一个新的花岗岩成因分类:基于变质岩深熔作用理论与大数据的证据

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2022.6.11

地学前缘 ›› 2022, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (4): 319-329.DOI: 10.13745/j.esf.sf.2022.6.11

一个新的花岗岩成因分类:基于变质岩深熔作用理论与大数据的证据

张旗¹^,²(), 翟明国¹^,², 魏春景³, 周李岗¹^,², 陈万峰⁴, 焦守涛⁵^,⁶, 王跃⁷, 袁方林¹^,²

1.中国科学院地质与地球物理研究所, 北京 100029
2.岩石圈演化国家重点实验室, 北京 100029
3.北京大学地球与空间科学学院, 北京 100871
4.兰州大学地质科学与矿产资源学院甘肃省西部矿产资源重点实验室, 甘肃兰州 730000
5.中国地质调查局发展研究中心, 北京 100037
6.自然资源部地质信息工程技术创新中心, 北京 100037
7.中国地质大学(北京) 地球科学与资源学院, 北京 100083

收稿日期:2022-05-20 修回日期:2022-06-10 出版日期:2022-07-25 发布日期:2022-07-28
作者简介:张旗(1937—),男,研究员,从事岩石学和地球化学相关的科研工作。E-mail: zq1937@126.com
基金资助:
自然资源部深地科学与探测技术实验室开放课题(202211);国家自然科学基金重大项目(41890834);中国科学院重点项目(QYZDY-SSWDQc017);中国科学院重点项目(41000000);国家重点研发计划项目“基于地质云的地质灾害基础信息提取与大数据分析挖掘(2018YFC1505501);国家重点研发计划项目“基于‘地质云’平台的深部找矿知识挖掘(2016YFC0600510);国家自然科学基金项目“大数据环境下的滑坡危险性评估模型构建方法研究(41872253);中国地质调查局项目“地球科学数据集成与服务(DD20221785)

Innovative petrogenetic classification of granitoids: Perspective from metamorphic anatexis and big data

ZHANG Qi¹^,²(), ZHAI Mingguo¹^,², WEI Chunjing³, ZHOU Ligang¹^,², CHEN Wanfeng⁴, JIAO Shoutao⁵^,⁶, WANG Yue⁷, YUAN Fanglin¹^,²

1. Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China
2. State Key Laboratory of Lithospheric Evolution, Beijing 100029, China
3. School of Earth and Space Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
4. Key Laboratory of Mineral Resources in Western China (Gansu Province), School of Earth Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
5. Development Research Center, China Geological Survey, Beijing 100037, China
6. Technology Innovation Center of Geological Information, Ministry of Natural Resources, Beijing 100037, China
7. School of Earth Sciences and Resources, China University of Geosciences(Beijing), Beijing 100083, China

Received:2022-05-20 Revised:2022-06-10 Online:2022-07-25 Published:2022-07-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

花岗岩目前的ISMA分类不是一个系统的分类,花岗岩分类可能需要从花岗岩的起源来考虑。花岗岩源自变质岩,可能是来自地幔或玄武质岩浆底侵带来的热导致的下地壳底部发生部分熔融的熔体形成的。因此,花岗岩与变质岩源岩有成因联系和因果关系,变质岩为母,花岗岩为子。根据埃达克岩与残留相平衡的理论,埃达克岩形成于斜长石消失线之上。那么,出现在石榴石出现线之上的是什么花岗岩呢?出现在石榴石出现线之下的又是什么花岗岩呢?本文即尝试从这个思路来探讨花岗岩的分类,并采用大数据方法予以佐证,得到的初步结果可以将花岗岩分为3类:(1)位于斜长石消失线之上的为高Sr低Y型花岗岩(高压,代表加厚的地壳);(2)位于斜长石消失线与石榴石出现线之间的为低Sr低Y类型花岗岩(中压,代表正常厚度的地壳);(3)位于石榴石出现线之下的为高Y型花岗岩(低压,代表减薄的地壳)。大数据研究的结果支持上述分类,给出的地球化学标志大体是:Sr含量为400×10^-6,Y含量为(20~35)×10^-6。

关键词: 花岗岩分类, 变质岩, 部分熔融, 深熔作用, 残留相, 大数据

Abstract:

The current ISMA classification of granitoids is not systematic and lacks petrogenetic specification. Most granitoids may have originated from anatexis of metamorphic rocks under lower crustal conditions, triggered by conductive and/or advective heating from asthenosphere mantle uprising and basaltic magma underplating. Thus, granitoid petrogenesis is causally related to metamorphism, and, to some extent, there is a parent-child relation between metamorphic rocks and granitoids. If adakites are formed by partial melting of eclogites under high-pressure (HP) conditions without plagioclase, what about granitoid types formed by partial melting under medium-pressure (MP) conditions with the presence of both plagioclase and garnet, or under low-pressure (LP) conditions without garnet? On the basis of these considerations, combined with big data technology, we proposed an alternative granitoid classification scheme. Granitoids are classified into three types: (1) high Sr-low Y type formed under HP conditions without plagioclase in subducted slabs or thickened crustal regions; (2) low Sr-low Y type formed under MP conditions with both plagioclase and garnet in normal or slightly thickened crustal regions; and (3) low Sr-high Y type formed under LP conditions without garnet in extended crustal regions. Big data statistics suggested that the above three granitoid types can be roughly demarcated by the geochemical criteria-Sr content of 400×10^-6 and Y content of (20-35)×10^-6.

Key words: classification of granitoids, metamorphism, partial melting, anatexis, residue, big data

中图分类号:

张旗, 翟明国, 魏春景, 周李岗, 陈万峰, 焦守涛, 王跃, 袁方林. 一个新的花岗岩成因分类:基于变质岩深熔作用理论与大数据的证据[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(4): 319-329.

ZHANG Qi, ZHAI Mingguo, WEI Chunjing, ZHOU Ligang, CHEN Wanfeng, JIAO Shoutao, WANG Yue, YUAN Fanglin. Innovative petrogenetic classification of granitoids: Perspective from metamorphic anatexis and big data[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2022, 29(4): 319-329.

图/表 11

图1 变质岩相图(据文献[10]修改)

Fig.1 p-T diagram showing the distribution of metamorphic facies.Modified after [10].

图2 不同压力的变质岩部分熔融形成花岗岩示意图(据图1修改)

Fig.2 A schematic p-T diagram showing the formation of granitoids under different pressures. Modified from Fig.1.

图3 地壳中变质作用演化过程以及有地幔热量加入时导致变质岩升温的示意图(底图据文献[19]修改) 蓝色曲线示地温梯度线(在加厚地壳背景下),代表变质岩随深度和温度增加变质岩相转变的关系;水平的红色箭头示地幔上涌导致的等压升温过程,部分熔融与红色曲线有关。

Fig.3 Schematic p-T diagram showing the metamorphic evolution within crust and the heating paths driven by mantle uprising. Basemap modified after [19].

图4 部分熔融产生的熔体与残留相平衡示意图底图为变质岩相图,白色曲线示部分熔融演化线,圆圈示发生部分熔融的位置,圆圈中的不同区域分别示熔体(深色)与残留体(浅色)的比例,不同压力下形成的熔体不同(由不同的颜色表示),温度不同,熔体与残留体的比例不同(以圆圈内不同颜色所占比例不同示意)。

Fig.4 Schematic p-T diagram showing the equilibrium between melts and residues produced by partial melting

图5 MORB成分基性岩在0.7 GPa(a)和1.5 GPa(b)等压升温熔融过程中的矿物及熔体含量变化图解(据文献[10]) 图中代号:bi—黑云母;cpx—单斜辉石;ep—绿帘石;g—石榴石;H—水;hb—角闪石;ilm—钛铁矿;L—熔体;mu—白云母;pl—斜长石;q—石英;opx—斜方辉石;ru—金红石;sph—榍石。

Fig.5 Mode-box diagrams showing the variation in mode of minerals and melt for a metabasite with MORB composition during an isobaric heating under pressure of 0.7 GPa (a) and 1.5 GPa (b). Adapted from [10].

图6 MORB成分基性岩在NCKFMASHTO体系中的p-T视剖面图解(据文献[10]) 图中L5~45表示熔体含量等值线(以1个氧化物为基础的摩尔分数,%);WS代表湿固相线;其他同图5;图中粉色箭头示不同压力下部分熔融路径,随着温度升高,变质程度升高,图的左侧温度低,变质岩矿物中角闪石、白云母、黑云母、绿帘石、石英较多;图的右侧温度高,变质矿物为单斜辉石、斜方辉石、石榴石比较多。

Fig.6 p-T pseudosection in the NCKFMASHTO system for a metabasite with MORB composition. Adapted from [10].

图7 基性岩部分熔融最佳位置图中表示,部分熔融最容易发生的地方在角闪石消失线之前的位置,其次为角闪岩相转变为麻粒岩相之前的位置。

Fig.7 p-T diagram showing the optimal conditions of partial melting of metabasites

图8 全球全部中酸性岩浆岩Sr-Yb图(a)和密度图(b)(50630件数据)

Fig.8 Yb-Sr plots of global intermediate-acidic magmatic rocks (a) and their density distributions (b)

图9 变质岩残留相组成与全球中酸性岩浆岩Sr-Y数据之间的关系该图展示了全球中酸性岩浆岩Sr含量与斜长石消失线之间可能存在的关系,石榴石出现线与变质岩残留相压力之间可能存在的关系,并依据上述关系将全球花岗岩分为3类:(1)高Sr低Y型花岗岩,位于A区(残留相为石榴石),主要地球化学标志:Sr含量>400×10-6,Y含量<20×10-6; (2)低Sr低Y型花岗岩,位于B区(残留相斜长石+石榴石),Sr含量≤400×10-6,Y含量≤30×10-6或35×10-6;(3)高Y型花岗岩,位于C区(残留相斜长石+角闪石+辉石),主要指标是高Y(Y含量>(20~35)×10-6),Sr含量没有要求,但主要是低Sr的。

Fig.9 Y-Sr diagram showing the relations between metamorphic residues and the density distributions of global intermediate-acidic magmatic rocks

图10 太古宙TTG与后太古宙花岗岩的REE分布对比图(a)和角闪石、石榴石和斜长石的REE图(b)(据文献[45,48]) 图中角闪石尤其是石榴石的重稀土分配系数较高,斜长石具有非常强烈的正铕异常,说明斜长石分馏将导致同源岩浆中强烈的负铕异常。相反,角闪石的分馏将导致岩浆中一个小的负异常。因此,石榴石、角闪石和斜长石的分馏过程都会在花岗岩形成中有所反映,这是一种REE分布模式的镜像效应。

Fig.10 REE distributions of TTG and the comparison with post-Archean granites(a) and REE distributions of amphibole, garnet and plagioclase (b). Adapted from [45,48].

图11 花岗岩分类的Y-Sr图(底图据图8修改) A区代表高压条件下形成的花岗岩(如埃达克岩);B区为中压条件下形成的花岗岩;C区为低压条件下形成的花岗岩。各区之间的界线不是截然的,允许出现过渡的情况。

Fig.11 Y-Sr diagram showing the classification of granitoids. Modified after Fig.8.

