Next Article in Journal
Zoharite, (Ba,K)6 (Fe,Cu,Ni)25S27, and Gmalimite, K6□Fe2+24S27—New Djerfisherite Group Minerals from Gehlenite-Wollastonite Paralava, Hatrurim Complex, Israel
Previous Article in Journal
Subduction Dynamics of the Paleo-Pacific Plate: New Constraints from Quartz Diorites in the Fudong Region
Previous Article in Special Issue
U-Pb and Hf Isotopic Analyses for Detrital Zircon of the Danzhou Group in the Western Jiangnan Orogenic Belt and Tectonic Implications
 
 
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 6
10.3390/min15060563
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

Origins of Zircon Xenocrysts in the Neoproterozoic South Anhui Ophiolite, Yangtze Block

by
Ziming Sun
1,
Junyong Li
2,* and
Xiaolei Wang
2
1
School of Cultural Industry and Tourism Management, Sanjiang University, Nanjing 210012, China
2
State Key Laboratory of Critical Earth Material Cycling and Mineral Deposits, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2025, 15(6), 563; https://doi.org/10.3390/min15060563
Submission received: 14 April 2025 / Revised: 16 May 2025 / Accepted: 20 May 2025 / Published: 26 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Tracing Precambrian Pathways: Neoproterozoic Rocks and Their Global Context)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Zircon serves as a robust tracer for crustal recycling processes owing to its wide stability under diverse geological conditions. Its cryptic occurrence within ophiolites offers valuable insights into regional paleotectonic evolution. In this study, we identify a few zircon xenocrysts in both peridotite and basalt units from the Neoproterozoic South Anhui Ophiolite (SAO) in the southeastern Yangtze Block, South China. Zircon xenocrysts within the peridotite yield U-Pb ages ranging from ca. 2.7 to 1.0 Ga (n = 21), with three peaks of 2.8–2.5 Ga, 2.2–1.8 Ga, and 1.2–1.0 Ga. Comparative analysis of age spectra suggests these xenocrysts likely originated from recycled subducted continental materials within the Yangtze Block. In the basaltic rocks, zircon xenocrysts exhibit ages of ca. 2.1–0.9 Ga (n = 27), with peaks of 1.1–0.9 Ga, 1.5–1.4 Ga, and 2.1–1.7 Ga. These zircons are interpreted to have been inherited from wall rocks through crustal contamination during magma ascent, as their age spectra closely resemble those of the surrounding basement strata. Collectively, these findings support that the SAO possibly formed in a back-arc basin setting, characterized by significant crust–mantle interactions.

1. Introduction

Zircon (ZrSiO4) is widely used as a tracer of a range of geological processes due to its stability across a broad range of temperature and pressure condition [1], as well as its resistance to alteration during later transport and metamorphism. It typically crystallizes from felsic melts and is thereby frequently used to reconstruct the formation and evolution of continents [2]. In contrast, mantle-related mafic and ultramafic melts are usually hard to crystallize zircon, since high temperatures and low zirconium contents prevent zircon saturation [3,4,5]. However, zircon xenocrysts have been widely documented in mantle-related rocks, including kimberlites [6,7,8,9,10], mantle xenoliths [11,12,13], and peridotites from ophiolite suites [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. Additionally, a significant amount of zircon xenocrysts has been discovered in alkaline ocean island basalts [22,23]. The occurrence of zircon xenocrysts within mantle-related rocks is somewhat puzzling and possibly provides insights into crustal recycling and mantle dynamics. For example, zircon xenocrysts in mafic–ultramafic rocks can serve as effective tracers of mantle metasomatism and lithospheric crust–mantle interactions [2,24,25,26].
Ancient ophiolite suites represent fossil remnants of oceanic lithosphere that are typically emplaced tectonically at convergent plate margins [27,28,29]. Zircon xenocrystals hosted within the ophiolite thus can preserve critical information about the regional tectonic and crustal evolution during convergent orogenesis. In this study, we conducted a chronological investigation of the Neoproterozoic South Anhui Ophiolite (SAO) along southeastern margin of the Yangtze Block, South China. A significant number of ancient zircon xenocrysts were identified within the peridotites and basalts of the ophiolite. Their U-Pb age spectra provide insights into ancient crustal recycling and evolutional processes at the block’s margin.

2. Geological Setting and Petrographic Characteristics

The Yangtze Block, in the northwestern part of the South China Block, is bounded by the Qinling–Dabie Orogenic Belt to the north, the Songpan–Ganzi Terrane and Tibetan Plateau to the west, and the Cathaysia Block to the southeast (Figure 1). It experienced multiple orogenies and associated crustal evolution throughout Earth’s history. The Jiangnan Orogen is situated at its southeastern margin and was formed during the Neoproterozoic Era through convergence between the Yangtze and Cathysia blocks [30,31]. This orogen witnessed complex tectonic processes, ranging from oceanic crust subduction and accretion to, ultimately, continental collision [32,33,34,35,36].
The SAO is located within the eastern segment of the Jiangnan Orogen, extending ~40 km in the northeast direction. It is tectonically emplaced within the flysch formations of the Neoproterozoic Niuwu Formation of the Xikou Group [38,39,40]. Available studies have indicated that the SAO formed at ca. 0.83 Ga, comprises structural peridotites, mafic cumulate rocks, pillow lavas, and sedimentary cover layers, and exhibits a typical tripartite ophiolitic structure [41]. From bottom to top, this structure consists of (a) an ultramafic unit, primarily composed of serpentinized dunite with podiform chromitites, along with minor pure olivine rock, harzburgite, lherzolite, and pyroxenite (Figure 2a,d); (b) a mafic unit, consisting of gabbro, gabbronorite, and diorite (Figure 2b); (c) a volcanic unit, characterized by pillow lavas; and (d) a sedimentary cover, comprising siliceous rocks and overlying sedimentary cover layers [40,42,43].
In this study, we investigated two ophiolitic geological sections exposed at Fuchuan and Futangkeng, respectively. In both sections, dismembered and fragmented ophiolite suites are exposed as discontinuous outcrops within strongly foliated flysch sequences (Figure 2d). We collected five samples, which included two serpentinized peridotites (14FC-5-1 and 14FC-5-3; GPS: 27°44′06.09″ and 116°50′27.28″), one cumulate pyroxenite (14FC-5-2), one diabase (14FC-2-5; GPS: 29°54′17.65″, 118°31′56.78″), and one coarse-grained metagabbro (14FC-4-1; GPS: 29°54′36.86″, 118°31′45.63″). Field observations revealed that the serpentinized peridotite was intruded by the gabbro (Figure 2a) and hosts minor granitic veins (Figure 2d). Alteration minerals, including talc and tremolite, are extensively observed in these mafic to ultramafic rocks.
Under microscopes, the peridotite samples have undergone extensive serpentinization, with olivine and pyroxene precursors largely replaced by serpentine and chlorite (Figure 3c). The cumulate pyroxenite, gabbro, and diabase units (Figure 3a,b,d) form a sequence of fractional crystallization from mantle-derived basaltic magma. Plagioclase and clinopyroxene minerals are partially substituted by secondary minerals to some extent, preserving their original textures (Figure 3b).

3. Analytical Procedures

The samples were crushed and processed by heavy liquid and magnetic methods to separate zircons. The zircons were then manually handpicked under a binocular microscope and embedded in epoxy resin. The mounts were subsequently ground and polished to expose the grain cores. Sites for in situ isotopic analysis were selected based on transmitted/reflected light microscopy and cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging characteristics to avoid cracks, heterogeneity, or inclusion domains. LA-ICP-MS zircon U-Pb isotope dating was conducted at the State Key Laboratory of Critical Earth Material Cycling and Mineral Deposits. The experiment was conducted using an Agilent 7500a ICP-MS mass spectrometer equipped with a GeoLas Pro laser ablation system at State Key Laboratory of Critical Earth Material Cycling and Mineral Deposits, Nanjing University (Nanjing, China) [44]. The analytical conditions were as follows: 193 nm wavelength, 5 Hz laser pulse repetition frequency, 60 s ablation time, 40 s background measurement time, and 24 μm beam spot diameter. Testing was performed according to the methods described by Jackson [45] and Wang [33]. During the experiment, 15 unknown sample points and standard points were grouped together as one dataset. To correct for fractionation of U-Pb isotopes and trace element concentrations, the primary age standard of GEMOC GJ-1 [45] was tested twice at the beginning and end of each dataset. To monitor the precision of age analytical results, a secondary zircon standard Mud Tank was dated as unknown. Eight Mud Tank zircons during the course of analysis yield a weighted mean 206Pb/238U age of 729 ± 13 Ma (MSWD = 1.6), consistent with the recommended value of 732 ± 5 Ma [46]. Zircon U-Pb ages were analyzed and calculated using the GLITTER software (ver. 4.4) [47]. Corrections and plotting of U-Th-Pb ages were performed using the ISOPLOT/Ex program (ver. 2.06) proposed by Ludwig [48]. Common Pb corrections were applied following the method of Andersen [49].

4. Results

4.1. Zircon Morphological Characteristics

Zircon cathodoluminescence (CL) images exhibit varying internal structures (Figure 4). Some zircons display simple, homogeneous interiors, while others show rhythmic zoning bands or core–rim structures. The luminescence intensities in CL images also differ: some zircons appear brightly luminescent, whereas others appear darker due to higher uranium (U) content. These features potentially indicate complex origins and formation histories for zircons.
Zircons in serpentinized peridotite samples (14FC-5-1 and 14FC-5-3) are transparent to pale yellow and predominantly occur as elongated or short prismatic crystals, with some exhibiting an ellipsoidal morphology. These zircons are euhedral, with grain sizes ranging from 80 to 200 μm and length-to-width ratios of approximately 3:2 to 3:1 (Figure 4a). CL imaging reveals core–rim structures, with most rims exhibiting relatively dark luminescence, likely due to subsequent metamorphic or anatexis events. Broad oscillatory zoning is observed in these zircons, and their Th/U ratios (ranging from 0.01 to 1.68) suggest a typical magmatic origin.
Zircons in the diabase sample 14FC-2-5 are transparent and exhibit a short prismatic habit with euhedral crystal forms. The grain sizes range from 50 to 100 μm, with length-to-width ratios of ~1:1 to 2:1 (Figure 4c). In CL images, zircons older than the Neoproterozoic resemble those found in the peridotite samples, displaying core–rim structures with broad oscillatory zoning. In the pegmatitic gabbro sample 14FC-4-1, zircons are predominantly short prismatic or irregular in shape, ranging from anhedral to subhedral. They are generally smaller, with grains sizes between 20 and 50 μm and length-to-width ratios of about 1:1 to 3:1 (Figure 4b). Some zircons exhibit uniform internal structures, while others display well-defined zoning patterns. Sample 14FC-5-2, a cumulate pyroxenite, contains transparent zircons, with habits ranging from elongated prismatic to short prismatic, all developing euhedrally. Their grain sizes range from 20 to 100 μm, with length-to-width ratios of ~1:1 to 3:1. Internally, these zircons exhibit distinct oscillatory zoning (Figure 4d). Among them, some exhibit high luminescence at the edges, with irregular boundary structures within these luminescent zones.

4.2. Zircon U–Pb Geochronological Characteristics

Samples were processed in separate batches during testing, and all samples exhibited ages older than the Neoproterozoic, making contamination during processing highly unlikely. Therefore, it can be confidently concluded that the zircons obtained are native to the rocks themselves. The testing of serpentinized peridotites from the SAO yielded an age range from the Late Archean to the Mesoproterozoic (2706 ± 59 Ma ~ 1012 ± 49 Ma, Supplementary Table S1).
The zircons from serpentinized peridotite samples of 14FC-5-1 and 14FC-5-3 have Th concentrations ranging from 10 to 928 ppm, U concentrations from 32 to 2054 ppm, and Th/U ratios between 0.06 and 1.11. The 207Pb/206U ages of six test points range from 2706 ± 59 Ma to 1012 ± 49 Ma (Figure 5a). In contrast, zircon xenocrysts found within the basaltic rocks of the SAO exhibit ages ranging from the Paleoproterozoic to the early Neoproterozoic (2092 ± 33Ma ~ ca. 900 Ma). In sample 14FC-5-2, the zircons show Th concentrations between 15 and 516 ppm, U contents from 60 to 1393 ppm, and Th/U ratios in the range of 0.01 to 1.68. The 207Pb/206U ages of these zircons range from 1746 ± 50 Ma to 968 ± 24 Ma (Figure 5b). Sample 14FC-4-1 has zircons with Th concentrations varying from 87 to 635 ppm, U concentrations from 128 to 588 ppm, and Th/U ratios from 0.6 to 1.68. The 207Pb/206U age range for this sample is 1777 ± 51 ~ 909 ± 14 Ma (Figure 5c). In sample 14FC-2-5, the zircons have Th concentrations ranging from 41 to 556 ppm and U concentrations from 73 to 1028 ppm, with Th/U ratios between 0.3 and 0.82. The 207Pb/206U age range of these zircons is 2092 ± 33 Ma ~ 916 ± 30 Ma (Figure 5d). The aforementioned U-Pb dating results indicate that most of the old zircons display oscillatory zoning, a characteristic of magmatic zircons. These zircons also exhibit relatively high Th and U concentrations, with Th/U ratios typically > 0.4. These features suggest the zircons belong to the category of magmatic zircons, rather than metamorphic or recrystallized zircons.

4.3. Zircon Age Spectra

Zircon xenocrysts in peridotites and basalts of the SAO show distinct age spectra (Figure 5). Zircons in the peridotites have a wide age range, spanning from the late Archean (ca. 2.7 Ga) to the Mesoproterozoic (ca. 1.0 Ga), with prominent peaks of 1.2–1.0 Ga, 2.2–1.8 Ga, and 2.8–2.5 Ga. In contrast, zircon ages in the mafic rocks range from the Paleoproterozoic (ca. 2.1 Ga) to the early Neoproterozoic (ca. 0.9 Ga), with peaks of 1.1–0.9 Ga, 1.5–1.4 Ga, and 2.1–1.7 Ga. While both groups share similar youngest age peaks, the basaltic rocks notably lack Archean zircon xenocrysts compared to the peridotites. This suggests that zircon xenocrysts in the two rock types have different origins.
The zircon U-Pb age spectra provide insights into duration of orogenic events related to supercontinents (Figure 6) [50]; it can be observed that the age peak of peridotite from 2.8 to 2.5 Ga includes information from the Paleoproterozoic–Neoarchean periods, which trace back to the ancient basement ages of the Yangtze Block during the Archean [51,52]. This age peak probably indicates a period of stable continental plate development and global continental crust growth during the transition from the Archean to the Paleoproterozoic [53,54,55,56]. Zircons with ages of 2.2–1.8 Ga likely correspond to magmatism relating to the assembly and breakup of the Columbia supercontinent [35,57,58,59,60]. The age range of 1.2–1.0 Ga could reflect magmatism in response to the assembly and breakup of the Rodinia supercontinent [61,62,63,64,65,66]. Additionally, a smaller population of zircon grains with ages around 1.5–1.4 Ga, found in basaltic rocks, may indicate a distinct magmatic event. This is consistent with similar-aged zircons previously identified within the folded basement strata of the Jiangnan orogenic belt [44].

