Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.

org on July 10, 2015

Geological Society of America
Special Paper 328
1999

Himalaya and Tibet:

Mountain roots to mountain tops
Rasoul B. Sorkhabi*
Department of Geology, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1404
Allison Macfarlane*
Department of Geography and Earth Systems Science, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030-4444
The richest and most varied elements for pursuing an analysis of this nature present themselves to the
eyes of the traveler in the scenery of Southern Asia, ... where the same subterranean forces that once
raised these mountain chains still shake them to their foundation and threaten their downfall.
Alexander von Humboldt in Cosmos (1854, v. 1, p. 27)

ithecus and other Miocene hominoids, Gondwanaland, continental collision, postcollisional leucogranite genesis, inverted
metamorphism, and crustal extension coeval with compression
in collision zones have arisen largely from studies in south-central Asia. The classic knowledge of Himalayan geology has
been synthesized in several volumes (Burrard and Hayden,
1934; Pascoe, 1964; Gansser, 1964; Wadia, 1975; Thakur,
1992). Sorkhabi (1997) reviewed the historical development of
Himalayan geology as a scientific activity.
The Himalaya-Karakoram-Tibet orogenic system may be
the highest and largest culmination of Earths crust since the
early Paleozoic Pan African mountains, as evidenced from
strontium isotope analyses of the Phanerozoic marine sedimentary rocks (indicative of the magnitude of continental denudation) (e.g., Edmond, 1992). Large rivers originating in the
Himalaya-Tibetan region account for 25% of the global sedimentation budget, although they drain only 4.2% of the land
surface (Raymo and Ruddiman, 1992). Fed by perpetual snow
and monsoon rains, these rivers provide fresh water for more
than one billion people in south Asia, nearly one-fifth of the
worlds population. Sediments shed from the Himalaya and
Tibet have formed the worlds largest marine fan (the Bengal
Fan) and river delta (the Ganges Delta), as well as the most
extensive, fertile agricultural lands in northern India and China
which have supported human settlements for millennia. The
influence of the Himalaya-Tibet highland on the Asian monsoon system and mid-latitude atmospheric circulations, and perhaps on the development of late Cenozoic glacial climate in the
Northern Hemisphere, has drawn much interest in recent years
(e.g., Quade et al., 1989, 1995; Prell and Kutzbach, 1992;
Raymo and Ruddiman, 1992).

INTRODUCTION
High mountains and plateaus of south-central Asia form
the largest, loftiest, and youngest highland topography on Earth.
Persian geographers called it Bm-i Dunythe Roof of the
World. The Tibetan Plateau has an area of 2.5 106 km2 and an
average elevation of 5000 m, and is surrounded by high mountains of the Himalaya to the south, the Kunlun to the north, and
the Karakoram and Pamir to the west (Fig. 1). In the Pamir
Knot, several major mountain rangesTian Shan, Karakoram,
and Hindu Kushmerge with the Pamir mountains. These
remote highlands hold crucial keys to understanding the tectonic and geomorphic processes shaping the Earth and contribute in many ways to the natural resources and environment.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, explorers, surveyors,
and geologists working for the British East India Company conducted preliminary mapping in the western Himalaya. Systematic geological work in the region began with the establishment
of the Geological Survey of India in Calcutta in 1851. In the
mid-nineteenth century, the Survey of India (established in
1800 in southern India) extended its cartographic work to the
Himalayan foothills. This century-old field work provided the
foundation for our present-day research on the Himalaya-Tibet
geology. Some of the fundamental discoveries in the earth sciences, such as monsoon meteorology, isostasy, Tethys, Ramap-

*Present address: Sorkhabi, Japan National Oil Corporation, Technology

Research Center, Geology and Geochemistry Section, 2-2 Hamada, 1-chome,
Mihama-ku, Chiba-shi 261, Japan; Macfarlane, Belfer Center for Science and
International Affairs, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 79
JFK Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138.

Sorkhabi, R. B., and Macfarlane, A., 1999, Himalaya and Tibet: Mountain roots to mountain tops, in Macfarlane, A., Sorkhabi, R. B., and Quade, J., eds.,
Himalaya and Tibet: Mountain Roots to Mountain Tops: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America Special Paper 328.

Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.org on July 10, 2015

R. B. Sorkhabi and A. Macfarlane

Figure 1. A geological map of the Himalaya (modified after Gansser, 1981; Windley, 1983).

Fundamental geological processes have been shaping the

Himalaya-Tibet region throughout the Cenozoic. Investigating
the nature of these processes and their operation in space and
time has far-reaching implications for our understanding of how
the crust of this planet functions and how it has evolved.
India-Asia Collision Tectonics
A major advance in our understanding of Asian tectonics is
the notion that the Asian continent has been built up from the
accretion of fragments of Gondwanaland with the Siberian
shield (Angaraland) over the past 500 m.y., following the closure of Tethyan (sensu lato) oceanic basins (see Sengr and
Natalin, 1996, for a recent review).

The collision of India (as the latest fragment of Gondwanaland) with Asia resulted in the formation of the Himalaya
along the leading edge of the Indian continental plate and in the
reactivation, deformation, and uplift of a large tract of southcentral Asian crust. This concept of collision tectonics and
crustal reactivation due to continental drift was eloquently
developed by Argand (1924), and revived in a plate tectonic
framework (Dewey and Bird, 1970; Powell and Conaghan,
1973; Molnar and Tapponnier, 1975).
Over the past two decades unprecedented international attention has focused on the geology of the Himalaya and Tibet. This
has been partly due to the opening of many parts of this remote
region to foreign visitors, and partly due to the advent of the plate
tectonic theory, which recognizes the Himalaya-Tibet orogenic

Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.org on July 10, 2015

Himalaya and Tibet: Mountain roots to mountain tops

system as the type example of continent-to-continent collision
tectonics for the following reasons (see also Mattauer, 1986).
1. The geneses of the Himalaya and Tibetan Plateau are
clearly linked (both in terms of tectonic setting and timing of
events) to the Cenozoic convergence between India and Asia,
following the closure of the Mesozoic Neo-Tethys ocean.
2. Compared to many ancient eroded orogens, there is a
complete record of precollisional and postcollisional events in
the Himalaya.
3. Orogenic and geomorphic activities in the Himalaya are
continuing, making the region a natural field laboratory for
studying the processes of continental deformation, crustal thickening, and landscape evolution.
4. Due to high rates of uplift and denudation and incision
of deep valleys perpendicular to the strike of mountains, the
Himalaya offer excellent exposures of rocks and structures for
investigating a diverse array of geological phenomena.
5. Despite local complexities, the overall structure and
lithology of the Himalaya are fairly uniform; thus deriving and
applying testable theories on fundamental orogenic processes
can be done with increased confidence.
It is significant that plate tectonic theory grew out of studies of the structure and dynamics of oceanic lithosphere rather
than continental lithosphere. Continental deformation is too diffuse and the thermotectonic behavior of continents too complex
to be subjected to the simple motion of rigid plates, wherein
deformation is confined to narrow plate boundaries (McKenzie,
1977). The India-Asia collision zone provides unique opportunities to better understand the processes of continental tectonics. A major challenge is to quantify the response of the Asian
lithosphere to the stress regime induced by the convergence of
India: considering the great expanse of the region, much more
geological, geochemical, and geophysical data are required.
Geophysical surveys give key constraints on the deep
structures of the double-normal continental crust in the IndiaAsia convergence zone (see Molnar, 1988, for a review). In the
1990s, the INDEPTH Project obtained seismic profiles in
southern Tibet (Zhao et al., 1993; Nelson et al., 1996). Gao et
al. (this volume) present results of a 900 km seismic profile
conducted by Chinese scientists in northernmost Tibet that constrains the crustal structure from the northern margin of the
Kunlun as far as the Mongolian border.
Since India collided with Asia 55 10 Ma, it has moved
northward 3,000 m (Klootwijik, 1984; Patriat and Achache,
1984; Searle et al., 1987). Some of the intriguing tectonic questions concern the mechanisms to accommodate this missing
continental crust. Various models such as whole-scale continental subduction of Greater India beneath Asia, ductile deformation and basement reactivation in the Himalaya as well as
the entire region of Tibet, and lateral escape or extrusion tectonics of the Indochina block have been proposed (see Dewey
et al., 1989; Le Picheon et al., 1992, for reviews). Other questions concern the kinematics and uplift history of Tibet and the
Himalaya (e.g., Harrison et al., 1992; Sorkhabi and Stump,

