MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409349492 · doi:10.1038/s43247-025-02250-z

Oxygen isotope shifts reveal fluid-fluxed melting in continental anatexis

2025· article· en· W4409349492 on OpenAlexaff
Silvia Volante, Amaury Pourteau, Zheng‐Xiang Li, William J. Collins, Luc S. Doucet, Hugo K.H. Olierook, Laure Martin, Matthijs Smit

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Earth & Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsPacific Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
FundersCentre of Excellence for Electromaterials Science, Australian Research CouncilEidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
KeywordsAnatexisOxygenIsotopes of oxygenGeologyGeochemistryPartial meltingMetallurgyMaterials scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fluid-flux melting is increasingly recognised as a key mechanism for continental crust growth and recycling, but the abundance and sources of the external fluids involved in this process are typically uncertain. Here we use zircon and garnet oxygen isotope data, geochronology, and petrological analysis of mid- to lower-crustal rocks from the Georgetown Inlier, Australia, to explore the composition and origin of anatexis-triggering fluids. Tonalite veins and garnetite residues show higher zircon δ 18 O values (~6‰) than their amphibolite source (~2–3‰), whereas sediment-derived granites show lower values (6‰) than those of typical siliciclastic sources (10–20‰). Mass balance modelling suggests that these isotopic shifts result from the interaction with mantle-derived fluids. Asthenospheric mantle upwelling beneath the Georgetown crust during slab rollback or break-off provided heat and fluids, generating hydrous mafic underplates that exsolved mantle-derived water, promoting crustal anatexis. This process may have been key in shaping Earth’s early buoyant sodic continental crust.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications Earth & EnvironmentSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207