Lyell Collection

Geological Society, London, Special Publications

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Orejana, D.
Right arrow Articles by Villaseca, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2008; v. 293; p. 101-120;
DOI: 10.1144/SP293.6
© 2008 Geological Society of London

Heterogeneous metasomatism in cumulate xenoliths from the Spanish Central System: implications for percolative fractional crystallization of lamprophyric melts

D. Orejana & C. Villaseca

Department of Petrology and Geochemistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain (e-mail: dorejana{at}geo.ucm.es)

The alkaline lamprophyres and diabases from the Spanish Central System carry a heterogeneous suite of xenoliths including a group of highly altered ultramafic pyroxenites that contain Cr–Mg-rich high-T hydrous minerals (Ti-phlogopite and pargasitic to kaersutitic amphibole), indicative of modal metasomatism. The trace element mineral compositions of these xenoliths show three patterns: type A xenoliths, with light rare earth element enriched clinopyroxenes with high field strength element (HFSE) negative anomalies; type B xenoliths, with clinopyroxenes and amphiboles with high incompatible trace element contents (large ion lithophile elements (LILE), HFSE and REE); type C xenoliths, with relatively REE- and HFSE-poor clinopyroxenes and amphiboles. These metasomatic signatures suggest the involvement of three different metasomatic agents: carbonate, silicate and hydrous fluids or melts, respectively. These agents could have been derived from the progressive differentiation of a CO2–H2O-rich highly alkaline magma, genetically related to the Late Permian alkaline magmatism. Because of the original sub-alkaline nature of the pyroxenite xenoliths, they might have been formed originally as pyroxene-rich cumulates associated with underplated Hercynian calc-alkaline basic magmas. Metasomatism as a result of the infiltration of alkaline magmas within these cumulates might explain the relatively high radiogenic Nd composition of the altered ultramafic xenoliths.