Next Article in Journal
Research on Digital Core Characterization and Pore Structure Control Factors of Tight Sandstone Reservoirs in the Fuyu Oil Layer of the Upper Cretaceous in the Bayan Chagan Area of the Northern Songliao Basin
Previous Article in Journal
Preliminary Study of Geochemical, Mineralogical and Magnetic Susceptibility Properties of Flotation Tailings from the Pb-Zn-Cu-Ag Rudnik Mine, Serbia
Previous Article in Special Issue
Ore Genesis of the Sansheng W-Mo Deposit, Inner Mongolia, NE China: Constraints from Mineral Geochemistry and In Situ S Isotope Analyses of Sulfides
 
 
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 12
10.3390/min15121288
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

Geochronology and Geochemistry of Early–Middle Permian Intrusive Rocks in the Southern Greater Xing’an Range, China: Constraints on the Tectonic Evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean

by
Haihua Zhang
1,2,3,
Xiaoping Yang
1,2,*,
Xin Huang
1,2,*,
Liang Qiu
4,
Gongjian Li
4,5,
Yujin Zhang
1,2,
Wei Chen
1,2 and
Haiwei Jiao
1,2
1
Shenyang Center of China Geological Survey, Shenyang 110034, China
2
Observation and Research Station of Mesozoic Stratigraphic System in Western Liaoning, Ministry of Natural Resources, Shenyang 110034, China
3
CAS Key Laboratory of Crust-Mantle Materials and Environments, School of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China
4
State Key Laboratory of Geological Processes and Mineral Resources, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China
5
Journal Center, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Minerals 2025, 15(12), 1288; https://doi.org/10.3390/min15121288
Submission received: 21 September 2025 / Revised: 3 December 2025 / Accepted: 5 December 2025 / Published: 8 December 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Selected Papers from the 7th National Youth Geological Congress)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

The tectonic evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean during the Early to Middle Permian remains a key issue in understanding the geodynamic history of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. To address this, we conducted petrological, whole-rock geochemical, zircon U–Pb geochronological, and Hf isotopic analyses of Early Permian biotite granodiorite and Middle Permian porphyritic granite from the south-central Great Xing’an Range. Zircon U–Pb dating yields ages of 273.2 ± 1.4 Ma and 264.4 ± 1.5 Ma, indicating that these intrusions emplaced during Early and Middle Permian. Geochemical analyses show that the rocks are characterized by high SiO2 and Al2O3 contents, and low MgO and CaO contents and belong to the metaluminous to weakly peraluminous series, typical of I-type granites. The rocks are enriched in light rare earth elements and large-ion lithophile elements (e.g., Rb, Ba, K), but depleted in heavy rare earth elements and high field strength elements (e.g., Nb, Ta, P, Ti), with weakly negative Eu anomalies. The Early Permian pluton exhibits low-Sr and high-Yb characteristics and thus fall in the plagioclase stability field. In contrast, Middle Permian pluton was derived from magmas generated by partial melting under high-pressure conditions and that, underwent crystal fractionation during ascent to the mid-upper crust, ultimately forming low-Sr and low-Yb type granites. All zircon εHf(t) values are positive (+4.84 to +14.87), with the corresponding two-stage Hf model ages ranging from 345 Ma to 980 Ma, indicating that the magmas were predominantly derived from juvenile crustal materials accreted during the Neoproterozoic to Phanerozoic. Considering these results, we propose that the Paleo-Asian Oceanic plate continued to subduct beneath the Songliao–Xilinhot block to the north during the Early to Middle Permian, with intense subduction and crustal thickening occurring in the Middle Permian. This suggests that the south-central segment of the Great Xing’an Range was situated in an active continental marginal setting during the Early-Middle Permian.

1. Introduction

The Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB), situated between the Siberian and Tarim–North China Craton [1], represents one of the world’s most extensive and complex Phanerozoic accretionary orogens. The CAOB formed through the subduction, accretion, and ultimate collision of the Paleo-Asian Ocean (PAO), and is characterized by significant crustal growth and abundant mineralization, which occurred during the Phanerozoic [1,2,3,4,5,6] (Figure 1). In northeastern China, the eastern segment of the CAOB is referred to as the Xingmeng Orogenic Belt [7,8]. This belt comprises various microcontinental blocks and accreted terranes of diverse natures and ages. From northwest to southeast, the belt can be subdivided into the Erguna Block, the Xing’an Block, the Xilinhot–Songliao Block, and the Bureya–Jiamusi–Khanka Block. These blocks successively collided along the Xinlin–Xiguitu, Heihe–Hegenshan, and Mudanjiang–Yilan suture zones [9,10,11], and were finally amalgamated with the North China Craton along the Solonker–Xar Moron–Changchun–Yanji suture zone [3,4,12,13,14] (Figure 1).
The tectonic evolution of the Xingmeng Orogenic Belt during the Late Paleozoic remains a subject of considerable debate, primarily focused on the subduction polarity of the PAO and the final timing of its closure. Most researchers advocate that bidirectional subduction of the PAO occurred during the Permian [16,17], while a minority support south-directed subduction. There is significant disagreement regarding the timing of the closure of the PAO, with two main perspectives. One view is that during the Late Paleozoic, the interaction between the North China Craton and the Siberian Plate was dominated by the subduction and consumption of the main oceanic basin and branch basins of the PAO, with final closure occurring along the Solonker–Xar Moron suture zone during the Late Permian to Early Triassic [8,14,15,18,19]. Alternatively, the other perspective is that the closure of the PAO was largely completed between the end of the Early Paleozoic and the beginning of the Late Paleozoic [20,21,22]. According to this view, initial E–W trending rift systems began to develop in the region from the Middle Permian, which subsequently evolved into oceanic basins. These restricted oceanic basins eventually closed after the Late Permian–Early Triassic [23,24].
Previous extensive studies of Late Carboniferous to Triassic magmatic rocks along the northern margin of the North China Craton provides critical insights into the petrogenesis and tectonic evolution [25,26,27,28,29]. Some studies argue that the PAO was a long-lived, independently subducting oceanic system, based on the presence of both Early and Late Paleozoic ophiolites and associated arc-related magmatic rocks [1,9,15,30,31,32,33]. It has been proposed propose that the northern margin of the North China Craton was an active continental margin after the Early Carboniferous at the earliest [32,34]. In contrast, other researchers suggest that the PAO was characterized by episodic subduction events [19,24]. According to this view, the ocean initially closed during the Late Silurian or Middle–Late Devonian [35,36,37,38], followed by regional uplift and a lack of sedimentation in the Devonian to Early Carboniferous [39,40]. Subsequently, an oceanic basin or epicontinental sea re-opened during the Late Carboniferous to Middle Permian [24,28,29]. The authors of these studies further propose that large-scale oceanic subduction may not have occurred during the Devonian–Carboniferous [41,42,43], implying that the northern margin of the North China Craton was likely passive and continental at that time.
The Balinyouqi–Linxi area is situated at the convergence zone between the southernmost margin of the CAOB and the northern margin of the North China Craton (NCC). It is crucial for investigating the evolution of the PAO and its interaction with the northern margin of the NCC. A precise understanding of the spatiotemporal relationships and petrogenesis of magmatic activity during key stages in this area is essential for elucidating the subduction process and closure timing of the PAO. Although Late Paleozoic magmatism is intense in the Balinyouqi region, reports of Early–Middle Permian magmatic activity are relatively scarce. Early–Middle Permian plutons have only been identified and exposed in areas north of this region, and comprehensive studies of these rocks remain limited. During geological fieldwork in this area, we newly identified Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks. In this study, we integrate existing regional research findings to investigate the petrogenesis and geodynamic setting of these Early–Middle Permian intrusions through petrological, geochemical, geochronological, and zircon Hf isotopic analyses. The results are expected to provide new insights and data to suppor research on the tectonic evolution of the PAO.

2. Geological Setting

The study area is located in the region encompassing Balin Right Banner and Linxi in southeastern Inner Mongolia. Tectonically, it lies within the Xing-Meng Orogenic Belt in the eastern part of the CAOB, north of the Solonker–Xar Moron Suture Zone (Figure 1). The area is characterized by widespread exposed geological units, formed in the Paleozoic (Figure 1). Early Paleozoic to Early Mesozoic units extend in a near east–west direction, with discontinuously distributed ophiolitic melanges, which are thought to be related to subduction and collision events during the evolution of the PAO [3,24,44,45]. In contrast, Jurassic to Cretaceous geological units are oriented in a north-northeast direction and are considered to be associated with the subduction of the Pacific Plate beneath the Eurasian Plate. This subduction process has overprinted and modified earlier geological structures [13,46,47].
In terms of regional stratigraphy, previous studies include those on the division of the strata in the study area into Late Devonian to Early Carboniferous units, including the Late Paleozoic marine sequences and those the Late Permian, consisting of marine–terrestrial transitional facies. These divisions were established based on paleontological fossils, paleogeographic environments, and lithological assemblages [48]. The aforementioned Paleozoic strata are unconformably overlain by Jurassic and Cretaceous continental volcanic-sedimentary rock series in the southern Great Xing’an Range (Figure 2).
The study area exhibits magmatic activity spanning multiple periods, including the Early and Late Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic. Among these, Late Paleozoic to Early Mesozoic magmatism is extensively distributed in an NEE-trending orientation north of the Solonker–Xar Moron River ophiolite belt. The rock types and assemblages are complex and diverse, and are thought to be associated with the late-stage evolution of the PAO [45,49]. The focus of this study is the analysis of Early to Middle Permian magmatic rocks to investigate Late Paleozoic magmatism within the orogenic belt and the tectonic evolution of the PAO.

