Field work 2015, the Baltic Shield

Fig. 1. A fragment of canonical map of the USSR; The Precambrian is shown in bright-red colors

For the last couple years I have been studying the Precambrian exposed within the East European craton (platform), so-called Baltic Shield (or sometimes called Fennoscandian) (Fig. 1). My current research project is related to the early Paleoproterozoic igneous activity and associated hydrothermal processes on the Baltic Shield. This summer I needed to visit several localities in the region (Fig. 2):

• The Kiy Island in the White Sea, located near the city of Onega with ~2.45 billion-year-old (hereinafter, Ga) gabbro-norite

• The 2.45 Ga Vetreny Belt rift on its southern edge, where its overlain by Phanerozoic sediments

• The Vetreny Belt at its northern inclination

• The Shueretskoe occurrence of garnet- and gedrite-bearing rocks

To visit all these localities we flew from Moscow to Arkhangelsk, drove to Onega, from Onega we took a ferry to Kiy Island and spend there a couple days. After Kiy Island, we visited Severoonezhsk and then Mt. Golec (Sumskyi Posad, Karelia) to study the Vetreny Belt rift. After we finished working on the Vetreny Belt rift, I moved north, to the Shueretskoe (station Shueretskaya) occurrence of garnet. 

Fig. 2. Generalized route taken during the field work

The Kiy Island, the White Sea

Fig. 3. The Kiysky monastery, build in 17th century

The Kiy Island is known for the orthodox cathedral that was built by patriarch Nikon, a reformer of the Russian Orthodox Church in the 17th century (Fig. 3). The island itself is composed of 2.45 Ga metamorphosed ultramafic-mafic intrusion (Fig. 4). The metamorphism occurred much later, at 1.8 Ga.

Fig. 4. Intensely metamorphosed part of the gabbro-norite complex

Goldschmidt’s “Grundlagen der quantitativen Geochemie” (1933)

 Introduction

Geochemistry, a branch of geological sciences, started its existence with contributions of Frank Clarke, Victor Goldschmidt and Vladimir Vernadsky. The initial concern of geochemistry was to characterize the chemical composition of the planet. Nowadays papers by Condie (1993), McDonough and Sun (1995), Taylor and McLennan (1985), Ronov and Yaroshevsky (1969), Rudnick and Fountain (1995), Turekian and Wedepohl (1961), Vinogradov (1962) and others are probably the most relevant references in the field. However, early influential contributions regarding the Earth’s composition were papers by Clarke and Washington (1924), and Goldsmith (1933). Their studies were focused the average composition of the most accessible part of the planet – continental crust and its components (e.g., igneous rocks merely). While, the paper by Clark and Washington (1924) is easily accessible on the internet, well-cited Goldsmith’s “Grundlagen der quantitativen Geochemie” (1933) was accessible for me only via library order. The actual reference is: Goldschmidt, V.M. (1933). Grundlagen der quantitativen Geochemie. Fortschrift Mineralogie 17(2), 112-156. Of course, it comes in German. I wondered how often such an influential paper was actually read (although I am aware of later Goldschmidt’s papers and a book in English, they are rarely cited in the context).

A good friend of mine, Sara Yanny-Tillar, recently received her Master’s degree in Germanic languages from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Her interest in German language is admirable and she was very kind to help me with translating a part of the paper. The translation turned out to be great and Sara said it was good experience for her to translate something scientific. Thank you, Sara!

Translating the chapter “Durchschnittliche Zusammensetzung der Eruptivgesteine” (Average Composition of Igneous Rocks) is especially important as Goldschmidt used the new approach to estimate the average composition of igneous rocks and continental crust overall. Arguing that the method used in Clarke and Washington misinterpreted the proportions of rock composing the average continental crust, Goldschmidt used fine-grained sedimentary rocks such as post-glacial tillites and shales as they naturally preserve proportions of rocks composing the crust.

 

In situ melting by Madison Myers

Melt inclusions (the round circles in the video below) are little pockets of melt that are trapped in growing crystals during cooling of magma. If magma was erupted and cooled quickly, melt inclusions preserve the composition of the melt in which their host crystal formed. However, slow cooling will cause these melt inclusions to form daughter crystals (shown as the dark grains in the round circles) which change their original composition. In order to restore the pre-eruptive melt composition, I reheated these quartz-hosted crystallized melt inclusions (diameter=50 micrometers) at the USGS in Menlo Park, using a reheating stage and the assistance of Dr. Jake Lowenstern, scientist-in-Charge of the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory. These quartz crystals were taken from the upper portions of the Huckleberry Ridge Tuff fall deposit (2.1 Ma, 2,500km3), the oldest and largest of the three volcanic cycles that form the Yellowstone Volcanic Field. The bottom part of the deposit contains beautifully glassy, and bubble-free melt inclusions, however the upper portion had the unfortunate experience of being reheated after emplacement when the larger, and much hotter, ignimbrite was deposited.

