Chapter 10 Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimentation …...Chapter 10 Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimentation and tectonics of the Singhbhum Craton, eastern India, and implications for global

Chapter 10

Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimentation and tectonics of the Singhbhum Craton, easternIndia, and implications for global and craton-specific geological events

RAJAT MAZUMDER1*, SHUVABRATA DE2, TOHRU OHTA3, DAVID FLANNERY4, LEENA MALLIK5,

TRISROTA CHAUDHURY5, PRIYANKA CHATTERJEE2, MARINAH A. RANAIVOSON6 & MAKOTO ARIMA6

1School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, and Australian Centre for Astrobiology,

University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia2Department of Geology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, 700035, India

3Faculty of Education and Integrated Arts and Sciences, Waseda University, 1-6-1,

Nishiwaseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 169-8050, Japan4Australian Centre for Astrobiology, School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences,

University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia5Department of Geological Sciences, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India

6Graduate School of Environment and Information Sciences, Yokohama National University,

79-7 Tokiwadai Hodogaya, Yokohama, 240-8501, Japan

*Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected])

Abstract: The Singhbhum Craton in eastern India preserves a depositional record from the Palaeo-Mesoarchaean to the Mesoprotero-zoic. Herein, we have summarized the Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic supracrustal record of the Singhbhum Craton, discussed tectonosedimen-tary processes and discriminated Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic global and craton-specific events. The late Palaeo-Mesoproterozoicsupracrustal record of the Singhbhum Craton is limited. It includes evidence for high continental freeboard conditions during 2.6–2.1 Ga in the form of terrestrial deposits (alluvial fan–fluvial) of the Dhanjori Formation. This was followed by a major transgressionand a transition to the relatively deeper-water shelf to shallow intertidal environments recorded by the Chaibasa Formation. A long hiatusensued before deposition of the Dhalbhum Formation and conformably overlying Dalma and Chandil formations, suggesting continuedhigh continental freeboard during 2.2–1.6 Ga. In significant contrast to the craton-specific Dhanjori Formation volcanism, the 1.7–1.6 Ga plume-related Dalma volcanism was probably part of a global tectonothermal event.

Earth experienced a fundamental revolution across the Archaean–Palaeoproterozoic transition, when the rate and style of continen-tal crust formation changed (Condie 1997; Eriksson et al. 1999,2006; Mazumder et al. 2000) and the atmospheric compositionchanged dramatically from one with little or no free atmosphericoxygen to one with .1025 present atmospheric levels during theGreat Oxidation Event, at 2.45–2.22 Ga (Farquhar et al. 2000;Kirschvink et al. 2000; Holland 2002, 2009; Bekker et al. 2004).Such a significant change in the composition of the Earth’s atmos-phere indirectly influenced sedimentation, including the develop-ment of extensive banded iron formations (BIF; Cloud 1973;Klein 2005). A change in the thermal regime of the Earth affectingglobal tectonics, the nature of orogens and the growth of supercon-tinents has been proposed (Aspler & Chiarenzelli 1998; Condieet al. 2009). While there were undoubtedly some common global-scale events (e.g. the Great Oxidation Event at c. 2.45–2.22 Ga;the first global glaciations at c. 2.4–2.2 Ga; and a possible ‘mag-matic shutdown’ at c. 2.45–2.22 Ga; cf. Farquhar et al. 2000;Kirschvink et al. 2000; Young 2004; Condie et al. 2009) preservedin the supracrustal cratonic record, many other facets of cratonicevolution were apparently unique (Eriksson et al. 2011; Mazumderet al. 2012a; Eriksson & Condie 2014). The challenge thus lies indiscriminating global and craton-specific events, and in this regardthe study of each and every ancient craton is of paramount impor-tance (Mazumder et al. 2012a).

The Indian shield preserves vast tracts of Precambrian rocks(Naqvi & Rogers 1987; Eriksson et al. 1999; Mazumder et al.2000; Saha & Mazumder 2012). Among the four cratonic blocksof India, only the Singhbhum Craton preserves a relatively

continuous depositional record from the Palaeo-Mesoarchaeanto the Mesoproterozoic (Mukhopadhyay 2001; Mazumder 2005;Mazumder et al. 2012a, b; Saha & Mazumder 2012; Chatterjeeet al. 2013; Ghosh et al. 2015). In this chapter, we summarizethe Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimentation history of the Singh-bhum Craton, discuss tectonosedimentary processes and discrimi-nate between global and craton-specific events. We emphasize thePalaeo-Mesoproterozoic supracrustal successions developed tothe north of the Archaean Singhbhum Craton nucleus. Readersshould consult Ghosh et al. (2015) and Mazumder et al. (2012b)for an overview of the Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic successions devel-oped to the WNW of the Archaean Singhbhum nucleus.

Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic Singhbhum supracrustals

The Palaeoproterozoic Singhbhum supracrustals (e.g. the Dhanjori,Chaibasa Dhalbhum, Dalma and Chandil formations) are sand-wiched between the oval-shaped Archaean nucleus (incorporatingthe Older Metamorphic Group, the Older Metamorphic TonaliteGneisses, the Singhbhum Granitoid, other granitoid bodies, andthe Iron Ore Group) and the Chotanagpur Granite GneissicComplex (CGGC) (Fig. 10.1). These rocks are deformed and meta-morphosed (lower greenschist to upper amphibolite facies; Saha1994) and occur as a c. 200 km-long and 50–60 km-wide roughlyeast–west-trending curvilinear belt (Bose 1994; Saha 1994;Mukhopadhyay 2001; Mazumder et al. 2012a, b). A c. 1.6 Ga-old zone of intense shearing, the Singhbhum Shear Zone (SSZ),

From: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) 2015. Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context.

Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 139–149, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.10

# 2015 The Geological Society of London. For permissions: http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/permissions. Publishing disclaimer: www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics

by guest on March 3, 2015http://mem.lyellcollection.org/Downloaded from

http://mem.lyellcollection.org/

occurs close to the northern and eastern margins of the SinghbhumGranitoid pluton (Fig. 10.1). A difference in opinion exists onvarious aspects of the SSZ (cf. Ghosh & Sengupta 1987; Saha1994; Joy & Saha 1998, 2000; Mukhopadhyay 2001; Sengupta &Chattopadhyay 2004). Mazumder et al. (2012a) have synthesizedvarious geological aspects of the SSZ, which readers may finduseful. The CGGC was accreted to the Singhbhum Craton alonga major shear zone, the North Singhbhum Shear Zone, SouthPurulia Shear Zone or the Tamar–Porapahar Shear Zone (Saha &Mazumder 2012; Mazumder et al. 2012a, fig. 1a).

Geochronology

The precise age of initiation of Palaeoproterozoic sedimentationand volcanism is unknown owing to the unavailability of suitabledatable rocks immediately overlying the Archaean basement gran-itoid. Whole-rock Sm–Nd isotopic analyses of basic–ultrabasicrocks from the upper part of the Dhanjori Formation have yieldedan isochron age of 2072 + 106 Ma, indicating that they date fromthe Palaeoproterozoic (Roy et al. 2002a). The age of Dhanjori sedi-mentation is very poorly constrained; researchers have speculatedthat part of the Dhanjori Formation may be of Neoarchaean age (c.2.8 Ga, see Misra & Johnson 2005; c. 2.6 Ga, see Acharyya et al.2010). No direct age data are yet available from the Chaibasa For-mation. Based on the Pb/Pb age of the Soda granite that intrudedthe Chaibasa Formation, Sarkar et al. (1986) have inferred that themaximum age of the Chaibasa Formation is c. 2.2 Ga (see Sen-gupta & Chattopadhyay 2004). However, the same granite hasbeen dated at 1.6–1.4 Ga (whole-rock Rb–Sr age, see Sarkaret al. 1986). Reddy et al. (2009) have also calculated the U–PbSHRIMP zircon ages from the youngest tuffaceous rocks of theDhalbhum Formation close to the Dhalbhum–Dalma stratigraphicboundary. The youngest grain analysed is 1740 Ma, representingan upper age limit on deposition of the Dhalbhum Formation.U–Pb SHRIMP analyses of zircons from a rhyolite collectedfrom the bottom-most part of the Chandil Formation yielded a

crystallization age of 1629 Ma (Reddy et al. 2009, table 1; seealso Nelson et al. 2007). These data together constrain the inter-vening Dalma Formation to the late Palaeoproterozoic (1.7–1.6 Ga; see Reddy et al. 2009; Mazumder et al. 2012a).

An Rb–Sr age of 1487 + 34 Ma has been measured fromfelsic tuffs of the Chandil Formation (Sengupta et al. 2000). Inspite of the metamorphic overprints, this was argued to be theage of eruption/consolidation of the felsic volcanic rocks (Sen-gupta et al. 2000; Sengupta & Mukhopadhaya 2000). Acharyya(2003) suggests that this age probably represents a metamorphicevent. No age data are yet available from the upper part of theChandil Formation. However, the intrusive nepheline syenitebody occurring close to the South Purulia Shear Zone is 922 Maold (U–Pb SHRIMP zircon concordant age, see Reddy et al.2009). Thus, the Dalma–Chandil supracrustals represent a LatePalaeoproterozoic–Mesoproterozoic record in the SinghbhumCraton. The upper age limit of the Chandil Formation is yet tobe determined.

Sulphides and uraninite occurring in the SSZ have yielded datesof c. 1700 Ma (sulphide Pb/Pb) and 1500–1600 Ma (uraninitePb/Pb; Krishna Rao et al. 1979). Recent U–Th–Pb chemicalages indicate that the uranium mineralization along the SSZ tookplace between 1800 and 1900 Ma (Pal & Rhede 2013). Pal et al.(2011) proposed an age of c. 1660 Ma for heavy rare earthelement (REE) metasomatism in the SSZ. Recent studies, mostlyelectron probe dating of metamorphic monazite from the Singhb-hum Palaeoproterozoic supracrustals, have suggested a protractedmetamorphic evolutionary history from 1700 to 1800 Ma (Mahatoet al. 2008; Chatterjee et al. 2010; Rekha et al. 2011). The last per-vasive tectonothermal event to affect the SSZ and the SinghbhumPalaeoproterozoic supracrustals took place around 1000 Ma(Sarkar et al. 1986; Sengupta et al. 2000; Acharyya et al. 2010;Rekha et al. 2011; Pal & Rhede 2013). Sanyal & Sengupta(2012) integrated available geological and geochronological infor-mation on the CGGC (see also Maji et al. 2008; Chatterjee et al.2010). These authors divided the high-grade block of the CGGCinto four stages associated with four distinct metamorphic events

Fig. 10.1. Simplified geological map (modified after Saha 1994 and Sengupta et al. 2000) showing the disposition of the Precambrian lithostratigraphic units of the

Singhbhum Craton, India; age data from Sarkar et al. (1986); Saha (1994); Roy et al. (2002a, b); Nelson et al. (2007); Reddy et al. (2009); Acharyya et al. (2010).

R. MAZUMDER ET AL.140



at around 1.87, 1.66–1.55, 1.55–1.51 and 0.87–0.78 Ga (seeSanyal & Sengupta 2012, table 1).

Sedimentation history

Mazumder (2005) and Mazumder et al. (2012b) presented adetailed account of Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimentation on

the Singhbhum Craton. Table 10.1 summarizes the sedimentologi-cal characteristics of the Palaeoproterozoic litho-units of theSinghbhum Craton and their inferred depositional environments.

The conglomerate–sandstone association (Lower Member;Fig. 10.2) at the base of the Dhanjori Formation represents thedistal fringe of an alluvial fan system and the overlying sandstonesare fluvial deposits (Mazumder & Sarkar 2004; Fig. 10.2). TheUpper Member does not include any sheetflood and sieve deposits

Table 10.1 Facies summaries and interpretations, Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic lithostratigraphic units, Singhbhum craton

Lithostratigraphic

unit

Lithofacies Inferred depositional environment

Chandil Formation The Chandil Formation includes quartzites, mica schists,

carbonaceous slate/phyllite, weakly metamorphosed felsic

volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks (including vitric and lithic

tuffs), and amphibolites. The sandstones are medium- to

coarse-grained and compositionally and texturally immature

(Chatterjee et al. 2013). Some fine-grained sandstone contains

rounded quartz grain (Fig. 10.7) and bimodal textures. The

uppermost sandstone units are relatively well sorted and

texturally mature and have mud couplets.

The compositional and textural immaturity of the medium- to

coarse-grained sandstones constituting the lower part of the Chandil

succession in combination with their poor sediment sorting, lenticular

geometry and unimodal cross-strata orientation are indicative of their

terrestrial (fluvial) origin (Mazumder 2005). Some relatively

finer-grained sandstones, having sheet-like geometry and occurring on

top of the coarse-grained sandstone facies, are relatively better sorted,

and the presence of rounded quartz grains (Fig. 10.7) and bimodal

texture indicate that they were subsequently reworked by aeolian

processes. The topmost sandstones are probably shallow marine and/or

lacustrine (Chatterjee et al. 2013).

Dalma Formation The Dalma Formation is represented by a thick sequence of

mafic–ultramafic volcanic rocks with lenses of basic

agglomerates (Gupta et al. 1980; Bose 1994; Mazumder & van

Loon 2012). Pillow structures are common within the basalts

along lower stratigraphic levels (Mazumder et al. 2012a, b). The

agglomerates are coarse-grained, characterized by angular

basaltic fragments embedded in a lava matrix and are

interlayered with the basalts. In places, the volcaniclastic rocks

exhibit planar cross-stratification (Mazumder 2005).

The inferred palaeogeography and tectonic setting of the Dalma

Formation ranges from continental rift (Dunn & Dey 1942; De 1964) to

island-arc (Naha & Ghosh 1960) and even back-arc (Bose &

Chakraborti 1981; Bose 1994, 2000). This discrepancy stems from the

geochemical bias of the previous research, which neglected the

importance of the associated volcanogenic low-grade meta-sediments to

constrain the palaeogeography. Mazumder & van Loon (2012) have

interpreted the precursors of the metamorphosed Dalma basaltic

agglomerates as pebbly mudstones (diamictite) formed by mass flow

processes in a terrestrial setting.

Dhalbhum Formation The Dhalbhum Formation is made up of sandstones and shales.

The fine-grained sandstones are relatively better sorted and have

low-amplitude ripples and wrinkle structures (Fig. 10.5a–c).

Some sandstones are medium- to coarse-grained, poorly sorted

(Fig. 10.5d) and are feldspar-rich. Penecontemporaneous

deformation structures (Fig. 10.5e) and dune to upper-stage

plane bed transition are common (Mazumder 2005). The shales

are generally massive.

Compositional immaturity, coarser grain size, poor sorting, fining-upward

cycles, coupled with a unimodal palaeocurrent pattern, suggest that the

Dhalbhum sandstones are of fluvial origin (Mazumder 2005; Mazumder

et al. 2012a, b). Frequent overturning of the cross-strata possibly took

place as a consequence of variable discharge, suggesting thereby a

braided character for the fluvial depositional system (Mazumder 2005,

Fig. 10.5e). The fine-grained, relatively well-sorted sandstones with

very low-amplitude ripples (ripple index 20) occurring on top of

coarse- to medium-grained sandstones are of aeolian origin

(Mazumder 2005; Mazumder et al. 2012a, b).

Chaibasa Formation The Chaibasa Formation is characterized by the interbanding of

sandstones, a heterolithic (very fine sandstone/siltstone–

mudstone) and shale facies in different scales. The sandstone

beds are pervasively cross-stratified with characteristic double

mud drapes (Fig. 10.4a). The heterolithic facies contain

profuse wave-generated structures including hummocky

cross-stratification and numerous slumps and slides

(Fig. 10.4b, c). The shale facies may contain generally thin

but sometimes very thick fine sandstone beds with a variety

of penecontemporaneous deformation structures (Fig. 10.4d).

In significant contrast to the lower Chaibasa shale facies, the

upper Chaibasa shale facies bears superimposed ripples and

desiccation cracks (Bhattacharya 1991).

The Chaibasa sandstones were formed in a subtidal setting. The

heterolithic facies formed in a shelf setting between the fair-weather

and storm wave base. The lower Chaibasa shale facies formed in a

shelf setting below the storm wave base (Bose et al. 1997; Mazumder

2004, 2005; Mallik et al. 2012; Mazumder et al. 2012a, b). The upper

Chaibasa shale facies formed in an intertidal setting (Bhattacharya

1991; Mazumder 2005).

Dhanjori Formation The Dhanjori Formation is made up of two members: phyllites,

quartzites and thin conglomerate comprise the lower member,

whereas volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks along with some

quartzites and phyllites are important components of the upper

member (Fig. 10.2). The sandstone bodies are either massive or

cross-bedded, and appear to be broadly lenticular, occurring in

units up to 30 m wide. The Dhanjori sandstone is medium- to

coarse-grained, locally granule rich and poorly sorted, with

matrix content generally 10–12% but occasionally .15%.

Grains, where they retain their primary boundaries, appear

subangular to subrounded.

Poor sediment sorting, compositional immaturity, lenticular geometry and

broadly unimodal palaeocurrent patterns indicate the Dhanjori

sandstone is a fluvial deposit. The conglomerate–sandstone assemblage

at the base of the lower member has been interpreted as the distal

fringe of an alluvial fan deposit. The Upper Member does not include

any sheet flood and sieve deposits and is constituted solely by channel

and mass flow deposits (Mazumder & Sarkar 2004; Mazumder 2005).

PALAEO-MESOPROTEROZOIC SINGHBHUM 141



and is constituted solely by channel and mass flow deposits(Mazumder & Sarkar 2004; Mazumder 2005). The Chaibasa sedi-mentation was a consequence of a transgression (Bose et al. 1997;Mazumder 2005). The Dhanjori–Chaibasa contact is marked by asheet conglomerate which has been inferred as a transgressive lagdeposit (Mazumder 2005, fig. 8a). The transition from relativelydeeper-water shelfal lower Chaibasa shale–heterolithic faciesto upper Chaibasa intertidal deposits (cf. Bhattacharya 1991;Mazumder 2005) indicates relative sea-level fall and consequentshallowing of the depositional setting (Mazumder 2005; Mazum-der et al. 2012b). The overlying terrestrial Dhalbhum Formationindicates that the Chaibasa–Dhalbhum contact is a sequenceboundary (unconformity, see Mazumder 2005; Mazumder et al.2012b). The Dhalbhums are conformably overlying by the DalmaFormation (Mazumder 2005 and references therein). The precur-sors of the metamorphosed Dalma basaltic agglomerates werepebbly mudstones (diamictite); Mazumder & van Loon (2012)have interpreted these as mass flow deposits formed in a terrestrial(largely aeolian) setting. The Chandil clastics were deposited in aterrestrial (fluvial–aeolian) setting (Mazumder 2005; Chatterjeeet al. 2013). The topmost sandstones of the Chandil Formationexposed in and around Barabazar (238030N, 868210E) have well-preserved mud drapes and are probably of shallow-marine orlacustrine origin (Chatterjee et al. 2013).

Tectonosedimentary processes

The tectonic milieu of deposition of the Palaeo-Mesoproterozoicsupracrustals of the Singhbhum craton is a matter of intensedebate (Naha & Ghosh 1960; Gaal 1964; Naha 1965; Mukhopad-hyay 1976, 1990; Gupta et al. 1980; Bose 1994; Bose et al. 1997;Bhattacharya & Bandyopadhyay 1998; Sengupta & Mukhopad-haya 2000; Gupta & Basu 2000; Dasgupta 2004; Sengupta & Chat-topadhyay 2004; Mazumder 2005; Bhattacharya & Mahapatra2008). Interested readers may consult Mukhopadhyay (1990), Sen-gupta & Chattopadhyay (2004) and Mazumder et al. (2012a, b) fora critical overview.

The Proterozoic successions of the Singhbhum Craton devel-oped in basins encircling the Archaean Singhbhum granitoid(Saha 1994; Mukhopadhyay 2001). During the emplacement ofthe Singhbhum ganitoid, the crust was c. 48 km thick (Bhatta-charya & Shalivahan 2002; Mazumder et al. 2000; Shalivahan &Bhattacharya 2002). Cooling down of the vast volume of Singhb-hum granitoid probably induced an isostatic readjustment. Theassociated tensional regime and deep-seated fractures controlledformation of the Dhanjori Basin (Mazumder 2002; Roy et al.2002a; Mazumder & Sarkar 2004). Sedimentation started withthe deposition of texturally and compositionally immature clasticrocks; these are the coarser-grained remnants of an alluvial fan

Fig. 10.2. Measured litholog showing lateral

and vertical distribution of facies of the Dhanjori

Formation (modified after Mazumder & Sarkar

2004).




sequence (Fig. 10.2; Lower Dhanjori Member, see Mazumder &Sarkar 2004; see also Bhattacharya & Mahapatra 2008). The over-lying succession is almost entirely composed of fining-upwardfluvial cycles (Mazumder & Sarkar 2004; Mazumder 2005). Anevent of basin tilting and volcanic eruption took place during thedeposition of the Upper Dhanjori Member, although the generalfluvial depositional framework remained unaltered (Mazumder& Sarkar 2004; Fig. 10.2). The two members of the Dhanjori For-mation display different palaeocurrent patterns as a consequenceof fluvial responses to the basin tilting (Fig. 10.2; Mazumder &Sarkar 2004; Mazumder 2005). Interbedded volcanic and volcani-clastic rocks at different stratigraphic levels within the UpperDhanjori Member suggest episodic volcanic eruption and anincreasingly important influence of volcanism on sedimentation(Fig. 10.2). Confinement of the volcanic and volcaniclastic rocksto the Upper Dhanjori Member (Fig. 10.2) implies that initiationof the rifting was not a consequence of convective upwelling inthe mantle (Mazumder & Sarkar 2004; Fig. 10.2).

The geochemical characteristics of the Dhanjori volcanic rocksindicate that they are basaltic komatiites (Mazumder & Arima2009, fig. 5). Spinifex texture is absent in these rocks. The stratigra-phically older volcanics have restricted REE concentrations; theyshow substantial enrichment of all REEs v. chondritic values andalso show a light REE enrichment (slight slope from left to right),as would be expected from rocks derived by partial melting ofthe mantle (Fig. 10.3a; Mazumder & Arima 2009). In contrast,the stratigraphically younger volcanic rocks show a much greaterrange in REE abundances and patterns, probably reflecting vari-able magmatic sources and/or dilution by sediment (Fig. 10.3b;Mazumder & Arima 2009). The Dhanjori Formation basaltic rockshave negative DNb values and thus plot below the DNb line in theplot of Nb/Y v. Zr/Y (Fig. 10.3c). These rocks also have low Nb/Th ratios (up to 4.7) and moderate Zr/Nb values (Fig. 10.3b).

Basalts plotting below the DNb line either come from a shallow,depleted mantle source, subduction zones, or represent plume-derived basalts that were subsequently contaminated by continentalcrust and/or subcontinental lithosphere (Condie 2005). The associ-ation of Dhanjori Formation basalt with terrestrial (alluvial fan–fluvial) sediments suggests sedimentation and volcanism in a con-tinental rift setting and thus negates the possibility of volcanism in asubduction-related arc setting (Alvi & Raza 1992).

The Chaibasa succession is transgressive overall with short-termlowstands (Bose et al. 1997; Mazumder 2005). In the lower partof the succession, the shallow-marine sandstones sharply passupward into offshore shale (Mazumder 2002). The upward faciestransition from sandstone to shale in the middle part of the Chai-basa Formation in the Ghatshila–Moubhandar sector is generallygradational because of the presence of the heterolithic facies. Insignificant contrast, the upward transition is sharp where the het-erolithic facies is absent. Soft sediment deformation structuresare abundant in the Chaibasa Formation (Bose et al. 1997; Mazum-der 2002, 2005). Except for recumbently folded cross-bedding,almost all penecontemporaneous deformation structures are abun-dant in the finer lithofacies and can be interpreted as having formedin a shelf setting below the storm wave base (Bose et al. 1997;Mazumder 2005; Mazumder et al. 2009). The majority of thesesoft sediment deformation structures have been interpreted as seis-mites as they are confined to laterally persistent selective strati-graphic intervals bounded by undeformed beds and appear tohave formed in a setting below storm wave base (Bose et al.1997; Bhattacharya & Bandyopadhyay 1998; Mazumder et al.2006, 2009). The paucity of seismites in the lower part of the Chai-basa Formation and their abundance in the upper part of the succes-sion indicate the marine shelf became considerably narrower in thelater phase of Chaibasa sedimentation (Mazumder 2002, 2005).The presence of slump folds and slump scars (Fig. 10.4b, c)

La Ce Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Y

UDVC1RM 1RM 2R6DR6CR6FUDPHY1

LDV1LDV5

LDV16LDV13LDV6

La Ce Pr Nd Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu Y

100

1

10

100

1

10

(a) (b)

(c)(d)

sam

ple/

chon

drite

sam

ple/

chon

drite

PLUME SOURCES

NMORB

ARC

OIB

Oceanic Plateau

Basalt

NON-PLUME SOURCESDNb Line

Zr/Y

Nb/

Y

1 100.01

1

10

0.1

OIB

Oceanic Plateau Basalt

ARCNMORB

Zr/N

b

Nb/Th

100

10

50

5

2010 300

Fig. 10.3. Rare earth element plot of (a) lower

and (b) upper Dhanjori volcanics (data from

Mazumder & Arima 2009); (c) Nb/Y v. Zr/Y

and (d) Nb/Th v. Zr/Nb plots of Dhanjori

volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks (after Condie

2005). Circles represent data from Roy et al.

(2002a) and triangles represent data from

Mazumder & Arima (2009).




indicates mass movement (see Bose et al. 1997; Mazumder 2005).Destabilized shelf clastic rocks frequently slumped down the slopeand resulted in fine-grained mass flows into the basin. The pene-contemporaneous thrusts (Mazumder 2005, fig. 9c, d) are the mani-festations of compressional stresses generated owing to crustalshrinkage as a consequence of thermal cooling (Mazumder et al.2000; Mazumder 2005). Thus, Chaibasa sedimentation took placein a tectonically active basin.

Unlike the Chaibasa Formation sandstone, the Dhalbhum For-mation sandstone contains rock fragments (Fig. 10.5d). The are-naceous component of the Dhalbhum Formation is much lowerthan that of the Chaibasa Formation. The metamorphic mineralassemblage in Dhalbhum Formation rocks is significantly differentfrom that of the Chaibasa Formation (Sengupta & Chattopadhyay2004). The dominantly argillaceous Dhalbhum Formation is

possibly volcanogenic and contrasts with the erosional clasticrocks of the Chaibasa Formation (Sengupta & Chattopadhyay2004; Mazumder et al. 2012a, b). This observation confirms thevolcanic influence during Dhalbhum sedimentation (Mazumderet al. 2012a). The Dalma volcanic rocks have been interpretedas continental tholeiites (Dunn & Dey 1942; De 1964), island-arcbasalts (Naha & Ghosh 1960, and back-arc basalts (Bose et al.1989; Bose 1994, 2009). However, the positive DNb values ofthe Dalma volcanic rocks are indicative of a mantle plume origin(Fig. 10.6; see also Roy et al. 2002b; Mazumder 2005).

The initial thermal input of the plume resulted in gentle domingand rifting, and the consequent thinning of the subcontinentallithosphere. Such upliftment (doming) may allow the establish-ment of a well-defined drainage network and pattern of sedimentdispersal (cf. Cox 1989; Kent 1991). Progressive shallowing of

Fig. 10.4. Field photographs of Chaibasa

Formation; (a) tidal bundles with double mud

drapes in Chaibasa sandstone; (b) slump fold and

(c) slump scar in the heterolithic (sandstone–

mudstone) facies; (d) penecontemporaneous

deformation structures within the thick

sandstone interbands of the Chaibasa shale.




the depositional setting from relatively deeper offshore shelf toshallow intertidal during the terminal phase of Chaibasa sedimen-tation, and the transition to terrestrial Dhalbhum Formation,

indicate that the gentle crustal doming took place prior to thecommencement of volcanism (Mazumder 2005; Mazumder et al.2012a, b). Interestingly, in significant contrast to the northerly to

Fig. 10.5. Field photographs and

photomicrograph of Dhalbhum sandstones:

(a) aeolian sand sheet; (b) low-amplitude aeolian

ripples on the bedding plane of sand sheet;

(c) wrinkle structures; (d) photomicrograph of

Dhalbhum sandstone with lithic fragments;

(e) coarse-grained trough cross-stratified

Dhalbhum sandstone (fluvial) with

penecontemporaneous deformation.




northeasterly Chaibasa and Chandil palaeocurrent data (Bose et al.1997; Mazumder 2005), the southerly-trending Dhalbhum palaeo-current data close to the Chaibasa–Dhalbhum contact (Naha &Ghosh 1960; Naha 1965) indicate that Dhalbhum sedimentswere transported from the north (Mazumder 2005; Mazumderet al. 2012a). The Dalma basalt and the felsic (rhyolite) volcanicrocks and tuffs of the Chandil Formation are compatible with amantle plume volcanism interpretation (Hatton 1995; Erikssonet al. 2002; see Fig. 10.6). The available sedimentological, strati-graphic, geochemical and geophysical data thus strongly suggestDalma volcanism was a consequence of mantle plume upwellingin a continental rift setting (Mazumder 2005).

Global and craton-specific Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic events

The Palaeoproterozoic era (2500–1600 Ma; Plumb 1991) rep-resented perhaps the first supercontinental cycle, from the amalga-mation and dispersal of a Neoarchaean supercontinent to theformation of the 1.9–1.8 Ga supercontinent Nuna (Reddy &Evans 2009). The Archaean–Palaeoproterozoic transition wasmarked by a substantial shift in terrestrial geochemistry andbiology, the onset of global glaciations, and led ultimately to thedevelopment and flourishing of eukaryotic life (Kirschvink et al.2000; Eriksson et al. 2011; Konhauser et al. 2011). Many acceptthat the dominance of mantle-thermal processes in the Archaeandid not persist into the Palaeoproterozoic, and the situationchanged somehow to a plate-tectonically dominated modernEarth (Eriksson et al. 2004; Mazumder et al. 2012b). The Palaeo-proterozoic is also characterized by a ‘global magmatic lull’ from

about 2.45 to 2.22 Ga, including also global tectonic quiescence(Condie et al. 2009). This hypothesis is proposed on a globalscale, with local exceptions occurring during the period (Mazum-der et al. 2012b; Eriksson & Condie 2014).

One of the predicted consequences of the global magmatic lulland tectonic quiescence is the widespread development of uncon-formities in the stratigraphic record, because of high continentalfreeboard (Eriksson et al. 1999; Condie et al. 2009; Mazumder& van Kranendonk 2013). The Palaeoproterozoic supracrustalrecord of the Singhbhum Craton includes evidence for high conti-nental freeboard conditions during 2.6–2.1 Ga, as is evident fromthe terrestrial (alluvial fan–fluvial) Dhanjori Formation and devel-opment of a palaeosol (Keonjhargarh palaeosol, see Bandopad-hyay et al. 2010; Mazumder et al. 2012b; Ghosh et al. 2015).Chakrabarti et al. (1998) inferred pre 2.8 Ga shallow-marine, near-shore and fluvial sedimentation on the Singhbhum Craton (BirtolaFormation; see Kundu & Matin 2007; Mazumder et al. 2012a).Van Loon & De (2015) have inferred that terrestrial (alluvialfan–fluvial) sedimentation on the Singhbhum Craton took placeduring the Neoarchaean. These studies suggest that high continen-tal freeboard conditions on the Singhbhum Craton prevailed fromthe Neoarchaean (c. 2.8 Ga). There is no evidence of Palaeoproter-ozoic subduction (Mazumder et al. 2012a, b). Mafic volcanismwas associated with intracratonic rifting; the trace and REEcharacteristics of the volcanic rocks indicate that Dhanjori volcan-ism was unrelated to mantle plume upwelling (Figs 10.2 & 10.3;Mazumder & Arima 2009). A subsequent relative sea-level risetook place around 2.2–2.1 Ga, when the Chaibasa Formationwas deposited (Fig. 10.1). A long hiatus then ensued before thedeposition of the Dhalbhum Formation and the conformably over-lying Dalma and Chandil formations (Mazumder 2005; Mazumderet al. 2012b), indicating high continental freeboard during theperiod 2.2–1.6 Ga.

There is no evidence of Palaeoproterozoic glaciation in theSinghbhum Craton. Van Loon et al. (2012) established that theRajkharswan conglomerates, earlier suspected as glacial depositsby Mazumder et al. (2000), are in fact fluvial conglomerates. Con-trary to the entirely marine Palaeoproterozoic glacigenic succes-sions (Meteorite Bore Member of the Turee Creek Group, seeMartin 1999) of Western Australia, the Palaeoproterozoic succes-sions of Singhbhum are indicative of high continental freeboardconditions (largely terrestrial sediments; see Eriksson et al. 1999,2006; Mazumder et al. 2000, 2012b). Unlike PalaeoproterozoicBIFs present in Kaapval, Pilbara and elsewhere, the Singhbhumand other cratonic blocks of India are devoid of PalaeoproterozoicBIF (Saha & Mazumder 2012). Therefore, known Late Archaean–early Palaeoproterozoic (2.6–2.2 Ga) events recorded in theSinghbhum Craton were largely craton specific.

Fig. 10.7. Rounded quartz grains and bimodal texture in the Chandil sandstone.

Fig. 10.6. Nb/Y v. Zr/Y and Nb/Th v. Zr/Nb plots of Dalma volcanic rocks

(after Condie 2005); data from Roy et al. (2002b; circles) and Bose et al. (1989;

triangles). In contrast to the Dhanjori volcanics, the Dalma volcanics have a

plume source; see text for details.




In significant contrast to Dhanjori volcanism, the 1.7–1.6 GaDalma volcanism was probably plume related (Figs 10.3 & 10.6)and part of a global tectonothermal event affecting the pre-1.6 Ga land masses (Roy et al. 2002b; Mazumder 2005; Chatterjeeet al. 2013). As in other cratonic blocks of the world, lithosphericthinning, sedimentation, magmatism, metamorphism and crustalmelting/anatexis are associated with this global geological eventin the Singhbhum Craton (Chatterjee et al. 2013).

RM acknowledges financial support from the Indian Statistical Institute, Depart-

ment of Science and Technology, Government of India and The University of

New South Wales, Australia. SD, TC and LM acknowledge financial support

from the Department of Science and Technology, Council For Scientific and

Industrial Research, India and the University Grants Commissions, Government

of India, respectively, for research fellowships. MR and MA acknowledge Yoko-

hama National University and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Sciences for

research funding.

References

Acharyya, S. K. 2003. A plate tectonic model for Proterozoic crustalevolution of Central Indian Tectonic Zone. Gondwana GeologicalMagazine, 7, 9–31.

