3.8 Article

Terminal Ediacaran anoxia in deep-ocean: Trace element evidence from cherts of the Liuchapo Formation, South China

期刊

SCIENCE IN CHINA SERIES D-EARTH SCIENCES
卷 52, 期 6, 页码 807-822

出版社

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11430-009-0070-7

关键词

chert; anoxia; trace elements; redox proxy; Ediacaran; South China

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [40532012, 40873007, 40603021]
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences [KZCX3-SW-141]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Here we report a detailed trace element study of the cherts from Liuchapo Formation, which is a terminal Ediacaran (551-542 Ma) succession in South China deposited in deep-water basinal setting. The REE of Liuchapo cherts shows similar features as observed for anoxic modern seawater (but not for hydrothermal fluids), characterized by positive La anomaly (La-N/Ce-N = 0.83-1.91, average 1.37), moderately negative Ce anomaly (0.53-1.1, average 0.73), positive Gd anomaly (average 1.08), positive Y anomaly (average 1.21), and depleted LREE and MREE. In addition, the Liuchapo cherts have low I REE pound (3.36-56.13 ppm, average 20.6 ppm), low Al2O3, Ti, Th and Zr concentrations, and high Y/Ho ratios (up to 43.9). The redox-sensitive trace elements concentrations in the cherts do not correlate with detrital input proxies. All of these features suggest that the redox-sensitive trace elements in the cherts were authigenically concentrated in water column and their concentrations thus are excellent indicators of ancient redox conditions. Very low Th/U ratios, high V/(V+Ni) and Fe-aScurrency sign/Al ratios, enrichments of redox-sensitive trace elements (U, V, Mo), and low concentration of Mn in the cherts imply anoxia in the deep seawater. Our data reveal that the terminal Ediacaran ocean was not completely oxidized and the deep ocean was still anoxic, at least in South China. We propose that although the oxidative events existed in the terminal Ediacaran oceans, decomposition of organic matter prolonged anoxia in the deep ocean.

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

3.8
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