华北克拉通(NCC)构造模式的地球物理和地质学检验分析

（编译：周春银；原作者：Timothy M. Kusky）

Kusky, T. M. (2011). Geophysical and geological tests of tectonic models of the North China Craton. Gondwana Research 20(1): 26-35.

【摘要】华北克拉通拼合的几何学和年代学研究仍存在争议，三种主要的模式对相关的区域构造、地质年代学和地质学关系提出了极其不同的解释。第一种模式认为，华北克拉通的东西部陆块在太古代时期分别形成，并于2.5-1.85 Ga当两个陆块在一东倾的俯冲带之上发生碰撞时，东部陆块发育有一个活动边缘。第二种模式推测东部陆块是在大约2.7 Ga时从另一个未知的更大的大陆裂解出来的，并于2.5 Ga在一西倾俯冲带之上和一个岛弧（可能已经拼贴到西部陆块）发生碰撞，1.85 Ga时的变质作用则与华北克拉通并入哥伦比亚超大陆时沿克拉通北缘的碰撞有关。第三种模式提出在2.1和1.88 Ga中央造山带有两次碰撞，并识别出一早期尚未确定具体时间的变形事件。最近的地震学结果详细揭示了深部地壳和岩石圈的构造，并同时支持后两种模式，即中央造山带下面的俯冲是向西的，并且还存在另一个西倾的古俯冲带，位于中央造山带东面下倾至西部陆块（鄂尔多斯克拉通）下面。由地球物理方法所鉴定出来的边界与第一种模式所提出的华北中部造山带的边界不一致，而且俯冲方向与该模式所推测的刚好相反。1.85 Ga时的高压麻粒岩相变质作用并非如第一种模式所述出的仅限于华北中部造山带，而是如第二种模式所推测的横穿华北克拉通地区，第二种模式提出1.85 Ga时沿克拉通北缘存在一主要的陆陆碰撞。此外，最近的研究显示，在华北中部造山带南部仅存在2.7-2.5 Ga之间的变质记录而并未见大约1.85 Ga时的变质记录。这表明华北中部造山带（定义为一个~1.85 Ga的造山带）其实并不存在。最近的Re-Os同位素研究进一步证实了这一结论，该研究表明中央造山带南部的陆下岩石圈地幔在年龄上为晚太古代，而华北克拉通北部一个省的相应年龄为大约1.8 Ga，这与所提出的横穿整个华北克拉通的华北克拉通与哥伦比亚超大陆碰撞带一致。中央造山带是一个太古代的汇聚带，在古元古代则重新改造；古元古代的构造运动在横穿华北克拉通的地区都非常普遍，正如该模式所推测的，先前已经拼合的东部和西部陆块在大约1.85 Ga与哥伦比亚超大陆发生了一次大陆碰撞，但是抬升/折返的速率很慢，因此有必要来重新认识华北克拉通的构造模式。

【关键词】华北克拉通 太古宙 地震反射剖面 前寒武纪地壳演化

原文下载链接：http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1342937X11000256

1.简介：华北克拉通前寒武地质

太古代华北克拉通（NCC）占据了中国东北、内蒙古、黄海以及朝鲜大约170万平方公里的面积（Fig.1）（Bai and Dai,1996,1998）。它南接秦岭-大别山造山带，北接阴山-燕山造山带，西连龙首山带，东连Qinglong-Luznxian、胶辽带（Bai and Dai,1996; Kusky et al.,2007a; Li et al.,2007,2009,2010a）。克拉通由两个主要的陆块组成，由中央造山带分隔开来（如Zhao,2001; Zhao et al.,2001a,2001b,2002,2005; Kusky et al.,2001,2004a,2004b,2007a,2007b）。主要的岩石类型包括大约3.8-2.5 Ga的片麻岩、TTG、花岗岩、混合岩、角山岩、超基性岩石、云母片岩、白云质大理岩、含石墨和夕线石的片麻岩（孔兹岩）、条带中含铁建造（BIF）以及变长石砂岩（Jahn and Zhang,1984a,b; Bai et al.,1992; Wu et al.,1998; Jahn et al.,1987; Bai,1996; He et al.,1991,1992; Wang et al.,1997）。太古代岩石被1.85-1.40 Ga中元古代长城系的石英岩、砂岩、砾岩、页岩和碳酸岩所覆盖（Li et al.,2000a,2000b）。在NCC中部部分地区保存有沉积于克拉通地堑中的2.40-1.90 Ga的古元古代序列（Kusky and Li,2003）。

Fig. 1. Geological map of the North China Craton (from Kusky and Li, 2003).

华北克拉通被划分为两个主要的陆块（东部和西部陆块），但是其间造山带的边界和年龄仍是目前争议的主题。其中一个研究小组（Kusky et al.,2001,2004a,2004b,2007a,2007b; Kusky and Li,2003; Kusky and Santosh,2009）认为，边界为被称作中央造山带（COB）的晚太古代-古元古代造山带，它在大约1.85 Ga遭受了后期的变形作用。其他的研究小组（如Zhao et al.,2001a）则认为该造山带为大约1.85 Ga的所谓的华北中部造山带（TNCO），代表两个陆块在1.85 Ga时的碰撞。应当注意地是中央造山带（COB）不同于Zhao等（2001a）定义的华北中部造山带（TNCO）是不同的。COB是太古代的造山带，由太古代构造来定义其边界，但是TNCO被定义为元古代的造山带，尽管其与中生代构造相邻。这些中生代断裂两边的前寒武地质学特征非常相似，TNCO里面和外围岩石的唯一明显区别就是Zhao等所定义的“TNCO中出露/未出露的太古代至古元古代的基底，以及东部和西部陆块中出露/未出露的太古代至古元古代基底”。在本综述文章中，我们将根据最新的地球物理和地球化学数据来评估这些华北克拉通构造演化模式，并提出一个与该克拉通最新数据和地质关系相一致的统一模式。东部陆块和西部陆块由一个造山带（COB或TNCO）所隔开，造山带中几乎所有的U-Pb年龄（上交点年龄）均落在2.55 Ga至2.50 Ga之间(Zhang, 1989; Zhao et al., 1998, 1999a, 1999b, 2000, 2001a, 2001b, 2005; Kröner et al., 1998, 2002; Li et al., 2000b; Wilde et al., 1998; Zhao, 2001; Kusky et al., 2001; Kusky and Li, 2003; Kusky et al., 2004a, 2004b; Polat et al., 2005, 2006a,b)。稳定的西部陆块，亦即鄂尔多斯陆块（Bai and Dai,1996; Li et al.,1998），是一个自前寒武纪以来具有厚地幔根、无地震、低热流、板内变形极少的稳定克拉通。西部陆块含有很厚的地台沉积盖层，沿东缘该盖层由一条狭长的2.55-2.50 Ga的岛弧深成岩体所侵入。由于存在很厚的太古代至白垩纪地台盖层，西部陆块大部分太古宙地质现象出露并不好。

相反，东部陆块是一个非典型的克拉通，它在构造上仍是活跃的，并存在大量的地震活动、高热流以及很薄的岩石圈，说明缺失很厚的地幔根（如Zhai et al.,2007）。东部陆块含有各种大约3.80-2.50 Ga的片麻岩和绿岩带，局部被2.60-2.50 Ga的砂岩和碳酸岩单元所覆盖（Kusky and Li,2003）。变形复杂而且呈多期，说明从早太古代至中元古代这一陆块经历过复杂的碰撞、裂解和底侵历史(Zhai et al., 1992, 1995, 2002, 2010; Li and Kusky, 2007; Kusky et al., 2001; Kusky and Li, 2003; Kusky et al., 2004a, 2004b; Zhai, 2004, 2005; Polat et al., 2006a, 2006b)，并在中生代-新生代又经历了一次（Zhai et al.,2007; Zhang et al.,2011）。

