Keywords

3.1 Introduction

This review adopts interdisciplinary approaches to understand how the proto India plate moved around the globe and grew since its initial formation in the Eoarchean/Paleoarchean till about the Eocambrian. We consider aspects of geochronology, geochemistry, plate kinematics, and geodynamic models, constrained by a variety of geological and geophysical observations published till date. India with its four major Archean cratons together with the Proterozoic southern granulite terrane and the Indian Precambrian rocks of the Lesser Himalaya constitutes a tectonic collage (Fig. 3.1), which records a complex history of structural and tectonic evolution. Paleomagnetic, geochemical, and tectonostratigraphic data establish that the Precambrian era was a dynamic period when several configurations of the amalgamation and breakup of the supercontinents occurred. Record of the dispersal of continents and the dynamic evolution of our planet are read from the large-scale expression of geological features across the continents and the study of the mantle underneath. Our understanding of the geodynamic evolution of the Earth developed over a century from the “continental drift” of Wegener (1912) to modern plate tectonics through the seminal geophysical and geological input from the oceans (Hess 1962). Many geological features, such as rift zones, continental margin depositional environments, calc-alkaline volcanic-plutonic belts, lithospheric sutures, and orogenic belts, follow from this plate motion process (Cawood et al. 2006). Following the plate tectonics paradigm, the concept of a huge united landmass consisting of most of the earth’s continental regions and surrounded by a global sea constituting the supercontinents gradually established itself (Dewey 1969; Rogers and Santosh 2004; Nance and Murphy 2013). Episodic peak of collisional orogenesis, continental amalgamation, and mantle plume-related mafic dyke swarms were recognized in the rock record as manifestation of the supercontinent cycles. Initially, the late Paleozoic supercontinent of Pangaea (Wegener 1912, 1922) was rigorously defined, but the knowledge of Precambrian supercontinents was very vague at that point of time. Even the existence of early earth supercontinents was questioned by many scientists (Davies 1992; Stern 2007; Stern et al. 2008, 2016; Dewey 2007; Brown 2008). With time, more research appeared wherein paleomagnetic, geochemical, and tectonostratigraphic data established that plate tectonics has been active since at least 3.1 Ga and that supercontinents played a key role in earth’s history, since its formation (Meert 2012; Nance et al. 2014; Meert and Santosh 2017). Deeply eroded ancient orogens provide insight into the hidden roots of modern orogens and offer an opportunity to address the nature of the earth’s geodynamic processes and ultimately earth’s history.

Fig. 3.1
figure 1

Cratonic blocks and major Proterozoic basins of peninsular India. ADMB Aravalli Delhi mobile belt, CB Cuddapah basin, CGGC Chotanagpur granite gneiss complex, Ch Chhattisgarh basin, CITZ Central Indian tectonic zone, EDC eastern Dharwar craton, EGB eastern Ghats belt, NFB Nallamalai fold belt, NSFB North Singhbhum fold belt, PGV Pranhita Godavari basin, SGT Southern granulite terrain, V, Vindhyan basin, WDC western Dharwar craton. (After Saha et al. 2016a)

Full size image

The Archean greenstone belts in peninsular India and elsewhere preserve some of the oldest terranes which are keys to the understanding of tectonic processes on the early earth (Jayananda et al. 2018). The supracrustal rocks in these belts often retain primary magmatic features and sedimentary structures, which provide us clues to the environment of deposition. In spite of the debate (Eriksson et al. 2004) about the modus operandi of the Precambrian plate movement and supercontinent formation, it is commonly considered that plate tectonics has been an active component of earth’s processes possibly since the formation of the first continental crust >4.3 Ga (Cawood et al. 2006). The plate motions are a response to heat loss and cooling within the earth’s interior and are also influenced by episodic emplacement of mantle-derived magmas in large igneous provinces.

In this chapter, we aim to synthesize knowledge of Indian geology in the light of the plate tectonic reconstruction models and breakup of the Indian plate for the Precambrian. Furthermore, we consider the increased understanding of the Archean and Proterozoic tectonics within the four major cratons and the Shillong plateau; their relationship along the margins; large-scale tectonic features like remnant orogenic belts, rifts, dyke swarms, paleo-sutures, and ophiolite domains in the cratons; and their implications for the interpretation of plate motions and orogenesis. Though the northern margin of the Indian plate is subducted below the Himalayas, the remaining part preserves the record of the interaction between the Indian plate and its tectonic neighbors. The tectonic plates witnessed assembly and breakup of the major Precambrian supercontinents Nuna/Columbia, Rodinia, and Gondwana and their timings and models. Finally, we review some of the main tectonic issues and uncertainties, bearing on the fit of Indian cratons in one or other of these models. Thus, this chapter is divided into three major parts: (1) a review and discussion of constraints provided by the Precambrian geology of the Indian cratons and their margins, (2) a review and discussion of constraints provided by the Precambrian tectonic history of the neighboring plate margins to get the best fit, and (3) unresolved tectonic issues.

3.2 Tectonic Features of Indian Cratons and Their Place (Status) in Models of Proterozoic Supercontinent Assembly and Breakup

3.2.1 Supercontinents Through Time

The earth’s plate motion sculptures its surface with distinctive and unique features, which are preserved in rock record through time. It has been proposed that cooling of the earth’s interior due to heat loss and episodic emplacement of mantle-derived magma in large igneous provinces (LIP) are the main drivers of plate’s horizontal movement (Cawood and Pisarevsky 2006). These two mechanisms of heat loss may have varied through time perhaps in response to decreasing heat flow (e.g., Davies 1999). This raises questions about the time of initiation of plate tectonic processes and formation of the first supercontinent. Was it very early in its history (Kröner 1981; Ernst 1983; Sleep 1992; Smithies et al. 2003, 2005; Condie 2005; Cawood and Pisarevsky 2006; Dilek and Polat 2008; Turner et al. 2014; Santosh et al. 2017a) or considerably later (Davies 1992; Hamilton 2007, 2011; Stern 2005, 2007; Stern et al. 2008, 2016; Dewey 2007; Brown 2008; Shirey and Richardson 2011)? How to recognize them? Substantial work has been done in this field; still, the time of initiation of plate tectonic processes remains debated. However, paleomagnetic, geochemical, and tectonostratigraphic data that are in favor of considering plate tectonics operating during the Precambrian and existence of supercontinents dating back to 3.2 Ga have been proposed (Table 3.1). The presence of ophiolites associated with island arc assemblages, occurrences of ultra-high pressure (UHP) rocks, and large igneous provinces dating back to the Precambrian offer us indication that lateral movement of lithospheric plates at divergent and convergent margins was operative during that time. Since our oceans are relatively new (Jurassic and younger), the clues to past supercontinents are not available from present ocean basins. Older oceanic crusts have been consumed in subduction zones. However, a host of geological features, such as past rift zones, continental margin depositional settings, calc-alkaline volcanic-plutonic belts, lithospheric sutures, and orogenic belts, gives us clues to the tearing apart and stitching together of the continents. The signatures, usually in bits and pieces from now widely separated continents, reveal the nature and evolutionary pattern of each of the supercontinents (e.g., Cocks and Torsvik 2002; Halverson et al. 2009; Meert and Lieberman 2004; Valentine and Moores 1972). We look for proxies to get the idea about the plate margins and their changes through time. Paleomagnetic data, the correlation of orogenic belts formed during accretion of the supercontinents, the correlation of extensional features that developed when the supercontinent fragmented, and the recognition of sedimentary provenance across the continents are four mostly used techniques for reconstructing supercontinents (Rogers and Santosh 2004).

