geometry and crustal shortening of the himalayan fold-thrust belt

30203 1st pages / 1 of 21

ABSTRACT

We present a new geologic map of eastern and central Bhutan and four balanced cross sections through the Himalayan fold-thrust belt. Major structural features, from south to north, include: (1) a single thrust sheet of Sub himalayan rocks above the Main Fron-tal thrust; (2) the upper Lesser Himalayan duplex system, which repeats horses of the Neoproterozoic–Cambrian(?) Baxa Group below a roof thrust (Shumar thrust) carrying the Paleo protero zoic Daling-Shumar Group; (3) the lower Lesser Himalayan duplex system, which repeats horses of the Daling-Shumar Group and Neoproterozoic–Ordovician(?) Jaishidanda Formation, with the Main Cen-tral thrust (MCT) acting as the roof thrust; (4) the structurally lower Greater Hima layan section above the MCT with overlying Tethyan Himalayan rock in stratigraphic contact in central Bhutan and structural contact above the South Tibetan detachment in eastern Bhu-tan; and (5) the structurally higher Greater Himalayan section above the Kakhtang thrust. Cross sections show 164–267 km short-ening in Subhimalayan and Lesser Himalayan rocks, 97–156 km structural overlap across the MCT, and 31–53 km structural overlap across the Kakhtang thrust, indicating a total of 344–405 km of minimum crustal shorten-ing (70%–75%). Our data show an eastward continuation of Lesser Himalayan duplex-ing identifi ed in northwest India, Nepal, and Sikkim, which passively folded the overlying Greater Himalayan and Tethyan Himalayan sections. Shortening and percent shorten-ing estimates across the orogen, although minima, do not show an overall eastward increase, which may suggest that shortening variations are controlled more by the origi-nal width and geometry of the margin than by external parameters such as erosion and convergence rates.

INTRODUCTION

Collision between the Indian and Eurasian plates, which started in the Eocene (Yin and Harrison, 2000; Leech et al., 2005; Guillot et al., 2008) and continues today, produced the Tibetan-Himalayan orogenic system, our best example of modern continent-continent colli-sion. Global positioning system (GPS) motion rates and neotectonic deformation rates show that approximately one-half (~20 mm/yr) of the convergence between these two plates may be accommodated through crustal shortening in the Himalayan fold-thrust belt (DeMets et al., 1994; Bilham et al., 1997; Larson et al., 1999; Lave and Avouac, 2000; Mugnier et al., 2003). This contraction of the northern Indian margin is ac-commodated by a series of south-vergent thrust faults, which detach and repeat the Proterozoic to Paleocene sedimentary cover (Gansser, 1964; Powell and Conaghan, 1973; LeFort, 1975; Mattauer, 1986; Hauck et al., 1998; Hodges, 2000; DeCelles et al., 2002; Murphy and Yin, 2003; Yin, 2006; Yin et al., 2009).

Determining the range of shortening magni-tudes along the length of the Himalayan fold-thrust belt is essential for testing predictions of how convergence is accommodated through-out the orogen, and for estimating the budget of crustal material into the orogenic system. Predictions of fi rst-order shortening variations along-strike include: (1) shortening and percent shortening should increase from west to east, as a result of postcollisional, counterclockwise rotation of India (Patriat and Achache, 1984; Dewey et al., 1989) or an eastward increase in convergence rates (Guillot et al., 1999) and ero-sion rates (Grujic et al., 2006; Yin et al., 2006); (2) shortening magnitude should mimic the width of the Tibetan Plateau measured in an arc-normal direction (DeCelles et al., 2002), or (3) shortening should be the greatest at the center of the orogen and decrease to the east and west (classic “bow-and-arrow” model of Elliott [1976]). To date, several studies have estimated Himalayan shortening with regional-

scale balanced cross sections. The majority of shortening estimates come from the central and western portions of the orogen, in Paki-stan, northwest India, and central and western Nepal (Coward and Butler, 1985; Srivastava and Mitra , 1994; DeCelles et al., 1998, 2001; Robinson et al., 2006), where much of the previous work on Himalayan stratigraphy and structure has been focused (e.g., Srivastava and Mitra, 1994; Hodges et al., 1996; Upreti, 1996; Vannay and Hodges, 2003; Searle et al., 1997; DeCelles et al., 2000, 2001; Vannay and Grase-mann, 2001; Richards et al., 2005; Robinson et al., 2006). These shortening estimates range between ~400 and 900 km (DeCelles et al., 2002; Robinson et al., 2006) and show a sys-tematic increase from the western syntaxis to the midpoint of the Himalayan arc.

However, comparable shortening estimates for the eastern quarter of the Himalayan oro-gen are either lacking in key areas or based on preliminary efforts. The eastern Himalaya occu-pies a key position along the arc for testing the predictions of systematic shortening variation listed above, giving shortening estimates here a greater impact. However, in Sikkim, Bhutan, and Arunachal Pradesh (Fig. 1), accessibility for fi eld research has only come recently, and mini-mal geologic mapping and stratigraphic data are available, particularly for the frontal Lesser Himalayan portion of the fold-thrust belt (e.g., Acharyya, 1980; Raina and Srivastava, 1980; Gansser, 1983; Bhargava, 1995; Kumar, 1997; Yin et al., 2006), inhibiting a rigorous evaluation of fold-thrust belt geometry. As a result, only preliminary studies illustrating geometry and estimating shortening are available from Sikkim (Mitra et al., 2010), Bhutan (McQuarrie et al., 2008), and Arunachal Pradesh (Yin et al., 2010).

In Bhutan (Fig. 1), most recent work has fo-cused on determining the metamorphic and defor ma tional history of the Greater Himalayan section, above the Main Central thrust (MCT) (Swapp and Hollister, 1991; Grujic et al., 1996, 2002; Davidson et al., 1997; Daniel et al., 2003; Hollister and Grujic, 2006; Long and McQuarrie,

For permission to copy, contact [email protected]© 2010 Geological Society of America

1

GSA Bulletin; Month/Month 2010; v. 1xx; no. X/X; p. 1–21; doi: 10.1130/B30203.1; 8 fi gures; 3 tables.

†E-mail: [email protected]

Geometry and crustal shortening of the Himalayan fold-thrust belt, eastern and central Bhutan

Sean Long1†, Nadine McQuarrie1, Tobgay Tobgay1, and Djordje Grujic2

1Department of Geosciences, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA2Department of Earth Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4J1, Canada

Long et al.

2 Geological Society of America Bulletin, Month/Month 2010

30203 1st pages / 2 of 21

2010). However, recent studies that present new geologic mapping between the MCT and Main Frontal thrust (MFT) in eastern Bhutan, and an extensive U-Pb detrital zircon data set (McQuarrie et al., 2008; Long et al., 2010), have built a detailed stratigraphy for Subhimalayan and Lesser Himalayan rocks. The combined re-sults of these foreland- and hinterland-focused studies facilitate, for the fi rst time in Bhutan, a de-tailed study focused on the geometry, kine matics, and shortening of the Bhutan fold-thrust belt.

The main objective of this paper is to provide accurate estimates of shortening through the Himalayan fold-thrust belt in Bhutan. To ac-complish this, we introduce a new, detailed geo-logic map of eastern and central Bhutan, based on mapping carried out in three separate fi eld seasons, and four regional-scale, deformed and

retrodeformed, balanced cross sections, which illustrate the geometry of the fold-thrust belt, and provide minimum shortening estimates. These new shortening estimates fi ll a signifi cant data gap for the eastern Himalaya, and allow for the fi rst along-strike comparison of shortening estimates across the full length of the orogen. The second objective of this paper is to present an updated compilation of shortening and per-cent shortening estimates along the Himalayan arc, in order to test the predictions listed above of systematic variation along the orogen.

GEOLOGIC BACKGROUND

Heim and Gansser (1939) and Gansser (1964) originally divided the Himalayan fold-thrust belt into four tectonostratigraphic zones

(Fig. 1), which represent distinct structural packages that have been imbricated and thrust to the south since the collision of India and Asia (e.g., Gansser, 1964; Powell and Conaghan, 1973; LeFort, 1975; Mattauer, 1986; Hodges, 2000; DeCelles et al., 2002; Murphy and Yin, 2003; Yin, 2006). From south to north, these are the Subhimalayan, Lesser Himalayan, Greater Himalayan, and Tethyan (or Tibetan) Hima-layan zones. The Subhimalayan zone represents synorogenic rocks, and the Lesser Himalayan, Greater Himalayan, and Tethyan Himalayan zones represent packages of pre-Himalayan sedi-mentary and igneous rocks of Greater India.

The Lesser Himalayan zone consists of clas-tic and carbonate sedimentary rocks originally deposited on the northern margin of the Indian craton (Gansser, 1964; Schelling and Arita,

STD

STD STD

STD

STD

SK

UKTCKLLW

MCT

MCT

MCT

PW

LS

MCT

MCT

KT

KT

MBTMBT

MFT

Paro Formation

Quaternary sediment

Lesser Himalaya

Greater Himalaya:Higher structural level, leucogranite

Chekha Formation

Tethyan (Tibetan) Himalaya:

Subhimalaya (Siwalik Group)

Higher structural level, undifferentiated

Lower structural level, orthogneiss unit

Lower structural level, metasedimentary unit

Paleozoic and Mesozoic, undiff.

Maneting Formation

Lesser and Subhimalaya:

?

?

?

Area of Figure 2

A

A′

B

B′

C

C′

D

D′

Sikkim

ArunachalPradesh

?

N

SamdrupJongkhar

Pemagatshel

Trashigang

TrashiYangtse

Lhuentse

MongarShemgang

JakarTrongsa

Sarpang

Damphu

Dagana

Haa

Paro

Thimpu

Samtse

Chhukha

Gasa

Punakha

WangduePhodrang

Phuntsholing

28°N

27°N

91°E90°E89°E

92°E0 20 40

kilometers

Bhutan

China (Tibet)

India

GH LH

Delhi

India

TH

Bhutan

80°E 90°E

20°N

30°N

Figure 1. Simplifi ed geologic map of Bhutan and surrounding region, after Gansser (1983), Bhargava (1995), Grujic et al. (2002), and our own mapping. Locations of the four tectonostratigraphic zones shown, along with bounding structures. Area of detailed geologic map (Fig. 2) outlined, along with locations of lines of section for four balanced cross sections (Fig. 3). Upper left inset shows generalized geo-logic map of central and eastern Himalayan orogen (modifi ed from Gansser, 1983). Structural detail left out of Tethyan Himalayan section north of Bhutan; map patterns of NE-striking, crosscutting normal faults northwest of Lingshi syncline (Yadong cross structure on Fig. 1 of Grujic et al. [2002]) are simplifi ed. Abbreviations: (1) inset: GH—Greater Himalaya; LH—Lesser Himalaya; TH—Tethyan Himalaya: (2) structures from north to south: STD—South Tibetan detachment; KT—Kakhtang thrust; MCT—Main Central thrust; MBT—Main Boundary thrust; MFT—Main Frontal thrust; (3) windows and klippen from west to east: LS—Lingshi syncline; PW—Paro window; TCK—Tang Chu klippe; UK—Ura klippe; SK—Sakteng klippe; LLW—Lum La window (location from Yin et al., 2009).

Shortening and geometry of Bhutan fold-thrust belt

Geological Society of America Bulletin, Month/Month 2010 3

30203 1st pages / 3 of 21

1991; Upreti, 1999; Yin, 2006). The Lesser Himalayan zone contains units as old as Paleo-proterozoic (Parrish and Hodges, 1996; Upreti, 1999; DeCelles et al., 2000; Richards et al., 2005; McQuarrie et al., 2008; Long et al., 2010) that are exposed across the entire orogen (Kohn et al., 2010). Younger Lesser Himalayan strata include Mesoproterozoic rocks local to Nepal (Martin et al., 2005; Robinson et al., 2006), Neoproterozoic to Cambrian and locally Ordo-vician rocks in northwest India, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, and Arunachal Pradesh (Valdiya, 1995; Myrow et al., 2003; Hughes et al., 2005; Rich-ards et al., 2005; Shukla et al., 2006; McQuarrie et al., 2008; Schopf et al., 2008; Long et al., 2010) and Permian rocks across most of the length of the orogen (Brookfi eld, 1993; DeCelles et al., 2001; Najman et al., 2006; Robinson et al., 2006; Yin, 2006; Long et al., 2010, in press). During Himalayan orogenesis, much of the Lesser Himalayan section was metamor-phosed to greenschist facies (Gansser, 1964; Schelling and Arita, 1991; Robinson et al., 2003), and Lesser Himalayan rocks were inter-nally deformed and thrust southward over the Subhimalayan zone across the Main Boundary thrust (MBT) (Gansser, 1964).

The Greater Himalayan zone consists of upper amphibolite facies (Gansser, 1964; LeFort , 1975; Harrison et al., 1997) meta igneous and metasedi mentary rocks, and synorogenic intrusive igneous rocks, which structurally overlie the Lesser Himalayan zone across the Main Central thrust (MCT) (Heim and Gansser, 1939; Gansser, 1964). Sedimentary protoliths of Greater Himalayan metamorphic rocks range between Neoproterozoic and early Paleozoic in age (Parrish and Hodges, 1996; DeCelles et al., 2000; Gehrels et al., 2003; Martin et al., 2005; Myrow et al., 2009; Long and McQuarrie , 2010), and Cambrian–Ordovician orthogneiss units are present in the Greater Himalayan section throughout the orogen (Stocklin and Bhattarai , 1977; Stocklin, 1980; Parrish and Hodges, 1996; DeCelles et al., 2000; Gehrels et al., 2003; Martin et al., 2005; Cawood et al., 2007; Long and McQuarrie, 2010). Evidence for widespread Cambrian–Ordovician metamor-phism and igneous activity has been interpreted as early Paleozoic orogenic activity that affected the Greater Himalayan section (DeCelles et al., 2000; Gehrels et al., 2003; Cawood et al., 2007). Since the contact between the Greater Himala-yan and Lesser Himalayan sections is always the MCT, the original paleogeographic relation-ship between these two tectonostratigraphic zones is in question.

The Tethyan Himalayan zone consists of Neoproterozoic to Eocene sedimentary rocks that in most places sit structurally above the

Greater Himalayan zone across a top-to-the-north–sense shear zone and/or one or mul-tiple top-to-the-north–sense detachment faults called the South Tibetan detachment system (Burg, 1983; Burchfi el et al., 1992). However, several studies throughout the Himalaya have interpreted a stratigraphic contact at the base of the Tethyan Himalayan section, where these rocks are preserved above lower-grade Greater Himalayan rocks in the frontal, southern por-tions of the orogen (Stocklin, 1980; Gehrels et al., 2003; Robinson et al., 2003; Long and McQuarrie, 2010). Stratigraphic evidence for Cambrian–Ordovician uplift, exhumation, and coarse-clastic deposition in northwest India and Nepal (Gehrels et al., 2003, and refer-ences therein) indicates that early Paleozoic orogenic activity also affected the Tethyan (or Tibetan) Himalayan section. This tectonic ac-tivity was succeeded by a passive margin set-ting on northern Greater India, represented by an Ordovician to Carboniferous shelf sequence that accumulated on the southern margin of the Paleotethys Ocean (Gaetani and Garzanti, 1991; Brookfi eld, 1993; Garzanti, 1999), and a Permian to Mesozoic passive margin sequence that accumulated on the southern margin of the Neotethys Ocean, which postdates the late Paleo zoic breakup of Greater India and the northward migration of crustal fragments toward Asia (Yin and Harrison, 2000). South-vergent deformation of the Tethyan Himalayan zone commenced during the Eocene with the initiation of northward subduction of the In-dian plate under Asia (Powell and Conaghan, 1973; Coward and Butler, 1985; Mattauer, 1986; Ratschbacher et al., 1994; Yin and Harri-son, 2000; Ding et al., 2005; Leech et al., 2005; Aikman et al., 2008; Guillot et al., 2008).

The Subhimalayan zone consists of the Mio-cene to Pliocene Siwalik Group (Gansser, 1964; Tukuoka et al., 1986; Harrison et al., 1993; Quade et al., 1995; Burbank et al., 1996; DeCelles et al. 1998, 2001, 2004; Ojha et al., 2000; Huyghe et al., 2005; Robinson et al., 2006), and repre-sents foreland basin deposits shed off of the ac-tively growing Himalayan orogen. The Siwaliks are bound at their base by the MFT, which coin-cides with the present Hima layan topographic front, and bound at their top by the MBT. South of the MFT, modern Hima layan foreland basin sediments onlap onto cratonic rocks of north-ern India. While synorogenic units as old as Eocene have been recognized in Nepal , north-west India, and Arunachal Pradesh, they are structurally above the MBT and are mapped as part of the Lesser Himalayan zone (Acharyya, 1980; DeCelles et al., 1998, 2001, 2004; Rich-ards et al., 2005; Robin son et al., 2006; Yin et al., 2006, 2009).

MAPPING METHODS

This study presents new geologic mapping, which was undertaken in the fi eld at a scale of 1:50,000, and is shown at 1:250,000 on Figure 23. Mapping was focused between the MFT and the Kakhtang thrust. Map data from the structurally higher Greater Himalayan section above the Kakhtang thrust are projected from the geologic maps of Gansser (1983), Gokul (1983), and Bhargava (1995) (Fig. 2*). Map data were collected in four ~100-km-long, north-south traverses (Fig. 2), which provide data for four balanced cross sections (Fig. 3 [see footnote 3]. The four traverses, listed from east to west, are: (1) along roads south and north of the town of Trashigang; (2) along the Kuru Chu (note: chu means river), which was along roads north of 27°10′N and trails south of this latitude; (3) between the Kuru Chu and Bhumtang Chu, along a road be-tween 27°40′N and 27°20′N, and along a trail that meets the Manas Chu at its southern end; and (4) on roads, north and south of the town of Trongsa, which pass through the town of Shem gang, and end in the south at the town of Geylegphug. Map data from these traverses were projected onto the Trashigang (A–A′), Kuru Chu (B–B′), Bhumtang Chu (C–C′), and Mangde Chu (D–D′) cross sec-tions, respectively (Fig. 3).

In addition, we collected map data in two along-strike transects, one on a trail between the Kuru Chu and the town of Pemagatshel, and another on the road connecting the towns of Trashigang, Mongar, Ura, Jakar, and Trongsa (Figs. 1 and 2). Our mapping was integrated with published geologic maps of Bhutan (Gansser, 1983; Gokul, 1983; Bhar-gava, 1995; Grujic et al., 2002), to help trace contacts and structures between traverses (see Fig. 2 caption).

The level of rock exposure in eastern Bhu-tan varies signifi cantly with elevation and the presence or absence of road or trail cuts. In general, south of ~27°00′N, lower eleva-tions and wetter climates resulted in much heavier vegetation cover, and discontinu-ous exposures of ~5- to 20-m-thick sections spaced apart ~250–500 m on average. Two exceptions to this were on the road north of Samdrup Jongkhar and the road north of Geyleg phug, where roadcuts permitted ex-posures spaced every ~100–200 m. In gen-eral, north of 27°00′N, vegetation cover was much more sparse, and exposures were more closely spaced (~100–200 m).

*Figures 2 and 3 are on a separate sheet accompa-nying this issue.

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 4 of 21

BHUTAN TECTONOSTRATIGRAPHY

Subhimalayan Zone

The Siwalik Group coarsens upward from siltstone and claystone to sandstone and con-glomerate, and has been divided into lower, middle, and upper members (Nautiyal et al., 1964; Jangpangi, 1974; Gansser, 1983; Lakshminarayana and Singh, 1995; McQuarrie et al., 2008; Long et al., 2010). Near Samdrup Jongkhar (Figs. 1 and 2), all three members are exposed, with a combined thickness of 5.6 km (Long et al., 2010) (Fig. 4). Along the Manas Chu (Fig. 2), only the lower and middle members are exposed, with a total thickness of 2.3 km.

Lesser Himalayan Zone

In eastern and central Bhutan, the Lesser Hima layan zone consists of six map units, with a combined thickness between 8 and 19 km (Fig. 4). Lesser Himalayan units can be divided into two stratigraphic successions: (1) the Paleo protero zoic lower Lesser Himalayan sec-tion, and (2) the Neoproterozoic–Paleozoic upper Lesser Himalayan section. Stratigraphy and deposition age constraints of Lesser Hima-layan map units in Bhutan are discussed in de-tail in Long et al. (2010.)

Lower Lesser Himalayan SectionThe lower Lesser Himalayan section consists

of the Paleoproterozoic Daling-Shumar Group, which displays a consistent two-part stratig-raphy of quartzite of the Shumar Formation be-low schist, phyllite, and quartzite of the Daling Formation (McQuarrie et al., 2008; Long et al., 2010). Both units are metamorphosed to lower greenschist facies (Gansser, 1983). The lower contact is always the Shumar thrust, which places the Daling-Shumar Group over the Baxa Group (Ray et al., 1989; Ray, 1995; McQuarrie et al., 2008). The upper contact is an uncon-formity with the Jaishidanda Formation (Long et al., 2010). An upper stratigraphic contact with the Baxa Group is not observed, although this contact is documented in Sikkim (Bhattacharyya and Mitra, 2009; Mitra et al., 2010).

The Shumar Formation consists of thick-bedded quartzite, with schist and phyllite inter beds. The Shumar Formation is generally 1–2 km thick, but a 6-km-thick section is local to the Kuru Chu valley (Long et al., 2010). The Daling Formation overlies the Shumar Forma-tion across a gradational contact, consists of green phyllite and schist with quartzite interbeds, and is 2.2–3.2 km thick. Granitic orthogneiss bodies are observed in variable stratigraphic

Less

er

Him

ala

ya

1.5–2.6up

pe

r LH

un

its

low

er

LH u

nit

s

Su

bh

ima

laya

(Siw

alik

Gp

)

1.3–2.8

1.0–1.3

1.5

lower member

middle member

upper member

un

diff

:

2.3

–6

.7 k

m

(Mio

cen

e-

Plio

cen

e)

MFT

Baxa Gp.

Diuri Fm.

Gondwana succession

Shumar Fm.

Daling Fm.

Da

ling

-Sh

um

ar

Gp

.

Jaishidanda Fm.

MBT

2.4–3.0

0.5–2.5

1.0–6.0

1.8–3.2

0.5–1.7

ST

MCT

(Paleoproterozoic)

(Paleoproterozoic)

(Neoproterozoic-Ordovician[?])

(Permian)

(Permian)

(Neoproterozoic-Cambrian[?])

depositional or STD

1.5–8.0

0.5–6.7

tota

l: 5

.3–

10

.5 k

m

Orthogneiss unit

Metasedimentary unit(Neoproterozoic-Ordovician[?])

(Cambrian-Ordovician)

Gre

ate

r H

ima

laya

(str

uct

ura

lly lo

we

r)

2.2–4.0

>1.0

Chekha Fm.

Maneting Fm.

(age uncertain;

Neoproterozoic

to Ordovician[?])

(Ordovician[?])

Teth

yan

Him

ala

ya

KT

STD

>13Undifferentiated- orthogneiss

- metasedimentary rocks

- leucogranite (Miocene)

Gre

ate

r H

ima

laya

(str

uct

ura

lly h

igh

er)

Teth

yan

Him

ala

ya

Undifferentiated- sedimentary rocks

(Neoproterozoic-Mesozoic)

~7–13(Hauck et al.,

1998; Lin et

al., 1989)

Figure 4. Column showing tec-tonostratigraphy of central and eastern Bhutan. The four Hima layan tectonostratigraphic zones and positions of major bounding structures are shown. Lesser Himalayan unit ages from McQuarrie et al. (2008) and Long et al., (2010) , unit ages for structurally lower Greater Himalayan section and Tethyan (or Tibetan) Himalayan units below Kakhtang thrust from Long and McQuarrie (2010), unit age range for Tethyan (or Tibetan) Himalayan units above Kakhtang thrust from Gansser (1983). Unit thickness range in km shown on right-hand side, from this study, McQuarrie et al. (2008), and Long et al. (2010), or as cited. See Figure 1 for structure abbreviations.



30203 1st pages / 5 of 21

positions within the Daling-Shumar Group (Fig. 2). Based on intrusive contact relation-ships, the orthogneiss bodies are interpreted as granite intrusions originally emplaced in the Daling-Shumar Group (Long et al., 2010).

Upper Lesser Himalayan SectionThe Neoproterozoic–Paleozoic upper Lesser

Himalayan section consists of the four map units, the Baxa Group, Jaishidanda Formation, Diuri Formation, and Gondwana succession (Fig. 4).

The Neoproterozoic–Cambrian(?) Baxa Group consists of coarse-grained to conglomer-atic quartzite, with common lenticular bedding and trough cross-bedding, interbedded with dark-gray phyllite and dolomite (McQuarrie et al., 2008; (Long et al., 2010). Upper strati-graphic contacts with the Gondwana succession and Diuri Formation are observed on the Manas Chu and Kuru Chu transects, respectively (Fig. 2). The Baxa Group is 1.5–2.6 km thick (Along-Strike Variability of Lesser Himalayan Duplexing section).

The Neoproterozoic–Ordovician(?) Jaishi-danda Formation unconformably overlies the Daling-Shumar Group under the MCT, and is not exposed within the upper Lesser Himalayan section below the Shumar thrust (Figs. 2 and 4) (Long et al., 2000; Bhargava, 1995). The Jaishi-danda Formation consists of biotite-rich, locally garnet-bearing schist interbedded with biotite-rich quartzite, and ranges in thickness from 500 to 1700 m.

The Diuri Formation consists of pebble-clast diamictite (Jangpangi, 1974; Gansser, 1983; Tangri, 1995; McQuarrie et al., 2008; Long et al., 2000). The Diuri Formation is in strati-graphic contact above the Baxa Group in the southern Kuru Chu valley (Fig. 2), but all other contacts are tectonic. The Diuri Formation is 2.4–3.0 km thick, and pinches out east of the Manas Chu (Fig. 2). A ca. 390 Ma youngest detrital zircon (DZ) peak indicates a Devonian maximum deposition age (Long et al., 2010).

The Gondwana succession consists of sand-stone, carbonaceous siltstone and shale, and coal (Gansser, 1983; Joshi, 1995; Lakshminarayana, 1995; McQuarrie et al., 2008; Long et al., 2010). The unit is 1.2–2.5 km thick in southeast Bhutan (Long et al., 2010), and a 500-m-thick section is exposed along the Manas Chu, in stratigraphic contact above the Baxa Group (Fig. 2). The Gondwana succession yields Permian fossils (Joshi, 1989, 1995; Lakshminarayana, 1995).

Greater Himalaya

The Greater Himalayan zone is divided into a lower structural level above the MCT and be-low the Kakhtang thrust, and a higher structural

level above the Kakhtang thrust and below the South Tibetan detachment (Figs. 1, 2, and 4) (Gansser, 1983; Grujic et al., 2002). The struc-turally higher section is at least 13 km thick, and consists of migmatitic orthogneiss and metased-imentary rocks and Miocene leucogranite (Figs. 2 and 4) (Gansser, 1983; Swapp and Hollister, 1991; Davidson et al., 1997; Grujic et al., 2002).

The structurally lower Greater Himalayan section consists of a lower orthogneiss unit and an upper metasedimentary unit (Long and McQuarrie , 2010) (Figs. 1 and 2). Together they are between 5.3 and 10.5 km thick (Figs. 3 and 4). In eastern Bhutan, both units display partial melt textures (granite-composition leuco somes) throughout the entire section (Grujic et al., 1996, 2002; Davidson et al., 1997; Daniel et al., 2003). However, south of Shemgang in central Bhutan (Figs. 1 and 2), beneath an erosional remnant of Tethyan Himalayan rocks, partial melt textures are only observed within the lower part of the orthogneiss unit, and much of the Greater Hima-layan section was deformed at temperatures be-tween ~450° and 500 °C (Long and McQuarrie, 2010). Throughout Bhutan, Greater Himalayan rocks just above the MCT are distinguished from Lesser Himalayan rocks below by the presence of kyanite, sillimanite, and granitic leucosomes (Grujic et al., 2002; Daniel et al., 2003; Long and McQuarrie, 2010).

The Greater Himalayan orthogneiss unit is 1.5–8.0 km thick, and consists of granitic ortho-gneiss with metasedimentary intervals <200 m thick. The Greater Himalayan metasedimentary unit is 0.5–6.7 km thick, and consists of quartz-ite, schist, and paragneiss. Circa 500 and 460 Ma youngest detrital zircon (DZ) peaks obtained from Greater Himalayan quartzite near Shem-gang indicate that much of the Greater Hima-layan metasedimentary unit in central Bhutan can only be as old as Cambrian–Ordovician (Long and McQuarrie, 2010). A ca. 900 Ma youngest detrital zircon (DZ) peak obtained from Greater Himalayan quartzite near Lhuentse (Figs. 1 and 2) indicates a Neoproterozoic lower deposition age for part of the section (Long and McQuarrie, 2010).

Tethyan Himalaya

Five isolated exposures of Tethyan Himala-yan metasedimentary rocks are mapped on top of Greater Himalayan rocks in the axes of syn-clines (Fig. 1) (Gansser, 1983; Bhargava, 1995; Kellett et al., 2009). The two westernmost ex-posures contain Paleozoic to Mesozoic rocks above a basal quartzite unit called the Chekha Formation (Gansser, 1983; Bhargava, 1995; Tangri and Pande, 1995). The Chekha Forma-tion lacks fossils, and is mapped stratigraphi-

cally below fossiliferous Cambrian units in the Tang Chu exposure (Bhargava, 1995; Tangri and Pande, 1995; Myrow, 2005; McKenzie et al., 2007), which has led to an inferred Neoprotero-zoic deposition age.

The three Tethyan Himalayan exposures in central and eastern Bhutan (Shemgang, Ura, and Sakteng) contain the Chekha Formation, and the Shemgang exposure contains the over-lying Maneting Formation (Figs. 1 and 2). The Chekha Formation is 2.2–4.0 km thick (Figs. 3 and 4), and consists of thick-bedded, locally conglomeratic quartzite interbedded with biotite-muscovite-garnet schist. The Maneting Formation is at least 1.0 km thick, and consists of graphitic, biotite-garnet phyllite (Tangri and Pande, 1995; Long and McQuarrie, 2010). A ca. 460 Ma youngest DZ peak obtained from Chekha quartzite near Shemgang indicates an Ordovician maximum deposition age (Long and McQuarrie, 2010), and suggests along-strike variation in the age of the oldest Tethyan Himalayan strata. Differing age estimates be-tween west-central and central Bhutan could indicate either: (1) structural complication that has telescoped the Tethyan Himalayan section, or (2) discrepancies in Tethyan Himalayan stra-tigraphy as currently defi ned, which have given the same name (Chekha Formation) and strati-graphic description to both Precambrian and Ordovician (or younger) quartzite.

Four of the fi ve erosional remnants of Tethyan Himalayan rock have been interpreted as klip-pen above the South Tibetan detachment (Grujic et al., 2002). However, because no fi eld observa-tions were available at that time, a fault contact at the base of the Shemgang exposure was queried on the map of Grujic et al. (2002). Recent map-ping in the Shemgang region indicates that the Chekha Formation is in interfi ngering depo-sitional contact above the Greater Himalayan metasedimentary unit (Long and McQuarrie, 2010), similar to original mapping by Gansser (1983) and Bhargava (1995) (Figs. 1 and 2).

BALANCED CROSS SECTIONS

Methods

Four balanced cross sections were constructed based on fi eld data projected from four north-south traverses (Figs. 2 and 3). From east to west, these are the Trashigang (A–A′), Kuru Chu (B–B′), Bhumtang Chu (C–C′), and Mangde Chu (D–D′) cross sections. Deformed sections are shown at 1:300,000 scale, and restored sec-tions are shown at 1:600,000 scale on Figure 3 (note different scale than Fig. 2). The lines of section are oriented N-S, which is parallel to the principal direction of Himalayan shortening

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 6 of 21

in Bhutan, as indicated by the regional strike of structures and N- and S-trending mineral stretch-ing lineation (Fig. 5, stereonet O). Cross sections are constrained by surface data and earthquake seismology (Ni and Barazangi, 1984; Pandey et al., 1999; Mitra et al., 2005; Schulte-Pelkum et al., 2005) and seismic-refl ection constraints (Hauck et al., 1998) that suggest an average dip of 4°N for the basal décollement, the Main Hima layan thrust (Fig. 3, #I).

Line lengths of thrust sheets measured on deformed sections were matched on restored sections (e.g., Dahlstrom, 1969). Apparent dips were calculated from surface data and pro-jected along-strike to their position on the cross section. The orientations of fold axial planes were determined by bisecting the interlimb angle at fold hinges, and most axial planes were modeled as kink surfaces (e.g., Suppe, 1983). Areas of cross sections were divided into dip domains, based on the average appar-ent dips of surface data, and dividing lines be-tween adjacent dip domains were also treated as kink-type fold hinges. No attempt was made to incorporate outcrop and smaller-scale fold-ing, or to account for ductile deformation in Greater Himalayan rocks.

The main unknowns in the balancing pro-cess are the positions of hanging-wall cutoffs of Subhimalayan, Lesser Himalayan, and Greater Himalayan units that have passed through the erosion surface. We used conservative geome-tries that minimize shortening in all cases, which involved placing hanging-wall cutoffs just above the erosion surface in the case of Subhimalayan and most Lesser Himalayan units, or just be-yond a unit’s southernmost exposure in the case of the structurally lower Greater Himalayan sec-tion. At the north end of the restored sections, we interpret that the northernmost footwall ramp through the Daling-Shumar Group marks the northern extent of Lesser Himalayan units and the permissible southern extent of the lower Greater Himalayan section (Fig. 3, #XIV). Jus-tifi cations for individual decisions on all cross sections are annotated on Figure 3.

Structural Zones

Main Frontal Thrust SheetThe map pattern of the Siwalik Group varies

signifi cantly from east to west, from an ~8 km N-S exposure in southeast Bhutan, to a ~4 km N-S exposure at and west of the Manas Chu, and no exposure near Geylegphug (Fig. 2). The southern contact of the Siwaliks with Quater-nary sediment, which covers the MFT, was drawn at the slope break between the foothills and the fl at Brahmaputra plain. The location of the MFT is interpreted just to the south of

this slope break, except where located by off-set terraces near Geylegphug (Gansser, 1983) (Fig. 2). In general, the Siwalik Group exhibits dips aver aging between 35° and 50°N. We ob-served no structural repetition of the three-part Siwalik Group stratigraphy, and thus interpret the Sub himalayan zone as one thrust sheet, up-lifted along the MFT (Fig. 3). The thickness of this thrust sheet varies between 2.3 and 6.7 km, and thins from east to west, in accord with the westward-narrowing map pattern. A lack of southward dips at the southern end of Siwalik Group exposures indicates that the hanging-wall cutoff has passed through the erosion surface on all four sections (Fig. 3, #III).

Diuri Formation and Gondwana Succession Thrust Sheets

In southeast Bhutan, a 2- to 10-km-wide (N-S) exposure of the Gondwana succession is observed in thrust contact above the Siwalik Group across the MBT. The Gondwana succes-sion is in thrust contact beneath the Diuri For-mation, which is observed in a 4- to 8-km-wide (N-S) exposure, in thrust contact beneath the Baxa Group (Fig. 2). In map pattern, the surface exposures of both the Gondwana succession and Diuri Formation merge to the west, pinch-ing out between the Kuru Chu and Bhumtang Chu transects (Fig. 2). The Gondwana succes-sion carried in the MBT hanging wall is steeply north dipping (40°–50° average), and is 2.5 km thick on the Trashigang cross section (Fig. 3A) and 1.2 km thick on the Kuru Chu cross section (Fig. 3B). The extra length of the Gondwana succession shown above the erosion surface is necessary to align the northern end of the thrust sheet with footwall ramps through the Diuri Formation and Baxa Group on restored sections (Fig. 3, #1 and #10).

On the Trashigang cross section (Fig. 3A), the Diuri Formation is folded into a syncline with 40°N and 40°S average limb dips, and is at least 2.4 km thick. One horse of the Gond-wana succession and one horse of the Baxa Group are interpreted to fi ll space under the Diuri Formation, and provide a mechanism for passively folding the overlying thrust sheet. On the Kuru Chu cross section (Fig. 3B), the Diuri Formation dips 40°N on average, and is 3.0 km thick. On both the Trashigang and Kuru Chu cross sections, we interpret that the length of eroded Diuri Formation section that has passed through the erosion surface must equal the total restored length of duplexed Baxa Group horses (see Along-Strike Variability of Lesser Hima-layan Duplexing section below), indicating that the majority of the original length of the Diuri thrust sheet has been removed by erosion (Fig. 3, #2 and #12).

Upper Lesser Himalayan DuplexAcross southeastern and south-central Bhu-

tan, the Baxa Group is exposed over a 16- to 29-km-wide N-S region that displays signifi cant along-strike variation in width. At the southern extent of exposure, the Baxa Group is in thrust contact over the Diuri Formation in southeastern Bhutan, and over the Siwaliks across the MBT west of the Manas Chu (Fig. 2). At the northern extent, lower Lesser Himalayan rocks are thrust over the Baxa Group across the Shumar thrust (Figs. 6A and 6B) (Ray, 1989).

Klippen of the Daling Formation in fl at-on-fl at thrust contact over the Baxa Group are present on high ridgetops in the Kuru Chu val-ley (Figs. 2 and 6B). These klippen require that the lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet in the hanging wall of the Shumar thrust extends at least as far south as the southern limit of Baxa Group exposure. Observations of thrust contacts within the Baxa Group (Fig. 6D) and faults that place the Baxa Group over lowermost Diuri Formation on the southern Kuru Chu transect indicate that the same Baxa Group section is being structurally repeated (Figs. 2 and 3B). The Shumar thrust extends over multiple Baxa Group thrust sheets in the southern Kuru Chu valley (Fig. 2), which indicates that the structur-ally repeated Baxa Group sections are a duplex system that feeds slip into the Shumar thrust, defi ning it as a roof thrust. We call this duplex system the upper Lesser Himalayan duplex. Kinematic indicators observed in Baxa Group rocks include shear cleavage in phyllite inter-beds (Figs. 6C and 6D), and consistently show a top-to-the-south sense of motion. We defi ne shear cleavage as a C-type, shear-band cleavage (Passchier and Trouw, 1998) with secondary tectonic foliations (S surfaces) gently inclined relative to bedding planes or primary tectonic foliation (C surfaces).

From east to west, the Trashigang, Kuru Chu, Bhumtang Chu, and Mangde Chu tran-sects expose continuous 11-, 6-, 7-, and 12-km-thick Baxa Group sections. However, based on the following stratigraphic, struc-tural, and geomorphic observations, we argue that these thick sections represent the same 1.5- to 2.6-km-thick Baxa Group section be-ing structurally repeated as multiple horses. On the Kuru Chu transect, a thickness of 2.6 km is calculated for the Baxa Group between lower thrust contacts and upper stratigraphic con-tacts with the Diuri Formation in two separate thrust sheets (Figs. 2 and 3B), and a minimum thickness of 2.5 km is exposed in the core of an anticline just below the Shumar thrust (Figs. 3B and 6B). The spacing of localized zones of deformation, which we interpret as the sites of intraformational thrust faults, provides further



30203 1st pages / 7 of 21

KT

STD

STD

MCT

MBT

MFT

ST

STD

MCT

H. B

C_l

ow

er_L

HN

n=

28n

=19

G. B

C_u

pp

er_L

HN

n=

177

n=

70

F. KC

_lo

wer

_LH

N

n=

58n

=14

B. T

_lo

wer

_GH

N

n=

69n

=0

E. K

C_u

pp

er_L

HN

n=

87n

=14

M. B

C_l

ow

er_G

H

Nn

=14

n=

107

L. B

C_T

H

Nn

=23

n=

15

I. M

C_L

H_a

llN

n=

12n

=16

J. M

C_l

ow

er_G

H

N

n=

43n

=19

4

K. M

C_T

H

N

n=

41n

=33

O.

Lin

eati

on

N

n=

260

P. C

ren

ula

tio

nfo

ld a

xes

N

n=

58

D. T

_up

per

_LH

N

n=

93n

=10

C. T

_lo

wer

_LH

N

n=

48n

=21

N. K

C_l

ow

er_G

H

Nn

=8

n=

38N

n=

8n

=11

A. T

_TH

Ura

klip

pe

Sakt

eng

klip

pe

Kuru

Ch

uan

ticl

ine

Trashigang section

Kuru Chu section

Bhumtang Chu section

Mangde Chu section

Stru

ctu

rally

hig

her

GH

Stru

ctu

rally

low

er G

H

low

er L

H

up

per

LH

Siw

alik

s

TH

THTH

TH

Shem

gan

gTH

sec

tio

n

Bed

din

gFo

liati

on

Fig

ure

5. E

qual

-are

a st

ereo

net

plot

s of

map

dat

a in

eas

tern

and

cen

tral

Bhu

tan.

Ste

reon

ets

A t

hrou

gh N

plo

t pl

anar

dat

a (n

ote

diff

eren

t sy

mbo

ls fo

r be

ddin

g an

d fo

liati

on) a

s po

les

to p

lane

s, a

nd s

tere

onet

s O

and

P p

lot l

inea

r da

ta. S

tere

onet

s A th

roug

h P

are

divi

ded

into

str

uc-

tura

l zon

es (

uppe

r L

esse

r H

imal

ayan

[in

clud

es d

ata

from

Siw

alik

s], l

ower

Les

ser

Him

alay

an, s

truc

tura

lly lo

wer

Gre

ater

Him

alay

an, a

nd

Teth

yan

Him

alay

an)

for

each

cro

ss s

ecti

on (

T—

Tra

shig

ang

[A–A

′]; K

C—

Kur

u C

hu [

B–B

′]; B

C—

Bhu

mta

ng C

hu [

C–C

′]; M

C—

Man

gde

Chu

[D

–D′])

. Map

dat

a fr

om s

truc

tura

lly h

ighe

r G

reat

er H

imal

ayan

sec

tion

are

not

plo

tted

.

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 8 of 21

support for a 2.6-km-thick Baxa Group section on the Kuru Chu transect, and constrains the thickness of the Baxa Group section to 1.5 km on the Bhumtang Chu transect (Fig. 3C). These deformation zones include ~10- to 25-m-wide zones of highly sheared phyllite (Figs. 3 and 6D, #15), intensely folded dolomite with hot springs and tufa precipitation (Figs. 3 and 6E, #20), brecciated quartzite, brecciated dolo mite, intensely sheared and folded phyllite, and a

sulfur-rich spring (Fig. 3, #21), iso clinally folded quartzite exhibiting outcrop-scale thrust faulting with an abrupt change in attitude (Fig. 3, #22), and folded, brecciated quartzite and intensely sheared phyllite with an abrupt change in attitude (Fig. 3C, #23). The abrupt attitude changes observed at these localized zones are in contrast to the generally homo-geneously dipping Baxa Group strata observed between structures. On the Trashigang tran-

sect, prominent ENE-trending valleys and sad-dles spaced ~3 km apart north to south support dividing the exposed part of the Baxa Group into fi ve 2.1-km-thick thrust-repeated sections (McQuarrie et al., 2008) (Fig. 3A, #5). Finally, on the Mangde Chu transect, the placement of fi ve intraformational Baxa Group faults be-tween the Shumar thrust and MBT was deter-mined by interpreting six structural repetitions of a 2.1-km-thick Baxa Group section, which

Figure 6 (on this and following page). (A) Picture facing NE of Shumar Formation (Fm.) thrust over Baxa Group (Gp.) across Shumar thrust on Bhum-tang Chu transect. Baxa Group quartzite cliffs are ~200 m high. (B) Picture facing NW of Shumar Formation thrust over folded Baxa Group across Shumar thrust, on Kuru Chu transect. Note klippe of Shu-mar Formation on south side. At least 2.5 km of Baxa Group strata are exposed in the cen-ter of the anticline; anticline axis marks northern extent of foreland-dipping part of up-per Lesser Himalayan duplex. (C) Top-to-south–sense shear cleavage in phyllite interbed between quartzite layers of Baxa Group; location is just be-neath Shumar thrust on Trashi-gang transect (30-cm hammer for scale). (D) Top-down-to-south–sense, σ-shaped shear cleavage in phyllite interval in Baxa Group. This is part of a ~10-m-thick interval of highly sheared and deformed phyllite interpreted as the site of an in-traformational thrust on the Kuru Chu transect (Fig. 3, #15). Note that this is in the foreland-dipping part of the upper Lesser Himalayan duplex, and is inter-preted to have been rotated to its top-down-to-south position by emplacement of subsurface Baxa Group horses (Fig. 7). (E) Picture of intensely folded Baxa Group dolomite, which is part of a ~25-m-wide zone that also exhibited hot springs and tufa precipitation, which we inter pret as the location of an intraformational Baxa Group thrust fault on the Bhumtang Chu transect (Fig. 3, #20). (F) Top-to-south–sense shear cleavage in Shumar Formation quartzite in Kuru Chu valley. Outlined zone between bedding planes is ~2 m thick.

Shumar Fm. phyllite

Shumar Fm. quartzite

Baxa Gp. quartzite

Shumar Thrust

SENW

A

S N

Bedding plane

Shear cleavage

Quartzite

Quartzite

Phyllite

C

SN

Primaryfoliation

(C surface)

Primaryfoliation

(C surface)

Shearcleavage

(S surfaces)

Shearcleavage

(S surfaces)

D

E

S N

Bedding planeBedding plane

Shear cleavage (S surfaces)Shear cleavage (S surfaces)

F

Shumar Fm.

Baxa Gp.

ST

ST

ShumarFm.

klippe

ST?

Baxa Gp.

B

NS



30203 1st pages / 9 of 21

is the average of the thicknesses observed on the other three transects (Fig. 3D, #28).

The geometry of the upper Lesser Himalayan duplex is predominantly hinterland-dipping. On the Trashigang transect, the fi ve exposed Baxa Group horses dip 30° to 40° north on average (Fig. 5, stereonet D). On the Kuru Chu transect, the four southernmost horses (#1, #6, #7, and #8) dip 40° to 50° north on average (Fig. 3B), and the hanging-wall cutoffs of horses #1 and #7 pass through the erosion surface (Fig. 3, #V), which together with the Daling Formation klip-pen, constrain the position of the Shumar thrust. On the Bhumtang Chu transect, two syncline and two anticline axial traces are mapped in horse #5, which is attributed to passive folding above two horses (#6 and #7) interpreted in the subsurface. North of this folding (note that map data are projected from the transect east of the section line [Fig. 3, #23]), Baxa horses #1–#4 dip between 20° and 35° north on average (Fig. 5, stereonet G), and hanging-wall cutoffs for horses #1 and #2 pass through the erosion surface (Fig. 3C, #V), constraining the position of the Shumar thrust. On the Mangde Chu tran-sect, the six Baxa Group horses dip 50° north on

average (Fig. 5, stereonet I) but are interpreted to fl atten signifi cantly in the subsurface, based on average foliation dips of 20°N in the overly-ing Greater Himalayan section (Fig. 3D).

An east-trending syncline-anticline pair mapped in Baxa Group rocks immediately south of the Shumar thrust along the Kuru Chu tran-sect can be traced along-strike to folded Daling-Shumar Group sections on the Trashigang and Bhumtang Chu transects (Fig. 2). These two folds are separated by a southward-dipping and southward-verging intraformational Baxa Group thrust mapped in the fi eld (Fig. 6D), and require a foreland-dipping section of the upper Lesser Hima layan duplex in the Kuru Chu section (Fig. 3). These two fold traces are present east of the Kuru Chu section line, based on the geologic maps of Gokul (1983) and Bhargava (1995), and we connect them with an anticline-syncline pair that we map in the Daling-Shumar Group (Fig. 2). Here, two Baxa horses (#1 and #2) are inferred in the subsurface (Fig. 3, #6), with an interpreted antiformal stack geometry, which explains the folding observed in the overlying Daling-Shumar Group. This is consistent with map patterns showing the Baxa Group exposed

in the core of an anticline beneath the folded Shu-mar thrust just west of the section line (Gokul, 1983; Bhargava, 1995) (Fig. 2). We interpret the folding of the Shumar thrust and its hanging-wall section as the result of duplex geom etries of Baxa Group horses that vary in size and displacement both along and across strike.

Lower Lesser Himalayan DuplexAcross eastern and central Bhutan, an expo-

sure of the Daling-Shumar Group overlain by the Jaishidanda Formation is present above the Shu-mar thrust and below the MCT (Figs. 2, 6A, and 6B). The map pattern varies signifi cantly along strike, and the N-S distance of exposure varies between ~15 km on the Trashigang transect, ~50 km in the Kuru Chu valley, ~11 km west of the Kuru Chu valley, and ~1–2 km west of the Mangde Chu. In the Kuru Chu valley, where the trace of the MCT is shifted ~45 km to the north relative to the east and west, we map two sections of the Daling-Shumar Group, which we interpret as structural repetition (McQuarrie et al., 2008) (Fig. 2). Map relationships showing only one lower Lesser Himalayan section under the MCT to the east and west of the Kuru Chu

Figure 6 (continued). (G) Top-to-south–sense feldspar augen σ-clast in orthogneiss body intruded into Daling Forma-tion section in northern Kuru Chu valley (Fig. 2). (H) Top-to-south–sense sheared quartz vein boudin in Daling Forma-tion phyllite just above Shumar thrust on Trashigang tran-sect. Hammer handle is 20 cm long. (I) Picture facing NW of structurally lower Greater Hima layan section thrust over Jaishidanda Formation across Main Central thrust (MCT) in upper Kuru Chu valley, near Lhuentse (Fig. 2). Thickness of Jaishidanda section between highlighted bedding plane and MCT is ~25 m.

NS

H

Structurally lowerGreater Himalaya

MCT

Jaishidanda Fm.

Bedding

I

NS

G

N S

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 10 of 21

valley (Fig. 2) suggest that the Greater Hima-layan section overlaps thrusts that repeat the lower Lesser Himalayan section. Further sup-port for thrust repetition of the lower Lesser Himalayan strata is found in regional-scale, long-wavelength, low-amplitude, east-west–trending folds defi ned by tectonic foliation and bedding measurements in Greater Himalayan and Tethyan Himalayan rocks (Gansser, 1983; Bhargava, 1995; our mapping) (Figs. 2 and 3). We suggest that these relationships indicate structural repetition of lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheets in a thrust duplex system at depth (which we name the lower Lesser Himalayan duplex), with the MCT acting as the roof thrust (Fig. 3, #X). While Greater Himalayan and Tethyan Himalayan tectonic foliation and bed-ding locally display variable attitudes indicative of outcrop-scale folding, we used the average dip direction of the majority of measurements to defi ne dip domains separated by fold axial traces on the map and cross sections (Figs. 2 and 3). Duplexing of lower Lesser Himalayan

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

1

8 7 6 5 4 32

1

8 7 6 5 43

21

8 7 6 543

21

8 7 65

43

21

pCs

pCd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCdpCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

A

B

C

D

E

F

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

8 76 5 4

3

21

G

pCs

pCd

pCs

pCd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

PzbPzd

Figure 7. Schematic cross sections showing sequential development of the upper Lesser Himalayan duplex in the Kuru Chu cross section (Fig. 3B). Active thrust faults for each increment shown in bold. (A) Lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet with thick Shumar Formation section begins to move over Daling-Baxa footwall ramp; (B) Baxa horse #1 translated farther than its length; (C) Baxa horse #2 translated less than its length, rotating horse #1 to foreland-dipping geometry; (D) Baxa horse #3 translated much farther than its length, further rotat-ing horses #1 and #2; results in a hybrid anti-formal stack and foreland-dipping geometry. The long translation relative to horse length in this increment is necessary for develop-ment of the fi nal duplex geometry in Figure 3B. Rapid forward propagation may have been facilitated by an increase in taper due to emplacement of the thick lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet; (E) Baxa horse #4 translated over what will become horse #5 and part of horse #6; (F) Baxa horse #5 translated less than its length, further rotat-ing parts of older horses to foreland-dipping geometries; (G) limited translation of Baxa horses #6–#8 produces hinterland-dipping geometries, progressively rotating older horses. Geometry of schematic Baxa duplex contains both foreland- and hinterland-dipping geometries, and is similar to fi nal geometry on Figure 3B.



30203 1st pages / 11 of 21

thrust sheets in the subsurface is interpreted as the mechanism that forms the structural lows and highs in the folded Greater Himalayan and Tethyan Himalayan sections, and duplexed lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheets are shown fi lling space under the Greater Himalayan sec-tion on all cross sections (Fig. 3).

The lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheets display signifi cant along-strike thickness varia-tions. On the Trashigang section, the lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet is 5.4 km thick (Fig. 3A). On the Kuru Chu transect, the south-ern lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet is 9.2 km thick, with a 6.0-km-thick Shumar For-mation section, and does not include the Jaishi-danda Formation in the line of section (Figs. 2 and 3B). The northern lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet on the Kuru Chu transect is 7.0 km thick, with a 2.0-km-thick Shumar Formation section, which is attributed to a décollement high within a 6.0-km-thick Shumar Formation section, rather than a thinner Shumar Formation to the north. A 6.0-km-thick Shumar section that rapidly thins to the north under Greater Hima-layan rocks near Lhuntse is another possible interpretation (Fig. 3, #18). On the Bhumtang Chu section, the lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet is 4.0 km thick (Fig. 3C). The thickness variations described above are interpreted as along-strike changes in depositional thickness (Himalayan river anticlines section). On the Mangde Chu section, the Shumar Formation and lower part of the Daling Formation are not exposed, and the thickness of the lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet is only 1.2 km (Fig. 3D). Since the Daling, Shumar, and Jaishidanda For-mations with a combined thickness of 4.0 km are exposed 25 km along-strike to the east (Fig. 2), we interpret the missing stratigraphy and thin section observed along the Mangde Chu as the result of a lateral ramp of the Shumar thrust that cuts upsection to the west as well as in the direc-tion of transport. The associated hanging-wall ramp through the lower Daling and Shumar sec-tions is interpreted in the subsurface, making the northern extent of horse #5 3.3 km thick, which is similar to the exposed thickness on the Bhum-tang Chu section (Fig. 3D). The location of the hanging-wall ramp corresponds to the syn-cline axial trace in the center of the Shemgang Tethyan Himalayan exposure (Fig. 2). Finally, since the Jaishidanda Formation is not present in the upper Lesser Himalayan section south of the trace of the Shumar thrust, it is interpreted to pinch out to the south, and its southern extent is queried above the erosion surface on all cross sections (Fig. 3, #VIII).

Kinematic indicators from lower Lesser Hima layan units consistently display top-to-the-south motion senses, and include shear cleavage

in quartzite (Fig. 6F), feldspar augen σ-clasts in orthogneiss bodies (Fig. 6G), and sheared and rotated quartz vein boudins in Daling Forma-tion schist and phyllite (Fig. 6H) and Jaishi-danda schist. In thin section, Shumar, Daling, and Jaishidanda samples display dynamically recrystallized quartz microstructure (Grujic et al., 1996; Long et al., 2010), with quartz crystallographic–preferred orientation (Grujic et al., 1996) and mineral stretching lineation (Figs. 2, 5O) indicating a N-S transport direc-tion. These observations argue against thick-ening via E-W–oriented ductile fl ow of Lesser Himalayan rocks, and support our interpretation for differences in original depositional thickness across eastern Bhutan.

Throughout eastern Bhutan, the lower Lesser Himalayan duplex is generally hinterland-dip-ping, but the geometry and number of horses varies along-strike. On the Trashigang section, the exposed lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet dips 30°N (Figs. 3B and 5C), except for a 25°S-dipping section that is interpreted as folding above subsurface Baxa Group horses (Along-Strike Variability of Lesser Himalayan Duplexing section above). Two additional lower Lesser Himalayan horses are interpreted under the Greater Himalayan section (Fig. 3A), and co-incide with fold axial traces observed in Greater Himalayan tectonic foliations (Fig. 2), includ-ing a synclinal trace that projects along-strike to the Sakteng klippe (Grujic et al., 2002), and an anticlinal trace that projects along-strike to the Lum La window (Yin et al., 2010). On the Kuru Chu transect, the southern lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet decreases in dip from 30°N to 4°N from south to north (Figs. 3B and 5F). The 4°N-dipping section corresponds to a décollement at the top of the Diuri Formation at depth (Fig. 3, #16). The northern lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet on the Kuru Chu transect steepens in dip from 4°N to 35°N from south to north (Figs. 3B and 5F), which constrains the position of a footwall ramp through the Diuri Formation and Baxa Group at depth (Fig. 3, #16 and #17). On the Bhumtang Chu section, the exposed lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet (#5) has a 20°N average dip (Figs. 2, 3C, and 5H), and four additional lower Lesser Hima-layan horses (#1, #2, #3, and #4) are inferred in the subsurface (Fig. 3, #X). These horses defi ne a hinterland-dipping duplex that coincides with a broad synform in the center of the Ura klippe and an antiform observed to the north in the Greater Himalayan section. We interpret a similar geom-etry for the Mangde Chu cross section, with four lower Lesser Himalayan horses (#1, #2, #3, and #4) that defi ne a hinterland-dipping duplex co-incident with a broad antiform in the Greater Hima layan and Tethyan Himalayan sections.

Bedding and tectonic foliation from both lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheets in the Kuru Chu valley defi ne a north-trending–, north-plunging anticline (Fig. 5, stereonet F), which we name the Kuru Chu anticline. This structure is responsible for the ~45 km northward shift of the MCT trace centered on the Kuru Chu valley.

Main Central Thrust SheetThe structurally lower Greater Himalayan

section is exposed above the MCT (Fig. 6I), and sits either structurally below (across the South Tibetan detachment) or stratigraphically below isolated Tethyan Himalayan exposures (Long and McQuarrie, 2010), and structurally beneath the Kakhtang thrust on its northern end (Grujic et al., 2002). North to south (across-strike) surface exposure varies between a maximum of ~90 km in central Bhutan and a minimum of ~14 km in the Kuru Chu valley (Fig. 2).

The structurally lower Greater Himalayan section displays signifi cant across-strike gradi-ents in pressure and temperature conditions, as recorded by metamorphic mineral assemblages, the presence or absence of partial melt textures, and quartz deformation microstructure (Long and McQuarrie , 2010). In eastern Bhutan, on the Trashigang, Kuru Chu, and Bhumtang Chu tran-sects, kyanite and partial melt textures (deformed granitic leucosomes) are present throughout the section, and peak pressure and temperature conditions are estimated at 8–12 kbar and 750–800 °C (Daniel et al., 2003). In contrast, in cen-tral Bhutan, on the Mangde Chu transect, partial melt textures are absent or only present near the base of the Greater Himalayan section, a biotite-muscovite-garnet mineral assemblage dominates the majority of the Greater Himalayan section and entire Tethyan Himalayan section, with no observed change across the Greater Hima-layan–Tethyan Himalayan contact, and quartz and feldspar microstructure indicates deforma-tion temperatures between 450° and 500 °C (Long and McQuarrie, 2010). In the lower-grade Greater Himalayan section observed in central Bhutan, quartzite preserves original sedimen-tary structures, including bedding, compositional laminations, and upright cross-bedding. Quartz-ite bedding and schist, phyllite, and paragneiss foliation are approximately parallel, and low-strain magnitudes show that bedding has not been transposed (Long and McQuarrie, 2010) (Fig. 5, stereonets B, J, M, and N).

The structurally lower Greater Himalayan section is shown in cross section as a 5.3- to 10.5-km-thick thrust sheet. However, since this section is bound by ductile shear zones at its base and top, and pervasive fabrics throughout the section indicate penetrative ductile defor-ma tion (Grujic et al., 1996, 2002; Daniel et al.,

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 12 of 21

2003; Hollister and Grujic, 2006; Long and McQuarrie, 2010), we emphasize that interpret-ing these rocks as a thrust sheet with a discrete thrust at the base provides a minimum estimate of displacement. On all transects, tectonic folia-tion in Greater Himalayan rocks just above the MCT is parallel to bedding and tectonic folia-tion of Lesser Himalayan rocks just below. This relationship can be traced at the surface for an across-strike distance of ~45 km in the Kuru Chu valley (Figs. 2 and 3). This regional-scale, fl at-on-fl at relationship is shown in cross sec-tion as a hanging-wall fl at over a footwall fl at (Fig. 3). Parallel dips above and below the MCT also indicate that the hanging-wall cutoff for the Greater Himalayan section has passed through the erosion surface on all transects. On the cross sections, the MCT trace is projected from its southernmost extent on either side of the Kuru Chu valley (Fig. 3, #IX), and the hanging-wall cutoff through the Greater Himalayan section is positioned just to the south, to minimize struc-tural overlap across the MCT (Fig. 3, #IX). Our cross sections show a westward-increasing mini mum structural overlap between 97 and 156 km across the MCT (Table 1).

Based on our mapping, the structurally lower Greater Himalayan section is ~8 km thick across eastern Bhutan. On the Trashigang section, at least 7.0 km of lower Greater Himalayan rocks are exposed, and the complete lower Greater Himalayan section is shown as 8.5 km thick be-tween the MCT and South Tibetan detachment based on projection of the Sakteng klippe above the erosion surface (Fig. 3A). On the Kuru Chu section, the Greater Himalayan section is 8.1 km thick between the MCT and Kakhtang thrust (Fig. 3B). On the Bhumtang Chu transect, the structurally lower Greater Himalayan section is 8.2 km thick south of the Ura klippe, and the Greater Himalayan metasedimentary unit thick-ens signifi cantly to the north between the Ura klippe and the Kakhtang thrust (Fig. 3, #25). In cross section, the Greater Himalayan ortho-gneiss unit is interpreted as thinning to the north in the subsurface, which keeps the total thick-ness of the Greater Himalayan section nearly constant (Fig. 3C). In central Bhutan, on the Mandge Chu transect, the lower Greater Hima-layan section thickens to the north, from 5.3 km between the MCT and the base of the Shem-gang Tethyan (or Tibetan) Himalayan exposure to 10.5 km between Trongsa and the Kakhtang thrust (Fig. 3D). In cross section, most of the thickness change is attributed to northward thickening of the metasedimentary unit (Fig. 3, #29). Note that the thinnest Greater Hima layan section, between the MCT and Shemgang, also corresponds to the coolest temperature and high-est viscosity Greater Himalayan section studied

thus far in Bhutan (Long and McQuarrie , 2010). In this region the Tethyan Himalayan section at Shemgang is in depositional contact above the structurally lower Greater Himalayan sec-tion (Long and McQuarrie, 2010), making the Greater Himalayan and Tethyan Himalayan sec-tions part of the same thrust sheet (Fig. 3D).

Tethyan Himalayan KlippenGrujic et al. (2002) provided fi eld evidence for

top-to-the-north–sense shear zones correlated with the South Tibetan detachment at the base of the Chekha Formation. This interpretation was based on structures observed at the base of the Ura and Sakteng Tethyan Himalayan exposures in eastern Bhutan (Fig. 2). Because no fi eld obser-vations were available at that time, the southern-most Tethyan Himalayan exposure at Shemgang (Fig. 2) was inferred to be the Black Mountain klippe (Grujic et al., 2002). New mapping in the Shemgang region shows an interfi ngering depo-sitional contact between the Chekha Formation and Greater Himalayan metasedimentary rocks

indicating the original stratigraphic relationship between the Chekha Formation and the structur-ally lower Greater Hima layan section (Long and McQuarrie, 2010).

The Sakteng klippe is exposed in the core of a syncline with ~30°N- and S-dipping limbs (Fig. 5, stereonet A), and although Chekha Formation bedding and tectonic foliation are varia ble, the majority of measurements are sub-parallel to the tectonic foliation of Greater Hima-layan rocks below (Fig. 3A), indicating that hanging-wall and footwall cutoffs of the South Tibetan detachment are above the erosion sur-face to the south. The Ura klippe displays two synclinal traces and an anticlinal trace, with ~20°N- and S-dipping limbs (Fig. 5, stereo net L). The southern contact of the Chekha Formation with the Greater Himalayan metasedimentary unit shows a fl at-on-fl at relationship across the South Tibetan detachment, while the northern contact displays a distinct change in bedding orientation from NE-dipping strata below to SE-dipping strata above (Long and McQuarrie,

TABLE 1. SHORTENING AND FAULT DISPLACEMENT ESTIMATES FOR EASTERN AND CENTRAL BHUTAN

(A–A′)Trashigang

(B–B′)Kuru Chu

(C–C′)Bhumtang Chu

(D–D′)Mangde Chu

LH length deformed (km) 135 139 148 164LH length restored (km)* 401 406 312 342

871461762662*)mk(gninetrohsHL25356666*)%(gninetrohsHL

Minimum MCT overlap (km) 97 107 140 156Minimum KT overlap (km) 42 31 40 53Total length restored (km)** 540 544 492 551

783443504504)mk(gninetrohslatoT07074757)%(gninetrohslatoT

Subhimalayan zone5575)mk(gninetrohS3332)%(gninetrohsHL1121)%(gninetrohslatoT

Diuri-Gondwana thrust sheets––1292)mk(gninetrohS––811)%(gninetrohsHL––57)%(gninetrohslatoT

Upper LH duplex76701731661)mk(gninetrohS83561526)%(gninetrohsHL71134314)%(gninetrohslatoT

Lower LH duplex6012520166)mk(gninetrohS06238352)%(gninetrohsHL72515261)%(gninetrohslatoT

GH lower structural levelMinimum MCT overlap (km) 97 107 140 156

04146242)%(gninetrohslatoTGH higher structural levelMinimum KT overlap (km) 42 31 40 53

4121801)%(gninetrohslatoT6699)mk(tnemecalpsidTFM3157643)mk(tnemecalpsidTBM04049794)mk(tnemecalpsidTS3102––)mk(tnemecalpsidDTS

Note: Abbreviations: GH—Greater Himalaya; KT—Kakhtung thrust; LH—Lesser Himalaya; MBT—Main Boundary thrust; MCT—Main Central thrust; MFT—Main Frontal thrust; SH—Subhimalaya; ST—Shumar thrust; STD—South Tibetan detachment.

*LH length and shortening estimates include SH zone.**Includes restored length from LH-SH, MCT overlap, and KT overlap.



30203 1st pages / 13 of 21

2010). Approximate locations for footwall and hanging-wall ramps through the Chekha Forma-tion are shown on the Bhumtang Chu section (Fig. 3C). These features are shown at their max-imum permissible southern and northern extents, respectively, which are constrained between the along-strike projection of the Shemgang Tethyan Himalayan exposure, where the Chekha Forma-tion is in depositional contact above the Greater Himalayan section (Long and McQuarrie, 2010), and the southern extent of the South Tibetan de-tachment at the Ura klippe, where a fl at-on-fl at relationship shows that the hanging-wall cutoff must be above the erosion surface to the south (Fig. 3, #26). These geometries constrain dis-placement on the South Tibetan detachment to ~20 km (Long and McQuarrie, 2010) (Table 1). On the Mandge Chu section, a similar geometry for hanging-wall and footwall cutoffs of Tethyan Himalayan units is shown, with the along-strike position of the Ura klippe projected above the erosion surface (Fig. 3, #30).

Our mapping in central Bhutan has implica-tions for tectonic models that interpret the South Tibetan detachment as a passive roof thrust (Webb et al., 2007). Our interpreted geometry for Greater Himalayan and Tethyan Himalayan units in central Bhutan (Fig. 3D), with detailed observations presented in Long and McQuarrie (2010), shows the South Tibetan detachment cutting downsection to the north through the Maneting Formation and Chekha Formation. This geometry is compatible with a top-to-the-north–sense normal fault, and is not compatible with a top-to-the-north–sense thrust fault. For the South Tibetan detachment to be a passive roof thrust above a Greater Himalayan wedge, rocks we map as Greater Himalayan south of Shemgang (Fig. 2) would have to be re inter-preted as Tethyan (or Tibetan) Himalayan rocks, requiring the South Tibetan detachment to merge with the MCT between the Bhumtang Chu (high-grade Greater Himalayan rocks dis-playing kyanite and partial melt textures) and the Mangde Chu (lower-grade Greater Himalayan rocks), and requiring the MCT to cut upsection from Greater Himalayan strata to Tethyan (or Tibetan) Himalayan strata south of Shemgang. The passive roof duplex model would also re-quire the trace of the South Tibetan detachment to be exposed between Trongsa and Shemgang. We have mapped and sampled a transect south of Trongsa in detail (Fig. 2), and observe only top-to-the-south-sense structures in outcrop and thin section (Long and McQuarrie, 2010).

Kakhtang Thrust SheetThe structurally higher Greater Himalayan

section is exposed above the Kakhtang thrust and below the South Tibetan detachment across

Bhutan (Figs. 1 and 2), and is shown on the cross sections as a thrust sheet (Fig. 3), similar to the structurally lower Greater Himalayan section. Note that surface data and cross-section lines terminate within the structurally higher Greater Himalayan section, so only minimum thick-nesses are shown on the cross sections. On the Kuru Chu and Trashigang sections, the higher Greater Himalayan section is at least 13 km thick (Fig. 4). Map data from the higher Greater Himalayan section are projected from the maps of Gansser (1983), Gokul, (1983), Bhargava (1995) (Fig. 3, #XI), and show that tectonic fo-liation dips 20°–40°N on average (Fig. 2), sub-parallel to dips of the structurally lower Greater Himalayan section beneath the Kakhtang thrust, indicating that the hanging-wall cutoff has passed through the erosion surface. Assuming that the hanging-wall cutoff is just above the erosion surface, and that the Kakhtang thrust roots into the Main Himalayan thrust at depth (e.g., Nelson et al., 1996), we measure structural overlap across the Kakhtang thrust from its trace to the footwall cutoff of the structurally lower Greater Himalayan section (Fig. 3, #XIII). This provides minimum shortening estimates for the Kakhtang thrust, which vary between 31 and 53 km (Table 1). Just like the lower Greater Himalayan section, fabrics indicative of penetrative ductile deformation are observed throughout the higher Greater Himalayan sec-tion (Gansser, 1983; Swapp and Hollister, 1991; Davidson et al., 1997; Daniel et al., 2003; Hol-lister and Grujic, 2006), so we emphasize that structural overlap across the Kakhtang thrust is only a minimum estimate for the amount of strain that these rocks have accommodated.

Crustal Shortening Estimates and Along-Strike Variation

Shortening Estimates by Tectonostratigraphic Zone

Our four deformed and restored, balanced cross sections (Fig. 3) allow estimation of the minimum shortening accommodated by the Lesser Himalayan and Subhimalayan zones in Bhutan to be 164–267 km, or 52%–66% ( Table 1). At the northern end of the restored cross sections, the footwall ramp through the northernmost lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet is interpreted to mark the northernmost extent of Lesser Himalayan rocks, and the per-missible southernmost ramp for the structur-ally lower Greater Himalayan section (Fig. 3, #XIV). By adding in the structural overlap across the MCT (97–156 km) and across the Kakhtang thrust (31–53 km), the minimum contributions of shortening of the structurally lower and higher Greater Himalayan sections

can be included in our shortening estimates. Our estimate for the total minimum shortening accommodated by the Subhimalayan, Lesser Himalayan, and Greater Himalayan zones is 344–405 km, or 70%–75% (Table 1).