Fig. 2. A. Tectonic divisions of the North China Craton proposed by the Zhao et al. group (redrawn after Zhao et al., 2005). Note that there is no inherent difference between rocks inside and outside the “TNCO”, and that the different units are only described by Zhao et al. (2005) as exposed (and covered) rocks inside the boundaries of the TNCO, and exposed (and covered) rocks in the Eastern and Western Blocks ( [Zhao, 2001] and [Zhao et al., 2005] ). B. Distribution of circa 1.9–1.8 Ga HP and HT–UHT granulite in NCC (modified after Zhai et al., 2010). Note the lack of correlation of granulite facies metamorphism with the proposed TNCO, but a concentration along the north margin of the craton cutting across “TNCO”, and scattered across the craton everywhere there are good exposures of Precambrian rocks (compare with Fig. 1), suggesting a craton-wide event at that time, triggered by an event in the north. The two black stars indicate the location of documented circa 2.5 Ga high-grade metamorphism (from [Kröner et al., 1998] and [Liu et al., 2009] ) which do show a positive correlation with the Central Orogenic Belt. Other areas of pre-2.1 Ga deformation, metamorphism and partial melting are known from within the COB (e.g., Trap et al., 2009), but are so far undated.

2.华北克拉通构造模式总结

过去十年中对于华北克拉通前寒武构造演化历史始终存在着争议，其中的两种模式是争论的主要焦点，在过去几年中也提出了两种新的模式。受CNNSF“North China Interior Structure Project”资助的促进，沿华北克拉通多个构造带的新地震反射剖面和层析成像剖面已经完成。这些地球物理观测结果为华北克拉通构造模式提供了新的视角，并显示出其中某些模式是可行的，而另外一些则不然。在这一节，我们将讨论提出来的各种构造模式，总结最近报道的地球物理剖面，然后评估哪些构造模式经得起地球物理观测的考验，哪些会被淘汰。

其中最流行的华北克拉通构造演化模式之一就是由赵国春等所提出的模式(Zhao, 2001; Zhao et al., 1998, 1999a,b, 2000, 2001a,b, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010; Liu et al., in review a)。该研究小组主要是利用U-Pb地质年代学和变质P-T轨迹来限定各带中岩石的时间和热演化，从而得出华北克拉通分为两个主要陆块（东部和西部陆块）的结论，由他们所命名为“Tran-North China Craton”（TNCO；Fig.2A）的造山带而隔开。基于他们的数据资料，这些研究人员认为，两个陆块是在太古代分别形成的，东部陆块西缘自从晚太古代开始是活动的、安第斯型边缘，直到大约1.85 Ga在一个东倾俯冲带上两个陆块发生陆陆碰撞为止。Polat和Kusky（2007）曾发表评论认为，在这一模式中所提出的安第斯型陆缘可能是地球历史上保存最久远的这类陆缘，而且并不存在如该模式所推测的大型增生造山带记录。Zhao等（2001a,2005,2007）模式的一个主要问题就是作者过于强调锆石地质年代学研究结果。锆石地质年代学研究不应该脱离野外的观测、岩浆作用和变形作用。正如Polat等（2010）研究所显示的，经历过高级变质作用的多期变形造山带的锆石年龄更反映了峰期变质作用的时间而不是岩浆作用和碰撞作用的时间。因此，尽管Zhao等（2001a,2001b,2005,2007）研究小组得到的数据明显记录了大约1.9-1.85 Ga的一个构造热事件，但是这些数据偏向于反映了最近期的高级事件，而且并不能排除TNCO中更早期的事件。

根据Kusky和Li（2003）的模式，其中克拉通北缘在大约1.8-1.85 Ga经历过一次陆陆碰撞，Zhao等（2005）修改了他们的华北克拉通地图使其在北部包含了一个碰撞带，但是仅仅只在西部陆块和造山带北部，他们称其为孔兹岩带和阴山陆块（Fig.2A）。然而，与这一碰撞相关的高压麻粒岩相变质岩延伸超过了西部陆块并正好切过所谓的TNCO（Fig.2B），这表明整个先前已经拼合的东部和西部陆块都卷入了这次碰撞事件，如下讨论。

Fig. 3. Tectonic subdivisions of the North China Craton proposed by [Kusky et al., 2007a] and [Kusky et al., 2007b] .

Kusky等（2001,2003,2007）提出了华北克拉通构造演化的另外一个大地构造图（Fig.3）和模式图（Fig.4），包括了2.5 Ga东部地块西缘一个岛弧和蛇绿岩弧前的碰撞。Kusky和Li（2003）提出了一个华北克拉通演化的综合模式，包括3.5-2.7 Ga时形成东西部地块的微陆块/岛弧碰撞，2.7 Ga时东部陆块西缘的裂解，2.5 Ga时（西部陆块东缘）岛弧的碰撞，以及随后在大约1.85 Ga时沿整个克拉通北缘的一次主陆陆碰撞（Figs.3,4）。这一模式随后由Kusky等（2007a,2007b）、Kusky和Santosh（2009）以及Kusky和Li（2010）进行了更为细致、更新的分析。

在Kusky等的模式中，他们仍然将华北克拉通划分为东部和西部陆块，但是利用太古宙地质学的变化来定义陆块间的构造边界以及其间的中央造山带。Li和Kusky（2007）在东部陆块提出了一个前陆盆地来标识向造山带的过渡，并把这一造山带称为中央造山带（COB），而不是TNCO（Fig.3）。所定义的TNCO以中生代断裂为边界，它所指的应该是由大约1.85 Ga的变形作用和变质作用所限定的造山带，而COB是一个太古代的造山带，由构造类型、沉积作用、岩石类型和地质年龄的转变而定义。大约2.5 Ga COB中增生弧和蛇绿岩弧前岩石的存在仍有争议，但是在构造、地球化学和地质年代学研究方面已经得到了很好的证明 (Kusky et al., 2001, 2004a, 2004b, 2007a,2007b; Polat et al., 2005, 2006a; Kusky and Li, 2010; Kusky et al.,2011)。

中央造山带（COB）包括遭受了各种变质的TTG、花岗岩和上地壳序列，变质相从绿片岩相到麻辣岩相。它从北部辽宁西部到南方河南西部绵延约1600 km。包括混合岩化在内的高级区域变质作用，存在于2.60-2.485 Ga大部分中央造山带中(Kröner et al., 1998; Zhai and Liu, 2003; Liu et al., 2009)，最后一期变质带的抬升发生在大约1.90-1.80 Ga，这与伸展构造作用（Li et al.,2000a）或者华北克拉通北缘的一次碰撞事件（Kusky and Li,2003; Kusky and Santosh,2009）有关。在COB东南部（如Qingling带），绿片岩相到角山岩相级别的变质作用起着主导作用，但是西北部则主要以角山岩相至麻粒岩相岩石为主，包括部分高压组合（10-13 kbar，850±50ºC；Li et al.,2000b; Zhao et al.,2001b;见Kröner et al.,2002的补充参考文献）。高压组合出露于沿ENE方向延伸超过700 km的线性衡山带（Figs.1,2B）。造山带内部（西部）含有与逆冲相关的近水平的面理、浅倾的剪切带、横卧褶皱以及在构造上互层的高压麻粒岩相混合岩和变沉积岩。中央造山带咋许多地区被地堑和大陆架环境下沉积的沉积岩所覆盖，并被大约2.5-2.4以及1.9-1.8 Ga的岩墙群所侵入。造山带中也识别出了一些较大的2.2-2.0 Ga的非造山的花岗岩。

Fig. 4. Model for Precambrian evolution of North China Craton proposed by Kusky et al. (2007a). Note that an arc in the COB (with ophiolitic fore-arc) is about to collide with the Eastern Block at circa 2.5 Ga, and that there was likely a basin behind this arc, separating the COB from the Western Block. Abbreviations as follows: COB, Central Orogenic Belt, EB, Eastern Block, WB, Western Block, IMNHO, Inner Mongolia Northern Hebei Orogen, NCC, North China Craton.

造山带中有两条线性褶皱带已经有被报道过，包括一条西部的高压麻粒岩带（Li et al.,2000a）和一条东部的前陆逆冲褶皱带（Li et al.,2002a,b; Kusky and Li,2003; Li and Kusky,2007）。高压麻粒岩带由西部陆块的正断层所分开，该断层被年龄小于2.40 Ga并在1.862.7±0.4 Ga遭受变质的厚层变沉积岩（孔兹岩）所覆盖（A. Kröner，个人交流，2003）。

另外还有学者提出一些其他的华北克拉通构造演化模式。Zhai等（2010及其参考文献）认为，相比Zhao或Kusky的模式（尽管Kusky模式可以解释较古老的陆块，见Fig.4）所描述的，华北克拉通含有更多的陆块，而且大约1.85-1.8 Ga的高级变质作用并非如Zhao模式所推测的只局限于TNCO（或COB），而是在克拉通许多地区均有记录。此外，Liu等（2009）最近的研究结果显示，在TNCO南部部分地区没有大约1.8-1.85 Ga变质作用的记录，只显示有大约2.7-2.5 Ga的变质作用。

Faure等（2007）和Trap等（2009）研究了中央造山带（TNCO）部分地区的构造和时间演化，并总结认为存在两期主要的变形事件，一期（D₂）在大约2.1 Ga，一期在大约1.88 Ga，早于大约1.8 Ga的区域变质作用。Trap等（2009）进一步指出，针对TNCO还需要做更多跟深入的研究来更好地认识太古代和古元古代的构造事件，尤其是他们识别出在高压角闪岩相至麻粒岩相条件下发育的一期更早期的变形事件，且到目前还尚未被定年过。该造山带与指示2.5 Ga变形作用的五台-遵化-东湾子带之间的关系、其他支持2.5 Ga变形作用的COB（TNCO）U-Pb数据（Kröner et al., 1998; Liu et al., 2009）以及显示保存有该地区之下2.5 Ga地幔的Os同位素证据（Liu et al., in review b），均表明这一更古老的事件可能也与沿COB的2.5 Ga事件相关。这一早期的、尚不清楚的变形事件包括混合岩、强面理化和线理化、公里尺度的N-NNW走向的背斜和向斜的发育。还需要进一步的研究工作来认识这一早期强变形事件的意义，以及它和东北部遵化带中大约2.5 Ga增生混杂堆积构造的关系（Kusky et al.,2004a,2004b; Li and Kusky,2007; Kusky and Li,2010）。

Faure等（2007）的模式与Kusky的模式是一致的，即在2.5 Ga岛弧地块和东部陆块发生碰撞之后，岛弧后面仍有一个盆地尚未闭合，这些变形事件可能与另外那些事件是相关的。Faure等（2007）的观测与Zhao的模式也是可以相容的，即如果东西部陆块之间有一个洋盆能够保持开启状态达9亿年之久，那么将会有不同的增生事件并形成一个大型增生造山带，其规模或许可以和Makran或阿拉斯加南部造山带相提并论。但问题是，中央造山带中并没有找到这样的增生造山带。

Fig. 5. Tectonic divisions of the NCC proposed by M.G. Zhai et al. (2010).

Fig. 6. (Modified slightly after Zheng et al., 2009). (A) Common conversion point (CCP) receiver function image of crust and uppermost mantle along Western Block–Central Orogenic Belt profile based on the inverted velocity model. Blue represents positive (brown represents negative) amplitude of receiver function annotated in the right color bar, indicating velocity increase (or decrease) downward. Dots in CCP image mark velocity discontinuities in the best-fitting models, including the interfaces with negative velocity gradient above L1 and L2 layers (blue), and the bottom interfaces of L1 and L2 (green). B: Shear-wave velocity structure of crust and uppermost mantle compiled from inverted velocity model along east–west profile (A–B). L1 is a westward-dipping low-velocity zone beneath stations 274–296 that separates the COB and Western Block, and L2 is a horizontal low-velocity zone in the lower crust beneath TNCO and the Western Block. The geometry of these west-dipping paleosubduction zone are remarkably similar in geometry for the circa 2.5 Ga collision between the East and West Blocks proposed by Kusky et al. (2001, 2003, 2007a,b, 2009), but opposite in polarity to the model proposed by [Zhao et al., 2001a] , [Zhao et al., 2001b] and [Zhao et al., 2005] ) C. Location of profile, EB — Eastern Block, WB — Western Block, COB — Central Orogenic Belt. Red arrows indicate borders of Central Orogenic Belt determined from geophysical profile and surface structure (Zheng et al., 2009), whereas blue arrow represents western edge of TNCO defined by Zhao et al. (2005).

3.对模式的地球物理检验

Zheng等（2009）报道了最新的华北克拉通中央造山带（TNCO）地震成像结果（Fig.6）。这些图像显示了目前中央造山带及其周围地壳板块下面不同物质的分布，但是当用现今的地壳结构来解释古构造事件时要十分谨慎。来自放射状接收函数方法的数据被用来对沿东部陆块、穿过中央造山带、到西部陆块剖面的地壳和上地幔结构进行成像。他们的结果显示在COB下面存在一个西倾的古俯冲带（Fig.6），这正与Kusky研究小组所推测的一致，而与Zhao研究小组模式所推测的东倾古俯冲带刚好相反。Zheng等（2009）的地震成像结果显示在COB西边还存在另一个西倾的古俯冲带，表明另外一个洋盆在这里闭合。这与Faure等（2007）以及Trap等（2009）所推测的两期可能与俯冲相关的变形作用是一致的，同时与Kusky等（2007a,2007b）的模式也是相容的，其中2.5 Ga时与东部陆块西缘发生碰撞的岛弧之后仍有一个盆地即将闭合。Santosh（2010）也研究了Zheng等（2009）的地震学结果，并认为它们反映了向西俯冲的大洋板块不断地在西部（鄂尔多斯）陆块下面的叠加。但是在那个模式中，古老的俯冲带应该位于西部，年轻的俯冲带则应该位于东部，这与Faure等（2007）、Trap等（2009）以及Kusky等（2001,2004,2007）所描述的刚好相反。地震学结果与Zhao研究小组的模式不符，该模式要求在东部陆块下面存在长久东倾的俯冲。

