Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study presents the detrital zircon U–Pb ages of the Upper Bhander Sandstone from the Bhopal Inlier, Central India. The age spectra of Upper Bhander Sandstone show the dominance of a detrital zircon population between 1,500 and 1,900 Ma, a subordinate cluster of 2,400–2,600 Ma and a single youngest zircon grain of ~770 Ma. These detrital zircon ages correlate with the timing of granite magmatism in Bundelkhand, Aravalli and Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ), implying their derivation from these terranes. The geochemical and geochronological data, together with the existing paleocurrent data, suggest that the magmatic and metasedimentary rocks exposed in the Satpura Mobile Belt (CITZ) are the major sources of the detritus for the Upper Bhander Sandstone exposed in the Bhopal Inlier. These data are combined with existing palaeobiological evidence to address the issue of lack of convergence between geochronology and biochronology of the Upper Vindhyan succession of Son Valley, Central India. The finding of a single grain of zircon of 770 ± 12 Ma as an outlier is a pointer that Vindhyan deposition may have extended into the late Tonian.

Keywords

Bhopal Inlier detrital zircons Tonian Upper Bhander Sandstone Vindhyan Basin

Introduction

The Proterozoic supercontinent cycles played a pivotal role in shaping the Indian subcontinent and largely controlled the development and evolution of the exceptionally well-preserved ‘Purana’ basins (Meert et al., 2010; Meert & Pandit, 2015; Wang et al., 2021). Some of these ‘Purana’ basins of the Indian subcontinent are hosted by Archean craton-dominated landmasses composed of the Banded Gneissic Complex (BGC), Bundelkhand, Bastar and Singhbhum cratons separated by Aravalli–Delhi Fold Belt (ADFB) and Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ) (Figure 1A, B; Basu & Bickford, 2015; Chakraborty et al., 2020; Kaur et al., 2022; Meert & Pandit, 2015; Wang et al., 2019). The Vindhyan Basin, one of the largest Proterozoic basins in the world, evolved in response to the breakup of Columbia and the amalgamation of Rodinia supercontinents (Figure 1A, B; Basu & Bickford, 2015). It hosts the thickest Proterozoic sedimentary succession of the Indian subcontinent, referred to as the ‘Vindhyan Supergroup’. The Lower Vindhyan (Semri Group) and the Upper Vindhyan (Kaimur, Rewa and Bhander Groups) successions have been extensively studied in terms of palaeobiology (Azmi, 1998; Azmi et al., 2008; Bengtson et al., 2009, 2017; De, 2003, 2006; Kumar & Pandey, 2008; Kumar & Sharma, 2012; Kumar & Srivastava, 2003; Pandey et al., 2023; Pandey & Kumar, 2013; Retallack et al., 2021; Seilacher et al., 1998; Sharma, 2006; Sharma & Shukla, 2009a, 2009b; Sharma et al., 2016; Shukla & Sharma, 2016; Srivastava, 2002, 2009, 2012) and geochronology (Bickford et al., 2017; Colleps et al., 2021; George et al., 2018; Gilleaudeau et al., 2018; Gopalan et al., 2013; Kumar et al., 2001, 2002; Lan et al., 2020, 2021; Malone et al., 2008; McKenzie et al., 2011; Mishra et al., 2018; Rasmussen et al., 2002; Ray, 2006; Ray et al., 2002, 2003; Sarangi et al., 2004; Turner et al., 2014; Tripathy & Singh, 2015) to constrain their depositional ages. The age of Lower Vindhyan (Semri Group) is geochronologically well-constrained, whereas the Upper Vindhyan succession lacks robust age constraints due to the absence of volcanic tuffaceous/pyroclastic materials (e.g., Tripathy & Singh, 2015). Detrital zircon geochronological data from the Upper Vindhyan sandstones generally show a lack of zircons younger than 1,000 Ma, and that has been used to infer the closure of the Vindhyan Basin at ~1,000 Ma (Chakraborty et al., 2020; Malone et al., 2008; McKenzie et al., 2011; Turner et al., 2014). Additionally, paleomagnetic evidence suggests the termination of Vindhyan sedimentation at the end of the Mesoproterozoic (Malone et al., 2008; Meert et al., 2013; Turner et al., 2014; Venkateshwarlu & Rao, 2013). Other radiometric dates, such as Pb–Pb and Sr-isotopic ages, suggest that the deposition of the Upper Vindhyan succession continued until at least ~800 Ma (George et al., 2018; Gopalan et al., 2013; Ray et al., 2003; Srivastava & Rajagopalan, 1988). Additionally, palaeobiological evidence suggests an Ediacaran age for the deposition of the Bhander Group, the youngest unit of the Upper Vindhyan Group (De, 2006; Kumar & Pandey, 2008; Pandey et al., 2024; Prasad, 2007; Prasad et al., 2005).

Figure 1.

Notes: Numbers in white boxes represent the age of magmatic events, especially the time of granite magmatism in Ga, and details related to the ages are provided in Table 1.

The recent mistaken identification of the Ediacaran fossil ‘Dickinsonia’ from the Upper Bhander Sandstone (Maihar Sandstone) at Bhimbetka from the Bhopal Inlier, Madhya Pradesh (MP) by Retallack et al. (2021) and its recognition later as extant beehive impressions (Meert et al., 2023; Pandey et al., 2023) together with the occurrence of a single youngest 548 Ma zircon grain from the Maihar Sandstone at Maihar (MP) (Lan et al., 2020) has raised interest in the reassessment of the closure age of the Vindhyan Basin. The Bhopal Inlier has exposure to Vindhyan rocks with extensive development of the Bhander Group, which is detached from the main Vindhyan outcrops in the Son Valley and the Rajasthan sector. Vindhyan sequences exposed in these two sectors have been studied by several workers to interpret their provenance (e.g., Chakrabarti et al., 2007; Banerjee & Banerjee, 2010; Lan et al., 2020, 2021; Malone et al., 2008; Quasim et al., 2018, 2020; Raza et al., 2010, 2012; Sen et al., 2014, 2023; Sen & Mishra, 2020; Shukla et al., 2020; Turner et al., 2014). A detailed geochemical study indicates that the source for the Semri and Kaimur Group of sediments in the Rajasthan sector is younger than the equivalent sections exposed in the Son Valley sector (Shukla et al., 2020). In contrast, the Rewa and Bhander sequences derived sediments from similar sources in both sectors (Shukla et al., 2020). However, limited data exist for understanding the provenance of the sequences exposed in the Bhopal Inlier, especially using geochemistry and geochronology (Shrivastava et al., 2023). Here we present the U–Pb detrital zircon geochronology of the Upper Bhander Sandstone exposed in the Bhopal Inlier. We integrated zircon age data with our petrographic and geochemical data along with the published paleocurrent data (e.g., Akhtar, 1978; Ansari, 1994; Bhattacharyya & Morad, 1993; Raza & Casshyap, 1996) to provide an improved understanding of the provenance for these Proterozoic sandstones.

Geological Background

The Vindhyan Basin

The Vindhyan Basin is a large intracratonic basin filled with unmetamorphosed and mildly deformed Proterozoic sedimentary rocks (Bose et al., 2001). It is an arcuate basin developed in the central part of the Indian shield, bounded in the west by the ADFB and in the south and southeast by CITZ (Figure 1 A, B; Chakraborty, 2006; Chakrabarti et al., 2007; Ramakrishnan & Vaidyanadhan, 2010). Low-grade metamorphic rocks of the Mahakoshal Group form the eastern margin of the basin, whereas it is bordered by recent alluvium in the north and covered by Deccan lavas in the south (Figure 1B; Chakraborty, 2006; Chakrabarti et al., 2007; Ramakrishnan & Vaidyanadhan, 2010). The Bundelkhand massif divides the Vindhyan Basin into the Son Valley sector and the Chambal Valley sector or the Rajasthan sector (Kumar, 2012; Valdiya, 2016). The rocks of the Vindhyan Supergroup are stratigraphically divided into the following four groups: Semri, Kaimur, Rewa and Bhander (Figures 1B and 2). The presence of a pronounced regional unconformity at the base of the Kaimur Group divides the succession into the Lower Vindhyan and the Upper Vindhyan (Kumar, 2012; Kale, 2016; Valdiya, 2016). The Semri Group forms the lower part of the Vindhyan Supergroup, which comprises five formations in the Son Valley sector, that is, Deoland, Kajrahat, Porcellanite (Deonar Formation), Kheinjua and Rohtas, in order of superposition (Figure 2). The Semri Group is composed predominantly of carbonates and shales with subordinate sandstone and volcaniclastic rocks and deposited mainly in shelf and shallow marine environments (Bose et al., 2001). The Upper Vindhyan is constituted by the Kaimur, Rewa and Bhander groups in ascending order (Figure 2). Overall, the Vindhyan Basin is characterised by a ~5,000 m thick succession composed of sandstone, shale, conglomerate and carbonate with subordinate felsic volcanics. The depositional environment for the Vindhyan sediments ranges from continental (alluvial fan) to marine shelf (tidal flat to storm-dominated shelf; Bose et al., 2001).

Figure 2.

Notes: The superscripts represent the references used in this compilation, which are as follows: 1 – Gopalan et al., 2013; 2 – Malone et al., 2008; Turner et al., 2014; 3 – Ray et al., 2003; 4 – Srivastava & Rajagopalan, 1988; 5 – Ray et al., 2011; 6 – Lan et al., 2020, 2021; 7 – Vinogradov et al., 1964; 8 – Tripathy & Singh, 2015; 9 – Gregory et al., 2006; 10 – Sarangi et al., 2004; 11 – Rasmussen et al., 2002; 12 – Ray et al., 2002; 13 – Bickford et al., 2017.

