Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T07:32:09.085Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chemistry of ilmenites crystallized within the anhydrous melting range of a tholeiitic andesite at pressures between 5 and 26 kb

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

R. N. Thompson
R. N. Thompson*
Affiliation:
Dept. of Geology, Imperial College of Science and Technology, London SW7 2AZ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Microprobe analyses of eight ilmenites, a titaniferous magnetite, and a rutile are presented. They were synthesized at pressures from 5 to 26 kb and temperatures between 1075 and 1225°C in the anhydrous melting interval of a tholeiitic andesite from the Snake River Plain, Idaho, U.S.A. Both the Fe/Ti distribution between coexisting ilmenite and titanomagnetite at 11 kb/1075°C and the low calculated Fe3+ contents of the other ilmenites confirm previous suggestions that the fo2 in these experiments was buffered by graphite capsules to values near those generated by the wüstitemagnetite assemblage. Mn in the ilmenites (0·30-0·51% MnO) shows moderate negative correlations with both the pressures and temperatures of their formation, whilst Al (0·41-1·06 % Al2O3) shows poor positive correlations with these parameters. In contrast, the only significant trend shown by Mg in the ilmenites (2·09-5·26 % MgO) is with the position of each experimental run in the melting interval of the lava. Mg/(Mg + Fe2+) of the ilmenite decreases during equilibrium crystallization at a given pressure and appears to be controlled solely by Mg/Fe2+ distribution amongst the coexisting ferromagnesian minerals and interstitial liquid (glass).

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 40 , Issue 316 , December 1976 , pp. 857 - 862
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, (A. T.), 1968. Amer. Journ. Sci. 266, 704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buddington, (A. F.) and Lindsley, (D. H.), 1964. Journ. Petrology, 5, 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finger, (L. W.), 1972. Carnegie Instn. Washington Yearbook, 71, 600.Google Scholar
Green, (D. H.) and Sobolev, (N. V.), 1975. Contr. Min. Petr. 50, 217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haggerty, (S. E.), 1973. Geochimica Acta, 37, 857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haggerty, (S. E.), 1975. Phys. Chem. Earth, 9, 295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovering, (J. F.) and Widdowson, (J. R.), 1968. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 4, 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, (R. H.), 1973. Journ. Geology, 81, 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nehru, (C. E.), Prinz, (M.), Dowty, (E.), and Keil, (K.), 1974. Amer. Min. 59, 1220.Google Scholar
Steele, (I. M.), 1974. Ibid. 59, 681.Google Scholar
Thompson, (R. N.), 1974a. Min. Mag. 39, 768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, (R. N.), 1974b. Contr. Min. Petr. 45, 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, (R. N.), 1975a. Ibid. 52, 213.Google Scholar
Thompson, (R. N.), 1975b. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 26, 417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, (R. N.), and Kushiro, (I.), 1972. Carnegie Instn. Washington Yearbook, 71, 615.Google Scholar