Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:46:05.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Melt segregation in the lower crust: how have experiments helped us?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

Tracy Rushmer
Tracy Rushmer
Affiliation:
Tracy Rushmer, Department of Geology, Perkins Hall,University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 054505-0122, U.S.A..
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

The rheological and chemical behaviour of the lower crust during anatexis has been a major focus of geological investigations for many years. Modern studies of crustal evolution require significant knowledge, not only of the potential source regions for granites, but also of the transport paths and emplacement mechanisms operating during granite genesis. We have gained significant insights into the segregation and transport of granitoid melts from the results of experimental studies on rock behaviour during partial melting. Experiments performed on crustal rock cores under both hydrostatic conditions and during deformation have led, in part, to two conclusions. (1) The interfacial energy controlling melt distribution is anisotropic and, as a result, the textures deviate significantly from those predicted for ideal systems—planar solid-melt interfaces are developed in addition to triple junction melt pockets. The ideal dihedral angle model for melt distribution cannot be used as a constraint to predict melt migration in the lower crust. (2) The ‘critical melt fraction’ model, which requires viscous, granitic melt to remain in the source until melt fractions reach >25 vol%, is not a reliable model for melt segregation. The most recent experimental results on crustal rock cores which have helped advance our understanding of melt segregation processes have shown that melt segregation is controlled by several variables, including the depth of melting, the type of reaction and the volume change associated with that reaction. Larger scale processes such as tectonic environment determine the rate at which the lower crust heats and deforms, thus the tectonic setting controls the melt fraction at which segregation takes place, in addition to the pressure and temperature of the potential melting reactions. Melt migration therefore can occur at a variety of different melt fractions depending on the tectonic environment; these results have significant implications for the predicted geochemistry of the magmas themselves.