Debate on the Termination Age of Upper Vindhyan Sedimentation

The occurrence of carbonate sequences such as Kajrahat, Salkhan and Rohtas limestone, as well as volcaniclastic materials in the Porcellanite Formation of the Semri Group, enables the determination of the absolute age of the Lower Vindhyan succession. Based on several radiometric data, such as U–Pb zircon ages of volcanic tuffs and rhyolite (Bickford et al., 2017; Mishra et al., 2018; Rasmussen et al., 2002; Ray et al., 2002) and Pb–Pb ages of carbonates (Ray, 2006; Sarangi et al., 2004), the age of the Lower Vindhyan succession has been reliably constrained between ~1,750 and 1,500 Ma (Figure 2). In contrast, the Upper Vindhyan succession shows the absence of volcanic tuffaceous material, and therefore detrital zircon U–Pb geochronology has been applied to constrain its maximum depositional age. U–Pb concordia dates of the youngest detrital zircons within the Upper Bhander Sandstone unit of the Upper Vindhyan, constraining its maximum depositional age to ~1,020 Ma (Malone et al., 2008). Several studies argue for a late Mesoproterozoic to early Neoproterozoic age for the Upper Vindhyan based on palaeomagnetic studies and the general absence of zircon grains younger than ~1,000 Ma in the Upper Vindhyan succession (Figure 2; Chakraborty et al., 2020; Malone et al., 2008; McKenzie et al., 2011; Turner et al., 2014). However, Kumar et al. (2002) proposed a 700–570 Ma age range for the Bhander Group on the basis of oxygen, carbon and strontium isotopic signatures. Based on Sr isotope stratigraphy of carbonates from the Upper Vindhyan (Son Valley sector), a mid-Neoproterozoic age (750–650 Ma) has also been suggested for the Bhander Group (Figure 2; Ray et al., 2003). Strontium isotope stratigraphy and δ¹³C shift in the Balwan Limestone (Figure 2), together with their Pb–Pb age (866 ± 90 Ma), present strong evidence for the continuation of Upper Vindhyan sedimentation during the Tonian period (Figure 2; George et al., 2018; Gopalan et al., 2013). Recently, Lan et al. (2020) reported the youngest detrital zircon of 548 Ma age from the Maihar Sandstone (Figure 2); however, also see Bickford and Basu (2021) for different views. From these multiple datasets, it is observed that there is no consistency in the stratigraphic ages proposed by different authors. Notably, the geochronology also shows divergence from the ages proposed on the basis of palaeobiological evidence. The presence of Arumberia and other Ediacaran-like fossils suggests an Ediacaran age as the upper limit of the Vindhyan sedimentation (Ansari et al., 2023; De, 2006; Kumar & Pandey, 2008; Pandey et al., 2024).

Upper Bhander Sandstone (Equivalent to Maihar Sandstone) from the Bhopal Inlier

Sandstones exposed in the Bhopal Inlier belong to the Upper Bhander Sandstone (Bhander Group) of the Vindhyan Supergroup (Figure 3A–C; Ramakrishnan & Vaidyanadhan, 2010). The equivalent Maihar Sandstone in its type area, composed of sandstone, siltstone and subordinate shale, is considered to be the youngest stratigraphic horizon of the Bhander Group, showing gradational contact with the underlying Sirbu Shale. The Upper Bhander Sandstone in and around Bhopal occurs as isolated outcrops forming the southwestern part of the Vindhyan Basin (Figure 3A; Mohammadi, 2015; Mohammadi et al., 2014). They are primarily red-coloured sandstones that are interbedded with yellow/brown siltstone (Figure 3D). These ferruginous and non-calcareous sandstone beds dip northward at ~10 degrees. Planar bedding is the most prominently developed sedimentary structure in the Bhimbetka Sandstone (Figure 3D). Structures such as ripple marks and trough cross-bedding are also observed in some places.

Figure 3.

Note: Stars show the location of the Upper Bhander/Maihar Sandstone.

Results

Petrographic Study

Sampling and analytical methods are reported in Supplementary Materials. The sandstone is composed of quartz, subordinate feldspar and lithic fragments with accessory mica, tourmaline and zircon. Subangular to subrounded quartz grains constitute the major portion (~90%) of the sandstone, sometimes exhibiting iron-oxide coatings. Monocrystalline quartz dominates over the polycrystalline quartz grains. Potassium feldspar accounts for about 5% of the bulk sample, followed by lithic fragments (quartzite and chert) comprising ~3%. Petrographic investigations reveal that the sandstone is medium- to fine-grained, moderate- to well-sorted quartz arenite, with a high degree of compositional and textural maturity. The presence of polycrystalline quartz grains along with undulatory extinction in some grains indicates metamorphic rocks as one of the possible sources for these sandstones.

Whole-rock Geochemistry

Major and trace element data for Upper Bhander Sandstone from the Bhopal Inlier are presented in Supplementary Table 3. These sandstones show high concentrations of SiO₂, ranging from 73.9 to 88.2 wt%. High SiO₂ content accords well with the abundance of quartz in these sandstones. The samples exhibit moderate amounts of Al₂O₃ (4.3–7.4 wt%) and Fe₂O₃ (2.4–9.1 wt%) and very low amounts of TiO₂, MnO, CaO, K₂O, Na₂O and P₂O₅. The K₂O/Na₂O ratio is greater than 1, indicating the dominance of potash feldspar over plagioclase feldspar, and is also consistent with the petrographic observations. The chondrite-normalised REE pattern of these sandstones shows LREE enrichment, with La _N /Sm _N ranging from 3.13 to 4.48 and a flat HREE pattern with Gd _N /Yb _N value in the range of 0.99–1.72 (Figure 4A). All the samples show a prominent negative Eu anomaly, which ranges from 0.35 to 0.59 (Figure 4A). The LREE-enriched pattern with negative Eu anomaly and very high La/Yb ratio (9.7–16.2) suggests the cratonic environment and is most likely a felsic source for these sandstones.

Figure 4.

Notes: ICV – Index of Compositional Variability.

The discriminant diagram proposed by Roser and Korsch (1988) is used to discriminate among felsic igneous, quartzose sedimentary, intermediate and mafic igneous provenances. All the samples fall in the field of quartzose sedimentary provenance, indicating recycled granitic/gneissic or sedimentary source (Figure 4B). The Index of Compositional Variability (ICV; Cox et al., 1995) was calculated for the samples to understand their compositional maturity. ICV for Upper Bhander Sandstone samples is close to 1 (0.9–1.2; Figure 4C), which suggests that these sandstones are compositionally mature and possibly deposited in tectonically stable/cratonic environments where sediment recycling was prominent. Recycling can also be confirmed by the Zr/Sc versus Th/Sc plot (McLennan et al., 1993) for these samples. First-cycle sediments generally show a good correlation between these ratios, whereas recycled sediments are characterised by very high Zr/Sc as compared to the Th/Sc ratio (Figure 4D). The La/Sc versus Co/Th plot shows that the samples fall in the common field of TTG of the Bundelkhand Craton and the rocks of the Mahakoshal Belt (Figure 4E). It can be inferred that these sedimentary rocks may have been derived from the older crust (TTG) and the metasedimentary and granitic rocks (e.g., Madan Mahal) of the Mahakoshal Belt exposed in the surrounding terrain (Figure 4E).

Detrital Zircon Geochronology and Trace Element Analysis of Zircons from the Upper Bhander Sandstone of Bhopal Inlier, Central India

Detrital Zircon Geochronology

A total of 227 zircons were analysed from the Upper Bhander Sandstone at Bhimbetka, of which 176 grains provided concordant ages (<10% discordance) and have been used for provenance and age interpretation. The data are reported in the Supplementary Table 1. Zircon grains of the sandstones from Bhimbetka are subangular to subrounded in shape and range in size from 50 to 200 µm. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images show some oscillatory zoned zircon crystals. Representative CL images of grains with their concordant ages are shown in Figure 5D. Near-concordant ages have been plotted in the Wetherill concordia diagram, which shows several age clusters (Figure 5A). Age distribution of the samples is shown in a probability density plot (Figure 5B). The sample has the most dominant population of detrital zircons between the age interval of 1,400 and 1,800 Ma, with a primary peak at 1,740 Ma and a secondary peak at 1,510 Ma. Another prominent peak at ~2,470 Ma is also recorded. One Paleoarchean zircon grain is present with a ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb age of 3,340 ± 47 Ma. A small cluster of zircon grains occurs in the interval of 2,150–2,000 Ma, with a subordinate peak at 2,044 Ma. A few grains reveal ages in the interval of 1,000–1,300 Ma, with a peak age at 1,220 Ma. The youngest grain in the sample has a ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U age of 770 ± 12 Ma. This particular grain exhibits a high degree of concordance (~95%); therefore, the age can be considered to be robust.

Table 1.

The Compilation of the Magmatic Events (Mainly the Ages of Gneisses and Granitoids) from the Satpura Mobile Belt (CITZ), Aravalli-BGC Craton and Bundelkhand Craton.

