Abstract Details
(2020) Whole-Rock Fe Isotope Compositions as a Tool for Exploring the Origin and Alteration of Hawaiian Shield-Stage Lavas
Bilenker L, Weis D, Williamson N & Gordon K
https://doi.org/10.46427/gold2020.190
The author has not provided any additional details.
05h: Room 2, Saturday 27th June 05:45 - 05:48
Laura Bilenker
View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020
View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Dominique Weis View all 12 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 22 conferences in series
Nicole Williamson View all 3 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Kathy Gordon View abstracts at 6 conferences in series
Dominique Weis View all 12 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 22 conferences in series
Nicole Williamson View all 3 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Kathy Gordon View abstracts at 6 conferences in series
Listed below are questions that have been submitted by the community that the author will try and cover in their presentation. To submit a question, ensure you are signed in to the website. Authors or session conveners approve questions before they are displayed here.
Submitted by Franck Poitrasson on Thursday 18th June 17:56
Dear Laura, Very interesting work. Did you try to link the Fe isotope compositions with the rock petrography, that is the presence of glass, chemical zoning of the minerals, any (obvious or cryptic) effect of alteration/weathering? Thank you, Franck.
Dear Laura, Very interesting work. Did you try to link the Fe isotope compositions with the rock petrography, that is the presence of glass, chemical zoning of the minerals, any (obvious or cryptic) effect of alteration/weathering? Thank you, Franck.
Submitted by Aaron Pietruszka on Monday 22nd June 22:46
Hi Laura, can you please comment on the origin of the high d56Fe values in some of the samples? Are these magmatic or secondary signatures?
Hi Laura, can you please comment on the origin of the high d56Fe values in some of the samples? Are these magmatic or secondary signatures?
Submitted by Keith Putirka on Wednesday 24th June 19:26
Hi Laura - Really interesting. I am curious about whether your work supports the idea of Lesher et al. (2020) that a shift to heavier isotopes (56 or 57 relative to 54) would be a signal of CMB thermal effect? If so, can we then use your measured delta-56 to infer a putative thermal gradient at or just above the CMB? -Keith
Hi Laura - Really interesting. I am curious about whether your work supports the idea of Lesher et al. (2020) that a shift to heavier isotopes (56 or 57 relative to 54) would be a signal of CMB thermal effect? If so, can we then use your measured delta-56 to infer a putative thermal gradient at or just above the CMB? -Keith
Submitted by Steven Shirey on Friday 26th June 20:20
Hi Laura- Excellent data set and presentation. First my congratulations to Mike Garcia on the wonderful and inspiring career has has had. The recent Gleeson paper called on pyroxenite components to impart a heavy Fe signature to Galapagos-influenced MORBs. Do you think you are seeing the pyroxenite component here and if so, is it an inherent signal of LLVSP material or streaks of pyroxenite inherited at higher levels and entrained from ambient mantle?
Hi Laura- Excellent data set and presentation. First my congratulations to Mike Garcia on the wonderful and inspiring career has has had. The recent Gleeson paper called on pyroxenite components to impart a heavy Fe signature to Galapagos-influenced MORBs. Do you think you are seeing the pyroxenite component here and if so, is it an inherent signal of LLVSP material or streaks of pyroxenite inherited at higher levels and entrained from ambient mantle?
Sign in to ask a question.