4.7 Article

Geochemistry of impact glasses in the Chang'e-5 regolith: Constraints on impact melting and the petrogenesis of local basalt

Journal

GEOCHIMICA ET COSMOCHIMICA ACTA
Volume 335, Issue -, Pages 183-196

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.gca.2022.08.030

Keywords

Lunar impact glass; Chang'e-5 regolith; Differential vaporization; Incompatible trace element; KREEP; Extensive fractional crystallization

Funding

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB 41000000]
  2. Key Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences [ZDBS-SSW-JSC007-15]
  3. CAS Interdisciplinary Innovation Team
  4. key research program of the Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences [IGGCAS-202101]
  5. pre-research project on Civil Aerospace Technologies of China National Space Administration [D020203]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the chemical composition of lunar impact glasses returned by the Chang'e-5 mission and identifies three different compositional groups. The variations in these glasses are likely due to differential vaporization of SiO2, suggesting an impact origin. Most of the glasses have compositions similar to the surrounding regolith, while a few glasses have distinct compositions indicating an exotic source. The study also provides important trace element characteristics of the CE5 basalt, suggesting a non-KREEP origin.
Lunar impact glasses can provide important information on the bulk compositions of their sources and the impact history of the Moon. Here, we report the chemical composition of fifty-four clean glass spherules containing neither relict clasts nor crystals from the Chang'e-5 (CE5) regolith. They can be subdi-vided into three compositional groups: (1) mid-Ti basaltic (TiO2 = 4.1 -6.5 wt%), (2) low-Ti basaltic (TiO2 = 1.3 -3.9 wt%), and (3) high-Al (Al2O3 > 15 wt%). Fifty-one glasses (-94 %) are mid-Ti basaltic, which form a loose compositional cluster for most major and trace elements. These glasses exhibit con-siderable variations in SiO2 (35.3 -45.3 wt%). Their TiO2, Al2O3 , MgO and CaO show negative correlations with SiO2, while the Na2O, K2O and P(2)O(5 )positively correlate with SiO2, also yielding a positive correlation between the CIPW normative plagioclase and olivine. These variations likely result from differential vaporization of SiO2, strongly suggesting an impact origin of these glasses. Their major and trace element compositions are averagely similar to the bulk-rock, in turn indicating that they were formed from the local regolith. The remaining three glasses, including two low-Ti basaltic and one high-Al variety, exhibit distinct major and trace elements from the regolith, indicating an exotic source. In addition, the mid-Ti basaltic glasses provide another approach for estimating the average composition of the CE5 basalt other than directly measuring the small basalt fragments assuming that the exotic materials in the CE5 regolith were limited. This estimation reveals critical trace element characteristics of the CE5 basalt, e.g., it has higher La/Yb (3.71), Sm/Yb (1.76), Sr/Yb (31.6), and (Eu/Eu*)(N) (0.45) than KREEP, indicating that CE5 basalt must derive from a non-KREEP source. Chemical modeling indicates that the contribution of KREEP-rich materials in the mantle source should be less than 0.3 %. The trace element characteristics of the CE5 basalt can be reproduced by extensive (80 %) fractional crystallization after low-degree (2 %) melting. We propose that this fractional crystallization process might occur at depth, implying vast igneous underplating (7,250 -11,750 km(3)) beneath the CE5 landing area. This study also suggests that the high Th concentration (5.43 ppm) is an inherent property of the CE5 basalt resulting from extensive fractional crystallization. Thus, high Th detected by remote sensing may not be associated directly with a KREEP component but rather with highly fractionated basalts. (C) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available