Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:44:22.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Origin of appinitic pockets in the diorites of Jersey, Channel Islands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2018

Colin H. Key
Colin H. Key*
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Queen Mary College, University of London, Mile End Road, E1 4NS
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Isolated pockets of pegmatitic appinite characterized by hollow-shell, prismatic amphiboles are common in the Pre-Cambrian metagabbros and metasomatic diorites of Jersey. Field relationships and petrography indicate a liquid phase in the formation of these appinitic pockets, which are chemically distinct from the associated gabbros and diorites. Close chemical ties between appinites and host rocks, however, prove a replacive, metasomatic, rather than intrusive origin for the pockets. Significant enrichment in SiO2, K2O, and Na2O suggest that surrounding granite provided the metasomatic agents. The localized changes in composition of the basic rocks resulted in the formation of partially molten pockets from which the appinites crystallized. This mechanism probably necessitates a temperature in the region of 900 °C at 2–5 Kb PH2O: Fractured, hollow-shell, prismatic amphiboles of the pockets are consistent with quench crystallization, possibly due to the sudden loss of volatiles. An increase in the oxygen fugacity may have played a major role in inducing the rapid crystallization of kaersutitic amphibole. The envisaged conditions under which these changes took place are those of a high-level, sub-volcanic environment.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical Magazine , Volume 41 , Issue 318 , June 1977 , pp. 183 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Present address: Department of Geology, Goldsmiths' College, University of London, New Cross, SE14 6NW.

References

Bailey, (D. K.), 1970. In Mechanism of Igneous Intrusion, 177-86, Liverpool (Gallery Press).Google Scholar
Bailey, (E. B.), 1916. Mem. Geol. Surv. Scotland. Google Scholar
Bishop, (A. C), 1963. Proc. Geol. Assoc. London, 289-300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biisch, (W.), 1970. Neues Jahrb. Mineral. Abh. 112, 219–38.Google Scholar
Condliffe, (E.), 1973. Unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
French, (W. J.), 1966. Proc. R. Irish Acad. B64, 303–22.Google Scholar
Fyfe, (W. S.), 1970. In Mechanism of Igneous Intrusion, 201-16, Liverpool (Gallery Press).Google Scholar
Hamilton, (D. L.), Burnham, (C. W.), and Osborn, (E. F.), 1964. J. Petrol. 5, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, (C. H.), 1974. Unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Nockolds, (S. R.) and Allen, (R.), 1953. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 4, 105–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piwinskii, (A. J.), 1967. Earth Planet. Set. Lett. 2, 161–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piwinskii, (A. J.), 1968. J. Geol. 76, 548–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roach, (R. A.), 1964. Proc. Geol. Assoc. London, 75, 185–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuttle, (O. F.) and Bowen, (N. L.), 1958. Mem. Geol. Soc. Am. 74.Google Scholar
Wells, (A. K.) and Bishop, (A. G), 1955. Q. J. Geol. Soc. London, 111, 143–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoder, (H. S.) and Tilley, (C. E.), 1962. J. Petrol. 3, 342–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar