Next Article in Journal
Fluid Inclusion Constraints on the Formation Conditions of the Evevpenta Au–Ag Epithermal Deposit, Kamchatka, Russia
Previous Article in Journal
Molecular Dynamics Investigation of Mineral Surface Wettability in Oil–Water Systems: Implications for Hydrocarbon Reservoir Development
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Minerals
Volume 15
Issue 11
10.3390/min15111195
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
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Provenance and Tectonic Setting of the Mesoproterozoic Pudeng Formation in the Western Yangtze Block

by
Jian Yao
1,2,
Youliang Chen
1,3,*,
Luyu Huang
1,
Jing Zhao
1,3,*,
Mengjuan Gu
1 and
Baoling Zhang
1
1
College of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China
2
No. 280 Research Institute of Nuclear Industry, Guanghan 618300, China
3
Key Laboratory of Applied Nuclear Techniques in Geosciences, Sichuan, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu 610059, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2025, 15(11), 1195; https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111195
Submission received: 9 October 2025 / Revised: 10 November 2025 / Accepted: 11 November 2025 / Published: 13 November 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Mineral Geochemistry and Geochronology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The Yangtze Block provides a natural window into the tectonic evolution of Precambrian continental crusts. The Julin Group is a dominant Precambrian stratigraphic unit in the southwestern block, the depositional age of which is still poorly constrained. The lowest sequence of this group, the Pudeng Formation, is primarily composed of mica-quartz schists and quartzites intruded by a biotite monzogranite. LA–ICP–MS zircon U-Pb ages of biotite monzogranite and detrital zircons constrain the deposition of the Julin Group to between 1099 and 1052 Ma. Geochemical compositions of the mica-quartz schists and quartzites display high δCe, ΣREE, Th/Sc, and Th/U, along with low δEu, La/Sc, Ce/Th, and Al2O3/(Al2O3 + Fe2O3) ratios, indicating their derivation from felsic volcanic protoliths in a passive continental margin setting. The detrital zircons show distinct age peaks at 2.5, 1.85, and 1.6 Ga, with their source regions primarily located along the western and northern Yangtze Block. Integrating the magmatic records within the Yangtze Block with the ages and εHf(t) values of detrital zircons indicates that the tectonic setting of the western Yangtze Block evolved from a subduction-related arc at ~2.5 Ga to an orogenic belt at ~1.86 Ga and subsequently to intracontinental extensional (rift) environments at ~1.6 Ga and ~1.2 Ga. This evolution reflects the geodynamic transition from the Arrowsmith orogeny to the assembly and development of the Columbia and Rodinia supercontinents.

1. Introduction

The Yangtze Block, a major Asian micro-continent, recorded the tectonic evolutionary history of Precambrian continental crusts [1]. Over the past several decades, studies on the Precambrian basement and associated magmatic rocks of the Yangtze Block have demonstrated that it was an important participant in the assembly and evolution of the Columbia and Rodinia supercontinents (Figure 1a) [2,3,4,5]. However, the paleogeographic position of the western Yangtze Block within the Columbia supercontinent remains debated. Some researchers proposed that the Yangtze Block had not yet participated in the supercontinent assembly during the late Mesoproterozoic [6]. Others argued that the western Yangtze Block was located adjacent to India, Australia, and East Antarctica but distal from Laurentia [7]; near Siberia and Australia [8]; or even simultaneously close to East Antarctica, Australia, Laurentia, and Siberia [9]. The northern and western margins of the proto-Yangtze Block are considered to represent two independent microcontinental fragments, which amalgamated together at ~2.0 Ga [3]. Along the western magrin of the Yangtze Block, late Mesoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic sedimentary strata are widely exposed, including the Huili [6], Yanbian [10], Kunyang [7], and Julin Groups [11,12] (Figure 1b). Even so, many fundamental issues involved in these Precambrian basements, including their depositional ages, tectonic settings, and provenances, remain poorly constrained so far, particularly when compared to the well-studied magmatic rocks in the block [13,14,15,16], for example, the Pudeng Formation of the Julin Group.
The Julin Group in the southwestern Yangtze Block comprises a well-preserved sequence of Precambrian basement units, including the Pudeng, Lugumo, Fenghuangshan, and Haizishao formations from bottom to top (Figure 1c) [17]. Among them, the Pudeng Formation has recently drawn particular attention due to its potential to host significant graphite and uranium occurrences [18,19,20,21]. Nevertheless, its depositional age and tectonic setting remain poorly constrained. To address these issues, we present a new zircon chronology, Lu-Hf isotopes, and whole-rock geochemical analyses from the Pudeng Formation. This study aimed to (1) constrain the depositional age of the Pudeng Formation and (2) clarify the provenance of detrital zircons, thereby providing insights into the tectonic evolution of the western Yangtze Block during the Precambrian.
Minerals 15 01195 g001
Figure 1. (a) Distribution of Precambrian basement outcropped in the South China Craton (modified from Cawood et al., 2020 [3]). (b) Geological map of the western Yangtze Block, highlighting the late Paleoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic strata (modified from Liu et al., 2025 [22]). The crystallization ages of granite plutons are from Li et al., 2003 [23]; Wang et al., 2019 [24]; Zhu et al., 2019; 2020, 2021 [2,25,26]; Huang et al., 2024 [27]; Yin et al., 2024 [28]; Huang et al., 2025 [29]. (c) Stratigraphic columns showing litho-sections of the Julin group (modified from Chen et al., 2014 [11]).
Figure 1. (a) Distribution of Precambrian basement outcropped in the South China Craton (modified from Cawood et al., 2020 [3]). (b) Geological map of the western Yangtze Block, highlighting the late Paleoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic strata (modified from Liu et al., 2025 [22]). The crystallization ages of granite plutons are from Li et al., 2003 [23]; Wang et al., 2019 [24]; Zhu et al., 2019; 2020, 2021 [2,25,26]; Huang et al., 2024 [27]; Yin et al., 2024 [28]; Huang et al., 2025 [29]. (c) Stratigraphic columns showing litho-sections of the Julin group (modified from Chen et al., 2014 [11]).
Minerals 15 01195 g001

2. Geological Background and Sampling

The Yangtze Block is located in southern China, where its southeastern margin joins the Cathaysia Block along the Jiangnan Orogenic Belt to form the South China Craton (Figure 1a). It is bounded to the north by the Qinling–Dabie–Sulu Orogen, which separates it from the North China Craton, and to the southeast by the Ailaoshan–Songma suture, which separates it from the Indochina Block [30,31]. Along its western margin, the Yangtze Block is adjacent to the Songpan–Ganzi terrane of the Tibetan Plateau [32]. Relatively continuous Precambrian strata occur along the northern and western Yangtze Block. The oldest rocks in the northern part of the block are 3.45 Ga granitic gneisses of the Kongling Complex [33], which are accompanied by abundant trondhjemite–tonalite–granite (TTG) gneisses and migmatites recording two major magmatic events at 2.85–2.95 Ga and a minor event at 3.2–3.3 Ga, respectively [34,35]. Subsequently, the Cuoke Complex in the western Yangtze Block has been recognized as comprising granitoids ranging from 3.1 to 1.9 Ga [36]. However, these ancient basement rocks are only sporadically exposed. In contrast, the majority of basement formations can be divided into two principal periods: the late Paleoproterozoic and the interval spanning the late Mesoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic. In the northern margin of the Yangtze Block, the Shennongjia and Dagushi Groups predominantly represent Mesoproterozoic sequences and share similar lithologies, including sandstone, siltstone, and dolomite [15,37,38], whereas the Huashan Group constitutes the main Neoproterozoic unit [15]. Specifically, the Shennongjia Group was deposited between 1.22 and 1.10 Ga in a continental rift setting along a passive continental margin [37,39], while the maximum depositional age of the Dagushi Group is estimated at 1.10–1.00 Ga [15]. The Neoproterozoic Huashan Group (810–780 Ma) was derived from juvenile material within an extensional tectonic setting [15]. At the western margin of the Yangtze Block, the Dongchuan Group represents the oldest basement, with a depositional age estimated between 1.74 and 1.68 Ga [40,41]. In addition, the Hekou and Dahongshan Groups are a Paleoproterozoic crystalline basement. The Hekou Group, deposited between 1.72 and 1.60 Ga, consists of volcanic and sedimentary rocks, with the volcanic components indicating formation in a back-arc basin [42]. The maximum depositional age of the Dahongshan Group is estimated at 1.71–1.69 Ga, and it is dominated by metamorphosed sedimentary rocks, including schist, plagioclase amphibolite, and marble, with a subordinate component of metamorphosed volcanic rocks [43]. The remaining basement sequences of the Yangtze Block span the late Mesoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic and are typically represented by the Kunyang, Huili, Julin, and Yanbian Groups [44]. The Kunyang and Huili Groups are mainly composed of siltstone, slate, sandstone-bearing siltstone, and limestone interlayered with volcanic rocks, with depositional ages ranging from 1050 to 1000 Ma [45]. Notably, one interpretation suggests that the Dahongshan Group constitutes the basement underlying the Kunyang Group [7,45]. Detrital zircons from the Lower and Upper Huili Groups were sourced from geochemically and geochronologically distinct provenances [6]. In contrast, the Yanbian Group consists of thick sequences of basaltic lavas and flysch deposits, with its upper portion characterized by fine-grained volcaniclastic sandstones and mudstones, and a maximum depositional age estimated at approximately 870 Ma [10]. The Julin Group is subdivided, from base to top, into the Pudeng, Lugumo, Fenghuangshan, and Haizishao formations (Figure 1c) [17]. The Pudeng Formation is primarily composed of quartz sandstone, qz-mus-schist, qz-schist, granitic gneiss, and amphibolite. The Lugumo Formation consists of schist, quartzite, and quartz sandstone, whereas the Haizishao Formation is dominated by schists and siltstones. In contrast to the other formations, the Fenghuangshan Formation contains marble (Figure 1c) [17]. In this study, the research area was located in the middle of the western Yangtze Block, with exposed outcrops of the Pudeng Formation.
The area is primarily underlain by the Meso- to Neoproterozoic granite and gabbro, the Pudeng Formation, and hosts a uranium anomaly site, located in the Xujie region of Yunnan Province (Figure 2). A measured stratigraphic section reveals that the Pudeng Formation comprises a wide variety of lithologies, which includes, quartzite, biotite quartzite, quartz shist, mica-quartz schist, plagioclase-amphibole schist, garnet-biotite-quartz schist, feldspar-mica-quartz schist, metamorphic-quartz sandstone, albitite, diabase, and granite (Figure 3). The metasedimentary rocks exhibit a well-layered structure, with individual beds ranging from 2 to 60 cm in thickness. NE-trending albitite, diabase, and granite dykes cut across the metasedimentary sequence, suggesting post-metamorphic intrusive activity.
Fourteen rock samples were collected, including thirteen metasedimentary rocks—mainly quartz schists and quartzites—and one granite sample (Figure 3 and Figure 4). The grayish-white, medium- to thick-bedded feldspar–biotite–quartz schist and quartzite are characterized by individual beds of ~10–20 cm in thickness, and cumulative thicknesses of ~10–20 m and ~3–70 m, respectively, indicating significant lithological variation (Figure 4a,e). Quartz schist beds (10–25 cm thick) and mica–quartz schist beds (0.5–2 cm thick) are rhythmically interlayered, forming a well-developed laminated structure (Figure 4c). The NE-trending biotite monzogranite dyke intrudes the mica-quartz schist of the Pudeng Formation (Figure 4g). The schists share broadly similar lithologies, but their mineral compositions vary. They are characterized by biotite (12%–27%) and white mica (5%–23%), which are intergrown to form lamellar mineral bands, quartz (36%–75%) aligned with stress orientations, garnet (0%–23%) that commonly shows sericitization, anorthoclase (0%–23%) strongly associated with stress-related fabrics, and minor opaque minerals (~1%) (Figure 4b,d). The quartzite exhibits granular blastoblastic, block, and gneiss-like structures (Figure 4e,f), mainly composed of quartz (93%–95%), biotite (0%–4%), muscovite (0%–4%), and opaque minerals (~3%). Thin-section observations reveal that most minerals in the metasedimentary rocks are subangular to angular, with only a few subrounded grains. Grain sizes are highly variable, indicating poor sorting and roundness, and suggesting immature detrital mineral assemblages. Moreover, microscopic analyses show a relatively high abundance of feldspar (Figure 4b,d [46]) and aggregates of biotite lamellae (Figure 4b,d,f [47]). Combined with field evidence, these features indicate short transport distances and thus support a proximal depositional setting for the metasedimentary rocks of the Pudeng Formation.
The biotite monzogranite (Figure 4g,h) is mainly composed of potassium feldspar (~36%), quartz (~31%), plagioclase (~20%), biotite (~12%), and minor opaque and translucent minerals (~1%). Overall, the rock displays a predominantly granular texture with a weakly developed gneissic fabric.

3. Methods

Ten samples were collected from the mica-quartz schist and quartzite of the Pudeng Formation in the Xujie area. Zircons from samples XJG2101 (biotite quartzite), XJG2102 (quartzite), XJG2103 (feldspar-biotite-quartz schist), and XJG2104 (biotite monzogranite) were separated using conventional heavy liquid and magnetic techniques. Zircon grains from the >25 μm nonmagnetic fractions were hand-picked, mounted in an epoxy resin disk, and polished and coated with gold film. After photographing under cathodoluminescence (CL) and obtaining backscattered electron images to reveal their external and internal structures, the zircons were selected for U-Pb dating and Hf isotope analysis at Nanjing Hongchuang Exploration Technology Service Co., Ltd. (Nanjing, China). The whole-rock major oxides and trace elements of the samples were analyzed at the Analytical Laboratory of the Beijing Research Institute of Uranium Geology (China). The analytical techniques are described in detail in the Supplementary File S1, and the analytical data are presented in Supplementary Tables S1–S3.

4. Results

4.1. Zircon U-Pb Age

4.1.1. Metasedimentary Rock

Zircons obtained from the three metasedimentary samples in the Pudeng Formation show transparent and subhedral grains with 30–150 μm in size. CL images (Supplementary Tables S1–S3) show that the zircons are elongated, with 70% exhibiting poor rounding, indicating a short transport distance and suggesting a proximal source. The remaining 30% show better rounding, implying a longer transport distance and more distal provenance. In addition, these zircons display distinct oscillatory zoning, and the average Th/U ratio was 0.70, indicating a magmatic origin. Zircon U-Pb Concordia diagrams and statistical histograms of age frequency were constructed (Figure 5). The analyzed points of these zircons were aligned with the concordia curve (Figure 5). Combined with dating data (Supplementary Table S1), the three groups of surface age values of 207Pb/206Pb, 207Pb/235U, and 206Pb/238U are consistent within their error range, ruling out significant Pb loss. Additionally, the ages of all analyzed spots were greater than 1000 Ma, so the age values of 207Pb/206Pb were used.
The zircon age distribution of the biotite quartzite (XJG-2101) samples ranges from 2553 to 1165 Ma, with three age intervals (Figure 5b). The first major interval was between 2000 and 1165 Ma (n = 67; the main peak age was ~1.60 Ga, and the secondary peak age was ~1.85 Ga). Additionally, two secondary age ranges were identified: 2272 to 2217 Ma (n = 2) and 2553 to 2462 Ma (n = 11, peak age ~2.52 Ga), with the youngest zircon being 1165 ± 25 Ma.
The age of the quartzite (XJG-2102) samples ranged from 3112 to 1099 Ma, and three age intervals were observed: ranging from 2229 to 1483 Ma (n = 50, the peak age was ~1.85 Ga), 2664–2333 Ma (n = 17, the peak age was ~2.50 Ga), 1374–1099 Ma (n = 12), with the youngest zircon age being 1099 ± 43 Ma (Figure 5d).
The age of the measuring point of the feldspar-biotite-quartz schist (XJG-2103) sample was between 3550 and 1103 Ma, and three age ranges were observed: 2309–1440 Ma (n = 56, the peak age was ~1.83 Ga), intermediate 2720–2435 Ma (n = 14, main peak age was ~2.5 Ga), and 1298–1103 Ma (n = 6), with the youngest zircon age being 1103 ± 3 Ma (Figure 5f).

4.1.2. Biotite Monzogranite

A CL image of zircons from the biotite monzogranite (XJG-2104) is shown in Supplementary Figure S4, where the zircons are idiomorphic and semi-idiomorphic, long (150–300 μm) and short columnar (60–150 μm), with an aspect ratio ranging from 1:1 to 3:1. The zircons in the XJG-2104 sample are typical magmatic zircons. Most of the zircons have apparent oscillating magmatic rings. XJG-2104 has 40 sets (Supplementary Table S1); the zircons in the sample have high Th/U ratios ranging from 0.53 to 1.13 (except for one, which was 0.3).
The age distribution of the analyzed spots was concentrated at approximately 1000 Ma, and the error of the 206Pb/238U age was significantly smaller than that of the 207Pb/206Pb age; therefore, the 206Pb/238U age value was used for all analyzed spots. By removing the missing Pb points below the harmonic curve and the missing U points above the harmonic curve, the harmonic age of the zircon was 1065 ± 10 Ma (MSWD = 1.09, n = 27) (Figure 6), and the weighted average age was 1052 ± 6 Ma (MSWD = 1.3, n = 27). The emplacement age of the biotite monzogranites invading the Pudeng Formation was 1052 ± 6 Ma. This age is consistent with the U-Pb age of the granite zircons from the intrusions into the Julin Group obtained by Zhao K et al. (2021) [48], which were 1063 ± 9 and 1064 ± 6 Ma.

4.2. Zircon Lu-Hf Isotopic Compositions

4.2.1. Metasedimentary Rock

The in situ zircon Lu-Hf isotopic analysis results for the three metasedimentary rock samples are presented in Supplementary Table S2. The 176Lu/177Hf and 176Hf/177Hf ratios of the analyzed zircons ranged from 0.000032 to 0.001933 and from 0.280592 to 0.282136, respectively. The ƒLu/Hf = −1.00–−0.94 of the three samples was evidently lower than that of the universe ƒLu/Hf = −0.72 of the silica-aluminum crust and universe ƒLu/Hf = −0.34 of the mafic crust [49,50]. The zircon εHf(t) values ranged from −14.6 to 11.0. The calculated two-stage model age (TDM2) varied from 1803 to 3837 Ma.

4.2.2. Biotite Monzogranite

The biotite monzogranite samples are presented in Supplementary Table S2. These zircon grains had higher εHf(t) values (+4.7 to +9.0) than those of the depleted mantle. This suggests that the magma forming the granite was mainly derived from the partial melting of newly formed crustal materials [51]. The (176Hf/177Hf)i value ranged from 0.282258 to 0.282355, and the 176Hf/177Hf ratio ranged from 0.282284 to 0.282376, corresponding to TDM2 ranging from 1354 to 1570 Ma.

4.3. Geochemical Characteristics

The mica-quartz schists are characterized by high SiO2 (63.17–84.30 wt%) and Al2O3 (7.73–16.58 wt%), but low MgO (0.35–1.66 wt%), CaO (0.10–0.61 wt%), Na2O (0.37–2.93 wt%), and TFe2O3 (1.56–7.37 wt%) contents (Supplementary Table S3). These samples exhibited significant variations for Ba (450.00–1063.00 ppm), Rb (85.10–212 ppm), Sr (26.20–115.00 ppm), and rare earth elements (REEs) contents (ΣREE = 175.10–637.52 ppm). Trace elemental contents (including REEs) were normalized to those of chondrites [52] and the upper continental crust [53]. Their trace elemental compositions were LREE-enriched (LREE/HREE = 7.52–17.90, Figure 7a), with moderate negative Eu (δEu = 0.44–0.55) and no Ce (δCe = 0.96–1.13) anomalies. Compared with those of the upper continental crust (Figure 7b), the mica-quartz schist samples were deficient in Ta, Nb, Sr, Zr, and Hf and enriched in K, P, Sm, and Ti.
The quartzite samples exhibited high SiO2 (93.12–96.00 wt%), low Al2O3 (1.26–2.42 wt%), MgO (0.10–0.37 wt%), CaO (0.05–0.22 wt%), Na2O (0.08–0.44 wt%), and TFe2O3 (0.89–1.29 wt%) contents (Supplementary Table S3). Their trace element contents were lower than those of mica-quartz schist samples, and the quartzite samples showed low REE contents (ΣREE = 34.29–40.60 ppm). Additionally, they showed similar multi-element patterns with Ta, Nb, Sr, Zr, and Hf depletion and positive K, P, Sm, and Ti anomalies with mica-quartz schist samples (Figure 7a,b). They exhibited LREE enrichment (LREE/HREE = 9.36–16.41, Figure 7a) with moderate negative Eu (δEu = 0.51–0.55) and positive Ce (1.48–1.69) anomalies.

5. Discussion

5.1. Depositional Ages and Possible Source of the Pudeng Formation

Dickinson and Gehrels (2009) [54] proposed that the youngest detrital zircon age could be considered as the maximum depositional age of the host sedimentary rocks. Consequently, the analyzed detrital zircons from the mica-quartz schists and quartzites of the Pudeng Formation, the lowest section of the Julin Group, yield a broad age spectrum ranging from 3.55 to 1.10 Ga. The youngest 207Pb/206Pb age is 1099 ± 43 Ma, indicating that the depositional age of the Pudeng Formation was not earlier than ca. 1.10 Ga. This interpretation is further supported by the crystallization age of a biotite–monzonitic granite that intrudes the Pudeng Formation, dated at 1052 ± 6 Ma. These results are consistent with published ages (1.07–1.05 Ga) of volcanic rocks from the Julin Group [11,12,48,55,56]. Collectively, these constraints indicate that the Pudeng Formation of the Julin Group was most likely deposited within a relatively narrow interval between 1.10 and 1.05 Ga, corresponding to the late Mesoproterozoic.
McLennan et al. (1993) [57] provided a range of Th/Sc ratios for felsic (>1) and mafic (<0.1) source regions and suggested that these values could be used to distinguish the compositional characteristics of sediment provenance. Metasedimentary rocks from the Pudeng Formation exhibit elevated Th/Sc values ranging from 1.72 to 4.87, with an average of 2.43, suggesting derivation from a felsic source rock. In addition, most samples display relatively low La/Sc (2.61–7.91) and Ce/Th (3.16–6.92) ratios. When plotted on the La/Sc versus Ce/Th diagram, these values cluster near felsic volcanic rocks and are clearly distinguished from basalts and andesites (Figure 8). Taken together, these geochemical characteristics suggest that the metasedimentary rocks of the Pudeng Formation were likely sourced from felsic volcanic rocks.

5.2. Tectonic Setting

Whole-rock geochemical parameters, including δEu, δCe, Al2O3/(Al2O3 + Fe2O3), Th/U, Ni/Co, and ΣREE, provide valuable insights for reconstructing the depositional environments of metasedimentary rocks [59,60,61,62]. Consequently, the metasedimentary rocks of the Pudeng Formation were likely deposited along a passive continental margin. Several lines of geochemical evidence support this interpretation. First, the mica-quartz schist samples exhibited major element compositions (SiO2 = 63.17–84.30 wt%, Al2O3 = 7.73–16.58 wt%, MgO = 0.35–1.66 wt%, CaO = 0.10–0.61 wt%, Na2O = 0.37–2.93 wt%), which are typical of continental margin. Second, these compositions differ significantly from those of greywackes in continental arcs (SiO2 = 58.53 wt%, Al2O3 = 17.11 wt%, MgO = 3.65 wt%, CaO = 5.83 wt%, Na2O = 4.10 wt%), oceanic arcs (SiO2 = 70.69 wt%, Al2O3 = 14.04 wt%, MgO = 1.97 wt%, CaO = 2.68 wt%, Na2O = 3.12 wt%), and continental margin (SiO2 = 73.86–81.95 wt%, Al2O3 = 8.41–12.89 wt%, MgO = 1.23–1.39 wt%, CaO = 1.89–2.48 wt%, Na2O = 1.07–2.77 wt%) [63]. The δCe values of mica-quartz schists and quartzites range from 0.96 to 1.69 (mean = 1.14), which is consistent with those of a typical continental margin but distinct from those of ocean basin sediments (δCe = 0.55), mid-ocean ridge (δCe = ~0.3), and continental margin (δCe = 1) [62]. Third, the Al2O3/(Al2O3 + Fe2O3) ratios (0.68–0.88) of mica-quartz schists and quartzites are within the continental margin of 0.6–0.9 [59]. Additionally, Figure 9 shows that most samples plot within the continental margin field, particularly within the passive continental margin. Moreover, other geochemical indicators, such as Th/U (5.76), ΣREE (238.81 ppm), and δEu (0.51), closely match the characteristics of typical passive continental margin signatures (Th/U = 5.6 ± 0.67, ΣREE = 210 ppm, and δEu = 0.56 [61]), further supporting the interpretation that the samples from the Pudeng Formation formed in a passive continental margin setting.

5.3. Provenance of the Pudeng Formation

Detrital zircon age spectra from metasedimentary rocks provide valuable insights into the tectonic evolution of sedimentary basins [64,65,66]. For the Pudeng Formation, the majority of the detrital zircons were derived from a proximal source, which is supported by the abundant feldspar and biotite in the Pudeng Formation (Figure 4b–d). This further supports the interpretation that 70% of the detrital zircons experienced limited transporting distances [45,67,68]. Of the remaining 30% with rounding in shapes, one grain yields an age of 3550 Ma. This is older than the previously reported oldest TTG age (3110 Ma [6]) from the western Yangtze Block. This indicates strong ablation during relatively long-distance transport before deposition. Consistently, Figure 10a shows four prominent age peaks (2.50, 1.86, and 1.60 Ga) in the detrital zircon populations of the Precambrian basement, reflecting a close temporal link with coeval magmatic events in the Yangtze Block and neighboring terranes.
The source of the 2.5 Ga detrital zircon age peak identified along the western Yangtze Block has commonly been attributed to its northern part [16]. Some studies have suggested that the Yangtze Block was assembled from several microcontinental fragments at ~2.0 Ga, with its northern and western margins representing two of these fragments [3]. Early Paleoproterozoic magmatic records have been documented in the Yudongzi [71,72], Douling [73,74], Jinpan [75], and Feidong [76] complexes. However, it is noteworthy that the ~2.5 Ga magmatic records from the northern margin of the Yangtze Block exhibit εHf(t) values ranging from −5.7 to +1.5, which are significantly different from those of coeval magmatic records in the Pudeng Formation (−13.8 to +8.1). These elevated εHf(t) values (>+5) appear inconsistent with a contribution from northern magmatic activities. Notably, 2498 ± 17 Ma Bajiaojing meta-diabases were recently identified for the first time in the Huili area, displaying the positive εHf(t) values ranging from +8.2 to +14.3 [77].
After the amalgamation of several microcontinental blocks to form the proto-Yangtze Block, extensive magmatic activity occurred at ~1.86 Ga, resulting in widespread exposures of K-feldspar granite, A-type granite, granite, albitite, and diabase [78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85]. The detrital zircon sources of this period were distributed along both the northern and western margins of the Yangtze Block. However, the source of the ~1.6 Ga detrital zircon age peak in the Pudeng Formation appears to be distinctive. No magmatic activity of this age has been identified within the Yangtze Block to date. However, CL images of zircons XJG2101-12, 40, 61; XJG2102-20, 29; and XJG2103-3, 16, and 65 (Supplementary Figures S1–S3) show angular to sub-angular morphologies, indicating limited transport prior to deposition. The Yangtze Block also exhibits a detrital zircon age peak at ~1.6 Ga, and some researchers have suggested that these zircons were derived from within the block itself [86]. We infer that a ~1.6 Ga magmatic event may have occurred within the interior of the Yangtze Block, which is either buried beneath younger sedimentary cover or obliterated through metasomatism or remelting during intense Neoproterozoic tectono-thermal events.

5.4. Tectonic Evolution

Detrital zircons are important for understanding the history of crustal and tectonic evolution because they preserve magmatic information. Positive εHf(t) values (>0) indicate the involvement of juvenile material, whereas negative εHf(t) values (<0) reflect reworking of ancient crustal components [87,88]. Based on this pattern, several studies have proposed that long-term variations in zircon εHf(t) values are related to regional crustal evolution during supercontinent cycles [89]. In this study, we compiled U-Pb ages and εHf(t) data of detrital zircons from Precambrian strata in the western Yangtze Block, including the Hekou, Dongchuan, Huili, Dengxiangying, Kunyang, and Julin groups [45,67,68,69,70]. The zircons exhibit oscillatory or sector zoning and have high Th/U ratios (>0.1), suggesting a magmatic origin. As shown in Figure 10a, four prominent age peaks are observed at 2.5, 1.86, 1.60, and 1.20 Ga. The first three peaks are consistent with those of the Pudeng Formation, indicating that the entire western margin of the Yangtze Block experienced similar tectonic evolution.
The ~2.5 Ga Bajiaojing diabase records a continental subduction environment during the early Paleoproterozoic and may represent a precursor to the global Arrowsmith orogeny (2.5–2.3 Ga) [20,90,91]. This interpretation is consistent with the εHf(t) values shown in Figure 10b, which include both positive and negative signatures. In addition, the Honghe Complex along the western margin of the Yangtze Block contains a 2535 Ma biotite-sillimanite-garnet gneiss [92], indicating that crustal thickening had already occurred at that time, further supporting the inferred tectonic setting of the block during this period.
The late Paleoproterozoic (~1.86 Ga) represents a crucial era during which the supercontinent Columbia continued to aggregate, accompanied by global collisional orogenesis and magmatism [67]. The magmatic rocks of this period within the Yangtze Block are all associated with orogenic processes; however, their precise tectonic setting and the specific stage of orogeny to which they belong remain highly debated [78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85]. Given that the detrital zircon εHf(t) values show a continuously decreasing trend at ~1.86 Ga, it is inferred that the strata along the western margin of the Yangtze Block were still undergoing crustal thickening during a sustained compressional stage, which is consistent with the εHf(t) values of magmatic zircons from the same region [85].
Although magmatic outcrops of ~1.60 Ga are rare within the Yangtze Block, widespread occurrences of ~1.7 Ga and ~1.5 Ga magmatic rocks provide important insights into its tectonic setting during this period. Along the western margin of the Yangtze Block, numerous ~1.7 Ga mafic intrusions and volcanic rocks are distributed in the Huili [93], Dongchuan [94,95,96], Tongan [97,98,99], and Hekou [100] areas. These mafic intrusions and volcanic rocks are generally interpreted to have formed in an intracontinental extensional setting. In addition, a series of ~1.5 Ga diabase and gabbro intrusions developed along the western margin of the Yangtze Block [93,95,98,101,102]. These rocks are generally interpreted to have formed in a continental rift environment associated with a typical mantle plume setting. The widespread occurrence of mafic rocks is commonly attributed to the upwelling of mantle-derived magmas, which can lead to elevated εHf(t) values and generation of juvenile crust [103]. Moreover, most detrital zircons from the 1.7–1.5 Ga interval exhibit positive εHf(t) values (>0), providing additional evidence for an intracontinental extensional (rift-related) setting.
The ~1.20 Ga detrital zircon ages from the western Yangtze Block broadly correspond to the global Grenvillian orogenic belt (1.30–1.00 Ga [85]). Along the western margin of the block, a suite of A-type granites, diabases, and amphibolites are exposed [44,104,105,106,107], which are interpreted to have formed in a rift-related tectonic setting. At ~1.2 Ga, most detrital zircons exhibit positive εHf(t) values (>0), providing additional evidence for this conclusion. Furthermore, Huang et al. (2021) [106] proposed that the Yangtze Block rifted away from the Rodinia supercontinent between 1.2 and 1.1 Ga and subsequently began drifting toward it again at ~1.1 Ga.

6. Conclusions

(1)
The Pudeng Formation of the Julin Group was deposited between ca. 1103 and 1050 Ma. The detrital zircons yield age peaks at 2.5, 1.86, and 1.6 Ga, sourced mainly from the western and northern Yangtze Block.
(2)
The mica-quartz schists and quartzites were likely derived from felsic volcanic rocks associated with a passive continental margin.
(3)
Based on the ages and εHf(t) values of magmatic and detrital zircons from the western Yangtze Block, the tectonic setting of the block evolved from a subduction-related island arc at ~2.5 Ga, to an orogenic environment at ~1.86 Ga, and to an intracontinental extensional (rift) setting at ~1.6 Ga and ~1.2 Ga.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/min15111195/s1, Supplementary File S1: Analytical methods; Supplementary Table S1: LA-ICP-MS U-Pb dating data of metasedimentary rocks and biotite monzogranite; Supplementary Table S2: Zircon Lu-Hf isotopic data of the metasedimentary rocks and biotite monzogranite; Supplementary Table S3: Major oxides (wt.%) and trace elements (ppm) of the metasedimentary rock. Beneficiation process. References [108,109,110,111] are found in Supplementary Materials.

Author Contributions

J.Y.: Data curation, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing. Y.C.: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing, Investigation. L.H.: Data curation, Writing—original draft. J.Z.: Project administration, Methodology, Writing—review and editing, Investigation. M.G.: Investigation. B.Z.: Investigation. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study is funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (42072096).

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary Material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author(s).

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the editors and peer reviewers for their constructive comments. We also thank Yunguang Wang from the Nanjing Hongchuang Geological Exploration Technical Services Co., Ltd. for his laboratory assistance.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known financial conflicts of interest or personal ties that might have appeared to have an impact on the work presented in this study.

