4.1 Article

Zircons from the Wambidgee Serpentinite Belt, southern Lachlan Orogen: evidence for oceanic crust at the Cambrian-Ordovician boundary

Journal

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH SCIENCES
Volume 69, Issue 3, Pages 406-418

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08120099.2021.1981441

Keywords

Zircon; U-Pb age; Hf-isotopes; Wambidgee Serpentinite; ophiolite; oceanic crust; plagiogranite

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [FT110100685 EB]
  2. DEST Systemic Infrastructure Grants
  3. ARC LIEF
  4. NCRIS
  5. Macquarie University
  6. University of Western Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined zircons from plagiogranites in the serpentinite belts of the Tumut region in the Lachlan Orogen in southeastern Australia. The analysis revealed that zircons likely crystallized from mantle-derived melts with an age of approximately 486 Ma.
Ophiolitic rocks of the Lachlan Orogen are important because they can provide key information used to refine existing tectonic models for the orogen. This study focuses on the serpentinite belts within the greater Tumut region of the Lachlan Orogen in southeastern Australia. U-Pb, Lu-Hf, O isotopic and trace-element data collected on zircons from a plagiogranite of the Wambidgee Serpentinite Belt are consistent with their crystallisation from mantle-derived melts. Their juvenile Hf-isotope compositions, with epsilon Hf ranging from +7 to +14, and delta O-18 values ranging from 4.35 to 5.07 parts per thousand, are close to typical mantle values and clearly within the range defined for zircons from plagiogranites of ophiolitic complexes worldwide. When combined with zircon data available for the Coolac Serpentinite and recent petrogenetic modelling for the Coolac Serpentinite Belt, a new U-Pb age of 486 +/- 3 Ma of the Wambidgee zircons constrains the age of formation of oceanic lithosphere in the greater Tumut region to Cambro-Ordovician.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available