Large Igneous Provinces and supercontinents: Toward completing the plate tectonic revolution

Lithos 174 (2013) 1–14

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Lithos journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lithos

Editorial

Large Igneous Provinces and supercontinents: Toward completing the plate tectonic revolution Richard E. Ernst a, b,⁎, Wouter Bleeker c, Ulf Söderlund d, Andrew C. Kerr e a

Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6 Canada Ernst Geosciences, 43 Margrave Ave., Ottawa, Ontario K1T 3Y2, Canada Geological Survey of Canada, 601 Booth Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E8, Canada d Department of Geology, Lund University, Sölvegatan 12, SE 223 62 Lund, Sweden e School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Cardiff University, Main Building, Park Place, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK b c

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 13 February 2013 Accepted 16 February 2013 Available online 1 March 2013 Keywords: Large Igneous Provinces LIPs Supercontinents U–Pb geochronology

a b s t r a c t Regional groupings of a majority, or all, of Earth's crustal blocks have occurred several times in Earth history, but only the most recent supercontinent Paleozoic Pangea/Gondwana, is well characterized. Prior Precambrian supercontinents are postulated: Rodinia (ca. 1 to 0.7 Ga), Nuna/Columbia (ca. 1.8 to 1.3 Ga) and Kenorland/supercratons (ca. >2.7 to 2.0 Ga), but the configuration of each is poorly known. A new methodology using Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) offers an opportunity for fast-tracking progress toward robust Precambrian reconstructions. Comparison of the LIP ‘barcode’ record between crustal blocks allows identification of which blocks were likely to have been nearest neighbors in past supercontinents. Restoration of the primary geometry (radiating or linear) of regional dyke swarms (the plumbing system of LIPs) offers another reconstruction criterion. A consortium of companies is providing funding for dating of essentially all major regional dyke swarms and sill provinces to complete the ‘barcoding of all major crustal blocks, and 13 of the papers in this special issue provides examples of this progress. Seven additional papers provide overviews of important LIPs. Together these 20 papers illustrate the potential for rapid progress using the LIP record for Precambrian supercontinent reconstructions toward completing the plate tectonic revolution which began nearly five decades ago. © 2013 Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction 1.1. The reconstruction dream Almost a century after Wegener's groundbreaking idea that the present continents are dispersed fragments of a former supercontinent, Pangea, that existed some 250 million years ago (e.g., Jacoby, 1981; Wegener, 1912), and nearly five decades after the beginning of the “plate tectonic revolution” of the 1960s (e.g., Oreskes, 2001), a detailed picture has emerged of the kinematics and dynamics of our planet, allowing integration and synthesis of much of the younger geological record. However, determination of robust pre-Pangea paleocontinental reconstructions has resisted solution and remains the unfinished business of the plate tectonic revolution. A substantial body of evidence suggests that pre-Pangea Precambrian supercontinents have indeed existed (e.g., Bleeker, 2003; Rogers and Santosh, 2004; Li et al., 2008; Meert, 2012; Zhang et al., 2012a; Pesonen et al., 2012): Rodinia (ca. 1.0–0.7 Ga), Nuna (also known as Columbia)

⁎ Corresponding author at: Ernst Geosciences, 43 Margrave Ave., Ottawa, Ontario K1T 3Y2, Canada. E-mail address: [email protected] (R.E. Ernst). 0024-4937/$ – see front matter © 2013 Published by Elsevier B.V. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2013.02.017

(ca. 1.8–1.3 Ga), Kenorland (or multiple supercratons) (late Archean to ca. 2.0 Ga). However, from the Precambrian world, there is no preserved record of ocean floor spreading nor a robust fossil record to help guide paleogeographic reconstructions. Progress on such reconstructions thus has relied on matching details in continental geology from one craton to another. Unfortunately, many such details are 1) inherently fuzzy (e.g., ages of granitoid belts and metamorphism), 2) variable or diachronous along strike (e.g., orogenic belts and their structural trends, ages of structural events), or 3) highly susceptible to modification (e.g., the outlines of sedimentary basin and the “piercing points” they provide) (Bleeker and Ernst, 2006; Ernst and Bleeker, 2010). Paleomagnetism can be effective in testing reconstructions but has limitations. Most of all, it requires study of precisely dated units that contain a record of the paleohorizontal. With the shortage of precise U–Pb ages on suitable units, there are too few key Precambrian paleopoles for testing most Precambrian reconstructions (e.g., Buchan, 2012; Evans and Pisarevsky, 2008). Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) and especially their associated regional-scale mafic dyke swarms represent a powerful tool for supercontinent reconstruction, and systematic use of the LIP record, offers a strategy for moving forward toward our collective goal of completing the plate tectonic revolution by producing robust reconstructions into the Precambrian at least back to ca. 2.7 Ga.

2

Editorial

Slave Rae?

Rae

Tungus Norbotten

Rae Slave

Hearne

Rae

Nova?

NAC

LAURENTIA

Archean inheritance

Sask

Anabar Shield Kola

Rae?

Disko?

Rae

SIBERIA Aldan Shield

NAC

Karelia

BALTICA

Lewisian Gneiss Complex

Superior

Tungus

Volga-Uralia

Nain

Sarmatia

Archean in core of New Quebec Orogen

SinoKorean

NORTH CHINA

TARIM

Ukrainian Shield

Tarim

Wyoming

Aravalli Bundelkhand

SAHARAN METACRATON WEST AFRICAN

Guiana Shield

LEGEND:

Man Shield

Exposed Archean crust Some generalized Archean cratons with limited or no exposure

Kaapvaal

AMAZONIA

Name and approximate outline of Archean cratons, representing many of the early “puzzle pieces” resulting from Archean supercraton breakup

ARABIANUBIA GREATER INDIA

SOUTH CHINA

Yangtze Singhbhum Bastar

Dharwar

CONGO

São Lucia

Carajas

AMAZONIA

Tanzania São Francisco Luiz Alvez

Kimberley Madagascar

KALAHARI

RIO DE LA PLATA

Name and approximate outline of younger composite cratons formed by amalgation during the Paleoproterozoic, representing most of the later Proterozoic “puzzle pieces”

Some of the more obvious correlations resulting from the breakup of Pangea Ice caps

Pilbara

NORTH AUSTRALIA

WEST AUSTRALIA

Zimbabwe Kaapvaal

Yilgarn

Gawler

SOUTH AUSTRALIA to Dharwar craton?

(MAWSON)

to East Antarctica Napier Complex

Vestfold Hills WB2003

Fig. 1. Generalized distribution of main cratonic blocks relevant to different supercontinents and the focus of discussion in this paper. Modified after Bleeker (2003).

1.2. The LIP method for paleocontinental reconstruction LIPs are large volume intraplate magmatic events (>100,000 km3) consisting of volcanic rocks (mainly flood basalts), sill complexes, mafic–ultramafic layered intrusions, and a plumbing system of dyke swarms (e.g., Bryan and Ernst, 2008; Ernst and Buchan, 2001). Many LIPs have associated felsic magmatism (both intrusive and extrusive), carbonatites and in some cases lamprophyres, lamproites and kimberlites. LIPs are typically characterized by a short duration magmatic pulse or pulses (less than 1–5 Myr), and while various origins have been proposed, the dominant model has been deep-seated mantle plumes arising to the base of the lithosphere (Bryan and Ernst, 2008; Coffin and Eldholm, 1994, 2005; Courtillot and Renne, 2003; Ernst and Buchan, 2001, 2003). The giant dyke swarms of LIPs are of particular interest for use in reconstructions (e.g., Bleeker and Ernst, 2006; Fahrig, 1987; Halls, 1982) because: 1) not only are they an integral part of LIPs, but) they 2) have very large footprints (300–3000 km), 3) were emplaced in short time pulses that can now be dated precisely (see below), 4) are relatively insensitive to uplift (given their vertical orientation), 5) project far into stable cratonic hinterlands, 6) contain rich geometrical and paleo-stress information (with radiating and linear regional trends), 7) provide superior “piercing points”, and finally, 8) provide the target rocks of choice for high-quality, precisely dated, paleomagnetic poles (“key poles”). The breakup history of Pangea,

Earth's most recent supercontinent, teaches us that LIPs play a pivotal role in continental breakup, typically leaving remnants of flood basalts and their giant feeder dyke swarms on conjugate rifted margins (e.g., Courtillot et al., 1999; Storey, 1995). The other important reason why LIPs and especially their dolerite dyke swarms and sill provinces are now so valuable for paleocontinental reconstructions is because of numerous advances in U–Pb geochronology, together with the realization that almost all mafic rocks contain trace amounts of baddeleyite (ZrO2) and/or zircon (ZrSiO4). These U-bearing accessory minerals allow essentially all short bursts of LIP magmatism to be dated precisely and accurately (e.g., Chamberlain et al., 2010; Heaman and LeCheminant, 1993; Krogh et al., 1987; Li et al., 2010; Rioux et al., 2010; Söderlund and Johansson, 2002; Wingate et al., 2002). Multiple precisely dated events provide, in effect, a magmatic “barcode” (not unlike a supermarket barcode) of ages that “fingerprint” a terrane or crustal block (Bleeker, 2003; Ernst and Bleeker, 2010). These barcodes can be compared between different crustal blocks, to recognize original “nearest neighbors”, thus providing important clues in the reconstruction of fragmented supercontinents. In addition, the geometrical information of radiating dyke swarms can define the relative orientation of blocks, while primary paleomagnetic information can further constrain azimuthal orientation, latitude, and relative longitude. Geochemistry can be used to

Fig. 2. Barcode diagram for cratonic blocks grouped in three time intervals relevant to supercontinent reconstructions. Part A is relevant to Pangea. Part B is relevant to the Proterozoic Nuna (Columbia) and Rodinia supercontinents. Part C is relevant to the late Archean supercontinent/supercraton(s). A bar indicates a single pulse. A box can enclose multiple pulses for a single event. Dots on the left side of a bar identify published ages produced by the Project or by associated grants (see Section 4.1). The labeling “Proto-xxx” was used in part C to identify regions likely consisting of more than one cratonic block that cannot yet be separated out. In Part C, Central Hearne and Rae (+NW Hearne) correlate with Hearne and Rae of Fig. 1 (see discussion in Berman et al., 2007).

Archean supercontinent/supercraton Breakup

c

1800

Ma

1900

2200

Superior Central Hearne Wyoming Slave Rae (+NWHearne) North Atlantic proto Amazonia proto Sao Francisco proto Rio de la Plata Karelia & Kola Samartia Volga-Uralia Kaapvaal Zimbabwe Congo Tanzania proto West African Dharwar Singhbhum (+Bastar) Aravalli (+Bundelkhand) North China proto North Australia proto South Australia Pilbara Yilgarn proto East Antarctica

N N

N

2300

2400

Breakup

Nuna (Columbia) Assembly

Breakup

Rodinia Assembly

Pangea

Breakup Ma

b

300 Ma

Antarctica

Australia

India

Asia

compare LIP events from different blocks and identify those that have matching geochemical fingerprints, and could therefore be ‘genetically’ related. Arabian Penn.

Africa +

Europe

South America

North America

a

Australia Tarim Greater India E. Antarctica S. China Siberia N.China Arabia-Nubia Laurentia Congo-Sao Francisco Rio de la Plata Amazonia Baltica West Africa Kalahari

Pangea Assembly &

Editorial 3

Given the present state of the global LIP record, we estimate that it would take approximately 250 new U–Pb ages to complete the barcoding of all main crustal blocks (Bleeker and Ernst, 2006); in

0

Ma

0

100 100

200 200

300 300

Ma

400 400

300

500 500

600 600

700 700

800

900 800 900

1000 1000

1100 1100

1200 1200

1300 1300

1400 1400

1500

1600 1500

1600

1700 1700

1800 1800

1800

Ma

N

1900

2000

2000

2100

2100

2200

2300

N

2400

2500

2500

2600

2600

4

Editorial

2.1. Crustal blocks (“puzzle pieces”)

other words, by completing the dating of all major regional dyke swarms and sill provinces. This should provide the decisive information necessary to resolve paleocontinental reconstructions back to at least 2.7 Ga. In this Special Issue we report on our progress toward this goal.