Keywords

melting reactionsmelt migrationstatic experimentsexperimental rock deformationstressstraingeochemistry
Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 87 , Issue 1-2: Third Hutton Symposium. The Origin of Ganites and Related Rocks , 1996 , pp. 73 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arzi, A. A. 1978. Critical phenomena in the rheology of partially melted rocks. TECTONOPHYSICS 44, 173–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbero, L., Villaseca, C, Rogers, G.&Brown, P. E. 1995. eochemical and isotopic disequilibrium in crustal melting: an insight from the anatectic granitoids from Toledo. Spain. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15, 745–66.Google Scholar
Brearley, A. J.&Rubie, D. C. 1990. Effects of H2O on the disequilibrium breakdown of muscovite + quartz. J PETROL 31, 925–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M, Averkin, Y. A., McLellan, E. L.&Sawyer, E. W. 1995a. Melt segregation in migmatites. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15, 655–80.Google Scholar
Brown, M., Rushmer, T.&Sawyer, E. W. 1995b. Segregation of melts from crustal protoliths: mechanisms and consequences. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15, 551–64.Google Scholar
Cavallini, M, Vielzeuf, D., Bottazzi, P., Mazzucchelli, M.&Ottolini, L. 1995. Direct measurement of rare earth contents in partial melts from metapelites. TERRA ABSTR 7, 344–5.Google Scholar
Clemens, J. D.&Mawer, C. K. 1992. Granitic magma transport by fracture propagation. TECTONOPHYSICS 204, 339–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connolly, J. A. D.&Ko, S.-C. 1995. Development of excess fluid pressure during dehydration of the lower crust. TERRA ABSTR 7, 312.Google Scholar
Davidson, C, Schmid, S. M.&Hollister, L. S. 1994. Role of melt during deformation in the deep crust. TERRA NOVA 6, 133–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dell'Angelo, L. N.&Tullis, J. 1988. Experimental deformation of partially melted granitic aggregates. J METAMORPH GEOL 6, 495–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deniel, C, Vidal, P., Fernandez, A., Le Fort, P.&Peucat, J. J. 1987. Isotopic study of the Manaslu granite (Himalaya, Nepal): inferences of the age and source of Himalayan leucogranites. CONTRIB MINERAL PETROL 96, 78–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faul, U. H., Toomey, D. R.&Waff, H. S. 1994. Intergranular basaltic melt is distributed in thin, elongated inclusions. GEOPHYS RES LETT 21, 29–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacker, B. 1990. Amphibolite-facies-to-granulite-facies reactions in experimentally deformed, unpowdered amphibolite. AM MINERAL 75, 1349–61.Google Scholar
Hacker, B.&Christie, J. M. 1990. Brittle/ductile and plastic/cataclastic transitions in experimentally deformed and metamorphosed amphibolite. In: Durham, W., Duba, A., Handin, J. and Wang, H. (eds) Brittle—ductile transitions. The Heard volume. GEOPHYS MONOGR SER AM GEOPHYS UNION 20, 127–47.Google Scholar
Hanson, R. B. 1995. The hydrodynamics of contact metamorphism. GEOL SOC AM BULL 107, 595–611.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, N., Ayres, M.&Massey, J. 1995. Geochemistry of granitic melts produced during the incongruent melting of muscovite: implications for the extraction of Himalayan leucogranite magmas. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15, 767–78.Google Scholar
Harrison, T. M.&Watson, E. B. 1983. Kinetics of zircon dissolution and zirconium diffusion in granitic melts of variable water content. CONTRIB MINERAL PETROL 84, 66–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, T. M.&Watson, E. B. 1984. The behavior of apatite during crustal anatexis: equilibrium and kinetic considerations. GEOCHIM COSMOCHIM ACTA 48, 1468–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jurewicz, S. R.&Watson, E. B. 1984. Distribution of partial melt in a felsic system: the importance of surface energy. CONTRIB MINERAL PETROL 85, 25–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jurewicz, S. R.&Watson, E. B. 1985. The distribution of partial melt in a granitic system: the application of liquid phase sintering theory. GEOCHIM COSMOCHIM ACTA 49, 1109–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laporte, D. 1994. Wetting behavior of partial melts during crustal anatexis: the distribution of hydrous silicic melts in polycrystalline aggregates of quartz. CONTRIB MINERAL PETROL 116, 489–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laporte, D.&Watson, E. B. 1995. Experimental and theoretical constraints on melt distribution in crustal sources: the effect of crystalline anisotropy on melt interconnectivity. CHEM GEOL 124, 161–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupulescu, A.&Watson, E. B. 1995. Tonalitic melt connectivity at low-melt fraction in a mafic crustal protolith. EOS, TRANS AM GEOPHYS UNION 76, 299–300.Google Scholar
McKenzie, D. 1985. The extraction of magma from the crust and mantle. EARTH PLANET SCI LETT 74, 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, C. F., Watson, E. B.&Harrison, T. M. 1988. Perspectives on source, segregation and transport of granitic magms. TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH 79, 135–56.Google Scholar
Montel, J. M. 1993. A model for monazite/melt equilibrium and application to the generation of granitic magmas. CHEM GEOL 110, 127–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paquet, J., Francois, P.&Nedelec, A. 1981. Effect of partial melting on rock deformation: experimental and natural evidence on rocks of granitic composition. TECTONOPHYSICS 78, 545–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petford, N. 1995. Segregation of tonalitic—trondhjemitic melts in the continental crust: the mantle connection. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15, 735–44.Google Scholar
Raleigh, C. B.&Paterson, M. S. 1965. Experimental deformation of serpentine and its tectonic implications. J GEOPHYS RES 70, 3965–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rapp, R. P.&Watson, E. B. 1986. Monazite solubility and dissolution kinetics: implications for the thorium and light rare earth chemistry of felsic magmas. CONTRIB MINERAL PETROL 94, 304–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubie, D. C.&Brearley, A. J. 1990. A model for rates of disequilibrium melting during metamorphism. In: Ashworth, J. R.&Brown, M. (eds) High temperature metamorphism and crustal anatexis, 57–86. London: Unwin Hyman.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushmer, T. 1993. Experimental high-pressure granulites: some applications to mafic xenoliths and Archean terranes. GEOLOGY 21, 411–4.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushmer, T. 1995. An experimental deformation study of partially molten amphibolite: application to low-fraction melt segregation. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15, 681–96.Google Scholar
Rushmer, T., Pearce, J. A., Ottolini, L.&Bottazzi, P. 1994. Trace element behavior during slab melting: experimental evidence. EOS, TRANS AM GEOPHYS UNION 75, 746.Google Scholar
Rushmer, T., Rubie, D. C.&Connolly, J. A. D. 1995. Melt-induced fracturing as a function of rate and time: implications for melt migration at the onset of reaction. GEOL SOC AM ANNU MEET ABSTR PROGRAMS 27, 431.Google Scholar
Rutter, E.&Neumann, D. 1995. Experimental deformation of partially molten Westerly granite under fluid-absent conditions with implications for the extraction of granitic magmas. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15, 697–715.Google Scholar
Sawyer, E. W. 1991. Disequilibrium melting and the rate of meltresiduum separation during migmatization of mafic rocks from the Grenville Front, Quebec. J PETROL 32, 701–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, H. R. 1972. Viscosities of magmatic silicate liquids: an empirical method of prediction. AM J SCI 272, 870–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinigoi, S., Quick, J. E., Clemens-Knott, D., Mayer, A., Demarchi, G., Mazzucchelli, M., Negrini, L.&Rivalenti, G. 1994. Chemical evolution of a large mafic intrusion in the lower crust, Ivrea-Verbano Zone, northern Italy. J GEOPHYS RES 99, 21, 575–90.Google Scholar
van der Molen, I.&Paterson, M. S. 1979. Experimental deformation of partially-melted granite. CONTRIB MINERAL PETROL 98, 7–22.Google Scholar
Vicenzi, E. P., Rapp, R. P. and Watson, E. B. 1988. Crystal/melt wetting characteristics in partially molten amphibolite. EOS, TRANS AM GEOPHYS UNION 69, 482.Google Scholar
Wickham, S. M. 1987. The segregation and emplacement of granitic magmas—some examples from the Pyrenees. J GEOL SOC LONDON 144, 281–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, M. B.&London, D. 1995. Incongruent dissolution of REE-and Sr-rich apatite in peraluminous granitic liquids: differential apatite, monozite and xenotime solubilities during anatexis. AM MINERAL 80, 765–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, M. B.&Wyllie, P. J. 1995. Liquid segregation parameters from amphibolite dehydration melting experiments. J GEOPHYS RES 100, 15,611–22.Google Scholar