4.5 Article

Carbonate Assimilation in Open Magmatic Systems: the Role of Melt-bearing Skarns and Cumulate-forming Processes

期刊

JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY
卷 50, 期 2, 页码 361-385

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/petrology/egp002

关键词

cumulate; skarn; carbonate assimilation; open system; Colli Albani

资金

  1. INGV-DPC
  2. MIUR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The geochemical characteristics of volcanic products in a variety of tectonic settings demonstrate that incorporation of crustal material into magmas is a relatively common process. Contamination of magmas by crustal components, in turn, can have a significant effect on magma composition and rheology. Despite this, the mechanism by which contamination occurs is still not well established and its efficacy is denied by some. In this study we focus on magmacarbonate interaction and on the rock shells (cumulates and skarns) formed at the contact between a magma chamber and its wall-rocks. We deduce that previous, unsuccessful attempts at carbonate assimilationfractional crystallization (AFC) modelling can be related to the paucity of information about the cumulate zone in contact with skarns. We use one of the best examples of a magmatic plumbing system emplaced within a thick carbonate substratum (the Colli Albani Volcanic District in Central Italy) to demonstrate that a skarn environment can act as a source of CaO-rich silicate melts, and that the assimilation of these melts into the primitive magma is the main process responsible for magma contamination, rather than the ingestion of solid carbonate wall-rocks. In particular, by means of microtextural observations, mineral chemistry, whole-rock geochemical data and MELTS simulations we highlight the effect of high Ca-Tschermaks (CaAl2SiO6) activity in the melt on the stability of Cr-spinel, olivine, and clinopyroxene in cumulate rocks, define a reaction-cumulate zone where clinopyroxene crystallization is favoured, and model the magmatic differentiation processes active in this zone.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据