In order to continue our evaluation of the composition of the magma that was being erupted at the onset of the Huckleberry Ridge Tuff eruption, I reheated around 10 quartz grains (each takes 1-2 hours, with the process violently halted if the quartz grain explodes due to it's initial experience at the alpha/beta transition) and videoed the process. Enjoy... 

    

by Madison Myers

Ph.D candidate at the Department of Geological Sciences, University of Oregon.

PS I want to thank Madison for sharing her awesome research on my blog. I hope that there will be more of collaborative effort in exposing our research experience to the web-based audience.

Numerical modeling of orbicular sctructures

Most commonly found in felsic plutonic rocks, orbicular structures represent repetitive concentric patterns consisting of continuous mafic and felsic layers that enclose the inner part of orbicules (Fig. 1). The inner parts of orbicules, or cores, can be a homogeneous spherical body of the same composition as of one of the layers, or a fragment of hosting parental rock or even a xenolith of wall rocks. The aggregates of alternating layer are referred to as shells. The mechanism of formation of the structure is still a puzzle for petrologists. Numerous papers (Eskola, 1938; Levenson, 1966; Elliston, 1984; and references therein) have been published on occurrences of orbicular rocks but all of them lack a quantifying explanation of their formation. For a large review on orbicular rocks see Elliston (1984).

Many authors describe orbicular structures observed in silica saturated (free silica) rocks like granodiorites, granites and monzogranodiorites (e.g., Decitre, et al., 2002; Grosse et al., 2010). However, silica-undersaturated rocks such as gabbro, diorites and even lamprophyres have been also reported (Levenson, 1966; Bryhni and Dons, 1975). It was widely emphasized that orbicular structures are most commonly observed in rocks of Precambrain age, especially in the Proterozoic. This fact can be attributed to inherent conditions existed on Earth in the Precambrian or can be explained by simply more advanced erosional level at Precambrian provinces that allows for exposure of deeper parts continental crust. In the field, orbicular structures are found to be spatially associated with the outermost parts of plutons. Bodies of orbicular rocks frequently form pockets with distinct boundaries between them and non-orbicular structured rocks. The most commonly observed shells of orbicular rocks consist of plagioclase-rich layers and biotite-rich layers. It was noted by many geologists that shells consist of alternating anhydrous and hydrous mineral assemblages. Apparently, orbicular structures are produced in presence of residual H₂O- and K₂O-rich melt (or fluid) interacting with preexisted solid particles .

Fig. 1. Orbicular structure in granite from Kangasala, Finnland. Adapted from Ellison, 1984. 

Using computational code written in MATLAB we present a model of orbicular structure formation in which the driving mechanisms are chemical oscillations and diffusion. In this paper, diffusion is considered to be a source of reactants that are concentrated at one place and spread outwards disturbing the local steady state causing the system to react. It is known that such mechanisms are responsible for producing so-called Turing pattern. After playing with diffusivity coefficients of different components, setting random concentrations of the components in the background and making initially high concentrations restricted to what subsequently became the cores of the orbicules, the code produces something that definitely resembles orbicular structure:

Fig. 2. Graphical output of the code. Warmer colors indicate higher concentrations. 

 

 The video!

This post is written based on my work in Geochemical Modeling class at the University of Oregon. I am grateful to Jim Watkins and Ben Shapiro for teaching me MATLAB and putting the code together that subsequently allowed me to play with it and produce the above described results. 

REFERENCES

1.    Bryhni, I. & Dons, J.A. (1975). Orbicular lamprophyre from Vestby, southeast Norway. Lithos, 9, 133-122.

2.   Decitre, S., Gasquet, D. & Marignac. C. (2002). Genesis of orbicular granitic rocks from the Ploumanac’h Plutonic Complex (Brittany, France): petrographical, mineralogical and geochemical constaints. Eur. J. Mineral., 14, 715-731.

3.  Elliston, J.N. (1984). Orbicules: an indication of the crystallization of hydrosilicates, I. Earth-Sci. Rev., 20, 265-344.

4.   Eskola, P. (1938). On the Esboitic crystallization of orbicular rocks. J. Geol., 46, 448-485.

5.  Grosse, P., Toselli, A.J. & Rossi, J.N. (2010). Petrology and geochemistry of the orbicular granitoid of Sierra de Velasco (NW Argentina) and implication for the origin of orbicular rocks. Geol. Mag., 147, 451-468.

6.  Levenson, D.J. (1966). Orbicular rocks: a review. Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull., 77, 409-426.