Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published January 2017 | public
Journal Article

Contrasting geochemical signatures of fluid-absent versus fluid-fluxed melting of muscovite in metasedimentary sources: The Himalayan leucogranites

Abstract

Most of the Himalayan Cenozoic leucogranites are products of partial melting of metapelite sources. In the Malashan-Gyirong area (southern Tibet), the geochemical compositions of leucogranites define two groups with distinct whole-rock major elements, large ion lithophile elements, rare earth elements, high field strength elements, and Sr and Hf isotope ratios. Based on published experimental results that define generalized melting reactions of metapelitic sources, we infer that these leucogranites are the products of two different types of crustal anatexis: fluid-fluxed melting and fluid-absent melting of muscovite in metasedimentary sources. As compared to the leucogranites derived from fluid-absent melting, those from fluid-fluxed melting have relatively higher Ca, Sr, Ba, Zr, Hf, Th, and light rare earth element concentrations, and Zr/Hf, Eu/Eu*, and Nd/Nd*, but lower Rb, Nb, Ta, and U concentrations, Rb/Sr and ^(87)Sr/^(86)Sr ratios, and ε_(Hf)(t). The geochemical differences can be explained by melting behaviors of major (muscovite, feldspar) and accessory minerals (zircon and monazite) during different modes of crustal anatexis. The systematic elemental and isotopic signatures of different types of crustal anatexis and, in particular, the coupling of major and trace elements that results from common influences on rock-forming and accessory mineral behaviors provide tools with which to refine our understanding of the nature of crustal anatexis.

Additional Information

© 2016 Geological Society of America. Manuscript received 8 July 2016; Revised manuscript received 8 October 2016; Manuscript accepted 17 October 2016; First Published on November 03, 2016. This study was supported by National Key Research and Development Project of China (grant 2016YFC0600304), National Science Foundation of China (grants 41425010, 41503023, and 41273034), and China Geological Survey (grants 12120114022701 and 12120115027101). Participation by Asimow was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation through Geoinformatics award EAR-1226270. Thanks go to Editor James Spotila for carefully handling this manuscript, and to Nigel Harris, Michael Brown, Calvin Miller, Antonio Acosta-Vigil, and one anonymous reviewer for their constructive comments.

Additional details

Created:
August 22, 2023
Modified:
October 23, 2023