A review of the Mesoproterozoic to early Palaeozoic magmatic and tectonothermal history of south–central Africa: implications for Rodinia and Gondwana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides a review of the tectonic evolution of central–southern Africa from Mesoproterozoic to earliest Palaeozoic times, using available geological information and a robust U–Pb zircon database. During the late Mesoproterozoic, the southern margin of the Congo–Tanzania–Bangweulu Craton was characterized by suprasubduction-zone magmatism and the accretion of arc and microcontinental fragments. Magmatism within the adjacent Irumide Belt formed by recycling of older continental crust. Ophiolite blocks, possibly part of an olistostromal mélange, are present in a Neoproterozoic sequence overlying the Irumide Belt, and the occurrence of high-pressure/low-temperature subduction-zone metamorphism and protracted Neoproterozoic suprasubduction-zone magmatism demonstrates that there was an ocean to the south (present-day coordinates) of the Congo–Tanzania–Bangweulu Craton until the amalgamation of Gondwana at 550–520 Ma, indicating that the Congo–Tanzania–Bangweulu Craton was not part of Rodinia. On the basis of their different ages and styles of magmatism, the Mesoproterozoic Kibaran Belt, Choma–Kalomo Block and Irumide Belt are not components of the same orogen, therefore precluding a sub-Saharan-wide, linked ‘Kibaran’ ( sensu lato ) orogenic event. Evidence is presented to illustrate that the Congo–Tanzania–Bangweulu and Kalahari Cratons developed independently until their final collision during the Pan-African Orogeny along the Damara–Lufilian–Zambezi Orogen at c . 550–520 Ma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".