See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/340668226

Petrogenesis of deformed tourmaline leucogranite in the Gurla Mandhata

metamorphic core complex, Southwestern Tibet

Article  in  Lithos · April 2020

DOI: 10.1016/j.lithos.2020.105533

CITATIONS READS

0 240

3 authors, including:

Cheng Lining Chao Zhang

Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration Northwest University
3 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS    74 PUBLICATIONS   710 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Petrogenesis and Geochronolgy of A Type granites View project

Oxygen-Transporting Membranes View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cheng Lining on 22 April 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Lithos

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lithos

Research Article

Petrogenesis of deformed tourmaline leucogranite in the Gurla Mandhata

metamorphic core complex, Southwestern Tibet
Lining Cheng a,c,⁎, Chao Zhang b,c, Xiaosong Yang a,⁎
a
State Key Laboratory of Earthquake Dynamics, Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, 100029 Beijing, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Continental Dynamics, Department of Geology, Northwest University, 710069 Xi'an, China
c
Institute of Mineralogy, Leibniz University Hannover, Callinstr. 3, 30167 Hannover, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The Himalayan leucogranites, which were derived from crustal anatexis during the India-Asia continental colli-
Received 22 November 2019 sion, have recorded the tectono-magmatic evolution process of the Himalayan orogenic belt. In the Gurla
Received in revised form 9 April 2020 Mandhata area of the western Himalaya, tourmaline leucogranites accompanied by variable deformation are ob-
Accepted 11 April 2020
served along the Gurla Mandhata detachment fault. Whole-rock compositions show that these leucogranites
Available online 15 April 2020
have high SiO2, alkaline elements and low CaO, MgO, FeO, TiO2 contents, and are strongly peraluminous with
Keywords:
A/CNK value of 1.13–1.27. For trace elements, these leucogranites are characterized by low Ba Sr, Nb, Nd concen-
Gurla Mandhata area trations and relatively high Rb, U concentrations with significant negative Eu anomalies. Zircon U\\Pb dating on
Tourmaline leucogranite the tourmaline leucogranites reveals a crystallization age of 11–12 Ma. Field observations, mineral assemblage,
Fractional crystallization and geochemical features indicate that the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites experienced high-degree
Boron-rich magma fractional crystallization, which mainly induced by the long-distance migration from generation to emplacement,
and the enrichment of volatile component (B, F, Cl, and H2O) facilitates the transportation ability of the
leucogranite magma. Two types of tourmaline, Tur I and Tur II, are identified in the tourmaline leucogranites,
enclosing relationships and mineral compositions suggest that these tourmalines should have formed at late
and early stage in terms of magma evolution, respectively. The occurrence of early-stage tourmaline suggests
that the primitive magma of the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites is enriched in boron and H2O,
which is most likely derived from fluid-flux melting of metasedimentary rocks from the Greater Himalayan Crys-
talline. The existence of the inherited zircon with ages of Paleoproterozoic and Neoproterozoic in combination
with previous whole-rock Sr\\Nd isotopic study implies that the source region of the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline
leucogranites is a two-component mixture between the Greater Himalayan Crystalline and the Lesser Himalayan
Sequence.
© 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction leucogranites are considered to have different protoliths (Guillot and

The Himalayan orogen was formed by the continental collision be-
tween India and Asia at around 65–50 Ma (Hu et al., 2016; Najman
et al., 2010). Since the onset of the collision, the Himalayan orogen has
experienced intense deformation, low- to high-grade metamorphism,
as well as widespread crustal anatexis (e.g. Smit et al., 2014; Yin,
2006), produced a large number of leucogranites and migmatites (e.g.
Weinberg, 2016 and references therein). Two sub-parallel leucogranite
belts have been defined within the Himalayan orogen, i.e., the High Hi-
malayan leucogranite belt to the south and the Tethyan Himalayan
leucogranite belt to the north. Based on their mineral assemblages, the
Himalayan leucogranites can be divided into two main types, i.e. two-
mica leucogranite and tourmaline leucogranite. These two types of
⁎ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: chenglining@ies.ac.cn (L. Cheng), xsyang@ies.ac.cn (X. Yang).
Le Fort, 1995), or represent different melt fractions from a similar
protolith (Inger and Harris, 1993), or represent residual melts via frac-
tional crystallizations with variable degrees (Liu et al., 2016; Scaillet
et al., 1990). As a potential way to form different types of Himalayan
leucogranite, the last mechanism has been paid more attention in recent
years. Based on bulk geochemistry, mineral assemblage, and experi-
mental results, tourmaline leucogranites were considered as a highly
fractionated leucogranite by some researchers (Liu et al., 2016; Scaillet
et al., 1990; Wu et al., 2017).
Dehydration melting of metasedimentary rocks from the Greater Hi-
malayan Crystalline (GHC) has been considered to the main mechanism
for the formation of Himalayan leucogranites on the basis of the geo-
chemical and experimental evidence (e.g., Harrison et al., 1999;
Patiňo-Douce and Harris, 1998; Visona and Lombardo, 2002). However,
compositional heterogeneity (such as CaO, Rb, Sr, and Ba contents) sug-
gests that other formation mechanisms, such as fluid-fluxed melting,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2020.105533
0024-4937/© 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.
2 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
are also absent during the crustal anatexis (e.g. Gao and Zeng, 2014). In
addition, whole-rock Sr\\Nd isotope and zircon Hf isotope studies indi-
cate that the Lesser Himalayan Sequence (LHS) also participated in the
formation of Himalayan leucogranites in some places (Guo and
Wilson, 2012; Hopkinson et al., 2019), materials in the LHS are thought
to be mainly involved in the melting reaction of leucogranites formation
as fluid and resulted in fluid-fluxed melting of the GHC (Gao and Zeng,
2014; Kawakami et al., 2019), this fluid may be produced by the dehy-
dration of mica in the LHS and be enriched in boron as the result of
the compatibility of boron. Therefore, fluid-fluxed melting involving
boron-bearing fluid is a potential way to form tourmaline leucogranite.
Tourmaline is the most abundant boron-rich mineral in the conti-
nental crust (e.g. London and Manning, 1995), it is stable over a wide
range of pressures and temperatures. Duo to the low diffusion rates of
elements in the tourmaline structure and along with this mineral's gen-
eral chemical and mechanical robustness once crystalized, tourmaline
can record the information of a multitude of geological events (van
Hinsberg et al., 2011). In granitic melt, tourmaline crystallization and
its chemical feature depend on the composition and condition of the
melt (London, 2011; London and Manning, 1995; Wolf and London,
1997), therefore, the occurrence of tourmaline and variation in its com-
position can provide information of the melt evolution (e.g. Smith and
Yardley, 1996).
In the Gurla Mandhata area, deformed tourmaline leucogranites
(GMTL) were observed as veins or dikes and distributed along the
Gurla Mandhata detachment fault (GMDF). These leucogranites have
been used to constrain the movement history of the GMDF and the
onset of the arc-parallel extension in the Gurla Mandhata area
(Mccallister et al., 2014; Murphy et al., 2002; Murphy and Copeland,
2005). However, there is an insufficient study concerning the formation
mechanism and source regime of the GMTL. Furthermore, whole-rock
Sr\\Nd isotopic data suggest that both the Greater and Lesser Himala-
yan rocks exposed in the Gurla Mandhata area (Murphy, 2007), there-
fore studying the formation mechanism of these tourmaline
leucogranites may help us understand the role of the LHS in the gener-
ation of Himalayan leucogranites and how it works. In this study, we
provide new whole-rock compositions, zircon U\\Pb ages, and tourma-
line compositions of the tourmaline leucogranites from the Gurla
Mandhata area to constrain its petrogenesis, emplacement age, and
source.
2. Geological setting
2.1. Regional setting
The Himalayan orogen is the southern boundary of the Tibetan Pla-
teau, which was formed by the continental collision between the India
plate and Asia plate in the Paleocene to early Eocene (65–50 Ma) (Hu
et al., 2016; Najman et al., 2010). From south to north, the Himalaya
can be divided into three main sequences: the Lesser Himalayan Se-
quence (LHS), the Greater Himalayan Crystalline (GHC), and the Te-
thyan Himalayan Sequence (Fig. 1a). The Tethyan Himalayan
Sequence and the GHC are separated by the South Tibetan detachment
system (Fig. 1a), which occurs as a dominantly top-to-the-north, north-
dipping shear zone and was active from Miocene or earlier (35 Ma) (Lee
and Whitehouse, 2007; Yang et al., 2009) to Pliocene (e.g., Burchfiel
et al., 1992; Yin et al., 2006). The GHC and the LHS are separated by
the Main Central Thrust (Fig. 1a), which is a 2 to10 km-thick ductile
shear zone and began moving at 23–20 Ma (e.g., Hodges, 2000), and
may have continued to be active as late as in the late Miocene-
Pliocene (e.g., Catlos et al., 2004).
The Himalayan leucogranites are distributed along with two sub-
parallel belts in the Himalayan orogen, which are defined as the High
Himalayan leucogranites and the Tethyan Himalayan leucogranites, re-
spectively. A large number of studies have been conducted on these
leucogranites, showing that there are differences in field outcrops,
geochemical characteristics, and emplacement ages (e.g., Gao et al.,
2017; Guillot and Le Fort, 1995; Scaillet et al., 1990; Zeng et al., 2011;
Zhang et al., 2004). The High Himalayan leucogranites crop out as
dikes, sills, and laccolithic bodies and were emplaced along with the
South Tibetan detachment system, and mostly formed at 23–15 Ma
(Weinberg, 2016; Yang et al., 2019 and references therein). The Gurla
Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites belong to the High Himalayan
leucogranites. The Tethyan Himalayan leucogranites are typically ex-
posed in the core of the North Himalayan domes of the Tethyan Hima-
layan Sequence and have ages in the range of 28–9 Ma (Gao and Zeng,
2014; Weinberg, 2016; Zhang et al., 2004 and references therein). How-
ever, recent studies have identified leucogranites in the Eocene-
Oligocene within the Tethyan Himalayan Sequence (Aikman et al.,
2008; Zeng et al., 2011).
A concurrent regional deformation related to the arc-parallel exten-
sion was found in South Tibet and the Himalaya, and it has induced
abundant N\\S trending normal faults and grabens. Numerous geochro-
nological studies have been carried out on granites that exposed in the
N\\S striking normal faults to constrain the onset of arc-parallel exten-
sion, the results indicate that the arc-parallel extension lasted from ca.
19 Ma until ca. 5 Ma, and show a younging from west to east Himalaya
(Cooper et al., 2015; Mccallister et al., 2014; Mitsuishi et al., 2012;
Murphy et al., 2002 and references therein). In the Gurla Mandhata
area, monazite Th\\Pb and muscovite 40Ar/39Ar dating results suggest
that the onset of arc-parallel extension is around 9 Ma (Murphy et al.,
2002).
2.2. Lithological units of the Gurla Mandhata area
The Gurla Mandhata area is located in the west of the Himalayan
orogen and composed of four main lithotectonic units: the Kiogar–
Jungbwa ophiolite, the Tethyan sedimentary sequence, the Pulan basin
and the Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex (Fig. 1b)
(Murphy et al., 2002). The first three units are on the hanging wall of
the GMDF, and the last one is on the footwall of the GMDF (Fig. 1b).
The Kiogar-Jungbwa ophiolite is mainly composed of norite, dunite,
and harzburgite (Murphy et al., 2002). The Tethyan Sedimentary Se-
quence consists of Upper Proterozoic through Lower Cretaceous sand-
stone, shale and limestone (Murphy et al., 2002). The Pulan basin is
located between the Tethyan sedimentary sequence and the Gurla
Mandhata metamorphic core complex (Fig. 1b). Murphy et al. (2002)
divided the Pulan basin into two sequences: the older Pulan basin strata
(Ts) and the younger Pulan basin Quaternary alluvium (Qal). The older
strata consist of Neogene siltstone, sandstone, and conglomerate. The
younger Quaternary alluvium is composed of coarse clastic deposits,
cobble-pebble gravel, sand, silt, clay, which were derived from the
Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex (Murphy et al., 2002).
The Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex is located on the east-
ern side of the Pulan basin and defined as the footwall of the GMDF
(Fig. 1b). Rocks within the metamorphic core complex, from being
near the GMDF (structurally higher) to being away from the GMDF
(structurally lower), consists of mylonitized garnet-biotite-muscovite
schist (bs) and marble, quartzofeldspathic biotite-garnet gneisses and
biotite schist (gn), and quartzofeldspathic migmatitic gneiss (mig)
(Fig. 1b) (Murphy et al., 2002). A penetrative mylonitic fabric with the
same shear sense as the GMDF (top-to-the-west shear sense) is investi-
gated in the footwall of the GMDF. Whole-rock Sr and Nd isotope anal-
yses of the rocks in the metamorphic core complex show that the
structurally higher units are isotopically similar to the GHC rocks, but
the structurally lower units isotopically correlated with the LHS rocks
(Murphy et al., 2007).
Variably deformed leucogranites were observed to intrude in the
Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex as dikes or sills with a
thickness of tens of centimeters to several meters (Fig. 1b). Based on
the crosscutting relationship and deformation intensity, the
leucogranite dikes/sills can be divided into two generations: the first
 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533 3