Shortening data for each structural zone are also listed on Table 1. The Subhimalayan zone accommodates only 5–7 km of shortening, 1%–2% of the total. The upper Lesser Hima-layan duplex accommodates 67–166 km, or 17%–41% of the total on individual sections, and the lower Lesser Himalayan duplex ac-commodates 52–106 km, or 15%–27% of the total on individual sections. Together, duplex-ing of Lesser Himalayan units accommodates 159–239 km, or 44%–59% of the total short-ening estimated on individual sections. Finally, structural overlap across the MCT on individ-ual sections accounts for 24%–41%, and across the Kakhtang thrust accounts for 8%–14% of the total shortening, although these estimates do not account for internal strain within the Greater Himalayan zone.

Along-Strike Variability of Lesser Himalayan Duplexing

At the scale of Bhutan, there are signifi cant along-strike variations observed in the geom-etry, number of horses, overall shortening, and relative shortening contributions of Lesser Hima layan duplexes. This variation indicates that along-strike horse width is on the order of the distance between adjacent cross sections (25 km average). The amount of shortening in the upper Lesser Himalayan duplex decreases signifi cantly from east to west (Table 1). Par-tially, this is taken up by an increase in short-ening in the lower Lesser Himalayan duplex. However, the total shortening in the lower Lesser Himalayan duplex does not show such a clear along-strike trend. The relative shorten-ing contributions of the upper and lower Lesser Himalayan duplexes could be controlled by the ratio of décollement strength to taper angle through time. As an example, the presence of a foreland-dipping duplex on the Kuru Chu sec-tion, which contains a locally thick lower Lesser Himalayan section (Fig. 3B), may illustrate the control of original basin geometry on later defor-mation. The sequential development of this duplex is illustrated in Figure 7. The foreland-dipping geometry results from a translation of three Baxa horses (#1–#3) that is greater than their individual lengths, most importantly the very long translation of horse #3 shown in incre-ment D. We suggest that the signifi cant forward propagation during this increment was facili-tated by an increase in taper due to emplacement of the locally thick lower Lesser Himalayan thrust sheet (Lower Lesser Himalayan duplex

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 14 of 21

section) over a footwall ramp, highlighting the control that original basin geometry can exert on fi nal deformation geometry.

At the scale of the Himalayan orogen, du-plexing of Lesser Himalayan units accommo-dates signifi cant shortening across the majority of the arc. Lesser Himalayan duplexing most likely represents a hinterland taper-building mechanism in response to either rapid forward propagation of the deformation front or rapid removal of material by erosion. An along-strike comparison of Lesser Himalayan duplexing is discussed in detail in Mitra et al. (2010). Not surprisingly, the thickness and relative transla-tion of individual horses involved in building the Lesser Himalayan duplex, as well as the area that needs to be fi lled between the décolle-ment and the roof thrust, have the largest effect on shortening magnitude. The former two are a response to original basin geometry, while the latter is dictated by taper, and may be a func-tion of basin geometry or external processes such as erosion. In northwest India and west-ern Nepal , the Lesser Himalayan duplex is pri-marily hinterland-dipping, and repeats multiple horses below the roof thrust, the Ramgarh thrust (RT) (Srivastava and Mitra, 1994; Robinson et al., 2006). In this region, from west to east,

the thickness of duplexed strata decreases and the vertical distance between the décollement and the roof thrust increases, resulting in a three- to four-fold increase in percent shorten-ing. In Sikkim, Paleoproterozoic and Paleozoic units are repeated in a duplex with a hybrid hinterland-dipping and antiformal stack geom-etry beneath the Ramgarh thrust, and thicker Paleoproterozoic thrust sheets are repeated in a hinterland-dipping duplex above the Ramgarh thrust and below the MCT (Bhattacharyya and Mitra, 2009; Mitra et al., 2010). The two-duplex system in Sikkim is very similar to what we ob-serve in eastern and central Bhutan. The Shumar thrust occupies a similar role as roof thrust that the Ramgarh thrust performs in duplexes fur-ther to the west. Note that offset on the Shumar thrust varies between 40 and 79 km across Bhu-tan, but the Ramgarh thrust in Sikkim has much more offset (164 km) (Mitra et al., 2010).

DISCUSSION

Shortening along the Himalayan Arc

A compilation of shortening estimates ob-tained across the ~2500 km arc-length of the Hima layan orogen is shown in Figure 8A, with

the data from individual studies listed in Table 2. Figure 8A and Table 2 are modeled after the compilation originally presented in DeCelles et al. (2002), but are updated to include more recent studies, in particular new data from the eastern Himalaya.

Other than Coward and Butler (1985), who presented a balanced cross section across the entire fold-thrust belt in Pakistan, the remain-ing studies compiled on Figure 8A present cross sections and shortening estimates for the Subhimalayan, Lesser Himalayan, and Greater Himalayan zones only, and not the Tethyan Hima-layan zone. These studies include, from west to east, Srivastava and Mitra (1994) in north-west India, Robinson et al. (2006) in western Nepal, Schelling (1992) in east-central Nepal, Schelling and Arita (1991) in eastern Nepal, Mitra et al. (2010) in Sikkim, this study in cen-tral and eastern Bhutan, and Yin et al. (2009) in western Arunachal Pradesh. Note that shorten-ing estimates from DeCelles et al. (1998, 2001) are replaced by updated estimates from Robin-son et al. (2006), and the preliminary estimate from McQuarrie et al. (2008) is replaced by the data from this study.

For shortening estimates across the entire fold-thrust belt, the results from the studies listed

TABLE 2. COMPILATION OF SHORTENING ESTIMATES FOR THE HIMALAYAN FOLD-THRUST BELT

Referencein Figure 8A Reference Location

Structuralboundaries

Tectonostratigraphiczones

Shortening(km)

074HS,HL,HGTFM-TMMnatsikaP)5891(reltuBdnadrawoC12 Srivastava and Mitra (1994) India, Kumaon and Garhwal STD-MCT GH (includes Almora thrust sheet) 193–260

161HS,HLTFM-TCMlawhraGdnanoamuK,aidnI)4991(artiMdnaavatsavirS3822HS,HLTFM-TCMlapeNnretseW)8991(.lateselleCeD

DeCelles et al. (2001) Western Nepal STD-MCT GH (includes Dadeldhura thrust sheet) 131–206 782HS,HLTFM-TCMlapeNnretseW)1002(.lateselleCeD

4 Robinson et al. (2006) Western Nepal STD-MCT GH (includes Dadeldhura thrust sheet) 111–221 225–473HS,HLTFM-TCMlapeNnretseW)6002(.latenosniboR5

mk002HGTCM-DTSlapeNlartnec-tsaE)4002(.latenhoK012–041HGTCM-DTSlapeNlartnec-tsaE)2991(gnillehcS6

07HS,HLTFM-TCMlapeNlartneC*)2991(gnillehcS7571–041HGTCM-DTSlapeNnretsaE)1991(atirAdnagnillehcS8

07–54HS,HLTFM-TCMlapeNnretsaE*)1991(atirAdnagnillehcS9942HGTCM-DTSmikkiS)0102(.lateartiM01352HS,HLTBM-TCMmikkiS)0102(.lateartiM11

12 This study 902–831HGTCM-DTSnatuhBnretsaednalartneC13 This study 762–461HS,HLTFM-TCMnatuhBnretsaednalartneC

331HGTCM-DTSnatuhBnretsaE)8002(.lateeirrauQcM622HS,HLTFM-TCMnatuhBnretsaE)8002(.lateeirrauQcM702HGTCM-DTShsedarPlahcanurAnretseW)0102(.lateniY41803HS,HLTFM-TCMhsedarPlahcanurAnretseW**)0102(.lateniY51621HTTMM-ZSIhkadaLdnaraksnaZ,aidnI)6891(elraeS

071–051HTTCM-ZSIhkadaLdnaraksnaZ,aidnI)7991(.lateelraeS6117 Corfi 58HTDTS-ZSIhkadaLdnaraksnaZ,aidnI)0002(elraeSdnadle

78HTDTS-ZSIhkadaLdnaraksnaZ,aidnI)3991(.latekcetS211HTDTS-ZSInoigersaliaKtnuoM,tebiT)3002(niYdnayhpruM81671ZS+HTDTS-ZSInoigersaliaKtnuoM,tebiT)3002(niYdnayhpruM91331HTTCM-ZSIreviRnurAfohtron,tebiT)4991(.laterehcabhcstaR02931HTTCM-ZSImikkiSfohtron,tebiT)4991(.laterehcabhcstaR12

Note: Compilation of shortening estimates for the Himalayan fold-thrust belt. Data accompany Figure 8A. Individual estimates are listed for each tectonostratigraphic zone (note that LH and SH zones are grouped together). Note that not all studies are referenced on Figure 8A. Augmented estimates marked with asterisk are discussed in the section “Shortening along the Himalayan arc”. Abbreviations: GH—Greater Himalaya; LH—Lesser Himalaya; SH—Subhimalaya; ISZ—Indus-Yalu suture zone; MBT—Main Boundary thrust; MCT—Main Central thrust; MFT—Main Frontal thrust; MMT—Main Mantle thrust; STD—South Tibetan detachment; TH—Tethyan Himalaya.

*Projection of Ramgarh thrust into eastern Nepal would increase LH shortening by 122–193 km (DeCelles et al., 2001; Pearson, 2002).Note that these offsets are similar to the 164 km slip on the Ramgarh thrust reported from Sikkim (Mitra et al., 2010).**50 km northward shift of northernmost ramp on Yin et al. (2010). Figures 4F–4G would decrease LH shortening by 75 km.



30203 1st pages / 15 of 21

above must be combined with shortening esti-mates for the Tethyan Himalayan zone. Several Tethyan Himalayan estimates are available from northwest India (Searle, 1986; Steck et al., 1993; Searle et al., 1997; Corfi eld and Searle, 2000). The minimum (Corfi eld and Searle, 2000) and maximum (Searle et al., 1997) of these estimates are added to the estimates of Srivastava and Mitra (1994). Minimum and maximum estimates from Murphy and Yin (2003), obtained north of west-ern Nepal, are added to the estimates of Robin-son et al. (2006). Data from Ratschbacher et al. (1994) from a transect north of east-central Nepal are added to the estimates of Schelling (1992). Data from Ratschbacher et al. (1994) from a transect north of Sikkim represent the easternmost available shortening estimate for the Tethyan Himalayan zone, and are added to the shortening estimates from eastern Nepal, Sik-kim, Bhutan, and Arunachal Pradesh. The data listed in Table 2 split out the range of shortening estimates individually by tectonostratigraphic zone. For each study site, the column on the left represents a total of the minimum estimates for each zone, and the column on the right repre-sents a total of the maximum estimates for each zone, after DeCelles et al. (2002). For this rea-son, the totals may be different from shortening estimates listed for individual cross sections in these studies.

To be able to directly compare shortening magnitudes, there are three places where we calculate shortening estimates that are different than published values (marked with asterisk). It is important to mention that the estimates we obtain in this manner are approximate. In east-ern Nepal, the shortening estimates of Schelling (1992) and Schelling and Arita (1991) are sig-nifi cantly smaller than those reported farther west in Nepal and to the east in Bhutan, particu-larly for the Lesser Himalayan zone. DeCelles et al. (2002) attributed this to a lack of iden-tifi cation of important structures in these cross sections, most notably the Ramgarh thrust. Sub-sequent studies have identifi ed an along-strike equivalent of the Ramgarh thrust in eastern Nepal (Pearson, 2002; Pearson and DeCelles, 2005), and this structure is also identifi ed to the east in Sikkim (Bhattacharyya and Mitra, 2009; Mitra et al., 2010). Projecting maximum and minimum displacements estimated for the Ramgarh thrust would add 122 km (DeCelles et al., 2001) to 193 km (Pearson, 2002) shorten-ing to the Lesser Himalayan zone (Table 2; Fig. 8A). Note that these offset estimates are simi-lar to the 164 km estimate obtained in Sikkim (Mitra et al., 2010).

Estimates from western Arunachal Pradesh, presented in Yin et al. (2009), are accompanied by deformed and restored cross sections that

include (1) an estimate with ~18 km of pre-Himalayan topography on the basal décolle-ment (Figs. 4D and 4E of Yin et al., 2009), and (2) an estimate with no pre-Himalayan defor-ma tion (fl at-lying strata) (Figs. 4F and 4G of Yin et al., 2009). Since the space between the erosion surface and the décollement exerts one of the largest controls on shortening magnitude, we use the latter estimate of Yin et al. (2010); this estimate minimizes shortening (515 km). In addition, for cross sections to balance, hang-ing-wall ramps and décollements must match footwall ramps and décollements in both the deformed and restored sections (e.g., Wood-ward et al., 1985). This constraint requires a ~50 km northward shift of the northernmost décollement ramp on Yin et al. (2010) Figure 4F, and suggests that the minimum estimate of Lesser Himalayan shortening in Arunachal Pradesh is 440 km (Fig. 8A; Table 2).

With new data from western Nepal, our augmented estimates for eastern Nepal and Arunachal Pradesh, and the addition of new data from Sikkim and Bhutan, for the fi rst time we can compare along-strike shortening varia-tions across the entire Himalayan arc (Fig. 8A). This allows us to evaluate the validity of the predictions of systematic shortening variation across the orogen listed above in the Introduc-tion. The data compiled on Figure 8A suggest that the greatest amount of shortening is accom-modated in the central part of the orogen, as fi rst discussed in DeCelles et al. (2002). Compared to western Nepal, shortening estimates from eastern Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, and Arunachal Pradesh are incompatible with an overall east-ward increase in shortening as suggested by the convergence history or increase in erosion (Guillot et al., 1999; Yin et al., 2006). Maximum shortening estimates for the eastern half of the orogen are very similar (ca. 580–640 km), and fall 280–340 km short of the maximum estimate in western Nepal. While not a perfect match for either, the data shown in Figure 8A are more compatible with the “bow-and-arrow” model (Elliott, 1976), or the hypothesis that shortening should mimic the width of the Tibetan Plateau (DeCelles et al., 2002), which is indicated by the dashed black line. The maximum shortening estimates from the majority of compiled studies fall very close to this line. However, exceptions that stand out are (1) the maximum estimate from western Nepal (Robinson et al., 2006), which exceeds the Tibetan Plateau width by ~250 km, and (2) the maximum augmented esti-mates from eastern Nepal (Schelling and Arita , 1991; Schelling, 1992), which fall short of the Tibetan Plateau width by ~100 km. The esti-mates from eastern Nepal are ~30–60 km less than estimates just to the east, falling short of

the estimates predicted by a simple “bow-and-arrow” model where shortening is greatest at the center of the orogen (Elliott, 1976). However, since our augmented estimates are not based on new cross sections that incorporate the Ramgarh thrust, future work in eastern Nepal could sig-nifi cantly refi ne and update these estimates al-lowing for a more robust comparison.

It is important to re-emphasize that our short-ening estimates from Bhutan, as with the rest of the shortening estimates compiled above, are minima. Several factors could increase shortening estimates, including: (1) increasing the depth of the basal décollement (e.g., Figs. 4D and 4E of Yin et al., 2010); (2) replacing thicker strata with thrust repetition of thinner stratigraphic units (e.g., addition of Ramgarh thrust to Schelling [1992] and Schelling and Arita [1991]); (3) greater displacement on thrust sheets where hanging-wall cutoffs have been eroded; or (4) incorporating penetrative strain or small-scale folding and faulting. For factor 1, earthquake seismology (Ni and Barazangi, 1984; Pandey et al., 1999; Mitra et al., 2005) and seismic refl ection (Hauck et al., 1998) have imaged a consistent, fl at, gently north-dipping basal décollement across the Himalayan orogen, removing signifi cant changes in the décolle-ment as a mechanism for increasing shortening. Factor 2 depends on the level of detail of map-ping, and the ability to delineate individual thrust-repeated units. In the case of our Bhutan cross sections, we see stratigraphic and struc-tural evidence for repeated Baxa Group horses (Along-Strike Variability of Lesser Himalayan Duplexing section) and a consistent two-part stratigraphy of the Daling-Shumar Group al-lows mapping of separate thrust sheets (Lower Lesser Himalayan duplex section). Factors 3 and 4 pose the biggest unknown for Subhimala-yan, Lesser Himalayan, and Greater Himalayan shortening estimates across the Himalaya, be-cause hanging-wall cutoffs are rarely exposed, and because of the degree of ductile deforma-tion, particularly in Greater Himalayan rocks. In Bhutan, klippen of lower Lesser Himalayan rock in the Kuru Chu valley allow constraint of the amount of erosion of Baxa Group horses. However, fortuitous map relationships such as this are not present in every study site across the orogen. Finally, one of the largest uncertainties in the composite estimates we compile above may be shortening in the Tethyan Himalayan zone, particularly east of Sikkim.

Percent Shortening along the Himalayan Arc

Precipitation from the Indian monsoon has been documented to increase significantly from the western to the eastern Himalaya (e.g.,

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 16 of 21

?

MMT

MCT

MBT

STD*

MCT

RT & MBT

MCT*

STDISZ

ISZ*

STD*

MCT*

ISZ*

MCT

MBT

STD

ISZ

Sho

rten

ing

(km

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

0

200

400

600

800

1000

0 200 400 600 800 1000 220020001800160014001200 2400Arc distance (km)

Hazarasyntaxis

NamcheBarwa

syntaxisPakistan Northwest India Nepal

Sikk

im

BhutanArunachal

Pradesh

Perc

ent

sho

rten

ing

(%)

40

60

80

30

50

70

90

40

60

80

30

50

70

90

0 200 400 600 800 1000 220020001800160014001200 2400Arc distance (km)

A

B

Tethyan Himalayan zoneGreater Himalayan zone

Lesser Himalayan zoneSubhimalayan zone

Structure abbreviations:ISZ = Indus-Yalu Suture zoneMMT = Main Mantle thrustSTD = South Tibetan detachment

MCT = Main Central thrustRT = Ramgarh thrustMBT = Main Boundary thrust

470

1

1

439

2

3

2

3

591

17

16

597

4

5

18

919

19

4

5

6

7

6

7

343

20

413

20

465*

606*

89

324

21

446*

21

8

9

384

577*

21

12

13

441

21

12

13

615654

21

14

15

1

23

4

4*

5

5*

87

109

1211

14

13 1615

Tethyan Himalaya (TH)

Subhimalaya + Lesser Himalaya (SH+LH)Subhimalaya + Lesser Himalaya + Greater Himalaya (SH+LH+GH)Subhimalaya + Lesser Himalaya + Greater Himalaya + Tethyan Himalaya (SH+LH+GH+TH)

641

21

10

11

6

579*

8*

Figure 8. (A) Compilation of shortening estimates from west to east across the Himalayan fold-thrust belt after DeCelles et al. (2002) but modifi ed and updated to incorporate recent work. Black dots connected with dashed line correspond to arc-normal width of Tibetan Plateau on fi ve transects shown on Figure 1 of DeCelles et al. (2002). Small numbers within colored boxes are referenced to data sources listed on Table 2. Left column shows minimum estimates, and right column shows maximum estimates for all tectonostratigraphic zones, except where only one estimate is available. Numbers with asterisk refer to augmented shortening estimates in eastern Nepal and Arunachal Pradesh (connected with adjacent estimates by dashed gray lines); changes listed in Table 2 and discussed in the Shortening along the Hima-layan arc. (B) Compilation of percent shortening ranges across the Himalayan arc. Data are totals for tectonostratigraphic zones listed below fi gure. Numbers are referenced to data sources listed on Table 3. Gray line connects maximum percent shortening from Greater Himalayan, Lesser Himalayan, and Subhimalayan zones. Numbers with asterisk (connected with dashed gray line) refer to augmented estimates in eastern Nepal and Arunachal Pradesh, as listed in Figure 8A and Table 2.



30203 1st pages / 17 of 21

Finlayson et al., 2002; Bookhagen et al., 2005). If the amount of precipitation can be directly related to erosion magnitude, as has been sug-gested by studies in the eastern Himalaya ( Grujic et al., 2006; Yin et al., 2010) and northwest India (Thiede et al., 2005), and if erosion exerts a fun-damental control on the width of orogens (e.g., Beaumont et al., 1992, 2001; Zeitler et al., 1993, 2001; Willett, 1999; Whipple and Meade, 2004), then the documented precipitation gradient should be refl ected in an overall increase in per-cent shortening from the western to the eastern Himalaya (e.g., McQuarrie et al., 2008).

Oxygen isotope records of sediments in Tibet (Dettman et al., 2003) and Nepal (Dettman et al., 2001) and foraminifera (Kroon et al., 1991) and diatom (Burckle, 1989) records from the north-ern Indian Ocean have been used to document a late Miocene (ca. 10–12 Ma) onset age for the Indian monsoon. Paleoelevation studies indicate that the High Himalaya and southern Tibet had achieved similar elevations to the present by approximately the same time (ca. 10–12 Ma) (Garzione et al. 2000a, 2000b; Rowley et al., 2001), indicating an orographic barrier had been established by the late Miocene. Since the ma-jority of deformation in the Tethyan Himalayan zone occurred between Paleocene and Oligocene time (Ratschbacher et al., 1994; Harrison et al., 2000; Wiesmayr and Grasemann, 2002; Murphy and Yin, 2003; Ding et al., 2005; Aikman et al., 2008), percent shortening estimates for the Miocene Himalayas (shortening in the Greater Hima layan, Lesser Himalayan, and Sub hima-

layan zones from the Miocene to the present) (e.g., Hodges et al., 1996; DeCelles et al., 2001; Grujic et al., 2002; Daniel et al., 2003; Searle et al., 2003; Kohn et al., 2004; Vannay et al., 2004; Robinson et al., 2006; Yin et al., 2009) would be the most representative standard for along-strike comparison of percent shortening.

Table 3 is a compilation of available percent shortening estimates for the Himalayan fold-thrust belt, which are shown graphically in Figure 8B. These data were either originally pre-sented in their source study, or were calculated from the balanced cross sections accompanying those studies. Data for the total percent shorten-ing in the Greater Himalayan, Lesser Himalayan, and Subhimalayan zones are shown by red boxes and connected with a gray line on Figure 8B. Since the shortening estimates that generate per-cent shortening ranges are most likely minima, the gray line connects the maximum estimates. Augmented estimates for eastern Nepal and for Arunachal Pradesh, calculated as discussed above (Shortening along the Himalayan arc), are shown as transparent boxes, and are marked with an asterisk and connected with a dashed gray line. Figure 8B shows that percent shortening in the Greater Himalayan, Lesser Himalayan, and Subhimalayan zones varies between 64% near the western syntaxis, increases to a maximum of 84% near the center of the orogen in western Nepal, and decreases to 76%–77% at the aug-mented estimates in eastern Nepal, increases to 82% in Sikkim, and decreases to 75% in Bhutan and 66% in Arunachal Pradesh.

Although this is only based on eight studies distributed across the ~2500 km arc-length of the orogen, our compilation does not support the prediction of an overall west-to-east increase in percent shortening, indicating a lack of fi rst-order correlation between precipitation magni-tude, shortening, and width in the Himalayan orogen. However, since the timing of defor-mation initiation of Greater Himalayan rocks extends back to the early Miocene (e.g., Daniel et al., 2003; Robinson et al., 2006), which pre-dates the late Miocene onset of the Indian mon-soon, this along-strike comparison of percent shortening should be viewed as a preliminary effort. A more robust test of the relationship of percent shortening to along-strike precipitation variations would require more precise timing constraints of late Miocene and younger short-ening magnitudes in the Lesser Himalayan and Subhimalayan zones in multiple along-strike locations. Finally, note that percent shortening across the arc smooths out the large variations in shortening amount, which may suggest that shortening variations may be controlled more by the original width and geometry of the north-ern Indian margin than by external features such as precipitation and convergence rate.

Himalayan River Anticlines

The observation that many major Himalayan rivers, including the Sutlej River in northwest India, the Arun River in eastern Nepal, and the Kuru Chu in Bhutan, fl ow parallel to the hinges

TABLE 3. COMPILATION OF PERCENT SHORTENING ESTIMATES FOR THE HIMALAYAN FOLD-THRUST BELT

ReferencenoitacoLecnerefeRB8erugiFni

SH + LH(%)

SH + LH + GH(%)

Total:SH + LH + GH + TH

(%)–4646natsikaP)5891(reltuBdnadrawoC1

2 Srivastava and Mitra (1994) India, Kumaon and Garhwal 65 76–79 721–742

3 Robinson et al. (2006) Western Nepal 74–77 79–84 723–774

4 Schelling (1992) East-central Nepal 32 58–65 56–615

4* Schelling (1992)* East-central Nepal 57–64 69–76 63–695

5 Schelling and Arita (1991) Eastern Nepal 26–36 59–65 55–596

5* Schelling and Arita (1991)* Eastern Nepal 56–67 70–77 63–696

672867mikkiS)0102(.lateartiM6 6

76–3657–0766–25natuhBnretsaednalartneCydutssihT7 6

8 Yin et al. (2010) Western Arunachal Pradesh 58 70 656

8** Yin et al. (2010) Western Arunachal Pradesh 51 66 626

Referencein Figure 8A

HTnoitacoLecnerefeR(%)

9 Searle (1986) India, Zanskar and Ladakh 5610 1Searle et al. (1997) India, Zanskar and Ladakh 6011 2Corfi eld and Searle (2000) India, Zanskar and Ladakh 6512 Steck et al. (1993) India, Zanskar and Ladakh 5913 3Murphy and Yin (2003) Tibet, Mount Kailas region 4914 4Murphy and Yin (2003) Tibet, Mount Kailas region 60 (w/ISZ)15 5Ratschbacher et al. (1994) Tibet, north of Arun River 5216 6Ratschbacher et al. (1994) Tibet, north of Sikkim 51

Note: Abbreviations: GH—Greater Himalaya; ISZ—Indus suture zone; LH—Lesser Himalaya; SH—Subhimalaya; TH—Tethyan Himalaya. Compilation of percent shortening estimates for the Himalayan fold-thrust belt. Data accompany Figure 8B. Maximum and minimum percent shortening are listed as totals for the indicated tectonostratigraphic zones. Superscripts in Total (SH + LH + GH + TH) column are referenced to the specifi c TH study used. Augmented estimates marked with asterisk are discussed in sections “Shortening along the Himalayan arc” and “Percent shortening along the Himalayan arc’’ and are matched with superscripts in “Reference” column.

*Calculated by adding 122–193 km shortening to LH zone (see Table 2).**Calculated by subtracting 75 km shortening from LH zone (see Table 2).

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 18 of 21

of orogen-perpendicular anticlines, has led to a number of studies searching for a folding mech-anism (Bordet, 1955; Krishnaswamy, 1981; Oberlander, 1985; Meier and Hiltner, 1993; Johnson, 1994; Burg et al., 1997; DiPietro et al., 1999; Montgomery and Stolar, 2006). However, no general consensus has been reached. Lateral ramps in major Himalayan thrusts and accretion of lenticular horses are two possible explana-tions (Johnson, 1994). In a recent study of the Arun River valley in eastern Nepal, Montgom-ery and Stolar (2006) argued that the observed spatial correlation between higher rainfall and the river valley itself supports the interpretation that Himalayan river anticlines are the result of “focused rock uplift in response to signifi cant differences between net erosion along major riv-ers and surrounding regions”(Montgomery and Stolar, 2006).

An alternative explanation is that preexist-ing structures and accompanying sedimentary thickness variations (i.e., paleogeography) may control the development of the north-trending Himalayan anticlines. The 9-km-thick section of the Daling-Shumar Group that we observe is local to a ~35-km-wide (east-west) area centered on the Kuru Chu valley (Fig. 2), and the thick-ness of the group decreases to ~4 km to the east and west. Since the lower contact is the Shumar thrust, these are minimum thicknesses. However, we assume that the faults detach the Shumar Formation at the base of the section. Displac-ing this locally thick section southward over the Baxa Group adds an extra ~5 km of structural elevation compared to the east and west (Figs. 3A–3C), creates two lateral ramps to the east and west, and as a result creates a structural high localized on the Kuru Chu valley. Note that the axis of the anticline does not continue below the Shumar thrust in the Baxa Group exposure to the south (Fig. 2), which provides further support for association with the thick Daling-Shumar Group section in the Shumar thrust hanging wall. Along strike through the eastern Himalaya, several north-trending folds are present, includ-ing the Arun antiform centered on the Arun River valley in eastern Nepal. This area also contains a thick (12–13 km) Lesser Himalayan section (Schelling and Arita, 1991; Schelling, 1992) when compared to the 3–4.5 km thickness of correlative Lesser Himalayan units in central and western Nepal (Robinson et al., 2006).

Locally thick Lesser Himalayan sections trending perpendicular to the Greater Indian continental margin could have been gener-ated from preexisting or syntectonic irregulari-ties, such as at the intersections of transform systems with the continental margin. While signifi cant along-strike synrift sediment thick-ness changes at the scale of salients and re-

entrants in continental margins have been identifi ed (e.g., Thomas, 1977), thick, smaller-scale, margin-perpendicular, basin-fi ll sections are also documented. Thomas (1991) observed abrupt along-strike thickness changes of synrift rocks in the Appalachian-Ouachita continen-tal margin, including a 65-km-wide, margin-perpendicular graben, localized along a synrift transform fault interpreted to have propagated onto the continent. Francheteau and Le Pichon (1972) also document similar deep, margin-perpendicular coastal basins interpreted to have formed where transform fracture zones inter-sected the east coast of Argentina.

CONCLUSIONS

A new 1:250,000-scale geologic map and four balanced cross sections through the Hima-layan fold-thrust belt in eastern and central Bhu-tan allow us to conclude the following:

(1) Major structural features of the fold-thrust belt include: (a) the ~2- to 7-km-thick Main Frontal thrust sheet; (b) the upper Lesser Hima-layan duplex, which structurally repeats ~2- to 3-km-thick horses of the Baxa Group, with the Shumar thrust acting as the roof thrust; (c) the lower Lesser Himalayan duplex, which repeats ~4- to 9-km-thick thrust sheets of the Daling-Shumar Group and Jaishidanda Formation, which passively folds the roof thrust, the MCT, and the structurally lower Greater Himalayan section; (d) the ~5- to 11-km-thick, structurally lower Greater Himalayan thrust sheet above the MCT and below the South Tibetan detachment; (e) Tethyan Himalayan rock in stratigraphic contact above the lower Greater Himalayan sec-tion in central Bhutan and in structural contact above the South Tibetan detachment in eastern Bhutan; and (f) the >13-km-thick, structurally higher Greater Himalayan thrust sheet above the Kakhtang thrust.

(2) In the Subhimalayan and Lesser Hima-layan zones, 164–267 km of minimum short-ening, or 52%–66%, is recorded. Structural overlap across the MCT and Kakhtang thrust varies between 97 and 156 km and 31–53 km, respectively. Total minimum shortening of the Himalayan fold-thrust belt between the MFT and the South Tibetan detachment ranges be-tween 344 and 405 km, or 70% to 75%. The Subhimalayan zone only accounts for 5–7 km, or 1%–2% of the total. The upper and lower Lesser Himalayan duplexes together account for 159–239 km of shortening, or 44%–59% of the total. When combined with observations from northwest India, Nepal, and Sikkim, this indicates that Lesser Himalayan duplexing ac-commodates signifi cant shortening across much of the Himalayan orogen.

(3) A compilation of shortening estimates across the length of the orogen does not indicate a systematic west-to-east increase, as predicted by the obliquity of Indian-Asian convergence, or increased erosion in the east. Although not a perfect fi t to either, the shortening data are more compatible with classic “bow-and-arrow” models (e.g., Elliott, 1976), and the hypothesis that shortening magnitude should mimic the arc-normal width of the Tibetan Plateau, as predicted by DeCelles et al. (2002). Finally, al-though precipitation increases from west to east across the Himalayan front, a compilation of the percent shortening across the length of the orogen does not indicate a systematic west-to-east increase, which would be predicted if pre-cipitation, erosion magnitude, and shortening were all positively correlated. We suggest that the original width and geometry of sedimentary basins on the northern Indian margin may exert a stronger control on shortening across the arc than external features such as precipitation and convergence rate.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank the government of Bhutan for their assistance and support, particularly Director General D. Wangda and the Department of Geology and Mines in the Ministry of Economic Af-fairs. This work was supported by National Science Foundation grant EAR-0738522 to N. McQuarrie. We would also like to thank reviewers Paul Kapp and Gautam Mitra and Associate Editor Matt Kohn for constructive comments. Finally, we are also grateful to Lincoln Hollister for discussions and comments that greatly improved the manuscript.

REFERENCES CITED

Acharyya, S.K., 1980, Stratigraphy and tectonics of Arunachal Lesser Himalaya, in Valdiya, K.S., and Bhatia , S.B., eds., Stratigraphy and Correlations of Lesser Himalayan Formations: Delhi, Hindustan Pub-lishing Corporation, p. 231–241.

Aikman, A.B., Harrison, T.M., and Ding, L., 2008, Evidence for early (>44 Ma) Himalayan crustal thickening, Tethyan Himalaya, southeastern Tibet: Earth and Plan-etary Science Letters, v. 274, p. 14–23, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2008.06.038.

Beaumont, C., Fullsack, P., and Hamilton, J., 1992, Ero-sional control of active compressional orogens, in K. McClay, ed., Thrust Tectonics: London, UK, Chapman and Hall, p. 1–18.

Beaumont, C., Jamieson, R.A., Nguyen, M.H., and Lee, B., 2001, Himalayan tectonics explained by extrusion of a low-viscosity crustal channel coupled to focused surface denudation: Nature, v. 414, p. 738–742, doi: 10.1038/414738a.

Bhargava, O.N., 1995, The Bhutan Himalaya: A Geological Account: Calcutta, Geological Society of India Special Publication 39, 245 p.

Bhattacharyya, K., and Mitra, G., 2009, A new kinematic evolutionary model for the growth of a duplex—An example from the Rangit duplex, Sikkim Himalaya, India: Gondwana Research, v. 16, p. 697–715, doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2009.07.006.

Bilham, R., Larson, K., Freymueller, J., and Project Idylhim members, 1997, GPS measurements of present-day convergence across the Nepal Himalaya: Nature, v. 386, p. 61–64.



30203 1st pages / 19 of 21

Bookhagen, B., Thiede, R.C., and Strecker, M., 2005, Ex-treme monsoon events and their control on erosion and sediment fl ux in the high, arid NW Himalayas: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 231, p. 131–146, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2004.11.014.

Bordet, P., 1955, Les elements structuraux de l’Himalaya de l’Arun et la region de l’Everest: Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des Sciences, v. 240, p. 102–104.

Brookfi eld, M.E., 1993, The Himalayan passive margin from Precambrian to Cretaceous times: Sedimentary Geology, v. 84, p. 1–35, doi: 10.1016/0037-0738(93)90042-4.

Burbank, D.W., Beck, R.A., and Mulder, T., 1996, The Hima layan foreland basin, in Yin, A., and Harrison, T.M., eds., The Tectonics of Asia: New York, Cam-bridge University Press, p. 205–226.

Burchfi el, B.C., Chen, Z.L., Hodges, K.V., Liu, Y.P., Royden , L.H., Deng, C.R., and Xu, J.N., 1992, The South Tibetan detachment system, Himalayan Orogen: Ex-tension contemporaneous with and parallel to shorten-ing in a collisional mountain belt: Geological Society of America Special Paper 269, 41 p.

Burckle, L.H., 1989, Distribution of diatoms in sediments of the northern Indian Ocean: Relationship to physi-cal oceanography: Marine Micropaleontology, v. 15, p. 53–65, doi: 10.1016/0377-8398(89)90004-2.

Burg, J.P., 1983, Tectogenese compare de deux segments de chaine de collision: Le sud du Tibet (suture du Tsangpo), la chaine hercynienne en Europe (suture du Massif Central) [thesis]: Montpellier University.

Burg, J.P., Davy, P., Nievergelt, P., Oberli, F., Seward, D., Diao, Z., and Meier, M., 1997, Exhumation during crustal folding in the Namche-Barwa syntaxis: Terra Nova, v. 9, p. 53–56, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3121.1997.tb00001.x.

Cawood, P.A., Johnson, M.R.W., and Nemchin, A.A., 2007, Early Paleozoic orogenesis along the Indian margin of Gondwana: Tectonic response to Gondwana assembly: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 255, p. 70–84, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2006.12.006.

Corfi eld, R.I., and Searle, M.P., 2000, Crustal shortening estimates across the north Indian continental mar-gin, Ladakh, NW India, in Khan, M.A., Treloar, P.J., Searle, M.P., and Jan, M.Q., eds., Tectonics off the Nanga Parbat Syntaxis and the Western Himalaya: The Geological Society of London Special Publication 170, p. 395–410.

Coward, M.P., and Butler, R.W.H., 1985, Thrust tec tonics and the deep structure of the Pakistan Himalaya: Geol ogy, v. 13, p. 417–420, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1985)13<417:TTATDS>2.0.CO;2.

Dahlstrom, C.D.A., 1969, Balanced cross sections: Cana-dian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 6, p. 743–757.

Daniel, C.G., Hollister, L.S., Parrish, R.R., and Grujic, D., 2003, Exhumation of the Main Central Thrust from Lower Crustal Depths, Eastern Bhutan Himalaya: Journal of Metamorphic Geology, v. 21, p. 317–334.

Davidson, C., Grujic, D.E., Hollister, L.S., and Schmid, S.M., 1997, Metamorphic reactions related to decom-pression and synkinematic intrusion of leuco granite, High Himalayan crystallines, Bhutan: Journal of Meta-morphic Geology, v. 15, p. 593–612, doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1314.1997.00044.x.

DeCelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., Quade, J., Kapp, P.A., Ojha, T.P., and Upreti, B.N., 1998, Neogene foreland basin deposits, erosional unroofi ng, and the kinematic his-tory of the Himalayan fold-thrust belt, western Nepal: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 110, p. 2–21, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1998)110<0002:NFBDEU>2.3.CO;2.

DeCelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., Quade, J., LaReau, B., and Spurlin, M., 2000, Tectonic implications of U-Pb zircon ages of the Himalayan orogenic belt in Nepal: Science, v. 288, p. 497–499, doi: 10.1126/science.288.5465.497.

DeCelles, P.G., Robinson, D.M., Quade, J., Ojha, T.P., Gar-zione, C.N., Copeland, P., and Upreti, B.N., 2001, Stratigraphy, structure, and tectonic evolution of the Himalayan fold thrust belt in western Nepal: Tec tonics, v. 20, p. 487–509, doi: 10.1029/2000TC001226.

DeCelles, P.G., Robinson, D.M., and Zandt, G., 2002, Impli-cations of shortening in the Himalayan fold-thrust belt

for uplift of the Tibetan Plateau: Tectonics, v. 21, no. 6, p. 1062–1087, doi: 10.1029/2001TC001322.

DeCelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., Najman, Y., Martin, A.J., Carter, A., and Garzanti, E., 2004, Detrital geochronol-ogy and geochemistry of Cretaceous–early Miocene strata of Nepal: Implications for timing and diachro-neity of initial Himalayan orogenesis: Earth and Plan-etary Science Letters, v. 227, p. 313–330, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2004.08.019.

DeMets, C., Gordon, R.G., Argus, D.F., and Stein, S., 1994, Effect of recent revisions to the geomagnetic reversal time scale on estimates of current plate motions: Geo-physical Research Letters, v. 21, p. 2191–2194, doi: 10.1029/94GL02118.

Dettman, D.L., Kohn, M.J., Quade, J., Ryerson, F.J., Ojha, T.P., and Hamidullah, S., 2001, Seasonal stable iso-tope evidence for a strong Asian monsoon through-out the past 10.7 Ma: Geology, v. 29, no. 1, p. 31–34, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(2001)029<0031:SSIEFA>2.0.CO;2.

Dettman, D.L., Fang, X.M., Garzione, C.N., and Li, J.J., 2003, Uplift-driven climate change at 12 Ma: A long δ18O record from the NE margin of the Tibetan Plateau: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 214, p. 267–277, doi: 10.1016/S0012-821X(03)00383-2.

Dewey, J.F., Cande, S., and Pitman, W.C., 1989, Tectonic evolution of the India-Eurasian collision zone: Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, v. 82, p. 717–734.

Ding, L., Kapp, P., and Wan, X., 2005, Paleocene-Eocene rec ord of ophiolite obduction and initial India-Asia col-lision, south central Tibet: Tectonics, v. 24, p. TC3001, doi: 10.1029/2004TC001729.

DiPietro, J.A., Pogue, K.R., Hussain, A., and Ahmad, I., 1999, Geologic map of the Indus syntaxis and sur-rounding areas, northwest Himalaya, Pakistan, in McFarlane, A., Sorkhabi, R.B., and Quade, J., eds., Hima laya and Tibet: Mountain Roots to Mountain Tops: Geological Society of America Special Paper 328, p. 159–178.

Elliott, D., 1976, The motion of thrust sheets: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 81, p. 949–963, doi: 10.1029/JB081i005p00949.

Finlayson, D.P., Montgomery, D.R., and Hallet, B., 2002, Spatial coincidence of rapid inferred erosion with young metamorphic massifs in the Himalayas: Geology, v. 30, p. 219–222, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(2002)030<0219:SCORIE>2.0.CO;2.

Francheteau, J., and LePichon, X., 1972, Marginal fracture zones as structural framework of continental margins in South Atlantic Ocean: American Association of Petro-leum Geologists Bulletin, v. 56, no. 6, p. 991–1007.

Gaetani, M., and Garzanti, E., 1991, Multicyclic history of the northern India continental margin (northwestern Himalaya): American Association of Petroleum Geolo-gists Bulletin, v. 75, p. 1427–1446.

Gansser, A., 1964, Geology of the Himalayas: New York, Wiley-Interscience, 289 p.

Gansser, A., 1983, Geology of the Bhutan Himalaya: Bos-ton, Birkhauser Verlag, 181 p.

Garzanti, E., 1999, Stratigraphy and sedimentary history of the Nepal Tethys Himalaya passive margin: Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, v. 17, p. 805–827, doi: 10.1016/S1367-9120(99)00017-6.

Garzione, C.N., Dettman, D.L., Quade, J., DeCelles, P.G., and Butler, R.F., 2000a, High times on the Tibetan plateau: Paleoelevation of the Thakkola graben, Nepal: Geology, v. 28, p. 339–342, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(2000)28<339:HTOTTP>2.0.CO;2.

Garzione, C.N., Quade, J., DeCelles, P.G., and English, N.B., 2000b, Predicting paleoelevation of Tibet and the Himalaya from δ18O vs. altitude gradients in meteoric water across the Nepal Himalaya: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 183, p. 215–229, doi: 10.1016/S0012-821X(00)00252-1.

Gehrels, G.E., DeCelles, P.G., Martin, A., Ojha, T.P., and Pinhassi, G., 2003, Initiation of the Himalayan orogen as an early Paleozoic thin-skinned thrust belt: GSA Today, v. 13, no. 9, p. 4–9, doi: 10.1130/1052-5173(2003)13<4:IOTHOA>2.0.CO;2.

Gokul, A.R., 1983, Geological and Mineral Map of Bhutan: Hyderabad, India, Geological Survey of India Map Printing Division, scale 1:500,000, 1 sheet.

Grujic, D., Casey, M., Davidson, C., Hollister, L.S., Kundig, R., Pavlis, T., and Schmid, S., 1996, Ductile extru-sion of the Higher Himalayan crystallines in Bhutan: Evidence from quartz microfabrics: Tectonophysics, v. 260, p. 21–43, doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(96)00074-1.

Grujic, D., Hollister, L.S., and Parrish, R.P., 2002, Hima-layan metamorphic sequence as an orogenic channel: Insight from Bhutan: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 198, p. 177–191, doi: 10.1016S0012-821X(02)00482-X.

Grujic, D., Coutand, I., Bookhagen, B., Bonnet, S., Blythe, A., and Duncan, C., 2006, Climatic forcing of erosion, landscape and tectonics in the Bhutan Himalaya: Geol-ogy, v. 34, p. 801–804, doi: 10.1130/G22648.1.

Guillot, S., Cosca, M., Allemand, P., and LeFort, P., 1999, Contrasting metamorphic and geochronologic evo-lution along the Himalayan belt, in Macfarlane, A., Sorkhabi , R.B., and Quade, J., eds., Himalaya and Tibet: Mountain Roots to Mountain Tops: Geological Society of America Special Paper 328, p. 117–128.

Guillot, S., Maheo, G., deSigoyer, J., Hattori, K.H., and Pecher, A., 2008, Tethyan and Indian subduction viewed from the Himalayan high- to ultrahigh-pressure metamorphic rocks: Tectonophysics, v. 451, p. 225–241, doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2007.11.059.

Harrison, T.M., Copeland, P., Hall, S.A., Quade, J., Burner, S., Ojha, T.P., and Kidd, W.S.F., 1993, Isotopic pres-ervation of Himalayan/Tibetan uplift, denudation, and climatic histories in two molasse deposits: The Journal of Geology, v. 101, p. 157–173, doi: 10.1086/648214.

Harrison, T.M., Ryerson, F.J., LeFort, P., Yin, A., Lovera, O., and Catlos, E.J., 1997, A late Miocene–Pliocene ori-gin for the central Himalayan inverted metamorphism: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 146, p. E1–E7, doi: 10.1016/S0012-821X(96)00215-4.

Harrison, T.M., Yin, A., Grove, M., Lovera, O.M., Ryerson, F.J., and Zhou, X., 2000, The Zedong Window: A rec-ord of superposed Tertiary convergence in southeast-ern Tibet: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 105, p. 19,211–19,230, doi: 10.1029/2000JB900078.

Hauck, M.L., Nelson, K.D., Brown, W., Zhao, W., and Ross, A.R., 1998, Crustal structure of the Himalayan oro-gen at ~90°E longitude from Project INDEPTH deep refl ection profi les: Tectonics, v. 17, p. 481–500, doi: 10.1029/98TC01314.

Heim, A., and Gansser, A., 1939, Central Himalaya: Geo-logical observations of the Swiss expedition, 1936: Memoirs of the Swiss Society of Natural Sciences, v. 73, 245 p.

Hodges, K.V., 2000, Tectonics of the Himalaya and south-ern Tibet from two perspectives: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 112, p. 324–350, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(2000)112<324:TOTHAS>2.0.CO;2.

Hodges, K.V., Parrish, R.R., and Searle, M.P., 1996, Tec-tonic evolution of the central Annapurna Range, Nepalese Himalayas: Tectonics, v. 15, p. 1264–1291, doi: 10.1029/96TC01791.

Hollister, L.S., and Grujic, D., 2006, Pulsed channel fl ow in Bhutan, in Law, R.D., Searle, M.P., and Godin., L., eds., Channel Flow, Ductile Extrusion and Ex-humation in Continental Collision Zones: The Geo-logical Society of London Special Publication 268, p. 415–423.

Hughes, N.C., Shanchi, P., Bhargava, O.N., Ahluwalia, A.D., Walia, S., Myrow, P.M., and Parcha, S.K., 2005, Cambrian biostratigraphy of the Tal Group, Lesser Himalaya, India, and early Tsanglangpuan (late early Cambrian) trilobites from the Nigali Dhar syncline: Geological Magazine, p. 142, p. 57–80.

Huyghe, P., Mugnier, J.L., Gajurel, A.P., and Delcaillau, B., 2005, Tectonic and climatic control of the changes in the sedimentary record of the Karnali River section (Siwaliks of western Nepal): The Island Arc, v. 14, p. 311–327, doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1738.2005.00500.x.

Jangpangi, B.S., 1974, Stratigraphy and tectonics of parts of eastern Bhutan: Himalayan Geology, v. 4, p. 117–136.

Johnson, M.R.W., 1994, Culminations and domal uplifts in the Himalaya: Tectonophysics, v. 239, p. 139–147, doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(94)90111-2.

Joshi, A., 1989, Marine Permian fossils from the foothills of the Bhutan Himalaya: Current Science, v. 59, no. 6, p. 318–321.

Long et al.


30203 1st pages / 20 of 21

Joshi, A., 1995, Setikhola Formation, in Bhargava, O.N., ed., The Bhutan Himalaya: A Geological Account: Geo-logical Society of India Special Publication 39, p. 34–37.

Kellett, D.A., Grujic, D., and Erdmann, S., 2009, Miocene structural reorganization of the South Tibetan detach-ment, eastern Himalaya: Implications for continental col-lision: Lithosphere, v. 1, p. 259–281, doi: 10.1130/L56.1.

Kohn, M.J., Wieland, M.S., Parkinson, C.D., and Upreti, B.N., 2004, Miocene faulting at plate tectonic veloc-ity in the Himalaya of central Nepal: Earth and Plan-etary Science Letters, v. 228, p. 299–310, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2004.10.007.

Kohn, M.J., Paul, S.K., and Corrie, S.L., 2010, The lower Lesser Himalayan sequence: A Paleoproterozoic arc on the northern margin of the Indian plate: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 122, p. 323–335, doi: 10.1130/B26587.1.

Krishnaswamy, V.S., 1981, Status report of the work carried out by the Geological Society of India in the frame-work of the International Geodynamics Project, in Gupta, H.K., and Delany, F.M., eds., Zagros-Hindu Kush-Himalaya Geodynamic Evolution: Washington, D.C., American Geophysical Union, p. 169–188.

Kroon, D., Steens, T., and Troelstra, S.R., 1991, Onset of monsoonal related uplift in the western Arabian Sea as revealed by planktonic foraminifera: Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientifi c Results, v. 117, p. 257–263.

Kumar, G., 1997, Geology of Arunachal Pradesh: Banga-lore, Geological Society of India, 217 p.

Lakshminarayana, G., 1995, Damuda Subgroup, in Bhar-gava, O.N., ed., The Bhutan Himalaya: A Geological Account, Geological Society of India Special Publica-tion 39, p. 29–33.

Lakshminarayana, G., and Singh, B., 1995, Siwalik Group, in Bhargava, O.N., ed., The Bhutan Himalaya: A Geo-logical Account: Geological Society of India Special Publication 39, p. 23–28.

Larson, K.M., Burgmann, R., Bilham, R., and Freymueller, J.T., 1999, Kinematics of the India-Eurasia collision zone from GPS measurements: Journal of Geophysi-cal Research, v. 104, p. 1077–1093, doi: 10.1029/1998JB900043.

Lave, J., and Avouac, J.P., 2000, Active folding of fl uvial ter-races across the Siwaliks Hills, Himalayas of central Nepal: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 105, no. 3, p. 5735–5770, doi: 10.1029/1999JB900292.

Leech, M.L., Singh, S., Jain, A.K., Klemperer, S.L., and Manickavasagam, R.M., 2005, The onset of India-Asia continental collision: Early, steep subduction required by the timing of UHP metamorphism in the western Himalaya: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 234, p. 83–97, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2005.02.038.

LeFort, P., 1975, Himalayas: The collided range, present knowledge of the continental arc: American Journal of Science, v. 275-A, p. 1–44.

Lin, B., Wang, N., Wang, G., Liu, G., and Qiu, H., 1989, Tectonic evolution of the lithosphere of the Hima-layas: Xizang (Tibet) stratigraphy: People’s Republic of China Ministry of Geology and Mineral Resources Memoir, Series 2, no. 11, 280 p.

Long, S., and McQuarrie, N., 2010, Placing limits on chan-nel fl ow: Insights from the Bhutan Himalaya: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 290, no. 3–4, p. 375–390, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2009.12.033.

Long, S., McQuarrie, N., Tobgay, T., Rose, C., Gehrels, G., and Grujic, D., 2010, Tectonostratigraphy of the Lesser Himalaya of Bhutan: Implications for the along-strike stratigraphic continuity of the northern Indian margin: Geological Society of America Bulletin, doi: 10.1130/B30202.

Martin, A.J., DeCelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., Patchett, P.J., and Isachsen, C., 2005, Isotopic and structural con-straints on the location of the Main Central thrust in the Annapurna Range, central Nepal Himalaya: Geologi-cal Society of America Bulletin, v. 117, p. 926–944, doi: 10.1130/B25646.1.

Mattauer, M., 1986, Intracontinental subduction, crust-mantle décollement and crustal-stacking wedge in the Himalayas and other collision belts, in Coward, M.P., and Ries, A.C., eds., Collisional tectonics: Geological Society of America Special Publication 19, p. 37–50.

McKenzie, N.R., Hughes, N.C., Myrow, P.M., Bhargava, O.N., Tangri, S.K., and Ghalley, K.S., 2007, Fossil and chronostratigraphic constraints on the Quartzite Member, Black Mountain Region, Bhutan, and its geo-logical signifi cance: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 39, no. 6, p. 416.

McQuarrie, N., Robinson, D., Long, S., Tobgay, T., Grujic, D., Gehrels, G., and Ducea, M., 2008, Preliminary stratigraphic and structural architecture of Bhutan: Im-plications for the along-strike architecture of the Hima-layan system: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 272, p. 105–117, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2008.04.030.

Meier, K., and Hiltner, E., 1993, Deformation and metamor-phism within the Main Central thrust zone, Arun tec-tonic window, eastern Nepal, in Treloar, P.J., and Searle, M.P., eds., Himalayan Tectonics: The Geological Soci-ety of London Special Publication 74, p. 511–523.

Mitra, G., Bhattacharyya, K., and Mukul, M., 2010, The lesser Himalayan Duplex in Sikkim: Implications for variations in Himalayan shortening: Journal of the Geological Society of India, v. 75, no. 1, p. 289–301, doi: 10.1007/s12594-010-0016-x.

Mitra, S., Priestley, K., Bhattacharyya, A.K., and Gaur, V.K., 2005, Crustal structure and earthquake focal depths beneath northeastern India and southern Tibet: Geo-physical Journal International, v. 160, p. 227–248, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02470.x.

Montgomery, D.R., and Stolar, D.B., 2006, Reconsidering Himalayan river anticlines: Geomorphology, v. 82, p. 4–15, doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2005.08.021.

Mugnier, J.L., Huyghe, P., Leturmy, P., and Jouanne, F., 2003, Episodicity and rates of thrust sheet motion in Himalaya (western Nepal), in McClay, K.R., ed., Thrust Tectonics and Hydrocarbon Systems: Ameri-can Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 82, p. 1–24.

Murphy, M.A., and Yin, A., 2003, Structural evolution and sequence of thrusting in the Tethyan fold-thrust belt and Indus-Yalu suture zone, southwest Tibet: Geologi-cal Society of America Bulletin, v. 115, no. 1, p. 21–34, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(2003)115<0021:SEASOT>2.0.CO;2.

Myrow, P.M., 2005, New stratigraphic and geochronologic data for the Tethyan of Bhutan: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 37, no. 7, p. 57.

Myrow, P.M., Hughes, N.C., Paulsen, T., Williams, I., Parcha , S.K., Thompson, K.R., Bowring, S.A., Peng, S.-C., and Ahluwalia, A.D., 2003, Integrated tec-tonostratigraphic analysis of the Himalaya and im-plications for its tectonic reconstruction: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 212, p. 433–441, doi: 10.1016/S0012-821X(03)00280-2.

Myrow, P.M., Hughes, N.C., Searle, M.P., Fanning, C.M., Peng, S.C., and Parcha, S.K., 2009, Stratigraphic cor-relation of Cambrian–Ordovician deposits along the Himalaya: Implications for the age and nature of rocks in the Mount Everest region: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 120, p. 323–332.

Najman, Y., Pringle, M., Godin, L., and Oliver, G., 2006, The detrital record of orogenesis: A review of ap-proaches and techniques used in the Himalayan sedi-mentary basins: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 74, p. 1–72.

Nautiyal, S.P., Jangpangi, B.S., Singh, P., Guha Sarkar, T.K., Bhate, V.D., Raghavan, M.R., and Sahai, T.N., 1964, A preliminary note on the geology of the Bhutan Hima-laya: New Delhi, Report of the 22nd International Geo-logic Congress, v. 11, p. 1–14.

Nelson, K.D., Zhao, W., Brown, L.D., Kuo, J., Che, J., Liu, X., Klemperer, S.L., Makovsky, Y., Meissner, R., Mechie, J., Kind, R., Wenzel, F., Ni, J., Nabelek, J., Chen, L., Tan, H., Wei, W., Jones, A.G., Booker, J., Unsworth, M., Kidd, W.S.F., Hauck, M., Alsdorf, D., Ross, A., Cogan, M., Wu, C., Sandvol, E., and Edwards, M., 1996, Partially molten middle crust be-neath southern Tibet: A synthesis of Project INDEPTH results: Science, v. 274, p. 1684–1688, doi: 10.1126/science.274.5293.1684.

Ni, J., and Barazangi, M., 1984, Seismotectonics of the Himalayan collision zone: Geometry of the under-thrusting Indian plate beneath the Himalaya: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 89, p. 1147–1164, doi: 10.1029/JB089iB02p01147.

Oberlander, T.M., 1985, Origin of drainage transverse to structures in orogens, in Morisawa, M., and Hack, J.T., eds., Tectonic Geomorphology: Boston, Allan and Unwin , p. 155–182.

Ojha, T.P., Butler, R.F., Quade, J., DeCelles, P.G., Rich-ards, D., and Upreti, B.N., 2000, Magnetic polarity stratigraphy of the Neogene Siwalik Group at Khutia Khola, far western Nepal: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 112, p. 424–434, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(2000)112<424:MPSOTN>2.0.CO;2.

Pandey, M.R., Tandukar, R.P., Avouac, J.P., Vergne, J., and Heritier, T., 1999, Seismotectonics of the Nepal Himalaya from a local seismic network: Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, v. 17, p. 703–712, doi: 10.1016/S1367-9120(99)00034-6.

Parrish, R.R., and Hodges, K.V., 1996, Isotopic constraints on the age and provenance of the Lesser and Greater Himalayan sequences, Nepalese Himalaya: Geo logical Society of America Bulletin, v. 108, p. 904–911, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1996)108<0904:ICOTAA>2.3.CO;2.

Passchier, C.W., and Trouw, R.A.J., 1998, Microtectonics: New York, Springer, 289 p.

Patriat, P., and Achache, J., 1984, Indian-Eurasian collision chronology has implications for crustal shortening and driving mechanisms of plates: Nature, v. 311, p. 615–621, doi: 10.1038/311615a0.

Pearson, O.N., 2002, Structural evolution of the central Nepal fold-thrust belt and regional tectonic and struc-tural signifi cance of the Ramgarh thrust [Ph.D. thesis]: Tucson, University of Arizona, 231 p.

Pearson, O.N., and DeCelles, P.G., 2005, Structural geol-ogy and regional tectonic signifi cance of the Ramgarh thrust, Himalayan fold-thrust belt of Nepal: Tectonics, v. 24, p. TC4008, doi: 10.1029/2003TC001617.

Powell, C.M., and Conaghan, P.J., 1973, Plate tectonics and the Himalayas: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 20, p. 1–12, doi: 10.1016/0012-821X(73)90134-9.

Quade, J., Cater, J.M.L., Ojha, T.P., Adam, J., and Harrison, T.M., 1995, Late Miocene environmental change in Nepal and the northern Indian subcontinent: Stable iso-topic evidence from paleosols: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 107, p. 1381–1397, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1995)107<1381:LMECIN>2.3.CO;2.

Raina, V.K., and Srivastava, B.S., 1980, A reappraisal of the geology of the Sikkim Lesser Himalaya, in Valdiya, K.S., and Bhatia, S.B., eds., Stratigraphy and Correla-tions of Lesser Himalayan Formations: Delhi, Hindu-stan Publishing Corporation, p. 231–241.

Ray, S.K., 1989, On the problem of lithostratigraphic classi-fi cation of the deformed Daling Group, its equivalents and related rocks of the Himalaya: Geological Survey of India Special Publication, v. 22, p. 1–4.

Ray, S.K., 1995, Lateral variations in geometry of thrust planes and its signifi cance, as studied in the Shu-mar allochthon, Lesser Himalayas, eastern Bhutan: Tectonophysics, v. 249, p. 125–139, doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(95)00008-B.

Ratschbacher, L., Frisch, W., and Liu, G., 1994, Distrib-uted deformation in southern and western Tibet dur-ing and after the India-Asia collision: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 99, p. 19,917–19,945, doi: 10.1029/94JB00932.

Ray, S.K., Bandyopadhyay, B.K., and Razdan, R.K., 1989, Tectonics of a part of the Shumar allochthon in east-ern Bhutan: Tectonophysics, v. 169, p. 51–58, doi: 10.1016/0040-1951(89)90182-0.

Richards, A., Argles, T., Harris, N., Parrish, R., Ahmad, T., Darbyshire, F., and Draganits, E., 2005, Hima layan archi tecture constrained by isotopic tracers from clas-tic sediments: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 236, p. 773–796, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2005.05.034.

Robinson, D.M., DeCelles, P.G., Garzione, C.N., Pearson, O.N., Harrison, T.M., and Catlos, E.J., 2003, Kine-matic model of the Main Central thrust in Nepal : Geology, v. 31, no. 4, p. 359–362, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(2003)031<0359:KMFTMC>2.0.CO;2.

Robinson, D.M., DeCelles, P.G., and Copeland, P., 2006, Tectonic evolution of the Himalayan thrust belt in western Nepal: Implications for channel fl ow mod-els: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 118, p. 865–885, doi: 10.1130/B25911.1.



30203 1st pages / 21 of 21

Rowley, D.B., Pierrehumbert, R.T., and Currie, B.S., 2001, A new approach to stable isotope-based paleoaltimetry: Implications for paleoaltimetry and paleohypsometry of the High Himalaya since the late Miocene: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 188, p. 253–268, doi: 10.1016/S0012-821X(01)00324-7.

Schelling, D., 1992, The tectonostratigraphy and structure of the eastern Nepal Himalaya: Tectonics, v. 11, no. 5, p. 925–943, doi: 10.1029/92TC00213.

Schelling, D., and Arita, K., 1991, Thrust tectonics, crustal shortening, and the structure of the far-eastern Nepal Himalaya: Tectonics, v. 10, no. 5, p. 851–862, doi: 10.1029/91TC01011.

Schopf, J.W., Tewari, V.C., and Kudryavtsev, A.B., 2008, Discovery of a new chert-permineralized microbiota in the Proterozoic Buxa Formation of the Ranjit window, Sikkim, northeast India, and its astrobiological impli-cations: Astrobiology, v. 8, p. 735–746, doi: 10.1089/ast.2007.0184.

Schulte-Pelkum, V., Monsalve, G., Sheehan, A., Pandey, M.R., Sapkota, S., Bilham, R., and Wu, F., 2005, Imag-ing the Indian subcontinent beneath the Himalaya: Na-ture, v. 435, p. 1222–1225, doi: 10.1038/nature03678.

Searle, M.P., 1986, Structural evolution and sequence of thrusting in the High Himalayan, Tibetan-Tethys, and Indus suture zones of Zanskar and Ladakh, western Himalaya: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 8, p. 923–936, doi: 10.1016/0191-8141(86)90037-4.

Searle, M.P., Corfi eld, R.L., Stephenson, B., and McCarron, J., 1997, Structure of the north Indian continental mar-gin in the Ladakh-Zanskar Himalayas: Implications for the timing of obduction of the Spontang ophiolite, India-Asia collision and deformational events in the Himalaya: Geological Magazine, v. 134, p. 297–316, doi: 10.1017/S0016756897006857.

Searle, M.P., Simpson, R.L., Law, R.D., Parrish, R.R., and Waters, D.J., 2003, The structural geometry, metamor-phic and magmatic evolution of the Everest Massif, High Himalaya of Nepal–South Tibet: Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 160, p. 345–366.

Shukla, M., Tewari, V.C., Babu, R., and Sharma, A., 2006, Microfossils from the Neoproterozoic Buxa Dolomite, West Siang district, Arunachal Lesser Himalaya, India, and their signifi cance: Journal of the Paleontological Society of India, v. 51, p. 57–73.

Srivastava, P., and Mitra, G., 1994, Thrust geometries and deep structure of the outer and lesser Himalaya, Kumaon and Garwal (India): Implications for evolu-tion of the Himalayan fold-and-thrust belt: Tectonics, v. 13, p. 89–109, doi: 10.1029/93TC01130.

Steck, A., Spring, L., Vannay, J.C., Masson, H., Bucher, H., Stutz, E., Marchant, R., and Tieche, J.C., 1993, The tectonic evolution of the northwestern Himalaya in eastern Ladahk and Lahul, India, in Treloar, P.J., and Searle, M.P., eds., Himalayan Tectonics: The Geo-logical Society of London Special Publication 74, p. 277–298.

Stocklin, J., 1980, Geology of Nepal and its regional frame: Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 137, p. 1–34, doi: 10.1144/gsjgs.137.1.0001.

Stocklin, J., and Bhattarai, K.D., 1977, Geology of the Kath-mandu area and central Mahabharat Range, Nepal:

Nepal Department of Mines and Geology, Himalayan Report, 86 p.

Suppe, J., 1983, Geometry and kinematics of fault-bend fold-ing: American Journal of Science, v. 283, p. 684–721.

Swapp, S.M., and Hollister, L.S., 1991, Inverted metamor-phism within the Tibetan slab of Bhutan: Evidence for a tectonically transported heat source: Canadian Min-eralogist, v. 29, p. 1019–1041.

Tangri, S.K., 1995, Diuri Formation, in Bhargava, O.N., ed., The Bhutan Himalaya: A Geological Account: Geologi-cal Society of India Special Publication 39, p. 59–63.

Tangri, S.K., and Pande, A.C., 1995, Tethyan Sequence, in Bhargava, O.N., ed., The Bhutan Himalaya: A Geo-logical Account: Geological Society of India Special Publication 39, p. 109–142.

Thiede, R.C., Arrowsmith, R., Bookhagen, B., McWilliams , M., Sobel, E., and Strecker, M., 2005, From tectoni-cally to erosionally controlled development of the Hima layan Orogen: Geology, v. 33, no. 8, p. 689–692, doi: 10.1130/G21483.1.

Thomas, W.A., 1977, Evolution of Appalachian-Ouachita salients and recesses from reentrants and promontories in the continental margin: American Journal of Sci-ence, v. 277, p. 1233–1278.

Thomas, W.A., 1991, The Appalachian-Ouachita rifted mar-gin of southeastern North America: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 103, p. 415–431, doi: 10.1130/0016-7606(1991)103<0415:TAORMO>2.3.CO;2.

Tukuoka, T., Takayasu, K., Yoshida, M., and Hisatomi, K., 1986, The Churia (Siwalik) Group of the Arung Khola area, west central Nepal: Shimane, Japan: Memoirs of the Faculty of Science, Shimane University, v. 20, p. 135–210.

Upreti, B.N., 1996, Stratigraphy of the western Nepal Lesser Himalaya: Journal of Nepal Geological Society, v. 13, p. 11–28.

Upreti, B.N., 1999, An overview of the stratigraphy and tectonics of the Nepal Himalaya: Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, v. 17, p. 577–606, doi: 10.1016/S1367-9120(99)00047-4.

Valdiya, K.S., 1995, Proterozoic sedimentation and Pan-African geodynamic development in the Hima-laya: Precambrian Research, v. 74, p. 35–55, doi: 10.1016/0301-9268(95)00004-O.

Vannay, J.-C., and Grasemann, B., 2001, Himalayan in-verted metamorphism and syn- convergence extension as a consequence of a general shear extrusion: Geo-logical Magazine, v. 138, p. 253–276, doi: 10.1017/S0016756801005313.

Vannay, J.-C., and Hodges, K.V., 2003, Tectonometamor-phic evolution of the Himalayan metamorphic core between the Annapurna and Dhaulagiri, central Nepal: Journal of Metamorphic Geology, v. 14, no. 5, p. 635–656, doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1314.1996.00426.x.

Vannay, J.-C., Grasemann, B., Rahn, M., Frank, W., Carter, A., Baudraz, V., and Cosca, M., 2004, Miocene to Holo cene exhumation of metamorphic crustal wedges in the NW Himalaya: Evidence for tectonic extrusion coupled to fl uvial erosion: Tectonics, v. 23, p. TC1014, doi: 10.1029/2002TC001429.

Webb, A.A.G., Yin, A., Harrison, T.M., Celerier, J., and Burgess, P.W., 2007, The leading edge of the Greater

Himalayan crystalline complex revealed in the NW Indian Himalaya: Implications for the evolution of the Himalayan orogen: Geology, v. 35, no. 10, p. 955–958, doi: 10.1130/G23931A.1.

Whipple, K.X., and Meade, B.J., 2004, Controls on the strength of coupling among climate, erosion, and defor-mation in two-sided, frictional orogenic wedges at steady state: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 109, p. 1–24, doi: 10.1029/2003JF000019.

Wiesmayr, G., and Grasemann, B., 2002, Eohimalayan fold and thrust belt: Implications for the geodynamic evo-lution of the NW-Himalaya (India): Tectonics, v. 21, no. 6, p. 1058, doi: 10.1029/2002TC001363.

Willett, S.D., 1999, Orogeny and orography: The effects of erosion on the structure of mountain belts: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 104, p. 28,957–28,982, doi: 10.1029/1999JB900248.

Woodward, N.B., Boyer, S.E., and Suppe, J., 1985, An out-line of balanced cross sections, Second edition: Knox-ville, University of Tennessee, Studies in Geology, v. 11, 170 p.

Yin, A., 2006, Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the Hima layan orogen as constrained by along-strike variation of structural geometry, exhumation history, and foreland sedimentation: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 76, p. 1–131, doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2005.05.004.

Yin, A., and Harrison, T.M., 2000, Geologic evolution of the Himalayan-Tibetan orogen: Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, v. 28, p. 211–280, doi: 10.1146/annurev.earth.28.1.211.

Yin, A., Dubey, C.S., Kelty, T.K., and Gehrels, G.E., Chou1, C. Y., Grove, M. and Lovera, O., 2006, Structural evo-lution of the Arunachal Himalaya and implications for asymmetric development of the Himalayan orogen: Current Science, v., 90, p. 195–206.

Yin, A., Dubey, C.S., Kelty, T.K., Webb, A.A.G., Harrison, T.M., Chou, C.Y., and Celerier, J., 2010, Geologic cor-relation of the Himalayan orogen and Indian craton: Part 2: Structural geology, geochronology, and tectonic evolution of the Eastern Himalaya: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 122, no. 3–4, p. 360–395, doi: 10.1130/B26461.1.

