Reconstructing Greater India: Paleogeographic, kinematic, and geodynamic perspectives

Publication date

2019-06-05

Authors

van Hinsbergen, DouweORCID 0000-0003-3410-0344ISNI 0000000065827851
Lippert, Peter C.
Li, ShihuISNI 0000000524044929
Huang, WentaoISNI 0000000449452454
Advokaat, Eldert L.ORCID 0000-0001-8239-0310ISNI 0000000493228580
Spakman, WimISNI 0000000394010017

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

taverne

Abstract

Key in understanding the geodynamics governing subduction and orogeny is reconstructing the paleogeography of ‘Greater India’ the Indian plate lithosphere that subducted since Tethyan Himalayan continental collision with Asia. Here, we discuss this reconstruction from paleogeographic, kinematic, and geodynamic perspectives and isolate the evolution scenario that is consistent with all three. We follow recent constraints advocating a ~58 Ma initial collision and update a previous kinematic restoration of intra-Asian shortening with a recently proposed model that reconciles long-debated large and small estimates of Indochina extrusion. Our new reconstruction is tested against paleomagnetic data, and against seismic tomographic constraints on paleo-subduction zone locations. The resulting restoration shows ~1000–1200 km of post-collisional intra-Asian shortening, leaving a 2600–3400 km wide Greater India. From a paleogeographic, sediment provenance perspective, Eocene sediments in the Lesser Himalaya and on undeformed India may be derived from Tibet, suggesting that all Greater Indian lithosphere was continental, but may alternatively be sourced from the contemporaneous western Indian orogen unrelated to India-Asia collision. A quantitative kinematic, paleomagnetic perspective prefers major Cretaceous extension and a ‘Greater India Basin’ opening within Greater India, but data uncertainty may speculatively allow for minimal extension. Finally, from a geodynamic perspective, assuming a fully continental Greater India would require that subduction rates close to 20 cm/yr was driven by a down-going lithosphere-crust assemblage more buoyant than the mantle, which seems physically improbable. We conclude that the Greater India Basin scenario is the only sustainable one from all three perspectives. We infer that old pre-collisional lithosphere rapidly entered the lower mantle sustaining high subduction rates, whilst post-collisional continental and young Greater India basin lithosphere did not, inciting the rapid India-Asia convergence deceleration ~8 Myr after collision. Subsequent absolute northward slab migration and overturning caused flat slab subduction, Tibetan shortening, arc migration and arc volume decrease.

Keywords

Greater India, Himalaya, Orogenesis, Paleogeography, Subduction, Tibet, Taverne, Geophysics, Earth-Surface Processes, SDG 6 - Clean Water and Sanitation

Citation

van Hinsbergen, D J J, Lippert, P C, Li, S, Huang, W, Advokaat, E L & Spakman, W 2019, 'Reconstructing Greater India : Paleogeographic, kinematic, and geodynamic perspectives', Tectonophysics, vol. 760, pp. 69-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2018.04.006