Tectonic Evolution of the SE West Siberian Basin (Russia): Evidence from Apatite Fission Track Thermochronology of Its Exposed Crystalline Basement

minerals

Article Tectonic Evolution of the SE West Siberian Basin (Russia): Evidence from Apatite Fission Track Thermochronology of Its Exposed Crystalline Basement

Evgeny V. Vetrov 1,*, Johan De Grave 2, Natalia I. Vetrova 1, Fedor I. Zhimulev 1 , Simon Nachtergaele 2 , Gerben Van Ranst 3 and Polina I. Mikhailova 4

1 Sobolev Institute of Geology and Mineralogy SB RAS, 630082 Novosibirsk, Russia; [email protected] (N.I.V.); [email protected] (F.I.Z.) 2 Department of Geology, Mineralogy and Petrology Research Unit, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium; [email protected] (J.D.G.); [email protected] (S.N.) 3 Environment Unit, Antea Group Belgium, 2600 Antwerpen, Belgium; [email protected] 4 Siberian Research Institute of Geology, Geophysics and Mineral Resources, 630091 Novosibirsk, Russia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: The West Siberian Basin (WSB) is one of the largest intracratonic Meso-Cenozoic basins in the world. Its evolution has been studied over the recent decades; however, some fundamental ques- tions regarding the tectonic evolution of the WSB remain unresolved or unconfirmed by analytical data. A complete understanding of the evolution of the WSB during the Mesozoic and Cenozoic eras Citation: Vetrov, E.V.; De Grave, J.; requires insights into the cooling history of the basement rocks as determined by low-temperature Vetrova, N.I.; Zhimulev, F.I.; thermochronometry. We presented an apatite fission track (AFT) thermochronology study on the Nachtergaele, S.; Van Ranst, G.; Mikhailova, P.I. Tectonic Evolution of exposed parts of the WSB basement in order to distinguish tectonic activation episodes in an absolute the SE West Siberian Basin (Russia): timeframe. AFT dating of thirteen basement samples mainly yielded Cretaceous cooling ages and Evidence from Apatite Fission Track mean track lengths varied between 12.8 and 14.5 µm. Thermal history modeling based on the AFT Thermochronology of Its Exposed data demonstrates several Mesozoic and Cenozoic intracontinental tectonic reactivation episodes Crystalline Basement. Minerals 2021, affected the WSB basement. We interpreted the episodes of tectonic activity accompanied by the WSB 11, 604. https://doi.org/10.3390/ basement exhumation as a far-field effect from tectonic processes acting on the southern and eastern min11060604 boundaries of Eurasia during the Mesozoic–Cenozoic eras.

Academic Editors: Alexandre Kounov Keywords: West Siberian Basin; apatite ﬁssion track thermochronology; thermo–tectonic evolution; and Meinert Rahn exhumation; subsidence

Received: 1 February 2021 Accepted: 29 May 2021 Published: 4 June 2021 1. Introduction

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral It is thought that the tectonic evolution of intracratonic basins is to a large extent with regard to jurisdictional claims in controlled by geodynamic processes in the lithospheric mantle [1–3]. Uplift events such as published maps and institutional affil- doming can, for example, be associated with mantle plume activity and the propagation of iations. the plume material to the Earth’s surface. The direct influence of horizontal tectonic forces on the evolution of such basins is traditionally excluded, since they are located far away at the boundaries of tectonic plates. At the same time, some episodes of tectonic uplift are difficult to explain in terms of geodynamic processes in the lithospheric mantle, especially when there is no other geological evidence of mantle plume activity. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. The West Siberian Basin (WSB) is one of the largest intracratonic basins of our planet This article is an open access article (Figure1). It is located on the Eurasian plate between the East European Craton to the distributed under the terms and West and the Siberian Craton to the East [4]. The basement of the WSB is covered by up conditions of the Creative Commons to 12 km of Mesozoic–Cenozoic sediments that register the basin’s tectonic history. The Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// sedimentary record has been vastly studied by drilling and seismic surveys [4,5]. Extensive creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ borehole and seismic information and its elaborate interpretations permit constraining the 4.0/). tectonic vertical motions within the WSB using backstripping analysis in 2D [6]. Vibe and

Minerals 2021, 11, 604. https://doi.org/10.3390/min11060604 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/minerals Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 24

Minerals 2021, 11, 604 2 of 22

Extensive borehole and seismic information and its elaborate interpretations permit constraining the tectonic vertical motions within the WSB using backstripping analysis in 2Dcoworkers [6]. Vibe [6 ]and have coworkers reconstructed [6] have the tectonicreconstr subsidenceucted the tectonic history ofsubsidence the WSB andhistory discussed of the WSBthe mechanism and discussed for intraplate the mechanism vertical fo motions.r intraplate vertical motions.

Figure 1. (a) Geographic map of Eurasia showing position and topography of the West Siberian Basin (WSB) (b). Tectonic map of the southeasternWSB showing position of the exposed basement segments and locations of the boreholes that give insight to stratigraphy of the southeastern WSB. (c) Geological position of the Ob and Novosibirsk massif (after [7,8]) and insight to stratigraphy of the southeastern WSB. (c) Geological position of the Ob and Novosibirsk massif (after [7,8]) and (d) geological position of the Kalman massif (after [7,9]) with indication of sample locations. Depth of “n” km means depth (d) geological position of the Kalman massif (after [7,9]) with indication of sample locations. Depth of “n” km means depth of the massif root according to geophysical data [7]. of the massif root according to geophysical data [7]. Therefore, despite the extensive study of the sedimentary fill of the WSB, its tectonic Therefore, despite the extensive study of the sedimentary ﬁll of the WSB, its tectonic evolution requires complementary independent data including quantitative estimations evolution requires complementary independent data including quantitative estimations of of vertical tectonic movements. The crystalline rocks from the WSB basement, as well as vertical tectonic movements. The crystalline rocks from the WSB basement, as well as the theoverlying overlying Mesozoic–Cenozoic Mesozoic–Cenozoic sediments, sediments, contain contain a record a record of the of tectonicthe tectonic processes processes that thatcontrolled controlled the long-term the long-term evolution evolution of the basin.of the Onebasin. of theOne sensitive of the methodssensitive availablemethods availablefor elucidating for elucidating such record such over record timescales over timesc of millionsales of millions of years of isyears apatite is apatite ﬁssion fission track track(AFT) (AFT) thermochronology. thermochronology. A temperature A temperature range for range AFT for annealing AFT annealing is established is established between ~60–120between ◦~60C[10–120]. According °C [10]. According to a geothermal to a geothermal gradient of gradient 20–25 ◦C/km, of 20–25 which °C/km, is typical which for is an intracratonic setting, this low-temperature range would correspond to a depth of 2.5 to Minerals 2021, 11, 604 3 of 22

6 km (upper crust). Such temperature sensitivity is able to cover intraplate low-amplitude tectonic movements. We carried out AFT analyses and thermal modeling on the exposed granitic massifs (Ob, Novosibirsk, and Kalman) of the WSB basement to better unravel tectonic events within the WSB that inﬂuence its stratigraphic evolution and to reconstruct the thermo-tectonic evolution of the southeastern WSB basement.

2. Geological Setting 2.1. Paleozoic Basement of the West Siberian Basin The WSB basement was formed as a result of collisional events between the Baltica, Siberian, and Kazakhstan paleocontinents [11,12], or the Russian Platform, the East Siberian Platform, and the Kipchak Arc complex [13,14] during the Middle–Late Paleozoic. The final amalgamation of the WSB basement was accompanied by mantle plume activity and during Permian–Triassic times, the WSB basement was affected by rift structures [8,14–16]. In the early phases (~250 Ma ago) it was associated with the formation of a vast province of rift basalts and Siberian flood basalts on the Siberian craton [3]. The majority of the West Siberian rifts evolved and became extinct in a continental setting. The plume arrival is suggested to have led to a Permian–Triassic uplift event, followed by WSB basement subsidence as rift structures evolved [16]. Small segments of the WSB basement are exposed in its southeastern realm within the Kolyvan Tomsk Fold Zone (KTFZ) and Northern Charysh–Talitsk Fold Zone (CTFZ) [4,6]. In this sense, these segments can be considered as the northwestern part of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (CAOB) [17–19]. The NE-oriented KTFZ is predominantly composed of sedimentary and volcanic rocks of Middle Devonian to Mississippian age intruded by granitic and mafic rocks of Permian–Triassic age. The formation and evolution of the KTFZ are controlled by a thrust fault system. The formation of these faults is associated with tectonic deformation due to the collisional events between the Baltica, Siberian, and Kazakhstan paleocontinents [11,12] during the Middle–Late Paleozoic and Early Mesozoic. The post-Jurassic reactivation of the faults is confirmed by the thrust of the Middle–Late Paleozoic KTFZ rocks onto Jurassic deposits along the Tomsk fault (Figure1b). The NW- oriented CTFZ includes mainly Cambrian to Devonian sediments hosting granitoids of Devonian and Permian ages. The evolution of the CTFZ is controlled by the Charysh right- lateral strike-slip fault due to the aforementioned collision events during the Paleozoic and Mesozoic (Figure1b) [ 7]. From the available geological data, there is no indication of any post-collisional reactivation of this fault. The studied granite massifs of the KTFZ (Ob and Novosibirsk) are of Permian–Trias- sic age based on data from several geochronological systems. Ar-Ar dating of biotite from the Ob massif granitoids yielded 254.5 ± 2.4 and 249.7 ± 2.0 Ma [20], while zircon U-Pb ages were 260.7 ± 1.6 and 248.8 ± 0.4 Ma [8]. The Novosibirsk massif has a hornblende Ar-Ar age of 243.7 ± 2.1 Ma, a microcline Ar-Ar age of 249.1 ± 0.7 Ma [20], and zircon U-Pb ages ranging between 258.3 ± 0.6 and 249.2 ± 0.6 Ma [8]. The age of the Kalman massif of the CTFZ is based on U-Pb dating of zircon (258.3 ± 2.3 Ma) [7]. Geological and geophysical data for the granitic massifs (Ob, Novosibirsk, and Kalman) show that they have experienced various denudation events leading to different exhumation history of these massifs. According to geophysical data, the depth of the Novosibirsk intrusion root resides at 2 km only, while the Ob massif depth varies from 4 to 8 km and the depth of the Kalman massif reaches 6–12 km [7]. Thus, studying the massifs with different exhumation histories potentially allows evaluation of not only the tectonic history of the WSB basement, but also considers the potential to reveal differential denudation histories within a single area during the same time interval. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 4 of 22