Acharyya, S. K., Gupta, A. & Orihashi, Y. 2010. Neoarchaean–Palaeoproterozoic stratigraphy of the Dhanjori basin, SinghbhumCraton, Eastern India: and recording of a few U–Pb zircon datesfrom its basal part. Journal of Asian Earth Science, 39, 527–536.

Alvi, S. H. & Raza, M. 1992. Geochemical evidence for the volcanic arctectonic setting of the Dhanjori volcanics, Singhbhum craton, easternIndia. Geological Magazine, 129, 337–348.

Aspler, L. B. & Chiarenzelli, J. R. 1998. Protracted breakup of Kenor-land, a Neoarchean supercontinent? Geochronologic, tectonostrati-graphic and sedimentologic evidence from the Paleoproterozoic.Sedimentary Geology, 120, 75–104.

Bandopadhyay, P. C., Eriksson, P. G. & Roberts, R. J. 2010. Avertic paleosol at the Archean–Proterozoic contact from the Singhb-hum–Orissa craton, eastern India. Precambrian Research, 177,277–290.

Bekker, A., Holland, H. D. et al. 2004. Dating the rise of atmosphericoxygen. Nature, 427, 117–120.

Bhattacharya, B. B. & Shalivahan 2002. The electric Moho under-neath Eastern Indian craton. Geophysical Research Letters, 29, 14/1–14/4.

Bhattacharya, H. N. 1991. A reappraisal of the depositional environ-ment of thePrecambrian metasediments around Ghatshila-Galudih,eastern Singhbhum. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 37,47–54.

Bhattacharya, H. N. & Bandyopadhyay, S. 1998. Seismites in aProterozoic tidal succession, Singhbhum, Bihar, India. SedimentaryGeology, 119, 239–252.

Bhattacharya, H. N. & Mahapatra, S. 2008. Evolution of the Proter-ozoic rift margin sediments – North Singhbhum Mobile Belt, Jhark-hand–Orissa, India. Precambrian Research, 162, 302–316.

Bose, M. K. 1994. Sedimentation pattern and tectonic evolution of the Pro-terozoic Singhbhum basin in the eastern Indian shield. Tectonophy-sics, 231, 325–346.

Bose, M. K. 2009. Precambrian mafic magmatism in the SinghbhumCraton, eastern India. Journal of the Geological Society of India,73, 13–35.

Bose, M. K. & Chakraborti, M. K. 1981. Fossil marginal basin from theIndian shield: a model for the evolution of Singhbhum Precambrianbelt, eastern India. Geologische Rundschau, 70, 504–518.

Bose, M. K., Chakrabarti, M. K. & Saunders, A. D. 1989. Petrochem-istry of the lavas from Proterozoic Dalma volcanic belt, Singhbhum,eastern India. Geologische Rundschau, 78, 633–648.

Bose, P. K., Mazumder, R. & Sarkar, S. 1997. Tidal sandwaves andrelated storm deposits in the transgressive Protoproterozoic ChaibasaFormation, India. Precambrian Research, 84, 63–81.

Chakrabarti, A., Bandyopadhyay, P. K. & Chakrabarty, A. K. 1998.Rounded fresh feldspar in the Late Archaean nearshore deposits

around Patasahi, Orissa: glacial activity? Indian Journal of EarthScience, 25, 94–107.

Chatterjee, A., Banerjee, M., Bhattacharya, A. & Maji, A. K. 2010.Monazite chronology, metamorphism – anatexis and tectonic rel-evance of the mid-Neoproterozoic Eastern Indian tectonic zone. Pre-cambrian Research, 179, 99–120.

Chatterjee, P., De, S., Ranaivoson, M., Mazumder, R. & Arima, M.2013. A review of the �1600 Ma sedimentation, volcanism, andtectono-thermal events in the Singhbhum craton, Eastern India.Geoscience Frontiers, 4, 277–287.

Cloud, P. 1973. A working model for the primitive Earth. AmericanJournal of Science, 272, 537–548.

Condie, K. C. 1997. Plate Tectonics and Crustal Evolution, 4th edn.Butterworth-Heinmann, Oxford.

Condie, K. C. 2005. High field strength element ratios in Archean basalts:a window to evolving sources of mantle plumes? Lithos, 79,491–504.

Condie, K. C., O’Neill, C. & Aster, R. 2009. Evidence and implicationsfor a widespread magmatic shutdown for 250 My on Earth. Earth andPlanetary Science Letters, 282, 294–298.

Cox, K. G. 1989. Mantle plumes and continental flood basalts: supportingevidence from drainage patterns. Nature, 342, 873–877.

Dasgupta, S. 2004. Modelling Ancient Orogens- an example from NorthSinghbhum Mobile Belt. Geological Survey of India Special Publi-cation, 84, 33–42.

De, A. 1964. Precambrian Dalma Dhanjori volcanicity of E. India and itsstratigraphic significance. Proceedings of the International Geologi-cal Congress, 10, 59–70.

Dunn, J. D. & Dey, A. K. 1942. The geology and petrology of EasternSinghbhum and surrounding areas. Geological Survey of India,Hyderabad, Memoirs, 69, 281–456.

Eriksson, P. G. & Condie, K. C. 2014. Cratonic sedimentation regimes inthe c. 2450–2000 Ma period: relationship to a possible widespreadmagmatic slowdown on Earth? Gondwana Research, 25, 30–47,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2012.08.005

Eriksson, P. G., Mazumder, R., Sarkar, S., Bose, P. K., Altermann,W. & van der Merwe, R. 1999. The 2.7–.20 Ga volcano-sedimentary record of Africa, India and Australia: evidence forglobal and local changes in sea level and continental freeboard. Pre-cambrian Research, 97, 269–302.

Eriksson, P. G., Condie, K. C. et al. 2002. Late Archaean superplumeevents: a Kaapvaal–Pilbara perspective. Journal of Geodynamics,34, 207–247.

Eriksson, P. G., Altermann, W., Nelson, D. R., Mueller, W. &Catuneanu, O. 2004. The Precambrian Earth: Tempos andEvents. Developments in Precambrian Geology, 12. Elsevier,Amsterdam.

Eriksson, P. G., Mazumder, R., Catuneanu, O., Bumby, A. J. &Ountsche Ilondo, B. 2006. Precambrian continental freeboardand geological evolution: a time perspective. Earth-ScienceReviews, 79, 165–204.

Eriksson, P. G., Lenhardt, N., Wright, D. T., Mazumder, R. &Bumby, A. J. 2011. Late Neoarchaean–Palaeoproterozoic supracrus-tal basin-fills of the Kaapvaal craton: relevance of the supercontinentcycle, the ‘Great Oxidation Event’ and ‘Snowball Earth’? Marine andPetroleum Geology, 28, 1385–1401.

Farquhar, J., Bao, T. H. & Thiemens, M. H. 2000. Atmospheric influ-ence of Earth’s earliest sulphur cycle. Science, 289, 756–759.

Gaal, G. 1964. Precambrian Flysch and Molasse – tectonics and sedi-mentation around Rakha Mines and Jaikan in Singhbhum District,Bihar, India. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International GeologicalCongress, New Delhi, India, 331–356.

Ghosh, G., Ghosh, B. & Mukhopadhyay, J. 2015. Palaeoarchaean–Mesoproterozoic sedimentation and tectonics along the west-northwestern margin of the Singhbhum Granite body, eastern India:a synthesis. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) PrecambrianBasins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. GeologicalSociety, London, Memoirs, 43, 121–138, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.9

Ghosh, S. K. & Sengupta, S. 1987. Progressive development of struc-tures in a ductile shear zone. Journal of Structural Geology, 9,277–287.




Gupta, A. & Basu, A. 2000. North Singhbhum Proterozoic mobile beltEastern India – a review. Special Publication of the GeologicalSurvey of India, 55, 195–226.

Gupta, A., Basu, A. & Ghosh, P. K. 1980. The Proterozoic ultramafic andmafic lavas and tuffs of the Dalma greenstone belt, Singhbhum,eastern India. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, 17, 210–231.

Hatton, C. J. 1995. Mantle plume origin for the Bushveld and Venters-dorp magmatic provinces. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 21,571–577.

Holland, H. D. 2002. Volcanic gases, black smokers, and the GreatOxidation Event. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 66,3811–3826.

Holland, H. D. 2009. Why the atmosphere became oxygenated: a propo-sal. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 73, 5241–5255.

Joy, S. & Saha, D. 1998. Influence of micaceous impurity on dynamicallyrecrystallized quartz c-axis fabric in L-S tectonites from the Singhb-hum Shear Zone and its footwall, Eastern India. Journal of StructuralGeology, 20, 1509–1520.

Joy, S. & Saha, D. 2000. Dynamically recrystallised quartz c-axis fabricsin greenschist facies quartzites, Singhbhum shear zone and its foot-wall, eastern India – influence of high fluid activity. Journal of Struc-tural Geology, 22/6, 777–793.

Kent, R. 1991. Lithospheric uplift in eastern Gondwana: evidence for along-lived mantle plume system? Geology, 19, 19–23.

Kirschvink, J. L., Gaidos, E. J., Bertani, L. E., Beukes, N. J.,Gutzmer, J., Maepa, L. N. & Steinberger, R. E. 2000. Paleoproter-ozoic snowball Earth: extreme climatic and geochemical globalchange and its biological consequences. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences USA, 97, 1400–1405.

Klein, C. 2005. Some Precambrian banded iron-formations (BIFs) fromaround the world: their age, geologic setting, mineralogy, meta-morphism, geochemistry, and origins. American Mineralogist, 90,1473–1499.

Konhauser, K. O., Lalonde, S. V. et al. 2011. Aerobic bacterial pyriteoxidation and acid rock drainage during the Great Oxidation Event.Nature, 478, 369–373.

Krishna Rao, N., Agarwal, S. K. & Rao, G. V. U. 1979. Lead isotopicratio of uraninites and the age of uranium mineralisation in SinghbumShear Zone, Bihar. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 20,24–27.

Kundu, A. & Matin, A. 2007. Sedimentary and tectonic environment ofdeposition of the Archaean Birtola Formation of Singhbhum Orissacraton, Sundergarh District, Orissa. Indian Journal of Geology, 79,22–34.

Mahato, S., Goon, S., Bhattacharya, A., Mishra, B. & Bernhardt,H.-J. 2008. Thermotectonic evolution of the North Singhbhummobile belt (eastern India): a view from the western part of thebelt. Precambrian Research, 162, 102–127.

Maji, A. K., Goon, S., Bhattacharya, A., Mishra, B., Mahato, S. &Bernhardt, H. J. 2008. Proterozoic polyphase metamorphism inthe Chotanagpur Gneiss Complex (India), and implications for trans-continental Gondwana correlation. Precambrian Research, 162,385–402.

Mallik, L., Mazumder, R., Mazumder, B. S., Arima, M. & Chatter-

jee, P. 2012. Tidal rhythmites in offshore shale: A case study from thePalaeoproterozoic Chaibasa shale, eastern India and implications.Marine and Petroleum Geology, 30, 43–49.

Martin, D. M. B. 1999. Depositional setting and implications of Paleo-proterozoic glaciomarine sedimentation in the Hamersley Province,Western Australia. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 111,189–203.

Mazumder, R. 2002. Sedimentation history of the Dhanjori and ChaibasaFormations, eastern India and its implications. PhD thesis, JadavpurUniversity, Kolkata.

Mazumder, R. 2004. Implications of lunar orbital periodicities fromChaibasa tidal rhythmite of late Paleoproterozoic age. Geology, 32,841–844.

Mazumder, R. 2005. Proterozoic sedimentation and volcanism in theSinghbhum crustal province, India and their implications. Sedimen-tary Geology, 176, 167–193.

Mazumder, R. & Arima, M. 2009. Implication of mafic magmatism in anintracontinental rift setting: a case study from the Palaeoproterozoic

Dhanjori Formation, Singhbhum crustal province, India. Journal ofGeology, 117, 455–466.

Mazumder, R. & Sarkar, S. 2004. Sedimentation history of the Palaeo-proterozoic Dhanjori Formation, Singhbhum, India and its impli-cations. Precambrian Research, 130, 267–287.

Mazumder, R. & van Kranendonk, M. J. 2013. Paleoproterozoic ter-restrial sedimentation in the the Beasley River Quartzite, LowerWyloo Group, Western Australia. Precambrian Research, 231,98–105.

Mazumder, R. & van Loon, A. J. 2012. Depositional history of diamic-tites from the Late Paleoproterozoic Dalma Formation (E India).Sedimentary Geology, 251–252, 49–57.

Mazumder, R., Bose, P. K. & Sarkar, S. 2000. A commentary on thetectono-sedimentary record of the pre-2.0 Ga continental growth ofIndia vis-a-vis pre-Gondwana Afro-Indian Supercontinent. Journalof African Earth Sciences, 30, 201–217.

Mazumder, R., van Loon, A. J. & Arima, M. 2006. Soft-sedimentdeformation structures in the Earth’s oldest seismites. SedimentaryGeology, 186, 19–26.

Mazumder, R., Rodriguez-Lopez, J. A., Arima, M. & van Loon,A. J. 2009. Palaeoproterozoic seismites (fine-grained facies of theChaibasa Fm., E. India) and their soft-sediment deformation struc-tures. In: Reddy, S. M., Mazumder, R., Evans, D. A. & Collins,A. S. (eds) Palaeoproterozoic Supercontinent and its Global Evol-ution. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 323,301–318.

Mazumder, R., van Loon, A. J. et al. 2012a. Mesoarchaean–Palaeo-proterozoic stratigraphic record of the Singhbhum crustal province,eastern India: a synthesis. In: Mazumder, R. & Saha, D. (eds)Palaeoproterozoic of India. Geological Society, London, SpecialPublications, 365, 31–49, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP365.3

Mazumder, R., Eriksson, P. G., De, S., Bumby, A. J. & Lenhardt, N.2012b. Palaeoproterozoic sedimentation on the Singhbhum Craton:global context and comparison with Kaapvaal. In: Mazumder, R.& Saha, D. (eds) Palaeoproterozoic of India. Geological Society,London, Special Publications, 365, 51–76, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP365.4

Misra, S. & Johnson, P. T. 2005. Geochronological constraints on evol-ution of Singhbhum Mobile Belt and Associated Basic Volcanics ofEastern Indian Shield. Gondwana Research, 8, 129–142.

