Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T12:25:20.295Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Granitoids and dykes of the Pine Island Bay region, West Antarctica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2012

Andrea Kipf
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel (GEOMAR), Wischhofstr. 1–3, D-24148 Kiel, Germany
Nicholas Mortimer
Affiliation:
GNS Science, Private Bag 1930, Dunedin, New Zealand
Reinhard Werner*
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel (GEOMAR), Wischhofstr. 1–3, D-24148 Kiel, Germany
Karsten Gohl
Affiliation:
Alfred Wegener Institut für Polar- und Meeresforschung, Postfach 120161, D-27515 Bremerhaven, Germany
Paul Van Den Bogaard
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel (GEOMAR), Wischhofstr. 1–3, D-24148 Kiel, Germany
Folkmar Hauff
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel (GEOMAR), Wischhofstr. 1–3, D-24148 Kiel, Germany
Kaj Hoernle
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel (GEOMAR), Wischhofstr. 1–3, D-24148 Kiel, Germany
*
*Corresponding author: rwerner@geomar.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We present geochronological and geochemical data for eight plutonic rocks from five locations in the Pine Island Bay area of West Antarctica, collected during RV Polarstern expedition ANT-XXIII/4. Ar-Ar laser method dating yielded closure temperatures ages of c. 147–98 Ma for dioritic and granitic plutonic rocks and an age range of c. 97–95 Ma for granitoid and trachyandesitic dykes. Major and trace element compositions indicate that all rocks have an I-type subduction-related chemistry. There are no A-type granitic rocks in our dataset, and none are yet reported from the Pine Island Bay area. Our results confirm earlier models of post 100 Ma subduction on this part of the Gondwana margin.

Information

Type
Earth Sciences
Copyright
Copyright © Antarctic Science Ltd 2012
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Overview map of West Antarctica. The red box indicates the map area shown in Fig. 2, the dashed blue line marks the boundary between Amundsen Province (AP) and Ross Province (RP) after Pankhurst et al. (1998). Map based on ETOPO 1-minute grid (Smith & Sandwell 1997). PIB = Pine Island Bay.

Figure 1

Fig. 2 Overview map of the Walgreen Coast and Pine Island Bay area. RV Polarstern expedition ANT-XXIII/4 sampling sites of the igneous basement are marked by coloured symbols (the same coloured symbols are used in subsequent figures). Bold red numbers indicate Ar-Ar ages presented in this study, small black numbers published age data from Pankhurst et al. (1993, 1998) and Mukasa & Dalziel (2000). U-Pb ages are marked by black squares. Letters indicate rock types which have been dated (g = granitoids, m = metamorphic rocks, v = volcanic rocks). Map based on ETOPO 1-minute grid (Smith & Sandwell 1997).

Figure 2

Table I Sample locations.

Figure 3

Fig. 3 Outcrops in the Walgreen Coast and Pine Island Bay area. a. Huge cliffs expose crystalline basement at the north-western coast of Wright Island. Samples PS69/277-1 and -7 were taken from the small island in front of the cliffs. b. Most islands surveyed on cruise ANTXXIII/4 in the Pine Island Bay consist mainly of granitic rocks. c. A porphyritic dyke (sample PS69/LI-1), and d. granitic rocks (samples PS69/LI-2 and -3) on Edwards Island. Note the dyke-like structure of the granitic outcrop.

Figure 4

Table II Sr-Nd-Pb isotope ratios of sample PS69/LI-1.

Figure 5

Fig. 4 Classification of the samples from Walgreen Coast and Pine Island Bay. The solid line marks the subdivision between alkalic and subalkalic rocks. All samples show evolved subalkalic or slightly alkalic compositions. The porphyritic dyke rock sampled on Edwards Island falls into the field for trachyandesites. All analyses have been normalized to a volatile free total of 100%.

Figure 6

Fig. 5Fig. 5 Age spectra and alteration indices (A.I.) from 40Ar/39Ar laser step-heating experiments. Plateau steps and corresponding range of alteration index values are accentuated by grey shading. Error bars are ± 2σ.

Figure 7

Fig. 5Fig 5 continued

Figure 8

Table III Results of step-heating 40Ar/39Ar analyses.

Figure 9

Table IV Results of major and trace element analyses.

Figure 10

Fig. 6 Multi-element diagram normalized to primitive mantle (after Hofmann 1988) and rare earth element (REE) diagram normalized to chondrites (after McDonough & Sun 1995) for the Walgreen Coast and Pine Island Bay rocks. The 97 Ma granites of Takahe Seamount (Mortimer et al. 2006) are shown for reference. Note the distinct Eu anomaly for the A-type Takahe granites.

Figure 11

Fig. 8 Y+Nb vs Rb tectonic discrimination diagram for granitoids after Pearce et al. (1984). The basement samples yielded on RV Polarstern ANT XXIII/4 cruise fall into the field for volcanic arc granitoids, consistent with a subduction setting for these rocks. Field for granites from Edward VII Peninsula and Ruppert Coast is based on published data from Weaver et al. 1992 and Pankhurst et al. 1998. Symbols as in Fig. 7.

Figure 12

Fig. 7 Y vs Sr/Y discrimination diagram after Defant & Drummond (1990) reveals a weak adakitic composition of most Walgreen coast and Pine Island Bay samples. Only the granite sampled on Bear Peninsula falls into the fields for “classical” arc compositions. Previously published data from Cretaceous granitoids from the Amundsen suite (Pankhurst et al. 1993, 1998), the Cretaceous New Zealand Rahu Suite (Tulloch & Kimbrough 2003) and Cretaceous sodic granites from the Antarctic Peninsula (Wareham et al. 1997) are shown for reference. Field for adakites and fractionation trends after Richards & Kerrick (2007).

Figure 13

Fig. 9 Histogram comparing ages of Jurassic and Cretaceous I-type plutons in the Thurston Island-Pine Island Bay area. The youngest dated Mesozoic rock in the Pine Island Bay area (Fig. 2) is 94 Ma (U-Pb zircon by Mukasa & Dalziel 2000).

Figure 14

Fig. 10 Reconstruction of Zealandia and West Antarctica at 90 Ma, combining features from Eagles et al. (2004), and Mortimer et al. (2006). Note the wide zone of the magmatic arc in eastern Marie Byrd Land (MBL), possibly due to crustal extension after the Hikurangi Plateau-Chatham Rise collision and cessation of the subduction. The rectangle indicates the map area of Fig. 2 (NI = North Island of New Zealand, SI = South Island, T = Takahe Seamount, PIB = Pine Island Bay, PAC = Pacific Plate, PHO = Phoenix Plate, CHA = Charcot Plate).

Supplementary material: File

Kipf supplementary material

Appendix

Download Kipf supplementary material(File)
File 98.8 KB