2.2. Mesozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Southeastern West Siberian Basin After the assembling of the WSB basement during the Permian–Triassic, its geodynamic evolution has been dominated by intracontinental tectonics [21–23]. The WSB records Mesozoic–Cenozoic tectonic events since the Early Jurassic (Figure2). WSB subsidence started in the Jurassic following the Permian–Triassic plume-induced uplift event and even continued until the Cenozoic [6]. In the Early–Middle Jurassic, alluvial-plains and lacustrine sediments were deposited in the vast territory of the WSB, while grayish coal-bearing molasses (Glushin Formation) accumulated in isolated depres- sions [24], marking reactivation of the different parts of the basement. An Early Jurassic (179 Ma) AFT age obtained for the KTFZ granitoid basement conﬁrms this exhumation episode within the study area [25]. During the Middle–Late Jurassic, the WSB represents a marine basin where bituminous clays and silts (Tatar and Georgiev Formations) were deposited in its southeastern part. In the Late Jurassic, the tectonic subsidence of the Southeastern WSB is estimated to have reached ~250 m [6]. At the beginning of the early Cretaceous (Berriasian), the subsequent accumulation of ﬁnely dispersed clay material enriched in organic matter (Kulomzin Formation) with clear signs of shallowing of the marine basin can be observed. This is followed by a regression in the Valanginian. Sandy to clayey sediments representing shallow marine and lagoon deposits [26] accumulated during this period (Tarsk Formation) and up to the Hauterivian–Barremian (Kiyalin Formation). In the Early–Late Cretaceous, the WSB area developed into a lacustrine and alluvial plain setting with continental coal- bearing deposits (Pokur Formation). Results of a backstripping analysis [6] estimate the tectonic subsidence of the southeastern WSB during Aptian and Late Albian-Cenomanian as up to 200 m. The Turonian–Maastrichtian period is characterized by slow tectonic subsidence >200 m. During this time, thick strata of marine clays and sands accumulated (Kuznetsov, Ipatov, Slavgorod, and Gankin Formations). Minerals 2021, 11, 604 5 of 22 Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 24

FigureFigure 2. 2.Schematic Schematic stratigraphicstratigraphic columncolumn ofof the Mesozoic and Cenozoic Cenozoic sediments sediments of of the the Southeastern Southeastern West West Siberian Siberian Basin Basin withwith indication indication of of climatic climatic conditionsconditions (climate(climate oscillationoscillation curvecurve after [27]). [27]). Absolute Absolute ages ages of of stage stage boundaries boundaries shown shown are are according to [28]. according to [28]. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 6 of 22

2.3. Cenozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Southeastern West Siberian Basin During the Paleocene to Eocene, the WSB represents a vast marine basin with a transgressive maximum in the Middle Eocene [29]. During this time, predominantly clayey sediments (Talits, Lulinvor, and Tavdin Formations) were formed in the Southeastern WSB. The KTFZ area was tectonically stable in this period and a peneplain surface was formed at elevations between 250–500 m [30]. We suggested the planar surfaces were formed on sea level or even below during stable sea level period. This period of peneplanation was widespread and affected the entire CAOB to the south of the WSB [22,25,31,32]. In the Oligocene, renewed tectonic activity led to the fragmentation of the peneplain surface and initiation of the modern relief [7,30]. During the Early Oligocene, the marine WSB transformed into a huge lake-swamp plain where the deposits of Atlym and Novomikhailov formations accumulated under a moderately warm climate [33]. In the Late Oligocene, further progressive WSB subsidence led to the formation of a huge lake [30] in which the Zhurav Formation sediments accumulated in shallow water conditions. The lake basin eventually evolved into a series of enclosed swamp reservoirs in the Early Miocene. Lacustrine and swamp sediments represented by gray and brownish coal-bearing clays, and silts with interlayers of sand and brown coal (Abrosimov Formation) were formed. From the Late Burdigalian to the beginning of the Serravalian, the WSB was characterized by alluvial plain sediments (Beshcheul Formation) that were deposited in valley-like de- pressions with recycling of the underlying sediments. In the Middle Neogene, the humid conditions (Abrosimov and Beshcheul Formations) changed to a semi-arid environment (Tavolzhan and Pavlodar Formations) (Figure2). Since the Late Pliocene, sedimentation in the WSB was limited to various large de- pressions where coarse clastic material was accumulated, while Southeastern WSB areas were exposed to intensive erosion indicating a neotectonic phase affecting the WSB basement [34].

3. Apatite Fission Track Thermochronology: Samples and Analytical Methodology In this study, we collected thirteen fresh outcropping Permian–Triassic granitic rocks (Novosibirsk and Ob massifs from KTFZ and Kalman massif from CTFZ) mainly from quarries. Two samples (syenogranite 1-1 and monzogranite 31-1) were sampled from the Ob massif at an elevation of 50 m, seven samples (syenogranites 676, 686, 708 and monzogranites 712, 670, 671-4, 664-4) were taken from the Novosibirsk massif at elevations between 50 and 175 m, and four samples (granites 1502-2, 1524, 1564 and granodiorite 727) were collected from the Kalman massif at elevations between 51 and 268 m. Table1 presents the location and lithology for each sample. Apatite separation was conducted by a standard procedure of crushing, panning, heavy liquid, and magnetic separation techniques at the laboratory of the Siberian Research Institute of Geology, Geophysics and Mineral Resources (Novosibirsk, Russia). For each sample, at least 20 apatite grains with the fewest number of inclusions and micro-fractures were handpicked and embedded in ◦ epoxy, polished, and etched in a 5.5-M HNO3 solution for 20 s at 21 C. AFT analyses were performed at Ghent University (Ghent, Belgium) using the external detector method with thermal neutron irradiation [35–38]. Apatite mounts were covered with a muscovite external detector and irradiated with thermal neutrons at the Belgian Reactor 1 in the Belgian Nuclear Research Center (Mol, Belgium). Induced tracks produced by thermal neutron irradiation in the muscovite external detector were etched in 40% HF for 40 min at 20 ◦C. Measuring track densities, conﬁned track lengths, and the kinetic parameter Dpar were performed using a Nikon Eclipse Ni-E microscope system with a Nikon DS-Ri2 camera (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan), and Nikon NIS Elements Advanced Research software, supplemented with the TRACKﬂow system [39]. Results of AFT analyses can be found in Table2. Some of analyzed apatite grains contained zircon microinclusions, which produced local haloes of high spontaneous track numbers. Accordingly, a reduced number of grains (5 to 12) could be counted only, however, with more than 1000 spontaneous tracks for each Minerals 2021, 11, 604 7 of 22

sample. AFT ages were calculated as conventional mean zeta-ages t(ζ)[40]. AFT zeta-ages were calculated based on an overall weighted mean ζ-value of 281.6 ± 5.1 a·cm2, based on Durango [41] and Fish Canyon Tuff [42] age standards with ages of 31.4 ± 0.7 and 28.476 ± 0.064 Ma, respectively, and IRMM-540 dosimeter glasses. Confined track lengths and angles to the crystallographic c-axis were measured using a 100× plan apochromat glass objective and an optical 1250× magnification. Mean track length (MTL) values were calculated based on both horizontal and inclined (corrected for dip angle) confined tracks with the TRACKflow system [39] using the precise z-readout of the microscope of the track’s endpoints and a correction for the optical media transitions. The values of the kinetic parameter Dpar (etch pit diameter parallel to the crystallographic c-axis) [43] were measured using automated and manual measurement to estimate AFT annealing behavior.

Table 1. Location, lithology, and sample details.

No. Sample Lithology Latitude Longitude Altitude Location Ob Massif 1 1-1 syenogranite 55◦4104900 N 83◦3605300 E 84 Near the village Baturino Near the village 2 31-1 monzogranite 55◦2803000 N 83◦1601600 E 86 Dubrovino Novosibirsk Massif 3 664-4 monzogranite 55◦0704200 N 82◦540 2800 E 132 Mochischensky quarry 4 712 monzogranite 55◦0201200 N 82◦5605700 E 127 Kamensky quarry 5 676 syenogranite 55◦0602700 N 83◦0301500 E 176 Near the village Kamenka Near the Novosibirsk 6 686 syenogranite 54◦5805300 N 82◦5605100 E 93 River Station 7 708 syenogranite 55◦0304500 N 82◦4805000 E 91 Near the village Priob 8 670 monzogranite 54◦5805800 N 82◦5905300 E 76 Borok quarry 9 671-4 monzogranite 54◦5804000 N 82◦5904600 E 51 Borok quarry Kalman Massif 10 1502-2 granite 52◦0905800 N 82◦5904600 E 51 Near the village Kalmanka 11 1524 granite 52◦0801200 N 83◦2304300 E 176 Near the village Kalmanka 12 1564 granite 52◦0500500 N 83◦2600700 E 159 Near the village Kalmanka 13 727 granodiorite 52◦0800200 N 83◦3303400 E 268 Near the village Kalmanka

Obtained AFT data such as track densities, confined track lengths, and Dpar were used to produce AFT thermal history models using the QTQt software (version 5.4.6, Rennes, France) [44], the annealing equations of [45], and the Monte Carlo Markov Chain search method for inverse modeling. Thermal history modeling was performed on each sample (with the exception of sample 712 with insufficient measurements of confined track lengths) and on multiple samples for individual massifs. At least 105 iterations were performed in a fixed time-temperature frame ranging from 140 to 20 ± 20 ◦C and from 250 ± 10 Ma (granitoid massif emplacement) until present day. Additional constraints (20 ± 20 ◦C for 25 ± 10 Ma for the Novosibirsk and Ob massifs and 20 ± 20 ◦C for 15 ± 10 Ma for the Kalman massif) have been introduced due to geological data that evidence the granitic massifs to have been exposed to the surface during the Oligocene–Miocene. Thermal histories for individual samples and combining models for massifs are presented in an identical time-temperature scale in Figure3 and Figure 5. Maximum likelihood models showing the time-temperature path with the highest probability are represented by red paths. Maximum posterior models with the maximum posterior probability are shown as khaki paths. The expected t-T models (black paths) are an average of all accepted models weighted to their posterior probability [44]. Detailing input parameters used for thermal histories modeling are given in the supplementary materials. Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 24 Minerals 2021, 11, 604 8 of 22