It is important to note that the set of “puzzle pieces” for each supercontinent are different (Figs. 1 and 2). For instance, puzzle pieces that formed or, more correctly, are the remnants of a late Archean supercontinents (or supercratons) correspond to the Archean cratons. Puzzle pieces that are critical to the reconstruction of supercontinent Nuna (Columbia) are in many cases composite cratons composed of more than one Archean building block with intervening and marginal younger orogenic belts. And those that are critical to the reconstruction of Rodinia are further modifications of the composite cratonic blocks, often with additional 1.3–1.0 Ga orogenic belts. The main puzzle pieces for each time interval are shown in Fig. 1. Only the major blocks are shown; many additional smaller blocks exist (Bleeker,

2. State of the barcode record In this section we review the current state of the global barcode record of the crustal blocks that constituted the various potential supercontinents. First of all we address the crustal blocks that represent the “puzzle pieces” of the paleocontinental reconstruction puzzle.

a

Australia 4 2 1 3 2 1 Tarim 2 1 2 1 1 Greater India 2 2 2 2 1 E. Antarctica 0 S. China 4 1 1 Siberia 3 1 1 N. China 1 1 Arabia-Nubia 0 Laurentia 4 2 1 Sao Francisco - Congo 3 1 Rio de la Plata 0 Amazonian 1 Baltica 1 West Africa Kalahari

Kalahari

West Africa

Baltica

Amazonia

Rio de la Plata

Congo-Sao Francisco

Laurentia

Arabia-Nubia

N. China

Siberia

S. China

E. Antarctica

Greater India

Tarim

Australia

1120-700 Ma Rodinia & its breakup

1 1 1 1 1

3

1 3

Kalahari

6 2 2 1 2 1 3 Australia 0 Tarim 0 Greater India 3 2 2 1 3 E. Antarctica 0 S. China 4 2 2 4 Siberia 3 1 1 N. China 0 Arabia-Nubia 6 1 2 6 Laurentia 3 1 1 3 Sao Francisco - Congo 2 1 2 Rio de la Plata 1 1 Amazonia 9 Baltica West Africa Kalahari

West Africa

Baltica

Amazonia

Rio de la Plata

Congo-Sao Francisco

Laurentia

Arabia-Nubia

N. China

Siberia

S. China

E. Antarctica

Greater India

Australia

Tarim

1800-1200 Ma Nuna/Columbia & its breakup

b

1

1

2

1

1 1 1

1 1

2 2

1 1 1

Fig. 3. Correlation matrices showing the number barcode lines in different time intervals for each cratonic block (“puzzle pieces”). Numbers in boxes indicate the number of barcode matches shared between the blocks on the grid axes, based on the data in Appendix 1. A match was declared for an ages similar to within 10 Ma. Matches that involve a box (enclosing multiple pulses) were counted as a single correlation. The age groupings were chosen to approximately coincide with the period of final assembly through to supercontinent breakup: for the Archean supercontinents/supercratons the relevant timing is from ca. 2500 to ca. 2000 Ma. For Nuna the relevant time is from ca. 1800 to ca. 1200 Ma. For Rodinia the relevant time is from ca. 1100 to ca. 700 Ma. For Pangea the time is from ca. 300 Ma to the present. The meaning of barcode matches during times of transition between these supercontinents has less diagnostic value and correlation matrix diagrams for these intervals are not shown.

Editorial

c

5

2 1 1 2

1

proto-East Antarctica

proto South Australia

proto North Australia

Yilgarn

1

Pilbara

1 1 1 2

North China

2

Aravalli (+Bundelkhand)

1

Singhbhum (+Bastar)

Dharwar

Superior 10 2 3 3 1 4 1 6 2 3 Central Hearne 3 1 1 1 1 3 2 Wyoming 6 1 1 1 3 1 1 Slave 6 2 2 2 2 1 Rae (+NW Hearne) 1 1 1 4 2 2 1 North Atlantic proto-Amazonia 0 1 1 Sao Francisco 0 Rio de la Plata 6 2 2 Karelia+ Kola Sarmatia 0 Volgo-Uralia 0 Kaapvaal 2 3 Zimbabwe proto-Congo 0 Tanzania 0 proto-West Africa

proto-West African

Tanzania

proto-Congo

Zimbabwe

Kaapvaal

Volgo-Uralia

Sarmatia

Karelia+Kola

Rio de la Plata

Sao Francisco

proto-Amazonia

North Atlantic + Lewisian

Rae (+NW Hearne)

Slave

Wyoming

Central Hearne

Superior

2520-2000 Ma breakup of Archean supercontinent/supercratons

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

0

3 1 Singhbhum (+Bastar) 0 Aravalli (+Bundelkhand) 0 North China 1 proto North Australia 0 proto South Australia 0 Pilbara 0 Yilgarn 1 proto East Antarctica Dharwar

0

Fig. 3 (continued).

2003) but are not included on this map in order to focus on those that will provide the framework for sorting out Precambrian supercontinents. Some of the puzzle pieces are extremely well defined (e.g., Kaapvaal, or Zimbabwe craton; i.e. surviving fragments of late Archean supercratons). On the other hand, the Sahara metacraton is poorly exposed and represents ancient blocks amalgamated and overprinted by younger deformation (Abdelsalam et al., 2002). The pattern in South America is also complicated with many smaller blocks relevant to Rodinia hidden beneath younger cover, and the distribution of blocks relevant to the earlier supercontinent cycles being even more uncertain (e.g., Fuck et al., 2008). On the other hand some simplifications occur by stepping back into the well-constrained reconstruction of supercontinent Pangea. For instance, the São Francisco and Congo cratons, of South America and Africa, respectively, are interpreted to have been connected since about 2.05 Ga (D'Agrella Filho et al., 1996; Feybesse et al., 1998); they only rifted apart and became separate entities following the ca. 120 Ma opening of the South Atlantic during Pangea breakup (e.g., Storey, 1995). 2.2. LIP ‘barcode’ summary: status of the global barcode record Our LIPs approach will be most effective when all the main crustal blocks have been fully barcoded; i.e., all the main intraplate magmatic events on each block have been dated. Failing this, some important “puzzle pieces” of the global paleogeographic puzzle will remain unconstrained. Fig. 2 summarizes the current state of the global barcode record including ages produced by the Project and discussed in the papers of this Special Issue. Note however, that a number of Project ages are still under a 12 month confidentiality agreement with our sponsors and are not incorporated in this figure. As clearly illustrated

by Fig. 2, some crustal blocks are well characterized in terms of their LIP record. In particular, there are robust barcodes for Superior, Slave and Karelian cratons, and at successor Meso- and Neo-Proterozoic times, Laurentia and Baltica. Most of the other large crustal blocks have sparse magmatic barcodes—not because they are not well endowed with dolerite dyke swarms or sill complexes, but they simply lack sufficient U–Pb dating of these units. The continuing global U–Pb geochronology program of our Project (Section 3), along with independent dating studies by other colleagues, will fill in the global LIP record. Nevertheless, as discussed in Bleeker and Ernst (2006), some blocks may remain difficult, even not impossible, to fully characterize: these are areas where basement exposure is limited due to extensive cover, or where obtaining precise U–Pb age on magmatic events is hindered by high metamorphic grades and deformation. The present state of correlations can be summarized in diagrams such as Fig. 3 where for each supercontinent time period the number of LIP events on crustal blocks can be cross-correlated to evaluate which blocks share the most barcode lines and which could therefore have been nearest neighbors in a preexisting continent. It has also been shown (e.g., Ernst and Buchan, 2002) that LIPs with matching ages (b5 Myr difference) can be found on widely separated blocks, and therefore be independent and unrelated. Therefore, single barcode matches may identify important connections but by themselves are generally not sufficient. Elsewhere we have argued (Bleeker, 2008) that any multiple barcode matches across a span of time (e.g. ca. 100–200 Myr) almost certainly identifies original nearest neighbor pieces of crust. The probability that such multiple matches are purely a function of chance seems negligible. Here we use three barcode matches to identify nearest neighbors, and use the slightly more relaxed criterion of a less 10 Ma difference as a

6

Editorial

possible match (based on the summary of the global LIP record in Appendix 1). Some strong correlations are evident and are discussed in a later section after we have previewed the new results presented in the papers of this Special Issue. 3. Industry consortium project To accelerate progress towards completing the LIP barcodes of all main crustal blocks we have obtained funding for U–Pb dating from an industry consortium, with additional academic and government support. The overall project is entitled the “Reconstruction of Supercontinents Back to 2.7 Ga Using the Large Igneous Province (LIP) Record: With Implications for Mineral Deposit Targeting, Hydrocarbon Resource Exploration, and Earth System Evolution” (www.supercontinent.org). Specifically, the goal is to essentially date every currently poorly dated or undated major regional dolerite dyke swarm and sill province around the world using the U–Pb method; particularly the large tholeiitic events predating or associated with breakup events. Five mining companies (Anglo American / De Beers, Archon Minerals/Norwest Rotors, Gold Fields, Minerals and Metals Group, Vale), and one oil company (Shell) are our primary sponsors. Their participation is based on the recognition of the importance of LIPs in global resource exploration: 1) LIPs have a direct magmatic link to a host of world-class ore deposits (e.g., Ernst, 2007; Naldrett, 1999, 2010): the largest Ni–Cu–PGE deposits are linked with the mafic–ultramafic intrusives (e.g., Noril'sk, Bushveld) which belong to the plumbing system of LIPs. The silicic component can also be linked with various commodities (e.g., the Gawler Range bimodal LIP with the Olympic Dam IOCG, iron-oxide copper gold deposit, of the South Australian craton (Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012). Additionally, carbonatites are strongly linked with LIPs and are the key source of Nb, Ta, and REEs (Ernst and Bell, 2010). The link between LIPs and kimberlite fields is also strong, both temporally and spatially. 2) LIP magmatism can also have an indirect influence on several other mineral resources. The associated thermal pulse into the crust can drive hydrothermal fluids and remobilize many different commodities (e.g., Au, Ag, Co, U, Hg, etc.). For the oil industry, LIPs are linked to oceanic anoxia that result in black shales (hydrocarbon source) in the ocean; they are linked to the dynamics and thermal history of sedimentary basins; and igneous sills can represent both structural traps and reservoir rocks for oil (Kerr, 1998, 2005). 3) Industry is also keenly interested in robust reconstructions that will allow tracing of known metallogenic belts into “greenfield” exploration areas on formerly adjacent crustal blocks. Our consortium project involves a large international group of scientists in an effective, mutually beneficial collaboration with industry (www.supercontinent.org). Specifically, our core team of geochronologists, and associated paleomagnetic and geochemistry expertise, is augmented by an informal network of about 50 regional experts around the world who provide kg-sized samples of coarse-grained dolerite/gabbro from key units in their regions for U–Pb dating. In return, our geochronology team produces U–Pb ages (mainly on baddeleyite). In collaboration with our regional collaborators we prepare short reports for our industry sponsors that summarize the new U–Pb geochronological results, and highlight the implications for resource exploration and paleocontinental reconstructions. Each report and age result has a one-year confidentiality period to allow our sponsors to utilize this information to their competitive advantage, in return for their considerable financial investment. After the confidentiality period expires for each report, results can be expanded into conferences abstracts and publications. We welcome additional collaborators, particularly those with access to samples in remote areas from key crustal blocks. Our work is synergistic with other reconstruction efforts in the community and together we expect to be able to achieve the target of completing

the plate tectonic revolution and producing robust reconstructions back to 2.7 Ga within the next 5–10 years. With industry support our project team has produced 49 U–Pb ages in Year 1 and 40 U–Pb ages in Year 2, from crustal blocks around the world, and 44 U–Pb ages in Year 3 (which just ended). Of these new age results, about 33 are out of confidentiality and released in abstracts and publications (including those in this special issue). 4. Papers of this special issue 4.1. Introduction The main release of our results is through journal special issues. Our first special issue was through Precambrian Research (Srivastava et al., 2010) which included 19 papers and was based on research produced as the Project was being formulated. This current Special Issue of Lithos includes 20 papers of which 13 include data produced by the Project. Two additional papers on the West African craton, representing research of an affiliated project funded through a Swedish Research Council grant to U. Söderlund and N. Youbi, and five other papers characterizing other important LIPs complete the volume. Additional special issues are planned. The papers in the present special issue are broadly organized in terms of age from youngest to oldest with additional thematic aspects emphasized as necessary. 4.2. Paleozoic: assembly and breakup of Pangea Two papers are focused on the ca. 280 Ma LIPs of Asia. Zhang and Zou (2013–this issue) consider the major 280 Ma LIP centered on the Tarim block and also extending into the Central Asian foldbelt. This single LIP intrudes both cratonic and adjacent collisional/orogenic regions, and this provides the authors an opportunity to investigate the contributions of lithospheric mantle to LIP geochemistry. The paper by Zhai et al. (2013–this issue) considers a second region of 280 Ma magmatism further south in Asia. Specifically, the Qiangtang dyke swarm of Tibet, and the correlated basalts (e.g., Panjal Traps) along the Tethyan Himalayas are linked to the initial rifting and opening of the Meso-Tethys Ocean in the Permian. Paleozoic intraplate magmatic provinces have been newly recognized in southeastern Siberia. Khudoley et al. (2013–this issue) have identified two magmatic events: the ca. 450 Ma Suordakh event and another event of early Cambrian age. Furthermore, the silicic magmatism associated with the Suordakh event is postulated to be related to crustal melting caused by LIP underplating rather than subduction; this paper is a contribution to the understanding of silicic magmatism associated with LIPs (see Section 5.3). A separate Cambrian event is associated with the opening of the Iapetus Ocean (Hanson et al., 2013–this issue). The ca. 540–530 Ma Wichita igneous province of the southern Laurentia (Oklahoma and Texas, USA) is now recognized to be considerably larger in size on the basis of new data from drill holes and geophysical modeling revealing a total volume in excess of 250,000 km3 of bimodal magmatism, not only in the rift but also outside the rift and including significant volumes of silicic magmatism. 4.3. Proterozoic LIPs and reconstruction implications The Proterozoic has a considerable number of LIP events in which the plumbing system of dykes, sills and layered intrusions is exposed by erosional removal of the overlying flood basalts. Several papers in this special issue identify some new Proterozoic LIP events and/or help characterize known LIPs. One of the major crustal blocks that had previously been poorly barcoded was the West African craton (WAC) (Fig. 1). Numerous generations of dolerite dyke swarms of unknown age are present in the Precambrian inliers of the Anti-Atlas belt in the northern part of the

Editorial

WAC. Two papers provide the first U–Pb baddeleyite ages on these dolerites and reveal a number of discrete events. Kouyaté et al. (2013–this issue) obtained ages of ca. 885, 1650 and 2040 Ma. El Bahat et al. (2013–this issue) obtained a 1380 Ma age on two dykes. However, subsequent LA-ICPMS dating on one of the dykes suggests a slightly older age of ca. 1415 Ma (Söderlund et al., 2013–this issue); provisionally we are recognizing an event with a more approximate age of 1380–1415 Ma. All these events are newly recognized in the West African craton, except for a previous 2040 Ma age on a dyke (Walsh et al., 2002). In addition, ca. 2040 Ma silicic intrusive magmatism in the Anti Atlas inliers is interpreted as having been derived from melting of lower crust by mafic underplating associated with the LIP. The 885 Ma age is considered in the context of Rodinia breakup; the 1650 Ma and 1380 (−1415) Ma ages are linked to Nuna/Columbia breakup, and the 2040 Ma age is linked to breakup of a late Archean supercontinent (or supercraton; cf. Bleeker, 2003). Puchkov et al. (2013–this issue) provide an overview of one of the major nodes of ca. 1380 Ma magmatism in the eastern margin of Baltica. The 1385 Ma Mashak event consists of dykes and volcanic rocks associated with rifting in the southern Urals but potentially extending into the northern Urals with an overall regional extent greater than 500,000 km 2. This event has implications for both metallogeny and hydrocarbons in the western slopes of the Urals. Pisarevsky et al. (2013–this issue) investigate the geochronology, geochemistry and paleomagnetism of mafic and felsic (bimodal) Lakhna dykes in the Bastar craton of India. Age and paleomagnetism allow a comparison with similar age paleomagnetic poles from other blocks and four plausible reconstructions are considered. The one preferred by the authors places western India attached to southwestern Baltica (Sarmatia). Geochemistry is interpreted in favor of an active continental margin, although it should be noted that subduction characteristics are seen in many LIPs that have a clear extensional setting (e.g., see discussion in Puffer, 2001). Our Consortium Project is also producing new U–Pb baddeleyite ages for dolerites in South America, specifically for the São Francisco, Rio de la Plata, and Amazonian cratons. Oliveira et al. (2013–this issue) discuss new Archean ages for the Uauá swarm (discussed in Section 4.5 below), and Silveira et al. (2013–this issue) present precise U–Pb ages of ca. 1505 Ma for two sets of dykes in the northern São Francisco craton. The latter is a new event for the combined São Francisco–Congo cratons, which were connected prior to Pangea breakup since ca. 2.0 Ga (as discussed above). In a complementary paper, also based on Project results, Ernst et al. (2013) report confirmation of the 1505 Ma event more than a 1000 km away in the Angola portion of the Congo craton. Furthermore, Ernst et al. (2013) and Silveira et al. (2013–this issue) suggest that the combined São Francisco–Congo craton was connected with northern Siberia, which has matching 1505 Ma magmatism. The Rio de la Plata craton hosts the 1790 Ma Florida and 1590 Ma Tandil dolerite swarms. Teixeira et al. (2013–this issue) expand U–Pb baddeleyite dating on the Tandil swarm and provide additional paleomagnetic data for the Florida swarm, and these data are compared with those of other crustal blocks to evaluate possible reconstructions involving the Rio de la Plata craton at this time: i) near the Amazonia + Rio Apa landmass (approximately as in present day); ii) as a nearest neighbor to the reconstructed NW Laurentia and Gawler blocks (proto-Australia); or iii) near the boundary of Amazonia (proto-Amazonian craton) and Baltica. Tandil dykes define both high Ti and low Ti suites and both the Tandil and Florida swarms have geochemical and Nd–Sr isotopic characteristics consistent with derivation from heterogeneous metasomatized mantle sources. One of the most dramatic magmatic events of South America is the ca. 1790 Ma Avanavero LIP of the Amazonian craton (Reis et al., 2013–this issue). It consists of dykes, volcanic rocks, and, in particular, a widespread dolerite sill province. Avanvero magmatism is tholeiitic and geochemically similar to E-MORB and subcontinental lithospheric mantle basalts. Precise U–Pb dating confirms a 1793–1795 Ma

7

pulse, but a younger 1780–1787 Ma pulse is also suggested by previous studies. Paleomagnetic data favor an Amazonia and Baltica link similar to that of the SAMBA reconstruction (Johansson, 2009). A link with the above described 1790 Ma Florida swarm of the Rio de la Plata craton is also offered (Teixeira et al., 2013–this issue). Ca. 1790 Ma magmatism is also important in the Ukrainian shield portion of Volgo-Sarmatia (combined Volgo-Uralia and Sarmatia cratons; Bogdanova et al., 2013–this issue) of Baltica (East European craton). As reviewed by Bogdanova et al. (2013–this issue), a widespread suite of AMCG (anorthosite–mangerite–charnockite–granite) magmatism includes dykes and intrusions of both tholeiitic and jotunitic character with ages clustered at 1790 Ma and 1760–1750 Ma. The two generations of dykes typically have different trends: ca. 1790 Ma dykes are generally NW-trending and the ca. 1750–1760 Ma dykes are generally NE- to N-trending; the authors favor an origin of these dykes related to a two-stage collision between Volgo-Sarmatia and Fennoscandia. Intraplate magmatism of ca. 1880 Ma is widespread on many blocks including the Slave craton (Buchan et al., 2010), Indian craton (French et al., 2008) and other blocks, most dramatically on the Superior craton (e.g., Heaman et al., 2009; Ernst and Bell, 2010). Minifie et al. (2013–this issue) provide a geochemical overview of the ca. 1880 Ma Circum-Superior event which is economically important for the Ni–Cu– PGE ores of the Thompson belt and Cape Smith regions. New geochemical data produced by Minifie et al. (2013–this issue) support a genetic link between units (such as the Fox River sill) located near the Thompson mantle plume center, the similar age units on the southern side of the Superior craton in the Animikie basin, and also the Pickle Crow dyke connecting these two areas which was previously postulated to be the feeder system for the Animikie basin volcanic rocks (Buchan et al., 2003). Bejgarn et al. (2013–this issue) provide precise 1880 Ma ages for intrusions in the Skellefte district of northern Sweden, a metallogenic belt hosting volcanogenic massive sulfide deposits, porphyry Cu–Mo–Au, Au, and mafic hosted Fe and Cu–Ni deposits. Their paper was included in this special issue because the orogenic setting preferred for the Skellefte 1880 Ma magmatism contrasts with the LIP (intrplate) style magmatism of the coeval 1880 Ma Circum-Superior LIP (Minifie et al., 2013–this issue). 4.4. Events associated with breakup of an Archean supercontinent/ supercratons Several papers discuss LIPs linked to breakup of an Archean supercontinent, or one or more supercratons. Nilsson et al. (2013–this issue) present six Paleoproterozoic U–Pb ages from the southwest Greenland portion of the North Atlantic craton (NAC). The new ages augment the 2050–2030 Ma Kangamiut–MD3 event previously recognized, provide further confirmation of a 2210 Ma event, and most significantly, identify a new 2370 Ma event. The latter age is only found on one other block, the Dharwar craton. On this basis it is proposed that the Dharwar and NAC cratons were nearest neighbors, and a systematic comparison between the two blocks was attempted that incorporates all the different barcode lines currently recognized for both cratons. As noted above the 2040 Ma age is also obtained on dolerites of the West African craton, suggesting that there may also be a possible link between these blocks (NAC and West African) (Kouyaté et al., 2013–this issue). The Blue Draw Metagabbro (BDM) of the Wyoming craton, dated at 2480 Ma (Dahl et al., 2006) provides a match with the Matachewan event of the southern Superior craton and supports a Wyoming–Superior reconstruction (Dahl et al., 2006; Ernst and Bleeker, 2010; Roscoe and Card, 1993). Ciborowski et al. (2013–this issue) provide a comprehensive geochemical characterization and petrogenetic interpretation of the BDM and compare it with the East Bull Lake intrusive suite of the Matachewan event. The BDM is of low-Ti tholeiitic composition with a trace element chemistry defined by enrichments in large-ion lithophile and light rare-earth elements and with prominent negative Nb, Ta and Ti anomalies. This ‘arc-like’ geochemistry is shared with

8

Editorial

the East Bull Lake suite and may suggest that these two units shared a common source. As noted earlier, an arc-like chemistry is known from many LIPs and does not require a subduction setting. Jowitt and Ernst (2013–this issue) provide an overview of the lithogeochemistry of eight LIP events in Canada to determine their Ni–Cu–PGE prospectivity. Prospectivity was analyzed in terms of fertility (metal endowment in the primary magma), sulfur saturation/ chalcophile element depletion, and crustal contamination (which can be used to infer if the chalcophile depletion is linked to incorporation of sulfur and removal of metals as sulfides). Those events which are most prospective based on these criteria are: the 2.49–2.45 Ga Matachewan, 1.87 Ga Chukotat, 1.27 Ga Mackenzie, and 0.72 Ga Franklin LIPs, each of which has known mineralization. This lithogeochemistry approach allows assessment of non-mineralized portions of a LIP, to predict whether mineralized units are likely present somewhere else in the LIP system. 4.5. Archean LIPs Three papers present Archean LIP ages. Oliveira et al. (2013–this issue) present ages of 2726 and 2623 Ma for noritic and tholeiitic dykes, respectively, of the Uauá swarm of the São Francisco craton. The noritic dykes are interpreted to represent low degrees of melting from enriched refractory mantle sources whereas the tholeiitic dykes represent high degrees of partial melting of more depleted mantle sources. It is suggested that the Uauá block (hosting the dykes) is a small piece of Archean crust dispersed after breakup of a major Archean supercraton. Perhaps part of this Archean supercraton involves the central part of the West African craton. Precise U–Pb dating of the Ahmeyim Great Dyke of Mauritania yields an age of 2733 Ma (Tait et al., 2013–this issue). This dyke is approximately 1500 m wide where sampled and can be traced for more than 150 km before being lost beneath cover rocks. The magmas which formed the Ahmeyim Great Dyke were boninite-like. This combined with evidence of crustal contamination, the large width of the dyke, and its potential links with Archean greenstone belts of tholeiitic–komatiitic affiliation suggest prospectivity for magmatic Ni–Cu–PGE sulfides. Finally, U–Pb baddeleyite dating reveals a new Mesoarchean LIP in the Kaapvaal craton consisting of the 2866 Ma Hlagothi Complex and its 2874 Ma NW-trending dyke swarm in southeastern Kaapvaal craton (Gumsley et al., 2013–this issue). This event can also be linked with ca. 2.85–2.75 Ga granitoids of the southeastern Kaapvaal craton. A shortlived mantle plume with associated uplift is proposed to have caused the ca. 2.87 Ga magmatism, and may also have controlled sedimentation in the Pongola-Witwatersrand basin. A possible link with magmatism in the Pilbara craton is also discussed in the context of the previously proposed supercraton Vaalbara. 5. Discussion

cratons which were connected at this time (Ernst et al., 2013; Silveira et al., 2013–this issue). Ca. 1350 and 1640 Ma events are now recognized from southern Siberia (Ernst and Bleeker, 2011; Metelkin et al., 2011). Ca. 1750 Ma dolerites are recognized from northern Baltica (Lubnina et al., 2012), 1880 Ma dolerites are newly recognized in the Nain (North Atlantic) (Sahin et al., 2012a, 2012b), and 2370 Ma and 2500 Ma events are now recognized in southwest Greenland (part of the NAC) (Nilsson et al., 2013–this issue). New Archean ages were obtained for Uauá block of the São Francisco craton (Oliveira et al., 2013–this issue), the West African craton (Tait et al., 2013–this issue), and from southeast Kaapvaal craton (Gumsley et al., 2013–this issue). Other papers in this special issue also demonstrate the regional importance of certain LIP events. Ca. 280 Ma events are important both in Tarim/central Asia (Zhang and Zou, 2013–this issue), and in Tibet and elsewhere along the Himalayas (Zhai et al., 2013–this issue). The scale of the 530 Ma Wichita event of southern of southern Laurentia is greatly increased (Hanson et al., 2013–this issue). Other papers show the regional importance of the 1385 Ma LIP event (West Africa, El Bahat et al., 2013–this issue) and Baltica (Puchkov et al., 2013–this issue). The 1590 Ma event is expanded in the Rio de la Plata craton (Teixeira et al., 2013–this issue), and 1790 Ma units are demonstrated to be important in the Rio de la Plata craton (Teixeira et al., 2013–this issue), Amazonia (Reis et al., 2013–this issue) and the Ukrainian Shield of Volgo-Sarmatia (Bogdanova et al., 2013–this issue). Each of these newly discovered LIPs, or expanded distribution of known LIPs, has implications for paleocontinental reconstructions, as addressed below. 5.2. Progress on continental reconstructions On the basis of new ages summarized above we recognize some new constraints on paleocontinental reconstructions. 5.2.1. Southern Siberia–northern Laurentia (725 Ma) The exact age match between the 725 Ma events of southern Siberia and northern Laurentia (Ernst et al., 2010, 2012) suggests a nearest neighbor relationship at this time. A number of other LIP matches over the interval 1.7 to 0.73 Ga are cited in support of a close reconstruction over this interval (Bleeker and Ernst, 2011; Ernst and Bleeker, 2011). However, the paleomagnetic evidence suggestive of a gap between Siberia and Laurentia at this time (e.g., Pisarevsky et al., 2008; Wingate et al., 2009) remains to be addressed. 5.2.2. São Francisco/Congo–Amazonia–Kalahari–India (1110 Ma) A newly discovered 1110 Ma event in the São Francisco/Congo craton (Ernst et al., 2013) and Amazonia (Hamilton et al., 2012), matches with similar ages in Kalahari (Umkondo LIP; Hanson et al., 2006) and India (Pradhan et al., 2012), and suggests that these blocks can be reconstructed together at this time (Ernst et al., 2013). However, the previously cited paleomagnetic arguments against linking the Keweenawan to the Kalahari at this time remain valid (Hanson et al., 2006).

5.1. Improved global LIP barcode record While the LIP barcode record is still sparsely populated for most blocks (Fig. 2), this special issue reports dramatic progress in U–Pb dating on several crustal blocks. Key results of the papers in this Special Issue along with results (of the Project) presented in conference abstracts and separate publications are summarized below. Some important new LIP events are recognized on some Proterozoic blocks. For instance, 725 Ma ages were obtained from the Dovyren and Upper Kingash units of southern Siberia (Ernst et al., 2012). The West African craton has new events at 885, 1380–1415, and 1650 Ma and confirmation of a 2040 Ma event (Kouyaté et al., 2013–this issue; El Bahat et al., 2013–this issue; Söderlund et al., 2013–this issue). Ca. 1110 Ma events are now recognized in Amazonia (Hamilton et al., 2012) and in the Angola portion of the Congo craton (Ernst et al., 2013). A 1505 Ma event has been newly recognized in both the São Francisco and Congo

5.2.3. Laurentia–Baltica–Siberia–Congo–West African (1380 Ma) A 1380 Ma giant LIP spans various blocks such as Laurentia, Baltica, and Siberia (Ernst et al., 2008, 2010, 2013; Evans and Mitchell, 2011) and represents a dramatic stage in the breakup of the Nuna/Columbia supercontinent. The newly discovered 1380–1415 Ma event of the West African craton (El Bahat et al., 2013–this issue; Söderlund et al., 2013–this issue) represents another potential fragment of this major LIP. 5.2.4. São Francisco–Congo–northern Siberia (1505 Ma) The matching 1505 Ma LIP ages obtained in the São Francisco craton (Silveira et al., 2013–this issue) and Congo craton (Ernst et al., 2013) confirm a São Francisco–Congo link at this time (see discussion above) and further suggest a reconstruction with northern Siberia and proximity with Baltica (Ernst et al., 2013).

Editorial

5.2.5. Siberia (southern)–Laurentia (northern)–Baltica (1630–1640 Ma) The 1640 Ma sills from southern Siberia (Metelkin et al., 2011) can be compared with the major Melville Bugt swarm of southern Greenland (e.g., Halls et al., 2011), also in the context of a southern Siberia–northern Laurentia reconstruction at this time (Metelkin et al., 2011). 5.2.6. Siberia (southern)–Laurentia (northern)–Baltica–West African craton (1750 Ma) Ca. 1750 Ma magmatism recognized in Baltica (Lubnina et al., 2012), along with that in Sarmatia (Bogdanova et al., 2013–this issue), in southern Siberia (Gladkochub et al., 2010), northern Laurentia (Ernst and Bleeker, 2010), and in the West African craton (Youbi et al., 2012) are all potentially part of a single LIP. 5.2.7. Amazonia–Sarmatia (1790 Ma) The SAMBA reconstruction (Johansson, 2009) with some modifications is favored by Reis et al. (2013–this issue) and Teixeira et al. (2013–this issue) and provides a juxtaposition of the 1790 Ma events of Amazonia (Reis et al., 2013–this issue) and Sarmatia (Ukrainian shield) (Bogdanova et al., 2013–this issue). 5.2.8. West African–North Atlantic (2040 Ma) The 2040 Ma ages from the West African craton (Kouyaté et al., 2013–this issue), can be matched with those of the North Atlantic craton (Nilsson et al., 2013–this issue), suggesting a reconstruction linkage at this time (Kouyaté et al., 2013–this issue). 5.2.9. Dharwar–North Atlantic (2370 Ma) The remarkable discovery of the 2370 Ma event in southwest Greenland (Nilsson et al., 2013–this issue) matches the age of the 2370 Bangalore-Karimnagar swarm of the Dharwar craton (Kumar et al., 2012), and given the uniqueness of this age globally suggests a

9

Dharwar–North Atlantic craton link at this time (Nilsson et al., 2013–this issue). 5.3. Silicic magmatism associated with LIPs There is increasing recognition that significant silicic magmatism can be associated with LIPs (Bryan and Ernst, 2008; Bryan and Ferrari, in press). Magmatic underplating associated with a LIP can cause partial melting of lower crust and produce silicic magmatism of variable type depending on the protolith being melted, and can be geochemically indistinguishable from that of subduction origin. Additional examples introduced in this Special Issue include: granites associated with the ca. 450 Ma Suordakh event of southeastern Siberia (Khudoley et al., 2013–this issue); the rhyolites associated with the 530 Ma Wichita event of southern Laurentia (Hanson et al., 2013–this issue); the 2040 Ma event in Anti-Atlas inliers of the West African craton (El Bahat et al., 2013–this issue); and granites coeval with the 2870 Ma LIP of the SE Kaapvaal craton (Gumsley et al., 2013–this issue). 5.4. Future work The LIPs—Supercontinent Reconstruction - Resource Exploration project (www.supercontinent.org) will continue to produce U–Pb ages on dolerite units around the world. These new ages, along with those being produced by other groups, will: 1) allow continued filling in of the LIP barcode record and provide further constraints on paleocontinental reconstructions; 2) provide geochronology control on paleomagnetic studies in order to test reconstructions; 3) suggest geochemical comparison of LIP fragments juxtaposed in reconstructions in order to investigate petrogenetic relationships and to sort out the magmatic pathways in the LIP plumbing system; and 4) allow analysis of reconstructed LIP events for their metallogenic potential, and implications for hydrocarbon resources. This is a golden time for studies of Large Igneous Provinces.

Appendix 1. Continental Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) back to 2600 Ma Does not include oceanic plateaus or accreted oceanic plateaus nor silicic LIPs. Only those events with well-determined ages are included. The selected references are either recent or represent compilations. Age

LIP name

Location(s)

Selected reference

15 30 60 65 90 90 130–90 120 130 130–120 130 140 180 200 250 260 280 280 300 320–280 380 380

Columbia River Afro-Arabian North Atlantic Igneous Province Deccan Caribbean-Colombian Madagascar HALIP Whitsunday Parana-Etendeka Comei-Rajmahal Bunbury Gascoyne Margin Karoo, Ferrar, Chon Aike CAMP Siberia Emeishan Tarim Qiangtang Jutland Kennedy–Connors–Auburn Yakutsk Baltica- Kola Pen.

