4.7 Article

An Early Cretaceous garnet-bearing metaluminous A-type granite intrusion in the East Qinling Orogen, central China: Petrological, mineralogical and geochemical constraints

期刊

GEOSCIENCE FRONTIERS
卷 3, 期 5, 页码 635-646

出版社

CHINA UNIV GEOSCIENCES, BEIJING
DOI: 10.1016/j.gsf.2011.11.011

关键词

Garnet; A-type granite; Early Cretaceous; East Qinling Orogen

资金

  1. Key International S & T Cooperation Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology [2007DFA21230]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of China [40521001, 40334037, 40903017]
  3. Nature Science Foundation of Hubei Province [2009CDA004]
  4. Ministry of Education of China
  5. State Administration of Foreign Expert Affairs of China [B07039]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Erlangmiao granite intrusion is located in the eastern part of the East Qinling Orogen. The granite contains almost 99 vol.% felsic minerals with accessory garnet, muscovite, biotite, zircon, and Fe-Ti oxide. Garnet is the dominant accessory mineral, shows zoned texture, and is rich in w(FeO) (14.13%-16.09%) and w(MnO) (24.21%-27.44%). The rocks have high SiO2, alkalis, FeOt/MgO, TiO2/MgO and low Al2O3, CaO with w(Na2O)/w(K2O)> 1. Their Rb, Ga, Ta, Nb, Y, and Yb contents are high and Sr, Ba, Eu, Zr, P, and Ti contents are low. These features indicate that the Erlangmiao granite is a highly evolved metaluminous A-type. Garnet crystallized at the expense of biotite from the MnO-rich evolved melt after fractionation of biotite, plagioclase, K-feldspar, zircon, apatite, and ilmenite. The relatively high initial Sr-87/Sr-86 ratios (0.706-0.708), low and negative epsilon(Nd) (120 Ma) values (-6.6 to 9.0), and old Nd model ages (1.5-1.7 Ga) suggest that the rocks were probably formed by partial melting of the Paleoproterozoic granitic gneisses from the basement, with participation of depleted mantle in an extensional setting. (C) 2011, China University of Geosciences (Beijing) and Peking University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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