参考文献 49

[1]	CHAPPELL B W, WHITE A J R. Two contrasting granite types[J]. Pacific Geology, 1974, 8: 173-174.
[2]	CHAPPELL B W, WHITE A J R. I- and S-type granites in the Lachlan Fold Belt[J]. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth and Environmental Science, 1992, 83(1/2): 1-26.
[3]	张旗, 王焰, 熊小林, 等. 埃达克岩和花岗岩: 挑战与机遇[M]. 北京: 中国大地出版社, 2008.
[4]	WHALEN J B, CURRIE K L, CHAPPELL B W. A-type granites: geochemical characteristics, discriminations and petrogenesis[J]. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 1987, 95(4): 407-419.
[5]	PEARCE J A, LIPPARD S J, ROBERTS S. Characteristics and tectonic significance of supra-subduction zone ophiolites[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 1984, 16(1): 77-94.
[6]	FOLEY S F, TIEPOLO M, VANNUCCI R. Growth of early continental crust controlled by melting of amphibolite in subduction zones[J]. Nature, 2002, 417(6891): 637-640.
[7]	FOLEY S F, BUHRE S, JACOB D E. Evolution of the Archaean crust by delamination and shallow subduction[J]. Nature, 2003, 421(6920): 249-252.
[8]	MOYEN J F, STEVENS G. Experimental constraints on TTG petrogenesis: implications for Archean geodynamics[J]. Geophysical Monograph Series, 2006, 164: 149-175.
[9]	RAPP R P, WATSON E B, MILLER C F. Partial melting of amphibolite/eclogite and the origin of archean trondhjemites and tonalities[J]. Precambrian Research, 1991, 51(1/2/3/4): 1-25.
[10]	魏春景, 关晓, 董杰. 基性岩高温-超高温变质作用与TTG质岩成因[J]. 岩石学报, 2017, 33(5): 1381-1404.
[11]	KAY R W. Aleutian magnesian andesite: melts from subducted Pacific Ocean crust[J]. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 1978, 4(1/2): 117-132.
[12]	DEFANT M J, DRUMMOND M S. Derivation of some modern arc magmas by melting of young subducted lithosphere[J]. Nature, 1990, 347(6294): 662-665.
[13]	PEACOCK S M, RUSHMER T, THOMPSON A B. Partial melting of subducting oceanic crust[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 1994, 121(1/2): 227-244.
[14]	MARTIN H, SMITHIES R H, RAPP R, et al. An overview of adakite, tonalite- trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) and sanukitoid: relationships and some implications for crustal evolution[J]. Lithos, 2005, 79(1/2): 1-24.
[15]	ROLLINSON H R, MARTIN H. Geodynamic controls on adakite, TTG and sanukitoid genesis: implications for models of crust formation: introduction to the special issue[J]. Lithos, 2005, 79(1/2): ix-xii.
[16]	GILL R. Igneous rocks and processes: a practical guide[M]. Chichester, UK: Wiley- Blackwell, 2010.
[17]	MOYEN J F, MARTIN H. Forty years of TTG research[J]. Lithos, 2012, 148(Complete): 312-336.
[18]	吴鸣谦, 左梦璐, 张德会, 等. TTG岩套的成因及其形成环境[J]. 地质论评, 2014, 60(3): 503-514.
[19]	WEI C J, DUAN Z Z. Phase relations in metabasic rocks: constraints from the results of experiments, phase modelling and ACF analysis[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2018, 474(1): SP474. 10.
[20]	WYLLIE P J, WOLF M B. Amphibole dehydration-melting: sorting out the solidus[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 1993, 76(1): 405-416.
[21]	SEN C, DUNN T. Dehydration melting of a basaltic composition amphibolite at 1. 5 and 2. 0 GPa: implications for the origin of adakites[J]. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 1994, 117(4): 394-409.
[22]	张旗, 焦守涛. 埃达克岩来自高压背景: 一个科学的、可靠的、有预见性的科学发现[J]. 岩石学报, 2020, 36(6): 1675-1683.
[23]	WYLLIE P J. Subduction products according to experimental prediction[J]. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 1982, 93(6): 468-476.
[24]	RAPP R P, WATSON E B. Dehydration melting of metabasalt at 8-32 kbar: implications for continental growth and crust-mantle recycling[J]. Journal of Petrology, 1995, 36(4): 891-931.
[25]	LIU J, BOHLEN S R, ERNST W G. Stability of hydrous phases in subducting oceanic crust[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 1996, 143(1): 161-171.
[26]	VIELZEUF D, VIDAL P. Granulites and crustal evolution[M]. Dordrecht, Boston. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1990.
[27]	魏春景. 麻粒岩相变质作用与花岗岩成因-Ⅱ: 变质泥质岩高温-超高温变质相平衡与S型花岗岩成因的定量模拟[J]. 岩石学报, 2016, 32(6): 1625-43.
[28]	魏春景, 朱文萍. 麻粒岩相变质作用与花岗岩成因-Ⅰ: 变质泥质岩/杂砂岩高温-超高温变质相平衡[J]. 岩石学报, 2016, 32(6): 1611-24.
[29]	HARLEY S L. The origins of granulites: a metamorphic prospective[J]. Geological Magazine, 1989, 126(3): 215-247.
[30]	ATHERTON M P, PETFORD N. Generation of sodium-rich magmas from newly underplated basaltic crust[J]. Nature, 1993, 362: 144-146.
[31]	DAVIDSON J P. Petrogenesis of Lesser Antilles island arc magmas: isotopic and geochemical constraints[D]. University of Leeds, UK: Unpubl. PhD thesis, 1984.
[32]	NUTMAN A P, BENNETT V C, FRIEND C R L, et al. Meta-igneous (non-gneissic) tonalites and quartz-diorites from an extensive ca. 3800 Ma terrain south of the Isua supracrustal belt, southern West Greenland: constraints on early crust formation[J]. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 1999, 137(4): 364-388.
[33]	SUN S S. Lead isotopic study of young volcanic rocks from mid-ocean ridges, ocean islands and island arcs[J]. London, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 1980, 297(1431): 409-445.
[34]	THOMPSON R N, MORRISON M A, HENDRY G L, et al. An assessment of the relative roles of a crust and mantle in magma genesis: an elemental approach[J]. London, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 1984, A310: 549-590.
[35]	BRYANT J A, YOGODZINSKI G M, HALL M L, et al. Geochemical constraints on the origin of volcanic rocks from the Andean Northern Volcanic Zone, Ecuador[J]. Journal of Petrology, 2004, 47(6): 1147-1175.
[36]	MACPHERSON C G, DREHER S T, THIRLWALL M F. Adakites without slab melting: high pressure differentiation of island arc magma, Mindanao, the Philippines[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2006, 243(3/4): 581-593.
[37]	SMITHIES R H. The Archaean tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) series is not an analogue of Cenozoic adakite[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2000, 182(1): 115-125.
[38]	南京大学地质系矿物岩石教研室. 火成岩岩石学[M]. 北京: 地质出版社, 1980.
[39]	许继峰, 邬建斌, 王强, 等. 埃达克岩与埃达克质岩在中国的研究进展[J]. 矿物岩石地球化学通报, 2014, 33(1): 6-13.
[40]	ARTH J G, HANSON G N. Geochemistry and origin of the early Precambrian crust of northeastern Minnesota[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1975, 39(3): 325-362.
[41]	CONDIE K C, HUNTER D R. Trace element geochemistry of Archean granitic rocks from the Barberton region, South Africa[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 1976, 29(2): 389-400.
[42]	CONDIE K C. Archean greenstone belts[J]. Developments in Precambrian Geology, 1981, 3: 434.
[43]	JAHN B, GLIKSON A Y, PEUCAT J J, et al. REE geochemistry and isotopic data of Archaean silicic volcanics and granitoids from the Pilbara block, Western Australia: implications for early crustal evolution[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 1981, 45(9): 1633-1652.
[44]	JAHN B M, VIDAL P, KRÖNER K A. Multi-chronometric ages and origin of Archaean tonalitic gneisses in Finnish Lapland: a case for long crustal residence time[J]. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 1984, 86: 398-408.
[45]	MARTIN H. Effect of steeper Archean geothermal gradient on geochemistry of subduction-zone magmas[J]. Geology, 1986, 14(9): 753-756.
[46]	MARTIN H. Petrogenesis of Archaean trondhjemites, tonalites, and granodiorites from eastern Finland: major and trace element geochemistry[J]. Journal of Petrology, 1987, 28(5): 921-953.
[47]	ELLAM R M, HAWKESWORTH C J. Is average continental crust generated at subduction zones?[J]. Geology, 1988, 16(4): 314-317.
[48]	MARTIN H. The mechanisms of petrogenesis of the Archaean continental crust: comparison with modern processes[J]. Lithos, 1993, 30(3/4): 373-388.
[49]	张旗, 原杰, 焦守涛, 等. 花岗岩三级分类刍议[J/OL]. 矿物岩石地球化学通报, [2022-06-13]. https://doi.org/10.19658/j.issn.1007-2802.2022.41.020.

