Seismic crustal structure of the Limpopo mobile belt, Zimbabwe

Abstract

A 145 km N–S seismic traverse was deployed to determine the crustal structure of the Limpopo mobile belt in southern Zimbabwe and the nature of its northern boundary with the Zimbabwean craton. Rockbursts from South African gold mines to the south and regional seismicity from the Kariba-South Zambia belt to the north were used as seismic sources. P-wave relative teleseismic residuals were also measured to assess whether any velocity contrast between the craton and the mobile belt extended into the upper mantle. Interpretation of reduced travel times from the local Buchwa iron-ore mine blasts, which were broadside to the traverse, revealed an upper crustal interface in the Limpopo mobile belt at a depth of 5.8 ± 0.6 km, dividing material with a velocity of about 5.8 km/s from that of about 6.4 km/s. On the craton, arrivals from the same source showed a 4.4 ± 0.5 km thick 5.5 km/s layer overlying crust of about velocity 6.5 km/s. P-wave arrivals from the regional seismicity were used to construct a crustal cross-section. Absolute crustal thickness was tentatively estimated from the identification of a Moho reflection on the mine blast recordings. To the south of Rutenga, the crust thins from around 34 km to 29 km in association with a positive gravity anomaly centred over the late-Karoo Nuanetsi Igneous Province and Karoo Tuli Syncline. North of Rutenga to the boundary with the Zimbabwean craton, the crust is about 34 km thick. The craton boundary was found to be a steeply southerly dipping zone associated with high-velocity material, which could either be deep-seated greenstones or mafic material associated with the margin in the region studied. This zone divides cratonic crust, which was found to be about 40 km thick, from that typical of the mobile belt and implies a step in the Moho of around 6 km. Analysis of relative teleseismic residuals showed that the velocity contrasts are not confined to the crust but extend into the uppermost upper mantle with the cratonic lithosphere being about 4% faster than that of the Limpopo mobile belt. The resolution of the technique is such that it is difficult to ascertain whether these differences are features of Precambrian evolution or are due to reactivation of the upper mantle during Karoo igneous and tectonic activity.