New geochemical and geochronological insights on forearc magmatism across the Sanak-Baranof belt, southern Alaska: A tale of two belts

Abstract

Abstract The Sanak-Baranof belt includes a series of near-trench plutons that intrude the outboard Chugach–Prince William terrane over ~2200 km along the southern Alaskan margin. We present new petrological, geochronological, and geochemical data for comagmatic microgranitoid enclaves and granitoid rocks from the Crawfish Inlet (ca. 53–47 Ma) and Krestof Island (ca. 52 Ma) plutons on Baranof and Krestof Islands, as well as the Mount Stamy (ca. 51 Ma) and Mount Draper (ca. 54–53 Ma) plutons and associated mafic rocks that intrude the Boundary block at Nunatak Fiord near Yakutat, Alaska, USA. These data suggest that intrusion of the Sanak-Baranof belt plutons is actually a tale of two distinct belts: a western belt with crystallization ages that young systematically from west to east (63–56 Ma) and an eastern belt with crystallization ages ranging from 55 to 47 Ma, but with no clear age progression along the margin. Hf isotope analyses of magmatic zircon from the western Sanak-Baranof belt become increasingly evolved toward the east with εHft = 9.3 ± 0.7 on Sanak Island versus εHft = 5.1 ± 0.5 for the Hive Island pluton in Resurrection Bay. The Hf isotope ratios of eastern Sanak-Baranof belt rocks also vary systematically with age but in reverse, with more evolved ratios in the oldest plutons (εHft = +4.7 ± 0.7) and more primitive ratios in the youngest plutons (εHft = +13.7 ± 0.7). We propose that these findings indicate distinct modes of origin and emplacement histories for the western and eastern segments of the Sanak-Baranof belt, and that the petrogenesis of eastern Sanak-Baranof belt plutons (emplaced subsequent to 57–55 Ma) was associated with an increasing mantle component supplied to the youngest eastern Sanak-Baranof belt magmas. These plutons reveal important information about offshore plate geometries and a dynamic period of plate reorganization ca. 57–55 Ma, but a clearer picture of the tectonic setting that facilitated these Sanak-Baranof belt intrusions cannot be resolved until the magnitude and significance of lateral translation of the Chugach–Prince William terrane are better understood.