Age	Central India (CITZ (Satpura Mobile Belt))			Northwest India (Aravalli BGC, Aravalli–Delhi Fold Belt, Sirohi and Marwar Basin)			North-Central India (Bundelkhand Craton)
~500–550 Ma	Location	Age (Method)	Reference	Location	Age (Method)	Reference	Location	Age (Method)	Reference
				Secondary thermal disturbance in Malani granite (Jalor granite)	515 ± 6 Ma(Ar–Ar age)	Rathore et al., 1999
				Argon loss in felsic volcanics of Sindreth Basin	550–490 Ma	Sen et al., 2013
Neoproterozoic (538–1,000 Ma)	Granodiorite from Sausar Group (7)	948 ± 4 Ma, 945 Ma (928 ± 4 Ma post-tectonic granite)(U–Th–total Pb monazite ages)	Chattopadhyay et al., 2015	Mirpur granite (Malani Igneous Suite) (14)	753 ± 9 Ma(U–Pb Zircon TIMS)	de Wall et al., 2018
				Mt. Abu Batholith (Sirohi terrain) (12)	764 ± 3 Ma, 767 ± 4 Ma (U–Pb Zircon TIMS)	Ashwal et al., 2013
	Granitoids of Gavilgarh-Tan Shear Zone (Betul Belt) (6)	945 ± 9 Ma(U–Pb zircon and U–Th–total Pb monazite ages)	Chattopadhyay et al., 2017	Erinpura granite (Sirohi, Punagarh region) (13)	863 ± 23 Ma (monazite chemical dating); 800 ± 2 and 873 ± 3 Ma (U–Pb zircon TIMS)	Just et al., 2011; Van Lente et al., 2009
				Sirohi terrain, the western margin of the Delhi Fold Belt (11)	1,015 ± 4, Ma, 966 ± 3 and 808 ± 3U–Pb zircon SHRIMP ages	Rao et al., 2013
Mesoproterozoic (1,000–1,600 Ma)	Granitoids of Gavilgarh-Tan Shear Zone (Betul Belt) (6)	1,227 ± 31 Ma(U–Pb zircon and U–Th–total Pb monazite ages)	Chattopadhyay et al., 2017				Quartz reef in the Bundelkhand granitic massif and associated hydrothermal activity	1,480 + 35 to 1,660 + 40 Ma (K–Ar geochronology)	Pati, 1997
	Tirodi biotite gneiss(Sausar Belt) (5)	1,603 ± 23 Ma,1,584 ± 17 Ma; (Zircon U–Pb and monazite ages)	Bhowmik et al., 2011
Paleoproterozoic (1,600–2,500 Ma)	Madan Mahal granite, Mahakoshal Belt (3)	1,695 ± 9 Ma(Zircon U–Pb ages)	Yadav et al., 2020	Granitic pluton from the Alwar region (Delhi Fold Belt) (8)	1.78–1.71 Ga (chemical dating of zircon)	Biju-Sekhar et al., 2003	Quartz reef in the Bundelkhand granitic massif and associated hydrothermal activity	1,790 + 40 to 1,850 + 35 Ma; 1,930 + 40 to 2,010 + 80 Ma (K–Ar geochronology)	Pati, 1997
				Sakhun–Ladera region (BGC, North-Central Aravalli Craton) (10)	1,721 ± 9 Ma (U–Pb zircon age)	Pandit et al., 2021
	Jhirgadandi granitoids, Mahakoshal Belt (1)	1,753 ± 9 Ma(U–Pb SHRIMP zircon geochronology)	Bora et al., 2013; Bora & Kumar, 2015	Granitoids of the Khetri copper belt (Delhi Fold Belt) (9)	1.82–1.70 Ga (~1,660 Ma—Biharipur, Dabla, 1,711 ± 0.5 Ma—Tehara pluton);1,800 ± 59 Ma, 1821.7 ± 0.4 Ma—Jasrapur pluton (zircon and Sm–Nd ages); 1,732–1,682 Ma (zircon U–Pb and Pb–Pb ages)	Kaur et al., 2007, 2009, 2011
	Sidhi granite,Mahakoshal Belt (2)	1,796 ± 17 Ma,1,645 ± 25 Ma (Zircon U–Pb ages)	Yadav et al., 2020
Archean (2,500–4,000 Ma)	Malanjkhand granitoids (Sausar Belt) (4)	2,450–2,500 Ma,2,490 ± 8 Ma (Re–Os ages)	Stein et al., 2004	Granites and gneisses from the Pur-Banera Supracrustal belt, Aravalli Craton	3,159 ± 8 Ma gneiss; 2,538 ± 11 Ma granite	D’Souza et al., 2019	Central Bundelkhand greenstone complex(15)	Granite—2,531 ± 21 Ma, 2,516 ± 38 Ma and 2,514 ± 13 Ma; gneiss—2,669 ± 7.4 Ma (U–Pb zircon ages)	Verma et al., 2016
				Granites (Jahazpur)	2,538 ± 5 Ma (U–Pb SHRIMP zircon ages)	Dey et al., 2019	Gneisses and granites from Mahoba, Karera, Babina, Kuraichaand Panchwara, (15)	3.3 and 2.7 Ga (gneiss); 2,516 ± 4 Ma, 2,521 ± 7 Ma (granite); 2,517 ± 7 Ma (rhyolite)²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb zircon ion microprobe ages	Mondal et al., 2002
				Mewar Gneiss, Aravalli Craton	3,281 ± 3 Ma (small ion microprobe)	Wiedenbeck & Goswami, 1994	Gneiss from Mau Ranipur, Bundelkhand(15)	3,551 ± 6 Ma(U–Pb and Lu–Hf isotope ages of zircon)	Kaur et al., 2014

Note: Numbers in brackets represent the numbers in superscripts inside the white boxes in Figure 1.

BGC – Banded Gneissic Complex; CITZ – Central Indian Tectonic Zone.

Figure 5.

Notes: The grain number is shown in yellow colour. CL – cathodoluminescence.

Additionally, a total of 179 zircons were analysed from Upper Bhander Sandstone exposed in and around Bhopal city, of which 161 grains provided concordant ages (<10% discordance) and have been used for provenance and age interpretation. These data are reported in Supplementary Table 1. Zircon grains of these sandstones are also subangular to subrounded in shape and range in size from 50 to 200 µm. Near-concordant ages have been plotted in the Wetherill concordia diagram, which shows several age clusters (Figure 6A). Age distribution of the sample is shown in a probability density plot (Figure 6B) with Th/U ratio versus U–Pb ages plotted in Figure 6C. The sample has the most dominant population of detrital zircons between the age interval of 1,400 and 1,800 Ma, with a primary peak at 1,730 Ma and a secondary peak at 1,460 Ma. Another subordinate peak at ~2,046 Ma is also recorded from these sandstones. One relatively older zircon grain is present with a ²⁰⁷Pb/²⁰⁶Pb age of 2,490 ± 116 Ma. A few grains reveal ages in the interval of 1,000–1,300 Ma. Overall, the detrital zircon geochronology of the Upper Bhander Sandstone from the Bhopal Inlier (Bhopal city and Bhimbetka collectively) suggests that the grains cluster predominantly around ~1,740 and ~1,500 Ma (Figure 6D).

Figure 6.

(A) U–Pb Concordia Diagram, (B) Relative Probability Density Diagram and (C) Th/U Ratio Versus U–Pb Ages Plot for Detrital Zircons of Upper Bhander Sandstone Sample from Bhopal Region. (D) Combined Relative Probability Density Diagram for All Upper Bhander Sandstone Samples from the Bhopal Inlier (Bhimbetka and Around Bhopal City).

Trace Element Analysis of Zircons

Concentrations of trace elements of zircons in the sandstone from Bhimbetka are reported in Supplementary Table 2. The sample has U content ranging from 42 to 1021 ppm with Th/U ratios varying from 0.16 to 2.31 with an average of 0.81 (Figure 5C). The CL images of the grains coupled with their Th/U ratio suggest a magmatic origin for these detrital zircons. The total REE content of the zircon grains varies from 69 to 17,845 ppm with an average value of 2,066 ppm. The majority of the grains exhibit a uniform chondrite-normalised REE pattern showing LREE depletion and HREE enrichment (LREE/HREE = 0.01–0.67; Figure 7A). The REE pattern of zircons shows negative Eu anomaly (0.01–0.90, average—0.43) and variably positive Ce anomaly (0.96–187.44, average—14.56). This HREE-enriched REE pattern with negative Eu and positive Ce anomaly is typical for zircons occurring in granitoids (Figure 7A; Belousova et al., 2002). In addition, the Y concentrations of zircons varying from 411 to 18,223 ppm fall within the range of Y of zircons from granitoids (Belousova et al., 2002; Poller et al., 2001). The (Lu) _N (where N = value normalised to chondrite) values varying from 344 to 14,955 are comparable to zircons from granitoids (500–20,000 ppm; Hoskin & Ireland, 2000). A cross plot of Y (ppm) versus U (ppm) and Y (ppm) versus Yb/Sm has been used for discriminating the origin of zircon grains (Figure 7B, C). The discrimination plots reflect that most of the samples fall in the field of granitoids (Figure 7B, C). Thus, the trace element concentration obtained from the analysed grains is typical for magmatic zircon.

Table 2.

Potential Sources of Detritus for the Upper Bhander Sandstone in Bhopal Inlier.

Zircon Population	Potential Source
Zircon Population	Proximal (from CITZ and Bundelkhand Craton)	Distal (Aravalli BGC)
~2.5 Ga	~2.48–2.55 Ga granitoids of the Bundelkhand region; ~2.5 Ga Malanjkhand granitoids of the Sausar Belt (CITZ; Table 1)	~2.5 Ga granitoids of Aravalli BGC (Table 1)
2,000–2,100 Ma	Magmatic rocks of 2.3–1.8 Ga from the Chitrangi Formation of the Mahakoshal Belt (CITZ; Khanna et al., 2017)
1,650–1,900 Ma	~1.88–1.65 Ga granitic rocks intruding the MSB (Table 1); reworked sediments of ~1.6 Ga Deonar Porcellanite and Rampur Shale	~1.8, 1.7–1.72 Ga magmatic rocks of the Aravalli–Delhi Fold Belt (Table 1)
1,400–1,600 Ma	1,603–1,584 Ma magmatism in Tirodi biotite gneiss in SMB, 1.62–1.53 Ga felsic plutonism in SMB (CITZ; Bhowmik et al., 2014; Chattopadhyay et al., 2020); ~1,534 Ma magmatic crystallisation with a thermal overprint at 1,454 Ma in Tirodi Gneiss (CITZ; Ahmad et al., 2009)
~1.0-1.1 Ga	1.05–0.95 Ga granite from the Gavilgarh-Tan Shear Zone in the CITZ; 0.94–1.06 Ga metamorphic rocks of SMB (CITZ)	Granitic intrusions of ~1.0–1.1 age from the Aravalli-BGC region and the Delhi Fold Belt (Table 1)
Ca. 770 Ma		769–764 Ma granites from the Abu-Sirohi corridor (Table 1)

Notes: BGC – Banded Gneissic Complex; CITZ – Central Indian Tectonic Zone; MSB – Mahakoshal Supracrustal Belt; SMB – Sausar Mobile Belt.

Figure 7.

Note: Numbers in B and C represent different types of granitoids (1 – aplites and leucogranites; 2 – granites; 3 – granodiorites and tonalites).

Discussion

Potential Sources of Detrital Zircons of Upper Bhander Sandstone Exposed in Bhopal Inlier

U–Pb detrital zircon geochronology of the Upper Bhander Sandstone at Bhopal and Bhimbetka shows an overall age range of 2,600–1,000 Ma, with a single youngest grain of 770 ± 12 Ma age. The documentation of zircon grains of 2,450–2,560 Ma age is comparable with the ~2,480–2,550 Ma age proposed for the emplacement of granitic suites in the Bundelkhand Craton (Kaur et al., 2016; Mondal et al., 2002; Verma et al., 2016). The ages of the gneisses and granitoids of the Bundelkhand (3,600–2,400 Ma) basement rocks and the Aravalli BGC (3,500–2,500 Ma) indicate that the Archean and Paleoproterozoic zircons of the Vindhyan sandstones are largely derived from these terrains (Figure 1A, B; Lan et al., 2020, 2021; Malone et al., 2008; Turner et al., 2014).