4. Results and Interpretation 6 2 5 2 Table 2. Apatite ﬁssion track results: n is the number of analyzed grains; ρs, ρi (in 10 tracks/cm ), and ρd (in 10 tracks/cm ) 4.1. Apatite Fission-Track Data are the densities of spontaneous tracks in apatites, induced tracks in micas, and induced tracks in the dosimeter micas. Ns, Ni, and Nd are the numbers of spontaneousIn total, thirteen tracks in AFT apatite, ages induced were reported tracks, and as inducedconventional dosimeter zeta tracks ages infor the samples external from 2 detector, respectively. P(χ ) isthe the WSB chi-squared basement. probability The resulting that the ages dated were grains mainly have Cretaceous a constant ρ ands/ρi -ratio.ranged AFT from ages 148 (in to 71 Ma) are presented as AFT zeta-agesMa. Two t( ζsamples). A ζ-value (1-1 ofand 281.6 31-1)± from5.1 a· cmthe2 Obwas massif established exhibited based Early on analyses–Late Cretaceous of Durango (86.8 and Fish Canyon Tuff age standards± 4.4 and and 101.4 IRMM-540 ± 5.4, respectively) dosimeter glass. AFT lagesm (in. µMeanm) is track the mean lengths horizontal (MTL) (or ranged corrected from for 13.5– 14.5 μm (with standard deviations between 1.5 and 1.0 μm, Table 2). They commonly dip angle) track length, σ (in µm) the standard deviation, and nl is the number of measured horizontal conﬁned tracks. exhibit narrow to slightly negatively skewed track length distributions (Figure 3). Such Measurements of the kinetic parameter Dpar (±the standard deviation) are given in µm. length data propose moderate thermal shortening, suggesting a relatively rapid transit ρ ρ ρ Sample n s N throughi theN apatited partialN annealingρ /ρ zoneP( χ(APAZ,2) t( temperatureζ) l rangen ofσ 120–60D °C). (±1σ) s (±1σ) i (±1σ) d s i m 1 par Analyzed samples from the Ob massif have apatite grains with relatively high values of Ob massif Dpar, i.e., 2.1 and 2.5 μm (standard deviations 0.3 and 0.4 μm), which indicate higher 7.982 6.946 5.478 1-1 12 1233 1073 2096 1.13 ± 0.05 0.98 86.8 ± 4.4 13.5 40 1.5 2.1 ± 0.3 (0.227) apatite(0.212) resistance(0.120) to annealing [46,47]. 10.080 7.549 5.395 31-1 10 1143 856 2153 1.35 ± 0.06 0.64 101.4 ± 5.4 14.5 100 1.0 2.5 ± 0.4 (0.298) (0.258)The AFT ages(0.116) obtained for the Novosibirsk massif can be divided into three groups: (1) Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous; (2) early Cretaceous, and (3) early–Late Cretaceous. Novosibirsk massif Samples 686, 708, and 712 yielded Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous AFT ages (141.3 ± 6.6, 9.635 7.943 5.402 664-4 7 1355 1187 2148 1.19 ± 0.05 0.52 90.1 ± 4.4 13.1 84 1.6 2.6 ± 0.4 (0.262) 148(0.238) ± 7.9, and 141.5(0.117) ± 8.3 Ma, respectively) while samples 671-4 and 676 resulted in Early 8.009 7.903 5.409 670 7 1135 1120 2143 1.04 ± 0.04 0.61 78.4 ± 4.0 12.8 40 1.3 2.3 ± 0.3 (0.238) Cretaceous(0.236) AFT (0.117)ages (115.6 ± 4.8 and 127.8 ± 5.7 Ma) and samples 664-4 and 670 revealed 22.979 14.990 5.417 671-4 7 2787 Early–Late1818 Cretaceous AFT2138 ages 1.53 (90.1± 0.05 ± 4.4 0.98 and 115.678.4± 4.8± 4 Ma). 12.9 The 75 length-frequency 1.2 2.5 ± 0.4 (0.435) (0.352) (0.117) 14.962 distributions9.082 for 5.494all samples show broader asymmetrical histograms with lower MTL 676 8 2303 1398 2084 1.67 ± 0.06 0.57 127.8 ± 5.7 13.1 91 1.3 2.3 ± 0.3 (0.312) values(0.243) between 12.9(0.120) and 13.8 μm (standard deviations between 1.2 and 1.6 μm) (Figure 3, 12.604 6.731 5.438 686 6 2073 1107 2123 1.87 ± 0.07 0.82 141.3 ± 6.6 13.3 94 1.3 2.3 ± 0.4 (0.277) Table(0.202) 2). This indicated(0.118) somewhat prolonged residence in the APAZ causing thermal 13.800 7.091 5.471 708 6 1446 743 2100 1.94 ± 0.09 1.00 148.0 ± 7.9 13.3 73 1.2 2.4 ± 0.4 (0.363) track(0.260) shortening.(0.119) The analyzed apatite grains from the Novosibirsk massif samples had 4.496 2.397 5.431 712 12 1054 relatively 562high values of D2128par between 1.87 ± 2.30.10 and 0.85 2.6 μm 141.5 (standard± 8.3 13.8deviations 26 0.3 1.3 and 0.4 2.6 ± μ0.4m). (0.138) (0.101)Samples from(0.118) the Kalman massif reveal Late Cretaceous AFT ages in a narrow range from 71.3 ± 3.6 to 80.5 ± 4.1Kalman Ma. massifThe length-frequency distributions for the Kalman samples 6.085 6.491 5.501 1502-2 9 1140 1216 2080 0.94 ± 0.04 0.77 71.3 ± 3.6 14.0 42 1.6 2.4 ± 0.5 (0.180) exhibited(0.186) broader(0.121) asymmetrical histograms with relatively high MTL values between 13.5 9.319 9.518 5.509 1524 10 1595 and 14.0 μ1629m (standard deviations2074 0.98 between± 0.03 1.1 0.60 and 72.11.4 ±μ3.3m) (Figure 13.5 3, 57 Table 1.4 2). As 2.4 for± 0.4the (0.233) (0.236) (0.121) 12.745 Ob13.245 massif samples,5.517 the measured confined apatite fission tracks from the Kalman massif 1564 5 1582 1644 2068 0.96 ± 0.03 0.51 74.0 ± 3.4 13.8 70 1.3 2.5 ± 0.4 (0.320) samples(0.327) evidenced(0.121) moderate signs of thermal track shortening. These samples also had 7.966 7.450 5.423 727 8 1159 1084 2133 1.07 ± 0.05 0.78 80.5 ± 4.1 13.8 40 1.1 2.4 ± 0.4 (0.234) apatite(0.226) grains with(0.117) relatively high Dpar values 2.4 and 2.5 μm (standard deviations 0.4 and 0.5 μm).

Figure 3. Cont. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 9 of 22 Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 24

FigureFigure 3.3.AFT AFT thermal thermal history history modeling modeling results results produced produc byed theby QTQtthe QTQt software software [44] and[44] track and lengthtrack length distributions for individual samples from the Ob, Novosibirsk, and Kalman massifs. Thermal distributions for individual samples from the Ob, Novosibirsk, and Kalman massifs. Thermal history history models are presented in a fixed time-temperature interval◦ of 0–140 °C and 200–0 Ma. The modelscolor scale are presentedindicates high in a ﬁxedprobability time-temperature for red and intervalyellow, ofbut 0–140 low probabilitiesC and 200–0 for Ma. blue The colors. color scaleThe indicatescentral black high curve probability and its forsurrounding red and yellow, envelope but display low probabilities the expected for time-temperature blue colors. The central(t-T) model black curveand the and 95% its probability surrounding range envelope interval. display The red the lin expectede indicates time-temperature the maximum (t-T)likelihood model model and the while 95% probabilitythe khaki line range shows interval. the maximum The red line posterior indicates model. the maximum For each likelihoodsample observed model while(O) and the predicted khaki line shows(P) data the for maximum AFT ages, posterior the mean model. track For length each sample(MTL) observedand the fit (O) (blue and predictedline) of the (P) track data forlength AFT ages,distribution the mean are track displayed. length (MTL)The legend and thefor ﬁtthe (blue geological line) of maps the track is the length same distributionas shown in areFigure displayed. 1. The legend for the geological maps is the same as shown in Figure1. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 10 of 22

4. Results and Interpretation 4.1. Apatite Fission-Track Data In total, thirteen AFT ages were reported as conventional zeta ages for samples from the WSB basement. The resulting ages were mainly Cretaceous and ranged from 148 to 71 Ma. Two samples (1-1 and 31-1) from the Ob massif exhibited Early–Late Cretaceous (86.8 ± 4.4 and 101.4 ± 5.4, respectively) AFT ages. Mean track lengths (MTL) ranged from 13.5–14.5 µm (with standard deviations between 1.5 and 1.0 µm, Table2). They commonly exhibit narrow to slightly negatively skewed track length distributions (Figure3 ). Such length data propose moderate thermal shortening, suggesting a relatively rapid transit through the apatite partial annealing zone (APAZ, temperature range of 120–60 ◦C). Ana- lyzed samples from the Ob massif have apatite grains with relatively high values of Dpar, i.e., 2.1 and 2.5 µm (standard deviations 0.3 and 0.4 µm), which indicate higher apatite resistance to annealing [46,47]. The AFT ages obtained for the Novosibirsk massif can be divided into three groups: (1) Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous; (2) early Cretaceous, and (3) early–Late Cretaceous. Samples 686, 708, and 712 yielded Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous AFT ages (141.3 ± 6.6, 148 ± 7.9, and 141.5 ± 8.3 Ma, respectively) while samples 671-4 and 676 resulted in Early Cretaceous AFT ages (115.6 ± 4.8 and 127.8 ± 5.7 Ma) and samples 664-4 and 670 revealed Early–Late Cretaceous AFT ages (90.1 ± 4.4 and 78.4 ± 4 Ma). The length-frequency distributions for all samples show broader asymmetrical histograms with lower MTL values between 12.9 and 13.8 µm (standard deviations between 1.2 and 1.6 µm) (Figure3 , Table2). This indicated somewhat prolonged residence in the APAZ causing thermal track shortening. The analyzed apatite grains from the Novosibirsk massif samples had relatively high values of Dpar between 2.3 and 2.6 µm (standard deviations 0.3 and 0.4 µm). Samples from the Kalman massif reveal Late Cretaceous AFT ages in a narrow range from 71.3 ± 3.6 to 80.5 ± 4.1 Ma. The length-frequency distributions for the Kalman samples exhibited broader asymmetrical histograms with relatively high MTL values between 13.5 and 14.0 µm (standard deviations between 1.1 and 1.4 µm) (Figure3, Table2). As for the Ob massif samples, the measured confined apatite fission tracks from the Kalman massif samples evidenced moderate signs of thermal track shortening. These samples also had apatite grains with relatively high Dpar values 2.4 and 2.5 µm (standard deviations 0.4 and 0.5 µm). In order to identify periods of tectonic reactivation, the MTL values for each sample were plotted against their corresponding age (Figure4). This so-called “boomerang plot” [48,49] demonstrates that the basement has likely experienced multiple thermo- tectonic events. For the Novosibirsk massif, only a “half boomerang” segment is displayed, indicating signs of an exhumed fossil APAZ with a Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous exhumation event (old AFT age and long MTL values) with a tail of mixed signature (shortening within the APAZ) with Late Cretaceous AFT ages and shorter MTL values. We assumed that the Novosibirsk massif rocks with Late Cretaceous AFT ages were affected by a prolonged residence in the APAZ and represent an uplifted/exhumed APAZ. Therefore, in this case, Late Cretaceous AFT ages have no direct geological meaning, but postdate the actual event. Only two AFT ages were obtained for the Ob massif, i.e., 101 and 86 Ma with MTL values of 14.5 and 13.5 µm, respectively. We speculated that the Early Cretaceous AFT age with the MTL value of 14.5 µm dated the exhumation event, while the Late Cretaceous AFT age with shorter lengths showed an age value mixed with a younger event. In the case of the Kalman massif, a “half boomerang” segment was characterized by slightly increasing AFT ages (from 71 to 81 Ma) with decreasing MTL values (from 14.0 to 13.5 µm). This may indicate that the granitic rocks of the Kalman massif have recorded a relatively young (Late Cretaceous) exhumation event after a prolonged residence in the APAZ or in even deeper zones of the upper crust, which led to significant annealing of the signatures of an older (e.g., Early Cretaceous) exhumation event. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 11 of 22 Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 24

FigureFigure 4.4. BoomerangBoomerang plotplot ofof AFTAFT datadata fromfrom thethe WestWest SiberianSiberian BasinBasin basement,basement, withwith meanmean tracktrack length and age (incl. their uncertainty) displayed on the vertical and horizontal axis, respectively. length and age (incl. their uncertainty) displayed on the vertical and horizontal axis, respectively.