Zeitler, P.K., Chamberlain, C.P., and Smith, H.A., 1993, Synchronous anatexis, metamorphism, and rapid denu-dation at Nanga Parbat (Pakistan Himalaya): Geology, v. 21, p. 347–350, doi: 10.1130/0091-7613(1993)021<0347:SAMARD>2.3.CO;2.

Zeitler, P.K., Koons, P.O., Bishop, M.L., Chamberlain, C.P., Craw, D., Edwards, M.A., Hamidullah, S., Jan, M.Q., Khan, M.A., Khattak, M.U.K., Kidd, W.S.F., Mackie, R.L., Meltzer, A.S., Park, S.K., Pecher, A., Poage, M.A., Sarker, G., Schneider, D.A., Seeber, L., and Shroder, J., 2001, Crustal reworking at Nanga Parbat, Pakistan: Evidence for erosional focusing of crustal strain: Tectonics, v. 20, p. 712–728, doi: 10.1029/2000TC001243.

MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 29 OCTOBER 2009REVISED MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 21 JANUARY 2010MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED 25 JANUARY 2010

Printed in the USA

1,000 1,000

1,000

1,000

2,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,0001,000

1,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

2,000

2,000

1,000

2,000

2,000 3,0003,000

2,000

2,000

3,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

3,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

3,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

3,000

3,000

1,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,00

0

2,000

3,000

4,000

3,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

2,000

3,000

3,000

3,000

4,000

4,000

3,000

4,000

4,000

3,000

3,000

4,0004,000

3,00

0

4,000

3,000

4,000

3,000

4,000

4,00

0

3,000

3,000

3,000

3,000

4,000

3,000

3,000

3,000 3,000

4,000

4,000

4,000

5,00

0

5,000

5,00

0

5,000

5,000

5,000

5,00

0

4,000

5,000

5,000

4,000

5,000

4,000

4,000

4,000

4,000

4,000

4,000

5,000

5,000

5,00

0

5,000

5,000

5,000

5,000

5,000

Nyera Am

o ChuManas Chu

Dra

ngm

e Ch

u

Sheri Chu

Kulong Chu

Kuru

Chu

Kuru

Chu

Mangde Chu

Mangde C

hu

Nikka Chu

Mangde Chu

Bhumtang Chu

Bhumtang Chu

Yakha Chu

KT

KT

STD

STD

MCT

MCT

ST

ST

MBT

MBT

MFTMFT

ST

ST

ST

ST

ST

?

?

STD

KT

MBT

MFT

ST

ST

MCT

MCT

? ??

?

?

?

? ?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

Samdrup Jongkhar

Pemagatshel

Trashigang

TrashiYangtse

Mongar

Geyleygphug

Shemgang

Trongsa

Jakar

Ura

Lhuentse

Qs

Qs

Ts

Ts

Ts

Tsl

Tsm

Tsu

Pzg

Pzg

Pzd

Pzd

Pzd

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

pCd

pCd

pCd

pCd

pCd

pCs

pCs

pCs

pCs

pCd

pCd

pCg

pCg

pCg

pCg

Pzc

GHlo

pCd

Pzb

pCs

?

?

Pzj

Pzj

Pzd

?

?

?

Tsl

Tsm

Pzb

PzbPzb

Ts

Ts

Pzg

pCd

Qs

Pzj

Pzj

GHlm

GHlo

pCd

GHlo

GHlo

GHlo

?

GHlm

GHlm

GHlm

GHlm

GHlm

GHlm

GHlm

GHlm

Pzc

Pzc

Pzc

GHho

GHho

GHho

GHhm

GHhm

GHhm

Pzm

GHhg

GHhg

GHlm

GHlm

GHlm

Pzj?

?

Sakteng klippe

Lum La window

Ura klippe

Tang Chu klippe

Kuru Chuanticline

Pzb

65

32

30

40

28

36

52

5860

47

50

5538

5846

30

5848

45

18

12

14

15

22

22

53

19

28

33

42

52

50253120

33 1830

122625

4036

403032

34

24

27

48

27

4045 42

45

33

21

35 30

2316

48

27

18

53

4042

4420

27

27

2018

22

36

4034

37

32

32

34

4033

37

47

32272240

252820

30

5048

5754

60

55

30

54

40

42

70

5646 4535

256782

32

503327

3328

60

33

27

33

4717

43

35

19

143

18

50

0

0

3933

6

35

28

32

5858

59

42

44

47

49

29

9

19

11

19

97

5

24

22

37

41 56

55

4539

65

47 34 5846 2142

2315 45

56

4043

4026 48

62 5040

40

8045

47284774

46

77

2526

3526

55

20 4015

4875

5355

24

3770 708034 18

202525

1826

40 14

251524

57

20 70

53 5244

24

4514

20 92937

4616

52 43

60

22

40 365

2427

1013

2540

46 56

15 2220101013

2022 13

41825

21

2422

135531

21362116

1813

15 18 24

21 6

35

27

108

3525

22

5827

4532

3220

32

238

1115

30 25

1420

4148

26

332424

41

4137

37

50

46

55

58

5044

47

49

3462

4944

47

47

20

45

54

32

3919

48444537

4059

6469

59

5842

453955

41

30

2226

4

4641

39

38 352736

35

3635

2134

3639

34

3633

3440

29

35

31

1421

4127

3440

53

2930

40

17

5252 47 7164

52

5772 54

5124

34

2631

445038

63

6958

58

34

54

3648

3143

3124

3

26

19

28

8

50

30

3563

30

24

25

20

20

28

58

28

32

2020

18

45

2527

1024

24

20

2121

30

6417

11

52

0

6941

69 27 25

46 51

29

6714

38 31

313032 3834

29 50

29

35

30

4840

31

542 17

26

20

6552

2333

1031

3018

1845

31

2222

18

13

13

4

243521

24

2054

26 326

18

15

1531

19

19

14

15

8 733

7

4624

2025

3212

3737

9

4435

351012

50 19

325

26 12 11

2126

151615

15

15

1420

1515

20

9 815

1

22

11

26

2410

21

422224

24 3035

3124

365323

32 1140

25

8119

16

12 201719

815

1545

44

4

40

45

35

1520

6

22

18

254

25

14

15

1615

2510

20 2012

2440

2276

133

2324

4235 01837

10352520

1835

2321

13

60

2121 16

15

173532 32

3023

6260

54353533

44444924

306020

133534

3536

3045

28 52

45

352056

71

52807565 42

795026

32 5264 75

6536 50

80

62

2830

254141

45463424

21

50

4641

2665

411

285124

394742

256

2815 18

15

1615

2

3221

309

6

3351010

2125

2221

1824

2519

1926

4136

2120

1538

22

23

3139

21

26

24

3035

323641

3224

21

4012 39

12

3733

26 6627

7171

3921

36

42

28

32

43

15 10

1136

23

4040

26

413641

545766

57

54 6868

54

6161

65 6825

6

33

31 5523

34 30

45

12

36

29

30

1734

38

3429

3518

7434

107

54

17

63535

2714

24

17

40

242929

26

10

25

1814

38

24

0

15

15

158

2110

10

3224

7 3228

12 7

36 2

2810 18

37

19

30

15

12

20 35

35

2513

010

5

7

11

30 433624

35

19

20

15

2020 4010

1110

3521 9

921

32

30

14

33

21

26

21150

1515 16

19

24

13 199 2430

25

27

351726

20 8 510

2020

18

2020

13

9

40 4263

38

5815

28

4758

49

54

64

2048 578

12

64

51

45

35

304229

27

1635

49

295818

283559

54

45

27

24

5042

62

14

47

30

50

32

44

2212

44

67824

46 7360

8

29

44

27

244022

4267

60

15

506670

5455

35

40

40

2012

55

45

76

35403045

55

35

9

25

62

25

54

19

52

2 31

7545

7025

42

30

14

42

25

12

24

20 20

31 2462

3854

30 5852

39

24

18

30

50

30

25

40

45

20

30

30

45

40

60

40

20

70

50

50

45

60

50

5045

20

30

40

40

40

60

40

40

40

30

25

40

21

4020

5060

2520

30

50

40

25

60

15

2020

~40

~40

~40

~20

~20

~20

~20

~20 ~20

~20

~20

~40

~20

~40

~20

~20

~40

~40

~20

~40

~20 ~20

~20

~20 ~20

~20

~20

~20

~20

~40~20

~40

~20

~20

~20

~20

~20

~20

~20

~20

~20

~60

~20

~20

~40~20

~20

~20

~20

~20~40

~20

~40

~40

~40

~60

~20

~20

4240

4236 4540 42

34 10 76

282

181830

25

10

50

60

45

42

45

26

2047

BhutanIn

dia

BhutanC

hina

ChinaIndia

Bhutan

India

Bhutan

India

91°00′E

91°00′E 91°15′E

91°15′E

91°30′E

91°30′E

26°4

5′N

27°0

0′N

27°1

5′N

27°3

0′N

27°4

5′N

26°4

5′N

27°0

0′N

27°1

5′N

27°3

0′N

27°4

5′N

90°30′E 90°45′E

90°30′E 90°45′E

B′

B A

A′

CD

C′D′

Stratigraphy

Symbols

40 31

2612

Stratigraphic contact

Thrust fault (teeth on upper plate)

Detachment fault (ticks on upper plate)

Anticline

Syncline

Strike and dip of bedding and foliation

Structural data from Gokul (1983)

Vertical bedding and foliation

Horizontal bedding

Road

River

Contour line (elevation in meters)

Town

Structures (North to South)

STD

MCT

MBT

MFT

ST

South Tibetan detachment

KT Kakhtang thrust

Main Central thrust

Shumar thrust

Main Boundary thrust

Main Frontal thrust

Qs

Ts

Pzg

Pzd

Pzb

pCd

pCs

Pzc

GHlo

GHhm

Modern sediment (Quaternary)

pCg

Siwalik Group (Miocene Pliocene) - lower (Tsl), middle (Tsm), upper (Tsu)

Subhimalaya

Lesser Himalaya

Gondwana succession (Permian)

Diuri Formation (Permian)

Baxa Group (Neoproterozoic Cambrian[?])

Dolomite

Daling Formation (Paleoproterozoic)

GHhg

Shumar Formation (Paleoproterozoic)

Orthogneiss (Paleoproterozoic)

Tibetan (Tethyan) Himalaya

Chekha Formation (age uncertain; Neoproterozoic to Ordovician[?])

Greater Himalaya

Scale: 1:250,000

Structurally lower orthogneiss unit (Cambrian Ordovician)

GHlm Structurally lower metasedimentary unit (Neoproterozoic Ordocivian[?])

GHho Structurally higher orthogneiss unit

Structurally higher metasedimentary unit

Structurally higher leucogranite (Miocene)

7

Mineral stretching lineation

Crenulation fold axis

Pzj Jaishidanda Formation (Neoproterozoic Ordovician[?])

71

Pzm Maneting Formation (Ordovician[?])

Structural data from Gansser (1983)

Structural data from Bhargava (1995)2612

4721

Geologic Map of Eastern and Central Bhutan

0 5 10 15 20 25

kilometers

S. Long, N. McQuarrie, T. Tobgay, and D. Grujic

Ura

Figure 2. Geologic map of eastern and central Bhutan (scale 1:250,000). Location shown on Figure 1. Stratigraphy, unit abbre-via tions, structure abbreviations, sources of map data, and symbols shown in legend. The following data sources were used to trace contacts between our traverses: locations of Main Boundary thrust (MBT), Kakhtang thrust, Main Central thrust (MCT) east of Trashigang traverse, Tang Chu klippe, and all structurally higher Greater Himalayan level contacts from Gansser (1983); locations of Shumar thrust (ST; folded Shumar thrust in eastern Kuru Chu valley from Gokul [1983]), most Lesser Himalayan unit contacts, and MCT from Bhargava (1995); location of Shumar thrust east of Trashigang traverse matches along-strike of location of Bomdila thrust from Yin et al. (2010); location of Lum La window from Yin et al. (2010).

Geometry and crustal shortening of the Himalayan fold-thrust belt, eastern and central BhutanLong et al.

Plate 1Supplement to: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. XXX; no. X/X; doi: 10.1130/B30203.S1

© Copyright 2011 Geological Society of America

2

–6 –84 0 –2 –4 –10

Elevation (km) –12

–14

2 –6 –84 0 –2 –4 –10

Elevation (km)

–12

–14

–16

–18

–20

–22

A (

Sou

th)

(No

rth

) A

′26°45′N

IndiaBhutan

Samdrup Jongkhar

27°00′N

27°15′N

Trashigang

27°30′N

Trashi Yangtse

27°45’ N

GH

ho

GH

loPz

gPzd

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzd

pC

d

pC

d

pC

s

pC

s

Qs

KT

MC

TST

MBT

MFT

Tsu

Tsm

Tsu

Tsm

Tsl

Tsl

Pzg

Pzg

pC

dST

MC

T

GH

loPz

cST

D

A. T

rash

igan

g C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

?

?

53

46

78

Pzb

Pzb

12

?

Pzj

pC

d

pC

s

Pzj

GH

lm

GH

lm Drangme Chu

Kulong Chu

Kulong Chu

Sakt

eng

klip

pe

pC

d

pC

s

Pzj

GH

lm

–100 –4 Thickness (km) –12–8–2 –6 –14

Pzg

pC

d

pC

s

Tsm

Pzd Pz

b

Tsu

Tsl

Rest

ore

d T

rash

igan

g C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

5

34

67

8

12

?

pC

sp

Cd

Pzj

Perm

issi

ble

so

uth

ern

exte

nt

of G

H s

ecti

on

2

–6 –84 0 –2 –4 –10Elevation (km) –12

–14

–16

2 –6 –84 0 –2 –4 –10

Elevation (km)

–12

–14

–16

–18

–20

–22

–24

–26

–28

Kuru Chu

Kuru Chu

Manas Chu

26°45′N

IndiaBhutan

27°00′N

27°15′N

27°30′N

27°45′N

B (

Sou

th)

(No

rth

) B

′

Pzc

GH

ho

GH

lo

Pzg

Pzg

Pzd

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzd

Pzd

Pzd

pC

d

pC

d

pC

dPzj

pC

d

pC

s

pC

s

pC

s

Ts

TsQ

s

KT

MC

T

MC

T

STD

ST

ST

MBT

MFT

?

pC

gp

Cg

B. K

uru

Ch

u C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

?

?

5

34

67

8

2

1G

Hh

m

GH

lm

GH

lm

GH

lm

Mongar

Kuru Chu

Kuru Chu

Kuru Chu

Kuru Chu

Kuru ChuLheuntse

ST

GH

loGH

lm

–80 –4 Thickness (km) –12

–16–6–2 –10

–14

Pzb

Pzd

pC

d

pC

s

Ts

Pzg

Rest

ore

d K

uru

Ch

u C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

5

34

67

8

21

Pzj

pC

s

pC

d?

Perm

issi

ble

so

uth

ern

exte

nt

of G

H s

ecti

on

pC

gp

Cg

2

–64 0 –2 –4Elevation (km)

2 –6 –84 0 –2 –4 –10

Elevation (km)

–12

–14

–16

Manas Chu

26°45′N

IndiaBhutan

27°00′N

27°15′N

27°30’ N

27°45’ N

Manas Chu

Manas Chu

C (

Sou

th)

(No

rth

) C

′

Pzc

GH

ho

GH

lo

Pzg

Pzg

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzj p

Cd

pC

d

pC

dp

Cd

Pzj

pC

s

pC

sp

Cs

TslTsm

Qs

KT

MC

TM

CT

STD

ST

ST

MBT M

FT

?

?

GH

lo

Tsl

Tsm

Pzg

Pzg

?

Pzc

Pzj

pC

d

Pzj p

Cs

GH

lm?

pC

d

pC

s

42

3

5

6

7

1

MC

T

GH

ho

GH

hm

GH

hg

GH

lm

GH

lo

GH

lm

GH

lm

GH

lm

Pzb

pC

d

Pzj

pC

s

Ura

21

34

5

C. B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

Ura

klip

pe

0 –4 Thickness (km) –6–2Pz

g

Pzb pC

d

pC

s

Tsl

Tsm

4

23

56

7

1

Rest

ore

d B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

?Pz

j

pC

s

pC

d

Perm

issi

ble

so

uth

ern

exte

nt

of G

H s

ecti

on

21

34

5

2

–64 0 –2 –4Elevation (km)

2 –6 –84 0 –2 –4 –10

Elevation (km)

–12

–14

–16

–18

Mangde Chu

26°45′N

IndiaBhutan

27°00′N

27°15′N

27°30′N

27°45′N

D (

Sou

th)

(No

rth

) D

′

Pzc

GH

loPz

b

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzb

Pzj

pC

d

pC

d

pC

d

pC

dp

CdPz

j

pC

sp

Cs

pC

s

Ts

TsQs

KT

MC

T

MC

T

STD

ST

ST

MBT

MFT

?

?

GH

lo

Pzj

pC

dPz

jp

Cs

?

pC

d

pC

s

3

12

45

6M

CT

GH

ho

GH

lmG

Hlo

GH

lm

GH

lm

Pzm

?

?

Pzc

Pzm

pC

dPz

j pC

sPz

j

STD

21

34

5

?

GH

lm

GH

lm

D. M

ang

de

Ch

u C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

Geylegphug

Shemgang

Trongsa

0 –4 Thickness (km) –2 –6

pC

d pC

s

Ts

Pzb

3

12

45

6

Rest

ore

d M

ang

de

Ch

u C

ross

-Sec

tio

n

?

Pzj

pC

s

pC

d

Perm

issi

ble

so

uth

ern

exte

nt

of G

H s

ecti

on

2

1

34

5

Cro

ss-S

ecti

on

s o

f Eas

tern

and

Cen

tral

Bh

uta

n

Def

orm

ed s

ecti

on

s: 1:

300,

000-

scal

e0

510

1520

25

kilo

met

ers

Rest

ore

d s

ecti

on

s: 1:

600,

000-

scal

e0

1020

3040

50

kilo

met

ers

bed

din

g

folia

tio

n

Ap

par

ent

dip

sym

bo

ls:

map

dat

a fr

om

th

is s

tud

ym

ap d

ata

fro

m G

oku

l (19

83)

map

dat

a fr

om

Gan

sser

(198

3)m

ap d

ata

fro

m B

har

gav

a (1

995)

No

ver

tica

l exa

gg

erat

ion

No

ver

tica

l exa

gg

erat

ion

Qs

Ts

Pzg

Pzd

Pzb

pC

d

pC

s

Pzc

GH

lo

GH

hm

Mo

der

n s

edim

ent

(Qu

ater

nar

y)

pC

g

Siw

alik

Gro

up

(Mio

cen

e-Pl

ioce

ne)

Sub

him

alay

a

Less

er H

imal

aya

Go

nd

wan

a su

cces

sio

n (P

erm

ian

)

Diu

ri F

orm

atio

n (P

erm

ian

)

Bax

a G

rou

p (N

eop

rote

rozo

ic–C

amb

rian

[?])

Dal

ing

Fo

rmat

ion

(Pal

eop

rote

rozo

ic)

GH

hg

Shu

mar

Fo

rmat

ion

(Pal

eop

rote

rozo

ic)

ort

ho

gn

eiss

(Pal

eop

rote

rozo

ic)

Tib

etan

(Te

thya

n) H

imal

aya

Ch

ekh

a Fo

rmat

ion

(ag

e u

nce

rtai

n; N

eop

rot.

to

Ord

ovic

ian

[?])

Gre

ater

Him

alay

a

Stru

ctu

rally

low

er o

rth

og

nei

ss u

nit

(C

amb

rian

–Ord

ovic

ian

)

GH

lmSt

ruct

ura

lly lo

wer

met

ased

imen

tary

un

it

(Neo

pro

tero

zoic

-Ord

oci

vian

[?])

GH

ho

Stru

ctu

rally

hig

her

ort

ho

gn

eiss

un

it

Stru

ctu

rally

hig

her

met

ased

imen

tary

un

it

Stru

ctu

rally

hig

her

leu

cog

ran

ite

(Mio

cen

e)

Pzj

Jais

hid

and

a Fo

rmat

ion

(Neo

pro

tero

zoic

–Ord

ovic

ian

[?])

Pzm

Man

etin

g F

orm

atio

n (O

rdov

icia

n[?

])

low

er (

Tsl),

mid

dle

(Ts

m),

up

per

(Ts

u)

STD

MC

T

MBT

MFT

ST

Sou

th T

ibet

an d

etac

hm

ent

KT

Kak

hta

ng

th

rust

Mai

n C

entr

al t

hru

stSh

um

ar t

hru

stM

ain

Bo

un

dar

y th

rust

Mai

n F

ron

tal t

hru

st

No

tes

for

Man

gd

e C

hu

sec

tio

n:

27

. Po

siti

on

of M

BT fr

om

Gan

sser

(198

3); s

urf

ace

dip

s o

f Siw

alik

s fr

om

Go

kul (

1983

).2

8. I

ntr

afo

rmat

ion

al B

axa

Gro

up

fau

lts

loca

ted

by

inte

rpre

tin

g 6

du

ple

xed

Bax

a G

rou

p h

ors

es e

ach

2.1

km

th

ick

(ave

rag

e th

ickn

ess

of t

he

Bax

a G

rou

p o

n o

ther

th

ree

cro

ss-s

ecti

on

s) b

etw

een

MBT

an

d S

T. I

ntr

afo

r-m

atio

nal

fau

lts

wer

e n

ot

map

ped

in t

he

field

. Su

rfac

e d

ips

in s

ou

ther

n t

hre

e B

axa

ho

rses

fro

m G

oku

l (19

83).

29

. GH

low

er s

tru

ctu

ral l

evel

incr

ease

s in

th

ickn

ess

to t

he

no

rth

fro

m 5

.3 k

m, m

app

ed b

etw

een

th

e M

CT

and

th

e C

hek

ha

Form

atio

n in

th

e so

uth

, to

10.

5 km

, map

ped

bet

wee

n a

syn

clin

e ax

is n

ort

h o

f Tro

ng

sa a

nd

th

e K

T. M

ost

of t

hic

knes

s in

crea

se t

akes

pla

ce in

GH

met

ased

imen

tary

un

it.

30

. Fo

otw

all a

nd

han

gin

g w

all r

amp

s fo

r TH

un

its

are

app

roxi

mat

ely

loca

ted,

sh

ow

n a

t th

eir p

erm

issi

ble

max

imu

m s

ou

ther

n a

nd

no

rth

ern

po

siti

on

s, re

spec

tive

ly.

Loca

tio

ns

con

stra

ined

bet

wee

n n

ort

her

n e

xten

t o

f TH

exp

osu

re, w

her

e C

hek

ha

Form

atio

n is

in d

epo

siti

on

al c

on

tact

ab

ove

GH

sec

tio

n (L

on

g a

nd

McQ

uar

rie,

201

0), a

nd

alo

ng

-str

ike

pro

ject

ion

of s

ou

ther

n e

xten

t o

f STD

at

Ura

klip

pe,

wh

ere

bed

din

g a

nd

folia

tio

n

dat

a sh

ow

th

at h

ang

ing

wal

l cu

toff

mu

st b

e ab

ove

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace

to s

ou

th.

31

. Fo

otw

all r

amp

th

rou

gh

up

per

par

t o

f Dal

ing

Fo

rmat

ion

co

rres

po

nd

s to

rest

ore

d le

ng

th o

f all

Bax

a h

ors

es.

No

tes

for

Bh

um

tan

g C

hu

sec

tio

n:

19

. Ap

par

ent

dip

dat

a is

pro

ject

ed fr

om

map

tra

nse

ct to

th

e ea

st o

f sec

tio

n li

ne.

20

. In

traf

orm

atio

nal

Bax

a G

rou

p fa

ult

loca

ted

at

zon

e o

f in

ten

sely

-fo

lded

do

lom

ite,

ho

t sp

rin

gs,

and

tu

fa p

reci

pit

atio

n.