Fig. 1. (a) Tectonic map of the western Himalayan-Tibet orogen. Modified from Murphy and Copeland (2005). YTS, Indus-Tsangpo suture; THS, Tethyan Himalayan sequence; GHC, Greater
Himalayan Crystalline; LHS, Lesser Himalayan sequence; GMDF, Gurla Mandhata detachment faults; MBT, Main Boundary Thrust; MCT, Main Central Thrust; MFT, Main Frontal Thrust;
STD, South Tibetan Detachment. (b) Simplified geological map of the north Gurla Mandhata area. Modified from Murphy et al. (2002). The Pulan basin consists of Pulan basin strata
(Ts) and Pulan basin Quaternary alluvium (Qal). The Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex composed of mylonitized garnet-biotite-muscovite schist (bs), quartzofeldspathic
biotite-garnet gneisses and biotite schist (gn), and quartzofeldspathic migmatitic gneiss (mig). Samples T14–04, T14–05, and T14–09 were collected from location 1, T16–196,
T16–198, and T16–199 were collected from location 2, T12–19 and T12–24 were collected from location 3, T12–22 and T12–42 were collected from location 4.

generation shows a mylonitic foliation and has a similar shearing pat- second generation cuts the mylonitic foliation of country rock at struc-
tern with the country rocks, and intruded in both mylonitized garnet- turally lower levels, but is deformed at higher levels and swings toward
biotite-muscovite schist (bs) and quartzofeldspathic biotite-garnet the west, these leucogranite dikes mainly intruded in the
gneisses and biotite schist (gn) as sills with large aspect ratio; the quartzofeldspathic biotite-garnet gneisses and biotite schist (gn)
4 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
(Murphy et al., 2002). The main type of leucogranite in the Gurla
Mandhata area is tourmaline leucogranite (GMTL), which commonly
intrudes in the garnet-biotite-muscovite schist (bs) of the structurally
higher unit, and a small number of other types of leucogranite, such as
two-mica leucogranite and tourmaline-bearing two-mica leucogranite,
were mainly observed in the quartzofeldspathic biotite-garnet gneisses
that are structurally below the garnet-biotite-muscovite schist (bs). Re-
markably, tourmaline-rich zones were commonly found along the
boundary between the leucogranite sills and the surrounding rocks in
some places.
Several geochronological studies have been performed on the
leucogranites and metamorphic rocks from the Gurla Mandhata area.
Monazite Th\\Pb dating on the leucogranites yielding two distinct
groups of ages at ca. 7 and 11 Ma as well as a broader distribution of
ages between 17 and 24 Ma (Murphy et al., 2002). However, the peak
at ~11 Ma was considered as the ages of inherited metamorphic mona-
zite grains, and the 17–24 Ma ages may reflect a distinct magmatic
event. Pullen et al. (2011) dated a garnet–tourmaline leucogranite
dike from the Namarodi gorge, yielding a zircon U\\Pb age of 18.6 ±
0.9 Ma.
2.3. The Gurla Mandhata detachment faults
The Gurla Mandhata detachment fault system (GMDF) is one of the
N-S trending normal faults that reflect the regional E-W extension in
Tibet (Mccallister et al., 2014; Murphy et al., 2002). The fault system is
the boundary between the Pulan basin and Gurla Mandhata metamor-
phic core complex (Fig. 1b). Murphy et al. (2002) defined the fault sys-
tem as a pair of west-dipping low-angle (b45°) normal faults: the
structurally lower Gurla Mandhata detachment fault 1 (GMDF1) started
to slip earlier, and has a mean shear-sense direction of 280°. The hang-
ing wall of the GMDF1 composed of the lower Paleozoic phyllites and
marbles and the footwall consists of mylonitic schists, gneisses,
migmatites, and deformed leucogranites. The structurally higher Gurla
Mandhata detachment fault 2 (GMDF2) cuts across fault 1 at a low
angle (b10°) and starts later than the fault 1. The GMDF2 juxtaposes
the Pulan basin strata in its hanging wall over the lower Paleozoic
phyllites and marbles in its footwall. Therefore, the deformation related
to the GMDF1 is mainly preserved on its footwall rocks (mylonitic
schists, gneisses, migmatites, and deformed leucogranites), and the
early deformation in the Gurla Mandhata area associated with the
movement of the GMDF1. The GMDF is associated with a branch of
the Karakoram fault system in the northwest of the Gurla Mandhata
area, and it strikes eastward and connects with the dextral Humla
fault, forming the Gurla Mandhata–Humla Fault System (GMH) in the
southeast of the Gurla Mandhata area (Murphy et al., 2002; Murphy
and Copeland, 2005). The model simulations by Mccallister et al.
(2014) have concluded that the initiation age of the GMDF was between
14 and 11 Ma with a mean fault slip rate of 5.0 ± 0.9 mm/year in the
north, between 14 and 11 Ma with a mean fault slip rate of 3.3 ±
0.6 mm/year in the center, and between 15 and 8 Ma with a mean
fault slip rate of 3.2 ± 1.6 mm/year in the south.
3. Petrography and microstructure
3.1. Petrography
In this study, ten tourmaline leucogranite samples were collected
along the GMDF from north to south (Fig. 1b). All these leucogranites
belong to the first generation leucogranites and intruded in the
garnet-biotite-muscovite schist as sills with a large aspect ratio.
The GMTL is composed of quartz (30–35%), K-feldspar (~20–25%),
plagioclase (33–38%), muscovite (1–8%), and tourmaline (2–6%)
(Fig. 2a). Accessory phases include garnet, apatite, zircon, and monazite.
Most phases are fine to very fine (b2 mm). Some tourmalines can reach
up to several millimeters (b5 mm). Plagioclase commonly occurs as
euhedral to subhedral crystals and occasionally as inclusions in K-
feldspar and tourmaline (Fig. 2f). Muscovite is euhedral to subhedral
and usually found as inclusions in K-feldspar and garnet (Fig. 2c, d). K-
feldspar is characterized by anhedral shapes and a wealth of inclusions.
It encloses abundant quartz, muscovite, tourmaline, and plagioclase
(Fig. 2c, f). Quartz can be enclosed in all the other phases and usually
has a rounded shape (Fig. 2a, b). Garnet appears sporadically, either
without inclusions or with muscovite, tourmaline, and quartz as inclu-
sions (Fig. 2a, e).
Two types of tourmaline have been observed in the GMTL. First,
most tourmaline (type Tur I) is present in various sizes (up to 5 mm)
and euhedral–subhedral grain and it contains abundant inclusions of
quartz, plagioclase, K-feldspar, and zircon (Fig. 2a, b, f). Second, in
some samples, tourmaline (type Tur II) also presents as small euhedral
or subhedral inclusions in plagioclase, K-feldspar, muscovite, and garnet
(Fig. 2c, d, e, f). The grain size of Tur II is relatively smaller (up to
400 μm).
The lack of inclusions and presence as inclusions in most other min-
erals suggest that plagioclase and quartz crystallized in a relatively early
stage. Tur II is enclosed by plagioclase, K-feldspar, and muscovite, sug-
gesting that it also crystallized early. Muscovite occurs as inclusions in
K-feldspar and garnet, and it encloses Tur II, quartz, and plagioclase, in-
dicating that muscovite crystallized at an intermediate stage. K-feldspar,
Tur I, and garnet are regarded as late phases because they enclose other
earlier phases.
3.2. Microstructure
The ductile deformation of GMTL was identified by field observa-
tions and laboratory analysis, and the various deformation extents
show that GMTL deformed under various temperature conditions.
Quartz commonly exhibits varying deformation textures, such as
undulose extinction (Fig. 3b), grain boundary migration recrystalliza-
tion (Fig. 3a), subgrain rotation recrystallization (Fig. 3c), and chess-
board extinction (Fig. 3d), suggesting a wide range of deformation
temperature (300–600 °C) (Passchier and Trouw, 1998). K-feldspar
shows subgrain rotation recrystallization and core-mantle texture
(Fig. 3e), and abundant myrmekite grew along the boundaries of K-
feldspar (Fig. 3f), suggesting a medium- to high-temperature deforma-
tion (400–600 °C) (Passchier and Trouw, 1998). Subgrain rotation re-
crystallization in plagioclase (Fig. 3d) also indicates that subsolidus
deformation occurred in the GMTL. Microboudin texture is commonly
observed in tourmaline (Fig. 3a). Muscovite displays a well-developed
ductile S\\C fabric with sigma-type mica fish (Fig. 3a). Brittle deforma-
tion, such as fractures, is present on plagioclase, K-feldspar, and quartz
(Fig. 3a, d, e, f), and some fractures are filled by fine-grained muscovite
and quartz (Fig. 3a).
4. Analytical method
4.1. XRF and ICP-MS whole-rock composition analysis
Ten fresh GMTL samples were selected to analyze the bulk rock com-
position. Bulk-rock major, trace, and rare earth element (REE) concen-
trations were obtained by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) and inductively
coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) at the Hubei province geo-
logical experimental testing center. Major elements were analyzed by
the XRF method with analytical uncertainties of b5%. Trace and rare
earth elements were analyzed by ICP-MS, and REEs were separated
using cation-exchange techniques. Analytical uncertainties are 10% for
elements with abundances of b10 ppm and around 5% for those of
N10 ppm.
 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533 5

Fig. 2. Photomicrographs and BSE images of mineral assemblage and texture of tourmaline leucogranites in the Gurla Mandhata area (GMTL). (a) GMTL consist of tourmaline, plagioclase,
K-feldspar, muscovite, quartz, and garnet; (b) Tourmaline shows a microboudin texture and includes quartz; (c) Muscovite is observed as inclusion in K-feldspar; (d) Garnet encloses
tourmaline, muscovite, and quartz inclusions; (e) Tourmaline present as inclusion in Muscovite grain; (f) Tourmaline includes K-feldspar grain, and a small tourmaline is enclosed by
the K-feldspar. Tur: tourmaline; Mus: muscovite; Pl: plagioclase; Kfs: K-feldspar; Qtz: quartz; Gt: garnet.

4.2. Tourmaline EMPA analysis
Major element compositions of tourmaline were analyzed using
the Cameca SX-100 electron microprobe at the Institute of Mineral-
ogy, Leibniz University Hannover. Tourmaline was measured for Si,
Ti, Al, Fe2+, Mn, Mg, Ca, Na, K, F, and B using a 2-condition analytical
routine. The first condition used a 15 kV accelerating voltage, 15 nA
beam current, and 2 μm spot diameter to analyze major elements
other than B and F. The second condition used the same accelerating
voltage and spot size, but a 100 nA beam current to analyze B and F. A
PC3 crystal was used for detecting boron. The following standards
were used for calibration: jadeite (Na), MgO (Mg), orthoclase (K),
wollastonite (Ca and Si), TiO2 (Ti), Fe2O3 (Fe), Mn3O4 (Mn), kyanite
(Al), SrF2 (F), and dravite (B).
6 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533

Fig. 3. Microstructures of Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites. (a) Microboudin texture in a large tourmaline grain, and muscovite displays a well-developed ductile S\
\C fabric with
sigma-type mica fish; (b) Undulose extinction in quartz grain; (c) Quartz shows a subgrain rotation recrystallization texture; (d) Chessboard extinction in quartz grain; (e) Subgrain
rotation recrystallization and core-mantle texture of K-feldspar; (f) Myrmekite grew along the boundaries of K-feldspar. Tur: tourmaline; Mus: muscovite; Pl: plagioclase; Kfs: K-
feldspar; Qtz: quartz; Gt: garnet. The scale bars in all pictures are 500 μm.

