4.7 Article

New insights into the Re-Os systematics of sub-continental lithospheric mantle from in situ analysis of sulphides

Journal

EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS
Volume 203, Issue 2, Pages 651-663

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0012-821X(02)00799-9

Keywords

Re/Os; siderophile elements; sulfides; mantle; metasomatism; in situ

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Os isotopic compositions of mantle rocks generally are considered to be established during melt-depletion events and to be robust to subsequent disturbances (e.g. metasomatism). Consequently, Os isotopes are used to date the main melting event that a mantle section has undergone, i.e. transformation of fertile asthenospheric material into a depleted, buoyant lithosphere. However, Os resides almost entirely in Fe-Ni-Cu sulphides, which can be very mobile under mantle conditions. In situ laser ablation multi-collector ICP-MS measurement of Re/Os isotopic ratios in sulphides from spinel peridotite xenoliths demonstrates that whole-rock Os-isotope signatures record the mixing of multiple sulphide populations. Sulphides residual after melting events have unradiogenic Os isotopic compositions reflecting ancient melt depletion; those introduced by later metasomatism events contain more radiogenic Os. Therefore, the whole-rock Os isotopic signature can be strongly altered by metasomatic processes, and studies of mantle-derived xenoliths show that such disturbance is quite common in the lithospheric mantle. Because melt-depletion ages estimated from individual sulphide inclusions are systematically older than those obtained from whole-rock analysis, caution is essential in the interpretation of the Os model ages derived from whole-rock analysis, and their use and abuse in geodynamic models. This work suggests that sulphide could become a key phase in unravelling the formation and evolution of the lithosphere. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

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