References

  1. Lu, G.M.; Xu, Y.G.; Wang, W.; Spencer, C.J.; Roberts, N.M.W.; Condie, K.C. Diverse source materials contributed to a secular increase in δ18O for the Paleo-Mesoproterozoic A2-type granites. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2024, 642, 118885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Zhu, Y.; Lai, S.C.; Qin, J.F.; Zhu, R.Z.; Zhang, F.Y.; Zhang, Z.Z. Petrogenesis and geochemical diversity of Late Mesoproterozoic S-type granites in the western Yangtze Block, South China: Co-entrainment of peritectic selective phases and accessory minerals. Lithos 2020, 352–353, 105326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Cawood, P.A.; Wang, W.; Zhao, T.Y.; Xu, Y.J.; Mulder, J.A.; Pisarevsky, S.A.; Zhang, L.M.; Gan, C.S.; He, H.Y.; Liu, H.C.; et al. Deconstructing South China and consequences for reconstructing Nuna and Rodinia. Earth Sci. Rev. 2020, 204, 103169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Cawood, P.A.; Zhao, G.C.; Yao, J.L.; Wang, W.; Xu, Y.J.; Wang, Y.J. Reconstructing South China in Phanerozoic and Precambrian supercontinents. Earth Sci. Rev. 2018, 186, 173–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Cawood, P.A.; Wang, Y.J.; Xu, Y.J.; Zhao, G.C. Locating South China in Rodinia and Gondwana: A fragment of greater India lithosphere? Geology 2013, 41, 903–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Cui, X.Z.; Lin, S.F.; Wang, J.; Ren, G.M.; Su, B.R.; Chen, F.L.; Deng, Q.; Pang, W.H. Latest Mesoproterozoic provenance shift in the southwestern Yangtze Block, South China: Insights into tectonic evolution in the context of the supercontinent cycle. Gondwana Res. 2021, 99, 131–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sun, L.; Wang, W.; Lu, G.M.; Xue, E.K.; Huang, S.F.; Pandit, M.K.; Huang, B.; Tong, X.R.; Tian, Y.; Zhang, Y. Neoproterozoic geodynamics of South China and implications on the Rodinia configuration: The Kunyang Group revisited. Precambrian Res. 2021, 363, 106338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhao, G.C.; Cawood, P.A.; Wilde, S.A.; Sun, M. Review of global 2.1-1.8 Ga orogens: Implications for a pre-Rodinia supercontinent. Earth Sci. Rev. 2002, 59, 125–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wang, W.; Cawood, P.A.; Pandit, M.K. India in the Nuna to Gondwana supercontinent cycles: Clues from the north Indian and Marwar Blocks. Am. J. Sci. 2021, 321, 83–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sun, W.H.; Zhou, M.F.; Yan, D.P.; Li, J.W.; Ma, Y.X. Provenance and tectonic setting of the Neoproterozoic Yanbian Group, western Yangtze Block (SW China). Precambrian Res. 2008, 167, 213–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chen, W.T.; Sun, W.H.; Wang, W.; Zhao, J.H.; Zhou, M.F. “Grenvillian” intra-plate mafic magmatism in the southwestern Yangtze Block, SW China. Precambrian Res. 2014, 242, 138–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chen, W.T.; Sun, W.H.; Zhou, M.F.; Wang, W. Ca. 1050 Ma intra-continental rift-related A-type felsic rocks in the southwestern Yangtze Block, South China. Precambrian Res. 2018, 309, 22–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zhao, J.H.; Zhou, M.F.; Wu, Y.B.; Zheng, J.P.; Wang, W. Coupled evolution of Neoproterozoic arc mafic magmatism and mantle wedge in the western margin of the South China Craton. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 2019, 174, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Liu, J.P.; Li, J.; Wang, G.H.; Sun, B.D.; Hu, S.B.; Yu, S.Y.; Wang, X.H.; Song, D.H. Geochemical characteritics and U-Pb age of the zircons from mafic intrusion in the southwestern margin of the Yangtze plate: Response to break-up of the Columbia supercontinent. Geol. Rev. 2020, 66, 350–364, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Huang, Y.; Wang, X.L.; Li, J.Y.; Wang, D.; Jiang, C.H.; Li, L.S. Early Neoproterozoic tectonic evolution of northern Yangtze Block: Insights from sedimentary sequences from the Dahongshan area. Precambrian Res. 2021, 365, 106382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Xiao, J.; Zhao, Z.D.; Zhu, X.Y.; Zhang, X.; Zeng, R.Y.; Zhang, M. Detrital zircon chronology and element geochemistry of the Dongchuan Group in Yunnan Province and its geological significance. Acta Pet. Sin. 2021, 3, 1270–1286, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources of Yunnan Province. Regional Geology of Yunnan Province; Geology Publishing House: Beijing, China, 1990; pp. 1–22. (In Chinese)
  18. Guo, Y.H. Characteristics and Genetic Analysis of Albite-Type Uranium Mineralization in the 1101 Area, Mouding, Yunnan; Chengdu University of Technoloy: Chengdu, China, 2021; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  19. Wang, F.G.; Yao, J. A new consideration on the genesis of uranium mineralization in Mouding, Yunnan: A new mineralization type related to albitite. Geol. Rev. 2020, 66, 739–754, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wang, G. Characteristics and Uranium of Migmatite Rocks in the Mouding Area in Yunnan Province; Chengdu University of Technology: Chengdu, China, 2016; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  21. Wang, H.J. Geochemistry Characteristics of Neoproterozoic Igneous Rocks and Related Uranium Mineralizations in Datian, Panzhihua and Xujie, Mouding, Southwestern China; Chengdu University of Technology: Chengdu, China, 2009; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  22. Liu, J.P.; Sun, Z.B.; He, X.H.; Zhao, J.T.; He, S.J.; Bi, L.J.; Li, W.K. Identification of the Shuanglongtan tectonic mélange (ca. 1.7–1.5 Ga) in the southwestern Yangtze Block and it’s tectonic implications. Precambrian Res. 2025, 417, 107658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Li, X.H.; Li, Z.X.; Ge, W.C.; Zhou, H.W.; Li, W.X.; Liu, Y.; Wingate, M.T.D. Neoproterozoic granitoids in South China: Crustal melting above a mantle plume at ca. 825 Ma? Precambrian Res. 2003, 122, 45–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wang, Y.J.; Zhu, W.G.; Huang, H.Q.; Zhong, H.; Bai, Z.J.; Fan, H.P.; Yang, Y.J. Ca. 1.04 Ga hot Grenville granites in the western Yangtze Block, southwest China. Precambrian Res. 2019, 328, 217–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhu, Y.; Lai, S.C.; Qin, J.F.; Zhu, R.Z.; Zhang, F.Y.; Zhang, Z.Z.; Gan, B.P. Petrogenesis and geodynamic implications of Neoproterozoic gabbro-diorites, adakitic granites, and A-type granites in the southwestern margin of the Yangtze Block, South China. Asian Earth Sci. 2019, 183, 103977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhu, Y.; Lai, S.C.; Qin, J.F.; Zhu, R.Z.; Zhao, S.W.; Liu, M.; Zhang, F.Y.; Zhang, Z.Z.; Yang, H. Peritectic assemblage entrainment (PAE) model for the petrogenesis of Neoproterozoic high-maficity I-type granitoids in the western Yangtze Block, South China. Lithos 2021, 402–403, 106247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Huang, L.Y.; Chen, Y.L.; Guo, R.; Yin, G.Q.; Fan, W.; Zhan, G.X.; Guo, Q.P. Genesis and geological significance of Huangcaoba A-type granitoid pluton, western margin of Yangtze Block. Geol. Rev. 2024, 70, 2169–2192, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  28. Yin, G.Q.; Chen, Y.L.; Zhang, B.L.; Gu, M.J.; Wang, Q.; Yao, J.; Yin, G. Zircon U-Pb chronology and Lu-Hf isotopiccharacteristics of the Pre-Sinian Wumaqing Formation and its intrusions in Yakou area, Miyi County, Sichuan Province, and their geological significance. Acta Petrol Sin 2022, 38, 1126–1148, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Huang, M.D.; Cui, X.Z.; Ren, G.M.; Deng, Q.; Chen, F.L.; Yang, J.W.; Li, T.; Sun, Z.M. Latest Mesoproterozoic arc-related granitoid magmatism in the southwestern Yangtze Block, South China: Petrogenesis and geodynamic implications. Precambrian Res. 2025, 417, 107635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zhao, T.Y.; Cawood, P.A.; Wang, K.; Zi, J.W.; Feng, Q.L.; Nguyen, Q.M.; Tran, D.M. Neoarchean and Paleoproterozoic K-rich granites in the Phan Si Pan Complex, north Vietnam: Constraints on the early crustal evolution of the Yangtze Block. Precambrian Res. 2019, 332, 105395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zhu, Y.; Lai, S.C.; Qin, J.F.; Zhu, R.Z.; Liu, M.; Zhang, F.Y.; Zhang, Z.Z.; Yang, H. Genesis of ca. 850–835 Ma high-Mg# diorites in the western Yangtze Block, South China: Implications for mantle metasomatism under the subduction process. Precambrian Res. 2020, 343, 105738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, L.J.; Lin, S.F.; Xiao, W.J. Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks of South China: Their separate positions in Gondwana until early Paleozoic juxtaposition. Geology 2023, 51, 723–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Guo, J.L.; Gao, S.; Wu, Y.B.; Li, M.; Chen, K.; Hu, Z.C.; Liang, Z.W.; Liu, Y.S.; Zhou, L.; Zong, K.Q.; et al. 3.45 Ga granitic gneisses from the Yangtze Craton, South China: Implications for Early Archean crustal growth. Precambrian Res. 2014, 242, 82–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Li, L.M.; Lin, S.F.; Davis, D.W.; Xiao, W.J.; Xing, G.F.; Yin, C.Q. Geochronology and geochemistry of igneous rocks from the Kongling terrane: Implications for Mesoarchean to Paleoproterozoic crustal evolution of the Yangtze Block. Precambrian Res. 2014, 255, 30–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhang, S.B.; Zheng, Y.F. Formation and evolution of Precambrian continental lithosphere in South China. Gondwana Res. 2013, 23, 1241–1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cui, X.Z.; Wang, J.; Wang, X.C.; Wilde, S.A.; Ren, G.M.; Li, S.J.; Deng, Q.; Ren, F.; Liu, J.P. Early crustal evolution of the Yangtze Block: Constraints from zircon U-Pb-Hf isotope systematics of 3.1–1.9 Ga granitoids in the Cuoke Complex, SW China. Precambrian Res. 2021, 357, 106155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Li, H.K.; Tian, H.; Zhou, H.Y.; Zhang, J.; Liu, H.; Geng, J.Z.; Ye, L.J.; Xiang, Z.Q.; Qu, L.S. Correlation between the Dagushi Group in the Dahongshan Area and the Shennongjia Group in the Shennongjia Area on the northern margin of the Yangtze Craton: Constraints from zircon U-Pb ages and Lu-Hf isotopic systematics. Earth Sci. Front. 