Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T21:21:16.212Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Geochemical implications of gabbro from the slow-spreading Northern Central Indian Ocean Ridge, Indian Ocean

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2010

DWIJESH RAY
Affiliation:
National Centre for Antarctic and Ocean Research, Goa 403804, India
SAUMITRA MISRA*
Affiliation:
School of Geological Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4000, South Africa
RANADIP BANERJEE
Affiliation:
National Institute of Oceanography, Goa 403004, India
DOMINIQUE WEIS
Affiliation:
Pacific Centre for Isotope and Geochemical Research, University of British Columbia, Canada
*
†Author for correspondence: misras@ukzn.ac.za; misrasaumitra@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Gabbro samples (c. < 0.4 Ma old) dredged from close to the ‘Vityaz Megamullion’ on the slow-spreading Northern Central Indian Ridge (NCIR, 18–22 mm yr−1) include mostly olivine gabbro and Fe–Ti oxide gabbro. The cumulate olivine gabbro shows ophitic to subophitic texture with early formed plagioclase crystals in mutual contact with each other, and a narrow range of compositions of olivine (Fo80–81), clinopyroxene (magnesium number: 85–87) and plagioclase (An67–70). This olivine gabbro could be geochemically cogenetic with the evolved oxide gabbro. These gabbro samples are geochemically distinct from the CIR gabbro occurring along the Vema, Argo and Marie Celeste transform faults and can further be discriminated from the associated NCIR basalts by their clinopyroxene (augite in gabbro, and diopsidic in basalts) and olivine (gabbro: Fo80–81, basalts: Fo82–88) compositions. Our major oxide, trace element and REE geochemistry analyses suggest that the gabbro and the NCIR basalts are also not cogenetic and had experienced different trends of geochemical evolution. The clinopyroxenes of the present NCIR gabbros are geochemically similar to primitive melt that is in equilibrium with mantle peridotite, and do not show any poikilitic texture with resorbed plagioclase; these results negate the possibility of these gabbros being a pre-existing cumulate that has been brought up to the shallower oceanic crust and interacted with the NCIR basalt. The Sr, Pb and Nd isotopic data of the gabbro substantially differ from those of the NCIR basalts and suggest significant contamination of the depleted mantle source of the gabbro, most likely by the Indian Ocean pelagic sediments. The Pb-isotope data suggest that the proportion of pelagic sediment that mixed in the depleted mantle source of the NCIR gabbro is much higher than the level of contamination observed for the Indian Ocean MORBs.

Information

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a) Sketch map of Indian Ocean showing position of Indian Ocean Ridge System (IORS) (1), 90°E ridge (2), and Sunda–Banda trench (3); (b) enlarged view of the box area in (a) showing multibeam map of the ‘Vityaz megamullion’ (after Drolia & DeMets, 2005). Dredge location has been shown as DR 14. Symbols: CR – Carlsberg Ridge; CIR – Central Indian Ridge; RTJ – Rodriguez triple junction; SWIR – Southwest Indian Ridge; SEIR – Southeast Indian Ridge.

Figure 1

Table 1. Modal analyses of NCIR gabbro

Figure 2

Figure 2. Photomicrographs of Vityaz gabbros: (a) olivine gabbro in plane polarized light showing ophitic or subophitic texture; note interstitial olivine (Ol) and clinopyroxene (Cpx) within plagioclase (Plag) grains that are in mutual contact; scale bar: 1 mm; (b) plagioclase in olivine gabbro showing triple junction; (c) digested plagioclase (Plag) within interstitial clinopyroxene (Cpx); (d) BSE image of Fe–Ti oxide gabbro showing subhedral equant Fe–Ti oxides. Scale bars for (b, c, d) are 0.5 mm.

Figure 3

Table 2. Comparative average chemistry of plagioclase, clinopyroxene and olivine of NCIR gabbro, NCIR basalt and CIR gabbro

Figure 4

Figure 3. Plots of clinopyroxenes of NCIR gabbros in molar wollastonite (Wo)–enstatite (En)–ferrosilite (Fs) (pyroxene) ternary diagram; data from Appendix Table A3 at http://multimediafluids.uam.elogim.com/journals/geo. The pyroxene compositions obtained during fractional and equilibrium crystallization experiments on primitive mantle-derived tholeiitic basalt at 1.0 GPa (Villiger et al. 2004) and unpublished clinopyroxene data of NCIR basalts of first author (D.R.) are also shown for comparison. Coexisting clinopyroxene and orthopyroxene compositions of Villiger et al. (2004) are connected with tie lines.

Figure 5

Figure 4. Binary plots for mineral chemical compositions of NCIR gabbro: (a) plagioclase in An (wt %) versus FeOtotal (wt %) plot; (b) clinopyroxene in Mg no. versus Al (a.p.f.u.) (atomic power formula unit) plot; (c) clinopyroxene in Mg no. versus Cr (a.p.f.u.) plot; (d) TiO2 versus Cr2O3 plot (after Lissenberg & Dick, 2008) showing clinopyroxenes of NCIR gabbro are in equilibrium with melt that co-exists with mantle peridotite. Symbols: filled grey circle – plagioclase/pyroxene from olivine gabbro; filled black circle – plagioclase/pyroxene from oxide gabbro (data from Appendix Tables A2, A3 at http://multimediafluids.uam.elogim.com/journals/geo); filled grey square – plagioclase/pyroxene from CIR gabbro (Bloomer, Natland & Fisher, 1989) and open square – NCIR MORB (Ray et al. 2007) for comparison.

Figure 6

Table 3. Major oxides, trace element and Sr, Pb and Nd isotopic data of the NCIR gabbro; available chemical data of the CIR gabbro and NCIR basalts are given for comparison

Figure 7

Figure 5. Plot of primary and fractionated NCIR basalts (data from Ray et al. 2007 and our unpub. data), and NCIR olivine gabbro and oxide gabbro (data from Table 3) in CIPW normative Olivine (Ol)–Diopside (Di)–Quartz (Qz) diagram projected from plagioclase apex (after Walker et al. 1979). Symbols: filled grey triangle – NCIR primary basalt; open square – NCIR basalt; filled grey circle – olivine gabbro; filled black circle – oxide gabbro.

Figure 8

Figure 6. Binary major oxide plots for NCIR gabbro and basalt in Mg no. versus (a) SiO2, (b) Al2O3, (c) CaO, (d) Na2O and (e) P2O5, and (f) MgO v. TiO2 plots; Mg no. – 100 × mol Mg/(mol Mg + mol Fe2+). Symbols: filled grey circle – olivine gabbo; filled black circle – oxide gabbro (data from Table 3); open square – NCIR basalt (Ray et al. 2007 and unpub. data); filled grey diamond – CIR gabbro (Engel & Fisher, 1975); filled grey triangle – primitive NCIR MORB (Pluger et al. 1989).

Figure 9

Figure 7. Normalized multi-element plot (normalized to chondrite, after McDonough & Sun, 1995) of NCIR gabbro (data from Table 3); average NCIR MORB (Ray et al. 2007) and Indian Ocean pelagic sediment (Carlo, 1993; sample no. 1H-2, 145–150, Leg 136) are shown for comparison. Symbols: filled grey circle – olivine gabbro; filled black circle – oxide gabbro; open square – average NCIR N-MORB; black filled triangle – average pelagic sediment.

Figure 10

Figure 8. Binary trace element plots of NCIR gabbro (data from Table 3) and basalt (Ray et al. 2007) in Mg no. versus (a) Zr, (b) Y, (c) Cr and (d) Ni diagrams. Symbols as in Figure 7; note differences in trends for gabbro (dotted best fit lines) and basalt (solid best fit lines).

Figure 11

Figure 9. (a) Chondrite-normalized (after McDonough & Sun, 1995) REE spider diagram of NCIR gabbro and other Indian Ocean rocks for comparison. Symbols: filled grey circle – olivine gabbro; filled black circle – oxide gabbro (data from Table 3); filled diamond – D mantle (Workman & Hart, 2005); cross-Indian ocean pelagic sediment (detail REE data from Ben Othman, White & Patchett, 1989); open square – average NCIR MORB; grey-shaded area – the range of NCIR MORB (data from Ray et al. 2007). (b) Binary plot of total REE (ΣREE) versus Mg no. for Indian ocean gabbro and basalts. Symbols: filled grey circle – olivine gabbro; filled black circle – oxide gabbro (data from Table 3); open square – NCIR MORB (data from Ray et al. 2007).

Figure 12

Figure 10. (a, b) Binary plots of present gabbro and NCIR basalts in compatible (Zr) versus incompatible trace element (Ni and Cr) log–log diagrams (after Cocherie, 1986); (c) plot of incompatible trace element ratio (Zr/Y) against the least compatible element of the two (Zr) (Process identification plot, after White, 1999). Symbols: filled grey circle – NCIR gabbro (data from Table 3); open square – NCIR basalts (Ray et al. 2007). Arrows show direction of compositional changes with increasing Zr.

Figure 13

Figure 11. Binary plots of present gabbro in (a) La/CeN versus 206Pb/204Pb, (b) 208Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb, (c) 207Pb/204Pb versus 206Pb/204Pb, (d)207Pb/204Pb versus 143Nd/144Nd, and (e) 87Sr/86Sr versus 206Pb/204Pb plots. Symbols: filled grey circle – olivine gabbro (data from Table 3); open square – Central Indian Ocean Ridge (CIR) basalts (Rehkamper & Hofmann, 1997); filled black square – Indian ocean pelagic sediments (Ben Othman, White & Patchett, 1989); filled black circle – depleted mantle (Hart, 1984); dashed and solid lines through the data indicate mixing lines between depleted mantle and Indian Ocean pelagic sediment end-members. Note that the IOR basalt and NCIR gabbro are always plotted on mixing lines between these two end-members; the role of pelagic sediments is also found to be important in the genesis of gabbro. Northern Hemisphere Reference Line (NHRL) from Hart (1984) is shown in (b, c) for reference.

Supplementary material: File

Ray Supplementary Material

Appendix.doc

Download Ray Supplementary Material(File)
File 282.6 KB