Abstract

Tourmalines from the late-Variscan Arbus pluton (SW Sardinia) and its metamorphic aureole were structurally and chemically characterized by single-crystal X-ray diffraction, electron and nuclear microprobe analysis, Mössbauer, infrared and optical absorption spectroscopy, to elucidate their origin and relationships with the magmatic evolution during the pluton cooling stages. The Arbus pluton represents a peculiar shallow magmatic system, characterized by sekaninaite (Fe-cordierite)-bearing peraluminous granitoids, linked via AFC processes to gabbroic mantle-derived magmas. The Fe2+-Al-dominant tourmalines occur in: a) pegmatitic layers and pods, as prismatic crystals; b) greisenized rocks and spotted granophyric dikes, as clots or nests of fine-grained crystals in small miaroles locally forming orbicules; c) pegmatitic veins and pods close to the contacts within the metamorphic aureole. Structural formulae indicate that tourmaline in pegmatitic layers is schorl, whereas in greisenized rocks it ranges from schorl to fluor-schorl. Tourmalines in thermometamorphosed contact aureole are schorl, foitite and Mg-rich oxy-schorl. The main substitution is Na + Fe2+ ↔ □ + Al, which relates schorl to foitite. The homovalent substitution (OH) ↔ F at the O1 crystallographic site relates schorl to fluor-schorl, while the heterovalent substitution Fe2+ + (OH, F) ↔ Al + O relates schorl/fluor-schorl to oxy-schorl.Tourmaline crystallization in the Arbus pluton was promoted by volatile (B, F and H2O) enrichment, low oxygen fugacity and Fe2+ activity. The mineralogical evolutive trend is driven by decreasing temperature, as follows: sekaninaite + quartz → schorl + quartz → fluor-schorl + quartz → foitite + quartz. The schorl → foitite evolution represents a distinct trend towards (Al + □) increase and unit-cell volume decrease. These trends are typical of granitic magmas and consistent with Li-poor granitic melts, as supported by the absence of elbaite and other Li-minerals in the Arbus pluton. Tourmaline-bearing rocks reflect the petrogenetic significance of contribution from a metapelitic crustal component during the evolution of magmas in the middle-upper crust.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.