一个新的花岗岩成因分类:基于变质岩深熔作用理论与大数据的证据

Innovative petrogenetic classification of granitoids: Perspective from metamorphic anatexis and big data

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 11

参考文献 49

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	朱紫怡, 周飞, 王瑀, 周统, 侯照亮, 邱昆峰. 基于机器学习的锆石成因分类研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(5): 464-475.
[2]	王焰新, 李俊霞, 谢先军. 高碘地下水成因与分布规律研究[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(3): 1-10.
[3]	周长松, 邹胜章, 冯启言, 朱丹尼, 李军, 王佳, 谢浩, 邓日欣. 岩溶关键带水文地球化学研究进展[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(3): 37-50.
[4]	张丁丁, 张衡. 全球典型大陆造山带中榴辉岩的折返机制:来自变质岩和地球物理的限制[J]. 地学前缘, 2022, 29(1): 303-315.
[5]	左仁广. 基于数据科学的矿产资源定量预测的理论与方法探索[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(3): 49-55.
[6]	周永章, 张前龙, 黄永健, 杨威, 肖凡, 吉俊杰, 韩枫, 唐磊, 欧阳冲, 沈文杰. 钦杭成矿带斑岩铜矿知识图谱构建及应用展望[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(3): 67-75.
[7]	李胜荣, 申俊峰, 李林, 张华锋. 基于大数据的成因矿物学研究思考[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(3): 76-86.
[8]	王功文, 张寿庭, 燕长海, 庞振山, 王宏伟, 冯占奎, 董宏, 程红涛, 何亚清, 李瑞喜, 张智强, 黄蕾蕾, 郭娜娜. 栾川矿集区地学大数据挖掘和三维/四维建模的资源-环境联合预测与定量评价[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(3): 139-155.
[9]	奚小环. 大数据科学从信息化、模式化到智能化:现代地球化学应用研究的新范式[J]. 地学前缘, 2021, 28(1): 308-317.
[10]	崔晓亮，苏尚国，宋晨，蒋俊毅，黑慧欣，伍月. 河北汉诺坝碱性玄武岩的源区和成因[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(6): 257-270.
[11]	赵鹏大. 地质大数据特点及其合理开发利用[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(4): 1-5.
[12]	罗建民，张旗. 大数据开创地学研究新途径：查明相关关系，增强研究可行性[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(4): 6-12.
[13]	葛粲，汪方跃，顾海欧，管怀峰，李修钰，袁峰. 基于卷积神经网络和火山岩大数据的构造源区判别[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(4): 22-32.
[14]	王威，蔡雨娜，刘洁. 岩石三维微观结构定量研究方案与应用实例[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(4): 55-66.
[15]	毛先成，王迷军，刘占坤，陈进，邓浩. 基于勘查数据的胶东大尹格庄金矿床控矿地质因素定量分析[J]. 地学前缘, 2019, 26(4): 84-93.