Search

Carbonatites define the largest range in Fe isotope compositions yet measured for igneous rocks, recording significant isotopic fractionations between carbonate, oxide, and silicate minerals during generation in the mantle and subsequent differentiation. In contrast to the relatively restricted range in δ56Fe values for mantle-derived basaltic magmas (δ56Fe = 0.0 ± 0.1‰), calcite from carbonatites have δ56Fe values between −1.0 and +0.8‰, similar to the range defined by whole-rock samples of carbonatites. Based on expected carbonate-silicate fractionation factors at igneous or mantle temperatures, carbonatite magmas that have modestly negative δ56Fe values of ~ −0.3‰ or lower can be explained by equilibrium with a silicate mantle. More negative δ56Fe values were probably produced by differentiation processes, including crystal fractionation and liquid immiscibility. Positive δ56Fe values for carbonatites are, however, unexpected, and such values seem to likely reflect interaction between low-Fe carbonates and Fe3+-rich fluids at igneous or near-igneous temperatures; the expected δ56Fe values for Fe2+-bearing fluids are too low to produced the observed positive δ56Fe values of some carbonatites, indicating that Fe isotopes may be a valuable tracer of redox conditions in carbonatite complexes. Further evidence for fluid-rock or fluid-magma interactions comes from the common occurrence of Fe isotope disequilibrium among carbonate, oxide, silicate, and sulfide minerals in the majority of the carbonatites studied. The common occurrence of Fe isotope disequilibrium among minerals in carbonatites may also indicate mixing of phenocyrsts from distinct magmas. Expulsion of Fe3+-rich brines into metasomatic aureols that surround carbonatite complexes are expected to produce high-δ56Fe fenites, but this has yet to be tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The restriction of most carbonatites to continental areas raises questions as to whether the parental liquids to carbonatites are generated within the continental lithosphere, or whether they are derived from deeper parts of the mantle with the lithosphere playing a subsidiary, but important, role in trapping volatile-rich melts/fluids. The constraints imposed by both radiogenic and stable isotopic data from carbonatites world-wide are consistent with a sub- lithospheric source for the parental melts, associated with either asthenospheric ‘upwellings’ or more deep-seated, plume-related activity. Crucial evidences that support the generation of carbonated melts from sub- lithospheric mantle are: the petrogenetic and temporal association of carbonatites with large igneous provinces (LIPs; e.g., Deccan, Parana), carbonatites with primitive noble gas isotopic signatures, radiogenic isotope ratios similar to OIBs (i.e. involving HIMU, EM1 and FOZO mantle components), and the uniform, time-integrated Rb/Sr and Sm/Nd development lines for Sr and Nd isotopic data for carbonatites from the Superior Province, Canada, and the Kola Peninsula, Russia. Such findings are difficult to reconcile with a lithospheric origin. Even if a metasomatized lithospheric mantle is considered to be the sole source of carbonated melts, an unknown mantle process is required, large enough to generate widespread, synchronous metasomatism spanning regions in excess of 1 × 106 km2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increasing evidence that many carbonatites are linked both spatially and temporally with large igneous provinces (LIPs), i.e. high volume, short duration, intraplate-type, magmatic events consisting mainly of flood basalts and their plumbing systems (of dykes, sills and layered intrusions). Examples of LIP-carbonatite associations include: i. the 66 Ma Deccan flood basalt province associated with the Amba Dongar, Sarnu-Dandali (Barmer), and Mundwara carbonatites and associated alkali rocks, ii. the 130 Ma Paraná-Etendeka (e.g. Jacupiranga, Messum); iii. the 250 Ma Siberian LIP that includes a major alkaline province, Maimecha-Kotui with numerous carbonatites, iv. the ca. 370 Ma Kola Alkaline Province coeval with basaltic magmatism widespread in parts of the East European craton, and v. the 615–555 Ma CIMP (Central Iapetus Magmatic Province) of eastern Laurentia and western Baltica. In the Superior craton, Canada, a number of carbonatites are associated with the 1114–1085 Ma Keweenawan LIP and some are coeval with the pan-Superior 1880 Ma mafic-ultramafic magmatism. In addition, the Phalaborwa and Shiel carbonatites are associated with the 2055 Ma Bushveld event of the Kaapvaal craton. The frequency of this LIP-carbonatite association suggests that LIPs and carbonatites might be considered as different evolutionary ‘pathways’ in a single magmatic process/system. The isotopic mantle components FOZO, HIMU, EM1 but not DMM, along with primitive noble gas signatures in some carbonatites, suggest a sub-lithospheric mantle source for carbonatites, consistent with a plume/asthenospheric upwelling origin proposed for many LIPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thirty-five S isotope analyses obtained from six carbonatite complexes from the Superior Province, Canadian Shield, ranging in age from 1,897 Ma to 1,093 Ma, have δ34SCDT values of between −4.5‰ and +3.4‰. Pyrrhotite, chalcopyrite and pyrite mineral separates were used. Each complex possesses its own distinct range and mean S isotope composition. The range for Schryburt Lake is: −4.5‰ to −3.4‰ ( mean = −3.9‰), for Big Beaver House: −3.6‰ to −1.5‰ (mean = −2.2‰), for Cargill: −1.5‰–+0.5‰ (mean = −0.7‰), for Spanish River: −0.1‰–+0.1‰ (mean = 0.0‰), and for Firesand River: +1.3‰–+3.4‰ (mean = +1.7‰). A single sample from Carb Lake yielded a δ34SCDT value of +2.8‰. Differences in isotope compositions can be related to isotope effects brought about during melt generation and emplacment, such as variations in fo2 and temperature. The different S and C isotope data for most complexes, however, suggest that the parental melts could have been generated from a heterogeneous mantle source, although process-driven changes cannot be completely ruled out. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]