Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T10:41:55.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

U–Pb geochronology of calcite carbonatites and jacupirangite from the Guli alkaline complex, Polar Siberia, Russia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2021

Ekaterina P. Reguir*
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Manitoba, 125 Dysart Road, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada
Ekaterina B. Salnikova
Affiliation:
Institute of Precambrian Geology and Geochronology, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia
Panseok Yang
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Manitoba, 125 Dysart Road, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada
Anton R. Chakhmouradian
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, University of Manitoba, 125 Dysart Road, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2N2, Canada
Maria V. Stifeeva
Affiliation:
Institute of Precambrian Geology and Geochronology, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia
Irina T. Rass
Affiliation:
Institute of Geology of Ore Deposits, Petrography, Mineralogy and Geochemistry, Moscow, 119017, Russia
Aleksandr B. Kotov
Affiliation:
Institute of Precambrian Geology and Geochronology, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia
*
*Author for correspondence: Ekaterina P. Reguir, Email: Ekaterina.Reguir@umanitoba.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This work is the first in situ U–Pb geochronological study of perovskite and calcic garnet (andradite) from the Guli complex in the Maimecha–Kotuy alkaline province (Polar Siberia, Russia). The U–Pb isotopic compositions of perovskite from contact zones of the two carbonatite stocks (Southern and Northern) and from jacupirangite separating the stocks were determined by laser-ablation inductively-coupled-plasma mass-spectrometry (LA-ICPMS) and isotope-dilution thermal-ionisation mass-spectrometry (ID-TIMS). The LA-ICPMS and ID-TIMS data for perovskite from the Northern carbonatite stock are in good agreement, yielding 206Pb/238U ages of 250.4 ± 1.1 Ma and 249 ± 2 Ma, respectively. These ages are also within the analytical uncertainty from the ID-TIMS results for perovskite from jacupirangites (250 ± 1 Ma). The LA-ICPMS results for perovskite from the Southern carbonatite stock indicate its somewhat older age (255.3 ± 2.4 Ma), implying the possibility of small-volume mantle magmatism predating the eruption of the Siberian flood basalts at ca. 252–251 Ma. This interpretation is supported by reports of pre-flood magmatism elsewhere in eastern Siberia. Andradite crystals from the contact between the Southern stock and metasomatised melilitolite were analysed by ID-TIMS. These measurements are inconclusive (247 ± 6 Ma) and could not be used to constrain further the timing of carbonatitic magmatism in the southern part of the complex. The present contribution also presents a refined methodology for LA-ICPMS geochronological studies of perovskite with elevated levels of common lead, and addresses some of the problems with previously proposed calibration standards.

Information

Type
Article – Gregory Yu. Ivanyuk memorial issue
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Location map of the Guli complex (indicated by a star) with respect to the principal structural elements of the northern Siberian Platform and Taimyr Peninsula. (b) Schematic geological map of the central part of the Guli alkaline-ultramafic complex (simplified after Yegorov, 1991): (1) Quaternary sediments; (2) dolomite carbonatites; (3) calcite carbonatites (undifferentiated); (4) phoscorites; (5) alkaline syenites; (6) jacupirangite–melteigite series; (7) melilitolites; (8) dunites; (9) melanephelinites; (10) fault zones and (11) sampling locations.

Figure 1

Table 1. LA-ICPMS operating and data-acquisition parameters.

Figure 2

Fig. 2. (a) Plane-polarised light (PPL) image of perovskite (Prv) associated with diopside (Di) and phlogopite (Phl) in jacupirangite; sample GU-28-41. (b) Back-scattered electron (BSE) image of cubic perovskite crystal from the Northern carbonatite stock, sample GU-13. (c) BSE image of cuboctahedral perovskite crystal from the Southern carbonatite stock, sample GU-14. (d) PPL image of zoned andradite (Adr) at the contact of calcite carbonatite (Cal) with metasomatised melilitolite, sample GU-08.

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Compositional variation of perovskite (a–c) and andradite (d) samples studied in the present work. (a–c) Variations in the contents of major and minor elements (wt.% oxides) in zoned perovskite crystals from jacupirangite (GU-28-41: circles) and calcite carbonatites (GU-13: squares, GU-14: diamonds). (d) Variation in the proportion of major end-member components in zoned andradite from the contact of calcite carbonatite with metasomatised melilitolite (GU-08).

Figure 4

Table 2. Representative WDS compositions (wt.% oxide) and formulae (apfu) of perovskite from Guli.

Figure 5

Table 3. Representative WDS compositions (wt.% oxide) and formulae (apfu) of andradite from Guli.

Figure 6

Table 4. LA-ICPMS U–Pb results for perovskite from the Guli carbonatites.

Figure 7

Fig. 4. Weighted mean 206Pb/238U age diagrams for perovskite from the (a) Northern carbonatite stock and (b) Southern stock.

Figure 8

Fig. 5. 207Pb/206Pb vs. 238U/206Pb diagrams (Tera and Wasserburg, 1972) for perovskite from the (a) Northern carbonatite stock and (b) Southern stock.

Figure 9

Fig. 6. Weighted mean 206Pb/238U age diagrams for perovskite from the Ice River ijolite.

Figure 10

Table 5. LA-ICPMS U–Pb results for perovskite from Ice River.

Figure 11

Table 6. U–Pb ID-TIMS isotopic dataa for perovskite and andradite from the Guli complex.

Figure 12

Fig. 7. U–Pb concordia diagram comparing ID-TIMS data for perovskite from jacupirangite (GU-28-41) and Northern carbonatite stock (GU-13) and andradite from the Southern stock (GU-08).

Figure 13

Fig. 8. Summary of geochronological data (from the literature and this work) for the Siberian flood basalts (black: lavas; green: intrusive rocks; blue: lamproites), Maimecha–Kotuy alkaline plutons (lilac: published data; purple: this work) and felsic intrusions (red). HP: Hoffman Peninsula (Reichow et al., 2016); MK: Maimecha–Kotuy (Burgess and Bowring, 2015); CP, ATS and NL: central Putorana, Angara–Taseevskaya syncline and Noril'sk lamproite, respectively (Ivanov et al., 2013, 2018); N1: Noril'sk intrusion (Renne, 1995); DS and AS: Delkansky and Arydzhangsky Suites (Kamo et al., 2003); GS, SS, T, N2, E, PND and D: Gudchikhinsky suite, Syverminsky suite, Talnakh intrusion, Noril'sk vein, Ergalakhsky intrusion, Post-Norilsk dolerite dyke and Daldykansky intrusion (Dalrymple et al., 1995); GUMC, GUSS, GUNS and GUJA: Guli melilitolite–carbonatite contact, Southern stock, Northern stock and jacupirangite (this work); GM and AD: Guli melilitolite and Avansky dyke (Dalrymple et al., 1995); KU: Kugda (Anosova et al., 2019); OD: Odikhincha (Salnikova et al., 2019); GU1, GU2, GU3: Guli (Malich et al., 2015; Kogarko and Zartman, 2007; Kamo et al., 2003, respectively); BG: Bolgokhtokh granodiorite stock (Kamo et al., 2003); RI, MI, UR: Uboinaya River, Morzhov Island, Rastorguev Island (Vernikovsky et al., 2003); DI and DU: Dikarabigai and Dumtalei intrusions (Augland et al., 2019).