Abstract Details
(2020) Archean Surface-Derived Contamination in the Plume Source of the Paleoproterozoic Bushveld Large Igneous Province
Bybee G, Hayes B, Magalhães N, Zirakparvar A, Farquhar J, Wu N, Penniston-Dorland S, Feineman M & Leach T
https://doi.org/10.46427/gold2020.292
The author has not provided any additional details.
02c: Room 1, Tuesday 23rd June 05:39 - 05:42
Grant Bybee
View all 3 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020
View abstracts at 7 conferences in series
Ben Hayes
Nivea Magalhaes View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 4 conferences in series
Alexander Zirakparvar
James Farquhar View all 5 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020
Nanping Wu View abstracts at 5 conferences in series
Sarah Penniston-Dorland View abstracts at 13 conferences in series
Maureen Feineman View abstracts at 4 conferences in series
Travis Leach
Ben Hayes
Nivea Magalhaes View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 4 conferences in series
Alexander Zirakparvar
James Farquhar View all 5 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020
Nanping Wu View abstracts at 5 conferences in series
Sarah Penniston-Dorland View abstracts at 13 conferences in series
Maureen Feineman View abstracts at 4 conferences in series
Travis Leach
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 Steven Shirey on Monday 22nd June 23:22
Hi Grant. Very nice talk and study. It is no wonder, with the four distinct components needed, why there were three different models advocated for the Bushveld. Every blind researcher was grabbing a different part of the elephant! But what about about explaining the homogeneity of magma composition across the Bushveld at the same stratigraphic level. Doesn't having four components make the problem worse there? Steve Shirey
Thanks for watching Steve! Was actually hoping to chat or email you about this at some point, as it has many parallels and linkages with your 2008 work. I think that the cumulate nature of the RLS (and possible isotopic disequilibrium), the 4 reservoir components and similarities in some of the component's lithophile isotopic signatures (e.g. Hf isotopic comp in sediment, possible Ventersdorp keel and mafic Bushveld) has obfuscated the source identification, hence the many (often conflicting) models. Explaining homogeneity at a particular stratigraphic level is the next step, and will require more detailed sampling and analyses, but may also be challenging given the cumulate and polybaric nature of the magmas. However, I'd predict, and we do see some evidence, that Sr and Nd are correlated with changes in d34S (which could be link to local crustal contamination), but as indicated, a much deeper reservoir is controlling the D33S. So I don't think the four components make the problem worse. Hope this answers the question.
Hi Grant. Very nice talk and study. It is no wonder, with the four distinct components needed, why there were three different models advocated for the Bushveld. Every blind researcher was grabbing a different part of the elephant! But what about about explaining the homogeneity of magma composition across the Bushveld at the same stratigraphic level. Doesn't having four components make the problem worse there? Steve Shirey
Thanks for watching Steve! Was actually hoping to chat or email you about this at some point, as it has many parallels and linkages with your 2008 work. I think that the cumulate nature of the RLS (and possible isotopic disequilibrium), the 4 reservoir components and similarities in some of the component's lithophile isotopic signatures (e.g. Hf isotopic comp in sediment, possible Ventersdorp keel and mafic Bushveld) has obfuscated the source identification, hence the many (often conflicting) models. Explaining homogeneity at a particular stratigraphic level is the next step, and will require more detailed sampling and analyses, but may also be challenging given the cumulate and polybaric nature of the magmas. However, I'd predict, and we do see some evidence, that Sr and Nd are correlated with changes in d34S (which could be link to local crustal contamination), but as indicated, a much deeper reservoir is controlling the D33S. So I don't think the four components make the problem worse. Hope this answers the question.
Sign in to ask a question.