Abstract Accretionary orogens form at intraoceanic and continental margin convergent plate boundaries. They include the supra-subduction zone forearc, magmatic arc and back-arc components. Accretionary orogens can be grouped into retreating and advancing types, based on their kinematic framework and resulting geological character. Retreating orogens (e.g. modern western Pacific) are undergoing long-term extension in response to the site of subduction of the lower plate retreating with respect to the overriding plate and are characterized by back-arc basins. Advancing orogens (e.g. Andes) develop in an environment in which the overriding plate is advancing towards the downgoing plate, resulting in the development of foreland fold and thrust belts and crustal thickening. Cratonization of accretionary orogens occurs during continuing plate convergence and requires transient coupling across the plate boundary with strain concentrated in zones of mechanical and thermal weakening such as the magmatic arc and back-arc region. Potential driving mechanisms for coupling include accretion of buoyant lithosphere (terrane accretion), flat-slab subduction, and rapid absolute upper plate motion overriding the downgoing plate. Accretionary orogens have been active throughout Earth history, extending back until at least 3.2 Ga, and potentially earlier, and provide an important constraint on the initiation of horizontal motion of lithospheric plates on Earth. They have been responsible for major growth of the continental lithosphere through the addition of juvenile magmatic products but are also major sites of consumption and reworking of continental crust through time, through sediment subduction and subduction erosion. It is probable that the rates of crustal growth and destruction are roughly equal, implying that net growth since the Archaean is effectively zero.

A distinctive yet enigmatic suite of fault-bounded ultramafic massifs occurs within accretionary complex mélange of the McHugh Complex on the Kenai Peninsula of southern Alaska. The largest and most significant of these include Red Mountain and the Halibut Cove Complex, consisting of dunite and pyroxenite with chromite seams and lesser quantities of garnet pyroxenite and gabbro. Several different hypotheses have been advanced to explain their origin. Burns (1985) correlated these fault-bounded ultramafic massifs with others known as the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex. Other parts of the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex are located several hundred kilometers away along the Border Ranges fault, marking the boundary between the Chugach terrane and the Wrangellian composite terrane in the northern and eastern Chugach Mountains. Burns (1985) suggested that this entire group of ultramafic bodies represents the deep roots of the Talkeetna arc developed on the southern margin of Wrangellia during Early Jurassic–Cretaceous subduction. In this model, bodies such as Red Mountain represent klippen thrust hundreds of kilometers southward over the McHugh Complex and now preserved as erosional remnants. Bradley and Kusky (1992) suggested alternatively that the Kenai ultramafic massifs may represent segments of a thick oceanic plate offscraped during subduction, and therefore might represent ophiolitic, oceanic plateau, or immature island arc crust as opposed to the roots of the mature Talkeetna arc. In this scenario, the Kenai ultramafic massifs would be correlative with the McHugh Complex, not the Talkeetna arc. A third hypothesis is that the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex may represent forearc or suprasubduction zone ophiolites formed seaward of the Talkeetna arc during early stages of its evolution and incorporated into the accretionary wedge during subsequent accretion tectonics. The implications of which of these models is correct are large because the Talkeetna arc section is the world's premiere example of a complete exposed arc sequence, including the volcanic carapace through deep crustal levels. Many models for the composition and evolution of the crust rely on the interpretation that this is a coherent and cogenetic section of arc crust. We report six new U/Pb zircon ages that show that at least some of the deep ultra-mafic and mafic complexes of the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex are Triassic (227.7 ± 0.6 Ma; Norian) and significantly older than structurally overlying Jurassic rocks of the Talkeetna arc (201–181 Ma, continuing plutonism until 163 Ma) but the same age as the surrounding Triassic-Jurassic-Cretaceous McHugh Complex. New geochemical data that show that rocks of the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex have ophiolitic affinities, with Cr-chemistry further indicating that the complex's rocks formed in a suprasubduction zone ophiolite. Regional and detailed and field observations show that rocks of the complex are similar to and can be structurally restored with other fault-bounded units in the McHugh Complex mélange, and that a crude ophiolitic stratigraphy can be reconstructed through the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex and McHugh Complex. We suggest that the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex represents the forearc oceanic basement upon which the Talkeetna arc was subsequently built. The conclusion that the Border Ranges Ultramafic-Mafic Complex does not represent the base of the Talkeetna arc but instead contains remnants of a dismembered ophiolitic complex raises questions about the validity of mass balance calculations and bulk crustal compositions, as well as models of arc development used to understand the growth of continental crust.

Full article available in PDF version.

Abstract The Neoproterozoic Najd Fault System extends for 2000km across the East African Orogen, yet its history of motion and tectonic significance are widely debated. The Halaban–Zarghat Fault is the northeastern-most of the major NW-striking Najd faults in the Arabian Shield. Several sedimentary basins of the Neoproterozoic Jibalah Group are bounded by strands of the Halaban-Zarghat Fault and other Najd faults, particularly along right steps in the fault trace. Among the largest of the basins is the Jifn. The geometry of the Jifn Basin and the sedimentary facies of Jibalah Group indicate that it is a dextral pull-apart basin between strands of the Halaban–Zarghat Fault. A zone of high-grade mylonitic gneiss is located along a left step in the fault zone and may be a deeply eroded pop-up structure related to dextral transpression. Analysis of structural data from around and within the Jifn Basin, the position of other pull-apart basins and high-grade mylonite zones along the Halaban–Zarghat Fault are all consistent with early dextral movement along the Halaban–Zarghat Fault. Offsets of distinctive older rock units and transection of the Jifn Basin by sinistral faults, however, show that the latest and most significant sense of offset on the Halaban–Zarghat Fault and other Najd faults was sinistral. A U–Pb zircon date of 624.9 ± 4.2 Ma from rhyolitic basement of the Jifn Basin gives a lower limit for the formation of the basin and initiation of dextral movement along the Halaban–Zarghat Fault. This age is interpreted as the earliest age for the collision of East and West Gondwana. A 621 ± 7 Ma pluton is offset 10 km dextrally along the Halaban–Zarghat Fault, showing that dextral motions continued for some time past 621 Ma, before switching to sinistral motions, and accreted terranes caught between the two continents were forced toward an oceanic-free face to the north. A 576.6 ± 5.3 Ma U-Pb zircon date from an undeformed felsite dyke that intrudes the Jibalah Group gives an upper time limit for movement along the Halaban–Zarghat Fault. This may mark the time that collision and escape tectonics ended, or it may reflect the time that displacements were transferred to other Najd faults in more interior parts of the East African Orogen.