Zhao等（2010）对Zheng等（2009）的数据和解释进行了评论，他们认为古俯冲带并未延伸到地幔中，地震剖面的位置并非是COB（TNCO）结构成像的理想位置，而且地震剖面与Zhao等（2001a,2001b,2007）和Li等（2010b）对地表地质学特征的解释是不符的。Zheng等（2010）回复Zhao等（2010）的评论文章时认为，他们的研究是包含且符合地表地质学构造的，对古俯冲带的地震追踪也肯定是延伸到了地幔中的，但是如果仅仅只使用一般转换点（common conversion point，CCP）叠加，那么浅部地壳结构中的多重结构可能会被误解成地幔结构，因此他们使用了一种综合接收函数技术来更好地确定地壳结构。Zheng等（2010）强调古俯冲方向明显是向西的。Zheng等（2010）还提出，Zhao等（2010）对地震学剖面的地质学解释还包括了碰撞其间就已就位的西部陆块逆冲推覆体，而这种解释是不太可能的，因为如果事实是如此的话，那么上盘中的岩石将会具有高地震波速，而不是所观测到的那么低。Zheng等（2010）坚持他们对COB（TNCO）下面两个西倾古俯冲带的解释。Zheng等（2010）还评论（批评）了Zhao等关于碰撞一定发生在1.85 Ga的观点，因为并没有识别出更古老的变质事件（这并非事实，见下文讨论），他们强调“陆陆碰撞和弧陆碰撞并不需要用高压变质作用来界定；在大多数情况下，它与地壳厚度有关”（同样见Polat and Kusky,2007）。Zheng等（2010）认为具有充分的证据证明在中央造山带中存在更古老的部分熔融作用和变形事件。

总之，Zheng等（2009）的地震剖面清楚地显示了中央造山带东部以及鄂尔多斯陆块下面存在两个西倾的古俯冲带。但是古俯冲带的年龄是单独利用地球物理方法所无法揭示的。

4.对模式的其他地质学、变质和地球化学检验

4.1. 高压麻粒岩

大约1.85 Ga的高压麻粒岩分布于NCC上许多带中（Zhai et al.,2010），显然并不局限于Zhao等（2001a,2001b,2005）所提出的“TNCO”中。大部分沿克拉通北缘分布（Fig.2B），并切过TNCO的边界（Zhai et al.,2010），其他带则位于山东半岛以及克拉通南界附近。衡山高压麻粒岩（HPG）带由许多变质地体所组成，包括衡山、怀安和承德混杂岩，地理上与辽宁西部和太行山南部中压变质混杂岩相关（Figs.1,and 2B）。HPG通常以孤立的顶垂体（pendant）形式出露于强烈剪切化的TTG（2.60-2.50 Ga）和花岗片麻岩（2.50 Ga）中，并普遍由2.20-1.90 Ga的K-花岗岩和基性岩墙群（2.45-2.40 Ga，1.77 Ga）侵入（Li et al.,2000b; Kröner et al.,2002; Li et al.,2010b）。局部地，低级变质孔兹岩和变质浊积沉积的逆冲碎块互层于高压麻粒岩相岩石。混杂岩的主要岩石类型为含石榴子石基性麻粒岩，石榴子石周围具有明显的斜长石-斜方辉石反应边，这是从1.2-0.9 GPa、700-800ºC的峰期P-T条件快速折返减压的证据（大约1.9-1.8 Ga）（Zhao et al.,2000; Kröner et al.,2002）。基性岩石显示至少有三种类型的REE分布图，从平缓型到LREE中等富集，指示陆缘或岛弧构造环境下的原始结晶过程（Li et al.,2002a,2002b）。另外一种高压麻粒岩则以变形的或破裂的岩墙形式出露。它们的SHRIMP锆石年龄为1973±4 Ma和1834±5 Ma，残余核的年龄为2.0-2.1 Ga（Peng et al.,2005,2007）。

有一组研究者（Zhao et al.,2001a,2001b,2005; Wilde et al.,2003）认为，NCC中~1.9-1.8 Ga麻粒岩事件与克拉通东西部陆块的陆陆碰撞有关。但是该模式主要是基于对变质PTt轨迹的解释，而与构造、沉积学和野外地质观测数据缺乏紧密联系。Kusky和Li（2003），以及Kusky和Santosh（2009）认为，地质学数据指示东西部陆块的碰撞发生在2.5 Ga，1.9-1.8 Ga的麻粒岩事件则遍布整个克拉通北半部，而不仅仅是在COB中，这可能与沿克拉通北缘的一次碰撞有关，在1.8 Ga形成一个东西向的造山带。O'Brien等（2005）识别出两种类型的麻粒岩，包括北部的高压（HP）基性麻粒岩和南部的中压麻粒岩，两者由东西走向的朱家坊（Zhujiafang）剪切带所分割。因此折返的深度向北而增加，不是向东或向西增加，这说明麻粒岩事件与东西走向的造山带中的变形变质作用有关。进一步向南，变质相级别则更低，在五台山地区，以角山岩相至绿片岩相为主(O'Brien et al., 2005)，证明~1.9-1.8 Ga时从北向南地壳高级变质岩石叠加于低级变质岩石之上。Santosh等（2007a,b）在克拉通北缘发现了大约1.92 Ga的UHT麻粒岩并进行了定年。Kusky和Santosh（2009）以及Santosh等（2010a,b）认为1927±11 Ma和1819±11 Ma的超高温变质作用（975ºC、9 kbar和900ºC、12 kbar）与哥伦比亚超大陆拼合过程中沿NCC北缘的1.9-1.8 Ga碰撞造山带的形成有关；但是Santosh和Kusky（2009）以及Peng等（in review）认为，UHT条件可能是在NCC拼合到哥伦比亚超大陆之前的洋脊俯冲过程中就已经达到的。Zhai等（2010）进一步指出大约1.85 Ga的高级变质作用遍布于华北克拉通，包括山东半岛和南部的大面积区域（Fig.2B），并且强调这与TNCO无关。Zhai等（2010）还认为温度和抬升速率与更新的陆陆碰撞带是不同的，需要重新检验所有的NCC构造演化模式。

4.2. 2.7-2.5 Ga被动边缘序列上的2.5 Ga前陆盆地

晚太古代青龙前陆盆地和褶皱逆冲带呈北到北东走向，现在保存有一些残余褶皱序列（Kusky and Li,2003; Li and Kusky,2007）。从下到上总体沉积岩序列可以进一步划分为石英岩-泥岩-大理岩、互层的杂砂岩和页岩以及上部砾岩段三个亚组。这些被看作是被动边缘、复理石组合以及磨拉石盆地（Kusky and Li,2003）。下部的石英岩-泥岩-大理岩亚组在它包括包含大量浅倾构造的青龙（Qinglong）前陆盆地（太行山，Fig.3）中段保存完好，并被认为是东部陆块2.5 Ga之前被动边缘沉积产物。它被低级的浊积岩和磨拉石类型的沉积所覆盖。青龙前陆盆地西缘被逆冲和褶皱作用强烈改造过，并被活动边缘岩石（TTG片麻岩、蛇绿岩碎块以及增生楔类型的变沉积物）所逆掩。盆地的东部岩石则变形较少，指示从COB的高级变质和韧性构造到上地壳层次的褶皱-逆冲带然后，再到东部前陆盆地型构造的逐渐过渡（Li and Kusky,2007）。被动边缘沉积岩和青龙前陆盆地又大约2.40 Ga的闪长岩和辉长质岩墙杂岩所侵入（Li and Kusky,2007），并被地堑相关的沉积岩和2.4 Ga的溢流玄武岩所覆盖。在五台和北太行盆地，沿前陆褶皱-逆冲带西缘识别出许多蛇绿岩地块。它们通常由枕状熔岩、辉长质堆晶岩和方辉橄榄岩组成，最大的地块在五台-太行山地区且长达10公里（Wang et al.,1997; Polat et al.,2005,2006b）。

Fig. 7. Precambrian tectonic evolution of the Central Orogenic Belt of the North China Craton. Note the gradual change in orientation of cross sections from E–W at 4.5 Ga, to NS by 1.8 Ga, to illustrate the main tectonic elements active at each time. Abbreviations as follows: COB, Central Orogenic Belt, DWO, Dongwanzi ophiolite, ZOM, Zunhua ophiolitic mélange, EB, Eastern Block, HS, Hengshan granulite belt, WB, Western Block, IMNHO, Inner Mongolia Northern Hebei Orogen, NCC, North China Craton, WA, Wutaishan arc, ZSB, Zunhua structural belt.

