层状侵入体中锆石的误读

IF 1.2 4区 地球科学 Q2 GEOLOGY
R. Latypov, S. Chistyakova
{"title":"层状侵入体中锆石的误读","authors":"R. Latypov, S. Chistyakova","doi":"10.25131/sajg.125.0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n A recent re-interpretation of the Bushveld Complex and other layered intrusions as stacks of randomly emplaced, amalgamated sills is mostly fuelled by finding of zircon ages that are not getting progressively younger from the base upwards, as expected from a classical model for the formation of layered intrusions. Rather, they display several reversals from older to younger ages and vice-versa with moving up-section through the layered intrusions. Here, we show that the reported zircon ages are at odds with the relative ages of rocks as defined by cross-cutting relations in potholes of the Bushveld Complex. This indicates that interpretation of the zircon isotopic data as the emplacement age of the studied rocks/units is incorrect, making a new emplacement model for layered intrusions baseless. This conclusion is further buttressed by the phase equilibria analysis showing that regular cumulate sequences of layered intrusions are not reconcilable with a model of randomly emplaced sills. In this model, the late sills are free to intrude at any stratigraphic position of the pre-existing rocks, producing magmatic bodies with chaotic crystallization sequences and mineral compositional trends that are never observed in layered intrusions. There are thus no valid justifications for the re-evaluation of the current petrological model of the Bushveld Complex and other layered intrusions as large, long-lived and largely molten magma chambers. A fundamental implication of this analysis is that the current high-precision U-Pb TIMS ages from layered intrusions are inherently unreliable on the scale of several million years and cannot therefore be used for rigorous estimations of the timing of crystallization, duration of magmatism, and cooling of these intrusions.","PeriodicalId":49494,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Geology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Misinterpretation of zircon ages in layered intrusions\",\"authors\":\"R. Latypov, S. Chistyakova\",\"doi\":\"10.25131/sajg.125.0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n A recent re-interpretation of the Bushveld Complex and other layered intrusions as stacks of randomly emplaced, amalgamated sills is mostly fuelled by finding of zircon ages that are not getting progressively younger from the base upwards, as expected from a classical model for the formation of layered intrusions. Rather, they display several reversals from older to younger ages and vice-versa with moving up-section through the layered intrusions. Here, we show that the reported zircon ages are at odds with the relative ages of rocks as defined by cross-cutting relations in potholes of the Bushveld Complex. This indicates that interpretation of the zircon isotopic data as the emplacement age of the studied rocks/units is incorrect, making a new emplacement model for layered intrusions baseless. This conclusion is further buttressed by the phase equilibria analysis showing that regular cumulate sequences of layered intrusions are not reconcilable with a model of randomly emplaced sills. In this model, the late sills are free to intrude at any stratigraphic position of the pre-existing rocks, producing magmatic bodies with chaotic crystallization sequences and mineral compositional trends that are never observed in layered intrusions. There are thus no valid justifications for the re-evaluation of the current petrological model of the Bushveld Complex and other layered intrusions as large, long-lived and largely molten magma chambers. A fundamental implication of this analysis is that the current high-precision U-Pb TIMS ages from layered intrusions are inherently unreliable on the scale of several million years and cannot therefore be used for rigorous estimations of the timing of crystallization, duration of magmatism, and cooling of these intrusions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Geology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Geology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25131/sajg.125.0001\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Geology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25131/sajg.125.0001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

最近对布什维尔德杂岩和其他层状侵入岩的重新解释是一堆随机放置的、混合的岩质,这主要是由于发现锆石并没有像层状侵入岩形成的经典模型所期望的那样,从底部往上逐渐变年轻。相反,它们显示了从年老到年轻的几次反转,反之亦然,通过分层侵入向上移动。在这里,我们发现报道的锆石年龄与Bushveld杂岩坑槽中通过横切关系确定的岩石相对年龄不一致。这表明,将锆石同位素资料解释为所研究岩石/单元的侵位年龄是不正确的,使得层状侵入体的新侵位模型没有根据。相平衡分析进一步支持了这一结论,表明层状侵入体的规则累积序列与随机放置的模型不相容。在这个模型中,晚期岩床可以自由侵入已有岩石的任何地层位置,产生具有混乱结晶序列和矿物组成趋势的岩浆体,这在层状侵入岩中是从未观察到的。因此,没有有效的理由重新评估布什维尔德复合体和其他层状侵入体的当前岩石学模型,认为它们是大型的、长期存在的、大部分是熔融的岩浆房。这一分析的一个基本含义是,目前来自层状侵入体的高精度U-Pb TIMS年龄在数百万年的尺度上本质上是不可靠的,因此不能用于严格估计这些侵入体的结晶时间、岩浆活动持续时间和冷却时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Misinterpretation of zircon ages in layered intrusions
A recent re-interpretation of the Bushveld Complex and other layered intrusions as stacks of randomly emplaced, amalgamated sills is mostly fuelled by finding of zircon ages that are not getting progressively younger from the base upwards, as expected from a classical model for the formation of layered intrusions. Rather, they display several reversals from older to younger ages and vice-versa with moving up-section through the layered intrusions. Here, we show that the reported zircon ages are at odds with the relative ages of rocks as defined by cross-cutting relations in potholes of the Bushveld Complex. This indicates that interpretation of the zircon isotopic data as the emplacement age of the studied rocks/units is incorrect, making a new emplacement model for layered intrusions baseless. This conclusion is further buttressed by the phase equilibria analysis showing that regular cumulate sequences of layered intrusions are not reconcilable with a model of randomly emplaced sills. In this model, the late sills are free to intrude at any stratigraphic position of the pre-existing rocks, producing magmatic bodies with chaotic crystallization sequences and mineral compositional trends that are never observed in layered intrusions. There are thus no valid justifications for the re-evaluation of the current petrological model of the Bushveld Complex and other layered intrusions as large, long-lived and largely molten magma chambers. A fundamental implication of this analysis is that the current high-precision U-Pb TIMS ages from layered intrusions are inherently unreliable on the scale of several million years and cannot therefore be used for rigorous estimations of the timing of crystallization, duration of magmatism, and cooling of these intrusions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.60%
发文量
18
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The South African Journal of Geology publishes scientific papers, notes, stratigraphic descriptions and discussions in the broadly defined fields of geoscience that are related directly or indirectly to the geology of Africa. Contributions relevant to former supercontinental entities such as Gondwana and Rodinia are also welcome as are topical studies on any geoscience-related discipline. Review papers are welcome as long as they represent original, new syntheses. Special issues are also encouraged but terms for these must be negotiated with the Editors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信