MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137756444 · doi:10.1093/petrology/egi097

Multi-Stage Modification of the Northern Slave Mantle Lithosphere: Evidence from Zircon- and Diamond-Bearing Eclogite Xenoliths Entrained in Jericho Kimberlite, Canada

2006· article· en· W2137756444 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Larry M. Heaman, Robert A. Creaser, H. Cookenboo, Tom Chacko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petrology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKimberliteEclogiteGeologyPhlogopiteXenolithGeochemistryZirconCratonMantle (geology)PaleontologySubductionTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Jericho kimberlites are part of a small Jurassic kimberlite cluster in the northern Slave craton, Canada. A variety of dating techniques were applied to constrain the nature and age of two Jericho kimberlites, JD-1 (170·2 ± 4·3 Ma Rb–Sr phlogopite megacrysts, 172·8 ± 0·7 Ma U–Pb eclogite rutile, 178 ± 5 Ma U–Pb eclogite zircon lower intercept) and JD-3 (173 ± 2 Ma Rb–Sr phlogopite megacryst; 176·6 ± 3·2 Ma U–Pb perovskite), and all yielded identical results within analytical uncertainty. As there is no discernible difference in the radiometric ages obtained for these two pipes, the composite Rb–Sr phlogopite megacryst date of 173·1 ± 1·3 Ma is interpreted as the best estimate for the emplacement age of both Jericho pipes. The initial Sr isotope composition of 0·7053 ± 0·0003 derived from phlogopite megacrysts overlaps the range (0·7043–0·7084) previously reported for Jericho whole-rocks. These strontium isotope data, combined with the radiogenic initial 206Pb/204Pb ratio of 18·99 ± 0·33 obtained in this study, indicate that the Jericho kimberlites are isotopically similar to Group 1 kimberlites as defined in southern Africa. The Jericho kimberlites are an important new source of mantle xenoliths that hold clues to the nature of the Slave craton subcontinental mantle. A high proportion (30%) of the Jericho mantle xenolith population consists of various eclogite types including a small number (2–3%) of apatite-, diamond-, kyanite- and zircon-bearing eclogites. The most striking aspect of the Jericho zircon-bearing eclogite xenoliths is their peculiar geochemistry. Reconstructed whole-rock compositions indicate that they were derived from protoliths with high FeO, Al2O3 and Na2O contents, reflected in the high-FeO (22·6–27·5 wt %) nature of garnet and the high-Na2O (8·47–9·44 wt %) and high-Al2O3 (13·12–14·33 wt %) character of the clinopyroxene. These eclogite whole-rock compositions are highly enriched in high field strength elements (HFSE) such as Nb (133–1134 ppm), Ta (5–28 ppm), Zr (1779–4934 ppm) and Hf (23–64 ppm). This HFSE enrichment is linked to growth of large (up to 2 mm) zircon and niobian rutile crystals (up to 3 modal %) near the time of eclogite metamorphism. The diamond-bearing eclogites on the other hand are characterized by high-MgO (19·6–21·3 wt %) garnet and ultralow-Na2O (0·44–1·50 wt %) clinopyroxene. Paleotemperature estimates indicate that both the zircon- and diamond-bearing eclogites have similar equilibration temperatures of 950–1020°C and 990–1030°C, respectively, corresponding to mantle depths of 150–180 km. Integration of petrographic, whole-rock and mineral geochemistry, geochronology and isotope tracer techniques indicates that the Jericho zircon-bearing eclogite xenoliths have had a complex history involving Paleoproterozoic metamorphism, thermal perturbations, and two or more episodes of Precambrian mantle metasomatism. The oldest metasomatic event (Type 1) occurred near the time of Paleoproterozoic metamorphism (∼1·8 Ga) and is responsible for the extreme HFSE enrichment and growth of zircon and high-niobian rutile. A second thermal perturbation and concomitant carbonatite metasomatism (Type 2) is responsible for significant apatite growth in some xenoliths and profound light rare earth element enrichment. Type 2 metasomatism occurred in the period 1·0–1·3 Ga and is recorded by relatively consistent whole-rock eclogite model Nd ages and secondary U–Pb zircon upper intercept dates. These eclogite xenoliths were derived from a variety of protoliths, some of which could represent metasomatized pieces of oceanic crust, possibly linked to east-dipping subduction beneath the Slave craton during construction of the 1·88–1·84 Ga Great Bear continental arc. Others, including the diamond-bearing eclogites, could be cumulates from mafic or ultramafic sill complexes that intruded the Slave lithospheric mantle at depths of about 150–180 km.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations103
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PetrologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207