METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE AGE OF IGNEOUS ROCKS USING THE ACCESSORY MINERALS

1952 ◽  
Vol 63 (10) ◽  
pp. 1045 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. S. LARSEN ◽  
N. B. KEEVIL ◽  
H. C. HARRISON
1936 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. 193-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. L. Bruce ◽  
Walter Jewitt

Intensive study of the heavy accessory minerals and comparison of the suites of them occurring in igneous rocks has recently received much attention. In 1915 Rastall and Wilcockson examined the heavy accessories from granites of the English Lake District in connection with a study of the mineral constitution of certain sandstones. They found a wide variation in the accessory minerals of the granites, but a distinct similarity in those from all phases of the igneous mass.


2014 ◽  
Vol 185 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Cuney

Abstract The strongly incompatible behaviour of uranium in silicate magmas results in its concentration in the most felsic melts and a prevalence of granites and rhyolites as primary U sources for the formation of U deposits. Despite its incompatible behavior, U deposits resulting directly from magmatic processes are quite rare. In most deposits, U is mobilized by hydrothermal fluids or ground water well after the emplacement of the igneous rocks. Of the broad range of granite types, only a few have U contents and physico-chemical properties that permit the crystallization of accessory minerals from which uranium can be leached for the formation of U deposits. The first granites on Earth, which crystallized uraninite, dated at 3.1 Ga, are the potassic granites from the Kaapval craton (South Africa) which were also the source of the detrital uraninite for the Dominion Reef and Witwatersrand quartz pebble conglomerate deposits. Four types of granites or rhyolites can be sufficiently enriched in U to represent a significant source for the genesis of U deposits: peralkaline, high-K metaluminous calc-alkaline, L-type peraluminous and anatectic pegmatoids. L-type peraluminous plutonic rocks in which U is dominantly hosted in uraninite or in the glass of their volcanic equivalents represent the best U source. Peralkaline granites or syenites are associated with the only magmatic U-deposits formed by extreme fractional crystallization. The refractory character of the U-bearing minerals does not permit their extraction under the present economic conditions and make them unfavorable U sources for other deposit types. By contrast, felsic peralkaline volcanic rocks, in which U is dominantly hosted in the glassy matrix, represent an excellent source for many deposit types. High-K calc-alkaline plutonic rocks only represent a significant U source when the U-bearing accessory minerals (U-thorite, allanite, Nb oxides) become metamict. The volcanic rocks of the same geochemistry may be also a favorable uranium source if a large part of the U is hosted in the glassy matrix. The largest U deposit in the world, Olympic Dam in South Australia is hosted by highly fractionated high-K plutonic and volcanic rocks, but the origin of the U mineralization is still unclear. Anatectic pegmatoids containing disseminated uraninite which results from the partial melting of uranium-rich metasediments and/or metavolcanic felsic rocks, host large low grade U deposits such as the Rössing and Husab deposits in Namibia. The evaluation of the potentiality for igneous rocks to represent an efficient U source represents a critical step to consider during the early stages of exploration for most U deposit types. In particular a wider use of the magmatic inclusions to determine the parent magma chemistry and its U content is of utmost interest to evaluate the U source potential of sedimentary basins that contain felsic volcanic acidic tuffs.


1902 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 375-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. K. Coomáraswámy

It is generally supposed that the crystalline limestones which occur amongst the schists, associated with orthogneisses, in various parts of the world, are altered sedimentary limestones whose accessory minerals and crystalline structure have been developed by simple contact and dynamo-metamorphism; and no doubt many crystalline limestones are of sedimentary origin, and owe their peculiarities to these agencies. In other cases the peculiar mode of occurrence of such rocks or their manner of association with igneous rocks (orthogneisses or nepheline-syenites) has led to the suggestion of other theories.


1938 ◽  
Vol 75 (7) ◽  
pp. 296-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin Sherbon Hills

The occurrence of andalusite and sillimanite in unaltered igneous rocks is, according to the orthodox view expressed in most standard textbooks (see, e.g., Tyrrell, 1934, pp. 50, 164; Shand, 1927, pp. 62, 146; Grout, 1932, p. 230), always to be ascribed to contamination of magmas by highly aluminous sedimentary or metamorphic rocks. Having been given cause to doubt the correctness of this view by the recognition at Pyramid Hill, Victoria, of andalusite-bearing granites and aplites in which evidence of assimilation is lacking, I was then very interested to discover that the opinion has often been expressed, and evidence adduced in support of it, that both andalusite and sillimanite may be normal pyrogenetic constituents of igneous rocks.1 That is, they may under certain conditions crystallize from uncontaminated magmas. Some authors, while admitting that andalusite and sillimanite may crystallize from magmas, regard such pyrogenetic occurrences of these minerals as caused by the development of local excess of alumina, due to the assimilation of shales (e.g. Wells, 1931; Shand, 1927, p. 62). Others do not make their position clear, merely classing andalusite and sillimanite as assimilation minerals (sic), but Tyrrell goes so far as to state that they are “never of pyrogenetic oiigin” (1934, p. 50). Because of the reliance that is placed upon accessory minerals in igneous rocks as indicators of consanguinity of magmas and of the role of assimilation and other processes in pedogenesis, it is important that the status of each mineral should be thoroughly understood. In most classifications of accessory minerals andalusite and sillimanite are either classed as “contamination accessories” (Wells, 1931) or grouped with minerals that are commonly due to contamination (Wright, 1932), and Wright regards them as “of little value for correlation purposes”. Chatterjee, however, was able to use andalusite as an indicator, on the one hand, of relationship between the Falmouth and Bodmin Moor granites, both of these containing a purple variety in fair amount, and, on the other, of the distinction of these granites from those of Dartmoor and St. Austell, in which andalusite is colourless and rare. The rare, sporadically developed andalusite in the Dartmoor granite is considered by Brammall and Harwood (1923) to be a contamination mineral, but Teall suggested (1887) that the andalusite in the Cheesewring granite is probably an “original constituent” (i.e. not mechanically incorporated with the granite, as strew from xenoliths or wall rocks), and the relative abundance and uniformity of distribution of andalusite in the normal type of the Bodmin Moor granite, as exhibited at the Cheesewring (see Ghosh, 1927), lend support to this suggestion.


Minerals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 240
Author(s):  
Hans-Jürgen Förster

Although minor in abundance and typically small in size, accessory minerals are of fundamental importance in deciphering the evolutionary history of magmatic–hydrothermal systems [...]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document