Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion: Tectonic and palaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethys

Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 66 (2013) 1–33

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Asian Earth Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate / jseaes

Review

Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion: Tectonic and palaeogeographicevolution of eastern Tethys

I. Metcalfe ⇑Earth Sciences, Earth Studies Building C02, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, AustraliaNational Key Centre for Geochemical Evolution and Metallogeny of Continents (GEMOC), Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Received 8 September 2012Received in revised form 12 December 2012Accepted 13 December 2012Available online 2 January 2013

Keywords:GondwanaAsiaTerranesSuture zonesTethysTectonicsPalaeogeography

1367-9120/$ - see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd. Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2012.12.020

⇑ Address: Earth Sciences, Earth Studies Building C067733499; fax: +61 2 67727136.

E-mail address: [email protected]

Present-day Asia comprises a heterogeneous collage of continental blocks, derived from the Indian–westAustralian margin of eastern Gondwana, and subduction related volcanic arcs assembled by the closure ofmultiple Tethyan and back-arc ocean basins now represented by suture zones containing ophiolites,accretionary complexes and remnants of ocean island arcs. The Phanerozoic evolution of the region isthe result of more than 400 million years of continental dispersion from Gondwana and plate tectonicconvergence, collision and accretion. This involved successive dispersion of continental blocks, the north-wards translation of these, and their amalgamation and accretion to form present-day Asia. Separationand northwards migration of the various continental terranes/blocks from Gondwana occurred in threephases linked with the successive opening and closure of three intervening Tethyan oceans, thePalaeo-Tethys (Devonian–Triassic), Meso-Tethys (late Early Permian–Late Cretaceous) and Ceno-Tethys(Late Triassic–Late Cretaceous). The first group of continental blocks dispersed from Gondwana in theDevonian, opening the Palaeo-Tethys behind them, and included the North China, Tarim, South Chinaand Indochina blocks (including West Sumatra and West Burma). Remnants of the main Palaeo-Tethysocean are now preserved within the Longmu Co-Shuanghu, Changning–Menglian, Chiang Mai/Inthanonand Bentong–Raub Suture Zones. During northwards subduction of the Palaeo-Tethys, the SukhothaiArc was constructed on the margin of South China–Indochina and separated from those terranes by ashort-lived back-arc basin now represented by the Jinghong, Nan–Uttaradit and Sra Kaeo Sutures.Concurrently, a second continental sliver or collage of blocks (Cimmerian continent) rifted and separatedfrom northern Gondwana and the Meso-Tethys opened in the late Early Permian between these separat-ing blocks and Gondwana. The eastern Cimmerian continent, including the South Qiangtang block andSibumasu Terrane (including the Baoshan and Tengchong blocks of Yunnan) collided with the SukhothaiArc and South China/Indochina in the Triassic, closing the Palaeo-Tethys. A third collage of continentalblocks, including the Lhasa block, South West Borneo and East Java–West Sulawesi (now identified asthe missing ‘‘Banda’’ and ‘‘Argoland’’ blocks) separated from NW Australia in the Late Triassic–LateJurassic by opening of the Ceno-Tethys and accreted to SE Sundaland by subduction of the Meso-Tethysin the Cretaceous.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22. Tectonic framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2.1. Gondwana origins of East and SE Asian Continental and Arc terranes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1.1. North China Block. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.1.2. South China Block. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42.1.3. Tarim Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52.1.4. Ala Shan Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.1.5. Qilian Block. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.1.6. Qaidam Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
ll rights reserved.

2, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia. Tel.: +61 2

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2012.12.020

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13679120

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jseaes

2 I. Metcalfe / Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 66 (2013) 1–33

2.1.7. North Qiangtang–Qamdo–Simao Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62.1.8. Simao Block. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.1.9. South Qiangtang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.1.10. Lhasa Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72.1.11. Indochina Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82.1.12. Song Da Zone (Terrane) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.1.13. North Vietnam Terrane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.1.14. ‘‘Orang Laut terranes’’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92.1.15. Sibumasu Terrane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112.1.16. Sukhothai Arc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122.1.17. West Sumatra and West Burma Blocks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152.1.18. SW Borneo Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162.1.19. Semitau Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162.1.20. East Java–W Sulawesi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162.1.21. Luconia-Dangerous Grounds Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3. Eastern Tethyan Ocean Basins and Suture Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1. Palaeo-Tethys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1.1. Longmu Co-Shuanghu Suture Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173.1.2. Changning–Menglian Suture Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173.1.3. Chiang Mai–Inthanon Suture Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173.1.4. Chanthaburi Suture Zone (Klaeng Tectonic Line) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183.1.5. Bentong–Raub Suture Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183.1.6. Songpan–Ganzi Suture ‘‘Knot’’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193.1.7. Song Ma Suture Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193.1.8. Dian Qiong Suture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193.1.9. Jinshajiang–Ailaoshan Suture zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203.1.10. Median Sumatra Tectonic Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.2. Sukhothai Back-Arc Suture Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2.1. Jinghong Suture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203.2.2. Nan–Uttaradit Suture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203.2.3. Sra Kaeo Suture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3. Meso-Tethys Sutures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3.1. Banggong–Nujiang Suture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203.3.2. Lok Ulo and Meratus Sutures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4. Ceno-Tethys Suture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.4.1. Indus–Yarlung–Tsangpo Suture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4. Dispersion and accretion of terranes/blocks and palaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethyan ocean basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.1. Rifting and separation of terranes/blocks from Gondwana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.1.1. Devonian rifting and separation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214.1.2. Early Permian rifting and separation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224.1.3. Late Triassic–Late Jurassic rifting and separation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

5. Tectonic and palaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethyan basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.1. Evolution and palaeogeography of the Palaeo-Tethys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235.2. Evolution and palaeogeography of the Meso-Tethys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285.3. Evolution and palaeogeography of the Ceno-Tethys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1. Introduction

Present day East and Southeast Asia is located at the zone ofconvergence between the Asian, India–Australia, and PhilippineSea-Pacific Plates (Fig. 1) and is the result of more than 400 millionyears of continental dispersion from Gondwana and plate tectonicconvergence, collision and accretion. Long-term subduction and re-lated tectonic processes have produced multiple volcanic arcs, is-land arc chains and marginal basins in the region. Most of thevarious continental pieces that now make up Asia were derivedfrom the southern hemisphere supercontinent Gondwana(Metcalfe, 1988) and travelled north to progressively collide andcoalesce prior to the current ongoing collision with the northwardsmoving Australian continent (Metcalfe, 1990, 1996a,b, 2011a,b).Several hundred millions of years of convergence in the Asianregion, including long-term subduction–accretion, arc-continentcollisions, and continent–continent collisions have resulted in mul-tiple orogenic and mountain building events, major plutonism (e.g.

tin-bearing granite belt of Southeast Asia), uplift and basin devel-opment. During the separation of the various continental terranesfrom Gondwana, their northwards migration and collision, threeintervening Tethyan oceans, the Palaeo-Tethys (Devonian–Trias-sic), Meso-Tethys (late Early Permian–Late Cretaceous) andCeno-Tethys (Late Triassic–Late Cretaceous), were opened and sub-sequently destroyed (Metcalfe, 1994, 1996a,b, 1998). Remnants ofthese ancient oceans are preserved in the various narrow suturezones and fold-thrust belts bounding the continental blocks,including ophiolitic rocks, volcanic arcs, and accretionary com-plexes with melange and deep sea sediments often forming dis-crete packages or disrupted elements of Ocean Plate Stratigraphy(OPS), see Wakita and Metcalfe (2005). The continental collisionsthat ultimately led to the formation of Asia began in the Palaeozoicand continue at the present day. In the Southeast Asian region con-tinental collisions and accretion occurred in two distinct phases,one in the Late Paleozoic–Early Mesozoic and one in the LateMesozoic and Cenozoic. The earlier phase brought together pieces

Fig. 1. Topography and main active faults in East Asia and location of SE Asia at the zone of convergence of the Eurasian (pale orange), Philippine (pale blue) and Indian–Australian plates (pale green). Large arrows represent absolute (International Terrestrial Reference Frame 2000, Altamimi et al. 2002) motions of plates (After Simons et al.,2007; Metcalfe, 2011a).

I. Metcalfe / Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 66 (2013) 1–33 3

of continent that exhibit widely differing Late Palaeozoic biotasrepresentative of the high-latitude southern hemisphere Gondw-ana and low-latitude equatorial-northern hemisphere Cathaysianbiotic provinces (Metcalfe, 2011a,b). The second collisional phaseinvolved the addition of Gondwana and Asia-derived continentalfragments to the mainland Sundaland core during the Mesozoicand Cenozoic and the Cenozoic collision of the northwards movingIndian and Australian continents with mainland and maritimeSoutheast Asia respectively (Hall, 1996, 2002, 2011, 2012). The LatePalaeozoic Gondwana–Cathaysia biogeographic divide or line inmainland Southeast Asia is as striking and as significant biogeo-graphically as the Wallace/Huxley/Lydekker Lines that divideextant Australian and Asian biotas (Figs. 2 and 3). This paper pre-sents a review of the origins and dispersal of continental blocks/terranes from Gondwana, their northwards translation and accre-tion to form Asia and an overview of the evolution of the easternPalaeo-Tethys, Meso-Tethys and Ceno-Tethys ocean basins.

2. Tectonic framework

Present day Asia (including SE Asia) comprises a complex col-lage of continental fragments, volcanic arcs, and suture zones(Fig. 2). The suture zones variably include accretionary complexrocks with disrupted Ocean Plate Stratigraphy (OPS), pelagic (radi-olarian cherts, pelagic limestones) and hemipelagic sediments,

ophiolites, ocean floor basalts, melange, sea mounts, etc. They rep-resent destroyed ocean basins or back-arc basins.

2.1. Gondwana origins of East and SE Asian Continental and Arcterranes

All the East and SE Asian continental terranes/blocks areinterpreted to have had (directly or indirectly) their origins onthe margin of Eastern Gondwana. These origins and interpretedoriginal positions of Asian terranes are based on an assessmentof multi-disciplinary constraining data, including basement natureand age; palaeomagnetism; faunal/floral affinities/biogeography;tectonostratigraphy; palaeoenvironmental/palaeoclimatic indica-tors; provenance (U–Pb detrital zircon age finger printing and Hfisotopes); see Table 1 and individual descriptions of blocks/terranes.

2.1.1. North China BlockThe North China Block (alternatively known as the Sino-Korean

Block) is bounded by the Qilian–Qinling–Dabie–Sula suture andTan Lu Fault to the south and the Solonker suture to the north(Fig. 2). The Ala Shan Block may form its westwards continuation.It has an ancient basement rooted in the supercontinent Rodiniawhich comprises some metamorphic basement rocks as old as>3.8 Ga and several Late Archaean (2.8 Ga) nuclei surrounded byPalaeoproterozoic orogenic belts of about 1.8 Ga (Jahn and Ernst,

Fig. 2. Distribution of principal continental blocks, arc terranes and sutures of eastern Asia. WB = West Burma, SWB = South West Borneo, S = Semitau, L = Lhasa, SQT = SouthQiangtang, NQT = North Qiangtang, QS = Qamdo–Simao, SI = Simao, SG = Songpan Ganzi accretionary complex, QD = Qaidam, QI = Qilian, AL = Ala Shan, KT = KurosegawaTerrane, LT = Lincang arc Terrane, CT = Chanthaburi arc Terrane, EM = East Malaya. After Metcalfe (2011b).


1990; Liu et al., 1992; Wu et al., 2008). Geochemical, geochrono-logical, structural and metamorphic P–T path data suggest thatthe basement of the North China Craton can be divided into Easternand Western Blocks, separated by the Late Archean to Paleoprote-rozoic Trans-North China Orogen (Zhao et al., 2000, 2001; Zhenget al., 2009). What is less clear, is whether North China formedan integral part of Gondwana in the Early Palaeozoic. Cambrianand Ordovician shallow-marine shelly faunas of the North ChinaBlock (particularly trilobites and brachiopods) include elementsthat characterise the Early Palaeozoic Sino-Australian biotic prov-ince (Burrett et al., 1990) and in addition, the distinctive Sino-Aus-tralian province conodont Serratognathus links North China withAustralia, South China, Tarim and Sibumasu in the early Ordovician(Metcalfe, 2006; Wang et al., 2007; Zhen et al., 2009). In addition tofaunal links, gross stratigraphical comparisons suggest that NorthChina and the Arafura Basin region of northern Australia are verysimilar (Fig. 4) indicating that North China may have been attachedto North Australia, adjacent to the Arafura Basin, during the EarlyPalaeozoic (Nicoll and Totterdell, 1990; Nicoll and Metcalfe,1994). This placement is also supported by palaeomagnetic data(Klootwijk, 1996a,b,c). Carboniferous and younger faunas and flo-ras of North China show no affinities to Gondwanaland suggestingthat it had already separated and moved northwards by that time.

2.1.2. South China BlockThe South China Block is bounded to the north by the Qilian–

Qinling–Dabie–Sula suture and Tan Lu Fault, to the south by theSong Ma suture, and to the west by the Songpan Ganzi accretionarycomplex. The block is composite and here regarded to comprisetwo sub-blocks, the Yangtze and Cathaysia blocks that amalgam-ated along the Jiangnan suture in the Proterozoic around 860 Ma(Charvet et al., 1999; Yao et al., in press; Wang et al., 2012). Recentrecognition of the Dian Qiong Suture zone (Cai and Zhang, 2009)implies a disrupted Indochina derived North Vietnam terranebetween this suture and the Red River fault (Fig. 3).

Early Palaeozoic shallow marine faunas of South China belongto the Asia–Australian and Austral realms in the Cambrian and Or-dovician, respectively (Yang, 1994; Li, 1994). These faunal affinities(Fig. 5), together with stratigraphic comparisons suggest thatSouth China had its origin on the Himalaya–Iran region of theGondwanaland margin (Burrett et al., 1990; Nie et al., 1990; Nie,1991; Metcalfe, 1996a,b). Central South China Pagoda LimestoneOrdovician trilobite faunas are identical at the species level tocoeval faunas on the Sibumasu terrane in Thailand and Malaysia,a region interpreted to have been attached to NW/W Australia atthis time. Similarly, Late Ordovician-early Silurian shelly faunasof South China are closely related to coeval ones on the Sibumasu

Fig. 3. Distribution of continental blocks, fragments and terranes, and principal sutures of Southeast Asia. Numbered micro-continental blocks, 1. East Java; 2. Bawean; 3.Paternoster; 4. Mangkalihat; 5. West Sulawesi; 6. Semitau; 7. Luconia; 8. Kelabit–Longbowan; 9. Spratly Islands–Dangerous Ground; 10. Reed Bank; 11. North Palawan; 12.Paracel Islands; 13. Macclesfield Bank; 14. East Sulawesi; 15. Bangai–Sula; 16. Buton; 17. Obi–Bacan; 18. Buru–Seram; 19. West Irian Jaya. LT = Lincang Terrane,ST = Sukhothai Terrane and CT = Chanthaburi Terrane, EM = East Malaya. C–M = Changning–Menglian Suture, C.-Mai = Chiang Mai Suture, and Nan–Utt. = Nan–UttaraditSuture. After Metcalfe (2011b).


terrane (Cocks and Fortey, 1997). Placement of South Chinaadjacent to the Himalaya–Iran region is consistent with the palae-omagnetic evidence which places South China in mid-southern toequatorial palaeolatitudes in the Ordovician (Lin et al., 1985; Burrettet al., 1990; Metcalfe, 1990; Zhao et al., 1996a,b; Torsvik andCocks, 2009). South China is interpreted to have been attached tothe NE Gondwana Himalayan–west Australian region in the earlyPalaeozoic. Devonian faunas (especially fish and some brachiopods)are endemic indicating that South China had separated fromGondwana at that time. Late Palaeozoic Carboniferous and Permianfaunas and floras are low-latitude warm-climate Cathaysian/Tethyan in nature consistent with equatorial palaeolatitudesindicated by palaeomagnetic data (Li et al., 2004), see Fig. 6.

2.1.3. Tarim BlockThe Tarim Block is bounded by the Tianshan orogen to the

north, and the Kunlun and Altyn-Tagh orogens to the south andsoutheast (Fig. 1). The block is largely covered by young Cenozoicsedimentary cover but Precambrian, Palaeozoic and Mesozoic

rocks outcrop along its margins. The Precambrian basement in-cludes Neoarchean tonalitic and granitic rocks and Palaeoprotero-zoic paragneiss. Mesoproterozoic meta-sedimentary quartzites,slates, conglomerates and marbles overlie the Neoarchean andPalaeoproterozoic rocks unconformably (Zhang et al., in press-b,c). These basement rocks are succeeded by Neoproterozoic vol-cano-sedimentary rocks and Palaeozoic passive continental marginsequences. Zircon Hf model ages for the Tarim basement rocksshow two peaks at 2.6 Ga and 3.2 Ga (Fig. 7). Zircon Hf modelage spectra is consistent with the whole rock Nd model age spectrawhich shows several peaks at 2.34 Ga, 2.53 Ga, 2.74 Ga and 3.2 Ga(Zhang et al., in press-b,c). Both whole rock Nd model ages andzircon Hf model ages indicate a significant growth of juvenile crustin the Mesoarchean and Neoarchean. Basement rocks of the TarimBlock appear to have formed later than those of North and SouthChina (Yangtze) see Fig. 7.

Ordovician conodont faunas of Tarim, include the Lower-MiddleOrdovician Sino-Australian Province genus Serratognathus, andshow close affinities (Fig. 5) with faunas from similar facies in

Table 1Interpreted origins and original sites of attachment of East and SE Asian Continental and Arc terranes/blocks.

Terrane/Block/Arc Terrane/Block boundaries Origin and site of original attachment

North China (Sino-Korean Block)

Qilian–Qinling–Dabei–Sula suture and Tan Lu Fault to the south and the Solonker suture to thenorth

Eastern Gondwana: Northern Australia

South China (Yangtze-Cathaysia composite)

Qilian–Qinling–Dabei–Sula suture and Tan Lu Fault, to the south by the Song Ma suture, and tothe west by the Songpan Ganzi accretionary complex

Eastern Gondwana: Himalaya–Iranregion

Tarim Tianshan orogen to the north, and the Kunlun and Altyn-Tagh orogens to the south andsoutheast

Eastern Gondwana: NW Australianregion

Ala Shan North Qilian suture to the south west, the Solonker suture to the north, and the west Ordosthrust belt to the east

NE Gondwana: Originally part of NorthChina

Qilian North Qilian orogenic belt to the north east and the North Qaidam ultra high pressuremetamorphic (UHPM) belt to the south

NE Gondwana: Originally part of NorthChina?

Qaidam Altun Tagh Fault zone to the north west, the North Qaidam UHPM belt to north east, and theKun Lun suture and Songpan Ganzi accretionary complex to the south

NE Gondwana: Originally part of Tarim?

North Qiangtang-Qamdo-Simao

Longmu Co-Shuanghu suture zone to the south east, and the Jinshajiang suture to the north east Eastern Gondwana: Extension ofIndochona?

South Qiangtang Longmu Co-Shuanghu suture to the north and the Banggong suture to the south Himalayan GondwanaLhasa Banggong–Nujiang Suture to the north and the Indus–Yarlung–Tsangpo Suture to the south Eastern Gondwana: East Himalaya–

Western Australian Gondwana marginIndochina Song Ma suture zone to the north east, Jinghong, Nan–Uttaradit, Sra Kaeo and a cryptic suture in

the Malay Peninsula to the west, and the eastern margin of Sundaland and a cryptic Cretaceoussuture offshore SW Borneo to the east

Eastern Gondwana: Himalaya–WesternAustralian Gondwana margin

Song Da Song Ma suture zone and the Red River Fault South ChinaNorth Vietnam Terrane Dian–Qiong suture and the Red River Fault South ChinaSibumasu Bounded to the west and southwest by the Mogok Metamorphic Belt, the Andaman Sea, and the

Medial Sumatra Tectonic zone and to the east and northeast by the Changning–Menglian,Chiang Mai–Inthanon, and Bentong–Raub Sutures

Eastern Gondwana: Western Australiamargin

West Sumatra Woyla suture to the south west and the Medial Sumatra Tectonic Line to the north east Indochina/South China marginWest Burma Mogok metamorphic belt to the east and the Mawgyi Nappe to the west Indochina/South China marginSukhothai Arc Changning–Menglian, Inthanon (Chiang Mai), and Bentong–Raub Palaeo-Tethyan suture zones

to the west, and Jinghong, Nan–Uttaradit and Sra Kaeo suture zones to the eastWestern Indochina/South China margin

SW Borneo Lupar and Boyan zones (with the small Semitau block between) to the north, the Meratus andLuk Ulo sutures to the southeast, and cryptic suture to the west

NW Australia: Banda embayment

East Java–WestSulawesi

Meratus and Luk Ulo sutures to the north west, and Sulawesi suture to the south east NW Australia: Argo embayment


the North and South China blocks (Wang et al., 1996, 2007). Thissuggests that Tarim was close to or attached to the Australian mar-gin of Gondwana in the Ordovician.

2.1.4. Ala Shan BlockThe small triangular shaped Ala Shan Block is bounded to the

southwest by the North Qilian suture, to the north by the Solonkersuture and to the east by the west Ordos thrust belt (Song et al., inpress). The basement comprises Archaean amphibolite (c. 2.7 Ga),other Archaean elements indicated by 2.5–3.5 Ga detrital zirconsin metasedimentary sequences and Proterozoic tonalitic/graniticgneisses dated at 2.3–1.9 Ga (Song et al., in press). The basementis overlain by Cambrian – Middle Ordovician cover sequences. Thisblock has previously been considered a westwards extension of theNorth China Block (Zhao, 2009), but due to differing tectonic his-tory to North China it is considered more likely to be a separatetectonic unit (Song et al., in press).

2.1.5. Qilian BlockThe Qilian Block as an imbricated thrust belt bounded by the

North Qilian orogenic belt to the north east and the North Qaidamultra high pressure metamorphic (UHPM) belt to the south. Thebasement comprises Precambrian granitic gneiss, marble, amphib-olite and minor granulite and Paleoproterozoic granitic gneiss da-ted at c. 2.5 Ga (Song et al., in press).

2.1.6. Qaidam BlockThis small continental block is bounded by the Altyn Tagh Fault

zone to the north west, the North Qaidam UHPM belt to north east,and the Kun Lun suture and Songpan Ganzi accretionary complexto the south. The basement of the block is formed by Early Protero-zoic metamorphic rocks with a Late Proterozoic–Palaeozoicsedimentary cover which is similar to that of the Tarim Block. A

Mesozoic–Cenozoic intra-cratonic basin sequence covers most ofthe block. It seems most probable that the Qaidam Block originallyformed part of the Tarim terrane and reached its current relativeposition to the Tarim Block by strike slip displacement along theAltun Tagh fault zone during the latest Cretaceous to Early Ceno-zoic (Allen et al., 1994).

2.1.7. North Qiangtang–Qamdo–Simao BlockA Qamdo–Simao Block, previously referred to as the ‘‘Lanpin–

Simao’’ block, the ‘‘North Qiangtang Block’’ (e.g., Jin, 2002; Bianet al., 2004) or ‘‘Eastern Qiangtang’’ Block (Zhang et al., 2002)was proposed by Metcalfe (2002a) based on the distribution ofEarly Permian faunas and floras of the region and distribution ofwarm Cathaysian vs. cold Gondwanan elements (Fig. 8). Metcalfe(2002a) regarded this block as a separate micro-terrane derivedfrom South China–Indochina by back-arc spreading in the Carbon-iferous. The western boundary of this block was not well con-strained but recent studies in the Qiangtang Block of Tibet haveproposed a Longmu Co-Shuanghu suture zone through centralQiangtang which includes blueschist, eclogite, metabasaltic rocks,ophiolitic melange, OIB-type basalt, metapelite, marble and minorchert, ultramafic rocks that represent ocean-floor and sea mountrock associations (Zhai et al., 2011 and references therein). U–Pbzircon metamorphic ages of the blueschists and eclogites of theLongmu Co-Shuanghu suture range from 230 to 237 Ma (early LateTriassic) and Permian protolith ages are indicated. Younger LateTriassic Ar–Ar ages on phengite (203–222 Ma) and on white micas(c. 220 Ma) suggest Late Triassic exhumation (Kapp et al., 2000,2003; Zhai et al., 2011). These new data suggests that the LongmuCo-Shuanghu suture may represent the main Palaeo-Tethys oceanand be the westwards extension of the Changning–Menglian su-ture of SW China. The presence of early Palaeozoic U–Pb SHRIMPzircon ages for cumulate gabbros along this suture belt (Zhai

Fig. 4. Gross Palaeozoic–Mesozoic stratigraphical comparison of North China andthe Arafura Basin, northern Australia.


et al., 2011) however seem too old to have been formed in thePalaeo-Tethys which is here interpreted to have opened only inthe Devonian.

2.1.8. Simao BlockThe concept of a Simao Block was introduced by Wu et al.

(1995) for the region bounded by the Changning–Menglian–ChiangMai sutures to the west, the Ailaoshan suture to the northeast andthe Uttaradit–Nan Suture to the southeast. Metcalfe (2002a)accepted this interpretation and correlated the Simao Block withthe Qamdo-Simao block to the north in Tibet, regarding these asa single disrupted terrane derived from South China–Indochinaby back-arc spreading. More recent interpretations of suture zonesin this region and re-interpretation of part of the Simao Block asthe Sukhothai Arc with its eastern boundary marked by theJinghong suture zone (Sone and Metcalfe, 2008; Metcalfe,2011a,b leaves only a remnant part of the original Simao Block, be-tween the Ailaoshan and Jinghong suture zones which is hereconsidered a north west sub-terrane extension of the IndochinaBlock (Figs. 2, 3 and 9).

2.1.9. South QiangtangThe South Qiangtang terrane is bounded to the north by the

Longmu Co-Shuanghu suture and the to the south by the Banggongsuture (Figs. 2, 3 and 8). Basement rocks are largely buried by aSilurian to Jurassic cover sequence. Upper Carboniferous and LowerPermian sediments include glacial–marine and glacial deposits andLower Permian cold-water faunas and Gondwanaland floras and

faunas. This indicates continental attachment to NE Gondwana atthat time. These pass up into Upper Permian shallow-marinedeposits with Cathaysian faunas and floras indicating that theSouth Qiantang Block had separated from Gondwana, as part ofthe Cimmerian continent, and moved into low latitudes by LatePermian times (Metcalfe, 2011a,b). Lower Triassic marls uncon-formably overly the Upper Permian and these are in turn uncon-formably overlain by Middle Jurassic siliciclastics and carbonates.

2.1.10. Lhasa BlockThe Lhasa Block is bounded to the north by the Banggong–

Nujiang Suture (Meso-Tethys) and to the south by the Indus–Yarlung–Tsangpo Suture (Ceno-Tethys) (Figs. 2, 3 and 8). Therehas been some recent debate on whether the Lhasa Block is a singlecontinental block or a composite terrane. Yang et al. (2009) identi-fied a Permian eclogite belt and associated ‘‘Island Arc basalts’’within the Lhasa Block and proposed that the block was compositecomprising a North Lhasa segment and a South Lhasa segment sep-arated by a ‘‘North Gangdese Suture’’. The arc basalts and eclogite(Fig. 10) are here interpreted as an arc constructed on the LhasaBlock whilst it still formed part of the Gondwana margin.

Zhu et al. (2011a) on the other hand regard the Lhasa Block as asingle unit and based on U–Pb zircon and Lu–Hf isotopic and bulk-rock geochemical data for Mesozoic–Early Tertiary magmatic rocksindicate basement rocks of Proterozoic and Archaean (up to2.87 Ga) in its central part with younger juvenile crust accretedboth to the north and south of this micro-continent. This impliesearlier southwards directed subduction beneath Lhasa, then laternorthwards subduction beneath the block. A Triassic separationof Lhasa from Australian Gondwana by back-arc spreading wassuggested and this is here supported. The same authors (Zhuet al., in press) however, show Lhasa separating from AustralianGondwana in the latest Devonian and isolated from Gondwana inthe early Permian. This interpretation flies in the face of unequiv-ocal biogeographic and climatic data that place Lhasa on the mar-gin of eastern Gondwana in the early Permian, and is inconsistentwith evidence for early Devonian opening and spreading of the Pal-aeo-Tethys. It is curious that Zhu et al. (in press) also do not showthe position of the Sibumasu block, and their ‘‘Eastern Qiangtang’’terrane mysteriously disappears from their reconstructions afterthe Early Cambrian. Further recent detrital zircon geochronologicaland geochemical data (Zhu et al., 2011b) suggests provenance fromthe Albany–Fraser belt in southwest Australia and a westernAustralian origin is suggested.

The Lhasa Block is here treated as a single tectonic unit until itcan be unequivocally demonstrated to be composite. The arc bas-alts and eclogites reported by Yang et al. (2009) may represent avolcanic arc constructed on the Lhasa Block rather than represent-ing a Tethyan suture zone. Such an arc would have been con-structed on Lhasa by southwards subduction of Meso-Tethysbeneath the Himalayan–Australian eastern Gondwana margin.Early Palaeozoic to Early Permian faunas and floras of the LhasaBlock are similar to those of Sibumasu and northeast Gondwana.The presence of Late Carboniferous–Early Permian glacial-marinediamictites and cool/cold-water faunas of the same age indicatecontiguity with Sibumasu, on the Gondwana margin, at this time.The original position of Lhasa on the Gondwana margin is stillpoorly constrained but comparisons of detrital zircon age profilesfrom the Lhasa Block, Western Australia, and Indian Himalayas(Fig. 11) indicate a Himalayan–Western Australian margin originwhich seems supported by available multidisciplinary data.Palaeomagnetic data for the Lhasa Block are sparse but the blockappears to have travelled from southern to northern hemispherelatitudes in the Late Triassic–Jurassic (Li et al., 2004), see Fig. 6.Chen et al. (in press) present new palaeomagnetic studies of theEarly Cretaceous Zenong Group, Lhasa Terrane and indicate a

Fig. 5. Palaeozoic and Mesozoic faunal and floral provinces and affinities vs. time for the principal East Asian continental blocks (after Metcalfe, 2001, 2011a).

Fig. 6. Palaeolatitude vs. Time for some principal east and southeast Asian continental blocks (After Li et al. 2004). Note northwards migration of South China, Sibumasu andLhasa from southern to northern latitudes in the Late Silurian–Early Devonian, Permian, and Jurassic–Cretaceous respectively.


paleolatitude of 19.8� ± 4.6� N. This is consistent with previous re-sults (Li et al., 2004).

2.1.11. Indochina BlockThe north-eastern boundary of the Indochina Block is delin-

eated by the Song Ma suture zone in Vietnam and the westernboundary by the Jinghong, Nan–Uttaradit, Sra Kaeo and a crypticsuture offshore eastern Malay Peninsula (Figs. 2 and 3). The easternboundary is poorly defined but broadly corresponds to the easternmargin of Sundaland in the South China Sea region and to a crypticCretaceous suture offshore SW Borneo. The basement of the Indo-china Block comprises a metamorphic core (Kontum massif) ofgranulite facies rocks exposed in Vietnam, and it has been sug-gested that this may have originally formed part of the Gondwanagranulite belt (Katz, 1993). Nd depleted mantle model ages of 1.2–

2.4 Ga indicate crustal formation in the Palaeoproterozoic andMesoproterozoic (Lan et al., 2003).

Two thermotectonic events are indicated by U–Pb (monaziteand zircon) and Ar–Ar (mica) ages in the granulites of the KontumMassif, one in the Middle Ordovician (470–465 Ma) and the otherin the Early Triassic (250–245 Ma) (Roger et al., 2007). Upper inter-cept ages for monazites of 635 ± 160 Ma, 1 ± 0.3 Ga and1421 ± 120 Ma are interpreted by Roger et al. (2007) as minimumages of an inherited component related to the sedimentary proto-lith age or to the age of a previous metamorphic event. These Or-dovician ages in the Kontum Massif are similar to U–Pb ages inthe Song Chay (northern Vietnam) for a magmatic event dated at428 ± 3 Ma (Roger et al., 2000) and at 418–407 Ma in the DailocMassif of the Central Truong Son Belt (Carter et al., 2001). Subse-quent Triassic Indosinian granulite facies metamorphism is indi-

Fig. 7. Zircon Hf model age spectra for Tarim, North China and Yangtze (from Zhanget al., in press-b,c and after Long et al., 2010; Geng et al., 2012).


cated by U–Pb SHRIMP zircon and Ar–Ar mica dates of 250–245 Ma(Nam et al., 2001; Maluski et al., 2005; Roger et al., 2007).

2.1.12. Song Da Zone (Terrane)The Song Da Zone (Fig. 9) north of the Song Ma suture and south

of the Red River Fault represents a continental rift (Tri, 1979;Hutchison, 1989). This rift terrane is separated from the mainSouth China Block by the Red River Fault zone. Early Permian–Low-er Triassic sedimentary rocks in the rift are terrigenous and areassociated with Permian plume/rift-related volcanics includingkomatiites equivalent to the Emeishan volcanic province in SouthChina (Hanski et al., 2003). The Middle Triassic in the rift includes

Fig. 8. Distribution of Lower Permian Gondwana and Cathaysian province faunas and florcontrasting cool- and warm-climate biotas either side of the main Palaeo-Tethyan dividzones. QS = Qamdo-Simao Block, SIB = Sibumasu terrane, SI = Simao terrane (northern In

marine calcareous sediments indicating deepening of the rift andinvasion of the sea (Lepvrier et al., 2008).

2.1.13. North Vietnam TerraneRecognition of a Dian–Qiong suture in South China regarded as

a disrupted Palaeo-Tethyan suture originally contiguous with theSong Ma suture (Zhang et al., 2006; Zhang and Cai, 2009; Cai andZhang, 2009) indicates that the small continental block betweenthis suture and the Red River Fault represents a disrupted compo-nent of the Indochina Block (Fig. 9). This small continental frag-ment is here referred to as the North Vietnam Terrane. If theDian–Qiong suture and North Vietnam Terrane are accepted, thenleft-lateral displacemnet along the Red River Fault must be sub-stantial. This would have major implications for tectonic modelsfor the region that employ relatively modest displacement alongthe Red River Fault (e.g. Morley, 2012; Hall, 2002, 2012) comparedto models that require substantial displacement (e.g. Tapponnieret al., 1982; Tapponnier et al., 1986). Further work is required toresolve this issue.

2.1.14. ‘‘Orang Laut terranes’’Ferrari et al. (2008) propose an ‘‘Orang Laut terranes concept’’

which suggests back-arc induced break-up of the South China–Indochina superterrane to produce what the authors call ‘‘OrangLaut terranes’’. The recognition of a West Sumatra terrane ofCathaysian origin, outboard of the Sibumasu terrane in Sumatraby Hutchison (1994) and Barber and Crow (2003) led to modelsthat derived this terrane from ‘‘Cathaysialand’’ (combined SouthChina–Indochina composite terrane in Permo-Triassic times) byBarber et al. (2005) and Metcalfe (2005, 2009). Furthermore, WestBurma has recently been identified as a probable Cathaysianterrane, originally contiguous with West Sumatra but now sepa-rated by the Andaman Sea (Barber and Crow, 2009). Further workis required to demonstrate that there was indeed a back-arc

as of the Tibet–Yunnan region, showing the remarkable juxtaposition of these highlye represented by the Longmu Co-Shuanghu and Changning–Menglian (C.M.) suturedochina), SG = Songpan Ganzi accretionary complex. After Metcalfe (1994).

Fig. 9. Tectonic subdivision of mainland SE Asia Sundaland showing the Sukhothai Arc terranes and bounding Palaeo-Tethys and back-arc suture zones. Ages of deep marineradiolarian cherts are shown in boxes. C–M S.Z., Changning–Menglian Suture Zone. Modified after Sone and Metcalfe (2008) and Metcalfe (2011a, 2011b).


Fig. 10. Occurrence of Permian arc basalts and eclogite in the central part of the Lhasa Block, here interpreted as a volcanic arc produced by southwards subduction beneathLhasa on the eastern Gondwana margin (after Yang et al., 2009).

Fig. 11. Detrital zircon age distributions for sedimentary and metasedimentaryrocks of the Sibumasu Terrane and Lhasa and South Qiangtang Blocks compared tozircon age distributions for Western Australia and the Himalayas. N = number ofsamples; n = number of analyses. Compiled from and after Zhu et al. (2011b) andHall and Sevastjanova (2012).


oceanic basin or basins developed along the Song Da/Song Ma zonein the Permian–Triassic rather than an intracratonic rift zone. Der-ivation of the Spratly Islands and parts of the Philippines from theIndochina margin by back-arc spreading is certainly a possibility,but whether West Sumatra, West Burma and SW Borneo (Kaliman-tan) were derived in this way as suggested by Ferrari et al. (2008)requires further investigation. SW Borneo has recently been pro-posed as a Gondwana-derived continental fragment that repre-sents the Banda allochthon that separated from NWAustralia inthe Jurassic (Hall, in press; Hall et al., 2008; Metcalfe, 2009). Itherefore prefer not to use the term ‘‘Orang Laut terranes’’ as pro-posed by Ferrari et al. (2008).

2.1.15. Sibumasu TerraneMetcalfe (1984) defined the Sibumasu terrane as including the

‘‘Shan States of Burma, Northwest Thailand, Peninsular Burmaand Thailand, western Malaya and Sumatra’’ and possibly extend-ing northwards into western China and Tibet. The name SIBUMASUwas an acronym derived by combining SI (Sino, Siam), BU (Burma),MA (Malaya) and SU (Sumatra). The terrane is bounded to thewest and southwest by the Mogok Metamorphic Belt, the AndamanSea, and the Medial Sumatra Tectonic zone (Barber and Crow,2009) and to the east and northeast by sutures representing themain Palaeo-Tethys ocean, from north to south; the Changning–Menglian suture in SW China, the Chiang Mai–Inthanon Suture inThailand and the Bentong–Raub Suture in the Malay Peninsula(Figs. 2, 3 and 9). Many authors have used Sibumasu and ‘‘Shan-Thai’’interchangeably, but these are not the same. The Shan-Thai Terraneof Bunopas (1982) was defined as including ‘‘eastern Burma,western Thailand and northwestern Malay Peninsula’’ did notinclude any part of Sumatra or western China. Recent usage of theterm ‘‘Shan-Thai’’ for very disparate geographic regions and tectonicunits has also rendered this term of little use (see Metcalfe, 2009for full discussion). The Sibumasu terrane is the eastern part ofthe Cimmerian continent of Sengör (1984) and is here regarded asincluding the Baoshan and Tengchong blocks of western Chinaand extending to the South Qiangtang Block of Tibet.

The oldest dated sedimentary rocks on Sibumasu are middleCambrian to Early Ordovician clastics of the Machinchang and Jeraiformations in NW Peninsular Malaysia (Lee, 2009), the TurataoFormation in southern Thailand, and the Chao Nen Formation inwestern Thailand (Fig. 12). Nd–Sr and U–Pb zircon dating ofPermian–Triassic granitoids in the Malay Peninsula (Liew andMcCulloch, 1985) suggested that the crust beneath the SibumasuBlock is 1500–1700 Ma old. Recent detrital zircon studies in theMalay Peninsula (Sevastjanova et al., 2011; Hall and Sevastjanova,2012) indicate that the basement of the Sibumasu Block can bedated as primarily Palaeoproterozoic, around 1.9–2.0 Ga. Thereare also probable minor Mesoproterozoic (1.6 Ga) and Neoarchaean(3.0–2.8 Ga) components (see Fig. 11).

Distinctive Cambrian-Early Permian Gondwanaland faunaswith NW Australian affinities on Sibumasu (Archbold et al., 1982;Burrett and Stait, 1985; Metcalfe, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1994, 2002b;Burrett et al., 1990; Shi and Waterhouse, 1991), suggest a NW Aus-tralian origin for the Sibumasu terrane. This is supported by thepresence of Late Carboniferous–Early Permian glacial-marinediamictites (Stauffer and Mantajit, 1981; Metcalfe, 1988; Staufferand Lee, 1989; Ampaiwan et al., 2009), Lower Permian cool-waterfauna and d18O cool-water indicators (Waterhouse, 1982; Ingavatand Douglass, 1981; Rao, 1988; Fang and Yang, 1991) which

Fig. 12. Stratigraphy of the Sibumasu Terrane. Mainly after Metcalfe (2005). Langkawi and NW Malaya Palaeozoic stratigraphy from Lee (2009).


indicate proximity to the Late Palaeozoic Gondwanaland glaciatedregion (see Figs. 5 and 12). Late Carboniferous and Early Permianplant fossils are extremely rare on Sibumasu but a Glossopteris florahas been reported south of Baoshan in western Yunnan (Wang andTan, 1994). Gross stratigraphical comparisons between Sibumasuand NW Australia (Fig. 13) also show similarities consistent withSibumasu having been positioned outboard of NW AustralianGondwanaland in the Paleozoic. In addition, Paleozoic paleomag-netic data indicates southern paleolatitudes (Fig. 14) consistentwith a position off NW Australian Gondwanaland in the Devonian,Carboniferous and Early Permian (Fang et al., 1989; Bunopas, 1982;Bunopas et al., 1989; Metcalfe, 1990; Huang and Opdyke, 1991).