4.3. LA–ICP–MS zircon U\\Pb dating
Zircons were separated from GMTL samples T12–24 and T12–42
using conventional heavy-liquid and magnetic separation techniques
and then handpicked under a binocular microscope. About 250 grains
from each sample were mounted in epoxy and polished to expose the
center of the crystals. The internal growth structure of zircon grains
was revealed by the cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging technique at
the Institute of Tibetan Plateau Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences
(ITPCAS).
U\\Pb dating of zircons was performed by an Agilent 7500a Quadru-
ple Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometer (ICP-MS) equipped
with a New Wave UP 193 nm ArF excimer laser-ablation system at the
ITPCAS. The ablation system was operated at a wavelength of 193 nm
using a spot diameter of 25 μm, and each analysis consisted of 15 s
with the laser off, 40 s with the laser on, and a 45 s washout delay at
 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
the end. The ICP-MS was operated using a peak hopping sequence in
DUAL detector mode. The standard zircon Plesovice (Sláma et al.,
2008) was used for correcting isotope fractionation. The Harvard zircon
91,500 (Wiedenbeck et al., 2004) was used as the secondary standard
for data quality control. Common Pb corrections were corrected follow-
ing the methods of Andersen (2002). U\\Pb ages were calculated using
the GLITTER 4.0 software (Jackson et al., 2004). Age plots were made
using the Excel macro program “Isoplot 3.0” (Ludwig, 2003). Uncer-
tainties of individual analyses are given at the 1σ level in Table S3 and
plotted at the 2σ level in Fig. 10.
5. Results
5.1. Whole-rock geochemistry
The major and trace elemental contents of the GMTL are listed in
Table S1 and illustrated in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5. In general, the major-
element compositions of the GMTL have the following characteris-
tics: (1) enriched in SiO2 (73.86–75.05 wt%) and Al 2 O 3
(14.47–14.87 wt%), with high A/CNK (1.13–1.27) ratios, showing
that these granites are typical peraluminous granites; (2) relatively
high Na2 O (3.61–4.50 wt%) and K 2O (3.95–4.80 wt%) but low CaO
(0.31–0.86 wt%); (3) low contents and limited variations in FeO T
(b1 wt%), MgO (b0.17 wt%), and TiO2 (b0.05 wt%). We used the Th
content as an index in the Harker variation diagram because of its
steady change during fractional crystallization and assimilation
(Hastie et al., 2007). There are positive correlations between Na2O
and CaO contents, while there are negative correlations between
K 2 O and P2 O 5 contents as well as the alumina saturation index
(ASI) value (Fig. 4). Systematic trends were not observed between
TiO2, MgO, and FeOT contents and Th concentration (Fig. 4).
For trace elements, the GMTL is characterized by low Ba, Sr, Nb,
and Nd concentrations and relatively high Rb and U contents
(Table S1). Similar to the major elements, correlations are also
found between Th contents and some trace element concentration,
for example, Ba, Sr, Nd, and Y concentrations show positive correla-
tions with Th contents, and Nb shows a negative trend (Fig. 5). The
GMTL samples have variable B (315–1800 ppm) and Li
(15–259 ppm) contents and analogous F (419–1125 ppm) and Cl
(14–25 ppm) concentrations (Table S1).
The total REE abundance of the GMTL ranges from 13.37 to
46.81 ppm, and the chondrite-normalized REE patterns are nearly
flat, with a range of (La/Yb)N from 1.93 to 4.84 (Fig. 6a). The pat-
terns also show significant negative Eu anomalies (Eu/Eu* =
0.36–0.68). Both LREE and HREE decrease with decreasing Th con-
tents (Fig. 5).
Based on the Zr and LREE concentrations, we estimated the magma
temperatures of the GMTL by zircon saturation thermometry (Watson
and Harrison, 1983) and LREE saturation thermometry (Montel,
1993), yields a TZr of 645–694 °C and TLREE of 637–727 °C, respectively
(Table S1).
5.2. Tourmaline composition
Tourmaline structural formulae were calculated on the basis of 31
anions, assuming stoichiometric amounts of B2O3 (B = 3 apfu), H2O
(OH + F = 4 apfu) and Li2O (Li = 15 − (T + Z + Y), and that all Fe
is present as Fe2+ (Tindle et al., 2002). The complete composition data
of tourmaline are given in Table S2. Overall, all tourmalines fall within
the Li-poor granitoids and associated pegmatites and aplites field in
the ternary Al-Fe-Mg diagram (Fig. 7a). All the tourmalines are classified
as “alkali” in the nomenclature of Hawthorne and Henry (1999)
(Fig. 7b) and belong to schorl (Fig. 8a). However, there is a significant
compositional variation between the different types of tourmaline. In
particular, they can be broadly distinguished in terms of their ferromag-
nesian contents, with Mg/(Fe + Mg) ratio increasing from the Tur I (0.1
7
to 0.34) to the Tur II (0.43 to 0.46) (Fig. 8). Tur I has relatively higher and
wider Na/(Na + Ca) ratios (Fig. 8d) and Mn contents (Fig. 8c) compared
to the Tur II, but the Xv/(Xv + Na) ratios (Fig. 8a) and Ti contents
(Fig. 8b) of both types of tourmaline are similar.
5.3. Zircon U\\Pb age
To constrain the crystallization age of the GMTL, samples T12–24
and T12–42 were selected for zircon U\\Pb dating, the surrounding
rocks of both dating samples are garnet-muscovite-biotite schist.
5.3.1. Sample T12-24
Zircons from sample T12-24 are euhedral and long prismatic,
having aspect ratios from 2:1 to 3:1 (Fig. 9a). The majority of
these zircons have core-mantle-rim texture, but some zircons
show core-rim texture or only have oscillatory overgrowth zoning.
Cathodoluminescence (CL) images show that some zircons display
a spongy texture within the mantle and core, but they still have a
thin and well-developed oscillatory zoning in the rim (Fig. 9a), in-
dicating that these zircons experienced different degrees of hydro-
thermal alteration before the rim overgrowth. Some zircon grains
have regular and oscillatory zoning in their cores. To constrain
the crystallization age of this sample, 15 analyses were performed
on 10 zircon grains. Because of the limited size of the rim of zir-
cons, we carefully selected four spots on a relatively thick rim
with well-developed oscillatory zoning. In the following discus-
sions, ages younger than 900 Ma are computed from 206Pb/238U ra-
tios, whereas older ages are calculated based on 206Pb/207Pb ratios.
These analyses indicate that these zircon rims have (1) variable
and high U concentrations (3344–13,541 ppm) and relatively sta-
ble and low Th concentrations (66.8–153.7 ppm); (2) low Th/U ra-
tios (b0.05) (Table S3). The 206 U\\238 Pb ages of the rims range
from 11.1 Ma to 11.3 Ma, cluster around 11.21 Ma on the
Concordia diagram, and yield a weighted mean age of 11.21 ±
0.15 Ma (MSWD = 0.032) (Fig. 10a). Two and nine analyses
were performed within the mantle and core, respectively. The
core has (1) relatively low U (67.5–1640 ppm) and low and vari-
able Th concentration (68.1–1108 ppm); (2) high Th/U ratios
(0.40–1.88); (3) a wide range of ages from 700 ± 24 Ma to
2509 ± 49 Ma, and 3 spots are scattered between 700 Ma and
750 Ma (Table S3). It is noted that one metamorphic core spot
shows an age of 16.0 ± 0.5 Ma. Owing to the mantles of zircon
are commonly thin or show spongy texture, the two analyses on
the mantles yield mixed ages of 224 ± 3.0 Ma and 111 ± 1.0 Ma
(Table S3).
5.4. Sample T12-42
Zircon grains from sample T12–42 are euhedral to subhedral
and long or stubby prismatic with length-width ratios that range
from ~2:1 to ~3:1 (Fig. 9b). According to the overgrowth structure,
the zircons can be divided into two types: core-rim and core-
mantle-rim. The overgrowth rim of most zircons shows well-
developed oscillatory zoning, indicative of a magmatic origin, and
the core is usually irregular with weak oscillatory zoning
(Fig. 9b). On the basis of high-resolution CL images, we selected
10 zircon grains from sample T12–42 and performed a total of 15
analyses, and 5 analyses were performed on the rim with well-
developed oscillatory zoning. These magmatic rims are character-
ized by (1) U and Th concentrations that range from 2327 to
4753 ppm and from 6.3 to 14.1 ppm, respectively; (2) Th/U ratios
that are generally lower than 0.01; (3) ages ranging from
12.4 Ma to 13.5 Ma, and the weighted mean age of 5 spots is
12.66 ± 0.52 Ma (MSWD = 3.4) (Fig. 10b). In addition, 2 analyses
were performed within the mantle and 8 analyses within the core.
The mantles have a relatively low and narrow range of U
8 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533

Fig. 4. Harker Variation diagrams for major elements of the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites.

(1200–1287 ppm), Th (6.2–8.4 ppm), and Th/U ratios (b0.01) (Ta-
ble S3). Taking into account the fact that mantles are too thin to ac-
curately analyze, we propose that both two ages (43.3 Ma and
379 Ma) are mixed-age. The spots from the core have a relatively
lower U concentration (114–1282 ppm), higher Th concentration
(69–577 ppm), and higher Th/U ratios (0.06–0.98) (Table S3).
The cores yield variable ages and ranging from 718 Ma to
2167 Ma and mainly cluster around two groups: 3 spots are
scattered between 718 Ma and 787 Ma, and 3 spots show spread
ages between 1595 Ma and 1690 Ma (Table S3).
 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
Fig. 5. Harker Variation diagrams for trace elements of the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites.
6. Discussion
6.1. Fractional crystallization
Based on petrography study, The GMTL is a typical tourmaline
leucogranite without biotite. Inclusion relationships and mineral com-
positions imply that two different types of tourmaline occur in the
GMTL. Geochemical and experimental studies on Himalayan
leucogranites suggest that tourmaline leucogranite may represent a
highly fractionated leucogranite. Scaillet et al. (1990) identified geo-
chemical trends between two-mica leucogranites and tourmaline
leucogranites in the Garhwal area, India, suggested that tourmaline
leucogranites can be formed by fractional crystallization of two-mica
leucogranites. Liu et al. (2016) reported the compositions of Xiaru tour-
maline leucogranites in the north Himalayan leucogranite belt and indi-
cated that these tourmaline leucogranites belong to highly fractionated
leucogranite. For the GMTL, the field observations, mineral assemblage,
and geochemical features indicate its highly evolved character. First,
field observations show, in some cases, a tourmaline-rich zone appears
9
in the boundary between the GMTL and surrounding rock. The
tourmaline-rich zone can be potentially formed by fluid-rock interac-
tion between boron-rich fluid produced by the degassing of highly
evolved magma and biotite in the surrounding rock (Cheng et al.,
2019; London and Manning, 1995). Therefore, the presence of a
tourmaline-rich zone supports that the GMTL is highly evolved and
probably in a fluid-saturated condition. Second, the GMTL is a typical
tourmaline leucogranite with a mineral assemblage of tourmaline +
muscovite + plagioclase + K-feldspar + quartz ± garnet (Fig. 2). Al-
though two types of tourmaline have been recognized in these
leucogranites, most tourmalines (Tur I) are considered to have crystal-
lized at a late stage of magma evolution on the basis of the abundance
of mineral inclusions (quartz, plagioclase, K-feldspar, and zircon), the
euhedral and prismatic in shape (Fig. 2a, b, f) (Cheng et al., 2019;
London and Manning, 1995) and the enrichment in Fe (Fig. 8) (Benard
et al., 1985). Furthermore, Mn-rich magmatic garnet (MnO N 10 wt%,
FeO ~ 24–30 wt%, CaO b 1 wt%, MgO b 0.5 wt%) has been found in several
leucogranite samples (unpublished data of authors), which contains
abundant mineral inclusions (Fig. 2d) and was thought to have
10 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533