The detrital zircon cluster in the interval of 1,500–1,900 Ma and a small cluster between 2000 and 2100 Ma are more likely sourced from the Mahakoshal Supracrustal Belt (MSB) along the Satpura Mobile Belt in CITZ (Figure 1B). The MSB lying in the vicinity of these Upper Bhander outcrops records magmatic rocks of 2,300–1,800 Ma age from its basal Chitrangi Formation (Khanna et al., 2017) and the overlying Parsoi Formation (1894.3 ± 9.4 Ma; Sharma et al., 2022). Furthermore, granites of ~1,880, ~1,780, ~1,750 (Bora et al., 2013; Bora & Kumar, 2015) and ~1,790 Ma (Yadav et al., 2020) ages have been reported from the MSB, suggesting an age bracket of 1,880–1,750 Ma for a tectonothermal event (Figure 1B; Yadav et al., 2020), and this correlates well with the Upper Bhander zircon ages that cluster between 1,900 and 1,700 Ma. Madan Mahal granite (1,695 ± 9 Ma; Yadav et al., 2020) from the western part and Sidhi granite (1,640 ± 9 Ma; Yadav et al., 2020) from the eastern part of the MSB preserve records of post-collisional events (Figure 1B). The ages of these magmatic rocks are comparable with the age cluster between 1,600 and 1,700 Ma in the sample under discussion.

The samples show a significant distribution over a range of 1,400–1,600 Ma, which is centred at ~1,500 Ma. Igneous and metamorphic rocks of this range are also known from the CITZ, as it records an orogenic event at ~1,620–1,540 Ma (Bhowmik et al., 2014; Chattopadhyay et al., 2020). The evidence of this orogenic event is preserved in the Sausar Mobile Belt (SMB) in the southern part of the CITZ, where felsic plutonism affected the SMB between 1,620 and 1,530 Ma (Figure 1B; Ahmad et al., 2009; Bhowmik, 2019; Bhowmik et al., 2011; Chattopadhyay et al., 2020). The age of magmatism in the SMB is comparable with 1,400–1,600 Ma detrital zircon ages. Apart from this, the source for ~1,600 Ma zircons could also be reworked sediments of the Porcellanite Formation and the Rampur Shale of Lower Vindhyans (Bickford et al., 2017; Mishra et al., 2018; Rasmussen et al., 2002; Ray, 2006). Granite magmatism at 1,700–1,800 Ma also affected the ADFB (Figure 1B), making them a plausible source for these zircon grains.

A few grains of ~1,000–1,100 Ma age present in the samples are likely to be derived from the CITZ, which experienced ~1,000 Ma orogeny (Figure 1B). Geochronological data record 940–1,060 Ma metamorphism in the SMB in response to the collision of the North and South Indian tectonic blocks (Bhowmik et al., 2012). Early Neoproterozoic (1,050–950 Ma) granite magmatism has also been reported from the Gavilgarh-Tan Shear Zone exposed in the CITZ (Figure 1B; Chattopadhyay et al., 2020). Moreover, granitic intrusions of ~1,000–1,100 Ma reported from the Aravalli-BGC region and the Delhi Fold Belt can also be related to ~1,000–1,100 Ma zircon grains of this study (Just et al., 2011; Pandit et al., 2003; Turner et al., 2014). The youngest single concordant grain has been recorded in the sandstone with the ²⁰⁶Pb/²³⁸U age of 770 + 12 Ma. No detrital zircon younger than ~900 Ma has been reported from the Upper Vindhyan sequence to date, except for one grain of 548 Ma from the Maihar Sandstone (Lan et al., 2020). This age correlates with the Neoproterozoic magmatic events recorded from Northwest India. The Abu-Sirohi corridor, which lies between the Delhi Fold Belt and Malani Igneous Suite (MIS) terrane, records granitic intrusions of the late Neoproterozoic (Figure 1B and Table 1). This tectonically active region experienced magmatic activity and resultant emplacement of granites dated between 769 and 764 Ma (Figure 1B; Ashwal et al., 2013). The rocks of the Eastern Ghat Mobile Belts (EGMB) also record Neoproterozoic tectono-metamorphic events (870–690 Ma; Chatterjee et al., 2017; Hippe et al., 2016) and Pan-African thermal events (611–484 Ma; Upadhyay, 2008). However, the Satpura highlands (CITZ), which act as a barrier between the EGMB and the Vindhyan Basin, likely prevented the transport of the detritus from the EGMB (Turner et al., 2014). Rocks of ~770 Ma age have so far not been reported from North and Central India. One possible source for the zircon of ~770 Ma age in the Upper Bhander Sandstone could be the granites of ~700–800 Ma from Northwest India (possibly MIS and its equivalent; Table 1).

The U–Pb detrital zircon geochronological data of the Upper Bhander Sandstone exposed in Bhopal and Bhimbetka (Bhopal Inlier) reflect a mixed source, which is also supported by petrographic observations and the whole-rock geochemical study (Figure 4A–E). A large variation in the Nd-isotopic values of siliciclastic rocks of the Bhander Group (Son Valley) reported by Chakrabarti et al. (2007) is also in agreement with the interpretation of a mixed provenance for these rocks. Co–Th–La–Sc systematics used to understand the source rocks for these sandstones suggest that the source for the Upper Bhander Sandstone (Bhopal Inlier) includes both igneous and metamorphic rock suites from the CITZ and the Bundelkhand massif (Figure 4E). The interpretation of modal data (Banerjee & Banerjee, 2010; Mohammadi et al., 2014) and the whole-rock geochemical attributes (Banerjee & Banerjee, 2010) of the Upper Bhander Sandstone exposed in the vicinity of Bhopal indicate their derivation mainly from granitic plutons and high-/low-grade metamorphic rocks, with a minor contribution from recycled sedimentary rocks (Banerjee & Banerjee, 2010; Mohammadi et al., 2014, 2015). Furthermore, it is believed that the underlying Kaimur Group of Son Valley has largely received sediments from the Mahakoshal Belt (Mishra & Sen 2012; Quasim et al., 2018). Combining past studies and the present geochronological data, potential sources for these zircons could be inferred as the Archean Bundelkhand Gneissic complex, gneissic and granitic rocks of the CITZ (mainly the Mahakoshal Belt), which are exposed close to the Vindhyan Basin, and the recycled sedimentary rocks/sandstones of the Rewa and Kaimur Groups. It is important to note here that north-, northwest- and west-directed paleocurrent patterns have been reported for the Upper Vindhyan sediments (Akhtar, 1978; Ansari, 1994; Bhattacharyya & Morad, 1993; Verma & Shukla, 2015), which indicate that the detritus is largely sourced from the south, southeast or east of the Vindhyan belt. Multiple lines of evidence including the north- and northwest (west)-directed paleocurrent patterns (Akhtar, 1978; Ansari, 1994; Bhattacharyya & Morad, 1993; Raza & Casshyap, 1996; Verma & Shukla, 2015) and detrital zircon geochronology suggest the Satpura-Mahakoshal/Bijawar highlands (CITZ) lying in the south and southeast (east) of the basin as the dominant source of detritus for the Upper Vindhyan sandstones exposed in and around Bhopal (Figure 8; Chakraborty, 2006). However, rocks from the ADFB may also constitute a secondary (distal) source for these sediments.

Figure 8.

Notes: The lower panel represents the U–Pb zircon ages from the Satpura Mobile Belt (CITZ; based on Banerjee et al., 2021). The bars correspond to the assembly ages of Gondwana – G; Rodinia – R; Columbia – C and the stabilization age of cratons – S.

Post-1,000 Ma Zircon Grains: Their Bearing on the Depositional Age of Upper Vindhyan Succession

It is noteworthy that earlier palaeontological findings (Table 3) have been used to assign an Ediacaran age (<1,000 Ma) for the Bhander Group in the Son Valley Sector. The Upper Bhander Sandstone from Maihar and Bhopal regions has thus far yielded two post-1,000 Ma zircon grains of ~548 (Maihar) and ~770 Ma (Bhimbetka) age, respectively. The detrital zircon geochronology of the Upper Bhander Sandstone in the Rajasthan Sector also suggests a ~1,000 Ma closure age for the sedimentation of Upper Vindhyan (Figure 9A, B; Malone et al., 2008). In contrast, a Cryogenian (850–630 Ma) age-marker microfossil, Trachyhystrichosphaera, from the Sirbu Formation of the Bhander Group, Rajasthan (Srivastava, 2009) and ~770 Ma age (on the basis of Sr isotope stratigraphy coupled with Pb–Pb age) of the Balwan Limestone (George et al., 2018; Gopalan et al., 2013), overlying the Upper Bhander Sandstone, suggest post-1,000 Ma sedimentation in the Rajasthan sector of the Vindhyan Basin (Figure 9B). The Proterozoic sedimentary packages of the Lesser Himalayan sector and the Ganga Valley have been linked with the rocks of the Vindhyan Basin in the cratonic area (McKenzie et al., 2011; Xiao et al., 2016). Recently, Negi et al. (2023) have estimated an MDA of ≤850 Ma for the Rautgara Formation of Inner Lesser Himalaya. This estimation suggests that the sedimentation in the Inner Lesser Himalaya, which is the extended part of the northern Indian cratonic margin, continued till the Neoproterozoic. In addition, the siliciclastic rocks of the Blaini Formation (Cryogenian) and Krol and Infra Krol (Ediacaran) successions of the Outer Lesser Himalaya have also yielded Neoproterozoic zircon populations (Figure 9D; Hofmann et al., 2011; McKenzie et al., 2011). Considering several of these datasets—palaeobiological, geochronological and isotopic—along with the two young zircon ages, that is, 548 and 770 Ma (<1,000 Ma), reported from the Upper Bhander Sandstone as robust data points, a ~1,000 Ma age for the termination of Upper Vindhyan sedimentation needs re-examination (Figure 9C).

Table 3.

Compilation of Palaeobiological Records from Bhander Group, Son Valley Sector Suggesting Late Neoproterozoic Age.

Formation	Fossils	Age	References
Ganurgarh Shale	Organic-walled microfossils(Vandalosphaeridium reticulatum, Obruchevella parva and Obruchevella valdaica)	Late Cryogenian–early Ediacaran (ca. 650–570 Ma)	Prasad et al., 2005; Prasad, 2007
Bhander limestone/Nagod limestone	Thalloid algae (multicellular metaphytes such as Aggregatosphaera miaoheensis, Baculiphyca taeniata and Enteromorphites siniansis)Organic-walled microfossils (OWMs)(Obruchevella delicata, Obruchevella parva and Obruchevella valdaica)VSMs (Cycliocyrillium simplex, C. torquata, Bonniea pytinaia and B. dacruchares)Ediacara-like fossils	Early to late Ediacaran	De, 2003, 2006; Pandey & Kumar, 2013; Pandey et al., 2024; Prasad et al., 2005; Singh et al., 2009
Sirbu Shale	Organic-walled microfossils(Obruchevella parva, Obruchevella delicata, CristalliniulII sp. and Dictyotidium sp.)AcritarchsLate Ediacaran Leiosphere Palynoflora and other associated organic-walled microfossils (Leiosphaeridia spp., such as L. jacutica, L. crassa, L. tenuissima, L. minutissima and Ostiana microcystis)	Late Ediacaran (ca. 570–544 Ma)	Pandey et al., 2024; Prasad et al., 2005; Prasad, 2007
Maihar Sandstone	Microbial mat structures (Arumberiabanksi and Rameshia rampurensis) and Ediacaran body fossil(Beltanelliformis minuta) in Maihar Sandstone	Late Ediacaran	Kumar & Pandey, 2008

Note: VSMs – vase-shaped like microfossils.

