Anisotropy of magnetic remanence: A brief review of mineralogical sources, physical origins, and geological applications, and comparison with susceptibility anisotropy

Abstract

The magnetic fabric of rocks and sediments is most commonly characterized in terms of the anisotropy of low-field magnetic susceptibility (AMS). However, alternative methods based on remanent magnetization (measured in the absence of a magnetic field) rather than induced magnetization (measured in the applied field) have distinct advantages for certain geological applications. This is particularly true for; (1) adjunct studies in paleomagnetism, in order to assess the fidelity with which a natural remanence records the paleofield orientation; (2) studies of weakly magnetic or weakly deformed rocks, for which susceptibility anisotropy is very difficult to measure precisely; and (3) quantitative applications such as strain estimation. The fundamental differences between susceptibility and remanence (and their respective anisotropies) are due to several factors: (1) susceptibility arises from all of the minerals present in a sample, whereas remanence is carried exclusively by a relatively small number of ferromagnetic minerals; (2) ferromagnetic minerals are generally more anisotropic than para- and diamagnetic minerals; (3) for ferromagnetic minerals, remanence is inevitably more anisotropic than susceptibility; and (4) a number of common minerals, including single-domain magnetites, possess an inverse anisotropy of susceptibility, i.e., they tend to have minimum susceptibility parallel to the long axis of an individual particle; remanence is immune to this phenomenon. As a consequence of all these factors, remanence anisotropy may generally provide a better quantitative estimate of the actual distribution of particle orientations in a rock sample.