海南岛前寒武纪地壳构造演化

在系统总结和分析前人成果的基础上，运用前寒武纪地质学新理论和同位素代学方法，对海南岛前寒武纪地壳的组成，时代和演化进行了研究和讨论，初步将海南岛前寒武纪基底岩系划分为中新太古宙紫苏花岗岩－片麻岩系，琼西古中元古宙绿岩系和中元古宙花岗岩类以及石绿新元古宙变质沉积－火山岩系等３种地质实体，并将前寒武纪构造演化划分为新太古宙结晶基底形成，古中元古宙陆壳断裂，中元古宙俯冲造山和新元古宙裂陷－冰川事件４大演     

太古宇的建系:前寒武纪年代地层划分大胆的尝试和重要的进展

前寒武系,虽然不是一个正式的地层单位,但是,却简单明了地代表了形成于寒武纪开始(显生宙起始时)之前的所有岩石,因而就囊括了可以追索到地球形成的所有时间阶段的物质记录。遵循现代地层学的概念体系,要建立一个更加精确的前寒武纪地质年代表将面临着很多挑战。与寒武纪以来的显生宙相对应,前寒武纪曾经被称为"隐生宙"。随着研究的深入,尤其是地质学家在前寒武纪地层中发现了许多生命活动的痕迹,被称为"隐生宙"的前寒武纪就进一步划分为冥古宙、太古宙和元古宙,这代表了前寒武纪地层学研究的第一次概念进步。现行的前寒武纪年代地层划分,主要基于不同克拉通上的可对比的地质事件,而且基于合适的计时性(大致为整数的)时间界限来划分前寒武系,这个划分方案已经服务地球科学界三十余年,尤其是基于大范围的构造活动与沉积特征尝试性地建立了元古宙的纪(埃迪卡拉纪除外),代表了前寒武纪年代地层划分的第二次概念进步。随着对地球前寒武纪演变历史的深入研究而识别出许多不同时代的重要事件,以及更为重要的是从岩石记录的背景变化中识别出造成这些事件的成因,这不但导致了对前寒武纪地球的更加深入的了解,而且为今天重新修订一个新的前寒武纪地质年代表提供了一个难得的机会,从而产生了前寒武纪年代地层划分的第三次概念进步。在新修订的前寒武纪地质年代表中,表现出以下重要的进展:1)运用现代地层学的理念,重新定义了冥古宙、太古宙和元古宙;2)明确了具有特殊地质学涵义的太古宙的底界;3)明确并修订了太古宙-元古宙界线;4)尝试性地进行太古宇的建系。一个修订了的太古宙,可以定义为前寒武纪历史进程中具有以下特征的时间段,即地表上保存的最古老岩石的首次出现(4030 Ma的Acasta片麻岩)、大致在2420 Ma广泛的冰川沉积、变冷的地球条件和大气圈氧气上升的首次出现,据此太古宙还可以进一步划分成三个代和六个纪。太古宙的这个修订和进一步划分,强调了一个基本的科学理念,即太古宙代表了地壳形成与生物圈确立的早期主要阶段,以高度还原性的大气圈为特征。因此,太古宇的建系,是前寒武纪地层学研究一个大胆的尝试,也是一个重要的进展。本文通过详述这一重要进展,为深入理解地球早期复杂的演变历史提供重要的思考途径和研究线索,同时也希望能够为激发研究热情而起到抛砖引玉的作用。     

前寒武纪大地构造观及构造演化推测

1.几种较有影响大地构造观当前出现了多学科,多方面探讨前寒武纪地质构造演化的好形势,出现了各种的构造观,比较有影响的有:1.1 地槽—地台构造观按萨洛普(Salop)的意见前寒武构造单元的演化;太古宙时(35亿年前隐生宙)地壳处于完全活动阶段,未分异成相对稳定的和相对活动的构造单元;原生宙(35亿年)开始,地壳演化进入地槽—地台阶段,其中老原生代(35—27亿年)地壳分成二个构造单元—原始地台和优地槽;到中原生代(27—19.5亿年)地槽系本身发生分化,在优地槽边     

国际前寒武纪地质年代表划分方案研究进展

传统的前寒武纪地质年代表划分方案以全球标准地层年龄（GSSA）为基础,不代表任何特殊的岩石实体,仅以推测的绝对测年值为界线进行单元划分,脱离了客观的岩石记录和地球演化系统,不利于对前寒武纪地球系统的研究。2004年—2008年前寒武纪划分参考方案,以反映地球历史阶段特征的“关键事件”为界线,创建前寒武纪地层划分的“金钉子”,建立客观的、“自然的” 前寒武纪地质年代表,并且通过全球一级事件群把前寒武纪划分为5个宙,即创世宙、冥古宙、太古宙、过渡宙和元古宙。另外,经过综合分析建议将埃迪卡拉纪归到显生宙。因此,对前寒武纪的研究实际上变为对“前埃迪卡拉纪”的研究,使术语“显生宙”在内涵和应用上更加一致。虽然“参考方案”在一定程度上还仅仅是一个理论框架,需要大量的研究去充实和细化,但是对这两种划分方案的系统研究和对比,可以给我国前寒武纪工作者提供重要的研究思路和方向。     

从中国东部前寒武纪岩系发育论中国东部大地构造分区

一.论前寒武纪划分的原则及命名关于寒武纪以前地质时代及地质层系的名词问题,作者在1948年曾予论述,已经通行的用法是把前寒武纪划分为两个阶段。前一阶段称为太古代(Archaeozoic)及太古界(Archaean);后一阶段称为元古代及元古界(Proterozoic),元古界另一通用     

马达加斯加前寒武纪变质基底特征综述

马达加斯加岛是全球重要的前寒武纪变质单元之一,是冈瓦纳大陆重要的组成部分.对其地质调查过程从19世纪初至今主要经历了4个阶段,上世纪90年代至今20几年新理论和新方法的应用使得其基础地质研究得到飞跃发展.根据现有研究,将马达加斯加岛构造单元划分为：太古宙Antongil块体、太古宙-元古宙Antananarivo块体、太古宙Tsaratanana绿岩带、南部元古宙块体和北部新元古宙块体5个部分,每个部分又可进一步细分不同的构造单元.该岛整体上经历中新太古代变质基底形成和新元古代构造活化两个阶段,其中新元古代构造活化与冈瓦纳大陆形成密切相关.     

中国前寒武系的划分

前寒武系在中国广泛分布。前寒武纪可划分为太古宙和元古宙两个时间单元,时间界线置于2500百万年。 据地质和同位素年龄资料,太古宙可两分,以2800百万年作为早—中太古代和晚太古代的时间界线。元古宙分为早、中和晚三代。以1900百万年和1000百万年分别作为元古宙内部划分的时间界线。寒武纪和前寒武纪的界线年龄推测为610百万年。     

西藏南部聂拉木地区前寒武纪结晶基底的组成及其特征

在对肉切村岩群的岩石组合、变质特点以及区域综合对比研究基础上,根据其中锆石U-Pb法年龄值686Ma、黑云母斜长变粒岩全岩Rb-Sr法年龄值796±103Ma,认为其原岩形成于新元古代,时代属震旦纪;前人划分的震旦—寒武系肉切村群,实际上是前寒武纪变质岩地层,聂拉木地区并未出露寒武纪地层。将前寒武纪地层划分为聂拉木岩群和肉切村岩群,并将聂拉木岩群划分为友谊桥岩组、曲乡岩组、康山桥混合岩和江东岩组4个构造岩石地层单元,将肉切村岩群划分为扎西宗混合岩和塔吉岭岩组两个构造岩石地层单元。     

略论我国前寒武纪变质作用和地壳演化的某些特征

本文对中国早前寒武纪太古期、早元古期、中晚元古期的变质作用的分布、岩石类型、变质相特点、变质相划分及同位素年龄数据等进行了论述。将中国前寒武纪地壳划分为华北、西北、华南、西南四个变质区、各变质区有自己的不同特点和演化历史。前寒武纪地壳演化是陆壳增长的历史,区域高温和中温变质作用是太古代原始地壳特有的变质作用。     

华北地台东北部前寒武纪地壳演化与铀成矿旋回

本文以研究华北地台东北部前寒武纪地壳演化为基础,阐明了该区不同地质构造单元中铀的分布与富集规律。根据铀矿化与铀源体的空间分布关系、硫同位素组成、稀上元素分布模式及同位素年龄等资料,论述了该区前寒武纪铀成矿作用具有同源性相多阶段复成因的特点。在此基础上,提出了铀成矿旋回的概念,并将华北地台东北部前寒武纪构造区存在的铀矿化划分为晚太古代、早元古代和中-晚元古代三个成矿旋回。     

A subdivision of the Precambrian of China

Precambrian rocks are widely distributed in China. The Precambrian is divided into two time units, i.e., the Archaean and Proterozoic Eon, each of these is separated into three chronological intervals, also with the status of eras, with the prefixes early, middle or late. The time boundary between the Archaean and Proterozoic Eon is placed at ～ 2500 Ma.According to the present isotopic data, the proposed subdivision for the Archaean of China is two-fold. The age of the Fuping Group is younger than 2800–2900 Ma, and that of the Qianxi Group and the corresponding stratigraphic units of eastern Liaoning are older than 2800 Ma, so that 2800+ Ma is selected as the boundary between the early—middle and late Archaean.Based on the representative stratigraphic units, the Wutai and Huto Groups, and an intervening major unconformity formed by the Wutaiian orogeny at 2200–2300 Ma, the early Proterozoic is further divided into two periods, with a time demarcation at 2200+ Ma. A major episode of orogeny known as the “Luliangian Movement” occurred at the end of the early Proterozoic at ～ 1900 Ma. This disturbance was very extensive and is, in a way, responsible for the difference in geological conditions between the lower and middle—upper Proterozoic in China. The boundary (1900 Ma) that relates to the Luliangian Movement is more important than the boundary corresponding to the age of 1600 Ma, which is recommended as the time boundary between Proterozoic I and II, so we propose to use 1900 Ma as the boundary between the early and middle Proterozoic in China.The time boundary between the middle Proterozoic, including the Changcheng System and the Jixian System, and the late Proterozoic, which is composed of the Qingbaikou and Sinian Systems, is ～ 1000 Ma. The age for the boundary between Cambrian and Precambrian, based upon the recent isochron data, is inferred to be 610 Ma.     

A New Progress of the Proterozoic Chronostratigraphical Division

The Precambrian, an informal chronostratigraphical unit, represents the period of Earth history from the start of the Cambrian at ca. 541 Ma back to the formation of the planet at 4567 Ma. It was originally conceptualized as a "Cryptozoic Eon" that was contrasted with the Phanerozoic Eon from the Cambrian to the Quaternary, which is now known as the Precambrian and can be subdivided into three eons, i.e., the Hadean, the Archean and the Proterozoic. The Precambrian is currently divided chronometrically into convenient boundaries, including for the establishment of the Proterozoic periods that were chosen to reflect large-scale tectonic or sedimentary features(except for the Ediacaran Period). This chronometric arrangement might represent the second progress on the study of chronostratigraphy of the Precambrian after its separation from the Phanerozoic. Upon further study of the evolutionary history of the Precambrian Earth, applying new geodynamic and geobiological knowledge and information, a revised division of Precambrian time has led to the third conceptual progress on the study of Precambrian chronostratigraphy. In the current scheme, the Proterozoic Eon began at 2500 Ma, which is the approximate time by which most granite-greenstone crust had formed, and can be subdivided into ten periods of typically 200 Ma duration grouped into three eras(except for the Ediacaran Period). Within this current scheme, the Ediacaran Period was ratified in 2004, the first period-level addition to the geologic time scale in more than a century, an important advancement in stratigraphy. There are two main problems in the current scheme of Proterozoic chronostratigraphical division:(1) the definition of the Archean–Proterozoic boundary at 2500 Ma, which does not reflect a unique time of synchronous global change in tectonic style and does not correspond with a major change in lithology;(2) the round number subdivision of the Proterozoic into several periods based on broad orogenic characteristics, which has not met with requests on the concept of modern stratigraphy, except for the Ediacaran Period. In the revised chronostratigraphic scheme for the Proterozoic, the Archean–Proterozoic boundary is placed at the major change from a reducing early Earth to a cooler, more modern Earth characterized by the supercontinent cycle, a major change that occurred at ca. 2420 Ma. Thus, a revised Proterozoic Eon(2420–542 Ma) is envisaged to extend from the Archean–Proterozoic boundary at ca. 2420 Ma to the end of the Ediacaran Period, i.e., a period marked by the progressive rise in atmospheric oxygen, supercontinent cyclicity, and the evolution of more complex(eukaryotic) life. As with the current Proterozoic Eon, a revised Proterozoic Eon based on chronostratigraphy is envisaged to consist of three eras(Paleoproterozoic, Mesoproterozoic, and Neoproterozoic), but the boundary ages for these divisions differ from their current ages and their subdivisions into periods would also differ from current practice. A scheme is proposed for the chronostratigraphic division of the Proterozoic, based principally on geodynamic and geobiological events and their expressions in the stratigraphic record. Importantly, this revision of the Proterozoic time scale will be of significant benefit to the community as a whole and will help to drive new research that will unveil new information about the history of our planet, since the Proterozoic is a significant connecting link between the preceding Precambrian and the following Phanerozoic.     

The Early Precambrian Rocks,Their Ages,Division and Correlation of the Taihang-Wutai Region, the Yanshan Region and the Eastern Sector of the Yinshan Mountains

According to differences of the protolith formations, the early Precambrian strata in the northern part ofthe North China platform may be divided into the stable stratigraphic region in the west and the mobilestratigraphic region in the east. Based on unconformities, either stratiragphic or tectonic, as well as significantmetamorphic thermal events, the two regions may be stratigraphically defined as follows: 1) the middleArchaean Fuping Supergroup composed of the Chenzhuang and Wanzi Groups (stable areas), and the middleArchaean Qianxi Group (mobile area), whose upper limits are all dated at 2800 Ma; and 2) the upper ArchaeanWutai Supergroup composed of the Longquanguan, Shizui and Taihuai Groups (stable areas), and the upperArchaean Zunhua, Dantazi and Zhuzhangzi Groups (mobile areas). whose upper limits are all dated at 2500Ma. A correlation of the above-mentioned units is also made. The lower Proterozoic Hutuo Group of the sta-ble region is adjusted to comprise the Gaofan, Doucun, Dongye and Guojiazhai Groups. The upper limit of theGaofan Group is placed at 2350 Ma, Dongye 1850 Ma and Guojiazhai (the lower limit of the Changcheng Sys-tem) 1700 Ma.     

A review of the 2500 Ma span of alkaline-ultramafic, potassic and carbonatitic magmatism in West Greenland

Kimberlites, carbonatites and ultramafic, mafic and potassic lamprophyres have been produced in West Greenland in recurrent events since the Archaean. Five distinct age groups are recognised: Archaean (>2500 Ma). Early Proterozoic (1700–1900 Ma), Middle Proterozoic (Gardar, c. 1100–1300 Ma), Late Proterozoic (600 Ma) and Mesozoic-Tertiary (200-30 Ma) The rocks comprise two large and four small carbonatite occurrences, four kimberlite dyke swarms, one lamproite dyke swarm and one lamproite pipe, one dyke swarm of potassic lamprophyre (shonkinite) and some ten dyke swarms of ultramafic lamprophyre and monchiquite. Geochemical data for the various rock groups are presented. Some of the carbonatites may represent relatively unmodified mantle-derived melts. The kimberlites range from primitive to differentiated compositions, and there are regional differences between kimberlites within Archaean and Proterozoic basement. The ultrapotassic lamproites and shonkinites have strong negative Nb spikes in their trace element spectra. The ultramafic and monchiquitic lamprophyres encompass a large compositional variation; however, several of the dyke swarms have individual chemical characters.

The rocks are very unevenly distributed in West Greenland, indicating a lithospheric control, probably by old weakness zones providing access to the surface. The kimberlites are considered to be mainly of asthenospheric derivation. The regional differences are interpreted in terms of melting with phlogopite as a residual phase, with smaller degrees of melting at deeper levels beneath the Archaean lithosphere than beneath the Proterozoic. The ultrapotassic lamproites and shonkinites occur almost exclusively within a continental collision zone with possible two-way subduction and they are interpreted as mainly of lithospheric derivation, with a contribution from a subducted slab. Data for the other rock types are equivocal.

Except for the Archaean rocks, the age groups can be related to major geotectonic events. The Early Proterozoic group is related to continental collision at 1850 Ma and subsequent rifting; the Middle Proterozoic group is related to continental rifting (Gardar) and the Mesozoic group is likewise related to continental rifting prior to continental break-up in the Tertiary. The 600 Ma kimberlites and carbonatite are envisaged as cratonic, extra-rift activity in relation to continental break-up and formation of the Iapetus ocean further south, perhaps with a common cause in a broad, impinging mantle plume.     

Regional geochemical and isotopic characteristics of high-grade metamorphics of the Prydz bay area: The extent of proterozoic reworking of Qrchaean continental crust in East Antarctica

Preliminary isotopic data for Late Proterozoic (～ 1100 Ma) granulite-facies metamorphics of the Prydz Bay coast indicate only very minor reworking (i.e., remetamorphism) of Archaean continental crustal rocks. Only two orthopyroxene—quartz—feldspar gneisses from the Rauer Group of islands, immediately adjacent to the Archaean Vestfold Block, show evidence for an Early Archaean origin (～ 3700—3800 Ma), whereas the vast majority of samples have Middle Proterozoic crustal formation ages (～ 1600–1800 Ma). The Prydz Bay rocks consist largely of garnet-bearing felsic gneisses and interlayered aluminous metasediments, although orthopyroxene-bearing gneisses are common in the Rauer Group; in contrast, Vestfold Block gneisses are predominantly orthopyroxene-bearing orthogneisses. The extensive Prydz Bay metasediments may have been derived by erosion of Middle Proterozoic rocks, such as the predominantly orthogneiss terrain of the Rauer Group, and deposited not long before the Late Proterozoic metamorphism. Data from nearby parts of the East Antarctic shield also suggest only limited Proterozoic reworking of the margins of the Archaean cratons.As in the Prydz Bay area, high-grade metamorphies in nearby parts of the East Antarctic shield show a secular increase in the sedimentary component. Archaean terrains like the Vestfold Block consist mainly of granitic orthogneisses derived by partial melting of igneous protoliths (I-type), whereas Late Proterozoic terrains (such as the Prydz Bay coast) include a much higher proportion of rocks derived either directly or by partial melting (S-type granitic orthogneisses) from sedimentary protoliths. Related chemical trends include increases in K₂O₂, Rb, Pb, and Th, and decreases in CaO, Na₂O₂ and Sr with decreasing age, essentially reflecting changes in the proportions of plagioclase and K-feldspar.     

苏皖北部晚前寒武纪地层层序的厘定

<正> 苏皖北部晚前寒武纪地层是指凤阳群不整合面之上,寒武系下统猴家山组平行不整合面之下的一套地层。这套地层在没有进行1:20万区域地质调查之前,前人的地质工作主要是在淮南,所建立起来的晚前寒武纪地层层序是正确的,如徐嘉炜(1959)所确定的晚前寒武纪地层层序及其划分(自下而上为下震旦统八公山统下部石英岩,它不整合在前震旦纪角闪片岩为主变质岩系上,其上为刘老碑页岩,再上为上部石英岩和上震旦统四顶山统泥质灰岩及泥灰岩层,其上是矽质灰岩,并被寒武系下统猴家山组平行不整合覆盖)是比较完善的。     

新疆北部前寒武系划分和对比

库鲁克塔格是新疆北部前寒武系分布较广,地层层序相对完整的地区.作者以库鲁克塔格为地层模型区,以同位素第龄为格架,初步确定了本区群级地层单元的界线及归属.在岩石地层、生物地层、化学地层等各种方法相互印证的基础上,建立并完善了前寒武纪的地层层序.     

关于中国元古宙地质年代划分几个问题的讨论

本文简略回顾了我国元古宙划分的进展和问题。在我国地质文献中,元古宙通常以2.5Ga、1．8Ga、1.0Ga．和0．57Ga为年代界线划分为早、中和晚元古代。本文建议以古、中和新元古代代替早、中和晚元古代的命名。古元古代介于2．5Ga至1．8Ga之间,可包含三个纪,内部年代界线置于2．3Ga和2．05Ga。文中未对三个纪的名称和代表性地层单元提出明确的建议。中元古代通常包含长城纪和蓟县纪,纪的界线置于1.4Ga,而该代的顶部时限置于1．0Ga。然而,中元古代内位于1．6Ga、1．4Ga和1．ZGa均有明确的地层界线,所以有可能进一步划分为四个纪。新元古代包含青白口纪和震旦纪,以0．8Ga作为它们的分界,但对于震旦纪的时限存在着明显的分歧,其底界年龄有置于0．9Ga、0．85Ga和O．8Ga等不同意见。有些地质学家建议震旦纪可再分为二个纪,亦有以冰碛层的底或顶为界的不同划分方法,因而内部界线分别置于0．7Ga或0．65Ga。本文作者倾向以国际上建议的0．545Ga代替我国现行使用的0．57Ga,作为震旦纪与寒武纪的年代界线。     