3. Sampling and Analytical Methods

3.1. Sampling

Two samples were selected for U–Pb isotopic and Lu-Hf isotopic analyses, respectively, and eight samples were selected for whole-rock geochemical analysis. Early Permian biotite granodiorite and Middle Permian porphyritic granite samples were used for geochronology and geochemistry.
The sample of Early Permian biotite granodiorite (sample D1010TW) for isotopic dating was collected from southeastern Balin Right Banner in the southern Great Xing’an Range (E 119°33′18.94″, N 43°38′44.78″). The rock exhibits a medium- to fine-grained texture and a massive structure, and is composed of quartz (20%), plagioclase (45%), K-feldspar (10%), hornblende (15%), and biotite (10%). Quartz is present as anhedral grains with wavy extinction and well-developed fractures with lengths of 0.4–0.8 mm. Plagioclase is subhedral and tabular, displaying polysynthetic twinning and zoning, with grain sizes of 0.4–4.4 mm. K-feldspar is subhedral and broadly tabular, showing a perthitic texture and surface fractures; grains range from 0.3 to 1.1 mm. Hornblende forms subhedral elongated prisms with distinct greenish-yellow pleochroism and sizes between 0.3 and 2.0 mm. Biotite is present as reddish-brown flakes, often surrounding hornblende, and is partially altered to chlorite. It contains minor metal-bearing minerals along cleavages and ranges from 0.4 to 1.4 mm in size (Figure 3a).
The sample of Middle Permian porphyritic granite (sample D1009TW) for isotopic dating was collected from the southern part of Balin Right Banner, located in the southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range (E 119°33′36.82″, N 43°38′52.55″). The rock exhibits a porphyritic texture and a massive structure, and is composed of plagioclase (50%), quartz (27%), K-feldspar (20%), and biotite (3%). Plagioclase occurs as subhedral, elongated tablets showing polysynthetic twinning and distinct sericitization, with grain sizes ranging from 0.4 to 3.2 mm. Quartz is anhedral and granular, exhibiting developed fractures, and has a grain size of 0.2–1.2 mm. K-feldspar is subhedral and broadly tabular, characterized by perthitic texture, and measures 0.2–1.0 mm. Biotite appears as reddish-brown flakes, occurring mainly within fractures, with grain sizes of between 0.4 and 0.8 mm (Figure 3b).

3.2. Analytical Methods

Zircon grains were separated using conventional magnetic and heavy liquid techniques at the Langfang Chengxin Geological Service Company. The crystals were examined under transmitted and reflected light microscopy, and only those free of visible fractures and inclusions were manually selected for analysis. Selected zircons were mounted in epoxy resin, polished to expose internal structures, and imaged by cathodoluminescence (CL) to observe zoning patterns. CL imaging was performed using a Garton Mono CL3+ spectrometer (AMETEK, Berwyn, PA, USA) attached to a Quanta 200F scanning electron microscope (FEI Company, Hillsboro, OR, USA) at Peking University.
U–Pb isotopic analyses were carried out using an Agilent 7500a (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS) coupled with a New Wave UP-193 laser ablation system (wavelength: 193 nm) (New Wave™ Research, Fremont, CA, USA). The analyses employed a laser beam diameter of 36 μm, a repetition rate of 10 Hz, and an energy density of 8.5 J/cm2. Zircon standard 91,500 was used as the primary reference material for U–Pb age calibration, and NIST 610 glass was analyzed for instrumental calibration. To monitor data quality, secondary reference zircons TEMORA [50] and Qinghu [51] were analyzed periodically. Common Pb corrections were applied following the method of Andersen [52]. The analytical results were plotted on Wetherill concordia diagrams, and weighted mean 206Pb/238U ages along with corresponding uncertainties were calculated using Isoplot 3.0 software.
Zircon Lu-Hf isotopic analyses were conducted using LA-MC-ICP-MS at the University of Science and Technology of China. The instrument setup consisted of a 193 nm ArF laser ablation system (New Wave™ Research, Fremont, CA, USA) coupled with a Neptune multi-collector ICP-MS (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Analyses were performed at or near the same sites previously used for zircon U–Pb dating and trace element characterization. Helium (approximately 0.37 L/min) and argon (approximately 0.9 L/min) were used as carrier gases to transport the aerosol to the MC-ICP-MS. The laser spot size was set to 43 μm, with a fluence of 3.5 J/cm2 and a repetition rate of 10 Hz. Detailed descriptions of the Lu-Hf isotopic calculation procedures and corrections for isobaric interferences can be found in Wu et al. [53].
The major oxide compositions of the whole-rock samples were determined by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectroscopy on fused glass beads, using a Malvern Panalytical spectrometer (Malvern Panalytical, Worcestershire, UK). Measured oxides include SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3, CaO, Na2O, and MgO, with analytical precision better than 2%. Trace elements, including rare earth elements (REEs), were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) using a PerkinElmer SCIEX ELAN 6000 system (PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA). Approximately 50 mg of each powdered sample was digested in a mixture of HNO3 and HF in high-pressure Teflon vessels at 190 °C for 48 h [54]. Rhodium was employed as an internal standard to correct for instrumental drift. Quality assurance was performed using international reference materials GBPG-1 [55] and OU-6 [56]. The analytical precision for all trace elements was better than 5%.

4. Results

4.1. Whole-Rock Geochemistry

4.1.1. Major Oxides

The Early Permian biotite granodiorite (sample D1010TW) has the following major oxide contents (Table 1): SiO2 = 64.2–65.0 wt%, Al2O3 = 15.6–16.2 wt%, MgO = 1.6–1.8 wt% (Mg# = 29.7–32.3, mean = 31.3), TFeO = 6.47–6.96 wt%, CaO = 4.2–4.6 wt%, Na2O = 3.6–4.2 wt%, and K2O = 1.0–1.8 wt%. The K2O/Na2O ratios ranged from 0.24 to 0.49. On the TAS classification diagram (Figure 4a), the samples fall within the granodiorite field and belong to the calc-alkaline series, and in the SiO2–K2O diagram (Figure 4b), they mainly fall within the calc-alkaline field. The aluminum saturation indices (A/CNK = 0.95–1.03; A/NK = 1.92–2.07) indicate metaluminous to weakly peraluminous characteristics.
The Middle Permian porphyritic granite (sample D1009TW) exhibits the following major element composition (Table 1): SiO2 = 76.6–77.9 wt%, Al2O3 = 12.9–13.8 wt%, MgO = 0.015–0.056 wt% (Mg# = 0.98–5.44, mean = 3.57), TFeO = 1.57–2.67 wt%, CaO = 0.41–0.90 wt%, Na2O = 6.19–6.37 wt%, and K2O = 0.03–0.13 wt%. The K2O/Na2O ratios ranged from 0.004 to 0.12. Overall, the rock is characterized by high silicon and aluminum and low magnesium and potassium contens. On the TAS classification diagram (Figure 4a), the samples fall within the granite field and belong to the calc-alkaline series, and in the SiO2–K2O diagram (Figure 4b), the samples consistently fall within the low-K tholetiic series. The aluminum saturation indices (A/CNK = 1.07–1.23; A/NK = 1.24–1.33) indicate peraluminous characteristics.

4.1.2. Trace Elements

The biotite granodiorite (sample D1010TW) has a total rare earth element (REE) content ranging from 60.0 to 62.8 ppm, with the concentrations of light rare earth elements (LREE) ranging from 47.9 to 50.1 ppm and those of heavy rare earth elements (HREE) varying between 12.1 and 12.7 ppm. The rocks are characterized by enrichment of light REEs (LREEs) and relative depletion of heavy REEs (HREEs). The (LREE/HREE) ratio varies from 3.84 to 3.97 (mean = 3.91), and (La/Yb)N values range from 2.96 to 3.19 (mean = 3.09; Table 1). The sample exhibits a weak negative Eu anomaly (δEu = 0.80–0.86) and a slight negative Ce anomaly (δCe = 0.91–0.94; Figure 5a). On the primitive mantle-normalized trace element diagram (Figure 5b), the samples exhibit enrichment in large ion lithophile elements (LILEs; e.g., Rb, Ba, and K) and depletion in high field strength elements (HFSEs; such as Nb, Ta, Ti, and P). They also show low Sr contents (204.0–245.8 ppm), and relatively high Y (18.3–19.5 ppm) and Yb (2.34–2.53 ppm) concentrations. The porphyritic granite (sample D1009TW) shows a total rare earth element (REE) content ranging from 29.15 to 42.36 ppm. The samples contained LREEs with concentrations ranging from 22.9 to 38.0 ppm and HREEs from 4.3 to 6.4 ppm. The chondrite-normalized REE pattern is characterized by light REEs enrichment (LREEs), relative depletion in heavy REEs (HREEs), and a weakly fractionated LREE/HREE ratio ranging from 3.67 to 8.01 (mean = 5.53). The (La/Yb)N values vary between 2.42 and 6.46 (mean = 3.78; Table 1), indicating a right-inclined LREE pattern and a relatively flat HREE distribution. The sample exhibits a weak negative Eu anomaly (δEu = 0.70–1.00) and no significant Ce anomaly (δCe = 0.94–1.09; Figure 5a). In the primitive mantle-normalized trace element spider diagram (Figure 5b), the rock is enriched in large ion lithophile elements (LILEs; e.g., Rb, Ba) and depleted in high field strength elements (HFSEs; e.g., Nb, Ta, Ti, P). It also exhibits low concentrations of Sr (84.0–90.0 ppm), Yb (1.00–1.53 ppm), and Y (6.5–10.0 ppm).
Table 1. Major oxides and trace elements of Permian intrusive rocks (wt.% for major oxides and ppm for trace elements).
Table 1. Major oxides and trace elements of Permian intrusive rocks (wt.% for major oxides and ppm for trace elements).
SampleD1010-1D1010-2D1010-3D1010-4D1009-1D1009-2D1009-3D1009-4
SiO264.43 64.63 64.96 64.28 77.0577.30 77.88 76.61
TiO20.50 0.49 0.51 0.51 0.110.09 0.07 0.14
Al2O316.23 15.84 16.13 15.62 13.10 13.77 13.30 12.92
FeO3.48 3.44 3.33 3.45 0.57 0.70 0.45 0.79
Fe2O33.75 3.37 3.68 3.90 1.88 1.15 1.24 2.09
MnO0.25 0.25 0.22 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.17 0.21
MgO1.62 1.73 1.70 1.84 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.01
CaO4.33 4.59 4.16 4.62 0.63 0.50 0.41 0.90
Na2O3.69 3.85 4.24 3.65 6.37 6.19 6.29 6.30
K2O1.63 1.75 1.00 1.80 0.03 0.13 0.12 0.03
P2O50.09 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
TFeO6.85 6.47 6.64 6.96 2.26 1.74 1.57 2.67
LOI1.45 1.07 1.42 1.12 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.47
SUM99.87 99.90 99.89 99.89 99.84 99.99 99.99 99.98
A/CNK1.03 0.96 1.03 0.96 1.12 1.23 1.18 1.07
A/NK2.07 1.92 2.00 1.97 1.25 1.33 1.27 1.24
Mg#29.68 32.26 31.33 32.05 4.24 3.61 5.44 0.98
Li12.8 8.6 14.8 9.5 7.4 9.7 8.8 7.6
Sc18.80 18.98 19.43 19.93 9.42 8.01 7.01 9.65
Co12.28 12.06 18.21 17.04 3.56 3.05 2.79 3.48
Cs1.13 1.11 1.27 1.14 1.05 0.98 0.95 0.78
Hf2.62 2.77 3.29 3.24 2.81 2.50 2.65 3.25
Ta0.30 0.30 0.39 0.33 0.29 0.26 0.23 0.36
Th3.09 2.09 2.04 2.21 1.64 1.97 1.51 2.08
U0.36 0.34 0.32 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.37 0.45
B2.03 1.09 1.70 1.46 1.03 1.00 1.05 1.02
Ba504 476 452 461 124 138 143 114
Cr31.0 36.5 35.8 37.7 44.8 19.4 33.5 26.2
Cu10.49 10.88 10.81 12.61 4.05 4.21 3.39 4.27
Ga30.3 24.4 24.0 14.1 17.1 17.3 17.0 16.0
Nb4.48 4.90 5.14 4.98 4.20 4.17 3.67 6.84
Ni7.8 7.8 6.9 6.9 3.1 4.0 3.0 3.0
Pb8.98 7.77 6.82 5.27 6.00 5.76 5.45 6.29
Rb29.6 30.3 19.8 31.6 7.5 10.7 10.6 6.9
Sr231 211 246 204 90 87 84 90
V135 133 141 145 38 25 23 39
Zn56.0 55.3 60.1 87.0 22.0 18.3 18.7 20.2
Zr76 76 103 109 78 64 75 90
Y18.3 19.3 18.6 19.5 10.0 6.9 6.5 9.9
La10.2 10.9 10.5 10.8 4.9 5.2 9.3 5.4
Ce20.5 21.2 20.6 20.8 10.0 11.6 19.4 12.1
Pr2.70 2.85 2.77 2.80 1.34 1.24 1.87 1.44
Nd11.3 11.7 11.6 11.6 5.2 4.6 6.3 5.5
Sm2.60 2.70 2.64 2.53 1.14 0.85 0.92 1.20
Eu0.72 0.73 0.70 0.71 0.29 0.26 0.20 0.26
Gd2.45 2.58 2.62 2.58 1.02 0.69 0.78 1.03
Tb0.50 0.52 0.51 0.52 0.25 0.18 0.18 0.25
Dy3.42 3.60 3.48 3.56 1.66 1.11 1.08 1.66
Ho0.67 0.71 0.69 0.70 0.35 0.25 0.23 0.35
Er2.00 2.09 2.10 2.10 1.06 0.73 0.70 1.10
Tm0.34 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.21 0.14 0.15 0.21
Yb2.34 2.45 2.53 2.50 1.45 1.00 1.04 1.53
Lu0.36 0.39 0.39 0.40 0.24 0.18 0.17 0.24
ΣREE60 63 61 62 29 28 42 32
LREE48 50 49 49 23 24 38 26
HREE12.1 12.7 12.7 12.7 6.2 4.3 4.3 6.4
LaN/YbN3.11 3.19 2.97 3.09 2.42 3.71 6.46 2.52
δEu0.86 0.84 0.80 0.84 0.79 1.00 0.70 0.70
δCe0.94 0.91 0.92 0.91 0.95 1.09 1.07 1.04
Note: δCe = Ce/Ce* = Ce CN/(La CN × Pr CN) 1/2; δEu = Eu/Eu* = Eu CN/(Sm CN × Gd CN) 1/2. N = Chondrite Normalized; the normalization value after [59,61]. LOI: loss ion ignition.