1993). Xu et al. (this volume) argue that the thermotectonics of

the interior of the Tibetan Plateau is controlled by a mantle
diapir while the margins of the plateau are subjected to intracontinental subduction.
A Geological Framework of the Himalaya
The Himalaya extend for about 2,500 km in a northwestnortheast direction along the leading margin of the Indian continental plate and are bounded by the Nanga Parbat syntaxis in
the northwest and the Namche Barwa syntaxis in the northeast.
The syntaxial bends of the Himalaya join the lineaments of
Burma (the Arakan Yoma) on the east and of Pakistan (the
Sulaiman and Kirther Ranges) on the west. These circumIndian mountains also resulted from the India-Asia collision,
although they are much less studied. Schelling discusses the
structure of southern Kirthar Range in Pakistan.
The Himalaya have been traditionally divided into six
lithotectonic zones extending in parallel belts (Gansser, 1964;
Le Fort, 1975; Windley, 1983; Thakur, 1992) (Fig. 1). From
north to south, they are as follows: (1) the Trans-Himalayan
batholith; (2) the Indus-Tsangpo suture zone; (3) the Tethyan
(Tibetan) Himalaya; (4) the Higher (Greater) Himalaya; (5) the
Lesser (Lower) Himalaya; and (6) the Sub-Himalaya.
The Trans-Himalaya is essentially composed of a large, linear
plutonic complex (the Trans-Himalayan batholith) covered partly
by forearc and continental molasse sedimentary rocks derived
from the uplift and erosion of magmatic rocks. The TransHimalayan batholith is a composite I-type plutonic complex ranging from gabbro through diorite to granite. It formed in several
magmatic phases from 110 to 40 Ma due to partial melting of the
subducting Neo-Tethyan slab beneath the southern margin of Asia
(Honegger et al., 1982). The Trans-Himalaya is divided into the
Kohistan block (to the west of the Nanga Parbat syntaxis), the
Ladakh block (between Nanga Parbat and the Karakoram strikeslip fault), Kailas, Gandese (southern Tibet), and Mishimi (to the
east of the Namche Barwa syntaxis). In the Kohistan block, the
Jijal-Chilas complex is regarded as the tilted base of a Cretaceous
island arc. Mikoshiba et al. report new geochemical and Rb-Sr age
data from the arc-type Chilas intrusive rocks.
Gansser (1964) first defined the Indus Suture Line as the
tectonic boundary between India and Asia along which the
Tethys was consumed. The Indus-Tsangpo suture zone crops
out in the upper valleys of the Indus and Tsangpo (Brahmaputra) rivers, and is composed of deep-sea and flysch sedimentary
rocks, blueschist metamorphic rocks, ultrabasic and submarine
volcanic rocks, and plutonic intrusions. In the western parts of
the Himalaya, a second suture zone to the north, the Northern
suture zone (or the Shyok-Chalt suture zone, named after the
Shyok and Chalt Rivers in Kohistan and Ladakh, respectively),
separates the Kohistan-Ladakh blocks from the Karakoram
mountains. The Shyok-Chalt suture formed in mid-Cretaceous
time from the collision of the Kohistan-Ladakh island arc with
the Karakoram block, before the early Eocene collision of India

Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.org on July 10, 2015

R. B. Sorkhabi and A. Macfarlane

along the Indus-Tsangpo suture zone (Searle, 1991, and references therein).
The less-accessible Karakoram mountains have had a complex thermotectonic history in Mesozoic and Cenozoic time.
Searle (1991) ended his book with the remark that one-half of
the total area of the Karakoram Range may still be labeled as
unexplored. This is especially true of the eastern Karakoram of
India. Sinha et al. present the results of their mapping and stratigraphic work in this area.
The Tethyan (Tibetan) Himalaya has an apparent thickness
of 1017 km and has preserved highly fossiliferous Tethyan
marine rocks deposited on the shelf and slope of the Indian continental margin from Late ProterozoicCambrian through early
Eocene time. Except in the Pakistan Himalaya, the PaleozoicMesozoic Tethys Himalaya rocks are largely unmetamorphosed, and occur in synclinorium-type basins to the south of
the Indus-Tsangpo suture zone. Hughes and Jell provide important data on the Cambrian trilobite faunas from the western
Himalaya of India. Liu and Einsele present a detailed sedimentologic and paleogeographic study of the Indian passive margin
during the Jurassic.
Another study of pre-Himalayan events in the lessinvestigated region of Balochistan of northeastern Pakistan
is documented by Khan et al., who suggest that the 7666
Ma Parh Group basalts mark the passage of the Tethyan
floor over the Reunion hotspot prior to movement of the
Indian shield over the same hotspot at ca. 66 Ma, as represented by the Deccan Traps.
The postcollisional culmination of India-Asia tectonics is
best revealed in the Higher Himalayan Crystalline sequence
(also called the Greater Himalaya or Central Crystalline zone in
the Indian Himalaya and the Tibetan Slab in Nepal). This zone
constitutes the metamorphic core of the Himalaya affected by
ductile deformation and is the axis of maximum uplift of the
orogen. The High Himalayan Crystalline sequence comprises a
1015-km-thick assemblage of mica schist, quartzite, paragneiss, orthogneiss, migmatite, and Miocene leucogranite bodies. The regional metamorphism seems to have been polyphase,
an early Barrovian type followed by a Buchan type, and finally
localized retrograde events. Thermobarometric analyses reveal
pressures of 500800 MPa and temperatures of 475825 C for
the peak metamorphic conditions (see Hodges et al., 1989, for a
review; Macfarlane, 1995). The metamorphism is recorded by
mineral assemblages of upper greenschist to amphibolite facies;
index minerals are biotite to sillimanite. The deformation fabric
shows a consistent top-to-south sense of movement, in accordance with the northward dip of the Main Central thrust, which
brings the Higher Himalayan Crystalline sequence atop the
Lesser Himalaya. The MCT, a longitudinal thrust fault first
mapped by Heim and Gansser (1939) in the Garhwal Himalaya,
is in many traverses a several kilometer-thick deformed zone
affected by varying degrees of shearing and imbrication (e.g.,
Hashimoto et al., 1973; Macfarlane et al., 1992).
The collision of India may have occurred first in the north-

western part of the Himalaya at 65-55 Ma and then terminated

on the eastern part at 50-45 Ma (Klootwijik, 1984; Patriat and
Achache, 1984). This diachronous, oblique convergence should
also have differential impact on the metamorphic and crustal
melting history of the Higher Himalayan Crystalline sequence.
Guillot et al. explore this possibility using the pressure-temperature paths of metamorphic rocks and geochronological data
from the anatectic leucogranites in various sectors of the
Himalaya.
The well-known Miocene two-mica tourmaline-bearing
leucogranites of the Higher Himalaya crop out predominantly
near the contact the Crystalline sequence with the Tethyan
Himalaya. While it is widely agreed that the leucogranites were
formed by the partial melting of the Indian continental crust
(e.g., Le Fort et al., 1987), the heat source for their genesis
remains controversial. In recent years, a more complex history
of the leucogranites has emerged in the Nanga Parbat area of
Pakistan Himalaya, which yield both very old (Eocene) and
very young (Pliocene) leucogranites (Zeitler and Chamberlain,
1991). Whittington et al. present field and geochemical data on
the contrasting anatectic processes at Nanga Parbat.
The geology of Nanga Parbat has drawn much attention
due to reports of extremely rapid exhumation rates and very
young tectonothermal events (e.g., Zeitler et al., 1982; Zeitler
and Chamberlain, 1991). The geology has, however, proved to
be extremely complex due to multiple syntaxial structures,
necessitating detailed studies. DiPietro et al. present such a
detailed map for the Indus syntaxis in the Swat area to the west
of the Nanga Parbat syntaxis. The contact between the Nanga
Parbat syntaxis and the Karakoram is explored by Pcher and
Le Fort.
The nature of the contact between the Higher Himalayan
Crystalline sequence and the Tethyan Himalaya has a history of
controversy. Mapping in southern Tibet (Burg et al., 1984;
Burchfiel et al., 1992) and India (Herren, 1987; Valdiya, 1989)
indicates that this contact is a low-angle normal fault system
referred to as the South Tibetan detachment system (Burchfiel
et al., 1992). This extensional structure extends parallel to the
strike of the Main Central thrust and dips to the north. It has
been interpreted as dorsal collapse of a Himalayan topographic
high in the early Miocene when the wedge of the Higher
Himalayan Crystalline sequence extruded by coincident movement on both the Main Central thrust and the South Tibetan
detachment system (Burg et al., 1984; Burchfiel and Royden,
1985; Hodges et al., 1992). The kinematic and temporal links
between compressional and extensional structures in the
Himalaya have drawn much attention in recent years. Godin et
al. analyze the complex deformational history of the hanging
wall of the South Tibetan detachment system (locally called the
Annapurna detachment fault by the authors) in central Nepal.
Carosi et al. present field evidence of widespread extensional
features in the footwall of the South Tibetan detachment system
in the Mount Everest region of Nepal. Manickavasagam et al.
present new structural and metamorphic data from several sec-

Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.org on July 10, 2015

Himalaya and Tibet: Mountain roots to mountain tops

tions of the western Himalayan of India and argue that the entire
Higher Himalayan Crystalline sequence should be viewed as a
distributed shear zone affected by both compressional and extensional tectonics. They then use the distributed shear model to
explain the long-standing problem of the inverted metamorphic
sequence that is observed from the Lesser Himalaya through the
Main Central thrust zone to the High Himalaya.
The Lesser Himalaya is delimited by the Main Central
thrust in the north and the Main Boundary thrust in the south.
The Lesser Himalaya mainly consists of the Proterozoic and
lower Paleozoic sedimentary rocks of the Indian platform,
some of which were metamorphosed to greenschist facies.
Scattered capping of Paleocene-Eocene limestone and shale
(the Subathu Formation), synclinal outliers (klippen) of the
Higher Himalaya metamorphic rocks intruded by the Cambrian-Ordovician (Pan African) granites are also in this
zone. Due to the lack of fossils, the ages of lithostratigraphic
formations and displacement history of rock units in the
Lesser Himalaya are poorly constrained. Upreti and Le Fort
argue against a one-to-one relationship between the crystalline
outliers in the Lesser Himalaya and their supposed root
zones in the Higher Himalayan Crystalline sequence; they
base their arguments on variations in lithology and metamorphic grade, and alternatively hypothesize that the root zones
may be concealed beneath the Main Central thrust.
HIMALAYAN FORELAND: THIN-SKINNED
TECTONICS, SEDIMENTS, AND LANDFORMS
The crustal structures of the Himalaya inferred from
microearthquake studies (Seeber et al., 1981), reflection seismic profiles (Zhao et al., 1993), and structural cross sections
(Schelling and Arita, 1991) demonstrate both thick-skinned
(basement reactivation of the Crystalline sequence) and thinskinned tectonics in the Himalayan fold and thrust belt. All of
the major Himalayan faults seem to join a mid-crustal decollement (the Main Himalayan thrust of Zhao et al., 1993). The
sequence of thrusting appears to become younger from north to
south, toward the Himalayan foreland, which also reflects the
temporal pattern of uplift in the Himalaya (Gansser, 1981;
Sorkhabi and Stump, 1993).
The active tectonics of the Himalayan foreland are conspicuous in the Sub-Himalayan zone, which consists of clastic
sediments derived from the uplift and erosion of the Himalaya
and deposited by rivers in a foreland basin. The Sub-Himalayan
molasse has been faulted and folded, and forms the low-altitude
Siwalik Hills skirting the Lesser Himalaya. The sediments have
been grouped into the Murree (Dharamsala) Group (late
Eocene?early Miocene) which is overlain by the Siwalik
(Churia) Group (early MiocenePleistocene). The SubHimalaya is overthrust by the Lesser Himalaya along the Main
Boundary thrust. To the south, the Sub-Himalaya overthrusts
the Holocene alluvial tracts of the Indo-Gangetic plains along
an active fault system called the Himalayan Frontal thrust.

Kumar et al. discuss basin evolution and sedimentation in

the Siwalik zone of India and controls of south-verging
Himalayan thrust tectonics during the Pliocene-Pleistocene.
Jadoon et al. present a seismic profile that constrains the thinskinned tectonics of the Pliocene-Pleistocene Siwalik formations
in Potwar Plateau (north Pakistan), a region well known for its
petroleum resources; these authors calculate shortening and uplift
rates for an overthrust wedge from structural cross sections and
stratigraphic constraints. Pogue et al. report their research on the
structural and stratigraphic relations between the cover sediments
and basement rocks in a section of the Pakistan Himalaya.
The geomorphic consequences of active tectonics is an
important field of study, and in this respect, the Himalayan
region is second to none. Uhlir and Schram document largescale landslides in the Ganesh Himal, northwest of Kathmandu.
Their study makes a case for hazard mapping that is badly
needed for the populous areas of the Himalaya.
Bendick and Bilham touch on an important issue that the
Indian shield may not be as rigid and passive as it is commonly
supposed. They examine buckles in the Malabar coast of
southwest India and relate these structures to the effects of the
ongoing Indian collision.
ABOUT THIS VOLUME
Since 1985, a series of international annual meetings, the
Himalaya-Karakoram-Tibet (HKT) Workshops, have been
held; Leicester, United Kingdom (U.K.) (1985); Nancy, France
(1986); London, U.K. (1987); Lausanne, Switzerland (1988);
Milan, Italy (1990); Grenoble, France (1991); Oxford, U.K.
(1992); Vienna, Austria (1993); Kathmandu, Nepal (1994);
Ascona, Switzerland (1995). The 11th HKT Workshop was
held in Flagstaff, Arizona, in April 1996 (Sorkhabi et al.,
1996). This first HKT Workshop in America was the logical
outcome of an increasing involvement of North American
geologists in the studies of the Himalaya and Tibet over the
past two decades.
Some of the past HKT Workshops have resulted in the publication of the following proceedings volumes: Barnicoat and
Treloar (1989); Baud (1989); Treloar and Searle (1993); Upreti
and Dhital (1995); Burg (1996a, 1996b).
In keeping this useful tradition, this special paper contains a collection of selected, refereed papers presented at
the 11th HKT Workshop in Arizona. In editing this volume,
we have paid special attention to the novelty of data and
ideas. Another feature of this volume is the attempt to integrate both hard-rock and soft-rock geology, paleotectonic and neotectonic history, and endogenic (tectonic) and
exogenic (geomorphic) processes in the Himalaya. No single volume can offer solutions to the numerous problems of
Himalayan geology. Nevertheless, we hope that this collection of papers presenting new data and integrating diverse
fields of research in a regional framework is a step forward
in our scientific journey.

Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.org on July 10, 2015

R. B. Sorkhabi and A. Macfarlane

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The 11th Himalaya-Karakoram-Tibet Workshop was held
at the Du Bois Center of Northern Arizona University,
Flagstaff, from April 28 to May 2, 1996. As organizers of the
workshop, we thank all of the nearly 120 participants at the
workshop, which made this a successful meeting with their
punctual attendance, presentations (both oral and poster), comments, and discussions.
Financial support for the workshop came largely from a
grant from the Continental Dynamics Program of the U.S.
National Science Foundation (NSF). The NSF grant supported
travel funds for some researchers from the Himalayan countries
(China, India, Nepal, and Pakistan) and students from Europe,
as well as the production of this proceedings volume.
George Mason University generously provided much of the
initial financial and clerical help to the workshop. In particular,
the staff in the Geography and Earth Systems Science Department gave their time to support the Workshop. Elenore Lavender
of Travel World ably handled the accommodation, banquet party,
and may other chores. The field trip to the Grand Canyon was led
by Troy Pw and Edmund Stump, and the Basin and Range field
trip was led by Stephen Reynolds, all at Arizona State University. We thank friends at University of ArizonaJan Price, Lois
Roe, Clark Isachsen, Tom Moore, and David Richardsfor help
with, for example, transportation vehicles, registration desk, and
projectors. We also thank David Spencer for his help in many
ways, including sharing with us his files of the 10th workshop.
Sorkhabi acknowledges a grant from the NSF Tectonics Program
and an Invited Fellowship from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) at Hokkaido University.
We would like to thank Abhijit Basu (Books Editor, GSA)
and for his time, advice, and official handling of the publication. We thank Jay Quade and Kazunori Arita for critically
reading this introduction.
We are grateful to the following colleagues and friends who
kindly reviewed the papers submitted for this volume: David
Applegate, Kazunori Arita, Gary Axen, Loren Babcock, Asish
Basu, Aymon Baud, Sam Bowring, John Bridge, Michael Brookfield, John Carter, C. Page Chamberlain, Margaret Coleman, Brian
Currie, Peter DeCelles, Steve Ellen, Maurizio Gaetani, Bernhard
Grassemann, Brad Hacker, Michael Hauck, Kip Hodges, Mary
Hubbard, Robert Lawrence, Robert Lillie, Yizhaq Makovsky, Gautam Mitra, C. J. Northrup, David Pivnik, Carolyn Ruppel, Daniel
Schelling, John Shroder, Jr., Michael Searle, Albrecht Steck, Peter
Treloar, K. S. Valdiya, Igor Villa, David Waters, Robert Webb, Neil
Wells, Stephen Westrop, John Wheeler, Brian Willis, Robert Yeats,
An Yin, Mitsuo Yoshida, and George Zandt.
REFERENCES CITED
Argand, E., 1924, La tectonique de lAsie: Compte-Rendu XIII Congrs
Gologique International, Belgique, 1922: Lige, France, Vaillant-Carmanne, p. 171372.

Barnicoat, A. C., and Treloar, P. J., eds., 1989, Himalayan metamorphism: Journal of Metamorphic Geology, v. 7, no. 1, 149 p.
Baud, A., ed., 1989, Colloque Himalaya-Karakoram-Tibet, Lausanne, 1988:
Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, v. 82, part 2, p. 583715.
Burchfiel, C., and Royden, L. H., 1985, North-south extension under the convergent Himalayan regime: Geology, v. 13, p. 679682.
Burchfiel, B. C., Chen, Z., Hodges, K. V., Liu, Y., Royden, L. H., Deng, C., and
Xu, J., 1992, The south Tibetan detachment system, Himalayan orogen:
Extension contemporaneous with and parallel to shortening in a collisional mountain belt: Geological Society of America Special Paper 269,
41 p.
Burg, J.-P., ed., 1996a, Uplift and exhumation of metamorphic rocks, the
Himalayan Tibet region: Tectonophysics, v. 260, 226 p.
Burg, J.-P., ed., 1996b, Special issue: Geodinamica Acta, v. 9, no. 2-3, 233 p.
Burg, J.-P., Brunel, M., Gapais, D., Chen, G. M., and Liu, G. H., 1984, Deformation of leucogranites of the crystalline Main Central Sheet in southern Tibet (China): Journal of Structural Geology, v. 6, p. 535542.
Burrard, S. G., and Hayden, H. H., 1934, A sketch of the geography and geology of the Himalaya Mountains and Tibet: (revised by S. G. Burrard and
A. M. Herron) Calcutta, Government of India Press, 359 p.
Dewey, J. F., and Bird, J. M., 1970, Mountain belts and the new global tectonics: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 75B, p. 26252647.
Dewey, J. F., Cande, S., and Pitman, W. C., 1989, Tectonic evolution of the
India-Eurasia collision zone: Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, v. 82,
p. 717734.
Edmond, J., 1992, Himalayan tectonics, weathering processes, and the strontium isotope record in marine limestones: Science, v. 256,
p. 15941597.
Gansser, A. 1964, Geology of the Himalayas: London, Interscience Publishers,
289 p.
Gansser, A., 1981, The geodynamic history of the Himalaya, in Gupta, H. K.,
and Delany, F. M., eds., Zagros, Hindu Kush, Himalaya, geodynamic
evolution: American Geophysical Union Geodynamic Series 3,
p. 111121.
Harrison, T. M., Copeland, P., Kidd, W. S. F., and Yin, A., 1992, Raising Tibet:
Science, v. 255, p. 16631670.
Hashimoto, S., Ohta, Y., and Akiba, C., eds., 1973, Geology of the Nepal
Himalayas: Tokyo, Saikon Publishing Co., 286 p.
Heim, A., and Gansser, A., 1939, The Central HimalayasGeological observations of the Swiss Expedition of 1936: Mmoires de la Socit Helvtique des Sciences Naturalles, v. 73, 245 p.
Herren, E., 1987, The Zanskar shear zone: Northeast-southwest extension
within the Higher Himalayas (Ladakh, India): Geology, v. 15,
p. 409413.
Hodges, K. V., Hubbard, M. S., and Silverberg, D. S., 1989, Metamorphic constraints on the thermal evolution of the central Himalayan orogen: Royal
Society of London Philosophical Transactions, v. A326, p. 257280.
Hodges, K. V., Parrish, R. R., Housh, T. B., Lux, D. R., Burchfiel, B. C., Royden, L. H., and Chen, Z., 1992, Simultaneous Miocene extension and
shortening in the Himalayan orogen: Science, v. 258, p. 14661470.
Honegger, K., Dietrich, V., Frank, W., Gansser, A., Thni, M., and Trommsdorff, V., 1982, Magmatism and metamorphism in the Ladakh
Himalayas (the Indus-Tsangpo suture zone): Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 60, p. 253292.
Klootwijik, C., 1984, A review of Indian Phanerozoic paleomagnetism; implications for the India-Asia collision: Tectonophysics, v. 105, p. 331353.
Le Fort, P., 1975, HimalayasThe collided range: Present knowledge of the
continental arc: American Journal of Science, v. 275A, p. 144.
Le Fort, P., Cuney, M., Deniel, C., Frances-Lonard, C., Sheppard, S. M. F.,
Upreti, B. N., and Vidal, P., 1987, Crustal generation of the Himalayan
leucogranites: Tectonophysics, v. 134, p. 3957.
Le Picheon, X., Fourier, M., and Julivet, L., 1992, Kinematics, topography,
shortening and extrusion in the India-Eurasia collision: Tectonics, v. 11,
p. 10851098.

Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.org on July 10, 2015

Himalaya and Tibet: Mountain roots to mountain tops

Macfarlane, A. M., 1995, An evaluation of the inverted metamorphic gradient
at Langtang National Park, central Nepal Himalaya: Journal of Metamorphic Geology, v. 13, p. 595612.
Macfarlane, A. M., Hodges, K. V., and Lux, V., 1992, A structural analysis of
the Main Central Thrust zone, Langtang National Park, central Nepal
Himalaya: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 104,
p. 13891402.
Mattauer, M., 1986, Intracontinental subduction, crust-mantle decollement and
crustal-stacking wedge in the Himalayas and other collision belts, in
Coward, M. P., and Ries, A. C., eds., Collision tectonics: Geological
Society of London Special Publication No. 19, p. 3750.
McKenzie, D., 1977, Can plate tectonics describe continental deformation?, in
Biju-Duval, B., and Jarvis, G. T., eds., Structural history of the Mediterranean basins: Paris, Editions Technip, p. 189196.
Molnar, P., 1988, A review of geophysical constraints on the deep structure of
the Tibetan plateau, the Himalaya and the Karakoram, and their tectonic
implications: Royal Society of London, Philosophical Transactions,
v. A326, p. 3388.
Molnar, P., and Tapponnier, P., 1975, Cenozoic tectonics of Asia: Effects of a
continental collision: Science, v. 189, p. 419426.
Nelson, K. D., Zhao, W., and INDEPTH Team, 1996, Partially molten middle
crust beneath southern Tibet: Synthesis of Project INDEPTH results:
Science, v. 274, p. 16841688.
Pascoe, E. H., 1964, A manual of the geology of India and Burma (v. III): Calcutta, Geological Survey of India.
Patriat, P., and Achache, J., 1984, India-Eurasia collision chronology has implications for crustal shortening and driving mechanism of plates: Nature,
v. 311, p. 615621.
Powell, C. M. A., and Conaghan, P. J., 1973, Plate tectonics and the Himalayas:
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 20, p. 112.
Prell, W. L., and Kutzbach, J. E., 1992, Sensitivity of the Indian monsoon to
forcing parameters and implications for its evolution: Nature, v. 360,
p. 646650.
Quade, J., Cerling, T. E., and Bowman, J. R., 1989, Development of Asian
monsoon revealed by marked ecological shift during the latest Miocene
in northern Pakistan: Nature, v. 342, p. 163166.
Quade, J., Cater, J. M. L., Ohja, T. P., Adam, J., and Harrison, T. M., 1995, Late
Miocene environmental change in Nepal and the northern Indian subcontinent: Stable isotopic evidence from paleosols: Geological Society
of America Bulletin, v. 107, p. 13811397.
Raymo, M. E., and Ruddiman, W. F., 1992, Tectonic forcing of late Cenozoic
climate: Nature, v. 359, p. 117122.
Schelling, D., and Arita, K., 1991, Thrust tectonics, crustal shortening, and the
structure of the far-eastern Nepal Himalaya: Tectonics, v. 10,
p. 851862.