Table 3.1 Precambrian supercontinents (after Rogers and Santosh 2004)
Full size table

3.2.2 Indian Scenario

The Indian tectonic plate, presently situated in the northern hemisphere, is bounded by four major tectonic plates, namely, the Eurasian plate to the north, the Australian plate to the southeast, the African plate to the southwest, and the Arabian plate to the west (Fig. 3.2). The northern part of the Indian plate is subducted beneath the Eurasian plate, but the peninsular India constituting the Precambrian Indian shield preserves fragmentary records of the past supercontinents. The Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ) divides the Indian Precambrian shield into a northern tectonic block and southern tectonic block, which is a collage of four Archean cratons, namely, Dharwar, Bastar, Singhbhum, and Aravalli–Bundelkhand, and the (Proterozoic) Shillong plateau in the northeast (Fig. 3.1). These cratons are composed mostly of granites, gneisses, and remnants of greenstone/schist belts of the Archean age and the cratonic basins of the Proterozoic age which overlie the Archean basement (Jayananda et al. 2015, 2016, 2018; Manikyamba et al. 2017; Radhakrishna and Naqvi 1986; Ramakrishna and Vaidyanadhan 2008; Meert et al. 2010; Saha and Mazumder 2012; Saha et al. 2016a). Large-scale tectonic features like exhumed orogen, rift basins, dyke swarms, paleo-sutures, ophiolite domains in the cratons, and their margins are being used as clues to unravel the history of the moving plates, focusing on India through time.

Fig. 3.2
figure 2

Tectonic plates around India. The subduction zone and the divergent plate boundaries are marked with purple lines. Green arrows mark plate movement directions

Full size image

The Proterozoic orogenic/mobile belts rim the Archean cratons in peninsular India—the eastern Ghats belt and the southern granulite terrane (SGT) bordering the Dharwar craton and the Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ) separating the Bundelkhand craton in the north from the southern and eastern Indian cratons, namely, the Bastar, Singhbhum, and Dharwar cratons. In addition, the Aravalli-Delhi fold belt borders the western part of the Bundelkhand craton (Fig. 3.1). By the end of the Archean or early Proterozoic, the cratonic nuclei were possibly amalgamated into a number of stable microcontinents, which coalesced to form larger continental masses. Occurrences of tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite (TTG) rocks, supracrustal rocks including Archean greenstone belts, and the late Neoarchean intrusive granitic plutons bear the signature of amalgamation (Santosh et al. 2015, 2016; Jayananda et al. 2013, 2018). High-grade Proterozoic metamorphic belts at the junction of the neighboring cratons were the stitching line between them. The junction between the Dharwar craton and the Bastar craton is marked by the Karimnagar and Bhopalpatnam granulites, whereas the ultra-high-temperature (UHT) granulites along the Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ: Bhowmik et al. 2005; Bhowmik 2006) suture the Bundelkhand craton in northern India to Bastar and the adjoining blocks of southern India. In addition, the vast cratonic sedimentary basins are the repositories of Proterozoic geological records roughly contemporaneous with the high heat-producing rocks in the surrounding orogens to its east and south (Collins et al. 2007; Dobmeier and Raith 2003; Santosh et al. 2006). Widespread development of the undeformed or little metamorphosed sedimentary successions of the Proterozoic cratonic basins (Purana successions of Holland 1909) of the peninsular India points to development of stable shield by the end of the Archean.

The stratigraphic successions of the cratonic basins of peninsular India, namely, the Chhattisgarh and its satellite basins in the Bastar craton; the Cuddapah, Bhima, and Kaladgi basins of the Dharwar craton; and the Vindhyan basin in Bundelkhand craton, ranging in age from the Paleoproterozoic through the Neoproterozoic, represent major cycles of sedimentation with significant similarity in development as well as wide variations in their depositional milieu. The depositional milieu of each of these major cycles is manifested in the varied facies associations, which represent the record of possible fluctuations in the sea level. The two key factors, namely, (1) epeirogenic movements in cratonic interiors and (2) changes in sea level, or combination of the two is responsible for the development of the craton interior unconformities. The unconformity bound sequences and the cyclicality pattern influenced by the global sea-level change curve have been used for intrabasinal correlations of the successions of the cratonic basins of peninsular India with an attempt to find possible tectonic links with the supercontinent cycles (Patranabis-Deb et al. 2018; Saha 1994; Mazumder et al. 2012).

We also take up Singhbhum craton and the Shillong plateau and adjoining NE Himalayan belt, with its subsequent activities to resolve the geodynamic puzzle through geological record preserved in them.

In this contribution, we deal with the published models of the supercontinents through time and the place of India in the amalgamation and dispersal patterns of the supercontinents. The craton interior sedimentary successions and the craton margin fold belts which may have correlatable counterparts in other continents are briefly described and discussed to highlight the Precambrian dynamics of the Indian plate. The techniques usually used to get an understanding of the older supercontinents are often indirect, because of loss of older record due to subduction processes through ages. The overall geological framework in each craton is discussed with emphasis on those stratigraphic records and tectonothermal events that are regionally significant and provide clues to regional and tentative global correlation.

3.3 Precambrian Supercontinents

3.3.1 Vaalbara: The Archean Supercontinent ~3.2 Ga

Vaalbara, the earliest supercontinent described so far, derived its name from last four letters of the Kaapvaal craton, now located in eastern part of South Africa and the Pilbara craton, presently located in north-western Australia (Fig. 3.3; Cheney 1996). Cheney (1996) correlated these two widely dispersed continents, by comparing 100–1000 m thick unconformity bound sequences, which show remarkable similarities in their depositional environment. Sequence stratigraphic correlation is supported by the paleomagnetic data (Zegers et al. 1998; Strik et al. 2003) and chronostratigraphic data (Zegers and Ocampo 2003), which placed Vaalbara to be the earth’s earliest craton. Further, it has been noted that the oldest impact-related layers, dated as ca. 3470 Ma, are recognized within greenstone sequences of these two cratons (Byerly et al. 2002). Though the existence of this 3.6–3.2 Ga continent cannot be unequivocally proven and debate about the existence of Vaalbara still persists, it matches chronologically with the volcano-sedimentary succession of the Dharwar greenstone belts of peninsular India. 3.5–3.0 Ga age for the Sargur Supergroup (Nutman et al. 1992; Peucat et al. 1995; Jayananda et al. 2008; Lancaster et al. 2015) and 3.0–2.7 Ga for the Dharwar Supergroup (Taylor et al. 1986; Kumar et al. 1996; Nutman et al. 1996; Jayananda et al. 2000, 2013), which led us to rethink about India’s participation during the making of Vaalbara as the nearest neighbor. However, recent study by Jayananda et al. (2018) shows that the Archean geological history and crust-forming events of the Dharwar craton are correlatable with the Bundelkhand craton in central India, Pilbara and Yilgarn cratons in western Australia, and Kaapvaal and Tanzania cratons in southern Africa. More research and authenticated data are still needed to confirm the participation of the Archean greenstone belts that were subsequently spread out across Gondwana and Laurasia.

