, plume mid-ocean ridge basalt; AB, alkaline basalt; OIB, ocean island basalt; VAG, volcanic arc granite; ORG, ocean ridge granite; Syn-COLG, syn-collisional granite; WPG, within-plate granite; Post-COLG, post-collisional granite.
Minerals 13 00752 g004
Minerals 13 00752 g005 550
Figure 5. Chondrite-normalized rare-earth element (REE) and primitive-mantle normalized muti-element patterns for the (a,b) Imgye gabbroic diorite and (c,d) Jungbongsan granite, respectively. The elements are normalized to the chondrite and primitive-mantle compositions suggested by [71].
Figure 5. Chondrite-normalized rare-earth element (REE) and primitive-mantle normalized muti-element patterns for the (a,b) Imgye gabbroic diorite and (c,d) Jungbongsan granite, respectively. The elements are normalized to the chondrite and primitive-mantle compositions suggested by [71].
Minerals 13 00752 g005
Minerals 13 00752 g006 550
Figure 6. Mineral chemistry plots of (a) amphibole [72] and (b) plagioclase in the Imgye gabbroic diorite [73]. Abbreviations: Tr, tremolite; Hbl, hornblende; Tsch, tschermakite; Ab, albite; An, anorthite; Or, orthoclase.
Figure 6. Mineral chemistry plots of (a) amphibole [72] and (b) plagioclase in the Imgye gabbroic diorite [73]. Abbreviations: Tr, tremolite; Hbl, hornblende; Tsch, tschermakite; Ab, albite; An, anorthite; Or, orthoclase.
Minerals 13 00752 g006
Minerals 13 00752 g007 550
Figure 7. SEM CL images and Concordia plot of U–Pb isotopic analyses of zircons from the (a,b) Imgye gabbroic diorite, (c,d) Jungbongsan granite, and (e,f) Jangsan quartzite in the Imgye area. (a,c,e) Solid circles and dotted circles indicate the locations of U–Pb and Lu–Hf analyses, respectively, and the numbers represent the analyzed spot numbers and 207Pb/206Pb ages of zircons. (b,d) Filled solid ellipses represent data used for obtaining intercept age. (f) Filled solid and dashed ellipses represent concordant age (concordance > 90%) and discordant age (discordance > 10%).
Figure 7. SEM CL images and Concordia plot of U–Pb isotopic analyses of zircons from the (a,b) Imgye gabbroic diorite, (c,d) Jungbongsan granite, and (e,f) Jangsan quartzite in the Imgye area. (a,c,e) Solid circles and dotted circles indicate the locations of U–Pb and Lu–Hf analyses, respectively, and the numbers represent the analyzed spot numbers and 207Pb/206Pb ages of zircons. (b,d) Filled solid ellipses represent data used for obtaining intercept age. (f) Filled solid and dashed ellipses represent concordant age (concordance > 90%) and discordant age (discordance > 10%).
Minerals 13 00752 g007
Minerals 13 00752 g008 550
Figure 8. Diagram showing the variation in zircon Hf isotopic data in the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite: (a) 176Hf/177Hf(i) vs. 207Pb/206Pb (Ma) diagram; (b) εHf(t) vs. t (Ma) diagram; (c) histogram of TDM2 model ages for the Imgye gabbroic diorite; (d) histogram of TDM2 model ages for the Jungbongsan granite.
Figure 8. Diagram showing the variation in zircon Hf isotopic data in the Imgye gabbroic diorite and Jungbongsan granite: (a) 176Hf/177Hf(i) vs. 207Pb/206Pb (Ma) diagram; (b) εHf(t) vs. t (Ma) diagram; (c) histogram of TDM2 model ages for the Imgye gabbroic diorite; (d) histogram of TDM2 model ages for the Jungbongsan granite.
Minerals 13 00752 g008
Minerals 13 00752 g009 550
Figure 9. The Imgye gabbroic diorite and other Paleoproterozoic mafic rocks in the northern Yeongnam massif plotted in the (a) Zr/Yb vs. Nb/Yb [55] and (b) Th/Yb vs. Nb/Yb diagrams [76], and in the (c) Sm/Yb vs. La/Yb diagram [77], in which melt curves were calculated using the modal batch melting equations [78]. Curves for garnet–lherzolite (with mode Ol0.60 + Opx0.20 + Cpx0.10 + Grt0.10), spinel–lherzolite (with mode Ol0.53 + Opx0.27 + Cpx0.17 + Spl0.03), and garnet–spinel lherzolite (with mode Ol0.55 + Opx0.22 + Cpx0.15 + Grt0.06 + Spl0.02) are after [79].
Figure 9. The Imgye gabbroic diorite and other Paleoproterozoic mafic rocks in the northern Yeongnam massif plotted in the (a) Zr/Yb vs. Nb/Yb [55] and (b) Th/Yb vs. Nb/Yb diagrams [76], and in the (c) Sm/Yb vs. La/Yb diagram [77], in which melt curves were calculated using the modal batch melting equations [78]. Curves for garnet–lherzolite (with mode Ol0.60 + Opx0.20 + Cpx0.10 + Grt0.10), spinel–lherzolite (with mode Ol0.53 + Opx0.27 + Cpx0.17 + Spl0.03), and garnet–spinel lherzolite (with mode Ol0.55 + Opx0.22 + Cpx0.15 + Grt0.06 + Spl0.02) are after [79].
Minerals 13 00752 g009
Minerals 13 00752 g010 550
Figure 10. Plot of the Jungbongsan granite and Paleoproterozoic felsic igneous rocks in the northern Yeongnam massif in the (a) Ba vs. Sr and (b) Ba vs. Rb diagrams, showing a feldspar-dominated fractional crystallization trend. The same abbreviations in Figure 2 are used.
Figure 10. Plot of the Jungbongsan granite and Paleoproterozoic felsic igneous rocks in the northern Yeongnam massif in the (a) Ba vs. Sr and (b) Ba vs. Rb diagrams, showing a feldspar-dominated fractional crystallization trend. The same abbreviations in Figure 2 are used.
Minerals 13 00752 g010
Minerals 13 00752 g011 550
Figure 11. Histograms of reported age from Paleoproterozoic igneous and metamorphic rocks in the (a) northern Gyeonggi massif, (b) southern Gyeonggi massif, and (c) Yeongnam massif. The data for the northern Gyeonggi, southern Gyeonggi, and Yeongnam massifs are in Table S11. (d) Simplified model of the tectonic evolution of the northern and southern Gyeonggi massifs at 1.89–1.83 Ga. (e) Simplified model of the tectonic evolution of the northern Yeongnam massifs at 1.90–1.85 Ga (modified from [14]). The same abbreviations in Figure 1 are used.
Figure 11. Histograms of reported age from Paleoproterozoic igneous and metamorphic rocks in the (a) northern Gyeonggi massif, (b) southern Gyeonggi massif, and (c) Yeongnam massif. The data for the northern Gyeonggi, southern Gyeonggi, and Yeongnam massifs are in Table S11. (d) Simplified model of the tectonic evolution of the northern and southern Gyeonggi massifs at 1.89–1.83 Ga. (e) Simplified model of the tectonic evolution of the northern Yeongnam massifs at 1.90–1.85 Ga (modified from [14]). The same abbreviations in Figure 1 are used.
Minerals 13 00752 g011
Table
Table 1. The summary of the tectonic evolution of the Paleoproterozoic massifs in the Korean Peninsula and northeastern North China Craton (modified after [43]).
Table 1. The summary of the tectonic evolution of the Paleoproterozoic massifs in the Korean Peninsula and northeastern North China Craton (modified after [43]).
Time
(Ga)		EventLocation
Taebaeksan
Basin
(Imgye)		Northern Yeongnam MassifSouthern
Gyeonggi
Massif		Northern
Gyeonggi
Massif		Nangnim
Massif		Jiao–Liao–Ji Belt in North China Craton
2.2–2.1Magmatism-----Arc-related
Metamorphism------
2.1–2.0Magmatism---Arc-relatedGranite
emplacement		-
Metamorphism------
1.99–1.96Magmatism-Arc-related----
Metamorphism------
1.95–1.90MagmatismArc-related-Arc-relatedCollision
-related		S-type granite
emplacement		-
Metamorphism--MigmatizationIntermediate-P/TIntermediate-P/TIntermediate-P/T
1.89–1.85MagmatismArc-relatedArc-related-Post-collision
-related		Post-collision
-related		Post-collision
-related
Metamorphism-Low-P/T-Low-P/TLow-P/TLow-P/T
1.84–1.80Magmatism--Post-collision
-related		Within Plate
rifting-related		Post-collision
-related		Post-collision
-related
Metamorphism--Low-P/T-MigmatizationLow-P/T
The relevant references are mentioned in [80,81,82].
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lee, B.Y.; Cho, D.-L.; Oh, C.W.; Lee, B.C.; Lee, S.H. The Paleoproterozoic Evolution of Basement Rocks of the Taebaeksan Basin, Korean Peninsula, and Their Correlation to Those of the Paleoproterozoic Massifs in the Korean Peninsula. Minerals 2023, 13, 752. https://doi.org/10.3390/min13060752

AMA Style

Lee BY, Cho D-L, Oh CW, Lee BC, Lee SH. The Paleoproterozoic Evolution of Basement Rocks of the Taebaeksan Basin, Korean Peninsula, and Their Correlation to Those of the Paleoproterozoic Massifs in the Korean Peninsula. Minerals. 2023; 13(6):752. https://doi.org/10.3390/min13060752

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lee, Bo Young, Deung-Lyong Cho, Chang Whan Oh, Byung Choon Lee, and Seung Hwan Lee. 2023. "The Paleoproterozoic Evolution of Basement Rocks of the Taebaeksan Basin, Korean Peninsula, and Their Correlation to Those of the Paleoproterozoic Massifs in the Korean Peninsula" Minerals 13, no. 6: 752. https://doi.org/10.3390/min13060752

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop