Brookfield opposes the model by explaining that in the Lesser Himalaya, thick and well developed strata, younger than Precambrian of age, are absent, while it is very well preserved in Tethyan Himalaya.
DeCelles et al.
also demonstrated that this model fails to explain the relationship of Greater Himalaya and Lesser Himalaya, along the main central thrust in Nepal.
In addition, Spencer et al.
achieved contrasting results in the εNd values, revealing a more negative value in Lesser Himalaya compared to both the Greater Himalaya and Tethyan Himalaya, suggesting different sources amongst the sequences.
The latter two have values that resemble the Arabian Shield and Eastern Antarctica, which conflict with the Indian Shield source that composes Lesser Himalaya.
Brookfield opposes the model by explaining that in the Lesser Himalaya, thick and well developed strata, younger than Precambrian of age, are absent, while it is very well preserved in Tethyan Himalaya. DeCelles et al. also demonstrated that this model fails to explain the relationship of Greater Himalaya and Lesser Himalaya, along the main central thrust in Nepal. In addition, Spencer et al. achieved contrasting results in the εNd values, revealing a more negative value in Lesser Himalaya compared to both the Greater Himalaya and Tethyan Himalaya, suggesting different sources amongst the sequences. The latter two have values that resemble the Arabian Shield and Eastern Antarctica, which conflict with the Indian Shield source that composes Lesser Himalaya.
Pre-collisional Himalaya