4.2. InverseThe thermal Thermal history History models Modeling for the individual samples from the Novosibirsk massif revealedTwelve differing thermal cooling history histories. models forSome individual of them (for samples instance, (Figure samples3) and 676, three 671-4, multiple 664-4 sampleand 670) models revealed for a the three-stage Ob, Novosibirsk, thermal history: and Kalman (1) Jurassic massifs–Cretaceous (Figure5) aremoderate presented. cooling; A low(2) Cretaceous numbers of–Neogene grains per stability; analyzed and sample (3) Neogene could lead to recent to weakly cooling. constrained Other models individual (e.g., thermalsamples history 708 and models. 686) were Hence, characterized a combination by a of two-stage individual thermal models history: was used (1) toJurassic better– constrainCretaceous the moderate thermal history cooling of and the (2) granitic Cretaceous massifs.-to-recent Samples rather from eachslow massifcooling were from taken 50 to from30 °C almost (Figure the 3). same The altitudemultiple and sample had similarthermal D historypar (therefore model eventually combines composition)all samples into and a MTLsingle values. thermal This history allowed model us tofor generate the Novosibi commonrsk massif thermal and models shows for three these steps: massifs. (1) Early We usedCretaceous the expected (~140– t-T130 paths Ma) (blackfast cooling, lines on followed the models) by as(2) guidelines an Early forCretaceous the interpretation–Miocene of(130 the–15 thermal Ma) period histories. of thermal stability, and (3) Late Neogene (last 15 Ma) slow cooling. TheThe expectedindividual t-T thermal models history for samples models from generated the Ob for massif all samples (1-1 and from 31-1) the showedKalman Cretaceous–Paleogenemassif were characterized (115–45 by Ma)moderate slow coolingcooling and with Cretaceous fluctuating (115–90 rates during Ma) rapid the cooling,last 100 respectively,myr (Figure followed3). Multiple by sample a stable modeling thermal regime for the withoutKalman visiblemassif oscillations.combined the Multiple thermal samplehistory modelingmodels of of four the Ob individual massif (Figure samples5) combined and revealed the thermal two similar history stages: models (1) of theLate individualCretaceous samples (85–80 andMa) demonstrated rapid cooling two and stages: (2) (1)Late Early–Late Cretaceous-to-recent Cretaceous (~105–90 (80–0 Ma)Ma) rapidmonotonous cooling slow and (2)cooling. Late Cretaceous to recent (~90–0 Ma) thermal stability (30–35 ◦C). During the Early–Late Cretaceous stage, the Ob massif rocks were cooled to below 60 ◦C within 15 myr. After the Early–Late Cretaceous rapid cooling, tectonic stability occurred in the Late Cretaceous and continued until recently. The thermal history models for the individual samples from the Novosibirsk massif revealed differing cooling histories. Some of them (for instance, samples 676, 671-4, 664-4 and 670) revealed a three-stage thermal history: (1) Jurassic–Cretaceous moderate cooling; (2) Cretaceous–Neogene stability; and (3) Neogene to recent cooling. Other models (e.g., samples 708 and 686) were characterized by a two-stage thermal history: (1) Jurassic– Cretaceous moderate cooling and (2) Cretaceous-to-recent rather slow cooling from 50 to 30 ◦C (Figure3). The multiple sample thermal history model combines all samples into a single thermal history model for the Novosibirsk massif and shows three steps: (1) Early Cretaceous (~140–130 Ma) fast cooling, followed by (2) an Early Cretaceous–Miocene (130–15 Ma) period of thermal stability, and (3) Late Neogene (last 15 Ma) slow cooling. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 12 of 22 Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 24

FigureFigure 5.5. AFTAFT thermalthermal historyhistory modelmodel resultsresults forfor thethe Ob,Ob, Novosibirsk,Novosibirsk, andand KalmanKalman massifsmassifs producedproduced byby thethe QTQtQTQt softwaresoftware [44[44]] combining combining nn samples. samples. ThermalThermal historyhistory modelsmodels areare presentedpresented inin aa ﬁxed fixed time-temperature interval of 0–140 °C and 200–0 Ma. The color scale indicates high probability for time-temperature interval of 0–140 ◦C and 200–0 Ma. The color scale indicates high probability for red and yellow, and the blue colors indicate low probability values (see the caption of Figure 3 for red and yellow, and the blue colors indicate low probability values (see the caption of Figure3 for further clarification). further clariﬁcation).

The individual thermal history models generated for all samples from the Kalman massif were characterized by moderate cooling with ﬂuctuating rates during the last 100 myr (Figure3). Multiple sample modeling for the Kalman massif combined the thermal history models of four individual samples and revealed two similar stages: (1) Late Cretaceous (85–80 Ma) rapid cooling and (2) Late Cretaceous-to-recent (80–0 Ma) monotonous slow cooling.

5. Discussion We discuss here the results of our thermochronological study on the Novosibirsk, Ob, and Kalman massifs in the context of the Mesozoic–Cenozoic tectonic evolution and Minerals 2021, 11associated, 604 cooling of the WSB basement, its denudation, and sediment accumulation. AFT 13 of 22 ages obtained in this study fit with observations that are widespread for the CAOB area to the south of the WSB (Figure 6). Cretaceous AFT ages are typical for fault zones in Tuva [50,51], Khakassiain Tuva[52], [Altay50,51], [25,53,54,55,56,57], Khakassia [52], Altay Gobi [25, 53Altay–57], [58], Gobi the Altay East [58 ],Sayan the East [59,60], Sayan [59,60], Kazakhstan [61,62],Kazakhstan Beishan [ 61[63],,62], and Beishan Tien [ 63Shan], and [32,38,64,65,66,67]. Tien Shan [32,38,64 –67].

Figure 6.FigureSchematic 6. Schematic tectonic map tectonic with Cretaceousmap with AFTCretaceous ages (in black)AFT ages and a(in Late black) Neogene and coolinga Late Neogene pulse (in red) cooling based on AFT agepulse ranges, (in apatite red) U-Th-Hebased on dating AFT (the age apatite ranges, He systemapatite withU-Th-He a closure dating temperature (the apatite range betweenHe system ~45–75 with◦C[ a68 ] is more sensitiveclosure to temperature near-surface processes range between than the ~45-75 AFT system), °C [68] and is thermalmore sensitive modeling to in near-surface the Central Asia processes Orogenic than Belt area to the souththe AFT of the system), West Siberian and thermal Basin. Strike-slip modeling faults in arethe linesCentral with Asia lateral Orogenic direction Belt of movement area to the shown south by theof the arrows. ExtensionalWest structures Siberian are Basin. shown Strike-slip by striped faults lines. ISZ—Irtyshare lines with shear lateral zone, TFF—Talas–Fergana direction of movement fault, ES—East shown by Sayan the fault, BRZ—Baikalarrows. rift zone,Extensional TV—Tuva, structures Kh—Khakassia. are shown by striped lines. ISZ—Irtysh shear zone, TFF—Talas– Fergana fault, ES—East Sayan fault, BRZ—Baikal rift zone, TV—Tuva, Kh—Khakassia. 5.1. The Novosibirsk Massif 5.1. The NovosibirskThe Massif multiple sample thermal history model for the Novosibirsk massif reveals a two- ◦ The multiplestage sample cooling thermal from 120historyC to model present for ambient the Novosibirsk temperatures massif during reveals the last a two- 140 myr. The stage cooling fromthermal 120 °C history to present models asambient well as thetemperatures AFT ages for during the Novosibirsk the last 140 massif myr. indicate The an Early Cretaceous fast cooling episode. This episode can be explained by basement denudation thermal history models as well as the AFT ages for the Novosibirsk massif indicate an and exhumation as a response to fault-reactivation and/or marine base-level drop. As Early Cretaceousshown fast incooling Figure 7episode., the Novosibirsk This episode massif cooledcan be across explained the APAZ by duringbasement 140–130 Ma, denudation and whichexhumation generally as coincides a response with to the fault-reactivation WSB marine regression and/or with marine its peak base-level in the Valanginian. drop. As shown Thisin Figure suggests 7, the that Novosibirs some inﬂuencek massif of erosional cooled base-level across the drop APAZ may haveduring added 140 to– the total 130 Ma, which generallydenudation coincides of the Novosibirsk with the WSB massif. marine However, regression eustatic with changes its peak in the in range the of 50 m Valanginian. Thiswould suggests have athat minor some inﬂuence influence when of cooling erosional the Novosibirsk base-level massif drop frommay ~120 have to 60 ◦C. added to the total denudation of the Novosibirsk massif. However, eustatic changes in the range of 50 m would have a minor influence when cooling the Novosibirsk massif from ~120 to 60 °C. Minerals 2021, 11, x FORMinerals PEER REVIEW2021, 11, 604 15 of 24 14 of 22

