On the Kinematics and Timing of Rodinia Breakup: a Possible Rift−Transform Junction of Cryogenian Age at the Southwest Cape of Congo Craton (Northwest Namibia)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
P.F. HOFFMAN On the kinematics and timing of Rodinia breakup: a possible rift−transform junction of Cryogenian age at the southwest cape of Congo Craton (northwest Namibia) P.F. Hoffman University of Victoria, School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Victoria, British Columbia V8P 5C2, Canada Harvard University, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA e-mail: [email protected] © 2021 Geological Society of South Africa. All rights reserved. Abstract After tilt correction for Ediacaran thick-skinned folding, a pair of Cryogenian half grabens at the autochthonous southwest cape of Congo Craton (CC) in northwest Namibia restore to different orientations. Toekoms sub-basin trended east-northeast, parallel to Northern Zone (NZ) of Damara belt, and was bounded by a normal-sense growth fault (2 290 m throw) dipping 57° toward CC. Soutput sub-basin trended northwest, oblique to NZ and to north- northwest-trending Kaoko Belt. It was bounded by a growth fault (750 m down-dip throw) dipping steeply (~75°) toward CC. Soutput growth fault could be an oblique (splay) fault connecting a Cryogenian rift zone in NZ with a sinistral transform zone in Kaoko Belt. A transform origin for the Kaoko margin accords with its magma-poor abrupt shelf-to-basin change implying mechanical strength, unlike the magma-rich southern margin where a gradual shelf- to-basin change implies a mechanically weak extended margin. A rift−transform junction is kinematically compatible with observed north-northwest−south-southeast Cryogenian crustal stretching within CC. Post-rift subsidence of the CC carbonate platform varies strongly across the south-facing but not the west-facing shelf. A sheared western CC margin differs from existing Kaoko Belt models that posit orthogonal opening with hyper-extended continental crust. Carbonate-dominated sedimentation over southwest CC implies palaeolatitudes ≤35° between 770 and 600 Ma. Introduction There is little consensus on where Congo Craton (CC) was et al., 2003, 2005, 2018, 2020; Poidevin, 2007; Caron, 2010; Monié positioned within Rodinia, or even if it belonged to that et al., 2012; Affaton et al., 2016; Passchier et al., 2016; Oriolo supercontinent at all (Dalziel, 1997; Hoffman, 1997; Pisarevsky et al., 2017; Cailteux and De Putter, 2019; Hoffman et al., 2021). et al., 2003, 2008; Trindade and Macouin, 2007; Li et al., 2008; This implies that surrounding oceanic basins opened and Evans, 2009, 2013; Scotese, 2009; Ernst et al., 2013; Merdith et al., closed, concurrent with the Rodinia-to-Gondwana geotectonic 2017a, b, 2019, 2021; Salminen et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2018; reorganization. This is easier to account for if CC was part of de Wit et al., 2020; Jing et al., 2020; Wen et al., 2020). Nonetheless, Rodinia than if it was not. CC (Figure 1a) is ringed by late Neoproterozoic ‘miogeoclines’ One reason for CC’s poorly-defined palaeogeographic role (former continental terrace wedges, Dietz and Holden, 1966) is a dearth of palaeomagnetic poles between ca. 748 and 570 Ma that were deformed during Pan-African/Brasiliano aggregation (Meert et al., 1995; Wingate et al., 2004; Moloto-A-Kenguemba of Gondwana (Stanton et al., 1963; Cahen and Lepersonne, 1967; et al., 2008). On this front, I am sad to report the absence of Porada, 1979, 1989; Miller, 1983, 2008b, 2014; Cahen et al., 1984; detectable primary remanence (Shihong Zhang, 2017, personal Stanistreet et al., 1991; Trompette, 1994; Prave, 1996; Goscombe communication) in the 747 ± 2-Ma Upper Naauwpoort SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF GEOLOGY 2021 • VOLUME 124.2 PAGE 401-420 • doi:10.25131/sajg.124.0038 401 ON THE KINEMATICS AND TIMING OF RODINIA BREAKUP: A POSSIBLE RIFT−TRANSFORM JUNCTION OF CRYOGENIAN AGE AT THE SOUTHWEST CAPE OF CONGO CRATON (NORTHWEST NAMIBIA) Formation trachydacite lavas in northwest Namibia (Miller, 1974, The Damara Belt has two branches (Martin, 1983; Miller, 1980b, 2008b; Hoffman et al., 1996). 1983, 2008b), the Northern (NZ) and Southern (SZ) basinal Another reason for CC’s ill-defined role is under-utilization of zones, separated by a Central (CZ) ‘ribbon’ continent aka the epi-cratonic stratigraphic record to infer timing and kinematics Swakop terrane (Figure 1b). In the standard model for Damara of Neoproterozoic rifting and break-up at the margins of the Belt, CZ is an extension of CC and crustal thickening in NZ was craton. Carbonate-dominated epicratonic sedimentation across a consequence of collision with Kalahari Craton in SZ (Barnes southwest CC implies low palaeolatitudes from 770 until 600 Ma and Sawyer, 1980; Kasch, 1983; Stanistreet et al., 1991; Miller, (Halverson et al., 2005), consistent with palaeomagnetic poles for 2008b, Figure 13.291; Goscombe et al., 2018). However, 765 ± 5 Ma (Wingate et al., 2004), 748 ± 6 Ma (Meert et al., 1995; structure−metamorphic geochronology indicates that crustal Mbede et al., 2004) and 571 ± 6 Ma (Moloto-A-Kenguemba et al., thickening in NZ began ≤50 Myr before the collision in SZ 2008). Not all palaeogeographic models adopt the carbonate- (Lehmann et al., 2016). This finding bears out an earlier facies constraint at 600 Ma, although early Ediacaran (Narbonne inference that synorogenic deposits (Mulden Group) on the CC et al., 2012) is the most carbonate-dominated interval across foreland are older than those (Nama Group) on the Kalahari southwest CC (Hedberg, 1979; Miller, 2008b, 2014; Delpomdor foreland (Germs, 1974). If crustal thickening in NZ is not et al., 2016; Cailteux and De Putter, 2019). One model that does attributable to Kalahari collision, then CZ−CC convergence could honour this constraint is de Wit et al. (2020). have been driven by southward subduction in NZ, or back-arc This paper is an attempt to structurally restore sedimentary shortening associated with northward subduction beneath CZ, half grabens, bounded by growth faults of known stratigraphic age, provided it had begun when thickening of NZ occurred. at the southwest corner of CC in northwest Namibia (Figure 1). Radiometric age constraints on crustal thickening can be ‘Growth faults’ are synsedimentary faults on which the throw obtained by dating foredeep deposits and synkinematic increases with depth. Strata of the downthrown side are thicker metamorphism of underthrust epicontinental rocks including than correlative strata on the upthrown side. Downthrown strata stretched continental crust. The onset of such metamorphism generally thicken toward the fault. Orogenic shortening at this gives a minimum age constraint on when continental crust first corner of the craton has previously been discussed (Coward, passed beneath the leading edge of an overthrust plate (e.g., 1981; Maloof, 2000; Clifford, 2008; Lehmann et al., 2016; trench inner wall). Existing radiometric constraints on the onset Passchier et al., 2016; Goscombe et al., 2017, 2018, 2020; of crustal thickening in each basinal zone–NZ, CKZ and SZ Hoffman, 2021), as have aspects of initial rifting (Miller, 1983, (Figure 1b)–are as follows. In widely spaced areas of NZ, 2008b; Porada, 1983; Henry et al., 1990, 1992/93; Stanistreet phengite growth synkinematic with early south-southeast−north- et al., 1991; Stanistreet and Charlesworth, 1999). The goal here northwest shortening yields 40Ar/39Ar laser-ablation plateau ages is to constrain the kinematics and timing of break-up in this of 598 ± 4, 594 ± 7 and 584 ± 4 Ma (Lehmann et al., 2016). From sector of CC. these ages it is inferred that crustal thickening in NZ was The specific area of the growth faults described here was underway by 595 to 600 Ma. In western NZ, D2 folds and systematically mapped and studied by Frets (1969) and lies foliations related to west-southwest−east-northeast crustal within the 1:250,000-scale Fransfontein Sheet 2014 (Schreiber, thickening in Kaoko Belt clearly postdate D1 structures (Coward, 2006). It is situated within the Northern Margin Zone (NMZ) of 1981; Maloof, 2000; Lehmann et al., 2016). the Damara belt, as defined by Miller (2008b), and corresponds In Kaoko Belt itself, metamorphic U-Pb and Sm-Nd mineral to the distal foreslope zone (Hoffman et al., 2021) of the ages east of the Coastal Terrane (CT) range 580 to 540 Ma, with Otavi/Swakop Group, the ca. 770 to 600 Ma carbonate platform 40Ar/39Ar cooling ages down to 520 Ma (Goscombe et al., 2003, covering the southwest CC (Hedberg, 1979; Miller, 1997, 2008b). 2005). The Cambrian ages are broadly coeval with final closure of the Clymene palaeocean bordering Amazonia (Figure 1a) (Tohver Regional tectonic setting et al., 2012; McGee et al., 2015a, b). In CKZ (Figure 1b), metamorphic garnet in pelitic schist of CC affinity (Swakop Group) Southwest CC is bounded to the west and south by the Kaoko has a Sm-Nd isochron age of 574.3 ± 9.7 Ma (Goscombe et al., and Damara belts, respectively (Figure 1). Kaoko Belt is an 2003), while a SHRIMP 207Pb/206Pb zircon mean age of 580 ± 3 Ma oblique sinistral collision zone between western CC and the (Seth et al., 1998) was obtained from an anatectic orthogneiss in Coastal Terrane (CT, Figure 1b) (Guj, 1970; Dürr and Dingeldey, westernmost CKZ (Hoarusib Domain of the Orogen Core of 1996; Goscombe et al., 2003, 2005, 2018; Will et al., 2004; Goscombe and Gray, 2008). These ages imply that crustal Konopásek et al., 2005; Goscombe and Gray, 2007, 2008), which thickening of the western CC margin was underway by 575 to represents the leading edge of the Dom Feliciano−Ribeira 580 Ma, closely following that of the southern (NZ) margin. composite magmatic arc (Figure 1a) (Oyhantçabal et al., 2011; Collision in Southern Zone (SZ, Figure 1b) between Kalahari Chemale et al., 2012; Alves et al., 2013; Konopásek et al., 2016; Craton (lower plate) and Greater Congo (upper plate: CC + CZ Basei et al., 2018; Hueck et al., 2018; Percival et al., 2021). and Dom Feliciano-CT-Ribeira terranes) is radiometrically Whether the basin that lay between CC and CT was a forearc or constrained by foredeep subsidence at 548.8 ± 1 Ma (Grotzinger backarc basin is not agreed upon.