Provenance of the Neogene Deposits in the Western Himalayan Foreland Basin: Implications for Drainage Reorganization During the Late Miocene Uplift of the Himalaya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Interaction between large‐scale tectonics and the Indian summer monsoon plays a key role in shaping drainage system of major Himalayan rivers. The Neogene‒Quaternary fill of the Himalayan foreland‐basin system holds critical constraints in their sedimentary archive for understanding these interactions. In this study we use detrital‐zircon U‐Pb geochronology and bulk rock Sr‐Nd‐Hf isotope data for tracking sediment sources of the Neogene fluvial succession of the Kasauli Formation and the Siwalik Group in the Subathu Basin of the Western Himalayan foreland. Comparison of results from this study and other previous detrital records from equivalent sedimentary successions of adjacent foreland basins of the western Himalaya point to substantial variability of provenance signal along the strike of the orogen. Marked occurrence of 40–110 Ma zircon population appearing at recurrent intervals within the Siwalik Group points to a sediment sourcing in the Trans‐Himalayan Batholith. Here, we evaluate possible paleo drainage architecture responsible for cross‐orogen sediment transport to the foreland basin. We propose that an ancestral drainage of the modern Sutlej River, routed these magmatic arc‐derived sediments across the Himalaya to the Subathu Basin. Zircon geochronology data suggest that this transverse dispersal system was particularly effective during the deposition of Middle Siwalik Formation (ca.11–4.5 Ma). On the other hand, the small‐scale fluctuations in the presence of the Trans‐Himalayan zircons observed in the Lower and Upper Siwalik formations may primarily reflect climatic forcing, which induced changing monsoon precipitation and the Sutlej's transport capacity between dry and moist periods.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".