冥古宙的地层学属性:了解地球形成初期古地理背景和演变历史的重要线索*

在现行的前寒武纪地质年代表中,由于太古宙底界没有得到很好的定义,只是被粗略地置于大约4000,Ma,因此也造成了一个没有得到较好定义的“冥古宙”。2个重要的发现促使学者们对冥古宙的地层学属性进行修订:(1)在西澳大利亚Jack山脉太古宙砾岩中发现了真正古老的锆石晶体,其不仅可将地层时代延伸到4404,Ma,而且包含了有关地球早期环境条件较为丰富的信息; (2)在加拿大北部发现了大约4030,Ma的Acasta片麻岩。根据这些发现,并结合月球和陨石的测年数据,就产生了大量有关太阳系和地球早期历史的新知识,包括太阳系与地球的形成、初生地球时期的重要变化及其物质记录和生命的起源及早期进化,这成为修订冥古宙地层学属性的重要基础。修订后的冥古宙代表了地球演变历史的最早时段,即从太阳系和地球在T0=4567,Ma的形成,一直延续到地球上最古老岩石的出现(4030,Ma)。冥古宙还可被进一步划分为2个代:(1)“混沌代”(4567,Ma—4404±8,Ma);(2)“杰克山代”或“锆石代”(4404±8,Ma—4030,Ma)。由于没有保存相应的地层记录,因此冥古宙顶界(4030,Ma)与底界(4567,Ma)的年龄值,仅为一个计时性的年代界限。上述这个被赋予了明确地层学属性的冥古宙,不仅代表了前寒武纪地层学研究的一个重要进展,而且也为深入了解地球早期演变历史提供了许多重要的理念。     

Tectono-metamorphic and geochronologic studies from Sandmata complex,northwest Indian shield: Implications on exhumation of late-palaeoproterozoic granulites in an archaean-early palaeoproterozoic granite-gneiss terrane

Several bodies of granulites comprising charnockite, charno-enderbite, pelitic and calc-silicate rocks occur within an assemblage of granite gneiss/granitoid, amphibolite and metasediments (henceforth described as banded gneisses) in the central part of the Aravalli Mountains, northwestern India. The combined rock assemblage was thought to constitute an Archaean basement (BGC-II) onto which the successive Proterozoic cover rocks were deposited. Recent field studies reveal the occurrence of several bodies of late-Palaeoproterozoic (1725 and 1621 Ma) granulites within the banded gneisses, which locally show evidence of migmatization at c. 1900 Ma coeval with the Aravalli Orogeny. We report single zircon ‘evaporation’ ages together with information from LA-ICP-MS U-Pb zircon datings to confirm an Archaean (2905 — ca. 2500 Ma) age for the banded gneisses hosting the granulites. The new geochronological data, therefore, suggest a polycyclic evolution for the BGC-II terrane for which the new term Sandmata Complex is proposed. The zircon ages suggest that the different rock formations in the Sandmata Complex are neither entirely Palaeoproterozoic in age, as claimed in some studies nor are they exclusively Archaean as was initially thought. Apart from distinct differences in the age of rocks, tectono-metamorphic breaks are observed in the field between the Archaean banded gneisses and the Palaeoproterozoic granulites. Collating the data on granulite ages with the known tectono-stratigraphic framework of the Aravalli Mountains, we conclude that the evolution and exhumation of granulites in the Sandmata Complex occurred during a tectono-magmatic/metamorphic event, which cannot be linked to known orogenic cycles that shaped this ancient mountain belt. We present some field and geochronologic evidence to elucidate the exhumation history and tectonic emplacement of the late Palaeoproterozoic, high P-T granulites into the Archaean banded gneisses. The granulite-facies metamorphism has been correlated with the thermal perturbation during the asymmetric opening of Delhi basins at around 1700 Ma.