Searle, M. P., 1991, Geology and tectonics of the Karakoram Mountains:

Chichester, John Wiley, 358 p.
Searle, M. P., Windley, B. F., Coward, M. P., Cooper, D. J. W., Rex, A. J., Rex,
D., Li, T., Xiao, X., Jan, M. Q., Thakur, V. C., and Kumar, S., 1987, The
closing of Tethys and the tectonics of the Himalaya: Geological Society
of America Bulletin, v. 98, p. 678701.
Seeber, L., Armbruster, J. G., and Quittmeyer, R. C., 1981, Seismicity and continental subduction in the Himalayan arc, in Gupta, H. K., and Delany,
F. M., eds., Zagros, Hindu Kush, Himalaya, geodynamic evolution:
American Geophysical Union Geodynamic Series 3, p. 215242.
Sengr, A. M. C. and Natalin, B. A., 1996, Paleotectonics of Asia: Fragments
of a synthesis, in Yin, A., and Harrison, M., eds., The tectonic evolution
of Asia: Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 486640.
Sorkhabi, R. B., 1997, Historical development of Himalayan geology: Geological Society of India Journal, v. 49, p. 89108.
Sorkhabi, R. B. and Stump, E., 1993, Rise of the Himalaya: A geochronologic
approach: GSA Today, v. 3, p. 85, 8892.
Sorkhabi, R. B., Macfarlane, A., and Quade, J., 1996, Roof of the Earth offers
clues about how our planet was shaped: Eos (Transactions, American
Geophysical Union), v. 77, p. 385387.
Thakur, V. C., 1992, Geology of Western Himalaya: Oxford, Pergamon Press,
363 p.
Treloar, P. J., and Searle, M. P., eds., 1993, Himalayan Tectonics: Geological
Society of London Special Publication 74, 630 p.
Upreti, B. N., and Dhital, M. R., eds., 1995, Proceedings of the 9th HimalayaKarakoram-Tibet Workshop: Nepal Geological society Journal, v. 11,
298 p.
Valdiya, K. S., 1989, Trans-Himadri intracrustal fault and basement upwarps
south of Indus-Tsangpo suture zone, in Malinconico, L. L., and Lillie,
R. J., eds., Tectonics of Western Himalayas: Geological Society of
America Special Paper 232, p. 153168.
Wadia, D. N., 1975, Geology of India (fourth edition): New Delhi, TataMcGraw-Hill, 508 p.
Windley, B. F., 1983, Metamorphism and tectonics of the Himalaya: Geological
Society of London Journal, v. 140, p. 849865.
Zeitler, P. K., and Chamberlain, C. P., 1991, Petrogenetic and tectonic significance of young leucogranites from the northwestern Himalaya, Pakistan: Tectonics, v. 10, p. 729741.
Zeitler, P. K., Johnson, N. M., Naeser, C. W., and Tahirkheli, R. A. K., 1982,
Fission-track evidence for Quaternary uplift of the Nanga Parbat region,
Pakistan: Nature, v. 298, p. 255257.
Zhao, W., Nelson, K. D., and INDEPTH Team, 1993, Deep seismic reflection
evidence for continental underthrusting beneath southern Tibet: Nature,
v. 366, p. 557559.
MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED BY THE SOCIETY FEBRUARY 3, 1998

Printed in U.S.A.

Downloaded from specialpapers.gsapubs.org on July 10, 2015

Geological Society of America Special Papers

Himalaya and Tibet: Mountain roots to mountain tops
Rasoul B. Sorkhabi and Allison Macfarlane
Geological Society of America Special Papers 1999;328; 1-7
doi:10.1130/0-8137-2328-0.1

E-mail alerting services

click www.gsapubs.org/cgi/alerts to receive free e-mail alerts when new articles cite
this article

Subscribe

click www.gsapubs.org/subscriptions to subscribe to Geological Society of America

Special Papers

Permission request

click www.geosociety.org/pubs/copyrt.htm#gsa to contact GSA.

Copyright not claimed on content prepared wholly by U.S. government employees within scope of their
employment. Individual scientists are hereby granted permission, without fees or further requests to GSA,
to use a single figure, a single table, and/or a brief paragraph of text in subsequent works and to make
unlimited copies of items in GSA's journals for noncommercial use in classrooms to further education and
science. This file may not be posted to any Web site, but authors may post the abstracts only of their
articles on their own or their organization's Web site providing the posting includes a reference to the
article's full citation. GSA provides this and other forums for the presentation of diverse opinions and
positions by scientists worldwide, regardless of their race, citizenship, gender, religion, or political
viewpoint. Opinions presented in this publication do not reflect official positions of the Society.

Notes

Geological Society of America