Abstract
ABSTRACTPorphyroblast inclusion trails have the potential to provide critical information about tectonometamorphic events. Recently, however, traditional interpretations of inclusion trails have been called into question by the suggestions that porphyroblasts do not rotate during non‐coaxial deformation and that apparent spiral inclusion trails can be generated in coaxial deformation. We present a new computer model that simulates inclusion trail development. Model results suggest: (1) that the extent of porphyroblast rotation is controlled by conditions at the porphyroblast‐matrix boundary; (2) that curved inclusion trails may develop in unrotated porphyroblasts; (3) that classic “snowball” inclusion trails are most simply explained by rotational growth histories; and (4) that some of the observations used to support the view that porphyroblasts do not rotate (e.g. weakly sigmoidal inclusion trails, apparent truncations of inclusion trails) can be accounted for by variations in the growth rate of rotating porphyroblasts.
Published Version
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