5. Discussion

Zircons hosted within basaltic and peridotite units of ophiolites provide critical clues for geological processes operating in the region [15,16,19,20,21]. Previous studies have identified multiple genetic mechanisms for these zircons. For instance, zircons hosted within basaltic rocks may originate from (1) crystallization from basaltic melts generated by the dehydration melting of the metasomatized asthenosphere mantle [16,68,69,70,71] or (2) magmatic assimilation of terrestrial crustal material, resulting in the incorporation of zircon xenocrysts from surrounding rocks [72,73]. On the other hand, zircon xenocrystals found in peridotite units are generally derived from recycled continental crustal materials that have been transported into the mantle [72]. The transportation may be facilitated by subducting slabs, while recycled zircons could be retained within the mantle and subsequently enter into mantle-derived peridotites as xenocrysts through mantle convection [73].
In this study, the zircons found in basaltic samples are significantly older than the formation ages of their host rocks. Notably, some of these ancient zircons exhibit well-defined oscillatory zoning in CL images, a characteristic indicative of crystallization from felsic melts. Therefore, it is unlikely that these zircons crystallized from melts generated by the dehydration melting of a metasomatized mantle. Alternatively, it is more plausible that mantle-derived basaltic magmas assimilated continental or newly formed crustal materials, thereby incorporating zircons from surrounding rocks. For instance, Pilot [19] reported numerous ancient zircons (ranging from Mesozoic 330 Ma to Proterozoic 1600 Ma) in the Mid-Ocean-Ridge Basalts from the Atlantic Ocean and attributed their presence to the magmatic assimilation of ancient crustal materials by ascending magmas. In our study, the zircon age spectra of the SAO basaltic rocks are broadly consistent with those of the basement sedimentary rocks in the Jiangnan Orogen (Figure 5 and Figure 7). Thus, we interpreted the zircon xenocrysts within the basaltic rocks as being inherited from the wall rocks of the Jiangnan Orogen, indicating contamination by crustal material during the ascent of mafic magmas. These findings suggest that the incorporation of basaltic magmas occurred during the evolution of basaltic magmas, consistent with the tectonic settings of the SAO, which is widely regarded as a back-arc basin where significant mantle-crust interaction occurred [40,41,74]. Therefore, magmatic assimilation provides a plausible explanation for the presence of zircon xenocrysts in the basaltic units of ophiolites.
Regarding zircon xenocrysts hosted within the serpentinite–peridotite suite of the SAO, they likely originated from recycled ancient crustal materials that were transported into the mantle via subducting slab. They are characterized by numerous Archean (2.8–2.5 Ga) ages. A comparation of their age spectra with those of the basement strata in the adjacent continental blocks (i.e., the Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks) (Figure 7) was conducted. Regionally, basement rocks and zircons with Archean ages are rarely documented within the Cathaysia Block [75] but extensively recorded in the Yangtze Block [76]. This suggests that the Archean zircon xenocrysts in the peridotites more likely originated from the Yangtze block. We infer that the crustal materials from the Yangtze Block were recycled into the mantle and eventually retained within the peridotites of the ophiolite. This crustal recycling process may be facilitated by slab subduction within the Yangtze Block (Figure 8). The youngest peak age of these zircon xenocrysts (ca. 1.0 Ga) sets a lower limit on the age of this subduction event. Therefore, we speculate that a subduction event occurred along the southeastern margin of the Yangtze Block during the early Neoproterozoic, which may have carried ancient crustal materials from the Yangtze Block deep into the mantle (Figure 8). These zircons may have recorded a complete geodynamic cycle wherein continental crustal materials undergo subduction into the mantle, remain preserved under mantle conditions, and are subsequently returned to the surface through mantle convection.
However, an important question pertains to whether zircons could survive in a mantle environment. According to the study by Reid and Ringwood [77], zircon can transform into scheelite-structured ZrSiO4 at approximately 15 GPa and 900 °C. Meanwhile, Glass and Liu [78] reported the discovery of polycrystalline ZrSiO4 under natural conditions within ejecta from the upper Eocene. Liu [79] proposed that under conditions of about 22 GPa and 1000 °C, ZrSiO4 could decompose into ZrO2 (cotunnite) and SiO2 (stishovite). Experimental simulations by Tange and Takahashi [80] on zircon decomposition under mantle conditions (as illustrated in Figure 6) demonstrated that the phase boundary for zircon decomposition occurs at 20.6 GPa (equivalent to a depth of 600 km), when the subducting slab temperature reaches 1500 °C, and at 23.2 GPa, when the temperature increases to 1800 °C. This indicates that zircons within subducting slabs must transform into a stable high-pressure polymorph of scheelite-structured ZrSiO4 at around 12 GPa [3,77,79]. On the other hand, seismic tomography reveals that subducting slabs can penetrate through the 660 km seismic discontinuity into the lower mantle [80,81]. However, upon reaching this depth, the ZrSiO4 structure decomposes, implying that zircons cannot be preserved under lower mantle conditions. Zircon within the subducting oceanic plate becomes unstable and decomposes near the bottom of the transition zone [3]. Therefore, it is possible that the pre-Neoproterozoic zircon xenocrysts within the peridotites originated from recycled continental crust that was preserved in the upper mantle environment. These ancient zircons were subsequently transported to the surface by upwelling asthenosphere and subduction zone magmas.

6. Conclusions

A few Archean–Paleoproterozoic zircon xenocrysts (2.7–1.0 Ga, peaking at 2.8–2.5, 2.2–1.8, and 1.2–1.0 Ga) were found in the SAO peridotite and were likely sourced from the Yangtze Block. Their presence in SAO peridotite possibly indicates a crustal recycling process via Neoproterozoic subduction that transported ancient Yangtze crustal materials into the mantle. Zircon xenocrysts (2.1–0.9 Ga, peaking at 2.1–1.7, 1.5–1.4, and 1.1–0.9 Ga) hosted within the basaltic units present comparable age spectra to that of detrital zircons from the folded sedimentary basement in the Jiangnan Orogen. Their origins could be interpreted as a result of crustal assimilation during magma ascent, supporting that the SAO formed within a back-arc basin setting, where significant mantle–crust interactions took place.

7. Limitations of the Study

This study provides some clues into the formation of the SAO. However, several limitations should be acknowledged. Zircon oxygen isotope and trace element data are currently lacking. In addition, the number of zircon xenocrysts identified in both peridotites and basalts is relatively small, especially those of Archean age. This may result in the omission of key age populations and limit the resolution of tectonic interpretations. Future research will address these issues by acquiring zircon oxygen isotope and trace element data. It will also involve analyzing a larger number of zircon xenocrysts to improve source characterization and refine models of crust—mantle interaction.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/min15060563/s1, Table S1: LA-ICP-MS U-Pb Dating Results of Zircons from the South Anhui Ophiolite (SAO).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Z.S.; Methodology, Z.S.; Validation, Z.S.; Formal analysis, Z.S.; Investigation, Z.S., J.L. and X.W.; Resources, X.W.; Writing—original draft, Z.S.; Writing—review & editing, J.L.; Supervision, X.W.; Project administration, X.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data (Supplementary Table S1) supporting reported results can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28789115.v2.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hoskin, P.W.O.; Schaltegger, U. The composition of zircon and igneous and Metamorphic petrogenesis. In Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry; Mineralogical Society of America: Washington, DC, USA, 2003; Volume 53, pp. 27–62. [Google Scholar]
  2. Siebel, W.; Schmitt, A.K.; Danišík, M.; Chen, F.; Meier, S.; Wei, S.; Eroǧlu, S. Prolonged mantle residence of zircon xenocrysts from the western Eger rift. Nat. Geosci. 2009, 2, 886–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Tange, Y.; Takahashi, E. Stability of the high–pressure polymorph of zircon (ZrSiO4) in the deep mantle. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 2004, 143, 223–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhang, R.Y.; Yang, J.S.; Wooden, J.L.; Liou, J.G.; Li, T.F. U–Pb SHRIMP geochronology of zircon in garnet peridotite from the Sulu UHP terrane, China: Implications for mantle metasomatism and subduction-zone UHP metamorphism. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2005, 237, 729–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zheng, Y.F.; Zhao, Z.F.; Chen, Y.X. Continental subduction channel processes: Plate interface interaction during continental collision. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2013, 58, 2233–2239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Batumike, J.M.; Griffin, W.L.; Belousova, E.A.; Pearson, N.J.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Shee, S.R. LAM–ICPMS U–Pb dating of kimberlitic perovskite: Eocene–Oligocene kimberlites from the Kundelungu Plateau, D.R. congo. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2008, 267, 609–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Belousova, E.A.; Griffin, W.L.; Pearson, N.J. Trace element composition and cathodoluminescence properties of southern African kimberlitic zircons. Mineral. Mag. 1998, 62, 355–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Page, F.Z.; Fu, B.; Kita, N.T.; Fournelle, J.; Spicuzza, M.J.; Schulze, D.J. Zircons from kimberlite: New insights from oxygen isotopes, trace elements, and Ti in zircon thermometry. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2007, 71, 3887–3903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Valley, J.W.; Kinny, P.D.; Schulze, D.J.; Spicuzza, M.J. Zircon megacrysts from kimberlite: Oxygen isotope variability among mantle melts. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1998, 133, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zartman, R.E.; Richardson, S.H. Evidence from kimberlitic zircon for a decreasing mantle Th/U since the Archean. Chem. Geol. 2005, 220, 263–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, Y.; Gao, S.; Hu, Z.; Gao, C.; Zong, K.; Wang, D. Continental and Oceanic Crust Recycling–induced Melt–Peridotite Interactions in the Trans–North China Orogen: U–Pb Dating, Hf isotopes and Trace Elements in zircons from Mantle Xenoliths. J. Petrol. 2010, 51, 537–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Liu, Y.C.; Wang, A.D.; Li, S.G.; Rolfo, F.; Li, Y.; Groppo, C.; Gu, X.F.; Hou, Z.H. Composition and geochronology of the deep–seated xenoliths from the southeastern margin of the North China Craton. Gondwana Res. 2013, 23, 1021–1039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zheng, J.P.; Griffin, W.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Zhang, M.; Pearson, N.; Pan, Y.M. Widespread Archean basement beneath the Yangtze Craton. Geology 2006, 34, 417–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Badanina, I.Y.; Lord, R.A.; Malitch, K.N.; Meisel, T.C. Origin of platinum-group mineral assemblages in a mantle tectonite at Unst deduced from mineral chemistry and osmium isotopes. In Proceedings of the EGU General Assembly Conference, Vienna, Austria, 7–12 April 2013. [Google Scholar]
  15. Belousova, E.A.; Gonzalez Jimenez, J.M.; Graham, I.; Griffin, W.L.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Pearson, N. The enigma of crustal zircons in upper-mantle rocks: Clues from the Tumut ophiolite, Southeast Australia. Geology 2015, 43, 119–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Grieco, G.; Ferrario, A.; Quadt, A.V.; Koeppel, V.; Mathez, E.A. The Zircon–Bearing Chromitites of the Phlogopite Peridotite of Finero (Ivrea Zone, Southern Alps): Evidence and Geochronology of a Metasomatized Mantle Slab. J. Petrol. 2001, 42, 89–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mattinson, J.M. Early Paleozoic ophiolite complexes of Newfoundland: Isotopic ages of zircon. Geology 1976, 3, 181–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mukasa, S.B.; Ludden, J.N. Uranium-lead isotopic ages of plagiogranites from the Troodos ophiolite, Cyprus, and their tectonic significance. Geology 1987, 15, 825–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pilot, J.; Werner, C.D.; Haubrich, F.; Baumann, N. Paleozoic and Proterozoic zircons from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Nature 1998, 393, 676–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Savelieva, G.N.; Suslov, P.V.; Larionov, A.N.; Berezhnaya, N.G. Age of zircons from chromites in the residual ophiolitic rocks as a reflection of upper mantle magmatic events. Dokl. Earth Sci. 2006, 411, 1401–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Stern, R.J.; Ali, K.A.; Liegeois, J.P.; Johnson, P.R.; Kozdroj, W.; Kattan, F.H. Distribution and significance of pre-Neoproterozoic zircons in juvenile Neoproterozoic igneous rocks of the Arabian–Nubian Shield. Am. J. Sci. 2010, 310, 791–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ashwal, L.; Torsvik, T.; Horváth, P.; Harris, C.; Webb, S.; Werner, S. A Mantle-derived Origin for Mauritian Trachytes. J. Petrol. 2016, 57, 1645–1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Schaltegger, U.; Amundsen, H.; Jamtveit, B.; Frank, M.; Grffin, W.; Gronvold, K.; Tronnes, R.; Torsvik, T. Contamination of OIB by underlying ancient continental lithosphere: U–Pb and Hf isotopes in zircons question EM1 and EM2 mantle components. Geochem. Cosmochim. Acta 2002, 66, A673. [Google Scholar]
  24. 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]
  25. Zheng, J.P.; Griffin, W.L.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Ming, Z.; Pearson, N. Zircons in mantle xenoliths record the Triassic Yangtze–North China continental collision. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2006, 247, 130–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zheng, J.P.; Tang, H.Y.; Zhang, Z.H. Zircon U–Pb ages and Hf isotopes of the Bixiling peridotite in the Dabie orogenic belt. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2007, 23, 343–350. [Google Scholar]
  27. Dewey, J.F.; Bird, J.M. Origin and emplacement of the ophiolite suite: Appalachian ophiolites in Newfoundland. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 1971, 76, 3179–3206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Nicolas, A. Structures of Ophiolites and Dynamics of Oceanic Lithosphere; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1989; 367p. [Google Scholar]
  29. Coleman, R.G. Ophiolites; Springer: New York City, NY, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  30. Shu, L.S.; Shi, Y.S.; Guo, L.Z. Plate-Terrane Tectonics and Collisional Orogenic Kinematics in the Central Jiangnan Orogen; Nanjing University Press: Nanjing, China, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  31. Shu, L.S.; Zhou, W.Q.; Shi, Y.S.; Yin, J. High-pressure metamorphic blueschists in the eastern Jiangnan Orogen and their geological age. Chin. Sci. Bull. 1993, 20, 1879–1882. [Google Scholar]
  32. Charvet, J.; Shu, L.; Shi, Y.; Guo, L.; Faure, M. The building of south China: Collision of Yangzi and Cathaysia blocks, problems and tentative answers. J. Asian Earth Sci. 1996, 13, 223–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, X.L.; Zhou, J.C.; Griffin, W.L.; Wang, R.C.; Qiu, J.S.; O’Reilly, S.Y.; Xu, X.S.; Liu, X.M.; Zhang, G.L. Detrital zircon geochronology of Precambrian basement sequences in the Jiangnan orogen: Dating the assembly of the Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks. Precambrian Res. 2007, 159, 117–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wang, X.L.; Shu, L.S.; Xing, G.F.; Zhou, J.C.; Tang, M.; Shu, X.J.; Qi, L.; Hu, Y.H. Post–orogenic extension in the eastern part of the Jiangnan orogen: Evidence from ca 800–760 Ma volcanic rocks. Precambrian Res. 2012, 222–223, 404–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. 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]
  36. Zhao, G.C.; Cawood, P.A. Tectonothermal evolution of the Mayuan Assemblage in the Cathaysia Block; implications for Neoproterozoic collision–related assembly of the South China Craton. Am. J. Sci. 1999, 299, 309–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhang, C.L.; Santosh, M.; Zou, H.B.; Li, H.K.; Huang, W.C. The Fuchuan ophiolite in Jiangnan Orogen: Geochemistry, zircon U–Pb geochronology, Hf isotope and implications for the Neoproterozoic assembly of South China. Lithos 2013, 179, 263–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Zhou, X.M.; Zou, H.B.; Yang, J.D.; Wang, Y.X. Sm–Nd isochron age and geological implications of the Fuchuan ophiolite suite in Shexian County, Anhui Province. Chin. Sci. Bull. 1989, 35, 1243–1245. [Google Scholar]
  39. Wang, C.Z.; Jiang, Y.; Xing, G.F. Current research status of ophiolites and issues related to South China ophiolites. East China Geol. 2011, 32, 235–246. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wang, X.L.; Zhou, J.C.; Chen, X.; Zhang, F.F.; Sun, Z.M. Formation and evolution of the Jiangnan Orogen. Bull. Mineral. Petrol. Geochem. 2017, 36, 22–43. [Google Scholar]
  41. Sun, Z.M.; Wang, X.L.; Qi, L.; Zhang, F.F.; Wang, D.; Li, J.Y.; Yu, M.G.; Shu, X.J. Formation of the Neoproterozoic ophiolites in southern China, new constraints from trace element and PGE geochemistry and Os isotopes. Precambrian Res. 2018, 309, 88–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhao, J.X. Genesis and tectonic implications of ophiolites in South Anhui and Northeast Jiangxi: Constraints from elemental and Sm–Nd isotopic data. Geochimica 1995, 4, 311–326. [Google Scholar]
  43. Zhou, J.T. Study on petrological and mineralogical types of the South Anhui ophiolite suite. Sci. Technol. Inf. 2013, 24, 468–469. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wang, X.L.; Zhou, J.C.; Griffin, W.L.; Zhao, G.C.; Yu, J.H.; Qiu, J.S.; Zhang, Y.J.; Xing, G.F. Geochemical zonation across a Neoproterozoic orogenic belt: Isotopic evidence from granitoids and metasedimentary rocks of the Jiangnan orogen, China. Precambrian Res. 2014, 242, 154–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Jackson, S.E.; Pearson, N.J.; Griffin, W.L.; Belousova, E.A. The application of laser ablation–inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry to in situ U–Pb zircon geochronology. Chem. Geol. 2004, 211, 47–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Black, L.P.; Gulson, B.L. The age of the Mud Tank carbonatite, Strangways range, Northern Territory. Bmr J. Aust. Geol. Geophys. 1978, 3, 227–232. [Google Scholar]
  47. Griffin, W.L.; Powell, W.J.; Pearson, N.J.; O’Reilly, S.Y. GLITTER: Data reduction software for laser ablation ICP-MS. Mineral. Assoc. Can. 2008, 40, 204–207. [Google Scholar]
  48. Ludwig, K.R. Using Isoplot/EX, Version 2, a Geolocronolgical Toolkit for Microsoft Excel; Berkeley Geochronological Center Special Publication: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1999; Volume 1a, pp. 1–47. [Google Scholar]
  49. Andersen, T. Correction of common lead in U–Pb analyses that do not report 204Pb. Chem. Geol. 2002, 192, 59–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Xiong, D.Y.; Wang, X.L.; Xing, G.F. A supercontinental cycle’s perspective for the formation of Precambrian pegmatitic lithium deposits. East China Geol. 2023, 44, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  51. Greentree, M.R.; Li, Z.X.; Li, X.H.; Wu, H. Late Mesoproterozoic to earliest Neoproterozoic basin record of the Sibao orogenesis in western South China and relationship to the assembly of Rodinia. Precambrian Res. 2006, 151, 79–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zheng, Y.F.; Zhao, Z.F.; Wu, Y.B.; Zhang, S.B.; Liu, X.; Wu, F.Y. Zircon U-Pb age, Hf and O isotope constraints on protolith origin of ultrahigh-pressure eclogite and gneiss in the Dabie orogen. Chem. Geol. 2006, 231, 135–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. 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]
  54. Bleeker, W. The late Archean record: A puzzle in ca. 35 pieces. Lithos 2003, 71, 99–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Hawkesworth, C.J.; Dhuime, B.; Pietranik, A.B.; Cawood, P.A.; Kemp, A.I.S.; Storey, C.D. The generation and evolution of the continental crust. J. Geol. Soc. 2010, 167, 229–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Mclennan, S.M.; Taylor, S.R. Geochemical Constraints on the Growth of the Continental Crust. J. Geol. 1982, 90, 347–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kusky, T.M.; Santosh, M. The Columbia connection in North China. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 2009, 323, 49–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Meert, J.G. Paleomagnetic evidence for a Paleo-Mesoproterozoic supercontinent Columbia. Gondwana Res. 2002, 5, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Rogers, J.J.W.; Santosh, M. Tectonics and surface effects of the supercontinent Columbia. Gondwana Res. 2009, 15, 373–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Santosh, M. Assembling North China Craton within the Columbia supercontinent: The role of double-sided subduction. Precambrian Res. 2010, 178, 149–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Condie, K.C. Rodinia and continental growth. Gondwana Res. 2001, 4, 154–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hoffman, P.F.; Kaufman, A.J.; Halverson, G.P.; Schrag, D.P. A Neoproterozoic snowball earth. Science 1998, 281, 1342–1346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Li, Z.X.; Bogdanova, S.V.; Collins, A.S.; Davidson, A.; Vernikovsky, V. Assembly, configuration, and break-up history of Rodinia: A synthesis. Precambrian Res. 2008, 160, 179–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Meert, J.G.; Torsvik, T.H. The making and unmaking of a supercontinent: Rodinia revisited. Tectonophysics 2003, 375, 261–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wang, X.L.; Coble, M.A.; Valley, J.W.; Shu, X.J.; Kitajima, K.; Spicuzza, M.J.; Sun, T. Influence of radiation damage on late Jurassic zircons from southern China: Evidence from in situ measurements of oxygen isotopes, laser Raman, U-Pb ages, and trace elements. Chem. Geol. 2014, 389, 122–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Zhang, F.F.; Wang, X.L.; Wang, D.; Yu, J.H.; Zhou, X.H.; Sun, Z.M. Neoproterozoic backarc basin on the southeastern margin of the Yangtze block during Rodinia assembly: New evidence from provenance of detrital zircons and geochemistry of mafic rocks. GSA Bull. 2017, 129, 904–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Meert, J.G. What’s in a name? The Columbia (Paleopangaea/Nuna) supercontinent. Gondwana Res. 2012, 21, 987–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chen, R.X.; Li, H.Y.; Zheng, Y.F.; Zhang, L.; Gong, B.; Hu, Z. Crust–mantle interaction in a continental subduction channel: Evidence from orogenic peridotites in north qaidam, northern tibet. J. Petrol. 2018, 58, 191–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Hermann, J.; Rubatto, D.; Trommsdorff, V. Sub-solidus Oligocene zircon formation in garnet peridotite during fast decompression and fluid infiltration (Duria, Central Alps). Mineral. Petrol. 2006, 88, 181–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Li, H.Y.; Chen, R.X.; Zheng, Y.F.; Hu, Z.C. The crust-mantle interaction in continental subduction channels: Zircon evidence from orogenic peridotite in the Sulu orogen. J. Geophys. Res.-Solid Earth 2016, 121, 687–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Zheng, Y.F.; Zhao, Z.F.; Wu, Y.B.; Gong, B. Protolith nature of deeply subducted continent: Zircon U-Pb age, Hf and O isotope constraints from UHP eclogite and gneiss in the Dabie orogen. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2006, 70, A745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Yamamoto, S.; Komiya, T.; Yamamoto, H.; Terabayashi, M.; Katayama, I.; Iizuka, T. Recycled crustal zircons from podiform chromitites in the luobusa ophiolite, southern Tibet. Isl. Arc 2013, 22, 89–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Robinson, P.T.; Trumbull, R.B.; Schmitt, A.; Yang, J.S.; Li, J.W.; Zhou, M.F. The origin and significance of crustal minerals in ophiolitic chromitites and peridotites. Gondwana Res. 2015, 27, 486–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Wu, R.X.; Zheng, Y.F.; Wu, Y.B. Zircon U-Pb Dating and Element and Oxygen Isotope Geochemistry of Gabbro from Ophiolites in South Anhui. Acta Geosci. Sin. 2005, 26, 70–73. [Google Scholar]
  75. Li, X.H.; Li, Z.X.; Li, W.X. Detrital zircon U-pb age and hf isotope constrains on the generation and reworking of Precambrian continental crust in the Cathaysia block, South China: A synthesis. Gondwana Res. 2014, 25, 1202–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Li, J.Y.; Wang, X.L.; Wang, D.; Du, D.H.; Li, L.S. Pre-Neoproterozoic continental growth of the Yangtze Block: From continental rifting to subduction–accretion. Precambrian Res. 2021, 355, 106081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Reid, A.F.; Ringwood, A.E. Newly observed high pressure transformations in Mn3O4, CaAl2O4, and ZrSiO4. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1969, 6, 205–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Glass, B.P.; Liu, S. Discovery of high-pressure ZrSiO4 polymorph in naturally occurring shock–metamorphosed zircons. Geology 2001, 29, 371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Liu, L.G. High–pressure phase transformations in baddeleyite and zircon, with geophysical implications. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1979, 44, 390–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Grand, S.P. Mantle shear structure beneath the Americas and surrounding oceans. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 1994, 99, 11591–11621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Hilst, V.D.R. Complex morphology of subducted lithosphere in the mantle beneath the Tonga trench. Nature 1995, 374, 154–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Minerals 15 00563 g001
Figure 1. Simplified geological map showing the distributions of the South Anhui Ophiolite (SAO). (a) Sketch map of South China and the Jiangnan Orogen. (b) Geological map of the eastern segment of the Jiangnan orogen (modified after [24]). (c) Geological map of the SAO (modified after [37]). Sampling locations are indicated by yellow stars. (For interpretation of the references used to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Figure 1. Simplified geological map showing the distributions of the South Anhui Ophiolite (SAO). (a) Sketch map of South China and the Jiangnan Orogen. (b) Geological map of the eastern segment of the Jiangnan orogen (modified after [24]). (c) Geological map of the SAO (modified after [37]). Sampling locations are indicated by yellow stars. (For interpretation of the references used to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Minerals 15 00563 g001
Minerals 15 00563 g002
Figure 2. Representative field photographs of the South Anhui Ophiolite (The yellow dashed line delineates the contact relationship between serpentinized peridotite and gabbro). (a) Intrusive contact between gabbro and serpentinized harzburgite units of the ophiolite. (b) Coarse-grained metagabbro. (c) Metabasalt of the ophiolite. (d) Leucocratic veins in the serpentinized peridotite.
Figure 2. Representative field photographs of the South Anhui Ophiolite (The yellow dashed line delineates the contact relationship between serpentinized peridotite and gabbro). (a) Intrusive contact between gabbro and serpentinized harzburgite units of the ophiolite. (b) Coarse-grained metagabbro. (c) Metabasalt of the ophiolite. (d) Leucocratic veins in the serpentinized peridotite.
Minerals 15 00563 g002
Minerals 15 00563 g003
Figure 3. Photomicrographs of representative samples from the South Anhui Ophiolite.
Figure 3. Photomicrographs of representative samples from the South Anhui Ophiolite.
Minerals 15 00563 g003
Minerals 15 00563 g004
Figure 4. Representative CL images of dated zircons from the SAO. Red circles show locations of U-Pb isotope analyses.
Figure 4. Representative CL images of dated zircons from the SAO. Red circles show locations of U-Pb isotope analyses.
Minerals 15 00563 g004
Minerals 15 00563 g005
Figure 5. Zircon U-Pb concordia diagrams for the SAO mafic–ultramafic rocks. (a) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the serpentinized peridotite sample (14FC-5-1 & 14FC-5-3). (b) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the pyroxenite sample (14FC-5-2). (c) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the gabbro sample (14FC-4-1). (d) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the diabase sample (14FC-2-5).
Figure 5. Zircon U-Pb concordia diagrams for the SAO mafic–ultramafic rocks. (a) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the serpentinized peridotite sample (14FC-5-1 & 14FC-5-3). (b) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the pyroxenite sample (14FC-5-2). (c) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the gabbro sample (14FC-4-1). (d) zircon U-Pb concordia plot for the diabase sample (14FC-2-5).
Minerals 15 00563 g005
Minerals 15 00563 g006
Figure 6. Comparison of U–Pb zircon crystallization ages of mafic–ultramafic rocks from SAO with spectra of U–Pb detrital zircon crystallization ages reported by Hawkesworth [55] and proposed times of supercontinent assembly (modified after [67]).
Figure 6. Comparison of U–Pb zircon crystallization ages of mafic–ultramafic rocks from SAO with spectra of U–Pb detrital zircon crystallization ages reported by Hawkesworth [55] and proposed times of supercontinent assembly (modified after [67]).
Minerals 15 00563 g006
Minerals 15 00563 g007
Figure 7. Compared U-Pb age distribution of peridotite and basalt zircon from SAO to distribution of detrital zircons from the underlying sequences of the Jiangnan Orogen.
Figure 7. Compared U-Pb age distribution of peridotite and basalt zircon from SAO to distribution of detrital zircons from the underlying sequences of the Jiangnan Orogen.
Minerals 15 00563 g007
Minerals 15 00563 g008
Figure 8. Illustration showing subduction-associated crustal recycling process to explain the origin of ancient zircon xenocrysts hosted within the SAO peridotites.
Figure 8. Illustration showing subduction-associated crustal recycling process to explain the origin of ancient zircon xenocrysts hosted within the SAO peridotites.
Minerals 15 00563 g008
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

Sun, Z.; Li, J.; Wang, X. Origins of Zircon Xenocrysts in the Neoproterozoic South Anhui Ophiolite, Yangtze Block. Minerals 2025, 15, 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15060563

AMA Style

Sun Z, Li J, Wang X. Origins of Zircon Xenocrysts in the Neoproterozoic South Anhui Ophiolite, Yangtze Block. Minerals. 2025; 15(6):563. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15060563

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sun, Ziming, Junyong Li, and Xiaolei Wang. 2025. "Origins of Zircon Xenocrysts in the Neoproterozoic South Anhui Ophiolite, Yangtze Block" Minerals 15, no. 6: 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15060563

APA Style

Sun, Z., Li, J., & Wang, X. (2025). Origins of Zircon Xenocrysts in the Neoproterozoic South Anhui Ophiolite, Yangtze Block. Minerals, 15(6), 563. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15060563

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