2.1.16. Sukhothai ArcThe Sukhothai Arc (Ueno, 1999; Ueno and Hisada, 1999, 2001;

Sone and Metcalfe, 2008; Sone et al., 2012), comprising theLinchang, Sukhothai, and Chanthaburi terranes and the Centralplus Eastern Belts of the Malay Peninsula (Metcalfe, in press), hasa continental basement and is bounded to the west by theChangning–Menglian, Inthanon (Chiang Mai), and Bentong–Raub

Palaeo-Tethyan suture zones (Fig. 9). Its eastern boundary ismarked by the back-arc basin Jinghong, Nan–Uttaradit and SraKaeo suture zones and a cryptic suture offshore eastern Malay Pen-insula (Fig. 9). The arc was constructed in the Late Carboniferous–Early Permian on the margin of the South China–Indochina super-terrane by northwards subduction of the Palaeo-Tethys. It wasseparated by back-arc spreading in the Early–Middle Permianand was then accreted back onto South China–Indochina byback-arc collapse in the Triassic (Fig. 15). Continuation of this arcterrane southwards into the Malay Peninsula is equivocal andMetcalfe (2011b) suggested continuatioin to the central Belt ofthe Malay Peninsula that forms a gravity high (Ryall, 1982).Metcalfe (in press), based mainly on the distribution of I-Typegranotoids, has subsequently interpreted that both the Centraland Eastern Belts of the Malay Peninsula (East Malaya Block) rep-resent the southern continuation of the Sukhathai Arc (Fig. 16). Inthis case, the Central Belt would represent the fore-arc basin andthe Eastern Belt the Arc and its continental basement derived fromIndochina. Highly deformed Carboniferous continental marginsequences along the eastern part of East Malaya may be the

Fig. 13. Comparison of gross stratigraphies and facies of Sibumasu with northern Australia Basins. After Metcalfe (1994).

Fig. 14. Palaeomagnetc data plot showing northwards latitudinal movement of Sibumasu in the Permian–Triassic (after Van Der Voo, 1993).


Fig. 15. Cartoon showing the tectonic evolution of Sundaland (Thailand–Malay Peninsula) and evolution of the Sukhothai Arc System during Late Carboniferous–EarlyJurassic times (after Ueno and Hisada, 1999; Metcalfe, 2002a; Sone and Metcalfe, 2008; Metcalfe, 2011a,b; Searle et al., 2012).


expression of orogenic deformation related to the closure of theback arc basin, which must then be located offshore eastern MalayPeninsula. This interpretation is followed here (see Metcalfe, inpress for further discussion).

A Proterozoic basement age of 1100–1400 Ma for the EastMalaya segment of the Sukhothai Arc was indicated by Nd–Sr

and U–Pb zircon dating of Permian–Triassic granitoids in the MalayPeninsula (Liew and McCulloch, 1985). Recent detrital zircon U–Pband Hf-isotope data for Peninsular Malaysia (Sevastjanova et al.,2011; Hall and Sevastjanova, 2012) supports a Proterozoic base-ment age but suggests older ages of �1.7–2.0 Ga with some older(2.7 Ga) age components compared to the 1100–1400 Ma ages

Fig. 16. Map showing the distribution of the Palaeo-Tethys Bentong–Raub Suture Zone and Semanggol Formation rocks of the Malay Peninsula, ages of radiolarian cherts, andpostulated possible extension of the Sukhothai Arc beneath the Central Belt. After Metcalfe (2000, 2011a,b).


reported by Liew and McCulloch (1985). The oldest rocks in theEast Malaya segment of the Sukhothai Arc (east of the Bentong–Raub suture zone) are Carboniferous siliciclastics, and carbonatesalthough Chakraborty and Metcalfe (1995), based on structuralgeology, indicated the possible presence of the pre-Carboniferous(Devonian?). Sandstones and shales in Pahang and Trengganu, EastMalaya have yielded Cathaysian Mississippian plants (Asama,1973; Jennings and Lee, 1985; Ohana et al., 1991). Shallow-marinePennsylvanian reefal carbonates (Panching Limestone) in Pahangcontain a rich warm-water Tethyan fauna (Metcalfe et al., 1980),and Permian shallow-marine carbonates and siliciclastics containwarm-water Tethyan and Cathaysian floras (Metcalfe, in press).

2.1.17. West Sumatra and West Burma BlocksThe West Sumatra Block (Hutchison, 1994; Barber and Crow,

2003, 2009) is an elongate continental sliver in Sumatra boundedto the SW by the Woyla suture and terranes and to the NE bythe Medial Sumatra Tectonic Line (Figs. 2 and 3). The oldest knownrocks in this micro-terrane are the Carboniferous Kluet and Kuan-tan formations that exhibit warm-water, low-latitude faunas(Barber and Crow, 2009). Early Permian floras and faunas on thisterrane belong to the warm-climate equatorial Cathaysian floral

province and Tethyan equatorial faunal province respectively(Jongmans and Gothan, 1925, 1935; Vozenin-Serra, 1989; Fontaineet al., 1989; Metcalfe, 2005, 2006; Ueno et al., 2006; Barber andCrow, 2009). West Sumatra is located in an unusual locationoutboard of the Sibumasu terrane (with cold climate Gondwananfaunas and floras and glacial deposits in the early Permian) inSumatra and is interpreted to have been derived from theIndochina–South China superterrane and emplaced by strike-sliptectonics in the Permo-Triassic (Metcalfe, 2006, 2011a,b; Barberand Crow, 2009).

The West Burma Block is bounded to the east by the Mogokmetamorphic belt and to the west by the Mawgyi Nappe(Fig. 17). The block has a late Palaeozoic sedimentary rock andpre-Mesozoic schist basement overlain by Triassic turbidites andCretaceous ammonite-bearing shales and limestones in the Indo-burman Ranges and by a Late Mesozoic–Cenozoic arc associationin the Central Lowlands of Burma. Metcalfe (1990) considered thisblock to have a continental basement and to be a possible candi-date for the ‘‘Argoland’’ block that rifted from NW Australia inthe Jurassic (Metcalfe, 1996a,b). Following the report of CathaysianMiddle Permian fusulinids from Karmine on this block (Oo et al.,2002), which are similar to the Middle Permian faunas of the West

Fig. 17. Tectonic units in Myanmar (after Mitchell, 1993 and Barber and Crow, 2009).


Sumatra Block, it seems more likely that West Burma forms a dis-rupted northwards extension of West Sumatra and that both theseblocks were derived from the Indochina–South China superterraneas suggested by Barber and Crow (2009).

2.1.18. SW Borneo BlockThe SW Borneo Block is bounded to the north by the Lupar and

Boyan zones (with the small Semitau Block between) and to thesoutheast by the Meratus and Luk Ulo sutures (Fig. 3). The westernmargin of the block with the West Sumatra, Sibumasu and EastMalaya blocks is cryptic. Poorly exposed schists and hornstonesmay represent the crystalline basement of this block but isotopicdating of these is required to confirm this. The oldest rocks previ-ously attributed to SW Borneo are Devonian limestones with coralsof the ‘‘Old Slates Formation’’ (Rutten, 1940; Sugiaman and Andria,1999) but these limestones appears to form part of a melange unitaccreted to the NE margin of SW Borneo and not therefore part ofthe core SW Borneo Block. Carboniferous-Permian fusulinid andconodont-bearing Cathaysian limestones (Terbat Limestone) inSarawak (Cummings, 1962; Metcalfe, 1985), also previously con-sidered part of the SW Borneo Block, are now regarded as formingpart of the acccreted material on the northern margin of the blockrather than representing part of its core basement. Deconstructingthese Late Palaeozoic Cathaysian elements from SW Borneo, nowallow its consideration as a block derived from NW Australia inthe Jurassic as proposed by Hall et al. (2008,2009), Hall (2009a,b,

2012) and Metcalfe (2011a,b). Diamonds occurring in SW Borneoplacer deposits without any likely local source, have geochemicaland isotope signatures similar to Australian diamonds (Tayloret al., 1990; Smith et al., 2009) and therefore support such aproposition.

2.1.19. Semitau BlockThe small Semitau Block (Fig. 3) is located between the Lupar

and Boyan melange/suture zones in Sarawak (Williams andHarahap, 1987; Williams et al., 1988). The Carboniferous-EarlyPermian Terbat limestones with warm-water Tethyan faunas formthe oldest dated rocks on this small continental fragment(Cummings, 1962; Metcalfe, 1985).

2.1.20. East Java–W SulawesiSeveral small continental blocks or areas interpreted to be

underlain by continental crust, have been recognised in the Java–SE Borneo–west Sulawesi region (Hutchison, 1989; Metcalfe,1990, 1996a,b). These include the East Java, Bawean, Paternoster,Mangkalihat, and West Sulawesi blocks (Fig. 3). It is not yet clearif these represent individual continental blocks or basement highsof a larger continental terrane. The latter, as proposed by Hall(2009a, 2011) and Granath et al. (2011) seems likely and theseare here designated the East Java–West Sulawesi terrane, followingHall (2012). Detrital zircon provenance studies indicate a Gondwa-nan origin (Smyth et al., 2007; Hall and Sevastjanova, 2012).


2.1.21. Luconia-Dangerous Grounds BlockA series of small continental blocks or basement highs north-

west of Borneo, including the Luconia, Kelabit–Longbowan, SpratlyIslands–Dangerous Grounds, Reed Bank, North Palawan, ParacelIslands and Macclesfield Bank are here regarded as derived fromthe South China/Indochina margin. These small blocks may wellrepresent several larger terranes. Fyhn et al. (2010) combined theLuconia, Kelabit–Longbowan, Spratly Islands, Dangerous Grounds,Reed Bank and North Palawan as a single block/terrane named‘‘Luconia’’. This Luconia terrane was interpreted as an allochtho-nous terrane accreted to the east Asian margin in the earlyPalaeogene causing a ‘‘Luconian’’ Orogeny that gave rise to Palaeo-cene to early Eocene inversion in the Phuquoc–Kampot Som Basin.Hall (in press) has followed this, but names the allochthonousterrane the ‘‘Dangerous Grounds’’. I am not convinced that thecontinental crust represented by Fyhn et al.’s (2010) Luconia isallochthonous and I here follow my previous suggestion that thecontinental crust represented by the Luconia/Dangerous Groundsterrane was derived by extension of the east Asian margin andopening of the South China Sea.

3. Eastern Tethyan Ocean Basins and Suture Zones

Three Tethyan ocean basins are now recognised in the Asia–Pacific region that opened and closed between Gondwana and Asia.These are the Palaeo-Tehys, Meso-Tethys and Ceno-Tethys oceans.The ages of opening and closure of these ocean basins is con-strained by ages of oceanic rock assemblages within the sutures,including ages of coherent and disrupted Ocean Plate Stratigraphy(OPS) that includes pelagic cherts, mid ocean ridge basalts (MORB),ocean island basalts (OIB) and sea mount carbonates capping OIB(Wakita and Metcalfe, 2005). The initial stages of rifting can beconstrained by deep-marine continental margin deposits includinghemi-pelagic mudstones, cherts, limestones and turbiditic sand-stones. A common misconception is that all radiolarian cherts arepelagic and deposited on ocean floor. This is not the case and thereare many examples of hemipelagic or even shallow-marine radio-larian cherts (Jones and Murchey, 1986; Kamata et al., 2009). It istherefore important, where possible, to determine the nature ofradiolarian cherts as true pelagic cherts (Type 1) or hemi-pelagiccherts (Type 2). Only Type 1 cherts represent deposition on oceanfloor MORB or OIB. Fig. 18 presents a compilation of ages of pelagicand hemipelagic radiolarian cherts, ophiolites, melanges, basalts(MORB and OIB) and carbonate sea mount caps within the variousPalaeo-, Meso- and Ceno-Tethys suture zones. The various suturezones are discussed individually below.

3.1. Palaeo-Tethys

The eastern Palaeo-Tethys main ocean basin is represented bythe Longmu Co-Shuanghu, Changning–Menglian, Chiang Mai–Inth-anon, Chanthaburi (cryptic) and Bentong–Raub suture zones(Figs. 2, 3 and 9). Studies of ocean plate stratigraphy, sea mountrock associations, ophiolites, accretionary complex rocks, cover se-quences, and stitching plutons indicate that this ocean basinopened in the Early Devonian and closed in the Triassic (Fanget al., 1994, 1996; Spiller and Metcalfe, 1995; Metcalfe, 1996a,b,1998, 2006, 2011a,b; Metcalfe et al., 1999; Wakita and Metcalfe,2005). The ages of various suture zone rocks are given inFig. 18A. A short lived branch of the Palaeo-Tethys opened as aback-arc basin in the Early Permian behind the Sukhothai Arcand closed in the Middle Triassic. This back-arc basin is repre-sented by the Jinghong, Nan–Uttaradit and Sra Kaeo suture zones(Fig. 18A). Other branches of the Palaeo-Tethys are representedby the Dian–Qiong, Jinshajiang and Song Ma suture zones.

3.1.1. Longmu Co-Shuanghu Suture ZoneThis suture zone forms the boundary between the South

Qiantang and North Qiangtang–Qamdao–Simao Blocks in Tibet.Metcalfe (1988) discussed the distribution of Early Permianglacial-marine deposits in the Himalayas, Tibet and SE Asia andrecognised that these were confined to the south-western part ofthe Qiangtang Block, south of what he termed the ‘‘LancangjiangFracture Zone’’. Metcalfe (1994) demonstrated that the distributionof Early Permian cold-climate Gondwanan fauanas and floras arealso confined to the SW of this zone and warm-climate faunasand floras to the NE of the zone, which was then termed the‘‘Lancangjiang Suture’’ interpreted to represent the main Palaeo-Tethys ocean. Little information was at that time available on thissuture zone or on remnants of the Palaeo-Tethys within it.Recently, Zhai et al. (2011) reported blueschist, eclogite, metaba-saltic rocks, ophiolitic melange, OIB-type basalt, metapelite,marble and minor chert and ultramafic rocks that representocean-floor and sea mount rock associations from this zone andtermed it the Longmu Co-Shuanghu suture zone, a name hereaccepted as it avoids confusion with the geographically disparateLancangjiang belt in SW China. They also reiterate that this proba-bly represents the main Palaeo-Tethys ocean and correlate it withthe Changning–Menglian Suture in SW China. This interpretation ishere supported by the occurrence of Late Devonian and Permianpelagic radiolarian cherts (Zhu et al., 2006). Ar/Ar ages on phengitebetween 203 and 222 Ma (Kapp et al., 2000, 2003) and Lu/Hfisochron ages on eclogite range between 233 and 244 Ma (Pullenet al., 2008) indicating a Late Triassic closure of the Palaeo-Tethysalong the Longmu Co-Shuanghu Suture.

3.1.2. Changning–Menglian Suture ZoneThis suture zone represents the main Palaeo-Tethys ocean basin

and forms the boundary between the Sibumasu Terrane to thewest and the Sukhothai Arc to the east (Sone and Metcalfe,2008). Pelagic radiolarian cherts within the zone range in age fromlate Middle Devonian to Middle Triassic (Liu et al., 1991; Metcalfeet al., 1999) and limestones interpreted as seamount caps, haveyielded fusulinids indicative of Early Carboniferous to Late Permianages (Wu et al., 1995). More recently, Ueno et al. (2003) described17 fusulininoidian faunal assemblages of late Early Mississippian(Serpukhovian) through late Middle Permian (Capitanian) age fromcontinuously deposited sea mount carbonates at the Yutangzhaisection, Yunnan. These limestones also contain rugose corals(Wang et al., 2001). The sea mount limestones are associated withor directly overlie Visean ocean island basalts (Zhang et al., 1985;He and Liu, 1993). In addition, Ueno and Tsutsumi (2009) reportWuchiapingian–Changhsingian sea mount carbonates (ShifodongFormation) in the suture zone. Supra-subduction zone ophiolites,dated at ca. 270–264 Ma, are interpreted to reflect subduction ofthe main Paleo-Tethys ocean in the Permian (Jian et al., 2009).Other ophiolites (Fang et al., 1994) that appear to represent initialocean floor spreading are dated at 386 Ma (Early-Middle Devonianboundary).

3.1.3. Chiang Mai–Inthanon Suture ZoneThe Chiang Mai–Inthanon Suture in northern Thailand (Figs. 2, 3

and 9) represents the main Palaeo-Tethys ocean and correspondsbroadly to the Inthanon Zone of Ueno and Hisada (1999) and Ueno(2003) and to the Chiang Mai Suture of Metcalfe (2005) and Wakitaand Metcalfe (2005). The suture zone includes disrupted OPSincluding MORB basalts, pelagic radiolarian cherts and limestones,pelagic mudstones and turbidites. Pelagic cherts range in age fromMiddle Devonian to Middle Triassic (Caridroit, 1993; Caridroitet al., 1993; Sashida et al., 2000; Feng et al., 2002; Sashida andSalyapongse, 2002; Wonganan and Caridroit, 2005, 2007; Wongananet al., 2007; Ueno and Charoentitirat, 2011; Hara et al., 2010; see

Fig. 18. Ages of cherts, carbonates, ophiolites, melange and basalts that constrain the age-duration of: A. Eastern Palaeo-Tethys suture zones, and; B. Meso- and Ceno-Tethyssuture zones. Compiled from multiple sources discussed in the text. �Changhsingian sea mount limestones, and hemipelagic Triassic sediments may represent elements ofMeso-Tethys incorporated along the Indus-Yalung-Tsangbo suture by strike-slip tectonics.


Fig. 18A). In addition, conodont faunas of Upper Devonian andLower Carboniferous age are reported from oceanic cherts (Randonet al., 2006) and Upper Devonian conodont faunas from pelagiclimestones (Königshof et al., 2012). The suture zone also includesaccreted sea mounts, including the Doi Chiang Dao sea mount with1100 m thick late Mississippian to Lopingian shallow-marinefusulinoidean carbonates sitting on ocean island basalts (Uenoet al., 2003, 2008, 2010; Ueno and Charoentitirat, 2011), an almostexact correlative of sea mounts found in the Changning–MenglianPalaeo-Tethyan suture zone to the north. The Inthanon zone inThailand, as originally mapped, includes in its western part afold-thrust belt with alternating thrust slices of Sibumasu base-ment and suture accretionary complex zone rocks thrust west-wards over Sibumasu.

3.1.4. Chanthaburi Suture Zone (Klaeng Tectonic Line)This is a largely cryptic suture but despite this, Late Devonian,

Late Permian and Middle Triassic radiolarian cherts are known(Sone and Metcalfe, 2008; Sone et al., 2012). This highly disruptedand largely hidden suture is interpreted as representing the main

Palaeo-Tethys along the western margin of the ChanthaburiTerrane segment of the Sukhathai Arc (Sone et al., 2012).

3.1.5. Bentong–Raub Suture ZoneThe Bentong–Raub Suture Zone of the Malay Peninsula repre-

sents the main Palaeo-Tethys ocean basin and forms the boundarybetween the Sibumasu terrane in the west and the Sukhothai Arcin the east (Figs. 2, 3 and 9) and was discussed in detail by Metcalfe(2000). The suture includes oceanic radiolarian cherts ranging inage from Devonian to Upper Permian (Figs. 15 and 17A), melangeswith clasts of ribbon-bedded chert, limestone, sandstone,conglomerate, blocks of turbiditic rhythmites, volcanic and volca-niclastic rocks ranging in size from a few millimetres to severalmetres and exceptionally, up to several hundred metres, and ser-pentinite bodies up to 20 km in length interpreted as representingmafic–ultramafic igneous rocks and oceanic peridotites (Metcalfe,2000). Chert and limestone clasts in melange are dated by radiola-rians, conodonts and foraminifera as Carboniferous and Permian(Metcalfe, 2000). Triassic hemipelagic cherts, turbidites and con-glomerates of the Semanggol ‘‘Formation’’ have been interpretedas forming in a successor or foredeep basin developed on top of


the accretionary complex (Metcalfe, 2000) or in submarine grabensalongside coeval carbonates deposited on horts following collissionof Sibumasu and east Malaya in the Late Permian–Early Triassic(Barber and Crow, 2009). Sedimentary rocks included in theSemanggol ‘‘Formation’’ include bedded pelagic cherts and mud-stones, hemipelagic cherts and tuffaceous mudstones, turbiditicsandstone–mudstone rhythmites, and conglomerates. The tradi-tional interpretation of the Semanggol ‘‘Formation’’ (Alexanderet al., 1959; Lee et al., 2004) is that it comprises three members,from base to top: Chert Member (Lower Permian to Middle Trias-sic); Rhythmite Member (Middle to upper Triassic); and Conglom-erate Member (Middle to Upper Triassic). It would appear howeverthat rocks previously assigned to the Semanggol ‘‘Formation’’ donot represent a coherent layer-cake mappable stratigraphic unitand the status of Semanggol ‘‘Formation’’ needs re-assessment.Semanggol cherts dated as Permian (Spiller and Metcalfe, 1995;Jasin, 2008) exhibit isoclinal folding and thrusting, whereas TriassicSemanggol cherts do not exhibit these features and are in generalless deformed than Palaeozoic cherts of the suture zone. LatestPermian and Lower Triassic cherts have also not been reported todate and appear to be absent (see Nuraiteng Tee Abdullah, 2009for a more detailed discussion). There are also no melanges associ-ated with the Triassic cherts of the Semanggol. In addition, AzharHaji Hussin (1993) reinterpreted the stratigraphy at GunongSemanggol, the type locality for the Semanggol Formation in thesouthern part of its outcrop area, and recognised a ‘‘pre-Semanggol’’unit of c. 80 m thickness comprising predominantly orthoconglom-erates comprising almost entirely of radiolarian chert clasts (authorsown observation in the field at Bukit Semanggol) overlain uncon-formably by more typical Semanggol ‘‘Formation’’ rock sequencewith a basal conglomerate passing upwards into an Upper Triassicturbidite-shale sequence (dated by ammonoids and bivalves).A major tectonic event is thus implied, which disrupted the deposi-tion of an older chert sequence, preceding the deposition of the‘‘pre-Semanggol’’ unit at Gunong Semanggol. An early to MiddleTriassic age for this tectonic event is implied but not precisely con-strained. A slightly earlier (Early Triassic) closure of Palaeo-Tethysin the Malay Peninsula compared to a Late Triassic closure inThailand is indicated.

3.1.6. Songpan–Ganzi Suture ‘‘Knot’’The Songpan–Ganzi suture knot comprises a huge Triassic fold

and thrust belt between North China–Ala Shan–Qilian–QaidamBlocks to the north, Tibetan blocks and India to the southwest,and South China to the southeast (Nie et al., 1994). This zonewas formed by shortening of a remnant segment of the Palaeo-Tethys ocean and was filled with a thick (5–15 km) sequence ofturbiditic ‘‘flysch’’ sediments deposited as large submarine fandeltas on oceanic crust and thinned continental crust (Rogeret al., 2008). The Triassic sediments are interpreted, based on detri-tal zircon U/Pb and white mica 40Ar/39Ar provenance studies, to bederived from surrounding regions of high relief, primarily from theKunlun–Qinling–Dabie orogenic zone, South China and the YidunArc (Enkelmann et al., 2007).

3.1.7. Song Ma Suture ZoneThe nature and age of the Song Ma suture zone, generally re-

garded as representing a branch of the Palaeo-Tethys and formingthe boundary between the Indochina and South China Blocks, re-mains controversial. The timing of collision between Indochinaand South China along the Song Ma suture zone has been variablyproposed as Devonian (Janvier et al., 1996; Thanh et al., 1996),Carboniferous (Tri, 1979; Metcalfe, 1999), Late Permian–EarlyTriassic (Lepvrier et al., 1997), Early Triassic (Carter et al., 2001;Lepvrier et al., 2004, 2008) and Middle Triassic (Zhang et al., inpress-b,c). Serpentinite bodies distributed along the Song Ma

suture zone are interpreted as representing original peridotite(lherzolitic harzburgite), with chromian spinel of YCr = 0.43–44comparable to Tethyan lherzolitic ophiolites (Trung et al., 2006).Sm/Nd isochron dating of titanites from these serpentinites(387–313 Ma) indicate Middle Devonian–Carboniferous crystaliza-tion ages (Nguyen Van Vuonga et al., in press). Eclogites and gran-ulites are recorded from the suture zone (Osanai et al., 2008;Nakano et al., 2010; Chen et al., 2012; Zhang et al., in press-b,c).These eclogites are variably interpreted as subduction-related(Nakano et al., 2010; Zhang et al., in press-b,c), or related to plumeactivity that produced rifting in the Permian and the Emeishan ba-salt LIP (Chen et al., 2012). Proposals for northwards directedPermian–Triassic subduction along the Song Ma suture now appearconvincing (Zhang et al., in press-b,c) and Middle Permian–EarlyTriassic granitoids along the Trung Song belt are said to record sub-duction (Liu et al., 2012). Metamorphic ages along the Song Mazone are generally Permian–Triassic. Pelitic gneiss associated withgranulites along the suture have provided an early Late TriassicU–Th–Pb age of 233 ± 5 Ma and the associated granulites havebeen interpreted as having formed in a crustal subduction environ-ment (Nakano et al., 2008). 40Ar–39Ar dating of biotite and musco-vite along the Trung Song belt yield Early to early Middle Triassicages of 250–240 Ma (Maluski et al., 2005) indicating an EarlyTriassic thermo-tectonic event. Zhang et al. (in press-b,c) report aU–Pb SHRIMP zircon age of 230 ± 8.2 Ma (early Late Triassic) forthe Song Ma eclogites and interpret this age to represent the clo-sure age of the Palaeo-Tethys along the Song Ma suture. It seemshowever unlikely that this event represents the final collisionevent and closure of a long-lived Palaeo-Tethys in view of evidenceof rifting in Vietnam and South China in the Permo-Triassic (Chenet al., 2012). Carter et al. (2001) and Carter and Clift (2008) suggestthat there is little evidence to support Indosinian Triassic collisionand mountain building in Indochina–South China and that theEarly Triassic thermochronology event relates to the accretion ofSibumasu to Indochina. A Late Palaeozoic amalgamation of Indo-china and South China is here favoured, followed by developmentof a narrow ocean basin during Permian plume-driven rifting (con-current with the Emeishan Large Igneous Province) which thenclosed in the Middle-early Late Triassic. A land bridge connectionbetween Indochina and South China is required in the Late Permianas indicated by the presence of the tetrapod Dicynodon in Laos(Battail, 2009). Further work is required on this interesting com-plex suture zone to resolve conflicting models for its evolution.

3.1.8. Dian Qiong SutureThe presence of deep-marine Devonian–Permian radiolarian

cherts in the Bancheng and Yulin areas, southern Guangxi, SouthChina (Wu et al., 1994a,b) along the southern border of the Nan-panjian Basin in South China was interpreted as a failed rift systemdeveloped during the rifting of South China from Gondwana byZhao et al. (1996a,b) and Metcalfe (1998). The subsequent discov-ery of associated mid-ocean ridge basalts and identification of acentral Hainan late Palaeozoic suture zone (Zhou et al., 1999) ledZhang et al. (2006), Zhang and Cai (2009) and Cai and Zhang(2009) to propose the Dian–Qiong suture in South China extendingto Hainan Island (Figs. 2, 3 and 9). There now seems little doubtthat this suture represents a segment of the Palaeo-Tethys oceanand it was likely originally contiguous with the Song Ma suturezone, now disrupted by Cenozoic strike-slip telescoping. A Triassicage for this suture suggests that South China and Indochina musthave been separated by an intervening ocean basin in the Perm-ian–Triassic. This seems to be at variance with biogeographicaldata and other evidence for an earlier suturing between Indochinaand South China along the Song Ma suture zone (see Section 3.1.7)and evidence of Permian–Triassic plume-related rifting in theregion.


3.1.9. Jinshajiang–Ailaoshan Suture zoneThe Ailaoshan and Jinshajiang suture zones are interpreted as

being contiguous and have been interpreted as a back-arc basinbranch of the Palaeo-Tethys ocean between the Simao Block andSouth China (Wang et al., 2000) or an Atlantic type Palaeo-Tethyanocean basin (Jian et al., 2009), see Fig. 8. Ophiolitic assemblages ofthe suture include meta-peridotite, gabbro, diabase and basaltcapped by radiolarian-bearing siliceous rocks. NMORB type ophio-lites in the Ailaoshan suture have been dated as Middle-Late Devo-nian (c. 387–374 Ma), and EMORB type ophiolites dated as LowerCarboniferous (c. 346–341 Ma) by Jian et al. (2009). Plagiogranite(Shuanggou ophiolite) has been dated as latest Devonian (c.362 Ma) by Jian et al. (1998a,b) and the radiolarian siliceous rocksare Lower Carboniferous in age (Wang et al., 2000; Yumul et al.,2008). Olistostromes in the suture comprise fragments of ophioliticrocks, graywacke, schist, chert and exotic limestone blocks set in aturbidite matrix. Clasts in the olistostrome range in age fromSilurian to early Permian. Collision related Triassic volcanic rocksalong the suture zone have recently been dated by Zi et al.(2012). SHRIMP U–Pb analyses on zircons give ages of 247–246 Ma for rhyolites of the Pantiange Formation, and ca. 245 Mato 237 Ma for basaltic and intermediate-felsic volcanics from theoverlying Cuiyibi Formation. The Ailaoshan and Jinshajiang oceanbasin is thus interpreted to have opened in the Late Devonian–Early Carboniferous and to have closed in the Early Triassic.

3.1.10. Median Sumatra Tectonic ZoneThe Median Sumatra Tectonic Zone (Barber et al., 2005; Barber

and Crow, 2009) is a major fault zone running NW–SE throughSumatra (Figs. 2 and 3). The zone forms the boundary betweenthe Cathaysian West Sumatra Block to the SW and the GondwananSibumasu Terrane to the NE. The zone comprises highly deformedrocks including lenses of massive marble, phlogopite, graphiticmarble, scapolite–calc-silicate schist, garnetiferous augen gneiss,slate, phyllite, biotite–garnet–sillimanite schist, biotite–andalusitehornfels with cordierite, and chiastolite, quartzite, quartz–feldsparaugen gneiss, migmatite, mylonite, and cataclasite, the latter withhorizontal slickensides (Barber and Crow, 2009). The zone does notcontain any ophiolitic components or remnants of rocks thatwould represent a former ocean basin and therefore as such doesnot represent a true suture. It is interpreted as a major crustalshear zone or transcurrent fault along which the West Sumatraand West Burma Blocks were translation westwards from Indo-china/South China and emplaced outboard of the GondwananSibumasu terrane.

3.2. Sukhothai Back-Arc Suture Zones

3.2.1. Jinghong SutureThe Jinghong Suture (Fig. 18A) includes melange, serpentinites

tholeiitic basalts and cherts (Sone and Metcalfe, 2008). Deep-mar-ine radiolarian cherts are of late Early, Middle and Late Permianage (Feng and Liu, 1993; Feng and Ye, 1996). The suture is equiva-lent to what has been previously referred to as the LancangjiangBelt or the southern Lancangjiang Suture by some authors (Liuet al., 1991, 1996; Fang et al., 1994, 1996; A short-lived Permianocean basin is indicated (Hennig et al., 2009) and this is here inter-preted as the northern part of the Sukhothai back arc basin. Thenorthwards continuation of this suture is unclear.

3.2.2. Nan–Uttaradit SutureThis suture zone forms the boundary between the Sukhothai

Arc and Indochina Block in eastern Thailand. The suture includesophiolitc rocks of Permian-Middle Triassic age. The Pha Som Meta-morphic Complex within the suture includes blueschists, beddedcharts and basic/ultrabasic igneous rocks. Actinolite in mafic schist

yields an early Middle Permian K–Ar age of 269 ± 12 Ma providinga minimum metamorphic age (Barr and Macdonald, 1987). MiddleTriassic (Anisian) bedded radiolarian cherts are described from thesuture zone by Saesaengseerung et al. (2008a,b) and suture zonerocks are overlain by Jurassic–Cretaceous continetal sediments.The Nan–Uttaradit suture is now interpreted as representing a seg-ment of the Sukhothai back-arc basin which opened in the Carbon-iferous and closed by the Late Triassic (Ueno and Hisada, 1999;Wang et al., 2000; Metcalfe, 2002a; Sone and Metcalfe, 2008).

3.2.3. Sra Kaeo SutureThe Sra Kaeo Suture is interpreted as a segment of the Sukho-

thai back arc basin in southern Thailand and a southwards exten-sion of the Nan–Uttaradit suture. It forms the boundary betweenthe Chanthaburi terrane (Sukhothai Arc) in the west and the Indo-china Block in the east. Ophiolites in the suture are represented bythe Thung Kabin melange and include bedded cherts, limestones,serpentinites, gabbros, and pillow lavas. Bedded radiolarian chertsassociated with pillow basalts, occurring as clasts in the Thung Ka-bin melange have been dated as Early Permian and late Middle toearly Late Permian by radiolarians and conodonts (Saesaengseerunget al., 2008a,b). In addition, cherts from the ‘‘Chart-Clastic Sequence’’(Hada et al., 1999) have been dated as Middle Triassic (Sashida et al.,1997).

3.3. Meso-Tethys Sutures

3.3.1. Banggong–Nujiang SutureThe Banggong–Nujiang Suture extends for 1700 km from Ban-

gong Lake in the west to east of Nujiang in the east and formsthe boundary between the Tibetan Lhasa and South QiangtangTerranes (Allégre et al., 1984; Girardeau et al., 1984; Deweyet al., 1988). The suture represents the Meso-Tethys Ocean, theremnants of which are preserved sporadically along its length.The suture was initially recognised and proposed following the dis-covery of ophiolites that were associated with Jurassic flysch sed-iments. Ophiolites along the suture zone are dated as LateTriassic–Early Jurassic (Wang et al., 2008). Serpentinite matrixmelange in the Bangong Lake, Dong Tso and Lagkor Tso areas inthe suture contain blocks of peridotite, mafic lavas and dikes, andamphibolite blocks of both arc and MORB affinity (Wang et al.,2008; Shi et al., 2008) and these have Early-Middle Jurassic ages.Wang et al. (2008) propose that the suture zone contains the rem-nants of a short-lived Middle Jurassic back-arc basin. Deep-marinepelagic cherts in the suture zone range in age from at least earlyMiddle Jurassic until well into the Early Cretaceous (Danelianand Robertson, 1997; Baxter et al., 2009). The youngest magmaticage from the suture zone is from ophiolitic gabbro, which producedan early Early Cretaceous U–Pb single zircon age of 128 Ma (Chenet al., 2006). The suture is blanketed by Late Cretaceous–Palaeo-gene rocks and Middle to Late Cretaceous shortening indicates aLate Cretaceous suturing age (Kapp et al., 2003, 2007).

3.3.2. Lok Ulo and Meratus SuturesThese suture zones represent the Meso-Tethys/Ceno-Tethys

ocean(s) and forms the boundary between the East Java–WestSulawesi Terrane and SW Borneo. Suture zone rocks include pillowbasalt, limestone, chert, siliceous shale, sandstone and shale thatoccur as disrupted tectonic blocks or in some cases coherent OceanPlate Stratigraphy or as clasts in melange. The youngest clasts inmelange are Early Cretaceous in age. Bedded radiolarian chertsrange in age from early Middle Jurassic to late Early Cretaceousin the Meratus Suture, and from Early Cretaceous to latest LateCretaceous in the Lok Ulo Suture (Wakita, 2000; see Fig. 18B).Some pillow basalts and associated limestones are interpreted asaccreted sea mounts.


3.4. Ceno-Tethys Suture

3.4.1. Indus–Yarlung–Tsangpo SutureThis suture forms the boundary between the Indian continent

and the Lhasa Block in Tibet and represents remnants of bothMeso-Tethys and (mainly) Ceno-Tethys. Hébert et al. (2012) re-view data on ophiolites within the Indus–Yarlung–Tsangpo suturezone and review geochronological and geochemical data for thevarious ophiolites. Most of the ophiolites are interpreted as intra-oceanic supra-subduction zone generated and five northwards di-rected subduction zones are proposed within the Ceno-Tethysprior to the arrival of India. Northwards Andean type subductionbeneath the Lhasa Block is proposed in the Early Cretaceous. Theearliest radiolarian assemblages from chert sequences within theIndus–Yarlung–Zangbo suture (IYZSZ) are of late Middle to earlyLate Triassic (Ladinian–Carnian) age which are interpreted as rep-resenting a rifting marginal basin (Zhu et al., 2005). Baxter et al.(2011) describe Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian – lower Tithonian)radiolarians from cherts within melange that forms part of theNaga Ophiolite, NE India. This ophiolite suite is regarded as an east-wards extension of the Indus–Yarlung–Tsangpo suture zone.Aitchison et al. (2011) indicate that deep sea sediments in generalrange from Early Jurassic to late Early Cretaceous and detrital zir-con data indicate that subduction northwards beneath the Lhasaterrane continued until at least Middle and possibly Late Eocene.The Xigaze forearc is interpreted to have been translated to itspresent position from c. 500 km to the east by oblique subduction.These authors also continue the proposition of an intra Ceno-Tethyan oceanic arc that collided with India c. 60–55 Ma with finalcollision of this Arc (amalgamated to India) with Eurasia atc.35 Ma. Ophiolite bodies range in age from late Early Jurassic tomiddle Late Cretaceous. The suture zone includes what has beeninterpreted as intra-oceanic arcs, ophiolites and accretionary com-plexes formed within the Ceno-Tethys (Aitchison et al., 2011).Incorporation of some Meso-Tethyan ocean remnants within thewestern part of the suture zone is indicated by the presence of LatePermian Changhsingian seamount limestones in the suture northof Burang (Wang et al., 2010).

Fig. 19. Schematic diagram showing times of separation and subsequent collision oftranslated northwards by the opening and closing of three successive oceans, the Palaeo

4. Dispersion and accretion of terranes/blocks andpalaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethyan ocean basins

The mid-Palaeozoic to Cenozoic evolution of Gondwana derivedcontinental terranes and blocks now located in E and SE Asia in-volved three phases of rifting and separation and northwardstranslation of continental slivers or collages of blocks and theirsubsequent amalgamation, together with intra-oceanic and conti-nental margin arcs, to form present day Asia. During this process,three Tethyan ocean basins opened behind separating terranes/blocks and subsequently closed. These are the Palaeo-Tethys(Devonian–Triassic), Meso-Tethys (late Early Permian-Cretaceous)and Ceno-Tethys (Late Triassic–Cretaceous), see Fig. 19.

4.1. Rifting and separation of terranes/blocks from Gondwana

The age of rifting and separation of terranes/blocks fromGondwana is constrained by some or all of the following: Oceanfloor ages and magnetic stripe data; divergence of Apparent PolarWander Paths (APWPs) indicating separation; divergence of palae-olatitudes (indicates separation); age of associated rift volcanismand intrusives; regional unconformities (formed during pre-rift up-lift and during block faulting); major block-faulting episodes andslumping; palaeobiogeography (development of separate biogeo-graphic provinces after separation); stratigraphy – rift sequencesin grabens/half grabens (Metcalfe, 1998).

4.1.1. Devonian rifting and separationInformation on ages of suture zone rocks in the Palaeo-Tethys

suture zones (Fig. 18) indicates that the Palaeo-Tethys opened inthe Middle Devonian following a period of Early Devonian rifting.Continental blocks that are here interpreted to have separated atthis time are North China, South China, Tarim and Indochina. Thesecontinental blocks all have Gondwanan Sino-Australian provincefaunas in the Early Palaeozoic (Figs. 5 and 20) and were locatedon the NE margin of Gondwana adjacent to Australia forming a‘‘Greater Gondwana’’ (Fig. 20). The limited palaeomagnetic datasupports the Ordovician–Silurian reconstructions presented in

the three continental slivers/collages of terranes that rifted from Gondwana and-Tethys, Meso-Tethys and Ceno-Tethys. After Metcalfe (2011b).

Fig. 20. Palaeogeographic reconstructions for (A) Early Ordovician and (B) Late Silurian showing the postulated positions of Asian continental blocks on the Himalayan–Australian margin of Gondwana and Sino-Australian province faunas linking the Asian blocks with Australia. I = Indochina/East Malaya/West Sumatra/West Burma;SQ = South Qiangtang; L = Lhasa; S = Sibumasu. After Metcalfe (2011b).


Fig. 20 (see above discussions of individual blocks and Metcalfe,2001, 2006, 2011a,b for details). Early Palaeozoic faunas define aSino-Australian province characterising NE Gondwana. By Carbon-iferous times, North China, South China, Tarim and Indochina exhi-bit warm-climate equatorial Cathaysian faunas and floras andthere are no Gondwanan elements present (Fig. 5). A clockwiserotation of these blocks away from Gondwana is consistent withpalaeomagnetic data that indicates a counter-clockwise rotationof Gondwana about a pole in Australia in the Devonian (Chenet al., 1993), Fig. 21.

4.1.2. Early Permian rifting and separationThe presence of Gondwana faunas and floras up until the Early

Permian (Sakmarian), together with the presence of Carboniferous-Early Permian glacial-marine diamictites (Fig. 22C) dictate that theSouth Qiangtang Block, Sibumasu Terrane (including Baoshan andTengchong Blocks) and the Lhasa Block were all located on theHimalaya–Australian margin of Gondwana up until the early EarlyPermian (Metcalfe, 1988, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2011a,b; Zhang et al.,in press-a). Early Permian floral distributions show clear provin-cialism and development of a distinct Cathaysian floral provinceon the intra-Tethyan North China, South China and Indochina con-tinental blocks (Fig. 22A and B). Detrital zircon studies also indicatethat these terranes have Gondwanan provenance signatures(Smyth et al., 2007; Sevastjanova et al., 2011; Hall and Sevastjanova,

2012), see Fig. 11. During the Permian, faunas and floras of theSibumasu Terrane and South Qiangtang Block (eastern Cimmeriancontinent) change from cool-climate peri-Gondwanan Indoralianprovince faunas in the Early Permian to endemic Sibumasuprovince faunas in the late Early Permian–early Middle Permian, towarm-climate equatorial Cathaysian province faunas in the LatePermian (Fig. 22) consequent upon the northwards translation ofthese blocks (Shi and Archbold, 1998; Fig. 22D–F). Palaeomagneticdata also indicates separation and northwards translation of SouthQiangtang and Sibumasu in the late Early Permian (Figs. 6 and 14).