Figure 7.FigureCorrelation 7. Correlation of the multiple of the sample multiple thermal sample history thermal models history (expected models t-T trends) (expected of the t-T Ob trends) (orange of line), the Novosi-Ob birsk (grey(orange line), line), and Kalman Novosibirsk (green line)(grey massifs line), and (below) Kalman with Mesozoic(green line) and massifs Cenozoic (bel tectonicow) with events Mesozoic (red, atop), and main sedimentationCenozoic stages tectonic in the Westevents Siberian (red, Basinatop), (blue, main bottom), sedimentation and mean stages paleo-water in the depth West (above). Siberian Global Basin eustatic (blue, level from differentbottom), studies and [69 mean–72] after paleo-water [6]. depth (above). Global eustatic level from different studies [69,70,71,72] after [6]. The denudation of the Novosibirsk massif most likely occurred as a result of the fault ◦ The denudationreactivation of the Novosibirsk and associated massif tectonic most uplift. likely Using occurred a geothermal as a result gradient of the of 20–25fault C/km, reactivation anddenudation associated rates tectonic of the uplift. Novosibirsk Using massifa geothermal rocks during gradient the Early of 20 Cretaceous–25 °C/km, stage were denudation ratesestimated of the Novosibirsk as ~240–300 m/myr,massif ro butcks again during geothermal the Early gradients Cretaceous may have stage been were enhanced by fast cooling and thus derived denudation rates lower. Early Cretaceous cooling is consistent estimated as ~240–300 m/myr, but again geothermal gradients may have been enhanced with the results of backstripping modeling, where irregular tectonic uplift of the South- by fast cooling easternand thus WSB derived is shown denudation (Figure8) and rates the total lower. amplitude Early duringCretaceous~150–110 cooling Ma is is estimated consistent with atthe 400 results m [6]. of The backstripping tectonic uplift modeling, could be caused where by irregular far-ﬁeld effects tectonic from uplift (1) the of Mongol– the SoutheasternOkhotsk WSB is oceanshown closure (Figure and 8) ensuing and the convergence total amplitude between during Siberia ~150 and–Amuria110 Ma [is73 ,74] and estimated at 400(2) m the[6]. joining The tectonic of the Lhasa uplift block coul tod be the caused southern by margin far-field of theeffects Eurasia from [75 (1)–77 the] (Figure 8). Mongol–Okhotsk ocean closure and ensuing convergence between Siberia and Amuria [73,74] and (2) the joining of the Lhasa block to the southern margin of the Eurasia [75,76,77] (Figure 8). Minerals 2021, 11, 604 15 of 22 Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 24

Figure 8.8.Estimations Estimations of of tectonic tectonic uplift/subsidence uplift/subsidence (color (color scale scale in m) in for m) the for WSB the during WSB ~150–110during ~150 Ma– based110 Ma on backstrip-based on pingbackstripping modeling modeling [6]. White [6]. stars White show stars the show position the ofpo thesition massifs of the studied massifs in studied this article. in this article.

After Early Cretaceous fast cooling, an Early Cretaceous–MioceneCretaceous–Miocene (~130–15(~130–15 Ma) episode of tectonic stability is clearly recognized in the thermal history model for the Novosibirsk massif. During this period, the WS WSBB developed from a lacustrine and alluvial plain to a marine basin.basin. A peneplain surface was formed within the uplifteduplifted areas.areas. The multiple sample thermal history model for the Novosibirsk massif shows an expected t-T path with an increase in temperature in the Neogene that allows interpreting this as a possible reheating episode. In some individual thermal history models the reheating event is more more clearly clearly pronounced, pronounced, but modeling modeling artefa artefactscts could nevertheless be at at play play here here [45]. [45]. As the reheatingreheating episodeepisode is is recognized recognized at at temperatures temperatures <60 <60◦C, °C, it isit notis not well well constrained constrained by bythe the AFT AFT data. data. For thethe LateLate NeogeneNeogene (from (from ~15 ~15 Ma Ma onwards), onwards), renewed renewed cooling cooling associated associated with with de- denudationnudation and and exhumation exhumation is suggested is suggested by the by Novosibirsk the Novosibirsk massif massif thermal thermal history history model. model.The Late The Neogene Late Neogene episode episode of rapid of cooling rapid iscooling known is inknown the entire in the CAOB entire to CAOB the south to the of souththe WSB of the (Figure WSB6 )(Figure and supported 6) and supported by (1) thermal by (1) modelingthermal modeling [ 36,52,54 [36,52,54];]; (2) AFT (2) ages AFT of ~17–10ages of Ma~17-10 [38, 62Ma]; and[38,62]; (3) apatiteand (3) U-Th-He apatite U-Th-He ages of ~15–5 ages Maof ~15 [65–].5 InMa our [65]. study In our area, study geo- area,logical geological data recorded data (1)recorded the general (1) the uplift genera of thel uplift WSB basementof the WSB in thebasement Early Miocenein the Early [30]; Miocene(2) intensive [30]; erosion (2) intensive of the erosion Pliocene of deposits the Plioce inne the deposits southeastern in the partsoutheastern of the basin; part and of the (3) basin;coarse and clastic (3) sedimentation coarse clastic insedimentation the northern in WSB the since northern the Late WSB Pliocene since the [6, 34Late]. Although Pliocene [6,34].the Late Although Neogene the cooling Late episodeNeogene in cooling the thermal episode history in the models thermal may history point to models a modeling may pointartifact to [45 a], modeling this cooling artifact episode [45], was this however cooling consistent episode with was regional however geological consistent evidence with regionaland may geological date a real evidence Late Neogene and may event. date a real Late Neogene event. The Late Neogene cooling episode of the Novosibirsk massif could be related to a structural reorganization reorganization within within the the CAOB CAOB edifice ediﬁce due due to toongoing ongoing India India–Eurasia–Eurasia collision colli- Minerals 2021, 11, 604 16 of 22

sion [22,38,55]. The Neogene basement cooling is possibly emphasized by a change in climate as well. In the Late Miocene, the temperate climate changed to more arid and cooler conditions as reflected by the sediment accumulation in the WSB (Figure2). Additionally, an influence of global sea level fluctuations on the denudational history of the WSB cannot be ruled out. As shown in Figure7, the episodes of rapid cooling in the Cenozoic generally coincide with a global drop in sea level.

5.2. The Ob Massif In turn, the multiple sample thermal history model for the Ob massif revealed two- stage cooling during the last ~105 myr. The thermal history models and AFT ages for the Ob massif indicated a Late Cretaceous (~105–90 Ma) rapid cooling episode. This Late Cretaceous episode could be explained by fast denudation as a response to fault reactivation. Assuming a geothermal gradient of 20–25 ◦C/km, a denudation rate was estimated as ~160–200 m/myr, but fast cooling may have increased the geothermal gradient for some time. The origin of this fault reactivation is not clear; however, it seems to have occurred simultaneously with the initiation of extensional tectonics due to the Late Cretaceous collapse of the supposed Mongol–Okhotsk orogen that formed during Siberia–Amuria collision (Figure7). A ~105–90 Ma cooling event was detected in several adjacent areas to the WSB (e.g., along the East Gobi fault zone [58] and along the Baikal rift zone [23]), suggesting that fault reactivations related with extensional tectonics were prevalent throughout most of northern Central Asia at that time [78]. This indicates that fast denudation and exhumation of the Ob massif could be caused by far-ﬁeld effects from tectonic events in the eastern part of Eurasia. After the Late Cretaceous fast cooling, the cooling path in our thermal history model for the Ob massif showed only weak slopes during the Cenozoic (~90–0 Ma), suggesting the absence of tectonic activity. It is noteworthy that the results of our AFT thermochronological study suggest a different Mesozoic–Cenozoic evolution of the Ob and Novosibirsk massifs that are located in the same KTFZ. On the one hand, the Early Cretaceous (~140–130 Ma) event is not preserved in the Ob massif due to the possible removal of the corresponding AFT signal during Late Cretaceous (~105–90 Ma) tectonic reactivation. On the other hand, the difference in the evolution of the Ob and Novosibirsk massifs could be linked to the reactivation of the different fault structures that might be hidden below the post-Cretaceous sedimentary cover of the WSB.

5.3. The Kalman Massif The thermal histories and AFT ages for the Kalman massif reveal a Late Cretaceous (~85–80 Ma) rapid cooling episode that can be explained by fast denudation as a result of fault reactivation. During the Late Cretaceous stage, the rocks of the Kalman massifs were brought to ~60 ◦C and, when assuming a geothermal gradient of 20–25 ◦C/km, a denudation rate of ~480–600 m/myr was estimated. Geothermal gradients may have been distrinctly higher after Late Cretaceous cooling; thus, true denudation rates may have been lower than estimated here. The tectonic evolution of the Kalman massif is controlled by the NW-oriented Charysh fault, which could have been reactivated during the Late Cretaceous and thereby caused fast denudation and exhumation. Similar AFT ages and thermal history models are known in CAOB areas (Figure6) situated along important fault zones (e.g., the Teletskoye graben [35,36], the Irtysh shear zone [5], and the Kurai fault zone [55]) and hence bear witness to a widespread event of Middle–Late Cretaceous fault-reactivation. This fault reactivation event cannot easily be linked to distant compressional tectonic forces; however, it is coeval with the onset of the Karakoram–Pamir collision in the southern part of Eurasia [79]. During the Middle–Late Cretaceous, the Karakoram block collided with the Pamir and led to a reorganization of tectonic blocks within the CAOB and could have caused the reactivation of the Charysh fault and other fault zones (Figure9c). If the Charysh fault is the only fault structure responsible for the exhumation of the Kalman Minerals 2021, 11, 604 17 of 22

massif, then dip-slip movement should be expected along the Charysh fault during its Middle–Late Cretaceous reactivation. After this episode, the thermal history model showed a near-horizontal t-T path reﬂecting a period of prolonged tectonic quiescence during the Late Cretaceous to recent times. The Late Neogene cooling, shown for the Novosibirsk massif, was not manifested in the thermal history model for the Kalman massif.

