Ectasian 40Ar/39Ar age of phlogopite from apopicritic metasomatites in the structure of the Bashkir meganticlinorium in the South Urals

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

In the central part of the Bashkir meganticlinorium, mafic intrusive rocks of the Low-Titanium (LTi) type (< 1 wt. % TiO2) represented by picrites, picrodolerites and metasomatic metapicrite rocks. Carbonate-talc, chlorite-quartz rocks with phlogopite, calcite and dolomite are formed after picrites. Phlogopite has been separates from the metasomatites. According to 40Ar/39Ar step-heating dating of phlogopite, a plateau age of 1356±16 Ma was obtained. Picrites presumably have undergone metasomatism associated with early post-magmatic processes. Metasomatic processes are not divorced in time from the intrusion of picrites. Similar age values are known for a number of mafic HTi-type intrusive in the north of the Bashkir meganticlinorium. The obtained data suggest that these two types formed synchronously, at least at the late stage of Mesoproterozoic magmatic activity.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

A. V. Ryazantsev

Geological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: dannaukiozemle@yandex.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

B. D. Levkova

Geological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: dannaukiozemle@yandex.ru
Russian Federation, Moscow

A. V. Travin

Institute of Geology and Mineralogy of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: dannaukiozemle@yandex.ru
Russian Federation, Novosibirsk

References

  1. Граменицкий Е. Н. Петрология метасоматических пород. М.: ИНФРА-М, 2022. 221 с.
  2. Ковалев С. Г. Новые данные по геохимии диабаз-пикритового магматизма западного склона Южного Урала и условия его формирования // Литосфера. 2011. № 2. С. 68–83.
  3. Ковалев С. Г., Высоцкий С. И., Ковалев С. С. К вопросу о петрогенезисе пикритовых комплексов Башкирского мегантиклинория // Геологический вестник. 2018. № 3. С. 98–108. http://doi.org/10.31084/2619-0087/2018-3-7
  4. Ковалев С. Г., Пучков В. Н., Ковалев С. С., Высоцкий С. И. Редкие Th–Sc-минералы в пикритах Южного Урала и их генетисекое значение // ДАН. 2019. Т. 484. № 6. С. 721–724.
  5. Краснобаев А. А., Козлов В. И., Пучков В. Н., Сергеева Н. Д., Бушарина С. В. Новые данные по цирконовой геохронологии аршинских вулканитов (Южный Урал) // Литосфера. 2012. № 4. С. 127–140.
  6. Краснобаев А. А., Козлов В. И., Пучков В. Н. и др. Цирконовая геохронология машакских вулканитов и возраст рубежа нижний – средний рифей (Южный Урал) // Стратиграфия. Геологическая корреляция. 2013. Т. 21. № 5. С. 1–18.
  7. Краснобаев А. А., Пучков В. Н., Сергеева Н. Д., Бушарина С. В. Полихронные цирконы вулканитов Навышского комплекса айской свиты нижнего рифея (Южный Урал) // Георесурсы. 2020. 22(4). 101–112. http://doi.org/10.18599/grs.2020.4.101-112
  8. Ларионов Н. Н., Бергазов И. Р. Грановская Н. В., Нигматуллина А. М. Государственная геологическая карта Российской федерации. Масштаб 1:200 000. Издание второе. Серия Южно-Уральская. Лист N-40-ХХП – Тукан. Объяснительная записка. М.: МФ ВСЕГЕИ, 2015. 247 с.
  9. Носова А. А., Сазонова Л. В., Каргин А. В., Ларионова Ю. О., Горожанин В. М., Ковалев С. Г. Мезопротерозойская внутриплитная магматическая провинция Западного Урала: основные петрогенетические типы пород и их происхождение // Петрология. 2012. Т. 20. № 4. С. 392–428.
  10. Пучков В. Н. Геология Урала и Приуралья (актуальные вопросы стратиграфии, тектоники, геодинамики и металлогении). Уфа: ДизайнПолиграфСервис, 2010. 280 с. ISBN: 978-5-94423-209-0.
  11. Ронкин Ю. Л., Тихомирова М., Маслов А. В. 1380 млн лет LIP Южного Урала: прецизионные U–Pb-ID-TIMS-ограничения // ДАН. 2016. Т. 468. № 6. С. 674–769.
  12. Сазонова Л. В., Носова А. А., Ларионова Ю. О. и др. Мезопротерозойские пикриты восточной окраины Восточно-Европейской платформы: петрогенезис и особенности составов оливина и клинопироксена // Литосфера. 2011. № 3. С. 64–83.
  13. Ernst R. E., Pease V., Puchkov V. N., Kozlov V. I., Sergeeva N. D., Hamilton M. Ernst R. E., Pease V., Puchkov V. N., Kozlov V. I., Sergeeva N. D., Hamilton M. Geochemical characterization of Precambrian magmatic suites of the Southeastern Margin of the East European craton, Southern Urals, Russia / Геологический сборник. 2006. Ред. В. Н. Пучков, Р. Ф. Абдрахманов, И. Б. Серавкин. Уфа: Дизайн ПолиграфСервис, 2006. № 5. С. 1–45.
  14. Ernst R. E., Wingate M. T. D., Buchan K. L., Zheng-Xiang Li. Global record of 1600–700 Ma Large Igneous Provinces (LIPs): Implications for the reconstruction of the proposed Nuna (Columbia) and Rodinia supercontinents // Precambrian Research. 2008. V. 160. Issues 1–2. P. 159–178. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2007.04.019
  15. Khotylev A. O., Tevelev A. V., Bychkova Ya.V., Latyshev A. V., Anosova M. B. Mezoproterozoic basite magmatism of the Bashkirian meganticlinorium (Southern Urals): age constraints, petrological and geochemical features // Geodynamics &Tectonophysics. 2020. 11 (2). 219–243. http://doi.org/10.5800/GT-2020-11-2-0471
  16. Le Bas M. J. IUGS reclassification of the high-Mg and picritic volcanic rocks // Journal of Petrology. 2000. 41. 1467–1470.
  17. Puchkov V. N. Structural Stages and Evolution of the Urals // Mineralogy and Petrology. 2013. 107(1): 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00710-012-0263-1
  18. Puchkov V. N., Bogdanova S. V., Ernst R. et al. The ca. 1380 Ma Mashak igneous event of the Southern Urals // Lithos. 2013. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2012.08.02
  19. Warr L. N. IMA–CNMNC approved mineral symbols // Mineralogical Magazine. 2021. 85. 291–320. http://doi.org/10.1180/mgm.2021.43
  20. Willner A. P., Gopon M., Glodny J. et al. Timanide (Ediacaran–Early Cambrian) Metamorphism at the Transition from Eclogite to Amphibolite Facies in the Beloretsk Complex, SW-Urals, Russia // Journal of Earth Science. 2019. 30(6): 1144–1165. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12583-019-1249-2 http://en.earth-science.net

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Scheme of distribution of mafic and ultramafic dikes and sills in the area of ​​the village of Ishlya in the east of the Bashkir meganticlinorium (A) (compiled using materials from [8]), scheme of the Bashkir meganticlinorium (B) according to [2] with modifications, scheme of the Ural folded belt (B). 1–3 – Middle Riphean: 1 – Zigazino-Komarov suite (R2zk), carbonaceous shales, siltstones, sandstones, carbonates, 2 – Zigalgin suite (R2zg), quartzites, quartzite-like sandstones, shales, 3 – Mashak suite (R2ms), basalts, conglomerates, sandstones, phyllites; 4–9 – Lower Riphean: 4 – Yushinskaya suite (R1js), carbonaceous-clayey shales, sandstones, siltstones, 5–9 – Suranskaya suite: 5 – Lapyshtinskaya subsuite (R1lp), limestones, dolomites, 6 – Serdauka subsuite (R1sd), clayey and carbonaceous-clayey shales, interlayers of limestones, dolomites, 7–8 – Angastakskaya subsuite, upper stratum (R1an2), shales and sandstones with interlayers of ferruginous carbonates (7), lower stratum (R1an1) – siltstones, sericite-clayey shales, marls, limestones, dolomites (8), 9 – Berdagulovskaya subsuite (R1br), clayey, carbonaceous-clayey shales, siltstones, dolomites, limestones; 10 - metasomatites after picrites; 11 - areas of picrite distribution; 12 - sills and dikes of gabbro-dolerites; 13 - faults; on the diagram (B): 14 - Paleozoic strata; 15 - Asha series, Vendian; 16-17 - Riphean strata: 16 - terminal and upper undifferentiated; 17 - middle, 18 - lower; 19 - Archean-Proterozoic formations of the Taratash complex; 20 - Paleozoic and pre-Paleozoic strata of the Uraltau zone; 21 - complexes of the Magnitogorsk megazone; 22 - ophiolites; 23 - faults: a - Main Ural, b - others; 24 - points of dated complexes (explanations in the text); on the diagram (B): UP – Ural folded belt, red line – Main Ural fault; EEP – East European platform and, in the north, Timan-Pechora plate (TPP); WSP – West Siberian plate; the polygon shows the position of the territory in Fig. 1 B.

Download (462KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. BSE SEM images of sections of apopicrite metasomatites thin sections. A – sample 2283/2, B – sample 2283/1, C – sample 2298; G – sample B2338. Mineral abbreviations according to [19]: Qz – quartz, Bt – biotite, Cal – calcite, Chl – chlorite, Ttn – titanite, Ap – apatite, Tlc – talc, Apy – arsenopyrite, Dol – dolomite, Aln – allanite, Mnz – monazite.

Download (307KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. Spider diagrams of distribution of chondrite-normalized rare earth element contents (A) and primitive mantle-normalized rare element contents (B). 1–3 – metasomatites after picrites and picrodolerites on the Syuryunzyak River: 1 – with phlogopite and dolomite porphyroblasts, 2 – talc-bearing with calcite porphyroblasts, 3 – with phlogopite porphyroblasts, monazite- and allanite-bearing; 4 – picrites from autoliths; 5 – gabbrodolerites, picrodolerites; 6 – dolerite-picrite body at the base of the Shatak complex after [2].

Download (191KB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. Results of 40Ar/39Ar studies of phlogopite from metapicrite metasomatites in sample 21120.

Download (76KB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences