Advertisement

Structures and morphotectonic evolution of the frontal fold–thrust belt, Kameng river section, Arunachal Himalaya, India

  • T K Goswami
  • D Bezbaruah
  • Soumyajit Mukherjee
  • R K Sarmah
  • S Jabeed
Article
  • 45 Downloads

Abstract

The Neogene–Quaternary Siwalik foreland fold and thrust belt is studied for better understanding of tectonics along the Kameng river section of Arunachal Pradesh, India. The Kimi, Dafla, Subansiri, and the Kimin Formation correspond to Lower, Middle and Upper Siwaliks, respectively. The lithology in the foreland basin is dominantly sandstones, siltstones, claystones, carbonaceous shales, and boulder beds in the upper part. The structural style of the sedimentary sequence from the Main Boundary Thrust southward shows first order ramp-flat geometry. The brittle shear transfers slip across glide horizons to shallower depth. Repeated splay generations from a major regional-scale floor transfers slip from one glide horizon to another that shortens and thickens the crust. In the micro-scale, the lithological response in the structural development is well documented as pressure solution seams and other diagenetic deformation signatures. The basement asperity plays a significant role as the moving thrust front produced a major lateral ramp. The differential movement of the mountain front on both sides of the ramp is decipherable. This is especially true at the western part of the SE flowing Kameng river. The tectonic evolution of the area initiated with slip along the MBT \(\sim \)11 Ma ago along with the deposition of the Siwalik sediments. With southward propagation of the mountain front, the foreland basin shifted towards S, produced splay thrusts from the Himalayan Frontal Thrust-1 (HFT-1), which has been uplifting the Kimin and the older terraces.

Keywords

Sub-Himalaya cross-section balancing brittle fault 

Notes

Acknowledgements

TKG, DB, RKS and SJ thank the previous Head of the Department for support. They are grateful to the University Grants Commission (UGC) for providing Special Assistance Program to the Department, which partly supported the fieldwork. TKG thanks additionally to the UGC for providing financial support: grant number: F.N. 41-1025/2012 (SR), 2012. SM acknowledges IIT Bombay’s CPDA grant. A research sabbatical assigned by IIT Bombay to SM for the year 2017 helped to finish this manuscript. Thanks to the anonymous reviewer for the positive comments in great detail, and Prof. Saibal Gupta for handling this article.

References

  1. Acharyya S K 2007 Evolution of the Himalayan Paleogene foreland basin, influence of its litho-packet on the formation of thrust-related domes and windows in the Eastern Himalayas – A review; J. Asian Earth Sci.  31 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ader T and Avouac J-P et al. 2012 Convergence rate across the Nepal Himalaya and interseismic coupling on the Main Himalayan Thrust: Implications for seismic hazard; J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 117 B04403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhattacharya A R 2000 Deformational regimes across the Kumaun Himalaya: A study in strain patterns; Gond. Res. Memoir  6 81–90.Google Scholar
  4. Burbank W D and Verges J 1994 Reconstruction of topo-graphy and related depositional systems during active thrusting; J. Geophys. Res.  3 1–25.Google Scholar
  5. Chirouze F, Huyghe P, van der Beek P, Chauvel C, Chakraborty T, Dupont-Nivet G and Bernet M 2013 Tectonics, exhumation, and drainage evolution of the eastern Himalaya since 13 Ma from detrital geochemistry and thermochronology, Kameng River Section, Arunachal Pradesh; GSA Bull.  125 523–538.Google Scholar
  6. De Sarkar S, Mathew G, Pande K, Phukon P and Singhvi A K 2014 Drainage migration and out of sequence thrusting in Bhalukpong, western Arunachal Himalaya, India; J. Geodyn.  81 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Godin L, Grujic D and Law R D et al. 2006 Channel flow, extrusion and extrusion in continental collision zones: An introduction; In: Channel flow, extrusion and extrusion in continental collision zones (eds) Law R D and Searle M P, Geol. Soc. London Spec. Publ. 268 1–23.Google Scholar
  8. Goswami T K and Sarmah R K 2013 Conditions of compaction and development of diagenetic microstructures in the Dafla and Subansiri sandstones, western Arunachal Pradesh, India; European Sci. J.  9(12).Google Scholar
  9. Kelty T K, Dubey C S and Yin A 2004 Structure and crustal shortening of the Subhimalayan fold and thrust belt, western Arunachal Pradesh, NE India; Him. J. Sci.  2 175.Google Scholar
  10. Khanal S and Robinson D M 2013 Upper crustal shortening and forward modeling of the Himalayan thrust belt along the Budhi-Gandaki River, central Nepal; Int. J. Earth Sci.  102 1871–1891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Khanal S, Robinson D M, Kohn M J and Mandal S 2015a Evidence for a far-traveled thrust sheet in the Greater Himalayan thrust system, and an alternative model to building the Himalaya; Tectonics  34(1) 31–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khanal S, Robinson D M, Mandal S and Simkhada P 2015b Structural, geochronological and geochemical evidence for two distinct thrust sheets in the ‘Main Central thrust zone’, the Main Central thrust and Ramgarh–Munsiari thrust: Implications for upper crustal shortening in central Nepal; In: Tectonics of the Himalaya (eds) Mukherjee S, Carosi R, van der Beek P, Mukherjee B K and Robinson D, Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ. 412 221–245.Google Scholar
  13. Labaume P 1987 Syn-diagenetic deformation of a turbiditic succession related to submarine gravity nappe emplacement, Autapie Nappe, French Alps; Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ. 29 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lang K and Huntington K W 2014 Antecedence of the Yarlung–Siang–Brahmaputra River, eastern Himalaya; Earth Planet. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.  397 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lang K A, Huntington K W, Burmester R and Housen B 2016 Rapid exhumation of the eastern Himalayan syntaxis since the late Miocene; GSA Bull.  128 1403–1422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mandal S, Robinson D M, Khanal S and Das O 2015 Redefining the tectonostratigraphic and structural architecture of the Almora klippe and the Ramgarh–Munsiari thrust sheet in NW India; In: Tectonics of the Himalaya (eds) Mukherjee S, Carosi R, van der Beek P, Mukherjee B K, Robinson D, Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ.  41 247–269.Google Scholar
  17. Mandal S, Robinson D M, Kohn M J, Khanal S, Das O and Bose S 2016 Zircon U–Pb ages and Hf isotopes of the Askot klippe, Kumaun, northwest India: Implications for Paleoproterozoic tectonics, basin evolution and associated metallogeny of the northern Indian cratonic margin; Tectonics  35 965–982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Martin A J 2017 A review of Himalayan stratigraphy, magmatism, and structure; Gond. Res.  49 42–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mukherjee S 2012a A micro-duplex; Int. J. Earth Sci.  101 503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mukherjee S 2012b Tectonic implications and morphology of trapezoidal mica grains from the Sutlej section of the Higher Himalayan Shear Zone, Indian Himalaya; J. Geol. 120 575–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mukherjee S 2013 Channel flow extrusion model to constrain dynamic viscosity and Prandtl number of the Higher Himalayan Shear Zone; Int. J. Eath Sci. 102 1811–1835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mukherjee S 2015 A review on out-of-sequence deformation in the Himalaya; In: Tectonics of the Himalaya (eds) Mukherjee S, Carosi R, van der Beek P, Mukherjee B K and Robinson D, Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ. 412 67–109.Google Scholar
  23. Mukherjee S and Koyi H A 2010 Higher Himalayan Shear Zone, Sutlej section: Structural geology and extrusion mechanism by various combinations of simple shear, pure shear and channel flow in shifting modes; Int. J. Earth Sci.  99 1267–1303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mukherjee S, Carosi R, van der Beek P A, Mukherjee B K and Robinson D M 2015 Tectonics of the Himalaya: An introduction; Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ.  412 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Passchier C W K and Trouw R A J 2005 Microtectonics; 2nd edn, Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Poblet J and Lisle R J 2011 Kinematic evolution and structural styles of fold-and-thrust belts; Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ.  349 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schelling D, Cater J, Seago R and Ojha TP 1991 A balanced cross-section across the central Nepal Siwalik hills: Hitauda to Amlekhganj; J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Univ. Ser. 23 1–9.Google Scholar
  28. Srinivasan V 2003 Stratigraphy and Structure of Siwaliks in Arunachal Pradesh: A Reappraisal through Remote Sensing Techniques; J. Geol. Soc. Ind.  62 139–151.Google Scholar
  29. Srivastava P and Mishra D K 2008 Morpho-sedimentary records of active tectonics at the Kameng river exit, NE Himalaya; Geomorphol.  96 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tearpock D J and Bische R E 2002 Applied Subsurface Geological Mapping with Structural Methods; 2nd edn, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Thakur V C 1992 Geology of western Himalaya; 19 Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  32. Thakur V C 2013 Active tectonics of Himalayan Frontal Fault system; Int. J. Earth Sci.  102 1791–1810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thakur V C, Joshi M, Suresh N, Jayangondaperumal R and Singh A 2014 Partitioning of convergence in nortwest Sub-Himalaya: Estimation of late Quaternary uplift and convergence rates across the Kangara reentrant, North India; Int. J. Earth Sci. 103 1037–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Verma P K and Tandon S K 1976 Geological observations in parts of Kameng district, Arunachal Pradesh (NEFA); Him. Geol.  6 259–286.Google Scholar
  35. Valdiya K S 1998 The Dynamic Himalaya; Univ. Press (I) Ltd.Google Scholar
  36. Valdiya K S 2003 Reactivation of Himalayan Frontal Fault: Implications; Curr. Sci.  85 1031–1040.Google Scholar
  37. Yin A 2006 Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the Himalayan orogen as constrained by along-strike variation of structural geometry, extrusion history, and foreland sedimentation; Earth Sci. Rev.  76 1–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yin A, Dubey C S, Kelty T K, Gehrels G E, Chou C Y, Grove M and Lovera O 2006 Structural evolution of the Arunachal Himalaya and implications for asymmetric development of the Himalayan orogen; Curr. Sci.  90 1–12.Google Scholar
  39. Yin A, Dubey C S, Kelty T K, Harrison M, Chou C Y and Celerier J 2010 Geologic correlation of the Himalayan orogen and Indian craton: Part 2. Structural geology, geochronology, and tectonic evolution of the Eastern Himalaya; GSA Bull. 122 360–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Academy of Sciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • T K Goswami
    • 1
  • D Bezbaruah
    • 1
  • Soumyajit Mukherjee
    • 2
  • R K Sarmah
    • 1
  • S Jabeed
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied GeologyDibrugarh UniversityDibrugarhIndia
  2. 2.Department of Earth SciencesIndian Institute of Technology-BombayPowai, MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations