Search for: All records

Competing hypotheses attribute the regional loss of 1.2–1.0 Ga detrital zircon from the Cambrian Sauk Sequence in southwestern North America to differing tectonic controls on surface topography. We test three hypotheses with source‐to‐sink detrital zircon provenance analysis via tandem in situ and isotope dilution U–Pb geochronology paired with geochemical and Hf‐isotope tracers. Our data indicate that the lower‐to‐middle Sixtymile Formation in Grand Canyon was derived from ca. 1.1 Ga rocks of the Llano Uplift and the ca. 539–523 Ma Wichita igneous province, approximately 1400 km away. In contrast, new U–Pb geochronology links the upper Sixtymile and Tapeats formations to the 513–510 Ma Florida Mountains intrusive complex, southern New Mexico, and proximal 1.4 and 1.7 Ga basement approximately 650 km away. We attribute a regional provenance shift to plume–lithosphere interactions on the Iapetan margin, tectonism along ‘leaky’ intracratonic transverse fault zones and the rift‐to‐drift transition on the Cordilleran margin.

 

Abstract The provocative hypothesis that the Shinumo Sandstone in the depths of Grand Canyon was the source for clasts of orthoquartzite in conglomerate of the Sespe Formation of coastal California, if verified, would indicate that a major river system flowed southwest from the Colorado Plateau to the Pacific Ocean prior to opening of the Gulf of California, and would imply that Grand Canyon had been carved to within a few hundred meters of its modern depth at the time of this drainage connection. The proposed Eocene Shinumo-Sespe connection, however, is not supported by detrital zircon nor paleomagnetic-inclination data and is refuted by thermochronology that shows that the Shinumo Sandstone of eastern Grand Canyon was >60 °C (∼1.8 km deep) and hence not incised at this time. A proposed 20 Ma (Miocene) Shinumo-Sespe drainage connection based on clasts in the Sespe Formation is also refuted. We point out numerous caveats and non-unique interpretations of paleomagnetic data from clasts. Further, our detrital zircon analysis requires diverse sources for Sespe clasts, with better statistical matches for the four “most-Shinumo-like” Sespe clasts with quartzites of the Big Bear Group and Ontario Ridge metasedimentary succession of the Transverse Ranges, Horse Thief Springs Formation from Death Valley, and Troy Quartzite of central Arizona. Diverse thermochronologic and geologic data also refute a Miocene river pathway through western Grand Canyon and Grand Wash trough. Thus, Sespe clasts do not require a drainage connection from Grand Canyon or the Colorado Plateau and provide no constraints for the history of carving of Grand Canyon. Instead, abundant evidence refutes the “old” (70–17 Ma) Grand Canyon models and supports a <6 Ma Grand Canyon.