Fig. 3.3
figure 3

The earth’s earliest known supercontinent Vaalbara, formed around 3.3 billion years ago. Vaalbara connects South Africa’s Kaapval craton and Australian Pilbara craton

Full size image

3.3.2 Ur: The Archean Supercontinent ~3 Ga

“Ur ,” meaning “original” in German , signifies the oldest craton, which possibly formed a core for a continental block as late as 1.8 Ga (Rogers and Santosh 2004). Ur supercontinent formed at ~3.0 Ga and accreted to the greater part of the east Antarctica in the middle Proterozoic to form east Gondwana (Rogers 1996). Initial configuration of Ur (Fig. 3.4) was proposed by Rogers (1993, 1996) which included the Kaapvaal craton of South Africa; the Madagascar, west Dharwar, Bhandara (Bastar), and Singhbhum cratons of India; and the Pilbara craton of Australia. Later on, parts of small cratons from east Antarctica, namely, Dronning Maud Land, Napier, Vestfold, and Yilgarn from Australia, were added to form expanded Ur supercontinent (Rogers and Santosh 2004). The correlation was based mostly from available age and roughly similar history of the origin and development of the cratons which actively took part in the amalgamation process to form Ur (Barley 1993; Blewett 2002; Jayananda et al. 2000, 2018; Mazumder et al. 2000; Goswami et al. 1995). However, tests of existence of “Ur” and specific correlation of the rocks from each of the cratons are very difficult because of its age, and hence large uncertainties remain.

Fig. 3.4
figure 4

Maps of “Ur” and “expanded Ur” at 3.0 Ga (Rogers and Santosh 2004). Symbols designate the following cratons: KA, Kaapvaal; MA, Madagascar; DH, Dharwar (west and east); BH, Bhandara (Bastar); SI, Singhbhum, DM, Dronning Maud Land; NP, Napier; VE, Vestfold; YI, Yilgarn; ZI, Zimbabwe; PI, Pilbara. Subsequent growth of Ur occurred to form the East Gondwana landmass

Full size image

Recent studies also suggest that the cratonic fragments of late Archean continents embedded in younger continents are part of the supercraton Superia (Bleeker 2003). The supercraton derived its name from the Superior craton, which represents one of the larger and better preserved fragments and occupies the central piece of supercraton Superia. Based on their paleomagnetic interpretation, Bleeker et al. (2008) argue that the Kaapvaal, Superior, and Wyoming were the nearest neighbors in supercraton Superia, representing the fragment that originated from the reentrant to the southwest of a combined Superior-Wyoming.

3.3.3 Arctica/Kenorland ~2.7–2.5 Ga

North America and Siberian cratons were considered to be part of a large continent, which was named as Arctica (~2.7 Ga), because of the presence of Arctic Ocean through them. However, Arctica’s position against North America is debatable. A group of scientists, in their reconstruction placed Siberia against the northern margin of N. America (Condie and Rosen 1994), while the others placed it along the western edge of North America (Sears and Price 2000, 2003). Secondly, history of the cratons in the Canadian Shield was not matching with the proposed reconstruction of Arctica. Williams et al. (1991) proposed the name “Kenorland” for the supercontinent at ~2.5 Ga, which encompasses Canadian cratons of Arctica. This study with detailed analysis of six thematic tectonic maps was used to comment on the makeup of the North American continent. They have also suggested that essentially similar plate tectonic processes controlled continental breakup and assembly from the Archean onwards, albeit with gradual increase in size of continental lithospheric plates and quantitative change in other parameters such as heat flow and character of the mantle (Williams et al. 1991). It has been suggested, but it was also questioned later that Kenorland underwent widespread rifting and collision along Trans-Hudson orogeny and Taltson magmatic belt between 1.9 and 1.8 Ga time interval (Fig. 3.5; Rogers and Santosh 2004). The breakup of Kenorland was contemporaneous with the glaciation event which persisted for up to 60 million years. The timing also matches with the atmospheric changes and rise in oxygen level and formation of habitable earth. The banded iron formations (BIF) also show their worldwide acme in development in this period, thus indicating a massive increase in oxygen buildup from an estimated 0.1% of the atmosphere to about 1% (see Hashizume et al. 2016). The alternate silica- and iron-rich laminae of banded iron formations (BIFs) are thought to reflect the dynamics of the paleo-environments and point to biological influence during 2.7–2.9 Ga on BIF (Hashizume et al. 2016).

Fig. 3.5
figure 5

Map of Kenorland (after Rogers and Santosh 2004). Major post-Archaean orogenic belts are named in bold. THO stands for the Trans-Hudson Orogen

Full size image

Despite many persisting problems about the timing and assembly of Kenorland , it is accepted that by Middle Proterozoic, it took active part and grew up to be part of the supercontinent Rodinia at ~1 Ga (Bowring and Grotzinger 1992). Comprehensive stratigraphic and geochronologic investigation of early Proterozoic sedimentary basins related to Wopmay and Thelon orogens located in the northwest Canadian shield indicates that the duration of the passive margin sedimentation in the Wopmay province was of the order of 80–90 Ma, which is in contrast with the earlier notion of about 10 Ma (Bowring and Grotzinger 1992).

3.3.4 Nuna/Columbia ~2.5–1.5 Ga

Hoffman (1997) proposed the name “Nuna” for their reconstruction of a giant continent which involved the lands bordering the northern oceans, namely, Laurentia, Baltica, and, to a lesser extent, the Angara craton of Siberia. This was not very different from the “Nena” as proposed by Gower et al. (1990). Careful examination made by Meert (2012) revealed that although “Nuna” was published prior to “Columbia,” the “Nuna” proposal in terms of the configuration of the giant continent does not fit well. Therefore, the proposal is made that “Columbia” consists of several core elements one of which is “Nuna” (Meert 2002; Meert and Santosh 2017). Rogers and Santosh (2002) proposed the name Columbia (Fig. 3.6a) for the Paleo-Mesoproterozoic supercontinent, where the Archean to Paleoproterozoic cratonic blocks were welded by the global 2.1–1.8 Ga collisional belts, with signatures of extreme metamorphism (Santosh et al. 2006). Columbia supercontinent was the first coherent supercontinent by definition, which contains nearly all of the earth’s continental blocks at some time between 1.9 and 1.5 Ga. In the initial configuration of Rogers and Santosh (2002), South Africa, Madagascar, India, Australia, and attached parts of Antarctica are placed adjacent to the western margin of North America, whereas Greenland, Baltica (Northern Europe), and Siberia are positioned adjacent to the northern margin of North America, and South America is placed against West Africa. In the same year (2002), Zhao et al. (2002) proposed an alternative configuration of Columbia, in which the fits of Baltica and Siberia with Laurentia and the fit of South America with West Africa are similar to that of the configuration proposed by Rogers and Santosh (2002), whereas the fits of India, East Antarctica, South Africa, and Australia with Laurentia are similar to their corresponding fits in the configuration of Rodinia. Zhao et al. (2002) proposed that the assembly of the supercontinent Columbia was completed by global-scale collisional events during 2.1–1.8 Ga, considering lithostratigraphic, tectonothermal, geochronological, and paleomagnetic data from around the world. India played a key role in the configuration of the Columbia. The South and North Indian Blocks were amalgamated along the Central Indian Tectonic Zone (Deshmukh et al. 2017); and the Eastern and Western Blocks of the North China Craton were welded together by ~1.85 Ga Trans-North China Orogen (Deshmukh et al. 2017; Naganjaneyulu and Santosh 2010). The existence of Columbia is consistent with late Paleoproterozoic to Mesoproterozoic sedimentary and magmatic records. Following its final assembly at ca. 1.82 Ga, the supercontinent Columbia underwent long-lived (1.82–1.5 Ga), subduction-related growth via accretion at key continental margins, forming at 1.82–1.5 Ga great magmatic accretionary belt (Condie 2002; Zhao et al. 2002, 2004; Rogers and Santosh 2004). In a recent study, Evans and Mitchell (2011) provided an update on the assembly and breakup of the center of Nuna , between Laurentia, Baltica, and Siberia. They have used Nuna and Columbia as equivalent terms for their study and used very precise paleomagnetic results from ten sites of acid volcanic rocks from North China, and from Australia, India, and Amazonia, to examine the positions of these continental blocks in Nuna. Evans and Mitchell (2011) proposed Laurentia–Baltica–Siberia connection for the bulk of Nuna (also known as Columbia) on the basis of paleomagnetic and geologic studies. Nuna reconstruction, constrained by the updated global paleomagnetic dataset, is also consistent with key geological features including the ca. 1.8 Ga orogenic belts. The Mesoproterozoic global intraplate extensional basins and large igneous province (LIP) record were possibly related to the breakup of Nuna. The breakup of Nuna may have commenced after ca. 1.4 Ga, but available paleomagnetic data are not yet complete enough to allow a more precise depiction of Nuna’s fragmentation. Models available for the breakup of Columbia indicate that it began to fragment about 1.5–1.35 Ga, associated with continental rifting along the western margin of Laurentia (Belt-Purcell Supergroup) (Zhao et al. 2004, James et al. 2015), eastern India (Godavari Supergroup), southern margin of Baltica (Telemark Supergroup), southeastern margin of Siberia (Riphean aulacogens), northwestern margin of South Africa (Kalahari Copper Belt), and northern margin of the North China Block (Zhaertai-Bayan Obo Belt). The fragmentation corresponded with widespread anorogenic magmatic activity, forming anorthosite-mangerite-charnockite-granite (AMCG) suite in North America, Baltica, Amazonia, and North China, and continued until the final breakup of the supercontinent at about 1.3–1.2 Ga, marked by the emplacement of the 1.27 Ga Mackenzie and 1.24 Ga Sudbury mafic dyke swarms in North America (Zhao et al. 2004). Other dyke swarms associated with extensional tectonics and the breakup of Columbia include the Satakunta-Ulvö dyke swarm in Fennoscandia and the Galiwinku dyke swarm in Australia. Very recently, Hou et al. (2008) proposed the new configuration of the Columbia supercontinent on the basis of giant radiating dike swarms.

Fig. 3.6
figure 6

(a) “Columbia” fit of Rogers and Santosh (2002) showing the approximate relationship between the various elements comprising the supercontinent without considering a specific map projection such that the continents are distorted. The dashed outline shows the “Nuna” core within the Columbia supercontinent, (b) a simplified image of the “Columbia” supercontinent according to Zhao et al. (2004), and (c) “Columbia” at 1.5 Ga using slightly modified rotation parameters (Laurentia fixed) originally given in Meert (2002) to approximate the Rogers and Santosh (2002) archetypal fit. Laurentia, along with all the other elements, is then rotated according to the ~1.5 Ga St. Francois mountains pole of Meert and Stuckey (2002)

Full size image

3.3.5 Rodinia

Valentine and Moores (1970) were probably the first to recognize a Precambrian supercontinent, which they named “Pangaea I.” McMenamin and McMenamin, in the 1990s, renamed it as Rodinia and proposed temporal framework for the supercontinent, which reached its maximum packing at around 1.0 Ga. The name Rodinia was derived from the Russian word rodít meaning “to beget” or “to give birth” and proposed plausible reconstruction which involved two Neoproterozoic continents (east Gondwana and west Gondwana) that were derived from the breakup of an older supercontinent Columbia (Rogers and Santosh 2004; Yoshida et al. 2003).

Following Powell et al.’s (1993) work, Rodinia became the dominant name used to refer to a wide variety of Neoproterozoic supercontinental reconstructions (see also Torsvik et al. 1996; Weil et al. 1998; Meert and Torsvik 2003; Li et al. 2008). Rodinia was assembled through worldwide orogenic events between 1300 and 900 Ma, with all, or virtually all, the then existing continental blocks likely being involved. Reports of major orogenic events at around 1.0 Ga from many parts of the world coincide with the maximum packing of Rodinia. Rodinia is the supercontinent that gave birth to all subsequent continents, and its continental shelves were the cradle of earliest animals (McMenamin and McMenamin 1990). Increased volcanic activity of the period also introduced into the marine environment biologically active nutrients, which may have played a significant role in the development of the earliest animals. The corresponding superocean surrounding Rodinia is called Mirovoi (McMenamin and McMenamin 1990). Till recent years, different models of reconstruction of Rodinia are put forward matching Grenvillian age belts (~1.0 Ga), where the configuration of the core cratons remains the same, but differ in many details. Dalziel (1991), Hoffman (1991), and Moores (1991) were among the pioneering workers who proposed this Precambrian supercontinent model by integrating geological evidence with paleomagnetic data. Most commonly referred model is that by Hoffman (1991), which included blocks surrounding Laurentia and attached East Antarctica and western North America along a series of Grenville age belt (Fig. 3.7). The assembly process features the accretion or collision of continental blocks around the margin of Laurentia. Meert (2001) proposed similar reconstruction for Rodinia, integrating geological evidence with Paleomagnetic data. Principally, these reconstructions matched the east coast of Australia-Antarctica with the west coast of Laurentia. Hoffman (1991) proposed that all Grenvillian belts are zones of ocean closure between continental blocks. It is also consistent with juxtaposition of Southwest North America and East Antarctica (Dalziel 1991), referred to as SWEAT hypothesis, proposed by Moores (1991). Wingate et al. (2002) proposed an AUSMEX connection where Australia and Mexico were adjacent to each other or AUSWUS, where Australia was placed against North America leaving room for Siberia to be joined to western Canada as proposed by Sears and Price (2003). Brookfield (1993), Karlstrom et al. (1999), and Burrett and Berry (2000, 2002) proposed a configuration for one part of Rodinia, which is different from the Rodinia proposed by Hoffman (1991). Merdith et al. (2017) points out that the existing models predict less subduction (ca. 90%) with respect to what we see on the modern Earth. This confusion led them to adopt conservative model, which shows notable departures of previous Rodinia reconstruction models, where India and South China were omitted from Rodinia completely, due to long-lived subduction preserved on the margins of India and conflicting paleomagnetic data for the Late Neoproterozoic, such that these two cratons act as “lonely wanderers” for much of the Neoproterozoic.

Fig. 3.7
figure 7

“Rodinia at about 700 Ma” (after Hoffman 1991). Orange shows Grenville age mountain belts, and yellow shows preexisting mountain belt

Full size image

Fragmentation of the supercontinent is recorded in Neoproterozoic rift and passive margin successions, as it broke apart (Burke and Dewey 1973; Bond et al. 1984; Dalziel 1991; Hoffman 1991; Powell et al. 1993, 1995). After the assembly of bulk of Rodinia , it moved to the higher latitudes and then returned toward equatorial–mid latitudes by ca. 800–825 Ma, with Laurentia occupying a low–mid latitude position and Australia-Antarctica and Siberia lying on the equator. The breakup of Rodinia started about this time resulting with the opening of the Proto-Pacific Ocean between Australia-Antarctica-Tarim and Laurentia. The spreading system separating Laurentia and Australia likely extended further north and is inferred to be the spreading ridge associated with Siberia’s dextral movement against Laurentia between 800 and 700 Ma (Pisarevsky et al. 2013). Mantle avalanches, caused by the sinking of stagnated slabs accumulated at the mantle transition zone surrounding the supercontinent, plus thermal insulation by the supercontinent, led to the formation of a mantle superplume beneath Rodinia, 40–60 million years after the completion of its assembly. Different models for breakup of Rodinia are available, but many disparities still exist, leaving space for further revision of the models with high precision data. However, it is generally accepted that widespread continental rifting between 825 and 740 Ma, with episodic plume events at 825, 780, and 750 Ma separated the continents (Rogers and Santosh 2004).

Rodinia broke apart, and its successor, Gondwana, began to amalgamate (Meert 2003; Boger and Miller 2004; Collins and Pisarevsky 2005) in four stages between 825 and 550 Ma (Bogdanova et al. 2008; Li et al. 2008). There is an overlap between the last stage of Rodinia amalgamation in geological records of one continent and the first stage of breakup in another continent, which implies that the record of time of amalgamation and breakup of this supercontinent vary between continents. Consequences of rifting are best recorded in North America being the central part of Rodinia. Rifting between the Amazonia craton and the southeastern margin of Laurentia started at approximately the same time, but only led to breakup after ca. 600 Ma. By this time, most of the western Gondwanan continents had joined together, although the formation of Gondwanaland was not complete until ca. 530 Ma. In the interval 650–550 Ma, several events overlapped: the opening of the Iapetus Ocean; the closure of the Braziliano, Adamastor, and Mozambique oceans; and the Pan-African orogeny, resulting in the formation of Gondwana.

3.4 Dynamics and Evolutionary Perspectives

3.4.1 Role of Indian Shield

The Precambrian era is very important and crucial because of many reasons, among which most important is the transition from an inhabitable earth to development of soft bodied, multicellular creatures. Numerous models of the wandering plates are being proposed since the widespread acceptance of the plate tectonic paradigm. The long-term trends and variations in mantle dynamics are preserved in rock record (e.g., Tackley 2000), faunal diversity and evolutionary patterns, distribution of ore deposits (e.g., Barley and Groves 1992; Bierlein et al. 2009; Butterworth et al. 2016; Meyer 1988; Pehrsson et al. 2016), seawater chemistry (Halverson et al. 2007; Hardie 1996), paleogeography, and climate (Hoffman et al. 1998; Kirschvink 1992). In this section, we will be looking at how the Indian cratons fit, if at all, in one or other of the available models of the assembly and breakup of the supercontinents and discuss about the unresolved issues and future directions.

In the following section, we discuss the events preserved in the rock records of Indian Peninsula in light of assembly and dispersal of the proposed supercontinents. Models for the supercontinents often rely on the history of orogenic belts within the continents and their nearest match to the other continent (matching piercing points). Accretion and dispersal of the slabs or continental blocks take place due to mantle convection. Supercontinents possibly accrete above the down going limb of very large convection cells and disperse above rising convection cells (Runcorn 1962; Rogers and Santosh 2004).

3.4.2 Vaalbara

The 3.2 Ga supercontinent’s existence is still in doubt, but the time frame and the greenstone succession match with some of the data from peninsular India, namely, the 3.5–3.0 Ga depositional age of the volcano-sedimentary successions of the Sargur Group, Dharwar craton (Jayananda et al. 2008, 2018), the Sonakhan Greenstone belt of Bastar craton (Das et al. 2009; Saha et al. 2000), and the Iron Ore Group of Gorumahisani–Badampahar area of Singhbhum craton (Mazumder et al. 2012; Mukhopadhyay et al. 2008). The stratigraphic history and the paleomagnetic data, the latter as yet unknown, of the Neoarchean–Paleoproterozoic greenstone belts from peninsular India might throw some light on India’s participation during the formation of the Vaalbara supercontinent (de Kock et al. 2009). The recently reported 3.2–3.5 Ga ages from arc-type magmatism and continental growth within the Coorg Block in southern India (Santosh et al. 2016) might also provide evidence for the existence of one of the cores of Vaalbara within Peninsular India.

3.4.3 Ur

Ur , the supercontinent which stabilized at 3.0 Ga, has records of India’s active participation. Dharwar, Singhbhum, and Bastar cratons (Figs. 3.1 and 3.4) formed the central part of Ur and were connected with Kaapval craton of South Africa in the west, Pilbara to the southeast and Napier, Vestfold and Dronning Maud Land of East Antarctica to the south. The reconstruction was done mainly on the basis of the available dates. Emplacement ages of the Singhbhum granite show wide range starting from 3.3 to 3.1 Ga (Saha 1994; Reddy et al. 2009). Older Metamorphic Tonalite Gneiss (OMTG) was dated to be 3.4 (Moorbath and Taylor 1988) and 3.5 Ga (Acharyya 2005). Saha (1994) reported 3.8 Ga for Older Metamorphic Group (OMG) and 3.3 Ga by Sharma et al. (1994) for the same Group. Mukhopadhyay et al. (2008) assigned 3.55 Ga sedimentation age for the Iron Ore Group, Daitari basin, representing the oldest shelf sedimentation in eastern India. On the other hand, the western Dharwar craton consists of 3.3–3.0 Ga old tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite (TTG) rocks (Jayananda et al. 2000, 2013, 2015; Chardon et al. 2011; Guitreau et al. 2017; Maibam et al. 2016; Ishwar-Kumar et al. 2013). Peninsular Gneiss, with enclaves of greenstone belts of the Sargur Group, was reported by Naha et al. (1991), which ranges in age between 3.3 and 3.1 Ga (Jayananda et al. 2015; Meert et al. 2010). The Bastar craton includes TTG and greenstones about 3.5 Ga age (Sarkar et al. 1993).

Mahapatro et al. (2012), Misra and Gupta (2014), Bose et al. (2016a), Chattopadhyay et al. (2015a, b), and Ghosh et al. (2016) are among the recent workers in the eastern Ghats belt, who suggested that the time of juxtaposition of Rengali province against the Eastern Ghats or its connection with the Bastar craton to be Late Archean in age. They correlated the granulite facies metamorphism, from one domain of the eastern Ghats belt with the thermal pulses in the Singhbhum craton and suggested possible connection with the assembly of the Archean supercontinent “Ur” (Mahapatro et al. 2012). Alternative hypothesis by Chattopadhyay et al. (2015a, b) suggests ~0.98 Ga amphibolite facies metamorphism and transpression of Rengali at ~0.5 Ga. Whether juxtaposition of the Rengali province with the eastern Ghats occurred during the Grenvillian orogeny (Chattopadhyay et al. 2015a, b) or Pan African orogeny (Ghosh et al. 2016) is a matter of debate, and additional data is needed to resolve it.

Despite the fact that Dharwar, Bhandara (Bastar), and Singhbhum cratons of peninsular India give overlapping age, the tests of the existence of Ur and the place of India in it are yet to emerge, because of its old age and limited outcrop. However, there is scope for better understanding by identification of similar depositional history and recognition of unconformity bound sequences within the greenstone succession, supported by paleomagnetic and geochronologic data.

3.4.4 Kenorland

The role of Indian shield in the formation of Kenorland is not known yet, but recently published data from Indian Paleoproterozoic orogenic belts suggest some connection in making up the supercontinent as against the common notion of global tectonic quiescence at 2.6–2.4 Ga (Condie et al. 2011; Mazumder et al. 2012).

3.4.5 Columbia Supercontinent

The Columbia is still believed to be the first coherent supercontinent which contained nearly all of earth’s continental blocks at some point of time between 1.9 and 1.5 Ga. During amalgamation around ~1.9–1.8 Ga (Rogers and Santosh 2002), the eastern India, Australia, and Antarctica were sutured to western North America (Rogers and Santosh 2004) and finally to the main landmass stated above. Zhao et al. (2004) put forward a different model with slight deviation from the original model proposed by Rogers and Santosh (2002). In his model, North China is attached to India with Trans-North China Orogen connected to central India (Fig. 3.6b).

Ramakrishna and Vaidyanadhan (2008) proposed that the small outcrop of Proterozoic basement gneisses and deformed metasedimentary rock groups of the Shillong plateau may be considered as part of the Indian craton. Rb-Sr method of dating gave ~1.7 Ga age for the gneissic basement complex of the plateau (Ghosh et al. 1994), while Yin et al. (2010) assigned 1.6 Ga migmatization age for the Shillong–Meghalaya basement gneissic complex. Based on the age distribution of detrital zircon population, Yin et al. (2010) concluded that the Shillong Group is possibly younger than 1100 Ma (see also Chatterjee et al. 2007; cf. Mitra and Mitra 2001).

The Lesser Himalayan augen gneisses (Bomdila gneiss) in Arunachal Pradesh, intruded into the phyllite–quartzite succession of the Bomdila Group, yield ages of 1.76–1.74 Ga (Yin et al. 2010). Paleoproterozoic sedimentation in the Lesser Himalaya may be broadly contemporaneous with the lower Vindhyan (Semri Group) sedimentation in the Aravalli–Bundelkhand craton, or similar elements preserved in the Mahakoshal belt or the Chotanagpur Granite Gneiss terrane (see Ramakrishna and Vaidyanadhan 2008). On the whole, the available evidence suggests that the amalgamation of the Shillong plateau basement with the rest of the Indian craton is a late Paleoproterozoic–Mesoproterozoic phenomenon, which corresponds to the amalgamation of Columbia supercontinent. However, no data on paleomagnetism is available, so the validity is still untested.

3.4.6 Imprints in the Aravalli–Bundelkhand Craton

Aravalli–Bundelkhand craton (ABC) , situated in the north of the Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ), preserves continuous record of deposition, deformation and cratonization starting from 3.3 to 0.5 Ga. Our description will be limited within 1.9–1.4 Ga events that coincide with amalgamation of Columbia supercontinent. The geophysical data of the craton indicate that the Aravalli–Bundelkhand craton constitutes the basement beneath the Lesser Himalayan successions and the Quaternary alluvium of the Indo-Gangetic plain (Kailasam 1976). About 700 km long NE-SW trending Aravalli-Delhi Orogenic Belt (ADOB) marks the NW border of the Aravalli–Bundelkhand craton, with Paleo–Mesoproterozoic deposition of the volcano-sedimentary successions (Choudhary et al. 1984). Compilation of petrological, geochemical, and geological investigations reveals that ADOB is a mosaic of geological terrane, juxtaposed against each other, separated by crustal scale shear zones (Gupta 1934; Heron 1953; Roy and Jakhar 2002; Ramakrishna and Vaidyanadhan 2008). These major ductile shear zones represent either Proterozoic sutures or ophiolite melange zones (Sinha-Roy et al. 1995).

The Paleoproterozoic Aravalli fold belt is generally considered to be separated from the Mesoproterozoic Delhi fold belt by a tectonic contact (Gupta 2004; Deb et al. 2001). Emplacement of syntectonic granitic plutons, namely, Darwal granite or Amet granite at ~1.8 Ga, has been linked with the early deformation of Aravalli Supergroup (Sharma 2009). Similarly, the protolith of the Anasagar Granite Gneiss was emplaced within supracrustal metasedimentary rocks (Aravalli Supergroup) at around 1.85 Ga (Mukhopadhyay et al. 2000; Chattopadhyay et al. 2012). Buick et al. (2006) assign granulite metamorphism age to be 1.72 Ga for the Sandmata complex. The Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ) records ~1.8 Ga closure of the northern and southern tectonic blocks (Acharyya and Roy 2000). Harris (1993) compared the tectonothermal history of CITZ with the Albany belt of Australia.

The chronological data obtained from the cratonic basin sedimentary succession of the Son Valley Vindhyan record ~1.72 Ga age for the oldest sediments and 1.6 Ga for the youngest rocks in the basin (Ray et al. 2002; Sarangi et al. 2004; Ray 2006). However, Malone et al. (2008) proposed 1000–1070 Ma age for the Upper Vindhyan on the basis of detrital zircon analysis of the Upper Bhander sandstones. This clearly indicates that the craton margin orogenic activity coincides with basin formation in the craton interior. The basin filling succession keeps record of the eroded past, and they should be taken care of during supercontinent reconstructions.

3.4.7 Dharwar Craton

The term Dharwar craton was introduced by the Geological Survey of India in 1978 (cf. Radhakrishna and Vaidyanadhan 1997), to accommodate Dharwar Supergroup which includes the “Dharwar greenstone granite” and “Sargur Schist complex.” On the basis of major differences in lithology and ages of rock units, a dividing line, along a steeply dipping mylonite zone (Chitradurga shear zone) (Nutman et al. 1992; Kaila et al. 1979) and the Closepet granite (Ramakrishna and Vaidyanadhan 2008), was proposed to divide the craton into Eastern Dharwar craton and Western Dharwar craton (Fig. 3.1). More recent studies show that the craton contains three microblocks with independent thermal records and accretionary histories, which amalgamated into cratonic framework ca. 2.56 Ga (Peucat et al. 2013; Jayananda et al. 2013, 2018). The craton is bordered to the south by the Pan-African Pandyan mobile belt, also referred to as the southern granulite terrane (Ramakrishna and Vaidyanadhan 2008). The northeastern fringe is marked by the Pranhita–Godavari (PG) Valley rift, and the Deccan basalts cover its northern fringes, where the Proterozoic Bhima and Kaladgi basins occur (Fig. 3.1). Intracratonic Cuddapah basin, ranging in age from the Paleoproterozoic to the Neoproterozoic, occurs in the East Dharwar craton. 5–6 km thick sedimentary succession in the basin with occasional interruption by magmatism holds clue to the happenings during the Proterozoic time. They also preserve record of the changing provenance through time. Paleoproterozoic–Mesoproterozoic tectonic development of the Indian shield is well preserved in the orogenic belt along the eastern margin of the Dharwar craton (Saha et al. 2010). The high grade Eastern Ghats belt, the Nellore schist belt with remnants of ocean plate stratigraphy, and the Nallamalai fold belt with their Paleoproterzoic to Neoproterozoic tectonic history are important in constraining the craton and subsequently the supercontinent development (Saha 2002, 2011; Saha and Chakraborty 2003; Saha et al. 2016b). 1.9 Ga mafic dykes and sills (French et al. 2008) of Dharwar craton mark extension and initiation of sedimentation in the cratonic basins of Dharwar. The interval, 1.5–1.1 Ga, marks wide emplacement of kimberlites/lamproites (Osborne et al. 2011) in Indian shield, pointing toward a link with global extensional episode. The hypothesis of an approximately 1900 Ma old large igneous province (French et al. 2008) incorporating the Cuddapah dykes, that is, those occurring in the basement (Dharwar batholith), is yet to be tested properly with data from other continental fragments.

3.4.8 Ongole Domain: EGMB

There are recent suggestions of the Paleoproterozoic to the Mesoproterozoic ancestry of the Ongole Domain of the southern eastern Ghats belt (Henderson et al. 2014; Sarkar et al. 2014). They have proposed that the sedimentary and igneous rocks showing granulite facies metamorphism preserve fundamental clues to the reconstruction of Columbia. Approximately 1850–1750 Ma LA ICP-MS age of detrital zircons from the sedimentary protoliths constrains the timing of deposition, which can be correlated with detritus from the Napier complex and the North Australian craton to a lesser extent North China Craton. Dasgupta et al. (2013) discussed about the tectonic evolution of the domain and suggested it to be part of accretionary belt of Columbia between Napier and Dharwar blocks at about 1.8–1.6 Ga. Conflicting views prevail regarding the source of the sediments. Sarkar et al. (2014) suggest the provenance was from the present geographic west, i.e., the Dharwar craton, while Henderson et al. (2014) preferred easterly source from the Napier complex. The final collisional episode between Indian and east Antarctic blocks in keeping with its record of high-pressure metamorphism at ca. 1.54 Ga (Sarkar and Schenk 2014; Sarkar et al. 2014) is also considered as cratonization age of the Ongole Domain.

3.4.9 Mahakoshal Belt

Mahakoshal belt (MB) , the northernmost of the supracrustal belt of Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ), records the emplacement of late to post-tectonic granitoid bodies and associated mafic microgranular enclaves (MME), some of which gave robust date between 1.76 and 1.75 Ga by U-Pb SHRIMP zircon geochronology (Bora et al. 2013). The emplacement age of the plutons fits well with continental collision during the assembly of Columbia (Bora and Kumar 2015). The collision was followed by mantle plume activity, with lithospheric thinning and rifting of the Mahakoshal belt, which is tentatively constrained at ca. 1.6 Ga (Srivastava 2013). The volcanic sequence and the sediments are in general intercalated in the MB, where the volcanic rocks are mostly tholeiitic in composition, and occur in association with gabbros, dunite, and pyroxenite, representing platform volcanism (Roy et al. 2000).

3.4.10 Southern Granulite Terrane

It is now becoming increasingly evident that a large part of the crustal basement south of the Palghat-Cauvery Suture Zone in the southern granulite terrane, up to the tip of the peninsula, comprises Paleoproterozoic rocks generated in arc magmatic setting (Yellappa et al. 2010). The basements of the central and southern Madurai Blocks and the Trivandrum and Nagercoil Blocks are now known to be widely composed of Paleoproterozoic (ca. 2.0–1.8 Ga) rocks (e.g., Kroner et al. 2015; Santosh et al. 2017b). Thus, it is possible that large parts of the southernmost part of India were part of the Columbia supercontinent.

3.5 Breakup of Columbia

It has been generally accepted that the demise of the supercontinent Columbia started at around 1.5 Ga (Rogers and Santosh 2002). The signatures of the Mesoproterozoic rifting are well preserved throughout the world. Rogers and Santosh (2002) correlated the Mahanadi-Lambert and Godavari rifts of India with the Belt and Uinta rifts of North America, respectively, thus placing India against western North America in Columbia (Fig. 3.8). Eastern India preserves remnants of ~1.5 Ga granite-rhyolite in the rifts and marginal basins at initial phase of rifting, comparable with granite-rhyolite terrane of type area, namely, central and southwestern United States (Anderson and Morrison 1992; Anderson and Cullers 1999).

Fig. 3.8
figure 8

Rifts in eastern India (left) and western North America (right). “N” shows present north of each area. (After Rogers and Santosh 2004)

Full size image

3.6 Breakup of Rodinia

The world experienced major orogenies around the period ~1.0 Ga, commonly correlated with the Grenville orogeny in Canada. The Grenville orogeny and its correlatives across the world hold the key to the reconstruction of the supercontinent Rodinia. Since the early Neoproterozoic, tectonic geography was dominated by the formation of the supercontinent Rodinia, its breakup, and the subsequent amalgamation of Gondwana. We discuss the Neoproterozoic orogenic record in Indian shield in the context of the dynamics of Rodinia supercontinent. The Neoproterozoic time range is crucial, that is, the earth went through the most extreme climate swings known, from “Snowball Earth” icy extremes to super-hot greenhouse conditions, when the atmosphere got a major injection of oxygen and when multicellular life appeared and exploded in diversity. All these individual events left distinct records in rocks, which could be traced across the continents.

3.6.1 Eastern Ghats and Rayner Belt

The eastern Ghats mobile belt (EGMB), lying in the east coast of India, is a composite terrain with multiple cycles of orogenesis recorded in different domains, which underwent, in general, granulite facies metamorphism during the Proterozoic. The mobile belt extends over 900 km along strike, and the width varies from less than 50 km in the south to 300 km in the north, bordering the Dharwar, Bastar, and Singhbhum cratons with a ductile shear zone in between (Chetty and Murthy 1993). Three distinct orogenic events clustered into three domains within the EGMB are the 1.7–1.54 Ga orogenesis of the Ongole Domain (Henderson et al. 2014; Dasgupta et al. 2013; Sarkar and Schenk 2014; Sarkar et al. 2014, 2015); the most prevalent 1.07–0.90 Ga Grenvillian orogenesis, recorded from the eastern Ghats province, north of the Godavari rift (Dasgupta et al. 2013; Korhonen et al. 2013); and the 0.55–0.50 Ga record of the Pan African orogenesis preserved in the northern part of the eastern Ghats province and adjacent Rengali province (Chattopadhyay et al. 2015a, b; Bose et al. 2016b). New data emerging from the EGMB opens better resolution of transcontinental correlation, either supporting or rejecting the old datasets (Saha et al. 2016a).

Here we focus on the eastern Ghats province with records of the Grenvillian Orogeny and Rodinia connection. In the reconstruction models, the EGMB is often shown to have links with East Antarctica (Bose et al. 2011; Yoshida et al. 2003; Rogers and Santosh 2004; Dasgupta and Sengupta 2003) based on the matching of ~0.95–0.90 Ga granulite facies metamorphic events of the eastern Ghats province with that in the Rayner province (Saha et al. 2016a). After docking of the Rayner province with the eastern Ghats, these two belts evolved simultaneously as a part of the amalgamated continent (Dasgupta et al. 2013). The ultra-high-temperature (UHT) metamorphism experienced by these rocks is the extreme manifestation of high crustal geothermal gradients that affected this region, whereas it was being deformed over a billion years ago which holds key to the Proterozoic tectonic development of the Indian shield. Controversies exist, and debate remains regarding the stages of evolution of the eastern Ghats granulites. Korhonen et al. (2013) suggested single, long-lived orogenic pulse between ~1.07 and ~0.90 Ga, against the existing two-stage evolution of the granulites. Back arc model for the generation of UHT metamorphism in the eastern Ghats is being proposed by Dasgupta et al. (2013). The cratonization age of the EGMB is considered as ~0.90 Ga, though minor activities were still going on around 0.85 Ga, when India and South China were located at the North Pole (Tucker et al. 2001; Santosh et al. 2016). Afterward, the united mass moved south toward Gondwana. Yangtze and northwestern India were fully assembled by this time, and a hiatus between 0.85 and 0.80 Ga in subduction is inferred when magmatism along the southern margin of India (Tucker et al. 2001), in the Seychelles and on the (present-day) northern margin of the Yangtze Craton (Yan et al. 2004; Zhou et al. 2002), started again. This collision orogeny of Grenvillian age welded proto-India against eastern Antarctica, and resultant eastern Ghats belt-Rayner complex terrane, which was not separated during the breakup of Rodinia, remained an entity until the fragmentation of Gondwana (Fitzsimons 2003). Recent work emphasizes that eastern Ghats belt (EGB) played important role in India-East Antarctica connection (Dasgupta et al. 2017).

3.6.2 Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ): Its Continuation in the South Purulia Shear Zone (SPSZ) and Singhbhum Shear Zone (SBSZ)

The CITZ, the main tectonic feature of central India, extends over 1200 km in an E-W to ENE-WSW trend from the west coast to the Bay of Bengal to the east. Its southern contact merges with Bilaspur-Raigarh belt, situated north of Chhattisgarh basin, and is often covered by younger sequences at many places (Chetty 2017). The CITZ, also known as the Central Indian Shear/Suture Zone, is bounded by the Son-Narmada North Fault (SNNF) to the North and the Central Indian Shear (CIS), the most significant ductile shear zone to the south (Yedekar et al. 1990). With the width of the zone varying between a few tens of meters to a few kilometers, the CITZ stitches the North and South Indian Cratonic Blocks (NIB and SIB, respectively) and is characterized by intense mylonitization of granite gneisses and other supracrustal rocks of Precambrian age. The rock successions record >800 million years of protracted Proterozoic tectonothermal and tectonomagmatic history from the Paleoproterozoic to the early Neoproterozoic. The tectonic evolution of the CITZ overlaps with two supercontinent assembly events, namely, Columbia (between 2.1 and 1.8 Ga) described above and Rodinia (between 1.2 and 0.9 Ga) described above.

Debate persists about the eastern continuation of the CITZ, where the northern branch is termed as South Purulia Shear Zone (SPSZ) and the southern branch coincides with Singhbhum Shear Zone (SSZ) via Jharsuguda-Rourkela-Jamshedpur. However, some works consider that the SPSZ is the southern boundary of the CITZ (Ramakrishna and Vaidyanadhan 2008). Bhoumik et al. (2010) proposed that final amalgamation of the northern and southern block of India took place during 1.0 Ga continent-continent collisional orogeny. Regional gravity anomaly map of central India shows a broad region of ENE-WSW trending “gravity high,” indicating thick pile of high-density mafic-ultramafic suits (Qureshy and Hinze 1989; Kaila et al. 1979). The CITZ along the northern border of the Bastar craton has been shown to contain possible sites of Proterozoic ocean closure (e.g., Roy et al. 2002). More recently, CITZ is considered as a possible link in alternative models of end-Proterozoic supercontinent reconstruction involving India and Australia (e.g., Bhowmik et al. 2012; Naganjaneyulu and Santosh 2010).

3.6.3 Proterozoic Cratonic Basins

Peninsular India contains several cratonic basins that include sedimentary rocks deposited at approximately the same time as the high heat-producing (now metamorphosed) sedimentary rocks in the surrounding orogens. The intracratonic Proterozoic sedimentary basins of India, namely, Chhattisgarh and its satellite basins of the Bastar craton, Cuddapah basin of eastern Dharwar craton, Bhima Kaladgi basins of the western Dharwar craton Vindhyan, and Marwar basins of Aravalli craton, preserves thick piles of unconformity bound sequences, which may be looked upon as successive sedimentation cycles, with prominent breaks in deposition (Saha et al. 2016b). The depositional milieu of each of the cycles is manifested in the facies association, which represents the record of fluctuations in the sea level and deposition of siliciclastic-carbonate cycles. The coarse siliciclastic deposit represents early rifting stage, followed by extensive shallow-marine carbonate sedimentation where storm and tide played important role in sculpturing the sediments. Occasional presence of pelagic carbonates and deep-water shales in some of the basins further point to deposition in a wide range of environments, starting from shallow shelf to deep basin (Saha et al. 2016b; Chaudhuri et al. 2012). The cessation of deposition, initiation of erosion, and reestablishment of depositional regimes are responsible for regional and interregional unconformities. Thus, two key factors (1) epeirogenic movements of continental interiors and (2) changes in sea level, or the combination of these two, are responsible for the development of these unconformities. The cyclicity pattern reflecting the global sea-level curve is used for correlation of the succession of the cratonic basins of peninsular India with an attempt to link it with the supercontinent cycle (Saha et al. 2016b). Distinct correlation between acme of passive margin sedimentation and supercontinent breakup has already been established by Bradley (2011). Global sea-level rise is also correlated with the supercontinent breakup, making the sedimentary records even in the so-called cratonic basins more relevant. However, uncertainties remain because of lack of precise geochronologic and paleomagnetic data from many of these sedimentary successions.

3.6.4 Rodinia Breakup and Gondwana Assembly

Rodinia broke up between 800 and 600 Ma, leaving evidences of extension over a broad area by relaxation of stress throughout the supercontinent. In India, major rift valley systems are developed and/or reactivated because of extension, where the post-Rodinia sedimentation continued in rift valleys. The Indian rifts are unique among all the earth’s known rift systems because they remained active as basins of subsidence from the Middle Proterozoic to the present (Rogers and Santosh 2004). Eastern Ghats province records evidences of several assembled crustal units with their own complex and often polymetamorphic histories (Dasgupta et al. 2017). Petrological, geochemical, and geochronological investigations of the western boundary of the eastern Ghats record three distinct events. The first one 0.95–0.93 Ga is related with the major granulite metamorphism, followed by decompression at 0.78–0.75 Ga, related to the breakup of the Rodinia. The third event with late thermal overprint at 0.525–0.51 Ga is inferred to coincide with the timing of amalgamation of Gondwana during the final phase, recording its connection with Prydz Bay region in east Antarctica (Chatterjee et al. 2017).

It is now well established that the orogenic events related to the formation of Gondwana supercontinent were described as the “Pan African” episode or event (Clifford 1968). Subsequent studies suggest that the west Gondwana which includes cratons of South America and Africa was amalgamated between 650 and 600 Ma. The east Gondwana was assembled in the last two stages, between 750 and 620 Ma, which is called East African Orogen (EAO) and 570–500 Ma (Kunga Orogen) (Meert 2001). The Kunga Orogen was originally defined on the basis of geochronological data and interpreted to be related to the collision between Australia/Antarctica and an already combined India-East Africa.

The southernmost domains of Indian peninsula preserve rock records of major late Neoproterozoic–Cambrian (Pan-African) events (Santosh et al. 2009) correlated to subduction and accretion events prior to the final assembly of Gondwana . These include multiple arc magmatic events during Neoproterozoic, such as those recorded from the southern part of the Madurai Block (Santosh et al. 2017b), and widespread regional metamorphism reaching up to ultra-high temperatures during the terminal stages of Gondwana assembly (Santosh et al. 2009). Post-collisional mafic magmatism during extensional collapse of the Gondwana orogen in Cambrian has also been recorded in recent studies (Yang et al. 2017).

3.7 Synthesis of Current Understanding and Outlook

Mantle dynamic processes exert fundamental controls over the accretion and movement of continents. It has been noticed that the formation and breakup of supercontinents follow a natural rule of repetitive pattern. Granites and detrital zircons having notably similar and episodic appearances in the rock record led Hawkesworth et al. (2010) to constrain the Precambrian supercontinent cycles with the peak of zircon appearance. Subduction zone proxies in the rock record provide good evidence for the existence of continent-margin and intra-oceanic subduction zones through time. Volcanic arc protoliths accreted in continent-continent or continent-arc collisions, or as the detritus of these volcanic arcs preserved in successor basins, give us clues to reconstruct the old supercontinents.

The characteristics and similarities among the orogenic belts of India suggest that the crustal architecture of India is developed during the Proterozoic period possibly through stitching of several microcontinents, though uncertainties remain due to an inadequate paleomagnetic data base (summarized in Li et al. 2008).

Better understanding of the Precambrian geodynamics as applied to the Archean cratons and Proterozoic mobile belts in India lies in integrated geochronologic and isotopic studies combined with classical geology. While some of the areas like the EGMB and SGB are well studied and significant data and newer interpretations are coming up in recent years, some areas like the Chotanagpur granite gneiss complex, Satpura mobile belt, and even parts of Aravalli-Delhi mobile belt are yet to be investigated in a comprehensive manner to yield pertinent data. While some suggestions relating to the place of India in reconstructions of Gondwana and Rodinia are getting validated by the recently emerging geochronologic, paleomagnetic, and geologic datasets, paucity of data impedes the understanding of India’s position in global models of older supercontinents.