Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T01:55:53.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Protolith nature and P–T evolution of Variscan metamorphic rocks from the Allahyarlu complex, NW Iran

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2020

Mohssen Moazzen*
Affiliation:
School of Arts and Sciences, University of Central Asia, Khorog, 736000, Tajikistan Department of Earth Sciences, University of Tabriz, 51666, Tabriz, Iran
Zohreh Salimi
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Tabriz, 51666, Tabriz, Iran
Yann Rolland
Affiliation:
Université Côte d’Azur, CNRS, OCA, IRD, Géoazur, Sophia Antipolis, France
Michael Bröcker
Affiliation:
Institut für Mineralogie, Westfälische-Wilhelms Universität Münster, Münster, Germany
Robab Hajialioghli
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Tabriz, 51666, Tabriz, Iran
*
Author for correspondence: Mohssen Moazzen, Email: mohssen.moazzen@ucentralasia.org
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Metamorphic rocks associated with ophiolitic rocks occur on the eroded surface of a NW–SE-trending anticline in the Allahyarlu area, NW Iran, between the Caucasus and Zagros orogenic belts. Metapelitic rocks consist mainly of quartz, muscovite chlorite, altered biotite and garnet. S1 is the pervasive schistosity, wrapping garnet, which is folded by the second schistosity (S2). The amphibolite records only one phase of deformation as the main lineation. The rocks experienced metamorphism up to the amphibolite facies, then overprinted by greenschist facies condition. Thermobarometry indicates an average pressure of c. 5 kbar and an average temperature of c. 600 °C for the amphibolite facies metamorphism, corresponding to a ∼33 °C km−1 geothermal gradient in response to a thick magmatic arc setting. Greenschist facies metamorphism shows re-equilibration of the rocks during exhumation. Amphibolites whole rock geochemistry shows trace elements patterns similar to both island arc and back-arc basin basalts, suggesting that the protolith-forming magma of the amphibolites was enriched at shallow to medium depth of a subduction system. Negative Nb anomaly and slight enrichment in light rare earth elements (LREE) and large-ion lithophile elements (LILE) of the amphibolites indicate arc-related magmatism for their protolith and a back-arc sialic setting for their formation. 40Ar–39Ar dating on muscovite separated from two gneiss samples, and hornblende separated from three amphibolite samples, documents a Variscan (326–334 Ma) age. The magmatic and metamorphic rock association of the Allahyarlu area suggests the existence of an active continental margin arc during the Variscan orogeny, without clear evidence for a continental collision.

Information

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2020
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) The locality of the study area in NW Iran and in relation to the main Neotethys and Palaeotethys sutures in the Middle East. Some examples of Variscan metamorphic rocks are shown with peak metamorphic ages: (1) Eastern Pontides (Topuz et al.2007); (2) Armenia (Rolland et al.2011); (3) Rasht (Rossetti et al.2017); (4) Anarak (Buchs et al.2013). (b) The study area in the northern part of the Ahar Block. The legends are: 1. remnants of the oceanic crust; 2. local structural trends; 3. main faults; 4. hidden faults; 5. country borders; 6. anticline; 7. syncline; 8. depression; 9. thrust; 10. Allahyarlu–Hovai thrust.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. The geological map and cross-section of the studied area, modified from Babakhani & Nazer (1991).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. (a) Outcrop of ophiolitic and metamorphic rocks at the erosion surface on the Allahyarlu anticline. (b) Outcrop of amphibolites. (c) Metapelitic rocks with pervasive S1 foliation. (d) Outcrop of gneiss with quartz- and plagioclase-rich pale and biotite-rich dark bands.

Figure 3

Table 1. Mineral assemblages (mineral name abbreviations after Whitney & Evans, 2010)

Figure 4

Fig. 4. (a) Foliation in muscovite schist. The main foliation (S1) is folded by S2. (b) Garnet with pressure shadow structures in textural equilibrium with metamorphic chlorite (both in cross-polarized light). (c). Garnet composition in garnet schist (samples ZS-2 N, ZS-18-19, ZS-28, ZS-13 and ZS-42) and gneiss (samples ZS-1-15 and ZS-1-12), which is almandine-rich. (d) Composition of plagioclase in the amphibolite samples. Plagioclases in sample ZS-3-B are albite to andesine, in sample ZS-1-14 are andesine and in sample ZS-43 they are albite to andesine.

Figure 5

Table 2. Representative garnet analyses in the studied rocks (Am: amphibolite; Sch: schist; Gns: gneiss). The formula unit is calculated based on 12 oxygen atoms

Figure 6

Table 3. Representative muscovite analyses in the studied rocks (Sch: schist; Gns: gneiss). The formula unit is calculated based on 11 oxygen atoms

Figure 7

Fig. 5. Photomicrographs of (a) amphibolite and (b) garnet amphibolite from the Allahyarlu area (both in plain polarized light).

Figure 8

Table 4. Representative amphibole analyses in the studied rocks (Grt Am: garnet amphibolite; Am: amphibolite). The formula unit is calculated based on 13 cations (CaNaK) and 23 oxygen atoms

Figure 9

Fig. 6. Composition of amphibole (a, b), garnet (c) and feldspar (d) in the studied amphibolites.

Figure 10

Table 5. Representative plagioclase analyses in the studied amphibolite samples (Grt Am: garnet amphibolite; Am: amphibolite). The formula unit is calculated based on 8 oxygen atoms

Figure 11

Table 6. Representative chlorite analyses in the studied garnet schist samples. The formula unit is calculated based on 14 oxygen atoms

Figure 12

Fig. 7. (a) Pseudosections for one pelitic schist (ZS-13); (b, c) calculated isochems for muscovite (b) and almandine (c) contents in the minerals; (d) intersection of muscovite in white mica isochem of 0.74 mole % and almandine in garnet isochem of 0.76 mole % indicates pressure of c. 4.5 kbar and temperature of 530 to 570 °C.

Figure 13

Table 7. Pressure–temperature estimates for the garnet schist and amphibolite samples

Figure 14

Table 8. Whole-rock chemistry of the amphibolite samples. Major oxides in mass % and the trace and rare earth elements in ppm

Figure 15

Fig. 8. 39Ar–40Ar plateau ages (c. 325 and 338 Ma) for muscovite separates from the gneiss samples.

Figure 16

Fig. 9. 39Ar–40Ar plateau ages (c. 174 to 248 Ma) for amphibole separates from the amphibolite samples.

Figure 17

Fig. 10. Whole rock chemistry of the amphibolite samples indicates an igneous (ortho-amphibolite) protolith for them.

Figure 18

Fig. 11. The protolith of the amphibolite samples had a basalt to basaltic andesite lithology (a) and metaluminous (b) and tholeiitic (c, d) nature.

Figure 19

Fig. 12. The initial magma forming the protolith of the amphibolites was an oceanic basalt (a) and had island arc to MORB affinities (b, c, d). They were formed in a volcanic arc setting (e, f).

Figure 20

Fig. 13. A back-arc setting can be considered for the studied amphibolites based on immobile and trace elements contents.

Figure 21

Fig. 14. Spider diagrams for the studied samples. The samples show similarities to both enriched and depleted back-arc basalts (a) and are more similar to typical island arc basalts, indicating shallow subduction components (b). The normalization values are from Sun & McDonough (1989).

Figure 22

Fig. 15. A schematic model for the formation of the Variscan metamorphic rocks of the Allahyarlu area in NW Iran.