Figure 9.

Notes: Numbers represent the locations (1 – Balwan; 2 – Bhimbetka; 3 – Maihar; 4 – Nainital; 5 – Mussoorie; 6 – Pachmunda). The shades of brown represent the land area with different elevations, and blue represents the shallow and deep sea. Locations are plotted on Map 88a, taken from PALAEOMAP PalaeoAtlas for GPlate (Scotese, 2016), using a rectangular projection in GPlate (A). Comparison of detrital zircon geochronology and palaeobiology of the Upper Bhander Sandstone of Son Valley and younger sequences of the Rajasthan sector (B), Son Valley sector (C) and equivalent Neoproterozoic sequences of the Outer Lesser Himalaya (D).

Conclusion

Geochemical and geochronological studies suggest that the magmatic and metasedimentary rocks exposed in the Satpura Mobile Belt (CITZ), south and east of the Vindhyan Basin, are the major sources of the detritus for the Upper Bhander Sandstone exposed in the Bhopal Inlier. However, the underlying older Vindhyan sedimentary rocks and those from the Bundelkhand Craton and ADFB likely also acted as provenance for the Upper Vindhyan sandstones. The occurrence of zircon grains of ~548 (Maihar) and ~770 Ma (Bhimbetka) as outliers in the two samples, taken together with the previously published palaeobiological evidence, serves as a pointer that the Vindhyan sedimentation could have possibly extended at least into the Tonian and possibly up to the Ediacaran, needing further investigations.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Bhopal for all its resources, including a doctoral student fellowship to Vandana Kumari. We thank Professor Gregory John Retallack for careful reading of an earlier version of this manuscript that resulted in its improvement. We thank the Superintending Archaeologist, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), Bhopal, for their approval to take samples from Bhimbetka. The authors would also like to acknowledge two anonymous reviewers and Professor Mukund Sharma (editor) for their constructive reviews that have improved this manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research of this article: this research is partially supported by an MHRD (FAST 2016/17) and a DST-FIST (SR/FST/ES-1/2020/70) grant.

Supplemental Material

ORCID iD

Arundhuti Ghatak

References

Ahmad

, Kaulina

T. V.

, Wanjari

, Mishra

M. K.

, & Nitkina

E. A.

(2009). U–Pb zircon chronology and Sm–Nd isotopic characteristics of the Amgaon and Tirodi Gneissic Complex, Central Indian Shield: Constraints on Precambrian crustal evolution. In Precambrian continental growth and tectonism (pp. 137–138). Excel India Publishers.

Akhtar

(1978). Paleogeography and sediment dispersal patterns of the Proterozoic Bhander Group, western India. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology , 24, 327–357.

Ansari

A. A.

(1994). Facies analysis, petrographic composition and nature of provenance of Bhander Sandstone around Bhopal, M.P . [PhD thesis]. Aligarh Muslim University.

Ansari

A. H.

, Pandey

S. K.

, Ahmad

, Sharma

, Govil

, Chaddha

A. S.

, & Sharma

(2023). High primary productivity in an Ediacaran shallow marine basin influenced by strong seasonal to perennial upwelling. Geological Magazine , 160(8), 1607–1623.

Ashwal

L. D.

, Solanki

A. M.

, Pandit

M. K.

, Corfu

, Hendriks

B. W. H.

, Burke

, & Torsvik

T. H.

(2013). Geochronology and geochemistry of Neoproterozoic Mt. Abu granitoids, NW India: Regional correlation and implications for Rodinia paleogeography. Precambrian Research , 236, 265–281.

Azmi

R. J.

(1998). Fossil discoveries in India. Science , 282, 627–628.

Azmi

R. J.

, Joshi

, Tiwari

B. N.

, Joshi

M. N.

, & Srivastava

S. S.

(2008). A synoptic view on the current discordant geo-and biochronological ages of the Vindhyan Supergroup, Central India. Journal of Himalayan Geology , 29, 177–191.

Banerjee

, & Banerjee

D. M.

(2010). Modal analysis and geochemistry of two sandstones of the Bhander Group (Late Neoproterozoic) in parts of the Central Indian Vindhyan Basin and their bearing on the provenance and tectonics. Journal of Earth System Science , 119, 825.

Banerjee

, Sequeira

, & Bhattacharya

(2021). Tectonics of the Greater India Proterozoic Fold Belt, with emphasis on the nature of curvature of the belt in west-Central India. Earth-Science Reviews , 221, 103758.

10.

Basu

, & Bickford

M. E.

(2015). An alternate perspective on the opening and closing of the intracratonic Purana basins in Peninsular India. Journal of the Geological Society of India , 85, 5–25.

11.

Basu

, Banerjee

, & Chakrabarti

(2021). A combined geochemical, Nd, and stable Ca isotopic investigation of provenance, paleo-depositional setting and sub-basin connectivity of the Proterozoic Vindhyan Basin, India. Lithos , 388, 106059.

12.

Belousova

E. A.

, Griffin

W. L.

, O’Reilly

S. Y.

, & Fisher

N. L.

(2002). Igneous zircon: Trace element composition as an indicator of source rock type. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology , 143, 602–622.

13.

Bengtson

, Belivanova

, Rasmussen

, & Whitehouse

(2009). The controversial “Cambrian” fossils of the Vindhyan are real but more than a billion years older. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 106, 7729–7734.

14.

Bengtson

, Sallstedt

, Belivanova

, & Whitehouse

(2017). Three-dimensional preservation of cellular and subcellular structures suggests 1.6 billion-year-old crown-group red algae. PLoS Biology , 15(3), e2000735.

15.

Bhattacharyya

, & Morad

(1993). Proterozoic braided ephemeral fluvial deposits: An example from the Dhandraul Sandstone Formation of the Kaimur Group, Son Valley, Central India. Sedimentary Geology , 84, 101–114.

16.

Bhowmik

S. K.

(2019). The current status of orogenesis in the Central Indian Tectonic Zone: A view from its Southern Margin. Geological Journal , 54, 2912–2934.

17.

Bhowmik

S. K.

, Wilde

S. A.

, & Bhandari

(2011). Zircon U-Pb/Lu-Hf and monazite chemical dating of the Tirodi biotite gneiss: Implication for latest Palaeoproterozoic to Early Mesoproterozoic orogenesis in the Central Indian Tectonic Zone. Geological Journal , 46, 574–596.

18.

Bhowmik

S. K.

, Wilde

S. A.

, Bhandari

, & Basu Sarbadhikari

(2014). Zoned monazite and zircon as monitors for the thermal history of granulite terranes: An example from the Central Indian Tectonic Zone. Journal of Petrology , 55, 585–621.

19.

Bhowmik

S. K.

, Wilde

S. A.

, Bhandari

, Pal

, & Pant

N. C.

(2012). Growth of the Greater Indian Landmass and its assembly in Rodinia: Geochronological evidence from the Central Indian Tectonic Zone. Gondwana Research , 22, 54–72.

20.

Bickford

M. E.

, & Basu

(2021). “Towards resolving the ‘jigsaw puzzle’and age-fossil inconsistency within East Gondwana”: A comment. Precambrian Research , 352, 105881.

21.

Bickford

M. E.

, Mishra

, Mueller

P. A.

, Kamenov

G. D.

, Schieber

, & Basu

(2017). U-Pb age and Hf isotopic compositions of magmatic zircons from a rhyolite flow in the Porcellanite Formation in the Vindhyan Supergroup, Son Valley (India): Implications for its tectonic significance. Journal of Geology , 125, 367–379.

22.

Biju-Sekhar

, Yokoyama

, Pandit

M. K.

, Okudaira

, Yoshida

, & Santosh

(2003). Late Paleoproterozoic magmatism in Delhi Fold Belt, NW India and its implication: Evidence from EPMA chemical ages of zircons. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 22, 189–207.

23.

Bora

, & Kumar

(2015). Geochemistry of biotites and host granitoid plutons from the Proterozoic Mahakoshal Belt, Central India tectonic zone: Implication for nature and tectonic setting of magmatism. International Geology Review , 57, 1686–1706.

24.

Bora

, Kumar

, Yi

, Kim

, & Lee

T. H.

(2013). Geochemistry and U–Pb SHRIMP zircon chronology of granitoids and microgranular enclaves from Jhirgadandi pluton of Mahakoshal Belt, Central India Tectonic Zone, India. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 70, 99–114.

25.

Bose

P. K.

, Sarkar

, Chakrabarty

, & Banerjee

(2001). Overview of the Meso-to Neoproterozoic evolution of the Vindhyan Basin, Central India. Sedimentary Geology , 141, 395–419.

26.

Chakrabarti

, Basu

A. R.

, & Chakrabarti

(2007). Trace element and Nd-isotopic evidence for sediment sources in the mid-Proterozoic Vindhyan Basin, Central India. Precambrian Research , 159, 260–274.

27.

Chakraborty

(2006). Proterozoic intracontinental basin: The Vindhyan example. Journal of Earth System Science , 115, 3–22.

28.

Chakraborty

P. P.

, Tandon

S. K.

, Roy

S. B.

, Saha

, & Paul

P. P.

(2020). Proterozoic sedimentary basins of India. In Geodynamics of the Indian Plate (pp. 145–177). Springer.

29.

Chatterjee

, Das

, Bose

, Ganguly

, & Hidaka

(2017). Zircon U–Pb SHRIMP and monazite EPMA U–Th–total Pb geochronology of granulites of the western boundary, Eastern Ghats Belt, India: A new possibility for Neoproterozoic exhumation history. Geological Society, London, Special Publications , 457, 105–140.

30.

