Ultrahigh‐pressure and High‐p Lawsonite Eclogites in Muzhaerte, Chinese Western Tianshan

Zeng Lu,Lifei Zhang,Ji Yue,Xiaoli Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jmg.12482
IF: 3.4
2019-01-01
Journal of Metamorphic Geology
Abstract:Lawsonite eclogites are crucial to decipher material recycling along a cold geotherm into the deep Earth and orogenic geodynamics at convergent margins. However, their tectono-metamorphic role and record especially at ultrahigh-pressure (UHP) conditions are poorly known due to rare exposure in orogenic belts. In a similar to 4 km long cross-section in Muzhaerte, China, at the western termination of the HP-UHP metamorphic belt of western Tianshan, metabasite blocks contain omphacite and lawsonite inclusions in porphyroblastic garnet, although matrix assemblages have been significantly affected by overprinting at shallower structural levels. Two types of lawsonite eclogites occur in different parts of the section and are distinguished based on inclusion assemblages in garnet: Type 1 (UHP) with the peak equilibrium assemblage garnet+omphacite +/- jadeite+lawsonite+rutile+coesite +/- chlorite +/- glaucophane and Type 2 (HP) with the assemblage garnet+omphacite +/- diopside+lawsonite+titanite+quartz +/- actinolite +/- chlorite+glaucophane. Pristine coesite and lawsonite and their pseudomorphs in Type 1 are present in the mantle domains of zoned garnet, indicative of a coesite-lawsonite eclogite facies. Regardless of grain size and zoning profiles, garnet with Type 1 inclusions systematically shows higher Mg and lower Ca contents than Type 2 (prp(4-25)grs(13-24) and prp(1-8)grs(20-45) respectively). Phase equilibria modelling indicates that the low-Ca garnet core and mantle of Type 1 formed at UHP conditions and that there was a major difference in peak pressures (i.e., maximum return depth) between the two types (2.8-3.2 GPa at 480-590 degrees C and 1.3-1.85 GPa at 390-500 degrees C respectively). Scattered exposures of Type 1 lawsonite eclogite is scatteredly exposed in the north of the Muzhaerte section with a structural thickness of similar to 1 km, whereas Type 2 occurs throughout the rest of the section. We conclude from this regular distribution that they were derived from two contrasting units that formed along two different geothermal systems (150-200 degrees C/GPa for the northern UHP unit and 200-300 degrees C/GPa for the southern HP unit), with subsequent stacking of UHP and HP slices at a kilometre scale.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?