Further Evaluation of Penglai Zircon Megacrysts as a Reference Material for (U‐Th)/He Dating

Shun Yu,Jingbo Sun,Noreen J. Evans,Martin Danišík,Lin Wu,Yuntao Tian,Ze Shen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/GGR.12331
2020-01-01
Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research
Abstract:The alpha-ejection-corrected (U-Th)/He dates of the widely used reference materials (e.g., Fish Canyon Tuff zircon) can be inaccurate for several reasons (e.g., inclusions, U-Th zonation). There is a need for large, widely available, compositionally homogeneous mineral reference materials with accurately and precisely known ages. In this work, four individual Penglai zircon megacrysts are evaluated via interlaboratory (U-Th)/He dating comparison, trace element analysis, U-Pb dating and a range of characterisation methods. The (U-Th)/He ages and(206)Pb/U-238 ages are variable between Penglai megacrysts - 4.12 +/- 0.10 Ma (1s) and 4.29 +/- 0.05 Ma (1s) (PL1), 3.07 +/- 0.25 Ma (1s) and 3.95 +/- 0.05 Ma (1s) (PL2), 3.04 +/- 0.24 Ma (1s) and 3.06 +/- 0.07 Ma (1s) (PL4), and 4.49 +/- 0.07 Ma (1s) (PL5; (U-Th)/He age only), respectively. A single, cm-sized megacryst (PL1) qualifies as a new (U-Th)/He dating reference material, as it is structurally and chemically homogeneous, and yielded a highly reproducible and statistically indistinguishable (U-Th)/He age of 4.12 +/- 0.10 Ma from repeated analysis in multiple laboratories (slightly younger than the(206)Pb/U-238 age of 4.29 +/- 0.05 Ma). These results confirm Penglai zircon as a suitable reference material for (U-Th)/He dating, on the proviso that some care needs to be taken to characterise individual megacrysts for trace element zonation, and to verify (U-Th)/He (and U-Pb ages, if double dating) prior to routine use. The(206)Pb/U-238 ages and (U-Th)/He ages obtained in this work provide constraints on the timing of Penglai megacryst crystallisation and eruption, and confirm at least two eruptive episodes during the Neogene in the Leiqiong area.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?