5.4. Implication for the Mesozoic–Cenozoic Tectonic Evolution of the WSB Basement Thermal history modeling based on AFT data demonstrates the occurrence of several fast cooling episodes associated with the denudation and exhumation of the Southeast- ern WSB basement after its consolidation during the Permian–Triassic. The episodes of basement denudation and exhumation recognized in thermal history models for the Novosi- birsk, Ob, and Kalman massifs are difficult to explain by mantle plume activity beneath the WSB basement as in the case of the Permian–Triassic uplift event, since no evidence of mantle plume activity exists in the study area during the Late Jurassic to recent. Kimber- lites with an age of 140–170 Ma indicate plume activity during the Middle Jurassic–Early Cretaceous in the northeastern part of the Siberian Craton [80,81], but this plume activity did not affect the tectonic evolution of the WSB. Moreover, if the vertical motions were induced by convective stresses of mantle flow, then they would display a large regional effect and slowly change over time. Recent backstripping analysis shows episodic irregular vertical motions within the area of the WSB during this time [6]. We propose alternative causes for the cooling episodes of the WSB basement during the Mesozoic–Cenozoic. During the Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous, the Mongol–Okhotsk ocean was closed along the Mongol–Okhotsk suture zone in a diachronous, scissor-like manner from central Mongolia to the Okhotsk sea [82] at the eastern margin of Eurasia (Figure9b,c). It is suggested that almost simultaneously with the proposed Mongol–Okhotsk event, the Lhasa block collided with the Qiangtang block along the southern margin of Eurasia, i.e., during the Latest Jurassic–Early Cretaceous [83,84] (Figure9b,c). The Lhasa–Qiangtang collision could have caused the Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous exhumation in the Tian Shan and other inner regions of the CAOB [22,41,78]. Both of these tectonic events could have led to the denudation and exhumation of the WSB basement during the Early Cretaceous (~140–130 Ma); however, the contribution of each of them is difficult to evaluate, and the question remains if this effect would be propagated this far. The signals of these tectonic events were preserved in the Novosibirsk massif and are not found in the deep rooting Ob and Kalman massifs. After rapid Mongol–Okhotsk ocean closure by the end of the Early Cretaceous, extensional tectonics have been recorded [83,84]. Possibly this is related to a gravitational collapse of the enigmatic Mongol–Okhotsk orogeny [74]. Tectonic activity might have triggered reactivation of fault systems further inland, causing fast exhumation of the Ob massif during the Late Cretaceous. Slightly later, in the Middle–Late Cretaceous–Early Paleogene, the Karakoram block drifted northwards and collided with the Pamir at the southern Eurasian margin [79]. The stress-field induced by the Karakoram–Pamir collision propagated to the north of Eurasia and could have reorganized the tectonic blocks within the CAOB and the WSB and reactivated fault structures such as the Charysh fault, leading to exhumation of the Kalman massif during this period. Finally, India collided with Eurasia as a consquence of the closure of the Neotethys Ocean in the Early Cenozoic, leading to tectonic signals within a vast zone of orogens in southern Eurasia [85–87] (Figure9d–f). This large-scale collision initiated a renewed episode of reactivation of the areas north of the Southern Eurasian margin and could have led to another exhumation episode of the WSB basement as shown above in the thermal history models for the Novosibirsk massif. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 18 of 22 Minerals 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 24

Figure 9. SimpliﬁedSimplified paleo-tectonic maps (after [73,88,89]) [73,88,89]) illustratingillustrating the position of the variousvarious continental blocks and oceanic plates from the Late Permian–EarlyPermian–Early Triassic toto thethe MioceneMiocene ((aa–f–f).).

6. Conclusions Conclusions This study presents apatite fission fission track (AFT) results for granitic rocks from the exposed basement of of the Southeastern West SiberianSiberian Basin (WSB). The obtained results allowed us to put further constraints on the Mesozoic Mesozoic–Cenozoic–Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the WSB. The following conclusions could be drawn: 1. 1.The The granitic granitic massifs massifs of the of exposedthe exposed segments segments of the WSBof the basement WSB basement exhibit differing exhibit coolingdiffering histories, cooling implying histories, differential implying basement differential denudation basement and exhumation denudation patterns and as shownexhumation by our patterns AFT data; as shown by our AFT data; 2. 2.AFT AFT ages ages and thermaland thermal history history models ofmodels the Novosibirsk of the Novosibirsk granitic massif granitic displayed massif an Earlydisplayed Cretaceous an Early (~140–130 Cretaceous Ma) period(~140–130 of rapid Ma) period cooling of associated rapid cooling with associated basement exhumationwith basement and denudation. exhumation This and denudation denudation. episode This candenudation be interpreted episode as acan result be of faultinterpreted reactivation as a result due toof thefault convergence reactivation between due to the Siberia convergence and Amuria between and/or Siberia the Lhasa–Qiangtangand Amuria and/or collision; the Lhasa–Qiangtang collision; 3. 3.AFT AFT data data obtained obtained for for the the Ob Ob massif massif show show a distinct a distinct Late Late Cretaceous Cretaceous (~105–90 (~105 Ma)–90 fastMa) cooling fast cooling period associated period associated with exhumation with exhumation and denudation and denudation of the WSB of basement. the WSB Thisbasement. event could This beevent caused could by be fault caused reactivation by fault reactivation due to a far-field due to a effect far-field from effect the gravitationalfrom the gravitational collapse of the collapse Mongol–Okhotsk of the Mongol orogeny–Okhotsk after final orogeny collision after between final Siberiacollision and between Amuria; Siberia and Amuria; Minerals 2021, 11, 604 19 of 22

4. Similar AFT ages and thermal history models of the Kalman massif reveal a Late Cretaceous (~85–80 Ma) rapid cooling period indicating basement exhumation and denudation as a result of reactivation of the Charysh fault and could be related to Karakoram–Pamir convergence along the southern Eurasia margin; 5. Thermal history models for all granitic massifs show, that the WSB basement experienced temporary thermal stagnation during much of the Cretaceous and the Cenozoic. This period of tectonic stability is evidenced by the development of the marine basin and the occurrence of peneplanation surfaces within uplifted areas of the WSB basement; 6. A ﬁnal Neogene rapid cooling episode of the WSB basement registered in the Novosi- birsk massif started at ~15 Ma and brought the rocks to surface temperatures at their present outcrop position. This event might be linked to continuous indentation of the Indian plate into Eurasia.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10 .3390/min11060604/s1, File: parameters used for thermal histories modeling. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, E.V.V.; formal analysis, S.N. and P.I.M.; funding acquisi- tion, E.V.V. and J.D.G.; investigation, E.V.V., N.I.V. and F.I.Z.; methodology, J.D.G., S.N. and G.V.R.; project administration, E.V.V.; resources, J.D.G.; software, G.V.R.; supervision, E.V.V.; visualization, N.I.V.; writing—original draft, E.V.V.; writing—review and editing, J.D.G. and N.I.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: The study was carried out with a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 19-77-00033). Natalia Vetrova was funded by a grant 19-45-543001 from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research and Government of the Novosibirsk Region. Fedor Zhimulev was funded by a state assignment of IGM SB RAS. Simon Nachtergaele was funded by a Ph.D. fellowship of the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO). Acknowledgments: We also wish to express our appreciation to the UGent Russia Platform for assistance and travel funds. The academic editors (Alexandre Kounov and Meinert Rahn) and three anonymous reviewers are thanked for their constructive comments all of which greatly improved this manuscript. Conﬂicts of Interest: The authors declare no conﬂict of interest.

References 1. Ju, Y.; Wang, G.; Li, S.; Sun, Y.; Suo, Y.; Somerville, I.; Li, W.; He, B.; Zheng, M.; Yu, K. Geodynamic mechanism and classiﬁcation of basins in the Earth system. Gondwana Res. 2020, in press. [CrossRef] 2. Allen, P.A.; Armitage, J.J. Cratonic Basins. In Tectonics of Sedimentary Basins: Recent Advances; Busby, C., Pérez, A.A., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: West Sussex, UK, 2011; pp. 602–620. 3. Nikishin, A.M.; Ziegler, P.A.; Abbott, D.; Brunet, M.-F.; Cloetingh, S. Permo-Triassic intraplate magmatism and mangle dynamics. Tectonophysics 2002, 351, 3–39. [CrossRef] 4. Vyssotski, A.; Vyssotski, V.; Nezhdanov, A. Evolution of the West Siberian Basin. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2006, 23, 93–126. [CrossRef] 5. Kontorovich, A.E.; Nesterov, I.I.; Salmanov, F.K.; Surkov, V.S.; Troﬁmuk, A.A.; Ervye, Y. Geology of Oil and Gas of West Siberia; Nedra: Moscow, Russia, 1975; p. 679. (In Russian) 6. Vibe, Yu.; Bunge, H.-P.; Clark, S.R. Anomalous subsidence history of the West Siberian Basin as an indicator for episodes of mantle induced dynamic topography. Gondwana Res. 2018, 53, 99–109. [CrossRef] 7. Babin, G.A.; Chernyh, A.I.; Golovina, A.G.; Zhigalov, S.V.; Dolgushin, S.S.; Vetrov, E.V.; Korableva, T.V.; Bodina, N.A.; Svetlova, N.A.; Fedoseev, G.S.; et al. Explanation Note to the State Geological Map of Russian Federation, Scale 1:1 000 000 (Third Generation) Atai- Sayan Series, Sheet N-44 (Novosibirsk); Russian Geological Research Institute: Sankt Peterburg, Russia, 2015; p. 181. (In Russian) 8. Vetrov, E.V.; De Grave, J.; Kotler, P.D.; Kruk, N.N.; Zhigalov, S.V.; Babin, G.A.; Fedoseev, G.S.; Vetrova, N.I. Evolution of the Kolyvan-Tomsk granitoid magmatism (Central Siberia): Insights into the tectonic transition from post-collision to intraplate settings in the northwestern part of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. Gondwana Res. 2021, 93, 26–47. [CrossRef] 9. Gusev, N.I.; Vovshin, Y.E.; Kruglova, A.A. Explanation Note to the State Geological Map of Russian Federation, Scale 1:1 000 000 (Third Generation) Atai-Sayan Series, Sheet M-44 (Rubtsovsk); Russian Geological Research Institute: Sankt Peterburg, Russia, 2015; p. 320. (In Russian) 10. Wagner, G.A.; Van den haute, P. Fission Track-Dating; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1992; p. 285. Minerals 2021, 11, 604 20 of 22

11. Dobretsov, N.L.; Buslov, M.M.; Vernikovsky, V.A. Neoproterozoic to Early Ordovician Evolution of the Paleo-Asian Ocean: Implications to the Break-up of Rodinia. Gondwana Res. 2003, 6, 143–159. [CrossRef] 12. Windley, B.F.; Alexeiev, D.; Xiao, W.; Kröner, A.; Badarch, G. Tectonic models for accretion of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt. J. Geol. Soc. 2007, 164, 31–47. [CrossRef] 13. Sengör, A.M.C.; Natal’in, B.A. Paleotectonics of Asia: Fragments of a synthesis. In The Tectonic Evolution of Asia; Yin, A., Harrison, T.M., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1996; pp. 486–641. 14. Dobretsov, N.; Polyansky, O.; Reverdatto, V.; Babichev, A. Dynamics of the Arctic and adjacent petroleum basins: A record of plume and rifting activity. Russ. Geol. Geophys. 2013, 54, 888–902. [CrossRef] 15. Holt, P.J.; van Hunen, J.; Allen, M.B. Subsidence of theWest Siberian Basin: Effects of a mantle plume impact. Geology 2012, 40, 703–706. [CrossRef] 16. Reichow, M.K.; Saunders, A.D.; White, R.V.; Al’Mukhamedov, A.I.; Medvedev, A.Y. Geochemistry and petrogenesis of basalts from the West Siberian Basin: An extension of the Permo–Triassic Siberian Traps, Russia. Lithos 2005, 79, 425–452. [CrossRef] 17. ¸Sengör, A.M.C.; Natal’in, B.A.; Burtman, V.S. Evolution of the Altaid tectonic collage and Palaeozoic crustal growth in Eurasia. Nature 1993, 364, 299–307. [CrossRef] 18. Kröner, A.; Windley, B.F.; Badarch, G.; Tomurtogoo, O.; Hegner, E.; Jahn, B.M.; Gruschka, S.; Khain, E.V.; Demoux, A.; Wingate, M.T.D. Accretionary growth and crust formation in the Central Asian Orogenic Belt and comparison with the Arabian-Nubian shield. Geol. Soc. Am. Mem. Mem. 2007, 200, 181–209. 19. Xiao, W.; Windley, B.F.; Sun, S.; Li, J.; Huang, B.; Han, C.; Yuan, C.; Sun, M.; Chen, H. A tale of amalgamation of three Permo- Triassic collage systems in Central Asia: Oroclines, sutures, and terminal accretion. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 2015, 43, 477–507. [CrossRef] 20. Sotnikov, V.I.; Fedoseev, G.S.; Ponomarchuk, V.A.; Borisenko, A.S.; Berzina, A.N. Granitoid complexes of the Kolyvan0-Tomsk folded zone (West Siberia). Russ. Geol. Geophys. 2000, 41, 120–125. 21. Dobretsov, N.L.; Buslov, M.M.; Delvaux, D.; Berzin, N.A.; Ermikov, V.D. Meso and Cenozoic Tectonics of the Central Asian Mountain Belt: Effects of Lithospheric Plate Interaction and Mantle Plumes. Int. Geol. Rev. 1996, 38, 430–466. [CrossRef] 22. De Grave, J.; Buslov, M.M.; Haute, P.V.D. Distant effects of India-Eurasia convergence and Mesozoic intracontinental deformation in Central Asia: Constraints from apatite fission-track thermochronology. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2007, 29, 188–204. [CrossRef] 23. Jolivet, M.; De Boisgrolier, T.; Petit, C.; Fournier, M.; Sankov, V.A.; Ringenbach, J.-C.; Byzov, L.; Miroshnichenko, A.I.; Kovalenko, S.N.; Anisimova, S.V. How old is the Baikal Rift Zone? Insight from apatite fission track thermochronology. Tectonics 2009, 28, TC3008. [CrossRef] 24. Adamenko, O.M.; Portnova, E.A. The main features of the structure and conditions for the formation of the second structural (Lower Middle Jurassic) tier of the Kulundinskaya Depression. Russ. Geol. Geophys. 1967, 3, 12–21. 25. De Grave, J.; Buslov, M.M.; Van den haute, P.; Dehandschutter, B.; Delvaux, D. Meso-Cenozoic Evolution of Mountain Range- Intramontane Basin Systems in the Southern Siberian Altai Mountains by Apatite Fission-Track Thermochronology. In Thrust Belts and Foreland Basins; Lacombe, O., Lavé, J., Roure, F., Vergés, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007. 26. Kazmina, T.A. Stratigraphy and Ostracods of the Pliocene and Early Pleistocene of the South of the West Siberian Plain; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1975; p. 98. (In Russian) 27. Kulkova, I.A.; Volkova, V.S. Landscapes and climate of West Siberia in the Paleogene and Neogene. Russ. Geol. Geophys. 1997, 38, 581–595. 28. Cohen, K.M.; Finney, S.C.; Gibbard, P.L.; Fan, J.-X. The ICS International Chronostratigraphic Chart. Episodes 2013, 36, 199–204. [CrossRef] 29. Panova, L.A. Oligocene and Eocene of the West Siberian Lowland. Cenozoic Flora of Siberia According to Paleontological Data; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1971; pp. 40–50. (In Russian) 30. Arkhipov, S.A.; Vdovin, V.V.; Mizerov, B.V.; Nikolaev, V.A. West Siberian Plain; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1970; Volume 280. (In Russian) 31. Jolivet, M.; Ritz, J.-F.; Vassallo, R.; Larroque, C.; Braucher, R.; Todbileg, M.; Chauvet, A.; Sue, C.; Arnaud, N.; De Vicente, R.; et al. Mongolian summits: An uplifted, flat, old but still preserved erosion surface. Geology 2007, 35, 871–874. [CrossRef] 32. Jolivet, M.; Dominguez, S.; Charreau, J.; Chen, Y.; Li, Y.G.; Wang, Q.C. Mesozoic and Cenozoic tectonic history of the central Chinese Tian Shan: Reactivated tectonic structures and active deformation. Tectonics 2010, 29, TC6019. [CrossRef] 33. Zykin, V.S. Stratigraphy and Evolution of the Natural Environment and Climate in the Late Cenozoic South of Western Siberia; GEO: Novosibirsk, Russia, 2012; Volume 476. (In Russian) 34. Adamenko, O.M. Pre-Altai Depression and Problems of the Formation of Foothill Subsidence; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 1976; Volume 184. (In Russian) 35. De Grave, J.; Van den haute, P. Denudation and cooling of the Lake Teletskoye region in the Altai Mountains (South Siberia) as revealed by apatite fission-track thermochronology. Tectonophysics 2002, 349, 145–159. [CrossRef] 36. De Grave, J.; Buslov, M.M.; Haute, P.V.D.; Metcalf, J.; Dehandschutter, B.; McWilliams, M.O. Multi-method chronometry of the Teletskoye graben and its basement, Siberian Altai Mountains: New insights on its thermo-tectonic evolution. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spéc. Publ. 2009, 324, 237–259. [CrossRef] Minerals 2021, 11, 604 21 of 22

37. De Grave, J.; Glorie, S.; Buslov, M.M.; Izmer, A.; Fournier-Carrie, A.; Elburg, M.; Batalev, V.Y.; Vanhaeke, F.; Van den haute, P. The thermo-tectonic history of the Song-Kul Plateau, Kyrgyz Tien Shan: Constraints by apatite and titanite thermo-chronometry and zircon U/Pb dating. Gondwana Res. 2011, 20, 745–763. [CrossRef] 38. Glorie, S.; De Grave, J.; Buslov, M.; Elburg, M.; Stockli, D.; Gerdes, A.; Van den Haute, P. Multi-method chronometric constraints on the evolution of the Northern Kyrgyz Tien Shan granitoids (Central Asian Orogenic Belt): From emplacement to exhumation. J. Asian Earth Sci. 2010, 38, 131–146. [CrossRef] 39. Van Ranst, G.; Carlos Pedrosa-Soares, A.P.; Novo, T.; Vermeesch, P.; De Grave, J. New insights from low-temperature thermochronology into the tectonic and geomorphologic evolution of the southeast Brazilian highlands and passive margin. Geosci. Front. 2020, 11, 303–324. [CrossRef] 40. Hurford, A.J.; Green, P.F. The zeta age calibration of fission-track dating. Chem. Geol. 1983, 41, 285–317. [CrossRef] 41. McDowell, F.W.; McIntosh, W.C.; Farley, K.A. A precise 40Ar–39Ar reference age for the Durango apatite (U–Th)/He and fission-track dating standard. Chem. Geol. 2005, 214, 249–263. [CrossRef] 42. Hurford, A.J.; Hammerschmidt, K. 40Ar/39Ar and K/Ar dating of the Bishop and Fish Canyon Tus: Calibration ages for fission-track dating standards. Chem. Geol. 1985, 58, 23–32. [CrossRef] 43. Donelick, R.A. Crystallographic orientation dependence of mean etchable fission track length in apatite: An empirical model and experimental observations. Am. Mineral. 1991, 76, 83–91. 44. Gallagher, K. Transdimensional inverse thermal history modeling for quantitative thermochronology. J. Geophys. Res. Space Phys. 2012, 2012, 1–16. [CrossRef] 45. Ketcham, R.A.; Carter, A.; Donelick, R.A.; Barbarand, J.; Hurford, A.J. Improved modeling of fission-track annealing in apatite. Am. Mineral. 2007, 92, 799–810. [CrossRef] 46. Carlson, W.D.; Donelick, R.A.; Ketcham, R.A. Variability of apatite fission-track annealing kinetics: I. Experimental results. Am. Mineral. 1999, 84, 1213–1223. [CrossRef] 47. Donelick, R.A.; O’Sullivan, P.B.; Ketcham, R.A. Apatite Fission-Track Analysis. Rev. Miner. Geochem. 2005, 58, 49–94. [CrossRef] 48. Green, P.F.; Duddyi, I.R.; Gleadow, A.J.W.; Tingate, P.R.; Laslett, G.M. Thermal annealing of fission tracks in apatite 1. A qualitative description. Chem. Geol. 1986, 59, 237–253. [CrossRef] 49. Gallagher, K.; Brown, R.; Johnson, C. Fission track analysis and its applications to geological problems. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 1998, 26, 519–572. [CrossRef] 50. De Grave, J.; De Pelsmaeker, E.; Zhimulev, F.I.; Glorie, S.; Buslov, M.M.; Van den haute, P. Meso-Cenozoic building of the northern Central Asian Orogenic Belt: Thermotectonic history of the Tuva region. Tectonophysics 2014, 621, 44–59. [CrossRef] 51. Vetrov, E.V.; De Grave, J.; Vetrova, N.I.; Zhimulev, F.I.; Nachtergaele, S.; Van Ranst, G.; Mikhailova, P.I. Tectonic history of the South Tannuol Fault Zone (Tuva Region of the Northern Central Asian Orogenic Belt, Russia): Constraints from multi-method geochronology. Minerals 2020, 10, 56. [CrossRef] 52. De Grave, J.; Glorie, S.; Zhimulev, F.I.; Buslov, M.M.; Elburg, M.; Van den Haute, P. Emplacement and exhumation of the Kuznetsk–Alatau basement (Siberia): Implications for the tectonic evolution of the Central Asian Orogenic Belt and sediment supply to the Kuznetsk, Minusa and West Siberian Basins. Terra Nova 2011, 23, 248–256. [CrossRef] 53. De Grave, J.; Van den haute, P.; Buslov, M.M.; Dehandschutter, B.; Glorie, S. Apatite fission track thermochronology applied to the Chulyshman Plateau, Siberian Altai Region. Radiat. Meas. 2008, 43, 38–42. [CrossRef] 54. Yuan, W.-M.; Carter, A.; Dong, J.-Q.; Bao, Z.; An, Y.; Guo, Z. Mesozoic-Tertiary exhumation history of the Altai Mountains, northern Xinjiang, China: New constraints from apatite fission track data. Tectonophysics 2006, 412, 183–193. [CrossRef] 55. Glorie, S.; De Grave, J.; Buslov, M.M.; Zhimulev, F.I.; Elburg, M.A.; Van den Haute, P. Structural control on Meso-Cenozoic tectonic reactivation and denudation in the Siberian Altai: Insights from multimethod thermochronometry. Tectonophysics 2012, 544–545, 75–92. [CrossRef] 56. Vetrov, E.; Buslov, M.; De Grave, J. Evolution of tectonic events and topography in southeastern Gorny Altai in the Late Mesozoic–Cenozoic (data from apatite fission track thermochronology). Russ. Geol. Geophys. 2016, 57, 95–110. [CrossRef] 57. Pullen, A.; Banaszynski, M.; Kapp, P.; Thomson, S.N.; Cai, F. A mid-cretaceous change from fast to slow exhumation of the western Chinese Altai mountains: A climate driven exhumation signal? J. Asian Earth Sci. 2020, 197, 104387. [CrossRef] 58. Vassallo, R.; Jolivet, M.; Ritz, J.-F.; Braucher, R.; Larroque, C.; Sue, C.; Todbileg, M.; Javkhlanbold, D. Uplift age and rates of the Gurvan Bogd system (Gobi-Altay) by apatite fission track analysis. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2007, 259, 333–346. [CrossRef] 59. Jolivet, M.; Arzhannikov, S.; Arzhannikova, A.; Chauvet, A.; Vassallo, R.; Braucher, R. Geomorphic Mesozoic and Cenozoic evolution in the Oka-Jombolok region (East Sayan ranges, Siberia). J. Asian Earth Sci. 2013, 62, 117–133. [CrossRef] 60. Arzhannikova, A.; Jolivet, M.; Arzhannikov, S.; Vassallo, R.; Chauvet, A. The time of the formation and destruction of the Meso-Cenozoic peneplanation surface in East Sayan. Russ. Geol. Geophys. 2013, 54, 685–694. [CrossRef] 61. De Pelsmaeker, E.; Glorie, S.; Buslov, M.M.; Zhimulev, F.; Poujol, M.; Korobkin, V.V.; Vanhaecke, F.; Vetrov, E.V.; De Grave, J. Late-Paleozoic emplacement and Meso-Cenozoic reactivation of the southern Kazakhstan granitoid basement. Tectonophysics 2015, 662, 416–433. [CrossRef] 62. Glorie, S.; Otasevic, A.; Gillespie, J.; Jepson, G.; Danišík, M.; Zhimulev, F.I.; Gurevich, D.; Zhang, Z.; Song, D.; Xiao, W. Thermo- tectonic history of the Junggar Alatau within the Central Asian Orogenic Belt (SE Kazakhstan, NW China): Insights from integrated apatite U/Pb, fission track and (U-Th)/He thermochronology. Geosci. Front. 2019, 10, 2153–2166. [CrossRef] Minerals 2021, 11, 604 22 of 22

63. Tian, Z.; Xiao, W.; Zhang, Z.; Lin, X. Fisson-track constrains on superposed folding in the Beishan orogenic belt, southernmost Altaids. Geosci. Front. 2016, 7, 181–196. [CrossRef] 64. Sobel, E.R.; Oskin, M.; Burbank, D.; Mikolaichuk, A. Exhumation of basement-cored uplifts: Example of the Kyrgyz Range quantified with apatite fission track thermochronology. Tectonics 2006, 25, TC2008. [CrossRef] 65. De Grave, J.; Glorie, S.; Buslov, M.M.; Stockli, D.F.; McWilliams, M.O.; Batalev, V.Y.; Van den haute, P. Thermo-tectonic history of the Issyk-Kul basement (Kyrgyz Northern Tien Shan, Central Asia). Gondwana Res. 2013, 23, 998–1020. [CrossRef] 66. Nachtergaele, S.; De Pelsmaeker, E.; Glorie, S.; Zhimulev, F.; Jolivet, M.; Danisík, M.; Buslov, M.M.; De Grave, J. Meso-Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the Talas-Fergana region of the Kyrgyz Tien Shan revealed by low-temperature basement and detrital thermochronology. Geosci. Front. 2018, 9, 1495–1514. [CrossRef] 67. Jepson, G.; Glorie, S.; Konopelko, D.; Mirkamalov, R.; Danisík, M.; Collins, A.S. The low-temperature thermo-tectonic evolution of the western Tian Shan, Uzbekistan. Gondwana Res. 2018, 64, 122–136. [CrossRef] 68. Ehlers, T.A.; Farley, K.A. Apatite (U-Th)/He thermochronometry: Methods and applications to problems in tectonic and surface processes. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2003, 206, 1–14. [CrossRef] 69. Haq, B.U.; Hardenbol, J.; Vail, P.R. Chronology of Fluctuating Sea Levels Since the Triassic. Science 1987, 235, 1156–1167. [CrossRef] 70. Kominz, M.A. Oceanic Ridge Volume and Sea-Level Change an Error Analysis. Interregional Unconformities and Hydrocarbon Accumula- tion; American Association of Petroleum Geologists: Tulsa, OK, USA, 1984; pp. 109–127. 71. Müller, R.D.; Sdrolias, M.; Gaina, C.; Roest, W.R. Age, spreading rates, and spreading asymmetry of the world’s ocean crust. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 2008, 9, Q04006. [CrossRef] 72. Pitman, W.C. Relationship between eustacy and stratigraphic sequences of passive margins. GSA Bull. 1978, 89, 1389–1403. [CrossRef] 73. Yang, Y.-T.; Song, C.-C.; He, S. Jurassic tectonostratigraphic evolution of the Junggar Basin, NW China: A record of Mesozoic intraplate deformation in Central Asia. Tectonics 2015, 34, 86–115. [CrossRef] 74. Jolivet, M.; Arzhannikova, N.; Frolov, A.O.; Arzhannikov, S.; Kulagina, N.; Akulova, V.; Vassallo, R. Late Jurassic-Early Cretaceous paleoenvironment evolution of the Transbaikal basins (SE Siberia): Implications for the Mongol-Okhotsk orogeny. Bulletin Société Géologique 2017, 188, 1–22. 75. Kapp, P.; DeCelles, P.G.; Gehrels, G.E.; Heizler, M.; Ding, L. Geological records of the Lhasa–Qiangtang and Indo–Asian collisions in the Nima area of central Tibet. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 2007, 119, 917–932. [CrossRef] 76. Zhu, D.C.; Zhao, Z.D.; Niu, Y.; Dilek, Y.; Hou, Z.Q.; Mo, X.X. The origin and preCenozoic evolution of the Tibetan Plateau. Gondwana Res. 2013, 23, 1429–1454. [CrossRef] 77. Zhu, D.-C.; Li, S.-M.; Cawood, P.A.; Wang, Q.; Zhao, Z.-D.; Liu, S.-A.; Wang, L.-Q. Assembly of the Lhasa and Qiangtang terranes in central Tibet by divergent double subduction. Lithos 2016, 245, 7–17. [CrossRef] 78. Glorie, S.; De Grave, J. Exhuming the Meso-Cenozoic Kyrgyz Tian Shan and Siberian Altai-Sayan: A review based on low- temperature thermochronology. Geosci. Front. 2016, 7, 155–170. [CrossRef] 79. Schwab, M.; Ratschbacher, L.; Siebel, W.; McWilliams, M.; Minaev, V.; Lutkov, V.; Chen, F.; Stanek, K.; Nelson, B.; Frisch, F.; et al. Assembly of the Pamirs: Age and origin of magmatic belts from the southern Tien Shan to the southern Pamirs and their relation to Tibet. Tectonics 2004, 23, 31. [CrossRef] 80. Sun, J.; Tappe, S.; Kostrovitsky, S.I.; Liu, C.-Z.; Skuzovatov, S.Y.; Wu, F.-Y. Mantle sources of kimberlites through time: A U-Pb and Lu-Hf isotope study of zircon megacrysts from the Siberian diamond fields. Chem. Geol. 2018, 479, 228–240. [CrossRef] 81. Sarsadskih, N.N.; Blagulkina, V.A.; Silin, Y.I. On the absolute age of the Yakutian kimberlites. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 1966, 168, 420–423. (In Russian) 82. Tomurtogoo, O.; Windley, B.F.; Kroner, A.; Badarch, G.; Liu, D.Y. Zircon age and occurrence of the adaatsag ophiolite and muron shear zone, central Mongolia: Constraints on the evolution of the Mongol-Okhotsk ocean, suture and orogen. J. Geol. Soc. 2005, 162, 197–229. [CrossRef] 83. Zorin, Y. Geodynamics of the western part of the Mongolia-Okhotsk collisional belt, Trans-Baikal region (Russia) and Mongolia. Tectonophysics 1999, 306, 33–56. [CrossRef] 84. Nokleberg, W.J.; Parfenov, L.M.; Monger, J.W.H.; Norton, I.O.; Khanchuk, A.I.; Stone, D.B.; Scotese, C.R.; Scholl, D.W.; Fujita, K. Phanerozoic Tectonic Evolution of the Circum-North Pacific; US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey: Reston, VA, USA, 2000; p. 1626. 85. Yin, A.; Harrison, T.M. Geologic evolution of the Himalayan-Tibetan Orogen. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 2000, 28, 211–280. [CrossRef] 86. Green, O.R.; Searle, M.P.; Corfield, R.I.; Corfield, R.M. Cretaceous-Tertiary Carbonate Platform Evolution and the Age of the India-Asia Collision along the Ladakh Himalaya (Northwest India). J. Geol. 2008, 116, 331–353. [CrossRef] 87. Li, T.; Daukeev, S.Z.; Kim, B.C.; Tomurtogoo, O.; Petrov, O.V. (Eds.) Atlas of Geological Maps of Central Asia and Adjacent Areas, Scale 1:2 500 000; Beijing Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2008. 88. Jolivet, M.; Bourquin, S.; Heilbronn, G.; Robin, C.; Barrier, L.; Dabard, M.; Jia, Y.; De Pelsmaeker, E.; Fu, B. The Upper Jurassic– Lower Cretaceous alluvial-fan deposits of the Kalaza Formation (Central Asia): Tectonic pulse or increased aridity. In Geological Evolution of Central Asian Basins and the Western Tien Shan Range; Geological Society of London: London, UK, 2015; p. 427. 89. Parsons, A.J.; Hosseini, K.; Palin, R.M.; Karin Sigloch, K. Geological, geophysical and plate kinematic constraints for models of the India-Asia collision and the post-Triassic central Tethys oceans. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2020, 208, 103084. [CrossRef]