MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3003663264 · doi:10.5194/gchron-2019-21

Baddeleyite microtextures and U-Pb discordance: insights from theSpread Eagle Intrusive Complex and Cape St. Mary’s sills,Newfoundland, Canada

2020· preprint· en· W3003663264 on OpenAlexaffabout
Johannes Pohlner, Axel K. Schmitt, Kevin R. Chamberlain, Joshua H.F.L. Davies, Anne Hildenbrand, Gregor Austermann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersMegagrantsKlaus Tschira StiftungDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBaddeleyiteZirconGeochronologyGeochemistryGeologyIsotope dilutionSillMineralogyChemistryMass spectrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Baddeleyite (ZrO2) is widely used in U-Pb geochronology, but different patterns of discordance often hamper accurate age interpretations. This is also the case for baddeleyite from the Spread Eagle Intrusive Complex (SEIC) and Cape St. Mary’s sills (CSMS) from Newfoundland, which we investigated combining high precision and high spatial resolution methods. Literature data and our own observations suggest that at least seven different types of baddeleyite–zircon intergrowths can be distinguished in nature, among which we describe xenocrystic zircon inclusions in baddeleyite for the first time. Baddeleyite 207Pb/206Pb dates from secondary ionization mass spectrometry (SIMS) and isotope dilution thermal ionization mass spectrometry (ID-TIMS) are in good agreement with each other and with stratigraphic data, but some SIMS sessions of grain mounts show reverse discordance. This suggests that matrix differences between references and unknowns biased the U-Pb relative sensitivity calibration, possibly due to crystal orientation effects, or due to alteration of the baddeleyite crystals, which is indicated by unusually high common Pb contents. ID-TIMS data for SEIC and CSMS single baddeleyite crystals reveal normal discordance as linear arrays with decreasing 206Pb/238U dates, indicating that their discordance is dominated by recent Pb loss due to fast pathway or volume diffusion. Hence, 207Pb/206Pb dates are more reliable than 206Pb/238U dates even for Phanerozoic baddeleyite. Negative lower intercepts of baddeleyite discordias and direct correlations between ID-TIMS 207Pb/206Pb dates and degree of discordance indicate preferential 206Pb loss, possibly due to 222Rn mobilization. In such cases, the most reliable crystallization ages are concordia upper intercept dates or weighted means of the least discordant 207Pb/206Pb dates. We regard the best estimates of the intrusion ages to be 498.7 ± 4.5 Ma (2σ; ID-TIMS upper intercept date for one SEIC dike) and 439.4 ± 0.8 Ma (ID-TIMS weighted mean 207Pb/206Pb date for one sill of CSMS). Sample SL18 of the Freetown Layered Complex, Sierra Leone (associated with the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province) was investigated as an additional reference. For SL18, we report a revised 201.07 ± 0.64 Ma intrusion age, based on a weighted mean 207Pb/206Pb date of previous and new baddeleyite ID-TIMS data, agreeing well with corresponding SIMS data. Increasing discordance with decreasing crystal size in SL18 indicates that Pb loss affected baddeleyite rims more strongly than cores. Employment of SIMS or mechanical abrasion prior to ID-TIMS analysis may therefore produce more concordant baddeleyite data. We emphasize that the combination of high precision and high spatial resolution dating, along with detailed microscale imaging of baddeleyite, is powerful for extracting reliable age information from baddeleyite from rocks with a complex post-magmatic evolution.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→