North America Arabian Pen. & Africa Greenland/N. Canada & Europe (UK) India Central America Africa Circum-Arctic Australia (east) South America & Africa Greater India Australia (southwest margin) Australia (northwest margin) Africa, South America, Antarctica North America, South America, Africa, Europe (Iberia) Asia Asia Asia Asia (Tibet) Europe Australia (NE margin) Siberia Baltica

Coble and Mahood, 2012 Beccaluva et al., 2009 Jerram et al., 2009 Hooper et al., 2010 Hastie and Kerr, 2010 Ernst and Buchan, 2001 Jowitt et al., in press Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Thiede and Vasconcelos, 2010 Zhu et al., 2009 Zhu et al., 2009 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Svensen et al., 2012 Marzoli et al., 2011 Sobolev et al., 2011 Ali et al., 2010 Zhang and Zou, 2013–this issue Zhai et al., 2013–this issue Kirstein et al., 2004 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Kiselev et al., 2012 Ernst and Bell, 2010 (continued on next page)

10

Editorial

Appendix 1 (continued) (continued) Age

LIP name

Location(s)

Selected reference

450 510 540–530 560–550 560–550 590 615 725–715 725 725 755 770–755 755 780 780 780 780 790 800 800 800 820 825 825 880 920 920 925–900 975–945 1075 1090 1110 1110 1110 1110 1115–1085 1140 1165 1210 1220 1240 1250 1250 1270 1270 1270, 1260, 1250 1320 1320 1380 1380 1380 1380 1380–1415 1380 1380 1380 1460 1460 1470 1500 1505 1505 1590 1590 1590 1600 1630 1640 1640–1670 1650 1690–1670 1790–1760 1730 1750 1750 1750 1740–1750

Suordakh Kalkarindji Wichita Central Iapetus- Sept Iles, Catoctin, Volyn Central Iapetus- Ouarzazate Central Iapetus- Grenville Central Iapetus- Long Range, Baltoscandian, Egersund Franklin Dovyren-Kingash Mutare Mundine Well Malani Shaba & Ogcheon Gunbarrel Kangding Kudi Boucaut Gannakouriep Rushinga group (and Magondi belt magmatism) Suxiong-Xiaofeng Niquelandia Qiganbulake (Kuruketage) Willouran-Gairdner Guibei Iguerda-Taïfast Gangil-Mayumbian Bahia Dashigou Blekinge-Dalarna Warakurna SW USA Diabase Province Umkondo GN Rincon de Tigre Mahoba Keweenawan Abitibi Late Gardar Marnda Moorn Protogine Zone Sudbury [dyke] Mealy-Seal Lake Vestfold Hills-5 Mackenzie Harp Central Scandinavian Dolerite Group Derim-Derim (Roper) Yanliao Hart River-Salmon Arch Midsommerso-Zig Zag Dal Vestfold Hills-4 Chieress 1380 event Kunene Pilanesberg Mashak Tuna- Lake Ladoga West Bangemall-Edmund Moyie Brevik-Rjukan Kuonamka Curaçá-Chapada-Humpata Gawler-Hiltaba Western Channel Tandil Breven-Hallefors Melville-Bugt ‘Nersa’ Hame Zenaga & Agadir Melloul inlier dykes Willyama Supergroup Eastern Creek Miyun 1750 Ma event Espinhaco Vestfold Hills-3 Cleaver-Hadley Bay- Pitz- Nueltin

Siberia Australia Laurentia Laurentia (east) & Baltica West Africa Laurentia (east) & Baltica Laurentia (east) & Baltica Laurentia (north) Siberia (south) Kalahari craton Australia (northwest) Greater India South China block Laurentia South China block Tarim craton Australia (south) Kalahari craton (sw margin) Kalahari craton (northern margin) South China block São Francisco craton Tarim craton Australia South China block West African craton Congo craton São Francisco craton North China craton Baltica Australia Laurentia Kalahari craton Congo craton Amazonia Greater India Laurentia Laurentia Laurentia (Greenland) Australia Baltica Laurentia Laurentia East Antarctica Laurentia Laurentia Baltica North Australian craton North China craton Laurentia Laurentia East Antarctica Siberia West African craton Congo craton Kalahari craton Baltica Baltica North Australian craton Laurentia Baltica Siberia São Francisco/Congo South Australian craton Laurentia Rio de la Plata craton Baltica Laurentia (Greenland) Siberia (south) Baltica West African craton South Australian craton North Australian craton North China craton Siberia São Francisco craton East Antarctica Rae craton

Khudoley et al., 2013–this issue Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Hanson et al., 2013–this issue Ernst and Bell, 2010 Ernst and Bell, 2010 Ernst and Bell, 2010 Ernst and Bell, 2010 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2012 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Rioux et al., 2010 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Correia et al., 2012 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Kouyaté et al., 2013–this issue Ernst et al., 2008 Evans et al., 2010 Peng et al., 2011 Ernst et al., 2008 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Bright et al., 2011 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2013 Hamilton et al., 2012 Pradhan et al., 2012 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Zhang et al., 2012b Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Söderlund et al., 2013–this issue Ernst et al., 2013 Ernst et al., 2008 Puchkov et al., 2013–this issue Ernst et al., 2008 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2008 Ernst et al., 2013 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Ernst et al., 2008 Teixeira et al., 2013–this issue Ernst et al., 2008 Halls et al., 2011 Metelkin et al., 2011 Ernst and Buchan, 2001 Kouyaté et al., 2013–this issue Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Peng et al., 2012 Gladkochub et al., 2010 Ernst and Buchan, 2001 Ernst and Buchan, 2001 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010

Editorial

11

Appendix 1 (continued) (continued) Age

LIP name

Location(s)

Selected reference

1780–1770 1790 1790 1790–1750 1830–1790 1830 1880 1880–1870 1880–1870 1880–1870 1890 1900 1920 1930 1950 1970–1960 1980–1960 1970 2000 2011 2025 2030–2050 2040 2040 2060 2055 2075 2085 2120–2100 2100 2100 2110 2115–2095 2145 2150 2170 2170 2180 2190 2190 2200 2210 2215 2210 2230 2215 2210 2220 2215 2240 2370 2370 2410 2410 2410 2410–2420 2450–2480 2450–2510 2450 2470 2500 2500 2510 2510 2580 2575

North China swarm Avanavero Florida (Uruguayan) AMCG suite Ukrainian shield Hart-Carson Sparrow- Christopher Island Fm Circum-Superior Ghost- Mara River - Morel Mashonaland Soutpansberg Cuddapah-Bastar Hearne-Chipman-Snowbird Waterberg-Olifantshoek Xuwujia Mugford Povungnituk Pechenga Xiwangshan Minto-Eskimo Kennedy Lac des Gras-Booth River Kangamuit-MD3 2040 Ma event Korak Bushveld Kuetsjärvi-Umba-Keivitsa Fort Frances-Cauchon Medrado Marathon Indin Karelia Griffin Bear Mountain- Snowy Pass Riviere du Gue Hengling Wind River Biscotasing Dandeli Dogrib Tulemalu Ongeluk-Hekpoort Turee Creek Ungava MacKay Malley Koli Somala Kandlamadugu BN1 Vestfold Hills-2 Bangalore-Karimnagar Graedefjord Sebanga Poort Ringvassoy Du Chef Widgiemooltha Matachewan Baltic LIP (BLIP) Wongarra Mtshingwe Kilarsaarfik Kaminak Mistassini Crystal Springs Caraiba Great Dyke of Zimbabwe

North China craton Amazonia Rio de la Plata craton Baltica (Volgo-Sarmatia) Northern Australian (Kimberley block) Rae craton Superior craton Slave craton Zimbabwe craton Kaapvaal craton Dharwar-Bastar craton Slave and Rae craton Kaapvaal craton North China craton North Atlantic (Nain) craton Superior craton Karelia-Kola craton North China craton Superior craton Wyoming craton Slave craton North Atlantic craton (Greenland) West African craton Superior craton Kaapvaal craton Karelia Superior craton São Francisco craton Superior craton Slave craton Karelia Hearne craton Wyoming craton Superior craton North China craton Wyoming craton Superior craton Dharwar craton Slave craton Rae craton Kaapvaal craton Pilbara craton Superior craton Slave craton Slave craton Karelia Dharwar craton Dharwar craton North Atlantic craton (Greenland) East Antarctica Dharwar craton North Atlantic craton (Greenland) Zimbabwe craton Karelia-Kola (West Troms Basement Complex) Superior craton Yilgarn craton Superior craton Karelia Pilbara craton Zimbabwe craton North Atlantic craton Hearne craton Superior craton Zimbabwe craton São Francisco craton Zimbabwe craton

Peng, 2010 Reis et al., 2013-this issue Teixeira et al., 2013–this issue Bogdanova et al. 2013–this issue Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bell, 2010 Buchan et al., 2010 Söderlund et al., 2010 Hanson et al., 2011 French et al., 2008 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Hanson et al., 2004 Peng et al., 2005 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Buchan, 2001 Peng et al., 2005 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Buchan et al., 2010 Nilsson et al. 2013–this issue Kouyaté et al., 2013–this issue Ernst and Buchan, 2010 Rajesh et al., 2013 Martin et al., 2013 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Oliveria et al., 2004 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Buchan et al., 2010 Vuollo and Huhma, 2005 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Peng et al., 2005 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 French and Heaman, 2010 Buchan et al., 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Buchan, 2001 Müller et al., 2005 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 French and Heaman, 2010 French and Heaman, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Kumar et al., 2012 Nilsson et al. 2013–this issue Söderlund et al., 2010 Kullerud et al., 2006 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Smirnov et al., 2013 Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Ernst and Buchan, 2001 Pirajno and Hoatson, 2012 Söderlund et al., 2010 Nilsson et al. 2013–this issue Sandeman et al., in press Ernst and Bleeker, 2010 Söderlund et al., 2010 Oliveria et al., 2004 Söderlund et al., 2010

Acknowledgments

References

Sergei Pisarevsky is thanked for insightful comments. This is publication no. 27 of the LIPs - Supercontinent Reconstruction - Resource Exploration Project (www.supercontinent.org).

Abdelsalam, M.G., Liégeois, J.-P., Stern, R.J., 2002. The Saharan Metacraton. Journal of African Earth Sciences 34, 119–136. Ali, J.R., Fitton, J.G., Herzberg, C., 2010. Emeishan large igneous province (SW China) and the mantle-plume up-doming hypothesis. Journal of the Geological Society of London 167, 953–959.

12

Editorial

Beccaluva, L., Bianchini, G., Natali, C., Siena, F., 2009. Continental flood basalts and mantle plumes: a case study of the Northern Ethiopian Plateau. Journal of Petrology 50, 1377–1403. Bejgarn, T., Söderlund, U., Weihed, P., Årebäck, H., Ernst, R.E., 2013. Palaeoproterozoic porphyry Cu–Au, intrusion-hosted Au and ultramafic Cu–Ni deposits in the Fennoscandian Shield: Temporal constraints using U–Pb geochronology. Lithos 174, 236–254 (this issue). Berman, R.G., Davis, W.J., Pehrsson, S., 2007. Collisional Snowbird tectonic zone resurrected: growth of Laurentia during the 1.9 Ga accretionary phase of the Hudsonian orogeny. Geology 35, 911–914. Bleeker, W., 2003. The late Archean record: a puzzle in ca. 35 pieces. Lithos 71, 99–134. Bleeker, W., 2008. The pulse of the Earth. Session MPI-04 Mafic dyke swarms: A global perspective — Part 1. 33rd International Geological Congress, August 6–14th, Oslo, Abstract CD (1 pp.). Bleeker, W., Ernst, R.E., 2006. Short-lived mantle generated magmatic events and their dyke swarms: the key unlocking Earth's paleogeographic record back to 2.6 Ga. In: Hanski, E., Mertanen, S., Rämö, T., Vuollo, J. (Eds.), Dyke Swarms — Time Markers of Crustal Evolution. Taylor and Francis Group, London, pp. 3–26. Bleeker, W., Ernst, R.E., 2011. Does the Slave craton continue into southern Siberia: comparison of their large igneous province (LIP) records. In: Fischer, B.J., Watson, D.M. (compilers), 39th Annual Yellowknife Geoscience Forum Abstracts. Northwest Territories Geoscience Office, Yellowknife NT. YKGSF Abstracts Volume 2011, pp. 22–23. Bogdanova, S.V., Gintov, O.B., Kurlovich, D.M., Lubnina, N.V., Nilsson, M.K.M., Orlyuk, M.I., Pashkevich, I.K., Shumlyanskyy, L.V., Starostenko, V.I., 2013. Late Palaeoproterozoic mafic dyking in the Ukrainian Shield of Volgo-Sarmatia caused by rotation during the assembly of supercontinent Columbia (Nuna). Lithos 174, 196–216 (this issue). Bright, R., Amato, J., Denyszyn, S.W., Ernst, R.E., 2011. U–Pb geochronology and isotope geochemistry of ~1.1 Ga diabase dikes and sills in the southwest U.S.: implications for Rodinia reconstructions”. Abstract No: 203717. GSA Abstracts with Programs 44 (6). Bryan, S.E., Ernst, R.E., 2008. Revised definition of Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs). EarthScience Reviews 86, 175–202. Bryan, S.E., Ferrari, L., (2013). Large igneous provinces and silicic large igneous provinces: progress in our understanding over the last 25 yr. Geological Society of America Bulletin. (in press). Buchan, K.L., 2012. Testing Precambrian supercontinent reconstructions with paleomagnetic ‘key pole’ data. Supercontinent Symposium 2012, University of Helsinki, Finland, Programme and Abstracts, pp. 25–26. Buchan, K.L., Harris, B.A., Ernst, R.E., Hanes, J.A., 2003. Ar–Ar dating of the Pickle Crow diabase dyke in the western Superior craton of the Canadian Shield of Ontario and implications for a possible plume centre associated with ca. 1880 Ma Molson magmatism of Manitoba. Geological Association of Canada-Mineralogical Association of Canada Annual Meeting 2003, Program with Abstracts 28, p. 17. Buchan, K.L., Ernst, R.E., Bleeker, W., Davis, W.J., Villeneuve, M., van Breemen, O., Hamilton, M., Söderlund, U., 2010. Proterozoic magmatic events of the Slave Craton, Wopmay Orogen and Environs. Geological Survey of Canada Open File 5985. Chamberlain, K.R., Schmitt, A.K., Swapp, S.M., Harrison, T.M., Swoboda-Colberg, N., Bleeker, W., Peterson, T.D., Jeffferson, C.W., Khudoley, A.K., 2010. In situ U–Pb SIMS (IN-SIMS) micro-baddeleyite dating of mafic rocks: method with examples. Precambrian Research 183, 379–387. Ciborowski, T.J.R., Kerr, A.C., McDonald, I., Ernst, R.E., Minifie, M.J., 2013. The geochemistry and petrogenesis of the Blue Draw Metagabbro. Lithos 174, 271–290 (this issue). Coble, M.A., Mahood, M.A., 2012. Initial impingement of the Yellowstone plume located by widespread silicic volcanism contemporaneous with Columbia River flood basalts. Geology 40, 655–658. Coffin, M.F., Eldholm, O., 1994. Large igneous provinces: crustal structure, dimensions, and external consequences. Reviews of Geophysics 32, 1–36. Coffin, M.F., Eldholm, O., 2005. Large igneous provinces. In: Selley, R.C., Cocks, R., Plimer, I.R. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Geology. Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 315–323. Correia, C.T., Sinigoi, S., Girardi, V.A.V., Mazzucchelli, M., Tassinari, C.C.G., Giovanardi, T., 2012. The growth of large mafic intrusions: comparing Niquelândia and Ivrea igneous complexes. Lithos 155, 167–182. Courtillot, V.E., Renne, P.R., 2003. On the ages of flood basalt events. Comptes Rendus Géoscience 335, 113–140. Courtillot, V., Jaupart, C., Manighetti, I., Tapponier, P., Besse, J., 1999. On causal links between flood basalts and continental breakup. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 166, 177–195. D'Agrella Filho, M.S., Feybesse, J.L., Prian, J.P., Dupuis, D., N'Dong, J.E., 1996. Paleomagnetism of Precambrian rocks from Gabon, Congo craton, Africa. Journal of African Earth Sciences 22, 65–80. Dahl, P.S., Hamilton, M.A., Wooden, J.L., Foland, K.A., Frei, R., McCombs, J.A., Holm, D.K., 2006. 2480 Ma mafic magmatism in the northern Black Hills, South Dakota: a new link connecting the Wyoming and Superior cratons. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 43, 1579–1600. El Bahat, A., Ikenne, M., Söderlund, U., Cousens, B., Youbi, N., Ernst, R., Soulaimani, A., El Janati, M., Hafid, A., 2013. U–Pb ages of dolerite dykes in the Bas Drâa Inlier of the Anti-Atlas of Morocco: newly identified 1380 Ma event in the West African Craton. Lithos.Sciences 174, 85–98 (this issue). Ernst, R.E., 2007. Large igneous provinces in Canada through time and their metallogenic potential. In: Goodfellow, W.D. (Ed.), Mineral Deposits of Canada: A Synthesis of Major Deposit-types, District Metallogeny, the Evolution of Geological Provinces, and Exploration Methods, Special Publication 5, Mineral Deposits Division, Geological Association of Canada, pp. 929–937. Ernst, R.E., Bell, K., 2010. Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) and Carbonatites. Mineralogy and Petrology 98, 55–76. Ernst, R.E., Bleeker, W., 2010. Large igneous provinces (LIPs), giant dyke swarms, and mantle plumes: significance for breakup events within Canada and adjacent

regions from 2.5 Ga to the Present. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 47, 695–739. Ernst, R.E., Bleeker, W., 2011. Comparing the Large Igneous Province records of northern Canada and southern Siberia: evidence for a ca. 1.9 to 0.7 Ga nearest neighbor relationship. International Symposium: LIPs of Asia: Mantle Plumes and Metallogeny, August 20–23, 2011, Irkutsk, Russia, Abstract Volume. ISBN: 978-5-91344-304-5, pp. 75–78 (http://lip-asia.com/). Ernst, R.E., Buchan, K.L., 2001. Large mafic magmatic events through time and links to mantle-plume heads. In: Ernst, R.E., Buchan, K.L. (Eds.), Mantle Plumes: Their Identification Through Time: Geological Society of America Special Paper, 352, pp. 483–575. Ernst, R.E., Buchan, K.L., 2002. Maximum size and distribution in time and space of mantle plumes: evidence from large igneous provinces. Journal of Geodynamics 34, 309–342. (Erratum: J. Geodynamics (2002) 34, 711–714). Ernst, R.E., Buchan, K.L., 2003. Recognizing mantle plumes in the geological record. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 31, 469–523. Ernst, R.E., Wingate, M.T.D., Buchan, K.L., Li, Z.X., 2008. Global record of 1600–700 Ma Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs): implications for the reconstruction of the proposed Nuna (Columbia) and Rodinia supercontinents. Precambrian Research 160, 159–178. Ernst, R., Srivastava, R.K., Bleeker, W., Hamilton, M.A., 2010. Preface: Precambrian Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) and their dyke swarms: new insights form high-precision geochronology integrated with paleomagnetism and geochemistry. Precambrian Research 183 (3), vii–xi. Ernst, R.E., Hamilton, M.A., Söderlund, U., 2012. A proposed 725 Ma Dovyren-Kingash LIP of southern Siberia, and possible reconstruction link with the 725–715 Ma Franklin LIP of northern Laurentia. Abstract volume 35, Geological Association of Canada (GAC)— Mineralogical Association of Canada (MAC) Joint Annual Meeting — Geoscience at the Edge, May 27–29, 2012, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Ernst, R.E., Pereira, E., Hamilton, M.A., Pisarevsky, S.A., Rodriques, J., Tassinari, C.C.G., Teixeira, W., Van-Dunem, V., 2013. Mesoproterozoic intraplate magmatic ‘barcode’ record of the Angola portion of the Congo craton: newly dated magmatic events at 1500 and 1110 Ma and implications for Nuna (Columbia) supercontinent reconstructions. Precambrian Research 230, 103–118. Evans, D.A.D., Mitchell, R.N., 2011. Assembly and breakup of the core of Paleoproterozoic– Mesoproterozoic supercontinent Nuna. Geology 39, 443–446. Evans, D.A.D., Pisarevsky, S.A., 2008. Plate teconics on early Earth? Weighing the paleomagnetic evidence. Geological Society of America, Special Paper 440, 249–263. Evans, D.A.D., Heaman, L.M., Trindade, R.I.F., D'Agrella-Filho, M.S., Smirnov, A.V., Catelani, E.L., 2010. Precise U–Pb Baddeleyite Ages from Neoproterozoic Mafic Dykes in Bahia, Brazil, and their Paleomagnetic/Paleogeographic Implications, AGU Brazil Abstract, GP31E-07 American Geophysical Union, Joint Assembly, Meeting of the Americas, Iguassu Falls, August 2010. Fahrig, W.F., 1987. The tectonic setting of continental mafic dyke swarms: failed arm and early passive margin. In: Halls, H.C., Fahrig, W.F. (Eds.), Mafic Dyke Swarms: Geological Association of Canada Special Paper, 34, pp. 331–348. Feybesse, J.L., Johan, V., Triboulet, C., Guerrot, C., Mayaga-Mikolo, F., Bouchot, V., Eko N'dong, J., 1998. The West Central African belt: a model of 2.5–2.0 Ga accretion and two-phase orogenic evolution. Precambrian Research 87, 161–216. French, J.E., Heaman, L.M., 2010. Precise U-Pb dating of Paleoproteozoic mafic dyke swarms of the Dharwar craton, India: Implications for the existence of the Neoarchean supercraton Sclavia. Precambrian Research 183, 416–441. French, J.E., Heaman, L.M., Chacko, T., Srivastava, R.K., 2008. 1891–1883 Ma Southern Bastar-Cuddapah mafic igneous events, India: a newly recognized large igneous province. Precambrian Research 160, 308–322. Fuck, R.A., Brito Neves, B.B., Schobbenhaus, C., 2008. Rodinia descendants in South America. Precambrian Research 160, 108–126. Gladkochub, D.P., Pisarevsky, S.A., Donskaya, T.V., Ernst, R.E., Wingate, M.T., Söderlund, U., Mazukabzov, А.M., Sklyarov, E.V., Hamilton, M.A., Hanes, J.A., 2010. Proterozoic mafic magmatism in Siberian craton: an overview and implications for paleocontinental reconstruction. Precambrian Research 183, 660–668. Gumsley, A.P., de Kock, M.O., Rajesh, H.M., Knoper, M.W., Söderlund, U., Ernst, R.E., 2013. The Hlagothi Complex: the identification of fragments from a Mesoarchaean Large Igneous Province on the Kaapvaal Craton. Lithos 174, 333–348 (this issue). Halls, H.C., 1982. The importance and potential of mafic dyke swarms in studies of geodynamic process. Geoscience Canada 9, 145–154. Halls, H.C., Hamilton, M.A., Denyszyn, S.W., 2011. The Melville Bugt Dyke Swarm of Greenland: A Connection to the 1.5–1.6 Ga Fennoscandian Rapakivi Granite Province. In: Srivasatava, R.K. (Ed.), Keys for Geodynaamic Interpretation SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg, Dyke Swarms, pp. 509–535. Hamilton, M.A., Sadowski, G.R., Teixeira, W., Ernst, R.E., Ruiz, A.S., 2012. Precise, matching U–Pb ages for the Rincon del Tigre mafic layered intrusion and Huanchaca gabbro sill, Bolivia: evidence for a late Mesoproterozic LIP in SW Amazonia? GAC MAC Joint Annual Meeting, St. John's 2012 Geoscience at the Edge, vol. 35. Hanson, R.E., Gose, W.A., Crowley, J.L., Ramezani, J., Bowring, S.A., Bullen, D.S., Hall, R.P., Pancake, J.A., Mukwakwami, J., 2004. Paleoproterozoic intraplate magmatism and basin development on the Kaapvaal Craton: age, paleomagnetism and geochemistry of ~1.93 to ~1.87. Ga post-Waterberg dolerites: South African Journal of Geology 107, 233–254. Hanson, R.E., Harmer, R.E., Blenkinsop, T.G., Bullen, D.S., Dalziel, I.W.D., Gose, W.A., Hall, R.P., Kampunzu, A.B., Key, R.M., Mukwakwami, J., Munyanyiwa, H., Pancake, J.A., Seidel, E.K., Ward, S.E., 2006. Mesoproterozoic intraplate magmatism in the Kalahari Craton: a review. Journal of African Earth Sciences 46, 141–167.

