Formation of Bushveld anorthosite by reactive porous flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bushveld anorthosites commonly contain the so-called “mottles” comprising irregular, typically centimetric domains of oikocrystic pyroxene or olivine enclosing small, embayed plagioclase grains. The mottles were traditionally interpreted to result from solidification of trapped intercumulus liquid or via in situ crystallisation at the top of the crystal mush. Here, we present microtextural and compositional data of a mottle to place further constraints on the formation of anorthosite layers. Element maps generated by scanning electron microscopy reveal that plagioclase within and around the mottle has markedly elevated An contents (up to An95) relative to the host anorthosite and is strongly reversely zoned. Other unusual features, some of which were reported previously, include a halo of sub-vertically oriented, acicular phlogopite around the mottle, elevated contents of disseminated sulfides, and relatively evolved yet Ni-rich olivine (Fo71–75, 3000 ppm Ni). These features are interpreted to result from reactive porous flow of hot, acidic fluid enriched in nickel and sulfur through proto norite. The fluids dissolved mafic minerals and leached alkalis from the outer rims of plagioclase grains. Reconnaissance studies suggest that reversed zoning of plagioclase is a common feature in Bushveld norite and anorthosite. This implies that reactive porous flow could have been far more pervasive than currently realised and that Bushveld anorthosite layers formed through recrystallisation of norites.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".