2016, 23, 186–201, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yang, J.; Hu, L.; Cawood, P.A.; Du, Y. Provenance of the Mesoproterozoic Shennongjia Group in the north Yangtze Block, South China, and implications for reconstructions of the Nuna and Rodinia supercontinents. Geol. Soc. Am. Bul. 2024, 137, 1437–1455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Du, Q.D.; Wang, Z.J.; Wang, J.; Deng, Q.; Yang, F. Geochronology and geochemistry of tuff beds from the Shicaohe Formation of Shennongjia Group and tectonic evolution in the northern Yangtze Block, South China. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2016, 105, 521–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, W.; Zhou, M.F. Provenance and tectonic setting of the Paleo- to Mesoproterozoic Dongchuan Group in the southwestern Yangtze Block, South China: Implication for the breakup of the supercontinent Columbia. Tectonophysics 2014, 610, 110–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Han, K.Y.; Zhang, H.; Ding, X.Z.; Ren, L.D.; Shi, C.L.; Pang, J.F. Zircon U-Pb Ages and Lu–Hf Isotope of the Dongchuan Group in Central Yunnan, China, and Their Geological Significance. Acta Geol. Sin. Engl. Ed. 2020, 94, 1093–1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhu, Z.M.; Tan, H.Q.; Liu, Y.D. Late Palaeoproterozoic Hekou Group in Sichuan, Southwest China: Geochronological framework and tectonic implications. Int. Geol. Rev. 2017, 60, 305–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yang, H.; Liu, F.L.; Du, L.L.; Liu, P.H.; Wang, F. Zircon U-Pb dating for metavolcanites in the Laochanghe Formation of the Dahongshan Group in southwestern Yangtze Block, and its geological significance. Acta Petrol Sin. 2012, 28, 2994–3014, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  44. Zhang, J.B.; Ding, X.Z.; Liu, Y.X.; Liu, P.W.; Shi, C.l.; Zhang, H. The ca. 1.13–0.92 Ga magmatism in the western Yangtze Block, South China: Implications for tectonic evolution and paleogeographic reconstruction. Precambrian Res. 2023, 386, 106961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Li, H.K.; Zhang, C.L.; Yao, C.Y.; Xiang, Z.Q. U-Pb zircon age and Hf isotope compositions of Mesoproterozoic sedimentary strata on the western margin of the Yangtze massif. Sci. China Earth Sci. 2013, 56, 628–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xia, G.Q. The Sedimentary Records of the Tectonic Uplift of the East Kunlun in the Cenozoic; Chengdu University of Technology: Chengdu, China, 2012; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  47. Xiao, Y.F.; Zheng, R.C.; Deng, J.H. A Concise Course in Petrology; Geological Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2009; pp. 1–291. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  48. Zhao, K.; Cai, Y.F.; Feng, Z.H.; Xu, T.D.; Zhou, Y.; Liu, F.L.; Hu, R.G.; Liu, H.R. Geochronological and Geochemical Characteristics of the Mesoproterozoic A-type Granite in the Western Yangtze Block and its Tectonic Implications. Geotecton. Metallog. 2021, 45, 1007–1022, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Vervoort, J.D.; Patchett, P.J.; Gehrels, G.E.; Nutman, A.P. Constraints on early Earth differentiation from hafnium and neodymium isotopes. Nature 1996, 379, 624–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Amelin, Y.; Lee, D.C.; Halliday, A.N. Early-middle archaean crustal evolution deduced from Lu-Hf and U-Pb isotopic studies of single zircon grains. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2000, 64, 4205–4225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wu, F.Y.; Li, X.H.; Zheng, Y.F.; Gao, S. Lu-Hf isotopic systematics and their applications in petrology. Acta Pet. Sin. 2007, 23, 185–220, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sun, S.S.; McDonough, W.F. Chemical and isotopic systematics of the oceanic basalts: Implications for mantle composition and processes. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 1989, 42, 313–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Rudnick, R.L.; Gao, S. Composition of the Continental Crust. Treatise Geochem. 2003, 3, 1–64. [Google Scholar]
  54. Dickinson, W.R.; Gehrels, G.E. Use of U-Pb ages of detrital zircons to infer maximum depositional ages of strata: A test against a Colorado Plateau Mesozoic database. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2009, 288, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Deng, S.X. The Evolution of Metamorphism and Geochemistry for the Cangshan and Julin Groups in Central Yunnan, China; Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences: Guangzhou, China, 2000; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  56. Jiang, X.F.; Wang, S.W.; Liao, Z.W.; Guo, Y.; Wang, Z.W.; Yang, B. U-Pb age of zircon from metamorphic basic volcanic rocks of the ancient Lugumo Formation in Yuanmou County and its restriction on the depositional age of Julin Group. J. Stratigr. 2013, 37, 624–625. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. McLennan, S.M.; Hemming, S.; McDaniel, D.K.; Hanson, G.N. Geochemical approaches to sedimentation, provenance, and tectonics. Geol. Soc. Am. 1993, 284, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gu, X.X.; Liu, J.M.; Zheng, M.H.; Tang, J.X.; Qi, L. Provenance and tectonic setting of the Proterozoic turbidites in Hunan, South China: Geochemical evidence. J. Sediment. Res. 2002, 72, 393–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Roser, B.P.; Korsch, R.J. Determination of tectonic setting of sandstone-mudstone suites using SiO2 content and K2O/Na2O ratio. J. Geol. 1986, 94, 635–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bhatia, M.R.; Crook, K.A.W. Trace element characteristics of graywackes and tectonic setting discrimination of sedimentary basins. Contrib. Miner. Pet. 1986, 92, 181–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Bhatia, M.R. Plate tectonics and geochemical composition of sandstones. J. Geol. 1983, 91, 611–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Murray, R.W.; Tenbrink, M.R.B.; Jones, D.L.; Gerlach, D.C.; Russ, G.P. Rare earth elements as indicators of different marine depositional environments in chert and shale. Geology 1990, 18, 268–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Li, T.B.; Zhang, X.W.; Wang, C.; Wang, R.L. Reconstruction of protoliths of metamorphic rocks and tectonic settingl of the Haiyuan Group in the Haiyuan inthe eastern segment of the North Qilian Mountains, China. Geol. Bull. China 2006, 25, 194–203, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Cawood, P.A.; Hawkesworth, C.J.; Dhuime, B. Detrital zircon record and tectonic setting. Geology 2012, 40, 875–878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Olierook, H.K.H.; Barham, M.; Fitzsimons, I.C.W.; Timms, N.E.; Jiang, Q.; Evans, N.J.; McDonald, B.J. Tectonic controls on sediment provenance evolution in rift basins: Detrital zircon U-Pb and Hf isotope analysis from the Perth Basin, Western Australia. Gondwana Res. 2019, 66, 126–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Liu, S.L.; Ren, G.M.; Sun, Z.M.; Pang, W.H.; Peng, J.; Chen, F.L. Zircon provenances of the late Paleoproterozoic metasedimentary rock in the South Yangtze Block: Implications for paleogeographic reconstruction. Int. Geol. Rev. 2024, 66, 3405–3427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Cui, X.Z.; Ren, G.M.; Pang, W.H.; Chen, F.L.; Sun, Z.M.; Ren, F.; Ning, K.B.; Deng, Q. Detrital zircon provenance of metasedimentary rocks in the Proterozoic Caiziyuan-Tongan accretionary complex: Constraints on crustal and tectonic evolution of the Yangtze Block, South China. Geol. J. 2022, 57, 2094–2109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Cheng, X.M.; Cao, S.Y.; Li, J.Y.; Dong, Y.L.; Neubauer, F.; Lvy, M.X.; Wang, S.T. Early Paleoproterozoic tectono-magmatic and metamorphic evolution of the Yuanmou Complex in the southwestern Yangzte Block. Precambrian Res. 2022, 371, 106572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ji, L. Detrital Zircon U-Pb Geochronology and Tectonic Implication of the Paleo- to Mesoproterzoic Strata in the Liangshan District, Western Yantgze Block, South China; China University of Geosciences: Beijing, China, 2015; (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  70. Ren, G.M.; Pang, W.H.; Wang, L.Q.; Sun, Z.M.; Wang, B.B.; Cui, X.Z.; Yin, F.G.; Ning, K.B. Detrital zircons of 3.8 Ga in the southwest of Yangtze Block and its geological implication. Earth Sci. 2020, 45, 3040–3053, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Chen, Q.; Sun, M.; Zhao, G.C.; Zhao, J.H.; Zhu, W.L.; Long, X.P.; Wang, J. Episodic crustal growth and reworking of the Yudongzi terrane, South China: Constraints from the Archean TTGs and potassic granites and Paleoproterozoic amphibolites. Lithos 2019, 326–327, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hui, B.; Dong, Y.P.; Cheng, C.; Long, X.P.; Liu, X.M.; Yang, Z.; Sun, S.S.; Zhang, F.F.; Varga, J. Zircon U-Pb chronology, Hf isotope analysis and whole-rock geochemistry for the Neoarchean-Paleoproterozoic Yudongzi complex, northwestern margin of the Yangtze craton, China. Precambrian Res. 2017, 301, 65–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wu, Y.B.; Zhou, G.Y.; Gao, S.; Liu, X.C.; Qin, Z.W.; Wang, H.; Yang, J.Z.; Yang, S.H. Petrogenesis of Neoarchean TTG rocks in the Yangtze Craton and its implication for the formation of Archean TTGs. Precambrian Res. 2014, 254, 73–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hu, J.; Liu, X.C.; Chen, L.Y.; Qu, W.; Li, H.K.; Geng, J.Z. A ∼2.5 Ga magmatic event at the northern margin of the Yangtze craton: Evidence from U-Pb dating and Hf isotope analysis of zircons from the Douling Complex in the South Qinling orogen. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2013, 58, 3564–3579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zhang, L.; Liu, H.J.; Zhang, S.B.; He, Q.; Li, Z.X.; Liang, T. Tectonic switch of the north Yangtze Craton at ca. 2.0 Ga: Implications for its position in Columbia supercontinent. Precambrian Res. 2022, 381, 106842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Yuan, X.Y.; Niu, M.L.; Cai, Q.R.; Zhu, G.; Wu, Q.; Li, X.C.; Sun, Y.; Li, C.; Qian, T. The nature of Paleoproterozoic basement in the northern Yangtze and its geological implication. Precambrian Res. 2022, 378, 106761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Huang, L.Y.; Zhao, J.; Chen, Y.L.; Fan, W.; Zhan, G.X.; Guo, Q.P. Earliest Paleoproterozoic arc magmatism in the western Yangtze Block, South China and its geological implications. Lithos 2024, 478–479, 107645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Qiu, X.F.; Jiang, T.; Zhao, X.M.; Lu, S.S.; Xiao, Z.B. Baddeleyite U-Pb geochronology and geochemistry of Late Paleoproterozoic mafic dykes from the Kongling complex of the northern Yangtze block, South China. Precambrian Res. 2020, 337, 105537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Guo, J.W.; Zheng, J.P.; Ping, X.Q.; Wan, Y.S.; Li, Y.H.; Wu, Y.B.; Zhao, J.H.; Wang, W. Paleoproterozoic porphyries and coarse-grained granites manifesting a vertical hierarchical structure of Archean continental crust beneath the Yangtze Craton. Precambrian Res. 2018, 314, 288–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Xiong, Q.; Zheng, J.P.; Yu, C.M.; Su, Y.P.; Tang, H.Y.; Zhang, Z.H. Zircon U-Pb age and Hf isotope of Quanyishang A-type granite in Yichang: Signification for the Yangtze continental cratonization in Paleoproterozoic. Sci. Bull. 2008, 54, 436–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Huang, M.D.; Cui, X.Z.; Cheng, A.G.; Ren, G.M.; He, H.Z.; Chen, F.L.; Zhang, H.L.; Zhang, J.Q.; Ren, F. Late Paleoproterozoic A-type granitic rocks in the northern Yangtze block: Evidence for Breakup of the Columbia Supercontinent. Acta Geol. Sin. 2019, 93, 565–584, (In Chinese with English Abstract). [Google Scholar]
  82. Chen, Z.H.; Xing, G.F. Geochemical and zircon U-Pb–Hf–O isotopic evidence for a coherent Paleoproterozoic basement beneath the Yangtze Block, South China. Precambrian Res. 2016, 279, 81–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Hieu, P.T.; Lei, W.X.; Minh, P.; Thuy, N.T.B.; Phuc, L.D.; Luyen, N.D. Archean to paleoproterozoic crustal evolution in the Phan Si Pan zone, Northwest Vietnam: Evidence from the U-Pb geochronology and Sr-Nd-Hf isotopic geochemistry. Int. Geol. Rev. 2022, 64, 96–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Anh, H.T.H.; Hieu, P.T.; Tu, V.L.; Son, L.M.; Choi, S.H.; Yu, Y. Age and tectonic implications of Paleoproterozoic Deo Khe Granitoids within the Phan Si Pan Zone, Vietnam. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2015, 111, 781–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Huang, L.Y.; Chen, Y.L.; Zhao, J.; Yao, J.; Wei, L.L.; Zhu, Y.F. Petrogenesis and chronology of albitite in the Yangtze Block, SW China: Tectonic implications for the Columbia supercontinent assembly. Precambrian Res. 2025, 431, 107955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Xie, X.F.; Yang, Z.N.; Zhang, H.; Polat, A.; Xu, Y.; Deng, X. Finding of Ca. 1.6 Ga Detrital Zircons from the Mesoproterozoic Dagushi Group, Northern Margin of the Yangtze Block. Minerals 2021, 11, 371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Long, X.; Xu, B.; Yuan, C.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, L. Precambrian crustal evolution of the southwestern Tarim Craton, NW China: Constraints from new detrital zircon ages and Hf isotopic data of the Neoproterozoic metasedimentary rocks. Precambrian Res. 2019, 334, 105473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Griffn, W.L.; Wang, X.; Jackson, S.E.; Pearson, N.J.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Xu, X.S.; Zhou, X.M. Zircon chemistry and magma mixing, SE China: In-situ analysis of Hf isotopes, Tonglu and Pingtan igneous complexes. Lithos 2002, 61, 237–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Huang, Z.Y.; Yuan, C.; Long, X.P.; Zhang, Y.Y.; Du, L. From Breakup of Nuna to Assembly of Rodinia: A Link Between the Chinese Central Tianshan Block and Fennoscandia. Tectonics 2019, 38, 4378–4398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Berman, R.G.; Sanborn-Barrie, M.; Stern, R.; Carson, C. Tectonometamorphism at ca. 2.35 and 1.85 Ga in the Rae domain, western Churchill Province, Nunavut, Canada: Insights from structural, metamorphic and in situ geochronological analysis of the southwestern Committee Bay belt. Can. Miner. 2005, 43, 409–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Berman, R.G.; Pehrsson, S.; Davis, W.J.; Ryan, J.J.; Qui, H.; Ashton, K.E. The Arrowsmith orogeny: Geochronological and thermobarometric constraints on its extent and tectonic setting in the Rae craton, with implications for pre-Nuna supercontinent reconstruction. Precambrian Res. 2013, 232, 44–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Lan, C.Y.; Chung, S.L.; Lo, C.H.; Lee, T.Y.; Wang, P.L.; Li, H.M.; Toan, D.V. First evidence for Archean continental crust in northern Vietnam and its implications for crustal and tectonic evolution in Southeast Asia. Geology 2001, 29, 219–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Fan, H.P.; Zhu, W.G.; Li, Z.X. Paleo- to Mesoproterozoic magmatic and tectonic evolution of the southwestern Yangtze Block, south China: New constraints from ca. 1.7–1.5 Ga mafic rocks in the Huili-Dongchuan area. Gondwana Res. 2020, 87, 248–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Zhao, X.F.; Zhou, M.F.; Li, J.W.; Sun, M.; Gao, J.F.; Sun, W.H.; Yang, J.H. Late Paleoproterozoic to early Mesoproterozoic Dongchuan Group in Yunnan, SW China: Implications for tectonic evolution of the Yangtze Block. Precambrian Res. 2010, 182, 57–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Lu, G.M.; Wang, W.; Cawood, P.A.; Ernst, R.E.; Raveggi, M.; Huang, S.F.; Xue, E.K. Late Paleoproterozoic to Early Mesoproterozoic Mafic Magmatism in the SW Yangtze Block: Mantle Plumes Associated With Nuna Breakup? J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2020, 125, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Liu, J.P.; Gao, Z.Y.; Zhou, J.X.; Sun, Z.B.; He, S.J.; Zhao, J.T.; Wu, X.T. Diagenetic and metallogenic responses to the late Paleoproterozoic breakup of the Columbia supercontinent on the western margin of the Yangtze Block, SW China. Ore Geol. Rev. 2024, 166, 105907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Liu, W.; Yang, X.Y.; Shu, S.Y.; Liu, L.; Yuan, S.H. Precambrian Basement and Late Paleoproterozoic to Mesoproterozoic Tectonic Evolution of the SW Yangtze Block, South China: Constraints from Zircon U-Pb Dating and Hf Isotopes. Minerals 2018, 8, 333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Lu, G.M.; Wang, W.; Ernst, R.E.; Söderlund, U.; Lan, Z.F.; Huang, S.F.; Xue, E.K. Petrogenesis of Paleo-Mesoproterozoic mafic rocks in the southwestern Yangtze Block of South China: Implications for tectonic evolution and paleogeographic reconstruction. Precambrian Res. 2019, 322, 66–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Huang, L.Y.; Zhao, J.; Chen, Y.L.; Long, X.P.; Zhang, J.S.; Guo, Q.P. Late Paleoproterozoic within-plate mafic magmatism in the western Yangtze Block, South China Craton: Implications for the initial break-up of the Columbia supercontinent. Precambrian Res. 2024, 414, 107609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Chen, W.T.; Zhou, M.F.; Zhao, X.F. Late Paleoproterozoic sedimentary and mafic rocks in the Hekou area, SW China: Implication for the reconstruction of the Yangtze Block in Columbia. Precambrian Res. 2013, 231, 61–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Fan, H.P.; Zhu, W.G.; Li, Z.X.; Zhong, H.; Bai, Z.J.; He, D.F.; Chen, C.J.; Cao, C.Y. Ca. 1.5Ga mafic magmatism in South China during the break-up of the supercontinent Nuna/Columbia: The Zhuqing Fe–Ti–V oxide ore-bearing mafic intrusions in western Yangtze Block. Lithos 2013, 168–169, 85–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Wang, T.G.; Huang, C.W.; Du, G.F.; Liu, Y.; Xie, J.F.; Li, H. Geochronology, geochemistry and zircon Hf-isotopes of the early Mesoproterozoic Yaopengzi dolerite in SW Yangtze block (Sichuan, SW China): Implications for the Columbia supercontinent breakup. Geosci. J. 2019, 23, 557–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Belousova, E.A.; Kostitsyn, Y.A.; Griffin, W.L.; Begg, G.C.