Downloaded from http://mem.lyellcollection.

org/ by guest on February 12, 2017

Chapter 1

Precambrian basins of India: stratigraphic and tectonic context

RAJAT MAZUMDER1* & PATRICK G. ERIKSSON2

1
School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia
2
Department of Geology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa
*Corresponding author (e-mail: rajatunsw@gmail.com)

The Indian shield represents a vast repository of the Precambrian
geological record. The Precambrian sedimentary basins were
developed on four major Archaean nuclei (Dharwar, Bastar,
Singhbhum and Aravalli –Bundelkhand; Fig. 1.1) and are compar-
able to those of Australia, South Africa, Canada and Brazil in scale
and importance for global studies of Precambrian crustal evolution.
Some of the Indian basinal successions, as elsewhere, contain valu-
able economic resources. Notwithstanding their global relevance,
many aspects of the Indian Precambrian basins and even entire
basins are not well known to international readers. Although
specialist papers, a book (Naqvi & Rogers 1987) and special publi-
cations (e.g. Mazumder & Saha 2012) have been written by several
authors on specific aspects of the Precambrian geology of India, a
comprehensive account of the time –space distribution of the Pre-
cambrian supracrustal successions is lacking; in particular, the
interrelation between tectonics and sedimentation, and the simi-
larities and dissimilarities of their evolutionary histories with
other comparable successions in other parts of the world are yet
to be addressed in any detail. The purpose of the present memoir
is to fill in this knowledge gap. In addition, the memoir will assess
the potential mineral resources of Indian Proterozoic basins and
integrate piecemeal information to provide a comprehensive
picture of Indian cratonic evolution during the Precambrian.
The content of the memoir has been divided into six sections; the
first gives an overview of basin classification and of the evolution
of Peninsular India during the Precambrian, to provide a frame-
work for the following four sections. The latter are devoted to
basins preserved in the four Archaean nuclei or cratons that
make up the subcontinent. The sixth section addresses Precam-
brian mineralization of the cratons and is completed by a synthesis
of basin evolution of Peninsular India as compared with the inter-
nationally accepted basin classification framework. The first
section begins with an overview (Allen et al. 2015) on the classi-
fication of sedimentary basins with examples from Proterozoic
basins of major cratonic blocks of the world. While presenting
an authoritative discussion of the basis, strengths and weaknesses
of the many classification schemes, these authors also emphasize
that no one scheme provides a panacea framework for Precambrian
(or younger) basins. Real basin examples are discussed by Allen
et al. (2015) for several cratons around the world as a foil to
Indian depositories detailed in the balance of the volume. The
most important finding of this chapter is that many Precambrian
basins might require elements of several defined ideal basin
types in their evaluation, many have complex polyhistories and
some depositories will merely defy classification altogether. In a
complementary chapter, Meert & Pandit (2015) examine the
evolution of the Precambrian sedimentary basins of India within
a unifying chronological and tectonic framework, and evaluate
possible correlation between different Indian Purana-type basins.
Their seminal work provides an essential basis for understanding
the more detailed individual basin studies making up the body of
this book, within a unitary context.
The second section (Aravalli –Bundelkand Craton) con-
tains three chapters on the sedimentology and stratigraphy of
northwestern Proterozoic basins of India. Roy & Purohit (2015)
present lithostratigraphic, geochronological and depositional set-
tings of the Precambrian succession of the Aravalli Mountains
and adjoining areas, Rajasthan. Precambrian basins preserved on
the Aravalli basement exhibit an unusual association of three
major basin-fills, each succeeded by an orogeny over the period
2.2– 0.85 Ga, in which rift-type depositories exhibit stable
platform-style sedimentation in each case. Despite cratonization
being completed by only 0.85 Ga, essentially stable basin-fills
characterized the Aravalli Craton both long before this event and
after it. Chakraborty et al. (2015a) discuss various controls on
sedimentation in the poorly studied Gwalior and Bijawar basins
that overlie the Bundelkand granite-gneiss basement. These two
basins continue the inferred theme of rift-related depositories (in
this case both continental margin rift basins) characterized by
largely chemical stable shelf deposits, one characterized by phos-
phorites and the other by iron formation. The different chemical
evolution reflects responses to rising sea-levels dictated by subsi-
dence regime, bathymetry, biological activity and the oxidation
state of waters within each specific basin. This underlines the
critical evaluation of both basin-specific characteristics and glo-
bal-scale secular change in Precambrian palaeoenvironmental
parameters in understanding Precambrian basin-fills. The con-
figuration and evolution of the Vindhyan Basin are discussed
by Bose et al. (2015). The importance of rifting in controlling
deposition within this famous basin of the Aravalli–Bundelkand
Craton continues the prime tectonic control inferred for deposi-
tories on this craton. However, a much more complex model is per-
tinent to the Vindhyan, with two major east –west ridges defining
long-lived sub-basins in the Vindhyan, while keeping separate this
basin from a coeval depository underlying the Gangetic plain to the
north. Horst-rift-style tectonic control in the Vindhyan thus per-
sisted throughout basin-filling, in contrast to other basins, where
rifting was followed by essentially stable platform deposition
and relative tectonic quiescence.
The third section (Singhbhum Craton) encompasses Palaeoarch-
aean to Mesoproterozoic sedimentation and tectonics of eastern
Indian basins; Hofmann & Mazumder (2015) summarize the
Palaeoarchaean history of the Singhbhum Craton with insights
from the Older Metamorphic Group (OMG) and the Older
Metamorphic Tonalite Gneiss (OMTG). They interpret a classic
cratonic evolutionary model of high-grade granitoid gneisses
(OMTG) and interleaved greenstone belts; importantly they see
these OMG greenstones as having low-grade equivalents in
the Iron Ore Group of this craton rather than the latter sedi-
mentary rocks being seen as a separate succession. Ghosh et al.
(2015) present a detailed tectono-sedimentary inventory on
the Palaeoarchaean – Mesoproterozoic successions of the west-
northwestern margin of the Singhbhum Craton. They define two
new formations, an older distal (deeper-water) equivalent of the
IOG followed unconformably by a younger deposit reflecting
fault-controlled basin opening (conglomeratic) and subsequent
stable shelf sedimentation. Van Loon & De (2015) critically
analyse the conglomerates of Jharkhand and discuss their

From: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) 2015. Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context.
Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 1–4, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.1
# 2015 The Geological Society of London. For permissions: http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/permissions. Publishing disclaimer: www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics
 Downloaded from http://mem.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on February 12, 2017

2 R. MAZUMDER & P. G. ERIKSSON

Fig. 1.1. Sketch map showing four Archaean nuclei in India. Note Proterozoic sedimentary basins (dark grey patches) and the large Deccan basaltic province.
SGT, Southern Granulite Terrain; NFB, Nallamalai fold belt; CITZ, Central Indian Tectonic Zone; PG, Pranhita Godavari Valley; Ab, Abujhmar Basin; Am, Ampani
Basin; Bh, Bhima Basin; Ch, Chattisgarh Basin; Idv, Indravati Basin; Kal, Kaladgi Basin; Suk, Sukma Basin; Ban, Bangalore; Cd, Cuddapah; Hyd, Hyderabad;
K, Kurnool; Kh, Khariar; Nel, Nellore; Ong, Ongole; Vij, Vijaywada (after Saha & Mazumder 2012).

Archaean sedimentation patterns on the Singhbhum Craton. Both
IOG and subsequent immature conglomeratic facies thus appear
to have been relatively widespread on the Singhbhum Craton,
thus supporting possibly broadly correlatable greenstone succes-
sions, as for example also found in the Pilbara Craton of
Western Australia, and in contrast to accretionary greenstones of
the Superior or Kaapvaal cratons, which young across preserved
cratonic nuclei. Issues related to the Archaean – Proterozoic tran-
sition in the Singhbhum Craton and the relation of Singhbhum
Craton-specific geological events to possible global equivalents
are discussed by Mazumder et al. (2015). Post-Singhbhum Gran-
itoid cooling and later possibly plume-related crustal doming
during the Chaibasa –Dhalbhum transition appear to have been
prime controls on subsequent sedimentation.
The Palaeoproterozoic basinal successions of the Bastar Craton
(Section 4) are discussed in four chapters. Mohanty (2015) pre-
sents a brief overview of the Palaeoproterozoic supracrustals
of the Bastar (Dongargarh Supergroup and Sausar Group). The
c. 2.5–2.1 Ga Dongargarh Basin-fill suggests post-orogenic col-
lapse and concomitant rift basin formation followed by stable
 Downloaded from http://mem.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on February 12, 2017
PRECAMBRIAN BASINS OF INDIA
shelf development, while a rift basin is also inferred for the
c. 2.4–2.2 Ga Sausar Group; the latter includes glacigenic depos-
its, correlatable with Earth’s first global glaciation during this
time interval. Genetic modelling of this glacial interval thus com-
pares favourably with the Huronian glacigenic strata discussed by
Allen et al. (2015) in Chapter 2, where supercontinent formation,
rifting and subsequent passive margin evolution accommodated
these famous glacial deposits. Chaudhuri et al. (2015) discuss
conflicting stratigraphic issues of the Purana succession of the
Pranhita –Godavari valley basin. They interpret this depository
as a polyhistory rift basin located along the Dharwar –Bastar
Craton boundary where syndepositional geodynamics control-
led sedimentation within two sub-basins. Chakraborty et al.
(2015b) provide a critical overview of the geology of the Mesopro-
terozoic Chhattishgarh Basin, another Purana succession, pos-
sibly reflecting a rift-sag basin evolution. These authors have
highlighted controversial issues of Chattishgarh succession that
deserve closer scrutiny. Das et al. (2015) have constrained the
c. 1450 Ma felsic volcanism at the fringe of the East Indian
Craton by geochronology and geochemistry of tuff beds from
smaller Bastar basins.
The fifth section (Dharwar Craton) begins with an overview of
the late Archaean supracrustal successions of the Dharwar
Craton (Sunder Raju & Eriksson 2015). Evolution of this
craton is thought to reflect accretion of either arcs or an assembled
arc-granitic whole batholith terrane (now preserved as the Eastern
Dharwar Craton, EDC) on to the Western Dharwar Craton, which
has a regionally correlatable greenstone succession, the c. 2.9–
2.6 Ga Dharwar Supergroup. This craton thus displays both a
widespread correlatable greenstone succession and accretionary
greenstone belts which young eastwards (compare with Van
Loon & De (2015) on the Singhbhum Craton greenstones), thus
providing a possibly unique Archaean cratonic evolution on the
global scale. Basin evolution related to tectonic shortening is
also envisaged for the Proterozoic Cuddapah Basin, Cuddapah
fold-thrust belt (CFTB) and the Kurnool Group succession
(Matin 2015), thought to have been related to assembly of both
Columbia (Cuddapah) and subsequent Rodinia (CFTB, Kurnool)
supercontinents. Chakrabarti et al. (2015) espouse a plume
model for earliest Cuddapah Basin evolution; this may have pre-
ceded the convergent setting postulated by Matin (2015). This
once again emphasizes the inherent complexities in Precambrian
basin interpretation and that most depositories had polyhistories
rather than simple, single-component evolutions; simple allocation
of any basin-fill succession to a specific standard model in any of
the globally accepted basin classification schemes thus has its
hazards and is seldom recommended by serious researchers (as
also stated clearly by Allen et al. (2015) in Chapter 2). The
relationship of the Nellore schist belt, east of the Cuddapah
Basin and the adjacent Nallamalai fold belt (together these make
up the CFTB discussed in Matin’s chapter) to the Cuddapah
depository are discussed by Saha et al. (2015). They relate this
once again to Precambrian supercontinent cycles, specifically to
Columbia break-up and Rodinia assembly. Dey (2015) examines
the Purana successions making up the basin-fills of the Kaladgi –
Badami and Bhima intracratonic depositories on the northern
margin of the Dharwar Craton. The merits of a far-field tectoni-
cally controlled model for the former and a pull-apart basin
model for the latter are discussed. Sengupta et al. (2015)
provide new high-resolution geochronological data for suspected
Purana deposits across the Palghat – Cauvery shear zone, Southern
Granulite terrane, which confirm this supposition and furthermore
suggest that the Purana basins formed across an amalgamated
Indian shield –Madagascan basement.
In Section 6, Deb & Pal (2015) provide an overview of the
mineral potential of the Proterozoic intra-cratonic basins in
India, accompanied by Mishra’s (2015) brief account of Archaean
mineralization of the four Indian cratons. The memoir ends with a
synthesis (Miall et al. 2015) of the Indian Precambrian basins
3
wherein the basin classification and inferred prime controls on
the genesis of the basin-fills discussed by Allen et al. (2015) in
Chapter 2 are applied to the Indian Precambrian sedimentary
record. Classification of the Indian Precambrian basins reflects a
dominance of divergent plate motion in their evolution, with con-
vergent motion invoked for the Kurnool Basin and the Eastern
Dharwar Craton supracrustal succession; transcurrent motion
appears to have been uncommon, being apparent only for the
Bhima and Kaladgi –Badami basins. A polyhistory with possible
links to a Wilson cycle model may apply to the Cuddapah Basin.
Mantle thermal influences and concomitant dynamic topography
may have controlled sedimentation within Dhalbhum and Dalma –
Chandil basins of the Singhbhum Craton. Time trends extracted
from application of standard basin classification schemes to the
Indian Precambrian supracrustal record indicate a more limited
range of basin types prior to c. 2.0 Ga and a more varied record
of depository types thereafter.
Key issues identified in this study of the Precambrian basins of
Peninsular India are as follows:
1. Indian Precambrian basins, like almost all around the globe,
are essentially intracratonic depositories with cratonic sub-
strates to basin-fills; they thus tell us much about cratonic
evolution and the plate motions, palaeo-atmospheric, palaeo-
biological and physico-chemical controls on Earth’s continen-
tal terranes. However, little direct evidence is preserved of the
Precambrian oceanic plates; the nature of their tectonism and
models for Precambrian global-scale plate tectonics thus
retain a significant element of postulation.
2. The Indian basins underline the critical importance of
high-resolution geochronology in understanding better the
evolution of ancient supracrustal stratified successions.
While this issue has been significantly addressed in cratonic
terranes in developed regions, such as North America and
Australia, and increasingly rapidly also in China, the undeve-
loped segment of the world’s cratons has lagged behind.
Studies of Indian cratons in this respect are in transition,
and some of the fruits of such advances in the Indian
Precambrian supracrustal successions are detailed in this
volume.
3. The Indian basins studied here provide much food for thought
on global issues of Precambrian crustal evolution, including
formation of greenstone belts, Precambrian tectonic regimes
per se and secular changes in global sedimentation regimes
allied to evolving atmospheric compositions, amongst which
major global glaciation events are possibly paramount, in
addition to providing a major contribution to the field of Pre-
cambrian basin analysis of relevance to the international
geological community.
We are sure that this state-of-the-art exposition of the Precambrian
basins of India will help to address gaps in the existing global
knowledge base and guide interested researchers, students and pro-
fessionals to gain a better understanding of Precambrian Earth
surface processes and crust –mantle interactions.
We are grateful to S. Banerjee, M. Bera, N. Beukes, T. Biswal, A. Bumby, O Catu-
neanu, P.P. Chakraborty, N. Chalapathi Rao, M. Deb, S. Dey, G. Ghosh,
A. Hofmann, N. Lenhardt, Q. Meng, B. Mishra, E. A Mondal, D. Mukhopadhyay,
J. Mukhopadhyay, Y. Ogawa, M. K. Pandit, J. Ray, A. Roy, D. Saha, P. Samanta,
A. Sarkar, S. Sarkar, P. Sengupta, E. Simpson, B. Sreenivas, R. Srinivasan,
R. Stephenson, A. J. Van Loon, G. M. Young and U. Zimmermann, for critical
review of the manuscripts. We are also grateful to Professor T. Bhattacharyya,
University of Calcutta and several colleagues for many helpful discussions over
the years and to our family members for supporting us in various ways. The
final draft of this memoir was completed with infrastructural support from the
School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, the University of
New South Wales, Australia and the University of Pretoria and the National
Research Foundation, South Africa.
 Downloaded from http://mem.lyellcollection.org/ by guest on February 12, 2017
4 R. MAZUMDER & P. G. ERIKSSON
References
Allen, P. A., Eriksson, P. G. et al. 2015. Classification of basins, with
special reference to Proterozoic examples. In: Mazumder, R. &
Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic
and Tectonic Context. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43,
5 –28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.2
Bose, P. K., Sarkar, S., Das, N. G., Banerjee, S., Mandal, A. & Chak-
raborty, N. 2015. Proterozoic Vindhyan Basin: configuration and
evolution. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian
Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological
Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 85 –102, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1144/M43.6
Chakrabarti, G., Eriksson, P. G. & Shome, D. 2015. Sedimentation in
the Papaghni Group of rocks in the Papaghni sub-basin of the Proter-
ozoic Cuddapah basin, India. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G.
(eds) Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic
Context. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 255 –267,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.17
Chakraborty, P. P., Pant, N. C. & Paul, P. P. 2015a. Controls on sedi-
mentation in Indian Palaeoproterozoic basins – clues from the
Gwalior and Bijawar basins, central India. In: Mazumder, R. &
Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic
and Tectonic Context. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43,
67 –83, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.5
Chakraborty, P. P., Saha, S. & Das, P. 2015b. Geology of Mesoproter-
ozoic Chhattisgarh basin, central India: current status and future
goals. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian
Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological
Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 185 – 205, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1144/M43.13
Chaudhuri, A. K., Deb, G. K. & Patranabis-Deb, S. 2015. Conflicts in
stratigraphic classification of the Puranas of the Pranhita– Godavari
Valley: review, recommendations, and status of the ‘Penganga’
sequence. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian
Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological
Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 165 – 183, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1144/M43.12
Das, K., Chakraborty, P. P., Hayasaka, Y., Kayama, M., Saha, S. &
Kimura, K. 2015. 1450 Ma regional felsic volcanism at the
fringe of the East Indian craton: constraints from geochronol-
ogy and geochemistry of tuff beds from detached sedimentary
basins. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian
Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological
Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 207 – 221, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1144/M43.14
Deb, M. & Pal, T. 2015. Mineral potential of Proterozoic intra-cratonic
basins in India. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precam-
brian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geologi-
cal Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 309– 325, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1144/M43.21
Dey, S. 2015. Geological history of the Kaladgi –Badami and Bhima
basins, south India: sedimentation in Proterozoic intracratonic set-up.
In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of
India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological Society,
London, Memoirs, 43, 283 –296, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.19
Ghosh, G., Ghosh, B. & Mukhopadhyay, J. 2015. Palaeoarchaean –
Mesoproterozoic sedimentation and tectonics along the west-
northwestern margin of the Singhbhum Granitoid body, eastern
India: a synthesis. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Pre-
cambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geo-
logical Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 121 – 138, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1144/M43.9
Hofmann, A. & Mazumder, R. 2015. A review of the current status of the
Older Metamorphic Group and Older Metamorphic Tonalite Gneiss:
insight into the Palaeoarchaean history of the Singhbhum craton,
India. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian
Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological
Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 103 – 107, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1144/M43.7
Matin, A. 2015. Tectonics of the Cuddapah Basin and a model of its evol-
ution: a review. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precam-
brian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context.
Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 231 –254, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1144/M43.16
Mazumder, R. & Saha, D. 2012. Palaeoproterozoic of India. Geological
Society, London, Special Publications, 365.
Mazumder, R., De, S. et al. 2015. Palaeo-Mesoproterozoic sedimen-
tation and tectonics of the Singhbhum craton, eastern India and impli-
cations for global and craton-specific geological events. In:
Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of
India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological Society,
London, Memoirs, 43, 139 –149, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.10
Meert, J. G. & Pandit, M. K. 2015. The Archaean and Proterozoic
history of peninsular India: tectonic framework for Precambrian sedi-
mentary basins in India. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds)
Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context.
Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 29– 54, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1144/M43.3
Miall, A. D., Catuneanu, O., Eriksson, P. G. & Mazumder, R. 2015.
A brief synthesis of Indian Precambrian basins: classification and
genesis of basin-fills. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Pre-
cambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geo-
logical Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 339– 347, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1144/M43.23
Mishra, B. 2015. Precambrian metallic mineralization in India. In:
Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of
India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geological Society,
London, Memoirs, 43, 327 –337, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.22
Mohanty, S. P. 2015. Palaeoproterozoic supracrustals of the Bastar
Craton: Dongargarh Supergroup and Sausar Group. In: Mazumder,
R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of India: Strati-
graphic and Tectonic Context. Geological Society, London,
Memoirs, 43, 151 –163, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.11
Naqvi, S. M. & Rogers, J. J. W. 1987. Precambrian Geology of India.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Roy, A. B. & Purohit, R. 2015. Lithostratigraphic, geochronological and
depositional framework of the Precambrian basins of the Aravalli
Mountains and adjoining areas, Rajasthan, India. In: Mazumder,
R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of India: Strati-
graphic and Tectonic Context. Geological Society, London,
Memoirs, 43, 55– 65, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.4
Saha, D. & Mazumder, R. 2012. An overview of the Palaeoproterozoic
geology of Peninsular India, and key stratigraphic and tectonic issues.
In: Mazumder, R. & Saha, D. (eds) Palaeoproterozoic of India.
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 365, 5 – 29,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP365.2
Saha, D., Sain, A., Nandi, P., Mazumder, R. & Kar, R. 2015. Tectonos-
tratigraphic evolution of the Nellore schist belt, southern India, since
the Neoarchaean. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds) Pre-
cambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context. Geo-
logical Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 269– 282, http://dx.doi.org/
10.1144/M43.18
Sengupta, P., Raith, M. M. et al. 2015. Provenance, timing of sedimen-
tation and metamorphism of metasedimentary rock suites from the
Southern Granulite Terrane, India. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson,
P. G. (eds) Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic
Context. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 297 – 308, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.20
Sunder Raju, P. V. & Eriksson, P. G. 2015. Evolution of 3.5– 2.5 Ga
basins of the Dharwar Craton. In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G.
(eds) Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic
Context. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 223 –230,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/M43.15
Van Loon, A. J. & De, S. 2015. Archaean sedimentation on the
Singhbhum craton: depositional environments of conglomerates in
Jharkhand (east India). In: Mazumder, R. & Eriksson, P. G. (eds)
Precambrian Basins of India: Stratigraphic and Tectonic Context.
Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 43, 109 –119, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1144/M43.8