4.0 Article

Paleocene-Eocene high-grade metamorphism, anatexis, and deformation in the Thor-Odin dome, Monashee complex, southeastern British Columbia

期刊

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH SCIENCES
卷 43, 期 9, 页码 1341-1365

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1139/E06-028

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Thor-Odin dome of the Monashee complex, in the southeastern Canadian Cordillera, comprises Paleoproterozoic basement gneiss with infolds of unconformably overlying rocks of a supracrustal cover sequence and is the deepest exposed structural level in the Omineca belt. Orthogneiss and paragneiss of the basement are migmatitic and contain ubiquitous stromatic leucosome and discrete phenocrystic and pegmatitic vein-type leucosome, which are all interpreted to have formed as a result of in situ melting. The stromatic leucosome is infolded with the country rock (F-2), contains a weakly developed foliation, and has a biotite-rich melanosome. The phenocrystic and pegmatitic vein-type leucosome crosscut the stromatic leucosome and the transposition foliation (S-2). Evidence to support an igneous and anatectic source for the leucosome includes (i) petrography, (ii) major and trace element chemistry, (iii) zircon morphology, and (iv) peak pressure-temperature (P-T) conditions. Sensitive high-resolution ion microprobe (SHRIMP) Pb-206/U-238 zircon dates range from ca. 56 to 54 Ma and are interpreted to represent the age of leucosome crystallization. Zircon commonly contains discrete ca. 2.6-1.8 Ga cores that are interpreted as detrital grains inherited from the host paragneiss. Anatexis was ongoing by ca. 56 Ma, as a result of regional prograde metamorphism, and was coincident, at least in part, with the formation of the penetrative S-2 transposition foliation and large recumbent F-2 tight to isoclinal folds. Anatexis continued during F-3 and F-4 folding. Melting may have continued until ca. 51 Ma, driven by decompression reactions, and was concomitant with the D-5 extensional deformation.

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

4.0
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