field of strongly differentiated granite in the ternary Rb-Ba-Sr diagram

Fig. 6. (a) Primitive-mantle-normalized trace element patterns and (b) chondrite-
normalized REE patterns of the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites. Chondrite
data and Primitive mantle data are from Sun and McDonough (1989).
preferentially crystallized in highly evolved magma with high Mn con-
tent (Gao et al., 2012). Hence, the widespread occurrence of late-stage
tourmaline and Mn-rich garnet show that the GMTL magma experi-
enced high-degree fractional crystallization. Third, abundant whole-
rock geochemical evidence suggests that the GMTL belongs to highly
evolved granite. For example, most samples are plotted within the
(Fig. 11) (Wang et al., 2013). In the Zr + Nb + Ce + Y versus FeOT/
MgO and (K2O + Na2O)/CaO diagrams (Whalen et al., 1987), all GMTL
samples are also plotted into the area of fractionated felsic granites
(Fig. 12a). The indicators of differentiation, Zr/Hf and K/Rb ratios of
the GMTL significantly deviate from the chondrite (Fig. 13a, b), and
Zr/Hf ratios (15– 47) fall in the ratio range of moderately to highly
evolved granite (Zr/Hf b 55) (Breiter et al., 2014). In addition, the low
Nb/Ta ratios and the trend that Zr/Hf ratios decrease with decreasing
of Nb/Ta ratios are indicative of fractionation (Ballouard et al., 2016;
Wu et al., 2017), and the Nb/Tb ratios are ~5, which is considered to re-
flect a geochemical feature at the transition of highly and extremely
fractionated granites (Fig. 13a) (Wu et al., 2017). The GMTL shows flat
REEs chondrite-normalized patterns, similar to other highly fraction-
ated leucogranites in the Himalayan orogen, such as Xiaru tourmaline
leucogranites (Liu et al., 2016), Ramba garnet leucogranites (Liu et al.,
2014).
The GMTL samples show systematic trends in some major and
trace elements versus Th. The positive correlations of Th with
Na 2O, CaO, and Na2O/K2O (Fig. 4), the positive trends between Ba
and Th, as well as between Sr and Th (Fig. 5), together with negative
anomalies in Ba, Sr and Eu (Fig. 6a), strongly suggest a significant
fractionation of plagioclase during magma evolution. The extensive
removal of plagioclase is further supported by the positive relation-
ship between Sr and Eu (Fig. 13c), and a negative correlation be-
tween Sr and Rb (Fig. 13d). Considering that K-feldspar commonly
crystallizes in the late-stage of magma evolution, and the negative
correlation between K2 O and Th (Fig. 4), as well as the variation
trend of Sr versus Rb (Fig. 13d), we propose that K-feldspar is not
an important phase during magma fractionation. Biotite fraction-
ation cannot be determined by the scattered distribution of the
GMTL in the diagrams of MgO, FeO T , and TiO 2 versus Th (Fig. 4).
Nd, Th, and LREE mainly concentrate in monazite, and therefore
the positive trends of Th with Nd and LREE (Fig. 5) imply that mon-
azite separation occurred during magma evolution. Furthermore,
monazite fractionation will decrease the LREEs contents of magma
and result in the flat REEs chondrite-normalized pattern (Yurimoto
et al., 1990), so the flat REEs patterns of the GMTL (Fig. 6b) also sug-
gest that the occurrence of monazite fractionation. Apatite is one of
the main accessory minerals in the GMTL, occurring as the most sig-
nificant hosting mineral of phosphorus in granite. The negative

Fig. 7. Ternary classification diagrams of tourmalines from the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites. (a) Al-Fe-Mg diagram after Henry and Guidotti (1985). Labelled fields are: (1) Li-
rich granitoids, pegmatites and aplites, (2) Li-poor granitoids, pegmatites and aplites, (3) Fe3 + −rich quartz-tourmaline rocks (altered granitoids), (4) metapelites and metapsammites
with Al-saturating phase, (5) metapelites and metapsammites lacking Al-saturating phase, (6) Fe3 + −rich quartz-tourmaline rocks, calcsilicate rocks and metapelites, (7) low-Ca
metaultramafic rocks and Cr-V-rich metasediments, (8) metacarbonates and meta-pyroxenites; (b) Classification diagram according to the principal constituent on the X-site
(Hawthorne and Henry, 1999).
 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533 11

Fig. 8. Chemical compositions of tourmaline expressed in terms of (a) Mg/(Mg + Fe) vs Xv/(Na + Xv); (b) Mg/(Mg + Fe) vs Ti (pfu); (c) Mg/(Mg + Fe) vs Mn (pfu) and (d) Mg/(Mg + Fe)
vs Na/(Na + Ca). Xv: X-site vacancy.

Fig. 9. Cathodoluminescence (CL) images showing the textures, spots, and respective ages of LA-ICP-MS zircon U/Ph dating. (a) is from sample T12–24, (b) is from sample T12–42.

correlation between Th and P2O5 (Fig. 4) suggests that apatite has GMTL is extremely enriched in SiO2. Thus, it is not an effective indicator
not been fractionated in the magma evolution process. of fractionation with such high content; (2) Biotite was not found in the
However, significant variation in the SiO2 contents of the GMTL was GMTL, only plagioclase and monazite segregated from magma cannot
not observed. There are two main reasons for this phenomenon: (1) The lead to an obvious decrease in SiO2 content of the magma.
12 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
Fig. 10. Zircon U\
\Pb Concordia diagrams for (a) Sample T12–24, (b) Sample T12–42. Error ellipses are shown for 1-sigma level of uncertainty.
Fig. 11. Rb–Ba–Sr diagram for the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites after Wang
et al. (2013).
6.2. Mechanism of evolution
The occurrence of magma differentiation depends on a number of
factors, such as the density difference between mineral and melt, the
viscosity of the magma, the crystal size, and the dynamics of the mag-
matic system (Wu et al., 2017). Fractional crystallization is considered
to hardly proceed in granitic magma because of the high viscosity of gra-
nitic magma and the lack of difference in density between mineral and
residual melt (Clemens and Petford, 1999; Scaillet et al., 1998). How-
ever, fractional crystallization of granitic rocks has been proposed to
be feasible on the basis of outcrop observations (Putirka, 2008), mineral
assemblage, and whole-rock geochemical data (Liu et al., 2016; Scaillet
et al., 1990). Viscosity is the most significant factor that controls the dif-
ferentiation of granitic magma, which is mainly affected by temperature
and volatile content. Although magma viscosity will increase with the
decrease of temperature during magma crystallization, previous studies
suggest that this effect is significantly buffered by enrichment of vola-
tiles (Johannes and Holtz, 1996). Scaillet et al. (1996) speculated that
the viscosity of the Himalayan leucogranite magma was closely 104.5
Fig. 12. Diagrams of (a) (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y) versus TFeO/MgO, (b) (Zr + Nb + Ce + Y)
versus (Na2O + K2O)/CaO after Whalen et al. (1987) for the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline
leucogranites. FG: Fractionated I-, S-, and M-type granites; OGT: unfractionated I-, S-,
and M-type granites.
Pa·s, which may have decreased by one or two orders of magnitude
during crystallization. Volatile, such as H2O, F, B, Cl, and Li, is another
factor to control the magma viscosity, the addition of 1 wt% B2O3 can re-
duce the magma viscosity by at least one order of magnitude (Dingwell
et al., 1992). The occurrence of early- and late-stage tourmaline in the
GMTL suggests that the leucogranite magma is enriched in boron during
crystallization. Together with the relatively high F and Cl contents
(Table S1), we propose that the GMTL magma has relatively low viscos-
ity, which makes magma differentiation possible.
Mechanisms that control the separation of crystals from melt mainly
include gravity and magmatic flow (e.g. Clemens, 2003). Even though
the low viscosity of the GMTL magma could result in an apparent differ-
ence in the density between crystals and residual melt, the dike/sill
shape and large aspect ratio suggest that the GMTL magma may
 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
Fig. 13. Zr/Hf versus Nb/Ta (a), Y/Ho versus K/Rb (b), Eu versus Sr (c), Sr versus Rb (d) for the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites. The Himalayan leucogranites data in diagram (a) is
from Wu et al., (2017).
experience low-distance migration, and the low viscosity makes magma
migration easier. Therefore we propose that flowage differentiation is
the possible mechanism of magma fractionation.
6.3. The composition of primitive magma
Phase relations of granitic magma strongly depends on the magma
composition. Based on the experimental studies, biotite and plagioclase
are the liquidus phases for water-rich and water-poor granitic melt, re-
spectively (Scaillet et al., 1995), tourmaline also can be a liquidus phase
in boron-rich melt (Benard et al., 1985; Scaillet et al., 1995; Wolf and
London, 1997). Biotite and tourmaline are the main mafic phases in
the Himalayan leucogranites. Based on enclosing relationships and
grain shapes, biotite commonly crystallized early and tourmaline usu-
ally occurs as a late-phase during magma crystallization. However,
early-stage, even liquidus-phase tourmaline has been observed in
some contributions (Scaillet et al., 1990; Scaillet et al., 1995), which is
consistent with the experimental results.
Tourmaline is the unique mafic mineral in the GMTL (Fig. 2). Accord-
ing to the enclosing relationship and mineral composition, two types of
tourmaline, Tur I and Tur II, were identified in the GMTL. Tur I contains
abundant inclusions of quartz, plagioclase, K-feldspar, and zircon
(Fig. 2a, b, f), and is characterized by high Fe and low Mg contents
(Fig. 8), suggests it began to crystallize late; Tur II commonly occurs as
small euhedral or subhedral inclusions in other phases (plagioclase, K-
feldspar, muscovite, and garnet) (Fig. 2c, d, e, f), and has relatively
high Mg and low Fe contents compared to the Tur I (Fig. 8), shows it
began to crystallize early. Grain shapes and mineral compositions
13
suggest a magmatic origin for both types of tourmaline (Fig. 7). There-
fore, tourmaline that crystallized in early stages can be used to infer
the compositional information of the GMTL magma at the beginning
of magma evolution.
Factors affecting tourmaline crystallization in granitic melt include
boron content, water activity, oxygen fugacity, mafic component, and
ASI value, and the most important factor is boron content (Benard
et al., 1985; London, 2011; Scaillet et al., 1995; Wolf and London,
1997). Experimental studies suggest that the boron content requires
for tourmaline saturation in granitic melt dramatically increases with
the increase of temperature (London, 2011; Wolf and London, 1997).
If we assume that the early-stage tourmaline crystallized at 750 °C,
the B2O3 content for tourmaline saturation at this temperature is at
least 2 wt% (Cheng et al., unpublished data; London, 2011; Wolf and
London, 1997). In addition, high H2O content is required for tourmaline
crystallization in the boron-rich granitic melt, otherwise, dumortierite
will crystallize (Cheng et al., unpublished data). Therefore, we propose
that the GMTL magma is characterized by high boron and H2O contents
before large-scale differentiation.
Biotite is a possible early-phase in the GMTL, which tend to crystal-
lize in the granitic melt with low boron, high H2O and Ti contents
(Scaillet et al., 1995). However, no biotite was observed in the GMTL,
which can be ascribed to no biotite crystalized during magma evolution,
or all biotite was separated from magma during magma differentiation.
We tend to deem that no biotite crystallized during magma evolution
because (1) if biotite crystallized at the early-stage and separated during
the magma evolution, some biotite should remain in the GMTL as inclu-
sions, like Tur II, but we did not find any biotite in thin section. It is hard
14 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
to believe that all biotite separated from magma and nothing remained;
(2) geochemical and experimental studies suggest that there is an anti-
pathetic relationship between tourmaline and biotite in granitic sys-
tems, the enrichment of boron in the early-stage magma and
consumption of mafic component during tourmaline crystallization
would limit the formation of biotite.
Based on the above discussion, we infer that the GMTL magma has