Editorial Hanson, R.E., Rioux, M., Gose, W.A., Blackburn, T.J., Bowring, S.A., Mukwakwami, J., Jones, D.L., 2011. Paleomagnetic and geochronological evidence for large-scale post–1.88 Ga displacement between the Zimbabwe and Kaapvaal cratons along the Limpopo belt. Geology 39 (5), 487–490. Hanson, R.E., Puckett Jr, R.E, Keller, G.R., Brueseke, M.E., Bulen, C.L., Mertzman, S.A., Finegan, S.A., McCleery, D.A., 2013. Intraplate magmatism related to opening of the southern Iapetus Ocean: Cambrian Wichita igneous province in the Southern Oklahoma rift zone. Lithos. 174, 57–70 (this issue). Hastie, A.R., Kerr, A.C., 2010. Mantle plume or slab window? Physical and geochemical constraints on the origin of the Caribbean oceanic plateau. Earth-Science Reviews 98, 283–293. Heaman, L.M., LeCheminant, A.N., 1993. Paragenesis and U–Pb systematics of baddeleyite (ZrO2). Chemical Geology 110, 95–126. Heaman, L.M., Peck, D., Toope, K., 2009. Timing and geochemistry of 1.88 Ga Molson Igneous Events, Manitoba: insights into the formation of a craton-scale magmatic and metallogenic province. Precambrian Research 172, 143–162. Hooper, P., Widdowson, M., Kelley, S., 2010. Tectonic setting and timing of the final Deccan flood basalt eruptions. Geology 38, 839–842. Jacoby, W.R., 1981. Modern concepts of earth dynamics anticipated by Alfred Wegener in 1912. Geology 9, 25–27. Jerram, D.A., Goodenough, K.M., Troll, V.R., 2009. Introduction: from the British Tertiary into the future — modern perspectives on the British Palaeogene and North Atlantic Igneous provinces. Geological Magazine 146, 305–308. Johansson, Å., 2009. Baltica, Amazonia and the SAMBA connection—1000 million years of neighbourhood during the Proterozoic? Precambrian Research 175, 221–234. Jowitt, S.M., Ernst, R.E., 2013. Geochemical assessment of the metallogenic potential of Proterozoic LIPs of Canada. Lithos 174, 291–307 (this issue). Jowitt, S.M., Williamson, M-C., Ernst, R.E., (2013). Geochemistry of the 130–80 Ma Canadian High Arctic LIP (HALIP) event and implications for Ni–Cu–PGE prospectivity. Economic Geology. (in press). Kerr, A.C., 1998. Oceanic plateau formation: a cause of mass extinction and black shale deposition around the Cenomanian–Turonian boundary. Journal of the Geological Society of London 155, 619–626. Kerr, A.C., 2005. Oceanic LIPs: the kiss of death. Elements 1, 289–292. Khudoley, A.K., Prokopiev, A.V., Chamberlain, K.R., Ernst, R., Jowitt, S.M., Malyshev, S.V., Zaitsev, A.I., Kropachev, A.P., Koroleva, O.V., 2013. Early Paleozoic mafic magmatic events on the eastern margin of the Siberian Craton. Lithos 174, 44–56 (this issue). Kirstein, L.A., Dunai, T.J., Davies, G.R., Upton, B.G.J., Nikogosian, I.K., 2004. Helium isotope signature of lithospheric mantle xenoliths from Permo-Carboniferous magmatic province in Scotland — no evidence for a lower-mantle plume. Geological Society of London, Special Publication 223, 243–258. Kiselev, A.I., Ernst, R.E., Yarmolyuk, V.V., Egorov, K.N., 2012. Radiating rifts and dyke swarms of the middle Paleozoic Yakutsk plume of eastern Siberian craton. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 45, 1–16. Kouyaté, D., Söderlund, U., Youbi, N., Ernst, R.E., Hafid, A., Ikenne, M., Soulaimani, A., Bertrand, H., El Janati, M., Rkha Chaham, K., El Janati, M., 2013. U–Pb baddeleyite ages of 2040 Ma, 1650 Ma and 885 Ma on dolerites in the West African Craton (Anti-Atlas inliers): possible links to break-ups of Precambrian supercontinents. Lithos. 174, 71–84 (this issue). Krogh, T.E., Corfu, F., Davis, D.W., Dunning, G.R., Heaman, L.M., Kamo, S.L., Machado, N., Greenough, J.D., Nakamura, E., 1987. Precise U–Pb isotopic ages of diabase dykes and mafic to ultramafic rocks using trace amounts of baddeleyite and zircon. In: Halls, H.C., Fahrig, W.F. (Eds.), Mafic Dyke Swarms: Geological Association of Canada Special Paper, 34, pp. 147–152. Kullerud, K., Skjerlie, K.P., Corfu, F., de la Rosa, J., 2006. The 2.40 Ringvassøy mafic dykes, West Troms Basement Complex, Norway: the concluding act of early Palaeoproterozoic continental breakup. Precambrian Research 150, 183–200. Kumar, A., Hamilton, M.A., Halls, H.C., 2012. A Paleoproterozoic giant radiating dyke swarm in the Dharwar Craton, southern India. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 13 (2). http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2011GC003926. Li, Z.X., Bogdanova, S.V., Collins, A.S., Davidson, A., De Waele, B., Ernst, R.E., Fitzsimons, I.C.W., Fuck, R.A., Gladkochub, D.P., Jacobs, J., Karlstrom, K.E., Lul, S., Natapovm, L.M., Pease, V., Pisarevsky, S.A., Thrane, K., Vernikovsky, V., 2008. Assembly, configuration, and break-up history of Rodinia: a synthesis. Precambrian Research 160, 179–210. Li, Q.-L., Li, X.-H., Liu, Y., Tang, G.-Q., Yang, J.-H., Zhu, W.-G., 2010. Precise U–Pb and Pb–Pb dating of Phanerozoic baddeleyite by SIMS with oxygen flooding technique. Journal of Analytical Atomic Spectrometry 25, 1107–1113. Lubnina, N.V., Pisarevsky, S.A., Söderlund, U., Nilsson, M., Sokolov, S.J., Khramov, A.N., Iosifidi, A.G., Ernst, R., Romanovskaya, M.A., Pisakin, B.N., 2012. New paleomagnetic and geochronological data from the Ropruchey sill (Karelia, Russia): implications for Late Paleoprotoerozic paleogeography. In: Mertanen, S., Pesonen, L.J., Sangchan, P. (Eds.), Supercontinent Symposium 2012, Programme and Abstracts. University of Helsinki, Finland, pp. 81–82 (Sept. 25–28 2012). Martin, A.P., Condon, D.J., Prave, A.R., Melezhik, V.A., Lepland, A., Fallick, A.E., 2013. Dating the termination of the Palaeoproterozoic Lomagundi-Jatuli carbon isotopic event in the North Transfennoscandian Greenstone Belt. Precambrian Research 224, 160–168. Marzoli, A., Jourdan, F., Puffer, J.H., Cuppone, T., Tanner, L.H., Weems, R.E., Bertrand, H., Cirilli, S., Bellieni, G., De Min, A., 2011. Timing and duration of the Central Atlantic magmatic province in the Newark and Culpeper basins, eastern U.S.A. Lithos 122, 175–188. Meert, J.G., 2012. What's in a name? The Columbia (Paleopangaea/Nuna) supercontinent. Gondwana Research 21, 987–993. Metelkin, D.V., Ernst, R.E., Hamilton, M.A., 2011. A ca. 1640 Ma mafic magmatic event in southern Siberia, and links with northern Laurentia. Geological Society of America Annual Meeting (9–12 October 2011), abstract no. 101-1, Minneapolis, USA.