4.1.3. Late Triassic–Late Jurassic rifting and separationEvidence of rifting, basin formation, development of unconfo-

rmities, and sediment source and palaeocurrent data on the NWAustralian margin and in Timor, coupled with offshore ocean floormagnetic anomaly data (Colwell et al., 1994), suggest that a pieceor pieces of continental crust rifted and separated from AustralianGondwana in the Late Triassic–Late Jurassic. The continental blockthat separated from the Argo abyssal plain region in the Jurassicwas named ‘‘Argo Land’’ (subsequently ‘‘Argoland’’) by Veeverset al. (1991) but not specifically identified. Metcalfe (1990, 1996)identified Argoland as possibly being the West Burma Block, butrecognised that little concrete evidence existed to confirm this.The report of Permian Cathaysian faunas from West Burma (Ooet al., 2002) has now ruled out this block as being Argoland. A

Fig. 21. Reconstructions of eastern Gondwana at (A) Devonian–Carboniferous boundary and (B) Early Carboniferous (Visean) times showing the postulated positions of theEast and Southeast Asian terranes. Also shown is the distribution of the endemic Tournaisian brachiopod genus Chuiella and the biogeographic distributions of the conodontgenera Mestognathus (Illustrated specimen is Mestognathus beckmanni from the Kanthan Limestone, Peninsular Malaysia) and Montognathus (Montognathus carinatus fromPeninsular Malaysia illustrated). NC = North China; SC = South China; T = Tarim; I = Indochina/East Malaya/West Sumatra/West Burma; SQ = South Qiangtang; NQ–QS = NorthQiangtang–Qamdo–Simao; L = Lhasa; S = Sibumasu; and WC = Western Cimmerian Continent. After Metcalfe (2011b).


recently identified continental terrane, the East Java–West Sulaw-esi Terrane, with Australian basement (Hall et al., 2009; Hall, 2012)now seems the most likely contender for Argoland. Hall et al.(2008, 2009) and Hall (2009a,b,2012) have identified ‘Argo’ and‘Banda’ blocks that separated from the Argo abyssal plain andBanda embayment, NW Australia respectively in the Jurassic. Theyidentify the Argo block as the East Java–West Sulawesi terrane andthe Banda block as SW Borneo (Fig. 3). Deconstruction of the Cat-haysian Carboniferous–Permian Terbat Limestones from core SWBorneo and occurrence of probable NW Australian-deriveddiamonds (see Section 2.1.18) now supports SW Borneo to be acandidate for the ‘Banda’ block.

5. Tectonic and palaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethyanbasins

The overall evolution of eastern Tethyan basins involves theopening and closure of three successive ocean basins, the Palaeo-Tethys, Meso-Tethys and Ceno-Tethys with the concurrent rifting,separation and northwards movement of three continental stripsor collages of continental blocks from NE Gondwana (Fig. 19).The northwards migration of terranes/blocks from Gondwanaand constraints on palaeo-positions of terranes is provided by

palaeomagnetism (palaeolatitude, orientation); palaeobiogeogra-phy (shifting from one biogeographic province to another due todrift); and palaeoclimatology (indicates palaeolatitudinal zone).The ages of suturing (Amalgamation/Accretion) of continentaland arc terranes/blocks are constrained by: Ages of ophiolite; mel-ange ages (pre-suturing); age of ‘stitching’ plutons (post suturing);age of collisional or post-collisional plutons (syn to post suturing);age of volcanic arc (pre-suturing); major changes in arc chemistry(syn-collisional); convergence of Apparent Polar Wander Paths(APWPs); loops or disruptions in APWPs (indicates rapid rotationsduring collisions); convergence of palaeolatitudes (may indicatesuturing but no control on longitudinal separation); age of blanket-ing strata (post suturing); Palaeobiogeography (migration of conti-nental animals/plants from one terrane to another indicatesterranes have sutured); stratigraphy/sedimentology (e.g. prove-nence of sedimentary detritus from one terrane onto another);and structural geology (age of deformation associated with colli-sion). See Metcalfe (1998) for details.

5.1. Evolution and palaeogeography of the Palaeo-Tethys

Rifting on the NE margin of Gondwna in the early Devonian ledto the separation of North China, Tarim, South China and Indochina

Fig. 22. Distribution of Early Permian floral provinces in extant east Asia (A) and on an Early Permian palaeogeographic reconstruction (B); Distribution of Early Permianglacial-marine diamictites (glacial dropstone shown in inset) and western Australian-derived diamonds in SE Asia (C); and palaeogeographic reconstructions (D, E, F) showingthe changing biotic provinces on the Sibumasu Terrane as it moved northwards from high southern to equatorial latitudes during the Permian (Shi and Archbold, 1998). AfterMetcalfe (2002, 2011a,b). WB = West Burma; SWB = South West Borneo; S = Semitau; L = Lhasa; SQT = South Qiangtang; NQ = North Qiangtang; SI = Simao; SG = SongpanGanzi accretionary complex; QD = Qaidam; AL = Ala Shan; KT = Kurosegawa Terrane; NC = North China; SC = South China; T = Tarim; I = Indochina/East Malaya/WestSumatra/West Burma; SQ = South Qiangtang; NQ–QS = North Qiangtang–Qamdo–Simao; S = Sibumasu; and WC = Western Cimmerian Continent.


in the early Middle Devonian. The earliest true pelagic sedimentsin the Palao-Tethys are Middle Devonian (Fig. 18) constraining

the opening age of oceanic Palaeo-Tethys. Middle Devonian faunason the separating Asian terranes still have some Australian

Fig. 23. Palaeogeographic reconstructions of the Tethyan region for (A) Early Early Permian (Asselian–Sakmarian), (B) Late Early Permian (Kungurian) and (C) Late Permian(Changhsingian) showing relative positions of the East and Southeast Asian terranes and distribution of land and sea. Also shown is the Late Early Permian distribution ofbiogeographically important conodonts, and Late Permian tetrapod vertebrate Dicynodon localities on Indochina and Pangea in the Late Permian. SC = South China; T = Tarim;I = Indochina; EM = East Malaya; WS = West Sumatra; NC = North China; SI = Simao; S = Sibumasu; WB = West Burma; SQ = South Qiangtang; NQ–QS = North Qiangtang–Qamdao–Simao; L = Lhasa; SWB = South West Borneo; and WC = Western Cimmerian Continent. After Metcalfe (2011b).


connections (Fig. 5). By Devonian–Carboniferous boundary times(359 Ma) the Palaeo-Tethys was already a substantial ocean be-tween separating terranes and Gondwana, but there was probablystill a continental connection between separating blocks andGondwana in the east. Endemic faunas of South China, includingsome fish faunas (Young and Janvier, 1999) and the distinctiveChuiella brachiopod fauna (Fig. 21), are interpreted to be a resultof the rifting process and isolation of South China on the riftingcontinental promontory, and do not necessarily imply continentalseparation of South China from the other Asian blocks and Austra-lia at this time. By Carboniferous times, North China, South China,Tarim and Indochina were located in equatorial to low northern

palaeolatitudes (Li et al., 2004). South China and Indochina/EastMalaya amalgamated within the Palaeo-Tethys. Carboniferous–Permian faunas and floras on these blocks are all warm-climateequatorial Cathaysian types and do not include any Gondwananelements. By the early Early Permian, the Palaeo-Tethys was a sub-stantial ocean (Fig. 23). The Sibumasu Terrane, South Qiangtang,Lhasa, East Java–West Sulawesi and SW Borneo Blocks were stillpart of the Himalayan–Australian margin of Gondwana andicebergs derived from the major Gondwanan ice sheets dumpedglacial-marine sediments on Sibumasu, South Qiangtang and Lhasain rift grabens (Figs. 12, 13, 22 and 23). Destruction of the mainPalaeo-Tethys ocean basin by subduction northwards beneath

Fig. 24. Palaeogeographic reconstruction of the Tethyan region for the Late Triassic (Rhaetian) showing relative positions of the East and Southeast Asian terranes anddistribution of land and sea. NC = North China; SG = Songpan Ganzi; SC = South China; WC = Western Cimmerian Continent; SQ = South Qiangtang Block; I = Indochina Block;S = Sibumasu terrane; EM = East Malaya Block; WS = West Sumatra Block; WB = West Burma Block; L = Lhasa Block; EJ–WS = East Java–West Sulawesi terrane; SWB = SouthWest Borneo. After Metcalfe (2011b).

Fig. 25. The three main granite provinces of SE Asia (A) and granite plutons of the Malay Peninsula (B), compiled from Cobbing et al. (1986) and Searle et al. (2012). Agesshown are all U–Pb zircon ages (Ages in B from Searle et al., 2012; Ages for the Malay Peninsular 1Liew and Page 1985; 2Liew and McCulloch, 1985; 3 Hotson et al., 2011 andOliver et al. 2011; 4Searle et al., 2012).


South China–Indochina began in the Early Permian and the Sukho-thai Arc was constructed on the margin of Indochina. Continuedsubduction of Palaeo-Tethys beneath Indochina and subductionroll-back led to the opening of an oceanic back arc basin and sep-aration of the Sukhothai Arc during the Permian (Figs. 15 and 23).

The Sukhothai back-arc ocean was narrow and short lived (EarlyPermian–early Middle Triassic) as indicated by the restricted rangeof pelagic cherts in the back-arc suture zones (Fig. 18). The lateEarly Permian saw a second major phase of rifting on the NWmargin of Gondwana (Fig. 23b) and the Cimmerian continental


strip, including the South Qiangtang Block and Sibumasu Terraneseparated from Gondwana opening the Meso-Tethys behind it(Fig. 23c). The South and North China blocks were in close proxim-ity during the Permian. The timing of their collision and welding isan ongoing controversy with Permian (e.g. Faure et al., 2009; Li andLi, 2007) and Triassic (e.g. Dong et al., 2012) timings being pro-posed. Studies of low-grade metamorphics in the Sulu belt (Zhou

Fig. 26. Palaeogeographic reconstructions for Eastern Tethys in (A) Late Jurassic, (B) Eacontinental blocks and fragments of Southeast Asia – Australasia and land and sea. AfterQS = North Qiangtang-Qamdo –Simao; SI = Simao; SQ = South Qiangtang; S = Sibumasu; ISWB = Southwest Borneo; SE = Semitau; NP = North Palawan and other small contiM = Mangkalihat; WS = West Sulawesi; PB = Philippine Basement; PA = Incipient East PhMB = Macclesfield Bank; PI = Paracel Islands; Da = Dangerous Ground; Lu = Luconia; Sm

et al. 2008) and geochronological and structural data (e.g. Faureet al., 2003, 2009) indicate Carboniferous–Permian subduction ofSouth China beneath North China. Identification of a Devonian–Tri-assic accretionary wedge that includes eclogites, and which formeda coeval volcano-plutonic arc that stretches from the LongmenShan to Korea supports subduction beneath the Qinling–Sino-Kor-ean plate and a Permian–Triassic collision (Hacker et al., 2004).

rly Cretaceous, (C) Late Cretaceous and (D) Middle Eocene showing distribution ofMetcalfe (2011b). SG = Songpan Ganzi accretionary complex; SC = South China; NQ–= Indochina; EM = East Malaya; WSu = West Sumatra; L = Lhasa; WB = West Burma;

nental fragments now forming part of the Philippines basement; Si = Sikuleh;ilippine arc; PS = Proto-South China Sea; Z = Zambales Ophiolite; Rb = Reed Bank;

= Sumba. M numbers represent Indian Ocean magnetic anomalies.


Thus, by Late Triassic times, South China–Indochina and North Chi-na had collided along the Qinling–Dabie–Sula suture, the Sukho-thai back-arc basin had collapsed and South Qiangtang–Sibumasuhad collided with Indochina. Strike-slip translation of the WestSumatra and West Burma Blocks from Indochina westwards topositions outboard of Sibumasu must have occurred in the Triassic(Metcalfe, 2011b). These various collisions that began in the LatePermian and culminated in the Late Triassic gave rise to the Indo-sinian Orogeny. This orogeny has long been a matter of debate interms of its timing and different phases have been recognised. Thisis because the orogeny represents multiple collisional events andfar-field thermo-tectonic events during Permo-Triassic times inthe SE Asian region. By latest Triassic times, the Palaeo-Tethyshad been reduced to a remnant suture knot now represented bythe Songpan Ganzi accretionary complex and proto East and SEAsia had formed (Fig. 24). The various Palaeo-Tethys suture zonesare blanketed by widespread Jurassic–Cretaceous continental redbed successions known as the Lufeng Formation in Yunnan, KalawRed Beds in Burma, Grès Superior and Khorat Group in Indochina,and the Saiong Beds, Raub Red Beds and Tembeling Group in theMalay Peninsula. During subduction of the Palaeo-Tethys beneathIndochina, arc-related I-Type granitoids were emplaced (Figs. 15and 25). These are dated by U–Pb zircon methods as ranging fromMiddle Permian to Middle Triassic (Fig. 25; Searle et al., 2012).Following collision of the Sibumasu Terrane with the SukhothaiArc and Indochina/East Malaya in the Middle-early Late Triassic,voluminous S-Type granites (Main Range Granite province) wereemplaced (Figs. 15 and 25). These granites stitched the collidingblocks and also intruded the Bentong–Raub suture zone rocksand accretionary complexes in places largely obliterating theremnants of the Palaeo-Tethys. The Main Range S-Type granitesare dated by U–Pb zircon techniques as Late Triassic–Early Jurassicin age (Searle et al., 2012). The huge volume of these S-Type tin-bearing granites implies a high degree of melting. This may bedue to slab break-off and rising asthenosphere (Fig. 15) or perhapsalternatively to basaltic underplating (Searle et al., 2012).

5.2. Evolution and palaeogeography of the Meso-Tethys

The Meso-Tethys ocean opened in the late Early Permian whenthe Cimmerian continental strip separated from Gondwana. Thistiming coincides, not unexpectedly, with the initiation of destruc-tion of the Palaeo-Tethys northwards by subduction (Figs. 15 and23). Southwards subduction of Meso-Tethys, beneath Himala-yan–Australian Gondwana, began in the Permian and a volcanicarc was constructed on the Lhasa Block (see Section 2.1.10 andFig. 10). Continued southwards subduction then led to the devel-opment of a back-arc basin behind the Lhasa Block and its eventualseparation from Gondwana opened the western Ceno-Tethys oceanin the Late Triassic and then the eastern Ceno-Tethys behind theseparating SW Borneo and East Java–West Sulawesi terrane inthe Late Jurassic (Fig. 26). Northwards subduction of theMeso-Tethys beneath the Cimmerian continent began in the Mid-dle Triassic and produced hornblende- and biotite-bearing I-typegranitoids in the western part of Sibumasu (Figs. 15 and 25) datedrecently by Searle et al. (2012) at Phuket Island, Thailand as LateTriassic (214.4 ± 2.4 Ma by U–Pb SIMS). The Meso-Tethys ocean isnow represented by the Bangong–Nujiang, Meratus and Lok-Ulosuture zones. The earliest OIB and OPS so far discovered in thesesuture zones is latest Triassic and expected Late Permian–TriassicOPS has not so far been reported (see Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2).Closure of the Meso-Tethys occurred in the Late Cretaceous–Paleo-gene. The western segment of the Meso-Tethys (Bangong–Nujiangocean (Fig. 26A) closed in the Late Cretaceous when Lhasa collidedwith Eurasia. Otofuji et al. (2007) present Jurassic and Cretaceouspalaeomagnetic data from the Lhasa Block and propose that it

was located south of the Qiangtang Block with a latitudinal differ-ence of 31 ± 11� in the Middle Jurassic representing a spatial gap ofmore than 1200 km. They propose that this spatial gap can be ex-plained by SE extrusion of the ‘‘Shan–Thai Block’’ (Sibumasu) in aTapponnier et al. (1982) style extrusion model. Otofuji et al.’s(2007) palaeomagnetic data is however consistent with the modelpresented here with a later (Late Triassic–Early Jurassic) rifting andseparation of Lhasa from Gondwana, as opposed to an earlierrifting of Qiangtang in the Permian (as part of the Cimmeriancontinent) and a middle Jurassic placement of Lhasa in equatoriallatitudes still separated from Qiangtang by the remnantBangong–Nujiang Meso–Tethyan ocean.

5.3. Evolution and palaeogeography of the Ceno-Tethys

The Ceno-Tethys ocean opened in two stages, the western Ceno-Tethys opened in the latest Triassic–early Jurassic when the LhasaBlock separated from the eastern Himalaya–Perth Basin Australiaregion of the Gondwana margin (Fig. 26A). The new Ceno-Tethysis interpreted to have been separated from the Meso-Tethys tothe east by a major transform fault. The eastern Ceno-Tethysopened in the Late Jurassic when the SW Borneo (‘‘Banda’’) andEast Java–West Sulawesi (‘‘Argoland’’) blocks separated from Wes-tern Australian Gondwana (Fig. 26A). The western Ceno-Tethysclosed by collision of India and Eurasia, but the timing of this ishotly debated, with an early collision of around 60 Ma being fa-voured by some authors (Yin, 2010), and a much younger Eo-cene–Oligocene collision being proposed by others (Aitchisonet al., 2007) who suggest that the collision at c 60–55 Ma was be-tween India and an intra-oceanic island arc. It is now reasonablywell established that an intra-ocean island arc existed within theCeno-Tethys during the Cretaceous (Aitchison et al., 2000; Khanet al., 1997, 2009). This island arc has been suggested to be theWoyla Arc in the east and has been referred to as the ‘‘Incertus’’arc in the west (Hall, 2011). The ‘‘Incertus’’ arc of Hall (2011) ishere interpreted to be the Kohistan–Ladakh Arc. The Kohistan–La-dakh Arc may have formed as early as c. 135 Ma in the early Creta-ceous (Bosch et al., 2011) or even as early as 150 Ma in the LateJurassic (Bouilhol et al., 2010) and was equatorial in the Late Cre-taceous–early Paleocene (Fig. 26C) based on paleomagnetism(Khan et al., 2009). Arc magmatism ended by 61 Ma by collisionwith India and the arc was then carried forward with India to col-lide with Asia. Recent U–Pb/Hf/Nd zircon isotopic data indicates anabrupt shift from juvenile isotopic signatures in the Jurassic–EarlyPaleocene to evolved crustal like signatures in the Eocene (Bouilholet al., 2011) supporting this contention.

By Middle Eocene times (45 Ma), India (with accreted Kohistan–Ladakh Arc) was probably in initial collision with Eurasia(Fig. 26D), temporally coincident with large-scale regional and glo-bal plate reorganisations at this time (Hall et al., 2009). Timing ofthe ultimate ‘‘hard’’ collision between India and Asia, and hencefinal demise of the western Ceno-Tethys is still equivocal with esti-mates ranging from 60 Ma (Yin, 2010) to 35 Ma (Ali and Aitchison,2007, 2008). The Late Jurassic saw the opening of the easternCeno-Tethys ocean behind the separating East Java–West Sulawesiand SW Borneo Blocks. Meso-Tethys to the north of these blocksclosed in the Late Cretaceous when these blocks collided andsutured to Sundaland (Fig. 26B). Remnants of the easternCeno-Tethys still exist to the northwest of Australia to beultimately destroyed by collision of Australia with SE Asia.

Acknowledgements

I thank Tony Barber, Robert Hall and Masatoshi Sone for valu-able ongoing discussions relating to the tectonic framework andevolution of SE Asia. Robert Hall and Françoise Roger are thanked


for their very thorough reviews that helped to improve the papersignificantly. The School of Environmental and Rural Science, Uni-versity of New England is gratefully thanked for facilities provided.The Australian Research Council is acknowledged for two largegrants during which much of the work reported here wasundertaken.

References

Aitchison, J.C., Badengzhu, Davis, A.M., Liu, J., Luo, H., Malpas, J., McDermid, I.M.C.,Wu, H., Ziabrev, S., Zhou, M.F., 2000. Remnants of a Cretaceous intra-oceanicsubduction system within the Yarlung-Zangbo suture (southern Tibet). Earthand Planetary Science Letters 183, 231–244.

Aitchison, J.C., Ali, J.R., Davis, A.M., 2007. When and where did India and Asiacollide? Journal of Geophysical Research, 112B. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006JB004706.

Aitchison, J.C., Xia, X., Baxter, A.T., Ali, J.R., 2011. Detrital zircon U-Pb ages along theYarlung-Tsangpo suture zone, Tibet: implications for oblique convergence andcollision between India and Asia. Gondwana Research 20, 691–709.

Alexander, J.B., Paton, J.R., Jones, C.R., 1959. Geology and palaeontology in Malaya.Nature 183, 230–232.

Ali, J.R., Aitchison, J.C., 2007. When and where did India and Asia collide? Journal ofGeophysical Research 112 (B05423), 1–19.

Ali, J.R., Aitchison, J.C., 2008. Gondwana to Asia: Plate tectonics, paleogeography andthe biological connectivity of the Indian sub-continent from the Middle Jurassicthrough latest Eocene (166–35 Ma). Earth Science Reviews 88, 145–166.

Allégre, C.J., Courtillot, V., Tapponnier, P., Hirn, A., Mattauer, M., Coulon, C., Jaeger,J.J., Achache, J., Schärer, U., Marcoux, J., Burg, J.P., Girardeau, J., Armijo, R.,Gariepy, C., Göpel, C., Li, T.D., Xiao, X.C., Chang, C.F., Li, G.Q., Lin, B.Y., Teng, J.W.,Wang, N.W., Chen, G.M., Han, T.L., Wang, X.B., Den, W.M., Sheng, H.B., Cao, Y.G.,Zhou, J., Qiu, H.R., Bao, P.S., Wang, S.C., Wang, B.X., Zhou, Y.X., Xu, R.H., 1984.Structure and evolution of the Himalayan-Tibet orogenic belt. Nature 307, 17–22.

Allen, M.B., Windley, B.F., Zhang, C., 1994. Cenozoic tectonics in the Urumqi– Korlaregion of the Chinese Tien Shan. Geologische Rundschau 83, 406–416.

Altamimi, Z., Sillard, P., Boucher, C., 2002. ITRF 2000: a new release of theInternational Reference Frame for earth science applications. Journal ofGeophysical Research 107 (B10), 2214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000561.

Ampaiwan, T., Hisada, K., Charusiri, P., 2009. Lower Permian glacially influenceddeposits in Phuket and adjacent islands, peninsular Thailand. Island Arc 18, 52–68.

Archbold, N.W., Pigram, C.J., Ratman, N., Hakim, S., 1982. Indonesian Permianbrachiopod fauna and Gondwana – South-East Asia relationships. Nature 296,556–558.

Asama, K., 1973. Lower Carboniferous Kuantan Flora, Pahang, West Malaysia.Geology and Palaeontology of Southeast Asia 11, 109–117.

Azhar Haji Hussin, 1993. Re-interpretation of the stratigraphy of the GunongSemanggol area, Perak Darul Ridzuan and its implication. Warta Geologi 19,113–114.

Barber, A.J., Crow, M.J., 2003. An evaluation of plate tectonic models for thedevelopment of Sumatra. Gondwana Research 6, 1–28.

Barber, A.J., Crow, M.J., 2009. The structure of Sumatra and its implications for thetectonic assembly of Southeast Asia and the destruction of Paleotethys. IslandArc 18, 3–20.

Barber, A.J., Crow, M.J., De Smet, M.E.M., 2005. Tectonic evolution. In: Barber, A.J.,Crow, M.J., Milsom, J.S. (Eds.), Sumatra: Geology, Resources and TectonicEvolution. Geolological Society Memoir 31, pp. 234–259.

Barr, S.M., Macdonald, A.S., 1987. Nan River suture zone, northern Thailand. Geology15, 907–910.

Battail, B., 2009. Late Permian dicynodont fauna from Laos. In: Buffetaut, E., Cuny,G., Le Loeuff, J., Suteethorn, V. (Eds.), Late Palaeozoic and Mesozoic Ecosystemsin SE Asia. Special Publications, vol. 315. The Geological Society, London, pp. 33–40.

Baxter, A.T., Aitchison, J.C., Zyabrev, S.V., 2009. Radiolarian age constraints onMesotethyan ocean evolution, and their implications for development of theBangong–Nujiang suture. Tibet. Journal of the Geological Society, London 166,689–694.

Baxter, A.T., Aitchison, J.C., Zyabrev, S.V., Ali, J.R., 2011. Upper Jurassic radiolariansfrom the Naga Ophiolite, Nagaland, northeast India. Gondwana Research 20,638–644.

Bian, Q.-T., Li, D.-H., Pospelov, I., Yin, L.-M., Li, H.S., Zhao, D.-S., Chang, C.-F., Luo, S.-L.,Gao, S.L., Astrakhantsev, O., Chamov, N., 2004. Age, geochemistry and tectonicsetting of Buqingshan ophiolites, North Qinghai–Tibet Plateau, China. Journal ofAsian Earth Sciences 23, 577–596.

Bosch, D., Garrido, C.J., Bruguier, O., Dhuime, B., Bodinier, J.-L., Padròn-Navarta, J.A.,Galland, B., 2011. Building an island-arc crustal section: time constraints from aLA-ICP-MS zircon study. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 309, 268–279.

Bouilhol, P., Schaltegger, U., Chiaradia, M., Ovtcharova, M., Stracke, A., Burg, J.-P.,Dawood, H., 2010. Timing of juvenile arc crust formation and evolution in theSapat Complex (Kohistan–Pakistan). Chemical Geology 280, 243–256.

Bunopas, S., 1982. Palaeogeographic history of Western Thailand and adjacent partsof Southeast Asia–a plate tectonics interpretation. Geological Survey Paper No.5, Department of Mineral Resources, Thailand, 810pp.

Bunopas, S., Marante, S., Vella, P., 1989. Palaeozoic and Early Mesozoic rotation anddrifting of Shan-Thai from Gondwana-Australia. In: 4th InternationalSymposium on Pre-Jurassic Evolution of East Asia, IGCP Project 224, Reportsand Abstracts, 1, pp. 63–64.

Burrett, C., Stait, B., 1985. South-East Asia as part of an Ordovician Gondwanaland.Earth and Planetary Science Letters 75, 184–190.

Burrett, C., Long, J., Stait, B., 1990. Early-Middle Palaeozoic biogeography of Asianterranes derived from Gondwana. In: McKerrow, W.S., Scotese, C.R. (Eds.),Palaeozoic Palaeogeography and Biogeography. Geological Society Memoir No.12, pp. 163–174.

Cai, J.-X., Zhang, K.J., 2009. A new model for the Indochina and South Chinacollision during the Late Permian to the Middle Triassic. Tectonophysics 467,35–43.

Caridroit, M., 1993. Permian Radiolaria from NW Thailand. In: Thanasuthipitak, T.(Ed.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Biostratigraphy ofMainland Southeast Asia: Facies and Paleontology, Chiang Mai University,Chiang Mai, Thailand, pp. 83–96.

Caridroit, M., Bohlke, D., Lumjuan, A., Helmcke, D., DeWever, P., 1993. A mixedradiolarian fauna (Permian/Triassic) from clastics of the Mae Sariang area,northwestern Thailand. In: Thanasuthipitak, T. (Ed.), Proceedings of theInternational Symposium on Biostratigraphy of Mainland Southeast Asia:Facies and Paleontology, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand, pp.401–413.

Carter, A., Clift, P.D., 2008. Was the Indosinian orogeny a Triassic mountain buildingor a thermotectonic reactivation event? Comptes Rendus Geoscience 340, 83–93.

Carter, A., Roques, D., Bristow, C., Kinny, P., 2001. Understanding Mesozoic accretionin Southeast Asia: significance of Triassic thermotectonism (Indosinianorogeny) in Vietnam. Geology 29, 211–214.

Chakraborty, K.R., Metcalfe, I., 1995. Structural evidence for a probablePaleozoic unconformity at Kg. Kuala Abang, Trengganu. Warta Geologi21, 141–146.

Charvet, J., Cluzel, D., Faure, M., Caridroit, M., Shu, L., Lu, H., 1999. Some tectonicaspects of the pre-Jurassic accretionary evolution of East Asia. In: Metcalfe, I.(Ed.), Gondwana Dispersion and Asian Accretion. IGCP 321 Final ResultsVolume. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 37–65.

Chen, Z., Li, Z.X., Powell, C.McA., Balme, B.E., 1993. Palaeomagnetism of the BrewerConglomerate in central Australia, and fast movement of Gondwanaland duringthe Late Devonian. Geophysical Journal International 115, 564–574.

Chen, Y.L., Zhang, K.H., Yang, Z.M., Luo, T., 2006. Discovery of a complete ophiolitesection in the Jueweng area, Nagqu County, in the central segment of theBangong Co–Nujiang junction zone, Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Geological Bulletinof China 25, 694–699.

Chen, W., Yang, T., Zhang, S., Yang, Z., Li, H., Wu, H., Zhang, J., Ma, Y., Cai, F., 2012.Paleomagnetic results from the Early Cretaceous Zenong Group volcanic rocks,Cuoqin, Tibet, and their paleogeographic implications. Gondwana Research 22,461–469.

Cobbing, E.J., Mallick, D.I.J., Pitfield, P.E.J., Teoh, I.H., 1986. The granites of theSoutheast Asian Tin Belt. Journal of the Geological Society of London 143, 537–550.

Cocks, L.R.M., Fortey, R.A., 1997. A new Hirnantia Fauna from Thailand and thebiogeography of the latest Ordovician of south– east Asia. Geobios 20, 117–126.

Colwell, J.B., Stagg, H.M.J., Symonds, P.A., Willcox, J.B., O’brien, G.W., 1994. Deepreflections on the North West Shelf: changing perceptions of basin formation.In: Purcell, P.G., Purcell, R.R. (Eds.), The Sedimentary Basins of WesternAustralia. Petroleum Exploration Society of Australia, Perth, pp. 63–76.

Cummings, R.H., 1962. Limestones of the Terbat Formation, West Sarawak. AnnualReport of the Geological Survey Department, British Territories Borneo 1961,pp. 36–48.

Danelian, T., Robertson, A.H.F., 1997. Radiolarian evidence for the stratigraphy andpalaeo-oceanography of the deep-water passive margin of the Indian Plate(Karamba Formation, Indus Suture Zone, Ladakh Himalaya). MarineMicropaleontology 30, 171–195.

Dewey, J.F., Shackleton, R.M., Chang, C., Sun, Y., 1988. The tectonic evolution of theTibetan Plateau. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London,Series A 327, 379–413.

Dong, Y., Liu, X., Zhang, G., Chen, Q., Zhang, X., Li, W., Yang, C., 2012. Triassic dioritesand granitoids in the Foping area: constraints on the conversion fromsubduction to collision in the Qinling orogen, China. Journal of Asian EarthSciences 47, 123–142.

Enkelmann, E., Weislogel, A., Ratschbacher, L., Eide, E., Renno, A., Wooden, J., 2007.How was the Triassic Songpan-Ganzi basin filled? A provenance study.Tectonics 26, 1–24.

Fang, N., Yang, W., 1991. A study of the oxygen and carbon isotope records fromUpper Carboniferous to Lower Permian in Western Yunnan, China. In: Ren, J.,Xie, G. (Eds.), Proceedings of First International Symposium on GondwanaDispersion and Asian Accretion - Geological Evolution of Eastern Tethys. ChinaUniversity of Geosciences, Beijing, pp. 35–36.

Fang, W., Van Der Voo, R., Liang, Q., 1989. Devonian palaeomagnetism ofYunnan province accross the Shan Thai-South China suture. Tectonics 8,939–952.

Fang, N., Liu, B., Feng, Q., Jia, J., 1994. Late Palaeozoic and Triassic deep-waterdeposits and tectonic evolution of the Palaeotethys in the Changning-Menglianand Lancangjiang belts, southwestern Yunnan. Journal of Southeast Asian EarthSciences 9, 363–374.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006JB004706

http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006JB004706

http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000561


Fang, N., Liu, B., Feng, Q. (Eds.), 1996. Devonian to Triassic Tethys in WesternYunnan, China. China University of Geosciences Press, Beijing.

Faure, M., Lin, W., Scharer, U., Shu, L., Sun, Y., Arnaud, N., 2003. Continentalsubduction and exhumation of UHP rocks. Structural and geochronologicalinsights from the Dabieshan (East China). Lithos 70, 213–241.

Faure, M., Shu, L.S., Wang, B., Charvet, J., Choulet, F., Monié, P., 2009.Intracontinental subduction: a possible mechanism for the Early PalaeozoicOrogen of SE China. Terra Nova. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3121.2009.00888.

Feng, Q., Liu, B., 1993. Permian radiolarians on Southwest Yunnan. Earth Science-Journal of China University of Geosciences 18, 553–564, in Chinese, withEnglish abstract.

Feng, Q., Ye, M., 1996. Radiolarian stratigraphy of Devonian through Middle Triassic insouthwestern Yunnan. In: Long, X. (Ed.), Devonian to Triassic Tethys in WesternYunnan, China. China University of Geosciences Press, Wuhan, pp. 15–22.

Feng, Q., Chonglakmani, C., Helmcke, D., Ingavat-Helmcke, R., Liu, B., 2002. MiddleTriassic radiolarian fauna from Lamphun, northern Thailand. In: Mantajit, N.(Ed.), Proceedings of the Symposium on Geology of Thailand, Department ofMineral Resources, Bangkok, pp. 108–116.

Ferrari, O.M., Hochard, C., Stampfli, G.M., 2008. An alternative plate tectonic modelfor the Palaeozoic-Early Mesozoic Palaeotethyan evolution of Southeast Asia(Northern Thailand-Burma). Tectonophysics 451, 346–365.

Fontaine, H., Gafoer, S. (Eds.), 1989. The Pre-Tertiary Fossils of Sumatra and theirEnvironments. CCOP Technical Papers 19. United Nations, Bangkok.

Fyhn, M.B.W., Pedersen, S.A.S., Boldreel, L.O., Nielsen, L.H., Green, P.F., Dien, P.T.,Huyen, L.T., Frei, D., 2010. Palaeocene–early Eocene inversion of the Phuquoc–Kampot Som Basin: SE Asian deformation associated with the suturing ofLuconia. Journal of the Geological Society, London 167, 281–295.

Geng, Y.S., Du, L.L., Ren, L.D., 2012. Growth and reworking of the early Precambriancontinental crust in the North China Craton: constraints from zircon Hfisotopes. Gondwana Research 21, 517–529.

Girardeau, J., Marcoux, J., Allegre, C.J., et al., 1984. Tectonic environment andgeodynamic significance of the Neo-Cimmerian Donqiao Ophiolite, Bangong–Nujiang suture zone, Tibet. Nature 307, 27–31.

Granath, J.W., Christ, J.M., Emmet, P.A., Dinkelman, M.G., 2011. Pre-Cenozoicsedimentary section and structure as reflected in the JavaSPANTM crustal-scalePSDM seismic survey, and its implications regarding the basement terranes inthe East Java Sea. (in The SE Asian gateway; history and tectonics of theAustralia-Asia collision). Geological Society Special Publications 355, 53–74.

Hacker, B.R., Ratschbacher, L., Liou, J.G., 2004. Subduction, collision and exhumationin the ultrahigh-pressure Qinling–Dabie orogen. In: Malpas, J., Fletcher, C.J.N.,Ali, J.R., Aitchison, J.C. (Eds.), Aspects of the Tectonic Evolution of China. SpecialPublication, 226. Geological Society, London, pp. 157–175.

Hada, S., Bunopas, S., Ishii, K., Yoshikura, S., 1999. Rift-drift history and theamalgamation of Shan-Thai and Indochina/East Malaya blocks. In: Metcalfe, I.(Ed.), Gondwana Dispersion and Asian Accretion. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp.7–87.

Hall, R., 1996. Reconstructing Cenozoic SE Asia. In: Hall, R., Blundell, D. (Eds.),Tectonic Evolution of Southeast Asia, vol. 106. Geological Society SpecialPublications, pp. 153–184.

Hall, R., 2002. Cenozoic geological and plate tectonic evolution of SE Asia and theSW Pacific: computer-based reconstructions, model and animations. Journal ofAsian Earth Sciences 20, 353–431.

Hall, R., 2009a. Southeast Asia’s changing palaeogeography. Blumea 54, 148–161.Hall, R., 2009b. The Eurasia SE Asian Margin as a Modern Example of an

Accretionary Orogen. In: Cawood, P.A., Kroner, A. (Eds.), Earth AccretionarySystems in Space and Time, The Geological Society London, Special Publications318. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 351–372.

Hall, R., 2011. Australia-SE Asia collision; plate tectonics and crustal flow (in The SEAsian gateway; history and tectonics of the Australia-Asia collision). GeologicalSociety Special Publications 355, 75–109.

Hall, R., 2012. Late Jurassic–Cenozoic reconstructions of the Indonesian region andthe Indian Ocean. Tectonophysics 570–571, 1–41.

Hall, R., Sevastjanova, I., 2012. Australian crust in Indonesia. Australian Journal ofEarth Sciences 59, 827–844.

Hall, R., van Hattum, M.C.A., Spakman, W., 2008. Impact of India–Asia collision on SEAsia: the record in Borneo. Tectonophysics 451, 366–389.

Hall, R., Clements, B., Smyth, H.R., 2009. Sundaland: Basement character, structureand plate tectonic development. In: Proceedings, Indonesian PetroleumAssociation Thirty-Third Annual Convention and Exhibition, May 2009, IPA09-G-134, pp. 1–27.

Hanski, E., Walker, R.J., Huhma, H., Polyakov, G.V., Balykin, P., Tran, Trong Hoa., Ngo,Thi Phuong., 2003. Origin of Permian-Triassic komatiites, northwesternVietnam. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 147, 453–469.

Hara, H., Kurihara, T., Kuroda, J., Adachi, Y., Kurita, H., Wakita, K., Hisada, K.,Charusiri, P., Charoentitirat, T., Chaodumrong, P., 2010. Geological andgeochemical aspects of a Devonian siliceous succession in northern Thailand:implications for the opening of the Paleo-Tethys. Palaeogeography,Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 297, 452–464.

He, F.X., Liu, B.P., 1993. Recognition of ancient oceanic island in Paleo-Tethys,western Yunnan. Journal of China University of Geosciences 4, 23–29.

Hébert, R., Bezard, R., Guilmette, C., Dostal, J., Wang, C.S., Liu, Z.F., 2012. The Indus–Yarlung Zangbo ophiolites from Nanga Parbat to Namche Barwa syntaxes,southern Tibet: first synthesis of petrology, geochemistry, and geochronologywith incidences on geodynamic reconstructions of Neo-Tethys. GondwanaResearch 22, 377–397.

Hennig, D., Lehmann, B., Frei, D., Belyatsky, B., Zhao, X.F., Cabral, A.R., Zeng, P.S.,Zhou, M.F., Schmidt, K., 2009. Early Permian seafloor to continental arcmagmatism in the eastern Paleo-Tethys: U-Pb age and Nd–Sr isotope datafrom the southern Lancangjiang zone, Yunnan, China. Lithos 113, 408–422.

Hotson, M.D., Zaw, K., Oliver, G.J.H., Meffre, S., Manaka, T., 2011. U-Pb zircongeochronology of granitoids from Singapore: implications for tectonic setting.In: Abstracts for 8th Meeting, Asia Oceania Geological Society (AOGS) Taipei,Taiwan.

Huang, K., Opdyke, N.D., 1991. Paleomagnetic results from the Upper Carboniferousof the Shan-Thai-Malay block of western Yunnan, China. Tectonophysics 192,333–344.

Hutchison, C.S., 1989. Geological Evolution of South-East Asia. Oxford Monographson Geology and Geophysics, vol. 13. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Hutchison, C.S., 1994. Gondwana and Cathaysian blocks, Palaeotethys sutures andCenozoic tectonics in Southeast Asia. Geologische Rundschau 82, 388–405.

Ingavat, R., Douglass, R., 1981. Fusuline fossils from Thailand, Part XIV: the fusulinidgenus Monodiexodina from Northwest Thailand. Geology and Palaeontology ofSoutheast Asia 22, 23–34.

Jahn, B.-M., Ernst, W.G., 1990. Late Archean Sm-Nd isochron age for Mafic-ultramafic supracrustal amphibolites from the Northeastern Sino-KoreanCraton, China. Precambrian Research 46, 295–306.

Janvier, P., Pham, K., Phuong, T.H., 1996. Decouverte d’une faune de Vertebres detype ‘‘sub-chinois’’ dans le Devonien inferieur de la basse River Noire (Song Da),Vietnam. Comptes Rendus Academy Science Paris 323, 539–546.

Jasin, B., 2008. Some Permian radiolarians from Bukit Yoi, Pokok Sena, Kedah.Bulletin of the Geological Society of Malaysia 54, 53–58.

Jennings, J.R., Lee, C.P., 1985. Preliminary note on the occurrence of Carboniferous-age coals and in situ plant fossils in Eastern Peninsular Malaysia. Warta Geologi11, 117–121.

