The Columbia supercontinent revisited

284Citations
Citations of this article
227Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Just over 15 years ago, a proposal forwarded by Rogers and Santosh (2002) posited the existence of a pre-Rodinia supercontinent which they called Columbia. The conjecture invigorated research into the Paleo-Mesoproterozoic interval that was; in our opinion, inappropriately dubbed ‘the boring billion’. Given the wealth of new information about the supercontinent, this review paper takes a careful look at the paleomagnetic evidence that is used to reconstruct Columbia. Our contribution represents a status report and indicates that; despite the exponential increase in available data, knowledge of the assembly, duration and breakup history of the supercontinent are contentious. The commonality of ~ 1.7–2.1 Ga orogenic systems around the globe are indicative of major changes in paleogeography and growth of larger landmasses. There is continued discussion about the interconnectedness of those orogenic systems in a global picture. Arguments for Columbia posit a ~ 1500–1400 Ma age for maximum packing. Paleomagnetic data from many of the constituent cratons during the 1500–1400 Ma interval can be interpreted to support a large landmass, but the consistency of the proposal cannot be reliably demonstrated for earlier or later times. One of the more intriguing advances are the apparent long-lived connections between Laurentia, Siberia and Baltica that may have formed the core of both Columbia and Rodinia.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Meert, J. G., & Santosh, M. (2017, October 1). The Columbia supercontinent revisited. Gondwana Research. Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2017.04.011

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free