13

Minifie, M.J., Kerr, A.C., Ernst, R.E, Hastie, A.R., Ciborowski, T.J.R., Desharnais, G., Millar, I.L., 2013. The northern and southern sections of the western ca. 1880 Ma CircumSuperior Large Igneous Province, North America: the Pickle Crow dyke connection? Lithos 174, 217–235 (this issue). Müller, S.G., Krapež, B., Barley, M.E., Fletcher, I.R., 2005. Giant iron-ore deposits of the Hamersley province related to the breakup of Paleoproterozic Australia: new insights from in situ SHRIMP dating of baddeleyite from mafic intrusions. Geology 33, 577–580. Naldrett, A.J., 1999. World-class Ni–Cu–PGE deposits: key factors in their genesis. Mineralium Deposita 34, 227–240. Naldrett, A.J., 2010. From the mantle to the bank: the life of a Ni–Cu–(PGE) sulfide deposit. South African Journal of Geology 113, 1–32. Nilsson, M.K.M., Klausen, M.B., Söderlund, U., Ernst, R.E., 2013. Precise U–Pb ages and geochemistry of Paleoproterozoic mafic dykes from southern West Greenland: Linking the North Atlantic and the Dharwar Cratons. Lithos 174, 255–270 (this issue). Oliveira, E.P., Silveira, E.M., Söderlund, U., Ernst, R.E., 2013. U–Pb ages and geochemistry of mafic dyke swarms from the Uauá Block, São Francisco Craton, Brazil: LIPs remnants relevant for Late Archaean break-up of a supercraton. Lithos 174, 308–322 (this issue). Oliveria, E.P., Windley, B.F., McNaughton, N.J., Pimentel, M., Fletcher, I.R., 2004. Contrasting copper and chromium metallogenic evolution of terranes in the Palaeoproteorozic Itabuna-Salvador-Curaçá orogen, São Francisco craton, Brazil: new zircon (SHRIMP) and Sm–Nd (model) ages and their significance for orogen-parallel escape tectonics. Precambrian Research 128, 143–165. Oreskes, N. (Ed.), 2001. Plate Tectonics, An Insider's History of the Modern Theory of the Earth. Westview Press (424 pp.). Peng, P., 2010. Reconstruction and interpretation of giant mafic dyke swarms: a case study of 1.78 Ga magmatism in the North China craton. In: Kusky, T.M., Zhai, M.-G., Xiao, W. (Eds.), The Evolving Continents: Understanding Processes of Continental Growth: Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 338, pp. 163–178. Peng, P., Zhai, M.-G., Zhang, H.-F., Guo, J.-H., 2005. Geochronological constraints on the Paleoproterozoic evolution of the North China craton: SHRIMP zircon ages of different types of mafic dykes. International Geology Review 47, 492–508. Peng, P., Bleeker, W., Ernst, R.E., Söderlund, U., McNicoll, V., 2011. U–Pb baddeleyite ages, distribution and geochemistry of 925 Ma mafic dykes and 900 Ma sills in the North China craton: evidence for a Neoproterozoic mantle plume. Lithos 127, 210–221. Peng, P., Liu, F., Zhai, M.-G., Guo, J.-H., 2012. Age of the Miyun dyke swarm: constraints on the maximum depositional age of the Changcheng System. Chinese Science Bulletin 57, 105–110. Pesonen, L.J., Mertanen, S., Veikkolainen, T., 2012. Paleo-Mesoproterozoic supercontinents — a paleomagnetic view. Geophysica 48 (1–2), 5–47. Pirajno, F., Hoatson, D.M., 2012. A review of Australia's Large Igneous Provinces and associated mineral systems: implications for mantle dynamics through geological time. Ore Geology Reviews 48, 2–54. Pisarevsky, S.A., Natapov, L.M., Donskaya, T.V., Gladkochub, D.P., Vernikovsky, V.A., 2008. Proterozoic Siberia: a promontory of Rodinia. Precambrian Research 160, 66–76. Pisarevsky, S.A., Biswal, T.K., Wang, X-C, De Waele, B., Ernst, R.E., Söderlund, U., Tait, J.A., Ratre, K., Kesorjit Singh, Y., Cleve, M., 2013. Palaeomagnetic, geochronological and geochemical study of Mesoproterozoic Lakhna dykes in the Bastar Craton, India: Implications for the Mesoproterozoic supercontinent. Lithos 174, 125–143 (this issue). Pradhan, V.R., Meert, J.G., Pandit, M.K., Kamenov, G., Mondal, Md.E.A., 2012. Paleomagnetic and geochronological studies of the mafic dyke swarms of Bundelkhand craton, central India: implications for the tectonic evolution and paleogeographic reconstructions. Precambrian Research 198–199, 51–76. Puchkov, V.N., Bogdanova, S.V., Ernst, R.E., Kozlov, V.I., Krasnobaev, A.A., Söderlund, U., Wingate, M.T.D., Postnikov, A., Sergeeva, N.D., 2013. The ca. 1380 Ma Mashak igneous event of the Southern Urals. Lithos 174, 109–124 (this issue). Puffer, J.H., 2001. Contrasting HFSE contents of plume sourced and reactivated arcsourced continental flood basalts. Geology 29, 675–678. Rajesh, H.M., Chisonga, B.C., Shindo, K., Beukes, N.J., Armstrong, R.A., 2013. Petrographic, geochemical and SHRIMP U-Pb titanite age characterization of the Thabazimbi mafic sills: extended time frame and a unifying petrogenetic model for the Bushveld Large Igneous Province. Precambrian Research 230, 79–102. Reis, N.J., Teixeira, W., Hamilton, M.A., Bispo-Santos, F., Almeida, M.E., D'Agrella-Filho, M.S., 2013. Avanavero mafic magmatism, a late Paleoproterozoic lip in the Guiana Shield, Amazonian Craton: U–Pb ID-TIMS baddeleyite, geochemical and paleomagnetic evidence. Lithos 174, 175–195 (this issue). Rioux, M., Bowring, S., Dudás, F., Hanson, R., 2010. Characterizing the U–Pb systematics of baddeleyite through chemical abrasion: application of multi-step digestion methods to baddeleyite geochronology. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 160 (5), 777–801. Rogers, J.J.W., Santosh, M., 2004. Continents and Supercontinents. Oxford Press, New York (289 pp.). Roscoe, S.M., Card, K.D., 1993. The reappearance of the Huronian in Wyoming: rifting and drifting of ancient continents. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 30, 2475–2480. Sahin, T., Hamilton, M.A., Sylvester, P.J., Wilton, D.H.C., 2012a. New U–Pb ages for gabbroic magmatism within the Ramah Group, northern Labrador: implications for Paleoproterozoic extension in Nain craton, and metallogeny. Abstract volume 35, Geological Association of Canada (GAC)— Mineralogical Association of Canada (MAC) Joint Annual Meeting — Geoscience at the Edge, May 27–29, 2012, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Sahin, T., Hamilton, M.A., Sylvester, P.J., Wilton, D.H.C., 2012b. New U–Pb ages for gabbro sills within the Ramah Group, northern Labrador: implications for Paleoproterozoic

14

Editorial

extension in Nain craton, and metallogeny. 22nd V.M. Goldschmidt Conference, “Earth in Evolution”, June 24–29, 2012, Montreal Canada. Sandeman, H.A., Heaman, L.M., LeCheminant, A.N., in press. The Paleoproterozoic Kaminak dykes, Hearne craton, western Churchill Province, Nunavut, Canada: Preliminary constraints on their age and petrogenesis. Precambrian Research. Silveira, E.M., Söderlund, U., Oliveira, E.P., Ernst, R., Menezes Leal, A.B., 2013. First precise U–Pb baddeleyite ages of 1500 Ma mafic dykes from the São Francisco Craton, Brazil, and tectonic implications. Lithos 174, 144–156 (this issue). Smirnov, A.V., Evans, D.A.D., Ernst, R.E., Söderlund, U., Li, Z.-X., 2013. Trading partners: tectonic ancestry of southern Africa and western Australia, in Archean supercratons Vaalbara and Zimgarn. Precambrian Research 224, 11–22. Sobolev, S.V., Sobolev, A.V., Kuzmin, D.R., Krivolutskaya, N.A., Petrunin, A.G., Arndt, N.T., Radko, V.A., Vasiliev, Y.R., 2011. Linking mantle plumes, large igneous provinces and environmental catastrophes. Nature 477, 312–316. Söderlund, U., Johansson, L., 2002. A simple way to extract baddeleyite (ZrO2). Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 3 (2). http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001GC000212. Söderlund, U., Hofmann, A., Klausen, M.B., Olsson, J.R., Ernst, R.E., Persson, P.-O., 2010. Towards a complete magmatic barcode for the Zimbabwe craton: baddeleyite U-Pb dating of regional dolerite dyke swarms and sill provinces. Precambrian Research 183, 388–398. Söderlund, U., Ibanez-Mejia, M., El Bahat, A., Ikenne, M., Soulaimani, A., Youbi, N., Ernst, R.E., Cousens, B., El Janati, M., Hafid, A., 2013. Reply to Comment on “U–Pb baddeleyite ages and geochemistry of dolerite dykes in the Bas Draa Inlier of the Anti-Atlas of Morocco: newly identified 1380 Ma event in the West African Craton” by André Michard and Dominique Gasquet. Lithos. 174, 99–100 (this issue). Srivastava, R.K., Ernst, R., Bleeker, W, Hamilton, M.A. (guest editors), 2010. Precambrian Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs) and their dyke swarms: new insights form highprecision geochronology integrated with paleomagnetism and geochemistry. Special Issue, Precambrian Research 183/3. Storey, B.C., 1995. The role of mantle plumes in continental breakup: case histories from Gondwanaland. Nature 377, 301–308. Svensen, H., Corfu, F., Polteau, S., Hammer, Ø., Planke, S., 2012. Rapid magma emplacement in the Karoo Large Igneous Province. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 325–326, 1–9. Tait, J., Straathof, G., Söderlund, U., Ernst, R.E., Key, R., Jowitt, S.M., Lo, K., Dahmada, M.E.M., N'Diaye, O., 2013. The Ahmeyim Great Dyke of Mauritania: A newly dated Archaean intrusion. Lithos 174, 323–332 (this issue). Teixeira, W., D'Agrella-Filho, M.S., Ernst, R.E., Hamilton, M.A., Girardi, V.A.V., Mazzucchelli, M., Bettencourt, J.S., 2013. U–Pb (ID-TIMS) baddeleyite ages and paleomagnetism of 1.79 and 1.50 Ga tholeiitic dyke swarms, and position of the Rio de la Plata craton within the Columbia supercontinent. Lithos 174, 157–174 (this issue).

Thiede, D.S., Vasconcelos, P.M., 2010. Parana flood basalts: rapid extrusion hypothesis confirmed by new 40Ar/39Ar results. Geology 38 (8), 747–750. Vuollo, J., Huhma, H., 2005. Paleoproterozoic mafic dikes in NE Finland. In: Lehtinen, M., Nurmi, P.A., Ramo, O.T. (Eds.), Precambrian Geology of Finland -key to the Evolution of the Fennoscandian Shield. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 195–236. Walsh, G.J., Aleinikoff, J., Benziane, F., Yazidi, A., Amstrong, T.R., 2002. U–Pb zircon geochronology of the Palaeoproterozoic Tagragra de Tata inlier and its Neoproterozoic cover, western Anti-Atlas, Morocco. Precambrian Research 117, 1–20. Wegener, A., 1912. “Die Entstehung der Kontinente” (in German). Geologische Rundschau 3 (4), 276–292. Wingate, M.T., Pisarevsky, S.A., Evans, D.A., 2002. Rodinia connections between Australia and Laurentia: no SWEAT, no AUSWUS? Terra Nova 14 (2), 121–128. Wingate, M.T.D., Pisarevsky, S.A., Gladkochub, D.P., Donskaya, T.V., Konstantinov, K.M., Mazukabzov, A.M., Stanevich, A.M., 2009. Geochronology and paleomagnetism of mafic igneous rocks in the Olenek Uplift, northern Siberia: implications for Mesoproterozoic supercontinents and paleogeography. Precambrian Research 170, 256–266. Youbi, N., Söderlund, U., Ernst, R., Soulaimani, A., Hafid, A., Ikenne, M., Kouyaté, D., El Bahat, A., El Janati, M., Bertrand, H., Rkha Chaham, K., 2012. U–Pb geochronology of dyke and sill swarms of the West African craton (Anti-Atlas Inliers): possible links to break-up of Precambrian supercontinents. In: Mertanen, S., Pesonen, L.J., Sangchan, P. (Eds.), Supercontinent Symposium 2012, Programme and Abstracts. University of Helsinki, Finland, pp. 156–157 (Sept. 25–28 2012). Zhai, Q-G, Jahn, B-M, Su, L., Ernst, R.E, Wang, K-L, Zhang, R-Y, Wang, J., Tang, S., 2013. SHRIMP zircon U–Pb geochronology, geochemistry and Sr–Nd–Hf isotopic compositions of a mafic dyke swarm in the Qiangtang Terrane, northern Tibet and geodynamic implications. Lithos 174, 28–43 (this issue). Zhang, C-L, Zou, H-b, 2013. Comparison between the Permian mafic dykes in Tarim and the western part of Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB), NW China: implications for two mantle domains of the Permian Tarim Large Igneous Province. Lithos 174, 15–27 (this issue). Zhang, S.-L., Li, Z.-X., Evans, D.A.D., Wu, H.-C., Li, H.-Y., Dong, J., 2012a. Pre-Rodinia supercontinent Nuna shaping up: a global synthesis with new paleomagnetic results from North China. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 353–354, 145–155. Zhang, S.-H., Zhao, Y., Santosh, M., 2012b. Mid-Mesoproterozoic bimodal magmatic rocks in the northern North China Craton: implications for magmatism related to breakup of the Columbia supercontinent. Precambrian Research 222–223, 339–367. Zhu, D.-C., Chung, S.-L., Mo, X.-X.-., Zhao, Z.-D., Niu, Y.-L., Song, B., Yang, Y.-H., 2009. The 132 Ma Comei-Bunbury large igneous province: remnants identified in present-day southeastern Tibet and southwestern Australia. Geology 37 (7), 583–586.