4.7 Article

Slow exhumation of UHP terranes: Titanite and rutile ages of the Western Gneiss Region, Norway

期刊

EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS
卷 272, 期 3-4, 页码 531-540

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2008.05.019

关键词

titanite; rutile; geochronology; ultrahigh-pressure; Norway

资金

  1. NSF [EAR-0510453, EAR-0549674]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

U-Pb ages of titanite and rutile were obtained from the central Western Gneiss Region, Norway, to assess the style and timing of exhumation and cooling of the Western Gneiss UHP terrane. Approximately half of the titanite ages are concordant, the majority of which yield a limited age range from 393 to 390 Ma. The other titanite data are discordant, and define discordia arrays with upper intercept ages of either similar to 938 Ma or similar to 1.6 Ga, and a lower interceptof similar to 389 Ma. Concordant rutile analyses range from 385 to 392 Ma. Both titanite and rutile ages young WNW toward the core of the orogen and are similar to 4 Ma older than 40Ar/39Ar muscovite ages, corresponding to a cooling rate of similar to 90 degrees C/Ma. A well-defined boundary between concordant and discordant titanite ages, in combination with the WNW-increasing P-T gradient and the similarity between muscovite cooling ages in the east and eclogite ages in the west, suggests that the WGR remained coherent throughout its exhumation history, and was progressively unroofed from east to west.A390.2 +/- 0.8 Ma titanite in the Soroyane UHP domain indicates that exhumation occurred at a vertical rate of similar to 7 mm/yr for similar to 12 Ma. These rates are slower than estimates from smaller UHP terranes, but similar to other large UHP terranes, suggesting that there may be fundamental differences in the mechanisms controlling the evolution of large UHP terranes that undergo protracted subduction and exhumation, and smaller UHP terranes that undergo rapid subduction and exhumation. (c) 2008 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