4.2. Zircon U–Pb Ages

Zircon grains from the biotite granodiorite are predominantly euhedral to subhedral, exhibiting prismatic and granular shapes with sizes mainly ranging from 80 to 120 µm and aspect ratios between 2:1 and 1:1. They display distinct magmatic oscillatory zoning (Figure 6a) and Th/U ratios ranging from 0.56 to 1.21, with an average value of 0.86. Analytical results indicate that all 25 measured spots are located on the concordia curve and yield a clustered age. The weighted mean 206Pb/238U age is 273.2 ± 1.4 Ma (MSWD = 0.78, n = 25; Figure 6b, Table 2).
The zircon grains in the porphyritic granite are predominantly euhedral, occurring as long and short prisms of sizes mainly ranging from 70 to 120 µm and aspect ratios mostly of around 2:1. They exhibit clear and well-developed magmatic oscillatory zoning (Figure 6c). Th/U ratios vary between 0.42 and 1.59, with an average value of 0.83. The results of the zircon samples analysis show that all 25 measured spots are concordant and yield a concentrated cluster of ages, ranging from 258 ± 2 Ma to 272 ± 4 Ma. The weighted mean 206Pb/238U age of the 25 analytical points is 264.4 ± 1.5 Ma (MSWD = 0.93, n = 25; Figure 6d, Table 3).

4.3. Lu-Hf Isotopic Characteristics

The Early Permian biotite granodiorite (273.2 ± 1.4 Ma) exhibits initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios ranging from 0.282814 to 0.283045, with εHf(t) values between +7.10 and +14.87 (sample D1010TW, Table 4). The single-stage Hf model ages (TDM1) range from 117 to 632 Ma, and the two-stage model ages (TDM2) vary from 345 to 836 Ma. The Middle Permian porphyritic granite (264.4 ± 1.5 Ma) exhibits initial 176Hf/177Hf ratios ranging from 0.282760 to 0.282967, with εHf(t) values between +4.84 and +11.97 (sample D1009TW, Table 5). The single-stage Hf model ages (TDM1) vary from 441 to 754 Ma, and the two-stage model ages (TDM2) range from 522 to 980 Ma (Figure 7).

5. Discussion

5.1. Age of Early–Middle Permian Magmatism

Magmatic rocks of Early to Middle Permian age are widely distributed along the northern margin of the North China Craton and the Solonker–Xar Moron Suture Zone. In the Balin Right Banner–Linxi area, magmatic activity occurred predominantly during three peak periods: Carboniferous (340–300 Ma), Early–Middle Permian (300–265 Ma), and Late Permian–Triassic (260–215 Ma) [48]. Early and Middle Permian magmatism spanned from 298 to 272 Ma and from 273 to 260 Ma, respectively. These rocks are mainly exposed in regions such as Sonid Left Banner, Linxi, Chifeng, and Ar Horqin Banner, and largely consist of granodiorite, monzogranite, and granite, with minor diorite, gabbro, and intermediate–felsic volcanic rocks. The granitic rocks are predominantly I-type [26,34]. The analytical points for the Early Permian biotite granodiorite and Middle Permian porphyritic granite cluster along the U–Pb concordia line. The obtained ages are reliable and thus accurately represent the emplacement ages of these intrusions. The U–Pb age of the biotite granodiorite is 273.2 ± 1.4 Ma, indicating an Early Permian intrusion, while the porphyritic granite exhibits a U–Pb age of 264.4 ± 1.5 Ma, corresponding to a Middle Permian intrusive event. Both ages are consistent with regional geochronological characteristics [34,48].

5.2. Magmatic Origin and Nature of the Source Region

Geochemical analyses indicate that the Early Permian biotite granodiorite (D1010TW) belongs to the calc-alkaline series and exhibits metaluminous to weakly peraluminous characteristics. Petrographic observations reveal that the rock contains biotite but lacks typical peraluminous minerals such as garnet, sillimanite, muscovite, or cordierite. Combined these features are inconsistent with typical S-type granites [62,63]. Additionally, the rock shows low concentrations of TFeO (total iron) and MgO, as well as relatively low levels of incompatible elements such as Zr, Nb, Ce, and Y, which preclude an A-type granite affinity [62,64]. The rock is characterized by high Na2O/K2O ratios, significant CaO content, and A/CNK values between 0.96 and 1.03, supporting classification as an I-type granite. The Middle Permian porphyritic granite (D1009TW) is geochemically characterized by high silicon and aluminum contents (SiO2 = 76.6–77.9 wt%, Al2O3 = 12.92–13.77 wt%), low potassium and P2O5 contents, a total alkali content (Na2O + K2O) of between 6.32 and 6.41 wt%, and K2O/Na2O ratios ranging from 0.004 to 0.021. It is enriched in elements such as Rb and Th but depleted in Nb, Ta, and Ti, consistent with the features of fractionated I-type granites [64].
On the discrimination diagrams (Figure 8), the biotite granodiorite samples occur within the fields of I-type, S-type, and unfractionated granites, while the porphyritic granite samples fall within the fields of I-type, S-type, and fractionated granites. The samples exhibit enrichment in LILEs and LREEs, along with depletion in HFSEs and HREEs. These geochemical features suggest that the primary magmas were derived from a lithospheric mantle that had been metasomatized by subduction-related fluids, indicating similarities to typical volcanic arcs [65,66]. In the (La/Yb)N vs. YbN and Sr/Y vs. Y discrimination diagrams (Figure 9), the Early to Middle Permian magmatic rocks within or near the classical island arc field, further supporting their classification as I-type granites that were formed in an island arc subduction zone or active continental margin setting.
In summary, this study indicates that both the biotite granodiorite and the porphyritic granite are I-type granites, with the latter exhibiting features of magmatic differentiation. However, in the (La/Sm) vs. La and Th/Nd vs. Th diagrams (Figure 10a,b), samples from both rock types display evolutionary trends consistent with partial melting rather than fractional crystallization. This suggests that fractional crystallization was not the dominant process responsible for the compositional variations. Instead, the geochemical characteristics of these intrusions can be used to infer the nature of the magma source region.
I-type granites are important in the investigation of crustal evolution, crust-mantle interactions, and processes such as crustal accretion, remelting, and differentiation in orogenic belts. Their formation mechanisms primarily include fractional crystallization of mantle-derived mafic magmas, mixing between mantle-derived basaltic and crust-derived felsic magmas, and partial melting of the continental crust triggered by underplating of mantle-derived magmas [69].
Late Paleozoic intrusions in the southern Great Xing’an Range are dominated by granitoids, whereas coeval mafic intrusive rocks (e.g., gabbro and diabase) are relatively scarce. Only a small amount of gabbroic rocks have been reported in the southern Balin Right Banner [70]. The moderately negative Eu anomalies observed in the rocks of the study area further suggest that the large-scale intermediate–felsic magmatism was unlikely to have originated from fractional crystallization of mafic magmas. Moreover, intense fractional crystallization is typically accompanied by the formation of ultramafic–mafic cumulates, which have not been identified in the region. Thus, geological field evidence does not support a fractional crystallization model. Mafic enclaves within intermediate–felsic intrusions are often regarded as key evidence of magma mixing, and no such features were observed during our field investigations. Therefore, a magma mixing origin is also preliminarily ruled out.
The intrusive rocks analyzed in this study exhibit relatively consistent zircon Hf isotopic characteristics, with εHf(t) values ranging from +7.10 to +14.87 and +4.84 to +11.97, respectively. These values are similar to those reported for monzogranites from the Hansumu area (εHf(t) = +7.1 to +14.4) and for Duerji granites (εHf(t) = −1.6 to +17.6) in the southern Great Xing’an Range [14,71]. This consistency suggests that granitic magma in the study area may not have been generated primarily by magma mixing. Furthermore, the samples are enriched in LILEs, such as Rb, Ba, K, Th, and U, and depleted in HFSEs, including P, Ta, and Nb—a signature resembling that of continental crust [72]. Given the positive εHf(t) values and two-stage Hf model ages ranging from 345 to 836 Ma and 522 to 980 Ma, we propose that the Early to Middle Permian intrusions in the study area were derived primarily from juvenile crustal material formed during the Meso- to Neoproterozoic.
Although the Early to Middle Permian intrusions in the southern Great Xing’an Range considered in this study formed within a narrow time range and are spatially closely associated, they exhibit distinct geochemical characteristics. These differences suggest that the magmas likely originated from separate sources and/or underwent different evolutionary processes.
According to Zhang et al. [73], Sr and Yb contents are key indicators of granite source regions. The Early Permian biotite granodiorite exhibits low Sr concentrations (204–246 ppm), while the Middle Permian porphyritic granite shows even lower Sr values (84–90 ppm). Both rock types display low Sr/Y and La/Yb ratios, indicating partial melting under plagioclase-stable conditions. The lower Sr content in the porphyritic granite further suggests a more plagioclase-rich source and higher degree of magmatic differentiation, consistent with its classification as a fractionated granite (Figure 10a). In contrast, Yb and Y concentrations differ markedly between the two units. The biotite granodiorite has high Yb (2.34–2.53 ppm) and Y (18.30–19.48 ppm) contents, typical of a high-Yb type, whereas the porphyritic granite shows low Yb (1.00–1.53 ppm) and Y (6.94–10.05 ppm) values, characteristic of a low-Yb type. This implies that the residue of the porphyritic granite source contained more minerals with high partition coefficients for Yb and heavy rare earth elements (e.g., garnet or amphibole).
Both units exhibit low (Gd/Yb)N ratios—0.85–0.87 for the biotite granodiorite and 0.56–0.62 for the porphyritic granite—suggesting amphibole rather than garnet as the dominant residual phase, as garnet retention would elevate (Gd/Yb)N ratios. Therefore, the Early Permian biotite granodiorite (low–Sr, high–Yb) likely originated from a source under amphibolite-facies conditions, while the Middle Permian porphyritic granite (low–Sr, low–Yb) was derived from melting under garnet–amphibolite–facies conditions. In summary, Early to Middle Permian magmas were generated by partial melting of crustal rocks at amphibolite and garnet–amphibolite facies, respectively.
The Early Permian biotite granodiorite, with low Sr and high Yb contents, likely formed at shallow crustal levels (middle and upper crust) within the plagioclase stability field. In contrast, the Middle Permian porphyritic granite exhibits a low–Sr and low–Yb signature. The low Sr content reflects plagioclase retention in the source, indicative of low-pressure melting, whereas the low Yb content suggests that garnet—a high-pressure mineral—was stable during melting and thus, depleted Yb and Y in the melt. This combination implies a more complex petrogenesis for the porphyritic granite.
During the Middle Permian, continued subduction of the PAO plate led to significant crustal thickening, with the lower crust reaching depths of >50 km. Under these high-pressure conditions, partial melting occurred with garnet as a stable residual phase, extracting Yb from the melt. Meanwhile, plagioclase became unstable and fully dissolved, enriching the melt with Sr. As the Sr-rich melt ascended to mid- to upper-crustal levels, the decreasing pressure stabilized plagioclase, prompting extensive fractional crystallization that lowered the Sr concentration. This process ultimately produced a magma—and the resulting rock—with low Y (due to garnet residue) and Sr (due to plagioclase crystallization) contents. These findings align with the classification of the Middle Permian unit as a fractionated granite. Thus, the low-Sr and low-Yb signature of this granite provides critical evidence for deep subduction and significant crustal thickening during the Middle Permian.

5.3. Tectonic Setting of Magmatic Rocks and Its Constraints on the Evolution of the PAO

The intrusive rocks in the southern Great Xing’an Range from the Early–Middle Permian are typical calc-alkaline I-type granites, characterized by geochemical signatures indicative of arc magmatism and an active continental margin setting [74]. In the Y–Nb and (Y + Nb)–Rb tectonic discrimination diagrams (Figure 11a,b), the samples are consistently located within the volcanic arc granite field. Similarly, in the Rb/10–Hf–Ta × 3 and Rb/30–Hf–Ta × 3 diagrams (Figure 11c,d), most data points fall within or near the volcanic arc granite domain. Young Hf model ages and positive εHf(t) values further support Phanerozoic crustal growth in the central Great Xing’an Range, likely resulting from mantle-derived magma underplating or subduction-related magmatism, consistent with an active continental margin. In summary, the Early–Middle Permian igneous rocks were formed in an active continental margin setting, genetically linked to the subduction of the PAO plate.
The central-southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range has undergone evolution and modification during the PAO tectonic regime [31]. The area is characterized by widespread Paleozoic to Early Mesozoic magmatic rocks, which constitute the main body of the Great Xing’an Magnatic Belt (Figure 2). During the Early to Middle Permian (ca. 300–265 Ma), intense magmatism occurred along the northern margin of the North China Craton and the central-southern Great Xing’an Range. Whole-rock geochemistry and zircon Hf isotope analyses indicate that these magmas were derived from subducted slabs and lithospheric mantle sources [34,37,48,66]. The granitic rocks are dominated by I-type granites with minor A-type affinities, likely formed in response to the ongoing subduction of the PAO during the Middle Permian [34,37].
A bidirectional subduction model has been proposed for the PAO, with northward subduction beneath the Songliao–Xilinhot Block and southward subduction beneath the North China Craton during the Early to Middle Paleozoic [3]. Regionally, the widespread Late Carboniferous to Middle Permian magmatic rocks along the northern North China Craton exhibit features typical of an active continental margin arc. Their spatial distribution, rock assemblages, geochemistry, and isotopic signatures collectively support an Andean-type arc setting [3,25,76,77,78].
The studied samples, located north of the Solonker–Xar Moron–Changchun–Yanji suture zone, exhibit geochemical signatures typical of I-type granites formed in an island arc or active continental margin. These characteristics are consistent with regional magmatic activity from the late Early Carboniferous to Middle Permian. The Early Permian intrusions show high εHf(t) values (+7.10 to +14.87) and young TDM2 ages (345–836 Ma), indicating a predominant contribution from the Neoproterozoic to Paleozoic juvenile lower crust. This suggests magmatism in an active continental margin setting, related to Paleo-Asian Ocean (PAO) subduction. The Middle Permian porphyritic granite also displays positive εHf(t) values (+4.84 to +11.97) and young TDM2 ages (522–980 Ma), reflecting a magma source derived mainly from depleted mantle or juvenile crust with minimal ancient crustal input. These isotopic features collectively indicate crustal growth during the Neoproterozoic to Phanerozoic, likely driven by mantle-derived magmatism in response to PAO subduction [79].
Integrated analyses indicate that during the Early Permian, the subduction of the PAO plate beneath the Songliao–Xilinhot Block (Figure 12) placed the central-southern Great Xing’an Range in an active continental margin setting. Under shallow-crustal conditions, in the plagioclase stability field, this process generated intrusions with a low–Sr and high–Yb signature. By the Middle Permian, continued subduction led to significant crustal thickening and vertical accretion. Partial melting occurred under high-pressure conditions in the deep crust. As the resulting magmas ascended into mid- to upper-crustal levels, plagioclase fractional crystallization took place, ultimately forming intrusions with low-Sr and low-Yb characteristics. This evolution reflects sustained subduction and major crustal thickening during the Middle Permian (Figure 12). The Early to Middle Permian calc-alkaline rock assemblage in the study area indicates not only significant crustal growth in the eastern CAOB during this period but also confirms an active continental margin setting. These findings demonstrate that the PAO was still in a subduction stage, with no collision having occurred by the Middle Permian.

6. Conclusions

Based on petrological, geochemical, and geochronological analyses, the following conclusions can be drawn:
(1)
Zircon U–Pb dating yielded ages of 273.2 ± 1.4 Ma and 264.4 ± 1.5 Ma for the newly identified Late Paleozoic intrusions, representing the emplacement and crystallization ages. These results indicate that the biotite granodiorite and porphyritic granite formed during the Early and Middle Permian, respectively.
(2)
The Early to Middle Permian intrusions are geochemically characterized by high SiO2 content, low CaO and MgO content, and a metaluminous to weakly peraluminous composition, features typical of I-type granites. The Early Permian intrusion formed under plagioclase-stable conditions, displaying a low–Sr and high–Yb signature. In contrast, the Middle Permian intrusion was derived from partial melting at greater depths and experienced fractional crystallization during ascent, resulting in a low-Sr and low-Yb granite. Positive zircon εHf(t) values and young Hf model ages indicate that both intrusions were sourced from juvenile crustal melts, likely triggered by mantle-derived magmatism in a subduction-related setting.
(3)
During the Early to Middle Permian, the Paleo-Asian Ocean plate continued to subduct beneath the Songliao–Xilinhot Block in the central-southern Great Xing’an Range. This subduction intensified during the Middle Permian, leading to significant crustal thickening, and the region remained in an active continental margin setting, with was no collision involving the Paleo-Asian Ocean.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.Z., X.Y. and X.H.; Methodology, H.Z., X.Y., X.H. and Y.Z.; Software, X.H., L.Q., Y.Z., W.C. and H.J.; Validation, H.Z., W.C. and H.J.; Formal analysis, H.Z., X.Y., X.H., L.Q., Y.Z., W.C. and H.J.; Investigation, H.Z., L.Q. and H.J.; Resources, X.Y., X.H., G.L., W.C. and H.J.; Data curation, H.Z., G.L., W.C. and H.J.; Writing—original draft, H.Z. and X.Y.; Writing—review & editing, H.Z., X.Y., X.H., L.Q. and G.L.; Visualization, H.Z. and L.Q.; Supervision, H.Z., X.Y., L.Q. and G.L.; Project administration, H.Z., X.H. and Y.Z.; Funding acquisition, H.Z. and Y.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the China Geological Survey Project (Grant DD202402079, DD20240207902), Director’s Fund from Shenyang Center of China (SJ202306), Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities “Research Project on Ideological and Political Work” (Grant No. 9-1-2024-04), Discipline Development and Research Foundation of China University of Geosciences, Beijing (Grant No. 2024XK218), the Society of China University Journals (CUJS2025-035; CUJS-TJ-2025-010; CUJS2025-CBRH-006), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (42172024, 92479206).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are openly available in Mendeley Data, V1, doi: 10.17632/pzzrv3kb9c.1.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Şengör, A.M.C.; Natal’in, B.A.; Burtman, U.S. Evolution of the Altaid tectonic collage and Paleozoic crustal growth in Eurasia. Nature 1993, 364, 299–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wilde, S.A.; Zhang, X.Z.; Wu, F.Y. Extension of a newly identified 500Ma metamorphic terrane in North East China: Further U–Pb SHRIMP dating of the Mashan Complex, Heilongjiang Province, China. Tectonophysics 2000, 328, 115–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Xiao, W.; Windley, B.F.; Hao, J.; Zhai, M. Accretion leading to collision and the Permian Solonker suture, Inner Mongolia, China: Termination of the central Asian orogenic belt. Tectonics 2003, 22, 1069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Xiao, W.; Windley, B.F.; Sun, S.; Li, J.; Huang, B.; Han, C.; Yuan, C.; Sun, M.; Chen, H. A tale of amalgamation of three Permo-Triassic collage systems in Central Asia: Oroclines, sutures, and terminal accretion. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 2015, 43, 477–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jahn, B.M. The Central Asian Orogenic Belt and growth of the continental crust in the Phanerozoic. In Aspects of the Tectonic Evolution of China; Malpas, J., Fletcher, C.J.N., Ali, J.R., Aitchison, J.C., Eds.; Geological Society of London: London, UK, 2004; pp. 73–100. [Google Scholar]
  6. Windley, B.F.; Alexeiev, D.; Xiao, W.; Kröner, A.; Badarch, G. Tectonic models for accretion of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 2007, 164, 31–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Li, J.Y. Somenewideason tectonics of NE China and its neighboring areas. Geol. Rev. 1998, 44, 339–347. [Google Scholar]
  8. Zhang, N.; Li, G.; Liu, Z.H.; Chen, Y.S.; Wang, S.J.; Li, C.H. Late Mesozoic magmatism and tectonic significance of the Kelihe area in the northern Great Xingan Range. Geol. J. 2022, 57, 1311–1336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liu, Y.J.; Feng, Z.Q.; Jiang, L.W.; Jin, W.; Li, W.M.; Guan, Q.B.; Wen, Q.B.; Liang, C.Y. Ophiolite in the eastern Central Asian orogenic belt, NE China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2019, 35, 3017–3047. [Google Scholar]
  10. Xu, B.; Zhao, P.; Bao, Q.Z.; Zhou, Y.H.; Wang, Y.Y.; Luo, Z.W. Preliminary study on the pre Mesozoic tectonic unit division of the Xing Meng Orogenic Belt (XMOB). Acta Petrol. Sin. 2014, 30, 1841–1857. [Google Scholar]
  11. Liu, F.; Wang, X.; Hai, L.F.; Zhao, D.S. Zircon U–Pb ages, Hf isotope and extensional tectonics of monzogranite in the Hansumu area of southern Great Khingan. Geol. China. 2021, 48, 1609–1622. [Google Scholar]
  12. Wu, F.Y.; Zhao, G.C.; Sun, D.Y.; Wilde, S.A.; Yang, J.H. The Hulan Group: Its role in the evolution of the Central Asian omgenic belt of NE China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2007, 30, 542–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wu, F.Y.; Sun, D.Y.; Ge, W.C.; Zhang, Y.B.; Grant, M.L.; Wilde, S.A.; Jahn, B.M. Geochronology of the Phanerozoic granitoidsin northeastern China. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2011, 41, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Liu, Y.J.; Li, W.M.; Ma, Y.F.; Feng, Z.Q.; Guan, Q.B.; Li, S.Z.; Chen, Z.X.; Liang, C.Y.; Wen, Q.B. An orocline in the eastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Earth Sci. Rev. 2021, 221, 103808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Liu, Y.J.; Li, W.M.; Feng, Z.Q.; Wen, Q.B.; Neubauer, F.; Liang, C.Y. A Review of the Paleozoic Tectonics in the Eastern Part of Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Gondwana Res. 2017, 43, 123–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Guan, Q.B.; Li, S.C.; Zhang, C.; Shi, Y.; Li, P.C. Zircon U–Pb dating, geochemistry and geological significance of the I–type granites in Helong area, the eastern section of the southern margin of Xing–Meng Orogenic Belt. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2016, 32, 2690–2706. [Google Scholar]
  17. Xue, J.X. Characteristics of Early Permian –Middle Triassic Volcanic Rocks in Faku–Kaiyuan, Eastern Part of the Northern Margin of the North China Block and Their Tectonic Significance. Master’s Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2021; pp. 1–77. [Google Scholar]
  18. Cao, H.H.; Xu, W.L.; Pei, F.P.; Wang, Z.W.; Wang, F.; Wang, Z.J. Zircon U–Pb geochronology and petrogenesis of the ate Pal eozoic– Eady Mesozoic intrusive rocks in the eastern segment of the northern margin of the North China block. Lithos 2013, 170, 191–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Shi, Y.; Shi, S.S.; Chen, X.; Huan, F.M. The extinction process of the paleo–oceanic basin in the eastem part of the northern margin of the North China Block: Implications from the intermediate–malic magmatic rocks in the northern Liaoning, NE China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2022, 38, 2292–2322. [Google Scholar]
  20. Xu, W.L.; Wang, F.; Pei, F.P.; Meng, E.; Tang, J.; Xu, M.J.; Wang, W. Mesozoic Tectonic Regimes and Regional Ore–Forming Background in NE China: Constraints from Spatial and Temporal Variations of Mesozoic Volcanic Rock Associations. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2013, 29, 339–353. [Google Scholar]
  21. Zhao, P.; Chen, Y.; Xu, B.; Faure, M.; Shi, G.Z.; Choulet, F. Did the Paleo–Asian Ocean between North China Block and Mongolia block exist during the Late Paleozoic? First paleomagnetic evidence from central–eastem Inner Mongolia, China. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2013, 118, 1873–1894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhang, Z.C.; Li, K.; Li, J.F.; Tang, W.H.; Chen, Y.; Luo, Z.W. Geoc hronology and geochemistry of the eastern Erenhot ophiolitic complex: Implications for the tectonic evolution of the Inner Mongolia–Daxinganling orogenicbelt. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2015, 97, 279–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zhang, J.R.; Chu, H.; Wei, C.J.; Wang, K. Geochemical characteristics and tectonic significance of Late Paleoaoic–Early Mesozoic meta–basic rocks in the mélange zones, central: Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2014, 30, 1935–1947. [Google Scholar]
  24. Song, S.G.; Wang, M.M.; Xu, X.; Wang, C.; Niu, Y.L.; Allen, M.B.; Su, L. Ophiolites in the Xing ‘an–Inner Mongolia accretionary belt of the CAOB: Implications for two cycles of seafloor spre adingand accretionary orogenic events. Tectonics 2015, 34, 2221–2248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, S.H.; Zhao, Y.; Song, B.; Yang, Z.Y.; Hu, J.M.; Wu, H. Carboniferous granitic plutons from the northern margin of the North China block: Implications for a late Palaeozoic active continental margin. J. Geol. Soc. 2007, 164, 451–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhang, X.H.; Wilde, S.M.; Zhang, H.F.; Tang, Y.J.; Zhai, M.G. Geochemistry of hornblende gabbros from Sonidzuoqi, Inner Mongolia, North China: Implications for magmatism during the final stage of suprasubductionzone ophiolite formation. Int. Geol. Rev. 2009, 51, 345–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Li, K.; Zhang, Z.C.; Feng, Z.S.; Li, J.F.; Tang, W.H.; Luo, Z.W. Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb dating and its geological significance of the Late–Carboniferous to Early–Permian volcanic rocks in Bayanwula area, the central of Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2014, 30, 2041–2054. [Google Scholar]
  28. Zhao, P.; Jahn, B.M.; Xu, B.; Wang, Y.B.; Xiao, W.J. Geochemistry, geochronology and zircon Hf isotopic study of peralkaline–alkaline intrusions along the northern margin of the North China Craton and its tectonic implication for the southeastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Lithos 2016, 261, 92–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhao, P.; Xu, B.; Zhang, C.H. A rift system in southeastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt: Constraint from sedimentological, geochronological and geochemical investigations of the Late Carboniferous–Early Permian strata in northern Inner Mongolia (China). Gondwana Res. 2017, 47, 342–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yakubchuk, A. Architecture and mineral deposit settings of the Altaid orogenic collage: A revised model. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2004, 23, 761–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Li, J.Y.; Gao, L.M.; Sun, G.H.; Li, Y.P.; Wang, Y.B. Shuangjingzi Middle Triassic syn-collisional crust derived granite in the East Inner Mongolia and its constraint on the timing of collision between Siberian and Sino Korean paleo-plates. Acta Petrol Sin. 2007, 23, 565–582. [Google Scholar]
  32. Li, J.Y.; Zhang, J.; Yang, T.N.; Li, Y.P.; Sun, G.H.; Zhu, Z.X.; Wang, L.J. Crustal Tectonic Division and Evolution of the Southern Part of the North Asian Orogenic Region and Its Adjacent Areas. J. Jilin Univ. Earth Sci. Ed. 2009, 39, 584–605. [Google Scholar]
  33. Liu, J.F.; Li, J.Y.; Sun, L.X.; Yin, D.F.; Zheng, P.X. Zircon U–Pb dating of the Jiujingzi ophiolite in Bairin Left Banner, Inner Mongolia: Constraints on the formation and evolution of the Xar Moron River suture zone. Geol. China 2016, 43, 1947–1962. [Google Scholar]
  34. Zhang, S.H.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, J.M.; Hu, J.M.; Song, B.; Liu, J.; Wu, H. Geochronology‚geochemistry and tectonic setting of the Late Paleozoic–Early Mesozoic magmatism in the northern margin of the North China Block: A preliminary review. Acta Petrol. Mineral. 2010, 29, 824–842. [Google Scholar]
  35. Jian, P.; Liu, D.Y.; Kröner, A.; Windley, B.F.; Shi, Y.R.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, L.Q.; Miao, L.C. Time scale of an early to mid–Paleozoic orogenic cycle of the long–lived Central Asian Orogenic Belt, Inner Mongolia of China: Implications for continental growth. Lithos 2008, 101, 233–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Jian, P.; Liu, D.Y.; Kröner, A.; Windley, B.F.; Shi, Y.R.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, F.Q.; Miao, L.C.; Zhang, L.Q.; Tomurhuu, D. Evolution of a Permian intraoceanic arc–trench system in the Solonker suture zone, Central Asian Orogenic Belt, China and Mongolia. Lithos 2010, 118, 169–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhang, S.H.; Zhao, Y.; Kröner, A.; Liu, X.M.; Xie, L.W.; Chen, F.K. Early Permian plutons from the northern North China Block: Constraints on continental arc evolution and convergent margin magmatism related to the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2009, 98, 1441–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Cheng, S.D.; Fang, J.Q.; Zhao, P.; Xu, B.; Bao, Q.Z.; Zhou, Y.H.; Deng, R.J. Detrital zircon ages of the Silurian–Devonian clastic rocks in south and north banks of Xar Moron River, Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2014, 30, 1909–1921. [Google Scholar]
  39. Tang, K.D. Tectonic development of Paleozoic foldbelts at the north margin of the Sino–Korean craton. Tectonics 1990, 9, 249–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Shao, J.A. The Crustal Evolution in Northern Margin Middle Segment of the Sino–Korean Plate; Peking University Press: Beijing, China, 1991; pp. 1–136. [Google Scholar]
  41. Shao, J.A.; Wang, Y.; Tang, K.D. A reflection on the Xarmoron tectonomagmatic belt, Inner Mongolia, China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2017, 33, 3002–3010. [Google Scholar]
  42. Xu, B.; Wang, Z.W.; Zhang, L.Y.; Wang, Z.H.; Yang, Z.N.; He, Y. The Xing–Meng Intracontinent Orogenic Belt. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2018, 34, 2819–2844. [Google Scholar]
  43. Lei, H.; Zhang, G.B.; Xu, B. The Late Paleozoic extending and thinning processes of the Xing’an–Mongolia orogenic belt: Geochemical evidence from the plutons in Linxi area, Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2021, 37, 2029–2050. [Google Scholar]
  44. Xiao, W.J.; Windley, B.F.; Huang, B.C.; Han, C.M.; Yuan, C.; Chen, H.L.; Sun, M.; Sun, S.; Li, J.L. End–Pemian to Mid–Triassic termination of the accretionary processes of the southern Altaids: Implications for the geodynamic evolution, Phanerozoic continental growth, and metallogeny of Central Asia. Int. J. Earth Sci. 2009, 98, 1189–1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Liu, J.F.; Li, J.Y.; Chi, X.G.; Qu, J.F.; Hu, Z.C.; Fang, S.; Zhang, Z. ALate–CarboniferoustoearlyEarly–Pemian subduction–. accretion complex in Daqing pasture, southeastern Inner M ongolia: Evidence of northward subduction beneath the Siberian paleoplate southernmargin. Lithos 2013, 177, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xu, B.; Charvet, J.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, P.; Shi, G.Z. Middle Paleozoic convergent orogenic belts in western Inner Mongolia (China): Framework, kinematics, geochronology and implications for tectonic evolution of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Gondwana Res. 2013, 23, 1342–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Li, J.Y.; Liu, J.F.; Qu, J.F.; Zheng, R.G.; Zhao, S.; Zhang, J.; Sun, L.X.; Li, Y.F.; Yang, X.P.; Wang, L.J.; et al. Major geological features and crustal tectonic framework of Northeast China. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2019, 35, 2989–3016. [Google Scholar]
  48. Liu, J.F.; Li, J.Y.; Zhao, S.; Zhang, J.; Zheng, R.G.; Zhang, W.L.; Lu, Q.L.; Zheng, P.X. Crustal accretion and Paleo–Asian Ocean evolution during Late Paleozoic–Early Mesozoic in southeastern Central Asian Orogenic Belt: Evidence from magmatism in Linxi–Dongwuqi area, southeastern Inner Mongolia. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2022, 38, 2181–2215. [Google Scholar]
  49. Chen, B.; Jahn, B.M.; Tian, W. Evolution of the Solonker ssuture zone: Constraints fromzircon U–Pb ages, Hf isotopic ratios and whole–rock Nd–Sr isotope compositions of subduction–and collision–related magmas and forearc sediments. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2009, 34, 245–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Black, L.P. TEMORA 1: A new zircon standard for Phanerozoic U-Pb geochronology. Chem. Geol. 2003, 200, 155–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Li, X.H.; Tang, G.Q.; Guo, 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. China Sci. Bull. 2013, 58, 1954–1961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Anderson, T. Correction of common lead in U-Pb analyses that do not report 204Pb. Chem. Geol. 2002, 192, 59–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Wu, F.Y.; Yang, Y.H.; Xie, L.W.; Yang, J.H.; Xu, P. Hf isotopic compositions of the standard zircons and baddeleyites used in U–Pb geochronology. Chem. Geol. 2006, 234, 105–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Qi, L.; Hu, J.; Greggoire, C. Determination of trace elements in granites by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Talanta 2000, 51, 507–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Jochum, K.P.; Nohl, U.; Herwig, K.; Lammel, E.; Stoll, B.; Hofmann, A.W. GeoReM: A new geochemical database for reference materials and isotopic standards. Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 2005, 29, 333–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Potts, P.J.; Kane, J.S. International association of geoanalysts certificate of analysis: Certified reference material Ou-6 (Penrhyn Slate). Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 2005, 29, 233–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Maitre, R.W.L. A Classiffcation of Igneous Rocks and Glossary of Terms; Blackwell Scientiffc: Oxford, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  58. Peccerillo, A.; Taylor, S.R. Geochemistry of Eocene Calc-alkaline volcanic rocks from the Kastamonu area, northern Turkey. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1976, 58, 63–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Sun, S.S.; McDonough, W.F. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts: Implications for mantle composition and processes. In Magmatism in the Ocean Basins; Saunders, A.D., Norry, M.J., Eds.; Geological Society of London: London, UK, 1989; Volume 42, pp. 313–345. [Google Scholar]
  60. McDonough, W.F.; Sun, S.S. The composition of the earth. Chem. Geol. 1995, 120, 223–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Boynton, W.V. Cosmochemistry of the rare earth elements: Meteorite studies. In Rare Earth Element Geochemistry; Henderson, P., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1984; pp. 63–114. [Google Scholar]
  62. Qiu, J.S.; Xiao, E.; Hu, J.; Xu, X.S.; Jiang, S.Y.; Li, Z. Petrogenesis of highly fractionated I–type granites in the coastal area of northeastern Fujian Province: Constraints from zircon U–Pb geochronology, geochemistry and Nd–Hf isotopes. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2008, 24, 2468–2484. [Google Scholar]
  63. Chappell, B.W.; Bryant, C.J.; Wyborn, D. Peraluminous I–type granites. Lithos 2012, 153, 142–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Wang, Z.Z.; Liu, D.; Zhao, Z.D.; Yan, J.J.; Shi, Q.S.; Mo, X.X. The Sangri highly fractionated I–type granites in southern Gangdese: Petrogenesis and dynamic implication. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2017, 33, 2479–2493. [Google Scholar]
  65. Stern, R.J. Subduction zones. Rev. Geophys. 2002, 40, 1–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Shi, Y. Late Ordovician–Late Triassic Tectonic Evolution of Faku Area in the Eastern Segment of the Northern Margin of the North China Craton–Evidence from Magmatic Activity. Ph.D. Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  67. Whalen, J.B.; Currie, K.L.; Chappell, B.W. A–type granites: Geochemical characteristics, discrimination and petrogenesis. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 1987, 95, 407–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Defant, M.J.; Drummond, M.S. Derivation of some modern arc magmas by melting of young subducted lithosphere. Nature 1987, 347, 662–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Jing, Y.; Ge, W.C.; Yang, H.; Dong, Y.; Zhang, Y.L.; Ji, Z. The Early Paleozoic granites in the Mohe region of northern Great Xing’an Range: Response to post–collision extension of the Erguna–Xing’an blocks. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2022, 38, 2397–2418. [Google Scholar]
  70. Du, J.Y. Tectonic Evolution of Xar–Moron Suture Zone in Late Paleozoic–Early Mesozoic: Evidence of Tectono–Magmatic Activity from Balinyou–Ar Horqin Banner. Ph.D. Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  71. Chen, L.L.; Cheng, Z.G. Mineralogical and Hf isotope study of the Dorol granite in Hinggan League, Inner Mongolia. Geol. China 2016, 43, 1189–1199. [Google Scholar]
  72. Rapp, R.P.; Shimizu, N.; Norman, M.D.; Applegate, G.S. Reaction between slab–derived melts and peridotite in the mantle wedge: Experimental constraints at 3.8 GPa. Chem. Geol. 1999, 160, 335–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhang, Q.; Wang, Y.; Li, C.D.; Wang, Y.L.; Jin, W.J.; Jia, X.Q. Granite classification on the basis of Srand Yb contents and its implications. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2006, 22, 2249–2269. [Google Scholar]
  74. Pearce, J.A.; Harris, N.B.W.; Tindle, A.G. Trace element discrimination diagrams for the tectonic interpretation of granitic rocks. J. Petrol. 1984, 25, 956–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Pearce, N.J.G.; Perkins, W.T.; Westgate, J.A.; Gorton, M.P.; Jackson, S.E.; Neal, C.R.; Chenery, S.P. A compilation of new and published major and trace element data for NIST SRM 610 and NIST SRM 612 glass reference materials. Geostand. Newsl. 1997, 21, 115–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zhang, S.H.; Zhao, Y.; Song, B.; Wu, H. The late Paleozoic gneissic granodiorite pluton in early Precambrian high–grade metamorphic terrains near Longhua County in northern Hebei Province‚North China: Result from zircon SHRIMP U–Pb dating and its tectonic implications. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2004, 20, 621–626. [Google Scholar]
  77. Wang, H.C.; Zhao, F.Q.; Li, H.M.; Sun, L.X.; Miao, L.C.; Ji, S.P. Zircon SHRIMP U–Pb age of the dioritic rocks from northern Hebei: The geological records of late Paleozoic magmatic arc. Acta Petrol. Sin. 2007, 23, 597–604. [Google Scholar]
  78. Chen, J.S. Petrogenesis of the Late Paleozoic to Early Mesozoic Granites from the Chifeng Region and Their Tectonic Implication. Ph.D. Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  79. Zhang, X.N.; Zhang, Y.F.; Peng, R.; Yang, Y.; Zeng, Q.D. Whole–rock Geochemistry, Zircon U–Pb Ages, and Hf Isotopic Characteristics of Ore–related Intrusions of the Tin Polymetallic Deposits in the Southern Great Xing’an Range and Their Geological Significance: Case Studies of the Bianjiadayuan, Maodeng, and Baogaigou Deposit. Acta Geosci. Sin. 2024, 46, 343–360. [Google Scholar]
Minerals 15 01288 g001
Figure 1. Tectonic units of Eurasia continents (modified after [15]).
Figure 1. Tectonic units of Eurasia continents (modified after [15]).
Minerals 15 01288 g001
Minerals 15 01288 g002
Figure 2. Distribution of Late Paleozoic-Early Mesozoic Magmatic Rocks in Southeast Inner Mongolia.
Figure 2. Distribution of Late Paleozoic-Early Mesozoic Magmatic Rocks in Southeast Inner Mongolia.
Minerals 15 01288 g002
Minerals 15 01288 g003
Figure 3. Microphotographs (a) of the Early Permian Biotite granodiorite and photomicrographs (b) of the porphyritic granite of the Middle Permian in the Balin Youqi area. Pl—Plagioclase, Qz—Quartz, Kfs—Potassium feldspar, Bt—Biotite.
Figure 3. Microphotographs (a) of the Early Permian Biotite granodiorite and photomicrographs (b) of the porphyritic granite of the Middle Permian in the Balin Youqi area. Pl—Plagioclase, Qz—Quartz, Kfs—Potassium feldspar, Bt—Biotite.
Minerals 15 01288 g003
Minerals 15 01288 g004
Figure 4. (a) TAS diagram (after Maitre [57]) and (b) SiO2–K2O diagram (after Peccerillo and Taylor [58]) of the Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the Balin Youqi area.
Figure 4. (a) TAS diagram (after Maitre [57]) and (b) SiO2–K2O diagram (after Peccerillo and Taylor [58]) of the Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the Balin Youqi area.
Minerals 15 01288 g004
Minerals 15 01288 g005
Figure 5. Chondrite–normalized REE distribution diagram ((a), after Sun [59]) and primitive mantle–normalized trace element spider diagram ((b), after McDonough [60]) of the Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the Balin Youqi area.
Figure 5. Chondrite–normalized REE distribution diagram ((a), after Sun [59]) and primitive mantle–normalized trace element spider diagram ((b), after McDonough [60]) of the Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the Balin Youqi area.
Minerals 15 01288 g005
Minerals 15 01288 g006
Figure 6. Zircon CL images (a) and concordia diagram of U–Pb age for the Early Permian Biotite granodiorite (b), and Zircon CL image (c) and concordia diagram of U–Pb age for the Porphyritic granite of the Middle Permian (d) in the Balin Youqi area. Red circles in Subfigures (a,c) indicate analytical spots for U–Pb dating.
Figure 6. Zircon CL images (a) and concordia diagram of U–Pb age for the Early Permian Biotite granodiorite (b), and Zircon CL image (c) and concordia diagram of U–Pb age for the Porphyritic granite of the Middle Permian (d) in the Balin Youqi area. Red circles in Subfigures (a,c) indicate analytical spots for U–Pb dating.
Minerals 15 01288 g006
Minerals 15 01288 g007
Figure 7. Lu–Hf isotopic characteristics diagram of Early–Middle Permian igneous rocks (a) and εHf(t) vs. Age (Ma) (b) in the study area. NCC: North China Craton; CAOB: Central Asian Orogenic Belt.
Figure 7. Lu–Hf isotopic characteristics diagram of Early–Middle Permian igneous rocks (a) and εHf(t) vs. Age (Ma) (b) in the study area. NCC: North China Craton; CAOB: Central Asian Orogenic Belt.
Minerals 15 01288 g007
Minerals 15 01288 g008
Figure 8. (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y)—(K2O + Na2O)/CaO diagram (a) and (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y)—FeOT/MgO diagram (b) of Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range (Whalen, [67]). A-A—type granite; I-I-type granite; S-S—type granite; FG—fractionated granite; OGT—unfractionated granite.
Figure 8. (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y)—(K2O + Na2O)/CaO diagram (a) and (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y)—FeOT/MgO diagram (b) of Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range (Whalen, [67]). A-A—type granite; I-I-type granite; S-S—type granite; FG—fractionated granite; OGT—unfractionated granite.
Minerals 15 01288 g008
Minerals 15 01288 g009
Figure 9. Diagram of (La/Yb)N vs. YbN (a) and Y vs. Sr/Y (b) of Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range (Defant and Drummond, [68]).
Figure 9. Diagram of (La/Yb)N vs. YbN (a) and Y vs. Sr/Y (b) of Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks in the southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range (Defant and Drummond, [68]).
Minerals 15 01288 g009
Minerals 15 01288 g010
Figure 10. Diagram of (La/Sm) vs. La (a) and (Th/Nd) vs. Th (b) for the Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks from southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range.
Figure 10. Diagram of (La/Sm) vs. La (a) and (Th/Nd) vs. Th (b) for the Early–Middle Permian intrusive rocks from southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range.
Minerals 15 01288 g010
Minerals 15 01288 g011
Figure 11. Tectonic discrimination diagram of Early–Middle Permian igneous rocks in the southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range. (a) Y–Nb diagram, (b) Y + Nb–Rb diagram, (c) Rb/10–Hf–Ta × 3 diagram and (d) Rb/30–Hf–3Ta diagram (Modified from Pearce et al., [75]).
Figure 11. Tectonic discrimination diagram of Early–Middle Permian igneous rocks in the southern segment of the Great Xing’an Range. (a) Y–Nb diagram, (b) Y + Nb–Rb diagram, (c) Rb/10–Hf–Ta × 3 diagram and (d) Rb/30–Hf–3Ta diagram (Modified from Pearce et al., [75]).
Minerals 15 01288 g011
Minerals 15 01288 g012
Figure 12. Schematic diagram of the Early–Middle Permian tectonic evolution in the Great Xing’an Range.
Figure 12. Schematic diagram of the Early–Middle Permian tectonic evolution in the Great Xing’an Range.
Minerals 15 01288 g012
Table 2. The U–Pb isotope composition of zircon for sample D1010 TW of biotite granodiorite of the Early Permian.
Table 2. The U–Pb isotope composition of zircon for sample D1010 TW of biotite granodiorite of the Early Permian.
Sample No.Content (ppm)Th/UIsotope RatioAge/Ma
ThU207Pb/206Pb±1σ207Pb/235U±1σ206Pb/238U±1σrho206Pb/238U±1σConcordance
D1010–1506 539 0.94 0.0521 0.0018 0.307 0.011 0.0426 0.0005 0.32 269 3 0.99
D1010–2150 200 0.75 0.0525 0.0020 0.311 0.012 0.0432 0.0005 0.30 273 3 0.99
D1010–3235 272 0.87 0.0530 0.0021 0.322 0.013 0.0441 0.0005 0.26 278 3 0.98
D1010–4393 399 0.98 0.0526 0.0027 0.324 0.018 0.0446 0.0008 0.32 281 5 0.98
D1010–592 161 0.57 0.0501 0.0042 0.302 0.028 0.0432 0.0010 0.26 273 6 0.98
D1010–6148 181 0.82 0.0512 0.0049 0.302 0.033 0.0422 0.0011 0.25 267 7 0.99
D1010–7146 173 0.85 0.0543 0.0095 0.319 0.049 0.0441 0.0022 0.32 278 13 0.98
D1010–8214 270 0.79 0.0524 0.0018 0.310 0.010 0.0429 0.0004 0.31 271 3 0.98
D1010–9514 596 0.86 0.0525 0.0113 0.307 0.052 0.0426 0.0020 0.28 269 13 0.99
D1010–10280 312 0.90 0.0507 0.0044 0.301 0.029 0.0427 0.0011 0.26 270 7 0.99
D1010–11358 314 1.14 0.0520 0.0038 0.308 0.020 0.0435 0.0007 0.23 275 4 0.99
D1010–12191 229 0.83 0.0530 0.0020 0.312 0.011 0.0430 0.0005 0.32 271 3 0.98
D1010–13105 187 0.56 0.0514 0.0020 0.301 0.012 0.0426 0.0005 0.29 269 3 0.99
D1010–14124 183 0.68 0.0519 0.0022 0.317 0.014 0.0440 0.0006 0.29 277 3 0.99
D1010–15666 549 1.21 0.0503 0.0014 0.303 0.009 0.0434 0.0005 0.37 274 3 0.98
D1010–16130 186 0.70 0.0520 0.0034 0.309 0.019 0.0433 0.0006 0.21 273 3 0.99
D1010–17114 181 0.63 0.0514 0.0024 0.314 0.015 0.0443 0.0006 0.27 279 4 0.99
D1010–18451 430 1.05 0.0523 0.0021 0.312 0.012 0.0431 0.0005 0.29 272 3 0.98
D1010–19287 312 0.92 0.0505 0.0017 0.301 0.010 0.0431 0.0005 0.35 272 3 0.98
D1010–20168 215 0.78 0.0520 0.0023 0.313 0.014 0.0434 0.0006 0.30 274 4 0.99
D1010–21147 192 0.76 0.0518 0.0028 0.301 0.015 0.0425 0.0006 0.28 268 4 0.99
D1010–22558 496 1.12 0.0505 0.0014 0.305 0.009 0.0435 0.0005 0.39 274 3 0.98
D1010–23218 248 0.88 0.0512 0.0019 0.307 0.012 0.0434 0.0005 0.30 274 3 0.99
D1010–24274 305 0.90 0.0516 0.0016 0.310 0.010 0.0434 0.0005 0.33 274 3 0.99
D1010–25524 488 1.07 0.0523 0.0019 0.314 0.011 0.0435 0.0006 0.35 274 3 0.98
Table 3. The U–Pb isotope composition of zircon for sample D1009 TW of porphyritic granite of the Middle Permian.
Table 3. The U–Pb isotope composition of zircon for sample D1009 TW of porphyritic granite of the Middle Permian.
Sample No.Content (ppm)Th/UIsotope RatioAge/Ma
ThU207Pb/206Pb±1σ207Pb/235U±1σ206Pb/238U±1σrho206Pb/238U±1σConcordance
D1009–1226 279 0.81 0.0513 0.0023 0.297 0.013 0.0422 0.0006 0.31 266 4 0.99
D1009–277 142 0.54 0.0521 0.0025 0.298 0.015 0.0416 0.0006 0.30 263 4 0.99
D1009–396 161 0.59 0.0508 0.0024 0.291 0.013 0.0419 0.0005 0.28 264 3 0.98
D1009–4491 447 1.10 0.0518 0.0021 0.293 0.012 0.0409 0.0004 0.22 259 2 0.99
D1009–5343 326 1.05 0.0505 0.0057 0.294 0.035 0.0422 0.0014 0.27 267 8 0.98
D1009–653 114 0.47 0.0536 0.0028 0.307 0.015 0.0424 0.0006 0.29 268 4 0.98
D1009–796 168 0.57 0.0530 0.0033 0.306 0.017 0.0423 0.0007 0.30 267 4 0.98
D1009–8347 339 1.02 0.0519 0.0017 0.302 0.010 0.0421 0.0004 0.31 266 3 0.99
D1009–9949 739 1.28 0.0518 0.0028 0.296 0.015 0.0415 0.0005 0.23 262 3 0.99
D1009–10391 335 1.17 0.0522 0.0019 0.302 0.010 0.0420 0.0005 0.32 265 3 0.99
D1009–11139 194 0.72 0.0517 0.0024 0.301 0.014 0.0424 0.0007 0.37 267 5 0.99
D1009–12189 256 0.74 0.0512 0.0053 0.300 0.031 0.0422 0.0011 0.24 266 7 0.99
D1009–13139 218 0.64 0.0516 0.0036 0.291 0.021 0.0408 0.0008 0.28 258 5 0.99
D1009–14395 338 1.17 0.0509 0.0057 0.298 0.033 0.0423 0.0008 0.17 267 5 0.99
D1009–15536 521 1.03 0.0505 0.0033 0.290 0.020 0.0414 0.0007 0.25 262 4 0.98
D1009–1682 193 0.42 0.0511 0.0046 0.289 0.022 0.0414 0.0017 0.54 261 11 0.98
D1009–1785 125 0.68 0.0519 0.0117 0.307 0.070 0.0427 0.0019 0.19 270 12 0.99
D1009–18162 206 0.79 0.0511 0.0029 0.295 0.017 0.0418 0.0008 0.34 264 5 0.99
D1009–19454 526 0.86 0.0511 0.0041 0.289 0.022 0.0409 0.0006 0.19 258 4 0.99
D1009–2075 142 0.53 0.0523 0.0038 0.307 0.023 0.0424 0.0008 0.25 268 5 0.98
D1009–211549 974 1.59 0.0517 0.0017 0.298 0.009 0.0417 0.0004 0.33 263 3 0.99
D1009–22181 242 0.75 0.0527 0.0038 0.308 0.021 0.0423 0.0011 0.38 267 7 0.98
D1009–23253 319 0.79 0.0531 0.0028 0.309 0.015 0.0425 0.0006 0.30 269 4 0.98
D1009–24126 201 0.63 0.0524 0.0029 0.309 0.016 0.0432 0.0007 0.31 272 4 0.99
D1009–25303 369 0.82 0.0515 0.0025 0.303 0.015 0.0426 0.0005 0.26 269 3 0.99
Table 4. Zircon Lu–Hf isotopic data for sample D1010 TW of biotite granodiorite of Early Permian.
Table 4. Zircon Lu–Hf isotopic data for sample D1010 TW of biotite granodiorite of Early Permian.
Samplet (Ma)176Yb/177Hf2σ176Lu/177Hf2σ176Hf/177Hf2σεHf(0)εHf(t)TDM1(Ma)TDM2(Ma)fLu/Hf
D1010–1269 0.1904 0.001392 0.0045 0.000036 0.283017 0.000028 8.66 13.78 367 411 −0.86
D1010–2273 0.1350 0.000248 0.0032 0.000007 0.282922 0.000027 5.29 10.72 497 609 −0.90
D1010–3278 0.1633 0.001019 0.0039 0.000016 0.282986 0.000031 7.57 12.98 408 469 −0.88
D1010–4281 0.1046 0.000626 0.0025 0.000015 0.282855 0.000022 2.94 8.65 586 747 −0.92
D1010–5273 0.0817 0.002045 0.0020 0.000052 0.282848 0.000019 2.69 8.33 588 761 −0.94
D1010–6267 0.1604 0.001340 0.0038 0.000031 0.282997 0.000025 7.96 13.15 390 449 −0.89
D1010–7278 0.0973 0.005348 0.0024 0.000113 0.282915 0.000032 5.05 10.73 496 612 −0.93
D1010–8271 0.0754 0.000642 0.0018 0.000010 0.282835 0.000018 2.22 7.85 605 790 −0.94
D1010–9270 0.1267 0.001804 0.0030 0.000047 0.282930 0.000022 5.60 10.99 482 589 −0.91
D1010–10275 0.1484 0.008432 0.0035 0.000186 0.283018 0.000035 8.70 14.10 355 394 −0.89
D1010–11271 0.1678 0.002820 0.0040 0.000079 0.283008 0.000031 8.35 13.60 375 424 −0.88
D1010–12269 0.0655 0.001471 0.0017 0.000030 0.282814 0.000020 1.49 7.10 632 836 −0.95
D1010–13277 0.0744 0.001918 0.0018 0.000041 0.282884 0.000021 3.97 9.73 533 675 −0.95
D1010–14274 0.1209 0.001858 0.0028 0.000033 0.282931 0.000021 5.64 11.15 478 582 −0.91
D1010–15273 0.0877 0.002103 0.0022 0.000055 0.282903 0.000021 4.62 10.25 511 639 −0.94
D1010–16279 0.0656 0.000998 0.0017 0.000020 0.282836 0.000019 2.27 8.10 600 781 −0.95
D1010–17272 0.1045 0.002526 0.0026 0.000061 0.282955 0.000023 6.46 11.99 440 528 −0.92
D1010–18272 0.1714 0.001210 0.0041 0.000037 0.282990 0.000031 7.71 12.97 404 465 −0.88
D1010–19274 0.1233 0.000998 0.0029 0.000014 0.282958 0.000021 6.57 12.07 439 523 −0.91
D1010–20268 0.1554 0.001836 0.0037 0.000052 0.283013 0.000023 8.52 13.77 364 410 −0.89
D1010–21274 0.1145 0.001298 0.0027 0.000033 0.282929 0.000022 5.55 11.08 480 587 −0.92
D1010–22274 0.0881 0.000659 0.0022 0.000015 0.282894 0.000023 4.31 9.93 524 660 −0.93
D1010–23274 0.1867 0.001864 0.0045 0.000034 0.283045 0.000030 9.65 14.87 324 345 −0.86
Table 5. Zircon Lu–Hf isotopic data for sample D1009 TW of porphyritic granite of Middle Permian.
Table 5. Zircon Lu–Hf isotopic data for sample D1009 TW of porphyritic granite of Middle Permian.
Samplet (Ma)176Yb/177Hf2σ176Lu/177Hf2σ176Hf/177Hf2σεHf(0)εHf(t)TDM1(Ma)TDM2(Ma)fLu/Hf
D1009–1268 0.0712 0.000629 0.0019 0.000018 0.282805 0.000021 1.16 6.70 650 861 −0.94
D1009–2267 0.0700 0.000941 0.0019 0.000023 0.282760 0.000023 −0.43 5.11 714 962 −0.94
D1009–3266 0.1538 0.002535 0.0038 0.000086 0.282869 0.000046 3.44 8.62 586 738 −0.89
D1009–4262 0.1496 0.001478 0.0040 0.000057 0.282867 0.000039 3.35 8.41 593 747 −0.88
D1009–5265 0.1184 0.003180 0.0031 0.000077 0.282914 0.000024 5.02 10.31 507 629 −0.91
D1009–6267 0.0667 0.000736 0.0018 0.000018 0.282814 0.000023 1.50 7.05 635 839 −0.94
D1009–7266 0.0598 0.002036 0.0017 0.000042 0.282837 0.000029 2.29 7.85 600 787 −0.95
D1009–8258 0.0895 0.001324 0.0024 0.000062 0.282820 0.000036 1.71 6.97 636 837 −0.93
D1009–9267 0.1224 0.003556 0.0033 0.000076 0.282862 0.000027 3.19 8.50 588 746 −0.90
D1009–10262 0.0944 0.009014 0.0026 0.000262 0.282856 0.000048 2.97 8.29 586 756 −0.92
D1009–11261 0.0885 0.000975 0.0027 0.000052 0.282813 0.000032 1.43 6.72 652 855 −0.92
D1009–12270 0.0689 0.000587 0.0018 0.000011 0.282771 0.000021 −0.03 5.57 696 934 −0.95
D1009–13264 0.0965 0.001575 0.0025 0.000043 0.282841 0.000023 2.43 7.80 607 788 −0.92
D1009–14258 0.1025 0.000753 0.0027 0.000022 0.282810 0.000021 1.34 6.56 656 863 −0.92
D1009–15268 0.0750 0.000716 0.0020 0.000016 0.282786 0.000025 0.50 6.03 679 904 −0.94
D1009–16263 0.1627 0.017353 0.0041 0.000404 0.282967 0.000050 6.89 11.97 441 522 −0.88
D1009–17267 0.1365 0.005791 0.0036 0.000184 0.282767 0.000037 −0.18 5.07 738 965 −0.89
D1009–18269 0.1254 0.001122 0.0032 0.000021 0.282900 0.000020 4.54 9.88 530 659 −0.90
D1009–19272 0.0738 0.000612 0.0019 0.000025 0.282792 0.000030 0.69 6.33 669 888 −0.94
D1009–20269 0.1465 0.005506 0.0039 0.000181 0.282762 0.000044 −0.37 4.84 754 980 −0.88
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

Zhang, H.; Yang, X.; Huang, X.; Qiu, L.; Li, G.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, W.; Jiao, H. Geochronology and Geochemistry of Early–Middle Permian Intrusive Rocks in the Southern Greater Xing’an Range, China: Constraints on the Tectonic Evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Minerals 2025, 15, 1288. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15121288

AMA Style

Zhang H, Yang X, Huang X, Qiu L, Li G, Zhang Y, Chen W, Jiao H. Geochronology and Geochemistry of Early–Middle Permian Intrusive Rocks in the Southern Greater Xing’an Range, China: Constraints on the Tectonic Evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Minerals. 2025; 15(12):1288. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15121288

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Haihua, Xiaoping Yang, Xin Huang, Liang Qiu, Gongjian Li, Yujin Zhang, Wei Chen, and Haiwei Jiao. 2025. "Geochronology and Geochemistry of Early–Middle Permian Intrusive Rocks in the Southern Greater Xing’an Range, China: Constraints on the Tectonic Evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean" Minerals 15, no. 12: 1288. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15121288

APA Style

Zhang, H., Yang, X., Huang, X., Qiu, L., Li, G., Zhang, Y., Chen, W., & Jiao, H. (2025). Geochronology and Geochemistry of Early–Middle Permian Intrusive Rocks in the Southern Greater Xing’an Range, China: Constraints on the Tectonic Evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean. Minerals, 15(12), 1288. https://doi.org/10.3390/min15121288

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