21

. In

traf

orm

atio

nal

Bax

a G

rou

p fa

ult

loca

ted

at

~20

m t

hic

k zo

ne

of b

recc

iate

d q

uar

tzit

e, b

recc

iate

d d

olo

mit

e, a

nd

inte

nse

ly-s

hea

red

an

d fo

lded

ph

yllit

e. S

ite

also

incl

ud

ed s

ulfu

r-ri

ch s

pri

ng.

22

. In

traf

orm

atio

nal

Bax

a G

rou

p fa

ult

loca

ted

at

zon

e o

f iso

clin

ally

-fo

lded

qu

artz

ite

exh

ibit

ing

ou

tcro

p-s

cale

th

rust

fau

ltin

g, a

nd

ab

rup

t ch

ang

e in

att

itu

de

fro

m s

ou

th-d

ipp

ing

rock

s ab

ove

to n

ort

h-d

ipp

ing

rock

s b

elo

w.

23

. In

traf

orm

atio

nal

Bax

a G

rou

p fa

ult

loca

ted

at

~10

m t

hic

k zo

ne

of f

old

ed, b

recc

iate

d q

uar

tzit

e an

d in

ten

sely

-sh

eard

ph

yllit

e, a

nd

ab

rup

t ch

ang

e in

att

itu

de

fro

m s

ou

th-d

ipp

ing

rock

s ab

ove

to n

ort

h-d

ipp

ing

ro

cks

bel

ow

.2

4. N

ort

her

n e

xten

t o

f Bax

a G

rou

p d

up

lex

in s

ub

surf

ace

corr

esp

on

ds

to s

ign

ifica

nt

shal

low

ing

of f

olia

tio

n d

ips

in G

H s

ecti

on

. 2

5. S

ign

ifica

nt

thic

knes

s ch

ang

es o

f GH

met

ased

imen

tary

un

it a

re o

bse

rved

bet

wee

n s

ou

ther

n e

nd

of U

ra k

lipp

e an

d a

rea

ben

eath

KT.

In

terp

rete

d s

ub

surf

ace

geo

met

ry s

ho

ws

GH

met

ased

imen

tary

un

it t

hic

ken

-in

g a

nd

GH

ort

ho

gn

eiss

th

inn

ing

sig

nifi

can

tly

to n

ort

h, w

hile

kee

pin

g to

tal l

ow

er G

H s

ecti

on

th

ickn

ess

sim

ilar.

Th

is is

just

ified

by

thic

knes

s ch

ang

es o

bse

rved

bet

wee

n t

hes

e tw

o u

nit

s ac

ross

cen

tral

an

d e

aste

rn

Bh

uta

n (F

ig. 2

). N

ote

th

at lo

wer

co

nta

ct b

etw

een

GH

met

ased

imen

tary

un

it a

nd

GH

ort

ho

gn

eiss

un

it m

atch

es a

pp

aren

t d

ips

of b

edd

ing

an

d fo

liati

on

dat

a. L

ow

er L

H h

ors

e #1

co

uld

be

GH

ort

ho

gn

eiss

, bu

t th

is

wo

uld

resu

lt in

sig

nifi

can

t an

d a

bru

pt

thic

ken

ing

of t

he

low

er G

H s

ecti

on

.2

6. F

oo

twal

l an

d h

ang

ing

wal

l ram

ps

for C

hek

ha

Form

atio

n a

re a

pp

roxi

mat

ely

loca

ted,

sh

ow

n a

t th

eir p

erm

issi

ble

max

imu

m s

ou

ther

n a

nd

no

rth

ern

po

siti

on

s, re

spec

tive

ly.

Loca

tio

ns

are

con

stra

ined

bet

wee

n

alo

ng

-str

ike

pro

ject

ion

of n

ort

her

n e

xten

t o

f TH

exp

osu

re n

ear S

hem

gan

g, w

her

e C

hek

ha

Form

atio

n is

in d

epo

siti

on

al c

on

tact

ab

ove

GH

sec

tio

n (L

on

g a

nd

McQ

uar

rie,

201

0), a

nd

so

uth

ern

ext

ent

of S

TD e

xpo

sure

at

Ura

klip

pe,

wh

ere

bed

din

g a

nd

tect

on

ic fo

liati

on

dat

a sh

ow

th

at h

ang

ing

wal

l cu

toff

mu

st b

e ab

ove

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace

to s

ou

th.

Co

nst

rain

s sl

ip o

n S

TD to

~20

km

(Lo

ng

an

d M

cQu

arri

e, 2

010)

.

No

tes

for

Ku

ru C

hu

cro

ss-s

ecti

on

:9

. Lo

cati

on

of M

BT t

aken

fro

m B

har

gav

a (1

995)

. Su

rfac

e d

ips

of S

iwal

iks

pro

ject

ed fr

om

eas

t an

d w

est,

and

tak

en fr

om

Go

kul (

1983

) an

d B

har

gav

a (1

995)

.1

0. L

eng

th o

f ero

ded

Go

nd

wan

a su

cces

sio

n s

ecti

on

th

at h

as p

asse

d a

bov

e er

osi

on

su

rfac

e m

ust

eq

ual

len

gth

of d

eco

llem

on

t o

n to

p o

f Diu

ri F

orm

atio

n b

etw

een

th

e G

on

dw

ana

succ

essi

on

foo

twal

l ram

p a

nd

Diu

ri

Form

atio

n/B

axa

Gro

up

foo

twal

l ram

p.

11

. Fo

otw

all r

amp

of G

on

dw

ana

succ

essi

on

is a

lign

ed w

ith

no

rth

en

d o

f Bax

a h

ors

e #8

bec

ause

if a

ny

furt

her

so

uth

, dis

pla

cem

ent

on

MFT

wo

uld

be

too

litt

le to

pas

s Si

wal

ik G

rou

p h

ang

ing

wal

l cu

toff

th

rou

gh

er

osi

on

su

rfac

e, a

nd

if a

ny

furt

her

no

rth

, dis

pla

cem

ent

on

MFT

wo

uld

n’t

be

min

imiz

ed.

12

. Len

gth

of e

rod

ed D

iuri

Fo

rmat

ion

sec

tio

n t

hat

has

pas

sed

ab

ove

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace

mu

st e

qu

al to

tal r

esto

red

len

gth

of d

up

lexe

d B

axa

Gro

up

ho

rses

.1

3. B

axa

Gro

up

ove

r Diu

ri F

orm

atio

n t

hru

st fa

ult

infe

rred

in s

ub

surf

ace

un

der

Dal

ing

Fo

rmat

ion

klip

pe;

loca

tio

n b

ased

on

2.6

km

th

ickn

ess

calc

ula

ted

for B

axa

Gro

up

sec

tio

n b

etw

een

low

er t

hru

st c

on

tact

s an

d

up

per

str

atig

rap

hic

co

nta

cts

wit

h D

iuri

Fo

rmat

ion

. N

ote

th

at fa

ult

is q

uer

ied

on

eas

t an

d w

est

sid

es o

f Dal

ing

Fo

rmat

ion

klip

pe

on

Fig

. 2.

14

. In

traf

orm

atio

nal

Bax

a G

rou

p fa

ult

loca

ted

at

abru

pt

chan

ge

in a

ttit

ud

e an

d li

tho

log

y fr

om

S-d

ipp

ing

qu

artz

ite

abov

e to

N-d

ipp

ing

do

lom

ite

bel

ow

; in

terp

rete

d a

s st

ruct

ura

l rep

etit

ion

of d

olo

mit

e se

ctio

n

exp

ose

d s

trat

igra

ph

ical

ly a

bov

e q

uar

tzit

e ju

st to

no

rth

(Fig

. 2).

15

. In

traf

orm

atio

nal

Bax

a G

rou

p fa

ult

loca

ted

at

~10

m t

hic

k zo

ne

of h

igh

ly-s

hea

red

ph

yllit

e w

ith

top

-to

-so

uth

sen

se o

f sh

ear i

nd

icat

ors

.1

6. D

éco

llem

ent

on

top

of D

iuri

Fo

rmat

ion

co

rres

po

nd

s to

ver

y sh

allo

w d

ips

mea

sure

d in

Dal

ing

-Sh

um

ar G

rou

p a

t su

rfac

e.1

7. F

oo

twal

l ram

p t

hro

ug

h D

iuri

Fo

rmat

ion

an

d B

axa

Gro

up

co

nst

rain

ed b

y si

gn

ifica

nt

incr

ease

in d

ip o

f Dal

ing

-Sh

um

ar G

rou

p a

t su

rfac

e.1

8. M

easu

red

th

ickn

ess

of S

hu

mar

Fo

rmat

ion

in n

ort

her

n lo

wer

LH

th

rust

sh

eet

is m

uch

less

th

an t

hic

knes

s o

bse

rved

in s

ou

ther

n t

hru

st s

hee

t; su

bsu

rfac

e g

eom

etry

inte

rpre

ted

as

a d

éco

llem

ent

wit

hin

a t

hic

k Sh

um

ar s

ecti

on

, rat

her

th

an a

th

inn

ed S

hu

mar

sec

tio

n.

No

tes

for T

rash

igan

g c

ross

-sec

tio

n:

1. E

xtra

len

gth

of G

on

dw

ana

succ

essi

on

ab

ove

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace

is n

eces

sary

to a

lign

wit

h B

axa

Gro

up

/Diu

ri F

orm

atio

n fo

otw

all r

amp

on

rest

ore

d s

ecti

on

.2

. Len

gth

of e

rod

ed D

iuri

Fo

rmat

ion

sec

tio

n t

hat

has

pas

sed

ab

ove

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace

mu

st e

qu

al to

tal r

esto

red

len

gth

of d

up

lexe

d B

axa

Gro

up

ho

rses

.3

. Bax

a G

rou

p h

ors

e #8

co

uld

be

Go

nd

wan

a su

cces

sio

n, b

ut

this

wo

uld

sh

ift fo

otw

all r

amp

th

rou

gh

Diu

ri F

orm

atio

n a

nd

Bax

a G

rou

p fa

rth

er n

ort

h; c

urr

ent

con

figu

rati

on

min

imiz

es s

ho

rten

ing.

4. B

axa

Gro

up

ho

rse

#7 h

as e

no

ug

h o

ut-

of-

seq

uen

ce d

efo

rmat

ion

to b

reak

th

rou

gh

roo

f th

rust

an

d p

lace

Bax

a G

rou

p o

ver D

iuri

Fo

rmat

ion

.5

. Pla

cem

ent

of i

ntr

afo

rmat

ion

al t

hru

st fa

ult

s b

etw

een

Bax

a G

rou

p h

ors

es b

ased

on

reg

ula

r sp

acin

g o

f EN

E-tr

end

ing

sad

dle

s an

d v

alle

ys (M

cQu

arri

e et

al.,

200

8).

6. S

ub

surf

ace

Bax

a G

rou

p h

ors

es #

1 an

d #

2 ar

e co

nsi

sten

t w

ith

map

dat

a sh

ow

ing

Bax

a G

rou

p e

xpo

sed

ben

eath

fold

ed S

T ju

st w

est

of s

ecti

on

lin

e. S

ou

th-d

ipp

ing

sec

tio

n o

f Dal

ing

-Sh

um

ar G

rou

p o

verl

ies

fore

lan

d-d

ipp

ing

par

t o

f Bax

a G

rou

p d

up

lex,

co

nsi

sten

t w

ith

ob

serv

atio

ns

on

Ku

ru C

hu

sec

tio

n.

7. D

iuri

Fo

rmat

ion

an

d B

axa

Gro

up

foo

twal

l ram

p c

ou

ld b

e p

osi

tio

ned

fart

her

no

rth

, wh

ich

wo

uld

dec

reas

e sh

ort

enin

g in

Dal

ing

-Sh

um

ar s

ecti

on

, bu

t ad

d le

ng

th to

rest

ore

d B

axa-

Diu

ri s

ecti

on

, kee

pin

g s

ho

rten

ing

ap

pro

xim

atel

y th

e sa

me.

8. M

ap d

ata

abov

e er

osi

on

su

rfac

e p

roje

cted

fro

m s

urf

ace

dat

a co

llect

ed e

ast

of c

ross

-sec

tio

n li

ne.

Pro

ject

ed to

ap

pro

xim

ate

stru

ctu

ral p

osi

tio

n.

No

tes

com

mo

n t

o a

ll cr

oss

-sec

tio

ns:

I. 4º

N d

ip o

f bas

emen

t-co

ver c

on

tact

bas

ed o

n e

arth

qu

ake

seis

mo

log

y (N

i an

d B

araz

ang

i, 19

84; P

and

ey e

t al

., 19

99; M

itra

et

al.,

2005

) an

d IN

DEP

TH

refle

ctio

n s

eism

olo

gy

(Hau

ck e

t al

., 19

98).

II. L

igh

ter s

had

ing

on

def

orm

ed a

nd

rest

ore

d c

ross

-sec

tio

ns

rep

rese

nts

mat

eria

l th

at h

as p

asse

d a

bov

e er

osi

on

su

rfac

e.II

I. M

FT d

isp

lace

men

t is

en

ou

gh

to m

ove

Siw

alik

Gro

up

han

gin

g w

all c

uto

ff t

hro

ug

h e

rosi

on

su

rfac

e an

d to

alig

n S

iwal

ik G

rou

p fo

otw

all c

uto

ff w

ith

G

on

dw

ana

succ

essi

on

foo

twal

l ram

p o

n B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u s

ecti

on

.IV

. Bax

a G

rou

p h

ors

es in

up

per

LH

du

ple

x fe

ed s

lip in

to S

T. B

axa

Gro

up

ho

rses

are

nu

mb

ered

seq

uen

tial

ly fr

om

low

(old

est

dis

pla

cem

ent)

to h

igh

(y

ou

ng

est

dis

pla

cem

ent)

.V.

ST

is p

osi

tio

ned

so

han

gin

g w

all c

uto

ffs

of B

axa

Gro

up

ho

rses

pro

ject

just

ab

ove

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace,

to m

inim

ize

sho

rten

ing.

No

te p

lace

s o

n K

uru

Ch

u

sect

ion

wh

ere

Dal

ing

Fo

rmat

ion

klip

pen

co

nst

rain

po

siti

on

of S

T, a

nd

pla

ces

on

Ku

ru C

hu

an

d B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u s

ecti

on

s w

her

e p

osi

tio

ns

of h

ang

ing

wal

l cu

toff

s o

f Bax

a G

rou

p h

ors

es a

re c

on

stra

ined

by

surf

ace

dat

a (*

).V

I. M

inim

um

dis

pla

cem

ent

on

ST

con

stra

ined

by:

1) f

lat-

on

-fla

t re

lati

on

ship

wit

h B

axa

Gro

up

ho

rse

#8 in

so

uth

ern

Ku

ru C

hu

val

ley,

ind

icat

ing

th

at

han

gin

g w

all r

amp

th

rou

gh

Dal

ing

Fo

rmat

ion

sta

rts

at s

ou

ther

n e

dg

e o

f klip

pe

(th

is g

eom

etry

is p

roje

cted

on

to T

rash

igan

g s

ecti

on

); 2)

no

rth

en

d o

f G

on

dw

ana

succ

essi

on

exp

osu

re o

n B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u s

ecti

on

, bas

ed o

n lo

w-s

trai

n m

agn

itu

des

ob

serv

ed in

th

in s

ecti

on

s o

f Go

nd

wan

a su

cces

sio

n

com

par

ed to

hig

h-s

trai

n m

agn

itu

des

ob

serv

ed in

Bax

a G

rou

p (t

his

geo

met

ry is

pro

ject

ed o

nto

Man

gd

e C

hu

sec

tio

n).

VII

. Lo

cati

on

of h

ang

ing

wal

l ram

p t

hro

ug

h S

hu

mar

Fo

rmat

ion

co

nst

rain

ed b

y fie

ld re

lati

on

ship

s ju

st e

ast

of T

rash

igan

g s

ecti

on

lin

e an

d ju

st e

ast

of

Kuru

Ch

u s

ecti

on

lin

e. L

oca

tio

n o

n B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u s

ecti

on

fro

m a

lon

g-s

trik

e p

roje

ctio

n fr

om

Ku

ru C

hu

sec

tio

n.

Sub

surf

ace

loca

tio

n o

n M

and

ge

Ch

u

sect

ion

co

nst

rain

ed b

y ch

ang

e in

bed

din

g a

nd

tect

on

ic fo

liati

on

dip

dir

ecti

on

at

surf

ace.

VII

I. Ja

ish

idan

da

Form

atio

n is

sh

ow

n p

inch

ing

ou

t to

so

uth

bec

ause

it is

no

t o

bse

rved

in u

pp

er L

H s

ecti

on

in fo

rela

nd

; th

is re

lati

on

ship

is s

ho

wn

as

qu

erie

d o

n re

sto

red

an

d d

efo

rmed

sec

tio

ns.

No

te t

hat

on

Ku

ru C

hu

sec

tio

n t

he

Jais

hid

and

a Fo

rmat

ion

is n

ot

exp

ose

d o

n t

he

sou

ther

n lo

wer

LH

th

rust

sh

eet,

and

is in

terp

rete

d a

s p

inch

ing

ou

t to

th

e so

uth

on

th

e n

ort

her

n lo

wer

LH

th

rust

sh

eet.

No

tes

com

mo

n t

o a

ll cr

oss

-sec

tio

ns,

co

nti

nu

ed:

IX. S

ou

ther

n e

xten

t o

f MC

T an

d s

tru

ctu

rally

-lo

wer

GH

sec

tio

n h

ang

ing

wal

l cu

toff

bas

ed o

n p

roje

ctio

n o

f so

uth

ern

mo

st p

osi

tio

n o

f MC

T tr

ace

bet

wee

n

east

(~5

km e

ast

of T

rash

igan

g s

ecti

on

lin

e) a

nd

wes

t (~

10 k

m e

ast

of M

ang

de

Ch

u s

ecti

on

lin

e) e

nd

s o

f Ku

ru C

hu

val

ley.

Tec

ton

ic fo

liati

on

dip

dat

a fr

om

str

uct

ura

lly-l

ow

er G

H s

ecti

on

ind

icat

es t

hat

th

e h

ang

ing

wal

l cu

toff

has

pas

sed

th

rou

gh

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace

on

all

cro

ss-s

ecti

on

s, so

GH

cu

toff

as

dra

wn

min

imiz

es s

tru

ctu

ral o

verl

ap a

cro

ss t

he

MC

T.X

. Ho

rses

co

nsi

stin

g o

f Sh

um

ar, D

alin

g, a

nd

Jai

shid

and

a Fo

rmat

ion

s ar

e re

pea

ted

in t

he

low

er L

H d

up

lex,

an

d fe

ed s

lip in

to t

he

MC

T. L

ow

er L

H h

ors

es

are

nu

mb

ered

seq

uen

tial

ly o

n B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u a

nd

Man

gd

e C

hu

sec

tio

ns,

fro

m lo

w (o

ldes

t d

isp

lace

men

t) to

hig

h (y

ou

ng

est

dis

pla

cem

ent)

. We

sug

ges

t th

at d

up

lexi

ng

of l

ow

er L

H s

ecti

on

fold

s th

e st

ruct

ura

lly-l

ow

er G

H s

ecti

on

an

d T

H s

ecti

on

, an

d u

se te

cto

nic

folia

tio

n a

nd

bed

din

g d

ata

in G

H

and

TH

rock

s to

def

ine

geo

met

ry o

f un

der

lyin

g d

up

lex.

X

I. Su

rfac

e d

ata

for s

tru

ctu

rally

-hig

her

GH

sec

tio

n o

n a

ll cr

oss

-sec

tio

ns,

and

par

ts o

f str

uct

ura

lly-l

ow

er G

H s

ecti

on

on

Man

gd

e C

hu

an

d B

hu

mta

ng

Ch

u

cro

ss-s

ecti

on

s, ar

e ta

ken

fro

m G

anss

er (1

983)

, Bh

arg

ava

(199

5), a

nd

Go

kul (

1983

).X

II. Q

uer

ied

ed

ges

of C

hek

ha

Form

atio

n b

ased

on

alo

ng

-str

ike

pro

ject

ion

of n

ort

her

n a

nd

so

uth

ern

ext

ents

of S

TD t

race

of S

akte

ng

klip

pe

on

to

Tras

hig

ang

sec

tio

n a

nd

Ura

klip

pe

on

to K

uru

Ch

u s

ecti

on

. B

oth

th

e ex

ten

t o

f STD

tra

ce fo

r Ura

klip

pe

and

ext

ent

of d

epo

sito

nal

TH

ove

r GH

co

nta

ct o

f Sh

emg

ang

TH

exp

osu

re w

ere

pro

ject

ed o

nto

Bh

um

tan

g C

hu

an

d M

ang

de

Ch

u c

ross

-sec

tio

ns.

Bed

din

g a

nd

tect

on

ic fo

liati

on

dat

a sh

ow

th

at h

ang

ing

w

all c

uto

ffs

thro

ug

h C

hek

ha

Form

atio

n in

Sak

ten

g a

nd

Ura

klip

pen

are

ab

ove

ero

sio

n s

urf

ace.

X

III.

Min

imu

m o

verl

ap o

f KT

mea

sure

d a

lon

g fa

ult

fro

m p

oin

t o

f su

rfac

e ex

po

sure

to s

ub

surf

ace

inte

rsec

tio

n w

ith

MC

T.

Stru

ctu

ral g

eom

etry

of K

T h

ang

ing

wal

l pas

t n

ort

her

nm

ost

su

rfac

e d

ata

is s

chem

atic

.X

IV. A

t n

ort

h e

nd

of r

esto

red

sec

tio

ns,

foo

twal

l ram

p t

hro

ug

h n

ort

her

nm

ost

low

er L

H t

hru

st s

hee

t is

ass

um

ed to

mar

k n

ort

her

n e

xten

t o

f LH

un

its

and

p

erm

issi

ble

so

uth

ern

ext

ent

of s

tru

ctu

rally

-lo

wer

GH

sec

tio

n.

I

I

I I

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

III

III

III

III

IV, V

IV, V

IV, V

IV, V

**

*

VI

VI

VI V

I

VII

VII

VII

VII

VIII

VIII

VIII

VIII

IX

IX

IX

IX

X

X

X

X

XI

XI

XI

XI

XII

XII

XII

XII

XIII

XIII

XIII

XIII

XIV

XIV

XIV

XIV

12

3

4

56

7

8

8

9

10

11

12

1314

15

16

17

18

2021

2223

24

25

2626

2728

29

30

30

31

Fig

ure

3. B

alan

ced

cros

s se

ctio

ns o

f ea

ster

n an

d ce

ntra

l B

huta

n fo

ld-t

hrus

t be

lt:

(A)

Tra

shig

ang;

(B

) K

uru

Chu

; (C

) B

hum

tang

Chu

; an

d (D

) M

angd

e C

hu. L

ines

of

sect

ion

show

n on

Fig

ures

1 a

nd 2

. D

efor

med

sec

tion

s sh

own

at 1

:300

,000

sca

le;

rest

ored

sec

tion

s sh

own

at 1

:600

,000

sca

le (

note

dif

fere

nt

scal

e th

an F

ig. 2

). D

ata

sour

ces

for

appa

rent

dip

sym

bols

, str

atig

raph

y, u

nit a

bbre

viat

ions

, and

str

uctu

re

abbr

evia

tion

s sh

own.

Rom

an n

umer

als

on c

ross

sec

tion

s co

rres

pond

to

note

s co

mm

on t

o al

l sec

tion

s on

ri

ght-

hand

sid

e; n

umbe

rs o

n cr

oss

sect

ions

cor

resp

ond

to n

otes

ben

eath

indi

vidu

al s

ecti

ons.

geometry and crustal shortening of the himalayan fold-thrust belt

Documents