Jian, P., Wang, X., He, L., Wang, C., 1998a. U-Pb zircon dating of the Shuanggouophiolite from Xingping County, Yunnan Province. Acta Petrologica Sinica 14,207–211 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Jian, P., Wang, X., He, L., Wang, C., 1998b. Geochronology of ophiolitic rocks from theAilaoshan suture, Yunnan Province, southwestern China, implications onPalaeotethyan evolution. Geology and Mineral Resources of South China 1, 1–11 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Jian, P., Liu, D., Kröner, A., Zhang, Q., Wang, Y., Sun, X., Zhang, W., 2009. Devonian toPermian plate tectonic cycle of the Paleo-Tethys Orogen in southwest China (I):geochemistry of ophiolites, arc/back-arc assemblages and within-plate igneousrocks. Lithos 113, 748–766.

Jin, X., 2002. Permo– Carboniferous sequences of Gondwana affinity in southwestChina and their paleogeographic implications. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 6,633–646.

Jones, D., Murchey, B., 1986. Geologic significance of Paleozoic and Mesozoicradiolarian chert. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 14, 455–492.

Jongmans, W.J., Gothan, W., 1925. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Flora des Oberkarbonsvon Sumatra. Verhandlingen Geologie en Mijnbouw, Genootschap voorNederland en Koloniën, Geologische Series 8, 279–304.

Jongmans, W.J., Gothan, W., 1935. Die Ergebnisse der paläobotanischen Djambi-Expedition 1925, 2. Die paläobotanische Ergebnisse. Jaarboek van hetMijnwezen in Nedelandsch Indië 59, 71–121.

Kamata, Y., Ueno, K., Hara, H., Ichise, M., Charoentitirat, T., Charusiri, P., Sardsud, A.,Hisada, K.-I., 2009. Classification of the Sibumasu and Paleo-Tethys tectonicdivision in Thailand using chert lithofacies. Island Arc 18, 21–31.

Kapp, P., Yin, A., Manning, C.E., Murphy, M., Harrison, T.M., Spurlin, M., Lin, D., Deng,X.G., Wu, C.M., 2000. Blueschist-bearing metamorphic core complexes in theQiangtang Block reveal deep crustal structure of northern Tibet. Geology 28,19–22.

Kapp, P., Yin, A., Manning, C.E., Harrison, T.M., Taylor, M.H., Ding, L., 2003. Tectonicevolution of the early Mesozoic blueschist-bearing Qiangtang metamorphicbelt, central Tibet. Tectonics 22, 1043, doi: 1010.1029/2002TC001386.

Kapp, P., DeCelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., Heizler, M., Ding, L., 2007. Geological recordsof the Lhasa–Qiangtang and Indo-Asian collisions in the Nima area of centralTibet. Geological Society of America Bulletin 119, 917–933.

Katz, M.B., 1993. The Kannack complex of the Vietnam Kontum Massif of theIndochina Block: an exotic fragment of Precambrian Gondwanaland? In:Findlay, R.H., Unrug, R., Banks, M.R., Veevers, J.J. (Eds.), Gondwana 8 –Assembly, Evolution and Dispersal, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 161-164.

Khan, M.A., Stern, R.J., Gribble, R.F., Windley, B.F., 1997. Geochemical and isotopicconstraints on subduction polarity, magma sources, and palaeogeography of theKohistan intra-oceanic arc, northern Pakistan Himalaya. Journal of theGeological Society 154, 935–946.

Khan, S.D., Walker, D.J., Hall, S.A., Burke, K.C., Shah, M.T., Stockli, L., 2009. Did theKohistan-Ladakh island arc collide first with India? Bulletin of the GeologicalSociety of America 121, 366–384.

Klootwijk, C., 1996a. Phanerozoic configurations of Greater Australia: evolution ofthe North West Shelf. Part One: Review of Reconstruction Models. AGSO Record1996/51, 106 pp.

Klootwijk, C., 1996b. Phanerozoic Configurations of Greater Australia: Evolution ofthe North West Shelf: Part Two. Palaeomagnetic and Geologic Constraints onReconstructions. AGSO Record 1996/52, 85 pp.

Klootwijk, C., 1996c. Phanerozoic Configurations of Greater Australia: Evolution ofthe North West Shelf: Part Three. Palaeomagnetic Data Base. AGSO Record1996/53, 148 pp.

Königshof, P., Savage, N.M., Lutat, P., Sardsud, A., Dopieralska, J., Belka, Z., Racki, G.,2012. Late Devonian sedimentary record of the Paleotethys Ocean – the Mae

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3121.2009.00888

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3121.2009.00888


Sariang section, northwestern Thailand. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 52,146–157.

Lan, C.-Y., Chung, S.-L., Long, T.V., Lo, C.-H., Lee, T.-Y., Mertzman, S.A., Shen, J.J.-S.,2003. Geochemical and Sr –Nd isotopic constraints from the Kontum massif,central Vietnam on the crustal evolution of the Indochina block. PrecambrianResearch 122, 7–27.

Lee, C.P., 2009. Palaeozoic stratigraphy. In: Hutchison, C.S., Tan, D.N.K. (Eds.),Geology of Peninsular Malaysia. University of Malaya and Geological Society ofMalaysia, pp. 55–86.

Lee, C.P., Leman, M.S., Hassan, K., Nasib, B.M., Karim, R., 2004. Stratigraphic Lexiconof Malaysia. Geological Society of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.

Lepvrier, C., Maluski, H., Nguyen, V.V., Roques, D., Axente, V., Rangin, G., 1997.Indosinia NW-trending shear zones within the Truong Son belt (Vietnam).Tectonophysics 383, 105–127.

Lepvrier, C., Maluski, H., Tich, V.V., Leyreloup, A., Phan, T.T., Nguyen, V.V., 2004. TheEarly Triassic Indosinian orogeny in Vietnam (Truong Son Belt and KontumMassif): implications for the geodynamic evolution of Indochina. Tectonophysics393, 87–118.

Lepvrier, C., Nguyen, Van Vuong, Maluski, H., Phan Truong, Thi., Tich, Van Vu, 2008.Indosinian tectonics in Vietnam. Comptes Rendus Geoscience 340, 94–111.

Li, Z., 1994. Ordovician. In: Yin, H. (Ed.), The Palaeobiogeography of China.Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 64–87.

Li, Z.-X., Li, X.-H., 2007. Formation of the 1300-km-wide intracontinental orogenand postorogenic magmatic province in Mesozoic South China: a flat-slabsubduction model. Geology 35, 179–182.

Li, P., Rui, G., Junwen, C., Ye, G., 2004. Paleomagnetic analysis of eastern Tibet:implications for the collisional and amalgamation history of the Three RiversRegion, SW China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 24, 291–310.

Liew, T.C., McCulloch, M.T., 1985. Genesis of granitoid batholiths of PeninsularMalaysia and implications for models of crustal evolution: evidence from Nd–Srisotopic and U-Pb zircon study. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 49, 587–600.

Liew, T.C., Page, R.W., 1985. U-Pb zircon dating of granitoid plutons from the westcoast province of Peninsular Malaysia. Journal of the Geological Society, London142, 515–526.

Lin, J., Fuller, M., Zhang, W., 1985. Preliminary Phanerozoic polar wander paths forthe North and South China Blocks. Nature 313, 444–449.

Liu, B., Feng, Q., Fang, N., 1991. Tectonic evolution of the Palaeo-Tethys inChangning-Menglian Belt and adjacent regions, western Yunnan. Journal ofChina University of Geosciences 2, 2–18.

Liu, D.Y., Nutman, A.P., Compston, W., Wu, J.S., Shen, Q.H., 1992. Remnants of 3800crust in the Chinese part of the Sino-Korean craton. Geology 20, 339–342.

Liu, B., Feng, Q., Fang, N., Jia, J., He, F., Yang, W., Liu, D., 1996.Tectonopaleogeographic framework and evolution of the PaleotethyanArchipelagos Ocean in western Yunnan, China. In: Long, X. (Ed.), Devonian toTriassic Tethys in Western Yunnan, China, China. China University ofGeosciences Press, Wuhan, pp. 1–12.

Liu, J., Tran, M.D., Tang, Y., Nguyen, Q.L., Tran, T.H., Wu, W., Chen, J., Zhan, Z., Zhao, Z.,2012. Permo-Triassic granitoids in the northern part of the Truong Son belt, NWVietnam: Geochronology, Geochemistry and tectonic implications. GondwanaResearch 22, 628–644.

Long, X.P., Yuan, C., Sun, M., Zhao, G.C., Xiao, W.J., Wang, Y.J., Yang, Y.H., Hu, A.Q.,2010. Archean crustal evolution of the northern Tarim Craton, NWChina: ZirconU-Pb and Hf isotopic constraints. Precambrian Research 180, 272–284.

Maluski, H., Lepvrier, C., Leyreloup, A., Vu Van, Tich, Phan Truong, Thi, 2005.40Ar–39Ar geochronology of the charnockites and granulites of the Kan Nackcomplex, Kon Tum Massif. Vietnam. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 25, 653–677.

Metcalfe, I., 1984. Stratigraphy, palaeontology and palaeogeography of theCarboniferous of Southeast Asia. Mem. Soc. Geol. France 147, 107–118.

Metcalfe, I., 1985. Lower Permian conodonts from the Terbat Formation, Sarawak.Warta Geologi 11, 1–4.

Metcalfe, I., 1988. Origin and assembly of Southeast Asian continental terranes. In:Audley-Charles, M.G., Hallam, A. (Eds), Gondwana and Tethys. GeologicalSociety of London Special Publication No. 37, pp. 101–118.

Metcalfe, I., 1990. Allochthonous terrane processes in Southeast Asia. PhilosophicalTransactions of the Royal Society of London A331, 625–640.

Metcalfe, I., 1991. Late Palaeozoic and Mesozoic palaeogeography of Southeast Asia.Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 87, 211–221.

Metcalfe, I., 1994. Gondwanaland origin, dispersion, and accretion of East andSoutheast Asian continental terranes. Journal of South American Earth Sciences7, 333–347.

Metcalfe, I., 1996a. Gondwanaland dispersion, Asian accretion and evolution ofEastern Tethys. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences 43, 605–623.

Metcalfe, I., 1996b. Pre-Cretaceous evolution of SE Asian terranes. In: Hall, R.,Blundell, D. (Eds.), Tectonic Evolution of Southeast Asia, vol. 106. GeologicalSociety Special Publication, pp. 97–122.

Metcalfe, I., 1998. Palaeozoic and Mesozoic geological evolution of the SE Asianregion: multidisciplinary constraints and implications for biogeography. In:Hall, R., Holloway, J.D. (Eds.), Biogeography and Geological Evolution of SE Asia.Backhuys Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 25–41.

Metcalfe, I., 1999. Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion: an overview. In:Metcalfe, I. (Ed.), Gondwana dispersion and Asian Accretion, Final ResultsVolume for IGCP Project 321. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 9–28.

Metcalfe, I., 2000. The Bentong-Raub Suture Zone. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences18, 691–712.

Metcalfe, I., 2001. Warm Tethys and Cold Gondwana: East and SE Asia in GreaterGondwana during the Phanerozoic. In: Weiss, R.H. (Ed.), Contributions toGeology and Palaeontology of Gondwana – In Honour of Helmut WOPFNER,Kölner Forum Für Geologie und Paläontologie, Köln, pp. 333–348.

Metcalfe, I., 2002a. Permian tectonic framework and palaeogeography of SE Asia.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 20, 551–566.

Metcalfe, I., 2002b. Devonian and Carboniferous conodonts from the KanthanLimestone, Peninsular Malaysia and their stratigraphic and tectonicimplications. In: Hills, L.V., Henderson, C.M., Bamber, E.W. (Eds.), TheCarboniferous and Permian of the World. Canadian Society of PetroleumGeologists Memoir 19, pp. 552–579.

Metcalfe, I., 2005. Asia: South-east. In: Selley, R.C., Cocks, L.R.M., Plimer, I.R. (Eds.),Encyclopedia of Geology, vol. 1. Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 169–198.

Metcalfe, I., 2006. Palaeozoic and Mesozoic tectonic evolution and palaeogeographyof East Asian crustal fragments: the Korean Peninsula in context. GondwanaResearch 9, 24–46.

Metcalfe, I., 2009. Comment on ‘‘An alternative plate tectonic model for thePalaeozoic-Early Mesozoic Palaeotethyan evolution of Southeast Asia (NorthernThailand-Burma)’’ by O.M. Ferrari, C. Hochard & G.M. Stampfli, Tectonophysics451, 346-365 (doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2007.11.065). Tectonophysics 471, 329–332.

Metcalfe, I., 2011a. Palaeozoic-Mesozoic History of SE Asia. In: Hall, R., Cottam, M.,Wilson, M. (Eds.), The SE Asian Gateway: History and Tectonics of Australia-AsiaCollision. Geological Society of London Special Publications 355, pp. 7–35.doi:10.1144/SP355.2.

Metcalfe, I., 2011b. Tectonic framework and Phanerozoic evolution of Sundaland.Gondwana Research 19, 3–21.

Metcalfe, I., in press. Tectonic evolution of the Malay Peninsula. Journal of AsianEarth Sciences., http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2012.12.011

Metcalfe, I., Idris, M., Tan, J.T., 1980. Stratigraphy and palaeontology of theCarboniferous sediments in the Panching area, Pahang, West Malaysia.Bulletin of the Geological Society of Malaysia 13, 1–26.

Metcalfe, I., Spiller, F.C.P., Liu Benpei, Wu Haoruo, Sashida, K., 1999. The Palaeo-Tethys in Mainland East and Southeast Asia: contributions from radiolarianstudies. In: Metcalfe, I. (Ed.), Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion, FinalResults Volume for IGCP Project 321. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 259–281.

Mitchell, A.H.G., 1993. Cretaceous-Cenozoic tectonic events in the westernMyanmar (Burma)-Assam region. Journal of the Geological Society, London150, 1089–1102.

Morley, C.K., 2012. Late Cretaceous–Early Palaeogene tectonic development of SEAsia. Earth-Science Reviews 115, 37–75.

Nakano, N., Osanai, Y., Nguyen, T., Minh, N.T., Miyamoto, T., Hayasaka, Y., Owada,M., 2008. Discovery of high-pressure granulite-facies metamorphism innorthern Vietnam: constraints on Permo-Triassic Indochinese continentalcollision tectonics. Comptes Rendus Geoscience 340, 127–138.

Nakano, N., Osanai, Y., Sajeev, K., Hayasaka, Y., Miyamoto, T., Minh, N.T., Owada, M.,Windley, B., 2010. Triassic eclogite from northern Vietnam: inferences andgeological significance. Journal of Metamorphic Geology 28, 59–76.

Nam, T.N., Sano, Y., Terada, K., Toriumi, M., Quynh, P.V., Dung, L.T., 2001. FirstSHRIMP U-Pb zircon dating of granulites from the Kontum massif (Vietnam)and tectonothermal implications. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 19, 77–84.

Nguyen Van Vuonga, Hansenb, B.T., Wemmerb, K., Lepvrier, C., Vu Van Ticha, TaTrong Thanga, in press. U/Pb and Sm/Nd dating on ophiolitic rocks of the SongMa suture zone (northern Vietnam): evidence for upper paleozoic paleotethyanlithospheric remnants. Journal of Geodynamics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2012.04.003.

Nicoll, R.S., Metcalfe, I., 1994. Late Cambrian to Early Silurian conodont endemismof the Sinian–Australian margin of Gondwanaland. In: Wang, Z.-H., Xu, F.-M.,(Eds.), First Asian Conodont Symposium, Nanjing, China, Abst., p. 7.

Nicoll, R.S., Totterdell, J.M., 1990. Conodonts and the distribution in time and spaceof Ordovician sediments in Australia and adjacent areas. In: Tenth AustralianGeological Convention, Geol. Soc. Australia Abst. 25, p. 46.

Nie, Y.S., 1991. Paleoclimatic and paleomagnetic constraints on the Paleozoicreconstructions of South China, North China and Tarim. Tectonophysics 196,279–308.

Nie, Y.S., Rowley, D.B., Ziegler, A.M., 1990. Constraints on the locations of Asianmicrocontinents in Palaeo-Tethys during the Late Palaeozoic. In: McKerrow,W.S., Scotese, C.R. (Eds.), Palaeozoic Palaeogeography and Biogeography,Geological Society Memoir 12, pp. 397–408.

Nie, S., Yin, A., Rowley, D.B., Jin, Y., 1994. Exhumation of the Dabie Shan ultra-high-pressure rocks and accumulation of the Songpan-Ganzi flysch sequence,central China. Geology 22, 999–1002.

Nuraiteng Tee Abdullah, 2009. Mesozoic Stratigraphy. In: Hutchison, C.S., Tan,D.N.K. (Eds.), Geology of Peninsular Malaysia. University of Malaya andGeological Society of Malaysia, pp. 7–131.

Ohana, T., Kimura, T., Khoo, T.T., 1991. Further discovery of some Carboniferousplant fossils from Tanjung Mat Amin, Trengganu, Peninsular Malaysia. Journalof Southeast Asian Earth Sciences 6, 93–101.

Oliver, G.J.H., Zaw, K., Hotson, M., 2011. Dating rocks in Singapore: plate tectonicsbetween 280 and 200 million years ago. Innovation Magazine 10, 22–25.

Oo, T., Hlaing, T., Htay, N., 2002. Permian of Myanmar. Journal of Asian EarthSciences 20, 683–689.

Osanai, Y., Nakano, N., Owada, M., Tra, N.M., Miyamoto, T., Nguyen, T.M., Nguyen,V.N., Tran, V.T., 2008. Collision zone metamorphism in Vietnam and adjacentSouth-eastern Asia: proposition for Trans Vietnam Orogenic Belt. Journal ofMineralogical and Petrological Sciences 103, 226–241.


http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2012.04.003

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2012.04.003


Otofuji, Y., Mu, C.L., Tanaka, K., Miura, D., Inokuchi, H., Kamei, R., Tamai, M.,Takemoto, K., Zaman, H., Yokoyama, M., 2007. Spatial gap between Lhasa andQiangtang blocks inferred from Middle Jurassic to Cretaceous paleomagneticdata. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 262, 581–593.

Pullen, A., Kapp, P., Gehrels, G.E., Vervoort, J.D., Ding, L., 2008. Triassic continentalsubduction in central Tibet and Mediterranean-style closure of the Paleo-TethysOcean. Geology 36, 351–354.

Randon, C., Wonganan, N., Caridroit, M., Perret, M.M.F., Degardin, J.M., 2006. UpperDevonian-Lower Carboniferous conodonts from Chiang Dao cherts, northernThailand. Rivista Italiana Palaeontolgica Stratigrafia 112, 191–206.

Rao, C.P., 1988. Paleoclimate of some Permo-Triassic carbonates of Malaysia.Sedimentary Geology 60, 163–171.

Roger, F., Maluski, H., Leyreloup, A., Lepvrier, C., Truong Thi, Phan, 2007. U–Pbdating of high temperature episodes in the Kon Tum Massif (Vietnam). Journalof Asian Earth Sciences 30, 565–572.

Roger, F., Jolivet, M., Malavieille, J., 2008. Tectonic evolution of the Triassic fold beltsof Tibet. Comptes Rendus Geoscience 340, 180–189.

Roger, F., Leloup, P., Jolivet, M., Lacassin, R., Trinh, Phan Trong, Brunel, M., Seward,D., 2000. Long and complex thermal history of the Song Chay metamorphicdome (Northern Vietnam) by multi-system geochronology. Tectonophysics 321,449–466.

Rutten, M.G., 1940. On Devonian limestones with Clathrodictyon cf spatiosum andHeliolites porosus from Eastern Borneo. Proceedings Koninklijke NederlandseAkademie van Wetenschappen 18, 1061–1064.

Ryall, P.J.C., 1982. Some thoughts on the crustal structure of PeninsularMalaysia—results of a gravity traverse. Geological Society of MalaysiaBulletin 15, 9–18.

Saesaengseerung, D., Agematsu, S., Sashida, K., Sardsud, A., 2008. A PreliminaryStudy of Lower Permian Radiolarians and Conodonts from the Bedded Chertalong the Sra Kaeo Suture Zone, Eastern Thailand. In: Choowong, M.,Thitimakorn, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of International Symposia on GeoscienceResources and Environments of Asian Terranes (GREAT 2008), 4th IGCP516, and5th APSEG, Bangkok, 24–26 November 2008, Department of Geology,Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, pp. 189–191.

Saesaengseerung, D., Sashida, K., Sardsud, A., 2008b. Discovery of Middle Triassicradiolarian fauna from the Nan area along the Nan-Uttaradit suture zone,northern Thailand. Paleontological Research 12, 397–409.

Sashida, K., Salyapongse, S., 2002. Permian radiolarian faunas from Thailand andtheir paleogeographic significance. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 20, 691–701.

Sashida, K., Adachi, S., Igo, H., Nakornsri, N., Ampornmaha, A., 1997. Middle to UpperPermian and Middle Triassic radiolarians from eastern Thailand. ScienceReports of the Institute of Geoscience, University of Tsukuba. Section B,Geological Sciences 18, 1–17.