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Pearson, N.J. The growth of the continental crust: Constraints from zircon Hf-isotope data. Lithos 2010, 119, 457–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Li, L.M.; Lin, S.F.; Xing, G.F.; Davis, D.W.; Davis, W.J.; Xiao, W.J.; Yin, C.Q. Geochemistry and tectonic implications of late Mesoproterozoic alkaline bimodal volcanic rocks from the Tieshajie Group in the southeastern Yangtze Block, South China. Precambrian Res. 2013, 230, 179–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Chen, F.L.; Cui, X.Z.; Lin, S.F.; Wang, J.; Yang, X.M.; Ren, G.M.; Pang, W.H. The 1.14 Ga mafic intrusions in the SW Yangtze Block, South China: Records of late Mesoproterozoic intraplate magmatism. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2021, 205, 104603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Huang, M.D.; Cui, X.Z.; Lin, S.F.; Chen, J.B.; Ren, G.M.; Sun, Z.M.; Ren, F.; Xu, Q. The ca. 1.18–1.14 Ga A-type granites in the southwestern Yangtze Block, South China: New evidence for late Mesoproterozoic continental rifting. Precambrian Res. 2021, 363, 106358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Lu, G.M.; Spencer, C.J.; Deng, X.; Tian, Y.; Huang, B.; Jiang, Y.D.; Wang, W. Mesoproterozoic magmatism redefines the tectonics and paleogeography of the SW Yangtze Block, China. Precambrian Res. 2022, 370, 106558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Gu, H.O.; Sun, H.; Wang, F.; Ge, C.; Zhou, T. A new practical isobaric interference correction model for the in situ Hf isotopic analysis using laser ablation-multi-collector-ICP-mass spectrometry of zircons with high Yb/Hf ratios. J. Anal. Atom. Spect 2019, 34, 1223–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Thompson, J.M.; Meffre, S.; Danyushevsky, L.V. Impact of air, laser pulse width and fluence on U-Pb dating of zircons by LA-ICPMS. J. Anal. Atom. Spect 2018, 33, 221–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Li, X.H.; Tang, G.Q.; Gong, B.; Yang, Y.H.; Hou, K.J.; Hu, Z.C.; Li, Q.L.; Liu, Y.; Li, W.X. Qinghu zircon: A working reference for microbeam analysis of U-Pb age and Hf and O isotopes. Chin. Sci. Bull 2013, 58, 4647–4654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Paton, C.; Hellstrom, J.; Paul, B.; Woodhead, J.; Hergt, J. Lolite: Freeware for the visualisation and processing of mass spectrometric data. J. Anal. Atom. Spect 2011, 26, 2508–2518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Minerals 15 01195 g002
Figure 2. A simplified geological map of the Huangcaoba pluton in the Xujie area, western Yangtze Block (modified from Huang et al., 2024 [27]). Also shown is the location of the geologic cross-section of the Pudeng Formation.
Figure 2. A simplified geological map of the Huangcaoba pluton in the Xujie area, western Yangtze Block (modified from Huang et al., 2024 [27]). Also shown is the location of the geologic cross-section of the Pudeng Formation.
Minerals 15 01195 g002
Minerals 15 01195 g003
Figure 3. Interpreted geologic cross-section from A to B (Pm01) and C to D (Pm02) through a part of the Pudeng Formation and distribution of sampling positions.
Figure 3. Interpreted geologic cross-section from A to B (Pm01) and C to D (Pm02) through a part of the Pudeng Formation and distribution of sampling positions.
Minerals 15 01195 g003
Minerals 15 01195 g004
Figure 4. Typical field photographs and photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of petrographic characteristics from the metasedimentary rock samples of the Pudeng Formation and intrusive rock in the Xujie area. Bt, biotite; Ms, muscovite; Pl, plagioclase; Qt, quartz; Grt, garnet; Kfs, k-feldspar. (a) field photographs of feldspar-biotite-quartz schist; (b) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of feldspar-biotite-quartz schist; (c) field photographs of mica-quartz schist; (d) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of mica-quartz schist; (e) field photographs of quartzite; (f) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of quartzite; (g) field photographs of biotite monzogranite; (h) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of biotite monzogranite.
Figure 4. Typical field photographs and photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of petrographic characteristics from the metasedimentary rock samples of the Pudeng Formation and intrusive rock in the Xujie area. Bt, biotite; Ms, muscovite; Pl, plagioclase; Qt, quartz; Grt, garnet; Kfs, k-feldspar. (a) field photographs of feldspar-biotite-quartz schist; (b) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of feldspar-biotite-quartz schist; (c) field photographs of mica-quartz schist; (d) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of mica-quartz schist; (e) field photographs of quartzite; (f) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of quartzite; (g) field photographs of biotite monzogranite; (h) photomicrographs (cross-polarized light) of biotite monzogranite.
Minerals 15 01195 g004
Minerals 15 01195 g005
Figure 5. Concordia diagrams of U-Pb data and age histogram of detrital zircons from the metasedimentary rock samples (a,b) XJG-2101, (c,d) XJG-2102, (e,f) XJG-2103 from the Pudeng Formation.
Figure 5. Concordia diagrams of U-Pb data and age histogram of detrital zircons from the metasedimentary rock samples (a,b) XJG-2101, (c,d) XJG-2102, (e,f) XJG-2103 from the Pudeng Formation.
Minerals 15 01195 g005
Minerals 15 01195 g006
Figure 6. Concordia diagrams (a) of U-Pb data and age histogram (b) of zircons from the biotite monzogranite.
Figure 6. Concordia diagrams (a) of U-Pb data and age histogram (b) of zircons from the biotite monzogranite.
Minerals 15 01195 g006
Minerals 15 01195 g007
Figure 7. Chondrite-normalized REE (a) and upper continental crust trace element patterns (b) of the metasedimentary rock from the Pudeng Formation (Chondrite-normalized adapted from Sun and McDonough, 1989 [52]; upper continental crust adapted from Rudnick and Gao, 2003 [53]).
Figure 7. Chondrite-normalized REE (a) and upper continental crust trace element patterns (b) of the metasedimentary rock from the Pudeng Formation (Chondrite-normalized adapted from Sun and McDonough, 1989 [52]; upper continental crust adapted from Rudnick and Gao, 2003 [53]).
Minerals 15 01195 g007
Minerals 15 01195 g008
Figure 8. Discrimination diagram of the material composition in the proto-source region of metasedimentary rocks of the Pudeng Formation (adapted from Gu et al., 2002 [58]).
Figure 8. Discrimination diagram of the material composition in the proto-source region of metasedimentary rocks of the Pudeng Formation (adapted from Gu et al., 2002 [58]).
Minerals 15 01195 g008
Minerals 15 01195 g009
Figure 9. Discrimination diagram of the tectonic environment of metasedimentary rocks in the Pudeng Formation. A1 = arc set-ting, basaltic and andesitic detritus, A2 = evolved arc setting, felsitic-plutonic detritus. (a) La-Th-Sc, adapted from Roser and Korsch, 1986 [59]; (b) K2O/Na2O-SiO2, adapted from Bhatia and Crook, 1986 [60]; (c) SiO2/Al2O3-K2O/Na2O, adapted from Roser and Korsch, 1986 [59]).
Figure 9. Discrimination diagram of the tectonic environment of metasedimentary rocks in the Pudeng Formation. A1 = arc set-ting, basaltic and andesitic detritus, A2 = evolved arc setting, felsitic-plutonic detritus. (a) La-Th-Sc, adapted from Roser and Korsch, 1986 [59]; (b) K2O/Na2O-SiO2, adapted from Bhatia and Crook, 1986 [60]; (c) SiO2/Al2O3-K2O/Na2O, adapted from Roser and Korsch, 1986 [59]).
Minerals 15 01195 g009
Minerals 15 01195 g010
Figure 10. (a) Detrital zircon εHf(t) values versus U-Pb ages of metasedimentary rock samples from the western Yangtze Block and Pudeng Formation. (b) U-Pb ages of detrital zircons from the western Yangtze Block (adapted from Bhatia and Crook, 1986 [51]). Data sources: Li et al., 2013 [45]; Ji, 2015 [69]; Cui et al., 2022 [67]; Cheng et al., 2022 [68]; Ren et al., 2020 [70]; this study.
Figure 10. (a) Detrital zircon εHf(t) values versus U-Pb ages of metasedimentary rock samples from the western Yangtze Block and Pudeng Formation. (b) U-Pb ages of detrital zircons from the western Yangtze Block (adapted from Bhatia and Crook, 1986 [51]). Data sources: Li et al., 2013 [45]; Ji, 2015 [69]; Cui et al., 2022 [67]; Cheng et al., 2022 [68]; Ren et al., 2020 [70]; this study.
Minerals 15 01195 g010
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

Yao, J.; Chen, Y.; Huang, L.; Zhao, J.; Gu, M.; Zhang, B. Provenance and Tectonic Setting of the Mesoproterozoic Pudeng Formation in the Western Yangtze Block. Minerals 2025, 15, 1195. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111195

AMA Style

Yao J, Chen Y, Huang L, Zhao J, Gu M, Zhang B. Provenance and Tectonic Setting of the Mesoproterozoic Pudeng Formation in the Western Yangtze Block. Minerals. 2025; 15(11):1195. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111195

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yao, Jian, Youliang Chen, Luyu Huang, Jing Zhao, Mengjuan Gu, and Baoling Zhang. 2025. "Provenance and Tectonic Setting of the Mesoproterozoic Pudeng Formation in the Western Yangtze Block" Minerals 15, no. 11: 1195. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111195

APA Style

Yao, J., Chen, Y., Huang, L., Zhao, J., Gu, M., & Zhang, B. (2025). Provenance and Tectonic Setting of the Mesoproterozoic Pudeng Formation in the Western Yangtze Block. Minerals, 15(11), 1195. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15111195

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