Isotopic Compositions of Plagioclase From Plutonic Xenoliths Reveal Crustal Assimilation Below Martinique, Lesser Antilles Arc

The chemical and isotopic compositions of volcanic arc lavas often show evidence for involvement of a sedimentary component during magma genesis. Determining where this sedimentary component is added to arc magmas is of vital importance for constraining the extent to which sediments and volatiles are recycled at subduction zones. Lavas from Martinique in the Lesser Antilles arc have wide ranging isotopic compositions extending to highly radiogenic values (e.g. 87/Sr/86Sr up to ∼0.710) that could, in principle, be explained by sediment addition to the mantle source or by crustal assimilation in the upper plate. We use Sr isotopic compositions of plagioclase from Martinique plutonic xenoliths to provide evidence supporting the crustal assimilation hypothesis. Plagioclase from plutonic xenoliths formed in the mid-crust (∼12 km) show a restricted range of unradiogenic Sr isotope ratios (87Sr/86Sr = 0.7041–0.7042) whereas plagioclase from upper crustal plutonic xenoliths (∼6 km) show greater intra-sample variation and more radiogenic Sr isotopic compositions up to 87Sr/86Sr = 0.7047. This trend is also observed in plutonic xenolith whole rock 87Sr/86Sr. Combined, these results indicate that the range of Sr isotope compositions becomes larger and more radiogenic in Martinique magmas as a result of sediment assimilation at shallow crustal levels. This is supported by Assimilation-Fractional Crystallization modeling, which shows that assimilation of chemically and isotopically heterogenous crustal sediments can produce the isotopic variation in Martinique plutonic xenoliths and lavas. Our results highlight the importance of constraining crustal contributions from the upper plate before using arc lava geochemistry to quantify sediment and volatile recycling at subduction zones and assessing potential heterogeneity of arc mantle sources.

Deep structure of the Grenada Basin from wide-angle seismic, bathymetric and gravity data

<p>Studying back-arc basins, where sedimentation is less deformed than in the forearc, provides complementary information about formation and tectonic evolution of subduction zones. At the Lesser Antilles subduction zone, the North and South American plates are subducting underneath the Caribbean plate at a velocity of 2 cm per year. The crescent-shaped Grenada back-arc basin is located between the Aves Ridge, which hosted the remnant Early Paleogene “Great Caribbean Arc”, and the Eocene to present Lesser Antilles Arc. In this study, based on wide-angle data, we provide constraints about lateral variations in basement thickness and velocity structure in the Lesser Antilles back-arc, and to a lesser extend in the arc and forearc domain, constraining for the first time the extent of oceanic crust in the Grenada Basin and shed light on the structure and compositions of the basin’s margins.</p><p>Three combined wide-angle and reflection seismic profiles, together with gravity and bathymetric data, were acquired in the Lesser Antilles back-arc basin. Direct modeling techniques were applied to the wide-angle seismic data in order to include shallow structures imaged by the coincident reflection seismic data. The resulting velocity models were additionally constrained by gravity modeling and synthetic seismogram calculation. The final models from direct modeling image variations in thickness and velocity structure of the sedimentary and crustal layers to a depth of up to 35 km. The sedimentary cover has a variable thickness from less than a kilometer on top of the ridges to nearly 10 km in the basin. North of Guadeloupe Island, the crust is ~20 km thick from back-arc to forearc, without significant change between the Aves Ridge, the Eocene and present Lesser Antilles volcanic arc. While based on the seismic velocities, the southern part of the basin is underlain by a 6.5-7 km thick crust of of mainly magmatic origin over a width of ~80 km, the northern part is underlain by thinned continental crust. At the western flank of the Lesser Antilles Arc, the crust is 17.5-km thick, about 5 km thinner than north of Martinique island. The velocity structure is typical of volcanic arcs or oceanic plateaus. Between Aves Ridge and the Grenada basin the crust thins in a 80-100 km wide transition zone. No anomalous high velocities indicating the presence of exhumed upper mantle material were detected at the transition zone. This narrow E-W arc-ocean transition zone suggests that opening might have proceeded in a direction highly oblique to the main convergence.</p>

Genetic Relations Between the Aves Ridge and the Grenada Back-Arc Basin, East Caribbean Sea

<p>The Grenada Basin separates the active Lesser Antilles Arc from the Aves Ridge, described as a Cretaceous-Paleocene remnant of the “Great Arc of the Caribbean.” Although various tectonic models have been proposed for the opening of the Grenada Basin, the data on which they rely are insufficient to reach definitive conclusions. We present a large set of deep-penetrating multichannel seismic reflection data and dredge samples acquired during the GARANTI cruise in 2017. By combining them with published data including seismic reflection data, wide-angle seismic data, well data and dredges, we refine the understanding of the basement structure, depositional history, tectonic deformation and vertical motions of the Grenada Basin and its margins as follows: (1) rifting occurred during the late Paleocene- early Eocene in a NW-SE direction and led to seafloor spreading during the middle Eocene; (2) this newly formed oceanic crust now extends across the eastern Grenada Basin between the latitude of Grenada and Martinique; (3) asymmetrical pre-Miocene depocenters support the hypothesis that the southern Grenada Basin originally extended beneath the present-day southern Lesser Antilles Arc and probably partly into the present-day forearc before the late Oligocene-Miocene rise of the Lesser Antilles Arc; and (4) the Aves Ridge has subsided along with the Grenada Basin since at least the middle Eocene, with a general subsidence slowdown or even an uplift during the late Oligocene, and a sharp acceleration on its southeastern flank during the late Miocene. Until this acceleration of subsidence, several bathymetric highs remained shallow enough to develop carbonate platforms.</p>