4.3. 对2.7和2.5 Ga绿岩带的解释

在Zhai等（2010）对NCC的划分中（Fig.5），在NCC东部陆块中存在一些大约2.7 Ga的绿岩带，且曾遭受大约2.5 Ga的绿岩带切过。在太行地区，Cheng等（2007）和Polat等（2006a）研究了其中一个大约2.7 Ga带中的科马提岩及相关岩石的成因，并认为基性/超基性岩石形成于地幔柱相关的裂谷构造环境中。有趣的是，2.7 Ga绿岩形成了这样一个分布图，包括山东西部一个发育良好的三联点结构，和另外两个被北京北部和和克拉通南缘附近的大约2.5 Ga绿岩带所截断的三联点结构（Fig.7）。这一分布图不禁令人回想起已退化的大陆中的裂谷系，它的另外一歌分支则发育于大洋中，还有一些晚期发育成坳拉槽（如Burke and Dewey,1973）。Kusky等（2007a,2007b）、Kusky和Santosh（2009）认为这些~2.7 Ga的绿岩带与东部陆块的裂解和中央造山带中洋盆的形成有关，然后在大约2.5 Ga经历了一次岛弧和东部陆块的碰撞，使得东湾子、遵化以及五台山蛇绿岩就位。Trap等（2009）还在五台山弧与东部陆块碰撞部位进一步识别出了2.1 Ga时的另外一期碰撞和增生事件，而在该弧后可能仍然存在一个打开的大洋，随后在更晚期闭合。

4.4. Re-Os同位素对NCC下深部地壳、地幔岩石年龄的限定

在最近的一项重要研究中，Liu等（in review b）报道了对NCC中部7个采样点的99个橄榄岩包体的岩石学、矿物组成、全岩及主要微量元素分析、Re-Os同位素分析，显示了一个明显的南北向趋势，指示NCC深部岩石圈沿COB（TNCO）在北部为大约1.8 Ga，在南部为大约2.5 Ga。克拉通北部的橄榄岩包体一般比COB南部的要更加富集，与由Re-Os同位素所得到的年龄范围一致。Liu等（in review b）认为这些趋势与保留了东西部陆块晚太古代拼合事件深部记录的COB南部有关，而且该深部岩石圈在北部由大约1.8 Ga沿克拉通北缘的一次碰撞所取代。这一结论充分支持了Kusky和Li（2003）、Kusky等（2007a,b）以及Kusky和Santosh（2009）所提出的构造模式，其中COB最初形成于晚太古代，随后在北部由大约1.8 Ga与NCC和哥伦比亚超大陆碰撞相关的构造作用所叠加。该结果与Zhao等（2001a,2001b,2005,2007）的模式不符，在该模式中整个TNCO下面的深部岩石圈年龄为大约1.8 Ga，比他们所提出的NCC西部陆块和西北部阴山陆块的碰撞事件要更年轻。更年轻的地幔明显地切过了COB，指示了横穿整个NCC的一个地表主构造事件以及深部地幔的取代。Liu等（in review b）认为该事件最有可能是已经拼合的NCC与哥伦比亚超大陆的碰撞。

5. 结论

根据上述地质学和地球物理学数据，我们提出了一个新的华北克拉通演化构造模式，该模式与克拉通的构造、地质年代学、PTt、沉积学以及最新的地球物理学和Re-Os同位素地球化学数据均为一致（Fig.7）。

华北克拉通部分地区在晚太古代之前具有非常久远的历史，许多不同的地壳陆块在3.8-2.7 Ga之间聚合形成了现今的东部和西部陆块（如Zhai et al.,2010, and Figs.4 &7）。到了2.7 Ga，东部陆块从一临近的大陆板块中裂解出来并产生了科马提岩（Cheng et al.,2007; Polat et al.,2006a），以及东部陆块西缘的被动边缘序列。从2.55 Ga至2.5 Ga（Fig.7）现保存于五台山地区的一个岛弧地体，（Polat et al.,2005,2006a）以及其前缘对一个弧前蛇绿岩带（Kusky et al.,2001; Kusky et al.,2004a,2004b），在一西倾俯冲带之上与东部陆块西缘被动边缘产生碰撞，包括东湾子东湾子和遵化带的蛇绿岩带也随即就位（Kusky et al.,2004a,2004b）。从2.4 Ga至2.3 Ga，碰撞弧后的洋盆开始闭合，不论是西倾还是双向俯冲，同时还伴随着西部陆块与经弧碰撞改造过的东部陆块西缘的碰撞。

华北克拉通前寒武构造演化过程中最后的重要事件就是泛克拉通1.8 Ga时的高级变质事件。Kusky和Li（2003）、Kusky等（2007a,2007b）以及Kusky和Santosh（2009）认为这一事件与克拉通北缘和哥伦比亚超大陆的碰撞有关。这一陆陆碰撞引起了对过去更古老事件的广泛变质叠加，包括在五台山-衡山地区详细研究过的岩石（Zhao,2001; Zhao et al.,1998,1999a,b,2000,2001a,b,2002,2005）。这一碰撞也导致深部岩石圈沿克拉通北缘取代新的富集地幔（Liu et al., in review b）。但是仍然不太清楚，受麻粒岩相变质作用所影响如此广泛的区域是如何经历这样一个缓慢的后造山抬升和折返历史的（Zhai et al.,2005,2010），并且目前还没有任何一个华北克拉通构造模式对其进行解释。

References

Bai, 1996 J. Bai, Precambrian Crustal Evolution of China, Geological Publishing House, Beijing (1996), 165 pp..

Bai and Dai, 1996 J. Bai and F.-Y. Dai, The early Precambrian crustal evolution of China. Journal of Southeast Asian Earth Sciences, 13 (1996), pp. 205–214. | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (8)

Bai and Dai, 1998 J. Bai and F.-Y. Dai, Archean crust of China, X.Y. Ma, J. Bai, Editors , Precambrian Crustal Evolution of China, Springer-Geological Publishing, Beijing (1998), pp. 15–86.

Bai et al., 1992 J. Bai, R.-Z. Wang and J.-J. Guo, The Major Geological Events of Early Precambrian and Their Dating in Wutaishan Region Geological Publishing House, Beijing (1992), pp. 1–60.

Burke and Dewey, 1973 K. Burke and J.F. Dewey, Plume-generated triple junctions: key indicators in applying plate tectonics to old rocks. Journal of Geology, 81 (1973), pp. 406–433.

Cheng et al., 2007 Suhua Cheng, Jianghai Li and T.M. Kusky, Komatiites from West Shandong, North China Craton: implications for Plume Tectonics, Special Issue of Gondwana Research, 12 ,in: M.G. Zhai, W.J. Xiao, T.M. Kusky, M. Santosh, Editors , Tectonic Evolution of China and Adjacent Crustal Fragments (2007), pp. 77–83. Article | PDF (1438 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (7)

Faure et al., 2007 M. Faure, P. Trap, W. Lin, P. Moine and O. Bruguier, Polyorogenic evolution of the Paleo-Proterozoic Trans-North China Belt, new insights from the Luliangshan–Hengshan–Wutaishan and Fuping massifs. Episodes, 30 (2007), pp. 95–106.

He et al., 1991 G.-P. He, L.-Z. Lu and H.-W. Ye, The Early Precambrian Metamorphic Evolution of the eastern Heibei and the Southeastern Inner Mongolia (in Chinese with English abstract), Jilin University Press, Changchun (1991), 1–17.

He et al., 1992 T.-X. He, Q. Lin and Z.-R. Fang, The Petrogenesis of Granitic Rocks in Eastern Hebei (in Chinese with English abstract), Jiling Science and Technology Press, Changchun (1992), 1–4.

Jahn and Zhang, 1984a B.M. Jahn and Z.Q. Zhang, Archean granulite gneisses from Eastern Hebei Province, China: Rare Earth geochemistry and tectonic implications. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 85 (1984), pp. 225–243.

Jahn and Zhang, 1984b B.M. Jahn and Z.Q. Zhang, Radiometric ages (Rb–Sr, Sm–Nd, U–Pb) and REE geochemistry of Archean granulite gneisses from Eastern Hebei Province, China, A. Kröner, G. Hanson, A. Goodwin, Editors , Archean Geochemistry, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1984), pp. 204–244.

Jahn et al., 1987 B.M. Jahn, B. Auvray, J. Cornichet, Y.-L. Bai, Q.-H. Shen and D.-Y. Liu, 3.5 Ga amphibolites from Eastern Hebei Province, China; field occurrence, petrography, Sm–Nd isochron age and REE geochemistry. Precambrian Research, 34 (1987), pp. 311–346. Article | PDF (2157 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (130)

Kröner et al., 1998 A. Kröner, W.Y. Cui and S.Q. Wang, Single zircon ages from high-grade rocks of the Jianping complex, Liaoning province, NE China. Journal of Asia Earth Sciences, 16 (1998), pp. 519–532. Article | PDF (1251 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (92)

Kröner et al., 2002 A. Kröner, S. Wilde, K. Wang and G.C. Zhao, Age and evolution of a late Archean to early Proterozoic upper to lower crustal section in the Wutaishan/Hengshan/Fuping terrain of northern China, a field guide GSA Penrose Conference, Beijing, China, September 2002 (2002).

Kusky and Li, 2003 T.M. Kusky and J.H. Li, Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution of the North China Craton. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 22 (2003), pp. 383–397. Article | PDF (1305 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (177)

Kusky and Li, 2010 Kusky, T.M., Li, J.H., 2010, Origin and emplacement of ophiolites of the Central Orogenic belt, North China craton, Journal of Earth Science 21, (5) 744–781. doi:10.1007/s12583-010-0119-8..

Kusky and Santosh, 2009 T.M. Kusky and M. Santosh, The Columbia Connection in North China, Geological Society of London Special Publication, 323 ,in: S.M. Reddy, R. Mazumder, D. Evans, A.S. Collins, Editors , Paleoproterozoic Supercontinents and Global Evolution (2009), pp. 49–71. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (17)

Kusky et al., 2001 T.M. Kusky, Jianghai Li and R.T. Tucker, The Archean Dongwanzi ophiolite complex, North China Craton: 2.505 billion year old oceanic crust and mantle. Science, 292 (2001), pp. 1142–1145. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (123)

Kusky et al., 2004a T.M. Kusky, Z.H. Li, A. Glass and H.A. Huang, Archean ophiolites and ophiolite fragments of the North China Craton, Developments in Precambrian Geology, 13 ,in: T.M. Kusky, Editor, Precambrian Ophiolites and Related Rocks, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2004), pp. 223–274. Article | PDF (3279 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (21)

Kusky et al., 2004b T.M. Kusky, Z.H. Li, A. Glass and H.A. Huang, Archean ophiolites and ophiolite fragments of the North China Craton, Developments in Precambrian Geology, 13 ,in: T.M. Kusky, Editor, Precambrian Ophiolites and Related Rocks, Elsevier, Amsterdam (2004), pp. 223–274. Article | PDF (3279 K) | | View Record in Scopus |

Kusky et al., 2007a T.M. Kusky, B.F. Windley and M.G. Zhai, Tectonic evolution of the North China Block: from orogen to craton to orogen, Geological Society of London Special Publication, 280 ,in: M.G. Zhai, B.F. Windley, T.M. Kusky, Q.R. Meng, Editors , Mesozoic Sub-Continental Lithospheric Thinning Under Eastern Asia (2007), pp. 1–34. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (42)

Kusky et al., 2007b T. Kusky, J.H. Li and M. Santosh, The Paleoproterozoic North Hebei Orogen: North China Craton's collisional suture with Columbia Supercontinent, Special Issue of Gondwana Research, 12, no. 1–2 ,in: M.G. Zhai, W.J. Xiao, T.M. Kusky, M. Santosh, Editors , Tectonic Evolution of China and Adjacent Crustal Fragments (2007), pp. 4–28. Article | PDF (9252 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (81)

Kusky et al., in press Kusky, T.M., Wang, L., Dilek, Y., Robinson, P., Peng, S.B., and Huang, X.Y., 2011, Application of the modern ophiolite concept with special reference to Precambrian ophiolites, Science China, Earth Sciences 54 (3), 1–27..

Li and Kusky, 2007 J.H. Li and T.M. Kusky, A Late Archean foreland fold and thrust belt in the North China Craton: implications for early collisional tectonics, Special Issue of Gondwana Research, 12 ,in: M.G. Zhai, W.J. Xiao, T.M. Kusky, M. Santosh, Editors , Tectonic Evolution of China and Adjacent Crustal Fragments (2007), pp. 47–66. Article | PDF (6901 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (35)

Li et al., 1998 J.-H. Li, X.-L. Qian and Y.-C. Gu, Outline of Paleoproterozoic tectonic division and plate tectonic evolution of North China Craton. Earth Science, 23 (1998), pp. 230–235.

Li et al., 2000a J.-H. Li, X.-L. Qian, X.-N. Huang and S.-W. Liu, The tectonic framework of the basement of North China Craton and its implication for the early Precambrian cratonization. Acta Petrologica Sinica, 16 (2000), pp. 1–10. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (43)

Li et al., 2000b J.-H. Li, A. Kröner, X.-L. Qian and P. O'Brien, The tectonic evolution of early Precambrian high-pressure granulite belt, North China Craton (NCC). Acta Geological Sinica, 274 (2000), pp. 246–256.

Li et al., 2002a J.-H. Li, T.M. Kusky and X. Huang, Neoarchean podiform chromitites and harzburgite tectonite in ophiolitic melange, North China Craton, Remnants of Archean oceanic mantle. GSA Today, 12 (2002), pp. 4–11. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (62)

Li et al., 2002b J.H. Li, T.M. Kusky and X. Huang, Neoarchean podiform chromitites and harzburgite tectonite in ophiolitic melange, North China Craton, Remnants of Archean oceanic mantle, . GSA Today, 12 7 (2002), pp. 4–11 (plus cover). | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef

Li et al., 2007 S.Z. Li, T.M. Kusky, L. Wang, G.W. Zhang, S.C. Lai, X.C. Liu, S.W. Dong and G.C. Zhao, Collision leading to multiple-stage large-scale extrusion in the Qinling orogen: insights from the Mianlue suture. Gondwana Research, 12 1–2 (2007), pp. 121–143. Article | PDF (4924 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (32)

Li et al., 2009 S.Z. Li, T.M. Kusky, X.C. Liu, G.W. Zhang, G.C. Zhao, L. Wang and Y.J. Wang, Two-stage collision-related extrusion of the western Dabie HP–UHP metamorphic terranes, central China: evidence from quartz c-axis fabrics and microstructures. Gondwana Research, 16 (2009), pp. 294–309. Article | PDF (4578 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (18)

Li et al., 2010a S.Z. Li, T.M. Kusky, G.C. Zhao, X.C. Liu, G.W. Zhang, H. Kopp and L. Wang, Two-stage Triassic exhumation of HP–UHP terranes in the Dabie orogen of China: constraints from structural geology. Tectonophysics, 490 (2010), pp. 267–293. Article | PDF (6724 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (8)

Li et al., 2010b S.Z. Li, G.C. Zhao, Z. Jian, M. Sun, G.W. Zhang and L.M. Dai, Deformation history of the Hengshan–Wutai–Fuping Complexes: implications for the evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen. Gondwana Research, 18 (2010), pp. 611–631. Article | PDF (8010 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (8)

Liu et al., 2009 D.Y. Liu, S.A. Wilde, Y.S. Wan, S.Y. Wang, J.W. Valley, N. Kita, C.Y. Dong, H.Q. Xie, C.X. Yang, Y. Zhang and L. Gao, Combined U–Pb, hafnium and oxygen isotope analysis of zircons from meta-igneous rocks in the southern North China Craton reveal multiple events in the Late Mesoarchean–Early Neoarchean. Chemical Geology, 261 (2009), pp. 140–154. Article | PDF (2335 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (2)

Liu et al., in review a. Liu, C., Zhao, G., Sun, M., Zhang, J., He, Y., Yin, C., Wu, F., Yang, J., in review a. U–Pb and Hf isotopic study of detrital zircons from the Hutuo group in the Trans-North China Orogen. Gondwana Research, doi:10.1016/j.gr.2010.11.016..

Liu et al., in review b. Liu, J.G., Rudnick, R.L., Walker, R.J., Gao, S., Wu, F.Y., Picolli, P.M., Yuan, H.L., Xu, W.L., Xu, Y.G., in review b. Mapping lithospheric boundaries using Os isotopes of mantle xenoliths: an example from the North China Craton, Geochemica et Cosmochemica Acta..

O'Brien et al., 2005 P.J. O'Brien, N. Walte and J.H. Li, The petrology of two distinct granulite types in the Hengshan Mts, China, and tectonic implications. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 24 (2005), pp. 615–627. Article | PDF (1477 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (47)

Peng et al., 2005 P. Peng, M.G. Zhai, H.F. Zhang and J.H. Guo, Geochronological constraints on the Paleoproterozoic evolution of the North China Craton: SHRIMP zircon ages of different types of mafic dikes. International Geology Reviews, 47 (2005), pp. 1–17.

Peng et al., 2007 P. Peng, M.G. Zhai, J.H. Guo, T.M. Kusky and T.P. Zhao, Nature of mantle source contributions and crystal differentiation in the petrogenesis of the 1.78 Ga mafic dykes in the central North China Craton, Special Issue of Gondwana Research, 12 ,in: M.-G. Zhai, W.J. Xiao, T.M. Kusky, M. Santosh, Editors , Tectonic Evolution of China and Adjacent Crustal Fragments (2007), pp. 29–46. Article | PDF (1666 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (34)

Peng et al., in review Peng, P., Guo, J.-H., Windley, B.F., Li, X.-H., in review, Halaqin volcano-sedimentary succession in the central-northern margin of the North China Craton: products of Late Paleoproterozoic ridge, subduction. Precambrian Research..

Polat and Kusky, 2007 A. Polat and T.M. Kusky, Discussion of geochemistry of the Late Archean (ca. 2.55–2.50 Ga) volcanic and ophiolitic rocks in the Wutaishan Greenstone Belt, Central Orogenic Belt, North China Craton: implications for geodynamic setting and continental growth, Reply to G. Zhao and A. Kroner. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 119 (2007), pp. 490–492. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (10)

Polat et al., 2005 A. Polat, T. Kusky, J.H. Li, B. Fryer and K. Patrick, Geochemistry of the Late Archean (ca. 2.55–2.50 Ga) volcanic and ophiolitic rocks in the Wutaishan Greenstone Belt, Central Orogenic Belt, North China Craton: implications for geodynamic setting and continental growth. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 117 (2005), pp. 1387–1399. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (66)

Polat et al., 2006a A. Polat, J.H. Li, B. Fryer, T.M. Kusky, J. Gagnon and S. Zhang, Geochemical characteristics of the Neoarchean (2800–2700 Ma) Taishan greenstone belt, North China Craton: evidence for plume–craton interaction. Chemical Geology, 230 (2006), pp. 60–87. Article | PDF (1947 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (29)

Polat et al., 2006b A. Polat, C. Herzberg, C. Munker, R. Rodgers, T. Kusky, J.H. Li, B. Fryer and J. Delany, Geochemical and petrological evidence for a suprasubduction zone origin of Neoarchean (ca. 2.5 Ga) peridotites, central orogenic belt, North China Craton. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 118 (2006), pp. 771–784. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (41)

Polat et al., 2010 A. Polat, R. Frei, A. Schersten and P.W.U. Appel, New age (ca. 2970 Ma), mantle source composition and geodynamic constraints on the Arhcean Fiskenaesset anorthosite complex, SW Greenland. Chemical Geology, 277 (2010), pp. 1–20. Article | PDF (7368 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (3)

Santosh, 2010 M. Santosh, Assembling North China Craton within the Columbia supercontinent: the role of double-sided subduction. Precambrian Research, 178 (2010), pp. 149–167. Article | PDF (5640 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (38)

Santosh and Kusky, 2009 M. Santosh and T.M. Kusky, Origin of paired high pressure–ultrahigh temperature orogens: a ridge subduction and slab window model. Terra Nova, 22 1 (2009), pp. 35–42.

Santosh et al., 2007a M. Santosh, T. Tsunogae, J.H. Li and S.J. Liu, Discovery of sapphirine-bearing Mg–Al granulites in the North China Craton: implications for Palaeoproterozoic ultrahigh-temperature metamorphism. Gondwana Research, 11 (2007), pp. 263–285. Article | PDF (3662 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (113)

Santosh et al., 2007b M. Santosh, S.A. Wilde and J.H. Li, Timing of Palaeoproterozoic ultrahigh-temperature metamorphism in the North China Craton: evidence from SHRIMP U–Pb zircon geochronology. Precambrian Research, 159 (2007), pp. 178–196. Article | PDF (2110 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (76)

Santosh et al., 2010 M. Santosh, D.P. Zhao and T.M. Kusky, Mantle dynamics of the Paleoproterozoic North China Craton: a perspective based on seismic tomography. Journal of Geodynamics, 49 (2010), pp. 39–53. Article | PDF (3139 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (29)

Trap et al., 2009 P. Trap, M. Faure, W. Lin, P. Monie, S. Meffre and J. Melleton, The Zanhuang Massif, the second and eastern suture zone of the Paleoproterozoic Trans-North China orogen. Precambrian Research, 172 (2009), pp. 80–98. Article | PDF (6436 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (21)

Wang et al., 1997 K.Y. Wang, J.L. Li and J. Hao, Late Archean mafic–ultramafic rocks from the Wutaishan, Shanxi Province: a possible ophiolite melange. Acta Petrologica Sinica, 13 (1997), pp. 139–151.

Wilde et al., 1998 S.A. Wilde, P. Cawood, K.-Y. Wang and A. Nemchin, SHRIMP U–Pb zircon dating of granites and gneisses in the Taihangshan–Wutaishan area: implications for the timing of crustal growth in the North China Craton. Chinese Science Bulletin, 43 (1998), pp. 1–144.

Wilde et al., 2003 S.A. Wilde, X.-H. Zhou, A.A. Nemchin and M. Sun, Mesozoic crust–mantle interaction beneath the North China Craton — a consequence of the dispersal of Gondwanaland and accretion of Asia. Geology, 31 (2003), pp. 817–820. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (113)

Wu et al., 1998 J.S. Wu, Y.S. Geng and Q.H. Shen, Archean geology characteristics and tectonic evolution of Sino-Korean paleocontinent, Geological Publishing House, Beijing (1998), pp. 192–211 (in Chinese).

Zhai, 2004 M.G. Zhai, Precambrian Geological Events in the North China Craton, Geological Society Special Publication, 226 ,in: J. Malpas, C.J.N. Fletcher, J.R. Ali, C. Aitchison, Editors , Aspects on Tectoinc Evolution of China (2004) Geological Society of London, Oxford, pp 57–72..

Zhai, 2005 M.G. Zhai, 2.1–1.7 Ga geological event group and its geotectonic significance. Acta Petrologica Sinica, 20 (2005), pp. 1343–1354.

Zhai and Liu, 2003 M.-G. Zhai and W.J. Liu, Paleoproterozoic tectonic history of the North China Craton: a review. Precambrian Research, 122 (2003), pp. 183–199. Article | PDF (785 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (120)

Zhai et al., 1992 M.-G. Zhai, J.-H. Guo and Y.-H. Yan, Discovery and preliminary study of Archean high-pressure granulites in the North China Craton, . Science in China, 12 (1992), pp. 28–50 (in Chinese).

Zhai et al., 1995 M.-G. Zhai, J.-H. Guo, Y.-G. Li and Y.-H. Yan, Discovery of Archean retrograded eclogites in the North China Craton and their tectonic implications. Bulletin of Science in China, 40 (1995), pp. 706–721.

Zhai et al., 2002 M.G. Zhai, J.-H. Yang, H.-R. Fan, L.-C. Miao and Y.-G. Li, A large-scale cluster of gold deposits and metallogenesis in the eastern North China Craton. International Geology Reviews, 44 (2002), pp. 458–476. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (31)

Zhai et al., 2005 M.G. Zhai, J.H. Guo and W. Liu, Neoarchean to Paleoproterozoic continental evolution and tectonic history of the North China Craton. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 24 (2005), pp. 547–561. Article | PDF (772 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (55)

Zhai et al., 2007 M.G. Zhai, B.F. Windley, T.M. Kusky and Q.R. Meng, Mesozoic Sub-Continental Lithospheric Thinning Under Eastern Asia, Geological Society of London Special Publication, 280 (2007) 352 pp..

Zhai et al., 2010 M.G. Zhai, T.S. Li, P. Peng, B. Hu, F. Liu and Y.B. Zhang, Precambrian key tectonic events and evolution of the North China Craton, Geological Society of London Special Publication, 338 ,in: T.M. Kusky, M.G. Zhai, W.J. Xiao, Editors , The Evolving Continents: Understanding Processes of Continental Growth (2010), pp. 235–262. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (5)

Zhang, 1989 K. Zhang, Tectonics and Resources of Ordos Fault-Block, Geological Publishing House, Beijing (1989).

Zhang et al., 2011 H.-F. Zhang, J.-F. Jing, Y.-J. Tang, X.-H. Li, C. Feng and M. Santosh, Phanerozoic reactivation of the Archean North China Craton through episodic magmatism: Evidence from zircon U–Pb geochronology and Hf isotopes from the Liadong Peninsula. Gondwana Research, (2011).

Zhao, 2001 G.-C. Zhao, Paleoproterozoic assembly of the North China Craton. Geology Magazine, 138 (2001), pp. 87–91. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (98)

Zhao et al., 1998 G.-C. Zhao, S.A. Wilde, P.A. Cawood and L.-Z. Lu, Thermal evolution of basement rocks from the eastern part of the North China Craton and its bearing on tectonic setting. International Geology Reviews, 40 (1998), pp. 706–721. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (148)

Zhao et al., 1999a G.-C. Zhao, S.A. Wilde, P.A. Cawood and L.-Z. Lu, Thermal evolution of two textural types of mafic granulites in the North China Craton: evidence for both mantle plume and collisional tectonics. Geology Magazine, 136 (1999), pp. 223–240. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (92)

Zhao et al., 1999b G.-C. Zhao, S.A. Wilde, P.A. Cawood and L.-Z. Lu, Tectonothermal history of the basement rocks in the western zone of the North China Craton and its tectonic implications. Tectonophysics, 310 (1999), pp. 37–53. Article | PDF (664 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (87)

Zhao et al., 2000 G.-C. Zhao, S.A. Wilde, P.A. Cawood and L.-Z. Lu, Petrology and P–T–t path of the Fuping mafic granulites: implications for tectonic evolution of the central zone of the North China Craton. Journal of Metamorphic Petrology, 18 (2000), pp. 375–391. | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (73)

Zhao et al., 2001a G.-C. Zhao, S.A. Wilde, P.A. Cawood and M. Sun, Archean blocks and their boundaries in the North China Craton: lithological, geochemical, structural and P–T path constraints and tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research, 107 (2001), pp. 45–73. Article | PDF (1545 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (355)

Zhao et al., 2001b G.-C. Zhao, S.A. Wilde, P.A. Cawood and L.-Z. Lu, High-pressure granulites (retrograded eclogites) from the Hengshan Complex, North China Craton: petrology and tectonic implications. Journal of Petrology, 42 (2001), pp. 1141–1170. | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (122)

Zhao et al., 2002 G.-C. Zhao, P.A. Cawood, S.A. Wilde, M. Sun and L.-Z. Lu, Metamorphism of basement rocks in the Central Zone of the North China Craton: implications for Paleoproterozoic tectonic evolution. Precambrian Research, 103 (2002), pp. 55–88. Full Text via CrossRef

Zhao et al., 2005 G. Zhao, M. Sun, S. Wilde and S.Z. Li, Late Archean to Paleoproterozoic evolution of the North China Craton: key issues revisited. Precambrian Research, 136 (2005), pp. 177–202. Article | PDF (1490 K) | | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (234)

Zhao et al., 2007 G.C. Zhao, A. Kroner, S.A. Wilde, M. Sun, S.Z. Li, X.P. Li, J. Zhang, X.P. Xia and Y.H. He, Lithotectonic elements and geological events in the Hengshan–Wutai–Fuping belt: a synthesis and implications for the evolution of the Trans-North China Orogen. Geological Magazine, 144 (2007), pp. 753–775. | View Record in Scopus | | Cited By in Scopus (34)

Zhao et al., 2010 G.C. Zhao, S.A. Wilde and J. Zhang, New evidence from seismic imaging for subduction during assembly of the North China craton: COMMENT. Geology, 38 (2010), p. e206. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (3)

Zheng et al., 2009 T.Y. Zheng, L. Zhao and R.X. Zhu, New evidence from seismic imaging for subduction during assembly of the North China Craton. Geology, 37 (2009), pp. 395–398. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (18)

Zheng et al., 2010 T.Y. Zheng, L. Zhao and R.X. Zhu, New evidence from seismic imaging for subduction during assembly of the North China craton: REPLY. Geology, 38 (2010), p. e207. | View Record in Scopus | | Full Text via CrossRef | Cited By in Scopus (1)