Abstract Details
(2020) Lawsonite (Pseudomorph)-Bearing Eclogites from the Kamieniec Metamorphic Belt (Sudetes, SW Poland)
Ilnicki S, Szczepański J & Zhong X
https://doi.org/10.46427/gold2020.1134
The author has not provided any additional details.
04h: Room 5, Thursday 25th June 22:03 - 22:06
SŁAWOMIR Ilnicki
View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020
Jacek Szczepański
Xin Zhong View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Jacek Szczepański
Xin Zhong View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Listed below are questions that have been submitted by the community that the author will try and cover in their presentation. To submit a question, ensure you are signed in to the website. Authors or session conveners approve questions before they are displayed here.
Submitted by Shah Wali Faryad on Tuesday 23rd June 14:45
Lawsonite (Pseudomorph)-Bearing Eclogites from the Kamieniec Metamorphic Belt (Sudetes, SW Poland) Ilnicki S, Szczepa?ski J & Zhong XI like your tectonic model and eclogite formation by subduction of the Saxothuringian plate beneath Tepla Barrandien. My question is if it is possible to form and exhume (U)HP rocks of the Gore Sowie massif by this model as you indicated?
Thank you for your interest and the question. The tectonic scenario we propose gathers together the results we obtained in our project also for metapelites that appear together with eclogites in the Kamieniec Metamorphic Belt (KMB) and models of Chopin et al. (2012), Mazur et al. (2012), Schulmann et al. (2009), Szczepa?ski & Ilnicki (2014; but see also Maierová et al. 2014 doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2012.08.020). However, these models were originally developed for the Orlica-?nie?nik Dome (OSD) and assumed that the OSD eclogites and granulites which recorded relatively high temperatures of (U)HP metamorphism were located in the core part of deeply buried and folded Saxothuringian crust. Given roughly the same conditions for eclogites from the Góry Sowie Massif (GSM) and taking into account Saxothuringian affinities of GSM (e.g. Tabaud et al. 2019 Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 21, EGU2019-13714-1, 2019), we tentatively included that massif into the core therefore suggesting similar exhumation mechanism as for OSD, though being fully aware that direct geochronological or structural links between KMB and neighbouring GSM or OSD are missing. We hope to obtain soon the age data for eclogites which may (or may not) further validate our model, or perhaps shed some light on possible alternative scenarios.
Lawsonite (Pseudomorph)-Bearing Eclogites from the Kamieniec Metamorphic Belt (Sudetes, SW Poland) Ilnicki S, Szczepa?ski J & Zhong XI like your tectonic model and eclogite formation by subduction of the Saxothuringian plate beneath Tepla Barrandien. My question is if it is possible to form and exhume (U)HP rocks of the Gore Sowie massif by this model as you indicated?
Thank you for your interest and the question. The tectonic scenario we propose gathers together the results we obtained in our project also for metapelites that appear together with eclogites in the Kamieniec Metamorphic Belt (KMB) and models of Chopin et al. (2012), Mazur et al. (2012), Schulmann et al. (2009), Szczepa?ski & Ilnicki (2014; but see also Maierová et al. 2014 doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2012.08.020). However, these models were originally developed for the Orlica-?nie?nik Dome (OSD) and assumed that the OSD eclogites and granulites which recorded relatively high temperatures of (U)HP metamorphism were located in the core part of deeply buried and folded Saxothuringian crust. Given roughly the same conditions for eclogites from the Góry Sowie Massif (GSM) and taking into account Saxothuringian affinities of GSM (e.g. Tabaud et al. 2019 Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 21, EGU2019-13714-1, 2019), we tentatively included that massif into the core therefore suggesting similar exhumation mechanism as for OSD, though being fully aware that direct geochronological or structural links between KMB and neighbouring GSM or OSD are missing. We hope to obtain soon the age data for eclogites which may (or may not) further validate our model, or perhaps shed some light on possible alternative scenarios.
Submitted by Matthias Konrad-Schmolke on Wednesday 24th June 08:48
Thank you very much for the nice talk. I think the shape and composition of the inclusions in garnet are quite convincing that these were lawsonites. My question is two fold: 1) are there other places reported in the bohemian massif where lawsonite or its pseudomorphs occur and 2) how reliable are the PT estimations in the neighbouring eclogites that seem to reflect a significantly warmer geotherm?
Thank you for your interest, and the questions. I'm glad you liked the presentation and our interpretation of the inclusions. As to your questions: 1) to the best of my knowledge, lawsonite pseudmorphs in the Bohemian Massif were reported only by Pato?ka & Pin (2005; doi.org/10.3166/ga.18.363-374) from mafic blueschists in West Sudetes (East Krkonoše Complex) and by Nowak (1998 Geologia Sudetica 31, 3-31) from metapelites in the Kamieniec Metamorphic Belt (which was confirmed during our project on the Belt); 2) the PT estimations for eclogites from the neighbouring massifs were obtained quite recently by means of thermodynamic modelling: with Perple_X for the Orlica-?nie?nik Dome (Majka et al. 2019 doi.org/10.1111/jmg.12450 but see also Walczak et al. 2017 DOI: 10.1016/j.lithos.2017.09.013) and with Theriak Domino for the Sowie Góry Massif by myself (Ilnicki et al. 2013 DOI: 10.13140/2.1.1878.9121, available as conference paper only, soon to be published); in the latter case the results of phase equilibria modelling agreed nicely with the conventional geothemobarometric estimations.
Thank you very much for the nice talk. I think the shape and composition of the inclusions in garnet are quite convincing that these were lawsonites. My question is two fold: 1) are there other places reported in the bohemian massif where lawsonite or its pseudomorphs occur and 2) how reliable are the PT estimations in the neighbouring eclogites that seem to reflect a significantly warmer geotherm?
Thank you for your interest, and the questions. I'm glad you liked the presentation and our interpretation of the inclusions. As to your questions: 1) to the best of my knowledge, lawsonite pseudmorphs in the Bohemian Massif were reported only by Pato?ka & Pin (2005; doi.org/10.3166/ga.18.363-374) from mafic blueschists in West Sudetes (East Krkonoše Complex) and by Nowak (1998 Geologia Sudetica 31, 3-31) from metapelites in the Kamieniec Metamorphic Belt (which was confirmed during our project on the Belt); 2) the PT estimations for eclogites from the neighbouring massifs were obtained quite recently by means of thermodynamic modelling: with Perple_X for the Orlica-?nie?nik Dome (Majka et al. 2019 doi.org/10.1111/jmg.12450 but see also Walczak et al. 2017 DOI: 10.1016/j.lithos.2017.09.013) and with Theriak Domino for the Sowie Góry Massif by myself (Ilnicki et al. 2013 DOI: 10.13140/2.1.1878.9121, available as conference paper only, soon to be published); in the latter case the results of phase equilibria modelling agreed nicely with the conventional geothemobarometric estimations.
Sign in to ask a question.