high boron and H2O contents at the beginning of magma crystallization,
which magma composition could represent the composition of primi-
tive magma because of nothing input or output from magma generation
to the beginning of magma crystallization.
6.4. Formation mechanism and source region
As discussed above, the existence of early-stage tourmaline (Tur II)
indicates that the primitive magma of the GMTL may have relatively
high boron and H2O contents. Acosta-Vigil et al. (2001) indicated that
the boron concentration in crustal anatectic melts depends on (1) the
proportion of tourmaline in protolith; (2) the degree of partial melting;
(3) the presence or absence of boron-rich fluid during partial melting.
Based on these interpretations, the boron-rich primitive magma could
be produced by fluid-absent melting of tourmaline-rich protolith, by
low degree mica-dehydration melting of tourmaline-free protolith, or
by the input of boron-rich fluid during partial melting of the protolith.
The first hypothesis may not be true considering the following two
problems. First, field observation shows that both gneisses and schists
(the possible protolith of the GMTL) in the footwall of the GMDF are
tourmaline free. Second, the zircon saturation thermometry (Watson
and Harrison, 1983) and monazite saturation thermometry (Montel,
1993) yielded relatively low magma temperature of the GMTL
(Table S1). However, tourmaline commonly remains stable up to am-
phibolite facies (Henry and Dutrow, 1996), thus it can hardly participate
in the partial melting reaction to produce boron-rich melt at the low-
temperature condition.
The second hypothesis, a low degree of partial melting of mica-rich
protolith, can also be excluded. Clay minerals and mica are the impor-
tant provenances of boron in crustal anatexis (Ota et al., 2008; Palmer,
2017), thus the low degree of partial melting of mica-bearing
metasedimentary rocks could produce boron-rich melt. However,
Moran et al. (1992) suggested that the boron content in mica schist de-
creases with increasing metamorphic temperature. Two-mica schist
and biotite gneiss, the possible source rocks of the GMTL, in the footwall
of the GMDF have boron contents of 13.46 and 9.69 ppm (unpublished
data of authors), respectively, and therefore it is difficult to produce
boron-rich melt by partial melting in such boron-poor sources, even
with a low degree of partial melting.
The third hypothesis, input of boron-rich fluid during partial melt-
ing, is the most likely mechanism for the enrichment of boron. The in-
compatibility of boron results in it tends to partition into the fluid
during the dehydration of metasedimentary rocks. Input of boron-rich
fluids into the source of granite at P–T conditions above the granite
wet solidus may induce the production of B-rich melts, and the addition
of boron in melting reaction could lower the solidus of granite. Taking
into account the relatively low temperature of the GMTL magma esti-
mated by the zircon and LREE saturation thermometry (Table S1),
fluid-fluxed melting is a potential mechanism for the formation of the
boron-rich primitive magma of the GMTL.
Whole-rock isotopic studies suggest that the GHC is the dominant
source of Himalayan leucogranites (e.g. Harris and Massey, 1994), but
some contributions imply the LHS also participated in the formation
process of these leucogranites (Aikman et al., 2012; Guo and Wilson,
2012; Hopkinson et al., 2019; Kawakami et al., 2019). Zircon U\\Pb dat-
ing results show that the GMTL has 1500–2500 Ma (six spots) and
700–800 Ma (six spots) cores (Fig. 9, Table S3), and these
Paleoproterozoic and Neoproterozoic ages are consistent with the
peak of detrital zircon ages from the LHS (Ahmad et al., 2000; Kohn
et al., 2010) and the GHC (Richards et al., 2006), respectively. The
Paleoproterozoic zircon cores also have been found from leucogranites
in Bhutan, which was ascribed to the LHS material was involved in the
formation of the Bhutan leucogranites (Hopkinson et al., 2017).
Whole-rock Sr and Nd isotopic analyses show that rock units (include
leucogranites and metamorphic rocks) in the footwall of the GMDF
have signatures that relate to those of the GHC and the LHS (Murphy,
2007). The above interpretations imply that the source region of the
GMTL is a two-component mixture between the GHC and the LHS.
Kawakami et al. (2019) identified the formation mechanism of tourma-
line in politic schists from the Main Central Thrust zone, indicated that
the boron-bearing fluid produced by the dehydration of the LHS could
infiltrate through the Main Central Thrust and induce the partial melt-
ing of the GHC to form tourmaline leucogranite. Their observations are
consistent with our findings for the boron-rich and two-component
mixed source characteristics of the primitive magma of the GMTL.
Therefore, we propose that the boron-bearing fluid derived from the
LHS infiltrated into the GHC, and then resulted in the fluid-flux melting
of metasedimentary rocks and produced the boron-rich primitive
magma of the GMTL, this boron-rich magma occurred fractional crystal-
lization during the extraction process from the mixed source region and
emplaced along the GMDF to form the GMTL.
The Gurla Mandhata area experiences complex evolution history
of metamorphism, deformation, and crustal anatexis since the conti-
nental collision between India and Asia, which mainly includes
break-off of Neo-Tethyan oceanic lithosphere and related
magmatism from 50 to 35 Ma, shortening of the Tethyan Himalayan
Sequence through crustal duplexing and burial metamorphism from
35 to 23 Ma, underthrusting of the LHS beneath the GHC and related
crustal thickening and crustal anataxis from 23 to 16 Ma, and arc-
parallel extension results in the exhumation of metamorphic rocks
in the footwall of the GMDF since 16 Ma (Pullen et al., 2011 and ref-
erences therein). The zircon U\\Pb dating results in this study show
that the GMTL crystallization took place at around 11–12 Ma
(Fig. 10), simultaneous with arc-parallel extension period, suggest-
ing that the formation of the GMTL may relate to the arc-parallel ex-
tension in the Gurla Mandhata area. During the arc-parallel
extension, high heat flux could result in dehydration of deeper
crustal rocks and released fluids induced partial melting of upper
rock units.
7. Conclusions
1. Deformed tourmaline leucogranites were observed to intrude in the
margin of the Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex as dikes
or sills, U\\Pb dating of zircon indicates that these leucogranites
were emplaced at 11–12 Ma.
2. Field observations, mineral assemblage, and geochemical features in-
dicate that the Gurla Mandhata tourmaline leucogranites experi-
enced high-degree fractional crystallization, which induced by the
long-distance migration from generation to emplacement, and the
enrichment of volatile component (B, F, Cl, and H2O) facilitates the
transportation ability of the leucogranite magma.
3. Two types of tourmaline, Tur I and Tur II, were identified in the GMTL,
inclusion relationships and mineral compositions suggest that Tur I
and Tur II crystallized at the late and early stages of magma evolution.
4. The occurrence of early-stage tourmaline suggests that the primitive
magma of the GMTL is enriched in boron, which boron-rich magma is
considered to produce by the partial melting of a two-component
source which mixed by the metasedimentary rocks from the GHC
and boron-bearing fluid from the LHS.
Acknowledgment
This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (Grant No. 41672197). We are grateful to Qing-Bao
 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
Duan, Yong-Mei Shang and Yu Yang for their assistance with the field-
