4.7 Article

A refractory mantle protolith in younger continental crust, east-central China: Age and composition of zircon in the Sulu ultrahigh-pressure peridotite

Journal

GEOLOGY
Volume 34, Issue 9, Pages 705-708

Publisher

GEOLOGICAL SOC AMERICA, INC
DOI: 10.1130/G22569.1

Keywords

peridotitic zircon; Hf isotope; trace element; U-Pb dating; Sulu UHP terrane; China

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Zircons have been extracted from garnet peridotite and its wall rock (gneiss), which was intersected by the pre-pilot hole of the Chinese Continental Scientific Drilling project (CCSD-PP1) in the Sulu ultrahigh-pressure (UHP) metamorphic belt. The peridotitic zircons record early Mesozoic UHP metamorphism ((206)pb/U-238 age of 223.5 +/- 7.5 Ma), but their Hf isotope compositions indicate that the protolith of the peridotite is at least Mesoproterozoic in age (minimum depleted-mantle ages [T-DM] of 1.4 Ga). Zircons from the gneiss also reflect the Mesozoic metamorphism, with a cluster of (206)pb/U-238 ages at 224.5 +/- 11.5 Ma; a trail of discordant grains indicates a protolith age older than 800 Ma, consistent with T-DM model ages of younger than 1.2 Ga. The peridotitic zircons have trace-element patterns similar to kimberlitic and/or carbonalitic zircons, while those from the gneiss have affinities with zircons from syenites/monzonites. The differences suggest that the metasomatic agents that affected the peridotitic zircons were derived from the asthenospheric mantle rather than from subducted continental crust. The strong depletion of the CCSD-PP1 peridotite in basaltic components, and the relatively unradiogenic Hf isotopic compositions (e.g., -16.3 to similar to-13.8 epsilon-Hf) of the peridotitic zircons, indicate that the peridotitic body is a fragment of refractory Archean mantle that experienced Mesoproterozoic metasomatism and represents a tectonic intrusion into younger crust.

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