Sashida, K., Igo, H., Adachi, S., Ueno, K., Kajiwara, Y., Nakornsri, N., Sardsud, A., 2000.Late Permian to Middle Triassic radiolarian faunas from northern Thailand.Journal of Paleontology 74, 789–811.

Searle, M.P., Whitehouse, M.J., Robb, L.J., Ghani, A., Hutchison, C.S., Sone, M., Ng, W.-P.,Roselee, M.H., Chung, S.-L., Oliver, G.J.H., 2012. Tectonic evolution of theSibumasu-Indochina terrane collision zone in Thailand and Malaysia: constraintsfrom new U -Pb zircon chronology of SE Asian tin granitoids. Journal of theGeological Society 169, 489–500.

Sengör, A.M.C., 1984. The Cimmeride orogenic system and the tectonics of Eurasia.Geological Society of America Special Paper 195, 1–82.

Sevastjanova, I., Clements, B., Hall, R., Belousova, E.A., Griffin, W.L., Pearson, N.,2011. Granitic magmatism, basement ages, and provenance indicators in theMalay Peninsula: insights from detrital zircon U-Pb and Hf-isotope data.Gondwana Research 19, 1024–1039.

Shi, G.R., Archbold, N.W., 1998. Permian marine biogeography of SE Asia. In: Hall, R.,Holloway, J.D. (Eds.), Biogeography and Geological Evolution of SE Asia.Backhuys Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 57–72.

Shi, G.R., Waterhouse, J.B., 1991. Early Permian brachiopods from Perak, westMalaysia. Journal of Southeast Asian Earth Sciences 6, 25–39.

Shi, R., Yang, J., Xu, Z., Qi, X., 2008. The Bangong Lake ophiolite (NW Tibet) and itsbearing on the tectonic evolution of the Bangong–Nujiang suture zone. Journalof Asian Earth Sciences 32, 438–457.

Simons, W.J.F., Socquet, A., et al., 2007. A decade of GPS in Southeast Asia: resolvingSundaland motion and boundaries. Journal of Geophysical Research 112,B06420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005JB003868.

Smith, C.B., Bulanova, G.P., Kohn, S.C., Milledge, H.J., Hall, A.E., Griffin, B.J., Pearson,D.G., 2009. Nature and genesis of Kalimantan diamonds. Lithos 112, 822–832.

Smyth, H.R., Hamilton, P.J., Hall, R., Kinny, P.D., 2007. The deep crust beneath islandarcs: inherited zircons reveal a Gondwana continental fragment beneath EastJava, Indonesia. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 258, 269–282.

Sone, M., Metcalfe, I., 2008. Parallel Tethyan Sutures in mainland SE Asia: newinsights for Palaeo-Tethys closure. Compte Rendus Geoscience 340, 166–179.

Sone, M., Metcalfe, I., Chaodumrong, P., 2012. The Chanthaburi terrane ofsoutheastern Thailand: stratigraphic confirmation as a disrupted segment ofthe Sukhothai Arc. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 61, 16–32.

Song, S., Niu, Y., Su, L., Xia, X., in press. Tectonics of the North Qilian orogen, NWChina. Gondwana Research. doi:10.1016/j.gr.2012.02.004.

Spiller, F.C.P., Metcalfe, I., 1995. Late Palaeozoic radiolarians from the Bentong-Raubsuture zone and Semanggol Formation, Peninsular Malaysia – initial findings.Journal of Southeast Asian Earth Sciences 11, 217–224.

Stauffer, P.H., Lee, C.P., 1989. Late Palaeozoic glacial marine facies in Southeast Asiaand its implications. Geological Society of Malaysia Bulletin 20, 363–397.

Stauffer, P.H., Mantajit, J., 1981. Late Palaeozoic tilloids of Malaya, Thailand andBurma. In: Hambrey, M.J., Harland, W.H. (Eds.), Earth’s Pre-Pleistocene GlacialRecord. Cambridge, pp. 31–337.

Sugiaman, F., Andria, L., 1999. Devonian carbonate of Telen River, East Kalimantan.Berita Sedimentologi 10, 18–19.

Tapponnier, P., Peltzer, G., Le Dain, A.Y., Armijo, R., Cobbold, P., 1982. Propagatingextrusion tectonics in Asia: new insights from simple experiments withplasticine. Geology 10, 611–616.

Tapponnier, P.G., Peltzer, G., Armijo, R., 1986. On the mechanisms of the collisionbetween India and Asia. In: Coward, P.P., Ries, A.C. (Eds.), Collision Tectonics,vol. 19. Geological Society Special Publication, pp. 115–157.

Taylor, W.R., Jaques, A.L., Ridd, M., 1990. Nitrogen-defect aggregation characteristicsof some Australasian diamonds: time-temperature constraints on the sourceregions of pipe and alluvial diamonds. American Mineralogist 75, 1290–1310.

Thanh, T.D., Janvier, P., Phuong, T.H., 1996. Fish suggests continental connectionsbetween the Indochina and South China blocks in Middle Devonian time.Geology 24, 571–574.

Torsvik, T.H., Cocks, R.M., 2009. The Lower Palaeozoic palaeogeographical evolutionof the northeastern and eastern peri-Gondwanan margin from Turkey to NewZealand. In: Bassett, M.G. (Ed.), Early Palaeozoic Peri-Gondwana Terranes: NewInsights from Tectonics and Biogeography. Geological Society, London, SpecialPublications 325, pp. 3–21.

Tri, T.V. (Ed.), 1979. Geology of Vietnam (the north part). Explanatory note to thegeological map on 1:1000000 scale. Hanoi Science and Technology Publishing,House, Hanoi, 354 pp.

Trung, N.M., Tsujimori, T., Itaya, T., 2006. Honvang serpentinite body of the Song Mafault zone, Northern Vietnam: a remnant of oceanic lithosphere within theIndochina–South China suture. Gondwana Research 9, 225–230.

Ueno, K., 1999. Gondwana/Tethys divide in East Asia, solution from Late Paleozoicforaminiferal paleobiogeography. In: Ratanasthien, B., Rieb, S. L. (Eds.),Proceedings of the International Symposium on Shallow Tethys 5.Department of Geological Science, Faculty of Science, Chiang Mai University,Chiang Mai, pp. 45–54.

Ueno, K., 2003. The Permian fusulinoidean faunas of the Sibumasu and Baoshanblocks: their implications for the paleogeographic and paleoclimatologicreconstruction of the Cimmerian Continent. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 193, 1–24.

Ueno, K., Charoentitirat, T., 2011. Carboniferous and Permian. In: Ridd, M.F., Barber,A.J., Crow, M.J. (Eds.), The Geology of Thailand. Geological Society, London, pp.1–136.

Ueno, K., Hisada, K., 1999. Closure of the Paleo-Tethys caused by the collision ofIndochina and Sibumasu. Chikyu Monthly 21, 832–839 [in Japanese].

Ueno, K., Hisada, K., 2001. The Nan–Uttaradit–Sa Kaeo Suture as a mainPaleo-Tethyan suture in Thailand: is it real? Gondwana Research 4, 804–806.

Ueno, K., Tsutsumi, S., 2009. Lopingian (Late Permian) foraminiferal faunalsuccession of a Paleo-Tethyan mid-oceanic carbonate buildup: ShifodongFormation in the Changning–Menglian Belt, West Yunnan, Southwest China.Island Arc 18, 69–93.

Ueno, K., Wang, Y., Wang, X., 2003. Fusulinoidean faunal succession of a Paleo–Tethyan oceanic seamount in the Changning–Menglian Belt, West Yunnan,Southwest China: an overview. The Island Arc 12, 145–161.

Ueno, K., Nishikawa, S., Van Waveren, I.M., et al., 2006. Early Permian fusulinefaunas of the Mengkarang and Palepat formations in the West Sumatra Block,Indonesia: Their faunal characteristics, ages and geotectonic implications.Abstract Volume and Proceedings, 2nd International Symposium on GeologicalAnatomy of East and South Asia: Paleogeography and Paleoenvironment inEastern Tethys (IGCP 516), November 2006, Quezon City, Philippines, Universityof the Philippines, Quezon City, pp. 98–102.

Ueno, K., Charoentitirat, T., Sera, Y., Miyahigashi, A., Suwanprasert, J., Sarsud, A.,Boonlue, H., Pananto, S., 2008. The Doi Chiang Dao Limestone: Paleo-Tethyanmid-oceanic carbonates in the Inthanon Zone of North Thailand. In, Choowong,M., Thitimakorn, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of International Symposia on GeoscienceResources and Environments of Asian Terranes (GREAT 2008), 4th IGCP516, and5th APSEG, Bangkok, 24-26 November 2008, Department of Geology,Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, pp. 42–48.

Ueno, K., Miyahigashi, A., Charoentitirat, T., 2010. The Lopingian (Late Permian) ofmid-oceanic carbonates in the eastern Palaeotethys: stratigraphical outline andforaminiferal faunal succession. Geological Journal 45, 285–307.

Van Der Voo, R., 1993. Paleomagnetism of the Atlantic, Tethys and Iapetus oceans.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Veevers, J.J., Powell, C.Mc.A., Roots, S.R., 1991. Review of seafloor spreading aroundAustralia. I. Synthesis of the patterns of spreading. Australian Journal of EarthSciences 38, 373–389.

Vozenin-Serra, C., 1989. Lower Permian continental flora of Sumatra. In: Fontaine,H., Gafoer, S. (Eds.), The Pre-Tertiary Fossils of Sumatra and their Environments.CCOP Technical Papers 19. United Nations, Bangkok, pp. 53–57.

Wakita, K., 2000. Cretaceous accretionary–collision complexes in central Indonesia.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 18, 739–749.

Wakita, K., Metcalfe, I., 2005. Ocean Plate Stratigraphy in East and Southeast Asia.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 24, 679–702.

Wang, Z., Tan, X., 1994. Palaeozoic structural evolution of Yunnan. Journal ofSoutheast Asian Earth Sciences 9, 345–348.

Wang, X., Metcalfe, I., Jian, P., He, L., Wang, C., 2000. The Jinshajiang–Ailaoshansuture zone, tectono-stratigraphy, age and evolution. Journal of Asian EarthSciences 18, 675–690.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005JB003868


Wang, X.-D., Sugimaya, T., Nagai, K., 2001. Permo-Carboniferous Coral Faunas fromPaleo-Tethys in the Changning-Menglian Belt, West Yunnan, Southwest China.Gondwana Research 4, 818–819.

Wang, Z.-H., Qi, Y.-P., Bergström, S.M., 2007. Ordovician conodonts of the TarimRegion, Xinjiang, China: occurrence and use as palaeoenvironment indicators.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 29, 832–843.

Wang, W.-L., Aitchison, J.C., Lo, C.H., Zeng, Q.-G., 2008. Geochemistry andgeochronology of the amphibolite blocks in ophiolitic melanges alongBangong-Nujiang suture, central Tibet. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 33,122–138.

Wang, Y., Ueno, K., Zhang, Y.-C., Cao, C.-Q., 2010. The Changhsingian foraminiferalfauna of a Neotethyan seamount: the Gyanyima Limestone along the Yarlung-ZangboSuture in southern Tibet, China. Geological Journal 45, 308–318.

Wang, X.L., Shua, L.-S., Xing, G.-F., Zhoua, J.-C., Tanga, M., Shua, X.-J., Qic, L., Hu, Y.-H.,2012. Post-orogenic extension in the eastern part of the Jiangnan orogen:evidence from ca 800–760 Ma volcanic rocks. Precambrian Research 222–223,404–423.

Wang, Z., Bergström, S.M., Lane, H.R., 1996. Conodont provinces and biostratigraphyin Ordovician of China. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica 35 (1), 26–59.

Waterhouse, J.B., 1982. An early Permian cool-water fauna from pebbly mudstonesin South Thailand. Geological Magazine 119, 337–354.

Williams, P.R., Harahap, B.H., 1987. Preliminary geochemical and age data frompostsubduction intrusive rocks, northwest Borneo. Australian Journal of EarthSciences 34, 405–415.

Williams, P.R., Johnson, C.R., Almond, R.A., Simamora, W.H., 1988. Late Cretaceous toEarly Tertiary structural elements of West Kalimantan. Tectonophysics 148,279–297.

Wonganan, N., Caridroit, M., 2005. Middle and Upper Devonian radiolarian faunasfrom Chiang Dao area, Chiang Mai province, northern Thailand. Micropaleontology51, 39–57.

Wonganan, N., Caridroit, M., 2007. Middle to Upper Permian radiolarian faunasfrom chert blocks in Pai area, northwestern Thailand. Eclogae GeologicaeHelvetiae 99, S133–S139.

Wonganan, N., Randon, C., Caridroit, M., 2007. Mississippian (early Carboniferous)radiolarian biostratigraphy of northern Thailand. (Chiang Dao area). Geobios 40,875–888.

Wu, H., Xian, X., Kuang, G., 1994a. Late Paleozoic radiolarian assemblages ofSouthern Guangxi and its geological significance. Scientia Geologica Sinica 29,339–345 (in Chinese with English abstract).

Wu, H., Kuang, G., Xian, X., Li, Y., Wang, Z.-C., 1994b. The Late Paleozoic radiolariancherts in Southern Guangxi and preliminary exploration on Paleo-Tethys inGuangxi. Chinese Science Bulletin 39, 1025–1029.

Wu, H., Boulter, C.A., Ke, B., Stow, D.A.V., Wang, Z., 1995. The Changning–Mengliansuture zone; a segment of the major Cathaysian –Gondwana divide in SoutheastAsia. Tectonophysics 242, 267–280.

Wu, F.Y., Zhang, Y.B., Yang, J.H., Xie, L.W., Yang, Y.H., 2008. Zircon U-Pb and Hfisotopic constraints on the Early Archean crustal evolution in Anshan of theNorth China Craton. Precambrian Research 167, 339–362.

Yang, J., 1994. Cambrian. In: Yin, H. (Ed.), The Palaeobiogeography of China.Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 35–63.

Yang, J., Xu, Z., Li, Z., Xu, X., Li, T., Ren, Y., Li, H., Chen, S., Robinson, P.T., 2009.Discovery of an eclogite belt in the Lhasa block, Tibet: a new border forPaleo-Tethys? Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 34, 76–89.

Yao, J., Shu, L., Santosh, M., Li, J., in press. Geochronology and Hf isotope of detritalzircons from Precambrian sequences in the eastern Jiangnan Orogen:constraining the assembly of Yangtze and Cathaysia Blocks in South China.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences. doi:10.1016/j.jseaes.2012.08.010.

Yin, A., 2010. Cenozoic tectonic evolution of Asia: a preliminary synthesis.Tectonophysics 488, 293–325.

Young, G.C., Janvier, P., 1999. Early-middle Palaeozoic vertebrate faunas in relationto Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion. In: Metcalfe, I. (Ed.), GondwanaDispersion and Asian Accretion. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 15–140.

Yumul, G.P., Zhou, M.-F., Wang, C.Y., Zhao, T.-P., Dimalanta, C.B., 2008. Geology andgeochemistry of the Shuanggou ophiolite (Ailao Shan ophiolitic belt), YunnanProvince, SW China: evidence for a slow-spreading oceanic basin origin. Journalof Asian Earth Sciences 32, 385–395.

Zhai, Q.-G., Jahn, B.-M., Zhang, R.-Y., Wang, J., Su, L., 2011. Triassic Subduction of thePaleo-Tethys in northern Tibet, China: evidence from the geochemical and

isotopic characteristics of eclogites and blueschists of the Qiangtang Block.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 42, 1356–1370.

Zhang, K.J., Cai, J.-X., 2009. NE–SW-trending Hepu–Hetai dextral shear zone insouthern China: penetration of the Yunkai Promontory of South China intoIndochina. Journal of Structural Geology 31, 737–748.

Zhang, Q., Li, D.Z., Zhang, K.W., 1985. Preliminary study on Tongchangjie ophiolitemélange from Yun County. Yunnan Province. Acta Petrologica Sinica 1, 1–14 (inChinese with English abstract).

Zhang, K.-J., Xia, B., Liang, X., 2002. Mesozoic–Paleogene sedimentary facies andpaleogeography of Tibet, Western China: tectonic implications. GeologicalJournal 37, 217–246.

Zhang, K.J., Cai, J.-X., Zhu, J.-X., 2006. North China and South China collision: insightsfrom analogue modeling. Journal of Geodynamics 42, 38–51.

Zhang, Y.-C., Shi, G.R., Shen, S.-Z., in press-a. A review of Permian stratigraphy,palaeobiogeography and palaeogeography of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau.Gondwana Research. doi:10.1016/j.gr.2012.06.010.

Zhang, C.-L., Zou, H.-B., Li, H.-K., Wang, H.-Y., in press-b. Tectonic framework andevolution of the Tarim Block in NW China: a review. Gondwana Research.,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2012.08.024

Zhang, R.Y., Lo, C.-H., Chung, S.-L., Grove, M., Omori, S., Iizuka, Y., Liou, J.G., Tri, T.V.,in press. Origin and tectonic implication of ophiolite and eclogite in the Song MaSuture Zone between the South China and Indochina Blocks. Journal ofMetamorphic Geology. doi:10.1111/jmg.12012.

Zhao, X., Allen, M.B., Whitham, A.G., Price, S.P., 1996a. Rift-related Devoniansedimentation and basin development South China. Journal of Southeast AsianEarth Sciences 14, 31–52.

Zhao, X., Coe, R.S., Gilder, S.A., Frost, G.M., 1996b. Palaeomagnetic constraints on thepalaeogeography of China: implications for Gondwanaland. Australian Journalof Earth Sciences 43, 643–672.

Zhao, G.C., Cawood, P.A., Wilde, S.A., Sun, M., Lu, L.Z., 2000. Metamorphism ofbasement rocks in the Central Zone of the North China Craton: implica-tions for Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research 103,55–88.

Zhao, G.C., Wilde, S.A., Cawood, P.A., Sun, M., 2001. Archean blocks and theirboundaries in the North China Craton: lithological, geochemical, structural andP-T path constraints and tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research 107, 45–73.

Zhen, Y.Y., Zhang, Y.D., Percival, I.G., 2009. Early Ordovician (Floian)Serratognathidae fam. nov. (Conodonta) from Eastern Gondwana: phylogeny,biogeography and biostratigraphic applications. Memoirs of the Association ofAustralasian Palaeontologists 37, 669–686.

Zheng, T., Zhao, L., Zhu, R., 2009. New evidence from seismic imaging for subductionduring assembly of the North China craton. Geology 37, 395–398.

Zhou, J.-B., Wilde, S.A., Zhao, G.-C., Zheng, C.-Q., Jin, W., Zhang, X.-Z., Cheng, H., 2008.Detrital zircon U-Pb dating of low-grade metamorphic rocks in the Sulu UHPbelt: evidence for overthrusting of the North China Craton onto the South ChinaCraton during continental subduction. Journal of the Geological Society London165, 423–433.

Zhou, Z., Ding, S., Liao, Z., Xu, C., Lao, Q., 1999. Metamorphic and Basic Rocks inMiddle Hainan Island: preliminary Geochemical and Petrological Studies andTectonic Significance. Gondwana Research 2, 643–646.

Zhu, J., Du, Y.S., Liu, Z.X., Feng, Q.L., Tian, W.X., Li, J.P., Wand, C.P., 2005. Mesozoicradiolarian chert from the middle sector of the Yarlung Zangbo suture zone,Tibet and its tectonic implications. Science in China Series D 49, 348–357.

Zhu, T.X., Zhang, Q.Y., Dong, H., Wang, Y.J., Yu, Y.S., Feng, X.T., 2006. Discovery of theLate Devonian and Late Permian radiolarian cherts in tectonic mélanges in theCêdo Caka area, Shuanghu, northern Tibet, China. Geological Bulletin of China25, 1413–1418.

Zhu, D.-C., Zhao, Z.-D., Niu, Y., Mo, X.-X., Chung, S.-L., Hou, Z.-Q., Wang, L.-Q., Wu, F.-Y.,2011a. The Lhasa Terrane: record of a microcontinent and its histories of drift andgrowth. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 301, 241–255.

Zhu, D.-C., Zhao, Z.-D., Niu, Y., Dilek, Y., Mo, X.-X., 2011b. Lhasa terrane in southernTibet came from Australia. Geology 39, 727–730.

Zhu, D.-C., Zhao, Z.-D., Niu, Y., Dilik, Y., Hou, Z-Q., Mo, X-X., in press. The origin andpre-Cenozoic evolution of the Tibetan Plateau. Gondwana Research.doi:10.1016/j.gr.2012.02.002.

Zi, J.-W., Cawood, P.A., Fan, W.-M., Wang, Y.-J., Tohver, E., McCuaig, T.C., Peng, T.P.,2012. Triassic collision in the Paleo-Tethys Ocean constrained by volcanicactivity in SW China. Lithos 144–145, 145–160.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2012.08.024

Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion: Tectonic and palaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethys

Documents

Transcript of Gondwana dispersion and Asian accretion: Tectonic and palaeogeographic evolution of eastern Tethys