Paleomagnetism, Magnetic Anisotropy and U-Pb Baddeleyite
Precambrian Research 317 (2018) 14–32 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Precambrian Research journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/precamres Paleomagnetism, magnetic anisotropy and U-Pb baddeleyite geochronology of the early Neoproterozoic Blekinge-Dalarna dolerite dykes, Sweden T ⁎ Zheng Gonga, , David A.D. Evansa, Sten-Åke Elmingb, Ulf Söderlundc,d, Johanna M. Salminene a Department of Geology and Geophysics, Yale University, 210 Whitney Avenue, New Haven, CT 06511, USA b Department of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden c Department of Geology, Lund University, SE-223 62 Lund, Sweden d Swedish Museum of Natural History, Laboratory of Isotope Geology, SE-104 05 Stockholm, Sweden e Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00014, Finland ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Paleogeographic proximity of Baltica and Laurentia in the supercontinent Rodinia has been widely accepted. Blekinge-Dalarna dolerite (BDD) dykes However, robust paleomagnetic poles are still scarce, hampering quantitative tests of proposed relative positions Sveconorwegian loop of the two cratons. A recent paleomagnetic study of the early Neoproterozoic Blekinge-Dalarna dolerite (BDD) Baltica dykes in Sweden provided a 946–935 Ma key pole for Baltica, but earlier studies on other BDD dykes discerned Paleomagnetism large variances in paleomagnetic directions that appeared to indicate more complicated motion of Baltica, or Magnetic anisotropy alternatively, unusual geodynamo behavior in early Neoproterozoic time. We present combined paleomagnetic, U-Pb baddeleyite geochronology rock magnetic, magnetic fabric and geochronological studies on BDD dykes in the Dalarna region, southern Sweden. Positive baked-contact and paleosecular variation tests support the reliability of the 951–935 Ma key pole (Plat = −2.6°N, Plon = 239.6°E, A95 = 5.8°, N = 12 dykes); and the ancient magnetic field was likely a stable geocentric axial dipole at that time, based on a positive reversal test.
[Show full text]