Mukhopadhyay, D. 1976. Precambrian stratigraphy of Singhbhum – theproblems and prospects. Indian Journal of Earth Sciences, 3,208–219.

Mukhopadhyay, D. 1990. Precambrian plate tectonics in the easternIndian shield. In: Sychanthavog, S. P. H. (ed.) Crustal Evolutionand Orogeny. IHB, Oxford, 7, 75–100.

Mukhopadhyay, D. 2001. The Archaean nucleus of Singhbhum: thepresent state of knowledge. Gondwana Research, 4, 307–318.

Naha, K. 1965. Metamorphism in relation to stratigraphy, structure andmovements in parts of east Singhbhum, Eastern India. QuaternaryJournal of the Geological, Mineralogical, Metallurgical Society ofIndia, 37, 41–88.

Naha, K. & Ghosh, S. K. 1960. Archaean palaeogeography of E. andN. Singhbhum. Geological Magazine, 97, 436–439.

Naqvi, S. M. & Rogers, J. J. W. 1987. Precambrian Geology of India.Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Nelson, D. R., Bhattacharya, H. N., Misra, S., Dasgupta, N. &Altermann, W. 2007. New SHRIMP U–Pb zircon dates from theSinghbhum craton, Jharkhand–Orissa region, India. Abstract. In:Banerjee, S. (ed.) International Conference on Precambrian Sedi-mentation & Tectonics & 2ndd GPSS Meeting, Indian Institute ofTechnology, Bombay, 47.

Pal, D. C. & Rhede, D. 2013. Geochemistry and chemical dating of ura-ninite in the Jaduguda Uranium deposit, Singhbhum Shear Zone,India – implications for uranium mineralization and geochemicalevolution of uraninite. Economic Geology, 108, 1499–1515.

Pal, D. C., Chaudhury, T., Mcfarlane, C., Mukharjee, A. &Sarangi, A. K. 2011. Mineral chemistry and in situ dating of allaniteand geochemistry of its host rocks in the Bagjata uranium mine,Singhbhum shear zone, India – implications for chemical evolutionof REE mineralization and mobilization. Economic Geology, 106,1155–1171.




Plumb, K. A. 1991. New Precambrian time scale. Episodes, 14,139–140.

Reddy, S. M. & Evans, D. A. D. 2009. Palaeoproterozoic super-continents and global evolution: correlations from core to atmos-phere. In: Reddy, S. M., Mazumder, R., Evans, D. A. D. &Collins, A. (eds) Palaeoproterozoic Supercontinents and Glo-bal Evolution. Geological Society, London, Special Publications,323, 1–26.

Reddy, S. M., Clarke, C. & Mazumder, R. 2009. Temporal constraintson the evolution of the Singbhum Crustal Province from U–PbSHRIMP data. In: Saha, D. & Mazumder, R. (eds) Paleoprotero-zoic Supercontinents and Global Evolution. International Associationfor Gondwana Research Conference Series, Abstract volume, 9,17–18.

Rekha, S., Upadhyay, D., Bhattacharya, A., Koojiman, E., Goon, S.,Mahato, S. & Pant, N. C. 2011. Lithostructural and chronologicalconstraints for tectonic restoration of Proterozoic accretion in theeastern Indian Precambrian shield. Precambrian Research, 187,313–333.

Roy, A., Sarkar, A., Jeyakumar, S., Aggrawal, S. K. & Ebihara,M. 2002a. Sm–Nd age and mantle characteristics of the Dhan-jori volcanic rocks, Eastern India. Geochemical Journal, 36,503–518.

Roy, A., Sarkar, A., Jeyakumar, S., Aggrawal, S. K. & Ebihara, M.2002b. Mid-Proterozoic plume-related thermal event in EasternIndian craton: evidence from trace elements, REE geochemistryand Sr–Nd isotope systematics of basic-ultrabasic intrusives fromDalma Volcanic Belt. Gondwana Research, 5, 133–146.

Saha, A. K. 1994. Crustal Evolution of Singhbhum–North, Orissa,Eastern India. Geological Society of India, Bangalore, Memoirs, 27.

Saha, D. & Mazumder, R. 2012. An overview of the Palaeoproterozoicgeology of Peninsular India, and key stratigraphic and tectonic issues.In: Mazumder, R. & Saha, D. (eds) Palaeoproterozoic of India.Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 365, 5–29,http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP365.2

Sanyal, S. & Sengupta, P. 2012. Metamorphic evolution of the Chhota-nagpur Granite Gneiss Complex of the East Indian Shield: currentstatus. In: Mazumder, R. & Saha, D. (eds) Palaeoproterozoic of

India. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 365,117–145, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP365.7

Sarkar, S. N., Ghosh, D. K., Lambert, R. J., St. 1986. Rubidium–strontium and lead isotopic studies of the Soda granites from Musa-boni area, Singhbhum Copper Belt. In: Sarkar, S. N. associates

(eds) Geology and Geochemistry of Sulphide Ore bodies and associ-ated rocks in Musaboni and Rakha Mines section in the SinghbhumCopper Belt. Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad, Diamond JubileeMonograph, 101–110.

Sengupta, S. & Chattopadhyay, B. 2004. Singhbhum Mobile Belt –how far it fits an ancient orogen. Geological Survey of India, Hyder-abad, Special Publications, 84, 24–31.

Sengupta, S. & Mukhopadhaya, P. K. 2000. Sequence of Precambrianevents in the eastern Indian Craton. Geological Survey of India,Hyderabad, Special Publications, 57, 49–56.

Sengupta, S., Sarkar, G., Ghosh-Roy, A. K., Bhaduri, S. K., Gupta,S. N. & Mandal, A. 2000. Geochemistry and Rb–Sr Geochronologyof acid tuffs from the northern fringe of the Singhbhum craton andtheir significance in the Precambrian evolution. Indian Minerals, 54,43–56.

Shalivahan & Bhattacharya, B. B. 2002. Implications of novel resultsabout Moho from magnetotelluric studies. Current Science, 83,1259–1264.

van Loon, A. J. & De, S. 2015. Archaean sedimentation on the Singhb-hum Craton: depositional environments of conglomerates in Jhark-hand (east India). In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds)Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context.Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 1–11, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.8

van Loon, A. J., Mazumder, R. & De, S. 2012. Unravelling the deposi-tional environment of the Archaean Rajkharsawan conglomerate(Jharkhand, eastern India). Netherlands Journal of Geosciences –Geologie en Mijnbouw, 91, 129–135.

Young, G. M. 2004. Earth’s two great Precambrian glaciations: aftermathof the ‘Snowball Earth’ hypothesis. In: Eriksson, P. G., Altermann,W., Nelson, D. R., Mueller, W. U. & Catuneanu, O. (eds) ThePrecambrian Earth: Tempos and Events. Elsevier, Amsterdam,440–448.




Chapter 10 Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimentation …...Chapter 10 Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimentation and tectonics of the Singhbhum Craton, eastern India, and implications for global

Documents