MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407689180 · doi:10.1093/petrology/egaf015

Role of Chamber Replenishment in the Formation of the Merensky Reef and its Footwall Anorthosite

2025· article· en· W4407689180 on OpenAlexaff
William D. Smith, Hadrien Henry, Jussi S. Heinonen, Wolfgang D. Maier, Duncan Muir, Sarah‐Jane Barnes, Jens Andersen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsAnorthositeGeologyGeochemistryReefPetrologyPaleontologyPlagioclaseOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Merensky Reef of the Bushveld Complex represents a magmatic unconformity that some researchers attribute to chamber replenishment by relatively primitive magma. It is propounded that cumulate rocks in this chamber reacted with replenishing melt, as part of the process that ultimately produced chromitite stringers and reef-style platinum-group element mineralization. This study investigates as to whether chamber replenishment contributed to the formation of the Merensky Reef and its underlying anorthosite at the Rustenburg Platinum Mine in the western lobe of the Bushveld Complex. At this location, the Merensky Reef is a coarse-grained pyroxenite bracketed by millimeter-scale chromitite stringers. This sequence is underlain by a centimeter-scale anorthosite which in turn is underlain by leuconorite. The leuconorite comprises normally zoned cumulus orthopyroxene with poikilitic rims (Mg80-79) and cumulus plagioclase (An80-58), where the latter defines a magmatic fabric indicative of gravitational settling of tabular crystals in a quiescent melt. The contact between leuconorite and anorthosite is marked by an increased abundance of late-stage accessory minerals, and the composition of poikilitic orthopyroxene at this horizon is consistent with trapped liquid shift. Plagioclase crystals in the anorthosite are variably zoned (An79-64) and record a magmatic fabric that strengthens with proximity to the reef. This unit is traversed by sinuous networks of sulfides, pyroxenes, quartz, and very fine-grained chromite that terminate at the contact with the leuconorite. The lower chromitite hosts both amoeboidal and blocky chromite crystals that are enclosed by complexly zoned plagioclase oikocrysts in the lower two-thirds and by orthopyroxene oikocrysts in the upper third. The upper chromitite hosts only blocky crystals, similar to those in the upper portion of the lower chromitite. Microtextural characteristics of the amoeboidal crystals coupled with their propensity to host polymineralic inclusions, suggests that these were initially skeletal crystals that subsequently underwent dissolution-reprecipitation. There is no discernible chemical difference between amoeboidal and blocky crystals; however, accessory mineralogy and chromite chemistry imply that the upper portion of the lower chromitite and the upper chromitite experienced post-cumulus re-equilibration with evolved intercumulus silicate melt. Our observations are consistent with the anorthosite being a restite of partially molten leuconoritic cumulates. This theory is supported by thermodynamic modelling that demonstrates that under certain conditions, replenishing melts can reconstitute noritic cumulates to anorthosite, troctolite, or feldspathic orthopyroxenite restites. The porosity generated during this process was exploited by downward percolating sulfide melt that displaced a proportionate amount of intercumulus silicate melt upward to the level of the nascent reef. Initially, these partial melts were likely relatively volatile-rich, triggering Cr-supersaturation at the cumulate-melt interface, and later became Cr-bearing with the consumption of poikilitic orthopyroxene and very fine-grained chromite.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PetrologySame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207