work; Ya-Hui Yue for the help with the zircon U\\Pb dating. We thank
two anonymous reviewers for their careful reviews and valuable com-
ments and Michael Roden for his constructive suggestions and editorial
handling.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.lithos.2020.105533.
References
Acosta-Vigil, A., Pereira, M., Shaw, D., London, D., 2001. Contrasting behaviour of boron
during crustal anatexis. Lithos 56, 15–31.
Ahmad, T., Harris, N., Bickle, M., Chapman, H., Bunbury, J., Prince, C., 2000. Isotopic con-
straints on the structural relationships between the Lesser Himalayan Series and
the High Himalayan Crystalline Series, Garhwal Himalaya. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 112,
467–477.
Aikman, A.B., Harrison, T.M., Ding, L., 2008. Evidence for early (N 44 Ma) Himalayan
crustal thickening, Tethyan Himalaya, southeastern Tibet. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 274
(1–2), 14–23.
Aikman, A.B., Harrison, T.M., Hermann, J., 2012. The origin of Eo- and Neo-himalayan
granitoids, Eastern Tibet. J. Asian Earth Sci. 58, 143–157.
Andersen, T., 2002. Correction of common lead in U–Pb analyses that do not report 204Pb.
Chem. Geol. 192 (1–2), 59–79.
Ballouard, C., Poujol, M., Boulvais, P., Branquet, Y., Tartèse, R., Vigneresse, J.L., 2016. Nb-Ta
fractionation in peraluminous granites: a marker of the magmatic-hydrothermal
transition. Geology 44, 231–234.
Benard, F., Moutou, P., Pichavant, M., 1985. Phase relations of tourmaline leucogranites
and the significance of tourmaline in silicic magmas. J. Geol. 93 (3), 271–291.
Breiter, K., Lamarão, C.N., Borges, R.M.K., Dall’Agnol, R., 2014. Chemical characteristics of
zircon from A-type granites and comparison to zircon of S-type granites. Lithos
192–195, 208–225.
Burchfiel, B.C., Chen, Z.L., Hodges, K.V., Liu, Y.P., Royden, L.H., Deng, C.R., 1992. The south
Tibetan detachment system, Himalayan orogen: extension contemporaneous with
and parallel to shortening in a collisional mountain belt. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Paper
269, 1–41.
Catlos, E.J., Dubey, C.S., Harrison, T., Edwards, M., 2004. Late Miocene movement within
the Himalayan main central thrust shear zone, Sikkim, north-East India. J. Metam.
Geol. 22, 207–226.
Cheng, L.N., Zhang, C., Yang, X.S., Qi, D.M., Zhou, Y.S., Holtz, F., 2019. Experimental inves-
tigation of reactions between two-mica granite and boron-rich fluids: implications
for the formation of tourmaline granite. Sci. China Earth Sci. 62, 1630–1644.
Clemens, J.D., Petford, N., 1999. Granitic melt viscosity and silicic magma dynamics in con-
trasting tectonic settings. J. Geol. Soc. London 156, 1057–1060.
Cooper, F.J., Hodges, K.V., Parrish, R.R., Roberts, N.M.W., Horstwood, M.S.A., 2015. Syn-
chronous N-S and E-W extension at the Tibet-to-Himalaya transition in NW
Bhutan. Tectonics 34 (7), 1375–1395.
Dingwell, D.B., Knoche, R., Webb, S.L., Pichavant, M., 1992. The effects of B2O3 on the vis-
cosity of haplogranitic liquids. Am. Mineral. 77, 457–461.
Gao, L.E., Zeng, L.S., 2014. Fluxed melting of metapelite and the formation of Miocene
high-CaO two-mica granites in the Malashan gneiss dome, southern Tibet. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 130, 136–155.
Gao, L.E., Zeng, L.S., Shi, W.G., Chen, Z.Y., Hu, M.Y., Sun, D.Y., 2012. Two types of garnet in
the Cenozoic granites from the Himalayan Orogenic Belt: geochemical characteristics
and implications for crustal anatexis (in Chinese with English abstract). Acta Petrol.
Sin. 28, 2963–2980.
Gao, L.E., Zeng, L.S., Asimow, P.D., 2017. Contrasting geochemical signatures of fluid-
absent versus fluid-fluxed melting of muscovite in metasedimentary sources: the Hi-
malayan leucogranites. Geology 45, 39–42.
Guillot, S., Le Fort, P., 1995. Geochemical constraints on the bimodal origin of High Hima-
layan leucogranites. Lithos 35 (3), 221–234.
Guo, Z., Wilson, M., 2012. The Himalayan leucogranites: constraints on the nature of their
crustal source region and geodynamic setting. Gondw. Res. 22, 360–376.
Harris, N., Massey, J., 1994. Decompression and anatexis of Himalayan metapelites. Tec-
tonics 13, 1537–1546.
Harrison, T.M., Grove, M., McKeegan, K.D., Coath, C.D., Lovera, O.M., Le Fort, P., 1999. Ori-
gin and episodic emplacement of the Manaslu intrusive complex, central Himalaya.
J. Petrol. 40, 3–19.
Hastie, A.R., Kerr, A.C., Pearce, J.A., Mitchell, S.F., 2007. Classification of altered volcanic is-
land arc rocks using immobile trace elements: development of the Th–Co discrimina-
tion diagram. J. Petrol. 48, 2341–2357.
Hawthorne, F.C., Henry, D.J., 1999. Classification of the minerals of the tourmaline group.
Eur. J. Mineral. 11, 201–215.
15
Henry, D.J., Dutrow, B.L., 1996. Metamorphic tourmaline and its petrologic applications.
Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 33 (1), 503–557.
Henry, D.J., Guidotti, C.V., 1985. Tourmaline as a petrogenetic indicator mineral – an ex-
ample from the staurolite-grade metapelites of NW Maine. Am. Mineral. 70, 1–15.
Hodges, K.V., 2000. Tectonics of the Himalaya and southern Tibet from two perspectives.
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 112 (3), 324–350.
Hopkinson, T.N., Harris, N.B.W., Warren, C.J., Spencer, C.J., Roberts, N.M.W., Horstwood,
M.S.A., Parrish, R.R., EIMF, 2017. The identification and significance of pure
sediment-derived granites. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 467, 57–63.
Hopkinson, T., Harris, N., Robert, N.M.W., Warren, C.J., Hammond, S., Spencer, C.J., Parrish,
R.R., 2019. Evolution of the melt source during protracted crustal anatexis: An exam-
ple from the Bhutan Himalaya. Geology 48 (1), 87–91.
Hu, X.M., Garzanti, E., Wang, J.G., Huang, W.T., An, W., Webb, A., 2016. The timing of India-
Asia collision onset – Facts, theories, controversies. Earth-Sci. Rev. 160, 264–299.
Inger, S., Harris, N., 1993. Geochemical constraints on leucogranite magmatism in the
Langtang Valley, Nepal Himalaya. J. Petrol. 34, 345–368.
Jackson, S.E., Pearson, N.J., Griffin, W.L., Belousova, E.A., 2004. The application of laser
ablation-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry to in situ U–Pb zircon geo-
chronology. Chem. Geol. 211 (1–2), 47–69.
Johannes, W., Holtz, F., 1996. Petrogenesis and Experimental Petrology of Granitic Rocks.
Springer (335pp).
Kawakami, T., Sakai, H., Sato, Katsushi, 2019. Syn-metamorphic B-bearing fluid infiltra-
tions deduced from tourmaline in the Main Central Thrust zone, Eastern Nepal
Himalayas. Lithos 348-349, 105175.
Kohn, M.J., Paul, S.K., Corrie, S.L., 2010. The lower Lesser Himalayan sequence: a
Paleoproterozoic arc on the northern margin of the Indian plate. Geol. Soc. Am.
Bull. 122, 323–335.
Lee, J., Whitehouse, M.J., 2007. Onset of mid-crustal extensional flow in southern Tibet:
evidence from U/Pb zircon ages. Geology 35, 45–48.
Liu, Z.C., Wu, F.Y., Ji, W.Q., Wang, J.G., Liu, C.Z., 2014. Petrogenesis of the Ramba
leucogranite in the Tethyan Himalaya and constraints on the channel flow model.
Lithos 208-209, 118–136.
Liu, Z.C., Wu, F.Y., Ding, L., Liu, X.C., Wang, J.G., Ji, W.Q., 2016. Highly fractionated late Eo-
cene (~ 35Ma) leucogranite in the Xiaru Dome, Tethyan Himalaya, South Tibet. Lithos
240, 337–354.
London, D., 2011. Experimental synthesis and stability of tourmaline: a historical over-
view. Can. Mineral. 49 (1), 117–136.
London, D., Manning, D.A., 1995. Chemical variation and significance of tourmaline from
Southwest England. Econ. Geol. 90 (3), 495–519.
Ludwig, K.R., 2003. ISOPLOT: A Geochronological Toolkit for Microsoft Excel. 4. Berkeley
Geochronology Center Special Publication p. 71.
Mccallister, A.T., Taylor, M.H., Murphy, M.A., Styron, R.H., Stockli, D.F., 2014.
Thermochronologic constraints on the late Cenozoic exhumation history of the
Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex, Southwestern Tibet. Tectonics 33 (2),
1–23.
Mitsuishi, M., Wallis, S.R., Aoya, M., Lee, J., Wang, Y., 2012. E–W extension at 19Ma in the
Kung Co area, S. Tibet: evidence for contemporaneous E–W and N–S extension in the
Himalayan orogen. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 325–326 (4), 10–20.
Montel, J.M., 1993. A model for monazite/melt equilibrium and application to the gener-
ation of granitic magmas. Chem. Geol. 110 (1), 127–146.
Moran, A.E., Sisson, V.B., Leeman, W.P., 1992. Boron depletion during progressive meta-
morphism: implications for subduction processes. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 111,
331–349.
Murphy, M.A., 2007. Isotopic characteristics of the Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core
complex: Implications for the architecture of the Himalayan orogen. Geology 35,
983–986.
Murphy, M.A., Copeland, P., 2005. Transtensional deformation in the central Himalaya
and its role in accommodating growth of the Himalayan orogen. Tectonics 24 (4),
38–46.
Murphy, M.A., Yin, A., Kapp, P., Harrison, T.M., Manning, C.E., Ryerson, F.J., Ding, L., Jinghui,
G., 2002. Structural evolution of the Gurla Mandhata detachment system, Southwest
Tibet: Implications for the eastward extent of the Karakoram fault system. Geol. Soc.
Am. Bull. 114 (4), 428–447.
Najman, Y., Appel, E., Boudagher-Fadel, M., Bown, P., Carter, A., Garzanti, E., Godin, L., Han,
J., Liebke, U., Oliver, G., 2010. Timing of India-Asia collision: Geological, biostrati-
graphic, and palaeomagnetic constraints. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 115, B12416.
Ota, T., Kobayashi, K., Katsura, T., Nakamura, E., 2008. Tourmaline breakdown in a pelitic
system: implications for boron cycling through subduction zones. Contrib. Mineral.
Petrol. 155, 19–32.
Palmer, M.R., 2017. Boron cycling in subduction zones. Elements 13, 237–242.
Passchier, C.W., Trouw, R.A.J., 1998. Microtectonics. Springer.
Patiňo-Douce, A.E., Harris, N., 1998. Experimental constraints on Himalayan anataxis.
J. Petrol. 39, 689–710.
Pullen, A., Kapp, P., Decelles, P.G., Gehrels, G.E., Ding, L., 2011. Cenozoic anatexis and ex-
humation of Tethyan Sequence rocks in the Xiao Gurla Range, Southwest Tibet.
Tectonophysics 501 (1–4), 28–40.
Putirka, K.D., 2008. Thermometers and barometers for volcanic systems. Rev. Mineral.
Geochem. 69 (1), 61–120.
Richards, A., Parrish, R., Harris, N., Argles, T., Zhang, L., 2006. Correlation of lithotectonic
units across the eastern Himalaya, Bhutan. Geology 34, 341–344.
Scaillet, B., France-Lanord, C., Fort, P.L., 1990. Badrinath-Gangotri plutons (Garhwal,
India): petrological and geochemical evidence for fractionation processes in a high
Himalayan leucogranite. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 44 (1), 163–188.
Scaillet, B., Pichavant, M., Roux, J., 1995. Experimental crystallization of leucogranite
magmas. J. Petrol. 36 (3), 663–705.
16 L. Cheng et al. / Lithos 364–365 (2020) 105533
Scaillet, B., Holtz, F., Pichavant, M., Schmidt, M., 1996. Viscosity of Himalayan
leucogranites: Implications for mechanisms of granitic magma ascent. J. Geophys.
Res. 101, 27691–27699.
Scaillet, B., Holtz, F., Pichavant, M., 1998. Phase equilibrium constraints on the viscosity of
silicic magmas. 1. Volcanic-plutonic comparison. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 27257–27266.
Sláma, J., Košler, J., Condon, D.J., Crowley, J.L., Gerdes, A., Hanchar, J.M., Horstwood, M.S.,
Morris, G.A., Nasdala, L., Norberg, N., 2008. Plešovice zircon—a new natural reference
material for U–Pb and Hf isotopic microanalysis. Chem. Geol. 249 (1–2), 1–35.
Smit, M.A., Hacker, B.R., Lee, J., 2014. Tibetan garnet records early Eocene initiation of
thickening in the Himalaya. Geology 42, 591–594.
Smith, M., Yardley, B., 1996. The boron isotopic composition of tourmaline as a guide to
fluid processes in the southwestern England orefield: an ion microprobe study.
Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 60 (8), 1415–1427.
Sun, S.S., McDonough, W.F., 1989. Chemical and isotopic systematics of oceanic basalts:
implications for mantle composition and processes. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 42,
313–345.
Tindle, A.G., Breaks, F.W., Selway, J.B., 2002. Tourmaline in petalite-subtype granitic peg-
matites: evidence of fractionation and contamination from the Pakeagama Lake and
separation Lake areas of northwestern Ontario, Canada. Can. Mineral. 40, 753–788.
van Hinsberg, V.J., Henry, D.J., Marschall, H.R., 2011. Tourmaline: an ideal indicator of its
host environment. Can. Mineral. 49 (1), 1–16.
Visona, D., Lombardo, B., 2002. Two-mica and tourmaline leucogranites from the Everest-
Makalu region (Nepal-Tibet): Himalayan leucogranite genesis by isobaric heating?
Lithos 62, 125–150.
Wang, Y.J., Xing, X.W., Cawood, P.A., Lai, S.C., Xia, X.P., Fan, W.M., Liu, H.C., Zhang, F.F.,
2013. Petrogenesis of early Paleozoic peraluminous granite in the Sibumasu Block
of SW Yunnan and diachronous accretionary orogenesis along the northern margin
of Gondwana. Lithos 182-183, 67–85.
Watson, E.B., Harrison, T.M., 1983. Zircon saturation revisited: temperature and composi-
tion effects in a variety of crustal magma types. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 64 (2),
295–304.
View publication stats
Weinberg, R.F., 2016. Himalayan leucogranites and migmatites: nature, timing and dura-
tion of anatexis. J. Metam. Geol. 34, 821–843.
Whalen, J.B., Currie, K.L., Chappell, B.W., 1987. A-type granites: geochemical characteris-
tics, discrimination and petrogenesis. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 95 (4), 407–419.
Wiedenbeck, M., Hanchar, J.M., Peck, W.H., Sylvester, P., Valley, J., Whitehouse, M., Kronz,
A., Morishita, Y., Nasdala, L., Fiebig, J., 2004. Further characterisation of the 91500 zir-
con crystal. Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 28 (1), 9–39.
Wolf, M.B., London, D., 1997. Boron in granitic magmas: stability of tourmaline in equilib-
rium with biotite and cordierite. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 130 (1), 12–30.
Wu, F.Y., Liu, X.C., Ji, W.Q., Wang, J.M., Yang, L., 2017. Highly fractionated granites: Recog-
nition and research. Sci. China Earth Sci. 60, 1201–1219.
Yang, X.Y., Zhang, J.J., Qi, G.W., Wang, D.C., Guo, L., Li, P.Y., Liu, J., 2009. Structure and de-
formation around the Gyirong basin, north Himalaya, and onset of the south Tibetan
detachment system. Sci. China Ser. D 52, 1046–1058.
Yang, L., Liu, X.C., Wang, J.M., Wu, F.Y., 2019. Is Himalayan leucogranite a product by in
situ partial melting of the Greater Himalayan Crystalline? A comparative study of
leucosome and leucogranite from Nyalam, southern Tibet. Lithos 342-343, 542–556.
Yin, A., 2006. Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the Himalayan orogen as constrained by
along-strike variation of structural geometry, exhumation history, and foreland sed-
imentation. Earth-Sci. Rev. 76 (1), 1–131.
Yurimoto, H., Duke, E., Papike, J., Shearer, C., 1990. Are discontinuous chondrite-
normalized REE patterns in pegmatitic granite systems the results of monazite frac-
tionation? Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 54, 2141–2145.
Zeng, L.S., Gao, L.E., Xie, K.J., Liu-Zeng, J., 2011. Mid-Eocene high Sr/Y granites in the North-
ern Himalayan Gneiss Domes: melting thickened lower continental crust. Earth
Planet. Sci. Lett. 303, 251–266.
Zhang, H.F., Harris, N., Parrish, R., Kelley, S., Zhang, L., Rogers, N., Argles, T., King, J., 2004.
Causes and consequences of protracted melting of the mid-crust exposed in the
North Himalayan antiform. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 228, 195–212.