Marine Carbonates in the Mantle Source of Oceanic Basalts: Pb Isotopic Constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For almost fifty years, geochemists have been interpreting the clues from Pb isotopic ratios concerning mantle composition and evolution separately. The Pb isotopes of ocean island basalts (OIB) indicate that their mantle source is heterogeneous, most likely due to the presence of end-components derived from recycled crust and sediment. Some OIB have unusually high 206Pb/204Pb coming from one of the end-components with a long time-integrated high 238U/204Pb or μ (HIMU). Most OIB and many mid-ocean ridge basalts (MORB) also have high 206Pb/204Pb, indicating a HIMU-like source. Moreover, measured 232Th/238U (κ) for most MORB are lower than those deduced from their 208Pb/204Pb and 206Pb/204Pb. Such high μ and low κ features of oceanic basalts are inconsistent with the known geochemical behavior of U, Pb and Th and temporal evolution of the mantle; these have been respectively termed the 1st and 2nd Pb paradox. Here we show that subducted marine carbonates can be a source for HIMU and a solution to the Pb paradoxes. The results are consistent with the predictions of the marine carbonate recycling hypothesis that posits the Pb isotopes of oceanic basalts indicate a common origin and/or magma generation process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".