Chattopadhyay

, Bhowmik

S. K.

, & Roy

(2020). Tectonothermal evolution of the Central Indian Tectonic Zone and its implications for Proterozoic supercontinent assembly: The current status. Episodes , 43, 132–144.

31.

Chattopadhyay

, Chatterjee

, Das

, & Sarkar

(2017). Neoproterozoic transpression and granite magmatism in the Gavilgarh-Tan Shear Zone, Central India: Tectonic significance of U-Pb zircon and U-Th-total Pb monazite ages. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 147, 485–501.

32.

Chattopadhyay

, Das

, Hayasaka

, & Sarkar

(2015). Syn-and post-tectonic granite plutonism in the Sausar Fold Belt, Central India: Age constraints and tectonic implications. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 107, 110–121.

33.

Colleps

C. L.

, McKenzie

N. R.

, Sharma

, Liu

, Gibson

T. M.

, Chen

, & Stockli

D. F.

(2021). Zircon and apatite U-Pb age constraints from the Bundelkhand Craton and Proterozoic strata of Central India: Insights into craton stabilization and subsequent basin evolution. Precambrian Research , 362, 106286.

34.

Cox

, Lowe

D. R.

, & Cullers

R. L.

(1995). The influence of sediment recycling and basement composition on evolution of mudrock chemistry in the southwestern United States. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta , 59(14), 2919–2940.

35.

(2003). Possible organisms similar to Ediacaran forms from the Bhander Group, Vindhyan Supergroup, late Neoproterozoic of India. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 21, 387–395.

36.

(2006). Ediacara fossil assemblage in the upper Vindhyans of Central India and its significance. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 27, 660–683.

37.

Dev

J. A.

, Tomson

J. K.

, Sorcar

, & Nandakumar

(2021). Combined U-Pb/Hf isotopic studies and phase equilibrium modelling of HT-UHT metapelites from Kambam Ultrahigh temperature Belt, South India: Constraints on tectonothermal history of the terrain. Lithos , 406–407, 106531.

38.

de Wall

, Pandit

M. K.

, Donhauser

, Schöbel

, Wang

, & Sharma

K. K.

(2018). Evolution and tectonic setting of the Malani–Nagarparkar igneous suite: A Neoproterozoic silicic-dominated large igneous province in NW India-SE Pakistan. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 160, 136–158.

39.

Dey

, Das

, Dasgupta

, Bose

, Hidaka

, & Ghatak

(2019). Zircon U–Pb (SHRIMP) ages of the Jahazpur granite and Mangalwar gneiss from the Deoli-Jahazpur sector, Rajasthan, NW India: A preliminary reappraisal of stratigraphic correlation and implications to crustal growth. In Geological evolution of the Precambrian Indian shield (pp. 39–56). Springer.

40.

D’Souza

, Prabhakar

, Xu

, Sharma

K. K.

, & Sheth

(2019). Mesoarchaean to Neoproterozoic (3.2–0.8 Ga) crustal growth and reworking in the Aravalli Craton, northwestern India: Insights from the Pur-Banera supracrustal belt. Precambrian Research , 332, 105383.

41.

Geological Survey of India. (1998). Bhopal quadrangle geological map of 56E, Madhya Pradesh . Geological Survey of India Publication.

42.

George

B. G.

, Ray

J. S.

, Shukla

A. D.

, Chatterjee

, Awasthi

, & Laskar

A. H.

(2018). Stratigraphy and geochemistry of the Balwan Limestone, Vindhyan Supergroup, India: Evidence for the Bitter Springs δ¹³C anomaly. Precambrian Research , 313, 18–30.

43.

Gilleaudeau

G. J.

, Sahoo

S. K.

, Kah

L. C.

, Henderson

M. A.

, & Kaufman

A. J.

(2018). Proterozoic carbonates of the Vindhyan Basin, India: Chemostratigraphy and diagenesis. Gondwana Research , 57, 10–25.

44.

Gopalan

, Kumar

, & Vijayagopal

(2013). Depositional history of the Upper Vindhyan succession, Central India: Time constraints from Pb–Pb isochron ages of its carbonate components. Precambrian Research , 233, 108–117.

45.

Gregory

L. C.

, Meert

J. G.

, Pradhan

, Pandit

M. K.

, Tamrat

, & Malone

S. J.

(2006). A paleomagnetic and geochronologic study of the Majhgawan kimberlite, India: Implications for the age of the Upper Vindhyan Supergroup. Precambrian Research , 149, 65–75.

46.

Hippe

, Möller

, von Quadt

, Peytcheva

, & Hammerschmidt

(2016). Zircon geochronology of the Koraput alkaline complex: Insights from combined geochemical and U–Pb–Hf isotope analyses, and implications for the timing of alkaline magmatism in the Eastern Ghats Belt, India. Gondwana Research , 34, 205–220.

47.

Hofmann

, Linnemann

, Rai

, Becker

, Gärtner

, & Sagawe

(2011). The India and South China cratons at the margin of Rodinia—Synchronous Neoproterozoic magmatism revealed by LA-ICP-MS zircon analyses. Lithos , 123, 176–187.

48.

Hoskin

P. W.

, & Ireland

T. R.

(2000). Rare earth element chemistry of zircon and its use as a provenance indicator. Geology , 28, 627–630.

49.

Just

, Schulz

, de Wall

, Jourdan

, & Pandit

M. K.

(2011). Monazite CHIME/EPMA dating of Erinpura granitoid deformation: Implications for Neoproterozoic tectono-thermal evolution of NW India. Gondwana Research , 19, 402–412.

50.

Kale

V. S.

(2016). Proterozoic basins of Peninsular India: Status within the global Proterozoic systems. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy , 82, 461–477.

51.

Kaur

, Chaudhri

, Raczek

, Kroener

, & Hofmann

A. W.

(2007). Geochemistry, zircon ages and whole-rock Nd isotopic systematics for Palaeoproterozoic A-type granitoids in the northern part of the Delhi belt, Rajasthan, NW India: Implications for late Palaeoproterozoic crustal evolution of the Aravalli Craton. Geological Magazine , 144, 361–378.

52.

Kaur

, Chaudhri

, Raczek

, Kröner

, & Hofmann

A. W.

(2009). Record of 1.82 Ga Andean-type continental arc magmatism in NE Rajasthan, India: Insights from zircon and Sm–Nd ages, combined with Nd–Sr isotope geochemistry. Gondwana Research , 16, 56–71.

53.

Kaur

, Chaudhri

, Raczek

, Kröner

, Hofmann

A. W.

, & Okrusch

(2011). Zircon ages of late Palaeoproterozoic (ca. 1.72–1.70 Ga) extension-related granitoids in NE Rajasthan, India: Regional and tectonic significance. Gondwana Research , 19, 1040–1053.

54.

Kaur

, Zeh

, & Chaudhri

(2014). Characterisation and U–Pb–Hf isotope record of the 3.55 Ga felsic crust from the Bundelkhand Craton, northern India. Precambrian Research , 255, 236–244.

55.

Kaur

, Zeh

, Chaudhri

, & Dutta

(2022). Detrital zircon U-Pb-Hf isotope record of conglomerates in the southern Aravalli orogen, NW India: Implications for stratigraphy, provenance and Archean to Paleoproterozoic crustal evolution. Precambrian Research , 379, 106800.

56.

Kaur

, Zeh

, Chaudhri

, & Eliyas

(2016). Unravelling the record of Archaean crustal evolution of the Bundelkhand Craton, northern India using U–Pb zircon–monazite ages, Lu–Hf isotope systematics, and whole-rock geochemistry of granitoids. Precambrian Research , 281, 384–413.

57.

Khanna

T. C.

, Rao

D. S.

, Bizimis

, Satyanarayanan

, Krishna

A. K.

, & Sai

V. S.

(2017). ∼2.1 Ga intraoceanic magmatism in the Central India Tectonic Zone: Constraints from the petrogenesis of ferropicrites in the Mahakoshal Supracrustal Belt. Precambrian Research , 302, 1–17.

58.

Kumar

, Gopalan

, & Rajagopalan

(2001). Age of the lower Vindhyan sediments, Central India. Current Science , 81, 806–808.

59.

Kumar

, Sharma

S. D.

, Sreenivas

, Dayal

A. M.

, Rao

M. N.

, Dubey

, & Chawla

B. R.

(2002). Carbon, oxygen and strontium isotope geochemistry of Proterozoic carbonate rocks of the Vindhyan Basin, Central India. Precambrian Research , 113, 43–63.

60.

Kumar

(2012). Stratigraphy and correlation of the Neoproterozoic deposits of central and western India: An overview. Geological Society, London, Special Publication , 366, 75–90.

61.

Kumar

, & Pandey

S. K.

(2008). Arumberia and associated fossils from the Neoproterozoic Maihar Sandstone, Vindhyan Supergroup, Central India. Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India , 53, 83–97.

62.

Kumar

, & Sharma

(2012). Vindhyan Basin, Son Valley area Central India . Palaeontological Society of India.

63.

Kumar

, & Srivastava

(2003). Carbonaceous megafossils from the Neoproterozoic Bhander Group, Central India. Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India , 48, 139–154.

64.

Lan

, Pandey

S. K.

, Zhang

, Sharma

, Gao

, & Wu

(2021). Precambrian crustal evolution in Northern Indian Block: Evidence from detrital zircon U-Pb ages and Hf-isotopes. Precambrian Research , 361, 106238.

65.

Lan

, Zhang

, Li

X. H.

, Pandey

S. K.

, Sharma

, Shukla

, & Zhai

(2020). Towards resolving the ‘jigsaw puzzle’ and age-fossil inconsistency within East Gondwana. Precambrian Research , 345, 105775.

66.

Ludwig

K. R.

(2012). Isoplot 4.15: A geochronological toolkit for Microsoft Excel (p. 5). Berkeley Geochronology Center Special Publication.

67.

Malone

S. J.

, Meert

J. G.

, Banerjee

D. M.

, Pandit

M. K.

, Tamrat

, Kamenov

G. D.

, & Sohl

L. E.

(2008). Paleomagnetism and detrital zircon geochronology of the Upper Vindhyan Sequence, Son Valley and Rajasthan, India: A ca. 1000 Ma closure age for the Purana Basins? Precambrian Research , 164, 137–159.

68.

McKenzie

N. R.

, Hughes

N. C.

, Myrow

P. M.

, Xiao

, & Sharma

(2011). Correlation of Precambrian–Cambrian sedimentary successions across northern India and the utility of isotopic signatures of Himalayan lithotectonic zones. Earth and Planetary Science Letters , 312, 471–483.

69.

McLennan

S. M.

, Hemming

, Mcdaniel

, & Hanson

(1993). Geochemical approaches to sedimentation, provenance, and tectonic (pp. 21–40). Geological Society of America.

70.

Meert

J. G.

, & Pandit

M. K.

(2015). Precambrian evolution of Peninsular India and its link to basin evolution. In

Mazumder

& Eriksson

P. G.

(Eds), Precambrian basins of India: Stratigraphic and tectonic criteria (pp. 29–54). Geological Society of London Memoirs 43.

71.

Meert

J. G.

, Pandit

M. K.

, Kwafo

, & Singha

(2023). Stinging news: ‘Dickinsonia’ discovered in the Upper Vindhyan of India not worth the buzz. Gondwana Research , 117, 1–7.

72.

Meert

J. G.

, Pandit

M. K.

, Venkateshwarlu

, & Rao

J. M.

(2013). Paleomagnetism of Bhander sediments from Bhopal Inlier, Vindhyan Supergroup. Journal of the Geological Society of India , 82, 588.

73.

Mishra

, Bickford

M. E.

, & Basu

(2018). U-Pb age and chemical composition of an ash bed in the Chopan Porcellanite Formation, Vindhyan Supergroup, India. The Journal of Geology , 126, 553–560.

74.

Mishra

, & Sen

(2012). Provenance, tectonic setting and source-area weathering of Mesoproterozoic Kaimur Group, Vindhyan Supergroup, Central India. Geologica Acta , 10, 283–293.

75.

Mohammadi

(2015). Sedimentological and remote sensing studies on Vindhyan Supergroup, Raisen District, Madhya Pradesh [PhD thesis]. Aligarh Muslim University.

76.

Mohammadi

, Rais

, & Habib

(2014). Provenance, tectonic setting and paleoclimate of Upper Bhander Sandstone in parts of Raisen district of Madhya Pradesh (India). International Journal of Advance Earth and Environment Science , 2, 39–45.

77.

Mondal

M. E. A.

, Goswami

J. N.

, Deomurari

M. P.

, & Sharma

K. K.

(2002). Ion microprobe 207Pb/206Pb ages of zircons from the Bundelkhand massif, northern India: Implications for crustal evolution of the Bundelkhand–Aravalli protocontinent. Precambrian Research , 117, 85–100.

78.

Negi

, Saha

, Ghosh

S. K.

, & Rai

S. K.

(2023). Provenance and sedimentation age of the Proterozoic clastic succession of the Garhwal-Kumaon Lesser Himalaya, NW-India: Clues from U–Pb zircon and Sr–Nd isotopes. Geological Journal , 58, 605–619.

79.

Nesbitt

H. W.

, & Young

G. M.

(1982). Early Proterozoic climates and plate motions inferred from major element chemistry of lutites. Nature , 299, 715–717.

80.

Pandey

S. K.

, Ahmad

, & Sharma

(2023). Dickinsonia tenuis reported by Retallack et al. 2021 is not a fossil, instead an impression of an extant ‘fallen beehive’. Journal of the Geological Society of India , 99, 311–316.

81.

Pandey

S. K.

, & Kumar

(2013). Organic walled microbiota from the silicified algal clasts, Bhander limestone, Satna area, Madhya Pradesh. Journal of the Geological Society of India , 82, 499–508.

82.

Pandey

S. K.

, Singh

, Sharma

, Ahmad

, & Bhan

(2024). A new palaeobiological assemblage from the Son Valley Bhander Group and its implications on the age of the upper Vindhyans of India. Palaeoworld , 33, 801–828.

83.

Pandit

M. K.

, Carter

L. M.

, Ashwal

L. D.

, Tucker

R. D.

, Torsvik

T. H.

, Jamtveit

, & Bhushan

S. K.

(2003). Age, petrogenesis and significance of 1 Ga granitoids and related rocks from the Sendra area, Aravalli Craton, NW India. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 22, 363–381.

84.

Pandit

M. K.

, Kumar

, & Wang

(2021). Geochemistry and geochronology of A-type basement granitoids in the north-central Aravalli Craton: Implications on Paleoproterozoic geodynamics of NW Indian Block. Geoscience Frontiers , 12, 101084.

85.

Pati

J. K.

(1997). Specialized thematic studies of Bundelkhand Granitoids for appraisal of the mode of occurrence of molybdenum and associated mineralization, Rauli Kalyanpur area, Banda districts, U.P. Geological Survey of India Records , 129, 144–146.

86.

Petrus

J. A.

, & Kamber

B. S.

(2012). VizualAge: A novel approach to laser ablation ICP-MS U-Pb geochronology data reduction. Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research , 36, 247–270.

87.

Poller

, Huth

, Hoppe

, & Williams

I. S.

(2001). REE, U, Th, and Hf distribution in zircon from western Carpathian Variscan granitoids: A combined cathodoluminescence and ion microprobe study. American Journal of Science , 301, 858–867.

88.

Prasad

(1984). Geology, sedimentation and paleogeography of the Vindhyan Supergroup, S. E. Rajasthan. Memoir of the Geological Survey of India , 116, 148.

89.

Prasad

(2007). Obruchevella and other Terminal Proterozoic (Vendian) organic-walled microfossils from the Bhander Group (Vindhyan Supergroup), Madhya Pradesh. Journal of the Geological Society of India , 54, 13–60.

90.

Prasad

, Uniyal

S. N.

, & Asher

(2005). Organic-walled microfossils from the Proterozoic Vindhyan Supergroup of Son Valley, Madhya Pradesh, India. Journal of Palaeosciences , 54, 13–60.

91.

Quasim

M. A.

, Ghosh

S. K.

, Ahmad

A. H. M.

, Srivastava

V. K.

, & Albaroot

(2020). Integrated approach of lithofacies and granulometric analysis of the sediments of the Proterozoic Upper Kaimur Group of Vindhyan Supergroup, Son Valley, India: Palaeo-environmental implications. Geological Journal , 55, 5991–6012.

92.

Quasim

M. A.

, Hota

R. N.

, Ahmad

A. H. M.

, & Albaroot

(2018). An approach to provenance and tectonic setting of the Proterozoic Upper Kaimur Group sandstones, Son Valley: Constraints from framework mineralogy and heavy mineral analysis. Himalayan Geology , 39, 145–160.

93.

Ramakrishnan

, & Vaidyanadhan

(2010). Geology of India (vol. 1 and 2). GSI Publications.

94.

Rao

C. D.

, Santosh

, Kim

S. W.

, & Li

(2013). Arc magmatism in the Delhi Fold Belt: SHRIMP U–Pb zircon ages of granitoids and implications for Neoproterozoic convergent margin tectonics in NW India. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 78, 83–99.

95.

Rasmussen

, Bose

P. K.

, Sarkar

, Banerjee

, Fletcher

I. R.

, & McNaughton

N. J.

(2002). 1.6 Ga U-Pb zircon age for the Chorhat Sandstone, lower Vindhyan, India: Possible implications for early evolution of animals. Geology , 30, 103–106.

96.

Rathore

S. S.

, Venkatesan

T. R.

, & Srivastava

R. K.

(1999). Rb-Sr isotope dating of Neoproterozoic (Malani Group) magmatism from Southwest Rajasthan, India: Evidence of younger Pan-African thermal event by 40Ar-39Ar studies. Gondwana Research , 2, 271–281.

97.

Ray

J. S.

(2006). Age of the Vindhyan Supergroup: A review of recent findings. Journal of Earth System Science , 115, 149–160.

98.

Ray

J. S.

, Davis

W. J.

, & Shukla

A. D.

(2011). Age of lower Vindhyans of Rajasthan. In Abstract volume of International Conference on Precambrian Sedimentation and Tectonics and Second GPSS Meeting (p. 75). IIT Bombay.

99.

Ray

J. S.

, Martin

M. W.

, Veizer

, & Bowring

S. A.

(2002). U-Pb zircon dating and Sr isotope systematics of the Vindhyan Supergroup, India. Geology , 30, 131–134.

100.

Ray

J. S.

, Veizer

, & Davis

W. J.

(2003). C, O, Sr and Pb isotope systematics of carbonate sequences of the Vindhyan Supergroup, India: Age, diagenesis, correlations and implications for global events. Precambrian Research , 121, 103–140.

101.

Raza

, & Casshyap

S. M.

(1996). A tectono-sedimentary model of evolution of middle Proterozoic Vindhyan Basin (pp. 287–300). Memoirs–Geological Society of India.

102.

Raza

, Dayal

A. M.

, Khan

, Bhardwaj

V. R.

, & Rais

(2010). Geochemistry of lower Vindhyan clastic sedimentary rocks of Northwestern Indian shield: Implications for composition and weathering history of Proterozoic continental crust. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 39, 51–61.

103.

Raza

, Khan

, Bhardwaj

V. R.

, & Rais

(2012). Geochemistry of Mesoproterozoic sedimentary rocks of upper Vindhyan Group, southeastern Rajasthan and implications for weathering history, composition and tectonic setting of continental crust in the northern part of Indian shield. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 48, 160–172.

104.

Retallack

G. J.

, Matthews

N. A.

, Master

, Khangar

R. G.

, & Khan

(2021). Dickinsonia discovered in India and late Ediacaran biogeography. Gondwana Research , 90, 165–170.

105.

Roser

B. P.

, & Korsch

R. J.

(1988). Provenance signatures of sandstone–mudstone suites determined using discriminant function analysis of major element data. Chemical Geology , 67, 119–139.

106.

Sarangi

, Gopalan

, & Kumar

(2004). Pb–Pb age of earliest megascopic, eukaryotic alga bearing Rohtas Formation, Vindhyan Supergroup, India: Implications for Precambrian atmospheric oxygen evolution. Precambrian Research , 132, 107–121.

107.

Sastry

M. V. A.

, & Moitra

A. K.

(1984). Vindhyan stratigraphy – A review. Memoris of the Geological Survey of India , 116, 109–148.

108.

Scotese

C. R.

(2016). PALEOMAP PaleoAtlas for GPlates and the PaleoData Plotter Program . PALEOMAP Project. http://www.earthbyte.org/paleomap-paleoatlas-for-gplate.

109.

Seilacher

, Bose

P. K.

, & Pflüger

(1998). Triploblastic animals more than 1 billion years ago: Trace fossil evidence from India. Science , 282, 80–83.

110.

Sen

, Pande

, Sheth

H. C.

, Sharma

K. K.

, Sarkar

, Dayal

A. M.

, & Mistry

(2013). An Ediacaran–Cambrian thermal imprint in Rajasthan, western India: Evidence from 40 Ar–39 Ar geochronology of the Sindreth volcanics. Journal of Earth System Science , 122, 1477–1493.

111.

Sen

, & Mishra

(2020). Source rock composition of Kaimur Group siliciclastics from Vindhyan Supergroup, Central India: A response to thermal events associated with Bundelkhand Craton and Chhotanagpur Gneissic Complex at ~1.1 Ga. Geological Journal , 55, 4128–4158.

112.

Sen

, & Mishra

(2023). Implications of heavy mineral assemblage to sediment recycling, rare earth element budget and provenance of Kaimur sandstones, Vindhyan Supergroup, Son Valley. Journal of Earth System Science , 132, 5.

113.

Sen

, Mishra

, & Patranabis-Deb

(2014). Petrological study of the Kaimur Group sediments, Vindhyan Supergroup, Central India: Implications for provenance and tectonics. Geosciences Journal , 18, 307–324.

114.

Sharma

, Das

, Chakraborty

P. P.

, Shiraishi

, & Kayama

(2022). U–Pb zircon geochronology of a pyroclastic rock from the Parsoi Formation, Mahakoshal Group: Implications towards age and tectonics of the Basin in Central Indian Tectonic Zone. Geological Journal , 57, 4122–4138.

115.

Sharma

(2006). Late Palaeoproterozoic (Statherian) carbonaceous films from the Olive Shale (Koldaha Shale), Semri Group, Vindhyan Supergroup, India. Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India , 51, 27–35.

116.

Sharma

, & Shukla

(2009a). Mesoproterozoic coiled megascopic fossil Grypania spiralis from the Rohtas Formation, Semri Group, Bihar, India. Current Science , 96(12), 1636–1640.

117.

Sharma

, & Shukla

(2009b). Taxonomy and affinity of Early Mesoproterozoic megascopic helically coiled and related fossils from the Rohtas Formation, the Vindhyan Supergroup, India. Precambrian Research , 173, 105–122.

118.

Sharma

, Shukla

, & Sergeev

V. N.

(2021). Microfossils from the Krol ‘A’of the Lesser Himalaya, India: Additional supporting data for its early Ediacaran age. Palaeoworld , 30, 610–626.

119.

Sharma

, Tiwari

, Ahmad

, Shukla

, Singh

V. K.

, Pandek

S. K.

, Ansari

A. H.

, Shukla

, & Kumar

(2016). Palaeobiology of Indian Proterozoic and early Cambrian successions—Recent developments. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy , 82, 559–579.

120.

Shukla

A. D.

, George

B. G.

, & Ray

J. S.

(2020). Evolution of the Proterozoic Vindhyan Basin, Rajasthan, India: Insights from geochemical provenance of siliciclastic sediments. International Geology Review , 62, 153–167.

121.

Shukla

, & Sharma

(2016). A new assemblage of large-sized microfossils from the Salkhan Limestone (>1600 Ma), Semri Group, Vindhyan Supergroup, India. Journal of the Paleontological Society of India , 61, 287–299.

122.

Shrivastava

A. K.

, Raza

M. B.

, Saha

, Yi

, Nasipuri

, & Pati

J. K.

(2023). Paleo-Mesoproterozoic rifting along the margins of Archean Bhndelkhan Craton North-Central India: Timing the event from U=Pb SHRIMP zircon data and their geodynamic implications. Lithosphere , 2022, 4111013.

123.

Singh

V. K.

, Babu

, & Shukla

(2009). Discovery of carbonaceous remains from the Neoproterozoic shales of Vindhyan Supergroup, India. Journal of Evolutionary Biology Research , 1, 001–017.

124.

Spencer

C. J.

, Kirkland

C. L.

, & Taylor

R. J.

(2016). Strategies towards statistically robust interpretations of in situ U–Pb zircon geochronology. Geoscience Frontiers , 7, 581–589.

125.

Srivastava

A. P.

, & Rajagopalan

(1988). FT ages of Vindhyan glauconitic sandstone beds exposed around Rawatbhata area, Rajasthan. Journal of Geological Society of India , 32, 527–529.

126.

Srivastava

(2002). Carbonaceous megafossils from the Dholpura Shale, uppermost Vindhyan Supergroup, Rajasthan: An age implication. Journal of the Palaeontological Society of India , 47, 97–105.

127.

Srivastava

(2009). Trachyhystrichosphaera: An age-marker acanthomorph from the Bhander group, upper Vindhyan, Rajasthan. Journal of Earth System Science , 118, 575–582.

128.

Srivastava

(2012). Problematic fossils from the Palaeo-Neoproterozoic Vindhyan Supergroup, India. Arabian Journal of Geosciences , 5, 1411–1422.

129.

Stein

H. J.

, Hannah

J. L.

, Zimmerman

, Markey

R. J.

, Sarkar

S. C.

, & Pal

A. B.

(2004). A 2.5 Ga porphyry Cu–Mo–Au deposit at Malanjkhand, Central India: Implications for Late Archean continental assembly. Precambrian Research , 134, 189–226.

130.

Taylor

S. R.

, & McLennan

S. M.

(1985). The continental crust: Its composition and evolution (p. 312). Blackwell Scientific.

131.

Tripathy

G. R.

, & Singh

S. K.

(2015). Re–Os depositional age for black shales from the Kaimur Group, Upper Vindhyan, India. Chemical Geology , 413, 63–72.

132.

Turner

C. C.

, Meert

J. G.

, Pandit

M. K.

, & Kamenov

G. D.

(2014). A detrital zircon U–Pb and Hf isotopic transect across the Son Valley sector of the Vindhyan Basin, India: Implications for basin evolution and paleogeography. Gondwana Research , 26, 348–364.

133.

Upadhyay

(2008). Alkaline magmatism along the southeastern margin of the Indian shield: Implications for regional geodynamics and constraints on craton–Eastern Ghats Belt suturing. Precambrian Research , 162, 59–69.

134.

Valdiya

K. S.

(2016). Neoproterozoic intracratonic basins in Peninsular India. In The making of India (pp. 269–297). Springer.

135.

Van Lente

, Ashwal

L. D.

, Pandit

M. K.

, Bowring

S. A.

, & Torsvik

T. H.

(2009). Neoproterozoic hydrothermally altered basaltic rocks from Rajasthan, Northwest India: Implications for late Precambrian tectonic evolution of the Aravalli Craton. Precambrian Research , 170, 202–222.

136.

Venkateshwarlu

, & Rao

J. M.

(2013). Paleomagnetism of Bhander sediments from Bhopal Inlier, Vindhyan Supergroup. Journal of the Geological Society of India , 81, 330–336.

137.

Verma

, & Shukla

U. K.

(2015). Deposition of the upper Rewa sandstone formation of Proterozoic Rewa group of the Vindhyan Basin, MP, India: A reappraisal. Journal of the Geological Society of India , 86, 421–437.

138.

Verma

S. K.

, Verma

S. P.

, Oliveira

E. P.

, Singh

V. K.

, & Moreno

J. A.

(2016). LA-SF-ICP-MS zircon U–Pb geochronology of granitic rocks from the central Bundelkhand greenstone complex, Bundelkhand Craton, India. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 118, 125–137.

139.

Vinogradov

A. P.

, Tugarinov

A. I.

, Zhikov

C. I.

, Stanikova

N. I.

, Bibikova

E. V.

, & Khorre

(1964). Geochronology of the Indian Precambrian. In Report of the 22nd International Geological Congress (Vol. 10, pp. 553–567).

140.

Wang

, Cawood

P. A.

, & Pandit

M. K.

(2021). India in the Nuna to Gondwana supercontinent cycles: Clues from the north Indian and Marwar Blocks. American Journal of Science , 321(1–2), 83–117.

141.

Wang

, Cawood

P. A.

, Pandit

M. K.

, Zhou

M. F.

, & Zhao

J. H.

(2019). Evolving passive- and active-margin tectonics of the Paleoproterozoic Aravalli Basin, NW India. Bulletin Geological Society of America , 131(3–4), 426–443.

142.

Wani

, Mondal

M. E. A.

, & Ahmad

(2022). Geochemistry of metasedimentary rocks of the Sonakhan and Mahakoshal greenstone belts, Central India: Implications for paleoweathering, paleogeography and mechanisms of greenstone belt development. Acta Geochimica , 41, 64–83.

143.

Xiao

, Tang

, Hughes

N. C.

, McKenzie

N. R.

, & Myrow

P. M.

(2016). Biostratigraphic and detrital zircon age constraints on the basement of the Himalayan Foreland Basin: Implications for a Proterozoic link to the Lesser Himalaya and cratonic India. Terra Nova , 28, 419–426.

144.

Yadav

B. S.

, Ahmad

, Kaulina

, Bayanova

, & Bhutani

(2020). Origin of post-collisional A-type granites in the Mahakoshal Supracrustal Belt, Central Indian Tectonic Zone, India: Zircon U-Pb ages and geochemical evidences. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences , 191, 104247.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.31 MB

Detrital zircon U–Pb ages of the Upper Vindhyan sequence from the Bhander Sandstone of the Bhopal Inlier in Central India and its implications for provenance of the Vindhyan Basin

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Geological Background

The Vindhyan Basin

Debate on the Termination Age of Upper Vindhyan Sedimentation

Upper Bhander Sandstone (Equivalent to Maihar Sandstone) from the Bhopal Inlier

Results

Petrographic Study

Whole-rock Geochemistry

Detrital Zircon Geochronology and Trace Element Analysis of Zircons from the Upper Bhander Sandstone of Bhopal Inlier, Central India

Detrital Zircon Geochronology

The Compilation of the Magmatic Events (Mainly the Ages of Gneisses and Granitoids) from the Satpura Mobile Belt (CITZ), Aravalli-BGC Craton and Bundelkhand Craton.

Trace Element Analysis of Zircons

Potential Sources of Detritus for the Upper Bhander Sandstone in Bhopal Inlier.

Discussion

Potential Sources of Detrital Zircons of Upper Bhander Sandstone Exposed in Bhopal Inlier

Post-1,000 Ma Zircon Grains: Their Bearing on the Depositional Age of Upper Vindhyan Succession

Compilation of Palaeobiological Records from Bhander Group, Son Valley Sector Suggesting Late Neoproterozoic Age.

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Declaration of Conflicting Interest

Funding

Supplemental Material

ORCID iD

References

Supplementary Material