The Tectonic origin of the Bay of Bengal and Bangladesh

Manik Talwani1, Maria Ana Desa2, Mohammad Ismaiel3, Kolluru SreeKrishna2

1
Department of Earth Science, Rice University, Houston, Texas 77251-1892, USA

2
Geological Oceanography, CSIR-National Institute of Oceanography, Dona Paula, Goa –

403004, India

3
Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research, CSIR-National Institute of Oceanography,

Dona Paula, Goa - 403004, India

Corresponding author: Manik Talwani (manik@rice.edu)

KEY POINTS

1. Identification of marine magnetic anomalies M12n to M0 in the Western Basin of the

Bay of Bengal conjugate to the Western Enderby Basin, off East Antarctica.

2. Establishment of boundary between continental and oceanic crust in Bangladesh

along line joining the Rajmahal and Sylhet traps (R-S line).

3. Ridge jumpby~118Ma from the Western Enderby Basin to the R-S line with a likely

change in spreading direction for the Indian plate.

4. The 85°E Ridge was initially evolved as a fracture zone, and subsequently associated

with volcanism.

5. The oceanic crust of the Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal is older than the crust of

the Eastern Basin and Bangladesh.

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not
been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process which may
lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as
doi: 10.1002/2015JB012734

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Abstract

We are able to decipher the tectonic evolution of the Bay of Bengal, a puzzle which has not

been satisfactorily solved in the past and are also able to shed new light on origin of the

buried 85°E Ridge. We do so by incorporating a number of disparate items into a unified

solution. These items are the marine magnetic anomalies in the Western Basin of the Bay of

Bengal, the Rajmahal and Sylhet traps and Deep Seismic Sounding lines in India, a

prominent magnetic anomaly doublet and seismic Seaward Dipping Reflectors in

Bangladesh, and a new precise gravity map of the Bay of Bengal. We identify seafloor

spreading magnetic anomalies ranging in age from 132 Ma (M12n) to 120 Ma (M0) in the

Western Basin. These anomalies are “one sided”, the conjugate anomalies lie in the western

Enderby Basin, off East Antarctica. The direction of spreading was approximately NW-SE,

and the half spreading rates varied from 2.5 to 4.0 cm/yr. With the arrival of the Kerguelen

plume around M0 time, seafloor spreading was reorganized and a new spreading axis

opened at or close to the line joining the Rajmahal and Sylhet traps. The prominent magnetic

anomaly doublet connecting the Rajmahal and Sylhet traps indicates that these traps are not

individual eruptions at about 118 Ma, but rather, together, define the new line of opening.

Spreading started at this line and subsequently India changed direction from west to north.

The new oceanic crust, thus generated, underlies Bangladesh and the Eastern Basin of the

Bay of Bengal and is younger than 118Ma. The western boundary of the new ocean floor is

a transform fault which was generated by the spreading axis jump. This transform fault

appears as the 85°E Ridge, and further north, on land, as a negative free-air gravity anomaly

strip. A unique feature of the northern boundary of the new oceanic crust is that due to the

later deposition of enormous sediments derived from the Himalayan orogeny, it lies onshore

Bangladesh, in contrast to most continent ocean boundaries in the world, which lie offshore.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and Background

The tectonic evolution of the Bay of Bengal which lies off the east coast of India is intimately

related to the early opening of the Eastern Indian Ocean. Norton and Sclater [1979] have

first described the overall evolution of the Indian Ocean, but the details of the tectonic

evolution of the Bay of Bengal have not yet been unraveled. These details principally involve

knowing the nature and age of the underlying crust. Three methods are characteristically

employed for this purpose - drilling to basement, seismic refraction to determine velocities of

deep crustal rocks, and examination of marine magnetic lineations created by seafloor

spreading. None of these methods have worked. No drill holes down to basement exist, nor

are there seismic refraction measurements that provide velocities of crustal rocks. Ramana

et al. [1994] did interpret the magnetic anomalies in the Bay of Bengal, however their

interpretation was not generally accepted, as discussed later.

Our research incorporates two seemingly unrelated findings. The first is a satisfactory

interpretation of marine magnetic data in the Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal. This

interpretation is not only compatible with the interpretation of anomalies in the conjugate

western Enderby Basin, but taken together they provide new insights to the evolution of the

Eastern Indian Ocean. The second is by combining petrological, seismic reflection, Deep

Seismic Sounding (DSS) and magnetic information in Bangladesh and adjacent parts of

India, we are able to discern a boundary between continental and oceanic crustal rocks at a

distance of several hundred kilometers inland from the shore line. Using these findings, we

have been able to build on other existing data to arrive at a detailed description of the early

opening of the Eastern Indian Ocean and the evolution of the Bay of Bengal and

Bangladesh. We have not only been able to work both on land and at sea, across different

disciplines, but also across international borders to combine disparate pieces of evidence to

help solve this puzzle.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

2. Gravity Map of the Bay of Bengal

Figure 1 shows a satellite derived free-air gravity anomaly map of the Bay of Bengal. Aside

from the large gravity anomalies associated with the Indian continental margin and the

subduction zone to the east, the most striking gravity features in the Bay of Bengal (as well

as the most studied) are the buried 85°E Ridge (with a gravity low) and the Ninetyeast Ridge

(with a gravity high) [Curray et al., 1982]. The Ninetyeast Ridge was created by the

Kerguelen hotspot as the Indian plate traveled north over it [Mahoney et al., 1983; Weissel

et al., 1991]. There appears to be no agreement regarding the origin of the 85°E Ridge,

although most authors favor emplacement of the ridge over the pre-existing oceanic crust of

the Bay of Bengal. These include a long lived or a short lived hotspot trace (Crozet or some

unknown hotspot) [Curray and Munasinghe, 1991; Michael and Krishna, 2011; Sreejith et al.,

2011], a spontaneous volcanic origin [Chaubey et al., 1991] or the effect of horizontal

compressive forces [Ramana et al., 1997; Anand et al., 2009]. Kent et al. [1992] considered

it a northern extension of the 86°E fracture zone, while Sar et al. [2009] suggested it could

have a continental origin. Gibbons et al. [2013] inferred that the 85°E Ridge and the

Kerguelen Fracture Zone formed as conjugate flanks of a 'leaky' transform fault following the

~100 Ma spreading reorganization of India.

Two further facts regarding the gravity field of the 85°E Ridge are worth pointing out. One,

that the eastern boundary of the 85°E Ridge has a large gravity gradient (~1.7 mGal/km).

Such linear steep boundaries are often associated with fracture zones [Kruse et al., 2000].

This is in contrast to the gravity field of the Ninetyeast Ridge, which is widely dispersed and

does not have such linear sharp boundaries [Krishna et al., 2012; Sreejith and Krishna,

2013]. Second, we note that the gravity low associated with the 85°E Ridge is flanked by two

gravity highs, which at its simplest interpretation calls for a shallow mass deficit,

compensated by a deeper mass excess. This is in contrast to the interpretation for the

gravity field of the Ninetyeast Ridge which has been attributed to a shallow mass excess and

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

a deeper mass deficit [Bowin,1973]. These two facts suggest that the 85°E Ridge has a

different origin from that of the Ninetyeast Ridge.

In addition to the lineation associated with the eastern edge of the 85°E Ridge, only two

other NW-SE trending discernible lineations in the gravity map can be seen. These lie off the

east coast of Sri Lanka. The enormous thickness of sediments in the Bay of Bengal [Curray,

1994] could, of course, blanket the gravity effect of most basement structures.

3. Magnetic Anomalies in the Bay of Bengal

The interpretation of magnetic anomalies in the Bay of Bengal has been difficult, in part

because it was suspected that the Bay of Bengal came into existence during the Cretaceous

magnetic quiet period [Gopala Rao et al., 1997]. Ramana et al. [1994] identified Mesozoic

magnetic anomalies M11 to M0 in the Central Bay of Bengal with half spreading rates up to

10 cm/yr. These anomalies extending from the Western Basin to the Eastern Basin were

claimed to be offset by several fracture zones and belonged to a single limb of the spreading

center. The discovery by Gaina et al. [2003] of the existence of both limbs on either side of

an extinct axis in the Enderby Basin invalidated the above interpretation.

However, we are now able to satisfactorily interpret the magnetic anomalies along a few

tracks in the Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal (Figure 2) with the known reversal

chronology of the magnetic time scale [Gee and Kent, 2007]. To do so, we have plotted

three magnetic profiles in Figure 3. These are: SK72-13 (Western Basin of the Bay of

Bengal), its conjugate, rc1704-b (Western Enderby Basin) and a2093 (west of the Gunnerus

Ridge). The profile a2093 traversing the Early Cretaceous crust in the Riiser-Larsen Sea

[Konig and Jokat, 2006] is used to lend support to the interpretation of the anomalies along

the profile SK72-13.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

We believe that the correlations presented in Figure 3 adequately date the seafloor along the

profile SK72-13 from M12n (132 Ma) to M0 (120 Ma). Correlation of the magnetic anomalies

along SK72-13 with other profiles in the Western Basin (Figure 2) indicates a roughly NW-

SE direction of spreading with half spreading rates of 2.5 to 4.0 cm/yr. We note that the

magnetic pattern is disturbed when the profiles approach the 85°E Ridge as well as the two

circular gravity lows (Figure 2). There is one exception: the M0 chron could be identified on

the 85°E Ridge. The NW-SE spreading direction in the Western Basin matches the trend

indicated by lineations in the gravity field further south near Sri Lanka (Figure 1). Anomalies

of similar age have been identified south and southeast off Sri Lanka [Desa et al., 2006;

Gaina et al., 2007]. On the other hand, Jokat et al. [2010] inferred that the oceanic crust

around Sri Lanka is of Middle Cretaceous age, while Gibbons et al. [2013] suggested the

presence of younger Early Cretaceous anomalies M4 to M2. We too assert that the Early

Cretaceous crust is not only confined to the location of the profiles in Western Basin shown

here, but continues southward and “wraps around” Sri Lanka.

This is the first reliable determination of the rate and direction of spreading in the Bay of

Bengal obtained from seafloor spreading type magnetic anomalies. Together with the

anomalies in the conjugate Enderby Basin (discussed later), they enable us to reconstruct

the opening in the Eastern Indian Ocean.

4. Rajmahal-Sylhet Line – A New Opening

The crust of Bangladesh is thought to be oceanic in nature [Alam et al., 2003]. We believe

that the nature of the Bangladesh crust holds one of the important clues with respect to the

early tectonic evolution of the Eastern Indian Ocean. On either side of the northernmost part

of Bangladesh, in India, lie the Rajmahal and Sylhet traps (Figure 4). These traps have long

been suspected to be related to early tectonic events of the Eastern Indian Ocean. The

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

suggestion that the Rajmahal traps originated from a hotspot, and that the 85°E Ridge

extending from the traps to the Afanasy Nikitin seamounts [Curray and Munasinghe, 1991] is

a hotspot trace, has been rejected, in part, on petrological grounds [Kent et al., 2002]. A

more acceptable suggestion has been that the eruption of the Rajmahal traps is best

explained by the presence of the Kerguelen hotspot close to the Indian margin (but not

directly below the traps), just after 120 Ma [Mahoney et al., 1983; Coffin et al., 2002; Kent et

al., 2002]. This supposition has been supported by the presence of “contaminants”

apparently derived from lower continental granulitic crust of the Eastern Ghats. The

Rajmahal and Sylhet traps have the same age of about 117-118 Ma and their similarity on

petrological and geochronological grounds has been noted [Baksi et al., 1987; Baksi, 1995;

Ghatak and Basu, 2013]. It has also been suggested that both the traps originated from a

single eruption with a very large diameter. What was not noted earlier, perhaps because it is

in another country, Bangladesh, is that a magnetic anomaly doublet of very large amplitude,

varying from greater than +250 to more negative than -250 nT lies between these traps

[Rahman et al., 1990]. Considering the southern hemisphere location where the doublet was

initially formed, it can be attributed to a normally magnetized body. Since the traps consist of

highly magnetic materials, the doublet, with supporting evidence of its continuity on either

side in India [Rajaram et al., 2006], can be extended to the traps. The continuity of the

magnetic doublet implies that we are dealing with a single body that outcrops at two

locations. This body is roughly linear in shape and we have termed it the Rajmahal-Sylhet

(R-S) line. The eastern limit of the R-S line lies under the fold belt and is not known.

South of the R-S line lies Bangladesh with its oceanic crust. Evidence for the R-S line being

a zone of opening where the Bangladesh oceanic crust was generated comes from two

seismic reflection lines shot by Prakla, PK-1 [Lohmann, 1995] and PK MY 8403

[Frielingsdorf et al., 2007]. Their locations and the traced seismic records are shown in

Figures 4 and 5, respectively. Both these lines show Seaward Dipping Reflectors (SDRs).

Lohmann [1995] argues that these SDRs are trap rocks and equated them to the SDRs

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

described, for instance, on the Argentine continental margin [Hinz, 1981]. Unpublished

seismic records obtained by the oil company UNOCAL show these reflectors are spread

over a large area in Bangladesh. Boreholes in an area south of the Rajmahal traps (Figure

4) also terminate in traps [Baksi et al., 1987]. The presence of SDRs interpreted as volcanic

flows giving rise to large magnetic anomalies, is diagnostic of volcanic continental margins.

A good example is the continental margin off the U.S. East Coast [Talwani et al., 1995].

Thus, there is little doubt that a boundary between continental and oceanic crust exists at or

close to the R-S line.

We also call attention to a rectangular strip enclosed by a -20 mGal gravity contour lying

south of Rajmahal traps (Figure 4). Two contours indicating positive gravity values lie on

either side [Singh et al., 2004]. These gravity contours are traversed by three DSS lines

[Kaila et al., 1992, 1996]. The DSS lines run from the Chotanagpur Precambrian basement

in the west to the sediment filled Bengal Basin to the east. Structure sections for the three

lines are shown in Figure 6a. All three sections show a drop of basement from the

Precambrian in the west to the sedimentary basin in the east. In the middle DSS profile, the

basement drop from about 8 to 14 km is at a steep escarpment. It is instructive to compare

the structure and gravity across the rectangular strip with that of the 85°E Ridge (Figure 6b).

The gravity is negative over both the strip and the 85°E Ridge, with positive gravity values

on either side. In both cases, there is a drop of basement to the east. On the 85°E Ridge,

which has oceanic crust to the west, there is a drop off also to the west, while for the

negative anomaly strip, there is continental crust to the west and no drop off. The much

debated positive anomaly in the Kolkata region (with no structural cause below it) is similar

to the positive anomaly east of the 85°E Ridge. Gondwana sediments overlying continental

crust are observed below the traps in the Palashi drill hole located towards the western

margin of the negative anomaly strip (Figure 4) [Kaila et al., 1996]. This is the easternmost

well in which Gondwana sediments are found indicating proximity to the eastern margin of

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

the continental basement. As inferred later, the negative anomaly strip is at a boundary

between continental and oceanic crusts.

5. Magnetic Anomalies in the Enderby Basin

In order to obtain an Early Cretaceous reconstruction of the Eastern Indian Ocean from

magnetic lineations, we need to examine the magnetic anomalies in the Enderby Basin,

conjugate to the Early Cretaceous lineations described above in the Bay of Bengal.

Anomalies plotted along ships’ tracks are shown in Figure 7 and in schematic fashion in

Figure 8. Just as in the Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal, early investigators interpreted

the magnetic anomalies in the entire Enderby Basin as “one sided”, that is, they were

generated conjugate to the anomalies in the Bay of Bengal. This interpretation proved wrong

when Gaina et al. [2003] discovered the presence of anomalies on either side of an extinct

axis after M2 age in the Eastern Enderby Basin, making them “two sided”. Stagg et al. [2004]

supported Gaina’s results and believed that the “two sided” nature of the anomalies

extended to the Western Enderby Basin. In a later paper, Gaina et al. [2007] raised the

possibility that the anomalies were “two sided only in the Eastern Basin (with the extinct

spreading axis after M2 time), and may be one sided in the Western Basin. They also hinted

that the stopping of spreading in the Eastern Enderby Basin (inferred from the “two sided”

anomalies) required the opening of a new spreading center north of Elan Bank, a continental

fragment [Borissova et al., 2003]. Gohl et al. [2008] also stated that the anomalies are two

sided, and inferred M6 as the date of the extinct axis in the Princess Elizabeth trough, south

of Southern Kerguelen Plateau.Further east, in the Labuan Basin, single sided anomalies

M11 to M2 have been inferred [Gaina et al., 2007; Leitchenkov et al., 2010]. Gibbons et al.

[2013] supported “two sided” anomalies in the Eastern Basin, but put the stop of spreading

there at 115 Ma to best fit the magnetic anomaly picks in the Perth Basin, Western Australia.

Thus, we see that there has been a general agreement that anomalies in part of Enderby

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Basin are two sided, but there has been difference of opinion as to the date at which the

spreading stopped.

Our observation of magnetic anomalies as seen in Figures 7 and 8 is that the anomalies in

the Western Enderby Basin are one sided, and in the Eastern Enderby Basin are two sided.

To solve the problem raised by the wide divergence in the different interpretations of the time

of cessation of spreading and the location of the extinct axis in the Eastern Enderby Basin,

we plotted magnetics as well as gravity along the profile rc1704-d. We centered the profile

over a negative trough in gravity, which could represent an axial rift valley, and compared

the original profile with the same profile “reversed” (Figure 9). The symmetry revealed by the

agreement between the two profiles and the existence of the axis of symmetry over the

gravity minimum gives us confidence of the “two sided” nature of the anomalies and that the

time of cessation of spreading in the Eastern Enderby Basin is after M2 time.

6. Plate Reconstruction Models

Figure 10 represents reconstructions from 160 Ma (pre-breakup fit) to 120 Ma (M0) created

using GPlates [Boyden et al., 2011] within the regional plate configuration [Gibbons et al.,

2013]. The pre-breakup fit reconstruction (Figure 10a) depicts the positions of the Eastern

Gondwana landmasses, and several areas which were later to appear as microcontinents

(Elan Bank, Central Kerguelen Plateau, Southern Kerguelen Plateau, Naturaliste Plateau,

etc.) and which were juxtaposed in the Bangladesh region. The next reconstruction is done

at M12n (132 Ma), the timing of the earliest identified magnetic anomaly in the Western

Basin of the Bay of Bengal (Figure 10b). A good alignment of the M12n anomaly in the

Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal with those in the Enderby Basin, suggest the breakup

and commencement of seafloor spreading between India and Antarctica. The NW-SE trend

of the flowlines indicates that this spreading is the continuation of the spreading between

Greater India and Australia. The flowline east of Sri Lanka suggests the occurrence of

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

transform motion along the conjugate margins of Lutzow-Holm Bay, East Antarctica and

southeast coast of India-eastern Sri Lanka. We observed that the Elan Bank, Central

Kerguelen Plateau and Southern Kerguelen Plateau remained with Greater India while

Naturaliste Plateau was attached to Australia.

The M2 (124 Ma) reconstruction exhibits excellent fit between the magnetic picks from the

Indian and Antarctica plates (Figure 10c). The alignment of the synthetic flowlines and

fracture zones suggests continued seafloor spreading, and the amount of crust generated in

the Bay of Bengal-Enderby Basin region is in agreement with that off Western Australia. The

“would be” microcontinents remained attached as before.

The M0 (120 Ma) reconstruction depicts that the spreading ceased in the Eastern Enderby

Basin (Figure 10d). A northward jump of the spreading axis is associated with the arrival of

the Kerguelen hotspot on the Indian plate. R-S line became the new axis of spreading.

Figure 11 is a sketch which details the plate boundary before and after the jump and Figure

12 is a detailed view of the M0 reconstruction.

7. The ridge jump kinematics

The pre and post ridge jump scenarios are illustrated in Figure 11. In the pre-ridge jump

scenario, the plate boundary between Greater India and Antarctica is extensional. After the

northward ridge jump, the southern segment of the plate boundary and the R-S line are

extensional. In between, with the exception of a small offset, the boundary is transform. We

believe that the 85°E Ridge is the southern portion of the transform and the negative

anomaly strip in West Bengal is the northern part of the transform. Kent et al. [1992] have

previously suggested that the 85°E Ridge is a fracture zone and a continuation of the 86°

fracture zone. Gibbons et al. [2013] have suggested that the 85°E Ridge was formerly a

spreading ridge that converted to a transform fault when India changed direction from west

to north. However, there is a question about the date at which this transform fault originated.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Gibbons et al. [2013] believe the date to be 100 Ma; we imply that the date coincides with

the date of the ridge axis jump. We return to this point later.

The continent ocean boundary, before the ridge jump lies outboard of the block that became

Elan Bank. It is also outboard of the area where parts of Kerguelen Plateau (termed KP in

Figure 11, including Southern Kerguelen Plateau and perhaps Central Kerguelen Plateau)

originated. The new line of opening resulted in detaching these partly igneous landmasses

from Greater India. They now reside (Figure 11) in the Antarctica plate as Elan Bank and

various parts of the Kerguelen Plateau [Weis et al., 2001; Ingle et al., 2002; Coffin et al.,

2002]. The separation of Elan Bank from India by a ridge jump has been proposed by earlier

authors [Gaina et al., 2007; Gibbons et al., 2013]. Our study confirms that Elan Bank was

positioned in the Mahanadi region (Figure 11). We note that it is adjacent to the offset

between the two transforms and we would expect the opening to be partly extensional here.

Our study also suggests that parts of the Kerguelen Plateau are conjugate to the R-S line.

We investigated the difference in the dates for the transform motion mentioned above. In the

normal magnetic polarity epoch in the Cretaceous, Matthews et al. [2012] relied on the 55

degree change in the azimuth of the Kerguelen fracture zone in the Western Enderby Basin.

They determined a distance of 395 km between the fracture zone and the closest anomaly

34 isochron (Figure 7). Using a half spreading rate of about 4 cm/yr, they calculated a time

difference of about 10 m.y. which placed a date of about 93 Ma (using a date of 83 Ma for

chron 34). However if we make a similar calculation from the closest M0 isochron, we arrive

at a distance of 155 km, and using similar spreading rates, a time interval of 3.9 m.y. is

obtained. Subtracting this from the M0 date of 120.3 Ma, a date for the spreading direction

shift of 116.2 Ma is obtained. The difference between the two dates points to the

uncertainties in this method for calculating the date for the change in spreading direction.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Matthews et al. [2012] also made a calculation of the shift in spreading direction in the

Wharton Basin. We notice firstly that the fracture zones in the Wharton Basin being curved

do not resemble those in the Enderby Basin, and, secondly, if the authors had used the

curved fracture zones, rather than an isolated straight fracture zone to calculate the time

between M0 time and the shift, the shift would have occupied a much larger possible range

of time between 100 and 117 Ma.

The suggestion that the shift in direction was not coincident with the ridge jump has merit in

that it solves some problems in relation to the distance between the Elan Bank pseudofault

and the Kerguelen fracture zone, but this suggestion raises other problems. If the 85°E

Ridge represented an extensional boundary between 118 and 100 Ma, it would have

resulted in the creation of a swath of oceanic crust about 500 km wide. We obtain this

distance by assuming spreading for 18 Ma at a half spreading rate of 4 cm/yr at an oblique

angle of 45°. The swath should show SDRs where a new continent ocean boundary was

created and not have negative gravity anomalies. The 85°E Ridge is only about 150 km

wide. It has a negative gravity anomaly and the seismic reflection records show no SDRs. It

is also unrealistic to expect an existing N-S 85°E Ridge to anticipate that a future spreading

direction would be parallel to it.

In sum, although we prefer a change in spreading direction to have taken place at the time of

the ridge jump, we cannot, in view of all the uncertainties involved, disallow the possibility of

a later spreading direction change and possibly a gradual one.

8. Discussion and Conclusions

The magnetic anomalies that we have identified in the Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal

(Figure 2) and in the western Enderby Basin (Figures 7 and 8) together with the identification

of the R-S line of opening, allow us to derive a regionally consistent account of the early

tectonic evolution of the Bay of Bengal (Figure 10).

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

We were able to reconstruct the India-Antarctica opening up to M12n time based on

magnetic anomaly identifications. The earliest magnetic anomalies reliably identified in the

Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal indicate ages from M12n (132 Ma) to M0 (120 Ma)

(Figure 2). Magnetic anomalies spanning the same age are also present in the western

Enderby Basin (Figure 7). Similar anomalies have been reported south of Sri Lanka [Desa et

al., 2006; Gaina et al., 2007, Gibbons et al., 2013]. The opening of these non-volcanic

margins was in an approximately NW-SE direction at a half spreading rate that varied

between 1.8 and 4.0 cm/yr (Figures 3 and 8). This was the first stage of the opening

between India and Antarctica and is the continuation of the spreading between Greater India

and Australia since ~136 Ma [Gibbons et al., 2012].

The next major tectonic event took place following the arrival of the Kerguelen hotspot at

about M0 time on the Indian plate. The spreading in the eastern Enderby Basin had ceased

sometime after M2 time and the R-S line in the vicinity of the hotspot became the new axis of

spreading. The Rajmahal and Sylhet traps (SDRs) were emplaced at the new axis of

spreading, and subsequently the oceanic crust now underlying most of Bangladesh and the

Eastern Bay of Bengal was generated. The R-S line was conjugate to the northern margin of

the microcontinents that were transferred to the Antarctic plate. The spreading axis in the

western Enderby Basin could possibly have remained the same. The location of the new

spreading axis necessitated the generation of a long transform fault, which is coincident with

the 85°E Ridge and the negative anomaly strip further north on land (Figure 11).

While it was generally accepted that Elan Bank and parts of the Kerguelen Plateau were

transferred from the Indian plate to the Antarctic plate, we are now able to pinpoint their

original locations. The Elan Bank originated in the Mahanadi area in the eastern part of India

and the continental parts of the Kerguelen Plateau originated south of the R-S line (Figure

12).

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

We have glossed over the age difference between the time of cessation of spreading in the

Eastern Enderby Basin (after M2 time) and the time of eruption of the Rajmahal and Sylhet

traps (~118 Ma) [Ghatak and Basu, 2013]. Since the time of cessation is after M2 time, it

could be immediately before M0 time (~120Ma). We then invoke about a ~2 million year

delay in eruption, and/or extended eruption time for the Rajmahal and Sylhet traps.

We are thus adequately able to describe the nature and age of the crust in the Bay of Bengal

and Bangladesh. However, we are aware that our proposed chronology for the evolution of

the Bay of Bengal does not answer all the questions that arise. Though the Greater India-

Australia spreading is illustrated adequately in the present study, the Africa-Madagascar

scenario could be not satisfactorily resolved [Davis et al., 2016]. The detailed cause for the

negative gravity anomaly over the 85°E Ridge was not determined, although the presence of

a negative anomaly over a fracture zone is not surprising. A seismic refraction survey is

needed to obtain the fine structure of this ridge.

We call attention to the observation that the R-S line is a rare occurrence in that most plate

openings appear on continental margins, not inland. Of course this opening also occurred on

a continental margin, but the voluminous sedimentation converted the continental margin

and the neighboring sea into the landmass that has become Bangladesh.

The data from fracture zones in the Western Bay of Bengal and Western Enderby Basin

supports the view that there was a single change in the spreading direction in the Early

Cretaceous. We submit that there is no universal agreement about the date of this shift-

whether it took place at the time of the ridge jump (which we favor) or at a later time. In the

above discussion we have examined the arguments for either possibility.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Acknowledgments

Manik Talwani thanks the CSIR-National Institute of Oceanography for visits as Adjunct

Scientist during three successive years. He also thanks Albert Bally for useful discussions.

All figures were made using GMT [Wessel and Smith, 1998]. We are indebted to Ana

Gibbons as well as the other reviewer for very useful suggestions as well as for pointing out

errors in our manuscript. The various datasets used for this paper are largely extracted from

the NGDC and NIO data bases and from the publications referenced in this paper. This is

NIO contribution number ……….

References

Alam, M., M.M. Alam, J.R. Curray, M.L.R. Chowdhury, and M.R. Gani (2003), An overview of

the sedimentary geology of the Bengal basin in relation to the regional tectonic

framework and basin-fill history, Sed. Geol.,155, 179-208.

Anand, S.P., M. Rajaram, T.J. Majumdar, and R. Bhattacharya (2009), Structure and

tectonics of 85°E Ridge from analysis of geopotential data, Tectonophysics, 478, 100-

110.

Baksi, A.K., (1995), Petrogenesis and timing of volcanism in the Rajmahal flood basalt

province, northeastern India, Chem. Geol., 121, 73-90.

Baksi, A.K., T.R. Barman, D.K. Paul, and E. Farrar (1987), Widespread Early Cretaceous

flood basalt volcanism in eastern India: Geochemical data from the Rajmahal-Bengal-

Sylhet Traps, Chem. Geol., 63, 133-141.

Borissova, I., M.F. Coffin, P. Charvis, and S. Operto (2003), Structure and development of a

microcontinent; Elan Bank in the southern Indian Ocean, Geochem. Geophys. Geosys.,

4,doi:10.1029/2003GC000535.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Bowin, C. (1973), Origin of the Ninetyeast Ridge from studies near the equator, J. Geophys.

Res., 78, 6029-6043.

Boyden, J. A., R. D. Müller, M. Gurnis, T. H. Torsvik, J. A. Clark, M. Turner, H. Ivey-Law, R.

J. Watson, and J. S. Cannon (2011), Next generation Plate-tectonic Reconstructions

Using GPlates: Geoinformatics: Cyberinfrastructure for the Solid Earth Sciences, edited

by G. R. Keller, and C. Baru, pp. 95–113, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.

Chaubey, A. K., M. V. Ramana, K.V.L.N.S. Sarma, K.S. Krishna, G.P.S. Murty, V.

Subrahmanyam, G.S. Mittal, and R.K. Drolia (1991), Marine Geophysical studies over the

85°E Ridge, Bay of Bengal, in First International seminar and Exhibition on Exploration

Geophysics in Nineteen Nineties (2), pp. 508-515, AEG Publ., Hyderabad, India.

Coffin, M. F., and O. Eldholm (1994), Large igneous provinces: Crustal structure,

dimensions, and external consequences, Rev. Geophys., 32, 1–36.

Coffin, M.F., M. Pringle, R. Duncan, T. Gladczenko, M. Storey, R. D. Mueller, and L.

Gahagan (2002),Kerguelen hotspot magma output since 130 Ma, J. Petrol., 43, 1121-

1137.

Curray, J. R. (1994), Sediment volume and mass beneath the Bay of Bengal, Earth Planet.

Sci. Lett., 125, 371-383.

Curray, J. R., and T. Munasinghe (1991), Origin of the Rajmahal Traps and the 85°E Ridge:

Preliminary reconstructions of the Crozet hotspot, Geology, 19, 1237-1240.

Curray, J. R., F. J. Emmel, D. G. Moore, and R. W. Raitt (1982), Structure, tectonics and

geological history of the Northeastern Indian Ocean, in The Ocean Basins and Margins

(6), edited by A. E. Nairn and F. G. Stehli, pp. 399-450, Plenum, New York.

Davis, J.K., L.A. Lawyer, I.O. Norton, and L.M. Gahagan, (2016), New Somali Basin

magnetic anomalies and a plate model for the early Indian Ocean, Gond. Res., doi:

10.1016/j.gr.2016.02.010.

Desa, M., M. V. Ramana, and T. Ramprasad (2006), Seafloor spreading magnetic

anomalies south off Sri Lanka, Mar. Geol., 229, 227-240.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Frielingsdorf, J., S.A. Islam, M. Block, M.M. Rahman, and M.G. Rabbani (2008), Tectonic

subsidence modeling and Gondwana source rock hydrocarbon potential, northwest

Bangladesh modeling of Kuchma, Singra and Hazipur wells, Mar. Pet. Geol.,25, 553-564.

Gaina, C., R.D. Müller , B. Brown, and T. Ishihara (2003), Microcontinent formation around

Australia, Geological Soc. Australia Spl. Publ., 22, 399-410.

Gaina, C., R. D. Müller, B. Brown, T. Ishihara, and S. Ivanov (2007), Breakup and early

seafloor spreading between India and Antarctica, Geophys. J. Int.,170, 151-169.

Gee, J.S., and D.V. Kent (2007), Source of Oceanic magnetic anomalies and the

geomagnetic polarity timescale, Treatise on Geophysics, 5, 455-507.

Ghatak, A., and A.R. Basu (2013), Isotopic and trace element geochemistry of alkalic–

mafic–ultramafic–carbonatitic complexes and flood basalts in NE India: Origin in a

heterogeneous Kerguelen plume, Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta, 115, 46-72.

Gibbons, A. D., U. Barckhausen, P. van den Bogaard, K. Hoernle, R.Werner, J. M.Whittaker,

and R. D. Müller (2012), Constraining the Jurassic extent of Greater India: Tectonic

evolution of the West Australian margin, Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst., 13,

doi:10.1029/2011GC003919.

Gibbons, A.D, J.M. Whittaker, and R.D. Müller (2013), The breakup of East Gondwana:

assimilating constraints from Cretaceous ocean basins around India into a best-fit

tectonic model, J. Geophys. Res., 118, 1-15.

Gopala Rao, D., K.S. Krishna, and D. Sar (1997), Crustal evolution and sedimentation

history of the Bay of Bengal since the Cretaceous, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 17747-17768.

Gohl, K., et al. (2008), Geodynamic and tectonic evolution of the continental margin of the

Prydz Bay area, in The expedition of the Research Vessel “Polarstern” to the Antarctic in

2007 (ANT-XXIII/9) edited by Hans-Wolfgang Hubberten, 15-36, Reports on Polar and

Marine Research, AWI, Germany.

Hinz, K. (1981), The Seismic Crustal Structure of the Norwegian Continental Margin and

Paleoenvironment Significance, Geol. Jahrbuch, 22, 3-28.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Ingle, S., D. Weis, and F. A. Frey (2002), Indian Continental Crust recovered from Elan

Bank, Kerguelen Plateau (ODP Leg 183, Site 1137), J. Petrology, 43, 1241-1257.

Jokat, W., Y. Nogi, and V. Leinweber, (2010), New aeromagnetic data from the western

Enderby Basin and consequences for Antartic-India break-up, Geophys. Res. Lett.,37,

doi:10.1029/2010GL045117.

Kaila, K.L., P. R. Reddy, D. M. Mall, N. Venkateswarlu, V. G. Krishna, and A. S. S. S. R. S.

Prasad (1992), Crustal structure of the west Bengal basin, India from deep seismic

sounding investigations, Geophys. J. Int., 111, 45-66.

Kaila, K.L., P.R.K. Murty, N. Madhava Rao, I.B.P. Rao, P. Koteswara Rao, A. R. Sridhar,

A.S.N. Murthy, V. Vijaya Rao, and B. R. Prasad (1996), Structure of the crystalline

basement in the West Bengal basin, India, as determined from DSS studies, Geophys. J.

Int.,124, 175-188.

Kent, R. W., M. Storey, A. D. Saunders, N. C. Ghose, and P. D. Kempton (1992), Comments

and reply on “Origin of the Rajmahal Traps and the 85°E Ridge: Preliminary

reconstructions of the trace of the Crozet hotspot, Geology, 20, 957-958.

40
Kent, R.W., M.S. Pringle, R.D. Müller , A.D. Saunders, and N.C. Ghose (2002), Ar/39Ar

geochronology of the Rajmahal basalts, India, and their relationship to the Kerguelen

Plateau, J. Petrol., 43, 1141-1153.

Konig, M., and W. Jokat (2006), The Mesozoic breakup of the Weddell Sea, J. Geophys.

Res., 111, B12102,doi:10.1029/2005JB004035.

Krishna, K. S., H. Abraham, W. W. Sager, M. S. Pringle, F. A. Frey, D. Gopala Rao, and O.

V. Levchenko (2012), Tectonics of the Ninetyeast Ridge derived from spreading records

in adjacent oceanic basins and age constraints of the ridge, J. Geophys. Res., 117,

B04101, doi:10.1029/2011JB008805.

Krishna, K.S., M. Ismaiel, K. Srinivas, D. Gopala Rao, J. Mishra, and D. Saha (2016),

Sediment pathways and emergence of Himalayan source material to the Bay of Bengal,

Curr. Sci., 118, 363-372.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Kruse, S. E., S. F. Tebbens, D. F. Naar, Q. Lou, and R.T. Bird (2000), Comparisons of

gravity anomalies at pseudofaults, fracture zones, and nontransform discontinuities from

fast to slow spreading areas, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 28399-28410.

Leitchenkov, G.L., Yu.B. Guseva, V.V. Gandyukhin, K. Gohl, S.V. Ivanov, A.V. Golynsky,

and A.Ju., Kazankov (2010), Crustal tectonics and depositional history in the Southern

Indian Ocean (East Antarctica: Cooperation Sea, Davis Sea, Kerguelen Plateau), in

Structure and evolution of the lithosphere, edited by Ju. G. Leonov, pp. 7–36, Paulsen,

Moscow.

Lohmann, H.H. (1995), On the tectonics of Bangladesh, Bull. Swiss Assoc. Petroleum Geol.

Eng., 62, 29-48.

Mahoney, J.J., J.D. Macdougall, G.W. Lugmair, and K. Gopalan (1983), Kerguelen hotspot

source for Rajmahal traps and Ninetyeast Ridge, Nature, 193, 385-389.

Matthews, K.J., M. Seton, and R.D. Muller (2012), A global-scale plate reorganization event

at 105-100 Ma, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 355-356, 283-298.

Michael, L., and K.S. Krishna (2011), Dating of the 85°E Ridge (northeastern Indian Ocean)

using marine magnetic anomalies, Curr. Sci., 100, 1314-1322.

Norton, I.O., and J.G. Sclater (1979), A model for the evolution of the Indian Ocean and the

breakup of Gondwanaland, J. Geophys. Res., 84, 6803-6830.

O’Neill, C., R. D. Müller, and B. Steinberger (2003), Geodynamic implications of moving

Indian Ocean hotspots, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 215, 151-168.

Rajaram, M., S.P. Anand, and T.S. Balakrishna (2006), Composite magnetic anomaly map

of India and its contiguous regions, J. Geol. Soc. India, 68, 569-576.

Ramana, M. V., R. R. Nair, K. V. L. N. S. Sarma, T. Ramprasad, K. S. Krishna, V.

Subrahmanyam, M. D’Cruz, C. Subrahmanyam, J. Paul, A. S. Subrahmanyam, and D.

V. Chandrasekhar (1994), Mesozoic anomalies in the Bay of Bengal, Earth Planet. Sci.

Lett., 121, 469 – 475.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Ramana, M. V., V. Subrahmanyam, A.K. Chaubey, T. Ramprasad, K. V. L. N. S. Sarma, K.

S. Krishna, M. Desa, and G.P.S. Murty (1997), Structure and origin of the 85°E Ridge, J.

Geophys. Res., 102, 17995-18012.

Rahman, M.A., H. R. Blank, M.D. Kleinkopf, and R. P.Kucks (1990), Aeromagnetic Anomaly

Map of Bangladesh: Dhaka, Geological Survey of Bangladesh Publication,

scale1:1,000,000.

Sandwell, D.T., R. D. Müller , W. H. F. Smith, E. Garcia, and R. Francis (2014), New global

marine gravity model from CryoSat-2 and Jason-1 reveals buried tectonic structure,

Science, 346, 65-67.

Sar, D., M.K. Maheshwari, S. Rangarajan, and C.S. Bahuguna (2009), Eighty five degree

east ridge and its hydrocarbon potential, Geohorizons, July, 15-23.

Singh, A.P., N. Kumar, and B. Singh (2004), Magmatic underplating beneath the Rajmahal

traps: gravity signatures and derived 3-D configuration, J. Earth Sys. Sci., 113, 759-769.

Sreejith, K.M., M. Radhakrishna, K.S. Krishna, and T.J. Majumdar (2011), Development of

the negative gravity anomaly of the 85°E Ridge, northeastern Indian Ocean – A process

oriented modeling approach, J. Earth Syst. Sci.,120, 605-615.

Sreejith, K.M., and K.S. Krishna (2013), Spatial variations in isostatic compensation

mechanisms of the Ninetyeast Ridge and their tectonic significance, J. Geophys. Res.,

118, 5165-5184.

Stagg, H. M. J., J. B. Colwel, N. G. Direen, P. E. O’Brien, G. Bernadel, I. Borissova, B. J.

Brown, and T. Ishihara (2004), Geology of the continental margin of Enderby and Mac

Robertson Lands, East Antarctica: Insights from a regional data set, Mar. Geophys. Res.,

25, 183-219.

Talwani, M., J. Ewing, R.E. Sheridan, W.S. Holbrook, and L. Glover, III (1995), The EDGE

experiment and the U.S. Coast Magnetic anomaly, in Rifted Ocean-Continent Boundaries,

edited by E. Banda, M. Talwani and M. Torne, 155-181, NATO/ARW Series.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Weis, D., S. Ingle, D. Damasceno, F. A. Frey, K. Nicolaysen, and J. Barling(2001), Origin of

continental components in Indian Ocean basalts: Evidence from Elan Bank (Kerguelen

Plateau, ODP Leg 183, Site 1137),Geology,29,147-150.

Weissel, J. K., J. Peirce, et al. (1991), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific

Results, vol. 121, College Station, TX Ocean Drilling Program.

Wessel, P., and W. H. F. Smith (1998), New improved version of Generic Mapping Tools

released,EOS Trans.AGU, 79, 579.

Wessel, P., K.J. Matthews, R.D. Müller, A. Mazzoni, J.M. Whittaker, R. Myhill, and M.T.

Chandler (2014), Semiautomatic fracture zone tracking, Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.,

16, doi: 10.1002/2015GC005853.

Williams, S. E., J. M. Whittaker, and R. D. Müller (2011), Fullfit, palinspastic reconstruction of

the conjugate Australian-Antarctic margins, Tectonics, 30, TC6012,

doi:10.1029/2011TC002912.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Table 1: Rotation pole parameters used to generate the plate reconstruction models (Figure

10).

Moving plate Fixed plate Time (Ma) Latitude Longitude Angle

Sri Lanka India 160 11.98 85.69 -11.58

132 11.04 84.31 -12.40
124 6.04 77.18 4.0
120 5.89 77.61 0.31
India Antarctica 160 3.49 -163.97 90.56
132 0.15 -168.57 86.13
124 -0.05 -164.79 84.73
120 2.13 -167.05 81.78
Elan Bank Antarctica 160 2.628 145.563 7.587
132 -1.807 141.186 4.748
124 50.676 166.592 1.618
120 0 0 0
Southern Antarctica 160 28.4 -47.16 -8.94
Kerguelen 132 -46.46 116.45 7.82
Plateau 124 0 0 0
120 0 0 0
Central Antarctica 160 -47.04 4.41 -12.41
Kerguelen 132 -36.98 -5.102 -6.493
Plateau 124 -52.08 9.94 -3.56
120 0 0 0
Australia Antarctica 160 -1.79 42.83 -31.84
132 -0.92 42.3 -31.69
124 -0.89 42.46 -31.13
120 -0.768 42.58 -31.19
Zenith Plateau Australia 160 -37.983 94.09 -7.814
132 -38.173 94.196 -6.138
124 -30.114 79.319 -6.414
120 -29.247 101.356 -5.762
Batavia & Australia 160 -62.188 38.136 -15.965
Gulden Draak 132 -60.847 52.836 -15.915
Knolls 124 -56.849 64.804 -15.938
120 -52.667 75.942 -16.376

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 1: Free air gravity anomaly map of the Bay of Bengal [Sandwell et al., 2014]. Two

striking features are the gravity responses of the N-S trending buried 85°E and Ninetyeast

ridges. The buried 85°E Ridge has a negative gravity anomaly with a steep gradient at its

eastern edge. The steep gradient is often characteristic of fracture zones. In contrast, the

buried Ninetyeast Ridge has a more diffuse positive gravity anomaly attributed to its origin as

a volcanic ridge associated with Kerguelen hotspot [Krishna et al., 2012]. The 85°E Ridge

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

divides the Bay of Bengal into a Western and Eastern basins. The Eastern Basin has higher

positive gravity anomalies than the Western Basin indicating younger crust. A thick blue line

indicates the track of the magnetic profile SK72-13 along which Mesozoic seafloor spreading

anomalies M12n to M0 have been identified (Figure 2). Also indicated is the seismic line

MAN-03. There are several prominent NW-SE oriented lineations around Sri Lanka, which

can be interpreted as fracture zones.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 2: Magnetic anomalies plotted along the ship tracks in the Western Basin, Bay of

Bengal are superimposed on the gravity map of Figure 1. The representative profile SK72-13

is indicated by a thicker line. The magnetic pattern is seen interrupted when the profiles

approach the 85°E Ridge (thin dashed outline) or the two circular gravity lows in the Western

Basin. Prominent magnetic anomalies M12n, M2 and M0 are indicated by thick dashed lines.

The orientation of these lines indicates a roughly NW–SE direction of opening. Drilling at the

northern circular gravity low reached rocks of continental origin [Krishna et al., 2016].

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 3: Magnetic anomaly identification along the representative profile SK72-13 whose

location is shown in Figure 2. A synthetic profile is included based on the geomagnetic time

scale of Gee and Kent [2007], using a depth of 7 km to the top of the 0.5 km thick

magnetized body and 0.3 A/m for the intensity of magnetization. The body is assumed to

have been magnetized at 50°S latitude. Half spreading rates of 2.5 to 4.0 cm/yr are inferred

between the identified magnetic anomalies M12n to M0. This is supported by the

interpretation of anomalies along the profile a2093 located west of the Gunnerus Ridge, East

Antarctica [Konig and Jokat, 2006] and profile rc1704-b in the Enderby Basin, East

Antarctica, conjugate to the Bay of Bengal. The locations of the Antarctica profiles are

shown in Figure 7.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 4: A prominent magnetic doublet [Rahman et al., 1990] “connecting” the

contemporaneously erupted Rajmahal and Sylhet traps suggests that these are not separate

eruptions, but define a line of opening at which the oceanic crust underlying the sediments in

Bangladesh was generated. Support for this comes from the presence of Seaward Dipping

Reflectors along seismic reflection profiles PK-1 and PK MY 8403 [Lohmann, 1995;

Freilingsdorf et al., 2007], illustrated in Figure 5. A NNE oriented strip south of Rajmahal

traps outlined by a -20 mGal gravity contour [Singh et al., 2004] lies between two gravity

highs. Three DSS lines [Kaila et al., 1992, 1996] cross this strip which defines the margin

between the Precambrian crust to the west and the oceanic crust to the east.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 5: Seismic reflection lines PK-1 and PK MY 8403 [Lohmann, 1995; Frielingsdorf et

al., 2007] showing the presence of SDRs (in grey). SDRs are a unique feature of a volcanic

rifted margin. Location of these profiles is shown in Figure 4.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 6(A): Basement along the three DSS lines [Kaila et al., 1992, 1996], across the

negative anomaly strip (Figure 4), drops from the Chotanagpur plateau to the Bengal Basin.

The exact nature of the drop varies. In the middle profile, the drop is at an escarpment.

Figure 6(B): Basement structure and gravity anomaly across a DSS profile (northernmost

profile in Figure 4) compared with that along MAN-03 profile [Gopala Rao et al., 1997]

across the 85°E Ridge. The location of the MAN-03 profile is shown in Figure 1. In both

profiles, there is a gravity low over the structural high, surrounded by gravity highs on either

side. We believe that the strip on land with the gravity low is tectonically analogous to the

85°E Ridge.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 7: Magnetic anomalies are plotted along the ship tracks in the Enderby Basin, East

Antarctica superimposed on a gravity map [Sandwell et al., 2014]. The same tracks are

displayed in schematic fashion in Figure 8. Prominent magnetic lineations, M12n, M2, and

M0 are indicated. The anomalies are “one sided”, that is they were created on one side of a

spreading ridge in the Western Enderby Basin. They are two sided with an extinct spreading

axis (also indicated) in the Eastern Enderby Basin. The existence of an extinct spreading

axis and its location are inferred on the basis of the symmetric nature of the magnetic

anomalies and a corresponding gravity low (Figure 9). The Continent Ocean Boundary

(COB) is shown as thin dashed outline [Gaina et al., 2007; Williams et al., 2011]. Fracture

zones are shown as dashed lines [Wessel et al., 2014]. The large igneous provinces are

shown as red outlines [Coffin and Eldholm, 1994]. Several N-S to NNE-SSW trending

fracture zones terminate at the southwest end of the prominent NE-SW oriented Kerguelen

fracture zone. Note the distance between the Kerguelen fracture zone and the nearest

Chron 34 and M0 isochrons. This is discussed in the text.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 8: A schematic plot showing the magnetic anomaly identifications along all the

profiles in the Enderby Basin. A synthetic profile has been generated with parameters similar

to those in Figure 3 facilitating the identification of symmetric sets of magnetic anomalies

M12n to M0 and half spreading rates of 1.8 to 3.5 cm/yr. Single set of Mesozoic magnetic

anomalies M12n to M0 are observed on the left, while “two sided” set of anomalies M12n to

M2 about an extinct spreading axis are seen on the right.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 9: Profile rc1704-d in the Eastern Enderby Basin is plotted with its inferred extinct axis

over a gravity low (unrelated to bathymetry). Also plotted is the same profile reversed about

the axis. Both the original and the reversed profile indicate similarity and symmetry about the

gravity low. A synthetic profile has been generated with parameters similar to those in Figure

3 facilitating the identification of symmetric sets of magnetic anomalies M12n to M2 and half

spreading rates of 2.2 to 3.5 cm/yr.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 10: Plate reconstruction models generated for various chrons using GPlates [Boyden

et al., 2011] within the regional plate configuration [Gibbons et al., 2013]. The rotation

parameters are given in Table 1. (a) Plate reconstruction model for 160 Ma depicting the

Eastern Gondwanaland landmasses. The tight pre-breakup fit of the different landmasses is

seen. Microcontinents such as SKP, and a part of CKP outlined by their 2000 m isobaths fit

into the Bangladesh region. Elan Bank is juxtaposed to the Mahanadi region.

(b) Plate reconstruction model at 132 Ma (M12n) depicting the initiation of seafloor spreading

between India and Antarctica. Flowlines matching the fracture zone trend depict a NW-SE

direction of seafloor spreading similar to that off Western Australia. Note that Greater India

along with Madagascar lies between the Davie and Wallaby‐Zenith Fracture Zones as in

Davis et al, [2016].

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

(c) Plate reconstruction model at 124 Ma (M2) depicting good alignment of the magnetic

picks and fracture zones. Note the comparable amount of oceanic crust present throughout

the Africa-Antarctica and Greater India-Australia spreading corridors. The model indicates

that the Southern Kerguelen Plateau attained its present day position by this time as inferred

by Gohl et al. [2008].

(d) Plate reconstruction at 120 Ma (M0) depicting the extinction of the spreading ridge in the

Eastern Enderby Basin and a northward ridge jump to the R-S line. Elan Bank and Southern

Kerguelen Plateau separated from India and transferred to Antarctica by this time. The

spreading ridge in the Western Basin of the Bay of Bengal is connected to the new opening

at the R-S line via a transform fault.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 11: Sketch illustrating the plate boundary (between pink and blue colors) and the

COB (dark green line). Before the jump, the boundary is entirely extensional, after the jump

the boundary is extensional in the western Enderby Basin and at the R-S line. In between it

is translational, except at a small offset in the middle, where it is partly extensional. India’s

COB is outboard, of both the Elan Bank and Kerguelen Plateau (KP in the sketch) before the

jump; it is outboard (dashed green line) after the jump. The exact position of India’s COB

south of the R-S line before the jump is not known, because it depends on the extent of the

area that was transferred from the Indian plate to the Antarctic plate. We have labeled the

Central Kerguelen Plateau and the Southern Kerguelen Plateau jointly as KP. How much of

these plateaus was transferred to Antarctica in the ridge jump described above, and how

much in later ridge jumps is not known.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.

Figure 12: Grid reconstruction model for 120 Ma (M0) depicting the extent of the oceanic

crust generated and location of the microcontinents by that time. The arrival of the Kerguelen

hotspot beneath the Indian plate [O’Neill et al., 2003] led to the opening of the R-S line,

which included the emplacement of the Rajmahal and Sylhet traps. The transform fault

connecting the spreading ridge on the western side to the newly opened R-S line lies along

the 85°E Ridge and the negative gravity anomaly strip on land east of the Chotanagpur

plateau (Figure 4). Further, the model indicates that the Central Kerguelen Plateau is

conjugate to the R-S line and Elan Bank has separated from the Mahanadi region. Some

amount of extension can be inferred between the Southern and Central Kerguelen Plateau.

Rotation parameters (latitude: 2.13, longitude: 12.95, angle: 81.78) keeping India in the

present day position.

© 2016 American Geophysical Union. All rights reserved.